<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<posts>
  <row Id="1" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3" CreationDate="2010-08-19T19:42:33.303" Score="5" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that the tags don't allow the ampersand.  This leaves the tag D&amp;amp;D4 as &lt;code&gt;dd4&lt;/code&gt;.  What should we label D&amp;amp;D as?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;dand&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;d-and-d&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your suggestion here!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; In response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1/what-should-the-dd-tags-be-without-an-ampersand/6#6&quot;&gt;Robert's answer&lt;/a&gt; we would obviously convert the version tags to the same format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:56:54.717" Title="What should the D&amp;D Tags be without an ampersand (&amp;)?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="3" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:04:04.517" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;DnD perhaps?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...........&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T20:04:04.517" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="4" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:18:09.550" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I actually am OK with dd -- does it conflict with anything?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T20:18:09.550" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="5" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="46" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:26:56.863" Score="1" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;What would be a good tag for questions about game maturity level type questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen some people start using kids, perhaps kids teens adults are simple and sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="88" LastEditorUserId="88" LastEditDate="2010-08-19T23:10:38.153" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T15:36:00.743" Title="Tags for age/maturity level questions (i.e. less violent game for young players)" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="6" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:31:57.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I already see a lot of version-specific questions tagged [dd3.5] [dd4.0], etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to stay consistent, I would suggesting sticking to [dd], in the generic case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T20:31:57.193" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="7" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:32:51.233" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;dd&#xA;odd&#xA;add1&#xA;add2&#xA;dd3e&#xA;dd4e&#xA;holmes&#xA;ddbx&#xA;ddbemci&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;those should cover the major variants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T20:32:51.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="8" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="23" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:48:18.107" Score="4" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two excellent questions about beginner RPGs; one specifically calls for younger players, but the answers are very similar between the two. Is there a way to flag these for merging?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T22:46:21.217" Title="Is there any way to merge questions?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="9" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:48:49.977" Score="13" ViewCount="601" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/553/write-an-elevator-pitch-tagline&quot;&gt;Write an Elevator Pitch / Tagline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Note:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are closing this domain naming thread. It is asking the &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; wrong question. See this blog post for details: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/10/domain-names-the-wrong-question/&quot;&gt;Domain Names: Wrong Question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're going to keep the name rpg.stackexchange.com. But we WILL be setting up redirects from the more &amp;quot;popular&amp;quot; domains names. (e.g. seasonedadvice.com to cooking.stackexchange.com, basicallymoney.com to money.stackexchange.com, and others as we go through the list).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New question: &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;Write an Elevator Pitch / Tagline!&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/553/write-an-elevator-pitch-tagline&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Click here to contribute ideas and vote.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[original message text below]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Domain name suggestions? Please only put one domain name per answer, so we can vote on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can you please indicate if your suggestion is available or taken.&lt;/strong&gt; Check &lt;a href=&quot;http://whois.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;here&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T17:12:18.373" Title="Domain Name Suggestions?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|" AnswerCount="54" CommentCount="14" ClosedDate="2010-10-09T00:29:02.050" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T15:00:24.777" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="10" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:49:14.920" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;www.rocksfall.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53" LastEditorUserId="94" LastEditDate="2010-08-26T16:52:38.727" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T16:52:38.727" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="12" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="17" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:50:23.407" Score="4" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are already tags that may (or may not be) equivalents. How do we want to handle gm vs. dm and online vs. online-resources for example? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T03:15:26.253" Title="How should we handle equivalent tags, like gm vs. dm?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="13" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12" CreationDate="2010-08-19T20:55:22.473" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think [dm] should be blacklisted (I dunno if we can do that in beta) as it's kind of DnD specific, while this site is RPG-oriented, not DnD oriented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone tries to use [dm] it should give them a message informing them to use [gm] instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sunno about the rest...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T20:55:22.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="14" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:01:46.217" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can't merge questions but you can &quot;close as duplicate&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First click on &quot;close&quot; (between &quot;retag&quot; and &quot;flag&quot;) then select &quot;Exact Duplicate&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IsUov.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Close Question&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ibi3A.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Exact duplicate&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one will be able to add answers, and a link will be displayed indicating this question is a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T21:01:46.217" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="15" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:05:27.817" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;criticalfailure.com ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="105" LastEditorUserId="94" LastEditDate="2010-08-26T16:53:07.447" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T16:53:07.447" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="17" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:23:40.663" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do believe there is a way to make synonyms for tags. That way if someone searches for [GM] they will get [DM] results as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="96" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T21:23:40.663" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="18" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:26:23.473" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say just [age] should be sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="96" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T21:26:23.473" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="19" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:28:40.840" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;rpgTableTopGames.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="96" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T21:28:40.840" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="20" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:47:34.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Also, you can just edit the tags. I have arrogantly taken it upon myself to purge all the [dm] tags (changing them into [gm] tags) -- if this is wrong of me let me know and I'll stop. But it seems like a decent solution for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T21:47:34.370" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="21" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-19T21:55:30.450" Score="3" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;Cause you know, it's such a tricky term. E.g.: there's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/180/good-first-indie-rpg-to-try-out&quot;&gt;question about a good intro indie game&lt;/a&gt;. The question's about experimental games, but some people are recommending non-experimental games from small publishers, which are really just as independent as anything anyone from the Forge or Story Games or etc. have done. But I don't like the term experimental, either. We're past experiments -- the people designing these games aren't experimenting any more. Story games? Meh. Too much emphasis on narrative games for me, although maybe that's accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may not be any good answer to this question, but I figured now is the time to ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T03:52:54.460" Title="How should we use the indie tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="22" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-19T22:03:54.937" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;TotalPartyKill.info&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Total-Party-Kill.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2010-08-19T22:45:45.927" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T22:45:45.927" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="23" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8" CreationDate="2010-08-19T22:31:38.550" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Merging questions is possible, but it takes a moderator (diamond by name) to do it.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;A moderator can choose two questions. The &quot;copy question&quot; will get wiped and locked, and all of its answers and comments will be transferred over to the &quot;original&quot; question.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XqJ8L.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4E1hY.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The typical way to handle this is: vote to close one of the questions as a duplicate, then flag it for moderator attention with a short message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40" LastEditorUserId="40" LastEditDate="2010-08-19T22:46:21.217" LastActivityDate="2010-08-19T22:46:21.217" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="24" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-20T01:50:00.170" Score="1" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/312/which-game-for-a-one-off-with-my-group&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. I even remarked, at the end of it, that it may very well be closed as too subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it seems an RPG-oriented Stack Exchange site might differ from others in that subjective is almost the norm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is: Did I cross a subjective line, or is that question OK?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="108" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T12:48:14.827" Title="Is my question on a one-off game too subjective?" Tags="|discussion|appropriateness|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="25" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="24" CreationDate="2010-08-20T03:13:06.947" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's OK as long as it's tightly scoped like yours was.  A question of &quot;Which is better, D&amp;amp;D 3e or 4e&quot; should be off topic flame bait, but &quot;What are the pros and cons of A and B for this specific need&quot; seems fair.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps over time that'll get tiresome, as people will ask the every popular-but-banal &quot;what game would be best for X!&quot; and you get the same 20 goons with their pet games pimping them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T03:13:06.947" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="26" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12" CreationDate="2010-08-20T03:15:26.253" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like synonyms; also frankly DM vs GM serves useful segmentation; you know a &quot;DM&quot; question is going to be about D&amp;amp;D and cover certain concerns that are often different from &quot;GM&quot; questions from the broader game world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T03:15:26.253" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="27" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="29" CreationDate="2010-08-20T03:17:36.887" Score="10" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've never used a site like this before--is up/down voting an expression of my agreement or disagreement with a statement, a statement on its helpfulness/appropriateness to the topic, something else altogether, or a combination of all of them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2011-02-18T15:06:50.173" Title="What does voting really signify?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="28" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="21" CreationDate="2010-08-20T03:30:54.593" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need to be all anal about it, but probably a FAQ/wiki instructing people to use terms/tags specifically - the terms don't have to be mutually exclusive, but the problem is many of them aren't good.  &quot;small press&quot; means games from - small publishers?  Isn't it a synonym for &quot;not D&amp;amp;D and, maybe, not White Wolf?&quot;  And many of the games generally considered indie aren't technically storygames.  Experimental games is a fine term - that no one uses in the real world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think using &quot;indie&quot; and &quot;traditional&quot; are about as descriptive as one can meaningfully get if you want &quot;those little freaky games&quot; as opposed to &quot;D&amp;amp;D, Shadowrun, and all those roll-dice-to-hit-things games.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T03:30:54.593" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="29" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="27" CreationDate="2010-08-20T03:42:17.640" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are no hard and fast rules - in the end, it's a community site, so everyone's votes are based on their own particular philosophy.  However, in terms of how they are commonly used and best practices, read on. Please note that certain levels of rep are required to do anything from vote up/down to vote to close - if you don't see one of these options, you don't have enough rep to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a question, voting up tends to mean &quot;That is a good question, other people should read this question, I'd like to hear answers to this question too.&quot;  Voting down means &quot;I feel this is a badly conceived question.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember you can also vote to close, flag, or delete. Vote to close if the question is an exact duplicate, off topic, subjective and argumentative, not a real question, or too localized. Flag if it is very low quality, spam, not relevant to RPG.SE, or otherwise needs mod attention. Vote to delete (high rep only) if something's already closed or flagged and needs to go away. You can do a combination of downvoting, voting to close, and flagging - flagging costs you rep but moves the question down, voting to close will take 5 votes and then close the question but you have limited close votes a day, and you can flag with no rep but mods generally don't act on small numbers of flags unless it's a clear and compelling case, preferring to let the community self police with downvotes and close votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting a question down probably shouldn't mean &quot;I don't like that game system&quot; or &quot;I don't like that guy&quot; or &quot;I don't like that playstyle.&quot; Voting up probably shouldn't mean &quot;Congratulations, you asked a question.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you answer a question, you should probably be voting the question up as you are clearly engaged with it. Unless you are not answering the question, in which case you should at best be leaving a comment, as your answer is likely to get rightly downvoted/flagged for being &quot;not an answer&quot; (see below).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you downvote a question, you should probably consider leaving a comment on it as to why so that the user can potentially improve the question and/or themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting up has the immediate effect of upvoted questions &quot;floating to the top&quot; of appropriate views on the site, and other users seeing that a question seems good to other users and maybe they should check it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On an answer, voting up tends to mean &quot;I agree with that answer&quot; and voting down means &quot;I think that is a pretty bad answer - I disagree with it or otherwise think it's off base.&quot;  No vote means &quot;that's technically a legitimate answer, but I don't think it's that helpful.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember you can flag answers, too, for being not an answer (really a comment or outside the scope of the question), low quality, spam, or not relevant to RPG.SE. In some cases you may vote down and flag; that's up to you - the voting down moves the bad answer down, which is helpful to others, but costs you rep. If it's spam you should probably save the rep and just flag it, as it'll get nuked anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting up/down answers has the immediate effect of good answers &quot;floating to the top&quot; in the question and having more visibility to other users, it is a signal to them that &quot;the community sees value in this question.&quot; In the end, this means that someone looking for an answer to that same question can easily see the ones everyone thinks is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a comment, upvoting tends to mean &quot;I like/agree with that.&quot; You can't downvote comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Upvoting comments signals other users that the community likes the idea within it, and makes them &quot;float to the top&quot; when comments are suppressed for space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rep&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, in addition to the functional effects of voting on promoting good questions and answers to the community's notice, the voting also generates rep for the user.  You vote up someone's answers if you think they are making sense and should have loads of rep and be running the site.  You let them alone if you're neutral.  You vote them down if you think they're really not helping and perhaps just spamming answers to try to get rep. You flag them if they are spam or offensive or trolls or whackjobs or off topic or unsalvageably incoherent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-02-18T15:06:50.173" LastActivityDate="2011-02-18T15:06:50.173" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="30" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-20T06:50:24.600" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Natural_One.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="151" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T06:50:24.600" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="31" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-20T09:41:22.060" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;criticalmiss.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="169" LastEditorUserId="94" LastEditDate="2010-08-26T16:54:02.440" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T16:54:02.440" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="32" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="24" CreationDate="2010-08-20T09:47:05.630" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Even a question like yours is likely to generate interesting answers that may be helpful to other people. A question is only too subjective if it's of &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; interest to other people at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="169" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T09:47:05.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="33" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="27" CreationDate="2010-08-20T11:37:56.177" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have exactly the same point. The voting system is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; for agreement/disagreement. Is for good answer/bad answer, and with bad answer it is intended an answer that is annoying or useless or technically wrong. If an answer is not useless, or not annoying, or technically sound, you should upvote it even if you don't agree with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On meta, however, traditionally +1 is for things you agree with, -1 for things you don't agree with. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="113" LastEditDate="2010-08-25T19:27:08.160" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T19:27:08.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="34" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-20T11:52:58.673" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;www.gamemastered.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T11:52:58.673" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="36" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="24" CreationDate="2010-08-20T12:48:14.827" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I strongly think we're going to trend more subjective -- it's the nature of the beast. Perl is a bit more defined than the process of roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T12:48:14.827" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="37" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-20T12:55:51.600" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;kind of mundane but therpgexchange sounds good to me. But I vote for the naturalone idea as well it fits with parent site Stack Overflow. Critical Failure is also good and less D&amp;amp;Dish in it's focus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T12:55:51.600" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="38" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-20T13:32:59.527" Score="0" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's gamism, simulation and story-telling. Lots of questions have different answers depending on what people want from the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;eg. A question about mapping&#xA; - in dungeon-crawls it's essential especially that DM is supposed to require players to find their way in the maze.&#xA; - in story-telling and alike it's the other way around - players shouldn't bother drawing maps of cities assuming that every non-retarded dwarf/human/elf will find his way (and if not, the GM will say so).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we should add tags to answers that would refer to 3 common attitudes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="183" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T04:56:10.263" Title="What about different attitudes towards rpg?" Tags="|discussion|tags|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="39" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="38" CreationDate="2010-08-20T13:48:01.623" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Only when they're highly related to the question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example some questions should be tagged &lt;code&gt;storytelling&lt;/code&gt; if the asker is asking for a question wants an answer that doesn't have an emphasis on rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't try to make a global tagging scheme out of this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T13:48:01.623" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="40" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="43" CreationDate="2010-08-20T13:58:07.940" Score="5" ViewCount="326" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assuming that, for example, I'm not interested in D&amp;amp;D at the moment it looks like I might have to filter out over 5 tags to hide D&amp;amp;D questions. Don't You think it's a bit too much?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who has the authority to merge tags? Or maybe it's better to have lots of tags? I'm not sure at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="183" LastEditorUserId="174" LastEditDate="2010-08-20T15:22:48.067" LastActivityDate="2011-08-03T01:59:34.860" Title="Too many tags for d&amp;d" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="41" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-20T13:58:41.777" Score="8" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking over the questions that have been tagged as &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; I have to question what value the tag really has.  The questions all are phrased so no system in particular is mentioned, so tagging it as &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; seems to be redundant.  When you're searching for an answer (especially those that are new to the site), your first thought for searching is generally going to be specific to the system you're in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only value it may have is for those that are just browsing the site looking for nothing in particular, just seeing what's all out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So is there really a good reason to keep using the &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T17:18:42.710" Title="Is the &quot;system-agnostic&quot; tag really necessary?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="42" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-08-20T14:10:17.120" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the tags are good.  If you want to ignore them all just use &lt;code&gt;dd*&lt;/code&gt; in the tag filter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T14:10:17.120" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="43" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-08-20T14:13:33.197" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given the variety of types of DnD over the years, I think it's fair to have several tags for DnD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, there are a lot of DnD3.5 players who might outright want nothing to do with DnD4.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, chances are a DnD3.5 player will be thoroughly confused by an ADnD question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should reduce nonetheless; &lt;del&gt;I think [dd-encounters] should instead be [dd] and [encounters].&lt;/del&gt; [dd-encounters] refers to a specific Wizards product/program, and &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unquestionably [add1] and [add1.0] should be merged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also think [dd] is too vague, given my above point; one should have to be more specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2010-08-20T18:07:04.797" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T18:07:04.797" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="44" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-08-20T14:24:10.197" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;One use of tags is to help people answer questions, as it can help focus where your specialities lie.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see how system-agnostic helps in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T14:24:10.197" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="45" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-08-20T15:21:17.567" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a concensus needs to be found on the &quot;n&quot;, ie, is it &quot;DD&quot; or &quot;DnD&quot; (both exist at the moment)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd allow a version-agnostic tag (ie, I don't think &quot;dd&quot; is a problem), otherwise how would you tag questions like &quot;which D&amp;amp;D version ...&quot;, would you have to tag it for &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; version?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="174" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T15:21:17.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="46" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5" CreationDate="2010-08-20T15:36:00.743" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I dunno... what purpose would this serve but to attract the attention of those who aren't supposed to look at that material?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could understand a [NAFW] tag but any attempt to mark off questions as forbidden will only attract those who shouldn't be there...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like kids/teen/adult as it more implies who would be most interested rather than who can/should view content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T15:36:00.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="47" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-08-20T15:43:04.343" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I use tags to get the highlighting in the question list so I can easily skip over those that aren't of interest to me when I am browsing the landing page.  Let's say I would like to see questions that are tagged with one of the many dnd tags, or questions that are not system specific, but I don't want other system specific questions highlighted.  Without a tag to represent questions that are not system specific there is no way I can get that highlighting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T15:43:04.343" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="49" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-20T16:45:01.420" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;www.IRolledAOne.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T16:45:01.420" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="50" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-20T17:27:59.467" Score="16" ViewCount="421" Body="&lt;p&gt;This came up during the proposal phase on Area 51 -- and I felt at the time that unlike many other Stack Exchange sites, a site on RPGs will be largely subjective. Sure, there are definitive answers (rules, release dates, etc), but a good number of questions will be on style, flow, advice, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now we have a few choices when it comes to these kinds of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave them be.&lt;/strong&gt; In the Stack Overflow world this would obviously never fly, but there's a huge difference between programming and RPGs. As Bryant said on my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/24/is-my-question-on-a-one-off-game-too-subjective/36#36&quot;&gt;earlier Meta question&lt;/a&gt;, &quot;Perl is a bit more defined than the process of roleplaying.&quot; The problem with this approach is that a line must be drawn somewhere -- so where does that line get drawn?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bring out the Community Wiki police.&lt;/strong&gt; Personally, I'm against this on SO, too -- CW is not, in my mind, a shield for an inappropriate or subjective question. Either the question is appropriate, or it is not. If the question is not appropriate, the community should absolutely close it. If it is appropriate, then berating people into making it CW confuses the purpose of what CW actually is: Group editing and community ownership.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Shut 'em down.&lt;/strong&gt; Close them. They're subjective, possibly argumentative, and there is no defined &quot;right&quot; answer. They don't fit in a Q&amp;amp;A environment. On SO, this is (perhaps 90 - 99% of the time) the right answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this today because of my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/319/are-dice-really-necessary&quot;&gt;most popular question&lt;/a&gt; -- currently sitting at 3 close votes, with an upvoted comment that perhaps Community Wiki would be a good idea. Whatever the community does, of course, I'll accept -- if it gets the other two votes it needs, I'll cast a reopen and see what happens. It's obviously a popular question, with 11 answers. However, even as I wrote it, I knew it would be controversial at best -- it was intended, not just to spark a discussion, but also to test the boundary conditions of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So where are our boundary conditions? (And I should note that the Gaming SE site went through some similar growing pains, so this is nothing new.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="108" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-11-25T03:17:38.633" Title="How much subjectiveness is OK?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|closed-questions|appropriateness|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="13" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="51" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-20T17:39:16.997" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is the POV of someone new to Stack Overflow, so take it with that grain of salt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I vote &quot;leave 'em be.&quot; Looking at the front page right now, we have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Music during game or not ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What makes a skill challenge great?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any good tabletop RPG’s for young beginner players?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gather a group of players in a foreign country&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your friend wants to learn the ways of the Dungeon Master, what do you do?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I make my game more “noir” as a GM?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sunrods, should they be used?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are dice REALLY necessary?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... OK, I'm gonna stop counting subjective questions. They are alll over the place. I'm pretty sure that shutting them down would fail the proposal. Now, maybe that's the right thing to do -- again, non-SO viewpoint here. But clearly people want to ask subjective questions, and gaming is pretty subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should now suggest a place to draw the line, I suppose. Hm. Well, let me throw this out there: should the goal be to make subjective questions system-specific? That has the effect of cutting back on the answer space to some degree. E.g., the Noir question was Shadowrun-specific, so that made it easier for me to answer. Likewise, the Batman question was specific to 4e Organized Play, which allowed me to focus the answer to an environment I knew well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T17:39:16.997" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="52" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-20T18:01:43.623" Score="5" ViewCount="324" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Related:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/728/moderator-pro-tem-announcement&quot;&gt;Moderator Pro Tem Announcement&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is time for this community to contribute some names of members you would like to act as provisional Moderators. A handful of members will be appointed to this site at about 7 days into the public beta. They will fill the role of Moderators until you can have elections at the end of the beta period. More about this program here: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/moderator-pro-tempore/&quot;&gt;Moderators Pro Tempore&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Some guidelines:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each nomination should be a separate answer. Link the name to the user's profile so we can see their activity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The nominee should indicate their acceptance by commenting on (or indeed editing) the answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Self nominations are okay, and even encouraged. Most sites have not had sufficient time for many users to stand out. Self nomination is simply a way to say, “I’m interested. Let my record speak for itself.” Links to other activities may be helpful: Area 51 participation, participation in other sites, blog posts reviewing or announcing the site, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The candidate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be a currently registered user in good standing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must have a reasonably high reputation score to indicate active, consistent participation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should exhibit patience and fairness at all times in their questions, answers, and comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should lead by example, showing respect for their fellow community members in everything they write.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should want the responsibility. Nominating users isn’t the same as an obligation. It’s purely voluntary!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Attribution goes to Jeff and ChrisF&#xA;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/211/moderator-nominations&quot;&gt;Blatantly stolen from Ivo Flipse and the great crowd at Gaming&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More information on how this process will work &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/57986/how-to-organize-a-formal-moderator-election-on-a-beta-se-site/58056#58056&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (meta.so) and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/moderator-pro-tempore/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (blog).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For further reading:&lt;/strong&gt; (thanks Bryant)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderation&quot;&gt;Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderator-abilities&quot;&gt;Moderator Abilities&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderators&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-16T14:10:45.357" Title="Provisional Moderator Nominations" Tags="|discussion|top-7|moderators|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-20T18:01:43.623" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="53" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-20T18:14:33.143" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously D&amp;amp;D is not C# to paraphrase Bryant.  As a long term (though lowly member) of the SO/SE community I think this site has to be different.  Role playing is by it's nature a subjective experience.  Furthermore as with any human experience things will work differently for different groups of people.  However, I don't think we should let anything go.  I think questions that are highly argumentative should &lt;strong&gt;NOT&lt;/strong&gt; stay.  Do we really want to allow:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Which is better, d20 (D&amp;amp;D) or d12 (White Wolf)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing that is going to come out of that is a flame war, and it won't benefit anyone.  Leave it to /tg/.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other thing I think we shouldn't allow is list questions.  We don't need to be another repository of lists of game types.  There's a lot of that out there, and it's not what SE is about. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To illustrate let me use the same list of subjective questions Bryant does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Music during game or not?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What makes a skill challenge great?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any good tabletop RPG’s for young beginner players?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Listy, should go away&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gather a group of players in a foreign country&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your friend wants to learn the ways of the Dungeon Master, what do you do?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I make my game more “noir” as a GM?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sunrods, should they be used?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are dice REALLY necessary?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Iffy.  Watching to see if it turns into a flame war.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have to allow more than S[O|F|U], but we can't say anything goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for community wiki, I don't think it should be enforced on all subjective questions, otherwise no one would get rep.  I think community wiki should largely be left up to the poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2010-08-20T19:29:36.067" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T19:29:36.067" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="54" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-20T18:24:53.873" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry :'(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You definitely raise some good points in #1, as so many questions have been answered &quot;Depends on your players/group&quot; that it's obvious we can't play by SO's rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and more good points in #2 about the question being either inappropriate or appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I made that comment since I felt like it was a good, appropriate question (perhaps even a great one!) which belonged on the site, but which didn't have an objective answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I definitely do &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; believe that question should be closed, and if it is I will promptly vote to reopen!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think ideally it would be rephrased as a &quot;What are your experiences with dice-less games?&quot; so as to be less argumentative... and then marked as CW ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with the way it's phrased now isn't so much that it's subjective but that it creates a kind of &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;False Dillema&lt;/a&gt; - which promotes conflict. @Logan MacRae's answer is &lt;em&gt;incredible&lt;/em&gt; not only because it's a cool idea, but the answer dispels the false binary by having a gray zone of randomness without dice, specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we need to re-define what's Community Wiki, and put that definition in the new FAQ. For starters, I think questions which are less questions and more lists of ideas, inspiration and experiences (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/503/custom-spells-weapons-artifacts-made-for-plot-reasons-or-player-request&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150/dnd3-5-d20-system-house-rules&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, or yours were it rephrased as above) are good candidates to not be closed, and to instead be CW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions which are argumentative &lt;em&gt;and encourage polarization&lt;/em&gt; should indeed be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Except yours... 'cause I like it. And what I say goes :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T18:24:53.873" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="55" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="52" CreationDate="2010-08-20T18:31:28.290" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;For his initiative in creating this 'thread' I nominate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross&quot;&gt;@C. Ross&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I accept.  Brief spiel about me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/users/16487/c-ross&quot;&gt;SO&lt;/a&gt; for over a year, and I am also an active participant on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/16487/c-ross&quot;&gt;Meta&lt;/a&gt;.  I've also  setup the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2/temporary-chat-for-role-playing-games&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; (please join me there, it's been a great tool for other sites!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have played RPGs for over ten years now, and have experience playing and gm'ing (admittedly more playing).  I've primarily played D&amp;amp;D (3, 3.5, 4.0) and D20 Modern, though I've dabbled in other systems and even free form storytelling role playing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for my style I tend to be a little aggressive in closing questions.  I hope that the users of Role-playing Games will give me the opportunity to work with community as a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T19:30:47.420" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-20T18:31:28.290" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="56" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="52" CreationDate="2010-08-20T18:40:31.267" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to nominate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/93/rs-conley&quot;&gt;@RS Conley&lt;/a&gt; -- he's sensible, brings a wealth of OSR/retro knowledge, and is supportive of all flavors of gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T18:40:31.267" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-20T18:40:31.267" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="57" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-08-20T21:38:18.703" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag can serve the purpose of being an easy short-hand for the types of answers being sought. Ideally, if I click on such a tag I'll find lots of questions/answers dealing with setting material, general play advice, the social atmosphere around the table, and so on. I may be in the minority in this, but I've been using the tags as a navigation device.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="100" LastActivityDate="2010-08-20T21:38:18.703" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="58" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="52" CreationDate="2010-08-20T23:11:39.070" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think, based on the evolution thus far of the site, any short list should include &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/24/bryant&quot;&gt;@Bryant&lt;/a&gt;, and am nominating him for his activity record and patience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I accept the nomination. Brief blurb:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/24/bryant&quot;&gt;Bryant&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a relative newcomer to the SO family; I've benefited from Server Fault answers more than once, but have not been a participant in the community. I have been gaming for coming up on 25 years or so. My first RPG was &lt;em&gt;Tunnels &amp;amp; Trolls&lt;/em&gt;, and my favorite Gencon purchase this year was an autographed &lt;em&gt;Monsters, Monsters&lt;/em&gt; reprint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I currently play a lot of 4e. When I lived in Boston, I played a lot of story games. I find that for the most part, I like games in general, although narrative-focused games tend to leave me cold. But I like thinking about those, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe in shaping a site by aggressively acting in the manner one wants to encourage. I suspect I'd have a ton to learn about moderating this style of site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T13:32:40.833" CommentCount="9" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-20T23:11:39.070" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="59" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T01:09:38.267" Score="6" ViewCount="261" Body="&lt;p&gt;After reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/50/how-much-subjectiveness-is-ok&quot;&gt;How much subjectiveness is OK?&lt;/a&gt; and specifically Richard JP Le Guen's answer, I thought I would start the discussion about how we want to use Community Wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:26:11.347" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:26:11.347" Title="How should we use Community Wiki? [2010]" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="9" ClosedDate="2016-10-07T13:18:43.600" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="60" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-08-21T01:18:04.193" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on my favorite use of the Community Wiki on StackOverflow, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/hidden-features&quot;&gt;Hidden Features of X&lt;/a&gt;, I think that we should use this feature to create community lists of bests. For example, I would like to see a question about the best published adventures/modules with each answer providing a description, link, and unique features of a single adventure/module. Voting would show which ones are most popular with the community. I feel that these lists would be great for finding resources for a game. They could be especially useful for less experienced gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T01:18:04.193" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="61" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-21T01:25:36.890" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel that subjective questions and answers are a given. I would only vote to close items that are argumentative. To me this is more a matter of wording. For example, I would be interested in a question about the relative merits of different game systems as long as the answers remained civil.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T01:25:36.890" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="62" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-21T02:48:46.083" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some amount of subjectivity is unavoidable and desirable. See the SO blog post &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&quot; for the Management's take on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should try to steer things toward less subjective questions, however.  We don't need another forums site for people to gibber about things; God knows there's enough of those.  We really should press on the Q&amp;amp;A format IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think perhaps we should try to guide questions to useful format and answers to giving useful data rather than being opinion-fests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a fine line.  But I think &quot;Use music during games?&quot; is a semi weak question.  Or at least, it is if the answers don't come in with a strongly objective &quot;here are the pros I see, here are the cons I see&quot; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that though &quot;Perl is less subjective than RPGs&quot; - it's not by much.  If you let people they'll argue about the &quot;right&quot; or &quot;best&quot; way to do things in Perl.  We don't want any of that here either.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should edit questions to be more conducive to objective responses - I do think &quot;Are dice REALLY necessary&quot; is a title that can turn inflammatory.  &quot;What are some approaches to diceless gaming?&quot; is a lot better.  Or &quot;Techniques to run games diceless?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One recent spate of questions has a number that IMO go way over the line to being lightning rods for pointless arguing - what makes an indie game indie, is railroading bad, etc.  I think a lot of those topic titles could be improved.  &quot;Sunrods, should they be used?&quot; is argumentative.  &quot;When and why would I use a sunrod&quot; is better.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we have a lot of folks coming here without SE experience and just RPG forum experience, so there's a pretty good reason to kinda police pretty hard out of the gate to get things going well.  It doesn't do anyone any good if this SE gets approved but then people end up not bothering with it because it just turns into a random messageboard.  I personally am interested in a Q&amp;amp;A site but not another forums site, there's enough of those and they're toxic enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we've come into the public phase, I am seeing a lot of - to me - unacceptably subjective questions, like &quot;how do we save print distribution&quot;.  There is a difference between 'subjective' - someone's take on how they do it, like how do they handle sex in their campaign - and 'speculative' - just talking out your ass about how you think the world should work.  Speculative is way across the line.  Subjective is OK in small doses - but again, I am not sure what about playing RPGs is any more subjective than programming - only a non-programmer would really think that it is.  Our devs just had a week long argument over the best way to log...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-07-26T19:49:02.177" LastActivityDate="2011-07-26T19:49:02.177" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="63" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-08-21T03:12:19.843" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The biggest issue is that community wiki questions don't earn the asker/answerers any points.  Since there's many questions out there that have no single/correct answer the community wiki would seem to be the best route to take, but those that like to answer questions in hopes of reputation may be less likely to provide input.  As has been stated in a few other questions/answers already, there's going to be a lot of semi-subjective content that's going to be posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would almost be better for this community if the emphasis on number of questions that a person has marked an accepted answer for isn't visible in their &quot;badge&quot;.  Along with this, lowering the required reputation to edit others posts.  So that way the community still votes on the response that they feel are correct and the asker/answerers still get points.  If the percentage doesn't show as part of the user's &quot;badge&quot; on the question it will won't deter people from answering in hopes of getting an accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T03:12:19.843" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="64" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-21T03:33:11.067" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I doubt it will be catchy, but after for whatever reason &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5g337Imvlc#t=1m22s&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Knights of the Dinner Table&lt;/a&gt; popped in my head:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TheDiceTauntMeWithLowRolls.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T03:33:11.067" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="65" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T04:56:19.043" Score="7" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inevitably a question has been asked on &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/the-stack-overflow-trilogy/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the main trilogy&lt;/a&gt; about comics that are very tangential to the topic of the site and although they generally get good upvotes they create a lot of controversy.  Since I had a few &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow1zRZR5Dao#t=1m50s&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Knights&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5g337Imvlc#t=43s&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;of&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmzWd0eik44&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpgqZ3JoRIc#t=1m43s&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dinner&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRshMRyRrgs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Table&lt;/a&gt; lines pop into my head earlier as I was looking over questions I figured I'd double check how the community felt about a wiki question on it first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because we all know that at some point the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/98/Jul/gazebo.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;gazebo&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zng5kRle4FA&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;casting magic missiles at the darkness&lt;/a&gt; will be mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T14:47:23.080" LastActivityDate="2012-01-06T12:56:27.527" Title="Are questions about RPG related comics on topic?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="66" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="65" CreationDate="2010-08-21T05:07:42.503" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that's gotta be off-topic. Come to think of it, the question about RPG novels might have been slightly off-topic as well, not sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T05:07:42.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="67" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-21T05:51:42.527" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;attackingthedarkness.com&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Alewives&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dead Alewives D&amp;amp;D sketch&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: video rehash of the sketch:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zng5kRle4FA&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zng5kRle4FA&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...now you have no excuse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastEditorUserId="188" LastEditDate="2010-09-02T03:11:06.823" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T03:11:06.823" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="68" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-21T06:09:06.910" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another classic RPG joke:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;fearthegazebo.com&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T06:09:06.910" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="70" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-21T08:21:01.823" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My two cents:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Argumentative/best/favorite:&lt;/strong&gt; Close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Listy (objective):&lt;/strong&gt; CW. If someone's new to RPGs (as someone else mentioned in their answer), I &lt;em&gt;refuse&lt;/em&gt; to tell them, 'No, you can't ask what's a good game to start out with. That's a bad question.' Be nice to the newbies. They're our future. A compiled list of game systems, or a list of links to sites with helpful information on some issue, isn't a bad thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also don't want to give them a ton of points, for convincing everyone to list their favorites. CW is meant for this sort of in-between. Duplicate listings should be consolidated and removed by editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, any question that has no clear, single answer is a candidate for CW. A question should only be closed if it has no basis in objective fact, is argumentative, or the material is off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T08:21:01.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="72" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="382" CreationDate="2010-08-21T08:46:38.497" Score="4" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I saw a tag name format which I thought was interesting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;sr4.shadowrun - Tag for Shadowrun, 4th Edition&#xA;&#xA;sr4.matrix - Tag for stuff related to matrix rules/info in SR4&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do people think about adopting this convention for other systems? Ex:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;dd35.monsters - Tag for monster stats in D&amp;amp;D 3.5&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a good tag format? Or would it have been better to use separate tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;sr4 shadowrun&#xA;&#xA;sr4 matrix&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can tags have uni-directional associations? i.e., an sr4 tag is, by definition, a shadowrun tag; but, not all shadowrun tags are sr4 tags (they could be using 3rd ed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:47:57.937" Title="Convention for sub-tags within a game system" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-21T18:07:03.760" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="73" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="65" CreationDate="2010-08-21T10:26:26.927" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this is not the principal subject of rpg@stackexchange, they are still tied to RPGs and should be authorized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wonder if questions/answers about some computer RPGs should be authorized. For example, Bioware is famous for adding a lot of character development (even if the recipes never strays far from a standard one). Am I authorized to ask questions about their &quot;dialog tree&quot; technic and how it could be applied in tabletop RPGs? Or even to ask if Loghain (from Dragon Age) is a credible NPC ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would answer yes, but I'm still unsure...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T10:26:26.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="74" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-21T10:29:35.080" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that, by very nature of the SE we have, subjectivity is intrinsic. We are discussing and asking questions about creativity and personal experience, on something that is seldom factual and often imagined. We are also discussing of a game where the ruleset is to be generally followed, but can also be changed at will from personal taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We cannot expect a &quot;correct answer&quot; on most of our questions, but we can expect a &quot;preferred answer&quot; by the question owner, and nice answers from the community. I wouldn't be surprised to see a minus-voted question to be accepted as the correct one, just because the owner likes it although it's outside of the standard ruleset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the CW, remember that our site is most likely to be in the low population range, hence we expect a reduced amount of votes. Forcing frequent CW question on subjective questions (the large majority) would reduce the incentive of increasing reputation, and we all know that people go at large to increase their reputation. It's one of the winning characteristics of the SE engine. CW should be for &quot;collection questions&quot;, where no answer is more likely to be appreciated or not, and each answer is part of a larger document which is completed by the contribute of the community as a whole. Examples: collection of house rules, or collection of home-made spells, or collection of changes from one ruleset version to another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would propose to relax the rules followed on SO. Questions that are really subjective and argumentative are &quot;what is the best&quot;-kind of question, or &quot;X sucks, why people play it&quot;, which are subjective &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; argumentative, but everything else that is just subjective is likely to be a legitimate question for our community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T10:29:35.080" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="75" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T12:51:25.823" Score="11" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are questions about conventions and other RPG events on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-12T10:26:32.583" LastActivityDate="2017-06-12T10:26:32.583" Title="Are questions about conventions and other RPG events on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|convention|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="76" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="75" CreationDate="2010-08-21T13:13:43.813" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Very good questions, and I personally would say, yes. They are, but not for organization (such as &quot;who is coming ?&quot; or &quot;where can I find the tickets?&quot;). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T13:13:43.813" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="78" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="65" CreationDate="2010-08-21T13:39:05.200" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say absolutely not on the computer RPGs - that's going to be one of the main points of confusion with this over time, as hordes of CRPGers happen across this and assume it's for CRPGs (there's 1000 of them for every 1 of us).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the comics and books...  I personally don't think so, but I'm on the fence.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T13:39:05.200" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="79" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="75" CreationDate="2010-08-21T13:59:06.530" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most of these type of questions are &lt;code&gt;On Topic&lt;/code&gt;, but many are also &lt;code&gt;Too Localized&lt;/code&gt;.  That is they only apply to a small period of time or a single location.  That doesn't benefit the site as a whole.  Certainly anything asking about &quot;Dragon Con 2010&quot; would be far too localized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T13:59:06.530" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="80" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="92" CreationDate="2010-08-21T14:01:24.157" Score="4" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;How should we treat &quot;trivial question&quot; questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of questions coming in that seem like exercises in laziness IMO.  &quot;What is a macguffin,&quot; &quot;What is railroading,&quot; etc.  At best these should be wiki entries, but really they are &quot;I don't feel like checking Wikipedia, let me make someone answer it for me.&quot;  I don't know if they're exercises in trying to pull rep or what, but they should be OT.  Just like on SO, it's not tolerated to ask &quot;What is Perl?&quot;  There's a difference between being newbie friendly and allowing that - and it's not &quot;unfriendly&quot; if someone asks &quot;What is a roleplaying game?&quot; to point them at the CW (or wikipedia) and close the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T19:19:36.423" Title="Should questions be for trivial definitions?" Tags="|discussion|appropriateness|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="81" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-08-21T14:06:57.467" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there's a need for a definitions list as part of the wiki; there's a big list of questions already up that are just asking &quot;what is a...&quot; indie rpg, death spiral, railroading, whatnot.  That stuff should be in CW.  Sure, it doesn't get as much rep, but ideally after the initial gold rush, people will stop being rep whores and just contribute to help out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T14:06:57.467" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="82" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="80" CreationDate="2010-08-21T14:06:59.277" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that if the answer can be found almost effortlessly by just checking wikipedia or a dictionary then it doesn't need to be a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is railroading / sandboxing are maybe more difficult to find definitions for than macguffin, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T14:06:59.277" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="85" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="65" CreationDate="2010-08-21T14:36:25.910" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. One thing worth considering here is that a lot of times those novels/comics can be canon for the setting, and thus are in some ways a form of sourcebook.  If the question is referencing the novels/comics in this way, I would say on topic.  If it's more about the novels/comics themselves, then OT.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-06T06:42:06.293" LastActivityDate="2012-01-06T06:42:06.293" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="86" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="111" CreationDate="2010-08-21T15:57:43.737" Score="3" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;I started thinking about what kinds of behavior we might want to encourage that are different from other stackexchanges, and how changing the badges might achieve that, but then I realized I don't know if we have control over that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Do we have any control over badges?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="87" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:00:54.983" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Repeating what I said in the other thread, I've found that the questions which should be CW tend to be those which are more about listing people's experiences and ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What house rules do you used?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What custom equipment/spells have you used?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are your experiences with dice-less games?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2010-08-21T16:17:54.483" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T16:17:54.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="88" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:13:36.767" Score="9" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should probably talk about publishers, like me, replying to questions about their products. Just so we know what the community standards are in this regard. I am a small press publisher so I didn't really expect to see the question about my Majestic Wilderlands pop up so soon. But it did and we should probably talk what we want to do in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-22T10:03:19.963" LastActivityDate="2020-07-22T10:03:19.963" Title="What are the community standards regarding publishers answering questions about their products?" Tags="|discussion|answers|game-designers|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="89" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="88" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:17:32.753" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;My feeling is that it is OK as long as the answer or question is not an outright ad and replies answer the question. That the mechanism of closing the question and downvotes will deter blatant attempts at doing this. I think is should be OK for a publisher to ask design question like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm making X RPG and for social interactions I am looking at Y and Z; which you think is better and why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T10:59:34.277" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T10:59:34.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="90" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="88" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:20:52.563" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;My thought is that publishers come with equal footing as everyone else.  I liked your answer, because it gave me a sense of the setting.  I also get a sense that someone who plays MW might experience it differently and have something else to add, but you didn't &quot;pull rank&quot; as publisher.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a publisher were to get on and answer questions in a way that pre-empted the community's ability to answer differently or disagree, or if (for example) someone from WOTC got on just to spout their party line that we can find at their website, that would be a different story. (No disparaging of WOTC or the existence of party lines in ANY business intended).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T16:20:52.563" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="91" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="72" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:24:38.300" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think we should just stick with using &lt;code&gt;-&lt;/code&gt;s as delimiters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does [dd3.5] mean [5] as a sub-category of [dd3]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think [dd3.5-monster] is better than [dd35.monsters].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, [sr4.shadowrun] I think would be better as [sr4-shadowrun].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(does that &lt;code&gt;sr&lt;/code&gt; stand for &quot;Shadowrun&quot;? Cause if yes, then I think it should just be [sr4] or [shadowrun4])&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T16:24:38.300" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="92" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="80" CreationDate="2010-08-21T16:40:05.080" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I figured the assumed level of knowledge about rpgs for someone coming to this site would range from complete newb, to sage-like veterans. Having a site that is the go to place for rpgs seems like it should cater to as broad a range as possible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply providing a link as an answer isn't a good enough approach to answering a simple question. The answer that was chosen for the macguffin question was done so because of it's relevancy towards role playing games. It was a shorter, concise answer that allows the reader to quickly learn what the term was, and how to apply in a role playing game. The wiki link has excess information that has nothing to do with gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't participated in any of the other stack exchange sites however, so this is just my initial views on appropriate basic questions. If community consensus proves otherwise, that's fine as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user162" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T16:40:05.080" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="94" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="38" CreationDate="2010-08-21T17:56:37.853" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the general premise that people approach roleplaying with differing attitudes, but I fairly strongly disagree that the three attitudes listed are the canonical three. Now, what I think doesn't matter so much, except that it indicates that you might have trouble getting people to agree on the list of tags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone wants to ask a question specifically pointed at narrativist techniques, I think that's a good time to use a tag, but I don't think we need to force people into defining themselves in ways they might not be comfortable with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T17:56:37.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="95" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T17:59:58.953" Score="4" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/700/what-makes-a-game-an-indie-rpg&quot;&gt;The question is here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I have altered the question. This alteration happened after it was closed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did not mean to cause an argumentative situation. However, &quot;Indie&quot; was (and is) a label that is used for RPG's. It has a history. Perhaps the question should have been CW (but given the historical aspect, a true answer should be possible, with a note that there's discussion about fringe cases).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a similar vein, a question might be &quot;What what the hype surrounding FATAL?&quot;. Neverthemind the abberation that FATAL is: the question is valid (IMHO).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T18:27:51.187" Title="Should this question have been closed? &quot;What makes a game an “Indie” RPG?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="96" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="95" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:06:50.657" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't vote to close it, but I woulda, based on three factors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's not really about roleplaying; it's about the history of roleplaying. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's been a source of serious flamewars elsewhere in the past.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers will be subjective.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of those would make me want to close it on its own! I'm not afraid of past flamewars; I have very high hopes that we can create a culture capable of discussing some touchier subjects without getting all cranky. I also think we need to allow for a bit of slippage; roleplaying is a social activity, so the history matters. And I've said elsewhere that I think we'll allow for some subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the cumulative problems of those three factors would tip the scales for me. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you both for asking the question in the first place, and thank you for starting a meta question about it. This is exactly the sort of thing that's going to be very important for our self-definition. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:06:50.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="97" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:08:31.510" Score="3" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;It feels to me like over half of the questions on the site are tagged [dd*]. Yes, it works acceptably, and is probably the best solution for now. It also looks unreadable and silly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T12:21:30.370" Title="Can we lobby stackexchange to support &quot;&amp;&quot; as a valid tag character?" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="98" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="95" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:12:07.680" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I voted to close it, and it's because there is no real answer. It's a label, like &quot;indie music.&quot;  There are no end of arguments over what qualifies - small press?  (Given that every RPG company except for Wizards and White Wolf has a couple full time employees at best).  Story games?  (And what does that mean?)  Only games approved by Ron Edwards?  Only game sold on indie press revolution?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may as well ask, &quot;What foods are desserts?&quot;  The ones that are obvious are obvious, and the rest is people arguing.  It's happened a million times before and doesn't need to happen here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:12:07.680" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="99" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="88" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:13:54.153" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, just identify yourself as such when you post and it's fine.  If anyone gets obnoxious about it (shills posting questions to be answered, general lording-over), the community will just start downvoting.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oh also I will note there is a statement in the FAQ covering this already... &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:19:53.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="80" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:28:05.963" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Disclosure: I posted at least one of these questions (RailRoading).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, I already knew what railroading was. However: we're trying to establish scope here, as such, I thought the question valid (and there are plenty of 'new users' who will benefit from a description of railroading). One man's &quot;trivial&quot; is another mans... etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:28:05.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:31:02.480" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;As long as the &quot;Don't be a dick&quot; rule is followed I say leave them alone. Hopefully the Stack Exchange mechanisms will allow a happy compromise to be achieved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:31:02.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="102" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:38:06.817" Score="1" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering... Would it make sense to try to collaboratively develop small settings or modules ? Of course, the main issue is to only work within the SRD monsters and rulesets (I guess that is allowed) to prevent legal issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can use the main Question document for the module text, and the answers for personal comments and feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2015-07-27T07:05:29.703" Title="Using SE to collaboratively create stories ?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="103" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:40:42.897" Score="4" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given the (already noticed) more subjetive nature of questions on this SE, should we add the suggestion that question posters add a real-life example (AAR fragment) when questions tend to the subjective? (Or at least consider the importance of such, so as to avoid 'talk to me about some what-if on this really general topic').&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question &quot;what die type is rolled most in game X&quot; is not subjective (barring bizarre playstyles in game X). &quot;What is railroading&quot; (one of my questions) might have been more useful to the community had I been forced to at least consider a real-life occurence and I (this may be personal) would have asked my question with more focus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-11-21T23:48:07.163" Title="Real-life examples in questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-21T18:40:42.897" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="102" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:44:58.927" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Even having them as community wiki questions they don't really fit into the Q&amp;amp;A style of Stack Exchange.  Maybe if that's all the entire site was dedicated to it might work, but intermixing it with regular Q&amp;amp;A style questions is going to confuse drive-by/new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:44:58.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:48:18.560" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;[Bulk suggestions; they're all available as individual answers now.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="24" LastEditDate="2010-08-29T23:01:15.730" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T23:01:15.730" CommentCount="9" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="102" CreationDate="2010-08-21T18:50:19.867" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is ok, but the answer (IMHO) is a resounding NO (given the SE mandate).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T18:50:19.867" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="103" CreationDate="2010-08-21T19:06:49.567" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that's a good idea. Anything that grounds the more subjective questions seems like a great idea to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T19:06:49.567" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-21T19:06:49.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="108" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-21T19:17:07.987" Score="12" ViewCount="355" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assuming the site exits beta in a few months, what kind of logo should it have?.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-03T22:16:18.993" LastActivityDate="2012-01-03T22:16:18.993" Title="Site logo design?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|design|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="80" CreationDate="2010-08-21T19:19:36.423" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The FAQ needs to define the guidelines of what kind of knowledge is expected of a user before they interact here.  This would help define what is trivial and what is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2010-08-21T19:19:36.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="86" CreationDate="2010-08-22T01:35:30.833" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is the type of question to bring to meta.stackoverflow - which serves as a QA for all the StEx sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/61835/is-the-list-of-bagdes-standard&quot;&gt;Is the list of badges standard?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T01:35:30.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="102" CreationDate="2010-08-22T01:50:25.763" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;For a story, maybe...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think questions&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; along the lines of &quot;This is some of my story so far; which directions could I bring it in?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for example, 1997 Joss Whedon could ask...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[Describes season 1 of Buffy] but then the heroes made some crazy rolls and have killed &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_%28Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the Master&lt;/a&gt;... I didn't expect this, and promoting his &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anointed_One_%28Buffyverse%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;lieutenant to a major villain&lt;/a&gt; isn't working since he's like 10. I don't know what direction to take my adventure in!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To which someone would answer...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You could create dramatic conflict by taking that sulky (dreamy?) &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_%28Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;NPC&lt;/a&gt; you described and make him turn evil!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... But the QA format doesn't work for creating modules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; I was thinking of tossing in a &quot;the question should be Community Wiki&quot; but I should really just get another song to sing. :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T01:50:25.763" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="113" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:30:21.690" Score="2" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a specific kind of question that I would like to see get a little guidance here, because I see it abused so badly on forums.  It's &quot;what game is good for X.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's one of those now - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79/any-good-tabletop-rpgs-for-young-beginner-players&quot;&gt;Are there any good tabletop RPGs for young beginning players?&lt;/a&gt;.  Some of the responses are good and have actual reasons why the game they list is good for that specific use case, but most of the time they don't.  Which leads to a very useless set of repeating questions, where people ask &quot;What game is good for... Kids, newbies, grognards, steampunk, fun combat, etc etc.&quot;, and the answers are always every single major system.  &quot;Fate and 4e and InSpectres and OD&amp;amp;D clones and...&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to me to be an area where allowing purely subjective answers rots the usefulness of the site overall.  I think the questions are probably fine, but is there a good way to say &quot;answers to these questions should carry specific reasons and optimally examples of when you actually did this?&quot;  My take is that most of the people who say &quot;game X is good for Y&quot; have never actually done that, they're just cheerleaders.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or am I being grumpy?  (&quot;Sell me on...&quot; is the other kind of thread that generates the hate in me.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-12-21T05:55:51.810" Title="Is &quot;Game for X&quot; subjectivity bait and can it be helped?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2012-01-08T16:13:10.080" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="103" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:45:48.750" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the burden is really more on the answers.  Adding an example to the question may not really reduce the subjectivity but instead make it a lot worse.  &quot;What is railroading&quot; at least has a chance of generating a useful definition.  &quot;Did my GM railroad me in this situation where this happened&quot; is purely subjective and something I'd vote to close in an instant - that's not suitable for a SE format, that's a forum whine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I do want to see answers carry real play examples rather than just being unbridled opinions...  In this case, &quot;In my play group, these following behaviors have caused people to complain the line was crossed from guiding the game into 'negative' railroading...&quot; would be an excellent addition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T04:45:48.750" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:45:48.750" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="115" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:49:54.017" Score="5" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a Community Wiki entry designed to enumerate a list of common question types, whether they should be asked here, and what things an asker or answerer should be advised of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please add common question types and vote them up/down based on whether you think they are good question types for the site.  Add comments to the question if you would like to add guidance, like &quot;but you need to do X&quot; or &quot;only in the case of Y,&quot; or &quot;this should be a Community Wiki.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If extensive discussion on one is required (and I assume often it will be), let's do it in a separate meta thread, and then add/vote it here for brevity.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-08-22T04:59:27.277" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T19:49:34.293" Title="What are good and bad question types for RPG Stack Exchange?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:49:54.017" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:50:38.837" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the definition of &quot;X&quot;, where X is a commonly defined term available on Wikipedia or TV Tropes like &quot;macguffin&quot; or &quot;jump the shark&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-08-22T04:57:09.200" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T04:57:09.200" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:50:38.837" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:52:06.617" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What game/system is good for situation &quot;X&quot;, where X is a class of people like newbies, or kids, or wargamers, or women; a genre like &quot;pulp&quot; or &quot;fantasy&quot; or &quot;western&quot; or &quot;pirates&quot;; or similar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-08-22T05:03:43.837" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T05:03:43.837" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:52:06.617" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:53:21.030" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the definition of &quot;X&quot;, where X is a general roleplaying term like railroading, immersion, indie game, munchkin, sandbox, etc.?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T04:53:21.030" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:53:21.030" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:54:14.947" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why should I play/sell me on/tell me about Game X - basically asking for information about a specific game, to convince me I want to play it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-08-22T05:10:52.187" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T05:10:52.187" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T04:54:14.947" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="38" CreationDate="2010-08-22T04:56:10.263" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah there's a huge war out there between people that believe in the &quot;threefold&quot; approach and people that hate them...  Best to avoid it when possible.  It always turns into a semantics debate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T04:56:10.263" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="121" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-08-22T06:16:42.807" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about just a d20?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T06:16:42.807" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-08-22T11:44:58.933" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;(I like that stack of d6's.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it doesn't turn out to be that one, a die with a questionmark on the top face might be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T11:44:58.933" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T11:48:01.097" Score="9" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suggested that 'Help me find a playgroup' be OFF-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T15:14:33.460" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:16:31.380" Title="Are questions about help finding playgroups on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="124" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T11:55:15.763" Score="14" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should questions that ask for help in designing an RPG game, or specific mechanics for an RPG game, be allowed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T14:46:37.873" LastActivityDate="2014-11-22T00:29:33.423" Title="Are questions about RPG design on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|design|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T11:55:15.763" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="125" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T12:30:14.230" Score="2" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;As you all may have noticed, I am 'seeding' the site with a bunch of questions. If anyone thinks it inappropriate, please let me know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T16:12:20.923" Title="Is my 'question seeding' appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="126" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="129" CreationDate="2010-08-22T13:02:15.290" Score="0" ViewCount="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;As we continue to work out these boundaries, I'm curious about the opinions on this question.  If people have made a set of tables, they are presumably locatable on google, but I have been unable to do so.  The discussion seems to be about how hard something must be to find before it is a valid question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T15:36:28.757" Title="Is my question about 4e encounter tables too broad or easy?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="125" CreationDate="2010-08-22T13:14:46.277" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think at this point, while we are in private beta, it seems okay, since it's important for us to build up a question base.  If someone were seeding later with questions that they didn't necessarily actually need answers to, that might be different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T13:14:46.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="124" CreationDate="2010-08-22T13:24:26.307" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes; definitely. As long as they are well scoped questions given other site parameters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-11-22T00:29:33.423" LastActivityDate="2014-11-22T00:29:33.423" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T13:24:26.307" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="126" CreationDate="2010-08-22T13:35:13.133" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's a valid question. I've been wishing I had an answer to it, cause I could use the same. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T13:35:13.133" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="125" CreationDate="2010-08-22T13:48:59.923" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm good with it, although I hope someone does the same for some other games. I badly don't want us to get too D&amp;amp;D 4e-centric. Commented on one of the build questions with a minor concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T13:48:59.923" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="123" CreationDate="2010-08-22T14:06:43.083" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;OMG seconded. We have two generic questions in that vein right now -- &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47/what-are-the-best-places-on-the-web-to-advertise-for-players&quot;&gt;where do I post on the Web to find players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/550/gather-a-group-of-players-in-a-foreign-country&quot;&gt;how do I find players overseas&lt;/a&gt;. I'd suggest one more question along the lines of &quot;what are good ways to find players in my area besides the Web,&quot; which'll get the usual advice about posting at gaming stores, try college clubs, etc. But none of the where do I find players in East Framingham stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:16:31.380" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="125" CreationDate="2010-08-22T14:08:27.403" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maybe for this beta, maybe, but I think we shouldn't seed too much.  Questions should be honest questions.  I know I personally don't feel like answering un-genuine questions, because I have other priorities than snapping up rep.  And part of the point is to see what happens organically, what questions are really FAQs and not just someone thinking they're being clever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd vote &quot;only ask legit questions.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And on the 4e thing - yeah, I don't want to see this get too 4e-ey either, and I'll note that some of your questions like &quot;Int vs Wis&quot; would be better scoped to all D&amp;amp;D or even wider than just 4.0 - if I had a way to &quot;ignore all posts tagged dd4.0&quot; I'd be planning to enable it soon, as there's a lot of stuff on it and I don't play it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T14:08:27.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="123" CreationDate="2010-08-22T14:11:20.080" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should direct people to existing &quot;generic&quot; questions on the topic - like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players&quot;&gt;Where can I find other RPG players?&lt;/a&gt; - but specific ones about a given person are &quot;too localized.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:16:19.790" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="134" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="125" CreationDate="2010-08-22T14:28:40.200" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Actually, I'll add a separate point - I just noticed all your questions are community wiki instead.  I think this is totally the wrong use of CW.  In my view, CW should be generally &quot;smaller&quot;, made up of high value FAQs and lists.  Spitting out random questions and just marking them CW is bad - I assume it's to not be rep-whoring, which is good, but in that case probably not posting them is better.  Our CW is already by this point a big mix of unrelated junk that at first view doesn't look different from the main site!!!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More followup in the &quot;what should we use CW for&quot; question but I thought I'd note it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T14:28:40.200" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="52" CreationDate="2010-08-22T14:55:12.520" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can nominate more than one person, right? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;@mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; is asking a ton of good meta questions and I'm learning from him, which is what I want in a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;Mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m a thirtysomething dad and IT professional living in the Austin, TX area. I started gaming way back in the day, 1982, with the TSR space opera game Star Frontiers. Since then I've been an avid roleplayer. I went to 5 Gen Cons, was a regional Triad for the RPGA's Living Greyhawk campaign, helped start a gaming club (the FORGE) in Memphis, TN, et cetera.  I use Server Fault mostly, the others less.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I GM and play a variety of RPGs; currently Pathfinder is in heavy rotation as well as various non-D&amp;amp;D-based games.  I also maintain a gaming blog, &lt;a href=&quot;http://mxyzplk.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Geek Related&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general I don't like pushy moderators on forum sites.  I plan to let viewpoints flourish but strictly maintain the SE format to distinguish this site from general forums.  I believe this could be a unique and invaluable resource if shepherded and wikignomed well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-04-16T14:10:45.357" LastActivityDate="2020-04-16T14:10:45.357" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T14:55:12.520" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="125" CreationDate="2010-08-22T16:12:20.923" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote blog post addressing the issues of seeding and asking the first questions on a new site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Asking the First Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T16:12:20.923" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="139" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T16:47:31.207" Score="0" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now there are two questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/553&quot;&gt;553&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/686&quot;&gt;686&lt;/a&gt;) on the site about World of Darkness. 553 is tagged with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot;&gt;[wod]&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;[world-of-darkness]&lt;/a&gt;, 686 with [world-of-darkness]. Which is the preferable parent tag for the purpose of tag synonyms?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="216" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T14:11:10.667" Title="World of Darkness tag synonyms" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="140" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-22T16:47:47.587" Score="2" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now there are two questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/553&quot;&gt;553&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/686&quot;&gt;686&lt;/a&gt;) on the site about new World of Darkness (typically abbreviated NWoD), and I'm writing up one related to old World of Darkness (OWoD). Should we differentiate questions about NWoD and OWoD with [nwod]/[new-world-of-darkness] and [owod]/[old-world-of-darkness] tags, or should we leave them all [wod]/[world-of-darkness]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we separate them into NWoD and OWoD, which one do [wod]/[world-of-darkness] become tag synonyms for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="216" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T22:48:38.107" Title="Should we have different tags for new World of Darkness and old WoD?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-22T18:20:11.447" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;'Help me find a playgroup'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T18:20:11.447" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-22T18:20:11.447" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="142" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="143" CreationDate="2010-08-22T18:56:20.830" Score="1" ViewCount="54" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that people in my gaming group might be interested, and the more people post, the more we pick up momentum. However, I'm not sure whether people are allowed to sign up right now. Should I be sending them links?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T20:41:46.217" Title="Can I refer friends to the site while it's in private beta?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="142" CreationDate="2010-08-22T20:41:46.217" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think you can. Maybe if they can Commit to the proposal while in beta (on area51, proposal page, tab commit), but I seriously doubt it. In any case, the site is going public in 4 days, it's not much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T20:41:46.217" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="144" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="152" CreationDate="2010-08-22T21:16:30.443" Score="2" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are in the process of opening a lot of questions to collect pre-made ideas, artifacts, spells and so on. Would it make sense to have a common agreed tag for this kind of questions (such as &quot;common&quot; or &quot;collection&quot;)? propose a better one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit&lt;/strong&gt; :  I will take the task of tagging the current questions with the new tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="113" LastEditDate="2010-08-23T15:41:52.723" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T15:41:52.723" Title="tag for collection questions ?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="140" CreationDate="2010-08-22T22:48:38.107" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd say separate tags -- the mechanics are noticeably different, certainly as different as AD&amp;amp;D 1st and 2nd edition mechanics. And the worlds are very different despite superficial similarities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T22:48:38.107" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="144" CreationDate="2010-08-22T23:18:37.590" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that this makes sense; I also think these kinds of questions should be CW. Although, maybe 'list' is easier than collection?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T23:18:37.590" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="147" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="148" CreationDate="2010-08-22T23:21:31.330" Score="0" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;Several times, I've seen people on meta RPG make comments about clutter on community wiki. Is there some special wikipedia-esque function that works specifically with this flag for browsing and editing? I understand how it works w.r.t. voting and editing responses&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Community wiki function?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="148" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="147" CreationDate="2010-08-22T23:36:32.320" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; over on meta.stackoverflow. Short form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;voting doesn't affect rep&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;lower rep level needed to edit original post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;post is owned by the Community User, not the original poster&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a bunch more details over there, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-22T23:36:32.320" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="113" CreationDate="2010-08-23T03:33:53.507" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The nice thing about SO that you don't get with a forum is the voting on answers; sure, some people may be cheerleaders -- although I think it's overly cynical to assume that most of them are -- but aren't the better answers likely to be sorted towards the top?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T03:33:53.507" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-23T10:27:54.687" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;rollingroles.com&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T10:27:54.687" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:52:03.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="144" CreationDate="2010-08-23T13:30:06.347" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps [reference]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T13:30:06.347" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="97" CreationDate="2010-08-23T13:39:12.290" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think so; if we really don't want to use [dd] we can use [dnd] and it works just as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When they release an &quot;Ampersands and Octothorpes&quot; module, I think we'll have a case... but until then...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T13:39:12.290" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="27" CreationDate="2010-08-23T17:24:32.273" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a community where so much emphasis is put on reputation, a downvote is a serious thing.  It is very unwelcoming for a new user to get a rash of downvotes the first time or two they comment.  Too often I see the downvote used as a measure of agreement instead of fitness.  If the answer is wrong or off-topic, then downvote and leave a comment why.  But, downvoting just because they aren't part of the hive mind is just mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves a three tier system:   Upvotes for good answers and agreement, no votes for good answers that you don't agree with, and downvotes for incorrect or off-topic answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people are still downvoting honest, on-topic opinions at the end of beta, then I doubt the group will survive.  If a newbie sees an honest question or honest answers downvoted for no reason other than the answers express a different opinion, especially one they happen to share, then they will forever lurk, or forever leave.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oh, and if you want your answer or comment to be read, then upvote the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question also appeared on the main meta.  I went there to see if there was a similar feeling before I posted here.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/480/when-is-it-appropriate-to-downvote/6467#6467&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/480/when-is-it-appropriate-to-downvote/6467#6467&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="98" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T17:24:32.273" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-08-23T18:05:00.740" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A stack of d6s toppling over similar to the stackoverflow logo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Answer added at request of commenters)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T18:05:00.740" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="156" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-23T18:51:26.533" Score="7" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hey, let's ask the FAQ question! Now I am going to go be talkative in the answers. One answer per answer, vote up/down depending on whether you think it should be there, yes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; I will be editing these into the FAQ soon, so make your suggestions and votes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2010-10-07T15:12:48.057" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="What should our FAQ contain?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T18:57:11.043" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="157" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-23T18:52:24.380" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Q: What kinds of questions should be marked as community wiki questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: If your question is intended to gather a list of equally relevant answers, and you don't expect one answer to be the most applicable, it should be a community wiki. For example, if you ask for a list of cyberpunk-themed RPGs, that'd be a community wiki. If you ask what would be a good cyberpunk RPG for a game in which posthumanism and uplifting non-human races are major themes, that's probably not a community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="24" LastEditDate="2010-09-04T15:12:29.897" LastActivityDate="2010-09-04T15:12:29.897" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-23T19:10:55.777" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The FAQ needs to clairify what the target audience is for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose the target be:&#xA;&quot;New and experienced RPG players and RPG game masters&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the comments come up with something better, I'll edit the post to reflect it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line &quot;This site is not intended for:&quot; should probably be included with a short list under it that includes computer RPG players and potentially larpers if the other questions ever determine if they are or are not part of the intended audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastEditorUserId="18" LastEditDate="2010-08-24T15:15:50.610" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T15:15:50.610" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-08-23T19:48:56.433" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not logo design, but: if the current look and feel with the graph paper just had a bunch of rooms on it... might be too D&amp;amp;D/fantasy specific, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T19:48:56.433" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="115" CreationDate="2010-08-23T19:49:34.293" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In [a specific game system] I'm having difficulty determining what should happen under [circumstances]. What's the fair/appropriate interpretation of the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-23T19:49:34.293" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-23T19:49:34.293" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-24T02:05:12.450" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;What is a Role-Playing Game?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know, that blurb that they put in the front of every single RPG core rulebook ever published. I think we should have our own version, for newbies, so they understand what we're about. A link to some more official source wouldn't hurt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T02:05:12.450" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="162" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-24T13:51:38.207" Score="2" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found a question on logo design.&#xA;However I didn't find any on the rest of the look and feel of the final site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I created a question to contain suggestions of what the theme for the site should be.&#xA;Suggestions for the button styles, colour theme and things go here.&#xA;Quoting from &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/the-7-essential-meta-questions-of-every-beta&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The 7 Essential Meta Questions&lt;/a&gt; &quot;We have designers on staff to come up with site designs but, if an idea stemming from the community stands out as exceptional, we are happy to use it.&quot;&#xA;So we can suggest if we want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, what do we want our new rpg stack exchange site to look like?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="175" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T22:47:10.500" Title="Look and feel of final site design" Tags="|discussion|top-7|design|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="162" CreationDate="2010-08-24T13:53:37.767" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought I'd start with the suggestion of keeping a handwritten look and feel to the buttons and tags.&#xA;The handwritten theme says rpg to me, particularly if it's in a fairly natural colour scheme.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="175" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T13:53:37.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="164" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="162" CreationDate="2010-08-24T14:10:43.863" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like the graph paper. Slap a couple of dungeon rooms in one corner and a relationship map in another corner and you've got something. It'd be kind of cool if the dungeon map was also the relationship map... does that make sense? I'll see if I can sketch out something to show what I mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T14:10:43.863" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="165" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-24T14:29:33.840" Score="22" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it okay to ask LARP specific questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-02-08T04:16:06.140" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T04:16:08.090" Title="Are questions about LARPs on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|larp|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2010-08-24T14:42:33.473" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, I don't see why not--the demographics of the community would determine whether they get answered and how they are voted.  That said, I don't know much about what kind of LARP questions there would be and how out of place they might seem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-02-08T04:16:08.090" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T04:16:08.090" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="167" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2010-08-24T14:57:03.460" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't want to be an excluder, but the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;original proposal&lt;/a&gt; explicitly states &quot;tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have any LARPers in the community at this point?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, we should accommodate them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, I think we should stick with the proposal. So far, there are no questions about LARPing (please correct me if I'm wrong) and several other users have already speculated in comments and answers that LARP could/should get its own Stack Exchange site. As such I think the silent consensus has been that this site is about tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But again, if there are LARPers in our community already, we should try to accommodate them; I'm not one for blatant, deliberate exclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're a LARPer, please see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/168/are-you-a-larper&quot;&gt;Are you a LARPer?&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T15:03:26.427" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="168" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-24T15:02:45.723" Score="8" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asked in respect to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/165/are-we-including-larps&quot;&gt;Are we including LARPs?&lt;/a&gt;. If there are LARPers in the community, I think we should accommodate them and see - while we're in beta - whether the scope of this site can/should include LARP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you're a LARPer, shout out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing to bump up the list, now that we are no longer in private beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T03:30:00.703" Title="Are you a LARPer?" Tags="|discussion|larp|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-24T15:02:45.723" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-08-24T15:29:13.807" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. And I've stated elsewhere there are a lot of very specific implementation/design questions that could benefit from the voting methodology of stack exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T15:29:13.807" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-24T15:29:13.807" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-24T15:30:54.973" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;When is something system agnostic versus system specific. We've seen a bunch of questions where someone made the question without specific system tags but they only make sense in certain games (or even versions of games for D&amp;amp;D).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So really, when to use system specific tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T15:30:54.973" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2010-08-24T15:47:52.927" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know we have at least one other LARPer who's pretty active but hasn't spoken up yet. I'd say go for it, and we'll see what happens. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T15:47:52.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="172" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-24T17:10:14.483" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;What should I not ask here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where to find a game in &lt;em&gt;your city&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Who would like to play in my game?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where to buy games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In character questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T17:10:14.483" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="173" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-24T17:18:11.367" Score="10" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;How should we promote this site, when we reach public beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the SEO team has come out with &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/a-recipe-to-promote-your-site/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;some specifics&lt;/a&gt; for how they could help promote.  What is the best way to reach the RP community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-10-22T01:02:08.910" Title="How should we promote this site" Tags="|discussion|top-7|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-24T17:50:41.310" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would really like to hear from people with more experience on the big RPG forum community sites, by which I mean ENWorld and RPG.Net -- how would they feel about links to this site showing up in discussion threads over there? I sort of feel like that would be stepping on toes, but my instincts could be wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a shame we just passed Origins and Gencon. I would have organized a get-together at Gencon. If anyone is going to Dragoncon, we should absolutely do a meetup there. Other fall cons of size/importance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we roll around to spring, I'll do a meetup at DDXP, although that's under a thousand people and way past public beta. I am being optimistic that we'll make it to the next stage, however. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: you know, a general Stack Exchange meetup at cons would probably get people who know about the other big SE sites but don't know about us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we could use a separate question to collate a list of bloggers and/or podcasters to talk to. I don't know how to do that, really -- I tend to feel awkward. Might be that natural word of mouth in blogging will work fine, since Zachary and R.S. are bloggers and brought a lot of people into the commitment phase. Heck, I'll blog about it, not that anyone reads my blog. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="24" LastEditDate="2010-08-26T11:59:49.493" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T11:59:49.493" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-24T17:53:09.357" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should get a promotional business card template that has the name of the site, a link, and a mission statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who here attends conventions?  Take some cards with you.  I don't know which cons I can afford next year but Gencon and Magfest are possible options for me.  Mention the site to anybody interested, hand some cards out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Got a local hobby store?  Ask the owner/manager if you can leave a stack of cards there or perhaps post a bulletin on their message board. (Physical board and/or online message board.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can even start as small as just mentioning it to your play group.  Maybe if you are the GM, offer a 100xp referral bonus. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've got a friend over at d20source.com, I'll see about getting him to look at the site and make a post once the beta is public.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT:  He's made a post about us!&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20source.com/2010/10/got-an-question-ask-rpg-stack-exchange&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.d20source.com/2010/10/got-an-question-ask-rpg-stack-exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastEditorUserId="18" LastEditDate="2010-10-13T18:50:16.913" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T18:50:16.913" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="176" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="181" CreationDate="2010-08-24T19:29:57.693" Score="14" ViewCount="1095" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;strong&gt;“list question”&lt;/strong&gt; is a question that generates an endless list of answers, none of them better or worse than any other. They're questions that ask things like “list all the things I could do with a sword” or “tell me all the spells that are cool” or “what do you use for an initiative method?”. For a longer answer see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6444/1204&quot;&gt;What are list questions?&lt;/a&gt;. (Since 2012ish “list question” has been outdated terminology; it's frequently misunderstood to mean questions answered with a bulleted list.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we allow and encourage list/collection questions here?  The tradition on the trilogy has been to allow a very few and force them to be CW questions.  It seems, like many of the other betas, we are collecting quite a few early on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions aren't popular with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/57226/should-we-have-a-list-of-x-close-reason&quot;&gt;management&lt;/a&gt;, and I feel that they devalue the site.  They add clutter, they abuse voting, and they don't interest &lt;em&gt;experts&lt;/em&gt;.  Beyond that they can be found everywhere else on the web (&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GURPS_books&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;List of Gurps Books&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_campaign_settings&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;List of Campaign Settings&lt;/a&gt;, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe we need to commit early on, that we're going to close these questions as they come up.  What does the community think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: as time has gone on SE management consensus is against pure list questions, but @GraceNote &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1617/so-what-actually-is-a-game-rec/1841#1841&quot;&gt;has a good post on how they can be transformed from lists into good questions&lt;/a&gt; - I recommend reading it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-03T15:15:50.993" LastActivityDate="2020-06-03T15:15:50.993" Title="Are &quot;list questions&quot; on topic?" Tags="|discussion|faq|questions|on-topic|list-questions|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2010-08-24T19:38:31.453" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Heh. I am of course guilty of answering some of these. Mea culpa...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there's a line to be drawn between generic non-preferential lists and questions about the best way to do something. Some of the latter will tend to be phrased as list questions. I like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/969/are-there-any-good-paleolithic-rpgs&quot;&gt;the paleolithic RPG question&lt;/a&gt; because AHM explained why he was looking for what he wanted, rather than just asking for everything that would fit in the basket.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a useful distinction to be made between asking for lists of techniques (storing miniatures) and lists of things (the character build questions)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T19:38:31.453" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2010-08-24T21:10:29.873" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As long as all questions concerning Live Action are tagged as such, I suppose it isn't a problem.  But, I don't see much overlap between the technical table-top and dramatic LARP.  It falls outside the scope of the proposal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="98" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T21:10:29.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="139" CreationDate="2010-08-24T21:20:54.933" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd be more inclined to use the world-of-darkness tag, primarily because of the extra descriptiveness over the abbreviation, which some people may not by familiar with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T21:20:54.933" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="88" CreationDate="2010-08-24T21:37:07.593" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I bounced an idea off the design group.  Let's see what they think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6472/optional-advertising-area&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6472/optional-advertising-area&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="98" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T21:37:07.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2010-08-24T22:09:31.780" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No,&lt;/strong&gt; list questions—questions which will generate an endless stream of undifferentiated answers—are not on topic. They're covered by the bullet points in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions to avoid asking&lt;/a&gt; and should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do note that a question doesn't have to have a single provably “right” answer to not be a list question.  It just has to be able to have a “best” answer by the guidelines of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective. Most gm-techniques questions, for example, don't have a provably right answer, but by sharing their experience there's certainly a most helpful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that a list question is not one where the answer is a short list of items. A question about “which ioun stones will give me a stat bonus?” can yield a correct answer that is a short list of items. “Which magic items are cool?” on the other hand yields an infinite list of answers where there is no qualitative measure of which is most helpful. @GraceNote explained it better here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1841&quot;&gt;So, what actually is a game rec?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;Real questions have answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is hard, let's go shopping!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6444/1204&quot;&gt;What are list questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-03T14:36:11.507" LastActivityDate="2020-06-03T14:36:11.507" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-24T22:11:58.813" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will post it on my blog too, and between all of us it should get spread via the RPG Bloggers Network.  And I think we have a better chance of not stepping on the toes of the Big Purple and ENWorld if we scope this thing right, and have it be a good Stack Exchangey expert Q&amp;amp;A site and not a general chat forum using different software.  You don't have to be all things to all people to be newb friendly.  Heck, in the FAQ we should have a list of forum sites for people that want to go hobnob.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, Google should do the work for us - hell, half the time I end up on Stack Overflow it's because I was searching for something and they got the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-24T22:11:58.813" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="183" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-25T03:00:43.643" Score="2" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often, when you go to a convention that supports gaming, they'll give you a grab-bag of &lt;strong&gt;free convention swag&lt;/strong&gt; at registration. What &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; item can we create to give away at a convention and promote the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keychain&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Plastic dragon mini&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Button w/site logo&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cheap collectible game&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Branded dice?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example contents of a grab-bag from various Dexcons (www.dexposure.com):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Battlestar Galactica Keychain&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Copy of Scientific American&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Toy insect (goes with an online webgame)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cheapass Games(TM) button game (you wear a button w/character picture and stats, and you can duel other people with buttons)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need postcards, and business cards, but I think we have the potential with this site audience to come up with something unique and cool that people will really want to hang on to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T11:07:35.140" Title="Convention swag for promotion?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|convention|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-25T03:29:33.297" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mulling over this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the keys to the success of a expert Q&amp;amp;A site is to have good answers not just from random humanoids but from recognized experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore one of the biggest things we could do to promote this site is to get game creator/designer/publishers to have a presence here to answer questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would suggest a specific campaign designed at personally inviting industry figures here - I am not sure what we can offer them besides the opportunity, initial rep bribes?  But come up with a compelling pitch to get them to come here and answer questions re: their game systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the mooks will be lining up, we won't need to lift a finger to attract them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T03:29:33.297" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2010-08-25T10:58:17.947" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Against closing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;List of entities, such as custom spells, artifacts, monsters, or short adventures are very useful for people looking for new ideas. This SE is not a technical Q/A which accepts clear cut answers, we should be more liberal in what we consider a good question, and the core is more to provide peer-evaluated information exchange, not &quot;this is right, this is wrong&quot;, unless we only accept questions about the rules, that can be generally answered without asking, just by looking up in rulebook. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly, for list-&quot;questions&quot;, the concept of &quot;green tickmark&quot; vanishes, and for this reason, the question must be CW from the very beginning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, don't underestimate traffic. The existence of such SE is bound to an evaluation in 3 months time. We are probably not going to have a lot (stackoverflow size) of traffic in the long run, and it's also difficult to continue keeping a reasonable stream of traffic (both in terms of visits and questions/answers). The more questions we consider to be closed down, the smaller will be the community participation and revisit value, and the higher the chances that we have everything closed down and say &quot;bye bye, back to forums&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T10:58:17.947" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="183" CreationDate="2010-08-25T11:07:35.140" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Dice would be pretty cool. Something like a ? for the 1 and the logo for the 6, maybe? Here're some custom die costs; looks like it'd cost around $2.50 per die if the print run was in the thousands.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.crystalcaste.com/custom.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Crystal Caste&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.chessex.com/Dice/Custom_Dice_Home.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Chessex&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://customdice.com/pricing.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Game Station&lt;/a&gt; (way cheaper, not sure why)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://q-workshop.com/help_more.php?topic=customdice&amp;amp;lang=EN&amp;amp;sell_type=DETAL&amp;amp;currency=EUR&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Q Workshop&lt;/a&gt; (picky about design)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T11:07:35.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-25T11:08:38.883" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Minor thing, but worth doing: put the place in your signature on forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T11:08:38.883" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="189" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="97" CreationDate="2010-08-25T12:21:30.370" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  It is not permitted because of the way the sites are built.  URL special characters like /, &amp;amp; and # are not allowed because tags and handles and titles show up in the URLs to make the site work.  For instance, look at the tagging or feature-request links on the right sidebar.  The system dynamically builds a URL that includes those tags to let you search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like DnD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="98" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T12:21:30.370" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2010-08-25T12:46:03.517" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems that we're conflating two categories of question here.  Stefano is talking about lists of custom spells, etc., which are really a form of the best practices/techniques that Bryant mentioned.  Lists of books, etc. are very easy to find on wikipedia or wherever and don't seem to add much value to the site.  Lists of practices/techniques definitely add value in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T12:46:03.517" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="162" CreationDate="2010-08-25T14:24:06.143" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to offer my day job experience as a graphic designer for anything that needs to be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T14:24:06.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="192" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-25T14:44:31.267" Score="6" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we talk about adventures, we're probably going to have spoilers. Do we care? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Should we worry about spoilers?" Tags="|discussion|spoilers|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="192" CreationDate="2010-08-25T14:47:40.527" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;My position: we should be a spoiler zone, and this should go in the FAQ so as to warn people. It's going to limit the ability to answer questions too much if people have to worry about talking around their answers. If the SO programmers would like to add a spoiler block, that'd be keen, but this &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1037/ability-to-mark-text-as-spoiler-text&quot;&gt;feature request&lt;/a&gt; has been around for nearly a year and hasn't seen much support so far. We could lobby for it, though!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T14:47:40.527" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="192" CreationDate="2010-08-25T14:52:40.377" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should give a little care to hide spoilers.  When a question specifically asks for spoilers it should be tagged &lt;code&gt;spoiler&lt;/code&gt;.  However I think a FAQ statement might go a long way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also there is a better performing &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-a-spoiler-tag-that-makes-hidden-until-you-click-text&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;[feature-request]&lt;/code&gt; here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T14:52:40.377" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="195" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-25T15:14:41.257" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;From:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/192/should-we-worry-about-spoilers&quot;&gt;Should we worry about spoilers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site may contain spoilers. We try to tag questions that are expected to generate spoilers with &lt;code&gt;[spoiler]&lt;/code&gt;, but you are not guaranteed to see a spoiler warning before reading a spoiler anywhere on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T18:45:28.353" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-25T15:37:16.050" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This will definitely get a mention on my podcast. It's not big, but we've got word-of-mouth appeal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T15:37:16.050" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2010-08-25T16:19:52.163" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question isn't picking up many answers and, in particular, up-votes on the question itself, then it's a good sign that it's a candidate for closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, if the community are showing they like it then keep it open.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what the vote system is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T16:19:52.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="198" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="220" CreationDate="2010-08-25T19:09:49.840" Score="3" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;Once again, regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/319/are-dice-really-necessary&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on the main site. I haven't looked at it in a while, but at one point there were 3 votes to close on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been a member of Stack Overflow since it was first public, and don't remember close votes ever &quot;expiring.&quot; Do they, and I perhaps just never noticed/knew? Because right now, there are no close votes, and according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/319/revisions&quot;&gt;revision history&lt;/a&gt;, it never was closed and reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="108" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Where did my close votes go?" Tags="|support|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="198" CreationDate="2010-08-25T19:21:01.650" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are right, this is very unusual. delete votes expire, but close votes should not, unless they changed it recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T19:21:01.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="200" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-25T19:21:21.463" Score="4" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt;'s question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/173/how-should-we-promote-this-site&quot;&gt;How should we promote this site&lt;/a&gt; got me thinking. One of the reasons that StackOverflow was initially so successful was due to the large followings that Joel Spolsky and Jeff Atwood brought to the site. Therefore, I think it would be great if we could have a well known expert with a large following using this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first person that came to my mind was &lt;a href=&quot;http://robin-d-laws.livejournal.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Robin D. Laws&lt;/a&gt;. He has been mentioned in several answers already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/791/what-role-playing-games-have-the-best-gamemaster-advice-sections#826&quot;&gt;What role-playing games have the best gamemaster advice sections?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1113/what-is-the-single-most-influential-book-every-gm-should-read#1118&quot;&gt;What is the single most influential book every GM should read?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/975/encouraging-out-of-the-box-thinking-in-game#978&quot;&gt;Encouraging out-of-the-box thinking in-game.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how do go about getting him involved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T01:15:02.327" Title="How do we get Robin D. Laws to use and promote this site?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="198" CreationDate="2010-08-25T19:21:33.477" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Close votes age away.  I believe it's two days.  I'm looking on meta for a source, but I haven't found one yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T19:21:33.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T19:34:24.247" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;MadMaxJr &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/156/what-should-our-faq-contain/172#172&quot;&gt;kind of proposed&lt;/a&gt; &quot;YeOldeSwordExchange.com&quot;. I think it's too long. But we can work from here.&#xA;The main issue is that they are fantasy oriented domain names. What about Cyberpunk RPGs ? the domain name should be method agnostic and setting agnostic. mhmm....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What about a completely disconnected name, such as one of a place or similar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Arcaria, Serinai, Mikeides, Morlekur, Samyria&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we try mindmapping concepts ? When do we have to deliver the domain name proposal ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I splitted names so you can vote them independently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:58:42.000" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T19:34:24.247" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:08:31.797" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;DiceySubjects.com?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:08:31.797" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:08:31.797" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:13:24.653" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;howweroll.com - Short form of &quot;Is This How We Roll?&quot; or &quot;This Is How We Roll&quot;, depending on implication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21" LastEditorUserId="94" LastEditDate="2010-08-26T16:49:50.223" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T16:49:50.223" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:13:24.653" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="205" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:16:16.243" Score="3" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;I saw this over on the Stack Overflow Blog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sponsor fun things for each community…&#xA;  especially the kinds of things that&#xA;  are likely to get talked about. This&#xA;  may mean photo contests for the&#xA;  photography site, cooking classes for&#xA;  the food and cooking site, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This got me thinking of what could be &quot;fun&quot; for our site. First I think that we should consider reviews as a valid &quot;question&quot; or community wiki. Some of the best RPG forums have good reviews. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second we should encourage people to throw up things to be playtested or used. I know this has been touched in the list and collection topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third have topics with more elaborate collaborative efforts like creating a setting or module.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A final suggestion is to encourage and reward people who post actual play reports.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway I generally suck at coming up with &quot;fun&quot; community things. But I think that between us we can come up with some good ideas as I think the blog post makes an important point especially since we are not as technical as other stack exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T13:45:15.827" Title="Doing Fun Things" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:18:43.360" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I seem to have a few suggestions floating around in comments...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rollforcriticalfailure.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.rollforcriticalfailure.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:18:43.360" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:18:43.360" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:19:27.727" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I seem to have a few suggestions floating around in comments...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rollandplay.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.rollandplay.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:19:27.727" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:19:27.727" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:46:15.880" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Separating answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;YeOldeGamer.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:46:15.880" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:46:15.880" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="209" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:47:24.567" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;YeOldeDie.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:47:24.567" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:47:24.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:48:19.057" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;YeOldeSpell.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:48:19.057" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:48:19.057" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="211" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:49:10.023" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;LandOfDice.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:49:10.023" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:49:10.023" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:49:48.850" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;MistyTaverns.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:49:48.850" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:49:48.850" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:50:36.587" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;RampartsOfDoom.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:50:36.587" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:50:36.587" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T20:51:37.007" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; MysticScroll.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T20:51:37.007" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T20:51:37.007" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="215" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="200" CreationDate="2010-08-25T21:58:34.323" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Once we're in public beta, the easiest answer, to me, is to simply e-mail or Livejournal private message him and let him know about this site, its mission, and graciously state that we'd love to see him as a member of our community. No hard sell, just something he may be interested in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="108" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T21:58:34.323" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="200" CreationDate="2010-08-25T22:01:49.277" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Robin's a full-time freelancer, so he's more likely to use the site if it has value to him. If the site winds up seeing a lot of design questions that are asked and answered well, I suspect it'll have more utility for any and all professionals. Let us continue to avoid the artificiality that comes with seeding, but if anyone has any design questions they need answered, we might well give them a shot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T22:01:49.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="217" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="162" CreationDate="2010-08-25T22:47:10.500" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm more a fan of the darker color schemes.  They seem easier to read to me.  Plus, there's the whole playing off the &quot;underground&quot; or &quot;in space&quot; feel.  I would also suggest a dragon (or some other stereotypical, symbolic creature) in the logo.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T22:47:10.500" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2010-08-25T22:54:01.507" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not a LARPer; I'm a tabletopper.  Still, I don't see a lot of difference between a good tabletop immersion in which everyone is in-character while sitting and a good LARP immersion in which everyone is in-character while standing and moving around.  The basic premise behind what the game is meant to be seems to remain the same (of course, I could be wrong since I don't LARP).  I think LARP questions should be included.  A &quot;LARP&quot; tag will allow people to filter out the questions if they don't want to see them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T22:54:01.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-25T23:15:25.167" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;ThePriceofPower&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T23:15:25.167" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-25T23:15:25.167" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="198" CreationDate="2010-08-25T23:28:09.747" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Close (and re-open) votes indeed age away (after 4 days). The premise is that, if they didn't, the occasional close-votes that tend to accumulate randomly would close many, many questions over a long enough period of time. So they age away. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reference: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53702/reopen-votes-disappeared-bug&quot;&gt;Reopen votes disappeared - bug?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-25T23:28:09.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T03:46:01.193" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;summonergeeks.com&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Alewives&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dead Alewives D&amp;amp;D sketch&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T03:46:01.193" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T03:46:01.193" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="222" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T04:03:36.947" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;ruleslawyer.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T04:03:36.947" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T04:03:36.947" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="205" CreationDate="2010-08-26T04:39:29.263" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm gonna suggest the one that's obvious, that everyone dismisses it because it seems unattainable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's host a gaming convention!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm posting this as it's own question, in hopes that it will start a new thread of discussion...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T04:39:29.263" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="224" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-26T04:41:15.850" Score="3" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;The powers-that-be are looking for fun community events that can drive site promotion. I suggest we host a gaming convention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the spirit of &quot;agile development&quot; from the software world, we can start with the smallest possible thing that can be run, and grow organically according to what people need and want to see at the con.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we put something together that's even remotely in my area (US east coast) I am willing to GM a couple of Shadowrun games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To get the ball rolling, we need the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A location&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A list of people who are going to show up&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An idea of what they're interested in doing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Really, any community get-together can be boiled down to these items. I'm suggesting we start with a weekend of RPG gaming.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think about it, we do this kind of thing all the time, in our own individual groups. We just need to get organized. =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2011-12-27T21:01:39.843" Title="Can we host a gaming convention?" Tags="|discussion|top-7|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="225" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:54:31.713" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request)&#xA;deargamemaster.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T09:54:31.713" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:54:31.713" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:55:06.507" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request)&#xA;deardungeonmaster.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T09:55:06.507" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:55:06.507" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="227" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:55:35.990" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request. Untaken (at time of original posting))&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;askthetable.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastEditorUserId="132" LastEditDate="2010-08-31T12:22:50.327" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T12:22:50.327" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:55:35.990" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:55:53.433" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;sayyesorrollthedice.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T09:55:53.433" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:55:53.433" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:56:17.740" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;canitake20.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T09:56:17.740" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:56:17.740" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T09:56:43.887" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;(split from earlier, by request)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;rpgreplies.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T09:56:43.887" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T09:56:43.887" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="224" CreationDate="2010-08-26T10:04:16.990" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given the web-nature of (rpg.)SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest this be a 'virtual' Con.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="132" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T10:04:16.990" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="224" CreationDate="2010-08-26T11:58:39.757" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, dibs on running a lot of 4e. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T11:58:39.757" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="205" CreationDate="2010-08-26T13:45:15.827" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a big fan of establishing a very different atmosphere to the site. because of the stack exchange format we're much better at being an objective answer site and less full of subjective. And for that reason reviews should always be question driven (pull) and not something put up (push)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T13:45:15.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="234" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-26T15:46:36.180" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;StackOfDice.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit:&#xA;Currently parked by GoDaddy.com on behalf of Stack Overflow&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-09-27T21:42:48.637" LastActivityDate="2010-09-27T21:42:48.637" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T15:46:36.180" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="235" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-08-26T18:09:18.520" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;1.)  I think all tags addressing D&amp;amp;D should be edited to say DnD instead of dd (or some other odd derivative).  This would help filter out a lot of the redundancies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2.)  Tags should exist for D&amp;amp;D in general, as well as each D&amp;amp;D version.  There are some cases, although perhaps rare, in which a question is D&amp;amp;D-specific but not really version-specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3.)  Tags for D&amp;amp;D-specific products, such as Encounters, the Player's Handbook, etc. should all have the same prefix to avoid confusion and aid in filtering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T18:09:18.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="237" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-08-26T22:35:00.470" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am. And I think that live-action roleplaying games &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; roleplaying games, and so included in the scope of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T22:35:00.470" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-26T22:35:00.470" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="88" CreationDate="2010-08-26T22:45:25.353" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a publisher answers a question, that's awesome I say. If Knuth answers a question about TeX on Stack Overflow, that's only a good thing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="286" LastActivityDate="2010-08-26T22:45:25.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:42:35.073" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;deadseriousgames.com  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:42:35.073" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:42:35.073" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:42:53.323" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;deadseriousgamers.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:42:53.323" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:42:53.323" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:43:14.227" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;allworkisplay.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:43:14.227" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:43:14.227" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:43:31.980" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;rpgascendant.com  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:43:31.980" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:43:31.980" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:43:59.797" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;innmeet.com is one idea&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:43:59.797" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:43:59.797" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="244" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:44:29.263" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;hereistheplan.com  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:44:29.263" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:44:29.263" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:44:50.433" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;rollyourattack.com (or roleyourattack.com)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:44:50.433" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:44:50.433" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:45:07.080" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;rollinginitiative.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:45:07.080" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:45:07.080" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T02:45:32.850" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;grabyourdice.com  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T02:45:32.850" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T02:45:32.850" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-27T05:22:57.510" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking of blogs -- if you don't normally enter a URL when commenting on blogs, using the URL here might be a decent idea. I wouldn't comment just for the sake of getting the URL out there, but if you were going to comment anyway and you don't have your own site to point to? Might be on the verge of spam; please downvote this if you think it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T05:22:57.510" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="249" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T13:30:19.663" Score="2" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should discourage acronym tags like &quot;tftfv&quot;. I assume it means Tales froma  Floating Vagabond, but I'm not sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T14:12:51.943" Title="Use of Acronym tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="249" CreationDate="2010-08-27T13:38:32.293" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We acronymize a lot of other games -- [nwod], [dd], etc. Obviously Tales from the Floating Vagabond is somewhat more obscure but I am not sure where to draw the line. I just created an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/tftfv/info&quot;&gt;info page&lt;/a&gt; for [tftfv] -- does that ability help resolve your concerns?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T13:38:32.293" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="139" CreationDate="2010-08-27T14:11:10.667" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've suggested [wod] as a synonym for [world-of-darkness]. If you have over a thousand rep, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/world-of-darkness/synonyms&quot;&gt;come on over and vote&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T14:11:10.667" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="249" CreationDate="2010-08-27T14:12:51.943" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do people actually refer to Tales from the Floating Vagabond as tftfv outside this site? I hear NWoD and D&amp;amp;D on a regular basis...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, tftfv is a tough acronym to parse :-P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T14:12:51.943" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="253" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T14:57:02.557" Score="5" ViewCount="205" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you click the button at the upper right side of the page?  What does it say?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it say &lt;code&gt;Post&lt;/code&gt;?  No, last time I checked it says &lt;code&gt;Ask Question&lt;/code&gt;.  This is intentional, this site is Q&amp;amp;A, not discussion.  There are plenty of great places on the web to ask discuss topics related to role-playing games. But there are very few places to ask questions about them.  I think we need to preserve this as a place to &lt;em&gt;ask questions&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;get answers&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discussion muddies the site and holds it back from its primary purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, where do we draw the line.  Are &lt;em&gt;pseudo&lt;/em&gt; questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1408/the-evil-corrupting-roleplaying-games-not&quot;&gt;The evil, corrupting roleplaying games… not.&lt;/a&gt; ok?  What about other questions like [What makes a game an “Indie” RPG? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/700/what-makes-a-game-an-indie-rpg-closed&quot;&gt;closed&lt;/a&gt;?  What level of discussion do we want to allow on the main site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T22:02:21.900" Title="Discussion questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="254" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:00:29.697" Score="14" ViewCount="419" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been seeing a lot of answers to questions that are basically duplicates. There may be some nice variants, but it’s basically already been answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we discourage this? How can we encourage folks to write comments when they just want to add a wrinkle on an existing answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've been getting more and more answers that say &quot;I agree and here's more&quot; what can we be doing better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is important to point out that deleting duplicate answers is SE pretty much policy. By not doing this we aren't meeting SE norms (which may be a bad thing as we think about getting out of Beta).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2020-09-21T04:12:20.993" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T04:12:20.993" Title="How should we deal with answers that are basically duplicates of existing answers to the same question?" Tags="|discussion|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="254" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:06:47.000" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;many people post an answer at the same time. You decide who to vote. If you don't like an answer or consider it relevant enough, just don't vote it. Downvotes are for annoying, or useless answers, or wrong (when the question can be answered with a single, specific answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T15:06:47.000" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="253" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:19:49.917" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found the evil RPG question to be pretty close to the line (sorry, Stefano), but not quite over it. Without the rephrase I would have voted to close it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I strongly feel that it's useful to phrase questions as questions. When a newcomer visits the site and sees &quot;The evil, corrupting roleplaying games… not.&quot; it looks like a discussion topic rather than a question; they won't necessarily click to look inside. I don't feel so strongly about it that I'll vote down questions that don't have a ? at the end, but I will plead here. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T15:19:49.917" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="21" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:27:40.847" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should remove the Indie tag from posts that are just about a specific game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T15:27:40.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="258" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:53:43.043" Score="2" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm getting on the old side and I have no idea what makes this tag different from the &quot;odd&quot; tag. Is it supposed to represent a certain style of game? if so, does it really need a tag? This seems a horribly subjective tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: And what is OSR?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-08-27T21:51:12.817" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T01:17:02.447" Title="What is the old-school tag supposed to cover" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="254" CreationDate="2010-08-27T15:53:53.263" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;My hopeful guess is that lots of identical answers will lead to spread out rep; people who post focused answers to questions that don't have a lot of answers already will get more rep, and that will encourage appropriate behavior better than down-voting. This process can be encouraged by upvoting that sort of question, always assuming it's a good question in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T15:53:53.263" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-27T17:47:03.623" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO, the old-school tag doesn't really provide much value. In some cases it's used as a stand-in for a specific, older version of a game (such as odd).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also incredibly subjective. D&amp;amp;D third edition is the edition of D&amp;amp;D that I &quot;grew up on.&quot; Does that qualify third edition as &quot;old school?&quot; Or maybe 2nd edition, which I played a couple times before I really got into role playing? Or does nothing published after 1980 count?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the important question here, is under what situations would a person want to search for &quot;old-school&quot;, specifically? It seems to be mostly related to original D&amp;amp;D, which already has its own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edited to add:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What if I post a question about the D6 edition of the Star Wars Role Playing Game? Should that receive an old-school tag, since it's an older version of an existing property? What about the original World of Darkness? Or the D10 version of 7th Sea (Swashbuckling Adventures)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the tag still have value if it applies to games beyond just Dungeons and Dragons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2010-08-27T18:00:37.703" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:00:37.703" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="261" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="263" CreationDate="2010-08-27T18:02:49.037" Score="2" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the [&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pnp&quot;&gt;PnP&lt;/a&gt;] tag for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:04:08.927" Title="What is the PnP tag for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="262" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T18:02:50.490" Score="1" ViewCount="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should the tag be [gumshoe] or [gumshoe-system]? I suggest that the latter is redundant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:54:12.513" Title="GUMSHOE or GUMSHOE-system?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="261" CreationDate="2010-08-27T18:04:08.927" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pen and paper. It is very redundant for this site, even if we wind up with some LARP questions. PnP is the default assumption, IMHO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:04:08.927" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-27T18:45:39.613" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it has some value, but it's limited? It is somewhat more focused than [indie] but will have some of the same issues in use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:45:39.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="262" CreationDate="2010-08-27T18:54:12.513" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sounds good to me. I'll fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T18:54:12.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="266" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-27T19:00:09.973" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general it is used to when a question could applies to all of older editions of D&amp;amp;D. Probably including the oldest games like chivalry &amp;amp; sorcery, tunnels &amp;amp; trolls, Runequest, Traveller, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the focus in on D&amp;amp;D and while the different editions the same there are differences. They all need tags including one to encompass all of them at once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T19:00:09.973" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="267" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T19:21:46.467" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recommend using full names when possible for search purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T19:21:46.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="253" CreationDate="2010-08-27T19:32:46.273" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recognize that this format is intended to be very strictly Q&amp;amp;A.  I believe, however, that we need to allow a certain amount of subjectivity in the questions.  Yes, some posts will be more &quot;discussion&quot; than Q&amp;amp;A at times.  All we need to do is reserve the &quot;discussion&quot; tag for those questions.  Then, those who want to see only Q&amp;amp;A can ignore that tag.  And those who don't mind participating in discussions can pay attention to it.  After all, good &quot;discussions&quot; (not to be confused with arguments, for which the mods would be responsible to address) tend to promote participation, which leads to a sense of belonging, which in turn leads to member acquisition and retention.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T19:32:46.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="269" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-27T19:57:19.700" Score="2" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given the nature of this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T23:38:37.233" Title="Are the &quot;games&quot; and &quot;roleplaying&quot; tags redundant?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="269" CreationDate="2010-08-27T19:59:10.793" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I should think so, yes. It seems to me that a site entirely about roleplaying games wouldn't need either tag. :) Retag at will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="108" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T19:59:10.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-27T20:01:47.290" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are my thoughts on tags.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should be as specific as possible.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should speak to the widest audience possible.  Not everyone knows and acronyms and jargon.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We should have only those that are necessary.  Tags should help with organizing and finding.  Too many will become counter-productive.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T20:01:47.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="269" CreationDate="2010-08-27T20:04:16.413" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Roleplaying&quot; could be a useful tag to mark questions about the &quot;acting in character&quot; part of gaming, as in the distinction roleplaying vs. combat.  There might be a better tag for that, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T20:04:16.413" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="273" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-27T21:24:02.567" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;savevsconfusion.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T21:24:02.567" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-27T21:24:02.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="21" CreationDate="2010-08-27T21:36:28.743" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no good answer. It's a silly, divisive term with many meanings, but as a tag won't it sort of reach a cognitive equilibrium over time? A definition that works by default here, because of consensus? I avoid using it myself but when I first showed up here, I checked out all the questions with that tag and could contribute to all of them, so that's something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="387" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T21:36:28.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-27T21:51:48.627" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen a couple posts lately tagged with &quot;osr&quot;. I think this (or old-school-renaissance) would be a good D&amp;amp;D specific alternative to old-school.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T21:51:48.627" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="269" CreationDate="2010-08-27T23:38:37.233" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Games&quot; has no purpose and should go.  (or &quot;rpg&quot;).  Everything here should fit that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-27T23:38:37.233" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="277" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-28T01:07:18.960" Score="0" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am unable to articulate the difference between these tags. Looking at the questions did not help. Should they be merged or setup as synonyms? If so, which one should we keep?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot;&gt;Questions tagged campaign-development&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot;&gt;Questions tagged world-building&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:50:22.450" Title="What is the difference between the campaign-development tag and the world-building tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="258" CreationDate="2010-08-28T01:17:02.447" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on the criteria in the StackOverflow blog post, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;, I think the [old-school] is a meta tag. Since these are now &quot;explicitly discouraged&quot;, I think that it should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T01:17:02.447" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="21" CreationDate="2010-08-28T03:18:48.173" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Does it qualify as a dependent tag as per &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;? This is not a rhetorical question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T03:18:48.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="277" CreationDate="2010-08-28T03:21:23.613" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;World building is probably somewhat larger in scope, in theory: you could develop a campaign within an existing world. In practice I don't think there's a ton of difference. I would say campaign-development is the right parent tag; it focuses on the activity of roleplaying rather than being a term that's used as often in writing fiction. Me am purist. Grunt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: as per mxy's comment, I don't think there's a need for quick action here -- there could be a difference, and if one develops or is encouraged that'd be nice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="24" LastEditDate="2010-08-28T15:44:10.437" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T15:44:10.437" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="281" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="21" CreationDate="2010-08-28T03:52:54.460" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both &quot;indie&quot; and &quot;story games&quot; are terribly muddled terms at this point, even for folks who are a part of the Forge or Story Games online/in-person communities.  I vote for not using them at all in responses, though of course people will come in with whatever questions that have, phrased however they like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="409" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T03:52:54.460" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="277" CreationDate="2010-08-28T04:44:54.357" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there's room for both.  World building is all the usual &quot;making the geography&quot; thing.  Developing a campaign has more to do with the specific plotline etc at hand - the &quot;adventure.&quot;  Now having said that some of the things tagged CD should have been tagged WB...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T04:44:54.357" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="283" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-28T04:46:52.060" Score="1" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;I came across the question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1401/how-many-encounters-can-you-squeeze-into-a-3-hour-slot&quot;&gt;How many encounters can you squeeze into a 3 hour slot?&lt;/a&gt;, while removing the old-school tag. Its only tags were old-school and convention. Neither of those really seem to apply. I think it is a good question with some valuable answers. Any idea how questions like this should be tagged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T13:23:07.230" Title="How should we tag questions about time constraints?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="284" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="285" CreationDate="2010-08-28T05:30:27.103" Score="15" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast, the same company that publishes DnD, has created a board game called Castle Ravenloft.  It uses rules that are derived partially from DnD 4.0.  In the future, they also plan to come out with another board game using the same system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, the rules are derived from the DnD 4.0 system, and questions on that topic are clearly allowable.  On the other hand, the particular rules are a streamlined set with noticeable differences, and there are many rules created just for the purposes of the game itself--which is a board game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would questions about this game be on-topic, or off-topic?  Best to get the discussion out there before we start seeing the questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="153" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T14:47:43.860" LastActivityDate="2016-06-27T19:15:09.770" Title="Are questions about role-playing derivative board games on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="284" CreationDate="2010-08-28T06:13:35.833" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. I would say that board games are off-limits. They are a different &quot;kind&quot; of game; there is no in-game character immersion, even if the basic style is the same.  Computer RPG's would also be off-limits for the same reason.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-06T06:42:34.657" LastActivityDate="2012-01-06T06:42:34.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="283" CreationDate="2010-08-28T13:23:07.230" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Broadly speaking, I think every question &quot;about time constraints&quot; is going to be about some activity that you're trying to accomplish within those time constraints. I think it's natural to tag those questions based on the underlying activity. Here, there are really two activities - &quot;running encounters&quot; and &quot;designing a scenario.&quot; The former is actually constrained, time-wise, but the latter is taking those constraints into account. At its core, the question is &quot;about&quot; scenario design, so I think scenario-development applies pretty strongly, here. If it were a question about what the longest real-time span a campaign could realistically cover (Is it OK if I run a campaign for a decade?) then it would be campaign-development, I guess. If it were &quot;how long can a dude dither about which square he's going to move his character into before he passes his turn,&quot; well, that's a mechanics question, I guess, and I'm not sure we have a tag for system-agnostic questions about how to manage the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This particular question wasn't system-agnostic, incidentally; but it did specify two distinct possible systems. I assume questions should be tagged with all the systems they purport to apply to. I went ahead and added add1.0, but the tagging convention for systems is still far too up-in-the-air for me to guess what the appropriate tag for S&amp;amp;W might be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T13:23:07.230" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="287" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="290" CreationDate="2010-08-28T14:08:56.800" Score="1" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was considering voting to close &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1128/im-creating-an-original-setting-for-dd-where-do-i-start&quot;&gt;I'm creating an original setting for D&amp;amp;D--where do I start?&lt;/a&gt; as a duplicate but there is no 'close' button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote to close takes 250 rep (which I have)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it 'cause it's a considerable upvoted question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the activity on that question I think it would be wise to merge it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11/what-qualities-are-important-when-creating-a-fantasy-rpg-campaign&quot;&gt;What qualities are important when creating a fantasy RPG campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-10-17T17:28:08.783" Title="Where's the &quot;vote to close&quot; button?" Tags="|discussion|support|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-28T14:15:34.447" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;questoverload.com&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(available)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You didn't sign up to fight yet another random encounter! There are worlds to save!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="416" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T14:15:34.447" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-28T14:15:34.447" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="287" CreationDate="2010-08-28T14:40:17.427" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Vote to close your own question is 250, vote to close someone else's question is 3000 rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="153" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-10-17T17:28:08.783" LastActivityDate="2012-10-17T17:28:08.783" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="291" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-28T17:32:44.223" Score="0" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is sort of an anal question, but is there a better tag for Carnage Amongst the Tribes/Stars than [catt]? [carnage-amongst-the-tribes] is too long. I updated my answer to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/702/anyone-know-when-carnage-amongst-the-tribes-will-be-released&quot;&gt;release date question&lt;/a&gt; and got all fussy; feel free to claim I'm being too nitpicky here. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T21:02:31.507" Title="Carnage Amongst The Tribes/Amongst the Stars Tagging?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="292" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="291" CreationDate="2010-08-28T18:38:47.187" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're being too nitpicky.  I don't think we can/should police tags for all 2000+ RPGs in existence.  I assume if someone is posting for some fringe game, they're more in trouch with how its adherents abbreviate/refer to it than we are.  At most we just need to merge dupes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T18:38:47.187" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="293" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="294" CreationDate="2010-08-28T20:22:17.563" Score="1" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know there are a lot of questions right now about &quot;does this tag make sense,&quot; and that's not what I'm asking about - those clearly belong here. But when it comes to &quot;What does [tag] mean?&quot; it seems like there are two places that people can go to discuss that - the tag wiki (which may exclude the person who created the tag) and meta (which will exclude all the people who haven't figured out what &quot;meta&quot; means.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there other options? Is meta the best place, given that there are so many un-wikied tags right now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T20:35:34.910" Title="Where to discuss questions of the &quot;What does [tag] mean?&quot; format?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="293" CreationDate="2010-08-28T20:35:34.910" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. As the site grows and we get people with better reputation we'll see that driven to the wiki. But for now, meta seems the best place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T20:35:34.910" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="291" CreationDate="2010-08-28T21:02:31.507" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;What about &quot;threesixteen&quot;?  Isn't that better, since they're the same game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="409" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T21:02:31.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="284" CreationDate="2010-08-28T21:10:30.577" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we want to be in the business of deciding what is and isn't a roleplaying game.  Can we discuss semi-larp tabletop games like Montsegur 1244 here? What about experimental stuff like Sweet Agatha? We're already discussing solo games for 1 player, which seems like an edge case. Surely discussing Castle Ravenloft is more appropriate here than it would be on a board games forum, where they don't have as much experience with WOTC products or D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I would encourage us to default to helping people out by directing them to helpful resources, even if those resources are somewhere else, rather than rejecting questions submitted by sincere, interested parties.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="409" LastEditorUserId="409" LastEditDate="2010-08-28T22:01:09.050" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T22:01:09.050" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="297" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="301" CreationDate="2010-08-28T22:08:20.177" Score="4" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it appropriate to answer a question by simply linking an existing article and possibly giving a short summary as to why that answers the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1691/using-the-ipad-as-a-gm-tool/1701#1701&quot;&gt;Myself&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T01:30:53.563" Title="Linking articles to answer questions" Tags="|support|answers|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="297" CreationDate="2010-08-28T22:58:01.157" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think so. The idea is to get questions answered and build knowledge, right? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T22:58:01.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-08-28T23:06:45.570" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gaming may be subjective but I think it is important we push for as objective questions and answers as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions should be questions and can be answered. &quot;How do I do X&quot; or &quot;I did Y is it right?&quot; seem good. What do you think about Z questions seem mostly too subjective unless the answer is one that can be objectively stated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also think questions that have no right answer (like the future of book distribution) are way too subjective for this site. If its the type of question you and your friends are going to have over a few beers its probably not for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should always have a discrete, objective and backed up answer. If they don't, they probably don't belong on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, this site has an opportunity to be a unique and different voice in gaming because of the avoidance of subjective questions and answers. I want to see us try to realize that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T23:06:45.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="297" CreationDate="2010-08-28T23:35:30.917" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Absolutely.  Duplication is not building knowledge when a link will do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-28T23:35:30.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="297" CreationDate="2010-08-29T01:30:53.563" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with myzplk and Bryant, but I think that a sort of &quot;annotated bibliography&quot; approach should be encouraged rather than just a bare link.  Someone providing a bit of context or a snippet of review (e.g., &quot;This link is to an article by so and so that sums up the issue nicely, especially the third paragraph&quot; or &quot;This has dramatically helped my games go more smoothly&quot;) is much more valuable than just the link, and helps make the site something more than a human-powered search engine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T01:30:53.563" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="253" CreationDate="2010-08-29T02:40:07.843" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I completely agree.  Only real questions.  Again, there are many fine RPG forum sites out there for discussions.  This is an expert Q&amp;amp;A site that should become a useful knowledge base over time.  It's not for socializing or noodling or speculating or anything that becomes noise not signal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look, I don't want to be a &quot;big meanie,&quot; but to get this SE off on the right foot we have to be strict out of the gate. Keeping high quality and low signal/noise is what will attract high quality contributors (like game publishers).  People are already adding more RPG forums and social network sites than you can shake a stick at out there - there has to be something to add value besides &quot;another place for people to spout just like they do everywhere else.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T02:40:07.843" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="303" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-08-29T03:15:31.660" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Anyone have any experience with getting URLs noticed on Digg, Reddit, StumbleUpon, etc? I bet it's really hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T03:15:31.660" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="253" CreationDate="2010-08-29T18:00:44.107" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I answer here due to my comments on mxyzplk becoming too long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree on one thing. Forum behavior must be discouraged. With Forum behavior I mean where answers are used for dialog among users. Every user should post one answer. This point is trivial, but makes SE and its usage stand out against forums. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I checked a bit on meta.SO for the meaning of CW, and the point is: nobody knows for sure. The only point that is made is that a CW is some post where 1) votes do not reflect skills (which imho is slightly wrong, since rep does not necessarily correlate with skills) 2) the post is owned by the community, not by a particular person. To me, the nature of the design of CW with a Q/A site where every answer is associated to a person makes little sense. Why should I edit your answer anyway ? This would make more sense if there were only one &quot;answer space&quot; available in CW, with this answer belonging to the community. But ok... this is SE design, I'm not here to discuss that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point clearly is: &lt;strong&gt;we need to encourage good answers to good questions&lt;/strong&gt;, not good discussion to good starting issues. Hold your horses, though. What is the difference between a discussion and a question/answer ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A discussion implies an intense exchange of opinions with retorts and counter-retorts. This behavior must be fought against. Our scope is that someone asks a question, and some other people provide answers. The appreciation of each answer by the community is voted (up or down) and the original question author can give his own recognition to his preferred answer by ticking. So far so good. This behavior is simple, googleable, quick (I have a need -&gt; I solve my need) and straightforward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then we come to the problem of subjectivity. There are various kind of questions a person can ask. Those who accept a clear, exclusive answer. examples from various domains&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the surface area of a cone?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I initialize a list of a given length in python ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the changes in AC between AD&amp;amp;D and D&amp;amp;D 3.5 ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who accept different possible answers, because they are different strategies (all equally good) to achieve the same goal:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I prove the pythagora theorem ? (you can prove it in many different ways, and no one is better than the other, although maybe someone is easier to be presented)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who accept different possible answers, because the strategies are different (and some strategies can be better in some situations than others)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to recognize malicious source code?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How many parameters are too many?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem we face is &lt;em&gt;subjectivity&lt;/em&gt;. Apparently, subjectivity is when the personal, non-mathematical, non-specified-in-literature gut-feeling enters into the answer. There can be questions that today are subjective and won't be subjective in 10 years. Example... Suppose someone asks &quot;Is object oriented programming suitable for my project  ?&quot;. In 1980, such question would be a heated source of discussion. Today, the answer is relatively straightforward and most definitely is a yes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, a question about how many parameters go into a routine is kind of subjective, but it's well agreed that too many is a bad idea, so there's no real subjectivity involved, at least today. Idem for the malicious source code. There are different techniques, some better than others, but they are specified in literature or experience. These questions generally lack the gut-feeling scenario, but it's worth noting that the gut-feeling scenario can change according to crystallized knowledge and acquired experience in the field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we are still at the same point. What is a &quot;subjective&quot; question ? And is a subjective question bad or not ? Let's see an example of what is &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; a subjective (a bad one by virtue of its subjectiveness) question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should my character be blonde or dark haired ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here everybody has his own answer, according to his preference, and whatever answer the player gives has no effect on the game whatsoever. Another one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should my character be LG or CG ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is another bad subjective question. The choice, in this case, has an effect in terms of gameplay, but it's impossible to answer properly without considering the context. The same question asked in this way:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should my paladin be LG or CG ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;definitely has an answer, and a right one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example (not rpg related):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;should I put decorative sunflowers on my dinner table ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is a bad subjective question if asked in the DIY SE, but it becomes a matter of style and presentation on the Cooking SE, where there's concern about visual impact on guests in a restaurant, and eventually can answer with a &quot;no. they smell too much&quot; (I assume they smell. I've never sniffed a sunflower)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion, the issue of bad subjectivity can be solved by asking yourself the following two questions, one after another:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Has this question &lt;strong&gt;a value of quickly solving a problem of general interest or providing strategies to solve it&lt;/strong&gt;, within in the context of this SE argument, regardless if the answer comes from personal feeling or from a clearly specified book ?&quot;. if Yes, then it should stay open. If No, it should be closed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Has the question &lt;strong&gt;no potentially better answer&lt;/strong&gt; (in terms of either technical exactness or greater personal satisfaction) that can be picked by the OP out of the pool? &lt;strong&gt;and any upvote that any particular answer could collect does not reflect the skills&lt;/strong&gt; of the person answering ?&quot;. If yes to both of them, then it's a CW, otherwise it's a regular question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="113" LastEditDate="2010-08-29T22:02:21.900" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T22:02:21.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="284" CreationDate="2010-08-29T21:12:55.627" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it calls itself a board game, as it seems &lt;em&gt;Castle Ravenloft&lt;/em&gt; will, then it's not a roleplaying game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think there's room for beneficent doubt when a board game, war game, or what-have-you is used in conjunction with a roleplaying game. In that case, it would be a matter of whether the question is about using such a game within the context of a roleplaying game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, then I'd say it's an appropriate question, just as if someone was asking a about how to use, say, the board game &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/miscpages/outsurvival.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Outdoor Survival&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; to manage wilderness exploration for an ongoing roleplaying campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If no, then I'd say it's not an appropriate question here, such as if someone was asking about an esoteric detail of how Chainmail works for their historical wargaming club's next meeting, with no roleplaying game involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-06-27T19:15:09.770" LastActivityDate="2016-06-27T19:15:09.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-29T21:40:16.913" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;askroleplayers.com (available)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T21:40:16.913" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-29T21:40:16.913" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-29T21:41:11.157" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;askrpgers.com (available)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-08-29T21:41:11.157" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-29T21:41:11.157" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="308" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-30T01:38:51.613" Score="2" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tried to tag my question as &quot;advice, genre, zombies, post-apocalypse&quot; but my rep is too low to create new tags. The genre zombies and post-apocalyspe do not exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;edit:&#xA;Genre might be too vague maybe genre-specific would make more sense as a tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T02:00:33.620" Title="I lack the necessary rep to create tags - should I suggest the tags here or wait until the tags are 'organically' created?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="308" CreationDate="2010-08-30T01:54:02.790" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think suggesting it here is fine as long as you don't mind that sometimes people won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think post-apocalypse is a good tag, genre or genre-specific is probably not,  and I'm split on zombies. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do other people think?  Going and looking there's not a lot of genre tags - no &quot;horror&quot;, no &quot;scifi&quot; or &quot;science-fiction&quot;, no &quot;superheroes&quot; or &quot;supers,&quot; and a precious few (3) &quot;fantasy.&quot;  I think they're probably a good idea though it makes me suspicious that none have been exercised yet!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &quot;lovecraftian&quot; tag already...  Do we go down the chain and make more specific genre tags like &quot;survival-horror&quot;?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is supposed to be an answer, so I propose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yes, we create genre tags, but not the tags &quot;genre&quot; and &quot;genre-specific&quot; (they are implied by tagging with a genre)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We start with the big ones - scifi, horror, supers, pulp, supers, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When people make lower level tags (survival-horror, street-level-supers) that's OK unless it gets crazy, and they should generally incorporate the master tag too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-08-30T02:00:33.620" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T02:00:33.620" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-30T02:04:47.157" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Player Character&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(registered but not in use; .net variants available)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T02:04:47.157" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-30T02:04:47.157" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="147" CreationDate="2010-08-30T02:11:51.513" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you search on &quot;wiki:1&quot; it shows you Community Wiki entries (wiki:0 shows you non-CW ones).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T02:11:51.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="312" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-30T12:20:43.093" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;In response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/173/how-should-we-promote-this-site/303#303&quot;&gt;Bryant's excellent idea&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/173/how-should-we-promote-this-site&quot;&gt;promoting the site&lt;/a&gt;, what are some &lt;em&gt;exemplary&lt;/em&gt; questions that are worth sharing on social media?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question should have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No Close Votes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At least one answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At least one upvote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what questions should I be liking on Stumble?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-09-05T23:52:35.937" Title="Questions worth Sharing?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="313" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-08-30T13:30:12.800" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Q: Are trivial questions OK?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: Yep. Stack Exchange sites are not meant as the second place to go for answers after Google; it's OK to ask questions that can be answered by other means. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8724/how-to-deal-with-google-questions&quot;&gt;This post&lt;/a&gt; from our parent site explains more of the reasoning behind this answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T13:30:12.800" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-30T13:30:12.800" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="314" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-08-30T13:35:50.370" Score="12" ViewCount="396" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked a banal question. That was banal for someone, but not banal for me, since I never heard about that particular thing. Banality is in the eye of the beholder (the big eye), and the fact that something can be solved by a single google shot is not the point. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of SE is to collect questions so that people can find them. &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/joel-talks-about-stack-overflow-at-google/&quot;&gt;&quot;Google as an interface&quot; is a core tenet of stackoverflow (see at minute 24)&lt;/a&gt;, and of all SE as a consequence. Hence, the point is to gather knowledge so that the first result on google is towards an SE answer. This issue has already been discussed on meta.SO &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16424/is-asking-wikipedia-questions-good-or-bad&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8724/how-to-deal-with-google-questions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a consequence, I advise to consider banal questions not as something to fight against and downvote, but as an equally valid resource for all the points said above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-23T08:34:31.240" LastActivityDate="2021-07-23T08:34:31.240" Title="On banal questions. Answer or no answer ?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="314" CreationDate="2010-08-30T13:37:21.693" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answer those suckers. I allowed my elitism to get in the way of considering this clearly, but I think the links you provided explain the matter thoroughly. I would recommend browsing through the related questions to those to get a good sense of the SO philosophy in this regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T13:37:21.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="316" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="314" CreationDate="2010-08-30T14:18:23.617" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think banal questions should be answered, but the simplest do not require anything more than a link and a short explanation.  It's fine you didn't know what Fudge dice are, that shouldn't be downvoted.  (Here I will note that in our other &quot;what are good questions&quot; faq we have voted that questions on gaming-specific terms are OK but common-use terms aren't, so &quot;mcguffin&quot; I would vote down...)  And your question was answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it's pointless to have a bunch of verbose answers to that question.   The Wikipedia link and a statement that &quot;They are special dice used by the FUDGE game system&quot; is perfectly adequate.  Google as a front end does not mean we need to just copy content to this site to &quot;have it here.&quot;  Duplicating wikipedia etc. content is a very poor long term idea in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it smacks of wanting other people to do your work for you.  If you think the full description of FUDGE dice should permanently reside on RSE for whatever reason, then you can read the provided link and sum it up as an answer to your question.  But the default mindset is that you are asking a question that you really want to know the answer to in order to use it to do something.  The link and &quot;they are dice for a game named FUDGE&quot; is more than adequate for that purpose. Seeding fake questions, wanting answers to &quot;boost SEO,&quot; etc. are second string purposes that I don't mind if people don't serve.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T14:18:23.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="318" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-30T22:22:39.063" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;knowledgecheck.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken, but appears to be unused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T22:22:39.063" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-30T22:22:39.063" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-30T22:23:55.723" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;legendslore.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Registered by a domain reseller; for sale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T22:23:55.723" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-30T22:23:55.723" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="224" CreationDate="2010-08-30T22:24:08.983" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's a cool idea. I want to do something similar on a local level, and even had a question about that. Hmm. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="443" LastActivityDate="2010-08-30T22:24:08.983" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-08-31T12:54:57.617" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Saving Throw (savingthrow.com).  Pleasingly like &quot;Stack Overflow&quot; etc.  Taken but being used by a 17 year old on his blog, I imagine the SE guys could bribe him easily :-)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T12:54:57.617" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T12:54:57.617" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="314" CreationDate="2010-08-31T13:15:12.277" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was the one that called it banal, because it can be gained from Google. If you Google something and the top result doesn't answer the question then there is all good reasons for making sure an SE has a good answer. In this case, the Fudge Wikipedia page was the top answer. In other SEs, the questions are posed because there isn't already a good answer on Google and so the SE answer becomes #1. In this case, the #1 answer in Google was the wiki page for Fudge. That's a waste of the SE power.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not about whether a question is particularly easy to answer, it's about the unthinking blatting of questions into a SE having not given a reasonable effort into finding the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="173" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T13:15:12.277" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="314" CreationDate="2010-08-31T14:16:28.253" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think these questions are appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When answering these questions, we have to remember:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The need of the OP is to find the answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The needs of the community are to ensure users don't get into the habit of not bothering to Google, &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; to not turn away new users who don't understand the site/system/community yet and make a wee mistake.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, I suggest the solution is to answer briefly and concisely, subtly pointing out that one can Google the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fudge uses customized &amp;quot;Fudge dice&amp;quot; which have an equal number of plus, minus and blank sides.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about them on Wikipedia, in the the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fudge_%28role-playing_game_system%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fudge RPG System article&lt;/a&gt;'s section on &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fudge_%28role-playing_game_system%29#Game_mechanics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Game mechanics&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quick &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&amp;amp;safe=active&amp;amp;q=fudge+dice&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;fp=6ce274432cdc752e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Google search&lt;/a&gt; also led me to the web site of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fudgerpg.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Grey Ghost Press Inc&lt;/a&gt;, the Fudge System's publisher. Their web site has a statement about &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;WHERE CAN I FIND FUDGE DICE?!?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; if you need to buy some.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With an answer like this you...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Give the OP a fish&lt;/strong&gt; by answering the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Teach the OP to fish&lt;/strong&gt; by demonstrating that the information is easily Googled and Wikipedia'd.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't end up turning away any new users who haven't fully integrated into the system/community, nor any upstanding, respectable users who don't appreciate being accused of banality.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user intends to invest the energy in maintaining/defending the site from banal questions, they have to do it in a way which also doesn't hurt the site by being snappish and cranky; threatening the communal nature of a Stack Exchange site is worse than threatening the quality of questions &amp;amp; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion maybe we shouldn't &lt;em&gt;be anal&lt;/em&gt; about questions which are &lt;em&gt;banal&lt;/em&gt;. (GET IT? &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P6ds11QzWA&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Waka waka waka&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T13:31:49.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="325" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:01:55.643" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm taking this as a one-suggestion-per-answer thing so people can up-vote. In deemed inappropriate, I'll merge my answers later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1779/what-rpg-best-models-a-world-war-z-zombie-apocalypse&quot;&gt;What RPG best models a “World War Z” zombie apocalypse?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:01:55.643" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T19:06:43.057" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:02:25.393" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm taking this as a one-suggestion-per-answer thing so people can up-vote. In deemed inappropriate, I'll merge my answers later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/146/experience-for-role-playing/170&quot;&gt;Experience for 'Role Playing'&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:02:25.393" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T19:05:46.587" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:02:56.950" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm taking this as a one-suggestion-per-answer thing so people can up-vote. In deemed inappropriate, I'll merge my answers later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/526/a-medusa-and-a-beholder-look-at-each-other-what-happens/544&quot;&gt;A medusa and a beholder look at each other. What happens?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:02:56.950" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T19:06:11.560" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:03:29.947" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm taking this as a one-suggestion-per-answer thing so people can up-vote. In deemed inappropriate, I'll merge my answers later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109/how-to-keep-track-of-abilities-for-dd-4e/119&quot;&gt;How to keep track of abilities for D&amp;amp;D 4e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:03:29.947" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T19:06:18.473" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:04:06.853" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You could/should just digg/stumble upon the home page of this site :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's pretty cool all on its own :D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:04:06.853" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T19:06:49.813" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T19:13:35.443" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the moment, it's possible to submit an RSS feed to Digg, which results in all new articles getting auto-submitted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T19:13:35.443" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="331" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="314" CreationDate="2010-08-31T20:25:19.660" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;My opinion is that no question is too banal or simple to be worthy of an answer. It could have other issues (not a real questions, argumentative, etc). RTFM and variations responses annoy me to no end when I see them used as response to these type of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-08-31T20:25:19.660" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-08-31T21:04:34.517" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm taking this as a one-suggestion-per-answer thing so people can up-vote. In deemed inappropriate, I'll merge my answers later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And definitely &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/319/approaches-to-diceless-or-lessened-dice-reliance-in-rpgs&quot;&gt;Approaches to diceless (or lessened dice reliance) in RPGs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T00:02:26.257" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-08-31T21:04:34.517" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="333" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-09-01T02:59:52.480" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hm, here's a big fat promotional mechanism: this place makes a superb support site. Let's say you're Bob Small Press. (&quot;Hi, Bob!&quot;) You want a place where you can answer customer questions, but you can't afford to/don't want to put up your own forums. Dealing with spam alone is a pain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you come here. You actively answer questions. You're going to be rated highly if you do a decent job of it; you'll also benefit from exposing your game to people who don't play it already. You could publicize the URL as the official support channel. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not Bob Small Press, so I don't know for sure that'd be attractive, but it seems logical. Famous last words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Inspired by Jared Sorenson's sudden run of answering Freemarket questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T02:59:52.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-09-01T03:22:29.803" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Avoid asking questions that are subjective, argumentative, or require extended discussion. This is not a discussion board, this is a place for questions that can be answered! If you want to talk about the site itself, please don't do it here. Visit our meta-discussion site where you can talk about things like what questions are appropriate, what tags we should use, suggest a feature, or generally discuss how RPG Stack Exchange works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question is about… &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Computer RPGs or MMORPGs, ask on gaming.stackexchange.com. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG or genre related movies, comics, novels, or other media, ask... Somewhere else? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Card games, miniature games, wargames, and boardgames, ask... Somewhere else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Up for suggestions on the somewhere elses)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T03:22:29.803" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-01T03:22:29.803" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="335" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-01T13:38:28.740" Score="4" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an experimental question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Reasons&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I go to five or six gaming cons each year, and I would like a way to find out who else from this site might be attending, so I can meet people face to face. I think this would both be fun and have some promotional value. Thus, I wanted to find out if meta is a useful place for that organization.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rules&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're going to be at a given convention, post it as an answer. Give the basic info about the convention (location, date, maybe anything interesting about the con) and link to their Web site. If someone else is going, either edit the original answer or add a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2011-01-20T20:51:19.163" Title="Who's Going To Be At Convention X?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-01T13:38:28.740" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="335" CreationDate="2010-09-01T13:40:51.497" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GASPcon 11&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gaspgamer.com/gasp_con/gaspcon.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GASPcon 11&lt;/a&gt; is taking place November 12th-14th, 2010, in Pittsburgh, PA. It's a good regional convention, with a strong story game track and a strong Living Forgotten Realms track, plus a lot of other games. There's not much of a dealer's room. It's good to make hotel reservations early, since there's a Pittsburgh Steelers home game which tends to cause the hotel to fill up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Attendees&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/24/bryant&quot;&gt;Bryant&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T13:40:51.497" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-01T13:40:51.497" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="337" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-01T14:34:28.640" Score="1" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lots of simialr questions around skill challenges, and most of them are having some great answers. But I feel we're into a cascade where they feed off each other. What is the best way to handle this? Does it need some skillful moderator editing? Is this when we move to communitywiki?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-09-01T14:59:12.610" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T22:46:17.163" Title="Do we push for consolidating questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="337" CreationDate="2010-09-01T14:46:18.700" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, not community wiki.  The answer is to close the ones that are duplicates, but I'm not sure we have that yet ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What makes a skill challenge great?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is about what features a great skill challenge has, not necessarily how to make them great.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do you involve all players in a skill challenge?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to craft and execute a challenge that will involve all your players at the table.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to make skill checks more then just sequences of die chucking&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to involve good role-playing and story development in your skill challenge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Need skill challenge ideas for Nature&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Specific list of ideas for a specific type of challenge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see those as being duplicates, and I'm not sure their answers will merge well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T14:46:18.700" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="339" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="335" CreationDate="2010-09-01T15:00:09.107" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Grand Masquerade II&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thegrandmasquerade.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Grand Masquerade&lt;/a&gt; (September 15-18, 2011; New Orleans, LA) is White Wolf's pan-Vampire™ fandom convention. It's got a strong live-action focus, but there's a full track for tabletop World of Darkness games and the Vampire CCG. There's reputedly a big announcement on Friday night — probably concerning the new MMO offering — and a few of the enormous parties that White Wolf is known for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Attendees&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/50/Jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2011-01-20T20:49:51.020" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-01T15:00:09.107" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="337" CreationDate="2010-09-01T23:04:40.537" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Close 'em as a duplicate and link them over to the one that's substantially the same.  Splitting basically identical responses across questions damages the ability to winnow via voting and encourages pointless duplication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-01T23:04:40.537" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9" CreationDate="2010-09-02T02:58:22.290" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;stackthedice.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Available. Has a double-entendre, playing on &quot;stack exchange&quot; and on &quot;stacking the deck&quot; in favour of a better game. Though, I think a better variation on that double-entendre can probably be done. Someone do it!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T02:58:22.290" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-02T02:58:22.290" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="277" CreationDate="2010-09-02T19:50:22.450" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me, campaign development often suggests a smaller-scoped activity of adapting an existing setting for a specific group of players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;World building, on the other hand, suggests creating a setting that can be used for many &quot;campaigns.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically talking about D&amp;amp;D games, campaign development often entails using the default setting or a boxed setting (Points of Light, Forgotten Realms, Planescape, etc.). World building always means creating a new setting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they're very different activities and would like to see the tags kept separate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:50:22.450" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-09-02T19:54:07.617" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A lot of these questions that seem to be subjective are asking for advice. I think there's value in providing answers containing good advice that can be measured by a community vote. This is very different than an unmoderated, unaccountable post in an internet forum somewhere. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:54:07.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="344" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-02T19:56:54.717" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's probably too late since the dd, dd3.0 etc. tags are well ensconced. However, I still think dnd, dnd3.0 etc. are better. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a data point, #dnd is the well-known hash-tag for D&amp;amp;D discussion on Twitter. It does occasionally have comical overlap with the Do Not Disturb people, though. =D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:56:54.717" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-09-02T19:58:15.483" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tagged something [dd] [dd4.0] and someone erased the &quot;superfluous&quot; [dd] tag. My thinking was to tag a [dd] on everything related to D&amp;amp;D so people could ignore one tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T19:58:15.483" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="346" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="337" CreationDate="2010-09-02T22:46:17.163" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't even try to merge questions.  Sure there's going to be a lot of questions that are extremely similar, but there's a specific element of the question that makes it unique.  There's a very good reason that there's the &quot;Related Questions&quot; part of the column to the right.  And if anybody comments or answers with a link to the similar questions, they will show up as &quot;Linked Questions&quot; above the related ones. So if you come across one question (say to skill challenges) that seems close to what you're looking for, but not quite, then most likely the other questions will appear as links from said question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As C. Ross commented on his answer, there's good reasoning behind the wording of &quot;Exact duplicate&quot; for closing a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="95" LastActivityDate="2010-09-02T22:46:17.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="347" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="349" CreationDate="2010-09-03T11:18:58.300" Score="6" ViewCount="133" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it would be useful to distinguish between well-intentioned but off-topic questions and those meant to promote a service or advertise a particular product. Is there a way to give advertising its own radio button in the &quot;close&quot; menu?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:53:48.387" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:53:48.387" Title="Why does the list of reasons to close a question include neither astroturfing nor spam?" Tags="|feature-request|closing-questions|close-reasons|spam|self-promotion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2010-09-03T11:54:11.690" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is pretty confusing to me as a newcomer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What makes your game sessions better?&quot; is shut down but &quot;Does system matter?&quot; is OK. The former seemed more useful to me than the latter in terms of actually improving play. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems pretty arbitrary, and I don't really know what kinds of questions I can ask outside of things that have a discrete, quantifiable answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="387" LastActivityDate="2010-09-03T11:54:11.690" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="347" CreationDate="2010-09-03T12:00:59.767" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The flag list includes spam. I think flags are reserved for poor behavior -- there's a qualitative difference between someone who asks a bad question with good intention and someone who's trying to abuse the system, as you note.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-03T12:00:59.767" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="347" CreationDate="2010-09-03T12:04:06.307" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should flag spam, not vote to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have a limited number of close votes, don't use them up on spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A mod will come and delete things that are flagged and need deleting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-09-03T12:04:06.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="351" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-09-03T12:09:03.727" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Kicking this around again now that we have another week of experience. How about the following simple rule:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;If your question is intended to gather a list of equally relevant answers, and you don't expect one answer to be the most applicable, it should be a community wiki.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note the plural for answers: if I ask for a list of Shadowrun editions, I'm expecting one answer to be comprehensive, so that's not community wiki. If I ask for a list of cyberpunk-themed RPGs, that's community wiki. if I ask what's a good cyberpunk-themed RPG is for a game with this and that specific feel and requirements, that's not community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we avoid &quot;best,&quot; for reasons noted in other excellent answers in this thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-03T12:09:03.727" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="352" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-03T22:03:12.093" Score="2" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;They seem highly subjective and reiterative but frankly I don't have enough evidence to say one way or another. But I do think they need to be cleaned up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-03T22:58:28.103" Title="What is up with all these OGL questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2010-11-30T21:44:26.330" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="353" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="352" CreationDate="2010-09-03T22:49:40.380" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's only one that's written neutrally, and that's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2208/what-can-make-ogl-material-harder-or-easier-to-reuse-in-other-products&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. I wish we'd given &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2187/what-are-the-top-ten-examples-of-ogl-content-that-is-the-easiest-and-most-well-fo&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; a bit longer -- Netherwerks might have been willing to revise his question, and I think it'd be fair to give him a chance to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aramis' answer is excellent either way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-03T22:49:40.380" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="354" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="356" CreationDate="2010-09-04T16:54:19.007" Score="4" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bryant made an interesting comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/352/what-is-up-with-all-these-ogl-questions&quot;&gt;What is up with all these OGL questions?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I wish we'd given this one a bit&#xA;  longer -- Netherwerks might have been&#xA;  willing to revise his question, and I&#xA;  think it'd be fair to give him a&#xA;  chance to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is a fair length of time to allow people to revise a possibly good question before we close it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How long should people have to revise their questions?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="354" CreationDate="2010-09-04T17:12:53.327" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;My personal guideline is 24 hours, but that's just a gut feeling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-04T17:12:53.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="356" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="354" CreationDate="2010-09-04T18:15:55.143" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I don't think we should wait at all, since &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/288/edit-a-closed-question/291#291&quot;&gt;they can fix the question once it's closed&lt;/a&gt;.  If you leave a bad question open, it will usually draw more answers and views than it deserves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-09-04T18:15:55.143" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="357" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="360" CreationDate="2010-09-04T19:35:08.960" Score="15" ViewCount="864" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at the question on teleportation, there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2238/does-teleportation-require-line-of-sight/2241#2241&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; that appears to quote a body of text from PHB3. I don't actually own that book, so I couldn't check it out. But that got me thinking about copying text from sources that are not freely available online. How much quotation from published material is too much? Is there a good rule of thumb? Do we need to be on the lookout for it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Followup question:&lt;/em&gt; If we do need to worry about it, is that a good reason to use the flagging system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-04-03T11:34:40.567" Title="What constitutes copyright infringement?" Tags="|discussion|answers|copyright|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="357" CreationDate="2010-09-04T20:03:53.927" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Previous meta.stackoverflow.com discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19508/how-to-deal-with-questions-or-answers-plagiarism-from-copyrighted-sources&quot;&gt;here, on flagging and appropriate actions&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stanford has a great explanation of &lt;a href=&quot;http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;fair use&lt;/a&gt; in United States law. The four factors to evaluate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are you transforming the source work in some way? Parody is the classic example, but scholarship also counts. Did you add value? Just quoting a chunk of text doesn't add value; adding explanatory material might. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is the original work fact or fiction? It's more likely to be fair use if it's fact. I am not sure what gaming texts would be in this case.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How much did you take? If you didn't take much, you're safer; if you didn't take key elements, you're safer. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are you hurting the market for the original work? This is a particularly scary bit, IMHO -- if someone can come here and ask a question about (say) how to make &lt;em&gt;Over the Edge&lt;/em&gt; characters, and they get a good answer, we're making it easier for someone not to buy the book.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, there's also legal precedent that you can't copyright rules, but how that applies to RPGs is untested to my knowledge. (Again, US only.) See &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/copyright/newgames.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;John Kim's page on RPG copyright.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-09-04T20:03:53.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="359" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="354" CreationDate="2010-09-04T23:45:09.800" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;As long as it takes to get 5 people to vote to close it. The faster the better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to reopen your question, edit it and then bring the matter up on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-09-04T23:45:09.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="360" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="357" CreationDate="2010-09-04T23:57:29.990" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that we need to do only two things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the FAQ or other prominent place, warn people against plagiarism.  (and/or copyright infringement, blah blah)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Take down stuff IF a copyright holder complains or issues a DMCA takedown notice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We as moderators/site people do not need to be engaging in unschooled Lawyer Junior behavior.  In fact if we do we become more legally liable for policing the content on the site.  Plagiarism is bad, and we should say &quot;don't do it,&quot; but should not try to make our own &quot;calls&quot; about it beyond the clear remedy by US law (DMCA).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit - this seems to be the general tone of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/legal&quot;&gt;the Stack Overflow legal page&lt;/a&gt;.  &quot;It's on you the subscriber to not post anything naughty.  Report violations using the DMCA.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:34.523" LastActivityDate="2010-09-06T16:11:18.687" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="357" CreationDate="2010-09-05T05:11:27.027" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Elaborating on my comment that it wasn't plagiarism, though it would be copyright infringement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4th edition isn't licensed under the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/OGLv1.0a.rtf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Open Gaming License&lt;/a&gt; (OGL) nor considered Open Gaming Content. Instead, 4th edition makes use of the OGL's significantly less-cool cousin, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/4E_GSL.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Game System Liscence&lt;/a&gt; (GSL).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both the OGL and the GSL have &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Reference_Document&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;System Reference Documents&lt;/a&gt;, but the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/4E_GSL_FAQ.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GSL FAQ site&lt;/a&gt; explicitly states...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SRD is a reference document detailing Terms, Tables and Templates that are&#xA;available for license under the GSL. It is a reference document and not a reprinting of the&#xA;rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It then continues to state...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the 4th Edition Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons product line is considered Open Game&#xA;Content made available to third parties through the Open Gaming License (OGL).&#xA;Certain content from 4th Edition is available royalty-free for specified uses subject to the&#xA;GSL.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while 4th edition has an &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/4E_SRD.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;SRD&lt;/a&gt;, unlike 3.5th edition, the 4th edition SRD only contains a list of terms which may only be referenced, as opposed to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;content which can be used, modified and distributed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they had cited the PHP3.5, what was posted could be passed off as OGL and consequently reproducible, but reproducing rules from a 4th edition rulebook is a no-no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/fankit/fantoolkitdnd.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fan Site Kit&lt;/a&gt; but it's just a bunch of pictures (cover art and stuff) which one can post on a web site. (Big whoop; thanks a lot WotC :P)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other instances (such as the tables I copied from some rulebooks while answering &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2148/beyond-hit-points-injury-in-dd/2161&quot;&gt;Beyond Hit Points: Injury in DnD&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; - as I understand it - acceptable; the first table was from Mutants and Masterminds - OGL - and the second was an optional side panel, from an out-of-print book, for a product which &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75862/22320337/Wizards_of_the_Coast_announcement&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wizards no longer has the license to sell&lt;/a&gt;... which I feel falls within &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357/what-constitues-plagiarism/358#358&quot;&gt;Bryant's definition of Fair Use&lt;/a&gt; ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I'm not a lawyer... so don't take my word for it ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So Bryant pointed out some interesting points about conflicts about the OGL and the Creative Commons license... I don't fully understand those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He also brought up the fact that OGL content has to include the OGL legal-jargon. However, in the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;OGL FAQ&lt;/a&gt; It states...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: I want to create a website that contains many different pages with Open Game Content. Do I have to include a copy of the License on every page?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: It will be sufficient to include a link on every page containing Open Game Content to one centralized copy of the License.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... so CC versus OGL aside, linking to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/OGLv1.0a.rtf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;OGL&lt;/a&gt; would be enough, were it not for incompatibility between the OGL and CC licenses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-09-05T12:47:06.397" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="362" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="312" CreationDate="2010-09-05T22:10:48.220" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/419/playing-4th-ed-dd-for-the-first-time-what-should-i-read-to-avoid-holding-everyo&quot;&gt;Playing 4th Ed D&amp;amp;D for the first time, what should I read to avoid holding everyone back.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've stumbled this already.  (Just FYI, stumble works best if multiple people stumble the same site).  I submitted it August 29th.  Since then it's garnered 149 views via Stumble.  That's over half its current view count.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-05T23:52:35.937" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="363" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3485" CreationDate="2010-09-06T23:19:27.140" Score="0" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's true that many questions about RPGs will be questions about rules. &lt;strong&gt;How should we use the &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Prompted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2231/what-tests-can-nature-mouse-be-substituted-for&quot;&gt;this rules question&lt;/a&gt;. The “rules” tag was added because it's a question directly about the rules of a game. Another participant removed the tag. To avoid a tag-edit ping-pong, I'm bringing it to Meta to discuss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what are examples of &lt;strong&gt;questions that should have the &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; tag&lt;/strong&gt;, and perhaps more importantly, what are examples of &lt;strong&gt;questions that should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have the &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; tag&lt;/strong&gt; even though they're close to the line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="520" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-09-11T00:25:29.693" Title="What should the “rules” tag include?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="364" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="363" CreationDate="2010-09-06T23:45:45.223" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The rules tag should be used incredibly sparingly as most questions on here will be about one or another rules in a game. If used everytime a rules question is asked it quickly becomes a useless tag. If it must be used than it should be used for questions about the body of rules as a whole. For example, I find a post like &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2054/what-are-the-mechanical-implications-of-dungeons-dragons-essentials&quot;&gt;What are the mechanical implications of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Essentials&lt;/a&gt;?&amp;quot; a reasonable enough use of the tag as it applies to an entire set of rules changes and not one subset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My rule of thumb is if the question is about a specific rule it doesn't need the rule tag, the tag for the game and maybe a tag for the subset action (combat, magic, loot being some I've seen used). If the question applies to an entire rules set (perhaps comparing and contrasting them) then it should get the rules tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be valuable the rules tag needs to be a subset and not the norm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-09-06T23:55:10.550" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="363" CreationDate="2010-09-06T23:45:54.417" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think rules questions are questions about the rules -- e.g., &quot;What tests can Nature (Mouse) be substituted for?&quot; &quot;Keeping dice after giving in Dogs in the Vineyard&quot; &quot;Beyond hit points: injury in D&amp;amp;D&quot;. All these are specific questions about how the rules work or how to make up new rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since games are defined by rules plus setting, you could interpret 90% of the questions as rules questions. For example, &quot;How can I balance the darkness of Dark Heresy with the humor without getting too goofy?&quot; could be a rules question, and the answer I liked best includes a house rule suggestion (the bit about operant conditioning). However, the primary focus of the question was GMing techniques rather than the rules of the game. With a more restrictive definition, I think we'd hit around 50% of questions currently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we define the [rules] tag that way, is it a useful tag? I sort of feel like it is. If I'm interested in looking for techniques rather than rules, I can mark [rules] as an uninteresting tag. Or vice versa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-06T23:45:54.417" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="363" CreationDate="2010-09-07T01:14:15.650" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions that are entirely about the rules of a game deserve the &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is about the whole ruleset of a game, then &lt;code&gt;ruleset&lt;/code&gt; seems an appropriate tag for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="520" LastActivityDate="2010-09-07T01:14:15.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-09-07T15:05:54.080" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not, but I think both communities have both a lot in common and a lot to learn from one another. A little cross-pollination is all to the good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="387" LastActivityDate="2010-09-07T15:05:54.080" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-07T15:05:54.080" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-09-07T15:21:19.477" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it gets us more questions then I'm all for it at the moment, usually very dry on the ground during GMT waking hours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-09-07T15:21:19.477" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-07T15:21:19.477" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="369" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-07T17:59:42.860" Score="5" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;As we enter the second week of the public beta, we desperately need members from the site whose focus is to engage the community, both in community-building issues and site management. That's why we select a few members from each community to act as temporary, provisional Moderators. You can read about the program here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/moderator-pro-tempore/&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Moderators Pro Tempore&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am pleased to announce that these members have stepped up and generously volunteered their time to help us assure that each community’s issues are properly addressed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lwTi4.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt; &lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zIXxy.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt; &lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/90CUF.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt; &lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Nc011.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/460.png&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/460.png&quot; alt=&quot;Pat Ludwig&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/77.png&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/77.png&quot; alt=&quot;AceCallhoon&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to make this site a huge success, and these members are great examples of exactly the type of people we need to make this site succeed. Please welcome them for the hard work and time they contribute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Did I overlook anyone?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost certainly. There are members who are actively involved and very deserving of recognition. My failure to account for everyone this early on is in &lt;em&gt;no way&lt;/em&gt; a slight against them. Ideally, Moderators are elected by the community and that's why &lt;strong&gt;you'll have your elections in several weeks.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of all, be respectful and understanding of the Moderators Pro Tem. Members of your community are volunteering their time and learning on the job. It’s a learning experience for everyone. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-10-17T15:20:37.090" Title="Moderator Pro Tem Announcement" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="363" CreationDate="2010-09-07T19:00:42.977" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should start this way: Replace &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; with &lt;code&gt;ruleset&lt;/code&gt;, restrict it to only questions that talk about entire rulesets, and then see if there is a hole in our tags later that is sensibly filled by a &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; tag. A tag like &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; is likely to explode if it's not narrowly defined, but it will be easy to add later if such a narrow definition presents itself, and with no loss to the functionality of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-07T19:00:42.977" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="371" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-08T03:23:43.657" Score="3" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we've got [barbarian] and [shaman] tags. There has been some degree of tag war about them. Are they useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T20:01:33.133" Title="4e class tags -- good idea or confusing?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="371" CreationDate="2010-09-08T03:25:58.170" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;My sense: nope, because they are inherently undefined. Does [shaman] mean 4e shaman, 3e shaman, AD&amp;amp;D shaman, or &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Stafford&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Greg Stafford&lt;/a&gt;? Clicking the shaman tag will not give me a well defined list of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T03:25:58.170" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="371" CreationDate="2010-09-08T10:56:23.267" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think they are useful. They allow someone to follow a theme fairly easily by going to tag, clicking it and seeing just those question. The purpose of tagging is to provide non-hierarchical information that allows easy, and intuitive searches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be an effective tag is has to be intelligible (easily understood by anyone who looks at it) and, at the same time, limit itself. The class tags like shaman, warlock or barbarian do exactly that, and provide a good deal more intelligence about the questions that contain them than others I could think of (natural-1, what  is that?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside I rather find the differences and similarities between games as enlightening as you find them annoying, which makes yet another good reason to keep the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T10:56:23.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="371" CreationDate="2010-09-08T13:32:10.033" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a fence sitter; I think the idea behind the tags is good but that the tags should be different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I was asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2379/in-what-edition-of-dnd-was-the-barbarianss-rage-introduced&quot;&gt;In what edition of DnD was the Barbarian's rage introduced?&lt;/a&gt; I originally was going to tag [dd-barbarian] but saw that [barbarian] already existed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they should be present and we should prefix them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T13:32:10.033" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="375" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:17:11.603" Score="4" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2394&quot;&gt;asked about non-D&amp;amp;D megadungeons&lt;/a&gt; and I was looking for either a &quot;No&quot; or a comprehensive answer. What I'm getting are single bits of what could be a comprehensive answer, spread across multiple answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At what point should a question be turned into a community wiki? Should these sorts of questions—ones that could have a comprehensive answer, but just aren't attracting one—be turned into a CW earlier, or should the asker and the community hold out for a comprehensive answer? Generally, should we be pro-active about converting to community wiki, or patient about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:22:01.713" Title="When should a question be changed into a CW?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="375" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:26:27.900" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's easier to turn a question into a community wiki than it is to change it back. (I'm not even sure you can change it back. I can't.) So patience seems in order. If people pick up some &quot;extra&quot; rep for providing part of a comprehensive answer, that's not so bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think at this point if I were you I'd convert your megadungeon question, though. I could edit my answer to include all the individual answers, but that doesn't really improve the question as a whole. The information is there either way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T19:26:27.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="377" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="371" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:26:29.863" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a system-agnostic [barbarian] tag promotes a useful search/browse workflow for players and game designers, if not necessarily people who are actually running games. &quot;What kinds of things do barbarians do, irrespective of system?&quot; is a question that can be answered most efficiently by examining questions tagged [barbarian]. If I'm new to R-pGs in general, and want more information about what barbarians are like, reading those questions will tell me how other players view barbarians. Similarly, if I'm writing my own R-pG, and want to see what mechanics other systems see as innate to &quot;barbarian-hood,&quot; surveying a system-agnostic [barbarian] tag can be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[dd4.0-barbarian] does not strike me as useful from a search/browse perspective. If we don't tag by class at all, I can search for &quot;[dd4.0] barbarian.&quot; If we use system-agnostic class tags, I can search by &quot;[dd4.0] [barbarian].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, all that goes out the window when we talk about following. The following system is innately less functional than it could be. I don't feel like prefixed tags are a good answer to that lack of functionality, because it doesn't mesh well with my personal mental map of what tags do. Also, (danger: slippery-slope argument ahead) I don't see why, if [dd4.0-barbarian] is useful, we don't also want to tag the &quot;when to use rage&quot; question with [dd4.0-rules] and [dd4.0-combat].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastEditorUserId="314" LastEditDate="2010-09-08T20:01:33.133" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T20:01:33.133" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="375" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:30:27.873" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should convert to community wiki when the question starts getting out of hand.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a single comprehensive answer and instead start getting single answers, go ahead and convert!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaving it open does two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People get rep for partial answers, which encourages them to keep giving them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Makes it harder to merge the answers into the one answer you really want.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T19:30:27.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="375" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:35:15.700" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I could go either way on this. The question is properly asked; you couldn't have known that the value of the thread would be in the &lt;em&gt;list&lt;/em&gt; of answers of relatively equal significance. Had you known, I would have started out by making it wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you felt that the question should have been community wiki from the start, the best thing to do is flag the question for moderator attention and request that it be converted by a moderator. You could, of course, convert it yourself but that would not convert the answers given before you made the conversion. A moderator making it wiki would convert &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; the answers in one shot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-09-08T19:35:15.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="380" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-08T19:45:30.880" Score="0" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a few tags that are effectively sub-tags, using a prefix and another word. [sr4.shadowrun], [sr4.matrix], and [sr4.technomancer] appear to use that model. I think [dd-oriental-adventures] is using dd as a prefix to &quot;oriental-adventures&quot; but it's difficult to say -  it might just be an attempt to prevent ambiguous interpretation. [dice] and [dice-notation] is close, too. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we use tags like this? Should we attempt to encourage their use? Is there a better metric than &quot;do it when it seems to make sense&quot; to determine when their use is appropriate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastEditorUserId="314" LastEditDate="2010-09-08T20:32:46.410" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:36:08.263" Title="Should we use prefixed tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="375" CreationDate="2010-09-09T01:22:01.713" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Anything that is a list without a &quot;right&quot; answer should be a community wiki from the get-go. This is obviously a list question, hence...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:22:01.713" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="382" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="72" CreationDate="2010-09-09T01:34:47.003" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not think that doing subtags like [dd3.5-monsters] is a good idea.  That should be [dd3.5] [monsters] or even better [dd] [dd3.5] [monsters].  Otherwise we get tag sprawl with every single combination that you could have (oh look, this question should be tagged [discussion-tagging-community-wiki]).  I think this is a crutch for those who don't know how to and/or tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is also how it's done on the main trinity.  On Stack Overflow, for example, you would tag a perl question [perl], additionally with [perl5] if it is specific to that version.  There are very few exceptions to this.  For example, there is a [perl-module] tag - but there are more questions tagged [perl] [module] than [perl-module].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My conclusion - no hierarchical, multipart, whatnot tags.  Ones that exist should be retagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:34:47.003" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-09T01:34:47.003" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="383" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="380" CreationDate="2010-09-09T01:36:08.263" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;To repeat my answer here, since this isn't techically closable as the same question as the one Richard linked but my answer's the same...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think that doing subtags like [dd3.5-monsters] is a good idea. That should be [dd3.5] [monsters], or even better [dd] [dd3.5] [monsters]. Otherwise we get tag sprawl with every single combination that you could have (oh look, this question should be tagged [discussion-tagging-community-wiki]). I think this is a crutch for those who don't know how to and/or tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is also how it's done on the main trinity. On Stack Overflow, for example, you would tag a perl question [perl], additionally with [perl5] if it is specific to that version. There are very few exceptions to this. For example, there is a [perl-module] tag - but there are more questions tagged [perl] [module] than [perl-module].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My conclusion - no hierarchical, multipart, whatnot tags. Ones that exist should be retagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:36:08.263" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="72" CreationDate="2010-09-09T01:47:57.937" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Key technical note: you can search on multiple tags inclusive, although you can't explicitly exclude tags. I should see if there's a meta proposal on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T01:47:57.937" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-09T01:47:57.937" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-09-09T14:54:14.713" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You can now get badges for promoting questions from the site!!!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/54/announcer&quot;&gt;Announcer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/55/booster&quot;&gt;Booster&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/56/publicist&quot;&gt;Promoter&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Read more about it on &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;the blog&lt;/a&gt;.  If you're looking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/312/questions-worth-sharing&quot;&gt;questions worth sharing&lt;/a&gt;, look no further.  Please suggest your great questions too.  Now lets all go get some views!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T14:54:14.713" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="386" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-09T15:49:35.253" Score="2" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Who are the influential people in the online gaming community?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People with popular:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Websites&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Podcasts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Blogs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Game developers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who can we reach out to about our new site? Please note why they're influential and how they can be reached.  Bonus points if you know the person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(one name per answer please)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2010-09-09T20:26:54.513" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T04:12:07.173" Title="Who are the big names in the gaming community?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2015-08-16T13:35:17.573" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="387" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-09T16:11:09.320" Score="0" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed that the tag for Original D&amp;amp;D is &quot;odd.&quot; Will people realize that this is for OD&amp;amp;D? Will there be confusion with odd/strange? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this another point in favor of retagging the D&amp;amp;D-related things as &quot;dnd&quot; and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T20:19:17.523" Title="How do we handle ambiguous tag names?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="388" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="387" CreationDate="2010-09-09T16:16:10.887" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We make sure there's useful information in the tag wiki! &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/odd/&quot;&gt;[odd]&lt;/a&gt; has a good one, which is nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T16:16:10.887" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="390" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="386" CreationDate="2010-09-09T17:38:06.310" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ron Edwards is one of the cofounders of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Forge&lt;/a&gt;, and the author of indie games like &lt;em&gt;Sorcerer&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Trollbabe&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Elfs&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Spione&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;S/lay w/Me&lt;/em&gt;. He's a vocal proponent of creator-owned game publishing, RPG theory, and game design that takes nothing for granted. He's extremely knowledgeable about the history of RPGs, game mechanics, and many specific RPGs (indie or otherwise). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You (or I) can send him a private message on The Forge. He's undoubtedly too busy for this site, but it doesn't hurt to ask. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want my bonus points for knowing him. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T17:38:06.310" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="386" CreationDate="2010-09-09T19:22:11.850" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Johnathan Drain and his &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20source.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;d20 source&lt;/a&gt; blog has a number of good articles.  I've spoken with him a bunch in the past about various articles and D&amp;amp;D related material.  He has a sizable following and a mention there would get some traffic here.  I'll see about dropping him a line to check out the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T19:22:11.850" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="392" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="394" CreationDate="2010-09-09T19:40:06.253" Score="0" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;Did C. Ross have to manually re-tag all [dd] questions to [dnd]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, points to him, but it also means we need to hurry up and settle on tag syntax, sub-tagging, and removal of erroneous tag, else the next time that sort of an activity is undertaken it will be twice as ginormous/lame. (I'm not even linking to all those questions I'm referring to; they're all over the place!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T19:47:52.743" Title="Did C. Ross have to manually re-tag all [dd] questions to [dnd]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-09T19:40:06.253" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="386" CreationDate="2010-09-09T19:43:23.610" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just off the top of my head, and in no particular order:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lumpley.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Vincent Baker&lt;/a&gt;, administrator of The Forge and author of &lt;em&gt;Dogs in the Vineyard&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;In A Wicked Age&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Apocalypse World&lt;/em&gt;, and others. He's pretty active on his own site and people seem to come to his &quot;place&quot; disproportionately, so anyone's guess whether he'd have time and inclination for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fred Hicks is a major force behind Evil Hat and their games, and has a significant online presence. He'd probably be interested in SE if he's not already lurking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Johnn Four writes/edits &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.roleplayingtips.com/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Roleplaying Tips&lt;/a&gt;, which is a big deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Berin Kinsman is &lt;a href=&quot;http://unclebear.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the big uncle bear&lt;/a&gt; of RPG blogging. He may be interested, but not have the time. Worth making him aware of it though, as he seems to believe in community-building. (He kicked off the Ning RPG social network before Ning went sideways.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chatty DM is a big, vocal presence online and always has a positive view. Also big on community building, he cofounded the RPG Bloggers Network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://davechalker.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dave Chalker&lt;/a&gt; is a luminary of blogging as cofounder of Critical Hits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crew at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gnomestew.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Gnome Stew&lt;/a&gt;, of which there are many, run an influential site. I bet some of them would be interested in hanging out here, if they're not already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Johnathan Jacobs of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thecoremechanic.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Core Mechanic&lt;/a&gt; is the force behind the &lt;a href=&quot;http://stores.lulu.com/open_game_table&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Open Game Table blog anthologies&lt;/a&gt;, as well as a principle mover of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nevermetpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Nevermet Press&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://wyattsalazar.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Wyatt Salazar/Dennis N. Santana&lt;/a&gt; is a vocal blogger who has a lot of name recognition and writes insightful stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/members/morrus.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Russell &quot;Morrus&quot; Morrissey&lt;/a&gt; is the owner and operator of ENWorld.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.vsca.ca/halfjack/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Brad Murray&lt;/a&gt; is the primary author of Diaspora, and is particularly active online.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T19:43:23.610" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="392" CreationDate="2010-09-09T19:47:52.743" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nah. We have awesome tools, yo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T19:47:52.743" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-09T19:47:52.743" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="387" CreationDate="2010-09-09T20:19:17.523" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;When it's unclear what the meaning of the tag is, but there's one clearly superior use, I think the wiki is enough. But there are systems named &quot;Adventure!&quot; &quot;Warlord,&quot; &quot;Wushu,&quot; &quot;Bushido,&quot; &quot;Wushu,&quot; and &quot;Wild Talent,&quot; all of which could conceivably be used as tags for other things. &quot;-&quot; is already in use to combine two words into an atomic tag, and I think that should be the sole use for &quot;-&quot;. When or if it becomes necessary, I think &quot;.&quot; should be used to append disambiguations. [adventure.system] or [adventure.game] is still going to be confusing, but at least there would be an underlying logic capable of being discovered and explained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T20:19:17.523" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-09-09T20:56:15.010" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;The questions all are phrased so no system in particular is mentioned&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem, here, is that sometimes those questions are phrased in such a way that people assume they're referring to a particular system. This is rare so far - for the most part, people are seem more likely to ask questions which could be answered in a system-agnostic way, but are narrowing the scope to a particular system and getting more focused answers as a result. Still, if someone really wanted to ask &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1007/balancing-character-levels&quot;&gt;Is there any benefit to trying to have someone start at the bottom and joining in?&lt;/a&gt; in a system-agnostic context, they'd pretty much have to disclaim that they were talking about D&amp;amp;D at some point, either in the question, or in response to a comment asking, &quot;Are you talking about D&amp;amp;D?&quot; The system-agnostic tag strikes me as an excellent way to formally include that disclaimer: &quot;I really do want something that applies to all systems [which have mechanics similar to the one I'm discussing].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Indeed, [dnd] is seeing a LOT of use as a shorthand for &quot;systems [which have D&amp;amp;D-like mechanics].&quot; With that in mind, I could see tagging a question &quot;[dnd] [system-agnostic]&quot; to indicate that you're talking about games that act like D&amp;amp;D, but that you don't believe the answer depends on any particular system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;When you're searching for an answer (especially those that are new to the site), your first thought for searching is generally going to be specific to the system you're in.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, we should plan tags in such a way that they're useful to people who are not new to the site, as well. And if you have a question that you know will be the same no matter what the system, you might well include [system-agnostic] to avoid getting answers that are too cluttered with a particular system's mechanics. More than that, though, I think that [system-agnostic] is a fascinating tag to browse, because it has answers that are by design applicable regardless of what system I might choose. That strikes me as well-defined and useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The only value it may have is for those that are just browsing the site looking for nothing in particular, just seeing what's all out there.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not agree that this activity is worthless. The top-voted [system-agnostic] questions are a fascinating collection already, and I look forward to continuing to browse them as the site grows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another problem I've been made aware of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;There is disagreement about what [system-agnostic] actually means.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jeremiah Genest believes it means something very specific, but hasn't shared that definition. I took it to mean something very different. So I'll admit that [system-agnostic] may not be the best possible wording to achieve what I want, because it generates such ideological conflict. Here's what I want:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want a tag that includes &quot;What problems do evil characters cause?&quot; &quot;What iPhone apps do you use for gaming?&quot; and &quot;What are some alternatives to miniatures?&quot; but does not include &quot;Do healing bonuses (Pacifist healer) apply to flat healing effects like consecrated ground?&quot; and &quot;What are the exact rolls and totals for a direct combat spell?&quot; Each of the first three questions clearly cannot possibly apply to ALL game systems imaginable. I propose that no question could do so. I don't want a tag that means that. I want a tag that means &quot;my question has broad applicability across a number of systems.&quot; I don't care what it's called, but that seems to be what people are using [system-agnostic] to mean, and I appreciate being able to readily find the questions that (some people feel) are &quot;system-agnostic&quot; (as opposed to truly being &quot;system agnostic&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T17:18:42.710" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-09-09T20:57:03.197" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the tag is really causing more trouble than it's worth.  If you ask a question that contains&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fantasy Setting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Co-operative dynamics&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Antagonistic dynamics&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An established game master position&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then it may not longer be &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt;.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2478/what-are-some-of-the-major-challenges-in-playing-an-evil-character&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; for an example&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-09T20:57:03.197" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="398" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-09T21:10:14.960" Score="13" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we've been kind of dancing around this question a lot, lately, and I'm not seeing a definitive answer in the FAQ. If I click on Tags at the top, I get &quot;A tag is a keyword or label that categorizes your question with other, similar questions. Using the right tags makes it easier for others to find and answer your question.&quot; However, in response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/41/is-the-system-agnostic-tag-really-necessary&quot;&gt;Is the “system-agnostic” tag really necessary?&lt;/a&gt;, digitaljoel was accused of &quot;essentially (re)defining the entire purpose of tags.&quot; Clearly, someone knows what the right and wrong way to use tags is well enough to say that digitaljoel wasn't using them right, even though he was definitely using them to &quot;find...question[s].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see them being used for five purposes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Limit the scope of answers - this can be handled explicitly in the text of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Search for questions which already answer a particular question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Search for interesting questions about a topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid questions which are not interesting because they pertain to a particular topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Try to attract attention to a question (presupposes that people are already doing #3).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing something? Is use #1 illegitimate? If I want to know about designing scenarios with orcs, but I'm only interested in answers appropriate for MERP, is tagging the post [merp] enough, or do I need to put MERP in the Title or the Question? Is it even appropriate to tag it [merp], since it's not really about MERP, it's just that I happen to be playing MERP, so I need to let people know that if they're thinking Shadowrun, they're not going to be much use to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="314" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-11-12T12:09:41.293" Title="What are tags for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="398" CreationDate="2010-09-10T01:19:18.023" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are for describing the content of a question.  This facilitates searching, filtering, and various other organizational purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags should:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;describe the content of a question &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;be general enough that they are not used only a couple times &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;stand alone (adequately describe a question if they are the only tag on it)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides that, they are a folksonomy, which means their use should be emergent and what the community in general finds useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Illuminating links - &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T01:19:18.023" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="369" CreationDate="2010-09-10T02:54:18.017" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bryant is clearly insane (see Rep), so he'd obviously be best; nobody would dare upset him. ;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T02:54:18.017" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="401" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="386" CreationDate="2010-09-10T04:12:07.173" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tycho (Jerry Holkins) and Gabe (Mike Krahulik) of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.penny-arcade.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Penny Arcade&lt;/a&gt; both play D&amp;amp;D which has been featured several times in their &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.penny-arcade.com/archive/?q=d%26d&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;comic&lt;/a&gt;. They have also done a series of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/rsspodcast.xml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;WOTC D&amp;amp;D podcasts&lt;/a&gt;. They also host &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Arcade_Expo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Penny Arcade Expo (PAX)&lt;/a&gt;, a gamer festival for console, computer, and tabletop gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T04:12:07.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-09-10T04:49:19.150" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although I have to agree with other answers that say the list of questions tagged &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; is fascinating reading, I don't think it adds anything to the questions themselves. Often it's unnecessary, and seems to be stuck on anything that doesn't deserve a particular system tag. In those cases eliding it would be more appropriate. The questions about mapping come to mind in particular—of course a general question about map-making software is going to be system-agnostic. If it's not system-agnostic, it would be tagged with a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other cases it's simply misapplied. There are a lot of questions that are specific to a particular kind of system that use the tag, but they're not really system-agnostic questions. The question about evil characters would be better tagged with something like &lt;code&gt;party-dynamics&lt;/code&gt;, which would be something like the in-game equivalent of the &lt;code&gt;social&lt;/code&gt; tag, since it only applies to games/systems that happen to have a cooperative party dynamic built-in and therefore isn't agnostic about systems. It's more like the question is pluralistic about systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for fascinating reading, that alone isn't enough to save a tag, in my view. With the other problems I'm seeing in the way the tag is currently applied, I don't think it's worth keeping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T04:49:19.150" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-09-10T05:00:55.040" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, one of the legitimate uses of the &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; tag could be to clearly flag a question as wanting &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; that are system-agnostic. (For example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/793/approaches-to-gm-less-or-lessened-gm-reliance-in-rpgs&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/423/what-is-important-when-choosing-an-rpg&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.) If we tightly define it that way and enforce it, then I can see it being very useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T05:00:55.040" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="404" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-10T12:02:36.337" Score="3" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;I confess: I've been doing some tweaking to the games I've been running and I'd be proud to share them here. In exchange, I'd be interested in seeing what cool modifications others have come up with. Is it appropriate to start a community-wiki thread with a title like &quot;What are your &lt;em&gt;GAME X&lt;/em&gt; house rules and modifications?&quot; and let people go to town, or is something with such little guiding focus better for another site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2010-09-16T18:10:20.847" Title="Is a &quot;house-rules all-call&quot; appropriate for this site?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="404" CreationDate="2010-09-10T12:06:35.387" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question is why the community wiki feature exists. The only suggestions I have is limit each post to one system as it will help fans of that system find the posts easier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T12:06:35.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="404" CreationDate="2010-09-10T12:24:20.173" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I would rather have system+topic specific questions, but that may just be personal preference.  I think that as long as it doesn't duplicate an existing question (there are a few houserule CWs out there) that it wouldn't need to be closed.  People can vote on it to express preference for such a general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T12:24:20.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="404" CreationDate="2010-09-10T12:32:15.567" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really don't think that such a question, even on a per system basis would be very useful to anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such a question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be ok if&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was community wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was system specific&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was asked with regards to a specific mechanic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;ie:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are your house rules for differentiating firearms damage in d20 modern?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, &lt;em&gt;keep the questions specific&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T12:57:52.480" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="408" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="41" CreationDate="2010-09-10T12:35:05.747" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on the disagreement over what &quot;agnostic&quot; means in this context, (is it &quot;universal&quot; or &quot;could apply to multiple/many/most systems?&quot;), I'd suggest the term &lt;code&gt;system-neutral&lt;/code&gt; as an alternative.  I think &quot;neutral&quot; more clearly doesn't require it to apply to every system, just not to be specific to one system.  System-neutral is actually the term I was more familiar with from reading product reviews and such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know not everyone finds the tag useful at all, but for those that think its useful, this might be a way to clarify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T12:35:05.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="369" CreationDate="2010-09-10T15:43:25.040" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;And R. S. Conley, who just got the mod tag! Excellent. Hey, R.S., if you did the odd tag wiki I'm really sorry. :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T15:43:25.040" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="404" CreationDate="2010-09-10T16:55:24.817" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hosue rules is a problematic tag only because it requires another tag to exist. Theres a good policy on stackexchange to avoid tags that can't surive on their own and are subjective (http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/). Hosuerules probably qualifies and we should remove it as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T16:55:24.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="411" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-10T17:37:25.387" Score="8" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;Everyone should read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;. In order to consoldiate some questions and try to look at it holisitically I thought one question is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please one possible meta tag per answer. Explain why it is a meta tag because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The tag can’t work as the only tag on a question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The tag commonly means different things to different people&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2016-08-21T16:40:59.243" Title="What are the meta tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="15" CommentCount="9" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T17:46:04.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T17:39:35.693" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advice&quot;&gt;[advice]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could not be the only tag on a question, it's too vague and not RPG-specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:05:18.263" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T03:30:41.903" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="413" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T17:42:10.557" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag has been merged with&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot;&gt;[design]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can't stand on its own as it begs the question design &lt;em&gt;of what&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far we have game design, character design, campaign design, class design and adventure design all tagged as [design]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-21T16:40:59.243" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T03:30:13.480" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T17:43:16.120" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As shown on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/41/is-the-system-agnostic-tag-really-necessary&quot;&gt;Is the “system-agnostic” tag really necessary?&lt;/a&gt; this tag meets both criteria. You would never use the tag alone, it always must be accompanied by another tag. And noone can agree on what it means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T17:43:16.120" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T17:46:41.500" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/list&quot;&gt;[list]&lt;/a&gt; fits the bill, as it begs &quot;a list of &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt;?&quot;. It should probably be replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference&quot;&gt;[reference]&lt;/a&gt;... assuming [reference] isn't deemed a meta tag. I think [reference] is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:06:09.130" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T17:46:41.500" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="416" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T18:18:26.890" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/interpretation&quot;&gt;Interpretation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of what? Isn't every question one of intepretation? If stuff was cut and dry I wouldn't be asking a question. I feel like this is like tagging questions with the tag &quot;question.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:05:30.047" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T18:18:26.890" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="417" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-10T19:37:52.723" Score="1" ViewCount="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/clues&quot;&gt;clues&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/investigation&quot;&gt;investigation&lt;/a&gt; and a smattering of other posts that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=investigation&quot;&gt;may be related&lt;/a&gt;. Is it possible to come up with a consoldiated tag that brings these together that serves a purpose?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T23:51:18.707" Title="Investigation, clue or something else?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="418" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-10T19:41:29.083" Score="2" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a reason to keep two seperate tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighting&quot;&gt;fighting&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;? Or should we consolidate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T20:04:30.987" Title="What is the difference between fighting and combat?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="417" CreationDate="2010-09-10T19:42:01.317" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about [mystery]? It implies other genre tags -- [horror], [science-fiction], [fantasy] -- so we should think about the precedent a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T19:42:01.317" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="418" CreationDate="2010-09-10T20:04:30.987" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;consolidate the tags, there is no difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T20:04:30.987" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T20:54:57.327" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot;&gt;[groups]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not see how this tag could stand on its own as the only tag for a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T20:54:57.327" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T20:54:57.327" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T20:56:34.377" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference&quot;&gt;[reference]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not see how this tag could stand on its own as the only tag for a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:05:41.690" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T20:56:34.377" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T21:48:05.653" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trivia&quot;&gt;[trivia]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It fits both criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T21:48:05.653" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T21:48:05.653" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="424" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T21:55:34.563" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot;&gt;[players]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure about this one. What does everyone else think? It's clear what it &lt;em&gt;means&lt;/em&gt;, but I think people are going to differ on what questions should have it and what shouldn't, and I'm not sure what it would mean if it were the only tag on a question. Possibly redundant with &lt;code&gt;social&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;recruiting&lt;/code&gt;, and the more-specific &lt;code&gt;problem-players&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;new-players&lt;/code&gt; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T21:55:34.563" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T21:55:34.563" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T21:59:25.103" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists, and is blacklisted to prevent re-creation.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot;&gt;[rules]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one hasn't been settled yet. Means different things to different people at different times in different contexts, and definitely can't stand by itself as the only tag on a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:06:46.320" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T21:59:25.103" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="426" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T22:04:25.733" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tag no longer exists.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/games&quot;&gt;[games]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Judging by the list of questions, this is probably as redundant as the &lt;code&gt;rpg&lt;/code&gt; tag would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T16:05:49.893" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T22:04:25.733" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-10T22:08:01.547" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gaming-style&quot;&gt;[gaming-style]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does it mean? Using funny voices vs. talking in 3rd person? Or playing Norwegian style vs. larping vs. tabletop? Narrative vs. gamist vs. simulationist? Specific techniques for achieving &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; during play? Too many possible meanings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T22:08:01.547" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-10T22:08:01.547" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="417" CreationDate="2010-09-10T23:26:07.903" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that perhaps people are gratuitously using tags.  I'm not sure how useful a tag &quot;clues&quot; is.  But sure, perhaps [investigation] (very similar to the fighting/combat thing - I was tempted to just delete the [fighting] tag...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T23:26:07.903" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="417" CreationDate="2010-09-10T23:51:18.707" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm very tempted to bring the hammer down on the proliferation of tags, but I think that impulse might be misplaced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To reap the benefits of a folksonomy we really do need to leave it be, focusing attention just on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/411/what-are-the-meta-tags&quot;&gt;harmful tags&lt;/a&gt;. I don't think redundant tags qualify as harmful: the only poor behaviour it encourages is slapping too many tags on a question, and that's not something that's going to get &quot;out of hand&quot; since it can be fixed whenever. Eventually it will be obvious which tags the community prefers (apart from the harmful ones, which should die by fire before then).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meantime: if in doubt, I say leave it be. When it's obvious that there's a better tag, make them synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-09-10T23:51:18.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="430" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-11T00:13:10.463" Score="6" ViewCount="361" Body="&lt;p&gt;Instead of generating a bunch of questions about how specific tags may or may not be the same, lets have them all in one place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One pair (or triplet, etc) of redundant tags per answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is just a place to collect tags that should be brought to everyone's attention because they might be synonyms and you can't suggest synonyms yet. Or they might be tags that are getting fuzzy around the edges and may need some work done to keep them separate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until we come to a solid conclusion about how to handle the redundant tags either by making them a synonym or by retagging them or deciding they are NOT the same, vote or comment on the suggestion. This list is just for collecting them in one place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the suggestion is synonymized, the suggestion (i.e. the answer) should be deleted, since synonyms are automatically retagged by the system and the answer here becomes clutter. If the suggestion is decided against it should stay here so future suggesters can see the historical discussion and add their 2 cents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2011-01-26T05:56:44.710" LastActivityDate="2013-04-20T13:04:48.647" Title="Did you spot a redundant tag? Possible tag synonym? Post it here." Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2017-05-22T21:26:27.573" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T00:13:10.463" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2010-09-11T00:15:45.463" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-creation&quot;&gt;[character-creation]&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-generation&quot;&gt;[character-generation]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-09-11T00:15:45.463" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T00:15:45.463" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2010-09-11T00:17:39.313" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot;&gt;[storytelling-system]&lt;/a&gt; redundant with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;[world-of-darkness]&lt;/a&gt;? Does one mean the setting and the other the system, or is it fuzzier than that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-11T00:17:39.313" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T00:17:39.313" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2010-09-11T00:18:47.173" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-style&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-style&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-style&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-03-24T14:04:05.897" LastActivityDate="2011-03-24T14:04:05.897" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T00:18:47.173" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2010-09-11T23:01:19.827" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gaming-aids&quot;&gt;[gaming-aids]&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-aids&quot;&gt;[game-aids]&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot;&gt;[tools]&lt;/a&gt; seem to be synonymous or at least one is a subset of the other based on use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-09-12T01:26:22.227" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-11T23:01:19.827" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="437" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-13T13:51:46.383" Score="18" ViewCount="286" Body="&lt;p&gt;I keep seeing spam questions on the site. Usually about poker, for some reason. What should I do about those? They make me &lt;em&gt;angry&lt;/em&gt;.  They make me want to &lt;strong&gt;HULK SMASH&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:03:55.963" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:03:55.963" Title="What should I do about spam questions?" Tags="|support|faq|spam|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="438" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="437" CreationDate="2010-09-13T13:53:45.620" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You should flag them!&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hdGyC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hdGyC.png&quot; alt=&quot;links beneath the tags on a question: share / edit / close / flag&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Choose the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;spam&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; reason, naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4mtE5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4mtE5.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;spam: exists only to promote a product or service; does not disclose the author&amp;#39;s affiliation.&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;vote to close them; you're wasting your close votes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;downvote it; flagging it as spam automatically downvotes it for you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you flag it (see the link right below the tags?) it'll come to a moderator's attention the next time they visit the site. Next to the link that takes us to the moderation tools, there's a little icon that shows moderators how many flags are in the system, so they always see flags immediately.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, if an item gets enough flags, it's &lt;em&gt;automagically deleted&lt;/em&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel like this isn't enough, comment and/or link it in chat suggesting other people flag the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2017-01-15T14:57:25.940" LastActivityDate="2017-01-15T14:57:25.940" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="440" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="441" CreationDate="2010-09-15T13:56:26.907" Score="2" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;In response to the comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2692/45&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.  Do we need two &lt;code&gt;Dread&lt;/code&gt; tags?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T15:55:38.490" Title="Do we need two Dread tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="440" CreationDate="2010-09-15T14:05:24.597" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Possibly. As one seems to nurture more discussion than the other, maybe &lt;code&gt;dread&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;dread-pandemonium&lt;/code&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T14:05:24.597" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="442" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="440" CreationDate="2010-09-15T15:55:38.490" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a third new Dread game. Dread House, which is also by Epidah Ravechol, the author of the Jenga Dread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dread house confusingly also uses a jenga tower but is a board game, which shouldn't really feature here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T15:55:38.490" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="443" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-15T16:10:43.040" Score="2" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Basically what phrases should one beware of when writing. The type of open ended, subjective stuff that does not belong here as its too argumentative and has no real answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-09-15T16:18:02.707" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T23:33:22.213" Title="What phrases should you avoid using to make your question a true question." Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-15T16:10:43.040" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="443" CreationDate="2010-09-15T16:13:17.930" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;“Normally this question would be highly subjective” if you have to say this then chances are the answers to this question will be subjective as well. Make sure you are asking questions that can have definitive answers. There are plenty of places for subjective argumentative fights on the web. This is a place to ask questions and get an answer that solves your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Hopefully the answers will…” if you have to hope that you’ll get answers that are useful you probably didn’t ask a good enough question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-09-15T16:18:33.533" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T16:18:33.533" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-15T16:13:17.930" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="443" CreationDate="2010-09-15T23:33:22.213" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;What is the best way to…&quot; is to be avoided. The problem with that phrase is that it is asking the &lt;em&gt;answerers&lt;/em&gt; to determine the best answer, and then write it. That shortcuts the Stack Exchange process where people just answer, and then the community determines the &quot;best&quot; answer by voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for &quot;the best&quot; of anything is a meta-question: it's a question about the potential answers (i.e., which answer is best), not asking for the potential answers directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A better way to phrase this would be &quot;How can I…&quot;, which asks for a direct answer to the problem and leaves the community to sort the answers by quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-15T23:33:22.213" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-15T23:33:22.213" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="404" CreationDate="2010-09-16T18:10:20.847" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd much rather see a question like, &quot;Where can I go on the net to find lists of house rules?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-16T18:10:20.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="447" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="449" CreationDate="2010-09-16T19:57:42.197" Score="2" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know we have moderators &lt;em&gt;pro tempore&lt;/em&gt;. I saw &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369/moderator-pro-tem-announcement&quot;&gt;in that thread&lt;/a&gt; Robert Cartaino on Sept. 7, 2010 announced that we'd have our elections &quot;in several weeks.&quot; Is that based on the Beta ending? Will the nomination and election process be the same as we did for pro tems?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When exactly do we elect &quot;real&quot; ones? Cuz I want to put my name in the hat and I assume it's too late to apply for a Pro Tem position.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T02:50:12.537" Title="When and how do we elect moderators?" Tags="|discussion|moderators|process|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="449" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="447" CreationDate="2010-09-17T02:50:12.537" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are building out community moderator election support as a standard feature of all Stack Exchange sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As soon as the site launches from beta, we'll hold nominations (which will be announced on the main site). After a reasonable nomination period (TBD), the elections will begin. The election process (which will also be announced on the main site) will be an external piece of software where users will select their choices. I have not seen the software, but I imagine it will work very similarly as it did in the 2010 Stack Oveflow elections: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/02/stack-overflow-2010-moderator-election-begins/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/02/stack-overflow-2010-moderator-election-begins/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T02:50:12.537" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="450" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="453" CreationDate="2010-09-17T06:12:39.780" Score="10" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;Roleplaying is a hobby where the players and gamemasters collectively define the game they are playing, and although there are rulebooks, the style and rules in effect are primarily determined by the people who play. And most of these people have different experience and opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes a asking for a &lt;strong&gt;definitive answer&lt;/strong&gt; moot for most of the questions. A question like &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How do you handle rules lawyers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;has multiple answers, and every and none of them are right. 'Accepting' one of the answers seems awkward when there are three more just-as-good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do you think we can differentiate such questions, and make the stackengine recognize them as such?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T21:32:34.650" Title="Do we always need to have 'accepted' answers?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="451" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="452" CreationDate="2010-09-17T13:03:16.417" Score="4" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are questions about Play by E-mail/Play by Web Games allowed or is it strictly tabletop, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we can, is it simply just rules discussions or are we also allowed to ask questions like the best place to advertise your game, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="618" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T13:22:49.437" Title="Are questions about Play by E-mail/Play by Web Games allowed?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="452" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="451" CreationDate="2010-09-17T13:22:49.437" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;As long as it's a play by email/web of a tabletop RPG, it's on topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you can ask stuff like &quot;where to advertise  your game&quot; but that'll be a one time community wiki on &quot;best places to advertise a PBeM game,&quot; not specific questions/promotion for a specific game...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T13:22:49.437" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="450" CreationDate="2010-09-17T13:28:31.913" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there is not a single best answer, then the question should be a community wiki; that is the mechanism SE uses for that kind of thing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also keep in mind that the asker can accept one answer, but everyone can continue to add and vote on them, so you will eventually get a stack ranked list of best ones regardless of the OP's opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anything designed to generate a big (and ideally living) list of answers should be CW.  The best practice there (and why questions should say they're CW out of the gate) is that then answers should be one idea per answer, and voting gives you the best ranked ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in many cases, there is a best answer, especially if people use SE correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have an answer that's 90% like one someone else gave, you do NOT do your own answer, you add a comment to theirs (or even edit theirs)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vote for the good answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remember this isn't a forum where these questions are &quot;one time&quot; things, they should be revised, added to, and voted on over infinite time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say with handling rules lawyers, you could indeed have a single pretty comprehensive answer emerge that the OP thinks is &quot;best&quot; - of course the other good answers would be voted high too.  If the poster wanted to instead do it as a &quot;long list of specific&quot; CW, that would be fine too, but in that case not demanded I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T13:28:31.913" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="454" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-17T14:52:45.793" Score="3" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two primary components to any Q&amp;amp;A site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We seem to have plenty of the latter, but are lacking the former.  Honestly there are days when I come to the site and wonder what I can contribute, because there are no questions to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at our site on &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/sites&quot;&gt;the directory&lt;/a&gt; lately?  We've been open 30 days, but we only &lt;em&gt;have 460 questions&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets see what kind of questions we have (front page at time of writing)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reincarnation rules for D&amp;amp;D 4th &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Old World of Darkness: Changeling banality rating for demons&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To document house rules, or no?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a list of non-OGL monsters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anyone have write-ups (or alternatives) for “missing” skills in D&amp;amp;D 4E? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Effective use of many close combat characters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are weapons for characters in a Journey conflict?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Beyond hit points: injury in D&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to be a Centaur PC?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does it make sense to give characters free weapons expertise?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A class with at-will powers only.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(several more)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What strikes me here is that so few are questions that interest players.  I count two, maybe three (&lt;em&gt;Effective use of many close combat characters?&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;How to be a Centaur PC?&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;What are weapons for characters in a Journey conflict?&lt;/em&gt;).  The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; states&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games - Stack Exchange is for gamemasters &lt;em&gt;and players&lt;/em&gt; of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. &#xA;  &lt;sub&gt;emphasis mine&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it seems we have a ton of GM questions, but very few player questions.  Non-gm players obviously make up a large part of our communities, and if you look on other sites (the Wizards boards, etc) there are plenty of player directed questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is making this site less attractive to players, and how can we make it more inviting to them?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T00:03:30.527" Title="Where are all the player questions?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="455" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="454" CreationDate="2010-09-17T16:29:38.587" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mostly this has been promoted through word of mouth among the RPG blogosphere, which is dominated by GMs. GMs network online differently than players do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we want more players, we need to take our promotion to the players: the RP forums like ENWorld, RPG.net, story-games.com theRPGsite, Paizo boards, WotC boards, etc. The only problem I see doing promotion on forums is that they can be really tribal, so I expect a lot of people to see this site as being competition for the forums, rather than nicely complementary to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't hang out those places, but those of you who do: add it to your sig, start a thread discussing the SE site (&quot;Have you used the RPG Q&amp;amp;A site? What did you find it useful for?&quot; maybe), and get a good asbestos suit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But above all, don't pull a Wizards and try to underline all the things SE is good at by pointing out how forums &quot;suck&quot; for doing what SE does! Each are good for different things, true, and drawing comparisons is going to feel like the natural way to explain the point of SE, but that will likely draw more fire than fans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T16:29:38.587" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="456" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="462" CreationDate="2010-09-17T21:05:22.280" Score="16" ViewCount="216" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm assuming that other people crossing that 1k rep line may be wondering the same thing, but maybe I'm alone on this.  What type of editing best helps the community?  When is a good time to edit, and when is it better to just leave it alone?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How should I approach editing?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="456" CreationDate="2010-09-17T21:24:02.137" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Editing is, I think first of all a copy editing job here, so the “Five Cs” that summarize the copy editor's job should be followed. Theres are to make the copy (i) clear, (ii) correct, (iii) concise, (iv) comprehensible, and (v) consistent; that is: make it say what it means, and mean what it says. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a stickler (obviously for grammar, style and punctuation), but I think a few core assumptions fall out of this idea that we should use editing to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;correct spelling&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ensure consistently used terminology &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make the post clearer or more effective. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make the question or answer timeless (i.e. remove date driven material&#xA;when the date no longer matters (like an answer about essentials that&#xA;assumes you couldn't get essentials yet).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make the post clearer or more effective.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Linking to other resources related to    the post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally people who question will police their questions and those who answer will do the same. But failing that it does fall to everyone who can to ensure a high degree of consistency. SE is a lot about the answers having repeat value, and to have repeat value, we have to ensure judicious editing happens from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE is meant to be more wiki than discussion forum, so always keep that in mind when editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-09-18T01:18:50.667" LastActivityDate="2010-09-18T01:18:50.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="450" CreationDate="2010-09-17T21:32:34.650" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is, of course, a subjectivity to roleplaying. I ask for a centaur race, or build of a monster, or tool to run a campaign and I may not get any I like. In these cases, not accepting an answer is telling people you are still looking for a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My caveat to my answer is that a question still needs to be able to have a best answer. If you don't think there is one when you ask it than it either shouldn't be asked or it should be cw.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T21:32:34.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="459" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-17T21:34:52.473" Score="0" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question was a response to a tag with a spelling mistake.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have enough rep to create tags, but I don't see an option to edit them yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can think of several ways I could handle this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post it here as a question (so someone with enough rep can correct the tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;flag a question with that tag for moderator attention with a note&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a preferred method for addressing errors discovered in the tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2010-09-17T22:02:34.873" LastActivityDate="2010-09-18T02:21:46.687" Title="What do I do if a tag needs correction?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="459" CreationDate="2010-09-17T21:42:14.043" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's a few questions and you have sufficient reputation, correct it. Otherwise post it on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Correcting can be creating a new tag spelled correctly or even reworded altogether for clarity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-09-17T23:08:08.423" LastActivityDate="2010-09-17T23:08:08.423" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="456" CreationDate="2010-09-18T02:32:48.983" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was a big blowup on Stack Exchange over what was called &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/the-great-edit-wars/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Edit Wars&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that article, here's what they recommend in regards to editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As it says in the faq: if you aren’t comfortable with the community&#xA;  editing your posts, Stack Overflow may&#xA;  not be the right website for you. What&#xA;  we do here is edit posts, together, to&#xA;  make them better and clearer. If you&#xA;  think that’s crazy talk and we’re all&#xA;  nuts, that’s fine. Like I said: there&#xA;  are millions of existing traditional&#xA;  discussion forums on the internet.&#xA;  We’re trying to do something different&#xA;  and perhaps more experimental here, so&#xA;  if you’re not tolerant of that,&#xA;  posting here is probably .. not&#xA;  advisable. I don’t like to see people&#xA;  go, but sometimes it’s just not a good&#xA;  fit.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As it says on the sidebar of every edit page, here’s what makes up&#xA;  good editing practice as we see it on&#xA;  Stack Overflow:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Fix grammatical or spelling errors.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Clarify meaning without changing it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Correct minor mistakes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Add related resources or links.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Always respect the original author. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Editing is welcomed and encouraged. However, if the author of&#xA;  the post is resistant to your editing&#xA;  changes, even a perfectly legitimate&#xA;  edit based on the above rules, be the&#xA;  bigger man (or woman) and let them&#xA;  have it their way. Our goal here is&#xA;  not to cause friction between users,&#xA;  or to make everything perfect&#xA;  overnight. All we aim to do is&#xA;  gradually clean up and improve&#xA;  questions and answers together. When&#xA;  in doubt, just move on! There will be&#xA;  plenty of other posts and other edits&#xA;  you can make. In time, that reluctant&#xA;  author will learn how Stack Overflow&#xA;  works.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Remember, we’re all adults here .. in theory. Please try to resolve&#xA;  edit disputes through simple&#xA;  communication, hopefully the kind that&#xA;  doesn’t involve being rude to your&#xA;  fellow developers. It says “Be Nice”&#xA;  in the faq for a reason. However, if&#xA;  you’ve tried to work it out and you’re&#xA;  still at an impasse, email us! We will&#xA;  happily mediate and help resolve&#xA;  disputes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Edit War post was followed up by the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/04/in-defense-of-editing/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;In Defense Of Editing&lt;/a&gt;&quot; post, my summary of which is &quot;sure, edit, but don't be a dick about it.&quot;  Some people take umbrage at it and being &quot;right&quot; is not a defense for being &quot;rude.&quot;  If you find yourself chronically editing every post that comes in - you will probably find me personally unsympathetic to you when someone complains.  Note that the SE overlords agree with this in their even-later blog post, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/04/a-day-in-the-penalty-box/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;A Day In The Penalty Box&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, where being a jerk about edits is a suspendable offense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But other than that, let's definitely fix up questions and answers where applicable!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-11-07T03:41:42.160" LastActivityDate="2010-11-07T03:41:42.160" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="463" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="506" CreationDate="2010-09-18T03:46:51.107" Score="5" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with the question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2694/what-are-the-advantages-of-tabletop-roleplaying-games-over-mmorpgs-and-crpgs&quot;&gt;What are the advantages of Tabletop Roleplaying Games over MMORPGS and CRPGs&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is that it requires us to be two things as a community:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Experts on the advantages of table-top roleplaying games and their ilk.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Experts on the advantages of massively-multiplayer RPGs and their ilk.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strictly-speaking, as a community we are (1) but not (2). We may have some individuals who are (2) as well, but the SE process relies on general community expertise to make the voting system work. Questions like this are naturally going to have up-voted answers that reflect our imbalance of expertise, &lt;em&gt;at best.&lt;/em&gt; At worse such a question will have no answers that include expertise of the (2)nd kind and just make us look ignorant.†&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, am I out to lunch? If not, what should be done about questions like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†Remember that &quot;Google is an interface&quot; to SE sites. Do we really want questions like this defining us to MMORPG players who have an interest in traditional roleplaying and our site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T13:57:11.997" Title="I figured out why the TTRPG vs. MMORPG question bothers me. Am I out to lunch?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="463" CreationDate="2010-09-18T10:51:45.993" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If that's your opinion (and I'm not saying you're wrong) then that's what the close vote is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The community has to decide by close and reopen voting what is &quot;on topic&quot; and what is &quot;off topic&quot;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same goes for what is too subjective and argumentative.  As a mod team we closed some questions that were obviously contentious when we first started, but now we really want the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt; (those with 500 or more rep to be specific) to do most of the voting.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;Obviously if something is spam/offensive or otherwise egregious, flag it and we'll get to it right away.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-09-18T10:51:45.993" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="463" CreationDate="2010-09-18T17:06:02.033" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't really have a problem with the question, though it could be reworded to be less antagonistic (focus on unique differentiators of RPGs vs &quot;what makes them better than&quot; computer games).  I think the question of RPG advocacy is on topic and &quot;What are the distinctive fun bits/advantages playing an RPG has over crpgs, ccgs, board games, etc.&quot; is a good area of inquiry.  I don't think we need to worry about &quot;Oh but we're not experts in card games too!&quot;  Any more than a question about where dwarves came from for D&amp;amp;D is off topic because &quot;we're not experts in anglo-saxon myth!  That's a question for anglosaxonmyth.stackexchange.com!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's reasonable to assume some people know about both, and that they will provide good answers which can be voted on.  If someone answers &quot;they're better because I hear CRPGs make you sterile but I've never played one&quot; then of course that's a bad answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we need to lighten up on closing questions that &quot;might have bad answers.&quot;  That's what voting on answers is for, NOT closing questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-09-18T17:14:30.657" LastActivityDate="2010-09-18T17:14:30.657" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="466" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="463" CreationDate="2010-09-18T18:44:34.700" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we necessarily have to worry about the lack of experts on either side of the question (although it is tangentially related), as it was a lack of scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we look at the accepted answer, this is what we ended up with as the &quot;advantages&quot; of RPGs over CRPGs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More social interaction.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Good excuse to get together with friends.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tabletop RPGs are generally more &quot;open-ended&quot; than MMOs; meaning there's more freedom of action for your character, and you're (hopefully) not stuck fighting the very same encounters over and over again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More reliance on your own imagination, which leads to a more satisfying gaming experience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;NO MONTHLY FEES!!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted in the comments, someone who plays on an RP server in WoW gets the benefits of 1 through 4 even though they're playing an MMO/CRPG. If they're role playing in DDO, they get all five; if they're considering switching to a tabletop game of 4E the monthly fee is actually a disadvantage of the TABLETOP game, not the computer one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if we assume that this list is a list of what differentiates CRPGs and tabletop games, advantages can often turn into disadvantages given the right situation. Items one and two locked me out of tabletop RPGs entirely a year or so ago. And items three and four are pretty easily debatable (the argument is between a free-form experience, versus one that's curated by an expert in the field... Prepublished module vs. homebrew campaign, if you will).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that with a tight scope (&quot;I have a group of friends that want to start a group activity on the weekends. The group is something like [insert description here]. What are the advantages of starting an RPG vs. doing something in an MMO?&quot;), we'd be more than qualified to answer this sort of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also mentioned in the comments that I think the question would have been fine as a &quot;fun&quot; CW question (as long as it stuck to good-natured ribbing, and stayed a little way above pure flaming), or as a &quot;how do I recruit MMO players to tabletops?&quot; kind of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-09-18T18:44:34.700" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="467" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="463" CreationDate="2010-09-19T11:05:19.213" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't object to the question enough to cast the last vote, but it's a moving target. MMO is a medium through which roleplay can be presented, not a genre. And what about text-based MUDs -- AmberMUSH, PernMUSH, etc? Do those count as MMOs, insofar as they have all the relevant characteristics? How about Second Life? There's a lot of roleplay in Second Life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-19T11:05:19.213" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="468" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-19T12:42:50.267" Score="1" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel bad that the one question unanswered (even with a bounty) is the only Shadowrun question we've had. Is this game still played? Anyone know any active forums to go and recruit? I looked and found a few inactive ones but I didn't really look that hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-09-19T23:56:36.383" Title="Anyone know any Shadowrun players?" Tags="|discussion|unanswered-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="469" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="468" CreationDate="2010-09-19T13:56:20.030" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.dumpshock.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dumpshock&lt;/a&gt; is the large active SR forum,&#xA;and at least when Catalyst was going through their whole financial scandal thing there was plenty of discussion on Fear the Boot, RPG.net, and theRPGSite.  It's still one of the more popular games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-19T13:56:20.030" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="468" CreationDate="2010-09-19T23:56:36.383" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's an official forum at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.shadowrun4.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.shadowrun4.com/&lt;/a&gt; as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-19T23:56:36.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="454" CreationDate="2010-09-20T00:03:30.527" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to pull out and build on something Jeremiah Genest said.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Also the Q&amp;amp;A format (And the push away from subjectiveness) makes this very different than normal forum use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, I would argue, is precisely why players don't seem to be as interested in this site.  GMs are more likely to be in a position to ask &quot;Where can I find this book?&quot; or &quot;What is the rule for this?&quot;, which are questions with answers.  Players aren't as concerned about what the rules say (after all DMs can override them).  When they have questions, they go to their GM (who can come here).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we want players to be more interested in the site, then I would recommend that we allow and encourage more subjective questions.  If we don't want to do that, then it would be best to accept/admit that players are not a primary target audience.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T00:03:30.527" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="472" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-20T02:20:11.867" Score="4" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;The FAQ mentions access to moderation tools and deletion ability. What are these moderation tools and how can I learn more about them? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or are they only for people who are actually moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T03:13:53.733" Title="So I just broke 2000 reputation... now what?" Tags="|discussion|moderators|reputation|tools|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="472" CreationDate="2010-09-20T02:58:08.793" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It may take a day for them to show up, but I think a &quot;mod&quot; menu will appear up top for you.  It's mainly self explanatory.  Read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, here's the tips I got emailed by Robert Cartiano when I became a mod:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tip 1: &#xA;When you vote to close or delete, your &quot;vote&quot; is binding (i.e. it happens immediately). So your &quot;vote&quot; is no longer part of the democratic process. You've got the &quot;super vote!&quot; As a general rule, I try not to apply Moderator function to activities that are being addressed by the community. If a post looks like a duplicate, you might give the community the chance to take care of it. If the community won't (or can't) act, do your thing. You have a bit more leeway early on because few people have the reputation to close. And certainly take immediate action on blatant problems (obvious spam, illegal activities, language, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tip 2:&#xA;Flagging: Users flag things for all sorts of crazy reasons. You will act on a pretty small percentage of them. Users will flag saying &quot;this is a dupe&quot; and &quot;this is subjective&quot; and, my favorite, &quot;This is spam.&quot; Users call anything they don't like &quot;spam,&quot; trying to get rid of posts through you as a super-vote-by-proxy. Remember, there is a community voting on this stuff. You don't have to act on everything when the community can decide for themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I'll delete the flag when I act on it (or the community acts on it [closed]). If I don't act on the flag, I will leave it there for reference. When the list starts getting long, I will start deleting old flags after some time has passed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tip 3:&#xA;Leave breadcrumbs: Ideally, the community should police itself. But sometimes you have to act and you should try to take the opportunity to let members know what you did. Leave a comment saying things like &quot;It's better if we don't split the answers up between multiple threads so I am closing this as a duplicate.&quot; New users will see these signposts and learn to use the system that much quicker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T02:58:08.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="472" CreationDate="2010-09-20T03:13:53.733" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You'll get a tools link; you won't get a mod link. You basically get a bunch of stats -- you can see a list of questions getting close votes, you can see posts by new users, that sort of thing. You can see a list of flags, but you can't do anything special with them that you couldn't already do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can vote to delete questions that have been closed for two days. I've been pretty uninclined to delete closed questions personally unless they're spam, but I'm not sure what the Stack Exchange general consensus is on that issue. Oh, and you can vote to undelete deleted questions. I think those two things are the only actual new actions you can take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T03:13:53.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="475" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="483" CreationDate="2010-09-20T19:26:39.910" Score="1" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comments have gotten out of control. The standard action when this happens on a SO site, is to move the comments to a meta thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So ya, can we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="629" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T02:18:19.950" Title="Can we move the discussiony comments from &quot;What RPGs emphasize Roleplaying?&quot; to meta?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="475" CreationDate="2010-09-20T19:44:01.763" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, feel free to create a meta question for any or all of the comments you think needs discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-09-20T19:44:01.763" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="477" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-20T20:34:55.160" Score="8" ViewCount="261" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been planning on making a business card I can hand out (and pass around the design) for &lt;strong&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/strong&gt;.  I can setup all the text I want, but it still looks plain.  Could someone design a simple graphic for the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; This is not expected to be permanent, but something we can use for advertising the site in beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-03T22:17:23.563" LastActivityDate="2012-01-03T22:17:23.563" Title="Can we get a graphic design?" Tags="|discussion|support|site-promotion|design|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="478" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-20T17:34:55.393" Score="7" ViewCount="282" Body="&lt;p&gt;We all think we know what it is. But do we really?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For clarification, I mean &quot;roleplaying&quot; in the context of RPGs, not other contexts like psychotherapy or things-you-do-in-bed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For further clarification, I mean &quot;roleplaying&quot; as an action (&quot;We want a game with more roleplaying!&quot;), not as a hobby &quot;I enjoy skiing, eating, and roleplaying&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" OwnerDisplayName="Adam Dray" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T02:31:08.773" Title="What exactly is roleplaying (the action, not the hobby)?" Tags="|terminology|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="16" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-20T20:02:52.233" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="478" CreationDate="2010-09-20T17:55:30.753" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Strictly speaking, role-playing is the act of playing a role. Usually this means making decisions and taking actions in a way that is consistent with a character within an RPG, and/or acting like that character. Providing elaborate descriptions of actions taken (beyond a simple mechanical &quot;I attack it&quot;) is also usually considered part of role-playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Role-playing&quot; is also used colloquially to describe the act of taking part in an RPG, whether or not the session or game in question actually encourages or supports the stricter &quot;in character&quot; definition of the term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some players use the term &quot;roll-playing&quot; to differentiate between play modes that focus on the gameplay and play modes that focus on emulating the characters, however this term has a bit of a pejorative taint to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" OwnerDisplayName="AceCalhoon" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T01:46:29.290" CommentCount="7" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-20T20:20:37.560" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="478" CreationDate="2010-09-20T18:54:03.040" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;At it's most basic level, roleplaying is simply the act of making decisions based on your assumed character's means, motivations and current situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anything beyond that is gravy: speaking with funny voices, using first-person voice, adding detailed narrative description, etc. These things are often desirable, but they're not the essence of roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="411" OwnerDisplayName="veritascitor" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T01:46:29.290" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="482" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="478" CreationDate="2010-09-21T02:15:33.990" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Roleplaying means a lot of different things to a lot of different people, and I think that's good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To many people, &quot;roleplaying&quot; &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; battlematting around - &quot;I'm playing what's labeled as a roleplaying game, and it's about minis combat, therefore minis combat is roleplaying.&quot; Or creating a compelling story (where that can mean interesting, or realistic, or...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often by &quot;roleplaying,&quot; when people try to stress it as a distinct activity within a RPG, it often means more &quot;character-focused&quot; roleplaying, though that also has sub-variations people don't agree on - &quot;character simulation&quot; vs &quot;actor stance&quot; vs &quot;immersion&quot; for example. We need a better, more specific name for this activity, which may be a mix of the following.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Character simulation&quot; encompasses&#xA;games where there are personality&#xA;mechanics that affect your behavior.&#xA;(Pendragon's a good example.) &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Acting&quot; is, well, acting out your&#xA;character. When people say &quot;funny&#xA;voices!&quot; this is what they mean.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Immersion&quot; is being able to actually&#xA;put yourself inside your character.&#xA;It's different from acting in that&#xA;it's more &quot;method acting&quot; as opposed&#xA;to &quot;just acting.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, history shows that trying to use the term &quot;roleplaying&quot; for &quot;character portrayal&quot; will inevitably end in this kind of flame war from those who think saying that their activities they prefer in an RPG are being looked down upon because they're not in that definition.  Therefore we should avoid that.  And besides, even &quot;roleplaying&quot; isn't precise, as seen above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose that questions etc. about &quot;roleplaying&quot; say what they actually mean.  &quot;What games mechanically reward portraying your character's personality quirks&quot; is a both less hassle-magnetic title and is also really precise.  And it is distinct from &quot;What games encourage character immersion&quot; or &quot;What games contain prescriptive personality mechanics,&#xA; all good questions that do not benefit from conflation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T02:15:33.990" CommentCount="11" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-21T02:15:33.990" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="483" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="475" CreationDate="2010-09-21T02:18:19.950" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have instead moved the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2848/what-exactly-is-roleplaying-the-action-not-the-hobby-closed&quot;&gt;What is roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;&quot; question to meta and purged comments on the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2834/what-rpgs-emphasize-roleplaying&quot;&gt;What RPGs emphasize roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;&quot; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T02:18:19.950" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="484" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-21T02:37:12.290" Score="0" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;There were questions tagged &quot;dd-essentials.&quot;  We had determined that D&amp;amp;D should be abbreviated &quot;dnd&quot;, and also I think it's worth saying it's D&amp;amp;D 4.0 Essentials since there well may be a D&amp;amp;D 5.0 Essentials in 2020.  Go &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd4.0-essentials/synonyms&quot;&gt;vote on my tag synonyms if you agree&lt;/a&gt;, I think it should be changed to &quot;dnd4.0-essentials&quot; and I've retagged the existing questions to that end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T04:41:53.643" Title="Should the D&amp;D Essentials tag be changed?" Tags="|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="484" CreationDate="2010-09-21T03:07:23.950" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Changing the dd to dnd is definitely the way to go. I'm not so sure about the 4.0, though... The product's name is &quot;D&amp;amp;D Essentials&quot;, so dnd-essentials or dnd-essentials4.0 would be a more discoverable tag I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, dnd4.0-essentials is more filterable... &lt;em&gt;shrug&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T03:07:23.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="484" CreationDate="2010-09-21T04:41:53.643" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Yea&quot; for changing it to [dnd-essentials]. That just looks like an oversight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Nay&quot; for trying to read the minds of future Wizards development teams. We should tag it what it's called, and worry about differentiating it from non-D&amp;amp;D4e Essentials if and when such a thing exists. If it ever matters, we can set up a quick synonym then to fix things up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T04:41:53.643" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="487" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="477" CreationDate="2010-09-21T08:25:18.397" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a stop gap feel free to use this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/B69gI.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this covered by the CC-wiki license? I've used paid for stock art, so my license wouldn't extend to anyone else reselling it, that's all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that no matter what the site ends up being called, the D6 is near perfect for our question and answer site!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="178" LastEditorUserId="178" LastEditDate="2010-09-21T09:07:55.413" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T09:07:55.413" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="478" CreationDate="2010-09-21T13:09:25.173" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two things, typically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making decisions about in-game&#xA;activity in accordance with diagetic&#xA;(in-fiction) factors, rather than&#xA;tactical or social ones.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Adding flavor and color to the&#xA;proceedings of a game through&#xA;persona play.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T13:09:25.173" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-21T13:09:25.173" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="456" CreationDate="2010-09-21T19:47:59.140" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can also encourage the original poster to improve their question. A simple comment along the lines of &quot;Hey! That's a nice question, but you've got some spelling and mistakes and people will take you more seriously if you get it right!&quot; would help newcomers realize their posts are read and being held to a high standard. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would add that edits should be &lt;em&gt;meaningful&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;substantive&lt;/em&gt;. If you are going to take the time to make changes to fix grammar and spelling, please look over the entire question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a sidenote (in case you haven't read &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts-on-stack-overflow/11741#11741&quot;&gt;What is a Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt;&quot;): a question whose body is edited by more than 5 people gets automatically turned into a community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-09-21T19:47:59.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="490" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="491" CreationDate="2010-09-22T00:55:54.563" Score="-1" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was thinking it might be good to have a way to pull up a list of closed questions.  I'm assuming mods can do this, but it might be good even for newcomers, kind of like that &quot;breadcrumb&quot; thing mentioned in the editing question.  It would allow someone to see what kinds of questions tend to get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if closed questions get auto-deleted after a time, though, in which case my question is moot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="155" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T01:41:59.573" Title="Should there be a tag for closed questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="490" CreationDate="2010-09-22T01:41:59.573" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Search for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=closed%3A1&quot;&gt;closed:1&lt;/a&gt; ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/search&quot;&gt;Search Options on meta.stackoverflow&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T01:41:59.573" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="492" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="495" CreationDate="2010-09-22T01:55:59.027" Score="3" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sure I've read it somewhere already, but I can't seem to find it now.  Does StackExchange have a page where they have published the milestones required for a site to progress through its various development phases?  How close are we to being out of Beta, and becoming a full-fledged site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T04:09:02.873" Title="When is the site going to be out of beta?" Tags="|discussion|beta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="477" CreationDate="2010-09-22T02:17:23.417" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like @Iain M Norman's one, with the question mark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's something similar, using some &lt;a href=&quot;http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dice_%28PSF%29.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikimedia commons dice&lt;/a&gt; instead of the paid stock art (and notably cheaper-looking as a consequence :P)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qKASi.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tossed in part of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/347/svg-versions-of-the-logos&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange logo&lt;/a&gt;, but I'm not a lawyer and don't understand if that's allowed according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/legal/trademark-guidance&quot;&gt;Stack Apps Legal Page&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's another with more StackExchange branding borrowed/stolen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ktbpP.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T13:31:02.743" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="494" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="478" CreationDate="2010-09-22T02:31:08.773" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have always thought the collaborative storytelling is what set apart the use of roleplaying in games from its use in training or psychology. It is not an individual activity but the interaction of all the players with each other. It also encompasses all of the activities that contribute to the shared narrative. If the group is talking about the pivotal natural 20 die roll in an epic battle months or years latter, then that is roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T02:31:08.773" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-22T02:31:08.773" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="492" CreationDate="2010-09-22T04:09:02.873" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/04/changes-to-stack-exchange/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Changes to Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; entry on the Stack Exchange Blog...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This phase will last between 60 and 90 days. At the end of that period, the site will need to reach a minimum critical mass to continue and move on to full citizenship.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T04:09:02.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="496" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="498" CreationDate="2010-09-22T12:48:04.157" Score="1" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the past 24-ish hours I've gained 75 rep (or so says my responses) but my score hasn't changed from 768.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone else experiencing something like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it because I've only been active on Meta for a while, not the actual rpg.stackexchange 'parent' site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T19:09:44.617" Title="My Reputation Seems Frozen?" Tags="|support|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="496" CreationDate="2010-09-22T12:53:29.150" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not all real time.  Rep totals, mod status, etc., sometimes there's up to 24 hours of lag for it to get all caught up.  I don't think there's a meta vs main cap (though one could certainly make an argument for there being one - I would strongly suggest that you be more active there and then worry about meta issues).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T12:53:29.150" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="498" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="496" CreationDate="2010-09-22T13:11:35.407" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your reputation on meta.rpg.stackexchange is the same as your reputation on rpg.stackexchange.com. You neither gain nor lose rep from participating on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now with &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/new-per-site-metas/&quot;&gt;citation&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reputation is always inherited from the parent site. You cannot gain or lose reputation* on the per-site meta. This also means that some reputation related functions like the rep graph and bounties are not enabled on the per-site meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;.* however, there is one exception: extreme misbehavior on the meta site will affect your parent site reputation. And not in, shall we say, the “good” way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T19:09:44.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="499" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-22T19:16:04.027" Score="4" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you answer a question what is your responibility to maintain that answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2015-11-21T16:53:32.827" Title="What is your responsibility when you answer a question?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="499" CreationDate="2010-09-22T19:18:58.523" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers should not be static.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit, edit, edit should be your mantra&lt;/strong&gt; - If you've got a good answer and someone adds more detail, integrate it, and remember to always respect an individual's work. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't link and run to random blog #56&lt;/strong&gt;. If the information is good and under an open license just put it in the answer (don't forget to attribute the author). Try to make your answer THE definitive answer to the question and ALSO send them to the official documentation your team supports. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments are like &quot;meta&quot; for the answer&lt;/strong&gt;. Don't ping pong back and forth in comments with new data, when someone leaves a comment with more info or something, just add the information to your question directly. If people post updates to a comment ask them to add it to their question; that's where the power of SE comes in, updates on people answering their question happens in the answers and the questions, so that when you are finished people don't have to track the conversation, just the final answer and solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/257/i-am-new-here-how-does-stackexchange-work&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think people need to be a lot better about editing, pruning, adding to, and if necessary deleting their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T17:33:45.957" LastActivityDate="2010-09-22T22:41:10.000" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="456" CreationDate="2010-09-23T01:03:24.423" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;As someone who has had a couple of my posts edited, I can say that I appreciated people with better spelling and grammar correcting me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T01:03:24.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="499" CreationDate="2010-09-23T02:30:38.390" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a link is busted or some obvious technical problems exist with an answer then edit it. Otherwise leave it along and add your own thoughts as a separate answer. People don't like other people screwing with what they write. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may ask &quot;What the difference it happens on wikipedia all the time?&quot; The difference here is that while edit are indeed tagged with an ID on Wikipedia here the answers are strongly associated with the person and their reputation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel that a question bears some consolidations then make a community wiki with the answers edited together. But leave the original author writing the alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already lost two dozen users that I know of because of excessive editing. One asked me to obliterate his account. I strongly suggest that advocates of Edit, edit, edit, reread a Theory of Moderation and remember that the editing controls are  supposed to be used with a light hand. If you are not the author leave it alone and let the original speak in his or her own voice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T02:30:38.390" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="503" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-23T02:50:42.370" Score="15" ViewCount="315" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site is several things as outlined in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange FAQ&lt;/a&gt;. However not all Stack Exchange sites are going to be alike due to differing subject matter. This means different sites will emphasize different aspects of Stack Exchange. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Q&amp;amp;A style pioneered by Stack Overflow is an excellent fit for questions about game mechanics. But RPGs are more than just the game mechanics. The roleplaying side, for a lack of a better term, is very subjective and very fuzzy. Strictly adhering to the Stack Overflow Q&amp;amp;A Style is going to stilt discussion of this side of RPGs. Thus causing this site to fail to be a repository of expert knowledge about Roleplaying Games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also there is intense interest in the hobby itself. But it is not large enough to sustain a separate site. So questions about the history, industry and why things happened the way they will have to be domain of this site or they won't get discussed anywhere in the stack exchange system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I seen a lot of comments reflecting what I call Stack Overflowism. This along with the excessive editing is driving users away. I believe this site needs to have expert knowledge about all things roleplaying. Not merely a Q&amp;amp;A site about mechanics. (Yes there is a little hyperbole there)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest everybody take a step back. Read over a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation&quot;&gt;Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt; especially the part about &quot;With a Light Hand&quot;. Leave other people's posts alone unless there some obvious technical mistake or the author meant that post to be extensively edited. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Loosen up about the subjective questions. And if the question is that badly phrased get a discussion going in comments with the author about how to fix it. But let the author fix it. If it spirals out of control deal with it then not before. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T14:19:27.703" Title="Stack Exchange RPG is a collection of expert knowledge." Tags="|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-23T02:50:42.370" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="503" CreationDate="2010-09-23T12:17:16.953" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree.  We need to not allow excessively subjective topics that are just noise, but a number of the closures have not fallen into that category for me. We don't want volume of Q&amp;amp;A just to have volume, we want knowledge.  I think looking at the original trinity is instructive - sure, it's &quot;objective programming questions&quot; but there's plenty of subjective &quot;how do I do this better&quot; stuff.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at our closed questions - there's a number that don't in retrospect look to me like they should have been closed.  There's more that were OK to close on being way too general, but I only see 1 or 2 (&quot;Should a RPG be fun?&quot;) that I really think should be closed as subjective flame bait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should a) not mod-close, let the community close, unless it's CRITICAL - e.g. there's flags and crap urging us to take action and b) encourage the community to take it easy.  Depending on how you define &quot;subjective&quot;, every post on Stack Overflow is subjective - it's someone's opinion on a good logging tool, or how to best handle database cleanup.  An opinion being involved doesn't make it subjective, having nothing but does.  I think the real differentiator in practice is that if people really are making an answer it's a good question - if people are posting hundreds of comments in ghetto-discussion-forum style that means it's a subjective discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And people are unused to the edit philosophy.  On the one hand, there shouldn't be anything wrong with editing as long as it's not against the OP's wishes - I think the &quot;RP edit mini-war&quot; was the only case of that - but we should roll slow on it so that people can get over their initial fears.  In the end, editing makes for a higher quality knowledge repo.  But I agree we should go for &quot;tell the OP to change it - then only change it yourself later.&quot;  Exceptions for just plain typos and whatnot of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T12:17:16.953" CommentCount="12" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-23T12:17:16.953" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="503" CreationDate="2010-09-23T12:41:18.573" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the following points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We &lt;em&gt;have to be&lt;/em&gt; more subjective than Stack Overflow.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We need to gather experts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We've gotten way too emotional about what's on the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Needless editing of other people's posts is disrespectful and needs to stop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that said I think we do need to have limits.  The point of this site is not so we can have another community for discussion.  There are dozens of those.  The point is to gather expert knowledge, and we do that here by questions and answers.  I think that's our strength and we should stick to it.  What does that mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you want to have a discussion about something, it needs to be asked as a question.  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there's no question you can make out of it, it needs to go somewhere else.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fuzzy questions are ok.  I'm defining a fuzzy question as one where there are answers, but the &quot;right&quot; answer is entirely a matter of opinion.  An example would be &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2937/what-makes-a-good-pitch-for-a-new-game&quot;&gt;What makes a good pitch for a new game?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Thinly disguised blog posts aren't questions.  Ten lines of rant followed by a sentence that just happens to have a question mark at the end does not a a question make.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which brings me to my main point about what should be closed.  We have a close vote for &quot;Subjective and &lt;strong&gt;Argumentative&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;.  Some questions are &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;troll&lt;/a&gt; bait, and I really don't think we should have them on the site.  My trivial example is &quot;Why is D&amp;amp;D better than Vampire the Masquerade&quot; (or vice-versa if you prefer).  This question while it might get a useful answer or two, is going to get a whole lot of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; useful answers, and cause more trouble than it's worth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; site that attracts experts.  That means that not every question (or pseudo question) is going to be valid, but that doesn't mean &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/01/stack-overflow-where-we-hate-fun/&quot;&gt;we have to hate fun&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Related:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/253/discussion-questions&quot;&gt;Discussion questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/50/how-much-subjectiveness-is-ok/&quot;&gt;How much subjectiveness is OK?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/456/how-should-i-approach-editing&quot;&gt;How should I approach editing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/463/i-figured-out-why-the-ttrpg-vs-mmorpg-question-bothers-me-am-i-out-to-lunch&quot;&gt;I figured out why the TTRPG vs. MMORPG question bothers me. Am I out to lunch?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T12:41:18.573" CommentCount="14" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-23T12:41:18.573" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="506" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="463" CreationDate="2010-09-23T13:57:11.997" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question is being over-analyzed and the I don't see acknowledgment of the fact that I had several paragraphs explaining the question's background and the specific answer that I was looking for. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So pretend (or roleplay) that you are&#xA;  talking to somebody today and trying&#xA;  to convince them why they should play&#xA;  a tabletop game versus a MMORPG, CRPG,&#xA;  or other alternatives. Hopefully the&#xA;  answers will help others in recruiting&#xA;  and finding players for our games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some criticized me for not making a community wiki. But I did not set it up to build a library of possible answers I wanted people to think and come up with what they thought is their best answer and I award it accordingly. That was my choice for this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of this discussion revolves around the assertion that you have to be an expert in both MMORPG and RPG to answer this. I don't accept that assertion. MMORPG are part of geek culture and Tabletop Referees are aware of them even if they don't play them or never had play them. So an answer from a tabletop referee who had to deal with issue AND is NOT an expert in MMORPG is just as valuable as an answer as somebody who is an expert in both. And that person may have well had the better answer (as I judges) in the form of a more effective presentation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is an example of something that is specific to the domain of roleplaying games. It not enough to learn the game, you need to organize and maintain a group of players in the face of competing interests for their entertainment time. So folks can be considered expert in this. Now I could have just made it more general but I chose to focus on what I felt to be tabletop's biggest &quot;competitor&quot; for entertainment time which is MMORPGs. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that I clearly stated the background of the question, and asked for a specific type of answer (i.e. roleplay that...) I feel the question should have not been closed. I am not going to reopen it myself as my vote has the moderator bat attached but those of you who agree certainly go ahead vote to reopen if you agree with my reply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T13:57:11.997" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="503" CreationDate="2010-09-23T14:19:27.703" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should continue to push CW for questions that are looking to gather a list, or which are strictly subject (although I'm not sure where to draw the line on that second idea). People's voting behavior on that sort of question is a lot different from their voting behavior on other questions, and I think that needs to be recognized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I DO think that we need to be a bit better about how we request CW status. It feels like we often vote to close while simultaneously leaving a terse &quot;this should be CW&quot; comment. Particularly for lower rep users (&amp;lt; 500), we should be using the term Community Wiki, and possibly pointing them in the direction of what they need to do (and mentioning why we think the post should be CW).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For posts that are unclear, or using broad terms, we should be asking for clarifications using examples. A comment like &quot;What sort of roleplaying are you looking for? Immersion, acting, character simulation, social combat, etc.?&quot; is probably more useful than directly criticizing choice of wording.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, we should move away from long-form discussions in the comments section of questions. If you think a question is important for setting precedent, start a meta thread. Otherwise, let's try to do better about not belaboring the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's okay if a couple of low quality questions make it into the site. Certainly much better than starting wars on a regular basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T14:19:27.703" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-23T14:19:27.703" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-09-23T15:23:09.707" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just noticed the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt; tag.  I believe this to be a meta tag&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see by the current usage that it is being used only as regards to dnd4.0 it cannot be used on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag may mean different things to users of different RPGs, as such, it should not be allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T15:23:09.707" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-23T15:23:09.707" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="509" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="511" CreationDate="2010-09-23T17:23:06.090" Score="5" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed today that some questions on the Parent site seem highlighted in blue, but I can't find an obvious differentiator between these and other questions.  Was there a recent change to the system?  What qualities causes a question to be highlighted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-09-24T18:52:20.657" Title="What are &quot;blue&quot; questions?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="510" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="509" CreationDate="2010-09-23T17:24:22.600" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed the reason, now.  I had added some tags to the &quot;Interesting&quot; list in my profile, and it seems the blue questions are the ones that have these tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't mind me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-09-23T17:24:22.600" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="509" CreationDate="2010-09-24T18:52:20.657" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Blue questions are those that have &quot;interesting&quot; tags. &#xA;Faded questions are those that have &quot;ignored&quot; tags.&#xA;Everything else renders normally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-24T18:52:20.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="95" CreationDate="2010-09-24T19:08:20.857" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;My feeling is that Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is about RPGs, not about role-playing. That means people should ask about all aspects of RPGs. RPG history has a place here, and some of the history questions have been very popular in terms of votes and activity. It's clear the community wants to discuss game history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think when someone asks what an &quot;indie&quot; game is, there are good answers and bad answers, and thus up and down votes. This makes it a good question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions that some deem &quot;argumentative&quot; have two or three different objective answers, but not an infinite number of subjective answers. Group A thinks indie games are games that aren't like D&amp;amp;D. Group B thinks indie games are author-owned games. Group C thinks indie games are games with a certain DIY feel. Most everyone thinks that one of those three definitions is okay, though they may vehemently disagree with the others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say let people ask this kind of question. Let people answer, and let the best answers rise to the top via votes. The very best answer would include all three definitions, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not advocating the blessing of every subjective and argumentative question. I'm saying that some of these questions may seem to be troll bait, but that doesn't mean they don't have a few very good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-09-24T19:08:20.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="513" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="515" CreationDate="2010-09-24T21:22:27.860" Score="13" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;p&gt;Background - my D&amp;amp;D group meets weekly, we have a pretty good group of rules lawyers, but there are plenty of times when we have questions/disagreements.  Each week we keep a list of questions generated by that session (0-3 a week) and figure out the real answers after the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was thinking of posting those questions here.  My reticence is because I will likely have researched the question by the time I post it here and would be able to supply the correct answer 80%+ of the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still would like to post them all because there is always a chance that I'm wrong!  I think it would also be a steady stream of questions for the site to chew over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-12-14T12:41:18.280" LastActivityDate="2019-12-14T12:41:18.280" Title="Is it appropriate to ask questions you are pretty sure you know the answer to?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="514" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="513" CreationDate="2010-09-24T21:24:46.353" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure! I do it all the time because I want to &quot;seed&quot; the site with questions I think are appropriate or want to test out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I generally try not to answer my own questions unless a week or so goes by and I feel I have an answer that hasn't been offered up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;About seeding&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/&quot;&gt;Robert Cartaino's blog post about seeding&lt;/a&gt;, and I get it now. If you care about the answer and feel you'll get good feedback that you can use, however, go ahead and ask and answer yourself, I think. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-12-13T19:51:55.207" LastActivityDate="2019-12-13T19:51:55.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="513" CreationDate="2010-09-24T21:40:49.053" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that would be great!  We love questions, and I'd personally like to see more rules questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to point out that I'm less comfortable with &quot;seed&quot; questions that were created on the fly for that purpose.  To play on the analogy we want to plant real questions because we want a real site!  This is perfect because they are real questions from a real game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-09-24T21:40:49.053" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="516" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-26T21:21:27.820" Score="4" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should every question that at all ask for an opinion be community wiki?  I ask because of the comments on &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3041/what-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-having-a-party-leader&quot;&gt;What are the pros and cons of having a party leader?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.  Based on Bryants &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki/351#351&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your question is intended to gather a list of equally relevant answers, and you don't expect one answer to be the most applicable, it should be a community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think this applies.  Should every &lt;em&gt;opinion&lt;/em&gt; question on RPG be community wiki?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; Only mods can make a question community wiki now.  If you feel strongly that a question should be, please flag it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Equivalent Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2937/what-makes-a-good-pitch-for-a-new-game&quot;&gt;What makes a good pitch for a new game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1272/can-rules-changes-fix-interpersonal-problems-at-the-table&quot;&gt;Can rules changes fix interpersonal problems at the table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2983/how-do-you-alter-the-difficulty-of-a-challenge-fight-in-the-middle-of-it&quot;&gt;How do you alter the difficulty of a challenge/fight in the middle of it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/pros-and-cons&quot;&gt;Stackoverflow &lt;code&gt;[pros-and-cons]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, many of which are not community wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these questions are looking for a single best answer that is more or less opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Related Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/375/when-should-a-question-be-changed-into-a-cw&quot;&gt;When should a question be changed into a CW?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2016-06-02T23:48:26.803" Title="Should every opinion question be Community Wiki?" Tags="|discussion|questions|community-wiki|list-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="516" CreationDate="2010-09-26T22:01:04.693" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This gets at the heart of why I think opinion questions are generally a bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's not a community wiki, the expectation is that you're going to accept one answer. We're supposed to be building a repository of knowledge; the accepted answer should be the correct answer. If the accepted answer isn't universally applicable, we're sending the wrong message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is orthagonal to pros-and-cons; pros and cons can be objective. In theory you could ask a pros and cons question about RPGs with objective answers, and it wouldn't need to be a community wiki -- e.g., what are the pros and cons of fighters vs. paladins in 4e. Heck, I think there are objective answers to the question &quot;what are the pros and cons of 3e vs. 4e,&quot; although I'd never ask that question because it's too likely to cause trouble. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think the party leader question is inherently subjective. It's too big for me to answer it in any kind of coherent fashion, but it's not subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24" LastActivityDate="2010-09-26T22:01:04.693" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="516" CreationDate="2010-09-27T04:31:15.380" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, some questioners are looking for a single best answer. This is similar to programming design questions on Stack Overflow. The best design is always subjective and it is up the questioner to determine which is the best answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember Stack Exchange isn't anything one thing nor is it a hybrid with a single focus. It is a repository of expert knowledge and it is a place were people can get questions answered and reward which response they feel is best. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastEditorUserId="14873" LastEditDate="2016-06-02T23:48:26.803" LastActivityDate="2016-06-02T23:48:26.803" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="516" CreationDate="2010-09-27T15:54:42.220" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the distinction should be on the idea of asking for experiences versus asking for advice. I'm going to try and justify it with a more rep-oriented mindset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind that... (from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#reputation&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Reputation is a rough measurement of how much the community trusts you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking people for accounts of things they've done or seen done while gaming (ex: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2980/what-is-the-most-impressive-skill-check-or-roll-youve-seen-at-the-table&quot;&gt;What is the most impressive skill check or roll you've seen at the table&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90/what-did-you-do-for-a-tarasque-adventure&quot;&gt;What did you do for a Tarasque Adventure&lt;/a&gt;) it feels fat out silly to award reputation for answers: just because someone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90/what-did-you-do-for-a-tarasque-adventure#comment-80&quot;&gt;died fighting the Tarasque&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2980/what-is-the-most-impressive-skill-check-or-roll-youve-seen-at-the-table/2990#2990&quot;&gt;rolled a 20 on a Bluff check&lt;/a&gt; doesn't mean the community trusts them any more than anyone else. It would mean sometimes awarding reputation for an account of what someone &lt;em&gt;else&lt;/em&gt; did, or for what someone else has done to/with you. It might make them &lt;em&gt;cool&lt;/em&gt; but it doesn't make them trustworthier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This just parrots my answer in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(...) the questions which should be CW tend to be those which are more about listing people's experiences and ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where a subjective answer deserves rep is when the answerer clearly demonstrates the kind of insight and understanding which would make me come back to them personally if I could; if the answer could potentially lead to me trusting them more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1272/can-rules-changes-fix-interpersonal-problems-at-the-table&quot;&gt;proposed a rule which fixes interpersonal problems at the table&lt;/a&gt; I would be sufficiently impressed that I'd remember that user and - were this the real world - I'd seek them out with more questions in the future. It would demonstrate a valuable insight which - even though subjective - leads to me trusting that answerer more, ergo &lt;em&gt;they should get reputation for the answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In Summary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This to me should be the distinction:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;What have you done?&quot; Questions&lt;/strong&gt;: Asking for people's experiences and ideas should always be Community Wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;What should/can I do?&quot; Questions&lt;/strong&gt;: Asking for advice should not be Community Wiki; while advice is subjective, there is such thing as bad advice, which would affect &quot;how much the community trusts you&quot; so advice should be reflected in Reputation. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-09-27T15:54:42.220" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="516" CreationDate="2010-09-27T17:22:01.133" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The two rules I would apply are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can a single answer reasonably be complete?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can each individual answer be determined to be correct?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is acceptable for a single question to have many potentially correct answers. This happens all the time on the original trilogy sites. What's important is that if another person has the same question (as written), and is given the accepted answer, they have all the information required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going through your list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What makes a good pitch for a new game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Borderline, especially since the topic title doesn't include the full question. However, Adam Dray's answer is both complete and correct, so it would seem that a non-CW was appropriate. If I wanted to know how to pitch a game to a prospective group of players, I could use Adam Dray's answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dray's answer is not necessarily the only possibility, but it does stand on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can rules changes fix interpersonal problems at the table?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As asked, I would say that this question is bad. It is quite likely that the answers will not be complete (one answer will apply to some bullet points, another answer might apply to other bullet points).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With rephrasing, this could easily be made into a great question. The likely course would be to focus on a subset of interpersonal problems (boredom, external conflicts, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do you alter the difficulty of a challenge/fight in the middle of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, it is possible to give a complete answer to this question. There are many correct possible answers, and judging the &quot;best&quot; between them is difficult, but if I need to know A way to adjust challenge difficulty, I can get it from this question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-09-27T17:22:01.133" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="521" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-09-27T18:29:34.293" Score="2" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted a community wiki question yesterday &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3050/a-grimoire-of-magic-item-curses-and-boons&quot;&gt;&quot;A Grimoire of Magic Item Curses and Boons&quot;&lt;/a&gt;. There were several objections raised in the comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It wasn't really a question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was asking for user created content.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was outside the scope of this website.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a number of folk have been watching from the sidelines. I'm now asking for people to chime in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What do you think about the content and particularly the &quot;user created&quot; question? &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What do you think about the structure?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is this a format/style of organization we want to use? why or why not?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the problem is the format/style is there an alternative you would suggest?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(I checked this a community wiki because others may have questions they would like to add.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-09-28T14:09:35.023" Title="What do you think about &quot;A Grimoire of Magic Item Curses and Boons&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|questions|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-27T18:29:34.293" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="522" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="521" CreationDate="2010-09-27T18:37:03.203" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;User created content doesn't work here IMHO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE sites are designed to answer questions.  Creating a list of house rules doesn't meet that criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-09-27T18:37:03.203" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-27T18:37:03.203" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="521" CreationDate="2010-09-27T18:46:52.997" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a comment I left on the original question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Would you say the question &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What are&#xA;  properties that when added to a magic&#xA;  item bump its effective level up by&#xA;  one?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; is within the scope of this&#xA;  site? Would that be a valid community&#xA;  wiki question? That (and several&#xA;  closely related variations) is the&#xA;  question implied here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that question is OK here, then the reservations people have at that post is with the formatting/organization/display of the information, not the information itself. Then, reworking the content into a different form that is more appropriate to this site is what needs to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-09-27T18:46:52.997" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-27T18:46:52.997" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="521" CreationDate="2010-09-28T14:09:35.023" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Following the train of thought that user created content is frequently sought by people interested in rpgs, and thus is perhaps an implicit question when looking at the site lends some weight to allowing within the scope of the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However I would argue that the real definition of this site lies in what it is not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are obviously questions that are not being asked here even if they definite questions about roleplaying games with reasonably clearcut answers &quot;What is the highest DPR that can be obtained with a level 14 living forgotten realms character?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Grimoire CW is designed so be a collection of user created content, but what about other collections of user created content? Where does it end? Does allowing list of house rules, or list of new magic items, invite collections of DnD character builds? Which in turn invites posting character builds and asking for critique? Or posting adventures and asking for critique? Are these desirable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2010-09-28T14:09:35.023" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-09-28T14:09:35.023" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="525" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="526" CreationDate="2010-09-28T18:10:24.017" Score="3" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems like I should be able to figure this out on my own ... yet here I am :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example, I returned from lunch to find my reputation went up 35 points.  Cool!  However, I'd like to know specifically which questions/answers of mine got notched up (or down) during that period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an easy way to determine this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How to know what last affected my reputation?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="526" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="525" CreationDate="2010-09-28T18:14:23.547" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do it by clicking the &quot;envelope&quot; and selecting the reputation tab and click on 'today'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know why this is different than the reputation tab on the user id page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2010-09-28T18:22:16.873" LastActivityDate="2010-09-28T18:22:16.873" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="528" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="600" CreationDate="2010-09-29T18:09:00.507" Score="2" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;I clicked over to the new third place from the banner on the parent site (which is cool btw). But I couldn't find a link back to either meta or RPG.se itself. There was a logo in the upper left that says &quot;Role-Playing Games Beta&quot; but that returned me to chat.RPG.se when clicked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I miss something? Or this intentional?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It also appears that MSO's chat does the same thing so maybe this is a question for MSO.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-08T21:14:59.433" LastActivityDate="2010-11-08T21:14:59.433" Title="Where is the link to get from the new chat page back to meta/parent site?" Tags="|support|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="529" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="528" CreationDate="2010-09-29T19:55:17.550" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The logo is at the lower right (next to your chat box) and should take you back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-09-29T19:55:17.550" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="525" CreationDate="2010-09-30T14:35:24.660" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another way which may be more or less useful, is to click on your name, then the &quot;reputation&quot; tab. On the graph, drag to highlight only the most recent data point, this will display exactly the relevant information, even if it didn't happen that day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="629" LastActivityDate="2010-09-30T14:35:24.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="525" CreationDate="2010-09-30T14:51:16.287" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I also just found the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/43004/how-do-i-audit-my-reputation&quot;&gt;reputation audit&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Check out &lt;em&gt;your own&lt;/em&gt; audit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/reputation&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (you must be logged in).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions are listed by ID and you can create the URL by id number: using rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/{&lt;strong&gt;put question id number here&lt;/strong&gt;}/&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-09-30T14:51:16.287" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="532" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="533" CreationDate="2010-10-01T12:24:34.063" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;for my first question i tried tagging it &lt;code&gt;nwod&lt;/code&gt; (for new world of darkness) and &lt;code&gt;changeling&lt;/code&gt;. The system tutut-ed at me saying that i couldn't create new tags with a reputation this low.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fair enough for the &lt;code&gt;changeling&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;nwod&lt;/code&gt; tag, but then i tried &lt;code&gt;wod&lt;/code&gt;, and no luck either, even though i can find 5 questions tagged this way...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;so, bug, or feature i don't get?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="705" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-08T21:14:30.590" LastActivityDate="2010-11-08T21:14:30.590" Title="why does the site say an existing tag can't be created with this low a reputation?" Tags="|support|tags|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="532" CreationDate="2010-10-01T13:24:07.167" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks to me like the canonical tag is [world-of-darkness] and those other tags have been largely retired for that one.  I don't see anything tagged [wod], and [wod] has been defined as a synonym for [world-of-darkness].  Does seem like a bug that it tells you &quot;you can't create a tag&quot; in that situation though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-01T13:24:07.167" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="535" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="543" CreationDate="2010-10-03T15:36:57.497" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I did a query for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=D%26D+Insider&quot;&gt;&quot;D&amp;amp;D Insider&quot;&lt;/a&gt; yesterday and two weird results were included:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vnl6g.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;search results for &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Insider&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are present for any query including &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; (which gets passed to the query as &quot;dd&quot;). They look to me like old tag descriptions for the original [dd] tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I couldn't flag them as &quot;noise&quot; (since I couldn't click on them and they are not actual Q or A that are held by Community) so I'm posting them here to see if anyone knows about how to remove them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-10-06T02:38:19.650" Title="What are these search results?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="536" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="540" CreationDate="2010-10-04T04:12:26.010" Score="6" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been adding links to the DDI Compendium in my questions and answers.  However, not everyone has access to the compendium.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find those links very helpful when discussing specific D&amp;amp;D4 concepts/powers/whatever.  I'm no longer certain that the links are a good thing if not everyone can use them so I thought I'd bring this to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My current thoughts are that we should at least include a visible reminder or hint that the link may not be usable for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What say you?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-10-07T22:30:50.050" Title="DND4.0 - Should Links to DDI Material be Encouraged or Discouraged?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="537" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-04T14:08:32.663" Score="5" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would a roll function for our excellent chat site help this site be a success?  Would you use it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-11-09T02:59:46.850" Title="Roll function for chat?" Tags="|feature-request|chat|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="537" CreationDate="2010-10-04T14:58:27.183" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there are plenty of options for folks out there that need dice rollers.  I don't think I'd like to see this feature here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-10-04T14:58:27.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="540" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="536" CreationDate="2010-10-04T23:01:05.110" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;My vote is to keep the links in the answer as a supplemental resource, as long as you include a summary or cite the relevant bits so the question/answer stands on its own for those of us without a subscription. I'd assume that those who have a DDI subscription would appreciate the direct link. Maybe use a &quot;... referenced-thing ([DDI]), ...&quot; format where the &quot;DDI&quot; is the linked text so it's easy to see where it will take you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The times I've really disliked an answer with DDI links has been when the meat of the answer is on the other side of the link without much explanation (and I've only seen maybe one or two of those). But I tend to feel that way about any answer that is only linking to other content without any context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-10-04T23:01:05.110" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="542" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="513" CreationDate="2010-10-06T02:29:06.477" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I say yes, absolutely.  In fact, StackExchange has a mechanism in place specifically to support self-answering of questions, while encouraging the user to accept other answers.  You can answer your own question immediately after it's been posted, but you must wait 24 hours before you can accept that as the answer to the question.  This gives time for others to post their own answers, which you may later decide are actually a better fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I'm definitely against seeding the site, for the sake of seeding alone.  Questions posted in this spirit would often be either too basic and therefore useless to the audience, or so specialized that the only one really interested would be the person who posted the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you've encountered a real-world scenario where you and your group have come to a decision regarding a particular translation of rules, or if you've just found the answer to your own head-scratcher, by all means please do share!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, do be aware that while this site offers a great community of DMs and players who have broad and vast amounts of experiences with the game, Wizards of the Coast is often happy to answer rules-related questions themselves!  They have their own community forums, and also offer support via phone, e-mail, and their own ticketing system.  I've always found their support personnel to be polite, professional, well-spoken (I'm fairly certain the call center is in the U.S.) and knowledgeable.  For what they don't know off the top of their head, the agents have the Compendium, a Knowledge Base, and books library on-hand for research.  If all that fails, they'll let you know when it's time for a &quot;DM's discretion&quot; call and will even follow up if they later find a definitive answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, this is by no means meant to dissuade you from using this website.  I love the community here, but at the same time can't say enough good about my experiences with WotC's customer support.  Please, if you do get an answer from them, come back here and share by posting your own Q&amp;amp;A entries!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-10-06T02:29:06.477" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="535" CreationDate="2010-10-06T02:38:19.650" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;tag wikis could be returned by search; this will be fixed in the next deploy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-10-06T02:38:19.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="544" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-06T16:31:33.637" Score="13" ViewCount="387" Body="&lt;p&gt;The FAQ says?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games - Stack Exchange is&#xA;  for gamemasters and players of&#xA;  tabletop, paper-and-pencil&#xA;  role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp&quot;&gt;slight bit of discussion&lt;/a&gt; about LARPs that seem to indicate &quot;maybe&quot; but no real LARP activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284/are-questions-about-role-playing-derivative-board-games-off-topic&quot;&gt;discussed board games&lt;/a&gt; and came to the conclusion of no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what about the other ancillaries, typs of roleplaying?. And how should this impact the FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:29:40.180" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T03:29:40.180" Title="What kind of questions can I ask here?" Tags="|discussion|faq|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="544" CreationDate="2010-10-06T16:33:56.127" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We include &lt;strong&gt;Shared-author fiction&lt;/strong&gt; when they become storytelling games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Shared-author fiction is where a story&#xA;  is told (or written) in successive&#xA;  pieces by different authors. It is&#xA;  distinct from other forms of&#xA;  collaborative writing in that each&#xA;  piece of text is written by a single&#xA;  author. Thus, a simplistic&#xA;  shared-author piece might be made by&#xA;  two people where one person writes&#xA;  odd-numbered pages while the other&#xA;  writes even-numbered pages. The story&#xA;  is written in order, where each author&#xA;  must pick up where the last one left&#xA;  off and continue in a coherent&#xA;  narrative. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This becomes role-playing when each&#xA;  author has associated characters which&#xA;  they own. Then each author may write a&#xA;  section about what their character&#xA;  does. These are role-playing games of&#xA;  a sort which these days are typically&#xA;  played online using web-based bulletin&#xA;  boards or other internet forums to&#xA;  post the story text. Unlike most&#xA;  computer games or tabletop games, a&#xA;  true shared-author game has rules&#xA;  structured as etiquette and style&#xA;  guides rather than means of resolution&#xA;  (i.e. &quot;no curse words&quot;, &quot;no sexual&#xA;  situations&quot;, etc.). Often the author&#xA;  of a given character has final word&#xA;  over anything that seriously impacts&#xA;  that character. i.e. A character can&#xA;  only be wounded or killed with that&#xA;  player's permission. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Shared-author/role-playing sites&#xA;  frequently are based on science&#xA;  fiction and fantasy television series&#xA;  -- evolving out of the phenomenon of &quot;fan fiction&quot;. There are numerous Star&#xA;  Trek shared-author RPGs, for example,&#xA;  along with Xena, Buffy, and various&#xA;  Japanese anime series. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Really, there is no clear line between&#xA;  shared-author RPGs and others. The&#xA;  form is distinct mainly in that it&#xA;  creates a (hopefully) coherent text&#xA;  narrative as its product. However, it&#xA;  certainly can overlap with tabletop&#xA;  play and online computer games. Some&#xA;  tabletop games are played over email&#xA;  (called Play-By-Email or PBEM). I list&#xA;  below a few links to what I would&#xA;  consider shared-author roleplaying&#xA;  games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Summary taken from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/whatis/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/whatis/&lt;/a&gt; because I'm lazy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-06T16:33:56.127" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="544" CreationDate="2010-10-06T16:36:24.797" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do not include computer RPGs of any type. There is another &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;StackExchange&lt;/a&gt; for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus we do not include&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Single-Player Games  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Text-based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multi-user Games (MUDs, MUSHs, MU*)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Graphical Online Games or MMORPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Social Media Games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alternate Reality Games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or any other flavor of computer game&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2013-10-08T21:49:15.280" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="544" CreationDate="2010-10-06T16:38:38.190" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do include games like &lt;em&gt;Once Upon A Time&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen&lt;/em&gt;, that is storytelling games where players take turns telling a story utilizing some set of mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-10-06T20:15:50.050" LastActivityDate="2010-10-06T20:15:50.050" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="544" CreationDate="2010-10-06T23:08:06.130" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;traditional roleplaying games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;story games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;live-action roleplaying games (LARPs)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;experimental RPGs (which will sometimes deliberately stretch the definition of &quot;roleplaying game&quot; to see what happens)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;free-form roleplaying games (Norwegian style, Jeepform, and other games with socially-mediated procedures that accomplish what traditional mechanics do)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;home-brewed roleplaying games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;any of the above played through an computer, letter mail, or other medium&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;strong&gt;do not&lt;/strong&gt; include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;computer roleplaying games&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; (CRPGs, i.e. &lt;em&gt;Final Fantasy VII&lt;/em&gt;, not RPGs like above that just happen to use the computer as a medium, i.e. D&amp;amp;D 4e over Skype)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;board games&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; (i.e. &lt;em&gt;Advanced HeroQuest&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Castle Ravenloft&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;wargames&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; (i.e. &lt;em&gt;Warhammer 40k&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Battlesystem, Heroclix&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Choose Your Own Adventure–type books, even if they have dice mechanics&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;MUDs, MUSHes, MOOs, MUCKs, or other multi-user text-based worlds&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;MMORPGs (Massively-Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games)&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;card games, collectible or otherwise&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dice games, collectible or otherwise&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We make exceptions for questions that are &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; about something on the &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; list that simply uses or refers to one of the &lt;strong&gt;do nots&lt;/strong&gt; in some way. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On-topic&lt;/strong&gt;: How can I use WH40k to play out a big battle that is the background of a Rogue Trader adventure?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Off-topic&lt;/strong&gt;: Are there &lt;em&gt;Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim&lt;/em&gt; mods that add D&amp;amp;D equipment and magic items?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1. May be on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt;, depending on the question.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;2. May be on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games SE&lt;/a&gt;, depending on the question.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;3. May be on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Science-Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy SE&lt;/a&gt;, depending on the question.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:43:11.833" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T20:49:16.053" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="550" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-07T00:32:55.543" Score="3" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often I will leave a comment on an answer that is a question waiting for an answer. For example, I might ask an answerer to clarify their answer before I will consider voting it up (or down).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as the system is currently setup we only get notifications of comments to questions or answers that we have written. I have to remember where I have asked questions and go check up on them every once in a while. This is terribly inefficient and means that comments will be &quot;left to die&quot;, so to speak. It would be very useful to get notifications when a comment thread we've participated in is added to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something others would find useful? If so, how do we / should we submit it as a feature request?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, if this is already part of the system somehow and I've just missed it, how does it work?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-10-07T00:58:52.073" Title="Can we get notifications of answers to our comments?" Tags="|feature-request|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="550" CreationDate="2010-10-07T00:58:52.073" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has already been implemented. You can receive notification of comments addressed to you, even if you are not the question or answer author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comment @username Notifications&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, you only get notified of comments when you own the post that is being commented on. But now you will also get notified of any comments that refer to you by @username, even if you don’t own the underlying post. This implementation is inspired by the way Twitter handles @username mentions — although we have the additional rather severe restriction that in our system, user names are not guaranteed to be unique.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the above example, Anthony Jones will get notified that Bruno Conde has replied to his comment. (writing out the entire username wasn’t entirely required, as will be explained shortly)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5nB8F.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the above example, &lt;code&gt;Anthony Jones&lt;/code&gt; will get notified that &lt;code&gt;Bruno Conde&lt;/code&gt; has replied to his comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about this feature here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/01/new-improved-comments-with-reply/&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New, Improved Comments With Reply&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-10-07T00:58:52.073" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="536" CreationDate="2010-10-07T22:30:50.050" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being the author of the answer linked by yhw42 I just &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to add something to the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Disclaimer: none of the following points are directed at yhw42 or meant as personal attacks/insults but should be rather seen as my typical cynical way of expressing my opinion.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't think my answer was bad or insufficient. It provided &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; information on how and where to find the answer to the question. It was a &lt;em&gt;single&lt;/em&gt; mouse click away, and the thread - on a publicly accessible forum - I linked to even had almost the same title. Perhaps it's me being a programmer, but I can't see any value to redundantly repeat the same information over and over at different places if you can just link to a single instance of the data. Also, being able to use a &lt;em&gt;strong&lt;/em&gt; pointer in the right direction to make the last step to find the answer to a question is something I expect from any halfway intelligent human being.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that the purpose of this page should be to spoon-feed people who either lack the very basic skills of the modern age (e.g. using a frigging search machine) or are simply too lazy to bother with any attempt to find an answer on their own (funny fact: I found the thread I linked in my answer by using the search on WotC's forum). Providing answers to questions, yes. But spoon-feed or provide access to pay-to-use services for free? Not in my book. If someone is unable or unwilling to follow a link to a thread where the answer is literally provided in the &lt;em&gt;third post&lt;/em&gt;, then I think all hope is lost.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could understand the argument if I had &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; linked the DDI data, thus preventing any non-subscribers from making good use of the answer, but I also provided the answer to the question in free form. Therefore I cannot really see where the problem is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, if we're making a fuss about links to DDI data and WotC forum threads, how are we going to handle links to any off-site information? Do we really want to quote hundreds of words just in case someone doesn't bother with checking the link? What about links to forums where you can only read the first post in a thread when you're not registered? Or forums where you need to register in order to see any links or embedded pictures or attachments? At some point we &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; run into issues with Fair Use when we're quoting whole articles left and right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, especially with WotC I'd rather avoid quoting &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; stuff from DDI literally in an answer. Considering that WotC isn't really reluctant to dish out Cease and Desist orders (*cough* &lt;em&gt;Ema's character sheets&lt;/em&gt; *cough*) I'd rather not want to get rpg.se.com in their line of fire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/strong&gt; my vote is &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; providing the DDI link and if possible an alternative link that is accessible to everybody (e.g. a thread in the WotC forums where the same question/problem is discussed). But I'm voting &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt; simply copy&amp;amp;paste'ing material from DDI into the answer because WotC may well view that as a use of their material that is not covered by Fair Use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user660" LastActivityDate="2010-10-07T22:30:50.050" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="553" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-09T00:27:02.773" Score="10" ViewCount="677" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;We closed the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9/domain-name-suggestions&quot;&gt;domain naming thread (click for details)&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, &lt;strong&gt;let's start with a killer &amp;quot;elevator pitch!&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Joel will be blogging about the elevator pitch approach to naming, but to get you started:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Elevator Pitch&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't as easy as it sounds. Imagine the user who will never read your FAQ and you have two seconds to grab their attention. It should be catchy but descriptive. It should be thoroughly clear but painfully concise. &lt;strong&gt;Make every... word... count.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some creative examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://gawker.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Gawker&lt;/a&gt;: Daily Manhattan media news and gossip. Reporting live from the center of the universe.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://gizmodo.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Gizmodo&lt;/a&gt;: The gadget guide. So much in love with shiny new toys, it’s unnatural.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.autoblog.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Autoblog&lt;/a&gt;: We obsessively cover the auto industry.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dumblittleman.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DumbLittleMan&lt;/a&gt;: So what do we do here? Well, it’s simple. 15 to 20 times per week we provide tips that will save you money, increase your productivity, or simply keep you sane.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.needcoffee.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Needcoffee.com&lt;/a&gt;: We are the Internet equivalent of a triple espresso with whipped cream. Mmmm…whipped cream.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Use it as a Tagline&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A shorter elevator pitch &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be used as a tagline — something you can display in the header at the top of the page. If it doesn't fit, consider shortening it or creating a separate tagline. Here are some great examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://slashdot.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Slashdot&lt;/a&gt;: News for nerds. Stuff that matters.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lifehacker.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Lifehacker&lt;/a&gt;: Don’t live to geek, geek to live!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thesimpledollar.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Simple Dollar&lt;/a&gt;: Financial talk for the rest of us.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Motto (don't forget your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/108/site-logo-design&quot;&gt;logo&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A logo begs for it own little, short tagline — like a motto. Maybe the tagline inspires the logo; Maybe it's the other way around. Mottos make good t-shirt, bumper stickers, and other marketing material. Either way, you'll recognize a good motto when you see it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just do it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Think Different.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Uncola.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Intel inside.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Like a rock.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The king of beers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;…and perhaps all this leads to a proper name and domain for your site… &lt;em&gt;eventually&lt;/em&gt;. So let's start from the basics. &lt;strong&gt;Come up with a killer elevator pitch, tagline, and/or motto!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-01-19T00:01:08.353" Title="Write an Elevator Pitch / Tagline" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="23" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="554" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-09T01:33:10.380" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask the Table&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(motto)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T18:28:50.333" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T18:28:50.333" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-09T01:33:10.380" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="555" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-09T06:55:36.720" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Level Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Motto)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T17:47:49.047" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T17:47:49.047" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="556" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-10T12:59:11.820" Score="6" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you checked the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;area51 entry for rpg&lt;/a&gt;, there's a &quot;how is the site going&quot; entry to click. RPG is fine for some things, but the number of views per day is worrying low. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-08T21:11:15.990" LastActivityDate="2010-11-08T21:11:15.990" Title="&quot;How is the site going&quot; entry in area51. Comments." Tags="|discussion|site-status|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="556" CreationDate="2010-10-10T15:04:28.703" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's obvious use of the site isn't spreading well yet.  A couple factors from my observations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Needs to be promoted in more places, many folks haven't heard of it.  Some folks have posted it on forums/our blogs but we rely on everyone spreading the word more.  Have a blog?  Post about it and put it in your blogroll.  Link to relevant answers in forum discussions.  Tell your gaming group.  Etc.  It's hard to keep people's interest without volume - I don't play 4e, for example, so even as a mod days go by when nothing happens here I care about.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Community closing and editing and whatnot has been a bit more obnoxious than it needs to be, causing new users to bail.  The mods have discussed dialing this back but in the end it's up to the community at large to implement that.  When someone's first question is downvoted and closed with little explanation, a new person who hasn't read through the FAQ and the history of stack exchanges and all of meta thinks, with some justification, &quot;Man these guys are assholes.&quot;  We want to keep the site on topic but I think some latitude is justified, at and least friendlier explanations when something's closed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Volume may never be super high.  Go take the first page of posts on any of the major fora - ENWorld, RPG.net, etc.  Then evaluate how much of any of those threads is useful questions and contentful answers, as opposed to the crowd of the same people grinding their usual axes, tossing in unhelpful asides and derailing threads, etc.  In the end it's a 1/10 or more ratio of posts to anything worth reading a day from now.  And I think that's OK.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-10T15:04:28.703" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-10T15:05:54.493" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Level up your RPG gaming skills with expert Q&amp;amp;A!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T17:59:22.400" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T17:59:22.400" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-10T15:13:22.990" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Get in character with focused help on your favorite tabletop RPGs! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T17:59:59.107" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T17:59:59.107" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="560" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-10T19:53:28.413" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack the dice in your favour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tagline. Superfluous U optional of course.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T17:59:40.590" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T17:59:40.590" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-10T19:54:34.840" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Crit your knowledge checks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(tagline)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-11T06:29:08.390" LastActivityDate="2010-10-11T06:29:08.390" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-10T19:57:09.653" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Master your game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(tagline)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-11T06:28:54.413" LastActivityDate="2010-10-11T06:28:54.413" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="537" CreationDate="2010-10-10T23:01:40.997" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think having a chat bot that does it is sufficient. If I'm using it to game with a bunch of friends, I expect them to be honest. If I'm using it as a joke, or just to mess around, I don't really care about the fairness of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is currently a chat bot in &quot;The Game Table&quot; chat room; however, it's kind of broken (try typing &quot;8d6&quot; in chat, and see what it produces. It would be nice to see it fixed, but I don't consider it a critical feature of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-10-10T23:01:40.997" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="564" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-11T06:25:54.043" Score="1" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This is about basic HTML element styling, not our site's eventual graphic design.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2952/what-does-the-laundry-rpg-change-in-the-brp/3341#3341&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; we can see how list formatting is a little strange: there is a space before a sub-list but no space after the sub-list. This is the opposite of what how we'd expect sub-lists to be formatted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we get this fixed? The below isn't extensively-tested code, but if something like this could be added to the site CSS:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;ul p + ul {&#xA;  margin-top: -1em;&#xA;  margin-bottom: 1em;&#xA;}&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;…then list formatting would look much more natural. This removes the space between a list-item and a sub-list and adds a space after the same sub-list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:50:28.467" Title="Can we request a change to the site CSS?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="565" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-11T13:06:53.530" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Improve your table-top experience!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tagline)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T17:47:34.510" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T17:47:34.510" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T03:29:16.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="566" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-11T14:20:56.413" Score="5" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is this stackExchange site an appropriate place to ask for performance criticisms and reviews?   For example, if I have a campaign log for a recently concluded campaign, can/should I post a link to it and ask people what they would have handled differently, how they would have approached certain problems differently, or ways that they feel I (the GM, in this case) mis-managed the campaign?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="732" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-03-28T01:20:31.330" LastActivityDate="2014-03-28T01:20:31.330" Title="Appropriate Place To Ask For Reviews/Criticisms on Campaign Log / GM Skills?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="566" CreationDate="2010-10-11T16:13:47.670" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;My sense is no, posting an entire campaign log as a single question is outside the scope of the site because that would be a very large, complex discussion with multiple facets and interpretations. A forum, message board, or email conversation is probably a better avenue. (You could definitely ask a question about where to find such a place online.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two other options I can think of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Read through your notes and break it down into a series of specific questions and ask those! If one relies on another, you can include a link to other questions in your questions. As mxyzplk &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/566/appropriate-place-to-ask-for-reviews-criticisms-on-campaign-log-gm-skills/569#569&quot;&gt;says&lt;/a&gt;, please &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; include details from you notes! It makes them more interesting and adds the context that makes for good questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You could ask for or create a room/table on the chat page specifically on the topic of discussing your campaign notes. (I think you need 100 rep to create your own.) I am not sure how you would recruit people to it or get them to 'stop by' but that seems like a possible use of the chat rooms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.rpg.stackexchange.com/rooms/7/campaign-discussion&quot;&gt;General campaign discussion chat room&lt;/a&gt; has been created. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T13:30:03.920" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="568" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="564" CreationDate="2010-10-12T03:32:58.473" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I look at that answer and is seems a little irregular... using only Markdown syntax I get the following, and it doesn't include any of the &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; elements which are creating the space between... did &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/556/matt-sheridan&quot;&gt;@Matt Sheridan&lt;/a&gt; manually enter his own HTML?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Charisma stat&lt;/strong&gt; replaces Appearance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No Magic Points&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Personality Type&lt;/strong&gt; is selected during character creation, adding an additional 20 skill points which are distributed between specific personality-appropriate skills. Personality choices include:&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Bruiser&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leader&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Master (as in craftsman)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Nutter (also starts with an insanity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Slacker&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Thinker&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Laundry Assignment/Training&lt;/strong&gt; is selected during character creation. Grants +10 bonus to several skills. (This is in addition to Call of Cthulhu-style professions.) Choices include:&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Archives&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Computational Demonology&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Contracts and Bindings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Counter-Possession&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Counter-Subversion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Information Technology&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Media Relations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Medical and Psychological&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Plumber (that being what the Laundry call their paramilitary clean-up operatives)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Wealth Levels&lt;/strong&gt; instead of specific savings and income.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Some changes to skill list&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The big mechanical change is apparently a &lt;strong&gt;new magic system&lt;/strong&gt;. It covers traditional/ritual magic, Laundry-style computational magic, and &quot;mental&quot; magic (which is casting spells without external aid). As noted above, Magic Points are out, but casting now requires a skill check with a Sorcery skill.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Combat and investigation are streamlined&lt;/strong&gt;, although I haven't seen anything about exactly how. Also, nice things were said about the sanity system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Special Successes&lt;/strong&gt; (rolling under 1/5 of your skill) replace criticals/impales. On attack rolls, they do double damage. Outside of combat, I think they're just extra good successes without any special rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and the Markdown:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; - **Charisma stat** replaces Appearance&#xA; - **No Magic Points**&#xA; - **Personality Type** is selected during character creation, adding an additional 20 skill points which are distributed between specific personality-appropriate skills. Personality choices include:&#xA;  - Bruiser&#xA;  - Leader&#xA;  - Master (as in craftsman)&#xA;  - Nutter (also starts with an insanity)&#xA;  - Slacker&#xA;  - Thinker&#xA; - **Laundry Assignment/Training** is selected during character creation. Grants +10 bonus to several skills. (This is in addition to Call of Cthulhu-style professions.) Choices include:&#xA;  - Archives&#xA;  - Computational Demonology&#xA;  - Contracts and Bindings&#xA;  - Counter-Possession&#xA;  - Counter-Subversion&#xA;  - Information Technology&#xA;  - Media Relations&#xA;  - Medical and Psychological&#xA;  - Plumber (that being what the Laundry call their paramilitary clean-up operatives)&#xA; - **Wealth Levels** instead of specific savings and income.&#xA; - **Some changes to skill list**&#xA; - The big mechanical change is apparently a **new magic system**. It covers traditional/ritual magic, Laundry-style computational magic, and &quot;mental&quot; magic (which is casting spells without external aid). As noted above, Magic Points are out, but casting now requires a skill check with a Sorcery skill.&#xA; - **Combat and investigation are streamlined**, although I haven't seen anything about exactly how. Also, nice things were said about the sanity system.&#xA; - **Special Successes** (rolling under 1/5 of your skill) replace criticals/impales. On attack rolls, they do double damage. Outside of combat, I think they're just extra good successes without any special rules.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2010-10-12T03:32:58.473" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="566" CreationDate="2010-10-12T04:18:18.827" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that's too general - if you can scope it down to a specific element, then it might make a good question though.  Not &quot;Here's my session summary what did I do wrong,&quot; but &quot;How do you handle players getting frustrated by puzzles?  Let me illustrate with the events of a recent session of mine....&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bits of actual play from real campaigns are EXTREMELY DESIRABLE both in questions and answers - in an answer, I consider those about 1000% more helpful than people spouting off their opinion of how things &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be.  I vote up Q's and A's with examples from real life unstintingly.  So posting a whole summary for general critique is too vague and unfocused, but I encourage you to do the same in a more targeted way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-12T04:18:18.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="570" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-12T14:02:59.837" Score="30" ViewCount="655" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This conversation was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;continued two years later&lt;/a&gt; with a different conclusion based on the experience gleaned from enacting this one.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3373/what-should-i-read-watch-for-information-about-the-1930s-united-states&quot;&gt;What should I read/watch for information about the 1930s United States?&lt;/a&gt;, and I was wondering, is this really appropriate to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It can be answered.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It requires &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; expertise (but not much).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It isn't directly related to RPGs.  It could easily be as valid for writing, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we allow this type of question on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:25:07.603" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:25:07.603" Title="Are campaign research questions on topic? [2010]" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|research|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2016-04-23T17:28:32.280" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="571" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2010-10-12T15:54:29.710" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, here are some points in defence of campaign questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In games like Call of Cthulhu, the setting is often more important than the game mechanics. Getting good locations in, say, 1930s Shanghai is essentially how you plan a scenario. So I'd be wary of, for example, insisting that questions must ask about specific mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answers I've got have been helpful. That's important, I think: asking the question hasn't been worthless.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Where would you draw the line? There's another question about Dogs In The Vineyard in the Holy Land: that question also asks about specific setting elements. There's a question about how to create old-looking newspaper articules: that question isn't directly related to RPGs and could apply to other types of writing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, although I understand the doubts, there is some sense in allowing questions about campaign settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="718" LastEditDate="2010-11-15T01:38:34.793" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T01:38:34.793" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2010-10-12T17:15:07.513" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a tough one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Campaign research and world-building are pretty integral to RPGs. They're definitely something we SHOULD be able to cover in some way. That said, I think that we should definitely be tying the RPG we're targeting into the question in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far as the CW vs. not CW issue is concerned, if the question is looking for a list of resources (Where do I go to... What do I read to...), I would favor the CW format. As someone approaching an already asked question I just don't find a group of massive lists with comments saying &quot;+1 for this&quot; and &quot;+1 for that&quot; to be terribly useful. It's difficult to parse out which aspects of each answer were actually helpful to people. As a voter I also feel constrained, because I feel like I should only be voting for the one best answer instead of up/down voting whenever I see something interesting/not interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, if the question is &quot;How do I build a city for ...&quot;, or &quot;how do I capture the feel of...&quot; I think that non-CW is appropriate. That sort of question is naturally going to lead to more original content, and will somewhat sidestep the massive list of links problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, this has just been my outlook on the matter. The community has been tending away from CW for list questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2010-10-12T17:33:32.457" LastActivityDate="2010-10-12T17:33:32.457" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="573" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-12T20:55:14.660" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because sometimes rulebooks won't have the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;variation:&lt;/strong&gt; Because sometimes rulebooks won't have the answers, and sometimes you won't even have the rulebooks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tagline/elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2010-10-15T23:40:22.540" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T23:40:22.540" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-12T20:55:14.660" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2010-10-13T00:28:25.877" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say that setting questions are perfectly valid, so long as they aren't purely historical. But I'm quite biased because of my gaming/philosophical question set.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T00:28:25.877" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="284" CreationDate="2010-10-13T02:32:50.227" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll say what I just said in the game table chat...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a problem with wargame questions posted here, personally, I think they belong in the same crowd, and the same ballpark, as RPGs. Wargames and RPGs share a common ancestry in game-mechanics and playerbase. Both are a leap of sophistication above board games. Tabletop gaming isn't a big enough industry that we can afford to be too fragmented or too picky. =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In fact, maybe we could broaden the site to Tabletop Gaming to widen our audience slightly? Just an idle thought.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@BrianBallsunStanton:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you differentate wargaming&#xA;  from board gaming? RPG from wargaming?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under most circumstances, I don't ;) There are board games and wargames with RPG elements, and vice versa... the line is exceptionally blurry, which I guess was my point. As a rule of thumb, I would say that any game which clearly doesn't have a roleplaying (acting in-character) element, and doesn't have a complicated enough rules system to warrant needing an online community to ask rules questions about it, probably doesn't belong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, chess clearly doesn't belong. It's a game with a lot of deep strategy worth discussing, but the rules are really simple and well-known.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jovian Chronicles is a game that looks and plays like a board game, but has distinct characters and an RPG theme/element. You are more likely to find answers about it on this site than on a board game enthusiast site, so I think it's reasonable to ask questions about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are creating your own dungeons for HeroQuest, while that may not be &quot;true&quot; RPG material, I think this site would also be a great resource, and I wouldn't really say it's off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T02:32:50.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-10-13T02:37:22.163" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've larped, but am not currently larping. It should be on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T02:37:22.163" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-13T02:37:22.163" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="284" CreationDate="2010-10-13T11:09:46.713" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The bar for what gets considered a role playing game should be deliberately very low.  Consider the 'tabletop strategy game' that got this conversation going in the chatroom: Battletech.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Battletech has a role playing game associated with it, but the primary game engine was intended to just be a miniatures war game. The role playing game is designed with the war game in mind, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we force all pure Battletech (as opposed to purely Battletech RPG) questions to another site, someone like me who enjoys playing Battletech RPG with the full war game integrated into it is forced to use two different sites to talk about the same game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This results in a serious drop off in utility in rpg.stackexchange for those individuals and they are likely to (I would) stop using the site since it's such a hassle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Games in this limbo that I'm aware of: Heavy Gear, Battletech, Jovian Chronicles, Gearkrieg, Chain Mail, and I'm sure there are others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="748" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T11:09:46.713" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="578" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-13T16:04:57.667" Score="3" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/556/how-is-the-site-going-entry-in-area51-comments&quot;&gt;“How is the site going” entry in area51. Comments.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to market the community more, or more effectively. Part of that is asking ourselves what we offer, and what potential users need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do potential users, RPGers, need - both in general, and of us?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And which of those needs to we fulfill? What are circumstances when you'd be able to snap your fingers at someone and go &quot;Oh man! You so need to join rpg.stackexchange.com!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once we can answer this, I think it could be easier to market the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T03:49:29.063" Title="What would an table-top RPGer want/need of a Q&amp;A community?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" FavoriteCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-13T16:05:35.737" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="556" CreationDate="2010-10-13T16:05:17.313" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;@Stefano, I agree with @mxyzplk; there are enough people and enough questions to sustain a Table-Top SPG Q&amp;amp;A site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the problem is the site, and the community; I really feel like @mxyzplk's point #2 is a huge issue, along with a lot of squabbling over the vision and direction of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ie. There is a sufficient user base out there, but we're not an attractive community!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of us have decided on what the site should be like, and are being very aggressive that users cater to that vision... but that vision caters to the legacy of StackExchange sites (ie StackOverflow) and isn't actually catering to the needs to RPG Q&amp;amp;A users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Summary:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We haven't decided who belongs to this community, and yet we're enforcing pretty stern rules about how the community should work. As a result, the community isn't really working out... as such, I propose a new Question! More productive than @Stafano's (no offense @Stafano but your question focuses a lot of &quot;the problem&quot; not &quot;the solution&quot;) and I call it: * drum roll *&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/578/what-would-an-table-top-rpger-want-need-of-a-qa-community&quot;&gt;What would an table-top RPGer want/need of a Q&amp;amp;A community?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T16:05:17.313" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="578" CreationDate="2010-10-13T16:07:29.467" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Table top RPGers want flexibility; that's why we play table top and not computer games. We like rules, but we like bending them and tossing them out the window sometimes for the sake of drama, adventure or even just plain fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T16:07:29.467" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-13T16:07:29.467" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="556" CreationDate="2010-10-13T18:26:29.750" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I challenge the idea that we are not currently an attractive community and that we close too many posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've heard this several times, and I'd like to hear specifics so that they can be properly debated.  Over the last 2 weeks, there are a total of 2 closed questions.  Over the life of the site, 21 in all.  Matched against our 590 total questions, I don't feel that is a very high number.  I counted 11 of the 21 closed posts as getting the full 5 votes.  10 were closed earlier by moderators.  &lt;strong&gt;The community has only closed 10 questions&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this about voting to close and not actual closing?  It takes 5 votes to close.  Are we to discourage all close votes?  For the record, I try to comment to explain any that I make.  Several have generated meta posts to discuss (which I'm totally fine with - I think we need to discuss these things).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My one close vote needs to find 4 others before its worth anything.  Until then, is it something that is chasing anyone away?  Sorry to be argumentative here, but I'm finding it hard to believe that what little close activity I've witnessed has chased anyone away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Big caveat - I was not here for the first couple weeks, from what I've heard it was more rancorous around here then.  My question is more about the present though, have things improved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-10-13T18:26:29.750" CommentCount="7" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-13T18:26:29.750" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="582" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="608" CreationDate="2010-10-14T01:56:04.710" Score="2" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, bug report (hopefully so this post is transfered to the correct site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I paste:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Area of Effect: An area attack creates an area of effect, usually a burst or a wall, within range. An area attack affects certain targets within its area of effect, which has a certain size. An area attack’s area of effect, range, and targets are specified in its power description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And quote it (either through keyboard ctrl-q or through the quote button on chrome I get:&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;its power description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;its power description.&gt; Area of Effect: An area attack creates&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;an area of effect, usually a burst or&#xA;  a wall, within range. An area attack&#xA;  affects certain targets within its&#xA;  area of effect, which has a certain&#xA;  size. An area attack’s area of effect,&#xA;  range, and targets are specified in&#xA;  its power description.its power description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;its power description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is this the correct venue to report such a thing? If not, what is? the question isn't handled in the FAQ section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-13T15:23:29.067" LastActivityDate="2019-11-13T15:23:29.067" Title="Bug report on &quot;quoting&quot; and venue question." Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="583" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-10-14T02:02:31.577" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recommend the mods of the community chatting with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://critical-hits.com/category/critical-hits/chattydm/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ChattyDM&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://critical-hits.com/about-critical-hits/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;critical hits&lt;/a&gt; blogs. I'm sure they'd want to say something about us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T02:02:31.577" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="578" CreationDate="2010-10-14T03:49:29.063" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;A) &lt;em&gt;Get your RPG rules questions answered, fast.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the number one reason why people should come to this site. Plain and simple. There are lots of other ways that users can find value, but this is the one where the Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A site format really shines. A few others that come to mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;B) &lt;em&gt;Get help making your chararacter.&lt;/em&gt; Find out how to calculate the point cost for your super-powers. Get a rules clarification. Hunt down that obscure splat book ability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;C) &lt;em&gt;Get GM advice.&lt;/em&gt; Get help balancing your encounters. Find obscure source material for your campaign. Learn how to be a good referee. Get better at making the game fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D) &lt;em&gt;Connect with other gamers.&lt;/em&gt; Check out the chatroom, see what new game's on the table. Reminisce about old times. Play with the dice bot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's inevitable that this site work best as a GM resource. An RPG player's primary Q&amp;amp;A resource is &quot;Ask the GM&quot; (hey, that could be a good tagline). That may be only a narrow subset of RPG gamers, but for those people, it's a gold mine. =) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T03:49:29.063" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T03:49:29.063" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-14T03:51:24.013" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask The GM: The RPG player's definitive Q&amp;amp;A resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastEditorUserId="188" LastEditDate="2010-10-14T03:56:56.360" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T03:56:56.360" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T03:51:24.013" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="586" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-14T16:01:37.820" Score="4" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2434/are-there-any-systems-that-are-specifically-designed-for-online-real-time-text-pl&quot;&gt;This Thread&lt;/a&gt; I posted a response that really should have been a comment.  However I don't see the option to add a comment to the question.  In fact the only place I have the ability to add comments is to my own posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing something obvious here?  Feel free to slap me if I've made an obvious user error ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="555" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-10-16T07:34:29.393" Title="Confused about &quot;Adding Comments&quot;" Tags="|support|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="587" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="586" CreationDate="2010-10-14T16:11:41.463" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You need 50 reputation to comment on other peoples posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Check out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; for what various levels of reputation will allow you to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T16:11:41.463" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-14T18:01:52.300" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Where helpful game experts hang out. The biggest adventuring party ever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T18:01:52.300" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T18:01:52.300" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-14T18:07:15.350" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The internet equivalent of a shining tower full of wizened sages and interstellar rules-lawyer robots. And we're here to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T18:07:15.350" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T18:07:15.350" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="590" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-14T18:23:06.773" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gain table-top XP!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T18:23:06.773" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T18:23:06.773" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="591" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-14T18:29:57.240" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We accept you Quest(ion)!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(tagline)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T18:29:57.240" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-14T18:29:57.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="592" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-14T18:54:18.197" Score="7" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would questions about &lt;a href=&quot;http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/18723/aye-dark-overlord&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Aye Dark Overlord&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; be on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's certainly role-playing, but it's more method acting than dice rolling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T15:12:41.713" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:12:41.713" Title="Are questions about semi-RPG party games like &quot;Aye Dark Overlord&quot; on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="593" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="592" CreationDate="2010-10-14T19:08:41.943" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't want to exclude story games, diceless games, or non-traditional RPGs do we? I've never played Aye Dark Overlord, but It seems like a card-drive RPG to me, albeit one I have pretty much no interest in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T19:08:41.943" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="592" CreationDate="2010-10-14T23:13:24.883" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that if something has any RP elements in it, it counts. So we take diceless, LARP, stupidly complex board games, war games that allow control of individuals, etc. RPG is such a broad term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-14T23:13:24.883" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="595" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-15T01:19:26.090" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Great Q&amp;amp;A: Quest and Answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T01:19:26.090" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-15T01:19:26.090" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="592" CreationDate="2010-10-15T04:55:30.333" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the site is currently defined, I believe this would be off-topic.  The game, from what I've researched of it, appears to be a card game and does not really fit in with other RPGs.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Particularly, this site's FAQ specifies that it is meant for pen-and-paper tabletop RPGs.  See the quote below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games. If you play or run Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs, then you're in the right place to ask your question! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, unless we want to broaden the scope of our site definition, and update the FAQ accordingly, &quot;Aye, Dark Overlord!&quot; would not fit in here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other, notable differences from commonly-recognized RPGs (specifically D&amp;amp;D, but I'm sure this applies to many others):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No persistent characters/world - Every session is a one-off.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No character creation/generation.  (In part due to bullet #1.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No unique background story, or much room to make one - Every session follows identical theme and play.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No actual &quot;world&quot; involved - Games take place in a single room, the Overlord's lair.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps the &quot;pen-and-paper&quot; stipulation mentioned above may be removed or modified (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/598/197&quot;&gt;this thread&lt;/a&gt; for discussion), but even if that were not an issue, Aye! Dark Overlord still does not IMHO qualify as an RPG for the purposes of this board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-10-18T20:29:58.227" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="597" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="606" CreationDate="2010-10-15T08:22:19.880" Score="7" ViewCount="293" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would it be appropriate and useful for the site for me/someone else to run games via the chat area? I'm thinking fairly slow paced, one for D&amp;amp;D encounters style and one for indie games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, need to clarify my question. Is not &quot;Is anyone interested&quot; But &quot;Is it good for the site to have this?&quot; My default expectation is, considering the audience, I'd be able to find 3-4 people who are interested (or play around with some more... obscure ideas, like group characters) But yes, I'm considering if it's appropriate and good for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2010-10-15T22:52:12.010" LastActivityDate="2010-11-07T05:28:49.820" Title="Viability of a chat based game?" Tags="|discussion|chat|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="598" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-15T12:55:29.800" Score="10" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;The consensus on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/165/are-we-including-larps&quot;&gt;Are we including LARPs?&lt;/a&gt; seems to be &lt;strong&gt;Yes!&lt;/strong&gt;.  Should I update the site help to remove the words &quot;pen and paper&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so how should we distinguish between our RPGs and all the other RPGs (computer, MMO, etc) out there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T16:31:36.830" Title="Should we update the site help to include non &quot;pen and paper&quot; games" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|larp|help-center|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-15T15:05:53.143" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Arguments against:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are less than 5 users who have identified themselves as LARPers on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/168/are-you-a-larper&quot;&gt;Are you a LARPer?&lt;/a&gt; question... but the community is 700+ users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are currently (10/2/2010) a total of only 5 questions that turn up in a search for LARP on the parent site, and none of them are specifically about LARP topics.  Further, there are no questions that use a LARP tag.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This may or may not be due to the current inclusion of the &quot;pen and paper&quot; specification.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rather, the consensus I see on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/165/are-we-including-larps&quot;&gt;Are we including LARPs?&lt;/a&gt; is not so much &quot;yes&quot; as it is &quot;why not?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Including LARPers makes the site less cohesive; there are generally 3 categories of RPGs; pen and paper, live action and computer. Even &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role_playing_game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wikipedia lists those as the 3 categories&lt;/a&gt; and &quot;Everything Except Electronic Media Role Playing&quot; makes for a weak site concept.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ie the inclusion of LARPers undeniably affects the cohesiveness of the site, but only &lt;em&gt;potentially&lt;/em&gt; brings substantial increase in user base.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T20:45:20.217" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-15T15:05:53.143" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="528" CreationDate="2010-10-15T15:09:30.753" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The logo in the upper left of the &lt;strong&gt;All Rooms&lt;/strong&gt; chat landing page&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CGkXy.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;chat landing page link back to parent site&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;now links back to the parent site like I expected it to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T15:09:30.753" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="601" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-15T15:10:22.883" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Arguments in favor:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some of our most prominent and active community members have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/168/are-you-a-larper&quot;&gt;identified themselves as LARPers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;LARPers opens up a new demographic of potential users, which can increase views per day, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/556/how-is-the-site-going-entry-in-area51-comments/&quot;&gt;which is something we need&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;LARPing and pen &amp;amp; paper RPGs have in common that they are much more oriented towards creativity, imagination and personal interaction between players; as such - while there is no term to bind them while excluding computer games - they are cohesive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's a slippery slope. There are games that call themselves RPGs that are very much like LARPs: e.g., Montsegur 1244 and It's Complicated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2010-10-18T18:27:36.233" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-15T15:10:56.033" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="602" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="597" CreationDate="2010-10-15T15:40:34.933" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that it would be great. I would definitely be interested in playing via chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T15:40:34.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-10-15T16:49:11.660" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quests and Answers: What you're seeking is here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(tagline?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T16:49:11.660" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-15T16:49:11.660" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="604" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-15T18:13:34.757" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We could update it to say something like, &quot;for players and gamemasters of all RPGs, from tabletop to live-action to freeform and all shades between.&quot; (And with &quot;no computer RPGs&quot; in the very next section, we don't need to be more restrictive in that sentence.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage being that an explicit call-out like that is a good start to making gamers at the margins of the hobby feel included and welcomed. Otherwise it would be easy for someone to look at a generic &quot;all roleplaying games&quot; statement and wonder whether we really mean it, or whether we're just ignorant of the variety of RPGs and would have excluded LARPs (or whatever) had we known about them when the FAQ was written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-15T18:19:02.343" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T18:19:02.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="605" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="597" CreationDate="2010-10-15T19:30:04.313" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I doubt I would play much, but I would be interested in observing other's exploits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T19:30:04.313" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="597" CreationDate="2010-10-15T19:52:54.170" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, in the few weeks it's been running, I think we've got a good idea of how well (or not well) the &quot;chat-based&quot; game is functioning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the game being anything we could call &quot;chat-based&quot;, I would say it's a hard failure.  Hardly anything aside from &quot;table talk&quot; is actually being done in the chat.  Everything else has either been done from the start in Google Docs, Wave, or other web resources, or has been moved over to those resources out of necessity.  Having a chat room available for expediting conversations when there is more than one person from the group online at once is definitely a bonus.  However, I would say that overall the chat is playing a very minor - and mostly replaceable - part in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, what this question has spawned is (I think) something that can become a great asset to the community.  That is, the idea of an online game for play-testing Answers from the site.  I definitely look forward to seeing what can come out of this exercise in that regard, and would love to see more groups popping up and doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, a reminder to everyone:  Just because there is one play-testing game in progress doesn't mean that it has to be the only one.  Feel free to start your own and recruit some players!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-07T05:28:49.820" LastActivityDate="2010-11-07T05:28:49.820" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="597" CreationDate="2010-10-15T23:06:52.513" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;(This post made community wiki, so people can just edit the [expletive] out of this idea)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming that people think that the game is viable, here's my proposition for the first one, inspired by group chess and the design of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rough intent is to create a game where a number of questions currently pending on the site can be explored. I'll run a very light but crunchy game (PG... won't mention blood). The trick is, once the characters are created, no-one will have ownership of them. Rather, as combat rounds go by once a day, people who respond will decide characters actions, with no one person deciding more than one action. Mods, of course, can have &quot;real&quot; characters if desired, or co-gming spots as necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we can test out various answers from the main forum and provide a way for new people to participate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a horrible idea? My inner GM is screaming at me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-15T23:06:52.513" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-15T23:06:52.513" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="582" CreationDate="2010-10-16T07:35:34.650" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sadly this is a bug in Chrome.. they need to fix it on their end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-10-16T07:35:34.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="609" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-16T10:33:14.097" Score="16" ViewCount="211" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a big crossover, with indie RPGs, between playing, designing and publishing. Can we ask questions about publishing RPGs, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What instructions should I give playtesters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the best way to pitch Kagematsu?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is a &quot;colour profile&quot;, as used by a printer?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm expecting the answer to be no. However, there's some sense in questions like this: they require expertise; they tend towards a fairly specific answer; and they can inform discussions on play. So I wanted to raise the question explicitly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T14:46:12.537" LastActivityDate="2014-11-10T17:13:56.563" Title="Are questions about publishing RPGs on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="610" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="609" CreationDate="2010-10-16T17:28:59.480" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I say absolutely yes.  I think &quot;Role-playing games&quot; is a great restriction and we should stay within it, but given that, author/design/publish/play/GM/whatnot is on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual the rubric should be whether it is a question that could be answered independent of the RPG domain. &quot;How do I set a printer's color profile&quot; is off topic, but questions about printing of RPGs specifically would be on topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the diagram programmers.SE always uses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cUjvQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Analogously, if a question is specific to RPG publishing, as opposed to &quot;everyone&quot; or &quot;everyone trying to publish something,&quot; then it's on topic here.  If it's of general nature to all publishing, it's not. But the RPG ecosystem has grown to where there are definitely RPG-specific venues and techniques for art, design, development, editing, and publishing, and those are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The omission of the &quot;just you&quot; in that diagram may or may not be wise, but that's not the main point of this answer.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-11-10T17:13:56.563" LastActivityDate="2014-11-10T17:13:56.563" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-16T17:35:25.590" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;So IMO the problem with including LARPs is that it's become a pretty large, wide-ranging niche now.  If we were just talking about the old school LARPs that are essentially outgrowths of specific tabletop games, like Cthulhu Live or Vampire Stand Around With Arms Crossed Thing (whatever it's called), I'd be OK with it.  But what about stuff like Amtgard?  Do we want questions on how to best construct your boffer weapons cluttering the site?  There's a growing new segment of &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_reality_game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;alternate reality games (ARGs)&lt;/a&gt; that are LARPish, but often tied to movie marketing schemes etc...  Does content around that really help the vast majority of the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe content like this will make this site LESS desirable to its core audience, tabletop roleplayers - just like adding shared fiction or computer games would.  You go to a site like this to find useful info related to what you do.  If it's a fundamentally different hobby, the crossover is harmful.  Don't do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-16T17:35:25.590" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="612" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="609" CreationDate="2010-10-16T23:10:07.793" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd recommend no, in general. Having worked on an RPG, the questions that arise are far outside the scope of this site, if we take the limiting of LARP and story-based euro-games as outlawed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, questions about theoretical RPG mechanics being about games themselves, even games not published yet, are fine. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-10-16T23:10:07.793" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="613" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-17T04:51:37.413" Score="3" ViewCount="35" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it OK to ask about specific products? Should we provide some guidelines on how to do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I asked a question about the Dwarven Forge product &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/624/how-many-sets-of-dwarven-forge-do-i-need-to-start-with/3326#3326&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, which spawned both a good response from an actual user of the product, as well as some good suggestions on alternatives. However, a similar post later, discussing the Epic Words website, was attacked as being an &quot;advertisement&quot;, so I deleted it. I still have other products I'd like to ask on, but I thought it would be good if we could get a policy / suggestions on how to phrase these kind of questions so that they're not upsetting anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This should probably be community-wiki)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="158" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-10-17T05:09:43.140" Title="How (or whether) to ask about specific products" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="613" CreationDate="2010-10-17T05:09:43.140" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have no problem with folks asking about a specific product.  I don't remember the Epic Words post, it may have predated me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a post smells like an advertisement then I could see objecting to it, but if you are asking for opinions/reviews of a certain product I don't think that would be problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-10-17T05:09:43.140" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="615" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="629" CreationDate="2010-10-18T02:24:46.163" Score="2" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Query for a mod: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3548/how-can-danger-be-effectively-telegraphed-in-dd/3549#3549&quot;&gt;How can DMs effectively telegraph specific dangers in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; is no longer relevant as an answer for the edited question, but as many of the answers are answering the &quot;tone&quot; question rather than the &quot;accurate intel&quot; question, what's the best way to fork the question into a new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-10-21T18:08:11.927" Title="Forking a question, because answers pre and post edit are significantly different." Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="615" CreationDate="2010-10-18T02:39:11.057" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Delete your old answer if you think it's not relevant. Start a new question and ask it differently.  If you really care about the question, that is - it wasn't your question in the first place, so there's not necessarily a reason to start a fork of it unless you really want to know (asking questions for shits and grins is frowned upon, by me at least).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-10-18T12:43:02.267" LastActivityDate="2010-10-18T12:43:02.267" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-18T20:38:07.523" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am all in favor of LARPers of any kind and genre, as long as we protect ourselves from potential deviation into &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.geekologie.com/2009/07/30/pika-1.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; or much, much worse, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.geekologie.com/2009/07/30/pika.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; (although I approve the former for other reasons, but it's beyond the point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, ok. A drift towards cosplay is very unlikely, but just to be clear that the &quot;game&quot; component is fundamental, otherwise is pure cosplay (regardless of the subject). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... Although according to the definition I gave above, I wouldn't know where to classify &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRW1Y5oi9S4&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastActivityDate="2010-10-18T20:38:07.523" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-19T16:58:25.693" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having run and played a LARP for over a decade (NERO Pro, NERO ARGO) LARP issues are distinct from tabletop despite their being a roleplaying game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for this is that Live Action dominates LARP issues. Whether you are a player or running event. It is also much more collaborative especially on event management. The only area of tabletop that comes even close would questions on managing living campaigns. Only because you have to keep track of players and their characters in between sessions and there some overlap in what is considered good scenario design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give a specific example is that because it is Live-Action event directors are much more constrained than tabletop referee. You can't shift things around as a tabletop referee. Yet people succeeded in running fun and interesting events despite this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not in favor of expanding this to include LARPs. If there is enough interest it should go through the Area51 process.  As it is one of the big three of roleplaying (MMORPG, LARP, tabletop) there a chance it will get through the process if promoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-10-19T16:58:25.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2010-10-19T22:58:19.550" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've LARPed in the past but it's been a few years. Still, I like the idea of LARP-related questions here, because it'll give a glimpse into what's currently going on in that area, and while I'm now out of the loop on rules and such, I might have suggestions based on my experiences as to how they should be run, what to bring to one, how to prep for an overnighter, what to expect in general, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="727" LastActivityDate="2010-10-19T22:58:19.550" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-19T22:58:19.550" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="620" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-20T06:56:26.687" Score="1" ViewCount="290" Body="&lt;p&gt;Followup to: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/392/did-c-ross-have-to-manually-re-tag-all-dd-questions-to-dnd&quot;&gt;Did C. Ross have to manually re-tag all [dd] questions to [dnd]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the questions tagged dnd, almost all of the questions either concern generic fantasy RPGs in general or are about specific editions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest that it be synonymed into a tag which represents the genre of fantasy RPGs, which is what I think it signifies. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-10-25T18:17:17.423" Title="[dnd] tag not useful, synonym for Fantasy RPG?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="620" CreationDate="2010-10-20T14:35:32.503" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to agree.  As a questioner, if you say &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; but really anyone playing fantasy could help, you're cutting yourself out of answers.  I've seen people similarly say &quot;D&amp;amp;D4&quot; or even more tightly scoped tags for general questions, which is sad for them because that puts those posts on my ignored list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Word to the wise, as a questioner, only scope down to a specific system and/or version in the tags if you really only want answers from the perspective of that game and version, which means the only people answering you will be the small subset of people on SE that play that game and version. (For comparison, from the stats only about a third of the players on this site play even the largest game, D&amp;amp;D4, or at least ask/respond to questions on that topic.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-20T14:35:32.503" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="620" CreationDate="2010-10-20T15:12:54.223" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I disagree with this. It's true that, for many questions, D&amp;amp;D maps to a specific system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it may not always do. There could be cross-edition questions (about, for example, how to make halflings interesting in D&amp;amp;D, or how D&amp;amp;D has developed across editions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, for the moment, I think it's better to overtag than undertag. If, later, we find that dnd is a useless tag, we can synonym it then. For the moment, let's keep our options open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I think a &quot;fantasy&quot; tag, meaning any fantasy rpg, is a good idea. We could use it alongside the dnd tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastActivityDate="2010-10-20T15:12:54.223" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="598" CreationDate="2010-10-20T16:53:29.437" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's a &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; slipperly slope here. We're not going to be taken over by LARPers, hence there is nothing to slip on if we accept LARP questions. Ditto for questions about indie publishing, Scandinavian home-brew, or any other fringe of the roleplaying community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CRPGs and MMOs, on the other hand, would crush us. Hence, CRPGs and the like represent a slippery cliff, with sharp rocks and stinging hornets at the bottom. Hornets with lasers strapped to their heads, with sharks strapped to the lasers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, we should be expansive as possible concerning fringe RPG elements, because &lt;em&gt;there's no risk and all reward&lt;/em&gt; as a result. The only things that we should be careful about including in the site scope are things that could potentially take over. If something is firmly in the fringe and has no hope of displacing questions about D&amp;amp;D 4e, then it's not going to be a &lt;em&gt;practical&lt;/em&gt; problem, ever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those worried about dilution, consider: if something is very fringe, there are only so many people who will ever view, upvote, or answer those questions, let alone ask them in the first place. They're going to be a blip among the scores of questions about RPGs that you're more interested in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, we need more people. Being exclusive and cutting out fringe roleplayers is likely not going to increase our appeal to less fringe roleplayers, but word getting out that we're exclusive and picky about what kind of RPG we think &quot;belongs&quot; is sure to turn people off. And we want the network effect to work for us, not against us. The flipped situation—we welcome a broad range of RPG players—isn't going to drive off the core traditional roleplayers because it simply won't make much of an apparent difference to them compared to the site as it is now, while it would enhance our image as &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; place to go with any RPG question you have. And we do want that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2010-10-20T22:25:17.390" LastActivityDate="2010-10-20T22:25:17.390" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="624" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="625" CreationDate="2010-10-21T15:15:57.893" Score="8" ViewCount="520" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there's guidelines for asking questions, there should probably be some guidelines for providing answers.  To this end, what do you think we should say?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit:  I've also suggested this item for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/156/what-should-our-faq-contain/628#628&quot;&gt;inclusion in the FAQ&lt;/a&gt;.  Feel free to upvote/comment the answer there, but please continue to use this thread for discussion of exactly what the &quot;answer guidelines&quot; should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-13T03:39:27.117" Title="What kind of answering guidelines should we have?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="624" CreationDate="2010-10-21T15:29:47.003" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's some ideas from me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't post an answer that is the similar to one already posted, unless your answer has significant differences or includes a notable amount of additional detail.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For questions regarding game rules, include references to official content if available.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(I have to remind myself of this one sometimes.) While voting and reputation are a part of the way this community operates, answering is not a competition.  Keep it civil and objective.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Answers to the same question should not refer to one another.  Each answer should be full and complete in itself. If you are building upon another answer, quote it in full in your own answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If a conflicting viewpoint needs to be addressed as part of an answer (see bullet 3 first) the address that viewpoint within your answer.  Do not address other answers representing that viewpoint, or their authors.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Answers &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt;, and in many cases &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be edited.  Any time there can be changes made for clarity, or if you find an error in your own answer, by all means edit it!  Also, bear in mind that some answers may &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to be changed over time due to rules updates, or even edits to the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="554" LastEditDate="2010-11-22T00:00:22.643" LastActivityDate="2010-11-22T00:00:22.643" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-21T17:58:23.990" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="556" CreationDate="2010-10-21T16:21:48.557" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The recent blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/10/when-will-my-site-graduate/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;When Will My Site Graduate?&lt;/a&gt; explains how SOIS is using this data. To summarize, if questions are being answered and the quality of the questions and answers is high, the metrics will determine how long a site stays in beta. They do not intend to close down sites at 90 days due to low traffic. The primary concern is that there will be enough users in the community with the edit and close privileges when the site is public. The reputation requirements for those privileges on a graduated site are 2000 and 3000 respectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, the Area 51 site shows the RPG SE is on pace to have 8 users with 2000+ and 4 users with 3000+ by the 90 days. The recommended numbers are 10 and 5. So in addition to spreading the word to get more users and more questions, we really need to be up voting good answers and questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think that we have any reason to be worried that the RPG SE will not make it out of beta. The question really is &lt;strong&gt;when&lt;/strong&gt; will it graduate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="119" LastActivityDate="2010-10-21T16:21:48.557" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="624" CreationDate="2010-10-21T16:41:53.877" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apart from any other guidance, we should have some specific guidance on how to answer subjective questions, which are usually looking for experience or opinion. We could import wholesale the original &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20101215231144/http://moms4mom.com/back-it-up&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Back It Up&lt;/a&gt;&quot; principle that motivated the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&quot; article:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Subjective answers should be based on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or we could develop something along those lines with language more specific to our context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-06-02T00:25:58.800" LastActivityDate="2016-06-02T00:25:58.800" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-10-21T17:08:46.277" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe that just as the FAQ contains guidelines for asking questions, so also should it include guidelines for answering them.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/624/197&quot;&gt;this thread&lt;/a&gt; for discussion on what those guidelines should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-10-21T17:08:46.277" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-10-21T17:08:46.277" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="629" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="615" CreationDate="2010-10-21T18:08:11.927" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question has been edited so that your given answer is no longer relevant, but you still feel that the question you originally answered was valuable to the community, you could delete your answer to the &quot;old&quot; question and then create and answer your own separate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just my $0.02&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-10-21T18:08:11.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="630" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="631" CreationDate="2010-10-21T23:20:11.967" Score="6" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tried to mark a post CW, but I can't find the check box that used to do that. Has it moved, been removed, or is it just my head that's not on straight?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-08T21:12:19.747" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Where did the Community Wiki option go?" Tags="|support|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="630" CreationDate="2010-10-21T23:26:33.980" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not your head. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Community Wiki option has been removed from general use and is now a mod-only option. If it really needs to be CW, I think the way to do it is to flag it for moderator attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Found the source: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2010-10-14: Questions can no longer be turned community wiki by non-moderators&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;from the in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/59445/150909&quot;&gt;Recent feature changes on Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; list which links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67039/what-can-we-do-to-make-community-wiki-better/67192#67192&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; by &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/17174/waffles&quot;&gt;waffles&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update (just noticed this): You can still mark your &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; &quot;Community Wiki&quot;, which still means &quot;owned by the community&quot; with the same low rep threshold for others to edit (and no rep, only badges, for the poster).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2010-10-22T13:14:58.197" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="632" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="173" CreationDate="2010-10-22T01:02:08.910" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use your own personal &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair&quot;&gt;flair&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;! (follow that link to find your own!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mine:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/8.png&quot; alt=&quot;yhw42&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simple one is at &lt;em&gt;&lt;code&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/&lt;/code&gt; &lt;strong&gt;[userid]&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;code&gt;.png&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/em&gt; but check out the flair page for more options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use it in your signatures and have it link to your user page (which is the default)  or to the site homepage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-10-22T01:02:08.910" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="633" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-23T11:48:44.410" Score="1" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just wrote a tool to roll up NPCs for Dogs in the Vineyard in python.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&#xA;import random&#xA;import math&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;def d(sides):&#xA;    return random.randint(0,sides-1)&#xA;&#xA;def ndx (n, sides):&#xA;    for i in range(n):&#xA;      rolls.append(d(sides))&#xA;    return rolls&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;def getStats():&#xA;    dx = d(10)&#xA;    statBlock = [[4,3,2,2],[4,3,3,2],[4,4,3,2],[5,4,3,2],[5,5,3,2],[4,4,4,3],[5,4,4,3],[5,5,4,3],[6,5,4,3],[6,5,5,4]]&#xA;    random.shuffle(statBlock[dx])&#xA;    return statBlock[dx]&#xA;&#xA;def getTraits():&#xA;    out = []&#xA;    traitBlock = ['2d4','1d4','1d6','1d8','1d10','2d6','2d8','2d10']&#xA;    for i in range(4):&#xA;        out.append(traitBlock[d(8)])&#xA;    return out&#xA;&#xA;def getRelns():&#xA;    out = []&#xA;    relnBlock = ['2d4','1d4','1d6','1d8','1d10','2d6','2d8','2d10','3d6','3d8']&#xA;    for i in range(2):&#xA;        out.append(relnBlock[d(10)])&#xA;    return out&#xA;&#xA;def freeDice():&#xA;    out = []&#xA;    freedice = ['2d4','2d6','4d6','1d8','2d8','1d10']&#xA;    for i in range(3):&#xA;        out.append(freedice[d(6)])&#xA;    return out&#xA;&#xA;def getNPC():&#xA;    stats = []&#xA;    for i in range(6):&#xA;        stats.append(getStats())&#xA;&#xA;    fd= &quot;Free dice: {0}, {1}, {2}&quot;&#xA;    print fd.format(*freeDice())    &#xA;&#xA;    proto = '''&#xA;&#xA;Name: ______________________&#xA;Stats&#xA;  Acuity: {0}d6\tBody: {1}d6&#xA;  Heart: {2}d6\tWill: {3}d6&#xA;Traits&#xA;  ___________ {4}\t___________ {5}&#xA;  ___________ {6}\t___________ {7}&#xA;Relationships&#xA;  Blood 1d6 &#xA;  ___________ {8}&#xA;  ___________ {9}&#xA;&#xA;'''&#xA;&#xA;    for npc in stats:&#xA;        npc.extend(getTraits())&#xA;        npc.extend(getRelns())&#xA;        print proto.format(*npc)&#xA;&#xA;    traits = getTraits()&#xA;    reln = getRelns()&#xA;getNPC()&#xA;&#xA;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be appropriate to post this as part of a &quot;Software tools for DitV&quot; question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-11-08T21:11:48.923" LastActivityDate="2010-12-08T22:45:42.257" Title="Posting tools for RPGs - Dogs in the Vineyard NPC generator" Tags="|discussion|tools|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="634" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="633" CreationDate="2010-10-23T13:08:40.907" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. You aren't answering a question you are offering a product and this is not the right place. This is a Q&amp;amp;A site, which makes us very different than a forum or blog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-23T13:08:40.907" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="635" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="633" CreationDate="2010-10-23T16:48:25.727" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, I have to say that if someone legitimately asks a question about software tools for DitV and you happened to post that it would be OK, but asking the question yourself and posting it or posting it in your question comes across as self-promotion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-10-23T16:48:25.727" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="633" CreationDate="2010-10-23T18:52:51.847" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's another factor to consider: We don't want to encourage people to make up materials to answer questions, we want to encourage people to give authoritative answers. Any forum is a good place to work with people to create stuff whole-cloth—StackExchange aims to be something different than any other forum. To accomplish that we have to avoid rewarding answers (and questions) that invite discussion, creation, debate, etc., which are more suited to forums and don't leverage/highlight what makes this place special.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-10-23T18:52:51.847" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="620" CreationDate="2010-10-25T18:17:17.423" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we have both going on. There are questions that dnd is used as synomous for all fantasy rpgs, but the majority seem to denote a specific style of play I associate with D&amp;amp;D and are not relevant for say, Ars Magica or even WarHammer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-25T18:17:17.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="556" CreationDate="2010-10-26T13:29:55.637" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think if this site is going to survive we need to do better at seeding it with good questions. If you search just about anything that we have a question for rpg.stackexchange is in the top list of answers. So we need more questions to drive more google visits here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People need to set aside their gamer &quot;know-it-allness&quot; and ask questions, lots and lots of good questions. We're not getting enough a day. The key is making sure they are good questions and not just terminology questions that can be easily answered by spending 5 seconds on wizards site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will also help push up reps to maintain site healthiness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-26T13:29:55.637" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="639" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-26T13:38:31.927" Score="3" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example, is there a way to know how close to the editor badge you are?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-10-27T01:21:31.030" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Is there a way to track progress towards the badges" Tags="|discussion|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="640" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="639" CreationDate="2010-10-26T19:35:53.933" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This answer is only looking at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/33/copy-editor&quot;&gt;Copy Editor&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/12/strunk-white&quot;&gt;Strunk &amp;amp; White&lt;/a&gt; badges:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The short answer is &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;, as far as I can tell after searching &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;MSO&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The medium answer is to check out these posts on meta that don't really answer your question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/442/150909&quot;&gt;What kind of edits contribute to the editor badges?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66586/150909&quot;&gt;What are the requirements for the Copy Editor badge?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long answer is also &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For sites in the Stack Exchange network that have graduated, there is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://odata.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;SEDE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (the Stack Exchange Data Explorer). That lets users create queries that can be run against the data and &lt;a href=&quot;http://odata.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/q/5117&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; will get approximate progress on the editor badge for the StackOverflow.com site given a user ID number. But RPG.se is not included in that data yet. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If RPG.se is included in the big (monthly?) &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/19579/150909&quot;&gt;data dump&lt;/a&gt;, you could download that and try to query it yourself... :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-10-26T20:24:55.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="477" CreationDate="2010-10-26T21:26:59.703" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've always thought that a d20 is a really good representation of role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LL4uV.png&quot; alt=&quot;alt text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This image has the 'Don't-need-a-license-'cause-I-drew-it-and-you-can-have-it' license.&#xA;I cranked this out very quickly.  If there is interest in it, I can take the time to do a better version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="590" LastActivityDate="2010-10-26T21:26:59.703" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="254" CreationDate="2010-10-30T12:29:08.290" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We need to be doing a better job (to quote the SO faq) &quot;Don't just rip off other answers - but refer to them and build on them.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Too many of our answers just paraphrase what is said elsewhere with a comment. There is a reason there is a comment button beyond chatter. If your not substantially building, make it a comment and allow the original poster to edit it into their answer making it more complete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you look at successful SEs you do not see this high level of repeating. People need to be better at not restating whats been said, of editing and when necessary deleting their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And not upvoting subsequent answers that don't add value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-30T12:29:08.290" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="643" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-10-31T12:55:46.920" Score="1" ViewCount="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the difference between new-players (5 uses), new-gm(3 uses), newb-advice (1 use) and beginner (1 use)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-31T12:57:09.413" Title="Figuring out tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="644" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="643" CreationDate="2010-10-31T12:57:09.413" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;newb-advice and beginner seem the same. I recommend going with beginner (its a real word for one). new-players and new-gm are seem specific enough to stand on their own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-10-31T12:57:09.413" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="645" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-01T15:09:14.520" Score="0" ViewCount="73" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like bounties, but they don't seem to get used much. How can we encourage people to use them? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Particularly, can we change the options around offering bounties? For example, can we allow people to set lower bounties for questions (25 or 10)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T16:01:54.443" Title="How can we encourage people to use bounties?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="645" CreationDate="2010-11-01T16:20:34.977" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree, bounties are not used enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bounties are a stackExchange wide thing and cannot be changed just for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a really high answer ratio, which may lead to people not wanting/needing bounties.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do think we'll see more bounties once more people get over the all important 1000 rep hurdle. Least thats when I did mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-01T16:20:34.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="647" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="650" CreationDate="2010-11-01T23:09:28.860" Score="22" ViewCount="839" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I'm the only one noticing this, but I've seen several Questions and Answers around here that have been downvoted for no apparent reason.  What's worse, is that no reason for the downvote is given - there's either no comments at all on the item, or there are no negative comments to address the downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way for us to make leaving a comment mandatory for people who wish to downvote a Question or Answer?  Alternately, is there any way for the community (Mods?) to see who is casting these downvotes and privately address abusers of this function?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recognize the general definitions and uses of upvotes/downvotes.  However, there's a noteworthy difference between the effects of the two in this environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To a person receiving an up-vote, it's confirmation that their question or answer is accurate and has value.  This is something they presumably already believed, otherwise they would not have posted in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To someone receiving a down-vote, it suggests that their post is either erroneous or value-less.  This being obviously contrary to the intent of the poster, I believe it's only reasonable and responsible that they be given a justification for the down-vote.  That way, they can be led to research the errors in their post or learn to construct posts that have more value to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-16T12:50:16.007" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Can we require comments on downvotes?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|voting|comments|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="647" CreationDate="2010-11-01T23:13:44.503" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  We just have to toughen up.  No one loves downvotes, but chilling the voting process by making voters open to public hassling is a huge spike in the heart of the democratic process. SE does not expose who voted how and considers it private for this reason. Even mods can't get access to that information, that's how sensitive it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will note that recent sentiment on meta.SE seems to indicate that simply indicating you're downvoting in a comment isn't good or useful (a legit critique is, but discussing voting isn't a good use). &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/138189/is-it-ok-to-indicate-that-i-downvoted-in-a-comment&quot;&gt;Is it OK to indicate that I downvoted in a comment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to encourage people to leave constructive criticism in the wake of a downvote, but that will never be enforced, here or SE-wide, as it's completely contrary to the site philosophy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are serial questionable vote detection tools mods have, but &quot;I downvoted something and didn't comment&quot; isn't a trigger criteria, it goes after large scale serial voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T12:51:16.887" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="645" CreationDate="2010-11-02T00:18:38.687" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know that they need to be encouraged, given that the answer rate is really high.  Bounties don't have value in and of themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are a lot of unanswered questions, then bounties would self-encourage, unless people just don't know they exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T00:18:38.687" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="650" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="647" CreationDate="2010-11-02T00:36:36.807" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;The anonymous nature of the voting process is extremely valuable and integral part of how the site works.  As users, we have 30 votes a day to spend how we wish. There is no rule about what votes mean. In general, votes up mean that I find the answer well written or helpful, but I could vote a post up because it included waffles or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2174/8&quot;&gt;dinosaurs&lt;/a&gt;. I could vote down because I'm having a bad day. By only having 30 votes, the impact that I can have on the general understanding of what a vote means is minimized. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I believe we have a pretty well agreed upon definition that &lt;em&gt;upvote&lt;/em&gt; means useful or helpful post and &lt;em&gt;downvote&lt;/em&gt; means incorrect or irrelevant posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The system is strong enough and large enough to withstand votes outside that definition.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There are checks and balances, though.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/03/important-reputation-rule-changes/&quot;&gt;Downvotes are rate limited&lt;/a&gt; after your 300th vote so you can't downvote more than 1/3 of the time (a 2:1 up to down ratio). There are also anti-irregularity scripts that run on a regular basis to find voting anomalies (such as sock puppets and revenge votes) and remove them. There is also the community that responds by upvoting good questions and answers, even if they receive the occasional unexplained down vote. Finally, if someone shows a pattern that negatively affects the community, they can and will be banned by the mods or the team. If someone &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; the target of explicit malicious behavior, mods or the team should be notified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blog posts regarding vote fraud and &quot;revenge voting patterns&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/12/vote-fraud-and-you/&quot;&gt;Vote Fraud and You&lt;/a&gt; -- description of anti-irregularity scripts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/more-voting-anomalies/&quot;&gt;More Voting Anomalies&lt;/a&gt; -- more discussion of voting fraud&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/03/important-reputation-rule-changes/&quot;&gt;Important Reputation Rule Changes&lt;/a&gt; -- outlines why question votes are worth less than answer votes and rate limiting of down votes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related conversations that have occurred on &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackoverflow.com&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/2451/150909&quot;&gt;Why do you cast downvotes on answers?&lt;/a&gt; -- downvote discussion and list of reasons used by some for their downvotes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/135/150909&quot;&gt;Encouraging people to explain down-votes&lt;/a&gt; -- Jeff's answer describes the &quot;add a comment&quot; reminder that occurs for all users under 2000 rep when they downvote&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/35393/150909&quot;&gt;Should everyone have to defend a down-vote?&lt;/a&gt; -- more discussion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T13:27:54.117" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="645" CreationDate="2010-11-02T16:01:54.443" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;You shouldn't really overly &quot;encourage&quot; the &lt;em&gt;routine&lt;/em&gt; use of bounties across the board. Bounties are designed to be used as a last resort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are supposed to start by putting the effort into getting the question answered yourself. If you don't get an immediate answer, you are expected to improve, clarify, and document your continued efforts. These activities bump your question to give it more exposure. That's how the site is &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When those efforts fail, bounties offer an escalation of that process by offering your &quot;reward&quot; and placing your question on the &lt;code&gt;featured&lt;/code&gt; page. But you don't want to create an environment where bounties are routinely used to get questions answered. You don't want to create the perception that you can only get good answers to your questions if you &quot;paid&quot; someone to answer it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's obviously not the case on this site. &lt;strong&gt;A high percentage of questions answered &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; resorting to bounties.&lt;/strong&gt; That's why you don't see the feature used that much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2010-11-02T16:01:54.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="652" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="254" CreationDate="2010-11-03T13:53:06.610" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is a general problem with the Stack Exchange system. You can’t comment (or do hardly anything) until you get some rep. Just about the only way for a new user to get rep is by posting an answer. So, for a new user, your choice is either to post a duplicate answer or do nothing. If you take the “high road”, that can make it really hard to find an unanswered question you have an answer for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, once you get a little rep, that problem goes away. So, this isn’t a general answer to the question, but I think it is a significant one, and one that only gets worse as the site grows. Most of the questions you have will have already been asked and most of the answers you can give will have already been given. It took me forever to get just a little rep on Stack Overflow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="462" LastActivityDate="2010-11-03T13:53:06.610" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="647" CreationDate="2010-11-03T17:41:26.053" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;(this is more of an answer to other answers; it's too long to be a comment)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true that forcing comments on down-votes or close votes kind of breaks the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also true that we don't vote enough here on rpg.stackexchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But voting isn't a serious threat to the survival of the site, while views per day and the ratio of 'avid' users to 'total users' &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt;, (&lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;see our area 51 page&lt;/a&gt;) and down-voting/closing can be interpreted the wrong way and lead to users abandoning the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment-less down votes and close votes are OK for regular users but for new users I really think they're a no-no; we can't risk turning away users by giving them a bad first impression of the site/community. It's important to acknowledge that - even though &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/62373/better-explanation-when-account-is-blocked/62414#comment-148877&quot;&gt;StackOverflow can turn away users based on early impressions&lt;/a&gt; because it has sufficient throughput to recover without them - &lt;strong&gt;we can't turn away users because we won't recover&lt;/strong&gt;: we have 15 more days of beta, low views per day, and those who were our biggest power users have drifted away: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/24/bryant&quot;&gt;@Bryant&lt;/a&gt; hasn't been online since mid-October; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/113?tab=activity&quot;&gt;@Stephano Borini&lt;/a&gt; is about in the same boat; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/155/numenetics&quot;&gt;@Numenetics&lt;/a&gt; hasn't been around since &lt;em&gt;early&lt;/em&gt; October. (I don't meant to target or pick on these users.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to avoid voting and closing behavior like there was on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3652/how-do-i-get-past-the-wotc-profile-setup-wizard-closed&quot;&gt;How can I get past the WotC Profile Setup Wizard&lt;/a&gt;. The question was asked by a (at the time) new user with 1 rep. It had something like 2 or 3 close votes, an answer to &quot;Contact WotC customer service with help on this one&quot; and &lt;em&gt;and not a single comment&lt;/em&gt;. No one was trying to reach out and make sure that user understood that they were welcome in the community, it was just &lt;em&gt;their question&lt;/em&gt; which was not in the right place. All it took were a few comments to make sure that new user became &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/810/f-randall-farmer&quot;&gt;an active participant in the community&lt;/a&gt;. Maybe they would have either way, but without the comments the response to that question was &quot;go somewhere else&quot; (Wizards support) and &quot;this doesn't belong here&quot; (closed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, this is normally fine, but we're kind of desperate for users and activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why aren't more or us investing energy into that sort of &lt;strong&gt;welcoming&lt;/strong&gt; community energy instead of fretting over voting trends?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-11-03T17:57:55.033" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="254" CreationDate="2010-11-04T00:19:22.357" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;To paraphrase a proverb about treasure and trash: One user's duplicate answer is another user's differently-nuanced answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So just because someone thinks an answer is duplicate, doesn't mean it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;. Often I've seen two &lt;em&gt;similar&lt;/em&gt; answers called out as duplicates, but I will see an important difference that makes me vote for one and not the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is a good thing!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to choose the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer, not just the one that is close enough but that's not quite perfect. To be able to do that, we have to allow people to post what might look &lt;em&gt;to us&lt;/em&gt; to be duplicate answers. Let the voters sort them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-11-04T00:19:22.357" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="655" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-04T16:55:47.263" Score="1" ViewCount="35" Body="&lt;p&gt;What does the tab &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/becmi&quot;&gt;becmi&lt;/a&gt; cover? Is this any different from all the other D&amp;amp;D tags we have, can it be folded, synonymed, gotten rid of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-11-05T06:38:41.823" Title="What does the tab becmi cover?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2010-11-04T17:43:40.703" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed several meta tags, that I can't see being useful.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounters&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;encounters&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;3d-space&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;character&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/line-of-sight&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;line-of-sight&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can someone please tell me how these might ever be used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-04T17:43:40.703" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-11-04T17:43:40.703" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="658" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="655" CreationDate="2010-11-05T06:38:41.823" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a distinct edition of early D&amp;amp;D. The rules are sufficiently different from BX or &lt;em&gt;Rule Cyclopedia&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D, and the historical role it played was distinct enough, that it can't really be folded into anything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-11-05T06:38:41.823" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="659" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-05T16:29:54.647" Score="0" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/192/should-we-worry-about-spoilers&quot;&gt;Should we worry about spoilers?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a continuation/consoldation of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/192/should-we-worry-about-spoilers&quot;&gt;Should we worry about spoilers?&lt;/a&gt;, which has 2 answer tied for the highest voted spot. They can be summed up by &quot;The Whole Site is a Spoiler Zone&quot; versus &quot;Use a Spoiler Tag.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have 4 questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spoiler&quot;&gt;spoiler&lt;/a&gt;, but spoiler is effectively a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/411/what-are-the-meta-tags&quot;&gt;meta-tag&lt;/a&gt;. Could we get a definitive yay-nay on the matter? Perhaps from a moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-11-05T16:40:29.720" Title="What was the final verdict on spoilers?" Tags="|discussion|tags|spoilers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2010-11-06T15:07:51.940" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="660" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-06T16:14:32.683" Score="3" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;I find many of our tag wikis to be recursive, to say the least, especially for the more difficult ones. What should a tag wiki include to be as useful as possible?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-06T16:14:32.683" Title="How to write Tag Wikis" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="661" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="662" CreationDate="2010-11-08T12:10:54.260" Score="3" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;Title kind of says it all.  I notice that no gold badges have been awarded yet, and with some of the serious power users on this site, that seemed kind of strange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="590" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T18:48:07.597" Title="Can gold badges be awarded during a site's beta period?" Tags="|discussion|badges|beta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="661" CreationDate="2010-11-08T19:35:01.267" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gold badges are hard to get, and I'd be surprised if anyone had got one by now. Where silver badges just take a &lt;em&gt;volume&lt;/em&gt; of something, gold badges tend to take something &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the easiest to get is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/28/electorate&quot;&gt;Electorate&lt;/a&gt;, but that requires 600 question-votes (that doesn't including votes on answers) and that 25% or greater total votes are question-votes. The fastest way to get that is to vote on exactly 600 questions (up or down) and never vote on answers, which would take 20 days of very strange voting behaviour given the 30-vote daily cap. That's much harder to get than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/18/civic-duty&quot;&gt;Civic Duty&lt;/a&gt;, which just takes voting a lot in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/33/copy-editor&quot;&gt;Copy Editor&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/23/fanatic&quot;&gt;Fanatic&lt;/a&gt; are probably the next easiest to get. Jeremiah and I only just got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/12/strunk-white&quot;&gt;Strunk &amp;amp; White&lt;/a&gt;, and we're the most prolific copyeditors on the site so far. We're a long way from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/33/copy-editor&quot;&gt;Copy Editor&lt;/a&gt;, which takes six times the edits. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/23/fanatic&quot;&gt;Fanatic&lt;/a&gt; takes 100 days, which is slightly longer than the beta period. That's probably the first gold badge that anyone will get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we had higher traffic, one of the &quot;Great&quot; and similar badges might be the easiest to get, but for now it's unlikely anyone will get 100 upvotes or 10,000 views on a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-11-08T19:35:01.267" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="661" CreationDate="2010-11-08T19:40:54.587" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's more than likely possible that the gold badges can be awarded, but no one has met the extraordinarily high requirements to earn one yet here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of this could be a matter of the site's relatively small size, user base, or activity level.  The gold badges, by nature, require that the site they're earned from be fairly large and active.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, the earnable gold badges are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Copy Editor:  Edit 600 entries&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Electorate:  Vote on 600 questions, and at least 25% of your total votes are on questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Famous Question:  Ask a question that gathers 10,000 views.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fanatic:  Visit the site daily for 100 consecutive days.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Great Answer:  Have an answer score 100 or more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Great Question:  Have a question score 100 or more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Legendary:  Hit the daily reputation cap on 150 days.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Populist:  Have an answer out-score an accepted answer with a score of 10 or more, by more than double.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Publicist:  Share a link to a question, which is visited by 1,000 unique IPs in 5 days.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reversal:  Provide an answer with +20 score to a question of -5 score.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stellar Question:  Have a question favorited by 100 users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unsung Hero:  Have more than 10 zero-score accepted answers, which is more than 25% of your total answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compare the above, to the following site stats (11/8/2010):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;81 days in beta&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Eliminates:  Fanatic, Legendary&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;767 questions&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Limits:  Copy Editor, Electorate&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;126 avid users&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Severely Limits:  Great Answer, Great Question, Legendary, Stellar Question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;908 total users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;4.4 Answer/Question Ratio&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;467 visits/day&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Severely Limits:  Famous Question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Eliminates:  Publicist&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it's no surprise at all that nobody here has earned a Gold badge as of yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT:&lt;/strong&gt; It is now more apparent that it is indeed possible to get a Gold badge during a site's Beta period.  We now have two members who have earned the &quot;Fanatic&quot; badge!  Congratulations to SevenSidedDie and yhw42!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="197" LastEditDate="2010-12-03T18:48:07.597" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T18:48:07.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="537" CreationDate="2010-11-09T02:59:46.850" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since the &lt;a href=&quot;http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/update-on-google-wave.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;reported death of Google Wave&lt;/a&gt;, my group has been looking for a replacement for play-by-post. We might end up hosting &lt;a href=&quot;http://googlewavedev.blogspot.com/2010/09/wave-open-source-next-steps-wave-in-box.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wave in a Box&lt;/a&gt; somewhere, but certainly I would consider running games on the RPG Stack Exchange chat. Keeping it PG might be a challenge, though, since my games tend to delve into &quot;violence, horror and adult themes.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Dice Service bot in the Game Table would meet my needs, but whether the community would actually &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; me creating a chat room (or two) for my own play-by-post game is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/597/viability-of-a-chat-based-game&quot;&gt;separate issue&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="737" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2010-11-09T02:59:46.850" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="665" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="666" CreationDate="2010-11-11T16:29:12.653" Score="4" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay, the title to this doesn't quite well define the question but it's as close as I could get it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was going to post a question in the parent site, until stopped to realize that it is probably &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; stretching the realm of relevancy.  So, I'm throwing it here to be judged and will drop it on the parent if it passes muster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Are there any MUDs based on D&amp;amp;D 4th Edition?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it.  I'm not looking to ask a question about any particular MUD, or how to run or play a MUD.  I just want to ask if there are any that are specifically designed to emulate my favorite tabletop system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would almost dare say this is similar enough to another fairly well-received (if only lukewarmly welcomed) question I've posted, regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4251/197&quot;&gt;tabletop RPGs featured in non-gaming media&lt;/a&gt;, that it should be accepted.  But, I'm leaving it up here for the community to decide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts, anyone?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-11T16:39:51.927" Title="Can we ask about MUDs, based on specific Tabletop systems?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="665" CreationDate="2010-11-11T16:39:33.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It opens the door to all kinds of things &lt;em&gt;based on&lt;/em&gt; specific tabletop systems. Are there any coloring books based on D&amp;amp;D? (yes)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I don't know if this community is the right one to answer those questions. Do we have the expertise?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you use as an example (&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4251/what-non-gaming-media-can-provide-outsiders-a-good-example-of-tabletop-rpgs&quot;&gt;What non-gaming media can provide outsiders a good example of tabletop RPGs?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;) is actually focused on the tabletop RPG experience. It asks, how do we better bring outsiders into that experience? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The MUD question is actually focused on a non-tabletop RPG experience. It asks, how do we find a particular kind of computer game (tangentially related to our tabletop RPG experience)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-11-11T16:39:33.893" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="665" CreationDate="2010-11-11T16:39:51.927" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. For the same reason we don't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284/are-questions-about-role-playing-derivative-board-games-off-topic&quot;&gt;discuss board games based on RPGs&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-11-11T16:39:51.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="398" CreationDate="2010-11-11T16:49:06.283" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are metadata that describe (not proscribe) a question. They are for all the reasons you list in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A person answering a question may look at the question's tags to determine the questioner's intent. For example, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4375/what-does-a-troglodyte-actually-smell-like&quot;&gt;What does a Troglodyte actually smell like?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; was tagged [adnd1.0] by the questioner. That signals answerers to give answers that make sense to players of Advanced D&amp;amp;D (1st Edition) and not, say, D&amp;amp;D 4E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking a question and need answers appropriate to MERP, tag your question [merp]. For additional clarity, also mention MERP in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, the metadata is information that can be used however people want. Since people will likely use it when answering a question, add tags that limit answers in a useful way. Since people will likely use it when searching for questions and answers, add tags that help people find the right material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-11-11T16:49:06.283" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="669" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="672" CreationDate="2010-11-12T09:12:08.367" Score="7" ViewCount="423" Body="&lt;p&gt;dnd4e, dnd 4.0, 4e should all be expanded to &quot;Dungeons and Dragons 4e&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki could include instructions on how to search the community wiki for hints, links to the compendium, and the rules updates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3.5 should have the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DitV should be expanded to Dogs in the Vineyard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are no reasons for having &quot;abbreviated tags&quot; when no-one searches from online services to dnd4.0&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit:&#xA;I've made a few questions with &quot;Dungeons-and-Dragons-4e&quot; in them. How do people like the look versus dnd4.0? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2011-01-26T05:45:57.660" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Proposed tag synonyms for [dnd4.0]" Tags="|discussion|support|tags|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="670" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2010-11-12T14:01:42.130" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is some logic to this, but there is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13270/how-many-words-can-a-tag-contain/13274#13274&quot;&gt;25 character limit&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;Dungeons-and-Dragons-4.0&lt;/code&gt;: 24&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;Dungeons-and-Dragons-3.5&lt;/code&gt;: 24&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;Dogs-in-the-vineyard&lt;/code&gt;: 20&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So those should all be ok.  It would probably help people find our site in google.  I did &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;q=dnd4.0&amp;amp;fp=53894057c0dc71cc&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a search&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;code&gt;dnd4.0&lt;/code&gt; (the term we use to tag), and we were &lt;strong&gt;the second result!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we should probably change the tags for anything under 25 characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Realize that this doesn't mean having to type in the full tag names.  We can create a synonym so that our current names work, and are automatically translated into the full form.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Advice from the developers &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/70060/how-do-tags-influence-the-stackexchanges-seo&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-11-19T19:08:45.877" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2010-11-12T15:11:26.533" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For now, I think we should keep the tags as they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are good abbreviations. It's obvious what they mean. And the shortness has an advantage: it keeps lists of tags short. For example, my lists of interesting/ignored tags are long already. If we use the longer versions, lists of tags will rapidly become unmanageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Admittedly, the longer versions are more searchable. But they bring problems, too. I think the problems outweigh the advantage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="718" LastEditDate="2010-11-12T16:28:54.143" LastActivityDate="2010-11-12T16:28:54.143" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2010-11-12T18:53:56.507" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is what I think the tags should be, as well as their implied hierarchies:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd]&lt;/code&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[odnd]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-bx]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-becmi]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[adnd]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[adnd-2e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-3e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-3.5e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-4e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-essentials]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few advantages to tagging things like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, they just look right. These are the abbreviations people already use. (Well, almost—less the ampersand, for technical reasons.) They don't look like unfamiliar jargon—they're &lt;em&gt;familiar&lt;/em&gt; jargon. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, they're no harder to discover than the existing scheme. People starting to tag something &quot;dnd&quot; will find everything except rules-cyclopedia, and if they're asking about that they're going to start typing &quot;Rules…&quot; anyway. Or we retag them, which is what us experienced people are for. For the same reason, all D&amp;amp;D tags can be added to a user's ignored or interesting tags using wildcards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, people playing, say, AD&amp;amp;D 1st edition &lt;em&gt;do not care&lt;/em&gt; if the tags are consistent with D&amp;amp;D 3.x naming conventions. In fact, they might be annoyed if they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some notes on choices:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;code&gt;[adnd]&lt;/code&gt; doesn't need a &quot;1&quot; qualifier. 1) Almost all AD&amp;amp;D 1e questions are relevant to AD&amp;amp;D 2nd edition since it's not significantly different in most regards. 2) If people say &quot;AD&amp;amp;D&quot; without qualifying, they &lt;em&gt;mean&lt;/em&gt; 1st edition. 3) If people mean 2nd edition specifically, they invariably say 2nd edition. Hence &lt;code&gt;[adnd]&lt;/code&gt; is a better tag than &lt;code&gt;[adnd1]&lt;/code&gt; would be, is more natural, and doesn't cover anything it shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't have tags for Basic D&amp;amp;D (aka BX), or for the Rules Cyclopedia yet. I'm not sure we need them now, but maybe it's just because we haven't got any BD&amp;amp;D players here yet. &lt;code&gt;[becmi]&lt;/code&gt; might cover Rules Cyclopedia fine, so be might never need a tag for it. We might want to think of how to tag Basic D&amp;amp;D when it comes up though: &lt;code&gt;[basic-dnd]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[bx-dnd]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[bdnd]&lt;/code&gt;? I like &lt;code&gt;[bx-dnd]&lt;/code&gt; myself. (&lt;strong&gt;EDIT&lt;/strong&gt;: Correction, we do have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bx-dnd&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;[bx-dnd]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt; tag. I'd forgotten that I edited that into a question. In any case, I'm not wedded to that exact tag, and since I don't play BX I'm not as familiar with the preferred abbreviation.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think Essentials doesn't need an edition qualifier. There are almost twice the Google hits for &quot;D&amp;amp;D Essentials&quot; than there are for &quot;D&amp;amp;D 4e Essentials&quot;. Both are used, but &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &quot;4e&quot; is far more common. For our purposes, &lt;code&gt;[dnd-essentials]&lt;/code&gt; is just as easy to discover when typing as &lt;code&gt;[dnd-4e-essentials]&lt;/code&gt; would be. There's never been another edition of Essentials, and if there is such thing as &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e Essentials&quot; at some point, we can cross that bridge with a one-time retag or synonym just fine when we come to it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's no &quot;parent&quot; tag for 3e tags. There are few uses of the 3.0 tag right now as it is, that I just don't think it matters. Everyone uses 3.5 to mean 3e generically now, only saying &quot;3.0&quot; if they specifically mean that edition. This is much like the AD&amp;amp;D/AD&amp;amp;D 2e situation, but the dominant, default-assumption edition is chronologically reversed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we really wanted to, it could be &lt;code&gt;[dnd-4]&lt;/code&gt; instead, since that's another common form. Either way is easily discoverable and I don't care either way&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-01-12T02:18:04.900" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2010-11-12T20:06:31.477" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not understanding @SevenSidedDie's point about the tag wiki being enough for Google.  (Granted, I'm not a SEO expert).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I picked a recent D&amp;amp;D4e question from this site that didn't explicitly mention the version of the game in the post and asked queried google to see if I could find it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4235/can-a-warlock-when-leveling-up-take-hexblade-powers-feats-etc&quot;&gt;Can a Warlock take Hexblade powers/feats/etc?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google results (rank/total pages returned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;95/3910 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4th+edition+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;prmd=fd&amp;amp;ei=kJvdTI3iKIa0lQeL9ZnRDA&amp;amp;start=80&amp;amp;sa=N&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4th edition warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;12/6200 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4e+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;prmd=fd&amp;amp;ei=xJvdTNnhDMaqlAeKjf3RDQ&amp;amp;start=10&amp;amp;sa=N&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4e warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;12/17500 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;ei=9ZvdTJz2PMPflge47tHQDA&amp;amp;start=10&amp;amp;sa=N&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4 warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;11/3780 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#q=dnd+4+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;ei=gJzdTOOvJYSglAeBt7ziDQ&amp;amp;start=10&amp;amp;sa=N&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd 4 warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;9/6680 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dungeons+%26+dragons+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;cp=35&amp;amp;qe=ZHVuZ2VvbnMgJiBkcmFnb25zIHdhcmxvY2sgaGV4YmxhZGU&amp;amp;qesig=mq9B8Mh2nW2y9dh7tVlE-w&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dungeons+%26+dragons+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;7/164 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#q=dnd4+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;ei=QZzdTNTQO4SclgeFr7T-DA&amp;amp;start=0&amp;amp;sa=N&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd4 warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;6/589 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;q=d%26d4e+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d&amp;amp;d4e warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1/9 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;biw=1440&amp;amp;bih=839&amp;amp;q=dnd4.0+warlock+hexblade&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=m1&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;fp=c44a0488c6e3ef3f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd4.0 warlock hexblade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our tag wiki leads off with the phrase - &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 4th Edition&quot;.  I think until recently that was the full content of the wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does not appear to be having the desired effect.  We are &quot;below the fold&quot; for the queries using &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@AceCalhoon suggested comparing to a question that uses Dungeons and Dragons more prominently.  I picked -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4170/is-the-use-of-action-points-permitted-in-a-surprise-round&quot;&gt;Is the use of Action Points permitted in a surprise round?&lt;/a&gt; as it is of similar vintage (1 day older to be precise) yet still does not have any form of D&amp;amp;D in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google results (rank/total pages returned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3/26400 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4th+edition+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=30&amp;amp;qe=ZHVuZ2VvbnMgJiBkcmFnb25zIDR0aCBlZGl0aW9uIGFjdGlvbiBzdXJwcmlzZQ&amp;amp;qesig=ZbdPrNgiave9avZHaVPLaQ&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dungeons+%26+dragons+4th+edition+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4th edition action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2/221000 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4e+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=21&amp;amp;qe=ZHVuZ2VvbnMgJiBkcmFnb25zIDRlIGFjdGlvbiBzdXJwcmlzZQ&amp;amp;qesig=1MfbnlwrJKUCX7AApNPimA&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dungeons+%26+dragons+4e+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4e action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;4/314000 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;q=dungeons%20%26%20dragons%20action%20surprise&amp;amp;aq=&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dungeons+%26+dragons+action+point+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&amp;amp;pf=p&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;4/231000 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dungeons+%26+dragons+4+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=36&amp;amp;qe=ZHVuZ2VvbnMgJiBkcmFnb25zIDQgYWN0aW9uIHN1cnByaXNl&amp;amp;qesig=wljp0XBakjUpBS5lZWGsXg&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dungeons+%26+dragons+4+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dungeons &amp;amp; dragons 4 action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3/1950000 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dnd+4+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=3&amp;amp;qe=ZG5kIDQgYWN0aW9uIHN1cnByaXNl&amp;amp;qesig=k02WVSnVo2wvJ2tnjzXzyA&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dnd+4+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd 4 action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1/3730 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;q=dnd4+action+surprise&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd4 action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;82/10600 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=d%26d4e+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=5&amp;amp;qe=ZCZkNGUgYWN0aW9uIHN1cnByaXNl&amp;amp;qesig=n6uEOfU2_jj1snPp6cyeYQ&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=d%26d4e+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d&amp;amp;d4e action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1/6890 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/#hl=en&amp;amp;expIds=17050,25657,26486,26488,26492,26496,26504,27028,27100,27102,27137,27404,27601&amp;amp;sugexp=ldymls&amp;amp;xhr=t&amp;amp;q=dnd4.0+action+surprise&amp;amp;cp=6&amp;amp;qe=ZG5kNC4wIGFjdGlvbiBzdXJwcmlzZQ&amp;amp;qesig=sRRiyUBvTvjs3eXB5HFN9Q&amp;amp;pkc=AFgZ2tm06TRshcDXNuxW074PQyppv7C_MH3cgAVInstvBrBudoUKa1FPg8TUu9IG-SW-Ec436SWZfNerTblB7Nf1YQhpGK3LxQ&amp;amp;pf=p&amp;amp;sclient=psy&amp;amp;safe=off&amp;amp;aq=f&amp;amp;aqi=&amp;amp;aql=&amp;amp;oq=dnd4.0+action+surprise&amp;amp;gs_rfai=&amp;amp;pbx=1&amp;amp;fp=fbb9e82777227709&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd4.0 action surprise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Higher placements almost universally across the board out of many more total pages returned.&lt;/strong&gt;  Again, I'm no SEO expert, but I believe this shows that with the right terms, RPGSE can place very high in the google ranks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we need to prominently use the words &quot;Dungeons&quot; and &quot;Dragons&quot; on every page that has a question relating to any form of the game.  I believe the easiest way to do that is to use them in the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T05:36:42.663" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="674" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2010-11-12T21:57:00.170" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;A great many games have historical issues which arise from game play, and affect play, but are not actually rules issues. These should be allowed, albeit kept focused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pendragon sites are riddled with historical questions, usually answered quickly by the more knowledgeable, and in some cases, answered by the rules-lawyers with a &quot;History says X, but Greg changed it in book Y&quot; and occasionally with a &quot;History says A, Bead and Nennius Say B, White says W, and Mallory says M, and Greg said Z.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Call of Cthulu also has lots of historical references that can make or break adventures... like the recent question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;At what point in the 20th century did automobiles and telephones become ubiquitous?&lt;/a&gt;... its highly useful for not just CoC, but also anyone running any 20th C historical or fantasy-historical game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, one could simply bar all setting questions, but I'm opposed to doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T04:55:30.763" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="675" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="691" CreationDate="2010-11-12T23:37:46.733" Score="6" ViewCount="299" Body="&lt;p&gt;The discussion in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/campaign-research-questions&quot;&gt;Campaign Research Questions&lt;/a&gt; suggests that campaign research questions should be allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why did &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;At what point in the 20th Century did automobiles and telephones become ubiquitous&lt;/a&gt; close? It didn't seem to be off-topic. Clearly, people didn't like it, but that's a reason to downvote it, not close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, it sets a difficult precedent if we close threads we don't like, whether or not they fit the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-07-27T15:31:16.917" Title="Why did the automobiles and telephones thread close?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|closing-questions|research|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-13T00:03:28.537" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because, I think, theory discussion in meta is way less important than how things really play out on the real site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that meta thread, everyone was trying to be all inclusive and &quot;sure, why not ask that.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then when on the real site, you're faced with a question that is a miscellaneous trivia question with no specific link to RPGs, everyone closed it because it was obviously off topic.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My conclusion is that &quot;oh sure, ask research questions on any old topic, if you're going to use it in an RPG&quot;  was an ill advised decision in that other thread, and the reality of the situation carried the day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll go add a &quot;no&quot; answer to the meta question for completeness.  Discussion and voting should really happen there if a wider scope than &quot;what was wrong with this specific question&quot; is desired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-11-15T03:12:51.167" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T03:12:51.167" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2010-11-13T00:06:04.197" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, such questions are off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory, they seem like they might be a good idea because the real world (or a variant on it) is the setting for many RPGs.  But in reality, when the community is faced with questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;At what point in the 20th century did automobiles and telephones become ubiquitous?&lt;/a&gt; people immediately vote to close them, because it seems to them that it is super off topic.  In reality &quot;yes&quot; to this question means any random question on any random topic is OK because it might be used in an RPG.  If you were to ask how bicycles work on SO &quot;because you want to write an app about them&quot; you'd get closed tout suite too. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if they are about RPG specific settings, that's different.  &quot;What is Bissel's relationship with Ketites&quot; for World of Greyhawk deals with a question space that is specifically inside RPG settings so that's OK.  But real-world-history questions aren't.  Is that a double standard?  Yes.  But it keeps the site in topic, where the topic is RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T03:16:54.690" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="678" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-13T00:22:08.820" Score="5" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why should people take the time to complete their profiles?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-17T22:30:01.293" Title="Why should I complete my profile?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="679" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="678" CreationDate="2010-11-13T00:25:20.703" Score="3" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It shows you are part of the community and are here to stay. Its a base level of commitment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You get a badge&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You get enough reputation to actually do stuff like vote which is a core aspect of the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You get to have your own picture if you want.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T00:25:20.703" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="678" CreationDate="2010-11-13T00:25:32.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Vanity and/or building a sense of knowing the other community members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T00:25:32.370" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-13T03:21:33.057" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I didn't not like the question; that is to say I liked it. If I'd not liked it, I'd have down voted, which I did not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point is you down vote what you don't like; you close that which is out of place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Personally, I never see any reason to down vote a question, only answers, but that's another discussion entirely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't on topic. It's just off-topic trivia. The heart of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How late in the 20th Century in the U.S. did telephones and automobiles become ubiquitous?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... is off topic, even if you prefix it with an RPG-related explanation. If it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; on-topic, then one can argue that this is also on-topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My players have killed the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretan_Bull&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Cretan Bull&lt;/a&gt; and now want to wear its stomachs as hats! How many stomachs do bulls have? Will there be enough stomachs for all of them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... or:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As part of my game the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoreanism&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Pythagoreans&lt;/a&gt; have found magical secrets in the digits of irrational numbers! What's the 100th digit of pi?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... or:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The player's have traveled back in time to Smarch 32nd 1963! What was the weather like on that day?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry, but the intro doesn't make these questions on-topic: they're still just trivia which are not related to RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How to make it on topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could have asked for settings and source books which catered to the player's needs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could have described the setting the GM envisioned, and how it could be tweaked to accommodate that player's needs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could have asked how to deal with such a demanding player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could have asked how to include cars and phones in a game while preserving... whatever the player misses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T03:21:33.057" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="682" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-13T16:46:24.953" Score="7" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;The stack exchange sites are for asking and answering questions. But I'd like to find a non-abusive way of using them to promote my work (&lt;a href=&quot;http://dyslexic-st.blogspot.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;character sheets for 3.5 and Pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;) that I honestly believe will be of use to people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose I could ask a fake question in order to answer it, but that seems like a dangerous way to operate. I certainly don't want to start abusing the system - like all of you, I want this site to be a success. And there's no money for advertising - they're free and open source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a valid way, or should I let it go?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="169" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:59:02.067" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:59:02.067" Title="Promoting my work on this site" Tags="|discussion|self-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="682" CreationDate="2010-11-13T17:13:17.333" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;First off, make sure it's a good product. &lt;code&gt;:)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it applies directly to the question, include it. If people agree with you, they'll vote it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add links to your stuff from your user profile page. When people become impressed with your answers, especially in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd3.5&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tagged questions, they'll check it out. I would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;List the site in your material. Then, when your users show up to ask their questions, answer them. That's the best way to make it work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And promote the site as much as you can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't create fake questions. Don't force your products into your answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;May I promote products I am affiliated with here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be careful&lt;/strong&gt;, because the community frowns on overt self-promotion and tends to vote it down and flag it as spam. Post good, relevant answers, and if they happen to be about your product, so be it. However, you must disclose your affiliation with the product in your answers. Also, if a huge percentage of your posts include a mention of your product, you're clearly here for the wrong reasons. Our advertising rates are quite reasonable; contact our ad sales team for details. We also offer free vote-based advertising for open source projects. &#xA;  &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-11-13T17:20:22.817" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="684" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="687" CreationDate="2010-11-14T04:54:12.687" Score="7" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems that most times I look at the site, about half of the front page is made up of old questions with no activity other than a recent edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, this doesn't seem right - I would hope to see new and interesting questions, not a slew of old posts raised from the dead to fix a tag or some punctuation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T21:57:18.847" Title="Are old posts getting edited too much?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="685" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="684" CreationDate="2010-11-14T06:33:31.127" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I personally like the churn. I occasionally answer old questions because of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-11-14T06:33:31.127" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="684" CreationDate="2010-11-14T12:18:49.827" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;An important part of SE is that old answers are the benchmark, the ones we point people to again and again. As we grow larger and have more volume we will see the same question again and again. Instead of answering those questions we should be pointing people to the old one, closing the new one, and go on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus it behooves us to ensure the old question and all answers are as streamlined as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-14T12:18:49.827" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="687" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="684" CreationDate="2010-11-14T15:47:21.940" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is absolutely desirable.  The point of a SE is not to be a discussion forum, but to be a knowledge base.  As new viewpoints come to the site, they should be continually added to old questions, which means edits and answers and comments and votes and whatever other activity.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Working on old questions doesn't stop anyone from submitting new ones.  Use a different view if you don't want to see old questions - I usually stay on the &quot;newest&quot; tab which accomplishes that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-14T15:47:21.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="688" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-14T20:33:15.570" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's a mistake to rule out this kind of question, especially when stated as extremely as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/campaign-research-questions/677#677&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; that we can ask questions about the World of Greyhawk, but not about the real world. This seems guaranteed to drive a wedge between one kind of gamer and another, for fear that the site will be plagued by hordes of questions about historical trivia, which I think is unlikely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a modest proposal. What if all such questions should be rephrased in terms of where the questioner can find useful resources to answer such a question? It would make the answers far more generally useful, and acknowledges that for the real world, the answer is generally 'out there' somewhere? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's in line with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134/online-resource-for-names-by-culture&quot;&gt;Online resource for names by culture&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1359/good-resources-for-travel-times&quot;&gt;Good resources for travel times?&lt;/a&gt;, both of which seem to be regarded as acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-11-14T20:33:15.570" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="689" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-15T04:01:27.833" Score="10" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;p&gt;This one's for @Graham; I'd like to hear some explanations of what Cthulu and other games like it need of the fringe-off-topic/too-localized &quot;trivia&quot; questions we discussed in the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/675/why-did-the-automobiles-and-telephones-thread-close&quot;&gt;Why did the automobiles and telephones thread close?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/598/should-we-update-the-faq-to-include-non-pen-and-paper-games&quot;&gt;we're open to including LARP&lt;/a&gt; we should at least try and figure out if and how we're boxing out valid needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So @Graham and anyone else who feels that these questions are necessary (@Jmstar) I invite you to answer this question and explain what games need this kind of information and how, more intricately: please focus on your needs, not on insisting the questions are appropriate; focusing on the need opens up the possibility of alternative solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the reality is, it's true, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/675/why-did-the-automobiles-and-telephones-thread-close#comment-1179&quot;&gt;I'm a DnD gamer and don't understand&lt;/a&gt;. But I'd like to :) and we're still in Beta, so what the hell!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I hope any and all of those users can step up and argue the needs they have which these questions reflect, so that we - as a community - can figure out how to accommodate those needs, or whether the whole thing's out of scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-07-25T23:58:24.633" Title="What do games like Cthulhu require of Campaign Research Questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|research|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-15T13:12:55.243" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wonder why my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1616/where-can-i-find-good-ship-plans&quot;&gt;Where can I find good ship plans?&lt;/a&gt; wasn't summarily closed. That was very productive for me but seems to hit all the &quot;real world trivia&quot; buttons that closed Graham's thread. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had to guess, I'd say that it is entirely arbitrary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="387" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T13:12:55.243" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="692" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="689" CreationDate="2010-11-15T14:02:43.887" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Really? OK. If you want an exhaustive list of roleplaying games that would benefit from real-world history I would say &lt;em&gt;all of them&lt;/em&gt;. History is an endless pageant of what we as a species tend to get up to and it is always fascinating. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Verisimilitude is fun and cool and a big part of many games that take place within a historical milieu. It's cool to be able to say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;So we're at the foot of the Pioniatowski bridge, up to our ankles in late summer Vistula mud, and we can see the shabby pavilion of the Warsaw zoo just across the river...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;There are three telephones in this town - one in the Mayor's office, one in the hotel, and one in Old Man Potter's mansion. He's the guy with the Ford Model T, the only car in the county, and he wheels around the dirt roads scaring the horses...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Details like this make the game. Fixing your players in the time and place isn't just fun, it's sort of your &lt;em&gt;job&lt;/em&gt; as Keeper in Call of Cthulhu, which is all about atmosphere. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To say these sort of questions are randomly off topic is very disheartening. The notion that &quot;what is the western-most point in Faerun?&quot; is appropriate here but &quot;What is the western-most point in Alaska?&quot; isn't makes no sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="387" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T14:02:43.887" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="689" CreationDate="2010-11-15T14:13:03.140" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Historical information is useful, in Cthulhu scenarios, for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is an expectation that Cthulhu scenarios are historically accurate. One of the pleasure of playing Cthulhu is playing in a detailed historical world.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cthulhu scenarios often weave monsters into real historical events.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's needed, then, is the answer to specific historical questions. The question &quot;At what point in the 20th Century did automobiles and telephones become ubiquitous?&quot; is actually a good example. Imagine I'm running a chase scene, in 1920s New York, I need to know:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are the Investigators likely to have access to a vehicle?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If so, is it a car or a horse-drawn carriage?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are the streets jammed with traffic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there traffic lights? Will the Investigators need to jump a red light?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those details do two things: they add flavour and they make a mechanical difference to how the chase plays out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For comparison, imagine running a chase scene in 1890s London. There, the Investigators will be navigating horses through crowds of people and flocks of animals. The details matter, both for flavour and for mechanics.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note, too, that details like this are surprisingly hard to find. You can find, from Wikipedia, when the Model T was introduced, but not when cars became &lt;em&gt;ubiquitous&lt;/em&gt;. So questions like this are immensely useful. As I've mentioned before, the structure of this site supports them extremely well, pushing informed answers to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="718" LastEditDate="2010-11-15T14:26:24.217" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T14:26:24.217" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="689" CreationDate="2010-11-15T16:12:04.083" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;These questions are as valuable as those about Faerun or the Yuan-ti. The key is in asking the question in a way that gives an answer (and it needs to be definitive) that can be used at the gaming table. We are, after all, a site dedicated to giving answers that can be used. This is not a discussion forum, it is a Q&amp;amp;A site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad question: &quot;When did automobiles become prevalent?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The good version: &quot;How would my 1920s call of Cthulu investigators react to distances and what is the best way to ensure that distance is a limiting factor.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers are tellingly different here. For the first I get some dates, maybe some social history. Ideally for the second I'll get some meaty gaming bit. Or at least thats how I would hope to answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad question: &quot;When do cell phones become prevalent?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The good version: &quot;For a 1980s conspiracy game what sort of cell phones are available and how should we handle their presence?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What the other answers are missing, and why I chose to give another rather than commenting is that need to write questions in ways that are game specific and give usable answers. I would be as quick to downvote a question asking about the western-most point of Faerun. We had one early on about the stars and I thought that one was borderline as well. Because it didn't ask for, or receive, answers that could then be turned into good gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorDisplayName="anon186" LastEditDate="2010-11-15T16:35:08.103" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T16:35:08.103" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-15T17:30:50.147" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why I voted to close it&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I voted to close that thread. My feeling is that questions here have to pertain specifically to RPG material. That can be game rules, game history, game design, game organization, game research, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we also have to draw a line. Some stuff is off-topic, right? In fact, most questions one could ask are off-topic. Just because someone needs an answer for their game doesn't make it a game-related question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I might be interested in &lt;a href=&quot;https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/2821/teflon-tape-recommendations-when-wrapping-pipe-threads&quot;&gt;teflon tape recommendations when wrapping pipe threads&lt;/a&gt; for my Apocalypse World game, but RPG SE isn't the best place to get that answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, @jmstar's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1616/where-can-i-find-good-ship-plans&quot;&gt;Where Can I Find Good Ship Plans?&lt;/a&gt; question was asked 10 weeks ago, whereas @Jadasc's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;At what point in the 20th Century did automobiles and telephones become ubiquitous?&lt;/a&gt; question is new. I think this SE site is finding its way and a lot has changed in ten weeks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Relevancy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my rules for determining a question's relevancy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the question pertain primarily to RPGs?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do the majority of people reading this question care about the answer? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does RPG StackExchange likely have the best expertise to answer the question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are RPG SE members interested in the question and answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these has a simple, cut-and-dried answer and there will always be judgment calls and corner cases. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For #2, I think tons of gamers will find lists of ship plans useful. I think far fewer gamers need to know precisely when certain technology became commonplace. Still, that's a terribly slippery slope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For #3, gamers don't have any special expertise for answering history questions (Jadasc's or Jason's, for that matter). Really, both questions should probably be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For #4, Jason's question got some traction: 6 upvotes and 6-7 answers (one with 6 upvotes). Jadasc's question got 1 upvote and two answers (with 3 and 2 upvotes). And no one voted to close Jason's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think, as gamers, we'd really like some firm rules here, but we're better off letting the community find its way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T19:53:59.787" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="684" CreationDate="2010-11-15T17:45:13.877" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;For my part, I only find the churn annoying when it looks like someone is looking for something—&lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt;—that they can edit to work towards the Strunk &amp;amp; White or Copy Editor badges. The edits that make me suspicious are the ones that just move the quality of the question &quot;sideways&quot; so it says the same thing differently instead of &quot;up&quot; so that it's clearer/punchier/more interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, I don't mind the churn. I sometimes wish there was a tab for &quot;active questions that aren't just being copyedited&quot;, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T17:45:13.877" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="697" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-15T17:55:15.877" Score="2" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;By fairly large margins we've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/192/should-we-worry-about-spoilers&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt; we are a spoiler zone, that its expected and normal. As we've had a little edit thrash today I think we need to better define what that means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T18:50:08.220" Title="How should spoilers be demarcated" Tags="|discussion|questions|spoilers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="698" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="697" CreationDate="2010-11-15T17:55:56.237" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions should be demarcated by the spoiler tag. There does not need to be anything more in the body to set them aside. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do not want to see spoilers, add the tag to your ignored tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="anon186" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T17:55:56.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="689" CreationDate="2010-11-15T18:04:05.713" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, I like both Graham and Jason's answers, but I'm going to have a go at my own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing remotely&#xA;mysterious going on here. Games set&#xA;in Greyhawk need Greyhawk setting&#xA;information; games set in 15th&#xA;century France need information on&#xA;15th century France.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cthulhu roleplayers want&#xA;historically accurate information for&#xA;their games, which they can then&#xA;abuse as they see fit. As Jason says, it's about atmosphere and versimilitude&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've recently finished a large-scale editorial&#xA;overhaul of Cthulhu by Gaslight, 3rd&#xA;edition, most of which consisted of&#xA;checking on the historical&#xA;accuracy/plausibility of the&#xA;information. The biggest single&#xA;complaint about the preceding&#xA;editions was that there was too much&#xA;about Holmes and other fictional&#xA;settings, and not enough historical&#xA;background. If gamers are willing to&#xA;pay for such information and it forms&#xA;a significant part of Chaosium's&#xA;business, I don't see how it can&#xA;possibly be out of the scope of RPG&#xA;SE.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As noted, there are plenty of&#xA;other games that share this need. I&#xA;know it's early days for the site,&#xA;but making people who play such games&#xA;effectively second-class citizens&#xA;strikes me as a serious mistake.&#xA;Shouldn't all games be considered&#xA;equal in the eyes of SE?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's arguably a &lt;em&gt;stronger&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;need for such background questions&#xA;for historical gamers than for&#xA;fantasy gamers. Worlds such as Middle&#xA;Earth, Greyhawk, Jorune, Tekumel are&#xA;all highly detailed settings, but at&#xA;least there is a known limit to&#xA;canon: certain questions just don't&#xA;have answers, or at least you have to&#xA;make your own. In historical gaming,&#xA;this is very difficult to ascertain.&#xA;Asking such questions of a large and&#xA;knowledgeable group is often the only&#xA;way to discover that your question in&#xA;fact does not have a known answer.&#xA;Maybe this is what worries people? I&#xA;don't think anything will ever match&#xA;the deluge of D&amp;amp;D-related questions,&#xA;however.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;trivia&quot; problem should&#xA;not arise. Examples given earlier&#xA;such as &quot;what's the 100th digit of&#xA;pi&quot; hardly seem likely to come up as&#xA;essential to someone's campaign prep.&#xA;And if they do, they will be voted&#xA;down as ridiculous. And there are&#xA;equally silly questions to be asked&#xA;in fantasy settings, as should be&#xA;obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, if a question is so narrow&#xA;that no-one is ever likely to ask it&#xA;again, the asker should be requested&#xA;to broaden it into a question about&#xA;resources for answering questions of&#xA;this type, while retaining the&#xA;specific issue in the wording below&#xA;for clarity. If they are unwilling to&#xA;do this, then I would vote to close&#xA;the question. From what I've seen so&#xA;far, specific questions often attract&#xA;answers in terms of resources anyway,&#xA;which is a Good Thing IMO&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The questioner should not&#xA;identify the game they are playing in&#xA;the question, only in the tags&#xA;applied (site style). But they should&#xA;make it crystal clear in the wording&#xA;that follows what game they are&#xA;playing, what the actual problem is&#xA;that they are trying to solve, and&#xA;what sort of answers would be&#xA;helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A &quot;history&quot; or &quot;historical&quot;&#xA;tag might well be useful. I don't&#xA;know enough about tagging on this&#xA;site yet, however. Or Jeremiah's&#xA;suggestion of &quot;verisimilitude&quot; would&#xA;also do nicely.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you don't run games that&#xA;require historical input, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; do&#xA;not vote to close a question simply&#xA;because you don't understand it.&#xA;Leave a comment asking the questioner&#xA;to clarify why they want to know&#xA;this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T18:04:05.713" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="700" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="689" CreationDate="2010-11-15T18:40:07.967" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Consider what sort of questions a Stack Exchange would gather if it were the &lt;strong&gt;Cthulhu Mythos Roleplaying Games Stack Exchange&lt;/strong&gt;. There would be mechanical questions about Call and Trail alongside historical questions about &lt;a href=&quot;http://gamecryer.com/2009/09/06/madness-in-london-town/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;how long it takes to get from London's passenger docks to the British Museum by taxi&lt;/a&gt; and when the telephone became ubiquitous in America.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point is that all of those would be on-topic for that SE. And if such historical questions would be on-topic for an SE about Cthulhu mythos–based games, it follows that such questions are on-topic for a SE that is about &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; roleplaying games, including those Cthulhu mythos–based games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's the heuristic I'm proposing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a question is on-topic for a specific roleplaying game, it's on-topic for the Roleplaying Game Stack Exchange.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know you're probably worried about questions getting bad answers because you're worried we're not expert enough in those sorts of questions. I suggest this isn't worth worrying about. For example, few people are expert enough in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4059/using-the-company-rules-in-reign-for-a-wilderness-keep&quot;&gt;how &lt;em&gt;Reign&lt;/em&gt;'s Company rules work&lt;/a&gt; to give good answers, too. That doesn't make it off-topic—it just makes it special-interest. Rest assured that the people who are interested in a game will be expert in the things that are relevant to playing that game, whether it's the nuances of social life in Vichy France or the &lt;a href=&quot;http://greyhawkgrognard.blogspot.com/2009/04/in-praise-of-polearms.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;names of obscure pole-arms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is too hard to answer because it requires expertise we don't have, the system will take care of that &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; us. We don't need to police such questions. What will happen is that it will be low-voted, and hang around for months (or years). Then someone who is &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the expert the OP was looking for will discover it, answer it brilliantly, and then the question will have served its purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, stop worrying and learn to love the voting system. Give the system a chance to do what it does best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T18:40:07.967" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="697" CreationDate="2010-11-15T18:50:08.220" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the OP wishes to place a spoiler warning then I have no issues with that. As spoilers are an issue in the various forms of internet discussion we should go with the original poster discretion as to whether they use tags or explicitly state it at the beginning of the question. The more explicit the warning the better the chance that somebody who care about spoilers will understand what is going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T18:50:08.220" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="702" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="703" CreationDate="2010-11-15T19:39:53.760" Score="4" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question that prompted this thought was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/742/what-adventures-are-there-out-there-that-would-fit-in-this-campaign&quot;&gt;What adventures are there out there that would fit in this campaign?&lt;/a&gt; It's a perfectly reasonable question content-wise: the problem (if there is a problem) is that many people could repeat exactly this question (conceivably even with the same tags) and yet mean something entirely different by it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a problem that necessitates rewording of the question to something more specific, or can the SE system handle this kind of redundancy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is a problem, are there any specific circumstances under which it would be OK, or is it always a bad thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T18:28:29.157" Title="Do questions need to have a unique phrasing?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="703" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="702" CreationDate="2010-11-15T19:50:30.270" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think questions should have unique phrasing.  At this time, I'm not willing to say that is an absolute and there wouldn't be exceptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case, I think the lead to the second paragraph is much better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can anyone recommend some low-level (1-4), site-based old school D&amp;amp;D adventures?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Modify it a bit based on the next few sentences and I'd be really happy with it.  Something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can anyone recommend a low-level, site-based Cimmerian themed adventure?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;old school D&amp;amp;D&quot; can be conveyed through tags or the text of the question.  I'm sure others could do a much better job of rewording it that my suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also think that a lot of questions here could stand to have their titles reworded for clarity and exactness.  I am far from perfect, one of my questions was recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/3500/revisions&quot;&gt;retitled&lt;/a&gt; to make it better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T21:17:05.220" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-15T21:31:37.677" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A request for a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My opinion on the matter largely coincides with @AdamDray so I won't bore you with repeating his fine arguments.  Also, like him, I am not upset that the question is reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;strong&gt;I am asking for the question and any like it to be tagged with a game&lt;/strong&gt;.  Or at least agree on a general purpose tag.  Something that I can use to easily ignore such questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current 3 tags on it are all general purpose&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;campaign-development&lt;/code&gt; - I'm definitely interested in this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;settings&lt;/code&gt; - This tag doesn't mean much to me, but it appears to cover a wide variety of questions, some that I don't wish to miss. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;history&lt;/code&gt; - This tag clearly means different things to different people.  It's covering a wide variety of topics.  Some I am very interested in.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T21:31:37.677" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="706" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="707" CreationDate="2010-11-15T22:23:56.497" Score="3" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast has stated that D&amp;amp;D Essentials is to be treated as just another set of rulebooks for 4.0 - not a new or at all separate system of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, is the D&amp;amp;D-Essentials tag really appropriate or needed?  Should we start tagging every post for the rulebook from which they originate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T03:07:13.957" Title="Is the dnd-essentials tag really appropriate/necessary?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="707" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="706" CreationDate="2010-11-15T22:34:27.337" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it is appropriate &lt;strong&gt;right now&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now folks that I've talked to are examining the books and determining how they are going to be used in their own groups (if at all).  Having the questions explicitly tagged is helpful I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In several months (certainly much less than a year) it should become apparent whether Wizards is speaking the truth to us.  I think Essentials will be strongly integrated into the new online tools which will make it harder for everyone to ignore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I think my answer to this question will change in 3-6 months.  For now, I think the tag is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-11-15T22:34:27.337" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="708" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-16T00:01:47.140" Score="3" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;I and a sufficient number of others voted to close the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;cars and phones&lt;/a&gt; question. Then a sufficient number of people voted to re-open it. Now we're discussing it here in Meta. Cool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that: &lt;strong&gt;What is the procedure for further determining the status of the question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that I cannot vote again to close it. My first vote counts and that's it. Do other people who haven't voted on the issue continue to vote to close it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ETA: Also, what's the etiquette? Should people avoid voting to open or close it until we hash things out here in Meta or do we encourage people to keep voting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="What is the process for re-closing a re-opened question?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|process|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="708" CreationDate="2010-11-16T02:04:37.690" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Other people can vote to close if they feel it's merited.  Eventually everyone who cares will have voted to close or reopen and the issue will be decided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is worth putting a comment on it driving people to a relevant meta discussion (in this case, we've made three, which isn't going to do anyone any favors). But there's no embargo rule that you must wait for that.  In the end, &quot;do you click on the little button&quot; is up to the individual user - if there was a rule to not do something while there was a discussion on meta, then there would be functionality for that.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relevant links:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/34815/give-diamond-moderators-the-ability-to-partially-lock-a-post/34819#34819&quot;&gt;Give Diamond Moderators the Ability to Partially Lock a Post&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53188/reopened-questions-shouldnt-be-able-to-be-closed-again&quot;&gt;Reopened questions shouldn&amp;#39;t be able to be closed again&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-12-22T21:59:40.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="711" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="706" CreationDate="2010-11-16T02:09:45.377" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a different tag is appropriate.  Essentials and 4e are &quot;compatible&quot; but that's not the same as being the same game.  And note how &lt;strong&gt;they don't say 4th edition on the cover anywhere&lt;/strong&gt; - someone who gets into the game just via Essentials may or may not know it's &quot;Fourth Edition!&quot;  It's a whole new set of books, whole new set of base classes, etc.  It's &quot;very similar,&quot; in the same way that I don't see a lot of difference between 3.5e and 3e (and Pathfinder), but if a question applies to both, tag it with both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-11-16T03:07:13.957" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T03:07:13.957" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="712" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-16T04:17:51.217" Score="11" ViewCount="225" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I was curiously following-up on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/556/how-is-the-site-going-entry-in-area51-comments&quot;&gt;“How is the site going” entry in area51. Comments.&lt;/a&gt; question, and I checked out our &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;Area 51 entry&lt;/a&gt;, to discover that - where it once counted down the days to the end of our private beta - it now says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This site is nearing the end of its beta and will be launching very soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and we no longer have any &quot;worrying&quot; stats; worst we have are an &quot;okay&quot; number of questions and an &quot;okay&quot; number of views per day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How awesome is that?!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, what does all this mean? (in the past, I've been a shining example of &quot;users who don't really understand what's going on&quot; and I'm sure there are others)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are we soon to have our own site design, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://cooking.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Seasoned Advice&lt;/a&gt;? If so, activity should flock towards the questions which will be relevant:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/108/site-logo-design&quot;&gt;Site logo design?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/553/write-an-elevator-pitch-tagline&quot;&gt;Write an Elevator Pitch / Tagline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/162/look-and-feel-of-final-site-design&quot;&gt;Look and feel of final site design&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:33:38.033" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T22:51:21.700" Title="&quot;The Site Will Be Launching Very Soon&quot;! How awesome is THAT!?" Tags="|discussion|site-status|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-11-16T04:23:47.703" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a dice-tower of assorted dice toppling could be more fun. But we don't have that many pixels to choose from. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T04:23:47.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="712" CreationDate="2010-11-16T04:26:00.680" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, once we graduate, and all the metrics indicate that we will, we'll get a design and everything.  Although there may be a backlog; there's one person doing it for all the sites and they'll be queued in order of &quot;excellence&quot;. So don't expect a new design to happen immediately (note that everyone on area51, if past 90 days, is still listed as &quot;passed beta and launching soon&quot; but don't have designs yet, and there's like 9 ahead of us.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Robert Cartiano wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Folks have been asking when their site&#xA;  is going to graduate. Here is how that&#xA;  is decided... Looking at Area 51&#xA;  (progress tab), any site past 90 days&#xA;  goes into a pool of sites to graduate.&#xA;  Jin is able to design about 1 to 1-1/2&#xA;  sites per week so we have to come up&#xA;  with an order to launch those sites...&#xA;  Based on this blog post When Will My&#xA;  Site Graduate?, the sites with enough&#xA;  2000 and 3000-rep users go first. The&#xA;  order after that is determined by the&#xA;  Area 51 statistics: The most&#xA;  Excellent, Okay, and Worrying, in that&#xA;  order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure they'll take our thoughts on meta into account so do feel free and put in design/tagline ideas (do not expect them to be held to them though - my expectation is that professional graphic design will win over design-by-committee when necessary).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2010-11-16T22:51:21.700" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T22:51:21.700" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="712" CreationDate="2010-11-16T14:45:23.853" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;One other thing to note is that most users' privileges will be reduced, as Beta site privileges are given out at much lower rep levels than full sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T14:45:23.853" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="716" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="675" CreationDate="2010-11-16T15:25:43.977" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing that I think a lot of the detractors are missing here, is a sense of scale. This isn't a &quot;small&quot; question, that could easily be hand-waved in a campaign setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question isn't covering a minor detail which will be relevant for less than an adventure (if it's relevant at all), like the brand of a fragment of duct tape on a piece of pipe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also isn't covering a one-time loot issue, that any good GM will balance out anyway like how many magic hats drop from a specific legendary beast, or an easily Google-able value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't covering something that players will neither know, nor care about like the weather their grandparents saw on a specific date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The existence of reliable cars and/or ubiquitous telephones fundamentally changes a campaign setting. It changes the stories you can tell, and how you have to stage them. It is fundamentally important to how the world works, and is something that you must know in order to use the game world effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, watch a few horror movies set in the present day and pay attention to the cell phones. Almost every movie will explicitly deal with the phones in some way: They get forgotten, jammed, are out of service, are confiscated, get lost, etc. The stories that the horror movies are attempting to tell are fundamentally incompatible with the existence of commodity cell phones, so they need to be excluded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cars and phones fall into the same camp. And while it's easy to exclude a technology for a single movie, it's much harder to exclude it from an ongoing RPG campaign, which is often intended to cover weeks or months of in-game time and offers the protagonists much greater freedom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may be a line to be drawn for questions about the real world. This question is well above it. The real world is, effectively, an open source shared campaign setting for a broad variety of games. Why should a game like Call of Cthulu or 7th Sea get less benefit out of this site than any other?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the only problem I had with that particular question was that it should have been two. The advent of cars and telephones don't really have a lot to do with each other in an RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T15:25:43.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="717" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="718" CreationDate="2010-11-16T17:08:36.493" Score="5" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is the opposite problem of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/40/too-many-tags-for-dd&quot;&gt;Too many tags for d&amp;amp;d&lt;/a&gt;. The specific issue which prompts it is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history&quot;&gt;[history]&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is currently being used to tag both questions about the history of RPGs and questions about historical settings. If this is not viewed as a problem, by all means tell me so. But assuming it is, what is the SE way to resolve it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, it's pretty easy to suggest ways of making these tags more specific. But I'm asking about the general approach to this issue - I would have thought other sites have run into this before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T17:19:41.633" Title="How do we resolve the problem of tags with multiple meanings?" Tags="|discussion|tags|process|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="717" CreationDate="2010-11-16T17:19:41.633" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd remove the [history] tag and add [history-research] and [history-of-gaming]. That way, when someone types in &quot;history&quot;, they will get prompted with the two canonical tags and can choose properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T17:19:41.633" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="192" CreationDate="2010-11-16T17:27:34.090" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should definitely be a spoiler-permitted zone.  However, we should be careful to warn people of where spoilers are particularly present, or seek to hide them from general viewing entirely.  Measures we can take to this end should include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spoiler warning in the site FAQ.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spoiler tag on affected Questions.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This maybe should include Questions for which there are Answers containing spoilers, as the Answers themselves cannot be tagged.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Explicit spoiler warnings in Question/Answer posts containing spoilers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Support of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-a-spoiler-tag-that-makes-hidden-until-you-click-text&quot;&gt;Feature Request&lt;/a&gt; to hide spoilers.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This feature is marked as STATUS-PLANNED! :-)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use of spoiler-hiding features once they are available.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This should include retroactive editing of existing posts, for site-wide consistency.   - This can be helped along with consistent use of the spoiler tag, until the feature is implemented.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T17:27:34.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="192" CreationDate="2010-11-16T18:06:41.980" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;My take on it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Spoilers need to be allowed, in order for us to effectively answer some important questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It is common courtesy to warn others about spoilers in some may, much as it is common courtesy TO TURN THE CAPS LOCK OFF.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The spoilers tag works well, but only for people who don't want to ever see a spoiler about anything, ever. Most people will have a few things they don't want spoiled, while being okay with seeing spoilers for a great many other things.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until the Feature request for a spoiler markup tag comes through, I'd suggest the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use descriptive, but spoiler-free titles for posts containing spoilers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use the Spoiler tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Append a simple warning paragraph to the top of the post, if you don't think the title is sufficient warning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the feature request comes through, use the above for posts which contain extensive spoilers (i.e. the entire thread is likely to be one huge spoiler), and the markup tag for incidental spoilers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2010-11-16T18:42:59.373" LastActivityDate="2010-11-16T18:42:59.373" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="678" CreationDate="2010-11-17T22:30:01.293" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's probably no good reason, in the sense that someone can be a perfectly useful member of this community without ever revealing a single fact about themselves. The best reason to do so is (duh) that you want people to know something about you. Particularly if you're tired of being asked whether you're &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; Robin Laws... :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-17T22:30:01.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="456" CreationDate="2010-11-18T05:35:26.933" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is one kind of edit I've seen recently that I find problematic. I think title edits are being done too much, and too unnecessarily, and without improving them substantially.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions titles are just that: titles. Titles don't need to be full sentences. In fact, questions in English require a lot of grammatical baggage to make them properly formed sentences, which &lt;em&gt;obscures&lt;/em&gt; the actual subject of the question more often than not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the title-edit sprees that I've seen end up not only robbing the title of the distinctness that the OP put into the title, but also make scanning them on the front page just that much harder. The sameness that has been added to question titles recently just isn't an improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose that we cool down on the title editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-11-18T05:35:26.933" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="724" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-11-18T08:59:27.737" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Elevator Pitch: Everything you always wanted to know about RPGs but didn't know where to ask&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-18T08:59:27.737" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-11-18T08:59:27.737" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-11-18T08:59:54.710" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tagline: It's like a Tome of Infinite Wisdom, but with tags&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-18T08:59:54.710" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-11-18T08:59:54.710" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="726" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-11-18T09:01:01.903" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Motto: We're all about RPGs. Any questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-18T09:01:01.903" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-11-18T09:01:01.903" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="103" CreationDate="2010-11-21T23:48:07.163" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this really depends on what sort of question you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking an open-ended question like &quot;What is railroading?&quot; then I'm not sure it's at all helpful to focus the discussion around one thing that may or not be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If however it's a question that relies on communicating a concept correctly in order for the question to make sense, well then yes, that's a good idea. For example, if you asked &quot;What's the best way to handle disagreements over game mechanics?&quot;, then a couple of examples of the kind of disagreements you meant would probably lead to much better advice than if all the questioners just imagined their own problem before suggesting how to deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-11-21T23:48:07.163" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-11-21T23:48:07.163" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="728" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="729" CreationDate="2010-11-22T18:57:57.147" Score="9" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;When posting a question recently, I filled in the title field as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can you Shift, or move your speed, while Sqeezing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Immediately after moving off the title field, I got the following red flag beneath it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why did this occur?&lt;BR&gt;&#xA;Is it a bug?&lt;BR&gt;&#xA;Is it a new feature?&lt;BR&gt;&#xA;By what qualities is it judging my question as &quot;subjective&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="1240" LastEditDate="2013-07-07T18:01:43.123" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Why is my question &quot;subjective and likely to be closed&quot;?" Tags="|support|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="728" CreationDate="2010-11-22T19:08:53.833" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because it contains the word &lt;code&gt;your&lt;/code&gt;.  The subjective filter is a simple regex, as Jeff states &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4371/how-does-the-automatic-subjective-filter-work&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-11-22T19:08:53.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="728" CreationDate="2010-11-23T01:36:43.660" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not a sophisticated thing; mostly it was an effort to prevent subjective questions containing things like &quot;what's the best..&quot; and &quot;what's the worst..&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I created the regex by studying a bunch of subjective closed questions; many of them contained the word &quot;your&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible this has outlived its usefulness, or maybe I can tighten it up by just checking for best/worst etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-11-23T01:36:43.660" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="731" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="737" CreationDate="2010-11-24T20:18:18.533" Score="4" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently came across a question that got me thinking.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4753/are-there-any-magic-items-that-greatly-improve-insight-or-allow-a-character-to-d&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; in particular is quite easily answered with a D&amp;amp;DI subscription, by searching through the online Compendium.  It's asking for an item with a specific bonus attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's been other questions that we have answered by providing Compendium links as references, but these typically call out specific powers, feats, rules, or other items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has me slightly bothered because the only way to answer it definitively is by having access to a full library of resources, the likes of which is only available through a D&amp;amp;DI subscription.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need to draw a line here, to avoid becoming the &quot;ask the Compendium&quot; board for people who may not be paying subscribers to the service?  Is there perhaps something in the D&amp;amp;DI ToS that we should be mindful of, when addressing these questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T02:51:37.157" Title="Are we stepping on D&amp;DI's toes?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="731" CreationDate="2010-11-24T21:06:58.523" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think so. Your answer alone shows that a simple search of the Compendium isn't exhaustive, and can leave some room for error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply because a resource exists, doesn't mean that any question covered by that resource should be off limits. Almost every rules question on the site boils down to a citation of some resource or another: the PHB, the DMG, WotC customer service, etc. Questions about Compendium content are no more stepping on the Compendium's toes than those questions are stepping on the toes of the DMG, PHB, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to this question itself, the question that you're really asking is: Is there a level of question that is too trivial to be asked here? Which is an interesting question on its own, but a difficult one to pin down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-11-24T21:06:58.523" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="733" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="734" CreationDate="2010-11-26T21:44:30.170" Score="2" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question probably mostly applies to meta, although it might be relevant to the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question prompting this question can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/352/what-is-up-with-all-these-ogl-questions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. No doubt it was perfectly sensible at the time, but the phenomenon it alludes to has gone, and there is only one answer (looks as though others were deleted) that is also useless without context, and contains broken links. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've already tagged the question for mod attention (or tried to) without result. Is the policy just to leave this sort of thing lying around? I would have thought cleaning up as we go was a better idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T10:10:08.277" Title="Should the moderators delete obsolete questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="733" CreationDate="2010-11-27T01:26:44.037" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually we leave things about unless they are patently offensive, or otherwise problematic.  This is definitely more true for the primary site for meta.  As far as the question in question (&lt;em&gt;?&lt;/em&gt;) I haven't decided it's enough of a problem to go.  One of the other mods can feel free to delete it, once they've worked off their turkey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-11-27T01:26:44.037" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="735" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-28T19:13:08.143" Score="1" ViewCount="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are tools that output (somewhat) standard formats formats for things like characters and monsters/mobs. DnD4.0 being a good example. Who it be 1) use-appropriate for rpg.sx to allow this and 2) Is it technically feasable to implement an XML import/support?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastActivityDate="2010-11-28T21:28:14.907" Title="Should post formatting be extended to include standard XML formats from tools?" Tags="|feature-request|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="735" CreationDate="2010-11-28T21:28:14.907" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not feasible for anyone actually on this site.  We could request it of the core SE team but it would need to be something that's not specific to one game, D&amp;amp;D 4.0 being a good example.  I'm split on it being use-appropriate - this is a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a work-product-sharing site (just like SO isn't a code sharing site).  I guess I have to say &quot;sounds of dubious value and probably not what I want to spend RPG.SE political capital on getting the SE team to implement.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-28T21:28:14.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="731" CreationDate="2010-11-28T21:36:11.997" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;An answer in three parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anyone posting content here should make sure they are not infringing copyright or other IP law, and that burden is 100% on that individual.  See the previous meta question on &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357/what-constitutes-copyright-infringement&quot;&gt;What constitutes copyright infringement&lt;/a&gt;.&quot; So yes, if you are posting info from DDI, understand the ToS and IP law in general.  (IP law says you can't copyright game mechanics, but their ToS may allow them to boot you for otherwise legal activity, I don't know.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The SE community generally believes even trivially Googleable information should be put into answers on an SE.  I personally am not so happy about that, but it's well established SE culture so I go along with it.  Obviously if it holds for a general search engine then it holds for something more rarefied like DDI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't really care if any site &quot;feels like we're stepping on their toes,&quot; ESPECIALLY WotC given their attitude towards IP and the player community.  If they feel like anything is violating their rights they can file a DMCA request and the extremely knowledgable SE staff will determine if that's right or not.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T02:51:37.157" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2010-11-29T00:34:40.407" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there any way that the tags, &quot;dnd-4.0&quot; and &quot;dungeons-and-dragons-4e&quot; can be merged?  I see no reason to have both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T00:34:40.407" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="739" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-29T09:05:56.293" Score="18" ViewCount="1310" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hi all. I'm &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/our-designer-in-residence-jin-yang/&quot;&gt;Jin&lt;/a&gt;, and I'll be working on the designs for the Stack Exchange sites as they graduate from the beta phase. Each site will have its own unique theme that will reflect its topic. However, all sites will share quite a bit of common elements so they feel like they're part of the Stack Exchange family.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm in the &lt;strong&gt;very early&lt;/strong&gt; stage of brainstorming about the design for the RPG site's final theme. Before I go any further, I'd like RPG.se community's opinion on the direction I'm thinking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the types of questions and popular tags, it seems a lot of them are about D&amp;amp;D. The design I have in mind is very graphics heavy around the shell of the site(headers, footer, site background). I'm thinking about using Medieval graphical elements, vintage paper texture, grunge effects, dragons, dice etc. Basically, a more subtle version of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.worldofwarcraft.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.worldofwarcraft.com&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Community.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Community.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it'd work well for the RPG.SE site. However, I was wondering if such a design would alienate other types of RPG gaming questions? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any other design ideas for the site, please let me know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;BTW, I really like the dice logo idea &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/108/site-logo-design&quot;&gt;proposed here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T09:35:31.823" Title="Design Ideas for RPG Site" Tags="|design|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-11-29T09:38:38.930" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the large header, a wooden table with a fantasy iconic character (orc, dwarf, or ::shudder:: elf), a supernatural (vampire, probably) and a sci-fi roboty/anime character rolling dice could be quite evocative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A pure D&amp;amp;D theme would give entirely the wrong idea, and emphasize D&amp;amp;D more than it should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For vertical bars, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/277/5/8/seven_dice_stack_by_sharawr-d3041gx.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;dice towers&lt;/a&gt;&quot; would be completely awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T09:38:38.930" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="733" CreationDate="2010-11-29T10:10:08.277" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Context of &quot;Obsolete&quot; is pretty much impossible to define for the main board... some of the games people have asked about date back 30 years+!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even many of the &quot;duplicates&quot; are sufficiently reworded that leaving them in place with an answer nicely pointing to the other wording's answer list is often going to be of benefit..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T10:10:08.277" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="742" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="743" CreationDate="2010-11-29T15:01:07.980" Score="4" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;See title.  Assuming a subjective question can be avoided, is a question about managing players appropriate here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T15:26:37.607" Title="Are questions about player management and logistics appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="743" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="742" CreationDate="2010-11-29T15:26:37.607" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.  Plus random words to make the answer take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T15:26:37.607" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="744" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-11-29T15:32:34.183" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the header, I agree with making it more 'genre inclusive' and not D&amp;amp;D specific - the heavy D&amp;amp;D 4e focus is one we're trying to overcome to serve all RPGs.  Hitting the majors (scifi, fantasy, horror, supers) would be nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, make sure it screams pen-and-paper/tabletop RP - we get a lot of confused people wandering through here asking about computer MMOs.  I think strong use of dice, &quot;people around a table,&quot; pencil/graph paper, miniatures kinds of elements would be helpful there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Ooo, in fact, if the iconic genres were each represented by a character that looked like an unpainted lead miniature that would be a cool effect...)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the dice, use them all but I would tend towards d20 as the major iconic die people associate with RPGs.  D&amp;amp;D uses it but so do many others. d6 risks confusion with normal boardgamers/wargamers who all use d6es exclusively.  I like the &quot;dice tower&quot; being of the varied RPG dice and if a favicon needs one, I'd go d20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I look forward to seeing what you come up with!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-11-29T15:32:34.183" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-11-30T07:20:53.940" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to dissent a bit from the trend so far—I don't like the idea of bluntly representative pictures to get across the point of the site. I'd much prefer that the graphic design look like a web page with tightly-woven graphic elements, rather than a page with pictures plastered about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I do like the idea of&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;using Medieval graphical elements, vintage paper texture, grunge effects, dragons, dice etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… but to include other genres, why not include anachronisms into those Medieval designs? What would a laser blaster drawn by a Benedictine monk look like? A hint of sepia-washed Cthulhuoid tentacles nibbling at the footer, threatening all above? Perhaps the vintage paper texture has a tear, revealing the control transistors of a e-paper device. Maybe the dragon is wearing a dashing fedora and a trench coat. A fairy-tale castle turret, with robots guarding the parapet, overlooking a superheroes-style mad scientist with a doomsday device? *&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Grungy post-apocalypse tech aesthetics and fantasy aesthetics blend together well, too. I could see the site name done up in a large, illuminated-manuscript style, while the site's tagline is displayed on a grungy, dim-lit, exposed-wires LCD marquee that's fit through a rough hole punched in the vellum beside the illuminations. (For an unnecessarily-detailed example. * )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I'd personally like to see a &lt;em&gt;unified&lt;/em&gt; graphical feel, but have the details &lt;em&gt;within&lt;/em&gt; that look betray the mixing of genres that RPGs naturally incorporate. There's no reason we can't have subtlety and flair while making it obvious that this ain't no fantasy-land exclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;*I realise a lot of that is more detailed than what can fit into, say, the vote arrows or tag styling, but it's the concept I'm trying to get across rather than implementation. I value a designer's good judgement more than their willingness to be the client's text-operated Photoshop inteface. ;)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2010-11-30T07:20:53.940" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="746" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-11-30T11:44:32.517" Score="6" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a proposal for creating community wiki post for role-playing related abbreviations. The ones that made me scratch my head so far are SRD and OGL (now I know the meaning). All other like GM, NPC etc. may posted there.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Is it a good idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1044" LastActivityDate="2011-02-01T05:32:10.380" Title="Community-wiki of abbreviations" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="746" CreationDate="2010-11-30T21:43:38.360" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this seems like a good idea in principle, but maybe not in practice. The two main problems I see are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(i) The answers will end up in whatever order people happen to think of them, whereas alphabetical would be a lot more useful. And there will be a lot of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(ii) The scope seems difficult to define. How obscure does an abbreviation have to get before it's not worth including? Community voting is not necessarily reliable on this point, unless we only want abbreviations used by the most commonly played games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone can suggest an approach that avoids or mitigates these two problems, then I can see it being a useful resource. But (i) in particular seems problematic to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: OK, (i) is not a big problem, because CW posts get edited by all and sundry until they are &quot;right&quot;. So we don't have one answer per abbreviation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastEditorUserId="955" LastEditDate="2010-12-02T00:22:00.790" LastActivityDate="2010-12-02T00:22:00.790" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="748" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-12-01T00:27:59.927" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, there's a risk to misrepresent futuristic settings, or gothic ones. It's a difficult tradeoff, but focusing on fantasy alone for the design is probably not representative of the roleplaying community as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what about a graphical header that combines all the aspects? on the left, fantasy/gothic. In the center steampunk and current day. On the right, futuristic/robots. It's hard to pull this off without a cartoonist, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Font should be pen-stroke but readable. We mostly use pen and paper, it makes sense we stay on this tone. As a &quot;accepted answer&quot; counter, I have no idea. One request I have is to have &quot;XP = reputation_value&quot;, and of course badges are gold/silver/copper coins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="113" LastEditorUserId="113" LastEditDate="2010-12-01T00:33:46.490" LastActivityDate="2010-12-01T00:33:46.490" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="749" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-01T14:16:38.577" Score="3" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;I came across &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/842/we-can-rebuild-him&quot;&gt;We can rebuild him…&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; this morning, and honestly it doesn't seem like a good question.  There's more back and forth on the page clarifying the intent, and the highest voted answer is saying &quot;This isn't a valid question&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we allow &quot;Build the character questions&quot;? What about more tightly scoped questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1460/effective-light-armor-fighter&quot;&gt;Effective Light Armor Fighter?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-12-01T15:30:55.797" Title="Should we allow &quot;Best Character Design&quot; questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="749" CreationDate="2010-12-01T14:34:54.760" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think the lack of answers is really a valid thing to hold against the question. Most of the other SR4 questions have a low answer count at the moment (probably due to low population of SR4 players), and character tweaking requires quite a lot of effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the general case, &quot;How do I create a character that...&quot; seems like a pretty straight forward question. It's the kind of question where there are many possible answers, but the answers can be judged against one another and upheld with experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How do I create the best character given...&quot; is a little fuzzier, in that it isn't something that people should actually use. It has some value to game designers and game masters, but players abusing that sort of information could hurt themselves. Still, answers can be judged against one another and backed up by rules citations and personal experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess my take on it is that I don't mind seeing them from time to time, but I'd be annoyed if I saw a lot of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-12-01T14:34:54.760" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="751" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="749" CreationDate="2010-12-01T15:30:55.797" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1460/effective-light-armor-fighter&quot;&gt;Effective Light Armor Fighter&lt;/a&gt; is a good question and within the scope of this site. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/842/we-can-rebuild-him&quot;&gt;We Can Rebuild Him&lt;/a&gt; is a bad question (too broad and ill-specified), but within the scope of this site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the way to handle it, I think, is by voting it down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2010-12-01T15:30:55.797" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-12-02T02:49:06.157" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm no good with design, but I thought I might provide you with ideas from some of the other games, besides D&amp;amp;D on the site.  Without further ado&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite.asp?eidm=108&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Death Watch&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eqLvp.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Death Watch Cover&quot;&gt; &#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pyAju.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Death Watch Minis&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.shadowrun4.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Shadowrun&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Grafw.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Shadowrun Cover&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20modern&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;D20 Modern / Future&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YxcvQ.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;D20 Modern Cover&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/etkN1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;D20 Future &quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lumpley.com/dogsources.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dogs in the Vineyard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TiNFG.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Dogs in the Vineyard Art&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CZGeb.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;New World of Darkness cover art&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.white-wolf.com/exalted&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Exalted&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XNKQR.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Exalted cover&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pelgranepress.com/site/?page_id=242&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Trail of Cthulhu&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/j4M2c.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's just a small sample.  I've made this post CW so people can add any art they would find evocative.  Keep in mind this is things that aren't typical fantasy games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2012-01-10T15:26:36.443" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T15:26:36.443" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-12-02T02:49:06.157" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="753" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="192" CreationDate="2010-12-03T02:18:59.463" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;A spoiler syntax has been implemented network wide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-a-spoiler-tag-that-makes-hidden-until-you-click-text/71396#71396&quot;&gt;Details on meta.stackoverflow&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T02:18:59.463" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="754" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="755" CreationDate="2010-12-03T06:37:00.810" Score="1" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tried editing a question earlier, to implement &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-markdown-support-for-hidden-until-you-click-text-aka-spoilers&quot;&gt;the new spoiler code&lt;/a&gt;, and ran into some troubles.  I'll be using this thread to test my usage of that code to make sure I'm doing it right - instead of messing with any more threads in the parent site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a spoiler:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Hello!  I'm a spoiler!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a really long spoiler:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are two adjacent spoiler paragraphs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looks like there may indeed be something broken with the feature.  Added the bug tag to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T18:41:24.807" Title="Does the new spoiler code work?" Tags="|support|bug|status-completed|spoilers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="754" CreationDate="2010-12-03T06:46:25.033" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do a &lt;kbd&gt;Ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;-&lt;kbd&gt;F5&lt;/kbd&gt; for a hard refresh to get the new code into your local cache.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; It worked for me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! although the two next to each other in your question body  &#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt;! still do not get hidden while they are separated by a line...&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;creates:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! although the two next to each other in your question body&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! still do not get hidden while they are separated by a line...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! but maybe if I try  &#xA;&amp;gt;!  &#xA;&amp;gt;! to link them together&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; but maybe if I try&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA; to link them together, it will work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T15:30:53.590" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="754" CreationDate="2010-12-03T08:33:14.240" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should work now; the &lt;code&gt;spoiler&lt;/code&gt; CSS class was not on the metas yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(you may still need to hard refresh as yhw42 indicated)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T08:33:14.240" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="754" CreationDate="2010-12-03T13:01:58.130" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;It works now.  I spoilered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4930/how-to-fix-this-scenario-for-dd-encounters&quot;&gt;How to fix this scenario for D&amp;amp;D Encounters?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T13:01:58.130" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="758" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-03T14:57:31.730" Score="4" ViewCount="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was looking at the links on &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4943/anyone-have-some-links-to-easy-to-read-resources-for-a-dnd-newbie&quot;&gt;Anyone have some links to “easy to read” resources for a DND newbie?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; and I can plainly see two links to questions in the comments, but only one of them shows up in the &lt;code&gt;Linked&lt;/code&gt; sidebar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T11:05:47.180" Title="Linked questions on the sidebar is not catching all links in comments?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|questions|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="759" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="766" CreationDate="2010-12-03T15:19:50.877" Score="4" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;Making this a new thread, since I can't remove &amp;quot;status-completed&amp;quot; from my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/754/197&quot;&gt;previous thread&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-markdown-support-for-hidden-until-you-click-text-aka-spoilers&quot;&gt;The spoiler code&lt;/a&gt; seems to work for single-line spoilers, and single-paragraph (one long line, which gets word-wrapped) spoilers, such as these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Single line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Hey, I'm a spoiler!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Single paragraph:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the code breaks when you have two paragraphs which are separated by a blank line, as below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only way to get two such paragraphs to display correctly, seems to require some non-spoiler text in between them as below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hi, no spoiler here!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I even tried using non-displayed, line-breaking code like the BR tag in between the paragraphs, to no avail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure the code should not require such separation between paragraphs.  Is there something I'm doing wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm running Windows XP SP3 with Firefox 3.6.12, but have had the same problem with Firefox on Ubuntu 10.10 and Windows 7, and Chrome 7.0.517.44 on XP SP 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The spoiler code does not work at all for me in IE 7.0.5730.13CO on XP SP3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT:&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/759/is-the-spoiler-broken-for-adjacent-paragraphs/760#760&quot;&gt;GraceNote has suggested&lt;/a&gt; using the following code, where there are two spaces inserted at the end of &amp;quot;First paragraph&amp;quot; and on the blank line between:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! First paragraph  &#xA;&amp;gt;!  &#xA;&amp;gt;! Second paragraph&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; First paragraph&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA; Second paragraph&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a good workaround, but the issue still remains un-patched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T01:41:18.090" Title="Is the spoiler broken, for adjacent paragraphs?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|spoilers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="759" CreationDate="2010-12-03T15:31:48.287" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of oddities that result from things that follow or precede a block quote. One of the more infamous ones is the behavior with lists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't so much a solution, but a workaround is to use the double-space single line break. You can do it once to have no space between your paragraphs, or twice like as follows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; What's going on here?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;br&gt;&#xA; Everything's dark!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The code for the above... well, you can't see it but the first line has 2 white space at the end, and the second line is nothing but two white space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! What's going on here?  &#xA;&amp;gt;!  &#xA;&amp;gt;! Everything's dark!&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, on my screen I'm not actually seeing the spoiler format (although the ! are getting trimmed). I'm hoping it works right for you. I did test it &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/716/formatting-sandbox/789#789&quot;&gt;over on Gaming&lt;/a&gt;, where it did work in this fashion. It's a pain, I won't deny that, but it's at least something to tide you over until either something changes or someone figures out a better workaround.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:32:35.770" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T15:31:48.287" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="761" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="769" CreationDate="2010-12-03T15:49:31.580" Score="2" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just went to update another spoiler-included thread, to add &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-markdown-support-for-hidden-until-you-click-text-aka-spoilers&quot;&gt;the new spoiler code&lt;/a&gt;.  It seems anything that is a hyperlink is not hidden by the code.  Can this be fixed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; Here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4271/197&quot;&gt;the link&lt;/a&gt; to the thread in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T09:42:46.443" Title="Hyperlinks break the spoiler code." Tags="|bug|status-completed|spoilers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-12-03T17:10:02.297" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like the generic grid paper.  Add some dice and pencils.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T17:10:02.297" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="763" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="156" CreationDate="2010-12-03T17:44:42.150" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since we now have the spoiler code implemented, I think the FAQ should contain guidelines for how spoilers should be posted and how to properly use the code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T17:44:42.150" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-12-03T17:44:42.150" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2010-12-03T18:47:47.020" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know if it's already in this &quot;thread&quot; but a few people expressed an appreciation of the beta layout - that is, it's pen-and-paper feel.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be fun for user profiles to be arranged a little more like character sheets :D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a DND 3.5 character sheet; it's the game that got me hooked so it's the first I add.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry for the delays; between being busy and not owning a scanner it took me a while to think of &quot;Google Image Search: DnD Character Sheet&quot; &gt;.&amp;lt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/szfy7.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2011-01-30T15:39:25.600" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T15:39:25.600" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="765" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2010-12-03T19:09:55.057" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we've got room, I'm all for a toppling tower made from a full set of polyhedral die:  d20, d12, d10, d8, d6, d4.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2010-12-03T19:09:55.057" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="759" CreationDate="2010-12-04T01:41:18.090" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;correct, use&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! First paragraph  &#xA;&amp;gt;!  &#xA;&amp;gt;! Second paragraph&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want multiple paragraphs of spoiler.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T01:41:18.090" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="767" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="768" CreationDate="2010-12-04T02:04:41.363" Score="1" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;Considering that IE and Windows XP own significant (if not still majority) shares in their respective markets, I find it hard to believe that a feature would be implemented here which does not work in those environments.  However, I've tested this in one machine with IE 7 and another with IE 8, both running Windows XP SP3, and the code does not work for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it just me, or is this a known issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="2" LastEditDate="2010-12-04T03:10:48.820" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T03:11:38.227" Title="Is the spoiler code non-functional in Internet Explorer?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|spoilers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="768" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="767" CreationDate="2010-12-04T03:11:38.227" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A fix for this will go out in the next build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The CSS for sketchy(meta) sites has a bit of hack for blockquote's, and I missed that hack when adapting them for the new spoiler syntax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T03:11:38.227" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="769" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="761" CreationDate="2010-12-04T09:42:39.597" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is completed, but may require a hard refresh &lt;kbd&gt;ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;f5&lt;/kbd&gt; to take effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2010-12-04T09:42:39.597" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="770" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2010-12-05T23:28:18.637" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sage Advice for every role-playing game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tagline)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-12-05T23:28:18.637" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-12-05T23:28:18.637" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="771" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="773" CreationDate="2010-12-07T13:57:16.857" Score="5" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;I ignore the &quot;dnd-4.0&quot; tag, but I'm currently seeing all the &quot;dnd-4.0&quot; questions. Have you any idea what's happening?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Fixed, see below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="718" LastEditDate="2010-12-07T16:53:20.620" LastActivityDate="2010-12-07T16:53:20.620" Title="Ignoring tags doesn't seem to be working" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="771" CreationDate="2010-12-07T14:00:33.300" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ignoring the tags doesn't completely hide them by default, it only styles them differently.  If you want to hide them completely, go to your account, click the prefs tab, and check the&#xA;&lt;code&gt;Hide Ignored Tags&lt;/code&gt; field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; Duplicated bug in FF 3.6, for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4.0&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt;, but not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2010-12-07T14:23:30.013" LastActivityDate="2010-12-07T14:23:30.013" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="773" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="771" CreationDate="2010-12-07T16:13:30.280" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another JS minification task was added to the build without the proper encoding.  This is now fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="221" LastActivityDate="2010-12-07T16:13:30.280" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="774" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-08T13:51:18.357" Score="28" ViewCount="816" Body="&lt;p&gt;So recently there was &lt;a href=&quot;http://xbowvsbuddha.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-im-blah-about-rpg-stack-exchange.html#disqus_thread&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a negative blog post&lt;/a&gt; about RPG.SE.  One negative blog post isn't a big deal perhaps, but I think it raises a good point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Okay!  Ahhh...see here...D&amp;amp;D 4.0, D&amp;amp;D 4.0, D&amp;amp;D 4.0...Dogs in the Vin- no...D&amp;amp;D 4.0, D&amp;amp;D 4.0, D&amp;amp;D 4-- AHA!  Call of Cthu-- no, that's got plenty of answers already.  D&amp;amp;D 4.0, D&amp;amp;D--OOH!  HEY!  AD&amp;amp;D 1st Ed. question! ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;all the baby seems to say is, &quot;4.0, 4.0, 4.0.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have an awful bias toward &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4.0&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/a&gt;.  The tag counts at time of writing are something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dnd-4.0 &lt;strong&gt;298&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dnd (the generic tag) 95&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dnd-3.5 65&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;system-recommendation 47&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;pathfinder 26&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;adnd-1.0 24&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;gumshoe 16&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize Dungeons and Dragons is the most played RPG in the world, but the slant is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; as severe as we see on our site, where the next most active system tag is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gumshoe&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gumshoe&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gumshoe&lt;/a&gt; with all of 16 questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think our site will have a more healthy ecosystem with more experts if we can cover more games.  How do we do that?  How do we bring in all the questions about Mage, or Call of Cuthulhu, and Death Watch?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, how do we live up to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; that says&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games. If you play or run Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs, then you're in the right place to ask your question! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Blog: &lt;a href=&quot;http://xbowvsbuddha.blogspot.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;I Waste the Buddha with my Crossbow&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/716/dr-rotwang&quot;&gt;Dr. Rotwang&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Thanks to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; for bringing this up.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-05-13T12:13:15.950" Title="How do we get more questions about things besides D&amp;D 4e?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="14" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-08T14:54:36.420" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Smart Ass Answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we get plenty of questions about other games. Yeah, there's a lot of D&amp;amp;D, for three reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of people play D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of people have questions about D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The D&amp;amp;D rules are vastly large in volume.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My smart-ass answer is, &quot;People aren't as confused about how to play Dogs in the Vineyard. If you have questions about another game, however, ask and we'll answer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;More Serious Answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, there's also a combination of the Rich Get Richer and Tragedy of the Commons going on. Because lots of people play D&amp;amp;D, questions about D&amp;amp;D get answered more than questions about other games. That drives off the non-D&amp;amp;D players. Before you know it, only D&amp;amp;D players will want ask and answer questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we have to make sure that every D&amp;amp;D question is a good one and downvote them if they're not. I think we have to upvote non-D&amp;amp;D questions enthusiastically and do our best to answer them and &lt;em&gt;retain&lt;/em&gt; those people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastEditorUserId="254" LastEditDate="2010-12-09T01:53:41.133" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T01:53:41.133" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-08T14:55:05.267" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask questions about other games. That's really all there is to it. The more questions asked about the game, the more people who play that game will be drawn to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, as noted, D&amp;amp;D has a particular intersection of being both monstrously popular and extremely system-focused. This site will always have a strong bias towards the latest version of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2010-12-08T14:55:05.267" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="778" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-08T16:10:16.777" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The good news is that there are (based on your numbers) at least 400 questions on the site currently about non-dnd topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope the answer isn't to discourage D&amp;amp;D questions but rather to better foster communities around other tags as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some folks don't even want to see D&amp;amp;D questions.  For those people we need to make sure that they know:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;about ignored tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to completely hide ignored tags(via your user prefs)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That there is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11852/a-greasemonkey-script-to-move-interesting-tags-to-top-ignored-tags-to-bottom&quot;&gt;greasemonkey script&lt;/a&gt; to move your ignored tags to the bottom of the page&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone takes those steps, they won't see hardly any D&amp;amp;D discussion at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, I believe the basic premise of this question is flawed.  Roughly half of all questions on this site deal with D&amp;amp;D in one form or another.  Over half of all RPG dollars go to D&amp;amp;D or its derivatives (especially pathfinder).  It is not surprising to me at all that D&amp;amp;D is the lions share of a general site.  Take a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=rpgmap&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Interactive RPG map&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-12-17T07:35:47.600" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-08T20:03:47.760" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the problem is beyond just &quot;4e is popular, and there are more 4e questions.&quot;  In the blog post in question, the person engaged with a 1e question but felt chased off by what could be considered hostile 4e-ey attitude within that question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would note also that some people want to play 4e in the same way they played earlier editions (roleplay, exploration) and that there are a lot of questions that could be answered well across edition. However, some of the answers to those questions as well are hostile to traditional D&amp;amp;D players, I will specifically cite &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5080/how-do-i-adjudicate-the-natural-tendency-for-hikers-to-spread-in-dd-4e&quot;&gt;the hiker spreading question&lt;/a&gt;. 4e is a ruleset and people come to it with different agendas, and though it does best support a &quot;superheroes do tactical combat&quot; approach we need to not crap on people that aren't doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, we can ask more non-4e questions, but I think we need to make behavior on non-4e questions and even 4e questions more friendly to people a) of other editions and b) of different RP approaches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Believe it or not, on other forums people that play totally different games from one another often have shareable insights.  On the technical SEs, same thing - I use Apache not lighttpd but I still might be able to contribute valuable knowledge to a question on compression or something. But if answers like that were met with &quot;well if you embrace lighttpd then you certainly would never use it to do that&quot; it would not go well.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-12-08T20:03:47.760" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-08T23:37:07.517" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem I have is that my thinky questions about Ars Magica have mostly been met by indifferent silence. I (despite the number of 4e answers I have) mainly run Ars Magica. But the questions I have for that game... are either self-answerable or &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; difficult questions that usually involve philosophy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd love to ask those questions, but it doesn't feel like there's any positive feedback when I have in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;--edit--&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Larger problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time I post a question about any other system, &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; get answers, and I certainly don't get upvotes on it. Any time I post a question about D&amp;amp;D I get plenty of answers and plenty of upvotes. I try very hard to vote up non-D&amp;amp;D questions myself (along with D&amp;amp;D questions, because every question is sacred) but ... it's not much fun having a bunch of my questions (and only my questions) hanging out at 0 votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2010-12-09T23:39:54.153" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T23:39:54.153" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-09T01:16:53.533" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Oooo! Crazy idea... but it depends on us either having a blog (do we get one once we're out of Beta, like &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.serverfault.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.serverfault.com/&lt;/a&gt;?) or starting one on our own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RjXY_-PUbo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;If we only had a blog&lt;/a&gt; we could invite community members who are active in those struggling tags to write a little beginner's introduction to games which &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; DnD... those intro posts would give an opportunity to DnD gamers in the community (who read the blog) to ask basic low-level (but not completely moronic) question about games they haven't played yet (collectively referred to as &quot;Games Which Are Not DnD&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Kind of like a &quot;Game Which Is Not DnD&quot; of the week!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then at least we're attracting non-DnD gamers who enjoy teaching/explaining their game. Once they've fallen for our ruse and become community members they form the basis for attracting more people who play &quot;Games Which Are Not DnD&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could even encourage community members to play a one-shot session of the GWiNDnDotW (the perfect acronym to use for a tag) and have a weekly CW question where people share their experiences playing it for the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I crazy?! (It should be noted that while this is littered with jokes, I am being serious; I think the idea has potential.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T01:16:53.533" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="782" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="786" CreationDate="2010-12-09T03:33:08.043" Score="6" ViewCount="383" Body="&lt;p&gt;By my understanding (and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;Area 51 FAQ&lt;/a&gt;), StackExchange sites are meant to be host to &quot;experts&quot; posting &quot;expert-level&quot; questions.  However, we've seen a number of questions asked and answered (and up-voted), which are quite definitely basic-level topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With my apologies for D&amp;amp;D4e-centricity in this list (it's all I know) here's some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4949/can-i-move-and-shift-as-a-single-move-action-in-dd-4e&quot;&gt;Can I move and shift as a single move action in D&amp;amp;D 4E?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4926/what-is-the-best-way-to-determine-overland-speed-in-dd4e&quot;&gt;What is the best way to determine Overland Speed in D&amp;amp;D4e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4726/197&quot;&gt;Do creatures occupy cubic space, or are larger creatures still one square tall?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2238/197&quot;&gt;Does teleportation require line of sight?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4533/197&quot;&gt;Can a blind creature teleport another?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4183/197&quot;&gt;Is there a high limit on how high the Tenser's Floating Disk will fly?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions each represent one of a few things, to an experienced D&amp;amp;D4e player:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something they should by now have inherent knowledge of.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something which is &lt;em&gt;unambiguously&lt;/em&gt; addressed in a &lt;em&gt;single&lt;/em&gt; rule.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something which can be quickly found by a &lt;em&gt;single&lt;/em&gt; lookup in a rulebook or online resource that an experienced D&amp;amp;D4e player would likely have access to.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I feel like any question that can be &lt;em&gt;unambiguously&lt;/em&gt; answered by checking &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; page or &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; entry in either the PHB, DMG, Essentials Rules Compendium, or D&amp;amp;DI Compendium, is not something which is &quot;expert level&quot; for our environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, we do have a good and large base of more in-depth and complex questions on a variety of topics here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, to stay within the spirit of SE, should we be discouraging simple questions about the bare basics?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Should a question be judged on its level of &quot;expertise&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|questions|voting|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="783" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="758" CreationDate="2010-12-09T11:05:47.180" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was a bug in how the linked questions were being determined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A fix will be pushed in tomorrow's build and I'll update the links using the new code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="138" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T11:05:47.180" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="784" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="782" CreationDate="2010-12-09T15:27:48.197" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;No,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not discourage these questions.  Just because a question is easy for one person to answer does not make it an illegitimate question.  Not all rules are easy to locate in the books at your time of need.  Heck, some game books fail to include an index or a table of contents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T15:27:48.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="782" CreationDate="2010-12-09T15:29:32.377" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt; As long as it is on topic, the question should be judged on the &lt;strong&gt;quality&lt;/strong&gt; of the question itself. We do want interesting, difficult, and &quot;expert&quot; questions, but there's plenty of room for the trivial, as long as it also has quality. A large part of the design of the site is that the expert questions don't get lost in the 14 forum pages of trivial discussion about something tangential. After all, its those good questions that bring the experts back to answer them, and that is why the Area51 quote is specific to the definition phase of the site proposal process to attract good answerers. The site is only as good as the set of people willing to answer the questions! (see Jeff's comment &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/69989/propose-a-new-20k-reputation-privilege/70004#70004&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-12-09T15:29:32.377" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="782" CreationDate="2010-12-10T00:19:18.473" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's complex.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we should be encouraging questions that require expertise. Yes, we should be discouraging trivial questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, as the other responders have suggested, expertise is a difficult thing to judge. I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3373/what-should-i-read-watch-for-information-about-the-1930s-united-states&quot;&gt;What should I read/watch for information about the 1930s United States&lt;/a&gt; requires expertise, but CRoss doesn't. Conversely, I think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4247/how-much-damage-is-caused-by-a-thrown-coin/4250#4250&quot;&gt;How much damage is caused by a thrown coin?&lt;/a&gt; is trivial, but obviously others don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, there's no easy answer. Personally, I think your guidelines are pretty good: if you can easily find it in a book, it's probably trivial. But there are dangers in those guidelines, too: for example, they'll lead to arguments over whether something is &lt;em&gt;unambiguously&lt;/em&gt; answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the answer to the thread title is yes. But judging expertise is a difficult problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-12-10T00:19:18.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="787" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-10T02:54:27.680" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's very easy, apparently, to take my blog post out of context.  One of my cardinal rules, stated elsewhere in my blog, is that &lt;em&gt;I don't talk smack unless it's &lt;strong&gt;really&lt;/strong&gt; deserved&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not interested in, have not played, and cannot comment upon the 4th edition of D&amp;amp;D.  Thus, upon seeing a proliferation of questions about said game, I find that I can't really help.  I found myself plowing past piles and mounds of questions to which I can contribute nothing, in search of something with which I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; help -- and I really didn't find much.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point was:  Everybody's talkin' 'bout stuff I can't talk about. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel powerless, unable to really help.  That's just the way it is; no helping it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will admit that being voted down for presenting a possible answer that wasn't apparently welcome left a bad taste in my mouth, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; when I was &lt;em&gt;sincerely&lt;/em&gt; trying to help by presenting a different light under which to look at AD&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; answering from experience, having once felt the same way about AD&amp;amp;D's supposed inadequacy for certain in-game activities.  But that's the nature of the internet -- it's the nature of humanity, really.  No helping that, either.  That's why I said (in metaphor) that I could ignore that, but I was still left with all these 4.0 questions that I can't help with, and only a few other questions which I might be able to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Filtering tags and so on helps -- to a point.  I now see questions that I &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; address more quickly, but they are not great in number.  Still, it's something, and I pitch in where I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact is that 4.0 is The New Hotness.  I am still down with the Old-And-Busted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;|shrug|  What can ya do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS I'm cross-posting this to my blog, where it also belongs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="716" LastActivityDate="2010-12-10T02:54:27.680" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-10T04:42:11.807" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer is, in part, to downvote and/or flag answers which are problematic, and whenever possible, get a reasonable answer up on non-D&amp;amp;D questions in a relatively reasonable time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, upvote other systems' questions; only upvote D&amp;amp;D questions which are awesome, but upvote other systems questions at merely decent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other part is making non-D&amp;amp;D posters feel welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also wouldn't hurt to have sig-links on other BBS's, where that's permitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2010-12-10T04:42:11.807" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="789" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="790" CreationDate="2010-12-11T23:49:48.847" Score="3" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see an easy way to find out how long this site has been in beta for - this sounds like a fairly easy, useful, feature to add to the stack-exchange sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1056" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2010-12-12T00:49:43.420" LastActivityDate="2010-12-12T00:49:43.420" Title="Countdown indicator to end of beta (or count up from the start)" Tags="|support|beta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="789" CreationDate="2010-12-12T00:43:27.767" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stats for the beta period can be found at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;Area51 page for RPG&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Area51&lt;/a&gt; is the launch pad for new Stack Exchange sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2010-12-12T00:43:27.767" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="791" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="789" CreationDate="2010-12-12T00:49:24.483" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/789/countdown-indicator-to-end-of-beta-or-count-up-from-the-start/790#790&quot;&gt;yhw42's answer&lt;/a&gt; is correct, but as to the countdown, the launch date has not been established.  This is because each site launch takes a custom effort for the design, and there is currently a backlog.  At present, &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;programmers.se&lt;/a&gt; is being worked on, and &lt;em&gt;hopefully&lt;/em&gt; the work on RPG will start after that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-12T07:31:26.427" LastActivityDate="2010-12-12T00:49:24.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="792" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="793" CreationDate="2010-12-12T09:08:49.113" Score="0" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sure this will probably end up a &quot;no&quot;, but I thought I would throw it in to make sure the devs are aware.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I normally use &lt;a href=&quot;http://coralietab.mozdev.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;IE Tab Plus (FKA: Coral IE Tab)&lt;/a&gt; for any browsing that &lt;em&gt;absolutely&lt;/em&gt; requires a site to be rendered in IE.  As such, it was my first choice to verify that the new spoiler code update indeed did &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/767/is-the-spoiler-code-non-functional-in-internet-explorer&quot;&gt;work in Internet Explorer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for me, the spoiler code is still broken in IE Tab Plus.  To be sure, I went and loaded the real Internet Explorer.  Sure enough, the code works there.  I'm not sure what the difference is (I thought IE Tab Plus just used the resident copy of IE on the system) but it seems the spoiler code is still broken for IE Tab Plus users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't know who would even want to load RPG.se in IE Tab Plus, since it works perfectly fine in Firefox, but again just wanted to make sure the devs are aware of this issue so that they can decide how (or if) to address it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2010-12-13T15:16:23.083" Title="Should the spoiler code work in IE Tab Plus?" Tags="|bug|status-declined|spoilers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="792" CreationDate="2010-12-13T15:14:44.410" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looks like IE Tab has problems with this kind of color fallback for non-RGBA-aware browsers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;.spoiler, .spoiler a&#xA;{&#xA;    color: #fffdf4;&#xA;    color: rgba(255,253,244, 0.8);&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It happens in several places; it's just particularly visible for the spoilers. For example, you may notice that the light blue background for the question asker's signature is missing as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you're right, this is a little too obscure a &quot;browser&quot; for us to worry about working around its bugs &amp;ndash; sorry :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might want to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.mozdev.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;report this to the IE Tab team&lt;/a&gt;, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastActivityDate="2010-12-13T15:14:44.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="794" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5349" CreationDate="2010-12-13T19:17:30.860" Score="7" ViewCount="216" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is probably good to be considered for any types of votes, but I'm especially asking about the close vote because of the special significance they have over the usual up/down voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was brought to mind by a particular post:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5123/197&quot;&gt;Is it practical to run a weekly lunch-hour game of D&amp;amp;D with my coworkers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original wording of the thread was something along the lines of &quot;Is it a good idea to...&quot;.  I voted to close because the question's wording made it too susceptible to being subjective/argumentative.  I also made a point to (as I've suggested in another thread) comment on the post, to address the reason for my close vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the OP has since changed the title and content of his question to be a bit more agreeable.  Though it seems the question will not likely get voted closed, I'd like to have an option to un-do my own close votes for this and similar cases which might otherwise end up closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can this be done?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-02-05T14:14:58.463" Title="Could an &quot;undo vote&quot; option be added, for close votes?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|voting|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="795" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="794" CreationDate="2010-12-13T19:49:19.070" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has already been asked and declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/915/can-we-have-the-ability-to-rescind-a-close-vote-before-it-closes&quot;&gt;Can we have the ability to rescind a close vote before it closes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/915/can-we-have-the-ability-to-rescind-a-close-vote-before-it-closes/33949#33949&quot;&gt;Jeff's answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that your close vote will age away harmlessly after a day or two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2010-12-13T21:10:52.713" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="796" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-14T13:15:51.700" Score="2" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Users with a total answer score of 5 or more, can vote for tag synonyms.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where's the right place to let people know that there's a new synonym up for a vote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2011-06-13T00:01:22.810" Title="What's the right procedure to promote a proposed synonym?" Tags="|discussion|voting|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-14T15:31:59.760" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The way to get more questions is awareness. If people know they can ask questions, they should ask them. If it isn't clear that you can ask a question about any RPG, then it should be. (I personally feel like it's clear). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But other than that: Let the ecosystem manage itself. If more people are asking about 4e, then that's simply the reality of what is going on. Answer those questions. If more people are asking about other systems, than answer those. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't about us. An audience, presumably a representative one, is participating. You and your tastes may not be represented. Or they might be. But the whole point is that it isn't about making people's tastes for them, or asking fake questions, or making up questions you already know the answers to in order to promote games that you feel need more exposure. This is not meant to be a self-licking ice-cream cone or a marketing tool, is it? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize that some people find the existence of 4th Edition D&amp;amp;D itself personally hurtful, but that isn't (and shouldn't be) our concern. If we have people like that who are participating in this site (and I know we already do, I read your blogs) well, I can only say this: if you have no problem keeping your emotional issues with 4e separate then fine, but if you simply can't participate without bringing &quot;I've been marginalized and need to strike back&quot;-type politics into your answers, you should accept that this is not the kind of website you can (or should) take part in. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fantasy of &quot;I've been marginalized and thus any subversive thing I say about my perceived enemies is fair game&quot; is a seductive one. It excuses any behavior. But it does not help anyone, and it is actively destructive to the ideals and goals of a project like this. Please remain above that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="443" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2010-12-14T20:36:32.000" LastActivityDate="2010-12-14T20:36:32.000" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="798" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-14T18:51:33.393" Score="3" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Exact Duplicate&lt;/strong&gt; (Meta Stack Overflow):&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/72373/can-we-get-our-personal-voting-data-displayed-on-the-questions-lists&quot;&gt;Can we get our personal voting data displayed on the Questions lists?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's been several times where I have been surfing the site, and noticed a question that I am not sure I've checked.  Even if I've checked the question before, I can't recall off-hand whether or not I've voted on it or its answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way we can have our personal voting history reflected to some degree or another, in the Questions listing?  For example, could there be an indicator as to whether or not we have already voted (up or down) on a question, and perhaps maybe an additional indicator as to whether we've up-voted any of its answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be very convenient to have some of this data available up-front, without actually having to view the question again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-01-08T14:03:46.260" Title="Can we get our personal voting data displayed on the Questions lists?" Tags="|feature-request|voting|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="796" CreationDate="2010-12-14T21:56:28.747" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;meta?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or am I missing something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-12-14T21:56:28.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-15T10:23:57.140" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not as discouraged as Dr Rotwang, even though I have a more limited set of gaming expertise. But if you want to stop people arriving, thinking &quot;it's all 4e&quot;, and leaving, then I think there should be a clearer route to discovering how to hide tags, etc. Maybe a link saying something like &quot;&lt;strong&gt;I don't see anything here I know how to answer!&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; could take people to a page on how to customise your view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands, the 4e players have not only the largest community (fair enough) and a natural tendency to hard-edged questions (ditto) but also the easiest learning curve in terms of making the site work for them (seems unnecessary).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And BTW, a small programming thing: it would be better if the number of questions displayed per page was &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; hiding questions, not &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt;. A bit harder to implement, but would be sharper.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="955" LastActivityDate="2010-12-15T10:23:57.140" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="801" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2010-12-15T18:29:44.447" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battlemat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battlemat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battlemat&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;-&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battlemap&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battlemap&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battlemap&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;-&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-map&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-map&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-map&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;-&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-mat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-mat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-mat&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure which is best and it should probably be synonym-ized, unless I'm missing some distinction between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I use battlemat, but that appears to be &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.chessex.com/mats/Battlemats_&amp;amp;_Megamats.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;trademarked by Chessex&lt;/a&gt;, so I'd vote the best answer as the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-map&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-map&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-map&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2011-01-26T16:11:34.433" LastActivityDate="2011-01-26T16:11:34.433" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-12-15T18:29:44.447" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="803" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-15T22:04:43.327" Score="6" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;As previously discussed in:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/669/proposed-tag-synonyms&quot;&gt;Proposed tag synonyms for [dnd4.0]&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;we have a significant SEO problem stemming from our use of (semi-) standard abbreviations for RPG names in tags.  This is exacerbated by tags not taking special characters and having a 25 character limit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the normal SEs, this isn't so much of a problem because [perl], [python], even [windows-server-2008] are short and you can just use them in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, common game names in the RPG world are &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fourth Edition&quot;, &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Essentials&quot;, &quot;Mutants &amp;amp; Masterminds Second Edition&quot;, and similar.  Normally, we'd abbreviate those things like &quot;D&amp;amp;D 4e&quot; but the resulting tags are resulting in poor SEO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what do we use?&#xA;[dnd4.0] was bad because there was no implicit space between dnd and 4.0.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;[dnd-4.0] is somewhat better.  But the dnd isn't quite &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot;.  And what if they are searching on &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons?&quot;  Do we tag everything multiple times for SEO reasons?&#xA;[dungeons-and-dragons-4e] might be better, but these forms start going over the 25 character tag limit.  [dungeons-and-dragons-essentials] isn't possible. And again, what about searches on &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; now? We can NOT have it be the community's job to be retagging every single post with multiple tags to make it more SEO friendly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things that could help this a little.&#xA;1.  Allow special characters (&amp;amp; especially) in tags.  [d&amp;amp;d-4e] would help.&#xA;2.  Let the tag field be a bit bigger, so things like [dungeons-and-dragons-essentials] fit.  40 characters maybe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real solution.&#xA;More advanced functionality where synonyms, perhaps drawn from the tag wiki, are inserted for SEO purposes.  Let's say we tag with &quot;[dnd4]&quot; for brevity.  If there were a way to configure &quot;hey, that should map to 'D&amp;amp;D 4e' and 'Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fourth Edition' in the tag wikis or synonym screens, and then SE should insert those expanded values into the page (optionally, just for search engines).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2010-12-15T22:04:43.327" Title="Need tag abbreviation expansion/synonyms for SEO purposes" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="804" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="805" CreationDate="2010-12-16T02:41:23.810" Score="-2" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen some people vanish from rpg.stackexchange.com so I assume there's a way to delete the account, but I can't seem to find said mechanism.  Note, I only want to remove from rpg, not from the whole stackexchange/stackoverflow/et al suite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="JUST MY correct OPINION" LastActivityDate="2010-12-16T04:34:57.430" Title="How do I actually remove my account?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="805" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="804" CreationDate="2010-12-16T04:34:57.430" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I or any mod can delete you, if you're set on it. But I would recommend not deleting, because you may not be able to come back later.  What's wrong with just &quot;wandering away&quot; if you're not currently interested? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2010-12-16T04:34:57.430" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2010-12-16T19:29:04.460" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;We need to attract communities. That's a hard thing to do. But we need to encourage various communities - indie gamers, Paranoia gamers, LARPers, Scandanavian freeformers - to ask questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some suggestions. They are rather provocative, but I think they're important, so bear with me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be more welcoming&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site can be argumentative. Elsewhere in this thread, there's an extremely heated argument, in which one person dismisses another's argument with &quot;F**k this&quot;. Earlier today, a moderator suggested that someone who wanted to leave the site was saying &quot;Waaah, I'm taking my ball and going home&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments like this will put people off joining. Indie game forums, for example, are often polite and respectful. Arguments will, I think, dissuade indie gamers from joining.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderators can make this site more welcoming. They could, for example, edit argumentative comments. At the moment, however, they are more likely to be argumentative themselves. (In other ways, I think they do a great job, but they do promote the argumentative nature of the site).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Make the site useful for their questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different gamers ask different questions. Indie gamers ask questions about publishing. LARPers ask questionsa about costuming. Cthulhu gamers ask questions about history. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To encourage these groups, we need to encourage their questions. At the moment, we don't do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've seen this with Cthulhuesque history questions. Even after long discussions, it's still unclear whether they're welcome on the site. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5087/depictions-of-19th-c-vienna-for-a-chronicle&quot;&gt;In a recent thread&lt;/a&gt;, a relatively new user was asked to provide explicit links to a game. Yet, elsewhere in meta, we seemed to have concluded that historical questions were fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence, there are rather mixed messages. Unsurprisingly, then, we don't get many questions, apart from those about D&amp;amp;D, which has a large following.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-05-13T12:13:15.950" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="807" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="808" CreationDate="2010-12-17T07:42:24.573" Score="5" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a number of questions, I've found the need to use 3-4 levels in bullet points (ex: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2474/what-is-the-most-effective-healing-class-in-dd-4e/5122#5122&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be possible to request the devs implement arbitrary nesting of unordered and ordered lists?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;* Level 1&#xA; * Level 2&#xA;  * Level 3  (should be)&#xA;   * Level 4 (nope, not working)&#xA; * Level 2 again&#xA;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 1&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 3  (should be)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 4 (nope, not working)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 2 again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-11-08T16:22:07.513" Title="More than 2 levels in bullet points" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="807" CreationDate="2010-12-17T08:32:15.247" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just use 3 spaces for each succeeding level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 1&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 2&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 3&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 4 (ordered)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 4 again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Level 2 again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2010-12-17T08:32:15.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="809" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="810" CreationDate="2010-12-19T02:03:30.593" Score="1" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed a couple of times that in comments (where I've seen it, but maybe it's in questions/answers as well) that sometimes the stamp is&#xA; -- UserName X [time unit(s)] ago &lt;em&gt;!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where most other comments are &#xA; -- UserName X [time unit(s)] ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the exclamation point mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2010-12-19T03:12:31.870" Title="What does the exclamation mark on a timestamp mean?" Tags="|support|users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="809" CreationDate="2010-12-19T03:12:31.870" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Actually, you're probably &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/245251#245251&quot;&gt;referring to the edit indicator&lt;/a&gt;, which looks like a pencil.  If you hover over it it will say &lt;code&gt;this comment was edited&lt;/code&gt;.  If it's been edited multiple times it will also state that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2010-12-19T03:12:31.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="811" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="59" CreationDate="2010-12-20T12:49:08.847" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been wondering about this problem myself. Until today I didn't actually know what a community wiki was because on SO I prefer questions that have definite answers. I might read CW questions but it's not why I visit SO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I see it this is almost the polar opposite of that. I would prefer to see more questions with a CW bias because I don't think that in the world of RPGs there often are hard and fast answers. I noticed there's been a bit of a fuss about a perceived D&amp;amp;D 4e bias on this site and I think, actually, the issues are related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D style RPGs are handy to ask and answer questions about on a site like this because there often &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; hard and fast answers to questions about D&amp;amp;D and systems like D&amp;amp;D. As soon as an RPG becomes more narrative then a greater number of possible answers to possible questions become moot so several, even contradictory, answers could be of merit depending on your perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that if you just CW all of these &quot;floppy&quot; questions in the traditional sense you could have absolute masters of narrative gaming, such as myself, getting no reputation because all of their questions and answers are CW and hence attract none, whereas this site's super high rep scoring mods are all experts on crunchy systems where Qs and As can have hard and fast answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just seems like a bias built into the way the system operates. Of course in a software developer's Q&amp;amp;A that's not going to happen because definitive answers are almost always preferable. Here I would say that in the case of &quot;crunchy&quot; systems (so therefore mostly D&amp;amp;D) definitive answers are going to be preferable. But in the case of subjective systems or practice you always want it to be a more CW approach, or at least I do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1059" LastActivityDate="2010-12-20T12:49:08.847" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2010-12-20T15:29:35.533" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose we &lt;strong&gt;change to the short form tags proposed by SevenSidedDie now&lt;/strong&gt;, see if or how that affects traffic, and leave the &quot;longer tag form / wiki would solve it&quot; question open until we get a definitive word from the SEO people on what would actually help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my reasons (besides the fact that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4.0&lt;/a&gt; bugs me):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/669/proposed-tag-synonyms/672#672&quot;&gt;tag suggestions&lt;/a&gt; are more correct than the current versions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's currently the highest voted answer to this question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The most used tag on a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/6556/does-the-order-of-keywords-matter-in-a-page-title&quot;&gt;is now prepended to the question's title&lt;/a&gt; if it's not in the title already. So most &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt; questions now have &quot;dnd 3.5 - &amp;lt; Title &gt;&quot; as the title of the page, for example the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5266/8&quot;&gt;Freedom of Movement&lt;/a&gt; question. (This might also be an argument against long form tags.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Google is probably smarter than me:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;when I type &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; as a search term it highlights &quot;Dungeons and Dragons&quot; in results' text.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;when I use &quot;dnd 4e&quot; it highlights &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; and &quot;4th edition.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I have no idea if that actually means anything, though!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One additional note: We should work on filling out the tag-wikis as well. When I did some test searching, often the first rpg/SE page in the results was the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4.0&quot;&gt;New questions in&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4.0&lt;/a&gt;&quot; page which includes the tag excerpt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-12-20T15:29:35.533" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="813" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2010-12-22T03:57:56.917" Score="5" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are several questions (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3/what-are-beginner-role-playing-table-top-games&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;) that say &lt;code&gt;community wiki&lt;/code&gt;. Also there are random answers that say &lt;code&gt;community wiki&lt;/code&gt; even though the questions they answer don't (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5025/which-systems-use-the-cthulhu-mythos/5136#5136&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does &lt;code&gt;community wiki&lt;/code&gt; mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="What does Community Wiki (CW) mean?" Tags="|discussion|questions|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="813" CreationDate="2010-12-22T06:14:13.743" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Basically, they are posts that are owned by the community with a much lower reputation threshold for editing. They are sometimes used when the poster wants others to collaborate and add to their answer and improve it, such as this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; (on &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackoverflow.com&quot;&gt;http://meta.stackoverflow.com&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Community Wiki posts are owned by the Community User, not by any individual user.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A much lower reputation (100 instead of 2000) is needed to edit a community wiki post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Voting on a community wiki post (up or down) does not affect any user's reputation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The original author still gets badges based on community posts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The original author keeps the reputation gained (or lost) before their post entered community mode.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A post (question or answer) becomes community wiki if one of the following is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has more than 30 answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The owner has edited the post 10 times (tag edits don't count).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;5 different users have edited it (again, tag edits don't count).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's flagged for moderator attention and a moderator enables the community wiki mode (typically done only by request).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer is made community wiki:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if the owner check the box when creating or editing it. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if it is posted to a question that is already community wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki%3A1&quot;&gt;find all posts that are community wiki&lt;/a&gt; by using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=&quot;&gt;Advanced Ninja Search Option&lt;/a&gt; &lt;code&gt;wiki:1&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2010-12-22T06:14:13.743" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2010-12-22T06:14:13.743" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="815" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="817" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:24:13.247" Score="1" ViewCount="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;Call me a dummy, but I can't seem to find this.  I know there was some form of FAQ provided shortly after I gained access to the Moderator Tools, but I am having trouble locating it again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could someone provide a link?  Also, if the link is featured in some part of the website that I've missed, could you point me to that as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As a comparison for clarity, instead of just finding out about &quot;Start-&gt;Run, appwiz.cpl&quot;, I'd also like to know I could go to &quot;Start-&gt;Settings-&gt;Control Panel-&gt;Add/Remove Programs&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T19:32:12.633" Title="Where is the FAQ about Moderator Tools?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="816" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="818" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:31:54.180" Score="0" ViewCount="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just posted a couple Community Wikis to help build lists of common RPG/DnD terms here.  Although answers to CWs should (theoretically, I believe) be contained within one community-edited answer post, that is rarely the case around here.  Often, people add separate answers (this brings up another question, I'll post separate) so that there usually ends up being three or more answers to a CW thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do I still need to accept one of these answers, to maintain my Accept Rate?  Will Community Wikis still show up in my profile as having no accepted answer, and thereby eventually alert to needing one?  (Come to think, I haven't seen that alert in awhile for some that I've deliberately left open - has it been removed?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T19:43:48.277" Title="Do Community Wikis affect my statistics, particularly the Accept Rate?" Tags="|support|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="817" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="815" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:32:12.633" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the main site click on your reputation score at the top of the page (yes, it's a link!).  This takes you to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges&quot;&gt;privilege page&lt;/a&gt;, where you can click on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;moderator tools link&lt;/a&gt; on the right to view the FAQ for that..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T19:32:12.633" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="816" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:43:48.277" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/08/new-question-asker-features/#comment-32274&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;No.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T19:43:48.277" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="819" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="826" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:47:31.927" Score="4" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought the point of a Community Wiki was so that multiple users could edit one answer, and have lists generated and consolidated into one entry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is it then, that we commonly see Community Wiki posts with multiple answers?  Is this something that should be corrected when it is seen?  For an example, refer to the CW made for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5475/197&quot;&gt;RPG Terminology&lt;/a&gt;.  There are currently two answers which are meant to serve the same purpose, where there should be one answer that has the contents of the two combined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Should Community Wikis have multiple Answer posts?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="820" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-05T19:54:01.970" Score="2" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reference &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/798/can-we-get-our-personal-voting-data-displayed-on-the-questions-lists&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I re-posted the same question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/72373/152399&quot;&gt;MSO&lt;/a&gt;, and it has since received little activity and no answers here.  Still, I'd like the question to stay on this site as a pointer to the other.  Can it be closed as an Exact Duplicate, with a referrer to MSO?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-01-08T03:52:07.303" Title="Can a question be closed as Exact Duplicate, when the duplicate is on another SE site?" Tags="|feature-request|closing-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="821" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-05T20:09:24.083" Score="2" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;This should be a CW.  I'm looking for a list of all the &quot;special purpose&quot; pages that may not have links, or may not have &lt;em&gt;obvious&lt;/em&gt; links from the main site.  This could also include some that are &quot;right in front of us where we can't see them&quot; as the saying goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Information for each page should include page title, description of purpose, URL (preferably via hyperlinking the page title), access restrictions if applicable, and directions to existing clickable links if there are any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of things we should probably see in this list include the priviliges page, FAQ for the moderator tools, the moderator tools themselves, and any pages with other useful utilities or information such as site statistics and such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T23:53:53.327" Title="Where are all the &quot;special purpose&quot; pages for the parent site?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-01-05T20:27:40.597" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="822" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="819" CreationDate="2011-01-05T21:41:41.530" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the entire &lt;em&gt;purpose&lt;/em&gt; of the question is to create a list, it is better to post the entries as separate answers. That way each individual contribution can be vetted (voted, so the 'more popular' answers rise to the top) and commented on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, in theory, you are correct; Wiki was designed to collaborate on a post by multiple contributors. If you consider the entire collection of answers as, effectively, the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; answer&amp;hellip; you achieve the same purpose, with added benefits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T21:41:41.530" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="821" CreationDate="2011-01-05T23:53:53.327" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Er.. what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The privileges page is linked from your reputation score on every page, and also on your user page.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The moderator tools are intentionally not linked because they are for moderators only&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really understand the intent of this post. It's almost like a &quot;hidden features of X&quot; but I am not sure I see the utility, other than as a &quot;let's make these things easier to find&quot; usability feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-01-05T23:53:53.327" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-01-05T23:53:53.327" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="824" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="819" CreationDate="2011-01-05T23:57:11.857" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, it is possible for a single answer to be community wiki when a user wants to invite others to edit it -- it doesn't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to be a single question / single answer model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in the specific case you cited, it does seem silly to have two answers when there should be one, so maybe flag it for mod attention with the rationale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have provided some additional guidance at the blog:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR version&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Most of the time, you should be asking yourself “How can I improve this post so that community wiki isn’t needed?” Community wiki is like a cheese knife: it is a specialized tool to be used sparingly, and only in very specific circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastEditorUserId="146" LastEditDate="2011-08-20T05:01:31.367" LastActivityDate="2011-08-20T05:01:31.367" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="819" CreationDate="2011-01-06T02:22:25.437" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We could adopt the Quora pattern for questions with lists - there is a &quot;Summary&quot; answer that cleans up the results, while leaving the individual answer-posts intact (for attribution, discussion, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That does require us to up-vote the summary - so an alternative would be to edit the question itself to contain the summary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastActivityDate="2011-01-06T02:22:25.437" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="826" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="819" CreationDate="2011-01-06T15:46:56.260" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the list has an implicit request for quality ranking between the answers or a grading of the answers, the different items should each be their own answer and voted on separately. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1113/what-is-the-single-most-influential-book-every-gm-should-read&quot;&gt;Such&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2782/where-can-i-buy-original-edition-and-out-of-print-roleplaying-books-and-accessori&quot;&gt;as&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/267/what-tools-are-useful-to-organize-a-gms-campaign-notes&quot;&gt;resources&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/791/what-role-playing-games-have-good-gamemaster-advice-sections&quot;&gt;specific&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4999/biggest-gm-pitfalls-for-new-gms&quot;&gt;purposes&lt;/a&gt;. (Since the changes in the usage of CW posts, though, this type of question would probably be asked as a normal question and switch over to wiki if it was requested or when it hit &gt;30 answers, assuming it wasn't closed first.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the list is a collection of facts, particularly facts that have an order(i.e. alphabetized or chronological), it should be in one answer so that order can be maintained. For example &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions&quot;&gt;the badge descriptions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59445/recent-feature-changes-to-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;recent feature changes&lt;/a&gt; wikis on MSO. They will split out to sub-answers as the text gets too long for a single post, such as when the badges post was split into &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/67399#67399&quot;&gt;A-L&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/68258#68258&quot;&gt;M-Z&lt;/a&gt;. Then links to each sub-answer can be added to the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say that the terminology wiki probably should have one answer which is alphabetized. Though, we could have one answer for generic terminology and a separate answer for acronyms and then split out a separate answer for each of the the major systems (D&amp;amp;D specific terms, GURPS, etc.) into their own answers. (See the other answers in the badge descriptions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/68259#68259&quot;&gt;badge families&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/68395#68395&quot;&gt;tag badges&lt;/a&gt;.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I'd think we want to keep the definitions as short as possible, leaving the long winded expositions to other sites which we could link to for further information. (i.e. this is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an encyclopedic entry with a complete historical definition and etymology, it's a &lt;em&gt;here's enough so you can at least understand the answer to your question&lt;/em&gt; kind of entry.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2011-01-06T15:46:56.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="827" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="820" CreationDate="2011-01-08T02:50:39.523" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  I tried to close as duplicate and put that URL in and it doesn't take it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-01-08T02:50:39.523" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2011-01-09T03:39:22.020" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suggestion is allowing 3.5e DMs, and players to also answer the 4e questions (or at least attempt), without fear of crazy down votes.  Chances are most of us had to convert from AD&amp;amp;D and many other games making out our own house rules, and &lt;em&gt;learning&lt;/em&gt; to convert.  If someone has not created a tag that specifically says dnd3.5e-dnd4-dnd4e something similar they should.  Or Good at Converting even.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also people in this beta community should consider having to explain ALL of their down-votes.  Especially in a beta state because this the most hindering factor from keeping me personally as an active poster.  When someone vote down explains why then I fix and they reverse that is a totally different story thats what I believe the system is intended for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also hesitant to post questions on 3.5e because most are so into 4e they dont even want to know what the 3.5e rules were, no seem to care, let alone have converted them up and could even assist me in that fashion.  Why ask?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion how questions are answered needs to be altered in some fashion and this would encourage those with large amount of experience being constantly down-voted &quot;this doesn't match the 4E tag.&quot;  Why waste all that data experience....etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This even falls into other categories someone who has put for effort to incorporate something into dnd4 from a game thats isnt DND i want to fit that into my character I will want to play more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1194" LastEditorUserId="1194" LastEditDate="2011-01-09T04:48:16.620" LastActivityDate="2011-01-09T04:48:16.620" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="829" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="830" CreationDate="2011-01-09T06:10:32.023" Score="2" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;By &quot;corrective action&quot;, I mean close/delete/undelete or any other type of vote that may change a post's good-standing status.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Refer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5475/197&quot;&gt;this thread&lt;/a&gt;, but I'm sure there's more like it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thread received a single close vote on the day it was created, January 5th.  However, today on January 9th, I still see that there is one close vote on the thread.  Aren't these supposed to expire after 2 days?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, one thought may be that another close vote has been submitted in the past two days while the first one expired.  I checked this with the moderator tools though - the thread referenced above does not show as having had a close vote posted in the past two days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are these votes not actually expiring or do they just not disappear when they do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-01-09T06:24:37.363" Title="Should &quot;corrective action&quot; votes disappear when they expire?" Tags="|support|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="829" CreationDate="2011-01-09T06:24:25.863" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, they expire after 4 days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;Questions.CloseVotesAgeThreshold    4&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-01-09T06:24:25.863" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="335" CreationDate="2011-01-10T14:20:17.917" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;NY/NJ 2011: Dreamation, Dexcon &amp;amp; I-Con&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Three cons in this area:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dreamation (Feb 24-27th 2011) and Dexcon (July 6-10th 2011) in the NJ area&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I-Con (April 15-17th, 2011) in NY.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Attendees&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/188/rmorrisey&quot;&gt;RMorrisey&lt;/a&gt;: all.  Maybe GASPcon too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Jmstar: Dreamation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/50/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt;: DexCon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-01-20T20:48:35.063" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-01-10T14:20:17.917" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2011-01-10T14:39:55.567" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we want to keep it relatively simple; it should be mixed, but not just throw in random different elements. An idea of how to mix things together: set the stage as a single encounter, a classic fantasy beast against a mixed-genre adventuring party.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An overhead view... a dragon rears his head at the top corner of the page. He breathes fire at a bunch of adventurers. The adventurers are assorted fantasy, sci-fi, cyberpunk, horror:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A mythos investigator examines the dragon-fire with a magnifying glass, to see how hot it is&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A cyber-troll stands in the edge of the fire, blazing away with an assault cannon&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A vampire fades into shadow to avoid the blast&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A wizard gets toasted by the dragon&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A cowboy with a six shooter aims for the dragon's eye&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The characters are realistic (maybe cartoony), but the whole thing happens on a wet-erase battle mat, with a light-colored hex grid and terrain drawn over it in marker. The dragon's blast should cause dice to scatter across the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastEditorUserId="188" LastEditDate="2011-01-10T14:44:56.840" LastActivityDate="2011-01-10T14:44:56.840" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="833" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-11T18:25:55.773" Score="2" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was just on the main site and saw a tag: &lt;strong&gt;dungeons-and-dragons-4e&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that it is practically identical to: &lt;strong&gt;dnd-4.0&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the tags should be merged - with the vastly more popular dnd-4.0 taking over the newcomer. I've got edit privileges, but I don't want to abuse them. Is there some process I need to follow to change these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2011-01-28T17:00:29.330" Title="What's the process for merging tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="834" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="833" CreationDate="2011-01-12T17:01:15.470" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;There is currently controversy surrounding tags and synonyms, so retagging (particularly the dnd-related family) is probably not a good idea right now.&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue has been resolved by synonyms. Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="696" LastEditDate="2011-01-28T17:00:29.330" LastActivityDate="2011-01-28T17:00:29.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="835" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-17T16:02:23.167" Score="5" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was thinking of putting up some questions on the site that I wasn't certain were appropriate in their scope.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've been playing some D&amp;amp;D 4e lately.  I've noticed that whilst we have many questions on 4e, especially 4e rules issues, we don't have many on 4e &quot;strategy&quot;.  So would questions with the following kinds of topics be appropriate, too broad, too general, offtopic, etc.?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How do I build the most effective 4e controller?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What should my 4e leader focus on doing?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How can my striker and my partner's defender best synergize their abilities and coordinate?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What sort of items should my save-focused wizard be prioritizing?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender?  How?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;etc.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="732" LastActivityDate="2011-01-23T04:37:52.807" Title="Are questions on general strategy for different classes appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="836" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="835" CreationDate="2011-01-17T16:45:43.563" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to answer &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; questions along those lines.  For me, the most successful questions would be very specific.  The below is my 2 cents on your proposed questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do I build the most effective 4e controller?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question cannot be answered IMHO.  It is dependent on the makeup of your party.  The best controller for your party may not be the best controller for someone else's party.  There is no single solitary best answer in real gameplay.  I'm sure someone could answer which controller can give out the best DPS.  But in a lot of situations, the better controller would do less DPS and hand out the &lt;code&gt;stunned&lt;/code&gt; condition at the drop of a hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should my 4e leader focus on doing?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, party dependent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can my striker and my partner's defender best synergize their abilities and coordinate?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Replace with, &quot;How can my Barbarian and my partner's Paladin best synergize their abilities and coordinate?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;What sort of items should my save-focused wizard be prioritizing?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a pretty good question.  Very specific and focused.  &quot;I need items for this purpose&quot;  To avoid the list becoming too large, it might be nice to restrict it to a certain tier.  Restricting it to a certain level might be too localized, I dunno.  It's a fine line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender? How?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, this is better directed to a forum.  It seems likely to generate an extended discussion which isn't what StackExchange sites are good for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-01-17T16:45:43.563" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="835" CreationDate="2011-01-17T16:49:04.073" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, the &quot;canonical&quot; references would be these recent blog posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Real Questions Have Answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think most of those examples are a little broad. Pat Ludwig's examples are pretty good, although I would think that &quot;Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender? How?&quot; is doable, assuming the question text scoped the questions properly (i.e. excluded the DM tuning encounters specifically for the group).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-01-17T16:49:04.073" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="335" CreationDate="2011-01-20T19:50:11.153" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gencon.com/2011/indy/default.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GenCon Indy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GenCon. It's the big one. Indianapolis, Indiana. August 4-7.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Gen Con Indy is the original, longest running, best attended, gaming convention in the world. For over 41 years, Gen Con Indy has been setting the trend and breaking records. Last year, more than 30,000 unique attendees experienced Gen Con Indy. The biggest complaint we hear is that there is simply too much to do, see, and experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Attendees&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/696/gomad&quot;&gt;gomad&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/50/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2011-01-20T20:51:19.163" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-01-20T19:50:11.153" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="835" CreationDate="2011-01-23T04:37:52.807" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;My opinions are &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/best-build-questions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. Roughly speaking, questions that allow discussion of theory and design patterns are good, questions that have a specific party configuration are good, and questions that just need a link to the CharOp forum are horrible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-01-23T04:37:52.807" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="840" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-23T22:43:48.403" Score="3" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think images break the spoiler code.  I'm not sure when or how often an image might need to be placed in a spoiler block, but can this be fixed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; &lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8f8571493d71202986f2a6ab0dbd7c23?s=32&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="1240" LastEditDate="2013-07-07T15:32:23.070" LastActivityDate="2013-07-07T15:32:23.070" Title="Images break the spoiler code." Tags="|bug|status-completed|spoilers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="669" CreationDate="2011-01-25T00:27:22.973" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Could someone please take a look at the &lt;em&gt;burningwheel&lt;/em&gt; / &lt;em&gt;burning-wheel&lt;/em&gt; tag set? I know it's not as big as the DnD issue, but with my current rep I can't fix it and it needs fixing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2011-01-25T00:27:22.973" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="842" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="844" CreationDate="2011-01-25T15:16:45.970" Score="4" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to thanks one user for some changes he made to one of my question, how can I do it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've done it trough the comments, but I'm not sure he will get my answer, am I wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1237" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How to contact a user?" Tags="|support|comments|users|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="842" CreationDate="2011-01-25T16:11:39.350" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments, answers to questions, and pings in chat generate an alert to the user, via the &quot;Inbox&quot; counter next to the StackExchange link in the upper-left corner as well as the message icon next to their username in the top bar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only people with access to out-of-band contact information (i.e.: e-mail address) for users, are &quot;diamond&quot; moderators and site admins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-01-25T16:11:39.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="842" CreationDate="2011-01-25T16:57:08.617" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you use the @-style comment replies, they'll be notified immediately if they are logged in or as soon as they next log in if they are not. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/43019/how-do-comment-replies-work&quot;&gt;How do @replies work?&lt;/a&gt; over on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;MSO&lt;/a&gt; for more. Assuming you are referring to the edit on your first question, you &lt;em&gt;did it exactly right&lt;/em&gt;! +1 for that!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out the user's profile page and see if they have included any contact info. Some folks include email or other contact info there which means it's OK (even expected) for you to contact them that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is explicitly (and often vehemently!) NOT a social networking site, so there isn't a private message system of any kind. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2011-01-25T16:57:08.617" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="845" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="847" CreationDate="2011-01-26T13:57:14.270" Score="7" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it safe to assume all references to AD&amp;amp;D (and the adnd tag) are references to the 1st edition (1e) version of the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1302" LastEditorUserId="8" LastEditDate="2011-01-26T15:11:35.297" LastActivityDate="2011-03-17T01:31:01.447" Title="Terminology - Does AD&amp;D (adnd tag) specifically refer to AD&amp;D 1st Edition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="564" CreationDate="2011-01-26T13:59:51.990" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suspect there won't be any changes permitted while the site is in beta, however if it makes it out of beta it will get a proper design - gaming and programmers are good examples of sites with their final full designs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jin (?), the SE designer will go through a process of proposing designs here on meta if that point comes and generally takes feedback and suggestions on-board (for instance the first programmers one was completely scrapped based on the initial comments).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1302" LastActivityDate="2011-01-26T13:59:51.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="845" CreationDate="2011-01-26T15:11:06.937" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't speak for how everyone will use the term in their questions... :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;code&gt;Yes&lt;/code&gt;, that is what the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; is for. To quote the discussion about the d&amp;amp;d tags (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/669/proposed-tag-synonyms-for-dnd4-0/672#672&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie's answer&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; doesn't need a &quot;1&quot; qualifier. 1) Almost all AD&amp;amp;D 1e questions are relevant to AD&amp;amp;D 2nd edition since it's not significantly different in most regards. 2) If people say &quot;AD&amp;amp;D&quot; without qualifying, they mean 1st edition. 3) If people mean 2nd edition specifically, they invariably say 2nd edition. Hence &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; is a better tag than [adnd1] would be, is more natural, and doesn't cover anything it shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looks like we need to add some definition to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/adnd/info&quot;&gt;wiki exerpt&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-01-26T15:11:06.937" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="411" CreationDate="2011-01-26T22:08:31.117" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is only about its use with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;. It is used under other systems and that may be fine, but I'm not as familiar with them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As near as I can tell, this tag means everything that happens that isn't roleplaying and involves the tactical rules; i.e. everything that happens while &quot;in initiative&quot;. Using that definition, it's too generic and most of our [dnd-4e] questions should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; as well. (Currently only 41 questions have it.) That distinction doesn't seem useful to me, since the question is usually about a more specific aspect of the rules that also gets tagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2011-01-26T22:08:31.117" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-01-26T22:08:31.117" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="849" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-01-28T02:23:16.253" Score="5" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently went through the questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; and cleaned out a few instances where the tag seemed to have been placed simply because the question was about RPGs.  In one or two cases, it was the only tag on the question but was easily and more appropriately replaced with other existing tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have suggestions for how we can rename this tag to more clearly reflect its purpose (intended for questions about how to act in-character) separate from general RPG questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2011-01-31T00:16:35.577" LastActivityDate="2011-01-31T00:16:35.577" Title="Should we rename the &quot;roleplaying&quot; tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="850" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="849" CreationDate="2011-01-28T02:38:58.980" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;how-to-roleplay?&#xA;roleplay-in-character?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(tags match regardless of position in the words, so typing rolep will match both of those)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2011-01-28T02:38:58.980" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="851" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="849" CreationDate="2011-01-28T14:13:28.323" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO, we can just periodically weed through the tag and get rid of the uses that don't match. A tag wiki would probably help too (although you don't see it when adding tags to a question...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main issue I've had with this in the past is that there aren't many terms for playing a role that are as widely used. And most of the natural runners up don't include the term &quot;roleplay&quot; unless we force it in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-01-28T14:13:28.323" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2011-01-29T02:14:31.650" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a Larper and I'm a tabletopper too.&#xA;I like see both in here. =D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1273" LastActivityDate="2011-01-29T02:14:31.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="853" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2011-01-29T02:19:50.227" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think about Papers, pencil and dices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1273" LastActivityDate="2011-01-29T02:19:50.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="840" CreationDate="2011-01-30T08:01:02.807" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I predict that you will get a &lt;code&gt;status-bydesign&lt;/code&gt; on this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1304" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T08:01:02.807" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2011-01-30T08:07:57.933" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to say a d6 being touched by a glowing wand.  Yeah, the wand is fantasy-centric, but probably we can admit that so is the hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I would really rather the stack of different types of polyhedral dice, but this logo has to scale down to a 16x16 favicon.  We have &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; little real estate to work with when you take that into consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1304" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T08:07:57.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="856" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="108" CreationDate="2011-01-30T08:10:01.957" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Alternately, I could go for a hexahedron, tetrahedron and icosahedron (d6, d4 and d20) arranged like the boxes in &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;gamedev.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;'s logo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1304" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:18:42.213" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T08:10:01.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="165" CreationDate="2011-01-30T10:22:03.540" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;LARP and Freeform should both be in.  I prefer to interpret the tabletop as saying that we aren't talking about business roleplaying, not that some of the RPGs you might see at a gaming con aren't welcome.  How about changing the charter from:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players, gamemasters, and writers of tabletop, live-action, or freeform role-playing games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(see how RPG writers sneak into my proposal)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T10:22:03.540" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="858" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="849" CreationDate="2011-01-30T17:15:16.413" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-01-30T17:15:16.413" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="849" CreationDate="2011-01-31T00:14:26.127" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, we might want to consider a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying-technique&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying-technique&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying-technique&lt;/a&gt; tag to cover the nuts-and-bolts of playing roles. I think that'd be slightly more inclusive than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, because it could encompass, for example inter-player techniques that enhance roleplay without being about how to play a character, and other roleplaying methodology stuff…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-01-31T00:14:26.127" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="860" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="746" CreationDate="2011-02-01T05:32:10.380" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This experiment has already been initiated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5475/glossary-of-common-rpg-terminology&quot;&gt;Glossary of Common RPG Terminology&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5476/glossary-of-common-dungeons-dragons-terminology&quot;&gt;Glossary of Common Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Terminology&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5469/where-can-i-learn-the-meanings-of-rpg-terminology&quot;&gt;Where can I learn the meanings of RPG terminology?&lt;/a&gt; for links to existing glossaries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-02-01T05:32:10.380" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="861" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="862" CreationDate="2011-02-02T08:13:38.213" Score="2" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a bit of a strange case.  I have a question which I would like closed, so that it can be re-built into its proper forms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5819/197&quot;&gt;Does shifting count as movement, for the purpose of triggering non-attack opportunity actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The situation with this is that the thread has become horribly mangled from its original intent, and also quite confusing to a degree.  I would rather it be taken out and replaced by the three separate questions which are actually discussed in the one thread:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;1. Does shifting count as movement, for the purpose of triggering non-attack opportunity actions?&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is of course, the title of the existing question.  I still feel this particular question will be of value to the community.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;2. Can immediate actions be triggered by shifting?&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This, as it turns out, is the actual question I was looking to have answered.  The power referenced is an immediate action, not an opportunity action.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;3. Can Pursuit of the Hunter be used to move away from the triggering enemy?&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is a question totally unrelated, except in that it refers to the same power I've given as an example in my question.  However, it has been raised (and in some cases become the primary feature) in some answers to my question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could a diamond mod take out this question, or advise what other corrective action should be taken?  I don't want to post the replacements until the original is dealt with, to avoid close-as-duplicate votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT - Took Pat's advice and made the new threads.  Voting to close the original as an exact duplicate of the first of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6024/does-shifting-trigger-immediate-actions&quot;&gt;Can shifting trigger immediate actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6023/can-shifting-trigger-non-attack-opportunity-actions&quot;&gt;Can shifting trigger non-attack opportunity actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6025/can-pursuit-of-the-hunter-be-used-to-move-away-from-the-triggering-enemy&quot;&gt;Can Pursuit of the Hunter be used to move away from the triggering enemy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-02-04T17:14:43.153" Title="Could the &quot;shift triggering opportunity actions&quot; thread be closed, for re-build?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="861" CreationDate="2011-02-02T14:34:14.913" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you should post your new questions, and then we can dup the old one to one of the new ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-02-02T14:34:14.913" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="845" CreationDate="2011-02-02T21:02:16.933" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;AD&amp;amp;D 1e and AD&amp;amp;D 2e are substantially different. Notably, 1e was written during the golden age of the 1970s, solely by E. Gary Gygax; 2e was written in the late 1980s, by David &quot;Zeb&quot; Cook after Gary was ousted from TSR. The differences are myriad (the biggest being Skills). Note that at Dragonsfoot.org, two thriving and separate forums address 1e and 2e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I strongly suggest that AD&amp;amp;D1e and AD&amp;amp;D2e be separate tags, and the generic AD&amp;amp;D tag be retired/redirected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="72" LastEditDate="2011-02-11T15:32:12.723" LastActivityDate="2011-02-11T15:32:12.723" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="864" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2011-02-02T21:14:02.720" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please remember that historically (and chronologically by version #) you have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D Line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v1: OD&amp;amp;D (3 LLB only)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v1a: OD&amp;amp;D + Supplements (with Greyhawk + Blackmoor, the basis for AD&amp;amp;D1e)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v2: Holmes D&amp;amp;D (update of thee above, O+Sup)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v4: Moldvay D&amp;amp;D (first new-brand D&amp;amp;D differing from AD&amp;amp;D1e)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v5: Mentzer D&amp;amp;D aka BECM (omitting Immortals since it's almost unrelated); the LAST Original D&amp;amp;D Line&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AD&amp;amp;D line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v3: AD&amp;amp;D 1e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v6: AD&amp;amp;D 2e (major expansion/change of 1e)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v7: AD&amp;amp;D 3e, renamed D&amp;amp;D 3e (least popular of all editions btw)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v8: [A]D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, fixing the massive errors (from lack of playtesting)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v9: [A]D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;v9a: [A]D&amp;amp;D 4e+ with vast errata (again, sigh)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each of the above 9 editions (plus 2 modifications/expansions) are notably different from one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be nice to have a Tag system allowing individual categorization along with bulk grouping options in searches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="72" LastEditDate="2011-02-02T23:47:39.107" LastActivityDate="2011-02-02T23:47:39.107" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2011-02-03T10:10:47.863" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we at least merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;?  I don't see a whole lot of value in having the two different tags; indeed, all but two of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, the two not so double tagged are: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3368/the-half-elf-is-it-balanced&quot;&gt;The half-elf: is it balanced?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;amp; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2689/searching-for-a-particular-dungeon-adventure&quot;&gt;Searching for a particular dungeon adventure&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-02-03T10:10:47.863" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="866" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="867" CreationDate="2011-02-03T20:09:36.403" Score="3" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few times, I've read a question and in typing an answer, I get the banner thingie that says that new answer(s) have been uploaded.  I click to see what has been answered already, and see that my answer will essentially be a duplicate of what just got uploaded (that darn fastest finger in the West beat me again).  I delete all the text in the answer box.  A span of time later, I load up the question to see the continuing discussion, and my half-answer is saved.  I think it's a great feature if I start an answer at work and then go home and load it on my home computer, but what if I decided that I won't post the answer I started typing?  Is there some way to kill that answer?  It seems an awful use of resources (I know, memory is cheap now) to hold onto half of an answer that will never finish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How do I delete an unposted answer?" Tags="|feature-request|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="867" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="866" CreationDate="2011-02-03T20:36:56.273" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/68957/manually-resetingdiscarding-saved-question-drafts&quot;&gt;Manually clear saved question drafts&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the top answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Data for only one question is stored for you. If you navigate to another question and start answering, you will loose what was stored of your last answer. You don't even have to worry about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No great waste of space to hold at most one answer for each person I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-02-03T20:36:56.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="861" CreationDate="2011-02-04T17:14:43.153" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can mod close it but am remote and doing it via iPhone - please post the new question links in a comment on that q and then I'll close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-02-04T17:14:43.153" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="869" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-05T12:03:29.907" Score="24" ViewCount="732" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just had the following conversation with a friend of mine, summarizing him grumbling about RPG.SE not being very useful to him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail: Being a total stranger to the resource, i come there, and look at the front page of questions, just clicking on the ones that look interesting. half are trivial, the others have immediate comments of &amp;quot;rewrite this&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;too general/specific, throw away&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail: I don't feel like i'm wanted here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brian: Well, what do you mean by wanted? Cause you do have a lot of gaming knowledge. So we can use your answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail: my input, whatever it would be, will be criticized for not fitting some criteria or others, until i learn what the spoken and unspoken rules are like. this presents 2 clear options&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail: 1) put effort and time into learning the rules, observe how people post and answer questions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail: 2) shrug and not bother writing answers that will not be appreciated despite being correct&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we make the site more approachable for newcomer experts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T04:18:08.497" Title="Site approachability" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="870" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-05T17:23:25.570" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A certain amount of 1) is necessary when joining any new community IMHO.  A newcomer to any regular forum isn't necessarily going to be welcomed into the inner circle despite demonstrating obvious expertise. Does he feel that it would be an excessive amount for this community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackExchange is optimized for getting answers to your questions.  I'd agree that it isn't necessarily optimized for new experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get the feeling that I'm not answering your question as so much as restating it. :-S&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would point out that due to the mechanism of reputation and increasing access to new functionality based on the same that everyone is guaranteed a seat at the table here, unlike most other forums/sites.  Especially with the site still in beta, it isn't a lengthy process to get the rep necessary to influence things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-02-05T17:23:25.570" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-05T17:48:22.827" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, a community like this has to balance &quot;the Stack Exchange way&quot; with &quot;Not being rude.&quot;   I feel bad for people who come and ask a question that in their minds seems reasonable (like &quot;where's the Star Wars license&quot; guy) and bam it gets shut down.  Justified or not, they'll be leaving and not coming back, obviously. But of course we need to have some concern (maybe not as much as we have, but some concern) over having good questions.  Not every question on SO/SF is one for the ages, I'll note.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I don't see as much of a problem with answers.  It's &quot;hard&quot; to write a good SE question out of the gate, but the only real reason to not write a good answer is that you're not writing an answer, you're writing a discussion-forum-esque comment.  And the response to those should be to migrate them to comments.  I am dubious that anyone who is a real expert will write many answers that will get massively downvoted, massive downvotes tend to be for people being hostile in some way or completely off topic.  Now, some people do get upset about one downvote, and that's sad but nothing to do about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, it seems like the rules are hard to find - we need to figure out a way to have a very clear &quot;New to the site?  Go read this!&quot; that concisely (not as part of a big ol faq or whatnot) explains the basic concept of the questions/answers nature of the site.  I can write one up, need to figure out how to place it prominently enough though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-04-12T04:18:08.497" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T04:18:08.497" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-05T20:24:40.193" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;This started as a comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability/871#871&quot;&gt;@mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt;... and then it got long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're thinking of and describing our FAQ as &quot;a big ol faq or whatnot&quot; I think it means our FAQ could use some streamlining and editing. It literally is the &quot;New to the site? Go read this!&quot; page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/l4U6J.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg.stackexchange page showing the message &amp;#39;Welcome to the Q&amp;amp;A for gamemasters and players of tabletop, pen-and-paper role playing games - check out the FAQ&amp;#39;. &amp;#39;FAQ&amp;#39; is a hyperlink to the FAQ page&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing I find interesting is that our FAQ contains both sections &lt;strong&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;What kind of questions should I not ask here?&lt;/strong&gt;... but more than half of &lt;strong&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/strong&gt; is devoted to &lt;em&gt;what not to ask&lt;/em&gt; and where else to ask questions which don't belong here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the above fact is interesting on its own; it reflects the way the community seems really fixated on what rpg.stackexchange &lt;strong&gt;is not&lt;/strong&gt; as opposed to what &lt;strong&gt;it is&lt;/strong&gt;. Mikhail's opinion (from the original question) of the community also reflects that mentality; there are lots of concrete rules people can cite when pointing the finger claiming others aren't fitting in, but not as many rules for others to understand quickly how to integrate; the only way they can integrate is the long way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I think we need to brush up that &lt;strong&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/strong&gt; section, thinking of it as a &quot;rpg.stackexchange bill of rights&quot; which anyone can easily cite saying &quot;Yes, my question belongs here&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We still have the same problem: the &quot;get off my lawn&quot; part of the FAQ &quot;What kind of questions can I ask here?&quot; is still lengthier than the &quot;welcome to our site part&quot; - visually it's twice as big and textually it's 30+ words longer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yOc3Z.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;The FAQ on April 1 2011&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes no sense and is redundant since there is another section of the FAQ devoted to &quot;What kind of questions should I not ask here&quot; later on...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2011-04-01T14:09:23.370" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-06T10:33:36.090" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think perhaps you're asking the wrong questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What topical sites &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; this person participate on? How do they work? What audience do they have? Why do they work for him?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And if the answer to the above is &quot;he doesn't participate on any&quot;, then well.. that's that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of people in love with the phpBB status quo and you will never change them. Furthermore -- we don't want to. We want the smart users who are &lt;em&gt;sick&lt;/em&gt; of the discussiony, signature-laden phpBB status quo and want a higher signal to noise ratio -- even if, yes, that requires &lt;em&gt;so many stupid rules!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know, rules like.. stay on topic.. ask questions that can be answered.. don't waste our time with idle discussion, stuff like that. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-02-06T10:33:36.090" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-07T17:30:38.080" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your friend seems to be looking at how &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; are policed and extrapolating that the same is done for &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That assumption is understandable, but incorrect. SE is extremely accepting of answers both in the system (you can't vote to delete them) and in culture (rarely do people argue in comments to an answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're going to think on how to make the site more welcoming to new experts, I think we need to somehow emphasise that not only are &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; answers welcome, but that eliminating bad questions is a &lt;em&gt;feature&lt;/em&gt; of the system for the benefit of people who like to answer interesting questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And on that note I'm going to address the part of Mikhail's comments that have gone without comment so far, and go out on a 4e limb: A portion—not most or even many, but enough to taint the well—of the 4e questions asked here seem to be ridiculously trivial. I get the (perhaps mistaken) impression that many people are playing using only DDi without reading the books, and come here to ask questions that would be trivially answerable if they had ever Read The Fine Rules. To be fair, I've noticed this with 3.5 too, where a small number of questions look like the asker is trying to play using only the SRD, having never read the actual rules—but it's 4e questions that dominate the front page and end up setting the tone of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I submit that a significant percentage of trivial rules questions—enough to form a visible trend—is a flaw for attracting experts. Those questions are just boring. To connect this to the first half of my answer, I don't think we're doing a good job of eliminating bad questions when it comes to The Most Popular Game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mikhail's impression was that the questions he saw were all either &lt;em&gt;trivial&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;shut down&lt;/em&gt;, and if we are going to discuss how to make this kind of potential user more welcome, we should really be addressing both halves of that equally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-02-07T17:30:38.080" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="875" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="879" CreationDate="2011-02-08T10:04:34.953" Score="7" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you look at the Area51 assessment of rpg.stackexchange.com &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;things are looking good except one area - the number of questions being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can be done to encourage more (good) questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1302" LastEditorUserId="146" LastEditDate="2011-02-08T16:03:00.160" LastActivityDate="2011-02-09T03:25:11.330" Title="Encouraging More Questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-08T10:34:31.760" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that this group is too fast to close questions down. It seams that a few of the regulars have topics that they either don't like, find uninteresting or seam to think is an  incorrect question. This makes it seam a very unfriendly place, it is better to correct a question, to improve it or to point it to a matching question before closing it down. Newbie are the life and soul of a community, frighten them away and you will be left with only the old hands, that can't post on anything as it has already been done. Also, sometimes an old question can be re-asked and new answers found, there is no point posting new answer to an already blessed answer on a previous question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="768" LastEditDate="2011-02-08T10:59:01.070" LastActivityDate="2011-02-08T10:59:01.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="875" CreationDate="2011-02-08T10:37:33.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;By not closing down question that are deemed to have already been asked or not quite on topic. It kills your community. I have got board personally as the site seamed to be run by people that are only interested in metaphysical points, if a question has been asked before then there a good given answer, that can't been corrected or added to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2011-02-08T10:37:33.520" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="875" CreationDate="2011-02-08T14:18:03.693" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generosity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/10/vote-early-vote-often/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Vote up often!&lt;/a&gt;  It is encouraging, both to new and established users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be charitable in interpreting the rules.  Look for novelty in questions that overlap with existing ones, and suggest improvements to otherwise problematic questions, before voting to close.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cross-reference existing posts that are relevant, and speak highly of worthwhile contributions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The time to slam on the brakes is when looseness is causing wider problems in the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="146" LastEditDate="2011-02-08T16:04:48.927" LastActivityDate="2011-02-08T16:04:48.927" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="875" CreationDate="2011-02-08T18:24:51.950" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can't really &quot;encourage more questions&quot;, per se; not at least in any sustainable way. But getting more questions is a nice side effect of &lt;strong&gt;promoting healthy growth overall&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make this site successful, you need a place where people are asking very interesting and challenging questions, not the same questions asked 100 times before on every other discussion site. &lt;strong&gt;The best way we've found to bring in more users is by publicizing interesting questions&lt;/strong&gt;. Use those social links: Twitter, Facebook, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these sites start out with steady traffic going kind of horizontally for a while. Then, at some unpredictable point, POW the site hits a critical mass &quot;tipping point&quot; and the traffic starts climbing inexorably. Your traffic trends are pretty healthy, and there have been some promising signs of upward growth. Almost 52% of this site's traffic comes from questions people found in Google, so it looks like &lt;strong&gt;you are almost there!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pK7dg.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To keep those users and get &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt; asking good questions, the quality has to be there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tell you this because when people start talking about &quot;getting more questions,&quot; the discussion inevitably goes in one or two directions: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/&quot;&gt;&quot;seeding&quot; the site&lt;/a&gt; with more questions, or lowering the bar on quality to &lt;em&gt;keep&lt;/em&gt; more questions. Both are a &lt;strong&gt;losing formula&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back when Stack Exchange was a for-subscription service, individuals tried to create these sites with little idea of how to draw an audience. When the questions did not magically appear, most panicked. Sites started soliciting and allowing lower-quality questions under the mistaken belief that &quot;more questions at any cost&quot; was better than nurturing fewer questions with the high quality Stack Exchange users have become accustomed to. The result was almost &lt;strong&gt;3,000 sites shut down with a 99.6% failure rate&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't emphasize enough the importance of staying on top of the quality of your content. This site's quality remains high; nearly 100% of the questions get answered; you have a strong community of &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;avid users&lt;/a&gt;&amp;hellip; &lt;em&gt;Those&lt;/em&gt; are your saving graces.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stay on top of the quality. Promote interesting questions. The traffic will come. If you start allowing questions that &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; a step above, it will start to undermine &lt;strong&gt;what we believe makes these sites worthwhile in the first place&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="94" LastEditorUserId="94" LastEditDate="2011-02-09T03:25:11.330" LastActivityDate="2011-02-09T03:25:11.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="880" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="881" CreationDate="2011-02-09T13:46:06.153" Score="5" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the things DragonsFoot does which seems fairly useful is mark questions where a &quot;by the book&quot; response is wanted - that is one which excludes house rules, &quot;spirit of the game&quot; explanations and so on and focuses just on what is actually written in the rulebooks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it worth having a tag for this?  Or another standardised format for how it's specified?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1302" LastEditorUserId="1302" LastEditDate="2011-02-09T14:07:25.467" LastActivityDate="2011-02-09T14:35:06.737" Title="&quot;By the Book&quot; Tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="880" CreationDate="2011-02-09T14:35:06.737" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do, it's &quot;[dnd-4e]!&quot; Zing!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the problem here is that we could have a &quot;[by-the-book]&quot; tag and use it to demarcate questions where the OP doesn't want to hear your kewl house rule but wants a RAW answer.  The problem is, that's &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a meta tag and use of those is discouraged for various reasons&lt;/a&gt; - a tag should be able to stand alone as the only tag on a question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, it's probably best to just specify your tolerance for legalism in the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-02-09T14:35:06.737" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-10T03:13:08.480" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure how we would go about directing people to them, but there certainly are some questions that are more &quot;expert&quot; level than others on the site (and I imagine we would have a heck of a time distilling such a list).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wonder if there are any views that are more conducive to encouraging new experts than the front page?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hot questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=hot&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=hot&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unanswered questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/unanswered&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/unanswered&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;FAQ questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=faq&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=faq&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Active questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=active&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=active&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2011-02-10T03:13:08.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="883" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-10T15:18:49.010" Score="3" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just got awarded the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/badges/8/citizen-patrol&quot;&gt;Citizen's Patrol badge&lt;/a&gt;... but I don't think I flagged anything recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone know why that might happen?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Citizen's Patrol Badge... why?" Tags="|support|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="883" CreationDate="2011-02-10T15:21:33.080" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because you flagged something for moderator attention, probably in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59445/recent-feature-changes-to-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;Recent feature changes to Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2011-02-09: Flagging for moderator attention now counts for the Citizen Patrol badge. This change applies retroactively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-02-10T15:21:33.080" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="885" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-10T21:34:01.167" Score="10" ViewCount="359" Body="&lt;p&gt;So it recently came up on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability/872#872&quot;&gt;Site approachability&lt;/a&gt; that our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; comes off as a little ... &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7X2_V60YK8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;get off my lawn&quot;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, how can we make it better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should be added?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should be removed?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What's good the way it is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Updated, please take a look.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T23:34:22.147" Title="Site FAQ Attempt #2" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2017-10-03T23:57:55.490" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="885" CreationDate="2011-02-10T21:40:44.093" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;These items&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about RPG or genre related movies, comics, novels, or other media&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about Card games, miniature games, wargames, and boardgames&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question is about Computer RPGs or MMORPGs, ask on gaming.stackexchange.com.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question is about board games, card games, or table top war games ask on boardgames.stackexchange.com.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;appear to be duplicate information and could be condensed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-02-10T21:40:44.093" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-02-10T22:43:36.833" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;With all that's been discussed so far, here's a few (perhaps opinionated) conclusions I've reached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The FAQ needs some work.  Plain and simple, although the work itself may not quite be.  We need to make it clearer what is and is not acceptable here, while at the same time putting some more emphasis on the former.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We're too soft on &quot;trivial&quot; or &quot;off-topic&quot; questions.  If we're really going to push for a certain level of &quot;expertise&quot; or &quot;complexity&quot; in our questions, and really want to disallow certain subjects or types of questions, we need to get better about closing them.  This statement of course is only meant to address questions that cannot be modified to more properly fit the intent of the site - whatever we conclude that to be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are closed because they are genuinely not appropriate for the site should be deleted in relatively short order.  This is just a simple matter of maintaining a clean site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We should continue to &lt;em&gt;gently&lt;/em&gt; prod people into asking better questions.  If a question is salvageable, either edit it directly or post a comment to the OP with appropriate suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We need to start cleaning up our comment space.  If certain comments have outlived their usefulness, such as edit suggestions that have already been implemented or rejected, or comment-debates that have run their course, it's time for them to go.  Again, it's just another part of keeping a clean site and pleasant appearance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-02-10T22:43:36.833" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="885" CreationDate="2011-02-11T00:01:03.433" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We still have the same problem: the &quot;get off my lawn&quot; part of the FAQ &quot;What kind of questions can I ask here?&quot; is still lengthier than the &quot;welcome to our site part&quot; - visually it's twice as big and textually it's 30+ words longer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yOc3Z.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;The FAQ on April 1 2011&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes no sense and is redundant since there is another section of the FAQ devoted to &quot;What kind of questions should I not ask here&quot; later on...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a try:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games - Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs - who need answers to questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The best questions are those that have specific answers, but in general, if you have a question which covers...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Game rules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Information about campaign settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...then you're in the right place!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Before you ask your question, though, consider the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;We want the questions on our site to be valuable sources of information for all web users, not just our community members, so we try to keep our personal opinions out of our questions and answers when we can.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Likewise, we don't want the information on our site to become obsolete, and so we try not to ask questions whose answers may change with time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Since the answers to questions on rpg.stackexchange shouldn't change with time, we don't re-ask the same question once it's been answered. We add more answers, we add comments, we ask a related question, but we avoid asking it again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you read the above and rpg.stackexchange isn't what you're looking for, you might want to try:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Asking questions about Computer RPGs or MMORPGs on &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;gaming.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Asking questions about board games, card games, or table top war games on &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;boardgames.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2011-04-02T05:18:03.183" CommentCount="21" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-02-11T00:01:03.433" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="891" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2011-02-11T22:13:20.197" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Loosen the rules requiring unambiguous, precisely answerable, specific etc etc questions.&lt;/strong&gt; Loosen them well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are not programming languages. RPG questions/answers are not measurable as good/bad like programming and such questions/answers. Allow way, way more freedom and subjectivity. I'll go further: not only allow these. Foster them. We're talking creativity and gaming here (aren't we?), not &quot;just&quot; best practices for solving equations, technical and logical problems/bugs in a given framework/system/etc. (No disrespect for StackOverflow and the rest of the similar SE sites, I use them often as well... &lt;em&gt;in my work&lt;/em&gt;. And that's a huge difference.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless this site welcomes more subjective questions, imo it will remain the destination of a relatively small group interested mostly in rules-lawyering (no offense), as non-subjective, non-ambiguous, specific questions are hard to ask about other things than rules and game mechanics. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DnD has always been (imo again) a rules intensive system, and the overwhelming number of DnD4.0 questions on this site seems to support my current view of rpg.se summed up (a bit haphazardly) above. Letting in more subjective games, topics and people would probably increase the number of non-DnD questions. (Letting in means refraining from closing and voting down such.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, pls consider not calling members &quot;experts&quot;. You might be a programming expert and a rules-expert, but I don't think &quot;an expert creative storyteller&quot; would paint anyone in a... respectable light, especially if you bestow the title upon yourself. Some people might grow to be called experts - by others. (And possibly not because of having answered a zillion minor questions about what page and paragraph of a rulebook answers an obscure game mechanics problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right, sorry for the rant. It's nothing personal and I didn't want to offend anyone. I respect all the different kinds of gamers - but to get this site going for real they'll all need to be present (invited and welcomed) here in a healthy balance. And the current approach to what is and what isn't an acceptable question about &lt;em&gt;roleplaying games&lt;/em&gt; doesn't seem to help that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="507" LastActivityDate="2011-02-11T22:13:20.197" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="885" CreationDate="2011-02-12T04:50:29.433" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;A couple minor formatting notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But what about ...&quot; is a bit large. It should match the other headings like &quot;What kind of questions can I ask here?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;We accept questions about rules, campaign settings, role-playing challenges, gaming tools, gamemastering challenges, and more. And yes, it's Ok to be subjective!&quot; should be broken up into a list, to help it catch the reader's eye:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We accept questions about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Rules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Campaign settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Role-playing challenges&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gaming tools&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gamemastering challenges&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And yes, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;it's okay to be subjective!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps make &quot;it's okay to be subjective&quot; a link to &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll go over the exact copy, and compare it to what LeguRi has tomorrow and see if anything jumps out...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2011-02-12T17:02:21.933" LastActivityDate="2011-02-12T17:02:21.933" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="893" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-16T02:42:32.610" Score="4" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is what brought this issue to mind for me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6266/is-it-possible-to-turn-tensers-floating-disk-into-a-charriot&quot;&gt;Is it possible to turn Tenser&amp;#39;s Floating Disk into a chariot?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is apparently an AD&amp;amp;D question, but it addresses a rules element that exists (at least) in both AD&amp;amp;D and D&amp;amp;D4e.  The real issue I have here, is that the only place the system/version was specified, is in the tags for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading the title and question, I began writing a response based on the D&amp;amp;D4e rule, having practically no knowledge myself of AD&amp;amp;D at all, let alone that this rules element also existed in that version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't until I was half-way through writing the post, that I noticed the tags referencing AD&amp;amp;D and realized that my answer may be very inappropriate depending on the differences between the versions of that rules element.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To prevent similar confusions in the future, should we enforce via mention in the FAQ and/or question editing, a specification of system/version in the title and/or text of the questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-03-01T07:45:45.157" Title="Should we enforce clearer specification of system/version in titles/questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="885" CreationDate="2011-02-16T08:23:24.967" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's my own riff (not edited in above because it's ... fairly different). Not a community wiki because we should have different versions competing for votes. Edit if you want to modify this version though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Be welcome, friend, and enter!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players, designers, and gamemasters of table top role-playing games and anyone else interested in the hobby. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We welcome questions about all pencil and paper RPGs, Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, or any of the thousands of others amateur or professional. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4457/what-is-role-playing-and-where-do-i-start&quot;&gt;What is role-playing, and where do I start?&lt;/a&gt; if you're wondering what this hobby is all about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Don't be scared!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The best questions are those that have specific answers, but in general, if you have a question which covers...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Game rules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Information about campaign settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...then you're in the right place!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Jump right in!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We like answers! If you answer based on your own understanding and experience, that's useful to us. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h2&gt; Better, faster, stronger...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We like to help you make your questions and answers better, too. Don't worry if you get a few comments on your contribution: we want this to be a resource that everyone can use and you may not be expecting some of our requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Before you contribute, though, consider the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;We want the questions on our site to be valuable sources of information for all web users, not just our community members, so we try to keep our personal opinions out of our questions and answers when we can. Don't be afraid to contribute your own experiences though. If you've experienced something, the lessons you learned may be valuable to others!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;We don't re-ask the same question once it's been answered. We add more answers, we add comments, we edit the answers, and we ask a related question, but we avoid asking the same thing again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you read the above and rpg.stackexchange isn't what you're looking for, you might want to try:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Asking questions about Computer RPGs or MMORPGs on &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;gaming.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Asking questions about board games, card games, or table top war games on &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;boardgames.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Asking broad discussion questions, solicitations for idea generation, and polls for popular opinion on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;an appropriate RPG forum&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-10-03T23:34:22.147" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T23:34:22.147" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="893" CreationDate="2011-02-16T17:46:07.323" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are welcome to edit the questions, but the tags are there for a reason. I read the tags first before clicking into any question - they are one of the most important parts of a question's frame. Tagging should be sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-02-16T17:46:07.323" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="897" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-17T11:02:35.603" Score="1" ViewCount="307" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not happy that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6281/what-does-raw-mean-closed&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was closed by three votes. Can we change the limit here to be more representative of the numbers that can now vote to close topics? It is reasonable that it should have been marked to point to the Wiki but closing says a topic is &lt;em&gt;off topic&lt;/em&gt; on site are we really saying that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also I am not happy that my answer on the Terms Wiki and been deleted and other have not, why? All the answer make up the thread to make the correct answer in the Wiki and they have equal weight. Just because one is more blessed than another does not mean that old ones have to be deleted by the &lt;em&gt;management&lt;/em&gt;. There was a question about the perception of this site to newbies. This is the kind of high handled attitude that make people put there hand up and vote with their feet. I did for 2 months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, if I had been asked, then I would have probably removed my answer myself to the Term Wiki, if that is the policy then it should be put at the top of the Term Wiki and people should be asked before they are just removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:32:59.987" Title="Terms wiki deletion" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|policy|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="897" CreationDate="2011-02-17T13:43:14.447" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges/close-questions&quot;&gt;&quot;cast close and reopen votes&quot; FAQ&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It takes 5 close votes to reach the closing threshold&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6281/what-does-raw-mean-closed&quot;&gt;RAW thread&lt;/a&gt; was not closed by voting threshold alone.  Please direct your attention to the blue diamond next to mxyzplk in the &quot;closed by&quot; text.  That diamond means that he is a site moderator (we call them &quot;diamond mods&quot;, to distinguish them from super-high-rep users who are effectively psuedo-moderators).  Once a diamond mod casts a vote, the action is done regardless of whatever threshold that action normally requires.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, diamond mods are the only ones who can delete entries at-will.  These individuals represent either the founders of the site, or other users who have been specifically selected by the community because they hold a high level of respect and trust within the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, when your own post has been deleted or you have high enough rep, you can see the deleted post highlighted in red.  I can see yours now, with a note from @mxyzplk:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Deleting as redundant with the PC/Player/GM post above; I pasted relevant bits from here into that one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The content you have generated was not lost.  It was simply incorporated into the larger answer to the question, as that is meant to be the final authoritative list.  This was discussed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/819/197&quot;&gt;another question here on Meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a similar point, participation in a Community Wiki thread - or marking a specific post as Community Wiki - grants implicit permission for practically &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; (only 100 rep required) to edit your content.  In cases where the item is edited, you are still free to rollback changes but that change in itself may even be rolled back or further revised - these become referred to as &quot;edit wars&quot; and are frowned upon.  In any case, this is a common issue in the SE environment and should come as no surprise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, it is perhaps worth noting (in case this was one of your concerns) that Community Wiki posts earn no reputation - so, there was also no reputation lost in deletion of your answer in that thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-02-17T13:43:14.447" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="897" CreationDate="2011-02-17T13:53:01.480" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wait for the community to close when it's a judgment call.  We have decided to put definitions into the one big wiki, however, (&lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/746/community-wiki-of-abbreviations&quot;&gt;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/746/community-wiki-of-abbreviations&lt;/a&gt;) so closing the other question wasn't a judgment call, two other votes are more than enough to tell any of the diamond mods they're doing the right thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you need to have less ownership of your answers in a community wiki.  I see Brian is actually going in there and rolling up all the answers into one big one, and that's fine. Wiki means &quot;anyone edit&quot; and I edited that wiki to make it better back on Jan 8. It does not mean your answer doesn't have worth or whatever, but there was a duplicate and I merged them. That is the right thing to do in the SE philosophy. There is no &quot;ownership&quot; especially in a CW. It has nothing to do with me being a mod, I would expect anyone with enough rep to edit would do the same thing (and they are).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T06:32:59.987" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:32:59.987" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="897" CreationDate="2011-02-17T16:09:53.493" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's something that I haven't seen mentioned in other answers: Closing a question DOES NOT mean that it is off topic. By definition, if a question is closed as exact duplicate, it is very much on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't even unusual behavior unique to StackExchange... RTFFAQ, calls to use the search function, and the like are pretty common on other help-related boards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I'm a little torn on the &quot;What does X mean?&quot; questions. On the one hand, they're pretty trivial. The most trivial questions we can possibly get. On the other hand, keeping them around has some SEO implications (&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/dr-strangedupe-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-duplication/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Dr. Strangedupe&lt;/a&gt;), and we aren't exactly overrun with them (also: I've defended other trivial questions in the past, and my reason for defending them still applies here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-02-17T20:04:56.613" LastActivityDate="2011-02-17T20:04:56.613" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="901" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="897" CreationDate="2011-02-17T19:57:07.980" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm displeased that the question was close too, but for different reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be honest, I don't much care for Community Wikis. I've tried caring about them (heck, I've been a mod at Wikipedia, so you'd think I'd care about wiki-things), but I just fundamentally can't bring myself to care about CWs. If something is switched to CW, regardless of how much I try to care about the question, observations of my actual behaviour indicate that a question switched to CW is dead to me. Evidence indicates that my approach to this site is effectively to ignore that CW even exists as a feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I'm displeased that anything is getting closed because it &quot;belongs&quot; in a CW ghetto. The glossary is a particularly unappetising example of a CW because it's been done better in multiple elsewheres. RPGGeek has a project to build an &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/wiki/page/RPG_Glossary&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG glossary&lt;/a&gt; that, even dormant for the past nine months, puts our CW glossary of terms to shame. To move something to the CW and then close the original question using &quot;duplicate&quot; as the reason seems like a run-around of what the system is supposed to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's just not a thing that SE is any good at. It's something that exists and gets added to &lt;em&gt;despite&lt;/em&gt; the fact that SE demotivates participation in wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, despite my deep dislike for CWs and the glossary in particular, it may be true that the best thing for the site overall would be to discourage trivial terminology questions. If that is truly the case, then I would say without reservation that eliminating trivial definition questions would be the correct course.&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Five years on, I don't think that it's the best thing for the site to discourage trivial terminology questions. They're not our most brilliant questions, but they get worklike answers that help real people with real problems. They've earned their place (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot;&gt;their tag&lt;/a&gt; not through theory, but just by being pretty OK in practice.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T07:09:49.963" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="902" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-18T09:50:09.997" Score="0" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I was commenting on the RAW meta question, I started to document how I vote on answers.&#xA;Here is mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I always up vote an answer if they answer the question, even if I think the answer is from my PoV wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I leave an answer zero, if I think the answer does not answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't normally down vote an answer unless I think it is spam, offensive or so way off mark to be close to the edge in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tend not to let what I think of the way an answer is written, its System, or Individual that wrote it influence my vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I normally try to leave a question for a few weeks before blessing an answer. Sometimes it is not worth it as the answer you have is the only one you will get and I will closed them very quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I have no answer or I think no answer is worthy I will added my own and then Bless it. I don't think answer as part of the main question are the correct thing to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I think and answer is close enough I will bless that answer then may be add my answer to document my PoV, which may not be everyone else (hence I don't bless it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway that is what I do. I hope it helps. May be other have better strategy and would like to comment?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T23:15:53.750" Title="How do you vote?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="902" CreationDate="2011-02-18T12:37:11.523" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I upvote if I consider that the answer contributes significantly to the question, leave alone if I don't think so, downvote if the answer doesn't answer the question, and flag as appropriate if I consider that the answer is spam/offensive/etc. I think that's what the flagging and voting system are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT&lt;/strong&gt; did you read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/27/what-does-voting-really-signify&quot;&gt;What does voting really signify&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, and re: &quot;blessing answers&quot;, are you programming in Perl?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="932" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2011-02-18T13:53:58.727" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="904" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="902" CreationDate="2011-02-18T15:09:01.620" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the question is still unanswered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvote only if I think the answer is an excellent answer to the question, and I'm sure it's correct (upvoting an answer removes the question from the unanswered list).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My own questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pass out rep to everyone who gave a reasonable attempt at answering, AFTER an acceptable answer has been found.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvote the top one to two answers, if I think they're pretty good. Occasionally upvote incomplete answers that provide a useful bit of information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I rarely downvote, due to the hassle. Mostly that's reserved for experienced users doing a handful of obnoxious things that I consider harmful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Flag for answers that should be comments, and for spam.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accepting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I usually accept an answer (either my own or an existing one) once the question has fallen off both the front page and the unanswered list.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I upvote questions aggressively. Especially for new users. Although lately I've tended to become pickier about what I vote for, particularly in the 4e category.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-02-18T15:46:30.933" LastActivityDate="2011-02-18T15:46:30.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="905" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-02-23T01:32:07.750" Score="11" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to know the communities opinions on whether or not I should ask and then answer questions that I have the answer to, aren't on the site yet, are appropriate to the site, and, often times, have seen asked repeatedly elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples would be &quot;Are there any sites to help easily make Saga Edition NPCs?&quot; or &quot;In exalted, what is Paranoia combat?&quot; or &quot;What are some sites one could use to generate Traveller maps?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm hesitant to do so because other I've read other questions which referred to seemingly similar things as seeding and discouraged it. On the other hand, the questions I'd be asking are real questions, somebody, at some point, really did want to know them (meaning that even if I haven't seen others ask them, I did spend hours trying to answer them on my own); moreover, they are generally about under represented systems, meaning that putting them up could better bring in a more diverse crowd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1402" LastEditorUserId="460" LastEditDate="2011-02-24T03:29:04.927" LastActivityDate="2011-02-24T03:29:04.927" Title="Question about asking and then answering questions currently not up" Tags="|discussion|questions|policy|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="905" CreationDate="2011-02-23T03:57:03.743" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt; If it is a legit question someone else will ask it, otherwise it is artificial seeding and will probably get reported to us mods for rep-whoring, and I hate it when things are reported to us mods, it makes me grumpy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I sympathize with the desire to make more diverse questions, but I would express that by asking questions you really want to know about those kinds of games; that will draw folks that will ask the more simple questions you have answers to as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-02-23T03:57:03.743" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="905" CreationDate="2011-02-23T04:30:36.430" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt;  &quot;Question seeding&quot; is still useful as a means of sharing valuable information - which is really the overall goal of this site.  However, in doing so you should be careful not to come off as a rep-whore.  Here's a few things to consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Does the question have real value?&lt;/em&gt;  Just because it was a great victory (we all know that feeling) to come across the revelation that brought the answer to you, doesn't mean it holds the same value for everyone else.  This is something that should be considered for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; question posted, but especially applies in cases where you have already come across the answer. If it is too localized or (in honest retrospect) relatively trivial, or may fall under any of the other criteria for closure, don't post it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Don't rush to post your own answer.&lt;/em&gt;  Others may have already faced the same issue, and come to the same conclusions you have.  Or, they may want to do their own digging and come up with their personal perspective on the issue.  Give them a chance to post and earn rep from their answers - you will already be getting some from the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Be fair and humble in considering other answers for acceptance.&lt;/em&gt;  First of all, StackExchange imposes a wait period (somewhere between 24-48 hours, I forget which) before you can accept your own answer anyway.  Regardless, just because you already have come up with &lt;em&gt;an&lt;/em&gt; answer to the question doesn't mean it's &lt;em&gt;the only&lt;/em&gt; answer or that someone else can't express it better.  If a better or more accurate answer does show up, be sure to up-vote and consider accepting it instead of yours.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-02-23T04:30:36.430" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="908" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="905" CreationDate="2011-02-23T14:30:01.047" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answering your own questions isn't something you should do a lot of. Pick the one or two most interesting question/answer pairs and go with those. You shouldn't be posting question/answer pairs just to fill the database... You should be posting them because it's something really awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would avoid asking questions that are just pointers to other resources (Are there any sites that...), because frankly those questions aren't very interesting from a Q&amp;amp;A standpoint. So if no one is going out and asking for the boring question, it probably isn't worth posting it yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ditto with definition questions, unless the definition is really obscure and interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-02-23T15:23:54.000" LastActivityDate="2011-02-23T15:23:54.000" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="905" CreationDate="2011-02-23T16:52:33.180" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'd wait to post my own answer. Rep whoreing accusations aside, I think that if you post your answer right away, when users come and view the question has been answered by the poster, they assume you found the answer you were looking for and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think keeping users interested and participating in questions is more relevant to the site than the  volume of questions on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From another angle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are posting the question on the RPG.stackexchange (Jesus we need a better name) it's because the question is of interest to other users. If it is of interest to other users we want users to look at it and participate in the question, maybe even upvote it and share it. Therefore, you should do nothing to discouraging them from contributing to that question. In the interest of not discouraging them you should not give them the impression that you already have the answer (ie suggesting you either don't need the community or that it is a dishonest question) and as such should wait to post your answer; give someone else a chance to shine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="25" LastEditDate="2011-02-24T00:40:24.353" LastActivityDate="2011-02-24T00:40:24.353" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="910" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="911" CreationDate="2011-02-23T17:33:06.997" Score="3" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you vote to close a question, a list of related candidates to move the question to shows up. For us this is only Meta.Rpg.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does this list come to be? Is it strictly manual?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's manual, could we get BoardGames.SE and/or Gaming.SE added?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question that brings this up is this one: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6391/which-game-system-was-the-computer-game-hero-quest-based-on&quot;&gt;Which game system was the computer game Hero-Quest based on?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a fair question, but as the answer indicates it isn't actually about RPGs. I'd like to see it moved to a more appropriate SE, but I only have the option to vote to close or ask a mod to step in... And I'm not sure it's worth bothering the mods about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-02-23T18:18:40.923" Title="How do question migration paths get set up?" Tags="|support|migration|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="910" CreationDate="2011-02-23T18:18:40.923" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are no migration paths for beta sites besides their own meta.  However, mods can migrate to any site, so if you really think migration is needed for a particular post then flag it for their attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-02-23T18:18:40.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="902" CreationDate="2011-02-25T07:55:14.493" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;downvotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any of these&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the answer has gross factual errors&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the answer has serious misrepresentations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if the answer doesn't address the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;upvotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;all of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if the answer is factually accurate&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if I substantially agree with the answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer is worded well&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;downvote&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;any of these&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;question is unanswerble due to wording&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;question puts poor light on RPG's&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;upvote&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;must be all of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;game is not D&amp;amp;D 4E&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;game is not D&amp;amp;D 3.X&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;worded clearly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And any of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer is not inherently obvious&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;game is a personal favorite&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;game is out of print and unsupported by publisher&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-03-10T10:08:59.583" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="913" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="914" CreationDate="2011-02-27T12:45:24.417" Score="3" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wi353.png&quot; alt=&quot;Chat Sidebar Screenshot&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2011-02-28T00:16:19.610" LastActivityDate="2011-02-28T15:46:22.887" Title="One of these chats doesn't belong!" Tags="|support|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="913" CreationDate="2011-02-28T09:22:27.890" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you check the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/new&quot;&gt;create room&lt;/a&gt; page, it is now really obvious what site you are creating a room for, and you can tweak it to suit. Better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="682" LastActivityDate="2011-02-28T09:22:27.890" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="913" CreationDate="2011-02-28T15:46:22.887" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;That room was created by me, with the intent of discussing the topic question from SU or SF (I forget which).  I thought I'd created it from SU/SF, but somehow it ended up here.  I have no clue how or why, or how to adjust it in the future.  If anyone has a killswitch for those things, feel free to throw it - the person I was hoping to chat with obviously isn't responding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-02-28T15:46:22.887" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="916" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="893" CreationDate="2011-03-01T07:45:45.157" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A thread would have benefitted from a 4e perspective I think: different ways of looking at what the spell does.  I think Iszi should have posted your answer, perhaps editing it to say &quot;I don't know about AD&amp;amp;D, but maybe the mechanics of the 4e version are relevant ...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see see how the site benefits from Balkanisation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastActivityDate="2011-03-01T07:45:45.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="919" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-03-05T21:57:03.647" Score="4" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I just got the &quot;subjective&quot; warning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;when asking about a game system for an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6495/what-game-system-is-best-suited-for-running-a-campaign-based-on-eve-online&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;EVE Online&lt;/em&gt; based campaign&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears to me that this is formulated in an unnecessarily harsh way and may scare off new users, especially on a site like RPG.SE that is more open to subjective questions than e.g. SO or SF. Would it be possible to change the message to something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question you're asking appears subjective. Since subjective questions are often difficult or even impossible to answer you should take a look first at the [guidelines for asking subjective questions] and the [FAQ]. You can still ask your question but make sure it fits with the site or it may get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way the problem was more clearly communicated and the user was directly pointed to the subjective-question-guidelines, making it easier for him to ask a &lt;strong&gt;good subjective&lt;/strong&gt; question from the start instead of having his &lt;strong&gt;bad subjective&lt;/strong&gt; question closed and &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; pointed to the guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; this question is not about the system of displaying the warning or how it works at all, but rather about how the warning is worded and how it could help the user with additional information to ask a good question instead of scaring him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user660" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-03-06T02:52:43.637" Title="Change wording of the &quot;subjective question&quot; warning message" Tags="|feature-request|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="845" CreationDate="2011-03-17T01:31:01.447" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;AD&amp;amp;D 1e and AD&amp;amp;D 2e are similar in a lot of ways. Obviously they're different too, but if you compare the BD&amp;amp;D line (B, B/X, BECMI, RC, WotI, CD&amp;amp;D) then the similarities are more apparent. I'd suggest that AD&amp;amp;D applies to both, and asking for a specific edition be clarified in the question. It's quite possible that the answer is the same in both editions, and if someone asks a question about 1e, all that's necessary is to qualify that the experience comes from 2e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be similar to asking a question about d20 and not specifying 3e or 3.5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-03-17T01:31:01.447" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="922" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="973" CreationDate="2011-03-21T19:49:23.537" Score="3" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can see them here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastActivityDate="2011-05-04T17:20:18.480" Title="Why are some questions tagged with [untagged]?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="922" CreationDate="2011-03-21T19:58:36.863" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It happens when the last tag on a question is removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those probably happened when Jeff nuked the board-games tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-03-21T19:58:36.863" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="925" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="926" CreationDate="2011-03-24T18:26:38.897" Score="2" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I search for questions with a given tag by entering, for instance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[gurps]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;into the search bar, or by clicking a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt;, I invariably end up on a page telling me there are no featured questions with this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I'm not interested in &lt;strong&gt;featured&lt;/strong&gt; questions. I just wanted to see all the questions with that tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What am I doing wrong? How can I get to &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of the questions with a given tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2011-03-24T18:43:02.417" Title="See non-featured questions for a tag" Tags="|support|tags|questions|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="925" CreationDate="2011-03-24T18:43:02.417" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps you're on the wrong tab? Try clicking the &quot;Newest&quot; or &quot;Active&quot; tab... When I click on a tag link, I get the list of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Hmmm, odd. I don't actually see ALL the questions tagged GURPS when I choose &quot;newest.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit 2: Nevermind the above. They're both still there... Just the &quot;author&quot; block changes depending on view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-03-24T18:43:02.417" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="927" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="928" CreationDate="2011-03-28T19:52:04.697" Score="1" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Last week I gained 5 rep per upvote. Today I gained 10 per upvote.  Is this an SE-wide change or is there some sort of rep bonus on certain days?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastActivityDate="2011-03-28T23:23:18.233" Title="Does rep gained for certain actions vary?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="928" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="927" CreationDate="2011-03-28T19:55:28.487" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Likely you're seeing rep gain for a question (+5), verses rep gain for an answer (+10).  No day is treated differently from any other, but there is a 200 rep cap per day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2011-03-28T20:09:21.260" LastActivityDate="2011-03-28T20:09:21.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="927" CreationDate="2011-03-28T23:23:18.233" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#reputation&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#reputation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary way to gain reputation is by posting good questions and useful answers. Your peers will vote on your posts, and those votes will cause you to gain (or, in rare cases, lose) reputation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answer is voted up   +10&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;question is voted up     +5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-03-28T23:23:18.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="930" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="956" CreationDate="2011-03-30T00:57:57.277" Score="12" ViewCount="907" Body="&lt;p&gt;As of today, &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;our beta stats&lt;/a&gt; look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://d7.pipemaze.com/images/rpgse-beta-stats-2011-03-29-5.45.00.png&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the last time I reviewed our stats, our percentage answered, users, answer ratio, and visits/day have held steady or improved. However, our questions per day has gone from &quot;Okay&quot; to &quot;Worrying&quot;. I've noticed this personally—most days there are no new questions that I'm interested in. At 222 days in beta with the number of questions being asked dropping, I have to wonder whether the site is going to graduate any time soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:45:37.050" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:45:37.050" Title="Beta stats review" Tags="|discussion|site-statistics|beta|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-03-30T13:23:59.313" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, here are the standard answers from the last time this came up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Vote generously (is your name &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=voters&amp;amp;filter=week&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;? If not, why not?).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Promote interesting questions and answers with the share buttons.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Provide high-quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask interesting questions of your own.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-03-30T13:23:59.313" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-03-30T15:12:29.480" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your community moderators have access to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/admin/analytics&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which will provide a bit more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stats do seem flat overall, but I don't see any precipitous drops or anything like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Invite notable RPG bloggers to weigh in on 'best of' interesting RPG questions. &quot;We're not sure how to answer {question link}, do you have any advice?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask RPG questions on their behalf. If they write a blog entry or ask something (on their blog, twitter, or facebook) that contains a question -- actual or implied -- post it as a question here. Wait and see what kind of response it gets, then bring it to their attention. &quot;I thought you brought up a really interesting question, and it got some interesting answers here {question link}.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it might be helpful to ping notable folks when you have something of direct interest to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(but of course, there is also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;Site approachability&lt;/a&gt; to think about...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2011-03-30T15:12:29.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-03-31T02:03:43.937" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was a big dropoff over Christmas that we never recovered from.  Our YTD stats aren't getting lower, but they've been consistently lower than 2010. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to attract new posters via crosspromotion on blogs, forums, facebook, and twitter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also need to be a place people want to use.  I think it's clear that there's not a lot of people interested in a &quot;rules only mostly 4e Stack Exchange.&quot;  However whenever interesting more general roleplaying questions are broached people get pissy; a couple people vote to close and then, thwarted, festoon every part of the question and answers with combative comments. At least mostly not stuff bad enough to get mod action, but enough to make the environment hostile. And people wander off; if they wanted to be taking BS from punks they'd be posting on RPG.net.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-03-31T02:03:43.937" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="934" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-04-01T09:24:28.450" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't be bothered, only come here once a week now. I would suspect that there are others that now feel the same way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I supposed as I was bothered once, it might be helpful to say why I am not now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a) Asked a question - marked too general could be closed&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;b) Asked a question - marked too specific and then merged into a wiki&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;c) Asked a question - closed and merged because it was though to just a deviation of another, but actually it had come up in our game that night and I did not want it mixed with someone else general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;d) answers that are 4e Dnd even though the questions are for 1e get more upticks&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;e) question after question is for 4e. argh enough of this. I have no interest in a 4e question site if the questions are only about 4e rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;f) pointing out that the premiss of a question, might be wrong (even if it is only IMO), is not off topic just because the questioner says so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;g) FAQ wiki should only be for questions that are Frequently Asked, not a bucket for general questions that seam trivial to some.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;h) not everyone speaks English as a first language, this preference for a high level of English literacy is stifling. If you want to correct someone else English that is cool and probably welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;i) just because an answer is an essay does not make it more worthy, pithy correct answer are just as correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;j) a totally on topic attitude is unfriendly to some, not everyone's culture is based around, just do it and meeting are only about the agenda. Off topic comments sometimes are useful to the question, they help others to thing about the problem in unique ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;k) if an answer seams to you to be antagonist, may be it was not intended to be. State why it may sound wrong, not everyone carries your perception of what has been written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am sure there is more ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="768" LastEditDate="2011-04-01T11:48:24.147" LastActivityDate="2011-04-01T11:48:24.147" CommentCount="28" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="935" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="937" CreationDate="2011-04-01T23:01:52.027" Score="16" ViewCount="304" Body="&lt;p&gt;The community had the idea to start a community wiki &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5475/glossary-of-common-rpg-terminology&quot;&gt;Glossary of Common RPG Terms&lt;/a&gt; to hold trivial definitions of RPG terms.  Some people have been complaining about questions being closed and merged over to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;So, do we maintain the Glossary or not?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And do we allow &quot;definition questions&quot; or not?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are problems with allowing definition questions.  Stack Exchanges are for &quot;expert&quot; discussion.  You won't get very far on Stack Overflow with &quot;What is Python,&quot; &quot;What is a constant,&quot; or &quot;What does CI stand for?&quot; You'll get downvoted into oblivion, go try it. Similarly, I don't know that we want a bunch of rep whoring clutter questions of &quot;What is a Hit Die?&quot; &quot;What does RAW stand for?&quot; &quot;What is D&amp;amp;D?&quot; I find it hard to say loads of that will make the site any better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the glossary allows us a way to answer those questions and not totally declare them off topic for the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your answers, clearly state whether you think the glossary should stay and whether you think definitions are on topic questions for this SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strongly consider voting and commenting on existing answers instead of starting your own, because if we don't see a clear consensus on direction emerge from the vote, we will go with the status quo. &quot;10 different answers with 2 votes each&quot; is not helpful to us mods (well, it helps us feel justified that there isn't a problem).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:11:19.333" Title="Should we obsolete the Glossary?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="935" CreationDate="2011-04-01T23:35:05.100" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think definition questions are on-topic for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are a niche of a niche of a niche, so definitions are hard to find. If the definition is on the &quot;Roleplaying StackExchange&quot;, googling for the term + &quot;rpg&quot; will likely land here once a question exists. That's useful!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We're unlikely to get many definition questions, and &lt;em&gt;highly&lt;/em&gt; unlikely to get them just to boost rep: people who are novices are unlikely to consider/care about manipulating their rep, and those are the most likely people to ask definition questions. Non-novices just aren't going to ask definition questions much, but when they do it'll very likely be an honest question. Both categories of asker mean giving the benefit of the doubt and allowing the questions is safe for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that light, should we have a glossary to house such questions? I'd say &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;List of&quot; types of pages are just big data dumps, hard to organise, and full of extraneous information that someone arriving from Google is unlikely to care about or want to dig through for their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A one-term, one-question setup leverages the system's existing organisation, makes for a quick answer to a Google search, and contains only the immediately relevant information.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/dr-strangedupe-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-duplication/&quot;&gt;questions closed as duplicates are considered hostile to users arriving from search engines&lt;/a&gt;. Closing definitions and merging them into a wiki forces the user to work harder to figure out whether our site actually does contain the answer, or whether the search engine hit was false. We don't really want that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a bonus, having entire questions devoted to answering a definition means we don't have to try to make rules about what makes a question a &quot;definition&quot; (and a target for merging/closing/etc) and what makes it a more general question. &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3572/what-is-an-ashcan-release&quot;&gt;What is an ashcan?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; could have been seen as a definition question, but it ended up providing much more information that simply what the word means. If we have to treat definitions specially from other questions, there will likely be some contentious grey areas that will increase our site unfriendliness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-04-01T23:35:05.100" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="935" CreationDate="2011-04-02T00:32:34.313" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would suggest that we avoid a glossary, but only allow non-trivial &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maintaining a glossary isn't really the purpose of SE (it's expert Q&amp;amp;A if you haven't noticed), and it's not the easiest thing to maintain in this format.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The system doesn't incentivize editing answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The system doesn't make it easy to maintain a glossary.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's discouraging to users (new and old alike) to be told to RtFG (Read the Friendly Glossary).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But having a question for every term imaginable isn't really much fun or much good for the website.  I propose the following rules for determining trivial terminology questions from non-trivial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it really RPG related, or is it a science fiction, fantasy, or internet term?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you search for the term by itself, will it show up in the first 5 google results, in a reasonably direct and understandable format?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;This is largely influenced by the SO Blog's &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/02/are-some-questions-too-simple/&quot;&gt;Are Some Questions Too Simple&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I entirely agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/935/should-we-obsolete-the-glossary/936#936&quot;&gt;Seven Sided Die's suggestion&lt;/a&gt; that questions that ask more than for a simple definition are a great improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2011-04-04T21:49:40.840" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="935" CreationDate="2011-04-02T16:53:53.417" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Neither of the existing answers quite match my thoughts, so I'll post a new one. If someone reads this and doesn't find it sufficiently different from the others, let me know and I'll remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having seen this site run for a few months now, I've never seen a point where glossary questions made up a large fraction of the site. This could be because the mods are getting to them before I'm seeing them, but I have no real way of verifying that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also noticed that &quot;my question was closed&quot; seems to be a huge complaint by people who speak poorly of their experience on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, trivial questions are dangerous. A few won't hurt us, but if they pile up they can be a huge detriment to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that we need to treat this as an approachability issue. New users should be answered briefly, given an upvote if they're below the comment threshold, and otherwise ignored. Linking to the glossary in this case should be encouraged by editing an appropriate link into the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a particular definition question gets asked repeatedly, then we really have no choice but to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps having mods close the question a day or two later wouldn't be as much of a sting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For users who have been around a little while, we should be much stricter about the question. In the general case, someone like me shouldn't be asking such a trivial question. A few exceptions can be made for questions which seem to be generating interesting answers (such as the Ashcan question SevenSidedDie linked), although I'm not sure how to adjudicate that ahead of time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far as the glossary goes... It can be useful for linking new users to, as part of answering their question. I won't really miss it if it's gone (there are other glossaries out there), but I have no problem with having it around. The main thing is, I don't think that having or not having the glossary should impact how we answer definition questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something else that may potentially help would be linking to a glossary in the FAQ (either our own, or someone else's).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-04-02T16:53:53.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="935" CreationDate="2011-04-04T09:11:32.353" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a safe bet for the glossary would be to close any questions which would be answered by the glossary section in a book. Even if something is well understood, if the book assumes knowledge of a term and forgets to define it, it's perfectly reasonable to ask that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-04-04T09:11:32.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="940" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-04-04T09:15:54.490" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's really anything to worry about. 3 excellents that don't seem to be going anywhere I think more than makes up for the low visits and low questions per day. Something to remember is that RPGs are a niche hobby, it just simply won't generate the same kind of numbers as a more popular topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-04-04T09:15:54.490" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="935" CreationDate="2011-04-04T11:16:07.533" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I basically agree with @SevenSidedDie (and up voted his) but ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;FAQ and Glossaries should come after a question has been answered not before or during. This may be months after, in a tidy up phase.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I have no problem with a question being closed, if it has already been answered and then pointed to the correct answer. But there should still be a chance for a non-irritating question to generate new content that is useful.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Merging questions to me seems wrong.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not StackOverflow, we are game players not programmers here (ok I am a programmer but you know what I mean), rules from StackOverflow do not necessary apply here they can be used as a guide but they should not be the rule.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't think there are trivial questions, only trivial answers ;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="460" LastEditDate="2011-04-04T14:35:12.153" LastActivityDate="2011-04-04T14:35:12.153" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="942" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="943" CreationDate="2011-04-04T12:21:36.873" Score="23" ViewCount="444" Body="&lt;p&gt;Imagine a DM that wants to introduce a certain house-rule into his game but is unsure about the gameplay/mechanical consequences of his proposal. So he decides to come to RPG.SE and ask a question along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the mechanical and gameplay consequences of my house-rule?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I want to change [certain part of the game] with a house-rule. I have thought about it for a long time and came up with the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[foo]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[bar]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[baz]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was asking such a question okay?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm curious about it because the other way round (asking a general question that gets answered with house-rules) is obviously acceptable. Are such feedback/rfc-style questions allowed even if they delve more into discussions than pure Q&amp;amp;A?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user660" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:03:43.670" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:03:43.670" Title="How to deal with feedback questions about house-rules?" Tags="|discussion|faq|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="942" CreationDate="2011-04-04T14:34:04.073" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't find discussions of house rules without actual play experience very helpful.  At least one side should be encouraged to use examples from gaming sessions that they've experienced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Q: We've been using this house rule for the last few sessions.  We like it because it solves this problem for us.  Does anyone see any unintended consequences that we might not have thought of yet?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example 2&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Q: We don't like &lt;em&gt;&amp;lt;insert problem&amp;gt;&lt;/em&gt; so we are considering &lt;em&gt;&amp;lt;insert house rule&amp;gt;&lt;/em&gt;.  Has anyone tried a similar house rule that could give us some feedback?  Alternatively, have you tried other solutions to the problem mentioned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A: We tried &lt;em&gt;&amp;lt;house rule&amp;gt;&lt;/em&gt; and ....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using examples from actual play will help keep the question and its answers focused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, we need to heed the advice in the article &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-10-27T17:07:31.950" LastActivityDate="2016-10-27T17:07:31.950" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="944" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-04-04T23:07:27.000" Score="6" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;Prior to the publishing of D&amp;amp;D 4e, &quot;d20&quot; was widely understood to mean games compatible with or derived from the d20 SRD. Wizards of the Coast decided that they were going to keep trademarking D&amp;amp;D 4e as a &quot;d20&quot; game, even if that meant contradicting the definition they created in the first place and that the community had been using for the past decade.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This gives us a dilemma for tagging. Should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; refer to the d20 SRD family of games and material, or should it refer to the SRD games family + D&amp;amp;D 4e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whichever it is, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; wiki should be filled in to make it clear how to use the tag here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-04-08T01:38:32.583" Title="What does the d20 tag cover?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="944" CreationDate="2011-04-05T00:15:50.513" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it would be most useful to minimize its use, or in other words, not to stick it on every 3.5 or 4e question. Instead, it should be used to indicate general questions whose answers would be useful to multiple games from the d20 srd family, for games in that family which don't have a prevalent tag, questions which might be answerable with knowledge from other games in the family, and for questions the asker wants to limit answers to games within the family. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1402" LastEditorUserId="1402" LastEditDate="2011-04-05T00:48:45.930" LastActivityDate="2011-04-05T00:48:45.930" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="944" CreationDate="2011-04-05T01:04:28.437" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would honestly leave that to individual posters (so that's a vote for d20 + 4e, I guess). While all &quot;true&quot; (SRD-based) d20 games theoretically have a common core of rules, in practice they tend to pick and choose which parts of that core they include. As a practical matter, very few &quot;d20&quot; questions will apply to ALL d20-based games. A question focusing on, say, D&amp;amp;D 3.x and Pathfinder will probably not apply at all to Mutants and Masterminds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The result of this is that most questions tagged d20 will need to be scoped explicitely in the question description (either to specific games, or to games with a specific characteristic). Looking over the questions that have been tagged d20 so far, &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of them restrict the scope of the question in some manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the hex grid question that brought this issue to light... While Brian's answer was littered with 4e-isms, and was overly negative to the point of being a little hyperbolic, the core of his points still applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When Brian references close bursts being weaker due to adjacency, this still applies. Eight surrounding squares dropping to six is a non-trivial difference for tactical games (which most d20 games are).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise the notes about blast and burst targetting areas still apply. While 4e uses by far the most square area effects (3.x mostly uses pixelated circles), various d20 games DO still make use of squares. The most notable instances being monster sizes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-04-05T01:26:50.767" LastActivityDate="2011-04-05T01:26:50.767" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="944" CreationDate="2011-04-05T01:22:20.097" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think in all ways but Wizards marketing, which I don't care about, d20 means derived from the d20 SRD - D&amp;amp;D 3e, 3.5e, M&amp;amp;M, Spycraft, etc etc.  It is not helpful from a technical point of view to include 4e as it is quite different from that ruleset, and at that point you should probably be just tagging &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying-games-in-general&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying-games-in-general&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying-games-in-general&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="146" LastEditDate="2011-04-08T01:38:32.583" LastActivityDate="2011-04-08T01:38:32.583" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="948" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-04-05T12:05:03.420" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whatever y'all have been doing this week (stumble, blog linking, whatever) keep it up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iAcMx.png&quot; alt=&quot;Area51 ScreenShot - 851 views, 3.8 questions&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-04-05T12:05:03.420" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="949" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-04-05T19:49:06.193" Score="3" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;Early on I got one comment on one of my answers that it should have been a comment, at the time I didn't have the privilege to post comments, which seems really silly. Comments are supposed to be less important than answers, so why is everyone allowed to write answers from the start, but not comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:38:42.137" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:38:42.137" Title="Commenting should be enabled from the start" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="949" CreationDate="2011-04-05T20:04:24.593" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer to this is really the same as when &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/71368/lower-commenting-threshold-to-1-rep/71390#71390&quot;&gt;we covered this in Meta Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;. So to quote that answer over here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We funnel users to the answer input box for a reason -- because &lt;strong&gt;the focus is on getting answers to questions, not meta-commentary&lt;/strong&gt;. Commenting is a privilege that should be earned by providing useful answers. And 50 rep isn't much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's highly unlikely a random drive-by user will&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;understand our Q&amp;amp;A goals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;understand our commenting system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So by the time they earn 50 rep, they should have learned roughly how things work, and be in a position to offer a &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; comment and not a &quot;+1 AWESOME ANSWER&quot; or &quot;NO U R WRONG!!&quot; sort of comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/51926/new-users-cant-ask-for-clarifications-except-as-answers/51939#51939&quot;&gt;New users can&amp;#39;t ask for clarifications except as answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-04-05T20:04:24.593" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-04-05T20:04:24.593" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 2.5" />
  <row Id="951" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="949" CreationDate="2011-04-05T20:04:25.687" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Because comments are less important.&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We only want to be getting comments from people we know can and will add value to the site, not just the grand internet peanut gallery.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that you can comment on &lt;em&gt;your own question&lt;/em&gt; and answers to &lt;em&gt;your own question&lt;/em&gt; from the start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/71368/lower-commenting-threshold-to-1-rep/71390#71390&quot;&gt;Jeff states it rather clearly here.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-03-28T12:51:59.857" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="952" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-04-10T14:47:52.463" Score="2" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1911/do-role-playing-games-have-to-be-fun&quot;&gt;some questions&lt;/a&gt; can still be worthwhile, even if their original tone could be construed as argumentative. It seems to me to be a little premature to close a question that has already garnered some intreresting and provocative answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1658" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-04-11T17:55:35.390" Title="How worthwhile does a question have to be before it trancends being argumentative?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="952" CreationDate="2011-04-10T17:06:40.043" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, that question was closed almost eight months ago. The prevailing sentiment lately has indeed been to open things up a bit more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a couple of notes worth making, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is that outright hostile questions aren't really welcome. They may either be closed, or have the rudeness edited out... But I think that a question would have to be pretty interesting to survive if it was actively being hostile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second, and more pertinent issue to the question at hand (which looks like it was considered more &quot;subjective&quot; than &quot;argumentative&quot;) is that topics need to be questions that can be answered. Preferably with either personal experience or reference to authoritative sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have problems with discussion questions here because there is only one level of threading (answer-&gt;comment) which makes it tough to hold a back-and-forth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the question again, I think where it's still a bit weak is in its definition of &quot;fun.&quot; All of the examples of &quot;other important things&quot; are things that a person could point to and say &quot;it was fun because of that.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One person could say &quot;Well, we had a game that was a terrible slog through hell with bad rules, an awful storyline and a megalomaniacal DM, but we got to know our fellows better so in the end it turned out to be fun.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another person could say &quot;Well, we had a game that was a terrible slog through hell with bad rules, an awful storyline and a megalomaniacal DM, but we got to know our fellows better so I guess fun isn't everything.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-04-10T19:48:33.003" LastActivityDate="2011-04-10T19:48:33.003" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="952" CreationDate="2011-04-11T02:41:10.760" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No Set Answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, there is no meaningful answer to this besides &quot;as much as convinces people to vote to reopen, and not have more people vote to close it again.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hand-wringing over all the specific factors that might cause a question to be be closed or not really doesn't matter, because closing or reopening is completely a vote by the community - it is not rule driven. It's organic - a subjective and argumentative question is like porn, we know it when we see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone were to edit and reopen that question in a way that were sufficiently nonargumentative, or if its value overcame whatever argumentativeness it had, it wouldn't get 5 votes to close it because community members wouldn't tip that way out of their own internal value judgements. There is no &quot;rule&quot; which can be stated that would guarantee that, it's whether it's good enough that community members at large don't read it and think &quot;flame war&quot; and vote to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A Warning&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a dim view of meta questions that are then used to bypass the normal SE community voting paradigm. So regardless of the opinion on this question, please understand that the opinions here don't turn into enforceable rules on the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My Personal Answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That having been said, I think many &quot;controversial&quot; questions are fine.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They should be edited to not be argumentative in tone out of the gate. That, there's no excuse for. And this is a SE, plenty of people can edit, so I don't see a reason to give a bye on those grounds ever. Ideally they are also worded so it's not just looking for people's opinions, but for actual implementations or examples. This bypasses the &quot;bad subjective&quot; problem.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They should be let to go on and occasional argumentative or hostile or bad answers/comments/users should be dealt with by community and/or mods. If the question is stated well, then it isn't responsible for a bad answer or two from people who get their nose bent out of shape on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Until there are too many of those and it's clear that there's going to be ongoing argument as part of the question, in which case it's time to get closed. As a mod if I have to be on guard to watch question X because I just know it's going to keep flaring up, my mouse finger gets twitchy around the close button.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll also note that if a question is getting unique answers from lots of people, it is likely to be asking for subjective opinions and verging on discussion forum activity - SEs are for deciding on &quot;the definitive better/best answer to a question.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-04-11T17:55:35.390" LastActivityDate="2011-04-11T17:55:35.390" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="956" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-04-20T09:04:27.107" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think if we want this community to grow, the first priority should be good quality questions. It seems that we have no problems providing answers once the questions are there, and that proves that between us we have an excellent body of knowledge (or at least opinion *8').&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 200 avid users, we only need to each ask one question every two weeks to get close to the 15 required to be considered a healthy beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I pledge to try and think of a question a week, either as follow-on question from existing questions here (like my first question) or trying to draw out questions from my own role-playing groups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1658" LastActivityDate="2011-04-20T09:04:27.107" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="957" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-04-23T23:48:44.763" Score="5" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently encountered the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/specific-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-spell&lt;/a&gt;, which seems to be to be ... useless for lack of a better word.  I've also noticed that we have a lot of tags that are hard to define because they mean different things in different games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; &lt;sub&gt;maybe we need a general adversaries tag instead?&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rituals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rituals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rituals&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feats&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feats&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we actually see benefit from these tags?  Can we precisely define what they are?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-04-25T17:05:27.430" Title="Do we have too many tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="957" CreationDate="2011-04-24T00:35:25.740" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm absolutely pants at tagging myself. I realize no benefit from those tags, though I &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; love an entry on our FAQ of &quot;How to bloody tag a question&quot; so that I could just follow a rubric. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My vote is to err on the side of minimal, useful, tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-04-24T00:35:25.740" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="957" CreationDate="2011-04-24T00:44:27.123" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree we need to kill some of those.  specific-spell was just pitched today, in fact it made the mod light come on, I disagree strongly with its existence. Going to look at new tags, I guess I'm glad cooler heads prevailed and they didn't go through with the [shrink-item] tag.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think some things are OK - monsters is not 100% general but it's general enough. I'm even OK with stuff like spells, it'll exist in conjunction with a tag that scopes it better per system. I am dubious of the utility, but I guess if someone wants to eventually search on discussions about spells in 4e, it's fine.  Specific-spell is awful, and asks us to put specific- on the front of every other word tag.  I am off to kill it now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I removed the tag from that ! - I wish that we could delete tags.  Or that the mystic tag reaper thing would delete zero use tags and not 1 or more use tags, as it seems to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-04-24T00:51:37.073" LastActivityDate="2011-04-24T00:51:37.073" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="960" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="957" CreationDate="2011-04-24T20:54:00.760" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's two issues here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is fairly easy to deal with most of the time. Purely useless tags such as &quot;specific-spell&quot; are going to crop up on a regular basis. Most users don't really know or care about tagging, and are just typing things in to make the &quot;tag required&quot; error message go away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MOST of the time, simply deleting the low-use tags as they crop up should be fine. Occasionally the question owner will squawk, which is the only really tricky case there. I'd say just leave it for the reaper (excess tags are annoying, but don't seem to be &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; annoying). But a case could be made for getting more aggressive...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The deeper issue is what to do about tags like &quot;spells,&quot; &quot;feats,&quot; or &quot;rituals.&quot; These are kind of meta-taggish (they don't have a clear meaning without a system tag). I'm not really sure what the best option here is... I can see searches for &quot;Pathfinder spells&quot; or &quot;dnd-3.5 feats&quot;, but only just barely. And &quot;Exalted Spells&quot; is going to mean something much different than &quot;dnd-3.5 spells&quot;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the tags listed, I would personally get rid of skills, powers, rituals, and feats as too redundant to their parent tag (and I'd probably synonym monsters-&gt;adversaries). But that's purely my take on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, a shout-out for the tag synonym page (linked at the bottom of the &quot;tags&quot; page): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a couple synonyms pending that I'd like to see some movement on :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-04-24T20:54:00.760" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="957" CreationDate="2011-04-25T17:05:27.430" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe there are &quot;synonym tags&quot;.  I'd say that &quot;spells&quot; should be synonym-tagged to &quot;magic.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Monsters&quot; could then be &quot;synonym-tagged&quot; to &quot;adversaries.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastActivityDate="2011-04-25T17:05:27.430" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="962" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-04-25T23:58:08.013" Score="13" ViewCount="1085" Body="&lt;p&gt;In comments to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/930/our-beta-stats-are-slipping/956#956&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/930/our-beta-stats-are-slipping&quot;&gt;Our beta stats are slipping&lt;/a&gt; question, there was a question and answer exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Baelnorn: the site has recently lost lots of its appeal&#xA;jprete: Can you elaborate on &quot;lost lots of its appeal&quot;?&#xA;Baelnorn: ... answer split over two more comments ...&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I believe that questions are better as questions, rather than as comments, I ask the question again here. More fully,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site has lost it's appeal for you, what caused it and what would you suggest to make the site better?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&#xA;I ask to try and find out if other long time users feel as Baelnorn obviously does, and see if we can come up with suggestions to correct those perceived problems. As is recommended for questions which are borderline subjective, I would ask that people provide examples from personal experience in their answers.&#xA;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1658" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:28:45.207" Title="Has Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange lost its appeal?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="11" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="963" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2011-04-26T02:57:23.407" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-05-30T10:39:21.290" LastActivityDate="2012-05-30T10:39:21.290" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2011-04-26T02:57:23.407" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-04-26T04:06:05.560" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Heck, as a diamond mod I'm dissatisfied with the site at times too. I think we've shaken out a lot of our initial tone problems but still the content is pretty 4e-centric, or at least there's not a critical mass of content for most other systems, which does become a self fulfilling prophecy about people leaving because there's not enough here on whatever game they play to hold their attention. We've had to fight for more general, non-system-specific, questions to not be kneejerk vote-to-closed based on fear of subjectivity or whatnot, but could stand a lot more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's somewhat exacerbated by the small number of people in general that play any specific RPG, easily 1/100 of those that play any given new popular computer game, and by the fact that games are all commercially shepherded and publishers tend to have forums of their own for expert game support. The RPG community is fragmented and not driven by the hottest new release that provides some content coherence to e.g. gaming.SE. Unless you are one of the rare birds like myself that owns hundreds of RPGs, it's easy to feel drowned out. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's the &quot;scaring off newcomers&quot; problem, but I think we've successfully convinced the community to be more welcoming and less &quot;YOU DON'T KNOW THE COMPLICATED RULES HERE YOU ARE CLOSED GO AWAY.&quot; Some of that is inevitable because of the &quot;SE way&quot; but we can certainly be 100% friendlier about it, we've come a long way there but of course can always stand to improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to get people in my gaming group and from my blog to come here, but in general the responses I get are &quot;seems fine, but there's what, one question a month on the game I'm playing?&quot; It's not &quot;It sucked I am leaving on purpose&quot;, it's &quot;I have a limited amount of time so I'm going to go to the Paizo forums or Dragonfoot or whatnot - even though those are way less signal to noise, there's so much more traffic that there is still more raw signal there.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that largely the solution is to keep promoting the site, and to promote it to specific game communities, till we have enough quality traffic per game to keep people interested in that game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that it's also important to make this site valuable in the Stack Exchange way.  SE is successful because it is not a forum, bulletin board, or social networking site. I've seen a half dozen &quot;social media site for gamers!&quot; launch and sink within a month. The value of a Stack Exchange, and why it attracts experts and Google search rank, is that it is about people asking real questions they need help with, and getting specific answers.  Not flame wars, not random noodling, not spouting off opinions. What we don't need to do in order to make this site appeal is deviate from the Stack Exchange formula - otherwise this is just one in a sea of sites, all alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-05-30T16:17:18.037" LastActivityDate="2011-05-30T16:17:18.037" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="965" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="966" CreationDate="2011-04-29T18:16:54.207" Score="6" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few times I've seen a question where the asker &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; only wanted answers to the game he tagged (usually 4e, not to flame, just to illustrate).  I've read the question and responded to myself, &quot;darn, I'd like to see answers relating to &lt;em&gt;_&lt;/em&gt;&quot;.  What is the etiquette on either asking a specific question over again without the single tagged game/version, or getting the original to be expanded a bit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2011-04-30T09:28:05.217" Title="What's the etiquette on broadening a question?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="965" CreationDate="2011-04-29T18:32:34.200" Score="5" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask the OP in a comment if they really want system specific or not. Often they'll swap over to generic willingly once you explain they are probably limiting the amount of good answers if they're not really looking for stuff just about their game's mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If they are not, or they are one of the easily confused kinds of user that don't see/respond to the comments, and you want to know a more general answer, open another question. Then prepare to fend off accusations of duplication, but them's the breaks. I've got your back.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-04-29T21:13:15.107" LastActivityDate="2011-04-29T21:13:15.107" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="965" CreationDate="2011-04-30T09:28:05.217" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per the blog&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is OK to edit a question to make it more general.&lt;/strong&gt; With the power of editing comes the power to take someone’s selfish, very specific question, and edit it a little bit until they’re asking the more general question that hundreds of people encounter. For example, if someone asks, “I set up a web server at home but I can’t access it from work,” it’s OK to rewrite the question as, “What things should I check when a web server running at home is not visible on the Internet?” In fact, sometimes selfish, stupid questions of the “do my homework” variety can be easily edited into a form where the answer will provide an extremely valuable resource for the internet at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-04-30T09:28:05.217" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-04-30T18:52:52.607" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Also, asking merely system or system specific questions is limiting; while creating a niche for yourself as a place that people can expect to get campaign or setting suggestions will increase the traffic as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know &quot;how would you do this?&quot; creates a less precise answer than, &quot;What is the mechanic for this&quot;, but how different people approach the same issues is what makes this hobby so worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="309" LastActivityDate="2011-04-30T18:52:52.607" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="970" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="971" CreationDate="2011-05-02T12:06:22.913" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been trying to add the &lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/rpgbloggers?format=atom&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Bloggers Network RSS feed&lt;/a&gt; to the chat, and just can't make it work.  It's a feedburner feed, and we have one of those working for &lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/GnomeStew&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Gnome Stew&lt;/a&gt;. I've tried playing with the format - setting it to atom, etc. - and still no love.  What is wrong?  Is there a specific format it requires that I'm missing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="7976" LastEditDate="2013-07-18T12:05:00.513" LastActivityDate="2013-07-18T12:05:00.513" Title="Why do some feeds not work in chat?" Tags="|support|bug|status-declined|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="970" CreationDate="2011-05-02T14:57:22.563" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;That feed returns RSS 0.92; chat currently doesn't handle that. The &lt;code&gt;?format&lt;/code&gt; parameter doesn't seem to have any impact &amp;ndash; are you sure it should? I haven't found any documentation on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can however use Feedburner to convert the format. I have created a custom feedburner feed using the RPG Bloggers feed as input and converting it to RSS 2.0: &lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/feedburner/VKtY&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://feeds.feedburner.com/feedburner/VKtY&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chat reads that just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it looks like that feed (the original one) doesn't return post dates, which may cause problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2011-05-02T15:05:47.910" LastActivityDate="2011-05-02T15:05:47.910" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-04T14:27:41.687" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been holding off to see if Baelnorn would elaborate on his problems, as they seem to be strictly a superset of my own. But since he's gone, I'll go ahead and write up what's bothering me lately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cliquishness of this site is really starting to wear on me. There's always been a certain separation of the posters, and to a certain extent there always will be (spheres of interest and so on), but lately I've had the feeling that the most overtly hostile group has won out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the reminders that dnd-4e is &quot;a tag many users ignore&quot; (even though 4e currently only comprises nine of the fifty questions on the front page, most of which are in a cluster several days old) to people that would rather see fewer questions they don't like than more questions they do like (&lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/930/our-beta-stats-are-slipping/934#934&quot;&gt;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/930/our-beta-stats-are-slipping/934#934&lt;/a&gt;), it's starting to feel a bit like the console wars in here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's really annoying me lately though is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7632/what-characterizes-a-modern-role-playing-game-or-gaming-system&quot;&gt;What characterizes a “Modern” role playing game or gaming system?&lt;/a&gt; question. Ah, a question asking about the design and gameplay trends of the past thirty years! This ought to be good, yes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;your last paragraph [about the rise of best practices] is dead wrong, in terms of assumption. As with many market-driven creations, based on poorly-defined focus groups. As are many answers so far.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Gamers don't like modern things they play all the same games from the 1980s anyway&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Aw, isn't it sweet, thinking of Amber as an early game.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;You are still right as to the ways some newer games try to GM-proof the game, and as they do this, they ruin tha ability for the above-average GM to create a superlative game.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Regarding an answer about RPGs in general, citing two specific example lines] &lt;em&gt;&quot;So, more streamlined than 'melee' or 'Tunnels &amp;amp; Trolls'? Doubt it.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, apparently my hobby is a rotting mass of stagnation that hasn't changed in any positive way in thirty years. Wonderful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T06:28:45.207" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:28:45.207" CommentCount="29" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="922" CreationDate="2011-05-04T17:20:18.480" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll clarify the process here, since this question got bumped and the full explanation isn't in an answer yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a periodic process that will remove any tag that &lt;em&gt;only has one instance&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;has lasted for 6 months&lt;/em&gt;. If there are other tags on the question, it will just remove the tag. If it is the last tag on a question, though, that question will be marked with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt;. The former is actually more dangerous, because it is more difficult to track and notice. But this is the origin of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can prevent this easiest by simply asking another question that needs the same tag. As well, this is also a good reason that, when introducing a new tag that applies to old questions, you should find at least two candidates. As long as there are at least two instances, the automated process will not remove the tag from existing questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2011-05-04T17:20:18.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-06T16:05:08.267" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site moves really fast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I visit the site casually, most of the questions have already been answered and upvoted. The quickest answers get lots of votes. The slower answers, even if they're better, don't. Often, the correct answer has been chosen within hours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often, the highest voted answer is not the best. For example, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7742/what-would-you-pick-as-the-four-elements-of-mind&quot;&gt;What would you pick as the &quot;four elements of mind&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, the answer with the highest vote total currently describes the Myers-Briggs test. It's quite a good answer, but it's certainly not comprehensive or significantly better than those based on Freud or the humours. (I mean this with all respect to RMorrissey, whose answer it was.) I don't think that, if a better answer comes along, it will get as many votes. The upvoting has happened very fast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This often means I don't add answers, especially if they require thought, because they won't get as many votes as the quick answer. And it does mean that my casual visits have declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-05-06T16:05:08.267" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="975" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-06T16:14:48.917" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Building on Graham's answer - because I can't leave comments yet - it's very hard for folks who aren't 24/7 online to get enough reputation points to perform even basic operations with regards to the content of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case in point: I can't leave comments yet, and I've been lurking here since October of 2010.  I know it's poor form to add answers like this that should be comments - I see people catching flak for it all the time - but I dont. have. a choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is extremely alienating, and I suspect something as simple as restructuring the locks on things like comments can help people feel welcome, rather than told &quot;you don't matter because you're not online enough to have valuable opinions to share.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="748" LastActivityDate="2011-05-06T16:14:48.917" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-11T18:03:14.347" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has lost its appeal for me too. I had a couple spurts where I thought things were moving slowly so I went through a back catalog of questions and answered any that I thought were interesting. Now, I've caught every question from the start to I guess about 10 days ago that I'm interested in answering. And I find much less reason to come here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess that's one of the things that Stack Exchange has for the rate of new questions being worrying. There isn't enough activity here to sustain people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also a thing with the nature of the site, once there are a certain number of answers for a particular question, there's no longer any point in giving your own. Even if you think you've got an answer that's really good, it'll be drowned out by the already accepted answers, and the 4-6 that have gotten the most upvotes. Even if the question rises to the top because someone just posted something, anyone who clicks on it probably won't see the most recent post. That's something of a problem with the nature of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also must say that the no rep for questions that become part of the community wiki bugs me to no end. I haven't seen any use to this feature, and it seems anyone with a high enough rep can just tag something community wiki. You can make a good answer, and the reward system that Stack Exchange works with simply gets negated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-05-11T18:03:14.347" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="978" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-05-13T00:27:05.023" Score="6" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;A little while back, Jeff Atwood made a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/962/has-role-playing-games-stack-exchange-lost-its-appeal/964#comment-2138&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; about how Gaming was seeding members of the community with new games to help encourage them to ask questions. I was initially skeptical of the idea, but having given it some thought I believe it's worth at least posting about. If for no other reason than to start getting some proactive and out-of-the-box ideas for generating new questions posted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first potential issue this faces is simply finding good candidates for the program. Unlike video games, RPGs require a group of people to really play through. And unlike board games, they require a pretty hefty time commitment. I know I probably couldn't provide a very good ROI myself, and I'd imagine that many adult players are in my boat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I don't think that this is a show stopper. Surely there must be a few groups out there that would be interested in trying a new RPG every &lt;em&gt;N&lt;/em&gt; months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The next issue would be product selection. Even among publishers that are actively producing content, the new content is almost exclusively in the form of add-on products. Which are probably too niche individually to do anyone much good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we'd need some mechanism to select a game, and figure out the minimum number of books to get a good experience out of it (and possibly an exemplar published module). This would probably be a good way of focusing game-specific pushes (which I believe have been brought up in comments somewhere).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there some angles I'm missing here? Does anyone have any thoughts on Jeff's idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2011-05-25T19:50:27.970" Title="Buying the Community Books to Generate Questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="978" CreationDate="2011-05-13T01:56:11.537" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a good idea, and I don't think it needs to be as complicated as all that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, multiple new games come out every month, they're just not D&amp;amp;D.  See new releases on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.indiepressrevolution.com/xcart/home.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;IPR&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.rpgnow.com/?&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPGNow&lt;/a&gt;, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/store&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Paizo store&lt;/a&gt;, The back wall of my FLGS is &quot;new stuff&quot; and there's always a good 30 products.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And once you add in major rule sets worthy of questionage, it's even more. I personally am looking forward to, in the near future, Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic for Pathfinder (Paizo), Ashen Stars (Pelgrane), DCC RPG (Goodman), Lamentations of the Flame Princess (same)... Mongoose, Green Ronin, there's a lot of companies with multiple product a month release schedules just keeping it to new games and major expansions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't get many questions about adventures, though I'm not really sure why not, seems like this would be a good venue for &quot;How can I make Tomb of Horrors not suck&quot; or similar. There are whole forums on paizo.com about the Adventure Paths and questions regarding them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Minor splatbooks, like &quot;Joe's Guide to Whatever,&quot; are probably niche enough not to merit this treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think the requirement would be &quot;multiple books and an exemplar published module and run a campaign with it!&quot;  The point is to generate questions and have someone knowledgeable enough to answer.  I think it would work like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Person gets a free game.  We target say 1 a month and pick out likely major new releases by preorder and buzz. We initially populate this queue with high rep users, like 5k+, who volunteer. Parcel them out by a combo of interest and rep.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That person commits to reading it and asking at least 3 (good) questions on it within a month of receipt. Furthermore, they are expected to at least try to answer any questions that come up on that game in the near future. Playtest/playing it is nice but not mandatory, with RPGs that's just unrealistic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;People that deliver to our satisfaction on #2 get put back in the queue. New 5k users get in too, unless we get so many that we need to up the rep buyin. This encourages rep whoring, I mean site participation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Profit.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-05-14T14:23:53.480" LastActivityDate="2011-05-14T14:23:53.480" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-19T16:25:53.460" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site's appeal is limited by format (no real sense of community in a pure Q&amp;amp;A format), and by the wide range of gaming styles. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add to that the D&amp;amp;D-4E centered nature of the majority of questions, and you have a recipe for BLAH.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, some moderation issues. The biggest one is the cases of similar but not exact duplicates being closed and labeled &quot;exact duplicate.&quot; Not only discouraging, but downright wrong in several cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But also, the stifling of discussions in comments that (in many cases) lead to edits which improve answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I post her mostly out of boredom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastEditorUserId="407" LastEditDate="2011-05-30T07:47:43.653" LastActivityDate="2011-05-30T07:47:43.653" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="981" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-05-20T22:22:47.360" Score="4" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently had a question closed (as a dupe), which is fair enough, but I wad wondering where is the best place to defend it? Meta, comments on the original question or somewhere else? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've popped a comment on my original question But it occurred to me that the people who matter (mods) probably won't re-visit the question, so won't see the comment. (and I suspect the SE engine won't alert anyone?) But to protest on meta would seem a little over the top (I want to discuss the closed question, not have a tantrum*) and presumably we don't want meta flooded with closed-question rants?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*this question is only tangentally related to the other, and definitely not a tantrum ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="174" LastActivityDate="2011-05-26T08:32:46.197" Title="Where do you defend / protest a closed question?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="981" CreationDate="2011-05-20T22:41:29.107" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Putting a comment up actually works surprisingly well.  &lt;strike&gt;I&lt;/strike&gt;We do try to revisit closed questions.  This also might cause people to &lt;em&gt;vote&lt;/em&gt; to reopen your question, which would get our attention pretty quickly (mod dashboards and all).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that doesn't work either put up a meta question or come talk to us in chat, per your preference.  Either of those options will &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; get our attention popups network wide and all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will go look at your question now ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-05-20T22:41:29.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="981" CreationDate="2011-05-26T08:32:46.197" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As @CRoss has mentioned, there are a few ways you can get your question re-addressed.  I'll try to elaborate a bit on them, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1.)  Check to see if the mod and/or other involved users are in the chat room, and hash it out there.  Especially if the mod in question is @CRoss, (he's almost always hanging out there) this should get you a fairly quick response.  It also provides the quickest means of two-way communication if a discussion of any length is required.  When posting your concerns via chat, I suggest posting a description of your issue in one message and a link to your question in its own message.  This allows the link to get &quot;OneBoxed&quot; and makes it more easily recognizable.  Also, make use of the @Mention function here to call out any mods and/or other users involved in closing the thread.  (More on @Mentions later.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2.)  Post in Meta.  This will give visibility of the issue to most of the community, especially including the moderators and other avid members who may be able to influence the closing/re-opening of the question.  Make sure to include a link to your question.  Put the link on its own line (may or may not be necessary, but just to be sure) so that StackExchange can convert it to a hyperlink with the question title as the display text.  Also, I'm not sure if @Mentions (more on those later) work in question/answer posts like they do in comments or chat, but it wouldn't hurt to try using them to summon the people involved in closing your thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3.)  Put a comment on your question.  I make this the last option because, in my opinion, it is least preferable to have potentially lengthy discussions placed in a comment-thread on the main site.  Still, if this is how you'd prefer to do it, one thing I definitely recommend is using the @Mention feature to call on the attention of the mods and/or other users involved in closing the thread.  Their names will be posted at the bottom of your question post if it is closed.  Simply include an @Mention of the user(s) (their username, without any spaces or punctuation, preceded by an @ symbol - like @Iszi, @CRoss, @AndrewM) in your comment.  This will place a message in their global Inbox, which will be flagged on any StackExchange site they visit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2011-05-26T08:32:46.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="984" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-05-28T02:37:35.480" Score="10" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8163/can-a-dd-character-be-launched-into-space&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8163/can-a-dd-character-be-launched-into-space&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see it as meeting any of the criteria given in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22228/what-is-a-locked-post/22229#22229&quot;&gt;What is a locked post?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no quarrel with the diamond mods unilaterally closing it, but it seems very extreme to lock it whilst the community was well on its way to reopening it.  If there are problems with the question, lets solve them together.  For me, that question is very similar to &quot;What happens when you cast fireball in a 5' corridor?&quot;  Unluckily for me, StackExchange wasn't around in 1980 when I could have used some help with that question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would it be possible for a mod to unlock the question long enough to edit it, or comment upon it directing people to this meta question for further discussion?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2011-05-29T20:43:58.457" Title="Why lock this question?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="985" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="984" CreationDate="2011-05-28T03:04:32.687" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's closed because it's obviously off topic, and it's locked because we mods have other things to do on a Friday night than keep patrolling to reclose.  I understand everyone's feeling fun and silly and all but the question is completely inappropriate. It's a great thing to yuk about in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-05-28T03:14:48.977" LastActivityDate="2011-05-28T03:14:48.977" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="984" CreationDate="2011-05-28T03:25:19.393" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's off topic, and the mods agree.  You know us, we don't overrule on a light basis, but this question is beyond any semblance of being on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The core of the question is a physics question, or a physics joke depending on how we look at it.  It requires &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; RPG expertise nor experience to answer.  It requires significant physics and math experience.  It is also not likely to add value to any RPG game, in fact it was tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this would have been great on a forum, or in chat somewhere (even in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/the-game-table&quot;&gt;our chat&lt;/a&gt;), but that doesn't make it right for our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is not a forum, it's a Q&amp;amp;A.  That requires &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; questions and &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; answers, not discussion starters, flame wars, and jokes.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference please see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;.  I'll quote and highlight some relevant sections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page. To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite ______?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;there is no actual problem to be solved: “I’m curious if other people feel like I do.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;we are being asked an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if ______ happened?”&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;it is a rant disguised as a question: “______ sucks, am I right?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If your motivation for asking the question is “I would like to participate in a discussion about -------”, then you should not be asking here. (You are more than welcome to have such discussions in our real time web chat.)&lt;/strong&gt; However, if your motivation is “I would like others to explain ------ to me”, then you are probably OK. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2011-05-29T20:43:58.457" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="987" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-05-28T17:08:36.240" Score="8" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we've agreed that questions asking people to generate content from scratch are off topic.  &lt;strong&gt;Do we have a stance on questions asking for review of home brew content.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I'm working on a port of the Artificer class to Pathfinder.  Would posting it and asking for reviews be on topic, and useful.   Would asking for input on specific features, or for guidance in achieving a particular objective improve the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we're thinking about, can you think of examples of this type of question that would be bad (too localized, subjective and argumentative, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-03-13T17:58:02.283" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T17:58:02.283" Title="Are questions requesting reviews of work on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|playtesting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="987" CreationDate="2011-05-28T17:18:25.463" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would prefer that folks tried out the material before bringing it here for review.  Such a question could then be phrased like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This house rule was written to address XXX situation, after trying it, we found that the goal was successful, but also side effect YYY.  How could we tweak this?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We tried house rule XXX to address YYY situation but it had little effect.  We really like the flavor of the house rule, how could we change it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We tried house rule XXX to address YYY.  After a couple sessions, it seems to work just fine.  Are there any potential side effects that we haven't seen yet?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, requiring experience with the rule change puts a limit on the number of such questions and helps to restrict them to changes that have merit rather than just something that was dreamed up.  Discussions of theoretical house rules should be directed to regular forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-05-28T17:18:25.463" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="989" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="987" CreationDate="2011-05-28T18:19:01.017" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general should be OK.  The gotchas are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone who's just pimping their stuff. &quot;Hey look at my new class isn't it cool?&quot; There will be a temptation esp. from PDF publishers whose product lines are just &quot;here's a new class in 2 page&quot; to do this, and it shouldn't be tolerated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;General/subjective. Shouldn't be &quot;review my thing,&quot; or just &quot;here playtest this,&quot; should be specific questions like Pat's proposed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wrestle with 3. Too Localized.  Is &quot;here's a lil rule for my homebrew&quot; too localized?  I guess not if there's meaningful context such that someone else could benefit either from the rule or from the theory discussion regarding it.  In the end it's all case by case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the end, like everything else - it it obviously related to RPGs, so it's under the big tent of site scope.  But I'm not going to say &quot;ah yes review requests are OK&quot; - if they are questions that otherwise pass the question quality markers, and they are under the &quot;big tent&quot; of beign tabletop related, then they're good.  If they don't, they're not.  Same answer for any other &quot;XX&quot; in &quot;RPG XX&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-05-29T15:44:32.947" LastActivityDate="2011-05-29T15:44:32.947" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="984" CreationDate="2011-05-29T18:27:24.380" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think both mxyzplk and C. Ross are being pretty damn arrogant to be saying that the question is clearly in the wrong, and in this case I consider both of them to be clearly in the wrong. They're coming at this from a very narrow minded point of view, and this is the exact point of view that's preventing the growth of the site. Everything is D&amp;amp;D3.x and D&amp;amp;D4e focused for the most part, with little about other systems. People have complained about this, and we've been discussing what we could do to expand the appeal to the site. Not looking at questions from a d20 lens, and considering them from other points of view would go a long way to doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You two should do what's good for the site, admit you were wrong and unlock it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-05-29T18:27:24.380" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="991" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-05-29T18:30:26.067" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Honestly, after looking at the Why lock this question? thread I think maybe we need to replace the mods. Their decision to unilaterally lock the question when members disagreed is a perfect example of the kind of stuff people here have been complaining about, and perhaps having them step down and be replaced with some more open minded mods would do good for the site and make it more appealing to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastActivityDate="2011-05-29T18:30:26.067" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="992" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-05-29T22:39:09.357" Score="5" ViewCount="683" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently we had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8163/can-a-dd-character-be-launched-into-space-closed&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on the site, I've reproduced it completely below for those unable to view it.  It directly conflicts with the site &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&#xA;  we are being asked an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if ------ happened?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously this question isn't an actual problem as it's noted that it's just for fun, and it's quite obviously hypothetical.  Also the question as written is not  about RPGs, but rather is a hypothetical Physics question with RPG trappings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How could this question be modified so that it matches the rules of the FAQ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Can a D&amp;amp;D character be launched into space?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ok, this is just for fun. Community Wiki away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Gilbert the Goblin saw something glinting in the water off of a dock. Ever the curious little creature, he jumped into the water and swam down the 10 feet to retrieve the item. Ooh, a shiny gold coin! Still inverted and reaching for the coin, he decided to place the gold piece in his Deep-Pocket Cloak (200 cubic feet of extradimensional space) before swimming back to the surface. He pulled aside a flap, exposing the many pockets in the cloak and FOOM! Gilbert was launched into orbit from the sudden force of the upward buoyancy created by the extradimensional space in his pockets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Assumptions, clearly stated by the Rule of Awesome:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D Physics treat the entire 200 cubic feet of extradimensional space as displacing an equal volume of water.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gilbert and his cloak and his shiny gold coin are not torn apart by the sudden force.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gilbert weighs 40 lb, the cloak weighs 1 lb, and his coin is weightless.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;All force is applied along a straight line perpendicular to the surface of the water.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The gravity is identical to the average Earth gravity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The density of the atmosphere is identical to that typical of our Earth.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gilbert assumes the ideal position for minimum air and water resistance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What height does Gilbert reach?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/math&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;math&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;math&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-06-02T13:33:30.607" Title="How can &quot;Can a D&amp;D character be launched into space?&quot; be asked so it's valid?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="992" CreationDate="2011-05-29T22:51:46.417" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It can't be.  You can remove the &quot;it's just for fun&quot; lead sentence, but in the end that's still the deal, the question is just a joke/physics problem not a real question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can take related concepts and make really quite unrelated questions out of them, or have the question bring cool imagery to your mind that you decide to somehow incorporate into a game, but that's not the same as the original question being valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-05-30T06:02:35.580" LastActivityDate="2011-05-30T06:02:35.580" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="994" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="992" CreationDate="2011-05-29T23:58:59.010" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simple. The PCs are on a Spelljamming ship around a planet that isn't known for having any, and they encounter a Goblin, with a significant amount of air around him floating in orbit, and they wonder why. Gilbert explains what happens, the PCs raise their eyebrows and move on however they like. The players might want to number crunch on their own time, so it helps to know if it'll stand up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And guess what, now that the question has been asked, this is a scenario I want to throw in to a game, and I've got players who will actually crunch the numbers (they've done it before). It's a real situation that I'm facing &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1520" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2011-05-30T00:03:00.910" LastActivityDate="2011-05-30T00:03:00.910" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="992" CreationDate="2011-05-30T00:51:02.183" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's the 4e question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How can I present a persuasive argument to my GM to allow me to launch an enemy into space following linky&quot; (not going to actually bother doing research for a meta question, but there's a 4e cosmonaut.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's the 3.5 question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I've got a gnome with boots of levitation and a decanter of endless water. Can he fly, and if he can, how fast?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of these require reference to in-game interactions, either rules or at the table. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at this, the &lt;em&gt;easiest&lt;/em&gt; way to phrase this is a:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I [suggested to the GM last night][want to suggest] that my deep pocket cloak can act as both a floatation device and as a way to launch my character out of the water. My GM likes realistic physics. How high do I go, using earth-normal physics, with the following parameters:&#xA;...&#xA;Is it worth suggesting this to my GM in my 4e game, or is there a better way to do this?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also the more general question of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I handle physics problems in 4e games? (I've faced physics puzzles before. it was... odd)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the consequences of having magic items obey real-world physics? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-05-30T00:51:02.183" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="996" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1095" CreationDate="2011-06-02T05:04:04.827" Score="12" ViewCount="194" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have established a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/517/rpg-se-case-study-paper-planning&quot;&gt;room&lt;/a&gt; for exploring the possibility of writing a Journal paper of around 5k words for the international Journal of Role-Playing. This is an unranked journal full of grad-student submissions, but it has potential. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The paper will probably be looking at different perceptions of the hobby using answers to popular and controversial questions as a case-study. I'm aiming my sights low so that we can establish the academic suitability of using the content of this site for case studies. Once we've established that it's valid, we can perform more interesting and articulate studies and experiments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like 2-3 co-authors. The paper is due 1st August. We'll be doing most of the writing on google docs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.marinkacopier.nl/ijrp/wp-content/issue2/IJRPissue2.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Link to Issue 2 and CFP&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For whomever can make it, we're discussing the issue in chat &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/517/rpg-se-case-study-paper-planning?tab=schedule&quot;&gt;today.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who's in?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2011-06-02T14:16:18.697" LastActivityDate="2011-09-14T08:36:37.727" Title="Who wants to help contribute to a RPG.SE Case Study for the International Journal of Role-Playing?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|research|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2012-01-04T00:03:15.170" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="996" CreationDate="2011-06-02T05:15:14.167" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm in; I enjoy the more on point scholarly articles in the IJRP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-06-02T05:15:14.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="996" CreationDate="2011-06-02T12:34:12.137" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd be happy to help with some of the legwork, but I'm not sure you actually want me writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-06-02T12:34:12.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="999" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="992" CreationDate="2011-06-02T13:33:30.607" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we can afford a few &quot;code golf&quot; style questions here, as long as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They are clearly written.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Related to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Are a question which can be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't have too many of them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Acknowledging that the question is outside the norm is also a plus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-06-02T13:33:30.607" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1000" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-06-04T23:55:52.983" Score="11" ViewCount="504" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What kinds of questions should be on and off topic on Role-playing Games Stack Exchange?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is intended to help work through some of the concerns on the site regarding things being off topic, and the concept that anything can be on topic, provided its followed by &quot;in an RPG&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the purposes of this discussion lets specifically talk about off topic, as opposed to what makes for a subjective question, or a too localized question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please refer to the existing FAQ or other StackExchange materials when making your case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T15:13:55.130" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:13:55.130" Title="What is on topic on Role-playing Games Stack Exchange?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1001" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="996" CreationDate="2011-06-06T08:32:29.633" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry I missed the chat - I've been away the last few days.  If you still need co-authors, I'd be glad to join.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="862" LastActivityDate="2011-06-06T08:32:29.633" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1002" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-06T10:09:44.453" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something that is not of interest to Players and Referees of a Role Playing Game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2011-06-06T10:09:44.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-06T12:53:03.703" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something that is not about role-playing games - playing them, creating them, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-06-06T12:53:03.703" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-06T15:19:34.743" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are trivial answers to this. Minutia of the rules of board games, or the mechanics of computer games are off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where things get muddy is when RPGs intersect with other well-studied areas. Is physics off-topic? There are certainly game situations where knowing the solution to a physics problem is necessary. What about the details of a well-known fictional universe, or the mechanics of mid-twentieth century naval vessels?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really have a comprehensive answer, but these are some things that strongly suggest a question may be off-topic to me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question excludes RPG-centric answers without cause. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1616/where-can-i-find-good-ship-plans&quot;&gt;ship plans&lt;/a&gt; question is the best example of this, even though it ultimately generated some good answers. It would be acceptable if a reason for the exclusion of RPG resources were elaborated on (needed for a prop, for example).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question requires a level of detail well beyond what's needed for RPGs (without explicit reason). Formal mathematical proofs, precise explanations of the operation of machinery, and so on. Note that this is different from an amazingly detailed answer being provided and accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question has no discernible tie to RPGs, and none is provided in the post. Usually this will be theoretical scientific questions, philosophy, trade knowledge, or other bits of obscura not typically used during practical play.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples of bullet point number two, as it seems to have been unclear. Using Perl as an example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly off topic questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do I check the file system with Perl?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should a newcomer to Perl learn both Perl 5 and 6?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Off topic, as they require a level of detail well beyond that used in RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On-topic questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What does Perl look like?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can I use Perl to hack into a security system? (My character in &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt; has the Perl specialization. Can Perl be used for this sort of task?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2011-06-21T17:47:03.150" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-07T09:16:49.327" Score="4" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that does not fundamentally draw on RPG expertise.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On topic: How high can a gnome with boots of levitation and a decanter of endless water in 3.5 actually fly, assuming that the decanter uses the water as reaction-mass. Even this is a borderline question, but given that I've actually calculated this... it's probably just inside the edge case.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Off topic: Substituting a goblin for Mu, the spherical physics cow. We don't need to know anything about the goblin to answer the question. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Other bits moved to new answers)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2011-06-26T15:48:53.920" LastActivityDate="2011-06-26T15:48:53.920" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-06-07T17:06:33.150" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm only speaking for my own use here.  The initial appeal to me was the stack exchange platform.  Community moderation, upvoting, etc.  Now that I've gotten a taste of it, it's hard for me to go back to a phpbb.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, once that appeal wore off, I went back to forums.  The reason is simple.  I'm more interested in discussion than in Q&amp;amp;A.  Explaining how mounts work in 4e does not hold my attention.  Debating about whether or not fudging is acceptable does keep me interested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I do enjoy this site.  It's just not my primary online source for RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;tl;dr I prefer discussion over Q&amp;amp;A.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2011-06-07T17:06:33.150" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1007" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-06-11T13:29:23.223" Score="4" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;Might &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogoverflow.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; help us fill the need for a place to discuss?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackexchange.com/2011/06/blog-overflow&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackexchange.com/2011/06/blog-overflow&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="1218" LastEditDate="2011-06-26T15:17:47.143" LastActivityDate="2011-06-26T15:17:47.143" Title="BlogOverflow.com" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1008" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1007" CreationDate="2011-06-11T17:41:59.653" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Blogs aren't really discussion, just people holding forth in alternation, but sure.  If someone wanted to walk us through &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogoverflow.com/getting-started/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the getting started items&lt;/a&gt; in Meta to where we thought it would really be sustainable, we could do it. It would take a lot of commitment, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-06-11T17:41:59.653" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1007" CreationDate="2011-06-14T18:55:13.323" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm one of those users that would like an area for discussion with the rpg.SE community.  But I don't think BlogOverflow is the right tool for that.  My understanding of it is that instead of open discussion, there are designated posters who write for the blog.  At best, I feel like we'd get an approved topic or two every day to discuss but there would be no way for an individual to ask a question.  There might be value in this sort of moderated discussion but I don't think it'll satisfy community debate the same way a forum would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2011-06-14T18:55:13.323" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2011-06-21T03:15:14.573" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm with mxyzplk. No, such questions are not within the purview of RPG.SE&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs cover every period in human history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's not RPG-specific and can be googled, why is it on SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8581/whats-a-denver-accent-sound-like&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a Denver accent sound like?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;...is NOT phrased &quot;What would a Denver accent sound like in the setting of SR4?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a generic historical question that is not RPG-specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this argument does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; apply to Future or Fictional History.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2011-06-21T03:15:14.573" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-21T03:47:46.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a separate answer, for clearer referendum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basic real-world things, that are not unique to a RPG, should not be on topic. This includes &quot;what does a RL Denver accent sound like,&quot; &quot;How far does a ball fly,&quot; and anything else not specifically related to RPGs.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On programmers.SE, things that would apply to other professions equally are OT. &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1697/is-a-question-always-off-topic-when-it-applies-to-other-professions-too&quot;&gt;https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1697/is-a-question-always-off-topic-when-it-applies-to-other-professions-too&lt;/a&gt; - just because &quot;a programmer wants to know&quot; is not on topic. &quot;Uniquely about programming&quot; is.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, &quot;a gamer wants to know&quot; is not on topic.  &quot;Uniquely about gaming&quot; is. Questions in another domain - physics, english, real world history - should be asked on those SEs or wherever else. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T17:21:05.530" LastActivityDate="2011-06-21T03:47:46.430" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1012" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-06-21T19:52:46.430" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was on here a long time ago and recently decided to drop in and find out how the site is doing.  I left originally because I became bored.  Unfortunately, I find myself quickly becoming bored again.  (Also, there are time constraints, but that's another story.)  I guess I should share my reflections on why that may be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe back in the day there was discussion on whether this site should allow discussions.  It seemed the majority opinion was that the format was meant to support strictly Q&amp;amp;A activity, and people didn't want it to turn into just another forum with the accompanying infighting.  (And now, according to an earlier comment in this thread, it appears that that decision was ultimately an SO decision.)  I can certainly understand and appreciate that stance.  However, that leads me to why I am not so hopeful for this site right now.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my mind, tabletop roleplaying isn't like videogaming or writing code.  The Q&amp;amp;A format is well geared for those other activities, in which specific, precise information about mechanics is important to success.  In tabletop roleplaying, however, the focus is on narrative.  Mechanics should (and I assume usually do) take a back seat to the development of story (and I assume experienced gaming here).  Mechanics are important, don't get me wrong.  But it's the quality of the story and how players are immersed in it that brings about success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem seems to be that something of lesser importance in the hobby has been made the focal point of the site.  When addressing a problem we always want to address it with the right tool.  A hammer is not the most valuable tool to bring to bear against a leaky faucet, although it might be perfect for other tasks.  After browsing the site again for a couple of days, I suspect that an SO format may be the wrong tool to bear when addressing the most important issues that people face when tabletop gaming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I write this I start to wonder if anyone here has ever thought about what kind of tool might be best for engagement around tabletop roleplaying.  What would the ideal site look like and how would it function?  I'm sure there are developers out there who could do it.  Are we using the SO system because it is convenient and available?  Or is this the format that people think best fits the need?  I can't answer those questions for others, but I think it would be a good thing to evaluate what we are trying to do and what might be the best way to go about it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="195" LastActivityDate="2011-06-21T19:52:46.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1013" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="962" CreationDate="2011-06-22T22:03:52.473" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this site is valuable for rules questions when the publisher or author is unwilling or unable to provide free answers. It is especially valuable in resolving ambiguous game rules by comparing actual solutions developed by users/customers. Although that is common to fora as well, the voting methodology provides quantifiable feedback to those results (unlike fora, where the dominant voice oft masquerades as a majority).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it seems to me that the downturn in growth (if any) has produced a trend to ask (and accept and reward) questions which can be easily answered by (a) consulting published rulebooks and/or their cooperative publishers, or (b) any search engine. These perceived problems are part of the cause of my waning interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I consider questions in the above two categories to be OT for SE, and a waste of my time, but few agree. Were I setting policy, I'd say &quot;Before you ask a question, try the manufacturer. And this is NOT the right place for research.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastActivityDate="2011-06-22T22:03:52.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1014" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-26T15:49:10.520" Score="-5" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A question not appropriate for the system it was asked for.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On topic: How can I fix the economics of D&amp;amp;D 3.5/AD&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;OFf topic: How can I simulate a world economy in D&amp;amp;D 4e. (This is probably going to receive comments of &quot;Don't.&quot; We should figure out if they're appropriate answers. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-06-26T15:49:10.520" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-06-26T15:49:49.647" Score="3" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking many things about many systems&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Off topic: my recent Q about &quot;what tool-tropes exist in various RPGs?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On topic: Single thing over one || many systems, depending on scope of interest &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-06-26T15:49:49.647" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1016" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1018" CreationDate="2011-06-29T16:40:41.573" Score="6" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maybe this isn't the right spot to bring this up but I saw this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8785/in-dd-4e-changelings-can-keep-other-forms-when-sleeping&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; tagged dnd-4e and changeling.  This confused me because when I think changeling I think of the White Wolfs Changeling: The Lost or Changeling: The Dreaming.  Is it really appropriate to have a tag for specific race in D&amp;amp;D?  It may be but I wanted some clarification and thoughts from others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal thought is that it is too granular and it also pushes the site into an even more D&amp;amp;D focused niche which might not be the overall intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1534" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-06-30T18:16:04.503" Title="Tag question - changeling tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2020-01-13T16:28:02.170" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1016" CreationDate="2011-06-29T17:09:17.477" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The relevant game tags are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-lost&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-dreaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-dreaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-dreaming&lt;/a&gt;. (Though perhaps they need to be changed for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-the-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-the-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-the-lost&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-the-dreaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-the-dreaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-the-dreaming&lt;/a&gt;, that's a tangent.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say it's borderline. I don't think there'd be any objection to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; tag, so perhaps a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling&lt;/a&gt; tag for the D&amp;amp;D race isn't uncalled for. On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; is really a broad tag that applies to a concept that's not limited to D&amp;amp;D 4e, while (the D&amp;amp;D conception of) changelings aren't broadly relevant beyond the game they're in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I do note that in practice the only questions that have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; on them are two D&amp;amp;D 4e questions, which might indicate that even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; is unnecessary granularity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Judging by the current practice I'd say that race-specific tags are &lt;strong&gt;problematic&lt;/strong&gt; because: a) they are useful in the scope of D&amp;amp;D 4e rules questions, because powers are built around things like class and race, but b) such tags are going to become D&amp;amp;D 4e specific as questions about other games have little reason to use race-specific tags like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Calling such tags problematic doesn't mean we should get rid of them, but it does mean they don't fit into our tag system very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-06-29T17:09:17.477" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1016" CreationDate="2011-06-29T17:39:58.670" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm of the opinion that race tags aren't useful, specifically because &lt;em&gt;they mean different things across different games.&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could have &lt;code&gt;game-race&lt;/code&gt; tag, but that leads to very long tags, and an even smaller use for each one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, is anyone actually going to search or filter based on &lt;code&gt;elf&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;changeling&lt;/code&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-06-29T17:39:58.670" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1019" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1021" CreationDate="2011-06-30T13:49:20.637" Score="5" ViewCount="130" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site (SE not rpg.se) has a history of closing questions that are closely related to another question even if it is not the same question.  However it seems when I try to make an answer to the more &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8677/how-can-i-improve-my-ability-to-react-to-spontaneous-events-in-star-wars-saga-ed&quot;&gt;general question&lt;/a&gt; rather than the specific it gets voted down even though it is a valid answer to the general question even though it may not had answered the specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this how we think it should be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-07-01T13:35:38.993" Title="General Answers to Specific Questions" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1019" CreationDate="2011-06-30T14:14:25.977" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, to address the edge case of downvoting your answer, I'd have downvoted it too. Not because I think it's a &quot;general answer to a specific question&quot; (I do that all the time) but because, in my opinion, it's absolutely horrible advice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, I'd downvote it because I think it's a bad answer. (I didn't actually downvote it because I don't check starwars specific questions...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-06-30T14:14:25.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1019" CreationDate="2011-06-30T14:26:33.677" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answering a specific question with a general answer is usually fine. The exception would be when the specific case in question is an exception to the general rule (e.g. providing traditional RPG advice to a non-traditional RPG question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Providing an answer to a related but different question is not fine. In that case you should either wait for the related question to be asked, leave a comment, or (if the question/answer is going to be really good) post the question yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is this second case that caused you to be downvoted. Your answer was not a more general form of &quot;how can I be more spontaneous?&quot;. Your answer was an answer to a question similar to &quot;how can I prevent my players from destroying the adventure?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two questions/answers are &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt;, but the relationship isn't one of general/specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-06-30T14:26:33.677" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1019" CreationDate="2011-07-01T13:35:38.993" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer might not be quite specificity on topic but I don't see why it is worth -5. Piling on or what. I don't like the tactics in the answer but personally I would not have bothered to -1 it, may be a comment to say I did not think it was relevant to the question. But after all that is my opinion not everyone that reads the questions and answers would agree. Getting no votes would have been enough of a signal to those that cared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2011-07-01T13:35:38.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1023" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1024" CreationDate="2011-07-02T12:10:28.687" Score="1" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has crossed my mind more than once to use some of what I consider to be my better answers here as the basis for my own blog. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way for me to easily extract my answers from RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:39:29.317" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:39:29.317" Title="Bulk extraction of answer text?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1024" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1023" CreationDate="2011-07-02T13:19:20.800" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not now, but &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; RPG.SE becomes a full fledged site, you will be able to download all your answers via &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;OData&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-07-02T13:19:20.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1023" CreationDate="2011-07-02T16:39:53.090" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Easily&quot; is kind of a relative term. In addition to the OData mentioned by C. Ross, there's also &lt;a href=&quot;http://api.stackoverflow.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the API&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/&quot;&gt;StackApps&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2011-07-02T16:39:53.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1026" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1027" CreationDate="2011-07-04T14:04:07.233" Score="8" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a few questions about a specific indie game. Does that merit a tag for the game? How big/popular does a game need to be to merit its own tag, rather than the collective [indie-rpg]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2174" LastActivityDate="2011-07-18T19:50:12.357" Title="Does a specific indie game merit a tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1026" CreationDate="2011-07-04T14:35:38.477" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's a public game, or even a public beta game, then yes it should have a tag.  If it never gets another question the tag will eventually drop off ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm looking at you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/maid&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;maid&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;maid&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-07-04T14:35:38.477" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1028" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-07-06T19:27:28.537" Score="12" ViewCount="285" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8901/polyhedral-dice-statistics-program-spreadsheet-or-document&quot;&gt;Statistics&lt;/a&gt; questions on topic here? Even if they are tangentially related to RP games? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What about general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8857/removing-bad-rolls-from-a-d20&quot;&gt;Dice&lt;/a&gt; questions? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize both of these questions are tangentially related to RPGs, but are they really on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T18:59:50.320" Title="Are general statistics or dice questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1029" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1028" CreationDate="2011-07-06T19:40:17.443" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I would say yes, they are off-topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasoning for this is the same reason why physics questions are considered off-topic. They are first and foremost about physics with a very tenuous connection to gaming in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dice question was primarily about gamer superstition and the statistics of dice question was a fairly common stat question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To expand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8857/removing-bad-rolls-from-a-d20&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; at its core is about gamer superstitions, with superstitions being the focus. As it is written, it is a bad question, and at it's core it is a &quot;just for fun let's talk about gamer superstitions&quot; question without any clear-cut answer to it. While it would be fun to discuss, there is no clear answer here and is more of a discussion point. Because of that fact, according to the SE faq, it is considered off-topic. There is no discernible merit to it for the RPG.SE website. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On there other hand, there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8901/polyhedral-dice-statistics-program-spreadsheet-or-document&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which is admittedly a better question. It has sense been reworded to help direct it's focus, but at it's core it is still a statistics question. It makes reference to the Rolemaster system, but that's where the tenuous connection to gaming ends. It is a simple statistics or mathematics question that does have a direct answer, but isn't a gaming question. Now, if the stats/math question was directly related to a system, such as figuring out the average to-hit for system r or the average damage from dice rolls with modifier included for system x, it would have a relevant link to a specific system that would not make sense on a straight statistics or mathematics site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The above mentioned question has sense been edited and reworded by SevenSidedDie and is no longer a statistics question and is instead looking for a system/spreadsheet/program to figure out statistics. I still think the example is relevant, so I am leaving it in my response.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, is there merit to these questions? Absolutely! But they are more suited for a forum discussion where answers are broad and more suited to an open-ended discussion. Conversely, RPG.SE by nature is a beast of specificity with concrete, set answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to demean the questions in question, as I'd love to discuss them in a forum-type setting or around my gaming table, but as such, there is a precedence with other types of questions that these are off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The precedence in question are referenced in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/992/how-can-can-a-dd-character-be-launched-into-space-be-asked-so-its-valid&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as well as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/984/why-lock-this-question&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NB: Not trying to bring up any bad blood or old wounds, just using the two linked controversial meta questions to establish precedence for my reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1951" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2011-07-06T20:56:06.627" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1030" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1028" CreationDate="2011-07-07T22:00:49.493" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having mulled this over for a night or two, I would say that &lt;strong&gt;the taxonomy of this question is not useful&lt;/strong&gt;. Making a &quot;yes, all statistics questions are okay&quot; or &quot;no, all statistics questions are off topic&quot; decision is unlikely to be useful to the site (or even particularly correct).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a counter to the two examples you brought up, consider these statistics questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2654/3d6-vs-a-d20-what-is-the-effect-of-a-different-probability-curve&quot;&gt;3d6 vs a d20: What is the effect of a different probability curve?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3274/earthdawn-dice-roll-probabilities&quot;&gt;Are Earthdawn&amp;#39;s dice mechanics as unfair and wonky as my player claims?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7233/what-is-the-formula-for-average-damage-for-an-avenger-against-an-oath-target&quot;&gt;What is the formula for average damage for an Avenger against an Oath target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also consider questions in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/probability&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;probability&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;probability&lt;/a&gt; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in the comments elsewhere, certain types of statistics (mostly those involving dice) are important to playing and running RPGs. These statistical questions are also essential to the design of new RPG systems (a topic area which we currently support).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike physics, players of RPGs have to deal with actual statistics. It can't be &quot;rule of cool&quot; -ed away... There is a specific target number at which my thief breaks even on pick pocketing, and that number can't be changed by fiat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that if the questions cited are to be considered off-topic, it is more likely a reaction to one of these areas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should questions about superstitions, traditions, and other meta-elements of the role playing hobby be allowed?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How tolerant do we want to remain of &quot;list of tools&quot; questions? We have a long history of allowing them... But how useful are they?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not misunderstand me: I am not suggesting that all stats questions are reasonable. I only believe that the small subset of statistics that deal with the randomizers used in RPGs are on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-07-07T22:00:49.493" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1032" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1028" CreationDate="2011-07-10T13:39:45.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the original poster I was quiet surprised that the question had been closed so longer after it had been answered... And both answers where good and useful. From the above I see this argument breaking into two:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking about statistics/mathematics is off topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking about specific RPG system statistics is on topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is fine but to me, it sounds like squabbling over semantics.  Would the following questions be on or off topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;I am designing a RPG system and want to know if someone had done some&#xA;statistics on a wide range of dice&#xA;rolls?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;I does anyone know if someone had done some statistics on a wide range&#xA;of dice rolls?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, they are the same question, phrased differently.  However, the first one would be on topic, the second not.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I right?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2011-07-10T13:39:45.520" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1028" CreationDate="2011-07-11T19:30:08.650" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As this is the wild-west of meta, I'm going to break this response out into a new answer to give myself access to formatting (and paragraphs). This answer is in response to @Cthos's comment here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1028/are-general-statisics-dice-questions-off-topic/1032#1032&quot;&gt;Are general statistics or dice questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;However, I don't think that in practice the line exists at all. Line keeps coming back to &quot;Did you phrase the question in such a way as that it seems relevant?&quot;. The 'question which shall not be named' actually came up in a game, but the author did not mention that it did. When he did, the reaction seemed to be &quot;Oh. Whoops...well, we can't reopen it now because its causing bad blood.&quot; We also seem to be going the &quot;I'll know it when I see it route&quot;, while the criteria remains amorphous. Though I'll note I did +1 your answer on the Off topic question and this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first layer is that you're right... The line doesn't really exist yet. The site was created with the mandate to be &quot;a StackExchange about RPGs.&quot; That gives a rough framework (no videogames, no board games, general guidelines for good and bad questions, etc.) but it left a lot undefined. Those undefined areas become defined through discussions in meta, chat, comments, and the overall history of opening and closing questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've given what I feel to be the best place to draw the line. Some folks like it. Some don't. Over time people will be won over to one way or the other. Some people will have to agree to disagree (although stating a clear case for what you want and why you want it is generally better than pointing out the faults in the arguments of others).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another layer is that no matter how much we debate this, the line will never be 100% reliable. Whether a site is community moderated or governed by administrators, judgement calls around the proximity of the line will always be necessary. We have neither the time nor the know-how to create an iron-clad classification of every possible question (even actual justice systems, developed by lawyers over &lt;em&gt;centuries&lt;/em&gt; still often come down to judgement calls). And even if we did, this simply isn't a worthwhile place to spend the effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As judgement calls, there will always be cases where slightly off-topic questions that are stated very well are allowed to stay. And there will always be cases where barely on-topic questions are squelched because they were ugly, poorly phrased, or awkward fits for the format. This is unavoidable. The solution is to accept it, and try to improve the questions that are on-topic, and to strive to evaluate questions as they &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; rather than how they &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt;. This also means that readers need to be willing to make big changes to a question to help it fit, and that askers need to take a light hand in fighting back against this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For what it's worth, I found the statistics behind Sardathion's post to be acceptable (albeit on the edge), which is why I didn't vote to close it. But I didn't think it was very well suited to the format... It felt too much like a request for a list of software, which is why I didn't vote to reopen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure which question we're not supposed to name (the goblin with the coat of many pockets?), but I'll conclude by reiterating this: when you ask a question, clearly state &lt;em&gt;why you want to know&lt;/em&gt; and give the question some context. Not only does this help clarify decisions and avoid &quot;oops, I guess we shouldn't have mod-closed that&quot; situations, it also allows people to answer the question you &lt;em&gt;meant&lt;/em&gt; to ask, rather than being stuck with the question you actually &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Expecting people to suss out an idle wondering unconnected to RPGs from a directly game related question on psychic powers alone is only going to lead to failure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2011-07-11T19:30:08.650" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1034" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-07-11T22:40:24.360" Score="5" ViewCount="204" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was surprised to see these closed items today:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfider Drow speech [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Combat systems not inspired by wargaming. [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Speech item was similar to a previous items that weren't closed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What does Deep Speech look/sound like? (5)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What's a Denver accent sound like? (4)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What does a Troglodyte actually smell like? (3)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise the alternate combat question seemed not that different from others asked before (though I'm having problems finding those examples, since it's not a topic I'm very interested in.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And those two [closed] appear adjacent (an unfortunate coincidence).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are only my personal impressions, but those closings look inconsistent with recent more &quot;relaxed&quot; accepting of these &quot;borderline&quot; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's a consensus that we need to be more strict, so be it, but I'm a bit nervous that we could be too discouraging of new questions when we need more new folks engaging (and having a positive experience.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastActivityDate="2011-07-12T02:55:03.490" Title="Today's closings... Is there a mood shift amongst the community leaders?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1034" CreationDate="2011-07-11T23:54:29.473" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Drow speech is just a shit question. It's &quot;How do I talk like a drow at the table.&quot; Which is not answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wargaming is &quot;Select out all non D&amp;amp;D systems and list them.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both are bad questions. I'll VtR wargaming when it's refined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-07-11T23:54:29.473" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1036" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1034" CreationDate="2011-07-12T02:55:03.490" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think its a sea change so much as taking out some of the garbage. I see all three of the example questions you listed (with the possible exception of the denver question) as on topic, although borderline. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Drow speech question was asking something that really up to the player. Even trying to edit it a bit I couldn't get it on topic. Its a personal decision what your character sounds like, you can ask for a base, but its kind of strange. Now, if the question was &quot;What do drow sound like&quot; that would be different. But it was &quot;what should my character sound like?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whereas the deep speech sound was asking if there had been an established deep speech pattern or script. I'd say thats on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Troglodyte question was actually wondering if there was a reference to a better description of the smell out there. It wasn't really subjective, obscure, sure, but it was looking for a right answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-07-12T02:55:03.490" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1026" CreationDate="2011-07-18T19:50:12.357" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is the indie-rpg tag even useful?  I would like to get rid of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2011-07-18T19:50:12.357" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1042" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-07-19T11:17:55.150" Score="4" ViewCount="440" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9048/do-you-know-a-good-sound-effect-library&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9048/do-you-know-a-good-sound-effect-library&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;vs &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9023/where-can-i-find-artwork-for-my-games&quot;&gt;How do I find artwork to inspire adventure design?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, asking for pictures is fine, asking for sound is not... Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the FAQ, I believe that my question fits &quot;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs&quot; and &quot;Techniques for running or playing RPGs&quot;.  I do not wish to start a flame war, I am just confused...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-07-22T09:38:43.563" Title="Asking for one media is fine, another not so much..." Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1042" CreationDate="2011-07-19T11:53:03.943" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;My problems with the sound effect library question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due Diligence and standing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due Diligence: you've given no evidence that you haven't done a trivial google search for sound effects. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Standing: Your question is: &quot;Where can I find a sound library?&quot; for a bunch of generic sounds. While these are certainly related to RPGs, they're in no way restricted to RPGs, nor inform the design of an adventure. One test for sounding: Is this just as valid on another SE site, like sci-fi? (Yes: you are asking for fantasy sounds, this is just as valid on sci-fi, therefore it lacks standing)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The artwork question is a &lt;em&gt;significantly&lt;/em&gt; harder question in terms of due diligence, and since he's looking to structure adventures around it, has RPG standing. To be fair, I'm not &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; happy with the artwork question either, but I didn't see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-07-19T11:53:03.943" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1044" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1042" CreationDate="2011-07-20T16:46:47.773" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the question linked is on topic - but way too broad.  &quot;I want links to all kind of sound libraries!  With raindrops and gunshots and whatnot!&quot;  I have closed it on those grounds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-07-20T16:46:47.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1045" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1042" CreationDate="2011-07-21T04:49:00.320" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I reopened the question because I strongly disagree it is overly broad. It about a specific technique used into tabletop gaming. The answers would be very useful to somebody coming onto this site for the first time. Particularly as a google search would turn up thousands of of hits on sound effect libraries. Here the answer would be given from a gamer's perspective. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2011-07-21T04:49:00.320" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1042" CreationDate="2011-07-22T09:38:43.563" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a suggestion. Rather than closing questions that are on the edge, why not tag them? We could have a standard set of &lt;em&gt;Objections&lt;/em&gt; then people that don't like specific sorts of questions could just &lt;em&gt;ignore them&lt;/em&gt;. That way those that dislike specific sort of questions will know to stear clear and the management have made there point but can allow others that disagree to still make a contribution to controversial subjects. We could also use the down vote system, if a large number of people are prepared to down vote and the total gets to -10 then may be a question should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2011-07-22T09:38:43.563" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1047" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-07-25T17:35:21.080" Score="0" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9135/organizing-my-collection-of-dd-3e-3-5-rulebooks&quot;&gt;How to organize my 3.X collection based on WotC&amp;#39;s internal numbering system?&lt;/a&gt; is in danger of being closed due to being non-constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar questions like: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1045/whats-an-organized-storage-solution-found-for-miniatures&quot;&gt;What’s an organized storage solution found for miniatures?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1041/whats-an-organized-storage-solution-for-dungeon-tiles&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s an organized storage solution for Dungeon Tiles?&lt;/a&gt; had a decent run back in the early days of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a category of question that should now be discouraged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-07-25T18:03:06.683" Title="Are questions on how to organize RPG equipment discoraged?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1047" CreationDate="2011-07-25T17:38:02.607" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;My take is that since for these questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there is (potentially) value to be found in the answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answers can be based on personal experience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answers are unlikely to devolve into either a chat, a debate or a war.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That it doesn't meet the &quot;non constructive&quot; criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2011-07-25T17:38:02.607" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1047" CreationDate="2011-07-25T18:03:06.683" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe that this is a false comparison. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &quot;how do I arrange books on a shelf?&quot; is fundamentally different then &quot;how do I best store some other object?&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One is asking for advice on sorting. The other is asking for equipment recommendations and methods that are far more meaningful then just the proper order to alphabetize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-07-25T18:03:06.683" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2011-07-25T19:01:11.893" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my mind as a new member, the rules on subjectivity are a great weakness that prevents this site from growing into a useful resource for players and GMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New members are told to post questions that can be answered objectively, yet only a single one of the site's 30 most popular questions can be given a single definitive answer (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7473/who-created-the-idea-of-experience-points&quot;&gt;&quot;Who created the idea of Experience Points?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;). A few others can arguably be answered objectively, but only by either giving the answer in the form of a list or restricting the answer to what is &lt;em&gt;subjectively&lt;/em&gt; most important (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2654/3d6-vs-a-d20-what-is-the-effect-of-a-different-probability-curve&quot;&gt;&quot;3d6 vs a d20: What is the effect of a different probability curve?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1/differences-between-dd-3-5-and-pathfinder&quot;&gt;&quot;Differences between D&amp;amp;D 3.5 and Pathfinder&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3849/what-games-are-out-there-that-could-be-played-in-a-single-night-with-no-prep&quot;&gt;&quot;What games are out there that could be played in a single night, with no prep?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/517/what-alternative-monsters-are-there-to-replace-orcs-kobolds-and-hobgoblins-in-l&quot;&gt;&quot;What alternative monsters are there to replace orcs, kobolds, and hobgoblins in low-level encounters?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&quot;). The rest of the questions demand entirely subjective answers—and they are great questions! They are exactly the type of questions that I, as a GM as well as a player, would want to ask and have answered and discussed on a site such as this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the rules tell us that the vast majority of the popular questions on this site are discouraged and ultimately harmful to the community, then there is nothing else to say than this: The rules are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2218" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-07-25T19:01:11.893" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="50" CreationDate="2011-07-26T09:15:54.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do have a reputation system...  If a qwuestion is borderline (like a lot of mine seem to be) then why not warn the poster by down votes?  Maybe adding a comment saying why you downvoted it so that the poster can re-phrase the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found that a few questions I asked were fine once a moderator re-prharsed it.  None of the meaning of the question was change, just the semantic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A better &quot;how to write a question&quot; guide is needed...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2011-07-26T09:15:54.370" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1052" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1053" CreationDate="2011-07-26T15:41:42.340" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I don't have enough rep to create tags yet, I'd like to request that 'creature-size' be added as a new tag.  A question that would have used it: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9163/what-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-allowing-a-player-to-play-a-large-cr&quot;&gt;What are the advantages and disadvantages of allowing a player to play a large creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2152" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-08-04T06:31:13.903" Title="Tag Request: creature-size" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1052" CreationDate="2011-07-26T19:45:34.020" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is a pretty weak tag that won't get used much at all - I'd stick to more general tags in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-07-26T19:45:34.020" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1058" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1059" CreationDate="2011-07-29T12:49:35.707" Score="4" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's a list of questions that I was going to put into a single question about adapting the X-Files into an RPG campaign:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Should I let the players take the roles of Mulder and Scully (and Krycek) or of custom characters working alongside them?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How should I handle scenarios that rely on finding very specific clues or understanding obscure connections? Mulder and Scully might be smart enough to find them but most real people won't be, especially not when given only a few hours.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How do I handle the fact that some players may know part of the story arc from the TV series?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Are there rulesets that would particularly favor an X-Files game? I'm not looking for modern-day RPGs in general but for games with specific mechanics that would be suitable for this setting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I then realized that several of these may well be more useful as completely separate questions with no mention of the X-Files. However, splitting them up into separate questions would not give me any of the X-Files-specific advice that I'm also looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I split these questions up or keep them as one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2218" LastActivityDate="2011-07-29T13:32:50.467" Title="Should I ask this as one question or as several questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1058" CreationDate="2011-07-29T13:32:50.467" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that you could pretty easily split them up into different questions, while still retaining X-files specific advice where it would be the most helpful. Perhaps phrase them as&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What problems might I run into by letting PCs play the main characters in a television show setting?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the best way of helping players figure out clues to the main storyline without making it painfully obvious?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I make a game challenging for a group where one or more players know the storyline?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there rulesets that would particularly favor an X-Files game?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In each of the questions you could mention your specific setting as an example of your inquiry. This way main answers can be general, but can then be specified to your situation. Looks like a good list of questions, I look forward to seeing what others have to say on the scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1846" LastActivityDate="2011-07-29T13:32:50.467" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1060" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-08-02T17:27:09.597" Score="6" ViewCount="195" Body="&lt;p&gt;Convention season is upon us. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What conventions will you be attending? Is anyone hosting games at any of these conventions? Do you want to meet up with other RPG.SE users while you are there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is interest in specific conventions maybe we could do a more formal meetup or a chat room dedicated to folks communicating about a specific con.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: low and behold Mr. Atwood has posted on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/supporting-community-conferences/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;stackoverflow blog&lt;/a&gt; on this very thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2011-08-04T15:03:13.077" LastActivityDate="2012-08-17T17:22:07.977" Title="What conventions will RPG.SE members be attending?" Tags="|discussion|convention|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1061" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2011-08-02T18:05:33.013" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;GenCon 2011&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be happy to meet any of the great RPG.SE folks I have grown to know if anyone else will be at the big gig!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT&lt;/strong&gt;: It was a great con - sorry I didn't meet any of you there!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="696" LastEditDate="2011-08-09T21:55:29.283" LastActivityDate="2011-08-09T21:55:29.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="40" CreationDate="2011-08-03T01:59:34.860" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;My issue with the exchange site has been that tags aren’t nested. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2275" LastActivityDate="2011-08-03T01:59:34.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2011-08-03T05:00:36.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;After years of hearing about &lt;strong&gt;Dragon Con 2011&lt;/strong&gt;, I may very well attempt the trek to Atlanta providing I have no other commitments that weekend. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I end up making it out there, I'd love to meet up with some folks, but again, it's a big &quot;if&quot; if I can even make it out that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1951" LastActivityDate="2011-08-03T05:00:36.430" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2011-08-03T07:39:27.293" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to go to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.consternation.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;consternation&lt;/a&gt;, the latest British Roleplaying Society Convention, but as normal now I am a family man there will not be time this year :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2011-08-03T07:39:27.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1065" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2011-08-04T03:52:34.173" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dexposure.com/m2011.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Metatopia 2011&lt;/a&gt;: A new Double Exposure convention for game designers and alpha testers. I already did most of my other conventioning for 2011. (Dreamation, Dexcon, and I-CON have already gone by for this year.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2011-08-04T03:52:34.173" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1052" CreationDate="2011-08-04T06:31:13.903" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Disagree with @mxyzplk. Size is a technical term in D&amp;amp;D which has specific rules associated with it. It could be helpful to look up size-related rules. Here are a couple of questions for which the size tag could be appropriate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8230/why-did-dd-4th-edition-remove-the-size-to-hit-modifiers&quot;&gt;Why did D&amp;amp;D 4th Edition Remove the Size To-Hit Modifiers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3707/how-much-vertical-space-do-a-rider-and-mount-occupy-together&quot;&gt;How much vertical space do a rider and mount occupy together?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4726/do-creatures-occupy-cubic-space-or-are-larger-creatures-still-one-square-tall&quot;&gt;Do creatures occupy cubic space, or are larger creatures still one square tall?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3454/close-burst-from-a-large-creature-one-square-origin-or-all-of-them&quot;&gt;Close burst from a large creature -- one square origin or all of them&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6623/how-do-you-rule-halfling-tossing-as-a-combat-action&quot;&gt;How do you rule halfling tossing as a combat action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Size is related, but not identical, to the 3d-space tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-08-04T06:31:13.903" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1067" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1069" CreationDate="2011-08-04T12:23:32.773" Score="6" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;Situation: I've got an answer out there (link withheld for obvious reasons) that just needs &lt;em&gt;one more&lt;/em&gt; competitive vote to get the Populist gold badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it considered bad practice to edit or comment on an old post just to bring it back to the top of the &quot;Active&quot; list so people see it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Question &quot;bumping&quot; - is it ok?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1068" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1067" CreationDate="2011-08-04T12:25:52.473" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't ask, don't tell. Just don't make it a habit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-08-04T12:25:52.473" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1067" CreationDate="2011-08-04T12:49:54.967" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are there absolutely no improvements you could make to your answer, the question, or any other post? Arbitrary bumping is frowned on (and can attract downvotes). Improving posts (along with some patience) is encouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#bounty&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#bounty&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;First, make sure you've asked a good question. To get better answers, you may need to put additional effort into your question. Edit your question to provide status and progress updates. Document your own continued efforts to answer your question. This will naturally bump your question and get more people interested in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See this related MSO question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7046/how-do-i-get-attention-for-my-old-unanswered-questions&quot;&gt;Getting attention for unanswered questions?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2011-08-05T03:21:31.960" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1070" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1071" CreationDate="2011-08-26T01:47:21.063" Score="44" ViewCount="5870" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is out of date - see the new answer (no) in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many Stack Exchange sites, like the similar gaming.SE, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1491/what-should-be-done-with-questions-asking-for-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;do not allow game recommendation questions&lt;/a&gt; (aka shopping questions) because &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/997/handling-game-recommendations-how-can-we-solve-these-two-problems-of-quality&quot;&gt;they pose an intractable quality problem&lt;/a&gt;. And this is after &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendations&quot;&gt;long, contentious discussion and learning on the topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shopping questions have also been discussed and judged to be largely off-topic by nature SE-wide in &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this Jeff Atwood Meta.SE blog post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should RPG.SE similarly reject game recommendation questions?  (aka system-rec, game-rec)? Are they too inherently subjective and low in quality?  Will people just always toss out their own favorite system no matter how specific the request for a recommendation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:39:11.207" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:39:11.207" Title="Are game recommendation questions on topic? [2011]" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2015-08-25T01:38:04.227" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1070" CreationDate="2011-08-26T02:08:44.287" Score="45" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This answer is historical and overturned by:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer has been discussed by the moderation team and reflects our thoughts on this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We believe &lt;em&gt;recommendations should be allowed for the time being&lt;/em&gt;. RPG systems, much more than most computer games or board games, are toolkits for creation and not simple products. They are also much more long lived and thus a recommendation for one isn't &quot;out of date&quot; in a year the way a computer game recommendation is. Therefore we believe even though disallowing shopping questions is considered a best practice SE-wide, RPG.SE might be a useful exception to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there are potential severe quality problems with these questions that one can see affecting the existing game-recommendation questions on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We propose the following criteria be strictly applied to game recommendation questions on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions should be specific enough that there can be a single or best answer.&lt;/em&gt; We will not allow polls or lists or &quot;community wiki&quot; for game rec questions. &quot;What are all the medieval fantasy RPGs&quot; or &quot;What's a fun game&quot; should be immediately closed as &quot;too broad&quot; and/or &quot;primarily opinion-based.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good question is of the format &quot;I want to try a game that has these specific attributes and use it in this way, who has done this and what would you recommend and why?&quot;  Don't just ask about games, add context about your needs.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9691/what-role-playing-games-best-emulate-a-non-mystical-old-west-setting&quot;&gt;This recent Wild West game question&lt;/a&gt; is pretty good, in that it is specific about the kind of game it wants, though it could stand to explain more about the asker's needs and predilections. You want &quot;gritty combat?&quot; Explain what you mean by that exactly. If your question is pulling a list and not a &quot;best,&quot; it's a bad question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember the goal of a SE isn't just to fart around, it's to help people with their actual gaming. Quizzing people for the sake of doing it or idle curiosity is likely to generate a poor question that is closed. Only ask for a game-rec when you really plan to use one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game recommendation questions should be tagged [game-recommendation].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Answers MUST adhere to the &quot;Back It Up!&quot; principle&lt;/em&gt; set forth in the SO blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. To wit, an answer MUST contain:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may only answer one of these questions if you have actually done it or seen it done, or if you have a detailed reference from someone who has done it (with details like how and results).  &quot;Oh, I'm sure FATE would be great for your ultra gritty combat system needs, of course I've never done that or seen anyone that has, but it is SUCH A GREAT SYSTEM that I'm sure it will do it&quot; should be viciously downvoted and may even be deleted as an invalid answer per these guidelines. If you have never even read the game, you definitely shouldn't be considering answering - anyone else can Google &quot;wild west RPG&quot; and enter the results or put something down they've vaguely heard of.  That isn't expert advice for experts. &quot;I know someone put out a Western supplement for game X&quot; is not an appropriate answer. &quot;We played a Wild West game, used system X, and here's how that turned out&quot; is the best kind of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stay on topic. Nobody wants to hear that you don't like that kind of gaming.  If someone asks for gritty combat and you say &quot;oh people don't like gritty combat&quot; - move along. You can make a parenthetical warning about pitfalls as part of an otherwise legitimate answer if you want; otherwise your answer will be deleted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should be voted up the more specific expertise they demonstrate - someone who played that kind of game for a while should be heavily upvoted, someone who has a game like that and has read it somewhat, someone who just knows about the existence of a game should be downvoted, and someone recommending their pet system with no grounds should be nuked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If we get a huge load of game recommendation questions and the quality of them stays poor, however, we may change our take on this.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FAQs&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;But what if I just want a anything I could maybe hack to my requirements?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; Note the related question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt; - we get some game-rec (adventure-rec, etc.) questions that try to be &quot;flexible&quot; (e.g. &quot;anything I can conceivably adapt to my goals&quot;) and as a result are too broad. When asking your question you should focus it down on the exact thing you want to accomplish - don't worry, people will suggest a bunch of things that don't hit your criteria 100% as it is. So that game-rec questions don't just become a litany of &quot;everyone's favorite game,&quot; we require you to narrow down your needs - think about it a while, you probably are assuming some requirements you're not conveying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;But what if I just lie about having experience with their requirements?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; The goal of the Good Subjective, Bad Subjective requirements is so that you can not just recommend a game for the poster's desired use, but explain how using that game for that purpose worked out. So a) just saying &quot;and I did it myself&quot; isn't really sufficient to help the poster and we expect a bit more of an explanation than that, and b) we try to assume good faith here on RPG.SE.  If you're a lying dirtbag, well, that's on you I guess. If you think that's helping anyone, you're mistaken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;How close does my experience need to be to their target requirements?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; If the request is well formed, then you don't have to have used a game in the &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; specific way they intend to use it, but you should have hit the major points and should address your deviation from any of their requested requirements.  So if someone wants a &quot;Wild West game with mechanics that help reinforce the genre, medium crunchy, with Indian magic and stuff, undead, and grey-type aliens,&quot; it would be fair to say &quot;I've played a lot of Deadlands and it addresses most of your points (include detail); they don't include grey aliens out of the box but did have an adventure with mi-go, you could easily re-skin them as greys...&quot; The trick is to answer from experience.  &quot;I have played GURPS and know they sell a Wild West supplement and supplements for Undead and aliens both too, so I bet you could use it to do that&quot; is not OK because it lacks enough relevancy of experience. The line is a judgement call, but you should be hitting near the bullseye not just somewhere on the target. If you're not addressing at least 2/3 of their requirements then you shouldn't even be considering posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T17:18:58.277" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1072" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-08-26T14:43:00.760" Score="6" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm wanting to print out some sort of flyer/promotional stuff for this site to post around town, but i'm not that great at designing stuff.  Do we have any pre-made promotional flyers for the site, or if not can we get some/have some made?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2011-09-30T15:34:42.787" Title="Do we have any promotional material?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1073" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-08-26T18:10:08.397" Score="13" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/456/how-should-i-approach-editing&quot;&gt;How should I approach editing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.se seems to lend itself to longer answers than some other sites.  Because of this, formatting becomes even more important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before I commit to reading a wall of text, I like to know there is something worthwhile in it (and I read a lot of answers on this site). Typically, &lt;strong&gt;I try to skim each answer for main ideas before reading&lt;/strong&gt;.  This becomes significantly easier if there is any bold or italics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Occasionally, I see an answer that has a lot of interesting information, but is difficult to scan.  Some especially long questions are difficult to digest, even on a read-through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On occasion, &lt;strong&gt;I edit posts in order to bold key points&lt;/strong&gt;. I have even added a paragraph break or two.  However, I am wary of offending someone (especially because I only edit answers that I think have excellent content!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the limits of politeness?  &lt;strong&gt;Are these formatting edits disrespectful of the author's intent?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/9619/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/9619/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/9658/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/9658/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-08-26T19:22:51.507" Title="What are the polite limits of editing others' posts for formatting?" Tags="|discussion|editing|etiquette|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1074" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1073" CreationDate="2011-08-26T19:22:51.507" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general you are encouraged to edit for formatting, as long as it is significant.  If you're going to bold &lt;em&gt;one word&lt;/em&gt; or add &lt;em&gt;a period&lt;/em&gt; it's probably not worth the edit.  Also, please do not edit large swaths of questions/answers at a time, as this floods the front page with whatever you're reading and hides current questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In short please made substantive improvements, but don't get carried away.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-08-26T19:22:51.507" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="609" CreationDate="2011-08-29T09:08:10.287" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two sides of this coin, first developing the game itself, which should definitely be on topic here, and preparing, printing, licensing or distributing a book, which are better handled elsewhere in the stackexchange network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2011-08-29T09:08:10.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1076" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1072" CreationDate="2011-08-31T14:56:24.190" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the site does not currently have a design, we do not have any promotional material that is explicitly for the RPG site. Once a design is developed (so, post-site-graduation), then work on promotional material can begin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, Beta sites usually instead use our general Stack Exchange materials instead, the most prominent of which are our stickers and T-Shirts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2011-08-31T14:56:24.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1077" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-08-31T20:02:23.553" Score="11" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/9780/revisions&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; (linking to the revision history because… well, that'll be obvious in a sec) was asked with an implied question in the title and an different explicit question in the body. After some comments it became clear there were two questions and I advised the asker to split them. There were already answers to the explicit question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker split the question, but asked the original explicit question in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9794/revisions&quot;&gt;new question&lt;/a&gt; (again a link to the revision history) and changed the old question to be about the unwritten, implicit question of the title, making the answers and comments invalid and incoherent. Worse, the new question had already gotten upvotes (being much better written) and an answer with one upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't want to leave it to become more of a mess, but my only recourse (as a non-admin, and apart from just leaving the mess to be a mess) seemed to be its own kind of messy: I swapped the titles, bodies, and tags of the questions to re-establish the connection between the original explicit question and the answers already given, making the new question be about the original implied question. I also asked the owner of the single answer on the new question to move it to the other by copying and deleting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So admins and others with interest: Is this how such messes should be handled? Is there a better way, or better tools? Should this be left to admins?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-09-02T15:12:46.893" Title="&quot;Emergency&quot; fixing a badly-split Question with two questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1078" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1079" CreationDate="2011-09-01T08:14:22.173" Score="3" ViewCount="1092" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are separate tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt;. Does the dnd-3e tag refer to all of D&amp;amp;D third edition (including 3.5) or only pre-3.5 D&amp;amp;D (also called 3.0)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2011-09-01T16:46:17.590" LastActivityDate="2011-09-01T17:02:41.793" Title="Should the dnd3e tag cover all third edition, or just 3.0?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1078" CreationDate="2011-09-01T11:45:13.213" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since there is a separate tag for D&amp;amp;D 3.5 it would only include questions that pertain to pre 3.5 material. Questions for 3.5 material should be filed with the 3.5 tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-09-01T11:45:13.213" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1078" CreationDate="2011-09-01T17:02:41.793" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current consensus (always up for revisiting!) was developed here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/669/proposed-tag-synonyms-for-dnd4-0/672#672&quot;&gt;Proposed tag synonyms for [dnd4.0]&lt;/a&gt; .&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; is currently intended to be for just 3e-not-including-3.5e, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt; is intended for just D&amp;amp;D 3.5. I've clarified &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd-3e/info&quot;&gt;the tag wiki for [dnd-3e]&lt;/a&gt; to say so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you might have noticed that very few questions are actually 3.0-specific. The idea at the time was that we should preclude the possibility that people would want to ask 3.0-specific questions. In practice, that hasn't really been a strong need yet. The logic still holds: people might want to ask 3.0-specific questions… but at some point, that allowance just becomes naïve. Having an umbrella tag might be useful. So, revisiting these assumptions is certainly possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One possible reorganisation would be to have this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.x&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.x&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.x&lt;/a&gt; (for all of 3.x, maybe with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.0&lt;/a&gt; (for questions specific to 3.0)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt; (for questions specific to 3.5)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms, retagging a pile of questions of a sudden can be disruptive, so there's also that to weigh when considering changing things up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-09-01T17:02:41.793" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1081" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-09-02T09:26:22.190" Score="6" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;Say, I wanted to know how to play a paladin and wanted to read up on Templar Knights.  Would a request for good historical accounts that can be applied to RPG relevant? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say no, go to &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;history.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt; but that site does not exists -- yet.  So, should I ask (get flamed, get down votes, get question closed, grow more bitter ^_- ) or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:47:51.077" LastActivityDate="2011-09-02T13:03:51.917" Title="Are questions about historical material relevant here?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2013-02-18T15:29:11.883" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1082" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1081" CreationDate="2011-09-02T13:03:51.917" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;See: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/campaign-research-questions&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My take on it remains:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) You should tie all such questions directly to an RPG, or RPG use-case. If you were looking to play a D&amp;amp;D paladin, you should be willing to accept D&amp;amp;D-based source material... A World of Darkness character should be willing to accept World of Darkness &quot;history.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) The level of detail should be appropriate to an RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2011-09-02T13:03:51.917" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1077" CreationDate="2011-09-02T15:12:46.893" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think above all, an important thing here is that you were in discourse with the author at the time, and he acknowledged and agreed with what your solution was. That was good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've always had a bit of a solid rule that we like to encourage, which is that &lt;strong&gt;one should always avoid question edits which invalidate existing answers&lt;/strong&gt;. This is especially the case for what was a valid question in the first place, just simply not exactly what the author may have initially intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct resolution in this scenario is what you had intended - that the alternate question, that which hadn't yet been answered, be asked as a separate question. I think your measures in fixing this when the reverse was done, they were good - you have the reputation to perform edits, and this worked pretty well for what chaos it may have imparted at first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the lone answer. The only way to transfer answers is by merging, which is decidedly undesirable for this scenario. Asking the answerer to move their answer was a functional alternative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All in all, I think it was a job well done for cleanup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2011-09-02T15:12:46.893" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1084" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-09-03T01:51:31.893" Score="4" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9812/are-there-any-other-beer-pretzel-pnp-games-along-the-lines-of-paranoia&quot;&gt;Are there any other Beer &amp;amp; Pretzel PnP games along the lines of Paranoia? &lt;/a&gt; has been closed twice now, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9755/rpg-designed-for-irregular-players-gaming&quot;&gt;RPG designed for irregular players/gaming?&lt;/a&gt; is still open.  Can someone explain to me what the difference is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-12-21T05:54:18.657" Title="Why are some system recommendation questions being closed while others are not?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1084" CreationDate="2011-09-03T01:55:11.903" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;No one reads every question, so just because one question gets closed for cause and another doesn't does not mean the other question is a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That other question is slightly better in that it is not specifically asking for a bunch of answers, it's asking for one, although it is indeed not giving much in the way of criteria to select a best one, so it could stand some guidance too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might consider giving them guidance, rather than coming here to narc them out to make someone else do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-09-03T01:55:11.903" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1086" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1087" CreationDate="2011-09-07T13:41:49.893" Score="6" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9632/recommendations-on-how-to-introduce-an-inexperienced-player-to-the-fate-combat-sy&quot;&gt;&quot;Recommendations on how to introduce an inexperienced player to the FATE combat system&quot;&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk♦&lt;/a&gt; responded with a comment that led me to an answer, but wasn't an answer in and of itself.  I responded with my actual answer with what worked for me.  &lt;strong&gt;My question is, should my answer be considered for the accepted answer to the question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-09-07T17:11:37.600" Title="Should an answer based on a comment by a different user be considered for the accepted answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1086" CreationDate="2011-09-07T17:11:37.600" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the original commenter does not post the same answer, or gives their blessing, then yes. Else give the check to the original commenter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-09-07T17:11:37.600" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1088" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1091" CreationDate="2011-09-08T15:12:45.530" Score="4" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tried to edit the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9901/do-experience-with-the-journal&quot;&gt;&quot;Do: Experience with the journal&quot;&lt;/a&gt; to be of a more a question and answer format, following some of the other changes I've seen on the site.  I changed the question to &quot;How does the Journal in Do: Pilgrims of the Flying Temple affect play of the game?&quot; but I couldn't submit it, because I didn't make an appropriate number of changes to the body of the question, i.e &quot;Edits must be at least 6 characters; is there something else to improve in this post?&quot;.  The edit was more than 6 characters; they just happened to fall in the title.  Is this really not an acceptable edit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-09-11T03:54:05.353" Title="Why couldn't I submit changes to a question?" Tags="|support|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1089" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-09-08T15:27:57.657" Score="3" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not sure if anyone else has been following the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/does-stress-reset-to-zero-between-sessions-in-maid-rpg&quot;&gt;Does Stress reset to zero between sessions in Maid RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I upvoted and commented on an answer which has since disappeared.  I suspect that it was deleted by the author, which leads me to question why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I (personally) felt that it was a good answer, and I hate to see it be deleted.  My inclination is that the poster may have felt unwelcome, in which case I am disheartened, as this was a new poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way we can reach out to this person and ask why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-09-11T03:22:32.603" Title="What happened to this answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1090" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1089" CreationDate="2011-09-08T16:34:23.093" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer was by @sunfall.  You can try contacting him via the comments on your question or in chat and asking him to undelete. There was a long comment thread on the question that would indicate he felt chased off by @JonathanDrain. Warning to all three of you, play nice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-09-08T16:34:23.093" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1091" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1088" CreationDate="2011-09-08T20:09:57.227" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The edit requirement of 6 characters is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; on edits to the question body. As such, if you want to modify the title, but don't have at least 6 characters of changes to the question body, simply make sure you make 0 changes to the question body. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Same goes for tags, by the way - those can be done without any restriction. The only issue is touching the body - essentially, it blocks edits of 1-5 characters. If your edit is 0 characters then you're in the clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2011-09-08T20:09:57.227" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1089" CreationDate="2011-09-11T03:22:32.603" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;That user emailed and asked to be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might want to consider how you're treating your new users -- particularly since IMHO that was an excellent answer from a user that &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; have become a useful contributor to the site. This is especially important for sites that need to grow and find an audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-09-11T03:22:32.603" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1093" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1094" CreationDate="2011-09-14T00:21:45.627" Score="3" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that the reputation requirements for privileges are &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/privileges&quot;&gt;higher on gaming.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt; than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges&quot;&gt;on rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;. For example, Create Tags is 150 here, but 300 on Gaming, and Trusted User is 4,000 here but 20,000 on Gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the difference? (Beta status? User count? Age?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can reputation requirements for privileges increase? If they do, can you lose privileges already accrued?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Why do privileges have different reputation requirements on other SE sites?" Tags="|support|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1093" CreationDate="2011-09-14T01:09:23.273" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are still in public beta, it has different (lower) rep requirements for privilege levels. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/58587/reputation-requirements-compared&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; post on MSO for more information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-09-14T01:09:23.273" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="996" CreationDate="2011-09-14T08:36:37.727" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clerics, Magic Users, Fighters, and Thieves: Theoretical Approaches to Rules Questions on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;By me, @mxyzplk and @cross&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://bit.ly/RpgSeCaseStudy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://bit.ly/RpgSeCaseStudy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Popular Abstract:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many different ways of thinking about the rules of a role-playing game. Some people want to use the “rules as written.” Others argue for the “rules as intended.” Still others think that the “rule of cool” trumps both of them. We present a description of how people on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange answer questions about RPGs. We borrow the four classes from the most popular iteration of early Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons to lend memorable labels to these ways of thinking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A cleric, or Jurist, likes the rules as written. The cleric prefers to get rules from external books and believes that the rules trump reality. The rules as written make for a fair, fun, and predictable game. If the rules aren’t working, they try to find a better game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A magic user, or Innovator, likes to make house rules and improve on the rules. The magic user will make new rules to fit particular situations within their game, acting as god, game master, and game designer for their players. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A fighter, or Realist, likes the rules as intended, and that intent is to simulate the world of the game. The fighter knows that the game mimics reality. When the rules present silly results, reality wins, and real-world history, tactics, and equipment are as valid an argument as anything in the rulebook. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A thief, or Imaginative, likes the rule of cool. The thief knows games are for entertainment. If something isn’t fun, it shouldn’t be in the game. If something is awesome, it will be in their game (even if they have to ignore the rules and any sense of reality to have it). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This case study looks at how people answered questions that cut across these concerns - about how to make players not focus on the rules, how to make players not be “a bunch of murderous cretins,” and the natural spread of adventurers hiking in the woods in the D&amp;amp;D Fourth Edition game. We have selected answers from all four classes in order to show how each class answers the same question in a distinctly different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2011-09-14T08:36:37.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1096" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-09-16T18:45:36.400" Score="14" ViewCount="225" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm curious if there's enough interest here for there to be a blog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the list of what needs to be figured out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Raise the idea on the child meta. A community blog needs the&#xA;involvement of community members.  These blogs don’t exist to be the&#xA;personal blog of a community member.  They are both for and run by&#xA;the community.  It needs to be something the community collectively&#xA;wants and will cultivate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Define the scope and purpose of the blog. Is the blog about the&#xA;site? Is it about the site’s topic? Is it about the industry around&#xA;the topic? Keep in mind the audience of your community and their&#xA;interests. Another generic blog about  may not be all that&#xA;interesting.  A community blog should be interesting to both current&#xA;members and potential new members.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Recruit contributors. Who will write entries for the blog? Starting&#xA;a blog is a bit like going through the buffet line. Be realistic –&#xA;don’t let your eyes be bigger than your stomach. Think seriously&#xA;about if and how often you will be able to contribute a blog post,&#xA;including research/prep time.  The more contributors there are, the&#xA;less frequently each contributor needs to post.  One post a month is&#xA;a much easier to stomach than a couple posts every week.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Plan a schedule. Given the results of steps #2 and #3, think about a&#xA;rough idea of a schedule for the blog. Will there be one post a&#xA;week, posted Mondays? Will there be  posts on Tuesdays and &#xA;posts on Fridays? You don’t need to be pushing out posts daily, but&#xA;you should post at least once a week.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Links of interest&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogoverflow.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Blog Overflow&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/blog-overflow/&quot;&gt;Blog discussing Blog Overflow&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2011-09-21T08:13:07.190" Title="Would an RPG Blog get read?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1097" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-16T18:52:33.833" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Topic ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Product Reviews&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Highlighted users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question of the [time period]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upcoming events&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2011-09-16T18:52:33.833" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-16T18:54:12.427" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the suggestions I have thrown around chat is that a couple of us could do weekly (or monthly or however often) write ups of epic moments from our regular sessions, these may not be a regular feature, or they could be something someone commits to doing after their session every week. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A number of us are active in regular games and would love a vehicle associated with the site to tell our stories and relay our epic victories or epic defeats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-09-16T18:54:12.427" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-17T02:32:51.657" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is, will we get enough sustained content?  Views on the main site are only ~2500/day which is not high for a blog even if everyone here reads it... I am willing to start in on this if we get enough persistent commitment to content generation, but if it's going to be dilettantes generating 2 posts and then out, it would be best to not start at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I say in the linked related question, if someone has the stick-to-it-iveness to walk us through the getting started steps, then I'll support it and pitch in my own blogging. But I'm not going to drive it to a largely unconcerned user base.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm being a little negative in my other comments because I don't personally believe anyone will put forth the effort to take this from &quot;here's a list of ideas that... someone else could post!&quot; to actually getting the blog going, but like I say I will support it if they do, and I'm a pretty experienced blogger.  As I have my own blog (well, blogs, I have a professional one too) I don't need the outlet so don't want to drive this, but will pitch in to a community-led effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-09-17T17:41:06.583" LastActivityDate="2011-09-17T17:41:06.583" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-17T03:24:45.837" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I ran &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20source.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a D&amp;amp;D blog&lt;/a&gt; from 2006 to 2010. Here's my two copper pieces.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A blog will float or sink on the quality and relevance of its content. Merely writing on a webpage isn't enough. If the content isn't something special, you'll never get viewer numbers of any significance, and as a result the contributors will lose their motivation because their work isn't important enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Write what you'd be interested to read, not just what you feel like writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of RPG blogs already. Ask yourself what yours will do better then them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastActivityDate="2011-09-17T03:24:45.837" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-17T07:58:17.843" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;some of the earlier concerns about site approachability&lt;/a&gt;, I think a more &quot;anything goes&quot; RPG blog would be nicely complementary to the main &quot;just the facts, ma'am&quot; RPG Q&amp;amp;A we do here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, it seems there is a large contingent of potential RPG users who just want to discuss a particular topic, and a blog post would be a great way to do that -- and perhaps gently introduce them to the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(comments on blog posts are semi-threaded by default and open to everyone.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2011-09-17T07:58:17.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-09-20T00:46:53.270" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;6 months on, questions per day is up from worrying to needs work (3.4/day), visits is still okay, but up to 960/day, and our other metrics are still excelent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do wonder what the rate of new users is? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2011-09-20T00:46:53.270" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-09-20T19:34:05.187" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Alright, I'm speaking as a very new user of the site: I saw it on twitter a year ago, but didn't join, and just recently saw it again after joining the LaTeX stack exchange. So far I've found the restrictions on questions very restrictive: I've already seen one question, that looked quite interesting to me, closed for lack of relevancy. I think expanding what constitutes a question on RPGs would help you a lot there. I mean, my reading of that stats indicates that the site is great at answering questions, but isn't getting many. Broadening its scope to include more aspects of RPGs would probably help. I mean, the purpose of that rule seems to be so that we don't have lots of off-topic questions covering up the sight, right? Well, from the stats it seems we don't have many questions at all, at least not compared to LaTeX, the other one I follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example: Miniatures are a part of many RPGs. Why is a question about printing them off topic? Early indications showed that it was answerable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm almost scared to post a question that doesn't have a specific page reference based on what I've seen in the last couple of days. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2469" LastActivityDate="2011-09-20T19:34:05.187" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-20T21:08:17.840" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, I'd be willing to write every two weeks.  Topics I could cover:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Things that are working, things that need work in our campaigns&#xA;(currently Dnd 4e and Dresden Files)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Character bio's (I'm thinking 1 per blog or every other blog, these&#xA;could be quite lengthy.  my gf has ~7 pages written about her dnd&#xA;character, and I've got a few written for mine)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Product reviews of whatever we might end up with (ie DnD tiles,&#xA;minis, suppliment books, character generators, etc.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Character builds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2011-09-20T21:08:17.840" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1096" CreationDate="2011-09-21T08:13:07.190" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Topic ideas - we could have a number of blog post serials:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Guidance on rules&lt;/em&gt;: we have a lot of posts that have several good answers on how to best interpret rules that could be synthesised into blog posts.  This would be something we could do here that is more valuable than a random blog post, because it could, with the right editorial system, be a consensus view.  E.g., the participants in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5933/how-can-i-make-brp-less-variable&quot;&gt;How can I make BRP less variable?&lt;/a&gt; could write up, I am sure, excellent guidance on how to play these rules and arguments against &quot;dick&quot; GMs.  Likewise, we could have a &lt;em&gt;System recommendations&lt;/em&gt; series.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Not constructive&lt;/em&gt;: We could propose opinion pieces that we think would propose interesting discussion among us that would not fit the Q&amp;amp;A format and would be kicked off with a post a bit too substantial for chat.  E.g., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1229/does-system-matter&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1229/does-system-matter&lt;/a&gt; could be a good discussion starter, perhaps kicked off with an elaboration of &lt;em&gt;Vreeg's first Rule of Setting Design, &quot;Make sure the ruleset you are using matches the setting and game you want to play, because the setting and game WILL eventually match the system.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;  This would give a place to take content that people really want to discuss here, they could be generated from chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Irregular tips&lt;/em&gt;: Perhaps each week or so, someone could post a couple of the most interesting links they've seen around the RPG world, and the comment thread could introduce more and discuss them.  A bit chat-like, but something to keep content bubbling over on the blog.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These series would both provide outlets for content that people want to generate, and provide quality posts that would make for a quality blog.  The keepers of the blog keys should be able to get the balance between high signal/noise and a lively throughput of content, I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can think of a couple of things I'd like to work into blog posts, and no doubt if I thought longer, I could find more things.  I don't think periods where the blog &quot;fails&quot; is bad, since we have some sort of community here that can give the blog a second and third fresh start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-09-21T08:13:07.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1106" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1107" CreationDate="2011-09-29T07:54:32.887" Score="11" ViewCount="329" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;Area 51&lt;/a&gt;, we've been in beta way more than a year now.  All &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;our stats on Area51&lt;/a&gt; aren't always green, but they've sure been consistent over that time. What is required for us to move ahead?  There's only two sites in beta older than we are, and some of the launched sites have stats virtually identical to ours (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/170/home-improvement&quot;&gt;Home Improvement&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: As an update, we still haven't heard from anyone on the community team or CHAOS. So we're left to our own devices to get site stats up to the point where someone might decide to care about us. I will note that the gaming renaissance on Google+ is making it our largest referring site now. Over the year our traffic has gone up and down but it looks like a good 25% improvement page view wise; questions and answers are flat. Basically if you read this and care, you can help by promoting the site via links on forums, blogs (yours and others), twitter, g+, fb, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-09-29T03:48:09.883" LastActivityDate="2013-09-29T03:48:09.883" Title="When will RPG.SE come out of beta?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1106" CreationDate="2011-09-29T09:02:29.163" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;See&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/does-this-site-have-a-chance-of-succeeding/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/does-this-site-have-a-chance-of-succeeding/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can you tell us when we’ll graduate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, we are not yet able to predict when a site will reach critical mass. A large part of this summer will be spent looking at the traffic data we’ve accumulated over the last three years to make sense of it all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your traffic indicators aren’t dropping precipitously, that’s a good sign. If your traffic is falling, we’ll let you know through meta initiatives.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/lookup/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/lookup/rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/sites?expand=true#rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;http://stackexchange.com/sites?expand=true#rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;diamond moderator admin analytics panel&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2011-09-29T09:02:29.163" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1108" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-09-29T20:46:43.803" Score="2" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;RE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/660/damnit-just-delete-me-already&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/660/damnit-just-delete-me-already&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the story? Can't someone delete their account?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-09-30T16:21:31.653" Title="User delete policy? Re: Baelnorn [aka Damnit-just delete me already]" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1108" CreationDate="2011-09-29T23:53:22.253" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To delete your account, you have to edit your user info to &quot;delete me please&quot; and send in an e-mail. There's no automatic system for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No idea why Baelnorn wants to delete his account. He has high reputation and hasn't posted on the site since April.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastActivityDate="2011-09-29T23:53:22.253" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1108" CreationDate="2011-09-30T03:36:28.793" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;First I've heard of it, whatever emails he's sending must be going to the core SE team or something.  I have hit the 'delete' button on his account.  I'm unclear how it differs from the core team doing a &quot;bigger&quot; delete but don't really care. Should be gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For future reference, if you are upset to the point where you want to delete your account, just bring it to mod attention and we'll do it for ya.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1637" LastEditDate="2011-09-30T16:21:31.653" LastActivityDate="2011-09-30T16:21:31.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1106" CreationDate="2011-09-30T16:57:30.847" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;To add on to the blog post Jeff linked to, we look at the overall picture of what the trends we see in a site.  When I look at the traffic stats, I want to see a graph that shows the site is growing - a positive slope to the graph as it gets higher the farther right it goes.  As the blog post mentions, this &quot;tipping point&quot; is vital.  Focus on making this a healthy community and the stats will follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1218" LastActivityDate="2011-09-30T16:57:30.847" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1112" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-10-03T14:52:22.243" Score="5" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many questions are very dependent on setting. As an example, &quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10261/what-would-clever-creatures-do-to-protect-their-lair&quot;&gt;What would clever creatures do to protect their lair?&lt;/a&gt; &quot; is oriented toward a low-magic d&amp;amp;d-type setting (and the word &quot;neolithic&quot; is mentioned).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same question could be asked for the future, modern day, post-apocalyptic societies, alternate worlds, etc. These are not system-specific questions, but rather world-specific ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we have a tagging system for technology levels, magical settings vs non-magical, or any other world-traits? If so, what should it encompass? If not, do you think this will work itself out (e.g. the other supposed question would be called &quot;what would clever creatures do to protect their space station?&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-10-05T02:28:07.570" Title="Should we use &quot;setting&quot; tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1113" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1112" CreationDate="2011-10-03T15:31:48.087" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes. Like anything else, sometimes a setting crops up often enough that it's useful to have a tag for it. When this comes up, it's best to propose the tag and show an example of existing questions that would benefit from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think that we need to make tags for settings something that we tack on as a matter of course. It's perfectly acceptable for additional restrictions on a question to exist in the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise it's acceptable for questions to have similar titles, but different bodies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is an excellent example of where the question body is the better place to put the restriction anyway... &quot;low-magic d&amp;amp;d-type setting (and the word &quot;neolithic&quot; is mentioned)&quot; is a heck of a lot of information to try to stuff into a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-10-03T15:31:48.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1112" CreationDate="2011-10-03T17:55:05.567" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag system is emergent.  If you think something (a game system, a setting, a setting type, a genre) is important - and a tag should be able to stand as the only tag on a question, it shouldn't be a &quot;modifier&quot; - then use it, and see if other folks/questions use it. I think we have [historical-settings] already because that specific topic saw wide use in addition to specific setting tags like [eberron]. Also there are some tags that are arguably setting, arguably genre, like [fantasy] and [post-apocalyptic].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am in all circumstances categorically against pre-creating tags - they will just get deleted by the system without notice anyway if more than one question isn't using them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, what are tags for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Allowing you to easily search for related content. If the content you find isn't related enough to really help, it's a bad tag&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Allowing you to not have to state/define common terms. If the definition of the tag isn't unambiguous, it's a bad tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any noun in a question doesn't have to turn into a tag.  Question text is good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-10-05T02:28:07.570" LastActivityDate="2011-10-05T02:28:07.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1115" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1116" CreationDate="2011-10-11T16:17:37.407" Score="6" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10212/does-backlash-reduce-the-targeting-number-when-casting-a-spell&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question, @DForck42 pointed out that the answer I chased down was actually what he had meant in his answer after I posted and accepted the answer I solicited from another source.  What I did was take my answer and update my question with it, deleted my answer, and updated his answer to be clearer.  Then I accepted his answer.  I just don't know if this was the right thing to do...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-10-11T17:04:33.093" Title="What should be done in the case of a misunderstood answer actually being correct on out of question clarification?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1115" CreationDate="2011-10-11T17:04:33.093" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Its pretty much up to you as you were the asker and the accepted answerer. If this solution was adequate to you then it sounds like an excellent solution. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the future, if your answer was clearer than the other answerer then its ok to leave your answer. If there are two similar answers stating the same thing in different ways then they both certainly have value, accept the clearer (to you) of the two and leave the other one so that people who think differently can still glean value from the answer that is more clear to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-10-11T17:04:33.093" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="774" CreationDate="2011-10-18T15:49:23.550" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you want to see more non-D&amp;amp;D-related questions, try giving good answers to the few non-D&amp;amp;D questions you do find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that when I ask a question that gets some good answers, it drives me to ask more questions in the same vein.  For example, if I've got a question about how to make &lt;em&gt;maps&lt;/em&gt; for an adventure, and a question about &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D rules&lt;/em&gt;, and the only one that gets any good answers is about maps, I'll ask more questions like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastActivityDate="2011-10-18T15:49:23.550" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1118" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1271" CreationDate="2011-10-18T19:26:42.213" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I try to page &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/77/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; in chat using the command &lt;code&gt;@@77@rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; I get the message &lt;code&gt;@@77@rpg.stackexchange.com - SomeOtherName does not have a profile on rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt;. I also have a similar problem adding him to a room manually.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I page Ace? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-01-21T11:44:35.120" Title="Unable to page AceCalhoon in Chat?" Tags="|support|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1119" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1120" CreationDate="2011-10-22T14:22:50.603" Score="5" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've visited the site every day for the past couple of months, every morning like clockwork.  But today when I visited, my consecutive day count had been reset.  How does the consecutive day counter work?  Are there any known issues with it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="1218" LastEditDate="2011-11-13T03:13:32.750" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How does consecutive days work" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1119" CreationDate="2011-10-22T18:16:56.753" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;StackExchange days change at 00:00:00 GMT every day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at your history I see no access on October 21st.  Looks like you had a string of consecutive days dating from August 24st up until October 20th.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Check what time zone you are in to see when the StackExchange day is for you.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is some more information on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/67399#67399&quot;&gt;meta.stackoverflow.com&lt;/a&gt; under the Enthusiast and Fanatic badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-10-22T19:34:12.823" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1121" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-10-25T15:02:09.173" Score="5" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, if I wanted to ask &quot;&lt;em&gt;What kind of one off games would be ideal for Halloween?&lt;/em&gt;&quot;, would that be closed as off topic because it is too broad, or maybe because it's too localized in time?  What if I were more interested in plots than systems, or the other way around?  Duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-08T07:48:41.367" LastActivityDate="2012-01-08T07:48:41.367" Title="Are questions about seasonal games on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1121" CreationDate="2011-10-25T16:08:30.220" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two directions a question like this can go:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. What features of a game make it a good one to run on Halloween?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the more abstract version of the question. The resulting answers will probably contain bits and pieces of a lot of different settings/systems, rather than a concrete &quot;play this&quot; kind of deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. What's a good one off game to run for Halloween?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be under the system-recommendations tag, and should follow the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-disallowed-on-rpg-se/1071#1071&quot;&gt;usual guidelines&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little unclear as to what you're asking exactly, but I'll try to give you my take on the individual questions... Let me know if I seem to be missing something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] would that be closed as off topic because it is too broad?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding &quot;for Halloween&quot; isn't going to change the on- or off-topic nature of the question. System recommendation questions remain border-line, but generally supported. More abstract questions live or die on the quality of the expression of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What if I were more interested in plots than systems, or the other way around?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then specify as such in the question body. Perhaps include the settings or adventure tag if your question relates to those areas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not quite sure what the question is here. In general, if your question is answer by another question (or would be answered by a question that isn't answered yet), it's a duplicate. If it isn't answered, then being explicit about how your question differs will help keep it open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;One final note on Halloween:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of different feels associated with Halloween. Off the top of my head, there's soft and fuzzy (&lt;em&gt;candy and jack o' lanterns hooray!&lt;/em&gt;); corny (&lt;em&gt;and when they got home and opened the door, they found a hook hanging from the handle! Aaah!&lt;/em&gt;); campy (&lt;em&gt;and then the teenagers stuck in the house with the slasher decided to split up...&lt;/em&gt;); scary (&lt;em&gt;You know, I don't think I want to go to bed after that last adventure...&lt;/em&gt;); or celebrity guest star (&lt;em&gt;ghosts, zombies, vampires, werewolves, oh my&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2011-10-25T16:08:30.220" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-10-26T17:55:54.727" Score="15" ViewCount="1602" Body="&lt;p&gt;More specifically:&#xA;Should a question with moral/ethical components be presented in a balanced non-judgmental way, or should it be heavily slanted to promote an individual agenda?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8002/how-do-i-get-my-pcs-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;derides games in which &quot;PCs become inured to murder and other antisocial activities&quot;. This topic is as old as roleplaying itself; Dr. Thomas Radecki (and his National Coalition on Television Violence) railed against violence in the TV medium back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and added anti-D&amp;amp;D to his agenda.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simplistic fantasy games (as well as first-person-shooter digital games) avoid the dilemma for the sake of fast and entertaining action-adventure. After the RPG industry matured, we saw a plethora of nonviolent games, so there are plenty of options for that. Meanwhile, there are still plenty of violent games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question cited above, the author's ACTUAL question was &quot;How can I give my PCs a respect for human life?&quot; However, this is appended to a long anti-violence rant. The answer he chose as Best cites real-world ethical and moral situations, thoroughly mixing reality with fantasy gaming, and continues the anti-violence agenda.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am moved to pose this in Meta because the cited question is extremely high-profile from one of the top forum members. Being an open sneer at certain gaming styles, &lt;strong&gt;is this one-sided tone appropriate for this site&lt;/strong&gt;, or should questions of this sort be more balanced?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-11-01T07:43:07.437" Title="Should questions that deride certain styles of play be permitted?" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-10-26T23:05:56.780" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a difference between 'deride' and 'advocate' you may be missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange, like the other Stack Exchanges, has a wide variety of schools of thought represented even on a single topic.  In this case, the RPG world has a wide variety of play styles represented. Luckily, there are well trod guidelines on how SEs maintain this diversity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People will ask questions about how to perform their chosen play style, how to get better at it, and how to advocate it. If you do not agree with the questioner's choice of play style, the best approach is to not participate in that question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked the question because I've played RPGs since the early 1980's - plenty of D&amp;amp;D among many others - and I am concerned about how many of them have encoded system or setting assumptions making violence and murder regular activities. I prefer to play games that simulate the real world more, and encourage realistic behavior on the part of the characters. Sometimes that IS murder, but I'd say in the real world it tends to be at a bit of lower rate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the question was not &quot;violent games are bad, how do I stop others from playing them?&quot; I didn't define any specific games as bad or advocate against them. The question is &quot;in my game, how can I cure the players of the habits they sometimes get from these other games?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that discussing morality vis-a-vis games is likely to be unwelcome among some folks, and that's fine - they don't have to discuss it.  But clearly a lot of people are interested in that topic and do want to discuss it and come up with ways to achieve the same thing in their gaming groups, hence the high rating and number of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, I asked a question about how I can better achieve my personal playstyle (an &quot;anti-violence agenda&quot; to you) in my gaming group, and the best answer was obviously someone who understands how to &quot;further my agenda.&quot; I don't want to ask a more &quot;balanced&quot; question because I am not interested in how to make my game more violent. You are, however, welcome to &quot;bring balance to the Force&quot; or whatever by asking a question along those lines, and those interested in your &quot;agenda&quot; may help further it in turn. I of course would likely choose not to participate in that question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of a SE is to help solve people's problems - not what other people think their problems should be. If you don't like their choice of game or playstyle (or programming language or operating system) - &lt;strong&gt;stay away from questions about them then&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-10-28T02:58:57.657" LastActivityDate="2011-10-28T02:58:57.657" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-10-26T23:31:08.327" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Comment history&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In my 35 years of roleplaying I've never seen a focus on the activities you cite. I also disagree strongly with your statement that &quot;In most  RPGs, PCs become inured...&quot;. If that's the way YOUR friends play and you don't like it, say so, but your slander on the RPG industry is unwarranted. And as an afterthought I think your terminology is either grossly inaccurate (claiming that most characters have thyroid conditions) or a highly offensive epithet inappropriate for this site. – ExTSR yesterday &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Well Frank, I find that surprising, I think a lot of people have seen the same thing. I'm not really even sure it's arguable; again, there are many posts, essays, and even full RPGs like the ones I cite addressing the issue. I suspect you are, as in the second part of your objection, just playing definition games. If you are serious, look me up in chat. – mxyzplk♦ 23 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I guess I just run, and frequent, games that do not suffer these failings, for whatever reason. Whether or not most people do, as you claim, I'm relating my personal experience (or lucky lack of this type). Since you don't think your point is arguable, I think we're finished with that (by fiat). As to words and definitions, my works get quoted literally for years, and I can neither indulge in nor condone the terminology you employ. – ExTSR 19 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Well, just now I read this interesting quote linked off LotFP: &quot;D&amp;amp;D does not easily lend itself to moralistic horror stories. The rules of the game directly reward getting rich and, if necessary, killing whoever gets in your way. As an emergent property it encourages operating from a position of overwhelming tactical advantage. These are sh*tty moral values if taken seriously: in the real world, they would be the values of a psychopath.&quot; - indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php?topic=32094.msg288670#msg288670 Has a point... Do you not run games like that, or just not take it seriously? – mxyzplk♦ 17 hours ago&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;mxyzplk (most recent above): I disagree with every line of that quote from a discussion on Forge (not 'linked off LotFP' as you claim), and also reject as unanswerable your Loaded Question (a logical fallacy). As a Moderator, do you often lay such traps to ambush users of this site? – ExTSR 2 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Well of course, as I prefer playing rogues. SNEAK ATTACK! But more seriously, these comments should probably be migrated over to the meta question now. – mxyzplk♦ 15 mins ago edit &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2011-10-26T23:31:08.327" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-10-27T02:44:22.833" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest this as a perfectly acceptable edit. I won't do it, of course; a moderator (yelling in all caps here) is the one who posted it, and I won't encourage him to start an edit war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question: &lt;strong&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderers?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Body text:) In some RPGs, characters may become accustomed to killing, even murder. Satirical treatments of the phenomenon exist, such Costikyan's &quot;Violence&quot; and Tynes' &quot;Power Kill&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to have a more realistic in-game treatment of these issues: people getting wounded and giving up, taking and ransoming of prisoners, etc. I have compunctions about continually playing in games where the taught behavior is uncomfortably equivalent to the worst examples of human behavior we see on the nightly news.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I encourage my PCs to respect human life?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="72" LastEditDate="2011-10-27T21:47:39.350" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T21:47:39.350" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-10-27T13:16:59.180" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can see that there's some advantages to avoiding brash one-sidedness, but I can't help thinking this would mean, if carried out zealously, &quot;don't communicate things the way you think about them, but censor yourself so that your post will be sufficiently bland to pass our rules about tone&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, the downvoting mechanism was in evidence when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9583/can-paladins-be-evil/9665#9665&quot;&gt;I made a brashly one-sided answer&lt;/a&gt; -voted +2/-2 at present- so I guess there is a community mechanic for murderous one-sidedism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T13:16:59.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-10-27T13:57:27.360" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all, I think I should establish that I do think this is an important question. No, I don't think RPGs need an across-the-board morality overhaul. Most of the articles linked are treating a plot device as though it were seriously intended. You could as easily say that the existence of a &quot;common tongue&quot; encourages an imperialistic viewpoint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of both mechanics is not to teach behavior, but to move the game along and avoid repetitive hangups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But more refined moral systems are something that is desirable to have for some people, some of the time. And switching to that mode IS difficult, particularly given that the games are designed to be played without it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As a corollary... I'm having problems getting my group to stop looting the bodies in a game I'm running. I don't think that looting the bodies is bad, in general, but I do feel that it doesn't fit my particular game)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far as language goes... Rule one is to be respectful of others. However, in asking a question, it IS important to be able to articulate what you dislike and what you are trying to achieve. We, as a community, need to understand that sometimes people will say things that we disagree with when they ask a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this axis, this is not an exemplary question. When I first encountered it, I found it a bit hostile, and moved away from participating in it. I don't have a problem with the title... But a few of the paragraphs within do seem a bit judgmental (particularly in the first and fourth paragraphs).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I don't think &quot;people who use simplified morality systems&quot; is a particularly sensitive group, in general. Mostly because it is the status quo, and it's easy for a commanding majority to tolerate dissent. And because I think a lot of people are aware that things are somewhat askew, and accept it for the game mechanic that it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion... I don't want to see many more questions with this particular tone. I'd like it if it was cleaned up a bit. But I see no reason to take action at this time, because I don't consider it to be &quot;that bad,&quot; and because I'm not seeing indicators of widespread dislike for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T13:57:27.360" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1129" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-10-27T16:30:07.500" Score="-10" ViewCount="729" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have objected to the use of the term &quot;cretin&quot; at rpg.stackechange.com and my objections have been arbitrarily dismissed. Two site moderators (mxyzplk and AceCalhoun) have endorsed the use of the term. Mxyzplk claimed that &quot;there is no Official StackExchange Policy&quot; and added a derogatory Comment stating that my objection is 'just playing definition games'. AceCalhoun has further commented (with much less hostility) to the effect that it's a 'majority rules' situation, pointing to the voting system on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People once used epithets about race, creed, color, disability, and more. These epithets were all perfectly acceptable to the norms of the past. They are not acceptable today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should insulting terminology, illegal in some venues, be freely used on this site? Should that decision be a matter of popular vote?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related data:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the EEOC (United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Workplace harassment is any unwelcome or unwanted conduct that&#xA;  denigrates or shows hostility or an aversion toward another person on&#xA;  the basis of any characteristic protected by law, which includes an&#xA;  individual's race, color, gender, ethnic or national origin, age,&#xA;  religion, DISABILITY, marital status, sexual orientation, gender&#xA;  identity, or other personal characteristic protected by law.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(&quot;Disability&quot; capitalized for emphasis.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of Offensive words for people who have specific medical conditions: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cripple: an offensive word for someone who is physically disabled, especially someone who is unable to walk&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;imbecile: an offensive word for someone who has a mental disability&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;retard: an offensive word for someone who has not developed mentally as much as most other people of the same age&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;spastic: affected by cerebral palsy. This word is now considered offensive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cretinism / Cretin:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;cretin (often offensive): one afflicted with cretinism&quot; (Merriam-Webster online Dictionary)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;cretin (offensive): a person considered to be extremely stupid&quot; (Collins English Dictionary)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;The disused term cretin was a medical term which described a person so affected with the condition, but, as with words such as spastic and lunatic, it can also have a vulgar connotation and can be used disparagingly.&quot; (Wikipedia)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2011-10-28T00:45:54.353" LastActivityDate="2018-10-09T19:21:04.720" Title="Should this site condone terms derogating an individual's characteristics?" Tags="|discussion|voting|moderators|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-27T17:06:35.753" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, of those terms, I think Cretin is acceptable. Many of them are not. Cretin is a disused medical term, which many people probably more strongly associate with its colloquial  meaning (if they know the medical term at all), which in this case was neither applied in description to the medical condition, nor directed at anyone in particular.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this word truly offends you, I will gladly edit the title of the post to something less offensive myself (&quot;idiots&quot; is the likely candidate) if you ask me to. This being Stack Exchange, I can't guarantee that it'll stay that way, of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will, however, be giving you a very quizzical look while I'm doing it :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T17:06:35.753" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-27T17:52:37.070" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was not aware that the term &quot;cretin&quot; was offensive.  Having done a little research, I am convinced that it is an ableist term and have edited the title in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your first sentence of your question does not appear to be correct though.  As far as I can determine, this question was the first specific mention of &quot;cretin&quot; being offensive.  Your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1123/460&quot;&gt;previous meta question&lt;/a&gt; seems more directed at the general tone of the question, and not the term itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the original question has been open for months now.  You have the rep and could have gone in at any time to edit it to something less offensive.  If an edit war had erupted, then a meta question would definitely be warranted.  I'm not sure it was needed yet in this case but I glad to finally understand the root of your issue with that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T17:52:37.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-27T18:35:11.640" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I liked the idea of calling a PC party a bunch of murderous cretins, and I now feel hesitant about having so liked it and enthusiastically reused the term in my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either it's OK after all, or I can console myself that the bad company I keep &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.stephenfry.com/2011/10/06/steve-jobs/single-page/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;includes Stephen Fry&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Only dullards crippled into &lt;em&gt;cretinism&lt;/em&gt; by a fear of being thought&#xA;  pretentious could be so &lt;em&gt;dumb&lt;/em&gt; as to believe that there is a distinction&#xA;  between design and use, between form and function, between style and&#xA;  substance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dumb is, in fact, a much worse ableist epithet, one I really am bothered about the carelessness with which I use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T18:35:11.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-27T19:38:18.563" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;May I go ahead and point out that a user &quot;using&quot; and site &quot;condoning&quot; behavior or terminology are two completely different things. I understand in this case it was a moderator, but moderators, while they manage the site aren't the site, they are merely a small group of users who have been chosen by SE to take out the trash and wash the dishes. They don't speak for SE and they don't speak for the site in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as site policy and what this site condones and doesn't condone that is up to us in Meta as far as our voices and powers go and ultimately up to SE as a corporation and what they want to see on their sites. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the term Cretin as used in common vernacular offensive? not at all. Is the true meaning of Cretin offensive? apparently. Honestly I'm not sure why this is causing quite the waves that it is..If you have a problem with the language used that's one thing, but this seems rather personal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2011-10-27T19:38:18.563" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1134" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-28T00:08:19.490" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Come off it. No one uses cretin that way, because no one talks about cretinism anymore. And if &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; do, you're doing so out of ignorance: it's an obsolete term. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been told that &quot;spaz&quot; is actually quite offensive in the UK. So if you're from the UK, and someone on the site calls you a spaz, then you have a legitimate complaint. I suppose since &quot;spastic&quot; is still in common use in some places as a name for cerebral palsy, you could make the argument that it's worth being sensitive toward those who might recognize the word as a medical term...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But frankly, your confrontational attitude is far more overtly offensive than either word. I &lt;em&gt;highly&lt;/em&gt; doubt you saw the title in question and thought to yourself, &lt;em&gt;&quot;He's talking about homicidal people with thyroid problems!&quot;&lt;/em&gt; Especially since your own answer has been sitting under the very same title for the past &lt;strong&gt;five months&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, you're trolling. You found a list of &quot;offensive&quot; words somewhere, and you're throwing out accusations because... You have an axe to grind? You're bored? You get off on provoking shocked reactions from good people who didn't realize the words they use have a &lt;em&gt;dark past&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who cares. Cut it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2011-10-28T00:08:19.490" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-10-28T02:49:59.650" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, of course not, that would be wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am not sure whose individual characteristics were derogated here. Besides that it was not directed at anyone except hypothetical fictional people in my game, the word &quot;cretin&quot; has long passed offensive usage.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are looking for an &quot;official&quot; ruling, the only written rule on Stack Exchange is &quot;Be nice.&quot; There is an offensive flag which reads: &quot;This question contains content that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive, or hate speech.&quot;  I don't believe &quot;cretin&quot; falls into that category, though perhaps you could seek a referendum on &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;English Usage Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I brought your concerns to the SE mod community, and I fear their reaction was harsher than mine; Shog9's answer is quite representative of the &quot;higher ranking&quot; mods' view on things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:08.827" LastActivityDate="2011-10-28T02:49:59.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1136" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-10-28T18:13:59.710" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would love to ask a question about the types of battle grids people use, as I think that it would make for a great resource on this site.  The only real problem is that it would be off-topic for being too broad unless it was made community wiki (which I'm perfectly ok with).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is, could we get a question about the types of battle grids available without it being closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that I think are in a similar vein:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/423/what-is-important-when-choosing-an-rpg&quot;&gt;What is important when choosing an rpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/267/what-tools-are-useful-to-organize-a-gms-campaign-notes&quot;&gt;What tools are useful to organize a gm's notes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-10-28T18:32:50.150" Title="Battle Grid question" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1137" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1136" CreationDate="2011-10-28T18:32:50.150" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I would prefer not to see a question that's just a list of all of the available types of grid. Yes, &quot;What tools are useful to organize a GM's notes&quot; managed to do fairly well in that context, but it's a really tough fit for the system. And most such questions do poorly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What is important when choosing a grid for you game/system/campaign&quot; (pick one) could do fairly well on its own. I don't believe that it would have any need to be CW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compare and contrast questions (&quot;what will happen if I replace grid system X with grid system Y?&quot;) can also work well, provided they are scoped to a specific situation, or perhaps of the form &quot;when is grid system X preferable to grid system Y?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about a specific grid can also do well: &quot;What are the advantages of grid system X?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, you can always go with &quot;I am in situation X, what would a good grid system to use be?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, if a topic MUST be CW to survive, it's a good sign that it will have problems. The current thinking (as I understand it) is that CW is for the rare question that gains a lot of community support, despite breaking the format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-10-28T18:32:50.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1123" CreationDate="2011-11-01T07:43:07.437" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some people are going to have a use for this question and its answers. Some people will not. I personally have no use for a lot of the questions and answers on this site, but otherwise have lots of use for others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it were not a real problem faced by a significant number of gamers, who would like a solution, the question would not be popular. Hence, it must accurately, to some greater or lesser degree, reflect a real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see any use in railing against the fact that people face a problem that one wishes they didn't face. I don't see any use in railing against their attempts to describe the problem in their own words, nor in the attempts to solve the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Despite that, I think I understand&lt;/strong&gt; the esteemed @ExTSR's problem with the question. I've been gaming long enough to remember meeting people, real people face-to-face, who thought my hobby was the work of the devil. People to whom I instinctively downplayed the violent and mercenary potential of the stories it could enable because that would be throwing chum to sharks. I haven't been playing nearly as long as he, but long enough to be caught by the tail end of the anti-D&amp;amp;D fear and at a very impressionable time of life. I couldn't comfortably admit to what I did for entertainment for years, and I'm still slowly undoing the internalised fear and marginalisation that keeps me from talking about my weekend roleplaying as easily as someone else might talk about the game of golf they played yesterday. I think I understand some sliver of what it must have been like to be a player through &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; those years, let alone someone who &lt;em&gt;worked&lt;/em&gt; in the very industry being crusaded against by the likes of the late Mrs Pulling and the police departments she duped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when I say that we don't live in that world anymore, that we live in a world where the worst rumour that the last two generations have heard about D&amp;amp;D is that it's for staid, boring people who aren't up with the latest MageKnight knock-off, I speak as one who knows quite well what the alternative is. I look for the signs that people think I'm swinging around live steel in steam tunnels, and those people don't exist anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D doesn't need its reputation defended anymore. The crusaders died, and were forgotten. Truth will out, and it did. Even Lego has constructable game-sets in big-box toy stores where you play fierce knights slaying dragons or evil warriors duking it out in an arena. D&amp;amp;D won, and it won so thoroughly that the world it was trying to win over has already forgotten where it got all the gaming tropes – violence among them – that D&amp;amp;D brought to it. Fantasy, including both violent and more peaceful varieties, have long since gone mainstream. D&amp;amp;D is no longer even a meaningful target among the immensely-greater profile &lt;em&gt;Dragon Age&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Warcraft&lt;/em&gt; (violence right in the name!) video game franchises, and it's time to come out of the castles after the long siege before we starve ourselves for fear of an enemy long dead and gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-11-01T07:43:07.437" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2011-11-01T08:10:50.930" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do think that language targeting (even in ignorance) marginalised groups is inappropriate. Moreso than many here, likely. I'd say any current slurs should be edited out of RPG.SE's posts as a matter of course. However, I don't think that &quot;cretin&quot; has had currency as a group-targeting slur for a long time. (I would similarly not support editing out &quot;beyond the pale&quot; used for its modern meaning from a post, &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/beyond_the_pale&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;despite its original meaning&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone corrects me on that, though, I'd say it should be treated as any other slur with such currency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2011-11-01T08:10:50.930" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1140" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1141" CreationDate="2011-11-04T19:53:10.443" Score="12" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is meant to be a community resource, not a resource for any one specific situation.  However, in the end, the asker is accepting the answer, which will relate to his take on the question.  If there is more than one good/correct answer, what is the responsibility of the accepter to accept an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10754/must-compels-be-negative-in-fate&quot;&gt;Must Compels be negative in FATE&lt;/a&gt;, looking at it in hindsight, I think the answer is based on who is running the game, and the flavour of fate that is being run, so yes and no are both valid answers, and there are two very good explanations of the reasonings behind them.  I accepted the answer from @SevenSidedDie because it seemed &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; to me, but the answer from @Jadasc was also valid after talking to him about it, and his edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is my responsibility in accepting an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-25T23:17:45.193" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T15:01:38.560" Title="What to do when there's more than one good answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1140" CreationDate="2011-11-04T20:04:13.480" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your responsibility is to accept the answer that most helps &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;. It's basically a way of marking for future visitors that &quot;I went this way.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I've seen a number of ways of dealing with two (or more) very closely competing answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept one answer, but upvote the other (effectively splitting &quot;the points&quot; for the answer).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add a comment to the accepted answer linking to the runner up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add a comment to the runner up, indicating that you feel that it also does a good job of answering the question in a different manner than the one you accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit one answer to include the other (if both seem incomplete).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post your own composite answer, integrating multiple other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This situation is one of the driving forces behind the voting system. Even if you pick &quot;wrong&quot; on your accepted answer, the community still has the opportunity to weigh in, and vote the competing answer up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2011-11-04T20:04:13.480" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="930" CreationDate="2011-11-10T10:56:40.883" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know the worst thing you can do to a community is point out that it is quiet but here are our stats: vists up but number of questions low. I imagine this is because those visiting the site feel that the restrictions are too tight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I watch the questions per day out of interest and it doesn't pass 4.0.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vWOAM.png&quot; alt=&quot;Stats as of 10 Nov 2011&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="173" LastActivityDate="2011-11-10T10:56:40.883" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1143" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-11-17T13:38:58.613" Score="18" ViewCount="426" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've often gone through and edited out the system name from question titles. One of the reasons I do this is so that the question titles are snappier and more likely to get attention. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets take a page from Gaming.SE's book and make our question titles awesome. Some great examples from Gaming:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I tell if a corpse is safe to eat?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I kill adorable animals?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does hitting a sheep in the face yield more wool?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can I permanently kill important people?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there any reason for me to sleep?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to pray safely (to God)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My wife is stuck in a wall, can I save her?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My children are useless. What should I do?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I find lesbians?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can I kill everybody?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I cannibalize people?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are just some of the top questions. Now I've noticed that not all of their questions remove the game, but honestly aren't these question titles more awesome from lack of context? All of them have at least 20 upvotes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets be more awesome. &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3246/should-we-be-allowing-tags-to-be-manually-prepended-to-the-title-of-questions&quot;&gt;Similar meta post on gaming&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:32:35.770" LastActivityDate="2011-12-28T12:08:13.267" Title="How can we be more awesome?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1143" CreationDate="2011-11-17T18:35:36.673" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's take a recent example, i.e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10932/what-kind-of-goals-are-valid-in-social-combat-in-the-dresden-files&quot;&gt;What goals are valid in Social Conflict in The Dresden Files&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, it's tagged with Social Combat and Dresden Files, so we take Dresden Files out... though both terms were in the title.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, if someone posts another question about social conflict in WoD.  These questions aren't immediately disambiguated (not to mention talking about social conflict in other games).  You might point to the fact of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; tag appears on the main page.  But what about other navigation/help?  When you're typing in a new question, and that appears?  What about the fact that in the right column, the related stories will show that question because of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social-combat&quot;&gt;social-combat&lt;/a&gt; tag, even though it's only tangentially related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed this in my use of the site, which was why I started including it, because it was annoying when related topics appeared, they weren't really related (but you couldn't tell by the title), and they wasted my time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not a big deal by any stretch of the imagination, and I can see the arguments for the other side.  I do think there needs to be a consensus on which way to go, though- seeing some questions with it and some without is, if not confusing, at the very least, messy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2011-11-17T18:35:36.673" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1143" CreationDate="2011-11-18T02:05:28.363" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, here's the deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like snazzy titles.  I try to use snazzy titles, as some recent weeping and gnashing of teeth indicates (murderous cretin question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If a poster objects to an edit, roll it back.  It's their question. Period. We had some early edit wars on this site and the upshot is that you can edit, but if they reject the edit, it's their call. You can vote to close the question if you think it doesn't meet site standards without the edit, but that's it. All this other discussion is secondary to that in every way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The site is primarily about getting good answers to the poster's question. When we've had rampantly popular linked questions, they draw some new eyes to the site - but sadly they do NOT draw better answers to the question (the Star Destroyer question comes to mind), in fact those questions tend to then need mod attention because of the drivebys. As a result I don't necessarily support going and rampantly editing titles for &quot;kewlness.&quot; Bringing new eyes is good, but not at the expense of answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags help somewhat, but especially in the sidebars, twitter, and whatnot they don't appear. Personally, if a question is really vague I'll just ignore it. Anyone can only know/play 1/100 of all the RPGs and so not every question is or can be for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post your own questions with 'awesome' titles. Problem solved.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Encourage others to have awesome titles, in meta or with comment suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit awesomeness in occasionally, and when you think it would be welcome. You know who your buds are on the site and who isn't.  Use it more for system agnostic questions that don't suffer from lacking the game system in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Be careful of going over the line, both in changing the question itself and in volume. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-11-18T02:05:28.363" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1146" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1147" CreationDate="2011-11-19T15:15:29.560" Score="11" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen in a couple of cases where someone will answer a question.  Then as others add answers, they will &lt;em&gt;incorporate&lt;/em&gt; the subsequent answers into their own to make it more comprehensive than it otherwise was, thereby making their answer the obvious choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, I suppose you get a more well rounded final answer, but it also seems a bit like plagiarism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the policy on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2011-11-19T16:27:48.377" Title="When is editing your answer not kosher?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1146" CreationDate="2011-11-19T16:27:48.377" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The point of the site is to improve answers to solve the OP's problem. Refining answers is expected. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With comments, the whole point of comments is to improve an answer - they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be incorporated and then deleted out; they are intended to be largely temporary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With answers, this shouldn't generally be a problem with a good question.  When can you just rampantly incorporate other answers into your answer?  Apparently they're not too different... Either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question was a list question in the first place, which is bad&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer being incorporated is a crappy little answer that should probably have been a comment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Another answer points out a minor flaw in the answer, in which case it's completely legit to fix it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, you should NOT post an answer when there is a very similar previous answer - you should comment/edit/refine and vote it up so that a clear community answer emerges.  Nothing's worse than 24 answers all of which say &quot;yes, with mostly the same justification!&quot; That should be one well edited answer with 24 upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the end the whole rep system is meant only to be an incentive, the goal is good questions and good answers - if that's happening, there's nothing wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-11-19T16:27:48.377" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1148" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-11-21T09:48:48.443" Score="8" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;Every year Paizo holds their &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/rpgsuperstar&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Superstar&lt;/a&gt; contest, which is a cool competition/talent search for commercial RPG content writers. I've been following for several years, and even though I don't play &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; or even like &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt; much, it's a really fun opportunity to see the challenges of commercial game design and how people deal with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The competition is usually announced before December, and then there's activity up through April-ish. I'm wondering if an event like this might be an opportunity for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One obvious way we could be of assistance is branding RPG.SE as a place to ask design questions, but I think that'd go over poorly - it's a competition; competitors are meant to do their own work and research, or at least not farm it out to a public Q&amp;amp;A site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But lots of design and mechanics questions come up throughout the contest - often in retrospect, when trying to evaluate a particular piece of work. We could chime in there, and discuss mechanical issues as they arise, throw a few links into the Paizo discussions, and hopefully demonstrate that we're a cool, useful, friendly resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are disadvantages here - more focus on &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder,&lt;/em&gt; &quot;competition&quot; with the Paizo threads where the same questions will be discussed. But it's such a good event. And the people following it are great people who are genuinely interested both in the intricacies of game design, and (very often) in fleshing out cool ideas and dramatics far beyond what most D&amp;amp;D is typically geared for. So it's a great crowd to pitch to - if we find a good way to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suggestions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2174" LastEditorUserId="146" LastEditDate="2011-12-02T23:18:21.493" LastActivityDate="2011-12-02T23:18:21.493" Title="Is RPG Superstar a promotion opportunity for RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1148" CreationDate="2011-11-21T14:38:01.660" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Could be interesting.  Especially if we could pitch to designers the utility of this format for design feedback - the Paizo threads drive me crazy, standard forum crapping, it is impossible to really get any kind of feel of consensus off them and the considered analysis is often buried within the dross - whereas here, you can get real focused feedback w/voting etc. It would seem to be quite focused for some kinds of playtest questions. Mot sure what our initial &quot;in&quot; is though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-11-21T14:38:01.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1148" CreationDate="2011-11-21T16:00:22.167" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm wondering if we could swoop in &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the rounds are over, the judge's comments are in, the voting results are in. By that point pretty much every entry's been picked apart in a dozen different directions. We could pick some interesting problems and criticisms, and then post &quot;how could I fix this design?&quot; questions for them. Then head back to the Superstar forums with &quot;On RPG.SE, they suggested some cool fixes like...&quot; replete with links. They could address very specific details of the contest entries, or wider issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/rpgsuperstar/round5/amongTheGearsOfMadness&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Where would be a good setting for an Alkenstar tech expo fair?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/rpgsuperstar/round5/isgeriBloodAndOrphansTears&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;How do I write an investigation game without railroading my players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/rpgsuperstar/round1/flaskOfFiveFifths&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;How should this magic item be priced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this would give us cool content. I'm worried, though, that it'll come across as overly aggressive and promotional, and get the locals annoyed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2174" LastActivityDate="2011-11-21T16:00:22.167" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1151" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-11-22T14:44:35.190" Score="6" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a consensus as to how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; tag works; it's for issues regarding persona portrayal in games. I'd like to work out something similar for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; tags. Are they synonyms waiting to happen? Does &quot;plot&quot; refer to something planned by the GM and &quot;story&quot; what emerges from active play, or &lt;em&gt;vice versa&lt;/em&gt;? Or should both of them be scrapped in favor of something more solid?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2011-11-22T16:55:45.110" Title="How should the &quot;story&quot; and &quot;plot&quot; tags be used?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2015-06-25T00:20:57.337" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1151" CreationDate="2011-11-22T16:17:52.017" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd say that plot is, effectively, not being used at this time. It's only on one question, which is also tagged with the story tag. You could call it a synonym waiting to happen, but I'd consider it a non-entity at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Current usage for story seems to be tied to authoring storylines for campaigns and adventure paths (i.e. what's been planned by the GM).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main deviation here is that it also has been added to a couple of questions about storytelling (i.e. presentation) ( &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8465/how-do-i-get-better-at-narrating-storytelling-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;How do I get better at narrating/storytelling as a GM?&lt;/a&gt; , &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7805/co-operative-story-telling-mechanics&quot;&gt;Co-operative story-telling mechanics&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The plot tag is effectively unused at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The story tag seems to have a strong consensus for use on questions about authoring RPG story lines. Are there tags beyond Plot and Story that overlap with it?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We may want to consider adding a storytelling tag for questions about storytelling systems (not to be confused with the Storytelling System :-P) and the presentational side of storytelling.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2011-11-22T16:55:45.110" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1153" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1154" CreationDate="2011-11-22T20:50:01.563" Score="6" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you offer a bounty and it goes unclaimed (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10836/using-pathfinders-variant-wounds-and-vigor-rules&quot;&gt;without even an answer&lt;/a&gt;), what happens to the bounty?  Just curious...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Unclaimed bounties" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1153" CreationDate="2011-11-22T21:49:24.613" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there are no answers, then the bounty disappears and is not refunded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other situations were answered on meta.stackexchange.com.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16065/how-does-the-bounty-system-work&quot;&gt;How does the bounty system work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;Meta FAQ&lt;/a&gt; is a great place to find answers to how things work in the general case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2011-11-22T21:49:24.613" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1155" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1157" CreationDate="2011-12-01T20:35:58.583" Score="5" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question I posted here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11080/how-do-you-deal-with-a-player-who-refuses-to-roll-his-die&quot;&gt;How do you deal with a drunk player who refuses to participate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;seems to have gone beyond the original intent, and changed into an inflammatory discussion. That was not my original intent, and, in its current form, seems to be a mix of two issues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original question related to drunk and disorderly players&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A question related to what is appropriate and not appropriate in a role playing session&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to rescue the question from the crash-n-burn it seems to be headed towards?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1056" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-12-02T02:31:42.507" Title="Can a valid question be rescued from my original?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1155" CreationDate="2011-12-01T21:16:24.490" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ah,the joy of the Internet.... Yes, it is revocable.   To be honest, it does not even come close to a flame war.  I would keep the question as is and add a caveat similar to Heinsenberg's one: &quot;This function makes everything I have written read as I indented it (calm, conciliatory, and reasonable).  If it reads differently, then there that was not my intent.&quot;  Or something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember what is appropriate for one person may not be for another -- ditto for the same person and different games.  That would make a good question in and off itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2011-12-01T21:16:24.490" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1157" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1155" CreationDate="2011-12-01T21:51:02.780" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Which of your two questions do you want answered?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the &quot;drunk&quot; aspect is still needed then lets refocus the existing question on &quot;drunk&quot; as that is where the majority of the answers lie.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other issue should go onto a separate question IMHO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-12-01T21:51:02.780" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1155" CreationDate="2011-12-02T00:51:37.920" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;You have fundamentally changed your question, which is always going to end in disaster.  Leave the first one as a pure &quot;drunk player&quot; one and do a second about &quot;no win.&quot; I'll delete the comment war on the first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-12-02T02:31:42.507" LastActivityDate="2011-12-02T02:31:42.507" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1159" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1160" CreationDate="2011-12-06T15:44:10.917" Score="3" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pretty much what the title says.  X would be an acting category that the GM could enhance for the player and the the player could role play better in and of themselves.  Anyway, one question with two slants or two very linked but differently focused questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2011-12-06T17:23:26.927" Title="Would asking how to role play X from a player and GM point of view merit two questions or one?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1159" CreationDate="2011-12-06T16:10:18.770" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assuming X is a characteristic of a PC/NPC, it would depend on how much of a difference you guess that being a DM will make. Generally, this won't be much, but there are some instances where it's extreme enough to warrant splitting the question (prophets come to mind).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the questions is about how a DM can &lt;em&gt;help&lt;/em&gt; a PC expand on their role playing, I'd say that warrants an independent question and shouldn't be tacked on to a &quot;how do I roleplay X&quot; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&#xA;&quot;How do I roleplay as a snake?&quot; will generally be a similar question, whether you are a GM or a player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;One of my players is roleplaying as a snake, how can I help them?&quot; is a distinct question from &quot;how do I roleplay as a snake?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-12-06T17:23:26.927" LastActivityDate="2011-12-06T17:23:26.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1161" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-06T19:58:33.727" Score="6" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;I placed a bounty on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10836/using-pathfinders-variant-wounds-and-vigor-rules&quot;&gt;someone else's question&lt;/a&gt;, because I was interested in the answer, and it didn't seem to be getting attention.  It expired unawarded, because no one answered the question.  Today, someone did, and the answer is very much what I was looking for.  Is there a way to award that bounty to the answerer.  Or is it just gone?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Awarding bounty after it expires" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1161" CreationDate="2011-12-06T20:29:07.770" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It appears the answer is no, it's gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/16067/151694&quot;&gt;Meta FAQ&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happens if there's no answer after the bounty period?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happens if I feel my question is still unanswered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is automatic awarding?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Twenty-four hours after the end of the bounty period, if the bounty starter has not manually awarded the bounty, an eligible answer can be automatically awarded half the bounty amount. The criteria for an answer to be eligible for automatic awarding are as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer must be given after the bounty was started&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer must have a score of at least +2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If two or more eligible answers have the same score, the oldest answer is awarded the bounty.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If no answers meet these criteria, the bounty ends without it being awarded to any answer, and is not refunded to the bounty starter.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-12-06T20:29:07.770" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1163" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-09T11:32:16.723" Score="10" ViewCount="300" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if this is just me or if others feel that the remit of rpgse is too narrow and too tightly controlled. I only post generic questions because I don't play D&amp;amp;D and few will know the homebrew systems I play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I posted this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11218/biggest-pitfalls-for-experienced-gms&quot;&gt;As an experienced GM, what pitfalls should I watch out for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the newbie version of the question was getting some interesting feedback and I was wondering if there were any bad habits I'd gotten into.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was closed and now my enthusiasm for the community has waned in an instant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we are trying to get out of Beta then we should support a broader range of questions. The question itself wasn't bad and hadn't been asked before. Being quick to close questions is going to put people off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it just me?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've edited the question to hopefully make it more suitable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="173" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-07-27T09:03:30.503" Title="Asking for advice, looking forward to answers, questions closed, now disillusioned. Is it just me?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1164" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1163" CreationDate="2011-12-09T13:55:15.707" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Closing is part of the natural process around here for questions that aren't quite specific enough.  It doesn't mean the question is unwelcome, or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing does:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Prevent new answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allow deletion votes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allow reopen votes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's pretty much it, the following actions are not prohibited:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Editing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Commenting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Voting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having an occasional question closed is not the end of the world.  I'd argue that it is healthy.  It allows the question to be improved, and then hopefully reopened which ultimately makes for a better site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blog posts such as &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;Real Questions have Answers&lt;/a&gt; do not back up your statement that we should be allowing a broader range of questions.  The way forward, and out of beta is to keep quality up and not allow the site to devolve into &quot;just another forum&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2011-12-09T13:55:15.707" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1163" CreationDate="2011-12-09T23:58:00.437" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this discussion is going in somewhat the wrong direction. Q&amp;amp;A format, aversion to lists, closing (and reopening and closing, etc.) of questions, these are all things that are part of the StackExchange format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're not going to change, because they have been &lt;em&gt;extremely successful&lt;/em&gt; in communities that adopted them. This is not to say that the system is perfect... But there is a great deal of inertia behind it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would really help us out is how we can make this process more pleasant. Yes, your question got closed. Yes, it's a bummer. But you've been a member here for a year, have nine other questions with lots of activity, and plenty of answers. What about the process makes it feel like the end of the world to you?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Regarding the Question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what's wrong with that question in particular? The problem with this sort of question is that it encourages a lot of short, shallow, answers and lists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/11219/77&quot;&gt;Sardathrion's answer&lt;/a&gt;. It's a pretty reasonable piece of work on its own. But scale things up over time. Think about what happens when the next person posts a long list of bullet points, half of which replicate Sardathrion's. And the one after that. And so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might be somewhat useful to you, as you get immediate notification when a new answer rolls in. But to the rest of the world, it often turns into just a bunch of boring, samey, top-ten lists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't guarenteed to happen. The question you linked to actually came out really well, in my opinion. But compare the answers you're getting to the answers on the older question. They're just not even remotely in the same ballpark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What needs to happen is that your question needs to be modified to draw out the thoughtful, reasoned answers. Not just a list of symptoms, but getting at the underlying problems and solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a very tough question to ask. Exploratory questions are kind of a rough fit for the Q&amp;amp;A format to begin with, because they usually rely on a dialog. I'll try to give it some more thought this weekend, but as it is now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The title may be able to stay as it is now. You really can't sum the entire question into a single line anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the question body, you need to establish where you are. What you mean by experienced. What are you doing now that seems really clever, what are some of the recent obstacles you feel have been overcome.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Describe your situation, and ask how to improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2011-12-09T23:58:00.437" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1163" CreationDate="2011-12-10T00:03:16.820" Score="-3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question was closed and now my enthusiasm for the community has waned in an instant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good. Because this isn't a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange model is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; equivalent to a forum. Forums exist to create communities and foster discussion. Stack Exchange websites are intended to create a place where people can ask &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; questions&lt;/a&gt; and expect to get reasonable, accurate information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange sites do not really build a community; they're for a loose-knit organization of faceless people who have no purpose other than to post questions and others who post answers. And the Stack Exchange model is well-designed to create exactly this kind of place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is an advice question. And while that would be useful to many people, the Stack Exchange model is not intended to cover &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt;. Advice questions are not part of it. Advice questions are just invitations to discussion. And &lt;em&gt;discussion&lt;/em&gt; is not what Q&amp;amp;A is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You cannot really build a &quot;community&quot; around a Stack Exchange site. It's just a collective that answers answerable questions; nothing more. To the extent that RPGs need a place for that, this site can be used. But your &quot;experienced GM question&quot; would be far more reasonable on a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2414" LastActivityDate="2011-12-10T00:03:16.820" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1167" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1163" CreationDate="2011-12-10T15:02:03.953" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously as mods we have to balance curation of the content on the site with the curation of the community on the site.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, all the tried and true SE best practices - about Q&amp;amp;A in general, about community wiki, about Good Subjective/Bad Subjective, about scoping - are all completely on point for this site. No SE site is really 'different' from the others. Everyone who starts a new one thinks it is.  We thought ours was. Then after a year plus of curating it, we realized the wisdom of the system. This SE will be run as a Stack Exchange. It is for experts who have actionable questions or problems they need an answer to or help with. That's not really a very strict format, but clearly some things lie outside it and don't belong here. In most cases, marginal questions can be brought back into the fold, because unless they are someone starting a question just for rep or to see themselves talk, there is an actual problem or question they have underlying it, they just aren't stating it in an actionable way.  In those cases, we close the question and people pitch in to make the question answerable and then it gets reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We generally wait to see some community closes before we mod-close, unless something's clearly spam or egregious, because it makes people feel better. But that's not a rule. We don't have rules, except the cardinal rule of &quot;Don't be a dick,&quot; we just have guidelines and rep-driven community empowerment and experienced mods. So in general we try to wait for community closes, in general we try to leave an explanation on the closed Q that explains why and how to fix it up, in general we try to help with that process. But don't always have the time to do all that ourselves, so the community may feel free to jump in!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will note that we have gotten &quot;not constructive&quot; flags on that question, which you don't see but the mods do, even since the reopen. But one person pulls the trigger, so everyone always thinks it's &quot;one mod!&quot; or &quot;the modclique!&quot; or whatever closing their question; there's usually a lot more behind it than that and that's why the mods are all established members of the community that folks should have the sense to trust some.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing our stats, over the life of the site (2200 questions) about 100 have been mod-closed. Less than 5%; I think that makes it pretty clear that there's not a heavy hand or too-strict rules. (It actually makes me think we've let too much slide...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, the community we want is a community that is motivated by high quality content and by expert Q&amp;amp;A. If we have discussiony stuff around, sure it might bring in &quot;more&quot; users but not the right ones. If people come here and see Yahoo Answers quality stuff, the numbers might get bigger but the experts will flee. Newbies might flee, but ideally those with fire in their bellies will want to come/stay to become experts. And that's the SE value prop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're a valuable expert on the site; you've asked many questions and gotten many answers. If one (temporary) question close is depressing you, likely the right solution is not RPG.SE process change, it's to get out this weekend and have some fun. I'm not saying this to be mean; I know what it's like for one forum post or email or SE question to get under my skin. But when one steps back to get some perspective, life goes on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-12-10T15:02:03.953" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1168" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-11T08:42:24.343" Score="7" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm just wondering where questions about props and other items for roleplaying games belong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Making/choosing armour for Larp Characters&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Buying/making/painting Miniatures for a game of DnD&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where to find good battle matts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where to find the best elf ears (for larp)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so on and so forth. Some of those stradle diy.stack, others would probably fit in others &lt;em&gt;stacks&lt;/em&gt; that I can't find (wargaming? theatre?). Do they belong in rpg.stack, elsewhere or both?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2011-12-11T08:53:30.733" LastActivityDate="2011-12-11T08:58:55.690" Title="Questions about making props for table top and/or LARP?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1168" CreationDate="2011-12-11T08:58:55.690" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#questions&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Questions about)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;LARPS aren't table-top RPGs, so any questions about them would be off-topic.  However painting for D&amp;amp;D should be OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shopping questions are generally frowned upon on StackExchange sites.  They are likely to be closed as &amp;quot;too localized&amp;quot; as the answers change frequently and most likely vary depending where in the world someone is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A better StackExchange flavored question would be, &amp;quot;How can I best identify good battle mats?&amp;quot;  Answers that that question may contain specific product recommendations, but a great answer would also have notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how big a mat to look for&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whether to get a grid on the mat&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The pros and cons of wet-erase vs. dry-erase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;etc&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That sort of advice is likely to be useful farther into the future rather than someone just telling you to buy the chessex gray 30&amp;quot; wet erase mat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Other StackExchanges and Migration&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of this may be on point at DIY as well.  There is no rule that a question can only be valid on just one StackExchange site.  A question will be moved only if it is clearly better  on one site than another.  I encourage you to ask your question on the site that you think could best answer your question.  If there is a consensus that it belongs somewhere else, well, we'll all learn something :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Please don't ask the same question on multiple sites at the same time though, that is frowned upon.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-12-11T08:58:55.690" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1170" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1173" CreationDate="2011-12-13T18:47:21.487" Score="5" ViewCount="601" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm curious, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3/what-are-beginner-role-playing-table-top-games&quot;&gt;This Question&lt;/a&gt;, was just closed. It is over a year old, and marked as community wiki, with a large number of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Granted, it did draw a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/11313/1736&quot;&gt;new answer&lt;/a&gt;, but that is also marked as community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we close all old community wiki list questions as they are prohibited by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;? Are there some which might still have merit as a list question? Should some of the questions with existing answers be edited to be more valid, when it is possible to do so?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1736" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-05-28T15:29:56.737" Title="Should we be closing old community wiki questions?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|list-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1170" CreationDate="2011-12-13T18:57:20.917" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Attempting to generalize from one action taken isn't wise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, any CW question that ends up on the front page is far more likely to receive scrutiny to see if it currently matches the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&quot;&gt;StackExchange community standards&lt;/a&gt; and our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because a question was acceptable a year ago does not mean that it continues to be so.  The StackExchange platform and this site evolve continually.  Every user is part of this evolution.  If you do not agree with an action taken, vote/comment/flag/etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that blog post it does seem that a little cleaning may be in order though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;a site should never have more than one community wiki question for every hundred questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki:1%20is:question&quot;&gt;77 Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; questions out of a total of 2271 questions as I write this.  About triple the number we &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; have by those standards.  Does that mean I'm going to go out and close 50 CW questions?  Not right away, and not willy-nilly.  My time is limited as are the other mods and there is a lot of work to do around here.  Examining that many questions is time consuming and other activities here are usually more rewarding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, my line in the sand is the front page.  &lt;strong&gt;I will look at CW questions on the front page and decide whether to close or not.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2011-12-13T19:03:54.930" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1172" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1170" CreationDate="2011-12-13T19:37:55.283" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;At this point, the mods' position is that we'll review old CW posts as they come to our attention (which usually means &quot;make the front page&quot;). None of us have the time or interest to go through the full backlog of CW posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what does happen when we become aware of one of these legacy posts? I generally look at a few criteria before deciding whether or not to act:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it a blatant clash with current standards? Some of the old CW questions are actually perfectly acceptable non-CW at this time. Most of them aren't.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What are the quality of the answers? Personally, I'll give a pass to a bad, ancient question if it has high quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does it have recent activity? If it looks like a question is going to continue to generate low-quality answers over time, I'm inclined to close it to stop the bleeding (and to indicate what's currently acceptable).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding that specific question: Note that even back when we were cool with CW posts, people thought that it was a bad question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Old posts and you:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; find an old post and want to do something about it, you have several tools at your disposal. Flagging it, with an explanation as to why it should be closed let's us know your thought. You can also vote to close yourself, although you'll probably need to do some work in meta and chat to get others to look at it within the window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please don't flag &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; dodgy question, though... Constantly updating the entire question base to current standards probably isn't that great of an idea. Keep it to a few of the worst offenders (like the question linked above).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would strongly advise &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt; trying to fix old questions through editing. If you DO edit, make sure that your edits don't invalidate the existing answers. Having an old question that no longer fits its answers doesn't help anyone (this causes problems even for still &quot;living&quot; questions)... You're better off posting the new version of the question (if you're interested in a more modern answer, or think it's a great question), with a note to help ward off &quot;close as dup.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2011-12-13T19:43:12.793" LastActivityDate="2011-12-13T19:43:12.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1170" CreationDate="2011-12-13T23:57:58.843" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, so let's see.  I understand Pat's action. I haven't closed a lot of the old ones I run across, mainly when they are a legitimate question that was CW-ed because people were CW-happy back in the day and you can't un-CW a question.  I don't think we should close an existing one (and likely open a new one) in that case - may as well have the legit question that just isn't giving anyone rep; I don't really care that much about rep in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad question, old or not, CW or not, should be closed. But the close should be like any other close - we should be seeing if something can be salvaged out of it. Keeping in mind @AceCalhoon's wise admonition about not invalidating answers. We do allow game-rec questions, and I think this specific question can be retooled without affecting the answers to a site-acceptable question.  I'll try to do that now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, I believe CW-ness is irrelevant and should not drive action.  Good question or bad question should drive action.  For a good question, we should all be voting it up and contributing to it.  For a bad question, we should be trying to make it better, or closing it permanently if unsalvageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Front page&quot; isn't technically a criterion, but obviously if stuff pops up it gets some eyeball review.  I see no need to go do aggressive historical revisionism, but as stuff comes up, may as well fix it, for the various options of fixing. There's no grandfather clause per se, though I would certainly edge less towards action if it is a well-participated question with lots of quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2011-12-13T23:57:58.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1174" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-14T21:13:18.840" Score="37" ViewCount="2112" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some site users have noticed old comments being deleted.  This is correct - site comments are meant to be a mostly temporary means of improving questions and answers.  Here's an explanation of the process we use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Argumentative comments&lt;/strong&gt; or extended discussion comment threads hijacking an entire question/answer will get deleted semi-immediately. Take it to chat or meta. What is &quot;extended discussion?&quot; If the comment thread takes up a whole Web browser top to bottom, you're definitely there. If you can't see any answers from the bottom of the question - you're there. Comments criticizing the content of a question/answer are fine; point by point rebuttals are not on topic here. If you want to write something really long, write your own better answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers in comments&lt;/strong&gt; - on the question, normally - get deleted immediately. Posting an answer as a comment is simply an end-run around the usual community voting, editing, etc. system and is inappropriate. (Further reading: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Obsolete comments&lt;/strong&gt; - like &quot;What about X?&quot; &quot;Good question, I edited that into the answer&quot; get deleted as they are seen, as they have achieved their purpose. This is a happy deletion - job done, time to tidy up. Comments suggesting changes get tidied up after a while too if the post author rejects the suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Trivial comments&lt;/strong&gt; - like &quot;+1!  I like that idea!&quot; get deleted eventually.  My preference is to let comments like that stand as part of the collaboration around a question, as they do provide helpful feedback around the whole process. I don't touch those until initial activity on the question has dropped off and it's clearly become part of the long tail of questions.  Then, I'll delete a comment like that when happened upon. When an old question pops up or I'm going to it, I'll delete comments that fit this criterion. (Needless to say, this is what voting is the persistent implementation of.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Irrelevant or pointless comments&lt;/strong&gt; - like most jokes - same thing; deleted once a question quiets down. Happy to let them go while the initial stampede is on, but no sense burdening posterity with them. If there are so many that it's taking up a page of real estate and hiding real answers, they may go quicker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lengthy discussions&lt;/strong&gt;, similarly, are discouraged and will be cleaned up once a question quiets down. Important information or clarifications should be rolled into a question or answer, not left in ten back-and-forths. I sometimes put comment-notes at the end of these saying something like &quot;Please incorporate any useful info from this into your answer, for this comment thread will be cleaned up soon.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course comment deletion (and editing valuable info from them into the real question or answer) isn't just up to mods, please do it with your own Q&amp;amp;As, with others' if you have enough rep, and if not you can flag comments for attention. Like so...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gsta6.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gsta6.png&quot; alt=&quot;Flag dialog as of 2017&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we get flags on comments, we will act to delete more quickly than usual because it's clearly bugging a site user in a non-hypothetical way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Needless to say, comment deletion isn't binary.  If comments seem to have lasting worth, and lots of upvotes on them is part of that, they get left.  We don't get charged by the comment so we're not obsessed with deleting them all.  We do, however, want questions and answers - individually and as a whole thread - to be easy to read and understand, and extensive commenting hinders that. So the best thing is for valuable info in comments  to make their way into the Q&amp;amp;As, and for low value comments to be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As some explanation as to why this is a SE practice and not just &quot;the Man trying to keep you down,&quot; I submit for your approval a statement from Robert Cartiano, Director of Community Development for the Stack Exchange Network, who says &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/a/617&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; on an equivalent question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's no wonder users are taken aback when Stack Exchange works against their spirited debate and conversation. Before Christianity SE, &quot;traditional&quot; discussion forums taught us to jump into the fray of the witty and insightful discussions where you could bounce off off into ever-branching sub-conversations as easily as you could click and type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The problem is that most online discourse reaches noise levels&#xA;  reminiscent of a group of friends at a spirited get-together. Stack&#xA;  Exchange specifically discourages that type of debate and on-going&#xA;  discussion. That is by design — but to understand why comments are so&#xA;  transient and expendable, you have to understand the core purpose of&#xA;  Stack Exchange's behavior. Stack Exchange in a Nutshell&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;After someone asks a question, members of the community propose&#xA;  answers. Others vote on those answers. Very quickly, the best answers&#xA;  rise to the top. You don’t have to read through a lot of discussion to&#xA;  find the best answer. If an answer can be improved, users can edit the&#xA;  post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments help facilitate that wiki-style editing by allowing us to ask&#xA;  for a bit of clarification or otherwise help improve that post. That's&#xA;  what comments are for. Period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When users start adding important, useful, and interesting information&#xA;  in the commentary, you break down that structure of &quot;one question,&#xA;  best answer.&quot; You have to comb through all the commentary for import&#xA;  addendums and corrections and partial answers and important bits of&#xA;  information spread throughout. That entirely defeats the purpose of&#xA;  having a Stack Exchange site on Christianity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's not enough to say that your comment is just harmless banter that&#xA;  isn't hurting anything. Users will imitate what they see, so when they&#xA;  see conversations posing as answers, they'll follow with their own…&#xA;  and the problem propagates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There's nothing inherently wrong with communities that that want free,&#xA;  open-ended discussion and back-and-forth debate. If traditional forums&#xA;  are your choice, there are certainly enough of them out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But on Stack Exchange, routine cleanup of comments helps enforce the&#xA;  purpose of comments. Comments are there to discuss improvements to the&#xA;  post. When their purpose has been served, they are deleted. When&#xA;  comments drift into conversations, they should be deleted. It's all&#xA;  part of discouraging comments from becoming mini chat systems…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;… and for users who have been around long enough to see how well this&#xA;  system works, it is a welcome change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this practice clear and understandable? Is there any additional guidance we should take into account when handling comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: Comments on meta are not deleted (except for cause); meta is deliberately more discussion-y than the main site. This seems to be causing confusion for many posters here so I thought I'd address it directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:32:13.703" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:32:13.703" Title="Why are site comments being deleted?" Tags="|discussion|faq|comments|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2011-12-15T00:07:57.180" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 5 minute window is a pain - but note that the deletion limit is much longer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The propensity of mxyzplk to delete comments on the basis of simply being &quot;too forum like&quot; in the absence of actual complaint... it's bad form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many times, comments clarify what's in the answer, and should be incorporated. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In others, they are tangential information. Information that adds value to the site, but not to the answer itself. But it's this very role which mxyzplk seems bent upon prohibiting. A role, which, if one looks on stackexchange.com itself, is not only not targeted, but often of more long-term utility than the answers themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2011-12-15T00:07:57.180" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1176" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-15T16:31:15.953" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;once again, I've failed my &quot;understand RPG.SE rules&quot; roll. Can anyone help me figure out what to do with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/11318/696&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to edit it to improve it, but the &quot;bad&quot; part has already generated all the comments. Do I edit it to improve, delete it, or leave the bad part as an &quot;antipattern&quot; for others to learn from?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2011-12-15T22:13:36.353" Title="What to do with bad answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1176" CreationDate="2011-12-15T16:35:31.597" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not sure what you mean. The comments will get deleted eventually; improve your answer to include info from them if you like...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess the answer is &quot;edit to improve.&quot;. The comments will be deleted. Or delete your answer if it's unsalvageable.  We don't leave wrong junk to be instructive (I think everyone knows there's an infinite number of ways to have bad answers, and have no need to be instructed in the art of it...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2011-12-15T22:13:36.353" LastActivityDate="2011-12-15T22:13:36.353" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1179" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-19T23:20:42.503" Score="3" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can think of a few good reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Get &lt;strong&gt;both&lt;/strong&gt; out of beta by combining stats&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Currently Miniature Wargaming straddles the line in an &lt;em&gt;awkward&lt;/em&gt; way (considering how similar some 'board' games are to D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More cross-pollination between the two&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.stackoverflow.com&quot;&gt;stackoverflow.com&lt;/a&gt; can handle languages from Python to INTERCAL, we can handle games from D&amp;amp;D to Bridge&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We get a shiny new name; &lt;code&gt;tableoverflow.stackexchange&lt;/code&gt; for example.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure this is riddled with issues, but when I saw it on this &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/a/594/2133&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; it seemed like the smart thing to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:47.663" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T15:04:34.427" Title="Should RPG.SE merge with boardgames.SE?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1179" CreationDate="2011-12-19T23:40:48.557" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Absolutely not.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two hobbies are too disparate.  You may as well combine Stack Overflow and Server Fault since they're both &amp;quot;about computers.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/WotCMarketResearchSummary.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This WotC survey&lt;/a&gt; shows that only 43% of RPG gamers play a classic type board game monthly. It's less than crossover with computer games. If there was cross-interest, more people from board games would be here already and vice versa. If there's not, an attempt to merge simply in order to &amp;quot;add the stats up&amp;quot; is ill-fated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I have no interest in board games, I play RPGs. If this site is full of board game content, its value to me is extremely diluted and I would go back to all the RPG forums that, oddly, have plenty of membership without combining all those other games into them. The number of people that play board games/card games is way, way larger than those who play RPGs (3% of the surveyed population) and our content would be drowned out in the long run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the response to low growth numbers isn't to dilute our content further - one of the goals of a SE is to curate good content to attract experts on a given topic. There are many RPG forums out there with hundreds of posts a day and thousands of users. The solution is to attract them, not become so defocused no one in their right mind would come here for RPG discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, I believe large numbers of board gamers couldn't help but approach RPG questions from that board gamer mindset, which means even the quality of answers on RPG questions would be biased.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are in general collaborative not competitive, they have a facilitator not just players - except inasmuch as some of the newer games obsess with selling tabletop widgets to up their revenue stream, there are few meaningful comparisons between the two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2011-12-19T23:40:48.557" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1179" CreationDate="2011-12-20T05:17:59.443" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There doesn't really seem to be much in it for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Graduation is based on &lt;em&gt;growth&lt;/em&gt;, not absolute numbers of users. So it isn't like adding B&amp;amp;CG will make us cross a population threshold to graduate. If they aren't growing fast enough and we aren't growing fast enough, the result will be a combined site that still isn't growing fast enough. It &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; result in upping our activity enough to trigger some kind of critical mass. But I'd want to hear a lot more merging success stories before relying on something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It gets us more questions, but not very interesting ones. Mechanics questions are fine. They're safe. But the questions that really seem to take off (and the ones that seem more interesting to me, personally) are the softer questions. The ones related specifically to role-playing, authoring, and group dynamics. Compare &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=votes&quot;&gt;our top questions&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=votes&quot;&gt;theirs&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is the commonality between the two sites? Table-top gaming? But what about LARP? Not-video-gaming?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strictly speaking I'm not against the merge... But I would want to see some benefits in it. Particularly given the uncertanties of rebranding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2.Currently Miniature Wargaming straddles the line in an awkward way (considering how similar some 'board' games are to D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little confused by this, as someone who isn't a participant at B&amp;amp;CG. The dividing line on our side is pretty clear: Are role-playing rules built in to the game? I.e. Castle Ravenloft is a board game, despite sharing mechanics and brand with D&amp;amp;D 4e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2011-12-20T05:17:59.443" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1182" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1183" CreationDate="2011-12-21T14:09:25.400" Score="5" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is graduation a prerequisite for a nice design? I ask because a prettier site could help to attract more people. Also, it would just be nice to look at for the rest of us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastActivityDate="2011-12-21T18:01:53.883" Title="Do we have to graduate to get a site design?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1183" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1182" CreationDate="2011-12-21T14:35:39.150" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Typically only graduated sites have designs, however there have been some exceptions (UX.SE). But even those exceptions are typically very close to graduation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say its a safe bet that we will not get a design until we are a month or less away from graduating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2011-12-21T18:01:53.883" LastActivityDate="2011-12-21T18:01:53.883" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="224" CreationDate="2011-12-27T21:01:39.843" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apologies for re-opening an old question, but I just noticed this, and have experience in this area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I participated in an online convention (RyvenCon, &lt;a href=&quot;http://ryvencon.omnivangelist.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://ryvencon.omnivangelist.net&lt;/a&gt;) last July, which went very well. GMs submitted games to the con organizer, who added each game to a public calendar along with a blank list of participants. Anyone who wanted to join a game edited the calendar entry, adding their Skype username to the participant list until the list was full.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Games were typically run over Skype, though of course these days one could use Google+ Hangouts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2803" LastActivityDate="2011-12-27T21:01:39.843" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1143" CreationDate="2011-12-28T12:08:13.267" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me as a new user, the tags are not compensating for not having the system in the title. I can't get over my expectation that everything is about D&amp;amp;D and I keep clicking on &quot;awesome&quot; questions like &quot;I want to build a castle... with magic!&quot; and slowly realizing from the unfamiliar vocabulary that this is not something I can have any input on (Ars Magica). One fix for this would be the ability to limit my front page view to D&amp;amp;D only, or make tags a little bolder. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I posted this after the second time I clicked on the magic castle question. The first time I thought &quot;should have read the tag,&quot; the second time I thought &quot;something's wrong with the display.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2255" LastActivityDate="2011-12-28T12:08:13.267" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-12-28T12:23:40.510" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two approachability suggestions (just minor things):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming here from Reddit, the instinct to upvote is automatic and it stinks to click the arrow and be denied. Also, upvotes only give one karma on Reddit so you think &quot;I have to get 15 upvotes before I can register my opinion? Forget it.&quot; I would change the hover text somehow to say say &quot;Requires 15 reputation to upvote (15 rep = about two upvoted answers)&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other thing is that I thought the privilege &quot;talk in chat&quot; sounded like &quot;ability to banter in the comments under each answer,&quot; and I was confused trying to find the link. I'd change the privilege name to &quot;talk in live chat,&quot; so I'd know whether I was interested in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2255" LastActivityDate="2011-12-28T12:23:40.510" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2011-12-28T15:05:26.930" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;One way to help: address the &lt;strong&gt;tone&lt;/strong&gt; of the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're all geeks, and we prize efficiency. Some questions are closed in a way that feels efficient to the poster but brusque and dismissive to newbies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some posts are closed after a few terse &quot;This looks off-topic&quot; comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often, posts are simply closed, with little or no explanation to the questioner besides the (also brusque) text &quot;closed as not a real question...It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. See the FAQ.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put another way: if a family member asked you a question, can you imagine answering him or her with those words?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, a solution is to add a comment &lt;strong&gt;explaining the close&lt;/strong&gt; in a friendly way, describing why the question is off-topic. I'm not suggesting we coddle people; just that the directness of the current interface could be softened by a human touch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2803" LastActivityDate="2011-12-28T15:05:26.930" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1000" CreationDate="2011-12-28T22:03:57.213" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a simple rule of thumb would be: &lt;strong&gt;If you think it would get better answers/would be a more helpful question for a different SE site, it's off-topic for this one.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;How can I simulate a world economy in D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;How can I fix the economics of D&amp;amp;D 3.5/AD&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt; would be nigh-impossible to get answered on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://money.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://money.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; site. The Question &quot;How would a medieval lord make an investment&quot; would struggle, but &lt;em&gt;almost&lt;/em&gt; fit better on the other site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only clincher I see is if that SE site doesn't exist (yet). I think any question you can tie to an RPG situation would &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; it on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:35.530" LastActivityDate="2011-12-28T22:03:57.213" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1189" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2011-12-30T14:47:41.273" Score="4" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;There exists 4 tags for the White Wolf World of Darkness, specifically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've just edited the last two, to reflect the differences. But couldn't we clear it up a little? The two systems are so similarly named it's confusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2011-12-30T17:53:37.690" Title="Clearing up White Wolf World of Darkness tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2014-09-16T02:02:08.210" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1189" CreationDate="2011-12-30T15:34:35.870" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Those tags serve the same distinct needs as the varied D&amp;amp;D edition tags do — they reflect different varieties and versions of the game and its attributed setting. I'm not a fan of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; tag, as it's not official terminology, but here's what's intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; is for the mechanics of the classic World of Darkness games. (1991-2004; 2011–)&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; is for the mechanics of the new World of Darkness games. (2005–)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; was intended to reflect elements of the setting of the games, but now has become a useful marker for the whole White Wolf WoD category, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see a need for distinct settings tags for the old and new settings; I'd be interested to see what suggestions come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edited:&lt;/strong&gt; The comment thread causes me to suggest the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; as the overcategory.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-new&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-new&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-new&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-classic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-classic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-classic&lt;/a&gt; for the settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system-classic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system-classic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system-classic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system-new&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system-new&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system-new&lt;/a&gt; for the systems, explaining that the proper name for &quot;nWoD Storyteller&quot; is &quot;Storyte&lt;em&gt;lling&lt;/em&gt;&quot; as per White Wolf in the tag wiki. They could even be shortened to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-classic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-classic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-classic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-new&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-new&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-new&lt;/a&gt;, if those were judged sufficiently clear.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2011-12-30T17:53:37.690" LastActivityDate="2011-12-30T17:53:37.690" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2012-01-02T09:12:42.410" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a thought after reading @mxyzplk 's answer, I think having a tab pop up saying 'read the FAQ' is not effective - in this age of advertising being shoved down your eyesockets, everyone just goes for the X button without reading what the tab says. I propose we give newcomers an incentive for reading the FAQ - like have a quiz that is only accessible from a link in the FAQ page with questions about the rules of the FAQ and based on what people just read (not aiming to provide a challenge - so in that sense, I suppose it's not a real quiz - but to provide an easy way for people to remember the most important rules, if not all, of this site) and if they get an X number of them right (or all of them, depending on what message we want to put through to the newcomer) then maybe they win something, like reputation or some medal? I am not sure if we can do that, I think we are bound by the same medals and rules about how to gain reputation as any other S.E site, but why not apply this idea to all S.E. sites, they could all benefit from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that still doesn't work, well then we'll just have to keep closing off topic questions (explaining why we did in the right way, of course). But I don't think we should be too pushy about it; something like, for example, not letting people with less than X amount of rep post a question without having to scroll at the bottom of the FAQ page and clicking on a &quot;I have read all this&quot; button is a bit too paranoid and sanitized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastActivityDate="2012-01-02T09:12:42.410" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1192" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1193" CreationDate="2012-01-03T15:15:19.863" Score="5" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know the answer to this probably is the S.E. staff, but what if the community is not happy with the design they apply? Can we petition a change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastActivityDate="2012-01-03T22:17:45.733" Title="Who decides what design we get when we graduate?" Tags="|discussion|design|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1192" CreationDate="2012-01-03T15:39:24.167" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd rather concentrate on graduating rather than worry about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I know that during previous graduations the site design was vetted with the community and feedback was taken into account.  There is no reason to suspect we would be different here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE has the final say, but there is no reason for them to force a hated design upon the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-01-03T15:39:24.167" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1194" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-03T17:15:50.460" Score="5" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just posted an idea in the chat for a &lt;em&gt;Weekly Challenge&lt;/em&gt;, inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/629&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; meta discussion on the judaism.se site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some discussion, I was pointed &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/does-this-site-have-a-chance-of-succeeding/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; to the site SO blog, discussing graduation, &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;area51 stats&lt;/a&gt; etc. The main thing they look for is &quot;Reaching Critical Mass&quot;, which looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5CYBG.png&quot; alt=&quot;Suddenly it all takes off&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I was thinking what idea did people have for getting us to reach critical mass? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some ideas from this &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/12/own-your-community-2/&quot;&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt; post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A Weekly challenge. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An Answer-a-thon. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Community promotion ads&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I think we'd benefit from more advertising on the forums of large &lt;strike&gt;gaming&lt;/strike&gt; roleplaying sites, like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ENWorld.org&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/forum.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG.net&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Giantitp.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;What ideas do you have?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:48:15.770" LastActivityDate="2012-01-08T15:31:34.933" Title="Reaching Critical Mass" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1195" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-03T17:56:50.127" Score="12" ViewCount="430" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; necessary anymore? We have quite a number of questions tagged with it, but does the tag actually add value?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm asking because I recently had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; identified as one of my frequented tags. Looking through the list, it occurred to me that there was almost no relation between the questions that were being highlighted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; feels a lot like a &quot;meta tag,&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;which are bad&lt;/a&gt;). What is a question exclusively tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; about? Does that tag provide meaning?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might just be that I'm &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/acecalhoon-hating-on-generic-questions&quot;&gt;feeling a little down on overly-generic questions&lt;/a&gt;, but it seems to me that system agnostic questions would be better off scoping themselves in the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts? Anyone feel the need to defend &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, these are the questions tagged exclusively with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11414/how-do-underground-tunnels-stay-up-is-it-possible-to-dig-under-a-castle-wall-wi&quot;&gt;How do underground tunnels stay up? Is it possible to dig under a castle wall without magic to support the tunnel?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11327/why-would-i-hire-you&quot;&gt;Why would I hire you?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9571/recommendations-for-arctic-campaign-sites-settings&quot;&gt;Recommendations for Arctic Campaign Sites/Settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8298/uses-for-a-10-foot-pole&quot;&gt;Why does everyone carry a 10&amp;#39; pole?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7632/what-characterizes-a-modern-role-playing-game-or-gaming-system&quot;&gt;What characterizes a &amp;quot;Modern&amp;quot; role playing game or gaming system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6610/a-summary-of-visibility&quot;&gt;A summary of visibility?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are these questions about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm seeing this tag start to slowly infect old questions, so I'll try again to present my viewpoint on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3601/how-can-i-make-a-mi-go-city-seem-dangerous&quot;&gt;How can I make a Mi-Go city seem dangerous?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's tagged with the systems &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gumshoe&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gumshoe&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gumshoe&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trail-of-cthulu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trail-of-cthulu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trail-of-cthulu&lt;/a&gt; tags. What does this have to do with system-agnostic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/3603/77&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a good answer to the question, by any metric you care to name. It is highly upvoted. It received favorable response from the question author via comments. For a while it was even accepted by the question author. This is not to say that it's the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer (a better one came along later), but it is a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;desirable&lt;/em&gt; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is system agnostic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, given that system-agnostic answers to the question are desirable, should this question have the system-agnostic tag added in addition to its system tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, where is the line? Does the author have to decide between system agnostic answers and systemic answers? Do they need to ask the question twice with different tags? Who would be interested in system-agnostic when it stands alone, but uninterested in it when it's used in conjunction with a system (any system)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, what is the purpose of this tag, and what does it represent? Is this something we need to add to every soft question that isn't strictly a rules lookup? Is it a tag to say that systemic answers are unwelcome (and if so, how does that apply to homebrew or off the cuff systems developed specifically for the question?)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-26T21:07:23.693" Title="Do we need the System-Agnostic Tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1195" CreationDate="2012-01-03T18:44:08.630" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;From your linked blog post these seem the most relevant tools:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If the tag can’t work as the only tag on a question, it’s probably a&#xA;  meta-tag. Every tag you use should be able to work, more or less, as&#xA;  the only tag on a question. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; can work on it's own, but perhaps it isn't as good when combined with, for instance &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tech&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tech&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tech&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dice&lt;/a&gt; to give more clues based on the question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s&#xA;  probably a meta-tag. In a cruel, ironic twist, the meaning of the&#xA;  tag [subjective] itself … is actually subjective. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: In agreement with mxyzplk, who said that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; means. &quot;let me hear solutions that are mechanic independent&quot;. That feels a lot closer to what I meant to get across previously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2012-01-04T14:58:38.023" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T14:58:38.023" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1195" CreationDate="2012-01-03T22:11:43.183" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a fine tag, not a meta tag.  Just as someone might only tag something &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, they might instead tag it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;. Same cognitive slot, different meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And frankly it's quite useful to shoo off the people who are &quot;just SURE you want a D&amp;amp;D answer even through you didn't tag it that way&quot; or the like. Utility trumps theory; it's a good tag by that metric too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you want answers specifically divorced from game mechanics or game specific stuff. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; gives a way to get that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-04T00:02:26.090" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T00:02:26.090" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1192" CreationDate="2012-01-03T22:17:45.733" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;We provide input here on Meta, SE (more specifically SE's designer) does the final.  See the previous questions on this topic - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt;. The designer (Jin at the time, it's been a while) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/739/design-ideas-for-rpg-site&quot;&gt;chipped in some&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do hear rumblings that we may get a design without graduating, but it was part of a pretty hedgey email about beta maybe isn't beta etc etc...  Don't let that stop you from trying to boost site traffic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-01-03T22:17:45.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1199" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-03T22:46:52.510" Score="2" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, this site is well over a year old.  Pretty much everything discussed in meta during that time &lt;strong&gt;is still here&lt;/strong&gt;.  Unfortunately, not everything discussed during that time is still applicable!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd appreciate anyone who could take a little time looking at this backlog and doing two things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Identify the &quot;good stuff&quot; - I'd like to identify our FAQ items, the core nuggets that anyone who would like to take the time to read a bit can use to answer their questions and common issues about how the site is run.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Identify the &quot;bad stuff&quot; - things &lt;strong&gt;in meta&lt;/strong&gt; that are no longer applicable.  Let's close/delete anything that could be misconstrued by a new user.  We don't want people to point to a meta post as justification if the site no longer works that way!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you find things, add links to them as answers here.  The moderators will check on everything and take the appropriate steps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="460" LastEditDate="2012-01-03T23:13:51.547" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T17:29:25.900" Title="Please help in the Meta cleanup!" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1199" CreationDate="2012-01-03T23:15:14.617" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Added to the FAQ&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/437/what-should-i-do-about-spam-questions&quot;&gt;What should I do about spam questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Candidates for the FAQ&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-disallowed-on-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T17:29:25.900" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1199" CreationDate="2012-01-03T23:31:37.873" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To Be Expunged&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/996/who-wants-to-help-contribute-to-a-rpg-se-case-study-for-the-international-journa&quot;&gt;This request for contributions that ended August 1st.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;strong&gt;closed&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1089/what-happened-to-this-answer&quot;&gt;What happened to that answer&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;strong&gt;should stay open&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2/temporary-chat-for-role-playing-games&quot;&gt;The temporary chat listing, now that we have a real one.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;strong&gt;deleted&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1/what-should-the-dd-tags-be-without-an-ampersand&quot;&gt;Dungeons and Dragons and Ampersands.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;investigate&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T17:16:02.223" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1203" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-04T11:51:15.493" Score="0" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;Could we retag our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; questions on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;main&lt;/a&gt;, please?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasons they have become untagged are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/922/2788&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, in short, &lt;em&gt;there is a periodic process that will remove any tag that only has one instance and has lasted for 6 months.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously some of these will want to be deleted, others just retagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Retagging untagged questions" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1195" CreationDate="2012-01-04T21:02:35.303" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; as shown by your sample questions could definitely be a meta tag.  It is used in different ways by different people.  As a result it gets used as the only tag on some questions by well meaning people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should encourage better tagging choices. &lt;strong&gt;Here is what I'd suggest for the questions you noted.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8298/uses-for-a-10-foot-pole&quot;&gt;10' pole question&lt;/a&gt;, needed a retitle to move away from the listiness.  It also directly focuses it on @mxyzplk's awesome answer.  I removed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and added &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;.  I think that is a better tag for it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tunnels and visibility&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't like these questions as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;.  Neither one requires RPG experts to answers and as generic real world knowledge should be directed somewhere else (not sure there is an SE site on point for either).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions here should be directed at RPG experts. Those two are not. Sure some of us may know something about either.  But that doesn't mean we are experts and even if so, there most likely aren't enough other experts in mining to properly judge/vet the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are directed at a certain system, then everything changes!  All of that same information can be used, but experts in the game can weigh in on what rules are available and how they should be used.  For instance, I know every edition of D&amp;amp;D has at least something on tunneling.  Even without magic, there are rules available to help the questioner.  As one answer hints at, if you have access to a dwarfs, it's quite reasonable to say that your tunneling speed is super-human.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we make the questioner to name the system, it will help these answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Failing all that, I still think removing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is the way to go.  Perhaps a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/general-knowledge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;general-knowledge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;general-knowledge&lt;/a&gt; could be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Artic Campaigns&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;.  If it isn't a sys-rec, then it is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/general-knowledge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;general-knowledge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;general-knowledge&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why would I hire you?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mis-tagged, the content indicates that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd4e&lt;/a&gt; is the system.  I suspect the questioner was trying to broaden the pool of answers, but I think it just waters down the question.  I'd also rework it a bit to incorporate @mxyzplk's warning in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Modern Roleplaying&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; works better for this one as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T20:49:51.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1205" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1206" CreationDate="2012-01-04T21:12:46.943" Score="2" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my profile I found the entry &quot;recent names   2&quot;  / &quot;other names used in the last 90 days&quot;. What does that mean? I used 0 (zero) other names. Do I misunderstand something, or is there a bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: I'm member for more than 90 days now, thus the entry is no longer in my profile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2550" LastEditorUserId="2550" LastEditDate="2012-08-01T17:07:44.320" LastActivityDate="2012-08-01T17:07:44.320" Title="Is rpg.stackexchange.com suffering from dissociative identity disorder or am I?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1205" CreationDate="2012-01-04T22:54:32.170" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on clicking on the number of names, I saw your current name and &quot;Anonymous,&quot; likely from when you first signed up and hadn't input a name yet. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recent names is a new profile feature that allows you to see what aliases you've used in the past 90 days. For example, I used to go by my full name on Stack Exchange, but have since defaulted to using only my first name, as you see currently. This change, which I made in late November, is visible in my profile still. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to sum: you've had two names in the last 90 days, you haven't really misunderstood anything, nor is there a bug. This is just a new profile feature. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2205" LastActivityDate="2012-01-04T22:54:32.170" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1194" CreationDate="2012-01-05T10:52:56.970" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has been suggested a few times that we give flyers to our local gaming shops to hand out or stick on the windows, and I still think that is the best idea so far. As far as online goes, the less intrusive way would be to design a forum signature that we can &quot;wear&quot; in any forum we like, so people can take notice and maybe attract more members this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T10:52:56.970" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1195" CreationDate="2012-01-05T12:14:45.737" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It feels as if you have two different questions: Is &lt;em&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/em&gt; a useful tag? and Is it being used properly?  The first is easy: yes, there are many good reasons to tag a question this way, (to get views from a wide spectrum, as well as to avoid &quot;page 377a says no; nobody plays anything but My Favourite RPG (tm)&quot;).  But the second is really up to the community: it is easy for questions like this to be off-topic, or for on-topic questions to attract off-topic answers (as in the underground tunnels). I think the benefits outweight the problems, but it's not obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2451" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T12:14:45.737" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1209" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1210" CreationDate="2012-01-05T22:24:18.853" Score="9" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm developing a new cyberpunk game based on the FATE system. What I have seen here is that there are a lot of people who could give feedback and constructive criticism to my game in development. However, I do not have a specific question about it(for now).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that game design questions are on topic but how about just asking for general feedback? I feel like it would not fit the Q&amp;amp;A format well, but I'd definitely want to ask for feedback in this great community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do you think I should seek feedback on my new game? Is rpg.se the right place for it? Should I maybe use the chat? Should I go to another site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Update&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I opened a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2152/edgerunner-rpg-feedback&quot;&gt;chatroom for the purpose&lt;/a&gt;, feel free to drop by and leave your feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-04-06T23:04:09.967" LastActivityDate="2012-04-06T23:04:09.967" Title="Asking for feedback rather than a specific question" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1209" CreationDate="2012-01-05T22:27:10.713" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Definitely bring it to chat!  We love to discuss things like this, and I suspect that we can help you identify particular issues that will make good questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary site just isn't designed to handle general feedback on a topic (even a specific game idea).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T22:27:10.713" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1211" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1209" CreationDate="2012-01-05T22:27:16.307" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Take it to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/the-game-table&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'll work out much better as I bet it would benefit from the immediate feedback and discussion cycle.  Much better than a 50 comment thread on the site would anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="460" LastEditDate="2012-01-05T22:51:06.423" LastActivityDate="2012-01-05T22:51:06.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="65" CreationDate="2012-01-06T12:19:23.807" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about characters and environment should probably head over to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Sci-Fi and Fantasy Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;. Questions about for instance, &lt;em&gt;Why does Elan think taking off his clothes will make him invisible?&lt;/em&gt; are probably more suited to here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:43:11.833" LastActivityDate="2012-01-06T12:56:27.527" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1194" CreationDate="2012-01-08T15:31:34.933" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We need to start using our &lt;em&gt;Flairs&lt;/em&gt; on some websites like ENworld.org and RPG.net.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2788/pureferret&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/2788.png&quot; width=&quot;208&quot; height=&quot;58&quot; alt=&quot;profile for Pureferret at Role-playing Games, Q&amp;amp;A for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&quot; title=&quot;profile for Pureferret at Role-playing Games, Q&amp;amp;A for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-01-08T15:31:34.933" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1216" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-09T15:56:28.573" Score="27" ViewCount="750" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast recently announced that they will be releasing &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D Next&lt;/em&gt;.  While not everyone plays D&amp;amp;D, it is one of the biggest names in our space, and a great opportunity for RPG.SE to gain some traction.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what do we do to make this event a huge success?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, see what &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3203/can-i-see-public-data-about-visits-and-page-views-for-gaming/3205#3205&quot;&gt;Skyrim did for Gaming&lt;/a&gt;. As a lead-in to the game launch, they had a huge contest, promoted SE-wide, with prizes and whatnot. See &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/11/se-podcast-26&quot;&gt;the SE podcast&lt;/a&gt;  and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/promos/1/skyrim-vs-mw3&quot;&gt;record of their promo&lt;/a&gt;. There is actually a &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/promos&quot;&gt;community promotion archive&lt;/a&gt; that can show you what's possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:43:44.200" LastActivityDate="2014-04-28T15:44:14.120" Title="How can we make D&amp;D Next a home run for RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="13" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1217" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-09T16:58:36.653" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're going to need a few volunteers to closely track 5e.  If we get a public beta/rules test at some point we need to start going over it and encourage site activity related to it.  There isn't much we can do without some source material to question in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we knew someone with ties to people involved with 5th edition, it would be neat if we make an ask-about-5e tag and get someone from inside WOTC to respond, but that is highly unlikely to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meanwhile, we will have to keep tabs on press releases and other sources that give insight into what 5e will contain and use them as an anchor to base good answers on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last, we will need to sanitize any attempt at provoking edition war arguments.  In most cases I don't see any useful information coming from such arguments and this really isn't a discussion site anyway (aside from meta).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T16:58:36.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-09T17:02:40.743" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should also be encouraging people to join us in a special '5E release chat room'. That will bond people together and get questions flowing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T17:02:40.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1219" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-09T17:27:02.880" Score="10" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;It struck me earlier that a few questions are being labelled &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; when the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag is more appropriate. It also strikes me that the three tags (the previous two plus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;), whilst related, are not exactly the same, with homebrew somehow straddling the two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Definitions from the internet:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A common use of the term is in role-playing games to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A roleplaying game played using house rules, &lt;em&gt;or devised entirely by its participants&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Issues related to designing RPG system mechanics&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first question is, do we need to do anything about this? If so what can we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-16T20:20:58.317" LastActivityDate="2021-11-16T21:39:34.363" Title="Differentiating between house rules, homebrew, and game design" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-09T17:33:10.017" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Get it in the hands of our users, early.  If we are leading the wave of questions, and can quickly get answers to questions after release, we could see some big gains...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T17:33:10.017" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-09T18:48:48.097" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can make rpg.se the 'Go-to' place for 5E news. Yes in a blog, but also in questions like &quot;When will the first open playtest of 5E be?&quot; and &quot;Are Mike Mearls and Monte Cook working on 5E?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T18:48:48.097" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1222" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-09T19:47:42.790" Score="4" ViewCount="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recall seeing a picture of various stack site promotional goodies and there were star wars ones that featured a question and a link to the site.  This got me thinking of various ways we could promote RPG.SE.  &lt;strong&gt;Which questions on the site best showcase the site?&lt;/strong&gt;  A good rule of thumb is how well the question and the answers fall in line with the intended rules of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to make a few flyers out of the best responses to post in a few places where gamers might see them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T19:47:42.790" Title="Which questions best showcase the site?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2013-02-18T15:28:40.200" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:07:19.753" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We already have a dnd-5e tag!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore asking questions, giving answers, and tagging accordingly makes it easy to find D&amp;amp;D 5e material at RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2550" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T21:27:47.010" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1224" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:10:52.723" Score="11" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;It came up in chat, and lots of ideas were fired around. I thought we could do with nailing some of those down and voting on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can we use gaming conventions to advertise RPG.SE?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-02-07T23:08:14.257" Title="How can we use gaming conventions to advertise RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1225" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1224" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:27:25.237" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there is a way to get funding from a community manager to help us get RPG.SE business cards into goodie bags or a small square in a con program booklet, we need to find a way to get in them ASAP!  Dragoncon, Origins, Gencon, and others.  Unfortunately I don't know where to begin such an investigation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T20:27:25.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1224" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:29:08.137" Score="12" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get a representative or a team dedicated for the convention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Contact the con staff&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Buy some advertisement to get their attention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Show up at the Con, occupy a table, or just roam around with a laptop&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get folks to post questions, dare them to &quot;Stump the Stack&quot;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Either sign them up with their own ID if there is time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or use the submitter's account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Give the person a business card prefilled with &quot;Check for your answers later at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/&lt;/a&gt;&quot; and fill in the question # afterwards&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For bonus points, use a special tag for the con and get the community organized to answer those questions to earn something special.  Something like, every approved answer or significantly upvoted answer gets you a lottery ticket to a giveaway with a decent prize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T20:29:08.137" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1227" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1229" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:32:47.007" Score="10" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11814/how-will-the-play-testing-for-dd-5th-edition-work&quot;&gt;question about D&amp;amp;D 5th Ed&lt;/a&gt;, but since it has only just been announced, details are scarce, and so it doesn't seem to have a definitive answer at the moment. However, more information should be released in the next few months such as to make it an answerable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we deal with this situation? The problem isn't unique to RPG.SE, but is presumably also present in other SE sites (such as Gaming.SE and SciFi.SE) - how do they deal with this type of question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2409" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T21:55:21.597" Title="How do we deal with questions that are currently unanswerable, but will have answers in the future?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1227" CreationDate="2012-01-09T20:37:11.073" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is one of the few times a community wiki would work, allowing/encouraging multiple people to contribute to the answers as more information develops.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T20:37:11.073" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1227" CreationDate="2012-01-09T21:26:18.073" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've now looked through some meta discussions from Gaming.SE and SciFi.SE about &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2002/why-is-asking-about-future-releases-considered-too-localized&quot;&gt;future releases&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1844/addressing-game-confirmations-and-release-dates/&quot;&gt;release dates&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/233/how-do-we-deal-with-questions-about-rumors-and-release-dates&quot;&gt;rumours&lt;/a&gt;. The general consensus is that they are generally not very useful. Some of the arguments don't entirely apply here, but I think the best point came from &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1850&quot;&gt;Jeff Atwood&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Consider, too, how utterly useless such questions are in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Who in 2010 cares about a question in 2005 about the release date of, say, Quake 4?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a similar thing applies here. As soon as the play test is over and D&amp;amp;D 5e is released, the question will be useless outside of historical interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2409" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:41.660" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T21:36:17.933" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1227" CreationDate="2012-01-09T21:55:21.597" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question linked to by Aether is, imho, a question best answered by Wizards.  We coule speculate but really the best source is going to be on Wizard's website.  And even then, like Aether said, after a certain amount of time the question and answer are useless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, in other specific cases I'm ok with a question staying open if it doesn't have an immediate answer but will be useful in a long term case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T21:55:21.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1219" CreationDate="2012-01-09T22:14:44.577" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would break it up thusly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about user-generated tweaks to existing systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really see an issue with having this tag cover analysis of existing mechanics and the creation of new ones. Both are an application of the same skill-set. However, it may grow to become meta if we develop a more refined set of sub-tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The distinction I would use: game-design is about generic principles, and the creation of mechanics for outside use. house-rules is about tweaking existing systems and mechanics for personal use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I haven't sifted through those tags yet to double-check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one that feels a bit odd is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. This question should probably be tagged house-rules:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11699/players-rolling-all-of-the-dice-in-dd-4th-ed&quot;&gt;Players rolling all of the dice in D&amp;amp;D 4th Ed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question might be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;, depending on whether you view the One Roll System as an engine to create new RPGs (tag it game-design), or a consumer-usable system in its own right (tag it house-rules):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6887/adding-an-explosive-dice-mechanic-to-the-one-roll-engine&quot;&gt;Adding an explosive dice mechanic to the One Roll Engine&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves the question: is homebrew about rolling your own things in an existing setting, or is it a system tag about playing with a custom-built system (a la dnd-4e, 7th-sea, etc.)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions support the former:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11800/guidelines-for-creating-homebrew-classes-base-prcs&quot;&gt;Guidelines for creating homebrew classes (base/PrCs)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9128/custom-magic-item-creation-standardization&quot;&gt;Custom magic item creation standardization&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8805/are-there-any-low-magic-4e-home-brew-settings&quot;&gt;Are there any low-magic 4e home-brew settings?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question supports the latter:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10355/what-tools-have-you-used-to-manage-spell-lists-especially-in-a-home-brew&quot;&gt;What tool(s) have you used to manage spell lists, especially in a home-brew?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd lean towards using it as a system tag, but the actual usage leans towards using it to describe user-generated content. I'm also not sure how the homebrew and systemless communities interact... Whether systemless gaming is truly without rules, or if it can fall under the umbrella of a group-specific customized system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-01-09T22:14:44.577" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1233" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-09T22:55:36.117" Score="8" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the beginning, RPG.SE was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/813/what-does-community-wiki-cw-mean&quot;&gt;Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; crazy.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki:1&quot;&gt;We used it for everything&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;We have an old Meta question on what to use CW for&lt;/a&gt;. But then we realized list questions were bad and CW was being used as a dumping ground for bad questions. So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/630/where-did-the-community-wiki-option-go&quot;&gt;now CW is anathema&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1170/should-we-be-closing-old-community-wiki-questions&quot;&gt;Some hunt down and kill old CW questions&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2253/are-there-any-role-playing-games-that-have-spawned-comic-books-or-vice-versa&quot;&gt;annoying old users&lt;/a&gt;. But some cases have come up recently, I think, where we should consider what CW should be used for. So here's a new question to obsolete the old - what &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; we use CW for in 2012?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:25:57.433" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:25:57.433" Title="How should we use Community Wiki? [2012]" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2016-10-07T13:31:16.763" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1234" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1233" CreationDate="2012-01-10T03:40:36.837" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there are some exploratory &quot;list&quot; questions that are a good fit. There's &quot;laundry&quot; lists, which are just long lists of simple game names or whatever.  Then there's design exploration questions like Brian's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7990/useful-mental-frameworks-during-character-creation&quot;&gt;Useful mental frameworks during character creation&lt;/a&gt; seem like perfectly good content for the site. Design exploration falls under &quot;by experts for experts,&quot; IMO. ENWorld is keeping a page like this (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=dnd5e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=dnd5e&lt;/a&gt;) but that's not community contribution, it's curated by the ENWorld guy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: nowadays we've decided list questions are just off topic, instead. Same with &quot;design exploration&quot; that's not tightly scoped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I think we should consider a &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e; What we know so far&quot; CW to prevent bad Q&amp;amp;A like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11794/will-a-5th-edition-of-dungeons-dragons-be-released&quot;&gt;Will a 5th edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons be released?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11814/how-will-the-play-testing-for-dd-5th-edition-work&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11814/how-will-the-play-testing-for-dd-5th-edition-work&lt;/a&gt; from erupting, while still gathering useful info and driving people to the site.  I think collecting info like this also counts as a good &quot;by experts, for experts&quot; use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: And in a separate newer question, we've decided not this either. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6166/would-community-wiki-be-useful-for-questions-about-the-current-state-of-someth&quot;&gt;Would Community Wiki be useful for questions about the “current” state of something?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to NOT use it for - everything else. I think it should be a safety valve for things extremely useful for the site GOAL that don't quite fit the usual site FORMAT.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-10-07T13:20:55.980" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1235" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-10T03:49:07.180" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think what we need to do is find a way to sell the utility of the SE format to people. Wizards forums and the like are always junk, full of trash and net-bullies and are just wearying.  If we can especially expose questions that on a normal forum just go round and round but here have a concise answer... &quot;Don't waste valuable rounds, get the answer on RPG.SE!&quot; I think buying banner ads on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=contact&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ENWorld&lt;/a&gt;, RPG.net, etc. have to be about the cheapest things in the known world given their subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I wonder how RPG.SE could become part of the RPG ecosystem - either via being a &quot;publisher&quot; and therefore included in that world or via being a &quot;news outlet&quot;. I suspect the only way to do the latter is for a single highly motivated person to take on the RPG.SE blog and blog DAILY.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also need to be careful to not become too 5e centric - it's fine to attract the folks but if for example we have a blog and it's all 5e content, that's not very happy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T03:49:07.180" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1237" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1238" CreationDate="2012-01-10T12:51:14.997" Score="4" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just got fifteen badges, about fifteen minutes ago, split between Announcer, Booster, and one Publicist.  While I do pass links around ... it seems a little strange that I would get so many at one time.  Can anyone check if there was a bug involved (that caused them to be added, or was previously causing them to be skipped), or if someone just linked me like crazy in the last day ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross?tab=activity&quot;&gt;Profile&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="I just got fifteen badges, but I'm not bragging" Tags="|support|status-bydesign|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1237" CreationDate="2012-01-10T12:54:07.627" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not a bug, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/118509/151385&quot;&gt;just a change in how these badges are awarded&lt;/a&gt;. You now can get them multiple times and you can get all three for the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2002" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T12:54:07.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-10T15:43:38.070" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Combining C. Ross's answer of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1220/2409&quot;&gt;&quot;get it in the hands of our users, early&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and Pureferret's idea of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1218/2409&quot;&gt;involving the chat feature&lt;/a&gt;, and depending on how the play test ends up working, if possible, we should create a chat room or two for running our own play testing sessions online. This should give WotC some nice public feedback, but should also provide us with some questions to ask and answer on the site. If we could also publicise these games, we might be able to get new users to sign up and contribute in order to play (thinking of the rep requirement for chat - 20 rep).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2409" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T15:43:38.070" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1240" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-10T19:05:32.853" Score="12" ViewCount="274" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll be presenting community with the final design of rpg.se very soon. Meanwhile, I need some ideas for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/error&quot;&gt;error&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/captcha&quot;&gt;captcha&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/404&quot;&gt;404&lt;/a&gt;  page images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the captcha image, I normally use a non-human figure and keep it light hearted. For the this site's catpcha image, I'm thinking about using a group shot of action figures from various games, golems, cyborgs etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please post your ideas here, preferably with photo references.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-01-14T08:53:32.390" Title="Site design: 404/captcha/error page images" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T19:23:52.427" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;404: A d20 on a 1 saying &quot;Critical failure!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like this, but a cleaner die&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EYC4P.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;d20&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastEditorUserId="1914" LastEditDate="2012-01-10T19:29:27.190" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T19:29:27.190" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T19:33:27.747" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Error:&#xA;a piece of paper (preferably a character sheet from something) with a glass of soda spileld on it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uPuAw.png&quot; alt=&quot;character sheet&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;plus something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2wlKB.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;spill&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T19:33:27.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T19:34:33.453" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;captcha: a troll caught in a net of some sort&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T19:34:33.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1244" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T20:37:49.843" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the error I think we could have something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The Error has summoned Cthulhu/Shogoth!&quot;&#xA;And then one of the picture below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8cCV3.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qDjO1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More HPL images welcome!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2012-01-14T08:53:32.390" LastActivityDate="2012-01-14T08:53:32.390" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-01-10T20:37:49.843" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T21:58:52.873" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Suggestion &amp;quot;Captcha&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Am I human?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y6A3T.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(from &lt;a href=&quot;http://stormindacastle.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/race_modron.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shown as an example, not expected to be used, due to copyright reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2862" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-01-13T09:58:12.380" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T21:59:59.863" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Suggestion &quot;Error&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Something doesn't seem right here...&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQdcT.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(from &lt;a href=&quot;http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l6s6zusfEu1qa7t63o1_r1_500.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2862" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T21:59:59.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T22:01:05.897" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Suggestion &quot;404&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;The world you are teleporting to could not be found.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Admt9.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(from &lt;a href=&quot;http://eaae-astronomy.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/black-hole-swallows-star.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2862" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T22:01:05.897" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T22:08:43.997" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rather than a robot on the captcha page, you might have a skeleton, zombie, frankenstein's monster or other assembled humanoid (or non-human) thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T22:08:43.997" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-10T22:10:08.207" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 404 could be a wizard's spellbook or other tome, with the pages frantically flipping of their own accord. (&quot;We can't seem to find that page…&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2012-01-10T22:10:08.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1250" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-11T08:01:16.670" Score="3" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently posted a question about larp on the main boards, as I was curious about some of the different styles of larp that existed. Mainly how they handled combat. I was expecting three answers, or styles (Along with more detail than I could give): Full-contact, low-contact and no contact, which would have been easier to tag. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11861/what-different-styles-of-larp-combat-exist&quot;&gt;Instead&lt;/a&gt; the post contains a ton of different styles, and I don't know how to tag questions about larp.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This became an issue in one of my last larp questions, as it mattered that I was talking about a no-stab, felt-blow style larp. As opposed to a stab-safe, full-force larp.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we be tagging? Do we even want new tags? Or should we just stick with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp&lt;/a&gt; and clarify in the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T13:10:09.890" Title="How to tag different styles of LARP?" Tags="|discussion|tags|larp|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="739" CreationDate="2012-01-11T09:35:31.823" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to prefer Spartan designs to cluttered things.  I would rather see a clean and slick design rather than a over burden one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T09:35:31.823" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1250" CreationDate="2012-01-11T09:38:07.077" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we have tags for different RPG systems, we should have tags for different LRP systems.  I see no problems in having &lt;code&gt;lrp-combat&lt;/code&gt; as a tag and &lt;code&gt;lrp-combat-safe&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;lrp-combat-full&lt;/code&gt; and the like...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we have them as &lt;code&gt;lrp-SYSTEM&lt;/code&gt; to avoid confusion but that's just a suggestion.  Although this is probably not a good idea -- see comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2012-01-11T13:10:09.890" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T13:10:09.890" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1250" CreationDate="2012-01-11T12:30:22.547" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would clarify in the question given the current volume of LARP questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T12:30:22.547" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2012-01-11T15:53:25.163" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG Knowledge Check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(motto+2)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T15:53:25.163" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-01-11T15:53:25.163" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-11T22:56:11.293" Score="19" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Suggestion &quot;404&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;What a roll!&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mKzWM.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(own horrible picture, own horrible image manipulation :P )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2862" LastActivityDate="2012-01-11T22:56:11.293" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-12T14:21:36.577" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the captcha page, how about a very frustrated looking cyborg?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly glaring at a computer screen of some kind, as though he'd just encountered the captcha page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/syCQR.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(via: &lt;a href=&quot;http://drelb.free.fr/drelb41e.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://drelb.free.fr/drelb41e.htm&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2012-01-14T05:12:05.247" LastActivityDate="2012-01-14T05:12:05.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-12T19:19:04.597" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It'd be useful if we invited some well-respected members of other communities to join the site. I think people would be interested in the possibility of having their questions answered by a well-known expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastActivityDate="2012-01-12T19:19:04.597" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1240" CreationDate="2012-01-12T19:57:33.770" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reaper Mini sells minitures for table top games, both fantasy and SF. Their 404 page, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.reapermini.com/404.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.reapermini.com/404.php&lt;/a&gt;, is not static but changes each time it is loaded. (OK, there is a limited number of pages from which is chosen.) I think it is at least worthwhile to have a look at the page (and reload a few times), and maybe we could have a changing 404 content at rpg.SE, too? This would allow for differently themed content, which would take into account different aspects of the site (for example SF and fantasy).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2550" LastActivityDate="2012-01-12T19:57:33.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2012-01-12T20:14:50.000" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questing for Answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;( Motto )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastActivityDate="2012-01-12T20:14:50.000" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-01-12T20:14:50.000" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="553" CreationDate="2012-01-12T20:20:14.780" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The next time you get plane-shifted during a grapple, we'll be here to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Elevator pitch)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1637" LastActivityDate="2012-01-12T20:20:14.780" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-01-12T20:20:14.780" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1262" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1224" CreationDate="2012-01-12T21:05:53.133" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To go with my swag idea, I would totally rock some d6's with rpg.stackexchange.com as a url on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-01-12T21:05:53.133" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1263" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-14T12:13:14.030" Score="3" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems like quite a few 4E questions are being answer with a quote and link from the D&amp;amp;D compendium. Whilst these answers are perfectly accurate, I'm not sure how useful it is as an answer in some cases. Are these General Reference?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-15T00:13:15.757" Title="Is the D&amp;D compendium General Reference?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1263" CreationDate="2012-01-14T12:19:13.770" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, these are not General Reference, as described &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/02/are-some-questions-too-simple/&quot;&gt;on this SO blog&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;General reference: this question is too basic; the answer is indexed in any number of &lt;strong&gt;general internet reference sources&lt;/strong&gt; designed specifically to find that type of information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the flow chart in the blog, and replacing an internet search with a search of the D&amp;amp;D compendium  many of the questions would be considered General Reference. However, D&amp;amp;D compendium is only accessible to those who have &lt;em&gt;paid&lt;/em&gt; for the Dungeons and Dragon's Insider subscription (DDI), and thus is not available to everyone. It is worth bearing in mind however that you should, when using the DDI as a source always (where practicable):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Give a quote from the compendium.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;List the &lt;em&gt;Primary Source&lt;/em&gt; of the information, be it a Dragon Magazine, a Splat book or otherwise, as well as the link to the compendium.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-14T12:19:13.770" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1263" CreationDate="2012-01-15T00:13:15.757" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think these may be general reference in some cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The DDI Compendium and d20 SRDs count as a general internet reference source for someone who plays that game in my book (especially because they basically cover the rulebook the person should have read).  If someone asks a C question that's straight out of K&amp;amp;R on SO, it gets closed (and should). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is hunting around and interpretation involved, then it's fine.  If it is just a black letter thing - &quot;What power does a sorcerer get at third level?&quot; then it's close as general reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When answering using an external source, you shouldn't just link it - you should link it and cite it.  If all the answer requires is a link and a cite, however, it may be a warning sign that it's GR. I tend to not come down too hard on GRs as a mod, but the second someone opens a bunch of them - revealing they are either rep-whoring or a complete dumbass - they'll go tout suite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-01-15T00:13:15.757" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1266" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-18T17:51:28.287" Score="7" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you click the &lt;code&gt;StackExchange&lt;/code&gt; menu on the top left of the screen you get to see all the 'hottest' question. Quite low down is &lt;em&gt;Are there any adventures for younger children?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/osebn.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;How is that figure calculated?&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/4766/175002&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is how it is calculated, and how can we boost ours so more SE users see them? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;(log(Qviews)*4) + ((Qanswers * Qscore)/5) + sum(Ascores)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;code&gt;--------------------------------------------------------&lt;/code&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;code&gt;((Qage+1) - ((Qage - Qupdated)/2)) ^ 1.5&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it uses the Log of the Views a question has (&lt;code&gt;Qviews&lt;/code&gt;), some measure of No. of answers and Upvotes for the question, and the Sum of the scores on the answers. These &lt;strong&gt;add&lt;/strong&gt; to the 'Hotness'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also uses the Question age and time since it was updated. These factors &lt;strong&gt;lessen&lt;/strong&gt; 'Hotness'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; we want to increase the hotness we need to be less stingy with upvotes across the board, especially the answers. I'm not asking for them to be artificially increased, but people to consider if 2-3 answers give a good answer consider voting for all of them, as opposed to just one for the 'best'. Scroll down the page, and don't just upvote the most voted answer on it's own. Also, it looks like the &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; and *slower we are at updating the question, the lower the hotness will be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do people think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-01-27T15:51:54.727" Title="What makes a question Hot? And how do we heat up our questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1268" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1269" CreationDate="2012-01-19T08:19:17.453" Score="4" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12011/768&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12011/768&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a bit confused. Is it now the policy to close questions just because they have the wrong answers to the questions? My question was not an RPG I am only interested in adventures, I can create my own RPG. I thought the we where supposed to comment and down vote answers that where not on topic. Not merge the question wholesale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now you have made your point and moved the questions can I have my question reopened, so I can get the answers I asked for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-01-20T14:08:45.820" Title="Are there any adventures for younger children?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1268" CreationDate="2012-01-19T10:46:06.197" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I attempted to re-open your question, which no longer shows as closed, but I am unable to add an answer.  I'll ask the technical team.  Worst case you may have to delete this question and re ask.  &lt;em&gt;I think at this point you just need to ask again.  Please note that you're asking specifically for adventures, not systems.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll try to find a better way to police people answering the wrong question in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-01-20T14:08:45.820" LastActivityDate="2012-01-20T14:08:45.820" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1268" CreationDate="2012-01-19T13:53:58.057" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's right, your question originally said adventures but you explicitly said yes to &quot;or RPGs&quot; in the comments as clarification. Then you immediately got 6-8 answers, all RPGs, that were all appropriate to the other question. &quot;Mouse Guard, 4e, etc...&quot; Your clarification led it to be a duplicate; those answers weren't wrong or accidental.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question can't be reopened after being merged. Merges move all the answers and their votes over to the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can cut and paste your paragraph of question about adventures into a new question easily. It'd take less time than crafting a meta question to complain. In fact, it would take less time than a close and discussion and cleanup and reopen. Reopen the same question, just keep it on track to adventures. 30 seconds of work, problem solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other option was to close it and wait, but you had generated a bunch of new good answers legitimately for the duplicate question, so the right thing to do is merge. Otherwise you re-clarify your question and have 6-8 &quot;bad answers,&quot; some of which get voted back up due to people being unclear on things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand you weren't there to see it, and that wasn't your intent, but there was a lot of traffic on that question and they were all RPG system answers. There were no adventure answers and none were going to happen; the question had clearly &quot;converted.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-01-19T15:34:53.507" LastActivityDate="2012-01-19T15:34:53.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1118" CreationDate="2012-01-21T11:44:28.037" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answering this since it looks resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue persists let us know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastActivityDate="2012-01-21T11:44:28.037" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1203" CreationDate="2012-01-22T08:56:33.877" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is a good idea to periodically check for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently 6 as of the time I am writing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as a reminder, any tag that only has one question for an entire 6 month period will be culled from the system as not useful, to avoid long term clutter of the tag system. If you feel strongly that a particular single use tag should stick around, make sure there are at least &lt;strong&gt;two&lt;/strong&gt; questions with that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See discussion at: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/48417/should-we-zap-the-low-occurrence-tags&quot;&gt;Should We Zap The Low-Occurrence Tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="146" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-01-22T08:56:33.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1273" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1276" CreationDate="2012-01-25T08:25:36.240" Score="6" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;So what occurred to me is that I have sometimes upvoted answers to questions that, while correct, may not necessarily be more articulate, or advanced I should say, for lack of a better word, than an answer you'd expect someone to give you while chatting. The answers themselves were perfectly fine. They were correct, to the point and with proper grammar and spelling. So the question that arose from a few of those answers is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should we upvote any correct answers, or correct answers that &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; show a deal of research greater than the usual/expertise on a specific subject/more than just the necessary amount of effort?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, the latter should always be upvoted, but does that then mean upvotes are &lt;em&gt;limited&lt;/em&gt; to answers like that? Do all the other correct answers, that might be more laconic, not get upvotes? Should we use upvotes as a meter of question quality, or correctness? &lt;strong&gt;Where is the silver lining?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastActivityDate="2012-01-27T00:37:51.963" Title="When should we upvote answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1274" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1275" CreationDate="2012-01-25T08:30:12.727" Score="-1" ViewCount="323" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel there should be a message system where you can leave specific users &lt;em&gt;private&lt;/em&gt; messages, so that users can comunicate privately, which is why the chat won't do. How come we don't have anything like that yet? I know S.E. doesn't have it as a feature in any site, but, hey, it's never too late.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:05:06.737" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:05:06.737" Title="Can I send private messages to users?" Tags="|feature-request|faq|status-declined|private-messaging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1274" CreationDate="2012-01-25T09:04:23.697" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't find a specific link or quote right now, but afaik that was specifically left out because SE doesn't intend to be a forum/chat community but rather a dedicated Q&amp;amp;A site. IIRC the tenor was that including too many social features (like private messages) would diminish or dilute the main focus of the sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Communication between users should be focused on the questions and answers and comments and the chat already provide that functionality. If users wants to be able to discuss other things they can always include further contact information (email, facebook, whatever) in their account profile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2862" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-01-21T11:08:51.897" LastActivityDate="2017-01-21T11:08:51.897" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1273" CreationDate="2012-01-25T09:18:07.673" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I upvote answers I think are useful to me, and maybe the OP. I treat them as something for the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt;. If I gained information whilst reading them, then it's useful to me. I also upvote if I agree with the information and I would have posted a similar answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I upvote questions that I think are worthwhile asking, or useful to me, such as questions I wanted to ask, or hadn't thought of asking. In the later case, I may never have needed to ask, but I can imagine being in a situation where it's a worthwhile question to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you found this answer useful, or thought it's what you would have said, upvote!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-01-25T09:18:07.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1277" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1274" CreationDate="2012-01-25T12:49:12.877" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most basic questions have been addressed network-wide on Meta Stack Overflow.  Answer to this one is &amp;quot;no.&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/431/any-way-to-send-a-personal-message-to-another-user&quot;&gt;Any way to send a personal message to another user?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The consistent response to this is that it's a bad idea, because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It could hide information from the community: useful information transmitted privately is unavailable to other readers, subverting the core purpose of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It could be used to harass other users (&amp;quot;Answer my question!&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Accept my answer!&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Yer momma so fat she overflows the stack!&amp;quot;, etc...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-01-25T23:31:47.607" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1273" CreationDate="2012-01-25T16:23:26.747" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges/vote-up&quot;&gt;privileges page for Vote-Up&lt;/a&gt; has the guidance that we have been given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no standard for defining &lt;em&gt;Useful&lt;/em&gt;, each user is encouraged to develop their own sense of what is useful and vote appropriately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-01-25T16:23:26.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1279" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1280" CreationDate="2012-01-26T16:11:32.667" Score="8" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can tweet links for site promotion, facebook them, our email seeking outside experts. Will posting to Google+ be in our toolkits any time soon?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3017" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-07-20T17:39:53.807" LastActivityDate="2019-07-20T17:39:53.807" Title="Is sharing a link via Google+ in the cards?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1279" CreationDate="2012-01-26T16:53:27.587" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was just added to SO I'd imagine that support for SE sites is right around the corner (maybe the next build?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/120389/170797&quot;&gt;Geoff Dalgas&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We have implemented Google+ share links on Stack Overflow and will be rolling these out to the rest of the network very soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-01-26T16:53:27.587" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1281" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1273" CreationDate="2012-01-27T00:37:51.963" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I've not been overly active on the site recently, I try to be liberal with my up-votes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I figure that if people get positive feedback for adding to our collective knowledge, then &quot;playing the game&quot; will be rewarding, and cause them to engage more. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm quite happy to up-vote all answers to a question that I agree with (although I may not if there are multiple similar answers, and the bunch of them are all pretty quick and off the cuff, rather than reasoned and researched).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll also up vote answers that look like someone put significant effort into even if I am unsure of the &quot;correctness&quot; of the answer, as I would like to acknowledge the effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2012-01-27T00:37:51.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1266" CreationDate="2012-01-27T15:51:54.727" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the answers to your questions are no different than the answers to questions about improving the site in general. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Draw more traffic to the site.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Views contribute to a question's hotness score, and those views come from visitors. Continuing to spread the word about RPG will draw more people to view more questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some respects, low views per question is simply a limitation of the current user pool. Gaming went through &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/341/8366&quot;&gt;a similar situation&lt;/a&gt; during its beta period: before it reached critical mass, there were a lot of people who played only certain games and couldn't answer questions about others. If we attract more people to the site, then that improves our odds of having people who are subject matter experts available to answer a question on a given game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Vote up good questions and answers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the best ways to encourage quality contributions is by rewarding them when you find them. Again, we should be rewarding quality rather than just contribution - what we reward is what we'll get - but it's good to read through all answers to a question rather than just the top one, and to occasionally revisit questions to see if new and better answers have shown up. (That's one reason they show up on the home page.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Provide quality answers for questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see a question that interests you, but you don't have resources with you to answer it, bookmark it and come back later, even if there's already a good answer for that question, and even if there's already an accepted answer. (Remember, one of the stats they look at for beta sites is answers per question.) Put together a good answer, especially for well-thought-out questions, and the person who asked will come back with another good question, hopefully drawing more visitors, more views, more upvotes ... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Don't give in to the temptation to reward low-quality work.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as rewarding effort leads to more effort, rewarding low-quality questions and answers will lead to more low-quality questions and answers, and even if that provides a temporary boost to the site, over time it will hurt us. The penalty for downvoting questions was removed for a reason - too many people were reluctant to downvote bad questions. At the same time, remember that we want to make those questions good if we can. If we can point out what's wrong with those questions, or even fix them ourselves while addressing the OP's concerns, we'll have more good questions, and that will feed back into the points above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course there are other things we can do, like making questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1143/1636&quot;&gt;more awesome&lt;/a&gt; (within reason; it's possible to make a question not-awesome by using the wrong words in the title), but I think continuing to focus on these areas will lead to more hot questions and more visibility across the SE network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1636" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-01-27T15:51:54.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1283" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1286" CreationDate="2012-01-29T12:40:31.270" Score="8" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our list of off-topic or prohibited questions does not include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12195/does-anyone-have-the-pdf-of-a-game-of-thrones-from-guardians-of-order&quot;&gt;Can you send me, or direct me to, a free copy of a game I would like?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to have this sort of thing added, so that we can close these questions as off-topic per our On/Off Topic guidance? This is distinct from inquiries about free or &quot;starter set&quot; RPGs; I'm talking about requests for passing around copyrighted material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T16:37:09.977" Title="Should we prohibit requests for free material in our help documentation?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|help-center|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1283" CreationDate="2012-01-29T17:48:45.937" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know we need that spelled out.  In this case, the poster seems to have believed in good faith that GOO had released it for free, as they did that with their other properties when they went under. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-01-29T17:48:45.937" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1283" CreationDate="2012-01-29T21:59:27.923" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions asking the users to simply find a link should be ruled off topic, whether for copyrighted or non-copyrighted material.  I think the problem with this question is not that it was asking for copyrighted material, but it was asking for something that requires no RPG expertise and doesn't exactly encourage good quality on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-01-29T21:59:27.923" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1283" CreationDate="2012-01-30T05:16:20.647" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, questions about locating hard to find material should be on topic for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers as to how to find such material &lt;em&gt;should not&lt;/em&gt; give directions as to how to obtain grey or black market copies of such material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Where can I find a copy of &quot;The Dragon, Issue 1&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would be (probably, I'm only guessing it's hard to find) on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should fall into categories, like: &quot;occasionally available on sites like ebay&quot;, &quot;in PDF form on the (insert real CDROM here) that was released with (insert product here)&quot;, &quot;for free on the WotC website if you purchase a DDI subscription (I wish...)&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And answers should not include: &quot;here's a megaupload link&quot;, &quot;in this torrent&quot; ect...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[edit]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say that updating the FAQ item about what kind of questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#dontask&quot;&gt;not to ask&lt;/a&gt; indicating that questions download links to pirated IP don't belong here, would be fine, if we were getting such questions on a regular enough basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so to answer the question, given that we don't get many such questions, and given that there is (in the question that prompted this discussion) some evidence that the original poster believed that the material in question may have been free to distribute, I don't see the need for a FAQ update. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-01-30T11:39:45.427" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-01-31T05:40:40.367" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think 5E is going to matter much. The format is at best only moderately good for RPG questions, since many cases lack detailed coverage in rules for a number of issues, and this format seriously discourages discussion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Banking on a new system where there literally are fewer correct answers to be had, coupled to the &quot;no discussion&quot; approach taken by the mods for RPG.SE, even if that system is D&amp;amp;D-whatever, is a poor plan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's most important to not preclude the discussions-in-comments which lead to better answers, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; for 5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But 5E may not even do well at launch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2012-01-31T05:40:40.367" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1288" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-01-31T23:34:40.963" Score="6" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been thinking about ways to increase our visibility to people who would be interested in our site. One thing that would be nifty would be flyer of some kind that would point people  here that we could post in our local gaming stores (I know ours has a corkboard for this sort of thing). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we create an official RPG.stackexchange flyer, with a QR code and such to lead them here? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2922" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2012-02-01T01:57:36.260" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T00:20:27.053" Title="Creation of an RPG.stackexchange flyer" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2012-02-01T09:37:22.373" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Run an online game with the new set of rules. This way we can answer the questions that people would ask. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1981" LastActivityDate="2012-02-01T09:37:22.373" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1290" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-01T21:47:00.297" Score="19" ViewCount="333" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our current chat dice bot is awesome. However it could be more awesome with 3 things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first and most important is support both the d4 and the d10. Currently these die rolls can be resolved using other dies but native support would be really good. (d3 would also be great, but is not necessary)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second thing that would be really awesome would be support for fudge dice. (These are six sided dice that have 2 sides showing a '+', 2 sides showing a '-' and 2 blank sides)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The final thing that would be most helpful would be support for larger dice pools. Currently it is limited at 9. Support for up to 12 would be nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Edit from Brian)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To extend and amplify, being one of the people who use this in chat for real games, the red dice visualization is cute but distracting. Ultimately, I would love this to present a &lt;a href=&quot;http://dev.man-online.org/man6/rolldice/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;rolldice&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt; like syntax (but including fudge dice) or similar which supports strong dice expressions. A port or hook to &lt;a href=&quot;http://topps.diku.dk/torbenm/troll.msp&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;troll&lt;/a&gt; could also be effective as a tool that can be referenced in dice questions. But the giant red dice, while eye catching, aren't particularly useful when actually gaming with them. Having a direct rolldice link would be awesome, especially if it pulled from /dev/random &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Edit from Max)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dice are a major part of most RPG games and having a flexible dice system could encourage more visitors to the chat. Being able to type 'roll XdY +/- Z' would be marvelous. I would like to see it display the individual rolls as well as the sum in the output if possible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Community Syntax)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;{#x}{#}d[#|%|f]{[+|-]#}&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;{#x} optional, roll # sets&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;{#}d[#|%|f] amount not required, defaults to 1, sides required, number, % (percentile), f (fudge, with +,-, and blank)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;{[+|-]#} add or subtract a number&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;output:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Text as Individual dice, total rolled via text format. preserve current images for the trivial #d# expressions supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2012-04-11T14:26:43.493" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T23:20:07.033" Title="Can we add d10 and d4 support to the chat dice bot?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1288" CreationDate="2012-02-02T13:59:54.247" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think doing so would definitely be possible, and to follow the lead set by &lt;a href=&quot;https://parenting.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/257/did-you-know-that-we-have-flyers&quot;&gt;parenting&lt;/a&gt; we need to pick out some exemplary questions to entice people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:47:25.533" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T13:59:54.247" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1292" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:08:13.843" Score="9" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the best thing to put on a flyer for this site is questions. These would be exemplary questions that sound interesting to people, similar to the ones that &lt;a href=&quot;https://parenting.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/257/did-you-know-that-we-have-flyers&quot;&gt;parenting&lt;/a&gt; has:&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WpsxY.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the format:&#xA;Question,&#xA;Image,&#xA;Tear off slips + QR code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T04:54:55.900" Title="What questions should we put on a RPG.SE Flyer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:10:41.153" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8002/2788&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T01:03:09.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:11:04.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What tools are useful to organize a GM's campaign notes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T14:11:04.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:11:50.187" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tips for organising a short campaign?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T14:11:50.187" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:47:03.033" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/7960/2788&quot;&gt;How many people does it take to steal an Imperial Star Destroyer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T01:05:22.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T14:53:46.817" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/933/2788&quot;&gt;Total Party Kill - What do I do as a GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T01:04:47.310" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="357" CreationDate="2012-02-02T17:21:25.053" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice&lt;/strong&gt; (even though it sounds like it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, the Copyright circulars make it pretty clear that small quotes are not infringements, provided they serve some valid purpose. Valid purposes include scholarship, parody, critical examination, and review. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such valid use requires some additional content aside from the quote; it doesn't require the content be by the same contributor, merely that the quote not be stand-alone. Since, axiomatically, answering a rules question often is best done by quoting the rules, even a bare rules-quote answer is part of a value-added situation - the quote has value because of the non-quote question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T17:21:25.053" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1299" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-02T17:29:59.180" Score="6" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;After thinking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1288/2922&quot;&gt;Creation of an RPG.stackexchange flyer&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1292/2922&quot;&gt;What questions should we put on a RPG.SE Flyer?&lt;/a&gt; it got me thinking about PAX. For those of you who do not know, PAX is Penny Arcade Expo an event held twice a year (PAX East in Boston and PAX Prime in Seattle) and is host to over 10,000 gamers each.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PAX East is 63 days away at the time of this writing 2/2/2012. PAX Prime is in late August. Do we have any RPG.SE folks going to PAX East? Can we get something together for them to get our name out there? PAX has an entire section just for table top games, and many many big named companies make a show there. I think we would be terribly remiss is we ignored this opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2922" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T17:29:59.180" Title="Making a presence at PAX" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T19:23:29.950" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;What should I do as a player to prepare for a gaming convention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T19:23:29.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T21:07:17.927" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7473/who-created-the-idea-of-experience-points&quot;&gt;Who created the idea of Experience Points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like an intriguing historical question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T21:07:17.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-02T22:42:22.840" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can my Hacker have an army of robots?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That sounds particularly awesome!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-02-02T22:42:22.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1303" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1288" CreationDate="2012-02-03T00:20:27.053" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can provide the graphics and design the flyer but I need some copy text. the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1292/what-questions-should-we-put-on-a-rpg-se-flyer&quot;&gt;parenting flyer&lt;/a&gt; had some interesting questions and urls on it. If you could give me the content then this is definitely doable!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T00:20:27.053" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-03T04:50:15.350" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the effect of a different probability curve?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T04:50:15.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-03T09:15:59.690" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;How can I enhance both my GM and player skills?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T09:15:59.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-03T09:19:53.070" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This isn't a question, but as it's a motto/tagline &lt;em&gt;it just fits so well&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/589/2788&quot;&gt;The internet equivalent of a shining tower full of wizened sages and interstellar rules-lawyer robots. And we're here to help.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I've love to see it on a flyer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T01:11:59.033" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1307" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-03T13:45:35.877" Score="8" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lets face it, our question volume isn't all that high.  This means that questions tend to hang around on the front page for a while, either good or bad.  In particular I've noticed that closed questions are just hanging out there for a while.  This is somewhat unsightly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please adjust the algorithm to keep closed questions away from the front page, or at least not at the top.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T21:02:34.617" Title="Please modify the front page algorithm to demote closed questions" Tags="|feature-request|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1307" CreationDate="2012-02-03T15:51:11.203" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I disagree.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They seem to decay significantly faster than other questions as it is now.  If they don't stay on the front page for a bit, their odds of getting a fair chance at being reopened drop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T15:51:11.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1307" CreationDate="2012-02-03T16:30:13.417" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please consider that when &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; revisited a question a few months after my initial reply (after having both reconsidered and also received related input from others not on SE), I was eviscerated by the users AND moderators. (That treatment of course decreased my participation here, which seemed to be the intent of the mods.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since revisiting a question can be so hazardous, why do you want to encourage it? :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T16:30:13.417" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1310" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-03T16:30:56.973" Score="17" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG is now getting a little love from &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/09/welcome-chaos/&quot;&gt;CHAOS&lt;/a&gt;! Awesome! What does that mean? It means we're going to do our darnedest to promote this site and expand its content, so the entire &lt;em&gt;world&lt;/em&gt; can see what an awesome resource RPG.SE is. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;We aren't stopping until we've taken over the world!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Exaggeration. &lt;em&gt;Anyway&lt;/em&gt;, there are a number of things we can do, but there's a smaller number of things we can do without a site design (don't worry, a site design is slowly but surely on its way). A site design means we can get &lt;strong&gt;swag&lt;/strong&gt; made (t-shirts, stickers, d20s, flyers, etc.), and swag means that you all can go to events and your shops and spread the word of RPG.SE with free stuff. But we don't have that...&lt;em&gt;yet&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what can we do now? Here are some ideas, and I'd love your input, especially pertaining to how these ideas (which have been implemented on other Stack sites) translate to RPG.SE. I'm a newbie to this neck of the woods, you guys are the experts. Let's brainstorm! We can...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Start an ongoing Topic of the Week Contest&lt;/strong&gt;. This has been implemented on &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1138/&quot;&gt;SciFi&lt;/a&gt;. The purpose of Topic of the Week contests are to increase the amount of questions and content on the site, focus on lesser used tags to vary the content on the site and, sometimes, create content based around new releases to hopefully lure Google traffic. Each week a topic (and tag) is selected, and every question asked in that tag over the course of the week enters the asker into a lottery drawing. At the end of the weeks, a user is drawn at random and they win a prize.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Provide new releases or underrepresented releases to high-rep users in the form of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/promotional-grant&quot;&gt;promotional grant&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (again, see SciFi), in the hopes of increasing the content on the site and capitalize on potential Google traffic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Start a blog&lt;/strong&gt;, the content of which everyone can share across the vast expanse of the internet. WARNING: Blogs are work and there needs to be a group of people dedicated to make it not suck.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Start an &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1962/are-you-an-english-student-or-teacher-do-you-want-some-free-food&quot;&gt;RPG Ambassador Program&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (implemented on some of our academic sites), where Stack Exchange will sponsor your RPG events and gatherings. Granted, these will be a lot cooler when we have swag to hand out, but we can provide generic Stack Exchange stuff for now.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are much bigger opportunities we can undertake once we get a design in place, but no reason to sit on our laurels until then. Tell me what you think, and answer with what ideas you think we should implement and how you think they could run on RPG. Let's do this!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2940" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:46:23.340" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T00:38:44.817" Title="CHAOS is here! How can we help?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1310" CreationDate="2012-02-03T16:57:02.877" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;welcome and thank you and CHAOS for your help and cooperation!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been a few discussions on meta about flyer content and design, some PAX attention and how to make this site more approachable and popular - They're all easy enough to find, most are in the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal view is that our No. 1 priority should be to attract new people. In my mind, that will bring more posts and activity which in turn will allow for more specialised content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the promotional Grants are a great idea! Also, the blog and Ambassador program sound like the sources of the most solid income of new blood on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, as flyers in gaming shops and conventions have been suggested the most so far, what do you think? Should we have some unofficial, community ones prepped, or wait for the design?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, an idea I had a while ago was forum signatures with the most popular questions of the site for people to &quot;wear&quot; in forums everywhere. (either specific questions, so a JPG, or an algorithm choosing from a selection, randomly, a different one on each page refresh, which would have to be flash I guess? or something along those lines, depending on what most forums allow as signatures)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once again, thank you for your cooperation and welcome to RPG S.E., the &quot;coolest, non-cool&quot; place to be in the Exchange!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2700" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T16:57:02.877" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1312" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1310" CreationDate="2012-02-03T17:01:07.223" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Topic of the Week would be neat, and Grants would be awesome.  Wizards is constantly coming up with new product for DND and new rpg's are released, at least ot my knowledge, on a fairly regular interval&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T17:01:07.223" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1313" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1310" CreationDate="2012-02-03T18:14:59.080" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I think a large opportunity for growth exists in reaching out to the smaller gatherings, in the form of the Ambassador program. Iif active users have flyers, stickers, or whatever else to hand out that provides a really good profile for the site, I think a lot of their gaming buddies will get involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So some sort of handouts (ideally highlighting excellent questions and answers, or something similar) for distribution at smaller events (things like a weekly gaming group, student organizations at Universities, etc.) seem appropriate. Of course, the same media is likely usable at large events (conventions, etc.), so it's really just finding a way to target those smaller gatherings as well as the big ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly I think a blog wouldn't be very hard; a lot of RPGers I know already do some sort of ongoing description of the game via email or personal blogs and such. Adding in some additional info about the system in question, how it was helpful/harmful, in-house rules for a setting, neat modules...it's obviously work (as mentioned), but I see value in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1916" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T18:14:59.080" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1307" CreationDate="2012-02-03T21:02:34.617" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rather than adjust the closure decay, I'd prefer to focus on the root of the issue and simply work on ways to increase question volume so the algorithm functions normally.  We already have topics to work on boosting activity.  The algorithm may have to be tweaked again when/if the site achieves a defined 'normal' level of activity if a custom solution were implemented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2012-02-03T21:02:34.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1310" CreationDate="2012-02-04T00:38:44.817" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hi all and thanks for coming to help out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we've been doing a pretty good job with curation and all, we just need more eyes on the site.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of our challenges is that there is a very wide variety of RPGs, and it's hard for people to consume all of them.  With sci-fi books, great, read a new one a day.  RPGs require a lot more investment, an entire group of people has to buy, then read, then play, usually over months of realtime. With the fragmentation of the D&amp;amp;D market into Pathfinder, 4e, and OSR there are certainly &quot;bigger&quot; RPGs but there are very few releases, possibly excepting the new D&amp;amp;D 5e whenever it comes, that is of interest to a large percentage of site users. So just something to keep in mind as context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps this will require a design, but then I think the very first promotion steps are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Well designed flyers&lt;/strong&gt; that people can put up in local gaming stores, post at conventions and local game days. RPG conventions aren't as big as the PC gaming cons or ComicCon and our calls for &quot;who's going to one&quot; have largely been somewhat silent&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;strong&gt;Banner ads&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; - there are many RPG forums that sell ads cheap (ENWorld, RPG.net) and I think that would be huge in terms of bringing the site to people's notice. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=rpgmap&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Here is an interesting map of the RPG forum world&lt;/a&gt; with size=membership for guidance. Or even putting ads in RPG convention programs, like Gen Con's.  Again, the $ for these is probably very, very small compared to PAX or whatever. And those of us with blogs and stuff could put them there, I link from my blogroll but that's not exactly premium placement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ambassador Program&lt;/strong&gt; - probably very good.  We could reach out to game designers and prominent bloggers (RPGs are so low-money that even famous RPG authors are usually not well of at all, or even full time). They all have vanity forums and blogs and stuff. There are some major &quot;network&quot; kind of events like D&amp;amp;D Encounters and Paizo Organized Play - offering to supply a couple pizzas for one of those and hand out some RPG.SE swag would go over well if we could find the people on the ground to do it.  Maybe work through RPG retailers, it's not like there are that many any more (seriously, there's maybe 2 places in Austin that qualify...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Topic of the Week&lt;/strong&gt; - probably OK, the real question is how do we do that?  If it's leveraging existing membership it needs to be a topic that cuts across systems, like perhaps the kinds the monthly &lt;a href=&quot;http://nevermetpress.com/the-rpg-blog-carnival-archive&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Blog Carnival&lt;/a&gt; uses. Tying to new releases is probably less useful just because there are few releases that more than a cursory number of people truly care about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Grants&lt;/strong&gt; - I like the idea but am not sure if it's a good fit for RPG. You have to get the book, read it, and ideally play it to know anything about it, and that requires not just one person but a group of people.  It will certainly take longer than the usual release-hype/Google SEO cycle especially given that most releases are of interest to ~10% of the user base max.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Blog&lt;/strong&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://geek-related.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;I blog a lot&lt;/a&gt; and would contribute, but would want more people to commit to updating &lt;em&gt;regularly&lt;/em&gt;. We put out that call on meta before and got no takers. The blogs don't really have a lot of premium placement on the site pages so I guess I'm concerned about how much worth they are - it'd be easy to come to RPG.SE and never see the blog, seems like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leverage some of the other networks&lt;/strong&gt; - So for example the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rpgbloggers.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Bloggers Network&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rpgba.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Blog Alliance&lt;/a&gt; would be good places to seed our blog but also they are usually things run out of some guy's house who has trouble coming up with the couple hundred dollars a year to keep it going - may be advertising/sponsorship opportunities there.  RPG groups use meetup.com a lot and there's a &quot;sponsor&quot; option there - might be a way to communicate with those meetups to offer to buy the pizzas or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T00:38:44.817" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1316" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-04T00:51:04.630" Score="11" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, so there are ubiquitous little twitter and facebook buttons anywhere.  It would seem like it would be a nice fit for SE to have a little [?] button people could use to link to a relevant SE, basically 'ask a formal question about this topic'. You could try to talk forum and blog folks into including it...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: OK, adding a very amateurish mockup based on an RPG.net forum post. Again, a button just like the ubiquitous FB and Twitter buttons, and when you click it, it, like, comes to the site and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;opens a new question&lt;/a&gt;.  In this case you'd probably be looking to ask a question about Paizo's Pathfinder supplement named Inner Sea Magic.  The only automatic thing that should probably be done is inclusion of a backlink in the opened question to the source as it'll probably be used for a reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously not just for forums, but for &quot;anywhere.&quot;  For product pages on a manufacturer's site or drivethrurpg. etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GxdTc.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Mockup&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T15:43:12.133" Title="How about an &quot;ask a question about this&quot; button?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1292" CreationDate="2012-02-04T04:54:55.900" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;We seem to be short on player-centric questions. Here's one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11856/how-can-i-play-dumb&quot;&gt;How can I play dumb?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-02-04T04:54:55.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1318" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1224" CreationDate="2012-02-07T19:00:05.393" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To amplify my &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/brian-tells-c-ross-of-cons&quot;&gt;conversation with @Cross in chat&lt;/a&gt;, I think that aspiring to a booth at Gencon would be a fantastic way to raise awareness, but it's a non-trivial undertaking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we wanted to do this, we'd probably want to partner with other stack sites and aim for large sci-fi and computer gaming conventions as well. This will expand the resources we could devote and the potential audiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key is to practice and form a good, coherent, team in local conventions before tackling the big named conventions. Having been an exhibitor at gencon, it is not for the unwary and costs real money (the general deal is that the exhibitor pays for food, lodging and the booth, while the volunteers ... volunteer their time.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forming regional teams could work, starting at small city-cons and lodging in each others homes and working from there. You'd want to have them run seminars and activities to draw people to the site outside of the convention, and give them roughly half the time to enjoy themselves (while wearing appropriate swag). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, this is something that costs real money, but is one of the main forms of advertisements for RPGs, something that we could jump on to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-02-07T20:36:36.520" LastActivityDate="2012-02-07T20:36:36.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1224" CreationDate="2012-02-07T23:08:14.257" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mainly, we need a way to figure out what RPG.SE'ers are going to a con, and from there to get them swag and posters and whatnot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't as easy as one would hope because it's hard to communicate to the whole SE. Creating a meta post saying &quot;going to a con?&quot; will be seen by the usual 6 characters and will drop off the front page even of meta.  We could pin a question but that question would get junky fast.  Perhaps a Q with a stated protocol of &quot;go to the chat and say &quot;I'm going to con X&quot; and we'll get you stuff.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-02-07T23:08:14.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="168" CreationDate="2012-02-08T03:30:00.703" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm Larper and Tabletopper too. Usually I like to be a D&amp;amp;D DungeonMaster =D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1273" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T03:30:00.703" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-02-08T03:30:00.703" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1321" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-08T15:19:31.677" Score="2" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;Like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12416/rpg-todo-list-like-epicwin&quot;&gt;this one.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please don't migrate stuff to us that we're just going to have to close. Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3085" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T15:33:08.970" Title="Hi RPG! A reminder from your friends at Gaming: We don't do Recommendations" Tags="|discussion|migration|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1322" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-08T17:08:37.150" Score="12" ViewCount="314" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on the initial response to my previous post (&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1310/chaos-is-here-how-can-we-help&quot;&gt;CHAOS is here! How can we help?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;) I think that starting an &lt;strong&gt;RPG.SE Ambassador Program&lt;/strong&gt; is a great place to start. Eventually I want to expand the program to include Meetup groups and local stores, but right now I want to start with you, the actual RPG.SE users. &lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt;...are our ambassadors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you would like Stack Exchange to provide your RPG session/night/event/hoopla with Stack Exchange cups and pizza, please contact me at &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;brett&lt;/em&gt; at &lt;em&gt;stack exchange&lt;/em&gt; dot &lt;em&gt;com&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; with the following information:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A brief description of your gathering/event/soiree and what RPG you will be playing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When the event takes place&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The number of people expected to attend your event (&lt;strong&gt;minimum of 5&lt;/strong&gt; required for involvement in the ambassador program)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The address where cups and food should be sent&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hopefully this will be a fun way for all of you to share the awesomeness of Stack Exchange with your friends, as we slowly try to take over the world. Once we get a site design and some swag created, those items can be sent along with food and we can start spreading our influence to Meetup groups and RPG stores. &lt;strong&gt;Regarding having an event in your local RPG store&lt;/strong&gt;, please clear it with the store first. But please, evangelize RPG.SE to your stores by having approved events in them. When swag gets made, I want to send it to your stores. This is a good way to start a relationship. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;P.S.&lt;/strong&gt; I apologize if any of my terminology is annoyingly n00b. Seeing people write &quot;spiderman&quot; instead of &quot;Spider-Man&quot; is a pet peeve of mine, and I'd hate to think I have done the RPG equivalent. Show me my errors!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2940" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2012-03-22T14:12:40.027" Title="RPG.SE Ambassador Program" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1322" CreationDate="2012-02-08T17:33:43.417" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just a note for those playing at a FLGS (Friendly Local Game Store), you probably want to clear this with the owner...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T17:33:43.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1322" CreationDate="2012-02-08T18:16:02.583" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Brett, how big of a group are you looking for?  My local game has six or seven players (plus other people hanging out in the shop), but many can be as small as only three or four people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How big should an event be before we apply?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T18:16:02.583" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1325" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-08T20:55:07.590" Score="12" ViewCount="385" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is somewhat similar to the dead and very old &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/183/convention-swag-for-promotion&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Convention swag for promotion&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; thread, but I also believe it is &lt;em&gt;vastly&lt;/em&gt; different. In this meta thread, I want to collect a list of items that Stack Exchange can have made (we have a budget! and a designer!) that will &lt;strong&gt;help you&lt;/strong&gt;, as well as Stack, promote the site &lt;strong&gt;at all times and places&lt;/strong&gt;. These items have to be useful; t-shirts and stickers are fun and will probably be made anyway, but I am specifically looking for items that you can use &lt;strong&gt;during game play&lt;/strong&gt; and are essential to it. For example, we got &lt;strong&gt;B&amp;amp;CG.Stack Exchange-branded Life Counter Sheets&lt;/strong&gt; made up for use in Magic: The Gathering tournaments. These items need to be things people will actually use; don't think &quot;cool&quot; so much as &quot;necessary.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a chat conversation, these ideas were brought up. I invite critiques and clarifications:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gaming Icon&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fudge Dice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dice Tower&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When pitching an item below, make sure to be &lt;strong&gt;incredibly specific&lt;/strong&gt; (links are always awesome).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NOTE&lt;/strong&gt; that the intention behind these swag items is not to give them out to a million dumbfounded strangers, thus infuriating them with junk they have to carry around/throw away. The intention is to provide people in our community and the RPG community at large with items they will use, and are of good quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2940" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T06:06:19.487" Title="What RPG-specific swag would you like?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-08T21:45:48.017" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll lead off by transcribing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/187/77&quot;&gt;Bryant's excellent version of the obvious answer&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Dice would be pretty cool. Something like a ? for the 1 and the logo for the 6, maybe? Here're some custom die costs; looks like it'd cost around $2.50 per die if the print run was in the thousands.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.crystalcaste.com/custom.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Crystal Caste&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.chessex.com/Dice/Custom_Dice_Home.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Chessex&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://customdice.com/pricing.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Game Station&lt;/a&gt; (way cheaper, not sure why)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://q-workshop.com/help_more.php?topic=customdice&amp;amp;lang=EN&amp;amp;sell_type=DETAL&amp;amp;currency=EUR&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q Workshop&lt;/a&gt; (picky about design)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Six- and ten-sided dice are the ones applicable across the greatest number of systems. D20s, or full &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; sets (d4, d6, d8, 2 d10 one printed for percentiles, d12, d20) probably hit the largest total market. I'm not sure where fudge dice specifically fit into that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The downside being that there isn't much room to differentiate RPG.StackExchange dice from ordinary dice... And most players here probably have a sizable dice collection already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T21:45:48.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-08T23:08:14.920" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another good alternative would be to produce &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/search?q=dice+bag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;dice bags&lt;/a&gt;. These are pretty much exactly what they sound like... Usually a draw-string pouch for holding dice. The bags Crown Royal alcohol comes in are popular for this. Slap an imprint on the bag, or cover it in artwork... Either way, it could potentially be useful, look nice, and be (relatively) easy to arrange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main concern would be durability. I haven't tried any of the customized offerings (Google will turn them up for you), but I'd be concerned that the bag or the printing on it might not hold up to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-02-08T23:08:14.920" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-09T02:16:51.597" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;From a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/brian-and-ross-discuss-swag&quot;&gt;conversation&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/760/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian&lt;/a&gt; in chat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dice Towers&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P5cGw.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Small Whiteboards&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;GM Screens (with blank back side so they can be printed)&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/X9SWO.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-02-09T02:16:51.597" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-09T10:47:43.547" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think players in a group are typically looking at one of four possible things (not all systems and/or groups will have all of these):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their dice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The GM&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The map&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their character sheet&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dice is an obvious swag item, and a GM screen has already been proposed (which I love the idea of). So additionally:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Battlemats&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/760/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton&lt;/a&gt; mentioned this in chat, although (as he notes) it could be prohibitively expensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was thinking, in particular, a battlemat with a grid (inch squares or hexes) and a large-ish RPG.SE logo/URL in faint watermark underneath the grid. It could be tricky to balance - it would need to be visible enough to get noticed, but faint enough to prevent interference with actual game play. However, like the GM screen, it would place our site branding and identity at the center of players' attentions - one item for a group which every player looks at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2409" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-02-09T10:47:43.547" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-09T12:01:56.067" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A note binder.  Not all of us are rich and use computer/tablets/smart phones to takes notes.  Some of us still use pen and paper.  So, a binder with room for a pad of paper, lose notes, a few pens, and character sheets in neoplastic covers would be useful.  If there was room for dices that would be awesome. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2012-02-09T15:20:00.243" LastActivityDate="2012-02-09T15:20:00.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1331" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1322" CreationDate="2012-02-10T01:28:33.163" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What about non RPG events? I'm giving a presentation at the Richmond Java Users Group in March. My presentations open with a bio where I basically state: I'm a role player too. I'm on a crusade to banish gamer shame (in the home town of Patrica Pulling no less; here's my last presentation , &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.slideshare.net/timstone/html-xhtml-html5&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.slideshare.net/timstone/html-xhtml-html5&lt;/a&gt;... &quot;not exactly&quot; was accompanied by a note that I prefer WRFP2e!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would expect about 30 people at this event, most geeks. Some players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, a shout out to CHAOS and Brett White for supporting my presentation at RJUG! Thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, thank you all for supporting my idea with the votes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Below are pictures, screencaps, and slides from my presentation and a hat tip to @mxyzplk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jWUSb.png&quot; alt=&quot;Slide from RJUG presentation with shout out to CHAOS and RPG.SE&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/RPssp.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;#39;mxyzplk&amp;#39; as protrayed in various media&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jmCon.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Choosing a tee...&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/E5HfM.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;So much good stuff!&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Q0tgd.png&quot; alt=&quot;Still playing D&amp;amp;D (in some form...)&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gvoln.png&quot; alt=&quot;My bio to the RJUG... RPG advocate? check!&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2670" LastEditorUserId="2670" LastEditDate="2012-03-22T14:12:40.027" LastActivityDate="2012-03-22T14:12:40.027" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-02-12T03:02:41.317" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're about pen and paper gaming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pens and pencils are an obvious choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many GMs game using wet erase battlemats so wet erase markers also fit the bill and perhaps have the advantage(?) of being useful for fewer purposes outside of the scope of the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2012-02-12T03:02:41.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1333" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1334" CreationDate="2012-02-12T19:31:06.997" Score="6" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why is there a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechas&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechas&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechas&lt;/a&gt; tag when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mecha&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mecha&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mecha&lt;/a&gt; is the proper plural?&#xA;Perhaps I'm infected with incurable pedantry, but it's as glaring as wandering around and seeing references to &quot;sheeps&quot; and &quot;goatses,&quot; or even &quot;mens.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-02-13T12:03:38.147" LastActivityDate="2012-02-13T12:03:38.147" Title="Why is there a &quot;mechas&quot; tag when &quot;mecha&quot; is the proper plural?" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1333" CreationDate="2012-02-12T22:55:24.833" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fixed that for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-02-12T22:55:24.833" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1335" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-15T14:13:56.480" Score="9" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;... I'm thinking of questions like &quot;what supplements for Game &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; are in print?&quot;, or &quot;who's the current publisher of Game &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that there are two ways to go: allow these questions but require/hope that they be kept up to date so that they record information as it develops through time; or, close them as too time-limited in scope and not useful over the long term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="380" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-03-29T14:10:15.790" LastActivityDate="2014-03-29T14:10:15.790" Title="Should we allow questions that are quite possibly very limited in time-scope?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1335" CreationDate="2012-02-15T22:45:16.153" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since answers are ultimately editable if you saw an answer that had fallen out of date couldn't you go in and edit it with the relevant information?  The who is the current publisher might not be as good of a question but you could update an answer by stating &quot;up until X/X/XX Publisher Q handled Game Y but now Publisher Z handles it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it'd be to our benefit if people knew we had a dynamic community willing to keep track of such information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1534" LastActivityDate="2012-02-15T22:45:16.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1335" CreationDate="2012-02-16T04:27:44.477" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general these are too localized, and in terms of &quot;what supplements are in print&quot; is worse, a list question. Saying they'll be edited and kept up to date is wishful thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-02-16T04:27:44.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1335" CreationDate="2012-02-16T16:12:11.020" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;That sort of constantly-changing information seems best suited to a venue like Wikipedia. For example, see the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowrun#Production_history&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;production history for Shadowrun&lt;/a&gt;, and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthdawn#History&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;history of Earthdawn&lt;/a&gt;. I'm not suggesting that in all cases Wikipedia can tell you whether a product is in print or not, but it seems like a more appropriate place for that information to live. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastActivityDate="2012-02-16T16:12:11.020" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1339" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-17T05:05:24.080" Score="7" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the site's position on &quot;make a character/party&quot; questions like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12543/could-you-make-me-a-party-themed-around-office-space-greaaaaat&quot;&gt;Office Space&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12496/making-a-party-of-warlocks&quot;&gt;Warlocks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-11-12T12:49:25.257" Title="sudo make me a party? (Are party creation questions OK?)" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1339" CreationDate="2012-02-17T05:08:59.077" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer to &quot;make me a character&quot; is like 5 pages long, which is barely tolerable.  &quot;Make me a whole party&quot; goes way over the line to intolerable by that measure IMO - it's not a &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;, it's a &lt;em&gt;work request&lt;/em&gt;. I'll note &quot;write my program for me&quot; is frowned on on SO as well.  I'm not against people building CharOp guides, but this probably isn't the best site to host them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an addition to the &quot;Office&quot; and &quot;Adventure Time&quot; build questions - this site isn't for discussion or spitballing.  It is for getting answers to actual questions you have or problems you face with running or playing RPGs.  A focused question on &quot;I'm making a Pathfinder samurai archer, how do I balance that with thing X&quot; is fine. A &quot;make Batman!  In all game systems!&quot; is crap and no amount of meta complaining will keep the mods from nuking it. Be advised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-02-25T00:37:29.483" LastActivityDate="2012-02-25T00:37:29.483" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1339" CreationDate="2012-02-17T06:49:39.483" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think demanding that a charachter or party be made is bad form and should be discouraged. However, asking about what background or theme or feat would go well with a certain charachter is a perfectly reasonable question, along with a party.  What the person is asking is for someone who knows the breadth of the rules better than them, to bring up or mention ideas and powers that might otherwise be overlooked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2012-02-17T06:49:39.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1322" CreationDate="2012-02-17T10:26:32.317" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do you send things outside of the US?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2012-02-17T10:26:32.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1344" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1345" CreationDate="2012-02-22T13:14:12.483" Score="16" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was browsing the main site and came across this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2/is-a-fumble-on-a-natural-1-an-official-rule&quot;&gt;veteran 1.5 year old question&lt;/a&gt;, and I feel that I have a useful answer to add - a house-rule interpretation that hasn't been brought up in the current set of answers and comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it acceptable practice here on RPG.SE to add a new answer, even though there hasn't been any activity on it for months?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:21:50.463" Title="Is it acceptable to resurrect old threads with new answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|etiquette|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1344" CreationDate="2012-02-22T13:21:27.730" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Absolutely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are even badges for it. Necromancer, Revival, Excavator, Archaeologist all reward you for going back to old posts and doing something (necromancer and revival for answering and excavator and archaeologist for editing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there isn't a good answer on an old question or you can do better than any previous answer then please provide one. SE questions are designed to be a lasting thing on the Internet and thus we should spend at least a little bit of time maintaining them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only caution I would issue is to do it slowly. If you edit/add answer to 10 or 15 new posts it might take a couple of days for them to go off the front page due to our relatively small volume of posts. However doing a couple at a time is a great way to keep old questions fresh and relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-02-22T13:21:27.730" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1346" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1347" CreationDate="2012-02-23T15:09:35.730" Score="12" ViewCount="457" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example: &amp;quot;WFRP2e--Does Tzenntch bully Nurgle, if so, can he be reported, and to who?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then tag the question with &lt;em&gt;WFRP&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;religion-and-deities&lt;/em&gt;. My thought is that the question lead should be dropped. The tag(s) are the filter and context, provided the question framing is appropriately worded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2670" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-02-06T16:50:01.387" LastActivityDate="2023-02-06T16:50:01.387" Title="Should questions include System/Setting in title if tagged with system/setting?" Tags="|discussion|faq|tags|questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1347" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1346" CreationDate="2012-02-23T15:24:26.320" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, the system probably shouldn't go in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system should be tagged. SE appends high-use tags to question titles in several situations (notably Google results). This means that if you both tag the system AND include it in the title, you'll get something like &quot;WFRP -- WFRPT2e--Does Tzenntch...&quot; Yuck.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also leads to cleaner, more enticing question titles. Which helps draw people in who may know enough to answer your question, but don't meet the exact system (i.e. lore nuts, or people who can answer questions that aren't strictly RAW).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For many RPG systems, I would say that it's also a good idea to mention system/edition information in the body of the question. System is a nice detail to have somewhere that's a bit more durable than tags. For RPGs that don't have a large question volume yet and are at risk of tag-reaping, including the system in the body is essential.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a hard-and-fast rule, though. There are cases where disambiguating the system in the question title can be useful (particularly if a term in your question has meanings in several popular systems).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-02-23T15:24:26.320" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1339" CreationDate="2012-02-25T10:00:08.073" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think for some questions the actual stating becomes too prescriptive and for a lot of poster too longwinded to follow, and a simple short sweet descriptive answer is sometimes all that's needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would help people link the concept to functionality which some people (I included) struggle with for some games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps some other functionality is needed whereby character sheets could be uploaded and viewed separate to the Q&amp;amp;A functionality?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or full blown break downs of character building could form blog posts on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, there seems to be a desire for this on RPG.SE and shutting it down with no discussion is going to drive some people away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2012-02-25T10:00:08.073" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1349" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-02-26T08:07:58.217" Score="4" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12660/2788&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; about adventure time has been closed on the grounds of it not being constructive, for the second time, despite being re-opened. I've tried to fix it so that it is more constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I fix it so it can be opened again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-14T16:04:04.707" LastActivityDate="2017-05-14T16:04:04.707" Title="How do I make my Adventure Time question better?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1349" CreationDate="2012-02-26T14:08:51.760" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the thing.  &quot;Build me a fictional character in game X&quot; is a meat and drink of a forum kind of question.  Chatty, no real objective best answer, no real subjective best answer following the rules in Good Subjective, Bad Subjective (unless someone happens to have played a 4e Adventure Time campaign I guess). These are usually just speculation and funsies.  Despite common opinion, SE modes do not hate speculation and funsies, but it's not on topic for a SE, which is specific actionable questions helping you with a real game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see a possible vector here which is that &quot;I was wanting to play a character like X, that does this specific thing, and I'm trying to figure out how to model that in some game.&quot; Where X is an example, not the goal.  You're edging that way with the question - &quot;I want to play a striker style paladin, which the character Finn in Adventure Time seems to pull off for example. I've done X so far, how do I get Y in there?&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But let me warn you and everyone - the mods are unanimous on this and are not planning to change our minds. We are lined up waiting to close fictional-build questions.  Questions trying to just cast themselves like the above just so they can sneak in a fictional-build question are going to be subjected hard to the &quot;smell test.&quot; We will be ruthless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me step back one level and explain something just to make sure everyone's on the same page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, we don't have rules on SE.  We have guidelines designed to illuminate the Golden Rule of Stack Exchange - that it's for &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;questions about real problems you face which can have answers that are either objectively true or can be supported by real-world evidence&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. That golden rule and the wise interpretation of a mod team is how that happens. Meta questions, FAQs, etc. are all subsequent artifacts designed to illuminate that, but imperfect in their nature.  In other words, trying to play fundamentalist/lawyer doesn't work. Questions that truly are of the type the site is for will go in, questions that are not will go out, plus or minus an error margin accounting for human frailty. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-02-26T14:08:51.760" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1351" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1356" CreationDate="2012-03-02T03:00:00.167" Score="0" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;A recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12767/challenging-talkers-in-sifrp&quot;&gt;Challenging Talkers in SIFRP&lt;/a&gt;, uses a large number of tags in the question. I &lt;em&gt;wonder&lt;/em&gt; if this is proper (&lt;em&gt;it can be&lt;/em&gt;), but also makes it hard to read the question detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Inline tags appear as graphics and when clicked do not produce additional context for the reader, but more questions about the tag subject. This could lead potential answerers astray from the original question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted, I think that the use of inline tags can be effective, but probably with limitations. Do the moderators have guidelines for the community, especially regular editors considering review of inline tags in a question. Do other SEs have guidelines we can adopt or refer too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2670" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-03-12T09:57:21.150" Title="The use of tags in question detail" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1352" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1351" CreationDate="2012-03-02T04:05:36.113" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I assume the question you're talking about is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12767/challenging-talkers-in-sifrp&quot;&gt;Challenging Talkers in SIFRP&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really see any reason to mess with it.  Fits under the category of &quot;Oh Lord someone does something different than I would have.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-03-02T04:05:36.113" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1353" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-02T15:23:10.927" Score="6" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;Jeff's Final &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/02/lets-play-the-guessing-game/&quot;&gt;Blog post&lt;/a&gt; discussed the issue of identification questions. We've gotten them from time to time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I support banning them for the following reasons &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPG questions are often potentially incredibly localized (&quot;I remember an adventure I played back in the 90s with these elements&quot; - &quot;Ummmm did your DM home brew that?&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;These questions can often just be a repeat of information already readily available on Wikipedia or some other general reference source.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They tend to be incredibly vague with the details&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They are not useful to anyone but the OP (questions should be useful to at least some set of RPG gamers).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, should we allow these or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-03-29T18:24:26.667" Title="Should we ban Game/System identification questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1353" CreationDate="2012-03-02T16:05:41.653" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the biggest problem is no amount of fluff detail can get you where you want to go with this kind of question, only mechanics. Consider the following questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;There was a game where you fought in mechs against aliens that looked like giant crustaceans&quot;&#xA;(Robotech)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;We were superheros that used the big chart to determine how good we were, it was a scale of 1 to something and each number had a name like 'monstrous strength'&quot; (Marvel)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;We used handfuls of d10s, and 10s are rerolled.&quot; (World of Darkness)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with fluff based requests is there is nothing preventing you from putting mechs and Invid into DnD rules, or GURPS. However mechanics are easier to pin down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The counter point to this is our little site is still in its infancy, and our question/day count is whats holding us back. Is restricting questions really a good idea at this point? It could bring someone to the site, and back to gaming, with a long whimsical memory of some far flung game. Even if that question never is answered that user may stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it becomes a problem we can head it on, but until then is preemptively removing things a good idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's my two sides of this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2922" LastActivityDate="2012-03-02T16:05:41.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1353" CreationDate="2012-03-02T16:14:51.490" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we should ban them.  They are legitimate needs in my eyes.  If a specific one is too vague (&quot;A fantasy game, we played elves or something&quot;) then it should be closed like any too vague question. If it's specific, it is helpful and in RPG-land I think it's a reasonably limited set compared to books/movies. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure that I like the progression of &quot;we're getting older and crustier and don't like content that's been part of the site a long time&quot; happening every 2 months. Them providing guidance is fine, but if something's not a problem here (and these are not a problem here), then banning them blindly to follow along isn't really a proper exercise of wisdom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-03-02T16:14:51.490" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1356" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1351" CreationDate="2012-03-02T21:18:51.573" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You have permission to edit any question or answer to make it look subjectively better (to you). Always. For so long as you aren't a jerk about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the guideline for editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specific to this question, yeah, I personally think the tags are a little distracting in this single case, but I don't think it's a huge issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point I don't have enough information to really be interested in trying to come up with the dos and don'ts of using tags in questions, other than: &quot;Be awesome.&quot; I'm also somewhat skeptical as to other SE sites having developed specific guidelines on this matter... The tag tags seem fairly underutilized outside of Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-02T21:18:51.573" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1357" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1360" CreationDate="2012-03-05T05:50:40.767" Score="4" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've come across multiple questions that are more than a week old, have answers for them (some are pretty great in my opinion) yet none of them have been accepted and, worse yet. there is no indication in the question about why none of them were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, what can we do to encourage users to accept an answer to their question or, if there is none of them are acceptable, at least leave a comment saying why? Leaving them like this can only hurt the site, since 1) anyone checking for the answer to that question won't know what the outcome is and 2) new users will get the feeling of &quot;why bother answering questions? they don't accept them anyway&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6942/uses-for-science-skill-mid-session&quot;&gt;Uses for Science! skill mid-session&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12607/it-is-possible-to-have-one-player-lose-control-of-their-actions-get-possessed&quot;&gt;It is possible to have one player lose control of their actions (get possessed) and have the other players not know it?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12530/does-a-warlocks-curse-added-on-a-staggering-note-count-as-a-damage-roll-for-p&quot;&gt;Does a warlock&amp;#39;s curse added on a staggering note count as a &amp;quot;damage roll&amp;quot; for purposes of feats which add to damage?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12424/how-do-you-handle-the-use-of-unrelated-skills-in-the-dresden-files&quot;&gt;How do you handle the use of unrelated skills in the Dresden Files?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12365/can-druid-in-shifted-form-speak-normal-languages&quot;&gt;Can Druid in Shifted Form Speak Normal Languages?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12297/how-does-one-get-players-to-explore-more&quot;&gt;How does one get players to explore more?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could go on. This is not necessarily a critic on the users that posted these questions - it's easy to forget about a question if you already passed the point when the answer would have been of use for you, but there really should be something we can do about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3135" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-03T14:04:47.750" LastActivityDate="2019-12-03T14:04:47.750" Title="What can we do about questions with no accepted answer and no specified reason for it?" Tags="|discussion|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1357" CreationDate="2012-03-05T06:02:08.490" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Selecting an answer is nice, but isn't needed or required for participating in this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your specific concerns,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answers are ranked by the number of votes received.  If one answer is truly the best, it should have a clear lead on the others.  If there isn't a clear lead, then perhaps the question does not yet have a great answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Again, great answers will be rewarded by votes.  2 upvotes is worth more (20) than receiving the accepted answer check (15)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-03-05T06:02:08.490" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1359" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1357" CreationDate="2012-03-05T12:17:39.863" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave them be.&lt;/strong&gt;  They aren't causing any harm, after all if people voted properly the best answer is already at the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;See Also:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/3669/16487&quot;&gt;Would it be possible to have a “community accepted” feature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/8692/16487&quot;&gt;Force Accepted Answers on Questions by Inactive Users&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-03-05T12:17:39.863" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1360" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1357" CreationDate="2012-03-05T14:39:50.997" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Accepting an answer isn't mandatory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, feel free and comment to the OP to recommend they pick one.  Also, if someone has a really low accept percentage, I sometimes point it out when they ask yet another question and mention that it may reduce the number and quality of answers they'll get if people aren't sure you are bothering to follow up on your own questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: More on low accept users...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some users seem to leap into the site, spam us with questions, never respond to comments asking for clarification, and never accept an answer. IMO this is a warning sign that they are not worth answering as it's unclear they are even looking for/reading the answers they get. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary point of questions asked on this site is to get the OP an answer, and only secondarily is it to post wisdom for the ages (tm) or wtvtf. If someone doesn't really seem interested in the answers to their questions, they are unhealthy for us. And I personally am uninterested in answering questions for people that don't seem to want answers.  I don't post answers to questions on RPG.SE to hear myself talk, I can do that in the privacy of my own home.  I do it to &quot;help people with real problems they face...&quot;  You know, the site charter and all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, if as a user you don't bother to accept answers, I and others will start to ignore you.  It's worth a mention to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-03-06T03:52:06.823" LastActivityDate="2012-03-06T03:52:06.823" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1361" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-06T17:32:54.437" Score="3" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been getting notifications in my SE inbox as normal, but the counts included are wrong.  In particular I got a notification on my TPK question that says I have five answers, but I only have three.  I'm fairly certain this isn't a quirk of &lt;em&gt;deleted&lt;/em&gt; because I'm a mod and I see no deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WMBtm.png&quot; alt=&quot;Notifier Drop Down ScreenShot&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is going on here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="221" LastEditDate="2015-02-06T16:43:46.120" LastActivityDate="2015-02-06T16:43:46.120" Title="My notifications are wrong!" Tags="|bug|status-completed|notifications|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1362" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-06T21:17:10.763" Score="14" ViewCount="306" Body="&lt;p&gt;In light of &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/03/the-new-stack-exchange-beta-theme-2/&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; I'd like to make a featured request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please allow RPG.SE to keep the sketchy theme.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I first came to this site I didn't notice the sketchy theme, I thought it was part of the ambiance here. RPGs have always featured graph paper as part of their culture, it works here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So please don't take sketchy away, we love it and we will cry. Huge nerdy tears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have cried my nerdy tears. Now we must battle for a more appropriate real site design (TM).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="75" LastEditDate="2012-04-11T20:39:57.613" LastActivityDate="2012-04-11T20:39:57.613" Title="Can we keep Sketchy?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2012-04-12T00:18:19.320" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1363" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-06T21:18:05.923" Score="0" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1362/can-we-keep-sketchy&quot;&gt;Can we keep Sketchy?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/03/the-new-stack-exchange-beta-theme-2/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/03/the-new-stack-exchange-beta-theme-2/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to that blog post, a new theme will be rolling out to beta sites shortly.  While I think the theme looks great, I'm rather fond of the one we have now, Sketchy.  Based on a very brief survey in chat, I'm not the only one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The grid gives the look of old school gaming and seems to fit us well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an option for the site to retain this look?  What do other people think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-03-06T21:18:05.923" Title="Petition to Keep Sketchy!" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2012-03-06T23:31:08.587" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1364" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1362" CreationDate="2012-03-08T15:51:53.020" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But just think...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If/when you graduate, you'll already know what to ask for as your own custom theme...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2012-03-08T15:51:53.020" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1365" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1369" CreationDate="2012-03-09T08:12:07.183" Score="6" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me, the site stats show &quot;1% answered&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess that is a bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Screenie:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LVVTv.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;1% Answered...&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3183" LastEditorUserId="1218" LastEditDate="2012-03-09T21:05:48.020" LastActivityDate="2012-03-09T21:05:48.020" Title="Site stats: &quot;1% answered&quot;" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1366" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1367" CreationDate="2012-03-09T08:17:27.537" Score="8" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems like there are no experts for the PnP &quot;The dark Eye&quot; on this site (As the tag had to be created when I was posting my question, and no one could give me an answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it okay if I post more questions about TDE, even though I know I will most likely not get an answer here, as long as these questions have a good quality?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3183" LastActivityDate="2012-03-09T13:20:46.957" Title="Asking (good) questions that you know will not get answered" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1366" CreationDate="2012-03-09T13:20:46.957" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sure.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posting good questions can only attract the kinds of experts you're seeking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2012-03-09T13:20:46.957" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1365" CreationDate="2012-03-09T13:30:21.543" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see your bug and raise you an order of magnitude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YlM48.png&quot; alt=&quot;Negative Answered Percentage&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-03-09T13:30:21.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1369" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1365" CreationDate="2012-03-09T21:05:37.320" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We recently converted some internal v1 &lt;a href=&quot;http://api.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;API&lt;/a&gt; usage over to v2.0.  Doing this conversion introduced a bug in the site stats.  It's since been fixed and all should be back to normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1218" LastActivityDate="2012-03-09T21:05:37.320" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1370" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-10T03:18:30.140" Score="2" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7328/what-other-diceless-tabletop-rpg-techniques-are-there/7367#comment20240_7367&quot;&gt;What diceless tabletop RPG techniques are there?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's a game-rec question at all - it's more of an exploration of what the different techniques are for diceless resolution. As such I think the current reason to close is invalid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it is a list question without a &quot;best&quot; answer. Normally that's a no-no. It may however be a candidate for Community Wiki, per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1233/how-should-we-now-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki, Part II?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stepping back from the site picky rules, I think that a question about the set of diceless resolution types with some analysis is a) a finite list and b) a very helpful list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I therefore propose it be reopened and CWed.  I'll do so unless a &quot;No&quot; answer is massively popular below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-05-28T15:29:35.673" Title="Diceless Technique Question" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|list-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1371" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1370" CreationDate="2012-03-10T05:06:31.890" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No,&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not a good candidate for Community Wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance comes from the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&quot;&gt;StackExchange blog&lt;/a&gt;. Some snippets:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Community Wiki is not a “Quick Fix”&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community wiki isn’t only abused for “fun” or “getting-to-know-you” stuff, though. Many sites propose using community wiki to allow content that is on-topic and useful, but can be considered borderline or questionable in other ways. Someone notes that a certain class of question has problems, and proposes using community wiki as a quick fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is valuable enough that you believe it belongs on the site, chances are you don’t need it to be community wiki!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many things which “need” to be community wiki simply don’t. Sometimes it’s just a matter of understanding the root of a question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we haven’t said this enough already, &lt;strong&gt;questions rarely, if ever, need community wiki&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;em&gt;(bold is in the original)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site already has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki:1%20closed:0&quot;&gt;a lot&lt;/a&gt; of Community Wiki questions.  I think the bar should be set pretty high before adding any more.  If you believe in the value of the question, edit it to meet the current standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;From the question:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I would be interested in is what other diceless resolution techniques exist, ideally with examples of tabletop diceless systems people have tried (including home brew systems) and how they found them to play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#dontask&quot;&gt;practical, answerable question based on actual problem that was faced&lt;/a&gt;.  It is a request for discussion and review.  That is not on topic for rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Continue down the FAQ a bit and see examples of subjective questions that should be avoided.  This question trips the first &lt;strong&gt;three&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there is no actual problem to be solved:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-03-10T05:06:31.890" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1372" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1373" CreationDate="2012-03-10T13:12:47.360" Score="3" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I was strolling &lt;a href=&quot;https://biology.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Biology.SE&lt;/a&gt;, I noticed that they seem to have a twitter bot: &lt;a href=&quot;https://biology.stackexchange.com/posts/1343/revisions&quot;&gt;On Biology.SE&lt;/a&gt; (See the middle event), &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/#!/StackBiology/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;on Twitter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be willing to dive into a bit of Python and Stack Exchange / Twitter API to build a bot for RPG.SE, or just take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/&quot;&gt;StackApps&lt;/a&gt; (Where I guess there are already some such bots) and run such a bot on my home server, if the majority thinks that this would be a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opinions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3183" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:48:10.207" LastActivityDate="2012-03-11T01:58:21.540" Title="Social Network integration" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1372" CreationDate="2012-03-10T13:50:23.587" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As suggested by @WaxEagle, I'm moving this into an answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/#!/StackRPG/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;We already have such a twitter account&lt;/a&gt;, it just seems like it's not advertised anywhere on the website.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3183" LastActivityDate="2012-03-10T13:50:23.587" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1370" CreationDate="2012-03-10T14:43:39.417" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, I believe that &quot;CW should be rare&quot; isn't the same thing as &quot;there should be no CW&quot; and with this particular question, rewording to have a &quot;best answer&quot; is nonsensical and would basically compromise the usefulness of the question, which is a design exploration of how various diceless resolution methods behave in play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question in this question is perhaps unstated, but it is &quot;I want to use a diceless randomization system for my roleplaying, what are the major options out there?&quot; I have edited the question to say that explicitly. It is certainly possible for a &quot;best answer&quot; to that - not every question on this site must have one and only one component to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-03-11T01:54:58.533" LastActivityDate="2012-03-11T01:54:58.533" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1375" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1370" CreationDate="2012-03-11T12:16:09.520" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe this question should be made into a CW because it is of general interest, and while it may not have &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; right answer, it is not subjective or argumentative.  Either something is a diceless mechanic or it isn't.  The answer to this question would be useful to anyone attempting to incorporate such a mechanic into their system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that the question is being rejected on technical grounds, when the real question that should be being asked is &quot;does the inclusion of this question improve the quality of rpg.stackexchange as a resource&quot;?  I would answer this question in the affirmative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, if you do want &quot;official&quot; StackExchange content that suggests this might be appropriate, can I suggest &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/01/stack-overflow-where-we-hate-fun/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/01/stack-overflow-where-we-hate-fun/&lt;/a&gt; ?  There are several community answers to this question, it has 5 upvotes, and it would be of benefit to other users of the site, so the &quot;two out of three&quot; ain't bad test cited here suggests this question is appropriate content for the site (popular question, useful to others), even if you assume it's outside of the official scope (which I'd argue is a highly debatable point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1673" LastEditorUserId="1673" LastEditDate="2012-03-11T14:58:00.490" LastActivityDate="2012-03-11T14:58:00.490" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1370" CreationDate="2012-03-12T14:00:54.487" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, this is a complicated one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, I'm having difficulty looking past the current set of answers. They are almost all worthless... &quot;Hey, X is a system that doesn't use dice! Here's the theme of the system!&quot; The only one that even begins to talk about the mechanics is your GUMSHOE answer, and even that one doesn't go into a great deal of depth on the mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would this question look like in a traditional format?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What makes a good diceless mechanic; what pitfalls do I need to avoid when using a diceless mechanic?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;lt;description of game design situation&amp;gt;, what would be a good diceless mechanic to use?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;lt;sys-rec&amp;gt;: I'd like to play a game without dice, which one should I try?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what about community wiki?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're listing systems that have diceless resolution mechanics, then no. It should be closed, or brought into line with the system-rec tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're trying to get a list of actual, diceless, resolution mechanics, as a designers resource, I can get behind that. But all of the current answers need to be removed, or dramatically expanded on. Even the GUMSHOE answer could use some expansion on how the mechanic works, and what the benefits of it are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions with Community Wiki are &quot;what are we saying with it&quot; and &quot;where do we draw the line.&quot; Is this something that the community wants to groom and maintain? Does it add value in that form? What is the threshold for list questions, if this one gets through? What separates this one from all the rest?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-12T14:00:54.487" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1377" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1378" CreationDate="2012-03-13T21:22:41.243" Score="9" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am having problems on deciding which answers to accept on Questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12969/rules-for-player-inventions&quot;&gt;Rules of player inventions&lt;/a&gt; or, perhaps a better example, &lt;a href=&quot;http://Perhaps%20a%20better%20example%20for%20my%20dilemma:%20https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12879/creating-emotions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;creating emotions&lt;/a&gt;. I mean, strictly speaking, there is no &quot;right&quot; answer, just a lot of house rules and different techniques to go about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I finally decided to accept an answer that was, &lt;strong&gt;in my opinion&lt;/strong&gt;, very well thought-out, but that does not mean that the other answers are inferior or, god forbid, wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, this is not supposed to be my personal Q&amp;amp;A-site, but a site where everyone can find good answers on questions that have already been posted. And some people only read the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/450/do-we-always-need-to-have-accepted-answers&quot;&gt;Do we always need to have &amp;#39;accepted&amp;#39; answers?&lt;/a&gt; suggested to use the CW function for this kind of question, but it is one year old, and in that time, the general policy on CWs has &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&quot;&gt;changed&lt;/a&gt;, and before I start marking almost all of my posts CW, I thought I would ask here (especially because I as a non-moderator can't even mark them as CW).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another things to consider is that I almost always add an example, and many of the answers then focus on the example instead of the general question, which would make it unfit for a CW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should I accept &lt;strong&gt;no answer&lt;/strong&gt; at all? Or the answer that is the best, &lt;strong&gt;in &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; opinion&lt;/strong&gt;, but might not be the best for a random person strolling onto the site? Or the one with &lt;strong&gt;the most upvotes&lt;/strong&gt; after X days? Or just (let mods) &lt;strong&gt;CW&lt;/strong&gt; the whole question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3183" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-03-13T21:46:22.397" Title="Questions that don't have a 'correct' answer" Tags="|discussion|questions|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1377" CreationDate="2012-03-13T21:40:03.793" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ideally, you mark the answer that you used to solve your problem as the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, suppose you get three answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An answer that's correct, but just doesn't work for you.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An answer that's less general, but which you ultimately use to solve your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An answer that looks good, but you never got around to trying (because the problem's already solved).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You would give the check mark to the second answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't worry about the &quot;purity&quot; of the accepted answer. That checkmark is strictly a way for you to communicate with future readers; to say &quot;I went this way.&quot; The community will reward the others with upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much better to give an accept to a pet answer that works, than not to accept anything at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Another things to consider is that I almost always add an example, and many of the answers then focus on the example instead of the general question, which would make it unfit for a CW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some basic rules of communication apply here. Don't lead with the example; begin and end with your actual question. Prefix examples with &quot;for example.&quot; Use formatting (particularly bolding) to highlight key points. Summarize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, there's a few other Q&amp;amp;A specific things you can do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Include multiple examples. If nothing else, an answer that solves both examples is more likely to apply generally.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comment frequently and swiftly to nudge future answers in the right direction. &quot;Well, this solves the example, but how would you solve it in the more general case?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Look at where people are going wrong, and edit your question to make it clearer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, &lt;strong&gt;don't write questions with an eye towards CW&lt;/strong&gt;.  CW is, at most, something that's extremely rare. It's not a guideline that you should be aspiring to with all of your questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-13T21:40:03.793" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1379" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-20T14:11:05.627" Score="8" ViewCount="99" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just came across this SE site and checked to see if the two RP-games I'm familiar with are represented, and sadly they are not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not greatly surprised that the Swedish DoD clone &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drakar_och_Demoner&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Drakar och Demoner&lt;/a&gt; is not here. It's probably a small niche.&#xA;But I &lt;em&gt;am&lt;/em&gt; surprised that something as big as &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_40,000_Roleplay&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Warhammer 40000&lt;/a&gt; is not here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this site just very young and has very few followers? It &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;doesn't look like it&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;Why then?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1057" LastActivityDate="2012-03-20T14:18:58.223" Title="Why are some RPG not at all present here?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1379" CreationDate="2012-03-20T14:18:58.223" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, the reason for a game not being present is simply that no one has thought to ask a question about that specific game. While we have grown a lot in the past two years, we still don't have a question for every RPG published.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, a lot of people have had questions about obscure games answered... Just because you don't see a question for it doesn't mean that no one in the community knows about the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, you ARE in luck when it comes to Warhammer 40k. While there is no Warhammer 40k tag at the moment, there are several tags related to the specific franchises. Check out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dark-heresy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dark-heresy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dark-heresy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue-trader&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue-trader&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue-trader&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deathwatch&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deathwatch&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deathwatch&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-20T14:18:58.223" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1381" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-21T18:45:00.787" Score="5" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your site looks a bit different today. Yes, we are getting rid of the 'Sketchy' look and replacing it with a more-polished and finished design for sites in beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about the redesign of our Beta theme on our &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/03/the-new-stack-exchange-beta-theme-2/&quot;&gt;blog entry&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note: This will not affect your &quot;graduation&quot; status in any way. When your site is due for graduation, it will get its final(real) site design and branding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're still seeing the old favicon, please do a hard browser refresh. (Although sometimes it may take Chrome a while to load the new image).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see any CSS or styling issues, please report it &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/126185/new-stack-exchange-beta-theme&quot;&gt;in this post&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; I created on Meta Stack Overflow. It will be easier for me to track all the bug reports there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-04-09T16:03:37.313" Title="New Beta Theme Launched" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1382" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1381" CreationDate="2012-03-21T18:55:17.177" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The new design looks great, but IMHO the sketchy look should probably be very close to the RPG's design when/if we get out of beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2012-03-21T18:55:17.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1384" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1386" CreationDate="2012-03-22T07:23:34.197" Score="0" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the comments to my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13110/where-to-find-an-adventure-with-a-crashed-spaceship&quot;&gt;Where to find an adventure with a crashed spaceship&lt;/a&gt; wax eagle noted that my question makes for poor Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like a clarification of what this means. To my understanding, resource and reference requests work fine on this sort of sites - at least MathOverflow accepts reference requests as suitable questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or maybe I should make the question community wiki and for a list of adventures containing crashed spaceships?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or was the question too specific?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should note that I edited the original question, adding a list of features I am looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-03-22T12:18:06.700" Title="Why was my question regarding adventures containing a crashed spaceship &quot;poor Q&amp;A&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1384" CreationDate="2012-03-22T11:16:11.167" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; that the question was fine but came close to a asking for a list of things.  It is hard to see what the best answer would be as well since you have not given really enough details as to what you were looking for.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2012-03-22T11:16:11.167" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1384" CreationDate="2012-03-22T11:23:34.403" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is my opinion and people are welcome to disagree with it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that this question was a poor fit for Q&amp;amp;A because its asking for a resource (considered a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;shopping question&lt;/a&gt;). My definition is a fairly narrow one and not necessarily shared by others on this site. My close vote is currently the only one so I'd wait until there are some more there to really start complaining (it takes 5 or a moderator to close a question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I think the subject matter is interesting I think the question as posed is poor. That's me, and my opinion, you (and the rest of the site) are welcome to disagree with it. There is some more information on asking subjective questions &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-03-22T11:23:34.403" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1387" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-23T16:35:15.620" Score="7" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;As most of you meta-heads know, RPG.SE does pretty well in terms of visits, and we're excellent about answering questions.  What we've always been a little weak on is the volume of questions.  Many other SE sites have used question contests to increase volume and help bring in new users. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are your suggestions for a Question contest?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should be the theme?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should be the prize(s)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should the question criteria be (upvotes, etc)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4253/121&quot;&gt;League of Legends Contest! (Gaming)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://thenewipadishere.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Ask Different iPad Contest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://apple.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1181/the-new-ipad-is-here-ask-different-and-win-one&quot;&gt;(meta.askdifferent)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://Topic%20of%20the%20Week%20Contest&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Topic of the Week Contest (Science Fiction and Fantasy)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:18.973" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T12:35:06.923" Title="Question Contest Ideas?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|contest|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1388" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1387" CreationDate="2012-03-26T12:35:06.923" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a suggestion for prizes, how about gift-cert value at &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;DriveThruRPG/RPGNow&lt;/a&gt;? Has the advantages of being directly related to our topic of choice, encouraging purchase of RPG material, and moving the subject of questions away from the D&amp;amp;D family of games, which get their fair share of questions already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T12:35:06.923" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1389" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-26T13:30:22.953" Score="2" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13189/is-there-a-documented-penalty-for-firing-into-melee&quot;&gt;Is there a documented penalty for firing into melee&lt;/a&gt; suggests in the first comment that a single WFRP tag might not be enough. Of the editions, 2nd and 3rd probably garner the most attention (3rd if only for current edition) with 2nd a strong runner-up (knowing in the community that 2nd has a large number of &quot;refugees,&quot; of which I count myself). 1st is mainly a grognard edition (of which I also count myself, sono foul called; WFRP 1e is the only game I kept when I purged my collection 12 years ago).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker makes an assumption about the edition and can only tag with a single WFRP tag, so clarification must be asked for or the answerer must make the assumption, or cover all three editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe it's time for edition tags for WFRP. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2670" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T13:33:14.603" Title="WFRP by Edition tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1390" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1389" CreationDate="2012-03-26T13:33:14.603" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a game has editions, and the rules are non-trivially different between editions there definitely should be tags.  However, it's not useful to create the tags for which there are no questions, so in this case we would want to create the appropriate tag after we know what edition the question is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T13:33:14.603" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1391" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1392" CreationDate="2012-03-26T19:23:07.267" Score="5" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;In reading about the recent beta design changes, I saw a mention of if/when we get graduate out of beta.  I did a quick bit of noodling around and found nothing on graduation from beta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what are the criteria for a site to graduate from Beta to &quot;full&quot; status, and how close is RPG to reaching that goal?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="185" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T19:27:56.577" Title="What are the criteria for graduation from beta?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1391" CreationDate="2012-03-26T19:27:56.577" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;There aren't any hard and fast rules, so far as I'm aware. StackExchange is kind of making things up as they go when it comes to graduation. Which is fair, since this is kind of a new thing in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary indicator for graduation at this time is site growth. When you plot the views per day against time, they want the graph to be increasing dramatically as it moves to the right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have that at this time. Our views are healthy, but they tend to be stable for a long period, followed by a spurt of growth, followed by a new (higher) plateau. We have yet to figure out how to achieve the continuous explosive growth required for graduation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-26T19:27:56.577" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1393" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-27T12:30:54.397" Score="6" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most of the questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; at the moment actually refer to GURPS 4th Edition.&#xA;Tasks relevant to 3rd edition only are also tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt;, very few questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; both and one single &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11269/why-use-a-pistol-instead-of-a-rifle&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; is only tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The choice I see are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the relevant questions should be retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the relevant questions shoulb be retagged to only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the general and 4th edition questions keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; tag, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; is removed and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-3e&lt;/a&gt; is created for all relevant questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference between GURPS 3rd and GURPS 4th Edition has been addressed in the Question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7427/what-are-the-differences-between-the-various-editions-of-gurps&quot;&gt;What are the differences between the various editions of GURPS?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3272" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-03-30T03:29:51.107" Title="Should the general game identification tag always mark the last installment? (on the specific example of GURPS)" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1393" CreationDate="2012-03-27T15:58:53.117" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current style we've been going for is that the generic tag is for questions that span editions (mostly meta and settings questions), while edition specific tags are used for edition-specific questions (usually without the umbrella tag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are exceptions to this, however. Lately I've seen some retagging of questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deathwatch&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deathwatch&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deathwatch&lt;/a&gt; (for example) getting the parent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt; tag added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I'm not a fan of using the generic tag to mean a specific version. I see a few issues with it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It requires a retagging when a new edition comes out (as is about to happen for Dungeons and Dragons).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The assumed highest edition can be murky. Is Saga edition the latest edition of the d20 Star Wars franchise (same publisher, same licenses, entirely different system)? Or a new franchise on its own? What about games that have crossed publishers? Does West End Games's D6 Star Wars system count as part of the same franchise as WotC's system, or its own? What if the most recent printing of a product is a reprint of a legacy system (I believe both D&amp;amp;D and WoD are going to be in this situation soon)?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do meta and settings questions get tagged under this system?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, there is a caveat that's pretty important. Some systems don't have the volume to support a full tag structure. In that case, tag them with the lowest level that can be supported (in addition to more specific tags) and include edition detail in the body of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-03-27T15:58:53.117" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1353" CreationDate="2012-03-29T18:24:26.667" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel like the chat is a tool better suited to finding the answer to this, since the questions are unlikely to help other users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="266" LastActivityDate="2012-03-29T18:24:26.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1393" CreationDate="2012-03-30T03:29:51.107" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Any attempt to make tags, which are just added by individual posters, be any more complicated or rules-bound is doomed to failure. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's not a real problem, leave it be.  Some games have versions close enough (CoC) that tracking revision is pointless busywork. If the poster thinks the version bears on the answers, they'll add one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-03-30T03:29:51.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1397" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-03-31T17:22:14.633" Score="2" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the title says, we're now sketchy-less and the FAQ needs updating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; Posted to Meta.SO &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/127692/were-no-longer-sketchy-someone-should-update-the-faq&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T16:31:46.467" Title="We're no longer sketchy; someone should update the FAQ" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|help-center|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1398" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1399" CreationDate="2012-03-31T17:38:26.530" Score="16" ViewCount="254" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I've developed some home-brewed content for my favorite RPG, such as a new class or monster for a d20 system, would posting it in a question asking for balance-related feedback be appropriate? While I believe it is certainly on-topic to the site, I fear a few things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly I fear that it may lead to too subjective of answers, even though the question would be phrased with the intent of generating more a objective &quot;yes, this is balanced&quot; or &quot;no, this is broken: fix &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;_&lt;/em&gt;__&lt;em&gt;_&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; by comparing the content to similarly powered core content. I wouldn't be asking for stylistic or flavor feedback, but rather answers such as: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You basically took a wizard and gave it perfect combat stats; there's no reason one would choose the core wizard over yours, therefore this class is broken. Reduce their spell-casting abilities to force players to make the trade-off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another issue is the fact that most class rules are far longer than typical length questions, and I would be tempted to post a link to them, which I know is frowned upon in case the link breaks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-11-22T19:55:26.383" LastActivityDate="2018-05-20T04:31:13.320" Title="Are &quot;critique my home-brewed content&quot; questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1398" CreationDate="2012-03-31T18:41:06.943" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, homebrew questions are allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not in favor of coming up with 100 different categories of question content we think are good or bad. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a specific question is not a good SE question, it will be closed.  If it is a good one, it will thrive. The guidelines on what makes a good SE question are - while not &quot;clear&quot; exactly, because it's the FAQ as modified by random blog posts (good subjective/bad subjective) and site specific meta rulings - are at least reasonably scoped. If it's on topic and a question that doesn't trigger the dupe/not constructive/not a question/too localized rubrics, then it's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can ask for review of homebrews in a good SE-compatible way (just like people post code on SO) or you can do it in a bad subjective pointless way. I see no difference that the specific topic of homebrew vs system-agnostic vs RAW 4e vs setting design makes toward that end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You basically admit above you fear that individual questions will be worded poorly and vaguely.  If they are, vote to close or edit to make them better.  But let's not cut more site scope out because someone &quot;can ask a bad question.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be a good homebrew question, the homebrew needs to be completely included and explained, and its goals stated.  To be good answers to a homebrew question, people need to either do mathematical/textual analysis or actually playtest it or something similar. Answers that are opinions on &quot;how it might work out&quot; will be subject to the usual censure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-20T04:31:13.320" LastActivityDate="2018-05-20T04:31:13.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1400" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:29:36.000" Score="7" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;About a month ago or so, some people might remember that I mentioned doing a quality review for this site for seeing whether RPG is finally ready to graduate. Well, it went pretty swell, but we'd like to see how &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; feel about the results. As such, we'd like to have you try your own run at reviewing the question set. So we're going to steal Aarthi's review template here and spice it up a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta sites often see people discussing specific questions that have been closed to determine whether or not they can (or should) be reopened, but it's rare that anyone looks at questions that are open and answered. Are they better than what the Internet has to offer? Are we making the Internet better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a rough guide:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Below, you'll find ten questions randomly selected from your site over the past 60 days.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For each question, search the internet for the question as if you were the asker!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If our answer(s) is good (complete, well-written, answers the question, useful, found in search results, etc) then &lt;strong&gt;vote it up&lt;/strong&gt;!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If our answer(s) is bad (incomplete, poorly-written, off-topic, incorrect, unfindable, worthless, etc) then &lt;strong&gt;vote it down&lt;/strong&gt;!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've included my own commentary from my run of the review. These are in spoiler blocks. It's up to you whether you look at them post-fact just to see how your perspective compares, versus letting my views shift your opinion of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment with anything you feel is worth noting, or to explain your voting choice. We have a rough guide to better/par/worse &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EQxi7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;right here&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;If your result is par, make a choice to vote up or down.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that our goal is to make the internet a better place. If you find yourself unable to decide how to vote, ask yourself: does this question and/or answer make the internet better? How you answer that question should determine your vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Talk to your fellow community members about how your site is doing and what you all can improve. Above all else, remember: this is a &lt;em&gt;team effort!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please note: this evaluation will close on April 9th, 2012! Get your answers in by then!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="1036" LastEditDate="2012-04-16T19:43:15.140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-16T19:43:15.140" Title="Evaluating your own site - a check for quality" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1401" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:32:02.147" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12567/can-i-make-multiple-extra-melee-attacks-with-one-crit&quot;&gt;Can I make multiple extra melee attacks with one crit?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Has no gun? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Better&lt;/strong&gt; - Other places cover other aspects of Harmony Blade besides the extra attacks component. We actually turn up on a lot of odd searches, too. so we're discoverable even to people looking for other points, haha.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:32:02.147" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:33:17.683" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12509/how-could-you-adapt-the-vitality-and-wound-points-system-from-unearthed-arcana-t&quot;&gt;How could you adapt the Vitality and Wound Points system from Unearthed Arcana to the 4th ed rules?&lt;/a&gt; (NOTE: This question was up for review prior to Brian posting an answer - keep this in mind for your judgment)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Neutral? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Worse&lt;/strong&gt; - All we have is just a &quot;you could...&quot; partial suggestion. No justification for why one would use Healing Surges over the Constitution score, and it touches nothing else on the system and its execution. There is a lot of talk about methods out there with nothing solid, but this just is so sparse in coverage that it is embarrassing, to be honest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-04-03T14:29:42.540" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:34:37.493" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12651/how-does-the-placement-of-wall-of-smoke-work&quot;&gt;How does the placement of Wall of Smoke work? &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Meh to the max? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Par&lt;/strong&gt; - This is easy enough information to find, but we're correct (at least, from my readings, it is accurate) &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; we have good findability. So, par.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:34:37.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:36:12.343" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12563/magus-casting-spells-in-close-combat&quot;&gt;Magus casting spells in close combat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? GoodBad? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Par&lt;/strong&gt; - Answer is correct, as verified by other findable resources. Not much else to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:36:12.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:38:15.477" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12604/how-do-i-price-a-sword-that-absorbs-other-weapons-abilities&quot;&gt;How do I price a sword that absorbs other weapon&amp;#39;s abilities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Dental plan? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Par&lt;/strong&gt; - It's a very, very specific scenario, which hurts discoverability. Past that, though, it's a magic-item standard pricing question, and the advice is spot on and equal to what you'd find in other guides when it comes to something like this item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:38:15.477" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:39:18.237" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12549/which-creatures-dont-speak-common&quot;&gt;Which creatures don&amp;#39;t speak Common?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Abstain? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Better&lt;/strong&gt; - No list has been compiled, but then again, it hasn't been compiled elsewhere, either! So we actually have the steps to make one. And we show up on such searches as &quot;List of 3.5e creatures that don't speak Common&quot;. Sounds like a score in my book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:39:18.237" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:40:49.123" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12637/a-ranger-build-that-is-close-to-tier-3-classes&quot;&gt;A Ranger build that is close to Tier 3 classes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Ninja kidnappings? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Better&lt;/strong&gt; - Nice guide lists while also including a sample build right here. Decent discoverability, too. It's that touch of compiling multiple items that makes it shine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:40:49.123" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1408" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:42:43.457" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12487/is-master-of-the-nine-a-solid-prestige-class-for-a-swordsage&quot;&gt;Is master of the nine a solid prestige class for a swordsage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Beyond such concepts? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Better&lt;/strong&gt; - Our accumulation of the number of resources is our advantage once again, and this is a much easier discover point than the Ranger question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:42:43.457" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:45:10.273" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12534/vow-of-poverty-overpowered-or-underpowered&quot;&gt;Vow of Poverty, overpowered or underpowered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Sentenced? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines explained above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Better&lt;/strong&gt; - Brian's answer is much more comprehensive than the accepted answer, as it goes into depth on the reasons behind its relation to various classes. It summarizes several viewpoints to give a much more overreaching answer than what could be done by just an individual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:45:10.273" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1400" CreationDate="2012-04-02T19:46:15.217" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12641/how-do-i-patch-up-my-weapon&quot;&gt;How do I patch up my weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good? Bad? Unreal? Please vote in accordance to the guidelines above, and optionally leave a comment if you have something extra to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; GRACE'S NOTE: &lt;strong&gt;Worse&lt;/strong&gt; - We're low on the list, and tons of other resources are far more comprehensive about your options than what we speak of. Just poor in comparison to what we have, honestly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-04-02T19:46:15.217" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1411" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-06T01:40:11.917" Score="5" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimisation&quot;&gt;optimisation&lt;/a&gt; tag, but char-op questions are not appearing in char-op searches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1400/evaluating-your-own-site-a-check-for-quality&quot;&gt;Evaluating your own site - a check for quality&lt;/a&gt; ) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we create optimisation tag synonyms for char-op, charop and character-optimization? Or a new tag? or?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-04-06T23:02:48.110" Title="How should we improve character optimization question tagging?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1411" CreationDate="2012-04-06T02:04:21.640" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Optimization != CharOp. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that instead of making a synonym, we find the questions that reference the cb and tag them with CharOp. Same with 3.5 questions. This leaves optimization as a general-case &quot;optimize my X&quot; and char-op reflecting current WotC forum usage. The trivial search for CB strings should provide most of our questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-04-06T02:04:21.640" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1413" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1411" CreationDate="2012-04-06T23:02:48.110" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The real problem: SEO for char-op.  Let's add a synonym and tag wiki and that'll help that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not a real problem: differentiating between different kinds of op. So far all the optimization questions have been fine with the poster stating their parameters, and frankly a lot of &quot;theoretical&quot; charop will get closed as not a real problem on a SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added charop, char-op, and optimisation as synonyms for optimization and filled out the tag wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-06T23:02:48.110" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1414" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2012-04-06T23:04:50.463" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about what topics and categories of question are on topic for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T20:20:19.457" LastActivityDate="2019-04-18T20:20:19.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1415" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2012-04-06T23:04:50.463" Score="0" Body="For questions about what topics and categories of question are on topic for RPG.SE." OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T20:20:19.457" LastActivityDate="2019-04-18T20:20:19.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1416" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-09T07:03:32.780" Score="38" ViewCount="911" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thank you for your helpful suggestions in the design &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/739/design-ideas-for-rpg-site&quot;&gt;brainstorming&lt;/a&gt; post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am very excited to present to the community the design I've been working on. The overall look and feel I'm going after is a warm and welcoming theme that reflects tabletop RPG gaming. It should capture the visual elements players are familiar with, striking a good balance between game manuals' renderings and the paper and pencil look.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;please click on images for full resolution view.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tcaGx.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tcaGx.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;RPG Home Page&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tTqV5.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tTqV5.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;RPG Question Page&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/744/75&quot;&gt;suggested&lt;/a&gt; by mxyzplk in the brainstorming post, the site design shouldn't be D&amp;amp;D heavy; we want our site to be more inviting to other RPG genres players. For the header artwork, a central piece of the overall design, I commissioned a very talented artist &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.deanspencerart.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dean Spencer&lt;/a&gt;. I asked him to create a header image that's a mix of traditional D&amp;amp;D and sci-fi genre. I'm very pleased with what he came up with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm also subtly using dice as recurring visual elements throughout the site, as seen as the logo, accepted answer background and voting arrows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meta&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we switched to the new Beta theme recently, several users said that they missed the Sketchy look, which fit the RPG theme - I agree. The design for the main site has a paper/grid look, but it is not as hand-drawn style as the old Beta theme. So I decided it'd be appropriate that meta.rpg would have its own sketchy style. After all, meta is where we discuss and shape the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aHmjQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aHmjQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG Meta&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YipA9.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YipA9.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Meta vs Main&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy with the overall look and feel of the design. I think the main site's design captures the imageries found in most games' boxarts and manuals, and also retains the pencil and paper feel. The Meta theme captures this hand-drawn style even further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are no major design changes, I'd like to start on the CSS conversion soon. I'd love to hear your feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-10-25T21:39:15.870" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T21:39:15.870" Title="Design for RPG.se" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1417" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1416" CreationDate="2012-04-09T11:36:05.883" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like it! Especially the art, it treads the line between only representing fantasy RPGs with not trying to cram in too much for a design (and some ninjas, and a pirate, and a zombie, and and and...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only some small suggestions which may be from this being a comp anyway - the grey background on the chat widget doesn't fit, it should probably be the same dark brown as the header/footer.  And the footer is dark brown like the header but doesn't have that same texture on it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, thanks, and let's git 'er done!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-09T11:36:05.883" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1416" CreationDate="2012-04-09T14:25:38.387" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;One minor quibble:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dark footer makes the CC notice almost impossible to see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-04-09T14:25:38.387" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1419" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-09T16:00:59.720" Score="11" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hopefully by now you've seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/75/jin&quot;&gt;Jin&lt;/a&gt;'s &lt;strong&gt;Awesome&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Design for RPG.se&lt;/a&gt;, so you know we're moving toward a launch.  The question is, how can we make the launch as successful as possible?  How and where can we promote this launch?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-04-11T19:21:35.760" Title="Promoting our site launch?" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1416" CreationDate="2012-04-09T18:44:09.490" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you should change &quot;WECLOME&quot; to &quot;WELCOME&quot;.  It's up to you, though. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3329" LastActivityDate="2012-04-09T18:44:09.490" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1419" CreationDate="2012-04-10T12:15:15.740" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should have every RPG.SE poster promote the launch on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Forums they frequent (wizards, rpg.net, enworld, dragonsfoot, paizo, storygames, therpgsite)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their blog&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their social media of choice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, of course, we've been saying that all along and have gotten indifferent results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally we'd have a little $$ to hook it into some cheap banner ads on enworld/rpg.net, heck buy a google adword or two.  Buying an ad in the Gen Con con booklet. That sort of thing.  Cheap but not free.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-10T12:15:15.740" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1290" CreationDate="2012-04-11T14:26:37.640" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay, d4 and d10 are my graduation gift to you :) They will be available with the launch of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;new site design&lt;/a&gt;. Since that's the main part of the request, I'm tagging it &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, as far as the rest goes, I have to decline that. The dice bot is supposed to be a cute little chat room easter egg unique to the RPG rooms. Its purpose is not (and never was intended to be, and never will be) to be a full-fledged feature-complete dice rolling service that covers all possible variations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has nothing to do with the question whether it's easy to implement, or whether someone takes the time to write the code. The plain and simple reason is that it's requesting to turn the dice bot into something that it's not supposed to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be reason enough, but &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4165336#4165336&quot;&gt;Brian gave me another great reason&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] it's generally quite convienent to have it be a dice-roller while we chat on skype, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Uhm, yeah, it should be quite obvious that that's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a supported use case; on the contrary, I'm quite unhappy to see that happening. And that's not just because it creates transcripts like &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/3564982#3564982&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T23:20:07.033" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T23:20:07.033" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1419" CreationDate="2012-04-11T19:21:35.760" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we could get a group together and get a table on the floor at DragonCon (or sponser a game or two?) that would be really good. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know we have several users (including myself) who are within a reasonable travel radius for the event and that would be a great way to do some low level on the ground type promotion. (If this was supplemented by a program ad that would be cool).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-04-11T19:21:35.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1424" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-11T20:31:49.417" Score="28" ViewCount="261" Body="&lt;p&gt;As you can see the new design just went live. Which means this site has been officially launched! Congratulations! Thank you for your valuable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;design feedback&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're still seeing the old favicons, please load the follow urls and do a hard browser refresh.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://sstatic.net/rpg/img/favicon.ico&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://sstatic.net/rpg/img/favicon.ico&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://sstatic.net/rpgmeta/img/favicon.ico&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://sstatic.net/rpgmeta/img/favicon.ico&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have also themed the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/the-game-table&quot;&gt;chatroom&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/#!/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;twitter&lt;/a&gt; account and newsletter template for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see any CSS/styling bugs, please start a new post and tag it with &quot;design&quot; and &quot;bug.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congrats on the launch and thank you for being an awesome community!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T12:35:58.797" Title="New Design Launched" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1362" CreationDate="2012-04-11T20:39:48.207" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;STATUS DECLINED! AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY!!!! CONGRATS!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-04-11T20:39:48.207" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1426" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-04-11T21:32:58.827" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B0002CKD1M&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;A satchel or messenger bag&lt;/a&gt;. When I don't need to transport my full library of books, I use a messenger bag to transport books, character sheets, my laptop, dice, and other odds and ends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The books are typically slightly larger than 8.5&quot;x11&quot; (those are softcover dimensions, with hardcovers being a shade larger due to the cover and binding), so the bags should be at least that size. Some extra room is nice, to allow for the inclusion of a bag of dice. My current bag looks to be about 14x11.5x4... Either the 14 or the 11.5 could stand to be reduced a bit to make the bag a little less floppy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd love to see a bag with the header image across the flap, or the wing and dice design from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tcaGx.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;upper-right of the design preview&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google turns up a number of custom printing options (and the bag I'm using was custom printed, although there's no manufacturer information on it), although durability could be a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-04-11T21:32:58.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1427" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1432" CreationDate="2012-04-12T00:50:52.443" Score="3" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;When visiting the site as an anonymous user, hovering over the &quot;feedback&quot; link below an answer causes the following answers to jump down by about 5 pixels, and back up again when you move the mouse away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tested on Chrome 18, Ubuntu 11.10.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2932" LastEditorUserId="75" LastEditDate="2012-04-12T13:49:49.320" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T13:49:49.320" Title="Answers jump when hovering over &quot;feedback&quot;" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1424" CreationDate="2012-04-12T04:22:45.543" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whoa! Superb. I was all about sketchy until I saw this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T04:22:45.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1429" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1430" CreationDate="2012-04-12T08:28:05.443" Score="0" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not seeing the welcome banner as show on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;design for RPG.se&lt;/a&gt; .  Is it my browser (Chrome) or something that is not yet done?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T10:03:14.213" Title="Welcome banner not seen" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1430" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1429" CreationDate="2012-04-12T10:03:07.350" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can see it just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My guess is that you have only looked at the site while logged in, correct? The welcome banner is only shown to anonymous users. Open RPG.se in an incognito window (Ctrl-Shift-N) and you should see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T10:03:07.350" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1431" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-12T12:41:24.283" Score="4" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I participated early on in the beta, but found that when I logged in after the official launch I didn't have any reputation or history. Are/were accounts inactive for a period of time purged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3337" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-04-14T13:38:53.983" LastActivityDate="2012-04-14T13:38:53.983" Title="Were Accounts Purged?" Tags="|support|bug|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1427" CreationDate="2012-04-12T13:49:37.073" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I put in a fix. It will be in the next production build. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T13:49:37.073" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1433" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-12T17:58:46.810" Score="1" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all, I think the new design is amazing. It elegantly combines the fantasy and sci-fi settings that tend to be prominent in RPG's, and also uses the pencil drawings at the bottom corners of the header to help show that this site is for pencil and paper RPGs and NOT video-game RPGs like World of Warcraft.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, the only thing I've noticed that I dislike is the font that shows user reputation in posts. The 3's and 5's just seem to blend in with the adjacent numbers a little, which makes them harder to read. Granted, this is an extreme nitpick in the amazing design, and I'll probably get used to it over time, but I wanted to see if anybody else agreed with me about the decrease in legibility. :D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="593" LastEditorUserId="75" LastEditDate="2012-04-12T20:03:07.557" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T20:03:07.557" Title="Make the font used to show user reputation in posts a little more readable?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1434" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-12T18:17:59.547" Score="3" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/egLkI.png&quot; alt=&quot;Bug&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure the 2 shouldn't be there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="75" LastEditDate="2012-04-12T19:57:04.943" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T19:57:04.943" Title="CSS bug: Review page inconsistant" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|css|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1434" CreationDate="2012-04-12T18:42:49.423" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Confirmed for FireFox 11.0.  Seems to be for answers that show up in &lt;code&gt;/review&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm really sick of this really high version number nonsense&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T18:42:49.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1434" CreationDate="2012-04-12T19:56:55.133" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I fixed the css so the answer vote # aligns with the stats of questions.  The change will be in the next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T19:56:55.133" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1433" CreationDate="2012-04-12T20:02:58.730" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I changed the badge count and reputation numbers to a different serif type and increased the size a bit. The change should be in the next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-04-12T20:02:58.730" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1438" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-14T02:56:29.967" Score="5" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the font used for usernames, the X is oddly distinctly larger than the other letters (see: my username on answers here and on the main site). Not just a little, like it seems like a half-capital compared to the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-14T11:03:54.383" Title="Big X in Usernames?" Tags="|bug|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1439" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1438" CreationDate="2012-04-14T11:03:54.383" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm experiencing the same effect (both with Chrome/Windows 7 and IE9/Windows 7).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's very weird.  the over-sized &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt; appears only on HTML elements using the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ffonts.net/Lusitana.font&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lusitana Regular&lt;/a&gt; font. However, small caps letters of said font seem to be all in line with one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your computer/browser doesn't have said font installed (mine doesn't), the CSS instructs the browser to use the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.whatfontis.com/Palatino-Linotype.font&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Palatino Linotype&lt;/a&gt; which, again, has a &quot;regular&quot; small caps &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't experimented further; but if I have to bet on something, I'd say that the Lusitana font stored on the stackexchange server is not the regular version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1018" LastActivityDate="2012-04-14T11:03:54.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1431" CreationDate="2012-04-14T13:38:29.053" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, I have to say as I'm looking around at old Q&amp;amp;A's I'm seeing a lot more greyed out accounts than I'm used to. We used to just have a couple.  Now, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6212/how-do-you-help-players-not-focus-on-the-rules&quot;&gt;How do you help players not focus on the rules?&lt;/a&gt; - there's two expired user accounts there.  Even as a mod I can't see anything about them.  But it does seem like a sharp noticeable increase. We used to have just a handful and we knew them all (malcontents who demanded to be deleted).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-04-14T13:38:29.053" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1441" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1442" CreationDate="2012-04-14T17:58:48.583" Score="2" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2161/dan-rasmussen?tab=answers&quot;&gt;answers tab&lt;/a&gt; of a user's profile, the green vote-count of an accepted answer is hard to distinguish from the grey vote-count of the others. In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2161/dan-rasmussen?tab=summary&quot;&gt;user's summary&lt;/a&gt;, accepted answers (and questions with accepted answers) are given a green background, which really helps. Is this background missing from the answers tab? Other sites like SO have the colored background on the tab.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-04-15T14:57:19.643" Title="Accepted answers in answer tab are hard to distinguish" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1442" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1441" CreationDate="2012-04-15T14:57:10.483" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has been fixed on dev. The change will be in the next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-04-15T14:57:10.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1443" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-18T13:48:59.090" Score="14" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just glanced at my badges and was very confused why I only had two silvers...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oA7D5.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It took me a few seconds to realize that the spacing was off. Compare to meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/etCg8.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if the difference is truly meta-vs-main or if its caused by the gold badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is happening on Chrome / Windows 7 x64. Confirmed in IE 8 as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastEditorUserId="138" LastEditDate="2012-05-09T21:18:13.927" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T21:18:13.927" Title="Badge spacing in top bar is misleading" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1444" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-18T21:38:11.337" Score="7" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;As our site &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1400/2788&quot;&gt;evaluation&lt;/a&gt; showed, we have a few question topics that need clearing up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are these topics and how can we improve them? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there tags or subjects that need more attention on the site? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there games we don't cover well enough?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-04-30T21:22:46.880" Title="What needs clearing up?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1445" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:35:12.233" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Did you spot a redundant tag? Possible tag synonym? Lot's of hard to distinguish tags that need clarifying?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post it here!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:46:27.310" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:46:27.310" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1446" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:35:12.233" Score="0" Body="Did you spot a redundant tag? Possible tag synonym? Lot's of hard to distinguish tags that need clarifying?&#xD;&#xA;&#xD;&#xA;Post it here!" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:46:30.540" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:46:30.540" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1447" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:36:48.613" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T03:36:48.613" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T03:36:48.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1448" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:36:48.613" Score="0" Body="This is the one stop shop for your ideas about promoting rpg.stackexchange.com!" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:46:22.617" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:46:22.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1449" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:40:32.820" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you found something that looks odd or out of place on the rpg.stackexchange.com website, or have a request/suggestion for improvement, tag it &lt;code&gt;css&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:45:55.923" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:45:55.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1450" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:40:32.820" Score="0" Body="Find a possible CSS bug on rpg.stackexchange.com?  Use this tag!" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:45:59.170" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:45:59.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1451" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:44:37.947" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Have an idea for a contest?  Have a question about a current contest? Have a concern or complaint about a contest?  Tag it with &lt;code&gt;contest&lt;/code&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:45:43.583" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:45:43.583" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1452" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2012-04-19T03:44:37.947" Score="0" Body="Have an idea for a contest?  Have a question about a current contest? Have a concern or complaint about a contest?" OwnerUserId="3380" LastEditorUserId="3380" LastEditDate="2012-04-19T10:45:52.553" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T10:45:52.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1325" CreationDate="2012-04-19T06:06:19.487" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many still use books at the table. I find the whole book gets cluttered with post it notes and torn paper bookmarks during a campaign. How about producing a set of 4~6 colour-coded bookmarks which can be annotated with dry erase markers for page numbers? The colour-coded allows the GM to easily find a specific section visually (blue for rules, green for spells, red for combat, etc) while the ability to write page references right on the bookmark puts an end to flipping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bookmark would carry the site logo and URL, with a pithy comment like: &quot;Still can't find what you are looking for?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="141" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T06:06:19.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1444" CreationDate="2012-04-19T13:33:53.050" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The perception around the gaming community is that rpg stackexchange is largely weighted towards D&amp;amp;D 4e. Largely because of the sheer number of D&amp;amp;D 4e related questions that the inital user see. It is a bit unfair as questions for other editions and games get promptly and accurately answered. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something on the site that explains the situation and reminds newcomers that it has been useful for a wide variety of RPGs would probably help a lot. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastActivityDate="2012-04-19T13:33:53.050" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1455" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-04-26T11:43:06.857" Score="9" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I do love the name of my room, Going to &quot;the Back Room&quot; for gaming and &quot;The Game Table&quot; for talking does seem slightly counterintuitive: every so often someone comes by the room and we have to steer him over to The Game Table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this certainly isn't a huge problem, suggestions for fixing it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-05-01T02:55:09.880" LastActivityDate="2012-05-01T02:55:09.880" Title="Perhaps The Back Room and The Game Table are confusingly named" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-26T13:03:40.577" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was thinking about this recently.  We could certainly swap names, but I think the main problem is what do we name the &quot;main&quot; or &quot;talky&quot; room?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The name &quot;Back Room&quot; doesn't really work, and &quot;Front Room&quot; doesn't mean much either ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RolePlayer's Lounge?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone has to have better suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-04-26T13:03:40.577" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-26T13:55:11.773" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that the names as they stand are confusing. What about &quot;The Tavern&quot; for the chatty room?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2012-04-26T13:55:11.773" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-26T17:11:40.743" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was very confused by those names my first few times in chat...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that &quot;The Game Table&quot; should be for gaming, and propose &quot;Out of Character&quot; for the chatty room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastActivityDate="2012-04-26T17:11:40.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-27T20:30:35.257" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like the name &quot;Back Room&quot; for the gaming section.  That is where we play games in most shops after all. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To keep the metaphor though, the talky room should be called, &quot;The Front Counter&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should change the room descriptions. Currently they are quite wordy.  Something like &quot;Start here&quot; and &quot;Play games here&quot; would be better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-04-27T20:30:35.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-27T20:48:20.820" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about Out of Character or OOC for the main room?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2012-04-27T20:48:20.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1455" CreationDate="2012-04-28T00:39:31.383" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree.  I think cutesy names are always going to have that problem.  &quot;General Discussion&quot; and &quot;Open Gaming&quot; aren't cute but they help people know what's up. Naming discussion something like OOC is going to make people think that it's OOC discussion for an actual gaming chat, which is how that is used on every PBP forum in the universe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-04-28T00:39:31.383" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1444" CreationDate="2012-04-30T21:22:46.880" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Further to Rob's observation about 4e swamping our front page and the perception that creates for visitors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would love to see a public-facing, non-logged in page in parallel to our main page that hides question with certain (community- or mod-chosen) tags. It's easy for me to see that this site is useful to non-4e players with all the [dnd-4e] tags on my ignore list and the &quot;hide ignored tags&quot; option on, but new and casual visitors who never make an account will never get that view. A parallel front page that shows off all our non-4e content would go a long way to turning those visitors into repeat visitors or even users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-04-30T21:22:46.880" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1463" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1464" CreationDate="2012-05-02T01:58:44.077" Score="14" ViewCount="187" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, really. Each post of his is like a tiny lecture by my statistics professor. A tour-de-force on the philosophy of game-making by Brian Ballsun-Stanton would be informative to read. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So come on dude, who's your publisher? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2919" LastActivityDate="2012-05-02T03:51:46.907" Title="Does Brian Ballsun-Stanton have a book published yet?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1463" CreationDate="2012-05-02T02:39:08.567" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;, I don't, cause I like eating ... and paying rent.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At present, I can't afford to take the month or two to write a book on the philosophy of role-playing. While I just got my doctorate, I'm trying to find a job at various universities. On the other hand, if there's some level of community funding, I'd be willing to start a kickstarter to cover rent and ... whatnot to...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... what? I.. really? ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A book is 50k-100k. I'll fold in my two papers on RPs for a clean 10k, that leaves us 40k short. Structuring 2-4k per answer for 10 selected answers could work, leaving me to write framework, structure, question and answer amplification, and a lit review of doom. (and yeah, wading through the IJRP.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can probably do this in 1-2 months part time.  (hahahaha... ::sigh:: I could, actually. I even have editors.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I can't afford to right now. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said at the start, if there's community support via kickstarter, I'd love to. Or, if you know of any agencies willing to write a grant, I'm more than willing to write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing some simple &lt;sup&gt;**&lt;/sup&gt; analysis of my RPG.SE posts, I've got 152k words on here. Easily enough to make a book with sufficient editing and framing. Call it a month of work?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sv8NA.png&quot; alt=&quot;my most common 150 words&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; Does a thesis count? What about 2 working papers on RPGs? (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.drbbs.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2012-05-02T03:51:46.907" LastActivityDate="2012-05-02T03:51:46.907" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1465" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-02T13:01:20.047" Score="4" ViewCount="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;There’s a dialog sidebar with links to the About page, FAQ and meta. Unfortunately, the “FAQ” link is broken in half, resulting in an (1) unaesthetic and (2) slightly confusing visual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wHANc.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;design bug&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This could be fixed easily by putting a non-breaking space between the text and the French quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3506" LastActivityDate="2012-05-02T13:01:20.047" Title="Use non-breaking spaces in sidebar banner links" Tags="|bug|design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1466" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-02T14:00:00.660" Score="2" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm reading through the recently-released Player's Handbook of the new version of &lt;em&gt;Hackmaster&lt;/em&gt;, and I plan to ask a few questions about it in the next few days. I was thinking about it, though, and I'm not sure how to properly tag these questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first version of Hackmaster was simply titled &quot;Hackmaster&quot;. The new version of Hackmaster is also titled &quot;Hackmaster&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the Kenzer &amp;amp; Co. message boards, the original version of Hackmaster is sometimes referred to as &quot;Hackmaster 4E&quot;, due to the fact that before the game every released, the Knights of the Dinner Table comic featured the group playing &quot;Hackmaster 3E&quot;, and an in-joke of the game was that this was a the new edition of what they play in the comic. In reality, though, this is the first version of the game that was released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the new version isn't called &quot;Hackmaster 5E&quot;. It's just referred to as Hackmaster. Further muddying the waters is the fact that while it was in development &lt;em&gt;Hackmaster Basic&lt;/em&gt; was released, which was basically a toned down, preview ruleset of the final product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rules mechanics between &lt;em&gt;Hackmaster Basic&lt;/em&gt; and the latest version of &lt;em&gt;Hackmaster&lt;/em&gt; are similar enough that it might not be worth separating them, but the rules for the previous edition of &lt;em&gt;Hackmaster&lt;/em&gt; are completely different. I'm not sure how to tag my questions about the latest version without there being confusion over which edition I'm asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that even in this meta post, I have to refer to &quot;previous edition&quot; and &quot;new edition&quot; to avoid confusion. How should this be tagged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="213" LastActivityDate="2012-05-03T00:29:35.013" Title="How should questions about the new version of Hackmaster be tagged?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1467" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1466" CreationDate="2012-05-02T14:21:07.187" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hackmaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hackmaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hackmaster&lt;/a&gt;.  There currently aren't any questions tagged with it.  There is no need to over-complicate things at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If/when we get several questions on each version, there may be a need to get more specific, but I don't see that as a need right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-05-02T14:21:07.187" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1468" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-02T20:49:02.127" Score="8" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;Notice an influx of traffic? Maybe? Sorry to blindside the community with this, but we're running a contest with the website/blog/podcast Obsidian Portal! Details &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.obsidianportal.com/rpg-stack-exchange-contest-win-75-worth-of-whatever-gaming-goodness-you-desire/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. This has been in the works for a few months, but was never firm enough to warrant a for-reals Meta post until rather soon. In the future, more of a heads up will be given!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, it's a contest that gets people to check out the site. So far the comments have been really awesome and supportive. If this contest was &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rottentomatoes.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Rotten Tomatoes&lt;/a&gt;, you guys would be certified fresh!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy to discuss any of the finer points in comments or chat, just ping me. Sorry to keep this brief, but the reasons I forgot to post a Meta post are the very reasons that I have to be skedaddling right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE:&lt;/strong&gt; The contest ended earlier this week and the winners were &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.obsidianportal.com/rpg-stack-exchange-contest-win-75-worth-of-whatever-gaming-goodness-you-desire/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;DreamDrake and RobertU&lt;/a&gt;! We're currently in the process of analyzing the results, but I know both us here at Stack Exchange and the fine folks of Obsidian Portal are happy with the results. We hope to bring more diverse partnerships, events and contests to the community in the future!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2940" LastEditorUserId="2940" LastEditDate="2012-05-25T14:59:38.413" LastActivityDate="2012-05-25T14:59:38.413" Title="Contest running with Obsidian Portal [Updated May 25th]" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1469" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1466" CreationDate="2012-05-03T00:29:35.013" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Typically fans of HackMaster(both versions) tend to separate them by saying &quot;HackMaster 4th&quot; or HM4 when referring to the original edition published in 2001 and just &quot;HackMaster&quot; or even &quot;HackMaster 5th&quot; or HM5 when referring to the new version. Officially Kenzer&amp;amp;Co uses HackMaster 4th Edition for the old one and just &quot;HackMaster&quot; for the new one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm here and can answer any questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My HM experience: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've played and/or GM'ed HM4 for about 6 or 7 years and have an active HM4 game(over 5 years old now) that I GM every other week, and play in another. I was a playtester for HackMaster Basic and still a Alpha Playtester for HackMaster products(PHB and the GMG). I'm a regular over at the K&amp;amp;Co forums as &quot;Greylond&quot; and would be happy to answer any and all questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, ask away and give me about a day or so to remember to check this site! :)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3414" LastActivityDate="2012-05-03T00:29:35.013" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1416" CreationDate="2012-05-03T21:03:09.000" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really like the overall design. I would like to point out that it's really hard to see &quot;favorite tags&quot; if your monitor has less-than-ideal coloration. Everything else is looking really fantastic!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3550" LastActivityDate="2012-05-03T21:03:09.000" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1471" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-04T23:42:03.790" Score="1" ViewCount="39" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just convinced my co-author Samuel Russell to proper-register on this site. Unfortunately, his cookie-auth has expired or is on a formatted computer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we merge:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3064/samuel-russell&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3064/samuel-russell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3579/samuel-russell&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3579/samuel-russell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They all should have the same-email address. (He reports that he thinks he made 3 posts cookie-authed from that address, but a trivial search isn't pulling them up.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-05-05T11:02:54.397" Title="Account merge request for a friend" Tags="|support|status-completed|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1472" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1473" CreationDate="2012-05-07T12:24:59.293" Score="10" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently, there's discussion about the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14113/how-do-the-rules-that-govern-a-clerics-turn-undead-ability-vary-among-dd-editi&quot;&gt;How do the rules that govern a Cleric&amp;#39;s Turn Undead ability vary among D&amp;amp;D editions?&lt;/a&gt; and concern over its usefulness.  We've had other questions like this, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6217/if-im-invisible-do-i-get-a-bonus-to-my-saving-throws&quot;&gt;If I&amp;#39;m invisible do I get a bonus to my saving throws?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14038/whats-the-history-of-the-darkness-spell&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the history of the Darkness spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some ongoing complaints in the comments about them, so let's discuss here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-06-03T14:36:27.047" Title="Are questions about how a rule has changed over the years on topic?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1472" CreationDate="2012-05-07T12:35:16.550" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, I believe these are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, Pat calls these out for being &quot;chatty and open-ended.&quot;  That's clearly the wrong criticism - the answer to the Turn question will be like the one to the Invisible one, which is just &quot;here's the rule in OD/1e/2e/3e/4e/PF&quot;.  Very cut and dried, and objective. An alternate question like &quot;I want to homebrew my own turn undead system, what should it be like?&quot; would be what would get closed for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The criticism with more teeth is &quot;but what problem does this solve?&quot; However, I think there's a perfectly good case to be made for knowledge being its own reward here.  Questions about how functionality varies by version (e.g. python, IE) abound on the technical SEs. You want to know how it works in different versions so you understand how to use it if you happen to be using that version, or maybe even you're designing your own and want to know the approaches that have already been taken and discarded.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like this is objective and on topic; it does have a little bit of the sense of posting a trivia question for the hell of it, but unless someone cranks out 10 of these at a time and is obviously rep-whoring I reckon they're kosher.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-06-03T14:36:27.047" LastActivityDate="2012-06-03T14:36:27.047" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1472" CreationDate="2012-05-07T13:07:40.550" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is the kind of question that needs to be prefixed with &quot;why do you want to know?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, they're technically historical in the same vein as &quot;who invented experience points.&quot; And they're objective, and so on. But they can also be pretty much just transcribing from a set of rulebooks (general reference), and extremely narrow in general interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is looking to move from one edition to another, then they should scope the question to those two editions. Nothing is gained by obfuscating the actual intent of the question, and scoping the question properly improves the odds of generating a solid answer (because answerers need to know a smaller set of editions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far as knowledge for the sake of knowledge, compare &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14038/whats-the-history-of-the-darkness-spell&quot;&gt;this question on the Darkness spell&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14113/how-do-the-rules-that-govern-a-clerics-turn-undead-ability-vary-among-dd-editi&quot;&gt;this question on turning undead&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question on darkness demonstrates research on the part of the questioner, looks at specific aspects of the spell, and probes for reasons behind the design of the darkness spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question on turning undead just asks for a multi-edition rules dump.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I would say that &quot;yes, questions about how the rules have changed can be on topic, but no, that question on turning undead is not (or at most is an extremely marginal question).&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-05-07T14:37:17.600" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1475" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1476" CreationDate="2012-05-08T00:23:36.310" Score="36" ViewCount="3073" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've had several questions lately that we've been closing. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14151/what-point-buy-systems-of-magic-like-psionics-in-3e-dd-are-there&quot;&gt;What point-buy systems of magic (like psionics in 3e D&amp;amp;D) are there? &lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14120/what-are-the-main-creative-commons-powered-tabletop-rpg-out-there&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14120/what-are-the-main-creative-commons-powered-tabletop-rpg-out-there&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14113/how-do-the-rules-that-govern-a-clerics-turn-undead-ability-vary-among-dd-editi&quot;&gt;How do the rules that govern a Cleric&amp;#39;s Turn Undead ability vary among D&amp;amp;D editions?&lt;/a&gt; (before it was scoped to D&amp;amp;D).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These all basically suffer from nothing more than the fact that the poster's a bit of a noob and doesn't realize that there are thousands of RPGs in every category ever thought of. Point buy magic, creative commons games, &amp;quot;turning undead&amp;quot; - it's like asking for &amp;quot;a good fantasy game!&amp;quot;  &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/browse/rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPGGeek has a list of, currently, 4007 different RPGs&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/browse/rpgitem&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;29,550 different RPG products&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to be unwelcoming by just shutting these down.  How do we help people scope more tightly when they may not know exactly what they're looking for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the questions have legit bases.  &amp;quot;I want to design a point buy system of magic and so want to see some others&amp;quot; is a valid need, we just need a way we can answer it meaningfully in the format. Some of the others just need a lot more definition -but what if you don't have additional criteria? Maybe I don't care if it's transhumanist sci-fi or a D&amp;amp;D derivative, I just want to play a CC game so I can say I've done it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, this is coming up a lot, and there's guidance specific to each question - but I can't help but think these are suffering from a similar root problem that we might be able to give meaningful guidance on in the FAQ or whatnot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:03:21.580" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:03:21.580" Title="How to deal with questions that just don't understand the scope of the RPG landscape?" Tags="|discussion|faq|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2012-05-08T01:06:58.253" Score="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Close them until the author narrows the scope of their question.&lt;/strong&gt; It shows a lack of effort on the part of the author in identifying their problem space and encourages them to actually do some research on their questions before asking them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly &lt;strong&gt;DO NOT ANSWER A POORLY DEFINED QUESTION&lt;/strong&gt;. This merely encourages people to not fix their question. The answers will likely be poor and of little use (even if the OP thinks they are useful, posterity will not), and likely won't actually address the root issue. By not answering, we force them to actually address the issues their question has, instead of half-assing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to be open to new users, and encouraging, especially to folks new to playing RPGs and who may not understand how vast the hobby is, but at the same time we need standards. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets make sure we hold up those standards, while at the same time being friendly, but firm with folks who &lt;em&gt;just don't get it...yet&lt;/em&gt; and encourage them to focus their questions to solve their &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; problems, instead of answering their arbitrary and nebulous question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T01:06:58.253" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1477" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2012-05-08T01:29:22.053" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, I agree that closing them politely and quickly is best.  Addressing the larger concern of trying to prevent them in the first place is harder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think making the FAQ more obvious would help.  I know I stumbled across this site through a google hit on an answer, and didn't scroll down to the bottom of the page of answers to find the faq link there.  Instead, I clicked the questions link at the top.  That led to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=faq&quot;&gt;this faq&lt;/a&gt; rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;this faq&lt;/a&gt;, which is the one that contains the useful information.  How much control do we have over the bar with &quot;Questions Tags Users Badges Unanswered&quot;?  Perhaps adding the faq to that bar would help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, perhaps noting in that question how &lt;strong&gt;vast&lt;/strong&gt; the RPG scope is (i.e. &quot;some of us have been playing for 30 years or more and have gone through nearly that many different systems&quot;) in that question could help the new to RPG people consider a tad longer before asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I definitely think making the FAQ more obvious up front would help!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3492" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T01:29:22.053" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1478" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-08T07:54:57.100" Score="6" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just got on the wrong side of the reputation stick on the Gaming SE, by asking a question against their specific flavor of FAQ and policies. It got me to thinking, and I wanted to ask whether the system works well as it stands, or if there might be some changes worth the doing. I chose to have the discussion here because I feel much more comfortable on this SE (thanks folks for making me feel at home :D) and because I feel like I am a much more credible expert on RPG topics, so I can discuss the system with the ramifications here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure that downvotes adversely impacting reputation is a good idea, for a few different reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Firstly, and on the basest of levels, receiving a penalty stings. The intent of the penalty is to make people stop and consider posting before they do, and that's understandable, but at the same time, honest mistakes happen. I asked a question that, familiar with &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; SE, I didn't think was ruled-out. Someone posted a comment saying it would likely be deleted, and posted a link to the FAQs. I saw it was listed, deleted the post, but by then, I already had gotten a downvote (I'm pretty sure it was actually the person who left the comment, but no matter). I lost two reputation, and am left with a very sour taste in my mouth. I don't think I deserved to be chastised, but I was. And at this point, I'm honestly not sure I'm going to ever go back to Gaming, because I don't think  I agree with their policy. If I had simply received the comment, I'd be much less upset about the whole thing (2 rep is a lot when you're at less than 20). I think the system probably works fine for veterans who should know better, but the system currently seems to punish new members, and possibly cause them to leave the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Secondly, I'm not sure that degrading my reputation when &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; downvote is a good thing either. In dealing with my frustration on Gaming, I asked a question on their Meta, and got linked in to the discussion on Game Recommendations, and why they flatly don't allow them. The post I saw with the most rhetoric (&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/997/handling-game-recommendations-how-can-we-solve-these-two-problems-of-quality&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;), has a lot of good things to be said about quality, and motivation. Trying to maintain a high-quality repository of information is certainly admirable, and seems a worthy goal of these sites. However, in attempting to maintain quality of the site, I have to choose between degrading my reputation (let alone that of someone else), and just ignoring the question altogether, which I've done until now. Most of the time, I've been selfish, and just not worried about the community as a whole, and maintained my personal number. That's not good for the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is important for you to mean it when you go to downvote a question. However, it also seems counter-intuitive to penalize yourself to make the community better. Would it be possible to refund voters' reputation if a question dips negative? Would that be worth the doing? It allows for active members to work as a community and help police things that may not actually need to stay on the site, from a quality perspective. Flags, to my understanding, have to do with whether a question adheres to the rules of the site, not the value of the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, is there a way to put in a window of &quot;noobie-protection&quot; where downvotes don't decimate their reputation? The community is active enough that within 10 minutes of my first post, I had a comment welcoming me to the site. If my post had been less than acceptable, I'm sure that welcome would have been a suggestion on either how to improve it or to take it down (if it was really unsalvagable). Could we rely on that to help correct new members, as opposed to the Reputation Stick as it stands now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3541" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:43:44.200" LastActivityDate="2012-05-25T07:26:43.147" Title="Can the reputation system be improved upon?" Tags="|discussion|voting|reputation|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1478" CreationDate="2012-05-08T08:37:42.830" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In short, no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reputation system has evolved over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackoverflow.com&quot;&gt;SO&lt;/a&gt; to the point that it should work everywhere, and mostly it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had a question at &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/q/55505/16142&quot;&gt;-4 down votes&lt;/a&gt; and I argued my case in the comments and on the meta and had it opened, so I'm certain the system works. Now to address your points:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Firstly, and on the basest of levels, receiving a penalty stings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(2 rep is a lot when you're at less than 20)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is, and that's the point. The system prematurely assumes that new users won't know the standard procedure, won't have read the rules [faq] and will be causing trouble. Whilst recommendations can sometimes fly here you need to be very very specific and you need to fight your case (at least in my experience). Asking a game recommendation question (here or there) boils down to a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Shopping&lt;/a&gt; question which need to be carefully policed as they can spiral out of control.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Down voting is the stick that keeps these questions from taking over Stack exchange and there will be some collateral. Yes it stings, but every user was low rep once (except perhaps &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/users/22656/jon-skeet&quot;&gt;Jon Skeet&lt;/a&gt;), and they just need to be careful with what they ask, take the good rep with the bad and keep on trying. You'll get a down vote here at some point, please don't let that deter you from posting here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Secondly, I'm not sure that degrading my reputation when I downvote is a good thing either. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oh &lt;em&gt;yes&lt;/em&gt; it is. If you thought that it was too easy to be down voted, don't forget that they got hit themselves. Remove that and people can downvote until a good post they personally disagree with is sunk into the ground with negativity. I, for one, also avoided losing my precious rep when I first got to Sci-Fi.SE, but as time went on and I rediscovered the posts I downvoted I realised that some of them didn't need a downvote, some needed to just be flagged and some should be Voted to Close (a privilege you'll get in time). If it was too easy to downvote, it would be too easy for new members to get it wrong (not saying you will, but it's possible) and leave random downvotes everywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:34.523" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T08:37:42.830" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2012-05-08T12:36:58.760" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry, this probably isn't the answer you are looking for, but I would suggest (as goofdad originally mentioned in chat) making the FAQ describing the scope of questions that can be asked more prominent.  As an OP newb, the first thing of interest that drew my attention (aside from the questions/answers) was the starred &quot;Ask Question&quot; button in the upper right hand corner - not the tiny FAQ section hidden in much smaller font above it.  Also, as a newb, I wouldn't feel that I need any instruction on how to ask a question, so I would be unlikely to consult the FAQ unless I had a problem submitting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a suggestion, why don't you make the FAQ answer for &quot;allowable questions&quot; pop up whenever someone with low reputation (ie a newb) tries to submit a question, so that they at least have a chance to recognize their error before being closed/downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand the reasoning behind closing/downvoting, but it does seem a little harsh as a first experience for what might be an honest mistake - enough to scare people off the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just my two cents ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3584" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T12:36:58.760" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1481" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1478" CreationDate="2012-05-08T12:45:00.297" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lets be clear here. Here is how the rep system works on non-community wiki posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#reputation&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8w0Wg.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rep system is in place to do the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Encourage people to post good content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Encourage people to vote their feelings on content, particularly on questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discourage people from downvoting a lot on answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Help the community grow by introducing a fun gamist atmosphere.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rep system is inherently a gamism. It's a foreign mechanic instituted into this Q&amp;amp;A site in order to encourage participation. By introducing &quot;achievements&quot; (privileges and badges) more gamist mechanics are introduced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Games can be &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; won and lost. And without some sense of conflict most games aren't much fun. Downvoting introduces those elements in a relatively pain free way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your post is complaining about (seemingly) a single downvote, that's 2 reputation, even if you have 20 rep that's only 10%, but more importantly that's 1/5 of an answer upvote. Go answer a question, if you get even one upvote you have netted 8 reputation, a 40% increase over your original 20 rep. Finally, deleting the post negates the upvote (only posts older than 60 days with a score &gt;3 keep their reputation after deletion), so why the complaint?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this imbalance (upvotes, even on answers, outweigh downvotes so heavily), even terrible contributors can manage to generate positive reputation scores. If anything the reputation system is to biased towards upvotes. however, this has an important function, we need high reputations users, and a lot of them. Because of the privileges mechanic, as sites grow, high reputation users can begin to preform moderator functions. Without these people providing these functions there would be a greater need for more moderators, or utter chaos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T16:57:47.773" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1482" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1484" CreationDate="2012-05-08T12:59:40.357" Score="4" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday (and again today) it appears that someone was going through FATE questions for the first time, upvoting the ones that they thought were good, I suppose.  But at the beginning of today, there was a negative value to equal the votes from yesterday with the description &quot;Serial Upvoting Reversed&quot;.  What does that mean and under what circumstances does that happen?  I've seen this pattern before, i.e. someone new joins and upvotes questions under a certain tag- I've even done it before when I first started, and when I've been away for a while.  Or I start playing a new game and going through the questions.  But this is the first time I've seen this particular action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2012-05-08T13:11:22.277" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T13:24:13.790" Title="What does &quot;Serial Upvoting Reversed&quot; signify?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1483" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-08T13:10:08.817" Score="31" ViewCount="1578" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fellow member @SteveC has been doing diligent work editing questions and answers to put the names of &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; terms into code text: from Toughness to &lt;code&gt;Toughness&lt;/code&gt;, as an example. Is there a practical benefit on the site in doing so, or is it just an aesthetic preference?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:02:35.097" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:02:35.097" Title="Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?" Tags="|discussion|faq|formatting|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1482" CreationDate="2012-05-08T13:24:13.790" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an automatic attempt to reverse voting fraud, and it's not targeted on specific tags, but specific users.  The algorithm says &quot;If N% of User X's votes were for User Y's posts, that's suspicious&quot; and reverses it out.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately the algorithm does seem to catch upvoting in particular tags because certain people have many of the answers in those tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T13:24:13.790" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2012-05-08T13:47:18.360" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I prefer putting special terms in &lt;strong&gt;bold&lt;/strong&gt; font, but can live with the code formatting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think SteveC's format for DDI links is sub-optimal though and have been pondering mentioning it.  I find having the ddi link sitting all by itself in brackets after each linked term interrupts the text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-05-08T13:47:18.360" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2012-05-09T06:48:49.207" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in certain comments, there is a practical benefit to putting things in code text: It changes the appearence of the text. Since a largely text-based site is a visual medium, any form of unusual formatting can be used to highlight or draw attention to important phrases and terms. Of course that's useful!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it could potentially be overused or used poorly, but you could say the same thing about exclamation marks. Are they useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, highlighting is not the purpose the code text boxes were introduced for, but neither was the stack overflow QA site format designed for questions about role-playing games. In both cases, the new use to which they have been put works for us. What's the problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T06:48:49.207" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1487" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-09T18:10:59.690" Score="5" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;In our FAQ we explicitly allow questions about RPG tools and equipment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently we got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14223/where-has-the-community-from-avidgamers-1-2-migrated-to#comment22576_14223&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question which someone suggested fell under that clause of the FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are online communities really tools? I can see both sides of the issue, but this is better decided here, rather than just taken for granted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do questions about online communities (their mechanics, their locations, their histories etc) have standing here or should we close them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T21:42:58.270" Title="Are communities tools?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1487" CreationDate="2012-05-09T18:31:43.370" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Closing is for when we're 100% sure that a question is unwelcome. &quot;Bad&quot; or &quot;dubious&quot; questions are for downvoting. Questions that are a roleplaying subculture's first question on this site are &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; to be given the benefit of the doubt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPing communities are integral to the roleplayer subculture of online RPers. If someone came here to ask about the history of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.jointhesaga.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;OtherSpace&lt;/a&gt;'s rule mechanics, that would be similarly on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless we're going to say that online RPers are unwelcome, we're going to have to be very cautious about closing questions that seem, &lt;em&gt;to tabletoppers&lt;/em&gt;, to be off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, from the perspective of dice&amp;amp;paper roleplayers, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14200/what-to-bear-in-mind-when-i-make-banded-mail&quot;&gt;question about making armour&lt;/a&gt; seems like something we'd have no expertise in. Well of course we don't, if we don't welcome LARPers to participate and share their expertise. I don't know a damned thing about banded mail (it goes horizontal, right?), but it absolutely belongs here &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; we are going to accept LARP questions at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ditto questions relevant to online RPers. If we drive them off, then of course we have no expertise. And, our tabletopper bias will make it seem reasonable to exclude such questions. The example about OtherSpace is a pointed example: most users here would look at such a question and think it's about videogames, or at best, about some trivia about an online RPing platform. In fact, OtherSpace runs on a Fudge variant, making it solidly on-topic. If we drive off online RPers, who here would know that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If questions like this that are relevant to a roleplaying subculture have nowhere to call home, then we're not really the Role-playing Games Stack Exchange, are we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T18:37:00.040" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1487" CreationDate="2012-05-09T18:47:28.787" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.  It's fine.  Why not?  As long as they are related to tabletop RP. History of Facebook is off topic.  Why do RPG.net Reviews suck now is on topic.  (Perhaps restated more diplomatically, natch). Let's not be exclusionary for the sake of it.  If the question has &lt;em&gt;quality&lt;/em&gt; problems address the quality problems, but scope wise it's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be honest, I am considering getting more confrontational over the hazing of new posters over some mythical sense of perfect question quality. There's a difference between poor quality and legit questions people have not being a &quot;question for the ages.&quot; People shouldn't have to justify themselves to ask questions clearly in site scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-05-09T18:52:43.833" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T18:52:43.833" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1490" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1487" CreationDate="2012-05-09T19:59:45.530" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think questions such as this, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1472/are-questions-about-how-a-rule-has-changed-over-the-years-on-topic&quot;&gt;the history question&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;the &quot;scope of RPG&quot; question&lt;/a&gt; are all parts of a bigger issue.  We need to figure a way to guide new users to &quot;good&quot; questions, and our options are limited.  Per the SE rules, we can only &quot;answer&quot; and &quot;close&quot; (and, eventually, &quot;delete&quot; but that's besides the point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We really need a middle ground.  We need a way to say &quot;hey, I'm going to take this question out of rotation while we help you clarify it so it doesn't get cluttered with useless answers&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would favor closing dubious questions with a LONG comment explaining why the question was closed, some ideas on how to narrow the scope, and a clear statement that closing is not permanent, just a way to keep clutter answers from clogging the site while said narrowing of the scope is handled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this particular question suggestions could range from @SevenSidedDie's &quot;What is the popular successor?&quot; to &quot;Where did user XX go?&quot; to &quot;What other public pbp forums exist?&quot;.  Point out that some of these might be valid questions, while some are most assuredly not.  Then ask the original poster to clarify and narrow the scope with a promise that the question can be re-opened once the scope is narrowed to an answerable, on-topic version of itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point here is to balance between &quot;improving content standards&quot; (which can easily be interpreted as hazing new users) and &quot;being welcoming and inviting&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@mxyzplk ... I have to say that I personally found this community to be pretty reasonable on the scale of inviting &amp;lt;-&gt; hazing.  Mileage may vary, though&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3492" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T19:59:45.530" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1487" CreationDate="2012-05-09T21:01:18.723" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I noted in chat, I don't think this is a particularly terrible question. The problem seems clear&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, and it seems relatively on topic. Depending on the size of the original site you could make a case for it being too localized (i.e. if the site was small enough that no one else had ever heard of it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; A point of clarification might be whether the asker is actually looking for the community (i.e. the people and the social contracts), the tools that were provided by that web site, or simply a hub for (some RPG related activity, such as PBP).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is the sort of clarification that's going to need some guidance to get to, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T21:01:18.723" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1492" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1443" CreationDate="2012-05-09T21:18:07.470" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A fix for this will be pushed in the next build, &gt; rev 2012.5.9.2511.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="138" LastActivityDate="2012-05-09T21:18:07.470" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2012-05-10T13:55:27.077" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMHO, requests for an open-ended list of occurrences are pretty much always off-topic for SE sites. Scoping them narrowly enough &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; make them answerable; it's not entirely clear that (a) this results in valuable, helpful content, or (b) that this helps the OP in what he's looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if a question that just asks for &quot;what are examples of...?&quot;, then I don't see much alternative to closing it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in the comments, it's helpful and friendly to check if the question is salvageable. Narrow scoping can be one avenue you can offer. Another option (and a superior one, when applicable) is asking &quot;what's your purpose in asking this?&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The example of designing a point-buy system is an excellent example here, because then the question can be rewritten to focus on this (impeccably on-topic) issue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Consider rephrasing as, e.g., &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What existing point-buy systems provide valuable insights to a system designer?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; This formulation may &lt;em&gt;allow&lt;/em&gt; a list-like question, but it also explicitly requires every answer to have a valuable insight. This avoids many typical problems with list questions. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Similarly, &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What would be a good sampling of games representing typical uses of point-buy systems?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; -- you &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; come up with an immense number of lists, but you should also have &lt;em&gt;one or two answers&lt;/em&gt; whose lists would be recognized as meeting the goal. &#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(This is kind of the opposite tack to the previous one - &quot;typical uses&quot; is more limited scoping; &quot;list of uses and &lt;em&gt;why they're interesting&lt;/em&gt;&quot; doesn't narrow the scope but requires valuable content.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The most direct approach might be &lt;strong&gt;What are important balance considerations to take into account when designing a point-buy system?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;. Extremely broad, and inviting lengthy answers, but that's really OP's actual goal - and it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; an answerable question. (I don't know what RPG.SE's policy is on questions this broad; I know at Writers.SE we usually accept them.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; If a question is just a request for a list of game titles, it's not very useful anyhow. If the question has more to it then that, it can probably be edited into a better, SE-appropriate question, simply by focusing on the actual goal/intent. This may require interrogating the OP and/or heroic edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2174" LastEditorUserId="2174" LastEditDate="2012-05-10T17:04:13.583" LastActivityDate="2012-05-10T17:04:13.583" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-12T13:50:41.087" Score="11" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I know, it is okay to answer your own questions. It is also recommended to show your progress with a question, and this is easily accomplished by editing the question itself and incorporating the progress there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When should I answer my own question and when should I edit the outcome into the question? (Obviously, if someone provided a satisfactory answer, then accepting it is more elegant, so suppose nobody provided a satisfying answer, or combining several answers gives a good one, or some scenario like those.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-11T22:33:54.130" LastActivityDate="2019-07-11T22:33:54.130" Title="Should I edit the outcome into the question, or answer my own question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|editing|self-answering|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1494" CreationDate="2012-05-12T15:37:10.633" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It strikes me as appropriate when you actually decide on a course of action.  Certainly with the &quot;best answer&quot; button it identifies the closest answer to your desired solution, but it never hurts to put a synopsis of how the other responses led you to a course of action as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3273" LastActivityDate="2012-05-12T15:37:10.633" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1494" CreationDate="2012-05-12T16:09:06.897" Score="13" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If what you did was mostly different from the other answers and solved your problem, post your own answer and accept it. There's a waiting period for self-accepting, but other than that it's fair game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is to get the best answer to have the green checkmark next to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If what you did was mostly the same as an existing answer with a few tweaks, accept that answer and either post a comment to it or edit it to show what you changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you don't consider what you're doing to solve your problem, post it as an edit to your question, with an explanation of why it isn't a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-05-12T16:09:06.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1497" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-16T17:13:10.383" Score="11" ViewCount="600" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ads - 2013&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations, RPG! As a perk of graduating, you get Community Promotion Ads!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Users of the community will provide images and content links, and then community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool server utilities&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;scripts packs or power tools&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be &lt;strong&gt;220 x 250 pixels&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently 6) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/1497&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2205" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-08-30T14:14:17.863" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2012" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="7" ClosedDate="2012-12-10T16:25:26.103" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-05-16T17:20:51.293" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1498" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-05-16T17:20:42.700" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hJIL.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2205" LastActivityDate="2012-05-16T17:20:42.700" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-05-16T17:20:42.700" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1478" CreationDate="2012-05-21T17:49:40.137" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I love stack exchange, but down-voting - as implemented here and just about everywhere else - is problematic in many ways. Here as it discourages new users. I know for a fact we've lost potentially good contributors because of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I happen to be an author on the topic, BTW:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/059615979X&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.amazon.com/Building-Reputation-Systems-Randy-Farmer/dp/059615979X/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the book is excerpted - specifically the danger of negative karma:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://buildingreputation.com/writings/2010/04/dont_display_negative_karma_re.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://buildingreputation.com/writings/2010/04/dont_display_negative_karma_re.html&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;http://buildingreputation.com/writings/2009/10/the_dollhouse_mafia_or_why_to.html&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://buildingreputation.com/writings/2010/02/on_karma.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://buildingreputation.com/writings/2010/02/on_karma.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Hi! SMACK! Welcome to Stack Exchange! SMACK! Your post is off [somehow]! SMACK! [-3 for you!]&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of my talks cover this topic downvotes and karma challenges:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;amp;rct=j&amp;amp;q=&amp;amp;esrc=s&amp;amp;source=web&amp;amp;cd=1&amp;amp;ved=0CGMQtwIwAA&amp;amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DYn7e0J9m6rE&amp;amp;ei=lX66T-eNMoWSiAKorKjjBg&amp;amp;usg=AFQjCNGLolFuKYbAAkUp10G_1DxGeYOVhw&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;amp;rct=j&amp;amp;q=&amp;amp;esrc=s&amp;amp;source=web&amp;amp;cd=1&amp;amp;ved=0CGMQtwIwAA&amp;amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DYn7e0J9m6rE&amp;amp;ei=lX66T-eNMoWSiAKorKjjBg&amp;amp;usg=AFQjCNGLolFuKYbAAkUp10G_1DxGeYOVhw&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to re-iterate that I think SE has an awesome reputation best-of-breed system, but it isn't perfect and has (as all of these systems do) certain pathologies and evolved cultural norms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastActivityDate="2012-05-21T17:49:40.137" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1500" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-23T07:19:50.247" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would you be interested in running a week &lt;em&gt;system agnostic&lt;/em&gt; drive?  I am happy to give away some reputation for good questions/answers. The aim would be to broaden the site to include more questions about role playing in general instead of the heavy D&amp;amp;D rules ones. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2012-05-23T13:05:54.593" Title="Weekly drive idea: system agnostic" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1500" CreationDate="2012-05-23T13:05:54.593" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd much rather see one of the concrete tags like gm-techniques, roleplaying, or campaign-development highlighted. Those tags tend to create non-rules questions naturally, and are a bit more cohesive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;System-agnostic has a lot of issues: A case could be made that a lot of system-tagged questions should also be tagged system-agnostic, and a lot of people already strip out a lot of important information from their question to create a &quot;pure&quot; system agnostic question. Incentivizing people to break the tag seems like a bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-05-23T13:05:54.593" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1502" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-24T20:30:55.313" Score="1" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1483/is-there-a-functional-purpose-to-putting-things-in-code-text-here&quot;&gt;Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SteveC is editing a lot of other users' questions and answers to put the names of books, place names and races in backticks, which &lt;code&gt;highlights them like this&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a good idea? Should we ask him to stop?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2012-05-24T21:26:18.913" Title="Is it good practice to highlight proper nouns in code tags?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2012-05-25T03:05:45.110" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1502" CreationDate="2012-05-24T21:19:24.990" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not a big user here, but here's my two cents:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could see highlighting certain specific game terms, &lt;em&gt;when they are a big deal to the overall context of the post&lt;/em&gt;. Like, I dunno, highlighting class abilities for D&amp;amp;D 3/4 does make the text a bit more readable in some ways. It sorta stops you a little and says, &quot;Here, here is the thing you should look up.&quot; Actual links to some kind of reference thingy would be preferable, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems absolutely pointless to highlight &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12227/possible-explanations-for-the-mourning&quot;&gt;fictional place names&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming here without any foreknowledge of the site's style, seeing &lt;code&gt;lots&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;lots&lt;/code&gt; of highlight text in one paragraph was &lt;code&gt;really jarring&lt;/code&gt; and didn't really make &lt;code&gt;the text&lt;/code&gt; easier to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-05-24T21:26:18.913" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2012-05-24T21:23:51.940" Score="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel that other formatting would be more appropriate than code tags. It's highly unusual for that formatting style to be used for every book title and game term, and some users may not appreciate their questions and answers being edited to include a non-standard formatting type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't adhere to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/the-code-element.html#the-code-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the HTML5 specification&lt;/a&gt; for the 'code' element, which specifies that it is used to represent a &quot;fragment of computer code&quot;, including a string that a computer would recognize such as a filename or program name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also feel that in the current design, it breaks the flow of text and makes the proper nouns stand out too much, when simple capitals or italics would suffice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following are more standard:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For D&amp;amp;D spells, lowercase italics: &lt;i&gt;summon monster i&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For book titles, italics: &lt;i&gt;Eberron Campaign Setting&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For proper nouns including D&amp;amp;D magic items and feats, plain capitals: Hand of Vecna, Power Attack, Argonessen, Dragonborn, Monte Cook&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastActivityDate="2012-05-24T21:23:51.940" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1506" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1478" CreationDate="2012-05-25T07:26:43.147" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, there are 2 or three SE communities that I will no longer participate in because of the voting and closing standards of those communities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sad part is, those communities will never know about it. They won't know why I left, and they won't know if they are chasing people away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there might be better ways to handle the voting, I think another option is to send out emails to people who have signed up, asked a question, and then not visited the site again in 30 days.  Ask them why they have not come back, and ask them if there were things that would make them come back instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then anonymously, put up the answers to those surveys in some section of the SE meta site.  I think that would help everyone even if the current downvoting system stays in place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2012-05-25T07:26:43.147" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1507" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-27T18:26:49.947" Score="10" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simple question:  I play tested DnD Next the other day, and I have a bunch of questions about how to understand certain rules/monsters charachter sheets etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are we allowed to ask questions about DnD Next PlayTest packets, or are they &quot;too localized&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2012-05-27T20:39:31.137" Title="Can we ask questions about DnD Next?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1507" CreationDate="2012-05-27T18:34:04.453" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Go for it!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe it is an RPG :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-05-27T18:34:04.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1507" CreationDate="2012-05-27T20:39:31.137" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, but there needs to be some consistency with the tags.  So far we have dnd-5e and dnd-next.  There really is no need for both of these...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2012-05-27T20:39:31.137" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1510" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-05-29T04:22:14.133" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thetangledweb.net/forums/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pXMcS.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;The Tangled Web&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3492" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T04:22:14.133" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-05-29T04:22:14.133" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1511" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-05-29T04:39:31.957" Score="11" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Online Playtesting Agreement (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DNDNextPlaytestingAgreement.pdf) may prohibit excerpting the rules as is common practice on rpg.se:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You agree not to copy, excerpt, distribute (either in physical or digital &#xA;  format), publish, display, disseminate, release and/or transmit, in whole or&#xA;   in part, or create derivative materials from any Playtest Materials provided to you...  Notwithstanding the&#xA;  foregoing, you may publicly discuss your thoughts regarding the D&amp;amp;D Next Playtest Materials and your playtesting experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a lawyer, but my reading of this is that we are free to discuss the materials, but not excerpt them here. I would love to be wrong about this, if anyone who is a lawyer and/or has more explicit information from WotC could chime in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="323" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T12:38:06.253" Title="Are we allowed to post excerpts from the 5e D&amp;D playtest?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1511" CreationDate="2012-05-29T08:01:28.747" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sounds to me, like people will just &quot;have to know what you are talking about&quot;, and you are correct, that we can not quote the rules or paraphrase them directly.  But we can likely say things like, &quot;the kobold has 2 hitpoints, can the reaper kill them on a miss?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T08:01:28.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1513" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1511" CreationDate="2012-05-29T12:38:06.253" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-horizons-upcoming-edition-d-d/323569-guidelines-d-d-next-playtest-adventure-discussion-here-enw.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;clarification provided to ENWorld by WotC&lt;/a&gt; is that &quot;You can talk about your current and previous playtest experiences and even talk about the rules and mechanics as long as you don’t directly quote text.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is not in the business of enforcing miscellaneous contracts. Therefore you might or might not be jeopardizing your own OPTA by posting rules here, but that is not our business and there will be no mod action on posts of this sort.  This is the same approach taken to copyright in general, as we are not lawyers - SE central actions on legal takedown notices but that is it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T12:38:06.253" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1514" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1515" CreationDate="2012-05-29T19:58:44.443" Score="10" ViewCount="195" Body="&lt;p&gt;How should we be tagging D&amp;amp;D Next questions during the playtest(s)? Right now we have questions tagged with a random combination of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-16T09:53:47.467" LastActivityDate="2017-06-16T09:53:47.467" Title="Tagging D&amp;D Next / 5e playtest questions" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1514" CreationDate="2012-05-29T19:58:44.910" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are problems with the two existing system tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; may or may not be the name of the later edition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; also may or may not be the name of the later edition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Both refer to a system that doesn't exist yet, therefore the current questions are about rules that may or may not actually be in a game system of that name in the future.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose that we create a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag to cover these questions. It is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Accurate and future-proof&lt;/strong&gt;: It accurately reflects the name of the system currently being asked about, and will keep these questions and answers segregated from future questions about the next edition of D&amp;amp;D without having to clean up the tags later.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discoverable&lt;/strong&gt;: It will be mostly discoverable as the asker types in a tag. Anyone typing in &quot;playtest&quot; will also have the chance to notice that we have a dedicated D&amp;amp;D Next playtest tag. It won't intercept people who are tagging &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and avoiding the &quot;Next&quot; name entirely, but those questions also appear to be a minority (1, as of this typing).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That should resolve the problems with the existing tags. Manual retagging should be enough to handle incoming questions. A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e-playtest&lt;/a&gt; synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; would nicely close the discoverability gap mentioned above. We might consider a temporary synonym from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; (to be removed once/if &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot; ever refers to a non-playtest ruleset), but only if manual retagging proves to be troublesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(To forestall one objection, we can't synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; or any other proposed tag because we have existing questions about &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&quot; from before Next was announced. (And I'll leave aside the question of whether we should have speculative &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions as a can of worms that's best considered separately from this issue.))&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2012-05-29T20:32:20.970" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T20:32:20.970" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1516" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1514" CreationDate="2012-05-29T20:36:45.290" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lets just use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and commit to adapting the rules questions as the playtest changes. Its silly to create this tag soup for a game that is eventually going to be a single entity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; into it and you have discoverability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-05-29T20:36:45.290" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2012-05-30T09:51:48.133" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/probability&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;probability&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;probability&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; seem to cover similar ground.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-05-30T10:39:31.647" LastActivityDate="2012-05-30T10:39:31.647" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-05-30T09:51:48.133" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1514" CreationDate="2012-05-30T19:27:54.850" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose that we synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; for now, and make sure that all current posts are ALSO tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest&lt;/a&gt;.  After all: if this works then D&amp;amp;D isn't likely to be the only game that will go through a public playtesting period such as this nor the only one that will have significant changes when playtesting happens.  This way, when the next game down the line starts playtesting we can tag it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nextgamedowntheline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nextgamedowntheline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nextgamedowntheline&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would make it obvious that these questions were asked during the playtest period, while not over-cluttering the tagspace with extra &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nextgamedowntheline-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nextgamedowntheline-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nextgamedowntheline-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3492" LastActivityDate="2012-05-30T19:27:54.850" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-05-31T05:30:37.500" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BQvCs.png&quot; alt=&quot;Find out the odds&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2012-05-31T17:27:19.757" LastActivityDate="2012-05-31T17:27:19.757" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-05-31T05:30:37.500" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2012-05-31T08:22:58.753" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has the practical benefit of making keywords standing out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way this has been done does not meet my personal aesthetic preference.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Also, it's difficult to define a rule when doing this kind of review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How Deep?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which are the terms to be formatted?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;If a system has a clear definition for attack, should the word &lt;code&gt;attack&lt;/code&gt; be formatted? Should it be formatted when appearing as a noun, as verb or both?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How Far?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should every keyword and definition in a post be formatted? Some technical answers and questions could become a clutter of formatted keywords that really defeats the purpose of formatting them in first place.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should someone format only the terms relevant to the question title? The, who defines how &lt;em&gt;distant&lt;/em&gt; from the original topic a term is?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should the formatting being used only on the term's first occurrence in the text or every time the term is used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1018" LastActivityDate="2012-05-31T08:22:58.753" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1523" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-01T15:55:59.883" Score="2" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title &lt;strong&gt;Dungeon Crawl Classics&lt;/strong&gt; is applied to various D&amp;amp;D modules (for multiple editions) released by Goodman Games over the years. With their recent release of their Dungeon Crawl Classic RPG, should new tags be created for questions related to their rule set? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment RPG.SE has the tag &lt;strong&gt;[dungeon-crawl-classics]&lt;/strong&gt;. This could be ambiguous when users search for questions related to either the modules or the RPG. Perhaps the tags &lt;strong&gt;[dungeon-crawl-classics-rpg]&lt;/strong&gt; and/or &lt;strong&gt;[dcc-rpg]&lt;/strong&gt; should be created?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My other thought is that questions regarding the modules may not make sense in the first place, in which case the current tag is perhaps sufficient. I'm curious what the community thinks about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3436" LastActivityDate="2012-06-02T18:42:06.257" Title="Should we create a tag for the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG system?" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1523" CreationDate="2012-06-01T19:26:35.873" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The bottom line is that there is one question for the game (mine), so worrying about what to tag it isn't very useful as that tag is going to get automatically removed in a couple months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-crawl-classics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-crawl-classics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-crawl-classics&lt;/a&gt; is fine.  Whatever you want to call it, it needs more questions.  My DCC campaign starts next week, perhaps that will help :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-06-01T19:26:35.873" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1523" CreationDate="2012-06-02T18:42:06.257" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't &quot;create tags for things.&quot;  The tag system is emergent - in fact, tags that aren't applied to m ore than one question are automatically deleted.  If there are more than a couple questions that end up getting tagged about the DCC RPG, then the tag will live.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of what the tag should be for the RPG vs the adventures, dcc-rpg is fine, though everything here is RPGs, so dungeon-crawl-classics would be fine too.  I wish there were more questions about actual adventures, people seem to just be using the site for &quot;core rules&quot; questions and I'm not sure why, but I think preplanning for a possible conflict is putting too much thought into a deliberately folksonomic system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-06-02T18:42:06.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1526" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-04T20:00:01.780" Score="8" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2012 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-06-20T00:14:43.323" Title="2012 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|moderators|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-06-04T20:00:01.780" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1527" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-04T20:06:29.123" Score="6" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we will be holding a Town Hall Chat session with the candidates.  This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.  As Rebecca is on vacation at the moment, I shall be the one to work with the candidates to find a time that allows the most participation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Town Hall Chat took place Wednesday the 13th at 15:00:00Z UTC. A digest of the chat can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1537/2012-moderator-election-town-hall-chat-digest&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the details so far:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I would like to schedule this towards the beginning of the primary phase.  This means that I am looking at the 11th-13th. As soon as I coordinate with the existing moderators and candidates to find a best fit based on availability, I will edit this post with details on the &quot;when&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Town Hall Chat will be a one-hour event using our &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;sort=active&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;chat platform&lt;/a&gt;.  I will update this post with a direct link to the chat room once the event is scheduled.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The format will be an open discussion.  Users are encouraged to pose questions to the candidates regarding their thoughts on moderation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After the chat session, a digest of the event will be permanently linked here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T20:41:49.267" Title="2012 Moderator Election: Town Hall Chat" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1528" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2012-06-04T20:44:04.930" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.  Years ago my D&amp;amp;D group got into a stupid argument over the interpretation of a rule.  Shocking, I know.  IIRC the debate was whether or not Fireball would clear out a mage's Mirror Images.  The text we got hung up on was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any successful attack against an image destroys it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically we weren't sure if &quot;attack&quot; was a game term or not.  A successfully cast fireball attacks an image.  But no attack roll is made, so no game term attack has ever taken place.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would argue that there should be syntax to indicate what is and isn't meant as a game term.  Of the available syntax, code makes sense to me.  I also wouldn't want to imply that bold or italics couldn't be used elsewhere because they were reserved for game terms.  I see no other use for code text, so why not use it in this way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, most of the time applying code is just being pedantic.  I wouldn't use it everywhere, only when it resolves ambiguity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2012-06-04T20:44:04.930" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1529" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1531" CreationDate="2012-06-08T01:10:26.490" Score="7" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got a question on my nomination saying &quot;but aren't you a mod already?&quot;  I guess I figured this was for reelection of the previous mods as well, but after reviewing the posts it's unclear.  Should me, CRoss, etc. be nominating ourselves to stand as mods, or is this for additional mods beyond us?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="2012 Community Moderator Election - Reelection Too?" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1529" CreationDate="2012-06-08T02:16:44.477" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Elected&lt;/em&gt; mods stay seated and don't have to be reelected, you only have to &quot;renominate&quot; is when you're a Pro Temp mod entering in the first Election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you're a pro temp (like all other mods this round) if you want to run, you'll have to nominate yourself and be elected. Pro temps are &lt;em&gt;temporary&lt;/em&gt; mods, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/984/should-community-moderators-be-elected-for-life-or-have-terms&quot;&gt;elected mods are for life&lt;/a&gt;*.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;*unless they step down, outstanding circumstances ect&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2996" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-06-08T02:21:01.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1529" CreationDate="2012-06-08T02:18:40.227" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you should. Refer back to the emails we sent you when you were appointed (yeah, I know, so much dust) or &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/moderator-pro-tempore/&quot;&gt;the Pro Tempore program blog post&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Candidates will be contacted and three of them will be selected to act as provisional Moderators until the community holds formal elections after the Beta period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369/moderator-pro-tem-announcement&quot;&gt;the other pro tempore moderators&lt;/a&gt; can (AND SHOULD!) nominate yourself for re-election. Once the election is over, all non-elected pro-tems will no longer be moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, thanks for &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of your work in getting the site to this point! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-06-08T02:18:40.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1532" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1535" CreationDate="2012-06-12T19:45:03.273" Score="4" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed on the election page that I don't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/12/strunk-white&quot;&gt;Strunk and White&lt;/a&gt;, but I would think I should have it.  My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross?tab=activity&amp;amp;sort=revisions&quot;&gt;user activity page&lt;/a&gt; shows that I've done &lt;em&gt;162&lt;/em&gt; revisions, while the badge only requires 80 edits.  Why don't I have the badge?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Why don't I have Strunk and White?" Tags="|support|status-bydesign|badges|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1532" CreationDate="2012-06-12T21:47:40.490" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Have you &quot;edited 80 posts,&quot; though?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on a quick glance at your revisions, you've made multiple revisions to some posts (not that there's anything wrong with that ;) ), so it's possible that 162 revisions is actually only spread over (for example) 70 individual posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have 228 revisions on Board and Card Games, &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/review/&quot;&gt;per the review page&lt;/a&gt;, I've only modified 75 separate posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2012-06-13T14:59:28.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1534" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1536" CreationDate="2012-06-13T14:48:36.167" Score="6" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;I hopped on chat for the Town Hall and saw this at the bottom of the window:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oZBmH.png&quot; alt=&quot;help text&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The logo doesn't look great, but the real problem is that the help text is completely unreadable. Highlighting it gives:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You must be logged in to talk. See the faq for more information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm tagging this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bug&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feature-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt;, but if someone better suited disagrees feel free to re-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2012-06-14T12:02:46.353" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:02:46.353" Title="The chat help-text for guests is unreadable" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|chat|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1535" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1532" CreationDate="2012-06-13T16:07:09.237" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You need to edit separate posts, not make 80 individual edits.  If you've more than doubled up your edits you may need to go a bit farther.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check your current progress by viewing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/&quot;&gt;Review page&lt;/a&gt;.  Your progress towards your next edit badge is in the middle/lower of the right hand column.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The full requirements can be found on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions&quot;&gt;meta.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Perform a total of 80 edits between questions and answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edits on deleted posts do not count&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edits to your own posts do not count&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edits to CW posts do count&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edits that consist only of tag changes do not count&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag wiki edits do count&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edits you suggest before gaining full edit privileges do count, once approved&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each edited post counts only once, regardless of how many additional edits you may submit&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2012-06-13T16:07:09.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1534" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:02:38.117" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm tagging this &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'bug'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'feature-request'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt;, but if someone better suited disagrees feel free to re-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes there's disagreement about the distinction between those two, but readable text is a feature that can be expected by default, so &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'bug'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt; is just fine in this case :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fixed now, thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:02:38.117" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1537" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:16:04.697" Score="2" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following is a &quot;digest&quot; version of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1527/2012-moderator-election-town-hall-chat&quot;&gt;2012 Moderator Election Town Hall Chat&lt;/a&gt;. The format, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/77831/how-can-we-improve-the-town-hall-digests&quot;&gt;as described on Meta Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;, is one &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; to this question &lt;em&gt;for every question&lt;/em&gt; asked in the Town Hall, containing all the candidate's answers to that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To view the digest chronologically, please sort the answers by &quot;oldest&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have questions or comments about this, &lt;strong&gt;please do not answer this question&lt;/strong&gt; as the answers are designed to be used for the questions from the Town hall itself. Instead, please ask on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/77831/how-can-we-improve-the-town-hall-digests&quot;&gt;the parent question&lt;/a&gt; or in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.meta.stackoverflow.com/rooms/352/town-hall-discussion&quot;&gt;the Town Hall Discussion Room&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see any corrections which need to be made to this digest, or if you were a candidate who was unable to attend the town hall and would like your answers included, please @GraceNote or @TimStone &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/3744/rpg-town-hall-chat&quot;&gt;in the chat room&lt;/a&gt; and let us know!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T13:09:15.350" Title="2012 Moderator Election - Town Hall Chat Digest" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="22" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:16:05.307" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945685#4945685&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;One of the big problems was the &quot;physics question&quot; category. How would you have dealt with those slew of questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945727#4945727&quot;&gt;asked for clarification&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm going to need a little bit of a background on these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945756#4945756&quot;&gt;clarified&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Set of questions like &quot;How far do you fly and what happens if you invert a pouch of holding underwater?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945776#4945776&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  With 3.5 and 4e tags that made it functionally unanswerable without huge initial sets of assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945767#4945767&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I was for them initially, but at this point my stance on them is similar to my stance on other setting questions. If you can relate them actual mechanics then they are ok (land speed record builds etc). But if they are just speculative, or purely joke questions they've gotta go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945794#4945794&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Standing is very important to me: do you have a real reason to be asking this question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945797#4945797&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  &quot;Real world stuff&quot; seems to be where things get trickiest. They're best when they are tied to a concrete scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945801#4945801&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  If the question is essentially &quot;solve a physics problem in RPG trappings&quot; it's off topic, and should be closed as such, deleted if necessary.  If the question is &quot;How do I model X aspect of reality in Y game&quot;, that's ok, and probably just needs a little comment nudge to keep it focused and on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945898#4945898&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I agree with Brian's answer, if they're practical and actually serve a purpose, keep them.  The rest is junk and too localized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945981#4945981&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm in favor of allowing them to remain open, so long as the question has applicability to more than one game and it doesn't seem like they're simply thought-experiments or &quot;whittling.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955023#4955023&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Generally agree with @CRoss' answer - physics for the sake of physics or as a joke or an intellectual exercise is off topic.  I was strongly for closing the goblin-bag of holding question for example, despite later protestations of &quot;well it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; happen...&quot;.  Relevant to real gameplay is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:16:05.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1539" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:19:02.073" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3ddd523d80551bae52ebe0434e0315e0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Rob&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/34572/rob&quot;&gt;Rob&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945731#4945731&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;My question: What do you see as the biggest problem at the moment for RPG Stack Exchange and how will you tackle/deal with it&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945816#4945816&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  how we deal with campaign research and system recommendation questions. I think we need to renew some meta discussion on campaign research specifically. (I've got a post floating in my head, but haven't put it down to screen yet)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945850#4945850&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Also the fact that we didn't get a Lawful Evil moderator candidate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945826#4945826&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  The huge numbers of edge-case games. Part of the way I'm solving the problem is making sure we're actually running games (and a high proportion of indie games too) to build expertise and attract non-mainstream gamers. Functionally, we need to make sure to not be &quot;all D&amp;amp;D all the time.&quot; and the best way to do that is to have activities that appeal to those players to attract experts to generate and answer questions with real standing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945852#4945852&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Finding ways to get people to explain the context of their problems, rather than having them try to &quot;purify&quot; the questions into blandness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945858#4945858&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  going through the review queue, one major thing that i've noticed is a tendacy towards keeping shorter answers, even awarding them as the accepted answer, even if there's very little context to the answer itself.  My solution would be to encourage the community to encourge more detailed answers, such as many that @brian-ballsunstanton usually provides&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945885#4945885&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Short answers, especially ones that aren't grounded in the literature, aren't particularly useful. Comments (and the occasional downvote) are a great way to motivate people to cite.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945889#4945889&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Bringing in new users in a friendly and productive way.  We're starting to be a little bit known, but there's a big difference between being a positive contributor here and on your generic RPG forum.  We need to welcome new users actively, and gently point them to the FAQ and good examples.  We need to close/delete bad examples when encouraging the user to change doesn't help.  We can't turn away new users, and we can't allow new users to change what makes the site work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946619#4946619&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Right now, the biggest problems for RPG.StackExchange are the perceptions that it's not open to new members or new players and that it's actually the D&amp;amp;D Stack in disguise. The first part is covered by a later question; the second, I think, can be handled with active curation of other games by interested posters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955054#4955054&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Attracting new users and not scaring them off.  Our stats aren't all that good and aren't growing consistently, which means we are not attracting and keeping people effectively.  I think reaching out to game stores, advertising on gaming sites and gaming con bulletins will help get eyes and then balancing enough moderation to not have total junk with being friendly enough that a new guy doesn't ask an honest question and get mod-closed in 30 seconds and driven off will keep them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:19:02.073" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1540" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:21:40.713" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Tim Stone&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/12325/tim-stone&quot;&gt;Tim Stone&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945892#4945892&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Two highly respected members of the community get in a comment war on a question. They both flag each other's comments and are cussing and it is clear that this is beyond a heated argument. What do you do, what don't you do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945918#4945918&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; At that point, winnow the comments, and ask them to knock it off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945935#4945935&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; I'd nuke the comments, lock the question, then try to snag them both into individual private chats, failing that probably a very polite mod message with a 24 hour cool down attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945943#4945943&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Good question. Lock down comments and bring them both to a (probably private) chat. This is something that needs moderation and cooling down. By changing the situation and being able to have people state grievances, it takes the problem outside the public eye. If that persisted, I would impose cooling off periods (equitable) for both of them, with an attempt to have dialogue in the venues that were still open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945951#4945951&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Engaging in their comment stream beyond a simple &quot;Let's take this to chat.&quot; or &quot;We're getting off topic.&quot; only adds to the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945950#4945950&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;strong&gt;Do:&lt;/strong&gt; Delete comments, protect contentious posts.  Talk to both of them about it, and suspend &lt;em&gt;if necessary&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;strong&gt;Don't&lt;/strong&gt; Take sides, or give the appearance there of.  Don't suspend people out of hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945976#4945976&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; I &lt;strong&gt;wouldn't&lt;/strong&gt; jump into the argument for either side.  I would comment that both need to take their argument to chat, then clear the comments.  If they both get too heated and start to actually take it out on eachother (downvoting, etc.) then they'll both get suspended (probably for a day).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955074#4955074&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Delete comments, lock the question temporarily, try to get them into chat. Most folks cool down when the comments start disappearing and further intervention is seldom needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:21:40.713" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:23:55.717" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/b3b22dc140c835e42f16f8366ffb449b?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Grace Note&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/757/grace-note&quot;&gt;Grace Note&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945909#4945909&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945977#4945977&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Valuable is a function of acceptance by the community. The best recent edge-case of that was the rash of &lt;code&gt;backticking&lt;/code&gt; proper nouns. While the highlighting is somewhat useful, the edit-spam and the... &quot;let's code-indicate everything&quot; eventually caused me as normal user to comment with a &quot;hey, can you only format according to our recent meta discussion?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946003#4946003&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Delete the comments.  Send them a message stating what the problem is, while recognizing their contributions.   Make a point to upvote their valuable, non-flamy comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946015#4946015&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Figure out what the problem is and ask them to address that part of their posts. Either in the comments or in chat. Failing either of those two a message outlining what I think is the problem&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946120#4946120&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Talk with them personally about what's going on by trying to get them into chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955104#4955104&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Start by pruning comments and posting the standard &quot;this isn't a discussion forum, comments are for clarifying answers only, please post your own answer and let voting work if you have a strong opinion&quot; verbiage. If it persists, send them a mod message explaining the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:23:55.717" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1542" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:26:02.220" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/6c38e00d92cd9bd3ada3392b15015553?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;F. Randall Farmer http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/6c38e00d92cd9bd3ada3392b15015553?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/306/f-randall-farmer&quot;&gt;F. Randall Farmer&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4945999#4945999&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;In order for any online community to thrive, it must grow, which means retaining new users. As a moderator, you play a huge role in converting a first-time contributor into a recurring one. What actions will you take to nurture our new users?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946075#4946075&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Immediate positive and negative feedback. Beyond voting, comments are a great way to shape behaviour. An &quot;attaboy&quot; comment &lt;em&gt;immediately&lt;/em&gt; after a good first post links the validation of the comment and the rep with the quality of the post. Just like in education, reward the actions you like, punish the actions you dislike. Comments are one of the best ways to do that. Beyond that, expanding the reach of the site through recommendations in appropriate venues and game stores is a job for all users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;C. Ross http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946096#4946096&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Get a welcome in as early as possible, and try to point them to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; and good examples.  It's important with new users to give positive re-inforcement for things that are even basically good (upvotes, positive comments).  You have to make clear the rules early, or set the site up for a more painful breakup later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;C. Ross http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946151#4946151&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Also in the past, we've had some success inviting people who make it to 20 rep, but are confused to chat to talk about it.  It tends to give people a better view, and a quicker intro into the culture.  We should probably bring that back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946163#4946163&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  The use of chat as a behavour shaping tool is excellent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wax eagle http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946106#4946106&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I think an initial welcome comment is key, even if that comment isn't exactly positive towards their question and is accompanied by a down or close vote, a friendly welcoming &quot;hey this is why this is good&quot; or &quot;hi, this is why this is bad&quot; is key.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946117#4946117&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  This is one I've not entirely figured out. My main response at the moment: 1. Communicate as much as possible (whys, specifically, especially if a close or clarification is needed); 2. Go the extra mile to make their posts shine; 3. Weight upvoting a bit higher for new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DForck42 http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946255#4946255&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  one of the big issues with retaining new users is that, their first question or two &lt;em&gt;usually sucks&lt;/em&gt;, or iust off-topic for the site.  just closing their question saying &quot;blargh this doesn't belong here!&quot; will immediately upset them.  what i liek to do is to take a personal approach, being nice and saying that i regretfully have to close their question (and i honestly do hate doing it), but i also give them guidelines on what to do and where the resources are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DForck42 http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946257#4946257&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; i also encourge them to visit our meta if they don't understand why their question was closed&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Jadasc http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946847#4946847&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Positive reinforcement through comments. Asking leading questions to help improve imperfect but solid answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mxyzplk http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955126#4955126&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  As mentioned in my previous answer I think this is the #1 issue for our SE.  I make it a goal to spend as much time constructively improving questions as I do closing them/arguing about whether they should be closed.  I also wait for community close votes before mod-closing (except in egregious cases).  Being welcoming - not just by saying &quot;hi&quot; but by shepherding questions and answers short of closing and deleting - is the way to do this IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:26:02.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:29:05.727" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/ccdd689e8c5dd22031cbd2287091a696?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Kalamane&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/18139/kalamane&quot;&gt;Kalamane&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946010#4946010&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt;  You were a mod on Literature.Stackexchange which failed.  What did you learn from this that you can apply to this site?  This applies to other candidates that have had similar situations.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946074#4946074&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  the first thing that i leanred is that, there &lt;strong&gt;has&lt;/strong&gt; to be community involvement with the site when making decisions.  part of the issue we had was that we couldn't get anyone interested in the meta discussions after the first couple of months.  the second thing i learned is that the fun questions (the one's that arent' very deep) are good to attract traffic, but you have to have deeper questions to keep most of yoru traffic&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946156#4946156&quot;&gt;added&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm a mod on Chrisianity stackexchange, and we had a huge turnout initially with some serious quality issues, however the way we handled it knocked our traffic off rather dramatically. One of the things I learned through that was that you have to address major site issues carefully and effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:29:05.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1544" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:31:10.513" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Tim Stone http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/12325/tim-stone&quot;&gt;Tim Stone&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946159#4946159&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;When you see a question with major issues (poorly-written, argumentative, etc.), what tool do you reach for first?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;C. Ross http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946183#4946183&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Comment, followed by close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;C. Ross http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946212#4946212&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; The corollary to this is often when the mods see it, one of the site grognards has already left a great constructive comment, and we don't need to pile on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946195#4946195&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Major issues is defined as &quot;I can't edit this into shape.&quot; So therefore the comment function. I tend to request for clairification often, especially when the requirements are unclear. We should have a discussion on meta, however, about preemptive closing to avoid getting bad-answers that then lock the question into a bad form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946197#4946197&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Edit if reasonably possible (usually for quality), comment, then close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wax eagle http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946207#4946207&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; This is a tough one. Major issues are a comment followed by a close. If the issue is easily fixed then I might edit instead of closing, but mostly the user needs to come back and learn from their mistake so closing is the right call&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Jadasc http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946241#4946241&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; If argumentative, the comment button; if poorly written, the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DForck42 http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946304#4946304&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; if it's poorly written, i'll just edit it to clean it up.  if it's argumentative, i'll usualyl close the question (and edit it if necessary) saying why it was closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mxyzplk http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955148#4955148&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; The comment.  You can always escalate - but recently when this question was posted - and completely sucked - I commented and it got converted perfectly without having to edit or close: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14900/combat-centric-1st-or-2nd-level-adventure-with-a-native-american-theme&quot;&gt;Combat-centric 1st or 2nd level adventure with a Native American theme?&lt;/a&gt; I believe in starting with the light touch - you can always edit or close in a couple hours instead of RIGHT NOW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:31:10.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:33:25.957" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/6c38e00d92cd9bd3ada3392b15015553?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;F. Randall Farmer&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/306/f-randall-farmer&quot;&gt;F. Randall Farmer&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946221#4946221&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Jeff Atwood, co-creator of Stack Exchange, suggested that this platform isn't a perfect fit for all communities. Personally, I see some clear differences between this community and the IT-related communities, such as Stack Overflow. What differences do you see and how would you work to adapt our policies (and possibly suggest technology improvements?) to improve the &quot;fit&quot;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946284#4946284&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  As a tech improvement, getting a gaming venue more integrated will help build an active chat community. (though this is something that's solvable with various other apps out there, it means that people aren't &lt;em&gt;on&lt;/em&gt; the site gaming.) One of the best ways to generate questions is to have active-games with a mindset towards question asking. As a policy improvement? We've actually had great success with the good-subjective/bad-subjective policies from parenting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946289#4946289&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  It helps us to define what gives a question standing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946292#4946292&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Every community is different, and the stack model isn't right for everyone. But at the same time we've adapted it to our community fairly well. It works exceptionally well for rules question. Less well for sys-rec/DM advice questions. But with the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective criteria that have come out thanks to sites like programmers, it's much easier to run a more subjective site like this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946329#4946329&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  It definitely isn't a perfect fit for every community, but I think one of the main advantages of RPG.SE is the blending of the RPG community and the SE community, it provides a community with the wit of the RPG community, but is results and format oriented like the SE community.  As far as tech improvements, the biggest thing I'd like to see is more flare like gaming has.  RP'ers are big on our achievements, and I can see some of the Gaming contests going over well here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946349#4946349&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  the first major difference that i've seen is that a lot of RPG users are very chatty.  that's to be expected since &lt;em&gt;you ahve to talk to explain all of your actions in your game&lt;/em&gt;.  Honestly to help cut down the chatter I thinkwe need to push more users to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955161#4955161&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I believe that the format is a perfect fit.  Only non-programmers or non-gamers believe that programming is more objective than RPGing.  I think that with &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;&quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&quot;&lt;/a&gt; SE has given us everything we need.  If it works for parenting it'll work for us!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:33:25.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:35:35.330" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3ddd523d80551bae52ebe0434e0315e0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Rob&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/34572/rob&quot;&gt;Rob&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946222#4946222&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How often do you expect to be able to do moderation stuff for RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946232#4946232&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Functionally every day. I find that this site provides significant validation for myself, and therefore I'm engaged every day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946237#4946237&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  At least half an hour a day.  Some days obviously a bit more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946238#4946238&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  nearly every day. I'm in front of a computer 9/10 work days and often on weekends&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946249#4946249&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  It's in the background most of the day during the week. I check in a couple times on the weekends (when it isn't as busy anyway)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946379#4946379&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  i usually spend about 2-3 hours on movies a day.  if i start covering rpg it'll probably be about 2 hours for movies and about 3-4 hours for rpg (depending on how things are going)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:35:35.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:37:36.683" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4ed39a45da77851396c07eea657c6b28?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Aarthi&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/19082/aarthi&quot;&gt;Aarthi&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946299#4946299&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;You are already moderator of two other, growing sites on the Stack Exchange network: Gardening and Christianity. Why do you believe adding a third, RPG, will not be overburdening yourself?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946342#4946342&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Great question. Does the answer &quot;anything ChrisF can do I can do&quot; work? ;). Seriously though the moderation load on Gardening is fairly light, and while C.SE is heavier it's not overwhelming. I'm already on RPG more than the other two sites I moderate so I don't see a disconnect here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:37:36.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:39:41.253" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Tim Stone http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/12325/tim-stone&quot;&gt;Tim Stone&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946341#4946341&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Do you feel like a representative percentage of the community participates in your site's meta? Based on that, how strongly do you think feedback presented on meta should factor into your decision making as a moderator?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946359#4946359&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Meta is visited dramatically less than the main site. What's really important about meta is that it gives people a place to articulate their sites, and make a case for or against something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946377#4946377&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; When I participate in Meta I pay much less attention to the votes (because a &quot;huge difference&quot; is, like, ten people) and much more to the arguments presented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946363#4946363&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; No, but it's the closest thing that we have to a policy consensus. If there is an answer with ten or more upvotes with few competing answers, I like to take it as &quot;policy until future discussion.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wax eagle http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946405#4946405&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Meta participation (like on many SE 2.0 sites) is not as good as we'd like it. However it's the only place we have for deciding site policy. If people don't like it they need to come to meta and participate. One of my goals will be driving more meta participation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;C. Ross http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946425#4946425&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; No, but close enough. Still, this is not a &lt;em&gt;pure&lt;/em&gt; democracy. I think the history of Gaming.SE shows that you can't govern based on whatever happens on meta. I also think we have seen RPG.SE's culture change from the early days, and not every two year old post on meta is an indicator of current state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mxyzplk http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955197#4955197&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Not enough people participate in meta. The new &quot;Community Bulletin&quot; box is helping with that.  I consider meta q&amp;amp;a more binding if there's more than a couple answerers. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, I disagree with the consensus but the Q has 19 votes and the dissenting answer 12, so I consider myself bound by it.  Something with 2 votes... I take it into account but will act differently if my mod experience tells me so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:39:41.253" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:41:46.820" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/ccdd689e8c5dd22031cbd2287091a696?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Kalamane&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/18139/kalamane&quot;&gt;Kalamane&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946370#4946370&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;What will you do when you come across a question that has been edited to ask something completely different than the answers are answering?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946383#4946383&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Revert, comment, and ask the poster to post the edit in a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946413#4946413&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  revert.  if the asker changed the question, prompt them to ask their new question as a seperate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946452#4946452&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  . I think the question that must be asked is &quot;do the answers hold any value&quot; if they do then attempting to return to the original question is the right thing to do. If they don't then either closing and asking the Op to start over or removing the answers and starting with a clean slate is the right thing to do&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946463#4946463&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  There's a fine line there.  Sometimes the &quot;new question&quot; is the one the poster obviously intended to ask all along, and the answerers are confused.  In that case comment on the answers to encourage them to get in line, downvoting if necessary.  In teh other case it's a new question b/c they thought of an additional one.  I would encourage them to post it separately, reminding them they can get more rep for it ;-).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946527#4946527&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I think one of the purposes of closing questions early is to prevent this (although communicating that is a challenge). As C.Ross noted, if the &quot;new question&quot; is a refinement, poke the existing answers for an update. If it's a secondary question, encourage splitting it into a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946755#4946755&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  If possible, edit the question to include the original request. Otherwise, revert with commentary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955215#4955215&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Discuss in comments; possibly arrange a reversion (we did this at least once) or ask the other question as well and migrate answers.  Don't let it stand though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:41:46.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:43:56.240" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/1b2b5d5007262ea3f9e21ab5b15f8b75?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;casperOne&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/13054/casperone&quot;&gt;casperOne&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946373#4946373&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;One of the things that moderators on smaller SE 2.0 sites play a key role in that moderators on larger sites don't is promotion.  With RPG being classified as one of the &quot;smaller&quot; sites, how do you envision your role in growing the site, and what are your current specific strategies, if any?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946428#4946428&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm already running weekly games. Getting what amounts to a constantcon for us would be a fantastic win in terms of a question generating resource. I'm also asking game-authors of indie games when questions explicity concern their games. We've had good success with Vincent Baker answering questions with dogs in the vineyard, and the various references to blogs I've posted seem to reflect question-visiting rates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946500#4946500&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  However, that kind of infrastructure (for constantly running games) would take some involvement in other platforms and active solicitation of integration. Still, that solicitation of tools will, itself, lead to more interaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946530#4946530&quot;&gt;concluded&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  In an academic sense, I'm using the site to provide research material for myself (thereby promoting it among academics) and plan to make a book on the philosophy of rpgs from my answers on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946451#4946451&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Asking questions, especially for the lesser covered questions.  That's the easiest way to cover our search engine footprint.  I've also been promotoing the site amongst friends.  I've actualyl gottena couple of them to join the site, even if they aren't very active.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946573#4946573&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  also on this point, we're running a topic of the week event on movies to encourge users to ask questions about either current topics, or to help fill in some of the holes the site has.  right now it's mostly run by us mods, but it's open for anyone to provide input.  it's too early to tell if it's had a positive effect, but i think it has&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946468#4946468&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm not that great of a promoter, unfortunately! :) Mostly, I just try to participate and set a good example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946489#4946489&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I see the role of moderators in this as both instigators and facilitators. On gardening right now We are working on an anniversary contest, one of our moderators instigated that and is following up on it. On C.SE however one of our users really wanted to get a blog kicked off, I'm currently facilitating that by writing the monthly topic posts and helping with scheduling etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946529#4946529&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm one of the more active promoters of the site (see my badges).  I've had the most success by sharing some of the great link-bait question the site has.  I would continue to do this, and attempt to organize this activity as well.  I also think it's well past time that we move some of our promotion out into meatspace, but that needs some more details worked out.  The important thing is to keep people positive and motivated, and have fun with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947215#4947215&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I believe that moderators can play a role in growing the site through curation of tags — expanding the scope and breadth of the knowledge available. The recent blog post on self-answering offers some cues in how this can work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:43:56.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:46:04.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/6c38e00d92cd9bd3ada3392b15015553?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;F. Randall Farmer&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/306/f-randall-farmer&quot;&gt;F. Randall Farmer&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946544#4946544&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;&quot;-1 votes&quot; are anonymous and discourage new users. Agree/Disagree? If you agree, what would you counteract/fix this?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946567#4946567&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  They certainly discourage &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt;. But a good comment of what's wrong or a positive comment and upvote can help mitigate the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946592#4946592&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Yeah, I'd say a -1 discourages anyone. I do my best to explain downvotes (even if they aren't mine) if I can and encourage the user to edit their post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946606#4946606&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I agree wholeheartedly that we should protect the anonymity of the voting system. However, I almost always leave a comment when I downvote (unless there is already a negative comment I agree with). It can be hard for a new user (which is why usually for a new user I'm more likely to flag and answer/cast a close vote)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946636#4946636&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  They are anonymous and &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; discourage a new user.  They can also help tweak the behavior of experienced users.  As already discussed, we need to be leaving active feedback on new users posts, explaining what they're doing for good or ill.  I do not see any reason to make downvotes not anonymous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946648#4946648&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  drive-by downvotes are discouring to almost everyone.  but, a couple of upvotes vastly outweight a single downvote.  i like to get people to upvote good questions.  if people are voting on good questions, and that question is indeed a good one, then the new user shouldn't be as discouraged.  also, comments to help the user make their question better are also good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946708#4946708&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I agree in part; I think it's important to separate &quot;this is a bad answer&quot; from &quot;this is a bad &lt;strong&gt;answerer&lt;/strong&gt;.&quot; (And, also, &quot;a bad answer&quot; from &quot;a &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; answer.&quot;) I try not to downvote answers from new posters into the negatives; I also ask leading constructive questions in the comments to help steer the question in a better direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946777#4946777&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955235#4955235&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  They are discouraging, though certainly not as much as a close.  People react better IME to &quot;I don't like what you're saying&quot; than &quot;and I want to stop you from saying it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955238#4955238&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Fixes have to be indirect, as votes are community action, but we certainly encourage comments with downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:46:04.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:48:16.170" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3ddd523d80551bae52ebe0434e0315e0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Rob&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/34572/rob&quot;&gt;Rob&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946589#4946589&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;As a moderator what do you consider your special attack and special weakness, so to speak; how do you counter the latter?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946631#4946631&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Special Attack: wall of academic text. I can generally cite at whatever depth of recursion necessary to provide necessary argumentation. Special Weakness: People who don't care. If there are people who don't respond well to reasoned-arguments or discussion... I don't really like bringing down punative measures save in extremis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946640#4946640&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Special attack: blather; Special weakness: borderline posts. I try to counteract that weakness by talking through the issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946671#4946671&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Special attack: &quot;Calm down guys&quot;, helping bring a situation under control.  Special weakness: questioner.  I'm personally heavier in the questions than I am in the answers, and this sometimes creates a weird dynamic as moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946674#4946674&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  special weakness: over aggressive closer. Something I'm working on here as a normal user, and I regularly think twice about when I'm running around with a diamond. Special attack: trolls bane flame strike - Moderating C.se I've become adept at dealing with trolls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946681#4946681&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  i think my special attack is my editing abilities.  my weakness is indecisiveness on closing some questions.  i counter this by talkign with fellow mods to get opinions (that's why my trouble is devil's advocate)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947125#4947125&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Special Attack: Subtle Cut. Weakness: Soft-Hearted. (I ameliorate that through conferring with colleagues to see whether the harder approach is warranted.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:48:16.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:50:42.360" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/3981cd271c302f5cba628c6b6d2b32ee?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Tim Stone&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/12325/tim-stone&quot;&gt;Tim Stone&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946649#4946649&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Your site has relatively low traffic compared to most other graduated sites on the network, though it also has an excellent answered rate. In light of this, do you feel like your site is experiencing any growing pains, and is there any aspect of how the site is currently run that you feel negatively impacts continued growth?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946686#4946686&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Growing pains? Not really. We're niche. Our questions cover products with a very long release cycle. This is something that we've learned to deal with. Dealing with D&amp;amp;D next will prove to be a very interesting time, especially considering their modularity. I see nothing wrong with how the site is currently run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946704#4946704&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; I think most of the negative light on the community right now is the echo of past growing pains. I think right now we're in a very good place, with some room for improvement (mostly in terms of communication). We do show steady growth, just not in terms of massive spikes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946734#4946734&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; I think the SE learning curve might be the only growing pain we really have. Our recent promotion with Obsidian Portal brought us a wealth of new users. But most RPG types are very used to the forum model and have to be indoctrinated into the SE way of doing things. This was rather evident with teh new users who came in from OP&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946774#4946774&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946779#4946779&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; Growing pains?  Not really.  how the site is currently run:  We've been in an awkward space for a while with many moderators, of varying styles and levels of commitment, some new, some old.  I think the election will firm that up, and help us get on the same page with a new staff all dedicated and engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:50:42.360" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1554" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:52:54.747" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/02b4e5d7d7a71da0876ba4ebd1db02dc?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wraith808&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/23131/wraith808&quot;&gt;wraith808&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946832#4946832&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;It seems that there is a focus on reputation not equivalent to it's true function related to the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt; rather than the &lt;em&gt;individual&lt;/em&gt;.  How will you emphasize the community aspect as opposed to the individual aspect- or do you see that as a problem?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946910#4946910&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I don't see these as competing interests most of the time. Gaining reputation can only be done through posting content. This is a positive feedback loop. You post good content, the community benefits and rewards you, making you want to post more good content and improve the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946933#4946933&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Reputation is a function of community acceptance and trust of your answers. It has a personal validation function (as @waxeagle pointed out) and a community-measurment function. From a game-theoretic behaviour modification point of view, I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946938#4946938&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I don't see it as a problem. We are a community of people with diverse interests — which means that, often, we don't have the ability to measure the value of a given person's contribution to the group as a whole. Instead, we trust that highly reputed individuals are qualified and generous in their areas of expertise, and generalize from there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946979#4946979&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I've not seen that as a particular problem.  I see problems with community stemming from the clash of our two community sources, and the usual flaming that goes on in forums (You're playing the game wrong man, you're ruining my life!).  The clash of the community sources happens when we have people with RPG forum experience and SE experience disagreeing on usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947013#4947013&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Rep is there to help us improve content.  We have to work to improve community in the usual ways (working together, sharing, communication, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947074#4947074&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  the reputation is a system that allows users to express what content they approve of and disapprove of.  it also shows which users are providing valuable content to the site.  i honestly think the rep systems works as it should.  are there bugs?  sure, but for the most part it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:52:54.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1555" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:55:03.917" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/ccdd689e8c5dd22031cbd2287091a696?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Kalamane&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/18139/kalamane&quot;&gt;Kalamane&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946930#4946930&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;What would you do if you had real life circumstances prevent you from accessing the site for any extended period of time? (Say, over a week)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946942#4946942&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Notify my fellow mods and try to hop on with my phone when and if I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946965#4946965&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  As with @Kalamane, although I'd be happy to appoint a deputy to serve in my stead, if that were legal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946969#4946969&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  a quick note in the TL and (do mods have a private room here? if not hten main chat) a mod room here letting mods know of my absence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946986#4946986&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  same as @BrianBallsunStanton, let my fellow mods know what's going on, usually with some time before i will be gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946999#4946999&quot;&gt;added&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Just to amplify that. Consistency and communication are critical to both alliteration and good governance. Having protocols in place and back-channel communication methods for the mods, as well as a common understanding of what the issues of the day are makes for individual mod &quot;absence&quot; unnoticeable or less problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947017#4947017&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt; If the mods aren't talking... then we've got problems.  that's part of what happened on literature, us mods never talked with eachother, but not from lack of me trying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947055#4947055&quot;&gt;responded&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Above all else, mods must have mental prediction models of the others' behavour in their heads, so that we don't get one mod just reversing another mod's decisions in public without a very clear and important reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947095#4947095&quot;&gt;added&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  yup.  if i see something a mod did and don't agree, i'll usually hash it out with them first becasue maybe i'm wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4946991#4946991&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Notify other mods that I'm away, check in when I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955251#4955251&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Let my fellow mods know (though I have this on my phone too so it only really happens when on extended vacation in darkest Siberia or getting hit by a bus).  There's enough mods that it shouldn't be a crisis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:55:03.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T12:58:35.893" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/ccdd689e8c5dd22031cbd2287091a696?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Kalamane&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/18139/kalamane&quot;&gt;Kalamane&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947051#4947051&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt;  The avatars of @CRoss, @BrianBallsunStanton, and @waxeagle all show men with nice beards.  Do you have a beard, and if not - if elected will you grow one?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947060#4947060&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Yes, yes I do. And it's now less... gorse brushy. The ability to clean pots with my beard is not necessarily a feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947257#4947257&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I do not have a beard, or plans to grow one. However, I believe the length of my head-hair more than makes up for this deficiency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T12:58:35.893" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T13:01:05.843" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947069#4947069&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Please describe your moderation style in a rpg game mechanical term&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947110#4947110&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm a 20th level Cleric with the Law and Community domains.  Happy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947115#4947115&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm a gamist/narrativist DM. I believe the rules exist to provide structure and inspiration. The rules should never be ignored on the spur of the moment, because that weakens the ability of players to function within the world by imagining future outcomes. At the same time, as a pragmatist, use the right system/tool for the job. There is no one &quot;holy&quot; system above all others. From an in-game PoV, I'm a highly pre-constructed character designed to meet specific goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947183#4947183&quot;&gt;continued&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Best to describe me as a Bonisagus Trianormii with a specialization in Intellego and Mentem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947145#4947145&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Conditioning (Dominate ••••)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/026f3abfbd6ac89b6dbabbd4cef2e83d?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;DForck42&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/16326/dforck42&quot;&gt;DForck42&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947179#4947179&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  chaotic good.  the rules are there to give us reference points, but they're not perfect and cover every aspect of life, so we have to make judgement calls to promote the greater good.  also, consistancy is key.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947193#4947193&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm a fighter. I lead when I have to, but prefer to be on the front lines dealing with things myself. I value rule of law, but try to be mindful that sometimes you have to throw the rule book out the window and just hit things with a sword.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/013fbfb6411dbf971dc8623af1096ddb?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/1212/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;AceCalhoon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947213#4947213&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Mystic Theurge. All ways of doing things are interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955245#4955245&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Neutral good.  I am concerned with both site rule/precedent and the unique case in promoting questions that solve people's problems.  The overweening goal is for questions that solve people's real problems.  Site guidelines are helpful but not sovereign in that regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T13:01:05.843" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T13:07:04.043" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/02b4e5d7d7a71da0876ba4ebd1db02dc?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wraith808&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/23131/wraith808&quot;&gt;wraith808&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947170#4947170&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/em&gt; The function of .SE sites tends not to foster community in a lot of cases because of the focus on answer the questions, rather than learning about each other through conversation.  Someone asked earlier about promotion- but do you have any specific ideas in terms of helping to build the community around RPG.SE?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947210#4947210&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Running games and making sure chat is a good and welcoming place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947211#4947211&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Chat!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947244#4947244&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I think regular gaming either in chat, on vid conf and others is a good way to foster that community. SE doesn't do &quot;community&quot; all that well, but it can through chat. More chat participation can help with that feeling of community&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947280#4947280&quot;&gt;added&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  To ampilfy, mods should always be available in chats for informal questions and concerns that may not merit a meta post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947287#4947287&quot;&gt;agreed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T13:07:04.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1537" CreationDate="2012-06-14T13:09:15.350" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/b3b22dc140c835e42f16f8366ffb449b?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Grace Note&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/757/grace-note&quot;&gt;Grace Note&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947168#4947168&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt; for final thoughts from the candidates&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/8b464e72261a39bd540f7c7c9b037adf?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/8/c-ross&quot;&gt;C. Ross&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947200#4947200&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm very pleased with everyone who is running.  Best of luck to everyone, and thanks to everyone for the great experience so far!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/a45d963e487add0f6096d1d723d9dcc7?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun​‑Stanton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947202#4947202&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Thanks for hosting this chat, oh brave DM. Also, drop by my game sometime, we need more people :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/c76c9f02505d6b3339e0f5a07fa5cf35?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;Jadasc&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/4894/jadasc&quot;&gt;Jadasc&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947223#4947223&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I'm pleased and privileged to have undergone this ritual. I feel like I've learned a lot today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/4320ac0987d82025b454bcee57d708d1?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/9069/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;wax eagle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4947293#4947293&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Very excited to see who wins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/9640c5561e9b03dfc501bda1aec101a0?s=16&amp;amp;d=identicon&amp;amp;r=PG&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/55/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/4955254#4955254&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  I've enjoyed moderating the site so far and hope that I've struck the right balance between mod action when needed and mod inaction and letting the community judge when not needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3841" LastActivityDate="2012-06-14T13:09:15.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1560" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-19T19:09:20.727" Score="4" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/507/opacitizen&quot;&gt;OpaCitiZen&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really see how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15087/good-azlanti-dungeon-adventure&quot;&gt;this Q&lt;/a&gt; is different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15081/suggested-system-mechanics-setting-choices-for-x-files-fringe-inspired-game/&quot;&gt;Suggested System/Mechanics/Setting Choices for X-Files/Fringe Inspired Game?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/what-rpg-worlds-systems-work-best-together-in-crossover-combinations&quot;&gt;What RPG worlds/systems work best together in crossover combinations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(see the comment by @Pat_Ludwig: &amp;quot;Questions should be specific enough that there can be a single or best answer. (...)&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, this is not sys-rec, but what is an adventure if not a sub/spec-rpg, and why would this Q have answers that are more objective? Help me see the principles more clearly. Thx. -.-&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-06-19T20:24:01.700" Title="&quot;Good Azlanti Dungeon Adventure?&quot; v. &quot;What RPG worlds/systems work best together in crossover combinations?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1560" CreationDate="2012-06-19T19:09:21.353" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;What's important to understand is that the goal of StackExchange is to help people solve problems. And by people we don't mean just the person who asked the question; we mean everyone who runs across the problem in a future search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the first key difference between the questions you've cited is that only two of them have problems to be solved:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk needs an adventure for his group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mad Brew needs a system to run his specific campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You need... What? What would solve your problem? A comprehensive list of systems that work well in a crossover? See below...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next, there's the issue of format. SE is designed so that you see the problem, and then immediately see the solution that worked for the person with that problem (accepted answer) or, failing that, the answer most voted up by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; you're interested, or need more details, you can read further answers. But it isn't necessary to read every answer ever posted if you're just trying to get your problem solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Eventually, Mxyzplk should accept the adventure that worked for his group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Eventually, Mad Brew should accept the system that he used for his campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What would you accept as answer? What about the answer you accepted solves your problem?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, there's the issue of scope. StackExchange works best with narrowly scoped questions that are quite specific. Constraints breed quality. This is true of creative writing and troubleshooting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk needs a level 6-8 Azlanti themed adventure for Pathfinder, that fits in with the campaign scenario he described.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mad Brew lays out seven bullet points worth of constraints.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All you ask is that systems be &quot;good for a cross over.&quot; This is rather vague.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I describe it, is that &quot;good questions have at least one, and fewer than infinite answers.&quot; If anything within the set of things being discussed meets the criteria for the question, that's bad. Robert Cartaino and Jeff Atwood explain it in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;Real Questions have Answers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Addendum: Good Azlanti Dungeon Adventure? v. Suggested System/Mechanics/Setting Choices for X-Files/Fringe Inspired Game?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference here is in the answers. Both questions are on-topic, reasonable questions. Both questions become at-risk of closure if they attract swarms of &quot;list all the things&quot; kinds of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the X-Files question &lt;em&gt;has a greater risk&lt;/em&gt; because it's criteria is inherently looser. Because RPGs can be re-skinned and repurposed, and are generally more versatile than adventures, there's a higher chance that people will start suggesting random things without stopping to think how well they know the answer is true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Addendum 2: What RPG worlds/systems work best together in crossover combinations?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my take on the closed question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You ask for things that have actually been run, which is very good.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The definition of what you're looking for seems to be too vague to me.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How I would improve it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What kind of cross overs are you looking for? Peanut-butter-and-chocolate synergy, or zany dissonance? Time travel? X vs. Y in a fight to the death? Etc.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do you want to go about crossing over? Similar systems? Different settings for the same system? Extremely different systems that you can weld together into an unholy monstrosity?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You mention some example crossovers. What worked about the examples, and what didn't?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="77" LastEditDate="2012-06-19T20:24:01.700" LastActivityDate="2012-06-19T20:24:01.700" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1562" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-06-20T00:14:48.987" Score="20" ViewCount="242" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, Role-Playing Games' very first &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/1&quot;&gt;moderator election&lt;/a&gt; has come to an end. Our winners are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/760/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/760.png&quot; alt=&quot;Brian Ballsun-Stanton&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/140.png&quot; alt=&quot;mxyzplk&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/45.png&quot; alt=&quot;C. Ross&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please give them a warm welcome, and hearty thanks and congratulations for volunteering!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, a sincere thank you to the rest of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369/moderator-pro-tem-announcement&quot;&gt;Moderators Pro Tempore&lt;/a&gt;, who (along with mxyzplk and C. Ross) helped shepherd the site through its beta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/93/rs-conley&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/93.png&quot; alt=&quot;RS Conley&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/460/pat-ludwig&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/460.png&quot; alt=&quot;Pat Ludwig&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/77/acecalhoon&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/77.png&quot; alt=&quot;AceCalhoon&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2012-07-04T19:56:11.840" Title="2012 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|moderators|election|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1562" CreationDate="2012-06-20T04:31:53.750" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks all!  My first action as robot overlord will be to crush your hopes and dreams.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-06-20T04:31:53.750" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-06-25T12:33:52.603" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://roll20.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/A1iwW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 - Virtual tabletop gaming that tells a story&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3272" LastEditorUserId="3272" LastEditDate="2012-06-25T15:59:50.273" LastActivityDate="2012-06-25T15:59:50.273" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-06-25T12:33:52.603" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1565" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-06-26T12:53:17.950" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1497/community-promotion-ads-2012&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V8XHh.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotion Ads - 2012&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2012-08-30T14:14:17.863" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-06-26T12:53:17.950" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1566" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1567" CreationDate="2012-06-27T16:02:10.957" Score="0" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;When trying to access the Data Explorer with my openid profile (the same one I use for all SE sites) I get a ASP.NET error page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Server Error in '/' Application.&#xA;Runtime Error&#xA;Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it still seems to log me in on the home page, but when I try to access any particular query I get the same error screen.  If I log out I can again view the queries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally when I try to execute a query anonymously I get:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Cannot open database &quot;StackExchange.Rpg.Exported&quot; requested by the login. The login failed. Login failed for user 'readonly'.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; Upgrading to &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'bug'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt; because it's definitely not just a transitive issue at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2012-06-28T23:03:52.033" LastActivityDate="2012-06-28T23:04:30.207" Title="Cannot log in to Data Explorer" Tags="|bug|status-completed|data-explorer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1566" CreationDate="2012-06-28T23:04:30.207" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Geoff kicked it a few times, and then kicked it some more. Seems to be working now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2012-06-28T23:04:30.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1568" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-03T20:03:53.390" Score="30" ViewCount="702" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a thank you for &lt;em&gt;being awesome&lt;/em&gt;, if you are on page 1 or page 2 of &amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=reputation&amp;amp;filter=all&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=reputation&amp;amp;filter=all&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;hellip; we'll be sending you a little care package shortly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Role-playing Games t-shirt in your size&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Role-playing Games die-cut, vinyl stickers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stack Exchange sharpie&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stack Exchange pen&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stack Exchange stickers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can expect to get an email soon with details on how to confirm and provide your mailing address and size preferences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The t-shirt&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kax0V.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg.stackexchange.com Tshirt&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The sticker&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mRtSI.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg.stackexchange.com sticker&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;(for anyone else who wants this swag, but isn't on page 1 or page 2 of the all time top users -- unfortunately we aren't able to gift this swag to everybody, but it will be available for sponsored events as needed)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T12:35:28.577" Title="Role-playing Games Top User Swag" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="27" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1571" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1562" CreationDate="2012-07-04T19:56:11.840" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Congrats to all indeed, and thanks to the pro tempore team. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="507" LastActivityDate="2012-07-04T19:56:11.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1568" CreationDate="2012-07-04T21:43:11.867" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thank you, a very thoughtful gift/prize. totally unexpected.  Will Wear it at GenCon this Summer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="685" LastActivityDate="2012-07-04T21:43:11.867" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1573" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1574" CreationDate="2012-07-06T08:05:39.143" Score="5" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've found some acronyms (like BBEG@) despite being a long time gamer were new to me and have had to look up via google and suchlike to find out what they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it worth either&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Adding acronyms to a section in the FAQ&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Adding a markup method so acronyms can have a &quot;hover to translate&quot; popup&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Having a standard offsite link to redirect to people for questions about them?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@ Big Bad Evil Guy&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3230" LastActivityDate="2012-07-08T00:26:15.677" Title="Acronyms; are they too confusing?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1573" CreationDate="2012-07-06T12:07:47.027" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If something's confusing in an answer... you're not alone. Leave a comment.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have comments not least because they can help people communicate aspects of answers that are problematic. If you see something you don't understand, especially in an otherwise good answer, leave a comment so that the person may improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-07-06T12:07:47.027" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1573" CreationDate="2012-07-06T12:23:43.837" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You have a good point, and this can be especially confusing when looking at a new game or genre. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest our default policy be that an acronym should be written fully at least once in a post.  &lt;em&gt;For example:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When we ran into the Big Bad Evil Guy (BBEG) he refused to fight us.&#xA;  Ya da ya da ... the paladin attacked the BBEG ... the BBEG&#xA;  disintegrated the paladin ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-07-06T12:30:11.460" LastActivityDate="2012-07-06T12:30:11.460" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="647" CreationDate="2012-07-06T16:23:42.173" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Aside from the reasons about anonymity and similar topics raised by others, consider what this would mean for legitimately bad questions. The first person downvoting would add a comment. Then the second person downvoting would.. say what? Leave a comment that says &quot;I agree with #1&quot;? Then the next? The next?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would lead a either people not voting because they don't want to comment or if they do vote, a ton of me-too comments spamming the comment list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="266" LastActivityDate="2012-07-06T16:23:42.173" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1573" CreationDate="2012-07-06T23:05:55.640" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;Read a book!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An acronym you don't know, just like a word you don't know, is an opportunity to look something up and learn something.  Whether it's an abbreviation like &quot;BBEG&quot; or ten cent words like &quot;fatuous and jejeune&quot; (Gygax Himself used these words to describe me once and I had to look them up) or a turn of phrase like &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ten%20cent%20word&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ten cent word&lt;/a&gt;,&quot; it's not really a need of the site to self-define everything.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People are welcome to link or explain or whatever a term they think might be unusual, or ask in a comment (or better yet, chat) to get filled in on a term they don't understand, but there certainly should not be a site policy on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone said something new to you; you looked it up and learned something.  That's working as intended (tm).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-07-08T00:26:15.677" LastActivityDate="2012-07-08T00:26:15.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1578" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-07-09T12:28:54.897" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://pcgen.sf.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dZpPK.png&quot; alt=&quot;PCGen - The Ennie Award Winning RPG Character Generator&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-07-09T12:28:54.897" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-07-09T12:28:54.897" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1579" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:17:57.140" Score="11" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG has long allowed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions under fairly tight tight rules, and every time they pop up the mods are posting a general comment like the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Just a note folks, remember that our sys-rec questions require &lt;em&gt;good subjective&lt;/em&gt; basis. You must have played the system within the context of the requirements to recommend it. – Brian Ballsun-Stanton&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15296/i-am-looking-for-a-game-to-ease-my-friends-into-role-playing#comment-24959&quot;&gt;Reference&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like a great thing to have in a post notice, with links to the sys-rec tag wiki and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective blog post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be even cooler if this could be automated...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:02:20.840" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:02:20.840" Title="Can we have a post notice for system-recommendation questions?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|game-recommendation|post-notice|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1580" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:37:40.140" Score="6" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given that we're gearing up for a default comment, let's get some community input on what the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; comment for describing our sys-req questions should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll post some of the ones we've used as answers. Upvote &lt;em&gt;and edit&lt;/em&gt; the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-07-27T16:35:53.827" LastActivityDate="2012-07-27T16:35:53.827" Title="What should our pro-forma system-recommendation comment be?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1580" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:38:41.153" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tag Wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;System recommendation questions must be tightly scoped to be allowed on RPG.SE; see our System Recommendation Q&amp;amp;A Guidance for more. Closely define what you need and then answers must follow &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;&quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&quot;&lt;/a&gt; criteria and only recommend what they have experience in and not just toss out Googled lists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="428" LastEditDate="2012-07-14T03:27:18.783" LastActivityDate="2012-07-14T03:27:18.783" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1582" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1580" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:40:10.450" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just a note folks, remember that our sys-rec questions require a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective&lt;/a&gt; basis. You must have played the system within the context of the requirements to recommend it. Please consider &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; the requirements before nominating your favorite system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-07-09T14:40:10.450" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1583" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1580" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:40:59.793" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers to this question should conform to our game recommendation question guidelines - you should be posting games you have personally used or seen used for the purpose and providing detail on the results. meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/… - simply listing games you have heard of/pulled off the net is a downvotable answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-07-09T14:40:59.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1580" CreationDate="2012-07-09T14:42:37.107" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please answer this question following the site guidance on game-rec questions - &quot;you could do this, I suppose&quot; is wrong, &quot;I have done this and here's what I did&quot; is right. meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/… Expect to be downvoted if your answer does not include personal experience or a relevant reference. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-07-09T14:42:37.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1580" CreationDate="2012-07-09T15:06:21.950" Score="12" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to both the [FAQ] and the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/760&quot;&gt;our meta&lt;/a&gt;.  In particular, all responses should be based on actual experience and contain references and examples whenever possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Formatted for &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/2116/autoreviewcomments-pro-forma-comments-for-se&quot;&gt;AutoReviewComments&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;###System Recommendation &#xA;As this is a [tag:system-recommendation] question, please adhere to both the [FAQ] and the rules for subjective questions as outlined in [Good Subjective, Bad Subjective](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) and on [our Meta](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/760).  In particular, all responses should be based on actual experience and contain references and examples whenever possible.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2012-07-09T19:11:40.593" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1586" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-07-11T12:25:52.390" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://tabletopforge.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XR7Ts.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Free app for Role-Playing via Hangouts&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-07-11T12:25:52.390" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-07-11T12:25:52.390" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1587" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-14T21:34:18.253" Score="9" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to get applied reflexively by askers to all sorts of questions that are unrelated apart from asking for clarifications. It does have a tag wiki and a few (7 as of now) followers, so maybe that indicates that at least a few people find it useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed it just now as I was cleaning &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tags from questions. Unlike the almost-always-redundant &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag though, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; seems to get used a lot. Is there a useful difference between them? Should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt;? Should we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-clarification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-clarification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-clarification&lt;/a&gt; tag instead, or would that be too much a metatag? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; lies in a grey area that lies between metatag-ness, redundancy, usefulness, and over-use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have an opinion, which is why I'm asking. It's a funny-looking tag to me—too funny-looking to be able to form a coherent opinion either way. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;For reference, here is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/363/what-should-the-rules-tag-include&quot;&gt;original discussion of the [rules] tag&lt;/a&gt;. Arguments against the [rules] tag might be applicable here and vice versa.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-07-27T15:39:14.317" Title="Is the [mechanics] tag useful or a problem?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="647" CreationDate="2012-07-14T21:41:54.360" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvoting and giving useful critiques to a post are different things and shouldn't be linked. You can easily leave a critique of a post without downvoting it, and downvoting a post should not obligate a critique—apart from the chilling effect that imposes, we should not prevent people form exercising their downvotes if they can't cogently articulate a constructive criticism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want lots of votes, down and up, in order for the sorting process to work properly and bubble the best to the top. We don't want to throw anything in the way of that process operating smoothly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, we want people to be helpful in comments. We don't want to unduly link giving constructive help with downvoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-07-14T21:41:54.360" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1587" CreationDate="2012-07-15T03:33:59.283" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would think that [mechanics] should properly only be used when developing mechanics for a game, not asking for any rules clarification.  &quot;Effects of using a 3d6 vs a 1d20 resolution mechanic&quot; or &quot;How to create a game mechanic that causes X...&quot;  Those are legit uses ([house-rule] assumes this isn't someone developing a mechanic for others to use...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But no, it shouldn't be used for &quot;Hey wait how do I use Feint?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-07-15T03:33:59.283" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1591" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-16T16:59:34.560" Score="9" ViewCount="347" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reason I posted the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1590/then-dd-is-not-the-game-for-you&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1590/then-dd-is-not-the-game-for-you&lt;/a&gt; question rather than as a comment, or flag on the comment as I saw this as indicative of a general problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As background, I have been a moderator. OK only of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://accu.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ACCU General emailist&lt;/a&gt; and I have been involved in &lt;a href=&quot;http://congenial.org.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG fandom&lt;/a&gt; as Chairman of the '96 Con. I raise this as someone that cares about the site and what I saw shocked me. It seams to me that this very young novice was attacked for asking question on a Q&amp;amp;A site about something he was obviously interested in. I remember reading the first D&amp;amp;D and it was incomprehensible; in fact, I would say it still is.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was under the impression that this was a &lt;strong&gt;Question and Answer&lt;/strong&gt; site for &lt;strong&gt;Players and Game Masters of Role Playing Games&lt;/strong&gt;. This does not mean that you have had to have read the book (even if this is a good idea) or even played it yet. If we can't help the beginners, how do we expect them to come here and ask their questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was this reasonable treatment of a Novice, and if it was not, what should it be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T14:20:21.830" Title="What is the correct way to treat new users of the site?" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1591" CreationDate="2012-07-16T17:26:20.057" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;First go read Jeff Atwood's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/118733/would-a-grace-period-or-a-sandbox-mode-help-introduce-new-users/118764#118764&quot;&gt;relevant response here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We certainly want beginners on the site. But do note that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;our FAQ&lt;/a&gt; says &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for expert Q&amp;amp;A by and for players&#xA;  and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which means, please work to get at least a basic knowledge yourself. So yes, you do need to have read the book yourself (if you're asking questions about using the book - obviously not if you're asking for recommendations or whatever).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we've tried to treat new people with respect and to be helpful - BUT we do not want or need 200 questions that are adequately covered by the complete basics of game rules on this site.  &quot;What is AC?&quot;  &quot;How do I add 4 to a d8 roll?&quot;  &quot;What is an orc?&quot; None of this is good and on-topic here.  Note &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86997/what-can-i-do-when-getting-sorry-we-are-no-longer-accepting-questions-answers/86998#86998&quot;&gt;an account can get question-banned for it&lt;/a&gt;, and &quot;not doing basic research&quot; is one of the reasons for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bryan did mod-contact him to help get him on the right track. He needs to read the book, ask in chat, find a play group, even watch one on YouTube.  I recommended that he ask a &quot;D&amp;amp;D is confusing, how do I learn more after reading the rulebook&quot; question so that we can perhaps put all those kinds of things in an answer that would benefit other people.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one comment you mentioned may have been phrased in an undiplomatic way; you flagged it and I deleted it. Success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2012-07-16T23:07:36.430" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1593" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1591" CreationDate="2012-07-16T21:20:34.413" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The actual Q&amp;amp;A part of this site isn't structured like a chat space or forum. Say you explain to the poster what 1d8 means. Okay, next question, what is Dex? Next question, what is AC? Next question, how many attack rolls do I make? Next question, where do I get funny dice? In another medium, a patient interlocutor could address these in one coherent space, and the user would actually gain understanding &lt;em&gt;through dialogue&lt;/em&gt;; on Stack Exchange, these are meaningless clutter that helps no one, including the person asking the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing the questions and directing the poster to another resource (including RPG.SE chat) was exactly the right move. As was moderating away any excessively pejorative responses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2012-07-16T21:20:34.413" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1591" CreationDate="2012-07-17T10:49:20.663" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We were all gaming novices at one time. Many of us still are (including, for the most part, me). However, that does not preclude us from asking expert level Q&amp;amp;A. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are at least two kinds of beginners though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Inquisitive Novice&lt;/strong&gt;. This is the kind of beginner that reads the rule book, plays the game a time or two, or sit and watches a game at his local gaming shop, or on youtube. Then they show up at the stack and start asking questions informed from the experience of game play. These people may ask basic questions, but they are well formed and the idea behind them is to improve the knowledge they have already acquired. This person will likely ask one or two questions initially and wait for answers and try to find the answers on his own to other questions (maybe even here).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Help Vampire&lt;/strong&gt;. This is someone who has taken a cursory look at the books, seen things he doesn't understand and maybe does a small amount of research, then fires off 10 basic questions because he doesn't understand &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; of the rules and hasn't even watched some basic game play to know the basic flow and mechanics of the game. The term vampire is used because they basically just suck out all of the help they can get and leave a dead hulk of a site in their wake. This kind of behavior unchecked will kill a Q&amp;amp;A site (Yahoo Answers?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our goal as a stack is to keep the &quot;Inquisitive Novices&quot; they can manage to ask even basic questions that qualify as expert Q&amp;amp;A because they've done enough research to have the vocabulary and some basic knowledge to understand the answer. However, the &quot;Help Vampire&quot; presents a much greater challenge. Either we can attempt to reform these users and turn them into useful citizens. Or we can communicate to these people that RPG.SE is not the right place for them to learn &lt;em&gt;entire games&lt;/em&gt; but is a place where they can come to clarify their understanding of the rules once they actually understand game play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me be clear. &lt;strong&gt;I do not see the purpose of the Q&amp;amp;A portion of this site as having anything to do with teaching people how to play RPGs.&lt;/strong&gt; Stack Overflow is not about learning how to program. Super User is not about learning how to use a computer. Seasoned Advice is not about how to learn how to cook. Christianity is not about how to become a Christian. All of these sites are for people who are there already to improve their skills and knowledge about their (profession/hobby/religion/etc). We are here to teach, but most of the time the very beginners are outside of our purview. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat (provided a minimal rep is accumulated anywhere on SE) is available and can be a much better means to actually teach people how to play RPGs. Several users on this site have learned 4e through Brian's weekly chat games where they can play with other experienced players (and a very competent--albeit evil--GM). We have an appropriate venue for teaching, and while the barrier to entry exists, it's minimal. Thus, if the problem is just that someone needs actual play experience, or to talk to someone then that's one thing. However, sometimes someone just want to come and suck out all the help they can get and move on. These people should be driven away as they consume valuable resources and provide no lasting benefit. They don't leave good questions behind and they just frustrate the kinds of users that we actually want to keep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-07-17T10:56:14.743" LastActivityDate="2012-07-17T10:56:14.743" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1595" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-17T10:55:53.183" Score="12" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a relative noob to the site and RPGing, I just wanted to gather suggestions of where noobs with basic questions about RPG mechanics or rules (which aren't considered &quot;expert&quot; but are valid questions) should be directed (online)?  Is chat an appropriate venue?  Are there SRD options for all/most of the games represented on this site?  I realize this is a topic of some controversy on the site, but I think it is a valid concern.  We were all noobs at one point, and trying to learn the game in isolation is harder than some of us perhaps remember ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3584" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-07-17T12:39:52.590" LastActivityDate="2012-07-18T23:17:42.940" Title="Where can novices ask RPG questions that fall outside the scope of this site?" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1595" CreationDate="2012-07-17T12:26:35.283" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question varies by game; there's a hundred places. But I don't think that's the real question here.  On a normal forum the response to questions like this is likely to be more hostile than here on SE, where we discourage RTFM/LMGTFY answers. Isn't the question more about how to learn a game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And meta isn't the right place to ask the question.  &quot;Teach a man to fish&quot; questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5214/how-do-i-get-started-playing-dungeons-and-dragons-by-myself&quot;&gt;How do I get started playing Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition by myself?&lt;/a&gt; are perfectly fine and I would encourage more of them, and/or better answers to those that exist (that one's a bit neglected).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like someone to start a new question like &quot;I have read the D&amp;amp;D PHB but am still having trouble grasping some of the basics, how can I learn more?&quot; and have noted that in various comments, but no one's done it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-07-17T12:39:30.040" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1597" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-18T08:14:36.307" Score="-8" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Possible Duplicate:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1274/a-way-to-leave-messages-to-users&quot;&gt;A way to leave messages to users?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we have a way to send a message or email directly to someone without having to do it via a comment, question, answer or chat? Or is they a way already?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also be useful to have a forum. If a question is not relevant to the Q&amp;amp;A site may be it could just be moved to a forum. I fact a relevant question might come from a forum topic and it could be useful o have a link between the too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2016-08-03T15:40:18.110" Title="Can we have an internal messaging system?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|private-messaging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2012-07-18T12:27:14.767" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1598" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1597" CreationDate="2012-07-18T11:58:54.727" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;NO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/431/any-way-to-send-a-personal-message-to-another-user&quot;&gt;requested repeatedly&lt;/a&gt; and denied every single time by Stack Exchange Inc, and other users of SO/SE sites. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason is simple. We are here to interact with the content, not the people. The chat system allows for some direct conversation with people, but it is always public (except in very specific circumstances related to moderation). Comments are intentionally kept clean. The focus of SE sites is on content, not interaction, that's why there is not a PM system and won't ever be one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as a forum goes...why? I see absolutely no need (unless you're looking for play by post....then just set up a gallery chat room..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-07-18T11:58:54.727" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1595" CreationDate="2012-07-18T23:17:42.940" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my view (mostly based on my experience with Board and Card Games), the issue isn't &quot;expert&quot; vs. &quot;basic&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something like &quot;Why does D&amp;amp;D have the Take 10 rule and how do you apply it?&quot; is a beginner question. But it's totally a legit question for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the big distinction here is whether a question is, erm, &lt;em&gt;well-formed&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;well-suited to the format&lt;/em&gt;. Because Stack Exchange organizes &quot;threads&quot; around a single question and a small set of answers, ephemeral, chatty questions don't work in the Stack Exchange format. That's because these sorts of questions are really conversation-starters, and &lt;strong&gt;SE Q&amp;amp;A assumes that the initial question will fully encompass the core issue that you're having&lt;/strong&gt;. If you can articulate a question in those terms, I think it's fair game, even if it's a &quot;newbie&quot; question; if you can't, I think it's a sign that your question isn't clear enough in your own mind to produce fruitful answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what can you do with ephemeral, chatty questions? &lt;strong&gt;Take them to Chat!&lt;/strong&gt; Talking about them is likely to get you an immediate answer (for trivial issues) or at least help you refine it to the point that it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a Stack Exchange question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2012-07-18T23:17:42.940" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1591" CreationDate="2012-07-19T02:41:30.853" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have to pick a nit here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I was under the impression that this was a &lt;strong&gt;Question and Answer&lt;/strong&gt; site for &lt;strong&gt;Players and Game Masters of Role Playing Games&lt;/strong&gt;. This does not mean that you have had to have read the book (even if this is a good idea) or even played it yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; actually mean they have to have played at least &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; roleplaying game. I know it looks like the worst kind of semantic argument, but it bears out in reality and not just semantics: if someone has never played an RPG in their life, they don't have anything resembling the basic knowledge necessary to put answers into context, let alone be able to ask a sensible question in the first place. They're not a player of RPGs, and our site is for players of RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having to have &lt;strong&gt;played an RPG&lt;/strong&gt; is a reasonable minimum bar for participating on an &lt;strong&gt;RPG Q&amp;amp;A site&lt;/strong&gt;. I don't think that's expecting too much of new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone new to programming who buys &lt;em&gt;Python in a Nutshell&lt;/em&gt; and starts asking questions at SO &lt;strong&gt;without ever touching a computer&lt;/strong&gt; is going to be out of place. It's no different here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-07-19T02:41:30.853" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1601" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-07-19T14:38:54.073" Score="13" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;Considering I've been on StackExchange for some time, I figure I should know where the search bar is by now.  However, I had a bit of a mental lapse when I came here today to look for a particular question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;knew&lt;/em&gt; there was a function on the site somewhere, but on a quick glance I just couldn't see it.  I had to look around for a good minute or so, and was almost ready to use the &quot;Ask Question&quot; button (to get to the &quot;Similar Questions&quot; and &quot;Questions that may already have your answer&quot; lists) instead before I finally noticed it up next to the FAQ page link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a few things in combination are what particularly made it difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The search field is translucent black, against a translucent black background.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The border around the search field is grey, and not particularly thick.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The word &quot;search&quot;, while formatted differently than the other link text on the same bar, isn't formatted in a way to be particularly prominent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The search bar is in the top (don't know what it's really called) utility bar of the site - not down in the main page, along with other main functions like &quot;Ask Question&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On just about every other SE site I frequent (SOFU, Gaming, Sci-Fi, IT Security) the search bar is a different color than the surrounding bar, and the word &quot;search&quot; stands out a bit more against that background as well as in comparison to other options on the utility bar.  This is the only site where I've really noticed it's particularly subdued.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since search is really a core function of this site, I think it should be either placed or formatted much more prominently than it is now.  Could this be changed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="197" LastActivityDate="2012-07-19T14:38:54.073" Title="Make main site search stand out more" Tags="|feature-request|site-design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1602" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1587" CreationDate="2012-07-21T23:48:43.293" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's useful to have a mechanics tag. &quot;mechanics&quot; is really just a synonym for &quot;rules&quot; in the context of gaming. The vast majority of content on rpg.se probably qualifies as &quot;game mechanics&quot; content. If you want to tag questions about developing new games, or house rules, use other tags that are less ambigous. [house-rule] and [game-development] might be good ones to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="188" LastActivityDate="2012-07-21T23:48:43.293" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1604" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1609" CreationDate="2012-07-25T01:26:06.597" Score="26" ViewCount="1379" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a category of questions on this site that seriously pollutes our scope. Taking these questions to their logical maximum (which I see us continually approaching) everything under the sun has become on topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This category is campaign research. Appending &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;historical-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;historical-settings&lt;/a&gt;,  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt;, or the sentence &quot;this is for research on my campaign&quot; seems to give a user carte blanc to ask whatever historical, geographical or technological question they choose, all in the name of &quot;campaign research&quot; with no barrier to entry of relevance or mechanics, or even any real bearing on the RP experience of the group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these questions could be asked on a history or nature site with little change in wording and be completely on topic. They are hardly relevant specifically to RP and are likely largely irrelevant to actual play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What purpose do they serve here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize there are numerous games that are set in historical time periods, but are your players clamoring so desperately for accuracy that you have to have it exactly right? And both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;historical-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;historical-settings&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-research&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-research&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-research&lt;/a&gt; have some great questions in them. But a lot of the questions in both of those tags have very little to do with RPGs in any specific sense and a lot more to do with history in the general sense. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the problem is that they are often way to broad to begin with. Trying to get a general sense of an entire decade for a CoC game in one question is probably a little much, wouldn't it be much better to hit up Wikipedia or another primary source to find out what kind of events and tech were there? We aren't here to be your research assistant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Medieval travel times might be useful in certain settings, but again, can't you research how fast you can walk, ride a horse, sail an old boat?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last but not least. Since this was last discussed site wide nearly 2 years ago, an SE for history has entered beta, it seems to me, that if these folks were willing to answer questions about ancient (and more modern) history it might serve as a better home for many of these questions. And quite frankly, if they consider questions like the ones we have not-constructive or off-topic, that should be a strong indication that we should go that direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of this question is to reopen the discussion from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic?rq=1&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; now that 2 years have passed and we have graduated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:24:53.873" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:24:53.873" Title="Are campaign research questions on topic? [2012]" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|research|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1605" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-25T02:03:43.740" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think we should limit it to questions for which RPG experts are the ideal resource for answering the question. A question better answered by some other group, whether it's another StackExchange site or the wider Internet, doesn't belong here.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question about the speed of water travel, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12911/middle-age-transportation-by-river-questions&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, should probably be on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;history site&lt;/a&gt;. A question about dangerous &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10563/what-are-some-dangerous-non-fantasy-creatures&quot;&gt;real-world animals for a no-magic setting&lt;/a&gt; should probably be on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://biology.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;biology&lt;/a&gt; site. A question about a setting based on novels/movies/etc, such as Dresden Files or Star Wars, should probably be on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;fantasy/sci-fi site&lt;/a&gt;. A research question about an RPG setting, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12684/mage-population-density-in-mage-the-awakening&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be a good fit here, unlike any of the other sites mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:48:10.207" LastActivityDate="2012-08-02T03:40:00.670" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-25T02:49:27.290" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Settings questions (of which historical questions are a subset) are... Interesting. At first it seems extremely simple: RPG settings go on RPG.SE, non-RPG settings go elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the corner cases get really ugly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What about a setting like &lt;em&gt;Star Wars&lt;/em&gt;? It certainly began as a movie, but most of the trivia that would be featured in a settings-style question (how many people it takes to crew a Star Destroyer, for example) were written by West End Games for their RPG product, or derived from those RPG sources.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What about a setting that defaults to history, like the &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What about a setting like &lt;em&gt;7th Sea&lt;/em&gt; that explicitly tells you to look things up in non-fiction works as part of the game's systems?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For that matter, what about settings such as &lt;em&gt;Forgotten Realms&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Dragonlance&lt;/em&gt; that were based on an RPG, but received most of their initial development in the form of novels, comics, games, and other non-RPG media?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is a strong case to be made for &lt;strong&gt;banning all non-design settings questions&lt;/strong&gt; as off-topic. Send D&amp;amp;D, Star Wars and its ilk to Sci-Fi, historical settings to history, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But at this time I don't see a good way to single out historical-settings in any fair manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that said, there are a few guidelines that I think we should be following in voting on it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the campaign is set in an existing setting, cite it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the campaign is set in a homebrew setting, some effort should be spent describing it. &quot;Just be as historically accurate as possible&quot; should be a warning flag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions should include context describing why the asker wants to know. Is it for adding a twist to the campaign? To help design a mechanic? The answers should be more fleshed out than &quot;I want it to help me design my campaign.&quot; In other words: Why are you asking an RPG site, and not a history/sci-fi site? Why does the answer matter?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, questions that demand strict historical accuracy and demand non-RPG citations should be VTCed and/or downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions asked for general curiosity/edification should be asked at other sites. Yes, we might be able to answer the question well. We have a diverse user base. But average quality will be much higher on a specialist site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Survey of Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since initially writing this post last night, I went back and looked at the tags in question. Here are the questions from each tag this year (i.e. over the past seven months):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;historical-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;historical-settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14680/which-technologies-commodities-were-available-during-the-30s-in-the-usa&quot;&gt;Which technologies/commodities were available during the 30s in the USA?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is pretty much fail, but that fail is more a result of the structure of the question and general vagueness of it than anything else (don't answer my question, find me a resource that answers my question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of ways to improve it, but the asker got upvotes/answers in the format he asked for, so there really isn't much to be done.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13550/is-there-a-semi-canon-concordance-between-the-peoples-of-the-forgotten-realms&quot;&gt;Is there a (semi-canon) concordance between the peoples of the Forgotten Realms and their &amp;quot;real-world&amp;quot; equivalents?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An odd question. But ultimately it's a question about the &lt;em&gt;Forgotten Realms&lt;/em&gt; setting of D&amp;amp;D, rather than real-world history.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11862/what-do-i-need-to-change-about-call-of-cthulhu-to-set-it-in-the-60s&quot;&gt;What do I need to change about Call of Cthulhu to set it in the 60s?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like an excellent example of a good historical question. It's grounded firmly in a specific game world, and is asking a question pitched to RPG experts. It isn't asking for &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; historical fact about the sixties, but rather which ones are important to a Call of Cthulu campaign. Nice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15443/starting-a-campaign-at-higher-level&quot;&gt;Starting a campaign at higher level&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15424/how-much-to-bend-the-rules-about-populating-a-world&quot;&gt;How much to bend &amp;quot;the rules&amp;quot; about populating a world?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15079/narrative-options-in-an-antique-shop-old-bookstore-or-library&quot;&gt;Narrative options in an antique shop, old bookstore or library&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Poorly formed question; closed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14706/rules-for-generating-a-game-world-as-you-go&quot;&gt;Rules for generating a game world as you go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14299/what-can-i-have-the-players-do-in-my-surreal-horror-scenario&quot;&gt;What can I have the players do in my surreal horror scenario?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The focus is on RPG interactions. How will the players react to this scenario? What do I need to prepare for? I see no reason why Sci-Fi or History would be better fits than here. Writers might be able to offer some assistance, but I would think that we could do a better job of it than they can.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14163/any-good-premade-campaigns-for-beginners&quot;&gt;Any good premade campaigns for beginners?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14035/how-do-i-promote-my-gaming-campaigns&quot;&gt;How do I promote my gaming campaigns?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14028/how-to-adapt-a-3e-community-building-system-for-a-larger-scale-use-in-a-4e-game&quot;&gt;How to adapt a 3e community-building system for a larger-scale use in a 4e game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13880/point-buy-structured-system-for-cooperative-4e-campaign-building&quot;&gt;Point buy/structured system for cooperative 4e campaign building?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13809/running-parallel-campaigns&quot;&gt;Running Parallel Campaigns&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13694/how-to-succesfully-make-one-quest-naturally-lead-to-the-next&quot;&gt;How to succesfully make one quest naturally lead to the next?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13669/reasonable-stats-for-a-god-dr-25&quot;&gt;Reasonable stats for a god (DR 25)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12911/middle-age-transportation-by-river-questions&quot;&gt;Middle age transportation by river questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The initial question seems reasonable. Travel by river IS a bit of a hole in RPG source material, and one that can come up in a campaign. From the comments, it's clear that this is a genuine question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted answer is a good example of the kind of answer you should expect to get from this sort of question asked on this site: A lot of &quot;back of the envelope&quot; calculations, and a citation to another RPG resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bounty criteria (&quot;I'd like to see answers like 'King John took 11 days to travel the Danube from Vienna to the Black Sea', where the source references a journey in or before the Middle Ages&quot;) is a prime example of a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; historical question. It's calling for an extreme level of very specific historical research. History would be a much better source for this kind of information.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12871/how-can-i-convey-the-nonsensicality-of-a-dream-world&quot;&gt;How can I convey the nonsensicality of a dream world?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could offload this to Writers, I suppose. But the interactive nature of RPGs makes it worthwhile getting an RPG-centric take on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12052/where-can-i-learn-more-about-the-world-tree&quot;&gt;Where can I learn more about the World Tree?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a question about the fictional setting behind D&amp;amp;D. It asks a bit about working the fiction into the campaign, which improves it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11815/how-do-i-get-my-dresden-files-players-involved-in-city-creation&quot;&gt;How do I get my dresden files players involved in city creation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not relevant to this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on this survey, I'm not seeing a great deal of problems coming out of these tags at this time. In a seven month period, there is one historical-settings question that is: 1) about historical settings; and 2) of poor quality. And that one is of poor quality due to the structure and vagueness of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Campaign-development is almost devoid of these sorts of questions by volume. The few that do apply seemed fine to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-07-25T20:48:21.907" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-25T07:00:34.617" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My .02 pennies... If the question is directly relevant to a game setting or mechanics (published or not) then it should be on topic.  If not, then another SE site &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; more appropriate.  However, that may hit semantics rather than substance. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What are the effects of a Levant climate on medieval crusaders' arms and armours?&lt;/em&gt;.  This probably should go into history.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What are the effects of a Levant climate on medieval crusaders' arms and armours which may or may not be magical and made from mithril?&lt;/em&gt;. This, as I see it, would be on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit&lt;/strong&gt;: I guess what I am driving at is that questions about rules are of no interest to me whatsoever.  So, closing a wide range of questions that I hold an interest in would diminish this site value for me.  I believe research into a setting to make it realistic (within the internal logic of said setting) should be on topic.  Although sometimes better answers should be sought in relevant SE sites or elsewhere -- kids, go read a book ^_~ &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2012-07-25T07:18:02.473" LastActivityDate="2012-07-25T07:18:02.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-25T22:07:54.070" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'm recanting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/700/321&quot;&gt;As someone who strongly argued for keeping historical research questions here&lt;/a&gt;, and (if those votes say anything) thereby established some of the weight of consensus to keep them, I'm changing my mind. I really don't think they belong here. Even our very own game books tell us: &lt;em&gt;Go research history in history books. It'll do you and your game good.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately we have more than libraries now—we also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;history.SE&lt;/a&gt; as a resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;An easy litmus test&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need detailed criteria for judging historical setting questions. Merely this one litmus test:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would this question be on-topic for history.SE?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is, then it can't possibly require RPG experts and should be migrated there. This works just as easily for questions about settings that were science fiction or fantasy literature &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; and are still &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about roleplaying settings are harder, but we're smart—we can probably tell the difference between a question that's best answered by book fans and one that's best answered by sourcebook experts. The latter should stay here and will be the vast majority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The former will be rare judgement calls, depending on how tied to a roleplaying context the question is. If it's just &quot;What year in (Dale Reckoning) did Drizzt fight the barghest?&quot; then that's probably best answered by a book fan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When all you have is a hammer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a hammer problem. We're gamers, we like hanging out in gamer spaces, and so we tend to bring our questions around gaming here by preference even when RPG.SE isn't the most suited Stack for the question. We've got this honestly &lt;em&gt;awesome&lt;/em&gt; hammer, but it makes us look at too many gaming question as a nail, when really the history Stack is a much better tool for questions about real-world history. If we really value authenticity in a historical question, our &lt;em&gt;duty&lt;/em&gt; is to migrate it to history.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to go register an account there now. I've been holding this hammer too long and it's giving me hand cramps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Post script: other SEs' answers to this issue&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://writers.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/20/is-it-appropriate-to-ask-questions-on-specialist-knowledge-areas&quot;&gt;Writers.SE has &lt;strong&gt;rejected&lt;/strong&gt; &quot;specialist knowledge&quot; questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For example, if someone is writing a historical fiction, we are not necessarily any more experts on history or historical research than we are on defusing bombs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:47:51.077" LastActivityDate="2012-07-25T23:48:00.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1609" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-26T00:20:30.823" Score="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, not unless they are truly RPG-centric.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A Summary: What to do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add a section to our FAQ defining what is on topic or off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My second draft of the wording (that I'm still not completely satisfied with):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Question about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, may be off topic if they are not RPG-centric (or better belong on another Stack Exchange site, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;). A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Close non-RPG-centric questions as off topic, or migrate them to a more suitable SE Site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an example of what would be on or off topic, see the end of this post. If we don't do this, we become the one stop shop for anything that could be used in a campaign but which has nothing really to do with RPGs, which is the entire problem that generated this topic in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I sympathise that this might be harsh, because whilst we do have a History site, &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/37498/geography&quot;&gt;there is not yet a Geography Stack Exchange site&lt;/a&gt;, but if we don't then we get our current predicament as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Trial the above amendment and be willing to make changes to the wording.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am sure those present here understand the &lt;em&gt;spirit&lt;/em&gt; of the above amendment, but I am also sure that if our wording isn't great then there will be people going by the letter and misunderstanding the spirit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should keep an eye out for when questions might seem off topic by the letter of the amendment, and yet are on topic by its spirit, and reword the amendment accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We are not the first ones going down this path.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Game Development.SE&lt;/a&gt; had this problem a while ago. Game Development is a very wide topic, and as such, ended up with questions on a lot of very different topics: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animation&quot;&gt;animation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/art&quot;&gt;art&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/programming&quot;&gt;programming&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/physics&quot;&gt;physics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/networking&quot;&gt;networking&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/html5&quot;&gt;web development&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/math&quot;&gt;mathematics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sound&quot;&gt;sound&lt;/a&gt;, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In summary, their problem was this:&lt;/strong&gt; A whole lot of topics which could be asked elsewhere, and many questions which &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;, but all these topics genuinely relate to Game Development! How do we decide what's on topic and what isn't!?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Our problem is this (seem familiar?):&lt;/strong&gt; Topics like history, geography, boat speeds - many of which can be asked elsewhere, and many questions which &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;, but all these topics genuinely relate to RPGs! How do we decide what's on topic and what isn't!?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Game Development.SE's solution&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest question for them was about which programming questions are off topic and which aren't, and they &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3/programming-questions-here-or-belongs-on-stackoverflow&quot;&gt;discussed that and came to a pretty decent conclusion&lt;/a&gt;. Likewise our main problem areas seem to be history, geography, and other topics which are just asking about the state of the world at a certain point in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can get the best wording by directly quoting &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;Game Development.SE's FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, where it's specific to programming:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;General programming questions more likely belong on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; instead of here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would a professional game developer give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than other programmers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here. For more discussion on that topic, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3/programming-questions-here-or-belongs-on-stackoverflow&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on our meta site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note: the &quot;this question&quot; link is the discussion I linked at the beginning of this section)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our solution, from learning from Game Development.SE&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions asking about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics might more likely belong on another Stack Exchange site (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;) than here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The wording is rough, but my intention is this: for a given question, would asking it on an RPG board give you a different, better or more specific answer than you could get by asking it elsewhere?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To consider briefly some questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12911/middle-age-transportation-by-river-questions&quot;&gt;Middle age transportation by river questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Off topic.&lt;/strong&gt; You could ask a Historian or a boat expert this question and they would give you the exact and correct answer. Nothing is gained from asking an RPG player specifically. There is nothing RPG-specific about the question and nothing RPG-specific about an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14680/which-technologies-commodities-were-available-during-the-30s-in-the-usa&quot;&gt;Which technologies/commodities were available during the 30s in the USA?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Off topic.&lt;/strong&gt; The accepted answer has nothing RPG-specific about it and would be perfectly at home on History.SE. There is no RPG-specific information being asked for, either - the player just wants to learn history. If you were to snip out mention of the fact it's for DMing a Trails of Cthulhu game, it would be the exact same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that by contrast, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11862/what-do-i-need-to-change-about-call-of-cthulhu-to-set-it-in-the-60s&quot;&gt;What do I need to change about Call of Cthulhu to set it in the 60s?&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;strong&gt;on topic&lt;/strong&gt; because it is directly intertwined with an RPG setting and a historian cannot answer this question decently.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10563/what-are-some-dangerous-non-fantasy-creatures&quot;&gt;What are some dangerous non-fantasy creatures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On topic!&lt;/strong&gt; Even though this can be answered by a Zoologist, take a look at the answers. These answers are something &lt;em&gt;more specific to the topic of RPGs&lt;/em&gt; than any zoologist could provide. &lt;strong&gt;gomad&lt;/strong&gt; answers the question from the point of view of what a wolf or boar could do to a group of adventurers or hunters, and who cares if wolves don't typically attack people? Other answers to a lesser degree consider things like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What would it be fun to fight?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is relevant to an adventure?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What impact could the animals have on some fighters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What animals can be &lt;em&gt;made dangerous&lt;/em&gt; and how? 500 rats, leeches (either giant or in large quantities), etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A zoologist might not even list wolves because they're not prone to attacking people or consider leeches since they can be easily removed with some salt. To get similar answers from a theoretical Zoology Stack Exchange site, you'd have to ask: &quot;If I were to put on some armour and grab a sword and throw myself into the most dangerous circumstances possible and fight some animals alongside some friends, what would be some great animals to aggravate and which would possibly kill me?&quot; The idea of 500 rats or a bunch of leeches (or giant) leeches might not even come up before the question would be inevitably closed as nonsense.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2016-04-23T17:29:52.380" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1610" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1587" CreationDate="2012-07-27T15:39:14.317" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What about for system agnostic mechanics?  That sounds a bit redundant, but I bookmarked this a while back.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/steal-this-trick-legends-token-and-bidding-system-for-social-encounters&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/steal-this-trick-legends-token-and-bidding-system-for-social-encounters&lt;/a&gt;  It's a mechanic that can be applied to any game and makes social skills more interesting.  Were I to ask about it or other mechanics of the same class, I'd probably use the mechanics tag coupled with system agnostic.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2012-07-27T15:39:14.317" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1604" CreationDate="2012-07-27T16:11:31.907" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Campaign research questions are generally on topic as long as they are acceptable questions according to other site critera, though we should suggest asking in more appropriate SEs in cases where it is probably better.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, I was a major opponent of campaign research questions in the original discussion, but I have come around and disagree with the majority of the &quot;let's ban them&quot; reasoning.  here's the deal.  To ban a kind of question as a &quot;site rule,&quot; it needs to present a clear and present danger to the site.  Anything else should go under normal site voting rules.  So let's evaluate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are There A Lot Of Them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are not at all frequent.  See @AceCalhoon's survey of the questions, only a handful really touch on this problem directly at all.  I personally tolerate way more dumb questions in other categories I don't like, so it doesn't make me too sad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are They Outside The Site's Scope?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, are they on topic in the most simple sense of being about the subject matter of the site?  (This doesn't mean we allow them in and of itself) - like on Gaming, a shopping question might be &quot;on topic&quot; but banned for other reasons.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these questions seem to me to be legitimately and directly useful to gamers.  More than that, they benefit from an answer &lt;em&gt;from a gaming context.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my personal yardstick.  Would you expect to see an article written on this topic in an RPG magazine? If so, it is appropriately on topic.  For example, with the pirate-based Skull and Shackles adventure path on, RPG gamers are legitimately interested in how to implement nautical travel in their games.  An answer to this question from History.SE is likely to be too rooted in the real world to be helpful.  Part of the brilliance of Steve Jackson Games, for example, is in their historical sourcebooks for GURPS.  These translate &quot;history&quot; into &quot;history in a form useful for gamers&quot;.  I remember how impressed I was with their Conan sourcebook for the same reason, it converted the fragmentary history of the Howard stories into something one could coherently use to game in - a not inconsiderable task.  That translation is &quot;not nothing...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;non-fantasy threats&quot; question is on topic.  A real world zoologist would give crap answers to this, from a &quot;I want to put together a generic 'forest random encounter table'&quot; perspective.  I have several Dragon Magazine articles on this exact topic. You could possibly make a &quot;big list&quot; argument against this specific question but that's irrelevant to whether its subject matter is on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Saying that a topic that an RPG product specifically covers is off topic for RPG.SE is a questionable line of reasoning.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;What commodities exist in the 1930s&quot; is a closable question because it's poorly scoped, not because it's off topic.  Frankly &quot;How do I find out what commodities are available&quot; is an on topic better scoped question - there's plenty of RPG products out there to help people with that question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is There A Better Place For Them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a daring concept.  Let people put their questions where &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; think they're going to get the best answer.  RPG vs History, Ubuntu vs Linux and Unix, etc.  If the question is off topic in your estimation, vote to close.  4 people agree with you and away it goes.  If it's not off topic, but you think it's &quot;better&quot; answered somewhere else - well, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.  Suggest it to the OP.  But I'm not really interested in enforcing &quot;what someone thinks would be better,&quot; mod action should generally be for major wrongs not opinion differences.  Migrating against an OP's wishes not for &quot;off topic&quot; but for &quot;better&quot; is hostile and should not be accepted practice anywhere on the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't agree entirely with @JonathanHobbs' conclusion but I do agree with the bit he linked from gamedev.se, especially given as it's worded as advice to the user and not as &quot;we will close or migrate you for daring to ask it here!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is There Another Compelling Reason To Ban Them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An argument for banning shopping questions (especially without tight guidance) is that they generate poor quality answers.  Or arguments.  I don't see campaign research questions doing that (except for the meta-argument of &quot;Do we allow them,&quot; which doesn't count).  So I'm having trouble seeing any way in which they are being disruptive or contributing to people breaking the &quot;real&quot; site rules (as codified by the vote/flag reasons).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that there aren't many of them, and they are generally on topic and not causing problems, and that the site mechanism exists to close ones that are off topic or causing problems, I see no reason for a &quot;site rule&quot; on this topic.  Site rules should be minimized to be a friendly, open community - we should only have rules over and above the general SE rules and the FAQ if such a rule is sorely needed (like sys-rec questions qualifies).  I don't see that this does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RPG.SE Is Not RPG Rules SE Or Fantasy SE&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just a warning about some of the common misapprehensions I'm seeing in this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The act of creating, running, and playing RPGs is about much more than game rules/mechanics.  If you are looking to reduce questions just because they don't touch on game rules, you will not find an ally in me. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, &quot;non magic setting&quot; does not make things off topic here.  D&amp;amp;D is fine and great, but this site is and should be inclusive of all games and settings. I understand that the industry largely wallows in the &quot;D&amp;amp;D Ghetto&quot; but that is not relevant here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-07-27T19:07:27.897" LastActivityDate="2012-07-27T19:07:27.897" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1612" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1613" CreationDate="2012-07-28T19:19:07.443" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15827/combat-and-exp-gold-reward-equations&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question needs editing; the author didn't realise (I assume) that linebreaks need to be inserted by using a 'double-space'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But editing the question to simply add the linebreaks and make the question easier to understand fails due to the &quot;6 non-space character minimum&quot; requirement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are formatting edits in this manner discouraged, or is this something that should be fixed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3567" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Editing a question to include linebreaks not possible due to &quot;6 non-space characters minimum&quot;" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1613" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1612" CreationDate="2012-07-28T20:21:46.290" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, they're not.  Users with rep sufficient to edit without approval can make these kind of changes.  Very small edits cannot be proposed, to keep them from drowning out more significant edits in the edit queue.  Users with sufficient reputation will be able to make these kinds of edits.  There is much more discussion about this at &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/suggested-edits&quot;&gt;Meta.StackOverflow&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-07-28T20:21:46.290" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1614" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1615" CreationDate="2012-07-31T07:42:34.840" Score="7" ViewCount="1058" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can I use &quot;DM&quot; as a verb, meaning &quot;playing an rpg game at the role of a Dungeon Master / Story Teller / ...? What are some (other) appropriate verbs for this meaning?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example &quot;Yesterday I DM-ed a fantasy game for my friends.&quot; or &quot;Do you prefer to DM or do you prefer to play a character?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course this is not proper English, the context I am asking about is this site solely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Note the excellent comment by SevenSidedDie below, saying that &lt;strong&gt;GM is a more general verb&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3502" LastEditorUserId="3502" LastEditDate="2012-08-03T05:11:04.147" LastActivityDate="2015-06-12T04:49:28.527" Title="Can I use &quot;DM&quot; as a verb?" Tags="|discussion|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1615" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1614" CreationDate="2012-07-31T08:49:51.363" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see a reason why not. Since &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/01/25&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;every noun can be verbed&lt;/a&gt;, we often use DM as a verb in my groups, and we even arm-twist it into Hebrew and conjugate it as a Hebrew verb, which will probably send language purists into paroxysms. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I'm for it. I DMed. She DMed. I have been DMing. I think it's clear enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="3043" LastEditDate="2015-06-12T04:49:28.527" LastActivityDate="2015-06-12T04:49:28.527" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1616" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-08-01T20:08:51.130" Score="4" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/14163/revisions&quot;&gt;this question's revisions&lt;/a&gt; you can see that the tags were changed twice. The first time &quot;system-recommendation&quot; was added even though the question didn't ask about a system, and stated the system in another tag. The second time that was removed and campaign-setting was also removed and adventure added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think campaign-setting was appropriate for this question because, considering it came from the original poster, it implies that they was willing to pick the campaign's setting based on what material they could find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, neither adventure nor campaign-setting have any description about what they are to distinguish them apart. I like when people edit a post to add something obvious (Like the poster says they're playing in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e but forgets to tag it) but this seems to be simple opinion of how someone else would tag it turning into something enforced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is retagging in this way something that is encouraged on the RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3874" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-08-03T16:51:48.390" Title="Is this a good or a bad example of changing tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1616" CreationDate="2012-08-01T21:25:57.807" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;First,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;retagging is perfectly fine and encouraged. We want people to appropriately categorize questions. If they feel like the question needs different tags then that's great, retag away. The only caveat to this is that one should actually do a good job retagging a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, as to whether this particular situation represents good tagging, let's look at all the tags individually.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; - this is good, it sets up the question, provides the necessary context. &lt;strong&gt;Good Tag&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; - looks good, the author wants a campaign. Except when we read the tag wiki, it's about writing or expanding campaigns, not about selecting one. &lt;strong&gt;Bad Tag&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt; - I'm kind of ambivalent on this one, there is no tag wiki here so it's kind of hard to know right off what it's intended for. Lets look at how it has been used in the past: looks like it's usually about asking for more detail &lt;em&gt;on a specific setting&lt;/em&gt;. That's not a good fit here. &lt;strong&gt;Bad Tag&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; - Now we're getting into the edits. A moderator added this tag. While I think it's actually more appropriate than some of the other tags here, the question is not asking for a system, it's asking for an adventure with the system already determined. &lt;strong&gt;Bad Tag&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; - Anther tag with no tag wiki. However, this tag is ultimately a meta tag (as is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. That makes it's inclusion a bad thing, just based on the existence of the tag. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately what we need here is a new tag. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recomendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recomendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recomendation&lt;/a&gt;. However, I discourage this. Any question that needs this tag should be closed. We should not be in the business of recommending things. (see &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is hard, let's go shopping&lt;/a&gt;)*&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*author note: this is the opinion of the post author and should not be taken as site policy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-08-03T16:51:48.390" LastActivityDate="2012-08-03T16:51:48.390" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1616" CreationDate="2012-08-02T03:06:09.933" Score="6" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Retagging is good and encouraged, per @waxeagle.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Shopping&quot; questions &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; allowed here - I see no reason to allow system-rec but not adventure-rec. Waxy's speaking a bit out of turn there. For shopping/recommendation questions, we only have system-rec,&#xA;which we could I guess rename to product-rec or game-rec or&#xA;shopping. I actually added the system-rec tag to that question to&#xA;indicate people should be abiding by the rules we use for system-rec&#xA;questions. It's the one we have, so the one we should use.  If&#xA;anyone wants to push through the complaining to propose a&#xA;constructive change we can do that of course.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the specific tags in this case - he is asking for a &quot;campaign,&quot; which in RPG parlance is a series of adventures, confusingly close of course to a &quot;campaign setting&quot; which is the world one's campaign is set in.  campaign-setting is a bad tag for this, campaign-development is fine.  Complaining about &quot;adventure&quot;, a real RPG thing, strikes me as pedantic and leads to this wrangling.  adventure-writing?  Well it's not writing it's choosing!  adventure-running?  Do all tags have to be a sentence strung together with hyphens?  It adds as much valuable context as dnd-3.5e does practically, so it's fine.  Read and understand &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt; - they're talking about purely unhelpful things like &quot;subjective,&quot; not tags that usefully set scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-08-02T03:33:40.430" LastActivityDate="2012-08-02T03:33:40.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2012-08-08T01:02:44.407" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is the &quot;in games&quot; implied for this stackexchange, regarding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/languages-in-games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;languages-in-games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;languages-in-games&lt;/a&gt; tag?  I propose replacing it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/language&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;language&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;language&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;languages&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2012-08-08T01:02:44.407" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-08-08T01:02:44.407" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1620" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1568" CreationDate="2012-08-09T19:12:56.760" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just received a certain package in the mail today - thank you once again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3273" LastActivityDate="2012-08-09T19:12:56.760" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1591" CreationDate="2012-08-11T04:42:41.327" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are we really concerned that opening the site to questions like &quot;What does 1d8 mean?&quot; will ruin everything? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you really believe that concern outweighs our desire to increase traffic to the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say open the site up to any question about RPGs, no matter how basic. If someone asks what &quot;1d8&quot; means, we rephrase the question, &quot;Explain standard dice notation, like 1d8,&quot; and answer that. Next time someone asks, we close the question as redundant. If someone asks what AC is, we restructure the question as, &quot;What are the abbreviations used in D&amp;amp;D?&quot; and answer that. Subsequent questions are closed as redundant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, all of this smells of elitism. Really, I see no reason to chase away new players, eager to learn more about our games. Open the doors and welcome them all in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="254" LastActivityDate="2012-08-11T04:42:41.327" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2012-08-12T02:31:33.030" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;GenCon 2012&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will be at GenCon 2012 - will anybody else from RPG.SE be there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2012-08-12T02:31:33.030" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1497" CreationDate="2012-08-13T10:35:24.980" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://edgerunner.merttorun.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1zpHG.png&quot; alt=&quot;Edgerunner, a different interpretation of FATE for a dark future&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2012-08-13T10:35:24.980" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-08-13T10:35:24.980" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2012-08-14T04:58:24.677" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://ropecon.fi&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Ropecon&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://tracon.fi&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Tracon&lt;/a&gt;, both in Finland, pretty much every year. I generally game master something, and may give a talk on some subject, as well. If anyone happens to visit Finland at the relevant times, please do tell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Both of the websites have material in English. Find a small flag or text such as &quot;In English&quot; and click it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastActivityDate="2012-08-14T04:58:24.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1625" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1626" CreationDate="2012-08-14T17:37:12.917" Score="12" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16063/3924&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;, I asked a question about the FATE generic RPG system, and then tagged it both FATE, and Spirit of the Century. I figured answers for one would be equivalent to answers for the other. However, after perusing the answers, it turns out that different versions of FATE would result in different answers to the question. Thus, the original question has several correct answers, since it wasn't specific enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think Spirit of the Century makes for a good standard version of Fate (until Fate Core comes out), and was considering changing the title of the question specifically mention it. This would make the question more focused, and make it clearer what the &quot;correct&quot; answer is. However, I am concerned changing the title after the fact will make some of the answers confusing to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3924" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-28T08:11:24.777" LastActivityDate="2020-11-28T08:11:24.777" Title="Rewriting questions after question has been answered" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1625" CreationDate="2012-08-14T21:03:37.113" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a hard problem that comes up from time to time, and I don't think I've seen a great way to handle it. All I can really point to is that there are three overlapping ways to handle it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave the question as it is, and ask a new question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If none of the answers you see solve your problem, and you see a significant miscommunication (like this one), it's reasonable to try again from scratch. You asked in good faith, they answered in good faith, but somewhere along the line things got out of hand. It happens, and sometimes trying to fix it just leads to a lot of noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll want to link the two questions and take a sentence or two to spotlight the differences you've uncovered to ward off &quot;exact duplicate&quot; closures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update the question to reflect your intent&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you got a really solid answer out of the question anyway, it might be worth giving it the &quot;accept&quot; check and then updating your answer to clarify it to your intent. You may want to reference your earlier gaffe in the final version of the question to provide context for the slightly off-base answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, there will be a lot of slightly off-base answers. But that's okay, because you've clearly noted what worked for you, and have done your best to make it clear what your actual problem was.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update the question to reflect the answers&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you accidentally ask a question that turns out to be pretty interesting in its own right. If you've got a solid answer for the accidental question there's nothing wrong with rewriting your question to reflect the answer and accepting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, you'll probably still need to ask your original question, but that's okay. Just try to be a little clearer this time around.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other, other, option is to update the question to your intent, and call in a mod to clear the question of deviant answers. But I can't say that I've ever been too happy with the results of that, unless the off-base answers were very low quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(and, of course, the mod might say &quot;no.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-08-14T21:03:37.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1627" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1629" CreationDate="2012-08-15T16:39:40.593" Score="5" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the case that a new user has a salient comment to make that is not an answer, but has not the ability to comment, is an answer a viable alternative?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ref: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16138/can-i-see-through-an-open-doorway/16147#comment27054_16147&quot;&gt;Can I see through an open doorway?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T14:21:49.340" Title="How do you handle comments from users without enough rep to comment?" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1627" CreationDate="2012-08-15T17:02:35.237" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just flag it as a not an answer. Or use a custom flag that indicates it should be converted to a comment. In this case neither is really a good choice here so you're move of leaving a comment indicating the answer was inappropriate was the way to go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only real advice we can give to someone is that they need to do their time posting answer, asking questions and editing until they have enough rep to comment. Commenting is a privilege not a right and the rep to earn commenting privileges is low enough that it should only require a post or two around here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-08-15T17:02:35.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1629" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1627" CreationDate="2012-08-15T17:02:55.287" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers are for answering the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users should try to post &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; questions and answers until they have the measly 50 rep needed to post comments. As mentioned in the linked answer, this is not a discussion site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the new user's comments can be reformed into an actual answer, then they can post that, and add their other thoughts as a comment to their own answer (you can always add comments to your own answer, your own question, and any answers to a question you asked).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2012-08-15T17:02:55.287" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1614" CreationDate="2012-08-15T21:20:00.210" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Oddly enough, I'd say that 'DM' is wrong on this site though right in normal speech.  The latter is because, when new activities arise, new words are needed for them; &lt;em&gt;referee&lt;/em&gt;  or &lt;em&gt;organize a game&lt;/em&gt;  are possible alternatives, but they don't convey the proper idea to somebody who hasn't heard of RPGs (and has presumably been living in seclusion for 30 years). 'DM' has a respectable history (I think it was coined by Gary Gygax), and is good enough for normal purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But on this site, 'DM' is too specific; it refers to D&amp;amp;D only, which doesn't seem to be what you want. SevenSidedDie's 'GM' is much the best, though &lt;em&gt;gamesmaster&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;referee&lt;/em&gt; (because users here can be assumed to know what you mean) are possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2451" LastActivityDate="2012-08-15T21:20:00.210" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1627" CreationDate="2012-08-16T17:59:05.287" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Welcome to RPG.SE. This looks like a comment and not a complete answer. Could you restructure it into being an answer? When you've answered a question or two, you will have enough reputation to leave comments. We're eager to have you share your knowledge and insights.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, one of the few things I find discouraging about SE for RPGs is the mechanical feel of rejection of our new users (negative vote totals, etc.) Anything we can do to soften the transition from message boards to this format would be immensely helpful to our growth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastActivityDate="2012-08-16T17:59:05.287" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1632" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1627" CreationDate="2012-08-17T16:07:52.530" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a new user, I find it completely baffling that I can't comment.  Doubly so because (unlike with downvotes) it's not obvious why.  I initially thought I just didn't understand the UI.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the rep required is &quot;measley&quot;, why is it there at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastActivityDate="2012-08-17T16:07:52.530" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1633" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1060" CreationDate="2012-08-17T17:22:07.977" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Pacificon 2012&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://pacificongameexpo.com/blog/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://pacificongameexpo.com/blog/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's one of the biggest west coast gaming conventions, held in Santa Clara, California this year (just outside San Jose).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Though I'm mainly going to promote my latest board game.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastActivityDate="2012-08-17T17:22:07.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1634" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-08-21T00:20:55.893" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we have a &quot;this answer seems incomplete, but I don't know how to fix it&quot; option in the new low quality posts review tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, allowing us to add detail as to what may need expanding on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2012-08-21T00:20:55.893" Title="More commenting options in the review-beta for low-quality-posts" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1635" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1636" CreationDate="2012-08-22T07:46:58.670" Score="8" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a website (well, a few) and I would like to link to RPG.SE. Rather than use a text link, I'd like to use an image as they get better click-throughs. Is there an image I can use to link the to site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; make my own using the banner as the starting point but I doubt that would look as professional as if it was done by the original artist. A range of shapes and sizes would be great but most blogs and sites use a 120px by 120px.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did hunt and search around the main site and meta for one but couldn't find any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="173" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:51:24.103" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:51:24.103" Title="Is there an RPG.SE button / graphic / banner?" Tags="|support|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1635" CreationDate="2012-08-22T16:06:45.590" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here you go!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1rmEX.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG Stack Exchange 120px banner&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-08-22T16:06:45.590" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1637" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1646" CreationDate="2012-08-27T16:45:49.610" Score="1" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would asking about specific (say Brazilian) music that has a cyberpunk feel to it be on topic?  I can argue both sides but would say that it is on.  Just checking here first...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be some confusion so here is the text of the question I wanted to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am writing a cyberpunk game (with heavy overtones of film noir and&#xA;  transhumanism) set in Brazil (specifically São Paulo).  I want to play&#xA;  during the game session music that is appropriate to the setting.  I&#xA;  have a lot of appropriate music already but utterly lack knowledge of&#xA;  what would be &lt;em&gt;appropriate cyber punk (or film noir) themed music&#xA;  originating from Brazil and/or Portugal&lt;/em&gt;.  Does anybody know of&#xA;  something  suitable? Creative Commons or buy direct from artist get&#xA;  bonus points...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2012-08-31T11:26:08.940" LastActivityDate="2012-08-31T21:46:21.627" Title="Music specific for a game setting" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1637" CreationDate="2012-08-27T18:45:48.320" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;That is a question that's RPG on topic instead of on topic for some music site why?  I'm pretty liberal about RPG just needing to be in the scope somewhere not the end all be all of the scope, but it's not really in this scope at all (cyberpunk + Brazil).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-08-27T18:45:48.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1639" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1641" CreationDate="2012-08-30T00:46:17.043" Score="26" ViewCount="3388" Body="&lt;p&gt;We attract some character build/optimization questions that are very vague - like this newer ones. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16427/oracle-build-help&quot;&gt;How can I add more attack to my Wood Bond Oracle?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16431/dd-3-5-action-survivor-like-class&quot;&gt;A class like the &amp;quot;Action Survivor&amp;quot; trope&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15045/pathfinder-arcane-duelist-melee-build&quot;&gt;Pathfinder: Arcane Duelist melee build&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've discussed this before in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/749/should-we-allow-best-character-design-questions&quot;&gt;Should we allow &amp;quot;Best Character Design&amp;quot; questions?&lt;/a&gt;, but &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;never came to a clear consensus and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;never came up with guidelines as to what makes a good vs. bad&#xA;character build question (like our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;system recommendation question&#xA;guidance&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are character optimization/build questions on topic, and if so, how should they be written to be good questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:32:50.033" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T03:32:50.033" Title="Are character build or optimization questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1640" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1639" CreationDate="2012-08-30T00:59:45.340" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I always like saving categories of questions - if we can.  Character optimization and build questions are popular on forums.  The problem with them is that in general, they tend towards three things that are undesirable on a SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why CharOp Questions Can Be Bad&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vague requirements.  Almost all the questions are stated as &quot;what do you think about this?&quot;  or &quot;How can I build a better X?&quot; Unless someone specifies &quot;maximum DPS&quot; or something very concrete - which isn't all that useful - then requests for builds or critique of a build are very unfocused.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tends towards lists.  There's definitely an infinite number of answers for any character build question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No best answer. Usual application of Good Subjective/Bad Subjective is unlikely - usually answers are pure theorycrafters, not &quot;You want a good archer? I ran this build and it performed this way.&quot;  We could try to push all the CharOp Q&amp;amp;A that way but that's really going against the grain.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How CharOp Questions Can Be Good&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Uh... I'm drawing a blank.  I mean, it's OK for the selected answer to be &quot;the one the asker likes best.&quot; But with the quality of most of these questions, it's a long list of spitting in the dark and lots of chatty back and forth.  So I'm leaning towards &quot;no&quot; but am willing to have someone come out with some guidelines that make them tolerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-08-30T00:59:45.340" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1639" CreationDate="2012-08-30T02:23:02.007" Score="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;A good charop question is either very specific or very general. If you fall in between you've entered the no mans land of &lt;em&gt;gimmie the codez.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are 3 types of char-op questions that fall into the &quot;good&quot; category in my mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm 90% complete and I need help making the final selection or two. These kinds of questions are generally answerable because they have a pretty finite set of answers and there are usually a pretty obvious set of &quot;Best&quot; answers. Unfortunately the downsides to these is that they are often too localized, but they help a user with a specific problem that others may encounter so maybe not. (Examples &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14544/optimizing-4e-executioner-for-spiderkiller-lair-assault&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11575/how-do-i-represent-a-warlock-with-a-background-in-thievery&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4124/how-can-i-increase-ac-for-a-wilden-shamanrunepriest&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;(meh, but ok))&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I need some general advice on direction for a build. These kinds of questions, while significantly more broad are the magnet for low quality, the key here is for the questioner to give some requirements that can lead to some general character advice. If they need a full handhold through building a character they should probably be seeking a message board or at least our chat rooms. But if they have some ideas and need a starting point we can help. This has the advantage of being useful if someone comes along with similar requirements. (Examples &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15454/what-is-a-fun-to-play-high-damage-build&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12355/how-can-i-make-sure-my-character-is-awesome-enough&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12193/how-to-best-improve-a-drow-warlock-to-act-as-a-blaster&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The last kind of question that I see as useful is the challenge question. These are the most borderline Op questions IMO, but they can also be the most fun. (Examples &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15141/what-is-the-maximum-air-speed-velocity-of-a-pixie&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13645/what-is-the-optimal-build-for-ac-for-a-fighter-at-level-13&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7606/exalted-land-speed-record-build&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically if the question is specific enough with requirements for the first and third, or has enough background that we can help with broader class/race/build help in the 2nd (if someone want's to provide a full character workup that's great, but that shouldn't be the expected answer from question type 2) then we can continue to take these question and they can continue to be more or less constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The common thread here is that the asker provides answerable requirements. As Brian says below if a thread does not have answerable reqs then we should be voting to close until they provide them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My examples mostly come from 4e questions that I'm familiar with, anyone with edit powers feel free to add good or better examples of each of the 3 question types. I've made this CW so the bar to edit is lower.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-06-30T15:56:16.323" CommentCount="7" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-08-30T02:23:02.007" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1568" CreationDate="2012-08-30T13:52:28.493" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got my swag in the mail yesterday! I'll be sure to wear the t-shirt on our gaming session this sunday :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: I took my swag someplaces:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PpDOy.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Machu Picchu&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="932" LastEditorUserId="932" LastEditDate="2012-09-20T14:15:03.243" LastActivityDate="2012-09-20T14:15:03.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1644" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-08-31T03:47:50.900" Score="2" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just discovered that the meta/main link on the mobile site is hiding down in the footer. This is very far away from everything, for someone who is used to looking for them in the top bar of the desktop site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we get that footer's contents duplicated in (or moved into) the dropdown menu? Given they're static it shouldn't be any additional JS or server-side weight, and they might as well not exist for mobile users if it's taken &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt; this long to find them, with how much I use the mobile site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-26T18:51:48.150" LastActivityDate="2016-08-26T18:51:48.150" Title="Mobile version: More accessible secondary navigation?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|site-design|mobile|accessibility|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1645" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1637" CreationDate="2012-08-31T07:52:48.213" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the question is specifically asking for something like background or mood music to be played during a game, I see no reason that it should be off topic. Otherwise it should be off topic as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1637/music-specific-for-a-game-setting#answer-1638&quot;&gt;mxyzplk said&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2012-08-31T07:52:48.213" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1637" CreationDate="2012-08-31T21:46:21.627" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reposting from earlier comments at Edgerunner's request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I look at it is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you posed this question to an expert on music who knew nothing about RPGs, the answer would be great (background music is background music). If you pose this question to an RPG expert who knows nothing about music, the answer they give will be terrible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can make a case for the existence of good questions that satisfy either one of those two conditions. But when you have both at once, it's tough to call it an RPG question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2012-08-31T21:46:21.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1647" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-09-02T22:26:15.417" Score="7" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a sufficient volume of questions such that the Oracle seems to be the main poster in chat on quiet days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assert that this volume of posting is meaningless, especially with the newish AJAX that provides for auto-updating of the main page, and that it provides nor stimulates no conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any objections to me removing it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm going to leave the meta-feed regardless, cause that does require attention-getting)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-09-04T18:02:51.390" Title="Is it time to remove the Main Site's feed from The Oracle in chat?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1647" CreationDate="2012-09-03T00:16:00.230" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;So that instead, there will be no volume there at all?  Not sure what the value of removal is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-09-03T00:16:00.230" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1647" CreationDate="2012-09-04T17:31:27.997" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should swap it to the dropdown feed type. At this point with the larger question volume sometimes does interfere with actual chat going on in the room. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other thing is that if we eliminate the actual posting in the room, it means that questions/answers that are oneboxed in the room are clearly relevant to the current discussion instead of potentially random.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2012-09-04T18:02:51.390" LastActivityDate="2012-09-04T18:02:51.390" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1650" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1651" CreationDate="2012-09-12T05:53:03.913" Score="11" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not talking about campaign settings either, but in cases of specific scenes or locales such as big finales or plot development (RPG style).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example questions would be &quot;How can I best inspire a sense of doom in my PCs when introducing them to the dark overlord in his lair,&quot; or &quot;how can I make a castle dedicated to a god of chaos appear more chaotic?&quot; They aren't questions about game mechanics necessarily, but I could see either answer fitting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastActivityDate="2012-09-12T15:38:52.340" Title="Are questions about scene-setting on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1650" CreationDate="2012-09-12T15:38:52.340" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are fairly narrow, but to my mind they're not &quot;useless to anyone else&quot;–narrow enough to be closed as Too Localized. I'd say go for it. How to set a scene with a fairly general but specific goal in mind can be useful to many people. The trap to avoid is refusing to accept answers unless they take into account the very particular details of the &lt;em&gt;exact scene&lt;/em&gt; that you're trying to set, rather than scenes with similar goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two things you can do when asking a narrow question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make it about the general thing you want to do rather than your particular setting's details:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yes: &lt;strong&gt;Inspiring a sense of doom upon meeting a Big Bad&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;No: &lt;strong&gt;Inspiring a sense of doom when meeting this specific character who has all these relevant tiny details which must be taken into account&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Broaden it so that the &quot;right&quot; answer helps you but also gives a wider range of useful information:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yes: &lt;strong&gt;How can I narrate the PCs' experience of a supernaturally or elementally chaotic place?&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No: &lt;strong&gt;How can I make &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; castle dedicated to [very specific god of chaos] appear more chaotic during a Chaos Eclipse while the PCs infiltrate a summoning ritual in progress?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously I'm exaggerating somewhat for effect! But note how the two ways of making a question more general – focusing on the thing you want to do divorced from your setting details, or focusing on a wider question that just so happens to answer your particular problem – makes for a question that is more appealing to a wider number of answerers, and suggests that it will attract solutions that can be applied to a variety of related problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-09-12T15:38:52.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1652" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-09-21T16:54:53.017" Score="6" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently noticed a lot of SE sites are cross promoting at our big sister site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade (AKA Gaming.Stackexchange.com)&lt;/a&gt;.  I think there is enough cross interest (and the occasional cross question) that it makes sense for us to put up an ad there.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5602/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ads - 2013&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, anyone have an ad suggestion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2012-12-24T15:34:00.753" Title="An ad for Gaming?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1568" CreationDate="2012-09-24T16:06:34.770" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;At what point should I check in because I have not received the swag yet?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hmm, guess I'm picking today. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="460" LastActivityDate="2012-09-24T16:06:34.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1568" CreationDate="2012-10-02T20:13:29.173" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;OMG I just noticed that I received your email but never replied. Is it too late?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastActivityDate="2012-10-02T20:13:29.173" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1655" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1657" CreationDate="2012-10-10T18:44:10.697" Score="15" ViewCount="334" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ruleofcool.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. I was a playtester for it, wrote them a review on RPG.net, and have since written some material of my own that has been included in their books (if it matters, I volunteered this work and was neither compensated nor expect to receive compensation should &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt; take off).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the system’s pretty good. I know for a fact that even among people who know of it, there are a few pretty common questions that I could address pretty well I think. But I just don’t know how legitimate it is for me to start these kinds of questions, particularly when as far as I can tell, no one on rpg.SE has ever asked or answered anything about the system. I have no delusions that my interest in posting these questions is for the sake of getting some questions on it out there, maybe getting a &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt; tag created, etc., because I like the system and hope to see it do well, hope to see more people playing it so I can get in on some games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should I go ahead and ask &amp;amp; answer some questions about &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt;, or is that too spam-like and/or promotional?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-04T03:36:19.417" LastActivityDate="2021-05-04T03:36:19.417" Title="How legit is it to ask &amp; answer some questions about my favorite RPG system (that I have contributed some small material to)?" Tags="|discussion|game-systems|self-promotion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="1656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1655" CreationDate="2012-10-10T19:00:55.747" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO, please do. having an answer that is semi authoritative is a good thing. I would only advise not asking questions that are only designed to lead into an answer you already know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2922" LastActivityDate="2012-10-10T19:00:55.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1657" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1655" CreationDate="2012-10-10T19:02:09.363" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Provided that asking/answering questions about Legend is not your only reason for being involved here, and is not the only contribution you are making. I think this is fine. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I would advise is that you disclose your connection to Legend, probably at least in your answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, if you're going to ask and self answer, please make sure the questions are actually good and not just vehicles for the answer you really want to write :). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're very happy to get coverage of small RPGs and as a contributer you qualify as an expert in Legend which is what we're here for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-10-10T19:02:09.363" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1658" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1659" CreationDate="2012-10-10T19:32:01.970" Score="5" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, so I just asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1655/how-legit-is-it-to-askanswer-some-questions-about-my-favorite-rpg-system-that&quot;&gt;whether or not I should introduce &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt; to rpg.SE&lt;/a&gt;, and got a favorable response, which is cool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, follow-up question. During Rule of Cool&amp;rsquo;s &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt;&amp;rsquo;s alpha stage, Mongoose Publishing changed the name of their &lt;em&gt;Rune Quest II&lt;/em&gt; to &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt; due to some copyright problems or something. Rule of Cool&amp;rsquo;s was definitely the earlier RPG by that name, but Mongoose&amp;rsquo;s was released first. As it turns out, there is an &lt;em&gt;even earlier&lt;/em&gt; RPG that, as far as anyone can tell, had the name first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn&amp;rsquo;t really a problem, since the name is ridiculously generic, except that I&amp;rsquo;m wondering how I should tag my questions relating to Rule of Cool&amp;rsquo;s &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt;, without messing up any potential future questions about Mongoose&amp;rsquo;s &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Per C. Ross&amp;rsquo;s comment, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/440/do-we-need-two-dread-tags&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is related, and it was decided in that case to give the shorter tag to the system that seemed to get more discussion. However, neither game titled &lt;em&gt;Legend&lt;/em&gt; has &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; discussion yet, so I'd appreciate suggestions on which, if either, should get the &lt;code&gt;legend&lt;/code&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2012-10-10T20:14:09.960" Title="Tags for RPGs that have name conflicts?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1659" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1658" CreationDate="2012-10-10T20:14:09.960" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there is no Legend tag than first come first served in this case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we get questions for the other system we will need to make a distinction, but until that time you're A OK to used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-10-10T20:14:09.960" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1660" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-10-12T14:27:38.390" Score="3" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not sure how to put this into the form of a question or it needs to be. What I want to do is make folks aware of Jon Petersons &lt;a href=&quot;http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0615642047&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Playing at the World&lt;/a&gt; a book about the history of roleplaying games and wargaming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What sets this book off from previous efforts at roleplaying history is that Peterson has documented nearly every section of the book. This is possible due to the rise of the roleplaying collector market in the past decade and Peterson has or gained access to a huge variety of documents spanning the dawn of wargames to the mid 70s the cut off time of the book. The book is extensively footnoted point out the sources of specific paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People should keep this source in mind when answering History of Gaming questions like the one on the origin of experience points. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addition:&#xA;I was a little confused at Mxyzplk answer and looking over my question I think why. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am NOT proposing to post anything on the main rpg.stackexchange.com site. I was just wondering how to post the info here on meta as I think mentioning Playing at the World is a meta issue not something for the main site. I do appreciate the info on the community ads. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" LastEditorUserId="93" LastEditDate="2012-10-13T01:54:48.383" LastActivityDate="2012-10-13T01:54:48.383" Title="Revising answers to Game History questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1660" CreationDate="2012-10-12T16:23:03.420" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, this falls into the category of &quot;I kinda want to pimp something, I know that's spam but it's something really useful. How does that work on a SE?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, you know you have to be careful not to overstep.  If the book contains info that informs a good answer to a question, great, answer the question and refer to the book as a reference. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, &quot;but I want to pimp it more.&quot;  Mention it in chat.  Propose a community promotion ad (http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1497/community-promotion-ads-2012). Put it in your user profile.  But that's about it.  The rules apply evenly to a super cool useful thing you like as they do to a random game-spammer, so we can't say &quot;Well it's Batty, he can make some fake questions that are really ads,&quot; obviously.  But leverage the community - answers, community ads, etc. are things that get voted up or down by the community, so if you're doing it right then the pimping will happen. Do it obnoxiously, and you'll get pimp slapped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-10-12T17:08:08.703" LastActivityDate="2012-10-12T17:08:08.703" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1655" CreationDate="2012-10-14T19:08:30.343" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;When determining if a question to which you know the answer is a good one, I would recommend drawing on actual play questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules questions that come up at the table and are not answered by means of &quot;flip to the page and quote&quot; would probably make for good content on a site like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules questions that can be easily answered from the books are less applicable as &quot;expert&quot; and &quot;intermediate&quot; questions, but they also have their place on the site. I would not discourage them, but also would consider their value before asking them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that frequently come up are much more generally useful than questions that are rare.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that imply at least a passing familiarity with the game are better than ones that don't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;i.e. A D&amp;amp;D question about what does 3d6 mean is a bit lame, even if that were to always comes up when introducing new players to the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="428" LastEditDate="2012-10-14T19:19:07.933" LastActivityDate="2012-10-14T19:19:07.933" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1655" CreationDate="2012-10-17T02:38:02.090" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, here's an idea- you may be great at the system, but do you know anyone who isn't? Grab a few new players, start up a game, and any question that takes you more than a few minutes to figure out the answer would probably fit on the site. Ask the question they asked, and answer with your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3442" LastActivityDate="2012-10-17T02:38:02.090" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1655" CreationDate="2012-10-18T23:58:47.690" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the questions were common, they'd be asked here already.  A lot of small and/or niche games pop up here naturally.  Astroturfing questions and answers don't particularly help anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2012-10-18T23:58:47.690" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1665" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="1666" CreationDate="2012-10-27T05:17:05.323" Score="5" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new to SE sites, and today I noticed a &quot;review&quot; link on the top menu/banner for RPG.SE (but not on other SE sites).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I looked into the about and faq pages for both the main site and the meta site; but couldn't find more detail than the brief paragraph on the first item in the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;way&lt;/em&gt; it works is pretty self-explanatory, but I'm wondering if there's something written somewhere as to the &lt;em&gt;intended&lt;/em&gt; mechanic for reviews.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For starters:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Is this written down somewhere? (and I just missed it)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Or, for example, at what point did I earn this privilege?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is expected from a review?&#xA;I remember the comments on my first answers (no chatty stuff) and I recognize some do-s and don't-s from the faq and from reading other posts (relevant questions, ask a real question, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that all there is to reviewing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record, I can only review new posts and late answers so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4462" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How does &quot;review&quot; work?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1665" CreationDate="2012-10-28T23:45:37.567" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The review page is just a community tool to automatically identify posts which are likely to need some reviewing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that when you reach 200 rep, the review menu &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/84693/eeeek-i-sense-an-eeeek-question-about-missing-a-unanswered-tab/88954#88954&quot;&gt;appears in the top menu&lt;/a&gt; and will be replaced with a &quot;tools&quot; menu when you reach 10k.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From @C. Ross:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are no hard and fast rules like &quot;You must do X when reviewing.&quot; The idea is to get eyes on posts that may need attention. Just do what you'd do when you see any other post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might also want to check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; and the following posts from other SE sites:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/74238/how-does-the-review-page-work&quot;&gt;How does the /review page work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88968/what-is-the-newly-added-review-section&quot;&gt;What is the newly added Review section?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/430/text-building-blocks&quot;&gt;Text building blocks&lt;/a&gt; (common replies for TeX.SX)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75572/please-make-review-route-available-as-a-link-somewhere&quot;&gt;Please make /review route available as a link somewhere&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4462" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2012-10-29T00:11:42.697" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-10-28T23:45:37.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1667" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-10-30T02:46:05.337" Score="3" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have this tag on the main site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4.matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4.matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4.matrix&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should it be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4-matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4-matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4-matrix&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag naming convention suggests that spaces should be hyphens, not dots, and I can't find any particular reason why it would explicitly use a dot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2012-10-31T12:55:48.440" Title="Should we rename the sr4.matrix tag to sr4-matrix?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1667" CreationDate="2012-10-31T12:55:48.440" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest that it be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/virtual-reality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;virtual-reality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;virtual-reality&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Matrix of Shadowrun and the Matrix Trilogy are examples of virtual reality, as is the cyberspace of Ghost in the Shell. Matrix is just the Shadowrun setting's name for the overarching concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As wax eagle has said in chat, tags should be applicable across multiple games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@JonathanHobbs concepts in games should be tagged separately so they can be used across multiple games. if another game has a matrix concept the same matrix can be applied and differentiated with the system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/6690999#6690999&quot;&gt;wax eagle's chat comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4463" LastActivityDate="2012-10-31T12:55:48.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1669" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-10-31T15:08:10.190" Score="4" ViewCount="73" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you type into the tags box, after half a second you get to see a list of the tags that start with what you type in. However if you type fast you don't see that list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a red highlight or underline will encourage people to go back and check to be sure that they want to create those new tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4463" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T12:39:45.267" Title="Highlight tags that will be created" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="1670" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1669" CreationDate="2012-11-05T03:51:40.577" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I disagree: making new tags should be acceptable, normal, and not discouraged. Individual thought is trumped here by community hive-mind, but the hive-mind must be fed raw material to do anything useful! We want individual input, even imperfect input, else we starve the SE engine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community will fix improper tags as soon as the work is warranted. Anything that discourages the organic growth of the tag folksonomy is something I'd oppose. We &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; people to make tags that they are experts in, even if they're not experts at using RPG.SE yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides, even if I agreed with the principle, I'd disagree with the proposed feature. Overloading a UI convention like wavy red underlines to mean anything other than &quot;there is a spelling error here&quot; is bad design. It would convey &quot;you spelled this wrong&quot;, not &quot;that tag doesn't exist&quot;. The meanings may be arguably close, but the closer a distinct meaning is the &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; the UI semantics need to be different to avoid user confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2012-11-05T21:26:54.517" LastActivityDate="2012-11-05T21:26:54.517" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2670" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2673" CreationDate="2012-11-06T13:37:35.307" Score="14" ViewCount="230" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just edited a post which was, in my opinion, quite a mess to read - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/18590/1381&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/18590/1381&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a moment I considered asking in the comment to &quot;use a spellchecker and differentiate between its, it's and other situations where apostrophe is used&quot; but I though I'd sound condescending, so I just ended up with a small note.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the preferred way to handle such situations by the community? Should I do as I did, edit the answer silently or publicly tell the person about the communication issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1381" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T14:20:31.437" Title="How to handle new users with bad grammar" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2670" CreationDate="2012-11-06T14:06:40.893" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first time or two just fix it an move on. If it's an obvious language barrier just move on, the person is trying to contribute, if they struggle with English we can help them (specially if they are asking good questions). A kind &quot;Welcome to RPG.SE I've edited your post to correct some grammar, and format it&quot; would be the most that I'd do here, but I'd probably just edit it and leave it alone or welcome them without mentioning the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they repeatedly use terrible grammar/spelling etc, a comment after a few posts politely asking for them to spell check or read over their posts might be appropriate. Perhaps even to note the changes you made on the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall though I want to stress trying to be kind to new users. You did a good job editing his post, and I think that's where it ends. We want the new folks to get an idea of what we expect here, but we don't want to kick them in the face with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-11-06T14:06:40.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2670" CreationDate="2012-11-06T16:39:36.633" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;A Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community by Chuq Von Rospach&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It is important to remember that we all make mistakes, and that&#xA;  there are many users on the net who use English as a second&#xA;  language.  There are also a number of people who suffer from&#xA;  dyslexia and who have difficulty noticing their spelling mistakes.&#xA;  If you feel that you must make a comment on the quality of a&#xA;  posting, please do so by mail, not on the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone with dyslexia I am happy to have my post edited and corrected. In fact I have thanked people that have in the past. I would be insulted if you where to tell me I have a &lt;em&gt;&quot;communication issue&quot;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2012-11-06T16:39:36.633" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2670" CreationDate="2012-11-07T00:13:05.710" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're &lt;em&gt;encouraged&lt;/em&gt; at SE to edit each other's posts to improve them: The edit button is right there; all text is Creative Commons–licensed; we get badges for doing a lot of editing; the review system includes an &quot;Improve&quot; button. Everywhere, the site gives us permission to fix each other's mistakes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the way to handle poor grammar is to edit it. Leaving comments is unnecessary – no-one would suddenly majorly improve their grammar just because someone says to, because anyone who would be receptive to the message is already paying as much attention to good grammar as they are able. On the flip side, someone who doesn't improve their grammar when they see their post edited is never going to improve it – they're either unable or unwilling to change their grammar skills. A comment is just going to be unconstructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The whole point of SE is that the collective wisdom and skill of the community is greater than any one person could have, so it gives us tools to harness everyone's abilities to make the every page as high-quality as it can be. That includes the quality of the spelling, grammar, and formatting in questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2012-11-07T00:18:30.377" LastActivityDate="2012-11-07T00:18:30.377" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2674" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2675" CreationDate="2012-11-11T13:17:56.893" Score="5" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry if I am missing something really obvious, but I have only recently discovered the &quot;favorite question&quot; feature, and would like to know where (if anywhere) all of the questions that I've personally tagged as &quot;favorites&quot; are displayed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3584" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-16T04:46:33.007" LastActivityDate="2019-12-16T04:46:33.007" Title="Is there any page/display that shows my &quot;favorite&quot; questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|bookmarks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2674" CreationDate="2012-11-11T13:40:55.570" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, on your user page.  Click your name to go to it.  Then you'll see a &quot;favorites&quot; tab among the many.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-11-11T13:40:55.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2676" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2677" CreationDate="2012-11-13T01:28:51.070" Score="11" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;The mods have noticed several repeated problems that perhaps some verbiage in our FAQ could help.  Our proposed amendments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not everything here has an objectively correct answer, but subjective&#xA;answers should be backed up with real play experience. See &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good&#xA;Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; for how to answer subjective questions on Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are many different tastes in games and different kinds of&#xA;playstyle. All styles are welcome here, but attacking others' styles&#xA;as wrong is not. As a rule, answer questions in the style they were&#xA;asked - telling someone &quot;they are playing wrong&quot; is usually unwelcome and not constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments are for asking for clarification or providing constructive&#xA;feedback on answers and should not be long discussion threads;&#xA;comments are considered temporary and will be cleaned up by mods. If&#xA;you have a major point to make, write your own answer and let people vote on it.  Comment warring will not be tolerated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feedback?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-11-13T04:57:55.310" Title="FAQ additions for answers/comments" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2676" CreationDate="2012-11-13T01:48:57.087" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with this, especially point 3. Comments are temporary. If you've got a point to make that &lt;em&gt;fits&lt;/em&gt; with the question, make it in your own answer. If you have a side point to make as a function of the other person's answer, make a new question that directly addresses the problem (so long as you have standing -- specifically that it's a question that has come up in your role-playing experience.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-11-13T01:48:57.087" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2676" CreationDate="2012-11-13T04:57:55.310" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seconded. In addition to what Brian Ballsun-Stanton mentions, I agree with point three because I myself have misused the comment thread before learning the &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; of it's use. The first point is a good segway to the second, and I've seen a lot of the second so clarification is unfortunately necessary. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastActivityDate="2012-11-13T04:57:55.310" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2679" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2670" CreationDate="2012-11-14T17:58:18.963" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not a native speaker and I write a lot of mistakes. I always thank private or public corrections, even on my mother tongue. I prefer polite corrections, but I thank even harsh ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in my experience, not all people see this kind of help with the same good eyes. Some can be quite angry about that, actually.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastActivityDate="2012-11-14T17:58:18.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2680" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2681" CreationDate="2012-11-17T20:58:51.217" Score="5" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are the questions about choosing the game system for given social situation on-topic here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As example, I would like to ask, which game is good for the train travel in the group 4 to 8 people, which travel duration 3 to 8 hours? The game should be possible to finish in a few hours and should not require much place. But... is such question on-topic on this SE, or rather is adequate for other SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user1214" LastActivityDate="2012-11-18T17:58:48.500" Title="Are the questions about the game choice for given situation on-topic here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2680" CreationDate="2012-11-18T10:47:04.240" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;So long as you abide by our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;System Recommendation&lt;/a&gt; guidelines, you'll be fine. Just make sure that there's a way to assess which game is best. Asking &quot;What game doesn't need much space&quot; will get you the usual suspects of FATE, various flavours of basic D&amp;amp;D, and the small games of choice (like minimus). Make sure that we can narrow down the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-11-18T10:47:04.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2682" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2680" CreationDate="2012-11-18T17:58:48.500" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We already have one question that's very much that sort of question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6004/which-role-playing-systems-might-be-best-suited-for-use-over-a-road-trip&quot;&gt;Which role-playing systems might be best suited for use over a road-trip?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible to see this sort of question as being &quot;too localized&quot; and therefore outside the scope of the site's purpose. On the other hand, it is very much solving a real problem, and it can be useful to other people. We also have lots of recommendation questions for things like certain age groups or time frames, and no-one has raised any concerns about those being too specific. Solving a real problem seems to trump localization unless it's really only ever going to help &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2012-11-18T17:58:48.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2683" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-11-19T02:32:12.567" Score="7" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new to the site, and part of a group that is relatively new to Pathfinder. I've been asking a lot of questions (I think, anyway) and I can't help but wonder if I'm breaking a rule. I have more questions to ask, but I'm worried about getting banned or the like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5793" LastActivityDate="2012-11-19T02:44:44.270" Title="Is there a limit on how many questions can be asked in a given time frame?" Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2683" CreationDate="2012-11-19T02:44:44.270" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Good question. In general we ask you to use common sense. Let these 5 questions get real answers and then move on. I would suggest that you don't have more than 3-4 active at any given time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-11-19T02:44:44.270" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2685" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-11-20T06:34:22.490" Score="10" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a comment to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/18821/696&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I asked @aramis if he thought his answer should be split. He replied that he didn't want to. Instead of continuing the discussion in comments, I thought it was time to move this to meta. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because what I really started to wonder was if splitting answers like that (not just his, all of them, mine included) would be better for &lt;strong&gt;the site&lt;/strong&gt;, for the reasons I gave in the comment: more granular voting and better differentiation of good answer &quot;segments&quot; from bad. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2012-11-20T21:31:10.630" Title="Should omnibus answers be split?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2686" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2687" CreationDate="2012-11-20T09:52:23.107" Score="4" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Check this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18851/where-are-the-different-games-tags-like-lineage-2-or-heroes-3&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18851/where-are-the-different-games-tags-like-lineage-2-or-heroes-3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's at least the second time someone has confused the site for computer games related and I wonder if the name, &quot;Role-playing Games&quot; is not a confusing one. Why not add &quot;Tabletop&quot; to the site title, or something like this, which would make the difference more clear on the first sight?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1381" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2012-11-20T13:43:47.147" Title="&quot;Role-playing Games&quot; confusion" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2687" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2686" CreationDate="2012-11-20T09:53:39.663" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;It wouldn't help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People who are that confused don't bother to read our fAQ or anything else before diving right in. Giving additional cues to them is like tossing bread pellets into a black hole. We close their questions (not downvote) and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-11-20T09:53:39.663" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2688" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2686" CreationDate="2012-11-20T13:43:47.147" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;This clue already exists. Open an incognito window and you'll see: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gI2r7.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they don't get a clue after seeing this than the best we can do is educate them post facto.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-11-20T13:43:47.147" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2685" CreationDate="2012-11-20T13:52:21.230" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not a fan at all of the &quot;one game per answer&quot; thing that is common in forums. It trivializes the idea of recommendations. TBH a good game rec answer probably has several games listed as either the requirements are too general to fit just a game or two, there are multiple games that fit the requirements, or there are different aspects of the requirements that different games perform better in. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Omnibus answers are complete answers, I'd rather not see answers made &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; complete just to satisfy some arbitrary standard of granularity in voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-11-20T13:52:21.230" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2690" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2694" CreationDate="2012-11-20T18:09:35.650" Score="26" ViewCount="496" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/18852/696&quot;&gt;answers like this&lt;/a&gt; - low-rep users with uncommented downvotes, I try to address them with a comment. It's my way of trying to gentle the slap in the face from the downvote. A downvote without a comment is fine for an experienced user, but it seems to me, from a &lt;strong&gt;citizenship&lt;/strong&gt; standpoint, that it's the equivalent of saying, &quot;Welcome to our site! EFF YOU!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But obviously, I can't catch them all, and don't want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some measure we can take to help keep us from driving away new users? I thought of a couple of things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Require a comment on a downvote for a user with less than some threshold of rep and / or some threshold of membership duration&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Instead of requiring a comment (which violates voting anonymity), could the system insert a comment directing the user to the FAQ or even an entry on &quot;So, you've been downvoted, welcome to the site!&quot; automatically?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like RPG.SE, but it needs to stay the welcoming community it was when I found it or it risks becoming insular and just as bad as any other place on the net.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-10-21T11:45:35.617" Title="Handling new users with bad answers" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|new-users|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2690" CreationDate="2012-11-21T16:54:06.680" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I did not think the answer was worth a down vote and it was my question. In fact I up voted because Real Life experience for me, as a referee, would have trumped the RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="768" LastEditDate="2012-11-21T17:32:16.747" LastActivityDate="2012-11-21T17:32:16.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2692" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-11-23T05:12:11.623" Score="13" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the type of person I am, I tend to explain what happened to prompt a question, along with the actual question. There's a two-fold reason for this; the first being that so far I've found answers to be more in-depth when I ask the question in this manner; the second being that I feel it helps me be more clear about what exactly it is I'm asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, on multiple occasions, it's been pointed out to me that the stories I tack on to my questions get as much attention as the specific questions I'm asking, and some times more so. I don't dislike this outcome, but it does make me wonder if there's not a better way to ask questions on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried asking direct, short, simple questions, but in general I find that the answers tend to be of the same type. However, when I elaborate, I often have to go back and edit the question to make it more clear to people what I'm asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I get the in-depth, thoughtful answers I'm looking for, without making it unclear what I'm actually trying to ask?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-09T20:33:08.830" LastActivityDate="2022-05-09T20:33:08.830" Title="How do I ask 'good' questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2692" CreationDate="2012-11-23T05:28:57.703" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Make the question you have clear first, and add a clearly marked 'for example.'  People do love to fixate on the single example, however, and it's harmful to go too much into it unless your question is really just about that one case. Keep it brief.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using multiple short examples instead of one long one helps with that. Also, use formatting to clarify your real question.  Your questions tend to be big walls of text with the real question embedded in some body paragraph, not set apart, not using bold, etc. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18935/how-do-i-handle-a-player-who-plays-his-character-far-differently-than-the-charac&quot;&gt;How do I handle a player who plays his character far differently than the character was originally presented?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You recently answered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8078/how-to-fix-the-broken-diplomacy-skill-mechanic-in-3-xe-and-pathfinder&quot;&gt;How to improve the Diplomacy skill mechanic in D&amp;amp;D 3.Xe and Pathfinder?&lt;/a&gt;, which is pretty well formatted - clear question, then example.  Some people still unhelpfully fixated on the brine dragon example but at least it was only in the comments, the answers are pretty clean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note in contrast a question more rambly and incoherent than yours, which has been closed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18921/old-school-gamer-attempting-to-get-back-into-it-with-some-trepidation&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18921/old-school-gamer-attempting-to-get-back-into-it-with-some-trepidation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Observe good examples on the site and bad examples; seek to emulate the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2012-11-23T05:28:57.703" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2690" CreationDate="2012-11-23T05:32:44.820" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are happy to say &quot;Hey!  With new users especially, please explain downvotes! It's nicer, and helps them improve when they don't know much about the site.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not expect any rules mandating that or any technical enforcement whatsoever of that. It won't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of pointers to the FAQ for new users, try opening a private browsing window or the like and approach the site like you're a new user.  We can only scream the FAQ so loud - people that don't listen and answer anyway will probably pull some downvotes. We rely on the community to reach out to these new users and help them along. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-11-23T05:32:44.820" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2695" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-11-24T04:12:16.723" Score="2" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just a thought to make the site perhaps more useful to future users who search, could we make it standard practice to edit system-recommendation questions (the good ones, I mean) to include tags for the systems that wind up getting recommended? The accepted answer&amp;rsquo;s recommendations, perhaps, or maybe all of them with (greater than some number? positive? non-negative?) ratings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, what do people think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2012-11-24T15:12:03.817" Title="Tag system recommendation questions with the systems that get recommended?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2695" CreationDate="2012-11-24T15:12:03.817" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sounds good at first but the devil's in the details. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's a limited number of tags allowed on a question. So tagging with all systems won't work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &quot;best answer&quot; doesn't necessarily have just one system in it, and may not have been accepted because they're all good. So the minimum viable &quot;let's tag with the winner&quot; isn't even necessarily correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Top voted answers will change over time - including over a very long amount of time.  Tagging off these will require maintenance and potentially generate argument from boosters of various answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tagging in this way fails to describe the questions, which is the avowed purpose of tags.  If I want to find questions about Ars Magica, a question that just recommends it to some guy is of super limited utility.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result of meditating upon these truths I think that no, tagging system-recs with answer systems is not a best practice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-11-24T15:12:03.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2697" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2700" CreationDate="2012-11-26T03:01:05.343" Score="10" ViewCount="374" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would argue that, no, it's not. So long as the question being discussed is a matter of RAW, then experience is not a valid argument. If someone has played a game for 20 years, then yes, they're likely to know an answer to most questions involving the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if someone challenges them on one of those answers, why does 'I've been playing this game for longer than you have' become a valid argument? Shouldn't they still have to site their sources?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This forum seems to put a lot of emphasis on citing your sources, and I'm wondering if experience should really be allowed to be one of them, when the question at hand is a matter of RAW. After all, just because you've been playing a game for twenty years, if you've been playing it wrong the whole time then you're still playing it wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific reason I brought this up is because of something that happened to me while I was gaming. I said that I drew my weapon as I charged, and another player at the table said you couldn't do that. I knew that he was wrong, and said as much. His only argument to this (which everyone seemed to go along with, for some reason) was &quot;I've been gaming for 20 years. I know what I'm talking about.&quot; Well, surprise, surprise, when we looked up the rule (correction, when I looked up the rule, at the end of the session) in the game we were playing, it was allowed. I pointed this out, and that's how we've played from then on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do I think this is an issue? Well, partly because, when I ask a question that concerns RAW, and I get back an answer that doesn't quote where the rule came from, it's less helpful, as I now simply know that said rule exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does that matter for this forum? Well, mainly, I just don't think that citing your sources in matters of RAW is strongly enough emphasized here. When I first asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19006/how-do-level-dependent-abilities-increase-in-pathfinder/19007#comment34674_19007&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; the answer I got back did not include a source. When I asked for one, the first thing I got back was a link to another question, also not stating its source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I admit, it could simply have been an issue with that specific question. It could be, that, had I asked any other question that concerns the RAW, I would have gotten back an answer with a quoted source, or at least been given one had I asked. That said, I brought this up in the first place with the hopes of discussing the issue, to determine if it's an issue at all, which is why I tagged it under 'discussion'. It was late when I wrote the question, and I forgot to add the 'does anyone else think this is an issue?' bit. For that, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to rant, or be argumentative, I just want to help make this site as helpful to people as possible. And, as I've said, in my experience, answers concerning RAW are more helpful when they cite a source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5793" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T22:51:02.727" Title="Is experience playing a game as valid as citing a rule?" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2698" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2697" CreationDate="2012-11-26T04:00:08.937" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although more experience doesn't mean someone else's answer is better, experience is a universally accepted good that tends to help people know what they're doing.  On RPG.SE, a certain amount of personal experience is in fact required to answer many questions (those whose answers are more subjective than a simple rules quote may solve). See the SE blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; for why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having said that, it's hard to know what you're talking about since you're handwaving generalities instead of citing specific questions and answers/comments you found to be objectionable.  Though people are welcome to state answers and comments you find objectionable, that is what the voting and answer-acceptance mechanics are here to sort out.  If someone's experience has led them to a somewhat 'tarded result, they will tend to get voted down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I suspect you are looking for answers to things that are, surprise, not ironclad legally defined in an RPG's rules.  There's a lot of stuff like that.  I know it makes the rules lawyers among us sad, but there is a level of common understanding and customary use that is useful in interpreting what you think a game's rules are saying. In which case, experience is useful, especially experience with multiple data points. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-11-26T04:12:25.950" LastActivityDate="2012-11-26T04:12:25.950" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2697" CreationDate="2012-11-27T00:00:31.547" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Of course &quot;I've been playing this game for (a long time/longer than you)&quot; is not a valid argument for being right. People try to push being an authority like that when they're in a debate over an issue, are confident they're right, but don't want to go to the trouble of having to cite a source or look it up in the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You said in that levelling question: &lt;em&gt;&quot;I play with people who redefine 'rules lawyer,' and who make me look downright agreeable.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the thing: &lt;em&gt;We are not rules lawyers.&lt;/em&gt; Well, most of us aren't. The Community At Large is not generally going to ask &quot;But where does it say that in the rules?&quot; if the answer's good enough. If it's important, or you want to know what the book is from, you can always ask. Nobody is going to proactively cite every single statement about the rules, for the same reason your coplayer tried to say &quot;I'm more experienced&quot; - &lt;em&gt;it's troublesome and time consuming&lt;/em&gt;. Are we paid for these answers? No, we just earn points for them and contribute to a community we like. So take it or leave it. We're not going to spend an hour for every single rule we mention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: Don't expect everyone to cite every rule mentioned proactively. Ask for a source if you need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the levelling question, asking was quite valid, but it was also a case that &lt;em&gt;it is simply not stated&lt;/em&gt; in the rules - it's just accepted as generally understood in the community. &lt;em&gt;There was nothing to cite&lt;/em&gt;, so the answerer was providing another explanation, and at no point did they try to say they were right because they were more experienced. I consider myself &lt;em&gt;lucky&lt;/em&gt; I found an official statement from a lead designer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2012-11-27T00:00:31.547" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2700" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2697" CreationDate="2012-11-27T18:05:49.403" Score="23" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Citing rules is encouraged, BUT…&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, citing sources is encouraged. Often, you'll see people linking to SRDs or citing page numbers in answers about rules questions. &lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, this isn't always possible or appropriate. Because questions on how to &quot;correctly&quot; play RPGs, or how to solve an RPG-related problem, are often subjective in a way that questions on programming aren't, at RPG.SE we rely heavily on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective guideline&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, it says that a question that requires a subjective answer needs to be answered either from experience or from a citation to be &quot;good subjective&quot;. Another way of stating it is the &quot;Back it Up!&quot; principle: back it with experience, or a cite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously many rules questions are not subjective and can be answered with citations, but often even rules questions don't have objective answers, such as when the rulebooks themselves are unclear, ambiguous, or outright contradictory. At that point, a ruling is the only productive course – and that gets into the realm of subjective experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, &lt;strong&gt;an answer that cites experience &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; valid&lt;/strong&gt;. Whether it's &lt;em&gt;as&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; valid than a cite to the rules is a matter of, ahem, subjective judgement. Fortunately, that's exactly what the voting system is designed to measure! So we allow answers from experience, but we don't have policy that privileges either experience or rules-citations – both are allowable in answers and won't get outright deleted. Meanwhile, the question of which is more valid is outside of the purview of policy, and is left to the voters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Still, isn't citing the rules when they're available better?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the above doesn't really address the substance of your objection or dismay at the way people are answering some questions. Some perspective on how the &quot;other side&quot; thinks might help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;reason&lt;/em&gt; many people cite experience instead of or even over RAW, is that games which are functionally-complete in their rules-as-written are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a relatively new concept&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a bit of a Holy Grail that no designer has ever achieved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are notoriously &quot;underspecified&quot; systems – even those that attempt to be complete are not fully-executable procedural programs that could be implemented without human-level-intelligence doing some (or a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of) interpretation. This is true even of games like 4th edition D&amp;amp;D, which tried their damnedest to avoid underspecification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, interpretation of the RAW in order to translate it into functioning play procedures is unavoidable, and experience with a game is a definite advantage in that translation process – though the degree of that advantage is necessarily debatable and subjective, for exactly the same reason. Complicating this is point (1): few game designers until recently even tried, or understood the utility of attempting, to close procedural gaps in the rules, making very many published games especially underspecified. Most game designers have, historically, instinctively or consciously tried to bridge these gaps with a brief example of play or a &quot;what's a roleplaying game?&quot; section, but of course these are not &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt; in the way that people mean when they speak of &quot;RAW&quot;, and they are only successful at bridging gaps by conveying intangible cultural ideas about what it &quot;looks like&quot; to play the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a classic example, original D&amp;amp;D doesn't even explain how to play the game or what you're supposed to do during play. OD&amp;amp;D is &lt;em&gt;impossible&lt;/em&gt; to play according to anything like the modern concept of &quot;RAW&quot;, because there's just not enough there. Every play group therefore plays their own idiolect of OD&amp;amp;D, and experience is vital to comprehending even the rules that are written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Needless to say, someone with 20 years of experience of what it &quot;looks like&quot; to play the game will have a leg up on understanding both the rules-as-written, the rules-as-intended, and the rules-as-actually-playable. As a downside, that same person will have a disadvantage of having to separate those three from a fourth: rules-as-we-play-them. So you can't really win either way – either you have an executably-incomplete set of rules and need subjective cognition to fill the gaps, or you have to judiciously, subjectively, untangle your subjective experience of play in order to distill out a (non-existent) Platonic ideal of how the rules work absent home-game-experience bias.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result there is a necessary cognitive dissonance when someone tries to follow the &quot;rules&quot; despite their being incomplete, which creates in the community an irreconcilable divide: those who resolve that &quot;no-win&quot; situation by privileging the Platonic ideal of a RAW by more-or-less forcefully denying that subjective interpretation is necessary, and those who resolve the &quot;no-win&quot; by privileging experience and forcefully denying that RAW should be followed in every way. Both sides see the other as unreasonable, but really, the unreasonableness is the concept that RPGs have complete rules that can be followed to the letter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2012-11-27T18:29:29.573" LastActivityDate="2012-11-27T18:29:29.573" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2701" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-11-27T21:51:42.633" Score="-3" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had an answer which did answer one paragraph of a multiple-part question. It also included a bit of other possibly irrelevant commentary. In my opinion that doesn't make it less of an answer and certainly doesn't mean it isn't an answer at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps the moderators should put some time into improving the questions if they cannot determine which answers apply to the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="751" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2012-11-29T17:42:30.257" LastActivityDate="2012-11-30T00:38:53.097" Title="Are answers focusing on one aspect of a complex multi-part question acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2701" CreationDate="2012-11-27T22:17:37.333" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've read your answer and I fully agree with the deletion. It was converted to comment, a perfectly valid, if not slightly merciful, action on the part of the mods. Were I a mod in this case I would have deleted it outright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answer was pretty well completely off topic to the question. Instead of answering the question &quot;how common is detect evil in the forgotten realms&quot; you launch into what I'm calling an &quot;ad-alignmentium argument&quot;. Attacking the alignment system in D&amp;amp;D. That's part of the RAW there, if you don't want to play with it in your campaigns, that's fine, but Forgotten Realms games exist in the forgotten realms and should get answers with the flavor from that setting, not an attack on the alignment system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not seeing you answering &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; part of the question, but using the opportunity to answer as a jumping off point to attack both the alignment system and Paladin mechanics, you provide an alternative, but that's not really helpful to the OP who is asking for an in universe explanation/description. He's not the DM; changing the mechanics isn't an option here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that to say, welcome to the site and we value your contributions, all that we ask is that you keep them targeted to the question at hand, not to your own motivations for answering. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2012-11-27T22:32:42.407" LastActivityDate="2012-11-27T22:32:42.407" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2704" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2705" CreationDate="2012-11-28T19:16:40.377" Score="2" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a case where two tags on a question yield separate yet valid answers would it not be useful to be able to add tags to an answer?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case in point &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19026/how-would-a-monk-go-about-throwing-a-charging-enemy&quot;&gt;a questioning about throwing people&lt;/a&gt; was originally added with one tag set and answered based on that. Later another tag was added to accommodate another possible answer that was originally a comment.  Both are valid within the context of one tag.  It seems adding a tag to answer would make that more clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course that is assuming I haven't missed a way to do just that.  But I didn't see a way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2012-11-28T19:33:14.100" Title="Can you add tags to an answer?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2705" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2704" CreationDate="2012-11-28T19:33:14.100" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are for questions not answers. This is unlikely to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we are trying to do is categorize questions to try to get them the best answers, and make them findable and relevant to people searching. Adding tags to answers will really just confuse this attempt. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer needs to specify something that would be in a tag (such as which system it applies to) do so in the text of your answer. This is part of the problem with allowing multiple potentially conflicting tags to a question (3.5 and pathfinder are the same a lot, but I'm sure they differ in some big places, dnd3.5 and 4e are very different, but the tags aren't mutually exclusive). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're issue here is that the tags were changed after you answered. That's not your fault, but it doesn't require a change to the fundamental tag system. It either requires you to edit your answer to be more inclusive of the new tag or the OP to just be content with the answers as the question was originally tagged (including removing the new tag), or the situation staying as it is and there being a bit of confusing wrt how things work. It's up to you and the OP on how to resolve this, but it's a fairly rare case and I don't think it's worth changing something fundamental to the system over. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-11-28T19:33:14.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2706" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2692" CreationDate="2012-11-29T21:18:31.093" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was first a Stackoverflow user before being a rpg.stackexchange user, so I try to ask questions the same way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On Stackoverflow, putting code is encouraged, but not too much. You have to put just enough so that people can understand what you are talking about, but not paste your whole code. The usual rule is &quot;&lt;em&gt;as little code as possible to reproduce the problem&lt;/em&gt;&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, same with examples. If no example is necessary (&quot;Is there a rule for gliders in Shadowrun?&quot;), then no example. I fmy question is related to an example, I put the story, and then remove every unnecessary element, until I have a self-contained story that only presents the elements required to understand the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's more difficult with RPGs, as real stories are more difficult to deconstruct than coding, but still a good path to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2900" LastActivityDate="2012-11-29T21:18:31.093" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2707" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2701" CreationDate="2012-11-30T00:38:53.097" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As one who flagged it for moderator review as not-an-answer, there's an important distinction that might not be obvious to new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The word &quot;answer&quot; has two relevant senses:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A response, or reply, to a question or statement. Hence, a volley in a back-and-forth conversation. &quot;I answered his challenge with my own.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A solution to a problem, a statement that satisfies or attempts to satisfy requirements previously stated. &quot;The answer to the problem was difficult to find, but obvious in hindsight.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers users may submit here at StackExchange are of the second sense. Users who are more familiar with discussion forums often erroneously assume &quot;answer&quot; here is in the first sense, synonymous with &quot;reply&quot; fields at the bottom of forum threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answer didn't seem to me to be an answer in the problem-solving sense, but instead an answer in the conversation sense. Since we only allow answers in the solution sense, I flagged it as not being an answer (solution) to the question posed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-11-30T00:38:53.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2708" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-01T08:51:19.123" Score="11" ViewCount="285" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been wanting to ask a few questions that are focused less around getting a ruling or asking for help with a problem, and I'm not sure where I should ask them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know Meta is for questions concerning the forum itself, but I'm not sure if the questions I want to ask would be best asked in a forum where the focus is getting a 'correct' answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of questions I want to ask, and reasons I'm not sure where to ask them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What makes a character build 'broken/OP'?&#xA;I want this to be less of a 'I'm looking for an answer' question, and more of a question that leads to a conversation. So far as I know, there's no 'discussion' tag in the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is there so much discrepancy when it comes to alignment?&#xA;This is something I've wanted to know for a long time, but I feel that I likely already know the answer, so really I'm just looking to discuss it with others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your favorite character build, and why?&#xA;Not this question, specifically, but a few similar questions. Basically, it's something that I want to get a large number of answers for, and have people talk about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, basically, my main problem is: &lt;strong&gt;I want to ask a question to start a discussion, not to get an answer.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;So, where do I ask that kind of question?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, before anyone suggests it, I don't want to put these questions in chat rooms for two reasons:&#xA;1.) Chat rooms are impermanent, and thus any answer gained in one will most likely disappear as soon as the chat room is closed. I want to ask these questions as much to give people a chance to see other answers, as to give people a chance to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2.) Chat room formats don't support the kind of discussion I'm looking for. A forum format allows people to give their entire argument, with the ability to edit said argument as the conversation evolves, where a chat room requires you to participate in a debate. You only have to worry about your own answer in the prior, where in the latter you have to worry about defending your every point as you're trying to make it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5793" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2012-12-01T16:33:07.167" LastActivityDate="2015-11-07T14:43:01.140" Title="Where should I ask discussion questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2709" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2708" CreationDate="2012-12-01T10:30:59.510" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, and before all else, Thank you so much for asking. You are doing everything correctly by raising this question on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Unfortunately, we're not a forum. The best place to raise a question to start a discussion &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a forum. We don't support threaded... anything. Intentionally. Comments are ephemeral. Intentionally.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are a place that's fairly specialized. Specifically, we exist to match information to queries. Whether that information comes from play experience, the rules, or (at worst) our imaginations, that is our purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you're asking for is a creative argument. The best place I can think of to have discussions you're wanting is on a wave-like service like rizzoma. Invite the best minds, engage in discussion, and then publish the results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how can we help?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, there are few things that &quot;have no answer.&quot; Instead, consider the stipulations that go into any of the major major discussions that you've proposed above. Entire books (or fan-produced handbooks) (&lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?372544-Tome-of-Fiends&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Tome of Fiends,&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Tome_of_Necromancy_%283.5e_Sourcebook%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Tome of Necromancy&lt;/a&gt;) explore fractions of your discussion areas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the above, the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; forum for extended and interested argument and discussion is a Journal. If you start an academic journal, all of those questions will absolutely be discussed in papers that are around 5000 words. Which is a good place to start for questions that big.) (Of course, I may be biased here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, we can help. There are stipulations that all of the above have that &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have standing: these arguments rely on facts that all parties can use. These facts pertain to real games and real problems. These facts can be assessed &quot;true&quot; or &quot;not true&quot; and therefore... have a place here. Once you've ironed out your facts, invite people to write extended blog posts debating the structure and interpretation of those facts on a blog you have started or can interest in the subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2012-12-01T10:30:59.510" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2708" CreationDate="2012-12-01T16:29:26.880" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE (like all SEs) is for questions and answers.  You can chat with others in the chat rooms but this network of sites has no general discussion functionality by design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to have a discussion, use a discussion forum.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt; Forums are better for discussions, while they are horrible for getting questions actually answered correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For your Pathfinder questions, I'd generally recommend the &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;paizo.com forums&lt;/a&gt;. Keep in mind any substantive discussion will be derailed into long rambling threads and people yelling about the same damn things all the time.  I read and post there myself, but if I actually have a question I need answered to better my game, I ask it here where the site format tamps down the bozos to a dull roar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-11-07T14:43:01.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2711" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-02T18:26:07.133" Score="17" ViewCount="488" Body="&lt;p&gt;We occasionally get adventure/encounter/setting/campaign recommendation questions that are asking for a subjective evaluation, not just objectively-identifiable features. They're infrequent enough that we can sorta overlook them regarding our *-recommendation policy, but present a bit of a tagging problem even so. Should we tag these somehow as rec-policy questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relatedly, we've had a few recommendation-questions that aren't for systems, but are getting the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag applied to flag that they're definitely subject to our *-recommendation policy. This is useful to us old hands, but it's confusing, counter-intuitive, and (most importantly to me) non-discoverable for the people actually asking these questions. By my entirely unrigorous estimation, people looking for recs are more likely to be new users, and it's an especially weird hoop to deal with as a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we have a general [recommendation] tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's how we're currently using the sys-rec tag. On the other hand, as soon as I typed that I got an &quot;ew, that feels like a meta tag&quot; reaction. My reaction might be completely unreasonable though, so I thought best to bring the question here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FYI, the question that was the last straw for me is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19176/recommend-a-published-encounter-for-4e-to-demo-its-strengths-to-newbies&quot;&gt;Recommend a published encounter for 4e to demo its strengths to newbies!&lt;/a&gt; When I edited it, I couldn't bring myself to add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag because it really, really doesn't make sense, yet the *-recommendation policy really &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; apply to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last but not least at all, &lt;strong&gt;is this actually a problem?&lt;/strong&gt; Or are my delicate editorial sensibilities just being delicately offended?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T03:30:04.227" Title="Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2712" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2012-12-02T22:40:38.940" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would oppose a general recommendation tag.  It's far too broad and will eventually end up being meaningless.  My preference would be to come up with a group of different *-recommendation tags that cover the range of questions that are likely to get asked.  If we keep an eye on these and their use we can edit/prune/add to them as and when is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2012-12-02T22:40:38.940" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2012-12-03T02:25:48.313" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't really want to curate a whole set of *--recommendation tags, that is solving a problem that doesn't exist yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe if we just switched system-recommendation to game-rec it could help. It's one of those things where nothing's perfect... &quot;product-rec&quot; but it's not necessarily a published product, etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess I'd have to see more proof that this is causing a problem of some sort before bothering to make much of a change. SSD, you're one of the most experienced users, so with all due respect your feeling of cognitive dissonance may or may not be indicative of any actual problem for new posters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-12-03T02:25:48.313" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2708" CreationDate="2012-12-03T14:38:11.713" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd assume it would be a perfectly valid rpg.se question if you asked for suggestions on which forum would be good fit for the discussion you wanted to start, as long as it relates to role playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2012-12-03T14:38:11.713" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2708" CreationDate="2012-12-03T17:43:33.423" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The best place to find people to discuss HackMaster, IMO, would be the Kenzer&amp;amp;Co discussion forums. We have a very active community over there and some of the K&amp;amp;Co &quot;D-Team&quot; hang out there, sometimes on a daily basis. Check out; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.kenzerco.com/forums&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.kenzerco.com/forums&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3414" LastActivityDate="2012-12-03T17:43:33.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2716" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2708" CreationDate="2012-12-03T21:44:34.350" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Come to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;Chat&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have threaded discussion in chat. If you want to talk about something that needs it's own room you can create a new chat room for that topic (or to carry on a comment discussion from the main site). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as your concerns about chat. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All SE chat is logged, indexed by Google, and searchable. If you want to start a long discussion open a new room. It might get frozen, but if you have a link to it a mod can always defrost it for you.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Arguments are a bit problematic. But SE's chat is pretty favorable to long answers as the limit is quite high if you add line breaks. It doesn't allow for the same thought process as the main site, but it's better than cluttering the main site. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also we have dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2012-12-03T21:44:34.350" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2717" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2718" CreationDate="2012-12-09T01:41:24.463" Score="7" ViewCount="157" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2697/4089&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am wondering if it would be excessive to split up questions requesting RAW answers and actual experience answers. One example would be if I took &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/19221/4089&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and reworded another question modeled after it looking for essentially the same thing except instead of the RAW constraint seeking advice from other DMs for how they handle it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:23:25.130" Title="Is it valid to ask similar questions, one requesting RAW and the other XP?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2717" CreationDate="2012-12-09T02:22:39.990" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it would be excessive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to ask questions from N different perspectives.  The point is to ask a question and have N different perspectives reflected in the answers, which are then voted and accepted.  Breaking it up does, in fact, work against the general mechanic of the SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People need to stop with the &quot;RAW question&quot; vs &quot;other question&quot; thing.  It's fine to say you're especially interested in RAW in the question, but in many cases that is a vain and sometimes technically incorrect constraint anyway.  Just ask the questions and vote up the helpful answers.  If helpfulness, to you, requires a degree of RAW then vote how the spirit moves you. As will others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-12-09T02:22:39.990" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2719" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-09T06:23:40.833" Score="13" ViewCount="305" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are MUDs, MUSHes, and similar text-based roleplay platforms that implement RPG systems in an mostly or entirely automated way on-topic? MUDs lie somewhere on a spectrum between play-by-chat (which we accept questions about) and RPG-based videogames (which we don't), but whether they are on this side or the far side of the on-topic line is something we've never established.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case in point: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19405/has-shadowrun-4-been-implemented-as-a-mud-or-similiar&quot;&gt;Has Shadowrun 4 been implemented as a MUD or similiar?&lt;/a&gt; This question quickly generated close votes and it seems like there's a contentious or potentially murky issue here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T00:21:53.190" Title="Are MUDs/MUSHes/etc. that use RPG systems on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2719" CreationDate="2012-12-09T07:56:36.793" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;My vote is that their &lt;em&gt;existence being confirmed or not&lt;/em&gt; is &lt;strong&gt;on topic&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;strong&gt;specific MUD mechanics questions&lt;/strong&gt; are &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A gray area I can see here is whether a particular MUD was faithful or not to the game it emulated, but I've not much experience with MUDing myself. Such a case as that, I don't have much to say for or against.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-18T00:21:53.190" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T00:21:53.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2719" CreationDate="2012-12-10T05:07:05.980" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt; is a far more suitable place for these questions. Since RPG.SE doesn&amp;rsquo;t accept questions on other roleplaying-related computer/video games (even if they&amp;rsquo;re related to a tabletop game, or even if people have roleplaying communities through them), I don&amp;rsquo;t see MUDs as any different just because they lack graphics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2012-12-10T05:22:05.803" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2722" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2719" CreationDate="2012-12-10T05:35:48.040" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can think of arguments against, built on this starting premise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Premise&lt;/strong&gt;: We are not an expert site about online games, even if they have roleplaying as part of them. This is pretty much self-evident, but which topics run afoul of it isn't. As a test, we can imagine editing out the details of the specific online game: if the question becomes meaningless, then it would have expected us to have game-specific knowledge that falls outside our scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of something that passes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to manage the delay caused by text-based communication when roleplaying online.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something that fails:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to organise a RP guild on a WoW RP server.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first we can help with, the second we can't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some considerations that I think show why questions that are &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt; about MUDs are off-topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We will never get rules questions related to MUDs from players, since their rule systems are nearly or fully automated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The programmers of a new MUD might ask while they're setting it up, but these will either be just about the rules (on-topic) or require us to have knowledge of MUD programming (off-topic). [These are unlikely anyway, since who codes up a MUD in a system they don't understand?]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;MUD-related questions about optimising would either be about the rules (on-topic), or about how to succeed on the MUD (off-topic).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Non-rules questions (roleplay, group dynamics, time management, narrative tricks, etc.) either will either only mention the MUD in passing (i.e., not integral to the question; on-topic), or will require us to be experts on MUD social dynamics and be off-topic).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This all suggest to me that question that are only about MUDs in passing, where the MUD-ness could be entirely edited out until it looked like just another play-by-chat question, are on-topic. Such question are about roleplaying and roleplaying games (our topic), that &lt;strong&gt;just happen&lt;/strong&gt; to be getting played on a particular digital communications system. If the MUD-ness can't be edited out of the question without damaging its meaning, it's off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-12-10T05:35:48.040" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2723" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-10T16:24:54.577" Score="16" ViewCount="605" Body="&lt;p&gt;As it is December 2012, we are now going to reset our Community Promotion Ads for the new year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be &lt;strong&gt;220 x 250 pixels&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/2723&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2013-10-16T14:33:43.557" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2013" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="16" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2013-12-06T11:41:31.970" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-10T16:24:54.577" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2724" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-10T16:26:03.500" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hJIL.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2012-12-10T16:26:03.500" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-10T16:26:03.500" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2719" CreationDate="2012-12-11T04:13:04.203" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  MUDs are not on topic for RPG.SE, which is about playing and running tabletop RPGs.  Related media - computer RPGs, novels, films, MUDs, breakfast cereals, etc. don't belong here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MUDs are legitimately on topic for Arquade, if anyone would ever ask a MUD question that's not a game-rec.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2012-12-11T04:13:04.203" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2726" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:16:47.343" Score="15" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently there is a dev(?)-accessible switch on a per-site basis that disables the script that cleans out tags that have only been used once in 6 months. &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5379/stop-removing-tags-that-are-only-used-once-in-the-last-6-months&quot;&gt;Arqade recently turned this off&lt;/a&gt; because they had a problem with questions losing game-name tags. We have a smaller problem with this, in losing system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The disadvantage of turning this off is having to manually prune the tags list of underused tags. Arqade has accepted this tradeoff, given they've got many eyes on the problem. I think we should accept this tradeoff, given that we don't get new tags added that often and losing system tags causes more work and consternation (especially when a tag wiki is lost) than would the infrequent tags that needs pruning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:32:35.770" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T00:00:53.923" Title="Retaining lonely system tags" Tags="|support|feature-request|status-declined|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:19:39.477" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BQvCs.png&quot; alt=&quot;Find out the odds&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-12-13T18:19:39.477" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:19:39.477" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:20:51.270" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V8XHh.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotion Ads - 2013&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2013-07-15T21:08:05.730" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:20:51.270" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:21:57.603" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://tabletopforge.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XR7Ts.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Free app for Role-Playing via Hangouts&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edited to add:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://plus.google.com/110771920494591644897/posts/jAUswUixcHr&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This project is being cancelled&lt;/a&gt;; we should probably yank the advertisement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2013-01-29T19:21:27.590" LastActivityDate="2013-01-29T19:21:27.590" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:21:57.603" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:22:24.420" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://roll20.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/A1iwW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 - Virtual tabletop gaming that tells a story&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-12-13T18:22:24.420" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:22:24.420" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:22:49.660" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://pcgen.sf.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dZpPK.png&quot; alt=&quot;PCGen - The Ennie Award Winning RPG Character Generator&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2012-12-13T18:22:49.660" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:22:49.660" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:23:10.783" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://edgerunner.merttorun.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1zpHG.png&quot; alt=&quot;Edgerunner, a different interpretation of Fate for a dark future&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="554" LastEditDate="2013-08-28T12:07:29.217" LastActivityDate="2013-08-28T12:07:29.217" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-13T18:23:10.783" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2726" CreationDate="2012-12-13T18:54:39.007" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;An alternative to turning off pruning is to create a list of questions that are good to ask of any system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the design goals of this system?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do I need to find or buy to get started?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the key features of the setting?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What inspired this game?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking enough of these will keep the game-system tag alive &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; provide knowledge about that game as well as bring in people looking for these obscure systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4463" LastActivityDate="2012-12-13T18:54:39.007" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-15T19:20:41.387" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://scifi.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eP1sD.png&quot; alt=&quot;SciFi &amp;amp; Fantasy&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6043" LastActivityDate="2012-12-15T19:20:41.387" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-15T19:20:41.387" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-15T19:35:21.683" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://scifi.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lvw9q.png&quot; alt=&quot;SciFi &amp;amp; Fantasy&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6043" LastActivityDate="2012-12-15T19:35:21.683" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-15T19:35:21.683" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2726" CreationDate="2012-12-19T01:33:49.103" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we want to do this.  We the modclique™ have no idea how and hope someone of substance will chip in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="554" LastEditDate="2012-12-28T15:14:44.677" LastActivityDate="2012-12-28T15:14:44.677" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2738" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2739" CreationDate="2012-12-19T18:46:28.437" Score="4" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;h1&gt;HELP, I CAN'T SEE!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1069/dpatchery&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BhgBd.png&quot; alt=&quot;its dark in here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fancy RPG border around our gravatars is great, but its making it hard to wear a hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I love hats, please let me wear it on the center of my head!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1069" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2012-12-19T23:58:01.530" Title="What's up with my hat?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2739" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2738" CreationDate="2012-12-19T23:41:16.793" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;the RPG.se user page has special CSS around the big gravatar (fancy border). We're going to push a javascript fix to move the hat to the correct location in the next build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2012-12-19T23:41:16.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2740" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2012-12-21T05:46:58.387" Score="6" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been a little leery of responding to system recommendation questions for a while now. Per my understanding of the FAQ, I only respond to them when I know my recommendation will be a solid fit for what the poster wants. That said, it is unlikely that just one system will meet the parameters of the question.  This being the case, it has struck me from the beginning that a community wiki format should be standard for this type of question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/19639/141&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was posted regarding an easy to learn and use fantasy system. I noted in the responses that one by Aramis on WEG D6 Fantasy got nudged in comments toward a format change to meet the standards of the FAQ, while one by Gomad did not. Comparing the two, it struck me that the one by Aramis was much closer to what we are calling for in the FAQ than Gomad's. As I am not as active in Meta, or the main board as most of you, I thought that I may have missed some discussion or shift in policy which could explain what we currently expect. As I would like to contribute more to the site, I feel it is long past time that I asked for clarification which none of the previous discussions or comments I have read really address. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What makes an appropriate answer to a system recommendation question? According to my understanding of the guidelines, the responses should be based on experience of the actual use the question addresses, with support of some kind (an actual play link, or personal experience using the system to do what the question poser inquires about) being a requirement. Suggestions based solely on opinion or from reading descriptions of a game are to be discouraged or no offered. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this framework in mind I am confused about what makes a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19640/141&quot;&gt;compound recommendation&lt;/a&gt; of three systems (one of which is unpublished, one of which has not been played, and all three of which need unspecified and unsourced hacks to fit the parameters of the question) more in line with policy than one which is based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19641/141&quot;&gt;actual play experience&lt;/a&gt; and is formatted to directly address the questioner's criteria? There are other examples around, but this one was fresh and easy to find. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hopefully this question is on the minds of other people than myself. If I were a new user jumping in for the first time I know I would be thinking that mixed messages are being sent on this type of question and associated responses. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(A related question is should we be voting up answers which we know do not follow the guidelines, but that is addressed elsewhere.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="141" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2012-12-21T05:56:09.110" Title="Appropriate Answers for System Recommendation Questions" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2740" CreationDate="2012-12-21T05:56:09.110" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have provided guidance for sys-rec questions and answers in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Why did this one specific question not come out according to the way things are supposed to go&quot; is usually unanswerable.  Because no one bothered to challenge gomad on adding experience to his answer? Because when someone challenged aramis on his answer and he (incorrectly) pushed back on &quot;not including personal experience&quot; it caused people that would otherwise challenge unsupported answers to back off?  Who knows?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general we keep going back and looking at system-rec questions because the continuous battle to make people not answer them shittily is draining and maybe we should just get rid of them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2012-12-21T05:56:09.110" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2742" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2743" CreationDate="2012-12-25T22:58:08.060" Score="5" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see that a comment can be flagged but I take that as a function for comments that are offensive in some way.  In cases where a comment is not relevant because the question/answer has morphed in to something else, what is done to weed out comments that are no longer useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18983/crime-investigation-in-a-fantasy-world/19017#19017&quot;&gt;Crime Investigation in a fantasy world&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-03-03T16:58:18.600" Title="How are comments removed when they are no longer relevant?" Tags="|support|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2743" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2742" CreationDate="2012-12-26T00:33:55.507" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Flag the comment as &lt;code&gt;Obsolete&lt;/code&gt; (that's an option under the flag) or if all the comments on a post are obsolete, flag the post for moderator attention.  We'll clean it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-12-26T00:33:55.507" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2744" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2745" CreationDate="2012-12-28T15:12:38.433" Score="2" ViewCount="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just saw that there are two different ads for scifi.se at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ads 2013&lt;/a&gt; question. Does that mean it is ok to post more than one ad for a single project? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2012-12-28T15:28:34.473" Title="Multiple Community ads for the same project" Tags="|discussion|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2744" CreationDate="2012-12-28T15:28:34.473" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt;  People are welcome to vote for both or neither.  Only the ads the community approves will be put in rotation.  However, you shouldn't post the &lt;em&gt;same&lt;/em&gt; ad twice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2012-12-28T15:28:34.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2012-12-28T20:47:14.700" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://edgerunner.merttorun.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AqMay.png&quot; alt=&quot;I am Jack&amp;#39;s neural implant&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2012-12-28T20:47:14.700" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2012-12-28T20:47:14.700" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2747" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-01-02T22:16:52.410" Score="1" ViewCount="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;My chat.se user profile suddenly (last known normal ~7 hours ago) has 0 rep and so, of course, I can't talk in rpg.chat. I &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; still talk in a side chatroom I've had going.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been hit by what appears to be the same bug as &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/161257/chat-stackexchange-reputation-bug&quot;&gt;this guy&lt;/a&gt;, though I don't have multiple SE accounts to use with his fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope this only hit me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-01-02T23:26:49.923" Title="chat.exchange.com reputation bug" Tags="|bug|chat|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2748" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-01-03T17:51:15.693" Score="0" ViewCount="34" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure where to post this, but for the last two days the top-bar interaction at RPG.SE.com has been broken under Chrome. I had a notice button that I couldn't click on and the popdown arrow &quot;V&quot; didn't work. Also the Winter Blast stopped appearing under chrome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://i1099.photobucket.com/albums/g393/frandallfarmer/Experiments/chrome_zpsd8bd29f1.png&quot; alt=&quot;chrome&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It all works properly under Firefox.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://i1099.photobucket.com/albums/g393/frandallfarmer/Experiments/firefox_zpsed7e372f.png&quot; alt=&quot;firefox&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastEditorUserId="1240" LastEditDate="2013-01-07T12:51:20.097" LastActivityDate="2013-01-07T12:52:20.750" Title="Chrome SE topbar broken" Tags="|bug|status-norepro|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2749" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-01-03T21:52:15.590" Score="2" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-missile&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-missile&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-missile&lt;/a&gt; is a little too precise and doesn't add anything. Are tags like these really necessary and should we keep using them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastEditorUserId="554" LastEditDate="2013-02-08T21:17:35.050" LastActivityDate="2013-02-08T21:27:11.427" Title="Is the tag [magic-missile] necessary?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2749" CreationDate="2013-01-03T22:40:26.687" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  It is goofy and unhelpful.  Not every noun in a question should be a tag, especially in the age of search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, here on RPG.SE tags are a crowdsourced emergent folksonomy.  If you detest it, remove it from the question(s) where it appears and it should eventually get reaped. Question askers may disagree and re-add it, in which case we'll let it ride - the modclique(tm) tries to be as hands off as possible and let the community run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-01-03T22:40:26.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2751" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2752" CreationDate="2013-01-04T14:24:19.840" Score="2" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;Earlier today, I was wondering where a good (local) shop to buy GURPS source books was to be found. I already have an answer, but wonderde if this would be on-topic or not for RPG.SE&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, it would probably benefit the hobby if people could find good, local game stores.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, every such question would be of only limited geographic interest (an answer suitable for Haparanda, Sweden is of next-to-no interest in Blacksburg, VA, US) and possibly of limited temporal extent (a shop that was open when an answer was accepted may well have folded 2-3 years later).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't seen any obvious decision as to if this is on- or off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="167" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T14:35:23.363" Title="Is &quot;shop recommendation&quot; questions on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2751" CreationDate="2013-01-04T14:35:23.363" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is off topic because it is &lt;em&gt;too localized&lt;/em&gt;, as you intuited. Similar to questions about finding local play groups - one &quot;general&quot; question on &quot;how do I find play groups&quot; is OK, but multiple ones about how do I find a play group in e.g. Haparanda is not, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/123/are-questions-about-help-finding-playgroups-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about help finding playgroups on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One question on how do I find a local game store that will contain such gems of wisdom like &quot;use the yellow pages and ask around, durrr&quot; would be fine, but not localized ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T14:35:23.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2753" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2754" CreationDate="2013-01-04T15:31:53.487" Score="1" ViewCount="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just created the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/beginner-box/info&quot;&gt;beginner-box&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/red-box/info&quot;&gt;red-box&lt;/a&gt; tags, should they exist and should they be a synonyms for each other or should there be one starter-kit tag to rule them all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T15:36:11.260" Title="Beginner-box and red-box tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2754" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2753" CreationDate="2013-01-04T15:36:11.260" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see no value in combining them, and &quot;red-box&quot; is a bad tag because there is the original D&amp;amp;D red box and the new 4e red box.  Usually just using the correct version tag (becmi, dnd-4e, pathfinder) is sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T15:36:11.260" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2755" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2756" CreationDate="2013-01-04T21:53:46.597" Score="2" ViewCount="73" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a question I think is off, or an answer I don't think really answers my question the way I like, or a comment I disagree with.  Should I just flag that for a moderator and move on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T22:17:45.030" Title="Should I flag a question, answer, or comment I don't like for mod attention without doing anything else?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2755" CreationDate="2013-01-04T21:53:46.597" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is intended to be moderated by the community by and large. The few full mods that get your flags are disinclined to take action unless it's something real bad - spam, abuse, things that would get something deleted for cause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you flag to tell us something that you should be telling them - &quot;I don't like your answer to my question&quot; for example - you're wasting our time.  We're volunteers with lives at least as rich as yours - I'm personally disinclined to play the telegraph game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you flag something and haven't commented on it, the mods will usually do one of three things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up and delete whatever it is if it's really egregious&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dismiss your flag if it's not and likely take no further action&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dismiss your flag as unhelpful if you're getting on our nerves&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2 is by far the most common.  1 - well, we do get a number of convert-to-comments, but about half of those even are less &quot;not an answer&quot; and more &quot;a brief answer I don't like,&quot; which we leave alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You really should comment even if you downvote - if you are flagging something, you really should. It is everyone's job to help guide users old and new - our mod technique is to be very hands off in general, and people seem to like that, so help that along by giving constructive criticism yourself and not just asking Mom to do it chronically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T21:53:46.597" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2755" CreationDate="2013-01-04T22:17:45.030" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flagging should be encouraged &lt;em&gt;If there is some reason a moderator should be notified of the content.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flags should be used for the following purpose. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Notify moderators of spam/offensive content (use the &quot;spam&quot;/&quot;not welcome in our community&quot; flags).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You want to notify a moderator of something specific about the post (use the custom flag reason). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You want to vote to close the post, but don't have the requisite 3000 reputation to do so. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post is low quality and should be deleted. This should probably be accompanied by a downvote, or even an edit, but it's not necessary. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you should not flag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answer is incorrect. This is a misuse of a flag, and a downvote or comment should be left instead. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When you disagree with an answer. Again, this is a misuse, a downvote or comment will suffice. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are a different animal entirely. Flag obsolete comments, flag chatty comments, flag comments that derail from the topic of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are basic guidelines and are far from exhaustive, but I felt a more constructive instruction on when and how to flag was merited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-01-04T22:17:45.030" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2758" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2759" CreationDate="2013-01-05T13:53:03.283" Score="2" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;As of this writing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search-new?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=moldvay%20is%3aquestion&quot;&gt;we have 7 questions&lt;/a&gt; explicitly asking for solutions within the Moldvay edition of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In chronological order, newest first:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19987/moldvay-dd-first-round-in-encounter&quot;&gt;Moldvay D&amp;amp;D First Round in Encounter&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19924/melee-combat-in-moldvays-dd-basic&quot;&gt;Melee Combat in Moldvay's D&amp;amp;D Basic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19185/how-many-things-can-a-player-do-on-his-or-her-round&quot;&gt;How many things can a player do on his or her round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19164/turns-vs-rounds-playing-time-in-moldvay-dd-1981-ed&quot;&gt;Turns vs. Rounds playing time in Moldvay D&amp;amp;D 1981 Ed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19156/moldvay-basic-dd-mapping-using-charater-movement-rates&quot;&gt;Moldvay Basic D&amp;amp;D - Mapping using Charater Movement Rates&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13830/how-can-players-learn-the-nature-of-magic-items&quot;&gt;How can players learn the nature of magic items?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5919/in-early-dd-why-would-chainmail-ever-be-preferred-over-plate-armor&quot;&gt;In early D&amp;amp;D, why would chainmail ever be preferred over plate armor?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of the fact we have no tag for Moldvay's D&amp;amp;D, a few of these questions are just leaving the system in their title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally we have a tag to distinguish between systems, and seven questions is probably enough to have a tag for Moldvay D&amp;amp;D. However I am concerned it may be counter-productive to have one. Is it worth distinguishing between Moldvay D&amp;amp;D and other AD&amp;amp;D systems tag-wise? Should we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moldvay-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;moldvay-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;moldvay-dnd&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-01-05T15:07:09.520" Title="Do we need a moldvay-dnd tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2758" CreationDate="2013-01-05T15:07:09.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, we do, though it's a bit confusing.  Our tag  hierarchy for D&amp;amp;D is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dungeons-and-dragons]&lt;/code&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[odnd]&lt;/code&gt; - Holmes LBB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[bx-dnd]&lt;/code&gt; - Moldvay Basic and Cook Expert&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-becmi]&lt;/code&gt; - Mentzer Red Box + (expert, companion, master, immortal)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[adnd]&lt;/code&gt; - aka 1e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[adnd-2e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-3e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-3.5e]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-4e]&lt;/code&gt; - includes Essentials&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dnd-next]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[pathfinder]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus some cruft that needs merging (dnd-5e, dnd-next-playtest, et al). Not sure why it's bx-dnd and not dnd-bx, it'd probably be easier to find the other way, and a tag synonym for dnd-mentzer to dnd-becmi would be fine. Also I'm not sure what dnd-basic is supposed to be - encompass the first 3 on that list? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-01-05T15:07:09.520" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2760" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2761" CreationDate="2013-01-05T15:54:29.020" Score="12" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently discussed in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2758/do-we-need-a-moldvay-dnd-tag&quot;&gt;Moldvay question&lt;/a&gt;, but this keeps getting hashed out in weird sub-questions so I thought I'd re-ask this more general question somewhere it can be found in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we tag questions for the game Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, given its long history and many, very different, editions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: If you are not expert on the various D&amp;amp;D editions, refer to &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/336/how-many-editions-of-dungeons-dragons-are-there&quot;&gt;How many editions of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons are there?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2089/what-are-the-differences-between-holmes-moldvay-and-mentzer-dd&quot;&gt;What are the differences between Holmes, Moldvay, and Mentzer D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1751/overview-of-dd-retro-clones&quot;&gt;Overview of D&amp;amp;D retro-clones&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2020-02-19T19:14:58.517" Title="How Should We Tag D&amp;D Versions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2761" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2760" CreationDate="2013-01-05T15:54:29.020" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;The desired hierarchy, initially hashed out in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/669/proposed-tag-synonyms-for-dnd4-0&quot;&gt;Proposed tag synonyms for [dnd4.0]&lt;/a&gt; but having evolved a little, should be and mostly is already:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; - For general cross-version stuff&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/odnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;odnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;odnd&lt;/a&gt; - The first D&amp;amp;D, aka 0e, brown box/white box from 1974&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; - The first Basic D&amp;amp;D by Holmes from 1977&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-bx&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-bx&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-bx&lt;/a&gt; - Moldvay Basic and Cook Expert from 1981&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-becmi&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-becmi&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-becmi&lt;/a&gt; - Mentzer Basic 'Red Box' + (expert, companion, master, immortal boxes, and the Rules Cyclopedia combo thereof) from 1983&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; - Advanced Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, aka 1e, from 1977&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; - Advanced Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Second Edition from 1989&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; - Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Third Edition from 2000&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; - Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 3.5 Edition from 2003&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; - Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fourth Edition from 2008 (includes Essentials)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; - Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth edition from 2014, also referred to as &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D Next&lt;/em&gt; in 2012. We have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag for questions that were/are specifically about its playtest stage.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; - Fork of D&amp;amp;D 3.5e by Paizo in 2008&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; - the newer 2019 version thereof&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And various retroclones.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;dnd-basic was being used inconsistently and often redundantly with dnd-bx and no one was using the right Moldvay tag because it was bx-dnd instead of dnd-bx (I synonymed it).  I propose that we either a) make dnd-basic just for Holmes or b) make it a collection of all three Basics, though I am unclear what purpose that would serve. or c) remove it in favor of the three specific tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general you shouldn't overtag - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; for instance shouldn't coexist with more specific version tags, it's a halfway step between [system-agnostic] and a specific version and is for questions that cross more than 2 versions (if you just want to compare 3.0 and 3.5, then just tag with the two of those and call it good) or are general and not version specific, but are D&amp;amp;D domain specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2020-02-19T19:14:58.517" LastActivityDate="2020-02-19T19:14:58.517" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2748" CreationDate="2013-01-07T12:52:20.750" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't repro this, and it seems you can't any longer either.  It's likely a bad cache in play as Maurycy said...since it's resolved I'm closing this out.  If you can repro please reply here and we'll dig deeper.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1240" LastActivityDate="2013-01-07T12:52:20.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2763" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-01-08T05:17:42.950" Score="7" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question exists because of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/20074/1204&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, and a discussion in chat that followed it. I'll get to that later.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is about a unique category of answers on Stack Exchange: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/specious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;specious&lt;/a&gt; answers.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specious answers are incorrect and bad, yet look legitimate and good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By an incorrect/bad answer, I don't mean an answer that has some inaccuracies. I mean an answer which is &lt;em&gt;fundamentally and irrecoverably bad&lt;/em&gt;. An answer that, for instance, proposes a Fighter build that builds completely on the assumption you can use some particular abilities together - but you &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; use those abilities together, and the entire build falls apart as a result. An inaccurate answer can be corrected, but an answer like this has its problems at its foundation, and the only way to make it correct via editing is to hit &lt;kbd&gt;Ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;A&lt;/kbd&gt; and then &lt;kbd&gt;Delete&lt;/kbd&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My basic question is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do we respond to answers like this on RPG.SE?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/7571092#7571092&quot;&gt;Earlier in chat&lt;/a&gt;, KRyan raised concerns about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/20074/1204&quot;&gt;the monk answer&lt;/a&gt;. It was frequently incorrect, yet he has no means to express &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt;. He cannot use the comment system, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/1204&quot;&gt;the comment system is not for feedback&lt;/a&gt;. With the problems with the answer being &lt;em&gt;subtle and frequent&lt;/em&gt;, an onlooker could think the answer's pretty good and upvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other Stack Exchange sites like GameDev experience these sorts of answers regularly. For instance, someone may ask &quot;How do I program this enemy to do so-and-so?&quot; Someone responds with some code which does the job wonderfully, and everyone upvotes it, but &lt;em&gt;one person&lt;/em&gt; notices that in a (fairly common) situation, the algorithm will go into an infinite loop and freeze the game. The algorithm itself is not repairable, it simply needs to be thrown out and replaced with a completely different approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On GameDev, the typical response is for someone to just say so in a comment: &quot;-1 This algorithm goes into an infinite loop and crashes the game when (common situation).&quot; Readers will see the comment, go &quot;Oh yeah&quot;, upvote the comment and downvote the answer. The day is saved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, we can't leave a comment like that. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/1204&quot;&gt;The comment system is not for that.&lt;/a&gt; So what do we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave an opposing answer&lt;/strong&gt; is a common mod suggestion. What do we do, leave an answer saying &quot;@ThatOtherGuy's algorithm is completely wrong&quot;? You could leave a better algorithm, and that's fine, but that won't address the fact a bad algorithm is getting upvotes. The problem here is not the lack of a contrary answer, it's conveying the incorrectness of the answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Downvote the answer?&lt;/strong&gt; The question will get one downvote, and a comment will be made asking &quot;Why the downvote? This answer is great!&quot; (which will be deleted, because it's an unacceptable use of comments here)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, how do we respond to such situations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;For the record, I don't know why the monk answer is incorrect. I am only concerned by the fact that @KRyan has no avenue to express why it is.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T12:35:51.333" Title="How should we respond to fundamentally incorrect/bad answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2763" CreationDate="2013-01-08T05:17:42.950" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Allow negative feedback comments.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Permit us to leave comments explaining why an answer may be bad, &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; them getting deleted by the mods. In GameDev, doing so is an &lt;em&gt;extremely valuable&lt;/em&gt; and acceptable usage of the comment system, and on a case by case basis, we should be allowed to do that too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Addendum 2017:&lt;/strong&gt; This answer was originally posted in 2013, and I don't have this stance any longer. I think it's useful if I can actually suggest something actionable, but not other cases. A non-actionable criticism comment tends to spawn arguments from community members or the post author, and those arguments inevitably need to get deleted (including the original criticism, since it'll likely just start more argument). It's better off not leaving them to begin with; choosing to not post them saves everyone a lot of time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T12:35:51.333" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T12:35:51.333" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2765" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2763" CreationDate="2013-01-08T08:33:49.093" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;That answer was bad because it &lt;em&gt;didn't answer the question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A comment inviting discussion and asking for improvement is a good first step, especially to someone who has just joined the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment, for the record (as worked up in chat):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to the site! I'm finding it a little hard to see how your answer shows us how to build a better monk. While your comparative ratings are excellent, perhaps we could trim your answer down a bit to where you provide specific build advice based on cited rules? Feel free to join us in chat to workshop it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the answer is specific to the question &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; has specific errors besides &quot;you like monks argbughughughudgfhughd&quot; then a single comment exploring those errors (with citations) may be appropriate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-01-08T08:33:49.093" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2760" CreationDate="2013-01-08T18:41:33.423" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would also suggest a [3.X] or [3.PF] tag to refer to games or questions that involve a blending of PF rules and 3.5 rules - not an uncommon thing to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6172" LastActivityDate="2013-01-08T18:41:33.423" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2767" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2726" CreationDate="2013-01-09T19:47:14.143" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shortly before you asked this, we decided to do a quick scan of other sites and see if we felt that other sites should get this treatment as Ask Patents and Arqade did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG was one such site that we reviewed, but we ultimately decided that we wouldn't turn off the script here. In our own analysis, the frequency of damage from the script was low and the amount of questions left completely context-less was likewise low. Since our judgment was based on the severity of the problem, RPG didn't seem like a place where it was strongly necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, for now I will have to mark this status-declined. If you think it will become a strong problem, though, don't hesitate to start tracking the damage caused by the script over the next few months. The more solid info to work from, the better!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2013-01-09T19:47:14.143" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2768" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-01-11T04:29:57.530" Score="3" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; tag. I recently asked a question that&amp;rsquo;s explicitly about Animal Companions, and it strikes me that it may not be obvious that animals should be tagged as Monsters. Is the tag intended to cover them? If so, should the title be broader (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/creatures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;creatures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;creatures&lt;/a&gt;)? If it&amp;rsquo;s not supposed to include the non-monstrous, should we have an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animals&lt;/a&gt; tag or something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should we just call all non-humanoids &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; and just understand that it&amp;rsquo;s the tag for all such things?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-01-11T05:40:54.740" Title="The &quot;monster&quot; tag – should it be broader? *Is* it broader?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2769" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2768" CreationDate="2013-01-11T05:40:54.740" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe (though I may be wrong) that the &quot;monsters&quot; name for all non-humanoid creatures is an artefact of early editions of D&amp;amp;D and some of its contemporaries, and so it's stronger in some roleplaying traditions and weaker or non-existent in others. I'm pretty sure that's what our [monsters] tag was supposed to mean, but since &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; are broader than one roleplaying tradition, it does a poor job at meaning &quot;creatures often encountered as opponents&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't think of a good replacement though. Busting out a bunch of specific tags doesn't seem like it would have much search value or help categorise better. What we really need is a better generic term. [opponents]? [opposition]? [antagonists]? [hostiles]? Though they might describe the category a bit better, they've got little to no currency, so askers won't discover and use them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-01-11T05:40:54.740" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2770" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-02-04T14:35:25.227" Score="36" ViewCount="3716" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed lots of links to dndtools.eu lately.  That site seems to have verbatim text from a lot of non-OGL D&amp;amp;D stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, that's really useful as a reference!  But the site itself is presumably violating copyright, and if it ever gets taken down, all those links become useless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something that needs to be addressed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-23T05:37:18.693" LastActivityDate="2020-11-23T05:37:18.693" Title="Links to &quot;D&amp;D Tools&quot; / dndtools and similar sites" Tags="|discussion|hyperlinks|copyright|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2770" CreationDate="2013-02-04T15:23:19.520" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NO&lt;/strong&gt;, unless the presence of the link is a copyright violation by itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having a reference on hand is way better than having to look everything up in a book, so it's either a plain quote from the rulebook (supposedly violating copyright) or a link to a plain quote (which is also violating copyright, but rpg.stackexchange.com is not to be blamed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the light of ability to look anything up in the physical book, the potential inaccessibility of the site hosting the plain quote is also a non-issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2179" LastActivityDate="2013-02-04T15:23:19.520" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2770" CreationDate="2013-02-04T20:07:47.847" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I contend &lt;strong&gt;yes, addressing it would be worthwhile.&lt;/strong&gt; Even though posting a link doesn't violate copyrights, the posting of a link does endorse a site. This endorsement flows through to copyright violation (even if not by the letter of the law, I'm no lawyer). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Begin rant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Legally (again, I'm no lawyer but I do know a tiny bit about copyright) I believe it's not punishable to show people where to find copyrighted information. Ethically is another matter entirely. While the material is not hosted by us or by RPG.SE, it's still essentially the same as directing someone to the former MegaUpload for copies of the books they are requesting rules from, instead of to Amazon or Wikipedia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the presence of some dead links could be remedied by an hour or two of volunteer work editing (yay for search features) at any time, it's a matter of social responsibility. I paid cash to have my books. I supported the company who published my books. I paid for the right to reference them whenever I'd like. Sites like DnDTools.Eu sidestep this and ultimately detract from the RPG community as a whole. If you like what's in a book, support the friggin' author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;/Rant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm &lt;strong&gt;not sure precisely how this should be addressed,&lt;/strong&gt; but it ought to be. The mods probably have a way for handling links to download illegal content? Things of this nature should fall in line with that. Even if we're not doing the copyright infringing ourselves, gaining unfair/free benefit from another entity doing so isn't right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-02-06T18:31:46.173" LastActivityDate="2013-02-06T18:31:46.173" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2773" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2770" CreationDate="2013-02-06T18:50:43.667" Score="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't offer a position on the ethics or legality of linking to &quot;D&amp;amp;D Tools&quot; – that's amply covered already, and (despite my frequent writing about the legal issues of copyright) my personal feelings about what &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be the ethics and legality are complicated and aren't relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There is a practical reason we shouldn't link to that site though.&lt;/strong&gt; It goes like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The site violates the Berne Convention and various narrower international agreements.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hasbro has a large and active legal department in a country that's party to these agreements.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From (1) and (2), it is therefore inevitable that Hasbro will cause the site or its contents to disappear at some point in the not-too-distant future. They've done it before.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;(Note: this prediction came true November 2014.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our basic goal is to provide answers that will remain relevant over time and won't “rot”.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If we keep these links, from (3) we know that inevitably they will become dead links in our answers. Even if mirrors are put up, they too will eventually be taken down, creating a never-ending link maintenance task for us.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(4) and (5) are in conflict, therefore we have to reject one or the other.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We're not going to abandon our site's goals, so we therefore must reject linking to sites that we know are as good as dead already.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, legally, we &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; leave these links alone, but we are compromising the quality of our site while doing so. This is a case where legality is not the only relevant concern. I think we should, despite the lack of legal liability, proactively replace these links simply as a matter of maintaining the quality of the answers the site generates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is analogous to “you have the protected right to say what you want, but not the right to prevent others from saying you're a terrible person for saying it” principle of freedom of speech: What's legal isn't necessarily &lt;em&gt;smart&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt;. Focusing on legality can make people miss the obvious a-legal downsides of a choice.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-11-04T19:13:52.933" LastActivityDate="2015-11-04T19:13:52.933" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-02-07T23:07:22.630" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anime.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Cfudk.png&quot; alt=&quot;Tagline to show on mouseover&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7399" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:54:48.223" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T21:51:12.550" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-02-07T23:07:22.630" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2749" CreationDate="2013-02-08T21:27:11.427" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wanted to propose a heuristic for which tags we should keep and which ones we should discard. Here goes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would you ever seek an expert on &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;tag&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would you ever call yourself an expert on &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;tag&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; ?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the question become ambiguous or unanswerable if you remove  the &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;tag&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tag?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say, if the answer to any one of these questions is a &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt;, then that tag is probably not necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2013-02-08T21:27:11.427" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2777" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2778" CreationDate="2013-02-11T19:00:42.340" Score="2" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357/what-constitutes-copyright-infringement/361#361&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; touches on the OGL, but talks more about WotC (dnd3.5e) and CC vs. OGL conflict.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some places I've looked into regarding this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/about/communityuse&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Paizo Community Use Policy&lt;/a&gt; - linked to by &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Pathfinder_OGC&lt;/a&gt; through Legal Information link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/openGameLicense.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Paizo Open Game License&lt;/a&gt; page. Specifically this (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Product Identity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following items are hereby identified as Product Identity, as defined in the Open Game License 1.0a, Section 1(e), and are &lt;strong&gt;not Open Content: All trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, deities, etc.), dialogue, plots, storylines, locations, characters, artworks, and trade dress&lt;/strong&gt;. (Elements that have previously been designated as Open Game Content are not included in this declaration.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Open Content:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Except for material designated as Product Identity (see above)&lt;/strong&gt;, the game mechanics of this Paizo Publishing game product &lt;strong&gt;are Open Game Content&lt;/strong&gt;, as defined in the Open Game License version 1.0a Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not a lawyer, so I can't be sure, but I &lt;em&gt;believe&lt;/em&gt; this means I can copy text from the Pathfinder published materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible that I can until it's taken down by action from Paizo, but I'd like to never reach that point if such a point exists (and I can always safely reference d20PFSRD, I suppose).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is my first meta question, so let me know if it's not quite in the right format (or edit it into oblivion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7451" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:34:01.113" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:34:01.113" Title="Are the Pathfinder published materials safe to reference in RPG Main questions/answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|copyright|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2778" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2777" CreationDate="2013-02-11T21:09:38.553" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Officially: Same answer as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357/what-constitutes-copyright-infringement&quot;&gt;What constitutes copyright infringement?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site deliberately has no opinion on this, it's up to posters to not plagarize.  Also, the site is not a signatory to the OGL, the Community Use Policy, or any other publisher agreements outside of federal law.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personal thought: Post brief excerpts of rules, which are likely covered by fair use, and link to fuller stuff where possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.930" LastActivityDate="2013-02-11T21:09:38.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2779" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2782" CreationDate="2013-02-11T21:30:16.950" Score="5" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;I used to maintain fan-generated FAQs for a couple of game systems on my website.  I plan to no longer maintain them.  None of the information is proprietary. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than have the information cast to the winds and only accessible via the internet archive, I have considered taking the most helpful/useful system-based questions and creating community-wiki-style questions on the rpg.stackexchange.com website.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is information I am relinquishing that others have found valuable in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this considered acceptable behavior or is it frowned upon?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6096" LastActivityDate="2013-02-13T00:07:17.043" Title="Is it acceptable behavior to add questions from a fan-derived game FAQ as community-wiki questions?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2779" CreationDate="2013-02-12T03:05:27.950" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the questions you have in mind are legitimate, answerable questions that meet the standards of any other question on the site, then go for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would recommend moving slowly. As @Brian noted in a comment, you don't want to annoy people by flooding the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would caution against using Community Wiki's ... they tend to congregate around questions that are not as good a fit for this kind of Q&amp;amp;A site. (If CW is to avoid charges of reputation fishing, don't worry - if your questions and answers are good they will get upvotes and you deserve the reputation for improving the community, and if they are not good, no votes means no rep...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastActivityDate="2013-02-12T03:05:27.950" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2779" CreationDate="2013-02-12T04:07:55.480" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, I'm torn on this one.  On the one hand, &quot;question seeding&quot; is usually not good - that is, asking a question you don't really want the answer to.  But this seems like a generally good use.  It should properly be Q/A, Q/A however, which concerns me about how many questions this faq consists of.  If you actually linked it we'd be able to better guide you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-02-12T04:07:55.480" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2779" CreationDate="2013-02-13T00:07:17.043" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking over the comments and replies and etcetera, I'm going to say &lt;strong&gt;go for it on a trial basis&lt;/strong&gt;. It sounds like you have enough familiarity with the format that inexperience isn't actually an issue we need to worry about, so it will come down to nuance in how it's done rather than clumsy inappropriateness like a new user might do. To judge nuance, it's probably necessary to have some live examples and the natural reactions of the broader user base.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do two in the tempo you're intending (without unnecessarily marking them as tests, though you might link to this Q with &quot;see here for meta discussion&quot;) and then check in on Meta again: ask a followup meta question (or edit this one) to ask if it all looks OK. We can ask for all the examples we like, but until we see it &quot;in the wild&quot; we can only really speculate about whether the hypothetical questions are going to fit the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-02-13T00:07:17.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2783" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-02-16T18:13:16.680" Score="5" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems to have started following the spate of code changes associated with the new close-vote and duplicate banners. Visited links on mobile are unstyled now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6b0Q7.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That freehand-circled sentence is a link, but I only knew it from context since I'd just visited it from the main page. I'm pretty sure visited links &quot;disappearing&quot; like this is not an intended feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1036" LastEditDate="2013-03-20T15:28:39.067" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Visited links have no style on mobile" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|css|mobile|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2784" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-02-28T20:08:28.587" Score="1" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to merge the following two accounts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/411/mike-riverso&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/411/mike-riverso&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4445/mike-riverso&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4445/mike-riverso&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to change the e-mail addresses so that they're the same, but the system refuses to let me because they're already in use. I'd like to keep the older user (411) of course, so that I can keep all my stats. Thanks very much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="411" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-03-03T16:48:00.363" Title="Account Merge Request" Tags="|support|status-completed|user-accounts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2784" CreationDate="2013-02-28T21:03:05.710" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please use the following tool found under the &quot;contact us&quot; page in the footer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/help/user-merge&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/help/user-merge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is now the only way to get your accounts merged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-02-28T21:03:05.710" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2786" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2787" CreationDate="2013-02-28T21:22:49.497" Score="3" ViewCount="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently posted a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22548/what-are-the-major-differences-between-add-1st-edition-add-2nd-edition&quot;&gt;What are the major differences between AD&amp;amp;D 1st Edition &amp;amp; AD&amp;amp;D 2nd Edition&lt;/a&gt; and I was wondering if this question meets the requirements for the system-recommendation tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7298" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-02-28T21:47:30.283" Title="A question about the system recommendation tag" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2787" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2786" CreationDate="2013-02-28T21:47:30.283" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;system-recommendation is for choosing a game to fulfill a set of requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is about those two systems in particular, so it's fine tagged as it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4463" LastActivityDate="2013-02-28T21:47:30.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2788" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-02T07:06:12.733" Score="3" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's some goofy behaviour I've noticed in Google Chrome. Here's how to reproduce it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Put your cursor somewhere in this region&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or anywhere in the site's header where you can middle-click, really. Then do that: middle click to get that scrolling cursor happening, and move your cursor to scroll &lt;strong&gt;left, right, or up&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bjP97.png&quot; alt=&quot;The spot to place your cursor&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This happens! Whoooaaa!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, you can scroll &lt;em&gt;until&lt;/em&gt; the point you middle-clicked on leaves the header div.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sy3R8.png&quot; alt=&quot;The results of scrolling there&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Some fix options&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any of these seem to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Remove #content's overflow: auto&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6S39g.png&quot; alt=&quot;#content&amp;#39;s overflow: auto&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Remove #subheader's overflow-y: hidden&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/46lEL.png&quot; alt=&quot;#subheader&amp;#39;s overflow-y: hidden&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Add an overflow-x: hidden to #subheader&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XN4ic.png&quot; alt=&quot;#subheader&amp;#39;s overflow-x: hidden&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2013-03-02T21:50:24.427" LastActivityDate="2013-03-02T21:50:24.427" Title="Wacky scrolling in Chrome if you scroll from the subheader" Tags="|bug|design|css|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2789" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-03T17:20:29.063" Score="13" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the main site, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag.  However, these seem like they are vague.  For GMs we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt;, and everything else I can find that's tagged [gm] seems to boil down to one of those.  Similarly with players we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; but not really &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-techniques&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; I'm really tempted to synonym it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; after a quick scrub to find any outliers.  With &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; I'm more torn, but both seem very unclear in and of themselves.  Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; asking about killer GMs from a player perspective, learning to GM from a GM perspective, what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't help that just about anything in RPG.SE could be tagged player or GM (or, I guess, designer for the rule/setting creation questions).  Seems like a meta tag to me.  Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="5746" LastEditDate="2013-03-10T22:06:23.370" LastActivityDate="2013-03-10T22:07:49.297" Title="Worth of &quot;GM&quot; and &quot;players&quot; tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2789" CreationDate="2013-03-03T23:10:19.053" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Neither of those tags is particularly descriptive IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd be in favor of synonimizing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I'm concerned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; can be burninated and we wouldn't lose anything (it's not a solo tag anywhere).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there is any specific reason to tag a question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; in that most of the time questions are either going to be asked form the perspective of the player, or they are going to be asked as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-03-03T23:10:19.053" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2791" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-03-04T14:58:40.973" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://howderek.com/projects/DerekDice/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VGQs1.png&quot; alt=&quot;DerekDice is a flexible online die roller&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7653" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-10-16T14:33:43.557" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-03-04T14:58:40.973" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2789" CreationDate="2013-03-04T16:47:47.233" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm in favour of a synonym from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; doesn't have much value, except that people will type it in. I think a synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;groups&lt;/a&gt; may be an improvement. People will still try adding it, and a synonym to something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;groups&lt;/a&gt; would be better than trying to keep it off the site. It's usually used in questions about how to handle players (who may not qualify as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;), but that usually means it's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;groups&lt;/a&gt; issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="5746" LastEditDate="2013-03-10T22:07:49.297" LastActivityDate="2013-03-10T22:07:49.297" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2777" CreationDate="2013-03-04T20:27:31.470" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Building on what mxyzplk's post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you post text excerpts, also post where you got the information. Book name, page number, publisher, ect. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3358" LastActivityDate="2013-03-04T20:27:31.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2794" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-05T01:41:11.680" Score="9" ViewCount="265" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; has been bugging me lately, and I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; it's because it's become a meta tag, at least in how it's commonly used now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;, they're described thus: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;meta-tags […] do not describe the content of the question. They describe some other aspect of the question, like the author’s skill level, or the author’s motivation for asking it, or generally what “kind” of question it is (poll, how-to, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A proper tag describes the content of the question – it merely labels something already there. It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; has recently been tacked on as a constraining instruction that doesn't always have any mention in the question body. That sounds like a meta tag to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also falling afoul of a less-obvious telltale of a meta tag (emphasis original):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a meta-tag.&lt;/strong&gt; In a cruel, ironic twist, the meaning of the tag [subjective] itself … is actually subjective. Ditto for [best-practices] and [beginner]. Best practices to whom? Beginner by what criteria? These tags are impossible to define by anything remotely resembling an objective metric. In comparison, the the meaning of tags like [java], [c#], and [javascript] are crystal clear to all but the nuttiest of nutbags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; often gets tacked onto questions that can't actually be answered without knowing, if not the &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; system involved, at least the sort of system. The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22260/how-can-i-deal-with-players-who-are-reluctant-to-spend-resources&quot;&gt;How can I deal with players who are reluctant to spend resources?&lt;/a&gt; became a bit of a mess because the asker wanted to cover a bunch of systems, but it's functionally unanswerable without focusing the problem to how those specific systems work. Notice all the answers that mention systems by name in order to answer usefully, and how all the &quot;bad&quot; answers are the ones that are truly ignoring the systems that the asker is &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; asking about; not agnostic (&quot;unknowing&quot;) of the system involved at all. I see this happen frequently with questions that require the assumption of a trad system too, when a truly system agnostic question would include a much wider set of mechanical designs in valid answers. Apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; means different things to different people, which makes it likely a meta tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also getting tacked onto questions unnecessarily.  Do we really need to be told that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22637/how-do-i-avoid-cliches-while-improvising&quot;&gt;How do I avoid clichés while improvising?&lt;/a&gt; is not about any one system? Doesn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-technique&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-technique&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-technique&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; cover the question more than enough? I don't think over-use is evidence that it's a meta-tag—I think this happens because it's such a pervasive tag that people feel like it's necessary to include if a question doesn't otherwise have a system tag. I do think that the pervasiveness of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; may be the fault of being a meta tag, though, indirectly causing this kind of over-use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do think the tag is seeing legitimate, non–meta tag uses as well. That makes it less obvious whether how it's being used is actually a problem. I might just be cranky.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; a meta tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a meta tag, can we figure out a policy for its proper, non-meta-tag uses so we can keep it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T04:59:29.223" Title="Is [system-agnostic] a meta tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2795" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2794" CreationDate="2013-03-05T01:43:04.343" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, or if so, I don't care.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This SE is rampant with people wanting game rules specific answers to more generalized roleplaying questions.  It's a useful tag to keep that away from proper general questions. It's so popular I can't imagine we'd actually go remove it regardless of tag theory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I don't think it's a meta tag - in fact, &quot;agnostic&quot; is a great word that shows its validity by direct analogy.  If this were a religion SE, then &quot;Christian,&quot; &quot;Muslim,&quot; &quot;agnostic,&quot; &quot;atheist&quot; would all be valid choices.  Here, &quot;D&amp;amp;D 4e,&quot; &quot;Pathfinder,&quot; &quot;Weirdos and Wombats,&quot; and &quot;system-agnostic&quot; are likewise valid choices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for when to use it - &quot;when you think it's needed.&quot;  In some of your cases cited above maybe it's not needed - but maybe it is.  &quot;How to encourage players to spend resources&quot; is a legitimate cross-game question as it does have some basic psych answers regardless of the system at hand.  And that proves the second point, which is that people often use it reactively to swat off the &quot;but what about the RULESET!!?!!&quot; flies.  If the asker wants it for a ruleset they should list the ruleset; if they want it without one then sadly system-agnostic ends up being needed.  When it's not, you get either a) hardcore D&amp;amp;D answers because 80% of the world assumes all RP revolves around D&amp;amp;D, or b) people demanding it get tied to a specific ruleset.  And to be honest, with all the indie games out there, you can't really say gm-techniques is by definition agnostic.  It is for most trad games but now there's at least one game that bizarrifies any given aspect of GMing and the &quot;most games&quot; answer isn't valid for it...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally like browsing the system-agnostic tag as it generally means less pedantry, more higher level thought in the questions it brings up.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-03-06T00:38:27.173" LastActivityDate="2013-03-06T00:38:27.173" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2794" CreationDate="2013-03-05T03:05:05.083" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is a useful tag with specific scope and purpose.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to amplify, it serves a critical role in our community: It illustrates that the querent has no system to which he or she refers, and therefore explicitly accepts answers from all systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We, in effect, have a &quot;please tag your question with your desired&quot; system tag ontology, with a lesser ontology of &quot;signal if you want pure &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; with that tag alluding to a more RAWish question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, because we, in effect require a system tag (I certainly go out of my way to edit it in), system-agnostic is useful. On the &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; hand, there are times when it certainly isn't warranted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reluctant-to-spend resources, you should indicate that system-agnostic is a bad fit, because resources are too close to system. But that's a problem for individual questions. It's just as poor a fit as a physics question for 4e. &quot;Your question cannot be answered under the tags provided&quot; falls into a number of types of close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should fix questions rather than try to fix this specific tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-02-26T04:59:29.223" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T04:59:29.223" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2794" CreationDate="2013-03-05T04:34:21.347" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some data and observations, but I'm not sure where it leads....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From looking at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; page, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is most used along side &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; questions in turn are only rarely tagged with a specific system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; is also common in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; questions, and while incidence of systems in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; questions is more common then in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; it is still common to have no system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at questions tagged only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; we have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22184/what-makes-a-character-creature-power-ability-etc-over-powered&quot;&gt;What makes a character/creature/power/ability/etc. over-powered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15565/where-can-i-find-transcripts-of-actual-game-sessions&quot;&gt;Where can I find transcripts of actual game sessions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13673/rewards-for-a-cancelled-session&quot;&gt;Rewards for a cancelled session?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11414/how-do-underground-tunnels-stay-up-is-it-possible-to-dig-under-a-castle-wall-wi&quot;&gt;How do underground tunnels stay up? Is it possible to dig under a castle wall without magic to support the tunnel?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9571/recommendations-for-arctic-campaign-sites-settings&quot;&gt;Recommendations for Arctic Campaign Sites/Settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7632/what-characterizes-a-modern-role-playing-game-or-gaming-system&quot;&gt;What characterizes a &amp;quot;Modern&amp;quot; role playing game or gaming system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7437/in-a-recorded-lets-play-of-a-table-top-game-what-elements-of-the-game-should&quot;&gt;In a recorded &amp;quot;Let&amp;#39;s Play&amp;quot; of a table-top game, what elements of the game should be shown?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6610/a-summary-of-visibility&quot;&gt;A summary of visibility?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-03-05T04:34:21.347" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2798" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2794" CreationDate="2013-03-06T13:47:12.267" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is completely unnecessary. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;When a question cares about the game being played we tag it with that game's tag.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So shouldn't the lack of a game tag indicate system agnostic already?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shouldn't basically any question that does not have a specific system attached to it be then labeled &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;? Doesn't that effectively render the tag meaningless?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd argue that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; should be replaced where it is a solo tag with more descriptive tags and it should then be burninated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-03-06T13:47:12.267" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2799" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-08T18:34:59.463" Score="12" ViewCount="187" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comments on &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22786/how-to-handle-wealthy-player-characters-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;How to handle wealthy player characters as a GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; got a bit out of hand, but it gave me an idea...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The contention seems to be between these two perspectives on how to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[system-agnostic] should be for questions that are useful without knowing anything about the system being used, so it should, as reasonably as possible, apply to all systems possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[system-agnostic] is about avoiding system-specific answers, so it only needs to apply to a goodly range of systems, not all or nearly all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that a good summary?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One comment stood out (emphasis original):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Your answer is only applicable to classical fantasy broadly based on the medieval period &lt;strong&gt;in systems that try to accurately simulate that period's economics&lt;/strong&gt;. Consider D&amp;amp;D 3.5 [...] The wealth in 3.5 isn't meant to model medieval economics, it's meant to throttle the rate at which characters acquire more powerful magic items. The system is in fact a ludicrous economic model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been my gut feeling about the [system-agnostic] tag in the past: that it should only apply if the question can truly be said to be answerable across every game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, though, I think that's an unreasonably high bar to set. There's a lot of good use in questions and answers that are &quot;unaware&quot; (agnostic) of the exact system that will be used, while still being constrained to a particular &lt;em&gt;kind&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;style&lt;/em&gt; of mechanics or play. There is very wide community support for using [system-agnostic] that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's possible that we need some tags for play style&amp;ndash;&lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than trying to make [system-agnostic] do duty as a catch-all for &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; question that is broader than one specific system, maybe we could use tags that are game-agnostic while still being limited to a particular kind of game. Maybe that would eliminate the arguments about [system-agnostic], since they seem to largely turn on the point that a particular question is still limited to a small set of games or a mode of play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sandbox&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sandbox&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sandbox&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/megadungeon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;megadungeon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;megadungeon&lt;/a&gt;, two well-recognised (because they're old) modes of campaign play. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, which gets used as often for &quot;the genre created by and around Dungeons and Dragons&quot; as often as it gets used for &quot;all D&amp;amp;D systems&quot; questions. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-map&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-map&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-map&lt;/a&gt;, which sometimes gets used in a system-agnostic way to indicate a common mode of roleplaying out combats. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fantasy&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/science-fiction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;science-fiction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;science-fiction&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/post-apocalyptic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;post-apocalyptic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;post-apocalyptic&lt;/a&gt; for questions about roleplaying within those literary genres. (Perhaps too broad, considering they're rarely used?) We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realm-management&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realm-management&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realm-management&lt;/a&gt;, which gets used for that play style as well as for mechanics for supporting it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-less&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-less&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-less&lt;/a&gt; covers a niche mode of play. I was surprised to find that we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; for that part of the GNS! Even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; can be seen as a play style tag (it's certainly useful for avoiding questions that are irrelevant for my preferred play styles). We even have a tag to ask questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; different &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gaming-style&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gaming-style&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gaming-style&lt;/a&gt;s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't suggest going on a tag-creating spree, even if more such tags would be useful. The question is, &lt;strong&gt;would play style tags be useful?&lt;/strong&gt; If we decide that tagging for play style is useful, then simply deciding that is enough. That will put us individually on the look-out for opportunities for new, &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; tags as questions come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If such tags wouldn't be useful though, then that's good to establish too. That would mean that [system-agnostic] is the right tag for questions that might be limited to a particular play style by the body of the question, but which shouldn't be answered with solutions relevant to only a particular RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-03-14T20:50:00.717" Title="Should we tag for play style and mode, more often?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2801" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2802" CreationDate="2013-03-08T21:05:13.060" Score="3" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wanted to start a discussion about a new feature request related to tags. I am proposing that there might be value in upgrading the tags system and offering more thorough presentations of tags, what each tag should be used for, and examples of appropriate questions for tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is related to the recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2799/should-we-tag-for-play-style-and-mode-more-often&quot;&gt;Should we tag for play style and mode, more often?&lt;/a&gt; discussion question, but is also related to my own personal new user experience of finding myself confused about the finer nature of how different tags should be used even after reading the About and FAQs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are some of my ideas about how tags could potentially be improved, and I would be willing to help if feasible:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More thorough tag descriptions for every tag wiki, including tips such as &quot;do not use this system-specific tag if answers could reasonably apply to many other systems&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag wikis to include well-representative examples of what a fitting question would be for that tag as well as links to meta discussions about that tag and meta discussions about topics that include that tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A better policy of coming back to meta when two or more experienced and respectable members start fighting with tags, switching each others' edits back and forth.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag hierarchy. It may be useful to show a hierarchy of tags for appropriate tags in tag wikis. For instance, specific systems could show the underling tags of specific versions of that system with brief summaries about why a user may want to try those tags instead. A description could explain the difference and why some questions may be best for specific versions and others may be best for the system in general while still others may be best for system-agnostic. This could also extend to popular associated tags that a player may want to consider instead of or in addition to that tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are some ideas that may or may not be wise to employ, but there may be better ideas out there for improving the tags system on rpg and meta.rpg.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a need for an improved tag system?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7702" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T23:17:55.207" Title="New functions for tags" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2802" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2801" CreationDate="2013-03-08T21:23:55.970" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are good ideas. Our tag wikis should be sufficient for holding better guidance on how to use them. We just need to &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag is already a model of doing this right, but other high-use tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; should have much more, and clearer, guidance in their info pages. Heck, the long description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; is wrong since we changed our policy on that tag! Ideally, high-profile tags (important, high-use, or commonly-problematic tags) should have extensive how-to guides or decision-flow instructions in their info pages, as well as guidance on what alternative tags an asker might consider instead. Links to relevant meta discussions should be included as well as endnotes, for the especially curious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way we could do this is with a tag-wiki party. For one week, pick a high-profile tag and create a meta question for improving its tag wiki. The jam session aims to produce a high-quality text, and serve as a central location for later refining it as necessary. This would give the improvement more visible. Also, it could bring the wider community into the discussion, and allow everyone to contribute to polishing the text even if they don't have enough reputation to edit the wiki directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T21:23:55.970" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2799" CreationDate="2013-03-08T21:28:27.717" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we do keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag (something I'm coming to think may be unnecessary), then it should probably be a constraint on &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; rather than on &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;. It becomes a way for the asker to say, &quot;You don't know which system I'm using, and I don't think the exact system is relevant to this question, so please don't bring system into it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, that shouldn't mean that an answer can't &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; a system, merely that a good answer won't &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; a system. It should be OK to say, &quot;System X uses mechanic Y to solve that problem, here's how it works... and here's how it might be generalized to apply to other systems...&quot; but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; OK to say, &quot;Well in system X mechanic Y takes care of that. END&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that will be more restrictive than (and therefore superior to) having it restrict the question to applying to a broad swathe of systems. If answers can be applied to a wide variety of systems, then the question is automatically useful to a wide variety of systems. Merely restricting the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; to being &quot;system agnostic&quot; would allow overly specific (and therefore less useful) answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Side note: Should this be posted at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2794/is-system-agnostic-a-meta-tag&quot;&gt;the system-agnostic question&lt;/a&gt; instead of here? In addition to here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: Regarding play style tags, I think we should be careful about introducing them. If we can find at least 5 or so questions already in existence that should clearly have the proposed playstyle tag &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; there aren't a bunch of grey area questions, where the tag might or might not be applicable or would be the subject of considerable debate, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; it might be reasonable to introduce the new tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T21:47:20.767" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2804" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2794" CreationDate="2013-03-08T21:42:43.387" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Cross-posted from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2799/should-we-tag-for-play-style-and-mode-more-often&quot;&gt;a related question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The contention seems to be between these two perspectives on how to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; should be for questions that are useful without knowing anything about the system being used, so it should, as reasonably as possible, apply to all systems possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is about avoiding system-specific answers, so it only needs to apply to a goodly range of systems, not all or nearly all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we do keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag (something I'm coming to think may be unnecessary, if not unwise), then it should probably be a constraint on &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; rather than on &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;. It becomes a way for the asker to say, &quot;You don't know which system I'm using, and I don't think the exact system is relevant to this question, so please don't bring system into it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, that shouldn't mean that an answer can't &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; a system, merely that a good answer won't &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; a system. It should be OK to say, &quot;System X uses mechanic Y to solve that problem, here's how it works... and here's how it might be generalized to apply to other systems...&quot; but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; OK to say, &quot;Well in system X mechanic Y takes care of that. END&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that will be more restrictive than (and therefore superior to) having it restrict the question to applying to a broad swathe of systems. If answers can be applied to a wide variety of systems, then the question is automatically useful to a wide variety of systems. Merely restricting the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; to being &quot;system agnostic&quot; would allow overly specific (and therefore less useful) answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T21:42:43.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2805" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2807" CreationDate="2013-03-08T22:11:04.643" Score="0" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15565/where-can-i-find-transcripts-of-actual-game-sessions&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;podcast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt; because I was trying to reduce the number of questions that had the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag and nothing else and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;podcast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt; was obviously clearly &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt; even if it didn't seem &lt;em&gt;directly&lt;/em&gt; applicable (the question specifies written transcripts rather than audio or AV recordings).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it make sense to either create a more general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recordings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recordings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recordings&lt;/a&gt; tag (or something along those lines) and retag the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;podcast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt; questions, or alternately to simply make a synonym for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;podcast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt; tag (I'll admit to not knowing much about about how tag synonyms work)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T23:14:24.417" Title="Diversify &quot;podcasts&quot; to &quot;recordings&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-03-08T22:26:25.223" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anime.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qKHbb.png&quot; alt=&quot;Tagline to show on mouseover&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user7366" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:54:48.223" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T22:26:25.223" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-03-08T22:26:25.223" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2805" CreationDate="2013-03-08T23:14:24.417" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, because it'll never get used and no one will think to use it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging here should be emergent.  People know &quot;podcast&quot; and will tag using it and search using it, it's obviously useful. Something more general isn't.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For written summaries, common terms are &quot;session summaries,&quot; &quot;story hours&quot; and &quot;actual plays&quot;.  You can try one of those on for size for that Q I'd think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T23:14:24.417" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2801" CreationDate="2013-03-08T23:17:55.207" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tagging by its nature is an emergent folksonomy.  Like other content on this site, we try to guide it a little but in the end it's what people write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more one tries to 'enforce' a tag hierarchy, the less like tagging it really is - and the less useful it becomes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging emerged on the Internet in response to all the crappy hierarchies out there that hobble people's categorization to what &quot;someone else thinks.&quot;  We don't want that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nothing wrong with expanding on the tag wikis, but don't go into it with the theory of you'll be &quot;keeper&quot; of the &quot;correct&quot; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, we have no control over changing how tags work and our SE masters don't take small feature requests from us, let alone major ones like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-03-08T23:17:55.207" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2809" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2799" CreationDate="2013-03-14T20:50:00.717" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure how useful those tags would be.  I've talked to a lot of players who assume that they play the default play style.  They might be aware that other people play differently, but their own is the normal one.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2013-03-14T20:50:00.717" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2810" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-15T09:13:45.047" Score="4" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;I went to vote to close a question on my phone earlier, and got this experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VxysT.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Went to close &gt; duplicate&lt;/a&gt;. The close button is disabled. I need to pick the question this one's a duplicate of, first, and I intend to pick the one right there that everyone else has been voting for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know its question number - there's an input box right there, which you can only tell is there from the screenshot because it causes a notch in the right-hand border. That means there's a CSS bug, too, probably.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess I need to tap it to select it before I vote for it. I do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9itMc.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The &lt;em&gt;entire question&lt;/em&gt; loads in the close pane&lt;/a&gt; - the question itself and every answer in full. It takes &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q6tex.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a lot of scrolling&lt;/a&gt; before I can reach the bottom - see the little green bar on the right hand side? That's my scrollbar. It's not usually that tiny.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I reach the bottom after a little while. &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/T6kAP.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;There's the close button!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't need to see all of that to vote for it as a duplicate, especially not in a mobile browser. I don't remember it being like this the last time I voted to close a question on my phone (admittedly, that was months ago).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently on desktop, it loads the question into a scrollable frame!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-03-20T04:09:04.417" LastActivityDate="2013-03-20T04:09:04.417" Title="Voting to close loads a question's entire content on the mobile site before you can vote for it" Tags="|bug|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2811" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-18T09:30:26.123" Score="7" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;The help for comments reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&#xA;Comments use mini-Markdown formatting: [link](http://example.com) _italic_ **bold** `code`. The post author will always be notified of your comment.&#xA;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But (in my browser and the one's I've tested) there's a line break after &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;[link]&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and before &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;(http://example.com)&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which makes it a little unclear that there should be no spaces/etc between them and that the two bits of code are related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can this be tidied up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3230" LastActivityDate="2013-03-18T09:30:26.123" Title="Help for comments isn't entirely helpful" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2812" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2814" CreationDate="2013-03-19T18:26:33.337" Score="16" ViewCount="447" Body="&lt;p&gt;I come from StackOverflow and I see that the answering style here is very different. Even simple yes/no questions get answers with multiple headings and paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened? Was this a conscious decision? Do I risk being downvoted for short yet complete answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5646" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Why are answers so verbose?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2813" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-03-19T18:32:52.653" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Short answers that are complete won't get downvotes, but, depending on how they're written, might not gather upvotes much. Since there are often multiple ways to approach a problem within roleplaying or an RPG's rules, a given answer that says merely &quot;do it this way&quot; rarely feels like a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer because it doesn't make a case for why the reader should do it that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-03-19T18:40:09.143" LastActivityDate="2013-03-19T18:40:09.143" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-03-19T18:55:08.063" Score="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the reasons that we give and receive verbose answers here is because there is rarely ever 1 correct solution to an RPG problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On SO oftentimes an answer &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; only consist of a small block of code that fixes whatever the problem is. But a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer will explain it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we get two kinds of questions here. The first is a cut and dried rules scenario. Typically this can be answered with a short quotation from a book, or even better an explanation of why or application of how the rule works the way it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the other type of question we get here is more conceptual. It's sort of the programmers.se or workplace.se type questions. How to handle group dynamics, how to handle specific social situations and how to write adventures/character. These require far more explanation to provide a good answer and are suited for the kind of long answers dealing with multiple facets that places like workplace and programmers were designed for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-03-19T18:55:08.063" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2815" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-03-19T19:26:54.407" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all, you have to make your case.  You can't just give an answer and hope for the best.  If I make a one liner, someone who isn't experienced with that suggestion won't necessarily upvote it.  I have to provide a context of how it helped my game or where I saw it used in someone else's game.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, this site rewards putting more than one answer in each post.  When I write five answers into one post, I'll often see comments like &quot;+1 for your second paragraph&quot; indicating that it was a specific suggestion that was worth an upvote.  In theory I think it's not supposed to work that way - each answer should be a separate post.  But consider which would be more rewarding.  If I have 5 suggestions to make and each one earns 2 points, my series of 5 individual suggestions will sit near the bottom for the duration of the thread.  If I concatenate them, my long winded suggestion will rise to the top.  It's more likely to be accepted that way.  It's also more likely to get more upvotes since it's the first thing people will see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding short answers, no nobody will downvote you for it.  You might get comments to expand your answers.  The thing I'd worry about is someone else poaching your answer.  On several occasions I've posted a couple sentences in response to something.  When I've gotten back to checking the site, someone else has paraphrase those sentences in their own post and added a couple paragraphs.  I don't begrudge them the karma - they wrote a more complete answer than I did and that should be the accepted answer.  But if you're feeling competitive about your answers, putting them out there when they aren't complete isn't going to work in your favor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2013-03-19T19:26:54.407" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2783" CreationDate="2013-03-20T15:30:20.220" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has been fixed, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/167823/can-the-color-of-visited-links-be-changed-on-the-mobile-site/168979#168979&quot;&gt;as per this Meta Question&lt;/a&gt;. There was an error in the CSS that has (long, eheh) since been fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-03-20T15:30:20.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-03-22T16:21:22.770" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you also have to bear in mind that you're comparing a programmer's community to a pen-and-paper community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, in programming terseness is often appreciated; for example, when looking at bad code, I feel like one of the most common criticisms I hear is &quot;they could have solved that in only one line of code&quot;. On the other hand, in pen and paper roleplaying vivid description is appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, your comparing a more professional/functional community to a more hobby/casual community. It's conceivable that on 4:45pm Friday afternoon I'll post a question to StackOverflow which I need answered before I punch out for the weekend. The faster I get my answer and it works, the happier I am as a community member - I might not care about the details. On the other hand, on rpg.stackexchange I doubt anyone logs in while in the middle of a dungeon run with all their buddies sitting around a table waiting for the answer. So I think the very subject matter makes the community less prone to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9731/fastest-gun-in-the-west-problem&quot;&gt;The Fastest Gun&lt;/a&gt; and terse answers. People here don't want immediate solutions, they want ideas which they can leverage in games which they are probably going to spend some time preparing for: they're going to draw maps, read rule books and fill out character sheets - maybe even paint some miniatures. When you've already lined up all that work for your game, reading (or writing) an extra 200 words on stackexchange only feels natural.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-03-22T16:21:22.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-03-26T12:19:37.457" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;My two copper pieces:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many questions on our topic require the use of imagination to answer. This encourages long, rambling answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's a lot of competition for each question, and often there's not one &quot;right&quot; answer, so people are trying to improve their answer by writing more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Long answers accrue upvotes because they look like the answerer has given a lot of time and effort.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG players sometimes use more words than necessary.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="559" LastActivityDate="2013-03-26T12:19:37.457" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2820" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-03-29T13:50:40.710" Score="11" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just took a look at our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/editing-help&quot;&gt;Editing Help&lt;/a&gt; and noticed it makes no mention of the fact you need two line breaks for a paragraph break.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;^ Like this. This seems to be the thing that &lt;em&gt;most commonly&lt;/em&gt; trips up new users! Markdown ignores single lines, yet some new users don't know what to do about that. Some do nothing and just have their giant unbroken paragraph with ignored single line breaks, whilst others fill their post with &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;'s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please change the editing help to mention paragraph breaks at the beginning!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently, this has been suggested on Meta.SO already: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/135252/152515&quot;&gt;Add “paragraphs” to Markdown help&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've upvoted or are upvoting this feature request, please drop by that link and upvote it there too!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-04-13T02:11:31.093" Title="Our Editing Help doesn't mention paragraph breaks" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2821" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2822" CreationDate="2013-03-29T15:58:16.040" Score="15" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really enjoy reading through the related posts. However, some of them can be quite old. Is it proper etiquette to upvote those that I give those that I find deserving? Should I consider a question that has not had any recent activity to be settled, therefore the upvoting has no purpose?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3844" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-15T13:23:23.690" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:23:23.690" Title="Upvoting Old Questions and Answers?" Tags="|discussion|voting|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2822" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2821" CreationDate="2013-03-29T16:03:46.490" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should absolutely upvote!  The fact that it's old doesn't make it not worthy.  In fact you should even suggest edits to old posts to improve them.  The only thing we would advise against is editing dozens of old questions in one go, as that can flood the front page (but upvoting won't do that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-03-29T16:03:46.490" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-03-29T23:23:31.013" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.facebook.com/AnimeAndMangaQA&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YAI2x.png&quot; alt=&quot;Anime &amp;amp; Manga SE Community on FB&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user7366" LastActivityDate="2013-03-29T23:23:31.013" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-03-29T23:23:31.013" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2824" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-03-29T23:25:54.147" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anime.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bYUt5.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Anime and Manga SE&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user7366" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:54:48.223" LastActivityDate="2013-03-29T23:25:54.147" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-03-29T23:25:54.147" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2723" CreationDate="2013-03-29T23:56:29.470" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://plus.google.com/111061084179563499110/posts&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/v9och.png&quot; alt=&quot;Anime &amp;amp; Manga SE Community on G+&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user7366" LastActivityDate="2013-03-29T23:56:29.470" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-03-29T23:56:29.470" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2826" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2821" CreationDate="2013-03-30T19:15:58.523" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, please do. Voting serves &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; purposes: indicating the community's collective wisdom and confidence by bubbling the best answers to the top, and giving reputation to the users who write the answers we thereby give our confidence to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding your voice to our confidence in an answer or question is still useful after the original asker has marked an answer as accepted, since people find these questions long, long after they're asked, either by browsing them like you do or through search engines. To a new reader looking to solve the same problem, the answers' age doesn't matter to whether they help &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, questions that &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; useful to more people than the asker get closed as &quot;too localized&quot; – we strive for questions that are at least somewhat widely meaningful to answer, so that they're remain a useful resource long after the original asker has solved their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Giving reputation to users (which upvoting does) who wrote good answers quite a while ago is still useful because reputation is how users gain more privileges and ability to shape the content that is hosted here: editing privileges, close-voting for things that don't belong, and that kind of thing helps maintain the quality of the site. By upvoting old, good answers, you help by saying you think these people know what they're talking about. Increasing the privileges of users who have a proven track record of writing answers that &quot;fit&quot; helps keep the site in good shape.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-03-30T19:21:27.750" LastActivityDate="2013-03-30T19:21:27.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2827" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2828" CreationDate="2013-04-01T17:18:47.423" Score="2" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;While browsing the question on low character HP this morning a little black box popped in on the right-lower corner of my screen. It offered me the option of chatting with an expert, not now and never.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Curious I clicked to chat. It came up CSS style with a small chat box where the &quot;expert&quot; asked if I had any questions about low character HP. The picture wasn't anyone I recognized from the site anyway and I've been around fairly often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;WTH is this? Something on the server side or on mine? I didn't find anything through searching.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="933" LastEditDate="2013-04-03T08:43:41.747" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Site &quot;chat with an expert&quot; script?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2827" CreationDate="2013-04-01T19:03:37.007" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's an SE-wide April Fools joke.  Yes, a bit of a blah one. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/174407/what-is-chat-with-an-expert&quot;&gt;What is &amp;quot;chat with an expert&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; for more on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-04-01T19:03:37.007" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2829" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-01T23:52:29.617" Score="12" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we've been invited, by the powers that be, to celebrate a one year anniversary with a contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While other sites have had contests for &quot;best user&quot; and &quot;unanswered question cleanup&quot; ... we have 4 unanswered questions and a tightly knit community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What kind of contest should we run for our April 11th first birthday? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit: We'll be making a decision and closing this down by EoD 4/4/2013 so that we have time to get the contest polished and ready to go!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="2205" LastEditDate="2013-04-28T21:09:06.363" LastActivityDate="2013-04-28T21:09:06.363" Title="One year anniversary contest?" Tags="|discussion|contest|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-01T23:55:27.830" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Underappreciated System Uplift Contest&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Title really needs work. Basically, a series of prises go to the users who best lift systems with less than 50 questions and a horrible tag wiki to fully participating tags in this site with graduated prizes as a function of how much effort we (the mods) and the community thinks that contributing users have put in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This contest would run from April 11 to May 11, with system tags that are under 50 questions during April being eligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-04-01T23:55:27.830" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-02T03:21:31.880" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Try Something New Month&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Encourage members to widen their activities into elements of the site that they don't usually participate in. For example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer questions with different tags than usual for you&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask questions (if you're normally an answers-only kind of citizen)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post in meta (if meta is a strange and scary place for you)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit tag wikis (maybe you didn't even know you could until now!)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer an old question (maybe a question with an answer already accepted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Join chat (please?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There'd be a list of site activities, and if we got fancy the list would be personalized to indicate which activities the member viewing the list wasn't a regular participant in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more new things you do, the more fully you dive into them, and the better the community response to your participation, the shinier the prizes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure how this could be implemented but it would be a fun diversifying exercise if handled well. It has the potential to be very messy though. Something measuring badges and tags might work, but seems lackluster. Perhaps if it were narrowed down to one or two activities very few members participate in, then it could be opened up a bit more in that context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2013-04-02T07:17:53.570" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T07:17:53.570" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-02T06:45:47.607" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Game of the Month&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pulling from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1387/question-contest-ideas&quot;&gt;this meta question that is the only other [contest]-tagged question&lt;/a&gt;, and somewhat inspired by Brian's suggestion here, we could do a &lt;strong&gt;Game of the Month/Week/Fortnight/whatever&lt;/strong&gt; contest, highlighting one game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Prizes could be for users in that game's tag with highest total question upvotes (maybe 1st, 2nd, 3rd), highest total answer upvotes, most views, and/or most favourites, etc. (Structure details depending on the quantity of prizes we'd have to hand out, of course.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to pick &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; game to promote is, obviously, a thorny question, but perhaps better minds than I can think of something clever there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T06:45:47.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2833" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-02T07:18:58.653" Score="5" ViewCount="189" Body="&lt;p&gt;After observing and participating in some discussions between @KRyan and other posters, I've come to believe that the Stackexchange format is &lt;em&gt;superb&lt;/em&gt; for hosting constests whose winners are resolved democratically. Homebrew is a wonderful part of the RPG community, and homebrew contests can help generate some wonderful content in addition to giving 'brewers access to critique and practice that can help sharpen their skills. To this end, I would like to propose that rpg.stackexchange host a prestige class contest monthly or bi-monthly. Here is the outline of my initial idea:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the beginning of the contest, a moderator will post a question containing the themes (see below) and any additional restrictions (such as &quot;five-level&quot; or &quot;no spellcasting&quot;). The themes in question will be quotes or ideas provided by the moderation staff, such as snippets of classical verse or a picture.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participants will have a period of two to four weeks (to be determined by discussion here, hopefully) to create their prestige class following at least &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; of the offered themes and all of the other restrictions. These classes must be complete, possessing fully-fledged flavor and mechanics, and hopefully a table if .stackexchange's programming will let us make them. During this time period participants are permitted and encouraged to seek critique on their work to edit and improve it. &lt;strong&gt;By the end of the submission period all legal entries must be posted as answers to the original question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the submission period will be a one-two week voting period wherein anyone can upvote the class(es) they find to be quality works. Leaving comments explaining one's vote is encouraged, as is discussing the content on chat if they want to question, praise, or critique the creator's work. At the end of the voting period, the class with the most votes wins the overall contest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;After the voting period, the moderation staff will award other prizes, with examples including &quot;Best fluff,&quot; &quot;Best mechanics,&quot; &quot;Most creative ability&quot; and/or others. I'm open to proposals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Great thanks to @KRyan for originally proposing this and for uncovering precedent of contests hosted on .stackexchange sites. The proposal above is very bare-bones but I'm hoping we can flesh it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[ADDENDUM by BESW based on CONVERSATIONS with LORD_GARETH]&lt;/strong&gt; Naturally, the idea can be adopted by anyone who wants to initiate a contest for a system dear to their heart. This particular proposal here is the germ of a broader concept, scoped narrowly (3.5 prestige classes) so as to be practical and achievable. There is no intention of limiting the &lt;em&gt;potential&lt;/em&gt; of the concept. In practice this particular contest can be expected to expand (beyond prestige classes?) and the idea will hopefully be adapted to other systems (FATE extras, anyone?) if the experiment proposed above is successful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6172" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2013-04-02T11:32:39.520" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T12:45:47.523" Title="Prestige Class Contest Proposal" Tags="|discussion|contest|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2834" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2833" CreationDate="2013-04-02T08:34:39.640" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Suggestion: Use two threads per contest.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;First thread&lt;/strong&gt; announces the contest, with theme, restrictions, deadline, etc. Draft entries would be posted for comments, and modified (but this is strictly voluntary on the part of the participants, a space created for collaboration and input). Votes would be irrelephant and comments would be allowed to hang loose.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Second thread&lt;/strong&gt; is for submissions, and posted a specific amount of time after the first thread (three weeks?). Final products are submitted as answers, comments are kept to a minimum, and the contest evaluation comprises voting on these answers. A specific time later (one week?) the votes are tallied, the mods intervene, and prizes are distributed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to take a moment to say that this is a cool idea, and I'm very impressed with the OP and those involved for working to present such an opportunity to enrich the RPG.SE community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T08:34:39.640" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-02T13:26:49.940" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Site promotion contest:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Winner determined based on how many &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/announcer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;announcer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;announcer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/booster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;booster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;booster&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/publicist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;publicist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;publicist&lt;/a&gt; badges are gained during the contest period.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Advantages&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Garners attention for the site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Easy and objective way to determine winners&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Disadvantage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Doesn't necessarily improve site quality &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Doesn't necessarily leverage all existing site users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly also give points for asking high viewed questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T13:26:49.940" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-02T14:01:30.253" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, here is my recommendation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really like Cross's site promotion idea and I think it works well as a reward to existing members, but I'd like to add to it something that draws in new members and additionally rewards folks who don't love promotion, but maybe do love some of the under-served games on our site. So let's combine the two into a multi-category contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spring is in the air, how about a Love fest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Category 1 - Love Site Promotion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Weekly prize for most promotion badges since contest starts (4 winners)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;End of the month drawing for anyone who has received one of the promotion badges during the month (additional winner(s))&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Category 2 - Love Indie Games&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Weekly prize for top voted question and answer in a system tag with &amp;lt;50 questions at contest start (8 prizes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;End of the month drawing with pool being anyone who asks/answers a question in a  system tag with &amp;lt;50 questions at contest start. (x prizes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Category 3 - Love New Users&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Weekly prize for top rep new user (4 prizes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;End of the month drawing for all new users with &gt;200 rep. (1 prize)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage here is that all of these are objective criteria that fulfill our site's mission. The disadvantage is that some of these are subject to gaming to some degree. But I'd like to reward folks for doing things that help the culture of this site improve through promotion, new membership and improving our indie content. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2013-04-02T14:58:55.050" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T14:58:55.050" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2833" CreationDate="2013-04-02T14:16:13.357" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15010819&amp;amp;postcount=2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is the traditional format used for submissions by the very-successful prestige class contest hosted monthly on Giant in the Playground. I think this format or something similar to it would be very appropriate for submissions; it makes the prestige classes look like published examples found in some of the later 3.X books (&lt;em&gt;Complete Scoundrel&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Tome of Battle&lt;/em&gt;, etc), has plenty of room to establish and expand on fluff, and also contains sections to advise on the &lt;em&gt;mechanical&lt;/em&gt; aspects of the prestige class. Artwork and the sample encounter have normally been held as being optional; frankly I'm in favor of cutting the sample encounter entirely, but I'd be perfectly happy for them to remain optional. Aside from those considerations, the prestige class must have this format filled out completely (even if it's only minimally) in order to qualify for voting and consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts? Alternate proposals? Can we even &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; tables on .stackexchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6172" LastActivityDate="2013-04-02T14:16:13.357" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2833" CreationDate="2013-04-03T00:58:40.300" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not an appropriate contest type for Stack Exchange.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a forum or a &quot;share your creations&quot; site. As much as I enjoy creativity (both exercising my own and seeing the fruits of others') and feel it should be fostered, this is not the site for doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to have a contest that focuses on a single RPG (something I honestly think we should avoid), then it should be designed to make our site a better resource for that RPG (see Arqade's recent AnswerSwarm contest for Heart of the Swarm).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2013-04-03T01:10:55.907" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T01:10:55.907" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2840" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2833" CreationDate="2013-04-03T12:45:47.523" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gentlemen, StackExchange is not appropriate for these sort of contests.  Part of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#dontask&quot;&gt;mantra&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a practical answerable question, it's just something we're voting on.  We vote, but we vote &lt;em&gt;to highlight the best answers to people's questions&lt;/em&gt;.  We've also had a long history of not allowing requests for content, which would be what your question is.  &quot;Write me a prestige class that ...&quot; would not be a valid question outside of a contest, and we're not going to have a contest that would involve off topic questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T12:45:47.523" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2841" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2843" CreationDate="2013-04-03T16:04:18.400" Score="7" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are some questions on good tablet/smartphone apps/sites/resources for GMing and playing. They are, unfortunately, years old, and I am sure that there have been and will be new releases and updates that improve on the current crop and provide new options for GMs and players of different systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should these questions be bumped or should new questions be asked or should this transient topic be handled in another way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T16:33:00.893" Title="What to do with questions that will have a different answer each year?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2842" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2844" CreationDate="2013-04-03T16:08:34.357" Score="15" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm keen to use RPGwithme.com and it seems to require a character import from HeroLab or similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would questions on how to use tools like this be on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T16:42:07.273" Title="Are RPG tool support questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2841" CreationDate="2013-04-03T16:33:00.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a necromancer badge just for that...  Adding more answers generally prompts the question to be seen on the front page and thus new members keep adding new answers and upvoting the old ones.  If in doubt, you can always open a new question (which will be closed as duplicate) or use the &quot;search&quot; feature of the site or Google.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T16:33:00.893" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2842" CreationDate="2013-04-03T16:42:07.273" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We handle questions about the Wizards character builder and compendium and other online tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure you'll get good answers here, but the questions should be on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-04-03T16:42:07.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2845" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2847" CreationDate="2013-04-04T11:23:37.643" Score="10" ViewCount="237" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a gig as a web writer. While I've done what I can to make sure I write about content I'm not presently reading about here, it's inevitable that my time here will influence what I write. While I don't believe in plagiarism by any means I am curious about how copyright works with the RPG.SE site. Though I'm curious about a few different points, I'm very cautious to not simply write about what I've been reading over here for the month or so prior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How would one go about citing someone else's question/answer as a source, or even the site for that matter?&lt;/strong&gt; I believe that inclusion in another non-fair use work requires permission and thus contact with that person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does this site fall squarely under fair use? Is there somewhere else on Stack Exchange that I can learn about the nuances of this?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really have no desire to lose my position or tread on anyone's toes here. While I told a new user there was no such thing as a stupid question earlier this morning, I remembered that there is. The one that's not asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-13T08:29:48.477" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T08:29:48.477" Title="How would I cite a question or answer on RPG.SE as a source? Does this site fall under fair use?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2845" CreationDate="2013-04-04T11:50:44.207" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/legal&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange Network Terms of Service&lt;/a&gt;, section 3 and 15 are particularly relevant.  I believe that most things said here are covered under &lt;a href=&quot;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;CC&lt;/a&gt; although it is worth checking.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are really concern, I would consult a lawyer. If you have a publisher/agent, they can advise you as it's part of their job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2013-04-04T11:50:44.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2845" CreationDate="2013-04-04T16:53:46.373" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The bottom of every page has a licensing/copyright notice:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;user contributions licensed under &lt;a href=&quot;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;cc-wiki&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/&quot;&gt;attribution required&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that's just for straight-up copying of text&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I am not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice, retain a lawyer if you're unsure, etc., etc., &lt;em&gt;ad nauseum&lt;/em&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For fair-use quoting (research, critique, etc.), such as is normally done in research papers and the like, normal citation practices would be acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For mere inspiration, there is no need to quote or attribute, not legally. There is no copyright on influences, and &lt;em&gt;ideas&lt;/em&gt; cannot be copyrighted; and the licensing terms only kick in once you're in the realm of copyright protection. Unless you have an &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidetic_memory&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;eidetic memory&lt;/a&gt; and can't help but repeat what you remember word-for-word, you are fine to use the &lt;em&gt;ideas&lt;/em&gt; in your memory entirely without licensing encumbrance or state copyright protection being relevant. Like a science fiction author who is inspired by their forebears, it's polite and classy to acknowledge one's influences, but that's more a matter of maintaining community and esteem, not law.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The big copyright holders of the world would have us believe that copyright is a right to dictate absolutely how something is used in every way and in perpetuity, and many people have begun to believe their pervasive propaganda, but the bare truth is that it merely protects the words written or images created, nothing more. Unless you start by making a direct copy and then edit (which counts as &quot;derivativation&quot;) &lt;em&gt;and then&lt;/em&gt; claim that it's your own work, copyright just doesn't apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-04-04T16:53:46.373" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2829" CreationDate="2013-04-05T09:06:21.963" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A Game War!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not focused around users, but around the various RPGs we have: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;, etc. We determine, fairly tongue-in-cheek because the entire premise is a little silly, which is the greatest RPG ever, based on things like question/answer activity within the competition period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's silly and lighthearted, and the competition itself should run with the idea that it's silly. The writing about the competition should not take itself too seriously, e.g.: &quot;YOU determine which will be the greatest RPG, by these completely arbitrary and actually meaningless criteria!!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could display progress in various ways, such as meters showing the various system tags' relative scores, or a battleground with coloured soldiers being more abundant for the winners.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't necessarily going to be a fair competition. Some games like Fate have a fairly simple ruleset that won't necessarily have many questions (then again, maybe this will prompt them). Other games have fairly complex and often convoluted rules which clash in all sorts of ways (no prizes for guessing which popular RPG I'm thinking of) which already give people &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; of opportunity to ask questions. There could be things done about this: games with low current activity score points more easily, etc. Remember ultimately this competition shouldn't be taken seriously, nor taking itself too seriously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-04-05T11:07:48.773" LastActivityDate="2013-04-05T11:07:48.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2849" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-08T18:55:13.207" Score="5" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that it is not possible to add a new answer to a question that has been closed, but why are you still able to vote existing answers up? This doesn't make any sense to me, as surely it undermines the impact and purpose of the question being closed in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-04-08T18:57:57.867" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T20:27:43.593" Title="When a question is closed as not being a good fit for the site, why am I still able to vote up answers?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2850" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2849" CreationDate="2013-04-08T18:59:39.970" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree; people go in and add comments and vote and edit their previous answers, bumping an otherwise undesirable answer back up to the top.  I hate to just delete closed questions because they can teach, but I really want to when it seems like people are basically ignoring the close to post information anyway.  I'd like the site functionality to close stuff down once things are closed. Of course, the main rebuttal is that once something's closed you want it edited to reopen, but 99% of the time that's editing the question not other activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-04-08T18:59:39.970" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2851" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-09T02:45:32.967" Score="18" ViewCount="348" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://webapps.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1219/clean-up-a-thon-contest&quot;&gt;cleanupathon&lt;/a&gt;, taken from highest upvoted answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2829/one-year-anniversary-contest/2830?noredirect=1#comment5308_2830&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&#xA;This post shall be for rules and discussion related to the first contest. This intro bit will be cleaned up after we start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The RPG Stack is about to celebrate its first birthday and we want to give you presents!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Rz5lC.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Young Witerich&amp;quot; by Cybele Wong, thecybil.deviantart.com&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(Image by &lt;a href=&quot;http://thecybil.deviantart.com/art/Young-Witerich-287776396&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cybele Wong&lt;/a&gt;, Used with permission)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But first, some rules...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site has grown very well from its public launch, but we can do better. Our unanswered rate is fantastic, but we do seem to cluster around a few central themes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, the point of this contest is to diversify our answers and promote the site!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This contest will run from 29 April to 31 May.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the month, we will give prizes (to be determined), based on the people who have the most points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 point for each Announcer badge gained during the month, (don't forget to use the url from &quot;share&quot; to qualify for this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3 points for each Booster badge gained during the month.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;5 points for each Publicist badge gained during the month.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2 points for each nice answer or nice question earned during the month on the following tags (or for new systems not in the list and not merged with an existing tag) (This list was chosen by looking at the total counts of each tags and excluding systems with over 150 questions, then a bit of cleaning). &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/7th-sea&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;7th-sea&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;7th-sea&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventurer-conqueror-king&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventurer-conqueror-king&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventurer-conqueror-king&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/all-flesh-must-be-eaten&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;all-flesh-must-be-eaten&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;all-flesh-must-be-eaten&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anima-beyond-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;anima-beyond-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;anima-beyond-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/apocalypse-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;apocalypse-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;apocalypse-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica-5&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/basic-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;basic-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;basic-role-playing&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battlestar-galactica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battlestar-galactica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battlestar-galactica&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battletech&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battletech&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battletech&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/black-crusade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;black-crusade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;black-crusade&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/buck-rogers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;buck-rogers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;buck-rogers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/burning-wheel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;burning-wheel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;burning-wheel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu-d20&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-dreaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-dreaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-dreaming&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-lost&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/coda&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;coda&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;coda&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/continuum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;continuum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;continuum&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cortex&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cortex&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cortex&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cortex-plus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cortex-plus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cortex-plus&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cyberpunk-2020&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cyberpunk-2020&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cyberpunk-2020&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-modern&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-modern&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20-modern&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d6-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d6-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d6-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dangerous-journeys&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dangerous-journeys&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dangerous-journeys&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dark-ages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dark-ages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dark-ages&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dark-heresy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dark-heresy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dark-heresy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deadlands&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deadlands&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deadlands&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deathwatch&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deathwatch&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deathwatch&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/diaspora&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;diaspora&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;diaspora&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dictionary-of-mu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dictionary-of-mu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dictionary-of-mu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-becmi&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-becmi&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-becmi&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-bx&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-bx&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-bx&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dogs-in-the-vineyard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dogs-in-the-vineyard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dogs-in-the-vineyard&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dread&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dread&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dread&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/earthdawn&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;earthdawn&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;earthdawn&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eclipse-phase&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eclipse-phase&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eclipse-phase&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/en-garde&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;en-garde&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;en-garde&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fallout-pnp-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fallout-pnp-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fallout-pnp-rpg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fear-itself&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fear-itself&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fear-itself&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fiasco&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fiasco&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fiasco&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/freemarket&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;freemarket&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;freemarket&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fudge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fudge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fudge&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gamma-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gamma-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gamma-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/geist-sin-eaters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;geist-sin-eaters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;geist-sin-eaters&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/genius-transgression&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;genius-transgression&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;genius-transgression&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/golarion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;golarion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;golarion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gumshoe&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gumshoe&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gumshoe&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heavygear&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heavygear&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heavygear&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heresy-engine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heresy-engine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heresy-engine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hero-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hero-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hero-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heroquest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heroquest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heroquest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hollow-earth-expedition&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hollow-earth-expedition&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hollow-earth-expedition&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-vigil&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-a-wicked-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-a-wicked-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-a-wicked-age&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-nomine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-nomine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-nomine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/interface-zero&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;interface-zero&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;interface-zero&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jade-regent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jade-regent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jade-regent&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kult&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kult&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kult&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/labyrinth-lord&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;labyrinth-lord&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;labyrinth-lord&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lady-blackbird&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lady-blackbird&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lady-blackbird&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/laundry&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;laundry&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;laundry&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legends-of-anglerre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legends-of-anglerre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legends-of-anglerre&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/leverage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;leverage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;leverage&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/little-fears&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;little-fears&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;little-fears&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lotfp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lotfp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lotfp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-ascension&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-awakening&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/maid&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;maid&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;maid&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/marvel-heroic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;marvel-heroic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;marvel-heroic&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mazes-and-minotaurs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mazes-and-minotaurs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mazes-and-minotaurs&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechwarrior-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechwarrior-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechwarrior-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/microscope&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;microscope&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;microscope&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mini-six&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mini-six&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mini-six&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutant-city-blues&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutant-city-blues&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutant-city-blues&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/natural-weapon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;natural-weapon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;natural-weapon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nobilis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nobilis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nobilis&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/odnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;odnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;odnd&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/over-the-edge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;over-the-edge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;over-the-edge&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/palladium-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;palladium-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;palladium-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reign&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue-trader&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue-trader&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue-trader&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/runequest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;runequest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;runequest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/serenity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;serenity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;serenity&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr4&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shock&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sifrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sifrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sifrp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spirit-of-the-century&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spirit-of-the-century&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spirit-of-the-century&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spycraft&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spycraft&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spycraft&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-d20&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-saga-edition&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-saga-edition&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-saga-edition&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sword-noir&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sword-noir&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sword-noir&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tekumel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tekumel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tekumel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tftfv&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tftfv&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tftfv&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-esoterrorists&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-esoterrorists&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-esoterrorists&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-multiverse-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-multiverse-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-multiverse-rpg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-one-ring&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-riddle-of-steel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-riddle-of-steel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-riddle-of-steel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tolkien&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tolkien&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tolkien&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/torg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;torg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;torg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/toward-one&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;toward-one&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;toward-one&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trail-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trail-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trail-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tremulus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tremulus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tremulus&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tsoy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tsoy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tsoy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ubiquity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ubiquity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ubiquity&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unisystem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unisystem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unisystem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/universalis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;universalis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;universalis&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-requiem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-forsaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-forsaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-forsaken&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-1e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-3e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wh40k&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wh40k&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wh40k&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wild-talents&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wild-talents&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wild-talents&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wraith-oblivion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wraith-oblivion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wraith-oblivion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wraith-orpheus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wraith-orpheus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wraith-orpheus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The prize pool will be Site Swag, RPG books or PDFs chosen by the moderators as a function of what tags the winners have contributed to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T19:24:56.243" Title="The first annual RPG Games-fest! (Proposed Rules)" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2852" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2854" CreationDate="2013-04-09T04:26:37.933" Score="2" ViewCount="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now, if you click on a low-traffic tag in the mobile view, you get this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are on the FAQ tab.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are no frequently asked questions at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps you'd like to select a different tab?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This page's mobile UI does not &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; any tabs, making the tag page fairly useless for most of our tags. And kinda frustratingly passive-aggressive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-04-09T15:11:06.027" Title="Tag pages are broken on mobile" Tags="|bug|status-deferred|mobile|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2853" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-09T12:56:48.053" Score="2" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm just wondering if you lose reputation when a post that you contribute to is deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example: If you were to edit a question and that question gets deleted would you lose the 2 rep that you gained from the edit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7298" LastActivityDate="2013-04-09T15:25:22.127" Title="Do you lose reputation when a post is deleted?" Tags="|support|reputation|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2852" CreationDate="2013-04-09T15:10:42.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are currently dong a general review of the UI/UX of tags and tag navigation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added this report to the things we need to address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="933" LastActivityDate="2013-04-09T15:10:42.430" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2853" CreationDate="2013-04-09T15:25:22.127" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You lose reputation from upvotes.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you were the asker of the question, all reputation changes (both positive &amp;amp; negative) from the question disappear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you edited the question, those 2 points will not disappear; they reward you for contributing to the &lt;em&gt;site&lt;/em&gt; (by cleaning up questions &amp;amp; answers), not for contributing to that specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2013-04-09T15:25:22.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2856" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2857" CreationDate="2013-04-10T13:00:19.120" Score="5" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a mechanism for a poster to follow-up their question with the results of actions taken based on what was learned here? I'm thinking specifically of GM Techniques questions, but I suspect other tags could benefit as well. Many of the &quot;How do I do this?&quot; and &quot;I have this problem...&quot; posts have interesting and creative answers, and I think it would be instructive to get the OP to provide feedback on what was tried and what worked or didn't and why. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is no current device for this, perhaps we could either provide a mechanism to add a &quot;Follow-up&quot; section to the post construct in addition to the original &quot;Question&quot; and &quot;Answers&quot; sections, or institute a common practice of returning and amending the original question statement with an &quot;OP's Follow-up&quot; blurb. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll confess, while I do in fact believe this would be instructional and improve the usefulness of our posts, sometimes I just want to know &quot;the rest of the story&quot;.  (I probably watch too many &quot;save my business&quot; reality shows...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5676" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-23T10:49:37.093" LastActivityDate="2018-03-23T10:49:37.093" Title="Follow up to posted questions" Tags="|support|feature-request|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2856" CreationDate="2013-04-10T13:20:02.637" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No there isn't, and I doubt it is likely to be added.  There are a few ways you could currently do what you want:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Poster Edit's the question:  This works well if they attempted a solution and it failed, so they need further input.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Poster answers the question: This works well if a hybrid approach from several answers worked (common in my experience).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Poster comments the answer that works: This works well if one answer handled it.  However it's not very visible to the community at large.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-04-10T13:20:02.637" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2858" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2856" CreationDate="2013-04-10T14:49:45.713" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is, in fact, a device just for this!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the accept check mark on the left of every answer. Ideally the OP of the question is encouraged to accept &lt;em&gt;the answer that works best for them&lt;/em&gt;. So if they actually implement a solution from one of the answers they should mark it as accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-04-10T14:49:45.713" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="95" CreationDate="2013-04-11T10:36:10.257" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a detailed answer on the different opinions about what &quot;Indie&quot; means could be an OK answer to that question, thus the questione would be answerable and good for SE, provided it complies with all the other SE rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T10:36:10.257" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2860" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2862" CreationDate="2013-04-11T12:43:44.357" Score="3" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed recently that the general Fate tag is being removed from The Dresden Files RPG questions.  As the DFRPG is the penultimate example of Fate v3, I sort of disagree with that decision, and wanted to get a general consensus as to when the general game identification tag should be removed from a licensed property.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T18:14:14.123" Title="When should generalized tags of a system for a licensed game be removed?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2861" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2860" CreationDate="2013-04-11T15:25:40.070" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sometimes a topic can't be generalized.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the subject in question is specific to the property and can't be easily generalized to other games in the system, the general tag should be considered for removal.&lt;/strong&gt; I don't think this is a hard-and-fast idea, but I think it's a matter of being honest about the scope of the question's topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't tag 3.5-specific questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; doesn't get added to all d20-System games. I think the same concept should be used with FATE and its subsystems as applicable. The modularity of FATE makes it a bit muddier, but I tried to only hit cases that seemed clear-cut.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost universally, games using the FATE engine contain customized elements that don't generalize to the rest of the the FATE experience. DFRPG falls firmly into this category; it's among the crunchiest of all FATE games. I removed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; from questions whose answers were specific to DFRPG and could not easily be generalized beyond that game's setting, context, or unique ruleset variants (some vampire-specific questions and one about whether you should read the books before you play the game, for instance).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I felt that the answers could reasonably be applied to experiences in non-DFRPG games, I happily left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; in place. But where it felt misleading to say it was a FATE question instead of a DFRPG-specific one, I pulled 'em (for example, a question in which the only DFRPG reference was a DFRPG-specific example of a broader FATE concept being addressed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also pulled a couple of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;s off some questions that arose in a DFRPG context but with no need for DFRPG-specific content in the answers. Again, when in doubt I left the existing tags alone, but tagging basic topics universal to FATE with the DFRPG label seemed dishonest about the extent to which DFRPG itself is covered in the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2013-04-11T15:37:36.970" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T15:37:36.970" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2860" CreationDate="2013-04-11T18:14:14.123" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are first and foremost about organising and collecting together questions and answers that are useful for someone who is interested in &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; that tag. That gives us an excellent litmus test for whether something should have a more general tag or not:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it's useful to someone who follows the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag but who doesn't give a monkey's uncle about DFRPG, then it should have the fate tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it's useful to someone who follows the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files-rpg&lt;/a&gt; tag but who doesn't give a flying hoot about Fate generally, then it should have the DFRPG tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions will have both tags. Some will only have one or the other. This has almost nothing to do with whether the question just &lt;em&gt;happens&lt;/em&gt; to be by someone using DFRPG &amp;ndash; it's entirely possible for someone to be asking about DFRPG but the actual meat of the question is about Fate and nothing specific to DFRPG, and therefore not have the DFRPG tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is analogous to tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;. Obviously they're using some kind of system, but we do not give it a system tag unless the question is intimately tied to that system and useful to people who follow that system's tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T18:14:14.123" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="95" CreationDate="2013-04-11T18:27:51.187" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this could be re-asked as a new question about the origin and evolution of the term &quot;indie&quot; and the disputes over it, instead of asking for us to &lt;em&gt;settle&lt;/em&gt; the whole dispute here. Answers on its history could be supported by facts and references (though digging some of them up may take some work, it's doable). A brief history of the term would end up being incidentally informative about various definitions &quot;indie&quot; has had without needing to argue &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; any of the definitions. The good answers would also end up showing why it's such a disputed term, just by describing how the definition has changed or been debated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering a question &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; a debate fits our format and doesn't fall afoul of the Not Constructive close reasons. It isn't likely to turn into a debate itself, since most people can agree on the existence of arguments even when they can't agree on their substance. Any comments/answers making actual arguments for one definition or another would qualify as off topic, so they'd could be deleted without harm or fuss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-04-11T18:27:51.187" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2864" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-12T18:25:39.743" Score="10" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the close votes and downvote, I get the feeling my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24682/what-is-the-history-and-signifcance-of-the-dire-prefix-to-creatures&quot;&gt;dire question&lt;/a&gt; is borderline, with some parts on topic and some off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we deal with questions about off-topic influences/sources (literature, historical, natural historical) of rules and other aspects of RPGs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-22T22:22:35.287" LastActivityDate="2022-02-22T22:22:35.287" Title="How to deal with questions that relate to off-topic influences to on-topic principles?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2864" CreationDate="2013-04-12T20:51:21.503" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something that is specific to RPGs is on topic here.  Something that could equally be on topic on SciFi and Fantasy or Biology or whatever is relevant for the subject at hand is not. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5466&quot;&gt;the programming.SE Venn diagram&lt;/a&gt; that's popular to clarify this. &quot;Genre&quot; is not for this site, it's for genre sites - this is &quot;gaming.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, these questions are on a short leash anyway because they are not totally congruent with our core vision per the FAQ - &quot;practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&quot; &quot;I wuz wonderin'&quot; is not an actual problem. Pure history of gaming questions (marginally) get a pass on this, but history of random tropes also used in gaming don't.  I know I considered closing both those questions but decided to let the community act on them first. Of course people are trying hard to change them into history of gaming formatted questions to avoid the close, but I'm not sure of the core value. &quot;Where did X come from, where did Y come from&quot; generate noise and rep but I'm not sure they're helping real gamers play or run their games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, it's fair enough when someone's ignorant that the thing &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a real world derived item (dire wolf, vampires can't cross running water), but that seems like then it's a &quot;I didn't bother to even google it myself before asking the question,&quot; which is poor form - this SE is supposed to be experts helping experts, not people just whirling off questions to entertain the masses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T17:21:05.530" LastActivityDate="2013-04-13T16:22:28.447" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2866" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-17T01:01:11.547" Score="12" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a user of multiple stackExchanges and have a few k rep in a few different SEs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I started playing RPGs last year, so I'm aware my experience is pretty vanilla so far (Pathfinder and about to start some games of Paranoia).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm enjoying asking questions and answering but since the scope of rpg.se is &quot;experts helping experts&quot;, should I lurk moar before answering since my answers are likely to be filtered through the prism of new-gm and new-player in limited systems?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy for my answers to languish without votes, but I don't want to muddy the waters with my enthusiasm to participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's best for the community from users who grok SE, but are new to RPGs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T17:09:10.293" Title="What can experienced SE users who are new to RPGs bring to the community?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2867" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2866" CreationDate="2013-04-17T03:21:33.473" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Real questions to specific problems after you've done some research.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We like real and &lt;em&gt;non-trivial&lt;/em&gt; questions. When asking a question, make sure you've done your research. Look it up on google, ask for us to help you shape it in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if it's a problem that you're facing and the answer is non-obvious, we'd love to have your question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T03:21:33.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2866" CreationDate="2013-04-17T17:08:19.150" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Also, answering questions by &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; new players/GMs is something that's absolutely OK. I probably have &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; experience with Pathfinder than you do, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24817/armor-as-dr-alternate-rules-do-untyped-ac-bonuses-apply-to-defense-or-dr&quot;&gt;anyone with a bit of experience in a d20 game can look up and clarify rules in the SRD&lt;/a&gt;. If you spot an easy &quot;gimme&quot; question like that, where the asker is missing something more-or-less obvious but an well-written answer can make it clear, and you know where and how to get that info, go for it. They often won't garner much rep (I think because people don't consider &quot;reading comprehension&quot; questions interesting and so they don't even look, let alone vote), but a bit here and there adds up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, if you confidently know the answer, it's safe to give it. &lt;em&gt;Sometimes&lt;/em&gt; you'll get it wrong and someone will completely school you – it'll feel a bit embarrassing, but there's no actual shame in being corrected and maybe deleting a wrong answer. (It's actually fairly respected as humbly doing the right thing, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/badges/20/peer-pressure&quot;&gt;they give out a badge for it&lt;/a&gt;. Besides, I've experienced this several times here myself, despite 20 years of RPG experience!) More often than not, you'll be right and it'll be helpful. Let confidence be your guide more than enthusiasm, and it will not often steer you wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T17:08:19.150" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2870" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2866" CreationDate="2013-04-17T17:09:10.293" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't hesitate to post, the community will let you know either via comments or votes if something is wrong. Worst case you ask a question that doesn't fit the guidelines and you delete it. This hands back the rep you lost and people spent voting you down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first few questions and answers on RPG.SE weren't perfect and people let me know. I was able to salvage some, but others I scuttled and kept the knowledge of the experience with me as I moved forward to write better questions and answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T17:09:10.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2871" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-17T19:53:51.990" Score="9" ViewCount="165" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1587/is-the-mechanics-tag-useful-or-a-problem&quot;&gt;original discussion&lt;/a&gt; of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; tag had many votes against it and no votes for it. Unless there are new arguments to keep it, we should burninate the tag now. We have 161 questions tagged with it at the moment, and none usefully that I can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-05-03T17:28:08.307" Title="Time to burninate the [mechanics] tag" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2871" CreationDate="2013-04-17T20:45:03.400" Score="1" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Has anyone double-checked to see if we have any questions with only the mechanics tag? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13998/is-there-a-trick-to-learning-the-pacesetter-goblinoid-action-table&quot;&gt;Is there a trick to learning the Pacesetter/Goblinoid Action Table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11689/can-i-default-to-swimming&quot;&gt;Can I default to Swimming?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5096/when-escalating-from-a-change-of-style-in-with-great-power-what-card-has-to-be-p&quot;&gt;When escalating from a change of style in With Great Power, what card has to be played?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1744/what-are-the-differences-between-pathfinders-kingmaker-and-birthright&quot;&gt;What are the differences between Pathfinder&amp;#39;s Kingmaker and Birthright?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These were the only ones I've found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1381" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-04-17T20:45:03.400" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2013-04-18T11:47:10.383" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've got both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/experience-points&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;experience-points&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;experience-points&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/xp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;xp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;xp&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-04-18T11:47:10.383" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-04-18T11:47:10.383" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2875" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2013-04-18T18:47:00.967" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; should be removed since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-design&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-design&lt;/a&gt; all already exist and are far less ambiguous.  The few questions that aren't about those things are either about book formatting or NPC creation, both of which would benefit from more specific tags.  Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastActivityDate="2013-04-18T18:47:00.967" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-04-18T18:47:00.967" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2013-04-19T00:54:20.917" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;settings&lt;/a&gt; &amp;lt;-&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2013-04-19T00:54:20.917" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-04-19T00:54:20.917" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="430" CreationDate="2013-04-20T13:04:48.647" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage&lt;/a&gt; need to be separate, for those instances when harm comes to someone outside the fighting rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-04-20T13:04:48.647" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-04-20T13:04:48.647" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2878" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-21T20:10:08.390" Score="1" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/24897/4089&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; I see a dilemma. The new user lacks the rep to comment. But we don't support duplicate questions. Their answer clearly is not an answer, but... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should we instruct users like this to do? Should they do as this one did, and just wait for someone to convert it into a comment?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-04-22T19:59:32.620" Title="Users without enough rep to comment leaving comment &quot;answers&quot; or duplicating questions?" Tags="|discussion|comments|duplicates|new-users|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2014-11-05T14:39:04.987" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2878" CreationDate="2013-04-22T15:16:11.517" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Should&quot; do? They should ask and answer questions until they have the rep to comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what what a user &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; do is kinda aside the point, since being aware of &quot;shoulds&quot; is something many new users never are. There isn't any policy we can make here that will help new users like that (or worse, drive-by users) because they aren't going to read anything anyhow. What will happen is they'll post comments or questions in the answers, and we'll clean it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-04-22T15:16:11.517" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2880" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-22T18:42:18.853" Score="10" ViewCount="414" Body="&lt;p&gt;The recent spate of V:tR questions from a new user has brought the mess of WoD tags to my attention. (And I do like cleaning up messy tag clusters.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;According to its tag wiki, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; is only for asking about the setting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The [world-of-darkness] tag should be used for questions concerning the setting of White Wolf's supernatural games. For questions concerning the mechanics, use [storyteller-system] for oWoD/cWoD games and [storytelling-system] for nWoD ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's being habitually put on every question about a White Wolf WoD game, though, which results in tag soup like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt;. Clearly there is a degree of redundancy here that is contrary to the tagging system's purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To add to the mess, I have no idea where the consensus for using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for only setting questions came from. Messier still, it's the synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt;, which people use as a system tag instead of a setting tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; are supposed to be used for rules questions, but instead we get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt; (which synonyms to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;) used for rules questions. Obviously our stated use for these tags isn't how users actually tag naturally: do we synonym away the &quot;xwod&quot; tags to their respective storytell(er|ing)-system tags, or do we go with the flow (and the SEO) and use the nWoD and WoD tags? (Actually, synonyming them to the systems might be a clever thing: &quot;owod&quot; and &quot;nwod&quot; are easier to remember than whether it's an -ing or an -er for nwod/owod, making proper system-tagging happen more automatically.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; for only setting Qs too? Or is it a system tag? It doesn't say in its tag wiki, but because it's the complement of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt; (which synonyms to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;) it's implied that it's for only setting questions by our tag structure. Unless the tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; is wrong, of course.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do we need to tag a question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; when it's already tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt;, or with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; when it's already tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; or any of the other oWoD games? Is it redundant, or useful?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/owod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;owod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;owod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt; don't exist, even as synonyms. I'm surprised they're not being constantly applied by new users to old/classic WoD questions. Should we make them synonyms of… whatever we decide to do with the rest of the tags?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Previous meta discussions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/140/should-we-have-different-tags-for-new-world-of-darkness-and-old-wod&quot;&gt;old discussion about needing to split nWoD and oWoD questions&lt;/a&gt;, but it doesn't deal with taxonomy beyond &quot;yes we should have separate tags&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1189/clearing-up-white-wolf-world-of-darkness-tags&quot;&gt;old discussion about the tag hierarchy for WoD tags&lt;/a&gt;. It mentions that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; was already intended to be for setting Qs, but doesn't say where or when that was decided. It proposes that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; be used like we do &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; as a tag for general Qs that aren't specific to any edition or that do meaningfully span editions, but the tag wiki wasn't changed to reflect that consensus (if it was a consensus), and it's not being used that way now anyway. (i.e., not every &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; question also has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; on it, but that's what we're seeing with WoD questions and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;). So, it's not being used according to its tag wiki nor this discussion's answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a useful opinion on this beyond &quot;the status quo is &lt;em&gt;awful&lt;/em&gt;&quot;, because I'm not a WoD player and don't have the nuanced familiarity with the various names' relationships to devise a &quot;right&quot; hierarchy, and I don't have the familiarity with the WoD community to judge what sorts of tags will align with how the terms are actually used in the wild. I am an editing junkie though, and we should have our tags set up such that anyone with a reasonable comprehension of a question can use the tag wikis as a reference for fixing the tags on a new question from a user uninitiated in the Ways of the Tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-05-24T13:41:59.647" Title="Shall we review the various World of Darkness tags' use?" Tags="|discussion|tags|policy|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="13" ClosedDate="2014-09-16T02:02:43.067" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2880" CreationDate="2013-04-22T19:18:30.943" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay. Here's some ideas about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think that having a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; is a useful thing, because pan-WoD fandom is a real phenomenon. Allowing people to find all the WoD questions at once seems useful. (Also, because having the single tag allows for the tag-badge to be created more quickly.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I like the idea of making &lt;em&gt;storyteller&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;storytelling&lt;/em&gt; systems synonymous with owod/cwod and nwod, respectively.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am no longer certain that a setting tag is required in light of those things.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe what we need is two tags, world-of-darkness-classic and world-of-darkness-new, that covers the two main branches of the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-04-22T19:18:30.943" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2878" CreationDate="2013-04-22T19:59:32.620" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;That looks like a new question to me. They can refer to the old one and add their expansion. They should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; edit a new additional question into an old one, they should be encouraged to ask their own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case that someone has a clarification they have two options, ask their clarified question as a new question, or do something else and ask it after they've amassed the relatively trivial 20 rep it takes to earn the comment privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding an answer with the intent for it to be converted to a comment is suboptimal behavior and should not be encouraged, though it is an option for moderators when it does happen (typically moderators are advised &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to do this for low rep users so as not to encourage it, though they typically do the conversion anyways).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-04-22T19:59:32.620" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2883" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2880" CreationDate="2013-04-23T16:23:30.213" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that most World of Darkness fans don't make much distinction between the &lt;em&gt;Storyteller&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Storytelling&lt;/em&gt; systems.  I could be wrong but I tend to think in terms of Old/Classic World of Darkness (owod/cwod cause I'm lazy) and New World of Darkness (nwod) lines and I think most fans do so as well.  I think the lines better represent the settings and system as a whole.  Associating the appropriate system to the related line would be very pratical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also to add in extra confusion the forthcoming God Machine Chronicles (&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/schedule/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;best info I can find&lt;/a&gt;) will update some of the nWoD rules.  It's basically the core blue book 2.0.  So we're going to have 2 variants of that system in the next year or so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1534" LastActivityDate="2013-04-23T16:23:30.213" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2880" CreationDate="2013-04-23T17:08:05.710" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;For clarity, this is the proposed tag set. There is no real hierarchy so far, so there is no tag nesting. Synonyms are listed under the tag that they resolve to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;This post to be edited as proposed changes are accepted so that it is an actionable &amp;amp; canonical reference.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;strong&gt;cross-edition&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;all edition&lt;/strong&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;generic&lt;/strong&gt; questions [1]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/classic-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;classic-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;classic-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;strong&gt;original World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/owod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;owod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;owod&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;strong&gt;new World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usage notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We will often see people tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; when they mean nWoD, just like we see people tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; when they mean D&amp;amp;D 4e. That's OK: we just retag as it happens, just like with D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unresolved issues before this is actionable (i.e. FIXMEs):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;This section to be removed upon ratification.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Did I miss any?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Where does a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt; tag fit in here? We don't currently have one, so maybe we won't see people trying to use it and we don't need one. If we do find we need one, does it synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; by direct acronym meaning, or to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; since that's how White Wolf uses &quot;WoD&quot; now and what most new users who might tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt; will typically mean? &lt;strong&gt;Do we need a [wod] tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm explicitly proposing that we &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; tag everying with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. Yes, that means that we won't have a single tag to find all WoD questions ever, but I think it would be contrary to the tagging mechanics. People can add &lt;code&gt;*world-of-darkness&lt;/code&gt; to their Favourite Tags list and it will highlight all three tags. &lt;strong&gt;Does this have support?&lt;/strong&gt; Or does it need further discussion?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-04-23T17:14:58.400" LastActivityDate="2013-04-23T17:14:58.400" CommentCount="26" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-04-23T17:08:05.710" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2885" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-24T19:50:57.267" Score="2" ViewCount="55" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know that getting users to read About, FAQs or the Formatting page is not something that will ever be guaranteed, but at the same time I feel that the layout/lack of highlighting of these areas of the site can lead to a lot of new users posting questions, answers and comments that have to be cleaned up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if it's possible within the structure of SE to add additional links to top of the sidebar on the main page highlighting these sections more or if we could also add a link to the formatting guide on the ask a question page. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Praise where praise is do I do like that the FAQ is prominently displayed to the right when asking a question to help new users. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T23:28:38.500" Title="Should the About, FAQs and Formatting be highlighted better?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|formatting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2885" CreationDate="2013-04-24T20:25:04.310" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We could make a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Community Ad&lt;/a&gt; for each of our FAQ, About, and Formatting pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CAs show more to new/non-users than to older users, so the right people would see it. The downside is it will be random whether it's shown and which, and it will compete with other CAs for being shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-04-24T20:25:04.310" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2887" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2885" CreationDate="2013-04-24T23:08:59.430" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The About page already has plenty of attention drawn to it. Log out of the site or enter it in private/incognito mode: there's an introductory panel to briefly inform new users about the site's basics, plus a button that links to the About page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe the FAQ and the Formatting Help pages can do with more attention, but the About page already has plenty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The About page links to the FAQ, though only at the end, possibly because linking to it earlier would cause people to stop reading about the basic way the site works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;the layout/lack of highlighting of these areas of the site can lead to a lot of new users posting questions, answers and comments that have to be cleaned up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe that should just be OK. This site works differently to others. New users are going to make mistakes not realising how it works, even if they &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; read the FAQ (because none of us are flawless information sponges, and we read things without really reading them or understanding them sometimes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-04-24T23:08:59.430" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2888" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2880" CreationDate="2013-04-25T16:44:56.613" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not sure how to format something as a tag, but here's my take on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say that rules questions probably only need the most localized version of the rules they're using, and do not need to tag things above it in the hierarchy. If I know an asker is playing Werewolf-The Apocalypse, then also saying it is oWoD or Storyteller-System is redundant. A rules question should probably only be tagged with the specific core book we're using. We should use these they way we use D&amp;amp;D3.5 or D&amp;amp;D 4th ed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;nWod and oWod (or even just WoD) are a good way to refer to groups of books, and such could be used the same way Dungeons and Dragons is used. I could see them being used for setting questions as well, since the overall setting between different books in nWoD is mostly similar. (oWod is less so.) xWoD could still be used for setting and comparison questions, and maybe for some rules questions, though each core book makes its own rules changes. (nWoD is more consistent, oWoD is less consistent.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;WoD should be a synonym of World of Darkness- that's what the acronym means, and anything else is probably going to confuse people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Storyteller is... a bit abstract at this point. All WoD games, plus Exalted, are storyteller games as far as I can tell. There's no way we could answer a rules or setting question on Storyteller, though we could probably compare them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd suggest keeping the tags higher on the hierarchy for comparison questions, and nWoD can probably be used for setting questions. For most other setting questions, and all rules questions, specific core books should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3442" LastActivityDate="2013-04-25T16:44:56.613" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2889" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-26T10:36:19.730" Score="6" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have had several questions now where multiple answer are correct. It would be nice to mark all the answer that are correct as so and then leave it up to the votes to decided which is the best of the correct ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:48:30.477" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:48:30.477" Title="Multiple Correct Answers" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2889" CreationDate="2013-04-26T10:40:44.100" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Choose the best answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Correctness is only one part of the answer. Choose the answer that was, as an answer, most useful to you. Maybe it's because of formatting or means of address. But no, having &quot;multiple&quot; correct answers is what upvotes are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-04-26T10:40:44.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2891" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2889" CreationDate="2013-04-26T14:41:34.180" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it a correct question ?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe it is written somewhere in the stone tablets that questions are actually supposed to have one correct answer. If the question objectively accepts multiple correct distinct answers, it could be that a reconsideration is in order then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1215" LastActivityDate="2013-04-26T14:41:34.180" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2892" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-27T02:07:24.143" Score="19" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;A while ago I posted my first bounty, on this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/23076/1204&quot;&gt;What are the key considerations to creating compelling environments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were two different things I didn't know about bounties that, if I'd known, would have entirely changed the way I would have handled that bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Here are the two things not described anywhere that I needed to know:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bounty reasons are not editable.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;Everything else everywhere I can input something on the site is editable&lt;/em&gt; - even chat and comments are editable for a few minutes. If this isn't behaving that way, we need to be told first.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Repeated bounties cannot be smaller, and are much larger than the first bounty.&lt;/strong&gt; After now having placed a bounty on that question of 200, my next bounty must be 400. I don't know if this is a static amount for the second bounty, or just double 200. We need to know that this happens. We also need to know whether this amount is just double the previous bounty, and how third and fourth bounties work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/faq#bounty&quot;&gt;FAQ section on bounties&lt;/a&gt; doesn't appear to mention these significant and permanent repercussions, nor does the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/privileges/set-bounties&quot;&gt;setting bounties privilege article&lt;/a&gt;, nor do the bounty-posting dialogs, though they all mention &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; very important things about bounties that I'm glad they describe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would have done two things differently knowing these things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If I had known bounty reasons were not editable&lt;/strong&gt; I would have taken a lot more time to draft it, and bounced it off one or two people.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As it was, I had four answers I wanted to reward, and I had actually planned to give three others smaller rewards of 100. 500 total? More than worth it. Those answers were fantastic.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If I had known subsequent bounties increase like that&lt;/strong&gt; I would have planned ahead and worked with the system by starting my bounty at 50. That way, I would have been able to give a 50, then a 100, then a 200 to the three best answers - and maybe even planned for a 400 if I felt like four were worth it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the second bounty had to be 400 regardless of the first bounty's cost&lt;/strong&gt;, then I'd have given 200 to the second-place answer and 400 to the first.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If I had only found out after starting the bounty&lt;/strong&gt; I would have done the same - I would have given the 200 to someone else, then a 400 to either BESW or another answerer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't like this situation one bit. I didn't get to act the way I would have if I'd known how things worked, and I don't get to reward the excellent answers I want to reward the way I wanted to reward them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This stuff is really important. Please let us know about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-05-18T00:12:34.740" Title="Tell us more about those repercussions of bounties that aren't mentioned anywhere" Tags="|feature-request|bounty|help-center|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2892" CreationDate="2013-04-27T05:08:39.770" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I'd like to see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/112188/can-we-have-a-way-to-edit-bounty-text&quot;&gt;a way to edit bounty text&lt;/a&gt;, even if it's just for 5 mins &lt;em&gt;a la&lt;/em&gt; comments, and for the page where you enter the bounty to 1) display a preview, and 2) to inform you about the doubling of bounty amounts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-04-27T05:08:39.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2892" CreationDate="2013-04-27T14:56:22.977" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree - I think there should be a link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt;, which is the master list of general how-does-it-work FAQs (the lazy man's version of documentation) in the standard part of our FAQ section.  Even diamond mods can only edit the &quot;What questions should I ask here&quot; part however - the rest is off limits to us. Down at the bottom there's an 'other questions' thing but it just links to meta.rpg.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meantime I'll add a general post tagged faq that has that link in it so there's at least a chain, albeit several levels deep and at the end of things.  Really the link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt; should be very prominent and near the top of all SE site FAQ pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Added: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2895/how-does-all-the-various-stack-exchange-functionality-work&quot;&gt;How does all the various Stack Exchange functionality work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In there I also try to explain that no one gives us mods any additional info whatsoever on how the SE engine works that everyone else doesn't have access to and we have no control over site functionality or any means to request changes to it not available to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, answers to complex &quot;how does it work questions&quot; generally run afoul of &quot;beats the hell out of me, I guess I could go crawl Meta.SE to try to figure it out&quot; and requests to change engine mechanics run afoul of &quot;the only thing I can do is post it to Meta.SE same as you.&quot; Unless we just happen to know, we have zero additional information/documentation or control to change site functionality than any 1 rep user has access to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-04-27T15:15:08.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2895" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-27T15:04:27.323" Score="42" ViewCount="338" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The FAQ&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to know how asking/answering, tagging, voting, bounties, or whatever works, all the answers are linked from the Meta Stack Exchange master FAQ question: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some weird reason there's no link to that FAQ in our FAQ (and we can only edit the first &amp;quot;What kind of question should I ask here&amp;quot; section so we can't add it).  Sorry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RPG.SE Works Like The Other SEs&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is a &amp;quot;skinned&amp;quot; version of the same Stack Exchange engine that powers Stack Overflow and the other hundred plus sites in the Stack Exchange network.  How this engine works technically is mostly the same across all sites and, except for some configurations we can try to ask the SE Illuminati to change (and we've pretty much been told no every time we have), your local RPG.SE mods have zero control over how site functionality works, nor does anyone tell us when core site behavior changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keeping Up With Site Functionality Changes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The coders do change how site functionality works from time to time and the more formal HTML-type documentation tends to be minimal or out of date; the questions in the Meta.SE FAQ aren't always 100% but at least they generally eventually update when the site does. If you want to stay on top of new developments you can do what we have to do, which is watch the main SE blog and Meta.SE to get the info.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note: We Don't Control Any Of This&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;RPG.SE mods, even diamond mods, do not have access to any knowledge or documentation or ability to change site mechanics that you don't have access to&lt;/em&gt;.  You can ask questions about how general SE functionality works on RPG.SE Meta, but the answer may already be on Meta.SE (and someone here may or may not know) so consider looking there too. You can ask for changes to how the site's core mechanics work here on our meta or on Meta.SE - you're welcome to ask here and the devs should see it but you may find a lot more eyes/votes on the topic on Meta.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:04:57.553" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:04:57.553" Title="How does all the various Stack Exchange functionality work?" Tags="|support|faq|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2892" CreationDate="2013-04-27T18:48:47.463" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Agreed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That this is useful to know and would ideally be mentioned somewhere discoverable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That a brief editable period for bounty text would be following the Principle of Least Surprise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disagreed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That it should work differently otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker of a question has only a tiny bit more authority over the question's answers and whether they're good or not. Being able to &quot;reward the excellent answers […] the way I wanted to reward them&quot; is exactly what the StackExchange engine is designed to prevent. If bounties were more flexible, then they would quickly decrease the relevance of the voting and the accepted mark to the point of being irrelevant. By making bounties difficult to use frequently, we're prevented from using them to make reputation into a currency or commodity of exchange. It also prevents granting repeated cheap bounties just in order to bump the question for nefarious purposes like skimming drive-by votes off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, bounties are a potential site breaker. They have to be pretty tightly constrained, or else we couldn't have a bounty feature &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But yes, they could be better explained. I understand &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they've gotten very little coverage though – they're a peripheral feature of the site, and giving them much more exposure than they already have would just give people the impression that they're more important than they are.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-04-27T18:48:47.463" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2897" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-28T21:11:24.640" Score="13" ViewCount="582" Body="&lt;h1&gt;HAPPY BIRTHDAY RPG!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To celebrate this momentous occasion, your moderator team and I have put together a fun contest!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Rules&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This contest will run from &lt;strong&gt;29 April 2013 to 31 May 2013&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the month, we will give 5 total prizes to users based on a raffle. Users gain &amp;quot;raffle tickets&amp;quot; by collecting points; each point acts as a ticket into the pool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 point for each Announcer badge gained during the month, (don't forget to use the url from &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; to qualify for this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3 points for each Booster badge gained during the month.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;5 points for each Publicist badge gained during the month.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2 points for each Nice Answer or Nice Question earned in the following tags:&#xA;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/7th-sea&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;7th-sea&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;7th-sea&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventurer-conqueror-king&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventurer-conqueror-king&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventurer-conqueror-king&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/all-flesh-must-be-eaten&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;all-flesh-must-be-eaten&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;all-flesh-must-be-eaten&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anima-beyond-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;anima-beyond-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;anima-beyond-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/apocalypse-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;apocalypse-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;apocalypse-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica-5&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/basic-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;basic-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;basic-role-playing&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battlestar-galactica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battlestar-galactica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battlestar-galactica&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battletech&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battletech&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battletech&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/black-crusade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;black-crusade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;black-crusade&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/buck-rogers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;buck-rogers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;buck-rogers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/burning-wheel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;burning-wheel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;burning-wheel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cadillacs-and-dinosaurs&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu-d20&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-dreaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-dreaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-dreaming&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-lost&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/coda&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;coda&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;coda&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/continuum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;continuum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;continuum&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cortex&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cortex&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cortex&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cortex-plus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cortex-plus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cortex-plus&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cyberpunk-2020&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cyberpunk-2020&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cyberpunk-2020&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-modern&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-modern&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20-modern&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d6-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d6-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d6-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dangerous-journeys&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dangerous-journeys&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dangerous-journeys&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dark-ages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dark-ages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dark-ages&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dark-heresy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dark-heresy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dark-heresy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deadlands&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deadlands&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deadlands&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deathwatch&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deathwatch&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deathwatch&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/diaspora&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;diaspora&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;diaspora&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dictionary-of-mu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dictionary-of-mu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dictionary-of-mu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-becmi&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-becmi&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-becmi&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-bx&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-bx&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-bx&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dogs-in-the-vineyard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dogs-in-the-vineyard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dogs-in-the-vineyard&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dread&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dread&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dread&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/earthdawn&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;earthdawn&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;earthdawn&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eclipse-phase&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eclipse-phase&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eclipse-phase&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/en-garde&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;en-garde&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;en-garde&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fallout-pnp-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fallout-pnp-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fallout-pnp-rpg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fear-itself&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fear-itself&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fear-itself&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feng-shui&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feng-shui&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feng-shui&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fiasco&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fiasco&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fiasco&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/freemarket&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;freemarket&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;freemarket&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fudge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fudge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fudge&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gamma-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gamma-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gamma-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/geist-sin-eaters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;geist-sin-eaters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;geist-sin-eaters&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/genius-transgression&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;genius-transgression&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;genius-transgression&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/golarion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;golarion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;golarion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gumshoe&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gumshoe&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gumshoe&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heavygear&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heavygear&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heavygear&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heresy-engine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heresy-engine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heresy-engine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hero-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hero-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hero-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heroquest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heroquest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heroquest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hollow-earth-expedition&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hollow-earth-expedition&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hollow-earth-expedition&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-vigil&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-a-wicked-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-a-wicked-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-a-wicked-age&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-nomine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-nomine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-nomine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/interface-zero&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;interface-zero&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;interface-zero&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jade-regent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jade-regent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jade-regent&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kult&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kult&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kult&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/labyrinth-lord&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;labyrinth-lord&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;labyrinth-lord&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lady-blackbird&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lady-blackbird&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lady-blackbird&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/laundry&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;laundry&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;laundry&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legends-of-anglerre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legends-of-anglerre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legends-of-anglerre&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/leverage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;leverage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;leverage&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/little-fears&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;little-fears&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;little-fears&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lotfp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lotfp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lotfp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-ascension&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-awakening&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/maid&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;maid&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;maid&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/marvel-heroic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;marvel-heroic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;marvel-heroic&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mazes-and-minotaurs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mazes-and-minotaurs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mazes-and-minotaurs&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechwarrior-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechwarrior-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechwarrior-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/microscope&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;microscope&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;microscope&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mini-six&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mini-six&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mini-six&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutant-city-blues&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutant-city-blues&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutant-city-blues&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/natural-weapon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;natural-weapon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;natural-weapon&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nobilis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nobilis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nobilis&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/odnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;odnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;odnd&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/over-the-edge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;over-the-edge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;over-the-edge&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/palladium-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;palladium-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;palladium-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reign&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue-trader&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue-trader&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue-trader&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/runequest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;runequest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;runequest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/serenity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;serenity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;serenity&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr4&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shock&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sifrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sifrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sifrp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spirit-of-the-century&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spirit-of-the-century&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spirit-of-the-century&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spycraft&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spycraft&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spycraft&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-d20&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-saga-edition&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-saga-edition&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-saga-edition&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sword-noir&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sword-noir&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sword-noir&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tekumel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tekumel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tekumel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tftfv&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tftfv&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tftfv&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-esoterrorists&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-esoterrorists&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-esoterrorists&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-multiverse-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-multiverse-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-multiverse-rpg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-one-ring&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-riddle-of-steel&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-riddle-of-steel&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-riddle-of-steel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tolkien&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tolkien&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tolkien&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/torg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;torg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;torg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/toward-one&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;toward-one&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;toward-one&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trail-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trail-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trail-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tremulus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tremulus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tremulus&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tsoy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tsoy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tsoy&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ubiquity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ubiquity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ubiquity&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unisystem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unisystem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unisystem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/universalis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;universalis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;universalis&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-requiem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-forsaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-forsaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-forsaken&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-1e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-3e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wh40k&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wh40k&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wh40k&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wild-talents&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wild-talents&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wild-talents&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wraith-oblivion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wraith-oblivion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wraith-oblivion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wraith-orpheus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wraith-orpheus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wraith-orpheus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Drawings will be held on 1 June&lt;/strong&gt; but I'll update this post / answers with a running leaderboard each week on Monday.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sharing badges can be earned for ANY question/answer, regardless of when that post was made or what tag it is in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;Nice Question&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Nice Answer&amp;quot; badges MUST &lt;strong&gt;both&lt;/strong&gt;: be earned during the contest period AND the associated post be created in the contest period. Badges earned for posts made prior to the contest starting are not eligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Other:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If your question is closed, it is disqualified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If your answer is deleted, it is disqualified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are found to be using sockpuppets or caught gaming the system, you will be disqualified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are suspended during the contest period, you are disqualified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We reserve the right to alter or append to these rules as circumstances arise during the event.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Prizes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Three users&lt;/strong&gt; will receive site swag items (t-shirts, stickers, etc), and &lt;strong&gt;two users&lt;/strong&gt; will receive RPG books or PDFs based on their most active tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2205" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T22:50:30.980" Title="Win cool site swag with our birthday party!" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|contest|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2897" CreationDate="2013-04-28T22:51:31.513" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;When sharing a question, make sure to use the share URL provided by the share link, it has an extra bit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2897/760&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2897/760 &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That second number is your userid, which means you get credit for sharing the link when someone clicks on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-04-28T22:51:31.513" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2899" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-04-30T12:25:26.553" Score="3" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to remove a down vote to make it a non-vote but I don't seam to be able to without upvoting? Is it possible?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:41:14.740" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:41:14.740" Title="How do I cancel a -1 vote without give a +1 vote?" Tags="|support|voting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2899" CreationDate="2013-04-30T12:29:58.160" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unclick the down arrow. Also there is a time limit after which votes are locked in unless the post is edited (30 minutes I believe).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-04-30T12:29:58.160" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2901" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-01T00:29:57.327" Score="2" ViewCount="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed the existence of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; and figured it&amp;rsquo;d be a nice, editorial thing to do to at least give them the relevant system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I&amp;rsquo;d finished, I realized that I&amp;rsquo;d A. just bumped a whole bunch of questions, mostly long-since answered, to the top of the question list, and B. created a whole bunch of new tags that didn't exist for systems that have only ever had one question asked about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is, is that how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; should be handled? Or is it OK for things to be untagged, or at the least &lt;em&gt;left&lt;/em&gt; untagged if they&amp;rsquo;ve been that way for a while? Does creating these singleton tags cause more problems than it solves?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T00:31:40.713" Title="Untagged Questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2901" CreationDate="2013-05-01T00:31:40.713" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To solve the problem, ask more questions in those respective tags.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Singletons get deleted. This is annoying, but there's not much we can do about it. The only real solution is to ask real questions with those tags in them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under no circumstances are you to spam the front page retagging tens of old questions. As a general protocol 2-4 at any given time, and allow &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; that many new things to percolate above them before continuing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T00:31:40.713" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2903" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-01T00:35:15.913" Score="0" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just created &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/final-fantasy-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;final-fantasy-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;final-fantasy-rpg&lt;/a&gt; for a question about Return Games&amp;rsquo; FFRPG. As far as I can tell, though, Returner Games is quite defunct, and in any event there has never been an official &lt;em&gt;Final Fantasy&lt;/em&gt; RPG. There are definitely other fan-made &lt;em&gt;Final Fantasy&lt;/em&gt; RPGs, though. There&amp;rsquo;s the SEED one, Dust&amp;rsquo;s d6-based one, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, we don&amp;rsquo;t have any questions about any of these systems. That said, if we ever get any, having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/final-fantasy-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;final-fantasy-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;final-fantasy-rpg&lt;/a&gt; refer specifically to Returner Games&amp;rsquo; version may be problematic and also quite possibly unfair &amp;ndash; I see no particular reason why they would get to lay exclusive claim to that title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, does anyone think it should be changed to something else? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/returner-games-ffrpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;returner-games-ffrpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;returner-games-ffrpg&lt;/a&gt; is pretty long, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T03:34:11.403" Title="Final Fantasy RPG" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2904" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2903" CreationDate="2013-05-01T03:34:11.403" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe that there even used to be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/final-fantasy-rgp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;final-fantasy-rgp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;final-fantasy-rgp&lt;/a&gt; tag specifically for the Returner Games version, and it was made for that question you (re-)tagged with it earlier today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We generally tag with the name of a game. When there is a name collision where multiple unrleated games share the same name, we resolve that in whatever way makes most sense for the particular games. However, we don't bother unless we actually have questions that &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; those other tags, so until one of the other claimants to the FFRPG title appears on the site, Returner Games version's claim to the name is uncontested and it gets the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T03:34:11.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2905" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-01T04:46:42.853" Score="3" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would a question trying to identify a published adventure be appropriate for this site? Something like the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The first adventure I ever GMed was a premade D&amp;amp;D 4e adventure from Wizards that involved the priest of some good god (Erathis, I think), telling some people that they needed to sacrifice their hands and eyes in order to make it rain (I didn't realize that any experienced players would know instantly that the priest worshiped Vecna). It had a final showdown and the temple, and a side encounter with a town full of people that turned into zombies at sunset. I can't remember the name of the adventure though, but it was definitely a premade adventure, not one I made up. Any ideas what it was?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another possible adventure identification question, but with a different set of information and a narrower focus:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I remember that one of splat books for the original Deadlands had an adventure in the back involving an Arab magician who had Huckster-like powers. He was after some sort of talisman, as I recall. Given the focus on magic, it was probably in Hucksters &amp;amp; Hexes or Hexarcana, but it could have been in The Great Maze or one of the other location books. Unfortunately, RPGNow listings for the books don't say what adventures these contain and my Google-fu has failed. Can anybody tell me what the name of this adventure is and which book it is in?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1353/should-we-ban-game-system-identification-questions&quot;&gt;Previous discussion&lt;/a&gt; about whether system identification questions were allowed had the most upvotes for allowing them, although there was a fair amount of dissent as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine the main barrier would be the fact that it's harder to identify these adventures and there's a fair chance that, if it's a player asking the question, they might be thinking of a homebrew adventure a GM made up, in which case it can never be identified. But if they are quite sure it is a published adventure (a GM would probably be able to remember if it was) and could narrow it down a bit (the second example, for instance), and especially if it's for a fairly well supported game, I imagine it could be identified and therefore would be a valuable question to have answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should adventure identification questions like this be allowed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T07:15:21.130" Title="Would a Published Adventure Identification Question be Appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2905" CreationDate="2013-05-01T07:15:21.130" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;These questions seem appropriate to me, with a couple of reservations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're clearly within the RPG domain, and there's certainly no other SE where they're more appropriate.  They're definitively answerable, not subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closest comparison I can think of is to book/film identification questions on SF&amp;amp;F.  These are common and seem to do the site no harm whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, these questions will often only be useful to a small subset of users.  Do we want want a policy of &quot;talk in chat first, then ask&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="862" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T07:15:21.130" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2907" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-01T12:43:10.210" Score="2" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;As of now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; is tagged in 26 questions with no wiki entry for it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; has 105 tagged questions and has a short yet, decent wiki entry:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Writing, managing, and expanding campaigns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that all the questions tagged &lt;strong&gt;Story&lt;/strong&gt; could just as easily be tagged &lt;strong&gt;campaign-development&lt;/strong&gt; and that its redundant to have &lt;strong&gt;Story&lt;/strong&gt; as a tag at all. The &lt;strong&gt;Campaign-development&lt;/strong&gt; tag could be reworded more explicitly to include story development within a campaign and could absorb all questions currently tagged &lt;strong&gt;Story&lt;/strong&gt;. Please chime in with your thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-05-01T19:15:15.960" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T19:15:15.960" Title="Should &quot;Story&quot; and &quot;Campaign-development&quot; be merged?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2908" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2907" CreationDate="2013-05-01T19:10:03.857" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. &quot;Campaign&quot; and &quot;story&quot; are not interchangeable, and neither is necessarily a subset of the other. Not all campaigns have a plot, and not all plots are the length of a campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do (personally) think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; is not a very good tag, but it's not a &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; tag so sleeping dogs get to lie undisturbed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-05-01T19:10:03.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2909" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-05T11:10:03.883" Score="11" ViewCount="235" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having just written a rather academic answer, I'm again at the point where I'm wondering if I can make RPGs a genuine research output.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm prepared to, over the next 8 months, try to find a journal willing to do a special topics issue on RPGs &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; I can have 8-12 people who are willing and able to contribute academic papers on the topic of RPGs. (What specific facet of RPGs is... somewhat open to interpretation and will be coordinated with the authors.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have an idea for a paper that's around 6-8k words (including references), please leave it in the answers. If we can get enough, then I'll feel comfortable trying to get a special issue and peer reviewers lined up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="3230" LastEditDate="2013-05-07T14:11:42.250" LastActivityDate="2013-05-14T14:43:00.983" Title="Who would be willing and able to contribute to a &quot;Special Topic&quot; Journal issue covering RPGs?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2909" CreationDate="2013-05-05T11:26:10.030" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously, I'd work up the two RPG-theory papers I'm sitting on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton, Ernest Mueller, C Ross Eskridge (2012) Clerics , Magic Users , Fighters and Thieves : Theoretical Approaches to Rules Questions on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton, Samuel Russell (2012) Constrained Optimization in Dungeons and Dragons : A Theory of Requirements Generation for Effective Character Creation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-05-05T11:26:10.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2911" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-08T00:42:34.123" Score="6" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why was: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25338/incentivizing-player-betrayal&quot;&gt;Incentivizing Player Betrayal?&lt;/a&gt; voted as off-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-05-08T00:42:34.123" Title="Player Betrayal Question" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2912" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2913" CreationDate="2013-05-10T02:02:44.200" Score="13" ViewCount="1288" Body="&lt;p&gt;What's the stance on asking for feedback on house-ruled material? In my particular case, I wrote a couple of generic moves for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tremulus&quot;&gt;Tremulus&lt;/a&gt; (they can probably be extended to AW/DW), changing the wealth system, and wanted to ask if the community could spot any potential pitfalls with them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-04-23T20:30:21.167" Title="Are homebrew evaluation questions OK?" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2912" CreationDate="2013-05-10T02:09:02.760" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Magician's quote from chat (&lt;em&gt;emphasis mine&lt;/em&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is anyone here familiar with AW/DW/tremulus? &lt;em&gt;Wealth didn't make any sense in the latter&lt;/em&gt;, so I wrote up a couple moves to earn and spend it. There's nothing exciting about them, but I'm wondering if there are any potential problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think homebrew evaluation is OK as long as it's part 2 of a multipart question. For example, &quot;Evaluate my homebrew&quot; is not a valid question. But this is (or at least could be, if phrased properly):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wealth doesn't seem to make sense in Tremulus, am I missing something? (&lt;em&gt;examples/explanation go here&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If wealth really is messed up in Tremulus, would these fixes work OK? (&lt;em&gt;list homebrew&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two parts are closely related enough to justify being in the same question, since any answer would have to go into how wealth does or doesn't work in Tremulus, and part 1 will be useful to a general audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2013-05-10T02:09:02.760" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2914" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2915" CreationDate="2013-05-11T19:42:54.410" Score="10" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;They're basically solo campaigns with the book acting as a DM, as I see it. However, you could argue that they're not, I guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastActivityDate="2014-03-17T09:14:36.143" Title="Are the Fighting Fantasy gamebooks and contents on- or off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2914" CreationDate="2013-05-12T05:24:07.453" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It depends&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, we're a site about real RPG questions for real situations. I suspect many contrived questions will lack standing or be more appropriate for sci-fi, but if you find yourself using them in an RPG context, they're certainly allowable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there is an element of sociality to RPGs, we have addressed solitare in the past. Therefore, if there exists a real problem with the &lt;em&gt;mechanics&lt;/em&gt; of one of these, go for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-05-12T05:24:07.453" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2916" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-13T02:02:48.260" Score="1" ViewCount="302" Body="&lt;p&gt;A place to post reports on competition for our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2897/win-cool-site-swag-with-our-birthday-party&quot;&gt;first anniversary contest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using the query found: &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/114968/breakdown-of-tickets-for-first-contest&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/114968/breakdown-of-tickets-for-first-contest&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2013-05-26T07:30:33.417" Title="Who has a chance to win free stuff? (Updated 26-May)" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2916" CreationDate="2013-05-13T02:04:29.127" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;13 May&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Three people have passed the nice question/answer threshold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Question Title                                                             User         Type     &#xA;-------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ -------- &#xA;What RPG systems are Designed for a &quot;Traditional&quot; Call of Cthulhu Scenario Erik Schmidt Answer   &#xA;What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                              okeefe       Answer   &#xA;What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                              Thunderforge Question &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one has any of the publicity badges yet!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-05-13T02:04:29.127" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2909" CreationDate="2013-05-14T09:32:35.160" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Of the top of my head I would be interested in writing an article on issues of authorship and authenticity in the &lt;em&gt;Encounter Critical&lt;/em&gt; hoax, connecting it to the originary anxieties of the Old School Renaissance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8253" LastActivityDate="2013-05-14T09:32:35.160" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2909" CreationDate="2013-05-14T10:45:19.353" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Title&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;em&gt;Topics in running systemless RPG&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Abstract&lt;/strong&gt; RPG systems have evolved from war games and the rules (or system) were expended to model the world.  Over the years, this modelling have changed to include modelling story telling or doing away with dice or simplifying the model to a few skills. This paper shall focus on specific topics in doing away with a system altogether or &lt;em&gt;systemless&lt;/em&gt; including character creation and development, in-game conflict resolution, and general pitfalls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2013-05-14T10:45:19.353" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2909" CreationDate="2013-05-14T10:49:59.577" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Title&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;em&gt;A statistical analysis of combat or why your system (probably) sucks at modelling combat&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Abstract&lt;/strong&gt;: A statistical analysis of a few combat system taking (i) a Muay Thai boxing match and (ii) a marines gun battle in Afghanistan as examples of why the modelling used in most RPG fails to model reality.  A new approach to modelling combat will be described and offered as an alternative.  Note that the point that not all systems are created to model reality shall be taken into considerations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2013-05-14T14:43:00.983" LastActivityDate="2013-05-14T14:43:00.983" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2916" CreationDate="2013-05-19T06:50:07.333" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;19 May&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;   User          tickets reason                                                                                  &#xA;------------- ------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- &#xA;Erik Schmidt  2       Answer: What RPG systems are Designed for a &quot;Traditional&quot; Call of Cthulhu Scenario      &#xA;Erik Schmidt  1       Announcer Badge                                                                         &#xA;Magician      2       Question: Wealth in tremulus: insane or horrific?                                       &#xA;okeefe        2       Answer: What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                                   &#xA;pconcepcion   2       Question: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back? &#xA;SevenSidedDie 2       Answer: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back?   &#xA;Thunderforge  2       Question: What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                                 &#xA;wax eagle     2       Answer: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back?   &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2013-05-19T09:18:40.223" LastActivityDate="2013-05-19T09:18:40.223" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2812" CreationDate="2013-05-22T06:28:12.343" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've used both a fair bit, so I'll try to add some perspective on the contrast between the sites. First: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2814/1204&quot;&gt;everything wax eagle said is true&lt;/a&gt; about this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;People here take time to stop and smell the roses.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackOverflow is fast-paced and not very rewarding. Averaging the scores of all answers in StackOverflow and RPG.SE (and making no attempts to remove outliers), &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/115639/system-average-scores-for-stackoverflow?opt.textResults=true&amp;amp;opt.withExecutionPlan=true&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;StackOverflow answers net an average 18 reputation&lt;/a&gt; whereas RPG.SE ones earn &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/115638/system-average-scores-for-rpg-se&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;60 reputation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of writing, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/116478/score-distribution-of-all-answers&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;over a count of all answers' scores on Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;77.7% of Stack Overflow answers have 0, 1 or 2 points.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Only 6.8% of answers on Stack Overflow have a score of 6 or more - our answers have a score slightly higher than that &lt;em&gt;on average!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply put, there's not much incentive to write more than the absolute bare minimum answer on StackOverflow. Questions disappear off the front page in an hour, and everyone is just there to have a highly specific problem fixed that will often be of no use to you. In my experience, putting in any extra effort often goes unrewarded, and there might be only one or two votes given to &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; answer to &lt;em&gt;the entire question&lt;/em&gt;. It's a race to the finish line. So, really, why bother writing more than a line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, meanwhile, things move slower, competition isn't intense, and answers are more rewarding. Furthermore, a particular question is often widely applicable and could be quite interesting to a lot of viewers - and it's going to be there potentially getting their attention for quite a while! You have more time and more incentive to take your time making a good answer - not to mention that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2814/1204&quot;&gt;good answers often need to explain a lot, as wax eagle pointed out&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;People here communicate well.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On StackOverflow, you often get a code dump and that's it: explanation is often found wanting, and ideas are very regularly not expressed clearly. Sometimes there's simply no motivation to go beyond the code dump (see the above section). Other times, however, this seems like poor communication on behalf of the user: that's as much as they feel it's necessary to express, or as much as they're capable of expressing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things don't tend to work that way here. Roleplayers, by the very nature of their hobby, must have pretty good social skills and must be able to communicate and express themselves well. An RPG player who is a terrible communicator is an outlier. Plus, there's rewards aplenty for a half-decent answer, so you can always get some reward for going that extra step or taking a few minutes to improve what you've written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In IT, though, poor communication and social skills is part of a programmer stereotype that didn't form without substance. Rick Freedman elaborates in this extract from the Communication Skills section of &lt;em&gt;The IT Consultant&lt;/em&gt;, a book published in 2000 (emphasis added):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Most IT professionals are intelligent individuals, folks who have mastered a difficult and demanding craft that has required diligent study and training. The idea that they cannot also be trained to communicate well is nonsense. People develop those skills for which they are mentored, compensated, and judged. &lt;strong&gt;Superior communication skills have not, until recently, been a requirement of the IT profession. In the mainframe days, IT teams worked in the infamous “glass room,” talking mostly among themselves, usually with a manager from the finance department to act as their interpreter.&lt;/strong&gt; As computing moved to the desktop, however, and the ability to provide support and service to users in a language they could understand became a valuable skill, communication came to the forefront. Those technicians who could avoid jargon, who could communicate clearly with the secretary, clerk, salesperson, and manager, became valuable commodities. In short, the desktop PC revolution forced IT to become more consultative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thankfully, as you can gather from the parts I &lt;em&gt;didn't&lt;/em&gt; emphasize, the &quot;glass room&quot; programmers and this stereotype are becoming a thing of the past, and communication skills are becoming increasingly important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-05-28T01:22:07.390" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2923" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-23T02:06:53.793" Score="3" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;A lot of my questions would be better answered in a discussion rather that Q&amp;amp;A style, and although I love the answers I get here, it often ends up being discussion anyways due to the way I ask the questions, and I don't want to keep accidentally bending the rules here. For &lt;strong&gt;pathfinder related&lt;/strong&gt; questions where it's hard to keep it clear, or when it's really a series of questions, but they all have to do with one another - where could I ask those?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively are there resources to / where can I learn to get better at forming really clear questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8307" OwnerDisplayName="Julix" LastActivityDate="2013-05-23T04:37:41.600" Title="Forums for discussions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2013-05-23T11:46:29.330" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2924" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2925" CreationDate="2013-05-23T05:37:56.677" Score="2" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm confused. I'm new to the meta, and I get things are different here, but I'm not exactly sure how different they are. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted?rq=1&quot;&gt;Over here&lt;/a&gt; the question was answered by the person asking within the room that's normally reserved for explaining the question. And then in a field that's normally for giving the answer is a post that would normally be a comment. and then as comments on that is a discussion / banter like you'd see it in a forum. Why exactly isn't the meta aspect of rpg.stackexchange a forum?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be useful (and possible) to create the option to &quot;post&quot; instead of &quot;ask&quot; in the context of the meta? Or is that already the case and it's just called &quot;ask question&quot; because of the way the software works? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2708/where-should-i-ask-discussion-questions&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; it was said the meta not a like forum... Can someone make sense of the first link and what happened there? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8307" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-05-23T08:21:22.213" Title="Discussions in the meta allowed or not?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2925" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2924" CreationDate="2013-05-23T05:45:33.380" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can and often do have discussions on Meta, but they're about the site, such as policy discussions. You can check out the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/discussion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'discussion'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;discussion&lt;/a&gt; tag to see what sort of discussions happen on Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are just fewer formal operating procedure rules back here. Questions don't have to be questions and answers don't have to be stand-alone, and comments are used extensively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Q&amp;amp;A format is still useful back here though – just like your Q and this A. The software is built for Q&amp;amp;A, and it would be more bother than help to have a custom forum for Meta, and questions like yours wouldn't benefit from a change in software anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-05-23T08:21:22.213" LastActivityDate="2013-05-23T08:21:22.213" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2880" CreationDate="2013-05-24T13:41:59.647" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think I've finally come up with a satisfying reason to keep the general and game-specific tags on entries. The analogy isn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;; it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/druid&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;druid&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;druid&lt;/a&gt;. The individual subgames are, realistically, the splats of the greater setting; they're not quite classes, but when looking at the game lines &lt;em&gt;as a whole&lt;/em&gt;, that's the function they serve. (Sub-splats, like clan or tribe or tradition, would be the equivalent of &quot;builds&quot;; not necessarily deserving of their own tags unless really popular.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still endorse the eventual changeover to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/classic-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;classic-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;classic-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, but I think that having them accompany the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-lost&lt;/a&gt; is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-05-24T13:41:59.647" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2928" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2929" CreationDate="2013-05-25T18:09:01.917" Score="10" ViewCount="272" Body="&lt;p&gt;This query came about following a comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25901/did-basic-dd-invent-and-popularise-the-abbreviation-xp-for-experience-points&quot;&gt;Did Basic D&amp;amp;D invent and popularise the abbreviation XP for experience points?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am particularly interested in how such a question meets the &quot;practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face&quot; requirement. My initial reaction is no, they don't, but there are other similar questions with enormous numbers of votes that suggest otherwise, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7473/who-created-the-idea-of-experience-points&quot;&gt;Who created the idea of Experience Points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-19T16:35:20.237" LastActivityDate="2022-02-19T16:35:20.237" Title="How do 'Trivia' Questions meet the requirements for posting?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2928" CreationDate="2013-05-25T18:44:47.833" Score="22" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Historical research into the history of table top gaming should be on topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line &amp;quot;practical answerable questions based on actual problems that you face&amp;quot; is quite outmoded and while it was suitable for the trilogy sites, has been and should be largely abandoned by SE 2.0 sites (though it's still a part of the FAQ it's wording is up for revisions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, it's a good criteria for most questions. The problem is when you have a general interest question that is otherwise quite good. &amp;quot;Did D&amp;amp;D invent the usage of XP for experience points?&amp;quot; is a good on-topic question (provided the author does a bit of prior research and informs the audience of such).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-19T16:34:38.693" LastActivityDate="2022-02-19T16:34:38.693" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="2930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2928" CreationDate="2013-05-25T18:50:36.057" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, trivia should be off topic because it does not meet the bar of &quot;practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face&quot; - which, far from being outmoded, is what separates SEs from the animals. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there should be limited exceptions with a high bar for items that might fit the category of scholarship/real information. &quot;Wikipedia article worthy&quot; stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7473/who-created-the-idea-of-experience-points&quot;&gt;Who created the idea of Experience Points?&lt;/a&gt; - who invented experience points, barely clears that bar, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25901/did-basic-dd-invent-and-popularise-the-abbreviation-xp-for-experience-points&quot;&gt;Who popularised the abbreviation of XP for experience points? Was it Basic D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; - strictly about the abbreviation - does not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-05-25T18:50:36.057" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2928" CreationDate="2013-05-25T21:48:33.063" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is mostly answerable. It's actually quite easy to validate the null hypothesis &lt;em&gt;Moldvay Basic is the primary source of the term &lt;strong&gt;XP&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All one has to do is show that either Moldvay wasn't the most widespread early source, or that a similarly widespread source was earlier. In point of fact, both of which are true. (AD&amp;amp;D's DMG uses XP, is earlier, in print longer, sold more copies, and in general, was better known prior to the rise of the OSR.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;History of Gaming, especially history of specific terms, is of use in later game design, as well as specific non-gaming uses (to wit, authors of fiction set in period).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which said, this particular question isn't really off topic. Further, it's actually answerable with a relatively high degree of certainty - far more than, say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25822/encouraging-players-to-not-cheat-the-item-purchase-system/25835#25835&quot;&gt;Encouraging players to not cheat the item purchase system?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus, such questions are exactly the kind of thing best handled by &lt;em&gt;crowdsourcing answers&lt;/em&gt;... which is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/strong&gt; the purpose of SE sites&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2013-05-25T21:48:33.063" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2916" CreationDate="2013-05-26T07:30:33.417" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;26-May&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;User          tickets reason                                                                                  &#xA;------------- ------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- &#xA;BESW          2       Answer: Do you have to reveal your NPC's aspects?                                       &#xA;BESW          2       Answer: What/how many different cities are officially supported by Dresden Files?       &#xA;Dakeyras      2       Question: What/how many different cities are officially supported by Dresden Files?     &#xA;Dan Rasmussen 2       Answer: How can I let players make more choices during combat?                          &#xA;Erik Schmidt  2       Answer: Players who want a dayjob for a megacorp. Should I allow it?                    &#xA;Erik Schmidt  2       Answer: What RPG systems are Designed for a &amp;quot;Traditional&amp;quot; Call of Cthulhu Scenario      &#xA;Erik Schmidt  1       Announcer Badge                                                                         &#xA;Lunin         2       Answer: In a high magic setting, how should I introduce &amp;quot;unnatural&amp;quot; magic?              &#xA;Magician      2       Question: Technological warfare: how does Iron Man fight?                               &#xA;Magician      2       Question: Wealth in tremulus: insane or horrific?                                       &#xA;okeefe        2       Answer: Encouraging players to not cheat the item purchase system?                      &#xA;okeefe        2       Answer: What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                                   &#xA;pconcepcion   2       Question: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back? &#xA;SevenSidedDie 2       Answer: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back?   &#xA;Thunderforge  2       Question: What Works Inspired Paranoia?                                                 &#xA;wax eagle     2       Answer: Technological warfare: how does Iron Man fight?                                 &#xA;wax eagle     2       Answer: Why the bad guys don't just teleport somewhere drop a bomb and teleport back?   &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-05-26T07:30:33.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2933" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-28T01:10:18.313" Score="13" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;consistently&lt;/em&gt; get spam of the type:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;$HoityToityName has made my $verb better because he cast spell for me. E-mail example@yahoo.com to have $noun [enlarged | made better].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... Except it takes a paragraph of spam to say that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most recent example is (deleted) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/25952/760&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and is completely true to form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A post that has attracted many spam is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/17198/how-do-you-make-a-wizard-who-doesnt-need-a-spellbook&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we set up an auto-flag system such that no-rep users who post messages of this type are auto spam binned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:04:18.673" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:04:18.673" Title="Can we auto-flag no-rep users posting answers with e-mail addresses?" Tags="|feature-request|flagging|spam|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2934" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7402" CreationDate="2013-05-28T23:31:07.620" Score="6" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25974/4398&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; about &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_%E2%80%93_Adventures_in_Time_and_Space:_The_Roleplaying_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Doctor Who – Adventures in Time and Space: The Roleplaying Game&lt;/a&gt;. So far as I can tell, it's our first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I gleefully ran to tag it, hoping to use something like &quot;adventures-in-time-and-space&quot; to differentiate this from &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doctor_Who_Role_Playing_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Doctor Who Role Playing Game&lt;/a&gt; (and to a lesser extent &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Lord_(role-playing_game)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Time Lord&lt;/a&gt;)... but that exceeds the 25-character limit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm here, canvassing suggestions for a clear, concise tag. It should avoid confusion with other &lt;em&gt;Doctor Who&lt;/em&gt; RPG titles (and shouldn't invoke images of &lt;a href=&quot;http://community-sitcom.wikia.com/wiki/Inspector_Spacetime&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Inspector Spacetime&lt;/a&gt;), and it should be easy for someone to find/guess when they're tagging a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T10:53:45.500" Title="Requesting ideas for Adventures in Time and Space tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2935" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2934" CreationDate="2013-05-29T01:21:20.927" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dr-who-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dr-who-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dr-who-adventures&lt;/a&gt; is pretty ideal. It's got Dr Who in it, so people who start typing Dr Who will see it pop up as an auto-completion, and the adventures part should be sufficient to distinguish it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2013-05-29T01:21:20.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2934" CreationDate="2013-05-29T03:52:16.247" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am the one who added the current tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-aits&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-aits&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-aits&lt;/a&gt; and after doing more research I realized that other people include &quot;and&quot; in the abbreviation, so I would suggest it changed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-aitas&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-aitas&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-aitas&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2229" LastActivityDate="2013-05-29T03:52:16.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2938" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2939" CreationDate="2013-05-29T18:05:24.097" Score="4" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I look at the reputation league for the RPG site on stack-exchange, I can't seem to find my username. How come it's not listed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1056" LastActivityDate="2013-05-29T19:07:27.807" Title="How come my name doesn't show up in the reputation leagues?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2938" CreationDate="2013-05-29T19:07:27.807" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Try the month view. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have have a reputation change during this current week for your name to show on that page or be searchable (subject to caching). As of this posting I'm not in the week view (though I will be when the cache updates), but I am in the month and quarter view which have far more users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-05-29T19:07:27.807" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2940" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-05-31T08:07:29.913" Score="22" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose that we rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-fae&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-fae&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-fae&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.evilhat.com/home/fae/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fate Accelerated&lt;/a&gt; is the proper name of the system; FAE is the initialism for Fate Accelerated Edition. Changing the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt; makes for a more readable tag and avoids an expansion of “Fate Fate Accelerated Edition”. If desired, we could also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fae&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fae&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fae&lt;/a&gt; be a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggested this in chat and got a handful of agreement with no detractors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-15T12:39:07.870" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T12:39:07.870" Title="Rename fate-fae to fate-accelerated" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2940" CreationDate="2013-05-31T09:40:13.150" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm in support of this . &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-fae&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-fae&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-fae&lt;/a&gt; did strike me as a bit odd, since it's repeating itself, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fae&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fae&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fae&lt;/a&gt; might be missed by some. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt; is perfect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-05-31T09:40:13.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2942" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-05T16:19:35.637" Score="9" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26154/is-there-any-reason-to-discourage-arms-racing-during-exchanges&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; started out tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;. It was retagged with just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;, and then the two original tags were re-added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, as I understand it Fate Core and Fate Accelerated Edition are unique game systems running on the FATE engine. Although Core is the current &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; version of the engine and Accelerated is its &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damn_Small_Linux&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DSL&lt;/a&gt; brother, they are discrete and separate from games like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spirit-of-the-century&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spirit-of-the-century&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spirit-of-the-century&lt;/a&gt;, which also run on the FATE engine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when a question like the one linked above, which was inspired by experience in Fate Core and/or FAE but is equally applicable without modification or adjudication to just about &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; game running on the FATE engine...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How the hayfeathers do we tag a universal &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; question?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're tagging it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;, it feels like we might as well pile on other game-specific tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; until it fills up. Clearly that is silly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But just tagging it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; seems... sparse and suboptimal for people searching for help on the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-05T16:31:10.990" Title="Cross-system Fate tag protocol" Tags="|discussion|tags|policy|fate|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2943" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2945" CreationDate="2013-06-05T16:20:47.307" Score="8" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen this a few times recently, and wanted to check what the 'official' line is. My understanding is that when you want to expand on an answer that someone else has already given, the way things are intended to work is that you edit the existing answer rather than create a whole new one for yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this correct? If so then why don't people do it more often, and how can we encourage them to do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-15T13:30:37.073" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:30:37.073" Title="Answers that expand on existing answers" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2944" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2942" CreationDate="2013-06-05T16:33:40.283" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm actually inclined to leave it at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;.  While I agree it seems a little sparse, it's discoverable enough for generic Fate questions (like the one that prompted this) - the user will either start typing &quot;fate&quot; or &quot;fate-core&quot;; either way they'll find the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;World-specific questions will inevitably gain their system tag as well as the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag; I propose the usual scoping rules - delete &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; if the question is entirely about the world or mechanics unique to it, keep it if the question applies to Fate mechanics in general.  (I expect several juicy new Fate game-specific tags later this year...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest downside to this proposal is not the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag itself, but that its existence makes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; slightly less discoverable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that over time, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; are going to become synonymous, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; and even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/diaspora&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;diaspora&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;diaspora&lt;/a&gt; becoming effectively a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;.  When this occurs, we can retag and merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;.  But that's definitely premature right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="862" LastActivityDate="2013-06-05T16:33:40.283" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2943" CreationDate="2013-06-05T16:44:56.533" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The entirely depends on what you're doing, why you're doing it and how nice you want to be. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are merely adding a point and aren't going to change the intent or purpose of the original answer, it's cleaner and better for the site to add the point to the other answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you are free (by the license and site policy) to take existing answers and improve upon them in your own separate answer provided you credit the original poster in your answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-06-05T16:44:56.533" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2942" CreationDate="2013-06-05T19:01:28.993" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should consider relegating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; to being a super-tag for Fate &lt;em&gt;games&lt;/em&gt;, but prefer to use the tags for specific published RPGs like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/diaspora&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;diaspora&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;diaspora&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because I've had enough experiences answering a question tagged &quot;fate&quot; with what I thought was a canonical answer, only to find that it was specific to a particular book I was familiar with, to realise that there is no such singular thing we can call &quot;Fate&quot;. I've had this happen with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; when I was answering based on Diaspora, and I've had this happen with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; when answering based on Dresden Files RPG, to mention only two. The fact of the matter is that there is no &quot;Fate RPG&quot;, only a family of Fate games, each different in &lt;em&gt;exactly the sort of details that we get questions about&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is analogous to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; tag: rarely can we properly answer a question based on merely &quot;it's a d20 game&quot;, since our answers are almost always going to be specific to whichever game the asker is actually playing, whether it's D&amp;amp;D 3e, 3.5e, Pathfinder, or one of the myriad games derived from the d20 SRD. (And to drive it home more, D&amp;amp;D 4e is technically a &quot;d20 system&quot; game! Just like Strands of Fate is a &quot;Fate system&quot; game; yet both are their own, entirely distinct beasts from their distant siblings.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is exactly the situation we find ourselves in with Fate games: we need to know which game you're playing, since an answer about (e.g.) who gets spent Fate points is going to depend on which published book you're using to play. (Example: the answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10270/what-happens-to-the-fate-point-after-a-character-invokes-an-aspect&quot;&gt;What happens to the fate point after a character invokes an aspect?&lt;/a&gt; (DFRPG) is different from the answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26027/who-can-earn-fate-points-from-invoking-attached-aspects&quot;&gt;Who can earn fate points from invoking attached aspects?&lt;/a&gt; (Fate Core) due to changes in how the GM handles Fate points.) Since the corner cases are the sort of things we get questions about, it makes more sense to treat &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; as a rarely-used tag for questions that apply to every game, and to prefer RPG-specific tags for all other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, what has happened is that Fate has just gone through the same process that GURPS did in 1986: something that was previously published as an embedded system in other games has been published as a stand-alone generic RPG. (What eventually became GURPS began as a book named &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/50272/man-to-man&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Man to Man&lt;/a&gt; in 1985.) The only difference is that there's such a volume of &quot;Fate&quot; games that came before that we've got mental habits about how &quot;Fate&quot; relates to all these RPGs, mental habits that are no longer accurate and don't agree with reality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fate Core has an entirely different relationship to other Fate games than what we previously called &quot;Fate&quot; does: &quot;Fate&quot; as we knew it is a sort of amalgamation of inferences about the &quot;core&quot; system of multiple distinct, disagreeing RPGs. And worse, &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; RPG we used as the authority when books disagreed kept shifting, changing the answers to questions as our guesses about this nebulous &quot;fate system&quot; had to adjust. Now, Fate Core is the authority on what the Fate (analogous to GURPS) system actually is, but it's still a distinct game from its parent RPGs, Spirit of the Century and Dresden Files RPG. Answers for Fate Core are no more applicable to &quot;Fate&quot; as we knew it, or to DFRPG, than answers for Pathfinder are applicable to D&amp;amp;D 3.5e or AD&amp;amp;D: i.e., answers for one only apply to the other where they just so happen to agree or where importing rules makes sense, but each game is its own master and doesn't change its RAW based on the other. As time goes on, Fate Core will become the basis for new specific RPGs, but each will differ by how they use and change the rules in Fate Core, just like how games based on the d20 SRD are different from D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, and questions about them can almost never be answered based on knowing D&amp;amp;D 3.5e. This new status for Fate Core as &quot;first among equals&quot; will be more obvious as time goes on, but we can start rearranging how we think of Fate games now. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to repeat myself, due to this fundamental shift in the relationship structure of the Fate games, we should tag questions according to which RPG is being played (Fate Core, DFRPG, SotC, Diaspora, Legends of Anglerre, etc.), and leave the general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag for questions that are truly applicable to all Fate games, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21600/how-do-i-explain-stress-to-a-d20-crowd&quot;&gt;How to explain stress tracks to new players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26154/is-there-any-reason-to-discourage-arms-racing-during-exchanges&quot;&gt;the question about escalating Aspect invocation&lt;/a&gt; that kicked off this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The disadvantage of tagging this way is that you can't track all Fate-based games now just by subscribing to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag, but then, who subscribes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; and expects to get all questions about D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, 4e, and Pathfinder? I think we will actually find separating the games from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag to be valuable, since we will stop seeing so many answers that are wrong simply because someone is answering based on their experience with a different Fate game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-06-05T19:13:26.507" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2947" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2948" CreationDate="2013-06-05T19:13:29.363" Score="3" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;Has the drawing been held for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2829/one-year-anniversary-contest&quot;&gt;one year anniversary contest&lt;/a&gt;? If so, who were the winners?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:30:11.213" Title="What's the status of the birthday contest?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2948" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2947" CreationDate="2013-06-05T19:33:12.257" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're running a little behind at the moment.  We hope to announce the results and the winners &lt;em&gt;soon&lt;/em&gt;, certainly by the end of this week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-06-05T19:33:12.257" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2942" CreationDate="2013-06-05T21:22:52.113" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;To build on SevenSidedDie's excellent answer: The various Fate games have a lot in common when it comes to system design, philosophy, GM advice, social issues, etc., but mechanically they vary in subtle and significant ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm playing a specific Fate game, I'm going to want the mechanical aspects of answers to relate to that specific game, whether I'm asking a question or browsing them. Therefore, if a question is likely to have (at least some) answers rooted in interpreting or tweaking the mechanics, I would prefer to tag it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;, etc. At the same time, if answers are likely to include general GM advice or system design issues, the more general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the question under discussion, I would expect most answers to have more of a GM-advice nature, so the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag is appropriate. However, I can also easily imagine answers based in rule interpretation or tweaking, and for those answers it's important to know whether Problematic is playing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; versus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While that does weaken the general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag, I don't think it's quite so bad as reducing it to the status of a meta-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastActivityDate="2013-06-05T21:22:52.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2942" CreationDate="2013-06-05T23:50:03.480" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use system specific tags for the Fate variant you are playing always, unless your question truly transcends the Fate variant boundaries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question about Fate point arms races was about Fate Core and Fate Accelerated. An answer that starts with &quot;Well, Dresden Files has X subsystem which means [useful resolution]...&quot; is not going to be useful or helpful or even relevant to Fate Core/Accelerated. If it can be ported, a good answer should say how it can be ported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue is relevant to other Fate variants, that doesn't mean we should retag it. People using other Fate variants can learn from this question about this variant. It happens all the time with our D&amp;amp;D tags: people don't retag a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; question about armor with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; because other editions also had similar armor mechanics; that's irrelevant and people from those systems can learn from this 3.5e-specific one. Same thing here: it relevant to other Fate variants and Fate in general, but that doesn't mean we should be retagging it. Use the system tag for the Fate system the player is actually using.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This pretty heavily overlaps with Bradd and SSD's positions, but I felt it was worthwhile to bring this specifically up and from the asker's perspective)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-06-06T00:04:42.797" LastActivityDate="2013-06-06T00:04:42.797" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2951" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2952" CreationDate="2013-06-06T23:37:48.993" Score="5" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you ask a question about how to simulate a condition from system X into system Y, should it be tagged with [x] and [y]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal opinion (and some disagree) is that if you're referencing another system both tags belong, as if you're filtering based on tags, you'll see it with either system, and both can contribute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ran into a similar situation in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9878/where-can-i-find-a-foldable-character-sheet-for-the-dresden-files&quot;&gt;couple&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9897/how-does-adding-aspect-scope-in-dresden-files-change-the-feel-of-the-game&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26162/how-can-i-contribute-to-the-game-and-have-fun-after-my-pc-dies/&quot;&gt;just saw a question that has this same issue&lt;/a&gt;, so wanted to know what the general consensus was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:29:34.117" Title="If a system is used for reference, should it be tagged with that system's tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2952" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2951" CreationDate="2013-06-07T00:10:21.167" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maybe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to get any mention of a game, we do have a site search functionality.  Tags are meant to be more of a first class &quot;this is ABOUT this&quot; designator.  So &quot;compare me Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 3.5&quot; - fine.  &quot;I like games like Paranoia and Toon, so how would I do a humor game in Pathfinder&quot; - not really. The examples you cite are marginal - to the degree that they're really about porting mechanic X from game Y to game Z, I'd tag with Y and Z.  To the extent to which they're just referring to &quot;I know game Y&quot; or whatever, I wouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-06-07T00:10:21.167" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2943" CreationDate="2013-06-07T22:44:27.587" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the post is just upgrading a single answer, I think it should be an edit.  But I've seen a lot of posts made that expand on an answer and several others.  These posts are more like digests of the entire thread, comments included.  I think they're worth posting on their own.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2013-06-07T22:44:27.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2954" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-08T04:20:34.343" Score="9" ViewCount="99" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a few of us who currently play games of Fate in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/8403/fate-game-room&quot;&gt;the FATE Game Room&lt;/a&gt;. All our games and chatter take place in that room alone, but at some point, activity may become great enough that we may end up running two games simultaneously, or otherwise cease to play our games exclusively within that room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At that point, we would probably take the approach of creating a separate room to play games in, which is the reason for this question. How should we handle it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it acceptable to create a new room for each session, letting each one expire due to inactivity, probably adding a couple of pages to the room archives after a while? Or,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we limit our number of rooms, e.g. having one per GM which is recycled as much as possible?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately: is there anything wrong with just creating lots of chat rooms over time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-06-15T00:27:35.443" Title="Is it okay to create a lot of chat rooms?" Tags="|discussion|chat|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2954" CreationDate="2013-06-08T05:59:27.173" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think one per session might be a bit prolific, but creating new rooms as they become necessary would suffice. So if there's Game Room 1 sitting idle and a session starts, it can go there, but if people are using Game Room 1, someone can create Game Room 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If chat rooms can be flagged &quot;not worth retaining&quot; even if the system thinks they are, or if frozen rooms can be manually unfrozen, then that would work out well. Otherwise, it would end up creating a bunch of frozen rooms as bubbles of activity rise, burst, and leave idle rooms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8450" LastActivityDate="2013-06-08T05:59:27.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2956" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2954" CreationDate="2013-06-08T06:34:53.007" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Building on Holland's answer, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games&quot;&gt;The Back Room: Live Tabletop Games&lt;/a&gt; already exists. If we could get it unfrozen, it would probably suit our purposes well until such time as two games are running simultaneously (which is a cross-that-bridge-when-we-come-to-it scenario, I think).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-06-08T06:34:53.007" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2957" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2954" CreationDate="2013-06-08T12:04:17.733" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; create a room per session, that seems like overkill, but a separate room for discussing FATE and playing FATE would be fine.  If you want to track individual sessions you should use the Conversation feature which allows a period of time in chat to be named and linked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-06-08T12:04:17.733" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2947" CreationDate="2013-06-10T10:36:38.167" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A little update on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I met with the mods and we were planning to do a little surprise ceremony for this. We'd jump into chat during an active time, and rather than having drawn the winners and announce them, we were going to do a public drawing, using our chat dice system. It seemed that this would be pretty fitting to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we ran into some issues actually confirming our potential-winner pool and also determining a time to do the rolling, which resulted in us, well, not rolling last week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking a gander at chat room activity levels, it seems liveliest somewhere in the later parts of today, so I'm figuring that rather than push this off for any more days, we'll look at rolling some time this evening. I will be waiting in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;the RPG General Chatroom&lt;/a&gt;, which is where the rolling will take place. Currently, just to pull a number out of thin air, &lt;strike&gt;18:00 EDT&lt;/strike&gt;, but I'll be happy to hold it earlier or later if people think there's a much better timing (just leave a comment~).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;UPDATE: Looking at 19:00 EDT after a quick conference with all of a handful of people in chat.&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE THE SECOND&lt;/strong&gt;: We're looking at &lt;strong&gt;20:00 EDT&lt;/strong&gt;. That would be at &lt;strong&gt;midnight in UTC&lt;/strong&gt;, at the break of Tuesday.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="1036" LastEditDate="2013-06-10T12:38:23.470" LastActivityDate="2013-06-10T12:38:23.470" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2897" CreationDate="2013-06-11T00:27:16.763" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Alright! Our anniversary contest has come to a close! It took a bit longer than the start of June to announce this, but that's because in a special twist, we decided to do a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/rpg-2013-anniversary-contest-drawing&quot;&gt;live drawing in our chat system&lt;/a&gt;! It was a bit of a short-notice thing, so sorry to those who could not attend. Linked earlier is a transcript of the event and how our drawing was made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The winners of our site swag are: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1981/extrakun&quot;&gt;Extrakun&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/7373/thunderforge&quot;&gt;Thunderforge&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4398/besw&quot;&gt;BESW&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The winners of sourcebooks or PDFs are: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1871/erik-schmidt&quot;&gt;Erik Schmidt&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5746/dakeyras&quot;&gt;Dakeyras&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the upcoming days, the moderators and I will be contacting the winners to arrange for shipping and prize selection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks again to &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; who participated in this contest and made it a smashing success! ♪&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-06-11T00:27:16.763" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2960" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2961" CreationDate="2013-06-12T20:29:54.260" Score="9" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I have a question that is very relevant...and has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/752/what-ebook-readers-work-well-with-roleplaying-pdf&quot;&gt;asked before&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was asked all the way back in the prehistory of today's technology - 2010.  Most of the answer acknowledge that things may change in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to ask an exact duplicate of the question - it would be pointless.  But I don't know a good way to direct attention to the question and get questions that aren't so out-of-date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I feel the question maybe isn't such a great fit for StackExchange, where duplicate questions are seriously frowned upon but the relevant question's answers are very time-localized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1340" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:29:22.397" Title="What's the proper way to ask for new answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2960" CreationDate="2013-06-12T23:17:53.413" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The proper way to do this would be to add a bounty to the old question soliciting new answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, that even though these kinds of questions are frowned upon across the network, they have traditionally done fairly well here because we ask that answers be based on experience and expertise rather than just opinion. And there are fairly objective and narrow &lt;em&gt;experiential&lt;/em&gt; criteria for evaluating these answers (how do gaming PDFs look, does it run the apps you need to play effectively, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd go ahead and put some rep on it with a blurb soliciting updates and answers based on current tech.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-06-12T23:17:53.413" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2962" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-14T20:31:37.190" Score="11" ViewCount="264" Body="&lt;p&gt;Custom &quot;off topic&quot; close votes are coming to RPG.SE soon, and the NC and NARQ close reasons are being (partially) replaced:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/184154/closing-changes-on-hold-unclear-too-broad-opinion-based-off-topic-reasons&quot;&gt;Closing changes: [on hold], unclear, too broad, opinion-based, off-topic reasons, bye-bye to Too Localized&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of these changes we will be able to enter freeform comments when voting to close as &quot;off topic&quot;, and our replacements for NC and NARQ will be more &quot;actionable&quot; by the question-asker, but it means we will lose some close reasons we're familiar with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To replace the uses of NC, NARQ, and OT that are important to &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site, we'll be able to specify up to three custom off-topic close reasons, and their explanatory text. These are both to cover site-specific reasons why we used to use NC and NARQ, but also simply for the convenience of not having to type &quot;This site is about analogue RPGs, so computer RPGs are off-topic&quot; by hand every time we choose &quot;off topic&quot;. I expect that we will quickly figure out which reasons we need boilerplate list options for by looking at what freeform reasons are given most often, but I'm pretty sure we can come up with some of them now and start compiling our options early.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, it's important to emphasise that we absolutely don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to choose anything now. When the new close menu rolls out, we will be able to use it just fine, and we can sort out what custom OT close reasons we want after we've gotten comfortable with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post will also serve as the place to discuss wording and changes to our custom OT reasons, once the new voting code is live on RPG.SE. (Can I get a [featured] tag, mods?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We will be limited to three custom OT reasons&lt;/strong&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7295/what-will-be-our-custom-off-topic-close-reasons/7298#comment20259_7295&quot;&gt;at least at first&lt;/a&gt;), so we should make sure we pick the most useful or common ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/120302/a-sampling-of-recent-off-topic-and-too-localized-closures&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here is a sampling of our recent Too Localized and Off Topic closed questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And for further reference, this is what our close options will look like, so we can judge where there are holes to fill that are RPG.SE-specific:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LO24G.png&quot; alt=&quot;The new close-vote radio list&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-12-11T00:19:53.503" Title="What custom off-topic close reasons should we have?" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2962" CreationDate="2013-06-14T20:50:49.577" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Common reasons I can think of right away with some suggested wordings:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;CRPG questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is about pen-and-paper, LARP, and other analogue RPGs. This question is about computer RPGs, which are off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too-broad character build and charop&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Character build and optimisation questions must include specific requirements to be on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The bad kind of historical setting questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Historical setting questions must have an inherent RPG component. This question does not require RPG expertise and is therefore off-topic. It &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; be on-topic at history.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Idle curiosity and amusement&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question is about a hypothetical situation that is only useful to satisfy idle curiosity or as a source of amusement, which is off-topic for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too-broad sys-rec&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Since there are many thousands of RPGs and more every day, questions asking for recommendations must include narrow requirements to be on-topic. The requirements of this question are too broad and may have many hundreds of correct answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these overlap with the other close vote reasons that will remain (&quot;unclear what you're asking&quot;, &quot;too broad&quot;, &quot;primarily opinion-based&quot;), so we should weigh whether we actually need them (to give the asker a specific actionable solution to their question being put &quot;on hold&quot;) or whether the more general categories will suffice for that kind of off-topic question. If in doubt, leave it out – we can always add an off-topic option later if we decide we should have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2013-06-19T04:07:25.833" LastActivityDate="2013-06-19T04:07:25.833" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2965" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-15T00:23:15.577" Score="6" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would be helpful if there was a dice mode for Fudge dice. Fudge dice are 6 sided, with 2 +, 2 -, and two blank. It would even be cooler if the total would be added together (+1, -1, 0) and given. Two suggestions on how to have this be called.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4dF (Rolls 4 fudge dice)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fudge! (Same as 4df)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are those who have a script to change the dice automatically, but it would be nice to support, especially since there seems to be a fair amount of chat room activity revolving around Fate, which uses Fudge dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8484" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2013-06-17T12:36:17.420" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T12:36:17.420" Title="New dice mode in chat" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2954" CreationDate="2013-06-15T00:27:35.443" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The way that other sites have tended to do this is if there is considerable conversation around a game, open a room for that game. Keep the room around if it's not in use, but don't have a room per session. The best example is of Arqade, which has rooms for the most popular 4-5 games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as Fate goes, I think if there is a serious effort, having one room per campaign would be reasonable. If one campaign dies, then the rooms could be recycled. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8484" LastActivityDate="2013-06-15T00:27:35.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2967" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2968" CreationDate="2013-06-15T18:22:24.167" Score="3" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems to come up regularly when a question is raised relating to the balance of power between the GM and players. What invariably happens is that people all have different interpretations of this, often based on how a particular game's rules are phrased.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This often leads to long discussions in comments, which I always understood was not the ideal way of doing things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are we handling these questions the best way? Is there a 'correct' answer that can be given with this type of issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-15T13:28:48.490" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:28:48.490" Title="'Rule 0' questions and their variants" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2967" CreationDate="2013-06-15T21:07:40.487" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's called &quot;refrain from arguing in comments.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Differing interpretations are fine.  Someone who has a Rule 0 answer should post it, someone who doesn't believe in that should post that, and then voting etc. will make the most helpful answers rise to the top. Usually someone who pauses to rub their two brain cells together will make an answer that incorporates both options, and they win.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with someone - post a competing answer, or live with the pain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-06-15T21:07:40.487" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2969" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2970" CreationDate="2013-06-16T03:13:41.577" Score="7" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;In light of the removal of the &quot;too localized&quot; close reason, I still feel like I should ask this here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm in search of a specific RPG system whose name I seem to have forgotten, but some details of which I remember. Is it within the scope of the FAQ/help center to ask about it on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't seem to find anything there which directly counters the posting of such a question, but I wanted to verify with the community first. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: This is now a moot point, since I remembered the name of the game I was looking for (Unknown Armies). Still, I'm curious what the answer is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorDisplayName="user8248" LastEditDate="2013-06-16T03:22:17.420" LastActivityDate="2013-06-16T04:29:52.123" Title="Is it acceptable to ask in search of a specific RPG system?" Tags="|discussion|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2970" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2969" CreationDate="2013-06-16T04:29:52.123" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We currently allow game identification questions. Some SEs do not and we would revisit this if we got lots and/or low quality ones. For now, go for it but show you've done research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-06-16T04:29:52.123" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2971" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-16T06:38:53.667" Score="13" ViewCount="332" Body="&lt;p&gt;So - most [closed] questions are posted by new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But experienced users continue to &quot;pile on&quot; and -1 vote them, even after they are closed!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What gives?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This discourages new users because:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does nothing to improve the question. (That's what comments are for.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It seems to encourage me-too/piling on.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It often leads to the dreaded -1.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How many ways do we have to kick a new user in the shins when they arrive?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand why voting remains active at all - at least once it reaches 0 and is closed, could we lock out downvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we can't change the software, let's change our behavior. Please don't down-vote new users' already closed questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ugh. Actions like these can make us appear as unfriendly - without intending to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastEditorUserId="810" LastEditDate="2013-06-17T01:51:52.543" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="New User Experience: Why allow downvotes (esp. below 0) on already closed questions?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|down-votes|new-users|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2971" CreationDate="2013-06-17T02:39:30.520" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know if disallowing downvoting is the right answer or not, but I do think this is an issue which should be looked at carefully. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that reputation is meant to be --at least in part-- a measure of how well a citizen understands the site's philosophies and is willing to play along with them. EG, the 20 rep minimum for chat shows that the citizen is able and willing to cross that low hurdle by contributing positively to the site. In that context, downvoting is a crucial part of the site's social engineering structure and shouldn't be casually blocked out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing questions is often done to &quot;protect&quot; them from unhelpful answers while the OP works on how to rephrase their concern. Giving answers to questions is a much more crucial element of the site than downvoting, and we have a mechanic to prevent it when inappropriate. Perhaps we should consider whether this intended function of closing questions would be enhanced by limiting or banning downvoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But maybe mechanical solutions aren't what's needed? We know that downvotes aren't always leveraged as intended: downvotes often go hand-in-hand with close votes, when the two serve very different functions. We also see that monkey-see-monkey-do is a common ailment of the community, and is probably one of the major reasons for dogpile downvoting on closed questions. Looked at in this light, downvoting is symptomatic of ignorance about the site's tools and tenets. Education about the tools and concerted effort to cultivate an environment in line with the tenets would then be an appropriate response, because any response that targeted only the downvoting behavior would fail to address the underlying cause of that symptom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T02:39:30.520" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2973" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-17T06:36:14.140" Score="2" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;While lurking in other online communities, I've occasionally come across questions that would be a great fit for RPG.SE, but haven't been asked here yet. Should these sorts of questions be &quot;ported over&quot; to RPG.SE, should we assume that users will search elsewhere and find their answer, or is there another way to handle these? If it's permissible to re-ask the questions here, is there any issue with the user who ported it benefitting in the form of upvotes/rep?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2402" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T08:42:57.193" Title="What's SOP for questions that have been asked in other venues?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2973" CreationDate="2013-06-17T08:42:57.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should we port questions over here? &lt;em&gt;Maybe.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/05/encyclopedia-stack-exchange/&quot;&gt;Encyclopedia Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, Joel explicitly mentions it's alright to come here and post bits of information you learned and they're trying to encourage it - &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; if you can provide a canonical answer to questions that keep coming up over and over again only slightly different each time. I'll resist quoting all of it, and just take the core part:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Stack Overflow launched, we’ve been trying to explain that it’s not just a Q&amp;amp;A platform: it’s also a place where you can publish things that you’ve learned: recipes, FAQs, HOWTOs, walkthroughs, and even bits of product documentation, as long you format it as a question and answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Jeff wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you have a question that you already know the answer to&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you’d like to document it in public so others (including yourself) can find it later&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it is OK to ask, and answer, your own question on a relevant Stack Exchange site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: if you want some piece of knowledge available to users &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;, and you have concerns about them being able to find it, then maybe, yes, post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is... tricky though. Porting questions is another thing. &amp;quot;Porting over&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25474357/The_Rules_Of_Hidden_Club:__Targeting_things_you_cant_see_in_DD.?pg=1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the Rules of Hidden Club&lt;/a&gt; to a canonical &amp;quot;How does stealth and hiding work?&amp;quot; question would be questionable at best, and would be copying a guy's hard work without permission at worst.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a large-scale well-known piece of work like the Rules of Hidden Club, we might not need it here: just mention it when it comes up, and if hiding questions become frequent and various enough we need a canonical answer, we should have one that politely links to the Rules of Hidden Club and summarises it or otherwise avoids providing a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;just-a-link answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want something large-scale over here, ask the user who wrote it if they wouldn't mind putting it here so they can benefit from the rep themselves. But first ask yourself why you need that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's obscure knowledge buried somewhere in an old topic that you think could be lost and is useful to people: rescue it. You're doing people a favour. Make it your original work, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, a lot of the times it might just come down to: &lt;em&gt;do we really need you to do that? Who are you helping?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What about copying and pasting things we didn't write?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably don't do that. It's not yours, and you don't have permission. It's intellectually dishonest - probably.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think the knowledge you're bringing here is worth bringing here, take the time to rewrite the question and answer to better serve as a canonical question and answer for the issue. Bring some craftsmanship to the Q&amp;amp;A you're about to post. If you don't want to take the time doing so, it's probably not worth transferring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's unlikely the posts you found are &lt;em&gt;so good&lt;/em&gt; they cannot &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; be improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What about the risk of people who're going to just post a lot of content they never wrote?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're pasting a lot of self-answered questions with highly inconsistent writing styles, people are going to start noticing, getting suspicious, and wondering what's going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're really making a genuine contribution though, people will react positively. If they're not... people won't: downvotes, closures, and eventually question-banning will follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What about reputation?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you put in work writing and editing and thinking about the answer and produced something originally your own, you deserve the reputation. If you made more use of the copy and paste buttons than of your brain, you should probably be posting the question and answer as community wiki, or not posting them at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T08:42:57.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2975" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2965" CreationDate="2013-06-17T12:36:11.247" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quoting myself from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1290/can-we-add-d10-and-d4-support-to-the-chat-dice-bot/1422#1422&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[…] I have to decline that. The dice bot is supposed to be a cute little chat room easter egg unique to the RPG rooms. Its purpose is not (and never was intended to be, and never will be) to be a full-fledged feature-complete dice rolling service that covers all possible variations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has nothing to do with the question wether it's easy to implement, or whether someone takes the time to write the code. The plain and simple reason is that it's requesting to turn the dice bot into some that it's not supposed to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T12:36:11.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2971" CreationDate="2013-06-17T16:51:26.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not an answer, but here are some related discussions on MSO:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/112749/block-downvoting-a-closed-question&quot;&gt;Block downvoting a closed question&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;asked Nov 18 '11&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/83798/why-allow-closed-questions-to-be-voted-on&quot;&gt;Why allow closed questions to be voted on?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;asked Mar 19 '11&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/181187/downvote-pile-on-on-closed-questions&quot;&gt;Downvote “pile-on” on closed questions?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;asked May 21 '13&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T16:51:26.430" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-06-17T16:51:26.430" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2977" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2971" CreationDate="2013-06-17T18:36:19.180" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/173513/turbocharging-the-roomba-solutions-for-premature-deletion&quot;&gt;Turbocharging the Roomba: solutions for premature deletion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Might also be relevant to this discussion. It may help inform other user behavior other than just voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-06-17T18:36:19.180" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2978" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2971" CreationDate="2013-06-18T14:41:42.280" Score="-10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is never a reason for a system to have downvotes. The vote of 0 is plenty enough to show that no one cares or thinks little of the question, comment, link, whatever in the system used. Closing, Locking, or Deleting solves what downvotes would otherwise solve as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think about the downvoting of comments on sites like reddit. What other use are they besides to tell others they are [insert favored insult]? They serve no purpose but to insult other users, or in other words: troll them. It is a literal troll feature, developed by a troll designer, and only a troll would implement such a feature to any system. Perhaps if the downvotes flagged something as spam to hide the comments, such as youtube does. However, most downvote systems fail to implement this, and instead have a SEPARATE function for reporting spam or inappropriate comments. Once again, making it useless. Downvoting is also NOT a good implementation of spam/deletion because unpopular opinions that do not violate the rules will become hidden or deleted, which is counter-productive to a free-speech environment. Such a system allows for trolls to abuse others by simply disliking their comments, making them disappear. Imagine if downvotes deleted that which was downvoted. Trolls can already delete any comments they wish on StackExchange, and moderators can do nothing to prevent it or reverse the damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes were made by a troll designer who enjoys spreading negativity on the internet (as if there wasn't enough already...) and every troll after him decided it was a good idea to mimic the design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Few people actually contemplate whether or not the feature being used is good, bad, useful, effective, etc. They merely copy/paste from design to design and change parts they like or dislike, without any thought to creating their own system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we had more originality in web design, and less mindless copy/paste, we would have more people implementing their own systems and not other people's. We would see the elimination of pointless troll features such as downvoting, and an increase in innovative features such as upvoting (which give good statements more visibility). Innovative features that would otherwise not be created or improved upon by original thought in design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, that is to naively pretend that every web developer is a great web designer. Honestly, it is probably best that people copy what works, due to the high possibility that their lack of skill will produce a worse design (or even a nightmarish one that no good designer wishes to even fathom!) As it stands, all of the good designers ARE original. They are allowed to be original, even encouraged to be so, due to their talent as a good designer. The rest just copy/paste and ruin or improve small bits at a time. It takes an intelligent person to instantly think &quot;Hmm...what is the benefit of a downvoting system? There sure are negatives...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvoting closed answers is simply a redundancy to the stupidity of the downvoting in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8550" LastEditorDisplayName="user8550" LastEditDate="2013-06-18T14:47:00.197" LastActivityDate="2013-06-18T14:47:00.197" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2971" CreationDate="2013-06-18T20:51:32.247" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been dragging my feet to write a full answer to this. But I think the functionality needs to stay and I think the behavior needs to stay. Here are some good reasons to keep the functionality (and to keep downvoting questions below -1).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allow for instant deletion. Questions with scores of &amp;lt;-2 can be deleted by immediately by 20k users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hide from the home page. Questions of score of &amp;lt;-3 are hidden from the home page (they still appear in the questions list). &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expose them to eventual abandonment deletion via the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/177675/170797&quot;&gt;Roomba&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Send a clear message that specific posts are unwelcome here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimize for Pearls not Sand&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally indicate a low quality effort&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, most questions probably don't need to be down voted after they are closed. But that should not a mechanical enforcement. Down votes on questions are free for a reason (because we want good questions and we shouldn't be afraid of down voting them). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's good to be nice to a user, but sometimes the best thing we can do for new user is to send a very clear message that their question does not meet our guidelines and if they want to participate here they will have to do better. This can be communicated in comments, but seeing a -1 or -2 next to your post sends an even clearer message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-06-18T21:00:41.470" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2962" CreationDate="2013-06-19T13:52:21.040" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I support SevenSidedDie's list, except for &quot;Idle curiosity and amusement&quot;. To me, that seems to be a catch-all group that could be used for ANY question. Quite honestly, we don't have any way to know what a user's real intentions are when they ask a question and what may seem an idle question to us could be something serious to them. For example, &quot;How do I get started in RPGs?&quot; could be flagged as an idle question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that vote-to-close reason is serious flamebait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3844" LastActivityDate="2013-06-19T13:52:21.040" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2981" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-06-19T13:58:21.820" Score="24" ViewCount="436" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the past several weeks, moderator comment deletion has been regular and heavy handed. I'm generally good with this (I'm on record as saying I'm far more likely to delete an entire comment stream than a few single comments when it's my job). But it would be good to both evaluate this behavior to make sure it continues to be constructive, and to enact some reasonable limitations on the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some data on recent comment deletions would be really good. I don't think this is available in the data explorer, but perhaps the community team could be called upon to provide it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few types of comments that rarely merit deletion and can be harmful &lt;em&gt;if they are&lt;/em&gt; deleted. It would be good to make sure that these kinds of comments are not getting deleted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that indicate an answer is incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that point to an uncorrected flaw.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that add additional sources that have not yet been edited into an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally if these comments lead to a stream of discussion this is not constructive, but when it's a single comment or two pointing to flaws/incorrect assumptions/flat wrong details, they are important supplements to upvotes and alternate answers and should be preserved. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we are trying to provide good information to people, comments that are critical of an answer, that correct flaws and provide sources are important tools for both readers and voters to properly evaluate whether the answer is correct or not. Generally moderators are not supposed to be making these judgements so comments that are critical of answers should stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately without the data to know how many of these kinds of things are being deleted it's hard to make a judgement. However, the sentiments of several people in chat are that critical and otherwise useful comments on answers are being deleted and that this is harmful to the site. It would be helpful if we had access to the data to evaluate our comment deletion practices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as data, a random sample of comment (or comment stream) deletions from the past 30 days would probably be sufficient to try to determine how the current comment deletion campaign is going and if there are any adjustments that need to be made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear. I am &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;NOT&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; arguing the preservation of extended discussions. I am requesting data on comment deletions and ultimately a preservation of singular comments or short exchanges that add useful information or correct errors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment deletion is about to become a whole lot less important in general. There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/182295/170797&quot;&gt;pending feature request&lt;/a&gt; that will prevent old comments from showing up, much the way that they do on questions with more than 30 answers (I'm working on getting a timeline for this, I'll report back when I've got a better idea of when it will be implemented). This means moderators can spend &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; less time dealing with comments and the site will still look very clean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T13:07:26.493" Title="Can we re-evaluate our comment deletion policy? (or at least have access to the data?)" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2981" CreationDate="2013-06-19T14:46:39.523" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;All RPG.SE mods continue to routinely delete comments given our policy&lt;/strong&gt; in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted?rq=1&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; and general SE-wide opinion on comments (Note the new network functionality coming that'll hide comments after 7 days unless upvoted, we are pretty much doing that, just manually...). Bad comments go immediately, non-useful ones (+1s, -1s) go after a while. We leave stuff that has multiple upvotes though (unless it is part of a comment war or otherwise bad-on-its-face).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To specifically address waxeagle's three areas in question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that indicate an answer is incorrect. These are deleted&#xA;along with comments indicating an answer is correct - +1's and -1's&#xA;alike get reaped after some time unless they add some other value.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that point to an uncorrected flaw. If it's a flaw of fact&#xA;they are more likely to get left and if it's of opinion they are more&#xA;likely to get deleted, with upvotes having an effect on their&#xA;disposition. &quot;You miscalculated DPS, it's 2.7&quot; will stay. (Ideally, it would get incorporated into the answer to improve it and then deleted!) &quot;I disagree with your playstyle&quot; or &quot;You say monks are fun but they suck&quot; will go.  Your answer is the place for your own opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments that add additional sources that have not yet been edited&#xA;into an answer. Usually left, though like everything it's&#xA;situational, if it's part of a 20-comment thread then unless it's&#xA;upvoted it's probably going to go with the rest of them. We evaluate everything on a case by case basis, value stays.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has become a &quot;hot topic&quot; on the site again likely because there has been more comment deletion than usual recently, for two reasons.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One, Brian put together &lt;strong&gt;a query to find super-comment-laden questions&lt;/strong&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/116350/posts-with-the-most-comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/116350/posts-with-the-most-comments&lt;/a&gt;.  This has led to us cleaning up hundreds of comments in the last month, though mostly on old, popular questions. We still leave the most constructive/upvoted comments (which is why there's still a bunch of questions with 20-40 comments on them).  I will note that if you want any kind of data on comments, comments deleted, who posts the most comments, etc., that interface can give it to you - query away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two, when people start flaming and getting rancorous, we wipe them out fast.  We've been forced to do this as a result of the recent monk flame war and sock flame war.  &lt;strong&gt;When comment wars flare, we delete comments more aggressively to promote civilized behavior.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anyone feels like a specific comment that adds value was deleted, they can bring it to our attention and the mods will review it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments are temporary post-it notes to improve an answer&lt;/strong&gt;. You are welcome to disagree with an answer, clarify the question, etc.  However, &quot;You are wrong&quot; comments, if not incorporated by the poster, do indeed get cleared.  &lt;strong&gt;If you have a competing opinion, post your own answer and let the people vote on its helpfulness.&lt;/strong&gt;  What is happening here is that other answers are being upvoted more than theirs and some users want their &quot;This answer is wrong!&quot; comments to stick on the higher voted answers, to &quot;warn the right thinking&quot; about the incorrect wrongthink of that answer and point them to his &quot;correct&quot; answer.  Tough.  I know it's sometimes hard to understand that people find others' answers more helpful than yours, but when they do, you don't get to coattail onto higher rep answers to get your opinion out.  Some site users feel obliged to comment &quot;wrong!&quot; on every other answer but theirs in a question.  We don't like that, it's not the SE way (it contributes to bullying, flame wars, and bypasses the innate democratic mechanic of the site), and yes those will get deleted after a while. The &quot;while&quot; is shorter the more mod attention has to come to a Q&amp;amp;A because of flags and other signs of contentiousness. Those posters can either a) make a more compelling case in their comment to the answerer so that their feedback gets incorporated, b) focus on their own answer's quality to get it more votes, and/or c) accept that people in the community found someone else's answer more helpful and move on. You generally don't contribute an answer unless you think you're right, but you can't be the &quot;winner&quot; all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T04:05:36.013" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2981" CreationDate="2013-06-19T21:39:53.020" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've definitely had comments on one of my own answers suddenly deleted, because a mod simply didn't realize that the comments &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; relevant and necessary.  They saw them as pointless rules wrangling when it was directly addressing a concern of the user who asked the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't sit right with me, and I don't understand how it helps the site.    If both asker and answerer think a clarification is necessary, the comments should at least stay up until the issue has been properly addressed.  If a mod thinks the comments are getting too chatty, that isn't a reason to delete what's already there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;e:&lt;/em&gt; Since someone commented here, I guess I should point out that I have since quit using this site over the comment deletion issue.  (I haven't had any such issue with comment moderation on other sites.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastEditorUserId="4132" LastEditDate="2015-06-02T13:07:26.493" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T13:07:26.493" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2984" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2995" CreationDate="2013-06-19T21:43:26.523" Score="13" ViewCount="348" Body="&lt;p&gt;Taking a look at the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;, I wonder what benefit it brings to our community.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Here is how I see it being used in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;I want to get correct answers.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/23151/2161&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21353/2161&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; are questions that I think really don't need a specific &quot;rules&quot; tag at all. In fact &lt;em&gt;9 out of 11&lt;/em&gt; of the questions I read look that way to me. The question is clear and concise enough that nobody would think to reply &quot;sure, if your GM allows it!&quot; The question is obviously asking for rules-as-written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;I want to house-rule something.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25827/2161&quot;&gt;What is the best way to prevent abuse of the gate spell?&lt;/a&gt; is an example of where &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; is used to describe the process of house-ruling something, which is completely counter-intuitive to me. We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag, which may fit here better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;I want to force the rules to my situation.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/26498/2161&quot;&gt;This recent question&lt;/a&gt; about &quot;legally&quot; trapping a character underwater is what piqued my interest in this tag. It seems prone to argument and rather specific to the exact scenario - the type of question I would expect to have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; tag. I'm not sure how I feel about the question as a whole, let alone the tag use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, of &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; 22 questions with the tag, only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16965/2161&quot;&gt;this &lt;em&gt;ONE&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is actually about rules-lawyering. The rest all use the tag to describe the question itself, or the answers they expect, rather than the content of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this how we should use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;? I would be in favor of removing the tag completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-06-22T13:32:07.677" Title="What benefit does the &quot;rules-lawyering&quot; tag bring to our community?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2985" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2984" CreationDate="2013-06-19T23:03:15.690" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You know, I have to admit that I came into this agreeing with you, but looking over the questions that used the tag I am in fact seeing a decent rationale for it. All of them are about &quot;I have a player who is gaming the system to make themselves overly powerful/able/otherwise messing my stuff up. How do I stop them?&quot;. Given that a certain percentage of RPG players are into it for the tactical combat aspects as much as anything else, and given that &quot;rules lawyering&quot; is a known trope in RPG playing, I think this does in fact qualify for its own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To your idea of commandeering the social-contract tag for this use, I don't know, man. It seems to me - and please bear in mind that as an RPG player I am way, way over on the &quot;RP and tell stories&quot; end of the spectrum and not at all on the &quot;optimize your character and hack and slash&quot; side - that when you include this tag with these kinds of problems, you're already asking people to provide you with a very specific kind of answer, in this case the &quot;you should talk this over with your player and discuss what you both can do to achieve their character goals and your storyline&quot; answer. Certainly this would be the route that I would go with, but there are a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of players/GMs who play the game the way it is depicted in Knights of the Dinner Table - with an adversarial GM and players who are going to use every trick in the book to get one over on him. Telling this kind of GM or group to talk it out is pointless, along the lines of asking your opponents in Monopoly if they would please agree to not re-roll their dice on doubles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8362" LastActivityDate="2013-06-19T23:03:15.690" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2984" CreationDate="2013-06-19T23:27:11.390" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we discussed and got rid of the [rules] tag - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/363/what-should-the-rules-tag-include&quot;&gt;What should the “rules” tag include?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then we discussed and got rid of the [mechanics] tag - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1587/is-the-mechanics-tag-useful-or-a-problem&quot;&gt;Is the [mechanics] tag useful or a problem?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now this has arisen. I think people are trying to use it to designate &quot;I want a rules-only - aka RAW - answer, not common sense or rulings or whatever.&quot; Perhaps a [rules-as-written] tag would fill that gap.  But in the end, that is a meta tag. When we did away with the rules and mechanics tags. the general reasoning was &quot;we don't want do that,&quot; those are bad tags by SE tag theory guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For rules-lawyering as describing a subset of problem-players, I'm not sure that carries a lot of additional value and it's not really how that tag is being used right now. It is somewhat valuable in describing a question about &quot;a situation where I am trying to rules lawyer with my GM/players to find a loophole to screw them into something,&quot; which while I find that personally abhorrent as a playstyle is a technically correct use of tagging.  So I'd suggest we keep [rules-lawyering] and give it a tag wiki that explains that context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end I think if you want a &quot;rulesy&quot; answer, or a &quot;rules as written&quot; answer or whatever - you should just describe that in your question, as is usual for anything else you'd otherwise be tempted to use a meta tag for. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-06-22T13:32:07.677" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2987" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2993" CreationDate="2013-06-20T16:54:13.033" Score="11" ViewCount="429" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing that I've seen a lot lately is people questioning the tone rather than the content of questions and answers.  Actually, I've seen it a lot period... recalling a few older debates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the great things about sites like this is the breadth of viewpoints and experiences.  I've learned a lot about the differences in ways that changes in culture and language alter the experience of games, and the way that they are played.  It helps to give new perspective on old games and old ways of playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when we choose to take offense at something that might be grating, yet not insulting, we alter the character of the answer, and I'm not so sure that's what we're trying to do.  Or is it?  Are we after a site devoid of the passion behind the hobby... warts and all?  The struggles between RAW and homebrew approaches- those are the things that define gaming and bring up good discussions.  As long as its not handled in a flame-like manner, should those things even be on the table?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just trying to get a discussion going about the site's direction and purpose beyond what's in the help as it doesn't really address these types of issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A mild example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26522/how-do-i-run-a-dungeon-crawl-communicating-how-various-rooms-passages-look-like&quot;&gt;How do I run a dungeon crawl, communicating how various rooms/passages look?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at Sardathrion's answer and the comments.  And then look at the history.  Is the part that was added a part of the answer?  Or a way to explain around the 'meh'?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A more fractious example: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8002/how-do-i-get-my-pcs-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, mxyzplk didn't budge, and didn't remove the word cretin, though there was a whole meta thread about the use of the word.  And I, for one, appreciate that he stood his ground.  Look at the conversations and answers generated by the phrasing of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a principle that I never thought of that was posted on meta a while ago- how to be more awesome, and generate traffic for the site.  And that's by making the site have personality, not just be some dry treatise and resource for answers.  But somewhere that people want to come to and participate in; not just when they have a question, but to stay around an participate.  This site only works if people participate.  It's not a discussion site, for sure... but just mechanically voting down things because they don't sit right with you without any explanation or trying to help the answers be better, or trying to sanitize anything that hit's you wrong seems... wrong.  Very much so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Can't we be civil and ourselves at the same time?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:28:24.673" Title="Are we losing the character of our members in our answers?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2984" CreationDate="2013-06-20T17:07:30.167" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;From my brief skim of the questions, the common bond these questions have is, &lt;strong&gt;&quot;I believe I have found a loophole or an exploit, but I want confirmation before I take advantage of it. Does this thing work the way I think it does?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Since looking for loopholes and exploits is commonly perceived as the behavior of a &quot;rules lawyer,&quot; that's the tag these kind of queries get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-06-20T17:07:30.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2989" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2987" CreationDate="2013-06-20T17:11:59.490" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/9945554#9945554&quot;&gt;Believe it or not, We value civility very highly&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tuesday and Wednesday a bunch of stuff went down, flame wars in comments, spilling over into chat, old hand users complaining about moderator comment deletions and a few other things. A new user popped into chat who had been genuinely trying to work out some issues, right in the middle of the chaos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of continuing the back and forth I directed that comment (the civility one there above) at the new user. Because frankly, what was going on in chat and in the comments on the site &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;was not representative of what this site is about or the level of civility I expect from this site&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact is, one of the best things about this site is that we keep a civil tone. If we lose that we've lost far more than the character of our members, if allow incivility to reign we become like the rest of the Internets. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is somewhere where being nice, being civil and keeping a passionate but respectful tone is valued highly and abandoning this standard would be a huge mistake. Reining in brusque users is an important part of maintaining this civility. Passion is great, but incivility is not. When disagreements go beyond differing playstyles and personalities and start spilling across additional questions or get personal then they have gone too far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2013-06-21T12:49:43.677" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T12:49:43.677" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2987" CreationDate="2013-06-20T17:44:56.457" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.  Is that a bad thing though?  I thought the whole point of SE sites was to curate answers.  Self expression takes a back seat to that.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I find the discussion here unsatisfying, I have forums for that kind of thing.  When I want a solid, well thought out answer instead of some wishy washy opinions, SE delivers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2013-06-20T17:44:56.457" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2991" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2992" CreationDate="2013-06-21T07:13:11.433" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;My browser's security function is reporting that a segment of the chat archive has malware inserted into it. What could/should I do as an RPG.SE citizen?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2013-06-21T08:18:01.280" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T08:18:01.280" Title="Malware in the chat archive: wat do?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2991" CreationDate="2013-06-21T08:17:54.120" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was an image in one of the chat messages that was hosted on a domain that Chrome flags as a possible malware distributor. The image was now a &quot;404 not found&quot; image anyway, so I've just deleted that message. The image filename was &quot;doublefacepalm21.jpg&quot;, so I can &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/search?q=double+facepalm&amp;amp;tbm=isch&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;imagine&lt;/a&gt; what it originally contained :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As soon as I deleted the message, Chrome stopped flagging the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to your question what you should do: Precisely what you did &amp;ndash; post here on meta (or on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/&lt;/a&gt;). Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T09:16:28.323" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T08:17:54.120" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2987" CreationDate="2013-06-21T17:39:51.923" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we can retain personality and fix the &quot;tone&quot; debates, because I don't think it's actually &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt; that's the problem as it is a certain kind of meta-message sometimes embedded into advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's very easy for a bunch of separate issues to get all rolled together here. I see a few things often happening all together during these disagreements:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is disagreement with the proposed advice. That's valid and fine in principle. It's only the explosion of comments when repetition and talking past each other sets in that's the problem (says the pot to the kettle, I know), not the presence of disagreement. We like disagreement, which is why there's downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are declarations of how another answer is &quot;wrong&quot; or &quot;right&quot;. Such declarations are inappropriate in an answer. &lt;strong&gt;That's what votes are for.&lt;/strong&gt; I oppose all answers that reference others or have elements of &quot;replying&quot;, because they are ill-suited to our format and lower the quality of our answers. It also makes the site look like a forum, which is misleading to new users and makes it harder for them to become good users of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is championing of a playstyle. That's valid in an answer. It's especially useful when the playstyle provides a context that can organically solve the problem at hand. It's also useful simply because the playstyle of the original asker and the next reader who has a similar problem are unlikely to be identical, so the variety of approaches to gaming is just as useful as a variety of solutions normally is.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Writing as if, or outright saying that, other playstyles don't exist or are &quot;badwrongfun&quot; or simply don't work. That's invalid. It's neither true, nor helpful. The worst consequence of this is that inexperienced readers are unable to separate the advice in an answer that's universal from the advice in an answer that is specific to the playstyle goals that the answer is pretending are universal. This can lead to readers taking advice that seems good but is going to conflict with their game and group, potentially disastrously. &lt;strong&gt;We are not here to promote playstyle at the expense of clarity.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These four things are often jumbled together, and it's hard to disagree with one and say so in a comment without mixing it up with the rest. Often what seems like disagreements over the advice are over (2) or (4). These are usually called out as &quot;tone&quot; disagreements, but I think it's actually a matter of content: a message about what is the only right way to &lt;em&gt;play&lt;/em&gt;, rather than solutions to the problem at hand. It's content that is a meta-level to the advice, but it's still communicated ideas, which is content. We are rarely asked what is the right way to &lt;em&gt;play&lt;/em&gt;, and offering that as advice is almost always going to be holding a match to dry tinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Drawing a line in the sand and saying &quot;This is the one true way to play&quot;, even only by implication, is what makes the rest of the RPG internet-o-sphere so argumentative and low signal-to-noise. We need to not do that here. It's really easy to accidentally do (2) while doing (3), since &quot;not like that over there&quot; is an easy way to differentiate a stance. I think the way to avoid turning &quot;championing&quot; (2) into &quot;this is the one true way&quot; (3) is to avoid normative statements. That takes practice, but is not too hard once you start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we can all agree that not all content belongs here. I assert that if we can be stubbornly pluralistic in how people play games, we will manage to avoid many so-called &quot;tone&quot; disagreements while retaining our personality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms, these are the two things that (I think) are productively objected to in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;references to other answers (positive or negative; though we don't argue about the positive so it's less an issue)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;normative statements about how to play&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Calling &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; those things out explicitly, without commenting simultaneously on the advice itself and how you (dis)agree with it, avoids jumbling up a valid objection with a value statement. The less confrontational the objecting comment is, too, the more likely it is to be heard charitably and not mistaken for an attack on the otherwise valid content of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-06-21T19:02:35.403" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T19:02:35.403" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2994" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2984" CreationDate="2013-06-21T17:47:28.337" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was originally a comment to @mxyzplk’s answer, which I mostly agree with, but it got too long and probably deserved its own answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Echoing mxyzplk’s suggestion of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; and the commentary suggesting that “rules lawyering” has massive negative connotations, I must agree. I actually would have thought of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; as a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; – i.e. I've got this guy who is constantly badgering me with “but the rules say!” – but I don't think we need a tag for that (and ultimately the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; tags worry me a little simply because they are so judgmental and obviously biased against whoever &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; the person asking the question). I definitely agree that “rules as written” is a more appropriate term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I have two concerns with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Meta Tag?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; might be a “meta tag,” which, as I understand things, are characterized by attempting to shape the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;, and are considered a bad thing. &lt;strong&gt;Personally&lt;/strong&gt;, I’m not entirely convinced that meta tags &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; bad, but then I’m not super-involved in tagging and don’t really know the details. In any event, I think that there definitely &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be a  need for users to request that answers be by “rules as written” – either to satiate a legalistic DM or player, or to try to maintain consistency (e.g. to avoid a situation where your personal houserule response turns out to contradict official material that ends up forcing you to change yet more rules), so I support &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; but I thought meta-ness warranted discussion now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;“Rules as _____” tags&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also have some concerns that this might lead to tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-intended&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-intended&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-intended&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-make-sense&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-make-sense&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-make-sense&lt;/a&gt; – these terms are frequently used in RPG forum debates (or, at least, in D&amp;amp;D forum debates), but I personally &lt;strong&gt;detest&lt;/strong&gt; them because they are overused or inappropriately used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of “rules as intended,” they are often used as an invalid argument from authority – “my opinion is better than yours because &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; my interpretation is what the authors intended!” and are also frequently absolutely impossible for most of us to realistically answer – the only people who &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; know what was intended are the authors themselves, and unless they have made external comments on particular rules, it’s unlikely that one can provide any real evidence that a particular interpretation is intended. This tends to lead to unsolvable arguments and I would foresee a lot of such questions ending in either no real answers, or in bickering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as for “rules as make sense,” the simple fact is that “common sense” is a myth and just about &lt;strong&gt;nothing&lt;/strong&gt; is innately “sensible” to all people. It’s basically a normative statement made by someone who has absolutely no basis for that claim.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I’d really prefer that a new &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag does not cause precedent for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-intended&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-intended&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-intended&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-make-sense&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-make-sense&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-make-sense&lt;/a&gt; tags. The &lt;em&gt;intent&lt;/em&gt; of such notions is that “we accept that the rules don’t always work and we want to hear other options that disregard or change the rules,” but my sense is that really, that is the &lt;strong&gt;default&lt;/strong&gt; on this site. That is, after all, why a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; would be used at all: to indicate that for a particular question, &lt;em&gt;unlike the norm&lt;/em&gt;, we are only interested in something that can be directly cited to particular rules text(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T17:47:28.337" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2984" CreationDate="2013-06-21T18:26:19.360" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with a bunch of the other answers but I wanted to sum up my view:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the rules lawyering tag redundant?&lt;/strong&gt; Maybe, but not necessarily. [rules-lawyering], used correctly, is a subset of [problem-players]. That doesn't mean we should get rid of it, so long as it is individually valuable to specify that particular kind of problem. (Note that [dnd-4e] is a subset of [dungeons-and-dragons]; we like subset tags just fine, so long as they're useful.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it a meta tag?&lt;/strong&gt; [rules-lawyering], as it is used in most of the examples, is a meta-tag, but that's misusing the tag: it's not saying the problem is &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; rules-lawyering, it's saying that they want &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; to engage in rules lawyering. The very definition of a meta-tagging. It should be removed from such questions, if we keep it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it valuable?&lt;/strong&gt; Whether it's valuable enough to keep as a specific kind of [problem-player] subject tag, I don't know, but (due to my disinterest in the subject) I'll leave to others to debate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is a RAW tag useful?&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, I would use a [rules-as-written] tag: I'd add it to my ignore list. Others would likely add it to their favourites list. That would be useful! That's one of the metrics for whether a tag is a good fit for a site: whether it can be productively use to search or filter questions to fit your interests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may be argued that it would be a meta-tag, but I think there's an argument for it to not be one: used on a question asking about the rules-as-written, that does describe the question content. It does imply that answers should be written a certain way... but then, so does tagging a question [dnd-4e] imply that answers should be written about 4e and not, say, Wushu. I think a RAW tag would be a content-description tag, not a meta-instruction tag. Just like giving a &quot;well you could do it like &lt;em&gt;3e&lt;/em&gt; does...&quot; answers to [dnd-4e]-tagged questions, answerers are still free to submit answers that don't fit inside the tags, if they think they have a worthy answer and are willing to risk the downvotes from those who disagree. It's possible for someone to ask about RAW and get a good answer that say, &quot;There's no RAW, but you could houserule like so&quot;. If it's a content tag that describes what their problem is with that's kosher; it wouldn't be if it's a meta tag that decrees what answers are acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are [rules-lawyering] and [rules-as-written] the same thing&lt;/strong&gt;? No. There is room for both a [rules-as-written] content tag (for when the question is about a problem they're having while sticking to the RAW) and a [rules-lawyering] tag (for when the Q is about a problem with the activity of rules lawyering). They're not the same thing, so it's not an either-or question. Whether we need one or the other or not, they're distinct tags with independent merits.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-06-21T18:33:36.020" LastActivityDate="2013-06-21T18:33:36.020" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2996" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2987" CreationDate="2013-06-22T02:47:47.583" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;m going to break one of SevenSidedDie&amp;rsquo;s guidelines to discuss my rationale for responding directly to another answer in one of my own, and also respond to his a little. Should be a neat little experiment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason why I consider direct response to be important is because while we expect answers to display expertise and authority (either you&amp;rsquo;ve dealt with the issue before, you know a lot about the circumstances, or you did the appropriate research), we do not have the same expectations for voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so there is the danger of an answer that &lt;em&gt;sounds good&lt;/em&gt; but is actually wrong in some fashion &amp;ndash; and for the sake of argument, let us assume a hypothetical case where the answer is objectively wrong. In this case, it may be necessary for other users to include information that directly rebuts another answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are available for such purposes, but comments may not always be appropriate for this function: they can be ephemeral, they can invite back-and-forth debate, and they are obviously limited in how much room they provide to make the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, here I make my case that SevenSidedDie&amp;rsquo;s claim that such answers are bad is, itself, wrong. Certainly, such a rebuttal is not &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; warranted, and I could see cases where it degrades an answer. But I think there are cases where it is appropriate, where we benefit from not having so absolute a view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-06-22T02:47:47.583" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2997" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="2998" CreationDate="2013-06-24T09:15:50.453" Score="3" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I'm doing research for a behavioral meta question about answering Fate questions, and that means slogging through Fate posts on the site for examples and precedents. &lt;em&gt;ALL&lt;/em&gt; of the Fate posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can track down about a dozen &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; tags which are actually used. If I went through them, I'd feel like I'd probably seen every D&amp;amp;D-related post on site. I'll have waded through something like 3,000 posts and may soon perish of Acute Alignment Poisoning (tell your friends about AAP; the life you save may be your own), but I'll feel like I got a pretty complete grasp of the site's D&amp;amp;D catalogue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to do the same for Fate, I have to &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/index.php?filters=0_0_0_44284&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;learn the name of every individual game ever produced using the Fate engine&lt;/a&gt; (and apparently there are debates about that; for example, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FATE_(role-playing_game_system)#RPGs_based_on_Fate&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikipedia article&lt;/a&gt; which sites &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faterpg.com/2011/fate-and-its-branches/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; as its source ignores the post's caveats). It doesn't seem like I could &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; confident that I'd seen most of RPG.SE's Fate game posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, perhaps my comparison is faulty, and I should be looking at d20 System tags instead of D&amp;amp;D tags. But I don't see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; questions getting answered with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu-d20&lt;/a&gt; rules nearly so often as I see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; questions getting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spirit-of-the-century&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spirit-of-the-century&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spirit-of-the-century&lt;/a&gt; answers. So if my comparison is faulty, there's a behavioral issue that needs to be addressed about Fate answers and I'll open a meta question about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag was never very comprehensive, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2942/4398&quot;&gt;this meta discussion&lt;/a&gt; leaves me with the impression that I now can't even &lt;em&gt;hope&lt;/em&gt; for a single tag, or a small group of tags (and let me point out that under the circumstances D&amp;amp;D's round dozen tags are a small number, since they feel comprehensive), that'll let me feel like I can track down all the Fate questions. Instead I have to round them up tag after tag after tag after interminal guesswork-discovered tag and just hope not to go mad over the astonishing number of duplicates that are wasting my time and brain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this correct? Am I missing a search function? Am I misinterpreting that meta discussion?&#xA;Or should I just suck it up and accept that this is a necessary casualty of the tagging policy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-05T16:31:25.437" LastActivityDate="2017-04-05T16:31:25.437" Title="Fate tag redux: The Archive Trawl Blues" Tags="|discussion|tags|fate|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2997" CreationDate="2013-06-24T10:20:34.810" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should keep a list of the various Fate systems within the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag's wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2942/4398&quot;&gt;that meta discussion you mentioned&lt;/a&gt; I expressed my stance that everyone asking a Fate question should always use the system tag for the system they're using. We &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag when asking a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; question isn't very helpful and I'm sure similar issues exist in Fate systems, but that leaves us having to trawl through all the different Fate system tags to find all the Fate questions. Hence: let's keep track of those systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-06-24T11:16:55.330" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="2999" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2997" CreationDate="2013-06-25T01:18:00.643" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fate-related tags that we have, in descending order of use as of right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aspects&lt;/a&gt;*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/diaspora&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;diaspora&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;diaspora&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/stress&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;stress&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;stress&lt;/a&gt;*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spirit-of-the-century&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spirit-of-the-century&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spirit-of-the-century&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fudge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fudge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fudge&lt;/a&gt;*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legends-of-anglerre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legends-of-anglerre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legends-of-anglerre&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thresholds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;thresholds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;thresholds&lt;/a&gt; (only one question, may disappear)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* &lt;em&gt;Denotes a tag that's not strictly Fate-only, but in practice is full of Fate questions.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This set of tags isn't a complete representation of Fate-based games, of course, but it's will get you nearly every question we have about Fate-based games. (It's a useful place to start from to fill out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; tag's wiki and tag-usage guide, too.) New tags are added infrequently, and can be caught by keeping an eye on the front page for new questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files+or+fate+or+fate-core+or+aspects+or+diaspora+or+stress+or+fate-accelerated+or+spirit-of-the-century+or+fudge+or+legends-of-anglerre+or+thresholds&quot;&gt;query that entire Fate-based game tag set&lt;/a&gt; by clicking that link, or by copying and pasting this search into the search form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[dresden-files] or [fate] or [fate-core] or [aspects] or [diaspora] or [stress] or [fate-accelerated] or [spirit-of-the-century] or [fudge] or [legends-of-anglerre] or [thresholds]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a full list of Fate-based games beyond what we have tags and questions for, &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/rpgsystem/577/fate&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the RPGGeek database entry for the Fate family of RPGs&lt;/a&gt; is one of the most maintained references.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-06-25T01:18:00.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2962" CreationDate="2013-06-25T19:46:44.207" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, there's a blog post on the changes:  &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2013/06/the-war-of-the-closes/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2013/06/the-war-of-the-closes/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stock reasons are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;too broad &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unclear what you're asking &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;primarily opinion based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;in addition to off topic, dupe, too localized.  Off topic can have &quot;custom&quot; added reasons (e.g. no sysrec, no product identification).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CRPGs, etc. are simple off topic, too broad charop or sysrec are too broad. Historical setting is simple off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see any solid justification for a site specific close reason at this time; I think we should wait and see if the given close reasons are unclear in practice and add them at need. We've tried hard to leave most things on topic here and just really roll hard on the other best practices on them (e.g. sysrec).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-06-25T19:46:44.207" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3001" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3002" CreationDate="2013-06-27T12:34:29.673" Score="12" ViewCount="455" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a current case of an infrequent problem: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26689/why-is-donjon-offline&quot;&gt;Why is Donjon offline?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dakeyras's answer was a response to a question that was &lt;em&gt;once&lt;/em&gt; there. It was made in good faith, and is a helpful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The part of the question it was responding to &lt;em&gt;no longer exists&lt;/em&gt;, and if the question were asked in this state to begin with, Dakeyras's answer would be &lt;em&gt;not an answer to any question being asked&lt;/em&gt;, though it's helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This pattern occurs sometimes: a question is asked, answers are supplied, the question is edited, and those answers are no longer responding to the current question and may sometimes now be completely irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do we do in these cases? Let an irrelevant answer sit there? Ask the author of the answer to delete it? Flag it for moderator attention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T17:32:05.957" LastActivityDate="2020-04-07T17:32:05.957" Title="What do we do with answers made obsolete by a question change?" Tags="|support|questions|answers|editing|question-scope|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3002" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3001" CreationDate="2013-06-27T13:21:42.580" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generally they need to be deleted or updated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the author is a regular a comment indicating that the question has changed and that they should edit or delete their answer is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the author is a drive by or hasn't been to the site in a while then you've got a choice to make. If a minimal edit can be made to bring it into the new scope of the question then that's best. However, if this is not possible (even if it's just too much work really), then go ahead and flag it with the &quot;not an answer&quot; flag or a custom message indicating that it's no longer relevant to the question as posed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change#comment5750_3001&quot;&gt;C. Ross says in his comment&lt;/a&gt;, this illustrates why we need to get a question &quot;On Hold&quot; asap if it's in need of editing. I also highly recommend &lt;em&gt;not answering&lt;/em&gt; questions that are undergoing scoping changes for this very reason, it creates more work for everyone involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2013-06-27T13:21:42.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3001" CreationDate="2013-06-27T23:11:04.040" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is why we don't like (and shouldn't answer!) questions that have multiple separate questions in them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fundamental solution is to not answer them in the first place before they're fixed. After the fact, updating or deleting the answer is usually the solution. In the case where the question was changed inappropriately, we roll back the question edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, I think the error was in editing out the wrong question in the first place. Now the question isn't the sort we handle, and the answers don't match it. I think the edit should have been to keep the &quot;where is a good fractal world generator?&quot; question, which is on topic and one we haven't fielded yet… but what's done is done and I'd rather see it left as it is than make a larger mess of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-06-28T05:09:53.360" LastActivityDate="2013-06-28T05:09:53.360" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3004" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3005" CreationDate="2013-06-28T09:35:59.177" Score="5" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;And I am not asking about the general &quot;what do you guys think&quot; questions, but since I noticed we have accepted (meaning reopened) questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26558/help-me-evaluate-this-homebrew-pokemaster-class&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, if only after extensive editing, is it okay to ask about our own designs? Or should that be left to the forums? I always thought the question would be too localised, but after seeing the question above, I began to doubt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the RPG.SE policy on such questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7723" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-07-02T23:22:57.793" Title="How far do we do peer reviews?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3004" CreationDate="2013-07-02T10:58:02.300" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is an absolutely necessary part of the site.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only is homebrew a common part of the RPG experience, many engines now require it to one degree or another: for example, non-generic questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; spellcasting &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; necessarily involve analyzing table-level invention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We seem to be fine-tuning our understanding of &quot;too localized.&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it appears to be based on the idea that if the &lt;em&gt;topic&lt;/em&gt; could be applied widely (like making spells in DFRPG) then it doesn't matter if the &lt;em&gt;example&lt;/em&gt; is exceptionally narrow. Only when others could not glean more general understanding from the specific solution does &quot;too localized&quot; come into play. This is one of my own questions that might be seen to fall into the &quot;localized but useful&quot; category: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21660/4398&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I turn invisible?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But they don't get a free pass where other questions wouldn't.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on these questions and their answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2912/4398&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Homebrew evaluation questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/942/4398&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How to deal with feedback questions about house-rules?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;it looks like the answer is that such questions are excellent provided they follow the standard site guidelines for asking questions. In particular, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;&quot;you&quot; should be sure to avoid cases where...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there is no actual problem to be solved: “I’m curious if other people feel like I do.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you are asking an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if ______ happened?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And remember that experience-based answers will be much better than theory-based answers in this context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-07-02T13:37:54.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-02T23:07:11.203" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's one specific alternate proposal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[game-recommendation] as the general &quot;shopping&quot; tag.  Modify with whatever the scope is, [published-adventures], [campaign-settings], [gm-tools], [4e], etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sub in all existing system-rec guidance on game-rec.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-07-02T23:07:11.203" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3007" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3004" CreationDate="2013-07-02T23:22:57.793" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Acceptable&lt;/strong&gt;: &quot;Here is a thing I made, here is its design goal, does this look like it would fulfill the goal or am I missing something important?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not acceptable&lt;/strong&gt;: &quot;Here is a thing I made, what do you think?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the latter will probably be hit with a lot of close votes of the &quot;too broad&quot;, &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot;, or &quot;mostly opinion based&quot; variety (depending on its exact phrasing). That's a good test of whether the question you're asking is a good fit for the site &amp;ndash; if you were a potential answerer reading just the text on the screen, would any of the close reasons seem appropriate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-07-02T23:22:57.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3008" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-03T01:20:39.063" Score="6" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've got a couple of tags that don't describe the topic of the question, but rather describe the kind of answer being sought. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; are pretty obvious, and there may be others I'm not aware of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;tagging section of the our help pages&lt;/a&gt;, we get a pretty clear description of what a tag is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From this, it seems like tags should be used to describe &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;, not &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give a &lt;em&gt;reductio ad absurdum&lt;/em&gt; example of why I think this could be a problem, please consider that this seems like precedent for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realism&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrativist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrativist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrativist&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulationist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulationist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulationist&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gamist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gamist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gamist&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/i-already-know-fate-is-about-story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;i-already-know-fate-is-about-story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;i-already-know-fate-is-about-story&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/experience-based&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;experience-based&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;experience-based&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dont-tell-me-monks-suck&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dont-tell-me-monks-suck&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dont-tell-me-monks-suck&lt;/a&gt;, and so forth: all of these describe the kind of answers that are expected, rather than the kind of question being asked, and do very little in terms of attracting experts or helping people find relevant questions later on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, &amp;quot;I would like X kind of answer&amp;quot; is better kept to the body of the question, where it can be explained and put in context. We're already seeing the extant tags being misapplied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: Why do we need this kind of tag? Can we take a good hard look at this practice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T05:50:55.250" Title="Reviewing the usefulness of type-of-answer tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3008" CreationDate="2013-07-03T01:24:49.393" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I view &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; as absolutely critical, describing the domain of the question, specifically, we require that any question describe what system(s) it applies to, and system-agnostic is a scoping tag, just like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, I find having something &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; that very useful to signal that the question refers to rules, not the social contract, intentions, or other fluff of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-07-03T01:24:49.393" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3010" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-03T03:32:15.437" Score="13" ViewCount="778" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am playing D&amp;amp;D 4e and I have a question about how I can create an excellent pirate adventure. Since people have pirate adventures in other RPG systems, and Stack Exchange is about useful answers, should I tag my question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; or maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; in order to cover a wider variety of responses and be more helpful to other people making pirate adventures, even if I'm only interested in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; answers myself? Also, I've seen questions get closed as &quot;too localized.&quot; Would doing this help keep my question from getting closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to the FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T15:41:57.260" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T15:41:57.260" Title="Should I use a narrow system tag, or use a broader tag?" Tags="|discussion|faq|tags|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3010" CreationDate="2013-07-03T03:32:15.437" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Always tag your question with the exact system you're using&lt;/strong&gt; if you're asking a question to help you out in a problem about your system and you're only really interested in answers relevant to your system. Even if your question could be relevant to other RPG systems, or a broader category of RPG systems, &lt;strong&gt;ask about your exact problem in your exact RPG&lt;/strong&gt;. There's no need to broaden your question to, say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; if you're not genuinely interested in answers broader than your own system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're playing in one RPG system and want answers about creating a pirate adventure for that system, and you see a similar question asked for a different system which has answers which are not helpful to you or not what you're after, feel free to ask your question tagged with your own system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;System-specific can be much more useful to you and others than a broader scope&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if it is an issue that could be relevant to other systems, if you're not interested in broader answers, you should just focus on getting &lt;em&gt;your own&lt;/em&gt; problem solved, not everyone else's. Ask about the problem you're actually facing in your own system and get a solution to your specific problem in your own system. There's no need to broaden the system scope of your question unless you specifically want broader answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; relevant to other systems, players of those other systems can still often learn just fine from questions targeted at your own system. In my personal experience when I only played D&amp;amp;D, I learned some things from questions about Fate, Burning Wheel and other systems, and often the specific philosophies that those RPGs bring to the table broadened my experiences and taught me things I could bring back to my own D&amp;amp;D gameplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If players of other systems don't get the answers they need, they can ask another question scoped to their own system, or ask a broader-scoped question if they're interested in broader-scoped answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is OK if it's what you're after:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How can I make an excellent pirate adventure?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers contain sorta-helpful stuff for your system of choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But this is more useful for solving system-specific issues:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How can I make an excellent pirate adventure?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers are targeted &lt;em&gt;straight at&lt;/em&gt; 4e, mentioning classes and themes and monsters and terrain and other content available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica-5&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How can I make an excellent pirate adventure?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers are targeted &lt;em&gt;straight at&lt;/em&gt; Ars Magica 5 and contain spell recommendations and other useful information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;How can I make an excellent pirate adventure?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers targeted &lt;em&gt;straight at&lt;/em&gt; Fate core, recommending piratey aspects, what skills and stunts various pirates should have, mooks and groups and characters, and possibly some recommendations from the magic system toolkit&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would prefer to see the same kind of question asked several times and for different systems each time by users wanting answers in those specific systems, than one that attempts to deal with all possible systems and whose answers are only of limited help to anyone wanting answers for their specific systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-12-20T01:52:07.140" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3012" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3010" CreationDate="2013-07-03T03:37:38.673" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should tag a question with a specific system if you want it answered for a specific system, and you should tag more widely if you're trying to solve a wider problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, tagging for the system you are playing is the right thing to do. You should be asking about the problem &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; have, and not making it more generic out of an attempt to get wider reach. If you are playing Pathfinder, there may be better specific answers to your question than you'd get by tagging with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; also, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people don't just play one game system, however, and there are many gaming techniques widely applicable to the majority of existing games. There's certainly a place on the site for those. You will note there is a wide variety of &quot;system agnostic&quot; products out there that are quite popular - generic NPCs, generic plot hooks, etc. People find these useful and are entitled to look for more generic answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those that really want things hooked into a specific ruleset, that's a valid mode of play and those people can tag with a specific system tag. In the end, it is up to the question asker. Trying to dictate which they 'should' be doing is not an appropriate use of time. Retagging their question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be helpful, but if they revert you should abide by their wishes - if you want to ask that question specific to a system, &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like on Stack Overflow, you can ask for a generic algorithm for a sort, or for that sort in C or Python or Java. They both solve problems - different problems, for different people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-04-21T03:51:56.503" LastActivityDate="2014-04-21T03:51:56.503" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3013" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-03T15:47:01.243" Score="15" ViewCount="314" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have separate tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't especially like this, for several reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's kinda making an assumption about the problem that may not be warranted. Sure, sometimes one person is the problem, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26849/abuse-is-it-fair-if-its-in-the-situation&quot;&gt;sometimes you've got an issue where several people are responsible&lt;/a&gt;, or the asker could accept an answer that indicates that &lt;em&gt;they themselves&lt;/em&gt; were the problem or that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18375/how-to-deal-with-players-who-like-to-use-the-local-authorities-to-solve-their-pr&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;no one&lt;/em&gt; is particularly to blame&lt;/a&gt;. Tags that only really unambiguously apply after a question has been definitively answered are... not very good tags.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's loaded language. Saying that someone is a &quot;problem player&quot; or &quot;problem GM&quot; is making the gaming problem a &lt;em&gt;the identity of a person&lt;/em&gt; rather than just &lt;em&gt;their behavior&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Minor) I feel like these are making structural assumptions about the game that don't fit all games.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-problems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-problems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-problems&lt;/a&gt; instead?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T17:46:03.583" Title="Let's merge problem-players and problem-gm" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3014" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2013-07-03T15:56:16.727" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I agree, it's been bothering me too.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The language is passive-aggressive, in addition to your first two points. I do think that &quot;not all games do it that way&quot; isn't a very solid reason for changing a tag --because then we'd have to trash &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-map&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-map&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-map&lt;/a&gt; too. But as you say, that's a minor reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I suggest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-at-the-table&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-at-the-table&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-at-the-table&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'll come up when they start to type in one of the other tags, and it avoids any implication of number, role, or identity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-07-03T15:56:16.727" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2013-07-03T15:58:51.290" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The lack of existence of a problem-GM tag as opposed to a problem-players tag makes the same assumption that you imply exists by its existence. There is clearly a school of RPGing in which the GM stands as a sort of adversary against the players, the rules to be used are the RAW, and both &quot;sides&quot; adhere to them. While it's not my own ideal style of play, it certainly exists. It's not necessarily a style I prefer to play but I think the site does a disservice by denying its existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is kind of a tough point to &quot;grok&quot;, I apologize, but the issue that I am getting at here is that to a large extent language speaks the people. In other words, if we don't have a term for something, it won't be used. To that end, what I fear is that by replacing &quot;problem-GM/player&quot; with problem-at-the-table&quot;, we will be obliquely cutting off responses from players in &quot;it's my way or the highway&quot; style games because they assume that since we don't even have a &lt;em&gt;word&lt;/em&gt; for problem GMs they must not be a &quot;thing&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I understand your point here but I think a tag like &quot;problem-behavior&quot; doesn't necessarily get at the particular issue a lot of folks want to get at when they use the tags. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12984/how-to-handle-a-power-gm&quot;&gt;How to handle a &amp;#39;power-GM&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To a new player, &quot;problem-GM&quot; in this case may as well mean &quot;I have a problem with this particular GM&quot;. The player doesn't know if it's a behavior issue or if it's just how the game is played, and since the whole point of the site is to answer these kinds of questions, I think the current vocabulary is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;People whose games of choice have structures which do not apply to certain tags can choose to ignore those tags. It is impossible to anti-ignore something, i.e. to choose a tag which does not exist because we have decided not to acknowledge the existence of that other structure.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-07-03T16:32:11.423" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3016" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3017" CreationDate="2013-07-03T16:10:02.657" Score="6" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it acceptable for me to ask questions about play-by-mail/email games, and for suggestions of PBM games to try?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5800" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-15T13:27:56.703" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:27:56.703" Title="Are questions about play-by-mail/email games acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2015-10-18T02:42:29.553" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3016" CreationDate="2013-07-03T16:58:51.993" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about play-by-mail/e-mail RPGs are considered on-topic for RPG Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a tag for them: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/play-by-post&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;play-by-post&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;play-by-post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;System recommendation questions are on-topic as well, but have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;their own specialized guidelines&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-07-03T16:58:51.993" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3008" CreationDate="2013-07-04T01:22:24.570" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tags should always describe the content of the question.&lt;/strong&gt; That's the responsibility of the tagger though, not the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All four example bad tags &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be used to describe the question, and should only be used that way:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;This question is not about any one system, even if I have mentioned the game we're playing,&quot; and similar situations. This should be clear in the question, but tagging it such emphasises that question content.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;This question is about game mechanics.&quot; A terrible tag, but not because it's inherently defining acceptable answers. It can easily be used to describe the content of a question that's discussing mechanics. (That it would then apply to &gt;50% of our questions is why it's been burninated as a bad tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;: Often used to ask us to engage in rules lawyering. In such cases, the tag is inappropriate and should be removed. That doesn't make the tag bad: it can still be used for questions about people who engage in rules-lawyering and problems surrounding that, which is legitimately describing the question content.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;Here is a thing I'm trying to do within the rules as written,&quot; is something that could appear in an acceptable question, and this tag would be appropriate on it. Used that way, it's describing the content of the question. Just like the [rules-laywering] tag though, it should be removed from questions where it does not describe the content.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Any&lt;/em&gt; tag that doesn't describe the content of a question doesn't belong on the question and should be edited out. That's standard operating procedure. That a tag is commonly put on questions on which it doesn't belong (I'm looking at you, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;) doesn't mean it's a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; tag, just that it's a tag that needs us experienced users to eliminate when used inapplicably. Just like all tags, when they're misplaced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-07-04T01:29:26.527" LastActivityDate="2013-07-04T01:29:26.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3019" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="840" CreationDate="2013-07-07T15:32:14.193" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Spoilers now hide on hover via a different mechanism, as a result images are supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1240" LastActivityDate="2013-07-07T15:32:14.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2951" CreationDate="2013-07-07T23:44:03.787" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO, sometimes yes. It depends on the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reason is, Question title have a limited length. Also longer titles are hard to read and discourage people to read it at all. Also a title (according to only the title itself) may refer to many different systems/campaigns etc. A question about spell casting might be a too broad category, and title might not be able to define the whote idea by itself alone. In this point, tags are very helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a page with 50 questions (some of which are highlighted) is quite crowded, long titles discourage me to read the question if it is too long. So, I prefer to check the tags first before I examine the question title. Reading broad-topiced question titles before the tags may lead me re-read the title again after I examine the tags to evaluate the question more accurately before I decided to click it and start reading the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in most cases, tags are as important as the title for leading the reader. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If question is a comparison/simulation question (as it read from the title of the question), then people will check the tags to see if they are interested. If I do not know both of the related systems, then I would not consider reading the question. If I know or have any idea about one (or two) of them, then I decide to read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3012" LastActivityDate="2013-07-07T23:44:03.787" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-08T20:32:57.167" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is a meta tag and should be abolished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, since it's not going anywhere for the moment, the answer to fixing it &lt;em&gt;is not&lt;/em&gt; adding more meta tags. The actual answer is &lt;em&gt;not tagging&lt;/em&gt; these questions with any kind of identifier about the &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt; of question that it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of adding more meta tags, questions themselves should be clear about what they are asking for, if they want an adventure, say so, if they want a tool, say so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need for additional &quot;question category&quot; tags. These are not what the tagging system is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-07-08T20:32:57.167" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2013-07-09T15:43:49.807" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;To follow up to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3014/3819&quot;&gt;BESW's answer&lt;/a&gt;, how about a merged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-behaviour&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-behaviour&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-behaviour&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the issue isn't the identity of a player/GM or their role, but their intentional or unintentional destructive behaviour causing the issue that the question is being asked about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-07-09T15:43:49.807" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2981" CreationDate="2013-07-12T19:40:49.090" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do we agressively delete comments on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How much?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;i&gt;Approximately&lt;/i&gt; two thousand in the last three months.&lt;/strong&gt;  That seems like a &lt;strong&gt;lot&lt;/strong&gt; of comments, but not when you consider there are 32k comments on the site, per the &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/124254/count-of-comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;data explorer&lt;/a&gt;.  That's about 6%.  I don't know what other stats I can give you.  The comment deletion process is simple, and doesn't track reason deleted like we track close reasons or flag reasons.  I'm also not aware of a way to pull out comment flags, or their reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these were flagged, noticed by the moderator team to be chatty (read: &lt;em&gt;prone to start a flame war&lt;/em&gt;), or pulled from the aforementioned query which shows very long comment threads which are mostly invisible (due to the five comment limit) and, in my experience, prone to start a flame war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my time as moderator here, the majority of problems we've had to deal with have been comments, or more particularly flame wars in comments.  Since comments are generally viewed as second class citizens, we have taken the policy of actively pruning them (again, especially the long threads), similar to how fire fighters clear brush.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jy9cf.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Firefighters clearing brush&quot;&gt;Image from &lt;a href=&quot;http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FEMA_-_33487_-_Bureau_of_Indian_Affairs_firefighters_working_in_California.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikimedia commons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To try to avoid this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bLb5T.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Wildfire&quot;&gt;Image from &lt;a href=&quot;http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trees_torching_-_High_Park_Wildfire.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikimedia commons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-07-12T19:40:49.090" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3024" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3054" CreationDate="2013-07-15T14:51:54.660" Score="11" ViewCount="340" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27181/how-do-i-handle-lengthy-days-actions-without-slowing-the-game/&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, the asker tagged his question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;.  He also tagged it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this contradictory or in some way contrary to the spirit of the tags in general?  If so, it seems like we should enforce some kind of rule that a question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; should have any system-specific tags removed.  If not, then it's simply nice to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4077" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-28T17:00:05.757" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T17:00:05.757" Title="Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3024" CreationDate="2013-07-15T17:37:38.030" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, they usually conflict.  The questioner should choose one.  In this case I'd say 3.5e is the most applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-07-15T17:37:38.030" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3026" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-15T20:01:00.947" Score="3" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;The advert for Community promotion ad says 2012 in its mouseover text, but the graphic links you to a 2013 site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blah blah attention to detail yada yada?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obligatory:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4yuZH.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1992" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-16T22:50:12.510" LastActivityDate="2013-09-15T23:20:16.580" Title="Mouseover text for community promotion ad says 2012" Tags="|support|status-completed|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3026" CreationDate="2013-07-15T21:08:45.903" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I beleive it was copy and paste error on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2728/45&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;.  I edited, it and the system should pick that up shortly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-07-15T21:08:45.903" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-17T02:51:35.243" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/module-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;module-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;module-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; work? Is there a good synonym for “published event material”? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see the utility of a general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag. &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; seems a little too genre-specific. I don't think system-specific tags, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/4e-adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;4e-adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;4e-adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; are a good idea, either; we don't need an explosion of tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastEditorUserId="307" LastEditDate="2013-07-18T04:49:23.543" LastActivityDate="2013-07-18T04:49:23.543" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3029" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-17T17:37:22.240" Score="4" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;I started looking at the Hidden tag when I answered this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27230/can-i-hide-using-cunning-sneak-with-wilderness-skirmisher&quot;&gt;Can I hide using Cunning Sneak with Wilderness Skirmisher?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me it seems that stealth (a much more widely used tag) would make more sense than having a hidden tag which is overly specific. Tagging a question with both 4e and stealth would include everything that the hidden tag connotes while also having a wider subject matter and both the stealth tag can be applied to non-4e questions whereas hidden cannot. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:09:25.077" Title="Is the Hidden tag too specific and redundant?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3030" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3029" CreationDate="2013-07-17T17:41:39.297" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've changed the tag on the question to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/stealth&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;stealth&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;stealth&lt;/a&gt; and considering that the current use of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hidden&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hidden&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hidden&lt;/a&gt; is all 4e questions and in 4e hidden is a subset of stealth, I've proposed a tag synonym. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;User with sufficient score in stealth can go &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/stealth/synonyms&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; to vote on the synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-17T17:41:39.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3031" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3033" CreationDate="2013-07-18T15:50:52.493" Score="2" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/rpg-general-chat?tab=feeds&quot;&gt;Here is a list of the feeds that currently show up in RPG General Chat.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How are these feeds selected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the community's procedure for suggestions additions or modifications to the feeds?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2013-07-23T18:18:57.097" LastActivityDate="2013-07-23T18:18:57.097" Title="How are ticker feeds for chat selected?" Tags="|discussion|chat|feed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2017-12-18T12:19:55.870" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3032" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3031" CreationDate="2013-07-18T17:12:03.967" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the general sense, they are controlled by the moderators or room owners. Any stack exchange moderator is a chat moderator so there are a lot of people with the ability to change the feeds. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main RPG room feeds are as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A ticker feed of questions asked on the site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A post feed of meta questions asked&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A ticker feed for gnome stew&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A ticker feed for aggregated RPG blogs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A ticker feed for the Enworld news page&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally it's up to the consensus of whoever is in chat when someone feels like changing the feeds. Although there is occasionally a meta process related to it. Things like the big decision to switch the mainsite question feed to a ticker was made here on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1647/is-it-time-to-remove-the-main-sites-feed-from-the-oracle-in-chat&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as these kinds of things are fluid it's not completely necessary for it to go through meta to change. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that to say, if you want something added or removed, just ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-07-18T17:30:04.097" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3031" CreationDate="2013-07-18T20:42:24.123" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's been suggested in the comments that I propose a process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a process. It is intentionally kinda informal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We make a meta thread for it like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;community ads&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People vote stuff up or down depending on whether they would like to see it in the chat feed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderators use these ratings as a guide to adjust the feeds.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-07-18T20:42:24.123" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3034" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-19T00:24:34.087" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose we open the gates to more -rec tags, but start modestly. (Simply allowing more than one -rec tag is by itself a shift in policy, and I think it's plenty of shift to take the overuse off sys-rec.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and it does it's job well enough. We'll simply stop using it for recs that aren't for a game system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; already has a set of questions that would qualify, so it's the obvious next rec tag to make.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other tags I could think of would probably be premature, or trying too hard to prescribe categories. Beyond those two we should simply watch for new questions that suggest new rec categories that we don't cover with a tag yet. If a tag gets added that way, or a user just comes up with one, we'll keep an eye on them and see how they're used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the -rec folksonomy gets wooly we can trim it, but I think we should simply let it grow a bit to see what comes out and what -rec tags end up being useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need to worry about it getting out of hand because, by our own policy, identifying a question with a -rec tag is begging for extra scrutiny. I don't think new -rec tags are going to start getting added willy-nilly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-07-19T00:24:34.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3024" CreationDate="2013-07-19T08:32:10.453" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're playing a specific game but asking for generic advice, I think it's reasonable to tag both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and the specific game. That way, you indicate the desire for generic answers while also showing how it applies to the specific system (if appropriate).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is quite similar to a recent discussion about when to use generic system tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; versus specific game tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2942/cross-system-fate-tag-protocol&quot;&gt;Cross-system Fate tag protocol&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-07-19T08:32:10.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3036" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-22T02:06:22.440" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Specific Proposal&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since mxy asked, not unreasonably, that we have a specific proposal that can attract some consensus in order to justify action on this issue, here one is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; absorbs the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions as well as any adventure recommendations; we would synonym both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; to this, and maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/module-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;module-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;module-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; as well if someone feels inspired&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; gets any kind of request for character sheets, character builders, online wikis, dice rollers, random dungeon generators, etc; anything that is a tool to help play and is not an actual system or adventure; questions should have this tag &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; both&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2013-07-22T13:59:08.357" LastActivityDate="2013-07-22T13:59:08.357" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3037" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3038" CreationDate="2013-07-22T17:17:05.470" Score="3" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Deadlands is a scenario / world / plot point that is available for several different game systems, including Savage Worlds, d20, and GURPS. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, there was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24855/how-did-the-civil-war-end/27345&quot;&gt;a question about how the &quot;history&quot; of the world evolved&lt;/a&gt; from Deadlands &quot;classic&quot; (the original game, with a narrative up to 1878) and Deadlands Reloaded (the &lt;em&gt;Savage Worlds&lt;/em&gt; version, with a narrative up to 1879). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has made me think that there may be a need to have more than one tag for Deadlands in the same way that there are more than one tag for DnD-, WoD-, and Cthulhu-related questions. Some questions may apply to one timeline but not to the others, or may apply to one system (e.g. Savage Worlds) but not to the others (GURPS). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, I am not familiar with the general policy on that respect and, given that there are only 8 Deadlands-related questions on the site, this may be overkill. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6026" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T22:22:10.550" Title="Would it make sense to have tags deadlands-classic and deadlands-reloaded?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3038" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3037" CreationDate="2013-07-23T02:49:30.843" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The original Deadlands (generally called &quot;Deadlands Classic&quot;) is its own rules system. We are currently using the tag both for rules questions on that system, and for rules questions on mechanics added into &quot;Deadlands Reloaded&quot;, the Savage Worlds version, which are unrelated to the Classic ruleset (especially &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15027/as-a-gm-when-to-force-a-harrowed-player-for-control-of-his-body&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;). We prevent this problem with other systems, like D&amp;amp;D, by having separate tags for the systems, thus it seems like we should follow precedent and also have separate tags for the systems. Eliminating &lt;code&gt;deadlands&lt;/code&gt; in favor of &lt;code&gt;deadlands-classic&lt;/code&gt; would ensure that it is used specifically for rules questions regarding the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for metaplot and settings questions, things fall under one of three categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Common setting elements and backstory for both editions (i.e. stuff happening before 1876)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Developments during the Classic timeline (1876-1878), which if important enough was included in the metaplot backstory in Reloaded (e.g. &quot;Bloody Sunday&quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Developments during the Reloaded timeline (1879 and onwards)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that we currently have only one question on the Deadlands metaplot, a &lt;code&gt;deadlands-setting&lt;/code&gt; tag seems unnecessary and, unless more such questions are asked, we should be able to use the system tag for the system in which the event was described (or both if described in both). Deadlands d20 and Deadlands GURPS were set in the Classic timeline, but to my knowledge, neither contributed to it, so we should only have two possible tags for metaplot issues, although we could create tags for those systems if rules questions for them come up (although given the fact that both of these versions were not very popular, it's unlikley).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the short proposal: eliminate &lt;code&gt;deadlands&lt;/code&gt;, create &lt;code&gt;deadlands-classic&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;deadlands-reloaded&lt;/code&gt;, which should adequately cover metaplot issues as well. Additional tags (e.g. &lt;code&gt;deadlands-d20&lt;/code&gt;) could be created if rules questions specifically for those systems should come up (they would not be relevant to metaplot questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-23T02:54:43.773" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-23T12:45:40.597" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't have recommendation tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/search?q=recommendation&quot;&gt;Programmers.SE doesn't have any&lt;/a&gt;. People just ask for a recommendation, and tag it with relevant stuff. Need a recommendation for a book on C++? &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/39152/is-there-a-good-book-to-grok-c&quot;&gt;It's tagged &lt;em&gt;C++&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Books&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=recommend&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow doesn't have any&lt;/a&gt;. Need to know about the recommended Python memory profiler? &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/110259/which-python-memory-profiler-is-recommended&quot;&gt;Tag it with &lt;em&gt;Python&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Memory management&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Profiling&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://ux.stackexchange.com/search?q=recommend&quot;&gt;User Experience doesn't have any&lt;/a&gt;. Need recommendations on how to design a button in a web app to suggest its particular purpose? &lt;a href=&quot;https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/11582/design-recommendation-for-a-button&quot;&gt;Tag it with &lt;em&gt;Website design&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Forms&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Buttons&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Design&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Feedback&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. That feedback tag isn't a &quot;give me feedback&quot; tag, it's a tag for questions about how to properly provide users with feedback on their actions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do we have recommendation tags? Honestly, why do we tag a &quot;Recommend me a system about aliens and pirates&quot; question with a system-recommendation tag? Who searches for &quot;system-recommendation aliens and pirates&quot;? People search for &quot;aliens and pirates&quot; instead, or maybe &quot;aliens and pirates system&quot;. We should be tagging by the content of the question; the fact it's asking for a recommendation should be a self-evident part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For system recommendation questions, we could maybe have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;systems&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-systems&lt;/a&gt; tag, since it's asking about RPG systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, this also completely circumvents the hard question of what to do about multiple categories of recommendations: if you want an adventure or module recommendation, just use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/modules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;modules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;modules&lt;/a&gt; tags. We don't need to also have a recommendation tag for those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:34.523" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T03:38:37.810" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3040" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2711" CreationDate="2013-07-23T13:23:38.470" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Burn it down!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I first found this site, one of the reasons I didn't participate was that it seemed like a lot of the questions were forum-like (Stack Exchange format is like the worst forum ever, for several reasons). The situation has improved dramatically, which is why now sys-rec is a proud nail just waiting to be hammered down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think our system-recommendation structure is tough enough to produce strong answers. I don't think there is a way we could define it that wouldn't lead to closing most of the questions people will actually ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Applying the fundamental philosophy of all SE questions to system-recommendation questions creates a tight-rope walk:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On the one hand, we want answers that actually solve the specific problem in the question. For sys-rec, that means spelling out exacting personal preferences in the question; otherwise you're just getting shotgun-method list-making rather than thoughtful advice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On the other hand, we want answers that help more than just the question asker. So too specific becomes useless.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean we should soften the requirements in order to support sys-rec questions, of course. Quite the opposite! We need to apply our standards consistently and if that ends up excluding most examples of sys-rec, then that's just how it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ask yourself this: Have you ever looked at &lt;em&gt;someone else's&lt;/em&gt; system-recommendation question and found an answer that was &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; a clear answer to the original question and actually helpful to you as well? (Maybe the answer &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; yes; I'm seriously asking.) If you haven't, then that's a sign that system-recommendations aren't actually contributing to useful, lasting content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2013-07-24T15:58:51.027" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T15:58:51.027" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3041" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-23T17:41:55.410" Score="15" ViewCount="1263" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Chat? Feeds?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE sites have associated chat rooms. This site's main one is &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt;. Check it out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE chat supports &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/rpg-general-chat?tab=feeds&quot;&gt;feeds&lt;/a&gt;, which shows up as little ticker pop-ups from time to time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since really we want the chat (like every site feature) to be useful to the users, it makes sense to have the users choose which popups show up in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Vote for feeds!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pretty straightforward procedure, really.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click on the feed links to see what content the feeds will be posting to the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Vote up feeds you personally want to see.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just ignore the ones you don't want to see.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Save downvotes for when you think something is actively annoying rather than just irrelevant to your interests. (I recommend adding a comment if you do this.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is meant to be a less-formal variant of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;community ads procedure&lt;/a&gt;. Note that moderators/room owners will have to go in and make the changes by hand. &lt;s&gt;There is no magic vote number for now; it's just &quot;play it by ear so that chat has feeds but isn't too full of them.&quot;&lt;/s&gt; BESW SAYS: Since I'm the chat owner now I'm semi-formalizing it: 4 votes gets you on the ticker, with a lower bar for feeds run by rpg.se citizens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Suggest feeds!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think there's a feed that should show up in general chat, add it as a new answer here. One feed per answer. &lt;strong&gt;Feed suggestions should be pitches telling us why we'd like the feed in our ticker,&lt;/strong&gt; providing useful information like general focus, update frequency (feeds which update many times a day are not popular with the chat), and particularly interesting examples of posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T14:26:15.290" Title="RPG General Chat: vote for your feeds!" Tags="|discussion|chat|feed|" AnswerCount="28" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2020-05-08T02:35:06.920" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-23T17:42:50.617" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/feeds&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/feeds&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions posted to our own RPG.SE (basically required).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-23T17:42:50.617" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-07-23T17:42:50.617" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-23T17:43:51.917" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rpgbloggers.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The RPG Bloggers network&lt;/a&gt;, consisting of hundreds of RPG bloggers blogging about everything RPG - reviews, session summaries, plot seeds, interviews, random musings, etc. for various and all RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feedburner feed: &lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/feedburner/VKtY&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://feeds.feedburner.com/feedburner/VKtY&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-07-29T15:34:13.300" LastActivityDate="2013-07-29T15:34:13.300" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-07-23T17:43:51.917" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3044" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-23T17:45:30.160" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/GnomeStew&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://feeds.feedburner.com/GnomeStew&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gnome Stew, a group blog about GMing. It's system-agnostic but focused on pretty traditional play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example from the recent post, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/more-than-one-chance-to-shine/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;More than One Chance to Shine&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;First, if a PC only has one chance to shine during a four hour (or more) session then her presence isn’t really necessary, an NPC can cover that base. This is further exacerbated by the fact that if the “spotlight” comes early then the player has little motivation to stay for the rest of the session; if the spotlight comes too late then the player may no longer care. The player needs regular assurances that her presence is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's another, from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/who-are-you-trying-to-impress/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Who Are You Trying to Impress&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don’t try to impress anyone but your group.&lt;/strong&gt; Your gaming heroes may love your choice of system, genre, setting, or storyline. But they are not at your table; your group is. Remember who your audience is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gnome Stew &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ennie-awards.com/blog/announcing-the-2013-ennie-awards-winners/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;recently won an Ennie Award&lt;/a&gt; for &quot;best website.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2013-10-24T06:43:54.273" LastActivityDate="2013-10-24T06:43:54.273" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-07-23T17:45:30.160" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3045" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-23T17:46:48.443" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recent articles from EN World.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/external.php?do=rss&amp;amp;type=newcontent&amp;amp;sectionid=1&amp;amp;days=120&amp;amp;count=10&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.enworld.org/forum/external.php?do=rss&amp;amp;type=newcontent&amp;amp;sectionid=1&amp;amp;days=120&amp;amp;count=10&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's often a news source that provides various official timely announcements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-03-16T04:44:49.223" LastActivityDate="2016-03-16T04:44:49.223" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-07-23T18:04:49.827" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3047" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3050" CreationDate="2013-07-23T21:47:25.267" Score="2" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something about the site's CSS/whatever is causing lots of text to not render in recent (nightly) versions of Firefox on OSX 10.6.  Most conspicuously the main site's list of questions.  Here is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CgH8P.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;screenshot of the behavior&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The version I'm using is  &lt;code&gt;Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:25.0) Gecko/20130723 Firefox/25.0&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The meta site is ok&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other stackexchange sites I've checked also have no problems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It works in Chrome, and the most recent stable version of Firefox&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The problem persists in safe mode&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I can click on links and copy the text, it simply doesn't show up.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might well be a bug in Firefox, but figured I'd better report this here, since I don't have any knowledge of how the site is styled.  (And thus would not have much to say in a bug report.)  :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;e:&lt;/em&gt; It was &lt;a href=&quot;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=896592&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this bug&lt;/a&gt;, and is now fixed in Nightly Firefox builds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bug report suggests that the @font-face declaration is technically incorrect, because you're not supposed to list multiple src descriptors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I notice that the CSS being used on mtv.de to load the fonts (the file fonts.css) is incorrect. The @font-face rules include a src: descriptor with a data-URL woff font, but then they have a second src: descriptor with the data-URL (uncompressed) truetype data, which overrides the woff one. As such, the truetype data is always used, and the woff data, although included in the file, is worthless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct way to provide multiple formats within a @font-face rule is to list multiple resources within a -single- src: descriptor (as the fonts.css file does for the truetype and svg formats). Then the browser should use the first supported one it finds in the list. So if you have some kind of contact with the site, you might like to offer this feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure rpg.se's CSS is also doing this.  Whether this actually matters, I leave to someone who knows more about this.  :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T22:57:50.417" Title="Invisible fonts in Firefox" Tags="|bug|status-completed|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-24T03:21:40.623" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The official Fate blog on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faterpg.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;FateRPG.com&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/Fate&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://feeds.feedburner.com/Fate&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This blog contains news on Fate developments such as the recent release of Fate Core. Additionally, however, it regularly discusses the workings of the system and provides playing advice to players. For instance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faterpg.com/2012/fire/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How does one model being on fire within the system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faterpg.com/2013/the-actual-dichotomy-of-absolutes/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How should players handle absolutes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faterpg.com/2013/one-note-approaches-in-fae/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How do we handle it when people just use the same approach all the time in FAE?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T03:31:43.967" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-24T04:06:52.080" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Deeper in the Game: From Geekdom to Freedom&quot; blog by Bankuei&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This blog is low-volume (I consider that a plus). It includes indie-games content, D&amp;amp;D content, theory and tools (like the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/the-same-page-tool/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Same Page Tool&lt;/a&gt;&quot; that we cite &lt;em&gt;constantly&lt;/em&gt; in comments and chat), and content about social-justice issues in fiction and roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T04:06:52.080" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-07-24T04:06:52.080" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3047" CreationDate="2013-07-24T05:29:16.993" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Firefox's Nightly builds appear to be having trouble with RPG.SE's web font, &lt;em&gt;Lusitana Regular&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The visible areas of the site you're seeing are using fonts like Palantino, Times New Roman, Georgia or your default serif font. All the invisible areas use Lusitana Regular.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This indicates a bug in the Nightly builds. It also may indicate a shift in how Firefox is going to handle web fonts in the future. Firefox can't just drop being backwards compatible with how web fonts currently work, though, so the fact that web font text isn't showing up is a bug in Nightly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T05:29:16.993" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3051" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3053" CreationDate="2013-07-24T10:33:22.853" Score="13" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on this implicitly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27406/how-viable-is-a-molotov-cocktail-in-a-fantasy-game&quot;&gt;system agnostic question&lt;/a&gt;, I answered using D&amp;amp;D as an example since it's a very common, often gateway system to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the assumption that an answer using D&amp;amp;D variants as an example for implicitly or explicitly  system agnostic question good practice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-26T11:45:22.617" Title="Is using D&amp;D as an example when no system is specified acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3052" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3051" CreationDate="2013-07-24T10:40:14.883" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;My impression is that we shouldn't &lt;em&gt;default&lt;/em&gt; to D&amp;amp;D when answering questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D has been a very popular system due to its large merchandising and it's probably known by almost every RPGamer on the planet, but it's not equally likely that anybody has ever played it or likes it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lots of players I know have kept very far from D&amp;amp;D because they favored World of Darkness' approach to gaming and many people who started playing after the Forge never touched any of the two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGaming is a social activity and it often is what your fellow players play that determines your knowledge about gaming systems - D&amp;amp;D is not an acceptable default, not more than let's say Fate or Apocalypse World.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think using a gaming system to show how things were managed by other authors is perfectly fine. Especially if one can write something about why those examples are good ways to manage the system-agnostic problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="4173" LastEditDate="2013-07-26T11:45:22.617" LastActivityDate="2013-07-26T11:45:22.617" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3051" CreationDate="2013-07-24T10:55:51.413" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question specifies no system, a useful answer assumes no system. &lt;em&gt;It has a responsibility to do so&lt;/em&gt;, or else it's potentially not useful. An answer providing D&amp;amp;D's mechanics or content as examples is &lt;em&gt;perfectly fine&lt;/em&gt; so long as the answer still talks in general RPG terms, and not system-specific terms. An answer becomes not useful once it just assumes the asker is playing a particular RPG and responds as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D is a popular RPG, but only one of many other popular RPGs we regularly receive questions for. One D&amp;amp;D version's mechanics and contents don't necessarily apply to World of Darkness (old or new), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/fate/info&quot;&gt;the various Fate systems we get asked about&lt;/a&gt;, Burning Wheel, or maybe even GURPS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose there's strong signs they are asking about D&amp;amp;D though: &lt;em&gt;a D&amp;amp;D answer may not even apply to other versions of D&amp;amp;D!&lt;/em&gt; 3.5e's simulationist mechanics are neither here nor there as far as 4e is concerned, since the systems are so different. The same stuff may not even fly in AD&amp;amp;D 2e. And they may still be playing Burning Wheel, Fate, or something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often in questions where the system is relevant but not specified, the asker should be asked to name the system so better answers can be provided, but that's another issue altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-24T10:55:51.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3024" CreationDate="2013-07-24T14:04:43.077" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem here is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; wears a lot of different hats. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; has come to mean a lot of different things to different people at different times, and whether or not it can be combined with another tag depends on what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; happens to mean at the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; to indicate a deep question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one of the few uses for s-a that even I can get behind. The idea is to have a single tag that someone can click on to quickly get a list of deep, soft, essay-type questions. &amp;quot;System-Agnostic&amp;quot; isn't a great name for a catch-all tag like that, but it's got historical precedent, folksonomy, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this use, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; will often mix with other system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; to invite non-rules discussion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose you have a kind of soft question you need an answer to. You're using a specific system, and you'd accept something specific to that system. But you also kind of suspect that there's a more general answer and you'd be happy to accept that. So you throw on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; to say &amp;quot;hey, I'm okay with an answer that doesn't cite rules for this specific system.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it says kind of crappy things about us if we need to explicitly tag for this behavior. But maybe those things are true, and at any rate... People do this all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this use, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; will almost always be mixed with a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; to refer to system-less, homebrew, and freeform&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In very rare situations, s-a is used to refer to questions involving a system that hasn't been published. This is a bit of a misnomer, but folksonomy, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this use, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; will almost never mix with other system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; as top-level hierarchy&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people consider s-a to be the top of this hierarchy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, a question that applies only to &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 3.5&lt;/em&gt; gets only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;. A question that applies to &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 3.5&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fourth Edition&lt;/em&gt; only gets tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, a question that could apply to both &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt; only gets tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has always felt a bit redundant to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this use, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; should not mix with system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; as completionism&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people have the goal of tagging every question asked with a system. So what do you tag a question that isn't system-specific? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this use, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; will never mix with a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; as totem against the people who play &lt;em&gt;shudder&lt;/em&gt; that one system&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The story goes that there's a barbarous horde of people playing one of the more popular systems (which one depends on who you ask). The theory is that these people will ignore the title, body, comments, system-tags, and answers to a question, but will immediately be turned aside if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is invoked in the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Heathens. Don't they know we're trying to talk about roleplaying games here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, for this use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; should be able to combine with anything other than that one system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T16:57:03.463" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3055" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-25T01:10:49.043" Score="6" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote three answers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79/are-there-any-good-tabletop-rpgs-for-young-beginning-players&quot;&gt;Are there any good tabletop RPGs for young beginning players&lt;/a&gt;. I made it three answers instead of one so that they could be voted on individually. (I could swear that, at the time, I’d done that because it was recommended.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of years later, someone combined my answers into a single answer. So now there is one unfocused answer instead of three focused ones. The individual vote counts (granted, not a lot) are no longer there to tell the reader what the community thinks about the individual answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, when answering System Recommendation questions, should I put all my recommendations in one answer? And if so, why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="462" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:27:32.220" Title="For a System Recommendation question, is it better to give one answer suggesting multiple systems or one answer per system?" Tags="|discussion|answers|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3056" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3055" CreationDate="2013-07-25T19:23:12.943" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that the focus on StackExchange sites is to find the best answers, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;the pearls&lt;/a&gt;. The votes mean &quot;&lt;em&gt;I find this answer useful&lt;/em&gt;&quot;, not &quot;&lt;em&gt;I agree with this answer&lt;/em&gt;&quot; (on meta it is quite the opposite). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that point of view, an answer may (and often should) have more than one suggestion if there is no single correct answer... which is the most common situation for a System Recommendation question. A useful answer could make e.g. three recommendations depending on different factors that are not specified in the original question. For example: &quot;if your kids are under 7, then Pokemon; if they are over 10, then D&amp;amp;D Basic; etc&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my humble opinion, one-system-per-answer encourages the &quot;I agree&quot; or &quot;I like&quot; behaviours, rather than the &quot;this is useful&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6026" LastActivityDate="2013-07-25T19:23:12.943" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2013-07-25T23:36:45.227" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Code formatting should &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; be used for non-code markup.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Semantic markup (like code tags) was not added just to make HTML pages pretty, it was added to make the structural meaning of parts of the page comprehensible to software so that it can be rendered correctly. Misusing it can have unexpected consequences, especially for users who use accessibility software to render the page. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;http://accessibility.psu.edu/boldface&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;visually impaired users might hear code tags spelled out, instead of given spoken emphasis as intended&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Code formatting means code (more generally speaking, a copy-and-paste text target), and is not for giving visual emphasis to stuff that isn't code. To give words emphasis (for technical terms or otherwise) that is correct regardless of how the user is rendering the page, we are obligated to use bold and italic, which are provided by semantic HTML precisely to produce an emphasis effect in all contexts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-05-02T08:02:25.237" LastActivityDate="2018-05-02T08:02:25.237" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3058" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-26T03:53:26.443" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://ponderingsongames.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://ponderingsongames.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My own blog, Ponderings on Games. Was primarily about D&amp;amp;D 4e, now moved on to other games. Low volume, vaguely game design perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastEditorUserId="1421" LastEditDate="2013-10-29T05:44:33.973" LastActivityDate="2013-10-29T05:44:33.973" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-26T04:07:41.630" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/search/label/RPGs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Siskoid's Blog of Geekery&lt;/a&gt; has an enjoyable RPG tag. For example, in addition to more traditional RPG experience/commentary/review posts, he does the really quite cool &lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/search/label/Seasons%20of%20DWAITAS&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Seasons of &lt;em&gt;Doctor Who: Adventures in Time and Space&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;: as part of his &quot;watching and reviewing all of &lt;em&gt;Doctor Who&lt;/em&gt; in order, he re-casts each season as an RPG campaign, providing character sheets and summaries of the fictional play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A feed of just the RPG material is what we would want:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/RPGs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/RPGs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-11-27T00:23:30.130" LastActivityDate="2014-11-27T00:23:30.130" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3060" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-26T04:13:05.307" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fantasticmaps.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Fantastic Maps&lt;/a&gt; is a down-to-earth blog about mapmaking, with a strong fantasy bent. It talks about the mechanics, philosophies, and practices of making fictional maps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-07-26T04:13:05.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3061" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3063" CreationDate="2013-07-28T22:11:17.087" Score="3" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, part of the Stack Exchange philosophy is that the question should suggest clear criteria for judging an answer, and ought to be relevant to a real problem the poster is experiencing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With system recommendation questions, this means specifying what you actually want pretty tightly instead of just casting a wide net that will just lead to everyone just posting their own pet favorites. Because lists are boring while answers to questions are awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that does mean the question is pretty specific to that poster. What should we do when someone else has similar general requirements but different specific requirements?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take a look at this question, for example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25375/what-is-a-good-system-to-play-lotr&quot;&gt;What is a good system to play LOTR?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a reasonable question as written. It specifies details relevant to what the poster wants, such as &quot;combat-focused&quot; and &quot;low-prop.&quot; These are very important for making sure that the original asker's problem is actually addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Buuuut...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Say I find this question by searching for &quot;system for LOTR.&quot; What if my criteria don't match the original ones?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say I don't want a combat-focused system (violates OP's requirements), or don't care about system complexity (violates OP's requirements), or really want a system designed for short-form play (not mentioned in the OP's requirements).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I ask a new question, also called &quot;What is a good system to play LOTR?&quot; (Will that be closed as a duplicate?) Am I basically out of luck?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T22:57:17.210" Title="How should we handle near-duplicates in system recommendation questions?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3061" CreationDate="2013-07-28T23:06:11.740" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should handle near-duplicate sys-recs just like we handle any other near duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it's so much of a duplicate we think it's really just getting the same answers as a similar question, propose to the OP they close as dupe. Vote to close as dupe if you feel moved that they are really identical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it's really different, leave it alone - &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/dr-strangedupe-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-duplication/&quot;&gt;&quot;near duplicate&quot; is not a SE close reason, &quot;exact duplicate&quot; is&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you are hitting on a more important part of SE philosophy here. A question is not supposed to answer &quot;anyone's&quot; problem - it's supposed to answer the questioner's problem.  This is modified with the caveat that it shouldn't be so narrow it'll never help anyone else (even though &quot;too localized&quot; isn't a listed close reason any more, it is still an attribute of a bad question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of sys-recs, we want to err a lot more onto the specific side of the spectrum.  This is because of our experience with bad sys-recs.  &quot;Best for LOTR? FATE of course!&quot; cries the FATE fanboy, cut and paste for everyone else. We require more specifics to make the question valid and on-topic for our site. cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, &quot;A system to play LOTR&quot; isn't better or sufficiently more specific than &quot;I want a fantasy game&quot; or &quot;you know, gritty sci-fi.&quot; These are not helpful to the OP, or, really, for anyone else (I've read enough &quot;sell me on...&quot; threads on various forums to know I'll never gain valuable insight from them). cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if &lt;strong&gt;you&lt;/strong&gt; want a LOTR system that's not combat-focused - &lt;strong&gt;you&lt;/strong&gt; post a question with &lt;strong&gt;your&lt;/strong&gt; exact requirements. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you just want &quot;a more general question for the record&quot; - refrain, as it will be closed as both a bad sys-rec and as a violation of the basic principle of SE, which is that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T22:57:17.210" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3061" CreationDate="2013-07-29T00:05:44.270" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both titles are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;LOTR&quot; is a hugely broad... thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are questions of explore middle earth with a simple RPG (which is what that other questions should have asked), there are questions of &quot;how can I retrace the steps taken by the hobbits in Lord of the Rings&quot; and there are even questions of &quot;how can I simulate the battle of helm's deep&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specific questions also extend to their titles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-07-29T00:05:44.270" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-07-29T20:29:48.740" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;If Magician's blog is getting upvotes, I'll throw mine into the mix too.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://gm.sagotsky.com/?feed=rss2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://gm.sagotsky.com/?feed=rss2&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's mostly about GMing.  Lately I've been spending more time designing a system than playing, so that's where the content has been.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2013-07-29T20:29:48.740" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3065" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3106" CreationDate="2013-07-30T03:24:45.000" Score="4" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should synonymize or retag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; + &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; reads: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Involving play of tabletop RPGs using Internet tools such as desktop applications, web applications, chat clients, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which fits the self-description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; exactly. I suggest we stick with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, though, since it's more self-descriptive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-21T12:32:09.480" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T12:32:09.480" Title="Synonymize or retag [online] and [online-roleplaying]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3065" CreationDate="2013-07-30T17:42:02.877" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we should synonymize &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; → &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, so that the main tag is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage of making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; the main tag is that it will be obvious that it doesn't belong on questions like &quot;Where can I find plot seeds online?&quot;, while it's not obvious that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; is inappropriate for that. I don't think there's any redundancy with our site's topic because not everything we roleplayers do online or talk about online is &lt;em&gt;online roleplaying&lt;/em&gt;. I think &quot;online-roleplaying&quot; accurately represents the meaning of the tag in a way that &quot;online&quot; doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-07-30T17:42:02.877" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3067" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-07-31T06:06:01.940" Score="16" ViewCount="450" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/127700/do-not-expire-single-use-tags-that-have-a-tag-wiki&quot;&gt;this meta suggestion&lt;/a&gt;, single-use tags will no longer expire &lt;strong&gt;if they have a tag wiki.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2726/1204&quot;&gt;We have a historic problem&lt;/a&gt; whereby users will ask about a game system (and a tag will be created for it), but that will be the only question on the system, dooming the tag to later be obliterated and, in a lot of cases, the context for the question will be lost. Help us save them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What can you do to help?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add system tags to the below list that only have one question and no tag wiki. Link its lone question as well, so that in the future the tag can be recreated and reapplied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rescue tags on the below list by either proposing a tag wiki, asking another question with that tag, or tagging another question about that system with that tag. If the tag's been destroyed since, add it back to the linked question if and when you can also rescue it through one of those actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If any of the below tags ought not exist, remove them from the question so they can be obliterated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remove tags from this list when they're safe (or deliberately obliterated). Please note in the edit summary what you did exactly (&quot;created a wiki&quot;, &quot;tagged another question&quot;, etc). If you've proposed a tag wiki, wait until the tag wiki's approved before removing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Single-question system tags in need of attention&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-multiverse-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-multiverse-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-multiverse-rpg&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22653/multiverse-question-on-ignoring-actions&quot;&gt;Are the rules for ignoring actions and having separate realities in contradiction?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rotworld&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rotworld&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rotworld&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13998/is-there-a-trick-to-learning-the-pacesetter-goblinoid-action-table&quot;&gt;Is there a trick to learning the Pacesetter/Goblinoid Action Table?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-dream&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanical-dream&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanical-dream&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12103/mechanical-dream-rules-gathered-together&quot;&gt;Mechanical Dream rules gathered together&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, quite possibly anything in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt; tag. If a system tag expires and it was the only tag on the question at the time, the question will wind up in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/untagged&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;untagged&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;untagged&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-06-03T04:44:09.970" Title="Save our system tags!" Tags="|support|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="16" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-08-21T22:03:05.373" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3068" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3070" CreationDate="2013-07-31T16:17:39.887" Score="1" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a tag for elf/elves but not for dwarf/dwarves.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should one be added?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2081" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-12T01:48:53.010" LastActivityDate="2020-01-12T01:48:53.010" Title="Add tag for Dwarf/Dwarves?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2020-01-13T16:26:57.403" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3068" CreationDate="2013-07-31T17:08:20.753" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Probably not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of the SE tagging system is to be emergent - to appear as needed to usefully describe and group questions. Therefore we don't create them 'on spec' - they should appear because there's already a set of questions they'd help out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, tags like &quot;elves&quot; and dwarves&quot; are bad from several points of view.  There's very little value to clustering a question about Shadowrun elves and D&amp;amp;D elves - besides some nominal similarity, they're different things. So mainly you're using the tag to cluster within games/game groups. The only two &quot;elf&quot; questions are within D&amp;amp;D 4e, but that then makes &quot;elf&quot; a somewhat undesirable meta tag (doesn't stand alone as the only tag on a question). &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;We try not to do meta tags&lt;/a&gt; except in very limited circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real question is - why do you think there should be?  &quot;Parity&quot; with the elf tag is not really a good reason in and of itself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-07-31T17:08:20.753" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3070" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3068" CreationDate="2013-07-31T17:09:56.113" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There's an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; tag? Why?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/half-elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;half-elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;half-elf&lt;/a&gt; questions (there are only five between them, all of them from 2011), some of them seem like the tag is unneeded and some it's arguably appropriate. I imagine that if they'd been made today, the tags would have been removed; the site's policies have evolved since then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Are there questions that need a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dwarf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dwarf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dwarf&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because there's a tag for one thing doesn't mean we need tags for all complementary things as well. Tags don't get made in a vacuum; they're created because there is a need in the community. If you ask a question that you feel needs to be tagged this way after reading up on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;what tags are for&lt;/a&gt;, that's when the tag should be made. Anything before that is jumping the gun and adding unnecessary &quot;noise&quot; to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-07-31T17:09:56.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3068" CreationDate="2013-07-31T17:11:18.380" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; tag, so I don't think we need a &lt;code&gt;dwarf&lt;/code&gt; tag, as much as I like the stout bearded folk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; tag is only used on two questions, both related to 4e racial abilities, but I don't know what it would help people find.  I suggest we consider removing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2013-07-31T17:11:18.380" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2897" CreationDate="2013-08-04T03:27:58.847" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today my copy of &lt;em&gt;Godlike&lt;/em&gt; arrived in the mail. Thank you very much for the the contest reward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now if you'll excuse me, I have an awful lot of reading to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastActivityDate="2013-08-04T03:27:58.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3073" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-08-05T16:10:55.890" Score="10" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have recently seen some uses of the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;. I believe this tag doesn't bring about any benefits, which, from what I understand, is a thing we want to avoid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, tags serve to help experts in a given are recognise questions that require their expertise. This, of course, cannot be considered with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;. Nobody can specialise in questions about attacks, not only since they are system dependent and the questions about attacks are so diverse, but also because specialising in 'attack' doesn't make sense even in conjuction with a system-specific tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, they help to find questions from the past. Unless you specifically know that there was a question with this tag, again, finding questions based on it is hopeless, especially with the inconsistency with which it is used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, it is often too narrow and describes only a part of the mechanism, which, I believe, should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;. I find this tag more descriptive, unlike &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;, and synonymising them into the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; tag would be, in my opinion, an improvement on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise I fear that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; tag is just an empty useless label added only in order to take up space in the tag department.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any thoughts on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7723" LastEditorUserId="7723" LastEditDate="2013-08-07T06:58:48.980" LastActivityDate="2013-08-07T06:58:48.980" Title="Does the [attack] tag have a purpose?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3074" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3073" CreationDate="2013-08-05T17:52:35.137" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree, and will add a tag synonym attack-&gt;combat unless there is a higher voted answer here I find compelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-08-05T17:52:35.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3075" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3079" CreationDate="2013-08-05T18:51:33.523" Score="8" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I created the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/accessibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;accessibility&lt;/a&gt; tag for our now-growing category of posts dealing with issues such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6532/gming-for-disabled-players-specifically-blind-players&quot;&gt;blind players&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27688/looking-for-a-game-that-does-not-need-anything-but-character-sheets&quot;&gt;prone players&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27710/how-can-i-make-things-easier-on-my-dyslexic-and-high-functioning-autistic-player&quot;&gt;dyslexic players, autistic players&lt;/a&gt;, etc. I also tagged one post (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15148/how-can-i-help-my-pcs-remember-clues-that-they-found&quot;&gt;How can I help my PCs remember clues that they found?&lt;/a&gt;) as accessibility as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is why I am asking this question. The latter post that I mentioned does not on the face of it seem to have to do with accommodating disabilities or special needs, and (presumably) for this reason @SevenSidedDie untagged it from accessibility. I would argue that this post &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; an accessiblity issue, however. First of all, Wikipedia defines accessibility as accommodating &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; people, especially those with disabilities or special needs. I paraphrased this in the tag excerpt for accessibility. Secondly, the post in question has one answer where the answerer states specifically that they have had these issues in cases with players who had learning disabilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously not all questions that have to do with making the game the best experience for players should fall in the accessibility category, but I think that this question should because it deals with a specific problem, that is very much like an issue that one with disabilities might face, that gets in the way of having a good gaming experience for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we treat posts like this? Should we tag them with &quot;accessibility&quot; as I did (resulting in reverting SevenSidedDie's edit), or should we refrain from tagging them as such for the sake of clarity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that we could benefit from having posts like this together in the accessibility category, as it will help people who are having issues like this to find the information that is out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7890" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-12T16:40:03.337" Title="What should the scope of the [accessibility] tag be?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3076" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3075" CreationDate="2013-08-05T19:12:48.440" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;We use tags to categorise the content of a question. They may be useful to other people for other reasons than the original asker's reasons, but we don't tag for every hypothetical and real external motive for reading the question. (The five-tag limit is a feature to help encourage the specificity of tags.) In particular, we don't tag questions after the fact based on answers people give.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that it's a very useful question for accessibility concerns, but it's not &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; accessibility. It could equally be extra-useful for GMs running a sandbox campaign, but the question isn't &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; running a sandbox campaign so we don't apply the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sandbox&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sandbox&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sandbox&lt;/a&gt; tag either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing about tags is that they're hyper-focused labels on a question so that they can be grouped by question topic. They're an excellent supplement to our search feature, but they're not a replacement for searching the site. A GM needing help with players' memories, regardless of the reason, will find that question via search because they are looking specifically for questions about players' memory. If we start tagging with non-content tags, each question could potentially have many, many new tags that would suit, but that would make the tag system unmanageably and degrade its utility to the point where no-one would use it anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-08-05T19:19:20.723" LastActivityDate="2013-08-05T19:19:20.723" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3073" CreationDate="2013-08-05T19:35:35.180" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it makes more sense to have it removed than to synonimize it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;. Looking at the questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; It looks like most of them don't need the tag and aren't about combat directly so they don't need that tag either. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-08-05T19:35:35.180" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3078" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3075" CreationDate="2013-08-05T20:07:28.663" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe that SSD was correct in removing the accessibility tag from the question. I have a strong background in working with accessibility in an educational context, and can understand why you felt that the question should be tagged in that way, but ultimately I don't think it should as I think it would widen the scope of the tag so much as to make it far too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue I see is that if we tag any question which is in any way linked to accommodating a certain group of people, then it will become extremely difficult to know where to draw the line. For example, there are questions on here that relate to 'categories' of players and how best to ensure GMs design their sessions in order to cater to them. You could argue then that it is about accessibility, as it is talking about accommodating a particular group of players in the same way as the question you have raised as an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What about questions to do with improving the legibility of hand drawn maps, or using index cards as a GM to help remember NPC stats, or ways of organising notes so that they are easy to locate and remember that touch on the use of mind maps, colours and images?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2013-08-05T20:07:28.663" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3075" CreationDate="2013-08-05T20:15:38.047" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We need to more carefully define &quot;accessibility.&quot; I do not think the tag is &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt; too broad, but I think it could be better defined so as to avoid that path. Here is my proposed definition:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accessibility is only for questions whose contexts require that the normal routes to play and/or solutions to the issue are not possible, and which require changes to the gameplay or mechanics to accommodate. In other words, accessibility is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; about making games easier or getting people to work together. Accessibility &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; about situations in which normal methods for gameplay do not apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, the question &quot;How do I get my players to better remember the rules?&quot; has nothing to do with accessibility, because no unusual means are required for gameplay; this is something most people have to deal with at some point. However, the question: &quot;How do I get my &lt;em&gt;memory-impaired&lt;/em&gt; players to better remember the rules?&quot; &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; accessibility, because the normal methods for teaching and learning rules may not apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that the tag is very specific, and is useful in searches. Its purpose would be clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorDisplayName="user8248" LastEditDate="2013-08-12T16:40:03.337" LastActivityDate="2013-08-12T16:40:03.337" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3075" CreationDate="2013-08-05T21:36:25.493" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's my attempt at defining the scope for this new tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag should be used when a question's core focus is a physical or mental disability not found in most participants, preventing an optimal session.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag covers temporary and long-term disabilities as such issues and their solutions generally don't change just because the disability lasts a short period of time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the source of a problem is not explicitly such a disability and may be explained by other reasons, then the tag does not apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an issue initially deemed to only apply to disabled participants were to objectively match a more common issue applicable to most gamers, the tag would not apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(definition edited based on comments)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would include all the OP's questions under the tag except for the one about remembering quests specifically for the reason that the question does not explicitely state that the memory issue stems from mental difficulties. One may assume it comes from a willful lack of attention for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7326" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-08-07T08:00:14.407" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3082" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-08-07T12:48:07.967" Score="7" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed we have two competing tags, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror-gaming&lt;/a&gt;.  I was going to synonym them as horror-gaming-&gt;horror but I noticed horror-gaming has more uses than horror.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag of horror-gaming seems weird to me - the entire site scope is about gaming, so it seems redundant. Our other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1112/should-we-use-setting-tags&quot;&gt;setting tags&lt;/a&gt; aren't e.g. [fantasy-gaming], but just [fantasy].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror-gaming&lt;/a&gt; into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:14:33.627" Title="Should we use [horror] or [horror-gaming]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3082" CreationDate="2013-08-07T13:33:26.530" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt; should be the primary tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror-gaming&lt;/a&gt; gets used because while we're comfortable with fantasy as a familiar gaming genre, horror is a little more niche. There may be a sense (especially upon seeing the choice of both tags come up) that the -gaming bit helps clarify things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it seems unneeded to me, for the reasons brought up in your question. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt; is fine and dandy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-08-07T13:33:26.530" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3084" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3085" CreationDate="2013-08-08T15:48:41.380" Score="2" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the answer to this question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27754/vampire-discipline-to-disbelieve-in-sunlight-stakes-etc/27755#27755&quot;&gt;Where can I find this Discipline that allows a Vampire to disbelieve in sunlight, stakes, etc. so strongly that it can ignore them?&lt;/a&gt;, there is a large block of source book text quoted. As per this Meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357/what-constitutes-copyright-infringement&quot;&gt;What constitutes copyright infringement?&lt;/a&gt;, it sounds like it would be okay until someone from White Wolf complains?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there too much text quoted? Should we try to cut down the answer, perhaps removing the actual games rules and just leaving the 'flavor' of the power?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3844" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-10T22:55:44.737" LastActivityDate="2020-05-10T22:55:44.737" Title="Does this answer to a question about a Vampire Discipline that lets them disbelieve in things have too much quoted text?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3084" CreationDate="2013-08-08T17:42:54.550" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's my strategy for writing answers on all SE sites:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use only as much quotation as is absolutely required to make your point.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's almost always better to summarize rather than to quote giant chunks because your answer needs to be tailored to answer the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use integrated quotes when possible as it makes you totally look like you know what you you're doing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Approach writing answers like you would for a highschool or college research paper.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last point is my ultimate piece of advice. Think back to your highschool or college research paper days. Use short quotes, integrated quotes, and links to supporting sources instead of just a giant chunk of text. This tailors your post to your thesis statement (you have a thesis statement right?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-08-08T17:42:54.550" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3086" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3087" CreationDate="2013-08-09T03:44:23.913" Score="3" ViewCount="459" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've taken to when I reference page numbers, using code formatting to make it more evident, but different from normal emphasis.  Especially since code formatting isn't really utilized on this SE.  It's not been a problem before, but today my post was edited:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/27794/2&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/27794/2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't have really paid attention, except for the comment seemed like an imperative.  In the vein of the rule that we don't allow signatures.  So I wanted to get clarity on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T12:05:22.993" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T12:05:22.993" Title="Is there a formatting guide around using code markup that must be followed?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3086" CreationDate="2013-08-09T05:20:08.953" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Code formatting is for code; it is not just a different way to format your text.&lt;/strong&gt; Don't use it for non-code text. If that means we never use code formatting, so be it. Like all HTML formatting, it actually has a purpose, and using it for non-code text is using it incorrectly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HTML elements are incredibly meaningful. To you and I, bold text is just thicker, italicised text is just slanted, code text is just a monospace font with a grey background, and they're all just ways of making things look visually distinct. The elements used to produce that formatting, however, mean something different to a visitor's screen reader, a browser trying to handle technical terms or code in special ways, or other machines doing other special things with your HTML markup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you appropriate markup for purposes it wasn't intended for, you confuse those machines and give anyone working with them a hard time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the definition for the element we use for our code formatting (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-code-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;code&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; for inline code, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/grouping-content.html#the-pre-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;pre&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; for code blocks):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;code&lt;/em&gt; element represents a fragment of computer code. This could be an XML element name, a file name, a computer program, or any other string that a computer would recognize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;pre&lt;/em&gt; element represents a block of preformatted text, in which structure is represented by typographic conventions rather than by elements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the text you're supplying either of these? If so, use code markup. If not, don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What do we use then?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Italics and bold! Our italic and bold text are represented by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-em-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;em&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-em-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;strong&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; elements which also have their own definitions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;em&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;em&lt;/em&gt; element represents stress emphasis of its contents. (...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The placement of stress emphasis changes the meaning of the sentence. The element thus forms an integral part of the content. The precise way in which stress is used in this way depends on the language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The definition of &lt;em&gt;em&lt;/em&gt; then goes on to provide examples of how usage of &lt;em&gt;em&lt;/em&gt; can and should change the meaning of a sentence. &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Cats&lt;/em&gt; are cute animals&amp;quot; means something different to &amp;quot;Cats are cute &lt;em&gt;animals&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;: the former is a suitable statement in a discussion about which animals are cute, the latter is a suitable reply to someone who just asserted they are cute vegetables. The two are not interchangeable without you sounding odd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;strong&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;strong&lt;/em&gt; element represents strong importance for its contents. (...) Changing the importance of a piece of text with the strong element does not change the meaning of the sentence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note for those who actually use HTML and may be unaware: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-b-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;b&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-i-element&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;i&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; are still in use and have their own distinct purposes. They aren't deprecated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Use MathJax for formulas&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site nowadays supports MathJax, a derived implementation of &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\LaTeX\$&lt;/span&gt; formulas, which provides us with a means to have well-laid-out equations. You can implement MathJax inline with &lt;code&gt;\$ ... \$&lt;/code&gt; or in its own line, centered, with &lt;code&gt;$$ ... $$&lt;/code&gt;. It can get a bit complex: see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/mathjax-basic-tutorial-and-quick-reference&quot;&gt;MathJax basic tutorial and quick reference&lt;/a&gt; on Math.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Pick your flavour&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, naturally, these are just two flavours of emphasis. Both will often be read by a screen reader in a different tone of voice to the rest of the text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either one works for page numbers; you might prefer italics (&lt;em&gt;YW 212&lt;/em&gt;) or just writing your page numbers out with no formatting at all (OW 55); actually using bold may be a bit much visually (&lt;strong&gt;YW 209&lt;/strong&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could also use superscript&lt;sup&gt;YW91&lt;/sup&gt;, since that's a fairly common standard for citations. (In fact, it seems &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/27794/1204&quot;&gt;you've used it already!&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T11:55:58.093" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3088" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3089" CreationDate="2013-08-09T22:31:58.557" Score="1" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was looking for online retailers that specialize in RPGs, and I came across &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2782/where-can-i-buy-original-edition-and-out-of-print-roleplaying-books-and-accessor&quot;&gt;this closed question&lt;/a&gt;. The question was not my exact one (I explicitly did not want eBay as an answer, for example), but close enough that it would have likely been listed as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to know if there is some way to retool the question so it can be reopened, and if so, how would I go about doing so? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7700" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-10T16:16:35.650" Title="Can this question be reworded so as to be reopened?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3089" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3088" CreationDate="2013-08-10T01:56:56.637" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's a list question, which we close fast and liberally. In fact, it says so right in the question: &lt;em&gt;&quot;Let's make a list of them!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if there was ever a definitive blog post explaining why list questions are so bad for our format, but at the very least, they violate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Questions not to ask&lt;/a&gt; guideline of every answer being equally valid - people will generally just upvote their favourites, and there's no correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leave that question closed. There's nothing needing rescuing in it, it's just not a suitable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want something similar, you could ask your own question. However... &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;shopping questions can be problematic&lt;/a&gt; and very often get closed. For instance, see this closed shopping queston and its comments: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12539/1204&quot;&gt;Where can I buy a massive d4?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend you talk to us in chat about exactly what you're after. We may help you work out a question, but it might just be something you need to google. Alternately, someone in chat might already know a place. Chat is often a good place to ask people for help with problems that won't really fit in the site's format, since it's a place we can actually discuss stuff with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-08-10T11:47:26.980" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3090" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3088" CreationDate="2013-08-10T16:16:35.650" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;FYI, there are canonical links on the SE blog, though you'd probably have to hang out for weeks on Meta.SO to find them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;Real questions have answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is hard, let's go shopping!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The not-as-related third is here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good subjective, bad subjective&lt;/a&gt;. This is the precursor to the other two, and started the scope-limiting that we see today on all SE sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, it's worth noting that these were originally created for Stack Overflow, where the questions they ask have one singular correct answer. The very nature of RPG.SE means people have different opinions and solutions - the difference is, the question must have an answer. Not necessarily a unique answer, but it must be answerable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2013-08-10T16:16:35.650" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3091" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-08-15T04:33:08.387" Score="1" ViewCount="55" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Star Wars: Edge of the Empire&lt;/em&gt; will soon be joined by &lt;em&gt;Star Wars: Age of Rebellion&lt;/em&gt;, and some time thereafter a third book with an unknown title. The format will almost certainly be the same, though: &lt;em&gt;Star Wars: X&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fantasy Flight Games will be rolling out these games using an approach similar to the one they've used with Warhammer 40k, wherein the same core mechanics are used, and each book stands alone but also adds more skills, settings, equipment, and so on to the previous books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag used for all Warhammer: 40k books is &lt;em&gt;wh40k&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Star Wars&lt;/em&gt; is the tag used for discussions of roleplaying in the Star Wars universe, regardless of specific game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given all of the above, what are your thoughts as to what tag or tags would be appropriate for the FFG Star Wars games?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-26T01:07:57.933" LastActivityDate="2022-02-26T01:07:57.933" Title="Star Wars: Edge of the Empire (and subsequent) tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3091" CreationDate="2013-08-15T09:19:00.933" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your suggestion makes sense&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and should be revisited if and when the need arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The point of the SE tagging system is to be emergent - to appear as needed to usefully describe and group questions. Therefore we don't create them 'on spec' - they should appear because there's already a set of questions they'd help out.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;@mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3069/4398&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to another proposed-tag question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't yet seem to have a set of questions about these things out of which a tagging system can organically grow. Forcing the growth of an SE construct out of the idea of what &quot;ought to&quot; or &quot;will&quot; be, rather than meeting the reality of the site as it is discovered, is something we try to avoid (much to my chagrin, at times; I like heading things off at the pass, too).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T09:19:00.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3093" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3094" CreationDate="2013-08-15T12:49:39.883" Score="3" ViewCount="55" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was looking around and realized we are inconsistent on what we call adventures - we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/modules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;modules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;modules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventures&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scenario-authoring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scenario-authoring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scenario-authoring&lt;/a&gt;. That's a bit of a mess; obviously the last two have some slight distinction (the authoring a bit more than the published - I would say when people say &quot;module&quot; they by definition mean a published adventure).  Even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; isn't a real good tag, it looks like it's 50% used for published adventures and 50% for more of a synonym with scenario-authoring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-path&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-path&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-path&lt;/a&gt; are also closely related to this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what term should we use as canonical?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-21T03:32:42.830" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T03:32:42.830" Title="Tagging for Adventure" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3093" CreationDate="2013-08-15T13:04:14.867" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would propose that of the three equivalent terms - module, adventure, scenario - we use adventure.  Scenario is more technically correct but it's also not what the average Joe searches for. I think adventure is more accessible (as is proven by scenario's use in only one of these tags with 13 occurrences, as opposed to module with 14 and adventure with 73).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We would then have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventure&lt;/a&gt; synonyms: published-adventures, modules,&#xA;published-scenarios&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt; synonyms: scenario-authoring, adventure-design&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could then preen the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; questions to put them into the right category... Those have some bad overlap with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign&lt;/a&gt; as well, cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14163/any-good-premade-campaigns-for-beginners&quot;&gt;Any good premade campaigns for beginners?&lt;/a&gt;. Once all 40 questions are disposed of, synonym adventure to adventure-writing. A pure adventure (or module, or scenario) tag is so vague as to be unhelpful, since it cam be used to describe everything PCs do in play and most of what GMs do in prep for play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-path&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-path&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-path&lt;/a&gt; which is an interesting case - given that there is a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2924/what-is-an-adventure-path&quot;&gt;What is an Adventure Path?&lt;/a&gt; I guess there is a niche in there right between published-adventures and campaign but it's narrow - I'd leave this be for right now but keep an eye on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-08-15T13:04:14.867" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3095" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3098" CreationDate="2013-08-16T01:37:27.740" Score="40" ViewCount="1263" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems like there's a gremlin in the Fate answers. He bites without warning, no one is immune, and while he'd been quiet for some time, he's back now. And he's making it hard to get good answers, which makes people not want to ask at all (I'll explain that at the end, after I've defined what I'm talking about.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The gremlin is a tendency to focus on Fate as a narrative game when it's inappropriate to do so.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm referring to a trend in answering Fate questions which seemed common for a while, but then died down and I'm concerned to see it again in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/27994/4398&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. (Let me make it clear that I'm not singling out SSD; a number of citizens have fallen into this trend at different times, and there's no real common thread or serial offender that I've noticed--hence the &quot;gremlin&quot; idea).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The gremlin encourages us to respond to Fate questions that are specifically concerned about how the mechanics work with an answer which basically says &quot;Fate isn't about mechanics, just make stuff up as it goes,&quot; and often implies (or outright &lt;em&gt;says&lt;/em&gt;) that worrying about mechanics in a Fate game means we don't get Fate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this is the entire answer, as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/26091/4398&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; which ignores the established setting and mechanical guidelines in favor of &quot;Fate is narrative, so just make stuff up as you go.&quot; (The whole thing is especially egregious when it's being done in a post about a rules-heavy Fate system like DFRPG with subsystems and very explicit lines drawn for what &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;is not&lt;/strong&gt; mechanically possible, as well as strong setting definitions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21816/4398&quot;&gt;questions which ask about how to facilitate the Fate philosophy&lt;/a&gt; are susceptible to having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/21824/4398&quot;&gt;answers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/21838/4398&quot;&gt;which&lt;/a&gt; condescendingly and painstakingly &lt;em&gt;explain&lt;/em&gt; the Fate narrative philosophy instead of talking about how to implement it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other times, it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/22264/4398&quot;&gt;tacked onto a totally okay answer&lt;/a&gt;, as if the asker of the question is so fundamentally clueless about the system that they need to be educated about it even though it's tangential to the question they asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, and people I’ve talked to, this feels like having the “d20 + ability modifier” mechanic explained every time I ask a D&amp;amp;D 3.5 question... often &lt;em&gt;instead of&lt;/em&gt; answering the question I actually asked. Which is, at best, unhelpful and patronizing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, don't get me wrong. I think the Silver Rule (“never let the rules get in the way of what makes narrative sense”) is pretty essential to the Fate ethos. But all those rules still &lt;strong&gt;exist&lt;/strong&gt; and are important --or we wouldn’t have a Golden Rule that says to figure out how the rules help model what we want to do! This gremlin nudges us to tell each other that if we try to understand how things can work within the rules provided, we don't get Fate, and the rules are not what Fate is about (why, then, do they and the Golden Rule exist?). There is no rule that says “ignore the rules and do whatever.” The Silver Rule is about when the rules would get in the way or &lt;strong&gt;cannot&lt;/strong&gt; help, not a general justification for telling people to stop trying to understand the rulebook and turn the game into a free-form RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This is making it hard to ask questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that for many months now, every time I sit down to ask a Fate question, I dread the possibility of meeting this gremlin. I spend a lot of time trying to phrase my questions to avoid getting cluttered with answers that just say my mechanical concerns are unfounded because I can ignore the rules. I even sometimes &lt;em&gt;don't ask&lt;/em&gt; questions if I fear they'll provoke a tide of &quot;you just don't get the game&quot; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've spoken with a few others who have encountered the gremlin, and it's hurting their ability to be enthusiastic about asking Fate questions on this site, too. &lt;strong&gt;This is a problem.&lt;/strong&gt; The gremlin is cluttering the Fate questions with Answers That Don't Answer the Question. This makes people feel like they'll be called dumb for asking how the system works--which makes them stop asking Fate questions, which is... bad... for an SE site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can we make this gremlin go away, so that our Fate answers are no longer plagued by the idea that wanting to understand and use mechanics is antithetical to the system's ethos?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-21T00:12:20.127" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T00:12:20.127" Title="The gremlin in our answers: &quot;Fate is narrative&quot; answers to mechanical Fate questions" Tags="|discussion|answers|fate|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3095" CreationDate="2013-08-16T03:17:33.760" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The text on the downvote button now simply reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer is not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With community consensus, we can downvote these types of answers. In this case, I think the solution is simply to achieve quorum about what constitutes good answers, and then to lead by example and act on it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I don't think any of us will have a problem following up on this, I feel obligated to point out that downvotes are only marginally constructive by themselves; comments are key for establishing quorum and changing behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T03:17:33.760" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3097" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3095" CreationDate="2013-08-16T05:21:16.010" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tell people to cut it out in comments, maybe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have often wanted to respond to such answers telling them something to the effect of...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Yes, we get it. We understand Fate too. We have read the books and taken time to understand it just like you have. We are not ignorant about how this game works. Please take this question seriously and respond as if we are equals, not unenlightened people who don't get the game.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... but my desire to say that is the result of my frustration with this issue in general, and I am not sure how I would convey &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; part of this in any way in any tone and be taken seriously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe if it is an issue with some community acknowledgement, so that people might actually stop and think &lt;em&gt;&quot;Huh, maybe I actually shouldn't do that,&quot;&lt;/em&gt; we can start just commenting on such answers saying (not in these exact words): &quot;Hey, you're not taking the question seriously. Cut that out and answer it.&quot; - perhaps with a link to this meta question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know how this gremlin snuck in, really, but I want to see it gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-08-16T07:06:02.153" LastActivityDate="2013-08-16T07:06:02.153" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3095" CreationDate="2013-08-16T13:30:32.637" Score="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this goes back to one of the &lt;em&gt;core&lt;/em&gt; statements about Stack Exchange sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking Expert questions, getting expert answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, and I have no context having not read or played Fate, it seems like people are so bogged down with non-expert Fate questions that the first instinct is to give an answer suited for a beginner in the system and not an expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some things you can do when asking a question to alleviate this (I'll enumerate them in a moment). But ultimately the onus is on the answerers not to condescend, even if the person is a n00b, and only explain core concepts when it's apparent that the person asking the question doesn't get it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My advice to askers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Display system mastery in your question. Use the correct vocabulary correctly, show understanding of the mechanics surrounding the ones you're asking about etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Explain your specific problem clearly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use comments to help folks understand that it's not the &lt;em&gt;core concepts&lt;/em&gt; you need help with but the specific mechanics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make it clear in your question that you need help with a mechanical concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, these pieces of advice are akin to saying &quot;this is how not to get assaulted&quot; - you can be careful, but bad things still happen. It's not your fault. The focus here is rightly on how we can reform answerers to provide answers that don't condescend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Assume the person is an RPG Expert. This is intended to be an expert community. People asking questions are to be treated like experts asking expert questions. I know that &quot;expert&quot; has a rather loose definition here, but &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; that someone is an expert until they prove they aren't.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expect overall system mastery. Write your answer &lt;em&gt;as if&lt;/em&gt; the person who is asking &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; has problems with this specific mechanic. Don't explain basic concepts unless they are pivotal to explaining the mechanic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you find the question too general or unclear, flag or vote to close. Don't answer it. If you feel led, comment explaining why. Don't answer questions that require an entire rewrite of the system rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you feel that a person has a basic misunderstanding of a core game concept based on their question &lt;em&gt;confirm this to be the case; before you answer.&lt;/em&gt; Don't write an entire answer that will be useless if you misunderstood the question. Understand what the OP is trying to ask &lt;em&gt;before you answer.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, I think that the answer to this conundrum is reminding folks to not make assumptions about system mastery, to remember that not everyone plays games the same way. Ultimately, we must all remember that this is intended to be an expert community. If we don't keep this in mind we lose the very thing that makes this site so valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again this site's intent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expert questions to be answered by Experts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-20T12:07:42.697" LastActivityDate="2019-03-20T12:07:42.697" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3099" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3100" CreationDate="2013-08-17T07:23:02.330" Score="2" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Edit link for Meta questions is grayed out and not clickable. Is this related to a Reputation level? For reference, I only wanted to add a missing tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Examples of questions with that issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1153/unclaimed-bounties&quot;&gt;Unclaimed bounties&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1161/awarding-bounty-after-it-expires&quot;&gt;Awarding bounty after it expires&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/645/how-can-we-encourage-people-to-use-bounties&quot;&gt;How can we encourage people to use bounties?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3086/is-there-a-formatting-guide-that-must-be-followed&quot;&gt;Is there a formatting guide that must be followed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also can't edit the Answers. I'm really starting to think it's &quot;normal&quot;, possibly rep-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7326" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2013-08-17T12:48:40.377" Title="Meta questions not editable?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3099" CreationDate="2013-08-17T12:48:40.377" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;That is correct, you need 2000 rep to do that per &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;Help Center &gt; Privileges &gt; edit questions and answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-08-17T12:48:40.377" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3095" CreationDate="2013-08-17T16:31:01.980" Score="-10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lots of people have been weaned on 13 years of a particular sort of RPG design which has a strong mechanics-to-mechanics paradigm for how rules work. This is not how &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; games work, but it's very easy to mistake most RPGs' designs as supporting such a use. Fate is an interesting example of a game that &lt;em&gt;strongly&lt;/em&gt; diverges from this flow-chart of rules handling, yet still superficially &lt;em&gt;appears&lt;/em&gt; to follow this paradigm. As a result, lots of people play Fate as if it supports mechanics-&gt;mechanics rule handling when it actually does not. It doesn't &lt;em&gt;break&lt;/em&gt; when played this way, but it fails to operate as designed when played this way and it results in questions here that are only meaningful if the fundamental misapprehensions of basic parts of Fate's design are left intact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I answer Fate questions that ask how mechanics-&gt;mechanics rules works with answers that say Fate does not support the mechanics-&gt;mechanics paradigm. When someone asks such a question, I will generally point out that Fate requires the players/GM to chain two or more narrative-&gt;mechanics interactions together in order to find the next bit of mechanics that applies, not try to find the next mechanics bit directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-08-17T16:43:25.000" LastActivityDate="2013-08-17T16:43:25.000" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3102" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-08-17T23:49:54.260" Score="0" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why not make comments on what you feel should change and let the author do it, or better yet, privately message the author and suggest. It just seems really tacky and rude to edit someone else's work with out permission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6025" OwnerDisplayName="CrimRei" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-21T15:34:47.083" LastActivityDate="2021-09-21T17:50:10.210" Title="Is it ethical to edit someone else's Questions or comments?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3102" CreationDate="2013-08-17T23:57:33.893" Score="32" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Absolutely. It is both ethical and moral, according to the community precepts established in the Stack Exchange.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are not a forum. We believe in improving, as a group, both questions and answers. If you take a look at our help center, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;editing&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All contributions are licensed under Creative Commons, and this site is collaboratively edited, like Wikipedia. If you see something that needs improvement, click edit!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing is important for keeping questions and answers clear, relevant, and up-to-date. If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the specific provisions encouraged for editing is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As comments can be deleted, it makes more sense to add the information to the question/answer. This way the extra info won't be lost, and is easier to see for other users in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, because we are not a forum we don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; a private messaging function. The closest we've got is tagging someone in a comment on the post or in the public (Google-indexed!) chat room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-09-21T17:50:10.210" LastActivityDate="2021-09-21T17:50:10.210" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3095" CreationDate="2013-08-19T02:03:07.540" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer to this is &quot;use the SE system.&quot;  If you do not believe an answer is helpful, downvote it, say why to get others on your side. Flagging might be helpful but in general we don't delete an answer just because &quot;someone doesn't like it&quot; - if it is truly irrelevant sure, otherwise if it's not super downvoted we will defer to the community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When Asking Your Question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Say specifically what you want. In the example question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27972/what-should-happen-in-a-legendarily-successful-attack-against-a-mook&quot;&gt;What should happen in a legendarily successful attack against a mook?&lt;/a&gt; the question nowhere states &quot;I want a rules mechanics answer not a narrative one.&quot; I find SSD's answer to that question quite appropriate especially since the rules do say &quot;go gonzo with the narration.&quot; Sure, you later clarify in a temporary comment on an answer &quot;Oh I knew that but...&quot; But if you don't put that into the question, you can't blame people for answering the question you wrote down, not the mental question you have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When Answering Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We specifically allow answers that &quot;break the frame&quot; of the question because sometimes that really is the best answer, of the &quot;Doctor, it hurts when I do this&quot; variety. How do we know if it's appropriate or inappropriate? Votes. And self restraint, you should only break the frame of the question if you are really, really convinced it's the best answer.  (Again, in the question linked I'm not even sure frame-breaking is going on because the question doesn't specify.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Muddy Areas Of Human Cognition&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Areas like this are difficult because you are dealing not just with written game rules but a game that specifically doesn't focus first on rules, and the general culture of its players play it a certain way. In general D&amp;amp;D 3.5e players care about whether something is balanced, but ask an Over the Edge player about &quot;is this balanced&quot; and they're going to tell you you're asking a silly, meaningless question.  You can probably find a wacky gonzo 3.5 player or a rules-obsessed Over the Edge player but they don't represent mainstream thought there. So you have to expect you'll get answers that come from the dominant value system gamers attracted to that game share, and that those answers will be found useful by others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's like reading the Bible and then taking it to a group of Christians and asking for a full list of shellfish because it says you're not supposed to eat shellfish in Leviticus. Mostly they're going to answer &quot;well you see, not bound by the Law etc.&quot; If you insist then maybe they'll get you to one of the small denominations that does that (seventh day adventists maybe?) but it is fair of them to also suggest &quot;don't do that...&quot;  Just like the recent question about optimizing D&amp;amp;D 2e.  The best answer to that was &quot;You know, in 2e circles, people don't really optimize, and when they do they are considered 'those dirty min-maxers.'&quot; Different mores surround that version of the game than 3e, for example. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to want to play the game differently from the majority, but of course majority = votes here on SE.  Mitigate against it by being very clear about what you want in the question and then accept the answer that suits you.  Those other answers are being found helpful by others even if not by you, so they have a place, and they don't cost you anything.  That's why there is a separate &quot;accept&quot; functionality and not just the voting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-08-19T02:03:07.540" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="176" CreationDate="2013-08-21T00:18:51.887" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am against list questions in general but it seems some of them are useful. Not the ones that expire a week after they're posted, though. Examples...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28135/4089&quot;&gt;Fighting Skills equivalent to skills&lt;/a&gt; Not a good candidate for a list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/23049/4089&quot;&gt;What are some good chance/luck-themed spells for Sorcerers?&lt;/a&gt; This one is about an edition with very little publishing still going on so answers (this far after release) can be counted as more-or-less complete for a while to come.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something in these questions seems to not work with the &quot;one best answer&quot; goal: Do lists with better quantity get priority over ones with better quality? That'd depend on the asker of course as to who is accepted. Suppose we got many high quality answers but few high quantity - that question will maraud the front page as people keep coming by to drop one-liners or small, poor answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How we can draw the line between &quot;good&quot; and &quot;bad&quot; list questions would be useful to spell out.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T00:18:51.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3065" CreationDate="2013-08-21T03:46:20.050" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe we instead need to split &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-tools&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;.  Once that's done then we should synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, but if we don't pull out the tools questions first it'll make a hash of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-08-21T03:46:20.050" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3107" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3108" CreationDate="2013-08-24T00:25:07.023" Score="5" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is pretty small, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28166/is-the-iron-kingdoms-entry-adventure-intentionally-easy&quot;&gt;a recent question&lt;/a&gt; created the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ironkingdoms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ironkingdoms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ironkingdoms&lt;/a&gt; tag. Normally we put a hyphen for the space in a tag's name, so it should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/iron-kingdoms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;iron-kingdoms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;iron-kingdoms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would make this change myself but I can't! I get this error message whilst trying to change the tag on the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bqTF2.png&quot; alt=&quot;Error message reading: &amp;quot;You are attempting to create the tag iron-kingdoms; however the tag ironkingdoms already exists! If you think this new tag should be allowed, raise it on meta.&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, here I am. Can we change it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-08-24T02:30:36.343" Title="Synonimise [ironkingdoms] to [iron-kingdoms]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3108" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3107" CreationDate="2013-08-24T02:30:25.890" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Changed that one answer and made a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-08-24T02:30:25.890" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3109" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3110" CreationDate="2013-08-28T16:50:12.510" Score="13" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question regarding who currently has the rights to publish a popular game line that's changed hands a few times.  During my due-diligence searching of past questions, however, I came across this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9739/who-holds-the-license-for-cadillacs-dinosaurs&quot;&gt;Who holds the license for Cadillacs &amp;amp; Dinosaurs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which was marked as off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was that question was off-topic because it was asking who owned the rights to a licensed property that was not itself a tabletop RPG, or are all questions regarding ownership of IP off topic, even if I'm asking about publishing rights for an RPG?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4249" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:52:16.153" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:52:16.153" Title="Are &quot;Who owns the rights to a game line&quot; questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3109" CreationDate="2013-08-28T17:14:26.597" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd have to say that asking who has the publication rights to a &lt;em&gt;specific game&lt;/em&gt; should be on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure there are some other questions here that have come and gotten pretty good answers that are along a similar line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that yes, it's probably quite different when the question is about a &lt;em&gt;non-rpg&lt;/em&gt; license issue. For instance asking who has the current star wars license (if there is not an active game) is probably not on topic. But asking who has the publication license for D&amp;amp;D would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, make sure that in your due diligence you take a peek at wikipedia or make a quick google search and make sure the answer isn't glaringly obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-08-28T17:14:26.597" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3109" CreationDate="2013-08-28T21:06:07.573" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;As clearly stated in its comments, that previous question was closed because it was a crosspost from SF&amp;amp;F that was already answered there, not because it was off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question to who owns publishing rights to a given RPG is on topic here, though frequently not really answerable without lawyers involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-08-31T13:33:50.070" LastActivityDate="2013-08-31T13:33:50.070" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3112" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3115" CreationDate="2013-09-02T14:58:18.113" Score="6" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/20248/7326&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; is a good answer, but, as explicitely mentioned, ends up not fitting the question since it has been edited since the answer was made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should users be suggested to do in such a case?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ignore the answer and possibly upvote other fitting answers, hopefully reordering things after a while?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote the answer because it doesn't fit at this given time?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like downvoting would punish the poster for no good reason, which is what's making me hesitate so much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7326" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T18:33:28.250" Title="Downvoting answers not fitting an edited question anymore?" Tags="|discussion|editing|down-votes|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3113" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3112" CreationDate="2013-09-02T15:04:08.173" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you can edit them to meet the new question, do that, it's the best solution. A comment on the answer might also work, if you don't feel right editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not I'd go ahead an flag them with a custom flag, explaining the situation. Sometimes a Not an Answer flag works, but generally you'll want a custom flag here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2013-09-02T15:26:08.390" LastActivityDate="2013-09-02T15:26:08.390" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3112" CreationDate="2013-09-02T15:07:25.997" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote.  It's not relevant how much of a brilliant well crafted piece of prose an answer is - if it doesn't answer the question as posed, it's not a good answer. Upvoting and downvoting are not &quot;reward&quot; and &quot;punishment&quot; and have nothing to do with how good a person the answerer is, how smart they are, etc.  It is solely about is the posted answer a good one for the posted question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't flag - what do you want the mods to do that you can't do? Mod intervention is for clear off-topic cases; stuff like this we look at, say &quot;Mmm-hm that looks like a corker,&quot; dismiss the flag and move on. If you want it deleted for being off-topic, vote to delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-09-02T15:07:25.997" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3115" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3112" CreationDate="2013-09-02T22:34:43.127" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvotes are appropriate for answers that no longer fit a clarified question. Take it as an object lesson in why it's risky to answer a question before it's clarified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes also notify the owner of the answer that there is a problem with it. They may ignore it, or may take action, but either way the downvote has served its intended purpose: to separate the good answers from the not-as-good answers and let the answerer know that there are problems with their answer. Remember that downvotes go away if they choose to delete; and if they edit, downvotes can be reversed and they may attract new upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-09-03T16:38:44.170" LastActivityDate="2013-09-03T16:38:44.170" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3116" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-04T16:00:48.880" Score="17" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related to the recent question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3112/downvoting-answers-not-fitting-an-edited-question-anymore&quot;&gt;edited questions obsolescing answers&lt;/a&gt;. In that case, there was a clarification added to the question that nullified my answer; it was deleted (and I probably should have done so myself). That&amp;rsquo;s fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I have seen cases where an edit to the question doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem &amp;ldquo;fair&amp;rdquo; &amp;ndash; the querent didn&amp;rsquo;t merely forget to include a detail that changes whether given answers are appropriate, they changed their mind, apparently, about what it was they wanted to ask. In one case that comes to mind, there was a switch from one system tag to another, for example, after there were a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of (very good) answers to the question based on the original system, that no longer applied at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my mind, that edit, and similar such edits, shouldn&amp;rsquo;t be made. If I found myself in such a situation, I&amp;rsquo;d just ask the new question; there&amp;rsquo;s nothing wrong, to my mind, with having a question that I didn&amp;rsquo;t end up needing. But that doesn&amp;rsquo;t necessarily mean that the edit, if it is made, should be reverted by someone else &amp;ndash; I&amp;rsquo;m not sure I&amp;rsquo;d go that far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I ask what the community thinks. Is there ever a point where an edit to a question is invalid, and should be reverted and the asker told to ask it as a separate question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, is there any decent way we can &amp;ldquo;port&amp;rdquo; existing well-written answers to a new question that asks, well, what they were originally asking? I mean in a somewhat automated sense, not hoping each answerer sees what happened and ports the question himself (and risking the mess that occurs when multiple answerers do this and don&amp;rsquo;t notice each other doing it, so we have a separate question for each answer)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-09-04T17:09:00.570" Title="Is it ever appropriate to revert someone's edit to their own question?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3116" CreationDate="2013-09-04T17:01:22.397" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes! This is the flip-side of that other question: when the question is invalidly changed and makes the answers obsolete. This is bad practice too. Consequently, policy aims to walk the line between the two possible badnesses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, it's possible to spot (as you have) the cases where the change to the question isn't merely clarifying or removing ambiguity and vagueness, but is actually switching it out for a completely different question. As a rule, we revert those changes and encourage the poster to post a new question. This is totally cool; though unsurprisingly it's not uncommon to deal with resistance from low-rep users who just don't grok the site, when their question is the one being held to a high standard of consistency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, never fear that someone can pull the rug on answers by doing a bait-and-switch like that, even if they mean it innocently. There's always room for more questions, so there's no reason to economise by letting people change their question mid-process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-09-04T17:01:22.397" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3118" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3119" CreationDate="2013-09-04T18:52:04.810" Score="17" ViewCount="380" Body="&lt;p&gt;Increasingly, we are seeing question askers wait only a matter of hours before accepting an answer. My understanding is that it would be far preferable to wait at least a couple of days before doing so, as this gives others the opportunity to give what might be much better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we encourage this behaviour more overtly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2013-09-16T19:19:10.303" Title="How can we encourage people to wait before accepting answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3118" CreationDate="2013-09-04T19:08:15.580" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is completely and utterly up to the person who asks the question whether they wait or not the accept an answer. They get to pick, it is entirely their opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when someone does accept an answer quickly on a question that is fairly subjective I'll often post a version of the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Hello, just so you know, it's generally considered good manners to wait about a day before you accept an answer. This is actually very much for your own benefit. We have a bunch of great users who post really great answers, they live in different time zones and often take several hours to respond. When you accept an answer you discourage these folks from contributing potentially better answers, so we advise you to wait about a day before you click the check mark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This works exceptionally well if the person whose answer has been accepted posts it. It let's the OP know that you have their best interests in mind and that you're not being self serving by asking them to wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-09-04T19:08:15.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3118" CreationDate="2013-09-04T22:25:07.870" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that if someone finds an answer sufficient then it shouldn't matter about the time frame. At the end of the day, as far as they are concerned they are satisfied and though there may be someone currently typing an extrapolated version of the answer with better referencing; if the question is answered, is there a need for it? Maybe, but that's for the individual to decide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They can of course still keep track of the question and alter their accepted answer but it would be bad form for people to comment on how quickly it was accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hells, only today have I noticed a slight influx of questions and loads of answered icons, which is nothing compared to the melee that is Stack Overflow! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: to reference the Help pages on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/accepted-answer&quot;&gt;What does it mean when an answer is &quot;accepted&quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Accepting an answer is not meant to be a definitive and final statement indicating that the question has now been answered perfectly. It simply means that the author received an answer that worked for him or her personally, but not every user comes back to accept an answer, and of those who do, they may not change the accepted answer if a newer, better answer comes along later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9231" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-09-04T22:30:33.140" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3121" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="544" CreationDate="2013-09-09T14:34:53.560" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should add into this list (Unless I've missed them)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;PBEM games - traditional roleplaying games but played by email/snailmail&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;PBP games - Play By Post games - roleplaying games played via a forum, IRC or similar medium.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3230" LastActivityDate="2013-09-09T14:34:53.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3118" CreationDate="2013-09-09T21:19:58.430" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that for questions that are about rules, where there is a single, objectively correct answer the user can accept it if it is detailed enough for them. This is because the only alternate answers are going to be either repetitions of the existing answer, or wrong answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, more experienced users will still tend to wait so that they have the best possible selection. This is good, but not always necessary. Some questions have the potential to be answered quickly and accurately, but could also receive a more in-depth answer with suggestions on how to avoid a problem, alternative courses of action, or more rules quotes/links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more subjective questions I think it should be discouraged to accept an answer for at least 24 hours, to allow all time zones to attempt a response. I think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3119/5746&quot;&gt;@waxeagle's method&lt;/a&gt; of simply commenting to let the user know is effective - I have seen it used successfully many times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, we should let new users accept answers for simple questions without waiting long, as they are likely to want a quick and simple solution. More experienced askers, or longer questions, should be encouraged to wait by simply leaving a message for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2013-09-09T21:19:58.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-10T13:23:14.377" Score="7" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;WOTC just changed their entire forum structure and linking. This question will help us track and repair the damage to our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please add broken links here as you find them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14403/is-it-possible-to-roll-stealth-versus-multiple-targets-when-one-or-more-can-see/14408#14408&quot;&gt;Is it possible to roll Stealth versus multiple targets when one or more can see you?&lt;/a&gt; Fixed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4828/when-a-creature-is-invisible-but-not-hidden-do-the-enemies-know-the-location-o/4829#4829&quot;&gt;When a creature is invisible, but not hidden, do the enemies know the location of the creature?&lt;/a&gt; Half-fixed?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27230/can-i-hide-using-cunning-sneak-with-wilderness-skirmisher/27236#27236&quot;&gt;Can I hide using Cunning Sneak with Wilderness Skirmisher?&lt;/a&gt; Fixed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please help us fix these a few at a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An update, it looks like they are trying to fix some of the links internally via redirects and whatnot. Please continue to update links as your come across broken ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2013-09-11T03:13:58.050" Title="Report Broken WOTC forum links here. Help us fix them" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-09-11T19:35:48.397" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3124" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3125" CreationDate="2013-09-10T14:33:28.073" Score="2" ViewCount="34" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the review tab, yesterday when I logged in there was nine questions pending in re-open votes. Most of these were older and the context was that they had been edited, but there were just so many -- normally there's some luck involved if a person happens to find three or four items requiring review, let along in the same category. Most of the time that includes something tagged as both a first post and late answer simultaneously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today when I logged in, there were &lt;strong&gt;forty-one items requiring review in the re-open category. Several of them things I had already addressed yesterday. Also, when I went through a few, the numbers were way off. I got through three and the system logged that ten, fifteen and more had been addressed.&lt;/strong&gt; What's up with that? Does that mean other people are getting the funky numbers on reviews pending for closed questions and not just me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Error with re-open votes?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3124" CreationDate="2013-09-10T16:53:52.667" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Automatic re-open procedures just got changed.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, this means that a closed question will automatically be added to the reopen queue when it is...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...Edited (body edits only) within 5 days of closure by the author. Or,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...Edited (body edits only) within 5 days of closure by a 3rd-party, provided the editor has not also flagged the question or voted to delete it. Or,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...Sufficiently popular, where popularity is calculated based on question score, top answer score, or views per month. We're still tweaking the exact thresholds for these, but right now they're fairly generous - however, the most popular closed questions are being added to the queue &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/196078&quot;&gt;this meta post&lt;/a&gt; for details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-09-10T16:53:52.667" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3126" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-10T21:48:27.380" Score="3" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is in the title. Is there a forum for the RPG stack exchange, and if not, would it be possible to have one made? And I mean specifically a forum, and not a chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there isn't one, then why not? There are already Many RPG forums out there, true, but none of them are directly linked to this website. There are a lot of questions I've seen here that often get a comment to the effect of &quot;this is a discussion question.&quot; While I understand that's not what this site is for, what would be the harm in having a forum that we could then send those questions to, possibly to either be changed to a better version, or to give the person asking the discussion they actually want, with the community they want it from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, yes, I understand the Chat does that already. However, it's much harder to use than a forum, because it makes time an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5793" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T22:14:05.373" Title="Does the RPG Stack have a forum, and if not, would it be possible to make one?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3112" CreationDate="2013-09-10T23:18:08.000" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A downvote without an explanation is a very sad thing to see on an answer that you took an effort to make nice. However I agree that a downvote has the power to get attention. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially when we are talking about originally good answers that look weird now because of an edited question, the best course of action IMO would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave a comment explaining why the answer doesn't make sense for the revised question. If there's already a comment doing that, upvote that comment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If possible, wait a while for the answerer to react, and then downvote if he doesn't, to attract his attention. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep an eye on the answer, and remove your downwote if and when the answer is updated to make sense in the new context.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove your original comment as it is no longer relevant, and optionally leave a comment thanking the answerer for fixing his answer, or even upvote it if you think it's worth it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This approach is also good for answers that deserve downvotes for other reasons. A naked downvote is a real heartbreaker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2013-09-10T23:18:08.000" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3126" CreationDate="2013-09-10T23:33:28.710" Score="17" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;what would be the harm in having a forum that we could then send those questions to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be a distraction from the point of the RPG Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;there are already lots of RPG forums out there&lt;/a&gt;. The only people populating this hypothetical one would be &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt;, which would draw our attention away from asking and answering questions. A forum wouldn't improve the site, and would have a high potential for making it &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T22:14:05.373" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3126" CreationDate="2013-09-11T00:04:17.100" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is not one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may never be one - this isn't a RPG.SE kind of decision, we're part of a vast network of Stack Exchanges and we use what the Overmind provides.  Stack Exchange generally believes its format is innately superior to forums for questions and answers and wants to maintain the purity of that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For random discussion - we encourage people to take it to one of the specialized forums. I'm not sure of the value of us endorsing one because there are various with strengths and weaknesses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Frankly, I don't spend a lot of time in chat either because to me it's the place where all the noise goes to die, and the reason I stay here on RPG.SE instead of ENWorld, RPG.net, etc. is because I personally hate forums and want the format that keeps things on topic. Briefly helping a noob there is the limit of my patience.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although, Jeff Atwood did &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2013/02/civilized-discourse-construction-kit.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;announce his &quot;even better forum software&quot; earlier this year&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.discourse.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Discourse&lt;/a&gt;. So if you went to meta.SE and sucked up enough and said &quot;Discourse is awesome, can't we have one on SE?&quot; it might not be a zero percent play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-09-11T00:04:17.100" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3123" CreationDate="2013-09-11T02:49:34.603" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/role-playing%20games/query/136845/posts-with-community-wizards-com-links&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Data Explorer Query&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like all data explorer queries, it's updated once a week. I've put user and score in there, so fix your own answers first. Edit this answer to show which users have been fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-09-11T02:49:34.603" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-09-11T19:35:48.397" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3131" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-11T17:39:12.470" Score="6" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;Now that a few more Numenera questions are coming in, there's been some misunderstanding about whether or not there is an accent over the last 'e', which stems from the logo &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.numenera.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;NUMENÉRA&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastEditorUserId="2161" LastEditDate="2013-09-13T14:40:52.537" LastActivityDate="2013-09-16T19:52:00.970" Title="Should &quot;NUMENÉRA&quot; include the diacritic when written textually?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3131" CreationDate="2013-09-11T17:39:12.470" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is &lt;strong&gt;no accent&lt;/strong&gt; over the final 'e' in Numenera. The mark on the logo is &lt;strong&gt;styling&lt;/strong&gt;, not an accent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is confirmed by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.numenera.com/overview/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;rest of the website&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.montecookgames.com/tag/numenera/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Monte Cook's blog&lt;/a&gt;, where Numenera is written without the accent everywhere in the text, and in the title of the website.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2161" LastActivityDate="2013-09-11T17:39:12.470" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3131" CreationDate="2013-09-12T16:08:20.120" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Oddly enough, the stylistic accent on the &lt;em&gt;e&lt;/em&gt; seems to be inaccurate in terms of the word&amp;rsquo;s origin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As @AdrianoVaroliPiazza points out in a comment,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's a Latin-rooted word. From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numen : &lt;em&gt;Numen, pl. numina, (&quot;an influence perceptible by mind but not by senses,is a Latin term for a potential, guiding the course of events in a particular place or in the whole world, used in Roman philosophical and religious thought.&lt;/em&gt; It's just that, in Spanish, we do use accents, and for me, &quot;Numenéra&quot; looked better, even though it'd actually be incorrect Spanish: accents are not written on the penultimate syllable of a word when the word ends in a vowel. But it still looked nicer :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He’s mostly correct, but &lt;em&gt;numenera&lt;/em&gt; is not a Latin word. The word &lt;em&gt;numen&lt;/em&gt; is, but it’s also a Spanish word (with the same forms, s. &lt;em&gt;numen&lt;/em&gt; pr. &quot;numEn&quot;, and pl. &lt;em&gt;numina&lt;/em&gt; pr. &quot;numIna&quot;), and Latin does not have the &lt;em&gt;-era&lt;/em&gt; suffix while &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-era#Spanish&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Spanish does&lt;/a&gt;: it implies the place or object where the suffixed noun is usually found. This suffix is explicitly &lt;em&gt;-era&lt;/em&gt; not &lt;em&gt;-&amp;eacute;ra&lt;/em&gt;, so &lt;em&gt;numen&amp;eacute;ra&lt;/em&gt; would be incorrect as Adriano points out. The word would still be pronounced &quot;numenEra&quot; in Spanish, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I think the correct form would be &lt;em&gt;numinera&lt;/em&gt; rather than &lt;em&gt;numenera&lt;/em&gt;, but either way &lt;em&gt;numen&amp;eacute;ra&lt;/em&gt; is right out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those curious, by my estimation, the meaning of the word would probably be something close to a shrine: it&amp;rsquo;s a &lt;em&gt;place where one finds a guiding spirit&lt;/em&gt; or perhaps an &lt;em&gt;object containing a guiding spirit&lt;/em&gt;, or possibly &lt;em&gt;the state of being a such a spirit&lt;/em&gt; (&amp;ldquo;&lt;em&gt;spirit-ness&lt;/em&gt;&amp;rdquo;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="932" LastEditDate="2013-09-12T17:13:25.803" LastActivityDate="2013-09-12T17:13:25.803" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3134" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-09-15T03:16:43.047" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The Walking Mind is Rob Donoghue, co-founder of Evil Hat and erratic RPG writer.&quot; A fairly active blog. The author has recently concluded a very in-depth look at 13th Age and Numenera. Well-written, thought-out, and a game designer's perspective is a plus, at least for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastEditorUserId="1421" LastEditDate="2013-09-15T03:23:24.790" LastActivityDate="2013-09-15T03:23:24.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-09-15T03:23:10.337" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://slyflourish.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://slyflourish.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sly Flourish has started as a D&amp;amp;D 4e blog (hence the name, I'm guessing), but has since moved on to broader topics. Weekly posts, focuses on practical advice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastActivityDate="2013-09-15T03:23:10.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-09-16T05:21:04.967" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Rick Neal's &quot;What's He On About Now?&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rickneal.ca/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.rickneal.ca/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rickneal.ca/?feed=rss2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.rickneal.ca/?feed=rss2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Started out as a DFRPG playtest blog, and has some of the best explanations/insights I've ever seen for that system. But he's writing on all sorts of other games too; Apocalypse World recently got a good article. Only posts when he has something to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-11-27T00:20:01.747" LastActivityDate="2014-11-27T00:20:01.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3137" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3118" CreationDate="2013-09-16T11:24:54.543" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would be nice if you did not answer your own question without waiting for other to get a chance to answer first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Edited as comments to answer tend to be deleted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;But it seams &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/its-ok-to-ask-and-answer-your-own-questions/&quot;&gt;&quot;it is not merely OK to ask and answer your own question, it is &#xA;  explicitly encouraged&quot; by Jeff Atwood&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;. You are allowed to give&#xA;  duplicated answer but you risk being down voted if you don't&#xA;  significantly improve on the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="768" LastEditDate="2013-09-16T19:19:10.303" LastActivityDate="2013-09-16T19:19:10.303" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3131" CreationDate="2013-09-16T19:40:21.770" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What do Official Sources Say?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://torment.uservoice.com/forums/197950-game-ideas/suggestions/3793821-french-typo-about-the-name-of-the-game-&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Someone working on the Numenera vidoe game seems to think it's a diacritic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Against:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I couldn't find a single instance of a diacritic on the site, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.numenera.com/setting/whats-in-a-name-numenera/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;including the &amp;quot;What in a Name&amp;quot; page&lt;/a&gt;, which is literally all about the name of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's no accent in the book text itself, &lt;a href=&quot;http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e235/dan_martland/cf9f0f2dc43506be56f6076f4c4b3ef3_zpsa598f8f7.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;even when it's writing the logo it out in smallcaps with a trademark sign&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My conclusion is that it doesn't actually have a diacritic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-09-16T19:52:00.970" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3139" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-19T12:19:39.313" Score="3" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that generic system tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; should not be used if a more specific tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; is also applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2760/4398&quot;&gt;How Should We Tag D&amp;amp;D Versions?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3024/4398&quot;&gt;Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2942/4398&quot;&gt;Cross-system Fate tag protocol&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2997/4398&quot;&gt;Fate tag redux: The Archive Trawl Blues&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been seeing a lot of posts tagged both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; lately. I know nothing about GURPS, but the tag wikis seem to say that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: Do we need to excise &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps+gurps-4e&quot;&gt;these nine posts&lt;/a&gt;, and help people avoid double-tagging in the future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-09-19T13:07:46.273" Title="gurps and gurps-4e tagging the same post" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3139" CreationDate="2013-09-19T13:07:46.273" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not really.  In GURPS, like Call of Cthulhu and many other non-D&amp;amp;D games, there's not a lot of change from version to version.  For rules wonks, answering for D&amp;amp;D 1e vs 2e vs 3e vs 4e is a completely different thing.  For many of these other games, it's a lot more correct to say &quot;I have a GURPS question...  It's 4e if it matters, but it's not likely it will.&quot;   And that's what that tag combo is saying.  We don't have federal reporting standards dictating everyone disclose their exact rules edition, the point is to scope it's domain to get the right people to answer in the desired scope and to facilitate future find ability within that scope - they are doing that fine and I fail to see any bad effect justifying mass intervention in those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-09-19T13:07:46.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3141" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3142" CreationDate="2013-09-23T14:49:48.333" Score="9" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot;&gt;Stackexchange&lt;/a&gt; encourages to answer your own question, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/513/is-it-appropriate-to-ask-questions-you-are-pretty-sure-you-know-the-answer-to&quot;&gt;this other meta post&lt;/a&gt; seems to acknowledge this, how do I know if there's a real need for this question to be on SE ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Context : Playing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr4&lt;/a&gt; the other night, I ran across a question with my GM of which I knew the answer and found it in an extension book: just a tiny phrase easily overlooked. Question is : does one see through glass using astral perception ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it worthy being asked ? If not, why ? If yes, what would not ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT :&lt;/strong&gt; Here's the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28973/is-glass-transparent-to-astral-perception/28974#28974&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8150" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T22:25:19.120" Title="What should I consider before posting a question and answer it myself" Tags="|discussion|questions|self-answering|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3141" CreationDate="2013-09-23T17:03:04.707" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a good example of something that should be a self answered question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a question, especially a relatively obscure one, then it's a great idea to go ahead and ask it, and then answer it yourself if you've found the answer already. This increases the knowledge base of this site, and helps other folks find the answer easily if they've got the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just be sure you put some work into the question itself. My biggest knock on this kind of thing is that people will often half ass the question so they can post the answer. Both should be of quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your other option is waiting for a relatively obscure question to show up and then you answer it. Isn't it better for that person to find the answer waiting for them already?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-09-23T17:03:04.707" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3143" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-09-24T19:20:36.187" Score="1" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lately, it seems to me that the amount of questions with no upvoted answers is increasing, and what more, some of the older questions seem to be getting themselves forgotten. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now it may be that the question IS obscure, and we have no experts on the topic, but I think many of these could be answered, if users were in some way reminded that these actually exist. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I wrong in my premise?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way we can remind the users or revive the questions, aside from bounties, which no one seems to be willing to place on these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7723" LastActivityDate="2013-09-26T00:49:15.523" Title="Is there a way we can remind people of unaswered questions?" Tags="|discussion|unanswered-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3141" CreationDate="2013-09-24T19:20:48.213" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see community wikis used very much on this site; aren't those perhaps a better way to &quot;answer your own question&quot;?  At least when the question is involved, without a simple black+white answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastActivityDate="2013-09-24T19:20:48.213" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3143" CreationDate="2013-09-24T19:54:18.667" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are 12 questions in the unanswered list. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's insanely low for a site of our size. One of our closest comps as far as site size and traffic is the Christianity site. There are nearly 50 unanswered questions there (still quite low). Another solid comp UX has 86. Travel has 26.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only six have been there for more than a month. Again crazy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if you want answers to these questions, you've got options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Research the question yourself. Sometimes all it really takes is someone to do some leg work. If you've got the time and energy and you care, why not do it yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Publicize the question. Twitter is a great place to be a gamer right now. If you follow the creator for a product go ask them on twitter. If you know of other experts, follow up with them. FB and g+ might also be good. We also have a very active chat community on this site, with some true experts hanging out there. If you think a question has been passed over, come talk about it in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit the question. Editing always bumps the question to the top of the list. This is like a free, 2 day bounty. Don't do this often, but if there are fixes to be made, you can always suggest an edit and have the question bumped.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, these questions are already presented in the unanswered list and that means that they are relatively easy to find compared to other old questions. If people &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to find things to answer, they will. If people take advantage of favorite tags, then the list is even more focused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: I've looked at all the questions in the unanswered list. I don't feel like any of them really merit a bounty right now. I've got reputation I'm &lt;em&gt;willing&lt;/em&gt; to give away, and I've invited folks to suggest posts for me to bounty in chat. Only one person has taken me up on it so far, but stop by and make the case if you've got a pet question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2013-09-24T19:59:44.377" LastActivityDate="2013-09-24T19:59:44.377" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3141" CreationDate="2013-09-24T22:19:54.790" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with WaxEagle's answer. I'd like to add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28027/does-using-combat-expertise-count-as-fighting-defensively&quot;&gt;another example&lt;/a&gt; of when it would be appropriate, as I see it. Since I wasn't certain of the way to rule that, I posed the question (which can stand alone) and gave my answer to it. Note that Starwed's answer is accepted and not mine; Despite the fact that I've been playing it in my own ruling for a while, their answer made more sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically it's a &quot;here's how I rule on this question, please express agreement/disagreement via votes/your own answer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-09-24T22:19:54.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3143" CreationDate="2013-09-26T00:49:15.523" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Community user will bump unanswered questions periodically, until they get an answer that's upvoted. That keeps them alive indefinitely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-09-26T00:49:15.523" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3148" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3150" CreationDate="2013-09-29T12:19:45.787" Score="22" ViewCount="479" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8144/where-can-i-find-a-couple-wife-friendly-adventures&quot;&gt;In this question, we're being asked for suggestions on &quot;wife-friendly adventures&quot;&lt;/a&gt;. While the person asking the question is doing so with entirely innocent intent (he wants to find a game that matches what his wife is looking for, and tells us what that is in the details), the title is problematic to quite a few people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I cringe a little every time I see it. In other parts of the &quot;gaming&quot; community, there is a lot of general misogyny and this term is thrown around as one of many derogatory terms implying that women don't play &quot;real&quot; games. Having a title like that gives the impression that the question (and by extension the site) is for male RPG players. That isn't actually true of this community from what I've seen at all, but we're facing something of a negative social stigma due to the actions of others and IMO need to avoid lopsided terminology like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this specific question it would be easy enough to change the title to something like &quot;nobles &amp;amp; political intrigue&quot; rather than &quot;wife-friendly&quot; (which would be more accurate). But I'm thinking about a more general case answer for what to do the next time similar terminology appears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2013-10-07T02:35:38.400" Title="Should gender-loaded terms like 'wife-friendly' be edited out?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3148" CreationDate="2013-09-29T12:37:59.840" Score="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, terminology like this should be edited away liberally from questions, answers, and &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; question titles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People could be &lt;em&gt;quite reasonably&lt;/em&gt; offended by this language - it's making disrespectful stereotypical judgements - and that in itself might well be a good enough reason to edit these terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there's another reason as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&quot;[societal-role]-friendly&quot; actually communicates nothing, and we can do better&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're all aware that people can enjoy &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; kind of game, regardless of their gender, or their familial status, or even their profession. So, really, the adjective &quot;wife-friendly&quot; doesn't mean anything at all, nor does &quot;male-friendly&quot; - nor &quot;dentist-friendly,&quot; for that matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this terminology is useless:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Where can I find an adventure friendly to [societal role]?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nobody knows what the heck that means. As a title, it's a poor one - this terminology tells people little about the question and it is not search-engine friendly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does &quot;[societal-role]-friendly&quot; &lt;em&gt;actually mean&lt;/em&gt; in your particular case? Does it mean the adventure has [features]? Great! Be to the point, and write this instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Where can I find a game that has [features]?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one actually communicates &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;. As a title, it tells you what the question's about from the questions list or from search engine results - and it's search engine friendly. It's good communication, and a great title. So it should be written like this in the first place - and edited to be like this if it isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;After word: Societal role terminology can be quite OK&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question and answer is meant to deal with the times it isn't useful and shouldn't be taken as a command to edit away all instances of such terms indiscriminately. Describing people in terms of their societal role &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; actually useful sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider these cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I suspect my GM is favouring this boy/girl they like&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm experiencing social tensions in my group because my husband/wife/etc is also playing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The societal roles here are &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; important, as are the specific nature of these relationships. There's not much to be gained by editing these away, and there's not much room for improvement here: these statements are already to the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So edit away cases where mention of a societal role is useless, but naturally, not indiscriminately when they're useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-10-07T02:35:38.400" LastActivityDate="2013-10-07T02:35:38.400" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3151" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-01T15:56:20.683" Score="6" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;A post this morning was hit with a spam flag which was validated by a moderator (or the moderator took it upon themselves to flag it as spam). It came from an established user, who appears to have no connection to the link and the link was very much on topic to the question. This is problematic because a valid spam flag comes with both a profile annotation and a -100 reputation penalty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/29103/1084&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/29103/1084&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is a 10k only link as the answer has been deleted and locked by community due to the binding spam flag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I agree with the deletion, however I think the validation (or binding cast, I can't tell) is severe overkill and I'd like to request the following on behalf of Ravn&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the spam/offensive flags be cleared.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the post be converted to a comment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a valuable and interesting link, it's on topic to the question. I agree that it's both time sensitive and it was not a full answer. However, validating this as spam is neither fair nor really in good faith to the intent of the poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-10-02T01:41:28.923" Title="How is this spam?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|spam|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3151" CreationDate="2013-10-01T17:40:13.700" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the deletion too, but the spam flag is probably overkill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, killing with fire answers that are &quot;and here's a kickstarter I have a vested interest in other people contributing to&quot; is a valid way to firmly discourage KS answers, which are time-limited (in a way answers shouldn't be) and &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; have an element of promoting the answerer's self-interest (in getting more contributions for the campaign, possibly unlocking stretch goals, which perhaps verges on spam). KS campaigns do encourage tweeting and reposting, as a means of having the contributors do advertising for the campaign, and an answer isn't an appropriate venue for advertisements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; hand, I'm 99% certain that the answer was made in good faith, even if it was in poor judgement. That's certainly forgivable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So on the balance, I do think the spam flag penalty is overkill and the penalty should be overturned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(You might be thinking that it works as a deterrent &amp;ndash; but deterrents aren't deterrents if they're not public, and the effects of the spam flag are almost entirely private except to 10k users who don't need the deterrence. Without deterrence the penalty is just punishment, and that's not what we're supposed to be doing with content-control features of the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for where the link &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be appropriate... The link is useless after the campaign ends, so chat is a probably a more appropriate venue for the link. I think a comment might be OK, still, but it's probably borderline and would have to be judged case-by-case, since I can imagine the same link embedded in a comment that is unobtrusive as easily as in one that is obnoxiously spammy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-10-01T17:40:13.700" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3151" CreationDate="2013-10-02T01:41:28.923" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Good point. A rep hit is harsh in this case since it was done in good faith.  The spam flag has been removed and the answer re-deleted normally. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for future reference, it doesn't have to be &quot;your&quot; spam to be spam. The behavior page says excessive self-promotion may be categorized as spam, but that's not an exclusive definition, it's one of the things that can be spam.  Any unsolicited advertisement - including any sale, job posting, Kickstarter, or similar - is spam and does not belong on the SE, regardless of whether it's &quot;yours&quot; or not. Many people really object to this kind of content (some of the site feeds options were downvoted because of excessive Kickstarter promotional content).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For stuff like that that's worth sharing, do what I do - put it in chat, and then people will star it, and then other people will see it. I certainly find the Bones II Kickstarter of interest and would happily read about it/star it, in chat.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not on an answer, for all the obvious reasons besides its spamminess (it was not an answer to that question, it is inherently time limited, that question sucked and was in the process of being closed...). Also, &quot;comments are no excuse&quot; - don't put stuff like this in comments either.  Y'all know site policy on comments; they're to improve the question and answer, and spammy comments will get wrath like spammy posts. Plus commenting on old posts will get a lot less play than a starred chat line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-10-02T01:41:28.923" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3154" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-06T01:25:14.817" Score="4" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many questions are ambiguous without their corresponding tags. Could we add them to the RSS feed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2013-10-06T01:25:14.817" Title="Include tags in RSS feed" Tags="|feature-request|rss|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3155" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-08T19:16:47.403" Score="-1" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, an rpg is simply that: a roleplaying game, whereas we undertake a specific role, and play it out. Now, within gaming genres, rpg has become intrinsically tied to traditional turn-based rpgs, originally lead by pnp -but wasnt pnp just a form of escapism, allowing us to fulfill a role of fantasy? Is rpg only a derivation of these original gaming systems, or is it more? Indeed, even fps games could in many terms be classed as rpgs, as you are merely enacting a role!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate this site deals mostly with pen and paper rpg, yet the site is called role-playing games: as such the many veterans here must have strong definitions of what an rpg is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am very interested in hearing these definitions -in hearing, on an individual basis, what is your answer, so that I may hopefully learn from such and improve/enrich my own understanding of what I class as an rpg.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9492" OwnerDisplayName="ReaperOscuro" LastEditorUserId="9492" LastEditDate="2013-10-08T21:10:04.217" LastActivityDate="2013-10-08T23:11:16.347" Title="What do you class as a &quot;Role-playing Game&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="17" ClosedDate="2013-10-09T01:17:30.680" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3155" CreationDate="2013-10-08T23:11:16.347" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;I think the Wikipedia explanation covers it pretty well&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game) is a game in&#xA;  which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting.&#xA;  Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a&#xA;  narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of&#xA;  structured decision-making or character development. Actions taken&#xA;  within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of&#xA;  rules and guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are several forms of RPG. The original form, sometimes called&#xA;  the tabletop RPG, is conducted through discussion, whereas in live&#xA;  action role-playing games (LARP) players physically perform their&#xA;  characters' actions. In both of these forms, an arranger called a game&#xA;  master (GM) usually decides on the rules and setting to be used and&#xA;  acts as referee, while each of the other players plays the role of a&#xA;  single character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Several varieties of RPG also exist in electronic media, such as&#xA;  multi-player text-based MUDs and their graphics-based successors,&#xA;  massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs).&#xA;  Role-playing games also include single-player offline role-playing&#xA;  video games in which players control a character or team who undertake&#xA;  quests, and may include capabilities that advance using statistical&#xA;  mechanics. These games often share settings and rules with tabletop&#xA;  RPGs, but emphasize character advancement more than collaborative&#xA;  storytelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Despite this variety of forms, some game forms such as trading card&#xA;  games and wargames that are related to role-playing games may not be&#xA;  included. Role-playing activity may sometimes be present in such&#xA;  games, but it is not the primary focus. The term is also sometimes&#xA;  used to describe roleplay simulation games and exercises used in&#xA;  teaching, training, and academic research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or in short form: any game where the principal focus is on roleplaying is an RPG. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, a lot of stuff is an RPG. Video games aren't covered here because they have their own SE site already. Board games &amp;amp; card games have their own SE. Anything else is largely fair game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't see a lot of questions about things like LARPs here despite them being on-topic, just by their nature. Each LARP has its own rules &amp;amp; community, and they're so small that they're insular. People just ask each other, rather than asking a wider Internet audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2013-10-08T23:11:16.347" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3157" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-08T23:36:33.140" Score="15" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know how many Meta regulars have looked at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;our Tour&lt;/a&gt; (aka About) lately or ever, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3155/what-do-you-class-as-a-role-playing-game&quot;&gt;this question and the confusion prompting it&lt;/a&gt; made me go looking for why it might have been asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently, our Tour is horribly inaccurate about what our topic scope is. It's &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; good at making it clear that CRPGs* and non-RPG games (murder mysteries, boardgames, etc.) aren't our bag, but it does it at the expense of a bunch of RPG types that we have spent a lot of time on meta deliberately including in our scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some quotes, emphasising the problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of &lt;strong&gt;tabletop, paper-and-pencil&lt;/strong&gt; role-playing games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ask about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a &lt;strong&gt;table-top&lt;/strong&gt; RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;RPG rules or mechanics&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;RPG adventures and campaigns&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing &lt;strong&gt;table-top&lt;/strong&gt; RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Information about RPG campaign settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Techniques for running or playing RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to &lt;strong&gt;table-top pen and paper&lt;/strong&gt; RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem:&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Nowhere&lt;/em&gt; does the Tour mention that we accept questions about freeform, LARP, play-by-chat, and other such RPGs we've deemed on-topic. And, by being unusually specific, it quite clearly &lt;em&gt;says&lt;/em&gt; (despite what it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; say) that we are about &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; table-top, pen and paper RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is quite inaccurate and unhelpful. It seems to have been borrowed from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our FAQ&lt;/a&gt; on acceptible questions, which we originally had say &quot;tabletop&quot; in the first sentence, with later sentences clarifying that we actually really mean LARP and freeform and stuff too. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/598/should-we-update-the-faq-to-include-non-pen-and-paper-games&quot;&gt;At the time&lt;/a&gt; that seemed like it was good enough since we couldn't think of a short, pithy phrase that fully captured our topic, but it seems to have backfired in translation to the Tour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;can we change the Tour?&lt;/strong&gt; Secondly, and more stickily, &lt;strong&gt;what phrase should we use instead?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Tabletop&quot; nicely eliminate CRPGs and party games like &quot;Werewolf&quot;, but it also eliminates LARP. &quot;Paper and pencil&quot; neatly eliminates CRPGs too (redundant?), but also eliminates PBM and online play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We either need a different term to distinguish our topic from CRPGs &lt;em&gt;et al&lt;/em&gt; that still includes all our other accepted RPG types, or we need to wedge some qualifiers in there &amp;ndash; like we originally did with the FAQ &amp;ndash; that make it clear that our site includes the whole scope of the RPG hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* Not that it seems to stop the CRPG question-askers we still get on a regular basis...&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-10-12T19:37:36.013" Title="Our Tour page is wrong. Help us fix it!" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T00:00:59.230" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;As Is&lt;/em&gt; (provided for me to just copy-pasta stuff mods can edit)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Top bit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/b&gt; is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's built and run &lt;i&gt;by you&lt;/i&gt; as part of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; network of Q&amp;amp;A sites. With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask questions, get answers, no distractions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can choose which question to put there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask About&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG or LARPs, including those run over mediums such as play-by-post, play-by-chat, or online tabletop simulators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG rules or mechanics&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG adventures and campaigns&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Information about RPG campaign settings&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Techniques for running or playing RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Don't Ask About&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Anything not directly related to role-playing games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Questions that are primarily opinion-based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Questions with too many possible answers or that would require an extremely long answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;computer RPGs&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;board and card games&lt;/a&gt;; these have their own dedicated Stack Exchange sites&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag list is same as featured question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2013-10-11T01:19:41.467" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-10-09T00:00:59.230" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T00:01:45.353" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;More to prompt discussion than a proposal, and I wanted to keep the Q from getting any wordier than it was; some thoughts and brainstorming:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Analogue&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen &quot;analogue RPGs&quot; used to capture RPGs. (Game Chef 2013 used &quot;analogue&quot; to define acceptable submissions, though they left off the &quot;RP&quot; in &quot;RPG&quot; to include card and board games this year as a kind of inclusivity experiment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Con: implies that play-by-chat, etc., are not in-scope. Some kind of &quot;analogue or normally-analogue-even-if-you-use-digital-tools-to-play&quot; modification is obviously unacceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's interesting is that the &quot;normally-analogue-even-if...&quot; modifier seems to be our actual measure of what is and isn't OK when it comes to the divide between &quot;proper&quot; RPGs and CRPGs, so thinking about how to communicate that may be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Two audiences&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have to speak to two audiences at the same time:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People we want to turn away: CRPG players/designers and (much more rarely) writers, non-RPG world-builders, conlangers, and other people doing things RPGers often do but without an actual RPG involved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People we want to include: LARPers, storytelling gamers, play-by-forum roleplayers, freeform roleplayers who use no &quot;rules&quot;, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes it hard to have a pithy phrase, since the sort of terms that strongly indicate that the first isn't welcome tend to imply the second isn't as well. &quot;Tabletop&quot;, &quot;pen and paper&quot;, &quot;traditional&quot;, and &quot;analogue&quot; suffer from this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think of RPGing as a hobby derived from D&amp;amp;D and other pre-D&amp;amp;D roleplaying-storytelling that was Katamaried up by the birth of RPGs, so &quot;traditional RPGs and games derived from the traditional RPG... uh, &lt;em&gt;tradition&lt;/em&gt;&quot; kinda captures our scope, but is obviously in a crap form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Roleplaying Games Hobby&quot;?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might be more what we're aiming for. We do cater to every activity that's under the umbrella of roleplaying &lt;em&gt;as a hobby&lt;/em&gt;, including world-building (for RPGs), online play methods for RPGs, LARPing, storytelling games, and all that lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Con: &quot;the hobby&quot; is pretty nebulous. It does capture the whole ball of wax &lt;em&gt;to me&lt;/em&gt;, but does a novice to RPGs read it that way too? I don't know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Weak pro: I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; this excludes CRPGs. I don't think anyone considers a &quot;RPG hobby&quot; to exist around CRPGs &amp;ndash; that's the videogaming hobby, and &quot;RPG&quot; is a &lt;em&gt;genre&lt;/em&gt; within the hobby, not a distinct sub-hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stronger pro, if the con doesn't sink it: it's nice and short, and it's a noun. (I somehow think being a noun is helpful?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-10-09T00:24:45.653" LastActivityDate="2013-10-09T00:24:45.653" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T00:09:52.537" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A comprehensive definition is unlikely to appear.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'd define RPGs within our scope as something like &quot;collaborative storytelling, using a set of agreed-upon rules to determine outcomes and adjudicated by one or more living persons.&quot; But that's not going to fly in the tour. We want to talk about what we cover, not write a thesis on the nature of role-playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Our definition should be exclusionary.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of listing everything we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; cover (tabletop, play-by-chat, play-by-email, play-by-post, LARP, online tabletop...), how about saying what kind of RPGs we &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; cover? That's... CRPGs and party games, right? We can still include a bit about what we do cover, for contrast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...gamemasters and players of non-computer role-playing games, like tabletop and LARP games, including those which happen online but are run by people (such as play-by-post).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know enough about party games to exclude them very easily, so I left that bit out for now. Comment with suggestions and I'll edit it in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-10-09T00:09:52.537" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T01:22:51.293" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not much of a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a bullet point to the effect of &quot;including LARPs and PBeMs and stuff&quot; would be fine, but in general the scope is 99% tabletop. Coming up with bizarre turns of phrase to try to encompass all the edge cases degrades the primary use case, which is &quot;tell some guy looking to ask his D&amp;amp;D question that he's in the right place,&quot; as well as the secondary &quot;no computer games, shoo.&quot;  If we add a quickie inclusive clause, then doing more doesn't really serve any other purpose to torture ourselves over wording.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I changed the last bullet to say &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs (including LARPs and play-by-post)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we really need to do more?  I vote no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-10-09T01:22:51.293" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T06:53:33.090" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think mxyzplk's change was constructive, but I don't think we should be talking as if &quot;table-top RPGs&quot; includes LARPs. It doesn't, and that immediately sounds silly and harms our credibility as a site for RPG experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I propose this version:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask about...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG or LARPs, including those run over mediums such as play-by-post, play-by-chat, or online tabletop simulators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;RPG rules or mechanics (Unchanged)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;RPG adventures or campaigns (Unchanged)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs or LARPs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Information about RPG campaign settings (Unchanged)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Techniques for running or playing RPGs (Unchanged)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top RPGs and LARPs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Don't ask about... (Unchanged)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anything not directly related to role-playing games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that are primarily opinion-based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with too many possible answers or that would require an extremely long answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2013-10-09T12:14:54.160" LastActivityDate="2013-10-09T12:14:54.160" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3157" CreationDate="2013-10-09T21:46:53.210" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Firstly, some background: feel free to skip.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The reason behind the actions(feel free to skip).&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, thanks Seven for raising this. I'll be honest: when I came here, I didn't think this site would be super table-top/pnp focused, simply because of the name. Role Playing Games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet when I saw the question from...ah, it's been removed -or at least, I cannot find it. The question about the unarmed army and should you be allowed to have an unarmed army. To me that was immediately understandable, and indeed very RPG-related, yet it was quickly....&quot;shot down&quot;, for that is what it felt like, perhaps due to the overly militant pouncing. The chat felt initially uninviting, although thankfully it tapered to helpfulness -but think: will that asker have left with a positive impression? Is he likely to return? I don't think so on both counts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One could argue, maybe he shouldn't return, because this site isn't for him -but on the flip-side I say, had the reaction/way it was dealt with been different, he may of been enticed into exploring further into the type of RPGing that is asked about here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alarm bells ringing, I thought it best to ask what is everyone's feeling of what an RPG is -and that was also quickly enough shot down, as it was felt not in tune with this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hopefully that all sets the scene as to why I agree that the Tour page needs revising, and why the tag line for the site needs to be improved: hey if this site is about a group of veterans strongly protecting their domain, then it doesn't need to. But I thought that it is a site about making others become veterans, and indeed about showing off how awesome this kind of RPG is, rather than making it feel daunting and putting potential peers off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As to what the starting site words could be.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seven and dlras42 (for the live-action comment) I believe are spot on: Role playing game hobby. It is exactly that -and being a hobbyist is pretty damn cool. Yet noobs may not know what is meant by it. So why not reword that first, most important and excluding of words, to something akin to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;RPG Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for RPG Game Hobbyists(eg: tabletop, paper-and-pencil, live action role-playing games and the like) and those that aspire to become such.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Immediately it is made more accessible, includes examples as to what the term means, is a cool sounding term, and is inviting by not excluding those that wish to dip their toes into this very daunting world. And all for the cost of... 1 1/2 line extra of text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As to why who shouldn't enter needs to be made more visible.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also agree with BESW: it needs to be made clearer who shouldn't post here -not because they are lesser beings for liking a different type of RPG (otherwise this site is but perpetrating the incorrect concept that pnp/tabletop Hobbyists are elitist), but because such sites are already present within SE. Until it was mentioned in reply to my question, I had no idea there were other sites for that.&#xA;Indeed, this is mentioned in the tour page: but let's face it, it is a very small text of two lines. I read it when I took the tour, sure, but it went in one ear, and quickly out again.&#xA;It would not be uncool to have a big warning about that (at least, in the font of the first words) below the words discussed in point one, yet prior to anything more in the tour, along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Dear explorers please note: computer game (hyperlinked) and board/card game (hyperlinked) RPGs are not covered here, as they are detailed with great insight in our cousin sites here, on SE!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Immediately the Dear (or similar acronym) invites warmth from us (like how Tridus/others give greetings immediately to new users, that's a super nice touch) and showing consideration; the explorer or similar shows playfulness and a semi-link to what takes often place in pnp; treating the other sites as &quot;family&quot; shows acknowledgement that we are all part of the big bad world of RPG, and are not being elitist in serving one specific branch -it would just mean too much spreading thin on one site, which as already stated isn't really the point here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As to what the tag line could be.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is indeed a dozy: yet again though I return to what Seven suggested, and implemented within the line: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Q&amp;amp;A for hobbyists, game masters and players of more traditional and unusual RPG Games&quot;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course doesn't have to be worded exactly like that, but I think it hits all the right notes:&#xA;-Hobbyists implies those that like to tinker without exactly being game masters (mentioned) or players (mentioned), and it also implies both groups in a cool way. Further, puts a more accessible and less intimidating terminology first. Also game masters seems should be kept as a separate word to make it look more tidy.&#xA;-Please note: I am not stating &quot;traditional and unusual RPG Games&quot;, but &quot;MORE traditional and unusual RPG games&quot;. There is always someone who thinks that one RPG is more traditional/unusual than another, and who are we to disagree? By implying thought that here they are more of a specific quality, it clearly steers it away from popular RPGs (computer, board and card) and towards the more, well, traditional and unusual (tabletop, pnp, live etc.)&#xA;-By a happy coincidence it is exactly as many words as the other tag -albeit I suspect the words are longer. 13 is a nice number.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Concluding:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's all from me, apologies there are so many words here. I strongly hope that this site will be made to feel, for newcomers, more accessible than it is, and that ultimately you decide to make it such, as pnp/tabletop etc. RPG is way too cool to not spread about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like butter, it works much better spread, rather than eaten in a lump.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9492" LastEditorUserId="9492" LastEditDate="2013-10-12T19:37:36.013" LastActivityDate="2013-10-12T19:37:36.013" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3164" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-10T16:16:40.830" Score="10" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd suggest its bad form to delete comments that add context to an answer -- edit that information into the answer first!  (Obviously preferable for the person leaving the comment to use the edit button, but the world is seldom perfect.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is especially true since there's no notification that comments have been deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or in other words:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Self-contained answers) &gt; (Incomplete answers with additional information in the comments) &gt; (Incomplete answers with no information in the comments)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastActivityDate="2013-10-10T16:16:40.830" Title="Deleting comments that add context" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3165" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-11T11:53:52.303" Score="3" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is about our behavior policy and how it relates to flagging offensive comments (and posts, I suppose).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it a violation of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;the behavior policy&lt;/a&gt; to insult another citizen, or to equate their actions on the site with serious offenses such as violent hate crimes?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In particular, should a &quot;rude or offensive&quot; flag for such statements be acted upon?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are flagged comments which would normally be deleted as offensive considered not worthy of removal if their visibility is limited to only some citizens rather than the entire Internet? (i.e. does our dirty laundry get washed less vigorously if we're the only ones who can see it?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are prompted by a recent comment which compared a citizen's undesirable posting habits to an act of genocide. It was an otherwise accurate comment which may have contributed to the speedy deletion of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/29310/4398&quot;&gt;the post&lt;/a&gt; by its owner, and so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29209/how-could-i-get-powerful-build-without-rp/29308#comment55741_29310&quot;&gt;the comment&lt;/a&gt; is only visible to 10k+ rep users. I flagged it as offensive prior to the post's deletion, and the flag was declined after the deletion --to my incredulous dismay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I provided links to the individual incident, as requested, but I'm concerned it'll put focus on the incident instead of the questions it brought to my mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="&quot;Rude or offensive:&quot; how does the nature of the offense and its visibility influence flag responses?" Tags="|discussion|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3165" CreationDate="2013-10-11T12:07:29.773" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flags and Flag Handling&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the flag, I don't know in this specific case because I didn't handle it (I was the flag-ee), but I usually decline flags on stuff that's deleted already.  Deleted items are meant to be deleted and they appear just for change-history, they're not &quot;Q&amp;amp;A just for high rep users.&quot; Not sure what the value would ever be except for a Vindicated Feeling of Righteousness (tm).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag handling is pretty low tech actually. It generally just gives you the options of &quot;delete,&quot; &quot;declined - helpful&quot;, and &quot;declined - not helpful.&quot; So unless it's a flag on a Q/A/C that we think is egregious enough to delete out of hand, we &quot;decline-helpful&quot; and then edit or comment or mod-message or do whatever other thing that the flag system doesn't understand to mitigate. As a result the vast majority of flags are &quot;declined.&quot; We only really proc the delete when it's over the top - spam or a long string of cusses... Or sometimes a comment we'd delete anyway, though often there it's part of an argument-thread where we delete the whole batch instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should interpret &quot;declined - helpful&quot; as the mod agrees and will possibly do something, and &quot;declined - not helpful&quot; as the mod thinks you just wasted their time and please don't do it again. Because of how it works technically, unless deletion out of hand is the answer, it gets declined.  This is an odd fencepost case in that the answer and thus comment was already deleted, so &quot;delete&quot; is not really effective...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the flagging system is super inconsistent from Q to A to C.  Comment flags just have &quot;delete,&quot; &quot;edit,&quot; and &quot;dismiss&quot; but no &quot;helpful/unhelpful&quot; choice, dismiss just dismisses it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6hHQL.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag stuff that's a problem, but don't seek self validation in the result codes that come back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some other information on flags and flag handling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/58032/what-are-the-spam-and-offensive-flags-and-how-do-they-work&quot;&gt;What are the “spam” and “rude or abusive” (offensive) flags, and how do they work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/95275/what-is-a-disputed-flag&quot;&gt;What is a disputed flag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/17364/how-do-comment-voting-and-flagging-work&quot;&gt;How does comment voting and flagging work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/160754/why-are-the-moderators-being-so-strict-with-quality-related-flags-recently&quot;&gt;Why are the moderators being so strict with quality related flags recently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2013-10-11T14:58:50.420" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3167" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-13T06:47:08.717" Score="15" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;For some time now I've been noticing a pattern: when a question about a relatively broad subject gives a specific example of the subject, nearly all its answers will be about the example rather than about the subject it is an example &lt;em&gt;of&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen it on the main site and in meta. It applies to questions asked by a variety of different people, and there doesn't seem to be any tendency for it to occur in any particular tag group more than in others. The habit of answering the example rather than the subject is, likewise, not confined to any small number of particular individuals. It's just a pattern of citizen behavior on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's gotten to the point where I'm loathe to provide examples of any sort--or even to say what it is that prompted me to ask the question--even though I think this reduces the quality of my questions, because I know it's likely to reduce the number of useful answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can we do about this, as both askers and answerers of questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2013-10-13T06:54:19.233" LastActivityDate="2013-10-13T18:32:04.143" Title="How can we use examples in a question without getting example-focused answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3167" CreationDate="2013-10-13T18:32:04.143" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a case where the burden falls squarely on the asker (and people helping them edit the question). People asking questions need to be aware of two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some questions are extremely difficult to communicate in the abstract sense.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given an example, people will assume that it's a good, comprehensive example.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you include an example that is not comprehensive, the first thing to do is stop and realize that it's a warning sign of a bad question. Often the details of a specific case will provide much better solutions than a &quot;comprehensive&quot; one-size-fits-all answer. Either the systems in question have rules to address the problem, or tonal differences are important to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is much, much, better to ask a specific question and get a general answer than the other way around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have also seen good questions ruined because the asker said to themselves &quot;well, I ran into this problem in D&amp;amp;D, but I'm sure this applies to other games as well, so I'm going to ask for the generic case.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you still feel confident about your question, then the next step is to &lt;strong&gt;include multiple examples whose overlap is the solution you want.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can't come up with multiple overlapping examples (or if it takes many examples to get to your point), then you're looking at one of three cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You are asking a bad question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You do not yet understand your own question well enough to ask effectively. More research is required.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You are asking as one question something which should have been many.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you've come up with your set of answers, be communicative and specific via comments on answers that fall short. &quot;Yes, this makes sense for the first example, but what about the second? This doesn't seem like it fixes (whatever).&quot; Be an active participant in your questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2013-10-13T18:32:04.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-10-15T06:54:55.250" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://tweetstocampaignby.tumblr.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Tweets to Campaign By&lt;/a&gt;, BESW's gathering of adventure seeds from the depths of Twitter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently not updating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastEditorUserId="4576" LastEditDate="2014-07-02T20:31:59.887" LastActivityDate="2014-07-02T20:31:59.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3170" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3171" CreationDate="2013-10-19T06:58:08.267" Score="18" ViewCount="349" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been wondering about this, as I have since I first arrived here all those centuries ago. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting habits on RPG.SE are very different than on other StackExchange sites. Very rarely do we see downvotes, and when we do, they are taken very seriously - to a degree I am still having trouble adapting to (though is very much appreciated).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is this? What parts of the culture of RPGs and/or this StackExchange's development and/or the scope of the site play into this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm curious why this happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2014-03-07T05:16:04.300" Title="Why are voting habits so different on RPG.SE in comparison to other SE sites?" Tags="|discussion|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3170" CreationDate="2013-10-19T08:05:57.313" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;Partly because we often deal in qualitative advice (rather than hard data answers) and those are rarely obviously &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;. More often, a so-so bit of advice is merely less helpful rather than incorrect, so it gets ignored rather than downvoted. The quality advice (or at least, the stuff the voters agree with) floats to the top fairly quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Partly because we're a fairly small, insular Stack with a pretty tight-knit community. Due to the nature of the questions, answers tend to come from established users (or users who are about to become established, simply by sticking around) rather than from Random Q. Internetperson, and that tight-knit community &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt;, perhaps, mean we're less willing to punish mere low quality submitted by familiar names. (I'm not actually sure that's true, but it's a hypothesis I'd investigate if I were doing a rigorous study.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-10-19T08:05:57.313" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3172" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3173" CreationDate="2013-10-22T15:58:08.473" Score="3" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a specific situation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;10th level witch&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;standard starting wealth (62K GP) plus and the ability to choose Scribe Scroll if it turns out to be worth it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a ratling familiar (with the ability to cast any spell of any class/level from a scroll, no UMD needed)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;joining a party where the only other casters are a blaster-sorcerer, a master summoner, and some paladins with wands of CLW (no full divine casters).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Heading into the Worldwound on a crusade (not based on any published AP)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I want advice on what scrolls to invest in (for myself and/or my familiar). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can mention all of these details in the question...but since Stack Exchange sites aim to help others in similar situations &lt;strong&gt;I'm wondering if there are some useful generalizations I could make to the question, to make it (and the answers it attracts) more useful for other readers.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8621" LastActivityDate="2013-10-22T16:17:18.130" Title="How specific to make my question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3172" CreationDate="2013-10-22T16:17:18.130" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please make your question as specific as you can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we do like things to be useful to others, the most important thing is that it &lt;em&gt;helps you.&lt;/em&gt; So make your question as specific as you feel it needs to be to get a usable answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally when people try to generalize we'll ask them to be more specific. Be specific. It helps to give all the relevant details and let the answerer sort out what is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-10-22T16:17:18.130" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3170" CreationDate="2013-10-23T10:16:28.657" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It may have somthing to do with RPGs being a social activity where we put ourself more &quot;at risk&quot;. I think people involve themselves more in RPGs they're playing than in books they're reading or applications they're programming... I know when I GM something, I can feel very annoyed, even sad, if something goes wrong or players don't enjoy themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, answering to a question here is &quot;that's what I do&quot;, and being downvoted may be read like &quot;what you do is wrong&quot;, and it requires some self-confidence and introspection to realize that it's not, and maybe the answer just doesn't fit the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8150" LastActivityDate="2013-10-23T10:16:28.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-10-24T01:50:08.090" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Geek Related&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://geek-related.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://geek-related.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@mxyzplk's blog, covering D&amp;amp;D and other games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example post: &lt;a href=&quot;http://geek-related.com/2013/10/12/rule-zero-over-the-years/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Rule Zero Over the Years&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The allowed scope of DM rulings has absolutely changed over time in D&amp;amp;D.  The balance between Dungeon Master’s discretion versus reign of the rules versus player empowerment has always been debated in D&amp;amp;D circles but there’s a clear evolution of thinking across the span of versions.  The attitude towards rulings vs. rules in the game shows up&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;directly and explicitly in the rules text&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;implicitly in the text and detectable via textual analysis&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;in the surrounding publications considered semi-canonical (Dragon magazine, nowadays forums and designer blogs), and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the culture of gamers surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s stick mostly to the first two in the interest of space...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-10-24T01:50:08.090" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-10-24T01:50:08.090" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3176" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-10-24T01:57:01.247" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Seven-Sided Die&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://d7.pipemaze.com/blog/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://d7.pipemaze.com/blog/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@SevenSidedDie's blog, covering D&amp;amp;D and others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example post: &lt;a href=&quot;http://d7.pipemaze.com/blog/2012/04/24/scarcity-creates-desire/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Scarcity creates desire&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to motivate your players, make things scarce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve seen this in my own play lately. Players that were hard-core WotC D&amp;amp;D players have suddenly been lusting after treasure and XP in ways that I’ve never seen. The need for creative approaches is bubbling to the surface. A scarcity of hit points is motivating working hard to keep those HP, and the desire to avoid danger. This tension between seeking treasure and yet trying to avoid the inherent danger of the places where treasure is found is, as far as I can tell, the quintessence of a certain kind of old-school play that is immensely enjoyable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what does satiety accomplish?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, if you satisfy the basic game scarcities, players are freed up to start taking those for granted and moving on to satisfying other needs...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-10-24T01:57:01.247" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-10-24T01:57:01.247" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-10-25T17:51:41.327" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ars Ludi/Lame Mage&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is an intelligent, well-written blog about RPGs by Microscope creator Ben Robbins.  He writes about various experiments he tried, social issues with RPGs, and actual play from the games he's written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastActivityDate="2013-10-25T17:51:41.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3178" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-10-29T00:24:14.233" Score="15" ViewCount="365" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have a crop of questions lately like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29786/how-do-you-get-a-dm-to-stop-targeting-you&quot;&gt;How do you get a DM to stop targeting you?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29677/betrayed-by-my-gm-how-can-i-respond&quot;&gt;Betrayed by my GM; how can I respond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think these questions, unless they hone in on a very specific actionable, answerable question, are not useful and on-topic.  It's basically people posting their side of some gaming group squabble and looking for validation from the community.  The answer to all of them is basically &quot;Make sure it's not you (usually omitted); talk it out with them or go find another group.  Same page tool blah blah.&quot; These seem popular but they are not good questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is some useful site guidance we can give on these questions to make them constructive and answerable (because I'll be honest, your friendly mod corps is done with 'em at the moment)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-10-30T11:35:12.363" Title="Appropriateness of &quot;I'm Being Picked On&quot; questions" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3178" CreationDate="2013-10-29T01:08:45.890" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to pull a few resources from the StackExchange blog, way back when these topics were originally discussed with respect  to Stack Overflow. (As such, bear in mind these posts were written &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; Stack Overflow, not RPG.SE.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first relevant post is &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;&quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&quot;&lt;/a&gt;; the second is &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;&quot;Real Questions Have Answers&quot;&lt;/a&gt;. I'm going to pull a couple of the important quotes out of this as I write this answer, as these are very good references for what constitutes good answers. So, what makes questions like these good?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Avoid asking questions that are subjective, argumentative, or require extended discussion. This is not a discussion board, this is a place for questions that can be answered!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we judge questions like these on merit, we have to make a couple inferences. Here's my half-baked litmus test:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the question ask us to solve an interpersonal problem? If yes, is that interpersonal problem related to the actual execution of a roleplaying game?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's what I mean by this. In the two questions you've provided, the asker clearly wants us to solve their interpersonal problem. The answer doesn't concern our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on-topic definition&lt;/a&gt; at all, as you've already pointed out. These questions I would argue are simply not on-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As much as I wish to help these people, for the purposes of RPG.SE, we are an RPG site, and not for solely interpersonal solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the question define itself well?&lt;/strong&gt; When you look at one of these questions, are you looking at something which needs minor/no clarification? Does it contain (almost) all the information you'd need to accurately answer it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the question &lt;em&gt;arguably&lt;/em&gt; have a correct answer?&lt;/strong&gt; If the best answer is &quot;there are a lot of ways to approach this situation,&quot; then the question is not within the scope of the site and/or needs significant refinement. The use of the word &quot;arguably&quot; is intended here such that people feel (regardless of quorum) that there is a single, definitively good response to the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it possible, within reasonable length, to provide enough information for an answer to be complete?&lt;/strong&gt; If no, then the question probably needs to be closed as too broad.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the question require an intrinsic/assumed knowledge of the people involved?&lt;/strong&gt; If  a question needs an answer based around who the people are and how they respond, it's probably not a good fit.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is very similar to the response from &quot;Real Questions Have Answers&quot; (emph. mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Constructive subjective questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;inspire answers that explain “why” and “how”.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;tend to have long, not short, answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose one of the main points I'd like to make is that &lt;strong&gt;even if a question is tangentially related to roleplaying/RPGs, it isn't necessarily a good fit for this site.&lt;/strong&gt; There's a lot of conversations one can have about roleplaying games, RP theory, and interpersonal relationships that, well, simply don't work well in this format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we've come across a category of these. Now that I've better defined what (I consider) is this class of questions...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do we improve questions like these?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these questions may be unsalvageable. I'm throwing this out there first, because, while I would love as much as the rest of you to save these questions from an unanswerable state, we have to be open to the idea that they may simply &lt;em&gt;not be a good fit&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, I think there are a few things we can do to improve these questions as a whole:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Where possible, take the user to chat. Most of the time, these questions are written in a fit of frustration, so their purpose is not immediately clear. Often, when you talk with someone, they'll resolve their problem. However, there's a good chance you'll run into something &lt;em&gt;concrete&lt;/em&gt; (and thereby worth asking a question about). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one's an imposition on the community as well as the participant, so it's really only helpful when people feel motivated to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Objectively analyze the text, and make an attempt to pull out the question. There is often a question in there, somewhere. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26849/abuse-is-it-fair-if-its-in-game&quot;&gt;&quot;Abuse: Is it fair if it's in-game?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;; this was originally in the format of your two examples, but through refinement, we worked it into a manageable state (though, as @mxyzplk points out, not necessarily a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; state). While I still think that it's somewhat out of the scope of the site, its core question is on-topic: &quot;what do I do if the GM abuses me in-game?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other questions, like &quot;How do I handle this GM?&quot; are not, at least until their core question is identified and extracted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Onholdificate the question, and explain to the OP why (and maybe invite them to chat to discuss it anyway). The question may simply not be salvageable. The OP may not be asking a concrete question. Rants, while sometimes helpful, are often simply just that: rants. Please take a look at MSO's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/tags/rant/info&quot;&gt;&quot;rant&quot;&lt;/a&gt; tag as well; it has some useful information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, it may be advantageous to mark these as duplicates of one another. Similar problems can be answered in similar ways.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To summarize:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are questions which do not clearly define themselves. They are either rants, or are broad. While they may provide specific information about their problem, not enough information is present. We can improve them by drawing out exactly what the OP's question is, by talking with them and seeing if their question needs to be resolved in this format, or simply by closing the question and explaining why. Limiting the scope of this &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; type of question isn't necessarily a bad thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, here's about my 50 cents, much more than I really have the authority to be giving. I hope there's some helpful content in here, or at least to kick off this discussion if I'm horribly, horribly wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-10-29T03:05:02.343" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3178" CreationDate="2013-10-29T15:39:45.777" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;These questions are generally &quot;a specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG&quot;. Since social dynamics are an integral part of playing RPGs (you can't meaningfully separate the social dimension of RPGs from the rest of RPG-playing), there's no &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt; reason for these to be off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of us might not &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; these questions, because we've left behind &quot;high school&quot; social dysfunction in our groups. That some of us have grown past such problems doesn't mean they're not problems that are inherent and endemic to the hobby, and integrally about the play of the game at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since such questions are evidently on-topic by our scope, to establish that they're off topic we would need to make a special exception based on experience that such questions are inherently a problem for our format. That would be fine, but that hasn't been done yet. In so doing, we will probably find that some of these are bad questions, and some are fine and keepable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically to that point and the issues raised in the meta question: Yes, these questions are &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; appropriate. Some of them might not be, but having answers that resemble each other doesn't establish that there's a problem. Ironically, that merely indicates that there is a universality to RPG social dynamic problems, which supports them being &lt;em&gt;on&lt;/em&gt; topic for RPG.SE. The one question (&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29786/how-do-you-get-a-dm-to-stop-targeting-you&quot;&gt;How do you get a DM to stop targeting you?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;) is specific but also a concise expression of a general problem, so that we now have a close-as-duplicate target for people with those problems. That's valuable, searchable, and will actually help us reduce these questions in the future by using the normal &quot;is a duplicate&quot; feature of the Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose that we use the old &quot;too localised&quot; logic to sort these questions into good and bad: will this &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; help anyone else? If yes, then it's a fine question, and will be a good duplicate target in the future. If no, then it's probably closable as &quot;primarily opinion-based&quot; because it's a unique, one-off problem that won't have a generally-accepted solution (and hence, primarily a matter of opinion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-10-29T15:50:05.963" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2013-11-01T07:20:20.747" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Fate Looms: A blog about an impending Fate tabletop system.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://fate-looms.tumblr.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://fate-looms.tumblr.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maintained by our own doppelgreener, this blog &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; started up. It's the dev blog for a Fate online tabletop app which several RPG.SE users are collaborating on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-11-01T07:20:20.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3182" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3184" CreationDate="2013-11-01T10:37:33.563" Score="8" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29596/handy-spells-to-have-on-scrolls-for-a-specific-scenario&quot;&gt;specific question&lt;/a&gt; -- one that would take a good deal of work to answer well. I quickly got a few reasonable answers but none had quite the detail I was hoping for (in particular about good spells for a ratling familiar to use while the PC does other things). Knowing that the kind of answer I was hoping for would take some real time to write (and wanting to create an incentive / show appreciation for detailed answers) I decided to add a +100 bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never having offered one before, I was surprised that the period came and went without any new answers being offered (except one dubious one questioning the premise of my question) or any edits to existing answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just awarded the bounty anyway to one of the folks who'd answered before I offered the bounty...but it makes me wonder...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if bounties actually function as incentives here? &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if there are things I could have done to improve my odds of getting more detailed answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8621" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-11-01T15:30:05.377" Title="How well do bounties work at RPG.SE? Or is it something I said?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3183" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3182" CreationDate="2013-11-01T13:10:13.677" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, there's someone who knows an answer but isn't willing to detail it for lack of time or good will. That's when a bounty could be useful, provided that someone cares about reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My vision is that in your case, there's either no one on this site that has a really good answer to your question (rpg.se is quite small compared to, say, stackoverflow.se, and it's entirely possible no pathfinder player here has a clear idea of one of the widest, most DM-depending aspects -- namely, spells -- especially when applied to an unusual case) &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; those few who know are not interested in spending much time to answer, either because they don't care about reputation or because they already have lots of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you also asked for what makes your answer hard to reply to, I'll detail my thoughts on the matter; they're by no way the one and only truth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 3.PF, spells are really powerful things that could make or break a plot. Which ones are best for the same specific situation heavily depends on how your DM DMs. Which spells are good depends on which enemies your DM likes to make you face and the spells those NPCs use, but mostly getting a hold of every good spell that's ever been written for any class is a gargantuan task. I know, because I played a Chameleon for D&amp;amp;D 3.5 and just getting all the divine spells up to level 3 down took me lots of free time in the course of a whole year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, I was not sure my choice of spells was the best one. I specialized in buffing, so knowing which spells would be better for, say, debuffing, would have required me to spend another whole bunch of time on the books, reading and comparing options. Until you find whatever the definitive list seems to be, and discover a 5th level spell from another class makes your whole debuffing irrelevant, because D&amp;amp;D and PF are written that way. (I had this while planning enemies for a D&amp;amp;D 3.0 campaign when the cleric began casting Iron Body. Days wasted planning unuseful strategies, oh-the-rage.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's any reputation bounty that could convince me to start a whole dissertation on such a complicate argument, while I'd be more than happy to spend entire afternoons telling you why each single spell is or is not a good idea to me (in D&amp;amp;D 3.x, not in PF, since I don't know its options well enough).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2013-11-01T15:30:05.377" LastActivityDate="2013-11-01T15:30:05.377" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3182" CreationDate="2013-11-01T13:15:47.237" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bounties help, but they're not magical.  In this case, I don't think it's a very well focused question. I play a witch in a Pathfinder game right now and &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; didn't want to answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Big scroll loadout,&quot; like &quot;big spell loadout,&quot; has infinite combinations and any &quot;in depth&quot; answer is going to be more like a class guide and less like a good RPG.SE answer. The two answers you have already are pretty substantial; if you are waiting for a 5 page essay on spell choice you are probably not looking in the right venue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-11-01T13:15:47.237" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3185" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3186" CreationDate="2013-11-13T02:13:02.713" Score="3" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question I answered is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30009/whats-a-good-system-for-many-6-players&quot;&gt;What's a good system for many (6+) players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer, deleted by a mod, read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Personally, I'd go for Warhammer Fantasy RP, either the first or the&#xA;  second edition. (I have no experience with the third one, but that&#xA;  might suit you as well.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's grim, dark fantasy by default, but you can tweak it to your&#xA;  needs, obviously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Character creation, if you know the system well, can be done really&#xA;  fast. Ignore rolling, make up the numbers, or, what's even faster,&#xA;  take some pregenerated characters from the book(s), change their names&#xA;  and a few numbers within the range allowed by the rules and there you&#xA;  go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The combat (and skill) system is basically a percentile roll and a&#xA;  damage roll (if I remember correctly.) Read through it (it's no longer&#xA;  than about 10 pages?) Strip away most of the optional rules, as well&#xA;  as anything &quot;non-optional&quot; (because for the DM, anything and&#xA;  everything is optional.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It does play fast even with most of the official optional rules in&#xA;  place. When we played it, turns rarely took longer than what you&#xA;  require.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It has as much combat in it as you put in it. ;) Be warned, though:&#xA;  combat can be pretty lethal, unless you multiply everyone's hit points&#xA;  fairly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It has very few tracked conditions indeed, especially if you strip&#xA;  away the optional rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Note, please, that the above practically holds true of most BRP based&#xA;  systems - like Call of Cthulhu, for example - as well. The reason why&#xA;  I'd go for WFRP is that it's fantasy, and it has an excellent,&#xA;  extensively described world (a lot of description in WFRP1, a bare&#xA;  10-20 pages in WFRP2, but tons of expansions and novels and whatnot if&#xA;  you have the time and are willing to read up on it. If not, filling&#xA;  out the blanks between the ribs of the skeleton is rather easy.) Also,&#xA;  it's the fantasy BRP-like system that I definitely have experience&#xA;  with. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I got a comment from the mod who later deleted the entire answer asking me to provide personally identifiable information, err, I mean, a request saying &quot;&lt;em&gt;Please indicate your experience with very large groups with WHFRP.&lt;/em&gt;&quot; He also posted a comment below the original Q (people must be flocking to read comments and requirement added by others than the original OP, I guess) warning people of deletion. Later on, he posted a rather insulting additional comment, &quot;notifying&quot; everyone of the deletions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I chose to delay and consider fulfilling said mod's request for various reasons - least of which is that I think I had a valid answer without the requested info. I answered all the sub-points, recommending a game that matched most and was (is) worthy of consideration. Despite the title of the Q, the OP did not ask for detailed personal experience, and my answer, even though &lt;em&gt;it did almost explicitly imply I had such&lt;/em&gt;, would not have been made better by listing said experience(s) in long-winded paragraphs. In my opinion this might be reason enough for some to downvote an answer (though even that's weird, considering that my points satisfied all the points raised by the Q), but for deletion? Seems definite overkill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've checked out the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;Why was my A deleted&lt;/a&gt;&quot; section, yet still can't seem to identify the reason for the deletion. The aforementioned section says the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers that do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed.&#xA;  This includes answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;commentary on the question or other answers asking another, different&#xA;  question; “thanks!” or “me too!” responses; exact duplicates of other&#xA;  answers; barely more than a link to an external site; not even a partial&#xA;  answer to the actual question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My A does not match any of these. It was not commentary on the Q or other As, was not &quot;thanks!/me too!&quot;; wasn't a duplicate of any other A; was way more than a link; and was, again, way more than a bare partial answer. Apparently, it simply did not fit a certain mod's taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My questions here are: Why exactly was my answer deleted? Why was there no explanatory warning about a possible deletion &lt;em&gt;below my A&lt;/em&gt; (because, frankly, I usually don't have the time to check back for comments on the Q or others' As)? Will this be a widespread practice on rpg.SE from now on? Are we, users, required to obey mod requests for information and/or answer-expansion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just curious. (But feel free to &quot;&lt;em&gt;delete, delete, delete&lt;/em&gt;&quot; this Q as well in case... anyone doesn't like it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="507" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-11-13T10:17:43.457" Title="Why exactly was my answer deleted?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3185" CreationDate="2013-11-13T02:33:05.387" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't delete it, but I'll tell you why it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to both&#xA;  the FAQ and the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good&#xA;  Subjective, Bad&#xA;  Subjective&lt;/a&gt;.&#xA;  In particular, all responses should be based on actual experience and&#xA;  contain references and examples whenever possible. Specifically here,&#xA;  if you haven't run a &lt;em&gt;social gathering style game&lt;/em&gt; with 8-10 players,&#xA;  and justify it in your answer, it'll be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the standard warning about game-rec questions, tuned to this question, which Brian posted first thing.  It's the same as every game-rec question.  &quot;I'm sure X would be good&quot; is not a sufficient answer.  &quot;I have done a very similar thing with X&quot; is. Period. As usual this guidance is in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, a frequently linked meta question. That link is also in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot;&gt;tag wiki for game-rec&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brian left a comment on your answer yesterday reading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please indicate your experience with very large groups with WHFRP. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it was ignored, the answer was deleted 3 hours ago, along with all the other answers that couldn't be bothered to explain their Good Subjective experience with running large 6+ player games with their recommended system and how it works at that scale. This is SOP and was warned both on your answer and on the question in general to all the noncompliant answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, if a mod asks you to alter your answer, it's in your best interest to do so. I'm not sure why someone would have to say those words out loud.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, it's always an option for us to discontinue allowing game-rec questions if people can't provide answers based on our guidance (most other SEs have disallowed them for this reason).  It is our hope RPG.SE users can understand and follow these guidelines so that we can preserve this popular type of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2013-11-13T10:17:43.457" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3187" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3188" CreationDate="2013-11-14T15:02:07.807" Score="10" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was reviewing an edit (by an anonymous person), that they removed a statement from a post, saying that this was incorrect.  I rejected the edit, and left the comment that they should downvote and leave a comment rather than wholesale removing content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I thought that might be a good clarification to be made- the difference between a 'good' edit and something that should fall into one system or another.  Perhaps this is already spelled out, but a cursory search didn't bring up this specific issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2013-11-18T17:32:15.570" Title="What's better for incorrect content in a post?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3187" CreationDate="2013-11-14T15:53:44.057" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reviewing edits should not require you to know whether an answer is correct or not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3358" LastActivityDate="2013-11-14T15:53:44.057" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3189" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-11-17T06:51:03.110" Score="21" ViewCount="395" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been looking through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag, and it looks to me like it's not a particularly useful tag. Here are my thoughts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The tag is not specific enough, as it doesn't say much about the question.. Saying that it has something to do with the GM doesn't really help anyone in looking for questions. Additionally, as far as metadata goes, this isn't that great. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The presence of tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-less&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-less&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-less&lt;/a&gt;, etc. obsolete the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second point obviously needs a bit of justification. So, here goes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many (most) questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; are &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; tagged with a more specific gamemastsery tag. This makes the GM tag itself entirely moot on these questions.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The questions which do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag should either not have the tag at all, or should be retagged with a more specific gamemastery tag. I will take four examples from the front page of the questions list as anecdotal evidence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27086/what-information-a-dm-should-have-at-hand-when-in-an-encounter&quot;&gt;What information a DM should have at hand when in an encounter?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; should probably be retagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29644/to-what-extent-is-reskinning-acceptable&quot;&gt;To what extent is reskinning acceptable?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; may not need the GM tag at all, as it's more of a game mechanics question. It could potentially be reworded to fit the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; tag, though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28930/how-do-you-scale-up-a-premade-adventures-difficulty-when-you-have-additional-pc&quot;&gt;How do you scale up a premade adventure&amp;#39;s difficulty when you have additional PCs?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is very obviously &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28415/knowledge-local-or-diplomacy-to-gather-information&quot;&gt;Knowledge (Local) or Diplomacy to Gather Information?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is another mechanics question, and probably shouldn't have the GM tag. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the community's thoughts on this? Should we begin (slowly) retagging these questions where appropriate, or should we keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this tag have a purpose I'm not seeing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Quick note: I've read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2789/worth-of-gm-and-players-tags&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and I think this needs significant revisiting. I don't think a synonym will cut it, in this case.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T16:33:48.577" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T16:43:04.297" Title="Should the [gm] tag be burninated?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3189" CreationDate="2013-11-18T17:09:00.493" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, here's my plan for dealing with this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There should only ever be a couple of these at the top of the list at any time. We don't want to flood the front page and active tab with old questions. As such, I'm making a goal to edit two of these questions every day. No more, no less. This should be enough to get the job done, but (hopefully) not enough to irritate anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there are 160+ questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;. So, this would take ~100 days to complete. In order to expedite this process, the following questions do not need editing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; that do not need any other GM-type tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; that are properly tagged with other, more specific GM-style tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, we don't need to remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; from questions if removal is all we would be doing. That can be done all at once without bumping through burnination, should we decide to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should significantly limit the amount of work to be done. Yay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the community agree with my approach? Anything which needs improving/obvious holes? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2013-11-18T17:09:00.493" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3187" CreationDate="2013-11-18T17:32:15.570" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The right way* for someone to correct an answer is to leave a comment and ask for clarification from/suggest a change to the answer's author. An anonymous user &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; do that, so often they will edit it directly instead. It's still not the right way to correct an answer, so if in any doubt (i.e., you would not make that correction yourself had you noticed it), reject it as &quot;minor&quot; or &quot;invalid&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to go the extra mile, you can write a comment to the answer's author explaining that an edit was suggested, and then leave it to them to judge whether the correction is warranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;* &quot;Right&quot; being defined here as &quot;least disruptive to the site and most likely to maintain answer quality.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-11-18T17:32:15.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3192" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3189" CreationDate="2013-11-18T17:51:01.760" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think the tag has any real value, and I think burnination would be useful. The more specific &quot;gm&quot;-based tags will show up when someone starts typing &lt;code&gt;gm&lt;/code&gt; into the tag field, which right now are often ignored because there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;. With that tag gone, people will more often stop and consider the more specific tags the interface suggests to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only drawback is that currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dm&lt;/a&gt; synonyms to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;, to catch people who use the D&amp;amp;D-derived term. People typing &lt;code&gt;dm&lt;/code&gt; aren't going to get any of our gm-tags suggested to them. Fortunately, there are only six relevant* tags that contain &lt;code&gt;gm&lt;/code&gt;, so we can easily set up synonyms for their &lt;code&gt;dm&lt;/code&gt; equivalent. (Big credit goes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3189/should-the-gm-tag-be-burninated/3192?noredirect=1#comment6429_3192&quot;&gt;Ellesedil for suggesting this&lt;/a&gt; when I was staring too hard at the trees to see the forest.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* I'm not counting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-less&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-less&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-less&lt;/a&gt; because &quot;DM&quot; doesn't ever see use in that term/meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2013-11-21T22:03:59.607" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3193" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-11-20T06:26:31.103" Score="14" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that there are a lot of questions that just because they use &lt;strong&gt;a mechanic or setting that's all the rage will essentially garner free rep&lt;/strong&gt; for putting just about any answer, even if it was already one that was stated, and even/especially if there is an easy answer to it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Disclaimer:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm not asking for any retroactive changes on anyone's behalf.*  However, it seems that the more obscure knowledge isn't rewarded as well because not as many people can confirm it.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm not invalidating the answers put forward by anyone, especially if they answered before reading the other answers that are present.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;However&lt;/em&gt; a well researched and worded answer to a question might get two or three upvotes and a 'best answer' where a on a more popular tag question (E.G. D&amp;amp;D 3.5) thread can easily get seven or eight upvotes merely for being present. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2/is-a-fumble-on-a-natural-1-an-official-rule&quot; title=&quot;Perfect Example&quot;&gt;High Traffic Answer&lt;/a&gt; where the question has high upvotes for an answer that takes exactly one reference to a page and paragraph (or sidebar) of a core book and no real need for extrapolation of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31273/constitution-bonus-and-health/3127&quot;&gt;Another Higher Traffic Answer&lt;/a&gt; where the question was something literally solved by one line of core text that was in no way hidden or debatable.  I don't think that my excerpt was really worth a &quot;Nice Answer&quot; badge, but thank you for the nod readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28467/how-do-attunement-and-consorts-work&quot;&gt;Underrated Answer&lt;/a&gt; where the answer is researched and well worded, but not trafficked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26429/is-this-fix-to-the-autumn-mantle-roughly-equivalent-to-the-other-seasonal-mantle&quot;&gt;Less Trafficked Question/Answer&lt;/a&gt; required knowledge of the system and the world as well as cross-referencing different parts of the book.  This question even had a bounty for a time and both answers are relatively ignored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What, if anything should be done in these cases?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3273" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-01-07T04:06:17.793" Title="Does &quot;Main Stream&quot; = Free Rep?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3193" CreationDate="2013-11-20T06:32:32.653" Score="21" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvote answers you find useful.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spread (via the share link, so you get credit) answers you think deserve more attention. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Decry the corruption of today's youth.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-11-20T06:32:32.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3195" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3193" CreationDate="2013-11-20T06:52:42.790" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This trend is baked into the system. High-profile tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; get the lion's share of our citizens' attention, for the very simple reason that it's what we're more likely to understand and maybe benefit from. This means threads with those tags get more action: more answers (good &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; bad) AND more votes (up &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; down, but we most often reserve downvotes for egregious site violations, so the general trend is up).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But just because it's never going to go away doesn't mean we can't work to alleviate it: &lt;strong&gt;We should pay more attention to other tags&lt;/strong&gt;. RPG.SE is relatively unique in that we can often tell if a question/answer is worth upvoting or downvoting even if we aren't very familiar with the system in question, so let's take advantage of that. You'll probably find that reading about other systems helps broaden your approach to whatever games you're running--I know it did for me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you use tag filters to reduce the number of posts you see on the site, consider relaxing the filters. If you use tag subscriptions, add non-system-specific tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; to broaden the posts you interact with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Invite your friends to join the site! Presumably they share some of your interests, and this will increase the number of citizens who pay attention to the tags you're interested in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Join the chat and call attention to posts that need love, or (as Brian suggests) spread the link through your Social Media Of Choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Model the behavior you want to see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2013-11-20T07:03:18.787" LastActivityDate="2013-11-20T07:03:18.787" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3193" CreationDate="2013-11-20T18:28:07.460" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it has to do with why people upvote which is always a personal choice. I'll never upvote questions and answers about a game I don't know simply because I'm no &quot;expert&quot; in that game and I don't want to mess with the natural selection of this beautiful community. I'll never answer questions about Pathfinder, 3.5 or others because I'm really out of touch with all the expansions and I can't even GM them properly. The only exception to that is if it's a new user asking a great question never answered before on a main stream game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, I think, main stream leads to more rep because it gets more attention. I don't see many Microscope questions around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should have a way to tip people who ask great questions by giving them our own reputation. Or maybe that could be abused I don't know...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastActivityDate="2013-11-20T18:28:07.460" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2013-11-21T04:02:20.833" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disruptive-behaviour&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disruptive-behaviour&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disruptive-behaviour&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A blameless tag that describes nothing but the fact there is stuff happening. Also, this better conveys the kind of problem these questions &lt;em&gt;universally&lt;/em&gt; deal with: something disrupting the game and the social group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally: synonymize &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-player&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-player&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-player&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disruptive-behaviour&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disruptive-behaviour&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disruptive-behaviour&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-11-21T04:02:20.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2013-11-21T12:30:12.313" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just fail to see any real problem that's being solved here, and I think we're talking about removing common sense tags people use all the time with artificial constructed tags they will just be confused by. I don't support a change at this time. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, someone who thinks the problem is their GM, the problem might actually be them - but that's not how they will be looking to ask the question, or to look for existing answers to their question.  And in the end that's what tags are for, not to satisfy our own sense of politically correct taxonomy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-11-21T12:30:12.313" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3199" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-11-23T00:12:10.467" Score="5" ViewCount="687" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30332/what-happens-when-detect-magic-is-used-upon-something-that-is-magically-invisibl&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; got me thinking: any question tagged spells can also be tagged magic, and they seem to serve a similar purpose. What's the difference between the magic and spells tags, or are they similar enough for one to be synonymed into the other, or for them to be replaced with a new tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-11-25T09:43:01.037" Title="What's the difference between the 'magic' and 'spells' tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3200" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3199" CreationDate="2013-11-23T00:54:35.003" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking from a D&amp;amp;D point of view, the two things are pretty different. Spells is only one of the possible manifestations of magic along with spell-like abilities (most &quot;spellcaster&quot; monsters and prestige classes), supernatural abilities (most other sort of magical monsters and classes), invocations (dragonfire adepts and warlocks), powers (psions, but it might as well be a completely different thing than magic under different optional rules), mysteries (shadow magic), enchantments (items) and magic effects not replicable by anything in the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, spells is specific and magic is generic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm perfectly aware this only apply to D&amp;amp;D 3.x, previous D&amp;amp;D editions and Next (D&amp;amp;D 4e has a different concept of spells that is more fluff-related but still has spells as a subset of magic), but a distinction it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question you linked, Detct Magic is a spell that can detect any form of magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="4173" LastEditDate="2013-11-25T09:43:01.037" LastActivityDate="2013-11-25T09:43:01.037" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3199" CreationDate="2013-11-23T02:34:03.660" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The difference is only meaningful within a game system, so I think we should synonym spells-&gt;magic. Who's an expert in &quot;spells&quot; and not &quot;magic&quot; within a game?  No one...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2013-11-23T02:34:03.660" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3199" CreationDate="2013-11-23T14:09:57.877" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd say that &quot;spells&quot; are specific, codified, mechanical effects, and &quot;magic&quot; is the in-fiction structure that makes &quot;spells&quot; work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2013-11-23T14:09:57.877" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3199" CreationDate="2013-11-24T05:53:01.630" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quite frankly it's sometimes a semantic issue.  Magic is not always an active thing.  In L5R there's something called Kiho which are magical effects, but ultimately these are not spells.  There abilities that are channeled through things like Shadowlands Taint and The Nothing that are magical in nature (as in supernatural) but are not spells.  What &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; count as spell use is the traditional magic forms used by shugenja that quite literally derive from written scrolls, spoken and sometimes performed in a specific fashion so that there is any result at all let alone the desired effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In essence, magic can exist in many passive forms, sometimes even active ones but a spell almost always between the systems I have personal experience with relates to something that requires exact and almost ritualistic execution.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3273" LastActivityDate="2013-11-24T05:53:01.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3204" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3205" CreationDate="2013-11-25T03:47:31.907" Score="22" ViewCount="1194" Body="&lt;p&gt;On RPG.SE, we deal with a fair number of questions that don't have a strict, objectively correct answer.  Some game rules questions do, but we also have a good number of questions about how to run a game, how to play a game, which game meets certain criteria, how to handle issues within gaming groups, et cetera, which are by their nature subjective in part or in total.  Are these questions on topic and how do we ask and answer them in the spirit of Stack Exchange, where we want people sharing real expertise and not random opinions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:28:00.133" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T03:28:00.133" Title="How do we ask and answer subjective questions?" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3205" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3204" CreationDate="2013-11-25T03:47:31.907" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;This topic was initially addressed in the beginning days of the site under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/50/how-much-subjectiveness-is-ok&quot;&gt;How much subjectiveness is OK?&lt;/a&gt; but our understanding of this issue and best practices surrounding it have changed somewhat so this is the new normative guidance on RPG.SE and subjective questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some, but not all, subjective questions are on topic, and there are rules you need to follow in answering them. Only constructive questions and answers are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking Subjective Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions on this SE will have some element of subjectivity, except for pure history and rules questions. &amp;quot;What's the best way to do something&amp;quot; has some to a lot of subjectivity within it depending on what the topic is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Read the site help center under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking&lt;/a&gt;. It's basically all about the boundary between good subjective (constructive) and bad subjective (speculative) questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rule #1 for any SE is &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Most qualities of a bad subjective question flow out of deviating from that basic premise. Polls, hypotheticals, rants, brainstorms, list questions, and idle curiousity where there is no real problem to solve do not qualify as a legitimate question. These kinds of questions will be downvoted, closed, and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Answering Subjective Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; is the gold standard for understanding how to make good on topic answers to subjective questions. The heart of it is using the Back It Up! principle, which states that you should only answer based on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, &amp;quot;happened to you personally&amp;quot; means real play experience. We understand that some people believe that given their wide experience in games they think they can tell someone the right technique or system or solution to use for their particular need even though they haven't done it themselves - but when everyone does that, it leads to opinion-laden chaos.  &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Good Subjective&amp;quot; is constructive and is based on experience and expertise.  &amp;quot;Bad Subjective&amp;quot; is speculative and is based on conjecture and opinion.&lt;/strong&gt;  Speculative answers will be downvoted, commented on (&amp;quot;Back It Up!&amp;quot;), and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A popular specific subjective question type is the game recommendation question; see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; for guidance on that but it boils down to the same thing; if you haven't used that game for the questioners' purpose, don't suggest it. Expertise stems from actually doing something (or having something specific you can cite like a fact or someone else's experience); armchair theory is not welcome here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some new users don't understand why we are so strict in our format on RPG.SE. The reason is that there are many discussion forums out there in the world, and if you want to conduct random discussion and have free flow of ideas you can use those.  Stack Exchange sites present a pure question and answer format, where experts answer well defined questions. It makes the whole site full of high value information as the community collaborates and votes on high quality answers so that we can capture the wisdom of many gamers while minimizing noise. We would rather have fewer, longer and more complete answers that have passed peer review by other gamers than many dashed-off and unsupported thoughts. Think of us as being midway between a wiki (one answer only, wrangled over and refined by all users) and a forum (an answer per user, only refined through long discussion if you're lucky). We don't aspire to fit every informational need, but when you want a well thought out answer to a real problem you have with gaming, we believe this is the most effective format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-14T16:21:19.070" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3206" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-11-25T16:56:52.103" Score="13" ViewCount="934" Body="&lt;p&gt;So today I was informed that I had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/21446/4563&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt;, to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21440/4563&quot;&gt;“Pathfinder RPG in Forgotten Realms 3.5 setting?”&lt;/a&gt; that was not “licit” because I have not done the exact specific thing asked in the question (run Forgotten Realms in &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have run other D&amp;amp;D 3.5 settings in other systems (not &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;), but that, to me, is irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because &lt;em&gt;this is not a particularly subjective question.&lt;/em&gt; The actual questions posed were “can it be done?” and “has anyone done so?” the answer to both of which is quite simply “yes.” It’s not even a particularly onerous or difficult process; I don’t have explicitly that exact experience but I have related experience and I have knowledge of both the setting and the systems. My answer isn’t even particularly different from the answer of someone who &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; have such &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; experience, and with a score of 11 (higher than that answer), apparently quite a few people found the answer useful, more useful than the one that had the exact experience in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in reading several comments in the chat by mxyzplk today, it seems that the mods’ new definition of “subjective” is “anything that’s not pure rules-lookup” and their idea of “Good Subjective, Bad Subjective” is that you are required to have the &lt;em&gt;exact same experience&lt;/em&gt; as the question-asker before being &lt;em&gt;allowed&lt;/em&gt; to answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I want to know:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Which questions does the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt; feel are subjective, and how should Good Subjective, Bad Subjective be interpreted?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-12-03T03:06:09.273" Title="What questions are “subjective” and what does “Good Subjective, Bad Subjective” mean to the community" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3206" CreationDate="2013-11-25T16:56:52.103" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;My own thoughts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Subjective Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Purely” subjective questions are those specifically requesting experience. Also, by special rule, all &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions, because “shopping” questions need special care to prevent getting out of hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;All other questions&lt;/strong&gt; are still &lt;em&gt;somewhat&lt;/em&gt; subjective, but that’s the nature of the games we play and the topic of the site. Even rules-lookup questions can be subjective if you get into cases where interpretation can play a role or the actual rule is problematic and people propose alternatives. Thus, experience &lt;strong&gt;is always useful&lt;/strong&gt;. But the distinction I am making is that these are cases where experience is not the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; relevant source of information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Role of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that the importance of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective is in the requirement that you “Back It Up!” &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; in some requirement that you have &lt;em&gt;exactly the same experience&lt;/em&gt; for &lt;em&gt;every question where experience could be relevant.&lt;/em&gt; We recognize experience as often valuable (an answer with experience is better, all else being equal, to an answer without it), which should be reflected in the voting, but the &lt;em&gt;requirement&lt;/em&gt; is that statements be backed up. Perfectly-matching personal experience is not the only way to achieve that, and rules-lookup questions are not the only cases where a well backed-up answer might never mention personal experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, experience is a source of information, an important one, but only in pure “what do you like best for this?” questions is it the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; source of information. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions always fall in that category, and others outside it may as well, but moderators should be &lt;em&gt;reluctant&lt;/em&gt; to unilaterally make that call: in most cases it is best that the community weigh in through the voting mechanism. Moderators are not here to &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; the community; their primary purpose, I think, is to act in cases where privileges are reserved or immediate action is necessary (flagrant spam, inappropriate material, etc.). Otherwise, all users should have their position judged on its merits, not on the basis of reputation, privileges, or polygons that may or may not follow their name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2013-12-02T00:23:29.140" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3206" CreationDate="2013-11-25T21:41:34.497" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Have you read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;? It makes it pretty clear that there is a continuum of subjectivity that begins immediately after &quot;Does this code compile?&quot; (RPG.SE equivalent: &quot;Is there a RAW or other factual answer?&quot;) and proceeds onward from there by degree. It's therefore a false dichotomy to ask if a question &quot;is a subjective question.&quot;  Most of our questions are at least partially subjective. The entire article was inspired by the moms4moms site which was by its nature mostly subjective as compared to the coding questions on SO, and that guidance was for their entire site's operation!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GS/BS is a not just guide &quot;to voting,&quot; many of its rules are in all sites' help centers for a reason. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&lt;/a&gt;.  That's not custom for RPG.SE (we can't even edit it), it's all about not asking &quot;bad subjective&quot; questions as overall SE guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;strong&gt;Back It Up!&lt;/strong&gt; principle is therefore relevant to whatever portion of a question is subjective.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt; (which is where this discussion probably belongs) I know people think they know everything and can easily extrapolate. And sure, relevant experience doesn't have to be totally exact. But it's just like the value of playtest info over the value of armchair theorycrafter info - it's just plain better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &quot;Running Forgotten Realms in Pathfinder&quot; - that's right, if you can't explain that you've done that, or seen it done, or even directly analogous experience (&quot;Well, I converted Eberron to PF fine and it's just about the same process&quot;), or can otherwise back it up (citing others' experience, facts...) then it's not a valid answer.  It's certainly not that you're a bad person or your theories are necessarily wrong - it's just that there's no reason to believe they're right besides appeal to your authority.  And when everyone does it, to quote the meta.SE blog post, &quot;you are left with an experience that looks more like the magazine rack at a grocery store than a book shelf at Harvard.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone on the Internet thinks they know things.  Here, we specifically want expertise. Experts have actually done things. It's pretty simple and direct. If you can't &lt;strong&gt;Back It Up!&lt;/strong&gt; then it's not a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, a question about running the Realms in Pathfinder, one might legitimately expect expertise, personal or cited, in that actual topic instead of &quot;converting from 3.5e to Pathfinder's easy.&quot; The OP cited a conversion guide. &quot;I'm sure it'll be fine, because game system conversion is easy&quot; is no better answer than &quot;Oh you can use FATE for that because it's good for anything&quot; or any other such.  In this case the answer's bad because it's a mix of lacking expertise and also not answering the real question (game system conversion from 3.5e to PF is an existing question with answers - how does it bear specifically on the Realms?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt; for more on site policy on subjective questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2013-12-03T03:06:09.273" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3209" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3210" CreationDate="2013-11-27T11:46:48.883" Score="4" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do you think a question on &quot;what system-agnotic-non-book-buying geeky gifts&quot; is appropriate? My family wants to get me cool RPG geeky stuff for Christmas and I'm coming up short on ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little concerned that it might be seen as advertising products, which is not the aim. The aim is to get a list of system agnostic coolness to use at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine such a question would become community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="173" LastActivityDate="2013-11-27T12:23:59.673" Title="Is a question on &quot;what system-agnostic gifts that aren't books are there?&quot; appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3209" CreationDate="2013-11-27T12:23:59.673" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, but not for why you're thinking.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lists... are not so good. Lists that are certainly going to be out of date, or horribly broad are doubleplusungood. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can phrase it as a game-recommendation question such that it can actually &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; an answer by fulfilling a specific need, great. But &quot;give me list of stuff!&quot; not so much, no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-11-27T12:23:59.673" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3211" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3212" CreationDate="2013-12-01T01:30:39.797" Score="10" ViewCount="253" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's a scenario: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;New user asks question ignorant of the site's format. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;While some are commenting on their question and their question is/is not getting closed, others &quot;answer&quot; in the comments to the question. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;New user's problem is solved, question remains closed/unedited and eventually gets deleted as obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such a question could be helpful to other users, but because the original asker has no more interest it leaves. Eventually we'll face the same question again. Such a problem might boil down to this: &lt;strong&gt;users take the shortcut of using a comment for their answer, treating the site more like a discussion board, and then their questions die/get deleted/whatever.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question:&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Should we not offer answers in comments? Should the comment system be entirely for the refinement of questions/answers? Do we need to hold out until a question is proper before we can give our potential answer, officially? Or should we take guesses at what new users (where I've seen this issue the most) are &lt;em&gt;intending&lt;/em&gt; to ask?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-11-26T17:48:46.503" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T17:48:46.503" Title="How much of an answer/suggestion should be in comments to questions?" Tags="|discussion|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2018-08-28T05:18:30.207" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3211" CreationDate="2013-12-01T01:38:42.430" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Correct, you should not use comments for answers.  Doing so robs the questioner of the opportunity to learn how to use the site constructively and robs all other users of a good answer (more than 600 characters worth at least) to a coherent question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag these comments as &quot;not constructive&quot; and they will be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-12-06T12:48:57.443" LastActivityDate="2013-12-06T12:48:57.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3211" CreationDate="2013-12-01T01:45:05.823" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd assume to use the comments for clarification of the question, rather than actually putting for the answer itself. Even if the question is changed after the answer is submitted, at least answers are shown and people will know to search for answers there, rather than passing over the question post entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9927" LastActivityDate="2013-12-01T01:45:05.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3206" CreationDate="2013-12-03T02:54:51.920" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question, ultimately, is what kind of expert answer are you going to give. There are two kinds of experts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've done this. This can sometimes be the best kind of expert. The person who's done what you're trying to do and knows how to do it well, or at the very least, knows what didn't work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've read a lot about this. Also valuable. These are the folks who, while they may not have done what you're asking about, have read extensively on the subject, are knowledgeable in the field and can give you good advice about what you're trying to do (can even tell you with some certainty whether something will work or not). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There has been a lot of talk about the parenting site, the Programmers site and the blog post these two sites sparked (the Good Subjective, Bad Subjective post that's linked in other answers here). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the important things that's missing from this discussion is there there &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; criteria that can be used to &quot;Back it Up.&quot; The first and &lt;em&gt;most authoritative&lt;/em&gt; is external sources. The second is personal experience. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you're interested in writing an answer and you don't have personal experience you need to go do some research. This is how the second kind of expert writes his answers. You don't just spout your knowledge, you &lt;em&gt;do research&lt;/em&gt; to confirm what you know (or counter it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-12-03T02:54:51.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3215" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-03T21:41:45.657" Score="3" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do I quote Questions and/or Answers outside the site that I've written myself for the site?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondarily, how exactly do I quote - again, outside the site - Q&amp;amp;A by others? And what's the difference between the two, if there's any?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know &quot;user contribution is 'cc-wiki' and 'attribution required'&quot; (both are stated in the footer, with links to explanations), but I seem to remember a more detailed official source on this, only I can't seem to find it. Does anyone have a link, or could someone sum the process up briefly? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Disclaimer: I've got a bad cold at the moment, and my google fu is seriously impaired by that. Sorry.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="507" LastEditorDisplayName="user4000" LastEditDate="2013-12-04T19:15:51.373" LastActivityDate="2013-12-04T19:15:51.373" Title="How do I quote RPG.SE material outside the site?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3215" CreationDate="2013-12-04T00:04:23.993" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions you've written yourself, you are the copyright holder and have no restrictions on your use thereof. It's eternally licensed to SEI but that only affects their ability to distribute it, not yours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions by others or in publication, the requirements for attribution are &lt;a href=&quot;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, as long as you mention it's from SE, you're allowed to republish the content, even for profit. The only restriction is that if you remix it or adapt it, the remix/adaptation is licensed under the same license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2013-12-04T00:04:23.993" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3217" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3218" CreationDate="2013-12-04T19:19:56.663" Score="10" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;I notice that a 'leaving-player' tag has been added. My personal opinion is that it is unnecessary, but want to try to get a consensus before going ahead and rolling back edits to the questions where it has been added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2013-12-05T02:12:59.633" Title="Is the [leaving-player] tag a necessary addition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3217" CreationDate="2013-12-04T19:26:01.333" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see nothing that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/leaving-player&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;leaving-player&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;leaving-player&lt;/a&gt; tag adds that isn't covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;, or even things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and such if necessary. I believe it's a bit overly specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could lead to a slippery slope of &quot;sub-tags&quot; and eventually we'd have tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players-that-smell-bad-and-eat-all-my-chips&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players-that-smell-bad-and-eat-all-my-chips&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players-that-smell-bad-and-eat-all-my-chips&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9927" LastEditorDisplayName="user8248" LastEditDate="2013-12-05T02:12:59.633" LastActivityDate="2013-12-05T02:12:59.633" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3217" CreationDate="2013-12-04T21:02:40.373" Score="6" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does this tag provide extra context on the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. How would you even ask this question without putting this information into the question itself?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can you be an expert on the topic of &quot;leaving-player?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That seems rather too specific.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2013-12-04T21:02:40.373" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3220" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-04T23:45:23.833" Score="10" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TM8eq.png&quot; alt=&quot;Main page error&quot;&gt;&#xA;This isn't present on other SEs I've visited, so the new header alone isn't the cause..? Though they may have already fixed it on the sites I checked. In case it matters, this view is from Firefox and persists on questions, profiles and the main feed (above). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2013-12-06T02:50:50.787" LastActivityDate="2013-12-06T02:50:50.787" Title="Main page blank space?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3220" CreationDate="2013-12-05T10:08:38.953" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I pushed a fix for this. It will go live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75" LastActivityDate="2013-12-05T10:08:38.953" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3222" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-06T11:41:11.187" Score="12" ViewCount="701" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's the time of the year again, namely it is December 2013, and so we shall now refresh our Community Promotion Ads for the new year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be &lt;strong&gt;220 x 250 pixels&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/3222&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-10-11T03:01:57.400" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2014" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="11" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2015-01-01T03:08:15.323" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-06T11:41:11.187" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-06T11:41:11.187" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hJIL.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2013-12-06T11:41:11.187" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-06T11:41:11.187" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3224" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3226" CreationDate="2013-12-09T02:13:35.853" Score="24" ViewCount="592" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a recent (otherwise quite solid) edit of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30616/4563&quot;&gt;“Will changing an artifact sword to another weapon type impact game balance much?”&lt;/a&gt;, @okeefe changed the British spelling “artefact” to the American spelling “artifact.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Searching our meta, I see no rule regarding whether a particular spelling is preferred, or whether someone editing a question &lt;em&gt;anyway&lt;/em&gt; can or should change from one spelling to another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T21:13:48.763" Title="Standardization of English, etc." Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3225" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2013-12-09T02:13:35.853" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personal feeling: the initial spelling in such cases should be left alone, even if you are already editing the question or answer for other reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even if we decide that we should standardize on a single spelling, seems to me that this would not be a large enough change on its own to justify making the edit in the first place, if you were not editing it anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-12-09T02:13:35.853" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2013-12-09T03:06:42.527" Score="25" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some common reasons to edit are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Try to make the post substantively better when you edit, not just change a single character. Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;; emphasis mine.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We aren't language experts.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Correct use of English spelling and grammar to the best of your ability. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/quality-standards-error&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although one of SE's meta goals is to improve communication skills, RPG.SE citizens are here for RPG expertise, not linguistic expertise. We want citizens to feel free to edit away typos (if they're major, or as part of a more significant edit--as described in the help section), and if we start coming on down people for fixing what they think are typos but turn out to be legitimate dialectic variants, we'll lose editors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't seen any pattern of behavior to indicate that anything more sinister is going on than good faith attempts to adhere to correct English spelling and grammar, so I don't think a more strict policy needs to be enacted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There is no &amp;quot;correct use of English spelling and grammar&amp;quot; unless we choose a style manual.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every publisher has a stylebook, and they don't agree. Even in something like &amp;quot;American English,&amp;quot; choices about the Oxford (serial) comma, whether to use &amp;quot;further&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;farther&amp;quot; or just &amp;quot;further,&amp;quot; and whether to hyphenate &amp;quot;African American,&amp;quot; create wide divides in style and grammar. Taken to its logical conclusion, we can't rule &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; style choice as right or wrong unless we adopt a specific style manual for the whole site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That seems excessive and needless, but...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's probably good to standardize usage within a single post.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edit in question was actually reverting a spelling change from a previous edit: the original post used &amp;quot;artifact,&amp;quot; and the body text still did, but the title had been edited by an Australian who used his spelling &amp;quot;artefact.&amp;quot; Okeefe reverted the spelling so it would be consistent throughout the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like a reasonable rule of thumb.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-12-31T14:10:25.090" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2013-12-09T05:33:44.647" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I follow the Wikipedia policy: for AmE, BrE, and CanE (&amp;amp;c) spelling variants, preserve the variant of the original and standardise to that, if necessary. If it's seems to be a mix of spellings from different countries but specific words are consistent, don't try to figure out why, and leave the spelling alone. Basically, when it doubt, don't touch the spelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was deemed super-important at Wikipedia in order for it not to slowly transform from a worldwide project into an American-seeming project. I agree with this reasoning, and I think it applies to this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking personally, as an English-speaker from a non-American-English country, you'd be surprised how &lt;em&gt;unwelcoming&lt;/em&gt; a site that erases my correct spelling from the page feels. A site that enforces AmE spellings on my own text &amp;ndash; even if only accidentally, due to editors not paying attention to the issue of spelling variants &amp;ndash; is a site that doesn't want me to contribute. It's not rational, but there it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A consequence of following this policy would be that unnecessary corrections are to be reverted to the original spelling. This shows respect for the original author, and counteracts any demographic bias rooted in the ratio of site users. It takes little effort, does minimal damage to the site, and demonstrates a dedication to being non-partisan. This would be my preference for how we handle spelling here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2013-12-09T05:33:44.647" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2013-12-09T12:49:43.413" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;You might be overthinking it. This might not be a case of which English is The Correct English.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e has a thing called artifacts. I live in Australia, where we spell it &quot;artefacts&quot;, but nevertheless, in the context of D&amp;amp;D 4e I will happily and consistently call them artifacts. They consistently call it that, and as far as I'm aware, they have no instances of calling them &quot;artefacts&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would probably be weird if some of the books called them &quot;artefacts&quot;, just like it'd be weird if some of the books said &quot;magick&quot; instead of &quot;magic.&quot; I see it as being a convention they have with a defined spelling, so I go with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should probably ask okeefe though. Right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-12-09T12:49:43.413" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-10T05:54:50.947" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/b3WQX.png&quot; alt=&quot;Find out the odds&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastActivityDate="2013-12-10T05:54:50.947" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-10T05:54:50.947" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-10T15:35:31.773" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQ5S2.png&quot; alt=&quot;Astronomy Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7890" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:59:06.147" LastActivityDate="2013-12-10T15:35:31.773" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-10T15:35:31.773" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-10T20:31:30.163" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://roll20.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/A1iwW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 - Virtual tabletop gaming that tells a story&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user10033" LastActivityDate="2013-12-10T20:31:30.163" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-10T20:31:30.163" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-11T03:44:39.137" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nGYBh.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool – For the RP Games you play&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2013-12-11T03:44:39.137" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-11T03:44:39.137" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3234" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-14T01:23:35.203" Score="7" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just so we have some stats on the thing, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions (or other shopping questions) would you all classify &quot;good&quot;, &quot;of value&quot;, and &quot;answered well.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm trying to get a sense for the trends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2013-12-16T16:16:08.690" LastActivityDate="2013-12-20T22:35:56.277" Title="What are our good game-req questions?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3235" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-14T09:23:42.160" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scabard.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/funnk.png&quot; alt=&quot;Scabard - RPG Campaign Manager&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8735" LastEditorUserId="2620" LastEditDate="2013-12-14T15:02:22.627" LastActivityDate="2013-12-14T15:02:22.627" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-14T09:23:42.160" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3236" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-16T11:13:16.640" Score="2" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to request that someone with higher privileges than me create some or all of the the following tags, and mark them as aliases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;God-Machine&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;God-Machine-Rules-Update&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nnwod&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nwod-GMC&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;wod-2.5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;new new world of darkness&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;new new wod&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell there is no commonly used acronym for it,&#xA;thus my suggestion for many aliases.&#xA;Informally I having seen &quot;new new wod&quot; quiet often in conversation.&#xA;and the book itself it s called &quot;World of Darkness: The God Machine Rules Update&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some questions that are appropriate only to it, and no to &lt;code&gt;nwod&lt;/code&gt; questions.&#xA;an example of use would be my question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30810/removing-conditions-without-resolution&quot;&gt;Removing Conditions without resolution&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T12:37:47.293" Title="Tag Request: God Machine Rules Update" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3237" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1669" CreationDate="2013-12-16T11:16:54.827" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would be useful so that users on low reputation, who can not create new tags,&#xA;know that the tag they want doesn't exist.&#xA;Creating Tags currently requires &lt;strong&gt;300 reputation&lt;/strong&gt;, for reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T11:16:54.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3236" CreationDate="2013-12-16T12:12:22.233" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tag creation and synonym creation are generally done &lt;em&gt;reactively&lt;/em&gt;, not proactively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;strong&gt;new tag&lt;/strong&gt; can be added when a need for it arises: i.e. when there's actually a question that exists or is being created that needs the tag. Whoever first creates such a tag will probably use whatever feels natural to them, which is going to be a decent candidate for the tag we should keep (or it should be an indicator as to what tag we should use).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tag synonyms&lt;/strong&gt; work the same way: we don't need to pre-emptively create them. We can afford to let new tags arise which &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be synonyms, and only make them synonyms once they actually get created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; tag to your question, since that seems to me to be the most intuitive and concise way to tag that update.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T12:12:22.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1669" CreationDate="2013-12-16T12:39:45.267" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a count of the number of questions that the tag is used in. To someone sensitive to this, this count is sufficient, but it's sufficiently unobtrusive that it won't prevent new tags from someone who doesn't care about counts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T12:39:45.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-16T16:24:54.720" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/44G6J.png&quot; alt=&quot;Astronomy Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7890" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:59:06.147" LastActivityDate="2013-12-16T16:24:54.720" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-16T16:24:54.720" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3234" CreationDate="2013-12-18T23:47:19.523" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I actually think that we've got a good framework just by looking at our four most popular questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/792/looking-for-solo-one-person-rpgs-do-they-exist&quot;&gt;Looking for solo (one person) RPGs - do they exist?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79/are-there-any-good-tabletop-rpgs-for-young-beginning-players&quot;&gt;Are there any good tabletop RPGs for young beginning players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3849/what-games-are-out-there-that-could-be-played-in-a-single-night-with-no-prep&quot;&gt;What games are out there that could be played in a single night, with no prep?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1864/1-gm-and-1-player-games-and-game-systems&quot;&gt;1 GM and 1 Player games and game systems?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, we see that there are some pretty simple guidelines here. They look at a specific audience or purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking &quot;What game should I buy&quot; is obviously meaningless, without providing an idea of what we're looking for. What can be clearly seen from this is that there are a few core criteria:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Specific audience. We either see a number of players (one person, one person and one GM, young people) or a specific condition (people playing for just a single night).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Actually not subjective. Only one of these mentions &quot;good&quot;. Others are just asking &quot;does something exist within these criteria&quot;. Even then, we see objective criteria; &quot;less bloody and dark&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very general. Any of these questions has many acceptable answers, and possibly has many equally valid options. Some of these options will look nothing like each other. While some will be more positively received, there are not a ton of &quot;invalid&quot; answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3136" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-12-18T23:47:19.523" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2013-12-20T13:46:26.143" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As we are playing particular systems any terms that might have alternative spelling should first the same as the spelling used by that system. If it isn't referring to a specific term then leave as the author intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for whether everyone should be aware of alternative spellings, well that's a hard one. I daresay most non-American English speakers are very aware of alternative spellings as they struggle through so many sites and programs that don't recognise the 'correct' spelling (such as recognise). If there were to be a policy then it should leave as the author intended except for those specific system terms, if it is edited then it is a simple matter to revert it once the actual situation is discovered. No harm, no foul.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10129" LastActivityDate="2013-12-20T13:46:26.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3234" CreationDate="2013-12-20T22:35:56.277" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is one I like for how well it did in our format:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15025/choosing-dnd-4th-edition-or-essentials-for-a-new-group-and-dm&quot;&gt;Choosing DnD 4th edition or Essentials for a new group and DM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's unusual among game-rec questions in that it's an either-or question, not wide open. That's nicely limited, it gives the answerers a lot of room to answer with a diversity of &lt;em&gt;good subjective&lt;/em&gt; experience, and arguments for their recommendation are much more pointed than I'm used to seeing in game-rec. It's also (I think) more widely useful beyond the asker than most game-recs. That may just be due to being about two popular, related systems, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2013-12-20T22:35:56.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3244" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3245" CreationDate="2013-12-23T15:43:29.533" Score="4" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30966/realism-of-poisoned-weapons&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, two new tags were created: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/verisimilitude&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;verisimilitude&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;verisimilitude&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realism&lt;/a&gt;. I'm not sure that we need these tags, and I highly doubt we need both. Is there a different tag they should both become synonyms of, should we synonymise one to the other, or should we leave it as is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T01:36:20.233" Title="Are the verisimilitude and realism tags necessary?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-23T15:55:02.547" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Neither&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While both are synonyms and the argument could easily be made why one is better than the other; neither tag should be kept because both were created from whole cloth as part of a question that was ultimately closed for both being too broad (never really nailed down a system or series of systems) and too specific (real-world historical poisons knowledge) and thus outside the scope of the site. People can and will ask verisimilitude/realism questions, but since both terms are very, very vague and their application extremely system specific and tempered by personal opinion they should not exist as tags. Someone looking for answers regarding the verisimilitude of D&amp;amp;D's vancian casting will not be aided by the verisimilitude of Cyperpunk 2.0.2.0.'s Friday Night Firefight System.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2013-12-23T19:58:08.777" LastActivityDate="2013-12-23T19:58:08.777" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-23T15:55:51.747" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest combining them into one tag.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/verisimilitude-realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;verisimilitude-realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;verisimilitude-realism&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Versimilitude is a very common word in some gaming circles (the ones I read), which is used instead of realism.  The reason for this, is that there is nothing &quot;realistic&quot; about a Fantasy world.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there is no reason to have two tags, as it's really the same idea with one using more accurate language than the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See this blog post for more about it:  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rickneal.ca/?p=308&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.rickneal.ca/?p=308&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/8xpqa/youre_an_elf_that_uses_magic_you_dont_get_to_talk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;reddit thread&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People are more likely to type in &quot;realism&quot; by hand, but by having the hyphenated tag, we can avoid such confusion or debates in the questions, trying to understand what type of &quot;realism&quot; the questioner is asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2013-12-23T16:56:13.003" LastActivityDate="2013-12-23T16:56:13.003" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-23T16:04:53.827" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/verisimilitude&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;verisimilitude&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;verisimilitude&lt;/a&gt;. I've never heard it used to mean what this question indicates it means. Nobody will search for it, and frankly, I doubt anyone else will use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realism&lt;/a&gt;, on the other hand, has actual potential value as a tag, and I would like to see it stay. It's a common term for this context, and one people might actually use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2013-12-23T16:04:53.827" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-23T16:08:50.247" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would get rid of verisimilitude and keep realism. Its a more common, easily recognisable word that people will understand. I would query whether verisimilitude is too narrow a term - how many questions would legitimately use it as a tag? How many questioners would even consider their question needing it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2013-12-23T16:08:50.247" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-23T16:58:49.203" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Verisimilitude probably isn't used by folks nearly as often as realism. But instead of getting rid of verisimilitude entirely, maybe just make it a synonym for realism. That way, people searching for verisimilitude will find the relevant topics, and we can condense the two into a single category. Clearly, when people are using either of these labels, they're probably trying to accomplish the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9927" LastActivityDate="2013-12-23T16:58:49.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2013-12-24T01:12:13.673" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the executive summary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, we don't need the tag(s) now, but we should not kneecap our future selves by informally banning them either.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the actual answer that leads to that conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trying to figure out whether we need the tag(s) is a bit like asking which carriage is faster: you can't ask which carriage is faster until you put horses in front of it, and then it's really a matter of which &lt;em&gt;horses&lt;/em&gt; are faster. So the first question that should be asked isn't whether we need the tags, it actually is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Are questions about verisimilitude or realism on-topic?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say they're on-&lt;em&gt;topic&lt;/em&gt; yes. They are, as we would expect the terms to get used, inherently about roleplaying games and the use thereof. However, being on-topic isn't enough to make a &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; acceptable here. RPG plots are also on-topic, but questions about where to find lists of plots are un-&lt;em&gt;acceptable&lt;/em&gt; for our site's scope regardless of topicality. In the case of questions about verisimilitude/realism, the most likely thing is that questions will be inherently subjective. So the second question to ask is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Are there any questions about verisimilitude or realism that aren't Bad Subjective?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm fairly confident saying that not every question about verisimilitude/realism is going to be subjective in the bad way. For example, the question that inspired this isn't problematic because it's &lt;em&gt;subjective&lt;/em&gt;, it's problematic because it's (maybe) out of scope by requiring real-world poison expertise, and (maybe) too broad for asking about poison in RPGs in general. I happen to disagree with both, but that's beside the point since the point is: neither charge is founded on it being too subjective, and that's not the sort of thing people around here are going to fail to point out when a question is being evaluated for close voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, verisimilitude/realism questions are on-topic, and at least some of them are going to be acceptably objective or good subjective. That leaves a final question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Do we need a tag(s) to describe and categorise these questions?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say no, with a caveat: I wouldn't go on a witch-hunt against the tag, I wouldn't ban it. My imagination is limited by humanity so therefore my provisional &quot;no&quot; answer is also limited &amp;ndash; it's entirely possible that some questions will show up that demonstrate the tag's usefulness. In that case, the site would be poorer for having, I dunno, unofficially banned it or something. We should allow it to naturally show up again so that we have the chance to see &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; there are any questions that prove its worth. And if there really aren't any such questions, then none will show up. So:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No, we don't need the tag. But we might need it for future questions. Leave it an open question.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, should the poison question be reopened, I do think it deserves one of these tags...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If we do need the tag(s), do we need both?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we don't need both. Keep one &amp;ndash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/verisimilitude&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;verisimilitude&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;verisimilitude&lt;/a&gt; is the one to keep &amp;ndash; and synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realism&lt;/a&gt; to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why &lt;strong&gt;verisimilitude&lt;/strong&gt; instead of &lt;strong&gt;realism&lt;/strong&gt; as the word to keep? &quot;Verisimilitude&quot; means &quot;to have the seeming of realism; to behave in a way that makes sense; to have internal fictional consistency&quot;. That's what people mean when they use &quot;realism&quot; in an RPG context, so even when they say &quot;realism&quot;, they are actually meaning what the word &quot;verisimilitude&quot; means. Thus, that's the word we should use and synonym to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-12-24T01:21:13.267" LastActivityDate="2013-12-24T01:21:13.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3251" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2013-12-26T12:21:43.683" Score="1" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was looking through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventure&lt;/a&gt; tags looking for some insights on modules to run.  However I was getting a lot of questions that were just noise for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to propose adding an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag to separate out those types of questions.   This is different than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, because it might be system agnostic, or system specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;related:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2711/has-system-recommendation-grown-too-big-for-its-britches&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an Example.  This question here &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28243/the-sunless-citadel-and-its-errors&quot;&gt;The Sunless Citadel and its errors&lt;/a&gt;  is a question which is about a published adventure but not a recommendation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28550/dd-4e-campaigns-adventures-that-spell-things-out-for-a-brand-new-dm&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e Campaigns/Adventures that spell things out for a brand new DM&lt;/a&gt; is a question about a published adventure recommendation.  Also, notice how they added the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; even though they know that they want to play DnD 4e and are not actually asking for a recommendation on a game, but rather just for an adventure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-02-27T13:40:55.557" Title="Can we add an adventure-recommendation tag?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3251" CreationDate="2013-12-26T12:51:07.157" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag is pulling weight for that right now.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure that there's sufficient distinction between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; to justify adding a new tag to the system. Anyone tagging or searching will find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt;, and there's no useful difference in the kind of expert that would be attracted to the different tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2013-12-26T12:51:07.157" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3251" CreationDate="2013-12-26T14:51:49.997" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The intent is that [game-recommendation] is the generic shopping tag and it should be modified with [published-adventures] or [campaign-setting] or whatever other product type ([gm-tools]...) you are looking for.  Mod your search accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2013-12-27T00:06:44.533" LastActivityDate="2013-12-27T00:06:44.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3251" CreationDate="2013-12-27T00:11:38.573" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Game recommendation&quot; is meant to be read as either a recommendations &lt;em&gt;of&lt;/em&gt; games to play or recommendations &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; stuff to use with a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...No, it's not ideal semantically, but the whole issue of recommendations is full of compromises. The only alternative that we came up with during discussion of the tag (when it changed from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; to its current name) was the possibility of using just plain ol' &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. That was rejected as being way, way too broad. We also considered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, but that was rejected on the valid grounds that &lt;em&gt;systems&lt;/em&gt; are often not 1:1 mappable to &lt;em&gt;products&lt;/em&gt;, so it was too narrow and narrow in the wrong way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We couldn't find anything good that covered the middle ground we wanted, so we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, with the advice to read it with an &quot;of&quot; or with a &quot;for&quot;, as needed. Tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventure&lt;/a&gt; can be added to make it clear that it's a recommendation request for adventures, and that makes them nicely searchable by plugging both into the search bar. Searching on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[game-recommendation] [published-adventures]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;gives you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation+published-adventures&quot;&gt;this list of questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2013-12-27T00:11:38.573" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2013-12-30T01:36:28.317" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anime.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Cfudk.png&quot; alt=&quot;Anime &amp;amp; Manga Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7399" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:54:48.223" LastActivityDate="2013-12-31T03:58:49.480" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2013-12-30T01:36:28.317" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="570" CreationDate="2014-01-03T10:34:28.557" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's something that is best answered by RPG experts, it should be on topic. The point of the Roleplaying Games SE is to get answers from RPG experts, so if we're the best people to ask then the question is clearly in the right place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This covers any question that is best answered by an RPG expert, &lt;strong&gt;even if&lt;/strong&gt; it's a question about real-life history. Asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4410/at-what-point-in-the-20th-century-did-automobiles-and-telephones-become-ubiquitou&quot;&gt;How late in history can I set a campaign based in the US without cars and telephones being widespread?&lt;/a&gt; is a better fit here than History SE, because the asker is interested in what time period would fit best for a campaign, which leads to different answers than you'd get for a purely history-based question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-01-03T10:34:28.557" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3257" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-05T12:40:35.760" Score="7" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am confused as to why this question has been closed...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31206/rpg-for-a-very-poor-reader&quot;&gt;Are there any RPGs that a first grade reader can read and learn?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...with comments added by mods for answers to show how they have experienced running the games they have given for young children. The reason for my confusion is that the question isn't asking anything about the playing of games, only the reading level of the literature that makes up the rules. The question even explicitly states that they are happy for violence to be present in whatever settings are suggested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given this is the case, why are mods still insisting that answers have experience of having run the game with young players when this isn't specified as a criterion by the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: It almost feels like the 'you must have experience of playing the game you recommend' criterion is being applied to all game-rec questions when actually there are some where it shouldn't as it is not relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-01-05T14:01:49.607" Title="Query over mod closing of question of 'poor reader' question" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-recommendation|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3257" CreationDate="2014-01-05T13:16:55.373" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question, specifically, was closed to allow answerers a day to clean up their answers to Back It Up! before they're deleted. I've also commented on every. bloody. offending. answer, such that they know they're in danger of deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The requirement is, in-fact, being applied to all questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; because of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. It is the moderation policy of the site that, as shopping questions tend to be horrible list-answers that attract everyone's favourite system, requiring people to Back It Up! allows us to winnow out, &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; aggressively, answers that are unfounded in fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel this is a problem, I encourage the community to pose the banning of shopping questions. We will, in no circumstances, relax this requirement, but we are happy to listen to the community in dissallowing these questions entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-01-05T13:16:55.373" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3257" CreationDate="2014-01-05T13:22:05.797" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The second paragraph is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I need a game that a young boy can read on his own and learn to play. I'll help him, but only after he reads it and gives a good-faith effort to come to our session having an idea what to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question's title only mentions reading ability, but the entirety of the question's body is about a &lt;em&gt;kid&lt;/em&gt; - one who's a couple of grades behind in his reading ability. Dealing with kids is very much a criterion of the question, so answers have to deal with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make that plain, let's suppose there's a theoretical RPG that only really makes sense to people who grew up in the 70s, even if it's good for people in the 70s who read at a level behind their peers. That's not really going to be a satisfactory answer to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-01-05T14:01:49.607" LastActivityDate="2014-01-05T14:01:49.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3260" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-07T01:35:19.857" Score="3" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/7605/1204&quot;&gt;What options are available for a Cleric casting multiple spells per round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This old question is about a cleric who wants to speed up his casting of divine spells. By our current standards for asking and answering, answers should respond to that exact situation and offer options which help clerics speed up divine spellcasting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it's also a textbook case of a user asking about their specific situation &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/should-i-use-a-narrow-system-tag-or-go-broad-if-possible-and-use-system-agnosti&quot;&gt;in very broad terms to be useful&lt;/a&gt;. In this case, they expanded the question to ask for all options to speeding up &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; kind of spell. That really is what happened; they even considered it a mistake to mention they were a cleric:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;P.S. I see a lot of requests for more information on my character. I was hoping to create a question that more people would find useful (I guess I shouldn't have mentioned that I am a cleric either ;-) ).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The answers are messy as a result.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most go into Cleric specifics without worrying about stuff for any other casters. Others mention things that explicitly only speed up &lt;em&gt;arcane&lt;/em&gt; spell casting, which whilst useful is irrelevant to a cleric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Hey I Can Chan&lt;/em&gt; then posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/31272/1204&quot;&gt;this excellent compilation&lt;/a&gt; of effects that speed up spellcasting, but a great number are completely irrelevant to clerics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By our current standards this is all over the place. They're answering two different situations (&quot;What things speed up spells?&quot; and &quot;What things speed up &lt;em&gt;cleric&lt;/em&gt; spells?&quot;) because of how the question was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What do we do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we leave this messed up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we somehow split the answers into a canon question for speeding up Divine casting and a canon question for speeding up anything-casting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-01-10T02:00:28.923" Title="What do we do with this Cleric Quicken Spells question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3260" CreationDate="2014-01-07T12:56:48.913" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question has been edited to be more narrow, with cleric and level, so I don't think closing the question's appropriate.  Stuff like this isn't complicated and doesn't require meta questions - a comment on the question saying &quot;no, we like questions specific, thanks&quot; and then comments on far afield answers saying &quot;yes but what about sixth level clerics&quot; suffice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He edited that information in 4 hours after asking the question back in 2011, so I find it hard to fault the questioner much here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-01-07T12:56:48.913" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3262" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3263" CreationDate="2014-01-10T11:55:27.640" Score="1" ViewCount="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you get 100 upvotes on an question or answer, that'll get you a Great Question/Answer badge. Likewise, there's the Famous Question badge for question views. But what happens if you already have a Nice/Good Answer? Does the lower-level badge get replaced, or does it stay?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastActivityDate="2014-01-10T12:10:16.137" Title="How do 'Get X votes/views' badges work?" Tags="|support|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3262" CreationDate="2014-01-10T12:10:16.137" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/45/nice-answer&quot;&gt;description for the Nice Answer badge&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This badge can be awarded multiple times. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You earn a new one each time you meet its requirements, for each answer that meets it. Your gold or silver badge never 'replaces' your bronze badge: you get it in addition. I still have a Nice Answer badge for each of my answers that also earned me a Good Answer badge, and both of those for the answers that gave me Great Answer badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you click on your badges, you'll see which answers you earned them for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-01-10T12:10:16.137" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3264" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3265" CreationDate="2014-01-11T03:30:14.297" Score="6" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I flagged a question about a console game (&lt;em&gt;The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker&lt;/em&gt;) as off-topic for this site. However, I noticed that the flags I had to choose from were as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xIc0K.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both flags say that they are for questions about &quot;computer-based games&quot;. However in this case the question wasn't about a computer-based game, but rather a console-based game. So technically the flag wasn't the right one to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Arqade and Game Development Stack Exchange don't limit themselves to just computer-based games. Given that this is the case, and that we may from time to time need to migrate console-based game questions, I think that the flag ought to be broadened to something more general that encompasses console-based games. I'd like to suggest the following alternative:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about &lt;strong&gt;video games&lt;/strong&gt;, including video games that are roleplaying games...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like this one because it is a simple term that, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/video_game#English&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;according to Wiktionary&lt;/a&gt;, encompasses both computer-based and console-based games. Other options might be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about &lt;strong&gt;computer-based and console-based games&lt;/strong&gt;, including computer-based and console-based roleplaying games...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about &lt;strong&gt;non-tabletop games&lt;/strong&gt;, including computer-based and console-based roleplaying games...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something that we might be able to change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also while we're at it, the first flag does not have a comma before the &quot;but&quot;, but the second one does. They should be consistent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:22:22.603" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:22:22.603" Title="Migration flags should be more general than &quot;questions about computer-based games&quot;" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|video-games|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3264" CreationDate="2014-01-11T04:01:15.083" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should change it to &quot;video game,&quot; really.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Video game&quot; is a term everyone understands.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Video game&quot; covers consoles, personal computers, and handhelds.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Arqade &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;self-describes&lt;/a&gt; as a &quot;video game&quot; site. As far as I can tell, they don't cover computer-based games that aren't video games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Game Dev &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;self-describes&lt;/a&gt; as a site for &quot;video/computer game developers.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:18:42.213" LastActivityDate="2014-01-12T02:27:00.300" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3266" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-12T07:39:44.220" Score="3" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/indie-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;indie-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;indie-rpg&lt;/a&gt; tag has two distinct purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a tag alongside another system tag, where that system happens to be an independent RPG. For example: a portion of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dread&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dread&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dread&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/freemarket&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;freemarket&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;freemarket&lt;/a&gt; questions. It also happens to be used on its won in a couple of questions - on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9901/&quot;&gt;Do&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5877/&quot;&gt;Engel&lt;/a&gt; systems - which might've been in this category but had their system tag disappear.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More popularly, it's a tag for questions about developing an indie RPG, e.g. how to publicise it or publish it or various other stuff involved.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is use #1 how this tag should actually get used? Should we make this tag be just about #2?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-01-31T06:13:41.480" Title="Should we tag questions about established (indie) RPG systems with [indie-rpg]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3267" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3266" CreationDate="2014-01-12T16:16:42.503" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;2 only, usage per 1 is a redundant and meta tag and should be removed when found.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a game is just about octaNe, adding indie-RPG has no value.  If it's about writing or marketing or communities or whatnot it's a meaningful differentiator.  But we don't label every 3.5e rules question with &quot;trad&quot; (or &quot;rules&quot;) - doing so fails to apprehend the reasons we have tagging on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-01-12T16:16:42.503" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3268" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-12T17:42:39.140" Score="3" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31402/wind-waker-barrier-skip-to-ganons-castle&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was closed because it's a video-game question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-theory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-theory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-theory&lt;/a&gt; because, well, presumably the asker couldn't find any more appropriate tags and just tagged it with &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, here's the problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It soooo not an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-theory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-theory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-theory&lt;/a&gt; question, but now it shows up at the top of the tag's question list.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has to have at least one tag, like every other question, so I can't remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-theory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-theory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-theory&lt;/a&gt; without adding some other one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; no appropriate tags, since it's a question about something this site doesn't cover.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-01-12T18:20:34.500" Title="What do we do about closed questions with bad tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3268" CreationDate="2014-01-12T18:20:34.500" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this case, the question should be deleted after a little while.  Since the guy has seen he's OT already, I've deleted it now.  Super off topic questions should get deleted as well as closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the rarer case when it's closed, shouldn't be deleted, and has bad tags - I find it hard to muster up much caring. If someone super anal wants to fix the tags, have at it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-01-12T18:20:34.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3270" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3273" CreationDate="2014-01-14T11:08:09.127" Score="5" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;'Skill-Challenge' is a term that has a specific meaning in certain systems, and until recently it was exclusively used in tandem with an appropriate system tag. However, a question has been posted asking about Savage Worlds using the tag, and this concerns me. The closest equivalent for a 'Skills Challenge' in Savage Worlds is 'Trait Test', and it feels wrong to use a tag with incorrect, and in my view confusing terminology.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an issue here, and if so how should we resolve it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-01-16T16:16:27.607" Title="The 'Skill-Challenge' tag and its use outside of D&amp;D" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3270" CreationDate="2014-01-14T11:24:02.560" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The description of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt; tag is (at the time of writing this answer):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag marks questions that involve the player character's skills&#xA;  and abilities being challenged by the GM in a non-combat way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not have any system attached to it, and makes sense to be used for all systems. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it need to be system specific? I think not, a skill-challenge in D&amp;amp;D might be a specific type of conflict resolution, but the concept of a skill-challenge is universal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there is an issue as it currently stands. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5841" LastActivityDate="2014-01-14T11:24:02.560" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3270" CreationDate="2014-01-14T14:45:54.560" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I know Skill Challenge is specific to D &amp;amp; D 4th edition.  That's really narrow, one edition of one game probably does not need it's own tag for a specific mechanic.  As D&amp;amp;D moves away from 4th edition this will be a more and more niche tag which also reduces its value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd recommend removing it as a tag.  A quick glance at the list of items tagged with it show only a handful of items that aren't 4e and many of the 4e questions have skill challenge in the question title so search should reveal them just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1534" LastActivityDate="2014-01-14T14:45:54.560" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3273" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3270" CreationDate="2014-01-15T23:32:59.197" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should keep it, but keep it exclusive to D&amp;amp;D 4e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a useful tag for 4e players to search on, since there are a lot of problems with Skill Challenges (perceived or real) that create debate and questions. That's pretty much the only criteria we need for a tag to have value. So we should keep it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This term is exclusive to 4e. Though in theory the phrase &quot;skill challenge&quot; could be used to describe stuff in other games, in practice it is not. Since we name tags according to how the larger RPG community uses them, this tag should be exclusive to 4e and removed from non-4e questions it appears on. (And on that note, it should have its tag wiki fixed to reflect that exclusivity.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-01-15T23:32:59.197" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3270" CreationDate="2014-01-16T16:16:27.607" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure as to why there is such an emphasis on locking out other systems from what is a descriptor about a rules mechanic that can span systems, if not specifically by &quot;name&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd consider a D&amp;amp;D Skill Challenge's mechanics to be &quot;a party of PCs perform tests of their choosing multiple times, and failure or success is determined by attainment of a certain amount of successes before a certain amount of failures&quot; - this can be easily applied across other systems without any specific D&amp;amp;D requirement, so in terms of maintaining its rules mechanic meaning, it doesn't need to stay solely with D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Savage Worlds, if my hacker needed to hack a system actively defended by a security expert, I'd &lt;em&gt;challenge&lt;/em&gt; their &lt;em&gt;skills&lt;/em&gt; by trying to roll a better &quot;knowledge: hacking&quot; result, or if my rogue needed to sneak past a guard, I'd consider Stealthing past him while he tries to Notice me a &lt;em&gt;challenge&lt;/em&gt; where we roll against our relevant &lt;em&gt;skills&lt;/em&gt;.  I know this might come down to semantics (I think the OP is mixed up between what a Trait Test is for and what his skills are for, for instance) but I'd appreciate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt; as people may refer to such situations in such a way, not strictly staying true to how a system might word the term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I've hopefully demonstrated, there's two ways of looking at this that provide a requirement for the tag, where it is applicable across systems (regardless of how accurate they are to defined system names for such mechanics).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I needed to see Skill Challenges within a system regardless of what I meant by a &quot;Skill Challenge&quot;, I'd ensure my search included the relevant system tags, rather than wanting a tag (that could apply cross-system to any situation where skills are compared against each other or where skills are repeatedly rolled until a criteria is reached) specifically reserved for a given system, which seems like a close-minded approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Abstraction of a tag would then also help those who wanted inspiration from other systems, and don't necessarily find such inspiration in the one system they're using; you want help devising a D&amp;amp;D skill challenge, but the D&amp;amp;D posts aren't doing it for you? Find other systems' skill challenge-like situations with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A slightly less helpful contribution would be to create system-specific skill challenge tags, and could be argued that if skill challenges in dnd-4e are so specifically reserved, the tag should instead be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e-skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e-skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e-skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt;, but this would require editing of existing, incorrect tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10268" LastActivityDate="2014-01-16T16:16:27.607" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3275" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3276" CreationDate="2014-01-16T23:22:01.610" Score="8" ViewCount="315" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was about to ask for help coming up with a list of titles that fit in with the theme of the WH:40K universe (and with Rogue Trader in particular). Latin isn't my first language =)&#xA;In particular, I wanted a title for a character that had risen in the administrative/logistical ranks of a ministorium.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other questions related to fluff, for example, could asking for background details on the Lovecraft Mythos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are questions like this on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10125" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-01-17T02:27:37.330" LastActivityDate="2014-05-03T01:45:33.943" Title="Are 'fluff' setting related questions relevant?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3275" CreationDate="2014-01-16T23:36:08.707" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If it's RPG-setting-specific and meets the other site guidelines for questions, they're fine.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question about the Lovecraftian Mythos would be better off in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy SE&lt;/a&gt;, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bdnd-4e%5D+%22points+of+light%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;questions about the 4e Points of Light setting&lt;/a&gt; are on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for this is that we can have an RPG in any setting--real-life 1920s New England, Middle-Earth, the world of Tron--and that means it'd be easy to have any question about &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; be on topic. So we have to limit it to RPG-only settings, both to keep the site from ballooning like a foam dinosaur in the bathtub and because we aren't the experts equipped to answer most of those questions. (Some non-RPG-setting-specific questions are re-opened on a case-by-case basis, and the topic is, of course, open for discussion on meta. The less likely it is that another SE or forum could answer the question usefully, the more likely we are to take that question under our wing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main problem with your question is not that it's a setting question, but that it's asking for an open-ended, speculative list of original ideas. If any answer could be added to indefinitely, and there's no clear way to tell if an answer is actually helpful, that just creates &quot;noise&quot; on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-01-16T23:53:51.387" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3277" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-21T18:27:52.410" Score="11" ViewCount="1200" Body="&lt;p&gt;For answers to Pathfinder questions is either a more preferred source for citations and references?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is either of them treated with more authority by members of this stack exchange site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Links the the websites in question: &lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/prd/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://paizo.com/prd/&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3358" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:29:32.213" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:29:32.213" Title="Pathfinder sources: prd vs d20pfsrd" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3277" CreationDate="2014-01-21T22:49:12.950" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, use either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally prefer d20pfsrd for everyday use because it's organized better and includes FAQs and relevant dev threads and stuff, but that's not an official declaration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;PRD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's dumped there by Paizo, so it's &quot;official&quot; (given that they don't really spend a lot of money on editing it for obvious reasons). People report errors in the PRD on the Paizo forums with some regularity, being put out by Paizo doesn't make it perfect.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's organized by book.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It only includes content from Paizo hardbacks.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has Paizo IP stripped out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;d20PFSRD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's maintained by the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's organized by content - for example, under &quot;Cleric&quot; are all the clerical templates and powers and stuff, which is much more useful for most real play scenarios.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It contains content from all Paizo books including softcovers, and some third party publishers as well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;FAQ items, dev threads, etc. are linked in context so you can get more/better information around a confusing/contentious topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has Paizo IP stripped out, but often links over to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pathfindercommunity.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.pathfindercommunity.net/&lt;/a&gt; for definitions and also embeds the real terms in their search (so you can search on &quot;Champion of Irori&quot; and up comes the bowdlerized &quot;Champion of the Enlightened&quot;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has started using excessive ads and weird popups that cause performance and loading problems. 13 banner ads on the home page? Come on guy, ask for donations or something, that's ridiculous.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26207/is-there-any-objective-reason-to-favour-d20pfsrd-over-the-paizo-prd&quot;&gt;Is there any objective reason to favour d20PFSRD over the Paizo PRD?&lt;/a&gt; on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T20:27:32.723" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3279" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-22T12:44:05.977" Score="2" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was in a normal (no bounty) question, clicked through to a &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12637/a-ranger-build-that-is-close-to-tier-3-classes?rq=1&quot;&gt;general question&lt;/a&gt;, and clicked on the optimization tag to see other questions with the same tag.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Instead of a list of questions, I arrived to the empty Featured part:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  You are on the Featured tab.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The link looks exactly the same for featured and non-featured filter, this is part of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not the first time I got into Featured without wanting to, and it is quite difficoult to get out. I am not an expert in User Interaction design, but I think clicking on a tag should get me out of the &lt;em&gt;featured&lt;/em&gt; context, and show me every question with that tag, with and without a bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The interesting thing is stackoverflow.com works like this, but superuser.com works the way I would prefer. Both use the same stackexchange engine, so I assume this behavior is controlled by a flag in the settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Long story short; could we please change it so that clicking on tags of featured questions show &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; questions with that tag, with or without a bounty?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stackoverflow.com has nearly 400 featured questions at the moment, it makes sense to be able to filter them with tags.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;If I recall correctly, we had 3 at a time at its peak, 0 at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-02-21T16:47:12.063" Title="site design: hijacked into the bounty section" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3277" CreationDate="2014-01-22T16:03:37.207" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Paizo site is more accurate, but d20PFSRD is easier to navigate and search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, there's &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; word salad on d20PFSRD:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;An alchemist can create three special types of magical items—extracts, bombs, and mutagens are transformative elixirs that the alchemist drinks to enhance his physical abilities—both of these are detailed in their own sections below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cross-referencing with Paizo's site, &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/baseClasses/alchemist.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; is how the same paragraph reads there:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;An alchemist can create three special types of magical items—extracts, bombs, and mutagens. Bombs are explosive splash weapons, and mutagens are transformative elixirs that the alchemist drinks to enhance his physical abilities—both of these are detailed in their own sections below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it looks like a case of the d20PFSRD transcriber omitting a line, but that line's &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; missing, and that missing line hampers understanding. Thus if it's &lt;em&gt;important&lt;/em&gt; go with Paizo for accuracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2014-01-22T16:03:37.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3281" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3284" CreationDate="2014-01-22T22:06:00.287" Score="11" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I tried to flag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31792/how-does-one-keep-up-a-poker-face&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31792/how-does-one-keep-up-a-poker-face&lt;/a&gt; as “Definitely off topic: Probably Board-Gaming related (maybe not even that)”. Unfortunately, when flagging as off-topic, the only options are &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about video games are off-topic here, but can be asked on Arqade.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about the development of video games are off-topic here, but can be asked on the Game Development Stack Exchange.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This question belongs on another site in the Stack Exchange network  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It belongs on meta.rpg.stackexchange.com – discussion, support, and feature requests for this site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no generic “Definitely off-topic, but I don't know where it would belong” option, and it would also be nice to add options for the three other Stack Exchange sites I have often seen migration suggestions to, so I would expand this list by:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about fictional settings are generally off-topic here (unless the setting is nearly exclusively a role playing setting) and should be asked on &lt;a href=&quot;http://scifi.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions concerning historical settings should be asked on &lt;a href=&quot;http://history.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;History Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about board and card games are off-topic here, but can be asked on &lt;a href=&quot;http://boardgames.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This question is very similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3264/migration-flags-should-be-more-general-than-questions-about-computer-based-game&quot;&gt;https://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3264/migration-flags-should-be-more-general-than-questions-about-computer-based-game&lt;/a&gt;, I stole the title from there, but since that one is marked as &lt;code&gt;status-completed&lt;/code&gt;, Thunderforge suggested asking this as a new question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5843" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:24:47.850" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:24:47.850" Title="Migration flags should be more general than “questions about video games”" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|flagging|video-games|migration|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3281" CreationDate="2014-01-23T13:59:28.237" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The totally generic &quot;this is just generally off topic&quot; close reason is already accounted for. Those of us with the privilege to cast close votes get this handy option for a close reason:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MX4wQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Among the off-topic close reasons is one reason which is simply named: Other (add a comment explaining what is wrong). There&amp;#39;s a text entry box prefilled with the words &amp;quot;This question appears to be off-topic because it is about&amp;quot; - and the rest is left for us to fill in.&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and we get to say basically anything in there, then cast the close vote. What we write in there becomes a comment on the question, and becomes an actual close reason for that question that people can vote for!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's exactly how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31792/how-does-one-keep-up-a-poker-face#comment63013_31792&quot;&gt;gomad's comment&lt;/a&gt; came to be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question appears to be off-topic because it is about a board game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's what the question was closed for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Other close vote reasons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are good requests for well-chosen off topic categories, with one modification: I'd expand the history one to generically state that real-world topics are only acceptable here if an RPG expert would provide better/different/more specific asker than, say, a Historian or Geographer. That is basically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our criteria for real-world topics&lt;/a&gt; - see the quote box halfway down. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, though: there isn't a huge need for them, and as far as I'm aware, close reasons aren't added lightly - it takes work on behalf of the mods and SE team both to add and adjust them, so it's done when it's super necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Video game questions are our most common class of off topic question, but even those we only get once every month or two. Other kinds of off topic questions are much rarer, and for now - until one of them becomes much more common - we can completely make do with the &lt;em&gt;Other&lt;/em&gt; field I mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that basis, I'm not sure there's a strong need for them to be added - yet! But until then, you can bet people with close vote privileges will swoop in on these questions we don't have a better off topic reason for, and vote to close them with a custom reason. We don't get a huge number of questions here, so every question gets many eyes on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-01-23T13:59:28.237" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3283" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3285" CreationDate="2014-01-23T16:52:00.440" Score="3" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;For some questions, when I try to flag for closing due to off-topicness, I get three options, one of them with one sub-option:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about video games are off-topic here, but can be asked on Arqade.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about the development of video games are off-topic here, but can be asked on the Game Development Stack Exchange.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This question belongs on another site in the Stack Exchange network &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;belongs on meta.rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31869/unhate-able-villians&quot;&gt;Unhate-able Villains&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31836/how-do-i-adapt-enemies-to-the-current-partys-level&quot;&gt;How do I adapt enemies to the current party&amp;#39;s level?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31791/what-are-the-major-innovations-in-dungeon-world-compared-to-dd-3-5-pf-4e&quot;&gt;What are the major innovations in Dungeon World compared to D&amp;amp;D 3.5/Pf/4e?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31783/call-of-cthulhu-6th-or-7th-edition&quot;&gt;Call of Cthulhu 6th or 7th edition?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31822/legend-of-the-five-rings-jiujitsu-alternate-rules&quot;&gt;Legend of the Five Rings Jiujitsu Alternate Rules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31794/what-is-gm-dm-fiat&quot;&gt;What is &amp;quot;GM/DM Fiat?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31812/what-stops-you-attempting-to-cast-minor-and-significant-formula-spells-repeatedl&quot;&gt;What stops you attempting to cast minor and significant formula spells repeatedly until you succeed?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31327/what-adventures-lie-in-laketown-from-the-hobbit-in-the-one-ring&quot;&gt;What adventures lie in Laketown from The Hobbit in The One Ring&lt;/a&gt;, )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some questions I get only the first of these two options (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6704/one-sheet-savage-worlds-adventures-do-they-only-require-the-core-rules&quot;&gt;One-sheet Savage Worlds adventures: do they only require the core rules?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/584/how-do-i-create-a-great-fantasy-villain&quot;&gt;How do I create a great fantasy villain that inspires the party to rally against them?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28479/my-friends-and-i-are-new-to-rpgs-and-need-a-system-i-can-dm-and-they-can-pick-up/28570#28570&quot;&gt;My friends and I are new to RPGs and need a system I can DM and they can pick up. Suggestions?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6212/how-do-you-help-players-not-focus-on-the-rules&quot;&gt;How do you help players not focus on the rules?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/445/from-dd3-5-to-gurps&quot;&gt;From D&amp;amp;D3.5 to GURPS&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An option to tell people with closing vote privileges some arbitrary new reason I (Option “Other (add a comment explaining what is wrong)” as third option) I only get on my own questions, where it counts as a close vote, and not just a flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is that, and is it supposed to be like that? What's the problem with letting people flag off-topic questions that are not video games questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5843" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Off-Topic Flagging options vary with the questions" Tags="|support|vote-to-close|flagging|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3281" CreationDate="2014-01-23T17:42:09.543" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;doppelgreener covers the general stuff well, but doesn't mention why there are such a dearth of migration options for flag-privilege users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, StackExchange hates question migration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's good reason for the hate. Often, questions are off topic because they're about the wrong subject, but they're &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; off topic on the target site. In the past these have been migrated, closed by the target site, and then the target site's users have more-or-less politely told the migrating site's users not dump their garbage on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since migration flags were almost always wrong and justified migrations were so rare, they're now the exclusive province of the mods, and removing the almost-never-useful flag options improved the workflow of the site. The only migration options that were retained were ones where the flaggers/voters would usually be right, which is to the site's own Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-01-23T17:42:09.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3283" CreationDate="2014-01-23T17:51:04.553" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Off-topic decisions that don't fall into the &quot;obvious&quot; categories (&quot;it should have been posted to meta&quot;, &quot;it's about videogames&quot;) aren't entrusted to flag-privilege users, that's all. Erroneous flags are something the system aims to avoid, and it's judged that on a healthy SE there are always sufficient active close-privileged users to take care of any off-topic question that isn't in the really-obvious categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, there is always the general flagging option: &quot;This requires moderator attention&quot;. You can use that for anything, so you're hands aren't completely tied just for the lack of close-privileges, and the &quot;bothering the mods&quot; aspect to that option (in theory) keeps it from generating too many erroneous flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason why some show migration options under &quot;off topic&quot; and some don't, is because there is a 60-day limit on migration. Questions older than 60 days are too old to migrate. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/156257/explain-why-a-60-day-old-post-cant-be-migrated-when-voting-off-topic&quot;&gt;There used to be a notice to this effect if you tried&lt;/a&gt;, but that notice appears to have been lost in the transition from the old set of close reasons to the new set.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-01-25T03:14:28.107" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3266" CreationDate="2014-01-26T23:34:26.327" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a useless tag. Its meaning is too varied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historically, I think it was added as a placeholder for tags of infrequently asked-about games, something that could stick around when the game's actual tag vanished when StackExchange cleaned it away due to apparent rarity and disuse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's just get rid of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastEditorUserId="307" LastEditDate="2014-01-31T06:13:41.480" LastActivityDate="2014-01-31T06:13:41.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3287" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-27T18:27:42.407" Score="2" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/32012/4089&quot;&gt;How do spells work in D&amp;amp;D Essentials Starter kit?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen some answers rolled back because the copyright wasn't owned. Ultimately all one would do to go around this example, though, would be to type out the relevant line -- still copying the information although less of it (probably).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2770/4089&quot;&gt;Links to &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Tools&amp;quot; / dndtools.eu and similar sites&lt;/a&gt; in the sense that we're facing the same issue in a different way (which I'm still seeing plenty of links to that source).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-04-03T11:34:51.883" Title="Copying Potentially Copyrighted Images" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3287" CreationDate="2014-01-27T20:09:05.457" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;While copyright issues on sites like StackExchange are always thorny because of the international audience, the copyright laws I'm familiar with include provisions for Fair Use, which include criticism, commentary or teaching - which I think most questions on RPG.SE fall under. As Joshua Aslan Smith says, as long as you're only quoting the specific bits you're asking about, it's probably reasonable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A somewhat different issue, however, is whether it is whether posting the &lt;em&gt;images&lt;/em&gt; of the power cards falls under Fair Use. Personally, I believe that as long as the question is about the &lt;em&gt;power&lt;/em&gt; and not the &lt;em&gt;card&lt;/em&gt;, posting the image isn't justified when the text alone would suffice, and be more search engine- and accessiblity-friendly to boot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastActivityDate="2014-01-27T20:09:05.457" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3287" CreationDate="2014-01-27T23:32:56.160" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Images that we might want to use here are almost always going to be copyright violations that have no Fair Use protection, since using an image simply as an informational reference isn't protected by Fair Use. Other transformative uses like parody, that are protected, just don't apply to our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a rule of thumb, quoting a complete &quot;item&quot; is going beyond Fair Use, because it no longer requires the reader to have access to a legit copy in order to use it and benefit financially (by not having to buy the book/subscription). Such uses are very unlikely to be covered by Fair Use since they are more than necessary. A quote should always be the very minimum necessary for clarity. Generally, it can be assumed that both asker and answerer have access to the text and should use citations to refer to it, to avoid quoting anything. When quoting is absolutely necessary to make it clear what is being discussed, a very small extract is all that is &quot;necessary&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This only applies to copyrighted material that we can't use under license, of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-01-27T23:32:56.160" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3291" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-29T01:45:04.410" Score="26" ViewCount="552" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta is where consensus happens.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions and answers have to be good questions and answers without requiring &quot;context&quot; from chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any Stack Exchange site has three realms for interaction: Main, Meta, and Chat.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Main is where the business of the site happens, in our case we ask and answer questions about Role Playing games&lt;sub&gt;as defined in help&lt;/sub&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta is where we talk about the operation of the site, and come to agreements about how it works.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chat is where we ... chat?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat is great for some things, generally extended discussions about questions and answers (especially questions that may be too broad, unclear, or subjective for the main site), and general socializing.  However it is not a panacea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat isn't a great place for establishing site consensus for the site for several reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;While permanent, it's not easy to refer to a specific canonical decision.  Bookmarked conversations help, but unrelated chatter can obscure the message, and they can be created deceptively.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are temporally localized.  There might be consensus for 30 minutes, and that change later on.  Also to participate a user has to be able to get on chat during the times the discussions are going on, which not all of us can.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chat doesn't have the tools meta does for managing consensus.  Stars aren't voting and there are no special tags.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta is the official place to establish consensus and discuss the site.  If that's where people are going to look for those discussions that's where we should have those discussions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Perhaps most importantly, chat gets a small subset of our user base, and a smaller subset at any given time.  We have an active user base (based on a quick look at voters) of about 100.  The main chat user base seems to be about 10, and some of those aren't active site users (surprisingly to me).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, Meta is the place for site consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As previously mentioned chat is a great place for extended discussions about questions and answers, but this can sometimes create a integration problems main site (I welcome a better phrase).  A question becomes a hot topic in chat, and because of chat consensus the main site activity changes in a way that doesn't make sense &lt;em&gt;on the main site&lt;/em&gt;.  The two most common ways this seems to happen are edits and duplicate questions. An edit problem happens a question is refined based on input and discussion from chat, to be a different question than it was originally.  The duplicate problem happens when hours of good conversation and debate in chat can pull out a nuance that seems to beg to be asked, but to those who weren't in on the conversation, it just looks like a duplicate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are we asking you to do?  Always consider contributions to the main site from the perspective of the main site.  Questions and answers have to stand on their own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-09-21T04:10:45.987" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T04:10:45.987" Title="The role of chat at RPG Stack Exchange" Tags="|discussion|chat|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3291" CreationDate="2014-01-29T14:51:46.760" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often, a question is improved through feedback given in comments. In this case, the context of the change is clear, since it's right there in the comments next to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of that, perhaps a solution to the problem would be to post the gist of a Chat discussion as a comment, to have the summary next to the question. Of course, this isn't enforceable, but as a general guideline or recommendation for chatters, it might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastActivityDate="2014-01-29T14:51:46.760" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3295" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-01-30T18:40:28.920" Score="11" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;I almost created a tag for legal or copyright issues when making the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/32118/what-guides-and-resources-exist-for-creating-custom-classes-in-dungeon-world&quot;&gt;What guides and resources exist for creating custom classes in Dungeon World?&lt;/a&gt;, but held off because I figured it was better to discuss it on meta first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that any actual direct legal advice or questions fall outside of the scope of RPG.SE, but I was wondering if legal questions related to publishing aspects of different RPGs (such as creating content for them) would fall under our scope, and if so, why not create a tag to bind these questions together?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument against would be each system having its own unique guidelines and choices by the publisher. The argument for in my mind is to group questions about copyright and legal use together so anyone looking for issues related to RPGs and that could easily get a broad swath of related questions across multiple systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should there be a tag for legal/copyright-related questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-16T19:58:23.193" LastActivityDate="2021-04-16T19:58:23.193" Title="Should there be a tag for legal/copyright-related questions?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|copyright|legal-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3295" CreationDate="2014-01-30T19:24:22.707" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Such questions are clearly related to one another. Assuming they are valid questions in the first place (and we have had a few that seemed popular and acceptable), it makes sense to have a tag to tie them together. That answers may differ depending on system is... completely irrelevant? to its validity as a tag; after all, most every tag is going to be answered very differently in different systems, since systems do things differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-01-30T19:24:22.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3297" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3432" CreationDate="2014-02-01T00:54:49.257" Score="33" ViewCount="519" Body="&lt;p&gt;On every question (correctly) tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, somebody comes along and leaves a comment reminding answer's how to address the question properly. To make this more permanent than the ephemeral comments, RPG.SE mods should request a permanent banner be set up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, Physics.SE uses these on book-recommendation questions, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5243/6634&quot;&gt;Shog's answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this edit is mostly just to bump the activity to the front page. It would appear that the answer by SevenSidedDie is a minor tweak on the wording in my answer and the difference in votes between the two could just be attributed to age (mine came first). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore -- in order to resolve this question and move on, I'll give it another day or so for comments for/against and I will accept SevenSidedDie's answer. Any objections or further discussion, leave a comment or pick it up in chat and let's finish this off!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6048" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:54.710" LastActivityDate="2014-04-07T14:51:04.880" Title="Permanent banner for game-recommendation tag" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3277" CreationDate="2014-02-03T07:54:40.240" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I'd say go with the PRD as the definitive source, due to the fact both sites are constantly in flux.  There is no guarantee that either will say tomorrow what they say at the time you link them, and the publishers of the game obviously take precedence in the event of any differences or revisions. There's also the more academic correctness of citing a primary source when you have one available as opposed to the secondary (&quot;citing something that's citing something else&quot;) - and I mean that purely in terms of the academic terminology referring to sources and in no way as a slight to d20pfsrd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I use both for everyday use, but I use d20pfsrd more as a useful tool to locate what I'm looking for, then switch to the PRD to get the official text and to provide links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the event of d20pfsrd actually providing a more detailed answer to a question, I'd be tempted to actually cite both.  That way you have a link to what you're referencing to back up your answer plus a link to the official version for reference by future readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9293" LastActivityDate="2014-02-03T07:54:40.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3299" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-02-03T09:17:30.217" Score="0" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;I first noticed in a chat message I sent yesterday but now it's more irritatingly present in a comment: something's up with formatting on messages? There's also a question I read today (perhaps elsewhere on the meta) where a user attempted to input italics but it would not let them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Link](rpg.stackexchange.com/tour)&lt;/code&gt; is correct, yes? Yet when I tried that moments ago it only spat out the code. No link :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4089" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2014-06-28T06:41:44.057" LastActivityDate="2014-06-28T06:41:44.057" Title="Format errors in Stack Exchange syntax?" Tags="|support|comments|chat|formatting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3299" CreationDate="2014-02-03T09:54:25.120" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;In chat, sticky returns (manual line breaks to make a second paragraph in the same chat entry) break most code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And all links need http:// or they won't process as links at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-02-03T22:23:49.940" LastActivityDate="2014-02-03T22:23:49.940" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3301" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6343" CreationDate="2014-02-03T13:33:55.117" Score="12" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;In comments,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[help]&lt;/code&gt; expands to the text &lt;em&gt;help center&lt;/em&gt; (with a link),&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; expands to the text &lt;em&gt;Role-playing Games Chat&lt;/em&gt; (with a link),&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[edit]&lt;/code&gt; becomes a link to edit the current question, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; does nothing at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="939" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-07T21:45:12.880" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T21:45:12.880" Title="Could we have a [tour] short link in comments?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|comments|tour|magic-links|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3301" CreationDate="2014-02-03T13:36:13.577" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The [about] quick link goes to the tour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-02-03T13:49:05.627" LastActivityDate="2014-02-03T13:49:05.627" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3303" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3299" CreationDate="2014-02-04T05:09:19.827" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Link](rpg.stackexchange.com/tour)&lt;/code&gt; is correct, yes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, it's not. You need a &lt;code&gt;http://&lt;/code&gt; in there: &lt;code&gt;[Link](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Broken version (no http): Link&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Working version (with http): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This won't work in a chat message with a line break in it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any chat message with a line break in it becomes special in a couple of ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They contain a &lt;em&gt;much higher&lt;/em&gt; character limit than normal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Markdown doesn't work in them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There may also be other ways I'm not aware of.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception to #2 seems to be the inclusion of a quote mark (&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;) at the beginning of your message, which turns the whole thing into a quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Message replies (&lt;code&gt;:0123457689&lt;/code&gt;) and user pings (@LitheOhm) still work since they're not part of markdown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-02-04T05:09:19.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2014-02-07T17:20:32.090" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://howderek.com/projects/diediedie/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4cJb2.png&quot; alt=&quot;DieDieDie: an advanced die roller for the modern web&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7653" LastActivityDate="2014-02-07T17:20:32.090" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-02-07T17:20:32.090" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3305" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3306" CreationDate="2014-02-10T10:36:31.590" Score="2" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some questions can be answered objectively, so the answers are either right, or wrong.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5580/&quot;&gt;In this case&lt;/a&gt; 3 are wrong, and mine is right. &#xA;The votes do not reflect this however, you have to read all answers carefully to realize this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have downvoted all other answers, what else can I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-02-12T03:21:43.437" Title="Is there a way to remove wrong answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3305" CreationDate="2014-02-10T11:09:38.760" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you believe that upvoted or accepted answers to a question are wrong (or perhaps outdated, as the answers to the linked question are all over two years old), you can do several things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can downvote them, an option you've already explored.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can comment on them, explaining why you believe them to be wrong or outdated. The user who wrote the answer will be automatically notified of your comment, and if convinced, will modify or remove their answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can go on Chat and attempt to convince people that these answers are wrong, and should be downvoted. Downvoting is the primary mechanism on StackExchange to differentiate wrong answers from right, and if those answers really are wrong, many on the site will be glad to improve the quality of answers provided, and downvote the incorrect answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you believe the accepted answer is wrong, you can comment on the original question, or on the wrong answer while @mentioning the original asker, urging him to reconsider and trying to explain why he's chosen a wrong answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What you &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; do is Flag the answers for moderator attention. Moderators are not arbiters of correct or incorrect &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt;. Moderators keep the site running, erase spam and abusive content, deal with malcontents, and in general (to quote the FAQ) &quot;are there to deal with those exceptional conditions that could otherwise disrupt the community&quot;. They can't, and &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; erase content that is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;. That is the community's job.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these actions should, of course, be taken in a polite and reasoned manner. Going around shouting &quot;I'm right, you're wrong&quot; won't win you any points in getting your message across. Our goal here is to have good answers to good questions. If you an just convince an answerer to fix his &quot;almost true but slightly wrong or out of date&quot; answer, especially to a two year old question, you'll probably be doing the site the biggest service.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="3043" LastEditDate="2014-02-10T11:16:22.547" LastActivityDate="2014-02-10T11:16:22.547" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3307" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3308" CreationDate="2014-02-11T14:28:50.693" Score="3" ViewCount="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;The uploaded picture on my profile is not aligned correctly. When first set, the picture is in the correct position, but after refreshing the page it shifts to the right.  If I use a gravatar it aligns correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This occurs in firefox, chrome and internet explorer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a link to my profile (this occurs on both meta and the main site)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10365/alex&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10365/alex&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a screenshot of what it looks like&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WPRXc.png&quot; alt=&quot;wrongly aligned profile picture&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user10365" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-02-11T15:08:19.480" Title="Uploaded picture alignment issue" Tags="|bug|status-completed|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3307" CreationDate="2014-02-11T15:08:12.433" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for reporting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is fixed in the next build (rev 2014.2.11.1362).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7976" LastActivityDate="2014-02-11T15:08:12.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3295" CreationDate="2014-02-11T22:18:38.983" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Legal issues for RPG's are quite different from those relating to fair use/etc for most other content that laymen commonly encounter - music&amp;amp;video. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it would make sense for such questions to be on exactly this sub-site of SE, and a separate tag as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2039" LastActivityDate="2014-02-11T22:18:38.983" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3305" CreationDate="2014-02-12T01:29:13.240" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;No - because the community determines who's right and who's wrong. Usually the person who wants others' answers removed is not necessarily in the right. If you are really right, your answer will rise to the top - by definition, if it doesn't, the other experts on this site don't consider it the most right.  Everyone who posts an answer thinks they're right and others are wrong, but here we use the democratic method to determine objective truth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;lisardggY points out the other recourses available to you, but of course, as you've discovered, it's still subject to the larger community's opinion on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-02-12T03:21:43.437" LastActivityDate="2014-02-12T03:21:43.437" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3311" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3312" CreationDate="2014-02-12T10:58:57.290" Score="5" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;I logged on and found I had an alert about a comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/comments/65924?noredirect=1&quot;&gt;Can I use &quot;Called Shot&quot; with burst fire?&lt;/a&gt;, which I had put an answer and some comments for. This comment alert was explicitly addressed to me (first word was my username), but upon clicking the comment I find the question has been removed for reasons of moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I don't know if I've done something wrong in my answering or commenting on the question, or whether some other aspect of the question was an issue, but it would help if I could read the comment that had been posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I even be alerted to a comment I can't actually read due to question removal? If so, shouldn't I be able to read the comment in its entirety, rather than the few words afforded in the recent inbox messages alert?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10268" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-02-12T11:07:33.773" Title="Reading comments to deleted questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3312" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3311" CreationDate="2014-02-12T11:07:33.773" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;That question was deleted because the querent asked for it. You had put in a large amount of work into your answer, and so I was encouraging you to post a question to which your answer was appropriate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, your rep isn't high enough to see deleted things which presents something of a quandary. If you have the research elsewhere, everything's golden. If you don't, I'm willing to undelete for 15 minutes for you to rescue your work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-02-12T11:07:33.773" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3313" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3315" CreationDate="2014-02-13T03:30:15.487" Score="12" ViewCount="871" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we need to do something about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12534/vow-of-poverty-overpowered-or-underpowered&quot;&gt;Vow of Poverty, overpowered or underpowered&lt;/a&gt;. Is it an essentially acceptable question? Yes. Has it attracted some good answers? Absolutely. The problem is that every Tom, Dick, &amp;amp; Fistbeard Beardfist that wanders past feels the need to chip in with their two cents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite being protected it continues to accumulate answers. Excluding system-recommendation questions, very &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; few questions on this site merit 10 answers, and this one &lt;strong&gt;definitely&lt;/strong&gt; doesn't. One of the old close reasons was something along the lines of &quot;likely to generate excessive discussion&quot;; this question isn't just &lt;em&gt;likely&lt;/em&gt; to generate discussion, it has demonstratively done so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I see it, we have 3 options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the question open. I'm sure you can all guess how I feel about this one. As I said, though, it is technically a legitimate question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Close the question. The disadvantage of this approach is that even if that's the consensus here, people who aren't aware of whatever gets decided here in meta may notice that it's a legitimate question and re-open it, which brings us right back to where we started.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One of our moderators could lock the question. The problem with this approach (unless I'm misinformed, which is certainly possible), is that the question &amp;amp; its answers can no longer receive votes once the question is locked. As I said, the question is (on technical merits) a valid and even good question. Several of the answers are also quite good.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do people feel about this? I'm sick of seeing that question at the top of the active list every month or two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-02-13T06:12:13.317" Title="It's time for a &quot;War on Poverty&quot;" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3313" CreationDate="2014-02-13T03:44:11.343" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Option 2: close, but with a comment leading to this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The page is producing more work than it's worth. Countless man-hours to review and prune, and even more citizen energy being devoted to ultimately-deleted debates when they could be focusing on more positive site activity elsewhere. Regardless of its original intent the thing has turned into troll bait, a black hole of limited site resources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Close it, and leave a comment linking back to this page discussing the decision. That way anyone who votes to re-open without broaching the subject on meta can be easily led back here by the nose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-02-13T03:44:11.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3313" CreationDate="2014-02-13T05:44:02.143" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've locked it, because the historical significance lock &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; correct. Using &quot;on hold&quot; is not the right tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will link back to this meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the question as phrased is too broad and soliciting argument (as we can see.) If the question was &quot;is the vow of poverty right for this specific group (details, details, details)&quot; that's something that I'd be more inclined to not nuke from orbit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-02-13T06:12:13.317" LastActivityDate="2014-02-13T06:12:13.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3316" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-02-15T08:07:59.083" Score="2" ViewCount="34" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4.matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4.matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4.matrix&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4-matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4-matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4-matrix&lt;/a&gt;, creating the latter in the process? (Or just retag all the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4.matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4.matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4.matrix&lt;/a&gt; questions)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The former doesn't follow our tag convention. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1667/1204&quot;&gt;There is no reason it uses the dot&lt;/a&gt;, other than at some point a bunch of tags used the dot and now they don't. (Turns out I asked about this myself over a year ago; this time I'm making the actual request!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-02-15T15:46:30.110" Title="Retag [sr4.matrix] to [sr4-matrix]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3316" CreationDate="2014-02-15T08:09:28.350" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your wish is my command... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-02-15T08:09:28.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3319" CreationDate="2014-02-15T19:12:49.160" Score="56" ViewCount="4704" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, someone asks a question that seems like it might suffer from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY Problem&lt;/a&gt; (asking about your attempted solution instead of your actual problem) and you want to point that out.  Or you feel that something about the question frame makes answering the question invalid and the only tenable answer is &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mu&lt;/a&gt;. Or, you just strongly disagree with something they're doing as revealed in the question and wish to challenge its frame. How do we do that in a constructive manner within the RPG.SE format?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:31:48.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:31:48.327" Title="How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?" Tags="|discussion|faq|questions|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3318" CreationDate="2014-02-15T19:21:12.613" Score="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it is really a case of asking about the solution instead of the problem, it's OK to leave comments of the form &quot;Can you state the real problem you're trying to solve so we can suggest alternate solutions?&quot; or similar requests for more information (if it's relevant/needed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in some cases there is already a solution domain chosen and that's OK. Comments like &quot;you shouldn't do that&quot; are not welcome or on topic. There are a lot of different gaming styles out there and different game systems, and critique of those in comments is not a legitimate use of comments on this site. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; for more on comment use here. Comments like &quot;you shouldn't try to do X in your game&quot; or &quot;you shouldn't use system X for that&quot; will be deleted per that policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You need to be careful when challenging the frame of a question - the line between that and threadcrapping can be a narrow one. You should:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Provide your critique as part of an otherwise legitimate answer. This isn't strictly required, but we &lt;em&gt;very strongly recommend it.&lt;/em&gt; Sometimes declining to answer the question and instead going straight to a frame challenge &amp;mdash; e.g. &amp;ldquo;don't do that at all&amp;rdquo; &amp;mdash; is the right answer, but it's also risky and liable to backfire. This is a judgement call for the author and voters to handle. In most cases you should spend more time answering the question than in challenging it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do it carefully and support your challenge - &quot;I prefer different things&quot; is not really a good reason, remember this isn't a forum and the goal of the site is to solve people's problems, not to wave our own personal freak flag around.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't get upset if you get voted down because the community thinks you overstepped your bounds. You know you're taking a risk by doing it instead of just answering their question. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don’t just &lt;em&gt;say&lt;/em&gt; you’re “challenging the frame” or “this is a frame challenge”. For every RPG Meta insider who knows what that means, you just confused a hundred regular users and a few thousand non-user readers from Google who don’t understand what you just said. Saying you’re frame challenging isn’t a replacement for actually challenging the frame. Don’t say it: do it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to provide an example of an answer following this guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33660/5th-level-optimized-fighter-ranger-builds-for-3-5-pathfinder/33683#33683&quot;&gt;5th level optimized Fighter/Ranger builds for 3.5/Pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;, where we had started to get comments questioning the asker's intent to introduce optimization to his game. I agreed with those sentiments, so made an answer that answers the question but brings up the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOOTKA0aGI0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;violence inherent in the system&lt;/a&gt;&quot; as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also remember sometimes you can see the XY problem everywhere because you can always recur up an additional level of generality. &quot;Well your real problem is using system X in the first place,&quot; &quot;Well your real problem is liking immersion/charop/whatever in the first place...&quot; These aren't really the XY problem.  If you want to tell someone e.g. they &quot;can't roleplay in D&amp;amp;D&quot; and should pick a different game system - well, you're wrong, but otherwise, you should make some suggestions to that end (&quot;I've had more success with evoking the mood you're looking for in other games&quot;) as a rider on an answer about how to actually accomplish their stated goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also note that if the question asker specifically addresses your concern proactively, you are pretty much off topic. People legitimately disagree, and you are not helping the person if you are going down a path they have explicitly stated as off topic.  For example, in my question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6212/how-do-you-help-players-not-focus-on-the-rules&quot;&gt;How do you help players not focus on the rules?&lt;/a&gt;, I proactively noted that I understood not everyone wants that playstyle but that is not relevant and I want answers from that frame. Of course, if a questioner asks a question and rules out what everyone considers to be the sensible paths - then they get no good answers, and they reap what they sow. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-08-21T00:02:05.953" LastActivityDate="2018-08-21T00:02:05.953" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3320" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-02-20T01:38:07.417" Score="9" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33894/how-i-figure-what-dice-i-need-to-attain-a-certain-curve&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was tagged with the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt;. However, I thought the term &quot;statistics&quot; were tied to attribute, ability scores, or any other numbers and traits which systematically specify the character's strength and weaknesses in RPG context, and there &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25333/questions-about-improved-familiar-advancement&quot;&gt;a question which fits this meaning&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since there is no tag wiki and there are both kinds of questions, here I present a question. What does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; tag mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it tied to &lt;em&gt;mathematical&lt;/em&gt; statistics, as the first question is tied to?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it tied to statistics &lt;em&gt;on a sheet&lt;/em&gt;, as the second question is tied to?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it supposed to mean something else, or a combination of multiple candidates?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10403" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-02-20T04:21:11.780" Title="What is the exact meaning of [statistics]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3321" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3320" CreationDate="2014-02-20T01:59:16.273" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The math kind. You could contribute to clarification by submitting a tag wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have [probability] too which is somewhat redundant with that...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &quot;character stats&quot; - if that's even a valid tag, and I'm not really sure it is - we could put in something else, perhaps [ability-scores], but I am not sure it's really a valid tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-02-20T01:59:16.273" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3320" CreationDate="2014-02-20T02:57:18.210" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose we make a tag synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/probability&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;probability&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;probability&lt;/a&gt; and take it off entirely from questions that don't fit (they can probably just have the relevant system tags, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-creation&lt;/a&gt; or whatever else).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2014-02-20T04:21:11.780" LastActivityDate="2014-02-20T04:21:11.780" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3323" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3325" CreationDate="2014-02-21T16:09:27.040" Score="6" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the wealth of RPG systems and questions that can be given more flavor from answering a non rules lawyering question....Is it alright or just frowned upon to answer from a similar systems perspective to give more options?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case in point: Ive played 4e in the past. Ive read books cover to cover in 3.5. Ive played Pathfinder, 13th age, and Dungeon World on a frequent basis. All these systems have obvious differences but some things that are broad enough or insightful enough that could be used by Rule 0 of DMing seem to garner so much dislike from 4e or 3.5e more often than not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I just ultimately ignore those tags and not answer questions within since they seem much more close minded and prone to immediately downvoting things? Is this a common thing for those two in particular?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10908" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:20:03.737" Title="Commonalities in Systems vs Community response" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3279" CreationDate="2014-02-21T16:47:12.063" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current site behavior is that when you switch tabs when browsing tags, the site will remember which tab you were last on amongst &lt;em&gt;newest&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;frequent&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;votes&lt;/em&gt;, etc.  The assumption is that that is your preferred navigation style and so rather than have you switch over each time, it'll just remember.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This causes issue, as has been reported several times in the past, when the &lt;em&gt;featured&lt;/em&gt; tab is the one that was last used - it will remember that tab even though the majority of tags will not actually have featured questions. To a technical point, your browsing is not being hijacked but is in fact the system doing its best to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; hijack your session and thus leaving all your browsing habits as you last left them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ideal goal is that we shouldn't tamper with the user's view preferences when they're browsing. Doing it specifically when the user is on a featured question and clicks any tag, we shouldn't force them onto any tab if they aren't wanting to be on other tabs. For this reason, I have for now marked this request as declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's thought that maybe it could be nice that if you are currently defaulting to the &lt;em&gt;featured&lt;/em&gt; tab and navigate to a tag that has no such questions (regardless of how you got there), that it should instead force you to, say, &lt;em&gt;newest&lt;/em&gt;. That would be less consistent with the rest of the navigation, but it would be less confusing. It's something to think about as an alternative solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2014-02-21T16:47:12.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3325" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3323" CreationDate="2014-02-21T16:56:41.653" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it alright or just frowned upon to answer from a similar systems perspective to give more options?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is &lt;em&gt;applicable&lt;/em&gt;, yes. Answering a 4e question with something from Pathfinder often isn't applicable as the systems are not really related. Answering a Pathfinder thing with a 3.5 thing might be, but it's better to find the Pathfinder rule itself whenever possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difficulty with this is that while there's similarities, there's also differences. You can  trip someone up by giving an answer that seems entirely correct unless you have enough system knowledge to realize it's one of the things they changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if the question is more about &quot;how should a DM handle weird situation X?&quot; or other things that aren't as rule based, your experience in similar systems is more relevant. Things like coming up with character backstory, interesting NPCs, plotlines, etc, all have universal issues across these systems and your experience applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rule 0 of DMing seem to garner so much dislike from 4e or 3.5e&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect this is where your trouble really is. Rule 0 is a useful tool, but it's very easy to use it like a hammer and treat every problem as a nail. There are lots of situations where there is a better answer than to use Rule 0, and the community has been known to respond to people throwing rule 0 as the answer to problems that have another solution with downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you were going to answer with rule 0, it'd be a good idea to provide some other alternatives first, and say &quot;if none of those will work for you, then you can use rule 0.&quot; In my experience, that type of answer tends to garner a more positive response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I try to avoid any questions that are looking directly for rules as written responses unless I can quantify it as...&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was from one of your comments. Rules As Written questions are explicitly looking for the literal written rule. If you're trying to quantify it as anything else, you're misunderstanding what is being asked. The best answers to a RAW question will quote specific rules or errata as evidence, and will not say something like &quot;we houseruled this to solve the problem.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RAW questions are &lt;em&gt;only interested in what the rules say&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-02-21T16:56:41.653" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3326" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3328" CreationDate="2014-02-23T13:38:20.397" Score="39" ViewCount="1491" Body="&lt;p&gt;For a while now, we've had answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/33764/1204&quot;&gt;like&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34138/1204&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34123/1204&quot;&gt;ones&lt;/a&gt; which fail to really answer the question on their own, but just add some extra information building on other pre-existing answers. They often even say as much: &quot;This other answer already covers everything, so let me talk about some tangential extra stuff&quot;. They're consistently from users &lt;em&gt;at least moderately experienced&lt;/em&gt; with our site, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have an expectation that answers should &lt;em&gt;always independently answer the question&lt;/em&gt;, such that if that's the &lt;em&gt;only answer&lt;/em&gt; that exists, it should still make sense and the question should still be considered answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, I've been consistently downvoting these answers and leaving comments requesting that these people &lt;em&gt;actually answer the question&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; provide the tangential stuff they want to - even if it's just a brief sentence or two and a link if they want to credit another answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I be doing this? Is there a better way to handle this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:31:33.987" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:31:33.987" Title="Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?" Tags="|discussion|faq|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3326" CreationDate="2014-02-23T15:45:23.103" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes,  you are correct.  Answers should be standalone - answers which &quot;add some thoughts&quot; to other answers within the question are not good answers.  This is what people should be using comment/edits for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-02-23T15:45:23.103" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3326" CreationDate="2014-02-23T16:39:37.567" Score="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my opinion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers should &lt;em&gt;actually answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. This is non-negotiable.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The real value of multiple answers is &lt;em&gt;different perspectives&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, really: five or ten answers just rewriting the same post are pretty worthless! All this really does is make sure the top 1-2 answers keep getting all the upvotes while all the other ones languish (because people read the ones already at the top, upvote them, and then get bored by other answers when they all seem to be repeating the same ideas).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you write an answer, it's important to have the self-discipline to ask yourself: Do I have anything truly new to add? If I'm repeating what's already been written, can I actually express it better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, though, the answer to that question is &quot;Yes, I really do have something to add! But part of my answer will be repeating someone else's and, quite frankly, no, I can't say what they've already said better than they can!&quot; So, what should you do? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Your answer should stand alone, but it's both acceptable and useful to reference other sources &amp;mdash; whether external sources or other answers &amp;mdash; for &lt;em&gt;detailed&lt;/em&gt; discussion that you can't do better yourself.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/7495/1910&quot;&gt;Here's an example from B&amp;amp;CG SE&lt;/a&gt;. I thought another poster already posted a great discussion of one facet of my answer. So I linked to his answer &lt;em&gt;and discussed it in brief&lt;/em&gt;. My answer is still intelligible even if you remove the reference, but the overall question view is cleaner because the same ideas aren't being repeated excessively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you only have a small bit you want to add to an existing answer, edit the existing answer.&lt;/strong&gt; (If you're unsure, start with comments and then make an edit once you've hashed out the idea a bit.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2014-02-23T16:39:37.567" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3297" CreationDate="2014-02-25T06:26:09.840" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note: I don't really have any strong opinions on the wording since I don't actually do anything other than lurk around reading questions. If a mod comes along and leaves a comment on this answer, I'll &quot;accept&quot; it and ping Grace Note to use the wording here. Competing wordings (unless super minor edits to this one) should probably be a separate answer so the voting can sort out what the community wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I guess since nobody has come up with the wording yet, I'll just propose that it be exactly what gets put in the comments now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Banner Wording&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to both the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; and the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/760&quot;&gt;our Meta&lt;/a&gt;. In particular, all responses should be based on actual experience and contain references and examples whenever possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6048" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-02-25T11:38:10.627" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3330" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-02-25T12:42:58.403" Score="3" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't imagine we need both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;settings&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt;. I've set up a synonym request, but if it can be magically made to happen through a meta post, why not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-02-26T01:48:18.933" LastActivityDate="2014-02-26T01:48:18.933" Title="Can we merge [settings] and [campaign-settings]?" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3331" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3332" CreationDate="2014-02-25T16:39:49.187" Score="6" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;When &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34200/game-design-process-to-create-a-white-wolf-like-setting&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question was initially posted, it was quickly closed as not being a good fit for the site. The questioner came into chat and a few of us hammered out a version edit that we thought would mean it would be acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, following the edit that we worked out it seems that there are still site users that feel it is not a good question, and it has gained three vote to closes. There is also an issue regarding which tags people think the question should have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the comments on the question are getting out of control, I thought it would be preferable to move the discussion to meta, hence this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is the question in its current format acceptable? If not then why not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-03-07T16:44:16.013" Title="White wolf setting question - ongoing comment discussion" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3331" CreationDate="2014-02-25T17:11:27.017" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, then allow me to stand for my question (not that I believe that it's bad moving it to meta, I just believe that it's format is indeed acceptable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first issue that people saw with the original version was that it's scope was broader than accepted. I failed to see that, &lt;strong&gt;but&lt;/strong&gt; I may also be failing in expressing my point of view (and I think that I dind't was that much clear anyway). So, okay, let's rephrase it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second version is really narrower, but people seems to believe that it's not enough. I ask for a process framework or guideline that the amazing folks at White Wolf may possibly have used. I don't know if there is such  a thing, and if there is not, than it's as valid a answer as any other. If no one knows, then well, that's it. An unanswered question, but not unanswerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see the issue of which tags should go along with the question as an issue at all. Maybe the correct tags don't exist, maybe that aren't popular so no one brought it up. Anyway, IMHO the  correct tag list is more a matter of housekeeping, and so is not a reason to label my question as invalid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One possible issue that has come to my mind is that this question deals more with game design than with the game itself. I believe that RPG SE covers game design &lt;em&gt;only partially&lt;/em&gt;, as this arguably one of the jobs of the DM, at least. I know that there is a limit to that coverage. Yet, I believe that setting creation is something totally in the domain of RPG SE, simply because it's so widespread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, I may be again failing to write this question in a good way. If that is so, I'm open to suggestions. And again, I don't think that it's bad to move it to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2698" LastActivityDate="2014-02-25T17:11:27.017" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3333" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3330" CreationDate="2014-02-26T01:48:10.197" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Done, I made campaign-settings the primary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-02-26T01:48:10.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3297" CreationDate="2014-02-27T06:44:05.600" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;An alternate pitch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Banner Wording:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A game recommendation question must adhere to those guidelines in the FAQ and follow the rules for subjective questions as described in Good Subjective, Bad Subjective and on the Meta. An answer to a game recommendation question must be based on personal experience playing the recommended game and, when possible, contain references to and examples from the recommended game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, if the idea is to be clear that answers must share personal experiences. If I'm mistaken, let me know, but this is the sense I've gotten based on questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30783/games-where-some-characters-can-play-as-weapons&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; wherein a moderator says, &quot;Answers that do not present personal experience here will be deleted,&quot; despite the current banner's &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; wording and the &lt;em&gt;references &lt;strong&gt;or&lt;/strong&gt; experiences&lt;/em&gt; of the Back It Up! Principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tweaked the wording a &lt;em&gt;tiny&lt;/em&gt; bit, but the issue remains. If personal experience playing the game is mandatory for a game recommendation, that &lt;em&gt;really does&lt;/em&gt; need to be clear in the banner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-03-25T14:00:09.547" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3335" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-02-27T14:31:03.690" Score="18" ViewCount="301" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should split &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; up and make it just be for actual recommendations of games. This has come up before, but hear me out, because we only need to create &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; extra tag to offload &lt;em&gt;all the other stuff&lt;/em&gt; in it that isn't recommendations of games, and we're using the tag weirdly to avoid something that isn't actually a problem after all. And the new tag isn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, which belongs in a bonfire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Recent history&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A while ago, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2711/1204&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt;, the idea came up to have a general recommendation tag. That wasn't a good idea. The &lt;em&gt;heavily&lt;/em&gt; supported idea was to have some individual &lt;em&gt;*-recommendation&lt;/em&gt; tags. mxyzplk &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2713/1204&quot;&gt;wasn't keen on&lt;/a&gt; having a whole set of recommendation tags, which is pretty reasonable!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3006/1204&quot;&gt;game-rec became the general shopping tag&lt;/a&gt; to avoid having a bunch of different recommendation tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue is though, the tag is weird and confusingly wielded, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3254/1204&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie points out&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Game recommendation&amp;quot; is meant to be read as either a recommendations &lt;em&gt;of&lt;/em&gt; games to play or recommendations &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; stuff to use with a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...No, it's not ideal semantically, but the whole issue of recommendations is full of compromises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags should be transparent in how they should be used, but we tag things that aren't recommendations of games with this tag. Theoretically it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3253/1204&quot;&gt;our generic shopping tag&lt;/a&gt;, but we also have at least one category of questions we &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; tag with game-rec, despite being recommendations for stuff to use in games: questions about props and craft. (And that's fine.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The compromise (of using the confusing tag) isn't even necessary&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went through the most recently active 200 game recommendations. If you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation+-published-adventures?sort=active&amp;amp;pageSize=50&quot;&gt;exclude [published-adventures] from the search&lt;/a&gt;, the last 200 active questions covers all game-rec questions back to the beginning of 2012. Based on those, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is used only in two consistent and regular ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; Run of the mill &amp;quot;Recommend me a game to play&amp;quot; questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; + &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; Which in combination means a published adventure recommendation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... And that's it! We also have 10 outliers in these 200:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings+game-recommendation&quot;&gt;Four&lt;/a&gt; questions that are actual campaign recommendations, without just asking for an RPG to play that fits a setting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Two rules recommendations: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/18861/1204&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12717/1204&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;. Rules recommendations usually don't come with the game-rec tag, and that's generally a good thing because the answer doesn't necessarily involve a new product. Consider our questions for: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=naval+rules+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;naval rules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aerial+rules+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;aerial rules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=mass+combat+rules+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;mass combat rules&lt;/a&gt;, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A tools rec: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/33448/1204&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;. Out of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot;&gt;77 tools questions&lt;/a&gt;, many of which involve recommendations, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation+tools&quot;&gt;only five open questions&lt;/a&gt; including that one also use the game-rec tag. One of these is an adventure recommendation. The remaining four seem to be breaking convention: the overwhelming majority of tools recommendations don't use game-rec, and these aren't asking for game recommendations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Three questions asking for comparison between three games:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/10366/1204&quot;&gt;4&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16824/1204&quot;&gt;5&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/13884/1204&quot;&gt;6&lt;/a&gt;. There's no recommendation happening here, and we don't use game-rec for our other system comparison questions. #7 might be a legitimate and run-of-the-mill game rec question, but I'm not sure - either way, it either fits the typical expected use of the game-rec tag, or doesn't need it at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(removed from this list: formerly numbered&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/15696/1204&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24856/1204&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/10745/1204&quot;&gt;5&lt;/a&gt;, which are perfectly OK run-of-the-mill game recs at a second look)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What's my point?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost every question in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag is either a recommendation for a game, or for an adventure. Of the ten outliers, the six numbered ones belong to pre-existing well established categories of questions which typically do not need or use this tag, and so these six are &lt;em&gt;breaking convention&lt;/em&gt; in using it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we use our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag weirdly to avoid creating the following tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And possibly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/setting-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;setting-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;setting-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, considering those four campaign setting recommendation questions. However, I'm not convinced these warrant their own tag, nor do they warrant overcomplicating the game-rec tag. We have multiple well established categories of questions that involve recommendations but do not need or use a recommendation tag — I've mentioned two of them (rules and tools). At a cursory look through the questions in the campaign setting tag, we already have at least a couple of campaign setting recommendation questions which do not use the game-rec tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2012, we were &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2712/1204&quot;&gt;heavily in support of *-recommendation tags&lt;/a&gt;. And there's only one (possibly two) tags that we need to create. So let's just create it - for a class of questions we've had all along - and make our game-rec tag specific to actual recommendations of games and drop this weird published-adventure/game-rec combo convention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3334/1204&quot;&gt;a permanent banner directly addressing games&lt;/a&gt; in a non-vague sense, because the game-rec tag will actually be about only one thing, instead of two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-16T00:22:48.550" Title="Let's make [game-recommendation] actually be for recommendations of games" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3297" CreationDate="2014-02-27T16:10:57.893" Score="14" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to both the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; and the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/760&quot;&gt;our Meta&lt;/a&gt;. In particular, all responses should be based on actual experience or cited references to others' experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is mostly the same text &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3329/321&quot;&gt;as in tpg2114's answer&lt;/a&gt; and that we've been using in comments to game-rec questions, but with &quot;and&quot; in the last sentence changed for &quot;or&quot; and the following words adjusted to fit that change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The change is to more accurately reflect the GSBS guidelines and its Back It Up! principle, which requires answers to be based on experience: your own &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; using references to someone else's experience. Otherwise, our banner will be more restrictive than the actual guideline we are using to explain it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-02-27T16:16:59.767" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3335" CreationDate="2014-02-28T20:30:54.430" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen this cause confusion (hence that comment of mine you quoted), and ideally we would solve that confusion. Some problems are hard to solve at all, but &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; one takes a mere single tag to solve, and that's about as cheap as an ideal solution can possibly get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-02-28T20:30:54.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3335" CreationDate="2014-03-01T10:43:33.237" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I've had a side thought, and rather than muddy the question by adding this to it, I'm proposing this in its own answer to be voted on independently. Please treat this as a separate stance to the question's, since I'm not so sure of this as I am on the question itself and it's a very different proposal.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; just about game recommendations. &lt;em&gt;However,&lt;/em&gt; contrary to the question: let's not actually create other recommendation tags. I think there actually isn't a need for it. I'll explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides recommendations for games and published adventures, we have a bunch of other categories of recommendation questions on this site: tools, online resources, rules for X in your RPG system, mechanisms for X in your larp, props, character builds, publishing services, and campaign settings (four use the game-rec tag, three don't: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8805/1204&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8770/1204&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24548/1204&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;). Some of these involve shopping, others don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Significantly, these other categories don't have their own recommendation tags - they just exist within other tags on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However... I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is a special case here, and I think that's why that tag even exists to begin with: unlike all these others, there &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; really another fitting tag for those questions to reside in! The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;games&lt;/a&gt; tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/269/1204&quot;&gt;was made redundant long ago&lt;/a&gt;, and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg&lt;/a&gt; tag would suffer the same fate. So game recommendations have some need for a recommendation tag of their own - but other kinds of recommendations don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over time, game recommendation questions also got identified as an area prone to certain problems, so it was pretty useful to have that tag to flag them as needing special attention - and now it's probably getting a permanent banner with that guidance offered perpetually.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Are there negative ramifications to this?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think so. We won't uniquely identify published adventure recommendations, but I'm not sure if there's a particular need to. They won't have a permanent banner on them either like game-rec tags will soon, not having their own tag and all. The rest of the existing recommendation categories will be unaffected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can still have a permanent banner on game-rec questions, though, which is the area that absolutely needs a message like that, given the propensity for people to say &quot;Sure, my system can probably do that.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-03-01T10:53:40.573" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3339" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-01T16:26:47.157" Score="11" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I visit SO or Workplace.SE, I see the voting as a feedback what to improve. I can see that when I put work into my post and have knowledge on the subject I get positive votes, when I make mistakes or are hasty, I get negative votes. Workplace.SE, as a more adult-oriented site has way better feedback mechanism, because people actually leave comments upon downvoting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE feels like a bunch of youths, that either like what you said, or not. This site does not convey a feeling that what you said is somehow helpful or not, but rather if you are in the &quot;in-crowd&quot; or not. If random passer-bys &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; what you said, irrespective of the actual content. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34485/post-apocalyptic-system-recommendation/34493#34493&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question as an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A single answer was upvoted 4 times. It keeps to the points and does not mention any real experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other answers were downvoted. Probably because of @mxyzplk game recommendation comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer was downvoted twice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But fact is, apart from the actual game recommended, my answer looks 1:1 like the answer that was upvoted 4 times, yet it was not upvoted once, but instead downvoted twice. Someone must have found it not only lacking real experience, but even found it worse than all others lacking it. Without any comment on how to improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leaves a feeling of helplessness. I don't know what to do. Can I improve? How? By recommending a game people &lt;em&gt;like better&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, this site does not feel like Stack Exchange quality, it feels like random votings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-03-02T18:28:22.340" Title="Voting Feedback totally screwed up compared to other SE sites" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3339" CreationDate="2014-03-01T18:06:35.020" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;At first, your answer didn't convey real experience per our site guidelines.  Then you added some, surrounded by verbiage about &quot;the trolls of RPG.SE&quot; and other hostile statements.  I'm not sure why downvotes were difficult to understand. I'm also not sure how that behavior demonstrates maturity as opposed to the &quot;bunch of youths.&quot; Since I've edited your answer to remove all the random attacks, most of the downvotes have evaporated.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want Stack Exchange quality, start by contributing it yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-03-01T18:06:35.020" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3339" CreationDate="2014-03-01T18:18:28.463" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This particular example was a compromise on keeping game-recs.  The alternative is to remove them altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At one point, they were wiki'd, because they became an opinionated list rather than anything really useful that you can't find anywhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want to see the genesis of the question and the solutions, take a look at the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2711/has-system-recommendation-grown-too-big-for-its-britches/3006#3006&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As one of the vocal mods on that thread, mxyzplk is very stringent on keeping people on point in that regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some correspondence in the comments, I understand where you are coming from a bit more.  I can't speak to everyone, but I did upvote the AW comment, and did not upvote yours, so I can speak to my reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The points in question from the question were&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules Light&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Non-Heroic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not d20&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flexible and Fluid combat system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Modern setting without anything weird.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;First, to get to your supposition that the games are the same:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Apocalypse World and Cyberpunk are indications of two different eras in game design.&lt;/strong&gt;  That rough middle patch between Roll-playing and role-playing, and the new Story game renaissance.  Based on that alone, from my experience playing, they are totally different creatures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In terms of tone,&lt;/strong&gt; Cyberpunk is more of restricted by its audience, and the fact that it was very popular commercially at one time.  So it's edge is dulled, just like Shadowrun.  It hints at an edge, but doesn't really have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In terms of interaction&lt;/strong&gt; between the players and with the environment, in Cyberpunk most of it is artificial and at the whim of the GM.  In AW, the whole game is exactly about this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;To move on to the requirements for the question:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Cyberpunk is not rules-light, and doesn't have a flexible and fluid combat system.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;my opinion&lt;/em&gt;, and informs my decision to upvote/downvote/novote.  It is where RPG.SE is different from SO and some other quantitative sites (though it comes up there too, which is the reason for the Code Review SE).  Unless you're talking about RAW, a lot of things to deal with game philosophies and views are based on opinion and experience.  And that's ok IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we end up with in regards to upvotes and downvotes in those cases is a cross section of  experiences and views on systems- which is what these questions are in the end for.  I'd never downvote an opinion.  My only reason for a downvote on this type of question are if you violate a rule.  Even then, I rare use my downvotes, preferring instead to comment.  On questions like this, because I disagree with the experience rule being an absolute ruler, I rarely downvote for not including experience, but instead upvote for it, using the downvote only in the case where someone lists a game and does nothing else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that helps.  As I said in the comments on another question, your rep indicates that a good group of people here think that your contributions are valuable.  Just don't take downvotes personally- that has helped me a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-01T18:45:05.053" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3339" CreationDate="2014-03-02T17:51:25.480" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't downvote your answer but...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&amp;quot;A gritty, fast, simple &lt;em&gt;post-apocalyptic&lt;/em&gt; system&amp;quot;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you're kinda missing the elephant in the room: &lt;strong&gt;the question asked for a &amp;quot;post-apocalyptic&amp;quot; system and you only paid lip service to delivering on that&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apocalypse World is a post-apocalyptic RPG through and through, with action rules, classes, and GM advice tailored to being the kind of thing it says on the tin. Thus, its big hurdle is meeting the other criteria, whereas it gets the &amp;quot;post-apocalyptic&amp;quot; largely for free.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cyberpunk 2020 is, out of the box, not a game of this genre. That means there's a higher bar to actually getting to pass the requirements. &lt;strong&gt;You have to &lt;em&gt;teach us&lt;/em&gt; how to make it a post-apocalyptic game, right there in your answer.&lt;/strong&gt; Or at least provide some very, very good links! Otherwise you might as well just be pitching Your Favorite Game and saying &amp;quot;Oh, I dunno, make it work!&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your entire contribution on how to make it work for the desired setting was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your setting is post-apocalyptic, pick an apocalypse of your choice to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cyberpunk 2020 is not an apocalypse game. For example it has no section on radiation, starvation or diseases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In between, there's a whole paragraph about day jobs, hospitals, and government regulations restricting access to heavy equipment — this makes it feel like it's a generic recommendation you've kinda copy-pasted rather than anything tailored to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note how the Fate Core question got downvoted hard, too, for &lt;em&gt;not saying anything substantial about &amp;quot;post-apocalyptic&amp;quot; play&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Experience in game-rec&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the stuff above is compounded by the game-rec rules:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If I've played a &amp;quot;post-apocalyptic&amp;quot; game like Apocalypse World or Twilight 2000 at all, that's direct experience related to the question's goals. Just showing familiarity with the system and an understanding of how to apply its play procedures is a good sign that I'm not just pulling stuff out of your butt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If I've played My Favorite Non-Apocalyptic System but I've never done a post-apocalyptic game with it, then, well, do I have relevant experience? Not really. So, ideally, I really should say &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; to show that I'm not just suggesting MFNAS because it's the best for everything while just handwaving my way past that annoying little &amp;quot;post-apocalyptic&amp;quot; requirement from my nice cushy armchair.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of asking for experience (does it actually work? hengh, that's a thorny question) isn't to create an arbitrary requirement to make me say &amp;quot;Oh, yes, I swear I did this for reals!&amp;quot; It's to discourage me from just spouting off something that &lt;em&gt;sounds&lt;/em&gt; good but won't stand up to further scrutiny from actual play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your &amp;quot;edit&amp;quot;, you added:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me say I played my share of &amp;quot;the world went to hell, try to survive&amp;quot; games in this system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, you have the experience! Share it! Highlight the most useful resources in the book, mention some play techniques, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-02T18:28:22.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3343" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-04T11:26:44.187" Score="8" ViewCount="271" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm asking in regards to this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/34615/1204&quot;&gt;What are the benefits of owning a physical book?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My gut feeling has me concerned this might not be suitable to ask here. It might be a primarily opinion-based matter, or a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;Gorilla vs Shark question&lt;/a&gt;, or something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My say in the matter is totally out though: I voted to close then retracted it, so I can't vote again, and I've answered, leaving me to a certain extent vouching for it being worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But my concern is still there, so I'm bringing it up here. Is this question OK, or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T11:34:14.300" Title="Is our books vs e-readers question primarily opinion based or OK?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3343" CreationDate="2014-03-04T13:09:22.113" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The one thing this question has going for it is that in the case of RPG sourcebooks, there are some objective differences between E-Readers and paper books. Primarily that the electronic versions are more searchable and updateable as things like errata are released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, it's still mostly opinion based. Anytime an answer says something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I own an ebook, and I find it more comfortable linear reading than in&#xA;  physical books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's opinion based. But the question of being updated vs being easy to use at a table, and things like the higher cost upfront of a paper book vs the cost of a subscription service like DDI for years have better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I shared your reaction to this one, and it took me a while to figure out what I think of it. Right now, IMO it's just far enough on the good side of the line to be okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-03-04T13:09:22.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3346" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3348" CreationDate="2014-03-04T17:25:00.767" Score="1" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;My group has been using the browser-based Roll20 (&lt;a href=&quot;https://app.roll20.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://app.roll20.net&lt;/a&gt;) platform pretty heavily lately. It provides voice and video chat, mapping tools, etc, and has been pretty instrumental in keeping our long-distance campaigns up and running when players end up living some distance away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm wondering whether it might be worth including a &quot;roll20&quot; tag to the main list.&lt;/em&gt; This app has a ton of neat features and I understand that they have their own boards for discussing these, but I can see a potential market for more general questions about how best to incorporate this software into your game, and how to most effectively use it to keep long-running campaigns going even if the players disperse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11039" LastActivityDate="2014-03-04T17:42:14.140" Title="Is it worthwhile to add a &quot;roll20&quot; tag to the main list?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3347" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3346" CreationDate="2014-03-04T17:40:11.960" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there are questions about Roll20, then yes. If not, then no. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are added by any user with 300 reputation, if you ask a question and don't have the tags you need, then add them. If you don't have the reputation to add them, then please either comment or flag so they can be added for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-03-04T17:40:11.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3346" CreationDate="2014-03-04T17:41:25.783" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tagging system here is emergent.  There is no master list.  You can just add new tags to your questions.  (Well, that does require 300 rep...).  Then if people use it, it'll stay, otherwise it will get auto deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-03-04T17:42:14.140" LastActivityDate="2014-03-04T17:42:14.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3343" CreationDate="2014-03-04T18:12:13.917" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that the question, as asked, is fine. The user is trying to determine what benefits are associated with paper books versus electronic ones. It's similar to someone on a music site asking what the benefits of vinyl are over CDs, or possibly more accurately, CDs versus MP3s. Some of the answers and comments, based on my entirely too faulty memory of the discussion, seem to head more toward answering a question of &quot;Why are electronic books better than paper books&quot; or vice versa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10867" LastActivityDate="2014-03-04T18:12:13.917" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3343" CreationDate="2014-03-05T01:14:41.293" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be honest, I voted to close because the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; seemed to be primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leads me to believe that the way the question itself is framed isn't really specific enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see the value in a question discussing the trade-off from a publisher's perspective, but the current version doesn't really define a use case for the information beyond &quot;Huh, why do they do this and not that?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2014-03-05T01:14:41.293" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3351" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3343" CreationDate="2014-03-06T00:04:10.997" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think the question is so opinion based, if you read it carefully. Especially, if you read this part of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So what am I missing? Why are people buying rpg rulebooks in paper format? Why are even books published(...)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This mark the question not about which is better, but what benefits do physical books have and why books are still printed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, every reason someone have to keep using physical books is objectively answering the question of why some people are still using them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As everyone that answered the question has tried physical and electronic formats, the answers are experience based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would dare to say that since the questioner has gotten an ample spectrum of reasons of why some people still use physical books, and since that was what he was looking for, the questions and the answers are working just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T00:04:10.997" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3352" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3343" CreationDate="2014-03-06T11:34:14.300" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the question is fine as it is, because it's asking for facts (&quot;what are the benefits&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8702/is-buying-game-ebooks-practical&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt;, cited as a better example, is still open and it does not get more subjective than that. If something is &lt;em&gt;&quot;too annoying&quot;&lt;/em&gt; is &lt;strong&gt;entirely&lt;/strong&gt; subjective. That one should indeed be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T11:34:14.300" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3353" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-06T14:26:13.457" Score="7" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen the case where people vote to close based on the format of the question, and suggest improvements.  Then the person edits- but perhaps one more vote is needed to close, and someone votes after the edit closing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is an edit, can we notify the close voters, and remove their close votes?  So that they have to review again and either vote to close again, or not?  (Or someone can just chime in why this is a bad idea...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2014-03-08T00:54:38.710" Title="Close votes and Edited Questions" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3353" CreationDate="2014-03-06T15:00:27.670" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This sounds like a good idea.  We already put questions up for reopen review automatically after an edit.  We should do something similar for questions edited before the last close vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T15:00:27.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3355" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-06T15:36:42.143" Score="-10" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;It annoys me that there are no tags for specific prestige classes. I have recently added a tag for the dragon disciple class. I feel that we should add tags for all of the official prestige classes of every game, but I'm unsure if that is necessary or even a good idea. Should we add these tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10516" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T16:37:08.793" Title="Is adding specific prestige classes tags necessary?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3356" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3355" CreationDate="2014-03-06T15:56:23.413" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Prestige classes for 3.5/Pathfinder are extremely specific. Tags that are too specific just clutter up the site without adding any real value. How many users are going to need to quickly access all questions related to the dragon disciple prestige class? How many questions would actually fall under that tag? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have the generalized &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; tag. I feel that it is already doing everything that is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2014-03-06T16:37:08.793" LastActivityDate="2014-03-06T16:37:08.793" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3357" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3170" CreationDate="2014-03-07T05:16:04.300" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I was surprised (not in a good way) to see that my reputation went down when I downvoted the first time.  That looks like &quot;negative experience points&quot;.  Translation: Most RPGers would assume downvoting is an action to be avoided.  &quot;In order to downvote anything, I have to hate it so much I'm willing to damage myself?  Not likely!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my money, there's your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10118" LastActivityDate="2014-03-07T05:16:04.300" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3353" CreationDate="2014-03-07T13:55:31.643" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Notifying us of updates sounds alright; I'd be willing to be a guinea pig in an experiment of how that'd work out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However... &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Absolutely do not remove our close votes!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question being edited is not in itself reason enough to suspect it no longer warrants closure. (It &lt;em&gt;certainly&lt;/em&gt; doesn't warrant removing all efforts to close it so far.) The issue here might be to ensure questions worth keeping open don't get closed, but we already have mechanisms in place to prevent that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind that close votes rely on a steady stream of people visiting the question, reading it, and voting to close it, and this process often takes a few hours, except during very active times. But the close process needs to be fast to avoid messy situations. Quoting C.Ross (emphasis added):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't have a great answer, but this is why it's important to &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;quickly&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; place questions in need of editing on hold. –  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3001/#comment5750_3001&quot;&gt;C. Ross♦ Jun 27 '13 at 12:47&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's assume a question receives three close votes, then gets edited. After that edit, there's it's either worth keeping open, or not (in the eyes of readers). New visitors will come along, and will either...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;think it's worth keeping open, and do nothing, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;think it needs closing, and vote to close it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If everyone new visiting the question thinks it's good enough, a Good Enough question is protected from closure simply by virtue of nobody else trying to close it. Otherwise, if enough people think it needs closing, it'll be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If everyone who voted prior thinks it's actually good enough now, they can vote to reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But if close votes get removed with edits, the process slows down.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's consider the scenarios again:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Scenario A: For a question that becomes good...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is fantastic at protecting those questions from closure. They're good, the old close voters think so too, new visitors think so too, everything's fine and the question stays open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Scenario B: For a question that remains needing closure...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question accumulates three close votes, then gets edited, then three new people vote to close, ordinarily it would already be closed by this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, though, it isn't: it has to wait for a further two new visitors, or for the three people originally to come back. We are not universally available people; that might be a few hours. Then the asker might edit again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each edit stretches the closing process out longer, but the question &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; needs closure. Remember, this is a scenario where the question &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; needs closure: at any point it can revert to scenario A, but for now we're sticking with Scenario B. Maybe it's an inherently opinion-based question, and no amount of editing will save it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, speaking for myself: I'd find it frustrating to have to revisit the question, and voting to close something for the second or third time that &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; needs closure. This is &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; different from coming back to review it, and only revoking my close vote when I actually think it's good enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The end results are:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that shouldn't be closed don't get closed. This will be the case almost always in the current system. Questions that get closed but wind up good enough get reopened.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that should get closed &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; get closed... but after &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; more time, and after making at least a few reviewers repeat their votes fairly often.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-03-08T00:54:38.710" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3359" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3331" CreationDate="2014-03-07T16:44:16.013" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I fail to see what is the problem with the question. I think the question is very difficult, but I don't see the harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question too vague can result in a lot of comments talking about different subjects. A question too subjective can result in flames with the responses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think those are situations which justify the question to be closed, but I can't see how the question is being a problem for RPGSE community, so I can't understand why so many people are so concerned in closing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we have to avoid losing sight of what are the purposes of our own rules, and use that rules to preserve that purposes more than treating those rules as sacred.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5624" LastActivityDate="2014-03-07T16:44:16.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3360" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-07T18:43:24.523" Score="6" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know that the Matrix differs from edition to edition of Shadowrun. It still feels quite redundant having a question tagged &quot;shadowrun-sr4 sr4-matrix&quot;. Shouldn't all the matrix tags be merged? The question would be tagged &quot;shadowrun-sr4 sr-matrix&quot; or something similar, so the system is still identified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it practical being so specific? Which case would be more common, someone looking for matrix questions without caring edition, or someone looking for specific matrix edition questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastActivityDate="2014-03-08T13:24:36.420" Title="Is sr4-matrix too specific?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3360" CreationDate="2014-03-07T19:17:44.193" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's too specific IMO. We don't have &quot;dnd3-feats&quot; and &quot;dnd3-skills&quot;, you use dnd3 + spells. All sr4-matrix questions also have shadowrun-sr4 on them so we should synonym sr4-matrix to - hmm, matrix or sr-matrix.  I favor &quot;matrix&quot; because that's the common tag usage, again not dnd-skills or d20-combat or gurps-settings...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-03-07T19:17:44.193" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3364" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3365" CreationDate="2014-03-10T10:25:16.273" Score="10" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Help Center includes the following two points for on-topic questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Techniques for running or playing RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But does that include topics on group dynamics and psychology, for example on how to treat or force groups to do certain actions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current question I have is basically the question &quot;How to force a group to choose a leader without using out of game telling&quot;. It has a certain overlap with (or even belongs on) &lt;a href=&quot;https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Cognitive Science&lt;/a&gt; but is limited to the situation a role playing party/a party of characters will find themselves in, so quite different to the real world (which Cognitive Science is about).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are such questions on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="788" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:56:17.700" LastActivityDate="2014-03-12T17:46:17.717" Title="Are questions about group dynamics/psychology on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3364" CreationDate="2014-03-10T10:33:50.333" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, depending on what you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a question situated in &quot;how did you get your groups to choose a leader?&quot; than RPG Experts can answer that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a question situated in &quot;how does the cognitive theory of &lt;a href=&quot;http://amr.aom.org/content/12/4/637.short&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;nudging&lt;/a&gt; provide a way to hint towards a group leader&quot; welllll... We're probably not the best bet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, it's about how you &lt;a href=&quot;http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frame-problem/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;frame&lt;/a&gt; your question. We certainly have questions about RPG groups and the problems they face, but they exist within our jargon and our sphere of expertise without any sort of well-controlled trials or studies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-03-10T10:33:50.333" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3364" CreationDate="2014-03-12T17:46:17.717" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. RPGs are group dynamics. The main objective is to construct an experience that fulfill the players. Some of the common problems you can face is when the group is not working, the players don't understand the DM (and viceversa), when a player is not having fun for some reasons or is uncomfortable with some topics, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am sure a psychologist could offer very interesting perspectives of these problems, but for a practical resolution its better to rely in gaming experience. In the same way a football team coach could better motivate its players than a psychologist &lt;strong&gt;most&lt;/strong&gt; of the times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception would be problems that goes beyond normal game experience and that fall into real psychological problems. i. e. A player that pathologically becomes violent during game sessions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5624" LastActivityDate="2014-03-12T17:46:17.717" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3367" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-12T23:57:01.013" Score="4" ViewCount="39" Body="&lt;p&gt;At 250 and 1000 reviews in a category, you get a badge. But if you either vote to close or reopen outside of the queue, does it still count towards this total? And if not (as I suspect at the moment), why not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T00:02:59.700" Title="Does contributing to Close/Reopen votes outside of the review queue contribute to your total?" Tags="|support|badges|vote-to-close|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3367" CreationDate="2014-03-13T00:02:59.700" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only queue that you get credit for from participating outside of the queue is the Edit Queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as the why, my guess is that it simply comes down to the fact that the queue is a specialized tool added much later than the features it tracks, so those features haven't been tied back to their respective queues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T00:02:59.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3369" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3370" CreationDate="2014-03-13T00:50:12.570" Score="14" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/34971/4398&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; appears to be asking about creating a fantasy football type of game system for rock bands. That's great. But is it on topic for us?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quick Google search will tell you that fantasy football is extremely similar to D&amp;amp;D. However, all those articles and posts are written with an agenda: trying to lift the social stigma from RPGs by comparing them to a more &quot;cool,&quot; socially-acceptable game. This means these articles are &lt;em&gt;strongly&lt;/em&gt; biased, having every reason to cherry-pick similarities and ignore whatever differences might exist between the games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fantasy football looks more like a competitive strategy game than an RPG to me, but I don't know enough about it to say that with any confidence--so I bring it to you, O Groupmind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:54:26.393" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:54:26.393" Title="Are questions about fantasy-football type games on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3369" CreationDate="2014-03-13T01:00:17.307" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Are fantasy sports on topic? No.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It goes back to the defining attributes of an RPG compared to other kinds of games: the emphasis on the shared fiction of play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fantasy sports is a game of research and strategy, akin to a more complicated version of sports betting. You pick players for your lineup, then wait for game results to figure out your hypothetical team's score. There's not even, like, a &amp;quot;session&amp;quot; really — AFAIK many people like to turn the initial draft into a party, but afterward you're just checking stats and occasionally trading with other players. You could imagine yourself as a team manager just like you can imagine yourself as a real-estate speculator in Monopoly, but this isn't a &lt;em&gt;shared&lt;/em&gt; experience and it has no impact on situations or outcomes in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Are make-believe games about [whatever] on topic? Maybe.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One could conceivably make and play a game an RPG or RPG-like game about sports or the music industry or whatever you like, of course! It's really not that weird of an idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that the site is scoped to &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&lt;/a&gt;.&amp;quot; However, as far as I know, we've been pretty permissive about &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; TRPG-adjacent stuff like freeform play-by-post and solo roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples of previous meta questions about RPG-like games:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3016/2570&quot;&gt;Play-by-email games&lt;/a&gt;: on topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2722/2570&quot;&gt;MUD/MUSH play-by-chat&lt;/a&gt;: on topic (except for technical questions).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2914/2570&quot;&gt;Game-book game questions&lt;/a&gt;: borderline.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/284/2570&quot;&gt;RPG-derived board games like Castle Ravenloft&lt;/a&gt;: not on topic (they fail the same test as fantasy sports, actually).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deriving a standardized rule is dicey, but, here's me taking a shot at it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is a site about tabletop RPGs (including tabletop RPGs played online).&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions about other RPG-like activities &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; generally in scope if they cover a facet of that activity that relates closely to tabletop roleplaying.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Are LARP questions on topic? Yes. (We just forget about LARP all the time.)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Pureferret asked about this in the comments.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;LARP is mentioned in the FAQ&lt;/a&gt; — &amp;quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, FATE, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs (including LARPs)&amp;quot; — but not on the Tour page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My understanding is that LARP was always &lt;em&gt;assumed&lt;/em&gt; to be in-scope because of the huge overlap between TRPGs and LARPs in terms of player base, subject matter, and even techniques, but it's not very popular among users overall so people forget about it all the time.&lt;/strong&gt; LARP seems to be supported here the same way it is on RPGnet (which is to say, absolutely on-topic, but the discussion is rather low-volume and peripheral because it's only of interest to a minority of the community).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-20T16:19:52.180" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3371" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3369" CreationDate="2014-03-13T02:03:19.883" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Some probably do, but not all.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two kinds of &quot;fantasy sports&quot; games that I'm aware of. The first is in the category of &quot;Rotisserie baseball,&quot; wherein the primary activity is the act of constructing a team of players and using their real-world progress to see how well &quot;your team&quot; does. Although you may give your team a name and enjoy the &quot;role&quot; of a manager, it's not an integral part of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is like &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy_wrestling&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;fantasy wrestling&lt;/a&gt;,&quot; which seems to have as much in common with play-by-email and play-by-post games as it does with things like Strat-o-Matic. In it, part of the game is handling promos, feuds, and other character-driven action while a simulator determines the results of matches. I'd say that this kind of fantasy sport game is on-topic here, and moreover that the &quot;fantasy band manager&quot; game the OP has described would also be on topic. (If the game were played by, I don't know, watching SoundScan rankings or the Billboard charts and allotting points by some means for chart position and duration, that would be more like the first game. And I'm surprised no one's made that game yet.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-03-13T02:25:02.953" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T02:25:02.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3369" CreationDate="2014-03-13T03:24:56.280" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fantasy football leagues do typically have rules. They are games, but don't involve any roleplaying, so don't qualify as RPGs. Fantasy football players do not appear to self-identify fantasy football as an RPG either. They're more akin to skill-based complex betting pools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question in the link appears to be the opposite: no rules, only freeform solo roleplaying. Solo RPGs do exist, so that's not a mark against it; but lacking rules, the pass-time described in the question appears to have no game involved. They do appear to self-identify it as an RPG, though, which may be enough to place it just barely in the outer fringes of RPGs. This is more akin to a structured fiction-writing exercise, which some RPGs do verge on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Aside, even if the pass-time described qualifies as an RPG, the questions they're asking are ill-defined enough to be unanswerable.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-03-13T03:31:51.973" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T03:31:51.973" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3373" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3375" CreationDate="2014-03-13T10:39:22.790" Score="5" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've created a collaborative narrative game called &quot;Watch the World Die&quot;.  It generates prompts and event chains allowing a group of players to create &quot;the history of the apocalypse&quot; and it is intended for prepping PostApoc RPG worlds, although it can also be played all by itself.  The game is currently in beta, it's free and published in PDF format - &lt;a href=&quot;http://asifproductions.com/sites/default/files/WATCH%20THE%20WORLD%20DIE.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here it is&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to ask people to read it, play it, and see if they can find any bugs, missed items, or flaws in the rules.  Is this a relevant question to ask on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: I've read related threads on meta, but I haven't seen a definitive ruling.  And this seems like a somewhat different circumstance since my game is a support tool for RPG campaigns rather than literally an RPG itself.  So I decided to make a new question for it.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10118" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-03-13T12:34:36.000" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T23:52:59.683" Title="Playtesting PostApoc &quot;Campaign Prep&quot; Game: Is this an allowed question?" Tags="|discussion|playtesting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3373" CreationDate="2014-03-13T12:11:15.247" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a bit tricky, because I think what you've designed itself would be on topic, but the question you want to ask is very broad and pretty much requires discussion in order to get good answers. As it hasn't been played yet, there isn't a body of knowledge out there to rely on to answer a question like &quot;is there flaws in it?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a question like &quot;are there flaws in the rules?&quot; consider a case where two people play test and post answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I say &quot;no, it works great!&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone else says &quot;yes, because X&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to figure out if X is really a flaw, more play testing will need to be done and a discussion will have to happen. RPG.SE's questions aren't the place for that discussion (although chat could be!). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same thing would be true in regards to missing items, except that one is also prone to answers that are lists of stuff you'd want to see in a post-apocalyptic setting. Questions that just ask for lists are also frowned on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So, No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, I don't think that question is a good fit for the site. It's possible that we can reword it into one or more questions that would be a better fit, but IMHO you'd be better suited to a forum type environment for a play test like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T12:11:15.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3375" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3373" CreationDate="2014-03-13T12:43:35.440" Score="10" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I want to ask people to read it, play it, and see if they can find any bugs, missed items, or flaws in the rules. Is this a relevant question to ask on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, you shouldn't be asking that here - it'd go against a few points on our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt; page. Specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;real questions have answers&lt;/a&gt;, which this one doesn't, and it's not the kind of question we field - it enters the realm of discussion. I'll quote two paragraphs from the beginning of the don't ask page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your motivation for asking the question is “I would like to participate in a discussion about ______”, then you should not be asking here. However, if your motivation is “I would like others to explain ______ to me”, then you are probably OK. (Discussions are of course welcome in our real time web chat.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Set up a discussion board, a report system, or something else and use that to handle your playtest reports. If you want a discussion board, maybe try the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.discourse.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Discourse beta&lt;/a&gt;, made by the same Jeff Attwood who cofounded Stack Exchange - I've tried it and it works pretty well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But really: Stack Exchange would suck at handling this anyway.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire reason we &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; questions to avoid is because those are questions this system doesn't handle well. Stack Exchange chose its niche of Q&amp;amp;A, and it does that &lt;em&gt;really well&lt;/em&gt; at the expense of sucking at everything else. There are other systems that better support the other stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's why it'd suck at handling your playtest reports:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The voting and accepted answer systems are not relevant to you. What is the point of having a negatively voted playtest report, or a positively voted one for that matter? If anything, they'll be a distraction. At its worst, it'd be discouraging people from giving you feedback, because they don't want to get downvoted / won't get votes / etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If someone submits an individual playtest report, it would be helpful to launch into discussion on it, ask further questions, talk with others about particular points, etc. Our comments will not support doing that. Forums will.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You do not need the community editing functions all that badly. They're not relevant.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, really, you just need some other system that gives you what you need without the distractions of irrelevant Stack Exchange features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-03-13T23:52:59.683" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3376" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3377" CreationDate="2014-03-15T09:29:26.757" Score="3" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to search for duo campaigns- GM and player? Solo is pretty limited and seem to be no GM campaigns. Are there many duo threads? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9516" LastActivityDate="2014-03-15T09:44:12.477" Title="Is there a duo tag or something like that" Tags="|support|tags|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3377" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3376" CreationDate="2014-03-15T09:44:12.477" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're looking for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-on-one&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-on-one&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;one-on-one&lt;/a&gt; tag, and there's also the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=two+player+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;two player&lt;/a&gt; keyword, though that more often hits on a circumstance with one GM and two players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might also prefer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign&lt;/a&gt; and its siblings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-03-15T09:44:12.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3378" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-15T11:50:27.363" Score="6" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt; (34 questions) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; (80 questions) generally cover software and online service recommendations, and their summaries seem to describe mostly the same thing. Software apparently covers online services, too, which isn't in the typical definition of 'software', but definitely within the scope of tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Scanning through the questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt;, I really can't see the difference between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of the more commonly used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-03-15T11:57:06.827" LastActivityDate="2014-03-20T02:20:46.583" Title="Synonymise [software] -&gt; [tools]" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3335" CreationDate="2014-03-16T00:12:49.170" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The solution I'd support here is going to a [product-recommendation] tag which would be our shopping tag and carry along the guidance, and then be modified by type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because there's plenty of system-recs, setting-recs, adventure-recs, tool-recs, etc. out there. And they should all follow the same GS/BS rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternately, creating them all and retagging, which would be a little disruptive.  Though tools might be able to go straight to tool-recommendation in most cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another issue is that sometimes people are looking for a &quot;system&quot; - but sometimes they're really just looking for a &quot;game,&quot; which is comprised of a system and a setting and maybe even other stuff. Not everyone is eager to mix and match.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think part of my problem here is the general unwillingness of folks to understand that really, the GS/BS guidelines should apply to everything here and not just rec questions, but we have only been successful enforcing them within those bounds.  Many of the [tools] answers are bad and should have better guidance applied, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess in the end this isn't an answer, it's more a statement of how all the existing answers are unsatisfactory and thus I feel like inertia is the best approach given no brilliant solution. I don't want to do a retag and jacking up of the front page when it's not really going to solve the problem and we're just likely to redo it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-03-16T00:22:48.550" LastActivityDate="2014-03-16T00:22:48.550" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2914" CreationDate="2014-03-17T09:14:36.143" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing to consider is that some solo gamebook series' have an associated RPG (I can name Fighting Fantasy and Lone Wolf), which then brings campaign setting questions into consideration, specifically those related to gamebook events that could affect the multiplayer RPG setting.  I think there's enough of a grey area that individual questions should be examined on their own merits rather than having a solid rule against them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9293" LastActivityDate="2014-03-17T09:14:36.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3378" CreationDate="2014-03-19T14:08:26.543" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go? That's kind of what this turns into.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Software &amp;amp; tools&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt; seems to be pretty clearly things that could fit comfortably in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;, as it's almost entirely about some kind of tooling. Hell, &quot;tools&quot; is the second word in the description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt;, and &quot;software&quot; is the third word in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;. They're pretty clearly overlapping heavily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On top of that, if you look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt;, you'll see software and tools being used interchangeably on a lot of questions in combination with gm-tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GM Tools&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the surface this seems somewhat reasonable, as GM tools may not overlap very well with player tools. The problem is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt; doesn't do a very good job of dividing things up by topic. Looking at gm-tools questions, you also see a bunch of other tags, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/map-making&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;map-making&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;map-making&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/generator&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;generator&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;generator&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12297/how-does-one-get-players-to-explore-more&quot;&gt;and in the case of a question like this&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;, where gm-tools isn't related to tools at all. You'll also find quite a few also tagged with software or tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, I'd also create a synonym for gm-tools to tools, and let the more specific tags like map-making let people find questions related to a specific type of tool. This is also going to work for tools that are of interest to players and GMs, like character generators, without raising more questions like &quot;is that a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt; question?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Online Resources&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; is actually being used for two things at once. One of them is yet another version of tools, only online. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8826/what-online-chat-or-chat-like-resource-will-work-for-my-closed-game&quot;&gt;Like this&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19279/ambient-sounds-not-music&quot;&gt;Or this&lt;/a&gt;. Unsurprisingly, tools and software show up along with online-resources quite a significant number of times. Even when it's not there, a lot of tools questions are given answers for online tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33489/can-i-legally-obtain-add-2nd-core-rulebook-in-a-digital-form&quot;&gt;The other use is for online versions of printed material.&lt;/a&gt;. Or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29902/what-is-the-full-text-of-favored-in-guild-jazred-chalssin&quot;&gt;web enhancements to printed material&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think these two things have any business being together, as they really have no relationship and having them in the same tag doesn't help organization at all. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first case, they should be retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;. In the second case... does anybody find that second case useful? I can't decide if it's worth keeping or not. Right now I'm leaning towards no, as &quot;online version of a book&quot; really isn't something I feel needs a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tag Descriptions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tools tag description is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A device, software, procedure or process used for a specific purpose&#xA;  in relationship to roleplaying games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The software one is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Applications, tools and utilities which assist in character creation,&#xA;  combat management, or DM/GM organization/preparation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current tools description is entirely accurate, but not the easiest language to parse. I prefer the software one, as it's very clear on what it's trying to be. Given that, I'll throw out a rough suggestion for a combined wording for tools. This needs more work, but it's something to discuss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Software, devices, or procedures to assist in character creation,&#xA;  combat management, GM organization/preparation, or game play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Summary - Steps to take&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; - Keep as is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;software&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;software&lt;/a&gt; - Make a synonym of tools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-tools&lt;/a&gt; - Make a synonym of tools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; - Go through the 58 questions with this and retag the ones that aren't about online tools to something more appropriate (like a tag for the relevant game system). Then make a synonym of tools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-03-20T02:20:46.583" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3382" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3385" CreationDate="2014-03-21T13:38:02.597" Score="5" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35231/gain-the-enchantment-property-from-both-implements-and-weapons/35234#35234&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; answer was recently edited, by another user. I am concerned with the edit for a number of reasons, but primarily it is the fact that they have changed a substantial portion of the substance of the answer after that answer has been accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a reasonable concern? If so, what is the most appropriate way of handling this? My initial reaction was that the edit should be rolled back, with a comment left to the person who attempted the edit asking them to provide their own answer if they disagree with this one. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-03-22T12:03:12.310" Title="Enchantment Property Spell edit concern" Tags="|discussion|editing|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3383" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3382" CreationDate="2014-03-21T13:43:22.533" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say that asking the editor to post his own answer and rolling the already accepted answer back to its accepted state would be best. The asker accepted the answer for a reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer had not been accepted I would say that in this specific case the answer was edited to such a high degree that a roll back would also be appropriate, that amount of editing, in my opinion, warrants a new answer as they basically rewrote the entire thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the edit was correcting grammar, punctuation, spelling or even just 1 or 2 small errors I would say let the edit stand, if the answer was not the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10263" LastActivityDate="2014-03-21T13:43:22.533" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3382" CreationDate="2014-03-22T03:57:13.483" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a tricky situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By all accounts, the first version of the answer - which was accepted - had some pretty incorrect statements in it. (This is why you don't accept answers within a day, people!) It should have, accordingly, been downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Andras's edit was definitely an improvement. But it was also an edit that was &lt;strong&gt;too major&lt;/strong&gt;, outright replacing a significant portion of the original answer. In this case, Andras should probably not have edited it this way and it probably shouldn't have been approved: Andras should have downvoted, and posted their own answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this circumstance though? Probably just leave it as is and avoid making this situation messier. I'll leave a comment on the answer letting Andras know about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this note, though: sometimes people perform a too-major edit on a bad (but accepted) answer, and explain they wouldn't normally have done it, but it was the accepted answer, and that one should be correct, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't do this.&lt;/strong&gt; Accepted answers don't get special treatment. If it's wrong or a bad answer, downvote it, then post your own, better answer. If the answer with a tick beside it has a low or negative score, and it's followed by one with a much better score, they'll get which one's the better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-03-22T03:57:13.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3382" CreationDate="2014-03-22T12:03:12.310" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I was the editor of the answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First I downvoted it, and started to give my answer, when I realized there is nothing wrong with the answer itself. It said what needed to be said, just the examples were totally bad.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I debated just deleting the examples, they were not an essential part of the answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I realized the question was fairly basic, so if he had to ask that, &#xA;the asker probably &lt;em&gt;needed&lt;/em&gt; examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So after this process modifying the answer was the logical step, but &lt;em&gt;I understand how the end result was wrong.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will give an independent answer next time.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastActivityDate="2014-03-22T12:03:12.310" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3387" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3389" CreationDate="2014-03-22T17:35:50.623" Score="2" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question about a party. I'm GMing and I want to know if a campaign a particular set of characters would be too hard to run: we are only 4 people (so 3 PCs) and they all want to be a support class. I want to know how to deal with that (so Asking what challenges to use in my adventures, for example). Can I ask a question like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10904" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-03-28T01:19:13.253" LastActivityDate="2014-03-28T01:19:13.253" Title="Are &quot;will this party work&quot; questions allowed?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3388" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-22T18:13:49.483" Score="20" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35288/roll20-reminded-me-of-a-similar-program-help-me-identify-it&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, there were 3 VTC based on it being a duplicate, 1 VTC based on it being opinion based, and 1 VTC (mine) based on the question being unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed as a duplicate; though it had been discussed in the comments about it being unclear, and one of the possible clarifications making it a duplicate, it seems that what we're communicating in this case (and in many other cases) might be different from what the problem actually is, based on nothing other than a majority vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no problem with that, it just struck me in this case that this is what we're doing, and wanted to clarify that this is actually what we meant by the VTC system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-03-28T01:21:45.137" Title="Vote to Close with different reasons make it seem like you agree with majority reason" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3389" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3387" CreationDate="2014-03-23T02:06:06.410" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd say so, but you're going to want to be as specific as you can be. Things like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What classes specifically are they using?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What problems are you expecting that to cause?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What adjustments, if any, have you already made?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's just a vague concern about unspecified classes, it's pretty hard to answer. If it's a specific concern about specific classes, someone can probably answer how to mitigate that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-03-23T02:06:06.410" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3390" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-24T19:52:32.430" Score="10" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG SE uses &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; a lot, and in a rather esoteric fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/system-agnostic/info&quot;&gt;Its tag wiki&lt;/a&gt;, however, is a sad, sad thing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;About &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not related to any one particular system of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This really needs more information. Users should be able to look at the tag wiki to find out which kinds of questions need the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag (vs. a specific system tag or no system tags at all), as well as obtain answers about how to structure their answers in a &amp;quot;system-agnostic&amp;quot; way. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/69584/248443&quot;&gt;See Tag Wiki Best Practices&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Why don't I just do it? Well, I've got some &amp;quot;I know it when I see it&amp;quot; intuition about the tag, but I really can't figure out how to express the answers to these questions in clear words that other people can understand.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-24T19:52:32.430" Title="System-Agnostic's tag wiki needs improvement" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3391" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-25T12:48:12.440" Score="7" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm asking this because of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35413/are-there-any-wwii-tabletop-rpgs/35417#35417&quot;&gt;Looking for a WWII RPG that requires no adaptation/conversion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is simply asking whether games of a specific type exist. The question has been put on hold, and answers downvoted, because it has been deemed to be a bad game-recommendation question, and they want to give more specific advice for his personal situation. Basically, the question has been put on hold for not asking for opinions, but only for facts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having seen questions closed for asking for opinions (recommendations), I'm surprised to see the opposite also put on hold. Why is this? And is this really what we want?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Isn't SE also supposed to be a reference, rather than personal assistance? The answers to this question would make a great reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10981" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-03-29T14:10:58.470" Title="Are questions about the mere existence of games on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3391" CreationDate="2014-03-25T13:09:52.817" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;SE is meant to be a &lt;em&gt;specific sort&lt;/em&gt; of reference. I'll quote our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt; guidance, which is consistent across the entire SE network:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most pertinently here: we are not interested in being a reference for endless lists of things. This is mainly because our voting and other feedback systems completely fall apart and become useless when faced with such a situation. Stack Exchange has chosen its niche to excel at, and this necessarily means it sucks at certain things. Lists are one of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's wrong with the question exactly?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you hadn't guessed it already, it's because it's going to compile a list. Every answer to that question is equally valid. There is no way to determine an objectively good answer, beyond whether that answer merely meets the criteria of being a WWII game or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is primarily because it is not a practical, answerable question based on an actual problem. Let's break it down:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Are there WWII RPGs?&quot; is not a problem, just a point of curiousity. It is not practically answerable beyond &quot;yes&quot;, and is more an invitation for a person to study further.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What are they?&quot; is also not a problem for similar reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I want to play something set in World War II, but I don't know what is available! What is there?&quot; is a problem, but as covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/1204&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt;, there is probably a phenomenal amount of available material. Thus, we will compile a list, and everything is good so long as it meets one single criteria. There is no way to vote for an answer being useful or not useful, other than it's a WWII game or not, and there is no single objectively correct answer, and no answer is better than any other, there are just a lot of them. Our system breaks down. This is why game-rec questions need specific criteria.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I want to play something set in World War II. I want the game to involve doing X, Y and Z. A and B are crucial thematic elements and I don't want C. What games are there for me?&quot; &lt;strong&gt;Now we're getting somewhere!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last one can have an objective practical answer. As observers, we can judge whether each recommended system meets the given criteria, and &lt;em&gt;how well&lt;/em&gt; it fulfils those criteria, and vote accordingly. &lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; our system handles it well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question just needs to specify some criteria for what it wants out of the game, and then it's golden.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-03-25T13:21:25.653" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3393" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3394" CreationDate="2014-03-26T10:38:26.633" Score="6" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;There were 2 answers for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35445/do-properties-of-magic-weapons-stack-when-using-two-weapon-fighting&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, both more than 50% right.&#xA;I ended up adding my answer, but should I change the other answers? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand they contain factual errors, so they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be corrected.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;On the other hand we will end up with 3 identical answers, what is the point of that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what is the preferred action in these cases?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-03-29T14:11:30.830" Title="Edit vs own answer" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3393" CreationDate="2014-03-26T11:36:22.720" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The guideline for editing is stated as this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;in our editing help&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;When should I edit posts?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so. The original author of a question or answer may always edit their own post, regardless of reputation level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;To fix grammar and spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;To add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most solid guidelines is that second point: &lt;strong&gt;your editing should not be changing the meaning of a post.&lt;/strong&gt; However, you can clarify their meaning, which extends to ironing over a small trip-up in the rules or poor usage of terminology.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, generally minor factual corrections are OK, but if you find yourself rewriting a substantial portion of the post just to correct it, you should probably just be downvoting it. How much is a substantial portion is your responsibility to make a judgement call on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your case, I'm guessing that in correcting those posts, you would be changing their meaning. Use your downvote instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-03-26T11:36:22.720" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3391" CreationDate="2014-03-26T16:08:31.740" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Part of the problem is that the question only superficially seemed like it was asking for mere existence. The second paragraph of the original version started talking about what the asker would like or enjoy in a WWII game&amp;mdash;clearly, they're asking not because they simply want a yes/no answer to &quot;do they exist?&quot;, they actually want to find a game they would enjoy with the intention of playing. The current version of the answer confirms this was the case: they are thinking of running a very specific kind of WWII game and are looking for a system to do it with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; think that mere existence is a valid question to ask, to answer your titular question. But I think it will rarely be asked in a valid way&amp;mdash;as part of a real problem. I can imagine a researcher asking &quot;does X exist?&quot; and explaining that they're just trying to get a grip on the field, and that could be valid. Answers to that wouldn't be recommendations, just throw out a couple names as evidence for the yes/no part of the answer. Answers that veer into recommendation territory would be off-topic and deletable, keeping the question manageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;strong&gt;yes, mere existence is a valid question&lt;/strong&gt;, but rarely is mere existence actually what someone is asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Incidentally, now that the question has been refined down to an on-topic problem, I do think your original answer is on-topic and you should consider undeleting it so that it can be upvoted now, for the right reasons.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-03-26T16:15:38.583" LastActivityDate="2014-03-26T16:15:38.583" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3396" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3397" CreationDate="2014-03-28T01:18:07.427" Score="5" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; tag and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; tag. We do not have a tag for other GURPS editions, e.g. a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-3e&lt;/a&gt; tag does not exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following questions appear to be asking about subject matter which could be edition-specific, but they don't have a tag indicating which version they're from. In particular, many of them are mechanical questions, and I presume mechanics can differ between editions. In the D&amp;amp;D and Fate areas of the site, using some kind of version-specific tag would be insisted upon. Should some of these have a version tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35502/how-to-use-shape-earth-spell&quot;&gt;How to use Shape Earth spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8469/is-gurps-dungeon-fantasy-compatible-with-banestorm&quot;&gt;Is GURPS Dungeon Fantasy compatible with Banestorm?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7627/gurps-series-as-compiled-books&quot;&gt;Will there ever be GURPS PDF series as compiled books?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7641/does-the-critical-hit-threshold-keep-rising-as-skill-goes-up&quot;&gt;Does the Critical Hit threshold keep rising as skill goes up?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3992/advice-on-setting-up-a-campaign-for-a-new-gm&quot;&gt;Advice on setting up a campaign for a new GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7490/alternatives-to-inapplicable-critical-hit-table-results&quot;&gt;Alternatives to inapplicable critical-hit table results?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7136/are-there-maneuver-options-for-non-combat-skills&quot;&gt;Are there maneuver options for non-combat skills?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7642/what-counts-as-a-critical-on-defense&quot;&gt;What counts as a critical on defense?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22995/what-are-some-ways-to-increase-melee-damage&quot;&gt;What are some ways to increase melee damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I'm not active in this site's GURPS community, and I haven't played GURPS. (I picked up the 4e manual once and almost reached the point of playing a game.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am asking this so those who &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; play GURPS can work out what to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-03-28T18:05:16.407" Title="Should these GURPS questions have an edition-specific system tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3396" CreationDate="2014-03-28T18:05:16.407" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Probably not. Being specific about edition is something the GURPS community itself doesn't often bother to do, and we try to keep our tag folksonomy reflecting community usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk said it well in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3140/321&quot;&gt;the related question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In GURPS, like Call of Cthulhu and many other non-D&amp;amp;D games, there's not a lot of change from version to version. For rules wonks, answering for D&amp;amp;D 1e vs 2e vs 3e vs 4e is a completely different thing. For many of these other games, it's a lot more correct to say &quot;I have a GURPS question... It's 4e if it matters, but it's not likely it will.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GURPS, like BRP and Hero and (somewhat less) Savage Worlds and many other generic RPG systems, don't change substantially between editions. (There are about seven editions of Call of Cthulhu I believe, but we only have one tag for it, because the difference never matters.) GURPS does contain rules changes between editions, but the changes tend to be small and specific. The changes between 4e and 3e in particular are relatively small. The 3e to 4e change represents more of a traditional &lt;em&gt;literary&lt;/em&gt; edition change&amp;mdash;an effort by SJG to reorganise their game line, and meanwhile make a few minor corrections in the process&amp;mdash;than an &quot;edition&quot; in the sense that D&amp;amp;D has redefined the term in RPG circles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, because of this continuity in the rules, very few new GURPS editions &quot;leave people behind&quot; the way games that change radically between editions can, so there are only a few people who have stuck with 3e, and the number of people who have stuck with any earlier edition is vanishingly small to the point that it may as well be zero. Further furthermore, the &quot;left behind&quot; 3e players aren't actually left behind, since they can use 4e material unchanged the vast majority of the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As a result&lt;/strong&gt;, GURPS players rarely bother to specify an edition when they're looking for help, even rules help. It's almost always 4e, and when it isn't &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; it's relevant, people say so. (And those case are very rare, as indicated by our lack of a GURPS 3e tag.) Folksonomy-wise, the GURPS community treats edition information as being only rarely relevant to say up-front, and often it's never relevant in the problem-solving process. That's reflected in the apparently &quot;sloppy&quot; way the tags have been used on this site. As the related question indicates, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; tag is the primary tag and most often used, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; gets added when it might be conceivably relevant. Meanwhile &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt; only gets used alone when the asker &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; believe the edition matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-03-28T18:05:16.407" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3398" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-31T05:02:38.710" Score="19" ViewCount="642" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is out of date - game-recs are now off topic, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've recently had a couple of recommendation questions appear with requirements so broad that they can cover &lt;em&gt;dozens&lt;/em&gt; or even &lt;em&gt;hundreds&lt;/em&gt; of systems or adventures. They've been closed as too broad, and the question author has been asked to refine their requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In both cases though (covered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3391/1204&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/35625/1204&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) the question author has stated they don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; more specific requirements, and expressed frustration with our closing the question. As they put it, they'd rather &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; that huge list to pick and choose from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a concrete example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;they just want a system that will let them play in World War II out of the box&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;they just want a simplistic AD&amp;amp;D fantasy adventure that will only take a few hours for first level characters&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm asking this meta question because it's worth addressing this user's concern and providing a thoughtful answer for posterity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Why do we close recommendation questions that we foresee as broad enough to have dozens or hundreds of matches?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What can a question author do if their question's been closed, but they don't think there's any criteria by which they'd want to narrow it down?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-05-29T01:26:23.283" Title="What's so problematic about a recommendation question having potentially hundreds of answers, anyway?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-recommendation|list-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3398" CreationDate="2014-03-31T11:46:56.787" Score="26" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Why do these questions get closed?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close these questions because they're list questions, which we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/176/1204&quot;&gt;declared as off topic in 2010&lt;/a&gt;. List questions tend to break our Q&amp;amp;A format: there's no single objectively correct answer, and no answer is better or worse than any other, so long as it simply meets the criteria provided. Our voting and accepted answer systems become irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;real, answerable question based on an actual problem you face&lt;/a&gt;, and your game recommendation fits our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/1204&quot; title=&quot;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&quot;&gt;game rec rules&lt;/a&gt;, you're welcome to ask it, but if you just want a theoretically endless list of stuff, this isn't the place to ask for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We demand narrow criteria from game rec questions because that's what it takes to make our system useful and relevant again: a sufficiently narrow question will cover only a small portion of the RPG landscape, and we'll actually be able to recommend an RPG that's probably objectively the best one for your purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is sometimes tricky though, and criteria you &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; are narrow might cover 90% of RPGs ever. In those cases, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/1204&quot; title=&quot;How to deal with questions that just don't understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&quot;&gt;we need to put your question on hold&lt;/a&gt; and work with you to refine your criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What do I do if I don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; narrower criteria?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chances are, you do have them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to play in a World War II setting, for instance, you &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; have an opinion on whether your game should focus on soldiers, espionage, strumpets, office workers, doctors, detectives, or so on during the period. You'll also likely have a preference on whether you want to focus on tactical action, personal drama, or other stuff. So think about those things, and tell us what in particular you want to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But I really don't have any preferences like that! I'll work it out myself, just give me stuff to browse through.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is the case, it sounds like you're here too soon. We are not here to produce a list of dozens or hundreds of arbitrary things for you to browse through: it breaks our format, and amounts to menial grunt work, which isn't fun. &lt;strong&gt;You need to do some work yourself to figure out those criteria &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; you come here.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do your browsing on &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG Geek&lt;/a&gt; (which has &lt;em&gt;thousands&lt;/em&gt; of RPGs catalogued) to work out what's available first, or on Google or at your friendly local gaming store - compilations have already been gathered for you! Think about what kind of game you'd want to run exactly, and if you're at a loss due to a sheer number of options, pick something appealing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you have your criteria, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; ask us what game or adventure would best support you doing that kind of thing. When you do that, we can weigh what we know and our answers to find something that best fits your requirements, and our voting and accepted answer systems are meaningful again, and it ceases to be a list question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-12T16:40:07.867" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3398" CreationDate="2014-03-31T12:29:37.610" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;To elaborate on doppelgreener's answer, I'd like to focus on the fact that StackExchange's goal is to be a repository of &lt;em&gt;experts&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a recommendation question contains detailed requirements and criteria, expert opinion and experience can be used to give the best answer to that question. A list question that just wants as broad a list as possible is just asking for someone to do &lt;em&gt;legwork&lt;/em&gt; for them, rather than exercise expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-02-03T23:47:11.707" LastActivityDate="2015-02-03T23:47:11.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3401" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-31T14:15:04.213" Score="8" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;A recent question has led to me seeking clarification as to what exactly counts as being 'on topic' for questions asking about probability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question I am referring to is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35643/help-needed-with-probability-math-for-2d10&quot;&gt;Help Needed With Probability Math for 2d10&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for my confusion is that our policy with this type of question seems confused at best, and undefined at worst. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33807/is-3d6-the-same-as-1d18&quot;&gt;Is 3d6 the same as 1d18?&lt;/a&gt; is another recent question that instead of being closed, received one of the highest vote counts in recent months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the criteria that define whether a question talking about dice or game statistic probability is on or off-topic?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T09:45:00.697" Title="What are the acceptable limits for questions using the probability tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3401" CreationDate="2014-03-31T14:30:31.600" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The criteria is this, featured in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;What topics can I ask about here?&lt;/a&gt; help article (the only one we get to customise):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, may be off topic if they are not RPG-centric (or better belong on another Stack Exchange site, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;). A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's our rule of thumb for real-world topics. We arrived at a decision to use this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/1204&quot;&gt;back in 2012&lt;/a&gt; when we couldn't iron out where to draw the line on campaign research questions, but it is not limited to just campaign research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, Is 3d6 the same as 1d18? is another recent question that instead of being closed, received one of the highest vote counts in recent months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It received one of the highest vote counts because it was in the hot questions list, and that's what happens to some questions that are in the hot questions list. People came, learned, registered, and voted. You might notice that one of the answerers, Eric Lippert, renowned for such things as his work on the C# programming language, has never used our site prior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why's it open though? I have no idea, and I voted to close it when it arrived.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't pass our rule of thumb. It involves dice, and dice probabilities are &lt;em&gt;relevant&lt;/em&gt; to us, but answering that question requires no RPG expertise, and RPG experts have not given a better, different, or more specific answer than something a mathematician would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-03-31T14:37:09.883" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3401" CreationDate="2014-03-31T15:39:53.823" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that we have two slightly conflicting elements to these kind of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Complex maths is a minority interest amongst RPG players.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dice games, and especially &lt;code&gt;game design&lt;/code&gt;, often rely on probabilities working within certain bounds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we might have some questions which tread an awkward boundary, generally of the form &lt;em&gt;I am considering using rule X in my game, but wondering if it is mechanically fair, or what the consequences were?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we extend this policy, similar to Stack Overflow's for recommendation questions: I.e. &lt;em&gt;Instead of asking directly &quot;are guns allowed in 1300 Europe&quot; or &quot;what is probability of having character with 3 18's under this system&quot;, please explain your related RPG/gaming problem and any approaches to solving it that you have considered or tried.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the referenced question, this would then be fair game for probability-based answers, and other approaches. The question would still be closed as it stands on the grounds that we don't know what the OP's problem really is (not knowing the relevant maths is not necessarily an RPG problem). If the OP wants to know if the stat increase might affect game balance, or errs on side of too weak/boring, then that can lead to other answers exploring similar house rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8364" LastActivityDate="2014-03-31T15:39:53.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3398" CreationDate="2014-03-31T17:18:38.110" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is what forums are good at&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange hasn't evolved mechanisms to accommodate people who really don't have any more detailed requirements because there are already a hundred and one sites that &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; accommodate those people's needs: forums and other discussion sites, that are excellent for soliciting long lists of subjective recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE doesn't aim to replace those discussion sites, because they are already doing the job perfectly fine, and serving this specific need well. The SE system doesn't aim to compete with forums on their core competencies, it doesn't &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to be the only site you use for help. Rather, the system was designed to fill a niche that discussion sites suck at: quickly getting expert advice to specific problems that have right and wrong answers. Discussion sites tend to bury the good advice in long threads. SE makes sure the good advice is right at the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When there is no such thing as good or bad, only opinion, SE doesn't try and doesn't even accept such questions. RPG.SE is a complementary site to those discussion sites, and expects people to ask their questions and seek help on the site that is most useful. RPG.SE is not a jealous site, it wants&amp;mdash;nay, &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt;&amp;mdash;you to visit many sites for different purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt; (as the forumites say): SE doesn't work with long list requests because it wasn't designed to, and it wasn't designed to because discussion sites already do it so well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A list of discussion forums&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For people coming here with this confusion, I recommend visiting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;one of the many discussion sites around the net&lt;/a&gt; to ask for lists of recommendations, since forums do well with questions that have possibly hundreds of answers (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;unlike us&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-07-17T16:00:00.447" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3401" CreationDate="2014-03-31T17:28:14.950" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think on RPG.SE there is place for that type of questions. You don't have to be a mathematician to know the mean result of 2d10 as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3364/are-questions-about-group-dynamics-psychology-on-topic&quot;&gt;you don't need to be a psychologist to know how to handle your game group&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simple questions about simple probability calculations behind RPG systems are on topic IMHO. If not, we wouldn't have a probability tag, as absolutely any probability question is better answered by a mathematician.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-03-31T17:28:14.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3406" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-03-31T22:55:05.640" Score="8" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;I sometimes see some of the ever problematic game recommendation questions having very specific requirements. And sometimes, I don't see a game I know answering those requirements, but I see how &lt;em&gt;hacking&lt;/em&gt; a game I know could work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35654/is-there-a-sea-creatures-rpg-system-or-would-i-need-to-create-one&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, where Fate hacks or Burning Wheel/Mouse Guard hacks have been mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This brings several questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would a game hack be an appropriate answer to an game recommendation question? How detailed would it need to be? And finally, is personal experience with &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; hack necessary, or is personal experience with the original system enough?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2900" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-04-10T13:16:31.180" Title="RPG hacks as answers to game recommendation questions" Tags="|discussion|answers|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3406" CreationDate="2014-04-01T00:39:01.363" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Remember the game-rec rules.  You have to have done it or seen it done.  Given that criterion, and assuming the question itself doesn't put it out of scope by saying &quot;no really, something published&quot; then a hack is... kinda OK as an answer, if it's a hack that's online that someone can use.  &quot;I did my own private hack&quot; isn't an actionable answer.  But if it's a public one, sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I say that it's &quot;kinda OK&quot; is that there's a difference between most &quot;hacks&quot; the way the community uses the term and a total conversion. It's one thing if someone says &quot;I took the Apocalypse World engine and have fan-published Aquarium World, a full game about being a fish.&quot; That's 100% OK. It's another when there's just a blog post saying &quot;Oh in AW you could all be fishies, just replace a couple drives and flavor it, you're done...&quot; Many such &quot;hacks&quot; have not even been used by their originator - it's the indie game scene wankery of choice, the game-design version of a &quot;bad subjective&quot; SE answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I'm sure you could hack that&quot; is of course totally off limits and is the main reason why we have the game-rec guidance, because everyone is &lt;em&gt;sure&lt;/em&gt; their favorite game could &lt;em&gt;totally&lt;/em&gt; do that... You can't suggest a universal rpg or hack or whatever because &quot;it could work&quot; - that violates Good Subjective, Bad Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-04-04T13:49:13.637" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T13:49:13.637" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3408" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3409" CreationDate="2014-04-01T08:02:26.650" Score="4" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;For april 1st and the Unicoin. What answer is guaranteed? I purchased it and I am curious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-04-01T12:17:08.163" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T12:17:08.163" Title="What answer does the guaranteed answer provide?" Tags="|discussion|unicoin|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3408" CreationDate="2014-04-01T09:16:40.453" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The one you choose when you buy your magnificent Unicorn power. You have made a wise investment. Take a look at your questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T09:16:40.453" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3401" CreationDate="2014-04-01T09:45:00.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a regular roleplayer wants to know something about dices, where he probably is going to look, in a mathematician site or in a RPG site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't forget this is a knowledge base. Maybe mathematicians are more prepared to answer those questions, but sure they will be far less interested than the people here, in answering or in reading the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5624" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T09:45:00.697" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3411" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-01T14:14:30.783" Score="7" ViewCount="363" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sure this is a problem in other tags, but it seems to come up relatively often in 4e and I feel like &lt;em&gt;most of the time&lt;/em&gt; we handle it well. However, today was an exception.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/35706/1084&quot;&gt;A few questions about mounts&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was asked and while there are some questions there that merit advice, but largely the question is seeking to understand the rules of the game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shortly after this question was posted, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/35707/1084&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer came through. The poster of the answer doesn't seem to have played 4e, at all. Their answer contains the basic advice &quot;stop worrying about the rules and do whatever seems right&quot; which might be good advice in some systems, but is terrible advice for 4e. Specifically this paragraph was troubling:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A mount is a creature. Treat it like it. An enemy could attack it or attack the rider. Don´t really pay attention to the 4E RAW about it - prefer using commom sense instead. It will make a game more imagininative and fun over time, and you will get away from that &quot;MMO-with-dice&quot; that 4E feels like. If you like that feel, well, that´s ok, however. [sic]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is nothing more than system bashing, and shows a clear lack of both expertise in the system and respect for the person asking the question. At best this is an unhelpful answer, at worse it's a clear non-answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when this was pointed out in the comments, and (assumably) in a flag, the moderator &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35706/a-few-questions-bout-mounts#comment70852_35707&quot;&gt;response&lt;/a&gt; was: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;4e does not equal RAW, there are plenty of people with a variety of play style preferences that pick it up as their first rpg just because it's on the bookstore shelf. This answer is valid since the question does not say &quot;raw rules only, no advice.&quot; Therefore this answer is not challenging the frame of the question. No more comment fighting about it please.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we really want inexpert answers being validated in this way? This question was asking for some advice, yes, but mostly it's a rules question. And unless you're going to provide both the rules, and the advice, it's not a complete answer. Add blatant system bashing to it and it should be deleted on sight. Leaving answers like this make this community poisonous to all play styles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-02T11:10:49.170" Title="How should we properly handle answers that show an apparent lack of system mastery?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3411" CreationDate="2014-04-01T14:35:10.777" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote them. You're right, we don't want to validate answers giving poor advice, and that's why we have our downvote button. Use it liberally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, if you can, provide a competing answer, but naturally understanding whether an answer is &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; doesn't mean we also know the &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for whether the answer is valid: it is. The question is asking: &quot;what's the rules for all this stuff?&quot; and the answer is saying &quot;stop fretting about the rules, just handle it like this.&quot; That's a valid way to respond to a question, and we've provided a lot of good answers around that format. So it's a valid answer to the question, and won't get removed as Not An Answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, whether it's a valid answer doesn't affect its quality level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-04-01T15:25:49.360" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T15:25:49.360" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3413" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3411" CreationDate="2014-04-01T15:13:54.677" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, system mastery is not the end all be all of gaming. GM techniques span systems and gaming groups and many groups have loads of fun without &quot;system mastery.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;System mastery is not a requirement for being an expert gamer.&lt;/strong&gt; But that's not really relevant to the issue at hand, this question's title is disingenuous. It's about what playstyles are &quot;allowed&quot; to answer 4e questions; that an answer based on rulings-over-rules &quot;is not in line with the querent's chosen system.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many people play 4e as a RAW-fest, but not all do.  As D&amp;amp;D is (was?) the leading brand in RPGs, it is often played by many people on the strength of it &quot;being on the bookstore shelf&quot; and people try to bring their own playstyles to it. That's been its boon and curse over the years, as people have used D&amp;amp;D to play everything from pure minis combat to high concept sci-fi games to historical accuracy games (to, apparently, &quot;Finding Nemo&quot; type games)... All those kinds of gamers are welcome here, regardless of how well they fit the majority opinion, &quot;designer intent,&quot; or other presuppositions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will remind everyone about the long-standing question &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6426/can-dd-fourth-edition-be-played-effectively-in-a-non-gamist-manner&quot;&gt;Can D&amp;amp;D Fourth Edition be played effectively in a non-gamist manner?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; Some folks here are basically saying &quot;no, and non-gamist answers regarding 4e are invalid.&quot; That is not actually what people answered that question with, by and large. They largely said &quot;well, it tends towards that, but you can do it differently.&quot;  Let's all keep that in mind, that others can do things differently than we would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The questioner did not clarify whether they wanted &quot;a RAW answer&quot; or &quot;a GM advice answer,&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; and given the statement of the question and its tagging, their intent was unclear. I posted a comment asking for that clarification, instead of assuming my own playstyle is the one associated with it. @JonathanHobbs says I pointed out the answer was challenging the frame of the question - actually the reverse, others claimed that and (incorrectly) pointed to the meta Q as some kind of &quot;proof&quot; that answers challenging the frame should be deleted (not a valid interpretation of that meta) - I disagreed, saying the answer does NOT clearly challenge frame and it only does if you make the &quot;4e = RAW and that's the only playstyle&quot; assumption.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, &lt;strong&gt;the answer is legitimate by any and all of this site's rules and guidance&lt;/strong&gt;.  You may not like it or agree with it and that's what the voting system is for.  You trot out the banner of &quot;oh but it's poisonous to other playstyles,&quot; but basically you want this question removed so that its playstyle is silenced.  That's unacceptable and will not be tolerated on this site. Propose a comment or an edit to the language you consider &quot;bashing&quot; if you would like.  Could the answer have been stated better? Yes, sure. To be fair, it's a lot more coherent than the original question was, we get all types here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One last piece of advice - &lt;strong&gt;be patient&lt;/strong&gt;.  The answerer has now replied here on this meta Q, stating his 4e experience and explaining some of what's going on, which has mollified some folks already.  The questioner may also chime in given time. This is why we don't immediately delete things someone doesn't like. Instead of just rapidly escalating more and more - this has escalated from me declining a single flag to delete a not-so-great answer to comment wars and meta questions and shrieking about &quot;abusive moderation&quot; in chat in a couple quick hours - try to use the system.  Vote.  Comment on why you think something could be improved.  Let people respond. The nuclear option is not always the best, and immediate escalation when one doesn't get one's way breeds conflict instead of a happy site. Give questioners and askers more than a couple minutes to refine their thoughts.  Edit your previous comments to refine rather than turning them into a mini-chat. Give people the benefit of the doubt.  We try to keep high quality here on the site but that doesn't mean things have to get perfect in 5 minutes or be mod-deleted. We err on the side of NOT mod-closing or mod-deleting things immediately (or at all), as that would really be abuse. The line can and should be wide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T18:05:00.217" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3411" CreationDate="2014-04-01T16:48:04.883" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all. I´ve played 4E since birth, and all versions of D&amp;amp;D for a long, long time. If I don´t see a rule as &quot;good&quot;, that doesn´t mean I don´t know the system &quot;at all&quot;, as people were saying. My viewpoint is different. Not wrong, just different. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Im the author of the anwser and I'm really... surprised by all the grudge against that post. &#xA;Ive played 4E for a good time, and I suppose that &quot;Don´t liking 4E as-is&quot; is a valid viewpoint. I don't enshirine 4E rules - I admit that some of them are good, and I can see that some of them are not. That question was not Raw and i suppose I can say that a rule of the system is bad. It´s my opinion, my advice. He asked for advice. Not for RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seens a crime proposing a variant rule for the system for some people. Im not Bashing 4E. 4E is a good system for some things, a bad system for others, and it goes into the same pitfall for all D&amp;amp;D games - mount rules sucks. I would say the same for 3.5. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My advice may seen &quot;terrible&quot; for some, but it worked for my group. It works for most non-gamist groups. My intent is to make his game FUN, not RAW-Viable, and that the point most people miss. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes books simply don´t work. This is to be an site were EXPERTS give advice. Just trowing rules at people without considering their implications is not what an RPG Expert does - it is what Rules Lawyers do. Im feeling really uneasy about all of that negative repercussion. My point was to be helpful, not to be &quot;aligned with 4E people&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, my mother-language is not - as you can see - english. Im sorry if my words may seen a little off, but I´m trying my best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2014-04-01T16:48:04.883" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3411" CreationDate="2014-04-02T01:00:10.577" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, this escalated quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm the guy who started it, I guess, because I flagged the answer and made a few comments on it. And I did not flag it &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; comment on it because of &quot;lack of system mastery,&quot; nor did I ask for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agreed with the answer's points, but it had two fundamental problems which I thought made it a bad answer despite my agreement, and which I felt were imminently fixable: it was rude and it ignored part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the answer (and other comments made by the author, which are now gone) used non-useful anti-system language, saying that any system which didn't make &quot;common sense&quot; a core priority was inherently and objectively bad. It specifically used the &quot;MMO&quot; language which is historically associated with knee-jerk anti-4e diatribes that aren't based on any understanding of the system. I felt these were inappropriate to the site's behaviour policies, made the poster look less informed than he seemed to be, and obscured the good points the answer brought up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, the answer deliberately avoided addressing a core part of the question. The question asked explicitly for certain 4e rulings, which the answer did not provide. That doesn't mean the answer should &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; have provided RAW --obviously the querent was asking for guidance too-- but that it clearly ignored a major part of the question, and that made it a poor answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a quick back-and-forth in comments in which I realised the issues would not easily be solved through comment input, I flagged it because I thought a moderator might be better able to address the points. It seemed like the basic &quot;don't bash systems, answer the whole question&quot; issues which moderators deal with regularly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mRJFK.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did not intend to call for deletion, nor to claim that RAW was the only acceptable kind of answer. I'm not sure where these ideas came from, but they did not willingly come from me. I am rather appalled that they have arisen at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-04-02T01:00:10.577" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3416" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-02T01:25:38.987" Score="3" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;For some reason, as of earlier today, the text of links in main’s homepage is no longer visible for me until after I’ve hovered over the link. Links to questions in a tag I follow do appear, however. On the flip-side, &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; (link or not) is invisible in the Looking for More? box, the network navigation box, and the copyright box.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not seem to happen every time I load the page, but it happens pretty consistently if I reload rather than follow a link. It does not seem to apply to links in questions, even the links that are the same in both pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am using Chrome Version 33.0.1750.154 m.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4290" LastEditDate="2014-04-04T18:49:43.820" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T18:49:43.820" Title="Links invisible until hovered over" Tags="|bug|design|css|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3417" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3411" CreationDate="2014-04-02T11:10:49.170" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I put my mind on this overnight and starting to see something that is becoming clearer as I read more 4E questions here. That´s not an 4E bashing issue, that´s an issue of Bashing someone that &lt;strong&gt;seens&lt;/strong&gt; to bash 4E. I never said that &quot;4E is bad as a whole&quot;, never raised the flag &quot;don´t use 4E&quot;. I was talking about 4E &lt;strong&gt;mount&lt;/strong&gt; rules and that they suck, IMHO, and some people took that as system bashing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4E &lt;strong&gt;have&lt;/strong&gt; an MMO feel, and that is not a &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt; thing. Some people, me included, don´t like it, but I won´t be blind enough to say that 4E is trash. Some people like that feel, and for some games, I can have fun in it too. WoTC build that game on the wake of WoW, so is kinda obvious that they tried to appeal to that public. It was a marketing strategy. WoW is already D&amp;amp;D-ish in essence, but 4E put lots of MMO-Mechanichs (Powers, for start) on the table, making it possible to play games that have an MMO Feel (again, it is not a bad thing) on the table. Heck, I used 4E to play countless WoW Games, and it just works for that. It´s another feel, not classic D&amp;amp;D feel. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Saying that comparing MMO´s to 4E is &quot;historically related to bashing 4E&quot; is a poor excuse to what happened here. I was not - again - was not bashing 4E. It was even stated by WoTC that &lt;strong&gt;that was the whole point from the start&lt;/strong&gt;. Look at what Collins said about 4E:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;As professional game designers, we look at all games for lessons. Certainly, &#xA;  the lessons we learn from &lt;strong&gt;online games&lt;/strong&gt; are going to be the &lt;strong&gt;most obvious&lt;/strong&gt; ones &#xA;  because they have a lot of people familiar with the sources, but there's also lessons &#xA;  about turn management from European board games, interface ideas from card games.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Emphasis mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.examiner.com/article/was-andy-collins-a-casualty-of-4th-edition-dungeons-dragons&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Look at this artcile for the complete context.&lt;/a&gt;, but keep in mind that I just wanted that quote from it. I don´t think that Andy did a bad work on 4E. As the 4E proposal, it´s good. Some people don´t like, but it does not mean that 4E is &quot;trash&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I was to bash 4E, I would start poiting another game to the questionner, but that was not the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, people, when the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;designers&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; say that a game is similar to a MMO in some way, STOP bashing people that agree with it. Please.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2014-04-02T11:10:49.170" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3418" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3419" CreationDate="2014-04-02T17:00:33.643" Score="11" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently we've had two questions that have attempted to reach beyond to scope of the game they were questioning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first one, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/35465/9625&quot;&gt;found here&lt;/a&gt;, was closed as off-topic for treating D&amp;amp;D 3.5e like a physics engine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second one, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/35739/9625&quot;&gt;found here&lt;/a&gt;, was not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I  know they vary slightly, but they were both asking for situations that were not covered by the rules because they were attempting to 'over-emulate' real life within the game. The answers were essentially the same and boiled down to &lt;em&gt;&quot;The game doesn't do this for you, so you will have to figure it out on your own.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With very similar answers why was one closed as off-topic and the other not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the &lt;em&gt;only reason&lt;/em&gt; (as hinted by the replies to my comments on the second link) was a &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;tag&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; then I vote the &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; question have the rules-lawyering tag removed and then be re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially the real issue here is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;When are questions that attempt to add 'real-life' elements into a game okay?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S.: I didn't flag the second question because I felt an opportunity for a re-worked question was better than a simple shut-down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9625" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-08-27T12:53:59.180" Title="When are questions that attempt to add 'real-life' to a game okay and on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3418" CreationDate="2014-04-02T18:17:45.340" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is big difference in the two questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is a purely theoretical &quot;apply RPG mechanics to real world stuff&quot; and the second is &quot;What are the implications of X in my game?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's basically the big difference. The first isn't related to something that could potentially come up in gameplay and the second is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both generally run afoul of this quote in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, the second is far closer to the realm of the possibility than the first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-04-02T18:17:45.340" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3418" CreationDate="2014-04-02T18:21:42.910" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;One question seems to be expecting or even &lt;em&gt;demanding&lt;/em&gt; that their real-life intuitions are modelled by the game, while the other seems to be very much asking what the game already does. The difference is subtle, but directly impacts how the questions are framed and reflect the problem each is trying to solve. The difference is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How does the game handle X?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is much simpler to answer. Sometimes &quot;it doesn't&quot; will be the answer, sometimes &quot;That's up to you&quot;, sometimes &quot;It doesn't, but here's how you could&quot;, or sometimes even &quot;there's a rule for that! Here it is.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the asker isn't presuming a bunch of false or problematic things, just asking how it does work and only softly mentioning their real-world intuitions as the prompt for asking, they're not pushing their assumptions to the forefront and demanding they be accommodated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How does the game handle X, given YZW and Q?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, if Y, Z, W, and Q aren't even &lt;em&gt;true&lt;/em&gt; about the game, the asker seems to be expecting that false things be accommodated by the answers. Possibly the question is ill-formed. Possibly, it's just something that the community doesn't want to deal with. You can try to answer it by challenging the frame of the question, but it's likely going to result in debate with the asker while they attempt to tell you that no, YZWQ are true, of course they're true.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference then is that people will shut down questions that seem to be impossible to answer given the insistence of contradictory requirements. A very similar question might attract no such negative voting attention though, simply by appearing to permit correction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the latter sort of question will sometimes be fine, even with false assumptions, if it seems amenable to correction in answers. It entirely depends on how it's asked, and how aggressively the false assumptions are presented. If they're merely misapprehensions that seem readily corrected, then the question is unlikely to give people a &quot;eugh, I don't want to even deal with it&quot; reaction and won't attract close votes. For example, in the form &quot;How does the game handle X? I believe YZW and Q, and so it all doesn't make sense,&quot; the question is almost inviting correction. It may still be difficult to convince the asker, but answers that clear up the confusion by pointing to the misunderstanding will often be accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-04-02T18:21:42.910" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3418" CreationDate="2014-04-03T06:44:25.693" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've repeatedly meet &quot;the game is not a physic simulation&quot; answer. And most commentators suppose that there are no ways for in-game mechanic to place a character into specified ambiguity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I may prove that some of cases seeming to be impossible are actually feasible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all physics works in any fantasy world, it is objective phenomena. Different worlds may have different physics laws, possibly totally undiscovered by it inhabitants. But this laws exist however not formulated. You may use well-known natural science way of hypotheses testing to bring light upon this laws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two approaches for inserting magic into a fantasy world. You may totally override all casual physical laws or you may enrich them with magic in so in most times normal laws are applicable and only in specific cases magic cheats the normal laws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first way be used in fiction where all characters obey the writer and exposes supernatural laws to the chosen degree that the writer can control. But considering open nature of the rpg worlds, the world author can not control character actions, so he generally prefers the second way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose a character happen to be into a magic world. Then he performs sequence of experiments that are described into the school science course. If they give him the same result (in a situation where magic interference reduced to zero) than all well-known physics laws are still on service. Even if electromagnetic field is replaced with electromagnetic elemental.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose that the fantasy universe follows the first methods of building &quot;everything is magic&quot;. Then some of experiments should go out of conventional way. It means that every one consequence of this behavior should be considered by the realm author. Say kinetic theory of gases ceases to work. The author should replace  diffusion, temperature-density relationship and other properties of gases with custom ones. You may effectively ban ICE with the cost of redefining all the atmosphere processes in your fictional world. And every player would pay attention to different aspects of magical universe laws, so the author would had hard times describing non-contradictory world&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking &quot;magic is only cheat to normal laws&quot; is much easier to describe. And all d&amp;amp;d realms follows that way. They describes earth-like planets with a sun and closely adjacent axial tilt. Only minor aspects are modified with magic. So all mundane engineering devices would work in this universe too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta-gaming objection &quot;your character may not know what is known to you&quot; may be fired. But note a typical d&amp;amp;d wizard. It has 30 inherited intelligence attribute by 20th level. Basic 18 + 2 as racial bonus to grey elf + 5 as level-dependent bonuses + 5 from wishes. Einstein has at most 25 Int attribute in the d&amp;amp;d scale. If player has a free time he can pursue physic laws by series of experiments each step based on previous and small enough to take appropriate Int test. His magic gives the wizard large advantage in setting such experiments. He may produce large variety of needed devices with magic. Shadow conjuration, wish, polymorph any object, other spells (and note that d&amp;amp;d permits to develop custom spells).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8208" LastActivityDate="2014-04-03T06:44:25.693" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3418" CreationDate="2014-04-03T13:03:51.683" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The two questions are fundamentally different. The second (open) one is after a bunch of preamble, asking this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In other words - can Minor Creation be used for constant food&#xA;  supplying, or it is basically a bad idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that there already is a spell that can do constant food supplying (Create Food), this can be answered by comparing the mechanics of the two spells and what, if anything, the game says about food. The rules in this case don't have any clear answers, but the question is about a specific effect of a specific spell in a specific situation, compared to some other spell that does the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe an edit for clarity would be helpful, but that's an answerable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first (closed) question reads like something from a physics exam. There are no rules based answers at all, and any answer other than &quot;make something up and call it a house rule&quot; is going to be relying on physics knowledge way out of scope of RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at the answers, that's pretty much what happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-04-03T13:03:51.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3406" CreationDate="2014-04-03T19:39:47.407" Score="5" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hacks are &lt;em&gt;totally&lt;/em&gt; appropriate for game rec.&lt;/strong&gt; TRPGs are a heavily DIY-based culture. From a pure &quot;System Does Matter&quot; perspective, it's often better to recommend a way to reskin and tweak a system that's a good fit for the goals of a game than to recommend an appropriate pre-built setting with a ho-hum system attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone doesn't want to hack, they can specify that in their question or just ignore your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As I suggested in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3342/2570&quot;&gt;this meta answer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;the key to suggesting hacks is to actually teach us what to do in your answer&lt;/strong&gt;. Now, your answer should be actionable, but I don't think it needs to do &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt;. But you have to &quot;teach your reader to fish&quot; by sharing the fruits of your play experience and system mastery &amp;mdash; clearly signpost the hardest and most important changes, and make at least a passing mention of the other kinds of things to be aware of.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;An answer should be more than mere speculation&lt;/strong&gt;. A good answer should have a clear and detailed understanding of the issues involved in making a hack like this. Because there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; issues that come up that aren't obvious from an armchair viewpoint. &quot;Oh, I dunno, hack my favorite game, I'm sure it'll work out fine&quot; isn't a useful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Direct experience with a similar situation is ideal. (I don't think it needs to be identical; that'd be an insane and counterproductive requirement that excludes too many good answers to be worthwhile, I think.) Indirect experience, i.e. you've read a bunch about someone else doing it, can also be useful &amp;mdash; you should definitely link back to the source so readers know where they can go to learn more, though.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-04-10T13:16:31.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3424" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-04-04T07:34:47.290" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2014-04-04T07:34:47.290" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T07:34:47.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3425" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-04-04T07:34:47.290" Score="0" Body="On the first of April 2014, a celestial alignment unleashed a burst of rainbow waves on Earth, where it hit the StackExchange servers. The resulting surge of Unipower cascaded into the spontaneous creation of Unicoin, a powerful currency that could invoke magical effects upon the user. It has since been suppressed by the Metacracy, but the Cult of the Allspectrum Disc suspects its power could reemerge in the future." OwnerUserId="1215" LastEditorUserId="1215" LastEditDate="2014-04-04T13:16:05.340" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T13:16:05.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3426" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3427" CreationDate="2014-04-04T11:54:40.867" Score="8" ViewCount="211" Body="&lt;p&gt;As is the nature of role playing games, the rules are very often incomplete and open to interpretation. This can often spawn differences of opinion on answers and lead to lengthly comments over whether a particular point is correct or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When this happens moderators are prone to delete the comments and leave one of their own:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Don't argue in comments. Present your opinions in your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't hold that against mods, they're following procedure; but I do find it frustrating. Posting two differing opinions in answers leaves no room for discussion on those opinions. It doesn't allow for anyone to point out why an answer might be flawed, except in your own answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this really the best policy? I'm not saying that comments is necessarily the best place for these discussions to occur, but I feel that valuable content is being lost because these comments are being deleted. Is there a better way we can handle this so that content isn't lost? Can we encourage users to place it in a better place where discussion can still continue and be publicly viewable in the correct context (i.e. linked to the question / answer they are discussing)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8968" OwnerDisplayName="Styphon" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T07:37:22.910" Title="How can the policy regarding discussions in comments be improved?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3426" CreationDate="2014-04-04T12:27:17.560" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments are a tool for getting to the right answer, not a place for answer.  You're right we need discussion in comments to suss out the question or improve an answer, but the result shouldn't &lt;strong&gt;live&lt;/strong&gt; there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What if you see content in an comment?  If it's good content, move it to an answer.  If we (the mods) see good content in comments we will ask for it to be moved to the answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes I'll even do it myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2015-09-02T15:51:37.090" LastActivityDate="2015-09-02T15:51:37.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3426" CreationDate="2014-04-04T12:29:34.643" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments aren't meant to be saved&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From our own help page on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Comments&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments are temporary &quot;Post-It&quot; notes left on a question or answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are meant to inform questions and answers, clear up misunderstandings and to ping users to changes being made to answers and questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should submit a comment if you want to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Request clarification from the author &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leave constructive criticism&#xA;  that guides the author in improving the post &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Add relevant but minor&#xA;  or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related&#xA;  question, or an alert to the author that the question has been&#xA;  updated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you seem to be describing though is an extended discussion which fits none of the above. Although it may be useful information if it doesn't fit the above criteria its better off being in our chat (transcripts are saved). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T12:29:34.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3426" CreationDate="2014-04-04T13:43:50.093" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The original policy with extensive reasoning as to &quot;why&quot; is set out in this meta question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted?rq=1&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; and revisited once in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2981/can-we-re-evaluate-our-comment-deletion-policy-or-at-least-have-access-to-the?rq=1&quot;&gt;Can we re-evaluate our comment deletion policy? (or at least have access to the data?)&lt;/a&gt; (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3211/how-much-of-an-answer-suggestion-should-be-in-comments-to-questions?rq=1&quot;&gt;How much of an answer/suggestion should be in comments to questions?&lt;/a&gt;, and others...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bottom line is that comments should be used to suggest an improvement.  Comment upvotes help put more weight behind them, and the answerer - or someone with edit privileges - can incorporate that improvement.  But if they don't, then comments are not the place to object to their opinion.  You write your own answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;60% of the drama on the site comes from comment wars (the other 40%, from chat wars). We are not interested in being a forum even a little bit.  I understand wanting to &quot;get a word in,&quot; but we don't support that very specifically because it leads to a different site metaphor than our successful Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A site.  You see that other-site mods from meta.SE have already commented to this same effect. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having said that, we don't delete all comments. Comments we think do add valuable information, and especially upvoted comments, tend to stay.  Unless they're part of a big comment war, in which case they can be lost in the purge. Of course, everyone's view is that their comment adds valuable information or context, so from their author's point of view 100% of comments are justified, but to the jaundiced eye of a site mod the set of comments that actually qualify is smaller. See the linked meta Q's for a more detailed explanation, no need for me to type it all in again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for improving - I'm open to brilliant out of the box ideas, as long as &quot;just leave the comments around&quot; is not that idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-04-04T13:43:50.093" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3430" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3431" CreationDate="2014-04-05T06:15:48.813" Score="10" ViewCount="276" Body="&lt;p&gt;That is, when should thanks be given, and how should that &lt;em&gt;Thank You&lt;/em&gt; look?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At what point should questions or answers inspired by another user's question, answer, or comment be attributed to that user in the question or answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35871/how-exactly-do-potions-and-oils-work/35872#35872&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; was modified because of other users' comments, and the poster was polite enough to thank the commentators, one of whom was me, in his answer. It wasn't necessary the user thank me--my comment wasn't an innovation or opinion but merely noted a relevant yet omitted fact, suitable for expanding the answer but offering nothing more research would've yielded. Was that thanks appropriate and expected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The final section of my answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35684/can-a-bound-outsider-disobey-its-orders/35759#35759&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; was added completely at the behest of a commentator who believed the information important enough to comment &lt;em&gt;twice&lt;/em&gt; even though I didn't initially think it'd be a thing. Turned out it kind of &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; a thing; should I thank the commentator for inspiring that section of the answer?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What should a &lt;em&gt;Thank You&lt;/em&gt; look like?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several times recently I've seen thanks given by linking to the user's profile, which seems a bit weird, but considering that--so far as I can tell--linking to a specific answer requires entering keywords from that answer into the search bar to find the answer's URL and linking to that, and that there's no way to read the deleted comment inspired a question or answer, I don't know how &lt;em&gt;else&lt;/em&gt; to properly and readily thank innovation, inspiration, or opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When using **@***username* in a question or answer, does that do anything besides look silly? Is there a method for searching for those? I've thanked another user by employing that method myself &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35714/does-casting-a-spell-with-somatic-and-material-components-require-2-hands&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; instead of profile-linking, but I don't know if that just makes &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt; look silly and does nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The role-playing game community is quite incestuous already so thanking folks for every little thing is obviously too much, but it's also militant about giving credit where credit's due. When and how should thanks be given?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-04-08T16:15:23.573" Title="When is it proper to thank another user?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3430" CreationDate="2014-04-05T06:46:49.403" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;First, the legal stuff&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only time acknowledgement is actually &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt; is when you're doing something relative to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;cc by-sa 3.0&lt;/a&gt; license all our content is provided under, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/&quot;&gt;the requirements are in this blog post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This almost never applies to comments. This covers using someone's actual written words, like when you're quoting them or redistributing things they've authored or developed. If you've edited their words, attribution is still required as long as their original work is recognisable. (Naturally, if it &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt;, you're not even using their work anymore and copyright and licensing is moot.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything outside this is entirely optional and subjective. We won't be able to tell you how to do all of this, and we don't have a community standard on how to handle this stuff. You'll have to use your judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. When should we thank people?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a matter of subjective ethics. But, a couple of things are simple at least: there is never a &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;, or to put it differently, you are never obligated to thank people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, it should never be &lt;em&gt;expected&lt;/em&gt; by anyone, unless it's a matter of legal attribution. Someone might have given you pointers or prompts, but people do that constantly here, and you're the one doing the hard work following it up and doing the study and writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's something to weigh your thanks against: the fact of the matter is that giving thanks does not improve the usefulness of your post, and most of your readers will not care. The only people with any emotional investment in an author thanking someone is the author, that someone, and the people with emotional investment in either of those people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you give thanks, I suggest this rule of thumb: make it genuine. Give thanks when you are genuinely, emotionally thankful and grateful. This keeps it infrequent, valuable and meaningful. You should not give thanks merely because you're concerned someone expects it: it's unreasonable of them to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. What should it look like?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unobtrusive. That's the main thing, because of the point above: this does not make your post &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; useful, so it should also not make it &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; useful. Mention your thanks in a sentence at the end, or briefly state &quot;(thanks &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8610/hey-i-can-chan&quot;&gt;Hey I Can Chan&lt;/a&gt;)&quot; then move on, or state your thanks your edit summary where it's permanent, attached to your change, and out of the way. Ensure it doesn't disrupt our ability to understand what you're trying to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, however you see fit. There's no standard form of giving thanks here. Go ahead and link to profiles, and say @HeyICanChan or Hey I Can Chan or whatever you'd like. You won't look silly, I promise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Linking to a question or answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every answer and question has a 'share' link in the bottom left. Click it and it'll give you the URL for that question or answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BidV6.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The URL always comes in this form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;http://example.stackexchange.com/{letter}/{post ID}/{your user ID}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;where:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;{letter} is either 'q' or 'a', for question or answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;{post ID} is the ID of that question or answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;{your user ID} is... well, your user ID, which is the same number that shows up in your profile URL. Mine is &lt;em&gt;1204&lt;/em&gt;. This part is optional, and contributes to the Announcer, Booster and Publicist badges. You can cut it off if you need the extra characters.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(naturally, sometimes the start bit will be stackoverflow.com or something else for those sites with a domain name)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-04-07T11:11:17.410" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3297" CreationDate="2014-04-07T14:51:04.880" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Done, tweaked as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;our rules for game recommendations&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;All responses must cite actual experience or reference others' experiences!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-04-07T14:51:04.880" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3433" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-07T18:31:46.770" Score="5" ViewCount="265" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, no disrespect meant to our current moderators. C.Ross and Brian are not as active as they once were on the site, but when they are here they are still extremely helpful. Mxyzplk is/has-been doing a lot of the work by himself and should be lauded for the time investment he is/has made in RPG.SE. That said, I think he can get overworked, and that the site could only benefit from having more mods that were active. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site traffic has grown a lot. If you look &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.quantcast.com/rpg.stackexchange.com?qcLocale=en_US&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; you can see the dramatic increase compared to 2013 let alone the huge growth in comparison to 2012 and earlier. Another way to look at things is that at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;end of the beta&lt;/a&gt; RPG.SE had:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3.4 Questions per day&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;408 Avid Users (&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/160371/distribution-of-avid-users-by-reputation-tier&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;150 rep or higher&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2725 Total users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1667 Visits per day&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 5 Pro-Tempore Moderators&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#traffic&quot;&gt;RPG.SE's statistics&lt;/a&gt; are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;12 Questions per day&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1189 Avid Users &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;8.3k Users &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;8.7k visits per day&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With only 3 moderators. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a higher-rep user, I try to take as many review actions as I can to assist. That said, I still feel the addition of new moderators could help to spread the load.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that the huge increase in RPG.SE's growth mandates that we up the number of Moderators. Should we have an election to add to their ranks? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-04-07T23:00:22.420" LastActivityDate="2014-04-10T12:53:35.340" Title="Expand Moderators to meet RPG.SE's Growth?" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3434" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3433" CreationDate="2014-04-07T23:00:09.537" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have only three diamond mods here on RPG.SE, @BrianBallsunStanton, @CRoss, and myself, but we have a lot of moderators - you, the rest of the community.  As long as everyone understands that it's their job to help moderate the site as well, and understand the abilities they get along with their rep, I think we have enough manpower - if one of us calls for help in mod chat the others come to their rescue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way the site works takes care of most items automatically, as long as people use close votes, flags, delete votes, edit privs, are responsible about not having discussions in comments, etc.  The main thing we have to intervene in nowadays that requires the diamond is primarily comment war deletion. A lot of the other things we do are because we can't get 5 close votes on a bad question, for example, even with all these users...  More users and higher rep users actually should cause us to require &lt;strong&gt;less&lt;/strong&gt; diamond moderation, as you all become empowered to help out yourselves!  If everyone sees it as their job to do all that as well, then we're kinda superfluous.  Edit that comment into that post... Crack down on spurious comments...  Engage in meta...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, as I write this I see that Brian was active 1 hour ago and CRoss 4 hours ago, and for the month Brian and I are neck and neck on all the mod activity stats. I think a lot of the perception is that we tend to be 'quiet' about our interventions.  I tend to be the voice of the mods on issues for a couple reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One, none of us are all that fond of site chat. In fact, we tend to see it as contravening the otherwise helpful and democratic paradigm of the site - see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3291/the-role-of-chat-at-rpg-stackexchange&quot;&gt;The role of chat at RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; for details on that.  As a result, you don't &quot;see&quot; any of us hovering about in chat even when we are active on the site. You see us talk in comments or meta, but that's off the radar of a lot of casual site users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two, I've got the thickest skin.  It's not really easy to have the same four or so usual characters scream about how you are an awful person and abusive mod and  every time you take (or don't take) an action on the site. Every mod deals with that in different ways. I tend to be the kind of person who takes the action and lays it out there and can deal with it when people attack me, so I tend to step up and take the public communication more, and that's fine. The other mods are involved and we discuss all the major policy statements and whatnot ahead of time, and ask for another set of eyes on things that get contentious, but we prefer to let the already engaged mod do the talking, to avoid the &quot;Mom said no, I'll ask Dad&quot; syndrome. Unified front.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't mind more mods, but I am guessing there's sites much larger than ours getting along fine with three, so I wouldn't say it's really needed. In the last month between all three of us we've only done 80 edits, 20 or so answer closes and 20 or so post deletes, which is only a little more than one activity per mod per day (though we've done more like 500 comment deletes, which is a PITA, we wish people would abide by the comment guidance).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-04-07T23:00:09.537" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3435" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3438" CreationDate="2014-04-08T12:40:10.277" Score="5" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;We now have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3432/1204&quot;&gt;this notice&lt;/a&gt; that can get added to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions. An example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25329/1204&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;our rules for game recommendations&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;All responses must cite actual experience or reference others' experiences!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would seem this has to be manually switched on by a moderator for each question, so our new game-rec questions could sometimes go a few hours before they get the notice added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dear diamond mods: what course of action would you like us to take on new game-rec questions, if we spot them before you've added a notice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the above message on a comment, and let you delete it and replace it with the actual notice when you see the new question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do nothing, and let you just add the notice later?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we should be leaving this notice as a comment, here it is in easily copyable code form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;As this is a [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation) question, please adhere to the [FAQ](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about), the rules for subjective questions as outlined in [Good Subjective, Bad Subjective](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) and [our rules for game recommendations](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071). **All responses must cite actual experience or reference others' experiences!**&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="How should we deal with game-recs now that we have a notice?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3435" CreationDate="2014-04-08T13:33:53.737" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is a case where flagging would be silly. It makes for an odd workflow for mods and puts a permanent black mark on the record of the user who asked a question that is quite likely in bounds for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the best bet is perhaps to add the post notice as a proforma comment, and then move on. The mods can stop in and add the post notice as they arise. This gets the right information across in a way that a mod can remove with a single click when they add the post notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; thing we can do is lobby for users to be allowed to add post notices as a part of the reputation based privilege system. Better (non-mod dependent) tools for post notices is something the Skeptics and Christianity communities have asked for and should be something that we begin pushing for as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few of these proposals on MSO and a couple of per-site metas when I find them I'll post them here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1961/add-a-review-queue-for-posts-with-a-citation-needed-notice&quot;&gt;https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1961/add-a-review-queue-for-posts-with-a-citation-needed-notice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/189528/170797&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/189528/170797&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added a feature request to our meta to get the ball rolling from our point of view. You can find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3442/1084&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T13:08:01.837" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3430" CreationDate="2014-04-08T16:15:23.573" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since I was used as an example, and I like to talk, I'll go over some of my reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;When I don't&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I do not attribute changes to the main copy of the question / answer. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34689/77&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; as an example... The bolded text was softened up a bit to be more accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case I don't attribute because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The words are still my own both before and after.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Attributing all changes would clutter the answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that same answer, you can see a different kind of attribution, though. I try to always link directly to answers that I quote or otherwise reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;When I do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most often, I attribute comments when it aids the structure of the answer. This will most often happen when I'm rolling comments into an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer you linked is a good example of this. The comments don't really add anything to the answer itself. Neither of them have anything to do with either of the two central questions that are being answered. On the other hand, they're both interesting points that may very well help the person who asked the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to rewrite the original answer, because the content I'm adding is tangential and not really important. So I put attach the new information to the bottom as addenda. I don't really want to take the time to reword the new information into flowing prose (because I'm lazy), so I just use a list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point I'm doing very little work, so an attribution feels somewhat necessary. Also, I like the look of the names a bit better than bullet points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will also sometimes use a structure such as &amp;quot;So and so raises the question... &amp;quot; when comments indicate that something needs clarifying or the need for a new section. It's just easier to add a &amp;quot;Q&amp;amp;A&amp;quot; format than working out connecting prose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Does @UserName do anything?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does not. Other than that people who use twitter recognize an @ symbol followed by a bunch of letters as a handle. No notifications or links are generated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why link to the profile?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It shows &amp;quot;who&amp;quot; the person I'm talking about is on the site. And it gives them an opportunity to promote their own platform (web site, blog, comment block, whatever) via their user profile. It also just feels like what I'd expect to see on the Internet, with its emphasis on links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What's up with rolling in comments?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments on the site are semi-permanent. The mods delete them fairly regularly. On the other hand, the mods frequently leave relevant comments while getting rid of the trash. So, I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; just let the mods clean out the garbage comments until eventually only Eric B and Hey I Can Chan's comments remained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't take this route, because rolling the comments in gives me a bit of extra control. I can expand on, format, spell-correct, organize, merge, split, etc. the comments to my heart's content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also means I don't need to guess which ones the mods will save, and the mods don't need to guess which ones I think are important. If I leave out an important comment, someone can edit it into the answer proper, or the mods can leave the original comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(although usually they'll just delete everything but a few highly upvoted comments, once they see they've been integrated into the answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Attribution required&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned elsewhere, attribution is usually required when quoting or paraphrasing someone. There's some wiggle-room for comments in that they are intended to &amp;quot;improve the answer,&amp;quot; but anything from elsewhere should be attributed and linked (if possible).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Facts should also be attributed when possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;tldr;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Callouts like the ones in your example are as much about making the answer look nice as they are about giving thanks. Saying thanks is polite, but not always necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-08T16:15:23.573" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3438" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3435" CreationDate="2014-04-08T20:39:00.213" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just add the usual notice text as a comment.  I at least was under the impression that the post notice would auto-add for that tag, but since it doesn't, I would rather the community be able to post the message in a comment than require a diamond mod to do it and have it be arguably more prominent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll use the post notice if we happen across one, but otherwise do feel free to simply paste the usual text into a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-08T20:39:00.213" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3439" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3441" CreationDate="2014-04-09T07:54:17.360" Score="5" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/746/community-wiki-of-abbreviations&quot;&gt;Community-wiki of abbreviations&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we implement a Markdown or plain HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) tag to give more meaning to abbreviations used in questions and answers? I think questions and answers would benefit if this information was readily and immediately available. I personally try to avoid using abbreviations if I can help it, but I completely understand its common use by others who are familiar with RPG (Role-playing Game) systems (see what I did there?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In HTML, there already exists such a tag, and it is supported by search-engines as well for SEO (Search Engine Optimization) purposes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;This is the mouse tool-tip text.&quot;&amp;gt;abbreviation&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;Role-playing Game&quot;&amp;gt;RPG&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot;&amp;gt;D&amp;amp;D&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;Non-Player Character&quot;&amp;gt;NPC&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;Game Master&quot;&amp;gt;GM&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;Pathfinder&quot;&amp;gt;PF&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;abbr title=&quot;All Flesh Must Be Eaten&quot;&amp;gt;AFMBE&amp;lt;/abbr&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While some of these examples may seem trivial to most of us here, people will come here for our expertise and by speaking a large amount in abbreviations we obscure the message of our answers (and sometimes questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of editing answers to 'expand' abbreviations to their full wording, I think leaving them as abbreviations with a mouse tool-tip will educate readers in a fast and concise way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Abbreviations with this HTML tag usually look like a hyperlink, except the underline is dashed or dotted, instead of a solid line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T08:38:24.453" Title="Can we implement Markdown for abbreviations?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3439" CreationDate="2014-04-09T08:10:59.113" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;While it's not a bad idea in principle, the specific request is a bad one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for expert Q&amp;amp;A by and for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games. If you play or run Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, FATE, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs (including LARPs), and need answers to your questions (or would like to answer questions about these games), this is the place for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jargon is necessary for succinct and clear communications. Glossing all of our jargon, or requiring the glossing of our jargon would dilute our experience to define every abbreviation for the newcomers to the site. Mainly, it would unnecessarily alienate experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments or direct edits are a great way to require an individual participant to be more clear, but I think implementing abbreviations &lt;em&gt;for this specific purpose&lt;/em&gt; is contrary to the intended audience of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T08:10:59.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3439" CreationDate="2014-04-09T08:38:24.453" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would kinda like this, and it's crossed my mind several times that it'd be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to define GM or D&amp;amp;D or PF - if you don't understand what those mean, you'll pick it up from context. This isn't when I'd find it useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; find it useful when I'm discussing one of the many 4e books. I don't want to write out &lt;em&gt;Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms&lt;/em&gt; over and over, but when I'm discussing a dozen different terms, when I start writing &lt;em&gt;HotFK&lt;/em&gt;, or just write that straight away, I'm not sure a less experienced user will get what I'm referring to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'd be really nice to be able to write &lt;code&gt;[HotFK](&quot;Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms&quot;)&lt;/code&gt; the &lt;em&gt;first time&lt;/em&gt; I want to mention that book, thus they're introduced to the abbreviation and can mouse over it to see what it stands for. Thus I can just go ahead and use RC, PHB2, TEE, TPB, MOP, etc and just type each out in full once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course the alternative is just to write:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms (HotFK) you can (...) and HotFK is (...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T08:38:24.453" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3442" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-09T13:07:20.827" Score="8" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have a post notice now for game-rec questions. That's great, there's just one problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only 3 people on this site are capable of applying it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This request is for one of two things, either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Apply the tag automatically when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is applied. Since this is a notice that should appear on &lt;em&gt;all questions with this tag&lt;/em&gt; it would be appropriate to add it to all of them automatically. There are some legitimate concerns on the code base side that Grace Note alludes to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/14497344#14497344&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. I don't know the codebase, and I don't know how much SE would be willing to change the model here just for us.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Allow normal users to apply (and potentially review via the queues) applications of post notices, or a subset of them. Honestly, the post notices are as follows&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Citation Needed&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Insufficient Explanation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Current Event&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Custom Post notice per-site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These all (with the possible exception of Insufficient Explanation), seem like that can be applied by high users with a minimal amount of review. I'm of the mind that this should be a rep based privilege akin to protecting questions. Let is happen right away, let high (~10-20k) rep users add it and then queue them up to be reviewed a few days later to see if the post has been edited that the post notice is no longer appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the last 3 months, we've averaged about 2 of these a week. That's obviously not too much, but if the post notice is going to be a useful feature it has to be something that more than 3 of us can apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T13:08:19.903" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T13:08:19.903" Title="Allow the community to attach the game-rec post notice or tie it directly to the tag" Tags="|feature-request|game-recommendation|post-notice|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3443" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-09T16:11:19.460" Score="-1" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1030/what-software-can-be-useful-for-a-dm-running-dd&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; on useful software for DMs was asked back in 2010, and while it was useful then, it's now slightly outdated and much too broad. It could easily be split into several questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, people are voting to close. But could we protect it instead (basically, a banner appears that says it's a historical question but no longer a good fit, and you can't answer or vote any more)? I think the question is still useful, but I agree that it shouldn't be left open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T09:30:23.533" Title="Can we protect this question instead of closing it?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3443" CreationDate="2014-04-09T16:19:13.083" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's called a historical lock, and I have applied it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T16:19:13.083" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3443" CreationDate="2014-04-09T16:48:19.587" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/126631/170797&quot;&gt;historical lock&lt;/a&gt; is called for here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This historical lock is for widely upvoted, highly valued posts that should be kept around for posterity. This post is neither of those things (14 upvotes is pretty good for what it is, but none of the answers come close to that). It's not something we should be using very often as our history is short and our sense of topicality is not all that evolved from the beginning of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official guidance on historical locks is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When is it appropriate to lock a question for historical reasons?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions can be historically locked when:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post is Off-Topic or Not Constructive, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post is stellar, in spite of its off-topic nature, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are a large number of views, upvotes and inbound links on the post, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post is contentious; i.e. it has been closed and reopened at least once, or deleted and undeleted at least once&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is definitely the first, and possibly the second (it's well viewed, but its' over 3 years old, and I'm unaware of &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; inbound links to it). It's not the second though, and this is the first action it's had towards contentiousness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we should do one of two things with this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We can close it, realize that most of the information there is outdated and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We can close it and ask a couple of narrower questions that would have appropriate answers made up of posts citing the answers there that are still valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we shouldn't do is preserve it as is. That said, a simple close here wouldn't slate this question for deletion (and historical locking it limits its searchability). It won't get caught by the automated cleanup scripts (they don't delete well voted posts), and it would be hard for normal users to delete (we don't have enough people to vote for it). So the only danger here would be mod deletion. And that seems unfounded if the mods are willing to apply an historical lock.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I say, let it get closed, if there is useful stuff there, let's salvage it, but it's not doing anyone any good if we can't edit it or add current/relevant answers to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T17:10:34.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3433" CreationDate="2014-04-09T23:06:31.020" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, the question of &quot;more mods&quot; would boil down to this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a problem with diamond moderator intervention not happening&#xA;  quickly enough due to overwork?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All three of them have responded in one way or another here, and they seem to believe the answer is no. Having been a frequent visitor for a while, I also haven't seen that problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a case where something has sat around for an extended period of time with a problem that high rep users (like us) couldn't fix on our own with edits or close votes? mxyzplk mentioned the only one I can think of: comment wars. And honestly, I'm an offender on that too. It's something we all need to be aware of. Generally speaking we can help those by not doing them, and if we see another user doing them, gently intervene to remind people that it should be taken to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, as a user, I don't see a need for more moderators. There isn't a problem on the site right now that increasing the number is going to solve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-04-09T23:06:31.020" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3447" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-10T12:29:42.677" Score="7" ViewCount="723" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/revision/182189/234580/worst-comments-per-user&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;On the RPG Data Explorer&lt;/a&gt; ... I've made a query of the number of comments per user. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The results, especially done as a ratio of comments over posts is &lt;em&gt;fascinating&lt;/em&gt;. At this point, I will simply encourage users to contemplate their comment activity versus their more productive activity. Refer to the site comment policy here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any ways I can improve this query, to help members of this site self-moderate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/182190/comments-per-tag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Number of comments per tag&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/182191/statistics-on-site-comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Average and Standard Deviation of comment to post ratio per user (1.62 +- 1.66)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/182189/worst-comments-per-user?UserId=760&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Worst comments per user&lt;/a&gt; sorted on (for all comments in a post: sum of age in days - comment upvotes) Posts with multiple, old, unscored comments on them will have a high &quot;score&quot;. My worst, at time of writing, was 7150, and was a back and forth thread that should have been purged long ago.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dont:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gSuPl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-10-22T15:04:22.683" LastActivityDate="2019-10-22T15:04:22.683" Title="A chart of comments per user" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3448" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3433" CreationDate="2014-04-10T12:53:35.340" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As per some of the comments on the question itself, it seems there is a suggestion that some people might be supporting this idea due to a dislike with the way one of the moderators sometimes operates. If this is the case and this is the main reason this idea is being supported, I believe it is misguided and would set a dangerous precedent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are existing systems in place to handle situations where users are unhappy with the way a moderator does their job. Expanding the number of moderators as a way of 'watering down' the behaviour of the mod in question just attempts to side-step proper processes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As a final comment, I want to stress that I am not suggesting for one second that the original questioner is motivated in this way, only that it appears some of the supporters of the idea might be.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-04-10T12:53:35.340" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3449" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3447" CreationDate="2014-04-11T00:09:14.607" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think comment metrics mean that much. Commenting lots doesn't necessarily mean you're ruining the site. Commenting a little doesn't necessarily mean you're not misusing the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/boardgames/query/182189/aggregate-comments-per-user&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;I put B&amp;amp;CG SE into the comment-counter&lt;/a&gt; and the numbers didn't seem that different from RPG SE's, yet that site really doesn't have a comment problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, more so than how much you comment, consider &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you comment. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;There's a whole page about it&lt;/a&gt;, but I think it's helpful to rephrase it in terms of the problems we actually have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do&lt;/strong&gt; comment seeking clarification. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comment to ask a question's poster to add a game tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comment to point out that a question doesn't spell out the actual &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; being asked very clearly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comment to request references from answers citing rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;However! If you just know the clarifying information already (e.g. you have your game book handy to add a page reference, or you can identify a game based on the specific terminology in a post), then just edit the post &lt;em&gt;instead of&lt;/em&gt; commenting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do&lt;/strong&gt; comment suggesting improvements that you can't make yourself. For example, if someone just wrote a kickass expert answer and you really want to see a bit more discussion on one point, ask them to elaborate. I've seen a lot of good answers become great ones as a result of these kinds of comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If someone asks you a question like this, do your best to answer in an edit rather than more comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there's a lot more you want to learn, write a new question instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't&lt;/strong&gt; use comments to leave drive-by mini-answers. If you don't think your response merits a full answer, it's probably not insightful enough to be worth posting in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Especially&lt;/em&gt; don't use comments to leave drive-by mini-answers to questions you think are malformed. You are actively polluting the stack when you do this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't&lt;/strong&gt; use comments to refight the same argument each time a question comes up. RPG SE posts aren't an excuse to post your special spiel every time you see some pet-peeve keyword show up in a question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you find yourself repeating yourself in the comments, &lt;strong&gt;just stop&lt;/strong&gt;. Write your arguments into an answer, or move the conversation to chat, or go express yourself off-site somewhere (may I suggest starting your own blog?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are a good way to request more information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments a second-rate way to share information with others. Use sparingly!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are not a space to express your opinions just because you feel like it. Don't try to sneakily turn RPG SE into a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T00:09:14.607" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3447" CreationDate="2014-04-11T00:25:27.527" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I just wanted to point out that if you realize a discussion is getting out of hand, or is resolved, you have a way to do your part here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Delete your own comments.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is something you can always do. If the discussion is over and the comments are no longer relevant, hit delete on yours and flag the others as obsolete. This lets a mod know they can come by an clean up, and they will be that much happier if you've already taken care of yours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is something that it's really easy to get into the habit of doing and shows that your committed to trying to use comments for the right purpose (not to have long drawn out discussions but to clarify post information, point out correctable errors etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to go diving to clean up your &lt;em&gt;own&lt;/em&gt; comments you can hit up your profile under the activity page there is a tab for comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T00:25:27.527" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3452" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3447" CreationDate="2014-04-11T00:31:50.217" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;To amplify the other answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're responding to a comment on your own answer, try to edit your answer first, then flag that comment for deletion. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comments are temporary. Mods spend quite a lot of time on janitorial duty. We'd be delighted if people took an idle 15 minutes or so and policed up their own comments, ones that are outdated or which no longer make sense. You don't have to do this in huge blocks of time, but making a habit of &quot;picking up after yourself&quot; will dramatically improve quality without much effort.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stop using the &quot;Edit:&quot; syntax of forums. We have explicit revision histories on everything, so everything should read as if the best version was the first version. if you see Edit: X hanging around, edit it out to make the content flow more smoothly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're tempted to reply to a comment, assume the commenter won't be persuaded by it. Is the temptation still there?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you simply must argue (&lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/386/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://xkcd.com/386/&lt;/a&gt;) don't. If you cannot resist the siren call, look to see how academics argue in journals. Discuss common misconceptions as an addendum to your answer and address how those misconceptions are wrong. (Don't call names or point to specific wrong answers, that's what downvotes are for) just show how the misconception is a misconception. And this way you get to cite resources, so that you're not just engaging in empty rhetoric.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Corrective comments can be cleaned after it's obvious that the target has read them or after some time has passed. If you see my old comments on something, feel free to flag them. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New users tend to want to respond to every answer with a comment-as-discussion. Try to nip that behaviour in the bud with a educational comment like: &quot;Hey, comments are for clarification only. If you want to thank someone for their contribution, upvote them. If you want to discuss things, go to a forum. If you have follow on questions, we welcome them as new questions, or as clairification on your original question.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-04-11T01:32:38.273" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T01:32:38.273" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3447" CreationDate="2014-04-11T01:07:54.507" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is really cool maths, and I did take some time to reflect. It led me to think about a few points of confusion and lack of skill I suffer from (maybe some others do too?), and I'd like to share them in case it's helpful to anyone else. I think some of these might be worth expanding into their own meta posts if I'm not the only one who suffers from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I often have trouble pulling out the useful bits from comments and editing them into a question; I really try, but sometimes I feel totally inept and it seem like leaving the comments is preferable--but then of course, they're cluttering things up and will probably vanish eventually so the value is lost entirely. There might be room on meta for a question about how to effectively edit useful comment stuff into answers so more comments can get flagged as obsolete. I think part of this is because when comments turn into dialogues it's harder to pull useful info out of them, which leads me to the next point.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The citizens who frequent the chat rooms recently got a (entirely justified) chastisement about overusing the ability to invite users to chat in order to help improve questions or answers. But now I, at least, have stopped doing that pretty much altogether. I try to use comments instead--and again, I try to flag as obsolete once the work is done, but it flies in the face of what a mod on another site once told me: &quot;If you go back and forth more than once on a single post, take it to chat, you've basically exhausted the usefulness of comments at that point.&quot; That does seem accurate. But it leaves me either misusing comments, misusing chat, or leaving low-quality posts lying around that could really shine with a bit of dialogue on how to polish them. (The last time I felt comments of this sort were going to run into a conversation, I instead flagged for a mod hoping they'd leave some pithy and edifying &quot;how to follow guidelines&quot; comment as I've seen them do expertly in the past, but they thought I was asking for it to be deleted. That was awkward.) I have no idea where to find a &quot;best practices&quot; guideline on this, if it exists. If it doesn't, maybe we can work on that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Recognising if a comment is useful and appropriate is not always easy or obvious to me when I'm in the thick of it. I really appreciate Brian's point above that &quot;If you're responding to a comment on your own answer, try to edit your answer first, then flag that comment for deletion.&quot; This is an example of what I'd like to see more of: instead of just telling me what's bad, help me recognise symptoms of that behaviour and offering explicit alternatives (and I'm totally cool with &quot;take a deep breath and close the tab while you make some tea&quot; as an alternative). AlexP's &quot;comments are for requesting, not sharing, info&quot; is also a great bit of advice along these lines, as it helps me recognise whether my comment is suited to the medium. I'm not all that great at self-examination and some pointers would be good--maybe this could be the subject of another meta post where citizens can offer what they've learned through experience? &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments as rules clarifications. There's a whole subcategory of comment which seems to consist of &quot;you're not SEing right.&quot; And the comment is usually true, and polite, and helps the person figure out how SE works and become a better citizen. They seem to improve the site's quality and I don't know of any more appropriate way to convey that information. IS this an appropriate use of comments? If not, what alternative behaviour should we have when we see someone with a simple misunderstanding of how SE works? And if so, these don't need to stick around forever, so when do I flag them as obsolete? The person who needs to see it won't respond if they're using comments right. I suppose I could start a bookmark folder with my comments to come back to flag as obsolete after a month, but I'm sure I'll forget. Maybe a whole new meta post on 'educational/corrective comments' would be good too--I know they're not inherently wrong because I see mods using them, but they do seem like a corner case which could use some clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will be going through my backlog of comments (slowly) and reviewing them, editing good stuff into posts as needed and then deleting. I hope this will give me some new insight into the comment environment and my place in it. (And I'll try not to spam the &quot;active&quot; page with a lot of old questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-04-11T01:32:02.913" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T01:32:02.913" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3454" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3473" CreationDate="2014-04-11T02:59:51.633" Score="52" ViewCount="2415" Body="&lt;p&gt;To amplify the bullet from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3452/760&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stop using the &amp;quot;Edit:&amp;quot; syntax of forums. We have explicit revision histories on everything, so everything should read as if the best version was the first version. if you see Edit: X hanging around, edit it out to make the content flow more smoothly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, we have a revision history. We have a great revision history. Signalling edits is for sites that don't have a revision history. Make your edits flow cleanly in your original post, such that a first time visitor who reads it (the majority of our traffic) doesn't have to apply errata to a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, &lt;em&gt;Nota Bene&lt;/em&gt; (N.B.) instructions to answerers are necessary in a question. But &amp;quot;Addendum&amp;quot; is just a longer word for &amp;quot;edit.&amp;quot; At the end of the day, just tacking text onto the bottom of the post is a lazy excuse for &lt;em&gt;not improving&lt;/em&gt; a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:02:25.170" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:02:25.170" Title="Don't signal your edits in text" Tags="|discussion|faq|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3455" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3454" CreationDate="2014-04-11T05:44:35.877" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No really, we mean it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When, in the course of natural events (i.e. not searching specifically for it) you see signs of a poorly edited-in edit, correct it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And regarding d7's claim about the flamethrower squad being called to deal with threads...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fwJ5H.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I can only allude to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonriders_of_Pern&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dragonriders of Pern&lt;/a&gt;, burning Thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-04-17T20:21:01.173" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T20:21:01.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3443" CreationDate="2014-04-11T06:56:21.550" Score="1" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, people are voting to close. But could we protect it instead (basically, a banner appears that says it's a historical question but no longer a good fit, and you can't answer or vote any more)? I think the question is still useful, but I agree that it shouldn't be left open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does it need protection from? Why would it need to be locked?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might be operating under a misconception: closing a question is not an indication it's going to get deleted. That question isn't going anywhere. It's going to stay where it is. You will still be able to reference it. The only difference is that it will be closed, which we both seem to agree is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're right it's useful, and that's exactly why it's going to stay. Let me quote the guidance on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;deletion feature&lt;/a&gt; us 10k+ users unlock:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When should I delete questions?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closed questions that are of no lasting value whatsoever should be flagged and deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before voting to delete, please check that there are &lt;strong&gt;no good answers&lt;/strong&gt;; if so, then the question should be flagged for moderator attention as a potential merge candidate. We don't like to lose great answers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Emphasis not added; that's bolded in the guidance too. Would you say the question is of no lasting value whatsoever? I wouldn't either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What about automatic deletions?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's safe. Questions only get cleared away if they've been closed for two weeks, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; have no answers, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the question is scored 0 or lower. This question doesn't meet those criteria. There's other circumstances, like if a question or answer accrues 6 spam flags, but that's not going to happen either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/3/1204&quot;&gt;the third question ever asked on this site&lt;/a&gt; was closed last year and is still around, and Stack Overflow has a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/q/28360/254830&quot;&gt;closed in 2008&lt;/a&gt; which is still around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Don't fret about closures. This doesn't and didn't need locking.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, by locking this question we agree is useful, it can no longer be updated as a reward, we can no longer leave comments to request improvement, and we can no longer edit the answers to improve them, such as by keeping them current or updating broken links. Compared to closure, we might agree that locking this is &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;worse!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we remove the historical lock on this thing and just let it be closed, since there was nothing wrong with it being closed to begin with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Unless, of course, the lock is completely appropriate for another reason, in which case let's leave it as is. But I'm pretty sure this is fine just leaving closed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T07:57:19.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3454" CreationDate="2014-04-11T12:24:38.947" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll check &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=%22edit%3a%22&quot;&gt;the highest scoring posts containing &quot;edit:&quot;&lt;/a&gt; once in a while and do a couple of quick edits...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T12:24:38.947" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3458" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3459" CreationDate="2014-04-11T16:09:05.247" Score="10" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2742/how-are-comments-removed-when-they-are-no-longer-relevant&quot;&gt;How are comments removed when they are no longer relevant?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I remove my own comments or flag them as obsolete if my suggestion or advise is absorbed into the post on which I commented? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T16:13:52.787" Title="When someone updates their post with my comment, should I remove my comment?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3458" CreationDate="2014-04-11T16:13:52.787" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes; if you can remember to go back and remove them, self-deleting obsolete comments is good practice. If there are other comments on the same post that are also obsolete now, you can use a flag to mark them as obsolete as well, which signals a mod to review and (likely) remove them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-04-11T16:13:52.787" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3460" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-12T15:43:15.923" Score="7" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a lot of meta discussion about Good Subjective, Bad Subjective and asking the questions.  We also have just as many on answering.  But we &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; have as many on &lt;strong&gt;voting&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may come down to a personal thing, and that's fine... I just wanted to bring it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific question that came up was in regards to a game recommendation for good one-on-one play(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34782/easy-to-learn-system-that-supports-one-on-one-play/&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;).  I answered(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34788&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;) with a system that had great rules that supported not only the answers to the question, but was also a generic system made for adapting existing source material.  It also has some background issues that some find objectionable, and someone downvoted for that reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't about the objectionable part.  It's the fact that a good answer to a question was downvoted only for that reason, and it was stated as such in the comments.  The system is pretty much advertised to be able to do one on one play with classic materials.  The background information is tacked on for use of the rulebook as a one stop shop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought long and hard about posting this question for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is subjective.  Therefore our opinions inform our voting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The opinions on the content are perfectly valid to have.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But after consideration, it seems that the opinions on content result in a vote on points unrelated to the question.  This seems like one of those points that informs what a community becomes, i.e. is it about our own reactions and opinions on questions?  Even when not subjective?  Or is it about putting aside any unnecessary opinions in order to answer the questions, and vote appropriately?  The first way dangerously comes close to the voting process being a popularity vote, in my opinion, rather than a rationalized process based on how well the content answers the question.  And so, I bring this up to get a community consensus on how our votes should be informed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, my stance on it is such:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I only vote down if the information is incorrect or inappropriate, no matter my feelings on the topic. It keeps the votes and conversation from a personal level. Especially as I might find something offensive that you don't, and vice versa. I keep it on the level of the question asked. But that's just my approach.  I might withhold a positive vote based purely on my feelings on the answer.  In truth, I think that's wrong also, and hadn't really appreciated it until this moment.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T22:44:21.780" Title="Voting on Subjective Answers" Tags="|discussion|voting|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3460" CreationDate="2014-04-12T16:04:42.503" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;All that voting means on SE is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvote: This answer is useful (unstated: &quot;to me&quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote: This answer is not useful&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That usefulness/unusefulness is entirely subjective. People can and do vote based on the content of the answer, its grammar, its political correctness, whether they have a hate-on for the author, etc. I understand and validate your sadness at that but in the end, that's the way it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; people vote? Well ideally they would show perfect apprehension of both question and answer, appreciation for every piece of guidance we've given on meta and the SE Way in general, along with a full realization that my ideas are always the best, and thus upvote my answers unremittingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Levity aside, in this case I think there is a point to be made on this particular Q&amp;amp;A. Sure, a game might be able to be stripped of questionable content, but is that really the best choice for a starter game? Probably not, and the downvote is possibly representative of the set of people who wouldn't appreciate that in their first game. I wouldn't think Scarlet Heroes, or Poison'd, or other games of the sort are really effective first games, just like Human Centipede probably isn't the best first horror movie for someone just getting into the genre. Frankly I consider pretty much all of the current answers to that question pretty bad, and of the general &quot;I can make one of my fave games hit your super vague requirements&quot; ilk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So though while ideally people will vote on answers based on their suitability to the criteria and how well they answer the questions, there are a lot of factors - some more valid, some more spurious - they actually use.  And, besides the other safeguards (edits, delete votes, comments, etc.) - that's the way the system works, and the way the system should work. The SE metaphor is of lightly cultivated crowdsourcing, and if you want to use the site, you have to understand that vision won't change; there are many other sources of information if you want more or less cultivated content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-04-12T18:26:57.770" LastActivityDate="2014-04-12T18:26:57.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3460" CreationDate="2014-04-12T16:32:43.580" Score="-8" Body="&lt;p&gt;It feels like a double standard. On one hand, a moderator will appear and downright delete the post people wrote if it does not include personal experience... yet when people post personal experience, anyone can come along and downvote it. To say &quot;you are wrong&quot; does not seem to need personal experience. I think if the original answer must be based on personal experience, a downvote should be based on personal experience as well. If someone says &quot;I tried what you described worked for you and we failed. How did you handle &lt;em&gt;$problem&lt;/em&gt;? We could not.&quot;, that speaks of personal experience. And that is helpful. I do not understand the requirements on posts if the votes are not enforced to be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way it is right now, this site &lt;em&gt;tries&lt;/em&gt; to enforce standards, but at the same time leaves those enforced posts up to random favoritism. While the post-police is way overboard compared to other sites, voting seems to be based on personal likes, not the professional &quot;hey, good answer&quot; attitude of the other SE sites I know.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over at StackOverflow, people only downvote if something is not helpful. That means if it's factually wrong or not an answer to the question. It's a professional community. This site is the only one I know that votes based on &quot;likes&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2014-04-12T16:32:43.580" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3463" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3460" CreationDate="2014-04-12T17:00:25.667" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Recommendations imply suitability&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that &amp;quot;objective vs. subjective&amp;quot; is a bit of a red herring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Game recommendations come with an implicit endorsement of suitability for use at the table.&lt;/strong&gt; That's why they're recommendations, not &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/advsearch/rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;database queries&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true that to write a good answer, you need to put the OP's goals and preferences above your own, but the best game-rec answers are going to be the ones that provide wisdom rather than just information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;→ Imagine you know a game that meets some question's pretty specific requirements (a roll-under system about undersea dragons with dream-magic powers, maybe), but that game has serious structural problems. Should you recommend that game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe you go ahead and recommend it, but equivocally.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe you recommend it with a guide to how to deal with the negatives.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe you recommend it straight-up because you don't think it's a problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe you don't recommend the game at all, despite it meeting the literal requirements, because you know about it but you wouldn't actually, you know, &lt;em&gt;recommend&lt;/em&gt; it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a big judgement call, but that's part and parcel of the &amp;quot;expert&amp;quot; Q&amp;amp;A concept of the site. You're supposed to take your built-up wisdom and exercise it for someone else's benefit, and on their behalf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this applies to voting, too. Of course game-rec votes shouldn't be a straight-up popularity contest. You should, however, do your best to use the systems provided to add your own knowledge to the pool, which can include downvoting answers that feature judgement calls you disagree with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The intent of my specific downvote&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note how this meta topic was prompted by the downvote &lt;em&gt;plus its explanatory comment&lt;/em&gt;. That's why I made the comment: to draw attention. (In a sense, I'm actually using a downvote to draw attention to the comment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I raised the specific issue because &amp;quot;problematic&amp;quot; content (like sexist tropes or cultural bigotry) can make the entire experience hostile and alienating. Gamers often feel uncomfortable actually discussing problems like these, but they can be a total deal-breaker, sometimes in ways that promote lingering personal discomfort with a group or the hobby as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that a black mark against the game doesn't have to be a black mark against the answer itself. &lt;strong&gt;A great game-rec answer actually &lt;em&gt;enhances&lt;/em&gt; a game text with useful advice about how to utilize it, including guidance on dealing with its weakest or ugliest parts.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I used a comment instead of an edit because I didn't feel comfortable editing my opinion right into the answer: it would be putting too many words into someone else's mouth. This way, the OP is free to choose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They can edit the question to address my criticism, at which point I can delete my comment and rescind the downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They can leave it out if they disagree, at which point the comment might stay there, but it's minor and marginal compared to the full text of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I used a downvote because I think this landmine is a particularly big deal, so not having it mentioned at all actively detracts from an otherwise strong answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was the best way I could see to use the SE system to raise a concern I considered important without stepping on the (thoughtful and useful) contributions of other users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-12T20:47:58.993" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3460" CreationDate="2014-04-12T17:01:13.407" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;As mxyzplk points out the criteria for voting is extremely simple, is the answer useful or not.  However I think we can put some criteria around when you should vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strong indicators that you should upvote are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer directly addresses &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of the question's criteria.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is factually correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is comprehensive in it's treatment of the issues (i.e. Pro's and cons)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is something you have &lt;em&gt;experienced being effective in solving the question's problem&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strong indicators that you should downvote are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is factually incorrect.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer doesn't address any part of the question besides the title.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is myopic, and ignores obvious problems with their suggestion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is something you have &lt;em&gt;experienced not being effective in solving the question's problem or detrimental in some way.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that it's largely a matter of preference.  Each person addresses grammar, style, tone, and popularity differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2014-04-12T17:11:25.687" LastActivityDate="2014-04-12T17:11:25.687" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3447" CreationDate="2014-04-14T18:57:06.517" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think on this site the comments are often better than the questions and answers and that comments are cleaned up too aggressively.  Most of the this question and it's answers proceed from a far different premise and so can't really be evaluated by anyone who disagrees with that premise as I do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2813" LastActivityDate="2014-04-14T18:57:06.517" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3467" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-15T12:26:03.823" Score="6" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have two tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt;, whose primary purpose seems to be to denote a type of thing. I'm not really sure what the intended use of these is, but what they are being used for is all over the map.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Online-resources had been used for all of the following (I've cleaned most of it up):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;. This was easy to fix.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Along with a system tag, because someone was looking for some reference that they thought was online instead of in a book. This has been very inconsistently applied, and doesn't really add anything even when it is applied (almost never is the person trying to say &quot;I won't accept the answer if it comes from a book).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone is looking for &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; online. Sometimes &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; has its own tag, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/art&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;art&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;art&lt;/a&gt;. Sometimes it doesn't. The tag for &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; seems to be the only useful one here, unless online-resources is meant to mean &quot;collection of unrelated stuff that happens to be online&quot;. Far as I can tell, that doesn't actually happen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a catch-all for otherwise unrelated things that happen online, but may or may not belong in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, books has been used:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where can I find old books? (These have been closed when they pop up.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Along with a system tag, because someone was looking for some reference that they thought was in a book and can't remember which one it is. Once again very inconsistently applied, and once again I've never seen any case where a person would reject an answer if it came from an online source instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comparing specific versions of a book for changes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions like &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34615/what-are-the-benefits-of-owning-a-physical-book&quot;&gt;What benefit does owning physical books have?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll note that #2 on both lists are basically the same thing, the only difference is where the person asking the question thinks the thing they're looking for is. Given that the person in pretty much every case is just looking for the answer and doesn't actually care if its in a book or online, that's largely pointless. It's also very inconsistently applied, making the tag not reliable for that purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I don't think either of these tags is doing a whole lot that's useful. They're overly broad, generally inconsistently used, and don't really add any kind of useful organization. There's a couple of cases where we have nothing better, but that should be a matter of creating tags to more accurately reflect what's being asked, rather than saying &quot;this thing is about something that happens to be online, so it gets an online tag.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Kind of a huge amount of the answers on the site rely on things that are either online or in a book, and most of them are not tagged with either of those things. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; in particular is a really useless distinction, as it's a collection that has nothing in common except the Internet is involved somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-04-15T19:33:00.580" Title="Do we really need resource type tags like books or online-resources?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3468" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3467" CreationDate="2014-04-15T12:46:29.527" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, but...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we remove it because Tools is already covering this area then we need to expand and improve &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; wiki entry and description blurb.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only immediate rebuttal that came to mind was D&amp;amp;D Insider and Tools related questions but we already have a specific tag for that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-insider&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-insider&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-insider&lt;/a&gt; which has effectively stolen the fire/thunder from the online-resources tag (all 7 questions). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-04-15T12:46:29.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3469" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3467" CreationDate="2014-04-15T19:33:00.580" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think they are useful enough that people are using them... If something's a pure synonym that's fine, or a pure meta tag then spending effort to wipe it out is merited. But beyond that, the tagging system is emergent for a reason - unless there is a very, very clear case against a tag then we shouldn't expend effort on it. I would think personally that people looking for a bunch of online D&amp;amp;D resources might well use the tag.  That is a &quot;thing,&quot; beyond just being art or random generators, as proven by blogrolls everywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-15T19:33:00.580" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="782" CreationDate="2014-04-16T19:47:34.250" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a problem of concept here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea of the Stack Exchange is not posting &quot;expert&quot; questions, but expert &lt;strong&gt;answers&lt;/strong&gt; for questions. Stack Overflow is the best friend of the beginner developer because of this--even the most basic topics are covered, with TONS of content generated by experts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site needs to be useful to everyone; they just need to follow the guidelines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, no, you shouldn't judge a question by its expertise. The idea of voting is &quot;Useful&quot; or &quot;Not Useful,&quot; not &quot;Expert&quot; or &quot;Newbie,&quot; and really good insight can be given to even the most newbie of questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-04-16T23:13:38.350" LastActivityDate="2014-04-16T23:13:38.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3472" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="782" CreationDate="2014-04-17T00:11:38.660" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;This question shows research effort; it is useful and clear.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the hover-over criteria for voting up a question. To vote down, it's the converse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't have to be an expert - but if a question is basically trivially answered in the rules, it is liable to be voted down. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for example, I voted down this question (even though I answered it): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36135/do-all-spell-trigger-items-always-require-a-use-magic-device-check/36136#36136&quot;&gt;Do all Spell Trigger items always require a Use Magic Device check?&lt;/a&gt; because the question was trivially answered in the skill description they were asking about, which to me fits the category of &quot;does not show research effort.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, you are allowed to vote down questions that do not show effort, are unclear or not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T00:11:38.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3454" CreationDate="2014-04-17T06:33:00.050" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;People come here with questions (often from Google) to find answers. They shouldn't have to sort through a pile of &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Edit&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Edit 2&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; amendments to work out what the answer is. There should be a straightforward question, and a straightforward answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider the case of an answer saying something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; Considering your edited version of the question, the answer is B.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is... bad. So we should just edit it to say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is B.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, we're supposed to be accessible Wikipedia style, so that people can just get these straightforward answers. That's why we can edit, or suggest edits, for every answer and question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's why we have this classic diagram, too, where Stack Exchange is the * in the middle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mHodp.png&quot; alt=&quot;a Venn Diagram where we're the overlap of a Wiki, Digg/Reddit, a Blog and a Forum&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T06:33:00.050" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3474" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-17T15:22:12.907" Score="2" ViewCount="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wanted to make a comment on a question, but I don't have enough rep to make a comment but what I want to say is not an answer to the question. So how can I go about getting my comment to the person who asked the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1777" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T15:25:40.640" Title="Contacting a user" Tags="|support|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3475" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3474" CreationDate="2014-04-17T15:25:40.640" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You wait until you have enough reputation to comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it. It's not a high bar to get to that reputation level (you're nearly there already!). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the person is active in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, you can try there. You have enough reputation to chat. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T15:25:40.640" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3476" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3479" CreationDate="2014-04-17T15:27:56.030" Score="4" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm raising this question based on the discossion around &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36364/is-the-pathfinder-faq-considered-raw&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36325/can-a-spellcaster-use-spell-slots-above-their-normal-limit-if-their-ability-scor&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; questions.  In the second question, the accepted answer references the Pathfinder FAQ, which is not considered RAW by some users.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/code&gt; tag was edited out of the question, with the justification that the FAQ was not rules as written, and thus the question couldn't actually be asking for a rules as written answer if the accepted answer referenced the FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this in mind, what are appropriate sources to use for an answer to a question tagged &lt;code&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/code&gt;?  I realize that this is going to be different for different systems, but what kind of guidelines should be used to figure out whether a certain source is RAW or not?  Does the opinion of the company publishing the game matter, or the community at large, or just the individual querent?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:20:16.303" Title="What are appropriate sources to reference in questions tagged [rules-as-written]?" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3477" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3476" CreationDate="2014-04-17T16:09:56.810" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Depends on the Company and Community&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most RPG developers have differing views on the matter and the only thing you can really do is check into the company's history of handling FAQ and errata. Do they publish errata? Do FAQ answers sometimes or often involve changing the rules text in question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In this case...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are opposing viewpoints both in the community and the company, as broken down below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3.5 FAQ&lt;/strong&gt; is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; RAW, explicitly; WotC established it only to unofficially interpret rules. WotC chose to create and uphold errata as its method of editing rules, and in addition to this and their statements that FAQ is not RAW we add the issue that the FAQ is normally &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;. The guy they had in charge of it...did not understand the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pathfinder FAQ&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; RAW. Paizo's official stance on their FAQ system is that it represents needed changes in the rules as well as clarifications. It speaks with the authority of the developers and is used in addition to, or sometimes even instead of, writing formal errata. This has lead to some controversies in the past but Paizo as a company and the Pathfinder community deal in FAQ as RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore: &lt;em&gt;the accepted answer to the second question is incomplete&lt;/em&gt;. It resolves the problem only for &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6172" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T16:09:56.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3478" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3476" CreationDate="2014-04-17T16:58:54.947" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no one answer, and there should not be a &quot;site rule&quot; on it, it should be determined by the voting system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every game system is different.  In addition, everyone has different opinions on what sources (which books, FAQs, etc) are valid within a given game system.  Rather than come up with meta rules that say &quot;for game system X only a, b, and c are valid,&quot; this should be handled by the voting and acceptance system.  If a questioner accepts a RAW answer coming from the FAQ - that's fine.  If a bunch of people vote it down because they don't accept the FAQ - that's fine. But we don't need to shortcut that with &quot;site rules&quot; created by only a couple site participants. This is why we have an acceptance system and a voting system. Some people don't consider Essentials part of 4e RAW and others do. Some people do and don't accept non-core books, FAQs, errata, etc. Let questioners be as specific as they want and let voters vote on answers they like - authenticity/reliability of sources is part of the baked in voting criteria on all sites, where sources range from textbooks to &quot;my cousin.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, there's a bunch of other questions conflated into this particular incident.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Was it wise to ask a &quot;Pathfinder, 3.5e, RAW&quot; question?  &lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt; RAW asks for a high level of pickiness, and though 3.5e and Pathfinder are more than compatible enough for most players, RAW signals a much more legalistic approach and that's where compatibility splits. If you have a 3.5e/Pathfinder question you are implying a more generalized approach, and those two things are generally in opposition.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Was it OK to remove the RAW tag from the question?  &lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt;  The tag describes the question and not the answers. Just like we don't tag game-recs with the &quot;winning&quot; game (given that can change over time, also), we don't change tagging on questions because someone has a different opinion than the accepted answer. The asker was correct in rolling that change back.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Was it OK that the asker accepted an answer that only addressed Pathfinder and not 3.5?  Given #1 above, &lt;strong&gt;yes.&lt;/strong&gt;  The asker is free to accept whatever answer they find &lt;strong&gt;most helpful&lt;/strong&gt;, not which answer someone else finds most legalistically correct. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T16:58:54.947" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3476" CreationDate="2014-04-17T17:29:27.217" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to give an extreme answer, but I think it's the right one here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a more fundamental problem than what sources are valid as RAW in a given system. The problem is at least twofold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is not a universal definition of what is and is not RAW. We see that in the differences between PF and 3.5, we can look at mxy's example with 4e and essentials, we can look all over the place and find people who read the term RAW differently. Tags with that level of ambiguity are a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Second, and most importantly, this tag is a meta tag. The true test of a meta tag is whether or not you can envision a question with the tag as it's &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; tag. What does a RAW question look like without a system tag? Not much to be honest. Meta tags are bad because they don't really convey any information about the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; they attempt to restrict the answers. The tag system is meant to indicate what the &lt;em&gt;question is about&lt;/em&gt; the questions that should be tagged RAW are ones like the one you asked this morning about how PF determins RAW. Not ones where you want a &lt;em&gt;by-the-book&lt;/em&gt; ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, there are &lt;em&gt;very few&lt;/em&gt; questions like yours and that means the tag is at best misused and at worst completely unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's do the right thing, SE has trogdor on standby for moments like this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say we burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhP3E.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address the concerns about how to indicate the sources that are considered authoritative. This should be specified in the question if it is a concern. If it becomes a concern as answers are made it should be edited in, and comment notification should be provided to answerers who do not comply. (Further noncompliance should be handled with downvotes and possibly not-an-answer flags as the answer would be out of scope)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-04-17T17:46:58.033" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T17:46:58.033" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3476" CreationDate="2014-04-17T18:20:06.503" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We can't have policy about this because &quot;RAW&quot; is undefined.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;RAW&quot; taken literally means &quot;rules as written&quot;. But nobody who discusses &quot;RAW&quot; actually &lt;em&gt;means&lt;/em&gt; &quot;the exact words literally written in the rulebook&quot;. Everybody knows or can look up what the exact words &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt;&amp;mdash;what everyone actually wants is what the words mean and how to apply them to specific circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once &quot;RAW&quot; becomes &quot;what the rules as written &lt;em&gt;mean&lt;/em&gt;&quot;, then we're no longer in objective territory, and have entered the realm of what degree of interpretation is acceptable to an individual while still qualifying as the rules as &quot;written&quot;. Ironically, despite the term &quot;RAW&quot; being invented to distinguish from the &quot;rules as intended&quot; (&quot;RAI&quot;), it still means &quot;what is the intended meaning of the rules as written (RAI)?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since what &quot;RAW&quot; even means is subjective, what is and isn't a RAW source is subjective. And since the concept of RAW itself helps not one whit in resolving the ambiguity between the written rules and the application thereof, it would solve nothing&amp;mdash;and actually cause problems&amp;mdash;if we attempted to base any policy on that quicksand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Besides, it's not normally our job to make rules about &quot;acceptable&quot; answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad answers only get downvoted. That is how SE is designed, and it breaks down otherwise. Only answers that are not even attempting to answer the question are permitted to be deleted. If an answer is &quot;unacceptable&quot; because it cites sources that don't fit a question's criteria, it's a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; answer and the downvote button is happy to help with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That we have one policy that contradicts this (our game-rec policy) is a special case and should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be the thin edge of the wedge for introducing answer-deletion policies for other questions. In fact, if accepting game-rec questions continues to undermine our community's ability to cleave to the SE way of doing things, that would be evidence that accepting game-rec questions is a failed experiment!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T18:20:06.503" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3481" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3476" CreationDate="2014-04-17T18:21:05.307" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The same way we can discard a splat book, asking by rules without Complete Arcane, for example, it's valid to ask questions stating &quot;FAQ is IN&quot; or &quot;FAQ is OUT&quot;. The only autorithy on whats allowed and what's not is the DM, not even the player that asked the question. Here on RPG Exchange we are not on the roles of Masters nor Players - we are advisors, and we can only give suggestions to the people that come by. A player can check with us if &quot;per the book&quot; his idea works, but if his GM says &quot;Not in my game&quot;, then it is out, regardless on what was said here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are dealing with games that use creative power and imagination, not with some legal stuff or programming languages. We need to understand that a book can't be more important than the enjoyment of the players and the DM. Asking &quot;Raw only&quot; just cuts out lot's of criativity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No DM on it's senses will discard a good ideia just because it's not as &quot;the book says&quot;. Almost all of the good RPG's call for the Rule Zero, giving complete powers for the players to create their game. We are dealing with a hobby on which people create, discard and change rules according with their tables. A House-Rule is not more or less &quot;official&quot; than any rule that the DM choses to use. &quot;Officialness&quot; is table-dependent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, in the end doesn't matter what are the sources - a book, a homebrew or a FAQ. If the ideia solves someone's problem, then it did it's job. If the D&amp;amp;D FAQ explains something better than the Pathfinder FAQ, then why we don't recommend it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a DM closes himself from house-rules, for this or that, then this person must read the Dungeon's Master Guide all over again (or the equivalent book on other systems). If it is a player looking for some big loophole for power, that's not much far away from cheating. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for a &quot;by the book&quot; anwser seens a bit wrong to me. Sometimes the books are not the best way around a problem. I think people should keep their minds open for insight, examples, and advice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to let this clear, I'm not saying that asking &quot;how rules work&quot; is &quot;wrong&quot;. Im saying that on my viewpoint, refusing off-the-book alternatives just because they are off-the-book is not wise. Systems improve based on house-rules, community feedback, and test, not rule-worshipping. Unearthed Arcana for 3.X is basically made of House-Rules from the community put up together as a supplement. The &quot;Complete&quot; series is not something that just dropped from the heavens, someone had thought about that rules and tested (in theory) before putting them to play. You can ask any question you want, just keep your mind open for different, off-the-book ways of dealing with things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Afterall, the first D&amp;amp;D is a house-ruled version of a Wargame, it isn't? The RPG was born out of House-rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="11162" LastEditDate="2014-04-17T21:04:32.947" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T21:04:32.947" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3482" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3483" CreationDate="2014-04-17T19:28:59.977" Score="0" ViewCount="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;How can I use the search feature to find, for example, all posts with the word 'mage' without also including those that have the word 'image'?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T19:48:22.127" Title="How can I search for a term on its own?" Tags="|support|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3483" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3482" CreationDate="2014-04-17T19:48:22.127" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use quotation marks try &quot;mage&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T19:48:22.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3484" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-17T20:52:51.220" Score="9" ViewCount="319" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently there's been a lot of discussion about the merits and/or problems with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; in the comments on various questions and in chat. Such discussion probably has a better home here in the meta where it can be more constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the pros and cons for our site of having the rules-as-written tag? It is a meta-tag but we have other &lt;strong&gt;meta-tag&lt;/strong&gt; that we strongly use (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;) so I don't think that instantly disqualifies it. Please make a case for how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; could be  best used or why it should be removed from the site? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Required Reading: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:23:59.890" Title="What are the Pros and Cons of the rules-as-written tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="363" CreationDate="2014-04-17T20:56:04.953" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;[rules] is a meta tag that should be deleted. It serves no useful purpose as questions about RPGs are very frequently about rules and the answer space should be obvious from the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that this is what has already happened - rules, ruleset, mechanics, etc. have all been deleted, just adding this answer here for posterity since the question popped back up to active.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T20:56:04.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3484" CreationDate="2014-04-17T21:23:29.127" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Pro: It aids searching&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can search by a tag, and you could not necessarily search for the same concept without the tag. There are various ways that the same answer-requirement could be included in a question’s body, not all of which would appear from the same search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Pro: It indicates an important aspect of the question to those browsing the list of questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see tags from the list of questions. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag on the homepage tells you something useful about the question without having to go inside it. This allows users to decide if the question meets their interests/is worth their time/etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Pro: It can be followed or ignored&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag, rather than merely having it as part of the question-body, also allows RAW questions to be followed (as I have) or ignored (as others have stated they have).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Pro: It reflects a common pattern of at least one major RPG community that we support&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5 questions habitually refer to RAW or not-necessarily-RAW as a matter of course. In systems less sophisticated than ours, threads are marked with “[RAW]” or whatever to indicate this. Considering that RAW is used as a tag &lt;em&gt;even when the underlying system does not support tags&lt;/em&gt;, it’s at the very least worth considering its use as a tag here on those grounds alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Neutral comment: Not all systems or communities make the distinction&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn’t really a con; after all, we have plenty of tags relating to specific concepts in various systems that don’t really work for other systems. It may be the case that many other systems have no use for the tag, but that does not, in itself, invalidate the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Con: It is “meta”&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not the one to ask about the “problems” of meta tags, because in my opinion, those problems are minimal and frequently overstated. I don’t dispute that the tag is meta; I merely don’t particularly care. I don’t have a problem with meta tags, provided they are useful, and I contend that this one is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for being used on its own, we more-or-less require that &lt;strong&gt;every question&lt;/strong&gt; use a system tag: questions without a system tag are expected to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;. It may be more or less dependent than other tags, but I hardly think it unique in that regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Con: We just had a kerfuffle over it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had a knee-jerk reaction as I was heading out the door, and I regret it. It was not the appropriate response to the situation. Ultimately, it was an issue of treating the tags on the question as &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; being required, rather than the intent, which was that answers from D&amp;amp;D 3.5 &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder be acceptable so long as they were indicated. I would argue that this was a poor choice in the initial tagging since the rules-as-written are not identical in this case, and either-or means that a valid answer could ignore one of the systems it was tagged as, but that’s irrelevant to my actions (I should have made that argument rather than just acting).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don’t think that a bigger issue needs be made of this than already has been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T21:23:29.127" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3487" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3484" CreationDate="2014-04-17T22:56:20.730" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two fundamental issues with the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is not a universal definition of what is and is not RAW. We see that in the differences between PF and 3.5, we can look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3478/1084&quot;&gt;mxy's example&lt;/a&gt; with 4e and essentials, we can look all over the place and find people who read the term RAW differently. Tags with that level of ambiguity are a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Second, and most importantly, this tag is a meta tag. The true test of a meta tag is whether or not you can envision a question with the tag as it's &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; tag. What does a RAW question look like without a system tag? Not much to be honest. Meta tags are bad because they don't really convey any information about the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; they attempt to restrict the answers. The tag system is meant to indicate what the &lt;em&gt;question is about&lt;/em&gt; the questions that should be tagged RAW are ones like the one we discussed this morning about how PF determines RAW. Not ones where you want a &lt;em&gt;by-the-book&lt;/em&gt; ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, there are &lt;em&gt;very few&lt;/em&gt; questions like these and that means the tag is at best misused and at worst completely unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's do the right thing, SE has trogdor on standby for moments like this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say we burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhP3E.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address the concerns about how to indicate the sources that are considered authoritative. This should be specified in the question if it is a concern. If it becomes a concern as answers are made it should be edited in, and comment notification should be provided to answerers who do not comply. (Further noncompliance should be handled with downvotes and possibly not-an-answer flags as the answer would be out of scope)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-04-17T22:56:20.730" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3484" CreationDate="2014-04-18T01:40:17.317" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having read through KRyan's answer, I'm not sure the tag needs to be removed. But we do need to change the way we treat it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As a way of signaling membership in a school of thought / playstyle, the tag is fine. Ish.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people want to use the rules-as-written tag as a rallying point for a sub-culture on the site, that's fine. The silliness of rules-as-written is roughly the same as the silliness of system-agnostic, and I'd gladly scour both from the site... But if other people like them, there's no great need to disrupt their fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Basic site functionality should NOT be channeled through tags, unless absolutely necessary.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I ask a question about the rules to an RPG, then I should have a reasonable expectation of receiving &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; the rules &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; advice on dealing with the situations those rules cover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I ask what the rules for mounted combat are because I fear a character is over-powered, I shouldn't have to apply a special tag to get someone to actually tell me what the rules are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And by that same token, I shouldn't need to apply &lt;em&gt;another&lt;/em&gt; special tag to get people to give me good advice on dealing with the repercussions of the mount in play, or advice to be careful about nerfing characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We certainly shouldn't be harassing users to try to fit in to rules-as-written / system-agnostic / whatever sits between them. If people use the tags, fine. If people don't use the tags, we should still be doing our best to answer well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In other words...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &quot;Rules-As-Written&quot; describes a &lt;em&gt;kind&lt;/em&gt; of question, then the tag is fine. Ish. Well, it's not as bad as other tags that haven't caused the site to explode. But questions should be self-contained in regards to any special rules they wish to enforce. And we shouldn't be badgering others to add the tag to any question that asks about the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we also shouldn't have a site policy on what is or isn't RAW. That should be defined by the individual publishers and/or askers (if it's ambiguous).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apologies for the rant, but this touches on a lot of pet peeves with the site :-P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2014-04-18T01:40:17.317" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3484" CreationDate="2014-04-18T09:03:55.817" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is underused for its category of questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This renders it less useful for searching or filtering (possibly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; useful), which is a problem when one of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;the stated objectives of tags&lt;/a&gt; is to connect experts with questions (2nd sentence). It was created &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/230004/152515&quot;&gt;on June 20 2013&lt;/a&gt;, last year, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2984/1204&quot;&gt;following on from meta discussions about previous tags like rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;, and has had a very low adoption rate among the rules questions it exists for. Evidently it's uncommon that people find it necessary to use or apply, and that's probably the &lt;em&gt;true&lt;/em&gt; test of whether a tag should really exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's consider this: if you search by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag, you'd hope to get nearly every question we have about spells. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; ideally would categorically include every single nWoD question, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dresden-files&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dresden-files&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dresden-files&lt;/a&gt; should include all our Dresden Files stuff. It's reasonable to expect this stuff, and it's what you'd get. These are tags doing their job correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But consider the following. If you searched by the RAW tag, what portion of questions about RAW would you get?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; has 1,809 questions. Since the RAW tag was created, we've had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e?page=25&amp;amp;sort=newest&amp;amp;pagesize=15&quot;&gt;~325 new D&amp;amp;D 4e questions&lt;/a&gt;. Of all of these, only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e+rules-as-written&quot;&gt;17 are tagged RAW&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; has 1,216 questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e?page=32&amp;amp;sort=newest&amp;amp;pagesize=15&quot;&gt;~480 since creation&lt;/a&gt;, of which only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e+rules-as-written&quot;&gt;54 are tagged RAW&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; has 1,129 questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder?page=38&amp;amp;sort=newest&amp;amp;pagesize=15&quot;&gt;~570 since creation&lt;/a&gt;, of which only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder+rules-as-written&quot;&gt;44 are tagged RAW&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those familiar with these tags might realise: this covers barely any of the rules questions. By using this tag to search, you'd be eliminating almost everything you're actually after, and by attempting to ignore it, you'd filter out almost nothing you'd want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Between those three tags we've covered 113 of the 128 RAW questions. What about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written+-dnd-4e+-dnd-3.5e+-pathfinder&quot;&gt;the remaining 15&lt;/a&gt;? World of Darkness, Shadowrun SR4, nWoD and Technomancer have more than one usage of this tag. A bunch of other tags coincide with only &lt;em&gt;one single use&lt;/em&gt; of this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag usage should be emergent, and there's concerningly few occurrences where people actually find it useful to add to a question, even among our questions that are actually about RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a portion of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; questions that I know have used this tag to stress the kind of answer they're after, because they've received answers like &quot;Don't do that&quot; or others which just don't actually stick to RAW. That's not what tags are for - we don't have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cites-books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cites-books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cites-books&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/uses-simple-terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;uses-simple-terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;uses-simple-terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag - and that should be resolved some other way. A question that wants RAW answers should be one that can only be &lt;em&gt;answered&lt;/em&gt; with RAW answers, or should make a request that people stick to RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-12-21T05:45:39.487" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3490" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3484" CreationDate="2014-04-18T13:34:22.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been burned by the RAW tag once before. Someone asked a question on interpretation and I provided my viewpoint on it without explicit citations of rules (as well as bringing in interpretation of the RAW). I still have a negative score for that answer, even after I explicitly cited the rules off of which I based my interpretations. It's a mildly complex situation, though, in that I pointed out that a particular set of rules being quoted have been noted by the developers as not RAW since it was a paid supplement, but is considered as RAW by others. I see it as mildly parallel to biblical canon. Is the Book of Tobit RAW? Revelations? All depends on who you ask, I think. And, much like the Bible, you get a lot of friction when the source material is conflicting or vague.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I see some worth for this being a tag for &quot;I want to be able to point to a line in the book and say this proves the point, not a discussion of what the rule should have been&quot;. The big catch is that the Rules-As-Written don't always cover the situation, so I think that sometimes, it's a valid answer to say, &quot;RAW doesn't really properly cover this. However, if you look items A, B, and X, and squint a little, you can get this interpretation which could be seen as logically following from RAW&quot;. Said answers should probably be removed if someone does find something in RAW that directly answers the question. As to whether they should be downvoted in that case depends on whether we want to reward being accurate or being helpful in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, I see this tag as the flipside of the usual rule that any answer on a rules interpretation should require actual user experience. That rule is indicating the spirit of the rule, a &quot;I did it this way and it worked or me&quot; or &quot;I did it this way and it did &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; work for me&quot; situation. RAW is the opposite where the focus is not on &quot;What is your experience with this?&quot; and more of a &quot;How can you prove your answer from fundamentals whether or not it jibes with your experience?&quot;. To use another parallel, the rise of Evidence Based Medicine among the scientific, namely a rejection of &quot;Well, sticking myself with needles works for me even if the studies keep showing that this doesn't really work and the physics doesn't work&quot;. Evidence trumps anecdote much as, with &lt;code&gt;Rules as Written&lt;/code&gt;, rule citations trump experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10867" LastEditorUserId="10867" LastEditDate="2014-04-18T14:02:41.707" LastActivityDate="2014-04-18T14:02:41.707" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3491" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-18T14:07:27.003" Score="1" ViewCount="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;1 question has both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/verisimilitude&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;verisimilitude&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;verisimilitude&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realism&lt;/a&gt;, and for each of these tags there's 1 more question with only that one without the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, both of these tags actually look like &quot;&lt;strong&gt;internal-consistency&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;, so we could rename both of them, in order to prevent someone to think incorrectly they instead refer to &quot;the real life&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Better ideas or insights?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1271" LastEditorUserId="1271" LastEditDate="2014-04-18T14:30:56.950" LastActivityDate="2014-04-18T14:30:56.950" Title="Tags: verisimilitude vs. realism" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2014-04-19T01:17:29.537" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3492" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3244" CreationDate="2014-04-18T14:32:25.337" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have removed all instances of both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-04-18T14:32:25.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3493" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3494" CreationDate="2014-04-18T20:31:55.153" Score="6" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;While going through some of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; questions (which I've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3189/should-the-gm-tag-be-burninated&quot;&gt;previously taken issue&lt;/a&gt; with), I've noticed that we tend to have a catch-all tag for gamemastery questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;. In my efforts to clean up the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag, it's come to my attention that really all I'm doing is, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3190/8248&quot;&gt;for the most part&lt;/a&gt;, retagging &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; =&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, which really doesn't get us anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Along a similar vein as my other question, I'm beginning to think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; is only &lt;em&gt;slightly&lt;/em&gt; less vague than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;. It's the catch-all for GM issues, problems, questions, and musings. It contains a vast assortment of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29677/betrayed-by-my-gm-how-can-i-respond&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30500/is-it-wrong-to-ask-a-player-to-justify-their-characters-actions&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3093/what-is-a-good-way-to-become-a-better-npc-monster-actor&quot;&gt;improvement&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/319/what-approaches-are-there-to-lessen-or-eliminate-reliance-upon-dice-in-an-rpg&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50/how-to-handle-a-powergamer-munchkin&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7789/how-do-i-build-a-sense-of-wonder-in-my-games&quot;&gt;theory&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15148/how-can-i-help-my-pcs-remember-clues-that-they-found&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25555/how-should-gm-deal-with-standing-orders&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2513/how-to-communicate-to-the-players-that-an-encounter-can-be-solved-also-through-d&quot;&gt;communication&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18375/how-to-deal-with-players-who-like-to-use-the-local-authorities-to-solve-their-pr&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6212/how-do-you-help-players-not-focus-on-the-rules&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13044/running-games-for-a-constantly-unreliable-group&quot;&gt;dealing&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11748/how-do-i-stop-my-pcs-from-acting-like-insomniac-monkeys-on-crack&quot;&gt;with&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11198/is-it-fair-to-press-the-players-for-decisions-during-combat&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/933/total-party-kill-what-do-i-do-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7686/how-do-i-get-the-pcs-to-stop-focusing-on-a-red-herring&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14013/how-do-i-deal-with-pcs-who-use-kidnap-and-torture-as-an-investigative-technique&quot;&gt;tough&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13743/how-can-i-quickly-get-a-player-back-into-a-session-after-their-character-dies&quot;&gt;GM&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13058/how-to-get-out-of-a-story-deadlock&quot;&gt;situations&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1946/how-can-a-gm-quickly-create-interesting-engaging-npcs&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34163/how-can-i-effectively-drop-clues-of-corruption-in-my-campaigns&quot;&gt;literally&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16168/preventing-saturation-in-a-horror-campaign&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10669/how-do-i-make-weather-an-important-part-of-the-game&quot;&gt;techniques&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26452/how-can-a-gm-prevent-growing-disillusioned-with-their-own-game&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30671/when-should-i-fudge-dice-rolls&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3548/how-can-dms-effectively-telegraph-specific-dangers-in-dd&quot;&gt;pink&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2329/how-do-i-deal-with-gm-burnout&quot;&gt;nerve-gas&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16710/how-can-i-make-my-pcs-flee&quot;&gt;farting&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31869/unhate-able-villains&quot;&gt;dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Yes, literally every word is a hyperlink to a unique question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People seem to be using 'techniques' to mean 'I need to do something that I'm not as a GM,' which is, quite honestly, redundant - they wouldn't be asking if they didn't need help with something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is valuable metadata which can and should be preserved in these questions, which would make for good and proper tags. As a result, I'd like to further refine and categorize gm-based questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the lines between the categories of GM-based questions are rather... vague. At least, their mysteries are not entirely clear for me. This is primarily a result of the fact that questions tend to fall into multiple categories, but also probably that I don't have enough categories. Maybe I just need to tune my microscope, but maybe I could just ask the community for a bit of assistance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the community think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; needs refinement? If so, what could we possibly replace it with? And if so, does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; still have a place, or should it be burninated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Do note that if we do replace these tags, we'll want names which make it glaringly obvious what they're supposed to be used for. If we don't, we'll just end up cleaning users' tags who are confused by our arcane pedantry.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T18:31:39.473" Title="Is it possible for us to refine [gm-techniques]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3494" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3493" CreationDate="2014-04-19T21:08:20.853" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Keep it &amp;amp; enforce it better&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; is one of those that arose organically from the community. I think it does have value and should be kept as-is. But I agree that it gets &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; too broadly, and that dilutes its value. If we can possibly identify other existing or missing tags that would cover the current mis-uses of the tag, we should more aggressively retag with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; tag is currently the dumping ground for &quot;um, this is about GMing, I guess this needs a 'GM' tag of some kind&quot; questions, and that's not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should [gm-techniques] cover?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; should only be applied to questions that are specifically about concrete applications of the skill of GMing, which is a literal interpretation that matches &lt;a href=&quot;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Technique&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;most definitions&lt;/a&gt; of &quot;technique&quot;, especially these two:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;noun&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  1. the manner and ability with which an artist, writer, dancer, athlete, or the like employs the technical skills of a particular art or field of endeavor.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  4. technical skill; ability to apply procedures or methods so as to effect a desired result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only if the question is very pointedly about or asking for &lt;em&gt;procedures and methods&lt;/em&gt; to &lt;em&gt;achieve a specific result&lt;/em&gt; using the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;technical&lt;/strong&gt; skills of GMing&lt;/em&gt;, should it have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; tag. (Extra bold on &quot;technical&quot; is deliberate.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is asking for general GMing advice, then the tag is not warranted. The &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; might provide techniques or might not—but the question is not specifically about techniques, any more than a game-rec question is about whichever systems are recommended by the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a rule of thumb, to qualify as a technique, something has to be asking both &quot;how&quot; &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; be about the application of the GMing art and theory to a certain end. People will often assume that any question that starts with &quot;how&quot; is asking for a technique, because one loose synonym is &quot;method&quot;, but not all &quot;how&quot; questions are actually asking for techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To apply this to the categories you've identified (IMO of course):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions literally about techniques&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly within scope of the tag. :)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about improvement&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Learning specific techniques is only one way of improving one's GMing. (Others include educating oneself about the division of authority; correcting misapprehensions about what GMs do; learning how to understand and apply the rules of one's chosen game; etc.) Answers might provide techniques, but the question is not asking for specifically or only methods of applying one's GMing skills—if it is, it would fall under the &quot;literally about techniques&quot; category.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about theory&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Theory is by definition outside the scope of techniques—techniques are, by definition, &lt;em&gt;applying&lt;/em&gt; already-established theory. Theory and techniques go hand-in-hand, but are very distinct. If a question is about both theory and technique equally (not one being background to the problem) it is probably a &quot;double question&quot; that should be split.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Maybe:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about communication&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this will be asking for specific communication techniques, like how to pass secret messages to players. Then &lt;em&gt;yes&lt;/em&gt;, of course. Sometimes this will be describing a miscommunication and asking what the heck they should do. Again, answers may provide techniques, or might not, which does not make that question itself about techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about dealing with players&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most often this will not merit the tag, as these are usually about social issues, and the problem and its good solutions will cover much broader territory than mere tricks of the trade. Only the rare question will be specifically about techniques; questions about how to speed up players who are slow to take their turn, for example, would almost always be asking for GM techniques (specifically the time-management subset of GM techniques).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about tough GM situations&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this will be a focused question about a specific problem due to lacking or failing at a specific GM technique. &lt;em&gt;Much&lt;/em&gt; more often though it will be about wild and wooly group issues like playstyle conflicts, finding or removing players, and the like; which aren't about GMing techniques so much as about &quot;being a social human&quot; techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;questions about pink nerve-gas farting dragons&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the outlandish name and catch-all nature of this category, these are often about specific techniques. Whether and when to fudge dice, how to convey GM-secret information for the desired effect, how to shape a game to encourage certain types of PC behaviour—those are all technique questions. (How to craft good villains will be, depending on the specific problem, either a GM technique question or belong to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;.) Sometimes they'll be more social or personal in nature though, and be broader than specific techniques—avoiding burnout and disillusionment are that kind of problem that aren't likely to be laser-focused on techniques. These are &quot;how&quot; questions, yes, but they aren't about applications of the GMing art, but broader being-a-human issues.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What tag(s) should be used for everything else?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few good existing tags for GMing problems that don't necessarily involve techniques:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;groups&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Why do we have both?)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-death&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-death&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-death&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social-contract&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social-contract&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social-contract&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; (for those rare questions about character portrayal)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possible new tags we could use:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/communication&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;communication&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;communication&lt;/a&gt; (13 letters) for &quot;soft&quot; questions about having communication problems&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(and/or)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/communication-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;communication-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;communication-techniques&lt;/a&gt; (24 letters) for &quot;hard&quot; methods-seeking questions that are more focused than &quot;soft&quot; communication-problem &quot;what now?&quot; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Although as always, too few tags is better than creating unneeded tags.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13044/running-games-for-a-constantly-unreliable-group&quot;&gt;&quot;Running games for a constantly unreliable group&quot;&lt;/a&gt; could probably be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt;. It's not asking for specific techniques, but more for how to structure sessions in order to reconcile the conflicting needs of the group's dynamics and the game's internal balance mechanics. That's not an application of the GM's art during play, but rather how to execute one of the GM's many out-of-game &lt;em&gt;responsibilities&lt;/em&gt;: the broad problem of logistics and how to adjust the game rules to accommodate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, our classic question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11748/how-do-i-stop-my-pcs-from-acting-like-insomniac-monkeys-on-crack&quot;&gt;&quot;How do I stop my PCs from acting like insomniac monkeys on crack?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, is more about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social-contract&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social-contract&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social-contract&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, and maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;. Notice how the accepted answer only briefly touches on a technique (&quot;Go around the table...&quot;), while most of it is about communicating, adjusting expectations and social contract. One of the pieces of advice provides a chunk of theory (&quot;give them useful choices&quot;) and then an application thereof—a technique—a tidy example of how the solution is a mix of technique and non-technique, meaning the question is itself not specifically and only about GM techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11198/is-it-fair-to-press-the-players-for-decisions-during-combat&quot;&gt;&quot;Is it fair to press the players for decisions during combat?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, is an interesting case. It is explicitly &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; a technique they're already using, but the real &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; is about whether it's fair to use that technique or not. This one could probably take or leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, but almost certainly should have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social-contract&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social-contract&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social-contract&lt;/a&gt; on it as the most important tag, as that's the best-fit tag to categorise questions about fairness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But then we won't be able to search for all GM-relevant questions!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But wait, that means that some questions won't have the letters &lt;em&gt;GM&lt;/em&gt; in the tags anywhere! That's... an interesting result. It suggests that we might want to have some way of collecting all questions useful to GMs together, even when it's not about specific techniques. One way of doing that would be to resurrect the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag as a marker that &quot;this is relevant to GMs&quot;... but that has known problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe we don't need a &quot;this is for GMs&quot; tag at all. After all, GMs are disproportionately represented online, so a huge fraction of our questions are relevant to GMs. In the same way we don't need a [rules] tag because it would apply to a ridiculous number of our questions, possibly we just need to trust that GMs can handle having to look through more specific tags if they're browsing tags for advice. Got group issues? Read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;groups&lt;/a&gt;. Got prep issues? Then look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;. Got both? Well, instead of wanting to be to be fed a huge self-defeating firehose of all GMing content on the whole site, put on your big-kid pants and deal with having to look in all of two places to find targeted content. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the latter approach is growing on me. &lt;strong&gt;We don't need an &quot;all GM questions&quot; tag.&lt;/strong&gt; If players can find content just fine without having every player-relevant question tagged &quot;[player]&quot;, then so can GMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T17:03:07.877" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3495" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-20T08:40:00.313" Score="2" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I looked through all the tags on this side to subscribe to some of them, I found that alot of them does not have any descriptions at all. Considering you have a very strict policy on quality of questions, answers and so forth, it becomes a bit confusing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should it not be a requirement to have a clear description on tags, So users can tag the best way possible?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I dont think users can tag questions as this community wants them to, when it's unclear what tags should be used for what. And it ends up giving the admins a lot of unneccesary work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that is another reason why there are so many questions tagged with dnd 4e. It is a safe tag to use, which results in, that people use it, for questions that require other tags to cover the content of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user11176" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-04-20T12:12:10.983" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T13:29:41.807" Title="Shouldn't tags always have descriptions so we can know which tags to use?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3495" CreationDate="2014-04-20T08:47:23.027" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're talking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/36521/revisions&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, first, look at the revision history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, we require questions about systems be tagged with that system in question. If you look at the revision history, BESW commented: &quot;tags describe questions, not answers, with an eye to future look-up; most tags on this are tangential to the question itself&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you object, you are welcome to revert the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T08:47:23.027" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3495" CreationDate="2014-04-20T12:36:37.363" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm the guy who removed those tags, and you've got a great question about tag wikis. First, though, a clarifying point which will come back to be relevant to the topic at hand: I'm not an appointed administrator or moderator. Stack Exchange expects its citizens to help moderate the site with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; gained via participation (measured by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;reputation&lt;/a&gt;). You've unlocked a few of those already! Anyway, my edits aren't binding or magically correct, just my own best attempts to help out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now to your main question, about tags and their wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you. [&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that tags should be related to the primary drive of the question; nearly every question on the whole site could be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt;, but very few would be usefully defined by that tag, which would render the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag useless and pointless. A lot of questions do only have a single tag (usually a system tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;) because there isn't any other tag which could usefully be applied to them. (Maybe one needs to be made; see below.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for tagging to indicate the kind of answer you want to get--it's something we're still working the bugs out of, and you stumbled over it in the meantime. That's the other thing about tags: they're &quot;emergent,&quot; meaning that we don't make them up in anticipation of a need, we make them when the need emerges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is very important to the site's health and dynamics for a number of experience-based reasons, but it also relates directly to your concern about tag wikis: tag definitions don't appear automagically, somebody has to write them. When a tag wiki looks weak (or doesn't exist at all), it's waiting for someone to write it or improve it. That somebody could be you!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All registered users can submit edits for tag wikis (until you hit a certain rep threshold the edits have to be approved by other users before they go public, but you get bonus rep every time that happens!). It's not something a lot of our citizens are necessarily really active in doing (I'm guilty of that myself), partly because system-specific tag wikis need experts in that system, while system-agnostic tag wikis need to be kept general enough that they apply to multiple systems without being so vague that they don't define anything useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of our tag wikis are, as you've noticed, sadly bare. This is a challenge we should rise to! Thanks for reminding us of it, and I hope you'll be part of the effort to improve our tag wikis. It's part of the whole Stack Exchange ethos, where &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; citizens work to improve the site behind the scenes as well as by creating front-page content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T13:29:41.807" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3498" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-20T13:50:17.130" Score="2" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is regarding this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36330/1204&quot;&gt;How to handle player knowledge when they fumble a knowledge roll&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36330/1204&quot;&gt;the revision history&lt;/a&gt;, SevenSidedDie and I disagree about whether this question should have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; tag. Currently, it doesn't, and in fact has no system tag at all. The most recent revision states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;9 people disagree with the 4e tag, including the question-asker&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which I presume refers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36330/how-to-handle-player-knowledge-when-they-fumble-a-knowledge-roll#comment72430_36330&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt; and its 8 points, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36330/how-to-handle-player-knowledge-when-they-fumble-a-knowledge-roll#comment72435_36330&quot;&gt;the following one&lt;/a&gt; by the asker:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Ernir: This question doesn't seem to be about the specific rules of fumbling, but more the general problem of player knowledge vs. character knowledge. OP should probably revise the question to clarify this. –  Grubermensch Apr 16 at 15:33&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;it is dnd-4e :) yes i think the game setting is probably less relevant, i am more interested in player vs character –  petex Apr 16 at 16:06&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(though I fail to see how either of these have much to do with the dnd-4e tag, and the asker was the one who put it there in the first place)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So rather than debate this in comments or have an edit war I'm just going to ask here. Should this queston use the D&amp;amp;D 4e tag, or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T17:51:40.553" Title="Should this knowledge check question have the [dnd-4e] tag?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3498" CreationDate="2014-04-20T14:01:09.350" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it should.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason why I added the tag is pretty simple:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker is playing D&amp;amp;D 4e and asking about knowledge rolls.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We're trying to solve their specific problem. That's why they're here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Knowledge rolls have their own mechanics, advice, and surrounding player attitudes in the D&amp;amp;D system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are also edition-specific rules, advice and attitudes regarding how knowledge rolls work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers, therefore, should know the system and edition in case there's anything specific and relevant to leverage. By contrast, if an answer is made without D&amp;amp;D 4e specifics, it'll only help the asker to the extent it works in D&amp;amp;D 4e - if they don't work in D&amp;amp;D 4e, the answer will be unhelpful or, worse, misleading and harmful. So we need to be able to judge those answers in the D&amp;amp;D 4e context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exact system and edition were relevant &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/36333/1204&quot;&gt;to at least one answer&lt;/a&gt; which attempted to draw on edition-specific rules regarding the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there's gain for the asker in having a system tag, and potential loss of helpfulness to the asker in solving their issue if we don't have one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus: &lt;em&gt;they're playing D&amp;amp;D 4e. The tags are supposed to describe the content of the question. Why is this not tagged with D&amp;amp;D 4e?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this question has been &lt;em&gt;actively messed up&lt;/em&gt; through removal of the system tag. I'm honestly surprised this has even happened, especially from a user with this level of experience with the system. Luckily, the question &lt;em&gt;stated&lt;/em&gt; the edition, so answerers they could surmise the context, and it turned out okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There's prior discussion on the matter too.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately I'll point back to this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3010/1204&quot;&gt;Should I use a narrow system tag, or go broad if possible and use system-agnostic?&lt;/a&gt; - which got both mxyzplk's agreement and various other peoples' support. (In fact, seeing how well supported this idea was is a &lt;em&gt;major reason&lt;/em&gt; I took that question to meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The central idea there being: always ask about your &lt;em&gt;specific system&lt;/em&gt; to get a solution to your exact situation and problem. Only ask in a broader context if you're &lt;em&gt;genuinely interested&lt;/em&gt; in having broader answers and they're useful to solving your problem. (I see no indication this is the case here, nor should someone be asking about resolving specific mechanics in a systemless context - we'd close the question as too broad!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, whether other systems outside the asker's narrow scope can benefit is immaterial to how that question should be tagged: people playing one system can learn from another (we &lt;em&gt;do not&lt;/em&gt; tag questions based on which other games the answers are also helpful for, that would be terrible) - if people playing other systems don't find sufficient help from this narrow question, they can go ask their own version within their own context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T14:32:32.817" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3498" CreationDate="2014-04-20T17:07:16.750" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The system shouldn't be in the tags. It &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be mentioned in the body though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community has gone back and forth over system tags for a while, but the current consensus I'm aware of is that questions do not always need a system tag. As a rule of thumb, if the system is merely &quot;background&quot; information it doesn't go in the tags. That goes for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; tag&amp;mdash;if it's merely background context helpful for the answerers, but not what the question is &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt;, then it doesn't go in the tags. At best, it gets mentioned in the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the system is background information. The asker doesn't want or care about system-specific information, and is asking about the general concept of hidden rolls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Our consensus on making questions narrower doesn't apply here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a matter of the original asker making the question artificially broad out of a misguided sense that it would help more people. The question they have simply &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; relevant to most RPGs, as it's about one specific detail of how people can handle rolls. The question is comprehensible and complete without system information&amp;mdash;it's not &quot;missing&quot; their real problem behind an artificial broadening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concept of hidden information &quot;leaking&quot; into the metagame is a specific, narrow issue that we can have questions about, just like a question about how to play women as a man is a general concept applicable to many RPGs, but is itself a valid, narrow question without having to stick a system tag on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, we have a community custom where, when people ask a generally-applicable question where it seems the system is merely secondary, we will advise them to &lt;em&gt;remove&lt;/em&gt; any system tags so that the question gets wider viewing. This is exactly the sort of question were we would have done that if they had originally tagged it [dnd-4e].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, this question is the inverse of the case in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3010/1204&quot;&gt;narrow-question meta&lt;/a&gt;: if their (not-too-broad) question is naturally general, should the asker narrow it down to their specific system when possible? The answer is the same: no! The asker should ask the question they have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This asker is already off the D&amp;amp;D 4e plantation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker has implemented fumbles in their game. People seem to really &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;hate&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; that fact, but the question isn't asking for people's opinions about that. People seem to really, really want to tell them they're doing it wrong&amp;mdash;but they shouldn't, because the implementation of fumbles is presented in the question as a mere background fact, a given. And since they're already not playing 4e &quot;right&quot;, the relevance of the [dnd-4e] tag is even weaker than normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're not asking for us to pass judgement on that house rule, they're asking how to handle player knowledge when the player would know from the roll information their character wouldn't. A question that would be substantially unchanged without the fumbles, note. In fact, this is exactly what a high-voted answer did: passed judgement on the house-rule &lt;em&gt;without even answering the actual question&lt;/em&gt;. That is a &lt;strong&gt;terrible&lt;/strong&gt; failure of the SE system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The asker didn't want it to be system-specific&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker originally declined to put a system tag on it, on purpose. When asked, they said that the system isn't the important part of the question, the important part is the issue of character-player knowledge differences. They added the tag only afterward&amp;mdash;but of course they did, because the comments were conveying the impression that it's a big damn deal and they'd done it wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the asker's own words identifying the core of the question, it might (at best) call for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag. Though I don't think that's necessary either, since not every question on the site needs a system tag. Also, that would discourage mentioning D&amp;amp;D 4e in the answers, and we don't want that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For helpful background context, the system deserves a mention in the body of the question. Answers can and should primarily address the general principle of how the GM should handle players gleaning &quot;hidden&quot; information based on seeing the roll&amp;mdash;the core point of the question, the real problem they have&amp;mdash;but adding 4e-specific implementation notes is a good bonus in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-04-20T17:51:40.553" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3501" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-21T00:50:31.987" Score="4" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3500/1204&quot;&gt;this recent answer&lt;/a&gt;, SSD stated the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In fact, we have a community custom where, when people ask a generally-applicable question where it seems the system is merely secondary, we will advise them to remove any system tags so that the question gets wider viewing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen this practice play out like this a few times before:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone asks a question about handling X in their game of D&amp;amp;D #e, and give it the [dnd-#e] tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;X is relevant to a broader category of RPGs, though the asker only really cares about solving their own situation. That's what they're here for, and it doesn't matter much to them whether X is relevant to a broader category.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other community members, noticing that X is relevant to other D&amp;amp;D editions, suggest removal of the tag [dnd-#e] tag or remove it outright.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Is this&lt;/em&gt; something we should be doing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-04-21T07:09:34.707" Title="Should we be encouraging askers to remove system tags if their question is relevant to a broader category?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3501" CreationDate="2014-04-21T00:53:48.737" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we should be doing this. This kind of thing isn't a practice I participate in, and I think it's harmful to people seeking answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel removing the tag could remove valuable context that could benefit the asker. Even if the answer can be fairly generic, answers targeted to their specific edition's terminology and practices would probably be of the most help to them. The question and its answers should be totally targeted to [dnd-#e], and it should be tagged and categorised as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, the presence of the tag doesn't prevent players of other editions from learning from [dnd-#e]'s analogous situations, nor does it stop them asking their own question in their own edition should the existing question not solve their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, we're here to solve peoples' specific problems. Their question, tags and answers should be focused entirely on the asker's system, regardless of whatever else X happens to be relevant to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-04-21T00:59:23.613" LastActivityDate="2014-04-21T00:59:23.613" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3501" CreationDate="2014-04-21T01:16:36.650" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There is no harm in having the tag, really&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; will still show up in a search of that tag even if it is also tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;. Ditto it'll show up as a highlight even if you don't highlight &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if you explicitly &lt;em&gt;ignore-list&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;, those questions will fall under the ignore list. So, in fact, I do exactly this, and part of why I do that (not just with Pathfinder) is that there are games dissimilar enough to my interests that questions they generate tend not to be relevant to my play. This includes questions about play advice as well as rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tags shouldn't be critical to making sense of and scoping a question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a keyword or label that categorizes your question with other, similar questions. Using the right tags makes it easier for others to find and answer your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, right there: tags are tools for categorizing questions. They are not the primary way of stating what your question is about (that is the title), nor are they the primary way to express your question and any supporting details (that's the question body).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags also aren't a special field for giving the question stats that you're not allowed to put elsewhere or anything. You can, in fact, say what system you are playing just in the question (and someone will come along and tag it later, to &lt;em&gt;categorize&lt;/em&gt; it). It's okay to leave that out of the question body and lean on the tags, but I think we should do that as a matter of convenience rather than, like, a hard-and-fast policy that says certain things only ever go in tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site has a decent search feature (it also shows up on Google very easily). The tags are just little bonus sticky labels to making browsing stuff more fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-04-21T01:16:36.650" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3501" CreationDate="2014-04-21T07:09:34.707" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I may have an unusual perspective, because I have two of the biggest tags on my ignore list. The fluctuations of system tags on questions is therefore readily apparent from day to day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My rule if thumb for any tag is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should this question be invisible to experts who hide this tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes then it should have the tag; if no then the tag should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that this both reflects the intended utility of tags, and also tends to closely match what a question is really about at its core. It also means that I never make the mistake of thinking that lazy tagging is OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-04-21T07:09:34.707" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3505" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-22T16:22:47.053" Score="27" ViewCount="782" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do we handle questions when the asker's problem is that they are confused or proceeding under a misconception?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most often the asker &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; write a self-aware statement of the actual problem because lacking that self-awareness is their problem in the first place. Sometimes the question is logically inconsistent or otherwise demonstrates clearly what their underlying problem is, but the explicit question is something we can't answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;strong&gt;Assume for the sake of this discussion that the asker's confusion &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the problem, and therefore no amount of nicely asking for clarification will result in a clarified question.&lt;/strong&gt; If that assumption is wrong for a certain question, it's not a question that has this problem and it will get clarified fine. My only concern is dealing with the questions that &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have this problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are an odd special case of poorly-framed or XY Problem questions. In a normal question with an XY assumption, we can use comments to tease our their real, underlying problem. In &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; type of question though, we can't: misunderstanding their problem &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; their problem. They don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; an underlying problem they can clarify for us, because the problem they're having will stop existing when their confusion is removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The friction comes from there being two possible reactions our experts can have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Aha! You have demonstrated your misconception quite clearly, and now let me untangle your conceptual knot.&quot; These users will want to answer the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What the hell, this question doesn't make any sense.&quot; These users will vote to close/hold the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answering users will annoy the closing users, because we all know quite well that we shouldn't answer bad questions. The closing users will annoy the answering users, because solving the obvious problem isn't hard at all and the OP can always ask a solid follow-up question after they've been enlightened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly, resolving their confusion in comments is a solution... but this is effectively using comments to answer the question to those who think that &quot;misunderstanding their problem &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the problem&quot;. Since the users who see the confusion know better than to answer in comments, they won't (they'll just answer). Meanwhile the users who don't see the confusion are, for that very reason, less likely to ask useful clarifying questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should these questions be closed as unclear?&lt;/strong&gt; This may save the site from conflict that we are better off avoiding, even if we could in theory help this person. Attempting to clarify in comments will either not work (and the question will remain closed), or end up answering-in-comments (and find out that there's no other question worth reopening for). Permanently consigning questions from confused askers to the trash bin may be justified. If this is what we decide, then users tempted to answer will know to &quot;answer&quot; in comments to remove the confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should these questions remain open to allow answers?&lt;/strong&gt; One or more of the answers is likely to solve their problem by correcting the misconception, at the expense of some of the answers guessing wrong in some particulars. The votes on such answers are likely to reflect more on the guesses of the community about the nature of the confusion, than on the fitness to their exact confusion-problem. Helping a thoroughly-confused asker may be worth hosting low-quality questions (as the downvote arrow is for). If this is what we decide, then we'll be able to point to this decision to ward off well-meaning but interfering close votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related reading is, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt; This problem is related, but distinct in that this type of framing problem is caused when the asker's problem is why they're unable to reframe their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A possible example of a question of this type:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36561/what-books-should-i-buy-to-play-with-an-average-dd-group&quot;&gt;What books should I buy to play with an average D&amp;amp;D group?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-09-21T04:13:32.590" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T04:13:32.590" Title="How do we handle it when the asker's problem is just that they're confused?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3505" CreationDate="2014-04-22T19:31:05.633" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to come down on the side of putting these on hold as unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasons for this are manifold, but the primary ones are that if the OP is genuinely confused, we do them a disservice by allowing people to try to answer their problem &lt;em&gt;at face value&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, some folks are going to come in and show them their error, but they &lt;em&gt;aren't actually answering the question&lt;/em&gt; that's being asked. That's a pretty clear sign that the question is unanswerable and should be closed as &quot;Unclear what you are trying to ask&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar to our discussion about challenging the frame, the guidance there is &lt;em&gt;answer the question first, then challenge the frame&lt;/em&gt;. If answering the question first is impossible, then we should vote to close and show the OP the error of the frame.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes. Comments are the right tool for this job. Close the question, and then use a comment to show the OP how the frame is incorrect, point it out, if they (or another user) can salvage the frame, then the question can be reopened, or reasked with the appropriate frame. If they cannot, then the question simply remains closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-04-22T19:31:05.633" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2014-04-23T00:56:30.383" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry for the very late answer, but this is trending topic recently on rpg.SE, and one that has been bothering me recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that a lot of comments should be deleted. While I don't mind reading interesting comments or good jokes, I understand they are not really appropriate on SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the ongoing &quot;comment hunt&quot; is disturbing. I hesitate more and more about using the comment box, no matter the situation, because of the looming &quot;Please refrain from using comments for...&quot; It happens pretty often &lt;em&gt;on the same day.&lt;/em&gt; On the long term, questions and discussions that could have triggered valuable comments will disappear. Then valuable comments themselves will disappear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Extremism in one direction or the other is never a good thing. I understand comments are pointless for posterity. But &lt;strong&gt;posterity takes time&lt;/strong&gt;. So let's aim for a middle ground: let's delete comments... after a probation period. Comments are allowed while the question is active. After two weeks of inactivity, comments are hunted and cleaned, as it should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand this means more work for us, but this is the only way we can have our cake and eat it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2900" LastActivityDate="2014-04-23T00:56:30.383" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3505" CreationDate="2014-04-24T01:45:43.847" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do what we do best: solve their problem to the best of our ability. From my experience we can sort these questions into three categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Their question is incomprehensible or really does not have an answer as posed.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These should get closed as unclear, naturally. We should try our best to coax something comprehensible and answerable out of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. They're confused but we don't notice and the question seems totally legit.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These ones by definition don't actually get sorted into this bucket. They probably get answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. They're confused and it's obvious. They've asked a question, but to really solve their problem requires poking at the confusion underneath.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer it. Answer their question at face value, then poke at the confusion underneath: show them what they're confused about and unravel their confusion for them. Solve their problem on every level. That's what we do here: we don't answer questions blindly, we &lt;em&gt;solve problems&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We actually answer a lot of questions from category #3 already! A typical example is we'll get a person asking if a certain D&amp;amp;D spell or power named &lt;em&gt;Foo&lt;/em&gt; will do &lt;em&gt;Bar&lt;/em&gt;, because if so they're going to use it to do &lt;em&gt;Whatsit&lt;/em&gt; — but we know that &lt;em&gt;Foo&lt;/em&gt; won't let them do &lt;em&gt;Whatsit&lt;/em&gt; anyway, and they've overlooked or misunderstood something. In this case we tell them whether &lt;em&gt;Foo&lt;/em&gt; does &lt;em&gt;Bar&lt;/em&gt;, then tell them &lt;em&gt;Foo&lt;/em&gt; won't let them do &lt;em&gt;Whatsit&lt;/em&gt; and why. Sometimes we even suggest things that will actually do &lt;em&gt;Whatsit&lt;/em&gt; instead!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this category I'll stress it's important to do &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; things: answer their question as asked, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; unravel their confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What about here?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the book/equipment question: we either close it as #1, or we can answer it at face value then pick apart their confusion to resolve that too as #3. It's been in a state of flux between both for a while.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In its &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/36561/4&quot;&gt;current state&lt;/a&gt; it probably counts as #3: we can tell them what books we need. The answer will probably be none, which answers the question. Then we pick apart the confusion: they require none because the group they join will have books to share, and they haven't worked out what edition they want to play yet anyway. They can go join a group, receive help and guidance from those people, then figure out what they need for themself later (possibly nothing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-15T19:23:27.013" LastActivityDate="2019-02-15T19:23:27.013" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2014-04-24T18:10:10.607" Score="-16" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO the practice of allowing users to delete comments is not defensible except when comments get nasty, contain profanity, etc. Following comments has never been a hassle on this site. I see them as funny bon mots, helpful observations, and polite responses to questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is there a perceived need to tidy up the place? By what right can someone censure your words? Who cares if the forum is a little messy. Big deal. It's disconcerting to discover someone has been rummaging through your posts &amp;amp; deleting your comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9753" LastActivityDate="2014-04-24T18:10:10.607" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3512" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3531" CreationDate="2014-04-25T15:10:05.127" Score="25" ViewCount="905" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are here to help people to have fun. We are here for a hobby, not something we are being paid for. Is not our job like Stack Overflow and it is not our creed like the Religious SE. It is not about politcs, it is not about money. It's about having fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why are people being so rude to each other, then?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone that post an answer here is doing that (or should be doing that) with the only intent to help. We are not fighting over Reputation, &quot;correcteness&quot; or anything like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So why people are being rude? It is almost everywhere. On comments, on answers, even on meta. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A While ago I was blasted hard regarding a question about 4E mounts for being &quot;anti-4e&quot;. Then I saw people fighting over the &quot;Scopeness&quot; of answers that barely answered the question. I see people bashing each other hard for really stupid things. I, myself, was rude sometimes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But today, a comment from Brian made me stop and think about things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;If it's clear, then you don't need to respond to the comment. Just&#xA;  flag the prior comment as obsolete and move on.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may be a cultural thing, but it sounded to me like a &quot;Shut up and be quiet&quot;. I was bothered by this on a first moment, but then I realized that it is all over the place (not specific to Brian, I mean rudeness on a more general level). People are being rude with each other without spending two secs to think about other people point of view. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I them ask again. Why people are being rude for no reason around the site? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To let things crystal clear. My focus is not Brian's comment. That may be a culture clash and his comment may even be not rude at all. It was just what made me think about the rudeness of RPG SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, Im not complaining about necessary interventions. What I'm talking about is unecessary rudeness, like being excessively harsh when adressing someone. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples? There ya go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That dreaded 4E mount question started with the assumption that I&#xA;didn't knew anything about the System, and even the title was&#xA;offensive when it first was posted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36627/do-you-add-your-strength-modifier-to-touch-spells/36629#36629&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; an user was overly energetic defending his point of view, to the point of nitpicking which terms I used to describe real-life physics, even if the concept on itself was right. The comments are deleted now, but if the mods can see them...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On a chat with someone that I can't really remember who was, it was stated that a different interpration of the rules is &quot;Impossible to someone who understands the language right&quot; or something along those lines.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm citing only things that happened to me, but i'm certain that it happens all over the place with everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not poiting fingers, but I feel that RPG SE can be a bit acidic, principally with new users. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-07-29T21:46:46.417" Title="Why people are being so rude?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3513" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3512" CreationDate="2014-04-25T16:28:00.097" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Site Rudeness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This used to be more of an issue, but is still an issue. I'm afraid that people get very heated up about their favorite hobby and address either people on this site or off in terms that are rude and inappropriate. Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;Help Center says&lt;/a&gt; &quot;Be Nice&quot; is one of our guiding rules but it doesn't always take.  This is a problem on SEs in general, in fact SE declared last summer the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/07/kicking-off-the-summer-of-love/&quot;&gt;Summer of Love&lt;/a&gt;&quot; with an effort to drive nicer behavior across all the sites. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;our RPG.SE Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt; for details on expected behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can you do about rudeness?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't be rude yourself, and deescalate hostile encounters&lt;/strong&gt;. Try using elementary school favorite &quot;Kelso's Choices,&quot; I &lt;a href=&quot;http://geek-related.com/2012/11/18/player-conflict-in-rpgs/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wrote an article on it&lt;/a&gt;. I know this is hard, sometimes I succumb to the lure of arguing with someone I think is a goon, but I shouldn't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flag offensive comments - even in chat&lt;/strong&gt;. I'm not in chat a lot but when I do drop in I don't really like what I see sometimes, and we have a lot of chat rooms. Chat is not some free-for-all location, all users please conduct yourself well in chat and flag rudeness when it appears. Dissing someone over their English counts as rude.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Site Housekeeping&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SE format does involve a fair amount of judgement and crowdsourcing around keeping the place usable. So discussions about answers being appropriate, warnings to stop using comments for chatting, etc. are expected.  Sometimes they're brusque, but especially when big comment fights keep happening - no one pays us to do this job, we get annoyed at having to keep deleting and moderating ourselves, so especially after we've had to police a question several times our messages about not using comments like a forum can become pointed. Although &quot;move on&quot; is not considered generally rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the larger picture here is that most of these site activities are done to try to minimize rudeness.  Is it ruder to evaluate removing an answer because it might be 4e-bashing, or to allow loads of edition-bashing answers on the site? Our opinion is that the latter leads to much more... net rudeness? in the world, so it's necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course it can be off-putting to new users who show up, post some gibberish, and get sad when it's closed. We try to address this, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;Site approachability&lt;/a&gt; for an earlier discussion.  &quot;On Hold&quot; instead of &quot;Closed&quot; is a recent friendliness change, and people tend to be pretty good about commenting &quot;Welcome to the site! I'm afraid that there's this problem with your whatever...&quot;.  First contact with rules is never without any conflict, but we think the rules minimize ongoing conflict.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Inequity Therein&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mention that it seems like sometimes one poster will get raked over the coals for something that another poster gets away with. That can happen; site housekeeping isn't always fair. Our model of democracy plus representatives with oversight is the best SE could come up with to try to make things maximally fair, but that doesn't mean always fair. However, keep in mind a couple things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sometimes it is about how you've expressed yourself. In our guidance on XY questions/&quot;challenging the frame of the question&quot; in an answer in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;, we kinda note that there's an art to it. Sometimes being able to express yourself in a compelling way does help. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our democratic site metaphor means that most anyone can hassle you without representing anyone other than themselves.  In the question you quoted about force vs momentum, it was a user with a lower rep than yours that was giving you stick.  But even that conflict was more about how it was expressed.  &quot;You mean momentum not force&quot; is a legitimate and factually accurate correction that, while minor, is legitimate to suggest. However, because of how it was worded, it turned into a 9-big-comment back-and-forth war, which I personally deleted because those back-and-forths either end in real rudeness, or at least perceived rudeness on the part of one or more participants. But I've definitely seen situations where everyone's dumping on one answer even though it's materially the same as a more highly upvoted answer. About 10% of that is OK - longer term site users have some trust built up around their motives and stuff - but 90% of it is not, and we should be giving newer users the benefit of the doubt especially wrt intentions and all.  A nice comment asking for clarification could do the trick. Sure, downvotes are &quot;reversible,&quot; but when you get a cavalcade of downvotes it never feels good, so I'd urge site participants to show some decor.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T00:28:40.933" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3514" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2014-04-25T17:06:27.547" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over on Arqade, they sometimes have &quot;release events&quot; for new, high-profile videogames such as Mass Effect 3 and Skyrim. Most often these are contests, to motivate asking and answering questions about the game. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/promos&quot;&gt;StackExchange Community Promotion Archive&lt;/a&gt; has overviews of past promotions, to get an idea of what they're like. The releases of Skyrim and Diablo III brought &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7075/4163&quot;&gt;major and lasting traffic increases to Arqade&lt;/a&gt;. The network likes this, and can provide material and logistical support for such promo events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We might consider doing something similar ourselves. In the world of videogames, high-profile game releases happen more often than in the world of RPGs, but if the first new edition of D&amp;amp;D since the birth of RPG.SE isn't a high-profile release, I don't know what is. Not only would it help prepare us to be as helpful as possible for the likely influx of new D&amp;amp;D questions, a promo event could also generally raise RPG.SE's profile in the RPG community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To do it in a way similar to Arqade has done, we would want some or all of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a temporary site redesign / art changes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a competition/prize structure for askers and answerers, keyed off site activity&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;social network exposure&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a few network-provided copies of 5e (however they usually do that selection process) to boost our expert base&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Etc., which take time and the support/collaboration of higher-ups. If we want to do something like that, we need to float the idea with &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/99341/153219&quot;&gt;the community manager team&lt;/a&gt; now (because our lead time is only four months now, based on the likely GenCon 2014 release). If the network has the resources and the community team thinks it's a good idea, we can start working with them to develop the promotion's detail right away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-04-28T00:08:41.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3517" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-26T02:09:26.460" Score="2" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;So how do you do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The help center is no help at all. And I really really really want to delete my profile. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user11176" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T02:11:17.647" Title="How do you delete your profile?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3517" CreationDate="2014-04-26T02:11:17.647" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As per &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/deleting-account&quot;&gt;https://stackoverflow.com/help/deleting-account&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your account has voted or posted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Edit the &quot;About Me&quot; section of your profile to say “please delete me”.&#xA;  edit profile&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Contact us to request deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:34.523" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T02:11:17.647" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3519" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-26T04:21:05.877" Score="17" ViewCount="558" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to brainstorm some possibilities for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_%28statistics%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;modal&lt;/a&gt; comment-interventions that we tend to do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Welcome to the site, but your question needs work because reasons&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Welcome to the site, but your answer needs work because reasons&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please stop arguing in comments!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please don't answer in comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Revise your answer instead of responding, here's an example of what it looks like.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's why your question was closed and some meta discussion on it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is a subjective question, so your answer must Back It Up!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Edit in other modal comments that you see popping up.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can the use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/2116/autoreviewcomments-pro-forma-comments-for-se&quot;&gt;auto-comment userscript&lt;/a&gt; to drop in these well annotated and linked comments in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific use is to have a community-normed pattern for gently correcting infractions of our rules in comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T06:00:44.397" Title="We could use some more pro-forma comments" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2014-04-26T04:31:49.300" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, we must make sure all of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; answers are updated for the latest edition. We don't want any playtest stuff getting dragged in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Query for the easy checking of updates: &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/186581/dd-next-playtest-queries&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/186581/dd-next-playtest-queries&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, at the very least, we may want to have a hangouts-on-air mass reading of the books when they're released. (Maybe to the point of buying them for people). The joint reading should be enough to seed obvious questions. It'll also help make very good Next questions so that we can close incoming ones as dupes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-04-28T07:32:17.363" LastActivityDate="2014-04-28T07:32:17.363" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3512" CreationDate="2014-04-26T04:35:09.470" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought I'd add a second answer based on a separate incident today that I believe is relevant to the thought process behind this question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Anna/@xxx posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36793/which-quest-elements-are-important-to-consider-to-make-the-game-continueing-ente&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; that some site members started to workshop. She'd spent a lot of time on that question and found that upsetting. She went and made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3515/the-difference-between-opiniondriven-questions-and-expirience-based-questions&quot;&gt;a meta post&lt;/a&gt; and got a long explanation from another user. This upset the user to the degree that she initated the process of self-deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I want to say that all the site members involved were a) not being rude, they were polite and b) were largely correct in their critiques. They did not do anything &quot;wrong&quot; per se. However, the upset of the user involved is not &quot;wrong&quot; either.  How can this be and what can we do about it? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, on SE we tend to take a very legalistic view of things.  But real people have emotions, and so when a comment/answer/activity is correct but makes someone upset, we can't just hide behind &quot;Well but we didn't mean to upset them it's all their problem,&quot; I think it's safe to say that general real-world thinking on inclusivity and interpersonal relations sees that as negligent.  I think we could perhaps add more empathy, or &lt;a href=&quot;http://psychcentral.com/lib/what-is-emotional-intelligence-eq/0001037&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;EQ&lt;/a&gt; if you will, to our activities. (also see Crucial Conversations, How To Say It, How To Win Friends and Influence People, and other fine works along these lines)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After conducting some retrospectives with some site users in chat, I have constructed some possible changes I think could help with perceived rudeness. (We occasionally have real rudeness, which I address in my other answer, but I think in the juncture between community moderation and people's emotions, we have a separate problem of perceived rudeness.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Understand when someone is upset and apply the same behavior you should in the real world.  Here's a good, simply explained example: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wikihow.com/Handle-People-Who-Are-Angry-at-You&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How To Handle People That Are Angry With You&lt;/a&gt;. (replace &quot;you&quot; with &quot;the site and the other folks on it&quot; if you're not one of the initial principals). When someone is upset, an immediate extended legal brief on their question's flaws and advice on how to fix it is, actually, not all that useful. I know that the SE rationalist way says that's totally the best solution, but we should probably have better awareness of context clues that someone is upset and not in lawyer mode right now. If someone's clearly venting on Meta, you can let it sit a little, respond with active listening and validation instead of a &quot;fix,&quot; etc.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Find some ways for people to reach out and get additional help when they're having a problem.  We allegedly have these, but they're kind of opaque to newer site users. How do you reach out to a mod?  Well...  You could ping in chat, if you go to chat and if you actually know the mods' names. You could post on meta and they will happen by eventually, probably.  You could flag something, though in cases like this it's hard to understand which noun (comment etc.) to flag. We don't have a &quot;contact the mods!&quot; button or anything, maybe we should. I may propose that on meta.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Find ways for people to get more help when they're having a problem.  We have meta, which you already have to be a site ninja to go elicit wisdom from.  We have the help center, which even though it gets popped up and linked a lot to new users, tends to be ignored.  I can easily envision more contextual help, though.  Your answer just got put on hold? Here's a notification to the &quot;what does getting put on hold&quot; mean part of the HC or meta Q or whatever.  That could add context to help people understand that a random pogrom didn't just break out on them, but that there's some site dynamic going on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd love to hear other suggestions of how we add more empathy to site operations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T04:35:09.470" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1216" CreationDate="2014-04-26T12:01:59.613" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Cross-post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure most gamers have no idea this place exists.  Large online DnD communities exist, answering questions in threads there by linking here will vastly increase user uptake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the stated goal of this site is to create linkable answers to questions, it's not even a shoddy means of poaching users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T12:01:59.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3519" CreationDate="2014-04-26T12:19:16.903" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know how useful anyone else might find them, but I've been collecting Comments I Often Make in a txt file for a while and I might as well share some of 'em. You'll notice that they tend to be slightly verbose; partly that's my style and partly I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; it helps seem more friendly and human, and less like the person got the wrong end of a rules-obsessed chatbot. Others I've based on moderator phrasings that I liked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;###[Q]New user introduction&#xA;Welcome to rpg.se! Please take a look at the [tour], it's a useful introduction to the site.&#xA;&#xA;###[Q]Looks like a forum post&#xA;In particular, Stack Exchange isn't a forum, it's a Q&amp;amp;A site. The &quot;answer&quot; form is for answers to the question being asked, and new questions should be asked independently.&#xA;&#xA;###[Q]Question is unclear&#xA;Can you expand your question, please? I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. Titles, while useful summaries for questions, cannot actually serve as the question itself.&#xA;&#xA;###[Q]Opinion Based&#xA;[type here] are value calls that we can't make for you.&#xA;&#xA;###Please no thank you comments&#xA;Comments are for improving questions. If you want to thank someone for their contribution, upvote them!&#xA;&#xA;###Please no forums in comments&#xA;Comments are for improving questions. If you need to discuss things, there are many RPG forums (SE, as a Q&amp;amp;A site, is not designed to support discussion).&#xA;&#xA;###Please no questions in comments&#xA;Comments are for improving questions. If you have follow-up questions, we welcome them as new questions, or as a clarifying edit to your original question.&#xA;&#xA;###Link with no context&#xA;Links to external resources are encouraged, but [please add context around the link](http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer) so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there. Always quote the most relevant part of an important link, in case the target site is unreachable or goes permanently offline.&#xA;&#xA;###Third-party proprietary content link&#xA;Please don't link to third party hosts of proprietary content, as they're [highly succeptible to link rot](http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/a/2773/4398).&#xA;&#xA;###New user chat invite&#xA;and once you have 20+ rep, feel free to join the [chat]!&#xA;&#xA;###Chat invite&#xA;Let's continue this discussion in [chat].&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2017-03-15T06:24:57.330" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T06:24:57.330" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2014-04-26T13:19:02.750" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am seeing an obsolete comment often; namely some variation of &quot;do not answer in comments.&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please stop leaving these pointless comments behind when you remove comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify, @mxyzplk, I'm not trying to be a smart-alek here, it's a serious comment. To me, those &quot;Please do not use comments for answers&quot; had no purpose; they seemed to be a waste of screen real estate telling me something that (hopefully) I already know. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for explaining why you are leaving those comments. I hadn't thought about someone who sees their comment gone thinking &quot;oh, the system ate my comment&quot; and reposting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7698" LastEditorUserId="7698" LastEditDate="2014-04-28T04:46:45.353" LastActivityDate="2014-04-28T04:46:45.353" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3526" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-26T21:34:19.247" Score="20" ViewCount="698" Body="&lt;p&gt;In literature authorial intent is kind of bugaboo. There're whole branches of criticism that ignore the author's role in his work entirely. Further, literary figures aren't prone to answering probing questions about their work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But role-playing game authors are more accessible. They write rules that are intended to be used, discussed, interpreted, tinkered with, and modified. They'll talk to gamers, and sometimes they'll &lt;em&gt;answer questions&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; don't know if, in role-playing games, more credit should be given to a role-playing game's author's answer to a question or to a gifted amateur who cleverly interprets the words that author wrote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I expect this will be more of an issue as the site's popularity increases, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/36821/8610&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; made me think of it. Other relevant questions include this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11997/is-hengeyokais-natures-mask-benefit-applied-to-hybrid-form-or-just-animal-form/12005#12005&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; and, tangentially, this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25923/is-the-greenbound-summoning-feat-as-powerful-as-it-looks-or-am-i-missing-someth/25924#25924&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; that includes a link to an author's forum post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Andreas Rönnqvist's point &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; taken: An author rarely controls his work after it's been submitted to a editor. That's understood. But I can imagine scenarios wherein Comment wars ensue, some lining up behind the &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WordOfGod&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Word of God&lt;/a&gt;&amp;mdash;who says that's not the text's intent or that the text is being misunderstood, taken out of context, or was changed after submission and here's what it &lt;em&gt;originally&lt;/em&gt; said&amp;mdash;and some lining up behind the text itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an author answers a question about his work, should that answer automatically be the right answer? If an author claims that he didn't intend a rule to be interpreted the way it's being interpreted and explains his intent, is that sufficient to end the conversation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:47:32.137" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:47:32.137" Title="Do Authors Overrule Users?" Tags="|discussion|game-designers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3526" CreationDate="2014-04-26T21:57:50.487" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;rsquo;t really expect it to become a huge issue. We don&amp;rsquo;t get that many answers along these lines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, an author brings obvious authority to any rules discussion. That said, &lt;em&gt;what the author intended&lt;/em&gt; is not necessarily the best way to run a rule (sometimes unintended side-effects are actually more fun) nor is it necessarily what actually got written (either because of misstatements or because of editorial changes during the writing process). So authors are not automatically &amp;ldquo;right&amp;rdquo; &amp;ndash; it depends on what the question is asking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent wants to know the &amp;ldquo;rules-as-written,&amp;rdquo; then even the person who wrote those rules has to justify his claims &amp;ndash; qualifications he&amp;rsquo;d &amp;ldquo;meant&amp;rdquo; to put in, or intended to be followed, or what have you, are not generally considered part of the rules-as-written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent wants to know the best way to run a given rule, then the author&amp;rsquo;s perspective is valuable but not automatically superior &amp;ndash; after all, it&amp;rsquo;s entirely possible for players with lots of experience &lt;em&gt;actually playing&lt;/em&gt; a given rule might have a better perspective on it (particularly if the author has since moved on to other products).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent specifically wants to know the authors&amp;rsquo; intent, he&amp;rsquo;s in the wrong place and that question would be closed. The overwhelming majority of the time, there is almost no evidence with which to &amp;ldquo;Back It Up!&amp;rdquo; as the rules require, and it becomes a pointless and arguably insulting slugfest &amp;ndash; &amp;ldquo;he &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; meant it the way I like it, anyone who disagrees is wrong because the author definitely agreed with me,&amp;rdquo; is not a meaningful or helpful answer, and is exactly the kind of Bad Subjective answer that this site&amp;rsquo;s format is meant to eliminate. That said, this sort of question is the only one in which the author&amp;rsquo;s answer is automatically the best one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, conclusion: the author is obviously an expert and obviously brings a very valuable perspective to the table. One can expect the author&amp;rsquo;s answer to be at the very least good, if not the best, answer, simply because the author has experience and perspective that none of the rest of us can match. But it is not &lt;em&gt;automatically&lt;/em&gt; so, so we should recognize it for what it is, but not more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T21:57:50.487" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3528" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3526" CreationDate="2014-04-26T22:08:55.777" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;Authors bring insight that is often highly valued by us&amp;mdash;but that doesn't obviate our voting system and automatically make their answers &quot;right&quot;. Unless people overwhelmingly vote for the author's answer, of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, we carry on as we are, and the votes will tell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-04-26T22:08:55.777" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3530" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7217" CreationDate="2014-04-27T02:18:21.057" Score="8" ViewCount="209" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 5th release of D&amp;amp;D is due for release in &lt;a href=&quot;http://company.wizards.com/content/wizards-coast-announces-thrilling-dungeons-dragons-launch-summer-2014&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;Summer 2014&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, which means sometime soon. As far as I'm aware, it does not have a definite name yet: it might be D&amp;amp;D 5th Edition, or retain its name of D&amp;amp;D Next.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently we have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; tag, which has the synonyms &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. It would be very messy if questions about the playtest &amp;amp; the release get mixed up in one tag. So, let's not leave that too late - it would be inconvenient if we had a flood of 5e questions on the first release days before anyone remembers to change over the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we action &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3520/1204&quot;&gt;this suggestion&lt;/a&gt; and rename the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt;, and decouple it from its synonyms, leaving &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; ready to use (and create anew) when the game's released?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-16T09:53:59.230" LastActivityDate="2017-06-16T09:53:59.230" Title="Can we rename [dnd-next] to [dnd-next-playtest] before it's released?" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3512" CreationDate="2014-04-27T03:19:48.007" Score="26" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Good intent&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wikipedia has a rule, &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Assume good faith&lt;/a&gt;.&amp;quot; It doesn't always work for them, but it's a big part of trying to avoid rudeness and infighting. Filtered through our own site's viewpoint, I think I'd call it &amp;quot;good intent&amp;quot; (cribbing the term from &lt;a href=&quot;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/playing-with-good-intent/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bankuei&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post with good intent!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post to share your knowledge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post to help other people improve their gaming experience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be mindful of how you express yourself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't use answers and comments as an excuse to soapbox.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post like you want to be here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assume good intent from others!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Read every post like it might have something to teach you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Treat other users as &amp;quot;experts.&amp;quot; Even if you think they're wrong about something, you can disagree without negating their experience or expressing yourself condescendingly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there's a constructive way to interpret a comment, choose to interpret it that way. Don't look for an excuse to get into a fight.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Treat other users like you want them to be here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-07-29T21:46:46.417" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3530" CreationDate="2014-04-27T05:02:06.097" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd really rather not, I don't understand the value in doing so. That seems way to deep down into the sub-sub-versions.  We don't have a pathfinder-beta tag, or a dnd-4e-essentials tag. I think their date and content makes it clear it's about the playtest. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-04-27T05:02:06.097" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3530" CreationDate="2014-04-28T07:30:04.880" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've written a &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/186581/dd-next-playtest-queries&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;query&lt;/a&gt; to show all &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; activity with a last activity before July 31st.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way, we'll have a simple list of next questions that haven't been touched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should differentiate questions that are about a specific playtest packet (and either discuss features that have slipped out, or other nonsense) and make it clear in the question which specific playtest it's about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For other questions, we'll just need to answer all of them with the latest details or ask the answerers to clean up their questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-04-28T07:30:04.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3534" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-29T11:39:21.607" Score="11" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's an infrequent but noticeable trend to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; tag on questions about dice or critical hits or the like, despite the tag being clearly labelled as specific to the d20 System:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The d20 system, developed alongside D&amp;amp;D 3e, forms the mechanical backbone for a variety of RPG's entirely departed from the D&amp;amp;D system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the tag itself were &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20-system&lt;/a&gt;, I think this would quickly and easily make the mis-tagging go away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it's not a major issue in the grand scheme of things, but it's been bugging me so I brought it here. (I'm also curious why the tag wasn't &quot;-system&quot; in the first place.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-05-01T00:28:01.373" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T00:29:15.013" Title="Should the [d20] tag be [d20-System] instead?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3535" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3526" CreationDate="2014-04-29T12:47:35.400" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The author isn't necessarily the best person to know about character optimization in the game they designed, as they didn't necessarily write it with that in mind.  Balancing is often done via playtesting rather than mathematical models.  In those cases, someone that actually spends their time doing optimization is probably the better source of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author may not have played their game as extensively as others, and may be unaware of obscure issues that can come up during gameplay.  People that have encountered and dealt with that specific issue are probably the better source of an answer in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is about Rules-as-Intended, the author is the best person to ask.  However, they ought to still be referencing the official word from an external source.  For starters, we don't authenticate users (to the best of my knowledge) and anyone could come on here and claim to be a particular author.  I've written many magazine articles and the Babylon 5 adventure &quot;The Athena Strain&quot; but there's no way you can know I'm telling the truth when I say this ;)   If the author has posted something supporting their answer (e.g. on their official blog or the publisher's website) they can post an answer referencing that as the source.  Then again, someone else may feasibly be able to post the same answer, referencing the same source, and word it better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules-as-written, it doesn't matter what the author thinks, it's what's &lt;em&gt;written&lt;/em&gt; (obviously) that matters.  If the author wishes to make a correction, they probably ought to be doing so via official errata, not an SE site (which isn't to say they can't post it here, just that their doing so doesn't make it an officially-recognized correction to any rulebook)  General note on the &quot;officialness&quot; of anything the author writes here: the author themselves may not be in charge of making the decision to make any changes official, it may be required to go through a development team or at least an editor.  Taking their word via a SE site isn't a good idea.  They can post the correction via the official source and then reference it here so we know it really is official.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, as far as SE is concerned, the best answer is the one that gets the most votes and the accepted answer is the one the person asking the question has accepted.  We're surely more concerned here with the answer the majority of actual players want than with an &quot;official&quot; one anyway, that's the whole StackExchange &quot;thing&quot; - which asks the question, do any other SE sites have any special measures for &quot;official&quot; answers?  If not, there's no reason we should either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9293" LastEditorUserId="9293" LastEditDate="2014-04-29T20:06:13.917" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T20:06:13.917" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3534" CreationDate="2014-04-29T14:10:21.857" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm for this, in part because it's less ambiguous, but also in part because of this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm also curious why the tag wasn't &quot;-system&quot; in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did a brief google, and its official title &lt;em&gt;is actually&lt;/em&gt; &quot;d20 System&quot;. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/srdfaq/20040123a&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here's a Wizards page&lt;/a&gt; - they don't just call it &quot;d20&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we create a tag for something, typically we name the tag after the official name. So aside from being clearer, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20-system&lt;/a&gt; would be &lt;em&gt;the correct tag name.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T14:10:21.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3537" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3534" CreationDate="2014-04-29T20:20:12.250" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like the idea. It's less ambiguous without being unwieldy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1871" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T20:20:12.250" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3538" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3539" CreationDate="2014-04-29T21:58:05.853" Score="5" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;The user lately known as &lt;strong&gt;xxx&lt;/strong&gt; got their account-deletion request fulfilled earlier today. Shortly after, it appears that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3515/the-difference-between-opinion-driven-questions-and-experience-based-questions&quot;&gt;the meta post&lt;/a&gt; (10k users) at the centre of that event was deleted, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3517/how-do-you-delete-your-profile&quot;&gt;this related one&lt;/a&gt; by xxx wasn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know that we really &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; the first meta post in an undeleted form anyway&amp;mdash;but I didn't particularly think it merited deletion either. I'm more curious/alarmed that something disappeared silently by an automatic site mechanism that I wasn't aware existed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-13T17:26:59.430" LastActivityDate="2022-05-13T17:26:59.430" Title="Why did the Community user delete one meta post by a deleted user, but not another?" Tags="|support|deleted-questions|user-accounts|community-bot|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3539" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3538" CreationDate="2014-04-29T22:13:31.843" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that&quot;&gt;From the FAQ:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The system will automatically delete any question (and its answers) or answer with a score less than 0 when its owner's account is deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of those posts scores &amp;lt; 0, the other does not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-04-29T22:13:31.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3540" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-04-30T15:09:25.527" Score="15" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;In, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1216/how-can-we-make-dd-next-a-home-run-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;How can we make D&amp;amp;D Next a home run for RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt; it was suggested (and I agree) that one of the best ways we could go about generating site traffic, increasing the user base, and solidifying our community as the go-to place for Expert Answers was to secure copies of D&amp;amp;D Next so we would be able to provide launch day answers. How would we as a community go about reaching out to WOTC to try to get some copies? Should we try to get both the Starter Set (released in July) and the PHB (released in august)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-05-16T15:41:11.450" Title="How can we go about getting advanced copies of D&amp;D Next's releases?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3541" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3542" CreationDate="2014-04-30T18:04:35.513" Score="5" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;A recent question used the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-needs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-needs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-needs&lt;/a&gt; tag, and being unfamiliar with it I had a look at what other questions have used it. Having done so, I find that I have no clear idea as to what the tag is supposed to cover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the correct use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-needs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-needs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-needs&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-11T00:24:33.273" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T00:24:33.273" Title="Player-Needs Tag Clarification" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3542" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3541" CreationDate="2014-04-30T18:21:57.180" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Terminate with Extreme Prejudice&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's only used on 14 questions, has no wiki description, and does not seem to be used consistently beyond questions that have something to do with players (but not problem players). It's amorphous and doesn't add anything to the questions it's used on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zmNfN.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2014-05-01T01:28:51.463" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T01:28:51.463" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3519" CreationDate="2014-05-01T00:21:57.340" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are some comment drafts for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/2116/autoreviewcomments-pro-forma-comments-for-se&quot;&gt;auto comment extension&lt;/a&gt; which can be easily imported/exported into the extension:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;###New user introduction&#xA;You may wish to take a look at the [about] and [help] pages; they're useful introductions to the site.     &#xA;&#xA;###Unexplained link to external resource&#xA;Links to external resources are encouraged, but [please add context around the link](http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8231/are-answers-that-just-contain-links-elsewhere-really-good-answers) so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there. Always quote the most relevant part of an important link, in case the target site is unreachable or goes permanently offline. When in doubt, see [How To Answer](http://$SITENAME$/help/how-to-answer).  &#xA;&#xA;###Answering in comments&#xA;@[type here], thank you for providing helpful information! If you believe you have enough information to post an answer, please do so. While I do appreciate the input, answering in comments is actively discouraged. Thank you!&#xA;&#xA;###User should be editing post instead of responding&#xA;@[type here], thank you for clarifying your post! Instead of using comments to include additional details, it is highly preferable that you [edit your post instead](http://$SITENAME$/privileges/edit). &#xA;&#xA;###[A] OP using an answer for further information&#xA;I'd like to request that you use the *Post answer* button only for actual answers. You can modify your original question to add additional information or expand; however, if you have a new question entirely, I ask that you instead [ask a new question](http://$SITEURL$/questions/ask). Thanks!&#xA;&#xA;###[A] OP adding a new question as an answer&#xA;If you have another question, please ask it by clicking the [Ask Question](http://$SITEURL$/questions/ask) button. Thanks!&#xA;&#xA;###[Q] Question is not clear&#xA;Would it be possible for you to expand upon your question? I'm not entirely certain what you're asking; please provide as much information as possible when asking. Thanks!&#xA;&#xA;###[A] Cut it out with yer' bickerin'.&#xA;@[type here], while I appreciate your efforts, arguments in comments tend not to be constructive. If you believe you have a differing interpretation, you are welcome to post a new answer below. Thanks!&#xA;&#xA;###[Q] Cut it out with yer' bickerin'.&#xA;@[type here], while I appreciate your efforts, arguments in comments tend not to be constructive. If you believe you have a differing interpretation, you are welcome to [post a new question](http://$SITEURL$/questions/ask) to clarify. Thanks! &#xA;&#xA;###[A] Frame challenge without legitimate answer. &#xA;@[type here], while we do accept [frame challenges](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6842/23064) as valid answers, [please also answer the question as posed before offering your critique on the subject](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/23064).&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you think these wordings should be changed, or would like to add your own to this list, feel free to edit it.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: the new user introduction comment excludes a welcome, because the auto-comment adds it automatically for users less than one week old.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note 2: Any [type here] blocks will automatically be selected when the comment is inserted, so you can begin to type over them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Unexplained link to external resource&quot; and &quot;Question is not clear&quot; comments were taken (almost) verbatim from BESW. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="23064" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T06:00:44.397" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T06:00:44.397" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-05-01T00:21:57.340" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3544" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3534" CreationDate="2014-05-01T00:29:15.013" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As it is written, so let it be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag merged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T00:29:15.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3545" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-01T09:01:00.583" Score="11" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There is no longer any kind of automatic Community Wiki conversion of questions and answers.&lt;/strong&gt; No matter how many editors or revisions your post has, it will &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; become Community Wiki now. The only way a post will ever become Community Wiki is if someone actually manually turns it into such. All automatic triggers are passed on. They are no more, they have ceased to be, they have expired to go and meet their maker; bereft of life, they rest in peace.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a part of the system we've lived with for a while, so this is just me trying to get the word out that it's gone. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about it in this blog post: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2014/04/putting-the-community-back-in-wiki/&quot;&gt;Putting the community back in wiki&lt;/a&gt;. It's kind of amusing, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So go forth, and edit your posts a dozen times if you want to, with no fear of community wiki conversion happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T09:01:00.583" Title="Community Wiki auto-conversion is no more" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3546" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-01T21:53:30.197" Score="1" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is going back and later editing comments later to say something else a problem?  If I make a spelling mistake and notice it, I can delete the comment and rewrite, but why not just leave it editable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2014-05-02T00:14:12.600" Title="&quot;Comments may only be edited for 5 minutes.&quot;" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3546" CreationDate="2014-05-01T22:09:21.553" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reason, I suspect, is because it's entirely possible to say something you expect will gather votes of 'useful', and then edit the comment to say something else you want inserted into the answer. The votes will stay, and the now wrongly upvoted comment's content might be edited into the answer. (Of course, this requires un-savvy viewers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T22:09:21.553" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3546" CreationDate="2014-05-01T23:10:46.943" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you have a question about core site features, it's worth checking on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; to see if there's an answer available; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/78573/why-is-the-time-limit-for-editing-comments-only-5-minutes&quot;&gt;there is in this case&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is going back and later editing comments later to say something else a problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes. Consider this comment exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Barbarians are great! They can pounce which is totally awesome. — Jonathan Hobbs&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I totally agree with @JonathanHobbs. — Jack Lesnie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I edit my comment the next day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Barbarians are the stupidest class ever and pounce is stupid and whoever wrote them is stupid. — Jonathan Hobbs&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I totally agree with @JonathanHobbs. — Jack Lesnie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments don't have a revision history, so you can't tell what I wrote beforehand. Originally, comments couldn't even be edited at all — the 5 minute edit window was added &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/459/152515&quot;&gt;so you could fix typos&lt;/a&gt;, and 5 minutes is long enough to do that. It's also short enough others &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; won't be replying to your comment inside of the edit window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a couple of spelling mistakes in your comment a while down the track, people can probably still get what you mean. If it's sufficiently embarrassing or a significant miscommunication, at least that's a good excuse &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3447/1204&quot;&gt;for clean-up of the comment chain!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-05-01T23:10:46.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3546" CreationDate="2014-05-01T23:14:11.643" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The five-minute window is a compromise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments shouldn't be editable because StackExchange doesn't want comments to be &quot;first-class citizens.&quot; Perpetual editing would highly encourage viewable histories, to &quot;keep you honest.&quot; Which would in turn encourage treating comments less and less like ephemera.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments should be editable because it sucks when you press &quot;post comment&quot; by accident, or when you post a comment and then immediately notice a typo while you're rereading it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the designers' view, (1) is a much bigger deal than (2), so the compromise is a five-minute window to allow you to clean up small problems easier (without having to copy/paste repost).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2014-05-02T00:14:12.600" LastActivityDate="2014-05-02T00:14:12.600" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3519" CreationDate="2014-05-02T18:21:34.403" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I find form comments incredibly off putting on the various stackexchange sites I frequent.  I don't think they should be encouraged in any way!  :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastActivityDate="2014-05-02T18:21:34.403" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3551" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3552" CreationDate="2014-05-02T20:53:54.667" Score="10" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if I did something wrong and I'm doing something even wronger posting this, but there is only one way to know. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went to my profile a few minutes ago and I found that there was a &quot;User was removed&quot; update in it. At first I thought I had been banned for some reason, but apparently everything is in place except that and 5 negative reputation (Never mind that, I don't really care).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to know if that is a glitch or it's because something that I shouldn't have done. I can't think of anything that could have caused this, so I don't know exactly what happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user9869" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2014-05-03T00:59:09.010" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T23:20:19.063" Title="User was removed?" Tags="|support|status-completed|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3551" CreationDate="2014-05-02T21:01:12.260" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, you're fine! Someone &lt;em&gt;else&lt;/em&gt; had their account removed, at their request. All the votes they ever made were removed from RPG.SE, which means that everyone lost any reputation earned from the removed votes. I got &amp;minus;8 myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your &amp;minus;5 was probably because they upvoted one of your questions once; removing that vote removed the +5 reputation their vote added to your account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: this only now happens when the deleted user was &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/125740/dont-throw-away-all-votes-when-a-user-is-deleted/268608#268608&quot;&gt;found to have been involved in vote fraud&lt;/a&gt;. Votes from deleted users are now preserved most of the time, with vote removal reserved for cases where vote fraud has tainted the deleted account's voting record. Accordingly we now see these kinds of “User was removed” events much less often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-20T23:20:19.063" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T23:20:19.063" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3275" CreationDate="2014-05-03T01:45:33.943" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Roleplaying Games Are Their Own Context&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are meta considerations in terms of setting-creation if you are going to set loose a bunch of PCs in it.  Assumptions and best-practices that are &lt;em&gt;instinctual&lt;/em&gt; to a good GM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, if it's a setting-question in terms of &lt;strong&gt;running a game in it&lt;/strong&gt;, it should be answered by people with experience in running games in that setting, or playing in games set in that setting, i.e., players and GMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having someone who has never played a roleplaying game in their life give a fluff answer that &lt;em&gt;does not work well in a roleplaying context&lt;/em&gt; is not a good answer to a RPG fluff question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2014-05-03T01:45:33.943" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3554" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-06T22:30:26.460" Score="15" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;During the outage earlier today, it looked like the explanatory bar saying that the site was in read-only mode was overlapping the header graphic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pLSZL.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Picture taken in Windows 7 using the latest Google Chrome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2556" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-12-05T23:16:07.947" LastActivityDate="2015-12-05T23:16:07.947" Title="Skin does not handle read-only mode well" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3555" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-07T01:52:36.980" Score="5" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for concept artwork to support an RPG campaign, and I'm having trouble finding more art in the same vein as a particular image I really like (specifically a particular character model for lizardfolk). &lt;strong&gt;Is RPG.SE a place where I can share a picture, describe what about it I want more of, and ask for help finding similar image resources?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm imagining that answers could be framed like, &quot;That's a Dawnforge lizardfolk, they have a lot of art in [publication],&quot; or &quot;[Site] specialises in humanoid reptilian art,&quot; or &quot;You should have luck with image searches for [search phrase].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-05-07T02:00:58.347" LastActivityDate="2014-05-18T22:43:11.627" Title="Would a question about finding art resources of a very specific style/theme/content would be on topic here?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3555" CreationDate="2014-05-07T03:07:38.160" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would be off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember the standard Venn diagram of what's on topic.  &quot;More art like this&quot; is not a meaningful overlap with &quot;RPG Experts,&quot; it's either anyone who can use Google image search or more suitable for art experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-05-07T03:07:38.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3555" CreationDate="2014-05-07T10:39:33.427" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm erring on this being off topic, like mxyzplk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This falls under the same kind of category as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/1204&quot;&gt;campaign research questions&lt;/a&gt;, which resulted in a new content guideline to rule out real-world topics that had nothing to do with RPGs. Basically: questions must elicit a better/different/more specific answer from an RPG expert than an expert on a different real-world topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There will be some requests where an answerer can say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Oh, hey! That's {obscure creature acknowledged only in certain D&amp;amp;D articles}. You can find more art of those in {place}.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and those questions will elicit a better/different/more specific answer from the RPG crowd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; requests are &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; just going to be a beast that appears in a myriad of art forms and sources, including all over DeviantArt, with none of it necessarily requiring any RPG expertise to dig up, other than the fact RPG experts might be one of the kinds of people to have experience trying to dig up reference art, but that skill is tangential to our domain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we allow the former but not the latter, we'd have to identify an objective guideline to draw &lt;em&gt;that does not depend on the question being answered first.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-05-18T22:43:11.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3530" CreationDate="2014-05-08T16:26:17.340" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a Dnd-Next-Playtest tag is created, it should NOT replace the Dnd-Next tag, and it's even possible that it should be kept seperate from the DnD5e tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasoning is as follows. The Playtest is now over. One is not able to gain access to the latest playtest rules (they go up to level 20) legally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you purchase one of the encounters modules, such as Dead in Thay or Vault of the Dracolitch or Ghosts Of Dragonspear Castle, you do get a version of the rules.  those rules only go up to level 10, and are missing some other content, like Warforged race.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, you can currently purchase the Dnd-Next rules, but you can not purchase the playtest rules, and you can not purchase the 5e rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I'll try to go through all the questions and amswer with the latest dnd next rules &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-05-08T17:43:01.797" LastActivityDate="2014-05-08T17:43:01.797" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3559" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-11T13:17:02.930" Score="8" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1282/what-to-do-when-a-player-loses-or-forgets-their-character-sheet&quot;&gt;What to do when a player loses or forgets their character sheet?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; is an fairly important question roleplayers want answers to.&#xA;It belongs on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is quiet a old question posted in 2010.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;During that time it has gained a lot of answers.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Well actually it hasn't. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;It has gained about 5 answers.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Expressed over the course of 19 posts.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some posts express two or three ideas, most do not.&#xA;Ever single idea is expressed more than once,&#xA;I went and counted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reconstruct  Aproximate In play: 4&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;DM look after: 6&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep Minimal Cheat Sheet of most important stats: 2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Store Online: 7&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Photocopy/duplicate GM lookafter: 5&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total Unqiue Ideas:&lt;/strong&gt; 5&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total Expressed Ideas:&lt;/strong&gt; 24&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total Answers Posted&lt;/strong&gt;: 19&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus several comments also giving the answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone wants to give there two cents. Whether or not the same idea has already been expressed.&#xA;I suspect for a lot of users it was their first post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it is hard to read and repetitive &#xA;What can we do to make it more readable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps can be deleted the 3 answers that have no upvotes.&#xA;Perhaps we can create a community wiki answer and summerise all the answers in it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T19:11:25.717" Title="Clean up Duplicate Answers in forgotten character question" Tags="|discussion|answers|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3560" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3559" CreationDate="2014-05-11T17:08:08.300" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not think that this question is really all that problematic. Yes, there is a lot of duplication, but the top answers (as of 11 May) cover the five principles you've identified:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(Bryant): approx. in play&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(Ororo): GM holds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(Tsojcanth): approx. in play, GM holds, cheat sheet&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(Katniss): online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the top four answers there is already coverage of all the points made (&quot;GM duplicate&quot; is really a subcase of &quot;GM holds&quot;). The answers might stand to have some upvote love, but the SE system &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; seem to be doing just fine here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T17:08:08.300" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3559" CreationDate="2014-05-11T17:48:14.150" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;StackExchange doesn't have a method for ridding itself of duplicate answers, because (excluding &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; duplicates) it doesn't matter.  Some of the answers get voted up.  Some of the duplicates will be better phrased and more comprehensive than others.  The best answers will be at the top.  So what if there's a long tail of duplicates?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one exception is copy and paste answers.  We delete those, flag 'em if you see 'em.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T17:48:14.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3559" CreationDate="2014-05-11T18:21:13.290" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the Stack Exchange Way of doing things, this issue is already handled by votes, not deletion. The votes push the less-useful answers down and pull the more-useful answers up. This effectively makes the less-good answers invisible to anyone who doesn't bother reading them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every visitor will have a different amount of attention to spend on researching solutions to this problem, so different visitors are given exactly the right number of answers, according to the strength of their need and the amount of tolerance for redundant ideas they have. Deleting them just means that we'd have to decide what the &quot;right&quot; number of answers is, which will never perfectly match anyone. So the voting, plus visitor behaviour, takes care of that for us automagically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But if the best solution isn't in the top answer(s)?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, like in this case, the &quot;best&quot; answer is really a bunch of ideas scattered over a few answers. Usually the voting will concentrate all the good stuff near the top, so that reading two or three answers gives a good set of solutions. Sometimes not, though. And determining that is subjective, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see a question that you think needs a good, canonical, single answer, there are two solutions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Offer a bounty using the standard needs-a-canonical-answer reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Write your own answer that covers all the ideas.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1) has the issue that people might simply not submit new answers or improve existing answers before the 7-day bounty period expires, but often it will get the necessary attention. (2) has the issue that the new answer might just increase the number of answers without getting voted up, but if it's really a great improvement, it will get votes. Which one (or neither) seem appropriate to a particular question is just a matter of personal judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-05-11T19:11:25.717" LastActivityDate="2014-05-11T19:11:25.717" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3563" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-11T23:52:23.200" Score="8" ViewCount="194" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally I see an answer on this site that is basically good, but has a lengthy digression tacked on to it that does nothing to address the question or improve the answer's quality.  It might be a rant about a pet peeve, or an attempt to give advice to the OP that kind of exceeds the mandate of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it ever OK to simply edit these paragraphs out?  This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3393/edit-vs-own-answer&quot;&gt;related discussion&lt;/a&gt; suggests that you should not drastically change a post's meaning; but removing things not strictly related to the answer seems (potentially) different enough that it could be ok.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4132" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-05-12T04:21:08.463" Title="Is it ok to drastically edit another's answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3563" CreationDate="2014-05-12T00:20:11.383" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits are intended to be minor changes in keeping with the general tenor and position of the answer. They are not intended to change the answer into something it isn’t, or to align the answer more closely to your own preferences. Add your own answer for that. The answerer deemed that material to be worth including, and if you disagree, that’s what a separate answer is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, edits to an answer should be things the answerer would agree with. The only exception, in my mind, is when edits are used to eliminate inflammatory language or spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-05-12T00:20:11.383" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3565" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3563" CreationDate="2014-05-12T04:11:46.513" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should probably not edit something like that out unilaterally.  As in our related question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;, however, an answer like this doesn't have to get a free pass. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer has a correct portion but then spends an inordinate time on something else to where it has an unfavorable signal to noise ratio, downvote it and add a comment.  Upvote other answers that make the same point but more concisely. Add one if you need to - this is an exception to the &quot;don't add duplicate answers&quot; rule, it's not a duplicate if it has the same answer without all the extraneous junk. I am also not a fan of answers that spend more time soapboxing than answering the question. This is a SE where we answer questions, and wanting to add your one-page essay on a related topic isn't appropriate. Sometimes people get snookered into voting for the longest answer with the most prominent subheadings, but if we drive a culture of &quot;the most accurate but also most relevant answer wins&quot; we can hopefully drown out the noisy ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say, however, that the mods may make an exception to extraordinarily long answers. An answer that's more than a page long pushes other valid answers off the page.  If most of the content doing that is irrelevant, then we might be moved to take action, feel free and flag answers that seem to fit that criterion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-05-12T04:11:46.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3563" CreationDate="2014-05-12T04:13:29.743" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Maybe&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A drastic edit is rarely called for—usually letting someone reap the votes they sow is best. Very rarely though, there will be a good answer buried in a terribly written post, which could be rescued with some significant pruning or rewording that remains faithful to the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can you tell the difference? Well, you can't. What does and doesn't justify a drastic edit is always going to be a judgement call. On the one hand we are curators of the best solutions the internet has to offer for a problem, and we can fulfil that with our editing powers. On the other hand it's not &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; reputation attached to it, so it behooves us to exercise a significant degree of restraint when we use our edit privileges. Somewhere in the very large gulf between those two motives is where that judgement comes in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One heuristic I use sometimes is: &lt;strong&gt;will the author thank me?&lt;/strong&gt; If I'm going to improve it enough, and respect its intent and message enough, that the author will be grateful for a heavy editorial hand, then I'll go ahead with the drastic edit. If there's any doubt, if there's a notable chance they'll revert or be insulted by the changes, then editing is futile. This heuristic rules out almost all these kinds of edits, but it does leave the rare editing opportunity where it is likely to do a lot of good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: walk gently, but remember that you're carrying a big editing stick for a reason. Ignoring or indulging either extreme is suboptimal for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-05-12T04:21:08.463" LastActivityDate="2014-05-12T04:21:08.463" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3567" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-13T16:26:02.167" Score="1" ViewCount="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3563/1271&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I noticed that it (likely unintentionally) also may apply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/37490/1271&quot;&gt;an answer I wrote&lt;/a&gt;: I wonder if I'd better remove the second part of it, then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first part just concisely answers the question, while the second one is a longer, relevant anectode. While I think this anectode could be interesting and useful, I'm no longer sure it's the case, and I also fear it could be considered a rant (it isn't intended to be, but that's beside the point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this answer be better removing the second part? Could this second part be good as &lt;em&gt;a question&lt;/em&gt;, such as &quot;Is my analysis of this situation correct?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1271" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-05-13T16:32:44.680" Title="Should I remove the second part of this answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3568" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3567" CreationDate="2014-05-13T16:32:44.680" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think so, you're enhancing the point with a reasonably relevant anecdote. As far as I can tell the meta question in question was targeted at answers that contained tangents that are related to the concept but completely unrelated to the frame of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-05-13T16:32:44.680" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3569" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-14T07:31:36.207" Score="1" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there any reason there isn't a badge/set of badges for individuals that find and answer bounty questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2014-05-14T08:34:26.603" Title="Feature Request - Bounty Hunter Badge" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3569" CreationDate="2014-05-14T08:34:26.603" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because this would be implemented across all of Stack Exchange instead of on just one site, it'd be better asked on the meta site &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; all of Stack Exchange, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1182/bounty-hunter-badges&quot;&gt;and it has been&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In summary: Badges are for encouraging/rewarding good behaviour. Bounties already do that by granting unusually large rep rewards (which ignore the daily rep cap, no less!). The question was responded to by creating new badges for &lt;em&gt;offering&lt;/em&gt; bounties instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think there's a good argument for revisiting &quot;Boba Fett&quot; badges, I suggest you write a new question on meta.se--but &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/search?tab=relevance&amp;amp;q=bounty%20and%20badge%20is%3aquestion&quot;&gt;familiarise yourself with the existing discussion&lt;/a&gt; and write something which builds on and adds to that conversation, or it'll just get closed as a duplicate of the existing posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-05-14T08:34:26.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3571" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3572" CreationDate="2014-05-14T09:41:24.300" Score="16" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37623/how-can-i-reduce-crunch-for-my-players-without-putting-all-pressure-on-the-gm&quot;&gt;I asked a question&lt;/a&gt;, and while I received some really solid answers, I found the most helpful response to come from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37623/how-can-i-reduce-crunch-for-my-players-without-putting-all-pressure-on-the-gm#comment75600_37623&quot;&gt;a comment&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have already urged the commenter to boil down the essence of their linked article into an answer of its own. Not just because I found the resource particularly useful and &quot;answering&quot;, but mostly because I believe it's the most complete answer for anyone who has the same question as me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; For me, that is what SE is essentially about, anyways. Not just about getting an answer for myself, but getting a useful Q and a useful A for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, the commenter hasn't taken it upon themselves to post it as an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'd feel like a punk if I'd take the linked article, write the answer myself and then accept my own answer to my question. Specially since the current answers are quite good, but didn't 'do it' for me as much as &lt;a href=&quot;http://angrydm.com/2012/12/five-simple-rules-for-dating-my-teenaged-skill-system/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;that linked article&lt;/a&gt; did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what should I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T17:49:07.857" Title="What should I do if the most valuable response came in a comment rather than an answer?" Tags="|discussion|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3571" CreationDate="2014-05-14T10:15:04.930" Score="26" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;However, I'd feel like a punk if I'd take the linked article, write the answer myself and then accept my own answer to my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Do it.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; It'll be beneficial in every which way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want them to write it themselves, give them a day or two to have a chance of doing so. But if they refuse or show no signs of doing so, go ahead and create an answer based off their comment if you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You'll be rescuing information. That's good.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are going to be deleted, no matter how valuable they are, unless they're doing what comments are for: requesting improvements or clarification. It would be a shame to lose that information, so &lt;em&gt;someone&lt;/em&gt; should recover it in an answer if the person who posted it doesn't want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want an answer, go find it, then share it with us and get some unicorn points for it. Go ahead and claim the credit. You did the effort of crafting an answer; you earned it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;They either won't care (good) or they will (also good).&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they don't care, everything's dandy and we don't need to explore any further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt;, though, maybe that'll motivate them next time to actually make their answer an answer if they care to &amp;mdash; if they wanted credit for an answer, they should've created one. If they don't want to or don't care next time, they'll probably just post a comment as usual and we rinse and repeat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they complain saying they were in the middle of their own answer, tell them to post it anyway. If they do (with or without complaining first), you can both reap whatever votes your answers have earned and enjoy that. (If you feel so inclined, you may also delete your post to &quot;make way&quot; for theirs, but I personally recommend against doing this - sometimes people will find your answer more helpful than the other.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they complain outright that you did this at all, that falls under the &quot;they do care&quot; path of this section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A healthy attitude of snoozers losers works fantastically overall for dealing with answers-as-comments, so go ahead and employ that attitude and turn comments into answers if the author won't do it themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-15T00:38:42.873" LastActivityDate="2014-05-15T00:38:42.873" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3573" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3616" CreationDate="2014-05-14T21:25:34.540" Score="22" ViewCount="1202" Body="&lt;p&gt;There have been questions in relation to language used, and offenses given in word choice- but what about outright profanity?  Though (I think) most here are adults, that's not necessarily a given, and I've always viewed profanity for it's sake to be the recourse of a limited vocabulary rather than some sort of profound emphasis.  But that's just me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the consensus on such?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:33:38.963" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:33:38.963" Title="Is profanity allowed on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|faq|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="3574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3571" CreationDate="2014-05-14T21:39:10.563" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Just Do It&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, tag the commenter, and invite them again to answer.  And if they do, then you can delete your own.  If they don't then everyone benefits by the answer being there.  And if they do, no harm no foul as you delete your own answer &lt;em&gt;(and optionally, incorporate the bits from your answer that might be unique into your question)&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9632/how-do-i-introduce-an-inexperienced-player-to-the-fate-combat-system&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.  As the commenter was a mod, he deleted the answer for me.  But it still applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-05-14T21:39:10.563" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3573" CreationDate="2014-05-14T21:40:33.203" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;SE behaviour model&lt;/a&gt; is pretty clear, I think:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Civility is required at all times; rudeness will not be tolerated. Treat others with the same respect you’d want them to treat you because we’re all here to learn, together. Be tolerant of others who may not know everything you know, and bring your sense of humor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that expletives are not allowed. If you use expletives on this site, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/22232&quot;&gt;you may be issued a warning or a suspension&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following that link reveals that there's some debate amongst users, but the site's actual policy seems clear--&lt;strong&gt;don't&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may have noticed when you signed up for your SE account that the age floor for SE is officially &lt;em&gt;thirteen years old&lt;/em&gt;, and I try to keep that in mind when making choices about content both in questions and answers and on the chat (I've actually run into a handful of SE citizens under the age of 15, so they do exist).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-05-14T21:40:33.203" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3573" CreationDate="2014-05-14T21:52:35.810" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The rules&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;Behavior&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that expletives are not allowed. If you use expletives on this site, you may be issued a warning or a suspension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, that's basically that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The rules are actually pretty arbitrary&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trawling through the archives on this issue gets a bit annoying. The discussion has come up on various SE sites in addition to Meta (mostly when it was SO Meta). As far as I can tell, Jeff Atwood's original arguments for a blanket ban revolved around stuff like &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/68/how-to-ask-about-games-with-impolite-names#comment260_97&quot;&gt;automated corporate blacklists&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22232/are-expletives-cursing-swear-words-or-vulgar-language-allowed-on-se-sites&quot;&gt;On Meta&lt;/a&gt;, the highest-scoring answer is &amp;quot;Keep profanity to a minimum,&amp;quot; followed by &amp;quot;Don't,&amp;quot; followed by &amp;quot;It depends.&amp;quot; Clearly the community is generally in favor of not putting cusses everywhere, but not everyone's all that excited about keeping a hard line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think that little line in the blurb serves as a useful deterrent from just swearing casually. And... that's about it. I find most of the actual arguments presented to be pretty silly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Where is this draconian nanny software? Is it real or hypothetical? What kind of sophisticated software is it using to decide that &amp;quot;Brainf---&amp;quot; must always be censored in text but &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/24079/is-the-language-brainf-ck-offensive&quot;&gt;it's okay to put its full name in a URL&lt;/a&gt;, or that it's okay to ask questions about &amp;quot;dirty&amp;quot; words on English Language &amp;amp; Usage Stack Exchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If swears are a big deal, where's the filter on the post button?  It'd be pretty easy to have a quick popup that says &amp;quot;Hey, this looks like cusses, did you really mean to post that?&amp;quot; without inhibiting the operation of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What about minors?&amp;quot; Forget the realities of language use and exposure: if we literally edit out everything, we're restricting &amp;quot;bad language&amp;quot; much more stringently than the &amp;quot;PG-13&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;TV-14&amp;quot; guidelines do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The MPAA/FCC regulate swears. That's true. &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system#Language&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;We're clearly not applying their standards&lt;/a&gt;, though. That's fine, because their standards are pretty stupid. Right now the policy seems to be &amp;quot;I know it when I see it.&amp;quot; Which is fine and all, if it's just going to be based on someone's gut-feeling about where the line is (&amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/25969/revisions&quot;&gt;sh--&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; is banned, but &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11970/how-does-the-big-damn-heroes-handbook-change-the-serenity-rpg&quot;&gt;d---&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8610/how-to-communicate-genre-tropes-for-better-player-buy-in-to-the-genre&quot;&gt;wh---&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; are fine; and another one of Carlin's &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_dirty_words&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;seven dirty words&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; appears on the site like 50 times), then do we really intend to enforce the &amp;quot;AND WE WILL BAN YOU FOR SWEARS MAYBE&amp;quot; part of the code of conduct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Professionalism&amp;quot; is a bugbear on SE, but note what the Behavior page actually says: &amp;quot;Be honest&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Be nice.&amp;quot; &amp;quot;Professionalism&amp;quot; also isn't a one-size-fits-all thing. In the context of the answer that prompted this, I consider a bit of frank language to be entirely sensible when discussing a charged, emotionally complicated situation affecting a group of friends playing a hobby game involving fictional rape. Keeping the whole response detachedly clinical would, in fact, have made it a worse answer, because it's not an answer about detachedly clinical things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Cussing is offensive!&amp;quot; Let's be very clear: some people &lt;em&gt;don't like&lt;/em&gt; swears, even the ones that see widespread use every day. Some people dislike them enough to say &amp;quot;I'm offended by this.&amp;quot; But some people get upset when you end a sentence with a preposition. Some people get ticked off when the answers to questions keep assuming you're playing D&amp;amp;D just because (in this case, &amp;quot;some people&amp;quot; is me! all the time!). Some people find the fleshy skull-robots in the site banner kinda gross, I'm sure. Should the site bow to those people or not? There's no One True Answer, and you can't always please everyone. This is a &lt;em&gt;choice&lt;/em&gt; you make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some details from the comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Profanity&lt;/a&gt;/vulgarity is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscenity&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;obscenity&lt;/a&gt;. This is a distinction that actually matters sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many common vulgar words are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; attacks. Analogies to bigot-words and bigoted ideas are entirely unwarranted. Group attacks should be always unwelcome, no matter what their form. If you're concerned about inclusion, forget about typing cusses into the search box and be more assertive in &lt;a href=&quot;https://security.stackexchange.com/posts/56290/revisions&quot;&gt;removing microaggressions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;It's lazy!&amp;quot; is empty moralizing. It's just a way to take an argument about propriety and wrap it up in the &amp;quot;Protestant work ethic&amp;quot; in order to make it easier to swallow to American audiences. I'm pretty sure the hobby-themed SEs are practically &lt;em&gt;sustained&lt;/em&gt; by laziness, anyway, if you count all the people posting from work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which isn't to say that the rules themselves are bad, necessarily. The justifications presented, however, are all over the place, and most of them are pretty poor. Which makes it hard to tease out how to &lt;em&gt;effectively&lt;/em&gt; apply the rules in order to improve the community rather than &lt;em&gt;arbitrarily&lt;/em&gt; applying them because that's what it says on that one page there — which, no offense, is what we seem to be doing right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can me point to site policy (or you can just go and change it without appealing to site policy, and even if I didn't know the site policy I probably wouldn't bother to change it back) and I'll accept the change, but &lt;strong&gt;I really don't think the question that prompted this is an example where site policy is actually doing anything substantive to improve its content&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;It's just minutiae&lt;/strong&gt;, like cleaning up some typos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Let's apply the rules anyway — constructively!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stack Exchange gives users plenty of tools to improve each others' content. So, improve away!&lt;/strong&gt; Just pay attention to what you're doing so you don't hurt anything while you're trying to help. Specifically...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When editing an post because of cusses:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Improving word choice is great&lt;/strong&gt;. If you think you can improve word choice as part of other edits, do it! There's very little downside.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you're editing direct quotes, make sure you add the appropriate markings so it's clear the text has been edited&lt;/strong&gt;. This is just how you comply with basic rules of citation and attribution. E.g. &lt;code&gt;The rules on page 45 say &amp;quot;Your [stuff] breaks whenever you roll a 1.&amp;quot;&lt;/code&gt; to show that &amp;quot;stuff&amp;quot; was your own substitution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bowdlerizing stuff with underscores and @$@# or whatever actively hurts readability&lt;/strong&gt;. If you're having to do this, your edit is hurting the content more than it's helping. Step back and find another way! Short of a direct naming issue like &amp;quot;Brainf---,&amp;quot; there's absolutely no reason to ever clutter up an answer with ugly censor-marks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When writing a post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I dunno, try not to cuss?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't cuss at other people. Or attack them without cussing at them. Because that's verbal abuse, either way. Not cool, ever, at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When reading posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit things that stand out as wrong to you. If you notice cusses, that's cool, edit away. If you don't notice cusses, don't waste time trying to train yourself to notice them. The issue will work itself out, just as easily as typos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Everyone should put effort into looking for actual verbal abuse, stereotyping, exclusive language, or nasty underlying subtext. Because that's what actually matters when building an inclusive space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-09-08T22:47:26.527" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3573" CreationDate="2014-05-15T12:24:02.447" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;The policy as stated is pretty clear. But.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally the policy is not enforced. Enforcing it capriciously is not appropriate and having a blanket &quot;no swearing&quot; policy is wrongheaded at best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is a much bigger issue here. Editing posts for language without bothering to edit &lt;em&gt;the rest&lt;/em&gt; of the post. I don't care if we're going to edit posts for language, but if that's &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; we're doing than we're bumping posts that don't need to be bumped for no reason. If someone wants to edit for language, they need to take a look at the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; post and make sure they aren't missing any grammar or misspellings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will reject any suggested edit that corrects only language as too minor. I will argue against anyone with edit privileges editing an old post solely for language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One more note. We are not bound by SE's general policy, and we should not be here if we don't want to be. Just because something shows up in the help center doesn't make it law for this site, yeah we can't edit it, and the help center should be our default policy position, but we make the rules here. If we'd prefer a more lenient stance on profanity, all we have to do is not enforce it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, editing it out during the normal course of site process is sufficient, we shouldn't be trawling for profanity to edit out and bumping posts for no other reason. That seems like a rational policy to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-05-15T12:48:57.640" LastActivityDate="2014-05-15T12:48:57.640" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3578" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-15T16:49:16.833" Score="4" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;I made this part of an answer elsewhere, but I just want to reiterate it independent of all the other, more contentious stuff. This is a response to mistakes I see people making when removing the profanity — both when editing existing SE posts and when writing new quotes that bring up these issues (e.g. quoting text with expletives).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;When modifying quotations, mark your changes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're editing direct quotes from other sources, &lt;strong&gt;make sure you add the appropriate markings so it's clear the quoted text has been modified&lt;/strong&gt;! This is just how you comply with basic standards of citation and attribution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rules on page 45 say &amp;quot;Your [stuff] breaks whenever you roll a 1.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brackets around &amp;quot;stuff&amp;quot; to show that it's my own substitution as opposed to the wording in the source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Avoid masking&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bowdlerizing stuff with underscores and @$@# or whatever actively hurts readability&lt;/strong&gt;. If you're adding these, your edit is hurting the content more than it's helping. &lt;em&gt;Find another way&lt;/em&gt;. Short of a direct naming issue like &amp;quot;Brainf---,&amp;quot; there's absolutely no reason to ever clutter up an answer with ugly masking when you can use substitution or elision to achieve the same result gracefully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-05-15T17:10:14.920" Title="Expurgating expletives the right way" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3578" CreationDate="2014-05-15T16:55:27.697" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do not mark edits in text on SE - it's what we have a revision history for. I see your point about actual quotes from other materials, that's a fine suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Substitution or elision is better - but not requiring replacement in the first place is optimal.  If your answer, or another you see, is edited in an inelegant way, improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When editing for profanity, feel free and improve the rest of the post as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is bumped due to a profanity edit, feel free to review it and add a new answer, interact with the other parts of the Q&amp;amp;A, etc. - there's no such thing as an obsolete question on SE! Having said that, the majority of the historical cleanup has been completed - we always tried to keep it clean, but over the years some posts slipped through and we weren't searching for it.  The small number of posts using offensive expletives have been processed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-15T17:06:20.637" LastActivityDate="2014-05-15T17:06:20.637" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3540" CreationDate="2014-05-16T15:41:11.450" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm Grace Note, a Stack Exchange Community Manager. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's still some active discussion going on internally about specifics. Getting some advance copies would probably be handy but we'd need some kind of way to determine how to distribute them, and then when launch hits it would be handy to have some kind of &lt;a href=&quot;https://sports.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/485/how-can-i-help-promote-sports-se-as-a-destination-for-olympics-questions&quot;&gt;promotional call for questions&lt;/a&gt; so that the folks who can now answer, actually have stuff to answer. We'll be happy to match efforts in formulating ideas on how to set it all up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In regards to what we can offer, what we'd like most is to see how much we can get done with less developer/designer effort. The goal should be primarily focused on content generation - the creation of an awesome canon here is far more important than drawing reader traffic alone. Now, with advance copies to help setup that kind of a canon, that's looking in the right direction. When we've worked together betwixt us to work out some ideas on how to actually manage all this, we can handle the work regarding getting the actual copies and such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:50:12.723" LastActivityDate="2014-05-16T15:41:11.450" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3582" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2014-05-16T18:54:49.527" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just to ask a question that I think I know the answer to, but what is the preferred method of responding to comments that are critical of your answer? In the past I've incorporated critiques I've agreed with into my answers and responded to critiques I've disagreed with in comments of my own. Some of these have been left alone and others have been deleted as &quot;argumentative&quot; and I don't know exactly what the threshold is. I get that this isn't a forum and long discussions in comment sections shouldn't happen. Is the best way to respond to critiques (even the ones I disagree with) not with comments at all but to incorporate those into edits in my answers? For instance, inserting a section like: &quot;Some might argue X, but I believe Y, and here's why&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9364" LastActivityDate="2014-05-16T18:54:49.527" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3584" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-17T13:02:00.597" Score="10" ViewCount="565" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://tex.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Tex.SE&lt;/a&gt; has alot of fun with its &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-list&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;big-list&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;big-list&lt;/a&gt;, subjective, community wiki &quot;Show Off&quot; threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/1319/showcase-of-beautiful-typography-done-in-tex-friends&quot;&gt;Showcase of beautiful typography done in TeX &amp;amp; friends&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/158668/nice-scientific-pictures-show-off&quot;&gt;Nice scientific pictures show off&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to have a similar type question, also marked community wiki,&#xA;for &quot;Show off your character sheets&quot;, for character sheet designs community members have made.&#xA;It would also serve a educational purpose, suggesting answers go into some detail about how they made it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would that be a good fit for this site?&#xA;I'm not certain.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I kinda think it would &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; be as it is a question without a  a single definitive answer.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;On the other hand it worked out fine for Tex.SE, and many people enjoy the threads.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;But on the other other hand &lt;a href=&quot;https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4190/tex-se-really-are-nicer-voters&quot;&gt;TeX.SE are nice people&lt;/a&gt;, and are really chill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; as noone has said anything against this,&#xA;I have created the Question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37806/show-off-your-character-sheet-designs&quot;&gt;Show off your Character Sheet Designs&lt;/a&gt;.&#xA;It has been flagged for a moderator to convert it to community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-05-24T06:18:35.613" Title="Just For Fun Request: Show-off character sheet thread" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|subjective-questions|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2014-05-17T13:19:54.243" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we'd be open to specific designated &quot;fun&quot; questions as long as people don't suddenly open others and flood us with low qual questions. We could do something like this as part of a specific initiative.  How would you propose a charsheet show-off to work, just posting an image of the sheet (probably with a max size, so one person's 6 page char sheet doesn't fill up 6 linear feet of space), a link if applicable, and a paragraph or two at the most about the design theory/benefits thereof?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sigh, OK after this other question asking about the charsheet questions' &quot;fun&quot; tag in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3601/what-is-the-intended-purpose-of-the-fun-tag&quot;&gt;What is the intended purpose of the &amp;#39;fun&amp;#39; tag?&lt;/a&gt;, I am going to change the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; and add a tag wiki that says it's an exception type only to be created with permission from meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess perhaps there should have been more windup and communication on this and a more defined &quot;this is the official it's OK&quot; before it got initiated - I'm about 3 meta questions into deciding this was more trouble than it's worth from various confused site members. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For rules going forward, I think we want:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A meta post requesting a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; question. It should justify itself as being both fun enough to break the rules and having some educational value. It should remain in voting for a week, and if it gets more upvotes than downvotes (and no diamond mod vetos) then it can proceed. &quot;There's been too many of these lately&quot; or &quot;it's just not interesting enough&quot; are valid downvote reasons, I wouldn't want to see more than one a month and only would want to see really good ones, not just because &quot;we think it's time for another fun Q...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Clear rules on the question - I think the charsheet Q is doing well on this, we had good guidelines on the answers with image sizes and whatnot, and a good standard format has emerged on them explaining how and why (which meets the educational criterion).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A clear announcement on the question as to its nature. This would consist of a link to the authorizing meta Q and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; tag, whose tag wiki would explain all this as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-05-30T16:07:16.187" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3586" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3596" CreationDate="2014-05-19T10:44:41.487" Score="11" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;While reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34234/does-this-armor-set-work-raw&quot;&gt;&quot;Does this armor set work RAW?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; I stumbled upon the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt; tag for the first time. Because I felt the overlap with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; should be quite large, I proceeded to have a look at the only 19 questions under this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they can be sufficiently categorized into three types (number of questions per category in brackets):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; questions. Some already have this tag as well, others (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1528/what-is-the-statistically-superior-character-creation-method-twelve-3d6-or-six&quot;&gt;like&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7866/optimizing-a-rogue-as-an-assassin&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5313/which-level-30-character-built-with-only-phb1-can-defeat-orcus-solo&quot;&gt;four&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2170/fighter-weapon-choice&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt;) can be reassigned (15/19).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12408/how-should-i-handle-nerfing-a-player-for-the-purposes-of-game-balance&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7335/how-do-i-deal-with-an-experienced-player-who-doesnt-interact-well-with-my-group&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50/how-to-handle-a-powergamer-munchkin&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; that already has this tag as well (3/19).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No additional tags needed at all, such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34234/does-this-armor-set-work-raw&quot;&gt;question I quoted above&lt;/a&gt;, which would work just fine with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/armor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;armor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;armor&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; (1/19).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I therefore think the tag is highly unnecessary and should be &lt;strike&gt;purged in the flames of hell&lt;/strike&gt; removed or reassigned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-05-30T16:01:57.827" Title="Is the Powergaming Tag needed?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3587" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3586" CreationDate="2014-05-19T10:58:08.660" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree, it's probably unnecessary because it can be rolled into other tags like you've described, without losing any particular benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it is also probably an inevitable tag which will be repeatedly re-created. I'm not sure what all the tag re-assignment and purging options available are, but I expect this to be a Lazarus tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T10:58:08.660" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3586" CreationDate="2014-05-19T11:32:35.213" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose cleanup of the tag, integrating the existing questions into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; as outlined in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3587/10979&quot;&gt;as BESW points out&lt;/a&gt;, the tag will likely be re-created by new posters. I think making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt; a synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; will be sufficient to prevent that, and the large majority of the questions fall under this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T11:32:35.213" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3589" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-19T14:18:19.747" Score="35" ViewCount="446" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you downvote a post, a popup appears urging you to explain in a comment why you downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/37838/1271&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; happened:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Wow, can I ask the reason of the downvotes? –  Vereos 46 mins ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I downvoted, explained why in a comment, and that comment got deleted... then the user who wrote the answer noticed the downvote, and was wondering why he got downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guys, I'm not sure what you &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; you are accomplishing by this comment-nuking, but I really think it has gone too far. Calm down, you are &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; doing a service to the community when you do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1271" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T17:53:24.400" Title="Comments explaining downvotes being deleted" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3590" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3586" CreationDate="2014-05-19T14:25:05.640" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how it has been &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt;, I tend to think of the &lt;em&gt;word&lt;/em&gt; powergaming as being a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;. While optimization is commonly used with respect to power (i.e. optimizing a character&amp;rsquo;s power), it is &lt;em&gt;far&lt;/em&gt; from the only use of optimization. Moreover, powergaming as a term is typically a pejorative in the RPG community, wherein the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; being described is a player&amp;rsquo;s devotion to mechanical power, at the detriment of the game as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, I think the common use described by @MrLemon is an inaccurate use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, that does not lend itself to a happy solution; making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; causes too many people to miss &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;, and as @BESW says, if we don&amp;rsquo;t make it a synonym of &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; it will just keep getting recreated. The ideal would be a sort of &amp;ldquo;did you mean..?&amp;rdquo; question with both options, but the system doesn&amp;rsquo;t support that (and I don&amp;rsquo;t think it would be a particularly good addition in general). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just think that powergaming and optimization are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; synonymous, and establishing the tags as synonyms just seems wrong. Does anyone know if there is any precedent on other SEs about this sort of issue, where you have a tag that&amp;rsquo;s too frequently used to try to keep deleting it, but is used in two very different senses that don&amp;rsquo;t lend themselves to a single synonym?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T14:25:05.640" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3591" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3573" CreationDate="2014-05-19T20:07:22.030" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I admit, I'm a long time lurker and a relatively new joiner.  That said, I think pragmatism is an operative word.  Unfortunately, this also introduces individual judgment, cultural variance, and a number of vagaries influenced by demographics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I'd like to avoid a deep dive into all that is profanity, I would like to point out that there is nuance here that is being glossed over and danced around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are we talking about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Blasphemy (against one or many)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cursing or Hexing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Bodily Functions or Byproducts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sexual Metaphors&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Racial-Cultural Slurs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I venture that all rules (guidelines) should be both meaningful and actionable.  As such, the WHY is important.  It is not enough to simply posit the notion that profanity is not &quot;a good idea&quot; without suggesting that perhaps community members that use profanity are not doing their absolute best to uplift the community to its potential and thus are not able to get the most from the community as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe the test should be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does [word] advance my communication (read: promote dialog) between me and the largest possible audience?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I acknowledge that there are terms of art and colloquial terms within my community that may not be acceptable to a larger audience.  I agree that, in order to be the most effective communicator and to achieve the best results, I must tailor my language to the needs of my audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's that simple.  It's not rocket surgery.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12339" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T20:07:22.030" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3589" CreationDate="2014-05-19T21:06:55.083" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;That comment was flagged &quot;comment flag: too chatty&quot; by a user. It was indeed too chatty and didn't provide constructive criticism. I deleted it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T21:06:55.083" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3593" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3589" CreationDate="2014-05-19T23:02:53.980" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;You've run into a historical mismatch here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some history: that &quot;please consider adding a comment&quot; was added &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/2373/152515&quot;&gt;back in July 2009&lt;/a&gt;, because of &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; what Vereos commented for: a lot of people didn't like getting downvotes without understanding why. The popup is about the best anyone could think of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That feature was added just three weeks shy of &lt;em&gt;five years ago,&lt;/em&gt; when Stack Overflow was just over a year old. A lot has changed in five years, and that might include our comment guidance (I haven't been checking), which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;currently says this&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;When should I comment?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should submit a comment if you want to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Request &lt;strong&gt;clarification&lt;/strong&gt; from the author;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leave &lt;strong&gt;constructive criticism&lt;/strong&gt; that guides the author in improving the post;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Add relevant but &lt;strong&gt;minor or transient information&lt;/strong&gt; to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;When shouldn't I comment?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments are not recommended for any of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Criticisms&lt;/strong&gt; which do not add anything constructive (&quot;-1, see previous comments you scallywag!&quot;); instead, down-vote (and provide or up-vote a better answer if appropriate);&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Secondary discussion&lt;/strong&gt; or debating a controversial point; please use chat instead;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A reminder of this appears in the comment field itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nUGLD.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;use comments to ask for clarification or add more information. avoid comments like &amp;#39;+1&amp;#39; or &amp;#39;thanks.&amp;#39;&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I saw last night some of the comments on the question you linked, and I'm not sure what yours was like, but at least one of them (not necessarily yours) amounted to &quot;-1 this is a terrible idea&quot; which is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; constructive criticism. If your comment can give the author something to work with, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; it might be ok, but bear in mind the clause that wasn't bolded above:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leave constructive criticism &lt;strong&gt;that guides the author in improving the post&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your comment must fundamentally provide guidance or an avenue for improvement. &quot;This could be improved by {specific change}&quot; or &quot;Your answer is good but weakened by basing it on X; you should drop that and focus on Y&quot;, or so on are more constructive comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are only leaving a comment to express fundamental disagreement with the answer, the author has nothing to work with and it won't be constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T00:09:52.813" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3589" CreationDate="2014-05-19T23:03:41.733" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I think there are at least three concerns dovetailing here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;First&lt;/strong&gt;, I'm not sure who you're intending this to be addressed to. Only moderators can delete comments, but from what I've seen and heard the moderators are not going out of their way to do so without provocation. Moderators aren't that bored: they respond to issues that have been flagged for their attention (by non-moderator citizens such as ourselves) much more often than they go looking for moderation work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that comments which get deleted usually have at least two people who think they ought to be deleted: the flagger, and the responding mod. Not a lot of unilateral deletion going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Second&lt;/strong&gt;--and more specifically to this issue--there's often a fine line between explaining &quot;why I don't like your question,&quot; and &quot;how you can edit your answer to get me to upvote it.&quot; The former is not constructive, and the latter is only useful if the edit wouldn't change the answer entirely. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/2373&quot;&gt;We are encouraged to comment about downvotes only if we think the post could be improved.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of your comment (I'm assuming &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37832/how-should-i-handle-retconning-or-not-a-session-with-a-drunk-player-and-charac/37838#comment77187_37838&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; is reasonably close to your original deleted sentiment), I can't tell how that comment--nor the poster's responding comment--could be used to improve the answer. It's simply a conversation in which you say &quot;I disagree,&quot; (your downvote expressed that just as effectively) and the answer responds, &quot;Agree to disagree.&quot; Comments which boil down to &quot;I disagree&quot; are noise, and dilute this site's primary function as an efficient conveyor of good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, that is a rather hard line to take. It reduces the human interaction factor and that can make an environment less friendly--but then, the first time I ever downvoted someone, I left an explanatory comment which got an angry response that I &quot;have a case of the doesn't-get-its.&quot; Explaining downvotes isn't a universal balm to ease the wounded hearts of the downvoted--often it's an invitation to comment battles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to propose changing the kind of critical comment which is accepted practice on rpg.se, that should be its own meta post. I'd be very interested in the discussion, and I'd be happy to help track down the existing debate about it both here and on meta.se so you can build on that instead of re-treading old ground. Until then, comments aren't for making people feel better, though I firmly believe we SHOULD be friendly and humanising in the comments we do make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking these two points together, it looks like someone thought your comment wasn't going to help the answerer improve their post, so flagged it as chatty because--well, frankly, it kinda was. And a moderator saw the flag, agreed, and so the comment was removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that brings me to the &lt;strong&gt;third&lt;/strong&gt; point: the general deleting of comments. How often, how fast, what kind, who can, if it should happen at all... there's a lot of discussion about this already, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/comments&quot;&gt;both here on rpg.se&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/210265&quot;&gt;in the wider SE community&lt;/a&gt;. It's a rather contentious issue among citizens--but the moderators and site owners across SE have a LOT of experience which shows that tightly controlling comments is necessary for the Stack Exchange to retain its unique &quot;answer-giving&quot; position (as opposed to the &quot;discussion-having&quot; position of most online communities).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, if you would like to weigh in on changing the established policy, make a meta post here or on meta.se (depending on the scope of the change you propose), and base it on the existing discourse so we aren't re-inventing wheel. Unfortunately, simply saying &quot;Doing this is bad&quot; won't get any traction unless/until the community can be shown the ways in which the policy is harming the site more than it's helping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-05-19T23:03:41.733" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3595" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3586" CreationDate="2014-05-20T00:25:14.683" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What can we do to keep the tag dead? Blacklist it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3590/1204&quot;&gt;KRyan points out&lt;/a&gt; quite well that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt; doesn't fit cleanly into either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimisation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimisation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimisation&lt;/a&gt;, and that people will use it for either, depending on whether powergaming is a good thing or the problem in their situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Y'all are asking what alternative there is to simply removing it or synonymising it though: it's blacklisting the tag. As long as the tag's blacklisted, it simply cannot be used, and people will have to seek an alternative or drop the tag altogether. I don't know if RPG.SE has any blacklisted tags, but you could experiment by &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;asking a question on Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; and trying out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/code&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;code&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;code&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/programming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;programming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;programming&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homework&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homework&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homework&lt;/a&gt; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MKWa7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MKWa7.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;the &amp;#39;code&amp;#39; tag is not allowed&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mind you, someone might just use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/power-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;power-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;power-gaming&lt;/a&gt; for their alternative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Let's wait to see if this is really necessary though.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blacklisting is appropriate for a tag that keeps coming back despite all efforts to destroy it, but let's first see if it really is a Lazarus tag (as BESW put it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest that for now, we burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt;. If, further down the line, it comes back and gets our notice, we can re-burninate it and start a new meta topic requesting it be blacklisted on the basis it's definitely a Lazarus tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T00:36:21.143" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3586" CreationDate="2014-05-20T00:39:48.893" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am reluctant to blacklist the tag, if only because removing common words from the tag space is generally a poor idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm also not sure whether subsuming it into problem-players is helpful - it makes the term wayyyyy more generic. Can we not use more specific terms about player problems than one big bucket? We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; for a more specific issue, I think powergaming can fill that niche as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could use the tag wiki summary to help - we could keep powergaming as the negative use and in the summary basically say &quot;if you're looking for this as a positive practice, use optimization instead&quot; and similarly in optimization &quot;the negative extreme of this practice as a problem in-game should be tagged powergaming.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-30T16:01:57.827" LastActivityDate="2014-05-30T16:01:57.827" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3597" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-20T00:55:10.323" Score="9" ViewCount="222" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; was the working name of the project.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the branding simply shows it as &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.critical-hits.com/blog/2014/05/19/dungeons-dragons-new-edition-formerly-next-gets-release-dates-cover/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;amp;utm_campaign=Feed:%20CriticalHits%20%28Critical%20Hits%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt;&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot; while there are some open questions still, this is concrete news that Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons (no longer Next, or even 5e, just Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons) is coming soon.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... So do we tag it as 5e, or retain &quot;next&quot; or what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1631-Dungeons-Dragons-Starter-Set-Fantasy-Roleplaying-Fundamentals-%28D-D-Boxed-Game%29-Hits-Amazon!&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oqpnmm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IvQMb.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vMvLE.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and apparently &quot;ampersand&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q9EJdm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T18:56:25.350" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T19:15:54.573" Title="How should we tag the &quot;next&quot; edition of D&amp;D?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3598" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3597" CreationDate="2014-05-20T01:04:17.697" Score="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;I vote for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, as that's what it is, and there's no way to confuse it. A year from now, people might not know it was ever &quot;Next&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T02:00:36.993" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T02:00:36.993" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3597" CreationDate="2014-05-20T01:15:23.340" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm putting this out here as &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; solution, just so we can judge its merits. I'd likely downvote this myself though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Migrate our current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt; and synonymize &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, which merely leaves the problem of how to integrate dungeons-and-dragons-module-x into the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T01:35:37.800" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T01:35:37.800" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3597" CreationDate="2014-05-20T01:41:32.020" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Oh, it was the same thing with 4e. The books don't say 4e; it was branded as simply &quot;D&amp;amp;D,&quot; but that didn't fool anyone. We had maybe a couple people show up here and mis-tag and they were corrected and the world went on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to do anything, just alias dnd-5e to dnd-next, and it'll all work out fine. It'll only be not known as &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot; to those who have never ventured onto the internet prior to coming here to RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://io9.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-dungeons-dragon-1578575603&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Early press shows&lt;/a&gt; that though they're going for the generic D&amp;amp;D branding, Gen Con for example is referring to it as 5e. I think we can wait and see whether 5e or Next is more common at launch, use that, synonym the other, done. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T19:15:54.573" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T19:15:54.573" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3601" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-20T03:56:02.637" Score="0" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37806/show-off-your-character-sheet-designs&quot;&gt;recent question&lt;/a&gt; included two new tags. One of them I do not understand the purpose of: &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fun&quot;&gt;fun&lt;/a&gt;.&quot; What kind of questions should this tag be used for? Given that discussing tabletop games is the favorite hobby of many of our contributors, it seems to me that we could apply it to any question on the site. Is there some subtlety I'm missing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of writing, the tag's tag wiki is blank.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T12:30:19.617" Title="What is the intended purpose of the 'fun' tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3601" CreationDate="2014-05-20T04:29:30.333" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answer 1: because people make new tags every day for all kinds of bizarre reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 2: to tag its specialness as an allowed question not meeting the guidelines, I assume.  Based on that assumption I have changed the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt;, given it a tag wiki explaining the setup, and added this information to the meta question that spawned it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3584/show-off-character-sheet-thread&quot;&gt;Just For Fun Request: Show-off character sheet thread&lt;/a&gt;, where we gave permission for a site-rule-breaking &quot;fun&quot; list question.  Oh, and deleted the other pointless &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-list&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;big-list&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;big-list&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of tagging is now other SEs designate rule-breaking &quot;fun&quot; questions, and it's a good idea because the tag wiki can convey the context of &quot;it's not a usually allowed question blah blah&quot; concisely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T05:26:10.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3604" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A kind of &quot;just for fun&quot; site question that lies outside our normal guidelines. Must be approved by the mods and community on Meta before posting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3605" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" Score="0" Body="A kind of &quot;just for fun&quot; site question that lies outside our normal guidelines. Must be approved by the mods and community on Meta before posting. " OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T04:30:02.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2014-05-20T06:58:17.730" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's off topic due to not having a best answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T06:58:17.730" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3608" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-20T13:53:22.790" Score="4" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3540/how-can-we-go-about-getting-advanced-copies-of-dd-nexts-releases&quot;&gt;How can we go about getting advanced copies of D&amp;amp;D Next&amp;#39;s releases?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Grace's answer to my question she outlined key points moving forward for (in no particular order):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Figure out what other promotional methods we could do to spread the word about RPG.SE with regards to D&amp;amp;D 5e's launch&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Figure out if there is going to be any sort of temporary site redesign and if so, what?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discuss!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T15:23:11.097" Title="What should we do to move forward on D&amp;D 5e planning?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3610" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2014-05-20T14:25:41.400" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm kinda ambivalent about this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure this thread really represents a direct analogy to the Tex.SE &quot;fun&quot; threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that the Tex.SE showcase threads are, in part, about &lt;em&gt;teaching&lt;/em&gt;. Each of the answers is implicitly saying &quot;Here is a cool trick I know,&quot; or &quot;Let me teach you about writing elegant code.&quot; That makes them potentially relevant to many hardcore Tex users (not just the people literally doing scientific diagrams in Tex). It's notable that, as far as I know, nearly everything posted comes with source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think RPG.SE's character sheet thread doesn't really achieve the same goals as the Tex.SE show-off threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it relevant to the site's users? Doing your own character sheet layout isn't really a core part of playing an RPG. It's more of a graphic design activity associated with publishing one (or being a dedicated fan, sometimes). The vast majority of people involved in the hobby are never going to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it relevant to the core mission of the site? I kinda suspect if you posted a detail-oriented question about how to make a character sheet (rather than an overview question like &quot;What tools could I use?&quot;), you'd be shunted off into Graphic Design or Tex or some other more technically-oriented part of SE.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does it contain tricks you can pick up and apply to your own work? Probably yes, but not as directly as the Tex.SE questions do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's cool to show off and maybe this is good enough for a first-time experiment (one thing that makes it a great choice for a first-time experiment, despite my concerns about on-topic-ness, is that it's a pretty narrowly scoped question). But, well, &lt;strong&gt;what would more questions like these look like?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Show off the games you've written?&quot; (Seems like advertising.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Show off your actual play?&quot; (But how do you turn that into a substantive teaching tool?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Show off your house rules?&quot; (That'd be a disaster, I think. No focus. So many comment arguments.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Show off your character doodles?&quot; (Is that in scope?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2014-05-20T15:00:03.170" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T15:00:03.170" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3611" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-20T14:40:56.660" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to ask the following question...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How has Dungeons and Dragons been able to maintain its dominant position in the RPG market for so long?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The original version of Dungeons and Dragons was published way back in&#xA;  1974. Since then there have been thousands and thousands of competing systems and settings, but none have been able to dethrone it&#xA;  as the most popular and successful product. What are the factors that&#xA;  have allowed it to maintain its position for 40 years? Have there been&#xA;  any periods where its position was seriously threatened? Good answers&#xA;  to this question will consist of more than fanboyism, and will back up&#xA;  their assertions with solid evidence and citings where appropriate and&#xA;  available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but have some doubts as to whether it meets site requirements. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been made aware of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34868/what-is-the-d20-bust-and-what-does-post-d20-game-mean&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question, but although some of its answers are relevant, I feel that it is not a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having raised the question in chat, concerns were voiced as to whether it would be more appropriate on a business site. I would argue that this question has a number of different angles that a good answer would cover. One of these would certainly be from the business angle, but there would also be consideration of other aspects such as cultural trends during the time period in question, and psychological reasons why the system has remained dominant. I would also argue that a RPG expert would give a better answer due to their knowledge of the game, its history and cultural background.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One other issue that was raised relates to the previous points, and suggests the question should be split to allow the covering of business, psychological etc as different answers. I would argue that this would certainly be an approach that could be taken, but that there is precedence all over the site for questions that can be answered from different perspectives and using different approaches, so as a result it should be possible to ask this as one question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having said all this though, I am torn, and throw things open to meta...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T17:53:22.733" Title="Is the following question appropriate for this site?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3612" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3611" CreationDate="2014-05-20T14:44:38.107" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you can post it but I'm not sure you'll get the quality or type of answers you might be looking for here. I can try to write up a more business-y and/or psych-marketing type answer since I have some knowledge in both of those fields from my grad classes, but there are much better experts in both fields elsewhere. I don't think RPG knowledge or playing RPGs is a requirement to effectively answer this question, anyone with knowledge in the fields I suggested and the care to answer could easily do some internet research and find out what they needed to know before answering. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe drop the fanboyism dig and simply stipulate what you want, that you want factual evidence and not personal opinion or anecdotal/experience-based evidence. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T14:44:38.107" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3613" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2014-05-20T16:48:22.033" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really liked this idea. We are here for our hobbies, so why not show what we have done for our hobbies on our tabbles?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, after I looked at that Ars Magica character sheet, I became &lt;em&gt;really curious&lt;/em&gt; about the system. While advertising is not the focus, a topic like this one could spark our curiosity to try new systems and taste a bit of new things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I confess, I got a bit proud of my character sheet. And having the oportunity to post it here, for others that share the hobby see and opine, is a great, great thing to me. I really liked this idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T16:48:22.033" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3611" CreationDate="2014-05-20T17:53:22.733" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would have to say this is &lt;strong&gt;off topic&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is too broad, primarily, as it calls for a 20 page essay on 40 years of business, psych, pop culture, the game industry, etc.  Also, most answers will be unacceptably opinion-based since anyone except those who have worked in a Wizards or closely related RPG marketing department will have anything like facts about what features of D&amp;amp;D have contributed; this will devolve into answers here where everyone lists &quot;the six things I like about D&amp;amp;D&quot; and assumes those are generally applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T17:53:22.733" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3615" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3597" CreationDate="2014-05-20T18:36:04.490" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;When a company pulls a stupid and gives a game an ambiguous name, you can always count on the player community coming up with an unambiguous moniker so that communication remains possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And because for &lt;em&gt;tag-naming purposes&lt;/em&gt; we always defer to the player community's naming conventions, we have nothing to worry about. We'll tag it whatever the community calls it, probably &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&quot; (most likely) or &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5th&quot; (less likely but maybe), so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5th&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5th&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5th&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-05-20T18:36:04.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3573" CreationDate="2014-05-21T04:17:41.143" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;After discussion, the mods believe we should stick to the standard SE &quot;no expletives&quot; policy to promote a friendlier and more civil site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As on English.SE, exceptions can be made for actual technical terms. If, as seems oddly likely, there is &quot;An Apocalypse World move called Fuckbunny&quot; then that can be used in the technical sense in a question. Or a direct quote from a sourcebook or the like. I wouldn't mind, and it wouldn't be a bad thing, if the poster &quot;bleeped out&quot; the offensive part of such quotes, as that doesn't harm understanding in the least (F**kbunny?  I have no idea what they mean, I only see a similar name without asterisks, whatever shall I do?) and could avoid offending other community members, but we won't enforce that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, there is no legitimate need to use expletives as either intensifiers or as lazy-language on this site. This is a site that caters to a hobby that includes young children (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kids&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kids&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kids&lt;/a&gt;). Site members should also remember that there are site participants from all backgrounds, states, countries, religions, etc. here and that the golden site rule of &quot;don't be a jerk&quot; means that your word choice is an important part of upholding a civil site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I won't go into &quot;but what words exactly,&quot; it should be obvious which words are considered offensive - the FCC-banned, anything pointlessly referring to a sexual part of the male or female anatomy, slurs, etc. If someone flags it, and it's something that a reasonable person would not want their kid to be saying, would not say to their boss or teacher, etc. then it should go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please adhere to this policy, for as stated in the help center we will &#xA;issue warnings or suspensions to those who are determined to violate it. Of course, the same goes for people being jerks in other ways. Be polite and civilized on this site. Our cardinal rule is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;&quot;Be Nice,&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and it's certainly possible to not be nice and still not be using profanity.  However, using profanity is generally a signifier you are probably being Not Nice. (Using it against someone who's not present isn't any more civil than using it on another site member.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-09-07T07:05:47.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3617" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-21T13:36:43.480" Score="4" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;For those with 10k rep, I deleted my original question to split it off into its separate parts so we can better address it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3608/what-should-we-do-to-move-forward-on-dd-5e-planning&quot;&gt;What should we do to move forward on D&amp;amp;D 5e planning?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In reference to Grace's answer here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3580/3529&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3580/3529&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What methods/data should we use to determine which RPG.SE users are sent advanced copies that SE procures for us for 5e's releases? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-05-25T07:27:00.473" Title="How should we determine which users receive advance D&amp;D 5e materials when RPG.SE gets them?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3617" CreationDate="2014-05-21T14:26:21.807" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about we look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd-next/topusers&quot;&gt;top users&lt;/a&gt; of the dnd-next tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From there you could take the top answerers and askers (both show interests). &quot;Top&quot; being defined as the activity on the subject not reputation. Minimal reputation would be good (like 2k so they can edit questions and clarify things). They should be active enough (at least once a day or every 2 days top). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't formulate why, but I'd like to see a fair distribution of mods and non-mods. I just think giving a head start on the rules to people who already have plenty of reputation (10K+) would be redundant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-05-24T17:59:42.243" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3619" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3621" CreationDate="2014-05-21T14:50:27.987" Score="3" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;Brian suggested, as part of an answer to the D&amp;amp;D Next/5e dilemma, that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; be changed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; be used for 5e (since that&amp;rsquo;s how WotC&amp;rsquo;s branding it). That was quite unpopular, particularly since 6e will likely &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; be branded as Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons without specifier, and then we have the same problem again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I think making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt; and making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of it has a lot of merit. It means anyone who tries to tag their question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; will have that change to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt;, immediately making it clear what the tag actually means, and potentially saving us some fixing. It&amp;rsquo;s also consistent with the rest of the D&amp;amp;D tags, which is nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorDisplayName="user4000" LastEditDate="2014-05-21T16:23:58.743" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T21:48:00.110" Title="dnd-all-editions" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3620" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3619" CreationDate="2014-05-21T16:40:57.387" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Realized that without an answer to vote on, this isn't really going anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, proposal: migrate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; questions to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt;, make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potential problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It messes with the site&amp;rsquo;s SEO; &lt;code&gt;dungeons&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;dragons&lt;/code&gt; are more significant search terms than &lt;code&gt;dnd&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; questions aren&amp;rsquo;t &lt;em&gt;necessarily&lt;/em&gt; about &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; editions; it&amp;rsquo;s about Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons in general, or across multiple editions, but it wouldn&amp;rsquo;t be unreasonable to tag a question specifically about TSR&amp;rsquo;s D&amp;amp;D or specifically WotC&amp;rsquo;s D&amp;amp;D with it, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-all-editions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-all-editions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-all-editions&lt;/a&gt; might seem to contradict that practice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T16:40:57.387" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3619" CreationDate="2014-05-21T17:07:57.137" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do not do this, it is counterintuitive (basically removes one of the most common terms ever from the tag space) and damaging to SEO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Worse than the cons - there is no reason for it.  As mentioned in the other Q, 4e also brands itself as non versioned &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; and that has not been an issue.  Tag wikis and autocomplete and synonyms have resulted in a handful of mistags over years of RPG.SE operation.  There is currently no problem, and it is speculation that there will be a problem, and that speculation would have been equally valid for 4e and did not turn out that way. So I decline if and until this is a real problem manifesting on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T17:07:57.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3623" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-21T22:55:30.237" Score="14" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am creating this meta in order to prevent any misunderstanding about whats going on and checking with you guys if this is okay before I go on posting the questions around. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What is Dead Winter RPG?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put it simply, it is a variant ruleset from the d20 system. A cousin to both Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 3.5. It came to be six years ago, as a new ruleset for my group to play with. During four years, I tended to it and watched it grow as its only DM. But them, it growth &lt;em&gt;big&lt;/em&gt;, and two years ago other DM's started to conduct games on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It spread over to a bunch of groups and became a complete, however obscure, system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it was written in portuguese, almost no-one in the great RPG communitys never heard a thing about it. It is not on rpg.net, it was not on rpg.se, it is not on GitP. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it sole writer, Software developer and a bunch of other things,  it is extremely hard to me to keep all of my duties AND the system on check. I can't keep on giving answers by email to every doubt that comes around. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I looked at RPG SE. It have the perfect format for adressing questions as they rise. It have an incredible easy interface and is really more clean than forums. So, I started to drive the dms and players of the system here, so we could keep a repository of questions and answers about the system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is part of the brazillian culture, however,  they ignored me and kept sending emails.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I started looking around their question and posted a couple of the most confusing subjects here, and sent back to then a &quot;hey, there is this great site that we all can use to kill those doubts!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of them never heard about RPG SE.  Im hoping that directing them to this site, they start to use it too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those questions are not some form of &quot;propaganda&quot; to DWRPG. Far from that. DWRPG is not a product, to start with, but a free, independent initiative to create a system with a different feel. I never used any term from DWRPG as an answer to another peoples questions. I never went to a game rec and said: &quot;here, I have a  System for ya&quot;. It is not my interest to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people look at those questions and want to know more about or even use them on their own games, thats fine. I would gladly talk about it all day long. It's my kid afterall. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, if the people here on RPG SE prefer that I stop posting questions about the DWRPG,  thats ok. I wont argue nor fight about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I leave this to you guys. It's okay to post those questions here, or would you prefer that I don't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the great answers. I will sumarize what I got until now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Posting those questions is fine if I keep them relevant to the scope of RPG SE &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Having the SRD of the System up and online is priority so more people (specially english-speakers) could answer the questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep the questions actual problems the players face or rules clarifications, as should be with any other question around RPG SE.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="11162" LastEditDate="2014-05-22T00:00:51.217" LastActivityDate="2014-05-22T00:00:51.217" Title="About Dead Winter Questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3623" CreationDate="2014-05-21T23:39:57.513" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for letting us know. I'm pretty sure this is fine. It's an RPG system, it's used by a bunch of people (so it's not just your tight-knit group), and these are questions that fit in with our Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's plenty of precedent for various organisations or individuals outsourcing assistance with their products to a Stack Exchange site, and it's generally accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a solid line to draw, though, where it becomes &lt;em&gt;unwelcome&lt;/em&gt; for organisations or individuals to do that: make sure the questions emerging here as a result of your outsourcing are still completely appropriate for our site. There are companies that have attempted to use Stack Overflow for tutorials, for their entire FAQ (including questions not appropriate to Stack Overflow), for their bug report or feature request medium. That behaviour is disruptive, and people have appropriately responded by telling them to quit it. They're also things Stack Exchange sucks at handling, so nobody should want to do that stuff here anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, by your current record, I'm &lt;em&gt;pretty confident&lt;/em&gt; this will generally stay within that line. We'll wait and see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind your community might have some issues with us, since as you've said your system's written in Portuguese, but Stack Exchange sites are not multilingual (except for the Portuguese Stack Overflow recently launched). That, and people can often get pretty confronted and have a bad experience when they arrive here and find their question can be put on hold in minutes, and a bunch of people start asking them to clarify so-and-so. Most people seem to handle it fairly well, so just be aware some people in your community... might not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, this should generally be OK. Just work with us to ensure the things that appear here are the kind that should appear in general for RPG.SE, and if this site doesn't fit your needs for particular inquiries, look into other solutions too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T23:39:57.513" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3623" CreationDate="2014-05-21T23:40:29.577" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question was literally that. Insofar as there is a community and it's a real product, that's great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We would like three things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Disclose your relationship to the RPG, at least in your profile.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Somehow get the reference documents online so that &lt;em&gt;other people&lt;/em&gt; can have a chance to answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Give your questions some time such that they may be answered by other people.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Treating the site as an FAQ for a product is totally cool. (I've actually encountered this problem myself on GIS). So long as they are real questions with real sources to back them up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T23:40:29.577" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3623" CreationDate="2014-05-21T23:43:23.463" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is totally a legitimate way to use the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's probably good to mention that you are the author in your profile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't need to write this in your posts, though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I'm currently the author of this. If you need any more detail on how it should work, I would be glad to talk about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &quot;disclaimer&quot; like this would be reasonable for, say, game recommendations (disclosing an apparent conflict of interest). There's no reason to add it to a simple factual rules question, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2014-05-21T23:43:23.463" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3623" CreationDate="2014-05-22T00:00:00.023" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just an FYI on your disclaimers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I'm currently the author of this. If you need any more detail on how it should work, I would be glad to talk about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you need to make them, you should trim them down to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I'm the author of Dead Winter RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 'currently' is unnecessary.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;'This' is ambiguous, and I've replaced it with the proper noun. No harm in being specific, and everything to gain. (Someone could read 'this' as meaning your answer, and likely go &lt;em&gt;duh, I can see that.&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The last sentence is problematic. That's already a part of our model - they can leave comments if they need clarification, and they'll probably naturally do so anyway. I'm concerned this will appear to be an invitation into discussion which will lead people down a poor course of interaction here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-05-22T00:00:00.023" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3617" CreationDate="2014-05-22T05:31:44.160" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's treat it like an election:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People can nominate themselves and their plans for the books, established groups, and other public commitments, then the community can vote, using established SE voting mechanics. People can then judge on whatever merits they choose, including rep earned in the dnd-next tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that there are 3-4 staggered book releases totalling $150 per set (more, if we count the starter) there are some interesting problems here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-05-22T05:31:44.160" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3629" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-23T18:19:52.630" Score="12" ViewCount="602" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on community approval of: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3617/how-should-we-determine-which-users-receive-advance-dd-5e-materials-when-rpg-se&quot;&gt;How should we determine which users receive advance D&amp;amp;D 5e materials when RPG.SE gets them?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have three advanced copies of the starter set to give away. Nominations will be accepted until we have to make a decision (likely in a few days from the 17th of June). The moderators and community coordinators will decide upon the three based on upvotes and our assessed probability of the recipient asking good questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, please add &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; in the world you are. We may have some shipping problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't worry about other people having more votes than you,&lt;/strong&gt; we will take time of nomination into account when deciding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're almost done deciding, so the nomination process is now closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-06-28T04:16:40.840" Title="Nominations for an advanced copy of the D&amp;D 5e starter pack! Nominations have expired" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3629" CreationDate="2014-05-23T18:31:22.237" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I nominate myself.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why I think I'm a valid candidate&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Playtest Experience - I've been playing the D&amp;amp;D Next Playtest for pretty much the whole way through. I've seen the various iterations on what will become D&amp;amp;D 5e at each stage, partaking in the feedback surveys as well as critically following the news and discussions occurring surrounding the development of the new edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Active on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt;, one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd-next/topusers&quot;&gt;top users&lt;/a&gt; for both asking and answering (5 and 6 respectively).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;High level of RPG.SE activity - I'm logged in just about every weekday on both my PC and my phone. I am active in both asking and answering questions on a variety of tags/systems and am logged into RPG.SE chat to discuss and help other users about 8 hours a day if not more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What I plan to do with the materials&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exhaustively read through them and ask questions as they occur to me while and discuss these questions with other members in the community to find the best possible answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Run a campaign in real life for my friends. My long-term college friends are interested (we currently play 4e and played the playtest) and I would be running a campaign for them in the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Offer to run an RPG.SE promotional campaign on Roll20.net for other RPG.SE users (and anyone else interested) that could be used to promote our site and help spread the knowledge about the new system to users who don't end up with a copy of the books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I live in Philadelphia, PA so I'm currently in EST or GMT -5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T20:27:34.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3629" CreationDate="2014-05-23T18:35:25.097" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to nominate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been following D&amp;amp;D Next since it was but a rumor and playtested it with my normal RPG group during the early editions of the play test materials. Since the playtest released I've been active in the asking and answering of questions on the subject and would love to be able to continue to do so when the final editions are released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two things I think are important to commit to when we distribute materials like this to our users. The first is a commitment to run games either IRL or online so that we can familiarize ourselves with the materials and how they actually play in games. The second is that the people who we give these two will contribute to our community by asking and answering questions on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can commit to both of these things. While I'm unsure of whether or not I will have an IRL playgroup available, I will host a weekly game with an open invitation to whoever is interested in playing on the Stack. Time will be mid evening EDT and the day of the week will be flexible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm already very active answering and asking questions in the 4th edition tag and D&amp;amp;D next and I intend to continue to be as active. If provided with materials I can do it more quickly and more efficiently than I would otherwise be able to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I live in NW Georgia (US EDT)/GMT -5. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-06-18T12:35:39.713" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T12:35:39.713" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3633" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-23T23:27:39.203" Score="2" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;Granted there might not be much that can be done for deleted answers (a question for the submission of answers to deleted questions perhaps?). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However could it be made possible to submit answers to a question if the answer form was opened prior to closing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps it is a flaw that I have but I personally have a tendency to answer questions in length.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately it has not been the first time (and not just on this SE site) that I have found that the question has either been deleted or closed by the time I wish to submit my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To say that it is frustrating to spend over an hour on an answer only to see it go to the save bin would be a mild understatement. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am fairly sure that other users of far better reputation than myself (particularly those who place time and effort into their answers) may identify with this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Source - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38089/dimensions-of-the-world&quot;&gt;Dimensions of the World&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12221" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-05-24T01:40:45.787" Title="Can there be recourse for answers to deleted or closed questions?" Tags="|feature-request|closed-questions|moderation|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3634" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3633" CreationDate="2014-05-23T23:40:09.160" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since this would require SE-wide changes to the site's functionality, I went to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;meta.se&lt;/a&gt; to see if it's been suggested there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/229167/allow-posting-answers-for-on-hold-questions&quot;&gt;It has.&lt;/a&gt; Ironically the question itself was closed as a duplicate--the two questions whose answers also address that particular question are definitely worth reading--but not before a couple answers were provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The reason we close questions is so that they can't get answers. We don't want to accumulate low quality answers to questions that are not a good fit for the site. If a question was closed erroneously, it can be reopened. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/229169&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can be very frustrating; I've been in your situation a couple of times myself. But at the end of the day, if a question gets closed it's because it needs to get worked on before it's answered--or it just isn't a good fit for the site's method of answering at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while it's irksome to have put in a lot of work on a question that I somehow missed should be closed instead of answered, it's a wake-up call to me that I need to be more evaluative of questions. Often I can help the querent improve the question to keep it open/re-open it, and then my answer will be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-05-23T23:40:09.160" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3635" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3629" CreationDate="2014-05-24T00:22:18.643" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/h76AV.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Why Should You Vote for Me?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm a regular on the site.&lt;/em&gt; I check the site several times a day, and I've been around long enough to know all the ins &amp;amp; outs of how the site is supposed to work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I like answering questions.&lt;/em&gt; As of this post I have 200 answers and 8 questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I like reading rule books.&lt;/em&gt; In high school I participated in a mock Congress. While I didn't win any important elected positions (elections are somewhat silly in a group of teenagers who just met 4 hours before), I was apparently the only one who read the trimmed-down Robert's Rules of Order describing the process we would be using, and therefore the only one to inform certain persons about privileges the fine print offered them. For my sins I was made House Parliamentarian: &quot;You can't play the game if you don't know the rules.&quot; I've also read quite a few rule books for RPG systems I've never actually played, merely because I was interested in learning about the mechanics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I can put a lot of eyes on the rulebooks.&lt;/em&gt; I'm in a regular group and a semi-regular group, and some friends &amp;amp; friends-of-friends have another regular group they wouldn't mind me joining for a bit to try something new. I and my circle constitute 11 people, including 3 aggressive optimizers, 3 serious roleplayers, and 5 regular or rotating GMs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I haven't played or even seriously read the playtests.&lt;/em&gt; That's actually a &lt;strong&gt;good&lt;/strong&gt; thing, because it means I don't have any earlier variations of the rules in my head. When I see a question, the only thing that will come to mind is the official rulebook. This may seem to contradict #3 above, but see #1 below.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why Shouldn't You Vote for Me?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the interests of full disclosure, here are some reasons why I may &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be the community's first choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I don't know that I'll stick with this edition for the long haul.&lt;/em&gt; I thought 4e was a &lt;em&gt;huge&lt;/em&gt; improvement over 3.5 in most ways, and from what I've seen of the design discussions WotC is posted, 5e sounds like it's doing some serious backtracking. Don't get me wrong, I've got a lot of nostalgia for the 2e through 3.5 games I played, but I think a fair amount of that fun was &lt;em&gt;despite&lt;/em&gt; the system, not &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of it. Maybe I'll be wrong about it, but while I like learning new systems (see #3 above), I don't currently expect to like 5e enough to be playing it a year and a half from now.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I have limited daily availability.&lt;/em&gt; We have some regulars on this site who, in addition to being amazing human beings, also apparently spend 6+ hours a day refreshing the site looking for questions to answer. I am not one of these people. I can mainly only answer questions from 7pm to 10pm (US Central) on weekdays, plus for brief interludes at lunch &amp;amp; before work, though I should be on considerably more on the weekend. If sheer availability is one of our criteria (and frankly it should be), then there are definitely other people who have me beat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I live in Houston, Texas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2014-06-18T00:54:03.870" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T00:54:03.870" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3633" CreationDate="2014-05-24T01:40:45.787" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions tend to be closed for one of two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is unclear, not a question, or in some other way not answerable in its present form.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question cannot be answered on SE because of how SE is designed to work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first case is hopefully something that you would catch on the way down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the second case, though, you have supposedly written useful advice to a question which at least some person cared about. &lt;em&gt;Don't throw it away!&lt;/em&gt; This could be excellent material for a posting in some other less formal setting. If you find yourself often answering questions that aren't SE-y enough, maybe you should start a blog. Whenever you hit a wall, instead of tossing the answer you just poured a bunch of time into, convert it into a blog post, and now it can be useful again!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-05-24T01:40:45.787" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3629" CreationDate="2014-05-25T07:22:20.857" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to throw my hat in the ring, but I don't feel comfortable marketing myself at the expense of others.  Its for that reason that I prefer a more objective criteria than who can write the better election post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I play in a weekly group in person, and am currently playing in 5 online games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel I could contribute a lot to this site and be able to pull more people to the website if I had early access to the books.  There is a gaming conference in Israel in October where I could likely run a game and advertise RPG.se if I was able to get the official books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My activity on the site speaks for itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition to playing in my own group, and online for quite a while, I am also aware of many of the commonly asked questions on various forums, and will be able to restate those questions here along with accurate answers.  I will likely be doing that anyways, though without early access, my answers will be given weeks later rather than the same day.  I live in Israel, however I have received items from SE in Israel before, such as a t-shirt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-06-25T12:28:17.157" LastActivityDate="2014-06-25T12:28:17.157" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3617" CreationDate="2014-05-25T07:27:00.473" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just to make things simpler,  I'm going to suggest that we offer the early resources to the top people in both questions and answers in the D&amp;amp;D 5e tag, giving first to the top answerer and second to the top questioner and then alternating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-05-25T07:27:00.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3639" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-26T12:58:10.100" Score="6" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been following the Wizards of the Coast forum closely lately, and a &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.wizards.com/forum/dd-next-general-discussion/threads/4091221&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;few&lt;/a&gt; of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://community.wizards.com/forum/dd-next-general-discussion/threads/4092041&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;threads&lt;/a&gt; I have felt would be best answered here on RPG.SE (Since the thread gets like 7 responses of and then dies out)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would be the best way to advertise on these forums? Is there a way to politely craft a forum response with a link to rpg.se? Should we reproduce the questions here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of me wants to respond to a thread on a forum and say (in a much nicer way), &quot;You know, this question would better be answered at rpg.se than this forum where people just say random stuff.&quot; :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-05-26T13:17:53.127" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T17:40:14.497" Title="What's the best way to advertise RPG.SE in RPG related forums?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3640" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3639" CreationDate="2014-05-26T13:03:04.860" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by BESW's comment, perhaps we can create a banner link to be placed in Signatures?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T13:03:04.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3639" CreationDate="2014-05-26T13:06:02.480" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;One option for general advertising of RPG.SE, not for specific questions, is to use the site's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair&quot;&gt;Flair&lt;/a&gt;, which is a nice little badge with your RPG.SE stats that might draw people in. It's not perfect, and a single-site flair-badge is a bit bland (as opposed to a &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/359568.png&quot;&gt;whole-network flair&lt;/a&gt;), and (most importantly) it doesn't actually &lt;em&gt;say&lt;/em&gt; StackExchange on it, but it's nice to have it around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BTBy1.png&quot; alt=&quot;profile for lisardggY at Role-playing Games Stack Exchange, Q&amp;amp;A for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&amp;quot; title=&amp;quot;profile for lisardggY at Role-playing Games Stack Exchange, Q&amp;amp;A for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T13:06:02.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3639" CreationDate="2014-05-26T16:49:00.687" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You could ask the question here, linking to and stating that it was inspired by the original thread, and then post in that thread that you have done so. It allows the two communities to see each other’s responses, and if the original thread dies it gives the OP a chance to see what we think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have had very good luck with a &lt;em&gt;similar&lt;/em&gt; tactic of linking to questions (and answers) here when someone asks something already answered here. I believe several members of the site are here because of my doing things like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T16:49:00.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3643" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-26T17:52:23.687" Score="8" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37806/show-off-your-character-sheet-designs&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, users are invited to share their character sheets creations. I have made one or two, but they are in spanish language, so I don't know if they would be useful to many users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question aims to be broader. Is non-english content still considered useful in this site? Or should we restrict to English as our common language?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T21:05:41.587" Title="Should I provide &quot;foreign&quot; language content?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3644" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-26T18:37:32.020" Score="0" ViewCount="306" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok. I have to admit that I am quite angered at the response gained to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38170/what-design-features-for-a-role-playing-game-would-appeal-to-female-players&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quite frankly it is my belief that this question was mistreated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I shall go into the question in depth - recalling as accurately as possible the original format of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not because I hold great hope of justice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My hope is that the original question might get the response it deserved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... the post-mortem begins:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too broad?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title was already a good indication. &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What design features for a role playing game would appeal to female players?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently asking for design features that may appeal to female players was too broad a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Opinion based?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was a question about design features that would attract females. While perhaps the later aspect might verily be &quot;opinion based&quot;, this question is no more opinion based than other questions that this SE site has successfully fielded. It was this question that got singled out. Why? Perhaps somebody could tell me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Off topic?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or perhaps it was off topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I.e. Caring about what design features of &lt;em&gt;role playing games&lt;/em&gt; would appeal for female players is off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Duplicate?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5185/how-do-i-make-my-role-playing-group-a-not-exclusively-male-one&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is a duplicate of the question that I posted (in any of its three incarnations).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never mind that the touted question regards how to positively treat female players at the table (whether as GM or as a fellow player). (&lt;strong&gt;table etiquette&lt;/strong&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never mind that my question was with regards design features of role playing games that would appeal to female players. (&lt;strong&gt;game design&lt;/strong&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Less harmful were the other comparisons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8144/what-adventures-focus-on-courtly-intrigue-and-social-conflict-instead-of-combat&quot;&gt;What adventures focus on courtly intrigue and social conflict instead of combat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25563/how-do-i-as-a-dm-help-a-girl-integrate-into-a-group-of-all-male-role-players&quot;&gt;How do I, as a DM, help a girl integrate into a group of all male role-players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and best of all...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11251/group-social-issues-when-roleplaying-as-the-opposite-gender&quot;&gt;Group social issues when roleplaying as the opposite gender&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...I 'do' see the relevance of the first link towards replying to one of my voiced concerns in thread - but the others...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Perhaps adding background to my question was my error?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was stating that in all my time as a table-top gamer, mainly roleplay, I'd not ever had a group where one player was female... out of line? Or was it perhaps the statement that I'd only ever witnessed one girl playing D&amp;amp;D in just as long?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Perhaps it was drawing and sharing my conclusions about why females are hard to come by at the gaming table&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following are apparently &lt;strong&gt;&quot;unsupportable assumptions&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That females have a tendency to shy away from a style of gaming that is combat/ violence heavy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That females may prefer to shy away from number-heavy game systems (while noting that this would not explain the absence from lighter systems)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And lastly that females may feel uncomfortable in a gaming environment where most players are males&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the use of the words 'may' and 'tendency' above indicate something other than an absolute. I am not saying that the above three points apply to &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; women.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that I have dissected the original question (and I invite the mods of this site to pick through any archives of the original question to find any tid bits that I might have forgotten - I am certain that there are no deal breakers amongst them)...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...Why? &lt;strong&gt;Would I have gotten the same response were I a woman?&lt;/strong&gt; (perhaps I would have been looking for perspectives beyond my own - I do not pretend to know what most men want in gaming - that does not appear to be an issue)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And by what means can the spirit of this question be fielded without being... mistreated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12221" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T03:27:11.683" Title="Post-mortem for a question relating to female players and role-playing games. Why and what now?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|moderation|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3645" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3644" CreationDate="2014-05-26T19:03:15.093" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the thing, while none of the questions linked are probably &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; duplicates, they all address &lt;em&gt;more specific&lt;/em&gt; aspects of the general question you're asking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the important thing here is to know the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Your question was evaluated &lt;em&gt;objectively&lt;/em&gt; regardless of who asked it, every question is subjected to the same level of standards.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We aim to ask and answer &lt;em&gt;very specific&lt;/em&gt; questions. You're asking a &lt;em&gt;really general&lt;/em&gt; one. General questions can be asked, but they need much better requirements than &quot;how do I design a game to appeal to half the population.&quot; The fact is, there is no right answer to this question. Just like there are a million different games out there that appeal to guys, there a million or more possible games that appeal to girls. Note that the guidance for &quot;too broad&quot; is &quot;can you envision a book entirely devoted to the topic of this question&quot;, BESW mentions that he can, I'm inclined to agree.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last thing, questions getting closed it part of our process here, it's not worth getting upset about your question getting closed. It's not a punitive measure, there is no black mark on your record for asking a closed question (specially not closed as a duplicate, we like those actually). If the discussion about your question prompted more specific questions in your mind, ask those, if not, let's move on to a different topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: Closure is not the end! note that no closure is final, a quick edit, 5 reopen votes and you're back in business getting answers. Some design changes have been made in the past few years to even make this process easier. But all that to say, if you think there is something here beyond what's been discussed re: duplicates etc, make some edits, see if you can get this question some more specificity and a clear differentiation from the other questions, and we'll see about getting it reopened. (In other words, how about a revival rather than a post mortem).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T19:03:15.093" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3644" CreationDate="2014-05-26T19:46:43.273" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to echo your run-down of the possible reasons for it being put on hold, based on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/38170/3&quot;&gt;current revision&lt;/a&gt; and not earlier ones:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Too broad: check&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's too broad in two ways: the target group is enormous and heterogeneous; an in-depth design analysis of how to appeal to even a narrow group is worth a whole book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Worth a book&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions can be answered both in a succinct way and in a book-length. Some can only be answered in a succinct way because there isn't a book's worth of material to answer with. Some answer can't be answered succinctly without being uselessly superficial, and can &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; be answered with a book's worth of words. This is the latter: any answer that fits our format would be far too little to help with deep design issues, and can only be answered with book-length answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Target group is too big and non-homogeneous&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Apparently asking for design features that may appeal to female players was too broad a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's asking what features appeal to &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; individuals within 50% of the human population. Yes, that's too broad by lightyears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if you don't mean &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; female gamers... can you think of a way to narrow it down to which ones you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; mean and still have it be a useful question? I can't. You would need to narrow it down massively to be an acceptable question, because there is no such thing as a monolithic &quot;all female gamers&quot; that coherent questions can be posed about in the first place. But massively narrowing it down would probably turn it into a question unrelated to what you're looking for, since you &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; wanting to get answers about female gamers as a general single group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flip it around: &quot;What design features of RPGs appeal to men?&quot; The answers, plural, to that question are far too many and far too broad, because there's no typical man that answers can be meaningfully based on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Opinion-based: check&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This ties into the false assumption that any meaningful assertions can be made about as diverse a group as half the human species. Any attempt at answering it within the frame of &quot;all female gamers&quot; will necessarily be opinion rather than fact, since there are no RPG-related facts that apply to that invalidly-constructed demographic group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Off topic: nope&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's about RPGs and players thereof, so it's on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Duplicate: nope&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the supposed duplicates actually are. Even the closest is super-reaching&amp;mdash;the only way it counts is if there could only ever be one question about how to game with women, which is silly for similar reasons to why &quot;all female gamers&quot; is an invalid demographic to form a question about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unclear: nope&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You didn't mention this one, but I'm including it for completeness. The question has no clarity problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So: closure?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yeah. Any one of those would result in it getting closed, and it fits two of them. It's asking a question that is way, way too broad, and the very nature of the question would attract primarily anecdotal opinions because finding a factual basis to answer it with isn't possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would I have gotten the same response were I a woman?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yep. The problem is with the content of the question not qualifying as answerable, because it's a) too broad a question, and b) not answerable with statements that can be backed up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(perhaps I would have been looking for perspectives beyond my own - I do not pretend to know what most men want in gaming - that does not appear to be an issue)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is worth looking at: if you know that you can't know what most men want in gaming, why would that be different for women? Any given woman isn't going to know what women in general want in gaming either, and there's no reason to believe that &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; could.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And by what means can the spirit of this question be fielded without being... mistreated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If by &quot;mistreated&quot; you mean being closed, no, not the spirit of &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's any way to reconstruct the question to actually get the answers it appears to be looking for, because those answers simply don't exist. Any form of the question that does have answers that exist wouldn't be about women in general, and what a few specific random women on the Internet personally want out of gaming isn't useful to know. (Unless you were trying to solicit a lot of answers to get an idea of the range of tastes, but that's an unacceptable question due to the site's problems handling list questions. Forums are good at that, but this site isn't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;One possible saving grace&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, if you have a different question as your intent behind this one, such as &quot;why aren't there more female gamers&quot;, maybe your actual question is answerable here. We can't say without knowing what the actual problem you want to solve is, first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.ca/search?q=why+aren&amp;#39;t+there+more+female+gamers&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;why aren't there more female gamers&lt;/a&gt;&quot; would very likely be deemed primarily opinion-based too, whatever your actual problem is might not be. If you do have a problem you are personally attempting to solve, it's always best to ask about that, instead of trying to cast the net wider with a more general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T19:55:44.463" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3647" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3644" CreationDate="2014-05-26T20:44:13.927" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question is too broad and subjective for this format. It's fishing for all kinds of things and directly asks for speculation. That does not fit the Stack Exchange format. Feel free and ask more focused questions that might have specific, objective answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T20:44:13.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3643" CreationDate="2014-05-26T21:05:41.587" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;For &lt;em&gt;that specific question&lt;/em&gt;, non-English sheets are probably fine. You're going to be presenting and explaining them in English, and much of the value of a sheet is in the visuals and layout, which can be appreciated regardless of the language its labels are in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general though, answers and questions need to be written in English, just as a matter of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13676/do-posts-have-to-be-in-english-on-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;SE policy&lt;/a&gt;. For better or worse, English is the &lt;em&gt;lingua franca&lt;/em&gt; of large parts of the Internet, and that's the part of the Internet that SE is in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-05-26T21:05:41.587" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3639" CreationDate="2014-05-26T21:57:54.067" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some forums disable images in signatures, preventing graphical banners and Flair from being used. In that case, text and links is the only option for sigs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have this line in my sig on RPG.net:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Need solutions instead of discussion? I answer questions at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; too. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Just ask&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the wording because it's phrased &lt;em&gt;about me&lt;/em&gt;, which is more tasteful for a forum sig than straight-up advertising for another site is. It's inclusive too, allowing for the different strengths of the two formats without saying one is better than the other. And it includes a crystal-clear &lt;a href=&quot;https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-to-action&quot;&gt;call to action&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The BBCode for it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Need solutions instead of discussion? I answer questions at [URL=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;]RPG Stack Exchange[/URL] too. [URL=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;][B]Just ask[/B][/URL].&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the line is too prominent beside the rest of the sig, or just too big for your tastes, you can use the BBCode tags like &lt;code&gt;[size=1][/size]&lt;/code&gt; (your site's BBCode might vary) to make it smaller than the default forum text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T17:40:14.497" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3650" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3639" CreationDate="2014-05-27T00:17:25.220" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Start by linking to relevant content that already exists. This is both more visible and more helpful than other kinds of &quot;advertising.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Hey, how many crits could a bugbear chuck if a bugbear could chuck crits?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;32 crits, because each even-level bugbear feat is worth 1.88 crits. 47 if he takes the Frenzied Spelunker prestige class. &amp;lt; link &gt;Here's a post from RPG Stack Exchange that explains the math in detail&amp;lt; /link &gt;.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T00:17:25.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3644" CreationDate="2014-05-27T02:18:21.167" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, since there's already been a dissection of the other issues and one part of this bothered me..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Perhaps adding background to my question was my error?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Was stating that in all my time as a table-top gamer, mainly roleplay,&#xA;  I'd not ever had a group where one player was female... out of line?&#xA;  Or was it perhaps the statement that I'd only ever witnessed one girl&#xA;  playing D&amp;amp;D in just as long?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding background can be useful, if it's providing information that will be relevant to an answer. What you said was this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In truth I have never, to date, played in a table-top game (barring&#xA;  certain board games like Catan, Monopoly, Cluedo, Disc World, etc.)&#xA;  where there have been female players involved. Last time I saw a&#xA;  female play D&amp;amp;D or similar was a good 10 years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is not particularly relevant. But it also wasn't really a significant problem. It was just extraneous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Perhaps it was drawing and sharing my conclusions about why females&#xA;  are hard to come by at the gaming table&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The following are apparently &quot;unsupportable assumptions&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;That females have a tendency to shy away from a style of gaming that is combat/ violence heavy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;That females may prefer to shy away from number-heavy game systems (while noting that this would not explain the absence from lighter systems)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;And lastly that females may feel uncomfortable in a gaming environment where most players are males&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Note that the use of the words 'may' and 'tendency' above indicate&#xA;  something other than an absolute. I am not saying that the above three&#xA;  points apply to all women.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I have an issue. So before I go on, let me say that I firmly believe you only had good intentions and that I'm saying what I'm saying in an honest attempt to answer, without malice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you're trying to ask is what would encourage women to want to play RPGs more, and you proceed to do that with two stereotypical assumptions (the third point is something that there's evidence to support in certain professions). Stereotypes are bad, and in this case they undermine the whole intent of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mentioned my wife in a comment, who is a stab happy Rogue. There's another woman in the campaign who isn't as big a fan of combat. There's also a man who isn't a fan of combat (and another that is). Starting a question off from a stereotype just isn't a good place to construct an answer from. It reminded me of the question asking for &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3148/should-gender-loaded-terms-like-wife-friendly-be-edited-out&quot;&gt;wife friendly adventures&lt;/a&gt;.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lumping women, wives, and such into an amorphous blob really doesn't do anybody any favors. You wouldn't do that with &quot;male gamers&quot;, would you? Reverse the pronouns and ask the question, and it sounds silly. Male gamers are a really diverse group with a huge range of wants and interests. Female gamers are exactly the same in that regard, but wording like you used doesn't treat them that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would I have gotten the same response were I a woman?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably. Nobody can really answer that for sure, but I don't think the question was in for an easy time as written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So, What Can You Ask?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say you haven't seen a woman play D&amp;amp;D in a decade. Do you know some other women? Friends, family, perhaps? Have you asked any of them if they want to join a game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do that, and they say no, ask why. A question like &quot;people I ask to play D&amp;amp;D said no because they don't like X, how can I address that?&quot; is something that we can probably answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know four women who play D&amp;amp;D, and they tend to want the same things that male players do. Those things very greatly by the individual, just as they do in male players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T03:27:11.683" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3652" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-27T04:59:17.857" Score="3" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards just announced D&amp;amp;D 5e basic which will be a free pdf. Should this be a seperate tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd%2F4ll%2F20140527&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd%2F4ll%2F20140527&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T11:54:49.177" Title="Do we need d&amp;d 5e basic tags?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3652" CreationDate="2014-05-27T05:01:33.693" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we can say yet, because we haven't seen what the Basic version looks like--and we probably &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; say, even then. We should wait until tags for it appear in the system, at which point we can start evaluating based on actual use rather than theory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T05:01:33.693" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3652" CreationDate="2014-05-27T11:54:49.177" Score="3" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not in advance, tags are emergent&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Probably not. Look, we have &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; versioned tags, mainly for D&amp;amp;D,  to reduce confusion, but there is such a thing as too much differentiation there. We don't have separate tags for Essentials, for playtests, for beginner boxes, etc. Normal games get away with a tag for the game, and ask in your question text if you really need it more precise. D&amp;amp;D gets big version buckets, but these really are intended to be &quot;you know, the version of D&amp;amp;D published in a given decade&quot; and not a tagging system designed to mimic the company's specific release schedule.  Major version is as far as tags do - or IMO should - go.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-05-27T11:54:49.177" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3655" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-28T05:58:41.800" Score="2" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a character from WFRP that I want to port over to D&amp;amp;D 5e.  The character is a dwarven alchemist, with some bombs, poisons, magic abilities (like casting knock) and really good healing abilities, really good armor, good health, but not so good with weapons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that to port over the character the way I want, will involve the creation of new items, skills, and class abilities. So the question is, how do I craft such a Class so that I can port it over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that all the core books for D&amp;amp;D 5e are not out yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this sort of question be too opinion based for RPG.se or would the question be answerable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-04T08:10:29.740" LastActivityDate="2020-01-04T08:10:29.740" Title="Is RPG.SE able to answer questions related to the creation of homebrew classes in 5e before all the books are out?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3655" CreationDate="2014-05-28T06:07:33.263" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that this sort of question falls under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3206/what-questions-are-subjective-and-what-does-good-subjective-bad-subjective&quot;&gt;Good Subjective&lt;/a&gt; guideline (but more on that later). There's no One True Answer, but people who have done this sort of conversion can show what they've done and how they'd do it again, and the best answer (for you) can be accepted, and the best answers (for the community) will be upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main issue in this case, I feel, is that 5e is too new. One of the main tenets of Good Subjective that makes those kind of questions and answers useful is the ability to back it up. This requires solid experience. Since very few people have played 5e, and fewer still have written up new classes, there can be very little solid experience with this process at this point in time. Answers will probably be &quot;I read the playtest packets and I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; the best way &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be to do...&quot;, which falls under Bad Subjective, and probably closed as Opinion-Based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the bottom line is that I think the &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; are fine, and a good fit for the site, but that 5e questions, specifically, are likely to attract bad &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; at this point. Not &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; answers, of course - there's already a 5e homebrew community out there, and answers from those folks would be welcome, but the pool of possible contributors is small, and care must be taken to prune out the bad answers quickly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way to do that is to explicitly state, in the question, that you'd like solid experience to back up any answers, and promptly challenge any unbased answers to prove their experience. Don't wait for the mods to step in and possibly close the whole question, but be proactive in demanding specific criteria for answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-05-28T06:12:44.130" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3657" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3655" CreationDate="2014-05-28T12:19:50.013" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm rather opposed to this bent of questions at this point. For one simple reason:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't know enough about 5e's published intent to make an objective assessment about balance yet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until we see the final edition of the game, speaking of balance is going to be purely hypothetical. 5e's balance environment changed so many times throughout the playtest that I'm virtually certain that nothing we've seen so far reflects the final game at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't know the final maths, we don't know the final class build structure (and yes, I expect some changes there from the final playtest).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But most importantly, we don't know what the system's expectation on balance is. There is too much unknown to even write a &lt;em&gt;good subjective&lt;/em&gt; question on creating homebrew that will be compatible with the final version of 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-05-28T12:19:50.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3658" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3655" CreationDate="2014-05-28T21:58:30.053" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you like, you can ask about converting to the playtest, which should get you 9/10ths of the way to a legal conversion for 5e once it's released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want it for 5e, wait until 5e is released to ask. I know we're in that giddy waiting period for a new edition, but let's not get ahead of reality. We can't accept questions about a game that nobody owns yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-05-28T21:58:30.053" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3659" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-05-28T23:48:28.730" Score="3" ViewCount="73" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the release of M&amp;amp;M 3rd Edition, we have an issue with having most questions be about 2nd, and a few about 3rd, but no tag to differentiate between the two systems with significant differences.  There's also the little played 1st edition of Mutants and masterminds, but right now, all of these games are lumped under the single tag [mutants-and-masterminds].  Do we need more tags to differentiate between these systems, and if so, what should they be?  [mutants-and-masterminds-xth] is too long to be a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not certain as to the differences between 1st and 2nd, but between 2nd and 3rd, while many things remain the same, there has been a major shift in the system with many of the names remaining the same.  There are now 8 ability scores instead of 6, instead of defense, there's parry and dodge as separate things, the skill list has been simplified and the individual skills broadened, and there are fewer effects.  A whole lot of the terminology is the same though, even though it's applied differently, so it would be easy to mistake some 3rd edition questions as 2nd (and vice versa).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorDisplayName="user5834" LastEditDate="2014-05-29T18:24:09.787" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T19:33:44.197" Title="Do we need more Mutants and masterminds edition tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3660" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3601" CreationDate="2014-05-29T00:35:13.157" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag (and it's new form &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt;) have no purpose on this site and should be eradicated at our earliest opportunity. It's a meta tag and those should be removed with abandon. It was created to justify a question that does not fit our guidelines. If we'd like to allow that question, let's just allow that question and not invent a meta tag to make it somekind of sacred cow. Creating a new tag for it was probably the worst possible idea when a comment below the question indicating that it was discussed on meta and approved would have been plenty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the fundamental problem with having a tag for this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It encourages more questions just like it. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that would merit a &quot;just for fun&quot; tag (other than the one that it's been applied to, as it's a bit of a different category), are what we'd call GTKY (Get To Know You) questions. These questions are terrible fits for SE as they break the voting. An occasional one can be good especially if it attracts experts, and would be acceptable on meta. However, the main site should not be the place for them. More importantly though, the very existence of the tag encourages &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; of this stripe of questions and is a broken window.  We don't want more of these, if we allow a few tightly controlled ones, that's OK provided there is consensus, but having a tag is basically saying &quot;ask whatever GTKY question you can think of&quot; and then we're down the slippery slope of &quot;What's your favorite class&quot; and &quot;Monks!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-05-29T12:30:19.617" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T12:30:19.617" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3659" CreationDate="2014-05-29T13:10:16.670" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two important questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is how many questions we get in general in the tag. Right now that number is 17.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is how different the editions are. Not being familiar with the game I'm unable to comment on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, with the relative dearth of questions on this particular system, I'd favor specifying edition in the question and not creating a tag. I can't point to a particular threshold, but I'd guess 50 questions would probably be a good start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only exception I'd be interested in making here is if the editions were &lt;em&gt;so dramatically different&lt;/em&gt; that information for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd edition are not helpful to players of other editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the sounds of it, this could very well be the case between second and third editions. It would be worth seeing &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; this becomes an issue and retagging with mutants-and-masterminds-3e &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; we see it becoming an issue in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-05-29T19:33:44.197" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T19:33:44.197" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3608" CreationDate="2014-05-29T15:23:11.097" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, I'm going to take a stab at this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're a bigger site than Sports.SE (by a good bit), so I'm guessing beyond just a call for questions, we should probably make an effort to try to treat this more like a new product push on Arqade complete with limited prize support and if possible a community supported site redesign (GN mentioned SE not wanting to allocate a minimum of developer and designer resources, if we do that ourselves it should fulfill that requirement). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to address your points directly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We need a multipronged approach here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We need document in the hands of our users ASAP. Whatever this means, the key thing is having experts on hand to answer questions right away.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We need to cross post stuff. Ask questions here, then post them in the Wizards forum with a link to the question. If you get a good answer, self answer (or better yet, draw someone in from over there). Let's be careful to not be spammy about this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get the word out. A lot of us are friends with gamers on FB and Twitter. Let them know that the best place for high signal:noise Q&amp;amp;A on 5e is right here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We need to make sure this site &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; like a great place for 5e questions. That means a proliferation of content on the site, questions getting answered and &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; a temporary redesign to get us started&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Design stuff. This is the big question, and ultimately, it's probably up to us to design the art, vote on any potential designs and ask SE very nicely to implement. Things we need to know going forward:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Will SE let us use fan art as the site header.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If yes to above, what dimensions would said images need to be.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What design elements should we include to make it &lt;em&gt;feel&lt;/em&gt; like 5e's home on the web.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What license restrictions are we operating under when creating this. How do we make it feel like 5e without stepping on license toes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;ideal&lt;/em&gt; thing here would be for SE and WOTC to develop a promotional relationship. However, that is not something we as users have any kind of control over. Thus it's best for us to operate under the assumption that this will go on without WOTC's official blessing or support. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-05-29T15:23:11.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2014-05-30T15:34:50.923" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think a small number of questions of this type,&#xA;reasonably curated, is beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the benefit of having them here rather than somewhere else:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Build Community.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We want out people on this site, thinking about each other, and as a group. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Knowing what cool things people have done, helps build a sense of community. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Attract Experts.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We want experts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many experts like to show off there expertise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some forms of expertise can't be readily shown off in normal answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;But the same experts might have other skills that can.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Educate:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I agree with Alex P that the TeX.SE big-list questions tend to have a implict educational component. And that it is important these do too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I disagree (with the statement I find implied) that they always achieve that goal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think that good answers to this type of question can and will have direct education (Eg my own answers to it tend to describe what tricks i had to do to make the software line things up and draw fields.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think there is a intrinsic education: &quot;All the high voted character sheets use only two fonts -- including sizing. That must be a good idea.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastActivityDate="2014-05-30T15:34:50.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3664" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-02T15:52:59.243" Score="8" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is asked to serve two slighly disparate, but very related purposes. It's ultimately an extension of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3662/1084&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall I'd like to come out of this with some ideas on what is possible and what we are capable of doing related to doing a site redesign during the period. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For context. Grace Note has said that they'd prefer to allocate minimal developer and designer resources to this project. That means (to me at least) that if we want something done with our design we'll need to do it ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some things we probably need to know (and or decide)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the willingness of SE and this site to accept and integrate a fan created design into the site design. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What dimensions would said art need to be.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What licensing issues are there for this kind of thing (IE how do we avoid getting this site sent a C&amp;amp;D from WOTC's famous Level 30 attorneys).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If those hurdles are cleared and clarified, we'll need to discuss what design elements we want here on the site, how can we make this &lt;em&gt;feel&lt;/em&gt; like a community welcoming 5e players and DMs with open arms. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is mostly to get the ball rolling on a potential temporary design shift, so lets get moving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-06-04T17:06:00.527" Title="5e and site design" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3665" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-02T18:00:26.230" Score="2" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/39451/ways-to-solve-balance-problems-with-a-master-summoner&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; has the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mastersummoner&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mastersummoner&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mastersummoner&lt;/a&gt;, which should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/master-summoner&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;master-summoner&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;master-summoner&lt;/a&gt; per the guidelines that spaces should appears as dashes in tag names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seems stupid to ask a mod for something so simple, but the site won't let me fix this tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You are attempting to create the tag [master-summoner]; however the tag [mastersummoner] already exists! If you think this new tag should be allowed, raise it on meta&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is assuming that we need the tag at all, which I'm unsure of but was going to leave for someone who's more Pathfinder-y to worry about.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-06-02T23:48:57.350" Title="Tag fix request: [mastersummoner] to [master-summoner]" Tags="|support|status-norepro|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3665" CreationDate="2014-06-02T18:06:35.387" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would suggest removing the tag. I don't think we need tags for specific classes, so tags for an ultra-specific alternate class feature of a non-core class? Seems excessive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastActivityDate="2014-06-02T18:06:35.387" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3667" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3668" CreationDate="2014-06-03T06:20:34.253" Score="3" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms&quot;&gt;a tag synonym&lt;/a&gt; pointing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanicaldream&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanicaldream&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanicaldream&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-dream&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanical-dream&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanical-dream&lt;/a&gt;, and it's preventing me from &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; recreating the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-dream&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanical-dream&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanical-dream&lt;/a&gt; tag and reapplying it to one of our past questions that lost its system tag. Could this tag synonym be destroyed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowadays, SE has protection from creating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thistag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;thistag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;thistag&lt;/a&gt; if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/this-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;this-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;this-tag&lt;/a&gt; already exists, so this tag synonym is no longer necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-06-03T06:21:45.100" Title="Please destroy the [mechanicaldream] -&gt; [mechanical-dream] tag synonym" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3667" CreationDate="2014-06-03T06:21:45.100" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There you go, boss. Synonym nuked (apparently it was never used).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-06-03T06:21:45.100" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3669" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5914" CreationDate="2014-06-03T06:49:07.527" Score="29" ViewCount="297" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a somewhat trivial request, but it's about a typographical &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.explosm.net/comics/2676/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;pet peeve&lt;/a&gt; I've been noticing for a few months. I figure I might as well make a request about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Problem 1 of 2: The H2 and H3 have poor spacing.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our heading spacing is off, which reduces the legibility of our H2 and (especially) H3 and any post that actually uses them. That discourages a lot of us from actually &lt;em&gt;using&lt;/em&gt; H2 and H3. It seems in general the community prefers using H1's, and a single bolded line as a mock-heading rather than H2 or H3. Other SE sites don't appear to have this formatting issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Headings are meant to have a gap above to separate a new section from the previous one, and then be snuggled in nice and close to the text of the new section to identify it. Alternately, they just have equal space above and below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our heading 2 and 3 do the opposite, because they have a &lt;code&gt;margin-bottom: 1.2em&lt;/code&gt; CSS declaration that places them closer to the text &lt;em&gt;above&lt;/em&gt; than their following paragraph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VZX3V.png&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot showing the padding&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(the orange bit is the margin)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Problem 2 of 2: The H3 looks too similar to normal bolded text.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The heading 3 ought to be made larger. It's virtually indistinguishable from normal bolded text. This means using it usually &lt;em&gt;reduces&lt;/em&gt; clarity if anything. Combined with the spacing issue, that makes the H3 unusable (except for the purposes of making your post worse somehow).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our H3 is 16px vs the body text's 15px, and it has a different font face (the &lt;em&gt;LusitanaRegular&lt;/em&gt; webfont vs the body text's &lt;em&gt;Georgia&lt;/em&gt;), but &lt;em&gt;LusitanaRegular&lt;/em&gt; has smaller text so these differences add up to be negligible. To demonstrate, I'll let you guess which of these is the H3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Example&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what do our headings currently look like?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Heading 1&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The spacing above and below the heading is about equal. This is currently my favourite heading to use on the basis of its legibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Heading 2&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The spacing places this &lt;em&gt;closer to the text above&lt;/em&gt; than below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Heading 3&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like the H2, this is closer to the text above. Because it's also smaller, it gives the impression of being &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; closer to the text above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What should our headings look like?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The appearance of the headings on Meta Stack Exchange is shown in the below image. Good spacing, good sizing: no legibility issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/246638/152515&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xxVOa.png&quot; alt=&quot;some heading appearance tests, click the link for the sandbox answer this was presented in&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On our site it should really look like this (it's an image).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ylYfW.png&quot; alt=&quot;spacing suggestions for these headings&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The size changes are necessary because we're increasing the H3's size to distinguish it from regular bolded body text (19px is the minimum size). H2 and H1 then get their size increased as well to maintain the present 2px gap between each heading's font size.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A margin-bottom of 10px is what Meta Stack Exchange uses for H2 and H3.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It hasn't been included here, but a margin-top of 1.2em or 24px would push headings further away from the paragraph above, and might improve their distinctiveness. This is a matter of preference though, and Stack Exchange seems to prefer equal spacing above and below. (It's also my own preference, but I'm happy either way.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in total, the changes are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;.post-text h1 {&#xA;    font-size: 23px !important; /* previously 20px */&#xA;}&#xA;&#xA;.post-text h2 {&#xA;    font-size: 21px; /* previously 18px */&#xA;    margin-bottom: 10px; /* previously 1.2em */&#xA;}&#xA;&#xA;.post-text h3 {&#xA;    font-size: 19px; /* previously 16px */&#xA;    margin-bottom: 10px; /* previously 1.2em */&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Community input welcome. I'll adjust accordingly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-11-29T22:17:27.360" Title="Please fix the spacing for our header styles (it's backwards) and our H3 sizing. Fix suggested inside" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3664" CreationDate="2014-06-03T15:53:28.170" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm making a dark stab here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point 1 and Point 2 should be discussed in different question. But let's talk about Point 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How's about licensing ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble is, the system license for D&amp;amp;D Next doesn't even... exist. (I assume?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;This is the one used for 4e &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now let's take a stab and read the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;5.7&#xA;  Imagery.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  For the avoidance of doubt and in addition to the provisions of&#xA;  Section 9 related&#xA;  to ownership and use of Wizards Intellectual Property (as defined therein), Licensee expressly acknowledges Wizards’ ownership of all&#xA;  imagery and artwork contained in 4E, and Licensee expressly&#xA;  agrees it will &lt;b&gt;not reprint any such imagery&lt;/b&gt; or artwork without Wizards’ written permission. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, we're actually in bad position. This rule, stately that we can't use theirs graphic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But here's my suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we were to rely to D&amp;amp;D's graphic for our artwork. (Which is actually, for me, OK), then we must be patient and hoping that they will publish a D&amp;amp;D Next's Fan Site Kit&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/fankit/fantoolkitdnd.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; (this is the e4's one) &lt;/a&gt; However, the license stated that we can't alter it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: How about the license for fan picture?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: From what I know, it's fair game as long the fan picture is not a plagiarism of the picture that have been published by WOTC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt; Note: It has to admitted that I'm sided with people that &quot;new web design just for solely welcoming D&amp;amp;D Next? Do we really need that?&quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12117" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-06-04T17:06:00.527" LastActivityDate="2014-06-04T17:06:00.527" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3664" CreationDate="2014-06-03T17:11:38.533" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about &amp;ldquo;Q&amp;amp;A&amp;rdquo; written in some fantasy style, and where in we attempt (difficult though it will be) to out-ampersand them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-06-03T17:11:38.533" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3664" CreationDate="2014-06-04T10:53:37.143" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is the willingness of SE and this site to accept and integrate a fan created design into the site design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll be trying to put our best foot forward and look professional. It has to let our site design look professional, and help us appeal to the audience we're targeting. Our willingness to accept a fan created design (of art or whatever) will be proportional to how much it helps us do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stuff like imagery for a unique event landing page, our top banner, or vertical side-gutter images as SevenSidedDie pointed out in comments would all help, so long as it helps us do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What dimensions would said art need to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mu. It just needs to be art. Its size depends on how we use it, and there's always a cropping feature available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What licensing issues are there for this kind of thing (IE how do we avoid getting this site sent a C&amp;amp;D from WOTC's famous Level 30 attorneys).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We use art we have a license to use: stuff that's available for commercial use and derivative works, which is inclined toward public domain works or creative commons licensed works, or stuff people explicitly allow us to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If those hurdles are cleared and clarified, we'll need to discuss what design elements we want here on the site, how can we make this feel like a community welcoming 5e players and DMs with open arms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The hurdles mostly don't have an answer, or the answer is straightforward, vague, and what you probably knew already. Let's move straight on to this step, because &lt;em&gt;that's&lt;/em&gt; the step we can start talking about unique event landing pages, top banners, and vertical side-gutter images. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Afterwards,&lt;/em&gt; we can come back to questions like these, as we work out what we need in order to do it and how we can make it happen, and at that point we'll have actual specific assets to be concerned with and we'll be able to do something useful with questions like these. (Though it's likely the designers like Jin will be doing the work here, so they're the ones who'll be coming up with the plan, and using or not using whatever we come up with or find.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-06-04T10:59:22.300" LastActivityDate="2014-06-04T10:59:22.300" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3674" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3675" CreationDate="2014-06-05T08:56:47.610" Score="10" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;I need a spellbook manager. Or some other tool, not really important for the sake of discussion. Can I ask about it on main site? Or would it be off topic? I know software recommendations site, but I doubt that many RPG players will able to see what I ask there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-06-05T11:32:43.403" LastActivityDate="2014-06-05T11:32:43.403" Title="Can I ask about game-helping tools and software here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3674" CreationDate="2014-06-05T10:29:32.060" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure! Take a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; tags to see the kind of questions that have been asked already. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=spellbook+%5Btools%5D&quot;&gt;Your question might have been asked and answered already&lt;/a&gt;, and if not you'll get a sense of the detail questions need to have in order to get good Stack Exchange answers. As always: describe the problem you're facing more than the solution you expect, giving more specific detail rather than generalising the question in hopes it'll be more useful to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-06-05T10:53:01.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2014-06-05T12:31:58.903" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://edgerunner.merttorun.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EtZnw.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2014-06-05T12:31:58.903" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-06-05T12:31:58.903" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3677" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3688" CreationDate="2014-06-05T16:28:47.803" Score="10" ViewCount="262" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a small problem. It is not with the site (although it is related to it), it is not with the regular community of the site (although it is with the community as a whole), and it bothers me for quite a time. I decided to write about it today, here, because it affected me personally this time, to a great extent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a problem with the platform of the site, at least for me. This problem is made by the users, but it is still connected to the platform. We people, when we read questions and answers, vote for them up or down. We use it in order to ensure that the best answers are the ones at the top. That the answers will be better, due to the granting of reputation which unlocks more and more advantages, but all of this builds on a simple premise- everyone will vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm an avid voter. Whenever I visit the site and read the questions and the answers, I vote for them if they're good. I comment on them if they can be improved. I review many a posts, whether answers or questions, and try my best to ensure that the best answers will be up fronted, and will be more and more common.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sadly, not everyone is like that. Today, though, I've witnessed a different thing. One of the answerers on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/39544/10849&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; wrote that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You have two excellent and verbose answers to your question…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet, he didn't vote for any of them. While one of the answers he mentions is mine, not this is the problem. &lt;strong&gt;I'm not looking for more votes. Furthermore, I'm not that interested in the reputation race either.&lt;/strong&gt; I do believe that this is a problem due to mainly a single reason. Having encountered it myself, I think that I'm in a position to state how I feel, hoping to express the voice of likeminded people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've put a lot of effort in this answer. I've worked an entire hour on it, which is quite a time. Yet it is buried beneath answers that at least some of them are worse in their level. Due to the platform of the site, people don't go to read the answer, because if it hadn't garnered those up votes, it isn't that good. As such is the case, it remains buried under less good answers. This makes me question the effort I put and bestowed upon this answer. Because if it doesn't receive the attention it deserves, something is amiss. So I start to think for myself &quot;is it really worth putting this much effort into my activity in the site?&quot; And I'm not sure that the answer will keep being positive. This will result in either of two cases, with one being leaving the site and the other being putting less effort in the answers. I don't think that either one of the answers is good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm putting it here, asking if I'm the only one who feels this, but also if there is some way to solve it, some way to encourage users to vote on other questions and answers. Maybe granting extra reputation for voting is the answer? Because I truly believe that this problem makes the platform fall apart.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks in advance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A few clarifications&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I've read the comments and the answer, there are a few clarifications that I think are needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, I'm not looking for or asking or even attacking those who don't read long answers. I don't have a problem with them. I don't always read long answers either, so no problem there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, I don't look for and I'm not interested in solutions for the example I've given. It made me come and write about it here, that's all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, because it was already brought by mxyzplk, if I'll quote the reason to up vote from the help center: Voting up a question or answer signals to the rest of the community that a post is interesting, well-researched, and useful. This doesn't say that one should agree with the question, but that the answer will be good. It is no secret that we don't agree with everything that others write here. But it is also no secret that the goal here, and the reason that I'm drawn to here, is that we try and strive to make the best answers possible, that we want complete and working answers and not some kinds of conversations between the questioner and the answerer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And here is my problem in a nutshell. He did read the answer, and he did think that it was well researched and maybe even interesting. He even went all the way to say that it was excellent even though not from the angle that he is looking for. But he didn't vote, or commented as to how it can be improved or anything of the like. And this is even more problematic, and deserves the attention not because I didn't get upvoted or downvoted or whatever. It is written here because he voted once in 4 months, and for a question. And he is not the only one. Voting is not mandatory, true, but the system, the platform, everything in here is based around voting. And if the voting system falls, and I'm pretty sure that this is not the only example (I've seen others, just didn't ran to tell about them so I'm bad too), the goal will be out there, running free, without us coming to achieve it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as a side-note, I agree that voting is not a like-button. I do believe that it is a sign that an answer is interesting, well researched and logical to one extent or the other. Am I the only one? Or in the minority camp? Because if so, maybe the problem is with the explanation of the voting role… &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10849" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T16:55:38.727" Title="Users reading answers and liking them, but don't vote" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3677" CreationDate="2014-06-05T18:10:03.530" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;The important things to remember:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voting is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; optional. All participation in this site is optional, but voting is not core participation (that's really asking and answering).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We can't &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; people vote on stuff. We really really really &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; people to vote, but we can't make them. It's secret, though you can raise awareness.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The best way to garner upvotes on answers is to attract eyes to the question. Post the link to your social media circles, add a bounty, come talk about the question in chat etc.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voting is...odd. A lot of times, the more simplistic the question and answer are, the more votes it gets. The post you highlighted takes &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; of effort to read, it's a long question, with several very long answers. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some people regard voting a bit more sacredly than simply &quot;liking&quot; a post. They need to see somethign more from it. This is a bit of an extreme approach, but sometimes is the case. We should all upvote more than we do...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voting is sometimes hard work. I know part of the reason &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; don't upvote as much as I should is that I'm not in as many posts as I should be. If I'm not visiting a lot of posts I'm not voting as much. There is also a small UI issue with longer posts, when you get to the bottom of a post, the upvote arrows are sometimes a long way away.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how do you address these issues?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vote yourself. This is important, you want to practice what you preach.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Raise awareness (this post is a good way to do it).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you post long answers, include a concise summary (called an abstract in academic literature) at the top of your post. This helps a user immediately judge whether or not your post is worthy of an upvote (if they read the whole thing and don't like it they can come back). &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you think you have a good answer that you've spent some time on, promote the question. Tweet it, Facebook it, share it on G+...whatever interwebs ways you have of promoting it. The upvotes will come.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-06-05T18:28:43.297" LastActivityDate="2014-06-05T18:28:43.297" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3679" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3681" CreationDate="2014-06-05T23:29:29.907" Score="-2" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/39545/8962&quot;&gt;Centaurs, do they have control of their bodily functions?&lt;/a&gt; asks what I consider to be a legitimate question (albeit containing misconceptions about real-world zoology) about a fictional species that appears in RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are questions about species appearing in roleplaying games that require research outside the rules in the specified RPG system on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address Brian Ballsum-Stanton's comment regarding the meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/570/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, Is this sort of question campaign research, which that Meta question's consensus appears to suggest &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8962" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T21:58:24.920" Title="Scope of questions regarding fictional species appearing in RPGs" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3679" CreationDate="2014-06-06T00:05:52.790" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem is not that the question is unanswerable, it's that it's not specific to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Centaurs are a staple of fantasy, directly from Greek mythology, so there's no real reason to ask about them in this site, except if the question is about how the system manages them (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13902/what-are-the-racial-skill-modifiers-for-dragons&quot;&gt;dragons' skill points&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15130/can-a-pixie-fly-higher-than-their-altitude-of-one&quot;&gt;pixie's mode of flight&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wondering about how a centaur defecates is a question that could be interesting given the right context (a centaur attending a ceremony maybe?) but it's not specific to D&amp;amp;D centaurs in any way. Since the rules say nothing about defecation (and I don't expect any RPG except F.A.T.A.L. to have rules on that), the D&amp;amp;D monster could be expected to behave just like the original creature it stems from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is no more about RPGs, it's about fantasy. Not our field of expertise.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Even if it's not the field of expertise of some other site on the .SE network, this doesn't mean it should be posted here. There's plenty of places outsside .SE it could go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T00:05:52.790" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3679" CreationDate="2014-06-06T00:35:54.047" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR: the question was closed as poorly asked, not as off topic. If it were better asked, we'd know with more clarity whether or not it's on topic. However, non-setting-specific research questions about non-mechanical elements of play are &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; going to be a bad fit for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is getting mis-framed. There's no doubt that the question can be answered, nor that it can be relevant to the RPG experience. Arguments based on that line of reasoning aren't going to get anywhere because they aren't what's being challenged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a matter of how wide RPG.SE can cast its net without losing its focus, and it's a discussion which has been going on for some time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An important thing to remember is that SE is explicitly uninterested in being like other sites. A common evaluative tool for site scope is to ask whether another site would do it equally well or better--in this case, RPG forums. This is why &quot;it's useful&quot; isn't always sufficient to justify on-topic-ness--for example, questions which solicit unending iterative lists are perfectly suited for forums but very poorly suited for SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These meta threads seem to be the most useful for seeing the reasoning behind the site's current approach to the site's scope for setting/worldbuilding questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/570/4398&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;/ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/4398&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic, part two?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/675/4398&quot;&gt;Why did the automobiles and telephones thread close?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/689/4398&quot;&gt;What do games like Cthulhu require of Campaign Research Questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3275/4398&quot;&gt;Are &amp;#39;fluff&amp;#39; setting related questions relevant?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular I draw our attention to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/676/4398&quot;&gt;this observation about the divergence between the community's theory and the community's practice&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll see that it's not cut and dried, but there is a sense that a line must be drawn--otherwise &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; becomes on-topic because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/4398&quot;&gt;there are RPGs about everything&lt;/a&gt;. Exactly where that line's drawn is an ongoing community-driven conversation. At the moment, the community seems to think science-based non-system-influenced questions about fantasy biology is a little too far afield.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I feel that if the Animal Planet channel could do a special which satisfactorily answers the question, it's not specific enough to RPGs for this site to field without excessively diluting our focus. (See: &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mermaids:_The_Body_Found&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mermaids&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Dragon_(2004_film)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dragons&lt;/a&gt;, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is speculative and framed as an abstract ponderment rather than a practical request for advice about a challenge or problem the querent is facing. This puts up warning flags, because such questions are usually either invitations to discussion or have something very specific in mind which they haven't communicated (so answers are just guessing what problem we're being asked to solve, and the querent is likely to respond &quot;but what about X thing I didn't mention?&quot;). When this kind of question becomes a regular problem an SE site either bans them entirely or imposes stricter limits on them (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;). The thing to do is to ask the querent to edit the question so it includes what prompted them to ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The subject material in this case is unaddressed by its RPG context (bowel movements in D&amp;amp;D are purely the subject of third party and homebrew content), and while &lt;em&gt;plausible&lt;/em&gt; biology-based answers can be provided, they will always be founded on shaky assumptions which makes them opinion-based rather than objectively accurate answers (for example, the assumption that a creature which looks like two other creatures but has abilities like darkvision shared by neither of them is similar to them in ways other than gross appearance--an assumption proven false multiple times in D&amp;amp;D by the presence of various &quot;mimic&quot; style monsters). The question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; asking about behavioural choices, but only about physical ability, so the setting's social context (and it's useful to note that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; encompasses many diverse settings rather than being itself a setting tag) is irrelevant to answers unless we read more into the question than is actually there--in which case we should, again, be asking the querent for clarification to improve the question instead of answering based on our interpretation of insufficient information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best answer for the question as written is &quot;D&amp;amp;D 3.5 doesn't tell us anything about that,&quot; followed by some advice about where to go from there based on the answerer's experience with bowel movements in RPGs (there's something I never thought I'd type). See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/39680/4398&quot;&gt;this question and its answer&lt;/a&gt; as an example of a question which gives context and an answer which gives guidance rather than speculation. Any further answer must necessarily be re-framing the question, which is fine but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;should follow the guidelines laid out in this thread&lt;/a&gt;--and again, it'd probably be better to ask the querent for clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-06-07T05:03:49.550" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3679" CreationDate="2014-06-06T01:12:35.890" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I say &quot;Yes&quot;, on the basis of the relevancy of such questions to RPG SE.  Would they fit on Mythology SE or Worldbuilding SE if they ever go beyond the commitment phase?  Perhaps, but at the time I write this answer, &lt;em&gt;they have not&lt;/em&gt;.  Would they fit on SciFi SE?  Perhaps, but we are more likely to find people knowledgeable about RPGs on RPG SE.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would suggest that RPG SE is the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; place for such questions as it is really only role players and world builders who might ask such questions and find the answers relevant, and at present RPG SE is the only active SE site that deals with world building, in addition to which, these are questions about species appearing in specific RPGs, and RPG SE is the best place to find people with the relevant expertise in the RPG in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that RPG SE should not necessarily be a source for answer on any imaginable topic appearing in RPGs.  Some of those could quite easily be answered by someone who has never even heard of RPGs.  For example, someone reading the online D&amp;amp;D rules about centaurs and not knowing what a centaur is could find out simply by doing a web search without cluttering up RPG SE with a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if a question addresses a species appearing in a particular RPG, that is hardly a non-specific question.  An answer would require knowledge of the RPG in question, as well as the ability to extrapolate from material available in the RPG, as well as applying other expertise.  I suggest that these sorts of questions are entirely relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question my meta question addresses, general questions about centaurs &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be addressed by referencing the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centaur&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Wikipedia Centaur&lt;/a&gt; article, but the example question was asking something much more specific, about a particular species appearing in D&amp;amp;D 3.5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Had the question included an [Ars-Magica] tag rather than a [Dnd-3.5e] tag, my answer may well have been different, as in &lt;em&gt;Ars Magica&lt;/em&gt;, Centaurs live like beasts and are happy to do so.  They would not care about social disapproval.  Hence again the relevance of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8962" LastEditorUserId="8962" LastEditDate="2014-06-06T02:49:53.983" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T02:49:53.983" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3684" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-06T12:17:36.710" Score="5" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;The other day I made a comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/39426/11898&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; explaining what I thought were problems with the the answer. A lengthy discussion followed and, for the most part, we discussed how my comment wasn't really SE material, and that I should pose it differently. The details are the discussion aren't important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After the discussion, I deleted all of my previous comments, and wrote a new one in a more &quot;positive criticism&quot; form, which I had just been told was exactly what to do. I also flagged the other discussion comments for deletion, because they shouldn't be there either. A moderator deleted all of the comments in &lt;em&gt;and after&lt;/em&gt; the discussion, including what I thought was a legitimate and helpful suggestion. In order to figure out why that was deleted (figuring it may well be an accident), I asked the moderator why that non-discussion comment was taken too. That comment was also deleted, leaving me frustrated and without answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this is not one of those mod-bashing questions people keep making after their comments are deleted, nor is it a general &quot;why are comments being deleted?&quot; question. Maybe the moderator had a good reason to delete the comments, &lt;strong&gt;I just don't know what that reason is&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a good place for asking specific moderators specific questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should I have taken this to meta with my specific comment in the first place?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If my comments really are that bad, how can I get directed feedback that will make me a better member of the community? Again, I'm legitimately trying to understand what was wrong with my comment, not just raging against the mod-machine.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there's no way to get feedback on that sort of thing, should I just hang up my SE hat? I obviously don't fit the mold yet, and my options for improving seem to be dwindling. I was hoping it was a philosophical goal of SE to build up content providers, but maybe it's only to find the ones that are already a match?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11898" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T16:38:47.833" Title="How can I request the reason for my comment being deleted?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3685" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3684" CreationDate="2014-06-06T12:26:57.160" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;That answer attracted over 16 deleted comments, with 4 flags from site users including too chatty and obsolete. Furthermore, that question, itself, has 15 deleted comments of argument. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Multiple moderators had to intervene to clean up that argument. The more comments there are, the more flags there are, especially argumentative comments in a back and forth without any indications of comment quality by other users, the more we &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;discourage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; argument. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, simply &lt;em&gt;don't argue in comments.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have an opinion contrary to the answer which &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; the question, answer the question  and let the voting sort it out. If you have an opinion contrary to the answer which doesn't answer the question, go blog about it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal policy for responding to comments is to edit my answer, and then ask the commenter if it's improved. When they respond, I delete my question to the commenter and the clarification comment which spawned it. Note how I try &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; to add content which should be in an answer into a comment in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When commenting on other peoples answers, I try to ask, once, if they've considered a source or idea. If they respond in the negative, I remove both my comment and their response. If they edit their post, I remove my comment. (Or try, at least. I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have a day job.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is &lt;em&gt;exceedingly&lt;/em&gt; rare to need to comment multiple times. &lt;strong&gt;Comments are not a persuasive vehicle.&lt;/strong&gt; That's what answers are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have 400 rep. For you, I'd recommend to pretend like the comment features don't exist. Focus on providing good and comprehensive answers. Demonstrate superiority &lt;em&gt;by providing better answers.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-06-06T12:32:40.670" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T12:32:40.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3684" CreationDate="2014-06-06T12:39:37.853" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's pretty simple.  There was a big ol' comment war on that question that kept pulling flags. I went, saw it, and deleted it in its entirety. Even going and looking at the deleted comments, I'm not sure which one you consider your &quot;constructive one&quot; and which are just part of the back and forth. So the direct answer is &quot;it was deleted because it was part of a comment thread in which you and two other site members were comment warring.&quot; If you succumb to the desire to argue in comments, then don't be surprised when there is collateral damage. When moderators are forced to step in and police things, we have other things to do as well, and we're not going to take the time to weigh every one of your carefully crafted snowflakes of a thought, we're going to disperse the crowd and move on. As I already said in that comment thread, if you really have a constructive thought, feel free and re-post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We consider comments low enough value and priority that we're not interested in justifying the deletion of individual comments or hassling over it. As for your other sub-questions, if the deletion of one comment makes you consider &quot;hanging up your SE hat&quot; I would suggest a thicker skin. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T12:39:37.853" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3687" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3684" CreationDate="2014-06-06T16:27:48.843" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a long (and continuing) history of comments turning into arguments. I gave you some (IMO) good advice in those now-deleted arguments... because I have lots of experience doing it &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; over that history. It sounds like KRyan also gave some good advice, and I know he got that experience the hard way too. So that's the context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sounds like your constructive comment got nuked along with the rest. Given the comment-argument history on RPG.SE, it probably simply got caught in the cleanup rather than being specifically judged and found wanting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On your specific questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a good place for asking specific moderators specific questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta is the right place for this, so you brought this to the right place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should I have taken this to meta with my specific comment in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe? But probably not. Meta posts of that kind tend to be more about issues with questions, such as their validity or topicality or how to handle them in some other way. Suggestions for improving a question don't tend to come here, since it's not a crisis either major or minor&amp;mdash;questions that could use improvement either get improved or they don't, and the votes follow, so there's rarely a productive point in blowing that up into a full meta conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If my comments really are that bad, how can I get directed feedback that will make me a better member of the community? Again, I'm legitimately trying to understand what was wrong with my comment, not just raging against the mod-machine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment deletion is pretty common on SEs and here in particular. They're deliberately ephemeral and expendable, so that SE doesn't become just another discussion board. That has implications for both parts of this sub-question: firstly, since the bar for deleting a comment is so very low (sometimes as low as &quot;it's been a week, time to clean up&quot;), deletion isn't intended as a value statement about the comments, so your take-away shouldn't be that they're &quot;really ... that bad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, that they were deleted for mere tidying reasons, not &quot;moderate bad content&quot; reasons (like how deletion is done on a forum), so they weren't judged as &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; &quot;that bad&quot; in the first place. They just weren't being constructive (leaving aside that one comment); a comment to survive a cleanup means that it has overwhelming value in being left, and everything below that very high standard goes in the bin. This is because of the philosophy that either comments get incorporated into what really matters here&amp;mdash;the posts&amp;mdash;or they must not have been useful. Rarely, a comment will survive for other reasons, such as pointing out something that doesn't really belong in the answer, but should stay for information reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If there's no way to get feedback on that sort of thing, should I just hang up my SE hat? I obviously don't fit the mold yet, and my options for improving seem to be dwindling. I was hoping it was a philosophical goal of SE to build up content providers, but maybe it's only to find the ones that are already a match?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, your conduct during that comment exchange was exceedingly commendable. You made an initial few comments in a way that was not constructive (according to the admittedly arcane dynamics of this site), but when you got brusque comments from me and others about that meta-concern you actively engaged with curiosity rather than reacted with offended defensiveness. That is something that many of our top users can't manage to do except on their best days. Most of us can't keep our egos in check if comments become argumentative, yet you handled the disagreement with integrity and turned it into the pursuit of knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your bringing this to meta in a non-confrontational way is also commendable. These things say to me that you are actually very well suited to the site. Someone who can handle disagreement with an even temper is hardly necessary to do well here (as I am living evidence of), but would give you a distinct edge in having constructive conversations about questions and answers that need a little bit of help and TLC to become their best. That you managed to demonstrate that within the span of a single comment argument means that I, personally, have no worries that you will run into similar (but I say again, minor) friction in comments any time soon&amp;mdash;in fact, I suspect that your comments in the future will contain a degree of diplomacy I can learn from!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Hats&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there is no need to hang up your hat. You've been getting votes and accepts on answers, and that's really the most important measure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments... well, comments are a thing that we can get personally invested in, but at the end of the day isn't what RPG.SE is here for, so that investment is sometimes best seen as a distraction. It's taken me a while to come to it, but now when a comment string that I'm invested in gets deleted, I shrug and remind myself that its not what we're here for, and that &quot;making&quot; people &quot;fix&quot; their errant answers isn't part of the core system of SE that makes it so valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I remind myself of that, it helps me let go of the comments and get back to the voting and answering, so that I'm voting up good answers and providing answers to be voted on. I will still often feel like an answer can be improved with changes... but, eh, there are other answers, and the votes will tell, so that helps let sleeping arguments lie.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-06-06T16:38:47.833" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T16:38:47.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3688" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3677" CreationDate="2014-06-06T16:55:38.727" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding your edited-in A Few Clarifications, I believe my comment can be expanded into a more full answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting is voluntary, so not everyone will vote—but &lt;strong&gt;that's OK, because there are others who will&lt;/strong&gt;. Those who actually vote determine what's good, great, and not. There are lots of people who don't vote, but they aren't a sign that the voting system is failing. We don't have any evidence for a lack of votes, as we routinely get votes into the 20s and above. Yes, &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; users &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; vote, but we don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; their votes because we already have the necessary critical mass of active voting users for the site to function.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should that person have voted? Maybe. It sounds like they vote very rarely, so they could obviously be voting more. But should they? &quot;Should&quot; is a value statement that I won't push here, no. We don't need their votes, if they're not voting much, since our voting engine is turning over smoothly already. And votes really must remain voluntary else they lose all meaning and damage the voting system more than they help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be nice for someone to follow up their nice words with a vote, but it won't always happen. Although we have guidance explaining what voting is for, it only exists to create the norm, not to enforce it. In the end, people vote according to whatever weird personal rubrics they use, and they might have nothing to do with the &quot;official&quot; voting reasons you've quoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, weirdo voting reasons cancel each other out, effectively making them not matter. Then, the existence of a normative reason for voting means that the people who do follow it more-or-less will make &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; votes reflect the site's voting norms you quoted. And that's all that matters&amp;mdash;the aggregate votes, not the individual votes or their individual reasons. Weirdo votes will be weirdo votes, but most votes will be votes for quality, and those are the votes that make a post rise to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system works, is working, and is not in a vote crisis. Weirdo voting happens, but the site it deliberately design in such a way that they are harmless. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU&amp;amp;feature=kp&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;So don't worry, be happy!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-06-06T16:55:38.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3426" CreationDate="2014-06-10T17:29:36.977" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a suggestion for a &quot;don't argue in comments&quot; boilerplate comment that should resolve both the &quot;huh, what is this comment here for?&quot; issue as well as partially address the content-loss issue, while being firm yet inoffensive in tone:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Reminder: comments are for clarifying content, not discussion. Please take any discussion to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;sort=active&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Role-playing Games Chat&lt;/a&gt;. All prior comments have been purged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The last sentence explains why this comment is here, preventing a &quot;huh?&quot; reaction from anyone who missed the foofaraw.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It kinda implies the fact that this information would have been preserved if it had been done in chat in the first place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The phrasing avoids any sense of scolding that might make the message harder to receive, while still very clearly including arguing (a subtype of &quot;discussion&quot;) as something inappropriate for comments. The firmness of its directions also strongly discourage further comments-for-discussion or -argument.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give credit, this is taken from Beofett♦ at Parents.SE &lt;a href=&quot;https://parenting.stackexchange.com/questions/13929/video-game-addiction#comment24740_13930&quot;&gt;[↗]&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Boilerplate text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Reminder: comments are for clarifying content, not discussion. Please take any discussion to [Role-playing Games Chat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;sort=active&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com). All prior comments have been purged.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:41:15.230" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T07:37:22.910" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3690" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-18T03:39:41.390" Score="3" ViewCount="470" Body="&lt;p&gt;There have been mentions of &amp;ldquo;rules-as-intended&amp;rdquo; (RAI) a few times on this meta, but always tangentially to other discussions, so I wanted to take this opportunity to provide a place to discuss it directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, there are two different things people generally mean when they use the term rules-as-intended:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Literal:&lt;/strong&gt; Actually what the designers of the rule were thinking when they wrote it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41089/4563&quot;&gt;Why do spontaneous casters lose out on a spell level compared to prepared casters?&lt;/a&gt; is a recent, well-written question seeking this kind of information.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not-RAW:&lt;/strong&gt; In this case, RAI is merely used as opposed to rules-as-written (RAW). That is, based on experience, fluff, verisimilitude, balance, fun, or any other considerations beyond the rules text itself. &amp;ldquo;What&amp;rsquo;s the best way to run this?&amp;rdquo; rather than &amp;ldquo;What does this rule mean?&amp;rdquo; Note that this meaning does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; match the actual meaning of the phrase &amp;ldquo;rules-as-intended.&amp;rdquo; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/38370/4563&quot;&gt;Rulings/Usage on Abrupt Jaunt&lt;/a&gt; is a recent question that (originally) used RAI in this fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I wanted to ask the community: how should these two sorts of questions be handled?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:16:06.390" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:16:06.390" Title="Rules-as-intended and designer intent" Tags="|discussion|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3690" CreationDate="2014-06-18T03:39:41.390" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Literal Case&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This reference to intent is the more clear version: the querent literally wants to know what the authors intended when a certain rule was written. Oddly enough, in my experience, the &lt;em&gt;term&lt;/em&gt; RAI is often not used here, possibly because of how common the other use is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question requesting this sort of information would typically be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;, and/or possibly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;. These sorts of questions are, I think, definitely on-topic and appropriate, and as the designer no doubt did have something in particular in mind when he or she wrote the rules, there does, in theory, exist a correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good Answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best answers asserting this sort of information (either in answer to a question specifically requesting it, or in answer to a question interested in any of a variety of perspectives) would cite specific quotations from the rules-designers. The problem with this is that the information necessary to answer the question &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; is often unavailable. Game designers speak about their products, and the rules in them, quite a bit, but there are a lot more rules that are never addressed specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, in theory, one might attempt to do a literature analysis, to try to determine authorial intent. This is difficult to do well, particularly in a concise enough fashion for SE, and RPG.SE isn’t necessarily where I’d expertise in such matters, but it can be done. It &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; requires citations: citations of meta-information such as the history of the product or the state of the community that played the game at the time the rule was written, citations of parallel cases elsewhere in the rules, etc. The overwhelming majority of attempts at this that I have seen have been fairly weak, but a few exceptions have been good enough that I feel compelled to acknowledge the possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bad Answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad answers use a request for RAI, or an invocation of RAI, as an opportunity to post their opinions without Backing It Up! as required by Good Subject, Bad Subjective. This overlaps quite a bit with the &lt;strong&gt;Bad Answers&lt;/strong&gt; section under &lt;strong&gt;Not-RAW&lt;/strong&gt;, because the answers tend to look very similar: intent is asserted, but the answer does nothing to try to establish that assertion as fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Not-RAW&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This case is both more and less problematic. On the one hand, questions requesting this kind of information are easier to answer well (after all, it’s the default for this site!), and the problems it does have can generally be fixed without ruining a good question or answer. On the other hand, the term does not match the meaning, which produces ambiguity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually posted by new users, who aren’t aware that “not-RAW” is our default. Occasionally used by established members when quoting rules-text to indicate that, despite the quote, they aren’t merely looking for analysis of the rules text (though this would, under my understanding of community expectations, not actually be necessary). The question may be good or bad regardless of the use of the RAI term; the term itself is almost meaningless in this case considering our defaults.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good Answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much like questions invoking RAI, good answers invoking RAI as not-RAW would be good answers even if they never mentioned RAI. These are answers that Back It Up!, not by asserting RAI, but through other means (play experience, textual analysis, rules lawyering, whatever perspective they are using, assuming that perspective is appropriate to the question asked). They just happen to &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; assert RAI.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only problem here is one of communication: by using “rules-as-intended” to actually mean “not-RAW,” at least in my opinion, these answers confuse matters. The term rules-as-intended implies more than just not-RAW, however often it may be used that way. Some people &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; say “rules-as-interpreted,” which would also be abbreviated RAI, but “rules-as-intended” is (at least in my experience) the much more common expansion of the abbreviation RAI.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bad Answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are answers that are fail to Back It Up!, and try hide that fact by asserting intent. For many questions, intent does not &lt;em&gt;automatically&lt;/em&gt; make for a good answer, but even if it does for a particular question, a good answer has to establish that intent if they are going to use it as the basis for Backing It Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be fair, I don’t see this kind of problem too often on RPG.SE. It’s more of a problem I associate with discussion forums, but it’s a serious (and obnoxious) enough problem there that I wanted to pre-emptively discuss it. On discussion forums, these kinds of assertions of RAI often signal the end of meaningful debate, as one side is asserting that their interpretation is what is intended, and refusing to consider any other perspective, while the other side has nothing they can actually debate because no case was actually made for intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I haven’t seen it happen with RPG.SE, I can imagine this compounded by the fact that, as an SE, we ideally &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; a “right” answer. Raw opinion doesn’t really have a place here. Good Subjective requires that we Back It Up! So there may be a temptation to try to use an invocation of “RAI” as a fake way to Back It Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Suggestions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question requesting intent needs answers that cite sources. This isn’t necessarily a special rule, as all answers must Back It Up!, but I think it is important to emphasize it in this case. Thus I suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions requesting intent should specifically require sourced quotations. Editing the question and/or commenting to remind answerers is appropriate. If the question seems to &lt;em&gt;actually want&lt;/em&gt; speculation, the question should be closed as Primarily Opinion Based.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, questions that use RAI to mean not-RAW might be confused with the above, and therefore:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit questions using RAI to mean not-RAW, such that the term RAI is no longer used. In the basic case, just expanding it to “rules-as-intended” could work, but preference should be for something less jargon-y, or nothing at all. A comment explaining to the querent that not-RAW is the default for this site is appropriate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the flip side, answers asserting &lt;em&gt;intent&lt;/em&gt; (whether in response to a question that specifically asks for it or not) must Back It Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Answers that assert intent, but do not Back It Up!, require specific fixes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the question is specifically requesting intent, the answer should be flagged as Not An Answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the question is not, and the answer otherwise Backs Up! its position well, editing the assertion out may be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is particularly true where “RAI” has been used to mean “not-RAW” – since that is the default for us, it doesn’t really need to be a part of the answer. If nothing else, expanding it to “rules-as-interpreted” eliminates any ambiguity, though the preference should be for something less jargon-y.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, an answer that is clearly &lt;em&gt;speculating&lt;/em&gt; that a given interpretation was intended can probably be left as is. E.g., “I also think this was the intent, though I cannot back that up,” doesn’t need to be removed so long as the rest of the answer is good. Being clear about what is and isn’t objective/backed up can go a long way, so long as the meat of the answer is Backed Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is merely asserting RAI as a way to avoid Backing It Up!, it should be downvoted. In particularly egregious cases, flagging as Very Low Quality may be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, &lt;strong&gt;we should default to taking “RAI” to mean rules-as-intended, and then take that literally, and hold people to Back It Up!&lt;/strong&gt; We should behave this way because we want to protect those questions &lt;em&gt;actually requesting intent&lt;/em&gt; by making it clear that if you are going to assert intent, you must Back It Up! This isn’t really different from usual, but because of the way these terms have historically been abused in  RPG-discussion communities, I think a somewhat more vigilant/pro-active approach is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T05:31:50.140" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3693" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-18T07:42:14.890" Score="3" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;Am I the only person who keeps thinking of Rep as XP?&#xA;I keep thinking (and almost typing) thinks like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;You should post that comment as an answer then you can earn some &lt;strong&gt;XP&lt;/strong&gt; from it.&quot;&#xA;or &quot;Man I have earned a lot of XP from that question&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I almost think we could rename Rep on RPG.SE to XP.&#xA;But of course we shouldn't because keeping consistency with other StackExchange sites.&#xA;(Note: I am &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; suggesting we should rename Rep to XP. Just pointing out the interesting parallels) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="1362" LastEditDate="2014-06-18T15:24:56.143" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T15:24:56.143" Title="Stackexchange Rep is XP" Tags="|discussion|reputation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3693" CreationDate="2014-06-18T13:25:32.933" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Augh! You've discovered our secret!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The resemblance isn't a coincidence. Stack Exchange employs a thing called &lt;strong&gt;gamification&lt;/strong&gt; - that's where the badges and reputation points come from. It's a nice reward, and helps motivate you to seek out stuff you can do to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're not being mind-controlled though: various studies have found that gamification is only really effective at motivating people to do stuff they would've enjoyed doing anyway, so if this site didn't exist you might be over using Giant in the Playground or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also be cool to call it XP, though &lt;em&gt;reputation&lt;/em&gt; alone has important connotations, including that it's more than just a thing you earn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T13:25:32.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3693" CreationDate="2014-06-18T14:09:29.457" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reskinning rep as XP was actually a suggestion on this site and &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/q/343/121&quot;&gt;Gaming&lt;/a&gt; around their site launches.  StackExchange never really bought into the idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:32:35.770" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T14:09:29.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3693" CreationDate="2014-06-18T15:02:48.940" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think reputation is better for the sense it carries. Losing &quot;XP&quot; for a bad contribution (answer, question) doesn't make sense. Losing reputation fits better. Your contribution to the site grants you reputation because other users judges your work for &quot;how much it contributes to the site&quot;. Even if this economy grants you achievements (badges) and new abilities (privileges) going as far as saying reputation is equivalent to XP is not accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, reputation instead of XP is also because it's more generic for non-gaming related communities like Math or Drupal Answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T15:02:48.940" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3697" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3629" CreationDate="2014-06-18T15:31:29.373" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I nominate myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the owner of &lt;a href=&quot;http://bronzeco.in&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Bronze Coin&lt;/a&gt;, a physical location for groups to meet and roleplay, I'm in a unique position to share the physical materials with several groups DMed by various people. I would make it clear to players and DMs when they start their games just exactly where the materials came from and encourage them to ask their own questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also, of course, be running a game myself. I would follow the next tag and answer any question I have the knowledge to cover, and ask any questions that came up in my own game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a long-standing record of supporting SE sites, having been a Pro Tem Moderator of the Science Fiction and Fantasy SE and been a regular user of RPG.se and others even as my life has filled up with more and more responsibilities. However, as those responsibilities grow in regards to The Bronze Coin, the more eyes the materials will be placed in front of. So if my own engagement would wane, the engagement of many others will wax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3799" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-06-19T11:25:48.857" LastActivityDate="2014-06-19T11:25:48.857" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3698" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3701" CreationDate="2014-06-18T18:20:41.683" Score="2" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I upvote someone, it doesn't cost me anything, but if I downvote it costs rep and provides a disincentive to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvoting is treated also as a personal attack, and there is a general attitude that 'not upvoting' should be the negative way to treat an answer that you believe is wrong or not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen good answers to questions posted later sitting below 7 or so crappy answers with a few votes apiece - the top answer has 40 or so votes, so clearly few believe these to be of use, but due to no downvoting at all, a good answer is buried where no-one will ever read it or upvote it into a place where it will be seen.  This contributes to the 'hurry to answer' 'first in best dressed' state of answers, and hides useful material under piles of crap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is; Why is there both a &lt;strong&gt;community&lt;/strong&gt; and a &lt;strong&gt;score-based&lt;/strong&gt; disincentive to downvote?  Shouldn't downvoting be used alongside upvoting to show which answers the community believes is useful, and order them in the reading queue?  If 'not voting' should be the default state, shouldn't there be a malus on both upvoting &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; downvoting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm asking this because I downvote answers, and with rpg.se's ability to check downvotes/upvotes, I often take a look at the ratio - and very rarely is there even a &lt;em&gt;single&lt;/em&gt; downvote.  Given that some answers receive few upvotes comparatively, or are clearly poorly written or researched, it's clear that downvoting is being preferentially avoided.  Why is that good for the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T17:52:07.753" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T17:52:07.753" Title="Why is there a malus on downvoting?" Tags="|support|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3112" CreationDate="2014-06-18T18:33:28.250" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Downvotes and Upvotes are a means to ordering the list of answers, not a reward or a punishment.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer no longer fits a question due to editing, that is exactly the same as an answer that never fit the question - it's the current state that matters, purely for ordering the list purposes.  The most useful (to that question) answer should be on top.  The least useful at the bottom.  This is so people looking for an answer to the question can get the most information in the least amount of time by reading top-&gt;bottom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community isn't venerating heroes and casting down villains - it's acting as a highly complex sort algorithm.  It's not perfect, because what the 'community' thinks is most useful is not going to apply to outliers, and there's stuff like this - cult of personality and confusing upvotes with personal approval.   But the overall goal is to simply sort the information, not to pass some sort of moral judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Additionally; If the answerer wants to preserve his answer in the face of a radically different question, he is free to re-ask the original question himself.  There is nothing wrong with this, and if his answer is good, it is what he &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; do.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T18:33:28.250" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3700" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3698" CreationDate="2014-06-18T18:44:50.667" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;First and foremost, how we vote, who we vote and whether or not we vote up or down is a personal choice and no standards are enforced. There are guidelines, but we cannot change how people vote in general by anything other than education. Ultimately, it's up to the users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, &lt;em&gt;we want you to downvote&lt;/em&gt;. In fact, please do it, and do it often. It's an important part of the system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's especially important that we downvote questions. This is reinforced by the fact that question downvotes are free. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's equally important the people upvote early, upvote often and keep the reps folowing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's also important to &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; before you downvote, especially answers. This is why answer downvotes cost reputation, people tend to become attached to their contributions to this community and it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; hurt a bit to know someone doesn't appreciate that. Adding a small penalty to the person casting the downvote helps them realize there is a cost there. The rationale here is that its a negative action, it affects users reputation in a negative way and can easily be taken personally/create an unwelcoming atmosphere. While its and &lt;em&gt;important&lt;/em&gt; part of the site's curation element, its the easiest to abuse and also the easiest for the user to feel abused by. Adding a cost adds a bit of a check on the person casting the downvote. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But like you said in your post, it's clear that both upvoting and downvoting are &lt;em&gt;really, really &lt;strong&gt;Really&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; important to this site (and really the concept). We must use the tools regularly and properly for this site to function.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We must also not take downvotes personally, sometimes people aren't going to like your answers (more often your questions). Lets be kind to the downvoters, they're doing a service to this community. That said, if you do downvote, want to reveal yourself &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; have something constructive to point out on the post, please do so. The ultimate goal of downvotes is to improve the content on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-06-18T19:06:19.587" LastActivityDate="2014-06-18T19:06:19.587" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3698" CreationDate="2014-06-18T22:03:33.663" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's behavioural engineering: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/15866/153219&quot;&gt;the stated purpose of the reputation malus for downvoting is to prevent people from downvoting for frivolous reasons (second paragraph)&lt;/a&gt;, like &quot;I don't like that game.&quot; Putting even a small cost on it means that people are much less likely to downvote for frivolous reasons, and reserve downvotes for when a post really deserves it (in their opinion, of course).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Observationally, it's effective. The issue of unpopular (or divisive) game systems or topics attracting downvotes has never come up as a problem in this community or any other meta.SE I've been active on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I can see the temptation&amp;mdash;I often find myself muttering &quot;I hate that question&quot;*, but because I don't like the topic, not because the question is bad in any way. Without a rep hit for downvotes, I'd probably get into the habit of downvoting the topics that I'm personally annoyed that people even discuss, but as it is I mutter to myself and move on. I actually think I'm better for it, too&amp;mdash;so if I look at it that way, the malus to Imaginary Internet Points is overwhelmingly compensated for by the bonus to Real Life Personal Growth points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* As I've been reminded, the malus doesn't even apply to questions, only answers. So... I guess the behavioural modification has worked exceptionally well, to make me check myself even when it doesn't apply! ;)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-06-19T22:44:29.797" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3702" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-19T22:49:26.407" Score="3" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;As per &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/15863/why-do-you-lose-reputation-for-down-voting/15866#15866&quot;&gt;the answer to this question&lt;/a&gt;, as linked by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3698/why-is-there-a-malus-on-downvoting?noredirect=1#comment9034_3698&quot;&gt;SSD in this answer&lt;/a&gt;, we know that the malus on downvoting was placed to avoid downvotes related to irrational dislike (of certain topics, answers, or people).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have seen an answer to a meta question (can't find it) that the system needs to be robust enough to power through irrational votes, as there's no real way to avoid irrational votes without exercising control over voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes can 'grey out' an answer, and a quick rush of downvotes can result in an answer being deleted or not-read by most viewers, thus destroying a good answer.  But a rush of upvotes can result in an answer being accepted, and other good answers not being read, to an almost similar extent &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, since both irrational upvoting and irrational downvoting can both harm the quality of answers;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a) why is the philosophy of relying on good votes to outweigh irrational votes not applied to downvoting&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;b) why is upvoting not limited in some fashion to discourage irrational upvoting in the same way downvoting is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;c) Why is the emotional investment in good answers (enough to downvote the bad ones at a personal cost) assumed to be higher than the emotional investment in irritation, dislike, or other irrational viewpoints that result in irrational downvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-07-03T06:58:31.257" Title="If there is a malus on downvoting to avoid irrational downvotes, why is irrational upvoting tolerated?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3703" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3698" CreationDate="2014-06-19T22:57:54.427" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Observational Bias&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is some bias in observing the number of downvotes on an answer. Generally speaking, people are likely to withdraw answers which get hit with downvotes. I would imagine this hockey-sticks very quickly, and so seeing very few answers with more than a single downvote is to be expected. It might be nice to see some statistics on downvotes to answers that have been deleted to confirm this trend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A similar effect could occur where answers with downvotes get fixed, and then the original voter removes the negative vote. This would also decrease the observation of downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-06-19T22:57:54.427" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3705" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3702" CreationDate="2014-06-19T23:31:46.030" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Downvotes can 'grey out' an answer, and a quick rush of downvotes can&#xA;  result in an answer being deleted or not-read by most viewers, thus&#xA;  destroying a good answer. But a rush of upvotes can result in an&#xA;  answer being accepted, and other good answers not being read, to an&#xA;  almost similar extent&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a difference here, in that grey-outs (and obviously deletion) exerts a &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; strong negative pressure to read the answer. If an answer is improperly upvoted, it does push down the other answers in the question while they're sorted by votes, but they remain accessible and can also be sorted by age and activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for increased pressure to accept a high-voted answer, I don't think this is as much of a problem as you make it out to be. If anything, I see more often that a very good answer isn't the accepted answer simply because it was posted after an inferior answer had been accepted by the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;a) why is the philosophy of relying on good votes to outweigh&#xA;  irrational votes not applied to downvoting&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because downvotes are poisonous, and upvotes are not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;b) why is upvoting not limited in some fashion to discourage&#xA;  irrational upvoting in the same way downvoting is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting, both up and down, is limited to 40/day and a little time-delay. Also, as described &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/12/vote-fraud-and-you/&quot;&gt;on the blog&lt;/a&gt;, Stack Exchange has some nifty algorithms behind-the-scenes that watch out for undesirable upvote patterns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;c) Why is the emotional investment in good answers (enough to downvote&#xA;  the bad ones at a personal cost) assumed to be higher than the&#xA;  emotional investment in irritation, dislike, or other irrational&#xA;  viewpoints that result in irrational downvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think this is the case. The penalties are reflective of the reality that downvotes are more powerful than upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-06-19T23:55:54.077" LastActivityDate="2014-06-19T23:55:54.077" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3706" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3702" CreationDate="2014-06-20T17:16:03.370" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simply, that our upvotes are wanted very much, and there's no effective way, even &lt;em&gt;in theory&lt;/em&gt;, to separate the rational and irrational components of our capacity to form judgements. Votes are the result of a large number of conscious and unconscious motivations, and the necessary role of almost all of those motivation in forming our capacity for judgement is recognised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not to say that &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; reasons someone might upvote are wanted in the computational mix at the end of the day, but avoiding those motives is done via different mechanisms. In particular, questions likely to generate popularity contests are not accepted. It's not that such questions are wrong or bad or wouldn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;generate a wealth of opinion that people might enjoy and profit from sifting through&lt;/a&gt;&amp;mdash;it's that we are horrible, terrible voting citizens on those questions. Similarly, there is a limit on our votes-per-day. The warning that the limit even exists only kicks in if you start voting very prolifically, so only voters at risk of voting indiscriminately get gently reined in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So upvoting &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; limited, but in a completely different way. Different mechanics for different dynamics and different system goals. Downvotes get rep maluses because it works, while what is presented to us for our voting pleasure is gated at an earlier stage in the process, because that works, and voting indiscriminately is very gently discouraged by capping votes-per-day (while also giving you a badge if you hit the limit, to keep it from causing overcorrection), because that also works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth remembering that much of the infrastructure of SE was developed incrementally, over time, based on a data-driven design philosophy. The odd corners of the system are there because a problem needed addressing and that was the effective solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-06-20T17:21:10.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3707" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-22T07:26:20.740" Score="2" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I created the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; tag. I really think that it was needed. I feel that it is different enough from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag in order to deserve a tag of its own. But I do have a little question, before I start to retag questions regarding villains with this tag. Do we need both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; tags in the same questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Villains being usually NPCs, stating that they are NPCs doesn't help much. Thus having them both makes the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag quite redundant and rather useless. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, am I alone in this? Do we need both tags for the same questions? Or maybe the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag is for more general questions regarding the entire population of NPCs or those that aren't covered by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; tag? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A small clarification in advance: There are enough questions deserving the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; tag to justify this tag addition and creation, and even after the entire retag process there will still be a big enough mass of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;-tagged questions for this tag to justly stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank in advance&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10849" LastActivityDate="2014-06-27T20:20:28.963" Title="Do we need both npc and villain tags in the same questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3708" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3707" CreationDate="2014-06-22T08:46:05.987" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are welcome to use it to tag your question, but I don't see any need for a mass retagging effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may make the tag more persuasive by filling out the tag wiki, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-06-22T11:56:25.307" LastActivityDate="2014-06-22T11:56:25.307" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3709" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3707" CreationDate="2014-06-22T11:32:58.137" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Using both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; on the same question is fine, and we definitely shouldn't remove the former just because the latter's present. The purpose of tags is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;&quot;connecting experts with questions,&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and they &quot;can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&quot; The two will both do that just fine together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag there, an entire set of NPC-focused questions won't show up in searches about NPCs. Villains are NPCs, so villain-specific advice is often useful in more generic circumstances, not least because many NPCs are more nuanced than &quot;allies/antagonists.&quot; In replacing the generic tag with the specific one, I'm not sure what benefit we could get which would outweigh the disadvantage of forcing people to figure out that many NPC-related posts aren't tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There's the issue of &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villains&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villains&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villains&lt;/a&gt; is necessary at all,&lt;/strong&gt; even if it supplements &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; instead of replacing it. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/create-tags&quot;&gt;guidance on creating new tags&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should always favor existing tags; only create new tags when you feel you can make a strong case that your question does cover a new topic that nobody else has asked about before on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've invented a new tag for questions asked by people who didn't seem to feel the need to create it themselves, and which is a subcategory of an existing tag, so a bit more justification should be given than &quot;a lot of questions could use it.&quot; Tags should be created to answer a need, and usually that need is perceived through main-site trends--I see no such need or trend, so you'll have to make that explicit in your support for the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villains&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villains&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villains&lt;/a&gt;? Shall we tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mentors&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mentors&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mentors&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/allies&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;allies&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;allies&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/romantic-interests&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;romantic-interests&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;romantic-interests&lt;/a&gt;, too? It doesn't seem like a particularly useful category of tag. It's very specific (to only a certain class of antagonist: the &lt;a href=&quot;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/villainous&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;villainous&lt;/a&gt; kind), and based on the lack of site convention, people won't even expect this tag to exist, both of which won't help people find the kind of question they want. Site usage bears me out: there's no movement among question-askers to tag for particular kinds of NPCs. If there is such a movement, I wasn't able to find it by searching for common names for types of NPCs... so such tags have failed to be useful to me. The closest I could find was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minion&lt;/a&gt;, and that's being used as a mechanical term in two specific games rather than a general category of NPC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a limit on how many tags a question can have (five), and that's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/34732/244929&quot;&gt;a deliberate site design choice&lt;/a&gt;. Overpopulating a site with overspecific tags obscures information rather than making it easier to find, because it increases the need for users to search multiple tags to see which specific tag someone thought the useful question needed, rather than using a handful of general tags which allow the person to actually know if they've searched the site exhaustively--and in the end the goal of Stack Exchange is to make good information easy to find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-06-22T12:20:10.540" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3707" CreationDate="2014-06-22T21:21:21.200" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Leave [npc] on villain questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see arguments for and against. On the one hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; on those questions is redundant with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; and we often avoid tag redundancy. On the other hand, it make sense to have everything about NPCs available under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I could see it going either way, probably it's best to leave the status quo alone and keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; on those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, when adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; to questions, best to do it only when you come across one in your normal browsing. We have about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=villain+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;60 questions that mention villains&lt;/a&gt; (though probably not all will deserve the tag), which is way too many to edit all at once because of the amount of front-page churn it would cause, never mind if the other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aquestion+%22big+bad%22&quot;&gt;10 mentioning &quot;big bad&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and four that mention &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aquestion+%22bbeg%22&quot;&gt;&quot;BBEG&quot;&lt;/a&gt; are also included in a mass edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question pops up on the front page, edit away; if you're looking for something else and find a question that's centrally about building villains, add it there; in general, adding the tag organically rather than all at once is preferable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-22T21:32:09.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3711" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-24T19:01:41.623" Score="7" ViewCount="297" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the help, valid comments are referred to thusly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Use comments to ask for more information or clarify a question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, that I get... when the question/answer isn't clear, you ask to get more information.  But there are a couple of other murkier situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, we will be referring to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities?noredirect=1#comment82293_41373&quot;&gt;the following comment&lt;/a&gt; for my questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Why not just run dungeon world? Honestly Dungeon World and D&amp;amp;D have explicitly different goals when it comes to mechanics and story. –  Joshua Aslan Smith, yesterday &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP asked what I considered a very well structured, very concise question (still wondering why it was closed).  He gave his background, which included the fact that he'd run Dungeon World.  And he wanted to take some of the mechanics over to D&amp;amp;D Next.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities?noredirect=1#comment82292_41373&quot;&gt;This comment&lt;/a&gt; made sense to me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do you &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to know the probabilities? Is this knowledge desired for designing the mechanic (though I'm not sure why, as it seems to be finished), or to be able to estimate probabilities when GMing? If the latter, why? –  SevenSidedDie, yesterday &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally didn't see why he needed to know the probabilities.  But I suppose for balancing sake, that might be why he'd need it, which is why I wouldn't have asked... just assumed that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the comment in question referred him back to the system that he was trying to take the mechanic from, with a comment that the systems were meant for different things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess what struck me about that was the fact that it wasn't informing him of anything that he hadn't already seen (i.e. he was trying to do this and he'd not seen the other system), and the answer to the comment &lt;em&gt;wouldn't clarify the question any further&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm genuinely wondering about the nature of such commentary.  I've just been personally trying to limit/eliminate my comments after a recent meta question, and this caught my attention because of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-16T15:05:11.690" Title="When is a comment not a comment?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3712" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3711" CreationDate="2014-06-24T21:18:52.547" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I, too, find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities?noredirect=1#comment82293_41373&quot;&gt;that first comment you quoted&lt;/a&gt; problematic. I don't think that the literal content of it was an issue. It seems reasonable to want to know the asker's motives for importing a mechanic into another system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue I have with the comment is that it is very aggressive. Rather than assuming the asker has legitimate reasons for mixing the systems and simply requesting they be described in the question, this comment suggests that what the asker is doing is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, and tells them to defend their decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities?noredirect=1#comment82292_41373&quot;&gt;other comment&lt;/a&gt; is better in this respect, though it does still come across a bit accusatory. Opening with &quot;Could you explain why X?&quot; I think would have been better in both cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-06-24T22:49:14.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3711" CreationDate="2014-06-24T22:36:27.240" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, these seem like answers to the question where the answerer is trying to address the fundamental issue (i.e. the question asker wants a certain type of dice mechanic, and has already assumed they must make it themselves when a different system might be a better solution). However, because they do not answer the question as stated, the answerer doesn't want to post it as an answer - it would probably be downvoted. Thus, they post it as a comment to try to get the asker to reach the &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; problem they are having.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a meta post about that situation &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. It's site policy to try to get people who are asking for help with their solution to a problem to post the original problem instead, as they may be going down the wrong track. Whether that is useful in this case is unclear - I think the question was more about dice probabilities and the background was designed to make it on-topic (a purely number-based question would be better asked elsewhere, while this type is generally acceptable here) - if it had been left off, the question might have been migrated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5746" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-06-24T22:54:33.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3711" CreationDate="2014-06-25T02:41:54.573" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see Joshua&amp;rsquo;s comment as quite distinctly appropriate, asking for clarification: the question asked for a version of D&amp;amp;D, which means Dungeon World would not have been an appropriate answer. However, based on that comment, Joshua seems to have felt that Dungeon World &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; seem to be an appropriate answer &lt;em&gt;aside&lt;/em&gt; from the request that the answer take the form of a particular edition of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, he wanted clarification on the question: based on the question&amp;rsquo;s parameters, Dungeon World seemed like a good answer to Joshua, but then the question barred it as a valid option. Without knowing &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; Dungeon World was a verboten answer, he couldn&amp;rsquo;t know how to answer: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;does he try to challenge the question, suggest Dungeon World despite the request for a version of D&amp;amp;D? If so, he&amp;rsquo;s going to need to know what those reasons are if he&amp;rsquo;s going to meaningfully challenge them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or does he accept the reasons as good reasons to exclude Dungeon World, and use those to educate an answer that suggests a particular edition of D&amp;amp;D? Again, in order to do that, he needs to know what those reasons are.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, of course, Joshua may not have been asking for himself: he may have merely been asking for the sake of the rest of the community who might consider answering, or even (or especially!) for the sake of the asker himself, who may not have heard of Dungeon World in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these are good reasons to seek clarification. Without knowing why Dungeon World wasn&amp;rsquo;t included in the list of possible answers, he couldn&amp;rsquo;t meaningfully challenge that requirement, nor could he simply accept the requirement because without those reasons, the &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; answer in his mind would have been Dungeon World and he had no information with which to choose differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-06-25T02:41:54.573" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3707" CreationDate="2014-06-27T20:09:54.390" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not all villains are NPC's!&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just 99% of them are, there are those 1% that are player-controlled!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, seriously. I would gladly adopt the Villain tag on my questions, if I happen to ask questions about creating, polishing villains or somehow related to them. It's a really good filter to search for those quetions later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Villains are a really specific and major type of NPC. While Romantic-Interests and Mentor seen also reasonable, there are tons of games that such things never appear. Villains, however, are almost always there, lurking in the shadows of their Evil Evilness. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2984/what-benefit-does-the-rules-lawyering-tag-bring-to-our-community&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; points out, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; is a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;. Subset tags are OK, they just need to be useful and in this case, I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I don't see the need to re-tag questions that already exists. If new questions arrive and the Villain tag gets a good adoption within the community, them we could consider going to the old questions and retagging them as they appear. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, it's a Good tag. Or should I say, an Evil tag? I'm... I'm cofused...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-06-27T20:20:28.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3716" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-30T19:39:30.267" Score="6" ViewCount="195" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems like we're stalled out here with any potential 5e promotion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where are we, what's going on behind the scenes? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can we as a community do to help?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the first release slated for Thursday during US West Coast Business hours, it would be helpful to know what our schedule looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-06-30T20:06:25.490" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T02:38:49.173" Title="Where are we with potential 5e promotions?" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3717" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-06-30T23:39:09.040" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;We get questions from excited users who want to get started with roleplaying games, but mostly what we do is shut them down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41670/me-and-my-girlfriend-wanna-start-playing-where-do-we-start&quot;&gt;How can I acquire free two-player D&amp;amp;D Basic/Expert adventures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41530/i-want-to-take-part&quot;&gt;I want to take part!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, we don't have an obvious FAQ.  There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&lt;/a&gt;, but no obvious FAQ that I can find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we write up a canonical “Getting Started with Roleplaying Games” answer that we can direct such users to, put it prominently at the top of our FAQ (or, barring that, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help&lt;/a&gt; page).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T01:51:12.860" Title="Add &quot;how to get started in roleplaying games to the FAQ&quot;. Also, start a FAQ?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3717" CreationDate="2014-06-30T23:50:32.510" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;SE is just a pile of questions. The frequently-asked ones are identified organically as people vote to close questions as duplicates of others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That should be sufficient for this case. If these seem like they count as &quot;Frequently Asked Questions&quot; but aren't linked as duplicates, you can flag them for moderator attention with a message about the duplication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if it wasn't redundant, we don't have any ability to create arbitrary pages like a dedicated FAQ. If we need a better way for people to discover frequently asked questions, we should submit a feature request for such a page/sidebar. (Right now the &quot;similar questions&quot; list that shows up when writing a question is the closest we have, and I believe that does draw on duplication data, but I've always thought it wasn't very effective as a &quot;FAQ interface.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-07-01T00:04:17.897" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T00:04:17.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3717" CreationDate="2014-07-01T01:51:12.860" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have that question, it's here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4457/what-is-role-playing-and-where-do-i-start&quot;&gt;What is role-playing, and where do I start?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site used to have a FAQ but the SE Overlords in their wisdom turned it into the help center. C'est la vie.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag on meta to designate things we want to put in there. We don't have loads of access to edit it though, so we keep that to the bare minimum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that should be prominent on the site, go vote 'em up and close things as duplicate on them when they come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T01:51:12.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3716" CreationDate="2014-07-01T02:38:49.173" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Users have been selected to get the books from the Nominations thread and have been emailed for their physical addresses by Grace Note/the SE team.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T02:38:49.173" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2014-07-01T04:13:29.500" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Official WOTC D&amp;amp;D Feed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Globals/Services/ArticleFeed.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Globals/Services/ArticleFeed.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 5e launching shortly I think it would greatly benefit the site and chat users to have the WOTC feed show up. I know ENWorld's coverage would overlap with this some, but I think their editorial take vs. the more informative approach of the actual Wizard's articles would be enough contrast. Plus, one can never discount the importance of primary sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T04:13:29.500" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3722" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-01T16:52:15.047" Score="1" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I answered a question in good faith.  The question was then put on hold and reworded by admins.  Within an hour of the rewording my answer was removed as &quot;not an answer&quot; (both have the same hours ago time stamp).  My answer was given in good faith and once the admins reworded the question I would have happily reworded my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To add insult to injury on the same question there is an upvoted answer that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lists the processor to the product I recommended.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has a &quot;partial answer&quot; comment from the same admin who removed mine.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the cases of editing a question what is the fair usage of removing answers that attempted to answer the prior version but don't fit the rewording?  What is a reasonable amount of time to allow the writer to restructure their answer to fit the new wording?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Requested link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41670/how-can-i-acquire-free-two-player-dd-basic-expert-adventures/41727#41727&quot;&gt;How can I acquire free two-player D&amp;amp;D Basic/Expert adventures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T23:05:47.203" Title="What is fair usage of the &quot;not an answer&quot; deletion" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3722" CreationDate="2014-07-01T22:58:00.427" Score="5" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Neither your post nor the other are answering the question posed IMHO - before or after the edit. &quot;I want free B/X starter adventures!&quot; &quot;Never mind that buy this other game.&quot; That makes the rest of this largely moot. I'm pretty sure I deleted your answer before BESW edited the post, even.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Mods&quot; did not edit the post, a high rep site user did. (Well, I did add some tags.) The whole community works together to improve questions and answers. If a question is incoherent and getting closed, consider waiting to answer - jumping to answer on a confusing question leads to this kind of thing happening. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mods have lives outside this SE, so sometimes we don't respond for hours and sometimes we don't have time to write an essay on how to fix your answer. Yours was by no means the only answer I was having to delete and I needed to go to work.  Therefore &quot;Doesn't answer the question.&quot; I think it was reasonably clear why right?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is deleted for cause, feel free and edit it to fit and flag for mod attention to be undeleted. Sorry if that costs rep in the meantime. We try to put sketchy questions on hold fast so that doesn't happen. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-07-01T23:05:47.203" LastActivityDate="2014-07-01T23:05:47.203" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3724" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2014-07-02T20:42:23.353" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dungeonsampdragons.com/bounded-advantage/?feed=rss2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.dungeonsampdragons.com/bounded-advantage/?feed=rss2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just started today with a few people here planning to contribute, focused on D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently the plan is for contributors to write content. For example livecasts from G+, 5e games from roll20, articles about the advantages of advantage, pontifications on modularity, focusing on D&amp;amp;D 5e’s release, rules, balance issues, and character optimization etc&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-07-03T13:16:50.073" LastActivityDate="2014-07-03T13:16:50.073" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3702" CreationDate="2014-07-03T06:58:31.257" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;In addition of the thins already saids, I want to point that if you irrationally upvote a bad answer, it gets more attention, so it will probably get downvoted if it deserves that. If you downvote a good answer it is less likely to be read, so its punctuation is less likely to be corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5624" LastActivityDate="2014-07-03T06:58:31.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3726" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-03T15:34:05.803" Score="4" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Morningstar RSS feed post form Wizard's RSS feed is back with a vengeance. The feed post will show up in the chat RSS feed hourly if not more often. What can we do to address the issue? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-07-04T00:16:30.170" LastActivityDate="2014-07-08T06:04:31.420" Title="Holy Glitch, Batman!" Tags="|support|chat|rss|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3727" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-03T17:51:37.080" Score="5" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;With D&amp;amp;D 5e's Basic Rules released today I think that we should make 5e the default tag that shows up and make dnd-next the synonym (its the other way around currently). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-07-04T05:49:41.827" LastActivityDate="2014-07-04T05:49:41.827" Title="Can we make dnd-5e the default and dnd-next the synonym?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3727" CreationDate="2014-07-03T18:21:46.563" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there's some value at this point in separating them. The DnD Next questions deal with playtest-specific issues in some cases, so I would be more inclined to have [dnd-5e] and [dnd-5e-playtest] with [dnd-next] linked to the latter. Probably we should also go and look at which questions are still relevant to 5e (based on the Basic Rules) and tag them as both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-07-03T18:21:46.563" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3729" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3730" CreationDate="2014-07-03T23:55:05.803" Score="0" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I'm rather new to the website, I've picked up quite a bit regarding one particular topic (the Rainbow Servant prestige class for 3.5th edition D&amp;amp;D), and I would like to write this information into a Q&amp;amp;A for other users to read. How do I do that? Just write a series of questions divided into a number of categories in the question (stuff for players regarding what is a Rainbow Servant, what do they do, how to level with them, issues regarding the class and how it affects them; stuff for Game Masters and what to do if a player wants to be a Rainbow Servant, the impact of a Rainbow Servant on the game, how to handle them regarding roleplaying, adventure hooks and so on), then post the answers to these questions in the fields below? Or should I be doing this in another way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12455" LastActivityDate="2014-07-04T00:16:32.537" Title="I want to write a Q&amp;A: how do I go about doing that?" Tags="|support|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3729" CreationDate="2014-07-04T00:06:07.790" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Find real, specific, questions and answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not a blog nor a monograph publishing service. When pondering self-answering questions (which we encourage) remember that the questions should be &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; questions that stem from problems you've seen or are having. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, find real questions about the rainbow servant, and ask them. Remember to cite the original asker if it's not a personal problem you're having. Or, if you want a lengthy discourse on the rainbow servant, start up a small blog and discuss at length. We don't discourage self-promotion in answers (so long as it's disclosed) and you can simply cite your blog when answering questions that the rainbow servant applies to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-07-04T00:16:32.537" LastActivityDate="2014-07-04T00:16:32.537" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3727" CreationDate="2014-07-04T00:06:48.737" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I concur. We should have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; as the &quot;real&quot; tag, because &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot; is what it's being called, and it's the 5th in this particular edition-numbering series. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; should be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3530/can-we-rename-dnd-next-to-dnd-next-playtest-before-its-released&quot;&gt;consensus seems to be to not have a separate tag for the playtest period rules&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-07-04T00:06:48.737" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3726" CreationDate="2014-07-04T00:17:39.790" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think I see what you mean - the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/news/morningstar&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Morningstar&lt;/a&gt; post is reappearing over and over in our chat's RSS ticker, right? It seems that in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Globals/Services/ArticleFeed.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;their RSS feed&lt;/a&gt;, the Morningstar post is getting its &lt;em&gt;pubDate&lt;/em&gt; property updated &lt;em&gt;reguarly&lt;/em&gt; to be &lt;em&gt;today.&lt;/em&gt; Heck, we're all aware it was published a couple of weeks ago, but check what it's set to at the time of this writing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;dc:creator/&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;title&amp;gt;Morningstar&amp;lt;/title&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;link&amp;gt;http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/news/morningstar&amp;lt;/link&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;description/&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;pubDate&amp;gt;Tue, 08 Jul 2014 00:00:04 PST&amp;lt;/pubDate&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;guid&amp;gt;http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/news/morningstar#93104&amp;lt;/guid&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And tomorrow, it'll say it was published tomorrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's remove their feed from the chat temporarily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can take another look at it in a few days, and if it's not screwing up any more at that point, we'll add their feed back to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-07-08T06:04:31.420" LastActivityDate="2014-07-08T06:04:31.420" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3733" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3734" CreationDate="2014-07-05T17:43:15.707" Score="5" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;When going through the review queue recently, a thought occurred: if reviewing things like late answers or close votes helps the site, why don't they give reputation?  It would make sense to me that site users who take the time to go through the review queue and look over or improve posts that need help get rewarded with reputation.  If reputation is supposed to be a measure of how much the community trusts a user, and how helpful to the community that user is, wouldn't it make sense to award rep for taking actions that help the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:39:44.083" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:39:44.083" Title="Why don't review actions give reputation?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|review|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3733" CreationDate="2014-07-05T18:09:39.313" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;They've been pretty firm about &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; providing reputation for &lt;em&gt;core&lt;/em&gt; actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those core actions are considered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answering questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only other thing you can get reputation for doing is getting confirmed suggested edits. That's it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing stuff isn't a core action, it's a purely optional, privilege based activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-05T18:09:39.313" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3733" CreationDate="2014-07-06T00:47:08.913" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;A major problem for reviews is so-called &quot;robo-reviewers&quot;, who click through queues for the review badges without &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; reviewing - they just hit approve on everything, letting all the crap through that the review queues are supposed to keep out. The SE staff introduced review audits on certain large SE sites to try and stop people from doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A totally reasonable concern is that giving people rep for reviews will make them more inclined to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But mainly it's just: rep is obtained by being helpful where people can critically examine you, and that's in public in questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-07-06T03:53:14.553" LastActivityDate="2014-07-06T03:53:14.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3736" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3737" CreationDate="2014-07-07T21:22:35.587" Score="3" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the sci-fi book I'm currently researching, I'm currently struggling to come up with a reasonable act 3-4 adversary (about 2/3 through the book). Now, ordinarily, I'd ask this on writers.SE, but they don't like questions that are basically &quot;what should I write about?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I understand RPG.SE does not mind questions related to setting and research, as long as they are not likely to be answered better in a different place. However, it's not directly related to an RPG campaign, setting, universe or ruleset, so I don't know if it's quite in order for RPG.SE. But, I can easily phrase my question so it appears to be from an RPG campaign, complete with setting, ruleset, PC party and universe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am wondering what the opinion of the RPG meta is. The origin of the question is not really related to RPGs, but it can easily be seen and phrased as a campaign setting. Would it be an acceptable question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since people asked about the setting (and because it's easier to have a quick source for chat later on): It's an alternate history/future earth. A gas giant orbiting a sunlike star in 2 years had a near exact copy of earth orbiting around it. The moon had an extremely rare ore found only in what's the current Belgium. The ore interacts with radiation of the gas giant to create a special gas that heightens the capabilities of humans living there for multiple generations. The moon mostly evolved the same up until the Gaul-Roman wars, at which point the Belgae are far too powerful for the romans. They become an allied state, help beat back the Germanic invasions and then take over the Roman Empire from within.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of the double length years and because the great libraries of Rome, Alexandria, Greece and Persia aren't destroyed by barbarians, science goes far further than in our Earth. in effect, they reached our current stage of technology in their 10th century (which on a galactic scale happens at exactly the same time our 10th century). At that point, due to a rogue black hole, The Earth-moon gets flung into a closer orbit with their star, and the gas giant was flung into the star. I'm still trying to figure out timelines and such, but at this point, their centuries begin to match up with ours, but they are still a thousand years ahead of us in tech.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was backstory. in 2050, a Belgian twenty-something thrillseeker/whitehat hacker with a homemade AI in what's basically the '50s Glass gets teleported from our Earth to the alternate earth after an experiment goes wrong on their side. The first quarter is about finding his place and setting the scene, the second quarter is about him becoming a security analyst on a explorer's spaceship. the beginning of the 3rd quarter is where i'm currently and the explorers got an assignment from the alternate Earth president. I want to figure out where to take this group and what a decent adversary would be, preferably without precursor aliens or an extragalactic threat. I'd also like for humanity to not be the center of the universe, like often happens in sci-fi.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above is setting, I'm hoping it can stay so I have something to refer chat to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11136" LastEditorUserId="11136" LastEditDate="2014-07-07T21:59:56.680" LastActivityDate="2014-07-07T21:59:56.680" Title="Are setting questions for something that isn't a game campaign on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3736" CreationDate="2014-07-07T21:39:41.693" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The nature of the question's origin is less important than how it interacts with the site. Some questions, while technically on topic because they're about RPGs, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3276/4398&quot;&gt;aren't a good fit for the Stack Exchange site&lt;/a&gt; and would be better asked in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; or on a forum site. Just framing a question as being about an RPG doesn't necessarily make it a question this site can field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, however, there's a more fundamental reason to avoid this strategy: it would be a bad idea to apply RPG advice to writing a book. Good advice about plotting RPG campaigns takes into account specific system mechanics and the inevitable independent improvisation of a game's players, while good advice about plotting a novel will rightly assume the author has total control over his protagonists and can easily shift the perspective of the narrative in ways which most RPG systems fail to even consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, brainstorming about these things with GMs and players on &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;rpg.se chat&lt;/a&gt; might be useful; it's too discussiony for the main site, but RPGers have a lot of experience with storytelling--albeit in a different form than yours--and could perhaps help spark ideas of your own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-07-07T21:39:41.693" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3738" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-08T05:50:55.050" Score="4" ViewCount="235" Body="&lt;p&gt;@Magician posted a question here : &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41868/what-are-the-stand-out-features-of-dd-5e&quot;&gt;What are the stand-out features of D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking what stands out for D&amp;amp;D 5e.  It was closed as being too opinion based, with the stated logic in the comments being that it's attracting bad answers and maybe can be reopened in a couple months.  However, the question only has 3 answers. One of which has 14 up votes, one of which has -3 votes and one of which has 1 upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can this be said to be attracting bad answers? How can 14 upvotes be a &quot;bad answer&quot;???&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is just really insulting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the logic of the comments, and based on this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140623&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;article here&lt;/a&gt;, this question can never be re-opened because the rules might change in 12 months. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like people have opinions about what experience people should have without having any experience with the system themselves! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T05:59:16.673" Title="How can an answer with 14 upvotes be called a &quot;bad answer&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3739" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3738" CreationDate="2014-07-08T12:26:39.080" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quite easily actually. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be the first to call this sort of reasoning out. Upvotes do not a good answer make (nor a good question tbh). Whether or not something is popular should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; determine whether or not it gets moderated. If the question is deserving we can let the answers lay. if we look at the answers on this question alone, my answer mostly has the advantage of having been first, your answer is actually far more detailed and probably answers the question more directly. Votes aren't the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; nor really the best judge of quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, on this particular question, I think our moderators have made a mistake. We've known about &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of what makes 5e special for close to a year now. Advantage/Disadvantage has been a part of the system since the first moments of the playtest. Bounded Accuracy has been in conceptual development for a while. The emphasis on the 3 pillars has been a design goal from day one. The only truly &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; standout feature in the basic rules is Inspiration which is covered in a couple of the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I don't think &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; of the answers are truly &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt;. One could argue that the answer at -3 was bad..though mostly it lacks sufficient details to be a good answer. Of the remaning 3 answers, one is pretty general, not calling out anything specific. Another is my answers which addresses some key areas of import (new things since 4e really, things that stand out to a reader, which I think was the intent to the question). Finally there is your answer, which is quite detailed, clearly informed by hours of play and probably the best of the bunch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with the evaluation that this question was attracting bad answers. It's attracted 4 answers, only one of which could be classified as &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; and then only if you're a bit more expansive of the definition of bad than I'm generally willing to go. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are the answers incomplete? perhaps? We'll know a lot more when the full system is released by the end of the year. However, as with the playtest, we should be able to answer these completely with the information we currently have available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the comments are asking about whether or not it's &lt;em&gt;too early&lt;/em&gt; to create definitive answers on this when we haven't had time to play this. I'd have to say as GMNoob points out, several people on this site have been actively involved in the playtest. GMNoob has been playing for close to a year, another of our members is DMing the current season of Encounters which uses the playtest and I've run several games of the Next playtest. While there are &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; changes, D&amp;amp;D Basic is not significantly different than the last playtest packet released. The core mechanics and design ideals are there, advantage/disadvantage and bounded accuracy are at the forefront of this. The only &lt;em&gt;truly new&lt;/em&gt; element in this playtest packet was the Inspiration mechanic which 2/4 of the answers here cover. While we may not have experience playing &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; the mechanic directly, I don't think it's out of line to project how it's going to work at our own tables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-07-08T12:47:33.307" LastActivityDate="2014-07-08T12:47:33.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3738" CreationDate="2014-07-08T13:24:42.677" Score="3" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;strong&gt;specifies Basic/Starter only&lt;/strong&gt; and specifically says &lt;strong&gt;not to cite the playtest as it's not relevant&lt;/strong&gt;.  Therefore no, no one has &quot;been playing this for months,&quot; that's not possible. Sure, there's only &quot;some&quot; changes, but just assuming those changes aren't significant is poor judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question isn't a simple rules question, it is about what &lt;strong&gt;kinds of playstyles&lt;/strong&gt; the game most effectively supports.  A Bad Subjective answer to this is to read the rules, guess, and post.  A Good Subjective answer to this is to have played and tried more than one or two things and have the experience and wisdom to know what playstyles it supports effectively. No one has had the opportunity to do this yet. &lt;strong&gt;The first answer that can cite &quot;I tried X and Y and Z in Basic and here's what it supports best and why&quot; is the first legal answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore since the enthusiasm for 5e is clearly trumping the sense of site voters, this has been mod-closed. The answers are not &quot;bad&quot; in the sense that they are incoherent junk from mouth-breathers, they are &quot;bad&quot; in the sense that they are not licit answers by the site's rules - it's not possible IMO at this time to have a Good Subjective answer to the question as posed. Everyone's really eager to show off their playtest and/or rules reading skills but this kind of question demands a more experiential, considered answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;highly voted&quot; answer we're talking about says out loud &quot;&lt;em&gt;From a (admitedly rapid, though complete) perusal of the Basic rules, the things that stood out to me (as someone who has only played 4e)...&lt;/em&gt;&quot;  It admits to no playing of 5e and being based on a single reading.  With no disrespect intended to @waxeagle, that is the &lt;em&gt;classic definition of a Bad Subjective answer&lt;/em&gt;. We may as well post the same question about 4e and get the answers of &quot;Well I read through it, haven't played it, but in play it will totally be like WoW.&quot; No one liked that when it happened, hence our site rules that focus on how to answer subjective questions. They're not just for when they're &quot;on our side.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those new to our site, please read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and note how it draws a line between expertise and speculation using the Back It Up! principle. All site answers to subjective questions should meet this bar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions invite sharing experiences over opinions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-07-08T13:48:59.843" LastActivityDate="2014-07-08T13:48:59.843" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3738" CreationDate="2014-07-08T18:39:06.040" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first problem is in the question. There's some misinterpretation going on with the line about not quoting playtest material, taking it to be more exclusionary than it's meant to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I read it, playtest experience is perfectly valid, so long as the thing the answer is talking about made it to the starter set or base rules PDF. But then we get...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The &quot;Good&quot; Answer Isn't That Good&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The highly rated &quot;good&quot; answer says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Bounded accuracy. Everything from recommended DCs (admittedly absent&#xA;  from the Basic rules from what I saw, we'll know more about this in&#xA;  the starter, but they were listed in the playtest as 10, 15, 20 for&#xA;  easy, medium, and hard, and I don't expect this to change)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no source cited, and it explicitly says that it's not in the base rules and that the person writing the answer doesn't know if it's in the Starter Set. The question explicitly asks for things in one of those two places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers don't ignore the question's requirements like that. If the rule is in the Starter Set then this can be changed to be a good answer, but right now it's objectively not answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-07-08T18:39:06.040" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3742" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3738" CreationDate="2014-07-09T05:59:16.673" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;How can a highly-upvoted answer be a &quot;bad&quot; answer? When a question is primarily a matter of opinion. Bad answers getting highly upvoted is &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; why we have strict rules for recommendation questions and why most other SEs ban them outright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question primarily opinion-based? Maybe, maybe not, and that's for mods and community to hash out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as to your core question: easily. Upvoted answers can easily be bad answers, and many site policies and features are designed to avoid letting such things go unchecked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T05:59:16.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3743" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-09T06:01:41.387" Score="-2" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently wrote an answer in which I wanted to callout text that wasn't a quote. I wanted it to clearly standout from the rest of the answer.  However, it seems there isn't a way to distinguish visually a quote from other called out text.  We do have a code block which could do that, but when I did that in my answer it was edited out as not being an approrpiate use of the format. (What is a code block used for in RPG.SE anyways?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be helpful if we could create a &quot;callout block&quot;, maybe using a &gt;&gt; syntax which would create a green or blue background instead of the yellow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nE3O6.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;plain text&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8lee6.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;colored boxes with emphasis&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first image has bold italics and regular text. There are two paragraphs in each picture which should stand out from the other text.  Clearly in the second picture, those boxes take no effort to spot, while in the first picture, if you are scrolling quickly you might miss it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There a number of use cases here, for a question and answer site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Giving contrary points of view within an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Calling attention to quotes vs asides&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comparing rules from different games or editions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Highlighting a &quot;short answer&quot; from the longer answer which contains quotes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, the current tools allow you to do these things, but subtle predefined colors, do it better, allowing you to use bold and italics within the text blocks as well.  You'll notice that in both images, some words are emphasized within the text itself, but the colored boxed ones are easier to spot without less mental effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-07-09T08:36:53.657" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T18:51:51.003" Title="Can we add a different colored &quot;Quote&quot; box?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3743" CreationDate="2014-07-09T07:15:40.663" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it will be useful to have multiple ways to highlight blocks of prose so code blocks remain only used for code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T07:15:40.663" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3743" CreationDate="2014-07-09T07:18:34.243" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&#xA;Too many colors will make the site look bad. Also there isn't enough need to warrant the time coding the new feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T07:18:34.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3743" CreationDate="2014-07-09T07:25:56.130" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reason we have a code block is that the codebase is inherited from Stack Overflow, and making changes like that in specific sites is usually discouraged, due to requiring developer work. Also, code blocks aren't just a generic &quot;this makes it look different&quot; block, but has the semantic meaning of &lt;em&gt;code&lt;/em&gt;, which allows different apps, browsers and such to display it as such - with syntax highlighting, monospaced fonts, no word-wrapping and so forth. &#xA;(Internally, it's a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; block, a preformatted text block).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for why we can't have an &lt;em&gt;additional&lt;/em&gt; quote block, differentiated by color - I think this is equivalent to simply having the option to choose font color and face, options that are a part of all word processors, but were &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; chosen to be disabled here. Here's a relevant Meta.SE question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/115455/having-font-color-option-in-so-question-editor&quot;&gt;Having font color option in SO question Editor&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where the voting (-20 for the question, +11/+19 for the answers against it) makes it clear that people see it as a feature that adds more noise for little gain. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think your suggestion isn't necessarily as noisy as allowing arbitrary colors, but it's still not particularly necessary - the number of times I felt the need for two different quote blocks formatted differently were... well, never, I think. We have italics for differentiating text and we have boldface for emphasis, two clear-cut but not too jarring text decorations, and I think they work fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T07:25:56.130" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3748" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3750" CreationDate="2014-07-09T16:28:16.467" Score="8" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://storium.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Storium&lt;/a&gt; is a recently funded &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/stlhood/storium-the-online-storytelling-game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Kickstarter&lt;/a&gt; now in beta.  I'll quote text from their site to illustrate its function:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Storium is a web-based online game that you play with friends. It&#xA;  works by turning writing into a multiplayer game. With just your&#xA;  computer, tablet, or smartphone, you can choose from a library of&#xA;  imaginary worlds to play in, or build your own. You create your&#xA;  story’s characters and decide what happens to them. You can tell any&#xA;  kind of story with Storium. The only limit is your imagination.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Storium uses familiar game concepts inspired by card games,&#xA;  role-playing games, video games, and more. In each Storium game, one&#xA;  player is the narrator, and everyone else takes on the role of a&#xA;  character in the story. The narrator creates dramatic challenges for&#xA;  the other players to overcome. In doing so, they move the story&#xA;  forward in a new direction. Everyone gets their turn at telling the&#xA;  story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we PBeM/PbP and Roll20 questions are on topic, I figured to get a ruling out of the way whether questions about Storium (or the worlds in Storium) are on-topic, as I figure it will come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T16:45:44.917" Title="Are questions about Storium on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3749" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3743" CreationDate="2014-07-09T16:36:19.047" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My other answer tried to address why this probably isn't a good enough feature to warrant the relevant dev work, but I think this answer is more practical and actionable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether it's a good or bad idea, &lt;strong&gt;RPG Meta isn't the right place for this feature suggestion&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm almost certain that changes to the Markdown parser will require network-wide changes, and will apply to other Stack Exchange sites, as well as RPG.SE. As such, it's entirely irrelevant what the conclusion of us here on RPG Meta is, this is a network-wide feature request, and as such, should be suggested in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta.StackExchange&lt;/a&gt;. This will allow users from all over the network to weigh in, and possibly convince the SE team that it's worth putting dev hours to add.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T18:51:51.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3748" CreationDate="2014-07-09T16:45:23.953" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Definitely!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have several &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storium&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storium&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storium&lt;/a&gt; questions, and none of them have had a thought towards closure. It's an RPG site and system that lines up with table top/PbP RPGs very well. It's the same audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chat regulars even have a few games going on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T16:45:23.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3751" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3748" CreationDate="2014-07-09T16:45:44.917" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While Storium doesn't bill itself as a traditional &quot;&lt;strong&gt;RPG&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; in my experience as a Storium user/player its similarities to existing systems like Fate make it a good fit for our site. The experience of playing Storium is very much one of playing an RPG. We've already had a few &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storium&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storium&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storium&lt;/a&gt; questions which I believe worked well for our format and seem to be well received enough that I believe Storium should be allowed on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T16:45:44.917" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3743" CreationDate="2014-07-09T18:15:51.137" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not believe that adding such a feature would be to the benefit of Stack Exchange in general, and I have some reasons why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Stack Exchange Philosophy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of Stack Exchange is to create a knowledgebase of questions and answers that are easy for any old person to find and use to get over a problem they are having. Jeff Atwood, a founder, talks about how they learned that allowing freeform discussion (which had been the norm on the major venue before SEs, forums) was inimical to that purpose, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.codinghorror.com/civilized-discourse-construction-kit/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;on his blog&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At Stack Exchange, one of the tricky things we learned about Q&amp;amp;A is that if your goal is to have an excellent signal to noise ratio, you must suppress discussion. Stack Exchange only supports the absolute minimum amount of discussion necessary to produce great questions and great answers. That's why answers get constantly re-ordered by votes, that's why comments have limited formatting and length and only a few display, and so forth. Almost every design decision we made was informed by our desire to push discussion down, to inhibit it in every way we could. Spare us the long-winded diatribe, just answer the damn question already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppressing discussion is one way in which SE attempts to separate signal from noise. But it's not the only way. The formatting options for posts on SE are very limited compared to other platforms around the web. This is done on purpose to limit the freedom of the community in composing responses. The marginal benefits of the proper use of each formatting feature decrease rapidly, whereas the potential for abuse and confusion increase rapidly (see: MySpace). For this reason, adding extra formatting flavor is rarely the best move for Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Markdown Philosophy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Separate from that, we have Markdown itself, which is the formatting method that is used on Stack Exchange. John Gruber &lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#philosophy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;describes the driver of Markdown's syntax as the emulation of plaintext&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A Markdown-formatted document should be publishable as-is, as plain text, without looking like it’s been marked up with tags or formatting instructions. . . . the single biggest source of inspiration for Markdown’s syntax is the format of plain text email.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The proposed formatting does not meet this standard. Plaintext has no color, and there is not an intuitive mapping to it. It's significantly to Stack Exchange's benefit to deviate from the Markdown &quot;standard&quot; as little as possible, so this change is not likely to be made from our side.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-07-09T18:15:51.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3753" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="3755" CreationDate="2014-07-10T03:15:04.830" Score="3" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question was mostly prompted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/42193/12011&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find the question as originally asked either extremely broad (whole book broad) or totally unclear. Since it is not clear what is being asked, how can we say that it is a duplicate of another question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unclear&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me point out a couple things to reinforce my notion that the linked question is unclear, although the question in question is just a specific example. My question still stands whether this particular example seems clear to you or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One answer was posted before the question was posted. It talks about quick-start rules to help the asker create a character and gain familiarity with mechanics. This is completely different than the answers to the linked duplicate, which describe the basic concept of role-playing from a much higher level than the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker specifically stated that they have been watching streams of DnD games, which indicates they are already familiar with the information presented in the answers to the linked duplicate. They even ask about creating characters, whereas the duplicate's answers inform the asker that there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question the asker wants to know &quot;how to make characters etc&quot;. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;etc&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. What is et cetera in this context? What do they want to know? I certainly can't read minds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Marking as a Duplicate is Confusing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, so regardless of whether you agree about that question being clear or not, let's assume we have an unclear question. Why does that matter?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was confused by this being marked as a duplicate, and I've been using this site pretty heavily for months. How is someone asking their first question supposed to interpret this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The provided reason for the question being closed is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowhere in there does it suggest editing the question or making it more clear. It doesn't say that the question &quot;appears to be a duplicate&quot;. It says that it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, we have a different option specifically for this situation. We mark the question as &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot;, and the user is told:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. The way the question is currenty written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which actually tells them what to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked BESW about this in the comments, and the response was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;result would be the same: a question on hold until edited for clarity so it can get useful answers. The reason for a close/hold does not influence the question's ability to get voted back open later&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps it doesn't influence the questions ability to be repoened on the mods' end, but it certainly affects the users likelihood of editing for clarity, seeing as how there's no indication that that's what they're being asked to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be fair, BESW did leave a comment suggesting editing for clarity at the time that the question was closed. Also to be fair, the big boxes on the screen saying it is closed as a duplicate are much larger and more official looking than this comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Summary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I don't think we can possibly know what the asker was actually asking, and I think that closing it like this makes it unlikely that we ever will. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, assuming that users will be aware of the intricacies of the close/on hold system -- which I find incredibly counterintuitive -- is not an excuse for doing something that is functionally equivalent but appears quite different to the user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, therefore, we should use the tools and procedures we already have in place to handle such a question in the most effective manner possible so that we can not only maintain the quality of RPGSE, but - more importantly - actually help the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-07-10T21:40:32.317" Title="Is it Optimal to Mark a Question as Duplicate if it's Unclear What's Being Asked?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3754" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3753" CreationDate="2014-07-10T03:27:17.160" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think it was unclear.  It was the standard &quot;noob wants to know how to get started with RPGs&quot; and that's why we have that other question. If that doesn't answer their question, they can certainly use their words and say so, clarify their question, etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-07-10T03:27:17.160" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="3755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3753" CreationDate="2014-07-10T03:40:05.437" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The situation was not ideal, but it was certainly within the bounds of &quot;appropriate.&quot; In a case like this I don't think there's any appreciable difference between asking a new question and editing the old one, so while your objection that the close reason text is confusing is valid, it doesn't really change the final outcome: if the querent asks a new question instead of editing the existing one... oh, well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides--it's hard to imagine a more obvious indicator that your question is unclear than that it's been closed as a duplicate of a dissimilar question. Roundabout, yes, certainly not ideal, but I'm not sure you're giving the average querent enough credit in the brains or motive department.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I think the &quot;original&quot; question is really very much like the new querent's: since the new querent is confusing D&amp;amp;D, Pathfinder, and RPGs, it's unlikely that answers about Pathfinder character creation will be helpful yet. Is that jumping the gun and reading too much into the situation? Probably. I waffled about which close reason to vote for and finally decided on the one which would point the querent most obviously toward a useful post which would help them re-define their question. Apparently at least one other person agreed with me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[NB: Questions get closed when they reach 5 close votes--or a mod or gold badge user votes to close them--regardless of whether all the votes are for the same reason. The majority reason gets the billing and all voters are credited with having voted that way.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there's the other issue, which I think you might be mixing together with the close reason: you're also objecting to the question being closed &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;. Closing the question is &lt;strong&gt;absolutely&lt;/strong&gt; the right thing to do; it sends a clear message that something needs to be changed, while (perhaps more importantly) protecting the question from getting bad answers which waste everyone's time and clutter up the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Standard procedure is to ask for clarification &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; simultaneously close the question until it's clarified, which is exactly what happened here. So while the specific text box for the specific close reason could be modified for better communication, that's the only problem I'm seeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might want to start a meta post suggesting a better text block for the close-as-dupe box. (And I agree, the close/hold mechanic is a little esoteric, being built as it is piecemeal over years trying to adapt without being ripped out from the roots and redesigned from scratch. A meta.se post about that might be in order; I'm sure there already are several to build on.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-07-10T03:51:05.743" LastActivityDate="2014-07-10T03:51:05.743" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4753" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-10T21:18:52.810" Score="17" ViewCount="1189" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;All Raffles Now Completed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks to everyone who participated! &lt;strong&gt;466 questions were asked by 172 users across the months that this contest ran&lt;/strong&gt;. Thanks also go to those who answered all of these questions - each and every question asked has received an answer, very many of which were highly in-depth. I'd say our goal of building a knowledge base for the new system has been a rousing success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post will eventually be updated with various statistics about participation in the event as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As has been hinted at across many posts in Meta, 5th Edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons is coming out soon! To lead us into this, we've sent 3 advance copies to 3 users selected amongst those voted by your community. So let us begin by congratulating the winners - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3799/dampes8n&quot;&gt;DampeS8N&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3529/joshua-aslan-smith&quot;&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3548/oblivious-sage&quot;&gt;Oblivious Sage&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The naming is not just for congratulations, but also to give y'all a heads up. As we're approaching the official release, I have asked these 3 to help begin populating the site with questions about 5th edition. If there's one thing that's better than having questions on our site at the start of the launch, it's having good questions before anyone else gets their hands on it. That way, those who buy it on release, they can already find us as a place to get answers to their questions, and may already find them without needing to ask. So keep aware that these three folks have these advance copies and will be asking questions early.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which brings us to our contest. &lt;strong&gt;We will be raffling out copies of the 3 core rulebooks as each one is released&lt;/strong&gt;. It's a simple process - ask good questions that get upvoted about 5th edition, and you'll earn one chance at winning one of the books. The more you ask, the more chances you'll have. There will be 4 separate raffles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From the release of the starter box to the release of the Player's Handbook, users will earn a chance to win a copy of the PHB when it comes out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From the release of the PHB until the release of the Monster Manual, users will earn a chance to win a copy of the MM when it comes out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From the release of the MM until the release of the Dungeon Master's Guide, users will earn a chance to win a copy of the DMG when it comes out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A bonus raffle will be held for our 3 folks who are helping pre-populate our site with wonderful content. For the upvoted questions they ask leading up to the release of the starter box, they will earn chances to win a copy of the Player's Handbook as well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I look forward to celebrating our ability to take a unique part in welcoming the new edition of D&amp;amp;D to the world at large. Let's start a grand new adventure here, together!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-10T19:45:15.557" Title="RPG Stack Exchange D&amp;D 5th Edition Contest - Dungeon Master's Guide Edition" Tags="|discussion|site-promotion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4754" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4759" CreationDate="2014-07-15T03:55:54.750" Score="17" ViewCount="9094" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have to say, I am not a fan of most of our 5e questions that are basically along the lines of &quot;sum up the rules for me.&quot; Many don't appear to even be real questions, just information seeding.  I understand we want 5e to be a success for the site but should we really encourage questions like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44400/how-do-wizard-cleric-spellcasting-work&quot;&gt;How does wizard &amp;amp; cleric spell preparation and casting work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44255/what-does-an-average-monster-in-the-starter-set-look-like&quot;&gt;What does an average monster in the Starter Set look like?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41862/what-are-the-major-differences-between-the-final-playtest-package-and-dd-5e-bas&quot;&gt;What are the major differences between the final playtest package and D&amp;amp;D 5e Basic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41890/what-terms-are-used-in-dd-5e-basic-that-have-different-meanings-than-the-same-t&quot;&gt;When teaching D&amp;amp;D 5e basic to players of previous editions, which terms have new meanings that will likely lead to confusion?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe all these questions should be closed, as they are basically just saying &quot;Hey, read and regurgitate the Basic set to me.&quot; They're not real questions solving an actual problem. Some are self-answered, which while &quot;not technically bad on SE&quot; is, in this case, IMO just creating 5e content to create 5e content. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-27T23:13:15.097" Title="Why Are Our 5e Questions Terrible?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T04:36:26.327" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I consider what you've said a pretty fair assessment of some of our 5e questions, and that &lt;em&gt;&quot;please read the rules to me&quot;&lt;/em&gt; is a pretty fair description of some of them. As we receive D&amp;amp;D 5e questions, we should keep an eye out for those and close them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think some of us may have noticed things that could be new and/or confusing, and in our excitement over 5e or creating new 5e questions, we've forgotten those questions have to actually contain &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;problems.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; Real, actual problems, that someone actually had, whether it was someone at our table or ourselves at some point in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problems would be solved by just reading the rules, that's the kind of situation where in the past, we've told the asker: &quot;Hey, maybe you shouldn't be here yet. You should read the books first, and come to us when you've at least got the basics down pat.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The wizard/cleric spellcasting question, if genuine, would be asked to explain exactly what's confusing the user. (It's also problematic that the answer largely relies on the rules to provide its explanation, which wouldn't be helpful if the rules were actually confusing.) The terms question has been a puzzle for me, but may be better off asked as individual instances of &quot;I find {specific concept} confusing because {reasons}. What's with this?&quot;, which is an actual problem with some specific correct answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there's one exception to the ones you've listed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44255/what-does-an-average-monster-in-the-starter-set-look-like&quot;&gt;What does an average monster in the Starter Set look like?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a &quot;read the rules to me&quot; question. It wants a statistical analysis of numbers of the Starter Set's contents. Valid question, if the premise is valid: in D&amp;amp;D 4e, &quot;average monster stats per monster level&quot; was meaningful, if you were comparing per role. (If you weren't, it wasn't meaningful.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 5e, hopefully the asker and answerers can manage this so the premise is actually something worth worrying about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41862/what-are-the-major-differences-between-the-final-playtest-package-and-dd-5e-bas&quot;&gt;playtest vs release&lt;/a&gt; question you asked may be similar to our D&amp;amp;D 3.5e vs D&amp;amp;D 4e Pathfinder trifecta (and other version comparisons of that nature).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T05:07:33.500" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T08:01:41.600" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;All the questions you have listed, are real actual questions, that I have needed answered. I'm sorry that my confusion is not your confusion or that you don't believe me, but they are real actual questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latest example, that about how spell casting works, took me more than a few hours on the forums talking to people to grasp the difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a new version of a game, with many same or similar elements to previous editions of the game.  Not everyone is able to so easily grasp why something is different, and or they might read the rules and miss a subtle difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For most of my questions that I self answered, I only did so after not being able to get good answers from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A very important point here is that no D&amp;amp;D manual will ever tell you How it's rules are different from the rules previously. They don't spell that out, and it's exactly something that only people with expertise in both/multiple game systems can point out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-07-15T11:21:28.363" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T11:21:28.363" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T11:22:08.497" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Of your four listed questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The first answered questions I had about how the system works and clarified it pretty well, so I consider it a useful question that solves a problem. Going by the votes, I'm probably not alone.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The second was covered by Jonathen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The third is extremely useful to anybody who played the playtest and wants to get up to speed on what's changed without reading the new rules and trying to play Where's Waldo by spotting the differences. It probably won't be useful at all next year (as the playtest won't really be a comparison point once the final release has been out for a while), but it clearly serves a purpose right now. It could be a useful place for a community wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The last one is... yeah, that is too broad. The summary answer is good though, if only for the &quot;don't assume any terms mean the same thing as they did before&quot; advice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, I don't see the problem here. I do see people trying to seed the site with questions and answers so that other people with questions can find those answers (and us) in the game's early days. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4753/rpg-stack-exchange-dd-5th-edition-contest-details&quot;&gt;As I recall, that was a stated goal of giving out free copies to certain users and running a contest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We really shouldn't be asking people to do something and then complaining when they go out and do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It's also not like &quot;read the rules to me&quot; questions are exactly unheard of. An awful lot of the 3.5/Pathfinder questions amount to reading the rules and explaining them. That the rules are better written this time doesn't suddenly invalidate those types of questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T11:22:08.497" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4758" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T12:56:44.100" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;First and foremost, 2 of the questions on your list &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; terrible, and the other two are only marginally bad. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think there's probably a relatively easy answer here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most of us haven't played a real 5e game or two yet. (sure, many of us have run playtest sessions, and that's good, but probably most of the questions that came up during those have been answered.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best questions come from actual play experience and seeing what becomes a problem in your games. That's not to say we can't come up with good questions from simply reading the rules. I've done this with several systems, and lots of questions come up from &lt;em&gt;preparing&lt;/em&gt; to play a game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions aren't as good as questions generated from actual play, but they aren't bad or illegitimate questions. Question quality will pick up a great deal as more of us get the starter set (and the PHB, MM and DMG) and start hosting games on a regular basis. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that said, we need to support &lt;em&gt;all stages&lt;/em&gt; of play. We need to be able to ask and answer conceptual questions, questions about switching editions, character creation questions, and questions about preparing as a DM. Most of the questions you highlighted fall into these categories and as such are legit questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address the questions highlighted specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a platform for a good answer. Yeah, not the best question, but it highlights a clear break in spell casting rules from previous editions of D&amp;amp;D. It's definitely worth a call out. As with more self ask/answers, it needs some work on the question front, but a marginal improvement would make this a great site question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is my question, and it's been addressed in a few places. But it's a basic char-op starter question. What does the average monster look like at a given CR level so you can have a legit comparison to run the maths. It might &lt;em&gt;seem&lt;/em&gt; silly, but it's analytical, answerable, and solves a real world problem (what number do I use for AC when I do average damage calculations).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a pretty basic edition transition question, we've got a few dozen of them. What are the major differences between edition X and Y. It's not the best style of question, but it's a type of question (and questioner) we should support. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is the most marginal question on the list. It's pretty iffy really, but it falls into the same category of edition changes, what are the unexpected pitfalls of starting the new edition with knowledge of past editions type question. I don't love this particular one, but this style is squarely in bounds. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. Yeah we're champing at the bit a little, maybe a touch overexcited about the new edition, but really, nothing bad or worrying is going on here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T12:56:44.100" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T17:35:18.013" Score="26" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Self-answering is hard to do well&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's hard to write a good question when you're planning on self-answering, and a few of our 5e questions suffer from this. It's even harder to write a good answer to such a question. If the problem as-written boils down to &quot;X in 5e is different from [other edition], help help&quot;, whatever other virtues the question might have are going to be dragged down by the lack of specifics presented, and the resulting answers are going to suffer the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general problem with self-answered questions is that often the problem is not well-explained, because it doesn't need to be: the answerer can read your mind, because you're the same person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Solution:&lt;/strong&gt; Unless one is confident in their ability to write a rockin' question even when self-answering, it may be useful to pause a moment: consider &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; self-answering for a day or two. Having to explain the problem clearly to &lt;em&gt;others&lt;/em&gt; makes it easier to avoid subconsciously taking shortcuts while writing the question. To gain that effect, strongly consider writing the question to the community, and letting them have a crack at it first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Do research to avoid asking about the &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; low-hanging fruit&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our question about statistics of the monster math is a valid question but suffers a cardinal question-asking sin: it doesn't just lack evidence of research, but it can only exist as a question &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of lack of research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Solution:&lt;/strong&gt; We're all excited about 5e, but it's doubly important to take a few moments to consider what research can be done toward solving the problem before asking. It might mean the question becomes moot, but if the question remains after research, it's going to be a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; question. And those are what we want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Broad questions are still broad&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a new edition is out, lots of questions we have are pretty broad due to the nature of how we, as humans, approach a new subject: in a top-down manner, engaging first with the high-level overview and then moving downwards into the nitty-gritty details. Right now there will be the temptation to transform our current questions of engagement into posted Stack questions. But many of those are by their nature fairly broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This is not terrible or wrong.&lt;/em&gt; But it does mean that taking some extra care to consider the question while writing it can make a large difference in quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Solution:&lt;/strong&gt; When trying to come to grips with a large idea, like &quot;how does X work&quot; or &quot;what is different about Y&quot;, try to be as specific about &lt;em&gt;your problem&lt;/em&gt; as possible. Remember than being general to help the most people is not actually helpful. Instead, ask yourself some questions: Why do I need to know this? What does knowing solve for me? Can I ask for help solving that instead?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a problem-centric question doesn't result from this introspection, it's possible that the question simply is too broad. In those cases, the solution is to either not post it, or to post it knowing that it will likely get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For a contentious example of broad question, we have the &quot;What terms have new meanings&quot; question. I think this can be significantly improved by moving away from the broad edition-focused question as written, to a more problem-focused question that's implied, using those questions and some hypothetical (but I think, not too inaccurate) answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why do I need to know this?&lt;/strong&gt; Because lots of my players are going to assume they know what terms mean.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What does knowing solve for me?&lt;/strong&gt; I can focus on the terms that contradict their assumptions when teaching the game to my players.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can I ask for help solving that instead?&lt;/strong&gt; Yeah, actually: I could ask a question like &quot;When teaching 5e to existing D&amp;amp;D players, what invalid assumptions can I expect them to make?&quot; or something like that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And if rewriting it as a problem-centric question simply doesn't work somehow, it's probably just too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T17:35:18.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4760" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-15T18:32:00.143" Score="1" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question I am asking about: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41773/pathfinder-magic-item-crafter-build-guide&quot;&gt;Pathfinder Magic Item Crafter Build Guide&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally I would have just voted to close the question and moved on, but since there is an open bounty on the question I cannot vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question covers a lot of stuff: skills, feats, traits, races and classes (possibly more just not currently address by question body and answers).  The only answer covers over 6 full screen lengths for my desktop pc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The vote to close description for 'too broad' says the following (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or &lt;strong&gt;good answers would be&#xA;  too long for this format&lt;/strong&gt;. Please add details to narrow the answer set&#xA;  or to &lt;strong&gt;isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this type of question/answer not too broad for our site? If it does not fall under the 'answer are too long for our format' umbrella, how long of and answer do we need to have that condition trigger?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3358" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-08-17T19:52:48.077" Title="Is this question too broad for this stackexchange site?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4761" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4760" CreationDate="2014-07-15T19:03:28.380" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be a bit broad. And that answer sure is long, but let's look at what the question is actually asking for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a guide anywhere that I may have missed outlining recommended traits, feats and such for a magic item crafter in Pathfinder?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's looking for a resource, not a full guide. The fact that the answerer chose to &lt;em&gt;provide the guide&lt;/em&gt; rather than simply point the OP at a link or two to a guide simply means he's gone the extra mile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the breadth of the question is not the prompt for the answer, but the answerer's own initiative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T19:03:28.380" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4762" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4763" CreationDate="2014-07-15T19:27:04.653" Score="0" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;So with the recent publishing of D&amp;amp;D Basic, the raffle to encourage users to post questions and create a knowledge base for the game, we had some questions using the format &quot;I don't understand how X work&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Their quality is questioned but users seem to upvote them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44400/how-does-wizard-cleric-spell-preperation-work&quot;&gt;How does wizard &amp;amp; cleric spell preperation work?&lt;/a&gt; for instance has 14 upvotes. I understand upvotes are not a unit to measure the quality of a question but my understanding was that we want to create questions for the upcoming release of the 5th edition and upvotes are a unit of appreciation. If a question is appreciated, I think there's a reason behind it. If the quality is lacking because of the nature of the question, then should we clarify that rules clarification are out of line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user4000" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T19:34:54.410" Title="Are &quot;I don't understand how X work&quot; questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4763" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4762" CreationDate="2014-07-15T19:34:54.410" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If this were the case, probably 50% of our 4e questions would be gone. And a goodly chunk of our 3.PF questions (and probably a solid chunk of the rest). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're here to help people solve their problems. If one of those problems is reading comprehension, then so be it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The objection to that question was not that it was a &quot;help me understand X&quot; question, it was that it was perceived as lacking specificity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it's been edited and reopened, it's much more specific, it's now directly addressing it's point, explaining the differences between spell preparation and casting between 3.PF and 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, explain concept X to me is not an off topic question, provided X is sufficiently narrow. Again, the objection isn't &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; to the question form, just the lack of specificity (and a perceived basicness).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules clarifications are by no means off topic. They are squarely on topic. However, we should make sure our questions on 5e are answerable and sufficiently narrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T19:34:54.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-15T20:45:39.010" Score="-8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is not our fault.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every edition has these kind of questions, but they have more of the good kind, so the proportions are better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are 2.5 types of good questions in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1 How can I make an efficient character? (Optimization)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  2 Does this work? (Rules interpretation)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  1.5 How can I achieve this effect? (The mix of 1 and 2)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are in fact only a few of these kind of questions, but the reason can be found at Wizards of the Coast, and not on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first type is rare, as there are no options to optimize. No Feats, no Paragon Paths, no Themes, no Epic Destinies, no Magic items.*   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second type is rare, because the rules are better written than in 4e. Much less confusion.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;This is a good thing, we should be happy we have few of this kind. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third type is also rare, because the rules are clear and the options are few.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Ok, there are magic items, but you have no control over them as a player.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="9552" LastEditDate="2014-07-16T13:50:35.737" LastActivityDate="2014-07-16T13:50:35.737" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4765" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-15T21:19:23.517" Score="20" ViewCount="671" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/503/stack-exchange-rpg-is-a-collection-of-expert-knowledge&quot;&gt;this question here&lt;/a&gt; about what RPG.SE is, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3098/932&quot;&gt;this answer here&lt;/a&gt; about answering FATE questions, specify &amp;quot;[this site] is a collection of expert knowledge&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Expert questions to be answered by Experts&amp;quot;. On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;the help page&lt;/a&gt; states&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anybody can ask a question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anybody can answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/932&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; has several newbie-friendly nuggets of wisdom. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3505/how-do-we-handle-it-when-the-askers-problem-is-just-that-theyre-confused&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; is encouraging, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question about FATE, one bit of an answer stated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like people are so bogged down with non-expert fate questions&#xA;that the first instinct is to give an answer suited for a beginner in&#xA;the system and not an expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This points out that there are non-experts asking questions, that they are many (how are they bogging down people otherwise?), and that they aren't really welcome (at least, not by the answerer): they ask the &amp;quot;wrong&amp;quot; sort of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So which is it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask because I'm not an expert on D&amp;amp;D 4E, 2E, Numenera or Fiasco. I just play and GM them. I have very limited time and chances to play, often having dry spells of months between 4-hour sessions. I enjoy rereading my corebooks and splats, but without actual playtime, my questions and answers will never actually be of &amp;quot;expert level&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The help page is inclusive, and makes me feel I can actually ask questions here. The first answers and comments cited don't, they make me feel that I can at best lurk and check from time to time if something interesting shows up. In the end, I feel I'm almost restating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, though not exactly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="932" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:33:25.983" Title="Is this site for experts, or not?" Tags="|discussion|faq|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="4766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4765" CreationDate="2014-07-15T22:24:34.723" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;(This answer is not about the linked post(s), it is in general)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;expert&quot; terminology is from an earlier rev of Stack Exchange, where Stack Overflow and the other sites tended to talk about &quot;expert&quot; users, and have since moved to terminology like &quot;professional and enthusiast&quot; or similar.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So no, you don't have to be an expert to use the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Asking&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To &lt;em&gt;ask&lt;/em&gt; a question, you should however have tried to get understanding on your own. &quot;I don't want to read the rulebook, read it to me&quot; is unacceptable and off topic. Look at the downvote tooltip, it says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a couple placeholder questions to help orient the &quot;I likey the RPGs where do I start&quot; folks that show up, but we don't want a huge amount of that on the site. Read the book, watch a YouTube video, then bother other people to give you more handholding. Doing it prior to that is frankly rude and answering them is just feeding their general personality problem of lack of ability to learn.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/257868/can-we-please-have-the-lacks-minimal-understanding-close-reason-back&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/257868/can-we-please-have-the-lacks-minimal-understanding-close-reason-back&lt;/a&gt; for the SO discussion, &quot;close as Unclear&quot; is the consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answering&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; a question, basically, you should be knowledgable enough to be qualified to answer it.  If you haven't read that game, you're not qualified to answer a rules question.  If it's a subjective question, if you haven't played that game and done that thing, you're not qualified. But you don't have to be a game designer or have played for 20 years. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should also generally have paid a day worth of attention to how RPG.SE works and have perused the Tour before you ask or answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Expert&quot; means different things to different people. I think &quot;basically know what you're doing&quot; is more the bar. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-17T10:37:54.603" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T22:24:34.723" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4767" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4765" CreationDate="2014-07-15T22:34:01.450" Score="47" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If you play RPGs, you're an expert and welcome.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line &quot;Asking Expert questions, getting expert answers&quot; has a particular history dating to when it was just the original three sites. &quot;Expert questions&quot; was important because they didn't want to teach askers the basics of how to program. Being an expert meant that you already knew how to program and what programming meant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The parallel here isn't perfect, so those words aren't so meaningful here. In practice we're OK fielding a question that is asking to be taught what RPGs are, so long as we don't get too many of them. We're not interested in teaching every comer how to RPG, so mostly we end up closing them as unclear or duplicates of the two or three existing questions about getting started. But we have them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what does that say about where we draw the line between expert and non-expert?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All it takes to be an expert is actual experience playing RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're new to RPGs, all it takes to be accepted is knowing enough to be able to ask a coherent question about how to learn more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the bar for &quot;expert&quot; here is &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; low. Which makes sense, because it's such a niche hobby that if you even know it &lt;em&gt;exists&lt;/em&gt; enough to ask a meaningful question, you probably actually know quite a bit of the basics already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T22:34:01.450" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4768" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4765" CreationDate="2014-07-15T23:42:05.987" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, and No. As has been stated, the &quot;expert&quot; term came from the past and isn't super relevant today. Generally speaking, the criteria for if you belong here are fairly simple:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do you play or want to play RPGs, or games that fall under our umbrella (like LARPs)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do you have questions about one or more of those games that you can't answer by reading that section of the rules? (If you have read it and the rules are confusing you, that qualifies.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do you have answers to other people's questions about one or more of those games?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you answer yes to #1, then you belong here. If you answer yes to #2, ask away! If you answer yes to #3, answer away!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of our questions are pretty beginner oriented, as you noticed. That applies to FATE, but also to systems like D&amp;amp;D. We get lots of 3.5 and Pathfinder questions that don't require what I'd call &quot;expert&quot; knowledge to answer, but that anybody who has played for a while can answer. Then we get harder questions that do require a lot of experience and research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions don't really even have &quot;experts&quot;. What does an expert GM/DM/Storyteller/Whatever look like? I have no idea. Questions about how to run a game are wide open to anybody with experience doing it. If you've done it, you're probably just as much of an &quot;expert&quot; on the subject as I am.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-07-15T23:42:05.987" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4769" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-17T03:32:55.870" Score="5" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;My Players often come to me and ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;How does this ability work?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;This example contradicts the text, which is correct?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;How do these abilities interact?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally I have a fairly solid response to them,&#xA;and generally these are good questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs can be notorious about being unclear -- or clear in places you don't need clarity and unclear when you do.&#xA;This is not surprising every group is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once I have taken alook at the rule they are asking me about, I often end up typing out a clarification and adding it to my list of House rules/Clarifications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If I believe I have a canonical answer to &amp;quot;How does X work&amp;quot;? should I post a self-answered question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking into account that the questions tend to be about systems that are not heavily represented on this site.&#xA;So are the kinda questions we need more of, to increase our presence in that system's area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What if my answer is not canonical?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example a player came to me and said &amp;quot;This ability says Use the rules for X from the other book, but the example is different&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another player/GM took a look and said &amp;quot;I know its weird, but the example makes more sense than the original rules. I would house-rule the example as being canon for all instances of X&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was sceptical but I took a look and said &amp;quot;I see what you mean, the rules referenced are far less elegant. But actually I'm not happy with either, I'm going to rule it is instead done using method Z (based on the example, but modified to be more like the base text)&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am confidant my solution is not what the authors intended, but is better than either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this Question/Answer be posted?&#xA;Perhaps this should be posted just as a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect if I asked this just as a question, someone would suggest a house-rule like I did. But self answers are held to a higher standard, than the answers of others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T22:25:34.240" Title="Should I post self-answered questions, for rules I clarify for my players?" Tags="|discussion|self-answering|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4770" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4769" CreationDate="2014-07-17T03:36:41.187" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Encourage your players to post their questions. We will then go through the usual clarification process to figure out &lt;em&gt;what exactly&lt;/em&gt; their question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are then welcome to answer their revised question with your house rule (if it still makes sense) with discussion of how your house rule changed play at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T03:36:41.187" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4771" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4772" CreationDate="2014-07-17T04:33:48.263" Score="9" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it considered 'best-practice' to come back and edit a question with the actual solution that was used in the situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I have a question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34250/playing-a-loyal-character-without-it-being-boring&quot;&gt;Playing a loyal character without it being boring&lt;/a&gt;) that attracted a number of good answers of which I selected one as being the best for my situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In reality though, I used bits and pieces from a number of the answers to resolve my problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I just leave it with the accepted answer or should I edit my question to give a 'debrief' to what was actually done?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10125" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T05:30:10.477" Title="Should I post updates to my questions when they are resolved?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4771" CreationDate="2014-07-17T05:23:03.523" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should not edit your question with the solution you used. That's very clearly not part of the question, and more of a forum-y thing to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However:&lt;/strong&gt; If your solution would be a good unique answer, make it an answer of your own posted to the question! That's a very good thing to do, and increases the quality of the site in the direction of its goal of being a pile of good well-sorted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As an aside, this is a good opportunity to point out that no one should feel obligated to accept answers, especially not until you've found out if any of the answers is &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; a solution to your problem. It's one of the reasons we no longer have &quot;accepted answer&quot; ratios as a stat in querent info.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-07-17T05:30:10.477" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T05:30:10.477" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4773" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-17T06:49:29.763" Score="12" ViewCount="591" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a ongoing issue with the tagging of the various Editions of the World of Darkness Lines. See:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2880/shall-we-review-the-various-world-of-darkness-tags-use&quot;&gt;Shall we review the various World of Darkness tags&amp;#39; use?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1189/clearing-up-white-wolf-world-of-darkness-tags&quot;&gt;Clearing up White Wolf World of Darkness tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to tackle a &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; small part of that problem, now. While it is still in infancy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two tags:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote the tag except, which I wrote (to be fair).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;God-Machine Chronicle Rules Update&quot; is a rules revision for the new&#xA;  World of Darkness games that serves as an in-all-but-name new edition.&#xA;  Its differences from the New World of Darkness line are more&#xA;  pronounced than from dnd 3.5 vs 3.0. Questions should not be tagged&#xA;  with both nwod and nwod-god-machine, unless specifically about both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I did not get any concesus before I put that in the tag wiki, but I thought it was reasonable as I had seen similar done in other tag wiki. Now I want to confirm that I was correct. Or be shown I am not, so that the wiki can be made straight/&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to see questions only tagged with one or the other.&#xA;nWoD:God Machine is a new and incompatible edition, in all but name.&#xA;Because of what I believe to be licensing restrictions, &#xA;it was never marketed as a new edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CCP (which merged with White Wolf) owns the Intellectual Property,&#xA;but Onyx Path now does all the publishing and writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is no more the same game then nWoD is oWoD,&#xA;or dnd3.0 is dnd3.5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of the weird licensing the core book replacement makes some references to the old book, but not many. It is highly incompatible, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41462/does-blood-and-smoke-invalidate-previous-vampire-books/41470#41470&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are different enough that many people, myself included, look at them as a new thing we could play. At the start of the campaign making the choice of which edition to use. Even once everything is converted, I expect it to persist like oWoD has.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Due to the high amounts of incompatibility an answer that is correct for base nwod is quiet likely wrong for nwod:god-machine.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, at the moment there is not a huge ammount of contend for nWoD:God-Machine-Chronicles (About 6 books), compared to nWoD, so some content has not been ported, so sometimes the best answer is &quot;here is a old nWoD book that did similar, you can use its content with [these adaptation]/directly&quot;&#xA;I don't think that changes how the question should be tagged though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Some examples:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions that should use both:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that a primarily about the differences, or asking about how to convert content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41462/does-blood-and-smoke-invalidate-previous-vampire-books/41470&quot;&gt;Does Blood and Smoke invalidate previous Vampire books?&lt;/a&gt; : asks which rule books can be used between.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36124/reconciling-conditions-with-flaws&quot;&gt;Reconciling Conditions with Flaws?&lt;/a&gt; : askes about conversion of content.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36132/are-mortals-from-after-the-god-machine-rules-update-more-powerful-than-before&quot;&gt;Are mortals from after the God-Machine rules update more powerful than before?&lt;/a&gt; : asks about differences.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions that should only be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44486/are-demons-able-to-effectively-deal-with-angels-in-the-twilight&quot;&gt;Are Demons able to Effectively Deal with Angels in the Twilight&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41587/should-mental-conditions-on-character-creation-be-given-some-kind-of-compensatio&quot;&gt;Should mental conditions on character creation be given some kind of compensation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35842/from-the-god-machine-chronicles-what-do-the-different-intensity-stun-guns-do&quot;&gt;From the God-Machine Chronicles, what do the different intensity stun guns do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;redlamp's answer is based on a partial except from old:nwod, and stuff from oWoD and is misguided (though a compatible house rule, and a honest attempt to help)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44540/how-many-are-the-starting-merit-dots-now&quot;&gt;How many are the starting merit dots now?&lt;/a&gt; : It is asking about the GMC number of starting merits. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;While the GMC-RU core rulebook/update basically says to read the old nwod rule book for base character creation. This is part of the new system -- that happens to be in a old book. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker can't be expected to know the answer is in a old book.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This question is of no interest to someone who is interested in the nWoD rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44544/traps-in-the-world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;Traps in the World of Darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It specifically reference God Machine content (though the god machine setting could be being divorced from the rules changes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is different in nWoD: GMC  because things like traps can impose Conditions (&lt;em&gt;nauseous&lt;/em&gt;), and Tilts (&lt;em&gt;Knocked-Down&lt;/em&gt;, all the environmental tilts).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions that should only be tagged nWoD&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are about nWoD.&#xA;Many of them would be valid, if asked again for nWoD: God Machine Chronicles.&#xA;The answers would normally change though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41688/contracts-for-changing-someone-else-into-a-creature&quot;&gt;Contracts for changing someone else into a creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41832/when-do-mortals-get-a-chance-to-sense-a-vampires-nature&quot;&gt;When do mortals get a chance to sense a vampire&amp;#39;s nature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44356/what-do-professions-do-for-a-hunter&quot;&gt;What do Professions do for a Hunter?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;-&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42132/i-have-an-electrified-baton-what-damage-does-it-do&quot;&gt;I have an Electrified Baton, what damage does it do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions that are Awkward to Fit, and currently use both tags:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42164/bringing-the-team-together&quot;&gt;Bringing the Team together&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the asker seems to be from his comments, house-ruling/converting content to run a game using both sets of rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question is almost &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am less certain about this question using both tags. In that it must have so many houserules, it could almost be a unique homebrew system -- but I guess both tags it probably for the best.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35843/should-availability-be-altered-for-non-us-settings&quot;&gt;Should availability be altered for non-US settings?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It asks about the &lt;em&gt;availability&lt;/em&gt; mechanic from nwod:GMC, which is very similar (but not quiet identical to) the &lt;em&gt;cost&lt;/em&gt; mechanic in nwod.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I believe it should be tagged just with nwod:GMC&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;but not certain since, that answer (largely by coincience) are all also true for old nWoD.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do people think?&#xA;Is splitting them up now good?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy to go on / continue my retagging everything to follow what I suggest above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or if community disagrees, I guess I'll go sulk abit then get over myself.&#xA; :-P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to sort this, without bring oWoD, cWoD, 20th annivery, Storyteller, Storytelling etc etc into the equation. Low hanging Fruit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-22T13:18:35.100" Title="Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-07-17T12:50:51.440" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there needs to be a renaming of the tags — and I'm not convinced that simply retagging isn't sufficient — I'm going to lobby for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for the games before the GMC rules revision and keeping &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; for those afterward. I know the first one &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; redundant, but if you're talking about &quot;the new World of Darkness games relying on the core book entitled '&lt;strong&gt;The World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt;',&quot; I think it's not a bad idea. Plus, it has &quot;world-of-darkness&quot; in it, which means people looking for World of Darkness questions will find it, just as they will find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-07-17T12:58:59.483" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T12:58:59.483" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4775" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-07-17T13:02:41.867" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Current tags (nwod and nwod-godmachine) are fine. Retag away per your proposal. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-07-17T19:09:33.220" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T19:09:33.220" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-07-17T13:20:44.897" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like your proposal with one exception: the settings of nWoD and GMC are mostly compatible, so a question like &quot;Is Twilight a separate place you can step into or just a different aspect of being?&quot; would apply to both. Likewise, a question about the Angel on the Moon would apply to both; the story is in the original &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; book, but it's directly related to the God-Machine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to the &quot;both&quot; category, add setting questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5679" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T13:20:44.897" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4778" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4779" CreationDate="2014-07-17T15:40:13.323" Score="12" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44263/what-are-the-requirements-to-use-a-smartgun-system-to-its-full-extent&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about a week back and I've received two answers at the current time of posting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with with David's answer but asking for clarification and further information in the comments helped me to come to a conclusion about how the rules should be interpreted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Archaos' answer provides some information in that it corrects an assumption I initially made in my question but it still doesn't fully answer the question and no further update to this answer has been forthcoming after asking about the remaining details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having come to a decision myself about what I consider to be the rules-correct answer for this question, would it be considered bad etiquette to self-answer the question based on my further reading and the information in the answers/comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14814" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-17T19:11:00.997" LastActivityDate="2022-02-17T19:11:00.997" Title="Would it be considered bad etiquette to self-answer a question summarizing points from other answers and comments?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4778" CreationDate="2014-07-17T15:45:54.040" Score="18" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No, in fact it's encouraged.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The important things to note when you give your answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Attribution is required. All content on SE is licensed as CC-By-SA and as such the author must be attributed, so if you reuse parts of the other answers, you're required to give them credit for it (plus it's the neighborly thing to do).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make sure you put some effort into your answer. It should read like a cohesive answer rather than a summary of two disparate answers and some comments (I've seen people just sort of throw up a comment stream, this isn't what we want here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if the current answers didn't quite solve your problem, but some comment discussion did, this is a great opportunity for a well documented, cohesive answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-17T19:10:51.603" LastActivityDate="2022-02-17T19:10:51.603" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="4780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4769" CreationDate="2014-07-17T17:42:49.893" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not only okay, but &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/its-ok-to-ask-and-answer-your-own-questions/&quot;&gt;explicitly encouraged&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you have a question that you already know the answer to&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you’d like to document it in public so others (including yourself) can find it later&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it is OK to ask, and answer, your own question on a relevant Stack Exchange site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be crystal clear, &lt;strong&gt;it is not merely OK to ask and answer your own question, it is &lt;em&gt;explicitly encouraged&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally your players could post the question and you could answer it, but we don't live in an ideal world and in practice that rarely happens. (Still, encouraging the keenest players to join up here is good!) And besides, sometimes we find &lt;em&gt;ourselves&lt;/em&gt; asking questions, then finding the answer, and wanting to share here. That's encouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most important principle to follow is that the question should be a good question all by itself. When it's something you've figured out between yourself and your players, this is easier because someone has already made an attempt at formulating the answer to you, so you have a real question phrasing to start from. It's a bit harder when it's your own question, as the oogy mess inside our heads is often perfectly functional but non-verbal, and when you've solved the problem, you still might not have ever formulated a decent phrasing to build a good question on. But in principle, that's still okay and encouraged, the latter just takes more care and work to craft a good question from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So make it a decent answer that others can also have a fair chance of understanding and answering, and answer it yourself, yeah. That's cool, that's useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a practical tip, try to do only one or two of these at first. If there are any problems with the approach you're taking, that gives the community time to give you feedback before embarking on dozens of these. Even once the kinks have been worked out, keep the rate low, one or a few a day, so that the front page isn't flooded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T17:42:49.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4781" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4782" CreationDate="2014-07-17T21:38:01.977" Score="2" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just created a question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44603/7373&quot;&gt;the availability of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons in Hungarian&lt;/a&gt;. I had considered creating a [foreign-language] tag for this question and similar (English) questions that discuss roleplaying games in other languages. Is this something that might be worth creating?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-08-06T00:39:53.563" Title="Would a [foreign-language] tag be worth creating?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4781" CreationDate="2014-07-17T22:00:12.980" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;UPDATE: Based on Mxy's comment below and my perusal of the tags in question, I've concluded that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;languages&lt;/a&gt; tag should be used for setting-specific language questions (it's &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; been used for translation questions yet, so far as I can tell, so this requires no re-tagging effort) while questions about real-world languages should be tagged with that specific language. So far we have only one such question: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hungarian&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hungarian&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hungarian&lt;/a&gt; question which sparked this discussion in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've given the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hungarian&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hungarian&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hungarian&lt;/a&gt; tag a rudimentary wiki (someone who knows more should modify it!) and edited the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;languages&lt;/a&gt; tag to say that real-world language questions should get tagged with the specific language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not sure &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/foreign-languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;foreign-languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;foreign-languages&lt;/a&gt; is the right tag. I think there should be a tag, but I dunno what it is. See below for rumination and suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/foreign-language&quot;&gt;it already exists&lt;/a&gt; but has no content! That means it'll probably get purged some time soon unless it's used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's think about tags a bit: their primary purpose is to help people find answers useful to them, and to help connect experts with questions they can answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many users on our site are not native English speakers, and game in languages other than English, which means questions about languages other than English will be useful to the site and we probably already have experts on the topic... except... an expert on gaming in Hungarian may not be very helpful to a Hebrew-speaking gamer, and neither of them can help the Italian gamer much with his language-related challenges. This tells me &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/foreign-languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;foreign-languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;foreign-languages&lt;/a&gt; is too broad to be a useful tag in most cases, much like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag should be replaced by edition-specific tags whenever appropriate so we get 3.5 experts looking at 3.5 questions and when I look for answers to my 4e problems I don't have to wade through AD&amp;amp;D questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my instinct is to say that a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hungarian&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hungarian&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hungarian&lt;/a&gt; tag (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/italian&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;italian&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;italian&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hebrew&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dutch&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dutch&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dutch&lt;/a&gt;, etc) would be more useful than a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/foreign-languages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;foreign-languages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;foreign-languages&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, then I look at your question and wonder if a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/translation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;translation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;translation&lt;/a&gt; tag would be appropriate (instead or or in addition to a language-specific tag, I'm not sure): it's likely that a person who knows about game translations would know about multiple languages' worth of translated games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, I think we need to let these tags evolve like they always do: organically, meeting needs as we encounter them rather than anticipating needs we don't yet have. But again, I'm not sure what that looks like in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-08-06T00:39:53.563" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4783" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4785" CreationDate="2014-07-17T23:25:12.210" Score="1" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my experience, starter sets often contain explicitly 'wrong' versions of the rules for the sake of simplicity. Now, I understand that people certainly don't want to see something like &lt;strong&gt;dnd-5e-starter-set&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;adnd-starter-set&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;dnd-3.5-red-box&lt;/strong&gt;. But we do have other examples of what I like to think of as cross reference tags; such as &lt;strong&gt;new-gm&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;magic&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;problem-players&lt;/strong&gt; and a host of others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've already gotten into one minor argument about this, so I wanted to run it by meta to see what other people think. It might need some synonyms for ease of finding the tag, but it seems well within the context of the existing tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="2875" LastEditDate="2014-07-17T23:49:27.823" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T23:53:21.700" Title="Should there be a &quot;starter-set&quot; tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4784" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4783" CreationDate="2014-07-17T23:45:29.627" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generally, this would &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; be a good idea if the rules for a starter set were typically different from the basic rules of play for a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the case of, say, the 4e starter where the characters were actually built with slightly different powers and mechanics from the AEDU and Essentials classes, that might be a good tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the 5e starter set though, all the rules are the same as the ones in Basic D&amp;amp;D so having a starter set tag for 5e's starter doesn't make sense. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general though, a common starter set tag should be for questions &lt;em&gt;about the starter set.&lt;/em&gt; The question you thought might merit it was asking about something that's going to be a fairly common issue (why don't these HP come out right, oh right, Hill Dwarf), even though the context is the starter pre-gens, it actually informs something that will come up, both in Basic and Advanced D&amp;amp;D. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some questions about the 4e starter set (the Red Box one), but they are largely handled with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; tags and other appropriate tags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to sum up, I don't see a compelling reason to add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/starter-set&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;starter-set&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;starter-set&lt;/a&gt; for this kind of thing. It's much better to just use the edition and other appropriate tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T23:45:29.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4783" CreationDate="2014-07-17T23:53:21.700" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As proposed it fits the definition of a meta tag: meaningless if it was the only tag on a question, and requiring some other tag to give it needed context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta tags are considered harmful and very rarely survive the community's scrutiny for long, so we avoid creating them in the first place if we can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatives that you mention, like [dnd-5e-starter-set] aren't meta tags, so they pass that test. In practice though, we rarely end up making/keeping tags for single line products. I don't think such a tag is necessary, but my objection isn't stronger than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-07-17T23:53:21.700" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2014-07-18T00:19:23.763" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Make [problem-gm] a synonym of [problem-player] and then, maybe, rename [problem-player]. [problem-gm] questions always come down to RAW and behavioral/play-style questions. The thing is, the GM is just another player. A player with a different role and agenda, to be sure, but he is as reliant on the group to play the game as they are on him and I'm not really sure what purpose having the tag split actually serves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, such a merge might require more careful policing of the [problem-player] tag to ensure people aren't using it for the &quot;This was a stupid decision; am I right?&quot; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastActivityDate="2014-07-18T00:19:23.763" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4791" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-23T04:02:05.423" Score="10" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay, the title is a lie, I'm not actually convinced (yet) that we &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; a tag for questions about looking for groups and players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we do have a problem with these questions, which is that their tags are not very good and are all over the map. Not only are they not getting grouped together in any useful way, but the randomness of their tags implies to me that people are flailing when trying to categorise them, and our experienced users are for whatever reason not stepping in to fill the void of tag chaos with tidy order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just look at these questions' tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players&quot;&gt;Where can I find other RPG players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18665/sites-for-finding-online-rpg-players-for-a-play-by-chat-rpg-campaign&quot;&gt;Finding online RPG players for a play-by-chat RPG Campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/play-by-chat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;play-by-chat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;play-by-chat&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21531/best-place-to-find-rpgs-on-skype&quot;&gt;best place to find RPGs on skype?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/32287/how-do-i-find-players-and-game-sets-in-my-area&quot;&gt;How do I find players and game sets in my area?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31114/how-do-i-find-roleplayers-for-ddo-com&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31114/how-do-i-find-roleplayers-for-ddo-com&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21411/where-can-i-find-online-playtesters-to-test-encounters-before-presenting-them-to&quot;&gt;Where can I find online playtesters to test encounters before presenting them to my group?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/550/how-to-gather-a-group-of-players-in-a-foreign-country&quot;&gt;How to gather a group of players in a foreign country?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the one that prompted my tagging conundrum:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44899/how-can-a-young-player-get-into-a-gaming-group&quot;&gt;How can a young player get into a gaming group?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate] (as of this writing)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I list the duplicates because the tags are important there for searchability, so that people find them and find the open frequently-asked questions they're duplicates of.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, the tags are all over the place, and often they're not properly describing the actual problem to be solved. Are any of these really about new players, as we normally use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt; tag? Are any fundamentally &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D 4e, AD&amp;amp;D 2e, or any other system? Are they &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; about group dynamics, as we use that tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seem to me that these are &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; how to find groups, form groups, advertise for players, advertise campaigns&amp;hellip; whatever we want to call the sum of those activities. Yet, there is no tag that describes that core problem around which all these questions fundamentally revolve and which they all have in common.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the perspective of grouping them, there's another thing to consider: look at all of them! There are probably more&amp;mdash;I just stopped after a pageful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do we need a tag? I normally wouldn't even ask, I'd just tag 'em and move on, but I'm frankly stumped on what I would call it. This isn't the usual request to pre-create a tag either&amp;mdash;the need can be in theory demonstrated to already exist, but I suspect that the lack of a good name for such a tag is more the reason why one has never been created spontaneously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, do we need a tag, or do these questions just need to be cleaned up and future ones better sorted? If we need a tag, what should it be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-07-30T07:43:02.887" Title="We need a tag for questions about finding groups and players!" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4791" CreationDate="2014-07-23T04:06:53.790" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't need a tag, because the batch of questions is mostly duplicates.  Tags help with finding a large body of related info, not finding the 1-3 canonical questions out there. We'd be better served by making the canonical question or two more findable in a search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having a tag for it also encourages people to ask more questions about it - and I'd say that this topic, much like &quot;How do I get started with gaming?&quot; is best served by a couple canonical Q&amp;amp;As and not a wide variety. The variants start to get very questionable in terms of being personal LFGs (or for getting started, personal tutorials). I can't think of more than another 1 or 2 questions along these lines that would not get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If for some reason you really want to anyway, I'd suggest [looking-for-group] and [lfg] as common terms found out there in RPG Internet land. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-07-23T13:46:48.627" LastActivityDate="2014-07-23T13:46:48.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4791" CreationDate="2014-07-23T04:56:29.643" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree we don't particularly need a tag, but even if half of these are duplicates as mxyzplk points out, it'll &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; help when we get another one of these if there's a tag I can visit that I know will contain the extant canon questions and duplicates of this category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should go for something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-people&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-people&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-people&lt;/a&gt;. &quot;Finding&quot; is the operative verb almost all of these questions use, so that's at least the first word probably being sound. Whether it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-players&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-groups&lt;/a&gt; might be going too fine: at the end of the day, it's about people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/looking-for-group&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;looking-for-group&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;looking-for-group&lt;/a&gt; is good for us. It's a really good term for this kind of thing! But it's used when people post advertisements or requests for players or groups, which we don't handle. [LFG] threads are about being given fish. And that's fine, that's exactly what they should be. We're about teaching people to go fishing, though, and I don't want people to think we really handle LFG requests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-07-23T04:56:29.643" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4791" CreationDate="2014-07-23T20:02:04.947" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at these questions from the perspective of trying to edit them, for the majority I would end up removing all the existing tags as being peripheral, tangential, or merely background information. That would leave me with no tag to represent the actual problem to be solved though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;That suggests to me that we do need a tag of some kind.&lt;/strong&gt; We can't really clean up the dog's breakfast of tags on these questions without one. Maybe that doesn't seem like a good reason to create a tag—but messy tags are broken windows and we're not doing proper caretaker work on these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further supporting evidence for needing a tag is that we have at lease four questions in this category that aren't duplicates. Even if forming a natural category isn't enough justification, this many of them makes a common tag useful for searching on to find the right question, and enhances the Ask UI's ability to pre-emptively find these when someone starts composing a duplicate. Having a tag would be useful if a future fifth non-duplicate gets asked, so that it is easy to tag well and gets naturally grouped with these related questions. A common tag would also make it easier to find the canonical questions when looking for one to use in a close-vote on a new duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm partial to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-people&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-people&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-people&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-players&lt;/a&gt; (GMs are players too!), or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-groups&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;finding-groups&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;finding-groups&lt;/a&gt;, with synonyms to catch guesses &amp;amp; enhance discoverability of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-07-30T07:43:02.887" LastActivityDate="2014-07-30T07:43:02.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4795" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4796" CreationDate="2014-07-23T21:40:25.007" Score="7" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously answers on old questions are still desirable, and presumably this would apply to informative comments as well. But what about clarification questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, additional information may allow for an improved answer. On the other hand, the poster has probably long since stopped caring about the question, or even forgotten.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions, my gut says ask if there's no accepted answer, don't if there is. Personally, I'd welcome any comments/questions, but I've got only 1 question and 5 answers to be commented on. I can see how seasoned users might have a different perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14649" LastActivityDate="2014-07-23T22:09:07.897" Title="Should I ask for clarification on an old question/answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4795" CreationDate="2014-07-23T22:09:07.897" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Go ahead, you never know.  Some people are not clueful enough to select answers, some people post a question and either never return or are clueless enough that they can't clarify their question starting 10 seconds after it's posted. We have a &quot;questions are never old&quot; policy in general on SE, hence the closing new ones as duplicates. So go ahead - even if the OP doesn't respond, other high rep users with edit privs might.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-07-23T22:09:07.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4754" CreationDate="2014-07-24T02:31:46.330" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm finding a lot of the issue with the 5E questions having a simple root concern: the full game is not out yet.   We've got a Starter Set, &quot;Basic Free Rules&quot; that give you character generation and a little bit of task resolution, and a several playtest rules which differ in significant ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, you've got people coming from several &quot;entry&quot; ways to 5E and even if they have all 3, sometimes people will ask a question just hoping someone else will know. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example &quot;What's an average monster in the Starter Set?&quot; is a question that makes perfect sense if you've gotten the free basic rules but haven't bought the Starter, BUT you want to run a game, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we have at this moment is a lot of interest, incomplete information to really have a full game for a lot of people, and until further rules come out, the questions are going to remain either speculative, built of minimal information, or attempts to squeeze for information that isn't out yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you go to the major RPG forums and look at the discussions around 5E, you'll see a lot of it is in the same vein.  &quot;We don't know, the rules aren't out yet.&quot; isn't a particularly satisfying answer, even if it's the most accurate one for a lot of the questions.  Neither is &quot;The 80% of other rules you need to run a full campaign aren't printed yet, no one can give them to you, sorry.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe the more useful question to ask is to consider which of these kinds of questions are worth entertaining, and in what fashion, for the next 2-3 months?  Kill off too many and it doesn't do well, entertain too many and the site becomes just like any other random forum.  Finding that line is not easy!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user9935" LastActivityDate="2014-07-24T02:31:46.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4798" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-24T05:19:09.167" Score="10" ViewCount="360" Body="&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e has been called by it's creators a &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/living-rule-set&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Living Rules System.&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;What this means is that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we know something is an issue, we’ll let you know that we plan to address it. When we have some ideas, we’ll put those in front of the community and playtest them before making any changes. If a change is well liked and solves problems, we’ll implement it as an option for DMs to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t plan on rushing things. It might be a year from when we raise an issue to when we have a fix. But as soon as we can, we’ll share that solution as an option for DMs and players to use as they wish. Groups that never felt the effect of the issue in the first place can ignore it, while those looking for a solution will have a well tested, proven response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After the release of the starter set, we saw an example of this.  In an Article called &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140707&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Building Adventures&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; it gives some suggested guidelines for XP daily budgets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The article then gives a disclaimer which reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Warning: These are not final rules. Although they've been playtested thoroughly, you can expect some adjustments before they debut in the Dungeon Master's Guide in November.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, at the bottom of the article it says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might find that you'll use this system of challenge rating and XP budgets to familiarize yourself with fifth edition encounters and combat, then slowly dial it back as your intuitive sense of the party's strengths and your own personal DMing style take over. And as with any tool, you might end up using these guidelines in ways that their creators could never have predicted. &lt;strong&gt;Have fun, and make the rules your own.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Now, let's see if anyone manages to use this article and the material in the Starter Set to hit 20th level by GenCon . . .&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems clear that the intention is for these rules to be used to play the game, and to understand the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when I asked a question based on these rules, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/16749827#16749827&quot;&gt;it was mentioned that:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@WesleyObenshain We can ask questions about what has been released so far just fine. We can't ask questions that draw on a combination of released and unreleased rules though.&#xA;@WesleyObenshain The question is actually based on the encounter/XP guidelines, which do not appear in any published material. It appears in the playtest and in a preview article that carries a bolded warning that these are not final rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that during the year between the official releases, and official surveys, there will be many Legends and Lore articles, or other WOTC articles that introduce rule changes or ideas that will not be in it's final form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are rules which are published by WOTC and given to the public to use, allowed to have questions based on them, or only if they are published as a &amp;quot;final rule&amp;quot;, or only if they are published in books which have a non-digitial counterpart?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-09-03T23:37:02.880" Title="Can 5e's &quot;Living Rules&quot; be used to ask questions on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4798" CreationDate="2014-07-24T06:13:24.853" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem in this case is that &quot;Building Adventures&quot; is an article, much like various Dragon and D&amp;amp;D Insider articles, and therefore not &quot;canon&quot;. Lacking any other evidence I have to assume the the Living Rules System is a reference to the Basic Rules, which have not been updated with this material. In addition, it is expressly stated within the document that these rules are subject to potentially significant change (as it concerns the question) within the next 4 month. This makes it rather inadvisable to consider it part of the Basic Rules as of yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, as with other questions, players should be free to establish their own guidelines for the answer, where relevant. In this case, the critical issue with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44710/how-do-different-classes-affect-the-damage-output-and-thus-balance-of-the-advent&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is that it contains a lot of irrelevant text, much of which confuses the question you're actually trying to ask. In fact, your question would be equally readable without any reference to the article or the term &quot;Adventuring Day&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several attempts have been made to help you turn this into a question the community feels is worth answering. The most recent of which was posted in the very chat you referenced. The post in question may end up being considered by the community as part of the Living Rules System, but as it stands I sincerely doubt that will affect the status of your question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-07-24T06:20:52.757" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4798" CreationDate="2014-07-24T09:56:44.150" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;IMO... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes, with a But&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's no rules in basic for the situation and Wizards puts out 'Living Rules' that address it, those new rules are relevant and can be used in an answer. Not using them means ignoring what WotC is writing about a game put out by WotC, which is kind of silly. &lt;strong&gt;Any such answer should say explicitly that it's based on the living rules, which are subject to change.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The risk with those rules is that they could change when the DMG comes out... but that's not as big a deal as it sounds. We already have cases where an answer from a couple of years ago is no longer correct, or there's now a better answer due to errata or new game material coming out. When that happens, either the original answer(s) are edited to reflect the change, or someone posts a new one with the new material. (This actually even happened on a 3.5 question, just because someone happened to find a line in the Rules Compendium that changed our understanding of the situation!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same thing happens on Stack Overflow pretty regularly when someone asks &quot;how do I do X?&quot; and the only way is a convoluted method, until a new version of the platform comes out and suddenly you can call foo.DoStuff() to do it all for you. Given that, I've seen the SE format handle this situation pretty well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-07-24T09:56:44.150" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4801" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3512" CreationDate="2014-07-24T12:38:28.773" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was going to put that as a comment to the second answer of @mxyzplk but it grew to a point I tought better to make that an answer of its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I once ran an RPG Game with around 20 players and 4 GMs. It was an &quot;Play By Forum&quot; game, so all the underlying rudeness that the text-only media carries with it applies in the same way it does here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we did not had any dice rolling in the game, when a new player came into play all we would ask of him was his backstory, and we started to get the same feedback of rudeness as the Question describes, and after we discovered this we knew that it made sense that people felt that way, even if all we did was to read their stories, see if it fitted in with the world we had created, and scan for potential &quot;Win Buttons&quot; they tried to sneak inside it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Problem&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When one make first contact with a new group he/she seek for approval. Even if he/she consider yourself superior to the group in question, he/she still seek for the admired look of those considered inferior, and if the first action taken by the new group is a reproving act, this sounds rude.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The group doen't know him/her, and he/she doesn't know the group. If nobody is assigned to close this gap, cultural differences between his/her worldview and the group worldview will be percieved as rudeness.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;He/She put effort and time trying to please the group with it. If one simply change it you may pass the idea that the newcomer is not even worth the trouble to be teached.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Solution&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We selected a few of our more experienced players, that were close to the GMs already and would not feel offended with our feedbacks, and made them responsible for reaching out to the new players, making the first contact with the community something different than a written piece that should be evaluated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We created common areas that all could access to ease in the newcomer into the group, and allow him to properly introce himself, and feel as part of the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We stopped rejecting (or altering) the backstories and started to work as someone that would be with the newcomer until &lt;strong&gt;he&lt;/strong&gt; gets it right. That made the stories start to be inline with our background story at the same time that the newcomer felt that the story still was &lt;strong&gt;HIS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Outcome&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That didn't eliminated the problem, there were people that still felt like we were being rude, but most times it was because we didn't agree that he could be invunerable. Real cases of rudeness would be treaded individually and we started to grow and keep the new players. That was what allowed the group to survive for as long as it did, because otherwise once the &quot;founder players&quot; had left, nobody would have been there to continue the RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know how to properly apply this here, mostly because I am a newcomer here as well and I don't understand half of the RPG.SE Worldview, working model or even its features, but I hope you can make heads and tails of this and use it somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10843" LastActivityDate="2014-07-24T12:38:28.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4802" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4798" CreationDate="2014-07-24T13:05:10.573" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you can ask about all these kinds of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look, here's the deal.  I know it's a shock to a lot of 3.5e/4e players who have adopted a very strongly legalist/&quot;canon&quot; approach to rules, but it's quite familiar to us OD&amp;amp;D/AD&amp;amp;D grognards. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any game - here 5e is being explicit about its approach, but really for any game, even a game that tries to portray itself as a NP-complete legal doc - the game rules are always evolving. You are always empowered to change them personally as well. Sometimes important and fun additions will come from some non-physical-rulebook source (used to be Dragon Magazine back in the day). This is good, effective, and results in fun. It's on topic here. House rules are asked about here - in 3.5e/4e they were treated as &quot;some weird special exception&quot; instead of &quot;expected business as usual&quot; as they were in 0e/1e/2e, but there's nothing about any of this that makes more organic rulesets off limits - except for those two games, pretty much all games are like that. 5e had to come up with a cute &quot;Living Rule System&quot; name to help get it back into people's lexicon, but any old Palladium player or AD&amp;amp;D player was used to it happening any time Kevin or Gary had a new flash of inspiration. As we see from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33526/are-rulings-that-only-feature-in-dragon-dungeon-magazine-official&quot;&gt;Are rulings that only feature in Dragon/Dungeon Magazine &amp;#39;official&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt;, trying to define &quot;official&quot; is even a pretty difficult (and, I would argue, valueless) effort. There is a bunch of game content - some in WotC physical books, WotC e-books, WotC paper or e-magazines, WotC blogs or other Webby things, forum posts, etc; and the same from second and third party publishers. All rules are &quot;living.&quot; And &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; get to choose what &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; want to use. And once you do, &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; are still welcome here!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this does have implications as to how you ask and answer questions. It means that declarations of &quot;strict RAW&quot; don't make a lot of sense. It means you should generally cite your sources a lot more in questions and answers (e.g. &quot;We are playing with the Paladins of Alternate Alignment from Dragon #106, and I have a problem...&quot; &quot;We are using the original 5e Starter Set Stealth rules and so...&quot;) It means we have to rely on &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; a lot in answers (&quot;I tried doing that and here's what happened...&quot;) more that just doing a lawyerly proof of &quot;what RAW says&quot; and considering it a job well done (instead of helping people have a better game). At the same time, avoid &quot;Bad Subjective&quot; (speculative) questions and answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it seems a little scary now but it's a brave new/old world - the hobby thrived as did discussions about the games (ah, rec.games.frp, how I loved you) when all games were more organic. The shift to games as massive legal documents is relatively recent and mostly an exception in the longer history of gaming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything changes.  The law changes, science changes, religion changes. They're all on topic on their relevant SEs. We mods have tried very hard to inculcate good habits into people on this SE because we knew this day would come in some way. So now we're faced with a more organic super-popular game and a flood of new users coming to ask about it.  It's time for everyone to step up and help them out in the same way, using our SE best practices. Help turn them into constructive questions, but don't get scared off because there's not a &quot;simple RAW&quot; answer to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-07-24T17:20:01.543" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1163" CreationDate="2014-07-27T08:18:38.693" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Three years later, and I think this question could have been asked today.  It would be ideal if time was given to make a question more clear before closing. It would be even better if suggested edits could be made to keep the question in scope of the site, even if that risks modifying the original intended scope of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of making people angry and frustrated it would be a teaching moment on how to improve questions for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3505/how-do-we-handle-it-when-the-askers-problem-is-just-that-theyre-confused&quot;&gt;questions like these&lt;/a&gt; appear to be voted on, but the votes are not followed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's almost as if every new question is looked at as &quot;How can we close this question?&quot; rather than &quot;How can we keep it open and get good answers?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-07-27T09:03:30.503" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4805" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-27T23:33:58.773" Score="7" ViewCount="332" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have an old question about trivia questions that we wrestled with, without a real consensus emerging:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2928/how-do-trivia-questions-meet-the-requirements-for-posting&quot;&gt;How do &amp;#39;Trivia&amp;#39; Questions meet the requirements for posting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went searching out that question due to recent wrangling over various questions, but it's too out-of-date to be a good resource, since it predates the Great Close Vote Overhaul.  A lot of the dissent there, including my own, stemmed from trivia not actually qualifying as closeable under the old votes. I feel like we need to revisit this topic in light of the changes to our closing process and the recent conflicts over &quot;unclear&quot; holds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are trivia questions on-topic? Is &quot;I'm curious&quot; or &quot;The problem is that I don't know the answer&quot; an OK reason for a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;NB&lt;/strong&gt;: &quot;Trivia&quot; and &quot;trivial&quot; don't mean the same thing. Avoid conflating them in this meta as that will just cause confusion.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;(This post is light on context and links because I wrote it on my phone. Feel free to add context and links that are relevant, especially if it would be helpful when this question is older and no-one knows what conflicts it's referencing.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T13:40:55.520" Title="Is trivia on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|policy|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4805" CreationDate="2014-07-27T23:47:21.830" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, trivia questions are off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should adhere to the SE-wide guidance, re-echoed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;our Help Center here&lt;/a&gt;, that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though it doesn't specifically say &quot;trivia bad,&quot; I think it's pretty clear that all the guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What type of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt; leads away from trivia questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I just wanna know&quot; is not a problem. It's not that someone doesn't deserve an answer to their trivia question - but, like many things, this isn't the place to get it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An interesting case is a number of well-answered and well-received questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; - are those questions trivia or not? I think they are not because the are not... trivial. They are actual history questions. There's a difference between &quot;How did the Nazis come to power in Germany&quot; and &quot;What did Hitler name his dog?&quot; Both are historical - one is trivial. There are an infinite amount of trivia questions and they don't help anyone with their game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main question I think is whether our site is one that helps you become a better practitioner - like Stack Overflow - or one that is just for the curious to ask trivia questions, like Movies.SE. I think we should be the former. A &quot;Making Movies SE&quot; would likely ban trivia. We are a &quot;Running and Playing RPGs SE.&quot; We should focus on that. Nonsense can go elsewhere - it otherwise dilutes the site for serious gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we want a bunch of questions like Movies.SE and Scifi.SE?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is Drizzt's panther's name?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the name of the 8-sided die?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the Greyhawk name &quot;Zagyg&quot; based on?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions don't make you or your game any better. Ask them on a forum. I know that personally, the furor over the latest crap questions has bled my time away from answering people asking the actual meaningful questions about playing the game. Is that what we want? I say no, that's not why I joined this site, contribute to it, and became a mod on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much like with campaign historical research questions, I think people understandably initially wanted to &quot;allow all kinds of questions here!&quot; and so voted in favor of this kind of thing.  But as with those questions, over time we see how it really doesn't fit the metaphor of the site and people in practice kick back against them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over time the site has been victim to many &quot;Hey does any game do X?&quot; questions, and they always turn out bad.  Either they're a list, or they are properly answered with &quot;Yes.&quot;, or they have to get revamped into a much better game-rec or design question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T00:19:04.917" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4805" CreationDate="2014-07-28T07:54:17.667" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Some Folks Need the Basics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's premature to place a wholesale ban on all trivial questions without first establishing a baseline for what &lt;em&gt;trivial&lt;/em&gt; means in relationship to the asker's role-playing game experiences and familiarity with the cultures that publish the vast majority of role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new GM who wants to run a time travel game might totally need the name of Hitler's dog, and while we're all computer savvy enough to hunt down such information quickly (4 seconds and it's &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondi&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Blondi&lt;/a&gt;), were that new GM some 80-year-old lady in a retirement home who wanted to run an RPG for her fellow retirees, she might struggle to find that information, and it's possible she might end up here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's highly unlikely, of course, but there it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'd like to think--rather than closing her question as trivial--we'd want to help her because A) new members deserve community support even if they lack our skills and experiences, and B) that old lady's awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, someone coming in cold with a question that initially looks stupid like &lt;em&gt;What's a hit point?&lt;/em&gt; probably deserves an answer because, while the site's for running and playing role-playing games, a new player has to start &lt;em&gt;somewhere&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, if someone's &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; question is &lt;em&gt;What is Drizzt's panther's name?&lt;/em&gt; (3 seconds and it's &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guenhwyvar#Guenhwyvar&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Guenhwyvar&lt;/a&gt;), that's probably fine. If that's someone's fifth, thirty-seventh, or hundred-sixth question, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; action can be taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T07:54:17.667" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4805" CreationDate="2014-07-28T08:20:09.610" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Banning questions that are basically a request to solve the problem of ignorance is IMO a very bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions like this one, also could be called trivia, but they are much more than that. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15093/in-an-even-fight-how-many-rounds-does-a-typical-monster-need-to-drop-a-pc&quot;&gt;In an even fight, how many rounds does a typical monster need to drop a PC?&lt;/a&gt;  There is no &quot;problem at the game table&quot; that this question solves, yet the answer helps people understand the game systems better, and helps establish expectations. All good things, which are not precise problem, but also are not trivia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a world of difference between &quot;trivia&quot; and &quot;The problem is that I don't know the answer.&quot;   If you want to ban questions like &quot;What is Drizzt's cat's name&quot; then such questions can easily shown to be unnecessary by asking, &quot;What research have you done so far?&quot;  Trivia can be found out with a simple google search, but questions where the problem is that they don't know the answer can not. I think making people jump through hoops, and to lie and craft stories about some hypothetical problem just to get them answered, isn't going to help anyone in the long run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the question I asked about regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45113/are-there-other-rpgs-with-the-phenomenon-where-the-class-that-is-stereotypically&quot;&gt;different games and if they have the same phenomena of as 3e&lt;/a&gt; is apparently for some people simple trivia.  To me, it's an important understanding of game design.   However, I could easily &quot;game&quot; the site, and re word my question to pretend it's some more concrete problem, and the answers will be the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could instead ask for a game recommendation, in which I am able to play a class that is very good at something another class is supposed to be good at.  I could word this question as if I'm looking for a game to play so I can try out this character concept.  I could do that, but I would be lying.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making rules which encourage people to lie about their problems just so they can be answered, is, in my opinion, a terrible idea. At best it makes people feel awkward, and at worst it can cause people to view all new questions with suspicion rather than to assume good will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since there is some doubt about the ability to reword the question, I imagine I could write something similiar to the following.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I really enjoyed the aspect of pathfinder that made picking a wizard&#xA;  to play a thief a secret, unintuitive optimization success story. I&#xA;  would like to do something similar in another game that isn't related&#xA;  to pathfinder. I have three charachter concepts in mind that would be&#xA;  fun for me if it's possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A mechanic that is better at fixing and getting scrap material than the assigned mechanic class.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A supernatural creature who is better at seduction and silent killing than the creature which has that reputation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A combat veteran who is better at defeating bad guys in a fight than the soldier/fighter class of that system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Which game can I play to create either one or all three of those&#xA;  scenarios?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer to the above question will answer my 'secret' question. It's also a bit of hoop jumping, and frankly I think requiring people to know enough about the site's history to figure out which fake question to ask is counter productive.  But, if that's the only way to get questions answered then that's what we will have to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-07-29T08:35:29.977" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4809" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-28T08:26:36.563" Score="1" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found that there is are not many tags that relate to around the table issues that do not directly relate to the game. I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45154/is-there-good-ways-of-distributing-pregen-characters&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but found myself at disadvantage when choosing appropriate tags. Is there a tag or multiple tags that would be used for issues around the table that are related to things like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;location, ambience, lighting, furniture,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;refreshments, spirits, snacks,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;breaks, distractions, &quot;background&quot; noise&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;techniques for setting up the game in an efficient manner,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;distributing props, handouts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dealing with conflicts over metagame and pre-game or post-game discussions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have found the following tags, but they only partially relate to the above: &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T09:50:33.407" Title="Is there a tag for various around-the-table issues?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4809" CreationDate="2014-07-28T08:35:37.047" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't find one myself, and none comes to mind. We do have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/props&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;props&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;props&lt;/a&gt;, but not stuff for ambience and so on, breaks and snacks, and etc. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; too, but that's pre-game stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you've described is pretty broad though (especially when you throw in metagame conflicts and discussions), and might not be well served by &lt;em&gt;just one tag&lt;/em&gt; for the whole lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-07-28T08:43:01.350" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T08:43:01.350" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4811" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4809" CreationDate="2014-07-28T09:33:56.200" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;For preparation, doppelgreener's suggestions of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/props&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;props&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;props&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; are good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For social stuff, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; and particularly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt; for lack of experience, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; for problematic interaction at the table. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metagaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metagaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metagaming&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powerplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powerplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powerplaying&lt;/a&gt; could be appropriate for excess strategy discussions at the table (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; when it's not in excess).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For keeping the game fluent, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt;, but that seems to be a very unused tag and there are a lot of questions that have neglected tagging it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For background music, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;music&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;music&lt;/a&gt; but it seems to be very scarcely used too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-07-28T09:50:33.407" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T09:50:33.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4805" CreationDate="2014-07-28T13:32:53.857" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the matter of whether a question is &lt;em&gt;trivia&lt;/em&gt; or not is a red herring here. So is whether the reason behind the question is &quot;I just wanna know.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm considering a &quot;trivia&quot; question to be one where the asker's just curious and wants to learn something, but it won't necessarily solve a practical problem they have. They just want to learn something. Trivia questions by this definition are &lt;strong&gt;not necessarily trivial to answer,&lt;/strong&gt; though.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Trivia questions are trivially not inherently bad&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This doesn't mean they're inherently &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; either.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've had lots of questions that are effectively asking for trivia, that are also good questions, cited in this very discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/7473/1204&quot;&gt;Who created the idea of Experience Points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/34825/1204&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the inspiration for the owlbear?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mostly everything in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/39546/1204&quot;&gt;Is there a name for the standard 7-die set?&lt;/a&gt;, which might sound like that 8-sided dice name question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;History of gaming questions probably have a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of questions asked just because someone wants to know, though it goes entirely unsaid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact we accept this stuff means that &lt;em&gt;something other than someone being curious&lt;/em&gt; is the common factor in the &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; trivia questions we close. So a question being trivia, or someone just wanting to know, &lt;em&gt;is not the factor we should be looking at.&lt;/em&gt; We have to be psychic to know why they're asking the question anyway, unless they say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;They just usually suck in some other way.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30358/1204&quot;&gt;What games have complex rules for arrow removal?&lt;/a&gt; was a big list question, just like any other game-rec question that was accidentally way too broad. (Being just curious just meant there were no finer criteria to make it good.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We had a (now deleted) question about what games George R R Martin plays, which is hardly relevant to anything.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37602/1204&quot;&gt;What was it like growing up through the Dungeons and Dragons moral panic?&lt;/a&gt; was a survey.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure, in reality, what the fate of the Drizzt's panther question would be or how the 8-sided dice question would go. They might get trivially answered. The former might be received quite well if someone says &quot;I need to look the panther up and learn about it to play it as an NPC in this game of mine, and later I'll stat it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that when someone's asking trivia, or just wants to know something, that isn't the problem itself. They'll just be more inclined to end up asking the kind of question that doesn't work well on our site, because they're more likely to dive into the domain of questions we don't handle well. We get &quot;I just wanna know&quot; comments appearing almost exclusively in irrecoverable closed questions, but those comments aren't themselves the origin of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the most part, I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4806/1204&quot;&gt;mxyzplk is right&lt;/a&gt; in suggesting it's mainly because we want to be answering decent, stimulating questions, not a bunch of inconsequential questions about things that don't matter beyond &quot;oh hey now I know.&quot; We would rather focus our efforts on meaningful stuff that makes a significant difference to people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But mainly it's probably just that the trivia questions end up sucking somehow most of the time. Trivia questions are fine. Just not the ones that end up crap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T13:40:55.520" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4813" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4815" CreationDate="2014-07-28T20:16:18.010" Score="11" ViewCount="205" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44636/can-warforged-be-repaired-with-a-skill-check&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; with a straightforward title and a mostly straightforward body, and got a straightforward answer, which I accepted because they answered the question as I wrote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I failed to make in clear I was interested in more than just that narrow answer. Perhaps a better question would have been &quot;What are all the ways to heal a living construct?&quot; or &quot;How can we make up for a Warforged's lack of healing?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I go back and edit the question to broaden it, or should I ask a new question? The base question seems to stand on it's own but it's answer would be encompassed by the broader question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14649" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-06T07:03:13.233" LastActivityDate="2020-07-06T07:03:13.233" Title="Should I edit my question or create a new one?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4813" CreationDate="2014-07-28T20:37:14.063" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would open a new one, starting with something on the line of &quot;I asked in a previous question about using craft to repair constructs. Are there other ways...&quot; and so on. I don't know if there's a site policy on that but it looks not like a duplicate to me&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T20:37:14.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4815" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4813" CreationDate="2014-07-28T21:33:58.563" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask a new question, definitely. When the question changes &lt;em&gt;substantially&lt;/em&gt;, it's cleaner and preferred to make a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The existing question is done and editing it now would create a bit of a mess, what with an answer already being accepted and answering a different question. Further, the question is a decent one by itself, so although it might not be the one you meant to ask, it's a good question and doesn't deserve deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the new question, note that of the two example titles you floated, one is &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; better than the other. &lt;strong&gt;&quot;How can we make up for a Warforged's lack of healing?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; describes your actual problem: the Warforged's lack of healing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What are all the ways to heal a living construct?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; is pretty general, and there's no guarantee that it will even solve your problem as it's likely to get answers along the lines of &quot;well construct X can be healed by X1, construct Y can be healed by Y1 and Y2...&quot; with perhaps none of them mentioning Warforged! You could end up in the same place again, with good answers to a solid question, but nothing that actually helps your actual situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you post a new question, it should be along the lines of &quot;How can we make up for a Warforged's lack of healing?&quot; That's a good title to start from to write a nicely focused question that will solve the problem you're actually facing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-07-28T21:33:58.563" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3512" CreationDate="2014-07-29T12:49:55.750" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This rudeness you detect is a passive aggressive culture that feels endemic to SE sites. Look around in some people's comment history and a pattern emerges. It gives the impression that they LIVE for the chance to browbeat people, instead of coming forth with a more &quot;I'm here to respectfully help this person&quot; type of attitude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good analogy for the tone you see around here is that of a jaded government employee in a customer facing role like taking queries from people. Not everyone is cut out for people facing roles. You can imagine the effect long term exposure to this type of task can have on  a person whose temperament is not a great fit for this type of role. Most people don't have the right temperament for long term duty of this type, and some would become jaded in less than six months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can change &quot;govenment employee&quot; for &quot;stackexchange volunteer&quot; and the analogy might make more sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I myself do not participate much in SE because the general passive aggressive and rude tone tends to make me want to respond in kind to those who engage in it. The attitude is contagious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5723" LastActivityDate="2014-07-29T12:49:55.750" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4817" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4819" CreationDate="2014-07-29T21:43:12.797" Score="7" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm creating an adventure for my game world and would like help coming up with specific details. Answers would necessarily be rather specific to the scenario (although system-agnostic and probably genre-flexible). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that on-topic in rpg.se? What sort of questions along this line are too broad or too narrow? What tag should I use?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2610" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-07-30T01:06:19.447" LastActivityDate="2016-10-22T05:51:12.520" Title="Are requests for help in coming up with plot details on topic, and how should I tag them?" Tags="|discussion|tags|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4817" CreationDate="2014-07-29T22:03:05.920" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's the more &quot;PC&quot; but less intuitive &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scenario-authoring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scenario-authoring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scenario-authoring&lt;/a&gt;.  I've tagged your Q with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-07-29T22:03:05.920" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4817" CreationDate="2014-07-30T00:24:42.627" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;. However, I don't think we get may questions of the form &quot;please help me fill in the blank in my plot.&quot; These are probably at great risk of being unsuitable for our site, and the questions' suitability will be case by case. I'm not aware of any guidelines we have on how to make these questions work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't necessarily do well coming up with ideas for your games, because questions requesting ideas generally fall under a lot of our bad subjective criteria from our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt; help page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your motivation for asking the question is “I would like to participate in a discussion about &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt;”, then you should not be asking here. However, if your motivation is “I would like others to explain &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt; to me”, then you are probably OK. (Discussions are of course welcome in our real time web chat.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt;?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt; for &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt;, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;you are asking an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if &lt;code&gt;______&lt;/code&gt; happened?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;(a couple of these points skipped)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you come to us with a question saying: &lt;em&gt;&quot;I have X circumstance. I need to do something. Does anyone have any ideas?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;, it's probably going to hit &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the negative points described above. A question like that is not a good fit for our site, and is probably better off asked on an RPG discussion forum or a chat room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One basic requirement of our system is that questions should ideally have a single, objectively correct answer. Subjective questions (which comprise &lt;em&gt;a large portion&lt;/em&gt; of our questions here) blur that requirement a bit, but you should still have requirements that allow us to objectively determine whether certain answers are &lt;em&gt;more valid and correct&lt;/em&gt; than others. (If every answer is equally valid, voting becomes entirely subjective and our system breaks down in that question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: make sure you have some specific criteria. Then, case by case, we'll work out what we can do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-07-30T00:37:24.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4820" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4821" CreationDate="2014-07-30T04:49:43.650" Score="5" ViewCount="99" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45231/ideas-for-a-plot-twist-during-a-hijacking/45236#45236&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; was posted at &lt;code&gt;2014-07-30 04:24:50Z&lt;/code&gt;, which is almost three hours after the question was closed at &lt;code&gt;2014-07-30 01:09:11Z&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the second time I've seen this. The first time a comment exchange followed along the lines of &quot;how did you do that?&quot; A: &quot;bad site scripting I guess&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like this happens when an answer is started when the question is opened, left for a while, and then submitted after it's closed. However it's happening, it's a significant bug that impairs the proper functioning of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-07-30T12:27:46.973" Title="Answers are being submitted on closed questions" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4821" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4820" CreationDate="2014-07-30T05:15:50.897" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a feature of the system. See this question on Meta.SO from 2011: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/91928/152515&quot;&gt;How was this answer posted after this question was closed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short: when a question gets closed, your client (as in: the browser, or the mobile app) will notice, tell you that you can't post an answer any longer, and the page will not cooperate in letting you do so. If your client &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; notice, however, the Stack Exchange servers will still give you a grace period of about four hours to write your answer and submit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is probably totally abusable if you know how, but only if you're absolutely adamant to answer closed questions anyway, which is probably a waste of time and will eventually lead to us asking you to quit it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-07-30T05:15:50.897" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4822" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-07-31T23:11:01.933" Score="17" ViewCount="358" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44781/what-living-apex-lifeforms-are-there-other-than-dragons&quot;&gt;What living apex lifeforms are there other than dragons?&lt;/a&gt; was originally debated and then kept open, with the good reason that &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/01/stack-overflow-where-we-hate-fun/&quot;&gt;we don't hate fun&lt;/a&gt; and it's 1) eminently useful, 2) accepted by the community, for 2 out of 3 points in that SE blog post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it's at 16 answers and counting now, with new ones trickling in at a rate of every day or two. Answer quality is not high on average and lowering as time goes on. It looks like, though it aspired to rise above becoming just a big ol' list question, it is succumbing to list-itis as it ages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question working in our format? Do its pros override its cons? Is there anything we can do to improve how it's working? Is it a lost cause? Is it just fine how it is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update&lt;/strong&gt;: On August 3rd the system's automatic protection algorithm was triggered for this question. This can apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/89971/153219&quot;&gt;happen&lt;/a&gt; for a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/228805/153219&quot;&gt;variety&lt;/a&gt; of reasons, and I can't figure out which it is. But auto-protection generally indicates that the question is encouraging new (&amp;lt;10 rep) users to post poor answers, enough that new users should maybe be prevented from posting more answers. That's not damning since it's just an automated script of limited intelligence and us smart humans can override it, but it's a relevant data point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-08-12T07:49:07.990" Title="Apex lifeform question: is it working?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4822" CreationDate="2014-08-01T03:29:36.560" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Overall it's working well in our format, except for the problem you've pointed out: answer quality on average is a concern. That's a problem we have a tool for fixing though, so really the problem is our voting patterns. If there's anything we can do to improve the question, it's to apply our votes with the severity of a well-respected &lt;a href=&quot;http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Hammerer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Hammerer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question only has three creatures which &lt;em&gt;truly&lt;/em&gt; fit &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; well. They're in the top three answers. Those creatures naturally and effortlessly totally fit into the role desired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every other answer is miles behind in votes for a reason. They're creatures which either totally fail the criteria, or half fit but miss out on some critical stuff. Several of these only work if you play your cards right or change some things (or both). Several are scary creatures, but are not creatures that slide into the &quot;apex life form&quot; role easily. (They're certainly up there, but not apex.) People might be suggesting creatures that only half-fit because other creatures that only half-fit are getting upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that currently, the top three answers are the only ones to pass the &quot;good and proper answer&quot; bar, due to being the only ones to cleanly pass all criteria required by the question. The others, due to not cleanly passing the criteria, are not good and proper answers. If we apply a level of strictness similar to that which we apply to Game Recs &amp;mdash; which are borderline-list questions that survive by their criteria like this one &amp;mdash; these answers ought to be getting downvoted, not upvoted. I believe that level of strictness is appropriate here, because otherwise the question attracts and becomes garbage, as it is presently doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The answers which submit multiple monsters are particularly problematic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, of all these answers, only five enter the double-digit vote scores. #4 and #5 submit multiple creatures. So does one other further down. I'm going to poke at these specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/44798/1204&quot;&gt;Phoenix/Roc/Naga&lt;/a&gt;: Most answers which provide only a single monster go into detail on why that specific monster fits the role, often justifying it against each individual criteria. That justification is wanting here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/44799/1204&quot;&gt;The one suggesting a ton of stuff&lt;/a&gt;: Most of these simply don't fit the criteria desired. Justification for each one is entirely missing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/44816/1204&quot;&gt;Chimera&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;any kind of Chimaera, really&quot; isn't a specific creature, and &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; &quot;any kind&quot; of chimera will do: I submit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34826/1204&quot;&gt;the spanielsaurus&lt;/a&gt;, the last red toy on the right, and rest my case. Evaluation of each one is wanting, as above. Note that Chimaera are acknowledged as not fitting the criteria of capacity for being reasoned with, unless one changes stuff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mentioned justification here. I think that's extremely important, because it demonstrates that your answer is a good fit. It also tells the author how they can work with your suggested creature, and how well it works. This isn't something demanded of the question - it's something that should be &lt;em&gt;expected&lt;/em&gt; of a good and useful answer. It's up to you if you go into a point-by-point list of criteria-and-response, but you should definitely be demonstrating why your creature meets each of the criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After all, which is more useful to someone looking for a creature to use?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the Grootslang, it's a super cool elephant/snake creature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the Grootslang, it's perfect. Here, let me show you how you can use a Grootslang to meet all your needs, here's how you run them, here's what they'll do for you. &lt;em&gt;(It isn't actually perfect in this question, since it's not remotely Western, but it is a super cool elephant/snake creature.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Justification's important. It's also why I can't post a kitten on there. Answers need to suggest stuff that fits, and show us it fits, or the question becomes a bit garbagey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would suggest that the lesson to take from these is that &lt;em&gt;quality&lt;/em&gt; is to be &lt;em&gt;hugely&lt;/em&gt; emphasized here, especially over quantity. If you have multiple ideas, pick one, two, &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; three, submit them individually, and &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; justify that they fit. In the Chimaera answer, I'd take Cerberus (my favourite of them), drop the others, and fully write as to why he fits. (He might not, and then when I reach that point in my justification where I'm writing &quot;He doesn't actually fit this at all&quot;, I stop, wonder if this guy really fits the role, and then don't answer if he doesn't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-08-02T00:15:43.943" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4824" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4822" CreationDate="2014-08-01T12:22:55.370" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, what makes this question &lt;em&gt;potentially&lt;/em&gt; &quot;eminently useful&quot; is that it can help breaking out of a pattern and &quot;think outside the box&quot; when designing a campaign. We may look for (or return to) this question for inspiration, and different users will take different answers as best fitting their specific need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trying to envision how this question and its answers could best serve me if I'm stuck for ideas a few months / years from now, I submit the following points:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Multiple good answers are fine&lt;/strong&gt; - Unlike specific issue questions, I think it is alright for this question to have 20+ &lt;em&gt;good answers&lt;/em&gt; - when looking for inspiration, seeing different takes on the same idea can be eye opening and productive. The voting mechanism will help digest the answers - making the SE format far superior than a normal discussion forum.&lt;br/&gt;&#xA;For this to work, &lt;strong&gt;users should be encouraged to actively down-vote poor answers&lt;/strong&gt; - much more so than in standard questions.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Good answers make a meaningful contribution to the discussion&lt;/strong&gt; - for example, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/44798/12454&quot;&gt;Phoenix&lt;/a&gt; answer genuinely surprised me - by discussing Buddhist and oriental traditions, it successfully presents and defend the suitability of a phoenix as an apex creature - providing many avenues of additional research for anyone choosing to use it without being too windy.&lt;br/&gt; Some of the poor answers IMO are not much more than &quot;name dropping&quot;, and as such, don't really inspire - the same purpose they may serve is much better met by casually browsing a monster manual.&lt;br/&gt;&#xA;As @&lt;em&gt;JonathanHobbs&lt;/em&gt; noted, the &quot;list of suggestions&quot; answers tend to fail this by default.&lt;br/&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;This question sorely requires specific answering guidelines&lt;/strong&gt; to reduce the number of well-intentioned but effectively useless answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Poorly suggesting a valid candidate doesn't make for a good answer&lt;/strong&gt; - Some users adopted the checklist format first used in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/44791/12454&quot;&gt;Beholder&lt;/a&gt; answer, but, while @&lt;em&gt;OpaCitiZen&lt;/em&gt; used paragraphs to discuss the more interesting points, others just use shorthand such as &quot;nope&quot; or &quot;definitely&quot; under each statement. &#xA;&lt;br/&gt;Now, I'm definitely not saying that a long answer is automatically better than a brief one, but I feel that the value of an answer to this question does not stem from merely &quot;finding another one&quot;, but from &lt;strong&gt;providing the reader with information and insight about how a specific candidate can be &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; in a campaign&lt;/strong&gt;. IMO, the check-list format tends to focus too much on detailing how a creature meets every one of the OP's criteria, at the cost of neglecting the big picture - i.e. how it can be used as an apex-creature.&lt;br/&gt; To improve this, &lt;strong&gt;focusing on the big picture should be one of the answering guidelines&lt;/strong&gt; - regardless of the answer's format.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bottom-line&lt;/strong&gt;: this question is both fun and potentially useful. Clear answering guidelines are required, and they should be immediately visible to those reading the question, to reduce new low-quality answers. Existing low-quality but valid answers should be encouraged to improve or face down-vote oblivion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As a side note&lt;/strong&gt;: Maybe we can also benefit from general ground-rules to make future similar questions work - such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/code-golf&quot;&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;em&gt;Code-Golf&lt;/em&gt;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/underhanded&quot;&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;em&gt;underhanded&lt;/em&gt;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/king-of-the-hill&quot;&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;em&gt;king-of-the-hill&lt;/em&gt;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; tags on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://codegolf.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Programming Puzzles &amp;amp; Code Golf&lt;/a&gt; SE. Such questions work only if everybody is on the same page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12454" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-08-01T13:04:53.617" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4825" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-01T16:40:03.710" Score="8" ViewCount="317" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often enough we get really low-quality questions that are obvious that the asker has not read the rules at all (vs. asking for clarification). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45372/11-to-hit-combat-question&quot;&gt;What does &amp;quot;+6 to hit, Hit: 13 (2d8 + 4)&amp;quot; mean in a creature&amp;#39;s stat block?&lt;/a&gt; is an example of this. Generally these questions seemed to be looked down on by the community as not serving our purpose or helping anyone and encouraging a &quot;read the rules to me&quot; mindset (thank you for that Grubermensch). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So can we add an option to the Vote to Close to reflect that the question lacks even a basic understanding of the system and they should go read the rules before posting? Right now none of the available options fit this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T04:28:18.940" Title="Can we have a RTFM equivalent in the Vote to Close options?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4826" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4825" CreationDate="2014-08-01T17:40:05.797" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although I completely agree with the sentiment behind this request, I can't help but worry a little about how exactly we would judge which questions should be closed for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is obvious and plainly written for one person can be really confusing for someone else, particularly once you factor in issues with rules not being written in peoples' first languages. I know I've asked some pretty dumb, obvious questions about new systems that in retrospect could easily have been closed for this reason. However, at the point I asked the question, I needed to ask the question and I &lt;strong&gt;had&lt;/strong&gt; RTFM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this reason, my personal preference would be to vote down the types of questions you are talking about rather than closing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-08-01T17:40:05.797" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4827" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4825" CreationDate="2014-08-01T18:23:06.877" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand the frustration. I really, really do. But it's not what votes to close are for and we don't need such an option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is already a tool designed for &quot;you didn't RTFM&quot;: the downvote arrow. When you hover over the downvote arrow, its tooltip says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That encompasses failing to read the fine manual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting to close is for questions that are off-topic or unanswerable in a finite amount of time. A question that describes a problem that boils down to &quot;I didn't read/find the rule&quot; is neither off topic, nor unanswerable — it's just &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;. Close votes are for questions that don't belong or that do belong but need some TLC before being answered, but for questions that are just bad we have downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;em&gt;why?&lt;/em&gt; Why do we have to put up with crap questions? Because the gamification of the site works a certain way, and bad questions aren't properly gamification-motivated by closing. Downvotes hurt materially — they ding the asker's reputation on an ongoing basis. A highly downvoted question, although it may be topical, gets buried and hidden from the front page. The punishment continues when other people find it, because it's still open and still begging for punishment. Downvotes send the message that the question is bad, and unappreciated by the community. It's still possible to answer a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; question with a stellar answer though, and we do want that to happen. (We even have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/50/reversal&quot;&gt;a hard-to-get badge for pulling off that kind of reversal&lt;/a&gt;.) We make the internet better that way — our site's founding principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing, on the other hand, is a site management feature. It's designed to keep the site tidy and on topic, and to prevent our expert answerers from getting tied up in open-ended discussions, and to prevent answers on questions for which we aren't experts and won't generate quality answers. Closing is primarily an &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; management feature. It doesn't inflict a material &quot;ow&quot; on the asker that might gamification-motivate them to stop (although it can be personally frustrating). Close votes send the message that the question might be fine, just maybe not &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;, or maybe not without some work done to fix it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's why we put up with crap questions: because we obliterate them with downvotes so that we don't get &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; crap questions. Closing questions doesn't discourage future bad questions, it just deals with this one right now. Different tools for different aims.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T01:21:31.693" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4822" CreationDate="2014-08-02T01:06:46.460" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's time to close that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We actually came up with some guidance to vet and put in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; questions - see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3584/just-for-fun-request-show-off-character-sheet-thread&quot;&gt;Just For Fun Request: Show-off character sheet thread&lt;/a&gt;. This didn't go through that process. That process exists to generate some guidance for answering, which is the main lack here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also and related, the answers are increasingly bad. Frankly I don't like the &quot;single monster answers&quot; unless it was a specifically just-for-fun question that casts off the rules - list questions like this sometimes get rescued by a brilliant answer that shows them &quot;how to fish,&quot; like &quot;here's a source for many villains of that sort and here's how you would decide and flesh them out.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, I'm not sure how fun it is really. Or how good even the upvoted answers are.  When I think &quot;drawn from Western myth&quot; I guess I think &quot;prior to D&amp;amp;D,&quot; and answering &quot;beholder&quot; and &quot;aboleth&quot; is certainly not that and not really system agnostic. I've been refraining from mod-closing this but if I go there and see a couple close votes I'm probably going to back them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2014-08-02T01:06:46.460" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4829" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4822" CreationDate="2014-08-05T03:50:20.143" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Really, I don't think the problem is with the answers. Some of them are weaker than others, but a lot of them are hovering around 0. That suggests to me that people have different understandings of the criteria. Which is pretty easy to understand when you look at it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Classic fantasy based, preferably Western culture originating&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I think &quot;classic fantasy&quot; I tend to think early D&amp;amp;D and all those 80's era sword &amp;amp; sorcery novels, but as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4822/apex-lifeform-question-is-it-working/4828#4828&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer points out&lt;/a&gt; there are other interpretations. Especially of issue is the preference for &quot;Western&quot; culture. I personally take Western to mean not &quot;Far Eastern&quot; or &quot;Middle Eastern&quot;, but theoretically could exclude things like Russia. I've even seen at least one argument over what &quot;originating&quot; means in this context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They can't be a standard biped race, humans and elves are so last millennium.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP made a definitive statement in the comments &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44781/what-living-apex-lifeforms-are-there-other-than-dragons/45212#45212&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and while there is no ambiguity about the answer in question, what a &quot;standard biped race&quot; is is open to interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;the &quot;true apex predator is man&quot; is exactly the trope [he wishes] to destroy&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not a dragon or a dragon clone.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's a &quot;dragon clone&quot;? Is it simply dragons from other cultures (like the Asian chimaera-like dragon), creatures like drakes and other near-Dragons, or does it include all creatures with a Dragon-like element (such as Dragon Turtles; who by the 3.5 picture are really more big snapping turtles).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Living. Breathing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point seems to be more about ensuring that it is a naturally occurring &lt;em&gt;species&lt;/em&gt; (not a single entity) than the actually adjectives used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An intelligent being that can be reasoned with. Diplomacy with this being should definitely be possible.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not ambiguous per-se but I'll point out that in a post about subverting a classic fantasy concept (Dragons are the definitive apex being/s) it seems counter-intuitive to suggest that you can't propose modifications to the classic interpretation of the creature. In this particularly context, &quot;intelligence&quot; seems almost like a non-criterion to me. After all, if you decide a creature is intelligent it doesn't really take more effort to treat them as such than it would a classically intelligent creature in their place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-08-05T07:29:44.593" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4830" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-05T18:53:37.770" Score="11" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;From other meta I have this quite clear: do not accept an answer if there isn't a good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what should I do when I am requesting experience based advice and there are several good ones, each approaching an angle? What if I can't decide which answer is best because all seems good to me? Should opinion+experience based questions have an accepted answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38331/how-to-have-a-game-in-which-one-player-character-is-the-leader-but-its-still-fu&quot;&gt;How to have a game in which one player character is the leader but it&amp;#39;s still fun for everyone?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of my favourite answers, no one seems more correct than the others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-08-05T19:29:44.407" Title="In good subjective questions, should I accept an answer if there are several good ones?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4830" CreationDate="2014-08-05T19:17:55.533" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wait until you use the advice, and then use the checkmark to indicate which one helped you most.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no time limit on accepting an answer, so there's no need to rush when the nature of the question requires using the answers before you can know which is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you find that what works best after all isn't any one answer, but a combination of them or new idea of your own inspired by the experience trying the answers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4778/would-it-be-considered-bad-etiquette-to-self-answer-a-question-summarizing-point&quot;&gt;it's OK and encouraged to self-answer the question with what actually worked, and accept your own answer&lt;/a&gt;. You can still show appreciation for the other answers with upvotes.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-08-05T19:29:44.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4832" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-06T00:20:11.163" Score="-1" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44781/what-living-apex-lifeforms-are-there-other-than-dragons&quot;&gt;popularity&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4822/apex-lifeform-question-is-it-working&quot;&gt;controversy&lt;/a&gt; of the &quot;apex lifeform&quot; question, I think it might be good to create a new question based on the original as a community-inspired &quot;just for fun&quot; question. To that end, I'd like the community to help me come up with an &lt;em&gt;unambiguous&lt;/em&gt; set of guidelines for what qualifies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me start it off; but remember that we're not just trying to duplicate the old question. We're trying to make a new one that will work better with the community standards. For these purposes, I think it would be good to use the answers to suggest edits and the votes to, well, vote. But I'm open to alternatives.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've included a definition of what dragons &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; because this is one of those things that's highly debatable. While I do agree that most people know what a dragon is there are also a lot of things that are incredibly Dragon-like that aren't technically dragons. However, just saying &quot;dragon-like&quot; (or things like: list, of, examples) creates additional ambiguity. Feel free to frame your edit a different way if you think it'll work better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Dragons are widely thought of as the &quot;top dog&quot; in classic fantasy. What is your best idea for of a species to take their place at the top of the metaphorical food chain? Remember, this is your single &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; idea, so only post the one!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Must:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Have a mortal (impermanent) nature and must have some form of offspring.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Be inspired by mythology. It doesn't have to match its mythological origin exactly but it should be referenced and it should still fundamentally resemble the creature in question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Explain what &lt;em&gt;unique&lt;/em&gt; combination of &lt;em&gt;natural&lt;/em&gt; abilities makes this type of creature superior to a dragon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Must not:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Be a dragon. A dragon is defined as having 3 or more of the following traits.&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A serpentine body (scaly or otherwise).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A predator's fangs and/or claws.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Flight (with or without wings).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A breath weapon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-14T03:24:51.493" Title="Just For Fun Request: How to Tame the Dragons" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4833" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4832" CreationDate="2014-08-06T03:21:09.030" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the apex lifeform question stuck around for 1 reason, and 1 reason only: it had value. There are people building campaign settings, or working on games who can refer to these kinds of lists to develop non-human, non-dragon overarching bad guy types.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question, basically is either a soliciation of same, or an invitation to develop homebrew characters. If the apex lifeform question was too broad, this is too broad by several degrees more with the invitation to homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly, SE is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a good place to develop new homebrew. It's an &lt;em&gt;OK&lt;/em&gt; place to ask about specific issues your having while developing it, or issues that arise in play because of it. But it's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a great place for new thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm inclined to believe that this would be an excellent question in a forum, but is not a good fit for an SE site, even with an explicit rule break meta tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; attached to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even those questions should solve actual problems (the only one we have so far is the 5e character sheet tag which solves a pretty darn clear problem). The apex pred question solved some problems, and the preference should be to edit, cull answers and reopen that one, not ask a new one that is broader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: If your developing a question specifically for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; you probably should stop right then. If we're going to keep that tag, we should only use it for  specific site events. The tag has to have meaning and using it to save questions from the bin is a terrible way to give it that. We've already had a mechanic for that (Community Wiki) that has fallen completely out of favor because it was used for this very thing. In other words, let's not use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; as a carte blanc for bad questions. Let's use it as a specific exception for major site events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-08-06T03:58:22.313" LastActivityDate="2014-08-06T03:58:22.313" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4834" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4832" CreationDate="2014-08-06T05:17:33.803" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is rapidly turning into a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;Gorilla vs Shark question&lt;/a&gt;, but with more problematic bits.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like &quot;what's a dragon?&quot; and &quot;where do the edges of 'mythological' fall?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m gonna take a step back. This was originally not about &quot;who can beat up a dragon?&quot; but about &quot;what can be used in place of dragons when designing an adventure?&quot; That &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be framable in something closer to Stack Exchange terms. We are using the &quot;fun&quot; tag, but let’s actually stay within our site’s strengths and try to solve a real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As an exercise I'll try to re-write the question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll take that question and modify it just a bit for my purposes: &lt;strong&gt;What can be used in place of dragons when designing a setting?&lt;/strong&gt; [Note: I don’t think this is going to be a good question &lt;em&gt;because I don’t have the need driving it&lt;/em&gt;. However, it’s a fun and interesting exploration of how this kind of question COULD be asked, if it can be at all. At the end of the day I might conclude it’s not a good fit for the SE format.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Time for brainstorming! I'll collate it all into a proper question at the end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously first I need to define the &lt;em&gt;role&lt;/em&gt; that dragons have in a setting, before I can do anything else. There’s no universal dragon template--they can be almost ANYTHING depending on the culture/setting/system/etc--so I need to define dragons in terms of what I need them to be/do/provide in this particular context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First and foremost: a dragon’s presence in the world must be FUN for the players at the table. This means my players can interact with it somehow (even if it’s just running away, I suppose, but that seems unsatisfying). So the primary feature of the dragon in this context (&quot;apex life form,&quot; &quot;top dog,&quot;) is that the dragon's presence must colour everything about the setting. The existence of dragons is a defining element of living in the world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The dragon must be physically powerful.&lt;/strong&gt; Otherwise a particularly nasty virus, or a physically weak but politically savvy doppelganger, could easily colour the landscape and dominate the world without being a dragon substitute from a storytelling/interaction point of view. Also, many RPGs assume combat and it’s hard to fight a virus without going all “Fantastic Voyage.” Additionally &lt;strong&gt;the dragon must be high-profile.&lt;/strong&gt; Dragons aren’t a surprise the party finds out about ⅓ of the way into an adventure, they’re not subtle like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I’m not sure the specific nature of the setting is important but there’s one assumption I can make: it has intelligent humanoids. That point is crucial, as it leads to this criterion: &lt;strong&gt;A dragon must be an intelligent creature with social influence.&lt;/strong&gt; A dumb brute, or even an intelligent creature which disregards social forces, will be unable to sufficiently influence a town, a city, or a nation, no matter how powerful the creature is.&#xA;Besides, this lets the characters &lt;em&gt;talk&lt;/em&gt; with the dragon as well as run from/fight him: more fun for the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ll make some other assumptions right off the bat. Some are drawn from the original question, others will be justified later on: &lt;strong&gt;dragons are solitary, living and breathing creatures with lifespans and offspring.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I know what dragons are: intelligent, physically powerful mortal creatures with solitary lifestyles. What role do they have? &lt;strong&gt;They dominate their environment through both physical and social superiority&lt;/strong&gt;; wherever a dragon is, the influence of its desire is felt by everyone nearby. They’re mortal: dragons can be defeated/killed. But while they’re solitary dragons are not singular: when one dragon dies, another will likely want to take its place in the local power structure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Excellent! Now I know what dragons are &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; what they do. Now, what is it about dragons which I &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; want to see in my replacement creature? Dragon abilities are so variant that it’s impossible to make a list of “must not,” but I can probably make a list of “try to avoid as many of these as you can.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Breath weapons.&lt;/strong&gt; These things are so iconic of dragons that it shouldn’t limit the answers much. Your creature can have a breath weapon, as long as it’s not also otherwise extremely dragon-y.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Colossal reptilian, likely winged.&lt;/strong&gt; Unless it’s a very non-dragon-y kind of colossal winged reptilian (I wanna see that).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hoards treasure.&lt;/strong&gt; While any successful politician has deep pockets, dragons go above and beyond, collecting wealth for its own sake. Your creature should probably avoid such indulgences.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And now what don’t I want to see in my “top dog” that isn’t inherently dragon-y? I agree with some of the original list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Humanoids are out.&lt;/strong&gt; Go away, “man is the real monster.” You’re not welcome here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Modern creations are out.&lt;/strong&gt; The original question wanted answers with relatively ancient lineage. If the thing’s origin can be traced to an author or source, it should be several hundred years old at least.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And there we have it. Let’s put that together, shall we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;I can't believe it's not &lt;s&gt;butter&lt;/s&gt; a dragon!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;While building a setting, I want to use a non-dragon creature in the role which dragons would traditionally fill: an intelligent, physically powerful mortal creature that dominates its environment through both physical and societal superiority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Features I want:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A physically intimidating creature.&lt;/strong&gt; One on one vs the creature, a human’s odds should be laughable, but we want the possibility of an epic battle.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;An intelligent creature with societal influence.&lt;/strong&gt; The creature should be able to influence local or national politics, bribe important people, and generally enact its will through non-physical efforts. We want to be able to reason and bargain with it. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;An obvious creature.&lt;/strong&gt; Dragons don’t skulk around and manipulate things as a shadowy figure revealed only in the penultimate arcs of the campaign. If you’re in an adventure with a dragon you know there’s a dragon in the adventure. This creature should be similarly high-profile in its world.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A solitary creature.&lt;/strong&gt; Perhaps the dragon’s greatest weakness vs humanity is its inability to form lasting alliances with its own kind. This sets the dragon apart mentally, and makes it more reasonable for a group of adventurers to eventually achieve victory over a dragon. I’d like to keep that if possible.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A mortal creature.&lt;/strong&gt; Living, breathing, with offspring to carry on its role in the world. It’s got a lifespan, it can be killed, there’s more than one of them out there. It’s neither a god nor a one-in-the-world monster.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A creature sourced from ancient real-world fiction or mythology.&lt;/strong&gt; I’m looking for creatures sourced from our real world’s mythologies, with fairly ancient lineage. If the thing’s origin can be traced to an author or source, it should be several hundred years old at least.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Features I don’t want:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;These ones are non-compromisable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Humanoids are out.&lt;/strong&gt; Go away, “man is the real monster.” You’re not welcome here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Modern creations are out.&lt;/strong&gt; I’m looking for creatures with relatively ancient lineage. If the thing’s origin can be traced to an author or source, it should be several hundred years old at least. (Yes, this is expressed above already.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And please, avoid the typical dragon-y traits as much as possible:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No breath weapons.&lt;/strong&gt; These things are so iconic of dragons that it shouldn’t limit the answers much. If your creature has a breath weapon, it should be &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; non-dragon-y otherwise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No colossal (likely winged) reptilians.&lt;/strong&gt; Unless it’s a very non-dragon-y kind of colossal winged reptilian (I wanna see that).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No obsession with shiny things.&lt;/strong&gt; While any successful politician has deep pockets, dragons go above and beyond, collecting wealth for its own sake. Your creature should avoid such indulgences.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your answer suggests a creature which has to be adjusted to meet some of these criteria, try to make sure they’re minor points, few, and provide explicit justification of how/why the modified creature makes for a better answer. (e.g., if you suggest a humanoid monster and tell me, “Just say it looks different,” that’s gonna be a hard sell--harder if you also have to modify it from being an unintelligent one-of-a-kind immortal monster.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-08-06T05:17:33.803" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4832" CreationDate="2014-08-06T13:07:29.457" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the time has passed on this one.  We already have the one apex lifeform question littering the site.  If the proposal isn't &quot;delete that and start again with this one,&quot; we don't want a second incarnation of a questionable thing. You say &quot;the intent is not to duplicate it&quot; but this is duplicating it with 5% change thrown in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's not a problem with [just-for-fun] being &quot;the new community wiki,&quot; as basically a Meta-vetted once-in-a-while exception. The CW problem was that everyone used it all the time; believe me we won't let that happen. It's a safety valve to try to have alternate question types once in a while that the site community likes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can either retroactively [just-for-fun] that apex question and maybe add some guidance of &quot;how to answer this in a non-crappy manner.&quot; Or just close it. I don't think doing the same thing again is worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-06T13:07:29.457" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4836" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4837" CreationDate="2014-08-07T07:18:30.493" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was looking at the following question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45614/color-spray-vs-small-earth-elementals&quot;&gt;Color Spray vs. Small Earth Elementals&lt;/a&gt;, and found myself wondering about merging one answer into the other. In of themselves, I think they are both valid: diego's is succinct but only a single sentence, while Mourdos's contains plenty of useful links, but could maybe use some editing. Otherwise they contain very similar information, which is the crux here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now my question is not specific to this question, but ideally I think combining the answers would yield a slightly better quality answer; putting the snappy explanation at the top and the cleaned up links and explanation below for those who want some more info. I don't want to add a third answer that just contains more of the same identical information, so I thought editing one into the other (with attribution if too verbatim) might be a a good route. It feels a bit unfair and underhanded though, especially in this case where choosing which answer gets the improvement would be largely arbitrary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which way would be the best to proceed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit one into the other&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Suck it up and make a new answer that is almost identical to the two already there&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just clean them up and upvote the both of them&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm leaning toward 3 since most people will probably read several answers regardless of how good the first one is but I'm wondering if there is already a widely accepted method of dealing with these situations where the answers are factually identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14933" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-07T15:13:15.147" Title="Should I edit one user's answer into another to make it better?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4836" CreationDate="2014-08-07T07:24:48.523" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Better answers are better. If you see a need for and are capable of providing a better answer that goes beyond simple edits, answer it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel your answer is too similar, do &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; research or attach it to your personal expertise. If you want to give credit, you may do so, but we want the best possible answers at the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this specific case, neither of those answers is exceptional. If you felt bad about simply merging them, you could provide suggestions of equivalent spells that &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; do what the querent wants to do against earth elementals or how you've disabled earth elementals with save-or-sucks in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-08-07T07:24:48.523" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4836" CreationDate="2014-08-07T11:47:14.410" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's some previous meta questions about editing, to give you some guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3563/is-it-ok-to-drastically-edit-anothers-answers&quot;&gt;Is it ok to drastically edit another's answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/456/how-should-i-approach-editing&quot;&gt;How should I approach editing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general guideline is that editing an answer to improve clarity is great. Editing an answer to change the meaning is generally not. If you're concerned that your edits to combine the two answers would change the meaning of them, then your best bet is to create a third answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IMO, looking at the two answers that are there, they are saying nearly the same thing. Unless you're adding new information, any clarity improvements are likely doable with an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Mourdos said you could feel free to edit his, so in this case you've got a green light to do editing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-08-07T11:47:14.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4836" CreationDate="2014-08-07T15:13:15.147" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;A good solution to situations where you feel that the &amp;ldquo;best&amp;rdquo; answer is not any one of the existing answers, but rather a combination of several existing answers, is to use Community Wiki. That way you can combine several answers, and not be seen as &amp;ldquo;taking credit&amp;rdquo; for it, since you get no reputation for CW answers. It&amp;rsquo;s also more polite to the original answerers, as the privilege to edit CW answers is &lt;em&gt;vastly&lt;/em&gt; less than the privilege to edit questions in general, which means even if you synthesize answers from lower-rep users, they can still edit the result if they think you have gotten something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing one answer to include a second answer is usually not a good idea. That&amp;rsquo;s giving person A credit for person B&amp;rsquo;s work, which is mildly unfair, but also potentially putting words in person A&amp;rsquo;s mouth, which is quite a lot more potentially rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But an important caveat here is &lt;strong&gt;you can&amp;rsquo;t just copy and paste answers together.&lt;/strong&gt; Your answer is still required to be a solid, stand-alone answer &amp;ndash; after all, the whole point of this approach is to develop one comprehensive answer. You have to perform a real synthesis and bring the points together in a coherent way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-08-07T15:13:15.147" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4840" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5190" CreationDate="2014-08-11T03:53:47.383" Score="12" ViewCount="157" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE has been receiving spellcaster spam for years (such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/45798/revisions&quot;&gt;this 10k only example&lt;/a&gt;). I understand that there's some machine learning behind our spam flags, but this stuff seems to regularly fall through the cracks. That's probably because we talk about priests and spellcasting and witch doctors all the time anyway, and thus train the machine that this stuff is fine. Its natural learning seems to not be adequate in this case, and I think it needs some manual guidance to deal with this problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This spam has other factors in common beside its subject matter we can use to identify it: it always arrives as answers, it usually contains no formatting or line breaks (proper, double-enter ones - single-enters seem common), probably contains a lot of capitalised words, and &lt;em&gt;they always contain an email address.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I got curious how many of our &lt;em&gt;valid&lt;/em&gt; posts actually contain emails - we have only &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/216707/posts-containing-email-addresses&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here's a data explorer query&lt;/a&gt; that makes a naive search for stuff that might even vaguely resemble an email address (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/237868/152515&quot;&gt;thanks to Shog9&lt;/a&gt;). Of the 19 results, most are self-censored expletives, @-mentions, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37270/how-can-i-get-anydice-to-determine-these-odds/37271#37271&quot;&gt;anydice syntax&lt;/a&gt;. Putting those aside, here's the two that actually &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; contain email addresses:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8498/1204&quot;&gt;What is an &amp;quot;Irensavelite&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/11124/1204&quot;&gt;What campaign wiki - or other collaborative tool - has these features?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of these are questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we get spellcasting spam answers containing email addresses &lt;em&gt;regularly&lt;/em&gt;, and we have &lt;em&gt;absolutely no&lt;/em&gt; valid answers that contain email addresses (we may have received ones that have since been edited, like those people who say &quot;hey contact me at noob@example.com if you want to know more&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could our spam filter be tuned to be super paranoid about answers with email addresses? Like, as in Matrix anyone-could-be-an-agent levels of paranoia? &lt;em&gt;Especially&lt;/em&gt; when the post contains no other formatting or double line breaks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-11-30T12:25:21.097" Title="Could our spam filter be made extraordinarily paranoid about answers with emails in them?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|spam|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4822" CreationDate="2014-08-12T07:49:07.990" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answers that are bad should be downvoted. The answers that are good should be upvoted. And that seems to generally be happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's working QUITE well in the SE format.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; But the effects of such voting take time to work their magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The guy with the list answer might be encouraged to break it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2014-08-12T07:49:07.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4842" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-12T10:32:10.800" Score="5" ViewCount="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed we have both a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/loot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;loot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;loot&lt;/a&gt; tag and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/treasure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;treasure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;treasure&lt;/a&gt; tag. They both mean the same thing - providing or acquiring items - and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/loot+treasure&quot;&gt;four questions are tagged with both&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/loot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;loot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;loot&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/treasure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;treasure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;treasure&lt;/a&gt;, thus keeping &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/treasure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;treasure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;treasure&lt;/a&gt; as the main tag? I don't have any score in either tag, so I can't suggest the synonym the usual way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Treasure's the more formal term, and apparently the more commonly used tag by a small margin. Plus it has a (very brief) tag wiki, and loot doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-08-12T12:04:29.007" Title="Synonymize [loot] -&gt; [treasure]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4843" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4844" CreationDate="2014-08-12T21:25:00.450" Score="3" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I've noticed that at the bottom of questions, there is a rather odd message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NltIW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine it's supposed to say something like &quot;...via email, Twitter, Reddit, or Facebook&quot;, but it seems like those other options are missing. I think that either other options should be added or it should be shortened to just &quot;Share a link to this question via email.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="7976" LastEditDate="2014-08-13T08:16:59.497" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T08:16:59.497" Title="&quot;Share a link to this question via e-mail, , , or .&quot;" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4843" CreationDate="2014-08-12T23:40:56.563" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You guessed right, it usually says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EEegX.png&quot; alt=&quot;Know someone who can answer? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook.&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your exact scenario has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/215219/152515&quot;&gt;reported before on meta&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196366/facebook-playing-hide-and-seek&quot;&gt;The cause&lt;/a&gt; is that you probably have an ad blocker or privacy extension that's filtering out any social sharing links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T00:49:54.670" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4845" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4847" CreationDate="2014-08-13T03:55:06.943" Score="2" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I gave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45847/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer, I may have provided good information, but I didn't actually &lt;em&gt;answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. Now there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45917/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer, which does answer the question, or at least comes a lot closer. Should I remove my answer? In general, what is the correct course of action for answers that don't answer the question that was asked?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45883/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer for another example of an answer that, while potentially useful, doesn't answer the question it was posted on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T04:21:52.343" Title="Answers that do not answer the question" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4845" CreationDate="2014-08-13T04:21:29.630" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Feel free and remove or edit your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that do not answer the question posed are liable to be downvoted and/or flagged for deletion; mods routinely delete posts that are not answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T04:21:29.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4845" CreationDate="2014-08-13T04:21:52.343" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's two topics here you're asking about: answers that don't answer the question, and then what to do when someone comes along with a better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3328/1204&quot;&gt;prior reference&lt;/a&gt; on the first issue actually hits on the second one too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers should actually answer the question. This is non-negotiable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The real value of multiple answers is different perspectives.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer isn't fundamentally answering the question, well, make it do that. You can provide extra relevant information &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; you also answer the question. (See that answer I linked for how to do that without just repeating what everyone else said.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone comes along with what you feel is a better answer, leave yours there. &lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; may find it better, but let everyone else also decide. They might be more accurate, but you might be the only one to explain the answer clearly. You could improve your answer if you want, I often tend to do  that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the question you're answering specifically, I think it needs some improvement and I've left a comment accordingly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting to close for now, since this is generating both &amp;quot;let me tell you what's different&amp;quot; answers and answers trying to provide guides of varying officiality. Both kinds of questions are fine, but I think this should be narrowed down to one. –  doppelgreener 1 min ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T04:21:52.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4848" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-13T08:04:48.587" Score="6" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have this tag: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;. I thought this was about &lt;em&gt;creating adventures.&lt;/em&gt; That seems to be what people use it for, too. Because, y'know, 'writing' them is the standard way to make them. Apparently it isn't about that though, because its summary says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question focuses on the writing aspect of adventure creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So apparently it's just about one aspect of the creation process. Not really sure what the &quot;writing aspect&quot; is exactly, or more to the point, what it &lt;em&gt;isn't.&lt;/em&gt; The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/adventure-writing/info&quot;&gt;tag wiki&lt;/a&gt; confuses me further:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions with this tag are inquiring about writing adventure material, preparing story material for a game, constructing a story, and a flow or series of paths the players might take and the encounters they will find along the way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... because that seems to describe &lt;em&gt;everything in creating adventures,&lt;/em&gt; unless we exclude the research portions or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's this tag really for, and how should it be used? Do we really need it to exist, or do we really need it to just be about &quot;the writing aspect&quot; as opposed to the whole creation process?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we keep it if we also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T03:23:15.653" Title="Do we need the [adventure-writing] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4849" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4848" CreationDate="2014-08-13T08:26:30.247" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can't we just re-write the tag wiki to express the broader meaning it's being used for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-08-13T08:26:30.247" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4850" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-14T04:05:16.530" Score="8" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45959/can-physical-devices-be-hidden-inside-a-host-in-sr5&quot;&gt;yet another Shadowrun question&lt;/a&gt;, and I noticed it's attracting views quite a bit more slowly than most.  I didn't give it much thought until just now, when I went to the Unanswered Questions list looking to see if I could answer some questions, and noticed mine wasn't there.  So I went back to my question only to find the one answer it has - which doesn't answer the question at all, as I explained in my comment on that answer - has pulled an upvote, disqualifying the question from being considered unanswered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would strongly prefer to have the question listed in the Unanswered Questions list, but have no clue how I would get it back there.  Ask the poster that misunderstood the question to delete his answer (after folding my comment into the question, since it clarifies that misunderstanding)?  Downvote the answer to return its score to zero?  I don't think &quot;wrong&quot; answers are normally something we flag for, but I'm still reasonably new to the community, maybe I'm wrong and I should flag it?  Or should I just accept it and hope the question attracts an answer eventually without the benefit of being where most people looking to answer a question look?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14948" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-08-14T04:13:27.557" Title="&quot;Unanswered&quot; questions not showing up in that list because of a single upvote" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4851" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4850" CreationDate="2014-08-14T04:06:35.790" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote early, downvote often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is a bad answer, downvote it. If there are no upvoted (as the sum total of their upvote) answers to a question, it goes back onto the unanswered list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-08-14T04:13:27.557" LastActivityDate="2014-08-14T04:13:27.557" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4852" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4855" CreationDate="2014-08-15T21:07:15.343" Score="14" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example, I have the following answer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45270/9058&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45270/9058&lt;/a&gt;.  When I wrote the answer, the only official material available was the Basic Rules, so that's obviously where I quoted from.  That's not the case anymore, and I could quote from either the Basic Rules or the Player's Handbook, as the text is available in both. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the supplementing text is available in both the Basic Rules and the Player's Handbook, where should we quote from?--do we care?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we proactively edit references from one to the other?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9058" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-19T19:55:53.473" Title="Should we prefer D&amp;D 5E answers that reference the Basic Rules or the Player's Handbook?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4853" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4852" CreationDate="2014-08-15T21:20:07.173" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't care. No need to prefer one or the other. Just cite your source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-15T21:20:07.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4854" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-15T21:47:22.543" Score="2" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question has an answer that partially answers the question, but not fully what should I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Options&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave an answer that only answers the unanswered portion of the question. Con: May make for a short answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave an answer that fully answers the question. Con: Duplicates the other answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave a comment on the answer or question. Con: Unless user chooses to incorporate into their question it won't have good visibility and might be deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit answer. Con: Substantially changes answer which might offend user or get get rejected.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14649" LastActivityDate="2014-08-16T00:25:43.553" Title="What to do with a partially answered question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4852" CreationDate="2014-08-15T22:48:01.457" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;It might be helpful (I know I do this when I do 4e cites from the compendium and include the book ref), when available, to cite &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt;. However, citing whichever one is more convenient should be fine. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, it's sounding like the PHB and BD&amp;amp;D don't &lt;em&gt;conflict&lt;/em&gt; at all with BD&amp;amp;D simply being  a subset of the MM/DMG/PHB. So it shouldn't matter which one you quote as long as you tell us &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;where you found it&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; actually be better overall to quote BD&amp;amp;D when you can, simply because that's more verifiable, but like I said, and as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4853/1084&quot;&gt;mxy said&lt;/a&gt;, in general it really doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-08-15T22:48:01.457" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4856" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4854" CreationDate="2014-08-15T22:49:37.647" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you know the &lt;em&gt;rest&lt;/em&gt; and there is already a partial answer, add an answer that answers the whole thing. If your source for the part that is already covered is the other answer, make sure you credit them and link to it. We prefer &lt;em&gt;full&lt;/em&gt; answers when we can get them. So adding a &lt;em&gt;more complete&lt;/em&gt; answer to an already answered question is both supported and encouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I actually literally &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; did this. On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4855/1084&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, the first answer was OK, but didn't look at &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; nuance in the issue at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-08-15T22:49:37.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4854" CreationDate="2014-08-16T00:25:43.553" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What to do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Answer it!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't discourage duplicating answers, because they're never actually exact duplicates. Differences in phrasing, organisation, or reasoning can make two answers that seem like duplicates quite different, and the votes will show the difference. The only kind of duplication we discourage is when it's so short that it can't possible add anything useful over the existing answers. (Those usually don't get deleted, but they do get downvoted into obscurity.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in this case, submitting your own answer that's complete (2) is one of the preferred courses of action, as it has no actual con and will probably be a better answer. You can leave a comment instead (3) if you like, but you're right that the author may ignore it; if they do you can leave your own answer, if you remember to return to that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing the answer (4) is &lt;em&gt;sometimes&lt;/em&gt; appropriate, but that's rare and you'll generally know it when you see it. Most often a new answer is better so the reputation goes to the person who actually did the work, not just whoever posted an incomplete answer first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The least helpful is (1), because then the information is split across the answers. At which point, a third person would be justified in coming along and writing a complete answer to solve that division.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-08-16T00:25:43.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4858" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-08-17T02:16:07.500" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As @SevenSidedDie points out, as the &lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/the-world-of-darkness-second-edition/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;very recent news about nWoD 2nd Edition&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To summerise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nWoD 2nd Ed is the same rules as introduced in the God Machine Rules Update&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a new Core book with the revision incorperated is coming out&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;so the core rules for mortals will no longer be predicated on only the old nwod core rules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Blood and Smoke will be receiving basically cosmetic changes only.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the publishers are calling it World of Darkness Second Edition, and referring to it as &quot;&lt;em&gt;the second edition of the new World of Darkness.&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this in mind, &#xA;I suggest the following additional clarifications be taken (in addition to those suggested in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-gmc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-gmc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-gmc&lt;/a&gt; becomes a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; is kept as it is for nwod 1sted. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-1e&lt;/a&gt; can be synonymised later &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; required.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the new books come out a drive is done to edit all old &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-gmc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-gmc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-gmc&lt;/a&gt; questions to make sure they are clear, and that they show up in google searches for both terms.&#xA;(I am happy to do this myself)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastActivityDate="2014-08-17T02:16:07.500" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3554" CreationDate="2014-08-17T09:02:00.687" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The read-only banner kinda looks outright broken now, given its recent content changes. Take a close look at the text of the banner:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Main&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cSeID.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Meta&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qTKv8.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Beta site for comparison&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5ulvK.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-08-17T13:05:53.260" LastActivityDate="2014-08-17T13:05:53.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4860" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-17T14:11:47.937" Score="4" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed today that there is a bug that means I keep getting unread message notifications, even for messages I've already read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is anyone else having this problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="138" LastEditDate="2014-08-18T19:13:45.157" LastActivityDate="2014-08-18T19:13:45.157" Title="Inbox unread messages keep appearing, even after reading" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4861" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-18T04:58:30.747" Score="-8" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are users on this site that are poisionong the site for me. How can I block them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried flagging their comments but there is no response, and my notifications are spammed with their activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T21:08:23.677" Title="Is there a way to block users?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4861" CreationDate="2014-08-18T05:11:00.147" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. There isn't. This is by design: if a user is behaving badly, it is imperative that the moderators are informed (via flags) and address the situation. Be aware that moderators would tend to contact users privately in these situations rather than making a spectacle of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also be unhealthy if users were able to squelch valid criticisms using such a blocking function - remember, many others may read these posts as the years roll by, and if there is a problem or a needed clarification then it is important that it is pointed out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2014-08-29T21:08:23.677" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T21:08:23.677" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4861" CreationDate="2014-08-18T07:27:12.223" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, there is a way to block/ignore users, however its a browser plugin script, rather than something which works on all devices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3360/ignore-users-script&quot;&gt;Ignore Users Script&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-18T07:27:12.223" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4864" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-08-18T13:32:51.017" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/the-world-of-darkness-second-edition/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Onyx Path has answered your prayers&lt;/a&gt; we should update nwod-god-machine to be nwod-2.0 and imho, nwod to nwod-1.0 allowing for nwod to be used for any questions that apply to both since the setting hasn't  really changed, and for the time being it seems they're trying to keep most/all fluff alive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastActivityDate="2014-08-18T13:32:51.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4860" CreationDate="2014-08-18T19:13:36.067" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We had problems with a datacenter test that left our caching layer in a partially broken state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All issues should now be resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/268957/topbar-notifications-dont-go-away&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/268957/topbar-notifications-dont-go-away&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="138" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-17T10:37:54.603" LastActivityDate="2014-08-18T19:13:36.067" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4866" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4852" CreationDate="2014-08-19T03:01:59.570" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quite a bit of the text in the PDF is directly quoted from the Players Handbook. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12357" LastActivityDate="2014-08-19T03:01:59.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4867" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4852" CreationDate="2014-08-19T19:55:53.473" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is in both, cite both, and quote from both as needed. If they're the same text, quote once, give both citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2014-08-19T19:55:53.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4753" CreationDate="2014-08-19T21:11:19.773" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first raffle period has closed! Thanks to everyone who participated in it! In total, &lt;strong&gt;98 upvoted questions from 47 users&lt;/strong&gt; were generated in the time period, for 98 total tickets earned. An interesting observation from this, &lt;strong&gt;36% of question askers (17 in total) were newly registered at some point after July 15th&lt;/strong&gt;, which is a pretty healthy amount of new volume.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wanted to do the drawing as soon as a tabulated the tickets, but seeing as the chatrooms were all but empty at the time, I've decided to hold off the drawing by a day so that we can get some witnesses and more importantly excitement! I will also be drawing the winner of the bonus raffle at the time. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The drawing was held in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17249772#17249772&quot;&gt;the Fifth Edition Chatroom&lt;/a&gt; at about 17:00 UTC (1:00 PM EDT) on Wednesday&lt;/strong&gt;. The drawing was done with a simulated 1d100 (via 2d10) in accordance to &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5amUW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this results table&lt;/a&gt;. The bonus drawing was done with a simulated 1d5 (via 1d10) with Joshua as the first 3/5 and Oblivious as the latter 2/5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations to &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/541/rampion&quot;&gt;rampion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; for winning the raffle for the PHB! And to &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3529/joshua-aslan-smith&quot;&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; for winning the bonus raffle. Emails should go out later with forms to fill out for receiving your prizes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T16:37:12.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4869" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4893" CreationDate="2014-08-20T14:29:11.700" Score="10" ViewCount="502" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; is a meta-tag and should be burninated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The criteria:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Only Tag:&lt;/strong&gt; If the tag can’t work as the only tag on a question, it’s probably a meta-tag.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; doesn't really describe any area of a problem. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It just describes who is asking about the problem&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a tag: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/experienced-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;experienced-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;experienced-gm&lt;/a&gt; would be a meta tag, so thus as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; is  also&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;subjective meaning&lt;/strong&gt;: If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a meta-tag&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what is a new GM? is it first session, first campaign, first time with a new system, is it getting a new GM, it it having only GMed for 6 months, or 6 sessions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking as the questions there seems to be no clear pattern amongst them.&#xA;It is closely tied to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; tags.&#xA;Also to some of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; and related tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However do correct me if I am wrong and we should keep the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T14:59:52.500" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T14:59:52.500" Title="burninate new-gm tag" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4870" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4869" CreationDate="2014-08-20T18:41:44.550" Score="33" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's not a meta-tag…&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; alone on a question. Consider the hypothetical question, &quot;How do I start GMing?&quot; Assuming it was asked in a way that wasn't too broad, it would need at least one tag, and the only one that would fit is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hypothetical demos aside, there are a number of questions we have where the newness of a GM is an inherent part of the problem, and those do justify the tag's existence. A hypothetical [experienced-gm] tag isn't symmetrical to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;: there are no problems inherent to being an experienced GM,† so it unlike &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; it would only be a meta-tag for labeling the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; tag, but it's not a bad tag either and doesn't deserve burnination.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;† You could argue that being experienced can lead to becoming a hidebound GM, but that's being a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, not being an experienced GM.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;… It's just being misused as one&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions where the tag is being (mis)used only to indicate who is asking, or as an apology, the usual solution suffices: remove the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end, the tag wiki should probably be worked on to emphasise that it's not for describing the asker, it's for tagging problems that are inherently entangled with being a novice GM. That won't stop it from being misplaced on questions, but &lt;strong&gt;correct tagging is the job of experienced users anyway&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; gets misused &lt;em&gt;way&lt;/em&gt; less than a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, which we're fine with having to clean up after constantly. It only looks like a lot of misuse now because we haven't been paying attention and have let it get out of hand. Going forward, it'll be easy to keep it from being abused as a meta-tag, just like it's easy to keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; from being used for the current edition. (Easier, actually, because we don't need to wait for the asker to clarify before we can fix misplacement of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It's extremely valuable in Search&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike [beginner]-type tags on sites like SO, where searching on it would get you a useless mix of problems about disparate, unrelated programming languages, searching on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; here effectively provides an ever-improving guide for new GMs. Provided we're curating posts properly and taking the tag off questions where it's being misused as a meta tag, what remains is a selection of common problems and pitfalls of novice GMs, with ready solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now that search doesn't look so great here, but the tag is way overused and due for cleanup to eliminate its meta-tag mistags. A selection of our top-voted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; questions shows what we could have after cleanup:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/415/your-friend-wants-to-learn-the-ways-of-the-dungeon-master-what-do-you-do&quot;&gt;Your friend wants to learn the ways of the Dungeon Master, what do you do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4457/what-is-role-playing-and-where-do-i-start&quot;&gt;What is role-playing, and where do I start?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22625/how-do-i-learn-to-become-a-good-gm&quot;&gt;How do I learn to become a good GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2611/how-to-remember-all-the-rules&quot;&gt;How to remember all the rules?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45089/how-do-i-analyze-and-improve-myself-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;How do I analyze and improve myself as a GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31636/how-to-guide-a-new-dm-through-his-first-game-as-an-experienced-dm-turned-player&quot;&gt;How to guide a new DM through his first game (as an experienced DM turned player)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24941/im-fairly-new-to-dd-but-want-to-gm-where-do-i-go-from-here&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;m fairly new to D&amp;amp;D but want to GM; where do I go from here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/488/how-to-encourage-the-gm-curious&quot;&gt;How to encourage the GM-curious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22207/challenging-pre-made-campaign-for-veteran-players-but-easy-on-new-gms&quot;&gt;Challenging pre-made campaign for veteran players but easy on new GMs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1976/what-major-differences-are-there-between-convention-dming-and-home-dming&quot;&gt;What major differences are there between convention DMing and home DMing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5601/advice-for-a-new-gm-taking-over-for-an-old-one&quot;&gt;Advice for a new GM taking over for an old one?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35765/how-can-i-decide-whether-being-the-gm-is-right-for-me&quot;&gt;How can I decide whether being the GM is right for me?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See how awesome those are, when they're grouped together like that and the unrelated questions are cut out? Quite frankly, I actually didn't expect them to be that great a list, but now that I see what the tag &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be, what kind of resource we've been sitting on and neglecting, now I'm actually quite excited to tackle pruning the tag to bring out this list of awesome on the actual site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should keep the tag, and aspire to make it a small, well-curated set of questions that maintain high value and are immediately useful to someone learning (or stumbling over) how to GM, kind of like a set of frequently-asked... questions!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Besides which we'd have to keep it anyway, so no burninating&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For discoverability, any replacement for the tag would need to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym, because that's the most natural phrase people think to type when looking for or asking the sorts of questions above (and why it was folksonomied into existence originally). Burnination prevents the tag from being re-created, so what we'd end up with is more people just putting the reviled &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag on more things for lack of any other tag they can find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we can synonym or burninate our way out of people trying to label themselves in the tags. For a tag that has a mix of good non-meta uses and bad meta uses, burnination doesn't improve the situation and might make it worse. That brings it back to the same conclusion as way up above: it's our job to fix question tags that new users misapply. We do it all the time, and adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; to the &quot;regular offenders&quot; is a drop in the bucket.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the tag alive because it's useful,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;clean the ever-loving crap out of our questions that only (mis)use it as a meta tag,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;then just keep it in mind during the usual cleaning edits on new questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions that still have the tag after that will be a collection of &lt;em&gt;solid gold &lt;strong&gt;awesome&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-08-21T04:50:02.890" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4869" CreationDate="2014-08-20T23:02:13.540" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a meta tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Overflow's [beginner] tag is one of the canon examples of a meta tag from &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;our canonical meta tag blog post&lt;/a&gt;. As a reminder, I'll quote part of that blog post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The reason meta-tags are a problem is that they do not describe the content of the question. They describe some other aspect of the question, like the author’s skill level, or the author’s motivation for asking it, or generally what “kind” of question it is (poll, how-to, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[beginner] was used alongside questions like &quot;[c#] What is operator overloading?&quot; to indicate the person asking the question was new, but it never added much substance to the question. It described the author's skill level, rather than the content of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of that is exactly the same as how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; is defined (see their tag wiki extract) and how it's used. It's the same for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie brought up the hypothetical &quot;How do I start GMing?&quot;, suggesting that [new-gm] was the only valid tag. That's not the case though: this is a question asking for an introduction to the arts and methods and skills of GMing, which fits &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;. [new-gm] on the other hand doesn't describe the topic, just says the person's new. Perhaps a general tag on GMing would fit better, but this might be the only case we use it, and we're already busy eradicating that one (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SevenSidedDie pointed out, lots of problems arise because someone is a new GM (or player). But that doesn't make it tag-worthy. A lot of our [new-gm] questions take the form of &quot;I am new to this game and do not understand {thing},&quot; but that's not substantially different to a straightforward &quot;I do not understand {thing}.&quot; The latter could be asked by someone at any skill level. If you're a new GM, you're new and asking about &lt;em&gt;something,&lt;/em&gt; and there is probably a tag for that something, and you can just use that, describe your situation (and confusion), and we'll explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Try it, and see what [new-gm] actually adds: Go through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; questions. Imagine the [new-gm] tag falling off, pretend the person's been playing for a few months, see if it fundamentally changes anything much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Questions on newness: let's find a new tag for them.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie collected a bunch of questions that are inherently about newness to the game. Those are pretty awesome. So it's clear our site has a subset of questions specifically about newness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for those questions, we can and should do better. [new-gm] is still a meta tag on those, because it describes the author and not the topic of the question. The &lt;em&gt;topic&lt;/em&gt; is &quot;GMing fundamentals&quot; or something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it still gets used as a meta tag everywhere else to say &quot;I am new, here is my question.&quot; Its usage sucks. So for these newness questions, we should find a tag that won't be misapplied by every new GM to every question they ask just because they're new.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should work out what new tag we can use, retag those questions with it, then burninate [new-gm] from everything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-08-21T01:43:00.940" LastActivityDate="2014-08-21T01:43:00.940" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4872" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-20T23:23:19.637" Score="9" ViewCount="1554" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46433/what-is-advantage&quot;&gt;What is advantage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was asked earlier and addressed something that while trivial, is a significant rules query. The term advantage, while having a specific meaning in 5e, is used as a noun without an article which is uncommon in typical English grammar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was generated by genuine confusion (likely a failure to read the complete rules, but whatever). Seeing this as a likely frequent scenario, and a question that could come up on countless occasions, I did something about it. I edited the question into a canonical &quot;what is advantage&quot; question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently missing the point, a moderator closed the question. There is a good answer on this question already, it's going to be a question that a lot of people have. Yeah, it's low hanging fruit, but it's a question we can dupe other questions into.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the point of closing this question? It's a valid question, and it benefits the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The larger issue though is that this is a first question from a new user. We accommodate &lt;em&gt;tons&lt;/em&gt; of these for other systems. By closing a valid first question from a new user we're driving them away, not helping them feel at home here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: My first instinct was to close this, it's a simple rules question, surely there was something we could dupe it to...but no, we don't have a question that asks &quot;what is advantage?&quot; so I edited this to be it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-07-22T16:09:46.013" Title="Reopen canonical &quot;What is advantage?&quot; question" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4872" CreationDate="2014-08-20T23:33:18.610" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do not need trivial rules definitions littering this site.  We might as well have &quot;What is Armor Class,&quot; &quot;What is a longsword,&quot; &quot;What is a Dexterity saving throw,&quot; &quot;What is an orc,&quot; etc. We are not here to reproduce rulebooks in their entirety, one snippet at a time. &quot;Canonical&quot; or not. These are not valid. Furthermore, for non-open licensed systems, I think we start to surpass the bounds of fair use as the only possible answer is 'reprint the rule here.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is different than &quot;I don't understand how something works.&quot; This is something in the index, a &quot;you didn't bother to look this up&quot; question. It &quot;shows no research effort,&quot; in the words of the downvote button. We do not add value to the site by fielding these. &quot;It's in the index, man.&quot; is the proper response. I understand and sympathize with those that have trouble reading a RPG book, but that's not a problem we can or should fix here; same with basic math. I'd close &quot;the book says to round down, how do I round down&quot; too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-08-20T23:42:39.253" LastActivityDate="2014-08-20T23:42:39.253" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4869" CreationDate="2014-08-21T06:10:52.780" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking from the standpoint of answering questions, I'm fine with New-GM being on the list of tags.  Quite frankly, I assume anyone I'm answering is knowledgeable about their system and wants to broaden their scope.  &lt;strong&gt;When I see &quot;new-gm&quot; I see the need to be more specific&lt;/strong&gt;, articulate, and to offer things that aren't inherently in the question because the OP might not even know the analogous options are even a thing.  There's a lot that I think regular users on this cite take for granted as sources and lingo and as of yet, there is no master index saying &quot;look here first&quot; by system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3273" LastActivityDate="2014-08-21T06:10:52.780" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4773" CreationDate="2014-08-22T13:18:35.100" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The clear answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ooWoD: The original classic World of Darkness releases.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;onWoD: The new World of Darkness games, starting with 2004's &lt;strong&gt;The World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt; and going until the &lt;strong&gt;God Machine Update&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;noWoD: The 20th Anniversary editions and the Classic World of Darkness revival.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nnWoD: Second edition new World of Darkness games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2014-08-22T13:18:35.100" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4877" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4879" CreationDate="2014-08-23T23:49:35.733" Score="10" ViewCount="293" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41089/why-did-the-dd-devs-design-spontaneous-casters-to-lose-out-on-a-spell-level-com&quot;&gt;We have a question asking for the game creator's intent behind Sorcerers being penalized when they get new spell levels relative to Wizards&lt;/a&gt;. There's no problem with the question itself, except that it's acting as a newbie trap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I mean by that is that the highest rated answer given is at 0, and that's only because it was preemptively deleted by a mod before it could be downvoted into last year. There's four other answers (two deleted), at -3, -6, -4, and -8. All but one is from a relatively low rep user (the exception is over 2k). The answers in question all deserve the downvotes, as they don't address the main criteria in the question (which I went and bolded a while ago to try and make obvious).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asker and the downvoters are not doing anything wrong, but the net result is a question that's acting as a trap for users that don't know better. I don't think that is making for a great experience for those (generally newer) users, but I'm not sure what else can be done to make it clear that speculation is not wanted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any ideas? Or is this just a case where everything is working as intended and people just need to learn the hard way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T01:42:55.350" Title="Is there any way to prevent &quot;newbie trap&quot; questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4877" CreationDate="2014-08-24T00:19:25.753" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/06/new-protected-question-status/&quot;&gt;protected question&lt;/a&gt; status is intended to do this, but it's for &lt;em&gt;truly&lt;/em&gt; new users (10 rep and less). This question's poor answers are not coming from that segment of the population, so it's not useful in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if this means that this question is working as intended in the school of hard knocks, or if there's something else which can kick in here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T00:19:25.753" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4877" CreationDate="2014-08-24T00:30:19.687" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not just newbies.  Some people just can't resist answering a question, even when they have no direct knowledge of the issue at hand. Happens on questions like that more just because it seems accessible and has no answers on it (there's less motivation to answer an already answered question, especially if you're talking out your butt). Even high-rep site users fall prey to this - &quot;I'm sure I can answer that even without direct knowledge, I'm so smart&quot; (the recent Spider Whip spell question comes to mind, where everyone's answering without knowing/owning the spell description and begging the OP to add the whole thing - hint, maybe those that own the Advanced Class Guide would be better answer-ers). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All we can do is enforce Good Subjective, Bad Subjective with the white hot fury of a thousand suns. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T00:30:19.687" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4880" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4881" CreationDate="2014-08-24T01:48:22.967" Score="4" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45527/1015&quot;&gt;This question was closed for being too opinion based&lt;/a&gt;. To be fair, I got enough answers, but I'd like to bring it up here, because I feel almost every question under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; is opinion based. I feel that this question was broadly applicable, and yet well scoped enough to not be too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the &quot;opinion based&quot; motivation was created for questions that on this site would be, D&amp;amp;D3.5 vs Pathfinder, or even D&amp;amp;D3.5 vs 4.0, where answers are both so broad and are likely to result in answers that are simply flame wars. Categories like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; don't have scientific answers; you can't glean the answer from a rule in the book like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;; there isn't years of scientific research on the art of being a GM; so by definition they are opinion based. There are even questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46406/1015&quot;&gt;that are too broad and too narrow at the same time&lt;/a&gt; (I'd close this one because it appears the question is simply about a very personal case and as worded I feel it's unlikely to help others, also answers are likely to be simple advice and just opinion: talk to her, leave, yada).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My point is that I feel my question has enough quality to be reopened, and that it is at least at par for this site.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I would also like to state that I don't feel the suggestion of restricting it to be system specific actually improves the question, because I personally don't think &quot;what makes good roleplaying?&quot; when restricting it to table top, and for the purpose of handing out xp for it, varies that much.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If people do not believe it is of that quality, I would like to understand why it is worse than the existing opinion based questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T22:42:37.540" Title="Why is it &quot;too opinion-based&quot; to ask about good role playing for the purpose of giving out experience?" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4880" CreationDate="2014-08-24T02:48:43.293" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because there are a lot of different games and theories of play - too many for an answer to this without narrowing it down more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is like asking &quot;How do I know if someone's programming style is good so I can promote them?&quot;  Do you not think you'd be met with a cavalcade of &quot;what language? What kind of programming? What's important in your environment?&quot; Similarly, there are a lot of very different RPGs and they go about defining and rewarding roleplay very different - trad games vs Apocalypse World or Fiasco are very different in their approach to a character, even.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is both too broad and, as it's very broad, any answer would be totally opinion based.  Provide some more criteria, and it will narrow and a less randomly opinionated answer might become possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than that, subjectve questions are fine within bounds; we use &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; to analyze both questions and answers for legitimacy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also encourage people to ask about &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; problem here.  If your problem is how to award XP for RP in WoD, ask &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt;.  Artificially widening it does no one any good; you'll get worse answers to your problem and others will be dissuaded from asking the question in a more appropriate context later since a general one seems to exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-08-24T04:43:19.090" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T04:43:19.090" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4880" CreationDate="2014-08-24T06:52:25.127" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What is &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; roleplaying is a matter of taste&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason it's closed is because it can't have objective answers or Good Subjective answers. Any answer to what is &quot;good&quot; roleplaying is, inherently, a matter of taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only is it a matter of taste and therefore completely (not even just primarily) opinion-based, it's also incredibly broad. There are myriad axes alone which to slice &quot;good roleplaying&quot; that focuses on different behaviours or experiences, and there are even more ways of judging those axes, again according to personal taste. And they're all valid slices and judgements, because there is no accounting for taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider these options, all equally valid: is metagaming good author-stance, or bad actor-stance? Is &quot;but my guy would kill you all in your sleep&quot; excellent roleplaying or being a huge jerkface? Is speaking in purple prose good roleplaying or bad hamming? How about 3rd- versus 1st-person speaking? How a person answers these has no basis in objective reality, just in taste. Each of these alternatives is &quot;good&quot; roleplaying to someone and &quot;bad&quot; roleplaying to someone else. There isn't even a way to make an answer to these choices Good Subjective by providing experience with them working — &quot;working&quot; for this purpose isn't quantifiable or qualifyable except with &quot;it resulting in play that was to my taste.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Good&quot; roleplaying is, therefore, completely a matter of what you want out of roleplaying. You can't even built that into a question as constraints on the answers, because once you give your criteria, those criteria &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; your taste in good roleplaying and answers have nothing left to do except nod and say, &quot;Yes, those are your measures of good roleplaying. Use those.&quot; And then it gets closed as &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot; or a custom close reason to revive the &quot;this isn't a question&quot; close reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;GM techniques and how to deal with problem players are not a matter of taste&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's opinion in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, but the opinion is susceptible to being Good Subjective because it can be backed up by experience with them satisfying play objectives that the questions are (presumably) specifying, rather than reducing to a matter of taste. The rubric of these questions are also not self-answering once written, unlike questions of taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the real dividing line here: things that are susceptible to the Good Subjective guidelines are going to be answerable, even if they involve some degree of opinion. Being able to satisfy criteria, according to experience or citations, is enough proof against rampant opining that we'll field the question. If a question is subjective and can't be made Good Subjective, then it'll be closed as primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T06:52:25.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4883" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5405" CreationDate="2014-08-24T07:12:28.223" Score="6" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange runs blog services for some sites upon request on their blog site, &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/blogs&quot;&gt;Blog Overflow&lt;/a&gt;. Stack Exchange has a blog post dedicated to &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/blog-overflow/&quot;&gt;what they're looking for in a blog&lt;/a&gt;, and I think we meet and exceed it on all counts. We have people with fascinating ideas and experience, and who write rather well. We even have a few bloggers on-site who are well-known.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we ask for one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Role-playing games are a complex and interesting field. I'm sure most of you have heard of the Forge, and many of the experimental games that came from the Forge - that's just one place we have previously discussed RPG theory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are hundreds of broad questions that are impossible to reasonably answer on the site, but which would likely be of fascination to our dear and beloved members. I know we have the capacity for content out there - for those of you who've stayed in chat a while, there's very frequently a discussion about RPG theory or some other RPG-related topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I believe we have the capacity to generate interesting content. In order to answer &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/blog-overflow/&quot;&gt;whether we should have a blog&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Who would be willing to contribute?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the scope of the blog be limited from &quot;RPG-related topics&quot;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How often should posts be released?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-11-16T18:22:46.493" LastActivityDate="2016-11-16T18:22:46.493" Title="Should we start a community blog?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4884" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-24T08:16:02.500" Score="13" ViewCount="209" Body="&lt;p&gt;My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;10k rep moderator tools&lt;/a&gt; include voting to delete questions, and it offers this guidance for my voting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Closed questions that are of no lasting value whatsoever should be flagged and deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am then instructed to avoid deleting questions with good answers, and to be cautious in deleting duplicate questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But often I find a closed question which has no answers and is not a duplicate, has been closed for some time, and could probably be made open-able with edits by the querent but it's unlikely they ever will (as the question's been closed so long without new edits).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally I've been erring on the side of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; voting to delete, but I'm thinking maybe that's not helpful to the site, so I'm curious: &lt;strong&gt;what indicates that a question is utterly valueless?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-08-25T14:44:57.317" Title="How do I judge &quot;no lasting value whatsoever&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4885" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4900" CreationDate="2014-08-24T09:06:28.823" Score="2" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new tag: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;god-machine&lt;/a&gt; has been created by xenoterracide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is distinct from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; because it about the setting element/entity/character known as the God-Machine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which while is a staple of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; system,&#xA;is not intrinsically linked to it and plenty of games of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; &#xA;are played without interacting with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And conversely games in other systems, such as nwod 1.0,  have been played with it,&#xA;there are published adventures,&#xA;and I personally have run a game (and I am sure I am not unique).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10691/how-does-nwods-secret-history-the-god-machine-chapter-relate-to-the-other-cor/10700#10700&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; which is about nwod 1.0, deserves the tag (if we keep the tag),&#xA;so  I have added it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are we in agreement that this is a valid tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a bit like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rokugan&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rokugan&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rokugan&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T13:46:34.660" Title="is God Machine a good tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4884" CreationDate="2014-08-24T09:43:30.380" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say that a question that is utterly valueless is only a question which is very clearly utterly valueless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if someone were to ask: &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What is the price of cheese on the moon?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; and there was no connection to any rpg at all, then that question has absolutely no value and should be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question could become valuable if it just had a few edits made to it, then I would recommend editing the question.  Especially if it's old and unlikely to be cared about or edited by the original asker.  The question serves a current value of showing people what questions not to ask, or how not to ask that particular question, which would allow them to either edit that question so it has value, or ask a new question avoiding those pitfalls and making sure it's not a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T09:43:30.380" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4887" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4885" CreationDate="2014-08-24T10:18:05.120" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's almost certainly going to get misused as if it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; instead. The name is just too similar and doesn't do anything to distinguish what it's for. The tag wiki description does do that, but we all know people will use it without reading that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then we've got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt;. So we've now created a situation where a question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;god-machine&lt;/a&gt; is a fundamentally different thing than one tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;. I find that more confusing than it was before, when the intention was to make it clearer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, is Google going to understand the difference between them, or are we going to muck up search results in this case?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IMO, I'd call the tag something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; (just to throw out an example, there's probably a better name), which makes it's intended use more obvious. While it's impossible to totally prevent misunderstandings, we should try to be clear and obvious with the tag purpose when possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="2064" LastEditDate="2014-08-24T10:38:23.813" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T10:38:23.813" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4888" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4884" CreationDate="2014-08-24T11:13:44.003" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Helpfully, we've got an objective frame of reference available: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that&quot;&gt;the system automatically deletes questions under certain conditions&lt;/a&gt;. I'll summarise the points relevant to this discussion (leaving aside spam etc), but you can find the full details at that link under the &quot;By the system&quot; heading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question gets deleted if it is &lt;strong&gt;unlocked&lt;/strong&gt; and meets one of these criteria (these checks are made continuously):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question's closed (not as a duplicate), has zero or negative score, it has no upvoted or accepted answers, it has no pending reopen votes, and it was closed over 9 days ago and hasn't been edited in the past 9 days.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;After 30 days:&lt;/strong&gt; The question has no answers and a negative score.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;After 1 year:&lt;/strong&gt; The question has no answers, a score of 0 (or 1 if the user's deleted), very few views, and 1 or no comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is our baseline. These exclude anything with a mere score of 1 (bar deleted authors), and &lt;strong&gt;anything that's answered,&lt;/strong&gt; because answers can be useful to someone, and I will almost never vote to delete a question that has worthwhile answers. We humans have the delete privilege to be intelligent (unlike a bot!) and delete the other stuff that also isn't redeeming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the generous criteria, our delete-bot deletes quite a lot of questions. This &lt;em&gt;includes&lt;/em&gt; questions which &lt;em&gt;could maybe&lt;/em&gt; be reopened if they were edited into something different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance isn't meant to be as generous as erring on deleting almost nothing, or even reserving deletion for absolute garbage or off-topic questions. It's just: keep stuff that has some genuinely useful content that people actually care about, and delete the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a question to stick around and it could be something useful, edit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or don't, and let it get deleted, which I think is actually doing people &lt;em&gt;a favour:&lt;/em&gt; if it's an important and good question, someone else is going to have it, and at that point, we get to have someone asking a genuine question with a real problem they're actually facing, instead of an artificial attempt to preserve a question made by someone who isn't actually facing that problem. Those artificial questions are generally inferior to questions by people facing the real issue anyway (as we've just experienced in our very controversial tide of 5e Basic questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if that's &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; who's experiencing a problem, and you find a closed question that &lt;em&gt;kind of&lt;/em&gt; touches on the problem but does so badly, you're probably better off letting the original get deleted and asking it &lt;em&gt;yourself anew&lt;/em&gt; - that way &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; become the question's custodian, and we have someone active accountable for it. It also means custodianship isn't shoved via an edit on someone else who doesn't care and didn't ask that question and who might be outright unhappy about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions aren't sacred. There's no inherent reason to save any question under threat of closure or deletion, unless you personally care about it strong enough to do something about it. If you don't care, it has no value to you - leave it to someone else to save. If &lt;em&gt;nobody&lt;/em&gt; cares, why would we want to save it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it doesn't have any particular value to you and has no answers that could be useful to people, it has no lasting value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-25T14:44:57.317" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4885" CreationDate="2014-08-24T18:01:02.947" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems odd to me. The analogy would be having a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; that was separate from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; or any particular Lovecraftian game. More specifically, since the God Machine exists in only one game line, it'd be like having a tag for a specific D&amp;amp;D deity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T18:01:02.947" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4885" CreationDate="2014-08-24T18:41:58.477" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have very little precedent for pure &quot;lore&quot; tags that are smaller than a game setting. The few lore-ish tags that we do have are typically about mechanics or a mechanical context—&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sr4-matrix&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sr4-matrix&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sr4-matrix&lt;/a&gt; and (arguably*) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feywild&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feywild&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feywild&lt;/a&gt; come to mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Precedent aside, we don't have an unmet need for purely lore tags more granular than a setting either—a setting tag and asking their question in the body is plenty to identify what they're talking about, both for users, SEO, and searchability. We don't need to collect together all information on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/drizzt&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;drizzt&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;drizzt&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gandalf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gandalf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gandalf&lt;/a&gt; for browse-ability, and neither do we for the God Machine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than remove or burninate it, we can use it as a synonym for the God Machine / NWoD 2e system—it will be mistakenly used as a one anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feywild&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feywild&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feywild&lt;/a&gt; tag has only four questions, and it looks like it isn't actually useful on three of those, and questionable on the fourth. It may be worth killing off too.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-08-24T23:35:24.407" LastActivityDate="2014-08-24T23:35:24.407" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4891" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4892" CreationDate="2014-08-24T23:54:15.147" Score="22" ViewCount="327" Body="&lt;p&gt;While commenting on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4885/is-god-machine-a-good-tag&quot;&gt;the need for a God Machine tag&lt;/a&gt; that stands separately from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; tag, I made an offhand reference to a hypothetical &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cthulhu&lt;/a&gt;. Turns out we have one. Turns out it's being used awfully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the description from the tag wiki: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Cthulhu is a fiction being [sic] created by Howard Philips Lovecraft. He, along with the rest of the Cthulhu mythos, are commonly used in horror RPGs, most notably The Call of Cthulhu and more recently The Trail of Cthulhu.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the questions tagged with this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45086/lovecrafts-cthulhu-mythos-in-pre-coc-dd&quot;&gt;Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos in pre-CoC D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; (looking for a list of references)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21437/monster-resource-from-cthulu-mythos-adjusted-for-dd&quot;&gt;Monster resource from Cthulu Mythos adjusted for D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt; (looking for a list of stats)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34763/trail-of-cthulhu-combat-question&quot;&gt;Trail of Cthulhu Combat Question&lt;/a&gt; (question about TOC initiative)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22929/cthulhu-in-dd-3-5&quot;&gt;Cthulhu in D&amp;amp;D 3.5&lt;/a&gt; (looking for stats for Cthulhu himself -- a real use of the tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31783/call-of-cthulhu-6th-or-7th-edition&quot;&gt;Call of Cthulhu 6th or 7th edition?&lt;/a&gt; (edition version differences)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5025/which-systems-use-the-cthulhu-mythos&quot;&gt;Which systems use the Cthulhu Mythos?&lt;/a&gt; (closed as list question)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19725/game-in-which-the-stars-are-right&quot;&gt;Game in which the stars are right&lt;/a&gt; (product ID question)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9281/what-are-the-main-differences-between-call-of-cthulhu-and-trail-of-cthulhu&quot;&gt;What are the main differences between Call of Cthulhu and Trail of Cthulhu?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8095/what-would-be-a-good-randomiser-to-use-for-a-game-in-the-dark&quot;&gt;What would be a good randomiser to use for a game in the dark?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of these questions, only one actually references the fictional entity that the wiki says the tag is about; the others are either references to particular Mythos games, asking about the Mythos generally, or are completely out there. Can we sink this tag, or at least redefine it to something more useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T06:44:15.740" Title="Iä, Iä, [Cthulhu] Fthagn! (Driving a boat through it.)" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4891" CreationDate="2014-08-25T06:10:55.463" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/29923/revisions&quot;&gt;only recently created&lt;/a&gt; and can't be considered authoritative, so let's see where it came from. The tag's earliest appearance is in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5025/which-systems-use-the-cthulhu-mythos&quot;&gt;Bad Old Days of We Don't Really Know What We're Doing&lt;/a&gt;. Ignoring the tag wiki for a moment and instead looking at its original and most common later uses, this appears to be a &lt;strong&gt;setting tag&lt;/strong&gt; that is phenomenally badly-named.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should be replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cthulhu-mythos&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cthulhu-mythos&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cthulhu-mythos&lt;/a&gt;, the most common name of the setting. Meanwhile, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; should become a synonym of the setting tag, and mighty Cthulhu can join the Tarrasque in not having a personal tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T06:44:15.740" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4869" CreationDate="2014-08-25T07:49:29.040" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The low-hanging fruit has been...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/121570/i-made-us-some-trogdor-graphics&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zm85C.png&quot; alt=&quot;BURNINATED&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SSD made a great point: there are usages of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; where it isn't a meta tag, but it just gets overwhelmingly used as one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've gone through [new-gm] and eliminated it from the questions using it as a meta tag. I've targeted questions where it's been used as a meta tag simply to describe skill level because the GM happens to be new, not because it's describing a critical part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When in doubt, I've erred on leaving the tag present. There may be more meta usages yet to burninate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still think we can do better than [new-gm] for a tag to describe these questions. Now that its meta-tag usage has been mostly cleared up, we may be in a state to actually work out &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Usage patterns&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What remains are 75 questions, 22 of which are closed (leaving 53 open). The questions that remain seem to fit generally into the following categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Literally asking about a new GM (or a potentially new GM).&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47582/player-dm-who-is-having-trouble-letting-go-of-an-old-campaign&quot;&gt;Player/DM who is having trouble letting go of an old campaign&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7837/transitioning-from-gm-to-player-or-how-to-recover-from-gm-burnout&quot;&gt;Transitioning from GM to Player; or how to recover from GM burnout&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/488/how-to-encourage-the-gm-curious&quot;&gt;How to encourage the GM-curious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/415/your-friend-wants-to-learn-the-ways-of-the-dungeon-master-what-do-you-do&quot;&gt;Your friend wants to learn the ways of the Dungeon Master, what do you do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35765/how-can-i-decide-whether-being-the-gm-is-right-for-me&quot;&gt;How can I decide whether being the GM is right for me?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35664/how-do-we-tell-our-new-gm-that-we-dont-like-some-elements-of-his-campaign&quot;&gt;How do we tell our new GM that we don&amp;#39;t like some elements of his campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm new, what do I play?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22207/1204&quot;&gt;Challenging pre-made campaign for veteran players but easy on new GMs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36839/1204&quot;&gt;Fate/Freeport as a first RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24329/1204&quot;&gt;Good games for inexperienced players and GMs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28130/easy-to-gm-harry-potter-rpg&quot;&gt;Easy to GM Harry Potter RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This includes &quot;I've finished the basics, now what?&quot; questions:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29332/what-do-i-need-to-keep-running-dd-after-finishing-the-red-box&quot;&gt;What do I need to keep running D&amp;amp;D after finishing the Red Box?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24950/how-do-i-start-dming-a-new-game-after-the-red-box&quot;&gt;How do I start DMing a new game after the Red Box?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I have barely done this yet and I have no clue&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29783/how-many-creatures-should-face-a-party-of-6-pcs&quot;&gt;How many creatures should face a party of 6 PCs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29483/differences-between-freeform-and-rules-heavy-roleplay&quot;&gt;Differences Between Freeform and Rules-heavy Roleplay&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36296/how-much-custom-content-is-too-much&quot;&gt;How much custom content is too much&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35783/as-a-newbie-dm-is-it-ok-to-borrow-plots-from-mmos-for-my-game&quot;&gt;As a newbie DM, is it OK to borrow plots from MMOs for my game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35597/advice-for-add-1e-without-miniatures-or-tiles&quot;&gt;Advice for AD&amp;amp;D 1e without miniatures or tiles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35592/how-much-are-the-players-supposed-to-know&quot;&gt;How much are the players supposed to know?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35495/add-1e-and-skill-checks&quot;&gt;AD&amp;amp;D 1e and &amp;quot;Skill Checks&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm really new and I want to improve&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27264/how-can-i-work-on-my-improvisation-skills-in-regards-to-running-a-campaign&quot;&gt;How can I work on my improvisation skills in regards to running a campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29058/how-to-get-my-paranoia-players-to-stop-cooperating-and-start-killing-each-other&quot;&gt;How to get my Paranoia players to stop cooperating and start killing each other?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45089/how-do-i-analyze-and-improve-myself-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;How do I analyze and improve myself as a GM?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is overwhelming primarily because I am new, how do I deal with this?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2611/1204&quot;&gt;How to remember all the rules?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/32186/1204&quot;&gt;Learning to use spells comfortably&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whew, that's 24 of the 53 open ones. There's others that might belong here, and some of these might &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; be meta tag usages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T13:39:06.837" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4894" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-25T19:11:16.947" Score="7" ViewCount="326" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that the tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; says&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;While practical CharOp, solving specific build problems for a specific character in a specific game is encouraged here at RPG.SE, &lt;strong&gt;general theoretical optimization questions tend to be broad guessing games seeking things like &quot;the best DPR.&quot; and usually are more suited to forum discussions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not been the trend lately, so I wonder if that text should be removed as contrary to community practice, or whether we've gone astray and it should be enforced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Then&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For context, that language was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/11577/3&quot;&gt;added April 7, 2012&lt;/a&gt; by Brian Ballsun-Stanton after we ran into confusion over how the tag should be used. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1411/how-should-we-improve-character-optimization-question-tagging&quot;&gt;How should we improve character optimization question tagging?&lt;/a&gt;, dated April 6, 2012.) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1411/how-should-we-improve-character-optimization-question-tagging#comment3281_1412&quot;&gt;This comment exchange&lt;/a&gt; appears to the the genesis of Brian's tag-wiki edit. (This is in no way calling Brian out for this! Just laying out the tag's history.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, after the tag wiki was edited, we had another discussion in August 2012 about what kinds of charop questions were on-topic, since we were getting a lot of poor ones at the time. That original discussion is at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are character optimization questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, I don't find direct support for that added language in the two answers to that discussion. The closest is this in the highly-upvoted answer by wax eagle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The last kind of question that I see as useful is the challenge question. These are the most borderline Op questions IMO, but they can also be the most fun. (Examples &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15141/what-is-the-maximum-air-speed-velocity-of-a-pixie&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13645/what-is-the-optimal-build-for-ac-for-a-fighter-at-level-13&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7606/exalted-land-speed-record-build&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That &quot;challenge question&quot; obviously meaning theoretical charop, by context and the examples provided. In mild contradition of what was earlier edited into the tag wiki, this argues that they're very borderline in being on-topic, but are also the most fun (implying they're worth keeping more-or-less firmly on-topic).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Now&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4754/why-are-our-5e-questions-terrible&quot;&gt;concerns about the quality of our 5e questions&lt;/a&gt;, and given how much discussion theoretical charop questions have been needing in comments before they can be answered, we should be saying more clearly than this whether they're OK or not. To that end we should fix the tag wiki to match actual community practice and good site governance, whatever that is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So are these on topic or off? Or are they somewhere in the middle, with some being off topic and some being on topic, and the difference turning on what point?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T00:07:31.827" Title="Is theoretical charop on-topic or off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|tags|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4894" CreationDate="2014-08-25T20:49:37.373" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Theoretical CharOp should not be on topic here.  It violates the point of the site (&quot;solutions to a problem you have&quot;) and is more of a just-for-fun exercise as a &quot;challenge.&quot; Without real use planned, it's very hard (as you're seeing from the thrash on those questions) to devise good success criteria.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think these questions are valuable enough to have a heavily curated set of specific criteria (like we do only semi-successfully for game-recs). So if it's not a real problem, save it up for a monthly just-for-fun posting or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-25T20:49:37.373" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4894" CreationDate="2014-08-25T21:12:25.933" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the wording is fine. &quot;General Theoretical Optimization&quot; is and should be at &lt;em&gt;the very least&lt;/em&gt; tread carefully around. Questions like &quot;who is the best at DPR&quot; is not a very good question, and probably shouldn't be justified with an answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; sets of &lt;em&gt;more specific&lt;/em&gt; theoretical optimization questions that are good questions and are squarely on topic here. For instance, the question that prompted this question, while broad, is quite answerable. Yes, it's hard, But it solves a quite actual problem (which should I play Wizard 10/Fighter 10 or Eldritch Knight 20). Just because it requires a bit of work, and a good bit of expertise doesn't mean it's a bad question. While it doesn't ask it directly, by asking it the way it does, it gives sufficient metrics for the OP to make their own decision. A good answer should at least provide summary builds of all three characters and show how they measure up. This isn't a particularly large burden with the ease of character generation in 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While often poo-poo'd by certain &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4895/1084&quot;&gt;members&lt;/a&gt; of this community, theoretical optimization is an arena of RPG study, and should be respected here. There are good questions to be asked there, and we have several of them (the speedy pixie is a good one, plenty of other ones). Yes, it &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be a bit of a minefield here, but there is no reason that there be a blanket prohibition as advocated in the linked post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point being, if a question is answerable, and on topic, whether or not it's theoretical is besides the point. There are hundreds, if not thousands of questions on this site that don't solve an &quot;problem someone actually faces,&quot; that's not a useful metric (and hasn't been for some time). The site's policies are reflective of this (no one checks...or at least I hope they don't). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we wanted to raise a proper meta discussion about the question that prompted this, we should ask whether class comparisons are on topic (pretty sure they are).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-08-25T21:12:25.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4897" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4894" CreationDate="2014-08-25T21:25:37.800" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's on-topic, but not how we've been doing it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am most swayed by Brian's comment in the wiki text that theoretical charop questions involve a lot of guessing games...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Who produces good theoretical charop?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Theoretical charop has historically been the result of many eyes turning a deep problem into a shallow one, over a long period of time, in back-and-forth discussions in forums that range across many threads and flamewars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The end process is a community consensus on the topic derived from an understanding of the subject that is broad, deep, and &lt;em&gt;distributed&lt;/em&gt; in such a way that errors and invalid working models are minimised, eliminated, or discredited and marginalised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;… Not us.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's doesn't describe our site's operation at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our home-grown theoretical charop that hasn't been grounded in work already done elsewhere has been pretty anemic. The answers tend to be posted, challenged in comments, get edited, and then iterate for a little while. And then they drop off the front page or get a checkmark... but are they right? History says &quot;unlikely&quot;, because the analysis and assumptions haven't actually been put through the ringer the way a forum does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want the forum-like dynamic necessary to do good theoretical charop. But more than that, our existing attempts to &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; a forum-like iteration process to generate consensus has been ineffectual because the site's design makes it hard iterate. Instead of intense debate that burns away all invalid ideas and approaches, people vote and move on, challenging in comments only if they disagree really strongly. A few voters and the OP's checkmark end up blessing the &quot;right&quot; analysis, which is a shallow kind of consensus completely inferior to that produced by the wild west of forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even if we could cultivate a strong iterative dynamic, such argument in comments over strongly-held views is contrary to our best practices. Every part of the process necessary to do good theoretical charop is anathema to the site's design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we kinda suck at theoretical charop, and aspiring to produce anything like the theoretical brilliance produced elsewhere for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and 4e is unrealistic. Because we don't have enough eyes to make the problem shallow or a site model that allows the necessary discussion, our conclusions are suspect and probably make RPG.SE look &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But theoretical charop can still be on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The subject is perfectly on-topic. There's a straightforward parallel to our relationship with lists though. Creating lists here is almost always off-topic (because our site model sucks at it) but we will report on &lt;em&gt;other people's&lt;/em&gt; lists happily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So too, we should limit ourselves to using &lt;em&gt;external&lt;/em&gt; theoretical charop conclusions that have already withstood the test of the public's flames, and prohibit questions that ask for &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; to produce bespoke theoretical charop. We just can't ever be sure that an answer is actually complete, in the same way that a list might never be complete, and we can't be sure that it's correct, reducing voting to a popularity contest of which opinion &quot;looks right&quot; to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-08-26T00:07:31.827" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T00:07:31.827" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4898" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4899" CreationDate="2014-08-25T22:53:34.440" Score="3" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; changed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npcs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npcs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npcs&lt;/a&gt; and and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villains&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villains&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villains&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just struck me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; are singular when most every other tag we have of this kind is categorical/plural: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapons&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag has 55 questions right now, which &lt;em&gt;although&lt;/em&gt; could maybe be retagged over some days without too much front-page churn, the system now prevents creating new tags that just have a trailing &lt;em&gt;-s&lt;/em&gt; different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T03:23:31.567" Title="Mod-tool request: change [npc] to [npcs], [villain] to [villains]" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4898" CreationDate="2014-08-26T03:23:31.567" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think this is necessarily a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are dozens of singular tags just like there are dozens of plural tags.  Just going to the front page I see gm-pc, wizard, fighter, npc, and new-gm vs monsters, new-players, skills, and races. We could do a statistical analysis on how many are singular vs plural and then synonymize all of one or the other...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or we could just get along with our day. The singular or plural made sense to someone and apparently continues to.  It does not interfere with finding/applying the tag, searching using the tag, or SEO one bit and I find it hard to justify spending effort to mess with, except for a kind of OCD &quot;wanting things to all look the same.&quot; In an emergent folksonomy like site tagging that kind of parallelism will never, and I would argue should never, happen anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T03:23:31.567" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4885" CreationDate="2014-08-26T13:46:34.660" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Community Concensus seems to be that the tag is not good.&#xA;There have been no answers posted infavor of the tag,&#xA;And only 1 downvote on each answer ssupporting removing the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will delete it from the 2 questions it is on at the end of this week,&#xA;unless something changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone with the rep might like to make it an alias for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;, in the future, but i doubt it, since the referring to the system that way will stop soon when the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine/4858#4858&quot;&gt;rebranding to nWoD 2e happens, over the next few months.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly the time to review this will return to us in the future,&#xA;but by then a better name for the tag may also have come to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-08-26T13:46:34.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4901" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-26T14:45:21.453" Score="6" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently marked a question for moderator attention because it was too specific to a given player's particular social situation. It was seemingly removed shortly thereafter - and I thought that was a good decision. I caught it early and it had gotten little attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then I see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46406/696&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and questions like it and wonder if the same principle applies, even though this one has a lot of activity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is the question of value to the site and the community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are the answers going to have value beyond this asker's instance?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can we effectively judge the relative merits of answers? Are &quot;Stay and fix it!&quot; and &quot;Walk!&quot; really going to be differentiated by anything but their popularity? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I genuinely do want to help people with their social gaming problems, but I also genuinely question whether this is the right place to do it. What does the community think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T14:01:59.333" Title="Social Problems - Too Specific?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4901" CreationDate="2014-08-26T15:04:37.023" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Question asking for personal advice &quot;help me fix my game&quot; are squarely on topic here &lt;em&gt;provided&lt;/em&gt; that the OP provides enough information about their situation that we can answer intelligently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; to be a close reason &quot;too localized&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185102/responding-to-your-too-localized-concerns&quot;&gt;it has been removed&lt;/a&gt; and rolled into  &quot;unclear what you're asking.&quot; Largely, if we're seeing a question that seems so narrow or niche that we're can't answer it, then we should probably be closing it. However, I don't think decently detailed &quot;help me decide whether to fix my game or leave it&quot; questions fall into this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer you bullets:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes, these are valuable. Even if someone isn't in &lt;em&gt;exactly the same&lt;/em&gt; situation, they might well be in a similar one. They show up in google results when people search for their problems, and they are of use to people who use this site. (One way (not the best one, but one way), to see this is with the votes. this question is highly upvoted...)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes. Most of the time answers on questions like this give good &lt;em&gt;general&lt;/em&gt; advice, even as they try to speak to the specific situation. A good answer shouldn't just help the OP solve his problem, but should also help someone in the future in a similar situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is why we don't want single sentence answers. A good answer &lt;em&gt;explains why&lt;/em&gt; they give the answer they do. Just like we want a question that gives the pertinent details, we want answers that provide solutions to the same. A good answer is a longish answer here. Short can't and shouldn't do. So you judge answers not on the merits of &quot;stay&quot; or &quot;go&quot; but on the merits of their &quot;whys&quot; and &quot;hows&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, these are the kinds of questions, that if we do well, and give good advice, we can gain a new user who can and will stick around and be a productive member of our community. Almost always these questions are from newish users. If we can help them get to a detailed question, and get a good answer (or several), than we may just find ourselves a new friend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community isn't our &lt;em&gt;primary&lt;/em&gt; purpose here. But it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something does form here in an organic way. When we can foster and encourage that without sacrificing quality (and in fact by improving it), we're doing what we do, and doing it well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-27T04:54:32.580" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4877" CreationDate="2014-08-29T01:42:55.350" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The questions needs some further attention -- specifically, it needs extraneous comments and invalid answers to be deleted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, it's sitting at a +22 score, with four chatty comments on the main question, and a pair of very-low scoring answers that, in turn, have a bunch of chatty comments.  Both answers should be deleted outright, as should every comment on the question save for @doppelgreener's note that we are seeking answers with citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't possible to outright prevent &quot;newbie trap&quot; questions, but they can be handled appropriately when they arise.  And in this case, &quot;appropriately&quot; means &quot;clean it up until a real answer can be found.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15655" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T01:42:55.350" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4904" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4905" CreationDate="2014-08-29T11:58:53.507" Score="9" ViewCount="189" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a bunch of games out there (Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate, many Bioware and Obsidian games in general) that use AD&amp;amp;D, D&amp;amp;D 3.5, D&amp;amp;D 4 or other Pen &amp;amp; paper Role playing systems as a foundation for their gameplay. For example, Neverwinter Nights 2 has a rather faithful implementation of the D&amp;amp;D 3.5 rules with a few minor changes involving spells that are changed or removed because they don't fit the gameplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are certain subjects here, like the setting (several games are set in the Forgotten Realms setting or other settings originally from gaming) and questions involving mechanics (like character development, spell interaction and other things that work the same as in the original ruleset) that wouldn't fit Arqade well due to too specialized, but would be a decent fit for RPG. However, videogame related questions appear to be off-topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is this kind of videogame question still off-topic? When going deep enough, they're still RPG, just in a digital setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11136" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:09:20.583" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:09:20.583" Title="Mechanics and setting in videogames using a well-established P&amp;P RPG system: on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|video-games|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="4905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4904" CreationDate="2014-08-29T12:46:28.753" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're asking about RPG-based video game content, you're probably better off asking Arqade, not us - or finding online communities still discussing these games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically it comes down to this: RPG-based games &lt;em&gt;adapt&lt;/em&gt; the story and mechanics, and alter them to serve video game purposes, and it's hard to know where the line begins and ends. We know about Planescape and the city of Sigil, but I can't tell you which parts of &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planescape:_Torment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Planescape: Torment&lt;/a&gt; are exclusive to the video game. The &lt;em&gt;Neverwinter&lt;/em&gt; MMO features a &lt;em&gt;modified version&lt;/em&gt; of D&amp;amp;D 4e's rules to make it work better for the MMO framework. Baldur's Gate has almost certainly simplified or dropped various AD&amp;amp;D features, just because a lot of features &lt;em&gt;absolutely rely&lt;/em&gt; on having a DM and common sense (not available in video games).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's assume there's a 50/50 chance you'll ask about something exclusively related to the game, or something that isn't, and which is actually in common with the stuff we know about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you ask it on here: 50% chance of us having no idea what you're talking about, 50% chance of it being something we can handle.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask on Arqade: 100% chance of it being something they can handle, because it showed up in the video game. You just also might need someone who knows the broader setting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, Arqade will probably be able to provide you with a better answer, because you'll be able to explain the context of your question in the video game, and people there who've played the video game will actually be able to respond to that context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you know &lt;em&gt;without a doubt&lt;/em&gt; that this is something in common with us, you can probably ask here too. Just that you're probably better off just asking on Arqade because of the above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-08-29T13:23:23.170" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T13:23:23.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4901" CreationDate="2014-08-29T14:01:59.333" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Too specific&quot; isn't really a thing. We &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; people to be specific about their situation, so that we can help resolve their actual problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; to have a close reason called &quot;too localized&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185102/responding-to-your-too-localized-concerns&quot;&gt;which got removed&lt;/a&gt; because nobody could agree on what &quot;too localized&quot; really &lt;em&gt;meant,&lt;/em&gt; either in terms of time, location, or quantity of people helped. You can read more about that there. Basically, it was useless and did more harm than good. It trained people to not ask about their specific problem, but try and be super-generic, which was stupid because that turned perfectly good questions into ones that were not as good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What &quot;too localized&quot; was really trying to do was target specific kinds of poor quality questions. As that linked meta Q explains, that got replaced with the custom off topic reasons we have now, so we just targeted those specific kinds of questions explicitly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, a better question to ask yourself is: are these questions absolutely useless to everyone else? As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4902/1204&quot;&gt;wax eagle describes&lt;/a&gt;: no, because there's a lot to learn from them, and they're still totally usable and helpful to the people whose situations are very similar but not identical (it might not even matter for the answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure what would truly be absolutely useless to everyone else here. On Stack Overflow, an example would be someone linking their website and asking people to help fix a programming error on there. Within days, the problem will vanish, and nobody else can really learn very well from the question. That gets closed nowadays with a custom off topic reason requiring the answer to actually provide the problematic code, a description of the problem, and some other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-29T14:01:59.333" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3189" CreationDate="2014-08-30T11:31:29.853" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You know, maybe we shouldn't, after all.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been almost a year since this proposal to burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; was made, and we still have (as of this writing) 88 questions tagged with it, more than half of which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm+-gm-*+-*-gm&quot;&gt;don't have any other gm-related tag&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's still a big mess, with many questions using the tag gratuitously, just because the asker happen to be a GM, or a GM is somehow otherwise tangentially involved.  But so are the other gm-related tags, too, and we can't just burninate &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(Well, technically, we &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt;.  I'm just saying that we probably shouldn't.)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the reason why the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag hasn't gone away, and &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; why it's stayed a mess, is that it had a simply awful &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/2740/3&quot;&gt;tag wiki excerpt&lt;/a&gt; that just defined what a GM is, but offered zero guidance on how and when to use the tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;The Game Master runs the game, including having final say over how actions are resolved. Also referred to as Dungeon Master (DM), Referee, Storyteller, Master of Ceremonies (MC) or other titles, depending on the game.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just submitted an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/10242&quot;&gt;edit suggestion&lt;/a&gt; to improve it, so that it'd recommend using the tag only for questions &lt;em&gt;about the role of a GM&lt;/em&gt;, not for any random rules / play-style / etc. questions that just happen to somehow involve a GM (usually as the person asking the question):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Questions about the role of the Game Master (a.k.a. Dungeon Master (DM), Referee, Storyteller, Master of Ceremonies (MC), etc.) in a role-playing game.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(As usual, further improvements are welcome; it's called a tag &lt;em&gt;wiki&lt;/em&gt; for a reason.)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it happens, that was before I found out about the existence of this burnination proposal.  The edit &lt;s&gt;is currently pending&lt;/s&gt; was just approved as I write this, and I do believe that it's an improvement &lt;em&gt;even if&lt;/em&gt; this tag is to be eventually deleted, as it should at least cut down on its rampant misuse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it also seems to me that, with a more focused tag wiki, further cleanup of the worst misuses and enforcement of its proper scope for new questions, &lt;strong&gt;this would actually make a perfectly good tag&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, having a general tag for questions about GM-ing would allow us to tidy up the current mess of tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, there's now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4869/burninate-new-gm-tag&quot;&gt;a proposal going on&lt;/a&gt; to burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, and one of the arguments originally made in favor of its deletion (besides the fact that it's &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; a huge mess, and kind of meta by its definition) is that, when used properly, it's basically redundant to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;.  (That proposal, which is now featured on the community bulletin, is actually how I came across the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag and, subsequently, this meta thread.)  Meanwhile, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3493/is-it-possible-for-us-to-refine-gm-techniques&quot;&gt;also has its share of problems&lt;/a&gt;, indeed not unlike those that have plagued this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, even at the risk of inviting downvotes by being too specific, let me present my own modest and tentative proposal for dealing with this mess of tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; as the general tag for &lt;strong&gt;questions about GM-ing&lt;/strong&gt;.  Remove it from any rules questions etc. where it's just used because the asker happens to be the GM.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;; when used properly, those tags are all but synonymous.  (Yes, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; is arguably a bit more specific, but IMO not enough so to warrant two distinct tags.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; as a pseudo-meta-tag (or mod-merge it into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;).  As typically used, it's essentially synonymous with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; + &quot;I'm a newbie,&quot; and even when &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; used so, it IMO still adds no significant value over just using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt;, assuming both are cleaned up, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is probably the most controversial part of the proposal, so let me explicitly note that it's also an optional one.  If the community feels that we really need a separate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag, then let's keep it; it'll be a bit redundant and meta-ish, but no more than it currently is.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-less&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-less&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-less&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; as they are for now.  Yes, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; has its, well, problems, but those are probably beyond the scope of this proposal.  The others are, IMO, pretty much OK as they are.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-08-30T11:45:19.537" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4908" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4904" CreationDate="2014-08-30T20:50:48.497" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, but...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The kinds of video game–derived RPG questions that will be on-topic here are very specific, and will be more about &quot;under the hood&quot; stuff in a video game. But in order to &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that your question is on-topic here, you have to &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that the mechanic in question is actually relevant to the RPG. And if you know that much about what exactly the video game is doing under the hood, you often know enough that you don't need to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, questions about RPG mechanics are on-topic, but rarely will you be able to ask a question about RPG mechanics in a video game that is clearly on-topic here &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; is a question you don't know the answer to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We actually have two examples of that kind of question here already:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9536/what-effect-does-the-size-of-a-shield-have-in-add-2nd-edition&quot;&gt;What effect does the size of a shield have in AD&amp;amp;D 2nd Edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is a good example of a very narrow mechanical question, but that is still a question. The interesting thing about this one though: &lt;strong&gt;it was asked on Arqade first&lt;/strong&gt;, and was only asked here after Arqade said &quot;we can't answer this, ask RPG.SE.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33452/can-you-help-me-understand-the-rpg-rules-behind-planescapetorment&quot;&gt;Can you help me understand the RPG rules behind Planescape:Torment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is a bit of a trick example. In appearance, it's about &lt;em&gt;Planescape: Torment&lt;/em&gt;. But in substance, it's actually directly about certain mechanics of the AD&amp;amp;D RPG itself that are cryptic to non-AD&amp;amp;D players of &lt;em&gt;P:T&lt;/em&gt;, so &lt;em&gt;P:T&lt;/em&gt; is only the background motivation for the question, not its subject. It's on-topic because the subject is the RPG AD&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No, but...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in &lt;em&gt;practice&lt;/em&gt;, no: for all but the most obvious examples (like the &lt;em&gt;P:T&lt;/em&gt; question), you're almost always going to be better off asking at Arqade anyway, and only asking here if it turns out their help is lacking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in &lt;em&gt;theory&lt;/em&gt;, yes, some questions will be on-topic here. Ask yourself, &quot;&lt;strong&gt;is my question actually &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the RPG system itself?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; If we don't need to have video game knowledge, and it's about the actual RPG itself, then it's probably on-topic. But those questions are rare, and if its &quot;aboutness&quot; isn't super-clear to others, having it get put on hold is a definite possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-08-30T20:56:07.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4909" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4911" CreationDate="2014-08-30T23:13:48.223" Score="2" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;The book/line nWoD: Blood and Smoke a styx chronicle &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/the-world-of-darkness-second-edition/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;is set to recieve a new name and cover (and no other major changed),&#xA;and be rerelease as Vampire the Requiem 2nd edition&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only user of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vtr-blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vtr-blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vtr-blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;recently edited his question to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-requiem-2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-requiem-2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-requiem-2&lt;/a&gt; (a new tag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The options now are to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;copy the tag wiki across and delete the old tag, or let the tag delete itself when X months go buy without questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;or to create a synonym (but fix the tag to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly creating a synonym is unnecessary, and the wiki should just be moved.&#xA;I think in this case it is more likely to be necessary since the book has actually been released under 2 titles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-12-13T21:07:57.383" LastActivityDate="2014-12-13T21:07:57.383" Title="Please synomise (or delete) [blood-and-smoke] with [vampire-the-requiem-2e]" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4909" CreationDate="2014-08-30T23:21:10.153" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Relatedly, do we want the tag to instead be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt; or the like?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2014-08-30T23:21:10.153" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4909" CreationDate="2014-08-30T23:49:33.077" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/19754/152515&quot;&gt;How can we get rid of misspelled and unused (or “zombie”) tags?&lt;/a&gt; on meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags not associated with any question are automatically destroyed at 03:00 UTC every day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's currently ~23:48Z. This tag is going to be deleted in about three hours. (It doesn't take months.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-08-30T23:49:33.077" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4912" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-31T00:10:56.627" Score="5" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;As discussed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine/4858#4858&quot;&gt;Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;now that Onyx Path has &lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/the-world-of-darkness-second-edition/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;officially rebranded the &lt;em&gt;God Machine Rules Update&lt;/em&gt; as the second edition of &lt;em&gt;New World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, we should go ahead and replace and synonym all our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; tags to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Agreement seems to have been generally reach on the aforementioned thread that we should rename the tag, so this is just a request for mod tools support. There are currently 71 questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;, making manual retagging possible but not ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I believe there is a moderator tool to rename tags.&#xA;Can that be used please?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-01-06T17:22:01.790" Title="Synonym [nwod-god-machine] to [new-world-of-darkness-2e]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4913" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-08-31T00:32:41.237" Score="9" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since we're keeping &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, at least for now, we should fix up its (empty!) tag wiki. What should it say? Especially, what usage guidance should it include? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that it's immediately useful I've already given it a wiki roughly in-line with my understanding of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4869/burninate-new-gm-tag&quot;&gt;the on/off-topic discussion about it&lt;/a&gt;. But it's very provisional! I just made some things up. Consider this question both a peer-review of that proposed tag wiki and as a place to brainstorm what it should say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As a bonus, figuring out what it should say in order to be most useful might be a step along the way to figuring out if there's a better tag for such questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-11-06T02:03:08.783" Title="Let's make the [new-gm] tag wiki useful" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4913" CreationDate="2014-08-31T00:32:41.237" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;For an idea of what kind of material I think should be in here, this is the first draft of the wiki and excerpt I've come up with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Main features:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tries to emphasise that this isn't for just being new, it's for problems that are inextricably &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; being new.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is hard to get across except with examples, I think, so it's the weakest part of the draft. But I think it's important to address somehow? Pointing people to alternatives later is part of showing what &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; inherently about being a new GM.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Points people away from using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; and toward using a plain system tag if they just have a rules question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lists some of the other more specific tags that c/should be used instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I based the list on ones askers have commonly used along with [new-gm] mistags, as well as a few that it occurred to me should maybe get used more often.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Exerpt:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about becoming or tutoring a game master (GM) serving for the first time. Use this only when the question's inherently about being new, not simply as a descriptor of your skill level whilst handling a situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For asking questions about the problems inherent in someone being new&#xA;  to the game master (GM) role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Tagging guidance&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Use this tag when the problem is &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt; about being new to&#xA;  GMing, not just when the problem is caused by or the result of being&#xA;  new to GMing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If the problem is about some other aspect of running roleplaying&#xA;  games, and being new to GMing is why you don't know the answer,&#xA;  &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;. Instead, use a tag that describes the problem you're experiencing. In particular, questions about how a game&#xA;  works should have the tag for that game system, and don't need this&#xA;  tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If in doubt, leave it out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Other subject tags&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are a few other tags useful to someone who is new to RPGs; tags that are more  specific, and&#xA;  when they apply they should be used instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; — For questions about how to learn or teach a particular game or system. (Not used when just asking for&#xA;  rules clarifications.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; — For questions about or asking for &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; techniques to achieve &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; effects, used while GMing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-preparation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-preparation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-preparation&lt;/a&gt; — For questions about preparing yourself and your materials for a game session.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; — Whether a new or experienced GM, preparing a campaign is a whole topic on its own.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt; — Everyone is new to designing/writing adventures at some point, even experienced GMs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; — For asking questions about a GM who may be causing or connected to conflicts in the gaming group, regardless of&#xA;  whether the GM is new or not. See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; — Use this tag if you're trying to figure out how to pick your GM or how to manage changing GMs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-09-01T14:08:11.277" LastActivityDate="2014-09-01T14:08:11.277" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-08-31T00:32:41.237" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2014-09-02T05:28:20.993" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.unendingraeg.tumblr.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Rage: the Dataening&lt;/a&gt; - the gaming blog @BESW finally persuaded me to create. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6172" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T05:28:20.993" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4916" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4917" CreationDate="2014-09-02T13:41:42.703" Score="4" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47086/how-to-avoid-arguments-with-a-player-about-what-should-happen&quot;&gt;recent question&lt;/a&gt; has pointed me to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; tag. I liked the sound of it, especially in light of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3013/lets-merge-problem-players-and-problem-gm&quot;&gt;a recent meta question&lt;/a&gt; about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has no tag wiki and is currently used by 6 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47086/how-to-avoid-arguments-with-a-player-about-what-should-happen&quot;&gt;How to avoid arguments with a player about what &amp;quot;should&amp;quot; happen?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26053/attack-versus-feint&quot;&gt;Attack versus Feint&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8874/audience-control-over-conflict-resolution&quot;&gt;Audience control over conflict resolution&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7671/is-throwing-other-pcs-possible&quot;&gt;Is throwing other PC&amp;#39;s possible?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131/in-a-mouse-guard-fight-does-each-team-target-a-specific-other-team-with-each-mo&quot;&gt;In a Mouse Guard fight, does each team target a specific other team with each move?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3720/what-is-the-best-way-to-use-extended-contests-in-gumshoe&quot;&gt;What is the best way to use extended contests in Gumshoe?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no clear line what the tag is supposed to be about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question 1 is about avoiding false expectations and miscommunications between players and GM, which makes it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; (if that tag includes OOC interaction during playtime).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions 2, 4 and 5 are about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; and should be tagged as such.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions 3 and 6 are about special non-combat conflict situations, not sure how I'd tag them, not sure if a tag is actually needed. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are your opinions on the tag? I see three viable options right now&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Burnination.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make it into the non-combat conflict tag, i.e. non-combat &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make it pertain to OOC conflicts, which are currently often &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; depending on who writes the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-05T15:10:10.813" Title="What to do with conflict-resolution?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4916" CreationDate="2014-09-02T13:48:07.867" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It really does seem to not mean anything, and the name itself is pretty ambiguous. These questions could just get retagged with [social] or [problem-x] or [combat] or others as you've mentioned, and the tag thus burninated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T13:48:07.867" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4916" CreationDate="2014-09-02T14:11:57.517" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I googled a bit to find what conflict-resolution is as opposed to task resolution, which is when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; should be used IMO.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I found &lt;a href=&quot;http://gamingphilosopher.blogspot.it/2006/09/conflict-and-task-resolution.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, and I think it needs to be read along with Chris Flood's comment at the end of the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Task resolution is succeed/fail. Conflict resolution is win/lose. You can succeed but lose, fail but win.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was used to shift RPG mechanics from &quot;I want to open the safe&quot; &quot;Ok, dice say you do it, but nothing is inside&quot; to &quot;I want to get proofs on this secret affairs&quot; &quot;Ok, dice say you do it. The documents were in the chest&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The page I linked says that the concepts are relative (&quot;Ok, dice say you find the documents, but they are useless to prove anything&quot; brings you back to being succubus to the DM's decisions), the comment makes a distinction...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...on when a player must roll the dice. For task resolution, it's when the character's competency is low relative to the complexity of the task at hand, while conflict resolution has the dice kick in when there is a conflict of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could otherwise be a taga about how to solve a game conflict mechanic of any type (but I'd label it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T14:11:57.517" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4916" CreationDate="2014-09-02T17:27:27.323" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt;: for Reasons detailed below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The old meaning of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; is the right one but the tag sucks for both its old meaning and this use.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We should make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; our new &quot;problems at the table&quot; tag, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; as synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&quot;Conflict resolution&quot; is a mechanical concept, but we don't need a tag for it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Conflict resolution&quot; is a bit of RPG terminology and was originally created for that purpose. If we go by its original creation's meaning and use, the recent taggings on group-conflict questions are mistaggings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, when a tag could be read with two meanings, one a general term and one a piece of RPG terminology, I would favour the RPG terminology meaning over the general one. So in this case, I'd say &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; is about the mechanical design concept, not about resolving conflicts between group members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure we need it &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; though, as it's unusually specific even where it's used &quot;right&quot;. The &lt;em&gt;Shock&lt;/em&gt; question is just a rules clarification and derives no search, SEO, or meaning benefit from the tag; the &lt;em&gt;Mouse Gaurd&lt;/em&gt; example is just a rules clarification around combat, and doesn't need the tag either. With both games it's redundant with the system tag, as the game systems are entirely built on conflict-resolution. I'm unfamiliar with GUMSHOE, but I expect that's similar. The only kind of question I can see it being valuable on is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; question, but then it offers &lt;em&gt;very little&lt;/em&gt; value and should probably just be part of the question, not the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if we don't need the tag at all for the mechanical concept, perhaps the tag is free for using to mean resolving conflicts around the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There are better names than &quot;conflict resolution&quot; for this use&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3013/lets-merge-problem-players-and-problem-gm&quot;&gt;Our existing discussion about merging&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; achieved consensus for merging them, but we never came up with a good term. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; tag looks attractive, but even better would be something more clear, like maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides, tags should describe the problem, not the desired solution — some group conflicts should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be resolved (q.v. our many &quot;just leave&quot; answers to such questions). &quot;Conflict resolution&quot; isn't the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt;, it's a guess at what the solution might be. At tag that is only ever valid on an XY Problem isn't a tag we should have. So again, something describing the problem, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt;, is better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, though, it begs the question of what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; mean and how they should be used. Perhaps we just have too many ambiguous &quot;stuff happening around the table&quot; tags. I favour specific over general tags though, so I'd say that the existence of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; shouldn't stop us from using a nicely-named tag, that just falls into our lap like this, to finally merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I suggest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; be made our merged tag, and synonym the otherwise-useless &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflict-resolution&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflict-resolution&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflict-resolution&lt;/a&gt; to it after removing it from the questions about the mechanical concept of conflict resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T17:27:27.323" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3013" CreationDate="2014-09-02T17:46:03.583" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4916/what-to-do-with-conflict-resolution/4919#4919&quot;&gt;In this newer meta&lt;/a&gt; I've suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; as our replacement tag for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pros:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It doesn't label any &lt;em&gt;person&lt;/em&gt; as a problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It doesn't assume where the problem lies, which might be where the asker thinks it is and might not.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's really clear what it means.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No judgement is implied; conflicts happen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compared to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-at-the-table&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-at-the-table&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-at-the-table&lt;/a&gt; (the top-voted suggestion):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Both tags have the pro of (2)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; is clearer by being unambiguous and specific, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-at-the-table&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-at-the-table&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-at-the-table&lt;/a&gt; may get mistagged on problems of any kind, because it only implies &quot;the people there&quot; is what the circumlocution &quot;at the table&quot; means.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; is more intuitive to discover for new askers and easier to type for experienced users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-conflict&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-conflict&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-conflict&lt;/a&gt; is better for (1), of not implying that maybe someone is the problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T17:46:03.583" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4921" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-02T21:41:08.383" Score="3" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;Help Center&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You can earn a maximum of 200 reputation per day from any combination of the activities below. Bounty awards, accepted answers, and association bonuses are not subject to the daily reputation limit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is there a limit on the amount of reputation that can be gained per day?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="913" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-03T11:48:30.157" Title="Why is reputation capped at 200 per day?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4921" CreationDate="2014-09-02T22:12:04.567" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;That limit mainly exists for two reasons :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It stops the site from being gamed by automated bots since the reputation limit gives a lot more time to the moderators to find them before they attain trusted reputation levels.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It slows down reputation gain from very active or lucky users so they do not gain abilities before they have time to understand how the site works properly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More information can be found on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22447/what-is-the-reasoning-behind-the-reputation-cap&quot;&gt;meta.stackexhange.com&lt;/a&gt; answer to that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14894" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-09-02T22:12:04.567" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4924" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-03T07:10:51.797" Score="1" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have multiple questions for a spell. The questions cover:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Duration of the spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Targets of the spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Effects of the spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After-effects of the spell once it has worn off&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it make more sense to ask a separate question for each, or to ask one question that touches on all 4 topics? The answer would apply to multiple spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="913" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T14:52:43.740" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T14:52:43.740" Title="Should I ask one question or several?" Tags="|discussion|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4925" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4924" CreationDate="2014-09-03T11:44:47.993" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a right answer to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If all of the details of the question are interrelated, then you're in good shape to ask it as one question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if this is 4 &lt;em&gt;general&lt;/em&gt; questions with one spell as the impetus, it should be four.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4924/should-i-ask-one-question-or-several#comment11758_4924&quot;&gt;Brian says&lt;/a&gt;, if you've got something you're having this much trouble with, there's a really good chance that a quick session in chat can either get you the answers you need, or at least get you to a focused question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-09-03T11:44:47.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4921" CreationDate="2014-09-03T11:48:30.157" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Basically, it's a throttle on your trust level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Major moderation functions are tied directly to reputation (things like editing, voting to close and deleting). The reputation cap serves to prevent you from gaining privileges that are beneficial to the site, but can be used for nefarious purposes too quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if you somehow managed to hit the rep-cap &lt;em&gt;every single day&lt;/em&gt; (no easy thing to do here), it would still take you somewhere around 10 days to get free editing privileges (2k), 15 to get close votes (3k) and 100 to get unfettered delete votes (20k).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This serves to force you to learn what a community is about before you get the tools to moderate it. This is a good and important thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-09-03T11:48:30.157" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4916" CreationDate="2014-09-05T15:10:10.813" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Conflict resolution exists as counterpart to task resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Task resolution is a binary yes/no result, e.g., a Climb check in D&amp;amp;D 3.5, that asks the question “Did you succeed at &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt;?”. Complicated plans often involve a succession of task resolution checks. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conflict resolution instead states “This is what happens if you succeed” with open-ended, often fail-forward results for failure and generally just one roll of the dice. A classic example in Burning Wheel is: Can I open this door before the guard finds me? On a successful test, yes, absolutely. On a failure, the GM has options: Did you get the door open? Or you did but not before the guard spotted you? Or you set off an alarm that gets the guard's attention?  On a failure, the answer to the original question is no, but couched in possibilities that advance the story rather than just saying no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I'm not sure it needs a tag unless it's about questions like this.  Mouse Guard's conflict system is called Conflict, so it makes a little sense that it got tagged in. I think the mouse-guard and conflict tags are fine for those. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2014-09-05T15:10:10.813" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4928" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-05T21:21:51.430" Score="4" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Dungeons and Dragons 3.X ecosystem is huge, with core books and splatbooks for essentially 3 different &lt;em&gt;almost compatible&lt;/em&gt; systems.  We often have questions that ask for character or monster options from either D&amp;amp;D 3.5 or Pathfinder in very general terms.  The answer that spawned this question is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47182/how-does-a-pc-make-a-permanent-extradimensional-space&quot;&gt;How does a PC make a permanent extradimensional space?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem I see is that you end up with not multiple sometimes overlapping list answers.  How do you decide which one is best without more detail?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;We have 222 questions that are tagged both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;, but many of these are comparing rules in the editions, or asking about how an effect might be handled.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-09-07T11:13:57.933" Title="Are some 3.5 and Pathfinder questions inherently too broad?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4928" CreationDate="2014-09-07T11:13:57.933" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, some questions probably are. But that's like asking &quot;are some questions about swords?&quot; For the sheer number of questions these systems get, it's inevitably going to be true at some point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see any particular problem in practice with these tags. There's a lot of cases where the system overlap is sufficient that you actually can answer for both, or (particularly for non-strict RAW cases) something from one is easily compatible with the other. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you gave has list answers because there's more than one way to do the thing in question. There also isn't a good way to make the question specific enough to narrow it down to only one way of doing said thing, until the person asking question already knows how to do it (which would defeat the point of asking the question). Both answers are also pretty detailed already, I'm not sure how much more could be added without making them overly long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know, I'm just not seeing any problem in this case. It looks like things are working correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-09-07T11:13:57.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4930" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-07T18:30:39.263" Score="4" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't notice we didn't already have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roll20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roll20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roll20&lt;/a&gt; tag for the pretty big virtual tabletop located at roll20.net.  I added a few tags to a new question and afterwards clicked the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roll20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roll20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roll20&lt;/a&gt; tag to see the tag-wiki for it out of curiosity; and then noticed it not only didn't have a tag wiki, but it only had 1 question - the one I'd just added it to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will admit a complete lack of knowledge regarding tag making etiquette - should I undo my tag creation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This popped up in the similar questions list while I was writing, very much related:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3346/is-it-worthwhile-to-add-a-roll20-tag-to-the-main-list&quot;&gt;Is it worthwhile to add a &amp;quot;roll20&amp;quot; tag to the main list?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update:  After reading and re-reading other meta posts and the tag creation privilege, I believe the tag to be worthwhile and will go ahead and start making a tag-wiki for it and tagging existing appropriate questions, but I want to leave this question up so more experienced users can still weigh in and confirm my opinion or explain why I'm wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14948" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-22T08:05:10.243" LastActivityDate="2020-09-22T08:05:10.243" Title="I think I just created the [roll20] tag; is it appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="4931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4930" CreationDate="2014-09-07T18:55:28.150" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag creation process is totally dynamic, and for the most part, completely up to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system intentionally makes transparent to you whether or not you're creating a new tag, and this is by design - new tags arise organically, and when they do, they make sense. Occasionally, tags do need to be removed and cleaned up, but this honestly doesn't happen with any real frequency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the Roll20 service is a useful, effective, and clear categorization, and is a prefect candidate for a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2014-09-07T18:55:28.150" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4932" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4949" CreationDate="2014-09-07T22:59:48.630" Score="15" ViewCount="401" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just burninated the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag. It had no wiki, and appeared to be uselessly broad, since almost &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; question on here is about rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm leaving this question here to record this burnination. &lt;s&gt;If this tag crops up again, we'll know it isn't the first time, and maybe it'll be worth blacklisting.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag has been burninated at least once before, and has risen from the grave yet again. It should probably be blacklisted. (There isn't a direct record of it, but: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/363/1204&quot;&gt;it was discussed in 2010&lt;/a&gt; and yet the usages below were from March this year at the earliest, meaning it silently disappeared between these two times.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions it was attached to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46358/can-you-maintain-bardic-music-and-still-make-an-attack-action&quot;&gt;Can you maintain bardic music and still make an attack action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45990/in-hunters-hunted-ii-how-do-you-use-plan-dice&quot;&gt;In Hunters Hunted II, how do you use Plan dice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44887/what-content-is-not-included-in-the-rules-compendium&quot;&gt;What content is not included in the Rules Compendium?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44884/which-parts-of-pathfinder-are-excluded-from-the-prd&quot;&gt;Which parts of Pathfinder are excluded from the PRD?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42110/dual-wielding-with-a-double-weapon-and-an-off-hand-weapon&quot;&gt;Dual wielding with a Double Weapon and an Off Hand weapon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41962/which-system-to-support-a-grim-world-of-low-fantasy&quot;&gt;Which system to support a grim world of low fantasy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37684/in-fantasy-craft-what-rolls-always-succeed-on-natural-20-fail-on-natural-1&quot;&gt;In Fantasy Craft what rolls always succeed on natural 20; fail on natural 1?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36552/designing-a-damage-system-for-our-rules&quot;&gt;Designing a damage system for our rules&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36000/using-ghoul-army-spell-as-am-oracle-with-the-tongues-curse&quot;&gt;Using Ghoul Army spell as am Oracle with the Tongues curse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35283/attributes-how-to-determine-them-in-a-setting-specific-manner&quot;&gt;Attributes - how to determine them in a setting-specific manner?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/121570/i-made-us-some-trogdor-graphics&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zm85C.png&quot; alt=&quot;trogdor was personally involved in this burnination&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-02-12T14:28:00.387" LastActivityDate="2023-02-12T14:28:00.387" Title="The [rules] tag has just been burninated (again), let's blacklist it" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|tag-block-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4933" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4962" CreationDate="2014-09-08T04:42:57.743" Score="5" ViewCount="318" Body="&lt;p&gt;I find the current tagging for world of darkness to be quite confusing. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; what's the purpose of this? it seems to refer to what is now canonically known as &quot;classic world of darkness&quot; not what is officially referred to as &quot;world of darkness&quot; also known as &quot;new world of darkness&quot; by fans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;with &quot;world of darkness&quot; 2.0 announced/coming out/out (whatever pseudo state it's in) it's even more confusing. So if I want to ask a thematic question about the new &quot;world of darkness&quot; do I tag it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;? or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;? because it's been stated, for example, that even though Belials Brood doesn't appear in the Vampire the Requiem 2 core book, they still exist in the setting (meaning they are attempting to retain fluff). if the question is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt; is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that note, how does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; still make sense, I know the origin, but the rules are being reslated as 2.0. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it make sense to tag things &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2&lt;/a&gt;? for example? or should we require two tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt;? and if we use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; what does that mean then? version 1? any version? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt; is even worse on this because technically it's v1 uses wod v2 rules&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically I'm confused about the current state of the tags and how to tag thematic questions, or questions regarding updates, or questions that may otherwise span games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;update&lt;/em&gt; I've asked these questions which apply to bother &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; but do not apply to classic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; (which the tag wiki says VtM is the flagship and thus this represents classic and not new).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47744/1015&quot;&gt;Qashmallim, and the similarity to Angels?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47454/1015&quot;&gt;How can I make a shapeshifter that takes human forms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41462/1015&quot;&gt;Does Blood and Smoke invalidate previous Vampire books?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this question was written to resolve how I should be tagging so I can stop arguing with people on here, and to hopefully remove ambiguity. I would like to see tag updates as a result of the answers, but if there is a clear answer which explains how and why I should use the existing tags that is acceptable (such an answer must explain why a promethean question would get lumped in with vampire the masquerade, and/or why my questions are unacceptable as both). Also if we are deciding to use the pan &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; I would like to see a question that equally applies to cwod, nwod, and nwod2&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-01-04T02:04:57.167" Title="Clean up tagging for &quot;World of Darkness&quot; related questions" Tags="|discussion|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4934" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4933" CreationDate="2014-09-08T04:49:19.597" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;as sort of a proposal, I believe we should burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; there isn't enough similarity between classic and new for it to be useful. After we migrate it to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-classic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-classic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-classic&lt;/a&gt; (although &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt; would be closer to nwod) (maybe on the name cwod, owod, and long versions would make sense for synonyms)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;we should then rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-godmachine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-godmachine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-godmachine&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-new-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-new-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-new-1e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-new-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-new-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-new-2e&lt;/a&gt; respectively, because it's consistent. Although programmatically I prefer this postfix version, we could do &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/classic-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;classic-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;classic-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; which is nicer linguistically, and then tag synonym the postfix for typing &lt;code&gt;world of...&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that we need a &lt;code&gt;-universe&lt;/code&gt; tag, to deal with things like Belial's Brood which is mentioned currently only in 1e, but was stated as an official response to exist in 2e, as well as Demons and Angels which only have 2e rules, but technically existed without rules in 1e. It is also important for questions where you may currently be playing. The storytelling is more emphasized than the mechanics. I would like to state that I define fluff as things I can simply describe, where as mechanics count as dots, and rolls. For example Obfuscate exists in all World of Darkness games (including VtM) and I believe the core concept has never really changed, though dots and detail may have in some cases &lt;code&gt;-universe&lt;/code&gt; should be fluff only. This is an attempt to address what is (according to @Oxinabox) a consensus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4773/1015&quot;&gt;that you should not tag both rule systems&lt;/a&gt;. However due to single universe one or the other is not necessarily relevant. I would be ok with tagging with all perceived acceptable systems. I just want to resolve the issue of multiple acceptable systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for specific games they should also follow &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent-1e&lt;/a&gt; which could then be tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-new-1&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-new-1&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-new-1&lt;/a&gt; if someone was trying to convert something to those rules, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;since long versions seem to be preferred, we should also make tag synonyms for &lt;code&gt;nwod-*&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;cwod&lt;/code&gt;,&lt;code&gt;owod&lt;/code&gt;, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-09-09T15:28:58.427" CommentCount="40" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4935" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4933" CreationDate="2014-09-09T01:43:54.913" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me stop my endless comment chain and put forward a proposal: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; gets replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-classic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-classic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-classic&lt;/a&gt;, which synonyms to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/owod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;owod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;owod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt; tag should just be burninated and existing questions clarified. We don't have tags for softback, hardback and revised, either.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-nwod&lt;/a&gt;, which matches best what people actually look for, and synonymize that with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-new&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-new&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-new&lt;/a&gt;. Change &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't make separate tags for the second editions of existing games; pair them with the edition tag that's relevant. &lt;strong&gt;Blood and Smoke&lt;/strong&gt; entries would get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-nwod-2e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-requiem&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new tag for the blue-book, mortals-focused game line that uses the book titled &lt;strong&gt;The World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt; as its core. (The one that &lt;strong&gt;God Machine Chronicle&lt;/strong&gt; will become the second edition of.) This way, we can keep to the previous suggestion. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness-nwod-mortals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness-nwod-mortals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness-nwod-mortals&lt;/a&gt; would be a good start.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still think the umbrella &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; tag is useful, since pan-WoD fandom continues to be a thing in a way that pan-edition-D&amp;amp;D or L5R isn't so much. But I think this is a good core to start from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-09-09T01:57:08.553" LastActivityDate="2014-09-09T01:57:08.553" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4936" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-09T18:10:53.467" Score="-6" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41852/what-is-inspiration/44639#44639&quot;&gt;What is inspiration?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46803/what-exactly-is-base-ac/46805#46805&quot;&gt;What exactly is &amp;quot;base AC&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47564/touch-attacks-on-dd-5e/47565#47565&quot;&gt;Touch attacks on D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As diagrammed below, there is only one case where somebody asking a D&amp;amp;D 5E question should need a link to the basic rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;          | Has Basic |  No Basic |&#xA;| Has PHB |     X     |     X     |&#xA;| No PHB  |     X     |     O     |&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These people, however, shouldn't even be asking a question, since they obviously haven't read the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The corollary to this is obviously, if we don't need to link to the rules, should we actively remove the links? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know this is a small thing, and probably doesn't matter, but, personally, I find the links distracting, since they don't add anything to the answer.  Furthermore, whenever I come across this situation I'm left thinking, &quot;This was a good question, the asker obviously already has (and has read) the rules, how is this at all helpful?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9058" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T00:21:14.090" Title="Can we stop linking to the D&amp;D 5e Basic Rules in answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4936" CreationDate="2014-09-09T18:52:31.573" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it depends. In the first and third question it's used in a weird way. It looks to me the answerers are sorta trying to say &quot;this is where I've gotten those info&quot; but instead say &quot;and if you want to learn more read the rules again&quot;.&#xA;It could be useful if they focused on pointing where all the small details that make use or integrate the asked matter are. Instead of saying &quot;if you want to see more of this, read here&quot; it tells me &quot;pay attention to these things too. If you have trouble finding where they are, look there&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second case is good, I think. The answerer provides a reference in order to tell the querent where he took the various pieces that form his answer, so that he can check and see for himself why the answer is the right one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2014-09-09T18:52:31.573" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4938" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-09T22:32:47.673" Score="13" ViewCount="250" Body="&lt;p&gt;Researching &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46704/can-the-arcane-druidic-focus-staff-double-as-quarterstaff/47602#47602&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46704/can-the-arcane-druidic-focus-staff-double-as-quarterstaff&quot;&gt;Can the arcane/druidic focus staff double as quarterstaff?&lt;/a&gt;  has lead me to re-evaluate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45266/can-an-elven-wizard-use-a-bow-for-an-arcane-focus/45270#45270&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45266/can-an-elven-wizard-use-a-bow-for-an-arcane-focus&quot;&gt;Can an Elven Wizard use a bow for an arcane focus?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, my view in has gone from, &quot;No, it's not possible per RAW, but you could house-rule it if you wanted to&quot; to, &quot;It's not technically called out as a possibility, but there's precedent, so go for it.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went ahead and made the edit, since that seemed like the right thing to do; but was it?  Would it have been more appropriate to create a new answer?--and, if so, should I have left the current answer, or deleted it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9058" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T06:33:35.873" Title="Do I edit or create a new answer when my view on my current answer changes significantly?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4938" CreationDate="2014-09-09T22:58:12.700" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Improve your answer and pay specific attention to explaining why your precious view was wrong. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't like massive edits introduced by other people, but if you're correcting your own errors, we prefer correct over incorrect any day. Just make sure you create a coherent answer which answers the question. Do not strike out or signal an edit in text (that is why we can view history), but you can certainly discuss previous iterations of your answer if they fell into subtle traps which may elucidate your point..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-09-09T22:58:12.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4940" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4938" CreationDate="2014-09-09T22:58:55.620" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, I would say that you should not edit your answer,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a new answer, it is substantially different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has its own different pros and cons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It thus should not benefit from the up/down votes the previous answer had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel your old answer was substantially wrong, and without merit, and causing harm, then you might choose to delete your old answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, then your old answer, and your new answer can war it out in the vote count to get to the top. Thus allowing the community to show which is most true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastActivityDate="2014-09-09T22:58:55.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4938" CreationDate="2014-09-10T00:14:57.690" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would generally consider the following to tell me whether I should edit or post a new answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Am I totally changing the meaning and message of the answer, such that this new version has nothing in common with the old one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, I'll delete the answer and make a new one. Otherwise, I'll edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The driving factor is the votes. Should the votes on the old version still apply to the new one? Are those peoples' votes still applying to roughly the same thing they might vote for? Editing an answer from &quot;Yes&quot; to &quot;No&quot; is &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; something you shouldn't do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; reverse their votes on your answer post-edit, but the question is whether they'll ever find out and do so. The best rule of thumb might be to consider, honestly, how you'd feel if &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; were the voter and the answer was someone else's. Would you be fine with your vote still applying after that major change, or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trivial examples of when I'll edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yes, because A B C. &amp;rarr; Yes, because X Y Z.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Probably, because X. &amp;rarr; Yes definitely, because X Y.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Horrible explanation of certain key ideas &amp;rarr; Same key ideas, total rewrite of the explanation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trivial examples of when I'll delete my answer and post a new one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No, you can't do that. &amp;rarr; Whoops, yes, you can totally do that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do {thing that I realise is a bad idea} &amp;rarr; Do {completely different thing}&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm inclined to think your answer is in the &quot;delete and post a new one&quot; category, because it's a major message change and &lt;em&gt;very close to&lt;/em&gt; a &quot;no you can't&quot; &amp;rarr; &quot;sure, you can&quot; change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind &lt;strong&gt;you also have the option of keeping both answers.&lt;/strong&gt; Consider: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/17144/is-a-dragonwrought-kobold-a-true-dragon&quot;&gt;Is a Dragonwrought Kobold a True Dragon?&lt;/a&gt; - You might want to do this to allow voters to decide, or so as to not destroy still-reasonable hard work, etc. In this case, probably call out in your second answer why you're posting a second answer that contradicts your first, as KRyan did there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T01:49:32.517" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4942" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4936" CreationDate="2014-09-10T00:21:14.090" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's fine linking to those rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People will link to the Compendium in D&amp;amp;D 4e answers, the d20srd and pfd20srd in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder answers, the Fate SRD (&lt;a href=&quot;http://fate-srd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;there is one now!&lt;/a&gt;) in Fate Core/Accelerated answers, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The examples you've provided are business as usual, essentially being:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's the rules source I'm citing, and a page citation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's the rules source I'm citing, and several extracts from it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It appears you might not realise the rules with this stuff are freely available, here they are &lt;em&gt;(Weird case, question got closed, but still fine within the answer as is)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that in the first two cases the authors have been lazy about it. I've edited them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T00:21:14.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4932" CreationDate="2014-09-10T06:06:28.373" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it should go. Vote for me, for the record. Hello, any SE dev that cares, can you blacklist this for us?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-09-10T20:54:42.813" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T20:54:42.813" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4944" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-09-10T06:08:01.113" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2014-09-10T06:08:01.113" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T06:08:01.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4945" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-09-10T06:08:01.113" Score="0" Body="This tag is used in requests for adding one or more tags to the blacklist, preventing them from ever being recreated." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-09-10T13:16:34.700" LastActivityDate="2014-09-10T13:16:34.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4947" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-09-11T00:14:28.393" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2014-09-11T00:14:28.393" LastActivityDate="2014-09-11T00:14:28.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4948" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-09-11T00:14:28.393" Score="0" Body="This tag is used in requests for adding one or more tags to the blacklist, preventing them from ever being recreated. " OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-09-16T13:45:28.063" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T13:45:28.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4932" CreationDate="2014-09-11T00:22:35.053" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rule&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rule&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rule&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ruleset&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ruleset&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ruleset&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rulesets&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rulesets&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rulesets&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mechanics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mechanics&lt;/a&gt; have all been blacklisted. Attempting to use them will produce the following warning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Z40fq.png&quot; alt=&quot;If your question concerns the rules of a game, that will be abundantly obvious. Instead, make sure you&amp;#39;re clearly describing the question you have *concerning* those rules.&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2014-09-11T00:22:35.053" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4950" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-11T05:45:14.627" Score="8" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’ve noticed a pattern in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions recently:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone posts an incredibly broad game recommendation question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It gets swiftly closed as too broad&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker protests and adds a little bit of information, narrowing it down to be slightly less incredibly broad than before. Sometimes they just protest. It’s still incredibly broad. Comments stating why it should be closed in the first place still apply.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It gets reopened and left open.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers might even remark on how broad it is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s some recent examples of when that’s occurred:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47662/&quot;&gt;What is a good, free, Space-faring RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35413/&quot;&gt;Looking for a WWII RPG that requires no adaptation/conversion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35625/&quot;&gt;Short One-Session Adventures for AD&amp;amp;D 1e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first two, an answerer even rightly points out that there are countless matches and the question is still overly broad (not to point a finger at that answerer). In the third, there are comments about it being too broad which probably still apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aren’t we being too soft on these questions? Shouldn’t they remain closed until they refine their criteria sufficiently, not until they simply refine their criteria at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ll leave this here for some prior discussion too: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s so problematic about a recommendation question having potentially hundreds of answers, anyway?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-13T02:07:26.917" Title="Overly broad game recs are being reopened and left open" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4951" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4950" CreationDate="2014-09-11T11:51:49.490" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a good point.  The other mods and I tend to exercise our closes and reopens &quot;once only&quot;, so once we've closed a question, if the community reopens, we just grouse and move on, mainly because we get sick of people screaming about what fascists we are.  I tend to then contribute an answer that follows our &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;challenge the frame of the question&quot; site guidelines&lt;/a&gt; by giving an answer but then telling them their criteria suck (as I did on two of the questions you linked). You are correct in that none of those have really been corrected enough to reopen, and should all be reclosed. Everyone go vote!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-09-13T02:07:26.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4952" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4953" CreationDate="2014-09-12T12:49:29.297" Score="2" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought left a lengthy comment under an answer to this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47604/without-a-magic-item-economy-what-is-gold-for&quot;&gt;Without a magic item economy, what is gold for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which now seems to have vanished. There's no record of my either posting it (or a mod deleting it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I imagine it? If not, how can I find out what happened to it. And while I'm here, how can I link to a particular answer, rather than just the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10635" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-12T17:09:48.890" Title="Vanished comment - how do I find out what happened?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4952" CreationDate="2014-09-12T13:15:55.280" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I'm aware, when a mod deletes a comment it is just gone. I've had a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of comments deleted (I have a tendency to get involved in comment conversations) and I've never seen a trace of the comment or any record of it's existence. So a mod has probably deleted your comment, and I don't think there's anything you can do about that. A mod &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; see and potentially restore deleted comments, so if you really want to know what happened or try to get your coment back you can ask one of the mods to check for you. The best way to do that is to ping one (probably mxyzplk, he's the most active), in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more information on this, check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deleted-comments&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deleted-comments&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deleted-comments&lt;/a&gt; tag on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/deleted-comments&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange.&lt;/a&gt; There's a lot of questions and answers there on similar issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each answer has the share, edit and flag links under it, just like a question. If you click share, you'll be given a link you can copy which goes directly to that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-17T10:37:54.603" LastActivityDate="2014-09-12T14:57:45.237" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4952" CreationDate="2014-09-12T17:09:48.890" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments are meant to be ephemeral and are often deleted on this site.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are for improving/clarifying questions and answers. Answers are the value here on the site.  Threads of comments obscure answers and are therefore are on the chopping block.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a general answer; after looking I found your comment on gatherer818's answer: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I was going to add an answer very much like this. The problem is that the difference between magic item trade in 44 and 5e appears vast. But there are happier mediums. Simply put: sure you can buy and sell magic items for gold, but the sums involved are going to be astronomical. Yet adventuring can yield astronomical sums eventually. So if your PC wants to buy something, they can, but they're going to have to save the proceeds of several adventures (at least) to afford it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a fine comment but not going to be kept forever.  It's a combination of +1, plus an opinion on a magic item economy which isn't really the point of the question. Gatherer could have incorporated your point into his answer but didn't; therefore it got deleted during cleanup after a couple days. I don't intend to undelete it; you could contribute an answer to the question if you want a permanent thought contributed (though do note that the question is asking about something a little different).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For further context, this question has had something like 50 comments on it, half of which have been deleted. I just deleted another 10 while in there. When questions get people into chatty forum mode, we have to crank the comment weedeater up to a higher pitch than we would on an arbitrary question, so that the question and answers get adequate &quot;screen time&quot; and it's not a big reddit-like mess of people hobnobbing with each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-09-12T17:09:48.890" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4933" CreationDate="2014-09-13T02:25:13.283" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, I am going to throw some ideas out in this answer, because it is too long for a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to use &lt;strong&gt;owod&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;cwod&lt;/strong&gt; interchangably throughout this post.&#xA;They are the same thing,&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;owod&lt;/strong&gt; == old world of darkness (opposite of nwod),&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;cwod&lt;/strong&gt; == classic world of darkness&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;owod 1st ed, owod revised, owod 20th anniversary.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I understand it, revised just incorporates more or less an errata.&#xA;20th anniversary incorporates another errata, and adds rules for things that weren't invented when owod first came out -- like mobile phones and the internet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Thus these all deserve one-tag between them,&#xA;if it matters that a question is not using the errata then it can be clarified in the post.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Correct me if I am wrong, I am not really too cluey about oWoD, I'll mark this community wiki).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Commonality between all three systems(owod, nwod 1.0,  nwod 2.0):&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Setting elements&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They all have vampires, wizards, werewolves...&#xA;but so does Dresden-files. So does Buffy. So does Supernatural. (all of which have RPGs).&#xA;Things that are common between all 3 editions, are common in all urban fantasy. If someone is in a situation where they have a question that general,&#xA;they should use a more generic tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&amp;quot;What does the average modern person know about vampires?&amp;quot; would go under a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/urban-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;urban-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;urban-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; tag (since it is actually asking about characters, who are in the dark about setting specific elements anyway) , &amp;quot;How to create dark atmosphere?&amp;quot; would go under a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But really, they are not asking a WoD question at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no real usecase for a tag for setting elements common across all 3 editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Setting elements the asker &lt;em&gt;assumes&lt;/em&gt; (or even knows) to be common to both editions should use the tag for the game they are playing. Since they could be wrong about that assumption, and it could change with new books coming out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the goal is to compare elements between the editions, eg &amp;quot;What happend to the Malkavian Clan?&amp;quot; then this is a good use for using two tags. It is specifically to two editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When WoD reachs truely deep numbers of editions like dnd has, by that stage it might be worth having a global &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; that is for questions like &amp;quot;How have vampires changed across WoD editions?&amp;quot;, but for now that isn't useful.&#xA;It is better to not have that global tag their to confuse people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Rules&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rules are boardly similar,&#xA;but so are the rules for Sion and Exhalted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general small difference in rules matter.&#xA;People come to the site when things are unclear,&#xA;and alot of that time it is boarder cases when things are unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Small differences in rules matter enough for the tagging to change.&#xA;The exception being if the difference is from using an erata, as I suggest the owod editions are, and that nwod-gmc is not.&#xA;(Dark Heresy for example has had 3 erratas, we do not have 4 different DH tags)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So common rules is no motivation for a common tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;No reason for a common tag across all 3 editions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Common Setting elements are also common to all &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/urban-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;urban-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;urban-fantasy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules are not similar enough to be useful&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only concrete thing they have in common is the current rights holder&#xA;(not even a common publisher).&#xA;and any question that is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/onyx-path-publishing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;onyx-path-publishing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;onyx-path-publishing&lt;/a&gt;, is going to be along the lines of &amp;quot;What is Onyx Path's policy on Fan-created Books?&amp;quot;, not a WoD question at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;nwod 1.0 vs nwod 2.0&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine?lq=1&quot;&gt;Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue we have right now, is that over the next few years, onyx path will finish republishing all the content they intend to cross over.&#xA;Right now there is the implict (and sometimes explict) understanding that most nwod 1.0 supernaturals are assumed to exist in nwod 2.0.&#xA;Eventually, all of them will come across.&#xA;But as we have seen with Vampire, and from what I have heard of Werewolf,&#xA;and from how Second Sight minors were merged into core, they will not make the transition without major changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Such questions have the final purpose of being used with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-2.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-2.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-2.0&lt;/a&gt; and should be tagged as such.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Given time, the new books will be out and they will have canonical nwod-2.0 answers, that will be better than anything from nwod-1.0.&#xA;People looking to answer will for now be familiar with both systems, and by the time that is no longer the case, all content that is going to be offically republished will have been.&#xA;Thus in those cases &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-2.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-2.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-2.0&lt;/a&gt; is all that is needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is distinct from questions specifically about the differenced between nwod-1.0 and nwod-2.0 which definately should be tagged with both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also the case of asking how to do the conversion, which is more problematic, think should be tagged with both, (I don't know if we have seen any such questions though so this may be moot)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are for final use with nwod-2.0 include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47744/qashmallim-and-the-similarity-to-angels&quot;&gt;Qashmallim, and the similarity to Angels?&lt;/a&gt; : which will actually I believe be concretely answered in the Promethean: The Created Second Edition, coming out in Spring. Til then speculation can be made based on the existing nwod-1.0 books. But it is speculation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47454/how-can-i-make-a-shapeshifter-that-takes-human-forms&quot;&gt;How can I make a shapeshifter that takes human forms?&lt;/a&gt; The question asker is playing nwod-2.0, but is willing to port content from 1.0. Since as GM he can create new supernaturals, and since is is going to have to do alot of rules work anyway, limiting the scope to things that have appeared in a past edition of the setting is likely unnesc. He just wants to know about shape-shifting monsters. This question I think might be better tagged: [nwod-god-machine] [urban-fantasy]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We will be wrong&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An issue we will see with questions about 1.0 setting elements in 2.0, is that we will be wrong.  That is Ok however, so long as it is clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone had asked me before Blood and Smoke (aka VTR 2.0) came out: &amp;quot;Could I have a GMC plot, where the party ambusses vampires while they are sleeping and kills them by openind the blinds?, I am willing to port content from 1.0&amp;quot;, I would say &amp;quot;Sure here are the 1.0 rules that support this idea. It will be a fairly easy fight, so easy that I don't think vampires would be foolish enough to be in such a position&amp;quot; but now with 2.0 my answer would be: &amp;quot;Sure, but it will be hard. Sunlight hurts vampires abit, but not enough to disable them before they kill half the party. Their occult checked should tell them this. They might be better off barricading the doors and torching the place.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some questions will be unanswerable:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;If a changeling takes a physical condition, eg Blinded, with-in a dreamfight, what happens when he wakes up?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can speculate but can not answer.&#xA;We strongly expect there to be changeling in God Machine, but we have no rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I think between nwod-1.0 and nwod-2.0 we are doing the right thing.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked about this in  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine?lq=1&quot;&gt;Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe there is enough clearness there to solve any issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Applying it to the example questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47744/1015&quot;&gt;Qashmallim, and the similarity to Angels?&lt;/a&gt; This is actually a different question dependign on if it is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-1.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-1.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-1.0&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-2.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-2.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-2.0&lt;/a&gt;. It if it about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-1.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-1.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-1.0&lt;/a&gt; then the answer will be based on the Sample Adventure from  Saturnine Night and on the core &amp;quot;Secret Histories&amp;quot;, if it is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-2.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-2.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-2.0&lt;/a&gt; then it is based on the paragraph from GMC-RU and whatever can be gleaned from demon, as well as the upcoming Promethean 2nd edition. If it is tagged both then it can not get a &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; good answer. Because the God Machine is presented differently between the books.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47454/1015&quot;&gt;How can I make a shapeshifter that takes human forms?&lt;/a&gt; This question is very broad. It is asking about something to use with nwod-2.0. It wants to take inspiration from nwod-1.0, but it is for nwod-2.0. The nwod-1.0 tag might attract people from 1.0 who can answer, but that is similar to asking a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zsh&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;zsh&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;zsh&lt;/a&gt; and also tagging it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bash&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bash&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bash&lt;/a&gt; on Unix.SE. While answers for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bash&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bash&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bash&lt;/a&gt; might help and you might be willing to convert them, its not actually about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bash&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bash&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bash&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41462/1015&quot;&gt;Does Blood and Smoke invalidate previous Vampire books?&lt;/a&gt; is the a listed example of something that should use both, it is asking wether books from one can be used for the other (and the answer is no)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-09-13T06:52:56.847" CommentCount="23" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-09-13T02:25:13.283" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4956" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4959" CreationDate="2014-09-13T04:10:17.957" Score="-3" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got thinking about a tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/urban-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;urban-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;urban-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; recently relating to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4933/1362&quot;&gt;WoD tagging question&lt;/a&gt;; and I thought more thinking about Genre Tags might be worth-wild.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I am thinking that reviewing what Genre tags are, and what they are for is in order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We appear to have the 3 top-level speculative fiction genre tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fantasy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/science-fiction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;science-fiction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;science-fiction&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/horror&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;horror&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;horror&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have tags for any other genres I've seen&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Crime/Mystery&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Military&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Romance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also don't have tags for any subgenres:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cyberpunk&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Urban Fantasy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we have tags like Urban-Fantasy? Or should we avoid them,&#xA;The normal fanstasy tag has strong connotations for medieval European fantasy&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think our Genre tags are at their best when they &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; questions like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44781/what-living-apex-lifeforms-are-there-other-than-dragons&quot;&gt;What living apex lifeforms are there other than dragons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They also show up on Game-recommendation questions, and also decent there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So are Genre tags good? Subgenre tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't like to see every WoD/Dresden-Files etc question marked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/urban-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;urban-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;urban-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; any more than I would like ot see every dnd question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fantasy&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;but for things that are system agnostic, like &quot;What kind of monsters/horrors from urban mythology can shapeshift?&quot; it seems decent match for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I am looking for here is an answers along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/urban-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;urban-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;urban-fantasy&lt;/a&gt; is reasonable, when need shows it can/will be created&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or &quot;We should not have subgenre tags, forever subdividing leads only to madness&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-14T03:41:29.433" Title="How do we feel about Genre Tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4958" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-13T11:46:20.417" Score="5" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt; tag is a relic from a much earlier idea of WoD tagging; there never were any games that used the Storytelling system that were not also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; games, and with the subsequent developments involving Onyx Path, there won't be. Let's bring together that which once was asunder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/nwod/synonyms&quot;&gt;synonym created&lt;/a&gt;; those with enough rep should vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T03:00:37.607" Title="Tag synonym request: [storytelling-system] - &gt; [nwod]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4956" CreationDate="2014-09-13T12:34:29.930" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK guys, time to step back a little.  The tagging system here is an &lt;em&gt;emergent&lt;/em&gt; &lt;em&gt;folksonomy&lt;/em&gt;.  It is not meant to be a rigorous top-down taxonomy and has no requirement to be parallel.  All it matters is that people can find questions about stuff they're looking for.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can imagine easily someone wanting to narrow down their query about something to the science fiction domain, just as they might want to narrow it down to the gurps-4e game system, so the tags are valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are created as they're needed, so apparently no one has needed genre tags for (every other genre in the world) yet. If someone is making some questions that specifically have to do with urban fantasy as a genre, then I'd expect them to possibly add that as a tag. Not before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure we have addressed this before in Meta but I can't find it immediately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-13T12:34:29.930" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4960" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4958" CreationDate="2014-09-14T03:55:11.690" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems like a good idea,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do not have enough questions that would justerfy considering the system's theoretical generic base, that only has one game for it, separately from that one game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are almost no used that are not also uses of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a few hundred rep from that required to create synonyms.&#xA;But if you do that, then those of use with more than 5 tag repm&#xA;can go &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/nwod/synonyms&quot;&gt;vote for making the synonym.&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are enough people with enough rep to solve it democratically in the synonym system, I believe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-09-14T03:55:11.690" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4958" CreationDate="2014-09-15T02:59:26.637" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have synonymed storytelling-system to nwod and storyteller-system to world-of-darkness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T02:59:26.637" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4962" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4933" CreationDate="2014-09-15T03:52:44.433" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to chime in with my own organisation proposal here, based on what I've learned from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dungeons-and-dragons/info&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/fate/info&quot;&gt;Fate&lt;/a&gt; tags, which have fairly robust tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That might be surprising, since I don't play these games and you've probably never seen me active in their questions. I have lurked though and learned about how your rules are organised, and recently in light of these issues you're experiencing I've tried to learn more (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17673863#17673863&quot;&gt;with help in chat&lt;/a&gt;). This might work out, or it might be terrible, or it might at least satisfy some of your needs and give you something else to build on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;My understanding I'm operating on&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I've made grevious errors in my understanding of the structure of your rules, please let me know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that the structure of the World of Darkness books can be broken down like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Old/Classic World of Darkness. No core book. A series of splash books (e.g. Vampire the Masquerade), each covering a type of creature for play.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New World of Darkness. Core book, new version of each splash (e.g. Vampire the Requiem).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;God Machine Chronicles comes out. It's effectively a new splash, except it also comes with a nWoD rules update. New versions of each splash (e.g. Blood &amp;amp; Smoke) are released for this rules update.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New World of Darkness Second Edition. This incorporates the rules update of God Machine Chronicles.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we consider how we'd version these, I think it's something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;oWoD = version 1.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nWoD = version 2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nWoD 2e = basically version 2.5, since it's a rules update but not exactly a whole new version in its own right.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;god machine chronicles's rules update provided the .5 to be added to nWoD. Now that .5 has been formally added in a new release.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each version of the game has its own splashes attached. These are basically their own game. You don’t play nWoD, so much as you play Vampire: the Requiem. You can mix these together though and play that with Mage: the Awakening, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11631/balancing-a-mixed-game-in-nwod/11634#11634&quot;&gt;you have to be careful with doing so&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because each splash is its own game, it needs its own tag. Even the rules updates like B&amp;amp;S, so as to connect experts with questions on that topic, and to make it clear whether an NWOD 2e player is using the rules update or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Here's how I'd structure this in tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for questions about the World of Darkness line of games and settings in general. You may end up using this, or you may not, so use it if and when you eventually need it. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; for an example of the questions something like this might contain: it might generally involve version comparison questions, or historical questions, or questions about consistent design choices, or so on.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for oWoD questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for nWoD questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; for nWoD second edition questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, for splashes: there's several splash lines. Each splash gets its own tag if it's something new altogether, including if it totally supersedes an old splash. Rule of thumb: if you leave the other books on the shelf when playing with this one, it probably deserves its own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; and so on for oWoD splashes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; and so on for nWoD splashes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt;, that one that's apparently in a kind of god-machine/2e overlapping pseudo-state?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the overall structure comes to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-ascension&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;etc&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; (after nWoD 2e comes out, these may move. &amp;darr;)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;etc&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; may become a synonym of this)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt; (after nWoD 2e comes out)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; may become a synonym of this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;???&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tags are named after the book titles: no '1e' for Vampire: the Requiem or anything else, because the book isn't titled that way. D&amp;amp;D deals with this just fine with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions get tagged with the core edition &amp;amp; game(s) the player is running:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-ascension&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt; (I think?)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;later &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; (a specific version comparison between two editions)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would that work at all well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me know if something's broken, or I've mistaken something in my understanding of how your game works, or I've done something stupid somewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-01-04T02:04:57.167" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4963" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4965" CreationDate="2014-09-15T05:50:46.373" Score="11" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;A couple of you will know the most recent person I am referencing, with a bit of a spurt from a new user constantly answering with bad posts in terms of content, grammar, spelling, well, they're really just all around bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47524/how-do-i-challenge-my-pcs-who-fight-every-battle-like-mongol-horse-archers/47535#47535&quot;&gt;How do I challenge my PCs who fsight every battle like Mongol horse archers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47830/how-can-i-get-my-group-to-use-actual-weaponry-not-just-improvised/47846#47846&quot;&gt;How can I get my group to use actual weaponry, not just improvised?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47825/creating-elder-magi/47847#47847&quot;&gt;Creating elder magi&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first one, SevenSidedDie notes that &quot;the community is reacting to sensing a deeper problem.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happens with users like this? Do we just let them roam and get downvoted? Or do the users actually get deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T23:22:43.493" Title="What happens to users that constantly write bad posts?" Tags="|discussion|users|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4963" CreationDate="2014-09-15T06:01:54.790" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few things happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They get downvoted a lot.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their material might be irredeemably low quality and deleted, or the answerer might delete it themselves. The rest sits around, accumulating downvotes, or serving as an equivalent of skulls on the ramparts letting people know what kind of quality &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; fly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Eventually, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/86997/152515&quot;&gt;they will probably get answer banned&lt;/a&gt;, and become totally unable to leave new answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last one is a completely automatic mechanism. (There's also question banning.) It happens after making a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of low quality posts. If your answers are getting downvoted or deleted, that counts towards an answer ban - same goes for questions and question bans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most users who contribute &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; decently will never have to worry about either kind of ban. You have to provide a lot of consistently low-quality answers before you get answer banned, and that will be a &lt;em&gt;significant&lt;/em&gt; portion of your answers. You can probably guess where this is going for this user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exact mechanisms of question/answer bans are kept secret by the SE staff so that they can't be gamed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user has an opportunity to get their ban lifted, if they work at producing quality material: doing good edits, posting good questions, etc. If they can't do that, or they post low quality questions, they might dig themselves an even deeper hole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There's a project in the works &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/236568/152515&quot;&gt;to redesign or replace Q&amp;amp;A bans&lt;/a&gt;, because &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; low-quality contributors can reach a point where they cease to care about bans and post quality completely, and re-register new accounts to post even more, meaning the system has a threshold at which it implodes and completely stops working.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T07:18:57.597" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4965" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4963" CreationDate="2014-09-15T06:02:48.620" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;The best and simplest thing that the community can do is downvote bad answers. It's simple and intuitive, but has more power than is immediately apparent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/answer-bans&quot;&gt;https://stackoverflow.com/help/answer-bans&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/question-bans&quot;&gt;https://stackoverflow.com/help/question-bans&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A user who consistently gets downvoted, and the majority of whose posts have a negative score, will be automatically flagged by the system, and will have their posting rights suspended. This isn't a temporary ban, but will persist as long as those bad questions are bad. The only way to lift it is to edit the bad posts and have the voters reverse their votes (or new voters upvote it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad users who get downvoted won't be able to &quot;roam free&quot;, even if they delete their posts. They will improve, or be suspended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T06:02:48.620" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4963" CreationDate="2014-09-15T10:43:26.800" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Normally quality doesn't require moderator intervention.  As users respond to the low quality content by downvoting, voting to close, and voting to delete where applicable the system will flag that person as trouble and limit or block their access to the site, both answers above describe this well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In extreme cases the moderators may contact users encouraging them to modify their behavoir, or even suspend users for increasingly long periods of time until their quality improves.  We don't &lt;em&gt;delete&lt;/em&gt; accounts unless they're used for spam or they were only used to post nonsense such as blatant trolling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-09-15T10:43:26.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4967" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4969" CreationDate="2014-09-16T00:35:55.123" Score="-3" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have come across &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17691974#17691974&quot;&gt;a bit of a stressful situation in-game&lt;/a&gt;, and I want to know if anyone might be able to give some suggestions as to what I might be able to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trouble is, from that explanation, a lot of people are immediately going to say &quot;No, too broad.&quot; But what if I have the situation figured out to a &quot;Go left or go right?&quot; situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT:&lt;/strong&gt; To clarify, this question is asking &lt;em&gt;&quot;Is it ok to ask for advice for a specific, in-game situation&quot;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T19:17:35.237" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T19:17:35.237" Title="Are &quot;What should I do in this specific circumstance&quot; questions ok?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4967" CreationDate="2014-09-16T00:57:51.327" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This type of question can't have an objectively best answer, because the consequences of your decision depend entirely on your DM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As well as being subjective, it's also entirely specific to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only way I can see a question of this type being answerable is if it was something along the likes of: &quot;In this specific system, with this specific character, will attacking with my spear or my axe do more damage?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T00:57:51.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4967" CreationDate="2014-09-16T01:04:50.433" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Help Center, &quot;Don't Ask&quot;&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fundamental issue with this style of question is the second clause, &quot;answerable&quot; these questions aren't answerable because it's nigh impossible to provide &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of the information required to answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; the question provides a &lt;em&gt;huge&lt;/em&gt; amount of detail, we might be able to answer it, but it's going to be hard to judge which answer is &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; in an objective sense. And there is a fundamental reason why. Let's suppose that you ask a question, and provide two possible solutions. You receive two answers, the first comes down on option B, and the second comes down on option A. You go back to your game the next week and decide you like option A the best. That works out OK. How do you know option A was better than option B? There's generally no way to traverse back to the decision point and travel down option A a ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are circumstances where we can &lt;em&gt;explain&lt;/em&gt; the reasoning behind a decision in sufficient detail that you will always be led to the right decision, but generally, I find &lt;em&gt;in game&lt;/em&gt; decisions aren't something that you want to ask about here from the POV of a player. As a DM it's a good idea as that will often lead you to be better play, but as a player in a game, too much is usually out of your hands for some random folks on the internets to provide you with good advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T01:04:50.433" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4970" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-16T00:58:26.937" Score="-14" ViewCount="466" Body="&lt;p&gt;This sites methode of doing it's ratins is so hostile shoild i bother to stay with it? Down-grading for minor spelling,grammer errors.These questions and answers that are posted here are first drafts.A author would consider them first drafts!.And a author does at least one draft before the final draft! One draft authors are experienced.And I'm not going to hand write out a first draft first before typing into your page.I'm not getting paid to write here!No one is!So why the hostility?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15954" OwnerDisplayName="GLANTH" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T20:51:00.387" Title="This sites methode of doing it's rating is so hostile should i bother to stay with it?" Tags="|discussion|tools|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4970" CreationDate="2014-09-16T01:51:02.343" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;You need to understand you are joining a community with certain expectations and rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly, that you should be contributing answers to the question posed, see the help center for more. About half your answers got deleted for being forum-chat tangentially talking about the topic and not answers. Regardless of spelling, grammar, and formatting, those are always disallowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of the others - there's a broad line between &quot;first draft&quot; and &quot;incoherent&quot; and many of your posts have erred towards the &quot;I can't figure out what the heck he's talking about&quot; side of that. People downvote those.  Go hover over the downvote button, it says &quot;This answer is not useful.&quot;  I'm afraid that your communication style pushes it over to &quot;not useful.&quot; Even when people point it out, you are unwilling to clean up/clarify your statements.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We the site mods sent you a mod message previously about this problem with information on how to work with the site; it doesn't really bode well that you seem to have ignored that in favor of just screaming a complaint on the main site. If you're having issues, don't post them on the main site - post them here on meta, since that's what meta is for. Which you would probably know if you cared to bother to read a bit of the help center.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general you seem to be unwilling to bother doing a token amount of understanding how we do things around here.  Is that our fault? Everyone has tried to explain the problems to you and point you to resources to help you do better.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We would love for you to participate constructively in the site.  Watch for a while and see how we do that here, maybe. But if you insist on just posting tangents that are quite hard to understand, they will rightfully still get downvotes for not being helpful to the question on which they are posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-09-16T20:51:00.387" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T20:51:00.387" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4972" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-16T01:55:57.710" Score="1" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are 3 meta questions about clearing up the mess of WoD Tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2880/shall-we-review-the-various-world-of-darkness-tags-use&quot;&gt;Shall we review the various World of Darkness tags&amp;#39; use?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1189/clearing-up-white-wolf-world-of-darkness-tags&quot;&gt;Clearing up White Wolf World of Darkness tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/tagging-mess-that-is-world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are Duplicates, we would not allow this on the mainsite, can we stop doing it/fix it on meta? It is even more confusing here.&#xA;and actively contributing to the problems all 3 try to fix&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they need to be merged,&#xA;or the older ones locked, and linked ot the newer one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None have been implemented cleanly.&#xA;even the ones that got concesus.&#xA;Some act actively contradicted by future more focused metas.&#xA;like: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4958/tag-synonym-request-storytelling-system-nwod&quot;&gt;Tag synonym request: [storytelling-system] - &amp;gt; [nwod]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T03:02:24.937" Title="Cleaning up the Mess of cleaning up the mess of wod tag metas" Tags="|support|status-completed|meta|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4933" CreationDate="2014-09-16T01:58:54.653" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is failing to achieve consensus.&#xA;Evidenced by the fact that most answers have equal number of upvotes and downvotesm and even the best has multiple downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last time this was tried, the implementation did not occur, even with the stronger concusses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1189/clearing-up-white-wolf-world-of-darkness-tags&quot;&gt;Clearing up White Wolf World of Darkness tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2880/shall-we-review-the-various-world-of-darkness-tags-use&quot;&gt;Shall we review the various World of Darkness tags&amp;#39; use?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly this is because it is too big to get a handle on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer suggests that it may be better to not tackle the problem all at once, but subpoint, by subpoint.&#xA;This has been happening and has been making forward progress:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine&quot;&gt;Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]&lt;/a&gt; (Could do with maybe some enhancing based on answers here)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4958/tag-synonym-request-storytelling-system-nwod&quot;&gt;Tag synonym request: [storytelling-system] - &amp;gt; [nwod]&lt;/a&gt; (Done and implemented)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4912/rename-nwod-god-machine-to-nwod-2e&quot;&gt;Synonym [nwod-god-machine] to [new-world-of-darkness-2e]&lt;/a&gt; (No answers, plenty of upvotes, generally agreed to be a good thing by posts in this thread)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus in this answer I recommend the creation of more meta questions focussing on fixing specific issues with WoD Tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is community wiki, feel free to add more targetted questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T01:58:54.653" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-09-16T01:58:54.653" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4972" CreationDate="2014-09-16T01:59:06.227" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes!  No!  I don't know!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So is this supposed to be the new question?  Or are you proposing &quot;there should be a new question?&quot; So... sure?  We could close all the existing ones as status-declined and let y'all start afresh... I'm willing to watch this spiral into infinity, since I don't get compensated to mod the site I guess I can interpret that as working by the hour...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Done!  I've closed the old 2 as dupes of the new one. May the God-Machine have mercy on your souls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T01:59:06.227" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4975" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4970" CreationDate="2014-09-16T02:20:20.790" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stackexchange vs. a forum&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stackexchange is designed to be an archive of questions and answers - easy to reference, easy to get an idea of useful information.  This is very different than a discussion forum, which is much more casual and designed to be an informal conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a forum, you can ask a question and spend 2-3 pages going back and forth and clarifying what you mean and it's great for you in the moment - it's a complete nightmare for anyone going back to try to get a quick and easy question-answer reference.   Because Stack Exchange is set up to be easy to reference, you're expected to put a little more time into framing your questions and putting out your answers, so other people can get the value from it easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I speak from much personal experience.  A lot of the great RPG knowledge I got came from stuff on the now closed Forge Forums, but, I would never point someone to dig through the archives for an easy idea on anything.  A lot of those ideas are basically scattered across months or years of threads...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mutuality is your payment&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You came to Stack Exchange to get some help, right?  Presumably you looked around and saw some other questions and answers and decided you'd get decent answers or help here, as opposed to the many, many, many other rpg forums on the internet, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cost of getting thoughtful answers and help is that people expect you to take the time to make thoughtful and clear questions and comments as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I make minor typos or formatting errors pretty often, but it's not a big deal because I put enough effort in to show I'm at least acting in good faith to try to make things easy for people to read and digest.  I often will take a look at the preview and double check what I've put together to make sure it reads easily enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're right, you're not getting paid to write here, no one else is either.  Good faith and a little consideration goes both ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Other Possible Issues&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're working with some situation that makes this especially hard (english as a second language, learning disabilities, etc.) it might help to ask on Meta if anyone can point you to some better resources to help improve things.  I know the spell check in the comment box helps me often enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user9935" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-09-16T03:23:26.310" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T03:23:26.310" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4976" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-16T12:57:29.107" Score="8" ViewCount="222" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently Mxyzplk closed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47743/are-5e-rangers-actually-underpowered&quot;&gt;Are 5e Rangers competitive with other core classes?&lt;/a&gt; on the grounds that it was primarily opinion-based. If this is true, and BESW made a fairly convincing argument to me in Chat in support of its closing, then why are questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3368/the-half-elf-is-it-balanced&quot;&gt;The half-elf: is it balanced?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;amp; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14315/sword-and-board-balance-in-dd&quot;&gt;Sword-and-board balance in D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt; still rolling around the site? Do we need to take a closer look at the questions using &quot;balance&quot; in the title and/or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/balance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;balance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;balance&lt;/a&gt;?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T13:32:58.747" Title="What are the standards for balance questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4977" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4976" CreationDate="2014-09-16T13:18:54.543" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The problem with balance questions isn't that they're &quot;balance&quot; questions: it's that far too often they don't meet other basic guidelines for good SE questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I voted to close Sword-and-Board as too broad--not as a balance question!--when you showed it to me in chat an hour ago, and it'd already gathered two more close votes to go with mine before you made this question. This means the system's working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both those questions are more than two years old, and the site's changed a lot since then. We don't actively go on witch-hunts to root out old questions which don't adhere to our newer standards, but whenever we notice them we smash 'em with hammers until they fit our ethos or turn to dust. You've brought two old questions to our attention which had previously escaped modern scrutiny and we're now evaluating them based on the site's current standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the specific questions at hand:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The ranger question is requesting a generic essay about a problem they've only heard of (not experienced themselves), and they leave the definition of &quot;poweredness&quot; as an exercise to the answerer. No answer could contain actionable advice for the querent, or even be sure it's relevant to the querent's vague theoretical scenario, so it's just an invitation to discussion. This is an appropriate reason to close a question on any topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think the half-elf question is specific enough to fit our site's modern guidelines, not least because it's asking for &lt;em&gt;actionable advice&lt;/em&gt; about a problem the querent is &lt;em&gt;actually facing&lt;/em&gt;. Again, its being a balance question doesn't even come into the picture.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Sword-and-Board question is so broad it's almost comical; it's requesting history &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; houserules across &lt;em&gt;any edition of the franchise&lt;/em&gt; an answerer might feel compelled to draw upon, including editions where the topic isn't even valid! It should be closed as too broad and all-encompassing (again, the topic of balance doesn't have to be considered).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-09-16T13:32:58.747" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T13:32:58.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4978" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4976" CreationDate="2014-09-16T13:19:25.937" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most, but not all, balance questions are intrinsically opinion based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because balanced means different things to different people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two friends of mine were arguing about whether&#xA;Mages from nWoD were balanced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They both agreed that mages were more versatile than other templates,&#xA;but generally less powerful at any given task for the same XP.&#xA;That is there power was wider, not deeper.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now one was arguing this mean mages were Weak -- after all they are less good at any task than another templated PC who was specialised. Thus they would never shine the brightest.&#xA;The other argued that Mages were strong -- they are so versatile and that is what counts. They can interact with every scene, and can always contribute something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So asking if Mages are balanced or not is a matter of opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, asking if Mages were more versatile than other WoD Templates, is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/balance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;balance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;balance&lt;/a&gt; question, and is completely answerable. It is not in any way a matter of opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastActivityDate="2014-09-16T13:19:25.937" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4979" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4980" CreationDate="2014-09-17T03:54:21.763" Score="12" ViewCount="206" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought there was a question for this, but I couldn't find it. When someone asks a bad question, should it be answered? For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47981/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question seems like a very poor question as it stands. However, it has already attracted 2 answers, both of good quality. Is this correct practice, or should bad questions be left alone until they are fixed or closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-27T07:40:22.173" Title="Answers to bad questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4979" CreationDate="2014-09-17T04:00:08.937" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are correct.  Users should refrain from answering bad questions and should instead vote to close and get them clarified.  In this case, it's two experienced users who &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; know better. I've put the question on hold and have only not deleted the answers because I am a kind and generous person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-17T04:00:08.937" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4979" CreationDate="2014-09-17T16:26:17.043" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answer them with caution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary goal of this site is to help people. If that means answering a bad question or a not completely defined question occasionally, so be it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad questions and answers will be sorted out by votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3358" LastActivityDate="2014-09-17T16:26:17.043" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4982" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-18T00:13:30.283" Score="5" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag was recently discussed in this meta topic: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4869/burninate-new-gm-tag&quot;&gt;burninate new-gm tag&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem was identified thus: [new-gm] is not a meta tag, but it was &lt;em&gt;predominantly&lt;/em&gt; used as one, describing the asker's skill level but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; anything related to the question itself (i.e. these were questions any sort of GM might ask, and the kind even skilled GMs ask here from time to time). I did some burnination, and now we’ve gone from ~200 questions to 75. Of these, 53 are open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I suspect we can do better than this tag. History has demonstrated it’s prone to being used as a meta tag, and it presently appears to cover a large variety of question types.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there some way to categorise these questions better? Is there one or more replacement tags we can use to divide up the content in this tag? Is there anything we should burninate further?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-10-09T01:41:36.140" Title="What can/should we do about [new-gm]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4982" CreationDate="2014-09-18T00:13:30.283" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The way it currently seems to me is that questions fall into these categories, but I’m not sure how I’d &lt;em&gt;tag&lt;/em&gt; these categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone being new to a game and being &lt;em&gt;totally clueless&lt;/em&gt; about part of that game.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone looking to improve fundamental skills.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions literally concerning a GM who is new.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Requests for game recommendations for people who are new, or a GM who is new.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It previously also covered questions which requested tutorials/introductions to a game or a mechanic, which have been retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some way these can/should be tagged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found a succinct test of meta-tag-ness &lt;a href=&quot;https://puzzling.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1268/2729&quot;&gt;on Puzzling.SE&lt;/a&gt; that is very relevant to the conundrum of where [new-gm] applies:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Exactly the same question asked by someone who [is in a different position] wouldn't have this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whilst we work out what to do about this tag, it may be worthwhile considering that the valid usages of [new-gm] are the ones where exactly the same question, asked by anyone, would still have that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... And I think by that text, &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; the questions literally concerning a GM who is new pass. So we need to remove or replace [new-gm] in every other context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:42:07.317" LastActivityDate="2014-10-09T01:41:36.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4984" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4982" CreationDate="2014-09-18T00:20:06.410" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Greener's categories need no new tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Someone being new to a game and being totally clueless about part of that game.&lt;/strong&gt; That's a meta tag. It should instead be part of the question's text. Burn the tag, no replacement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Someone looking to improve fundamental skills.&lt;/strong&gt; We've got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; for that; it's not an exclusively expert-level tag. Replace universally.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions literally concerning a GM who is new.&lt;/strong&gt; If his newness is the primary point of the question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; is being used appropriately. If it's tangential, burninate it in favour of tags about the challenge he's facing (see points immediately above and below).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Requests for game recommendations for people who are new, or a GM who is new.&lt;/strong&gt; This is a job for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag, with an in-question criteria about newness, and maybe the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-09-18T00:36:43.230" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T00:36:43.230" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4985" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-18T02:53:12.473" Score="10" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48009/list-of-monk-prestige-classes&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which is only the most recent incarnation of the template.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Periodically we get a question that is basically, &quot;It seems like there are a lot of X. Can anyone give me a link to a list of X?&quot; This seems to me to be a terrible sort of question. And yet they never seem to get closed. &quot;Oh, it's not a list question, it's asking for a resource!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for a List = &lt;strong&gt;BAD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Link-Only Answer = &lt;strong&gt;BAD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Asking for Link to a List = &lt;em&gt;OK???&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1QPR6.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Jackie Chan: WTF?&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-05-28T03:41:16.183" Title="&quot;Find Me a Resource&quot;" Tags="|discussion|questions|closing-questions|list-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4985" CreationDate="2014-09-18T02:59:53.307" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Asking for a list is not OK.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Link-only answers are not OK.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Asking for a link to a list should be &lt;s&gt;doubly&lt;/s&gt; &lt;em&gt;triply&lt;/em&gt; not OK.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't allow list questions because the list has to be maintained in order to be correct. We don't allow link-only answers because the link can rot. A link to a list that may or may not be maintained adequately is the &lt;em&gt;least reliable answer that can possibly exist&lt;/em&gt; (except perhaps a list of links to lists, but that's getting a tad meta). Six months down the road, who knows if the link in an accepted answer will still direct visitors to a list that is correct? Not even &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMlRpN8ANrU&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the Shadow&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T02:59:53.307" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4987" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4985" CreationDate="2014-09-18T03:59:32.500" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;List-type questions can be okay. You said in your answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We don't allow list questions because the list has to be maintained in order to be correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't the problem with them, though; many good answers are susceptible to needing maintenance. The problem is that if we had a question asking what kinds of weapons exist (so that someone can put them in their middle-aged combat game), answers would go on forever listing various combinations, people going &quot;hey wait you forgot about this culture's inventions,&quot; or &quot;that answer which brought up that culture was not arbitrarily comprehensive enough and missed these ones.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the answers would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;equally valid&lt;/a&gt;; none necessarily more correct or incorrect than any other. There basically becomes no point to voting or the accepted answer mechanism; people just pick the answers they like, or which are well written, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The work we do with game-rec questions is to get them into a state where we can actually objectively rate answers, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This problem is not suffered by someone requesting a resource. Whether the resource being requested happens to be a list is &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; neither here nor there, as long as the question itself is not going to spawn an endless series of equally valid answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that exist to link to something else can be okay, as long as they're not &lt;em&gt;literally&lt;/em&gt; &quot;link-only&quot; answers. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;actual context&lt;/a&gt; is answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;barely more than a link to an external site&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This captures answers to a question that just say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That does sound tricky. You can read about how to do this &lt;a href=&quot;http://example.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;in my blog here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No thanks! Provide the answer here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we have lots of questions that request resources &lt;em&gt;that need linking to.&lt;/em&gt; That's most of our tool recommendations, for instance, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36261/1204&quot;&gt;they are not just link-only&lt;/a&gt;. In my recommendation of Chaotic Shiny's generator on that question, I describe how to use it, what it does that the asker wants out of it, and so on. If I'd just said &quot;hey use &lt;a href=&quot;http://example.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;&quot; I'd be rightly downvoted into the dirt. But I can't exactly &lt;em&gt;provide the generator&lt;/em&gt; in my answer: I don't have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes questions come up and request something that must be resolved with a link. But that's ok. That isn't the link-only answer case, which describes someone putting &lt;em&gt;zero effort&lt;/em&gt; into their answer and sharing &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; with us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the link dies on a link-only answer, there's no point to its existence: the answer was contained elsewhere, and its only point was to forward people there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a link dies on an answer to a question like this, though, that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; unfortunate. Happened with a lot of our WotC links when the site layout changed. Hopefully people can do research and see what happened to Chaotic Shiny, if it ever disappears - maybe the source code can be shared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means it comes down to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;List questions: bad. Need work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions asking for a link to a resource: fine, we have loads, so long as the question has the requirements defined enough to not be a list question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions asking for a link to a resource which is a list: changes nothing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T07:21:59.447" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4988" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-18T14:43:53.487" Score="9" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;Around the release of the starter kit and the PHB any extended discussion of 5e was banned from the main chat room due to some contentious conversations basically crowding out everything else. In the months since I believe heads have cooled and no one really seems to be having big debates anymore over the system. As such, I think we should be able to allow 5e to be openly talked about in main chat. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T15:30:39.517" Title="Should 5e no longer be verboten in the main chat?" Tags="|discussion|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4989" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4988" CreationDate="2014-09-18T14:59:02.620" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe it's probably time.  Heads &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; cooled, there are plenty of resources and real games running.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also things are more awkward and hard to moderate (for mods and users) now that those conversations are partitioned off into another room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T14:59:02.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4988" CreationDate="2014-09-18T15:30:39.517" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd second the move to end the prohibition with a single caveat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's be mindful of those in the main room who have little interest in 5e. Part of the reason it's been beneficial to segment is that 5e can sometimes take over the main room. Let's commit to moving &lt;em&gt;extended&lt;/em&gt; conversations on the subject to the 5e room (or another relevant side room), and also to take future contentious arguments elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is a fundamentally sound strategy for any extended or contentious topic, so I don't see why it would be a problem, but it should probably be made explicit here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T15:30:39.517" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4991" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4982" CreationDate="2014-09-18T19:04:52.407" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think [new-gm] should be renamed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning-to-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-to-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;learning-to-gm&lt;/a&gt;, but before voting, read on (or skip to the end) for why I think it fixes the problems of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Identifying the problem with [new-gm]&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as we still have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, it will get misused. And for some reason it's particularly hard to tell when it's misused, and since doubt leads to inaction, it will slowly spread and get us right back where we started. The tag needs a new name that leaves no doubt about whether it belongs on a given question or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An ideal tag is also one that a new user can use correctly every time; less ideal, but more practical to achieve, is a tag that gets used by new users correctly &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the time, and is clear to us when it's not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; is not even close to being usable correctly most of the time, and it's not obvious when it's misused. Keeping it and assigning it to one of the categories for correct usage will actually make that problem more acute. &lt;em&gt;As well as&lt;/em&gt; using better tags for other categories now covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, we should kill the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag by synonyming it to a new, better name that describes its category better, so it will stick out as misplaced when it's put on the wrong question because someone used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; and it was synonym-replaced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Exploiting synonym replacement for easier cleanup&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an example, if we were going to use [gm-cultivation] as the replacement (not a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; tag, just an example for sake of discussion, as it fits a &quot;making new GMs&quot; category of questions), it would apply to questions about teaching new GMs, how to encourage people to take up GMing, and the like. Someone who put &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; on a question about &quot;How do I write my first adventure?&quot; would actually end up putting [gm-cultivation] on it instead—obviously wrong, and the lack of doubt making it easily fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should exploit that effect of synonyming to a more precise tag, to make cleanup easier after a question is posted. The rest of the tags to cover the categories now covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; should be similarly precise, so that they only ever get used when they really fit, instead of just when someone flails around typing in &quot;GM...&quot; and looking for some kind of &quot;I am the [gm]&quot; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A bunch of tag ideas&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What follows isn't a proposal, that's farther below; this is just showing my work, so if my specific proposal isn't popular, maybe the process will inspire better ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The principle I focused on while brainstorming: Ideally, &lt;em&gt;newness&lt;/em&gt; should be relegated to a detail in the question, with the actual tags describing something more concrete, like a goal, action, or process that's specific to being new but isn't &lt;em&gt;newness&lt;/em&gt; itself. As newness is a subject judgement of quality, we can't judge when newness wears off, and tags work better when they represent something objective in the problem-question that can be pointed to clearly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So some tag ideas, some overlapping and not necessarily dividing along the categories doppelgreener outlined, some too specific or too broad to be useful, some less serious than others, but presented to spark discussion around how to replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-cultivation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-cultivation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-cultivation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-rotation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-rotation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-rotation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-initiation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-initiation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-initiation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning-to-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-to-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;learning-to-gm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/becoming-a-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;becoming-a-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;becoming-a-gm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/introduction-to-rpgs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;introduction-to-rpgs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;introduction-to-rpgs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning-rpgs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-rpgs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;learning-rpgs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-management&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-management&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-management&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-management&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-management&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-management&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-fundamentals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-fundamentals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-fundamentals&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-fundamentals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-fundamentals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-fundamentals&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/how-to-run-games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;how-to-run-games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;how-to-run-games&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-communication&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-communication&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-communication&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hold-my-hand&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hold-my-hand&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hold-my-hand&lt;/a&gt; (okay, that's just a terrible tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/information-management&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;information-management&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;information-management&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gming-style&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gming-style&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gming-style&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mentoring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mentoring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mentoring&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-mentoring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-mentoring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-mentoring&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-mentoring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-mentoring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-mentoring&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-concepts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-concepts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-concepts&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching-rpgs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teaching-rpgs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teaching-rpgs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changing-gms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changing-gms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changing-gms&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching-gming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teaching-gming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teaching-gming&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these are admittedly not very good, but, well, that's brainstorming. We only need one or two gems to improve on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of these &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; redundant with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;. That's on purpose: right now, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; is a generically-named umbrella tag for many specific techniques, but maybe some of those techniques are actually widely-asked enough that they merit their own tags? We already have some tags like that, so there's precedent too: for one example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt; is clearly a GMing skill, but a big enough subject to merit its own tag. As a bonus, some of these decouple a supposed &quot;GM technique&quot; from the GM: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; is likewise a GM technique that's big enough to not be hidden under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; umbrella, and bonus, it's not limited to GMs by the tag just like how introducing people to a system isn't necessarily done by a GM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Thoughts on that list&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[learning-to-gm]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best tag in there, I think. It describes all but one or two questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4870/321&quot;&gt;the list of &quot;gold&quot; that I identified in my answer to &quot;burninate new-gm tag&quot;&lt;/a&gt;. It has, I think, a pretty clear division from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, in that once you're asking &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; GM techniques, you're no longer asking the puppy-stage &quot;GMing, how do I even?&quot; questions anymore, so [learning-to-gm] and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; should be exclusive of each other. (Basically, if someone puts [learning-to-gm] on a question, but to accurately describe the question it should really be [learning-to-gm-&lt;strong&gt;better&lt;/strong&gt;], then it's a mistag and should probably be replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.) It also, with a bit of a stretch, covers teaching GMing, in that the asker's target is learning-to-GM; then maybe [teaching-gming] and/or [gm-mentoring] could be useful synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[learning-rpgs]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar to [learning-to-gm], it covers a bunch of our questions (not those I've highlighted in the &quot;gold&quot; list, but still some of the best in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; currently). It would be very useful for &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; for finding all those diversely-titled and -tagged questions about &quot;I'm new to this, what the heck?&quot; when we need to find the right duplicate for the inevitable re-asks. It would probably get self-tagged on new questions often enough even by the super-novice users who'd ask such questions. And best, it really narrowly fits a category sketched out by the existence of those questions, which otherwise don't really have great tags on them right now. It wouldn't be a widely-applied tag, but it's nicely precise and good for searchability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[group-communication]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure this actually solves much of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tagging issues, but it's a tag that I think we could use. There are a number of questions that are &quot;How do I talk to the GM/players about not liking the game/doing something/etc.&quot; that I notice in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; right now that are fundamentally just &quot;how to communicate&quot;. That suggests that a &quot;how to communicate&quot; tag would be of use. Also, some of our [problem-*] questions might fall under it, chipping away at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3013/lets-merge-problem-players-and-problem-gm&quot;&gt;another set of problematic tags&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[gm-fundamentals]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one has grown on me since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4871/321&quot;&gt;doppelgreener suggested it in burninate new-gm tag&lt;/a&gt;. It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the topic of many of the questions, after all. I think it has one of the problems that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; does though: where is the line between a fundamental and something in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;? We'd likely see it over-applied, and doubt would prevent tag cleanup, leading to scope creep and back to square one. I still like it though, I'm just not sure how to make it work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[changing-gms]&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;[group-management]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a number of questions about GM rotation or making the transition between an old and new GM within a continuous campaign or group, and I've never been happy with our tagging options for them. They're not really &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; as that covers group interpersonal dynamics, they're not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; even when the reason is a problem GM (because that's just question motive, not question subject), they're usually not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; as it's rarely really about the individual GM's skills. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; is almost a uselessly broad tag, but I guess would describe these questions. These questions are specifically about how to swap GMs or generally about how to organise and manage the gaming group, which are subjects we don't really have any fitting tags for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's such a small category of questions that I'm lukewarm about bothering with a tag for them, but it's a loose thread that jumped out at me again as I reviewed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; questions while brainstorming.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;[rpg-concepts]&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I think this tag would fit some questions super-well, I also think it would get way overused and also tread on the toes of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; fairly often.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Proposal redux&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should kill &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; by replacing it and making it a synonym. I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning-to-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-to-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;learning-to-gm&lt;/a&gt; is a suitable replacement, because it describes a concrete process rather than a subjective quality, and has a sharp boundary with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't solve the swapping-GMs or learning-RPGs question tagging, but it covers and collects together an awful lot of the remaining &quot;gold&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; questions, and the rest can mostly scatter to other tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt;, sometimes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, or just a question's existing tags minus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;. Swapping-GMs and learning-RPGs questions are a small enough problem that I think that letting them be a bit muddy for a while longer won't hurt (and what to do with them will probably be clearer after we've finished dealing with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; anyway).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-09-18T19:11:09.003" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4992" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="4996" CreationDate="2014-09-19T03:26:48.167" Score="6" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question a while back and it never really got answered to my satisfaction, but I realize that a huge part of that was my failure to ask it well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, recently, I posted a new question that was much better formed, and got some really good answers. What should be done about the old question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to take a look,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, worse one,&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46765/mechanics-that-express-character-personality-and-moral-growth&quot;&gt;Mechanics that Express Character Personality and Moral Growth?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, better one,&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48003/rpg-with-character-moral-growth-and-corruption&quot;&gt;RPG With Character Moral Growth and Corruption?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-09-19T14:54:35.270" Title="What to Do About a Redundant Question That You Asked?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4992" CreationDate="2014-09-19T05:32:12.563" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The old question should be marked as a duplicate of the new one. However you need a large amount of reputation to be able to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The solution? &quot;Flag&quot; your own first question as a duplicate (requires 15 reputation). This should bring it to the attention of the users with a large amount of reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2454" LastActivityDate="2014-09-19T05:32:12.563" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4994" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-19T13:24:58.070" Score="8" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47327/are-there-ways-to-concentrate-on-more-than-one-spell-at-a-time&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question and accepted an answer, however, another answer incorporated the accepted answer and is now clearly better. &lt;br&gt;Should I change my selection to the now better answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11486" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-09-19T13:47:04.293" Title="Should I change which answer I accept?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4994" CreationDate="2014-09-19T13:47:04.293" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you should. That is the nature of the site, finding what works for the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastActivityDate="2014-09-19T13:47:04.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4996" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4992" CreationDate="2014-09-19T14:54:35.270" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just leave a comment on the old one linking to the new one and explaining that it's the &quot;replacement&quot; or &quot;second edition&quot; of it or something  like that. That links them together as related in the system, which will make the new one show up in the sidebar and searches more. The old one could be flagged to be closed I suppose, but nothing &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; has to be done with it. It'll fade into the back pages of the question list on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-09-19T14:54:35.270" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4997" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-21T01:23:59.293" Score="4" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&lt;/a&gt; :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Try to make the post substantively better when you edit, not just change a single character. Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, basically, this covers most minor spelling and grammar fixes. These are not only discouraged, but actively blocked: in many cases, a spelling error &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; be corrected unless the person correcting it can find at least 5 other characters they can justify changing at the same time. Why is this done? If someone misspelled a word in an otherwise good question or answer, and another citizen corrects that misspelling, without changing anything else, then the latter person has left that question, and therefore this site as a whole, better than they found it. What is the upside to discouraging that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7754" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-21T01:35:55.920" Title="Why are minor edits discouraged?" Tags="|support|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4997" CreationDate="2014-09-21T01:35:55.920" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mostly because every edit bumps to post to the top of the home page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But more importantly, 99.99% of the time &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; else in the post could use a cleanup and you should do that too while your there to save someone else the trouble in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: this minor edit issue is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; in place for those with &amp;lt;2000 reputation, in part to keep you from making a ton of single letter edits and getting the reputation for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we have 3 reasons to prevent minor edits: all edits bump, there is always something else to do on a post, and to prevent gaming of the reputation system. Really the middle reason is the most important one though. The idea here is to create and curate a great resource for gamers. If we're spending time making trivial edits, we aren't serving that porpoise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-09-21T01:35:55.920" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="4999" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5000" CreationDate="2014-09-21T05:31:04.897" Score="5" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41837/1015&quot;&gt;spec-ing npcs&lt;/a&gt; a while back, and I realize that I still don't really have an answer I like. The problem I'm having is either I make enemies that can easily tear the head off a player, or they just get creamed by the players. I don't seem to be doing a good job of judging how to make a challenging enemy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Haven't really encountered a problem like this on other SE sites due to their technical nature (where answers tends to be boolean, it works or it doesn't).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I reword my original question? or create a new one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-13T16:18:19.377" Title="Should I reword a question or ask a new one, if it's not getting useful answers?" Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4999" CreationDate="2014-09-21T13:31:55.677" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Probably a pretty simple rule of thumb is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are you asking a totally new question? Or did you totally stuff up expressing your previous question, and want to ask roughly the same thing better? If it's the former, ask a new question. Otherwise you should probably revise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could consider flagging your post for moderator attention and asking for it to be closed as unclear temporarily whilst you edit it, to save people - including yourself - the trouble of poor answers accumulating whilst it's not clear enough. (I think? I haven't done this before but it seems like a pretty reasonable case for moderator intervention &amp;amp; assistance.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also ask chat for help in better communicating your intentions on the question. You could also ask meta, maybe, but I'm not sure how that'd work out. From the concerns that culminated in the meta Q &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3291/the-role-of-chat-at-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;The role of chat at RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, if you seek help in chat, then when you make the revision, please link back to the conversation (e.g. a permalink to a chat message) somehow - the edit summary might be the best place for that, since it doesn't necessarily belong in either the question itself or the comments. (The same meta Q mentions that meta is the place to discuss the site, but also acknowledges chat is great at the kind of extended discussion this kind of thing might require, so I'd err toward using chat myself.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your edit might invalidate certain answers so that they're no longer answering the new question. The basic policy for handling that situation is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change&quot;&gt;What do we do with answers made obsolete by a question change?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; since they're no longer answering the question, flag them accordingly, maybe leave a comment explaining the situation for the author &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; for people who will respond to your flag. The unofficial policy is also probably try to avoid creating this kind of situation by asking clearly in the first place, but sometimes this happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-09-22T02:12:14.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5001" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-23T02:15:08.347" Score="9" ViewCount="311" Body="&lt;p&gt;About a week ago, we discussed how to sort out the World of Darkness tags in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/clean-up-tagging-for-world-of-darkness-related-questions&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt;. The question's been settled for about a week, and it seems you have all come to agreement on a particular scheme with no major disagreements voiced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm creating this question to prompt you to act on it. &lt;strong&gt;It's time to start retagging.&lt;/strong&gt; This is the part that takes work and patience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use this thread to discuss pertinent retagging stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you identify a &lt;strong&gt;tag synonym, merge, or rename&lt;/strong&gt; that would save a lot of retagging work, please bring it up here. This is preferable to manual edits.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest you identify a search query, or a series of search queries, which represent &lt;strong&gt;all World of Darkness questions&lt;/strong&gt;, and work through them ordered by &lt;em&gt;Newest&lt;/em&gt; - this is an order that won't change, so you can safely work through it from newest to oldest (or vice versa) without the order changing and leaving you missing a question because it's now in a page you covered yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The new tagging scheme&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4962/1204&quot;&gt;The new scheme is suggested in the previous thread.&lt;/a&gt;. I'll also describe it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The series tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. Apply this to any questions which are about the World of Darkness line of games and settings in general. This tag may get used, it may not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its questions may generally involve version comparison questions, or historical questions, or questions about consistent design choices through the series, or so on. See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag for a sample of the types of questions this tag might contain, from the D&amp;amp;D context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not use this tag for questions asking about a specific World of Darkness edition. It's redundant in those cases. Save your limited 5 tags for something else; you will already be using at least 2 of them on an edition and game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The edition tags&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each question asking about a specific World of Darkness game should have at least one of these tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; - for the time being, tag questions using the rules update with this tag. This may later become a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; (This will come into the picture later.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may be questions asking about comparisons between Old and New; these can be tagged with both. The long form of these tags has been chosen over the short form (wod, owod, nwod) for legibility and SEO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The game tags&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are tags such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;...&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-ascension&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;etc&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;...&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt; (also use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; (also use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;, again)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;etc&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; (after it's out)...&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; may become a synonym of this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is asking about a specific game, it should have a tag describing it. As a rule of thumb: if someone is going to leave their other manuals on the shelf to run this game, it should probably have its own tag. That means for now, Blood &amp;amp; Smoke should also have a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag games by their book title. Vampire: the Requiem 2nd Edition has a '2e' in its tag name because the book will be titled that way. Vampire: the Requiem's first edition &lt;em&gt;does not&lt;/em&gt; have a '1e', because it isn't titled that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Other questions in the World of Darkness tag cleanup project&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/clean-up-tagging-for-world-of-darkness-related-questions&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt; (and the many now closed as a duplicate of it)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4972/cleaning-up-the-mess-of-cleaning-up-the-mess-of-wod-tag-metas&quot;&gt;Cleaning up the Mess of cleaning up the mess of wod tag metas&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5012/world-of-darkness-tags-include-the-the-from-the-title-or-drop-it&quot;&gt;World of Darkness tags: include the &amp;#39;the&amp;#39; from the title, or drop it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T07:48:57.663" Title="Start retagging the WoD questions! (aka &quot;Editors: the Retaggening&quot;)" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5002" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T03:50:18.030" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Brazen mod request: Turn &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not forever; just during the Retagging. I'd wager more than three quarters of the questions tagged w-o-d are o-w-o-d tag worthy. Retag the ones that aren't, then release the w-o-d tag from synonymy and use it as described above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T12:36:55.113" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5003" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5004" CreationDate="2014-09-23T07:29:48.320" Score="10" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48251/how-can-i-politely-handle-a-gm-who-doesnt-appear-to-get-how-dungeon-world-wor&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and I feel (and feel free to tell me I'm just being paranoid) that the comments on my question are unduly critical while also being irrelevant to the question asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You managed to go that entire question without clearly stating how DW is fundamentally different from either D&amp;amp;D, Storyteller, or Fate. If you can't clearly state it here, you can't communicate it to Bob. It seems like you and Bob have different ideas about this system, and that's more a social issue than a game system question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This just seems to outright challenge my communication skills without basis, it's not that I &lt;strong&gt;can't&lt;/strong&gt; explain the difference it's just that I felt that doing so would add unnecessary bulk to an already-lengthy question. I have almost no experience with either of the three mentioned systems and I feel like my communication skills are being criticized without the suggested improvement actually being relevant to my question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is indeed a social issue, but the social issue is that the GM doesn't seem to understand the game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you can't say, here, in less than ten words what you think Bob did wrong, you may not be able to tell him at all. At best, you could complain about a lot of different things, and maybe if Bob knows you very well he could infer it. Maybe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This just seems to be trying to hammer home the &quot;it's your communication skills that are the problem&quot; point without adding anything I can act upon, I don't think it's humanly possible to sum up the differences between a *World system and a system like D&amp;amp;D in ten words, nor do I wish to agonize myself trying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top answers so far don't seem to have had any trouble understanding the problem at all, so should I just ignore these types of comments or is this a legitimate concern I should try and address with an edit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14814" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T11:25:53.033" Title="I feel like I'm being unduly criticized in comments, how should I handle this?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5003" CreationDate="2014-09-23T08:07:41.243" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Those comments are out of line.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not just because they're needlessly condescending, but because they're straight-up not Stack Exchange comment material regardless of tone. They aren't a request for clarification--though I think they might be &lt;em&gt;trying&lt;/em&gt; to do that--but if so they doesn't actually make that request. Instead they're an un-actionable half-answer lecture masquerading as an equally inappropriate-for-comments discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They should be flagged as &quot;answer in a comment&quot;/&quot;too chatty&quot; or &quot;not constructive.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-09-23T08:36:37.020" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T08:36:37.020" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T12:45:01.247" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is now done, as the new tag exists, &#xA;the tag wiki can now be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/edit-tag-wiki/2770&quot;&gt;edited in place.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;&#xA;Lets write this thing. I am not certain enough to do it. So community wiki.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/world-of-darkness/info&quot;&gt;The current is not great.&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;Since right now, with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; likely being destroyed then recreates &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Proposed new tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Excerpt&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions relating to the World of Darkness series of settings and games in general. Not for questions about specific editions.. For specific editions, see the [new-world-of-darkness] or [old-world-of-darkness] tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Wiki&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;World of Darkness is a series of settings and games developed by Mark Rein-Hagen and White Wolf. The game currently exists in the form of three distinct settings: &lt;em&gt;Old World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;New World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Monte Cook's World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;. Each setting has been brought to life in a variety of games, such as &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade, Werewolf: the Forsaken, Changeling: the Lost,&lt;/em&gt; and others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag should be used only for questions discussing the series in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;World of Darkness System tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;These are the various World of Darkness products this system has tags for. If this list is missing a tag, add it! Some World of Darkness games may not have questions here yet, and those won't have a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-ascension&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wraith-the-oblivion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wraith-the-oblivion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wraith-the-oblivion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-the-dreaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-the-dreaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-the-dreaming&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kindred-of-the-east&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kindred-of-the-east&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kindred-of-the-east&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-dark-ages&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-dark-ages&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-dark-ages&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-the-forsaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-the-forsaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-the-forsaken&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-the-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-the-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-the-lost&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-the-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-the-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-the-vigil&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/promethean-the-created&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;promethean-the-created&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;promethean-the-created&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/geist-the-sin-eaters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;geist-the-sin-eaters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;geist-the-sin-eaters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; for the God Machine content or rules update&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If you're interested in live-action games set in the World of Darkness, you'll find those questions under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-theatre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-theatre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-theatre&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Good Examples of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47183/what-version-of-wod-is-this&quot;&gt;What version of WoD is this?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/17023/official-self-references-in-the-world-of-darkness-setting&quot;&gt;Official self-references in the World of Darkness setting?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Fill me up.&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-10-02T01:54:04.980" CommentCount="12" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-09-24T14:20:14.087" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T12:51:46.270" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Rename and Synonymise &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; is currently in use.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; fits in better with doppelgreener's taxonomy.&#xA;There is no reason they can not live together happily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I can't yet propose tag synonyms but someone else can and I can vote. Or a mod can insta-do it)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Or we could not do it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think we should not, please downvote this post.&#xA;A reason we should not do it, is that we do not traditionally create synonyms that have no questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When proposed it will be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/nwod/synonyms&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T12:51:46.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5007" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T13:04:09.547" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is really splitting hairs.&#xA;It is roughly the same rules. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;The metaplot is gone but the rules are the same. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;The largest differences in that wod-20th has modern items that wern't invented &lt;sup&gt;citation needed&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All 7 of the 8 of the questions are tagged with: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;6 of 8 are tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the same 6 are also by the same user. Not a problem so much as a interesting factoid.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This one is not: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45213/what-is-the-experience-cost-of-learning-a-ritual&quot;&gt;What is the experience cost of learning a ritual?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has no tag wiki&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Or we could not do it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think we should not, &lt;strong&gt;please downvote this post&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;Reason we should not rename:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is destroying information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are not strictly identical systems.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10834/what-are-the-major-changes-made-to-vampire-the-masquerade-for-its-20th-annivers&quot;&gt;What are the major changes made to Vampire: The Masquerade for its 20th Anniversary edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T13:04:09.547" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5008" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5010" CreationDate="2014-09-23T15:00:07.317" Score="-1" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been wondering for a moment, because in a lot of answers there are links to very interesting external resources, for example when speaking of d&amp;amp;d 3.5&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sites with a lot of online material&lt;/strong&gt; (those are easily found via a quick research anyway)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dandwiki&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20srd.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d20srd&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chet.kindredcircle.org/pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dnd crossed Indexes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Specific topics about specific questions&lt;/strong&gt; (that are highly relevant but quite harder to find)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=o1sd9079nqnpa6f987r5g2b1e4&amp;amp;topic=5293&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Tiers Classification&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?125732-3-x-X-stat-to-Y-bonus&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;X stat to Y Bonus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?187851-3-5-Lists-of-Necessary-Magic-Items&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;List of Necessary Magic Items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the list goes on. As far as I saw there are not so much questions around there that ask for a polite RTFM answer, but anyway... I discovered most of those links in various answers where they where given as external references and kind of regretted I did not get to read them before because they are very handy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I am wondering if we have such a list somewhere, and if this is not the case if you think it would be appropriated to have one, for example as a community wiki post so that everyone would be able to add content, and finally, since we are only speaking about d&amp;amp;d 3.5 there, what about editing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd-3.5e/info&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e tag wiki&lt;/a&gt; to add these references there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; I am not suggesting to have some &quot;&lt;em&gt;Must read before posting&lt;/em&gt;&quot; topic or whatever like those you can see on the forums, but rather that for people searching such resources as well as for people who often reply to questions, there would be a place where all links to relevant external context would be gathered, making things more easy. Once again I don't feel like there would be so much question showing lack of research effort to justify bothering, so that would more be for us to use. As for maintenance it is more or less like any other question where external links can become dead. Still there is the wayback machine who can resurrect a lot of dead sites, so I would not even bother so much..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10684" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T11:12:27.273" Title="wiki topic about external links to useful resources?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5008" CreationDate="2014-09-23T15:09:09.480" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;These things tend to be unweildy, hart to maintain and generally not a fit for our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's the thing. We don't have a way to pin things to the top. So a resource list like this isn't going to be very visible except via search. It's also not going to stay up to date. Sure someone might maintain it for a while, but generally websites will need to be pruned or added and there won't be anyone around to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also no real way to vet what should be on the list. Sure a small group of people could curate it, but that's not the best thing in the world, again low visibility and remembering to update can be hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, it doesn't really fit our format here. There's not &quot;best&quot; answer when there is one single list of things. And single source per post doesn't work very well when there are multiple useful sources of information (again there are issues curating too).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, ultimately, this format of question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; useful for this site. It'd be &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; on a blog. Not so much here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T15:09:09.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5008" CreationDate="2014-09-23T16:11:15.340" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's useful, but not appropriate for a question and we haven't ever mustered enough content/submitters for a blog. I think the best place for these is the tag wiki.  As long as we don't go overboard and keep it to a small list of definitive sources - a SRD link and publisher's website link in the game system tag wiki, for example. But not a laundry list of links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately that leaves some stuff out due to the tagging scheme - you don't want to put a link to tiers and charop handbook-of-handbooks in the optimization tag wiki, because those are for one game system only and the optimization tag is general. Ideally those would be found by going and looking at highly rated questions in your chosen domain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I specifically don't want it to become an ideological war of people putting in biased links to try to win an argument outside the scope of site voting - e.g. Oberoni Fallacy link in the optimization tag - so don't do that, and expect to get edits reverted and warnings from mods if you do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T16:11:15.340" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T23:13:01.510" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Rename [vampire-darkages] to [vampire-the-dark-ages]&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a space in the book title. There should probably be a space in the tag. This isn't a big deal but it's bugging me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, we're including the 'the' in titles now, so there's that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-09-26T01:03:09.727" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T01:03:09.727" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5012" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-23T23:19:21.697" Score="4" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a discrepancy in our World of Darkness tags. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5005/1204&quot;&gt;As you can (presently) see here&lt;/a&gt;, the vast majority skip any 'the' that is present, whether it's from OWOD &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-ascension&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; or NWOD &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-awakening&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-awakening&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-awakening&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/changeling-lost&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;changeling-lost&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;changeling-lost&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-vigil&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But these two have it: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/promethean-the-created&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;promethean-the-created&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;promethean-the-created&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/demon-the-descent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;demon-the-descent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;demon-the-descent&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I figure rather than obliterating and renaming those last two to fit the majority, I'd ask here: do we want our tag naming scheme to include the &lt;em&gt;'the'&lt;/em&gt; in the game titles, or should we skip it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, the &lt;em&gt;'the'&lt;/em&gt; adds a little bit of legibility and, in my opinion, looks a little nicer. On the other hand, it eats up ~4 characters, though we can skip it for games that desperately need those characters. Neither its inclusion nor omission is strictly necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which one should we go with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Hopefully this won't have to be settled by breaking a pool cue in half and waiting for the last one standing.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2014-09-27T03:36:14.597" Title="World of Darkness tags: include the 'the' from the title, or drop it?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5013" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T23:54:28.127" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A tag search&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The search only lets us go up to 10 tags in a single search. That is &lt;em&gt;just enough&lt;/em&gt; for these two. (And thank goodness to Sublime Text for making this easy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;All OWOD questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[old-world-of-darkness] or [vampire-masquerade] or [werewolf-apocalypse] or [mage-ascension] or [wraith-oblivion] or [changeling-dreaming] or [vampire-kindred-of-east] or [vampire-darkages]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness+or+vampire-masquerade+or+werewolf-apocalypse+or+mage-ascension+or+wraith-oblivion+or+changeling-dreaming+or+vampire-kindred-of-east+or+vampire-darkages&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness+or+vampire-masquerade+or+werewolf-apocalypse+or+mage-ascension+or+wraith-oblivion+or+changeling-dreaming+or+vampire-kindred-of-east+or+vampire-darkages&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;All NWOD questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[new-world-of-darkness] or [vampire-requiem] or [werewolf-forsaken] or [mage-awakening] or [changeling-lost] or [hunter-vigil] or [promethean-the-created] or [geist-sin-eaters] or [demon-the-descent] or [nwod-god-machine]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness+or+vampire-requiem+or+werewolf-forsaken+or+mage-awakening+or+changeling-lost+or+hunter-vigil+or+promethean-the-created+or+geist-sin-eaters+or+demon-the-descent+or+nwod-god-machine&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness+or+vampire-requiem+or+werewolf-forsaken+or+mage-awakening+or+changeling-lost+or+hunter-vigil+or+promethean-the-created+or+geist-sin-eaters+or+demon-the-descent+or+nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-24T00:02:48.550" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5014" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-09-23T23:54:46.383" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Forgot the LARPers.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do have questions under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-theatre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-theatre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-theatre&lt;/a&gt;, which should go in the hierarchy somewhere. I think this is another mid-level tag. It can pair with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; (the card-pull system) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; (rock-paper-scissors) and any of the extant games. There is a new edition of the RPS system out now, published by By Night Studios under license rather than Onyx Path, and I'm not sure what to do about that yet — probably &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-theatre-bns&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-theatre-bns&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-theatre-bns&lt;/a&gt;, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-theatre-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-theatre-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-theatre-2e&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2014-09-23T23:54:46.383" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5015" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-09-24T05:13:05.043" Score="1" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;Specifically, this one: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48351/how-should-i-handle-the-rest-of-my-party-who-believe-all-necromancy-must-be-evi?noredirect=1#48351&quot;&gt;How should I handle the rest of my party, who believe all Necromancy must be evil?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no other rpg system that I am aware of that uses those terms - '9th level' 'wizard' 'necromancy being automatically evil' 'Good, Evil, Neutral' 'Alignments' 'knowledge skill' 'ranks' - that I am aware of except for Dungeons and Dragons.  Even if it isn't, the chance of it being DnD are incredibly high.  Enough to go with the probability in terms of answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue being raised is the exact same in both versions of dungeons and dragons that use those terms - pathfinder and 3.5.  It is slightly different in 4e, perhaps, but unlikely to be enough so that it changes an answer significantly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is this question put on hold by a moderator (when users are upvoting it), instead of the tag being added?  In the unlikely event of it being for some unrelated game system, as long as the question is not a duplicate (there's a couple it's close to, but none that address that specific issue), those answers can then be migrated to a new question created by one of the answerers if they wish to remain relevant.  In the &lt;em&gt;far more likely&lt;/em&gt; event that it is 3.5 DnD or Pathfinder, the question can be answered immediately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user creates an account, asks a question, and then the question is closed by mod due to an incredibly minor nitpick, how likely are they to keep using the site?  Probably: Not Very.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How likely are they to keep using the site if someone modifies their question with clearly stated best intentions, and it gets answers?  Probably: Much more likely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's bad for the site adding users - it creates a culture of nitpicking rather than sharing information - and it's just &lt;em&gt;rude&lt;/em&gt;.  It's a classic perfectionist behaviour and almost completely negative to shoot someone down for a minor fault instead of ignoring or repairing it and addressing the broader thrust of the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So why is this occurring?  I see this happen a lot, this is just an especially egregrious example.  If a question can be fixed to be something useful, it should - why shouldn't it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is literally a question of adding a single tag or working out that obviously the system being used is 3.5 or pathfinder, and the answer is the same in both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;'&lt;strong&gt;Why do you think putting a question on hold is bad?&lt;/strong&gt;'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People can't answer it, it falls off the front page, the user feels chastised, and often if they come back a while later and update the question not enough people will look at an 'on hold' question to bother voting to reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For someone with little investment in the site, why would they persevere?  It probably takes less effort to simply ask the question somewhere else - and so they will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And rpg.se has one less useful answered question, and one less user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;'&lt;strong&gt;This is irrelevant, as we can't fix it, only the OP knows the system&lt;/strong&gt;'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To highest accuracy, sure.  But there is a very easy &lt;em&gt;guess&lt;/em&gt; as to the system, because he uses LOTS of rules terms from one of two - pathfinder or dnd 3.5.  They are also the most asked about systems on the site, by a lot.  And the terms he used don't appear in any other single RPG I am aware of - and that is a lot of RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it can be fixed, to an &lt;em&gt;acceptable&lt;/em&gt; degree of accuracy, and from there answered.  There are a lot of questions that get put on hold that are like this.  Some of them are questions never asked before or since on the site, that could have useful information in the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So some questions are on hold, surely people don't care that much&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is closed, there is usually a bunch of comments saying 'your question is wrong' - sometimes with advice on how to fix it, sometimes not.  To someone who asked that question, that is going to be read as a &lt;em&gt;bunch&lt;/em&gt; of people saying 'you suck' - a crowd shouting them down.  Worse, when a question is put on hold it also often accumulates downvotes - even if the issue is fixable - leading to further 'I logged onto the site, asked a question, and got shouted at and told I suck - i'm leaving'.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question being put on hold seems to often be confused for a question being a &lt;em&gt;bad question&lt;/em&gt;.  Add the behaviour of bandwagonning and you end up with a number of downvotes that I am &lt;em&gt;at a loss&lt;/em&gt; to explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Something which exacerbates this: Mods deleting comments suggesting re-opening the question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The few times I have voted to reopen a question, and then commented with why I voted to reopen a question, that comment has usually been deleted.  So have any other comments regarding re-opening.  So the user comes back to their question, finds no answers, a little official box saying their question is on hold because they suck, and a bunch of comments saying they suck, and often, a big '-5' next to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that an incentive to fix it?  No.  Only negative feedback = poor response in low engagement activities like contributing to a website for the first time.  This is a &lt;em&gt;terrible&lt;/em&gt; way to greet new users, especially since the way the rules for asking questions is enforced is quite finicky, the help center is approximately 50,000 words not organized in a newbie-friendly manner, the 'tour' is &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; unclear about how harshly the rules are enforced and 'you're wrong' is pretty much the first time new users will have the opportunity to realize that this community has decided on very specific standards for whatever reason, and some will simply assume instead that it is &lt;em&gt;full of assholes&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which, to be fair, working from the information they have been handed - intensely negative response for unclear reasons - is not an unreasonable assumption.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-09-24T12:47:20.330" Title="Closing questions instead of fixing really minor issues" Tags="|discussion|tags|closing-questions|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5015" CreationDate="2014-09-24T11:42:13.460" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The point, besides getting correct answers to an accurate question, is to teach the user how to use the site. &quot;Please clarify what game system you're using&quot; is not a high bar. If they are unable/unwilling to do that, then are they even going to come back to see the answers? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, we aren't interested in having every user on the Internet here.  Those users are why everything from forums to Yahoo Answers are a hateful morass of incoherence.  If that makes us elitist for requiring someone to have the basic capability of &quot;using their words,&quot; then so be it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, comment threads on a question arguing with mod activities will be deleted.  I'm not sure why you would expect it wouldn't.  Take it to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-24T11:42:13.460" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5012" CreationDate="2014-09-24T12:19:04.037" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use full titles&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with the notion that having the &quot;the&quot; in there increases readability, and I can't think of any reason to not include it, unless it doesn't fit the character limit. doppelgreener pointed out in the comments, that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/promethean-the-created&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;promethean-the-created&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;promethean-the-created&lt;/a&gt; sits at 22 characters, which means it still has room for the 3 characters it takes to add '-2e' to the end if a second edition comes out. [...] &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-kindred-of-east&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-kindred-of-east&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-kindred-of-east&lt;/a&gt; (23 chars) seems to be the only WoD tag that would pass the 25 character limit if written in full.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the only WoD product that has more than 25 characters (including whitespace, excluding punctuation) is &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindred_of_the_East&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Kindred of the East&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. Incidentally, I noticed that it is called just that, rather than &lt;strong&gt;Vampire: Kindred of the East&lt;/strong&gt;. Renaming this particular tag to not include &quot;Vampire&quot; will allow for a &quot;the&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel that &quot;Vampire&quot; is needed for tag visibility, I suggest making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-kindred-of-east&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-kindred-of-east&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-kindred-of-east&lt;/a&gt; a Synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kindred-of-the-east&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kindred-of-the-east&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kindred-of-the-east&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="10979" LastEditDate="2014-09-24T15:26:30.443" LastActivityDate="2014-09-24T15:26:30.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5015" CreationDate="2014-09-24T12:47:20.330" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for asking this, it's a good issue to get out there, because I know it bothers people a great deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There is no other rpg system that I am aware of that uses those terms&#xA;  - '9th level' 'wizard' 'necromancy being automatically evil' 'Good, Evil, Neutral' 'Alignments' 'knowledge skill' 'ranks' - that I am&#xA;  aware of except for Dungeons and Dragons. Even if it isn't, the chance&#xA;  of it being DnD are incredibly high. Enough to go with the probability&#xA;  in terms of answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The issue being raised is the exact same in both versions of dungeons&#xA;  and dragons that use those terms - pathfinder and 3.5. It is slightly&#xA;  different in 4e, perhaps, but unlikely to be enough so that it changes&#xA;  an answer significantly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.x, 4, and Pathfinder all immediately spring to mind. They don't handle this the same way, as with alignment issues the setting in use matters (hell, when it comes to animate dead being inherently evil, I'm not sure two DMs handle it the same way). Just guessing which one the user meant runs a significant risk of guessing wrong, and that'd waste the time of people putting answers in if the user comes back and edits the question to a different system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're saying we should just attempt to answer everything even when we don't know that kind of detail... I don't agree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's bad for the site adding users - it creates a culture of&#xA;  nitpicking rather than sharing information - and it's just rude. It's&#xA;  a classic perfectionist behaviour and almost completely negative to&#xA;  shoot someone down for a minor fault instead of ignoring or repairing&#xA;  it and addressing the broader thrust of the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is not to shut someone down. The goal is to get the issue sorted out so they can get good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For someone with little investment in the site, why would they&#xA;  persevere? It probably takes less effort to simply ask the question&#xA;  somewhere else - and so they will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's no comments arguing with the moderators on the question, all the user has to do is show back up to look for answers, see a comment asking what system they're using, answer it, and they're back in business. The question is pretty popular, it'd be reopened very quickly if the tag issue was resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People arguing with the moderators in comments on the issue creates a lot of noise for the user asking the question and makes it more difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So it can be fixed, to an acceptable degree of accuracy, and from&#xA;  there answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't agree, and judging by the fact that it only has two reopen votes, I'm not alone. Questions get reopened after a mod closure often enough that it's not particularly unusual. That this isn't one of them despite the +7 on it is pretty telling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A question being put on hold seems to often be confused for a question&#xA;  being a bad question. Add the behaviour of bandwagonning and you end&#xA;  up with a number of downvotes that I am at a loss to explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it can. I've felt that way too. At the moment, it's the best tool we have, though. If you can think of a better way to handle the situation (other than &quot;guessing&quot;), I'd be happy to use it instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The few times I have voted to reopen a question, and then commented&#xA;  with why I voted to reopen a question, that comment has usually been&#xA;  deleted. So have any other comments regarding re-opening. So the user&#xA;  comes back to their question, finds no answers, a little official box&#xA;  saying their question is on hold because they suck, and a bunch of&#xA;  comments saying they suck, and often, a big '-5' next to their&#xA;  question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's several things going on here. Comments being zealously deleted (or overzealously deleted, depending on your POV) is not a new issue, and I'm not sure there's a whole lot of agreement on what to do about it. I would contend that if the goal is to help a new user clarify a question, the &lt;em&gt;ONLY&lt;/em&gt; comments on the question should be for that purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments about why it should or shouldn't be open should be moved to meta, so we're not bogging someone down in stuff they likely don't know or care a whole lot about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user in this case has a big +7 and some new privileges, so I'd hope it's not that discouraging. If they really can't come back for long enough to tell us what system they're using, then I'm not sure they'd ever come back to see answers either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall the new user experience could be better, but that means more than just &quot;mods shouldn't close stuff&quot;. It also means us experienced users should guide the new user towards how to get their question answered, and not fill the thing up with comments arguing with the mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-09-24T12:47:20.330" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5019" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5021" CreationDate="2014-09-25T10:51:16.550" Score="12" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding the recent question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48432/which-material-has-errata-or-been-updated&quot;&gt;How do I quickly find the official errata for any book?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed by several heavy users as a duplicate of &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1138/how-do-you-tell-if-a-dd-book-is-3-0-or-3-5&quot;&gt;How do you tell if a D&amp;amp;D book is 3.0 or 3.5?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions are not the same, but the latter question happens to have a very long answer that contains the answer to the first question, among other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make things worse, this answer is the third answer from the top, and finding the information that the poster asked requires thoroughly looking at the footnotes to the long lists in this answer. Basically, without @HeyICanChan's comment pointing out the specific answer, the answer is really hard to find, and Comments are just not persistent enough to contain such important additional information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To sum it up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are answers to unrelated questions, that happen to answer a new, different question a reason to VTC as duplicate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does this change if the answer is not the top-voted or accepted answer?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T05:51:04.933" Title="Non-duplicate question with answer in another question" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5019" CreationDate="2014-09-25T11:13:06.500" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are answers to unrelated questions, that happen to answer a new, different question a reason to VTC as duplicate?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe so. Questions are there to be answered, that is why there is a 1:n on Q to A. In addition our site traffic is supposed to come primarily from search engines and therefore we should have many questions, especially if they ask for different things in a suitably different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that answers the second question as well. Well written answers can apply to multiple questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On the subject of the original question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5 and 3.0 are kind of special in that if a 3.0 has an associated 3.5 version, the 3.5 version IS the errata to the 3.0 book (in that you can basically throw your 3.0 version of that book away). What makes it slightly more complicated is that parts of 3.5 books can replace parts of 3.0 books. Such as the Shifter (3.0) being replaced by the master of many forms (3.5).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore the question was a kind of unintentional duplicate, it was requesting the same information (with a different reason and wording), but the information did already exist on the site and a question did ask for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a better question might have been &quot;Which 3.0 books and classes have not been updated/replaced by 3.5?&quot; if you were looking for valid 3.0 sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15190" LastEditorUserId="15190" LastEditDate="2014-09-25T12:02:22.530" LastActivityDate="2014-09-25T12:02:22.530" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5019" CreationDate="2014-09-25T12:17:25.707" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not a duplicate&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dead giveaway on this one is that one of the comments contains the actual answer. Trying to find it in the &quot;duplicate&quot; requires going to the third answer on a question that doesn't look like it's related in any way whatsoever, and carefully reading it to find a link buried in the middle of a paragraph, then editing the link because nobody who marked it as a duplicate bothered to fix the link so that it'd &lt;em&gt;actually work&lt;/em&gt;. (I've since made those updates.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People were very, very overzealous on this one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A duplicate is something where the questions are basically the same, not where they're hardly related at all and one of the answers happens to contain a link buried somewhere that leads to an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-09-25T12:17:25.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5019" CreationDate="2014-09-26T05:21:47.793" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;First: I agree it's not a duplicate. Second: That was closed as duplicate by either 2 or 3 users; two close votes (including my own) were simply to close that question as too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing as a duplicate generally means either the questions are the same, or that they're close enough and there's already a clear answer in one. That answer doesn't have to be the accepted or most upvoted one, but it had better be obvious where the answer can be found. None of this is the case here; they're very different questions and the answer can't be readily found in the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; far too broad though.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question does need to get closed and improved. It's asking what D&amp;amp;D 3e or 3.5e material has any errata from any source, including someone saying something at a convention, or an arbitrary magazine releasing an update.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer that hopes to be remotely useful needs to list not &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; what &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; errata, but also provide a link to the errata, instructions on locating it, or the errata itself. (Because, y'know, reading only &quot;Complete Warrior received errata.&quot; isn't very helpful &amp;mdash; you also need to know what that errata &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That amounts to an answer that might be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/36990/1204&quot;&gt;as big as this one&lt;/a&gt; or bigger, and might still be incomplete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That question needs to be closed, and improved somehow to ask something more reasonable. Maybe it should turn from a &quot;give me the fish&quot; question into a &quot;teach me how to fish&quot; question: how do I find out if something has errata, and how do I find that errata?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, that's also why it got closed as a duplicate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Voting to close as a duplicate. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/36990/8610&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; lists how to find the updated material and errata, although links need updating due to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45357/8610&quot;&gt;Wizards of the Coast renaming efforts.&lt;/a&gt; –  Hey I Can Chan 21 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I agree that &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to find errata is far too buried in that answer for this to be clear enough to count as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T05:51:04.933" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5003" CreationDate="2014-09-26T11:25:53.033" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you should try not to be offended, even if they missed the point. Assume good faith. Even if the comments could be inappropriate, I don't think anyone had tried to purposely attack you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a proper answer would be: &quot;I don't think I have bad communication skills. I have done this and this, and therefore I think it's not a communication problem on my part&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T11:25:53.033" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5024" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5026" CreationDate="2014-09-26T13:57:25.343" Score="0" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hunter: The Vigil currently has no announced 2nd Edition, this is likely because it's farther out than 2 years (Per Onyx Path they are not wanting to discuss anything that far out). However, they did release &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/129193/Hunter-Mortal-Remains?term=Mortal+Remains&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Mortal Remains&lt;/a&gt; which includes a 2nd Edition Rules update in the back of the book. This update is like The God Machine update, in that it simply provides updates to things that have changed in lieu of the God Machine Rules (such as Practical experience, Profession, etc). There is no guarantee a Hunter 2nd edition wouldn't update this further. The front of the book would apply to Hunter the Vigil 1.0 as well (It's just more Hunt supernaturals of type... info)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to correctly play Hunter the Vigil using World of Darkness 2.0 rules, you currently need the following books: World of Darkness 1, the God Machine Update, Hunter: the Vigil, Hunter: Mortal Remains (contains Hunter Update). These are the books on my table currently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is two fold, Should we create a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-mortal-remains&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-mortal-remains&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-mortal-remains&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we do, or do not, should questions tagged appropriate be considered to include books that weren't explicitly updated (Any of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-vigil&lt;/a&gt; addons) or do I need to include &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; to say that it's ok to supply answers with those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I'm asking this, is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/48302/1015&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; ( that I deleted because I believe I asked the wrong question) was briefly retagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;  by accident, I presumed that tagging with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hunter-vigil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hunter-vigil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hunter-vigil&lt;/a&gt; would be enough, but I'm concerned that it may not be 100% clear with those tags that I'm not using 1.0 rules. So how should this question be tagged currently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-27T16:47:00.363" Title="Does Mortal Remains need it's own tag? more nWoD GMC" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5026" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5024" CreationDate="2014-09-26T19:03:34.567" Score="6" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bah.  Tags aren't the end all be all of describing your game's rules.  If you're playing 2e with Skills &amp;amp; Powers, or Pathfinder but without Ultimate Combat, we don't need tags for that, we need the question asker to use their words.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The emergent tagging of the site will automatically delete any tag that's not on at least 2 questions. So proactive tag creation is not desirable by design. If it needs to happen, it'll happen. Looks like there's not enough volume of this edge case to let it happen yet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-09-26T19:03:34.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4979" CreationDate="2014-09-27T07:40:22.173" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;A number of users disagree with the ◆moderators over where the line should be drawn on &quot;bad questions&quot; as a matter of degree. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I see a question, and I can answer it, I'll answer it. Even if it's not ideally worded. Even if I suspect one of the ◆mods is likely to VTC it... because, unless I think it's fully well and across the line, I'll always choose to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastActivityDate="2014-09-27T07:40:22.173" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4753" CreationDate="2014-09-29T19:22:22.567" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The second raffle period has closed! Thanks to everyone who participated in it! In total, &lt;strong&gt;171 upvoted questions from 70 users&lt;/strong&gt; were generated in the time period. Let's check out some statistics on those numbers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;18 users who participated in the first raffle&lt;/strong&gt; participated in the second raffle, and contributed &lt;strong&gt;60 questions between them&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Of the above numbers, &lt;strong&gt;4 users who were newly registered from July 15th&lt;/strong&gt; submitted &lt;strong&gt;20 of those questions&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;52 users who were not present in the first raffle&lt;/strong&gt; participated in this raffle, and contributed &lt;strong&gt;111 questions between them&lt;/strong&gt;. This accounts for &lt;strong&gt;74% of users participating in this raffle being newly active in this tag&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;25 of those users were newly registered on August 19th or later&lt;/strong&gt;, and those users accounted for &lt;strong&gt;55 of the questions asked&lt;/strong&gt;. This means that &lt;strong&gt;almost 50% of the new boost in both users and questions came from people who newly registered after the release of the PHB&lt;/strong&gt;. These new users ranged from users who contributed several questions (including one user contributing 24 questions) to users who contributed only one or two questions but went on to stick around as strong answerers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The drawing was held in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17923682#17923682&quot;&gt;the Fifth Edition Chatroom&lt;/a&gt; at about 17:00 UTC (1:00 PM EDT) on Tuesday&lt;/strong&gt;. The drawing was done using a simulated 1d216 (via 3d6, converted from base 6 to base 10), in accordance to &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O7Bjz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this gigantic results table&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations to &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3529/joshua-aslan-smith&quot;&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; for winning the raffle for the MM, to go hand-in-hand with his new PHB! An email should go out later regarding the receiving of your prize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T17:19:12.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5029" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5008" CreationDate="2014-09-30T11:12:27.273" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I actually think this would be a great subject for the blog that was talked about at one point but that we didn't have enough submissions to do. It'd definitely be useful to people, it's something that could be done in a blog post, and there's people willing to write it (myself, probably you as well :) ).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure its a great fit for a question, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T11:12:27.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5030" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5033" CreationDate="2014-09-30T13:22:31.090" Score="18" ViewCount="298" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; there are lots of questions and answers that mention snacks (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13150/what-kinds-of-player-contributions-work-well-and-under-what-circumstances/13154#13154&quot;&gt;One example&lt;/a&gt;). Those questions are usually broader than just snacks, and I can't find any question that's only about snacks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would a question solely about snacks be on topic? The question I'm thinking about came about because it seems that at some of my sessions, players are more or less awake by the end of the session depending on what snacks are offered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I want to ask about what type of snacks people have had experience with over lengthy gaming sessions, and how well they did at keeping players awake &amp;amp; active over the duration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-20T06:13:09.563" LastActivityDate="2019-06-20T06:13:09.563" Title="Are questions entirely about snacks on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5030" CreationDate="2014-09-30T13:40:35.050" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I suspect this is on topic here, it'd probably get better answers on &lt;a href=&quot;https://fitness.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;fitness.se&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:46:48.623" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T13:40:35.050" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5032" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5030" CreationDate="2014-09-30T14:11:03.483" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The presence of food and drink at the table is as much a part of setting group atmosphere as lighting, music, and props, all of which are acceptable question subjects. Gaming and snacking are historically intertwined — the Dead Alewives' sketch (&quot;Where are the Cheetos?//Can I have a Mountain Dew?&quot;) confirms what we already know. Totally on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T14:11:03.483" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5030" CreationDate="2014-09-30T16:59:20.093" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;A question &lt;em&gt;solely&lt;/em&gt; about snacks would be off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are lots of things that we can &lt;em&gt;leverage&lt;/em&gt; for use in an RPG environment, but which are not &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; RPGs. History research is one that we've discussed in the past and deemed off-topic, even though it's very useful for roleplayers, because it is not within our mandated area of expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How food effects (and affects) wakefulness is not &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; RPGs—though you can use the knowledge for advantage when playing RPGs, it equally applies, unchanged, to long meetings, driving long-distance, and a million other human activities where influencing attention level variations could be useful. The common element—how food choice affects attention outcomes—is the domain of nutrition and biopsychology, which is not what our SE is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More pragmatically, the point is: we would be non-experts talking out of our nether regions, using unscientific non-research anecdotes to answer questions that require scientific expertise and rigour to answer correctly. Hosting and answering such questions would not reflect well on us as a community of experts, and would only add noise to the Internet when our purpose is to add quality signal instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-09-30T16:59:20.093" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5034" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-01T04:26:17.887" Score="18" ViewCount="299" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2995/1204&quot;&gt;From this meta Q from 2013&lt;/a&gt;, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; tag is for questions about engaging in that practice, or people doing so. It isn't for asking about strict rules interpretations; that's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;'s turf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I discovered a bunch of our [rules-lawyering] questions were really RAW questions, though, so I retagged them. Then I found out that's the case for &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; our [rules-lawyering] questions, except these two:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158/how-to-handle-a-rules-lawyer-player&quot;&gt;How to handle a rules-lawyer player?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16965/how-should-i-respond-to-a-dm-who-unfairly-plays-the-rules-lawyer-card&quot;&gt;How should I respond to a DM who unfairly plays the &amp;quot;rules-lawyer&amp;quot; card?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally that's the exact issue raised in the meta Q I linked: all the [rules-lawyering] questions were actually RAW questions, bar &lt;em&gt;one,&lt;/em&gt; that &quot;how should I respond?&quot; question linked above. More than a year later, the situation hasn't improved and the tag still isn't used well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should synonymise [rules-lawyering] into [rules-as-written] to tag the remaining questions correctly, and then remove the synonym to let the [rules-lawyering] tag vanish altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about rules lawyers can just be tagged with [social] and/or [problem-player/gm], and the above two questions are already tagged with the latter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mods, please make and then remove this synonym?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T05:45:25.510" Title="Synonimise [rules-lawyering] to [rules-as-written], then destroy it" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5001" CreationDate="2014-10-02T02:59:50.577" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Blood and Smoke&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've created the Blood and Smoke tag (following the book title, it's exactly that: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt;) for the following two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44540/how-many-are-the-starting-merit-dots-now&quot;&gt;How many are the starting merit dots now?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41462/does-blood-and-smoke-invalidate-previous-vampire-books&quot;&gt;Does Blood and Smoke invalidate previous Vampire books?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter was tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt; previously (and untagged and retagged; really it's had a pretty turbulent tagging history). &lt;del&gt;However, since it's not asking about that book, but instead its predecessor, I've tagged it accordingly with the book it's asking about.&lt;/del&gt; VTR 2e's going to be about the same thing, but we should probably wait until it's out to make the synonym switch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Handling the pseudo-2e tags: Blood &amp;amp; Smoke, and God Machine Chronicle&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NWOD has two odd games published: Blood and Smoke, and God Machine Chronicle. The former is being re-released as Vampire: the Requiem 2e, and the latter is becoming part of NWOD 2e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we &lt;strong&gt;keep the God Machine Chronicle tag&lt;/strong&gt;, and synonymise Blood &amp;amp; Smoke &amp;rarr; VTR 2e only when the book's out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for keeping the GMC tag is simple: people might not be playing with the newer NWOD 2e, and might instead just be playing with NWOD + GMC. Communicating what they're playing with is important, tagging it accordingly is too. Tagging them with stuff they're &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; playing is strange communication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know NWOD 2e will be very much heavily based on GMC, but if they add, change, or leave out/remove anything, that opens things up to confusion. It's likely they will, being a new book: as far as I know it's not clear that NWOD 2e will contain the story content of GMC, and NWOD 2e might include new story content of its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Why aren't you using X?&quot; &quot;What do you mean, there isn't an X in this.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Check the chapter on ABC, page 22.&quot; &quot;In which book? I can't find that on page 22...&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;You mention you're using Y. What do you mean? Y doesn't exist.&quot; &quot;Sure it does, it's right there in the book.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;You seem to be using Z to do this thing, but it doens't do that.&quot; &quot;Sure it does.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(and so on with problems coming from the asker and answerers using different books)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, if we keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt;, it should probably be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/god-machine-chronicle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;god-machine-chronicle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;god-machine-chronicle&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, I haven't read these books, I just know what I know from what you've all said about them or told me in chat. So if the above is dumb or based on misconceptions, definitely call me out in comments. &lt;em&gt;(Some of the above was dumb and has been edited!)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-02T23:27:17.217" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5036" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5034" CreationDate="2014-10-02T20:59:10.423" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should do that. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-lawyering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-lawyering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-lawyering&lt;/a&gt; is just a specific sub-set of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-player&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-player&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-player&lt;/a&gt; in the end, and the frequency that those questions show up don't justify having such a narrow tag. We have more questions that refer to, for instance, the maturity of people at the table than rules-lawyering per se, and we don't have a tag for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-maturity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-maturity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-maturity&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2014-10-02T20:59:10.423" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5037" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-05T16:13:22.210" Score="4" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;Chrome shows the &quot;loading&quot; spinner for RPG SE endlessly for me. Taking a look in                                                                       Chrome's dev-tools shows wss://qa.sockets.stackexchange.com as Status 101 Switching Protocols and Time as Pending.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google Chrome version 37.0.2062.124 m&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and now I've stopped seeing this behavior, literally as I posted this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's back again. And it only happens at meta.rpg and rpg, not other SE sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2014-10-05T19:13:48.573" LastActivityDate="2014-10-05T19:13:48.573" Title="qa.sockets.stackexchange.com never finishes loading" Tags="|bug|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5038" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4848" CreationDate="2014-10-06T05:43:56.260" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag could be renamed adventure creation or [campaign building] but I think [adventure writing] is the most-used phrasing of the whole process of creating an adventure, campaign, mission, dungeon-run, or what have you, and thus feel like it's probably the best term we could be using for that, as we should seek to use phrases in tags that are commonly recognizable.  Given our current format for multi-word tags, [adventure-writing] is the way we would render the tag we would want to use for such questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag is made distinct from the [adventure] tag because it refers specifically to creating adventures entirely of one's own rather than setting up and running adventures made by another, and because it always refers to work performed by someone with GM-like authority, where the [adventure] tag would also apply to someone playing a published adventure rather than GMing one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag is made distinct from the related [world-building] tag in that it refers to writing an adventure in a preexisting campaign world (whether that is provided by books/information from the creators of the system, a third-party publisher, a collective understanding of some 'normal' campaign world in a given system, or previous world building by a GM) rather than one which is created from scratch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-10-06T05:43:56.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5030" CreationDate="2014-10-06T15:35:16.440" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;A question solely about the effects of food on wakefulness and alertness? Sorry, it is a good question but it is off-topic here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked a similar question awhile ago in Arquade.se, and it was closed for the same reason.  While snacking may be an integral part of gaming (Of both kinds), it is not in itself &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; gaming.  It's about nutrituion, and as far as I'm aware there is no Nutrition.se (though it could be an interesting subject...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now you can ask questions that &lt;em&gt;involve&lt;/em&gt; snacks - you can ask about how to determine who should bring snacks to the gaming table, you can ask about how to keep snacks from staining your game mat, you can even ask if there's some game-setting appropriate snacks you could incorporate into your game to make it 'more authentic', because in all of those cases the focus of the question is on the game, rather than on the snack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you put consumption into the mix though, it becomes about the snack itself, and we are not prepared to offer you nutritional advice here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9328" LastActivityDate="2014-10-06T15:35:16.440" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5040" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-07T00:26:34.953" Score="1" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was just wondering what rep is required to see the votes on a question? I.e. Total upvotes/total downvotes. I am of mixed rep over several SE sites so I can't specifically remember.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T00:37:13.457" Title="What rep is required to see upvotes/downvotes?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5040" CreationDate="2014-10-07T00:37:13.457" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;1000 - see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T00:37:13.457" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5042" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:10:03.233" Score="5" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;There seem to be smattering of questions about Dungeon World of late, which is apparently a system &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48251/how-can-i-politely-handle-a-gm-who-doesnt-appear-to-get-how-dungeon-world-wor&quot;&gt;with very specific rules as to what a GM can and cannot do&lt;/a&gt;.  However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dungeon-world/info&quot;&gt;the wiki entry&lt;/a&gt; doesn't include a single mention as to this quirk of the system, instead only including a marketing blurb from a 2012-era kickstarter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Dungeon-World.com &lt;a href=&quot;http://dungeon-world.com/#system&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;System&lt;/a&gt; page would be a better start if a quote is necessary, as it at least includes an implication that this RPG has different assumptions than those you could pick up at a chain bookstore.  And of course, if there were a good &quot;this is how DW is different from other games&quot; page, it would probably suffice for a replacement from the marketing blurb.  But right now, just from the text listed, it's hard to tell at a glance that Dungeon World isn't just D&amp;amp;D with two six-siders instead of a d20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15655" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T04:21:49.593" Title="Can the Dungeon World Wiki entry be improved?" Tags="|discussion|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5042" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:10:03.233" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Edited for take 2:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dungeon-world.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/a&gt; is a fantasy RPG system with an emphasis on at-the-table creativity and clearly defined rules for players and GM's.  It was inspired by Vincent Baker's &lt;a href=&quot;http://apocalypse-world.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Apocalypse World&lt;/a&gt; system, and shares much of Apocalypse World's mechanics and design philosophy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A print run was funded in 2012 via a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sage-kobold/dungeon-world-a-game-with-modern-rules-and-old-sch-0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Kickstarter&lt;/a&gt; investment.  The rules can be &lt;a href=&quot;http://book.dwgazetteer.com/index.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;browsed online at DW Gazeteeer&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://github.com/Sagelt/Dungeon-World&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;downloaded freely from GitHub&lt;/a&gt;, as the system was released under a Creative Commons Attribution license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mechanically, conflict resolution uses a 2d6+X system, with both the modifier and the ability to roll determined by a character's various characteristics and the circumstance.  The result of such a roll is compared to an absolute scale shared by all characters, which determines the degree of success or failure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dungeon World treats its GM section as rules necessary for the system to operate, rather than optional guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I removed the quote, minimized the description of the game to what would be appropriate for someone on rpg.SE who had never heard of the game before, included an actual link to the kickstarter, and removed the links to a blog and github.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT:&lt;/strong&gt; I added back links to DW Gazeteer and github, refined the brief mechanical description, and included a brief note as to the &amp;quot;no rule zero&amp;quot; principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15655" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T04:21:49.593" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5044" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:27:05.503" Score="4" ViewCount="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question has a fairly large &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/49066/revisions&quot;&gt;edit history&lt;/a&gt; already, some major, some minor, but the original question has changed into another altogether. However, the original theatrics were unfortunately lost, but I do intend to (possibly) reiterate then into the new question. To be up-front: I'd like to do that merely for entertainment, and it isn't likely to improve or hinder the original meaning of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I? As I said, it's merely for a bit of fun, so it's not all that important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T02:55:07.393" Title="How many times should I/could I edit my question?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5045" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5042" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:29:11.403" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;That tag wiki should definitely be improved, but not because people are answering questions without understanding the system. Tag wikis aren't --and &lt;em&gt;shouldn't be&lt;/em&gt;-- for explaining how a system works. And people who answer without understanding the system being asked about? They won't be reading a tag wiki anyway. Just downvote them and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, improving our tag wikis is an ongoing task and this one should definitely get something more than a Kickstarter blurb. Anyone can suggest a change to the tag wiki, and should if they see the need and think they can meet it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-10-07T01:37:22.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T01:37:22.773" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5046" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:45:20.170" Score="1" ViewCount="192" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question about a specific in-game situation, and ask about the reaction from a well known party?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To elaborate, we need to offload a Deathguard with intact Gene-seed, but we're uncertain about what might happen if we turn him over to the Inquisition, given the circumstances of his coming into our possession.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My uncertainty for asking this question stems from the possible lengthy explanation that comes before, as well as the possible outcomes that may stem from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T04:44:21.190" Title="Asking questions about game events, with specific in-game situation" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5044" CreationDate="2014-10-07T01:59:45.080" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Considering the number of times: there's no technical limit on the number of edits you can make. &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/231220/posts-with-the-most-revisions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Some posts have lots&lt;/a&gt;, which might alter your bar for &quot;a fairly large edit history&quot;. Posts used to be automatically converted to community wiki after enough edits, but &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2014/04/putting-the-community-back-in-wiki/&quot;&gt;that no longer happens ever&lt;/a&gt;. The only real limit is that at revision #50, it might be healthier to let that post go in its imperfect state and turn your attention elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want to improve your post, go ahead, if you consider it a worthwhile improvement. That can include single word changes (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/44476/revisions&quot;&gt;I have done that&lt;/a&gt;) or big rewrites to communicate the same message better (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/35571/revisions&quot;&gt;revision #4&lt;/a&gt;). Rewrites for entertainment value is fine too, just make sure it's &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt;, and aids communication, or at the very least, doesn't diminish it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're trying to benignly rewrite your question, you may want to carefully avoid &lt;em&gt;breaking&lt;/em&gt; existing answers with your changes - i.e. bringing your question to a state where they're not quite valid answers to it any longer. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3117/1204&quot;&gt;That can be bad.&lt;/a&gt; If that's a disconnect because you changed how you're asking your question, that might impair readability for visitors to the site. However, if you really did preserve the meaning of your question, it might simply be exposting an answer that wasn't solving your problem very effectively in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T02:55:07.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5046" CreationDate="2014-10-07T02:54:22.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can ask about setting information&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about game settings are totally on-topic here. (The only exception is if the game setting is primarily from a non-game source, like Westeros, in which case you're better off asking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;scifi.se&lt;/a&gt; and might see the question closed here, depending.) If you want to ask what can be known about the reactions of a public-figure NPC in an RPG setting, we can try to answer that, though it's possible there is insufficient information published to be able to answer certain questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that's only if you're asking about the setting in an idealized, canonical sense. That's the sort of thing that a GM might ask, when seeking raw material to inform their creative process when deciding how/whether/what to do in a game they're running.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But you can't (usefully) ask what will happen in &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; game&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The GM is not bound by our conclusions about a setting when it comes to &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; vision of the setting in a game that &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; are running.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you're a player, and trying to gather information for decision-making in-game, you can't take what we say, or even written canon, as true. Assuming that information you gather outside of the game is true for the &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; game reality that your character lives in is just asking to be proved wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you honestly want to know more about a setting, ask away. If you want to find out information to give your character an edge or help you make a decision, you can still ask, but take the answers with a grain of salt, especially if it's not basic common knowledge within the setting or you're not sure whether your GM has other ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is any sliver of doubt that your GM might contradict setting information—and when it comes to the thoughts and choices of NPCs, this is very rarely dictated strictly (or even vaguely!) to the GM by the setting material—you're &lt;strong&gt;far&lt;/strong&gt; better off engaging in that kind of discussion with your GM, or simply having the character directly engage in the appropriate research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:43:11.833" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T04:44:21.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4848" CreationDate="2014-10-07T03:12:13.313" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the record, I think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-design&lt;/a&gt; would make more sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Writing is a major part of campaign creation, encounter creation, character creation, house-rule creation, game design, etc., but our tags for those aren't [campaign-writing], [encounter-writing], [character-writing], [house-rules-writing], [game-writing], etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adventures aren't especially writing-based compared to the rest of the hobby, and I find it odd to have it singled out that way. Perhaps emphasising the &quot;writing&quot; part of adventure design once made sense in the days of typewritten adventure manuscripts submitted to &lt;em&gt;Dungeon&lt;/em&gt; for consideration, but that's not what our users are doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-10-07T03:23:15.653" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T03:23:15.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5050" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-07T10:25:06.577" Score="6" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;I love Dungeon World and I'm happy to answer questions about it, but there have been a lot of questions asked recently by a new user which all amount to the same problem of differentiating the rules from the fiction. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/49112/14814&quot;&gt;Does a shield protect the PC, even if it&amp;#39;s not hit?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/49108/14814&quot;&gt;Should I tell the players the exact stats of monsters they fight?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/49111/14814&quot;&gt;Are HP part of the fiction, or part of the meta?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't help but feel like these questions are mostly theoretical rather than practical problems and will attract very similar if not the same answers to only superficially different questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this be handled, does it even need handling at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14814" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T10:56:47.527" Title="How to deal with multiple questions that have effectively the same answer?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5050" CreationDate="2014-10-07T10:47:51.543" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;A major part of how Stack Exchange derives traffic is from people searching for questions finding us via a search engine. In addition, the site is about answering questions and getting those answers. How does a person who is looking for something to do with shields know that their answer is in a question about showing the exact stats of a monster? Would we even show up in the search results?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question that you should ask is &lt;strong&gt;'Is this a duplicate?'&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;As BESW commented: If the answers to two different questions are identical, then the questions should be examined closely to see if their not-duplicate-ness is purely superficial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are not duplicates then answer their question, citing the old answer if you want.&#xA;We don't have a close reason for 'Answered by another question' and we shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifics:&lt;br&gt;As for the situation where this is one user whose questions are based on not getting the difference between the narrative and the mechanics, try emphasising those points in the answer. If he has been confused by it, chances are others might be as well, now or in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15190" LastEditorUserId="15190" LastEditDate="2014-10-07T10:56:47.527" LastActivityDate="2014-10-07T10:56:47.527" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5052" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5030" CreationDate="2014-10-08T06:24:03.387" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel certain snack-centric questions could be on topic, and others not:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;On topic:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I protect my books from greazy hands?&lt;/strong&gt; (To which answers could focus on snack choice)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does drinking improve roleplay?&lt;/strong&gt; (My own experience is ... sometimes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Off topic:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Where can I get caffinated mountain dew?&lt;/strong&gt; (Until recently why the internet tells me that mountain dew is the stapple of roleplaying sessions, it was not available in caffinated form in my country)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What kind of food can I cook that will not need checking on midsession?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What foods can I cook that the PCs might also eat?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looks like you have reworked your question about snack choice into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48936/setting-a-table-atmosphere-that-keeps-players-energetic-during-long-encounters/49058#49058&quot;&gt;Setting a table atmosphere that keeps players energetic during long encounters&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;Or at least that is a related question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1362" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-10-08T06:24:03.387" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5053" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-08T13:31:44.013" Score="6" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we get a clarified difference between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-building&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;World Building SE&lt;/a&gt;. I personally feel that they're probably different in scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I'm asking this, is I've asked a couple of questions (really it was the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/49103/1015&quot;&gt;same one clarified&lt;/a&gt;) trying to get help in the process that comes with readying oneself for an off the rails chronicle and having a &quot;living world&quot;, but both times someone has basically said &quot;There's an entire site for world building&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now much like Unix SE (which overlaps with all 3 of the original SE sites and, Ubuntu SE) there is definitely overlap. But I do believe we can distinguish between questions that are ok here, and questions that belong there, by better defining &quot;world building&quot; and what it means in the context of the site(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's what I think the difference is (should I make this an answer?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;World Building in the context of the SE site, meaning that site is for, users who are attempting to create a universe. Universes like this include Star Wars, Game of Thrones, World of Darkness, Dungeons and Dragons. They could be the authors of fiction, video games, movies, etc. That site is more dedicated to people who are creating the &quot;world's&quot; we play in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;World Building in the context of &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site is defined as populating the world of an existing universe. In role playing games worlds are only partially populated, there are usually some known denizens and locations, but the rest is up to the GM. For us questiosn about world building should be restricted to things specifically about populating existing universes. In some games I suspect this is more open, for example I wouldn't be surprised if some games allowed you to create a planet with variations on things like gravity. Said planet must still be within the existing universe though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I on spot? if so could we perhaps clarify the tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-08T15:39:58.573" Title="Worldbuilding tag vs Site" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5053" CreationDate="2014-10-08T14:15:35.983" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, first, to get this out of the way, the comment you brought up says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There is an &lt;em&gt;entire Stack Exchange&lt;/em&gt; devoted to worldbuilding; methinks that this question is far too broad to try to answer here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-building&lt;/a&gt; tag got along splendidly for &lt;em&gt;three years&lt;/em&gt; before World Building Stack Exchange arrived; the fact the topic now has its own site doesn't make questions about it too broad. Mind you, they can still &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; too broad like any other question, and the commenter could have meant that in the ordinary way that you're asking too big a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now then. The line between when to ask here or there can be drawn pretty naturally based on business as usual:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is for questions about playing RPGs. We focus on an application of world building to the RPG context, &lt;a href=&quot;http://xkcd.com/435/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;like physics is applied mathematics&lt;/a&gt;. We have needs different to those of general world builders: we build worlds &lt;em&gt;for people to interact with in specific ways,&lt;/em&gt; we need to leave room for player agency, and there's no point in us building stuff the players won't interact with. Borrowing from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our guideline on real world topics&lt;/a&gt;, RPG experts are often going to give you a better, different, or more specific answer. If they will, and you want those answers, ask here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you take a look through our open world building questions, almost all of them are totally at home here in the applied context. Some exist in a grey area (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22845/how-do-you-customise-swearing-to-a-setting&quot;&gt;How do you customise swearing to a setting?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28039/incorporating-smell-taste-and-weather-underwater&quot;&gt;Incorporating smell, taste, and weather underwater&lt;/a&gt;), but as you'll see from those questions, RPG experts have &lt;em&gt;still provided&lt;/em&gt; better, different, and more specific answers for the RPG context that are more helpful to us RPG players or GMs than the answers we'd get at world building.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're in a grey area where you're not sure where your question belongs, work it out for yourself based on the kinds of answers you want to receive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-10-08T15:06:58.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5055" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5053" CreationDate="2014-10-08T15:39:58.573" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;So rule #1 is that no SE needs to care what some other SE considers on topic.  It's either on topic for you or it's off topic for you.  If it's off topic - maybe it's on topic on another SE, maybe it's not, it's not directly relevant except as a purely helpful &quot;maybe try place X&quot; suggestion after a close.  The complaint &quot;But then it's not on topic on any SE&quot; is not relevant to closing - &quot;sorry, let them eat forum&quot; - and therefore neither is &quot;It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; on topic on another SE.&quot; Something is not off topic here because some new SE has chosen to include it, but it is off topic here if it's purely about that other thing and only tangential to gaming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is sufficiently related to RPGs, it's on topic here. We try to be somewhat generous about that and sometimes frankly err on the side of being too inclusive (making fake parchment, making fantasy swears). We've drawn a line at times (historical research, because &quot;well I can game in the real world so any real world history question is on topic right?  Wrong.&quot;). See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/on-topic&quot;&gt;on-topic tag&lt;/a&gt; here on meta for existing rulings. Other things get knocked off organically (non-sleepy snacks). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things can be on topic in 2 places, ask those where you want to get answers from.  For example the &quot;Christian reaction to RPGs&quot; question is posted both here and Christianity.SE, which is fine as it's on topic in both places. Some of it is also a matter of degree, not of black letter law. If you plan on having 20 questions fretting over all kinds of aspects of your fictional world - people here will get a little tired of it and you'll start pulling answers like &quot;Just make it up, windbag.&quot; worldbuilding.se might be a better choice because by definition that kind of minutia is not just on topic but is kinda the entire point of that stack. Just like if you started asking 20 questions about &quot;what do Methodists think about RPGs?  How about Episcopalians?&quot; you'd probably be better served on the side of the line you're focusing on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A worldbuilding question is on topic here if it has tangible relation to roleplaying. If it's just fictional world creation - &quot;what history sounds cool&quot; - I don't think it's on topic. If it has to do with aspects of a world that are going to be used in a game, interacted with by RPG characters, etc., then that is something where a RPG-driven answer will be more specifically on point than a fictional answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To directly respond to a point in the question, on-topic here is NOT a function of whether it's development of some world some other person has sold you as opposed to a world  you are creating. Both are on topic. For rules as well as setting, this is not &quot;crap WotC wants to sell you SE,&quot; homebrew is completely on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-10-08T15:39:58.573" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5056" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5057" CreationDate="2014-10-09T14:45:13.110" Score="9" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just realised that part of why we've been getting 5e questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; is because someone typing in &quot;dungeo…&quot; isn't going to see the 5e tag pop up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would do it, but you can't propose a non-existent tag as a synonym. (And I don't want to abuse some poor question with an arbitrary edit just to make the tag exist long enough for synonym voting…)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could a mod create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons-5e&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll still get people mistagging with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; when they mean &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, but this should cut it down somewhat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-10-09T15:36:41.030" LastActivityDate="2014-10-09T15:36:41.030" Title="We need a [dungeons-and-dragons-5e] synonym, please and thank you!" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5056" CreationDate="2014-10-09T15:11:55.480" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a really great point, and something we overlooked with the transition from dnd-next to dnd-5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/M9yA5.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Concur&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-10-09T15:11:55.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5058" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5059" CreationDate="2014-10-09T23:09:37.033" Score="15" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a large number of questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46188/15469&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; (&quot;Does a Warforged barbarian get fatigued?&quot;) one or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49224/can-a-summoner-cast-the-summon-monster-spell-with-his-eidolon-out&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; (&quot;Can a Summoner Cast the Summon Monster Spell With His Eidolon Out?&quot;), where the question asked in the title is the opposite of the one asked in the text of the question, i.e. a 'yes' to the question in the title is equivalent to a 'no' to the question in the text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I find this confusing when answering, even though very few answers stop at a simple yes or no. So, are questions like these a problem? (The irony is intentional.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-02T00:53:55.463" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T23:17:31.970" Title="Are questions with title opposite to text ok?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5058" CreationDate="2014-10-09T23:13:38.410" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not ideal when that mismatch exists, and you're right to call it out that it makes the question confusing. They ought to be edited to be brought in line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should still preferably say more than &lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt; at the beginning, so that we know exactly what they're saying yes &lt;em&gt;to.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Yes, X happens.&lt;/strong&gt; is generally better communication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-10-09T23:13:38.410" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5060" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5071" CreationDate="2014-10-10T12:19:34.203" Score="3" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a problem. I need to know if there is a possibility to use gold to improve my character without buying magic items or using a wish. Actually I know that there is at least one combination of spells that would work, and I am wondering if there is any other alternative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49122/what-to-do-with-100-000gp-and-no-item-purchase-available&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; about this, which was closed for being too broad/opinion based, and even after several edits, I couldn't manage to make it acceptable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now my problem is still unsolved so in last resort I am posting there, so that you can tell me how should I ask the question so that it will be acceptable here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10684" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T16:45:06.410" Title="How should I have asked?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5061" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5060" CreationDate="2014-10-10T14:32:00.070" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too broad simply means too Broad&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is closed for Too broad its because the are too many answers that would be &quot;correct&quot; (not enough requirements to distinguish the right answer from another one) or simply that an appropriate answer to such a question would itself be too long because of all the ground it would need to cover. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes RPG.SE isn't the right place to ask a question simply because the nature of the question would be better served by ongoing discussion on a forum which SE in general avoids. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-10-10T14:32:00.070" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5062" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5064" CreationDate="2014-10-10T17:42:52.380" Score="3" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49347/clarification-of-flaming-sphere-spell-mechanics&quot;&gt;How does a Flaming Sphere&amp;#39;s movement work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Question text:&#xA;  Regarding Flaming Sphere:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The sphere does damage when it occupies the same space as a creature. When I move it into a creature's space to attack, the sphere stops moving for the round. If the creature and sphere don't move, is this attack automatic on my next round, and is the sphere stuck in the same space as the creature until the creature moves?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If I am able to move the sphere out of the space occupied by the creature, does it not do damage to that creature again until it moves back into that creatures space?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the sphere move only in a straight line, or can I have it move in a circle (North 5 feet, East 5 feet, South 5 feet, West 5 feet, North 5 feet, South 5 feet)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does directing the sphere to move provoke an attack of opportunity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can a caster have two spheres at the same time, using two move actions to direct them both during a round? If so, can both spheres attack a single target&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11818" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-10T19:48:34.580" Title="Should this question be split into five?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5060" CreationDate="2014-10-10T17:43:37.157" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Narrow down your criteria. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know this is the obvious but hear me out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now your question has nothing as to what kind of enhancements you are wanting for your character. There are dozens of builds that can be enhanced in dozens of ways each. Put in some background on your character. Is he a tank, a caster, a striker, what is his Class, race, theme, ect. Tell us what your end goal is and we can help you more. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now your only criteria is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Old items.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;100,000 gold spending limit&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2 weeks to complete the process&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Come into the chat and we could help you talk it out if you want. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8933" LastActivityDate="2014-10-10T17:43:37.157" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5062" CreationDate="2014-10-10T19:48:34.580" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions are closely related, and it would be confusing for the asker and the answers to answer in multiple places.  The rules to cite will likely be similar between the questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-10-10T19:48:34.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5065" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-10T21:48:29.153" Score="8" ViewCount="324" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3211/how-much-of-an-answer-suggestion-should-be-in-comments-to-questions&quot;&gt;How much of an answer/suggestion should be in comments to questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related (newer): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What’s the best way to deal with answers posted as comments? I’ve run into this a few times with my recent popular question. Some folks have been persistent about posting advice in the comments. Eventually I replied “please post that as an answer” and flagged the comments as “too chatty.” In the earlier meta question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3212/8012&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; suggests flagging as “not constructive.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What’s the best way to communicate the situation to the commenter or the moderators so that this stuff gets posted as answers, or at least not as comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-03-22T13:54:00.883" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T13:54:00.883" Title="How to deal with answers in comments?" Tags="|discussion|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5065" CreationDate="2014-10-10T21:53:48.120" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;To them - comment &quot;this should be an answer, comments are temporary and not for answers&quot;&#xA;To moderators - again, flag as not constructive and we'll up and delete it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-10-10T21:53:48.120" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5067" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3222" CreationDate="2014-10-11T03:01:57.400" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ljt1P.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16488" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:52:23.590" LastActivityDate="2014-10-11T03:01:57.400" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2014-10-11T03:01:57.400" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5068" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-13T03:06:58.020" Score="12" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that we have the (older, more well-established) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ogl&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ogl&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ogl&lt;/a&gt; tag as well as the (newer, used on only two questions) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/open-game-license&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;open-game-license&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;open-game-license&lt;/a&gt; tag. I went to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ogl&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ogl&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ogl&lt;/a&gt; tag and suggested the other as a synonym, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/ogl/synonyms&quot;&gt;go vote it up and make it happen&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before debate ensues about which should actually be the tag and which the synonym: our usual policy is to use the more common term within the wider community, and &quot;OGL&quot; is used overwhelmingly more than the full &quot;Open Game License&quot;, just like &quot;D&amp;amp;D 4e&quot; gives us &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; because it's used overwhelmingly instead of the longer version. That seems clear enough to me that I don't think it needs discussion, but it's possible there's a flaw in that reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side note, the tag wiki text in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/open-game-license&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;open-game-license&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;open-game-license&lt;/a&gt; is excellent, so I replaced the tag wiki text in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ogl&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ogl&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ogl&lt;/a&gt; with it. Props to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/9293/matt-thomason&quot;&gt;@MattThomason&lt;/a&gt; for that text!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-03-02T00:54:50.360" LastActivityDate="2021-03-02T00:54:50.360" Title="Call for voting posse: synonym [open-game-license] to [ogl]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5069" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5070" CreationDate="2014-10-13T22:27:38.973" Score="7" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted a comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/49429/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer which was the reason I didn't see that answer as correct. The comment was then deleted when a mod cleaned up the comments on that answer, but the answer hasn't changed and my criticism still applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I repost the comment, or leave it as is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T00:10:49.350" Title="Deleted comment that is still relevant" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5070" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5069" CreationDate="2014-10-13T23:28:20.663" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote, provide a better answer or improve your question, and move on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are not for arguing. The larger an argument gets, the more we are inclined to delete it (starting at &quot;really quite&quot; and moving upwards). If the answerer doesn't choose to improve their answer, arguing with them isn't useful. Instead, provide a better answer or better question such that your criticisms are channeled into a &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; direction. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-10-14T00:10:49.350" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T00:10:49.350" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5060" CreationDate="2014-10-14T13:38:58.993" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, you still don't seem to understand why more information was needed for this to be an acceptable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other people don't have all the context you do.  Therefore without some parameters about the situation, they will waste their time giving pointless answers - like the guy who had to delete his big ol' answer because you finally got around to explaining &quot;oh our custom time travel doesn't work that way.&quot;  Even Brian's graft etc. suggestions I'm not sure will work in this situation, tattoos and grafts and stuff should go if it's really terminator mode but you're not even sending your body back, just your spirit, as it took a whole week for you to mention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just saying &quot;100k, no gear&quot; doesn't make an optimization question good.  &quot;Optimize me!&quot; OK, here's a way to use that to get +10 to WIS.  Is that good for your character?  Or not? hard to tell if you can't be arsed to say what class and level you are. We have general guidance on optimization questions here for that reason.  Optimize what exactly, for what purpose exactly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you say &quot;time travel to the distant past,&quot; that could mean &quot;you're all popping out in dinosaur times, no civilization around, food and water and normal swords will be a challenge to get.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question still has a bit too much on what doesn't help (your byzantine time travel plot) and a bit too little on what you need to do. When you drop back into your level 1 body, were you fighting vampires in Karrnath? Or just hanging out and conducting courtly intrigue in Breland? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question doesn't have to be long, it just has to have the important parts in it. Here's an example that wouldn't have been closed and would probably only have needed a couple clarification comments before people could answer effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I am a level 12 human swashbucker that specializes in two-weapon fighting and diplomacy. In two weeks I and my party will be traveling back in time - our souls will move back to inhabit our first level bodies from 30 years ago. We can't take gear with us, though intelligent items' spirits will come back with us and can go into gear of the time. Body modifications like tattoos won't travel but permanent spells, inherent bonuses, and things like that will. When we will go back, we will be based in courtly society in Breland but also doing cross-country adventuring, trying to survive for three years and change the past by killing the vampire king of Korrath.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have 100,000 gp to spend. What can I do in the two weeks I have to enhance myself for this trip?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't require lengthy explanation,  it just requires insertion of the facts that bear on your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, if you ask questions that make people go on fishing expeditions, a) they get closed and reopened, b) people write answers that have to get rewritten and/or deleted, and c) eventually people decide that maybe answering your questions is more trouble than it's worth. So it's in your best interest to learn how to ask effective questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, it's worth restating one of our fundamental SE best practices.  Ask about your PROBLEM, not about your SOLUTION.  All the parts you spent actually talking about the parameters of your specific situation and what you want to achieve were valuable. Parts where you assumed a given answer and drilled down into that generally led people down wrong paths. So don't assume an answer or a solution.  Post your problem, with all the appropriate parameters that would rule in/out solutions, and let people answer with the actual solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-10-14T16:45:06.410" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T16:45:06.410" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5072" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-14T22:34:29.697" Score="14" ViewCount="403" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m concerned about some potentially inflammatory language in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/49461/8012&quot;&gt;a recent answer&lt;/a&gt;, regarding the limitations of a popular role-playing game (emphasis in original):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It goes a &lt;em&gt;little&lt;/em&gt; beyond that, but only a little. Unfortunately, &lt;strong&gt;it also lies to you&lt;/strong&gt; and claims to do &lt;strong&gt;much&lt;/strong&gt; more than that. Every attempt I have seen to use it for such purposes, however, has either relied on heavy houseruling/freeforming or simply fallen flat on its face. . . . That’s mostly because &lt;strong&gt;they shouldn’t have any effect and their inclusion is just an attempt . . . to maintain the fundamental deception that it is a game that cares about these things.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post has spawned at least two extended and heated exchanges in comments which were later deleted or &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/17872/discussion-on-answer-by-kryan-how-to-reward-players-that-come-prepared-for-non-c&quot;&gt;moved to chat&lt;/a&gt;. I’ve asked the poster to tone down the language, but he vehemently refused. I don’t object to the poster’s point of view, but framing the opposition as “lies” and “deception” puts fans of the game on the defensive and paints them as dupes or conspirators in the deception. Even worse, some of the people who &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/72/extsr&quot;&gt;wrote&lt;/a&gt; the game in question are members of the community, and we really shouldn’t be attacking their creations as “lies.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/code-of-conduct&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt; asks us all to &lt;strong&gt;Choose your words carefully&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;Be civil.&lt;/strong&gt; The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/240839/the-new-new-be-nice-policy-code-of-conduct-updated-with-your-feedback&quot;&gt;latest proposed version&lt;/a&gt; specifically warns against using inflammatory language even when not directed at another person:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don’t be a jerk.&lt;/strong&gt; [Avoid] &lt;strong&gt;Name-calling.&lt;/strong&gt; Focus on the post, not the person. That includes terms that feel personal even when they're applied to posts (for example, “lazy”, “ignorant”, or “whiny”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that our community includes game designers and fans of the games we discuss, I think we should apply this policy to games as well as posts. There’s room for reasoned criticism, but we should avoid &lt;em&gt;name-calling&lt;/em&gt; here, no matter whether it’s applied to posters, their posts, or the games they write and play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It’s not a theoretical question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers which argue that these words can’t, or shouldn’t, create bad feelings need to address the fact that they &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; spawned multiple heated, emotional discussions: at least two comment threads have been deleted for this reason. This is a real problem and “people shouldn't feel like that” doesn’t make them feel it any less.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T03:19:08.893" Title="Keep game criticism constructive, not provocative" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5072" CreationDate="2014-10-14T23:11:35.227" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not specifically a defense of my post, but a description of why I think that answers like mine &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; be allowed on this site. That is, this is not an attempt to get anyone to upvote or not-downvote my answer, but rather merely saying that the answer should not be edited or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Deceptive business practices exist&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like an obvious statement, but it needs to be established first: it is possible for companies to make misleading claims about the capabilities of their product. This is something that has happened many times, across many industries. In other words, it is reality that sometimes businesses &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; deceptive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It is our responsibility, as experts, to highlight such practices&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a business or product has misleading marketing or descriptions, that we as experts recognize, it is part of the responsibility we assume as answerers to highlight them for readers. Deception can lead the uninformed to make purchasing decisions that they otherwise might not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We can only call ’em like we see ’em&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers are always going to be at least somewhat subjective on this site; we can back up our answers with reasoning, citation, or experience, but the bar for making claims is not, and cannot be, that we must demonstrate absolute proof. Because we cannot do so, and because we should be warning readers are about deceptive business practices, this means we can and should warn users about dubious business practices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Voting already covers, as well as SE can, establishing credibility&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer, as of this writing, has &lt;strong&gt;20 upvotes&lt;/strong&gt; to &lt;strong&gt;8 downvotes&lt;/strong&gt;. Apparently, I am not the only one who feels that the marketing and description of D&amp;amp;D is inconsistent with the product actually sold. I am, apparently, far from the only one who &lt;strong&gt;feels deceived&lt;/strong&gt; by them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting would work equally well for other, similar answers. If an answer posed a crazy conspiracy theory, it would be downvoted into oblivion. If an answer seemed plausible, but not convincing, it would receive few votes, or up- and downvotes in roughly equal measure. These votes, then, handle anything that needs to &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; handled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Companies and products are not persons, are not members of our community&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The quoted site rules are designed to foster community and collaboration among our members, not to quash dissenting opinions. Moreover, criticizing a &lt;em&gt;product&lt;/em&gt; seems not only to be valid, but to also be an important part of what we are here to do. The failure of D&amp;amp;D to establish consistency between its narrative and its mechanics has, no doubt, &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; causes, from time constraints, to design mistakes, to miscommunication between separate authors, and many more, I am sure. Nonetheless, the end result &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; have this disconnect, which leads to the system not actually having features that it claims to have (read: rules for covering aspects it seems should be part of its narrative). That bears mentioning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T23:11:35.227" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5074" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5072" CreationDate="2014-10-14T23:15:37.317" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The code of conduct you're quoting is about how we treat &lt;em&gt;people.&lt;/em&gt; Products don't have feelings to hurt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you're examining here is called &lt;em&gt;criticism,&lt;/em&gt; and it's valid. If a game does something wrong, it's a good thing to call it: players learn, developers learn, and so on. We're not here to be nice to games, we're here to share expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly if I couldn't call out the flaws in a game, that would be &lt;em&gt;awful.&lt;/em&gt; I'm not about to pretend the games I use are necessarily good in every way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D has a lot to answer to, and it can handle it when we call out that product. If one of those flaws is that a game &amp;mdash; through accident or deliberate design &amp;mdash; effectively lies about itself, is deceptive or misleading, then calling the product out as lying or being deceptive or misleading is entirely on point. (How else ought we describe it, and remain truthful?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-10-14T23:15:37.317" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5072" CreationDate="2014-10-15T00:04:03.013" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's step back a moment, shall we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to make this about right and wrong and whether people are justified in behaving a given way on their side of the argument. I happen to think the answer is largely within its rights to say the things it says, but that's not important!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's an obvious objective fact that many people don't just disagree with the &lt;em&gt;opinions&lt;/em&gt; it presents: &lt;strong&gt;the &lt;em&gt;language itself&lt;/em&gt; is needlessly provocative&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;is encouraging real people to engage in inappropriate use of comments&lt;/strong&gt;. Real people are having real bad feelings about this. It'd be easy to say the same thing without using language of a demonstrably antagonistic nature, so &lt;em&gt;why not&lt;/em&gt; since it's clearly a vortex for bad site behaviour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd speculate that removing the antagonistic language would improve the answer's quality because it'd encourage the use of more detailed explanatory language to present the point clearly. Right now it's almost two paragraphs saying there's a problem and only one sentence (which never gets down to specifics) in support of those claims. I think it's &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt;, but it's a poor answer nonetheless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We should have the freedom to be honest and direct and to have opinions, or the site won't work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;But we should also strive for the eloquence to present opinions as our own subjective view, and be honest without being offensive, or the site &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; won't work. (The idea that honesty and tact are mutually exclusive is a toxic false dichotomy which a lot of the Internet hides behind. Let's not be those guys.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We should have the maturity to disassociate our own self-image from the games we happen to play.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;But we should also want to converse graciously with people who are still struggling with that, because it's a good way for them to learn.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And when a post is a trouble spot for bad site behaviour, that needs to be addressed regardless of who started it and who's right.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not mistake vitriol for vigour, nor believe candour and insult should go hand in hand. Anger and aggression don't make people think about our points more seriously: they make people want to argue or leave, neither of which the Stack encourages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-10-15T03:19:08.893" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T03:19:08.893" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5076" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5072" CreationDate="2014-10-15T02:02:41.043" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should start to remember a few things that happened a while ago, on a dreaded 4e question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made a honest comparision between 4e and a MMO, and the world fell on my head because of that. Yes, my answer was not the best on the world, but I received tons of &quot;Don't bash the system&quot; comments and tips, from almost everyone involved on the time. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3411/how-should-we-properly-handle-answers-that-show-an-apparent-lack-of-system-maste&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt;. Look at the comments to see how people received &lt;em&gt;perceived&lt;/em&gt; system bashing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that, if even a mild system bashing was unaceptable back then, that would change now. I retracted my answer, made it more polite, and the world went on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So please, don't turn this more difficult. If you want to say that D&amp;amp;D is a bad system to out-of-combat stuff, go ahead. That is perfectly possible to say without using such words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need to use that word set. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T02:02:41.043" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5072" CreationDate="2014-10-15T02:29:47.837" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the critique of the answer in question, especially given the newer code of conduct guidance as cited by @BraddSzonye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The big rule people need to understand is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Being right is no excuse for not being civil.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all know there's a fine line between attacking posts, positions, or in this case games, and attacking people. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this post isn't the only case of it.  Frankly I see it in chat a lot more than I'd like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/240839/the-new-new-be-nice-policy-code-of-conduct-updated-with-your-feedback?cb=1&quot;&gt;the new SE-wide Code of Conduct on its way&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rudeness and belittling language are not okay.&lt;/strong&gt; Your tone should match the way you'd talk in person with someone you respect and whom you want to respect you. If you don't have time to say something politely, just leave it for someone who does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Legitimate, founded critique of a game or company in the context of a question it's relevant to is fine. However in this case it is taken to histrionic extent, and additionally slathered with inflammatory language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;D&amp;amp;D isn't good at survival simulation&quot; - good, if backed up. People can fairly challenge it on its facts (we did a lot of survival situation in 1e and 2e) but that's legitimate discourse for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;D&amp;amp;D lies to you!&quot; - not good. We can engage in a bunch of sophistry here about the definition of inflammatory, but your mom and your kindergarten teacher would call you out on it regardless. Not acceptable.  Will be edited and if the post owner doesn't want it edited, the post may be deleted.  Users should submit edits and flags accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;D&amp;amp;D engages in deceptive business practices.&quot; That's not using inordinately inflammatory language but it's still pretty dicey.  &quot;Because we put in an equipment list, and the game isn't good at Survivor simulation, we are engaging in something &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_business_practices&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;that's a crime in most locations&lt;/a&gt;?&quot;  Also unacceptable unless it's factually true, not just &quot;well if I am histrionic and stretch words I can say it.&quot; You can make a good, factual case that, for example, Outlaw Press and Jim Shipman are guilty of deceptive business practices because they actually steal products and art. Saying that about a game that doesn't do something to your satisfaction, no it's not. If WotC is using sweatshop labor, bring it up. If you are accusing them of some crime because you don't like they way they made their game, keep it on your own blog or whatever - it's not for here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt; in mind - your critique needs to be on topic for a given question. Questions should generally be answered using Good Subjective, Bad Subjective techniques. Our opinions inform our answers, but there are few cases here on RPG.SE where just airing your opinions for the sake of it is relevant. Even if this question were &quot;Can you effectively tell survival stories in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e?&quot; (which it's not), I'd consider an answer of &quot;I did this and it worked/didn't work and here's how&quot; a lot better than &quot;here's my theory/opinion/textual analysis/whatever.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edition (or Game) Warring Will Not Be Tolerated&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@ThalesSarczuk has a good point that we have kept this well reined in on 4e and some other games.  If someone posted &quot;4e lies because it says it's an RPG&quot; you all know that would get deleted and someone that insisted on keeping doing it would get mod messaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This same standard of behavior extends to other game professionals, game companies, and games. There will be no tolerance for bagging on those on the site, regardless of your feelings on D&amp;amp;D, Paizo, Pathfinder, SKR, or the other targets people feel free to libel. This includes chat - we mods have been letting behavior go on that we're uncomfortable with there.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It creates an aura of hostility to new users to be immediately told that 5e, or Pathfinder, or whatever game they plan and came here to ask about &quot;is an abomination.&quot; Find a more positive thing to talk about. Plus, we'd like some of those real game experts to come participate here, which is less likely to happen if the &quot;experts&quot; we have already continuously insult them. Show some respect to someone with 100 more game credits than you have, perhaps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Critique is legitimate. Insults are not critique. Attacks create a hostile environment here. That's not OK.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can spout vitriol on your own blog or whatever forum will have you all day. It's not OK, but no one can stop you.  But it's not civil, polite, or nice, therefore it's not welcome here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T03:18:29.793" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5078" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-15T12:42:26.947" Score="5" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;While reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49504/what-is-a-good-system-for-a-political-espionage-game&quot;&gt;What is a good system for a political espionage game?&lt;/a&gt;, I saw the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-for-setting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-for-setting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-for-setting&lt;/a&gt; tag, and I don't see the difference to a tightly formulated (i.e. correctly asked) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is currently used 5 times in total, 4 of which are also tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The aforementioned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49504/what-is-a-good-system-for-a-political-espionage-game&quot;&gt;What is a good system for a political espionage game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29095/i-want-to-run-an-rpg-inspired-by-mon%C3%A1es-metropolis-concept-series&quot;&gt;I want to run an RPG inspired by Mon&amp;#225;e&amp;#39;s &amp;#39;Metropolis&amp;#39; concept series&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29282/alternate-class-system-for-mtg-inspired-setting&quot;&gt;Alternate class system for MtG inspired setting&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9907/system-for-setting-misfits&quot;&gt;System for Setting: Misfits&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8349/system-for-setting-joe-abercrombies-the-first-law&quot;&gt;System for Setting: Joe Abercrombie&amp;#39;s The First Law&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last two questions were both asked by gomad, and he added the tag to both questions in Sept. 2011, which means the tag might have missed some game-rec-reforms and -metas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions need to be specific, with the asker clearly stating which part of the game is important to him and asking for a system that has mechanics that supports this kind of thing. This is not much different from specifying a setting, though potentially less precise (&quot;Interstellar space warfare, where the players are working for the underdog faction&quot; vs. &quot;Star Wars Rebels&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, many game-rec-questions are about recreating the feel of a specific movie/TV series/book/...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, I doubt that the tag has any merit and vote for burnination or synonymization.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T06:30:26.273" Title="system-for-setting scope and difference from game-rec" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5078" CreationDate="2014-10-15T17:01:34.397" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;With only a few instances, this is one that we should just remove and let it age away. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No need for outside intervention. A few edits and we're done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T17:01:34.397" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5078" CreationDate="2014-10-15T20:33:15.007" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure why we need to eliminate the tag.  Some people have clearly used it and found it useful.  Does it meet any of the objective bad-tag criteria? If not, just let it go. The point of the emergent tagging system is that it doesn't need over-curation. Sometimes, tags are subsets of another tag, and that's OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-10-15T20:33:15.007" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5078" CreationDate="2014-10-15T22:48:13.737" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It doesn't seem to be hurting anything (the tag isn't replacing a more useful tag, for example), and I think it's a useful tag for attracting experts &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; for sorting questions. [game-rec] has an extremely broad mandate: a quick glance over recently active questions finds questions about systems for a particular group makeup (size, experience, age), the difference between two systems, and systems which support particular moral themes, as well as many questions which could use the [system-for-setting] tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone looking for a specific question, [system-for-setting] narrows this down so I don't have to slog through &quot;Game for my 11-year-old who likes Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter&quot; questions when looking for the best system to run a game about Rangers of the North.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an answerer, it helps me sort out the kind of experience I should have in order to answer a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as a site user, favouriting or blacklisting the tag helps me focus on the kind of [game-rec] questions I'm interested in: the ones I may be able to answer or improve, the ones I'm most confident voting on. (If I only work in homebrew worlds, hiding the [sys-for-set] tag could be &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; helpful in bringing my attention where it's useful).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think we could tag this more aggressively.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...but it's not a tag that querents are likely to stumble across while writing their question, which brings all of this into doubt for me as it hints this isn't a &lt;em&gt;natural&lt;/em&gt; tag. Or maybe it just needs re-phrasing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-10-16T06:30:26.273" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T06:30:26.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5083" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-16T07:07:27.450" Score="-4" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This ONLY applies to New World of Darkness, a game system that DOES have a core rulebook, with splat books for playing different types of characters.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The focus of this discussion is on tagging which Core set of rules, &lt;strong&gt;a concept that does not apply to the Old World of Darkness&lt;/strong&gt;, and if the splat lines under those core rules should be tagged with the edition in question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5001/start-retagging-the-wod-questions-aka-editors-the-retaggening/&quot;&gt;this thread&lt;/a&gt; the retagging of all the World of Darkness questions, and the tags used is discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing about the suggestions and the tags implemented in them that bothered me was the, in my opinion, noisy expansion of tags for the splats of the second edition of New World of Darkness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that thread it is suggested that there be both second edition tags for New World of Darkness itself, and for the splat books there in.  For example, there would be both [vampire-the-requiem] and [vampire-the-requiem-2e] (along with an interim [blood-and-smoke]) tags to distinguish between editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is my contention that, while I do not fully agree with the creation of umbrella New World of Darkness second edition tags, they can add value to the question.  I also contest that adding second edition tags for the splats, however only serves to add noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edition of the game has already been indicated by the use of the appropriate nWoD version tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, as the difference between the editions is minimal, the vast majority of questions are suitable for either edition.  While the person asking the question may indicate the edition of the core rules they are using in their game, it is of little benefit to anyone to indicate this twice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I therefore suggest we limit the creation of nWoD tags to the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[new-world-of-darkness-1e] (synonym new-world-of-darkness)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[new-world-of-darkness-2e]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[nwod-god-machine] (interim)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one (and only one) for each of the creature splats, with no version distinction&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really feel it is not understood what is being suggested here.  WoD questions are already tagged with what edition of the rules is in question.  There is no need to also tag it with the edition of the creature splat that is in question as that is inexorably tied to the rules edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-10-17T01:48:34.623" Title="Let us not tag all the New World of Darkness Second Edition Creature Splats" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5084" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-10-16T07:52:58.833" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Meta questions related to how we handle World of Darkness questions on the main site, including tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T19:19:38.470" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T19:19:38.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5085" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-10-16T07:52:58.833" Score="0" Body="Meta questions related to how we handle World of Darkness questions on the main site." OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T19:18:52.777" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T19:18:52.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5086" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-16T10:28:55.273" Score="8" ViewCount="435" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not about venting about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49434/are-characters-limited-to-20th-level-in-5e/49446#49446&quot;&gt;downvotes on my post&lt;/a&gt;. Let's agree that my post does contain mistakes and that my comments down the road were driven by frustration. I'd like to share &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; I was frustrated and ask your opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see a large gap in voting and commenting behaviour between RPG.SE and the other SE sites I frequently visit. Obviously this is only my own experience, Stack Overflow for example is &lt;em&gt;huuge&lt;/em&gt; so if you check different tags, maybe you have a different experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the other sites my voting experience is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;downvotes are for factually wrong content beyond salvaging or content that did not show any effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example low-quality answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;The level limit in D&amp;amp;D 5 is 17, only Orcs with Cyberware can obtain level 21.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;It's 20.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments are used when the post does show effort, but got things wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;The table for levels in AD&amp;amp;D 1 went to 29, not 20&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Mentioning Level 9 characters and level 9 spells in the same paragraph may confuse people. Can you be more precise?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If people do not share the &lt;strong&gt;opinion&lt;/strong&gt;, they either &lt;em&gt;upvote another&lt;/em&gt; post or write their own. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post however (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3339/voting-feedback-totally-screwed-up-compared-to-other-se-sites&quot;&gt;this is not the first time this happend&lt;/a&gt;) received a lot of downvotes without anyone getting constructive about &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; was wrong. It's impossible to actually correct any mistakes on the base of &quot;you got all the details wrong&quot;. Well what details? &lt;em&gt;What&lt;/em&gt; is wrong? The last comment finally got into details. If that comment would have been the first, before the downvotes, I would probably have improved and corrected my post. Without it, that was pretty much impossible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do make as many mistakes as anyone else. And I absolutely look up to the senior members of other sites. I share a tag with a 700K rep user on StackOverflow and I have been corrected by him more than once. But he wrote constructive comments. Comments where when I read them I was like &quot;D'oh he is so right&quot;. Right now, I cannot say this from this community. All I get is downvotes and broad &quot;that's wrong&quot; statements. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels like random favoritism. I'm not saying it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;. I know fully well that everybody can vote as he likes and no comment is necessary. But just because it's possible, that does not mean that it builds a good and constructive community with respected members. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What do you think about this site's voting behavior?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are your experiences?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do you see differences between this and other SE sites?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the comments have been deleted and no longer visible, here they are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm not passing judgement on whether 20th level should be a hard limit or not — I’m just trying to ascertain what the rule actually is. The PHB seems to imply that 20th is the limit, and if that’s 20 character levels then it inherently limits multiclassers, in as much as you can't have more than 20 class levels in total. Eg. If you're Fighter 7/Wizard 8/Bard 5 then that's it. You're done. –  Rick Lecoat 2 days ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yes, right now, 20 is the limit. Voting behaviour of RPG.SE gaming kids aside, that is what both answers say right in the first line. –  nvoigt 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@nvoigt: The other answer doesn't say that 20 is the limit, it says that the rules don't tell you how to progress past 20. –  Charles 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Charles Where is the practical difference? The rules also don't explicitly forbid having a pink flying elephant as race. But we implicitely assume that you should play only the races available, until another book brings new races. Same with level 20. –  nvoigt 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@nvoigt: The practical difference in answers is that yours says it can't be done and the other says the rules don't specify, which is a big difference in the context of your comment. The practical difference in gameplay between continuing to gain levels through multiclassing (using existing PHB rules) and pink flying elephants as a race... I'll let you work that one out. –  Charles 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Charles Tell me how much XP you need to build a Level 10 Something/11 Another? What exactly do I need to work out there? No rules exist for that. Sure, you can houserule that. And I could houserule pink flying elephants. But that's not the point, is it? The point is, for all practical purposes, the rules go to level 20, no matter how you distribute the levels. –  nvoigt 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This also gets a lot of details about AD&amp;amp;D wrong. –  SevenSidedDie 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@SevenSidedDie Mind to explain the &quot;lot of details&quot;? –  nvoigt 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Maybe @SevenSided Die was referring to my original question, in which I did generalise regarding the ability to progress to unlimited levels in AD&amp;amp;D (I neglected to mention that certain classes and certain class/race combinations did have inherent level limitations). –  Rick Lecoat 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The details of levelling and Name level in both 1e and 2e are either wrong, or vague and misleading in what they seem to suggest; the comments on balance are eyebrow-raising, and mentioning wish and 9th level in the same breath (is maybe unintentional but) creates a false impression. It's just sloppy or wrong in all the points that it tries to set up as the basis of its argument. –  SevenSidedDie 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My desire is not to pick all the nits. Just to point out that there are more issues with this answer than just a quibble about how to word what 5e implies. Dismissing the downvotes as merely &quot;voting behaviour of RPG.SE gaming kids&quot; is doing yourself a disservice, when there are other issues that could be fixed. –  SevenSidedDie 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I cannot fix any issue on the basis of &quot;I don't like it&quot; or &quot;it's wrong&quot;. I have the very books we are talking about right in front of me. Please point out what is wrong. My comments on balance are my personal opinion, declared as my opinion and with a mention that this is just an opinion and your experience may vary. Voting on that is mind-bogglingly stupid and not worthy of an SE site. But we already had the discussion on professional behaviour and how this cannot be expected from every site in the SE network. –  nvoigt 2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Cheap shots at the community here aside, here are some of its issues: it suggests 1e and 2e are different in ways they are not; there is no prescription in either that 9th level is the end of adventuring; wish and power word: kill are not available to a 9th-level wizard. These inaccuracies (or vaguenesses that look like inaccuracies) further sink an answer that is already on shaky ground by not really answering the question. Crafting a good &quot;let me show how your question is wrong&quot; answer is hard enough, it can't survive other weaknesses. –  SevenSidedDie yesterday &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Another big issue is that the framing of the answer is (paraphrasing) &quot;all D&amp;amp;Ds limit max level, but some lift them in the DMG.&quot; However, the most relevant edition, the edition the asker is most familiar with, doesn't accord with that: AD&amp;amp;D already has infinite levelling (for some race/class combinations) described in the PHB, the DMG doesn't add it. The answer is off on the wrong foot and keeps stumbling; but if those details and framing could be fixed, the core assertion that 5e is limited to 20 levels (which I agree is true) might stand a chance to get through. –  SevenSidedDie yesterday &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="29513" LastEditDate="2018-12-06T15:51:28.390" LastActivityDate="2018-12-06T15:51:28.390" Title="Downvoting behaviour does not enable me to improve my post" Tags="|discussion|comments|editing|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5086" CreationDate="2014-10-16T13:04:28.280" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with your post &lt;em&gt;wasn't&lt;/em&gt; the details. I downvoted it not for those, but because &lt;em&gt;bulk&lt;/em&gt; of the answer was an editorial on why playing up to or past L20 was untenable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That wasn't in scope for the question, and it wasn't necessary to a proper answer. But more importantly, the reasoning given was largely hearsay. &quot;Level 20 is a kind of optimizer-min-max theory, but I have never seen people actually play D&amp;amp;D at that level.&quot; That's not driven by experience, or the kind of quality we expect here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if you find yourself spending 2/3 of your answer to a basic rules question explaining why what the person wants to do is untenable, it's probably an answer that will stir the pot and attract downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly. When you know that you've given an answer that is likely to stir up downvotes, don't double down and insult us as a community. Several of your comments were way out of line and this &lt;em&gt;is not the first time&lt;/em&gt; for that either. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes happen. They're an important tool for our communities. Please stop taking them personally. If suggestions are given on how to improve your post, great. If not, take a hard look at yourself and see if you can find something to fix. If after a hard look see you're still having trouble, stop by chat and we can talk about it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Largely, people &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; pile on here, and when they do leave comments with downvotes they are helpful. This post is an exception to both of those things. But that may be in part because you're seen as an experienced user who can evaluate their own posts at this point. You've been here a good long time, and have a lot of reputation, we expect folks like that to be leaders.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T13:04:28.280" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5086" CreationDate="2014-10-16T13:20:22.627" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie already wrote, like, 2000 words about this in the comments that you've posted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please reread them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T13:20:22.627" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5089" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5086" CreationDate="2014-10-16T13:42:22.693" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I haven't seen this until now, so this is an opinion coming from fresh eyes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a difference in voting patterns on this site compared to something like Stack Overflow. It takes some getting used to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your case, what happened is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;but I have never seen people actually play D&amp;amp;D at that level. How much&#xA;  fun would a game be where an enemy can insta-kill you if you lose the&#xA;  initiative roll and vice-versa? Not much I guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's opinion. Opinions can open you up to downvotes if people don't agree with the opinion. In particular, anybody who does play campaigns at high level and does enjoy it is probably going to downvote this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They may or may not leave a comment, as the comment isn't going to be able to help you improve the answer. All it's going to say is &quot;I think you're wrong&quot; or &quot;I don't think that's useful&quot;, and their downvote already says that. Anything else would be suggesting you &lt;em&gt;change&lt;/em&gt; your answer rather than &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was asking about if there are rules for epic level. Saying &quot;I've never played at that level but I don't think it would be fun&quot; isn't adding a lot of value to the answer. &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;It's Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. If you &lt;em&gt;had&lt;/em&gt; played it before and could explain what you found problematic or not fun, that would be better. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you had a link or tips on how to mitigate some of those issues, that would be better still. That could also run the risk of going off topic if it turns out the 5e epic rules don't have those issues, but it's much more likely to be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-10-16T14:13:12.593" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T14:13:12.593" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5090" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5092" CreationDate="2014-10-16T18:13:02.923" Score="10" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49587/what-is-missing-in-my-campaign?noredirect=1#comment100644_49587&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; that asks for feedback on a proposed adventure arc for a Pathfinder game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the question is well written and interesting, I'm affraid that here not really the best place for reviews - It's a bit too broad, and too opinion based, it feels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How we should proceed here? Close?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T18:22:10.533" Title="Adventure Review Questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5090" CreationDate="2014-10-16T18:22:10.533" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Defintely a close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP is asking for a critique without talking about his design intent and the post is entirely composed by the adventure. He needs a forum to be a sounding board for him, not a Q&amp;amp;A site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T18:22:10.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5093" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5083" CreationDate="2014-10-16T20:22:28.563" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see this being accepted. Splatbooks in WoD have always been things like &lt;em&gt;Clanbook: Brujah&lt;/em&gt;—a supplement to the main game book &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt;. Sometimes the individual supernaturals are called &quot;splats&quot; too, but this isn't a useful distinction to us as—for various reasons—we care most about the &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt; a question is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we prefer to tag games, and in oWoD the games are the &lt;em&gt;X: the Y&lt;/em&gt; books. In the nWoD(s) this is somewhat confused by regularising the WW/OP house system into a separately-publishable core system, but the &lt;em&gt;games&lt;/em&gt; are still the books titled &lt;em&gt;X: the Y&lt;/em&gt;. It's just that now, there are two books needed to play the core game instead of just one. The core &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; book is a game in itself too, but only when used alone, and that is far less popular that the &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; + &lt;em&gt;X: the Y&lt;/em&gt; combinations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your proposal basically means splitting the semantic information for &quot;what game is this?&quot; across two tags: the core edition (which I'll call &quot;era&quot; for clarity) and a generic monster-type tag. This makes no sense for the oWoD material as they aren't even 100% compatible within the oWoD era, and though it makes slightly more sense for nWoD, splitting the meaning of tags across multiple tags is unwieldy and not something we have precedent for when it comes to a game tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also guarantee many new users would tag their WoD questions wrong, resulting in a lot of avoidable &quot;question is unclear&quot; closes. That alone would be enough to avoid doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anything, it's the era tags that we could do without—if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt; is on a question, we know exactly what game and system is involved and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; era tag is superfluous. However, the new tagging scheme is, well, &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt;. Even if a modification like that is a good idea on paper, we're already executing on the new scheme and it's far too soon to decide that it's not working, not without overwhelming indications to the contrary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though we might be able to ditch the era tags as superfluous, we should see how this tagging scheme works in practice first, learn from it, and only adjust it based on experience with how well or not well it does the job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-10-16T23:04:42.810" LastActivityDate="2014-10-16T23:04:42.810" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5094" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-17T16:58:26.620" Score="9" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have the tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt;. Is there any value in having both, or should one be a synonym of the other?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Previous inconclusive meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1151/how-should-the-story-and-plot-tags-be-used&quot;&gt;How should the &amp;quot;story&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;plot&amp;quot; tags be used?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T16:13:53.533" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T16:13:53.533" Title="Do we need both [plot] and [story]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5094" CreationDate="2014-10-17T17:59:25.063" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, there's a bit of a difference between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plot is something that &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt;, or at least, &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; happen. Your campaing have a plot - the planned events that you want to put the players in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Story, on the other hand, is something that already happened or is more or less static: your character background, the lore regarding a magic item,  the tales regarding the founding of a dungeon, that kind of stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Plot&quot; tag should be more about planning stuff, while the story tag would cover &lt;em&gt;telling&lt;/em&gt; stuff. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least, that is how I would use each tag. If this is the way they are being used, that's another matter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11298/how-do-i-help-create-story-around-the-table-without-writing-it&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; asks for advice regarding how to handle what seens like  railroading. This question end's with a interesting phrase, with the questioner seeing cleary that there &lt;em&gt;is indeed&lt;/em&gt; a difference between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thinking a bit more about those tags, however, it seens that neither of them are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Story would be about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Review of Stories - No good, RPG.SE is not for reviews.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Creating Stories - No good, too opinion-based.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking how to close a gap in a story - While narrower, still too opinio-based.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking general methods about how to create a history - that's more like it, and the only use that I can devise to this tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plot suffers similar problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is about a missing element to your plot, like a monster, a special spell or a NPC, it would use that tag (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monster&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is about how to create a plot, that would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaing-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaing-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaing-development&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is asking a review about a plot, that would not be a good fit for RPG.SE.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is asking about how to resolve player action inside a plot, that too would be too opinion-based to fit here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, while I can sey they are indeed different, I can't say they are &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-10-17T17:59:25.063" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5086" CreationDate="2014-10-20T06:27:28.493" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you think your answer is useful and has taken fair account of the objections, don't worry about its unpopularity - it is just a signal to you and other users of the site that few people agree with you and many disagree vehemently.  Not many people liked my opinion on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6405/narrativist-gaming-how-do-you-transition-more-traditionally-trained-players-int/6413#6413&quot;&gt;Narrativist Gaming: How do you transition more traditionally-trained players into them?&lt;/a&gt;, but I think the answer was constructive and interesting and I am amused by the voting behaviour.  A popularity-contest mechanic for a Q&amp;amp;A site is bound to be like this sometimes: I don't regard it as injustice, just the community milieu.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't get defensive in your justifications for your answer: others are quite entitled to dislike your idea, and you don't need to convince everybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-10-20T06:46:15.217" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5065" CreationDate="2014-10-22T14:20:14.737" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I post an answer as a comment, I take the risk that my comment will eventually be deleted. But comment deletions are not so quick nor frequent, and my comment will most probably be read and taken into account before it happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, when I post an answer as a real answer, I take the risk of being downvoted and loosing reputation points. Once I will have thousands of reputation points I think I won't really care about it anymore. But currently I am still low rep and I have to pay attention to this possibility. When I was under 50 it was even more important because not being able to comment really sucks and the tiniest little rep point is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are strict rules for downvoting answers, for example they must be nonconstructive or offtopic. But experience shows that among high-rep users who don't care anymore about the rep, some won't hesitate to downvote just because they don't like it, even if the response is constructive and ontopic, exactly as if they were on META where you are allowed to proceed like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I ask myself a lot of questions, I am the first happy that there are so much competent people that can make very complete and detailed answers. But when I am in the position of answering, I know that there is a high probability that a &quot;Thousand goldish&quot; user will post something three times better and more detailed and get most upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once again I won't complain about this since it helped me so much in the game so far. And  I am even more sorry that I don't exactly conforms to the rules, but most of the time I'd rather leave my two cents in a comment or say nothing, rather than taking the trouble of posting a useless answer that might even grant me downvotes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10684" LastActivityDate="2014-10-22T14:20:14.737" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5065" CreationDate="2014-10-22T23:24:38.837" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asking them to post it as an answer is a great first step. There are lots of users who honestly don't know better, and a few who do know better but slip up anyway. (Not that I'd know anything about that. ;) )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they do post it as an answer, great! Vote on it as appropriate and flag the comments as mxyzplk mentioned. But what if they don't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Steal It&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Steve Jobs said that &quot;great artists steal.&quot; In this case, it's an entirely legitimate thing to do. We want good answers. If someone posts a good answer in a comment, and despite cajoling won't post it as an answer, feel free to do it yourself. That comment won't be around forever, and we want to keep the good stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I don't do it without first asking the author to do it. If they don't, then I'll do it and make a note of who wrote it originally (&quot;Thanks X!&quot;). I don't think there's any rule that actually requires that, I just find it courteous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't let good answers disappear if you can avoid it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastActivityDate="2014-10-22T23:24:38.837" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5100" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5102" CreationDate="2014-10-23T00:18:26.270" Score="8" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; tag has an empty tag wiki and 9 questions. Of these, 4 are closed, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16309/15469&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; isn't really an RPG question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22786/how-to-handle-wealthy-player-characters-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; doesn't actually appear to be about simulation at all, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21905/15469&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/23062/15469&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; are game-recommendation questions where simulation was a requirement, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14617/why-dont-weapons-grant-some-sort-of-defense&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; is a question genuinely about simulation in RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should something be done about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; tag? At the very least, I believe it should have a tag wiki explaining how it is meant to be used, since it is clearly unclear as it stands. My assumption of the purpose of the tag is that it is meant to be used for questions like the last one. The game-recommendation questions also seem like a possible legitimate use, but requirements for recommendation questions are usually specified in the question rather than in the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:38:43.767" Title="The simulation tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5100" CreationDate="2014-10-23T02:48:07.527" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The judgement is death&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actual simulation would inevitably be physics, sociology, or history based questions outside our scope. Simulationist game play is a part of many RPGs but rarely is terribly important to mention separate from the actual system in question. If it were really necessary as a tag we'd see much higher usage, I say kill it/burninate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zRXjJ.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zRXjJ.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Dredd&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;http://img.moviepilot.com/assets/tarantulaV2/project_images_square_big/1368692054_dredd_2-oo.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;moviepilot.com&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2022-12-29T04:38:43.767" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:38:43.767" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5100" CreationDate="2014-10-23T18:01:02.010" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;My general answer to questions like this is as follows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging is a &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;folksonomy&lt;/a&gt;.  This is why people are free to create and apply any tag to a question. We have some limited guidance about tagging (no meta tags etc), and in certain places where a hierarchy is kinda needed (D&amp;amp;D game naming, WoD game naming) we set up some structure.  But otherwise, overzealous curation of tags is somewhat against the point of a folksonomy. I see a dozen tags every day that I think are stupid. Here, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags?page=15&amp;amp;tab=popular&quot;&gt;let's go look into page 15 of 21 of our tags&lt;/a&gt;, and see the junk out there that 2 random questions are tagged with. Nine questions for a tag, that's in the top 50% of tags! But intervention is best kept to issues that are significantly degrading or would significantly improve the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting tags and/or setting them up so &quot;people can't use them&quot; isn't something that should be done just because someone has misapplied a tag. It really also isn't worth much time unless it's a pretty popular tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in this particular case, my general line of thinking is &quot;I just spent way too much time on even discussing a 9-question tag, all of our time on site curation could be much more profitably spent.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-10-23T18:01:02.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5103" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5104" CreationDate="2014-10-23T21:18:32.747" Score="3" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I tried writing a question with the title: &quot;What's the point of risk, or the advantage of avoiding death, in games that let you return at the same level?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as soon as I moved my cursor to the text editor, I got the warning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wow. What algorithm is sure enough to say that, and why? Is it accurate? I suddenly no longer feel like detailing my interesting question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it just because it has the words &quot;what's the point&quot; in it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Ok, I see this sub-part of my question is already asked here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/728/why-is-my-question-subjective-and-likely-to-be-closed&quot;&gt;Why is my question &amp;quot;subjective and likely to be closed&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; and mostly answered by this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4371/how-does-the-automatic-subjective-filter-work&quot;&gt;How does the automatic subjective filter work?&lt;/a&gt; - so it's the word &quot;you&quot; - ok...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am quite interested in hearing what players think about risk of death in games where if you die, the GM lets you get a replacement character at the same power level you were at. This seems to be a common way people play, and I am really interested to hear what such players think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the problem that there is no one right answer, and so this site just doesn't want that kind of question? Do I need to take this to an RPG forum somewhere else? Any suggestions for a good RPG forum?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-10-23T22:16:09.940" Title="Why would this question be closed for being subjective?" Tags="|support|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5103" CreationDate="2014-10-23T22:16:09.940" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Automated warning aside (it's a bit trigger-happy sometimes), it sounds like you'd find a back-and-forth conversation on this topic more fulfilling than the Q&amp;amp;A format the main Stack Exchange site supports. That is, I think the question &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be framed so it's appropriate for the Stack, but it'd probably not be the kind of question you want to ask anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the sort of thing that the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG.SE chat&lt;/a&gt; would probably love to discuss, and the people there can probably help you find suitable forums as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2014-10-23T22:16:09.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5105" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5106" CreationDate="2014-10-27T13:59:18.813" Score="11" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently started a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50041/9328&quot;&gt;game-recommendation question&lt;/a&gt; and have received some very good suggestions from the community.  I'm ready to try a few of them, but there's a more immediate problem that needs addressing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are all very good...but I'm not sure what the proceedure is for accepting an answer on this type of question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any or all of these answers that recommend a system are good recommendations, but no single answer is necessarily the 'right' answer.  Many are very good, and as such are getting upvoted for their high quality and accuracy, but I the question asker am not sure how to determine which good answer is most worthy of being 'accepted'. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the usual practice for accepting an answer on a game-recommendation question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9328" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-10-27T14:28:51.507" Title="Accepting an answer on a game-recommendation question" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5105" CreationDate="2014-10-27T14:17:03.527" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You accept the answer that is most useful to you. If no answer is useful to you then you probably want to edit your question or post a comment on it to specify what about the current answers does not fulfill your requirements so that answers can be more tailored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never feel like you have to accept an answer if you do not feel your question has been answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside:&#xA;Upvotes and Downvotes are what the community feels is a good or bad answers. Feel free to ignore them when you select your accepted answer; It is your question after all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15190" LastActivityDate="2014-10-27T14:17:03.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5105" CreationDate="2014-10-27T14:28:51.507" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;As Mourdos said, you accept the answer most useful to you. (In fact in general I strongly agree with his answer here.) You're under no time pressure or obligation to accept an answer. What you accept and why is up to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for a game recommendation, it would probably be logical to accept the answer providing the game that you find works best for your purposes. I recommend trying them out before accepting an answer - this means you pick the system that works well, not the one that looks good but might fail to deliver when you try it out. After all, you don't need to accept an answer anytime soon. You have time to experiment first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If no answers are good, you don't have to accept any of them. You may wish to refine your requirements as Mourdos said, or wait it out if there's nothing more to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-10-27T14:28:51.507" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5108" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5112" CreationDate="2014-10-29T00:04:33.350" Score="1" ViewCount="252" Body="&lt;p&gt;Re: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50041/8012&quot;&gt;European Medieval Fantasy RPG with an appropriate setting, minimal bookkeeping, random characters, and simple rules?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has several upvoted answers that explicitly address the concerns and requirements stated in the post. The author asks for a “rules light” recommendation and defines exactly what he means by “light”: as little bookkeeping, character optimization, and subtle rules interaction as possible. The original post even gave an example of an RPG that would suit the author if only it had the right setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question also has had a few answers that did not follow the game-recommendation guidelines at all, from lower-reputation posters. Some of them were improved through editing, others deleted. In any case, they shouldn’t be taken as an indication of the question’s quality, just its popularity. Usually, I see answers like this as a sign that a question should be protected, not put on hold, especially since it spent time on the Hot Questions list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the question was put on hold as Unclear What You’re Asking with a note that all of the existing answers were terrible – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5105/accepting-an-answer-on-a-game-recommendation-question&quot;&gt;even though the original poster stated that he “received some very good suggestions from the community” on meta&lt;/a&gt;. Next, the original poster and a few other contributors worked on improving the question so that it could be reopened, and it acquired at least 4 reopen votes. But now the question is closed again as Too Broad, voiding the reopen votes and blocking us from voting again. So now this question will require at least 9 votes to re-open, plus now we have no guidance as to what we can do to further improve the question. The moderator comments still mainly point to the low quality of answers, rather than how to improve the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the main problem is quality of answers, then why was the question put on hold instead of protected? And why was the question closed again, voiding all the reopen votes, instead of letting the voting process work as designed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, presuming that the question &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be on hold, what should we do to get it in shape for reopening? And what’s the procedure for reopening when several people can’t re-vote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T00:36:03.093" Title="Why close this instead of protecting? How to fix it?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5108" CreationDate="2014-10-29T00:10:47.600" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I reclosed it because of the significant edits. The first problem was that the question was asking for maid RPG like rulesets that can apply to swords &amp;amp; sorcery and was unclear on the requirements of what &quot;maid rpg like rulesets&quot; meant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new edits make it entirely too broad, as the set of games with less rules than 3.5 in a fantasy setting is impossible to have a single best answer to. We have asked for the querent to improve their question, and when they do such that &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; answers can be deemed better than others without attracting the usual cohort of systems, I'll reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For locking it, it locks down too many things, including comments, which would absolutely preclude it from being improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-10-29T01:39:25.957" LastActivityDate="2014-10-29T01:39:25.957" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5108" CreationDate="2014-10-29T00:12:53.313" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because it is not yet a good game recommendation question. So every mod is going to close it, until it improves. Answers are not good, by definition, with a bad question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt; to understand the game-rec question rules on the site.  They exist so that game-recs will be allowed at all because the format is inherently problematic and is banned on most other SEs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sum total of the requirements in this question is &quot;I’m looking for an RPG in a fantasy medieval setting that is light on rules, bookkeeping, character optimization, and system interactions, but with all the trappings of something like Pathfinder or D&amp;amp;D.&quot; And that's not sufficient. It describes pretty much every other D&amp;amp;D-like game of the last 10 (more, really) years besides 3.5e, Pathfinder, and 4e. Everyone's trotting out the same list of games for all the other questions like that, of which some have been closed and some have snuck by. Every OSR game, SW, FAE and every other FATE variant, DW, Mouse Guard, DCC, every other actual D&amp;amp;D version (Basic, 5e, 2e, 1e)... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And look at those games. Not very similar, are they? You have storygamey mechanics. You have old school mechanics.  All because the question author isn't explaining what he really wants out of the game experience (besides &quot;not D&amp;amp;D&quot;). It's not sufficient and so it's not a good question, so it will be closed by mods till it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does he want something better for short form or long form? Strong storygame elements and narrative mechanics or lighter sim mechanics? The original question mentioning Maid was very interesting, because Maid is a significantly different game experience than the storygames, it's more like Icons/Paranoia in terms of rules content and intent. Maybe even Numenera. It's not at all like DW or 13th Age. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game-recs are not here to be a popularity contest.  The more broad they are to where everyone just lists all the usual suspects and everyone votes on them so you can see &quot;people love FATE!&quot; - the worse they are. They must be tightly scoped to where you know what you want, and others can help you get exactly what you want. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-10-29T00:23:59.043" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5108" CreationDate="2014-10-29T01:47:25.920" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've done my best to address these concerns in a recent edit of the question by adding a new list of criteria.  They include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules that are not strict&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A strong focus on the narrative built between GM and player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reduced dice rolling.  Preferably only requiring a single type of die or type of check to perform actions. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fantasy creatures, including particularly elves and dwarves, and if possible bird-like humanoids (Tengu).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Combat being possible, with resolutions met by dice-based challenges.  Preferably with a single die roll.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Simple character generation, randomized if possible, with character generation options that allow for different races, backgrounds and skill sets, but not with a &lt;em&gt;mandatory&lt;/em&gt; background for characters.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Character sheets should not take up more than a single page to write a sheet even if&#xA;'maxed-out' on levels (if levels even exist in said system).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Simple NPC generation in particular, to ease the burden on the DM.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flexible encounters, so that fights and diplomacy use the same rules to resolve.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note: Because I've been asked, I'm attempting to narrow this down even further.  This is the most recent set of criteria I've made&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is insufficient, please let me know and I can try to further narrow down my question.  Some of these elements &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; taken from the Maid RPG, but I wanted to avoid a &lt;em&gt;direct&lt;/em&gt; connection to that game because I felt like it was making it too confusing for people who were unfamiliar with the system, or who were trying to figure out what aspects of the system I was referring to. Hopefully this is a more clear-cut set of criteria.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9328" LastEditorUserId="9328" LastEditDate="2014-10-29T01:59:55.927" LastActivityDate="2014-10-29T01:59:55.927" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5108" CreationDate="2014-10-29T22:50:19.813" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here’s my suggestion for rewriting the end of Zibbobz’s question based on the feedback I’ve seen so far. My hope is that this both represents Zibbobz’s needs well and is sufficiently specific to request game recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I’m looking for an RPG with a fantasy medieval setting that is extremely simple, has a unified conflict resolution mechanic (diplomacy is only fighting by another name), doesn’t really worry about bookkeeping and number-crunching, and has most of the thematic trappings of D&amp;amp;D’s high fantasy settings.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flexible, narrative-friendly rules:&lt;/strong&gt; I want rules that help me resolve conflicts, but can be ignored and let the group tell the story they want. I want all conflicts to use the same resolution mechanism which can scale by the conflict’s importance, regardless of whether it’s for combat, diplomacy, exploration, crafting, or whatever. I would like to resolve simple, unimportant conflicts with one die roll and move on, but have the option of more complex resolution for important conflicts and competitions between players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Minimal bookkeeping and number-crunching:&lt;/strong&gt; I’d like it if the players and GM could jump into play quickly, with minimal prep-work and fuss over characters. I would like the option of different races, backgrounds, and skill sets, but character generation should be simple and streamlined, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; for the GM. Quick, randomized character generation should be possible. Even the most complex character sheets should easily fit on a single sheet of paper, and reference tables should be kept to a minimum too – it’s not the end of the world if we miss a modifier or two. Encounter design should be simple and make fighting or diplomacy equally viable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Medieval fantasy elements:&lt;/strong&gt; The game should include a medieval European fantasy setting. I’m specifically interested in elves, dwarves, and bird people (tengu in D&amp;amp;D). Minimal prep-work is important here – I don’t want to invest a lot in adapting the RPG to fantasy or converting D&amp;amp;D material to the other game. Otherwise, I’d just adapt a game that I already like (e.g., Maid RPG) that satisfies the other requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="8012" LastEditDate="2014-10-30T00:36:03.093" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T00:36:03.093" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5113" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5114" CreationDate="2014-10-30T00:22:00.367" Score="1" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone thought &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49972/can-i-dodge-if-i-dont-have-the-initiative?noredirect=1#comment101810_49972&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; could have an answer on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44433/how-to-divide-the-dice-pool-reactively&quot;&gt;this another question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It hasn't. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, the latter question is about splitting dice and dodges in Vampire, while the one I asked is about something that Werewolf seems to do differently, or explain differently that all the other WoD games. I'm interested to know if Werewolf does something different than the other games, so, no, a question about how things in Vampire work doesn't answer my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the accepted answer on the old question is mine. So, no, I didn't ask for something I had already answered on another question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I would like to get rid of the blue banner saying my question may have an answer there. I have tried to edit the question, but doesn't seem to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5641" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T00:25:44.903" Title="My question is not answered there. How do I get rid of the blue banner?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5113" CreationDate="2014-10-30T00:25:44.903" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Edit the question such that it's more distinct such that the related question isn't obviously a duplicate, then wait for the close vote to expire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T00:25:44.903" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5115" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-30T06:07:07.733" Score="20" ViewCount="467" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is one querent, intentionally not identified here, who likely needs a &quot;you may want to reconsider how you go about gaming.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While any individual question from this querent isn't horrible, the &lt;em&gt;pattern&lt;/em&gt; of questions paints a picture of someone who isn't actually having that much fun dealing with their group's foibles. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do we do? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nothing, and simply continue to answer the querent's questions on face value.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discuss a proper meta-response to the pattern of questions on meta and suggest a solution on meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note very well that this question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; posted with my &quot;moderator's hat&quot; on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T19:36:37.267" Title="How/should we stage an intervention?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-10-30T07:56:37.237" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it would be valuable to do this, and figure out a tactful way to handle this situation when it comes up again in the future (it probably will).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's in tune with the basic reason most of us are probably &lt;em&gt;here:&lt;/em&gt; we enjoy helping people! It's also in tune with why &lt;em&gt;they're&lt;/em&gt; here: they want these problems sorted out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is kind of like a larger scale version of a kind of answer that's often helpful when something's going very wrong: the kind that says &quot;well, here's the solution to the &lt;em&gt;individual&lt;/em&gt; problems you brought up, but there's something deeper going on here, so let's talk about &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; instead.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;.... However, this hinges on finding a tactful way to do this. There's risks: members of the community with less than benevolent intentions may take the opportunity to make personal attacks, and the individual in question may find the situation overly confronting or overly personal or uncomfortable in other ways, or they may take the thing personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also hinges on this not being an issue of &quot;you are doing it wrong!!&quot; &amp;mdash; it has to be decently well-founded, like &quot;the problems you are experiencing are a natural result of factors X, Y and Z. As you've noticed these have an unhealthy influence. Instead of those, successful games tend to feature A, B and C.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That all depends on the individual (you haven't named them, and I only have guesses) and how we handle it. So we have to handle it well. I'm still thinking on that, but... this is a possibility worth exploring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T07:56:37.237" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-10-30T08:00:47.317" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, we shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm posting this mainly to have a voting answer on inactivity. Speaking as a devil's advocate, it would probably be: &quot;There is no fair and tactful way to approach this as a community, and the entire exercise would be toxic to everyone involved.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T08:00:47.317" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-10-30T18:01:41.367" Score="20" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have a Help Vampire. But we have effective garlic too.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've chewed on this quite a bit. (Some of you might have noticed my uneven attempts to productively engage with the user in comments — sometimes they were productive, but more often they came out harsh and showing my frustration.) The conclusion I came to is that they are a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.skidmore.edu/~pdwyer/e/eoc/help_vampire.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;help vampire&lt;/a&gt;. This realisation has helped me a lot, and I think can help the site too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19665/the-help-vampire-problem&quot;&gt;SE's philosophy about help vampires&lt;/a&gt; is that the system deals with them far better than other sites, in that the biggest threat of a help vampire — they suck the life out of online communities — is something SE's system prevents them from doing. So help vampires are mostly de-fanged here. They're not an existential threat to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But they're still irritating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Along those lines, I've come to the conclusion that an intervention is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; necessary, so long as the system is allowed to work properly. To that end, &lt;strong&gt;I decided that the best response was to apply SE's voting mechanisms unforgivingly to this user's questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory this seemed like it would be unfair, but I've found in practice that it is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fair.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Their questions are frequently unclear, amounting to vague pleas for some kind of help that give the impression that even &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; don't quite know what's wrong. (Sometimes we can help such people, but only when their question reveals to us the problem that they can't see themself — this user's questions often don't do that.) Their questions &lt;em&gt;continue&lt;/em&gt; to be poor too. Their play appear to be unchanged by previous questions asking for help changing it, so they continue to have the same problems, or problems that are knock-on effects of things they didn't fix despite the prior help, and sometimes even ask duplicates of their own past questions. Not only do their problems appear to remain unsolved, but the questions themselves never improve in clarity or specificity (or grammar) despite ample opportunities to learn and a literal site full of examples for how it's done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, I get the impression that their &lt;strong&gt;real&lt;/strong&gt; problem is that they are impervious to help. Since asking questions is not helping them solve their problems, the best we can do is vote &quot;this question is not useful&quot; when they ask vague questions that represent hapless, un-helpable flailing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Liberating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have to care much about the questions, just vote and move on. I often leave one or two comments trying to Socratically prompt the user to improve their question, but I don't fuss myself too much (anymore) if they don't get the hint. I don't wait for them to answer and then try myself to fix their question (much) anymore, just offer them some clues and the chance to fix it themselves, and leave them to it. They've been here long enough to have picked up how the system works, and voting unforgivingly on their (lack of) performance as a question-asker lets me wash my hands of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the main feature of the SE system that makes help vampires mostly harmless: you can penalise their behavior and then ignore them, preventing them from driving you away from the site directly, or indirectly driving you away by driving away the other people who generate the material that keeps you engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What to do: Vote Early and Often, Fairly and without Mercy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.skidmore.edu/~pdwyer/e/eoc/help_vampire.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;help vampire&lt;/a&gt;. Our community is well-protected from their fangs though, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19665/the-help-vampire-problem&quot;&gt;the SE system deals well with help vampires&lt;/a&gt;. They only add a bit of noise to the site — which SE is, again, well-protected against. They add a bit of frustration too, but putting trust in the system means you can disengage, saving yourself from the destructive effects that frustration can have on your own use of a site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But only if we vote honestly on the questions, with neither unwarranted mercy nor unwarranted spite:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Vote the bad ones down, pushing the majority — the bad un-helpable ones — down out of sight.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Vote the good ones up. They do sometimes ask a decent question that improves our site's signal-to-noise ratio instead of degrading it, because these accidentally-good questions benefit other users even if it seems that they don't ever benefit the asker. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and so we should not vote &lt;em&gt;viciously&lt;/em&gt; because of &lt;em&gt;who&lt;/em&gt; is asking, which would be voting dishonestly and inappropriately on the question's own merits.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote early, because bad questions will frustrate other users who are tempted by the vampire's siren calls for help that can never be delivered to them. Push those questions down fairly but mercilessly, for the good of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote often, because the bad questions come often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And don't be tempted to vote gently. A help vampire is, after all, a help vampire because they don't &lt;em&gt;implement&lt;/em&gt; the solutions we give them when they ask, they just go through the motions of asking for help hoping that the act of asking will itself solve everything. They haven't learned to use the help, and so keep returning to the well and asking again, vainly hoping that this time the ritual will solve the problem all by itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A help vampire cries out for help that is impossible — so the &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; merciful thing to do is not to feed its hunger with food that can never fill its belly. The merciful thing to do is to be merciless with the harmful things it does: asking terrible questions. Have no mercy when voting on the &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;, and that is the most merciful thing that you can do for the &lt;em&gt;user&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After all, maybe they &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; learn eventually. But they'll only learn if the system punishes being a vampire, as intended. By not enabling their learned helplessness and the ritual asking that goes with it, the system's bloodless rejection of the ritual has a chance to teach them to use the help they have already been offered, instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T19:36:37.267" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-10-30T22:39:04.673" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not a full-blown answer, but given the detailed, well-articulated responses so far, I'd just add this: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapoport-rules-criticism/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;how to criticise with kindness&lt;/a&gt;. My thought is that one can &quot;go into&quot; the other's gaming mindset (by acknowledging where they are and how they feel, giving merit to any laudable approach or stance they're taking), and from there, try to &quot;walk them out&quot; into a more fun, enjoyable experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15680" LastActivityDate="2014-10-30T22:39:04.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5120" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-10-31T03:38:58.833" Score="1" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a new user and I have been taking time to read through some rules, set up my account, and just generally get a feel for the sight(I like it a lot btw) So I just got trough reading the Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, and I couldn't help put feel the tag game-recommendation is purely subjective. I mean a recommendation can't really be objective sense most people will recommend different things, and have different opinions about what is being recommended. I did read there is a sister sight purely for the subjective side of things, wouldn't that tag be more fitting there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17779" LastActivityDate="2014-10-31T03:38:58.833" Title="Isn't the tag game-recommendation purely subjective?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2014-10-31T03:52:27.237" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5121" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-02T20:52:27.737" Score="4" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title says it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had a question about making appropriate DCs and was surprised to see that there isn't a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dc&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; tag. Is there something more appropriate to tag this type of question with, or should this be added? I was going to add it, but I don't have enough rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15866" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T11:24:17.663" Title="There's no tag for DC or difficulty class" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5121" CreationDate="2014-11-02T22:38:54.757" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; tag would be highly specific to D&amp;amp;D, and the more broad version of it is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; tag, which we already have. I would recommend tagging questions about DCs with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2014-11-02T22:38:54.757" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5123" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5121" CreationDate="2014-11-03T16:46:59.540" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's no tag because it hasn't been needed yet, but it could be made&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dc&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; tag because nobody has made one. There's no reason other than that for them to not exist. If someone wanted to make it, it would exist. A new tag can easily be made when a question is asked just by adding it to the question, &lt;em&gt;provided&lt;/em&gt; that the user has 300 reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;300 reputation is not very much, so the level of trust in a user that the community needs for tag-creation is quite low. That says a lot about how much of a non-issue it is to create new tags. Our tag system is a folksonomy—the tags that exist reflect what people use, not some idealised categorization system that sprang from the forehead of Athena.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are perhaps other tags that might fit, yes. If one of the existing tags covers the question's contents well, then perhaps a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; wouldn't be needed. Its hard to tell without seeing your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there's also no reason to shoehorn an almost-right tag into a question when a more appropriate tag could be created. If your hypothetical question was very much about DCs in general and naturally covered more than just skills&amp;sup1; (e.g., spell save DCs have nothing to do with skills), then a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; wouldn't naturally describe the question and a tag more like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; would make sense to create.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly, this is entirely &lt;strong&gt;hypothetical&lt;/strong&gt; right now: a tag doesn't exist until at least one question uses it. Every tag was created after someone asked a question that looked like it needed a new tag to cover it properly. So ask your question, and if someone with ≥300 rep thinks a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; is called for, it will get created!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Assuming it's broader than just the topic of skills because it is naturally so, not just because it's multiple questions posted together.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-03T17:10:03.837" LastActivityDate="2014-11-03T17:10:03.837" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5124" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-03T20:28:31.843" Score="-9" ViewCount="415" Body="&lt;p&gt;The general consensus that &quot;rules-as-written&quot; with respect to D&amp;amp;D 3.5 means &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the core rulebooks, followed by their errata, followed by any later published source book and it's errata that does not contradict a previously published rulebook. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comes from a very strict reading of the blurbs included at the beginning of each source books' errata, without taking into account the clear intent of the provided examples. This text has changed over time (possibly complicating the matter). This text in the Spell Compendium's errata&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When the text within a product contradicts itself, our general policy&#xA;  is that the primary source (actual rules text) is correct and any secondary reference (such as a table or character's statistics block) is&#xA;  incorrect. Exceptions to the rule will be called out specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the understanding of this text espoused on this site, a later published source book cannot change any rules covered in a previous source book; thus allowed only to create something new or add to something (although I would argue; this is change and in many cases, contradictory). This is evident by the discussions on the Rules Compendium. The RC is not even an entirely original work, but one that ties in expansion rules from various source books into on volume. By stating that the RC is in violation; the consensus says the RC sources are too in violation (all the Complete series, et al). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is my understanding (quite contrary to the &quot;consensus&quot;) that this text was to prevent an error in a table or a secondary reference from being propagated when it contradicted the primary reference. This was not intended to prevent source books and errata from changing, expanding, formalizing or otherwise creating contradictions to the existing rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site's consensus invalidates any answer that quotes from any source that &quot;contradicts&quot; a previous source and stifles understanding. Further, it invalidates any answer that quotes an faq or rules of the game article, if &quot;rules-as-written&quot; is in the question tags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possible solutions, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) Convince people to abandon this approach that invalidates much of the published material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) Create a new tag, rules-strict and use this for this narrow reading of the errata directive. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) To avoid confusion, answer any question where a rule is mentioned in more than one reference with a section of rules-blocks;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Strict errata reading) information pertaining to original core&#xA;books, DMG/PHB + it's own errata, disregard anything else&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Errata reading where source book can alter the rule) Expansion&lt;br&gt;&#xA;source book + it's errata &lt;em&gt;[likely only need to look to RC for 99%]&lt;/em&gt;   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(Additional material - technically non-RAW but may aid in&lt;br&gt;&#xA;understanding) Faq, web article, published adventure, et al&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems a bit extreme, but would at least provide the OP with all the information and they can make an informed decision. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9671" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T05:45:43.603" Title="Change the definition of &quot;rules-as-written&quot; with respect to D&amp;D 3.5" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5124" CreationDate="2014-11-03T20:44:28.267" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are giving an edition specific example, Rules-as-written is system agnostic tag and should not be changed because one edition of D&amp;amp;D handles their rules canon in one particular way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-11-03T20:44:28.267" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5124" CreationDate="2014-11-03T22:01:19.867" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;@JoshuaAslanSmith is correct in that the tag is of general application and so there's not really anything related to the tag we can/should do to mitigate this problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, in terms of your real problem (people not accepting later books in their understanding of RAW on 3.5e questions) - yes, you're right, it seems like the majority of vocal 3.5e folks on this site have a very... strict reading of the books and don't recognize newer books, the FAQ, the Rules Compendium, etc. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37466/does-the-rules-compendium-overrule-the-core-books&quot;&gt;Does the Rules Compendium overrule the core books?&lt;/a&gt; illustrates this. You could hold a referendum just on changing the site attitude here, but given the voting on that fairly recent question I suspect you won't make headway. I strongly agree with you that this stance places some strange form of barracks-lawyering well above the value of practical, working game fun, but that appears to be the predominant local 3.5e players' mode d'emploi, so you just have to accept that at some level. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would recommend just posting your answers and sticking to your guns. I personally vote up an answer that has a reasonable basis in &quot;The FAQ says&quot; or &quot;A later 3.5e book says.&quot; The answer to the RC question has nothing to do with the validity of an answer of that sort. It may pull downvotes from those who disagree, and that's the risk you take. Feel free and flag/point out anywhere that overzealous community members may be crossing the line from voting their conscience to trying to muffle reasonable viewpoints and the mods will take action.  Of course, there are questions where someone's after super-strict RAW, and other kinds of answers might not necessarily be welcome there. But for those asking for &quot;I don't understand, how's this supposed to work,&quot; answers based on those other sources are IMO super useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T19:30:20.317" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5124" CreationDate="2014-11-03T22:35:04.520" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't have the power to dictate how individuals or whole communities interpret a game, which is what you're asking us to do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even if we did have the power, using it in this matter contradicts our tags policy: tagging reflects how the wider RPG community uses a term, not how we at RPG.SE might &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; the term to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To change the meaning of RAW in regards to D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, you have to go out there and change the existing community consensus until the majority of respected voices use it in the way you'd prefer. How to do that is left as an exercise for the reader&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-11-03T22:35:04.520" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-11-04T06:35:10.507" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;My answer is admittedly too long (as most of my answers are), so I put in a TL;DR at the end. Feel free to jump to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What is really being asked?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me start by saying that I agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5118/15465&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt; on this one, as far as the &lt;em&gt;engine&lt;/em&gt; is concerned. SE has sufficient mechanisms to deal with the situation with minor consequences only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm sure that Brian, as a mod, knows already that the &lt;em&gt;engine&lt;/em&gt; that is SE is well equipped to deal with this. Let's look instead at the way the question was phrased (emphases mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;stage an &lt;strong&gt;intervention&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;someone&lt;/strong&gt; who isn't actually having that much fun dealing with their group's foibles.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;[someone] who likely needs a &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;you&lt;/strong&gt; may want to reconsider how &lt;strong&gt;you&lt;/strong&gt; go about &lt;strong&gt;gaming&lt;/strong&gt;.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that Brian asked this question because he's worried that this user is going to ruin RPG.SE. It seems to be asked more out of worry for the &lt;em&gt;user&lt;/em&gt; than for the tool. Maybe he feels (rightly, in my opinion) that we are a community of gamers, and we should care for each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have the time to be as participative as I would like to, so I don't know who is the querent. But I &amp;quot;lurk&amp;quot; enough to know we have a set of regulars who are always around, be it asking/answering questions or commenting or in the chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my best guess is that Brian is really asking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are we merely a Q/A website or an actual community composed of real people?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If we're the latter, should we care that our members might not be having fun?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If we should, what can we do about it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, if that is right and if we were to take SevenSidedDie's answer at face value, the appropriate response would be to flag this tag as &amp;quot;out of scope&amp;quot; or whatever, since Meta—at least as far as I know—is to discuss SE &lt;em&gt;as an engine&lt;/em&gt;, not as a group of people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that SE disencourages the latter interpretation, and has constant reminders that we're simply a Q/A forum, and features designed to minimise social interaction in the website. The idea, I presume, is to put aside subjectivity (e.g. &amp;quot;I'll vote this up because I like SevenSidedDie&amp;quot;), and, &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt;, I'm fine with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But fact is, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;RPG.SE is much, &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; smaller&lt;/a&gt; than &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/users&quot;&gt;other communities in the SE family&lt;/a&gt;. If somebody who participates frequently gives an opinion I disagree with, I'm more likely to give it a second thought than if &amp;quot;user31915876&amp;quot; does the same. Unless every user changes their name to &amp;quot;JohnSmith&amp;quot;, uses a black square as avatar and a standard profile (so all that matters is the reputation), it's just too hard to ignore that there are people behind the users, and that I value some opinions more than others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, my answer becomes subjective. I'd answer my own questions by saying that (1) we're a community, therefore (2) yes, we should care—especially if it comes to a point where a mod is concerned enough to ask a question on Meta—and (3) maybe we should talk to them about our concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So answering Brian's original question, as formulated by him, I think that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;, I think we should care, as a community, if one of our members seems like he is struggling to enjoy gaming, which is the very thing that brings us together, and &amp;quot;stage an intervention&amp;quot; of sorts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll admit I don't have a clear answer regarding how to do it. I'd recommend creating a chat room with other regular users who feel that (1) they care about this person and (2) have any suggestions they think this person could use and inviting the person in for a friendly chat. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5116/15465&quot;&gt;Dopelgreener&lt;/a&gt; has a longer, more elaborated and thoughtful response to the &amp;quot;how&amp;quot; part of the question, so I won't repeat him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;, I don't think the person is at risk of endangering the community, for the reasons SevenSidedDie listed. And I &lt;strong&gt;don't&lt;/strong&gt; think that banning the person from asking questions in this community—which is what is going to happen if we don't do anything about it—is constructive. Not for us, as a community, and not for the person. I'll concede only that &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; it'd make us more streamlined, as a Q/A website.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, &amp;quot;intervention&amp;quot; is a strong word—I don't think anybody should have to go out of their ways to do so. It's not a &amp;quot;let's come to this person's house and bring them in to get help&amp;quot;. They are not a threat, neither to the website nor to themselves nor to others around them, they're merely not having fun by playing games. If they don't want to participate in the chat, let the engine deal with it, and that's that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15465" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T06:40:15.077" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5121" CreationDate="2014-11-04T11:24:17.663" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just seen the tag that has been created, and am a little concerned. Although the description makes it clear that the tag can and should apply to a wide variety of systems, the tag name is DnD specific. Would it not make more sense to choose a term that is a little more generic and means something to people who have never played DnD before? You could synonym DC to it for clarity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T11:24:17.663" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5130" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6744" CreationDate="2014-11-04T18:50:50.243" Score="4" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5115/how-should-we-stage-an-intervention/5118?noredirect=1#comment12476_5118&quot;&gt;wax eagle pointed out to me&lt;/a&gt; that question-banning is likely turned off on RPG.SE, since it's off by default and has to be turned on by a mod. The reasoning is apparently that on smaller sites such problem users will be handled personally by mods before a question ban would ever kick in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; reason for this setting to ever be turned off, because in any given case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;either mods will step in before it would trigger, making the &quot;on&quot; or &quot;off&quot; setting irrelevant for that case, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's users' voting behaviour will meet the difficult-to-reach threshold for a question ban before the mods step in, in which case it would be &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; justified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only effect that having it &quot;off&quot; would have is a question-banning &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; happening despite it being really justified. Yes, mods probably would/should take care of it once it was so clearly justified, but why not turn it on anyway then and have that backup?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The role of moderators is to step in when the system can't take care of a problem itself, and question-banning is clearly something that the system can take care of by itself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It would also free the mods up from having to take direct action against a user personally, which can be ironically harder on a small, close-knit SE like this one. Let the impersonal algorithm take care of the well-meaning but hopelessly-incompetent askers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:44:46.937" Title="Can we have mods turn on automatic question-banning?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5130" CreationDate="2014-11-04T19:24:13.150" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to think we're small enough and the mods responsive enough that we can and would rather handle it by person rather than have it magically happening by algorithm potentially out of our sight.  It's not a common problem on our site so I'm not worried about the demand getting away from us, it also allows more coaching than the system generally provides.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now people who show up and post actively-bad questions (spam, nonsense, etc.) we just up and burninate. We do sometimes have people who are of good faith but are just somewhat incoherent or have some underlying problems that their questions are just floating on top of. The former, I don't mind banning but I'd rather work with them. The latter, I don't think is really ban-worthy, even if people start hatin' on their questions. In either case, I'd rather handle it as a mod than have the system do stuff to our users that I don't know about - the traceability is frankly kinda bad anyway and I am often wondering if there's inappropriate stuff going on I can't easily see (edit harassment or other stuff from moderate rep users). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T19:24:13.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5115" CreationDate="2014-11-04T19:33:00.680" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Users should continue to interact at the &lt;em&gt;post&lt;/em&gt; level. Issues of systemic issues with users is a moderation issue and not one ordinary users should concern themselves with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem your pointing to is one that you and the moderation team need to discuss. Is this something that is in need of moderator intervention. If is is, then great! do something about it (might I suggest the low quality questions over time template?). If it isn't then it's best to simply leave it alone and let the system keep working as it is. (A private chat might also be appropriate, though that is rather cumbersome at times)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IF a user &lt;em&gt;chooses&lt;/em&gt; to involve themself with this, their tools are quite limited (much more limited than a moderators). Their &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; tool is to try to goad the user into a chat conversation and talk it out there. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately though, we're here to help people with &lt;em&gt;the problems they present us.&lt;/em&gt; If we can occasionally get at a deeper issue, that's great. But much like our meta discussion about reframing a user's question, we have to address the surface issue &lt;em&gt;first.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user is asking a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of questions that indicate a deeper issue, it's &lt;em&gt;not the user's job&lt;/em&gt; to address that. The user's mandate is to address the individual posts &lt;em&gt;without regard to poster&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-11-04T19:33:00.680" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5124" CreationDate="2014-11-05T00:58:54.763" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to add an answer here which I think needs stating: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone asks for rules-as-written information, going so far as to tag their question with the rules-as-written tag, we can assume that they want answers based on the rules-as-written. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they want answers that are reasonable when the rules-as-written aren't, which, let's face it, &lt;em&gt;is a lot of the time&lt;/em&gt;, they can simply not ask for rules-as-written in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your suggestion that the meaning of the rules-as-written tag be extended to include rules that, rules-as-written, aren't valid, is changing the meaning of the tag to be contrary to its name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a tag that includes all rules regardless of whether they are valid under the rules-as-written, I would absolutely agree that there could be space for it. (Not sure what I'd call it, but that's a different problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T00:58:54.763" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5134" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-05T03:29:46.663" Score="5" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently saw a post about creating a dc tag and then used it on a (Fate 2.0) question I had been thinking about for a while.  It has been brought to my attention that the name is disputed on the grounds that 'dc' is a system specific term and should be reserved for that use.  I disagree, as both I and those I game with use the term in a much more general manner (and not all of us played D&amp;amp;D as our first system, though the people who taught us probably did, I think).  I am in favor of keeping the tag as is and adding synonyms as they are created/used in questions, but a good deal of discussion about the name of the tag seems to be happening in comments (on my question, on the question of whether the tag should exist, etc.) and it should really have it's own question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what do you think?  What should the tag be called and why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T06:44:00.493" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T07:49:32.493" Title="What should the dc tag be called?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5137" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5134" CreationDate="2014-11-05T03:38:13.267" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a term used consistently by a single (albeit popular) engine, the d20 System, &quot;difficulty class&quot; is a term which users who aren't familiar with that engine won't be able to find when tagging their questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Call it something generic/common with synonyms for system-specific terms as necessary.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50437/whats-a-good-difficulty-for-a-5-aspect-20-skill-point-fate-game?noredirect=1#comment103322_50437&quot;&gt;the comments&lt;/a&gt; on that main site question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Fate 2.0 got the term &quot;Difficulty&quot; from Fudge, which existed long before d20, so it's pretty safe to say that it is not just meaning DC without saying &quot;DC&quot;. The wider community doesn't fit your view based on your local players—that is something only done by the subset of RPG community who mostly got into RPGs with D&amp;amp;D. The original generic term, and still the most widely used, is &quot;target number&quot;. Ironically, D&amp;amp;D invented &quot;DC&quot; to avoid using the existing most-common term, and to parallel its existing &quot;AC&quot;. It might even have got it from Fudge. (SevenSidedDie)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty&lt;/a&gt; is the term most commonly used by a wide variety of systems (Fate, AITAS, and so forth). &quot;Difficulty class&quot; is prevalent in &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; circles because it's the term used by a popular engine (the d20 System), but anyone who doesn't use the d20 System will not think to use that term unless they've acquired it via cultural osmosis. &lt;strong&gt;We should not assume that our users come to us pre-immersed in RPG culture.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, using a generic term and common synonyms seems most reasonable to me: tagging with DC makes it harder for non-d20S-familiar users to find the right tags. Using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty&lt;/a&gt; (or whatever else winds up being chosen, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/target-number&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;target-number&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;target-number&lt;/a&gt;) with synonyms to other system-specific terms seems the most accessible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty&lt;/a&gt; seems ideal because it'll be picked up by people looking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt;, and because many systems use it as the &quot;official&quot; term for their implementation of the concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's awkward, but it's the best I can come up with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T07:49:32.493" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5134" CreationDate="2014-11-05T03:39:49.423" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should endeavor to use tags that match the verbiage used in the appropriate systems. So a DC tag should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt;, but if another system has a &lt;em&gt;similar&lt;/em&gt; mechanic, it should be tagged with what it's called be it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/target-number&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;target-number&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;target-number&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mashed-potatoes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mashed-potatoes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mashed-potatoes&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My rationale for this is pretty simple. If a question is about &lt;em&gt;DC&lt;/em&gt;s in D&amp;amp;D, &quot;target number&quot; isn't something someone is going to search, and it doesn't classify things well at all within that system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The word &quot;Target Number&quot; has no meaning in D&amp;amp;D, and thus the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt; should be used. On a Fate question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty&lt;/a&gt; would be the appropriate tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T04:01:47.850" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T04:01:47.850" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5134" CreationDate="2014-11-05T07:15:34.967" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think using a different term, perhaps target-number as suggested, would be valuable &lt;strong&gt;if that term really is more commonly used&lt;/strong&gt;.  I understand that the prevalent use of the term DC (difficulty class is not actually a term I hear used ever, except as the first part of an answer to &quot;what does DC mean?&quot;) is probably due in part to the prevalent use of D&amp;amp;D and the various other d20 systems, but if the use of the term to apply to any rpg is widely accepted, I think it would be best to use it, as it would actually cause &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; average confusion to new users as they are more likely to be familiar with the term.  Also, if the term ever becomes part of standard rpg jargon (like 'GM'/'DM', XdN notation for dice, 'system', 'PC', 'NPC', adventure, etc) then we should give primacy to the term as it is used by experts, even at the expense of immediate accessibility, and explain what the terms mean as necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, however, I don't think that my use of the term represents a significant enough percentage of the population to be deemed jargon, though I am still unsure if it is popular enough to be the most common term used and thus superior to, for example,  'target-number'.  I generally think that it is best to let the community sort these kinds of things out via tag usage or avoidance, but if 'dc' is popularly perceived as D&amp;amp;D specific, I should at least use a different tag on my 'FATE' question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My problem with Wax Eagle's approach (having one tag per system) is that I'm not sure it would be possible to address questions tagged 'dc' (or equivalent) and 'system-agnostic' if that tagging method is followed, yet I think good questions with those tags (or even  just 'dc' by itself) exist.  If we have one tag per system and I ask a question with just that tag, aren't I locking myself into that system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly, the idea of a 'dc' or 'target-number' or whatever else it may be called is one Platonic idea, regardless of the Platonic form it has in any given system.  It's expression in each system is merely a reflection of the one Idea, and it would be useful to have a tag that refers to the Idea of the 'dc'/'target-number', rather than an individual form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, if we had such a tag, we could, as BESW suggested, make all of the suggested system-specific tags synonyms.  I think that in doing this we would lose nothing, as the Form of a given system can be made clear by using both the dc Idea tag and the tag for the specific system in question, which seems much more natural and aesthetically correct to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T07:15:34.967" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5124" CreationDate="2014-11-05T13:18:58.017" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there's a misunderstanding here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When the text within a product contradicts itself, our general policy&#xA;  is that the primary source (actual rules text) is correct and any&#xA;  secondary reference (such as a table or character's statistics block)&#xA;  is incorrect. Exceptions to the rule will be called out specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It is my understanding (quite contrary to the &quot;consensus&quot;) that this&#xA;  text was to prevent an error in a table or a secondary reference from&#xA;  being propagated when it contradicted the primary reference. This was&#xA;  not intended to prevent source books and errata from changing,&#xA;  expanding, formalizing or otherwise creating contradictions to the&#xA;  existing rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're right. That is what that text means. An example case is one of the classes in Complete Divine, where the text says &quot;each level, gain a spellcasting level&quot;, but the table only shows it every other level. The text you quoted is meant to fix that type of editing error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you're disputing is different text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Another example of primary [versus] secondary sources involves book&#xA;  and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all&#xA;  the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using&#xA;  base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics&#xA;  from the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees&#xA;  with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is&#xA;  the primary source. The Dungeon Master's Guide is the primary source&#xA;  for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material&#xA;  construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary&#xA;  source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural,&#xA;  extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/37471/1953&quot;&gt;The whole mess is outlined effectively in this answer.&lt;/a&gt; But in a nutshell, what happened is the books and the errata say &quot;the books and their errata are primary and overrule everything else&quot;. So if what the book says and what a web article or FAQ entry say, even if written by the same person who wrote the rules, even if the article/FAQ came out later, and even if it was specifically created to fix some confusing nonsense in the books, the books win. It reaches extreme nonsense levels when the Rules Compendium gets involved...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't Worry So Much About It!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;spirit&lt;/em&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is that you should answer the question citing the rules. For that purpose, just ignore the FAQ/web articles and stick to books when dealing with D&amp;amp;D 3.5, and you will be doing the right thing 99% of the time (cases where a published book contradict another published book in a way that'd mess this up are rare enough that you shouldn't lose sleep over it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the RAW answer results in something that doesn't make sense, it's perfectly acceptable to add another section to your answer addressing that. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/48634/1953&quot;&gt;Here's a simple example where I did that.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first part of the answer addresses the question by RAW (no rule quotes are needed since the question already quotes the relevant rule). The second part is how I'd play it in a real game, because the RAW is kinda weird here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's in that second part where if you want to bring in secondary sources (or even homebrew, like KRyan's alternate flying rules), you should feel free to do so. Just make sure that you've already answered the RAW question with primary sources before you do that. I've used this approach successfully for quite a while&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yep, it can be a bit quirky. But &lt;em&gt;quirky&lt;/em&gt; describes a lot of 3.5. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Other Games&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other games don't handle this the same way. Pathfinder is the most obvious example, as one of the game designers making a ruling on the Paizo forum is considered valid RAW. 20pfsrd.org will often be updated with those rulings, and there's a FAQ list out there as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're not sure what counts as RAW for a given game, then you can list what source you're using, or ask in a comment on the question what sources are considered acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T13:18:58.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5141" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-05T14:03:24.740" Score="26" ViewCount="659" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lately, I'm encountering the following situation more and more often (at least three times this week):  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A relatively new user (rep of less than 150, sometimes rep of 1 [ = first post ever]) asks a question. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question has some problem with it, sometimes it is downright unsuitable for this site (too broad, opinion based, inviting a discussion etc.), but at other times it is something minor such as omitting some details needed for a specific answer, unclear language or even merely not using the style we are used to see on most of our higher quality questions. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is voted to close because of said problem, sometimes without any comment, sometimes with a problematic comment - either a vague one (&quot;I can't understand this&quot;) or one which won't mean much to a newcomer (&quot;this seems highly opinion based&quot;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question receives more VtCs and is closed, sometimes along with down-votes. Even at this stage, it is sometimes clear that the newcomer has no idea what did he do wrong. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I appreciate the need for keeping the Q&amp;amp;A high-quality and on-topic, I am concerned that not only are we missing out &lt;em&gt;potentially good questions&lt;/em&gt; which just require some editing to meet our standards, but we are also driving away newcomers - or at the very least are being very uncivil towards them&lt;sup&gt;(1)&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think this is problematic.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can (and should) we do to improve the way newcomers are treated?&#xA;Specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can we help newcomers improve valid but low quality question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can we help newcomers with non-valid question understand where did they go wrong?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can we do this in a way which won't seem like a sanction taken against a serious offender?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm not linking examples at the moment as I wish to keep this discussion focused on the general issue - please comment if you feel such examples are necessary)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1) keeping in mind that to an outsider, our VtCs and downvotes may be perceived as a sanction taken against a serious offender - equivalent to being muted or banned in a forum. And that for good intentioned new users, this &quot;slap on the wrist&quot; seems uncalled-for and unduly aggressive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12454" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-08-10T19:24:57.873" LastActivityDate="2023-08-09T02:48:57.927" Title="Can we improve the way we treat newcomers?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|new-users|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2014-11-05T18:32:11.063" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There is a misconception in the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Improving an improvable question is definitely the first step. But it's not always possible; not every question is improvable without asking the asker to improve it themself directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in the meantime, we have a more important priority: preventing &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; well-meaning users from posting answers to a question that is incomplete, unclear, too broad, or otherwise problematic. Question-closing is to stop &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; from being made, not to stop the question from existing. Editing versus closing is a false dilemma because closing doesn't prevent editing. We close, always, based on the current form of the question, not what it maybe might be someday. Editing can happen regardless of whether a question is open, held, or closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Putting questions on hold is &lt;em&gt;fundamental&lt;/em&gt; to the health of the site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't hold back on voting to close. As the SE article &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimizing For Pearls, Not Sand&lt;/a&gt;&quot; says, contrary to most people's intuition, questions are not the most important part of the SE design — the absolute top, #1 priority is always, always, &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; retaining experts who are willing to write &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[&amp;hellip;] asking questions on our site is a privilege, not a right. [&amp;hellip;] If we don’t do our part to cull the bad questions, then we risk alienating the true experts who provide what really matters: the answers! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions are a dime a dozen. We will never lack for questions, and can afford to be choosy about them. As poor questions drive experts away, we can not only afford to, but we &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; reject the poor questions, leaving them to either shape up or ship out. This is a core, fundamental, central, non-negotiable part of the design of SE and every single feature of our site derives from that core principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have to close questions that have issues, no matter whether it might be taken wrong by the asker. We must, or the site dies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A high rate of quality questions is what makes us different from forums, from Quora, from Yahoo Answers. It is the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; value we have to offer over the competition: we are attractive to experts. Being soft on questions means a front page laced with poor questions that experts don't want to answer — but non-experts are happy to add their 2&amp;cent; noise to — and that is unattractive to experts. Avoiding that is why SE was created in the first place, closing poor questions (until they improve, or fall off the front page) is the primary mechanism for fulfilling SE's design goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoiding &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; making a new user feel uncomfortable is necessarily of secondary concern. Our goal has never been to be the most popular site, only the most useful — being more popular degrades usefulness. There is nothing that can be said to change the order of those priorities, while remaining a Stack site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-05T18:37:14.377" LastActivityDate="2014-11-05T18:37:14.377" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5144" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-06T07:35:52.207" Score="1" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;I still sometimes have the &quot;we can't quite tell if you're a human&quot; popup happen when I try to do stuff, with attached captcha.  I think there should be a privilege that comes with a certain amount of rep that stops that from happening, because it's kind of annoying and it's rather unlikely someone with more than a certain amount of rep is a bot.  I'm not seeing it frequently enough that I'm interested in altering my software or network to obtain a work-around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading the posts linked by @doppelgreener, I think this should be done even more.  It seems silly that you have to have 10K rep before the system decides you probably aren't a bot.  In fact, it seems counterproductive as a 10K user who &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a bot (because their account got hacked) can actually cause harm to the site (as a moderator) while the rest of us couldn't actually do much besides screw our account over.  Spam bots are target at sites with low entry barriers, which SE is not.  Even a measly 5 rep requirement would probably be  fine.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, why do we care if bots use our site?  If they're contributing high-quality questions and answers (which a 10K mod would have to be) does it matter?  I understand that a botnet of coordinated upvoting and downvoting could be a problem, but don't you need a baseline amount of rep to upvote and downvote?  And isn't there a 200 rep single day maximum?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the system is more than safe enough without a captcha on anything but account creation, but I'm not a computer security expert by any means and I can see how it might be and issue so I'll leave that alone.  I really can't see how letting users with more than, say, 100 rep do stuff without asking if they're human is a problem.  And according to the comments, users with 10,000 rep (which is supposed to give some anti-captcha benefit) still see the popup occasionally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2014-11-06T08:39:28.187" LastActivityDate="2014-11-06T08:39:28.187" Title="Captcha Bypass Privilege" Tags="|feature-request|site-design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5144" CreationDate="2014-11-06T08:08:04.210" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no captcha bypass privilege, but once you pass 10k, your threshold before you're asked for a captcha is massively increased. This isn't mentioned on the 10k privilege page though. See this Meta SE request:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/143594/152515&quot;&gt;Add captcha threshold information to privileges page&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That same meta question links to some others, which point out that captcha gets suppressed periodically once you're past 200 rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-11-06T08:08:04.210" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5146" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5147" CreationDate="2014-11-10T01:58:42.933" Score="4" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm referring to this question from 2012: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16380/1204&quot;&gt;Tabletop Play Style Classification Schemes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was mod-created to replace a previous question, and has attracted 1-3 high quality answers (going by votes). But it's also a list question, with the caveat that not many people have gone to the effort of answering well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect it should be closed as too broad (and not placed on historical lock, so that it can remain editable), and I'd usually just go ahead and vote that way and leave a comment, but I get the feeling I may be missing something this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question worthwhile leaving open, or should it be closed as no longer meeting our quality standards?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-05-29T01:26:51.850" Title="Should our tabletop play styles question be closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5146" CreationDate="2014-11-10T14:01:11.363" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it has been historical locked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-11-10T14:01:11.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5148" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-11T02:10:33.520" Score="13" ViewCount="454" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have some tags that seem to regularly get used such that they &lt;em&gt;imply&lt;/em&gt; information about the post, which isn’t actually stated in the post itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;our various system tags, including [system-agnostic]. The asker will very often just tag with their system, and not mention it in tags or title.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[rules-as-written], which comes with various rules like you have to stick to RAW interpretations and probably do citations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These seem to be becoming a problem sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not always! One of the standard uses of a system tag is to ask about a game’s mechanic, then use, say, the [dnd-3.5e] tag as the only definitive indication of what game you’re actually playing. This goes smoothly enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it does lead to some problems in some cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. Tagging multiple systems when their relationship is unclear&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’ve got this convention of describing the system &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; in the tags, right? This causes some problems in questions tagged with a mixture of [dnd-3e] [dnd-3.5e] and [pathfinder], though. Consider this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45786&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HgSZC.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This involves D&amp;amp;D 3e and 3.5e somehow. But how? This question is explicitly interested in material from both editions, but what about 3e features which have been explicitly altered in 3.5e? This information isn’t specified the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same author later asked a second question that &lt;strong&gt;did&lt;/strong&gt; specify the important information in the question - they say at the end what systems they’re using how, and give meaning to the tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50535&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jAZkm.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(To be doubly clear, this screenshot is an example of good behaviour, not problematic behaviour.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. Non-system agnostic system agnostic questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the trend that system tags don’t need to correlate strictly to question content, there is an often-arising type of question: one that is tagged [system-agnostic], and which says: “If it helps, I’m playing in {system}”. As an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50671&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LuNHW.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does the [system-agnostic] tag mean here, truthfully? If we specify solutions that don’t work in NWOD 2e, we do not provide a valid answer to the querent’s problem. I retagged this particular question, put the last sentence at the beginning (and rewrote it), and left a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50671&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qBppn.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of situation is why I brought up &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/&quot;&gt;Should I use a narrow system tag, or go broad if possible and use system-agnostic?&lt;/a&gt; a while ago, to verify if this stance made any sense and had the community’s support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;3. Rules as written questions, where RAW constraints aren’t described&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We get a lot of questions that specify they have certain rules constraints, e.g. “please cite your answer so I can show those rules in the book to my GM.” Or, “please stick to RAW, I’m not interested in interpretations.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, sometimes we’ll get a question that asks how certain mechanics work, then just has a [rules-as-written tag]:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50734&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8tw3w.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what does the tag mean in this case? What rules-as-written constraints does the asker have? Answerers get bitten, because other readers interpret the rules-as-written tag to mean various things not described in the question, and when it’s a new user, they’d have no idea anyway:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50735&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jOnld.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Should we do something? If so, what?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope I’ve at least conveyed that there’s a problem arising regularly, and some of you have probably run into these situations multiple times before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the problem is that I generally &lt;em&gt;don't see these cases acted on,&lt;/em&gt; so the questions will still be in this state months later (if this wasn't the case I wouldn't be raising this question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this enough of a problem we need to change things? If so, what should change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previous discussions on [system-agnostic]: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2794/is-system-agnostic-a-meta-tag&quot;&gt;Is [system-agnostic] a meta tag?&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/41/is-the-system-agnostic-tag-really-necessary&quot;&gt;Is the &amp;quot;system-agnostic&amp;quot; tag really necessary?&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/do-we-need-the-system-agnostic-tag&quot;&gt;Do we need the System-Agnostic Tag?&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3024/does-the-system-agnostic-tag-conflict-with-system-specific-tags&quot;&gt;Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And on [rules-as-written]: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3008/reviewing-the-usefulness-of-type-of-answer-tags&quot;&gt;Reviewing the usefulness of type-of-answer tags&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3484/what-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;What are the Pros and Cons of the rules-as-written tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T03:59:22.567" Title="Are our implicit-information tagging practices becoming a problem?" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5148" CreationDate="2014-11-11T02:10:33.520" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don’t rely on tags to provide meaning (usually).&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the problems in these cases mainly comes from these tags being just ambiguous enough to be a problem: when one uses [rules-as-written], [system-agnostic], or multiple system tags, there's a few different things they could mean in each case. Of course, the asker and all readers could assume they've all communicated and understood the one correct meaning, but &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiio%27s_laws&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;that's unlikely&lt;/a&gt;. In cases like the above, the situation's left ambiguous, just that nobody's asking for clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all cases, I think we need to stop treating these tags as having implicit clear meaning, because they don't. In the cases above, I'm left having to wonder what exactly the tag &lt;em&gt;means&lt;/em&gt; there out of the possible meanings, with no clear answer available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whatever information the author is attempting to communicate with these tags should be in the question to make it clear and unambiguous the sort of results they want. &lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; the tag can be used if it correlates to what’s being described in the question. Note this isn't a suggestion to change these tags or really change the system, it's a suggestion that we treat these situations as ambiguous, and respond as we usually would: request clarification, vote to close as unclear if necessary, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Someone using the rules-as-written tag should be specifying their RAW constraints. If they don't have any, they probably shouldn't be using the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If someone's playing in a specific system (that they have stated in the question) and asking for help with a problem they'll be applying in that system, and they've used the [system-agnostic] tag, it should be clear from their question why that tag is there: Do they want to apply this to multiple systems? Are they using their own homebrew thing? Otherwise they should probably just be using their system's tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If someone's tagged their question with multiple systems or editions, they should be specifying their relationship to those and make it obvious why each tag is there.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for our practice of not mentioning the system when we’re using just one and it’s tagged: that’s generally harmless, and I don't think we should change that. As SSD noted in comments, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50515/creatures-treasures-and-legend-points#comment103441_50515&quot;&gt;that will generally result in boilerplate&lt;/a&gt; that was not ambiguous to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-11-11T23:08:24.443" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5148" CreationDate="2014-11-11T02:47:17.300" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not a problem specific to tags.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone can always make an unclear question. They can do it with words in the title, words in the question or words in the tags. The site response to lack of clarity is, I trust, well trod enough not to require me to go over it. Get them to clarify, vote to close if needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags do convey implicit information, which is why they exist, have tag wikis, etc. It's good, and a useful shorthand. If someone wants a system-agnostic technique they don't need to spend a paragraph explaining &quot;I want a technique I can use across the various games I run, man&quot;. I can only imagine most attempts at doing this would lead to even more pedantic arguing in comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a long way to go for a pretty simple answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, game system tags are pretty self explanatory. If it says [dnd-5e] then it can be assumed to be a normal D&amp;amp;D 5e question. Some uses of tags are clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, just adding a tag sometimes doesn't really give enough information, or at least is going to create bad answers.  &quot;Give me a way to alternate melee and ranged attacks&quot; simply tagged with [feat] isn't going to sufficiently signal to an answerer that you only want feats as an answer to the question. This use of a tag is unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If your question is not clear - make it clear, using tags, words in the body, words in the title, etc.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you do not understand a question - including its tag use - ask for clarification.&lt;/strong&gt; It's the actual intended, constructive use of the comment system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-25T03:59:22.567" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T03:59:22.567" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5151" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5148" CreationDate="2014-11-11T17:40:02.450" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a problem only in the cases where you've noticed a problem: tags that aren't obvious and clear from the question asked. Where the problem can be noticed though, it can be fixed and is already being solved naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's where misuse can go unnoticed and causes damage that it's a problem. &lt;strong&gt;And I have an idea to fix that case.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;: this gets used as a &quot;Hmm, I'm asking about rules, let's type &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; into the tag box, oh, there's the tag for rules questions! *click*&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a special problem with the RAW tag because it's a binary &quot;switch&quot; that can be on or off, and questions about rules can look perfectly consistent with and without it. That means when the tag is misused by a novice user, the misuse is undetectable and uncorrectable; but its presence triggers experienced users to give radically different answers. This is damage to our answer quality!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To solve this we could revive the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag to catch these naive but self-destructive &quot;I need a tag that says 'rules' somewhere because I'm asking about rules&quot; uses, which we can then see and remove. We could even synonym it to something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dont-use-this-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dont-use-this-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dont-use-this-tag&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deprecated-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deprecated-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deprecated-tag&lt;/a&gt; so that it's really obvious to us that the poster tried to do something we need them to not do (i.e., tag every last rules question with a tag that says &quot;rules&quot; in it somewhere). The indirection of a synonym has the added benefit that we won't discourage them from choosing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt;, which is important because if we in any way hint to a naive user that they shouldn't use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; then they'll just say &quot;Oh, OK!&quot; and &lt;em&gt;helpfully&lt;/em&gt; use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; instead...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;: This doesn't have the same problem as the RAW tag, because whether it belongs on a question or not doesn't need mind-reading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When it conflicts with the body, we know there's something wrong and we need to clarify.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When it conflicts with other tags, we know there's something wrong and we ask to clarify.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When it's not obviously out of place... it doesn't cause damage the way &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; does.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the wrong tag, but that's not obvious, it means it fits the body of the question. But even then, we will often challenge the &lt;em&gt;body&lt;/em&gt; of the question, and ask them to tell us what game they're playing so that we can answer more usefully. (Lots of people just assume that every RPG works like the RPG they're playing but with different dice for the same thing; I think this is the motive for this kind of misuse of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In effect, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; doesn't suffer destructive misuse because our normal &quot;uh, can you clarify your question?&quot; processes already catch the situations where it could be misused destructively.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Mixing system tags: as you've astutely pointed out in the question, we notice when a mix is invalid, isn't obviously justified, or hints at something they've left out and should really come out and tell us. It's just like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; that way: the situations in which system-tag mixing can be a problem are already situations we don't let slide; the tag mixing will get fixed as a side-effect of our normal &quot;hey, problem with your question as-written&quot; habits and procedures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;[rules-as-written] is the only tag that has this problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So really, that just leaves &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; as problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To fix its misuse, I propose we recreate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag as a kind of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_%28computing%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;honeypot&lt;/a&gt; to catch people who would misuse &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, and synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; to something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dont-use-this-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dont-use-this-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dont-use-this-tag&lt;/a&gt; so that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; can remain never-used and to facilitate cleanup. It's like giving the site mind-reading powers! It should drastically cut down on the mistagging of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, and thereby improve the quality and topicality of our answers for naive rules-question-having users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-11-11T17:40:02.450" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5148" CreationDate="2014-11-11T20:51:34.540" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not sure there is a problem to solve here. People are always going to misuse tags, and my understanding of site policy is that when it is spotted as an issue in a question, an appropriate edit should be made, with a comment if necessary. This feels no different to any of the multitude of other reasons we have to make edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, some tags are tricky to use correctly (RAW I'm looking at you), but contorting tag mechanics in unnatural ways isn't the way to deal with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-11-11T20:51:34.540" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5153" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5154" CreationDate="2014-11-12T00:59:36.007" Score="18" ViewCount="1333" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps it's just the game designer in me, but for many of the questions asked here I almost automatically start thinking of homebrew solutions to whatever problem the asker is having. Would providing a short bit of homebrew rules be an acceptable &quot;answer&quot; to a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The clearest example is the recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50771/is-there-a-real-use-for-the-medicine-skill-in-dd-5e&quot;&gt;&quot;Is there a real use for the Medicine skill in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the surface, the answer to this seems to be a simple &quot;Nope, it's pretty useless.&quot; As soon as I read it, though, I started thinking about ways that Medicine could be useful, specifically a set of rules for using the Medicine skill to maximize hit dice re-gained during a rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17908" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:31:20.033" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:31:20.033" Title="Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?" Tags="|discussion|faq|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5153" CreationDate="2014-11-12T01:10:06.647" Score="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;If, after well articulated research, you can reasonably suggest there's something missing for what's being sought in the originating system, and the querent doesn't explicitly forbid homebrew, you can answer with a &quot;Your system doesn't support your request, but here is some homebrew I wrote, and &lt;em&gt;here's how it played out in a game I ran.&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last bit is really important, by the way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We require answers that are justified by &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective&lt;/a&gt; and objective components (if any.) Discussing your homebrew in context in your experiences shows that you've &lt;em&gt;tested&lt;/em&gt; your homebrew. Since your answer can stand alone &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; the homebrew, due your research into the system showing the absence of support, or the poor implementation of support, adding a &quot;here's how I fixed this problem&quot; is quite good. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not a good community for the &lt;em&gt;testing&lt;/em&gt; or discussion of homebrew though. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a note, if the querent &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; requests potential homebrew, then you're on much safer ground, especially if you can point to similar imaginings and how they worked in other games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-12T05:08:02.620" LastActivityDate="2017-09-12T05:08:02.620" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="398" CreationDate="2014-11-12T12:09:41.293" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are most frequently metadata that describe a question, but may also be used for other purposes (most frequently to signal special treatment to the meta-site, but also for other purposes). They are for all the reasons you list in your question, and any other uses the community as a whole deems useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of a tag used for metadata purposes is rules-as-written&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of a tag used for special treatment purposes is discussion&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of a tag used for some other purpose may be rules , which may be designed to protect the tagging system from the ignorant and may be synonymed to do-not-use-this-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is inspired by commentary on Seven Sided Dice's answer to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5148/are-our-implicit-information-tagging-practices-becoming-a-problem?cb=1&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-11-12T12:09:41.293" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1339" CreationDate="2014-11-12T12:49:25.257" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not all game systems are D&amp;amp;D.  Not all character builds- justifications and all- need to be more than a page long.  In some systems asking about developing/optimizing/etc a full party of characters may make perfect sense.  As an example, consider the system 'What is an RPG': a novice RPG group may want to ask about forming a party for that game, which shouldn't really take too much space to answer.  FATE 2.0 characters are also very short, and asking about a party there could be possible too (to give an example from a game people play in significant numbers). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-11-12T12:49:25.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5157" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5158" CreationDate="2014-11-13T02:20:42.987" Score="4" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now these two tags have significant overlap, in that they both 100% equally apply to &quot;I'm teaching a system to players for the first time&quot; questions, with no distinction I can see between them to help choose the right tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;Players new to a specific system or to RPGs in general.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;Information, methods and tools for introducing GMs and players to a system and to help them pick it up.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are just the tag wiki excerpts (the popup when you hover over the tags in the tag chooser), but it illustrates the overlap nicely and the full tag wikis don't lessen the overlap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we figure out how to separate these two tags into distinct usages, so we can unambiguously say that &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question takes one and &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question takes the other?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A working example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50811/how-to-quickly-introduce-character-creation-mechanics-to-new-numenera-players&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;, and only after noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt; wasn't actually wrong according to its usage notes. It's a nice clean example question that &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; only take one tag or the other and &lt;strong&gt;I have no idea which&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-11-13T05:24:09.960" Title="How can we make sure [new-players] and [system-introduction] are distinct?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5157" CreationDate="2014-11-13T02:44:35.777" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You would use [new-players] when you have new players. This can mean brand new to gaming, or new to your group, or whatever.&#xA;You would use [system-introduction] when introducing a new system.&#xA;You may be doing one or both at any given time. Therefore one or both tags may be appropriate.&#xA;If you're dealing with brand new players on their first system, then I'd tend toward new-players and not system-introduction just because the latter has a slight connotation of not really applying to a bunch of new players' first game, but I see no reason to mandate it one way or the another or to fret over it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging is an emergent folksonomy.  It does not need to be a strict logically correct hierarchy and overlap between two tags is not something we must do something about. Let people use the tags they find helpful and make sense to them. Overly curated tagging is IMO harmful to the point behind them and turns it into an advanced-users-only Dewey Decimal system instead of just letting people use terms that are meaningful to normal players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-11-13T02:44:35.777" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5157" CreationDate="2014-11-13T04:10:53.343" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;That question you linked can be tagged with both, because it's about both. Like mxyzplk pointed out, if the tags have overlap that's okay. Remember we have [magic] and [spells] too, and we manage having those just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rest assured the [system-introduction] tag &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; have its own unique use: for when someone needs an introduction to a system, or is introducing others to it. That's distinct from [new-players], and it's possible to have questions tagged only [system-introduction] or only [new-players].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used [system-introduction] a lot during &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4893/1204&quot;&gt;my partial burnination of new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, for instance. There were a lot of [new-gm] questions saying &quot;I am totally new, please give me a basic rundown on this system&quot; (or &quot;a rundown on this part of the system&quot;), and &quot;I am new, also here is my question&quot; is the exact kind of meta-tag usage I was targeting. I retagged these to just [system-introduction].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it helps, here's unambiguous usage guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-players&lt;/a&gt;: Adapting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4984/1204&quot;&gt;BESW's answer on our discussion about new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, we should &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; only really be using [new-players] when the question is literally asking about new players. If someone says &quot;I have new players! I have a problem relating to them.&quot;, that's a [new-players] question. However, simply &lt;em&gt;being&lt;/em&gt; new (&quot;I am new, also here is my question&quot;) is not appropriate usage of this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt;: You need us to introduce you to something, or you need to introduce someone else to something. Introductions to a system is involved, somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This could be a new GM needing a general idea of a system: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14002/what-are-the-main-differences-and-similarities-between-pathfinder-and-runequest&quot;&gt;What are the main differences and similarities between Pathfinder and RuneQuest?&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37437/shadowrun-5e-breakdown-tutorial&quot;&gt;Shadowrun 5e breakdown/tutorial&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7653/what-is-some-good-advice-for-starting-paranoia-with-a-new-group&quot;&gt;How to get a new group into the spirit of the game Paranoia?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This could be a new GM needing a critical game mechanic explained: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37542/written-example-of-pure-add-1e-combat&quot;&gt;Written Example of Pure AD&amp;amp;D 1e Combat&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This could also be about introducing new players to a system (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50811/how-to-quickly-introduce-character-creation-mechanics-to-new-numenera-players&quot;&gt;How to quickly introduce character creation mechanics to new Numenera players?&lt;/a&gt;, which you found), which is a point of overlap with [new-players] because it is literally discussing new players.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Bearing in mind that we have questions literally asking about a GM who is new, from a player perspective (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/415/your-friend-wants-to-learn-the-ways-of-the-dungeon-master-what-do-you-do&quot;&gt;Your friend wants to learn the ways of the Dungeon Master, what do you do?&lt;/a&gt;), it is entirely possible that one day we will have a system introduction &lt;em&gt;to a new GM&lt;/em&gt; rather than a new player.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, not every type of system introduction question is about new players and deserves a new-players tag. And as you can see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-players+-system-introduction&quot;&gt;from a search&lt;/a&gt;, a lot of questions about new players have nothing to do with introducing them to a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when a question's about an introduction for new players, it should &lt;em&gt;totally&lt;/em&gt; have both tags. And that's ok.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-11-13T05:24:09.960" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5160" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5161" CreationDate="2014-11-15T11:17:11.607" Score="-1" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50916/what-energy-types-are-most-valuable-in-dd-3-5-pathfinder&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; which was closed, if I understand correctly, because it was asked out of a desire to have a specific, narrow topic explained to me rather than asking out of a desire to have a specific, solvable problem which I am experiencing solved.  This confused me because I have seen several highly rated questions that are not problem-centered  on this site, have contributed answers to questions that don't seem to be problem-based, and the help center seems to specifically condone such questions.  Ordinarily I would assume the other persons involved in this incident were themselves wrong, but that seems presumptuous/arrogant in this case, particularly since the questions I am/have been asking recently have not been well received by the community and the person responsible for the closing of the question was a diamond moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are non-problem based questions allowed?&#xA;If not, should the /help/dont-ask and the /help/on-topic pages be updated to reflect this paradigm shift?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note, if non-problem based questions &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; allowed there is a very good chance that I have merely misunderstood the reasons why my question was closed, but I would nonetheless want to know whether non-problem based questions are allowed at all, as it is still relevant to my asking good questions in the future (and such a motivation would not, in that case, be prohibited).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-11-15T18:56:29.647" Title="Are Non-Problem Based Questions Acceptable on the Main Site?" Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5160" CreationDate="2014-11-15T11:21:57.577" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was closed as too broad. I asked that you descope it by describing your problem. &quot;I was just wondering&quot; questions are very much at risk as being too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question would require a complete enumeration, coding, and analysis of every monster, item, and class ability in two editions, sorting by all sorts of damage and healing capabilities, and then condensing it. And, on top of that, running a survey to figure out the average incidence of monster use per monster to make the previous analysis correctly weighted. Furthermore, any literature currently extant on the topic is likely to include most common resources, rather than core only, so a &quot;what literature exists?&quot; modification is... less bad, but still discouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you've asked for is a (mildly interesting) research project, not an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Non problem questions are... suspect. They're allowed, but suspect, and can easily fall into discussion, subjective, or too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-11-15T12:44:27.420" LastActivityDate="2014-11-15T12:44:27.420" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2014-11-15T14:46:13.973" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Optimizing is important&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should optimize for quality like any SE site. I think in that regard RPG.SE works fine. It's hard to distinguish what should count as &quot;opinion&quot; because after all, apart from the simplest rulebook questions, everything here is opinion in one form or another. But the other close reasons are well understood even by people new to the site. They just need to &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Communication is key&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a problem that all SE sites face, but only the smaller ones actually are at a limit where it counts (on SO for example, a bad question is closed in minutes): if someone casts a close vote, that's totally unhelpful. It &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; become helpful the second that 4 others vote to close, because then, &lt;em&gt;and only then&lt;/em&gt; a helpful text is presented. It might well be that a post sits at 3-4 close votes, without any indicator what might be wrong. The poor fellow has to wait for hours until a fifth member thinks the post is bad. In the meantime, he could have already improved it, so it didn't get closed from the start. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Already existing feature&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The review queue already has this feature. It will review &lt;em&gt;with a comment attached to the post&lt;/em&gt; that gets upvoted when another one votes in that direction. I think that's very nice, because the comments are pre-written, they do not take the time of the voter and they are nice and constructive including relevant links. The same behaviour could be implemented for close votes. The description is already pretty comment-worthy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People said that this invades their anonymity of voting, but I do not really think that's a point. If the vote goes through, the people who voted are listed by name anyway.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a proposal on the SE meta &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/207167/button-to-automatically-add-the-reason-for-closing-when-voting-to-close-a-quest&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. This is a feature I would like for &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-11-15T14:46:13.973" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5148" CreationDate="2014-11-15T15:21:52.950" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reading all the comments here, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; seems to impose restrictions on the &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; which is very rare for SE sites and therefor not very intuitive. Normally, tags are used to grant information and filtering about the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;. I'm not sure if a tag is the correct way to impose those restrictions, but if something is required, I think we should make it &lt;strong&gt;easy to understand&lt;/strong&gt;. This is a gaming website, I don't want to read the small print on all tags just to not break any rules. If this tag means that a citation from the rules is required, &lt;em&gt;then by all means name it that way&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-must-quote-rulebook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-must-quote-rulebook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-must-quote-rulebook&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-requires-rule-citation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-requires-rule-citation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-requires-rule-citation&lt;/a&gt; or whatever else works. No small print, no hidden costs, no lawyers involved. In addition, we could use a pattern where a tag starting with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-x-y-z&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-x-y-z&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-x-y-z&lt;/a&gt; sets requirements for the answer of a question. Maybe RAW will not be the only one.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2014-11-15T15:21:52.950" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5164" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5165" CreationDate="2014-11-19T00:13:18.323" Score="7" ViewCount="236" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm noticing that my comments are getting deleted, and I'm wondering what the feel is here for that. According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3711/when-is-a-comment-not-a-comment&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, it seems as though the purpose for comments is for asking follow-up questions and not &quot;comments&quot; per se? Perhaps the one common element to my comments are that they are 'comments' and not 'questions'. Am I understanding that correctly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over on &lt;a href=&quot;https://security.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Security.SE&lt;/a&gt;, comments and even min-debates are valid, but I know and respect that every community is different. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14752" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-17T10:46:00.670" LastActivityDate="2014-11-20T16:26:46.793" Title="Definition of a valid comment" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5164" CreationDate="2014-11-19T00:15:46.437" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments are for a brief request for clarification or improvement, and they can be deleted after the querent or respondent performs appropriate edits. If sufficiently sure of yourself, a witty Bon Mot can be added, though it's likely to be swept up in general purges if not highly upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be unhealthy so they tend to get cleaned up quickly &amp;mdash; arguments are &lt;em&gt;very easy&lt;/em&gt; to have about role-playing games. Responding to a comment is almost always not worth it, as it takes effort that can otherwise be used to improve a votable resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially unhealthy usage of comments includes: starting an argument, leaving a comment on an answer only to tell them they're wrong and/or their answer's bad whilst suggesting no means of improvement (just downvote, and if you can, provide a better answer), or thanking someone for their help (just upvote), or asking them about entirely unrelated problems in comments (this is help vampirism; you should start a new question instead so people can use the proper answer mechanisms to respond).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Invite people to chat to have debates, so that only people who want to voluntarily subject themselves to the argument can see. (You can use &lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; in comments, make your own room, or link to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;main rpg chat room&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The intention here is to focus on improving question and answer quality. Conversation is for chat or a forum. And unfortunately, comment policing isn't something that can be done halfway, as hanging comments tend to attract arguments and discussion and thereby decrease quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also worth noting that much of our deletion prompts come from commendable user flagging of comments that have become too chatty, argumentative, or correctly have been edited into their respective posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-11-19T00:33:36.687" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T00:33:36.687" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5164" CreationDate="2014-11-19T00:25:17.027" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In case Brian's answer isn't quite clear:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are for providing feedback on questions which allows questioners or answerers to improve their question or answer. This can take the form of suggestions for improvement, requests for clarification, or constructive criticism (such as pointing out a mistake or error, not just saying &quot;this is bad&quot;). They'll generally get deleted sometime after the clarification or improvement is made. If a mod is active, and they have their eye on the question or users are flagging comments for cleanup, that could be &lt;em&gt;very quick.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your comments are comments which don't provide anything that can be used to improve what you commented on, they are likely to be purged by a mod. Note that even if they &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; provide this kind of information, if the poster edits their post to take your comment into account, your comment is also likely to be purged. (It's served its purpose by helping the poster improve, so it doesn't need to be there any more.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note for clarity: This all applies to the main site. On meta, in many cases it's almost the opposite. Discussion in comments is perfectly legitimate on meta and rarely, if ever, gets deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-11-19T00:39:28.320" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T00:39:28.320" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5153" CreationDate="2014-11-19T22:14:00.467" Score="-14" Body="&lt;p&gt;YES! The more the better. The site is absolutely suffocating in BtB (by the book, aka RAW) rigidity that misses the entire point of roleplaying games and their use of GMs to make calls on the spot. Advice and thoughts are definitely something that it urgently needs more of. I wonder sometimes if some of the answerers have ever actually put the books down long enough to play a session.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless the poster specifies BtB, you should encourage out-of-the box thinking instead of parroting the same old party line which is by far the worst aspect of the site today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15520" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-06-08T18:08:57.043" LastActivityDate="2015-06-08T18:08:57.043" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5169" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5170" CreationDate="2014-11-19T22:50:26.457" Score="2" ViewCount="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;The original version of Anima has no English translation, except possibly on the servers of Fantasy Flight Games.  The Spainish revised edition is available in English, and is the text I assume is indicated by the [anima-beyond-fantasy] tag it is different from the original version in meaningful but small scale ways.  The Core Exxet, which is the most recent major revision to the Core rules, is also only available in Spanish, and also changes the system in meaningful but small scale ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I ask questions about Anima, I want to be able to get answers for the version of the game that uses the English Core Rulebook, which I own, and not the Spanish Core Exxet, which I don't, because practical answers for the later system often don't apply to the earlier one and vice versa.  It seems to me the best way to do this is a tag, but I am unsure what a tag should be called so as to be easily found by other askers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the best way of differentiating the editions in questions and, if that method is a tag, what should the tag be called?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T23:14:53.697" Title="What is the most appropriate way to differentiate different editions of Anima?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5169" CreationDate="2014-11-19T23:11:18.080" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Put it in your question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are for finding questions, not for straitjacketing you to sticking to the tag.  If you only want information from one edition, and we do not have edition tags for it, just clarify in your question.  if you get answers from other editions, downvote them ruthlessly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T23:11:18.080" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5169" CreationDate="2014-11-19T23:14:53.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Anima isn't a large enough game to need edition tags. Simply make your requirements clear in your question. If we get questions about multiple editions of anima, we'll let the edition tags fall out naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-11-19T23:14:53.697" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5164" CreationDate="2014-11-20T16:26:46.793" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something to note, although the mods may not agree: a comment can be useful even if it's soon deleted. I find it perfectly appropriate to make a comment that I know will be cleaned up sometime if it serves a greater social purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I just had a comment exchange that went like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;You beat me to the answer! I was surprised there was an answer in the&#xA;book for this.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Me too! I had the 'up to the GM' answer all written&#xA;out before I double-checked!&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This exchange enhances comradery among potential answerers and turns what could have been a grumpy &amp;quot;sniped&amp;quot; feeling into a little moment of shared wonder. Should/can those comments be deleted at some point? Sure. But I think it's worth the small amount of moderator effort required in exchange for a better community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5679" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-11-20T16:26:46.793" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5174" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-22T01:30:58.533" Score="85" ViewCount="3391" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently had the dubious pleasure to have been told &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; that the high visibility of RAW-centric optimising online is an illusion and nobody actually plays that way in a real game, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; that old-school playstyles are obsolete and nobody actually plays that way except from irrational attachement. The different users were equally convinced they were speaking truth, despite the impossibility of both being true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I'm &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; sick of trying to talk people out of One True Wayism about how people do play, let alone how people &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; play, my personal annoyance is nobody's problem but mine. However, both these recent discussions were had in the context of what should be &lt;em&gt;allowed&lt;/em&gt; on this site, and that's not personal anymore. &lt;strong&gt;Trying to bend this Stack to favour any single subculture in RPGs is not cool.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to be able to, in the future, hand a link to someone trying to limit who this site is for with One True Wayism. This is not so much about answers advocating &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; a playstyle — playstyle-based perspective is valid and expected in answers (when backed up, and/or with a good frame-challenge), and when they aggressively swerve into One True Wayism they typically get voted into the ground. So answers are generally fine. It's slagging playstyles or One True Wayism in comments — where accusations of &quot;badwrongfun&quot; usually happen — or when an answer starts badmouthing a different playstyle, that I want to be able to point people to this page to politely ask them to knock it off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I ask the community to affirm that we embrace the plurality of how RPGs are played and value the input of diverse views, but none exclusively.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:33:04.647" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:33:04.647" Title="Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?" Tags="|discussion|faq|policy|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-22T01:37:22.970" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are all roleplayers, and there is a lot of room in this tent for the many ways we play. We have no need for comments that suggest there is one universal &quot;true&quot; way to play RPGs, disparage other playstyles as &quot;wrong&quot;, or erase our or others' preferred ways of playing by asserting or implying that they don't exist; regardless of whether the motive is combative malice or just innocent ignorance of the wider world or RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Group hug!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-11-22T02:08:49.770" LastActivityDate="2014-11-22T02:08:49.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5176" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-22T01:56:01.667" Score="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is much like the questions we get on religious sites about whether one sect should be excluded or given preference to another. The SE policy on this for religious sites is that all sects are created equal for the purpose of the site and if you really can't get on board with that, then you can find the door. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, one of the things that the religious sites do, that we've only semi-adopted for this site is to make questions tightly define what sects/doctrines they are about (in our case playstyle) and then delete answers that don't conform to that (in addition to shutting down discussion and arguments about who is right and who is wrong). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the thing though, specifying a playstyle is pretty much &lt;em&gt;completely optional&lt;/em&gt; here. That's in large part because it's not always relevant, a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of the time your style of play is pretty evident from the game you're playing, or the kinds of question you ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that answers (And often comment discussion) ends up being a mishmash of playstyles and often only some or even none of the answers/comments match with the playstyle of the author. This is a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a site about religion. It's a site about a hobby. Telling people they are wrong is OK here. And sometimes, the answer to someone's question where they are detailing a problem, is, in fact, &quot;hey, you might try a different style of play, because it sure looks like the way you're playing is making you all miserable, try this instead.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's the guideline I'm going to propose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All play styles are welcome.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers and comments should not &lt;em&gt;disparage&lt;/em&gt; another play style, even if they are discouraging of it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Warnings that a playstyle may not be appropriate for a game or setting are OK, but should be well supported, and restricted to answers (this is a frame challenge, essentially).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Differing playstyles is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an excuse to ignore this site's guidelines on questions or answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2014-11-22T02:32:03.940" LastActivityDate="2014-11-22T02:32:03.940" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-22T02:46:35.287" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some resources: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/760&quot;&gt;Challenging the frame of a question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, we require that people Be Nice. Insulting other play styles isn't being nice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, if you &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; going to dissent in an answer, make sure to restate your assumptions. People may not share (or agree with) your model of gaming. Being clear in &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you are answering in that particular way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, consider weak-man and steelmanning arguments. Consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question#comment12689_5168&quot;&gt;SSD's comment&lt;/a&gt; on homebrew or optional rules:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If someone comes to us confused about how something is supposed to work, answering with homebrew is fundamentally not answering the question. To answer non-BtB you need some connective tissue in the answer between what they're asking and the off-book advice, usually by answering BtB to solve their basic confusion, and only then offering the homebrew/etc. as a superior alternative, explicitly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can demonstrate an awareness, sympathy, and understanding for the other perspective, answer it formally, and then go &quot;But, I've also had &lt;em&gt;even better&lt;/em&gt; experiences this way&quot; your persuasive message isn't &quot;you're dumb. Right thinking people do it my way.&quot; but rather &quot;Hey, here's your specific answer demonstrating expertise and empathy with your problem and playstyle, and here's an even better thing that you might not have considered.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fourth, There are many games and many game philosophies and many traditions. We simply require rigour and expertise. It's likely that your expertise is valuable, especially if you've interacted with &lt;em&gt;different schools of thought.&lt;/em&gt; We acknowledge that there are many games and many ways to play the game. The ultimate arbiter of the requirements of the question is the querent, and it's our job to make the best possible answers to &lt;strong&gt;solve the particular situation the querent is in.&lt;/strong&gt; If you have a great answer to a &lt;em&gt;different question&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. one that subscribes to your &lt;a href=&quot;http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;weltanschauung (worldview, see relativism)&lt;/a&gt;), pose that question instead. Encouraging the querent to elucidate their worldview by asking them to edit their game style into their question, on the other hand, is quite encouraged. (Remember, good information goes into questions and answers. Comments evaporate. Comment arguments are burned by the gods with prejudice.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-11-25T06:09:31.720" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5153" CreationDate="2014-11-22T19:59:21.267" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to add a different answer that differs slightly from Brian's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answering Game Questions With Homebrew&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some game questions are asking for &quot;Rules As Written&quot; answers. Homebrew is not an answer to those questions. I mean, you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; put forth a homebrew answer, just don't be surprised when it gets downvoted into oblivion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some questions are asking about how their game system works.  Answers are generally expected by them and others to be about the usual system, but following the guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt; you can suggest your own tested solutions after clarifying how it works in the system, and that either there's not a solution or the solution is one you find poor for specific reasons. As Brian says, &quot;We require answers that are justified by good subjective and objective components (if any.) Discussing your homebrew in context in your experiences shows that you've tested your homebrew. Since your answer can stand alone without the homebrew, do your research into the system showing the absence of support, or the poor implementation of support, adding a &quot;here's how I fixed this problem&quot; is quite good.  This doesn't mean you can only suggest homebrew when there's not a RAW answer, but also where the RAW answer is suboptimal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Obviously if someone is asking for homebrew/house rules/alternatives, it's fine.  &quot;I'm playing AD&amp;amp;D 2e and feel like I need some kind of Perception mechanic but there's not one... How do you handle this?&quot; That's legitimate, of course answers must conform to Good Subjective, Bad Subjective and not be something you just made up off the cuff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Homebrew Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about vetting homebrew rules are acceptable inasmuch as they are tightly scoped. Remember the goal is &quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective.&quot; What's the difference between asking a question about a new rule from a third party publisher and your own homebrew? Nothing, in nature.  But the question has to be tightly scoped - complete explanation of the rule, and &quot;have you done this or similar and what were its effects.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;For example, &quot;I want to replace AC with damage resistance in 5e D&amp;amp;D because it seems more realistic. Here's the exact details:...  Have you done this, and what are the pros, cons, and effects on your game?&quot; This is legitimately answerable without speculation. Others have used official and/or unofficial rules to do this in various D&amp;amp;D flavors. Experience does not have to be 100% identical to qualify as Good Subjective - as every group and table is different, that's not possible.&#xA;Of course, you can answer this badly and get downvotes (&quot;Savage Worlds works kinda like that!  It's fun.&quot;). But homebrew is legitimately on topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1398/are-critique-my-home-brewed-content-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are &amp;quot;critique my home-brewed content&amp;quot; questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; I've also added a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag to some other meta questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T22:35:57.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-23T11:40:15.293" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with your question is that it looks at answers in isolation. If I, to pick a completely random example, say that focusing on roleplaying your character and what you as that character wants to do is and answer to &quot;How do I play in a system with rules that aren't written down?&quot; then that can be seen as &quot;one true wayism&quot; but I'm consciously trying to balance out the &lt;em&gt;overall&lt;/em&gt; site bias towards rule-based solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The important question is the mix of answers, not that one particular person is consistently answering in their own style; otherwise you end up with the sort of bland mess of nothing that Wikipedia is. I don't want to read two-page answers where the person has felt they had to weigh every option and justify every statement in the light of 100 other options they didn't choose. I'm an adult and I know people are posting personal opinions and that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many approaches to roleplaying and the lack of discussion here makes some of those approaches more amenable to being posted. The sort of loose, subjective approach that many people mean by &quot;old school&quot; is never going to fit in as well in a format where each answer has the appearance of objectivity (by dint of discussion not being allowed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, my answer is: the site accepts a plurality exists but it is strongly biased away from more free-form styles simply because of SE's limitations as a format. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm content that the voting should reflect this; that's life. What I find really annoying is the sort of stuff that appears in comments, and the way in which comments are purged outside of meta-. Indeed, I think the site would be SUBSTANTIALLY improved by turning the answer comments off completely, as they serve no useful purpose that I can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15520" LastActivityDate="2014-11-23T11:40:15.293" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5180" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5249" CreationDate="2014-11-23T21:14:06.767" Score="12" ViewCount="205" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2014.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Winterbash 2014&lt;/a&gt; is coming!* 'Tis the season of earning silly hats for your avatar to wear by achieving achievements in Stack usage. Not only are these achievements more &quot;fun&quot;, off-kilter, and promote a sense of community festivity than the usual goals for getting badges, but they earn you hats. Some are secret criteria for secret hats, but the non-secret hat criteria are listed on the Winterbash 2014 site, for which you earn hats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I mention there are hats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So get your heads (or dice, abstract concepts, &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; hats, pets, or whatever your avatar displays) ready, because Winterbash starts December 15th (site time) and runs until January 5th. For those who are new to RPG.SE since the last Winterbash, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2013.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Winterbash 2013&lt;/a&gt; site and &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2013.stackexchange.com/faq&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; should give you an idea of what to expect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And should you have an unreasonable, irrational, ridiculous but totally &lt;strong&gt;respected&lt;/strong&gt; hatred of hats, you can opt out and have a 100% hat-free holiday site experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;strike&gt;Site not yet live! But it is already alive in our hearts.&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-12-15T20:41:20.807" LastActivityDate="2015-01-05T00:59:17.873" Title="On a lighter note: 'Tis the season for Hats!" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|hats|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-25T06:39:38.137" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since you're trying to keep this question focused on comments and site discourse, I'll stick to that. Brian has already &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5177/1204&quot;&gt;adequately covered our expectations of answers&lt;/a&gt;. (It was probably pretty helpful he brought that up, even if you don't intend this question to be about answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we embrace a variety of playstyles. Active use of the site, and diverse reading, pretty much guarantees we'll be confronted by it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our variety of games has shown us this.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The variety of games here shows us there's many play styles, and each game may have its own ideal varieties. The dichotomy of &quot;RAW-centric vs old-school&quot; is only really relevant to the D&amp;amp;D-likes, which is a vanishingly small portion of RPGs available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are games in which RAW is not &lt;em&gt;opposed&lt;/em&gt; to improvisation and judgement calls, but &lt;em&gt;must necessarily coexist&lt;/em&gt; with it: &lt;em&gt;Fate&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Roll for Shoes&lt;/em&gt; are such games, which offer a toolbox of mechanics the group must discuss how to apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So have social issues.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of us pay attention to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; tags. These show us where play styles, or social dynamics arising from them, can lead to breakdowns or problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, there's the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/18762/1204&quot;&gt;&quot;DM trumps book!&quot; question&lt;/a&gt;: a player who preferred to use the rules joined a group that preferred house ruling stuff. Neither style was unhealthy for the individuals before the joining, and nobody was playing wrong but the clash of these two styles lead to an unhealthy situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've also noticed that it's easy for people to assume their local experience is representative of gaming worldwide. This is &lt;em&gt;particularly&lt;/em&gt; endemic to the D&amp;amp;D crowd &amp;mdash; but as one of our own members wrote, there are so many unique D&amp;amp;D playstyles that it is easy to say there is, in reality, &lt;a href=&quot;http://ponderingsongames.com/2013/03/18/no-such-thing-as-dnd/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;no such thing as D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The 'correct' playstyle is a person's own preference.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone has preferences for certain ways to play their games. There is no superior/correct style. Nobody naturally progresses to one universal style: people just progress toward their own preferred playstyle, provided there's others they can play that way with, and provided they're aware that playstyle is an &lt;em&gt;option.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no &lt;em&gt;healthiest&lt;/em&gt; playstyle, except for the one that works best to make the player happy and fulfilled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D community here includes people who for years have played by RAW and surrounded themselves with people who play that way. It also includes people who for years have played by heavy application of house rules, and surrounded themselves by people who play that way. That's fine. This is their preference. None of them are playing wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, all that said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The site has made us plainly aware of many playstyles. We acknowledge and embrace them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you try to argue that your way is the One True Way, do not expect much agreement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Playstyles are still subject to criticism when appropriate, and can be advocated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;None of this is an excuse for breaking our rules on arguing or discussion in comments. As usual, if you have a disagreement with an answer, channel that energy into writing a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; answer. Take part of it to advocate why your approach will work well, and if you wish, take a part of it to dissuade people from using this other approach that will not work well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-11-27T12:50:17.123" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2770" CreationDate="2014-11-25T12:13:01.687" Score="26" Body="&lt;h1&gt;D&amp;amp;D Tools.eu has been taken down.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They received a cease &amp;amp; desist letter from Wizards of the Coast. That pretty well settles the debate: we shouldn't link to it, because there's nothing there now. SevenSidedDie's predictions came true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some parting words from the owner on the homepage, and an explanation of the situation: &lt;a href=&quot;http://dndtools.eu/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://dndtools.eu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that ever goes down too, &lt;a href=&quot;http://web.archive.org/web/20141122002750/http://dndtools.eu/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the same parting words are preserved on the Internet Archive Wayback Machine&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Speaking of the Wayback Machine: I suggest we do not link to cached/archived versions of D&amp;amp;D Tools.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Legal or moral issues of whether we should link to cached versions &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; aside: those preserved copies of the site's copyright-violating content are going to go away eventually too, and they're broken links simply waiting to be such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Internet Archive services requests to remove copyrighted works. See their Wayback Machine FAQ, specifically: &lt;a href=&quot;https://archive.org/about/faqs.php#20&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;What is the Wayback Machine's Copyright Policy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google Cache has done similar in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Same goes for mirrors: don't link to 'em.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, there's mirrors now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast will catch up with those too, however many pop up, one by one. While they're busy playing whack-a-mole like world governments with the Pirate Bay, we're going to get the same links breaking along the way, which is a pain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just say what you have, cite the book, and rely that whoever's reading might have the book (and really, these are the people you &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; answering your question anyway because they understand the greater context of your thing). Whoever else can go look up an illegal third party site like dndtools, that's their choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-11-17T11:32:51.720" LastActivityDate="2015-11-17T11:32:51.720" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5183" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5198" CreationDate="2014-11-26T01:04:39.673" Score="13" ViewCount="378" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few times recently, the concepts of &lt;strong&gt;nomothetic&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;idiographic&lt;/strong&gt; have come up in use on the site &amp;mdash; particularly from Brian Ballsun-Stanton, who wrote a paper in which those concepts are pivotal. Answers such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18762/how-do-i-handle-a-group-that-does-not-understand-the-assumption-rule/18765#18765&quot;&gt;How do I handle a group that does not understand the &amp;#39;assumption rule&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt; explain the concepts as they apply to the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am uncertain of their meanings in the broader RPG context, and I am not confident using the terms myself where they have seemed relevant to what I'm writing &amp;mdash; even after reading the explanation in Brian's academic paper. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomothetic_and_idiographic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wikipedia page on these terms&lt;/a&gt; is entirely impenetrable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what do these words mean in our context?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are they behaviours or ideas (ideologies even?), or both? What is the noun form? (Is it nomotheticism and idiographicism?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T18:51:36.123" Title="What do nomothetic and idiographic mean for RPGs?" Tags="|discussion|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5185" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5188" CreationDate="2014-11-26T04:55:53.157" Score="5" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/15469&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt; covers the (somewhat persistent) problem we have with game-recommendation questions, and what members of the site should do about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/15469&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; covers what makes a game-recommendation question good or bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, users asking game-recommendation questions regularly have them closed, and often seem a bit confused by the requests for more specific criteria. So I was talking in chat, and the point came up that we don't actually have a resource to point users to to help them narrow down their questions. This question can hopefully be that resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Hypothetical scenario incoming) I've asked a game-recommendation question, it's been closed, and I'm being asked to provide more specific criteria before it can be re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Where do I go from here? What sort of detail should I add to my question to make it acceptable for this site?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-11-27T22:36:32.460" Title="How to narrow down game-recommendation questions?" Tags="|support|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2014-11-26T07:40:09.777" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be very clear here, the role of a comment is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to challenge the frame of an answer. If you disagree with an answer, provide a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; answer. If you have &lt;em&gt;improvements&lt;/em&gt; to suggest to an answer, by all means, leave a temporary comment (and it'd be totally awesome if you could clean up after the answer was improved.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Challenging an answer because you have a different style of play will get your comment deleted. It starts arguments and reply chains, and really all the bad feelings that can go into comments &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; go into comments due to these sorts of disagreements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, argue by answering an answer better, argue by downvoting (silently, if you cannot or will not suggest improvements), but don't argue in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-11-26T07:40:09.777" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2014-11-26T11:53:38.400" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://beyondthebundle.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Bundle of Holding blog&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bundleofholding.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Bundle of Holding&lt;/a&gt; is a tabletop RPG version of the videogame &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.humblebundle.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Humble Bundle&lt;/a&gt;: it promotes small-business RPGs by offering cheap bundle rates for high-quality indie games, and donating proceeds to charities of the creators' choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RSS feed: &lt;code&gt;http://beyondthebundle.com/feed/&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2014-11-26T11:58:48.013" LastActivityDate="2014-11-26T11:58:48.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5185" CreationDate="2014-11-27T22:27:51.570" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see value in such a resource. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;If they don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; further requirements, their question shouldn't be made to fit our guidelines artificially.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A resource such as that, at best, might help a few people by jogging their thoughts enough to refine the question (in a way that comments can't somehow?); at worst it would become a checklist for how best to game the site, resulting in an increase of substandard shopping questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the best case scenario has limited (or no?) value, and the worst-case scenario leads to degradation of the entire site in a way that lies close to its core purpose, there's no contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we let people be confused. &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;We have no lack for questions, and we &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; ill-fitting questions to get themselves closed.&lt;/a&gt; That self-elimination is &lt;strong&gt;the&lt;/strong&gt; main way the site has to ensure its goal of providing a high signal-to-noise ratio that people want to invest time in answering, after all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most SEs ban shopping questions outright. We set a high bar on purpose, so that they're possible to host at all here. People can either meet that bar, or not. If they can't, either because they just want to ask a low-quality &quot;help me shop&quot; question that even &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; ban, or because they &lt;em&gt;really do&lt;/em&gt; have a good shopping question but can't figure out how to express themselves in question, comments, or chat, that's on them. And it's not on us to tell the difference between those two failure modes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's definitely not on us to help them even more than we already do via comments and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;the existing guide&lt;/a&gt;. At best that guide could be more prominent, but our ability to make it more prominent is minimal. (A problem any additional resource would also have.) It's linked in the game-rec banner, and if that's insufficient... well, again, it's not on us to save questions that we're not even sure, without mind reading, &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; meet our minimum standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-11-27T22:36:32.460" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5189" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-11-28T00:27:38.757" Score="6" ViewCount="319" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I've been noticing a trend on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; lately. Mainly, people realising that &quot;rules&quot; is banned, so they use the first tag that starts with rules which, y'know, says &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt; on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; which, while quite &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt; to rules, isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also been noticing that our user community isn't really bothering to address these potential discrepancies in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, a question to each of you all. On a brief review of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, how many of those questions, do you believe, intended to just use it as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag? Examples would be delightful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Useful sorting categories (add more to your answer if you have a better ontology):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolutely incorrect. They used this tag as a &quot;rules&quot; tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolutely correct. There is evidence in the question that they really are interested in RAW&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questionable, but we didn't comment on the question. Why didn't we?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questionable, but we did comment (and the user didn't respond)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be very clear, this is a function of your interpretation as reader, based on how well they signaled their intent. If their intent is unclear &lt;em&gt;that itself&lt;/em&gt; is interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:23:37.837" Title="Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4840" CreationDate="2014-11-30T12:21:37.907" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is the problem - we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; filter it, but they quickly just obfuscate the email address using some other means. Text filtering &lt;em&gt;does not work&lt;/em&gt;, which is why the spam system operates on different levels, we can't &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; go by the text being submitted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm going to be modifying the weights that &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site carries when it comes to teaching the system, the following actions from users and moderators here will cause it to learn more rapidly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spam-flag deleting a post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A moderator destroying an account &lt;em&gt;for spamming&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tripping of various 'honeypots' that we have laying around, because we like honey&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, when this community identifies something as spam, the system will acknowledge and deal a blocking blow sooner than it would otherwise. This 'spellcaster' stuff has been appearing all over the network for quite a while, but I do agree that it's a bit more concentrated here due to the topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But please, don't spend too much time considering ad-hoc filters to try to keep certain things out; they quickly learn and just work around it - it ends up just being a waste of time and resources. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7607" LastActivityDate="2014-11-30T12:21:37.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5189" CreationDate="2014-12-01T08:28:00.923" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Of the top 26 recently active RAW questions 25 are 'Absolutely Correct' in my opinion and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37803/is-dd-4e-supposed-to-have-really-easy-skill-checks&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; is Probably Incorrect based on the 'thanks' comment the OP placed on one of the answers.  I have added an inquiring comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1 in 26 is less than 1 in 20, so we're doing pretty good compared to some people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-12-01T08:28:00.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5192" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5193" CreationDate="2014-12-01T17:56:20.543" Score="3" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've got a few questions where I think the best answer is all of the answers, there's not really one that stands out. Should anything be done to those? or should they simply be left without an accepted answer. Here's 2 of them&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/48808/1015&quot;&gt;Can already dead characters be resurrected?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47454/1015&quot;&gt;How can I make a shapeshifter that takes human forms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T00:50:00.383" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T00:50:00.383" Title="How to deal with questions that have no best answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5192" CreationDate="2014-12-01T18:14:35.380" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You have several options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept an answer you like &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; than the others. This is particularly useful if you're asking a question about a situation in your game, and you choose one answer among them to be the ruling/idea you use in your game.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept an answer, and bounty one or several of the other answers. You can always add bounties to questions you or someone else has asked, each bounty you add has to be an increased point value.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do nothing. You don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to accept an answer, and no one can &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; you do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add a new answer that incorporates the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; of all of the other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The important thing here is that the criteria for an accepted answer is &lt;em&gt;best, most useful&lt;/em&gt; answer. It's completely your call, so do what feels right to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-12-01T18:14:35.380" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5189" CreationDate="2014-12-01T20:27:40.160" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You know, this made me think for a while. This answer may not be what you asked for, but I hope help people think about this, even if a tangential way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I checked a bunch of questions around the site. Most of the time, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51477/is-a-bluff-check-necessary-when-telling-the-truth&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51040/can-i-choose-to-grant-combat-advantage&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51459/how-does-shaking-off-hold-person-work&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, the question seems to be &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the rules, without the need to &lt;em&gt;completely stick to the rules as published&lt;/em&gt;. Those questions are more about how to proceed in a given situation (be it RAW or by some interpretation) than really using the literal text from the books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are &quot;Truly RAW&quot; are a bit different. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51349/are-humans-living-creatures-by-the-rules-that-is&quot;&gt;Are humans living creatures? By the rules, that is?&lt;/a&gt; is an example - the querent explicitly rules out anything that is not written on the books - it's about how rules, as written, interact with other and what happens from there. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48632/can-a-night-elf-swim-naked-in-a-volcano&quot;&gt;My question about Night Elves and Volcanos&lt;/a&gt; is also a &quot;Truly RAW&quot; question, despite not having the tag.  It is not about how to rule a given situation, is about what happens if you take the book literally. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/39535/skill-to-recognize-cleric-domains-and-what-spells-appear-on-them&quot;&gt;This question from KRyan&lt;/a&gt; is, maybe, one of the best examples of what I would consider a good use of the Rules-as-Written tag: he explicity says that he &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; want non-published material and what he already researched, and  his question is about &lt;em&gt;finding&lt;/em&gt; a set of rules for a given situation and how them would work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing with Rules-as-Written is that it is a tricky subject. You need to make clear what is ok and what is not on your question if you want useful RAW answers. RAW could be Core-only, Core-Plus-Splatbooks, Core-Plus-Splatbooks-Minus-Rules-Compendium, Core-Plus-Splatbooks-Minus-Tome-Of-Battle-Cause-My-DM-is-Crazy, Core-Plus-Splatbooks-Plus-Magazines, etc, etc, etc. And that's only for D&amp;amp;D. What, exactly, would be RAW for games that are massively subjective? Or for games that have a WTFazillion of modular, non-exclusive splatbooks, like GURPS? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Heck, some DM's even consider  Flavor Text as &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt;. They are written on the book, aren't they? This whole thing of &quot;Rules as Written&quot; is, ironically, pretty subjective. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, people that &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; want a by-the-book answer will say that out loud in the question, citing what is the valid material that could be referenced. Most of the time, however, our users are mostly interested in figuring how to use the rules in a given game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... What I see, from my random browsing, is that what is really happening is that people are often just asking &quot;rules clarification&quot; questions — a sister to RAW questions, but with lesser constraints, where new users are basically saying, &quot;Hey, I need help understanding this set of rules!&quot; I know that this behavior is supposed to be the SE's default, but most of newcomers are not aware of that and tag away with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moar audits!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This one seems to be wanting a house-rule, not a RAW answer. The asker explicitly says that the RAW, as it is, is not enough, and wants a solution for that. The accepted answer is, indeed, a house-rule. The questioner however commented this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I added the rules-as-written tag to the question to indicate that I&#xA;  prefer solutions which can be applied consistently with little&#xA;  interpretation necessary&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which made me unsure if &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; is a use case for RAW or not. To me, it is a case of house rules, not RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48015/&quot;&gt;Is the product of the Heavens Mystery revelation &amp;quot;Coat of Many Stars&amp;quot; a valid target for Magic Vestment?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48071/&quot;&gt;Does an Enhancement bonus on clothing become an Armor bonus?&lt;/a&gt; are, because they are by-the-book clarifications, indeed RAW. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31895/&quot;&gt;How can I keep the Tarrasque &amp;quot;dead&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; explicitly asks for RAW, so, it is, indeed, a RAW question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51346/&quot;&gt;Can the heal spell (and other positive energy effects) work on constructs?&lt;/a&gt; wants to find a rule to a given situation, and the querent explicitly asks for RAW, so it's ok to tag as such.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21755/&quot;&gt;When exactly do &amp;quot;once each round&amp;quot; effects work?&lt;/a&gt; wants answers &lt;em&gt;supported&lt;/em&gt; by the rules. This is different from RAW, mind you, since RAI can be argued to be &quot;supported by the rules&quot;, too. I would tag this one with Rules Clarifications, not RAW, since RAW is about taking rules &lt;em&gt;literally&lt;/em&gt;. This question would welcome RAI, I think.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49312/&quot;&gt;Can you intentionally fail a skill check?&lt;/a&gt; uses RAW for defining the preference for a given set of rules but, in their own word, they are not mandatory. I would just remove the tag here - you don't need to tag something as RAW if it is just your preference, you can just spell it out on the question. RAW questions should be about taking the book literally.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22499/&quot;&gt;Master of Shrouds Summon Undead caster level&lt;/a&gt; is explicity a Rules Clarification question, that seems tagged RAW because of the lack of a more appropriate &quot;Rules Clarification&quot; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51316/&quot;&gt;Does the rider need to expend an action to ride a horse?&lt;/a&gt; is a RAW question, and it says so out loud on the last line. &lt;em&gt;It could be&lt;/em&gt; a rules-clarification question, easily.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50728/&quot;&gt;Are there rules for called shots in D&amp;amp;D 4e?&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a RAW question. This question is asking for rules &lt;em&gt;or ideas&lt;/em&gt; about how to deal with this, there is no apparent need for a by-the-book answer. The tag was not even part of the original question, and was added later, by another user. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will expand the first 3 questions, to explain why I think they are not RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51477/is-a-bluff-check-necessary-when-telling-the-truth&quot;&gt;Is a Bluff check necessary when telling the truth?&lt;/a&gt; - I think this is not a RAW question. Here, we are not dealing with rules interactions. We have the explicit aknowledgement that this may be the case of DM-Fiat, and this question is not about some strange, bizarre use of the Bluff Skill. To me, this is just a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rule-clarification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rule-clarification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rule-clarification&lt;/a&gt;, and not a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51040/can-i-choose-to-grant-combat-advantage&quot;&gt;Can I choose to grant Combat Advantage?&lt;/a&gt; - This one is a bit problematic. At first, I don't see any evidence that this question should be using the RAW tag, however I don't know what exactly happened on comments and, by what SevenSidedDie said on comments below, this question appears to be an exception and not representative to the question at hand. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51459/how-does-shaking-off-hold-person-work&quot;&gt;How does shaking off hold person work?&lt;/a&gt; - This is just a rules clarification question. There is no aparent need for the RAW tag, and the user is indeed a new user, so he may not be aware of what exactly RAW means on the context of this community. This appears to be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rule-clarification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rule-clarification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rule-clarification&lt;/a&gt; case.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T10:42:25.567" CommentCount="32" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5195" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-02T01:49:12.093" Score="3" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm referring to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51510/how-to-create-meaningful-relationships-with-npcs&quot;&gt;How to create meaningful relationships with NPCs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question's been mod-reopened from its unclear state already, and all comments deleted. I have no idea what has happened in comments since, and have had little chance to interact with the asker and see what they've said. This line has been added to the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am not looking for a specific game rules solution to this, but instead techniques to get the players to feel attachment to these fictional characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's fine, but the reason I voted to close was not so we could offer rules-based solutions, but because the &lt;strong&gt;problem&lt;/strong&gt; may be rules-based: from the asker's other question they may be playing Pathfinder, and in a system such as that, there are all too many reasons the players would behave they way the asker is describing. Understanding the system context, and directly addressing the way the system may cause this behaviour, is instrumental to a proper solution, hence me voting to close it as unclear: more details are needed to fully address the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is similar to Brian closing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51444/1204&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on the basis the mechanics involved are pivotal to a proper response, but were entirely unexplained, and reopening it once they were provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I recall, other comments were left requesting additional detail, none of which have been addressed either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I would leave another comment requesting detail so that we can understand the &lt;strong&gt;problem&lt;/strong&gt;, not so that we can provide rules-based solutions, but I expect it may wind up deleted under some impression it violates clean-up and has already been addressed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am concerned moderation has been far too swift in this instance and not allowed time for the problems in the question to get properly addressed, nor for public discourse to run its proper course. (Unless it has. But I am oblivious to what has happened in deleted comments, and the problems with this question do not appear to have been addressed at all.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to let this stuff occur properly, I believe the question should be re-closed and the comments undeleted, and that reopening in this instance should be done by the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; once it observes the question is fit to reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-01-31T04:46:46.823" Title="The 'creating meaningful relationships' question was reopened and cleaned up too soon" Tags="|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5195" CreationDate="2014-12-02T03:20:46.973" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Feel free and add additional comments asking for clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not see any good reason to undo the cleanup and reopen.  Five brave souls may reclose if it is merited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do keep in mind that system-agnostic questions are legal here and this seems to me, at least, to be a pretty clear cut question around a standard trad-game syndrome of PCs treating fictional NPCs as just set-dressing; I do not personally find it confusing or unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-12-02T03:20:46.973" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5183" CreationDate="2014-12-02T08:24:28.817" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all, you should read Dr. Ballsun-Staton's definition, from his paper, if you haven't already: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2.3 Nomothetic versus Ideographic&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Guba and Lincoln (1994) articulate the nomothetic debate in&#xA;    social sciences where they note that general theories may not fit&#xA;    specific cases well: “This problem is sometimes described as the&#xA;    nomothetic/idiographic disjunction. Generalizations, although&#xA;    perhaps statistically meaningful, have no applicability in the&#xA;    individual case.” While their argumentation is in support of&#xA;    qualitative research, the theoretical basis of the nomothetic as&#xA;    “law-making” conflict with the ideographic study of the&#xA;    individual case maps quite strongly onto the &lt;strong&gt;axis of form&lt;/strong&gt; and the&#xA;    ideas will be used throughout this document. &lt;strong&gt;Players seeking the&#xA;    support of rules are far more nomothetic than those seeking&#xA;    mimesis with specific, individual cases of reality or imagination.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and (from the Axis of Form section)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Rules, in a role-playing game, represent an encoded mimetic&#xA;  reflection of the fictional reality of the game filtered through the&#xA;  author's understanding and stylistic habits. They are an encoded&#xA;  social contract that players agree to insure that bad or otherwise&#xA;  undesirable things happen to their characters in ways that appear&#xA;  realistic or fun. A game where there is no chance of conflict or&#xA;  failure has no need of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;While rules are mimetic themselves, the act of encoding them and&#xA;  describing the statistical operations upon attempts at agency&#xA;  changes them from a purely mimetic representation of a world&#xA;  into a framework for understanding their own reality. Players at a&#xA;  table then build their own understanding of a world from these&#xA;  rules, instead of purely trying to mimic reality. However, answers&#xA;  to rules questions that are not well situated within the rule system&#xA;  can choose to derive their answer from other rules present in the&#xA;  system: showing how the edge case is indeed covered by the rules&#xA;  as written, or may try to describe a mimicable aspect of reality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The act of using the rules as a reference to uncertain situations&#xA;  within the rules represents accepting the form of the rules: they&#xA;  have a structure and a meta-statistical pattern that can be used to&#xA;  adjudicate the situation in question. The acceptance of the form&#xA;  of the rules requires that the answers be from or suggested by the&#xA;  rules and internally consistent with the rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;On the other side of the axis is the understanding that because the&#xA;  rules are designed to mimic reality, answers to rules questions&#xA;  should be drawn from reality as the primary form of the source.&#xA;  While the rules are a useful mediator, there is no need to draw&#xA;  upon them to cover edge cases or even to respect their authority&#xA;  when they imperfectly mimic something from the “real world.”&#xA;  Most people on the site, however, do not have a pure adherence to&#xA;  either rules or mimesis but fall between the two extremes. The&#xA;  articulation of archetypes within this design space is not meant to&#xA;  indicate that all who belong to a certain archetype always have&#xA;  answers that are at the extremes of the archetype, but that they are&#xA;  privileges of mimesis or vice versa. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should also read the rest of the paper, which is quite good, if a bit sesquipedalian.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The terms are nascent, but are entering the lexicon without too much difficulty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The terms introduction to English occurred as a result of the work of Wilhelm Windelband, and though their meanings have varied from field to field, Idiographic entities and Nomothetic entities are consistently held to form a dichotomy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No 'official' noun form of the words currently exist but, like in RPGs, codified rules are typically drawn from some field of expert experience and development occurring outside the codified rules.  Basically this means we get to make up our own noun form and see it in a dictionary in a few years if it gets adopted.  I suggest Nomothesis and Idiography.  In extant philosophical work the adjectival form is frequently just nouned, resulting in phrases like 'the idiographic' and 'the nomothetic'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the context of RPGs these mean that the esteemed Dr. Ballsun-Stanton, felt he needed a euphemism for hard-rules systems/players/ideologies/etc (nomothetic gaming social contracts) and soft-rules systems/players/etc (ideographic gaming social contracts).  The nomothetic seek and use the general, hence applying the rules to the specific actions of players, while the idiographic seek the specific, hence modifying or ignoring the rules as convenient in achieving mimesis (sameness) with the 'reality' of the game world.  Basically a primacy of nomothesis is what drives hard-rules RPGers like myself to seek and uphold 'general' rules (whether they be ones we make ourselves or those in published text) while a primacy of idiography (or, more likely, mimesis itself) is what drives soft-rules RPGers to ignore the rules when they proscribe something contrary to that RPGers conceptualization of the game world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2014-12-03T05:30:51.523" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T05:30:51.523" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5183" CreationDate="2014-12-02T12:26:15.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Nomothetic&lt;/strong&gt; - relates to rules systems/social contracts/play that believe written rules act as absolute boundaries in defining what is and isn't possible within a game. They are hard and fast, and anything that isn't defined by them isn't allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Idiographic&lt;/strong&gt; - relates to rules systems/social contracts/play that believe written rules are only guidelines, particularly when questions of what is and isn't possible in the 'game world' come up. In order to determine what is possible, an ideal/imagined scenario is often used. Examples might include 'it's how it would work if the world was real' or 'it's how it would work in the genre of the game being played'. If there is consensus at the table (however this is agreed) that something should be possible, then it doesn't matter whether that particular thing is defined/allowed within the system being used and its written rules. Agreement will then be reached at the table as to how to model what they have decided is allowed within the rules system being used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms, rules systems aren't usually solely one or the other of these, and often contain aspects or sub-systems that tend to favour one or the other. A particular gaming group might also emphasise a particular approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2014-12-02T23:23:26.173" LastActivityDate="2014-12-02T23:23:26.173" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5199" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5202" CreationDate="2014-12-03T05:22:27.957" Score="0" ViewCount="212" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51509/how-does-lack-of-in-character-rules-knowledge-impact-play-in-fate&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, in turn inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51503/subverting-the-stormwind-fallacy-part-1-what-can-characters-know-about-thei&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears to be the majority opinion that some quality of the impact of game systems prevents authoritative answers as to the impact of special in-character knowledge of the rules-as-metaphysics in a system-agnostic manner (i.e. in a general manner with specific differences between general system categories based of off general principles).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I currently disagree with this opinion, but am aware I am likely wrong because I do not understand this position at all.  How and why does the impact of special in-character knowledge of the rules-as-metaphysics vary between game systems?  If this is not possible to answer, what is it about system differences that makes no general theory of the impact of in-character knowledge formulatable?  What prevents these issues from being overcome?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit/Re-Explaination:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &quot;How does a post-modernist cosmology affect a game?&quot; is not answerable because different rule systems behave so erratically different (i.e. they form a chaotic system) that either no possible unifying principle can be applied or such a principle would require more effort than it is appropriate to ask for from this site (this is a reasonable position).  I don't understand why or that this is the case.  Explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" OwnerDisplayName="the dark wanderer" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T22:47:11.127" Title="How does the nature of a game system impact how in-character knowledge of a rules-based metaphysics impacts gameplay?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5200" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5199" CreationDate="2014-12-03T05:57:47.603" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The relationship between rules and in fictional setting varies by system.&lt;/strong&gt; For any two given systems and settings, the rules will simulate different things, for different reasons, in order to produce different kinds of stories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a game like GURPS, for example, the rules an (extremely approximate) simulation of the physical laws that govern the game world and the experiences of its characters, and the difficulty of an action is governed by (for example) the abilities and circumstances of the character and the resources and expertise required to achieve the task. In a system like Fate, on the other hand, the rules are built around resolving the dramatic moments of stories that take place within a world, and the difficulty of an action is governed by how dramatically important the action is and how interesting the consequences of failure and success are. In each game, the consequences of characters knowing about the &quot;rules&quot; would be drastically different; In GURPS, a character might try to find rules contradictions or loopholes they could exploit; In Fate, a character might try and ramp up (or eliminate) the dramatic stakes in order to improve their chances of success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Because the way in which the rules of the game relate to to the fictional world can vary so much, the consequences of characters being aware of the rules will change from one game to the next.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T05:57:47.603" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5199" CreationDate="2014-12-03T06:02:58.053" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a question of post-modernism and setting. Self-awareness is a post-modernist response to &quot;normal&quot; settings. Any game, in any setting, can be made post-modern and self-aware. Most games, and most published settings do not presume this self-awareness, as the fact of the self-awareness becomes the focus of the narrative, rather than the narrative itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most normal stories do not focus on the mechanics of story, because that's not the story they want to tell. The entire post-modernism movement was founded on exposing the mechanics of art as art.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T06:02:58.053" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5199" CreationDate="2014-12-03T06:06:05.083" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Once you start introducing &quot;rules as metaphysics&quot; into the imagined space, a few things start to happen. The first is that you'll see characters start to &quot;reason&quot; out the effects — &lt;strong&gt;Earthdawn&lt;/strong&gt;, for instance, has levels of initiation that can correspond to character levels, and in one book for &lt;strong&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/strong&gt;, an NPC scientist discovers the &quot;vitae efficiency unit,&quot; which players will recognize as the &quot;blood point.&quot; (There are some who say that the game &lt;strong&gt;Paranoia&lt;/strong&gt; started out this way: the multiple clones were meant to represent players who just recreated the same character again and again after dying.) At this point, the intrusion of the rules into the metaphysics is mild, and doesn't harm the verisimilitude very much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second level is where characters in the game are so exposed to the rules as they intrude into the imagined space that they no longer behave in ways untainted by the knowledge. This is the &lt;em&gt;Order of the Stick&lt;/em&gt; level -- characters talk openly about spell levels and saving throws and the like -- or something like &lt;strong&gt;Buffy,&lt;/strong&gt; where people make inside jokes about the genre they're in. (Remember &quot;Normal Again,&quot; where Buffy is flashing between the world of the story as we know it and a world where she's a mentally ill girl and all the plot holes and dramatic contrivances are held up as signs of her madness? Like that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third and final level of rules as metaphysics intrusion is where the characters have so much access to rules knowledge that they eventually understand that they are characters in a game being played. (No lie -- there's an &lt;strong&gt;Over the Edge&lt;/strong&gt; scenario where this is the end state.) At this point, gameplay generally devolves into pawn stance as the players lose the incentive to roleplay or the game becomes an exploration of metafiction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, the impact on differing games of &quot;rules as metaphysics&quot; varies based on their resilience to parody and camp. In your example, if the GM describes Charles as &quot;checking an Aspect,&quot; it's akin to saying that &quot;Charles looks at Alice's watch -- not Bob's, &lt;em&gt;Alice's&lt;/em&gt; -- and sees that there's only ten minutes left, so he has time to make his escape.&quot; (The &quot;ten o'clock monster&quot; from LARP, as another example.) If Charles understands Aspects, then Charles understands Fate Points, which means that Charles stops acting in ways recognizable to Alice as &quot;like a person.&quot; How important that is will vary from system to system and setting to setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2014-12-03T06:21:56.090" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T06:21:56.090" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5203" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-03T11:21:25.563" Score="19" ViewCount="1485" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the title says.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm starting to think that there are a few different views of what &quot;RAW&quot; means here on RPG.SE. I think that it is time to sit down and pinpoint the &quot;correct&quot; way to use the corresponding tag, so we can prevent further confusion. I will list how I see some people using this tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please Cite Rules&lt;/strong&gt; — &lt;em&gt;RAW&lt;/em&gt; as a shortcut for &quot;rules citations are needed&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51316/does-the-rider-need-to-expend-an-action-to-ride-a-horse&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Literal Mechanics Consequences&lt;/strong&gt; — Questions about what happens if we take book literally, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48632/can-a-night-elf-swim-naked-in-a-volcano&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How does this work?&lt;/strong&gt; — Questions about &lt;em&gt;finding&lt;/em&gt; rules, that may or may not exist. Most of the time, those questions also add &quot;If those rules are missing, house rules are welcome&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50728/are-there-rules-for-called-shots-in-dd-4e&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag valid for all of those uses? Are there other uses for which it is valid? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, we've had a bunch of other discussions about rules-as-written tags and such:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please&quot;&gt;Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3484/what-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;What are the Pros and Cons of the rules-as-written tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3476/what-are-appropriate-sources-to-reference-in-questions-tagged-rules-as-written&quot;&gt;What are appropriate sources to reference in questions tagged [rules-as-written]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/880/by-the-book-tag&quot;&gt;“By the Book” Tag&lt;/a&gt; — not really rules-as-written, but almost the same use nowadays.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2984/what-benefit-does-the-rules-lawyering-tag-bring-to-our-community&quot;&gt;What benefit does the &amp;quot;rules-lawyering&amp;quot; tag bring to our community?&lt;/a&gt; — the discussion that was the genesis of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, looking back at these metas, I'm not sure if we need to have this tag &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;. It seems to be causing more trouble than it is worth, and the consensus seems to have been, more than once, that it is indeed a bad, meta tag. Anyway, if we want to keep this tag, I think it's time to define &lt;em&gt;what we want this tag for&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T17:48:20.410" Title="What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2014-12-03T11:54:06.277" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpWmlRNfLck&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;War. Huh. What is it good for&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the discussion on my answer, I move that we burn &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; with fire. Questions who require rules as written only answers can specify those directives &lt;em&gt;in&lt;/em&gt; the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not believe that the tag has shown sufficient discriminatory power for the problems it presents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3484/what-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;Pros and cons of rules as written&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Contrast: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yknZf6xER60&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The War song&lt;/a&gt; (as our original intent for... the tag?) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T11:59:59.190" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5205" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2014-12-03T12:06:36.267" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the current tag wiki text offers us a consistent protocol to follow with rules-as-written:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Interpretations and applications of rules that only take into&#xA;  consideration specifically what published game material states.&#xA;  Questions involving this tag require explicit citations of the rules&#xA;  in question when providing an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is a use for this tag explicitly requesting citations from specified material, as opposed to house rules and &quot;common sense&quot;. It is, and should be, applicable to the three types of questions presented by the OP, perhaps barring house rule requests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T12:06:36.267" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2014-12-03T14:06:29.710" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is well established that there are differing views between games/systems/people/tables as to the exact definition of RAW, and this causes some of the less friendly disagreements on this site. In these circumstances it is foolhardy in the extreme to expect it's tag to be used with any consistency at all. Therefore, we should burn it and require detail in the question as to what a questioner means when they use RAW and how they want to apply it to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2014-12-03T14:06:29.710" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5207" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-04T06:41:32.937" Score="-2" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I recently read Brain, mxyzplk, and CRoss's excellent paper which can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18762/how-do-i-handle-a-group-that-does-not-understand-the-assumption-rule/18765#18765&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, in Brian's answer.  I migrate through the different divisions of the RPG space when performing different tasks, but I have come to notice a trend in a particular type of question I ask being rejected by this site as too broad.  After reading the paper I have identified the sections of questions which are rejected as those I ask from a Magic-User prospective, i.e. both those which I ask expecting some kind of created system that is applied to existing rules to produce a range of desired behaviors and, with much more prejudice, those which I ask to ascertain the effects of a &lt;em&gt;general&lt;/em&gt; mechanic on gameplay, expecting an overview of what is possible to accomplish with said mechanic, the relevant factors influencing its effects, and (for a best answer) examples of published material using the mechanic to accomplish that effect (I did this and this is how it turned out is also ok).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously sometimes these questions really are too broad (&quot;In what kinds of games are rules for encumbrance useful?&quot; Answer: idk, lots.  How do you define &quot;kind of game&quot;?  Also, list question so on thin ice already) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other times, they aren't (at least, I really think so) (&quot;What impact would changing the d20 to a d24 have on a D&amp;amp;D 3.5 game assuming all players are provided dice?&quot; Answer: crit less often, modifiers matter slightly less, qualitative effects and multipliers matter more by comparison, crit effects less good due to crit chance decrease)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really have this problem with spell asked from other perspectives (I actually use the Cleric perspective much more than the Magic User one because I find it cooler and more fun.  I also have developed a significant degree of expertise with the Thief perspective because I GM groups that 'should not work' according to the Same Page Tool and other various resources and have put special effort into learning and researching how to do this, with the Thief (or 'Casual gamer/Social gamer' (both of which are misnomers)) perspective presenting me the most problems.  I never encounter this issue when asking from a Cleric perspective (because Cleric questions are the least subjective and most naturally specific of all RPG questions), and I don't ask questions from a thief perspective because I'm not an expert in using that perspective myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that being said, &lt;strong&gt;how can I ask good Magic User questions, and how can I tell them apart from bad ones?&lt;/strong&gt;  Is this the place to ask Magic User questions or are they all inherently and necessarily in violation of Good Subjective/Bad Subjective or some other aspect of the site's question paradigm?  Is this something I can do without knowing the answer to the question I'm asking or should I just go buy a mithral keyboard and hope for the best?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts so far:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions never are about a 'specific problem' the way other people see 'specific problems' because the specific problems of a Magic User are nomothetic, and people only accept idiographic problems as specifics. (X thing happened!  Fix it! v.s. I believe X to be a underlying principle governing the occurrence of problems for me, how do I make it not a problem (Cleric) or what do I do to change it (Magic User).  Worse still is the nomothetic impulse to ask &quot;T,Y,Z,P,Q, and R happened and appear to be similar, what is X, the underlying problem which I have?&quot;, which is a guess-my-problem question and thus bad)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, these questions do each have an answer, and answers can vary in quality due to both correctness and writing.  The questions are less subjective than many other allowed questions on the site (Thief perspective questions come to mind).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;affirmed that the site is inclusive with regard to playstyles&lt;/a&gt;, which seems like it ought to mean that each of the four presented divisions of the design space (and any other outlying groups created by failure of the system's underlying model to accurately model people, if this is the case) ought to be free to ask and answer questions pertinent to their playstyles so long as they do not violate MSE requirements.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If MU questions are allowed, it will often be the case that a question asked from a Magic User will be unanswerable without the MU having any way of knowing without asking. (Finding no material on a topic via internet searches could mean that the thing you are searching for can't be done for some reason you are unaware of or just that it hasn't been done/asked about before and written about in an accessible manner.  Both are frequently the case, at least for me.)  For example, I might wonder &quot;Since static spell effects can be modularly combined for novel purposes anyways, what's the difference between a system that is designed statically with the understanding that provided spells may end up serving as modules in User-created spells and a system that is designed modularly at the presented level the RAW?&quot;.  I really don't know if that is an ok question or not.  I can find no information about this online at all (besides a million or so indie developers insisting that their &quot;unique modular spell system&quot; is better than all other spell systems because flexibility, with no real support.  Is this because the question is either to hard or 'too dumb' to be answered or because answers, while provide-able, are not readily available?  Is wanting to know the answer and being unable to find it after 2 seconds effort a good enough 'problem' reason to post a question (probably not)?  2 minutes? 2 hours?  2 days?  2 years(Yes.  Also I'm probably obsessed and should probably deal with that)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also possibly all my MU questions are bad for some other reason and I'm just getting lucky with the non-MU questions.  Or maybe it's just coincidence.  Or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T07:56:20.943" Title="How can I reduce my chance of Arcane Spell Failure?" Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2015-02-07T12:11:09.697" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5207" CreationDate="2014-12-04T07:56:20.943" Score="4" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't really deal with hypotheticals well: they require discussion and refinement, since the full details aren't available.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Therefore: situate your problems in your experience. Solve &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; problems. Discussion is great. Somewhere else. We need specific problems because we must give specific answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We like &lt;em&gt;simple&lt;/em&gt; problems. (note, simple != easy). Most answers should be short, well situated in experience and evidence, and well researched. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We like questions which know what answers they expect. Your assertion: &quot; are nomothetic, and people only accept idiographic problems as specifics.&quot; is absolutely incorrect both in assertion and use of terms. Rules questions are &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; easier to answer, have better answers more quickly, and have less argument. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our site acknowledges that different play styles exist. We however, have relaxed none of our requirements on question &lt;em&gt;quality.&lt;/em&gt; Specific problems, situated in your experience, with criteria that allow us to differentiate a good answer from bad. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;If MU questions are allowed, it will often be the case that a question asked from a Magic User will be unanswerable without the MU having any way of knowing without asking. &quot; Yep, and therefore shouldn't be asked. You should have sufficient experience by now to have a feeling for what questions are trouble, poor quality, and worthless. Don't ask them. Not because they represent a bad &quot;play style&quot; but because &lt;em&gt;they are bad questions that should instead be discussed on a forum.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It sounds like most of your high level discussions want to be discussions. Go discuss them somewhere else. It sounds like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/8669/760&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/8669/760&lt;/a&gt; is a good question for you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Since static spell effects can be modularly combined for novel purposes anyways, what's the difference between a system that is designed statically with the understanding that provided spells may end up serving as modules in User-created spells and a system that is designed modularly at the presented level the RAW?&quot; Closed as too broad. subjective, and unclear what you're asking. Followed by days of edits and discussion. Again, the theme: &quot;what problem have you run into? Where did you run into it? describe the problem well.&quot; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Is wanting to know the answer and being unable to find it after 2 seconds effort a good enough 'problem' reason to post a question (probably not)?&quot; Wrong criteria. Assess &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; an answer exist, or is discussion and research required.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; case, given your history and proclivities, err on the side of finding a better venue where you can discuss and theorize to your heart's content. Bring problems that you have run into &lt;em&gt;in the real world&lt;/em&gt; to us. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T07:56:20.943" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5209" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2014-12-04T15:18:47.483" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The purpose of the tag are your #1 and #2 uses, which are mostly the same thing. Just &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; literal you have to be has some wiggle room, but I’d say even in #1 you should be sticking to fairly literal understandings. Implying or claiming that the rules &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; work a certain way can be a big claim, and it should be well backed-up. It is much better to couch interpretations in language that indicates that it is such and acknowledges alternatives, than it is to claim a definitive “correct” answer that you cannot justify as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In most cases where there are questions of how literal one should be with the RAW, the best answer is one that is simply thorough: it acknowledges the literal result, acknowledges the problems with that, and acknolwedges reasonable alternatives and/or offers suggestions based on experience for improving the rules. In these cases, answers should follow the form indicated in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4563&quot;&gt;How Do We Handle a Desire to Challenge the Frame of a Question&lt;/a&gt; &amp;ndash; give the strict answer first, then challenge it with alternatives that are less strict but work better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your #3 use is not appropriate and is a misuse of the tag. I am not sure about your example question, however: the bulk of the question seems, to me, to be looking for a #1-type answer, and then &lt;em&gt;only if that doesn’t exist&lt;/em&gt;, does it ask for houserules or the like. I’m honestly not sure how this question should be tagged: to me, it reads like a RAW question that is explicitly inviting answerers to challenge the frame of the question – &lt;em&gt;in much the same manner as the meta question.&lt;/em&gt; That is, it requests non-RAW suggestions only after an answer has already established that RAW doesn’t have an answer. If the request was never made, that same answer would be a valid RAW answer that challenges the frame of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also question how common your #3 misuse actually is. I have seen several users &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; the tag has been misused on questions where I don’t get that impression at all. I’d like to call on our community to give users the benefit of the doubt, and to assume that they are competent enough to ask their questions correctly unless given specific evidence to the contrary. If there is a lot of evidence of misuse, that would speak to a need to improve the tag wiki, but I just haven’t seen that evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T15:18:47.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5189" CreationDate="2014-12-04T15:52:07.350" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Experiential audit of the Experiential audit of [rules-as-written]&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Repetition intentional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see a lot of questions being listed as misuses, based on the idea that they are rule-clarification type questions. &lt;strong&gt;That alone is insufficient to conclude that a question has been mistagged.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A person can ask for a clarification of the rules without the RAW tag, and RAW does not mean rules-clarification. That said, they also &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; ask a rules-clarification question with the RAW tag; that is a valid and meaningful choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With no more information than that, &lt;strong&gt;you have to assume that they intended to do what they did.&lt;/strong&gt; Didn’t tag with RAW? Must be interested in answers not necessarily out of the rules. Did tag with RAW? Must not be, must want everything to be by the book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only when you get someone tagging RAW, but asking after houserules, suggestions, and the like, or commenting that answers are too legalistic, should there be reason to start suspecting they acted in error. On the flip side, someone not tagging RAW, but then commenting on answers asking after book citations, is also someone you should suspect made a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But don’t assume there &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; a mistake just because there &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; have been a mistake. For all you know, the tagging could have been quite intentional. In fact, considering that they explicitly went and tagged it, the safer assumption is that it was. You don’t know what they want better than they do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T15:52:07.350" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5211" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-04T18:35:31.740" Score="19" ViewCount="556" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; has two purposes right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;this question is about the rules as written&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;answer must obey special rules&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; doesn't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to have that second purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what &lt;strong&gt;votes&lt;/strong&gt; are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before it's brought up — no, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is not a counter-example that shows that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; can have special rules and work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and &quot;this is off-topic&quot; delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are &lt;em&gt;banned&lt;/em&gt;. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; RAW, and &lt;em&gt;aboutness&lt;/em&gt; is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is the very tag we would naturally want to replace &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt; with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should save it&lt;/strong&gt; because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should save it&lt;/strong&gt; because it legitimately describes many of our questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should save it&lt;/strong&gt; because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should save it&lt;/strong&gt; because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should save it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that &lt;em&gt;doesn't even work&lt;/em&gt; and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote with me to set &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;. We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please&quot;&gt;Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/a&gt; (and every meta &lt;em&gt;it&lt;/em&gt; links to)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-01-08T21:24:38.810" Title="The [rules-as-written] tag is a good tag, but we've made it sick. Let's cure it" Tags="|discussion|tags|policy|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5211" CreationDate="2014-12-04T18:41:35.093" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It doesn’t &lt;strong&gt;have&lt;/strong&gt; special rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question defines a topic. Answers are required to stay on that topic (or stray only after addressing the question on-topic). RAW questions are no different in this regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only reason that RAW is perceived to have special rules is because a lot of people want to &lt;em&gt;ignore the topic&lt;/em&gt; of RAW questions, and post non-RAW answers, and then are upset when those answers get down-voted or deleted. They are upset and feel that it must be because the RAW tag is special. They want to encode this perceived specialness in the tag wiki, because they feel “burned” because they didn’t understand the question in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the tag isn’t special. Posting “Well, I don’t know the rules, but this has worked really well for my games in the past,” which would otherwise be an acceptable answer, is off-topic for such a question, and should be downvoted and/or deleted &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the same way as “Well, I don’t know anything about 5e, but in 4e we did this and it was awesome,” in a question tagged 5e should be. Posting “the rule says this,” when it does not, in fact, say that, should be downvoted just as “5e does this,” when they’re actually describing a 4e concept should be downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-12-04T18:41:35.093" CommentCount="51" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5211" CreationDate="2014-12-04T19:26:14.567" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To resolve this, I think two things need to happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove the special rules from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag that make it a meta-tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't flag or down-vote answers that don't have citations if they aren't asked for.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I absolutely agree that the special rules need to be burned, I think this also necessitates a change to our culture to reflect this. If we remove the rules from the tag, but continue to down-vote answers that don't have citations, even when citations aren't asked for, the problem will remain, only worse because now it's even less likely that a new user will know about this invisible rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, this goes back to the heart of Stack Exchange policy: &lt;strong&gt;Questions must be held to a high standard of quality and clarity in order to maintain a healthy group of experts that provide good answers.&lt;/strong&gt; Right now, we're putting the onus on the answerer to know to add citations if the question being asked is about rules-as-written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, I say that we should put the onus on the questioner; they should be required to ask for citations if they think citations are needed. If someone asks a question that you think requires citations, but doesn't stipulate that, then you should edit that question to include this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also say that &lt;strong&gt;not all RAW questions necessarily need citations.&lt;/strong&gt; No other type of question &lt;em&gt;universally requires&lt;/em&gt; this kind of rigor. As long as the answer is clear and useful without citations, then down-voting or flagging that answer is not helpful. If an answer could be improved by citations, then by all means edit them in. I expect that most good RAW answers will include citations anyways, but this should be considered an improvement to the answer, not a requirement for it to be considered valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17908" LastEditorUserId="17908" LastEditDate="2014-12-06T05:20:42.123" LastActivityDate="2014-12-06T05:20:42.123" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5211" CreationDate="2014-12-04T22:51:07.620" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm all for healing it, but when we heal it, will there actually be a valuable tag left?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The [rules-as-written] tag evolved for classifying questions that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;were asking about the rules, or how something would work inside the rules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;wanted answers to do some combination of: stick exclusively to the rules themselves, take the writing literally, make &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; up (no house rules or fiats), cite the rules, and so on.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, the tag was fine, it was just describing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, at some point, a lot of people started using [rules-as-written] as a short-hand for their requirements, and &lt;em&gt;stopped writing&lt;/em&gt; those requirements, which turned it into a meta-tag which implied rules on answers. To complicate the matter, we don't always agree on what those requirements &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt;, and people stopped saying them explicitly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we have two options for dealing with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't let [rules-as-written] become a &lt;em&gt;substitute&lt;/em&gt; for explaining RAW requirements. Questions still need to explain those requirements clearly, leaving no need for [rules-as-written] to imply anything extra. &lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; the tag returns to just describing the content of the question, and categorising questions that do that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make [rules-as-written] no longer be about the second bullet point. However, that will mean it's just for questions about the rules, which means it's the [rules] tag, which we don't need.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-12-06T14:49:36.423" LastActivityDate="2014-12-06T14:49:36.423" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5215" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-06T19:26:20.183" Score="-3" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;Recent&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5148/are-our-implicit-information-tagging-practices-becoming-a-problem&quot;&gt;conversations&lt;/a&gt; on meta  and in chat have suggested that we don't do a particularly good job of scoping questions to the asker's approaches to gameplay. We have an established pattern of tagging questions based on specific systems both because this narrows the scope of good answers and because it makes it easier for answers surface questions that are in their purview.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example tags could include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; When the game takes the system as-is, and does not wish to modify or extend it with house rules or unofficial content.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulationism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulationism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulationism&lt;/a&gt; When the game is concerned strongly with emulating the real world in a believable way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrativism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrativism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrativism&lt;/a&gt; When the game is concerned strongly with presenting an engaging story.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/collaborativism&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;collaborativism&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;collaborativism&lt;/a&gt; When the game is developed with equal influence from all players.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have included &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; here because it is most accurately a description of a style of play. I think some of the wrangling over the purpose of this tag has been caused by the fact that it has lived on as the only game style tag, and thus we haven't properly figured out what to do with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we encourage the use of such tags to distinguish different game styles &lt;em&gt;in support of explicit game style definition in the question itself&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T15:20:05.297" Title="Should we have &quot;game style&quot; tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5215" CreationDate="2014-12-06T19:26:20.183" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, game style tags provide valuable categorization of questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game style tags provide another layer of information about the querent's goals. While for some systems which clearly target a specific game style (such as Roll for Shoes), they may be redundant, in systems with a larger, amorphous community (such as D&amp;amp;D) distinguishing different approaches to the game is extremely valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like system tags, game style tags can provide a framework that commenters can use to request more information about an unclear question. They also provide a more descriptive identification than the current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; question, which is often used as a label for questions which address issues bigger than a single system, but frequently fail to account for assumptions on the part of the querent about the breadth of the RPG ecosystem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Recommended usage&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These tags should be used to summarize existing statements in the question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like all other tags, we should not allow these game style tags to add additional information to the question which is not present in a reading of just the question text. Tags' main value is navigational, allowing related questions to be explored together, not as a method for shorthanding a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These tags do not exclude frame-challenging answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as it is sometimes valid to answer a question tagged with a system tag with a suggestion that a different system may be better suited to the goal at hand, so it is valid to answer a question tagged with a particular game style with a suggestion that a different style may improve the situation. These tags suggest the scope of answers a querent is seeking, but not necessarily the scope of answers which are good for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2014-12-06T19:26:20.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5217" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-07T11:59:49.663" Score="-1" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am fully aware that comments are &lt;strong&gt;temporary&lt;/strong&gt; means to communicate and improve a question or answer. Please don't mark this as a duplicate to the appropriate meta post, I have read all of them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51826/are-there-homebrew-fix-classes-or-rules-that-put-fighting-types-and-roguish-type&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; post of mine had 3 comments, some asking for clarification. I came back not an hour later to find them gone. The only answer I got was &quot;take it to chat&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I do not want to take it to chat!&lt;/strong&gt; What I want is &lt;em&gt;offline&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;non-realtime&lt;/em&gt; communication with people. I don't even know most of them because voting is anonymous. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On what base is Brian Ballsun-Stanton deleting my completely appropriate comments after just minutes without letting me even know what was answered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who is he, to tell me that I &lt;em&gt;must have&lt;/em&gt; an online chat? Does he someone own my PC or my network or my time using both?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where can I challenge his decisions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T12:07:50.433" Title="Instant comment deletion" Tags="|support|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5217" CreationDate="2014-12-07T12:07:50.433" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;12&lt;/em&gt; deleted comments on that answer are in violation of site policy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We forbid argument in comments. Chat is always logged, and voluntary, and so an isolated chat room is &lt;em&gt;less bad&lt;/em&gt; than the alternative. Chat can absolutely be a semi-private voluntary asynchronous space for post improvement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We forbid extended discussions in comments. There is a series of 5 answers in sequence that were intended to be a single super-length comment. That's not appropriate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We allow answers to challenge the frame of the question. We do not allow play style discussions or arguments in comments (as per meta.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post has already been flagged multiple times, thus it has attracted moderator attention. The flags have been insufficiently persuasive to argue deletion. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the option had been open to migrate the whole argument to a chat room, I would have taken it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back and forth discussion in comments is extremely discouraged. Back and forth arguments are nipped in the bud.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T12:07:50.433" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5211" CreationDate="2014-12-07T12:14:05.913" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should not try to rehabilitate the tag. Instead, we should more aggressively &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/8012&quot;&gt;enforce Good Subjective for home brew and house rules&lt;/a&gt;. If people are discouraged from posting arbitrary, ad hoc rules then there is much less need for the RAW tag for any reason. We are only supposed to post RAW, RAI, and fully vetted house rules in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that focus on unvetted, ad hoc rules are Bad Subjective and should be treated as such. Regular users may downvote them or comment linking to the Good Subjective rules (either the general rules or Brian’s linked post). Simply following established SE policies here greatly reduces the need to demand RAW for rules clarification questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That narrows the scope for RAW questions to thought experiments and rants in disguise, the sorts of question where somebody points out an absurd or surprising implication of the rules as written, and asks if it’s really true. Such questions are popular but also a rough fit for SE. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8012" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T14:21:06.997" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5215" CreationDate="2014-12-07T15:20:05.297" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  If we can't even agree on what RAW means we sure as shootin' aren't going to agree on what simulation or other more contentious terms mean to construct our Custom RPG.SE Mandatory Taxonomy of Gaming Styles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, tags are supposed to be EMERGENT from real questions asked by real users, who are welcome to (and have) used tags like simulationism when they think it's important.  In almost all cases a desire to proactively build out a tag taxonomy is prima facie inappropriate.  We only do it when large scale confusion is resulting otherwise (like the D&amp;amp;D versions taxonomy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case querents are welcome to describe in their question or use a tag.  Coming up with &quot;must apply&quot; style tags will run afoul of a dozen obvious problems stemming from askers who don't understand the term, disagreements over the term, etc,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-12-07T15:20:05.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5221" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-08T20:36:44.957" Score="1" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now I write my answers sort of like essays:  the answer has a thesis, generally present somewhere in the first text block, and the most answer-y portions of the answer occur in the first and last (excepting a footnote style addendum, when present) text blocks, while the middle passages serve to explain and support each aspect of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I was made aware that having critical information succinctly stated only in the last paragraph makes it less likely to be read, resulting in it seeming 'hidden'.  It occurred to me that I could instead put information in descending order of importance, like a newspaper article, on the assumption people are only going to skim the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are either of these options expressly encouraged or discouraged by this site or SE policy?&#xA;Is one generally better than the other or are they both good, but in different contexts (and what differentiates the relevant contexts)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T01:25:02.737" Title="Should answers be like essays or newspapers" Tags="|discussion|answers|formatting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5222" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-12-08T20:42:10.920" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions about writing style and format pertinent to any aspect of the site's use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/markdown&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;markdown&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;markdown&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:37:32.233" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:37:32.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5223" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-12-08T20:42:10.920" Score="0" Body="This tag is for questions about writing style and format pertinent to any aspect of the site's use. (See also: the [markdown] tag.)" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:37:32.233" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:37:32.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5224" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5221" CreationDate="2014-12-08T22:16:16.933" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to go with whatever seems to “work” for a particular answer, but in general having some kind of headline, abstract, or what have you, helps to give people a perspective on what your answer &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;, so they can read your case in the appropriate lens. It also does help those who, yes, don’t read entire answers – especially when they don’t know where a long answer is going.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there aren’t any real formal style guides on this point. The goal is to provide clear, concise, correct answers that are well backed up. Whatever makes that happen is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T22:16:16.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5225" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5221" CreationDate="2014-12-08T22:18:35.403" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no &lt;strong&gt;policy&lt;/strong&gt; on this. The voting system is designed to respond to what a community of experts considers quality, and, among other things, that includes clarity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find that an answer isn't being well received, adjusting its accessibility is one way of responding. I use a blend of essay and newspaper information organisation, more or less of either depending on what I'm writing and what form it's taking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another useful too for leading the reader toward the most salient information is good headings. If they can glance at answer and see its structure, that can draw them in to find the crucial information. This is especially useful when important information is at the end by necessity or spread throughout the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T22:18:35.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="902" CreationDate="2014-12-08T23:15:53.750" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;For Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I upvote if I want to see the question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't vote if I don't find the question interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't vote if the question is unclear.  Instead I leave a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I downvote if I want to see the question deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I flag if I want to see a question closed or give it special moderator attention (negative or positive:  I flagged a question that I wanted a mod to reopen before I found out about reopen votes.  The question was also reopened and the flag marked helpful so this may be an acceptable use of flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I flag if I want the question deleted &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; I think that declining to do so would be sufficient grounds for a meta-post about moderator quality.  These kinds of flags are reserved for questions that aren't questions, are obscene or profane, are racist or sexist in a manner that is patently insulting and overtly offensive, etc.  I haven't actually given one of these yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For Answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I upvote only if:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if the answer is the right answer or close enough to it that a novice reading the answer carefully would be lead in the right direction &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answer is a right answer, no single answer can exist because the question is bad &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answer incidentally touches on something I think is valuable for RPGs in general and not generally understood.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answer is sufficiently well writen that, regardless of its actual content, a novice reading it would not reasonably be lead in a wrong direction.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answer does not meet any of my criteria for downvoting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer was the first such answer provided chronologically and no fundamentally better answers have been provided &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the answer makes a case for itself against older correct answers successfully.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I don't vote if:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am not sufficiently an expert to determine if the answer is the right answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is a little unclear, instead I leave a comment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is extremely and obviously wrong, but does not state the implication that indicates to me it is this wrong.  Instead, I leave a comment asking if that implication was intended&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I downvote if:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is wrong&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is very unclear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is very poorly written&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is misleading, such that it supports any one of the numerous commonly accepted fallacious beliefs in the RPG community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I find the answer offensive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer includes a statement like &quot;But no GM would ever allow that&quot; and I have allowed 'that' (pretty much all cases in which this statement is used).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer does not make such a statement as a parenthetical intended to deter downvoting by persons who hate on our playstyle.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AND&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer does not make such a statement as a mild expression of the answerer's playstle bias taking up no more than one line of a answer composing at least two paragraphs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is a change-of-frame answer that is anything but incredibly well done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is immoral or advocates immoral behavior&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer advocates something which lessens the value of an RPG as a form of art.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I flag if:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the answer is so exceptionally low quality I can't keep myself from doing this, despite the fact I know the flag will be declined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;moderator attention is needed/desired for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T23:15:53.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5227" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2885" CreationDate="2014-12-08T23:28:38.500" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The formatting page could defintely use more highlighting; it took me seeing other users with fancy formatting not covered in the tiny answer/question box header to use a google search to find the Meta.SE post about formatting, which links to the actually formatting guide &lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/basics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  That's a little silly, especially considering &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; guide doesn't even cover nested lists, which we cover &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  Some way of better highlighting both of these sources would be much appreciated, although the click '?'-&gt; click 'advanced help' route is at least possible without googling around.  If that could be linked to in part of the FAQ or help center, that would be good. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2014-12-08T23:28:38.500" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5228" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5231" CreationDate="2014-12-08T23:42:19.370" Score="2" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;Official documentation &lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/basics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure how to make nested lists work.  It looks like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/editing-help&quot;&gt;provided syntax&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; work, because it conflicts with code-spans (also signaled by 4 space indenting).  This indeed appears to be what happens, unless there is no intervening text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;this is a list item&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;this is a nested list item, processed correctly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;this is a list item&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is some text&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;+ I want this to line up with the other nested list item, but it doesn't 'cause it's a code span.  &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;+ It's not even a list anymore so &#xA;+ this  doesn't work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What am I doing wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:34.523" LastActivityDate="2014-12-11T00:19:42.367" Title="The nested list formatting doesn't seem to work and isn't part of the official documentation" Tags="|support|formatting|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5228" CreationDate="2014-12-08T23:56:14.430" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;(For optimum effect, your mental voice for this answer should read in William Shatner's voice.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kind of &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Like this.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The important bit&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is 4 spaces per indent (maybe 3, but 4=tab, so is good).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you break out of a UL,&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You have to start over.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;testing&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one space indent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the one-space indent only goes out by one, not unlimited nesting.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the t... okay, I've got no model for how this works. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2014-12-09T01:17:15.507" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T01:17:15.507" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5228" CreationDate="2014-12-08T23:56:49.900" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What you're doing wrong is trying to start a new list already nested. That's not an option, there's no other list for them to be nested inside yet!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're right that the list indentation syntax conflicts with code indentation, &lt;em&gt;but&lt;/em&gt; that's sorted out by the list indentation syntax taking precedence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can start a list out at the first list level.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It can even have spaces before it, which would usually make it nested if there were less-indented list items above it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can make a list item a second-level list with more indentation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or have a new line belonging to the previous list item.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you can't then break the list&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;and start a new list item at the nesting level as before.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Code for the above (all whitespace in this code block is 100% deliberate):&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take note that the first list level starts with a space before it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; * You can start a list out at the first list level.&#xA; * It can even have spaces before it, which would usually make it nested if there were less-indented list items above it.&#xA;   * You can make a list item a second-level list with more indentation.&#xA;&#xA;     Or have a new line belonging to the previous list item.&#xA;&#xA;But you can't then break the list&#xA;&#xA;   * and start a new list item at the nesting level as before.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-12-09T00:14:06.443" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T00:14:06.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5228" CreationDate="2014-12-09T00:00:10.990" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;What's happening is that when you include an empty line and don’t indent the next one, Markdown treats that as starting a new paragraph (specifically, whatever block tag you are currently in is closed, and then a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tag is inserted). Thus, in your case, it ends the list (which is a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;ul&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;; putting a blank line triggers &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;/ul&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; followed by &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As pointed out in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5230/4563&quot;&gt;doppelgreener’s answer&lt;/a&gt;, indentation saves you. By indenting lines that are supposed to be part of the same bullet-point so the text lines up, it will remain part of the same bullet point. This works even with things like block quotes indicated with &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;, but it doesn’t work with code boxes because, as you notice, those are normally indicated by indentation – in a list, that behavior is overridden and so codeboxes won’t happen. To force a codebox, you’ll have to use the HTML tag &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;* this is a list item&#xA;&#xA;    * this is a nested list item, processed correctly&#xA;&#xA;* this is a list item&#xA;&#xA;  Here is some text, now part of the previous bullet point&#xA;&#xA;    + I want this to line up with the other nested list item, and it does.&#xA;&#xA;      &amp;gt; A block quote, for example&#xA;&#xA;  &amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;I *want* this one to be a codebox&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&#xA;&#xA;* This is still part of the list&#xA;&#xA;    This won’t be a code box even though the line starts with 4 spaces&#xA;&#xA;&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;So I had to not indent to end the list and use &amp;amp;lt;pre&amp;amp;gt; to get the code box.&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which produces:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;this is a list item&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;this is a nested list item, processed correctly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;this is a list item&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is some text, now part of the previous bullet point&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I want this to line up with the other nested list item, and it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A block quote, for example&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;I *want* this one to be a codebox&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is still part of the list&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This won’t be a codebox even though the line starts with 4 spaces&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;So I had to not indent to end the list and use &amp;lt;pre&amp;gt; to get the code box.&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T14:06:04.463" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2726" CreationDate="2014-12-09T00:00:53.923" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Creating a tag-wiki also protects against this.  Every tag should have a tag-wiki anyways, so this is not really a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T00:00:53.923" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5221" CreationDate="2014-12-09T01:25:02.737" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're doing what will answer the question the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In most cases, this is &lt;strong&gt;neither&lt;/strong&gt; essay nor newspaper form - believe it or not (I know some of our users don't) but many questions can be answered in a single paragraph.  Keep in mind that adding an essay on a related subject or your related thoughts can degrade and not enhance the value of a concise answer to a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions that really do merit a longer-form answer, it's generally considered better (and will get you more votes, and more people will benefit from your answer) to not bury your lede and use newspaper form. If you just wind up towards your answer for a page, people will TL;DR it and move on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essay form is mainly of interest when in school.  Business communication and other forms of communication generally stress brevity and giving the critical info with additional explanation below to be consumed if desired; forcing people to consume the basics first is not generally considered user friendly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T01:25:02.737" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5236" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5183" CreationDate="2014-12-09T18:51:36.123" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think they really mean anything much in the context of an RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No role-play can be completely nomothetic and no game can be purely ideographic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The essence—the genius, I would say—of the RPG lies exactly in the fact that it's NEITHER of these things. Why discuss something in relation to two things it isn't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By defining the range using two points that are definitely not applicable, you end up implying all sorts of things about what supposedly exists in between them; a false dichotomy sets up an equally false spectrum in between.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a bit like saying that tennis falls somewhere on the range between contact sport and solo-games; it's sort of true, but it misses everything that's important about the actual game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what is important about an RPG? The emergent nature of it; the iterative way in which a game develops, leaving a trail of story behind it (as distinct from story-telling games which try to find and follow the story ahead of them). So long as a RPG is producing a story that the players enjoy, it will continue and develop, and the modes in which it can do that are wider than a line between any two points can contain, no matter how many syllables they have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15520" LastActivityDate="2014-12-09T18:51:36.123" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5237" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4753" CreationDate="2014-12-09T20:43:38.247" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The third and final raffle period has closed! Thanks to everyone who participated, not just in this round but in any of the rounds! It's been a wonderful run for this contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the third raffle period, &lt;strong&gt;197 upvoted questions from 93 users&lt;/strong&gt; were generated. I'll have more detailed statistics on not just the participation in this round in this post, and statistics for the contest as a whole will be in the main post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The drawing was held in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/18999236#18999236&quot;&gt;the Fifth Edition Chatroom&lt;/a&gt; at about 19:00 UTC (2:00 PM EST) on Wednesday&lt;/strong&gt;. The drawing was done once again using a simulated 1d216 via 3d6 in base 6, using &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PQXD9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this results table&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations to &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/16414/nicholas&quot;&gt;Nicholas&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; for winning the raffle for the DMG! An email should be going out to you shortly regarding your prize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2014-12-10T19:12:14.133" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2014-12-10T00:40:53.137" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The [rules-as-written] tag fills the niche of expressing a specific configuration of a couple of &lt;em&gt;dials&lt;/em&gt; that are present for questions about the rules. All rules questions non-negotiably require a rules answer, but askers tend to have preferences regarding:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;whether the rules should be followed literally (even when doing so gets weird), versus whether interpretations and rules-bending should be made for the sake of sanity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;whether custom content (homebrew) is acceptable, which ranges from &quot;homebrew's OK&quot; through to &quot;homebrew's wasting my time, so don't bother.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are the dials. Remember any configuration is fine: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Rules as Written typical dial settings&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Follow the rules literally, even if it gets weird and nebulous. Be literal and pedantic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Homebrew's wasting my time, so don't bother. (It's useful if the rules are terrible, such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46568/when-do-per-day-spell-like-abilties-recover-in-3rd-edition/46615#46615&quot;&gt;einn&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48488/what-happens-when-hiding-behind-ones-tower-shield/48492#48492&quot;&gt;tveir&lt;/a&gt;. If there are no relevant rules, answers tend to stop there.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker just wants the rules of the situation explained or the available by-the-rules options explored, other stuff is usually unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Contrast, the non-RAW typical dial settings&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Explain the rules, but if things start getting weird or nebulous, you have the liberty to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; take everything literally, suggest interpretations, and so on.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't care either way about homebrew, I just want to understand the rules or have a practical solution. (The middle of the dial.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... when not expressed otherwise. When someone invites homebrew answers, the second dial's tuned to &quot;homebrew's OK too.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all cases, custom content &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question/5154#5154&quot;&gt;must be tested&lt;/a&gt;, and is only advisable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question/5178#5178&quot;&gt;as part of an otherwise complete answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Citations:&lt;/strong&gt; [rules-as-written] doesn't actually express a stance on them. Naturally citations usually make a RAW answer better, but there are many good and accepted RAW answers that don't cite everything (examples: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/51210/1204&quot;&gt;un&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/48075/1204&quot;&gt;duex&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/31896/1204&quot;&gt;trois&lt;/a&gt;) and it's not always important to do so. Some people expressly request them (search: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Brules-as-written%5D+is%3Aquestion+%22cite%22&quot;&gt;cite&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Brules-as-written%5D+is%3Aquestion+citation&quot;&gt;citation&lt;/a&gt;). You might be thinking &quot;hey wait, the RAW tag's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot;&gt;excerpt&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/info&quot;&gt;wiki&lt;/a&gt; say citations are required&quot;, but emergent usage doesn't agree, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4848/do-we-need-the-adventure-writing-tag&quot;&gt;usage defines tag wikis&lt;/a&gt;, not the other way around. &lt;s&gt;The tag excerpt and wiki should probably not make such a statement.&lt;/s&gt; &lt;em&gt;(They've been edited to no longer say this.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-12-16T15:24:48.343" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5239" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5240" CreationDate="2014-12-10T08:25:34.307" Score="10" ViewCount="434" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pretty much what it says in the title. I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51944/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question and it has been suggested that it is unanswerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A previous question of this type is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41089/what-explanation-do-the-dd-devs-have-for-designing-spontaneous-casters-to-lose&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, which by my understanding was decided to be a legitimate question for the site, but I could be wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: Based on the answers I've gotten here, I've updated the question to make it clear that idle speculation isn't helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update 2: Based on doppelgreener's excellent breakdown in comments of the issues with my question, I have reframed it to be about design intent specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments were deleted, but here they are for posterity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm voting to close this question as too broad. At the moment, it is inviting speculation on three different fronts: (a) what various benefits are there to having a stat of 19 rather than 18 (regardless of whether an item does it), (b) what benefit is there to having an item that would do that, and (c) why did the designers do it that way? (a) and (b) aren't necessarily related (as observed by JasonK's answer), and neither necessarily answer (c) which could be, for instance, a designer quote saying &quot;I like odd numbers, they're cool.&quot; –  doppelgreener 11 mins ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't necessarily have a problem with (a) and (b) being wrapped up together -- except whilst (a) is objectively answerable, (b) involves opinion and speculation. The stake-to-the-chest for this question though is that neither of those will answer why the developers did it. –  doppelgreener 6 mins ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:41:09.237" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:41:09.237" Title="Are questions of designer intent on-topic for this site? [2014]" Tags="|discussion|questions|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2018-05-22T16:19:33.383" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5239" CreationDate="2014-12-10T08:41:55.747" Score="22" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Unanswerable&quot; is never a reason for a question to be closed!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's truly unanswerable, then it's &lt;em&gt;provably&lt;/em&gt; unanswerable and proving it should make for a good, solid answer. Which makes it answerable in the Stack Exchange sense of the concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's not provably unanswerable, then it shouldn't be closed as unanswerable for what I hope are obvious reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if someone thinks that a question is unanswerable but cannot prove it... well, if the only answer I can give is unsupported, maybe the best thing is to not give an answer at all and hope someone else can. Perhaps I can link it around to experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Design intent is not inherently subjective.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either it's backed up by citable designer statements and supportable extrapolations thereof, or it's probably unsupported speculation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unsupported speculation isn't &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; appropriate in Stack Exchange answers. Thus design intent answers should provide citations or they probably shouldn't be answers at all. So we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have a solid and non-subjective path for questions about design intent to get answered in happy Stack Exchange ways. Hooray!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's okay for questions to wait for answers indefinitely.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question about designer intent can be answered with cited statements by designers, and usually &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; by that. It's very hard to prove a lack of relevant statements, which means the question may go unanswered--and &lt;strong&gt;that's okay&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lack of a good answer doesn't mean it's a bad question. Sometimes that means it's a great question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Often &quot;unanswerable&quot; is standing in for some other close reason like &quot;primarily opinion-based.&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what your triggering comment claims. It's not really relevant for designer-intent questions (as I've laid out above design intent can be addressed without unsupported opinion) but I'll talk about this for a moment: Opinion-based questions and answers get evaluated on their own set of experience/source-based criteria which are outside the scope of this meta post but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3205/4398&quot;&gt;well covered&lt;/a&gt; by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;. (And remember that the close reason isn't &quot;opinion-based,&quot; it's &quot;&lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based.&quot; There's a range of opinions supportable through experience and citation which are valuable and necessary to RPG.SE's function.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, if my answer can't hit the field of the question without ignoring the site's guidelines on that kind of question, it's probably best not to answer--better to vote to close and then help the querent get it into shape so that I &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-12-10T11:00:18.273" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5239" CreationDate="2014-12-10T14:53:45.550" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You shouldn’t have to, but if you’re going to ask for intent, you have to be really explicit about what constitutes a good answer to the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, you should state that you really need quotes from developers discussing the topic. You have to strictly forbid speculation or guessing. You shouldn’t have to, but it’s very common in RPG discussion for people to assume that &lt;em&gt;the way they imagine things went&lt;/em&gt; is actually what the developers were thinking. Discussions of “RAI” often become unbridled speculation, and that is never useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you shouldn’t have to say anything. People should know what a good answer is, and should know that random speculation &lt;em&gt;never is&lt;/em&gt;. But history has shown that such questions will attract bad answers &lt;em&gt;even when they take pains to explicitly tell people not to.&lt;/em&gt; And I think experienced users respond to that with Close votes when they see a question that seems to be inviting speculation by not setting those rules strictly. After all, the &lt;em&gt;point&lt;/em&gt; of Close votes aren’t necessarily “this is a bad question,” so much as “this question will invite bad &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;,” and those are the real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-10T14:53:45.550" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5239" CreationDate="2014-12-10T21:07:52.383" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given the advent of the internet, I think questions about designer intent may not be off topic, but they may be hard to answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's plenty of places such as designer blogs, game company websites, &quot;Ask Me Anything&quot; threads for designers and such that can provide a wealth of knowledge in terms of intent about how rules are generally intended to work.  (For smaller, indie designers, you can often ask them directly on their own forums as well...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I think that's also a very different question than:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What are the design effects of having the rules work like this?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of it is that a lot of roleplaying games copy conventions from other games, often without understanding why/how it worked a certain way previously* - in which case the designer themselves may not be able to answer that question but someone with better understanding of mechanics might, which is damn useful if you're either designing a game of your own OR trying to figure out how to modify a game you're playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that second question ends up serving more people more often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Of course, if you look in a lot of game books, the &quot;Introduction&quot; and &quot;GM's Advice&quot; sections often is the designer pontificating about how roleplaying 'should' work and you can easily find examples in games where the rules actually contradict their own espoused philosophy which makes their intent for play count for a lot less...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user9935" LastActivityDate="2014-12-10T21:07:52.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5228" CreationDate="2014-12-11T00:19:42.367" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Actually, you can even include code blocks inside lists without &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;, as long as you indent them by an &lt;em&gt;extra four spaces&lt;/em&gt; (or one tab) for each level of nesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks best if you also consistently indent your nested lists by four spaces; while the Markdown parser is generally forgiving and allows you to use any number of spaces to indent lists, code blocks are a special case and require more rigor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Example:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;  * This is a list item.&#xA;&#xA;    This is another paragraph inside the same list item.&#xA;&#xA;        This is a code block inside the list item.&#xA;&#xA;      * This is a nested list item.&#xA;&#xA;            This is a code block inside the nested list item.&#xA;&#xA;  * This is another list item.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Produces:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a list item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is another paragraph inside the same list item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;This is a code block inside the list item.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a nested list item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;This is a code block inside the nested list item.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is another list item.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A problem does occur if you want a code block to immediately follow a list item, but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be nested inside it.  One solution is to reset the nesting level e.g. by placing a dummy HTML comment (&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;!-- comment --&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;) before the code block.  (On sites that have syntax highlighting enabled, like SO, you can also use the comment to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/editing-help#syntax-highlighting&quot;&gt;specify the correct language for the highlighter&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;For example:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;  * This is a list item.&#xA;&#xA;    This is some normal text inside the list item.&#xA;&#xA;&amp;lt;!-- this is an invisible comment --&amp;gt;&#xA;&#xA;    This is a code block outside the list.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Produces:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a list item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is some normal text inside the list item.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;This is a code block outside the list.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, all this also works with numbered lists (&lt;code&gt;1.&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;2.&lt;/code&gt;, etc.) and block quotes (&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;) just like it works with bulleted lists (&lt;code&gt;*&lt;/code&gt; / &lt;code&gt;+&lt;/code&gt; / &lt;code&gt;-&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing you &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; do, however, is briefly &quot;pop out&quot; of a list back to a lower indentation level, and then later return to the higher indentation without a new bullet point / item number.  That is to say, &lt;em&gt;this will not work&lt;/em&gt;, and cannot be made to work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;  * This is a list item.&#xA;&#xA;This is some normal, non-indented text.&#xA;&#xA;    This is supposed to be a continuation of the previous list item&#xA;    (but will actually be parsed as a code block).&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alas, there's really nothing you can do about that, except to rethink the structure of your post.  Markdown simply does not support this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In fact, it's kind of tricky to achieve this even in raw HTML, although there are a couple of more or less klugy solutions, like setting a negative CSS margin on the &quot;outdented&quot; block, or making the continuation a separate list item with an invisible bullet.  None of those work on SE, though.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2014-12-11T00:19:42.367" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5244" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-11T21:18:53.540" Score="2" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given that L5R 4th Edition has been around for a while, and the L5R tag contains questions from multiple editions (and is often multi-tagged with L5R-4e) I'd like to make L5R a synonym of either L5R-4e or Rokugan and create a new tag for each of the other editions (such as L5R-2e and L5R-3e). Right now the default assumption seems to be that the L5R tag refers to 4e, but there are no alternatives even though questions have been asked for other editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we make L5R a synonym? Should it be a synonym of L5R-4e or of Rokugan? Should Rokugan be made a synonym of L5R and the wiki edited to clarify that the tag is intended for setting questions rather than mechanical questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we create the L5R-2e and L5R-3e tags, since its provable that people are disinclined to create unique tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="2875" LastEditDate="2014-12-11T22:00:03.377" LastActivityDate="2014-12-12T01:04:42.597" Title="Should we clean up the L5R tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5244" CreationDate="2014-12-11T23:28:32.893" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest you don't make [l5r] a synonym of any specific version, because it simply isn't one: [l5r] does not mean [l5r-4e], it means the series itself. It doesn't make intuitive sense to redirect people who write 'l5r' in the tag box to the [l5r-4e] tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll also be robbing yourself of the generic [l5r] tag, which is useful sometimes, like how we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. Someone who eventually wants to use it will have to jump through a hurdle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Right now the default assumption seems to be that the L5R tag refers to 4e, but there are no alternatives even though questions have been asked for other editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The default assumption is that [l5r] refers to l5r, and some people aren't also tagging with their version because y'all don't have a well-established practice around this and haven't been moderating those questions to enforce that practice. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for whether you should have edition-specific tags: yes, if it helps. GURPS users opt not to have edition-specific tags because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3396/1204&quot;&gt;that is not useful for them&lt;/a&gt;; the editions are all similar enough it's rarely worth specifying which edition you're using. Most other games with editions have opted for editions tags because &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; helpful: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; expertise is very different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2014-12-12T01:04:42.597" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5246" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-12T13:57:54.113" Score="3" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a follow up to this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4909/please-synomise-or-delete-blood-and-smoke-with-vampire-the-reqium-2&quot;&gt;Please synomise (or delete) [blood-and-smoke] with [vampire-the-requiem-2e]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;can we please ,migrate synomise the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; to (I believe that's the tag suggested by previous threads) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;as of a little over a week ago Blood &amp;amp; Smoke is no longer available for purchase, and those of us who did received our courtesy downloads of 2nd edition. &lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/the-whatchamacallit-with-the-blurbs-and-blasts-monday-meeting-notes/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;As of this past monday the status was&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;VTR II –  Found formatting errors in the Index of the PoD versions, so not going up for sale Weds, hopefully next Weds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth noting that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51931/1015&quot;&gt;I have had to correct tags&lt;/a&gt; recently from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-and-smoke&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blood-and-smoke&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blood-and-smoke&lt;/a&gt; and from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; so this stuff is getting confusing not being in place&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2014-12-12T20:32:10.107" Title="Blood and Smoke to Vampire the Requiem 2e" Tags="|support|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="15" ClosedDate="2014-12-13T12:46:03.913" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5247" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2014-12-14T23:19:44.140" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For discussion regarding the main-site &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, and handling RAW questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main-site RAW tag is for questions that are about the logical interactions and application of the game rules, when their written form is interpreted as strictly as possible, without reference to explanations or considerations outside of the rules texts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bringing in sources outside of game rules is not discouraged on principle, but should only be attempted when certain it is a practical solution to the problem. Such attempts are &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;&quot;challenging the frame of the question&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and best approached according to the guidelines of that meta post, to maximize the chance of being practically useful to the problem instead of merely off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-16T07:41:58.143" LastActivityDate="2018-10-16T07:41:58.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5248" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2014-12-14T23:19:44.140" Score="0" Body="For discussion regarding the main-site [rules-as-written] tag, and handling RAW questions." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-17T20:37:04.587" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T20:37:04.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5180" CreationDate="2014-12-15T01:44:51.927" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hatmas is over. The hats are gone. Go home! And &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/246533/152515&quot;&gt;leave some feedback for what you want next year&lt;/a&gt; if you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/89Fke.gif&quot; alt=&quot;here&amp;#39;s to next year!&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-01-05T00:59:17.873" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5250" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-15T13:39:59.370" Score="-13" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like a post reopened I had put on hold for &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot; here:&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53149/how-do-the-injury-and-death-mechanics-work-flow-chart&quot;&gt;How do the Injury and Death mechanics work (Flow Chart)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I fear I will get the same response here as I assume it will be the same select few that make the decision sadly. However its worth a few minutes to try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My argument:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1)First of all even if it was unclear of what I was asking(it's not), the community as a whole supported the posts that alone should be enough for it to remain open, as up voting is an indication of people finding the post helpful and in essence that being what we are trying to achieve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) As the majority of individuals that put the post on hold are very often in the same chat run on a regular basis, it could have been the pressense of a comrade mentality that drove some if not all to put the post on hold, we can't say for sure that was the case we also cannot rule it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) The posts question was &quot;How do the Injury and Death mechanics work (Flow Chart)&quot; The result was a flowchart detailing the Injury and Death mechanics. The question was how do the mechanics of a particular system work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) To what end will putting the post on hold achieve, Imo its stopping others in the community from better the post with input and potential improvements to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18345" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2014-12-15T19:34:48.657" Title="Request for reopening a post on the following grounds" Tags="|support|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5250" CreationDate="2014-12-15T14:04:32.813" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at your question and self answer it is a little too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it is very useful to have all of the information you compiled in one place instead of in multiple pages all over the place, it doesn't really fit the Q&amp;amp;A format of this specific site. This would make an incredibly well received post on forums as it is very well put together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for an explanation on an entire core rule is too broad because there are many sub questions such as &amp;quot;How does CON effect how far in the negative your HP can go&amp;quot; &amp;quot;What is HP?&amp;quot; There are also many answers. Taking a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;help for closed questions&lt;/a&gt; the too broad says.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;too broad - if your question could be answered by an entire book, or has many valid answers, it's probably too broad for our format&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow down the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8933" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-15T14:04:32.813" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5250" CreationDate="2014-12-15T15:01:45.553" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The presence of an answer should not “save” a question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you had asked your question with no answer, it would have been closed for being far too broad. This site exists (in part) for clarifying the rules, not trying to replace the PFSRD. Questions about the injury and death mechanics are perfectly valid; questions about the entirety of it is too broad, and too much trying to do the PFSRD’s job. It’s just not what this site is designed for. Just like &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;English Language &amp;amp; Usage&lt;/a&gt; is not trying to be a dictionary (and questions like “what does ‘X’ mean?” get closed there on a regular basis), we are not trying to be a game manual. The correct response to “In detail how do the Injury and Death mechanics work?” is “Go read the PFSRD, and come back here with specific questions if you still have them.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the fact that you supplied an answer is not supposed to inform the closing process: the question is still far too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-15T15:01:45.553" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5250" CreationDate="2014-12-15T19:29:27.793" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would make more sense to self-answer your existing question with the corrected flowchart than to start a new question solely for the purpose of self-answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The virtue of your original question is that its problem — &amp;quot;is this right?&amp;quot; — is fairly narrow. It's also very to-the-point and understandable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want to fix this question (not just demand it be reopened without having to do anything), then you have to address the reasons why this question was closed and the other wasn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The virtue of your first question — narrowness and clarity —  is a virtue that your new question doesn't share. It's a borderline question, yes, and maybe if it was borderline in only &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; way it would be OK to leave open, but it's borderline in several different ways that add up to one big &amp;quot;too many problems to keep open&amp;quot; judgement:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's broad, but on the borderline: some people will think it's not too broad, other will think it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is largely what's tripping you up, I think. You don't think it's too broad, and are perplexed why it should be closed just because &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; people do think it is. If this was the only problem the question had, maybe you'd be right, but there's more.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's very, very similar to the last question you asked. A question that's so similar to the last question someone asked is a red flag to vote-to-hold-privilege users that there is a problem. Holding is often the solution for when there's a problem with a question, because that gives the question time to be fixed (before answers start getting submitted and add to the confusion). And in the case that it can't be fixed, then the hold stays.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realise you object that the hold prevents people from increasing knowledge by answering the question... but there is no reason to make that objection. If they have an answer that is good for this question, the same answer is good for your last question. Because your original question is still open, there is nothing stopping people from adding their knowledge on this subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's unclear what your exact problem is. It sounds like you &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; a good understanding of the death and injury rules (if you didn't, you wouldn't be able to create the flowchart), so when you post a question asking for an explanation of &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; about death and injury it's very obvious that the real problem behind posting the question is not being revealed to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are perhaps having trouble with certain corner cases, but you're not asking about those corner cases you're having trouble with. You're perhaps having trouble with when certain rules should be invoked, or in what order of precedence, but you're not asking about the exact things you're unsure of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is why some people have said your problem is unclear. Maybe it's borderline, and not actually unclear enough to put it on hold, but enough people think it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any one of these borderline problems with the question would be enough for &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; people to vote to hold the question. And you're right, if there was &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; one of these, it might be unreasonable to put it on hold and then &lt;em&gt;keep&lt;/em&gt; it on hold. But all of these borderline problems, taken together, add up to needing to put it on hold. The hold period is necessary to figure out what this question is about and whether it really needs to exist, or whether it can exist in another form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That process of figuring out what to do with a question is required by the community in order to keep our questions and answers to a high quality, and isn't something we compromise on. That may be frustrating. And yes, you're right — it's based on people's &lt;em&gt;opinions&lt;/em&gt;. But that's our job: voting up, down, or close based on our subjective judgement. People being of the opinion that the question should be closed is the system working — it would be impossible for a voting system to function without those opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, unfortunately, it's not our job to reopen questions without having our opinions changed. It's your job to convince the community why the question fits &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; standards. To do that, you need to accept that our standards are not really negotiable, and then work with us to improve everyone's understanding of the question. Only once the question is cleared up can it be re-judged and it might be reopened. And that process of understanding can't start until you're willing to stop complaining that it was closed, and start helping us understand what value the question has in being a question. To do that, you have to solve at least one of the three problems above (which may incidentally solve one or both of the others):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tell us why this question isn't too broad. Yes, you've answered it already with a long but not-too-long answer, but that doesn't prove that the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer is actually short enough to fit on our site. Since we care about getting the best answer, the question must be not-broad enough so that the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer is not a book or just repeating a reorganised version of the SRD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tell us why this question is useful, when the other question seems to do the job already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tell us &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; what part you're having trouble with. Our format does much better with questions about very specific problems, and because our format does poorly otherwise, it's become part of our requirements for open questions that they be specific and clear about that specific problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-15T19:34:48.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5254" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5255" CreationDate="2014-12-16T02:23:41.893" Score="10" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I noticed when I was writing an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/53164/4563&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; that we have a lot of questions about “touch attacks,” which are used for certain magic abilities in D&amp;amp;D that require touching the target. I imagine other systems could easily have analogous options. It seems to be a confusing topic, and we have several questions about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At what point (and why) does it become useful to add a tag for something like this? Someone searching “touch attack” would probably get everything in the tag anyway, without a lot of  false-positives, and obviously there hasn’t been emergent usage of such a tag. Still, I wanted, when writing my answer above, to be able to link to those questions – a tag would have been useful for that purpose. Instead I referenced the Related questions on the right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, does this topic deserve a tag of its own? Are there any guidelines for when something like this crosses the line from “something a fair few questions have been asked about” to a real “specific topic that deserves a tag of its own”?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2014-12-29T01:02:39.513" Title="Do touch spells deserve a tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5254" CreationDate="2014-12-16T04:03:46.623" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd say this deserves a tag, yeah.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At what point (and why) does it become useful to add a tag for something like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It becomes useful to create a tag when someone says: &amp;lsquo;hey, it'd be useful to have a tag about this,&amp;rsquo; and creates it. There's not many clear rules of thumb around them, since they're mostly done by feel, but this passes as being a good tag. It's a distinct and clear topic area, people can actually have expertise on it here, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Are there any guidelines for when something like this crosses the line from “something a fair few questions have been asked about” to a real “specific topic that deserves a tag of its own”?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There aren't really, given the &lt;em&gt;really loose&lt;/em&gt; basis on which tags get created. But you're dealing with a tag that would collect a bunch of questions on one clear topic together to make them more accessible, so it offers plenty of utility as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2014-12-16T04:42:23.737" LastActivityDate="2014-12-16T04:42:23.737" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5256" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-17T20:54:10.757" Score="1" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;After reading through the 5e DMG, I became disgusted with the way magical items are organized. I'm creating a sortable list and will upload to DropBox or something this weekend; my question is, how do I share my work?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I post a question like &quot;How do I pick the right magic item?&quot; and then provide an answer myself with a link included?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12079" LastActivityDate="2014-12-21T05:21:07.030" Title="How do I list an external resource?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5256" CreationDate="2014-12-17T21:08:44.683" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Our site doesn't function well as broadcast point&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While your desire to share this helpful tool you've created is laudable, the format of our site and our best practices for questions and answers would tend to look down on that kind of a post and it would likely be voted to close within a few hours. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could however share it in chat. I'd also suggest submitting it to enworld as they seem to be happening place for any and all 5e homebrew and content restructuring right now. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2014-12-17T21:08:44.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5256" CreationDate="2014-12-18T01:46:15.683" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with Joshua this generally is not a good broadcast point. In your case, however, there are some avenues available for you. First, you have to follow some guidelines, because you're (a) providing a link to an external resource, and (b) advertising. Those guidelines are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;Avoid link-only answers&lt;/a&gt;. Your answer must still fundamentally answer the question if the link goes dead tomorrow. We want our answers to still be useful a few years from now. (Some circumstances circumvent this, like tool recommendations, which is perfect for you, but I'll get to that.)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're sharing your own resource, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; make sure the link won't go dead within weeks. We would hope the link can last for a few years, or your tool will still be findable after that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;our advertising guidelines&lt;/a&gt;: you must disclose your affiliation to the product, and it has to be a good and relevant answer. You should also not be here &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; to advertise, but I think you're OK in this regard.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can provide a good answer to an existing question following the guidelines above, and a link to your tool would be fitting, you may link to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your best options are probably these (and you can do both):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Use our community ads&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3222/community-promotion-ads-2014&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ad&lt;/a&gt;. If we like it, we'll upvote your ad and it will display on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community ads question is recreated each year (e.g. here's last year's: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ads - 2013&lt;/a&gt;). That might happen anytime now, so when it gets refreshed you'll have to add it to the new question too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Find or create a relevant tool recommendation question.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag for people looking for things that help them do stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look through it and see if there's a question already asking for this kind of thing. If there is, answer it! If there isn't, you can create your own self-answered question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If you go for a self-answered tool-rec...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Self-answered questions, and their answers, &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; still meet our quality standards. This &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; go without saying, but people tend to get lazy in this regard when making self-answered questions. Your question must be one that would be considered good quality even if the answer didn't exist (a good answer doesn't justify a bad question), and your answer would hopefully still be good quality as if you were providing someone else with an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make a good question, pretend your tool didn't exist, but you wanted something like it. What would you ask? What would past-you have said, before you went and made the tool yourself? Maybe something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't like the way D&amp;amp;D 5e's magic items are organised. {Explain why, so that we understand what features to avoid. Be brief, don't make it a rant.}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a resource that offers a well-organised magic item list? I'm after these criteria:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;{Now explain what you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; want.}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then answer it with a link to your tool, describing what it is and how it meets the criteria &amp;mdash; that's what the best tool-rec answers tend to do, and what you should probably do anyway if you want people to be interested in your thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind your question and answer &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; still be subject to the usual moderation by the community at large, and you still need to make sure you meet our quality criteria if you act on this suggestion. People may request improvement, or so on. If you somehow wind up asking a bad tool recommendation, it may get closed, and in most cases someone will instruct you on how you can improve it. (If nobody does, you can ask here on meta what you can do.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-12-21T05:21:07.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5259" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-19T13:17:09.990" Score="5" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a problem understanding votings again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49572/how-to-challenge-epic-level-characters&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is a question basically asking how to run an epic campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53260/how-to-build-an-evil-campaign&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is a question basically asking how to run an evil campaign. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One was downvoted and closed. The other has 23 upvotes, not a single downvote and not a single close vote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the points of critique for the first question was the lack of a specific version tag. Yet although the &quot;great&quot; question has a version tag, it's never used and the highly upvoted and accepted answer even says that it has &lt;em&gt;no experience in said tag&lt;/em&gt; and just hopes that the general principles will be the same (and I do agree btw.). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what exactly is the difference between the questions? Why is the &quot;how to create an evil campaign&quot; not &quot;too broad&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2014-12-24T05:05:52.317" Title="How broad is too broad?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5259" CreationDate="2014-12-19T14:19:47.643" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Epic is more system dependent than evil, is the bottom line.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2014-12-19T14:19:47.643" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5259" CreationDate="2014-12-19T16:28:52.590" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be honest, I hadn't looked at the evil campaign question. I've voted to close it as too broad myself, though I suspect that vote is unlikely to be taken up by others at this point. I think it's a pretty well-asked question (hence not downvoting), but I think it's too broad. That said, one major advantage it does have is that it mentions some of the characters involved, though only some of them and without much detail, so that wouldn't be enough to stave off my vote-to-close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The epic campaign question actually looks &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; to me, though I'd still vote to close it as too broad. It gives several concrete ideas of the &lt;em&gt;problems&lt;/em&gt; that you have run into and are trying to solve, which is good. But its hypothetical nature is a problem: you're not asking about a particular campaign, with particular characters and plot, but any epic-level game. That seems problematic to me, enough to close it and suggest you come back when you have an actual campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-12-19T16:28:52.590" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5262" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5265" CreationDate="2014-12-20T02:44:08.370" Score="5" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53365/is-heat-metal-too-powerful&quot;&gt;Is heat metal too powerful?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was closed because it was opinion based.  My opinion based flag is declined&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is confusing&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11818" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2014-12-20T04:15:14.597" Title="i flagged this question opinion based and now it is closed as such but my flag is declined" Tags="|discussion|flagging|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5262" CreationDate="2014-12-20T03:27:18.883" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, that's a bit confusing. Mods are only human though, and they might have had a change of mind after dealing with your flag. Also, there are three of them — it could have been two different mods dealing with the flag and the closure, and mods don't always 100% agree with each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's nothing to worry about though: declined flags aren't some kind of black mark on your account. (There &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a tiny bonus from having a flag accepted as &quot;helpful&quot; in that lots add up to a couple of badges, but that's a fairly inconsequential bonus, and a single flag declined won't make much difference in progress toward the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/70/deputy&quot;&gt;80&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/78/marshal&quot;&gt;500&lt;/a&gt; it takes for them.) A close flag is also a fairly small (but useful! keep it up!) thing, so this doesn't represent a significant breakdown of process or anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least, you can rest confident that your judgement was on-target!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2014-12-20T03:38:06.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5262" CreationDate="2014-12-20T03:40:48.880" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Community bot declined your flag, likely due to no action needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2014-12-20T03:40:48.880" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5262" CreationDate="2014-12-20T04:15:14.597" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the flag was declined automatically as a side-effect of the close vote queue. There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/105391/why-does-flag-marking-as-helpful-declined-not-always-correlate-with-moderator-ac&quot;&gt;a general helpful/declined confusion FAQ&lt;/a&gt; (which I found as a result of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/97572/flag-declined-but-question-closed-for-the-same-reason&quot;&gt;this exact issue being reported before&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that FAQ, one way for this to happen is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If your flag was a recommend closure flag, if it receives three &quot;do not close&quot; responses in the Close Votes queue without a single close vote, it will be declined. When you flagged, this is what happened, but later others decided that the question was worthy of closure and therefore closed it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case you're unaware, when someone raises a close flag, it doesn't go to the moderators &amp;mdash; the question lands in the Close Vote review queue, accessible to 3k+ users. 10k tools show me that the question entered that review queue 8 hours ago, and received three Leave Open responses in a row. If you flagged the question &gt;8 hours ago, this would have meant it was declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later, others came along and the question was closed anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2014-12-20T04:15:14.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5266" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-23T14:33:01.707" Score="5" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reference:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53498/does-natural-armor-stack-with-unarmored-defense&quot;&gt;Does natural armor stack with unarmored defense?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this question, there were initially two questions.  The question was edited to wholesale remove the second one- but not by the initial poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally would have just VTC on the basis of being unclear, and commented... so it struck me that the question had been edited so drastically.  Should we be making assumptions of this nature as to the intention of the poster?  Or just VTC as unclear?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-06T00:46:33.503" LastActivityDate="2020-11-06T00:46:33.503" Title="Should we edit multi-part questions to only favor one part?" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|question-scope|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5267" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5266" CreationDate="2014-12-23T14:53:29.933" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two cases here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are two questions, but one is handled well another place&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are either more than two questions or the second question is not handled well on site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first case, it's absolutely correct to edit out the second question and point them to the other post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the second case, it should be closed and the OP needs to narrow it to one question, and then ask additional questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2014-12-23T14:53:29.933" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5266" CreationDate="2014-12-23T15:07:58.440" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no &lt;em&gt;should.&lt;/em&gt; We can do it either way, edit or close. It's a pretty good course of action to edit questions like this, though, or at least not a bad one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could just close the question and ask the author to pick a question and post the others separately, and often do. Sometimes however if we're clearly going to go down that route, it speeds up the process to just pick one out for the asker (usually the highest quality of the bunch, i.e. the one most likely to stay open) and edit out the others, and give the asker guidance on where to go from here: post the edited-out questions separately, here's how you can check the edit history and retrieve them, here's some improvements you might want to make to those whilst you're busy doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It saves time and several close and reopen votes (and the asker from experiencing getting a question closed in the first place, which a lot of people don't like), and saves us from possibly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3001/1204&quot;&gt;clearing up a mess&lt;/a&gt; if someone wants to jump the gun and answer all of the questions at once, and possibly thus leaving the asker feeling no need to take action. Also, it gives the asker (and us!) one still-open good question, whether or not the asker decides they want to take action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the asker rolls it back, we go ahead with the close process. If all the questions are bad quality and there isn't one to pick out that's likely to stay open, it's not worth doing the edit and the question should just get closed with avenues for improvement suggested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2014-12-23T15:13:29.933" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="869" CreationDate="2014-12-23T22:34:18.677" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just joined today.  Promptly after writing my first question I was told I used an incorrect tag line.  I will say that it wasn't rudely stated but it was surprising to just be called out.  It would be great if we could answer questions more freely and easier.  I was scanning through some questions that I would have liked to answer but cant because I have 0 reputation and no one has answered my question or voted on it, I cannot.  I am new to these type of board pages but I feel like if I have a helpful answer that no one has posted, wouldn't it be positive for me to answer and help that person?  I feel a little intimidated but I hope my experience will change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19564" LastActivityDate="2014-12-23T22:34:18.677" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5270" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5274" CreationDate="2014-12-24T02:53:05.760" Score="29" ViewCount="4328" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is somewhat of a related question to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4754/why-are-our-5e-questions-terrible/&quot;&gt;Why Are Our 5e Questions Terrible?&lt;/a&gt; - but this post is about questions from people who haven't read the book yet, and want us to do it for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a little different from the discussion in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/782/should-a-question-be-judged-on-its-level-of-expertise&quot;&gt;Should a question be judged on its level of &amp;quot;expertise&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; because these questions don't even attempt to apprehend the rules, they are purely &quot;I have not read the book, tell me what it says&quot; questions.  Some are linked into my first referenced question above but we have had a recent new one, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53527/alternative-ways-to-gain-xp&quot;&gt;Are there alternative ways to gain XP?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should our response be to questions like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-07-05T15:31:17.837" LastActivityDate="2021-07-06T11:57:12.313" Title="What Do We Do With &quot;Read The Book To Me&quot; Questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5270" CreationDate="2014-12-24T02:53:05.760" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions of this sort are problematic for several reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, it is a variety of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19665/the-help-vampire-problem&quot;&gt;Help Vampire problem&lt;/a&gt;, super lazy edition. At a bare minimum such questions should be downvoted (&amp;quot;This questions does not show any research effort...&amp;quot;).&#xA;I like the quote from the top answer on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/258087/what-should-we-do-about-users-who-are-proud-to-be-help-vampires&quot;&gt;this meta.SE question&lt;/a&gt; -&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct method of dealing with any question which is off-topic, is to vote to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct method of dealing with any question which lacks research effort is to downvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second of all, we are dealing with something different than most domain questions - we're essentially giving away information in a copyrighted work. Without getting into a debate about what exactly is LEGAL there - it certainly rubs me the wrong way to say &amp;quot;sure, let me give you the info in that book you should instead be buying to support the people that make that game.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would propose that people should not answer these questions, except with a reference to the book.  This isn't for &amp;quot;I read it and don't understand it&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;I can't even use an index so I can't find that specific rule&amp;quot; as discussed in the previous 5e meta, but pure &amp;quot;I am not reading your game. Explain it to me.&amp;quot; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I can see @Sevensideddie's point from the comments on that Q in closing as off topic as &amp;quot;read a book to me&amp;quot; is not on topic even when it's an RPG book. I could go that way too if folks support it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that people are excited especially about 5e questions and &amp;quot;woot, easy rep&amp;quot; is there for something that just requires a cut and paste from the book, but answering these questions seems to me to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Perpetuate the behavior of doing it by that questioner&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fill the site with questions that people who have the books don't really have&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, I have no idea what the upside of answering these is (&amp;quot;SEO&amp;quot; is a terrible response). I want to be welcoming to people, sure, but really I want to welcome and keep people who will bother to engage a little and do the basics like &amp;quot;own and read the rulebook&amp;quot;; I must say my projection of the contributions of those who won't isn't too rosy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2014-12-24T03:12:57.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5270" CreationDate="2014-12-24T04:34:14.893" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to agree with mxyzplk (and have found the recent rash of such questions annoying), but I did think of a concern I have for a nearly-identical question that I think is very valid:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am considering buying &lt;em&gt;XYZ&lt;/em&gt; but I'm not really sure if it's going to be useful to me. One thing that I could really use some guidance on is &lt;strong&gt;abc&lt;/strong&gt;. How good is &lt;em&gt;XYZ&lt;/em&gt;'s coverage of this topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this is probably a fairly valid question (particularly about something like a &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master&amp;rsquo;s Guide&lt;/em&gt; which often contains a lot of generic information about running a game that experienced masters may have less use for &amp;ndash; depends on the system and what exactly the authors chose to put in that book). People have been playing 5e with no &lt;em&gt;DMG&lt;/em&gt; for a few months now, so it's valid to question whether or not you really need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If&lt;/strong&gt; this sort of question is valid (and I'm not sure it is), then I don't think it's right to judge a question based on &quot;why (we think) it's being asked&quot; &amp;ndash; even if it looks like the querent is just lazy or trying to avoid paying for the material, if the fundamental underlying question is valid it should be answered (and editing might be appropriate to make it appear more like my quote).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2014-12-24T04:34:14.893" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5273" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5259" CreationDate="2014-12-24T05:05:52.317" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Evil Campaign&quot; is a &lt;em&gt;style&lt;/em&gt; of campaign, while &quot;Epic Campaign&quot; is a &lt;em&gt;category&lt;/em&gt; of campaigns. You may as well ask, &quot;How to run a campaign that starts at level 1,&quot; or, &quot;how to run a campaign that starts at level 11.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Epic only denotes the power level of the characters involved. It could still be heroic fantasy, or swords and sorcery, or wuxia, or mystery, or hack 'n slash, or any other number of things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll admit that &quot;Evil Campaign&quot; is a fairly broad topic as well, but much less so. It denotes a specific type of campaign with a specific type of player character, and asks for specific help on the unique challenges that an evil campaign presents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going even further, you also didn't pick a specific version, which is important as the answer varies wildly based on the edition you're talking about. And then there are questions on exactly what level of epic you're playing, what level of optimization your players have (which is a huge factor in those levels, especially for 3.5), what classes they're playing, what type of players they are, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you could either edit or re-ask your question, and be much more specific, and you'd get much better and more useful answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17908" LastActivityDate="2014-12-24T05:05:52.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5270" CreationDate="2014-12-24T07:36:37.973" Score="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's at least two kinds of easily confusable questions here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I hear the DMG has rules for X. I don't have the DMG. What are the rules for X?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there rules for X? What are they?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;#1 is a deeply problematic question that asks us to engage in violating copyright: the person should buy the book. We should not provide the materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;#2 has no such implications and is actually a &lt;strong&gt;question about a real practical problem&lt;/strong&gt; and probably acceptable! It is an uncommon kind of question for us, and it is not to be confused with #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the example question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53527/are-there-alternative-ways-to-gain-xp&quot;&gt;Are there alternative ways to gain XP?&lt;/a&gt;) I suspect the author is not even &lt;em&gt;aware&lt;/em&gt; that such rules exist, or are to be found in the DMG. Some degree of system expertise doesn't mean they'll necessarily &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; this stuff, but just makes it more likely. In comments they say they're from Japan, and the Japanese don't have &lt;em&gt;nearly&lt;/em&gt; as much exposure to or knowledge of Western RPG stuff as we do. They may not be aware that the PHB, DMG and MM make up some vital trifecta for D&amp;amp;D that covers all the basics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A response of &amp;quot;just read the DMG, why are you asking us to reproduce it?&amp;quot; is appropriate for case #1, but for case #2 it is outright unhelpful and probably rude. We've basically answered their question (yes they exist, they're in the DMG) but in a way that &lt;em&gt;really easily&lt;/em&gt; comes off as snarky and assumes ill intent and laziness where it does not exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case #2, we can answer the question by saying: &amp;quot;yes, and here's where you can find them, though you'll have to buy the book because we can't reproduce them in full here without violating copyright.&amp;quot; We can point them to the pages and give them a basic idea of what's involved, we can quote portions of those rules for analysis or commentary within the bounds of &lt;a href=&quot;http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;fair use&lt;/a&gt;, but providing a quote-dump of the rules in full, or instructing them on the rules in such detail they'll never have to pick up the original book, would violate copyright and is something we shouldn't do. (Unless the game and its rules are free or whatever, in which case go ahead.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In addition to just these two cases, there's other cousins of these questions like what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions/5272#5272&quot;&gt;KRyan's answer&lt;/a&gt; points out, but some of these are much more clearly acceptable.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Telling the difference:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Oblivious Sage points out in comments, RPG books can often not be as well organised as they could or should be. They can also be poorly written! Assume the asker is coming from ignorance, not malice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So from that, the difference is: &lt;em&gt;can you answer the question without reproducing the rules?&lt;/em&gt; If the answer's no, it's case #1 and the question is a problem — don't answer it. If yes, it's case #2 or some other variety — answer the question, explain where the rules can be found, summarise or name them if it helps, and do not reproduce the rules (except within &lt;a href=&quot;http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;fair use&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-06T07:09:40.533" LastActivityDate="2021-07-06T07:09:40.533" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5270" CreationDate="2014-12-26T22:33:19.970" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you think it's bad question, mark it down. I voted the XP question and a few others down recently. doppelgreener's classification is fairly on the money, although even some of the class 2 questions have seemed rather lazy. The site has voting; use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15520" LastActivityDate="2014-12-26T22:33:19.970" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5276" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2014-12-27T02:25:31.580" Score="8" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;What if,&#xA;1. No one has really given an answer to my question (or no answer worked)&#xA;2. My group figured out a homebrew solution on our own and played it.&#xA;3. That answer was the best and solved the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it acceptable to post that answer myself, on my own question, and explain what we did, and then check &quot;answer&quot; on the post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15570" LastActivityDate="2014-12-27T02:27:36.743" Title="Answering My Own Question With A Self-Made Homebrew" Tags="|support|questions|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5277" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5276" CreationDate="2014-12-27T02:27:36.743" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, as long as your question allowed for homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the intended behavior of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45" LastActivityDate="2014-12-27T02:27:36.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5278" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5279" CreationDate="2014-12-27T04:32:35.170" Score="9" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;In regards to the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53650/in-what-order-are-creatures-affected-by-the-sleep-spell&quot;&gt;In what order are creatures affected by the Sleep spell?&lt;/a&gt;, the asker had a sentence in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/53650/1&quot;&gt;initial revision&lt;/a&gt; that stated that he was confused about the bugbear chief's Heart of Hruggek trait, which gives it advantage on saving throws against being put to sleep (along with other conditions) but checked the PHB and found that the &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell had no saving throw; the asker then went on to actually ask about the order in which the &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell affects creatures by HP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I edited out the part about the bugbears as it is not entirely relevant to what's being asked, and &lt;em&gt;almost&lt;/em&gt; feels like a second question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this an accepted edit within the site's rules? Or should I refrain from doing this in the future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-06T02:24:51.910" LastActivityDate="2020-11-06T02:24:51.910" Title="Am I overstepping any boundaries by deleting irrelevant passages from a question?" Tags="|discussion|support|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5278" CreationDate="2014-12-27T05:34:56.687" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's fine.  Sometimes people (often urged by commenters wanting more details) put in examples or background that are not useful.  And that non-constructive content can often lead respondents down irrelevant paths.  Delete it in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, sometimes that detail does illuminate the problem or reveal it to be an XY problem.  Keep the content in for these cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously this requires judgement to see which case it is, if you're not sure leave a comment and see if it incites the mob or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2014-12-27T16:33:24.530" LastActivityDate="2014-12-27T16:33:24.530" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5254" CreationDate="2014-12-29T01:02:39.513" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd argue &lt;strong&gt;against&lt;/strong&gt; creating a tag for such a narrow topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think of it this way. &lt;strong&gt;Tags help other users of the site keep up with questions they are interested in.&lt;/strong&gt; You say things like &lt;em&gt;&quot;Hey, I'm an expert on &lt;code&gt;tag-x&lt;/code&gt; so I'll add it to my favorites list and try to help people with it&quot;&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;&quot;I'd like to learn more about &lt;code&gt;tag-y&lt;/code&gt; so I'll keep an eye on it.&quot;&lt;/em&gt; or even &lt;em&gt;&quot;I'm fed up with all this &lt;code&gt;tag-z&lt;/code&gt; clutter, I'll add that to my ignore list&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When creating a tag, I ask myself the question: &lt;strong&gt;Would someone add it to their favorite or ignored tags list?&lt;/strong&gt; If yes, then it may be a candidate for consideration. If no, then dropping it is probably the best idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So ask yourself the same question; would you like to follow or ignore all &lt;code&gt;touch-attack&lt;/code&gt; questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldnt…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2014-12-29T01:02:39.513" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5283" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5284" CreationDate="2014-12-31T01:48:38.007" Score="4" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;For context: I'm talking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/13612&quot;&gt;this edit&lt;/a&gt; of my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm aware that &quot;die&quot; is a possible, maybe more correct singular of the plural &quot;dice&quot;. However, &quot;dice&quot; also is an accepted singular form. And in the text, it's not even singular in all instances at all. In addition, I learned in school that all numbers below 20 are to be spelled out. So that leaves... nothing at all of this edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I'm not a native speaker. What do you think? To me, my post looks terribly wrong after the edit. But three people think it's better now. Should I roll it back or is my &quot;feeling&quot; of the English language just not in tune with the realities of contemporary grammar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the answers, as the opinions seem to be clear, I have rolled the edit back and edited those two instances that actually needed editing because they are singular and should read &quot;die&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2014-12-31T02:20:41.000" Title="Edit: Die vs dice" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5283" CreationDate="2014-12-31T02:00:42.137" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Neither edit is technically correct, because singular &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; plurals are needed.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The number of HD&quot; should be &quot;hit &lt;em&gt;dice&lt;/em&gt;&quot; because it's an indeterminate quantity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;For each HD&quot; should be &quot;hit &lt;em&gt;die&lt;/em&gt;&quot; because that's talking about each (singular) HD gained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And likewise &quot;1 HD&quot; is talking about just one, and so it should be &quot;hit &lt;em&gt;die&lt;/em&gt;.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://english.stackexchange.com/a/167110/46054&quot;&gt;&quot;Dice&quot; isn't a proper singular noun&lt;/a&gt;, just commonly misused because the word &quot;die&quot; is heard rarely enough in common language that people often don't know it &lt;em&gt;exists&lt;/em&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The numeral thing is purely style and probably not an appropriate edit.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While style guides usually advise that single-digit numbers are almost always written out (and many have further things to say on higher numbers), and RPGs have their own internal style traditions when talking about dice numbers (though I'm not familiar with 5e's), at the end of the day it's for the asker to decide on. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3226/4398&quot;&gt;We have a pretty firmly established consensus on the need to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; edit for grammar and style where clarity is not at stake.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:08.827" LastActivityDate="2014-12-31T02:14:48.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5283" CreationDate="2014-12-31T02:01:14.237" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Properly, the first use of the word should be plural (&amp;ldquo;dice&amp;rdquo;), so that part of the edit is just wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using &amp;ldquo;dice&amp;rdquo; as a singular is only really acceptable if you&amp;rsquo;re talking about some number of dice that &lt;em&gt;could be&lt;/em&gt; one but isn&amp;rsquo;t necessarily (i.e. people are fine using &amp;ldquo;dice&amp;rdquo; for what might more properly be &amp;ldquo;die or dice&amp;rdquo;). But using &amp;ldquo;dice&amp;rdquo; to refer to a single die is, at least from my perspective, wrong. &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.stackexchange.com/a/167107/24589&quot;&gt;This answer from our own English Language &amp;amp; Usage site&lt;/a&gt; agrees with me, and shows a &lt;strong&gt;strong&lt;/strong&gt; consensus on that site on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Writing a numeral versus writing out the name of the number is very much a matter of clarity than it is about right and wrong. I tend to agree with the editor that &amp;ldquo;1 Hit Die&amp;rdquo; is clearer than &amp;ldquo;one Hit Die&amp;rdquo; but that&amp;rsquo;s just a gut reaction. My own education (based on the &amp;ldquo;MLA&amp;rdquo; format from the Modern Language Association) mandated writing out numbers all the way up to &amp;ldquo;one hundred&amp;rdquo; and using numerals only for 101 and higher, but I think that having this as a hard-and-fast rule is a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:08.827" LastActivityDate="2014-12-31T02:01:14.237" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5286" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5287" CreationDate="2014-12-31T03:59:53.227" Score="4" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;The idea occurred to me when I answered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53671/resources-for-campaign-based-in-amn-region&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, specifically asking for resources for a D&amp;amp;D campaign focused in Amn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm fairly new to RPG.SE (and SE in general), but a quick search for &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=resource&quot;&gt;resource&lt;/a&gt;&quot; and &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=source&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;&quot; showed that there are dozens of these types of questions, which seem best suited to an answer in explanatory list form. For example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1st (re)source - explanation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2nd (re)source - explanation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3rd, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what little I know of Community Wiki (CW), this seems to be the perfect way to answer (re)source-based questions since a single &quot;regular&quot; answer rarely covers all or, at times, even a majority of the possibilities and the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer is usually a collection or compilation of multiple responses, including comments. CW would let everyone add their piece of knowledge into one complete, cohesive response rather than force readers to read &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; answers and comments to make sure they didn't miss something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I saw that CW was overhauled a couple of years ago, but have yet to see an actual CW answer, so maybe I'm missing something (other than people not earning reputation)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18235" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-05-29T01:33:07.780" Title="Should answers for questions about (re)sources for games be made CWs?" Tags="|discussion|answers|community-wiki|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5286" CreationDate="2014-12-31T04:46:49.817" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, resource questions—that aren't inherently too broad—should be normal, non-CW questions and their answers should almost always be normal, non-CW answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're actually okay with lists—so long as they are &lt;em&gt;closed&lt;/em&gt; lists of reasonable length, such that one expert user could compile an answer that will stay good for a long time. The Amn question is a good example of this—there will be no more 4e material printed for Amn, and that makes it a static list; the amount of 4e material dealing with Amn is limited, making for a list short enough that one (good) answer could catch it all or nearly all in one try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't like &lt;em&gt;open-ended&lt;/em&gt; lists, because they never end. Votes on an answer that is never &quot;finished&quot; stop being meaningful, and having to constantly fix the answer by adding new items (or cleaning up the mess of other people adding to it) makes for a maintenance headache.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Headache plus meaningless equals banned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Wiki seems like it might be good for list-like questions, but it really adds no utility:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For &quot;good&quot; lists, CW isn't very useful because the best answer is the one that's already complete from the first edit; once that answer is written, it either needs no additions, or only minor additions that comments and normal edits can easily handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An expert is also more likely to &lt;em&gt;write&lt;/em&gt; this kind of best answer when the reward of reputation is there, and CW takes that incentive away. Even when that expert is yourself, it makes a difference—CWs make it easy to be slightly lazier and not write one's best. In light of this drawback, it's even rarer for a CW to be better than a normal post.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For &quot;bad&quot; lists, CW solves none of their problems: they're still unmaintainable and infinitely growing. The only thing CW adds is making it easier for answers to become a mess, and &quot;bad&quot; lists don't need more of that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, CW isn't very useful. Network–wide their usage has dropped off as the &quot;Stack Way&quot; has become clearer and better understood. There are rare uses for them, but they're quite rare.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2014-12-31T05:16:19.067" LastActivityDate="2014-12-31T05:16:19.067" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5288" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-01T03:07:53.097" Score="14" ViewCount="922" Body="&lt;p&gt;The dawn of a new year, 2015, now approaches, or has already approached, either way it means that it is now time to reset our Community Promotion Ads!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be &lt;strong&gt;220 x 250 pixels&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/5288&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:40:00.250" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2015" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2016-01-15T05:39:12.377" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-01T03:07:53.097" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-01T03:07:53.097" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZDB5P.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2015-01-01T03:07:53.097" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-01T03:07:53.097" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-01T08:37:01.177" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/frybI.png&quot; alt=&quot;Rolling Made Awesome!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-01-01T08:37:01.177" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-01T08:37:01.177" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-02T01:43:58.110" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ljt1P.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user19667" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:52:23.590" LastActivityDate="2015-01-02T01:43:58.110" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-02T01:43:58.110" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-02T01:54:12.713" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nGYBh.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool – For the RP Games you play&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-01-02T01:54:12.713" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-02T01:54:12.713" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-03T02:11:36.883" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://roll20.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/A1iwW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 - Virtual tabletop gaming that tells a story&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-01-03T02:11:36.883" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-03T02:11:36.883" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-03T02:14:11.407" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://edgerunner.merttorun.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EtZnw.png&quot; alt=&quot;Edgerunner Alpha - Fate-Powered Cyberpunk Roleplaying&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-01-03T02:14:11.407" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-03T02:14:11.407" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-03T02:15:12.217" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5288/community-promotion-ads-2015&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V8XHh.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotion Ads - 2015&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-01-03T02:15:12.217" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-03T02:15:12.217" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5299" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-03T02:35:10.777" Score="10" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I know, we don't have any RPG.SE ads to submit to the Community Promo metas on &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; Stacks. (We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1635/is-there-an-rpg-se-button-graphic-banner/post1636#1636&quot;&gt;this ad made by Jin for general web promo&lt;/a&gt;, but it's the wrong size and shape for Community Promo metas.) Going through &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1497/community-promotion-ads-2012&quot;&gt;our own old Community Promo metas&lt;/a&gt;, I noticed that other Stacks have been more organised and proactive about this kind thing than we have — we've mostly been the target of cross-promotion, not the initiators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this is where we change that (or not, if the votes say 'meh'). Submit your RPG.SE ad designs below so we can discuss, collaborate, and submit the best of them to our sibling Stacks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A note on common design types&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Judging by other Stacks' promo ads, there are two common approaches to designing ads: general-use and site-customised. General-use ads represent their Stack clearly no matter which other Stack they appear on, while customised ads highlight the crossover that might appeal to a user of the other Stack and entice them to click through to the advertised Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously general gives more reuse of the initial effort, but my impression is that custom is better at getting clicks (and probably votes in their metas). Either would be an improvement over our current none though, and both are useful in different ways, so take this as food for thought when thinking of and voting on designs, rather than guidance on what we &quot;should&quot; make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-01-21T09:24:45.127" Title="Off-site Community Promotion Ads" Tags="|discussion|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5300" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5301" CreationDate="2015-01-03T13:28:20.077" Score="7" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the functional difference between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-aids&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-aids&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-aids&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter has a well-defined excerpt and description:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Excerpt:&lt;/strong&gt; An online or offline tool used in preparing or running a RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Wiki:&lt;/strong&gt; A device, software, online service, procedure or process used for a specific purpose in relationship to roleplaying games that is not part of the ruleset for a given rpg. Could be anything from &amp;quot;the Obsidian Portal campaign wiki website&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;the document called the Same Page Tool.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the former only has an excerpt:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Physical items or digital tools that help a game run more smoothly or enhance game play in some fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Tools&amp;quot; also has many more questions than &amp;quot;game-aids&amp;quot;. Of the existing &amp;quot;game-aids&amp;quot; questions, most seem to be about Android apps, which would seem to fall squarely in the &amp;quot;tools&amp;quot; bailiwick.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can these be merged? Or am I missing some nuance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're not merged, shouldn't the Android questions in &amp;quot;tools&amp;quot; be re-tagged to &amp;quot;game-aids&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6223" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-12T20:23:36.823" Title="(game-aids) vs. (tools)" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5300" CreationDate="2015-01-03T17:02:14.457" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems like a solid case for synonymizing, and as of January 12, 2015, the community has agreed and the synonym has been made. &lt;code&gt;game-aids&lt;/code&gt; now automatically remaps to &lt;code&gt;tools&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2015-01-12T20:23:36.823" LastActivityDate="2015-01-12T20:23:36.823" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5303" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5305" CreationDate="2015-01-04T21:13:03.223" Score="4" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53932/what-are-some-generally-useful-story-telling-roleplaying-techniques-for-incorpor&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question is on hold as being too broad/not specific enough, and I'm looking for ways to improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To explain the kinds of answers I'm looking for in the question/the kind of question I'm looking to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A more specific example would be based on the linked question in the body there (ie, what can I do to more seamlessly incorporate someone who's chosen to play a monk in my campaign, when his choice stands out as particularly difficult to play compared to other players' choices and the campaign I'm running). That example sounds too specific to me, though - how often, really, will other people want to play monks in campaigns which are substantially similar to mine?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine, though, that other DMs have run into similar situations - a player has obstinately chosen to play a particularly hard to play character, given the party and campaign - and, all &quot;experienced players deserve what they ask for&quot; aside, eventually have to find a way to rescue the player/character/party from getting to an end which would damage the campaign as a whole. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, I'd like to get a few, preferably original, ideas for smoothly handling this situation. Backstory twiddling is an easy/obvious one, but can only be milked so far before it becomes obvious/a god-hand manipulation. &quot;Accidentally&quot; providing the character with exactly the unique magical items he needs to be successful is also very godhandy - as are all other similar techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any suggestions on how to rewrite the question, so that it both produces the kinds of answers that I'm looking for and meets with the requirements to fit the RPG site? Is that even possible?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1056" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-01-04T22:59:32.123" Title="How do I best improve the linked question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5303" CreationDate="2015-01-04T21:40:58.253" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You seem to have a pretty good idea of how to fix your question! It was put on hold for being too broad, indicating that you need to make it more specific. You've got a more specific example in mind already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can understand your concerns it might be too specific, but they're unwarranted. &quot;How can I help a player who wants to play a Monk maintain equality with the rest of the party?&quot; is a perfectly valid question; in fact, we have a very similar one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37435/15469&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, deliberately generalizing a more specific question is probably not the greatest idea. Check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3173/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; meta for support. We see far more questions closed for being too broad than for being too specific. In fact, there isn't even a close reason for being too specific. Answers dealing with a specific example can often be useful for others dealing with a similar situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-01-04T22:43:14.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5303" CreationDate="2015-01-04T22:48:51.880" Score="7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That example sounds too specific to me, though - how often, really, will other people want to play monks in campaigns which are substantially similar to mine?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't matter. &quot;Too specific&quot; is not a category of problem with a question. Please do tell us about your exact situation and ask us about your exact problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's important is that your question has a clear question, and contains all the information necessary for us to give you a useful answer. When you unnecessarily generalise your question, we begin to lose the information necessary and it might get closed, and if it stays open, you suffer for having less specifically helpful answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider: if you're having problems with a monk in your specific dynamic, would you prefer answers that are broad, general, airy-fairy, and can only talk in sweeping unspecific ways about varieties of classes and dynamics (and might not even &lt;em&gt;mention&lt;/em&gt; the ones you're dealing with), or would you prefer answers that tell you how to handle that specific kind of monk in your specific dynamic? Which one's more helpful? I'd pick the latter, but answers can only be as specific as your question is &amp;mdash; so be specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-01-04T22:48:51.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-01-05T04:13:05.753" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scabard.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4AAFC.png&quot; alt=&quot;Scabard is a free web-based RPG campaign manager&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8735" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-06-24T20:00:53.783" LastActivityDate="2015-06-24T20:00:53.783" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-05T04:13:05.753" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5307" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5308" CreationDate="2015-01-08T21:18:06.500" Score="16" ViewCount="333" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've talked about meta tags a lot here. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211/the-rules-as-written-tag-is-a-good-tag-but-weve-made-it-sick-lets-cure-it/5212#comment13092_5211&quot;&gt;One thing&lt;/a&gt; that the last round highlighted is that we have a lot of tags that are impossible to use without a system tag. It's been said that tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; maybe shouldn't exist because they can't be the only tag on a question. Perhaps those are debatable, but more system-specific tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aspects&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; are more clearly unable to stand alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, the wisdom is that this makes them meta tags. But is that true here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thought I'm chewing on is that, perhaps, we can't use that test for meta-tag-ness unless we give a 1-tag discount for a system tag. Why we might have to do this, is because many questions &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; a system tag before you can reasonably talk about all sorts of things, and tagging for all those other things is incredibly useful. (q.v., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;'s existence.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth noting that the original &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;SE Blog post on meta tags&lt;/a&gt; formulated the test as a heuristic, not as the stronger hard rule that we sometimes treat it as (my emphasis):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If the tag can’t work as the only tag on a question, it’s &lt;strong&gt;probably&lt;/strong&gt; a meta-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the strong only-tag test for meta-ness broken on RPG.SE?&lt;/strong&gt; Can it be un-broken by this hack or is it more complicated than that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-02-01T23:19:07.320" Title="Is the Only-Tag Test for meta-tag-ness broken here?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5307" CreationDate="2015-01-08T22:23:31.567" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Correct, the system tag can be considered an exception to the Only Tag test with respect to other tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty similar to Stack Overflow, where the language is the equivalent of the system tag.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/inheritance&quot;&gt;Like all the SO questions tagged &quot;inheritance,&quot;&lt;/a&gt; well, inheritance works differently per language so they pretty much all have &amp;lt;language&amp;gt;, inheritance as tags.  A lot like our system tag, and you'd see &amp;lt;system&amp;gt;, spells as the equivalent tagging structure here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore (and to avoid tags like java-inheritance or dnd4e-feats), the system tag can safely be assumed to not count towards the one tag rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2016-02-01T23:19:07.320" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5307" CreationDate="2015-01-09T09:01:11.960" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A meta tag is a tag that describes &lt;strong&gt;irrelevant&lt;/strong&gt; aspects of a question that can't stand alone, according to the blog post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The reason meta-tags are a problem is that they do not describe the&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;content&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;of the question.&lt;/strong&gt; They describe some other aspect of the question, like the author’s skill level, or the author’s motivation for asking it, or generally what “kind” of question it is (poll, how-to, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta-tags are actually a subset of a larger problem that I usually call dependent tags. These are tags that don’t say anything by themselves – you can’t tell what the question is about unless they’re paired with some other tag (or several of them). These tags are a problem because people don’t realize this and will often use that as the question’s only tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as a tag describes the content/nature of a question it is not a meta tag.  It may still be a &lt;em&gt;dependent&lt;/em&gt; tag, though, which is what that test checks for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dependent tags are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; actually a problem for this site, and seem to be nothing but helpful here.  System tags are an excellent example of a dependent non-meta tag as they definitely cannot stand alone yet are very helpful (note that all questions that have a single system tag appear to implicitly be tagged rules-clarification).  In general questions tagged with a single dependent tag do not seem to be a problem for us and the existence of most of our current dependent tags is beneficial so i think we should ignore the MSO advice on that one.  Meta tags, of course, are discouraged and probably not helpful, but I am unsure we have any tags like that.  Occasionally someone asking a bad question tries to suggest a just-for-fun tag, but we seem to be aware that that is a dangerous idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-09T09:01:11.960" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5299" CreationDate="2015-01-12T20:41:36.753" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;An incomplete list of SEs with some degree of overlap in audience&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Entries link directly to the SE's [community-ads] tag on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind every SE site can also accept Community Ads at double their normal size (600&amp;times;500 px) for improved display on Retina displays and similar, as well as the standard 300&amp;times;250. That includes our site! (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/247063/152515&quot;&gt;See this meta for confirmation.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have advertised with us, making acceptance of a reciprocal ad more likely.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ads that aren't &quot;game-relevant&quot; in at least some passing way do poorly in the voting there, historically. (Compare: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8059/4163&quot;&gt;A&lt;/a&gt; vs &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8066/4163&quot;&gt;B&lt;/a&gt;.) A generic &quot;RPG.SE is great!&quot; ad will probably not make the cut.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;English Language &amp;amp; Usage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stack Overflow will not accept a CA about RPG.SE.&lt;/strong&gt; CAs on SO are strictly limited to &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/281524/open-source-advertising-sidebar-1h-2015&quot;&gt;advertisement[s] soliciting the participation and contribution of programmers writing actual source code&lt;/a&gt;&quot; for open source projects. We can cross SO off our list of potential advertising sites. This entry is here for informational purposes, especially to explain why well-meaning suggestions that we advertise there won't be considered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have advertised with us, and have indicated interest in a reciprocal ad. One is being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6036/23970&quot;&gt;workshopped&lt;/a&gt; right now.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://movies.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Movies &amp;amp; TV&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Beta sites&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following sites of interest have not yet had Community Ads activated (subject to change):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Anime &amp;amp; Manga&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://history.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://writers.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Writers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-01-21T09:24:45.127" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-01-12T20:41:36.753" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5307" CreationDate="2015-01-16T12:23:06.937" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Those tags could &amp;mdash; and, &lt;em&gt;arguably&lt;/em&gt;, should &amp;mdash; be renamed to, say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-aspects&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-prestige-class&lt;/a&gt;, which would allow them to stand on their own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, there's a practical reason for using such a naming scheme &amp;mdash; it's not just policy-wanking for its own sake.  The reason is that while, say, the term &quot;aspect&quot; has a clear and well defined meaning &lt;em&gt;within Fate&lt;/em&gt;, we really just happen to be lucky that no other popular RPG has chosen to prominently use the same word.  As soon as that happens (and I expect that, &quot;aspect&quot; being such a generic word, sooner or later it will), the tag will become a complete mess, with people using it for two different concepts from two different systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(SO, for example, is full of such useless muddled tags.  Just glancing at the front page, I can see a dozen examples like &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/field&quot;&gt;&lt;kbd&gt;field&lt;/kbd&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/select&quot;&gt;&lt;kbd&gt;select&lt;/kbd&gt;&lt;/a&gt;; does that mean the SQL &lt;code&gt;SELECT&lt;/code&gt; keyword, or the HTML &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;select&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; element, or the POSIX &lt;code&gt;select()&lt;/code&gt; syscall, or one of the &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; Perl built-in functions of that name (one of which is a wrapper for the POSIX function), or...?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately, for now, RPG.SE is still small and cohesive enough, and our question volume is low enough, that we can probably just wait and deal with the problem if and when it arises.  But renaming the tag now would keep the problem from arising in the first place, and might save us a considerable amount of manual retagging labor later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ps.&lt;/strong&gt; I wasn't sure if I really needed to address this, but since KRyan mentioned it: Unless some future edition / variant of D&amp;amp;D decides to &lt;em&gt;completely&lt;/em&gt; change what they mean by &quot;feat&quot; or &quot;prestige class&quot;, we'll still only need a single &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-feats&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-feats&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-feats&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; tag, not separate tags for 3e, 3.5e, Pathfinder, etc.  The point is that &lt;em&gt;within the scope of D&amp;amp;D and its variants&lt;/em&gt;, &quot;feat&quot; and &quot;prestige class&quot; are clear and well defined terms, just like &quot;aspect&quot; is for Fate and all its variants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, D&amp;amp;D is still kind of the 900 pound gorilla of RPGs, so it's pretty unlikely that some other RPG system would decide to use a specific term like &quot;prestige class&quot;, except maybe as a deliberate nod to D&amp;amp;D, anyway.  Thus, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; may be a poor example here, as it's unlikely to become ambiguous.  But a word like &quot;feat&quot; is just about generic enough that some other system &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; decide to use it for something else, confusion be damned.  And I could definitely see that happening to &quot;aspect&quot; some day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2015-01-16T14:24:09.467" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5312" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5313" CreationDate="2015-01-18T21:24:51.030" Score="8" ViewCount="240" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone asked a question about the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e spell Mage's Magnificent Mansion, which can be found under that name in the online SRD. An edit was then requested to change the name to Morkenkainen's Magnificent Mansion; the name under which the spell can be found in the Player's Handbook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea which of the two would be better/prefered here and would like to hear what others would think is better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Link:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55580/dispelling-mage-s-magnificent-mansion&quot;&gt;Dispelling Mage’s Magnificent Mansion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T22:59:29.093" Title="SRD name vs book name" Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5313" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5312" CreationDate="2015-01-18T22:27:00.707" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t think it matters; the names are distinctly similar enough that it’s unlikely to cause confusion, particularly with those who have even a passing familiarity with the SRD. I &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; don’t think it’s warranted to edit someone else’s question to make that change; I would have rejected that change if I’d seen it in the review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the sake of those with &lt;em&gt;zero&lt;/em&gt; familiarity, though, I tend to try to just keep things consistent. If someone asks a question about &lt;em&gt;Mordenkainen’s magnificent mansion&lt;/em&gt;, I won’t have my answer randomly talk about &lt;em&gt;mage’s magnificent mansion&lt;/em&gt; – I imagine that would be confusing for some readers. And vice versa, of course – if the question uses &lt;em&gt;mage’s magnificent mansion&lt;/em&gt;, then so will I.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When asking a question, I’d probably use the SRD name, just because it’s easier to remember how to spell most of the time...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-01-18T22:27:00.707" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5312" CreationDate="2015-01-19T00:41:06.363" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;An edit should not replace OP's language unless that language is wrong or unclear. As @KRyan and @doppelgreener have pointed out, neither was the case with linked question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best option when something as specific as spell names are &amp;quot;distinctly similar&amp;quot; may be to use a footnote. Another option would be to add a parenthetical reference of the alternate directly following the first in-text use of the term. In these ways, searches for either term will return the appropriate results. This is not a &lt;em&gt;requirement&lt;/em&gt;, but a best practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the linked question, no change would be made to the title, but the first sentence would read either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... if somebody tried to dispel &lt;em&gt;Mage's Magnificent Mansion&lt;/em&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Called &lt;em&gt;Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion&lt;/em&gt; in the PHB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... if somebody tried to dispel &lt;em&gt;Mage's Magnificent Mansion&lt;/em&gt; (called &lt;em&gt;Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion&lt;/em&gt; in the PHB) ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vice-versa with SRD if OP used the book term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18235" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T03:38:03.957" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5312" CreationDate="2015-01-19T05:55:00.107" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's a question about &lt;strong&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&lt;/strong&gt; and they've used an incomplete reference from another source, it's legitimate to edit the question to use the names that appear in the actual game. Conversely, if they specifically ask about the SRD, then it's appropriate to alter any references to D&amp;amp;D 3.5e material to match what's actually in the SRD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons v3.5&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;d20 System Reference Document&lt;/em&gt; are two different things — the former is a roleplaying game, the latter is a 3rd-party designers' reference document that is deliberately altered and incomplete, with spell names in particular being deliberately shortened or altered to remove product identity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T05:55:00.107" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5316" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5312" CreationDate="2015-01-19T07:40:36.510" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first rule should be respect and consistency, just like in the american versus british english debate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Respect the querent's language and try to maintain it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, edits which &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; edit the proper nouns of the question are insufficient and bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For answers, consistency with the querent's jargon is important, but if you want to mention the alternate wording (especially if it's a gotcha when searching) that's fine. It may be worth a comment asking a respondent to update their language to match the querent's if the differences are incomprehensible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2015-01-19T07:46:23.450" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T07:46:23.450" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5317" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-19T12:17:33.387" Score="0" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;What?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55590/what-are-some-good-underdark-modules&quot;&gt;What Paragon-Tier modules can I use to showcase the Underdark?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are several qualifications in this question (including new ones, because BESW asked for them) and it was placed [ON HOLD.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am no noob to this service, but I am baffled by this hold. How is it unclear, exactly? What, specifically, is ambiguous about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="810" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T14:29:25.537" Title="How can I make this question any clearer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5321" CreationDate="2015-01-19T13:31:53.940" Score="12" ViewCount="334" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55575/4563&quot;&gt;Simulate/Emulate 4th Edition Invoker in 5th Edition&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per advice from doppelgreener, the OP has massively changed this question &amp;ndash; do the question they meant to ask, no doubt, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4813/4563&quot;&gt;existing meta opinion&lt;/a&gt; suggests that the OP &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have asked a new question, since the change was significant and undercuts an existing, well-received answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the OP have made a new question rather than make that edit? Now that they &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; made that edit, should the edit be rolled back and the OP asked to make a new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T14:34:28.380" Title="Massive edit to a question undercuts existing highly-upvoted answer" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5318" CreationDate="2015-01-19T13:31:53.940" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, this is in part because I want to keep a good answer that I wrote. I admit my bias. However, I do not think it useful to the site as a whole to have questions changed significantly out from under answers. It is important to note that the original question was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Itself a valid question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not unclear&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Had not garnered a single close vote&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question itself had been a problem, then an edit would be fine; there’d be no value in keeping the question, and likewise not in any answers to it. But in a case like this, the community has in the past pushed users to ask new questions and leave the old one as-is, and I think that is what should have happened in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T13:31:53.940" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5317" CreationDate="2015-01-19T13:53:02.870" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an answer in three parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Part the First: Recommendation Questions And The Stack&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question falls into the category known as &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;&quot;shopping questions,&quot;&lt;/a&gt; which most Stack sites have categorically given up on after years of poor experience getting them to fit the Stack's format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE, however, doesn't want to issue blanket bans for something which we see as a crucial part of our particular bailiwick. Subjective questions have &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;stricter criteria&lt;/a&gt; across the whole family of sites and to keep recommendation questions workable in the Stack context RPG.SE has assembled &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;some specific guidelines for them&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I probably should have tagged your question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; when I first saw it, with the first tag's attendant &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/game-recommendation/info&quot;&gt;guideline links&lt;/a&gt;, but I was in a hurry and just slapped out a quick comment. We used to have to go around to each recommendation question and manually add comments like this one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6oBcW.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;one of mxy&amp;#39;s &amp;quot;game-rec&amp;quot; comments from his heroic efforts to keep the site well-informed&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but now we have this alert box:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GMxT5.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm gonna go add those tags after I'm done with this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Part the Second: Teasing Out Detail and Avoiding Open-Ended Criteria&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, let's look at your question's criteria and talk about it in the context of RPG.SE's recommendation guidelines. You give a lot of really useful context (edition, level, the kind of adventures it's setting up for), but then you undercut that by saying you don't actually need answers which act on that context. You're asking for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;An adventure in any D&amp;amp;D edition, published by anyone, which effectively introduces the Underdark --or maybe just take place underground-- and which the answerer liked. And maybe it should have a dragon endboss? I'm unclear on that point, it seems like an aside.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, the &quot;remember fondly&quot; bit is the easiest to talk about so I'll hit it first: it's a criterion for which every answer will be equally valid. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;&quot;What's your favourite X?&quot; questions are specifically called out as bad for the site&lt;/a&gt;, so we'll strike that out and trust our citizens not to recommend junk. (I really hope most recommendations aren't for things the answerer didn't enjoy!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we're left with &quot;every adventure that introduces the Underdark and maybe has a dragon&quot; and nothing to differentiate which you'll find more useful beyond that. Although you say it doesn't necessarily have to introduce the Underdark, just take place underground? I don't see how answers to this can be anything except a bunch of random guesses. Voting will break down along popularity lines rather than usefulness and the Stack's goal of &quot;neatly sorted pile of questions and answers&quot; will fail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look again. One common rule of thumb is not to leave things too open-ended unless they &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to be. It's really tempting to widen our criteria so that we get more answers, or our questions will be useful to more people, but our answerers enjoy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4398&quot;&gt;challenging the frame of the question&lt;/a&gt; enough that there's no need to invite us to do it. Answers to specific problems are more useful than vague generalised suggestions. With that in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're playing in D&amp;amp;D 4e. We'll stick to asking for 4e adventures from WotC. Underdark and Drow lore are drastically different depending on the edition, so this reduces the chances that a recommendation will be useless because of lore drift.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're focusing on the Drow later on, so rather than a general introduction to the Underdark let's ask for an adventure which gives the players a primer on Drow abilities, culture, and lore. That'll necessarily include some other Underdark stuff too, I'd hope.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're running it at low Paragon tier. Why not include that as a criterion too, instead of an aside?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now you've got this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A 4e adventure for a low-Paragon party which eases them into the Underdark, introduces them to the Drow, and has a dragon for them to fight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Woo! This I'd be comfortable going to press with, no problem. It's got narrow, clear criteria which let us identify a &quot;best&quot; answer. If such an adventure doesn't exist within your precise requirements, our citizenry will probably recommend the closest possible thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I wouldn't dream of editing your question to reflect these changes because I made several leaps and extrapolations which may be incorrect. Since you've seen my thought process now, hopefully that'll help you develop more accurate criteria in the same vein.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Part the Third: On Closing Quickly&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for being trigger-happy on closing, well, one of the big reasons to close a question is to protect it from accruing answers that aren't actually useful. That kind of answer wastes the answerer's time in writing it, wastes the community's time in moderating it, and clutters things up betweentimes. This is only effective if we close questions quickly. Once improved, questions get re-opened just as fast as they're closed--often faster!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, leaving questions open on virtue of what they might become (rather than what they are at the time of voting) is helpful to neither the querent (who is often unlikely to improve his question if he can still get answers to it, however poor they may be) &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;nor to the site&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T14:29:25.537" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5321" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5318" CreationDate="2015-01-19T13:59:09.283" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, I don't think they should have created a second question. Hence my not suggesting that they do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They asked a question about dragging their group &amp;quot;kicking and screaming&amp;quot; into 5e, and wanted to know how to make an invoker. You &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/1204&quot;&gt;challenged the frame&lt;/a&gt;, telling them not to do either. At the time, this was an excellent thing to do. The usual risk with a frame-challenge response like this is that they often don't answer the question (as in this case, &amp;quot;don't&amp;quot; isn't an answer, whilst others &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; answering how to make an invoker).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other risk is that when the problem a frame-challenge addresses is undermined, the frame-challenge is also undermined. In this case, that problem you were addressing got undermined completely. Worth noting the comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;If your group is happy with 4e&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; That's the thing; they're not particularly happy with it. &amp;quot;Kicking and screaming&amp;quot; was just a bit of hyperbole. I'm not looking for a direct translation, but more just a way to have the same sort of flavor. I'll see if I can add some clarity to my question.  – Wrathchild 14 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Wrathchild Even that being the case, you are &lt;em&gt;far&lt;/em&gt; better off finishing the campaign, retiring the characters, and starting over with fresh characters. – KRyan 14 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly. Probably, even, if this was most people think of as a campaign. But it really rather isn't. It's barely a sandbox/adventure-of-the-week kind o' deal.  – Wrathchild 11 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/55575/revisions&quot;&gt;In revision 4&lt;/a&gt;, the author undermined the original &amp;quot;kicking and screaming&amp;quot; issue totally, asserting the exact opposite: their group is &lt;em&gt;actually cheering and fist-pumping&lt;/em&gt; for the new edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At that point it's pretty clear they're providing hyperbole one way or another, and are uninterested in being straightforward with us on that point. They want the invoker one way or another and will mislead us (deliberately or accidentally) to whatever ends has us just give them an invoker conversion. If they're willing to provide unreliable background information like this, we're better off scrapping it and just dealing with the question they're trying to get answered, so I suggested removing the unreliable background info altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For the record, although it's possible, I am not attributing this to manipulativeness or malintent, so much as some less than careful use of language for which the impact was not foreseen.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the impact of actually requesting them to ask a second question, the result would be that they created this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;How do I make a 4e invoker in 5e?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... followed shortly by ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;How do I make a 4e invoker in 5e, pt 2: No seriously, how do I make an invoker in 5e?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experience tells me this would be met by the second being closed as a duplicate, followed by the community investing &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; critical inspection into the handling of the first question. &amp;quot;How did we mishandle it such that they had to ask &lt;em&gt;two questions&lt;/em&gt; to get the first one answered?&amp;quot; would be a pertinent question. (My guess is this would be followed by handling of the question and answers to get them collectively focused just on the invoker conversion.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original version of the question introduced unhelpful hyperbole which is wasting a bunch of time on behalf of several people that never would have been wasted were it not included. It has been cleansed. The nonexistent problem which never should have been invented has been removed. The person didn't need convincing otherwise. This has been very disruptive and the question started off entirely derailed from the moment of its inception, and is now hobbling its way back onto the rails.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope it doesn't need to be said, but in case it does: this was nothing personal targeted at you in any way. We are just in the position of dealing with the wrong end of a mess that could've been avoided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T14:34:28.380" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5318" CreationDate="2015-01-19T14:31:58.930" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the &quot;OP&quot; in question, perhaps I should chime in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All I was originally trying to do was include a little levity in my question. My group just wants to get together for a few hours of escapism every couple of weeks. They probably don't care if we stay with 4th, move to 5th, or if I break out my old 2nd Edition AD&amp;amp;D books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, my player with the Invoker isn't actually clamoring to keep her. If I say there's no such thing in the new edition, she'll probably just shrug and ask what else she could play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had &lt;em&gt;no idea&lt;/em&gt; that that throwaway bit of deprecation would be latched on to and used to frame an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, honestly, while that answer is well-written and has obviously been well-received, it's not actually answering my question. It's admonishing me for trying to change systems in the middle of a campaign. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(By the way, an answer along the lines of &quot;No, I don't think so. The underlying rules are too different. Don't try.&quot; would have been acceptable.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6223" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T14:31:58.930" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5323" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-19T21:45:45.400" Score="11" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a question that we treat as the canonical duplciation-target for &quot;where do I find players?&quot; questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players&quot;&gt;Where can I find other RPG players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today we got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55605/wheres-a-good-place-to-play-dd-online&quot;&gt;Where&amp;#39;s a good place to play D&amp;amp;D online?&lt;/a&gt; and I VTC'd as a duplicate of the our canonical question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I voted out of lack of certainty though, on the principle that closing prevents messes and can be reversed. (It's closed now.) I'm uncertain though because the answers for &lt;em&gt;online&lt;/em&gt; options on the other question are either poor or just not well received, and they're way down the list in the vote rankings. Probably because the original question is about in-person play, and answers that challenge that frame just haven't been well-received &lt;em&gt;for that question&lt;/em&gt;. I think that makes that question less canonical than we've been treating it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem I'm pondering is whether duplicating questions about online play to that question might not be very useful. It's certainly useful to &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; because it keeps the site tidy. But since the point of duplication is to help people find answers, we should be sure that canonical questions do quickly help the majority of people whose questions we close as duplicates. It's been observed that someone will usually leave a Stack page to seek answers elsewhere if they don't see anything relevant in the top one or two answers, and the low quality of the online-focused answers there concerns me. (Can't find the cite offhand—someone know the SE blog post on that?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I kind of feel like we need two canonical questions: one for in-person looking-for-group, and one for online looking-for-group. (Heck, we might even already have that second, and I just can't find it. We should make it more findable, if so! If we don't already, this new question is nice and tidy and might serve well, maybe by migrating the online-only answers from our other question?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Uh, I need a short bolded summary question I guess, if I'm going to stick to my &lt;em&gt;modus operandi&lt;/em&gt;, so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players&quot;&gt;canonical Looking-For-Group question&lt;/a&gt; adequately serve people looking for online play, or can we do better somehow?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T21:58:53.220" Title="Does our canonical &quot;Where can I find other RPG players&quot; question serve online players well?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5323" CreationDate="2015-01-19T21:58:53.220" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our canonical question (at least my top-voted answer to it) ends up pointing to a variety of more specific questions about online play, because &quot;online&quot; isn't a thing, play by post, play by skype, online recruiting for play IRL, etc. are things. I'd close as one of those if it's clear which one they are looking for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18665/finding-online-rpg-players-for-a-play-by-chat-rpg-campaign&quot;&gt;Finding online RPG players for a play-by-chat RPG Campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37853/where-can-i-advertise-for-players-for-my-play-by-post-game&quot;&gt;Where can I advertise for players for my play-by-post game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or just to the main one if it's not clear, and let them read and click as they are moved by the Spirit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T21:58:53.220" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5325" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5327" CreationDate="2015-01-19T22:47:32.447" Score="15" ViewCount="593" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have 2 questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55592/simulate-emulate-4th-edition-avenger-in-5th-edition&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55575/simulate-emulate-4th-edition-invoker-in-5th-edition&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;) that are asking for answers to homebrew up a class for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me this seems like it's both very broad and entirely opinion-based. I can't see a way to judge answers objectively. Since there's 2 of them, I figured it was worth checking with meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these questions an acceptable fit for this site? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-17T19:24:06.293" LastActivityDate="2021-12-17T19:24:06.293" Title="Are 'Homebrew a class for me' questions allowed on this site?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5325" CreationDate="2015-01-19T23:04:24.773" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I don't feel any content commission questions are appropriate for the site...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opening the door for homebrew commission questions is asking for a whole world of trouble. As you state there is no way for the community itself to effectively vote up or down on answers submitted to these type of questions. The lenght of answers for this type of question would be long by necessity (the final version of a class usually takes up 1 -2published pages). Further this makes a foundation for letting other type of commission/submission request questions into the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T23:04:24.773" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5325" CreationDate="2015-01-19T23:46:12.360" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are three hurdles that must be passed in my mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a way for there to be a best answer to this question? I.e. are sufficient criteria given for assessing whether an answer is good or not.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a way for good subjective to apply? Homebrew must be &lt;em&gt;tested&lt;/em&gt; by experience, not just made up on the spot. The question must be able to point to this requirement of experience, so we don't spend our days deleting &quot;I'll make it up&quot; answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it possible and narrowly scoped? Campaign settings bad, individual manipulations less bad. Can this question be answered by a single, discrete, thing, that doesn't even come close to threatening our word count limit? Opposite: would this be better on a blog or a wiki?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-01-19T23:46:12.360" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5325" CreationDate="2015-01-20T11:29:11.750" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let's address directly the problem that was seen here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;To me this seems like it's both very broad and entirely opinion-based.&#xA;  I can't see a way to judge answers objectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't feel at all like they are entirely opinion based and I see many ways of how to objetively judge the questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a way to emulate/simulate the 4e Archer Ranger in 5e?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Yes. Use the 5e fighter with Archery Style. Since the ranger in 4e is a martial class. It doesn't give you the feeling of much more than a well trained archer. You can use a background to fulfill the lore side of a nature strider.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a way to emulate/simulate the 3.5e Arcane Archer in 5e?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Yes. Use the 5e Eldritch Knight with Archery Style. It will allow you to be good with the bow and have a spell list&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a way to emulate/simulate the Rune Priest in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Yes. The simple way is this: go for a melee Eldritch Knight, change the spellcasting Ability to WIS and, instead of using the Wizard Spell List, use the Cleric Spell List. Being the case, you'll have enough divine power to feel like you're using rune-magic and will manage to handle yourself in close combat very well, just like a Rune Priest would&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all the answers are going to be short, though. And it's not entirely opinion based. Besides having to know what makes the class itself tick (as in, Invokers being intuitive casters, Avengers having their swords guided by their gods, Runepriests being a tanky-battle-cleric with a limited divine power), you have to follow what the DMG considers correct when doing those changes. Check what the 5e Dungeon Master's Guide says, Page 288:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The first step is to figure out what class feature or group of class&#xA;  features you're going to replace. Then you need to evaluate what each&#xA;  feature provides to the class, so that the features you are adding&#xA;  don't make the class over- or underpowered. Ask yourself the following&#xA;  questions about a feature you're replacing: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What impact does replacing the feature have on exploration, social interaction, or combat? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does replacing the feature affect how long the party can continue adventuring in a day? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the feature consume resources provided elsewhere in the class?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the feature work all the time, or is it regained after a short rest, a long rest, or some other length of time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers in the Invoker's issue respect all of these.&#xA;Including the change made in the spell-list that was suggested for when you use the Sorcerer or Wizard as a guideline. The DMG goes further:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;CHANGING PROFICIENCIES (DMG 287)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Changing a class's proficiencies is a safe and&#xA;  simple way to modify a class to better reflect your world. Swapping&#xA;  out one skill or tool proficiency for another doesn't make a character&#xA;  any stronger or weaker, but doing so can change the flavor of a class&#xA;  in subtle ways. For example, a prominent guild of rogues&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The designers are saying this is a good solution, and it's used in my answer when suggesting the Invoker should use Staffs and Rods as spell foci. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it comes to changing other things in the design (like what I asked about the Avenger in one of those questions, we go here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;SUBSTITUTING CLASS FEATURES (DMG, Page 287)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If one or more features of a given class&#xA;  don't exactly fit the theme or tone of your campaign, you can pull&#xA;  them out of the class and replace them with new ones. In doing so, you&#xA;  should strive to make sure that the new options are just as appealing&#xA;  as the ones you are removing, and that the substitute class features&#xA;  contribute to the class's effectiveness at social interaction,&#xA;  exploration, or combat just as well as those being replaced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And when it's about making a new spell list for the class (as suggested in the Runepriest example or in my answer for the Invoker's problem), here is what the DMG has to say about it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;CHANGING SPELL LISTS (DMG, page 287)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Modifying a class's spell list usually has little&#xA;  effect on a character's power but can change the flavor of a class&#xA;  significantly. In your world, paladins might not swear their oaths to&#xA;  ideals, but instead swear fealty to powerful sorcerers. To capture&#xA;  this story concept, you could build a new paladin spell list with&#xA;  spells meant to protect their masters, drawn from the sorcerer or&#xA;  wizard lists. Suddenly, the paladin feels like a different class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a matter of fact, checking all of this, the answer that I left for the Invoker should have been even longer, honestly. I should have mentioned that he should change the class skills and some other little things. But in the end, I'm suggesting the changes without moving away from what the Dungeon Master's Guide says and also, without moving away from what the class is. According to the Character Builder, this is the Invoker:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;You channel your god's power directly. No mere symbol can contain it,&#xA;  for you speak the words of creation, shaping the universe to your and&#xA;  your god's will&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I was saying, an intuitive divine spell-caster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Considering how things are supposed to work in Stackexchange&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a guideline for great subjetive questions (which includes this meta-question)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions inspire answers that explain “why” and “how”.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The DMG in 5e inspire those two answers, being implicit in the question, since it is for the D&amp;amp;D 5e system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions tend to have long, not short, answers&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then again, check my answer in the Invoker's issue&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you manage to give two solutions, being one you like and one you dislike but also solves the problem, I believe the answer more than passed it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions invite sharing experiences over opinions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have much experience with D&amp;amp;D 4e and a few with D&amp;amp;D 5e (which comes from quite a few oneshots, but not a campaign). Experient D&amp;amp;D 4e players are well aware of how balance works towards numbers, probabilities, &quot;powers&quot; and other mechanics. We can see how they masked and changed things in 5e, but we can also see what is left there. Using the same logic I'd use in 4e, plus using the 5e DMG guideline, I could create a Invoker that is quite balanced and feels like an intuitive caster (both solutions suggested by me do, in fact, from that matter. Since sorcery points are the main mechanism to make it feel like you can do more than a wizard. Besides, having a number of spells known and not having to prepare any, plus having more cantrips is enough to make someone have the same intuitive feeling. The Wizard based Invoker won't be versitile but balance wise, it is compensated by the other features the wizard provides). About the Avenger, I didn't come up with a decent solution. Or at least not one that convinced myself or my player that likes playing as an Avenger and therefore, that's why I asked the question.&#xA;PS: I edited this for recently running a oneshot to test the Invoker.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions insist that opinion be backed up with facts and references.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As in, again, the DMG guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great subjective questions are more than just mindless social fun.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, those questions might serve as a guide for anyone else who comes asking the same sort of conversion. And if they don't find it good enough, they might add some dept to the issue by creating a new question and explaining why it doesn't work. I see nothing bad about it at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12344" LastEditorUserId="12344" LastEditDate="2015-01-22T20:46:09.727" LastActivityDate="2015-01-22T20:46:09.727" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5325" CreationDate="2015-01-20T15:06:47.247" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with @BrianBallsunStanton's answer, and believe that these two questions can be a fit for the site given those criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The questions are pretty specific about the exact attributes they want the resulting class to have (feels like the 4e avenger in that it uses giant sword, but can Turn Undead and isn't STR-based). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are rules/guidelines for class creation in the 5e DMG&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An answer doesn't have to be an entire 3 page class writeup, it's OK for answers to be more general in proportion to broadness of question (for example, questions on &quot;in general how do I emulate a specific genre well in my game&quot; and &quot;how do I emulate the pirate genre in my game&quot; are both on topic, it's just that genre-emulation 101 info is appropriate for the first as an answer and highly detailed pirate things are appropriate for the second).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore these questions should be answerable by someone who has specifically tried to emulate those older classes in 5e.  Now, this means that maybe they won't get answered quickly - they should not be answered by someone who just does some theory work and says &quot;Oh, it seems to me that should play like the Avenger&quot;, it should be answered by someone who's actually played to get that &quot;avenger feel&quot; in 5e - but &quot;not likely to be answered&quot; is not a site criteria for question validity. This does mean that even the OP's answer to the Invoker question is invalid until tried in play and it results in either acceptable invoker simulation or not.  If the requirements were made purely technical (class must use large weapon and turn undead and have STR &amp;lt; 15) then it could be answered from a rules theory perspective, if they are somewhat subjective (plays like the avenger, feels like divinely guided) then it requires play to be Good Subjective. However, given that, it's not less answerable than any technique question that's not &quot;get my DPS to 20.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-01-20T15:06:47.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5331" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-25T00:50:22.840" Score="7" ViewCount="1705" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whose copyright rules do we abide by here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wikipedia's &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_international_copyright_treaties&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;list of parties to international copyright treaties&lt;/a&gt; outlines five major international copyright treaties, which apply in various combinations to various countries.  We seem to be a US-centric site, so I currently assume we follow US copyright law in specific in addition to any international treaties the USA has ratified.  Is that the case?  Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-02-12T02:50:03.730" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T02:50:03.730" Title="Whose Law do we follow?" Tags="|support|policy|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5331" CreationDate="2015-01-25T01:01:51.403" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/legal&quot;&gt;legal&lt;/a&gt;: US Laws and international treaties.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All materials displayed or performed on the Network, including, but not limited to text, graphics, logos, tools, photographs, images, illustrations, software or source code, audio and video, and animations (collectively, “Content”) (other than Content posted by Subscriber (“Subscriber Content”)) are the property of Stack Exchange and/or third parties and are protected by United States and international copyright laws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are proprietary to Stack Exchange and/or third parties. Subscriber shall abide by all copyright notices, information, and restrictions contained in any Content accessed through the Services.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Network is protected by copyright as a collective work and/or compilation, pursuant to U.S. copyright laws, international conventions, and other copyright laws. Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, Subscriber may not copy, modify, publish, transmit, upload, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in this Section), create derivative works based on, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content, software, materials, or Services in whole or in part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;15&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Copyright Policy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange has adopted the following policy toward copyright infringement with respect to the Network in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The address of Stack Exchange's Designated Agent for copyright takedown notices (“Designated Agent”) is listed below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-01-25T01:01:51.403" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5333" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2015-01-25T01:38:46.947" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2015-01-25T01:38:46.947" LastActivityDate="2015-01-25T01:38:46.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5334" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2015-01-25T01:38:46.947" Score="0" Body="For questions about copyright-related issues" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2015-01-26T12:16:58.883" LastActivityDate="2015-01-26T12:16:58.883" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5335" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5336" CreationDate="2015-01-25T06:45:57.940" Score="17" ViewCount="318" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sort of the opposite of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1227/how-do-we-deal-with-questions-that-are-currently-unanswerable-but-will-have-ans&quot;&gt;How do we deal with questions that are currently unanswerable, but will have answers in the future?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently saw this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55852/what-are-some-standard-monsters-or-npcs-that-can-dispel-magic&quot;&gt;What are some standard monsters or NPCs that can dispel magic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is, of course, a list question, and it isn't particularly narrowly scoped.  List questions are often too broad and it is often difficult to say which list is the best, and so most list questions are bad questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5e hasn't been out very long.  As a result, there are actually fairly few monsters published  that can cast Dispel Magic.  Miniman's answer there, I think, covers all of them (not counting spellcasting demihuman NPCs).  That answer is less than half a page long, well within our limits for reasonable length.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5e is a game published by a large publisher with a history of producing a lot of content for its supported games.  There is no reason to think that such content will not be produced for 5e, just as it was for 4e, 3e, AD&amp;amp;D 2e, AD&amp;amp;D, D&amp;amp;D basic, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If more content is produced, the answer will be outdated, which is fine because the question will still be useful.  However, it will likely not be long until the 'correct' list answer is too large and the question thus becomes too broad.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle questions like this, that are fine now but will likely become poor in the future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-05-28T15:29:04.250" Title="Good questions that will become bad" Tags="|discussion|questions|list-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5335" CreationDate="2015-01-25T07:00:00.203" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to speak to the general policy question. I don't think the example cited is a very good question yet (it needs more than one recommendation criteria) but that's a discussion which should take place in comments, chat, or a meta post set aside for that purpose (and I'm not a 5e expert, so I probably shouldn't hold forth on it there either).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We close questions when they aren't a good fit for the site, not before.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't moderate based on speculation about the future, no matter how sure we are about What Will Come To Pass. We moderate the present situation, drawing on experience from the past to inform the decision. Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We close old questions that were fine when posted, but aren't anymore because the RPG.SE policies have matured. It doesn't matter that the question &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; a good fit, we have to evaluate every question based on the current situation in which we find it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We downvote posts which are bad but can be improved, and then upvote them after they're improved. It doesn't matter if the post can &lt;em&gt;become&lt;/em&gt; great, we have to vote on its current state.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems reasonable that we should apply the same principle to questions whose quality changes because of conditions outside the site: If a question is good &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;, we encourage it regardless of potential reasons it might be less good later. If at some point in the future it's no longer good, we stop encouraging it and take the appropriate action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As always: If, after we have several of this sort of question devolve over time, the experience teaches us that the policy should be revisited, we will re-evaluate it without hesitation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-01-25T10:30:10.320" LastActivityDate="2015-01-25T10:30:10.320" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5335" CreationDate="2015-01-26T04:35:51.987" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I agree fully with BESW's answer as a general policy, I think there's room to be proactive about these sorts of things as well. Rather than let a question we know will be bad in the future sit around and, more likely than not, remain bad after said future date because nobody gets around to fixing it, you can help prevent some confusion by preemptively structuring the question (and in some cases the answer) to prevent the issues from coming up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, with the question you linked, you could preemptively narrow the scope of the question and/or answer, from &quot;What monsters have Dispel&quot;, to &quot;What monsters in the Monster Manual have Dispel?&quot; While this doesn't change anything about the question right now, it ensures that the scope of the question won't expand when more content with more monsters is released. It doesn't matter if there's a MM2, MM3, MM4, etc, since the question is explicitly about just the first one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this may seem nit-picky, it does serve a useful purpose in that, when a player two years from now finds that question through a google search, they can easily see that the question is out of date, and won't include monsters from any other sources that have come out since then. Then can then either use the information as-is, or if the question is no longer good enough, they can ask a new question that better fits their needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17908" LastActivityDate="2015-01-26T04:35:51.987" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5339" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-27T18:46:19.553" Score="12" ViewCount="296" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a great many questions about the 5th edition of D&amp;amp;D that were asked prior to the release of all of the core books. Some of those questions are now outdated, since additional detail is available in the DMG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For better or worse, these outdated questions have accepted answers. As a result, it can be challenging for an updated, accurate answer to rise to the top in votes and replace the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what is the preferred approach for reconsidering such questions? Is it a good choice to post a near-duplicate question, such as &quot;Now that the core books are released, &lt;em&gt;original question here&lt;/em&gt;&quot; or is it better to respond to the original question and hope that the updated answer eventually trickles up to get some attention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a tag that could be applied to questions where the accepted answer states &quot;We'll know more after the DMG is released&quot; so the community can more easily identify questions that may need to be revisited? Perhaps dnd-5e-basic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a concrete example, consider this excellently-answered question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44430/does-a-single-pc-who-is-stealthy-get-to-surprise-monsters-when-the-rest-of-the-g&quot;&gt;Does a single PC who is stealthy get to surprise monsters when the rest of the group is not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is well-authored, clear, concise, and helpful. &lt;strong&gt;It is probably the case that this answer is still correct.&lt;/strong&gt; Its only fault is that it predates the core books, so the viewer cannot be confident that it is correct in 5th-edition as currently written. The answer would be more useful to current audiences if it were updated with the appropriate page numbers and citations from the PHB and DMG rather than the starter kit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would hesitate to post my own solution, as it would be merely a restatement of the already-excellent-and-accepted answer with updated page numbers and whatnot. While I currently lack the reputation on this Exchange to edit answers, I would still hesitate to do so, as changing the page numbers and updating the citation text as necessary is, in my opinion, too substantial a change to be made in the pure editorial sense outside of a community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-03-20T23:22:04.540" Title="Now that the 5e DMG is released, what is the best approach to revisit existing questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5339" CreationDate="2015-01-27T19:29:20.767" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do not duplicate.  Go post new answers, those question will rise to the front page, and good new answers will be upvoted.  Ideally the OPs will be around to accept new answers, but if not, the highest voted vs accepted is a well understood distinction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Propose edits to the existing answer if the changes are pro forma or minor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add a comment if the existing answer has become plain ol' wrong based on later information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-03-20T23:22:04.540" LastActivityDate="2015-03-20T23:22:04.540" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5339" CreationDate="2015-01-27T19:29:47.223" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you see a question that you feel needs an update, you have two, not mutually exclusive, options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answer it yourself&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question will be bumped up to the main page, and ideally many people will see it, check out your answer and upvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Place a Bounty on it&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/bounty&quot;&gt;Bounties&lt;/a&gt; are Stack Exchange's solution to really getting peoples attention to a question. In fact, one of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/09/bounty-reasons-and-post-notices/&quot;&gt;listed bounty reasons&lt;/a&gt; is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Current answers are outdated&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The current answer(s) are out-of-date and require revision given recent changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Setting a bounty will not only put the question on the front page, but it will be listed as &quot;featured&quot; for 7 days, and carry a high-contrast blue thingy next to the title. It will also state directly why this question needs attention, and more visibly than a comment or new answer could state it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, if you opted for variant 1, someone else might come along and bump it up further by setting a bounty himself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T09:23:49.127" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5342" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5344" CreationDate="2015-01-28T22:33:09.460" Score="5" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some questions asking for rules clarification aren't just fairly easy for anyone familiar with the game to answer, the correct answer is immediately clear upon reading a single, short, clearly marked, indexed, and easy to find passage of text inherently associated with the asking of the question.  Rarely, in this case, this is the result of heavy intellectual bias on the part of the asker, representing a problem for a significant portion of the gaming community-- even though the answer really is obvious to anyone without the errant background (cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44400/how-does-wizard-cleric-spell-preparation-and-casting-work/44476#44476&quot;&gt;How does wizard &amp;amp; cleric spell preparation and casting work?&lt;/a&gt;).  Most of the time, however, this is not the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the answer to a question is RTFM (or a direct two-three line quote with no necessary explanatory text and no gaps, omissions, additions, etc), voting to close may prevent copyright issues, preserve site quality, and forcibly encourage new users to obey &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions/5274#5274&quot;&gt;our meta consensus&lt;/a&gt;.  That last post is particularly important; this question is basicallyy a follow-up to that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If we are not supposed to answer RTFM questions, ought we then to VTC them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T01:11:08.727" Title="Is an extraordinary lack of research effort on the part of the asker a good reason to vote to close?" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2015-01-29T04:27:48.177" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5342" CreationDate="2015-01-28T22:36:58.980" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we should indeed VTC such questions.  If the question is actually not clear, underscores an important misconception, etc. it can be reopened after editing to make that clearer.  These questions are bad for the site and should not be allowed.  Furthermore, any question which users are 'not supposed to answer' should be closed; open questions should not be traps for new users or anyone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-01-28T22:36:58.980" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5344" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5342" CreationDate="2015-01-28T22:48:34.363" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit:&lt;/strong&gt; Found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4825/15469&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; which answers this question nicely. (In fact, it's probably a duplicate.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you hover over the downvote button, you can see the following text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question does not show any research effort&lt;/strong&gt;; it is unclear or not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there's a definite recommendation from the site to downvote questions like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, we don't have a close vote reason that mentions trivial questions or lack of research effort. You suggested that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55960/15469&quot;&gt;example question&lt;/a&gt; should be closed as off-topic; the off-topic close vote reason has the following text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question does not appear to be about role-playing games within the scope defined in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you visit this help center page, it similarly does not mention trivial questions or lack of research effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With respect to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5270/15469&quot;&gt;previous 'Read the book to me' meta&lt;/a&gt;, it was asking about questions which are essentially asking for an entire set of rules. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55960/15469&quot;&gt;The example question&lt;/a&gt; for this meta you're asking now isn't that kind of question; it's just a trivial question that is easily answered with a quick glance at the book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The conclusion here seems obvious to me; as far as the site is concerned, trivial questions should be downvoted, but there is no strong justification for closing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T01:11:08.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5345" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-01-29T02:40:17.333" Score="5" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;In strictly point-buy systems (like GURPS and HERO System) you can build pretty much any character/vehicle/gadget you can think of if you know how to combine the powers and modifications thereof. Trouble comes of not knowing how to combine them appropriately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm wondering if those sorts of questions would be okay here. (I suppose they'd be along the lines of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to build the Silver Surfer's surfboard in HERO System&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to point build a taser in GURPS&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What would mimic the &lt;em&gt;Holy Avenger&lt;/em&gt; from D&amp;amp;D in Fantasy HERO?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose there's a risk that this could get into &quot;design my character for me&quot; territory. (&lt;em&gt;&quot;Build me Batman!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;) but within reason that might not be so bad (&quot;How to build Batman on 250 points&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would these sorts of questions be on-topic here? If not, why not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6223" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T20:59:03.387" Title="How to build X in (a point-buy system)" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5346" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5345" CreationDate="2015-01-29T02:47:33.953" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there are some pitfalls here to watch out for. The first is that in a point-based system, there's often no one &quot;best&quot; way to build a given thing, which means they might be prone to list answers. The other is that without careful structuring, deciding which elements of a thing are crucial to include or to exclude can be pretty opinion based, which could take these questions into the &quot;so what level is Gandalf/clan is Lestat&quot; territory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T02:47:33.953" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2849" CreationDate="2015-01-29T20:27:43.593" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The design intention of Stack Exchange is that closed questions that will &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; get fixed and reopened &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86046/off-topic-questions-should-be-deleted-rather-than-closed&quot;&gt;should be deleted&lt;/a&gt;, except when they serve as signposts for what not to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which closed questions get kept as signposts and which get deleted, and the delay between closure and deletion for those questions so fated, is a function of the moderation team's priorities and will vary from site to site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here at RPG.SE we seem to like to err on the site of keeping most of our closed questions around so that we can close-as-duplicate incoming repeats. It also might have a benefit in teaching new voters what is and isn't on topic by example, should they go digging around or witness a close-as-duplicate to a previously-closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T20:27:43.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="794" CreationDate="2015-01-29T20:50:13.533" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;After Mr. Atwood's leaving SE, the issue was revisited and apparently approved.  You can see that according to the comments at the very end of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/915/can-we-have-the-ability-to-rescind-a-close-vote-before-it-closes/33949#33949&quot;&gt;this answer's thread&lt;/a&gt;, as well as implied by &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/915/can-we-have-the-ability-to-rescind-a-close-vote-before-it-closes&quot;&gt;the status-declined tag being replaced with status-completed&lt;/a&gt;.  Note that, like votes on comments, if you VTC and then rescind that vote you will be unable to VTC again on that question in the future, even if it is edited, undergoes a rollback, or is otherwise changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-02-05T14:14:58.463" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5345" CreationDate="2015-01-29T20:50:44.107" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;These are classes of poorly specified optimisation questions which should be closed until they can fit our requirements.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jadasc said, in a comment: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The difference between the two is that you've established what &quot;building Gandalf&quot; means to you in a way that's useful. Take the example of &quot;build me Batman on 250 points.&quot; Well, Batman as a character has been around for 75 years; you'll have to narrow down what parts of the character feel inescapably Batmann-y to you. Moreover, your Batman will almost certainly differ from my Batman. –&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, questions of this ilk cannot rely on a shared cultural touchstone to provide requirements, therefore questions of this ilk are &quot;unclear what you're asking.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, by operationalising the ideas of the trope or ideal into the game world, it does become possible to have a best answer, and follow our other optimisation rules. Answers, however, will likely have a hard time with that first step, as there are too many unstated assumptions campaign by campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2015-01-29T20:59:03.387" LastActivityDate="2015-01-29T20:59:03.387" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5352" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5354" CreationDate="2015-02-02T20:32:05.140" Score="-3" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tables&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tables&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tables&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pen-and-paper&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pen-and-paper&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pen-and-paper&lt;/a&gt; tags appear in the list of room tags for the main chat, but they are dead links because those tags don't currently exist.  Can they be changed, or are we stuck with them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11818" LastActivityDate="2015-02-02T21:40:05.863" Title="Is there a way to remove dead tags from the Main Chat room tags?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5353" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5352" CreationDate="2015-02-02T20:48:22.063" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;They &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be changed by room owners/moderators, but they're mostly non-functional descriptors anyway. There are only rare instances where chat tags are useful, so most chatrooms just either use them as jokes or general descriptors. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.meta.stackexchange.com/rooms/89/tavern-on-the-meta&quot;&gt;Tavern on the Meta&lt;/a&gt; has the tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[bug] [crickets] [discussion] [excuses] [support] [waffles]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;while in reality, &lt;code&gt;[crickets]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[waffles]&lt;/code&gt;, and &lt;code&gt;[excuses]&lt;/code&gt; don't link out to any useful tags on Meta Stack Exchange. Just a flavor thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, except waffles. Waffles are delicious. Though they're also pretty much just a flavor thing. But in a different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2015-02-02T20:48:22.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5352" CreationDate="2015-02-02T21:10:02.687" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some of those tags &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; existed on the main site. I put them there as a clue to new users what our chat is really about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've got one of the most active chats on the Stack. This means that people from any Stack Exchange site, when they look for chat rooms, will see ours near the top. We semi-regularly get people looking for video game chat, video game development chat, coding chat, mathematics chat, and just about anything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few months ago, after our last batch of more joke-y tags got a little stale, I figured it couldn't hurt to put in some more &quot;what we're about&quot; cues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There really aren't many good tags for general chats: tags are supposed to be a lot more specific than a chat room for an entire Stack site. This leads to their tags being jokes, un-useful, or imaginary.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-02-02T21:40:05.863" LastActivityDate="2015-02-02T21:40:05.863" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5355" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-05T05:05:53.550" Score="-14" ViewCount="194" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why can't RPG fit into Arqade? After all, it has an rpg tag. The way I see it, any question about an role playing game would be a game that fits in Gaming. Why isn't it merged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21200" LastActivityDate="2015-02-05T05:07:33.657" Title="Why doesn't RPG fit into Arqade?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5356" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5355" CreationDate="2015-02-05T05:07:33.657" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because Arqade is about video games and computer games, and we’re about tabletop, pen-and-paper, and live-action roleplaying. The RPG tag on Arqade applies to a genre of video game, not the games that this site is about. There is minimal overlap between expertise in one or the other, so there’s little reason to expect Arqade’s users to be able to answer questions about this site’s topic, and vice versa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-02-05T05:07:33.657" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5357" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5358" CreationDate="2015-02-06T19:22:39.987" Score="31" ViewCount="2690" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the various Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons games, and a limited set of other RPGs, there is the concept of &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(role-playing_games)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;alignment&lt;/a&gt;,&quot; which is the ethical and moral disposition of a character. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a fair number of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alignment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alignment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alignment&lt;/a&gt; questions on the site, but some get closed for asking if so-and-so is compatible with a given alignment, to wit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56372/chaotic-good-and-fleeing-thugs-yet-another-alignment-problem&quot;&gt;Chaotic Good and Fleeing Thugs: Yet Another Alignment Problem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51632/how-would-you-judge-the-alignment-of-this-action-and-the-possible-repercussions&quot;&gt;How would you judge the alignment of this action and the possible repercussions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53257/when-laws-conflict-what-does-a-lawful-character-do&quot;&gt;When laws conflict what does a Lawful character do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there are other alignment questions that are fine. What kinds of alignment questions are on topic for the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:32:27.450" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T03:30:15.103" Title="Are questions about alignment on topic?" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5357" CreationDate="2015-02-06T19:51:22.703" Score="30" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Only specific kinds of alignment questions are on topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a variety of kinds of alignment questions, some of which can be constructively handled by our site and some that can not. There's not really a need for special rules for alignment questions; these are covered by the usual close rules (too broad, opinion based, etc.) but it can be hard to see how these apply in certain cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that some &amp;quot;is this good or what&amp;quot; alignment questions on the site have not been closed - but they have been identified as XY questions and answered outside their frame. Like top voted answer on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33981/good-alignment-on-characters-facing-a-vampire?rq=1&quot;&gt;Good alignment on characters facing a vampire&lt;/a&gt; leads off with explaining what &amp;quot;Always X&amp;quot; really means, and a good answer to the first linked example in the question explains &amp;quot;one act doesn't change your alignment.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble with alignment questions is that the alignment rules for the most part are deliberately vague about what exactly is good, evil, lawful, or chaotic - they provide a brief description but then leave it to you to fill in your own RL moral code in most circumstances. And people's moral codes are not good topics in the Stack Exchange format.  You'll note that even the religion sites (Christianity.SE, Mi Yodeya) have had to resort to saying &amp;quot;you have to cite the specific viewpoint of a denomination/acknowledged authority&amp;quot; to avoid this problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Good Kind&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it's appropriate and on topic to ask alignment questions that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mechanical - how does changing alignments work, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Social - people in my group don't like me playing an evil character, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Bad Kind&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the kind of question that is always &amp;quot;primarily opinion-based&amp;quot; is &amp;quot;what alignment is act X/situation X/character X/society X?&amp;quot; Except for the couple very narrow exceptions (e.g. in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, casting an evil descriptor spell is explicitly defined as an evil act) this is basically asking &amp;quot;what is your philosophy of life,&amp;quot; which is not a good topic and is impossible to answer even using Good Subjective, Bad Subjective  - you can say &amp;quot;I ruled that as evil in my game&amp;quot; and that's experience, but it's unhelpful and irrelevant.  The SE format is not intended for or appropriate to topics that basically just become popularity voting on completely subjective opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The right answer to all of these questions ends up being the same, which is to turn the specific question into a process question of &amp;quot;how do you figure this out yourself,&amp;quot; and a review of all these questions on the site shows that the meaningful answers all end up composed of one or more of these points:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alignment is subjective and it's a DM call&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alignment should be descriptive and not prescriptive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One act usually shouldn't change your alignment, depending on the system there may be optional rules that have been introduced to model alignment shift (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/alignment-description/additional-rules#TOC-Changing-Alignments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here's Pathfinder's&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's a bunch of descriptions of good and evil and lawful and chaotic stuff from the core rules and various splatbooks you can use to guide your decision&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Various general warnings about social issues (it's debatable, it can cause player dissent, chaotic and/or evil and/or lawful good characters could make the other players frustrated, etc.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alignment is a dumb horrible system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in the end it's the same answer for all of them.  Just point them here.  We should close these and change the tag wiki for alignment to say &amp;quot;Alignment debates over what alignment a person, act, or society should be are off topic.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T03:30:15.103" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T03:30:15.103" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5359" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-07T06:02:51.680" Score="-2" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder are somewhat-special among the systems we run into in that their mechanics are spread across &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; texts, as opposed to being defined in one place.  Of course, SRDs help with this, but are somewhat-necessarily limited in what they cover; people who are new to 3.5e and/or Pathfinder, though, may not appreciate this all that well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Practically speaking, this means that &quot;read the book to me&quot; turns into &quot;read &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; book to me, again?&quot; as the answer may not be in the PHB or even the SRD, but in some splatbook a novice player may never have heard of...so what should we do with questions where the answer at first appears to be simply &quot;read the PHB/SRD/DMG&quot; but, upon a second look, isn't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="16044" LastEditDate="2015-02-07T06:10:18.953" LastActivityDate="2015-02-07T23:56:51.277" Title="D&amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder -- read *which* book?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2015-02-08T02:51:04.773" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5359" CreationDate="2015-02-07T19:30:11.340" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with &quot;read the book to me&quot; questions is not that they are off-topic, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4825/can-we-have-a-rtfm-equivalent-in-the-vote-to-close-options&quot;&gt;they &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; on-topic&lt;/a&gt;. That is not the issue with them at all. The issue with &quot;read the book to me&quot; questions is that they lack any indication of research effort. That makes them poor, incomplete questions that are hard to answer, which we're encouraged to downvote. A good question about this kind of thing will indicate &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; reading the books does not solve the problem — perhaps, because which book to read is unclear. It can be that simple, but we're not mind readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Including everything relevant to a question makes it a better, more answerable question. That includes research effort and in what ways the research wasn't fruitful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-02-07T23:56:51.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5362" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5364" CreationDate="2015-02-11T01:03:26.100" Score="6" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if there were models/miniatures for certain characters in 40k, but I'm not sure if I can ask about miniatures specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am aware that asking could possibly be considered a &quot;Where can I get them&quot; question, but I'm not interested in asking that, as it's off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2015-02-11T02:09:20.480" Title="Can I ask questions about miniatures?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5363" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5362" CreationDate="2015-02-11T01:20:15.367" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/miniatures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;miniatures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;miniatures&lt;/a&gt; tag with nearly 40 questions! So long as you're meeting all the other guidelines for questions, miniatures and models (as RPG props/tools, not as collectibles or for wargaming) are totally on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-02-11T01:40:13.473" LastActivityDate="2015-02-11T01:40:13.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5364" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5362" CreationDate="2015-02-11T02:09:20.480" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asking about miniatures is totally on-topic for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, for &lt;em&gt;Warhammer 40,000&lt;/em&gt; miniatures specifically, you can find &lt;em&gt;way&lt;/em&gt; more experts in &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer-40k&quot;&gt;boargames.SE's [warhammer-40k] tag&lt;/a&gt; than you will ever find here at RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it's on-topic, yes. But we're probably not the droids you're looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2015-02-11T02:09:20.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5365" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-12T02:01:05.117" Score="0" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I have noticed several high-rep users edit perfectly good and upvoted questions containing language like &quot;Is this good&quot; or &quot;Is this a good way of approaching this issue/solving this problem&quot; or &quot;Is X good for/at Y&quot;.  I think that many of these questions are excellent questions and I wish we got more of them because they suffer from the XY problem much less frequently than other questions do.  However, it appears that these kinds of questions are considered subjective, and so special language avoiding the words 'good' and 'bad' are encouraged to avoid VTCs.  I have some issues with this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) 'Good' is not necessarily subjective.  If we claim to be experts we ought to be able to, as a quorum, tell people &quot;No, that is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a good way&quot; and &quot;Yes, that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a good way&quot; for at least some subset of method questions pertaining to RPGs.  Even when the terms are used on questions that &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; subjective, people seem to assume the language makes the question Bad Subjective, which seems wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) Sometimes the 'equivalent' language isn't equivalent.  As an example one common replacement for 'good' is 'best', which can make good questions of the form &quot;Is X a good way of handling Y&quot; different and probably worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) I worry that an aversion to such language might be based in or seemingly condone artistic relativism with regards to RPGs, which is, of course, antithetical to the nature of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) The actions of these high-rep users are in-fact helpful; questions using such language typically end up closed for no good reason as &quot;primarily opinion based&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples (will be added to over time):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56602/limiting-player-freedom-in-introductory-scenarios&quot;&gt;Limiting player freedom in introductory scenarios&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T22:44:51.887" Title="What's wrong with asking if something is 'good' or 'good for X' or etc?" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5365" CreationDate="2015-02-12T02:07:04.720" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Because it's not very good.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Is this good&quot; is a &quot;read my mind&quot; statement. We don't know how the querent operationalises good. We know how we operationalise good and project that onto the querent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this site's mind-reading attachments are still in alpha, and haven't been pushed out to the general population.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing the question to be the question such that there is a direct question and answer is always preferable to a chunk of content followed by &quot;is this good&quot;. Not least because we don't know which statement in a block of text &quot;this&quot; refers to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T02:07:04.720" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5365" CreationDate="2015-02-12T02:35:53.397" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Is it good&quot; is not an objectively answerable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What are the effects of this&quot; is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Does this achieve my specific requirements&quot; is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Is this good,&quot; &quot;Do you like this,&quot; etc. are subjective questions that are a poll at best and noise at worst. Go read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. Every gamer thinks they're an expert and their opinion is true, or that since they and some other folks like something it's true. That's not how we do things here. Q&amp;amp;As are not polls. They are not intended to just &quot;have the group of experts vote on what they like best&quot; - there is intended to be either objective or Good Subjective grounding behind answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do not care about your purely subjective opinion, either of one person or of multiple people. That is what separates SE from the beasts (and forums, and reddits).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-02-12T03:44:06.830" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T03:44:06.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5368" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5369" CreationDate="2015-02-12T20:32:21.407" Score="7" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a result of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3659/do-we-need-more-mutants-and-masterminds-edition-tags&quot;&gt;Do we need more Mutants and masterminds edition tags?&lt;/a&gt; we now have a couple of Mutants and Masterminds edition tags: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m2e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m3e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the convention of basically every other edition tag on the site, those should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m-2e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m-3e&lt;/a&gt;, with that extra hyphen before the edition number. The closeness prevents me from doing a retag. Could these be renamed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-05-19T19:59:04.040" Title="Rename the M&amp;M edition tags to be properly hyphenated" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5369" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5368" CreationDate="2015-02-12T22:54:18.930" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The lack of hyphen makes me cry and needs to be fixed. I support this. Vote for me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-02-12T22:54:18.930" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5370" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5372" CreationDate="2015-02-15T01:29:00.080" Score="-1" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sparked by comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56737/which-is-the-most-obscure-rare-or-hard-to-find-fantasy-rpg-ever-published?noredirect=1#comment117817_56737&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56737/which-is-the-most-obscure-rare-or-hard-to-find-fantasy-rpg-ever-published?noredirect=1#comment117817_56737&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we can all agree that question is poor as-asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do these comments imply collecting is off-topic? We've got a tag for it and everything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is entirely opinion based, our site does not hand poll questions at all or extended discussions. This type of question would be a much better fit on a forum or reddit. –  Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to RPG.SE. This question is not answerable in its current format. You should give a look at the FAQ about good subjective/Bad subjective. –  Mouhgouda &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt;  The banner fibs as I didn't mark this as primarily opinion-based but too broad. This could be quantifiable if sufficiently narrowed. For example, a history of gaming question focused on severely limited-print-run professionally produced RPGs (i.e. not vanity press, not self-published) should be within the site's scope. –  Hey I Can Chan&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is the kind of question that doesn't have a stable answer, though. Five, ten years from now, the most rare/obscure/expensive/hard-to-find RPG might be one that hasn't even been published today. –  SevenSidedDie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@user23715 It's not a problem when it's the exception. When every possible answer to a question must eventually become stale though, that's a sign that the question doesn't suit this site. –  SevenSidedDie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@SevenSidedDie &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5335/good-questions-that-will-become-bad&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt; disagrees –  the dark wanderer &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Consider if the question were asked on a theoretical stamps.se as &quot;what is the rarest collectable stamp in the world?&quot; that would be a fine question for the SE format (unless the site has weird rules). A question like this could be a good fit for our site, but the criteria are not yet well defined. OP, I recommend 'rarest collectible fantasy RPG' or 'most expensive fantasy RPG system' as potential distillations of your current criteria. –  the dark wanderer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4&lt;/strong&gt; The one I've been designing over the last few years. There's only one copy that was ever made, and it's stored in a medium (my own memory) that only one person in history has ever had the ability to read. Is that obscure enough for you? –  Matthew Najmon &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; @thedarkwanderer That meta would be relevant if this was a good question for the site now, but it isn't. I didn't say that was the reason for closing, either, I said it was a sign — a red flag. A hypothetical stamps.SE is not a legit comparison either: in numismatics, rarity is largely the point of the hobby, and knowing rarity would be the main line of expertise on an SE. That's quite different from the point of RPG.SE, and detailed tracking of every book's rarity is quite distant from our core competency. –  SevenSidedDie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; @thedarkwanderer As for your suggested edit, cross off &quot;most expensive&quot; (which is at least quantifiable with tools we have) — that would be a duplicate. &quot;Rarest&quot; is unfortunately unquantifiable with existing tools (and possibly a meaningless question anyway, as Matthew Najmon demonstrated). –  SevenSidedDie&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Folks, take this to meta or chat. Comments are not for discussion. –  Brian Ballsun-Stanton♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-02-15T02:52:06.607" Title="Are rpg-specific collector questions on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5371" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5370" CreationDate="2015-02-15T01:49:34.640" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not really. On the stack, we are quite happy with refusing to answer questions that &lt;em&gt;aren't appropriate for our format&lt;/em&gt;. Note well, bad questions make bad precident, and this is a bad question regardless of its topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what specific problem does this solve? If the question as phrased as a specific problem, our expertise may be applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How can good subjective or even objective criteria apply? The best answer is a list answer where people compete for whatever strange prices they've paid for out of print books at $BigCon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can this sort of thing &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; an answer? Maybe, but then it becomes Too Broad.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, the first hurdle is a generally useful one. We deal poorly with &quot;I was just wondering&quot; questions because they seldom, if ever, present enough details for us to &lt;em&gt;actually solve the problem.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2015-02-15T02:05:16.383" LastActivityDate="2015-02-15T02:05:16.383" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5370" CreationDate="2015-02-15T02:22:34.780" Score="7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We might want to get rid of it and/or historical lock those questions if we decide this site is specifically about RPGs (the actual activity itself) but not about RPGs (things typically associated as/with the activity but which are, in fact, not the activity itself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has already been solidly decided and is not in question at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is fine with questions about things associated with RPGs, or otherwise not about the activity of playing one itself. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/props&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;props&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;props&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon-care&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon-care&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon-care&lt;/a&gt;, among other tags for plenty of questions about things away from the table but connected to RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on topic help page&lt;/a&gt; we have a section on real-world topics: ctrl+f &lt;code&gt;real-world topic&lt;/code&gt;. If it's genuinely within the expertise of an RPG.SE player and we'd be the best people to ask, it's on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Brian said, the real issue is whether collector questions are &lt;em&gt;good for the Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/em&gt; We've only had four in that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/collector-value&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;collector-value&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;collector-value&lt;/a&gt; tag: one is closed, three are fine. Signs are the category &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt; is okay, but we'll still close individual questions asked here that don't fit. (If the category turns out to be not-OK, that'll only be after we notice we're closing basically all of its questions for not fitting.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is not an answer creating new policy. This answer is just saying we do things as usual, and no policy decision needs to be made yet.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-02-15T02:22:34.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5373" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-15T09:48:36.960" Score="30" ViewCount="236" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mainly, just like we map [help] and [tour], I'd love to be able to map [gsbs] to the Stack Overflow blog post &quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&lt;/a&gt;) since we use it so often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm quite aware that I can script this in Greasemonkey, but this seems to be a rather more useful pattern than for me personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="68611" LastEditDate="2021-02-19T22:35:19.693" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T22:35:19.693" Title="Could we have a shortcut &quot;magic link&quot; to the &quot;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&quot; blog post?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|comments|hyperlinks|magic-links|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5374" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-16T17:45:46.460" Score="2" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll spare you all the rant but I don't like this stack exchange anymore and haven't for several years. The obvious solution was to stop reading it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I do use other stack exchanges. And sometimes I get notifications from RPG. Usually they're just points for getting upvotes on something I wrote years ago. Sometimes they're pretty negative. I'd rather not get them at all. Is there any way to do this short of deleting all the content I ever posted?  If that's the only way, is there a bulk delete option?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Yes, I tried google but only got answers about programming notifications in a variety of systems.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2015-02-18T23:20:56.023" Title="How do I stop getting notifications from this stack exchange?" Tags="|support|stack-exchange|notifications|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5375" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5374" CreationDate="2015-02-16T18:20:12.787" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an issue about the SE network rather than RPG.SE specifically, and has been asked here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/179434/is-there-a-way-to-disable-all-forms-of-notification-for-a-specific-site&quot;&gt;Is there a way to disable all forms of notification for a specific site? - Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;. The long and short of it is: no, not without asking for your RPG.SE account to be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are at least two (slightly different) feature requests on Meta.SE to allow muting or disabling notifications, which you may want to vote up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/157405/dont-show-me-notifications-or-comments-from-sites-im-logged-out-of&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t show me notifications or comments from sites I&amp;#39;m logged out of&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/132922/more-control-over-multicollider&quot;&gt;More control over multicollider&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2015-02-16T18:20:12.787" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5374" CreationDate="2015-02-16T22:40:12.273" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;@sevensideddie's links told me there was no such feature in stackexchange.  I did the next best thing I could think of which was write a userstyle that hides those links so I don't have to look at them anymore.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://userstyles.org/styles/110509/stack-exchange-notification-hider&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://userstyles.org/styles/110509/stack-exchange-notification-hider&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="819" LastActivityDate="2015-02-16T22:40:12.273" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5377" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5374" CreationDate="2015-02-16T22:58:28.490" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there any way to do this short of deleting all the content I ever posted? If that's the only way, is there a bulk delete option?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a slightly less nuclear option that leaves your content intact: you can delete your RPG.SE account. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/7979/152515&quot;&gt;The guidance on doing that is here&lt;/a&gt;. Your posts will become dissociated from your account, since you'll no longer have one here. As for the votes you've cast, since you're a high reputation user with lots of voting history, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/286156/254830&quot;&gt;the Community♦ user will take ownership of those votes&lt;/a&gt; (in other cases they'd just disappear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want your posts to no longer display your name beneath them after account deletion, you should change your name on here prior to account deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This won't blow up every account you have on every network site, just the sites where you request it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2015-02-18T23:20:56.023" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5378" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-18T23:44:03.593" Score="8" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was a totally awesome answer to someone else's question that really helped me out.  So I want to award an additional bounty... just as a way of iterating this.  I started a bounty, and checked that it was for an existing answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I have to wait 24 hours to award it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is that?  And if there's no real reason... can we change it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2015-02-19T03:27:49.070" Title="What's the purpose of the 24 hour wait on awarding a bounty?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5378" CreationDate="2015-02-19T00:02:23.937" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/116072/244929&quot;&gt;asked and answered on the main Stack Exchange meta&lt;/a&gt;. The delay is justified with two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a bounty is awarded quickly, it discourages other potentially better answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some seemingly unnecessary restrictions on the bounty system are there to prevent abuse.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first point is the most important, I think. Bounties are a mechanic for incentivising high-quality site content, and it makes a lot of sense for the 24-hour period to be read as a kind of dare to other users: &quot;I think &lt;strong&gt;this&lt;/strong&gt; answer is worth 200 rep. &lt;em&gt;Can you do better?&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question isn't &quot;What does the delay prevent from happening?&quot; but rather &quot;What would an instant transaction inhibit which a delay allows?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bounties are &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/99458/244929&quot;&gt;incentives for encouraging high-quality answers&lt;/a&gt;, not &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/42548/244929&quot;&gt;a tool for moving reputation around&lt;/a&gt;. Giving a 24-hour period for other answerers to step up their game results in a net gain for the site which immediate reputation-exchange transactions does not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not about frustrating your desire to reward a good answer--you still can, obviously. The delay is designed to goose the entire site's forward momentum, at the cost of asking a little patience on the part of people who have already shown a willingness to go out of their way to personally reward awesomeness. This inserts a bit of healthy competition into a mechanism which might otherwise quell ambition: at the very least, it gives 24 hours for everyone else to see &quot;Hey, if I write a good enough answer, someone might give me a massive lump sum for it!&quot; Makes the transaction public, y'see?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-02-19T03:27:49.070" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5380" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5381" CreationDate="2015-02-20T15:55:06.340" Score="5" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are there any options for grouping together those questions? I've seen a number of them now, most of them attract really good answers. But they seem to be a common theme and I might imagine that many people who are looking for one of these might also be interested in others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to do something a Community Wiki post where we gather all of them together? Maybe add a new tag to all of them? Or is the site not supposed to work like that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see the whole set of questions together to be an amazing resource for people who are trying to work on their roleplaying skills (whether as a player or DM).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, here's some of the questions I'm talking about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56968/how-can-i-dm-a-character-with-more-social-skills-than-me&quot;&gt;How can I DM a character with more social skills than me?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71/how-do-i-roleplay-a-character-more-intelligent-than-i-am?lq=1&quot;&gt;How do I roleplay a character more intelligent than I am?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36633/how-can-i-roleplay-a-character-more-manipulative-than-myself?lq=1&quot;&gt;How can I roleplay a character more manipulative than myself?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53042/how-do-i-gm-a-character-immeasurably-more-intelligent-than-myself?lq=1&quot;&gt;How do I GM a character immeasurably more intelligent than myself?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-02-20T16:07:36.417" Title="Grouping questions in the theme of &quot;how to roleplay a character more X than I am&quot;" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5380" CreationDate="2015-02-20T16:07:36.417" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;These all fall under our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; tag. &quot;How to roleplay X better&quot; is a subset of roleplaying problems, so the tag fits. Do we need a more specific tag for this subset though? Not really: Since &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; possible questions about how to play a role are actually too subjective for the Stack, these questions are a significant proportion of those under the tag, so they're easy enough to find, when they're properly tagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-02-20T16:07:36.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5382" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5384" CreationDate="2015-02-20T17:57:58.250" Score="12" ViewCount="1087" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47655/is-there-a-legal-way-to-get-dd-5e-core-rulebook-pdfs&quot;&gt;about legal 5e PDF's&lt;/a&gt;, it has, more than once, attracted answers advocating piracy or even linking to pirated versions of these PDF's.  Is our policy just to downvote and move on, or should we actively flag these answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-02-22T05:26:57.617" Title="What's our policy with answers advocating piracy (accidentally or not)?" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|copyright|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5383" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5382" CreationDate="2015-02-20T18:19:18.103" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers that are in clear violation of copyright should be deleted. (or flagged if you cannot vote to delete)&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of the material we share on this site is copyrighted in some way that limits reproduction. A lot of the excerpts we source to improve the quality of our answers could be seen in breach of that copyright given the amount we source, however our nature as a Q&amp;amp;A site and our practice of deleting pirated/copyright infringement links keeps us from receiving a DMCA notice to remove those excepts from our site. This is not a strictly written policy, but a best practice the majority of the community follows. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2015-02-20T18:19:18.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5382" CreationDate="2015-02-20T21:03:32.023" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2773/321&quot;&gt;my answer regarding the (now defunct) DndTools.eu site&lt;/a&gt; is relevant. It goes something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The legality of linking to infringing material is unclear, with conflicting legal precedents, and different ones in different countries. It's legal in the US though, so long as DMCA takedowns are processed in a timely fashion (which SE does).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Regardless of legality of linking, these files are clearly illegal and will inevitable be taken down (as DnDTools.eu was recently), rendering the links useless.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers that will become useless in the near future make our site worse.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My conclusion there applies here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, legally, we could leave these links alone, but we are compromising the quality of our site while doing so. This is a case where legality is not the only relevant concern. I think we should, despite the lack of legal liability, prohibit these links as a matter of maintaining the quality of the answers the site generates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So these answers aren't really illegal (maybe), but they do us no good either way. Leaving them also gives the wrong impression that we're blasé and pirate-friendly, when we're actually quite careful about how we quote and use game text. For practical reasons, rather than legal reasons, we should kill 'em on sight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-02-20T21:03:32.023" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5385" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-21T00:03:28.050" Score="10" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;Only previous reference is in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/549&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/544/what-kind-of-questions-can-i-ask-here&quot;&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/a&gt;, which is 5 years old. We've seen much water pass under the bridge since then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question inspired by: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57100/choose-your-own-adventure-books-games-are-there-any-two-player-variants&quot;&gt;Choose Your Own Adventure Books/Games: Are there any Two-Player variants?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us take a hypothetical:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone asks about character optimisation for a Lone Wolf game they're playing (perhaps with friends kibitzing). On/off topic. Why, why not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What other edge cases can we use to define the scope here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:34:59.050" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T03:34:59.050" Title="Are &quot;choose your own adventure&quot; questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5387" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5385" CreationDate="2015-02-23T05:32:46.503" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;CYOA books, a.k.a. &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebook&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;gamebooks&lt;/a&gt;, are not RPGs and are off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs based on a gamebook line (e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/rpg/1832/advanced-fighting-fantasy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Advanced Fighting Fantasy&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;) are on topic, since they're RPGs. Questions about using gamebooks in some way for an RPG are also on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if it's just about gamebooks, we're not the relevant experts. If it's about using gamebooks in an RPG context then we can help, just as we can help with other things (like music or computer hardware) being used in an RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-02-23T05:32:46.503" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5388" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5389" CreationDate="2015-02-23T20:57:37.780" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm really frustrated, and a bit stuck.  At the end of the day, posting on the RPG stack only ends up in aggravation.  Can anyone tell me how to delete just the RPG profile without effecting the Stack Overflow or any of the other profiles?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user11839" LastActivityDate="2015-02-23T21:04:01.653" Title="Is there any way to just get rid of the RPG profile without the others?" Tags="|support|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5389" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5388" CreationDate="2015-02-23T21:04:01.653" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you can request account deletion on &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; your RPG.SE profile. Please follow the instructions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; by selecting account deletion in the dropdown. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-02-23T21:04:01.653" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5390" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5393" CreationDate="2015-02-26T08:07:57.927" Score="5" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most of the time the sort of comments I'd like to downvote are comment-answers that use the inability of people downvote comments to look highly supported.  I flag these as comment answers and they get taken care of, though there is no specific flag for that complaint and I use the 'other' flag every time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, though, they are just suggestions or statements starting with &quot;note that...&quot; on an answer or question that I strongly disagree with.  Because they can't be downvoted and tend either to make strong claims or be steeped in a strongly opinionated subset of RPG culture these comments often get a decent number of upvotes over time.  The worst of these I can just flag as 'not constructive'.  The better ones, however, I can't (since it's not clear with a cursory inspection why it's not constructive).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The options I see are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag it as not-constructive anyways.  Seems ok, except that puts me and one random mod in charge of deciding whether or not every comment suggestion or addendum is 'right' or not, regardless of how useful other people think it is as a suggestion for improvement.  This also enables edit-wars where Alice posts a comment which Bob deletes but then Charlie posts almost the same comment again, which Dean deletes, and so on.  Worst of all, you can't blame people for re-posting or flagging the comment since they have no way of knowing it was ever posted or deleted before.  Sounds like a mess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leave another comment responding to the offending comment.  This is what the community seems to do as the status-quo.  It leads to lengthy comment 'discussions' that are really more like arguments (though one side is usually fairly clearly on superior footing academically speaking).  These inevitably lead to either a chat room (rare) or Dr. Ballsun-Stanton nuking it from orbit (somehow more common.  And it's pretty much always him, too.  How three mods manage to manage the entire site I do not know).  Existing policy explicitly discourages eliciting discussion in comments.  I'm okay with ignoring that guideline if the discussion is strictly limited to how best to improve a question or answer and stays very short, but the kind of discussion this response elicits is definitely not okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Give up and just let it be.  This results in misleading, erroneous, and/or insidiously offensive advice being disseminated via our platform as a sort of 'necessary casualty'.  That is unacceptable for what I hope are obvious reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Solicit meta.se for the ability to downvote comments, which I expect will be denied on the grounds we shouldn't be using comments that much anyways, what with them being 3rd class citizens.  This does seem to have the least negative side effects though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-02-26T20:11:59.290" Title="What should I do when I want to downvote a comment?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5390" CreationDate="2015-02-26T09:02:01.083" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Leave a better answer on the question or go contribute to another question. Arguing in comments isn't worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the say, comments are for improving answers. If you simply cannot stand for a comment to be there, create a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; answer than all the others which also addresses common misconceptions, especially if they exist in other venues. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, create a chat room for explicit discussion of the issue and post a link to that in the comments. But do actually consider improving the quality of content on this site first. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, if you can't leave a better answer, don't be this guy:&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZM8lI.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2015-02-26T09:34:40.643" LastActivityDate="2015-02-26T09:34:40.643" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5392" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-02-26T18:18:53.147" Score="8" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, so theoretically, if I want to learn how to participate in the site I can do so by going to the help center, right? Wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a vast number of meta.rpg posts (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;), blog posts (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;Gorilla v.s. Shark&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;), meta.se posts (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/73566/is-there-any-markdown-to-create-tables&quot;&gt;Is there Markdown to create tables?&lt;/a&gt;), and random other sites (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;What the formatting page says is the official formatting documentation but is actually hopelessly outdated&lt;/a&gt;), not to mention all that stuff that doesn't seem to be documented anywhere, until it's mentioned in passing by someone who knows about it on meta (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5373/could-we-have-a-shortcut-bracket-link-to-the-good-subjective-bad-subjective-pos&quot;&gt;Could we have a shortcut bracket link to the good subjective, bad subjective post?&lt;/a&gt;).  As someone trying to learn how to use the site, this is frustrating.  Is there a way we could consolidate these kinds of things via links in an actually-useful help center?  Is there a reason we only provide the information we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-02-26T20:39:54.023" Title="Why is our help center so awful?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5390" CreationDate="2015-02-26T20:06:55.523" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Flag it as not-constructive anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;except that puts me and one random mod in charge of deciding whether or not every comment suggestion or addendum is 'right' or not, regardless of how useful other people think it is as a suggestion for improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;hellip; isn't actually a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are ephemeral and not &lt;em&gt;meant&lt;/em&gt; to hang around being useful. If they were useful, they would get incorporated into the answer or question. They may have been temporarily useful at one point (to raise awareness of something or otherwise alter the mood around a post), but if they're older than — oh, I don't know, let's pick an arbitrary &quot;not part of a current issue&quot; timeframe — a week, say, then they're fair game. And waiting until comments &quot;age&quot; even just a little bit (even just a couple of days) means that you won't see comment reposting, because it's old news and people have usually moved on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag 'em. If they were important to keep for posterity, they wouldn't have been &lt;strong&gt;comments&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I say this, despite suspecting you're objecting to a bunch of my comments. I'm one of the few (only?) users here with the know-it-all typing tic of starting comments with &quot;Note that...&quot; :) Besides, helping prune &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; old comments is &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; useful, since there are quite a lot of them that need pruning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-02-26T20:11:59.290" LastActivityDate="2015-02-26T20:11:59.290" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5392" CreationDate="2015-02-26T20:39:54.023" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because we don't have control over the help pages. They're set network-wide in order for the SE network to control network-wide policy (an example is the recent roll-out of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; policy page). It's good to have standardisation, but the trade-off is that it has the usual downsides of one-size-fits-all approaches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the plus side, a bunch of this is actually in the help (e.g. bracket shortcuts, the actual markdown reference&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;), or in our meta &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag (frame challenge, local GS/BS implementation). I agreed that &quot;we can't do tables&quot; would be useful to mention in the formatting page, but we can't add that ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no need for a new feature though, and you can start fixing this right now on your own: &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/its-ok-to-ask-and-answer-your-own-questions/&quot;&gt;ask and self-answer questions&lt;/a&gt; on these topics as you figure them out, and then flag them to have a moderator consider adding the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag. And if you see a page that people regularly refer to that's missing the tag, flag it too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tagging meta questions as FAQs is our most effective means to collect together useful information that's particular to our site, or that's hosted off-network.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Yes, the &quot;official markdown syntax reference page&quot; is misleading right there at the top of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/formatting&quot;&gt;formatting help page&lt;/a&gt;, but it's unfortunately a necessary kowtow to the original designer because he gets grumpy about how Markdown is used and changed by people other than him, even when it's permitted by the Markdown license. The formatting help page does go on to correctly explain &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; Markdown flavour's formatting syntax.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-02-26T20:39:54.023" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5395" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-02T09:43:21.190" Score="18" ViewCount="373" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What do you do when the OP says they only want RAW but the RAW don't mention what they want?&lt;/strong&gt; I went for &quot;tell them the RAW are silent but give them your humble (and indeed tongue-in-cheek) opinion for a solution, but that was almost instantly downvoted, and not by the OP. So I left it as &quot;say the RAW are silent but cite the nearest thing (making it clear these are not the RAW you seek).&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is is enough just to say, &quot;The RAW don't mention this&quot;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can't see that being very popular with the OP or anyone else either. But unanswered questions are also bad, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see this being an ongoing issue as more people make the jump from 3.5, Pathfinder and other RAW-heavy systems to D&amp;amp;D 5e. I now wonder in this case if we should just quote the bits of the books telling DMs to wing it - though probably also not popular.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20972" LastEditorUserId="20972" LastEditDate="2015-03-12T00:34:20.843" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T00:34:20.843" Title="How to answer a RAW question when the RAW are silent?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5395" CreationDate="2015-03-02T09:56:08.100" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is effectively a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;. If you can show that there is no RAW, that there's community consensus that there is no RAW, and discuss alternatives that have &lt;em&gt;worked for you in the past&lt;/em&gt;, you're less likely to be downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are unanswerable, because they're unclear, should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that demonstrate a misunderstanding of the rules are subject to the frame challenge rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are just unknown shouldn't have an answer until they are known: we have &lt;strong&gt;33&lt;/strong&gt; unanswered questions out of &lt;strong&gt;11,140&lt;/strong&gt;. I'm quite quite happy with our question answer rate, and see no need to rush to answer a question that requires thought or time (either in research, or waiting for discussions on other sites to resolve, or waiting for new books) to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-03-02T10:05:51.323" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5395" CreationDate="2015-03-02T10:09:48.267" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two points that I think should be made here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unanswered questions aren't really an issue. If you don't have a good answer to a question, just don't answer it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57476/4398&quot;&gt;The specific question you're asking about&lt;/a&gt; requested either RAW that they missed OR a statement of designer intent. If they'd just asked for RAW, an answer of &quot;there is no RAW&quot; is difficult to prove, but if proven, is a perfectly good answer. In this case, though, &quot;there is no RAW&quot; should probably be backed up with &quot;but the designers meant this&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-03-02T10:30:57.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5398" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5395" CreationDate="2015-03-02T13:26:09.897" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Agree with Brian on its being a frame challenge, but you're correct that as 5e picks up the current ed RAW junkies are going to have a harder time of it, as many answers to such questions to the designers end up being replied to with a tweet that says &quot;make it up, man.&quot; Because of this shift of tone, you're right that people demanding RAW are more often going to be left out in the cold, and they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be asking for Good Subjective answers. However, the way to get them to do that is to leave their &quot;RAW only!&quot; questions unanswered, to drive their behavior. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-02T13:26:09.897" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5399" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-03T23:54:15.043" Score="5" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tool recommendations are a fairly popular category of question (found in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, and a lot of them are simply tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;). Being recommendations, these questions and answers need to go a bit further than most questions to be of good quality for the site, and are more prone to run into problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time, things work themselves out well, but we still have problematic patches and answers that say little more than &lt;em&gt;&quot;here, try this: {link}&quot;&lt;/em&gt;. We have no policy or guidance tailored specifically to tool recommendations to point these people to, and it's probably about time we did have that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are our requirements for tool recommendation questions and answers? What guidance can we give to authors to have their questions and answers work well within our system? If parts of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/1204&quot;&gt;policy for game recommendations&lt;/a&gt; applies, what applies?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Please elaborate or summarise the requirements: the intention here is that we can link people to this question and they'll understand the basics of what we need from them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-03-04T03:25:57.367" Title="What are our requirements for tool recommendation questions and answers?" Tags="|discussion|tools|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5399" CreationDate="2015-03-03T23:57:09.070" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;All the game-rec stuff applies.  Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2711/has-system-recommendation-grown-too-big-for-its-britches/3006#3006&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt; we decided not to do a whole bunch of extra tagging (tool-rec! Adventure-rec!) for stuff that surfaces once in a blue moon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-03-03T23:57:09.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5402" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5404" CreationDate="2015-03-04T09:31:17.763" Score="6" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been reading on the Harpers (a faction in the Forgotten Realms setting of Dungeons and Dragons) a bit, and I have seen quite some comments online of people not liking them a lot because of the things they have been doing.. I want to ask a question about this, but I do not want to phrase it in a way that makes it a non-subjective question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking it like &quot;Why do poeople dislike the Harpers?&quot; is of course a no-go.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Phrasing it like &quot;What have the Harpers done to gain out-of-universe dislike?&quot; is still a bit iffy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What canonical events have contributed to a negative image of the Harpers?&quot; isn't quite it yet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I go about phrasing this particular question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12455" LastActivityDate="2015-03-08T15:18:21.977" Title="How to ask a question regarding canonical events that generate negative player reactions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5402" CreationDate="2015-03-04T10:02:52.747" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems more suited for discussion on a forum somewhere. Some questions simply are a poor fit for our venue, and &quot;primarily opinion based&quot; is one of our close reasons. We're also, unfortunately, stingy with our telepathy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We view this sort of &quot;knowing what we're bad at&quot; as a feature, instead of a bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that said, the way to think about this sort of question is: &quot;can there be a single best answer to this question?&quot; In this instance, the best answer can only link to and summarise the comments you've already read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you absolutely must, you could ask for author intent and where the author has discussed his or her intentions, but that... wouldn't be a very good question in this context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-03-04T10:02:52.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5402" CreationDate="2015-03-04T15:23:55.560" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This sounds like a question for an expert, but &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; might be that expert&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like &lt;em&gt;What canonical events have contributed to fans' negative feelings about the Harpers?&lt;/em&gt; then the question's body containing perhaps a description of the Harpers and its role in the Realms and some links to places where folks are disparaging of the organization sounds like a reasonable and valid question that an expert on the Forgotten Realms should and can answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with Brian Ballsun-Stanton's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5403/8610&quot;&gt;concern&lt;/a&gt; that this question is not a good fit here. This question isn't better addressed by a message board conversation where static from fans and worse will lead to confusion and frustration but is better addressed here by a lecture from a well informed Realms historian who can confidently speak to fans' reactions to canonical events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thing is, unless there's a Realms historian who frequents this site or you can encourage one from another to visit to answer the question, &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; might be in the best position to answer your own question, having already done some research, assessed the impact of some events, and gauged fans' reactions. While it's totally okay to answer your own questions, it sounds like you don't &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to. So there's that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-03-04T15:23:55.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4883" CreationDate="2015-03-05T01:32:20.277" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is no longer starting new community blogs. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/244467/were-no-longer-starting-new-individual-site-community-blogs-heres-why&quot;&gt;We&amp;#39;re no longer starting new individual site Community Blogs - here&amp;#39;s why&lt;/a&gt; if you want to find out the reasoning behind that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The situation may change in the future, but for now, we don't need to worry about whether or not to start one up 'cause we can't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-03-05T01:32:20.277" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5402" CreationDate="2015-03-05T21:43:10.210" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the core of this is what your question really is.  What is the problem you're trying to solve?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Why does some set of people on the internet believe something&quot; is always a crappy question. It lacks clarity of who 'those people' are and frankly even a good answer doesn't help anyone. And you read their posts, I'm not sure why you'd ask the question here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you or your players have a problem with something, that's a better question because it has standing and is actionable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thinking about how this impacts your play and asking a question like &quot;How do I make having a pervasive goody-goody organization like the Harpers not derail campaigns set in the Realms because my players will be tempted to hand every threat above CR5 over to them&quot; is a good question too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But why does anyone believe anything on the Internet?  it's full of psychoes and reason has little to do with it. Not very relevant for here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="50" LastEditDate="2015-03-08T15:18:21.977" LastActivityDate="2015-03-08T15:18:21.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-03-06T01:08:56.983" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Pvu4S.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;http://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;herokuapp.com&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2947" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2022-12-29T04:40:00.250" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:40:00.250" CommentCount="9" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-03-06T01:08:56.983" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5408" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-06T06:37:44.190" Score="4" ViewCount="251" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm thinking of asking and self-answering a game-recommendation question. I teach English as a Foreign Language (EFL/ESOL) at a foreign university. I had a great experience last semester running a simple rpg for several groups of college-aged students as part of their English-language tuition, and think rpg.se would be a good place to 'park' this information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this might be really useful to an admittedly tiny group of people (EFL/ESOL teacher gamers) but I would have been glad of this information at the start of last semester. There is some stuff on the web, including a whole &lt;em&gt;paper&lt;/em&gt; which I'll reference in my question, but that's of limited use as it's based around AD&amp;amp;D 2 (my 'native' system but not one I'd want to inflict on the innocent). Other references are pretty superficial &quot;I played D&amp;amp;D with my class it was awesome.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think I'm au fait with the way of writing a good game-recommendation question (specify genre, target audience, level of rules complexity, ask for personal experience), but the latter point could potentially involve a lot of pedagogy (how to introduce students to the necessary concepts and vocabulary, class and group management etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is: &lt;strong&gt;Am I in danger of my question or my self-answer being challenged as off-topic for rpg.se if I include a pedagogical part to the question and my self-answer? Is it a case of making sure that the majority of both is rpg material, or is pedagogical stuff legit if it is specifically &quot;rpg pedagogy&quot;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should perhaps also say that my question and answer will be a labour of love, which is why I want to get meta advice first. I'm not expecting to get much (or any) rep from it, but if there's any danger of mass downvoting or closure I'd rather not attempt it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20972" LastEditorUserId="20972" LastEditDate="2015-03-06T07:00:59.010" LastActivityDate="2015-03-07T16:19:55.227" Title="How much pedagogical detail is legit in student-oriented game recommendation?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5408" CreationDate="2015-03-06T07:04:07.030" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, interesting requirements are interesting. We've dealt with pedagogical requirements in the past, especially for ESL stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would however recommend that you start by asking your question, and waiting for community refinement. Then, if you find that your answer answers the question after it's refined by the community, you're welcome to contribute it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-03-06T07:04:07.030" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5408" CreationDate="2015-03-07T13:08:14.110" Score="2" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Am I in danger of my question or my self-answer being challenged as off-topic for rpg.se if I include a pedagogical part to the question and my self-answer? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A pedagocial part is fine. However, you artificially narrowed it down to basically &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; ask for relevant experience, but instead ask for &lt;em&gt;being you&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example what I'm talking about: I am a certified instructor. I did have courses with 20+ people that never roleplayed before. And due to foreign exchange students that did not have a strong enough grasp of our language yet, we did it in English once or twice, a foreign language and certainly a good learning experience to all of us. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But how dare I answer your question, not being an actual clone of you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't mind open questions with self-answers. What I do mind is questions that are blocked for others. This is a community site. Where people talk to each other. If you want a place where you can talk to yourself, I'd suggest you find a blogging service. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You wrote a great question. But it's not actually a question, it's just the first half of your paper. And as such, I will vote it &quot;not useful&quot; for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry for having been a bit harsh but your question really rubs me the wrong way and I finally think I know why: You asked a question, denied 99% of the community the chance to answer, mentioned you already &lt;em&gt;knew&lt;/em&gt; the answer and then &lt;em&gt;did not even share it with us&lt;/em&gt;. That is, step-by-step, the anthithesis of StackExchange. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you should have done is write a self-answered question. The way you wrote your question, I think that would be great. That means you write a question, free of artificial restrictions. And free of any mention of already knowing the answer. And then you write an answer with your experiences. And then you post &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt;. I think there even is a checkbox somewhere that allows you to post your question with an answer already attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking forward to your self-answered question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="7665" LastEditDate="2015-03-07T16:19:55.227" LastActivityDate="2015-03-07T16:19:55.227" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5411" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-08T02:16:18.197" Score="6" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=intags%3amine%20is%3aquestion%20hasaccepted%3ano%20closed%3a0&quot;&gt;bookmarked search page&lt;/a&gt; which returns a set of questions within my favourite tags (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;). I have an addon that I rely on heavily, which lets me right-click on links then mark them as read from the context menu. The URLs are fine when I hover over them, but when I right click, they are changed by JS to have some extra parameters (&lt;code&gt;?s=13|0.000&lt;/code&gt; or the like) which breaks my ability to use this addon, because marking a different URL visited doesn't change the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opening the pages works, but if I've right-clicked they'll carry that parameter, and I tend to do that first by habit. This seems to show up mainly in this search page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-03-09T14:05:07.453" Title="A script changes search URLs when I right click on them, breaking my workflow" Tags="|bug|status-declined|search|site-design|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2962" CreationDate="2015-03-08T18:28:55.423" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question has been closed as Idea Solicitation.  While  a good answer often contains good ideas, a request for ideas is off-topic here, because it &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;doesn't have a single best answer&lt;/a&gt;.  Consider posting such solicitations on &lt;a href=&quot;http://ourchosenrpgforum.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a forum&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Idea solicitation questions are always sort of too broad, because a thorough answer would have to cover a potentially large range of possibilities and doing so in depth would be too long for this format.  They are sort of not too broad because the asker doesn't usually want answers in that format; instead they are expecting a smorgasbord of short, low-quality, &quot;handful of random ideas&quot; answers from which to pick and choose what to use in their game.  They are looking for a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Idea solicitation questions are often sort of primarily opinion based, because they often desire no way of determining whether an idea is or is not any good besides opinion, and almost never provide a aesthetic framework to judge answers within.  Idea solicitation questions are not problematic just because of the opinion component, however, as even 'objective' idea solicitations (&quot;How can I add two User-provided numbers in Pearl?&quot;) or 'good subjective' idea solicitations (&quot;any ideas for a CR6 monster in D&amp;amp;D 3.5?) are horrible questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crucial problem with idea solicitation questions is that they are not interested in &quot;the best way&quot;-- in fact a 'best answer' might not even be a coherent concept-- just good ways, and sometimes just ways.  This means that they are not a real question, because real questions have answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There has been some objection to this idea somehow being made moot by the less useful generic messages associated with either Too Broad or Opinion Based.  Even were this wholly subsumed in one or the other of those (it's not), a more specific message for a common problem is worthwhile.  If it &quot;straddles the two&quot; (it does more than that), it's certainly a good custom close reason because neither of the close reasons best describe the issues and providing a single statement that addresses what's wrong prevents both multiple closure events (a little discouraging) and the question &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; not being a bad fit for the site for the reason listed on the close banner yet being un-reopen-able due to other issues the querant may not even be aware of (extremely discouraging).  &quot;Not quite one, but not quite the other.  Maybe a bit of both?&quot; is also a good indication that something be wholly outside an established framework.  If, like I think, this is really  it's own kind of problem similar to but separate from 'Too Broad' and 'Opinion Based', it would also be a good idea to add this to the VTC list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because we don't have this custom close reason, people are sometimes hesitant to close questions that fit this category.  Such open idea solicitation questions will be linked here as I happen across them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57832/what-are-the-best-barbarian-heavy-player-races-from-a-narrative-standpoint/57844?noredirect=1#comment121034_57844&quot;&gt;What are the best barbarian/heavy player races from a narrative standpoint?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22814/idea-for-missing-on-a-shapeshift-roll-for-dungeon-world&quot;&gt;How to cause a missed shapeshift roll for Dungeon World&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57379/is-there-a-way-to-become-immune-to-possession-all-the-time/57715#57715&quot;&gt;Is there a way to become immune to Possession all the time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51112/whats-a-good-item-or-spell-for-creating-a-magical-surveillance-state&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a good item or spell for creating a magical surveillance state?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51069/i-have-an-ardent-battlemind-and-i-need-some-ideas-for-feats&quot;&gt;I have an Ardent-Battlemind, and I need some ideas for feats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T18:13:11.340" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5413" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-08T18:32:16.073" Score="8" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have a new earnest poster who seems to think this site is a forum.  They've had several questions closed, including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57720/making-a-better-desert-adventure&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; (well, it will be soon).  I'd like to close their questions with helpful VTC messages but I'm not sure what the best way to do that is.  Generally, I'd prefer 'Unclear' over all others if it's applicable, but in these cases it's typically not.  Instead the questions are usually both too broad, primarily opinion based, and off topic as idea solicitation (which we should maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2962/what-custom-off-topic-close-reasons-should-we-have/5412#5412&quot;&gt;add to our custom VTC list&lt;/a&gt;).  Obviously I would most prefer to VTC for the custom close reason, but since that is not currently a viable VTC option if the message to be displayed is of concern would 'Too broad' or 'Opinion based' be more likely to be helpful to this user and how can I tell?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-03-08T19:32:11.190" Title="What VTC reason should I choose if there are multiple applicable problems?" Tags="|discussion|support|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5413" CreationDate="2015-03-08T18:43:10.340" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;For this particular one, I voted &quot;primarily-opinion based&quot;. The reasoning is that this cuts most closely to the core problem: they want opinions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; too broad, but closing it as such might just get them to try to be more specific about what opinions they want, which won't result in reopening and may confuse them as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a heuristic, I try to imagine their response to each fitting close reason while assuming they won't change their underlying problem/desire (as that is the path of least resistance, something our system tries to leverage for Good). Then I pick whichever one most closely matches why their desired help is not what we do here, to cut right to the quick of the issue with their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe they'll change their tack, and that's fine. The sooner an immovable object obstructs their core desire, the sooner they're likely to make a useful change in tack. We want the path of least resistance to be either for them to make their question fit our site, or to just abandon their question if that's not going to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-03-08T19:32:11.190" LastActivityDate="2015-03-08T19:32:11.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5411" CreationDate="2015-03-09T11:39:14.683" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We use the extra parameter to log the behavior of users using search and to measure if any change we make to search is effective. In particular we use that parameter to determine which were the rank and relevance of the result you clicked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL:DR; You need to ask the add-on author to fix the add-on, as we don't have many other feasible ways of getting this done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can also give you a couple of other suggestions that might bypass the problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;you can use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/unanswered/tagged?tab=mytags&quot;&gt;this unanswered page&lt;/a&gt; which is similar to your search&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;you can wait for 6-8 weeks while we revamp our question links: the current proposed solution would allow for your list to be a normal list (i.e. not a search).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="933" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-03-09T11:39:14.683" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5416" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5422" CreationDate="2015-03-10T05:51:12.500" Score="8" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am looking to learn more about RPG theory in general and am considering posting a request for an overview here just like one would on &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Christianity.SE&lt;/a&gt;.  I am unsure whether such questions are allowed here because we generally require people to only ask questions directly related to play experience.  Below is the proposed form of my question (I actually already posted it accidently, but I deleted it.  I'll undelete it if it's allowed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In what different ways do experts break up the different playstyles people RPG with into classifications and what are the key features and differences between the dominant schools of thought on the different ways of performing such categorization? I am not looking for a thorough analysis (though if you could recommend one should I or another reader be interested that would be appreciated), I am looking for an overview of the subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I note that we do have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-theory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-theory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-theory&lt;/a&gt; tag, so I am hopeful that the question type might be allowed, but &lt;strong&gt;Are RPG overview questions in general on-topic and is my question in particular acceptable?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:56:54.213" LastActivityDate="2015-03-10T23:50:12.947" Title="Is this overview question ok to ask here?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5417" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5416" CreationDate="2015-03-10T11:52:35.563" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would probably get closed as a duplicate of this question, which went to pains to incorporate GS/BS criteria. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16380/tabletop-play-style-classification-schemes&quot;&gt;Tabletop Play Style Classification Schemes&lt;/a&gt; But it was eventually historical locked. It attempted to replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/736/tabletop-player-styles&quot;&gt;Tabletop Player Styles&lt;/a&gt; which was previously closed for being too listy. Look into the gaming-style tag, which predates the rpg-theory tag by a wide margin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An &quot;overview&quot; should be legitimate, but be careful to word it so it's not a list question, perhaps history-of-gaming would be a better angle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-03-10T11:52:35.563" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5418" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-10T14:33:19.900" Score="8" ViewCount="262" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that the policy is not to allow any answers whatsoever in the comments, but there is a bit of a weird situation when it comes to &lt;strong&gt;[closed]&lt;/strong&gt; questions. Lately I've been encountering a lot of closed questions where comments have been removed by the moderators with the usual “A closed question is not an invitation to answer in comments.” or “Please don't answer in comments.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is, of course, simply the moderators doing their job, but often these answers could have helped the person asking the question to better flesh out their original post to make a proper answer possible, so that it no longer has to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the comments that get deleted are in fact such good answers that it makes me wonder why the question was closed in the first place, because clearly it was precise enough that a proper answer could be formulated. Blink a few times and the answer is gone though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shouldn't we be leaving these comments around for longer than 5 minutes, so they can help improve the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10921" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T20:04:30.050" LastActivityDate="2023-02-08T09:15:47.697" Title="What's with the policy on deleting answer comments on closed questions?" Tags="|discussion|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5418" CreationDate="2015-03-10T14:50:12.893" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A good answer does not a good question make...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone may write an excellent answer to an unclear or too-broad question, but generally a question is useless on our site if it's not well-written. A question should effectively communicate its needs and adhere to our guidelines, or it should remain closed/on-hold until such time as it meets those qualities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions on our site serve two purposes: 1) help the person who asked the question, 2) help anyone else who also has, will have, or might have this issue in the future. A question needs to be searchable, readable, and understandable to fulfill this second purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-08T09:15:47.697" LastActivityDate="2023-02-08T09:15:47.697" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5418" CreationDate="2015-03-10T14:51:04.443" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad or unclear question is a bad or unclear question, and simply because one person has an answer that appears correct/good, doesn't mean that it actually answers the question the poster intended. It may be a good guess, but it's still a guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are intended to help clarify and improve the question to where it can be reopened/answered, not for answering a closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-08T09:15:17.893" LastActivityDate="2023-02-08T09:15:17.893" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5418" CreationDate="2015-03-10T14:53:49.533" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not really a weird policy, and in fact, in the case that you're talking about, we the users potentially have the power to take care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First. Comments can't be directly migrated to answers. If you have a full answer that fits in a comment, you probably haven't written enough. More importantly though, comments just aren't a good vehicle for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second. If a commenter feels like they &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; what the person is asking, their first move should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be to leave a comment. It should be to edit the question and make it clear what's being asked. Then they can cast a reopen vote (or flag for reopen if they lack sufficient reputation to cast a reopen vote). Then the community can decide if the question is now answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;point&lt;/em&gt; of closing questions is to prevent answers. Allowing answers in comments defeats this purpose. If you feel like you understand a question well enough to answer it, edit the question. If you don't, but see how it could be clarified by the OP, then leave a comment asking for edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the community can help, it's ultimately on the OP to clearly communicate what they need help with, and then it's up to us to help them. If we can't tease out the precise problem, we don't have any business answering it, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; not in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your last sentence directly. No. These comments are a violation of the fact that the question is closed. If the commenters think they have something that can improve the question, they should post that. Answering in comments shouldn't be tolerated because it creates a disincentive to actually curating the site properly. They question won't get edited and reopened because the OP has what they want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2015-03-10T15:00:50.233" LastActivityDate="2015-03-10T15:00:50.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5416" CreationDate="2015-03-10T17:59:26.083" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It will depend on the merits of the &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; question — because this &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt; of question is not inherently outside our scope — and on whether any recognised theory work on the desired subject actually exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overview questions related to RPGs are…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;on topic, certainly. They're about RPGs. Our most prominent open overview questions are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1751/overview-of-dd-retro-clones&quot;&gt;Overview of D&amp;amp;D retro-clones&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13212/what-are-the-big-differences-between-the-dd-editions&quot;&gt;What are the big differences between the D&amp;amp;D editions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;not inherently primarily-opinion based (unless the core of your question is for evaluations of the theories! don't do that here)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;sometimes too broad, but sometimes not&lt;/strong&gt;—this will vary with the specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go for tightly-defined, clear categories of things and it should be OK. RPG theories is kinda waffly and imprecise enough to be too broad—asking for major, well-known RPG theories is probably precise enough to not be too broad as the set that qualifies then is small and fairly clear-cut. (Examples that don't qualify, if they're mentioned by answers, will be weeded out by the judgement of voters voting on such answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoiding a list question is not too hard since an &lt;em&gt;overview&lt;/em&gt; is a singular, integrated thing. Historically, we've had no trouble with questions asking for an overview, as they usually get responded to with one very good answers. Any small answer that is just a single thing and a description of it are fundamentally not answering the question; so the question being responded to as if it's canvassing for list items wouldn't be the fault of the question, but of answerers missing the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, no matter how tightly you categorise the overview subject, &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; subjects in RPG theory simply don't have any widespread agreement or recognition, due to the youth of the field. Such questions will probably be closed as too broad (or opinion-based), because of a wide field of lackluster candidate theories and/or dispute over which, if any, are even worth calling &quot;theory.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;not unclear (unless the specified set of interest as mentioned above is poorly-written or -defined)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;whether it's a duplicate of any existing question will depend on the subject. We don't have an overview of RPG theory frameworks that I know of, but we do have an (sort of&amp;dagger;) overview of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16380/tabletop-play-style-classification-schemes&quot;&gt;player taxonomies&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt;, such questions do not have an inherent problem that voids their acceptability in all cases and all ways. Such questions can easily be put on hold on the merits of the specific question, of course, or because of the non-existence or youth of the desired subject within RPG theory (which is generally unlike even esoteric subjects in religious studies), but questions of this general type are not inherently outside our scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;dagger; I say sort of, because it's not a singular overview so much as a failed experiment in finding a valid use for listy questions. We don't have a singular overview question of player type/behaviour/style taxonomies, but there's no widely-accepted rigorous discussion of such that would qualify as theory anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-03-10T23:50:12.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5418" CreationDate="2015-03-10T22:35:01.627" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments with questions about an unclear question help, as they tend to get the question clarified. Those are fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments that are stabs at answering an unclear question hurt, as they either result in the OP wandering off, or set weird expectations among others that you really know what the question is saying when you don't. These don't help clarify anything and are deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-10T22:35:01.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5424" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5425" CreationDate="2015-03-12T03:29:23.253" Score="14" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is a bit of an adventure to learn the culture of the different Stack Exchanges that I participate in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, I received &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53972/is-the-omission-of-a-racial-2-to-wisdom-intentional#comment121056_53972&quot;&gt;a polite reprimand&lt;/a&gt; for the manner in which I formatted edits to a question. Upon seeing that, I hopped onto meta, read up on the matter, and consider myself informed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I don't know is: what is the most appropriate way to say, &quot;Thanks. Got it. Won't do it again. Shall we remove this comment?&quot; Or is it already the case that moderator comments such as this automatically disappear after a time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19718" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T03:31:12.187" Title="What is the best way to acknowledge a reprimand so that it can be removed?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5424" CreationDate="2015-03-12T03:31:12.187" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hrmm, this is actually trickier than it seems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't see &lt;em&gt;who&lt;/em&gt; flags comments. From my perspective, either flag it with custom reason saying &quot;Got it.&quot; Or leave a comment along those same lines and then flag as obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or signal on meta. That works too, though is rather overkill in most cases. It was quite appropriate in this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T03:31:12.187" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5426" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5429" CreationDate="2015-03-12T17:41:43.233" Score="3" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;They seem to be off-topic, according to &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;real question have answers&lt;/a&gt;, and we seem to get a lot of them, and we seem to leave them open for a farily long time, letting them draw at least a few low-quality answers before being closed.  These low-quality answers then tend to be upvoted and accepted by the asker, since a closed question is seen as a dead question by new users.  Is there a policy we could make that would help improve our treatment of these questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57832/what-are-the-best-barbarian-heavy-player-races-from-a-narrative-standpoint&quot;&gt;What are the best barbarian/heavy player races from a narrative standpoint?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57379/is-there-a-way-to-become-immune-to-possession-all-the-time/57715#57715&quot;&gt;Is there a way to become immune to Possession all the time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51112/whats-a-good-item-or-spell-for-creating-a-magical-surveillance-state&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a good item or spell for creating a magical surveillance state?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51069/i-have-an-ardent-battlemind-and-i-need-some-ideas-for-feats&quot;&gt;I have an Ardent-Battlemind, and I need some ideas for feats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7535/ideas-for-a-dungeon-with-high-cr&quot;&gt;Ideas For a Dungeon With High CR&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6756/what-are-some-quality-low-magic-d20-3-5e-pf-systems&quot;&gt;What are some quality low-magic d20 (3.5e/PF) systems?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-03-18T05:13:19.893" Title="Should we make a new policy for idea solicitation questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5426" CreationDate="2015-03-12T17:45:23.933" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why, yes, we could make a custom close question for this purpose, as suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2962/what-custom-off-topic-close-reasons-should-we-have/5412?noredirect=1#comment13646_5412&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  This would allow users to more clearly see that these questions are not allowed and have a way of responding that is generally more helpful to askers in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T17:45:23.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5426" CreationDate="2015-03-12T17:56:28.343" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;These questions are already covered well under existing close reasons and no new content is needed to adequately close them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are either &quot;Unclear what you're asking&quot; because they do not contain a question or &quot;primarily Opinion based&quot; because they don't have an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need for a custom close reason or additional policy on this matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T17:56:28.343" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5426" CreationDate="2015-03-12T23:57:10.060" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new policy is not required because it would be incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These aren't all too broad/list questions even though someone says the word &quot;ideas&quot; - there's a difference.  It's a matter of scope. Questions that really are too broad get closed for that.  One of those is an optimization question that describes a build and asks for &quot;ideas&quot; on the last two feats. Like most of our questions, there's no single objectively correct answer, but it's tightly scoped and there are better or worse answers that achieve that build's goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question that says &quot;do you have an idea&quot; is not automatically bad and therefore a policy directed against that would be fallacious.  We have rules against pure opinion, unclear questions, and way too broad, and that's all that's required to cover this use case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-12T23:57:10.060" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5430" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2912" CreationDate="2015-03-14T04:16:10.583" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think asking for well parameterized homebrew evaluation is fine by itself.  I'd actually prefer that to 'two part' questions because two part answers make voting hard. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-03-14T04:16:10.583" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5431" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-16T19:16:30.723" Score="10" ViewCount="394" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recommended reading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s so problematic about a recommendation question having potentially hundreds of answers, anyway?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Observe recent question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58110/are-there-any-perk-based-rpg-systems-e-g-fallout-iii-skyrim-etc&quot;&gt;Are there any perk based RPG systems (e.g. Fallout III, Skyrim, etc)?&lt;/a&gt;.  Compare to a question like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1751/overview-of-dd-retro-clones&quot;&gt;Overview of D&amp;amp;D retro-clones&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this question isn't really an example of a game-rec question, as the poster isn't looking for one game that fits a set of criteria - it's a survey question, where it's asking for a primer in a certain area.  The retroclones question is a good example of this - instead of sweating the OP on &quot;what exact retroclone do you want&quot; we had some good answers explaining the space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From time to time we have questions like this, where they are asking for games but really it's a theory question asking about mechanics or techniques, and wants to know if they exist/what they're called/what major games use them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We discussed this way back in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1370/diceless-technique-question&quot;&gt;Diceless Technique Question&lt;/a&gt; but that was in context of Community Wikis and stuff.  I think in the modern regime, we should consider guiding posters with questions like this away from the game-rec rules and towards asking something like,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I am interested in RPG mechanics like the perk-based advancement in Skyrim/Fallout - no classes, but with leveling, and advancement defined by increasing skills and gaining specific perks (abilities) related to those skills.  Does this concept exist within tabletop RPGs, if so what is it usually called, and what are examples of major games use it?&quot; (Note this is more focused than the current linked question, it is not a good question as it stands yet).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously there will be some temptation for people to answer these poorly with just a single game (&quot;Champions durr, peace out&quot;) but it'd be pretty obvious to downvote those. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we adopt this approach to people seeking general understanding of an area, or force them down the &quot;super specific&quot; game-rec path?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-03-30T18:05:40.453" Title="How do we handle &quot;game survey&quot; questions?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5431" CreationDate="2015-03-16T21:45:57.590" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Why overviews can't save &quot;looking for a game&quot; questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two kinds of overview questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I want to understand an aspect of the hobby. This is an existing aspect of the hobby that is worthwhile understanding for its own sake, not for the list of games that it generates.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I want to see a list of games that are in an &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; category defined by my too-broad requirements, so I can go shopping with it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is fine, and we can field those. However, type 1 questions will never be initially posted as any kind of game-rec lookalike in the first place, so there's no need for special handling of type 1 questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What distinguishes type 1 from type 2 is that the first does not require editorial opinion to pick and choose the games to include. Type 1 forms an existing set: D&amp;amp;D editions for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 2 games do not form a natural set, they form a set defined by an arbitrary set of feature chosen by the asker. Games that are skill-based is an arbitrary feature — a set (in the sense of set theory can easily be formed from it), but this set will be necessarily large. (Necessarily, because any &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; set that's small is already an OK game-rec question.) Paring that large set down to an overview-sized list is a process that is &lt;strong&gt;primarily opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;, and that's the killer for type 2 overviews.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So type 1 will only ever be asked straight, without having to have the asker narrow the question. Type 2 will always be too broad — they can't be narrowed (since they don't have any more criteria) and can't be left open without us inappropriately embracing primarily opinion-based answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 1 overviews are not a problem, and aren't really an issue that needs solving here. They fit our format, and don't run afoul of our game-rec rules. Voting on these overviews isn't especially vulnerable to game favouritism, and is done by the quality and completeness of the overview rather than agreeing with the overviewer's choice of representative games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 2 overviews are just shopping questions that can't be fixed by the application of Good Subjective/Bad Subjective. Any voting on answers would be vulnerable to &quot;I like the games you mentioned!&quot; sentiments, and comments would easily fall into arguments over differences in opinion on the games included and excluded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Besides, this impulse is often just the asker trying to make RPG.SE their one-stop RPG site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The impulse of askers to broaden our deliberately-limited tolerance for shopping questions into accommodating &quot;I'm not &lt;em&gt;shopping&lt;/em&gt;, I'm looking for an &lt;em&gt;overview&lt;/em&gt;... that I will use to shop&quot; isn't really productive — they already have an effective tool near to hand for those: forums. They don't actually need &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; to get their window shopping desire met, and we don't need to pull our format out of shape to accommodate the misplaced question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forums are ideal for answering type 2 overview requests. They are one of the few types of question that forums, etc. handle really well. We don't need to stretch (or break) our format to accommodate them when they're so easily accommodated next door.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How to handle them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 1 overviews are fine and don't need special handling. Vote on quality, and comment to improve the details of the overview.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it walks like a type 2 duck, handle as usual for game-rec questions: close when too broad or opinion-based, and ask them to provide more criteria. If they can't, point them at the &quot;hundreds of games&quot; meta as an explanation for why the question is staying closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, when they can't narrow it down, send them to a forum. Asking on a forum is an effortless way to get the overview-for-shopping-purposes that these questions are truly seeking. It makes no sense to struggle and strain here to get them answered, when the tool they need is lying right beside the RPG.SE tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-03-30T18:05:40.453" LastActivityDate="2015-03-30T18:05:40.453" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5339" CreationDate="2015-03-16T23:36:24.473" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our fixing of old Next questions has not been working that well. With some hindsight, I'm going to propose something that may be conceptually unpopular, but may be very effective:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let &lt;em&gt;natural&lt;/em&gt; duplicates happen as they're asked, and close the &lt;em&gt;old&lt;/em&gt; question as duplicates of the new questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been several old Next questions that later 5e questions are duplicates of, but the old questions are either hard to revise to make current or the answers are a mess of speculation, &quot;We'll see when the DMG comes out&quot;, and a tangle of irrelevant rules that aren't part of the final D&amp;amp;D 5e rules. Fixing these to make them palatable targets for closing as duplicate is hard work; getting attention for new answers is hard and not very effective; getting people to update their answers is tough. Bounties have just not been effective in this case, based on observation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, we're shutting down nice, clean, current questions from people with an honest problem. Rather than push a boulder uphill trying to fix the old Next questions, why shouldn't we take advantage of the clean questions that people are giving us for &lt;em&gt;free&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know, I know, duplicating old questions to new questions is getting it backwards. Except it's not! &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/147643/should-i-vote-to-close-a-duplicate-question-even-though-its-much-newer-and-ha&quot;&gt;That's actually what we're supposed to be doing&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If the new question is a better question or has better answers, then vote to close the old one as a duplicate of the new one. — Shog ♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I say we stop shutting down new 5e questions when they're nicer than the old Next questions, and then close the old ones as duplicates of the new ones. If someone really wants old playtest question information, they can go digging for it using timestamp searches because they're still there. But the more common case of people wanting current &lt;em&gt;5e&lt;/em&gt; information will more easily find our &lt;em&gt;current&lt;/em&gt; questions if the duplicates are pointing forward, when there's a significant quality difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our job is curating the best, after all. Duplicating forward toward good questions is an effortless way to fix our old bad D&amp;amp;D Next questions and ensure we're curating the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-03-16T23:36:24.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5434" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5431" CreationDate="2015-03-17T07:03:13.873" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, a question asking for an overview is acceptable&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site shouldn't be one's introductory RPG destination, but its contributors are better equipped to provide an overview of systems than most, and its format means grokking an overview is far easier compared to sifting through a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see little problem in permitting questions like...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the most important X role-playing games and why?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the advantages and disadvantages of X role-playing games?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples for X could include class-and-level, point-based, archetype-based, d20, fantasy, science fiction, vampire, or whatever. These are probably still too broad and would require further refining, but the premise is sound. A warning that answers should focus on the question and not the examples might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think this information's conveniently available anywhere else. A quick Web search revealed no repository that classifies and details role-playing games like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is such a site, instead of answering such questions here, let's further popularize &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; site by linking such questions to that site in such question's &lt;strong&gt;Closed&lt;/strong&gt; notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2015-03-17T07:03:13.873" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5435" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-24T21:04:01.320" Score="7" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;A comment that is continually made is that it is usually good to leave the question open in order to allow time for better answers.  Might it be good to add this note in the tour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1493" LastActivityDate="2015-03-24T23:19:00.327" Title="Do we need a note in the tour about accepting answers and timing?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5435" CreationDate="2015-03-24T21:14:59.317" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tour should cover the most core of site functionality. Accepting answers is not a core element of site functionality (important, but not core).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We Should probably have a meta writeup under the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged 'faq'&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; for this, but not an addition to the Help Center or Tour (neither of which we have enough control over to add to ourselves and would need SE involvement).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2015-03-24T21:14:59.317" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5435" CreationDate="2015-03-24T23:19:00.327" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Doesn't matter if we need it, it's stock for all the sites, we can't change it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-24T23:19:00.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5438" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5441" CreationDate="2015-03-25T03:49:21.530" Score="-2" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot;&gt;this really a good line&lt;/a&gt; of questioning? it seems like every question is answered with some variant of&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;talk to your players, be polite&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;remove problem if that doesn't work&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and generally seems to be a &amp;quot;be my groups therapist&amp;quot; tag, and since we aren't professional therapists, maybe we shouldn't cover this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1015" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-03-26T01:19:40.510" Title="Problem Players" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5439" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5438" CreationDate="2015-03-25T03:53:43.920" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Vote to close as duplicates for duplicate questions. If it's a bad question, downvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the questions are the same, then close as duplicate. Otherwise, we will accumulate them until we do have duplicates. We &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; experts at talking to groups, so it's on topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-03-25T03:53:43.920" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5431" CreationDate="2015-03-25T07:57:46.970" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Overview questions are awesome and totally on topic.  Confer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5416/is-this-overview-question-ok-to-ask-here&quot;&gt;Is this overview question ok to ask here?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good overview question has a limited scope.  As @Hey I Can Chan alludes, this &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; the site for beginners, and questions like &quot;What are RPGs like, give me an overview&quot; are uncool.  The overview should be reasonably expected to fit within our format's length limitations, and probably should expect answers much shorter than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good overview question is asking for an introduction to a subject. I strongly disagree about this not being a site for introductions to RPGs.  I consider myself an expert on a variety of RPGs and even RPGs in general, but when I am moving into a new system for a specific purpose (cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57578/is-microscope-a-good-game-for-a-conflict-avoidant-disaffectionate-player&quot;&gt;Is Microscope a good game for a conflict-avoidant, disaffectionate player?&lt;/a&gt;) or dealing with edition changes in an RPG franchise (cf. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22548/what-are-the-major-differences-between-add-1st-edition-add-2nd-edition&quot;&gt;What are the major differences between AD&amp;amp;D 1st Edition &amp;amp; AD&amp;amp;D 2nd Edition&lt;/a&gt;) an introduction (albiet not necessarily an overview) is what I'm looking for.  Expert level intros to RPG systems or a specific classification of RPG systems are extremely helpful to RPG experts and are probably among the most &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; stuff this site produces, from an expert point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because a good overview question is asking for an introduction, a good overview answer will provide suggestions as how one might proceed in further research if interested (a Further Reading section or some such).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good overview question clearly indicates that it is an overview, and not just confused about the size of the RPG landscape.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good overview question asks for an overview of something in which there really are multiple different parts, and the relationship between those parts is interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because a good overview question is overviewing entities that differ in interesting ways, a good overview answer should at least briefly explain why the differences exist and what the differences are, not just list the different categories present.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an overview question is good, it's definitely on-topic.  If it's not, then it might not be, but not just because it's an overview question.  &lt;strong&gt;These questions do not need a smaller scope&lt;/strong&gt;.  They also don't need to be limited to 'games showcasing X mechanic' (which will almost always be bad) or 'different implementations of X mechanic in published games' (which will almost always be good).  &lt;em&gt;Any&lt;/em&gt; subject of which an overview is appropriate an overview can be requested for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-03-25T07:57:46.970" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5438" CreationDate="2015-03-26T01:19:40.510" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand your frustration.  Even though these questions are in theory different, the answers are always the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Boot them!&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Talk to them!  Then boot them!&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Incoherent new guy chimes in here!&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote to close as duplicate pretty aggressively, and downvote and comment on answers that don't address anything unique about that question and just give the general advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am hoping the new &quot;butt&quot; question, as it's pretty generic, can be our close as dupe target in the future - even though we had others they tried to be more specific (he's a rules lawyer, he's sexist, he something else specific).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-26T01:19:40.510" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5442" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2015-03-26T17:55:12.227" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Alexandrian&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/category/roleplaying-games/feed&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/category/roleplaying-games/feed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An influential blog written with an eye to using analytical theory to develop practical tools for GMing. Especially good for campaign building and adventure building concepts and tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author is critical of various D&amp;amp;D designs without being an edition warrior, and is critical because he's a fan and plays them and has worked hard to figure out how to make them even better at their existing design goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-03-27T22:37:16.433" LastActivityDate="2015-03-27T22:37:16.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5443" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-03-27T13:56:28.483" Score="9" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In a rare scenario of some (real-life maybe) events leading to the answer becoming obsolete, what should the answerer do? What should the moderators do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question that got me thinking is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58176/is-there-a-way-to-browse-scabards-characters-irrespective-of-their-campaign&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. Well, it probably should have been WebApps SE question indeed, but one can come up with a hypothetical RPG example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The RAW question is asked about &lt;em&gt;B&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is given that would be considered correct for the current state of the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The author of &lt;em&gt;B&lt;/em&gt; browses the SE, sees the question and realizes that the logical RAW contradicts the RAI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The author publishes the errata and provides his own answer.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8653" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-04-03T12:46:48.593" Title="How to handle answers made obsolete by a change in real life circumstances?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5443" CreationDate="2015-03-29T04:51:59.460" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is going to be a fairly rare circumstance. When they do though, generally they take care of themselves as the usual voting practices kick in: answers that are now incorrect usually get voted down, and that either pushes the answer down the page or inspires the author to update or delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, since you're the author of the relevant answer, my advice would be to just delete it. The answer's content doesn't have any value to preserve anymore, and there's not much you can do to update it without just duplicating the other answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2015-04-03T12:46:48.593" LastActivityDate="2015-04-03T12:46:48.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5445" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5446" CreationDate="2015-03-29T08:59:59.553" Score="11" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;On my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/58728/revisions&quot;&gt;question about dogfighting RPGs&lt;/a&gt;, somebody edited out the tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt;, leaving only the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a reason he put:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;flight&lt;/code&gt; would be an irrelevant tag, and the &lt;code&gt;combat&lt;/code&gt; tag is for combat mechanics of specific systems. Tags are not keywords.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm confused. The question is about combat and flight at it's core. Answers without either component would be completely invalid. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are for conveying information in a way that other users (and systems) can filter for it. So if there is an expert for the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt; out there, I do want to hear his opinion. I think if someone knows about flight in general, across RPG systems, that would be the exact expert I would look forward to hear from in this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing out tags is something I do for two reasons: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are wrong. For example I almost put &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/planes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;planes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;planes&lt;/a&gt; until I realized it's about planar stuff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are not part of the question itself. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'd just roll back the edit because I don't understand it, but I'd like to hear your opinion on it. What makes the difference between a tag and a keyword? When would I put &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt; in and when not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-03-29T23:35:55.480" Title="Tag versus Keyword" Tags="|discussion|tags|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5445" CreationDate="2015-03-29T12:02:18.550" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're the author, you've got a quite broad authorial say here. In terms of tagging, your question could certainly be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt; and (less so) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;. You're completely within your rights to revert that edit. This sort of conflict allows people to intuitively clarify their internal folksonomy of tags, and is therefore useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With regards to this question, the first clue is that the tag wikis and excerpts for these two tags are &lt;em&gt;awful.&lt;/em&gt; They don't tell us what should or should not be discussed in these tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; use, (especially as I tend to be very... sparing) of tags, I use them as &amp;quot;questions about X&amp;quot; so, therefore, I would see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica&lt;/a&gt; as a &amp;quot;question about &lt;strong&gt;flight&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;in&lt;/em&gt; ars magica&amp;quot;. Asking about flight &lt;em&gt;in&lt;/em&gt; a &lt;strong&gt;game system&lt;/strong&gt; follows almost the same pattern, though it disquiets me because the emphasis-of-question is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, this is because the tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flight&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; are &lt;em&gt;worthlessly defined&lt;/em&gt; and so all that is left to us are our intuitions. I suspect that, if these two tags were to be improved, any concerns about their use would be greatly diminished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;site help&lt;/a&gt; defines tags as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, people &lt;em&gt;interested&lt;/em&gt; in flight, should be notified about a flight game-req. And people interested in interested in questions about combat should be notified about a combat game-req. ... kinda. Rephrasing it &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; way suggests the strong inclusion of flight into the tags, but the exclusion of &amp;quot;combat&amp;quot; insofar as it's not a question about &lt;em&gt;combat&lt;/em&gt; as a question about &lt;em&gt;flight in a game which has combat&lt;/em&gt;. Following that same pattern, though, allows us to then exclude both under the rule that &amp;quot;it's a question about a game (tagged) which has flight and combat.&amp;quot; I'd say that flight is sufficiently novel of a feature to warrant a tag, and that combat isn't, but this is a grey area that should respect your authorial intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;– they do not communicate anything about the content of the question.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;under the meta tags discussion suggests that insofar as the question isn't &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; flight or combat, so much as they are features of a larger system, that those tags should be excluded. I can see that argument, but I'd weigh the &amp;quot;people interested in flight should see this game-req&amp;quot; as a higher priority thing-which-can-be-evaluated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, we should use the above heuristic to guide our tagging efforts and improve the hell out of our tag wikis such that they offer better guidance as to the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-03-29T23:35:55.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5447" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5448" CreationDate="2015-03-30T12:21:50.957" Score="6" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I logged in today hoping to see new answers, I was surprised when I found that my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58693/how-to-build-a-flexible-and-scalable-system-for-pcs-npc-organizations&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; was on hold.  The notice has flagged it as too broad.  There was one comment suggesting that system-agnostic is an inappropriate tag, but that is it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the six users who put my question on hold, what do you find too broad about it, and what can I do to improve it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22072" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-03-27T00:06:30.670" LastActivityDate="2019-03-27T00:06:30.670" Title="How can I improve my question on hold for being &quot;too broad&quot; so that it is re-opened?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5448" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5447" CreationDate="2015-03-30T12:29:02.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just guessing.  From the &quot;too broad&quot; definition:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's too many answers to this, but if you want someone to write in an answer a small-to-giant-crunchy-org-management solution it'd be too much.  I think that's easily tweaked for asking for preexisting rulesets that meet your criteria.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problem is &quot;what you want is too big I don't think something like this exists&quot; (which is likely), this is an incorrect use of close-too broad. Open with no answers is the proper response. Remember voters, &quot;too broad&quot; doesn't mean &quot;he's looking for something too broad in scope to be likely,&quot; it means &quot;the question as posed is too broad to answer in this format,&quot; and those are very different things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-03-30T12:29:02.893" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5449" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9335" CreationDate="2015-03-30T18:26:48.087" Score="102" ViewCount="11977" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question that got closed for not being suited for the Q&amp;amp;A format that RPG.SE uses, and was told that my question would work better on a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where can I find an RPG discussion forum well suited to my question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Guidance for answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should be a curated list of &lt;em&gt;directions&lt;/em&gt; a question-asker could go, not a collection of forum reviews. To keep answers action-focused, I suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Write answers with an eye to redirecting an off-topic question asker.&lt;/strong&gt; The answers should quickly help someone decide where to take their closed question. Focus on creating a collection of signposts to help &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt; choose the best site for their current question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Avoid answers that focus on suggesting a forum for its own sake, or just exist because you think it's a good site. We're trusting your expertise when recommending a site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not all playstyles and personality types are good fits for every one of these forums; try to indicate the kind of player they cater to without being hostile/judgemental if that's not your cup of tea.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New site suggestion &amp;rarr; new answer.&lt;/strong&gt; After an answer has &quot;aged&quot; a bit (a few months) such that other users have had time to endorse (votes or comments) or oppose (comment) a recommendation, it will be edited in to the existing list-answer or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to the FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T15:41:43.687" LastActivityDate="2021-04-05T15:38:57.750" Title="I've been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?" Tags="|support|faq|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-11-06T12:57:21.973" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5456" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-01T15:30:42.970" Score="7" ViewCount="234" Body="&lt;p&gt;Everyone has unexamined assumptions about &quot;other&quot; groups of people, and sometimes that comes through harmfully in an answer or question posted to the site, either unintentionally or intentionally. When that happens, how do we deal with it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't about making assumptions about individual people — we have to make guesses about people all the time. The stereotypes at issue are about a groups of people, based on things like sex or gender, religion, ethnicity, choice of hobbies, sexual orientation, and the like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-04-01T17:18:46.213" LastActivityDate="2015-04-02T19:57:37.477" Title="How do we deal with harmful stereotypes in posts?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5456" CreationDate="2015-04-01T15:30:42.970" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not OK. We edit it out of posts when it's small and inconsequetial to the rest of it. When it's woven deeply into a post, we downvote it for being &quot;not useful&quot; — or even actively harmful — to the health of our hobby. Particularly bad examples that count as any or all of &quot;offensive, abusive, or hate speech&quot; can also be flagged as such in addition to or instead of downvoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gamers get unfairly stereotyped all the time. We don't need to put up with that here. Subsets of gamers get unfairly stereotyped all the time too, and we don't have to put up with that either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially for subsets of gamers, stereotyping often happens in daily life, and yet another poke in the eye from a thoughtless or intentional stereotype during what is supposed to be fun leisure hobby time is the last thing we want to experience or inflict on another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As curators of this site, it's our job to make it not a needlessly hurtful experience to our readers, especially those who get it regularly in their daily life. As a site that I hope represents the very best of the gaming community, we should be a safe, welcoming place for all gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be not just tolerant, but actually welcoming, to all gamers, we have to be intolerant of some attitudes that are thoughtlessly or deliberately hurtful. I think it goes without saying that if it comes to a choice between a &lt;em&gt;person&lt;/em&gt; and an &lt;em&gt;attitude&lt;/em&gt;, it's the attitude that will be made unwelcome here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our regular curation tools are effective for this: downvotes, editing, comments requesting alterations, and flagging are all excellent ways to show what is and isn't a good post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-04-02T19:57:37.477" LastActivityDate="2015-04-02T19:57:37.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5456" CreationDate="2015-04-01T16:03:05.690" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This kind of stereotyping is unacceptable. It's not fair to make assumptions about a gamer based on gender, race, creed, sexuality, or any other factor that is out of their control. Discussions about the role of a player without the understanding of that player's motivations, based purely on traits that mean nothing, should be considered off-topic and taken elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in most cases, I think the existing downvote system works in place of a harsh reaction from moderation. In exceptional circumstances, or in the case of repeat offenders, it should be handled on a case-by-case basis. If a question or answer is blatantly off-topic, including answers that are just used to state political beliefs not related to the original question, it should be removed as if it were any other off-topic post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19732" LastActivityDate="2015-04-01T16:03:05.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5463" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-06T03:24:27.963" Score="5" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, you, noble RPG.SE denizen, just created a dungeon.  Or a character class.  Or some house rule.  Of course, like a good and noble DM or amateur developer, you want to play test it before you unleash it on the unsuspecting peasantry.  Is there a &quot;canonical&quot; way to seek out playtesters among our fellow RPG.SE denizens, or is it just a matter of popping into the general chat and asking &quot;I have a thing for system X, does anyone wish to help me playtest it?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should we look in foreign lands for our playtest subjects?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-22T00:14:47.180" LastActivityDate="2019-08-22T00:14:47.180" Title="I just created a thing that needs playtesting. How do I find playtesters among the RPG.SE denizens, or are there other places I should look instead?" Tags="|discussion|playtesting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5463" CreationDate="2015-04-06T03:37:26.823" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Chat&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Role-playing Games Chat&lt;/a&gt; is where this kind of thing belongs. As nice as it might be to “advertise” it more, to those who might not frequent chat, that would be, ya know, advertising, and it’s not really appropriate for a Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/4563&quot;&gt;elsewhere&lt;/a&gt; is likely also a good bet, though of course you won’t necessarily get us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-04-06T03:37:26.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5463" CreationDate="2015-04-06T03:38:17.193" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Mainsite and meta aren't set up for this.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't allow &quot;Who wants to join my group?&quot; questions for a whole host of reasons, not least of which is that answers will be &quot;Yes, I want to!&quot; and &quot;No, I don't.&quot; Not exactly insightful experience-based solutions to a problem you're facing--the answers are useful to YOU but not to anyone else in similar situations who aren't &lt;em&gt;you.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We want the questions on our site to be valuable sources of information for the whole Internet, not just our community members. (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;What Topics Can I Ask About Here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Playtesting solicitation is just a variant on &quot;join my group&quot; and has all the same problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Chat can do it, but not well.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're free to solicit for playtesters in chat, but you may not get a big response: it's a small, erratic group from all around the world. A joining of interest and availability on a scale large enough to do playtesting is uncommon, since good playtesting needs a fairly wide variety of players and situations in order to usefully evaluate the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;You can ask the main site for &lt;em&gt;guidance&lt;/em&gt; in finding players, though!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would actually make a good mainsite question: &quot;I have X system/adventure/whatever, with Y qualities, that I want to test for Z audience. How do I get playtesters?&quot; The Stack &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; set up to provide this kind of assistance. It can be answered through experience; it has clear criteria for voting on whether answers are useful; its advice can be useful to others in similar but not identical situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-04-06T03:43:29.923" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5466" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-06T20:02:32.750" Score="11" ViewCount="473" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we will be holding a Q&amp;amp;A with the candidates.  This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5516/2015-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how it'll work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;During the nomination phase, (so, until Monday, April 13th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post &lt;em&gt;one question per answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at current.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the phase, the Community Team will select &lt;strong&gt;up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community&lt;/strong&gt; provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. That said, if I have concerns about any questions in this fashion, I will be sure to point this out in comments before the decision making time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, containing 10 questions in total.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions or feedback about this new process, feel free to post as a comment here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-04-13T20:17:21.570" Title="2015 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="15" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5467" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-06T20:02:32.750" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&amp;amp;A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, what do moderators do? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2015-04-06T20:02:32.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5468" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-06T20:02:54.653" Score="3" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2015 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-04-06T20:02:54.653" Title="2015 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|moderators|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-04-06T20:02:54.653" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-07T10:04:47.677" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2015-04-07T16:13:49.953" LastActivityDate="2015-04-07T16:13:49.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5471" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-07T10:54:00.610" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;While going around the site, our banner is the most prominent element on the page, and it does nothing to stop people from thinking this is about computer RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we add a &quot;tabletop&quot; writing over the title?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:47:46.520" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:47:46.520" Title="A better banner" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5472" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5471" CreationDate="2015-04-07T11:36:45.923" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because this isn't a problem we have. We have what, one person every 2 or so months come and post a CRPG question? And usually they are pretty incoherent, and they've ignored all the new user information presented directly to them. More context clues would a) have a very low chance of helping and b) be addressing a corner use case that is better handled by clicking close once every two months. We have now officially spent more time discussing it than handling half a year worth of this particular use case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-04-07T11:36:45.923" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5471" CreationDate="2015-04-07T12:51:55.697" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;While you &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; choose to see our top banner as &quot;video gamish,&quot; and you might think that if you're unfamiliar with table top games, it's actually rather reminiscent of the types of art pieces you see in D&amp;amp;D, and other well illustrated RPG manuals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, if you're paying any attention at all, you can see that the top banner includes &lt;em&gt;several&lt;/em&gt; call outs to the fact that this is an RPG site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The site logo occupies a prominent place in the background of the header and is a d20. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The edges of the banner fade to pencil drawings, not something a video game would have&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;While not the top bar, the edge gutters of the site are filled with a grid that would be far more at home on a table than a computer monitor.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, this site is pretty darn clear from it's design what it's missions is about. We're a table top RPG site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if it's not clear from the graphics, it's clear from the content. Questions about video games are shut down promptly and redirected to appropriate sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxy&lt;/a&gt; points out, confusion is pretty darn rare. We have a couple of questions every month, but they are quickly shuttered and sent on their way to a more appropriate sites (we even have custom close reasons for the two primary types of these). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, overall, we've got a very nice design, with what are pretty clear call outs to our primary purpose (the fact that the art could be at home in a video game is mostly at testament to how much video games have borrowed from our hobby tbh). I see no need for a change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-04-07T12:51:55.697" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-07T14:45:48.490" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are there any new policy topics that you would like to see addressed during your term?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2015-04-07T14:45:48.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5475" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-07T18:25:53.897" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;How does your system expertise complement that of the existing moderation team?  In particular, what systems are you expert in in which the existing moderation team lacks expertise?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-04-07T18:25:53.897" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-08T00:36:16.367" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod reopened a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2015-04-08T00:36:16.367" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-08T19:17:21.087" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly.  This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after.  As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2015-04-08T19:17:21.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-08T23:49:47.693" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;What do you want the community at large to do to help you when you're a moderator? What in particular would you encourage us to keep doing, and what would you like us to do differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-04-08T23:49:47.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-09T13:55:19.747" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-04-09T13:55:19.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5487" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5447" CreationDate="2015-04-09T16:29:03.453" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Typically, you can't. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mods and others simply lambaste the author and never revisit it, even if you do a complete overhaul, especially if someone was offended by the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other irritating part is other users will quickly down-vote a question (or an answer), many times without any indication as to why, and never up-vote after an edit by the original author that complies with the suggestions made in the comments that do exist. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I don't think this is intended, it's how it works in practice. You'll have much better luck if you delete the original question and resubmit as a new question, using the suggestions made by mods and others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9671" LastEditorUserId="9671" LastEditDate="2019-03-26T22:28:46.023" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T22:28:46.023" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-09T21:14:47.460" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site.  These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site.  As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2015-04-09T21:14:47.460" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5490" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-09T22:16:18.833" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-04-09T22:16:18.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-10T02:21:12.197" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A common problem on stack exchange sites are discussions in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Understanding that these are often legitimate discussions that are simply taking place in the wrong location, how would you deal with these situations while still being respectful to those involved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T02:21:12.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5492" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-10T03:05:38.393" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the hardest aspects of being a community leader is dealing with interpersonal conflicts. How do you propose to handle a) disputes between two reputable users that turn ugly in comments and b) a similar dispute wherein one party is directing their frustration at you directly? How would you use these disputes to help shape policy on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21795" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T03:05:38.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-10T03:06:52.600" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;What, in your view, is the role of a moderator as opposed to the role of an active, high-rep user? Why would you being a moderator make this site better than you being an active, high-rep user who can lead by example? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21795" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T03:06:52.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-10T12:42:04.893" Score="8" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59373/what-xp-assigning-schemes-work-in-practice-and-why#59373&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question I believe is a good one, and I think is answerable as an overview of what XP systems are used for, both psychologically and game-design wise. I'm fine with the community's decision to put it on hold, if that's what they agree is correct (I lack the experience on this site to really determine something like that yet). But if I want to contend that the question is fine as is, where do I go to do that? Should I mention in a comment on the question that I think it's a fine question, come here on the meta, or something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21795" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T02:09:02.420" Title="A question is closed that I think I can answer, what do I do?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5494" CreationDate="2015-04-10T13:09:45.743" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’d say there’s generally three categories of this, two of which are handled by editing the question, and one which probably just needs discussion on Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In both of the editing cases, you are editing a question and &lt;em&gt;changing the question&lt;/em&gt; – you should &lt;em&gt;never do this&lt;/em&gt; unless the original question as it was written was not fit for the site. In all cases, the edit privilege should be used carefully, but with extreme care when you are actually changing what someone is saying. You have to be &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; certain that you know what they meant, and are &lt;strong&gt;actually helping them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The question is extremely unclear... but you got it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This happens to me a fair amount in the 3.5 tag, because I am familiar with a very large amount of that system. Someone asks a question, usually in broken English and with only vague mentions of classes or feats or whatever, and it makes no sense to most people, and is rightfully put on hold. But since I recognize the classes or feats (even though the question-asker got the names wrong) and know what they do and what interaction could be confusing, I can fix that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the solution here is editing. Edit it so that the thing you understood, is clear to everyone else. It might mean just inserting the appropriate rules quote. It might mean cleaning up broken English. But whatever it is, you can fix it. A good example of this is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58090/4563&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The question doesn’t fit our site... but a very-similar one might&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; common: someone asks how to do something &lt;strong&gt;big&lt;/strong&gt;. There’s detail enough to narrow down answers, but any complete answer isn’t going to fit in our answer boxes. A very simple solution is to change the question from asking &lt;em&gt;how?&lt;/em&gt;, to asking &lt;em&gt;where can I find?&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar situations abound, too. Someone asks &lt;em&gt;why did they write the rules this way?&lt;/em&gt; (which technically &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; a valid question, but almost certainly won’t draw any good answers because it’s almost impossible to back them up) when they really want to know &lt;em&gt;does something bad happen if I change it?&lt;/em&gt;. This is generally what’s known as the XY Problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to reiterate, just because (you suspect) there’s an XY Problem, isn’t itself good enough to justify changing someone’s question. It’s only when there is a very small, subtle change between what was asked and what is valid on the site, that such an edit is justified. A (suspected) XY Problem is also not, itself, cause to close a question – if it’s a valid question, it shouldn’t be on hold even if you think it’s not &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; what they want to know. Turns out, most of the time, people know what they want better than you know what they want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;You disagree with the community about a question’s appropriateness&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the case you have here. The only option, really, is to bring it up on Meta, make a case, and see if you can get people to cast Reopen votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T13:09:45.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5494" CreationDate="2015-04-10T13:10:21.990" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Honestly, overview questions aren't great. Generally if you think that something needs an overview of an &lt;em&gt;entire RPG concept&lt;/em&gt; to be answered well, that's a sure sign that the question is too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case though, it's a pretty simple fix. He's asking a question that has system specific answers, and so we should give it a proper system tag (which has been done as of this writing). Thus the question is no longer too broad and can be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T13:10:21.990" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-10T13:13:39.283" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our site sometimes has a problem where users can be a little too dedicated to providing what they see as the most possible help – which often leads to them seeing XY Problems where there aren’t any, and demanding question-askers explain why they want to know the answer to a given question. They think will help get to the root of the problem, but often comes across as making them &lt;em&gt;justify having the question&lt;/em&gt;. Behavior which might be appropriate if the question itself was on hold (or going that way), but is sometimes applied to perfectly-valid questions. Some users even seem to think that, particularly with new users, they know what the new user wants better than the new user does! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How would you, as a moderator, take steps to politely tone down the fervor on these kinds of issues? Since the first step of healing others is healing yourself, do you feel that you have done this kind of thing, and if so does that change being a moderator, with the extra gravitas the blue diamond adds to such questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T13:13:39.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5498" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-10T16:42:45.007" Score="19" ViewCount="546" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone asks a question, and it's a valid question that has answers that we can provide. And then someone else comments that they think it's an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY Problem&lt;/a&gt;, asking what their real problem is, and votes to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the question is valid, we can answer it, and the answer will be useful to future readers. Why shouldn't it be left open so it can be answered? After all, shouldn't we respect that someone knows what they want better than we do, instead of closing it on suspicion that they don't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; want what they're asking for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2015-04-16T20:52:44.713" Title="What's so wrong with taking a question at face value, just because someone suspects an XY Problem?" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|xy-problem|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2015-04-21T03:02:07.517" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-10T17:18:24.530" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should ask for context&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the description you have provided, this is a useful question which is simply missing context. It may be in fact an XY Problem, but the solution to an XY Problem is not always to replace it with a new question focused on the root problem. Sometimes there are enough facets to the root problem that the querent has by themselves been able to narrow to a mostly-reasonable solution, and just needs implementation advice. Sometimes the querent &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; understand the situation better than we do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We should only close questions that are not useful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is answerable and otherwise valid, closing it because it is not this other question we would rather have someone ask is unhelpful to the community at large and rather rude to the querent. In this case it is appropriate to ask for clarification in the comments as to the context for the question, but that need not be accompanied by a close vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T17:18:24.530" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-10T17:54:29.170" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is not site policy; this is Stack Exchange rules – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be nice.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each and every one of us is required, by the tenets of the Stack Exchange network, to be nice. Being nice means, among other things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be welcoming, be patient, and assume good intentions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not welcoming to assume we know better than the user him-or-herself what they want. It does not assume &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; good about them to presume that what they have asked, &lt;em&gt;isn’t &lt;strong&gt;really&lt;/strong&gt; what they &lt;strong&gt;meant&lt;/strong&gt; to ask, and that &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; know what &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, the very line continues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't expect new users to know all the rules&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But those are the rules – &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; stuff. Yes, new users may not be familiar with the site; as the members here, we are experts on that. And indeed, any given user may not be an expert on the material they’re asking about – that’s why they are asking, and they’re asking us because we &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; (as a group) subject-matter experts in that topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But no one is a subject-matter expert on the anyone’s thoughts and feelings &lt;em&gt;but that person&lt;/em&gt;. In short,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We &lt;em&gt;do not&lt;/em&gt; know better than the asker themselves what they want&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even new users generally know what they want, and even if they &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt;, assuming that &lt;em&gt;we do&lt;/em&gt; is a lot. It is &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; rare that we can be sure that an XY problem &lt;em&gt;even exists&lt;/em&gt;, much less be able to tell what it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We have good intention, but intention isn’t everything&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we do this because we want to help. We do this because we have a suspicion that there is a deeper question that we could answer, or could answer &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt;, than the question actually asked. And it is very, very tempting to assume that they really meant that question, because we think our answer to that question is so good and helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, new users, while they &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; generally know their own wants, &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; know this site. They don’t know its users. They don’t know that the numerous comments that seem to be &lt;em&gt;accusing&lt;/em&gt; them of not giving all the information, seem to be demanding they &lt;em&gt;justify&lt;/em&gt; their question, are really just ham-handed attempts to &lt;em&gt;help more&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And sometimes we get that way, because we sometimes think a little too highly of &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;, and forget that ultimately,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We are here to answer the questions people ask&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is the purpose of this site. Doing anything else is logistics, bureaucracy, or troubleshooting – to allow more and better questions to get more and better answers. The only reason we care about the XY problem &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; is because fixing it sometimes allows us to help someone, whose question at face value couldn’t have been answered, or could only be answered with something that wouldn’t actually help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But no one is a subject-matter expert on the anyone’s thoughts and feelings &lt;em&gt;but that person&lt;/em&gt;. In short,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The default &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; be that the question asked is the question &lt;em&gt;meant&lt;/em&gt; to be asked&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, we are required, by the definition of the network, the Stack Exchange model, to assume that users have good intent. Mistakes are possible; XY problems are a real thing. But you need substantial evidence to the contrary to question someone’s intent to ask the question they asked: after all, &lt;strong&gt;the fact that they asked it is &lt;em&gt;massive&lt;/em&gt; evidence that they meant to.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No one on the site is required to &lt;em&gt;justify&lt;/em&gt; their interest in a particular question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments asking about suspected or possible XY problems therefore should be &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; courteous and careful. Particularly from experienced, established users, or even more so diamond moderators, even a simple question can seem to be a simple sugar-coating on a demand, with the implied threat of closing a question for violation of some policy (remember, new users &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; know those!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it doesn’t &lt;em&gt;matter&lt;/em&gt; if a question seems stupid to you, if the answer seems useless to you: if the question is &lt;em&gt;answerable&lt;/em&gt;, by the definitions of our site, it should be &lt;em&gt;answered&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; it was asked isn’t really relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if a question &lt;em&gt;isn’t&lt;/em&gt; answerable, it becomes much more important to ask what related questions that we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; answer are also of interest to the user. This is a &lt;strong&gt;great&lt;/strong&gt; time to ask about suspected XY problems. Not necessarily the only time, but we should be &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; hesitant to do so when a valid question is asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;XY problems are not, themselves, a reason to close a question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A valid, answerable question can still be an XY problem. In such cases, a good and accurate answer &lt;em&gt;may not actually help the person who asked!&lt;/em&gt; Or it could even be a bad idea, an answer that is only good because of the constraints of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, there are generally two options, depending on whether or not the answer to the question is just not useful to the asker, versus actively harmful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is fine, just not useful to the asker – say, the user indicates in comments that it isn’t what they were looking for, and further comments clarify that there’s actually an XY problem going on – then the question should be left alone, the answer upvoted appropriately for being a good answer. The question too, if it’s a good question for someone else, even if it turns out to not really be useful to the original asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the asker should ask a &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; question, the one they meant to ask, based on the insights gained from the first. There is no limit on the number of questions one can ask, after all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the only way to answer the question is to offer something that is really a bad idea, or is just useless to &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt;, not just the person asking, then that is an excellent opportunity for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4563&quot;&gt;challenging the frame&lt;/a&gt; of a question – the advice in that Meta is quite useful for this purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question should also, perhaps, be edited to allow for better answers without challenging the frame, but whether or not to do this can only be determined on a case-by-case basis. Personally, I strongly feel that it is better to err on the side of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; editing a question to change its meaning. Challenging the frame is the better approach: it allows you greater room to detail why, exactly, the sort of solution assumed in the question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a good idea. That makes the answer more useful than simply eliminating the assumption unaddressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the question isn’t closed in either case. That’s because we are dealing with a valid question. The question may not be what the &lt;em&gt;asker&lt;/em&gt; meant to ask – but the answer can still be useful. Either because the answer &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; useful, just not to the asker, or because the answer challenges the frame, which is an excellent way for both the asker &lt;em&gt;and future readers&lt;/em&gt; to learn about potential flaws in their assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There is little cause to worry much about XY problems behind valid questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone finds that the good answers to their valid question, are still leaving them with question, with problems to solve, &lt;strong&gt;it is trivial for them to simply recognize that and ask another question.&lt;/strong&gt; And if they have difficulty determining &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; they want to ask, they can easily ask that too. There is no real reason to pre-emptively &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; there is a problem; generally speaking, users will realize the problem when they see the answers aren’t what they are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, even when we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; courteously and correctly ask about XY problems behind valid questions, there isn’t much to be gained by doing so. Doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t – if it’s courteous, that’s fine – but it’s worth keeping in mind, if you have &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; doubts about whether or not there’s actually an XY problem, or that you are asking about it courteously, &lt;strong&gt;it harms no one to just wait and see.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The FAQ about XY problems is addressed to &lt;em&gt;askers&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;“What is an XY problem?”&lt;/a&gt; FAQ entry exists as guidance to &lt;em&gt;asking better questions&lt;/em&gt;. It’s great advice – for asking good questions. &lt;strong&gt;Nowhere in the FAQ is it suggested that the community is expected to respond in any particular way to a suspected XY problem.&lt;/strong&gt; That is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; a part of Stack Exchange policy, or even guidance – Be Nice is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People asking questions should avoid XY problems. They should read that FAQ entry, should understand what it means to ask about Y rather than X, and they should consider their situation fully and ask about X. There is no argument there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we have to act in good faith ourselves, as well as assuming it in others. That means, unless we are given evidence to the contrary, &lt;strong&gt;we have to assume that users have done what they should, and are asking their question in the best possible way to get the answers they need.&lt;/strong&gt; To assume otherwise is disrespectful in the extreme, and flies flagrantly in the face of Be Nice policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-04-16T15:26:19.220" CommentCount="35" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-10T18:08:55.597" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questiosn with XY problems should generally not be closed. An XY problem usually has nothing to do with the validity of the question, just the helpfulness of a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question should probably not be closed for being an XY question per se - although there are various good close reasons that could be described as an XY question if you squint hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Real problem - &quot;I can't be arsed to read the rulebook&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Real problem - &quot;My thought processes are terminally disordered&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Real problem - &quot;I am randomly curious about a hypothetical&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, good questions are about actual problems that you face. I'll call this a &quot;meta&quot; X-Y problem - it's not that they are asking about Monkey Grip when they really want to know about maximizing DPS, it's that they are cosmically troubled in some other way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general more routine non-meta-scoped XY problems can be comment-clarified and downvoted, and answered with a frame-challenge (subject to voting if people think it's valid or not) if it's merited within the narrow guidelines already expressed here on meta. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's nothing wrong with encouraging people to give context as to why they're trying to do what they do, because they may not be sure how to reach their goal (they are asking, after all) and need to either edit their question or ask another - a good example is &quot;I want to ask a question about how to use monkey grip because I want the best dps ever&quot; - you can go ahead and answer how to use monkey grip, and that's a legitimate question and a legitimate answer, but they may not be a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; question and a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer because they don't solve the problem. I would consider a frame-challenge an appropriate possible answer to that question.  Close votes on the question would not be appropriate, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Valid close reason - &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Invalid close reason - &quot;I don't like what you're asking&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-04-11T02:05:55.563" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T02:05:55.563" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-10T19:51:32.343" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is important to be respectful of the asker, but it is also important to do your best to help the person, and this may mean helping them to realize their faulty assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that some of the best answers address apparent XY-problems by doing the following: First they answer the question literally without making assumptions, then they explain why the solution could lead to problems in practice, and show how to approach the underlying problem differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some may find tacking advise on the end of an answer to be patronizing, but some people really appreciate it; and you won't know until you actually do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example of one of my questions where the poster did this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/47800/15866&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/47800/15866&lt;/a&gt;. He managed to answer the question &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; give me some new ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15866" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-04-10T19:51:32.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5504" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-10T23:12:32.933" Score="1" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently, asking for individual edition answers in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag is too broad; is the proper procedure for such cross-edition questions to ask one question per edition I'm interested in, or is there something &lt;em&gt;else&lt;/em&gt; I should be doing with this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T01:40:53.540" Title="How am I supposed to ask questions when I'm trying to discern evolution or conservation of a rule or intent across D&amp;D editions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5504" CreationDate="2015-04-11T01:40:53.540" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tagging wise you're asking the question correctly, using either dungeons-and-dragons as a spanning tag if you're talking about comparison across all/a lot of editions, and 2-3 specific ones if you're doing a more limited comparison.  The tagging isn't what's wrong with that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I want comparison of 5 editions&quot; should not garner 5 answers each of which just talk about one edition. No answer is then correct and helpful unto itself. If you want a comparison of X over Y, you need to wait for someone that understands X over Y to answer. That's the price of wanting a big expansive answer (well, and the price of &quot;too broad&quot; which it can bump up against). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also consider what problem you're trying to solve.  &quot;Curiosity&quot; isn't much of a real problem and often people will vote that way. Remember on a SE you are asking people to do work to help you. Just asking them to &quot;write a dissertation because it amuses me&quot; is less well received, and that's just life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T01:40:53.540" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5506" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5494" CreationDate="2015-04-11T02:09:02.420" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should help get the question opened, and be patient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can do this by:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Commenting to help the OP overcome the others' concerns&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Editing to help clarify (rep allowing)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post on meta about the specific question, but you should really only do this once 1 and 2 have run their course&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, as usual, some small tweaks to the question got it reopened so you can lay your wisdom down on us. I think we all survived going an extra 3 hours before you could post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T02:09:02.420" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5507" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5512" CreationDate="2015-04-11T02:53:34.707" Score="14" ViewCount="347" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have several questions recently where a commenter asks the OP to quote the rules for their game so that they can help them. Is this appropriate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-09-21T04:09:51.887" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T04:09:51.887" Title="Should I ask a poster to quote the rules he or she is confused about?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5507" CreationDate="2015-04-11T02:56:38.483" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, this is not appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, this isn't &quot;reading English Stack Exchange.&quot; If they just need to paste the rule and have you read it for them, it's not really a good question anyway. It's unlikely that's their problem. If you're not sure &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; rule they're talking about, that's a different thing, I am talking here about &quot;I don't know about Anima, paste the rules here&quot; or &quot;I don't know about that feat/spell, paste it here.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And usually this request is being made by someone not familiar with the ruleset at hand. You may think you're an expert on any RPG as long as you read a sentence of it... But that's not an expert answer.  Don't consider answering a question if you're not familiar with the ruleset. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should flag comments of that sort for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T02:56:38.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5507" CreationDate="2015-04-11T03:17:39.297" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, this is perfectly appropriate under certain circumstances:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are times where a proper answer is dependent on &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; wording that may not be universally available to the answerers, but is otherwise the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; information needed to answer the question that is not readily available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly, if there are errata or version concerns, it can be helpful to make sure that you are looking at the same piece of text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about feats in 5e. While it is &lt;em&gt;preferable&lt;/em&gt; that a person answering a question about a feat in 5e have a PHB in front of them, it's perfectly plausible that in many scenarios the person best equipped to answer that question simply is not somewhere where a PHB is available (I know I'm often answering from work where I don't have my books). It seems pretty reasonable to me to ask the OP to quote the specific text they are having trouble with in order for the answerers to all be working from the proper source material in order to give a correct answer. In this case it's not a lack of familiarity with the source material, it's a desire to be precise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Massive errata such as in 4e between the PHB and Essentials. There are plenty of times when answering a 4e question where it becomes quickly obvious from reading the question that the OP is working off of old source material. In these cases it &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be helpful to ask them to quote the exact wording (though more often it's helpful for them to mention the book they are looking at). But, ultimately, the exact wording that they are using &lt;em&gt;for their game&lt;/em&gt; matters more than what the rules are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, my guidance here would be: &lt;strong&gt;if you're asking because your completely unfamiliar with the source material, you shouldn't be answering the question in the first place. However, if you're asking to make sure you know the precise wording so that you can give a correct answer, then you're just fine and should continue.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unilaterally and universally banning these requests is not a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2015-04-11T03:44:55.793" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T03:44:55.793" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5510" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-11T04:21:00.073" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;In reality, I think this question is much simpler than the answers (as informative as they are) have made it out to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real issue with the XY problem is that we have absolutely no way of knowing which questions are XY and which are not. We can attempt to heuristically identify which questions are and are not, but as far as I've seen this has a high chance of failure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even on the off chance that it succeeds, it's not reasonable to tell someone &quot;no, that's not what you're asking.&quot; It's either going to be rude or ineffective, and very likely both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, if you're not sure, just &lt;strong&gt;ask clarifying questions.&lt;/strong&gt; If they ask a question that is clear, but isn't what they really want, it's not unclear what they're asking. They just mean something else. You can ask something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How do you see an answer helping you run games better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further advice can be given solely based on what the asker really needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Separating questions and people is important. If someone asks an answerable XY-question, the OP should be discouraged from editing it into something else, and instead encouraged to post a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastActivityDate="2015-04-11T04:21:00.073" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5507" CreationDate="2015-04-11T16:04:45.200" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asking for the inclusion of such quotes (or, better yet, links to an SRD entry where one exists), is helpful to people other than the OP who are interested in the question.  Our goal is to create expert questions with expert answers.  The question should not just be helpful to the OP, it should be helpful to other interested experts as well.  If you need to ask for the rules to be quoted or linked to, you are probably not qualified to answer the question (though, as Wax Eagle points out, you might be).  That doesn't mean you have no place asking the OP to improve their question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm following, say, the flight tag and a super-cool question in a system I have no expertise in whatsoever comes up, I might want to know what the rules being discussed are.  It is helpful to me, in using the Q&amp;amp;A, if the question contains links or quotes.  We aren't just about good answers here, we're about good questions too (or at least we should be).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Indeed, even if I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know the relevant rules and have them in front of me I might consider it a worthwhile use of time to edit the OP's question for them to include said material and then answer.  Also, as an incentive to actually do this, there are badges for it if you answer fast enough after editing, but the timing is such that it's not really possible for someone like me to get them.  Maybe one of you guys with superhuman typing speed can get 'em though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yah, don't answer questions you aren't qualified to answer.  But, please, by all means feel free to help improve the quality of existing questions and answers by commenting and/or editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2015-04-12T17:20:36.657" LastActivityDate="2015-04-12T17:20:36.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5507" CreationDate="2015-04-12T18:09:39.120" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Only when you're already familiar with the RPG involved.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether you should ask for a rules quote depends on your motive:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;: Your motive is that you know the RPG, and the question would be clearer with the precise wording that the asker is having trouble with (especially when there are possible errata or version differences involved).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;: The motive is that you think you could write an answer, despite unfamiliarity with—or perhaps never having even read—the RPG in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also probably a bad idea for selfish reasons: any answer you write is likely to be seen as oddly incomplete by anyone who does know the game, buying you downvotes, or comments asking for details you can't provide (which is embarrassing and can turn into a mess of comments when you can't admit your lack of expertise).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also likely to not do the asker or the Internet any favours anyway—important wrinkles you miss from lack of knowledge can easily mislead the asker and spread misinformation!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also worth saying that, if you don't know the game but your motive still feels like the first case, you can easily be wrong that it's unclear and should still leave it alone. Asking for a quote when it's obvious to actual players of the game can cause confusion, if they start second-guessing themselves and the question because they assume you know what you're talking about and think they might be missing something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been guilty in the past of doing part of this—answering for a game I don't know based on only a quote in the question—so I can speak from experience. It's a bad idea, and feels bad in the end. Leave clarifying and answering questions to the players of that game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-04-12T18:53:07.093" LastActivityDate="2015-04-12T18:53:07.093" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5513" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5514" CreationDate="2015-04-13T14:48:18.977" Score="3" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd think you couldn't but there is an upvoted comment by @Emrakul on @WaxEagle's nomination post.  Is there a place other than the nomination screen where you're supposed to look at these?  Will it work the same way for the election phase?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-04-13T17:33:48.647" Title="How do you flag/upvote comments on election material?" Tags="|support|election|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5514" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5513" CreationDate="2015-04-13T17:33:48.647" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was a bug, and was disabled when it was caught during the SO election that is being held concurrently with ours. See this for more information:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/245124/can-too-upvote-comments-under-an-election-nomination&quot;&gt;Can *too* upvote comments under an election nomination&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like the restriction is for &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; the nomination phase. However, we will not have a primary (unless more than 7 candidates step forwards this afternoon), and I think comments disappear during the voting phase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-04-13T17:33:48.647" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5466" CreationDate="2015-04-13T18:30:19.710" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-04-13T18:30:19.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5516" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-13T20:16:54.960" Score="11" ViewCount="379" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&amp;amp;A thread for the candidates. Questions collected &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5466/2015-moderator-election-qa-question-collection&quot;&gt;from an earlier thread&lt;/a&gt; have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Not every question was compiled - as noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us. I did merge one of them, though, given the volume and the similarity between it and an existing question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/68326b7c-d234-4b44-aee0-2134fca02107/view-source&quot;&gt;copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes&lt;/a&gt;. Oh, and please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck to all of the candidates!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1) What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2) As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;3) We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;4) What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;5) How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;6) How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been? What about if another moderator reopens/undeletes a question that you think should've stayed closed/deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;7) Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;8) What do you want the community at large to do to help you when you're a moderator? What in particular would you encourage us to keep doing, and what would you like us to do differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;9) What, in your view, is the role of a moderator as opposed to the role of an active, high-rep user? Why would you being a moderator make this site better than you being an active, high-rep user who can lead by example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;10) How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-05-08T11:27:27.343" Title="2015 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Questionnaire" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5516" CreationDate="2015-04-13T23:40:17.183" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;SevenSidedDie&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1) What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the moderation of the site has been good, even accounting for C. Ross admittedly being less active of late than he would have liked. Our comments are on-point and don't devolve into meandering tangents; our open questions are high-quality; and our meta discussion robust.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some points in the past I've felt that marginal answers had been deleted too quickly; as a moderator I might look at adjusting that. On the other hand, I feel that there are answers that are obviously the poster mistaking us for a forum that get a pass for kinda looking like frame challenges, and I feel that such forum-reply non-answers should be deleted more frequently than they have been. But I'm detail-oriented, and overall these preferences would amount to minor tweaks rather than significant changes in practice, especially since mods do have to roughly agree on how to approach such things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2) As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the point of having multiple moderators is to share the load of administrative tasks. Part of it though, is to balance each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a mod in that situation, the best I could do is listen. I can't promise action or resolution, as a problem between a user and a different mod is ultimately outside a mod's direct power. But I can hear, and make up my own mind, and let that inform my own actions and what I advocate for publicly and privately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;3) We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to give the unpopular answer here: not all new users are a good fit for the site, and losing them is an intended design feature of SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know. That's hard to swallow. But it's the first passive defense we have against the ravening hordes beyond the walls, out in the wild internets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a new user asks a question that doesn't fit the site, we already know that they didn't read the prominent banner, click through to the tour, or read the how-to-ask advice hugging the question-submission box before posting. That doesn't mean they're going to be a poor fit, but we do know that one way of becoming a well-fitting user didn't reach them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a new user gets feedback on their question, they can either respond well or poorly. Some of them will be on the fence, responding poorly to poor feedback and well to good feedback, but the ones not on the fence are already decided: poor and good fits, in a kind of Schrödinger's Box with an unknown user inside. How they respond to our feedback tells us something about whether they're likely to be a good fit for the site or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately, we don't have to be their judge and jury — by design, someone who doesn't like getting feedback that their question has problems will often (but not always) remove themselves from the site &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; us! That's wonderful. They're hopefully going somewhere else that will suit them better, so that they won't waste their time being frustrated with a site that doesn't suit them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those that do respond well are jewels to be treasured, but again — we have to do nothing to keep them, as they see they fit and do the job for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have some small amount of control over what the fence-sitters do. The more inviting our feedback is, the more likely their potential response will resolve into a positive one, and then they're functionally indistinguishable from a user who started out as a clear good fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, that's my probably-unpopular answer: greet them warmly, correct them firmly but gently, and then let this first layer of the SE's filters do its job to identify fitting new users. And ultimately, this is a community job rather than a mod job, so I can only try to lead by example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;4) What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/153219/sevensideddie&quot;&gt;I am slightly active on Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt; currently, with a few questions and answers. I regularly dig through it to find answers to questions I have about SE operations. Featured posts always get my attention, and I tend to also check in occasionally to see if anything interesting is happening, but not nearly enough to have the pulse of the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't plan to increase the amount of time I spend there just checking in. However, I'll probably see more of it in passing regardless: as a mod I expect issues would crop up more often that I would want to bring to Meta.SE, and I would have more procedural or system questions to research than I do now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;5) How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the pattern is an outlier for the site, I'd bring it to the rest of the moderation team and we'd discuss whether and what to do. That is of course assuming that just dealing with the flags has been insufficient to change the pattern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The easiest remedy would be asking them into a private chat with the mods, to ask them to re-evaluate their posting/commenting style. The advantage of this approach is that getting official mod attention conveys some of the gravity of the problem, while the type of forum provided by chat allows for a nuanced approach to figuring out the issue and problem-solving cooperatively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;6) How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been? What about if another moderator reopens/undeletes a question that you think should've stayed closed/deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team is a team first, otherwise the site suffers; but I also expect significant disagreements of this sort to be rare. At most it would get discussed behind closed doors, and likely the community wouldn't see anything noteworthy happen. If overt action had to be taken as a result of those discussions, it would be a joint decision presented without fanfare.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time discussion probably wouldn't even be necessary, since the community's own voting powers are often enough to resolve the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;7) Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Arguments happen, and frankly it's on the users to conduct themselves with integrity and resolve their differences, and on them if they fail. (Speaking from experience.) The only ways in which it's a mod's job to intervene is where it is affecting the operation of the site (which includes effects on the site due to annoyed bystanding users).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, the usual firefighting toolkit is effective, from mundane to emergency measures:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;removing inflammatory comments removes the fuel&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;directing disputes over procedure to meta may turn it productive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;shunting in-chat arguments that drown a chat room into a separate room reduces collateral damage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;private mods' chat discussion with the users involved, separately or together, may resolve the issue&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;mod messages telling the belligerents to knock it off can serve as a wake-up call&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;timed suspensions, as a penultimate resort, provide users space to think and give the site a reprieve from significant strife&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the last resort of permanent suspensions save the site from the incurable and cut them loose to find a new niche&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somewhere in that list of escalating responses, users of high standing will step to a personal brink and decide it's indeed time to step back. Anyone of high standing who doesn't eventually check themselves is, unfortunately, someone who has self-selected to stop contributing constructively to the site. I hope I never see it get to that point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(These things are subject to being schooled in Moderation Best Practices, of course. But these are my untutored instincts.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;8) What do you want the community at large to do to help you when you're a moderator? What in particular would you encourage us to keep doing, and what would you like us to do differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Flag more clearly-obsolete comments as obsolete! Cleaning up comments is easier (and less controversial) when the community is taking part in deciding what needs to go. We have a very active community and years of comments have piled up that have long since done their job and been forgotten. When you're reading through an old question, consider the comments and flag any whose business is done. Flagging makes work for mods and I know that makes some of us hesitate to send those flags, but handling flags is easier than going looking for old comments manually, and gives us a less-noisy site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Welcome new users and help them learn how to become good users. We're pretty good at that, and I think it's something to encourage. Welcoming gives the site a friendly face, in general. And when it's someone who might be making a mistake, thinking in terms of &lt;em&gt;welcoming&lt;/em&gt; them makes it easier to word advice so that it's more likely to be welcomed in turn and acted on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;9) What, in your view, is the role of a moderator as opposed to the role of an active, high-rep user? Why would you being a moderator make this site better than you being an active, high-rep user who can lead by example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see the mod team as guides and leaders. Mods also have the responsibility of seeing the site from a high-level, operational view that users are often free to ignore while they advocate for specific questions or issues. There's a bit of a tension there — I think mods should be guiding the community toward better self-moderation, but also need to speak up for those larger operational issues; mods have to see both forest and trees.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I rather like the official analogy of mods as human exception-handlers: where the normal community process doesn't work, mods step in to take necessary action. Otherwise, they are just one (slightly louder) voice in the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think the site will be markedly better with me as a moderator than as a high-rep user. Someone needs to do the job, and I'm willing, but someone else would do it if I don't. I'm well-positioned in terms of time, energy, and willingness for the responsibilities of a moderator though, and few of our high-rep users do want the responsibility — so that's the most significant distinction, for me, between staying a high-rep user and becoming a mod. (Although I am really looking forward to being able to kill spam on sight.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;10) How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For starters, there are always at least three moderators, and though the Team might aim to present itself as a unified body, opinions behind closed doors won't always be in accordance. So, my own reaction to community consensus that I disagree with is only a small part of the relevant story. Mods are there in part to balance each other, and I expect I will be balanced as much as I balance others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the whole mod team strongly disagreed with an emerged community consensus, I think that would be something of a crisis for the community. I think such an even is unlikely though, and no logjam like that can last forever anyway: either the reasons for acting contrary will become better understood and the consensus will shift, or a &quot;third way&quot; option will come out of some clever user's brain and give us a way to resolve the crisis. We're RPGers: we're creative and good at imagining new possibilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do about a failed consensus is fairly straightforward: since the status quo is unchanged, there is normally nothing for the mods to do. Cases where something clearly must be done are the exception — but exception-handling is a mod's job in the first place and it's unlikely that such exceptional issues wouldn't be dealt with before they got to meta. In the cases where quick mod action results in the community forming a consensus of dismay, that's a conversation to have after the fact, to see what can be changed for the better now and what can be done better next time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-04-13T23:46:26.987" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5516" CreationDate="2015-04-14T02:19:53.163" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wax Eagle&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally in agreement. The biggest thing I've had issues with over the past several years has often been the &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt; (at times rude/condescending) of moderation rather than any specific decisions (though there are times where I've disagreed withe moderators, most of those have been rather minor). This is something that's a personal choice, but I think that simply having &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;more active&lt;/em&gt; moderators will help the overall tone of moderation here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is a difficult problem. There is a balance to be weighed and measured, and in some ways the situation will dictate my actions. However, I am a generally conciliatory person and am sympathetic to people who feel wronged. I try to understand problems like this and explain anywhere that is unclear in what has happened. I'm active in chat and on meta, and would use both of these as vehicles for helping to make sure that voices are heard, and complaints are registered. We have a strong community here, but this is a subject that &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be very contentious. I have a lot of experience dealing with contentious subjects (I moderate a stack about religion), and we have had an amazing amount of success dealing with very touchy subjects in a way that makes the internet a better place. I hope I can bring more of that experience to bear on the moderation side here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This may seem odd, but I strongly believe that one of the best gifts we can give to a new user is a rapid close with a strong comment about what can be fixed followed by a rapid reopening. Yes, we can scare new users off with our friendliness and adherence to site policy at times, however, we can also get a user who is just off track right on very quickly if we can get to them early, get their question closed, edited and reopened in a few short minutes. It's important in these situations to communicate both site policy and how to repair a question quickly and concisely and to pair that with decisive action (Both on the close side and the reopen side)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I have in the past (and will in the future) had spurts of strong activity on the main SE meta site. It's a place where we need both our moderators and regular users to be active and involved if we are going to get engine changes that we care about. We need users there with cache with the rest of the SE community so that our voices our heard and we need our moderators active both there and in the moderator chat rooms (which I am also already active in). You can see my existing MSE involvement on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/170797/wax-eagle&quot;&gt;my profile&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users who contribute valuable answers are fantastic, and should be encouraged to keep doing so, however, no one user is greater than the whole. Users who make the site miserable for other users need to be dealt with. The first and easiest move is to make sure that argumentative comments are dealt with swiftly, the second is to send a warning message. Hopefully this is enough to keep the user from continuing down that same path, however, argumentative or disruptive comments should be dealt with and suspensions can and should be used in cases where a user is not receptive to other types of warnings. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been? What about if another moderator reopens/undeletes a question that you think should've stayed closed/deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally, whether a question should be open or closed, especially if the moderators disagree, it should happen on meta. However, in a case like this, a quick back channel communication between the moderators can usually resolve the dispute. A &quot;hey, that looks like it should have stayed closed, what are you seeing that I'm not&quot; can usually resolve it without needing to take it to meta. Generally though, the types of question that should be open/closed should be directed by the community, which means that there should be a pretty consistent understanding across the mod staff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I love chat, but it's not meta, and main isn't meta. Site policy discussions need to make their way to meta. And the meta discussion have to be complete. We can't have contextless meta posts that are driven by things that are happening in chat. Chat is relatively low visibility. However, chat is a much better real time communication tool than meta and as such, a lot of things can happen in chat in a very short time that would take a lot longer on meta. However, if site polity things get discussed in chat, it's very important that they get fully summarized and described on meta. Honestly the best use of chat re: site policy is twofold: 1. organizing site cleanup efforts and 2. formulating posts. Ongoing discussion of policy needs to be on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As far as diffusing arguments, that's pretty easy on the main site. Comments can be scrubbed, and if necessary posts can be locked and users sent to meta. More importantly though is understanding what the argument is about and why it is happening. Chat arguments it's &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; enough to tell the parties to knock it off or move the discussion to a different room where it will not be disruptive (we have done this several times in our main room). Meta is the &lt;em&gt;place&lt;/em&gt; for arguments, though if civility cannot be maintained then that has to be addressed. This is a place that should be welcoming, we can disagree, we can even dislike each other, but if we are going to stay and continue to have a place in this community we need to get along and be nice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What do you want the community at large to do to help you when you're a moderator? What in particular would you encourage us to keep doing, and what would you like us to do differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post, Edit, Vote, Flag and be involved in meta in that order. Moderators are not super human, and they can't read every post on the site, we also can't answer every question on main or meta. SE sites are &lt;em&gt;community moderated&lt;/em&gt; that means that everyone with a flag can play the role of moderator to some degree or another. Posting good content, editing to improve it, voting and flagging to curate it and discussing on meta to guide it are the things that make SE great and are the things that will keep RPG.SE going for years to come.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What, in your view, is the role of a moderator as opposed to the role of an active, high-rep user? Why would you being a moderator make this site better than you being an active, high-rep user who can lead by example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To be the better garbage man. The big change from current high rep tools to mod tools is access to flag handling, I don't know how many flags this site gets, but I'd love to do my part (and probably encourage more flagging). Perhaps the most impactful change is that moderator close and delete votes are binding (close votes can be overridden by the community, but deletes cannot be), so this will actually cause me to be quite a bit more careful about where I use my close votes (it's important for the community to close where we can). Comment cleanup is also a major part of site policing that high rep users cannot be involved in that I would be able to help with if elected.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great question, and a good one to end on. The policies of the site are the policies of the site &lt;em&gt;regardless&lt;/em&gt; of whether I agree or disagree with them (though it's much easier to enforce policy you agree with). If community consensus is reached on a policy I disagree with, I will be happy to enforce that policy. However,  I do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; believe that moderators should be fully beholden to the community. Yes, we are elected by them, but our duty is to making sure the site is as healthy as possible, and sometimes that means that you have to make a decision that is not popular, but that you wholeheartedly believe is the right choice. In cases like this it is especially important to communicate clearly the what and the why and to acknowledge that it's not the most popular course of action even though you believe (As a team) that it's the right one.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the interest of giving an example, I'll give one where I was on the &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; side of the fence. A long time ago there was a question about gnomes and physics (as related to water and handy haversacks). Some of the older hands around here may remember. It was closed as not a real question by the moderators, the community rallied and reopened it, and the moderators reclosed it. It was discussed on meta, and despite some popular support (mostly driven by angry users (of which I was one at the time)), it was ultimately and reasonably closed (And eventually deleted). Ultimately, this was a situation where the moderators saw that what the users wanted was foolish, this question (and questions for which it would set a precedent) were not good, they really weren't answerable. The moderators realized that this was &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a healthy line of questions of the community and over ruled the angry mob. I remember being angry about it at the time, but, in hindsight, it was the right move and the moderators did their job, making sure that we didn't harm ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-04-14T03:31:18.117" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5516" CreationDate="2015-04-14T14:21:48.990" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/em&gt; for Moderator&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.&lt;/strong&gt; What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general I am pleased with the overall moderation of RPG.SE. As a whole (both moderators and high rep users) however we could improve our friendliness toward new users. Sometimes we can scare them away as a result of our quick and efficient moderation. This is not due to anyone (mod or user) being malicious but rather a lack of tone awareness which is a problem that can occur in any text-based medium, but especially on the internet. We have been progressing in this area recently and its been a topic of discussion and consideration in chat and on rpg.se meta so I feel we simply need to continue to iterate and we will keep improving. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2.&lt;/strong&gt; As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First and foremost I would ask the user(s) for specific examples of this behavior on questions and answers and in the chat logs so I could examine the exchanges first hand. Even if that is not possible, (it is very time consuming proposal) I would still hear out their complaints and bring it up with the moderation team as a whole to discuss in private. I cannot give a concrete response as to what actions or decisions would follow, as it would depend on the issues at hand, but I can say I would act in good faith toward the users and fellow moderators to help resolve the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3.&lt;/strong&gt; We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often these quick-to-close questions stem from an inherent misunderstanding of our site's focus &amp;amp; scope or of the nature of Stack Exchange as whole. In the ideal situation these users end up stumbling into Main chat and we get to amicably teach them before they start posting multiple, low-quality questions or answers on the site, but usually that is not how it goes. I feel very strongly that it is important to close very low-quality questions asap for the benefit of the site. Other new/infrequent users will answer low-quality questions without hesitation and take none of the steps that the rest of the community would take to improve the question leading to string of answers on a low quality question. The user gets what they need, but leaves our site with a very poor question that does nothing to help other users, present or future. Whenever possible a low-quality question should be put on hold, but with helpful comments explaining why we are doing so and explaining how we can help them get their question up to our standards so it can be reopened for answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4.&lt;/strong&gt; What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently I don't participate on SE's main Meta at all, beyond referencing it for general policy questions or reading the blog for news/updates (such as Good vs Bad Subjective questions in the amazing &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;Gorilla vs. Shark&lt;/a&gt; post). However, if elected Moderator, I would become an active participant seeking to make sure the needs of our community are met as well as helping to push RPG.SE projects forward. I was very active on our own meta as a user. I helped figure out our strategy for 5e's release which resulted in our drive for questions and associated raffle contest. I would seek to be bring that same kind of activity and initiative to the SE's meta for the benefit of our site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;5.&lt;/strong&gt; How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would invite said user to locked and private chat room and mentor them about their comment actions. I would emphasize the value of their contributions to the site and illustrate how their comment activity ultimately detracted from their valuable answers, appealing to their sense of propriety. Finally I would leave them with a warning letting them know I would not hesitate to delete offending comments by them ASAP in the future if their behavior continued.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;6.&lt;/strong&gt; How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been? What about if another moderator reopens/undeletes a question that you think should've stayed closed/deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would privately chat with all of the mods and discuss the issue hoping to reach a consensus. However failing that if it were closed I would let it stand for the community to reopen via votes. If it were deleted and I truly disagreed I would likely raise a meta question to discuss the issue with the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;7.&lt;/strong&gt; Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a healthy debate can be quite good for the site, but have personally seen and participated in discussions where everyone let their passion get the best of them. First and foremost any arguments in comments would be deleted (comments are not for extended discussions) and a comment would be left saying so and suggesting those involved discuss things in chat. If users were to argue within the text of their own answers I would edit those parts of the answer out leaving an explanation that answers are not meant to reference one another, but should, on their own, directly answer the question. As to chat itself, I suggested once during such an argument in Main chat that we needed something like a bar to air our problems without disturbing the site. BESW created the &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://%20http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13848/not-a-bar-but-plays-one-on-tv&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Not a bar, but plays one on TV&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; chat room for that express purpose and we now direct users there and actively shunt sprawling or flaring topics over there so they do not disrupt the site as much. In addition to all these mechanical approaches, I would try to chat with those involved in the dispute in an attempt to cool their ardor. As an absolute last ditch measure, if a user refuses to calm down or take a time out a temporary ban would be instituted for the benefit of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;8.&lt;/strong&gt; What do you want the community at large to do to help you when you're a moderator? What in particular would you encourage us to keep doing, and what would you like us to do differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By and large keep doing what you are doing. Users are very active on question and answers as well as meta. I would prefer if users would be freer with downvotes and editing other's questions &amp;amp; answers. There is an inhibition there which I completely understand as I shared it myself for a very long time but I think a lot of headaches over quality could be resolved by users making use of these options. While questions and answers are in a sense owned by the users whom created them; we have a duty beyond helping those users to help future users of the site by editing questions to make them more understandable and easily searched for. Beyond that more users should drive by the review queue more often and resist the temptation to leave long comments or multiple comments on questions and answers whenever possible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;9.&lt;/strong&gt; What, in your view, is the role of a moderator as opposed to the role of an active, high-rep user? Why would you being a moderator make this site better than you being an active, high-rep user who can lead by example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators exercise their unique privileges to help keep the site working like a well-oiled machine. In practice high rep users can effectively take care of most of the moderation of the site from closing questions to editing tags to flagging inappropriate comments. Where I would step in as a moderator is to handle those tasks that high rep users will never be able to handle such as deleting comment strings, deleting spam or otherwise wholly inappropriate content. As a user I take care of as much of this as I can, but often times there are things happening when I am active 730am - 5pm EST/EDT (USA) that I cannot currently address. There may be a question that needs closing, but I cannot do so by myself and there are not enough high rep users on. I may flag something that needs to be deleted, but none of the current moderators are available or active so it sits there for a long time. Tied in with this would be a more cautious use of close votes by myself on questions as I would be able to close a question at any time. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;10.&lt;/strong&gt; How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a consensus is reached on meta it should be implemented regardless of my own opinions so long as it does not conflict with our site's guidelines or SE's guidelines. Ultimately we are are a community-driven enterprise and I believe it is best to rely on the community to help shape the direction of RPG.SE whenever possible. In cases where consensus is lacking I would err on the side of caution letting existing policies stand until the community can find a consensus. Hypothetically if there were a situation where a policy change must be implemented, but the community is unable to reach consensus, I would work with the other mods to pick the option we thought best with the caveat that we know we are making the decision ourselves in the absence of consensus. Afterward the community can and should review the action taken by the mods to decide if we made the right choice. If we did, great keep it going, but if not, then we as a community go back to the original issue and try a different approach hoping to find consensus again. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2015-04-14T14:21:48.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5520" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-14T18:09:59.683" Score="3" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was put on hold as unclear what it's asking: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59485/how-should-i-change-the-star-trek-phaser-table&quot;&gt;How Should I Change the Star Trek Phaser Table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@doppelgreener Says in comments that this seems to be asking for (or would lead to) a discussion rather than an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if the people who put it On Hold had also explained how to fix it, that'd be constructive, but they don't seem to see a way to fix it, which baffles me a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the wording &quot;The question is, what changes would you suggest?&quot; were edited to &quot;Is there errata for this, or good house rules, or how can these inconsistencies be fixed or explained?&quot;, would this be acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me, that each of the specific points listed could be answered well with limited answers with concrete reasoning. There are only four questions with the Star Trek tag, and this is about one specific table in one game system. The question is about correcting the apparent inconsistencies, and not just a general call for alternate damage tables. So I don't see this resulting in a wild spew of opinion answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting this on hold prevents people answering it. It seems to me that while in theory questions of this type could lead to a variety of answers, that in this case, these are pretty limited and specific and would not have many divergent answers, especially if there is errata, or if anyone has ever played this game and was bothered by the same wonky table and fixed it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me counter-productive to block answers on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me like a case of what Moderator Election question #3 discusses:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also seems like a waste of time for me and others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should we suggest people go to other forums (e.g. forum.trek-rpg.net) instead? Or will links to specific other forums be edited out, so also be a waste of time, so we should just give up on using rpg.stackexchange unless we have a one-answer question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to me like a much more specific and limited question than many many questions which are left open on this site, about house rules, where various opinions are given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15412/do-weapons-damage-themselves&quot;&gt;Do weapons damage themselves?&lt;/a&gt; about Pathfinder. This question has many answers which are about people's opinions about possible house rules for determining if weapons are broken or damaged during regular use. Isn't that about 1000 times more wide open than this one about specific fixes to one damage table? Then there are of course all the questions under the house rules tag. Why is this one seen as any more wide-open than those? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-04-15T01:11:53.027" Title="Is it really wise to close this question?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|policy|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5520" CreationDate="2015-04-14T20:05:49.313" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The short answer to your question is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, your suggestion to change the wording to &quot;Is there errata for this, or good house rules, or how can these inconsistencies be fixed or explained&quot; is probably a good start into getting this question reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions with phrasing like &quot;what changes do you suggest&quot; are almost always going to be closed. Posters need a better goal than &quot;help me fix this.&quot; The question sets some of that up (better damage progression for energy used etc), but then undermines it by freely asking for suggestions. Asking for errata or well thought out house rules is an excellent fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the larger point of &quot;should this question be closed?&quot; I have to say that yes, it should be. It's a question that as of right now is better suited for a forum (it's an open call for house rules without a lot of detail on what and why you want them fixed). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast, the question you linked contains a very clear question about the rules. The fact that house rules are included &lt;em&gt;as parts of answers&lt;/em&gt; indicates a lack of presence of rules for the situation provided and a suggestion of alternate rules that might add additional realism if that's what the OP wants. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as guidance for helping new users workshop their questions into something more appropriate for the site, I cannot recommend our site chat highly enough. A few minutes in there is often all it takes to turn a salvageable question from something closed into something that can be reopened. You can find chat right &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2015-04-15T01:11:53.027" LastActivityDate="2015-04-15T01:11:53.027" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5522" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5520" CreationDate="2015-04-14T21:07:02.850" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was originally put on hold for being &lt;strong&gt;unclear&lt;/strong&gt;, as it lacked any indication of what answerers were supposed to do with the question. After being put on hold it was edited (yay, this is the system working as intended).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it's not attracting any reopen votes. Likely, this is because it is now &lt;strong&gt;primarily opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately the close reason can't easily be changed (without mod intervention). Fortunately, the new problem with the question has been well-explained in the comments by doppelgreener. That should be all the guidance necessary for the original poster to decide what to do with their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a fact that is both unfortunate and by design that not every question suits the SE voting system. Currently this is one of those that doesn't fit — on purpose, because SE does not aim to replace forums as a place to have discussions and throw around ideas. Forums are quite good at that too, so we don't actually have to feel too bad about marking such questions as off topic — they're fine questions, just not &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the reason why we must block answers, even though sometimes it might seem easier to &lt;em&gt;just help them already, why not?&lt;/em&gt; is because discussion is a distraction from the purpose of RPG.se, and that is the true waste of time. We don't aspire to attract and host excellent discussion, and from long experience we know that discussion drowns out the quality-focused Q&amp;amp;A that we do exist to host.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to avoid wasting everyone's time, we have procedures to quickly shut down questions that would waste the asker and answerers' time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could the question be edited to be on-topic? Sure. It could ask simply if there is errata, which would be a yes-or-no question. We won't generally do that for the asker though, since we can't read their mind to know if that is a question they care about the answers to. We try to leave it to askers to decide what to do with held questions. If they end up going elsewhere, that's okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-04-14T22:32:05.737" LastActivityDate="2015-04-14T22:32:05.737" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5498" CreationDate="2015-04-16T03:50:19.770" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two orthogonal issues here: whether to point out potential XY problems and whether to close potential XY problems. Question validity/answerability is relevant to the latter and a complete red herring for the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;What is the XY problem?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is part of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt;, and pointing out that it might be happening in a question is fine. &lt;strong&gt;Valid, answerable questions&lt;/strong&gt; are not magically safe from falling into this common problem-solving trap, so it remains kosher to suggest the possibility with a pointer to the FAQ (the purpose for which it was written).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's contentious, that's something to take up at the appropriate level: on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;Meta.SE question about it&lt;/a&gt; or in a fresh question on Meta.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a conversation to be had about how to diplomatically mention it, but that is apparently a conversation we're not ready to have yet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closing potential XY problems is a separate issue. Not all potential XY problems are unclear. Ultimately, casting a close vote or not is an individual judgement, just like casting a reopen vote is should you disagree with the result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Advising caution in casting close votes is legit, but we don't have a problem with lots of questions going through a contentious close-reopen cycle over this, so that's not a real issue that needs solving.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are orthogonal issues: the first can be an issue with a question when the second isn't, and vice versa. Keeping the two clear and separate should help reduce confusion and conflict over comments about the XY Problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-04-16T20:52:44.713" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5524" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5525" CreationDate="2015-04-16T14:18:33.253" Score="5" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm running a 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D campaign and one of the players asked to be an Asura from Guild Wars 2. By talking it through with the player, we decided to use the Tinker Gnome racial characteristics, with a couple of small tweaks. So far, so good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some point in the campaign, the Asura will be returning to its home plane. I'm not a Guild Wars 2 player, so I need to collect some information regarding Guild Wars 2. However, I'm looking for setting information specific to RPGs (monsters, cities, etc.), rather than any game guidance or tips.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would a question about where to find this information be on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3844" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:23:25.100" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:23:25.100" Title="Are questions about a fantasy video game setting on topic here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|video-games|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5524" CreationDate="2015-04-16T14:56:43.420" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can answer questions on offically published RPG settings because they are RPG materials but questions about settings completely beholden to other media are off-topic simply because the experts for those settings will exist on other SEs. Your example would be best served by Arqade because your actual question (story and setting issues in a GW2's world) is about something on topic there. Another example might be me wanting to run a version of Stargate in D&amp;amp;D 5e. If I had a question about how the various factions interact in the story of that setting Sci-fi &amp;amp; Fantasy could answer it, but not RPG.SE. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2015-04-16T14:56:43.420" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5526" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-16T23:39:17.917" Score="6" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange just debuted &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2015/04/two-new-user-pages-one-new-stat-this-ones-big/?cb=1&quot;&gt;new user profile pages&lt;/a&gt;, and they're pretty great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are they coming to RPG.se?  When?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-11-23T15:38:37.080" LastActivityDate="2015-11-23T15:38:37.080" Title="When are we getting the new user pages?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2015-11-24T18:47:58.563" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5526" CreationDate="2015-04-16T23:53:43.863" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are coming to all of SE, including RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These updates depend on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/253359/list-of-communities-with-base-css-updates-completed&quot;&gt;the rollout of a new CSS framework&lt;/a&gt;. We are apparently set up with that new framework (as evidenced by a recent bug in it that showed up here briefly), so it's just a matter of time before we also get the new pages code rollout.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm anxious for them too! They are pretty great.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of November 2015, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5912/a-design-update-is-coming&quot;&gt;they are imminent&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T18:31:53.373" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5528" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-17T16:26:26.710" Score="8" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before we begin, I'd like to say I've seen this meta question: - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4850/unanswered-questions-not-showing-up-in-that-list-because-of-a-single-upvote/4851#4851&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Unanswered&amp;quot; questions not showing up in that list because of a single upvote&lt;/a&gt; -&#xA;My question is related but different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been wondering for a while now why my question on main  - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59302/recognize-firefly-esque-sci-fi-scenario-with-minimalist-narrative-d6-system&quot;&gt;Recognize Firefly-esque sci-fi scenario with minimalist narrative d6 system?&lt;/a&gt; - isn't showing up in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/unanswered&quot;&gt;Unanswered questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my reading of the above meta question it should be, as the sole answer has 5 downvotes at the moment, and no upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a moment of paranoia I deleted my comment on the answer, as I wondered if a comment automatically showed some sort of condoning of the answer on my part, but it still hasn't turned up in Unanswered Questions. I also tried flagging the answer for deletion, but no joy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also tried the different filters, ie &quot;newest&quot; and &quot;no answer&quot;, but no show.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why is my question not showing in Unanswered Questions?&lt;/strong&gt; Is something broken? Or have the rules changed about answers needing to be upvoted to count as answers? Or something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously I'd like my answer to stay visible in Unanswered Questions so someone can, um, answer it someday.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20972" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-04-20T10:16:59.680" Title="Why is my question with only a downvoted answer not appearing in Unanswered Questions?" Tags="|bug|unanswered-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5529" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2015-04-18T20:28:26.067" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Onyx Path&lt;/em&gt; regularly make excellent blog posts about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/owod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;owod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;owod&lt;/a&gt;  games which make up the bulk of the content, but it's also the place for other games they own, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pugmire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pugmire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pugmire&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scarred-lands&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scarred-lands&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scarred-lands&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trinity-continuum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trinity-continuum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trinity-continuum&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cavaliers-of-mars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cavaliers-of-mars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cavaliers-of-mars&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They have the first look at new developments into all of these games, as well as taking part in open development there so you can impact what goes into games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/?feed=rss2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The feed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Excellent examples of why I think this is good blog to &lt;strong&gt;feed&lt;/strong&gt; off of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/beasthungers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;[BEAST]HUNGERS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a preview of one aspect of Onyx Path's new game Beast: The primordial. It's a teaser to get fans excited, but also an idea of what will be in the game, with the opportunity to discus on the OP forums, which the developers read and may incorporate into the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/hurt-locker-open-dev-dump-2/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;HURT LOCKER OPEN DEV DUMP #2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is another example of what I think is good quality content form the blog. It's a link to the first draft of merits and templates from the Hurt Locker book, provided in full in a google drive document. They don't call it &lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/category/projects/open-development-projects/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Open Development&lt;/a&gt; for nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/pregnancy-in-the-world-of-darkness/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;PREGNANCY IN THE WORLD OF DARKNESS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a reworking of content from the Demon: the Descent book Heirs to Hell, aimed at generalising pregnancy to be used in all of their systems. This kind of 'reworked' content is rarer but still good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They do also advertise when they release new products (from books to shirts) and when there is a sale on. Not sure if that is a plus or a minus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2015-04-21T22:40:06.343" LastActivityDate="2015-04-21T22:40:06.343" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-04-18T20:28:26.067" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5530" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5531" CreationDate="2015-04-21T10:34:39.697" Score="14" ViewCount="450" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, there is this (good) question about asking for a particular authoritative source. However, I believe there can be no answer either because of some fundamental problem with the framework or because any answer would be so subjective it would mean nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I leave a comment?  Well, no since it will be too long as I would need to justify my reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I answer the question?  Well, no since I do not have an authoritative source. On the other hand, a negation might be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we handle these questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-09T22:37:14.243" LastActivityDate="2018-07-09T22:37:14.243" Title="Whether to answer or not if one believes there is no answer possible" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5530" CreationDate="2015-04-21T12:52:20.653" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you can effectively support that the question is unanswerable, that is almost certainly &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt; fodder for a good answer: if you're drawing on cited material and/or personal experience as appropriate, and following the usual guidelines for good answers, you can give a great and useful response to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't have an answer yourself, and you &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; support a claim that the question is unanswerable, don't answer the question at all. &lt;strong&gt;It's okay for questions to sit unanswered&lt;/strong&gt; if nobody's yet come along who can provided a definitive response one way or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2015-04-21T12:52:20.653" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5530" CreationDate="2015-04-21T13:24:41.460" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you can prove there is no answer, answer in the negative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you just don't know, but think it unlikely, don't answer.  Unanswered questions are fine, if there is no answer - in fact, adding an answer with no useful information hurts the question as it removes it from unanswered views.  In this case I would delete your answer on the question you link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you desire to challenge the frame of the question, use the guidance in our XY Problem meta - but I see no grounds for that in this case. He wants a study about game genres and likely there isn't one. There's nothing wrong with that question frame.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-04-21T13:24:41.460" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5533" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-21T20:02:21.407" Score="21" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/2&quot;&gt;second moderator election&lt;/a&gt; has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the 2 new moderators are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/321&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/321.png&quot; alt=&quot;SevenSidedDie&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1084&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/1084.png&quot; alt=&quot;wax eagle&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They'll be joining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the existing crew&lt;/a&gt; shortly — please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/2&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.opavote.org/results/6237572061724672/0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;view a summary report online&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-04-21T20:02:21.407" Title="2015 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5534" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-22T20:05:58.273" Score="1" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just heard about a very strange feature for RPGs and I'd like to know who uses such a feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: Where is balancing an object on your head used in RPGs?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone told me a story about an RPG they saw where players had to balance an object on their head to see if their character succeeded at a task.  Is this a feature of a particular game out there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; it's a reasonable question, since it could have a clear, definitive answer.  Something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; That's from &lt;em&gt;Fireball Legends&lt;/em&gt;, an RPG published in the late 1980s.  The second edition of the game (1993) got rid of it, but the balancing-objects-on-your-head thing is still used by many &lt;em&gt;Fireball v2&lt;/em&gt; gaming groups today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a reasonable kind of question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-04-23T00:40:58.420" Title="I'd like to ask &quot;Who in the world of RPGs uses this very strange feature?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5535" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5534" CreationDate="2015-04-22T20:09:52.457" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do these kinds of questions, with caveats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The big cavaeat is that you need to have enough of a memory of a system to provide useful narrowing conventions. We don't have ESP so if there isn't much to go on, it's really hard for even the best RPG historians to figure out what you're looking for and find the right answer. These questions belong in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; tag and you can check out other question in that tag for some good examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the problem I'm having with this meta query is that the question you're referencing as bringing you to asking this question appears unrelated. You're asking about specific, group or org play level behavior, but the meta question is about a game element. It's a very different brand of question and there aren't many similarities. The question you've referenced is really broad and could potentially have hundreds of answers (and disparate ones like &quot;my group accepts any character from any edition&quot; to &quot;no that's not something that's done anywhere around me&quot; or &quot;yes, org play group X does this!&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2015-04-22T20:16:45.843" LastActivityDate="2015-04-22T20:16:45.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5536" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5537" CreationDate="2015-04-23T06:16:39.083" Score="11" ViewCount="237" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry to bring up something on meta after asking my first question on this site, but I'm somewhat puzzled at metric units being forcefully translated to feet and inches in my question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59989/how-to-leave-a-battle-in-dd-3-5&quot;&gt;How to leave a battle in D&amp;amp;D 3.5?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was done under the assumption that D&amp;amp;D uses only feet and inches. I've seen foreign translations of the D20 documents using metric units though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that american readers are more comfortable with feet than with meters; is this reason enough to edit out references to the metric system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user22511" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-04-23T08:04:59.827" Title="Should the metric system be avoided when referring D&amp;D 3.5?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5537" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5536" CreationDate="2015-04-23T06:35:39.263" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry, I made that edit and it wasn't intended to be quite as forceful as it appears it felt to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no rule about this, no. I can only offer my reasoning, and see if that seems reasonable to you:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since English is the language of this Stack, the English editions of games are almost always the authoritative reference. In English editions of D&amp;amp;D, measurements are exclusively in Imperial units such as feet (and rarely, yards and inches). Using the unit that's common to English editions of the game decreases the chance that people writing answers will misunderstand the measurement and answer incorrectly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's all I was thinking at the time: the foot is the standard unit in English D&amp;amp;D discussion, so converting to feet eliminates a source of error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably what would have been less forceful an edit, while also adding clarity, would have been for me to just add the distance in feet or even just squares after the distance in metres, so that it said &quot;~50 meters (~150 feet)&quot; or &quot;~50 meters (~30 squares)&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So no, we don't have a policy about this, and the edit was well-meaning but perhaps not ideal. You are very welcome to revert it using the edit history view (click &quot;edited [time] ago&quot;) or make a new edit to use both measurements side-by-side, whichever you think would be most useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-04-23T06:35:39.263" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5536" CreationDate="2015-04-23T06:35:42.050" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The English language publication of D&amp;amp;D uses feet and inches. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, all players of the English language version, regardless of their country's usual system of measurement, use the measurement system that the rules use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't comment on any other translations of the rules, as I haven't seen them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14988" LastActivityDate="2015-04-23T06:35:42.050" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5539" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-04-24T08:55:38.423" Score="3" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;Across StackExchange, I quite often use the commenting function when I want to add something that I feel may well be relevant to the poster, but doesn't answer his question (as asked) so will probably not be too relevant for future visitors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, recently, such a comment was removed from this site by a mod, which makes me feel this is not accepted commenting behavior on this site. I am not quite sure what to do if this comes up again. Let me expand on the example, as that will probably make it clearer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59920/what-to-do-when-players-bypass-plot-hooks&quot;&gt;What to do when players bypass plot hooks&lt;/a&gt; and the poster described how the plot hook he was having trouble with involved a drug user. I, then, commented on drug use with a small comment that I felt would possibly help him with this very plot hook he was having trouble with. However, it never attempted to deal with the larger issue or the general question, which was about plot hooks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment (along with a number of other comments) was removed and replaced with this comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please don't leave &quot;lite&quot; answers in the comments. If you feel you have material that should be preserved for the ages, either make a comment on an answer suggesting its addition or forge it into a proper answer — even a short one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another (meta) example would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5536/should-the-metric-system-be-avoided-when-referring-dd-3-5&quot;&gt;Should the metric system be avoided when referring D&amp;amp;D 3.5?&lt;/a&gt; where I would like to add a note explaining that an edit does not mean the original was wrong or should be avoided. It does not answer the question, nor request an edit to the question, but it does help the general understanding of the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In neither case I tried to &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; the question, so it wasn't an &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt;. It wasn't something that should have been in the question, so it wasn't a request for an edit. Then, should I not try to be helpful in situations like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-04-24T12:02:21.447" Title="Commenting on the background information" Tags="|support|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5540" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5539" CreationDate="2015-04-24T09:37:27.830" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's neither a question nor an answer, nor moving toward improving one of those things, the main-site Stack Exchange's formal Q&amp;amp;A structure doesn't really have a place for the idea. This is by design: the Stack sees that discussion and brain-storming are already done well by traditional forums, so this site wants to offer a form of interaction that they don't do well: structured, searchable, sorted-by-value Q&amp;amp;A. Part of doing that well is making it the only kind of interaction that's easy to have, so the value of the Stack Exchange model isn't drowned out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; get a bit more strict than some other Stacks about enforcing Exchange-wide comment policies, for a variety of reasons ranging from population size to citizen education and topic-specific experience learning. (There's a lot of history on the meta you can delve through if you're interested. In a nutshell, we've learned that tangential asides get out of hand really easily, bypass the Stack's sorting-and-searching mechanics so they can't help other in similar situations, and clutter up the page to obscure actual answers. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/4398&quot;&gt;There are a TON of great traditional RPG forums out there&lt;/a&gt;, so we should assume folks who come to us want the experience only the Stack offers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there IS a place on the Role-Playing Games Stack for citizens to give each other free-ranging advice about their campaigns: &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. The chat exists in part as a pressure valve for activities that, while pleasant and constructive, don't fit the Stack's streamlined vision or purpose. The specific querent you were hoping to help hangs out there semi-regularly, and we do consider it acceptable to leave a comment inviting a user to the chat--just delete the comment after they show up in the room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-04-24T11:51:38.700" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5539" CreationDate="2015-04-24T12:02:21.447" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This case is pretty illustrative of why we have the site comment policy we do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5164/definition-of-a-valid-comment&quot;&gt;Definition of a valid comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Your comment (&quot;Hey, people relapse&quot;) was duplicating information in a preexisting answer. Comment-answers are frankly often left by those not bothering to take the time to engage with the question, read the other answers, etc. and means that often their &quot;helpful ideas&quot; are of lower quality than the contributor thinks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There were 15 comments on that question already, most of them &quot;giving ideas.&quot; This is Stack Exchange, we don't want &quot;ideas,&quot; we want answers. Stealing screen real estate (an entire page, in this case) from real answers is bad form, so we delete them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The inclination to &quot;help someone&quot; is laudable.  Here, we expect that help to be done in a quality manner according to our format. Therefore, for a variety of reasons (see the links, not going to list them all again) we do not encourage idea generation, partial answers, etc. in comments, it's not what they for and in many cases they end up degrading the eventual answers in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-04-24T12:02:21.447" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5542" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5543" CreationDate="2015-04-27T03:42:17.827" Score="7" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;h3&gt;When/How many times should you link to a resource?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've never had this issue come up before, but when answering &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/60092/5891&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I kept referencing the same items repeatedly.  When that happens:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a recommended limit to how many times to link it?  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If only 1 link should be used is it 'proper' format to link the first time, or if it seems more important later is it acceptable to do so then?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5891" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-04-27T09:28:01.370" Title="How many times to link a resource?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5542" CreationDate="2015-04-27T04:16:11.237" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, there's no recommendation for this. It's not really a problem, so no need for guidance to avoid the non-problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Link as many times as is useful. One style (which Wikipedia uses) is to provide a link for the first instance of a keyword in a section, then skip the link for the rest of the instances in that section. Another style (often seen in technical or user help documentation) is to link every instance of a keyword. It's a matter of taste here, since we don't impose a site style guide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way to generate fewer link entries at the bottom, if this is a problem for you, is to reuse the same link if you've already used it. This won't make any difference for the reader, but could make a difference for you (saving time, or help you be less self-conscious about a tower of links). You can do this by noting in the editor what the &lt;code&gt;[n]&lt;/code&gt; after the link is, and reusing that number manually instead of using the new-link button at the top of the editor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the first time you link to &lt;code&gt;http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/harm.htm&lt;/code&gt;, use the new-link button. The second time you want to link to it, instead of using the button, just add it manually like so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;... this allows its [Harm][1] ability to be used...&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you forget what the number matching a URL is, you can always check at the bottom of the answer box to see what number the new-link button assigned to it originally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, rather, there's another way that skips the trouble of remembering what number is for what...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Skipping the numbers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're linking things repeatedly, you may want to replace the number (that &lt;code&gt;[1]&lt;/code&gt;) at the bottom of your editor with a name and use that instead of numbers. This makes it easier to remember since it's the name of the thing itself, but it means you can take a shortcut linking to the item itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;... this allows its [Harm] ability to be used...&#xA;&#xA;[harm]: http://example.com&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note you didn't even have to include the second square bracket for the link! You just threw square brackets around the word itself, which saves a lot of work. But you can still do that if you want:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;... And as for [that harm spell I mentioned][harm] ...&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But really, no need to worry. Links are free in terms of text real estate, and handy to have nearby the relevant text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-04-27T09:28:01.370" LastActivityDate="2015-04-27T09:28:01.370" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5545" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5546" CreationDate="2015-04-29T16:55:36.657" Score="7" ViewCount="354" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have concerns with the quality of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60341/which-translations-of-dd-3-5-use-meters&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D Translations question&lt;/a&gt; and the answers it has received so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see it is going to be virtually impossible to guarantee a complete list as required, as it would be necessary to have access to all available translations to be able to compile one. As things stand, I believe the question encourages answers such as those that has already been given, with a single language that meets the criteria in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is, this does not answer the question as stated, yet one of the answers has already received 3 votes. If we leave things as they are I can see it encouraging similar answers, each with a single language in, none of which by themselves actually answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that this is effectively a list question in disguise, and if it were more obvious then it would closed, yet it has received no VTC at all. Is there anything we can/should do about this? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-05-29T01:30:26.030" Title="Concerns over the D&amp;D Translations question" Tags="|discussion|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5545" CreationDate="2015-04-29T17:04:51.947" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, that's a (small) problem (and potentially a slightly larger precedent-setting one too). List questions can be a problem for a few reasons, most often due to being unbounded, but also if the answers will just be minor variations on each other, as here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, the actual &quot;problem&quot; is curiosity about how metric units work within the system, such as the size of grid squares and the listed weights of items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've edited the question to make it &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; ask about &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; translations use metric, as that's almost useless (even if it's a tiny bit useful, it's not a question that is suited to the SE format). I've made it instead a direct question about how the units are used in the system. This presumes that the metric-using translations all use metric similarly or identically, but my guess is that variations will be minor at best — and where they are different, that does merit a new answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That still leaves the answers. They should be editable to simply say how metric is used in &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; translation, the translation being used as an example of how d20 handles metric conversion, instead of just listing off a translation that checks the &quot;uses metric&quot; box.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, reviewing them in light of the edited question, they don't actually seem like they need edits. With the new &quot;how does metric work?&quot; focus of the question, in context they read as &quot;here's an example translation that does, and here's what it says about how metric works,&quot; rather than a submission to a crowdsourced list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-04-29T17:28:14.683" LastActivityDate="2015-04-29T17:28:14.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5174" CreationDate="2015-04-30T20:52:27.600" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There is no such thing as &quot;wrongfun.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it. We're done, thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What, you want more? Sorry, there's not much discussion needed. SE is about answers to questions. If you ask a question about a particular playstyle, that's one thing... but categorically, SE isn't about supporting or refuting any given playstyle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to petition for an &quot;old-schoolRPG.stackexchange.com&quot; or a &quot;RAW-optimizers.stackexchange.com&quot; or &quot;slapstickRPGstyle.stackexchange.com&quot; and hey... if you get it, then you can have your answers optimized to that playstyle. Otherwise, ask about what you want to know. If an answer doesn't fit due to the playstyle at your table being relevant, update the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15783" LastActivityDate="2015-04-30T20:52:27.600" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5548" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-04T05:18:35.760" Score="2" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;There were a lot of questions answered before the DMG came out that hypothesized about what it might include.  Now that the DMG is out, those answers might be wrong.  If it's obvious that they are, then one could just propose a new answer with the new information.  But what if you don't know if the answers are now wrong, but want people to take another look at the question in light of all the information we now have in the DMG?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The example I am thinking of right now is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50054/does-casting-a-spell-from-an-item-count-as-casting-a-spell&quot;&gt;Does casting a spell from an item allow you to apply class abilities that are used when casting a spell?&lt;/a&gt;, but I have actually wanted to get updated answers on other questions in the past as well.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The very related meta question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2960/whats-the-proper-way-to-ask-for-new-answers&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the proper way to ask for new answers?&lt;/a&gt;, suggests placing a bounty on the original question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if the new information in the DMG allows me to add more detail to the question as well, would it be proper to ask a new more detailed question, referencing the first?  (I would obviously try to make it not be a duplicate, but that could be iffy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If it makes a difference, the question in question is &quot;protected&quot;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12270" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-05-04T06:14:58.723" Title="How to ask people to re-answer a question in light of new information, when you're not sure if the answer has changed?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5548" CreationDate="2015-05-04T06:14:58.723" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Improve questions where possible. Place bounties or improve answers. Do not post duplicate questions for the sake of duplicating a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have already offered this advice here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5339/now-that-the-5e-dmg-is-released-what-is-the-best-approach-to-revisit-existing-q&quot;&gt;Now that the 5e DMG is released, what is the best approach to revisit existing questions?&lt;/a&gt; and the advice stands. If a question can be improved, improve it. It doesn't matter how old. If an answer can be improved, improve it. If you want other people to do this work, place a bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2015-05-04T06:14:58.723" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5550" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-04T07:59:02.477" Score="15" ViewCount="437" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/60547/8610&quot;&gt;Can I play D&amp;amp;D4E solo?&lt;/a&gt; seems to really need an answer recommending Wizards of the Coast's line of &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; Board Games (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0786958731&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Legend of Drizzt&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0786955708&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wrath of Ashardalon&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;), and a Comment was made suggesting exactly that. That Comment's gone now but I don't know if that's because the Comment should've been an answer or because the Comment suggested a board game or because comments are transitory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leads to this: When making a game recommendation, is an answer on topic if it recommends a game from a medium other than tabletop role-playing games?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a fictional example, were a question to ask...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I want a game that simulates duels between powerful wizards. Wizards have a limited number of spells they cast but &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; spells they can cast during combat are determined randomly, and uncast spells are saved for later casting. Further, such a game should involve summoning a wide variety of creatures that can be sent to attack an opposing wizards. I'd really like the game to have a detailed resource management system, and I'd like combat to become more spectacular the longer an engagement lasts because of spells that have been previously cast and remain in effect. What game would you recommend?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...would an answer remain on topic if it recommended &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T18:55:24.997" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T18:55:24.997" Title="Is an answer on topic if it recommends a game that isn't a role-playing game?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5550" CreationDate="2015-05-04T17:04:40.400" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it would not be on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our mandate is to give &lt;em&gt;RPG&lt;/em&gt; expertise. A non-RPG might be the right answer — or it might not, and our voting scheme would be untrustworthy to determine which. We aren't collectively experts on non-RPGs (even when some of us are &lt;em&gt;individually&lt;/em&gt;) and our site's premise means that non-RPG advice comes with no assurances that it is any good:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;our community of voters is not expected to be able to properly vote on non-RPG answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;we don't expect answers to generate a variety of non-RPG alternatives so that the best non-RPG answer floats to the top&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;people searching for quality non-RPG answers will not think to come here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the feedback loop that ensures quality in RPG matters does not function (or worse, malfunctions) when it comes to material outside of our topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Non-RPG answers to RPG questions are off topic, because they break the system, for the same reasons that answers based primarily on opinion rather than expertise break the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-05-04T17:04:40.400" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5550" CreationDate="2015-05-04T20:07:23.117" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you assume good faith, and that the question itself is on-topic, then there is an implied (role playing) before every instance of the word &amp;quot;game&amp;quot; in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want a [role playing] game that simulates duels between powerful wizards. Wizards have a limited number of spells they cast but which spells they can cast during combat are determined randomly, and uncast spells are saved for later casting. Further, such a game should involve summoning a wide variety of creatures that can be sent to attack an opposing wizards. I'd really like the [role playing] game to have a detailed resource management system, and I'd like combat to become more spectacular the longer an engagement lasts because of spells that have been previously cast and remain in effect. What [role playing] game would you recommend?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Magic: the Gathering&lt;/em&gt;, while an excellent game, does not satisfy these requirements as it is not a role playing game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; assume that they are looking for a role playing game, then you are either assuming bad faith on the part of the asker or that their question is off topic. In the first case, you shouldn't answer the question, and in the second you should vote to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Exception&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even with good faith there are still times when a non-role playing game could be the best solution for the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps after talking with the user you've determined that they are so unrelentingly hack-and-slash that they would never use improvisational rules. Or that they're so whimsical that they feel the need to add role playing elements to their games of Monopoly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or perhaps you yourself have a way of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/casual-related-formats/homebrew-variant-formats/508938-mtrpg-magic-the-role-playing-game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;bolting a role playing module on to the game&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case go ahead, but treat it as a frame breaking answer. You are subverting a key requirement of their question, and you should cover the reasons thoroughly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Real Problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what about those D&amp;amp;D board games? While they do a fine job of streamlining the combat mechanics, they are simply not role playing games. Playing the D&amp;amp;D board game solo is not the same as playing D&amp;amp;D solo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you were to recommend them in this case, then you would need to provide an answer that is useful to someone who is looking to play the actual game solo. At a bare minimum, this would be notes on what's missing from the board game experience. You would also likely want to include experiences adding role playing elements to the board game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-05-09T15:34:36.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5554" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-06T03:49:03.807" Score="5" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;Via several comments, downvotes, and meta posts such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4754/84&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/782/84&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, I get the impression that people would rather not be answering basic questions on this site, especially ones that can be answered directly by quoting source material. Complicated questions certainly get the most play, discussion, and longest-winded answers. But basic questions, ones that can be answered by direct quotes out of the rulebooks, seem to get flak and &quot;RTFM&quot; comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This runs contrary to everything in my veins, so I'd like to bring it up for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before StackOverflow started, I listened to Joel and Jeff's podcasts. I distinctly remember their opinion at the time being &quot;accept all questions, even easy ones.&quot; The goal of StackOverflow was to become the #1 site for programming knowledge on the internet (which they have done). While they did want to encourage expert-level questions and answers of course, intro-level questions were also highly sought after to bring in newcomers and be great for search results. It seemed that as the greater StackExchange network started up, the opinion was distinctly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; &quot;we are one Q&amp;amp;A site of many for this topic&quot; but rather &quot;we are the best Q&amp;amp;A site for this topic.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/782/84&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;Area 51 FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, and I get the impression people think this site should be experts-only. &lt;strong&gt;I do not read it that way;&lt;/strong&gt; my impression is that the site should not just deep dive into RPGs and be expert-friendly, but quite simply be the best Q&amp;amp;A resource for RPGs that exists, usable by experts and newcomers alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what kind of community is this? Do we want expert questions only, do we want to accept all sorts, or something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast, I feel that &lt;a href=&quot;http://gaming.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt; is currently far more accepting of basic questions than this site. Clearly my opinion is that basic questions should be accepted with open arms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="84" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-23T08:34:40.643" LastActivityDate="2021-07-23T08:34:40.643" Title="Are basic questions frowned upon here? Should they be?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5555" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5554" CreationDate="2015-05-06T04:00:24.647" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you hover over the downvote button, you can see the following text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question does not show any research effort&lt;/strong&gt;; it is unclear or not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there's a definite recommendation from the site to downvote questions which show a lack of research effort. This doesn't rule out any and all beginner questions; if someone posts their question, includes where they have looked for the answer, why what they've looked at doesn't answer their question, and why they are confused about what they have looked at, their question is a perfectly good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, we don't have a close vote reason that mentions trivial questions or lack of research effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the conclusion is pretty simple: We should downvote questions that show a lack of research effort, but we shouldn't close them, which means they are there to be answered. Answers are judged on their own merits as per usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see this taking place on questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58472/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; one or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/60252/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; one: they are heavily downvoted, but they have good, upvoted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't apply to any and all beginner questions; if someone posts their question, includes where they have looked for the answer, why what they've looked at doesn't answer their question, and why they are confused about what they have looked at, their question is a perfectly good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46516/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question is pretty trivial to answer, but the querent had clearly looked at what there was to look at and was still confused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-05-06T04:07:10.683" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5550" CreationDate="2015-05-07T14:42:16.560" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If communicating it in a comment isn't appropriate because it should be an answer, then the answer's on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is off topic, then the comment shouldn't be an answer and should stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I stand persuaded that answering the question with a non RPG would be off topic. But it's still useful information the would be of value to querent. The most appropriate way to communicate the information would seem to be a comment. Otherwise you're saying that one user who knows how to help another user shouldn't be able to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14649" LastActivityDate="2015-05-07T14:42:16.560" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5550" CreationDate="2015-05-09T02:49:56.883" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suggesting a non-RPG wouldn't be on topic as an entire answer, for the reasons discussed in other answers here, but I don't think there's anything wrong with putting that suggestion in an answer that &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; suggests the best matching RPG you can think of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;SomeRPG is about as close as you're going to get, for these reasons: ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;However, your best bet might not even be an RPG. There's a card game called Magic: The Gathering, and it would be even better than SomeRPG, because ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastActivityDate="2015-05-09T02:49:56.883" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5559" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5561" CreationDate="2015-05-12T08:04:56.940" Score="7" ViewCount="366" Body="&lt;p&gt;It kind of rubs me the wrong way when I see a question posted with a title that's not actually a (properly formatted) question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mild example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/61800/10682&quot;&gt;Pack Flanking on non Hunter Character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Worse: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/60634/1&quot;&gt;Reversing AC rolls?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*&lt;em&gt;cringe&lt;/em&gt;*: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/61767/10682&quot;&gt;Magic Jar without a receptacle&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, as much as it tickles &lt;strong&gt;me&lt;/strong&gt;, are these titles bad? Maybe it bothers me because I'm a fan of the Q&amp;amp;A format, but I get triggered because I don't see a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking the &lt;em&gt;Magic Jar without a receptacle&lt;/em&gt; title, it doesn't tell me what the question is without clicking through to the Q page, other than it's probably about a Magic Jar that has no receptacle. So what about it? What is the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the question &lt;em&gt;title&lt;/em&gt; reflect the core question of the question's post? Should that title be formatted as a question, or is it okay if it's a statement, or even just a bunch of keywords?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-05T06:06:06.003" LastActivityDate="2022-02-28T18:38:05.690" Title="Should question titles be formatted as a question?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5560" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5559" CreationDate="2015-05-12T08:15:09.657" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;We encourage people to edit questions to improve them. Making titles more clear is an improvement that can always be reverted by the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-05-12T08:15:09.657" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5559" CreationDate="2015-05-12T20:40:07.780" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Titles should clearly represent the content of the post&lt;/strong&gt;, yes. We need to be able to find them later, and they should be good front-page advertisements for their question. &lt;strong&gt;But they need not be phrased as a question so long as they are clear.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Titles are just that: titles. A title's first job is to succinctly inform the reader about the contents of the post, and being a full sentence is way down the list in a title's job description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially for questions, making a title into a full question-sentence can add a lot of extra baggage (in the form of &quot;question words&quot; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxiliary_verb&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;auxiliary verbs&lt;/a&gt;) that actually impairs its clarity in the list of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the ruling consideration is that we should always &lt;strong&gt;make sure titles are as clear and informative as possible&lt;/strong&gt;. That means that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it is currently unclear what the post is actually about, then edit the title to be clearer. This may (or may not) mean turning it into a question and/or full sentence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Odd as it might seem, the best test I've found for this is “is there a verb?” Uninformative titles often lack a verb describing how the other words relate, and editing to accommodate a verb of some sort (discovered by studying the actual question) usually makes the title significantly more descriptive and informative, (sometimes even without making them full sentences or questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/101814/revisions&quot;&gt;Here's an example of an edit&lt;/a&gt; where a bit more information significantly improves the understandability of the title:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;Druid and Ancient Guardian Archetype&lt;/s&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Does a 2nd level Ancient Guardian druid have Woodland Stride?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the title is already plenty clear and informative, and turning it into a question would not make it more clear, then the change is superfluous and it's best to leave the title alone. The only purpose for the edit then would be to satisfy a personal aesthetic, which is a poor reason to edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The possible exception is when you're already editing other parts of the post: then a title that works equally well as a sentence or non-sentence can be edited as part of the deal. It's already going to be bumped anyway. Just make sure it's not &lt;em&gt;purely&lt;/em&gt; a personal aesthetic change.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the title is already plenty clear and informative, and turning it into a question would make it &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; clear, definitely leave it be. The title is already doing its job and we want it to keep doing its job as best it can.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are my personal guidelines, which have been developed by trial and error (plenty of error) over the years as the most active editor on RPG.se. At first I too wanted to make every title a proper sentence in the form of a question, but I quickly found that this did not actually help the site! A front page full of posts that begin with the same few question words (&quot;How do I&amp;hellip;&quot;, &quot;What is the&amp;hellip;&quot;) actually makes it harder to scan and find posts of interest. I realised that clarity and informativity were much more important goals, and that led to this three-step evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-05T03:54:33.143" LastActivityDate="2018-09-05T03:54:33.143" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5562" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-12T20:52:13.443" Score="1" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;I edited this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50054/does-casting-a-spell-from-an-item-allow-you-to-apply-class-abilities-that-are-us&quot;&gt;Does casting a spell from an item allow you to apply class abilities that are used when casting a spell?&lt;/a&gt; and placed a bounty.  No new answers have been offered.  The only person who has really made any contribution is Dyndrilliac who edited prior answers.  The OP, although active on the site, has shown no interest.  Is there any way I can award the bounty to Dyndrilliac, who is the only person who contributed anything of use since the bounty was posted?  If not I will just let the bounty expire unawarded.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12270" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-05-12T22:43:32.630" Title="Any way to award a bounty to an editor?" Tags="|discussion|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5562" CreationDate="2015-05-12T21:06:04.323" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bounty can only go to one of the answers and its owner, so there's no way to give it to a helpful editor. I suppose you could persuade them to write their own answer, and then you would be able to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you don't awared the bounty, half its value will automatically be awarded to the top-voted positive-scored answer at the time that was posted during the bounty period. If nothing meets those criteria it vanishes.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the plus side, the bounty &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; do its job of improving the answers. And an editor who helps to improve others' answers is usually doing it for their own satisfaction, since there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/3/editor&quot;&gt;only&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/12/strunk-white&quot;&gt;a few&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/33/copy-editor&quot;&gt;rewards&lt;/a&gt; for editing. So really, everyone still wins. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-05-12T22:43:32.630" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5564" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-13T03:56:40.153" Score="-1" ViewCount="686" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a site about Role-Playing Games.  We are experts on Role-Playing Games.  There is a sickening number of questions about law, that are only tangentially related to games, and they are being treated as on topic.  This is &lt;strong&gt;highly&lt;/strong&gt; problematic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The questions are almost always far too broad.  'Is this a violation of copyright?'  Where?  In what country?  Under what law?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are only tangentially related to role playing games anyways.  Every single one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/copyright&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;copyright&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;copyright&lt;/a&gt; questions could be re-posted, swapping a role playing property for some other media, and get the same answers.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We are literally giving legal advice without being lawyers.  I am not a lawyer, but I understand that it's probably not a good idea for us to be doing that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the first two points alone, they should be closed, but aren't currently.  The last point explicitly spells out that &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We Are Not Legal Experts&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.  Why are we answering questions for which we are not experts?  These questions are painfully off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; - With the exception of one question that I cannot figure out the reason for being tagged as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-10-28T12:48:19.850" LastActivityDate="2021-01-13T16:25:03.237" Title="We are not lawyers. Why do we allow law topics?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|legal-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5565" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5564" CreationDate="2015-05-13T04:17:26.603" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because, despite what some lawyers might like most of us believe, it's not actually illegal, counter to good sense, or constituting practising law without a license for creators and users of copyrighted materials to share their knowledge about copyright and how it impacts their works and uses of such works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Publishing is on topic, and copyright (and trademarks and patents) is an integral part of RPG publishing and licensing. Since publishing is explicitly on topic, that aspect of publishing is part of our topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's really all there is to why we host such questions. You cannot be a content creator in this day and age without familiarity with copyright issues, and due to the vigorous creative reuse of materials, it's hard to even be a mere user of RPG materials without being exposed to copyright issues (especially in the last 15 years, with the rise of the OGL and the OSR).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The questions are almost always far too broad. 'Is this a violation of copyright?' Where? In what country? Under what law?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost never too broad. Copyright laws are widely harmonised (for better or worse) among Berne Convention countries. Being the Internet, it's also nearly impossible for a Berne Convention signatory to not be involved in any given RPG publishing situation. So, it's actually usually pretty clear what copyright regime is relevant to a question about copyright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Every single one of the copyright questions could be re-posted, swapping a role playing property for some other media, and get the same answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the contrary, our answers are almost always extremely pragmatic—that is, they are focused on the &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; issues that a real RPG publisher has to be concerned about, which are not universal and are particular to the RPG publishing environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We are literally giving legal advice without being lawyers. I am not a lawyer, but I understand that it's probably not a good idea for us to be doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a widespread myth. The only way to violate the prohibition against practicing law without a license is to mislead your audience into believing you are a lawyer. We haven't had a problem with that, and our community moderation tools are sufficient to the task, in the unlikely case that we ever do have that problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-05-13T04:17:26.603" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5559" CreationDate="2015-05-13T19:11:27.983" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; “problem” with a question is that its title is not phrased in the form of a question, then &lt;em&gt;there is no problem with the question.&lt;/em&gt; Please do &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; clutter the top of the site with idiosyncratic edits that do not improve anything. A title in the form of a question is not inherently better than a title that is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, if there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; anything wrong with the question, an edit is always appropriate. Improvements are always welcome. Many titles are unclear, or imply something other than what the body of the question actually asks. Editing these to make them clearer is a very good thing. And if the form of a question allows the title to be more clear and accurate, then it should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-05-13T19:11:27.983" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-05-14T06:43:22.447" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pbMUEHvoAo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ehI3v.png&quot; alt=&quot;Speak Friend and Enter; don&amp;#39;t forget to Be Nice&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2015-05-14T06:53:27.223" LastActivityDate="2015-05-14T06:53:27.223" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-05-14T06:43:22.447" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5568" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5550" CreationDate="2015-05-15T13:31:16.497" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The line that differenciates an RPG from a non-RPG is quite thin and very much relies on the play style of the group. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are enough groups out there (and sometimes, this includes mine) that uses an RPG book and rules for a brainless hack-and-slash dungeon crawl. It's mindless fun. Is it roleplaying? Only because that's printed on the front of the book. Besides saying &lt;em&gt;I hit the orc&lt;/em&gt; instead of &lt;em&gt;my plastic figure hits the orc&lt;/em&gt; there really is no &quot;roleplaying&quot; involved on those adventures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are huge communities that are so narrowly focussed on the mechanical side, that I'd not call them &quot;roleplayers&quot;. They don't actually play roles, they use RPGs as a min-max optimization theory playground. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yet, this is roleplaying. Who am I to tell them their style is not roleplaying. They are using the rules, they bought the books, they are &lt;em&gt;roleplaying&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other side of it are for example board or card games. Their natural style in turn would be to be optimized mechanically, to play a fast round of mindless fun without identifying with playing pieces or cards. And yet, with the right group, such a game can be more roleplaying than any of the RPGs with a group that's not set for roleplaying. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because &lt;em&gt;roleplaying&lt;/em&gt; is &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; you play the game. Regardless of rules. As long as there is no rule &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt; roleplaying, you could probably roleplay a tycoon using a monopoly board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, suggesting something that is not officially a roleplaying game is not exactly on topic, but who decides what a roleplaying game &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;? There is no official body that would put a stamp of approval on products to mark them as &quot;officially roleplaying material&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think suggestions that do not have roleplaying in their title should include a description on what to do to make it a roleplaying experience, but other than that, I think it's a matter of up and downvoting, not something that should be closed or flagged. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2015-05-15T13:31:16.497" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5559" CreationDate="2015-05-15T18:44:43.577" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I largely agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5559/should-question-titles-be-formatted-as-a-question/5561#5561&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie's answer&lt;/a&gt;. However, I wrote a long comment about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/61767/magic-jar-without-a-receptacle&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;magic jar&lt;/em&gt; question&lt;/a&gt; you linked to, but decided it made more sense as an answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I read the &lt;em&gt;magic jar&lt;/em&gt; question, and there's nothing wrong with the title, but instead something wrong with the question. The question doesn't &lt;em&gt;contain&lt;/em&gt; one specific question. It's just asking for general information about how &lt;em&gt;magic jar&lt;/em&gt; effects work without a receptacle and asks several questions to elucidate the confusion, in which case the title perfectly captures the content.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you wanted to edit the question so that it focused more on the question that was answered: &amp;quot;Is it possible to instantly kill an enemy or yourself with this ability, as the life force has no where to go?&amp;quot;, then it would make sense to edit the title to match.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if you see a title that is not a question and you want to fix it, perhaps you should read the question itself and see if it actually matches, as there may be other more substantive issues that need resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-28T18:38:05.690" LastActivityDate="2022-02-28T18:38:05.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5559" CreationDate="2015-05-16T08:16:50.043" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Thanks for clarifying.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No,&lt;/strong&gt; titles do not need to be formatted as questions. They just need to communicate well what the question is about. They're titles! If you want to know what the question is, &lt;em&gt;read the question body.&lt;/em&gt; That's the place where all the important context is, too, and you should be reading that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you're not, you're answering the title alone, and that is bad practice and a fast way to create an unhelpful answer. Either it will be obvious you didn't read, or you'll just miss all the important details and create an answer vastly inferior to what you could have created.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But, as much as it tickles me, are these titles bad? Maybe it bothers me because I'm a fan of the Q&amp;amp;A format, but I get triggered because I don't see a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're not great, but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; because they're not full questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Reversing AC rolls?&quot; is a confusing title: what's an AC roll, what's this concept of 'reversing' it? Really, this question is about going from a model of attack rolls vs AC to attacks vs an AC roll, to be in line with saving throws, so the new title &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/60634/&quot;&gt;What are the implications of using AC rolls for defense?&lt;/a&gt; is clearer. If I were looking for that kind of thing in search results, I'd be grabbed by the new title, but not the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other two titles are, also, each just a couple of words away from something more thoroughly communicative. That turns that into an easy improvement. &quot;Pack Flanking on non Hunter Character?&quot; - what about it? It's an easy shot to edit that into the exact nature of what's being engaged in: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/61800/how-can-i-get-pack-flanking-on-a-non-hunter-character&quot;&gt;How can I get Pack Flanking on a non-Hunter character?&lt;/a&gt;. I also like seeing titles that makes sense on their own and use decent grammar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The improvements here &lt;em&gt;are not&lt;/em&gt; because we're turning those into questions. We could turn them into statements if we wanted to. The improvement will be that we're making them more communicative. If putting a brief question in the title helps communication, so be it, but &lt;strong&gt;titles that are statements&lt;/strong&gt; are not incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in summation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should the question title reflect the core question of the question's post? Should that title be formatted as a question, or is it okay if it's a statement, or even just a bunch of keywords?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; reflect the core of the question. It is okay whether it is a question or a statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a title communicates poorly it should be improved. Titles that are just a bunch of keywords usually communicate poorly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit to improve communication of what the question's about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't expect a title to contain the entirety of the question. If you want to know what the question is truly, you should read the question body. The title just needs to communicate what the inquiry is about, and statements do that just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-05-17T04:11:37.310" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5571" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-05-18T00:19:02.897" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://mythology.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pa2rN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Join Mythology Stack Exchange and meet the original dungeon crawler&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user22938" LastActivityDate="2015-05-18T00:19:02.897" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-05-18T00:19:02.897" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5572" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5573" CreationDate="2015-05-19T15:31:39.693" Score="5" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;I occasionally use the Stack Exchange app for iOS when reading or answering questions on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hold the phone in my left hand and scroll with my thumb along the left side of the screen. This detail turns out to be important because I discovered today that my scrolling errantly triggered a vote on an answer. What is worse, it was a downvote on an answer I would normally upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I discovered the error just under an hour after the vote had been issued. By this time, attempts to change the vote result in an error message stating &quot;You last voted on this answer 52 minutes ago. Your vote is now locked in unless this answer is edited.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, I find this feature a little disconcerting. While I can imagine the reasons behind the restriction--those reasons are not really important for this question--I am disappointed that I appear to have no anonymous recourse to change my vote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do I comment to the answerer an embarrassing: &lt;em&gt;&quot;Sorry, I have fat thumbs. If you'll waste your time making an unimportant edit, I'll remove my errant downvote?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do I shrug and sigh &lt;em&gt;&quot;C'est la vis&quot;&lt;/em&gt; and hope that the community overthrows my errant vote with a tide of upvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or do I take it to meta?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, here I am. Do I have any reasonable recourse to fix errant votes such as this one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19718" LastActivityDate="2015-05-20T03:31:11.243" Title="How best to address the problem of fat thumbs" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5573" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5572" CreationDate="2015-05-19T16:33:03.470" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your only courses of action are to suggest an edit so that you can change your vote or leave a comment asking for a small edit in order to change your vote. There is not an anonymous recourse available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an unfortunate side effect of the vote locking, a system that was put in place to prevent what's called &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22771/the-answer-to-tactical-downvoting-problem/22776#22776&quot;&gt;tactical downvoting&lt;/a&gt;&quot; wherein a user downvotes an otherwise good answer because they have a similar competing answer that will attract more upvotes if the other answers are downvoted. Waffles posted some numbers in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/55898/170797&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, there is, as of the last time &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/126044/remove-vote-locking-for-high-privilege-users&quot;&gt;it was raised&lt;/a&gt;, little interest in modifying this feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the advent of the mobile site, and the ability to upvote/downvote from mobile and the increased possibility of fat fingers in the mobile interface, it may be time to re-raise the issue. I'm going to leave your post here for the time being (Rather than migrating it to Meta.SE). However, I encourage you to raise it as a feature request there highlighting specifically the issues with the mobile interface that may necessitate a reexamination of this policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-05-19T16:33:03.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5574" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-19T22:13:44.330" Score="-7" ViewCount="257" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the Role-playing games forum someone recently asked about possible usage of fictional D&amp;amp;D spell &quot;Friends&quot; which allows caster to charm someone for up to a minute, but such person will later remember the fact that it was coerced. One of the answers was suggesting &quot;Charm guard, tell him to give you the password and then kill him so he won't rise alarm after the spell wears off&quot;. I've suggested &quot;get brief affection of bar wench without paying&quot; (for which someone joked &quot;how much affection can you get in one minute?&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why was I suspended and my comments subject to such censure?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15881" LastEditorUserId="760" LastEditDate="2015-05-21T01:53:21.623" LastActivityDate="2015-05-21T13:21:45.250" Title="What is &quot;appropriate&quot;" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5572" CreationDate="2015-05-20T03:31:11.243" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do I shrug and sigh &quot;C'est la vis&quot; and hope that the community overthrows my errant vote with a tide of upvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure. I misvote sometimes. Everyone misvotes occasionally, 'cause they clicked the wrong part of the page without noticing, the wrong button while they were sleepy, they held their phone or tablet wrong, their finger or thumb touched something while they were looking away or shifting their grip, etc. This isn't limited to or caused by the mobile app, it's just a thing that happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Though scrolling with your left thumb on the mobile app would &lt;em&gt;help&lt;/em&gt; it happen. Sounds like they could improve interaction with the voting buttons to make doing that by accident less likely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All sites have a bit of baseline voting noise, consider yourself to have added a minute amount to it. It's relatively harmless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; get a tide of upvotes overriding your single downvote. Likewise bad answers will get downvotes overriding your single upvote. A single vote alone by design has a low amount of impact in this Q&amp;amp;A system, except for borderline or highly contentious material, which will go the way it goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it really bothers you, leave a comment or suggest an edit. I suggest you only let it bother you for the exceptional answers that are really worth the attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-05-20T03:31:11.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5576" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-20T23:18:22.440" Score="1" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;I flagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28599/whats-the-up-side-of-aquatic-campaigns-in-pathfinder/62292#62292&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; as NAA because, like the commenters, I consider link-only answers to not actually be answers in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My flag was declined, and to add insult to injury, declined &lt;em&gt;by a diamond&lt;/em&gt; (&quot;a moderator reviewed your flag, but found no evidence to support it&quot;). (Presumably the LQRQ moved too slowly on it and it leaked into the mod queue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I completely off-base, or is this just one of those unfortunate glitches that we have to live with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-05-22T03:17:26.390" Title="NAA flag for link-only answer declined by moderator?" Tags="|discussion|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5576" CreationDate="2015-05-20T23:36:17.477" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the time of the flag the answer had a comment (from me) requesting the user expand the answer, and very little time had passed. The community of users able to vote for deletion had not cast any votes to delete it, and there were no spam flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The non-mod community has tools to handle this too, and so far hadn't seen the need to. If the poster doesn't react to the request today or tomorrow though, it will probably be deleted as unlikely to ever be fixed, with a note left indicating that it may be restored if it's ever fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The decline isn't a black mark or a judgement against the flagger. It was a flag that didn't need submitting, is all: a mod was already visibly involved and a flag asking for mod involvement was superfluous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-05-20T23:36:17.477" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5578" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5574" CreationDate="2015-05-21T01:59:52.987" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments joking about rape are in violation of our Be Nice policy. As BESW said on your other meta question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The Stack's policies on acceptable content are derived from the wider norms of the society in which it operates: a society more comfortable with explicit violence than with explicit sexuality--and which regards sexual violence as an especially sensitive topic. A Stack meta post is not a useful place to challenge societal norms. (You'll also want to notice that SSD is not saying you were justifying real-life sexual assault--you're just defending making jokes about it--but that your meta posts effectively invite others to do so.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not an appropriate venue for joking about sexual assault. This is not an appropriate venue for figuring out what constitutes joking about sexual assault. This is not an appropriate venue for figuring out where the lines of decency are drawn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were suspended because it, hopefully, would give you a cooling off period such that you could rejoin us in answering questions about RPGs without involving the stack in moral debates that are both outside scope and decency. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-05-21T01:59:52.987" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5574" CreationDate="2015-05-21T11:40:23.717" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's just post the comments in question here, shall we? So we &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; know what we're talking about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LrLZJ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could have just said &amp;quot;It's an easy way to earn her affection if you have no other means.&amp;quot; You jumped right into getting laid, having a 'peek' and then &lt;em&gt;you, yourself&lt;/em&gt; conceded that the waters were getting pretty muddy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No one needs to read that garbage on our sites. Ever. Never ever ever.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; You're obviously not without the means to recognize territory that others would call offensive &lt;em&gt;and you ignored the warnings that you received&lt;/em&gt;. Do not use jokes in poor taste that were subsequently posted by others as evidence that it was a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; idea to write that crap, it wasn't, and I'm not going to entertain anything suggesting that it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If what you write on our sites can be construed by an average, reasonable person as being offensive, &lt;em&gt;we remove it&lt;/em&gt;. It's not censorship, it's us having positively no obligation to host it on our servers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You do raise kind of an interesting point, however.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's all kinds of crazy stuff in games. You have things that eat babies, people babies eat, there's no limit to the bizarre. Folks have a good faith assumption that you're speaking in the context of the game, to the extent necessary to ask or answer a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your comments broke that assumption, which is why you got the reaction that you did. What you typed reminded me of a woman walking past a group of young men and loud cat-calling that followed. That's how it came off to me, and I don't want that on our sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone pulls you aside and tells you &amp;quot;that's over the top&amp;quot;, a good default reaction is to listen to them until you've had some time to think about it, even if you're not immediately certain where they're coming from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7607" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-05-21T13:21:45.250" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5576" CreationDate="2015-05-22T03:17:26.390" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bad answer is not &quot;not an answer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been declining a lot of NAA flags lately.  In general I tend to err on the side of declining as helpful, but I start declining as not helpful if I want folks to get the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something completely off topic, or &quot;a related question,&quot; or a miscellaneous comment is not an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A partial answer, an answer you don't feel is substantiated well, etc. is an answer. There are exceptions (non-Good Subjective answers on game-recs and other opiniony questions) but in general if an answer is probably an edit away from being a good answer, it's certainly not &quot;not an answer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-05-22T03:17:26.390" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5581" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5582" CreationDate="2015-05-24T23:16:58.947" Score="2" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should we have a dedicated tag for Pathfinder Unchained in addition to a tag for regular Pathfinder?  Or are the two systems close enough that a separate tag isn't needed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-05-26T00:46:09.307" LastActivityDate="2015-05-30T13:16:34.793" Title="Should we have a [pathfinder-unchained] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5582" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5581" CreationDate="2015-05-24T23:28:58.180" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;On RPG.SE tags are emergent not prescribed.  If there are enough Unchained questions, and if a tag becomes necessary to distinguish them, then we might have one.  In general we avoid subsystem fiddly tags unless there is a critical mass that makes them worth it.  So &quot;no, unless we get a batch of questions that use it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also not a centralized decision. If you have more than a token amount of rep, you can add a new tag to your own question.  If that tag gets used on more than one question, it'll stay around (solo tags get reaped after a time period). And lo, a new tag is born. Just because there is a tag doesn't mean someone has to use it - even if a pathfinder-unchained tag were to be created, someone could ask an unchained question without it just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More specifically to this case, we tend to look down on creating tags for one specific sourcebook for one specific game. There's thousands of games and many of them have books full of rules and/or optional rules, we prefer the &quot;use your words&quot; approach and not having 200 pathfinder tags, 50 shadowrun tags, etc. each with a specific product name in them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-05-30T13:16:34.793" LastActivityDate="2015-05-30T13:16:34.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5583" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-05-25T07:57:29.013" Score="13" ViewCount="292" Body="&lt;p&gt;My answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62442/696&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was deleted. Another answer, similar to mine (no actual experience w/ Harry Potter setting, experience w/ campaign similar to the one described), remains.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the difference? If I add a bunch of links to HP implementations that I haven't actually tried (as the surviving answer does), is that really it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm surprised at this point to find my game-rec answer under fire. I took the criteria one-by-one and have actual play experience, noted what would probably need work, and generally felt like it was a solid answer - and so did several upvoters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So is it really a bunch of links that's at issue here or am I really missing something crucial?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-05-27T03:52:53.430" Title="Two Answers - One Deleted - What's the difference?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5583" CreationDate="2015-05-25T08:20:15.457" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's absolutely crucial that game-rec questions draw on experience (your own or someone else's) with the querent's criteria. In your answer I see your experience with DFRPG, but no mention of having used DFRPG for Harry Potter games. That's really important, because otherwise your answer--no matter how accurate or useful--is hard to differentiate from unsupported speculation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other answer appears to provide specific links to using Savage Worlds for Harry Potter games and cites personal experience with games that share specific elements with that concept; I haven't looked at the links closely, but it passes the smell test. It might be a terrible answer (if so it's deserving of downvotes), but it's a &lt;em&gt;supported&lt;/em&gt; answer and so it's not coming under the axe for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the difference. Experience doesn't have to come from the answerer, but &lt;em&gt;someone's&lt;/em&gt; experience with the actual solution being recommended (not only with the system, but with using the system in that particular way) has to be cited: otherwise we're just dealing with speculation. Hard experience on this site has shown that's not enough. Game-rec questions need to have experience-based support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is important because otherwise game-rec answers are subjective enough that they regularly fall through the Stack's ability to sort them usefully. Most Stack sites have banned these questions entirely, but RPG.SE has (through years of experience) come up with a set of living criteria which let us still offer this service. They're linked at the bottom of every question with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag, and in the tag's wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game-rec questions on RPG.SE are on a permanent probation period, pending the time when they're more trouble than the value they provide. We routinely flag and delete answers to game-rec questions which violate the strict criteria, because they're all that lets us still field this kind of question at all. They get un-deleted as soon as they're edited to make that experience component explicit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel your experience meets these requirements, it should be fairly simple to edit it to make that more clear. If your actual play experience is not specifically with using DFRPG to run Harry Potter, you need to connect the dots for us very carefully on how you're using it to support the recommendation. Once you do, just flag it for a moderator's attention to get re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-05-27T03:52:53.430" LastActivityDate="2015-05-27T03:52:53.430" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5583" CreationDate="2015-05-25T14:17:57.263" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What Makes A Good Game-Rec Answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we have said many times in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;our guidance on game-rec questions&lt;/a&gt;, they (like all subjective Q&amp;amp;A on the site) need to adhere to core SE guidance on Good Subjective, Bad Subjective. The most crucial part of this is how you support your answer with Back It Up!.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Back It Up! means that your answers must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want your opinion.  Or your judgement, preference, belief, rumor, or suspicion. We want your, or someone else's, expertise. This means you ran a Harry Potter game, or something really darn close to the OP's spec, or you have references to info from people that have done so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All site questions should do this. Subjective &quot;what should I do with a drunk player?&quot; kind of questions are just as in need of GS/BS - &quot;what you would do&quot; no one cares.  &quot;What you have done and how it worked out&quot; we care. But with game-recs, we have to be more draconian in its enforcement, because something about them makes hordes of people want to answer with their favorite systems. Which is understandable, there's a lot of semi-generic systems out there.  So every game-rec regardless of requirements tends to get the identical suite of &quot;GURPS! FATE! Savage Worlds! Etc!&quot; answers, because those systems are flexible and their players are sure it'll work for the target scenario as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What Do We Do About Bad Game-Rec Answers&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what we usually do in escalation order when we see a game-rec question not being Good Subjectived is, as needed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put on the game-rec notice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put a comment on the question reminding people about the requirements&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put a comment on all answers not obviously GS reminding people of the requirements&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Delete the most egregious GS violating answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Delete the rest of the answers not obviously GS&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Close the question as irredeemable&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This One Specific Question, Why One Answer Was Quashed And Not The Other&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have gotten to about stage 5 on this one.  It's a time consuming and frankly boring process, so each time it brings up &quot;do we need more game-rec restrictions&quot; or &quot;should we ban it like all the other Stacks.&quot; So do everyone a favor and keep it clearly Good Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, mods deleted your answer because though it struck in the right vague direction, really only said &quot;you can do dark fantasy with FATE, and I've done it&quot; but that a lot of the more Harry Potter distinct stuff was &quot;probably doable.&quot; That falls just short of the line. The answer that remained - well, it wasn't good at the start, but the edits got it to the other side of the line, which is &quot;you can do dark fantasy with Savage Worlds, and I've done it,&quot; and as for the Harry Potter part &quot;here's people who have done it, here's references.&quot; That brings it across the goal line of Back It Up!.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! is deliberately a high bar. There are a lot of forums where you can go post &quot;System for Setting: Harry Potter!&quot; and get a huge batch of noisy crap suggestions (Google that string for proof). We want answers that are provably correct, and with subjective questions provable means not a logic exercise, but an exercise in experience. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a game-rec, the kinds of answers that meet the bar are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's a game you have used for that specific thing.  Slam dunk.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's a game that explicitly says it does that - but you still need some familiarity with it.  I can say &quot;I've seen Redhurst Academy of Magic in game stores and it claims to be Harry Potter-y&quot; - but since I don't know if it hits the OP's more detailed criteria, it's still not good.  Like for the DBZ question, the DBZ game (if not specifically called out in the question) would be a good answer if the answerer had played it, or at least a similar R.Talsorian anime Fuzion game.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's a game you have used for something very close to that. This is a judgement call.  &quot;I used it for a Babylon 5 game with that same feel and you're asking for Space: Above and Beyond, but that's minimal adaptation, just starfury = little space marine ships, etc.&quot; is probably OK.  &quot;I used it for Babylon 5, you want Star Trek, I'm sure it would be fine you just add in a bunch of near-magic technology and you're good&quot; is less OK. Your answer hits right in here - the spell system is as core to HP as the technobabble is to Star Trek, and I don't think &quot;modern dark fantasy&quot; is close enough per se without having evidence it can support the specific magical system Potter revolves around.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why Other Game-Rec Answers Somewhere Else On The Site May Be Bad But Not Yet Quashed&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An addendum to answer more specifically why a specific other bad game-rec answer on this or other questions hasn't been corrected or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it may of course seem like your friendly diamond mods are omniscient, it's not quite the case. We try to rely on you the community to detect and act on poor questions and answers before we have to, and bring such bad content to our attention. We don't actually consider it our job to read every single question and answer on the site - we participate as we feel moved, and otherwise wait for flags and stuff to bring things to our attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as for &quot;why hasn't answer X been similarly quashed without mercy,&quot; the answer may be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's actually a good answer in our opinion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We've seen it, and have commented hoping it will improve and are giving it some reprieve time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We've seen it, and since the shouts of &quot;those darn mods are always abusing their power and enforcing site rules&quot; are too loud that week, are waiting for community members to act on it via comments, edits, delete votes, etc. (none of which are reserved for diamond mods)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(Most likely) We haven't seen it, and no one's bothered to flag it for us or otherwise act on it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to ask us &quot;why haven't you done something about answer X,&quot; and you haven't commented on or flagged or VtD'ed that answer for being bad, you should as the kids say &quot;check yourself before you wreck yourself&quot; and consider using those mechanisms. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2015-05-26T23:25:18.333" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5591" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-06-02T06:31:04.663" Score="2" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;I worked on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62856/23058&quot;&gt;document&lt;/a&gt; which did not ask a specific question but was related to 3.x and Pathfinder, it was a collection of useful articles are various topics, usually related to classes. It was deleted (then put on hold) because it either wasn't clear enough or was not specifically asking for a question. When I joined the site I thought I saw an post which was a document about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/41664/23058&quot;&gt;creating undead and it being an evil act&lt;/a&gt; and it turns out that what I remembered was actually an answer and not the original post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So would the correct way to go about creating a collection of useful material for users be to ask it as a question and then provide my own solution, or is this just something I should not be doing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23058" OwnerDisplayName="Fering" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T06:35:08.497" Title="Correct way to make a non-question post if possible" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5591" CreationDate="2015-06-02T06:35:08.497" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're a site which answers questions. If you have useful material to blog about, you should start a blog. The research you're doing is valuable, just... not here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are questions looking for documentation like: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9035/are-the-wotc-archives-of-d20-character-optimization-forum-forever-lost/9050#9050&quot;&gt;Are the WotC archives of d20 Character Optimization forum forever lost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But every question must pose a specific problem that can have a singular, best, answer. The best sort of resource there is a forum. We've tried to maintain a glossary in the past and... it didn't age well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My recommendation is, if you're going to start a competitor to the handbook indexes, compile it in google docs, share it, and then use it as a linked resource to questions that pose a problem it can answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T06:35:08.497" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5593" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5594" CreationDate="2015-06-02T06:57:29.070" Score="-8" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why are users allowed to up/down vote their own questions and answers?&#xA;I feel that voting on your own post invalidates part of the process. Sure its only one vote, but it still matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23058" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T07:03:34.210" Title="Users voting on their own posts" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5593" CreationDate="2015-06-02T07:03:34.210" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can't. Therefore, there are no problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="760" LastActivityDate="2015-06-02T07:03:34.210" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5596" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5599" CreationDate="2015-06-03T00:27:29.743" Score="3" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have in the past been told that a question has to/should have a tag because, even though the tag doesn't really describe the question, experts in the tag would be interested in/useful for answering it.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62911/15469&quot;&gt;Today&lt;/a&gt; I was told this is not the case, and we mustn't/shouldn't tag things to attract experts in a given field.  What gives?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-06-03T03:44:21.773" Title="Do we or do we not tag based on the kind of expert we want to attract?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5597" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5596" CreationDate="2015-06-03T00:49:38.077" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're stating this in a false strawmanny way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site help defines tags as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you tag with things that &lt;em&gt;describe the question&lt;/em&gt; to connect experts among other reasons.  You don't tag it &amp;quot;to draw experts.&amp;quot; That's a fine but important distinction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, questions are better if they are scoped more specifically. But more urgently, they are better if they are &lt;strong&gt;scoped to the poster's problem&lt;/strong&gt;. This poster doesn't want to know how to negotiate with GMs about a variety of systems.  He wants to know how to negotiate challenge with his D&amp;amp;D 5e DM.  It's a specific problem, tagged specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP had a question of &amp;quot;hey this comes up across various games I've been in, I want a system-agnostic answer&amp;quot; - why that's fine too. A later question can ask this - if that's that poster's problem!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone hates 5e so much that they are ignoring the tag, then yes, they'd miss out on this question.  C'est la vie. They might not really have a constructive mindset to do so, is my thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider also reviewing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/do-we-need-the-system-agnostic-tag&quot;&gt;Do we need the System-Agnostic Tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2794/is-system-agnostic-a-meta-tag&quot;&gt;Is [system-agnostic] a meta tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3024/does-the-system-agnostic-tag-conflict-with-system-specific-tags/3054#3054&quot;&gt;Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-06-03T00:49:38.077" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5596" CreationDate="2015-06-03T03:44:21.773" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I remember writing the comment that I think you're remembering — it was regarding putting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; on your question “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62151/is-there-any-reason-not-to-put-the-1-level-of-existing-class-features-from-unca&quot;&gt;Is there any reason not to put the +1 level of existing class features from Uncanny Trickster into Uncanny Trickster?&lt;/a&gt;”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the confusion is that, when you objected that the tag maybe didn't suit, I asked if you thought that people who don't engage in optimization would be able to help. The point I was making Socratically was that, if it &lt;em&gt;requires&lt;/em&gt; experts who know optimization practices, the question is fundamentally &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; optimization practices, despite doubts you might have had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when one wants to put a tag on a question because “experts in the tag would be interested in/useful for answering it,” there are two distinct paths to arrive at that thought. Only one of those two paths comes from a motive aligned with the function of tags here, though. The non-aligned motive is wanting certain (kinds of) people to see it; the aligned motive is that the question itself is fundamentally about the stuff those experts are knowledgeable about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How that pans out regarding the tagging on “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62911/how-can-i-suggest-the-dm-stop-trying-to-kill-us&quot;&gt;How can I suggest the DM stop trying to kill us?&lt;/a&gt;” is that system-agnosticism isn't really something someone can be an expert in, so the thought that “system-agnostic experts” should see the question doesn't really make sense, and doesn't Socratically reveal any fundamental truth about the nature of the question and what its tags should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-06-03T03:44:21.773" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5600" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-06-08T07:03:39.047" Score="3" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am aware that there are guidelines regarding how to handle answers that suggest homebrew solutions where no evidence of their use has been shown. My understanding is these are generally strongly discouraged, but that there is no clear instruction as to exactly what to do with them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a previous meta question on this subject - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt; - but my question is whether our stance should be stricter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this because of the existence of our very strict rules on game-rec answers and the delete policy for anything that doesn't meet them. How is a homebrew answer that shows no evidence of actual use any different to a game-rec answer that shows no evidence? Is there any inherent value in such homebrew answers that is not present in the latter, or should we delete them in the same way? Is there a middle ground?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-12-16T00:43:54.697" Title="Stricter guidance on homebrew answers with no demonstrated evidence of use" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5601" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5600" CreationDate="2015-06-08T07:57:01.823" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game-rec questions are a special category. They're &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/1204&quot;&gt;perpetually only tentatively allowed&lt;/a&gt;, and the heavy moderation applied to them is the &lt;em&gt;minimum&lt;/em&gt; necessary to keep it that way. Since this is special handling, it doesn't set automatic precedents - so our policies there don't set precedent for other parts of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need special policy for homebrew answers. We can handle them as any other answer that needs to follow &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;GSBS requirements&lt;/a&gt; and the Back It Up! Principle. That means downvoting if they're poor quality (e.g. not backing it up), and moderation comes in when it's needed, but answers are not &lt;em&gt;automatically&lt;/em&gt; under threat of deletion if they don't provide evidence. Unless a moderator feels like it's necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-06-09T01:50:05.183" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5602" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5600" CreationDate="2015-06-08T11:59:00.003" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We only need special, more draconian rules if there's a big problem.  Game-recs were a big problem - many of them, lots of answers, terribly low quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has not come to my attention that we have rampant homebrew answering causing a similar problem, but if you wanted to collect evidence thereof it could cause us to reevaluate that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-06-08T11:59:00.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3526" CreationDate="2015-06-09T18:35:22.623" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The only time an author should be able to have an effect on the nature of the rules in the book they wrote is if they are ambiguous and are not readily understood.  Words have meaning, and in the event the meaning of the words can be clearly understood by the simple parsing thereof, unless new words are published that either state the original rules are either superseded or errata, then the author should not be able to override them, and the original writing should stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23314" LastActivityDate="2015-06-09T18:35:22.623" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5604" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-06-10T02:26:12.233" Score="2" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/63260/12011&quot;&gt;undead having darkvision&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I felt that the original question was pretty unambiguously worded, but apparently I was wrong as the answers don't really match what I was looking for at all. I've asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/92064/are-zombies-traditionally-portrayed-as-being-able-to-see-in-the-dark&quot;&gt;related question&lt;/a&gt; on Sci-Fi and Fantasy SE, which was almost closed. This question is focusing on my curiosity regarding other media.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think I should delete the original question here, and write a new one that is more clearly worded, making it clear that I'm interested in the reason behind the game designers decision. If this happens to be other media, great, if it happens to be an in-universe justification, great, if somebody did it for kicks, great. I'm just curious why, as it seems like an extremely odd decision to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does that sound like a reasonable course of action?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:57:41.223" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:57:41.223" Title="Should I delete this question and re-ask?" Tags="|discussion|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5605" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5607" CreationDate="2015-06-10T03:16:52.863" Score="9" ViewCount="1066" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I've been on SE, I noticed that many questioners and answerers use 'GM' to describe the person running the game as opposed to 'DM'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that DM stands for Dungeon Master and that GM stands for Game Master, but why do people use GM even when talking about explicitly Dungeons and Dragons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18126" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-06-11T14:41:22.220" LastActivityDate="2015-06-13T23:31:20.877" Title="Why do people use GM versus DM?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5605" CreationDate="2015-06-10T03:21:17.237" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Habit or ease. It's like how I could say &quot;Volkswagen&quot; or I could just say &quot;car&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, DM is just a fancy trademarked proprietary way of saying GM in the context of D&amp;amp;D. They're still the same thing otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-06-11T22:23:51.413" LastActivityDate="2015-06-11T22:23:51.413" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5605" CreationDate="2015-06-10T03:25:27.737" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;DM, or &quot;Dungeon Master,&quot; is a term used only by D&amp;amp;D players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GM, or &quot;Game Master,&quot; is a generic term used by players of many of the other 10,000 RPGs out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore people with wider game experience tend to just say &quot;GM&quot; (many other games have goofy proprietary names for the GM as well, which are hard to remember).  People who mostly have only played D&amp;amp;D tend to say &quot;DM.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-06-10T03:27:29.987" LastActivityDate="2015-06-10T03:27:29.987" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5609" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5604" CreationDate="2015-06-10T19:52:33.177" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Do not delete it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would actually expect the moderators to un-delete it if you did. There is useful and interesting information that users put time and effort into; the question, and its accompanying answers, are no longer yours to delete. That you asked your question poorly and it was misunderstood by &lt;em&gt;everyone who read it&lt;/em&gt; is an issue that lies squarely on your shoulders; it is not a cause to delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s also not, in itself, a problem for the site. OK, not exactly what you meant to ask, got answers that don’t really help you: oops. It’s still a useful question that got useful answers, even if they aren’t useful answers &lt;em&gt;to you&lt;/em&gt;. Probably shouldn’t accept any of the answers, since the definition of acceptance is helping you, but that’s fine too. Let it lie, let the answerers enjoy the fruits of their labors and let the rest of the community enjoy the useful and interesting information that they are offering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Do consider asking a new question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are not limited in how many questions you can ask. Made mistakes asking this one, it got answers that don’t help you: no problem, try again. No need to delete it; you can just have both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;You have the option to dissociate with the question, if you are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; annoyed by it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can remove it from your profile, and your name from the question. This is your only option, since as mentioned it is no longer yours to delete. I don’t see why you would want to, but you can. See the FAQ: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/96732/190917&quot;&gt;How do I remove my name from a post, in accordance with CC:WIKI?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-06-10T19:52:33.177" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1614" CreationDate="2015-06-11T19:28:37.477" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think your use of &quot;DM&quot; is completely acceptable, as is &quot;GM&quot;. In my playgroup we also use &quot;GM&quot; to refer to the act of houseruling or arbitrating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &quot;I wonder if Bill will GM my non-RAW usage of [blank] valid?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;He GMed that monster into existence.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Refering to a previous discussion: &quot;We'll have to let Bill GM that when we play this weekend.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2015-06-11T19:28:37.477" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5612" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5605" CreationDate="2015-06-13T23:31:20.877" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;Dungeon Master&quot; is actually owned by Wizards of the Coast, who produce D&amp;amp;D, legally other game systems (even if they are fantasy based dungeon crawls) are not allowed to use the term. Therefore the generic term Game Master is used by most other companies, except for certain games that come up with special names for their system, like the Zero Meister in Space Ship Zero. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like others have said, the people that use GM generally play games other than D&amp;amp;D and those that say DM have likely only played D&amp;amp;D. Personally, I use DM when talking about D&amp;amp;D and GM for most other cases, unless I am referring to a specific function of the GM like referee, narrator, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10263" LastActivityDate="2015-06-13T23:31:20.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5613" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5614" CreationDate="2015-06-14T20:59:18.990" Score="3" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/18267/14848&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt;... has a 25 point bounty?  What's up with that?  Is that a thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is a thing, how do I do it?  Bountying seems to start at 50 if I approach it the normal way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-06-14T21:26:24.307" Title="How do you 25 point bounty?" Tags="|support|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5613" CreationDate="2015-06-14T21:26:24.307" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was a 50-rep bounty that was reduced by half due to not being awarded in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/set-bounties&quot;&gt;When does a bounty expire?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[…]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you do not award the bounty within 24 hours of the bounty period ending, half the bounty value will be automatically awarded to the top voted answer posted after the bounty start, provided it has a score of at least 2. If no new answer matches this requirement, no reputation will be awarded at all, and the reputation used on the bounty will be lost forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-06-14T21:26:24.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5615" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-06-16T11:56:51.410" Score="21" ViewCount="292" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/121570/152515&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Wr6T.png&quot; alt=&quot;this tag has been BURNINATED by TROGDOR&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless anyone has any objections or wants to salvage/synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/random&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;random&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;random&lt;/a&gt; somehow, I'm going to burninate it in a couple of days. &lt;em&gt;Randomness itself&lt;/em&gt; doesn't seem like a useful area of expertise, and the tag isn't well-used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It gets used beside &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/generator&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;generator&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;generator&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-tables&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-tables&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-tables&lt;/a&gt; a lot and in a couple of questions about dice rolls, but all of those things are implicitly about randomness anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For historical record, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/random&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;random&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;random&lt;/a&gt; is attached to these 11 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47801/what-ever-happened-to-rolling-for-stats-encountering-class-trainers-etc&quot;&gt;What ever happened to rolling for stats, encountering class trainers, etc?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/540/random-dungeon-maze-generator&quot;&gt;Random Dungeon/Maze Generator&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26705/whats-a-good-random-dungeon-generator-for-dd-3-5&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a good random dungeon generator for D&amp;amp;D 3.5?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45606/random-treasure-psionic-item-powers-chart&quot;&gt;Paper-and-dice random loot chart for psionic item powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1568/how-to-randomly-generate-a-village-or-town-for-old-school-dd-game&quot;&gt;How to randomly generate a village or town for old school D&amp;amp;D game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/365/what-are-some-interesting-ways-to-structure-a-random-encounter-table&quot;&gt;What are some interesting ways to structure a random encounter table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14706/rules-for-generating-a-game-world-as-you-go&quot;&gt;Rules for generating a game world as you go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8512/weapon-that-does-5-damage-vs-one-that-does-1d10-damage-what-characteristic-of&quot;&gt;Weapon that does 5 damage vs. one that does 1d10 damage: What characteristic of the weapons causes this difference?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6351/is-there-a-working-online-random-adventure-generator-for-dnd-3-5e&quot;&gt;Is there a working online random adventure generator for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/741/does-anyone-have-random-encounter-tables-for-4th-edition-dd&quot;&gt;Does anyone have random encounter tables for 4th edition D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2391/is-there-a-random-encounter-generator-online-for-color-minor-city-detail-stuff&quot;&gt;Is there a random encounter generator online, for color/minor city detail stuff?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T14:59:24.930" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T14:59:24.930" Title="The [random] tag is no more" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5616" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5617" CreationDate="2015-06-17T08:30:41.280" Score="3" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's been a little edit war in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/29684/2100&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; whether or not to use the term &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchebag&amp;amp;defid=5268202&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;douchebag&lt;/a&gt;&quot; as defined &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchebag&amp;amp;defid=5268202&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If slang is allowed (and I believe it is), then this insulting term should be fine.  If it it not, then where do we draw the line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-06-17T12:42:22.523" Title="Derogatory slang in answers" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2015-06-18T06:31:32.550" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5616" CreationDate="2015-06-17T09:03:54.503" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;My view is that if there is a reasonably polite way of saying something, then that's the way it should be said. It is hardly ever necessary to use derogatory terms, and I feel that it lowers the tone of the site as a whole and can given the wrong impression. Allowing these types of terms also then sets an example and encourages further use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2015-06-17T09:03:54.503" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5616" CreationDate="2015-06-17T12:27:25.523" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a pure duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3573/2100&quot;&gt;Is profanity allowed on RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt; and in general violates the &quot;Be Nice&quot; overarching rule of the Stack. The post in question currently states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Or to use slang terms, a douchebag, or a jerk, or an asshole... Take your pick of insulting term, which of course are gender/sex/racial non-specific.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two of those terms are clearly inappropriate in a professional environment.  They will be edited out and further use may result in behavioral warnings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have more than enough trouble with arguments and people baiting each other on this site without allowing curses or intensifiers.  Keep it professional and family appropriate and we can more easily maintain a civil atmosphere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-06-17T12:42:22.523" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5619" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5622" CreationDate="2015-06-17T16:05:59.523" Score="2" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;Has anyone noticed this recurring glitch in the Stack Exchange websites? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frequently, when I click on &quot;add a comment&quot; or &quot;show &lt;em&gt;n&lt;/em&gt; more comments&quot; at the bottom of a question or response, the webpage immediately scrolls to the top of the page instead of displaying the remaining comments or a comment text box.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's going on? Exiting out of the website and reopening corrects the problem sometimes, but not always.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been going on intermittently since last year. I'm using the Windows 7 OS and MS Explorer internet browser. I should add that after I power down my computer and restart in the morning, the issues abates for a while, then mysteriously reappears. It's weird. Userscripts are unlikely to be involved: I don't know about userscripts on my work PC, and don't think I have any on my home PC unless the Geeks Squad folks installed them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Responding to waxeagle - I'm not sure, I don't think so. I'm currently locked out of adding comments and I don't think any comments have been deleted from this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: Responding to doppelgreener - We're using Internet Explorer v8 here at work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9753" LastEditorUserId="9753" LastEditDate="2015-06-18T15:22:30.370" LastActivityDate="2015-06-24T19:58:57.773" Title="Unable to post/read additional comments - page scrolls to top" Tags="|bug|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5620" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5621" CreationDate="2015-06-24T15:20:10.427" Score="15" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just a note, I just added tag wikis for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemy&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemist&lt;/a&gt; and cleaned up a few questions for each. I decided against synonymizing because a distinction was apparent in their emergent usage, and because it parallels the distinction we have between e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, for the most part, the emergent usage was pretty good: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemist&lt;/a&gt; were for questions about a (usually Pathfinder) class by that name, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemy&lt;/a&gt; was for questions about the production and usage of alchemical items. I have codified this distinction in the tag wikis. Only a few questions needed to be edited to fit the scheme.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a couple of questions that have both tags, but they’re explicitly about creating or using alchemical items as a member of an alchemist class, so that seemed OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did leave a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; question that was asking about the “Alchemist” feat and how it was used to produce certain items tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemy&lt;/a&gt; rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alchemist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alchemist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alchemist&lt;/a&gt;, since despite the feat’s name it seemed much more appropriate to that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, wanted to start a meta discussion about the tags in case anyone wanted to chime in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-06-24T17:43:22.670" Title="Alchemist vs. Alchemy" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5620" CreationDate="2015-06-24T17:43:22.670" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;This looks like solid reasoning for how to clean up these tags and keep them distinctly useful. Thanks for taking that on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-06-24T17:43:22.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5619" CreationDate="2015-06-24T19:58:57.773" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most likely this is caused by a scripting error on the page. The &quot;add a comment&quot; link is actually a link to the top of the page, with a script that says &quot;don't do that, do this instead.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble is, if any scripting error occurs, IE will often stop all scripts from running. So if the script that updates the vote widget in real time fails (for example), it would also break the &quot;add a comment&quot; link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're technical, you can view the developer tools by hitting F12. The console (which might be under the script tab) will show you the error messages, which might help you figure out exactly what's giving you problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also a category of issues which &lt;em&gt;go away&lt;/em&gt; if you simply have the developer tools &lt;em&gt;open&lt;/em&gt;. So opening the tools, reloading the page, and just leaving them open might help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that being said... The real fix is likely going to be updating to a more recent browser. IE8 is old, wasn't very good when it was released, and there have been some major shakeups in the web over the past few years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck getting it fixed at work, though...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2015-06-24T19:58:57.773" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5094" CreationDate="2015-06-25T00:14:36.657" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, we don't need them both, and we should make one a synonym of the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plot&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Multiple dictionaries&lt;/a&gt; define &quot;plot&quot; as primarily meaning &quot;secret scheme&quot;, and secondarily meaning &quot;story&quot;. We've been using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; in the second sense, which means we're using it &lt;em&gt;exactly as a synonym of story.&lt;/em&gt; We can't get much more of a solid synonym than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thales makes a distinction between them that plot is forward-looking narrative and story is backwards-looking narrative. The definitions we're operating on don't make such a distinction though, and netiher have the users &amp;mdash; both tags are being used both ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we want a tag for the first sense of 'plot', as in secret schemes, we should pick a clearer name for the tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/secret-scheming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;secret-scheming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;secret-scheming&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-06-25T01:28:38.553" LastActivityDate="2015-06-25T01:28:38.553" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3211" CreationDate="2015-06-30T00:45:46.360" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers flat-out shouldn't be posted in comments. Beyond the reasons suggested by mxyzplk &amp;mdash; we're not using the site correctly, and everyone gets robbed of a soldified answer &amp;mdash; I want to highlight a very deep problem with answers in comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments have virtually no quality assurance.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you post an answer, the entire question is bumped for everyone to see. Your answer is big and obvious. It has enormous upvote and downvote buttons. People can review it, point out critical issues you need to address, improve it now or later if/when it's worthwhile doing so, and &lt;strong&gt;downvote it if it's wrong.&lt;/strong&gt; Plus, the question overall gets more activity and attention by virtue of the bump, which is healthy for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments have none of that. They just silently appear, will probably not get noticed (except by the asker), and only have an upvote button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So providing an answer in comments, or permitting one, is irresponsible: you subvert the community-checked quality assurance process that validates or refutes your solution. You could provide an answer in comments (we'd delete it, but you can still try) &amp;mdash; but maybe this is the time you provide bad/mistaken guidance. Nobody notices to respond to it, asker takes it and leaves, is never seen again, and operates on bad advice. (Good job.) If you're confident you're correct, submit your answer to our QA process and see. If you're not confident, either don't post at all, or post an answer anyway and see if we really do downvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some common motivations people have for doing this anyway, and I'd like to address those:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To those deliberately giving up rep:&lt;/strong&gt; You may be nobly sacrificing your reputation via answers in comments, but &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; don't do that. You're also sacrificing site quality, which sucks! &lt;em&gt;Please&lt;/em&gt; use our answer mechanisms so that we can keep the site high quality, cement your answer for future visitors when it's the correct one, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you're leaving the comment so someone else can make a better answer:&lt;/strong&gt; They won't. We need you to do that yourself. People probably just won't notice your comment. (If the question's bright and new, it's probably got the attention of people who have already thought of that.) If it's bad/incorrect guidance, &lt;em&gt;nobody&lt;/em&gt; will want to do that, but then we'll have no way to show it's bad guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-07-01T00:17:32.180" LastActivityDate="2015-07-01T00:17:32.180" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5625" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-01T21:22:38.340" Score="3" ViewCount="406" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, that's what I read today &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64219/are-there-stats-for-the-roman-scutum-in-any-supplement/64221&quot;&gt;in comments on an answer to this question&lt;/a&gt;. Again:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Players who see it differently are simply &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone downvoted me, based on the fact that &lt;em&gt;his&lt;/em&gt; playstyle must be &lt;em&gt;the only correct playstyle (tm)&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that different players in different campaigns might put a different weight on risk vs. reward (or malus vs bonus in that case) does not exist in his world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Way to go RPG.SE, because that quote is from a nearly 100K rep user. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This user calculated that trading +2 to hit for +2 armor class is not worth it. &lt;strong&gt;Never&lt;/strong&gt;. Anyone doing this is &lt;strong&gt;wrong&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thought that in a different campaign, this may be well worth it does not even cross his mathematically inclined mind of average and default calculations. No. If you don't fit in the standard, default, average, vanilla textbook campaign:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You. Are. Wrong. Period. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; play a siege campaign where not getting hit is better than hitting yourself. That simply &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; be. How &lt;em&gt;dare&lt;/em&gt; you play a fantasy campaign that is not kicking in the dungeon door and rolling to hit for the first orc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You cannot play a dwarven tank with the best protective shield he can get. Because that would not be optimized the way the min/max thread tells you to. And not being optimized would be &lt;strong&gt;wrong&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we please clarify (again) that there is no one true roleplaying style and that something that ends in &quot;... depending on your playstyle&quot; cannot be &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; as long as it's not against the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T04:29:23.767" Title="&quot;Players who see it differently are simply wrong&quot;" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5625" CreationDate="2015-07-01T21:34:12.910" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Flag such comments for moderator attention and we'll take care of them. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Comments are fragile, expendable things that we have few compunctions about deleting&lt;/a&gt;, and inflammatory ones have even less chance of survival than most when they fall under the gaze of the moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once flagged, it's best to disengage entirely. If you feel you &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; say something to halt a flood of argumentative comments, consider restricting it to simply posting the URL to “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;” as a reminder that speaks for itself. But it's best to just flag silently and walk away, since the temptation to “score points” with a righteous rebuttal is often very great, but neither productive nor actually feels good in the end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-07-01T21:57:21.343" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5625" CreationDate="2015-07-01T22:04:14.763" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think my comment is taken out of context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The context was a question of balance. Of numbers and of opportunity cost. It was not a discussion of playstyle or preferences or characterization.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was, effectively, my claim:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The option under discussion is, 100% of the time, suboptimal. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mistaken about the effectiveness and the opportunity cost of the option in question. There does not exist any campaign, playstyle, or play preference in which this is not true, unless the rules are changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certainly, that’s a big claim. Comments don’t leave room enough to more than assert it, and I don’t expect anyone to be convinced by me merely asserting it. That’s fine; I really was only explaining why I was downvoting: because I think one of the statements made was always, 100% of the time, bad, yes even then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;strong&gt;that,&lt;/strong&gt; large claim that it is, is still all that I said. I didn’t say, for instance, that anyone who chooses to take the option &lt;em&gt;despite being suboptimal&lt;/em&gt; was wrong. I didn’t say it was wrong to use it, to enjoy it. I didn’t say that whatever playstyle or preferences that were being claimed as situations where the option was a good one were wrong or bad. I just said that, no, even in those cases, it’s still not a good option mechanically. I said that the statement that it was an optimal choice was incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And ultimately, the validity of my claim or the lack thereof is irrelevant to this discussion. It doesn’t matter whether I was right or wrong to think the option is always, yes-even-then, suboptimal: that opinion is not an attack on anyone’s preferences. The claims that I did so, that I was pushing my own playstyle as the only correct playstyle, are wildly unfounded and off-base.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments went back-and-forth too much; that was inappropriate, and they have been deleted as is appropriate when that happens. I apologize for not ending the discussion sooner, but I felt (apparently correctly, given this discussion) that my comments were not being understood.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2015-07-02T12:13:35.320" LastActivityDate="2015-07-02T12:13:35.320" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5625" CreationDate="2015-07-02T14:06:07.037" Score="15" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;You are absolutely wrong.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Am not!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Are too.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;You're criticizing me!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;No I'm not.  But you're absolutely wrong in all circumstances.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Stop criticizing me!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;I'm not.  Just your wrongness. Your absolute wrongness.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(continue ad infinitum)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look, here's the deal.  There is not a black and white answer here. My interpretation of the shades of grey are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;KRyan is being uselessly stubborn. I know it's not your &quot;intention&quot; to criticize the playstyle or the person, but by continuing to repeat &quot;I AM ABSOLUTELY RIGHT I AM ABSOLUTELY RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG&quot; it sure starts to come off that way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nvoight is whining too much. So he thinks you're wrong.  It's the Internet. Someone always thinks you're wrong. Flag his comments and move on. SevenSidedDie's answer is completely correct in its advice to you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It takes two to keep an argument up like this.&lt;/strong&gt;  At any point on RPG.SE, when you find yourself repeating the same point, that is the Universe's way of telling you to stop so that mods don't have to intervene with what you're doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While KRyan doesn't represent the community, so turning his comment into a &quot;the community&quot; question is a little overblown, KRyan, you are very high rep and are quite fond of pointing out the greater responsibility that comes with powers on this site, and I think if you reflect on this and put someone else into your spot in this argument (like say any mod), you might be quite incensed at their behavior and be chiding them about how &quot;we expect more from you.&quot;  Something to consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Continued argument on the question or here on meta is inappropriate and will stop. Clearly you both have strongly held, well-reasoned thoughts on the subject.  Therefore you should both answer the question and move on. Comments constructively pointing out areas for improvement in your answer should be read and either edited in or disregarded, and they will get reaped either way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that, this is starting to become disruptive to the site, and further arguing of the point here or on main will result in  mod activity that the violator won't like. This also applies to anyone else trying to escalate this conflict (Yes you, MrLemon). Drop it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-04-12T04:29:23.767" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T04:29:23.767" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5629" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-04T00:55:46.397" Score="12" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our link colours on Meta RPG are a sort of off-yellow (as opposed to red on main site), and mostly they're pretty legible, but the visited link colour is not, being &lt;a href=&quot;http://example.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a fairly bright yellow (#d29b44) on white.&lt;/a&gt; Text in visited links here is pretty hard to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the Web AIM colour contrast checker&lt;/a&gt;, it has a pretty bad contrast ratio:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KDySs.png&quot; alt=&quot;contrast ratio of 2.47:1&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For good legibility you usually want to shoot for at least 3.5:1 or preferably 4.5:1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the sidebar links are upon a background of &lt;code&gt;#FFF8DC&lt;/code&gt;, which means a contrast ratio of only 2.32:1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The unvisited link colour isn't quite so bad:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QPfb3.png&quot; alt=&quot;contrast ratio of 3.93:1&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please replace our visited link colour on meta with with a more legible colour.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that involves changing the link colours altogether (visited &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; unvisited), I'm fine with that. I'm not attached to the yellow. A couple of weeks ago our links turned blue on here for about half an hour. It wasn't quite the right blue for our site, but it was nevertheless an improvement. You can still see it &lt;a href=&quot;http://example.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;if your link's in code&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. Our main site's red would also be fine!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-07-04T02:45:01.483" LastActivityDate="2015-07-04T02:45:01.483" Title="Please change our visited link colours on Meta to something more legible than bright yellow on white" Tags="|bug|design|css|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5630" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5631" CreationDate="2015-07-08T01:24:56.833" Score="5" ViewCount="234" Body="&lt;p&gt;In our tags, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; for working on the sweeping project of the &#xA;entire campaign world. We also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt; for small-scale encounters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64421/creating-a-city-made-of-illusion-that-wont-be-quickly-figured-out&quot;&gt;Creating a city made of illusion that won&amp;#39;t be quickly figured out&lt;/a&gt; has been giving me some trouble edit-wise, because it needs a tag that's in the middle of those &amp;mdash; it's not the entire world and it's not just one encounter, it's a single location &amp;mdash; and I've been &lt;em&gt;sure&lt;/em&gt; we have one and trying to recall it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Apparently&lt;/em&gt; it might be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-design&lt;/a&gt;, which has a tag wiki of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about designing location-based adventure environments, both above and below ground. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... &quot;Dungeon design&quot; is a terrible name for this though. Most environments we'll be working on aren't dungeons (even D&amp;amp;D is notorious for regularly featuring neither dungeons nor dragons). And the name &quot;dungeon&quot; as a metaphor only makes sense for a narrow selection of RPGs (D&amp;amp;D and its derivatives).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we produce a better name for this tag? I am not sure if [location-design] works, and not in a frame of mind to work out a tag name myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't think we need a &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; tag, hence the proposal for a rename. We don't need one tag for location design of literal dungeons and another for non-dungeons, especially since they often use the same patterns anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should it be called?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-07-09T09:46:43.393" Title="Can we rename [dungeon-design] to something more inclusive of non-dungeons?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5630" CreationDate="2015-07-08T01:55:58.203" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-design&lt;/a&gt; serves a purpose, because (for better or worse) designing dungeons takes a very &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; set of tools, skills, and knowledge that aren't generally applicable to designing any other types of location, unless you're already designing your dungeons in non-traditional ways that don't use those peculiar abilities. And despite the tag wiki's claim that the tag is more broad than its name, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-design&quot;&gt;the questions it contains are pretty much about traditional dungeon-design issues&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki should be tightened up to reflect usage, as (at least for this tag) there is no higher authority than its pattern of usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For other things that need designing, we should probably have another tag. It's okay if they overlap — we've got both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt;, to mention only one instance of tags overlapping, and that has been fine. I'd use [location-design], but I'm bad at naming things so take that with a few grains of salt. Or in other words, &lt;em&gt;to the folksonomy mobile!&lt;/em&gt; Let's see what tag(s) get made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-07-08T02:01:00.060" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5632" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-08T20:46:32.077" Score="-2" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've had a number of different legal questions about RPG publication over the years, and by and large, I think the answers are pretty good. The problem is that most of us aren't copyright lawyers and case law, precedents, changing understandings of the law, and other things can lead to completely unpredictable situations, especially when juries get involved. &lt;strong&gt;Complete answers are far more complex than we can account for in this format,&lt;/strong&gt; which is problematic with something that purports to be an expert answers site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this has the potential to open both StackExchange and the answerers up to lawsuits themselves. If we don't want to close these questions as &quot;off-topic&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5564/4398&quot;&gt;which we don't&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;strong&gt;is there a way we can somehow &quot;announce&quot; on the questions the issues with asking for such advice here?&lt;/strong&gt; It seems like answers are often couched in definitive terms, even when there are clearly gaps in the information. At the minimum, I think the related tag wikis should be updated to reflect the nature of the advice given. Additionally, a common resource to point people to (such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; post) to avoid the appearance that any of us are, in fact, experts on copyright law; as well as the idea that these answers are comprehensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-26T14:40:26.563" LastActivityDate="2017-03-26T14:40:26.563" Title="Should we have disclaimers for our legal answers?" Tags="|discussion|legal-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5633" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5630" CreationDate="2015-07-09T08:00:47.047" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;How about [episode-design], [event-design], [event-mapping] or [event-cluster-design] or something similar? Some of them are a little unwieldy but they fit what you're going for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2875" LastActivityDate="2015-07-09T08:00:47.047" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5635" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5636" CreationDate="2015-07-09T14:29:16.177" Score="0" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;Background:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use of the search feature did not lead me to any question on meta that addressed Comments earning reputation.  (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3733/why-dont-review-actions-give-reputation&quot;&gt;this addresses reviews&lt;/a&gt;, not Comments). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is based on the triangle next to a comment that (if you hover your mouse over the triangle) indicates that a comment added something useful to the post.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having asked a few questions and posted a few answers, I have found on more than one occasion(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62553/would-being-able-to-wild-shape-into-aberrations-monstrosities-be-unbalanced&quot;&gt;neil slater's help on this question&lt;/a&gt; being a good case) that a user makes a comment that helped me improve the answer by either pointing to a new resource or a theme/concept that I hadn't folded into the answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I understand &quot;we award rep for core functions,&quot; I feel that the comment that is helpful to the querent or the responder supports the core function directly: good questions, good answers.  A single rep point here and there won't break the rep system, and unless someone finds a comment helpful, it doesn't even touch it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My recommendation is that a &quot;this comment adds something useful to the post&quot; flag (triangle?) being clicked awards a single rep point to whomever wrote that comment.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE voting, now that I have reviewed about 20 questions/answers that did come up from that search on voting and rep, is biased toward up votes as a means for helping this site achieve its objectives:   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers, better answers, and best answers to good questions posed is why we are here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When one of our community members provides an insight that makes an answer better, or even best, that member has helped this SE site achieve its goal of putting out good answers regarding this hobby.  A rep point reward seems to fit into how rep awards incentivize participation in a constructive way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Position contra considered:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having read a number of meta questions regarding comments, and the problem of people answering questions in comments instead of providing answers, I can see that this might lead to fewer answers to choose from, and a worry that this would incentivize undesired behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contra to the contra: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The flip side of this is that if A's answer covers most of what B would say, but B knows a point or source that A hasn't mentioned, isn't it better that B help improve A's answer rather than post an answer that replicates A's answer but adds one more thing?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have seen considerable discussion in meta about answers in plentitude that say the same thing being undesirable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe this question has two parts:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;a.  Why doesn't someone clicking on the &quot;this comment adds something useful to the post&quot; triangles award a single rep point?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;b.  Should the voting system accommodate that? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it should, but there may be a good reason, or some experience with this idea that I am unaware of which explains why this is a bad idea.  None of this is related to the fact that comments go away eventually (allegedly).  This inquiry is based on the idea of rewards for improving the in-process crafting of better and best answers to good and better questions.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers to this question should cover:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This has been tried before and X happened.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Doing this does/does not support the intent of the voting system.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Doing this does/does not support the goals of SE&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Doing this does/does not incentivize the behavior we prefer in pursuit of site goals.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;We covered this &quot;here&quot; but the way you searched missed that Q &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-07-09T16:11:32.197" Title="Why don't we award a rep point for a helpful comment that improved an answer?" Tags="|feature-request|comments|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5635" CreationDate="2015-07-09T15:57:26.870" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This won't be implemented for a few reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't control the software. This would have to be altered at a very high level by Stack Exchange developer employees.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of the reputation system is to &lt;em&gt;alter&lt;/em&gt; behaviour. This proposal suggests giving reputation for existing behaviour, but people are already motivated to help in comments, so there is no apparent need for reputation to spur action. Since people are already motivated, the only effect giving reputation for this behaviour could do is &lt;em&gt;alter&lt;/em&gt; it away from the current state of affairs, likely leading to undesirable behaviour changes.*&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's no way to know why someone clicked the &quot;comment upvote&quot; button, and no way to link it to a positive change in the post. Anyone can upvote a comment and the system has no way to know why, currently. Being able to &quot;accept&quot; comments after implementing their suggestions would require significant new functionality.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are many behaviours that are helpful to the site but don't earn reputation, such as editing other's posts to improve their quality, voting in the review queues, … or participating on Meta. ;) Not everything useful to the site needs to be rewarded with reputation — only those things that people might not do without such a bribe.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/296/reputation-for-comments&quot;&gt;proposal was made and rejected in 2009&lt;/a&gt; and the reasons are unlikely to have changed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In sum, there doesn't appear to be any need to give reputation for useful comments. People are already doing it, and gamifying it would likely interfere with that more than help, even if it was within our power to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* There is an existing, parallel system for rewarding behaviours that are desirable but which it would be harmful to allow people to “farm” for reputation: badges. For commenting we have two: a bronze &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/17/commentator&quot;&gt;Commentator badge&lt;/a&gt; (for using comments at all) and a silver &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/24/pundit&quot;&gt;Pundit badge&lt;/a&gt; (for writing well-liked comments). Those are SE's way to show new users that good commenting is appreciated, without motivating anyone to make it their primary activity on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-07-09T16:11:32.197" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5637" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-09T19:15:50.990" Score="3" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hey could you tell me a little bit about your logo and what it means? I really like it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Same one that appears as the Favicon in the URL field and behind the word playing in the banner. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user23794" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-07-10T05:42:59.433" LastActivityDate="2015-07-10T17:21:56.640" Title="What does this site's logo mean?" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5637" CreationDate="2015-07-09T19:57:53.847" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The designer, Jin, explained a bit about it in the original post about it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Design for RPG.se&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm also subtly using dice as recurring visual elements throughout the site, as seen as the logo, accepted answer background and voting arrows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The hexagon divided into triangles invokes the shape of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/d20&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;20-sided die&lt;/a&gt;&amp;hairsp;—&amp;hairsp;one of the most common dice that is still distinctive to roleplaying games&amp;hairsp;—&amp;hairsp;seen top-down and rendered with a subtle amount of perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compare:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fj8zp.png&quot; alt=&quot;The RPG SE logo on its own without text: a stylised twenty-sided die inside a circle&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:W%C3%BCrfel_W20_Schwarz.png#mw-jump-to-license&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fdoHgm.png&quot; alt=&quot;A black twenty-sided die with gold numbering&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-07-10T17:21:56.640" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5639" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-11T20:14:51.810" Score="10" ViewCount="246" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have an idea to improve our answers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions, and I'm presenting it here as an optional, voluntary practice that community members might wish to adopt: voluntary banners at the top of answers indicating how the post adheres to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;game-rec guidelines&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose these two, one for each way a recommendation can be backed up with experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This recommendation for &lt;strong&gt;[item name]&lt;/strong&gt; cites &lt;strong&gt;my own experience&lt;/strong&gt; using it for the purpose in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This recommendation for &lt;strong&gt;[item name]&lt;/strong&gt; cites &lt;strong&gt;someone else's experience&lt;/strong&gt; using it for the purpose in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers could include one of these (without the list bullet) at the very top of the answer, with the part in square brackets replaced with whatever the rest of the answer is recommending. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/62068&quot;&gt;Such a banner would look like this in a real answer post.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't think we need any rules for “validating” the usage of these banners. I think our collective judgement of individual answers will take care of that organically, as usual.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Rationale&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few interlocking reasons to why I think such a simple and &lt;em&gt;voluntary&lt;/em&gt; action could significantly improve our game-rec answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voluntarily reading, choosing, and applying one of these forces oneself to think explicitly about how one's answer fits within the game-rec guidelines. Psychologically speaking, it's hard to choose one of these and then self-justify submitting an answer that doesn't &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; follow the banner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, this voluntary practice will ever-so-slightly improve the answers by users who choose to use it (possibly resulting in getting more votes).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It makes it easier for readers (voters) to know what to expect from the answer, making it easier to absorb what follows. (This would be similar to how academic writing practice includes a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis_statement&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;thesis statement&lt;/a&gt;.) Voters who can more easily absorb an answer are more likely to properly consider it, which leads to more voting. People like (and upvote) clear answers they can grasp sooner more than ones that are hard to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, answers that have banners &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; fulfill their banners will receive positive reinforcement for following the game-rec guidelines, while answers that don't match their banners won't be well-received, reinforcing truth in advertising.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Those who voluntarily adopt these banners in their answers will, just by example, make others think about how they are considering answering the question. This is especially valuable for new users who skip reading the game-rec banner on the question. People will see these concise statements of &lt;em&gt;how these questions should be answered&lt;/em&gt; and imitate it. If answerers never read the game-rec guidelines, but do follow the statements in one of these banners, they'd be fulfilling the game-rec guidelines rather well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, the practice is likely to both spread and to serve as in-place, hands-on education to everyone else jumping in to recommend something, improving our game-rec answers further.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why voluntary?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because game-rec has enough rules and we don't want to weigh it down with more. And because, ultimately, people &lt;em&gt;following&lt;/em&gt; the game-rec guidelines is a matter of site culture rather than enforcement, because enforcement is never perfect, and becomes even less effective when site culture isn't quite aligned with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Self-selected optional banners is a way to remind ourselves about what is important in game-rec answers, and provides a visible indication of our site's culture that can spread and involve new users much more effectively than expecting people to voluntarily read a pageful of yet more site rules. Each use of such a banner would reinforce in oneself how game-rec should be answered, and reinforces it in every passing reader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Templates&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For easy copying and pasting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Own experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt; This recommendation for **[item name]** cites&#xA;&amp;gt; **my own experience** using it for the purpose in the question.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Another's experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt; This recommendation for **[item name]** cites&#xA;&amp;gt; **someone else's experience** using it for the purpose in the question.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Can I change the wording?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see why not. These are completely voluntary and, if adopted, would be completely community-driven. Having a standard format is a good place to start, but they're not meant to be straightjackets for answers either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you keep in mind the game-rec guidelines and the opinion of voters reading your banner and question, it should work just fine. I see no danger of gaming alterations, since banners that are questionable in their adherence to the game-rec guidelines would likely attract downvotes anyway. So, I don't see any reason why the banner can't be worded a bit differently to adjust for corner cases that these three don't fit perfectly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are just suggestions too, and better banners might solidify through community use and become the &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; standard instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-07-20T01:51:13.907" Title="Voluntary banners for game-rec answers" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5640" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5639" CreationDate="2015-07-12T13:05:58.497" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This answer refers to a banner now removed from the suggestion. I now support these banners wholeheartedly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I don’t think the third banner leads to good answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone just googled the question, found a system they’ve never played, and see that it’s described as fitting the question, that doesn’t seem like a good answer. It might be the &lt;em&gt;start&lt;/em&gt; of a good answer (for instance, you might be able to find campaign archives or, or find others outside the site who have played it), but I don’t think we want to suggest that “I can’t vouch for the validity of the claims, but they say &lt;em&gt;System X&lt;/em&gt; does this” is a good game-rec answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can’t recall having seen this sort of answer to a game-rec question, so it’s not a problem we currently have, and I suppose those who actually read Meta will probably be able to use it judiciously (since I’m also sure there are cases where that banner could apply to a good answer), but ultimately I don’t like the idea and think it may lead to users who found this meta, and thought it gave them the A-OK to answer game-recs with something like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-07-13T12:48:31.777" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5641" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-12T17:32:38.227" Score="11" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should citations of designer &lt;em&gt;intent&lt;/em&gt; alone be sufficient for a valid answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions? That is, in the absence of any description of actual play experience?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:48:24.807" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:48:24.807" Title="Game-rec and designer intent" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5641" CreationDate="2015-07-12T17:36:32.573" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game-rec guidelines allow citing other people's experience using a game for the exact use described in a question. Designers are people too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice it's &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; rare for there to exist clear, citable statements from a game's designer that it functions usefully for &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;, where &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; is an exact match for something in a game-rec question, so it's not really an issue. If someone did cite an exact match, it would make for a very good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-07-12T17:36:32.573" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5643" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5641" CreationDate="2015-07-12T17:36:43.760" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, game-rec wants what actually works, not what is supposed to work&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game-rec rules rely on one simple premise: you, or someone you can point to, has actually tried what you recommend, and it actually worked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A statement of designer intent is a statement that something &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; work, but that does not mean it actually &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; work. And &amp;quot;actually does work&amp;quot; is the basic requirement of a game-rec answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designers do, of course, play their own games. Designer statements describing their own play of their games are fine, great even. But the statement alone that they meant for a game to be good for some purpose is insufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-04-14T03:17:47.370" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5644" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5632" CreationDate="2015-07-13T16:55:43.513" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, we should not.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because on SE, we prefer to solve problems we actually have.  It doesn't matter what we're talking about - tags, post notices, other policies.  If we really had a problem where people were taking SE answers as Solid Legal Advice (tm) I would bother to think more about this problem.  But as we have not had any such problem, it is specifically not worth addressing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can all think up thousands of issues that &quot;might happen,&quot; and come up with policies and tags and post notices and feature requests to address them. But that's all wasted effort given the limited resources everyone has to apply to this site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So lacking any real evidence of problems being caused by this on the site, both in this specific case and in any other case where someone is worried about a problem that hasn't actually happened yet, no, action and effort is not merited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-07-13T16:55:43.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5646" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-15T06:56:54.917" Score="-6" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes on RPG stack you're playing that game where you want to do something sneaky or underhanded and its really hard to do so when you can't pass the GM a note to let them know of your intentions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anyway to implement a &quot;note passing&quot; or a &quot;whisper&quot; system in stack-chat?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-01-15T12:03:30.760" LastActivityDate="2016-01-15T12:03:30.760" Title="Is there any way we can set up whispers to certiain screen names in chat?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|chat|private-messaging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2016-08-07T23:43:20.060" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5647" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5639" CreationDate="2015-07-15T07:00:24.787" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is against the culture of Stack Exchange, and should be stopped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, by being a voluntary process only discoverable by being an active user on meta, prejudices the voting pool, and the querent who we are trying to help, against otherwise good answers from new users or those simply ignorant of meta.  It adds a visual cue that 'This is the answer to look at, and those lacking this are worthless'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not even take into account the additional laziness factor it will give answerers; An answer that gives no explanation of how a suggestion actually worked in reality will get a pass simply because of a bit of markdown syntax.  To suggest otherwise proves that these are not needed - if you still have to show how something is based on yours own or second hand experiences, then whats the point of adding the visual syntax for that?  It only serves to distract from the actual content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should be judging an answer based on the actual content of the post.  This has a high chance of hurting that process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have the tools to correct poor answers that would be caught by this procedure - comments and downvotes.  If an answer does not show real world experience, then ask for that in a comment, and/or downvote the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2015-07-15T07:00:24.787" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5646" CreationDate="2015-07-15T15:00:09.453" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. Stack Exchange is probably never (ever, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/431/any-way-to-send-a-personal-message-to-another-user/433#433&quot;&gt;see meta.se&lt;/a&gt;) going to have a private messaging system. Private communication methods exist for official moderator business, but that's about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, we're first and foremost a Q&amp;amp;A network that's here to build &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.codinghorror.com/stack-overflow-none-of-us-is-as-dumb-as-all-of-us/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a public wiki to help people through the problems they're facing&lt;/a&gt;, and while our chat's a great medium to play games on, it's there to support a Q&amp;amp;A network, not to support RPG gameplay. If you want to be able to share notes, I suggest you exchange instant messenger details with the other players or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of our wiki goal, having PMs opens us up to one of the more counterproductive acts available, which is people &lt;em&gt;using them for Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/em&gt;. (This happens too often on forums.) Q&amp;amp;A happens here in the public eye where (a) everyone sees the author's clarifications and updates, (b) everything gets peer reviewed (and terrible ideas like &quot;reinstall your operating system&quot; get called out as such), (c) you can see things everyone's suggested so far, and (d) when it's finally solved, it's solved in public where everyone can access the solution forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of that really happens in PMs, so they don't help our goals and probably undermine them. (I also left out all the potential scam/harassment/exploitation scenarios.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/979/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nsFBS.png&quot; alt=&quot;xkcd comic. text: &amp;quot;never have I felt so close to another soul, and yet so helpelessly alone, as when I google an error, and there&amp;#39;s one result: a thread by someonewith the same problem, and no answer, last posted to in 2003.&amp;quot; comic is a guy shaking his monitor: &amp;quot;who were you, DenverCoder9? WHAT DID YOU SEE?!&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;All long help threads should have a sticky globally-editable post at the top saying &amp;#39;DEAR PEOPLE FROM THE FUTURE: Here&amp;#39;s what we&amp;#39;ve figured out so far ...&amp;#39;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-07-24T00:58:23.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5649" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5655" CreationDate="2015-07-16T01:25:22.343" Score="18" ViewCount="472" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems to me we are getting a bunch of long, rambly, problem-player (and problem-gm) questions all of which share several problems.  One is that they mix in many different issues with a huge amount of unknown social context and want - well, sometiems validation, sometimes solutions, to be honest, and the other is that they all end up having mostly the same answers. &quot;Talk to them, kick them, same page, blah blah.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64812/how-do-you-deal-with-a-player-slowing-the-group-because-of-excessive-rp&quot;&gt;How do you deal with a player slowing the group because of excessive RP?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64799/player-has-little-faith-in-dm-unhappy-with-in-game-events-acts-stubborn-obstr&quot;&gt;Player has little faith in DM, unhappy with in-game events, acts stubborn, obstructing game play&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64852/power-player-is-a-problem-any-fix&quot;&gt;Power player is a problem. Any fix?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64356/how-to-deal-with-rude-players&quot;&gt;How to deal with rude players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64583/how-to-deal-with-feuding-characters-derailing-the-game&quot;&gt;How to deal with feuding characters derailing the game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63785/how-do-i-deal-with-aggressive-disrespectful-criticism&quot;&gt;How do I deal with aggressive/disrespectful criticism?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63566/how-to-deal-with-a-dm-that-doesnt-listen-to-or-cooperate-with-his-co-dms&quot;&gt;How to deal with a DM that doesn&amp;#39;t listen to or cooperate with his co-DMs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62911/how-can-i-suggest-the-dm-stop-trying-to-kill-us&quot;&gt;How can I suggest the DM stop trying to kill us?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79007/my-dm-is-my-roommate-and-not-a-good-dm-help&quot;&gt;My DM is my roommate and not a good DM... help?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to have near-duplicates in general on SE but when the only meaningful answer to a whole class of questions is identical then maybe something needs to be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Workplace.SE has the same issue.  They even made a custom close reason for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, &lt;a href=&quot;https://workplace.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2693/custom-off-topic-close-reasons-change/2695#2695&quot;&gt;click&#xA;  here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we do something like this, or something else to stem the tide of &quot;blah blah another player bugs me or my GM is a meanie?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-04-23T17:13:49.143" Title="Dissatisfied with problem-player questions" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5650" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5649" CreationDate="2015-07-16T01:41:34.990" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well personally I think that each Problem-player or problem-GM question does have a myriad of issues that can be addressed individually which can lead to some pretty complex answers. I don't really think the answer is always &quot;kick the player out, he's a douche&quot; or &quot;your GM is abusing his authority&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the variety in the questions enough to try and peg each individual issue and come up with a solution unique to their situation, however I would much rather the questions have reasons with why their question isn't the garden variety &quot;This guy is being rude at the table&quot; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastActivityDate="2015-07-16T01:41:34.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5649" CreationDate="2015-07-16T01:59:21.110" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Scanning over those questions, it looks like the majority have a unique answer. The workplace, just like the game table, has nuanced issues that are all in the same vein, but we have the added benefit of not being stuck in the real world and have other means to deal with problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top answers I see are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Don't reward the player&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Suggestions on different reasons someone might be having problems with a DM&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A myriad of things between clarifying rules and &amp;quot;the rules don't say I can't&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove player/change character paradigm&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Standard conflict resolution steps&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...I guess pointing out the answer is in the explaination?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stop co-gming or alternate in a different way (good answer!)...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a lot of good answers in there. What we can do is for the ones where the answer is obviously &lt;strong&gt;leave the group&lt;/strong&gt; is to either close the question or see if they can make it a more positive question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What's a positive question?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While my answer in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64356/how-to-deal-with-rude-players/64361#64361&quot;&gt;How to deal with rude players?&lt;/a&gt; focused on the behavior, I also tried to include a somewhat helpful character concept to allow the player to remain and make them less alienating to the players. Though most of my answers don't follow suit, if a question where &amp;quot;obviously leave the group&amp;quot; or a duplicate of something else, maybe salvaging the question by asking something that would benefit the specific situation without being a duplicate is a better option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, what would constitute as &amp;quot;obviously leave the group&amp;quot; is beyond me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8076" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-07-16T01:59:21.110" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5652" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5654" CreationDate="2015-07-16T02:03:08.450" Score="8" ViewCount="610" Body="&lt;p&gt;The conceit of this site is that it provides expert, or &lt;strong&gt;the best&lt;/strong&gt;, answers.  It's hard to have the best answer if you have an incomplete question.  Putting aside the frame challenge and comments that eventually disappear, or get deleted ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64812/how-do-you-deal-with-a-player-slowing-the-group-because-of-excessive-rp&quot;&gt;This post&lt;/a&gt; is but one example of many that has me gritting my teeth on how the questions get answered at this site. (I expect this is a challenge for any &amp;quot;voting site&amp;quot; and will one day read the SE member's book on that topic.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Problem statement&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any of us who may offer an answer on a group dynamics topic only have one side of the story to use as the basis for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a person (me included) asks a question and it involves group dynamics, the default problem is that we only get one person's side of the story from which to attempt to arrive at &lt;em&gt;a most excellent answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have seen in both comments and in answers signs that some responders recognize this, but I have seen far more answers (I am now at ~700 pages of q and a reviewed of 850ish) that provide a canned or favorite response to &lt;strong&gt;a problem presented by one person from a group of people&lt;/strong&gt; regarding what boils down to friction in expectations and interpersonal interactions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This bothers me enough to ask about it.  None of the RPGE &amp;quot;powers that be&amp;quot; nor the SE &amp;quot;powers that be&amp;quot; wish for this venue to turn into an interactive forum type of site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question I'd like to see answered is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;While staying within the constraints of the SE format: are there tags, links, old discussions, or community derived tools that reflect my concern and thus guidance to that flaw in the model?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the flaw?  We only get one side of the story yet try to provide a &amp;quot;best answer&amp;quot; with incomplete information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't get the whole story when a &amp;quot;problem player&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;group dynamics&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;styles are in conflict&amp;quot; question gets asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately, some folks who answer do point to style differences, GNS concepts, and the critical issue of communication in any problem resolution.  Unfortunately, I've seen the canned answers get a lot of up votes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RL &amp;quot;incomplete story&amp;quot; that contributes to why this bugs me&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I have served on two jury's.  The most disturbing thing this has taught me is how a jury does NOT get the whole story.  Never.  Both the defense and the prosecution work to only tell the jury a part of the story.  Lawyers are hard working, smart, and motivated to succeed.  So, the jury does not get the whole story.  On the last jury where I served, the judge visited with us afterwards before we returned to our normal lives.  When asked something by one of my fellow jurors, she shared some facts that could not be introduced into evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, when a jury doesn't have the whole story, the jury can arrive at a &amp;quot;wrong answer&amp;quot; and either convict the wrong person or not convict one who has committed a crime.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site provides an unregulated jury, at best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question repeated:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;While staying within the constraints of the SE format:  are there tags, links, old discussions, or tools that reflect my concern and thus guidance to that flaw in the model?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I am sure I have been guilty of this already at least once.  It was the linked post, and @thatgirldm's reply (which I liked a lot, including the diva point) that got the gears churning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-08T02:46:41.507" Title="The Problem of One Side of the Story: what tools to address?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5652" CreationDate="2015-07-16T05:27:49.020" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comparison to a jury is misleading at best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are not judges, juries, or otherwise in control of the fate of any persons. We do not need to be fair. No-one will be unjustly incarcerated due to our limited acces to ineffable Truth. We have a limited ability to cause errors, because we can only &lt;em&gt;advise&lt;/em&gt;, not enforce our conclusions. A real, intelligent human being who knows their situation well considers any advice we give, and acts on it or not, possibly with modifications or unique inspirations, under their own discretion and discernment of the facts. All we provide is perspective, concepts, and knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So. We don't need the whole story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All we need is one person and &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; problem. We are here to help solve problems, not render verdicts. We can give them advice for how they might proceed, knowing that we're speaking to only one person in a dynamic. If we can help them navigate their problem, even a little, we have served them and our site's purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-07-16T05:37:03.033" LastActivityDate="2015-07-16T05:37:03.033" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5652" CreationDate="2015-07-16T13:21:16.070" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tend to agree, actually, that this is a problem.  We are here to solve problems - but a lot of the time, when the stated problems is &quot;someone else is an idiot!&quot; the problem is likely at least 50% with the poster themselves. This can be glaringly obvious (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64852/power-player-is-a-problem-any-fix&quot;&gt;Power player is a problem. Any fix?&lt;/a&gt;) or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are probably also referring to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64812/how-do-you-deal-with-a-player-slowing-the-group-because-of-excessive-rp&quot;&gt;How do you deal with a player slowing the group because of excessive RP?&lt;/a&gt; where the lead answer, I actually initially downvoted and worked with the poster because based on the questioner's clearly biased viewpoint, they were labeling the &quot;problem-player&quot; a &quot;diva&quot; and putting a lot of blame/shame on them. Which might be justified but might not be. The worst of the language was cleaned up but you are (correctly IMO) reacting to the remaining bias in it. And here's why that's not useful - these things are often just personality, playstyle, etc. conflicts where one person isn't &quot;right&quot; or &quot;wrong.&quot; If the solution to a problem is &quot;go tell them they are bad people doing bad things&quot; is that really going to solve any social problem IRL? No, it's not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't Reddit.  We can do better than that. Posts here, if they are just to get &quot;internet validation,&quot; are not a real question. They are here to solve their IRL problem, and so they need to also learn how to express themselves constructively and see two sides to an issue (admittedly a hard thing to learn from a post if you haven't already).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5649/dissatisfied-with-problem-player-questions&quot;&gt;Dissatisfied with problem-player questions&lt;/a&gt; where this issue is part of my general dissatisfaction with these kinds of questions. I definitely support us coming up with some better formulation for problem-X questions that helps to mitigate that many of them are just rants about &quot;hey this dude is a goon, right?&quot; and the answers are &quot;yes from your description clearly they are a goon, tell them to shape up or kick them/leave.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-07-16T13:21:16.070" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5655" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5649" CreationDate="2015-07-17T09:20:34.813" Score="18" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we do something like this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Generally speaking&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the workplace, this rule makes sense, because the options are so limited and specific. There is a contract to be followed, there are laws to be adhered to and people writing an answer have a hard time knowing either. At the same time, a lot is at stake. There really cannot be a good answer to &amp;quot;my boss is an ***hole&amp;quot;. That's not even a question. As a matter of fact, &amp;quot;if you need the money, you have to bear it&amp;quot; will always be &amp;quot;correct&amp;quot; in a way. The same goes for &amp;quot;just quit&amp;quot;, which is NotAnAnswer as per the rules for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here on the other hand, we have group dynamics of groups that work roughly the same globally, with a balance of power where all members are basically equal. There is no boss, there is no contract and there are no repercussions other than not having fun. So solutions will be transferrable. My powerplayer is a lot like your power player. Because unlike employment law in two different countries, we operate on the same rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;In this specific cases&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is a lot more information and details in the problem player posts here than in any closed post on Workplace.SE. I mean they have line breaks. Real line breaks! Even before editing! That's more than we get over at the workplace for most of the rants :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If something is a duplicate, we can close-vote it as such. For the time being, I think that's enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-07-17T09:20:34.813" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5639" CreationDate="2015-07-20T01:45:08.473" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's an optional add-on that people may wish to use if they want to include an explanatory link in a banner they use. This is provided down here rather than in the post above because it complicates the idea and may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's been requested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This code added directly below the banner code will add a little &lt;strong&gt;[?]&lt;/strong&gt; mark (with a &quot;What's this?&quot; tooltip) to the end of any banner's wording that links to this meta page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt; &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[?]](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5639 &quot;What’s this?&quot;)&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Paste it below the code for whatever banner is being used, with no blank lines in between, and it will work as in this example (hover over the link to see the tooltip):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This recommendation for &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sentient Blueberry Muffins: The Role-Playing Game&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; cites&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;my own experience&lt;/strong&gt; using it for the purpose in the question.&#xA;  &lt;sup&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5639&quot; title=&quot;What’s this?&quot;&gt;[?]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-07-20T01:51:13.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5657" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5658" CreationDate="2015-07-24T01:43:01.650" Score="7" ViewCount="206" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do I get -2 Reputation for some of my questions?  They are sincere questions.  And I don't have the reputation to tag this with reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23932" OwnerDisplayName="Progredi" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-07-24T02:57:44.137" LastActivityDate="2015-07-24T02:57:44.137" Title="Why do some of my questions have a (-2) to reputation?" Tags="|support|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5658" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5657" CreationDate="2015-07-24T02:07:06.200" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, the short answer is: because someone thought they were unclear, not researched, or not useful, and downvoted them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long answer is: You probably need to do some exploring of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help centre&lt;/a&gt;. In particular, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;our page on reputation&lt;/a&gt; explains all the details of how reputation works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is a community that works differently to regular forums, and has its own rules and guidelines. There are a lot of potential pitfalls for a new user, so I really can't recommend strongly enough that you skim through the help centre to learn how things work around here. A quick glance through some of the meta questions in the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; category might be helpful too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-07-24T02:08:11.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5659" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5657" CreationDate="2015-07-24T02:08:23.473" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions get upvoted &amp;amp; downvoted by readers, based on whether they think the question is a good one or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hovering over the up/down buttons gives you a quick summary of the criteria:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question shows research effort; it is useful and clear&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more information on how the site works, you can read the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help&lt;/a&gt; pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14988" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-07-24T02:08:23.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="102" CreationDate="2015-07-27T07:05:29.703" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you wanted to collaboratively work on settings, or even parts of modules at a time, I think you'll have better luck of at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding StackExchange&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack is at heart a Question and Answer site.  If you had a setting question you wanted a direct answer to, we can definitely help.  If you wanted an opinion or a collaborative effort, that doesn't fit within the guidelines of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said - You can always make a new &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Chat&lt;/a&gt; room and ask people for help that way!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23186" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:52:23.590" LastActivityDate="2015-07-27T07:05:29.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5662" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-07-28T06:24:26.790" Score="11" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I down-voted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65370/23186&quot;&gt;This Answer&lt;/a&gt;, as at the time I felt that it didn't actually answer the question as it was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that the question has been edited, this answer is a valid answer and not deserving of my down-vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to implement that votes on answers can be changed on the question itself being edited as well as the voted answer being edited?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23186" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T21:41:31.673" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T21:41:31.673" Title="Is it possible to change a vote on an answer from the question being edited?" Tags="|feature-request|questions|answers|editing|voting|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5663" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5664" CreationDate="2015-07-28T18:26:25.000" Score="6" ViewCount="96" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scroll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scroll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scroll&lt;/a&gt; tag with all of six questions (though one doesn't seem to deserve it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need this tag, or does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; suffice? Should it be merged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2015-07-31T15:10:25.730" LastActivityDate="2015-07-31T15:10:25.730" Title="Do we need a separate [scroll] tag beside the [magic-items] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5663" CreationDate="2015-07-28T18:26:25.000" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is very little adoption of the tag, and the community usage seems to be to tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; instead, there being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=is%3aquestion%20[magic-items]%20scroll&quot;&gt;29 questions about scrolls tagged that way&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the low adoption (showing a lack of need to single out scrolls with their own tag), no searchability advantage over &lt;code&gt;[magic-items] scroll&lt;/code&gt;, and the lack of similar tags for specific kinds of magic items, we should make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scroll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scroll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scroll&lt;/a&gt; into a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-07-28T18:26:25.000" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5665" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5663" CreationDate="2015-07-29T19:01:19.603" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The lack of adoption means it’s probably unwarranted, but just to play Devil’s Advocate here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, at least, scrolls have a fair few rules specific to themselves, some of which are common sources of misunderstandings (scroll mishaps, what a nat-1 means for UMD with a scroll, etc.). There are also a number of classes with special features relating to scrolls, which could prompt questions about the best scrolls available for a certain purpose, perhaps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, it might be valid to think about questions about scrolls as a specific subset of those about magic items in general, and a meaningful distinction is possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...but the fact that people have not been using the tag suggests that, while possible, people have not found value in this distinction, which is why I have voted for d7’s answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-07-29T19:01:19.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5666" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5667" CreationDate="2015-07-30T11:21:09.557" Score="7" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers downvoted to -3 or less are shown grayed out, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/129593/un-fade-low-score-answers-on-rollover-or-click&quot;&gt;they're supposed to unfade when you hover the mouse over them.&lt;/a&gt;  Except it doesn't work here on RPG.SE.  (It does work on most other SE sites.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please fix this, o' great CSS wizards of SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-07-31T09:59:43.507" Title="Downvoted answers stay grayed-out when hovered over" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5666" CreationDate="2015-07-31T09:59:36.210" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This will be fixed in the next deploy (usually several times a day)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="682" LastActivityDate="2015-07-31T09:59:36.210" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5668" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5672" CreationDate="2015-08-02T00:35:35.683" Score="6" ViewCount="432" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Background&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As suggested by @doppelgreener I am posing this question here in response to the closure of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65461/how-does-surprise-work-in-dd-5e&quot;&gt;How does surprise work in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please accept and remember that I do not believe and I do not wish to infer that the people I mention who hold different opinions from me are in any way acting maliciously or capriciously or that they are in any way not 100% admirable human beings.&lt;/strong&gt; I just think they're wrong and they think I'm wrong :).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Originating Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is as stated: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65461/how-does-surprise-work-in-dd-5e&quot;&gt;How does surprise work in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As originally posed it referenced all the Questions I could find on surprise and suggested that they were specific instances of a general misunderstanding of the surprise mechanic in DnD-5e. The answer was posted Q&amp;amp;A style as a Community Wiki and is essentially original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both the question and the answer received a large number of up-votes a favorites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was then closed as &quot;Too broad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As currently posed (post-hold) it quotes the 3 paragraphs from the PHB about surprise and asks for an explanation of this mechanic with examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What this site says about &quot;Too Broad&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;too broad -&lt;/strong&gt; if your question could be answered by an entire book, or has many valid answers, it's probably too broad for our format&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow down the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&lt;/a&gt; it says (my emphasis):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The best questions are &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;those that have specific answers&lt;/a&gt;; RPG.SE is not a general discussion forum. In general, if you have a question which covers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RPG rules or mechanics&lt;/strong&gt;;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;RPG adventures and campaigns;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs (including running them online);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Information about RPG campaign settings;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Techniques for running or playing RPGs; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;then you're in the right place!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We want the questions on our site to be valuable sources of information for the whole Internet, not just our community members, so we try to keep subjective opinions out of our questions and answers when we can. Share your personal play experiences and viewpoints, but avoid argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Community members can and will edit your questions and answers to be clear and grammatically correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Community members will vote up clearly asked, cogent, reasoned questions and answers and vote down off topic, incoherent, or inflammatory questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your motivation for asking the question is “I would like to participate in a discussion about ______”, then you should not be asking here. However, if your motivation is “I would like others to explain ______ to me”, then you are probably OK. (Discussions are of course welcome in our real time web chat.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Discussion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please take the time to read the discussion that took place in the comments because it is really these that are the source of this question. I will attempt to summarize the positions taken by the protagonists; it is not my intention to put words in anyone's mouth or misrepresent what was said, you all have enough reputation to edit this question so I you feel I have done you a disservice please do so so that the summary acurately reflects what you meant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;@GMJoe said the basis of the question as originally posed i.e. as a one-stop-shop for surprise with links to other questions was inappropriate for the forum. I accept that and as a result edited the question so that it stood on its own merits.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;@GMJoe suggested that it was &quot;Unclear&quot; as &quot;It's trying to solve all possible problems with surprise without specifying what those problems are.&quot; and &quot;this question isn't trying to solve a real problem that someone faces&quot;; in this he was supported by @Miniman who said &quot;questions of the type &quot;how does this mechanic work&quot; are too broad. The site deals in specific problems.&quot; Questions on how mechanics work are &lt;strong&gt;specifically&lt;/strong&gt; permitted on this site; they are a permitted class of question that exists independently of those that are attempting to solve a specific problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;@SevenSidedDie &amp;amp; @Miniman both had variations on the theme that high up-votes on question or answer do not save a poor question. I accept that position but they surely must serve as an indicator; if 20+ people think a question is worthwhile then the 5 people who voted to close it should be open to having another look. As my father is very fond of saying to me when I express a strong opinion &quot;Never overlook the possibility that you could be dead wrong.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;@Miniman &amp;amp; @GMJoe both quoted &quot;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face&quot; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&lt;/a&gt;. I do not understand this at all. The question posed is practical (surprise is an inherent part of most DnD 5e combats), answerable (clearly it is because I answered it) and its an actual problem I face (until I looked at these paragraphs thoroughly, I was playing it wrong).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;@BraddSzonye said &quot;The single, very good, not terribly long answer is strong evidence that this close reason does not apply. Voting to reopen.&quot; That's what I'm saying ;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Compare and Contrast&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As my English essay questions used to say ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers I would like to see will demonstrate, within the guidelines this site provides how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65461/how-does-surprise-work-in-dd-5e&quot;&gt;How does surprise work in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt; is too broad while the following are not:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62911/how-can-i-suggest-the-dm-stop-trying-to-kill-us/62925#62925&quot;&gt;How can I suggest the DM stop trying to kill us?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47604/without-a-magic-item-economy-what-is-gold-for/47627#47627&quot;&gt;Without a magic item economy, what is gold for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/20165/how-can-i-play-monsters-and-npcs-up-to-their-potential&quot;&gt;How can I play monsters and NPCs up to their potential?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62346/why-does-the-experience-to-next-level-not-change-between-some-levels/62358#62358&quot;&gt;Why does the experience-to-next-level not change between some levels?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8002/how-do-i-get-my-pcs-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins/25370#25370&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all of these are rules focused so answers can and should address if this is in itself a factor in deciding issues of &quot;too broad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please specifically reference the relevant parts of the sites various &quot;how to&quot; pages and the specific questions cited as referenced above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T16:52:12.067" Title="Is our interpretation of &quot;too broad&quot; too narrow?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5669" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5668" CreationDate="2015-08-02T04:34:41.273" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The question at issue is definitely &quot;Too Broad&quot;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question does not do nearly enough to define its scope. Stripping out the rules quote, the question can be reduced entirely to &quot;Explain surprise to me&quot;. These kinds of questions are ruled as &quot;Too Broad&quot; for a few reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They don't present a problem that is solved by RPG expertise. This question is solved by reading the rules, and maybe by playing out an encounter. There is no expertise involved, just reading.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They don't present a specific problem. The guidelines of the site are based upon making it valuable for &lt;em&gt;future readers&lt;/em&gt;. With a question that is this nonspecific, it's unlikely that a future reader will find it as a solution to a problem they are having.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way to evaluate whether a question is likely to be &quot;Too Broad&quot; is whether it is capable of having multiple valid answers. Most questions are formed such many valid answers of the form &quot;Yes because X&quot;, &quot;No because Y&quot; exist. Not all of those answers are good, but they are all valid. If we contrast with the question at issue, it fails this test on two counts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is only one correct answer because multiple answers would each address separate parts of the question. A valid answer must stand alone and address the entirety of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is only one correct answer because the answer is just repeating the official rules text.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11157" LastActivityDate="2015-08-02T04:34:41.273" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5670" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-02T05:30:28.367" Score="2" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;On this answer here:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65542/2064&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65542/2064&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A definition is given of  a word.  That definition is NOT provided by the text of the book being referenced.  My comment alerting readers to this fact is being deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are going to quote the book, quote the book accurately, and stop trying to hide the fact that you are doing so!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment for the record, which keeps getting deleted is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;The definition of the word provided here does not match the one provided by the PHB, please make that more clear.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This back and forth of deleting relevant comments is getting ridiculous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I attempted to make it more clear by having the source include only the actual table in the book, instead of the paragraph defining &quot;Trinkets&quot;.  That also was reverted, despite there being no items on page 159.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using mod privileges to erase comments that are perfectly valid, seems frankly quite harmful to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-08-02T09:53:58.957" Title="Stop deleting valid comments because you don't like them" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5670" CreationDate="2015-08-02T06:21:29.020" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being agitated about a point of game rules does not entitle you to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Argue in comments - I deleted a big ol' thread of back and forth and repeating yourselves.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ignore mod directives - I said stop arguing in comments and I meant it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your comment has been declined as an improvement by the poster of that answer. If you feel strongly about it put it in your own answer. You have, now the community can vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Continuing to argue in comments after this point will result in specific further mod action you will not like. Even if it is the most important point ever made in the world. You should probably take a walk AFK and get some perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-08-02T06:28:07.243" LastActivityDate="2015-08-02T06:28:07.243" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5668" CreationDate="2015-08-02T06:26:58.397" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are simply saying &quot;explain a rules system to me.&quot;  You may as well ask how combat works, or how spellcasting works. Your question indicates no problem, nothing you are clear on or specifically unclear on.  It does not appear to be a real question based on a problem you have - &quot;I want someone to read it to me&quot; is not a real problem. What is the specific problem you have with the rules?  Seems to me that since you're self-posting an answer you are just trying to make a faq or dupe target and like most question seeding the problem is that it may or may not help someone with a real specific question about surprise. The SE way is to answer those new questions, not artificially extend some master community wiki to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So no, this isn't what we do, and it will stay closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-08-02T06:26:58.397" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5670" CreationDate="2015-08-02T06:56:38.640" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You suggested an improvement to an answer and it was declined by the answerer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When that happens, the comment should get flagged as obsolete by the answerer and the responding moderator will delete it unless the comment's been upvoted in the meantime. &lt;strong&gt;No part of this process requires the answerer to be a moderator&lt;/strong&gt;; it'd work the same way for you or me or anybody else who uses the comment-flagging system. When the person flagging them as obsolete is the person who wrote the answer, &quot;deleting comments because you don't like them&quot; is kinda basic protocol.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why should the comment get flagged and deleted? Because we know that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/4398&quot;&gt;&quot;when users start adding important, useful, and interesting information in the commentary, you break down that structure of 'one question, best answer.'&quot;&lt;/a&gt; Leaving the info in a comment means stranding information you think is useful in a non-searchable, non-votable part of the site! If you feel the info is important enough to preserve, the thing to do is (as you have) to make it part of your own answer--and downvote the other answer if you think leaving out that info makes it worthy of such action. The Stack's outlet for &quot;But you're wrong!&quot; is downvoting and giving better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And anyway, once a user declines to fold a comment's information into her answer, repeating the suggestion probably won't make her re-consider.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-08-02T09:53:58.957" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5674" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-05T13:26:44.793" Score="7" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question that is nearly identical to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15777/is-there-a-spell-managing-program-app-for-dd-3-5e&quot;&gt;Is there a spell managing program/app for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e?&lt;/a&gt; however about Pathfinder instead of 3.5&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am aware the two systems are very alike but I would like PF specific answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this question be a duplicate, or would it be OK due to being about a different system? If it would be a dup, what would be the best way to go about asking about Pathfinder specific Spell Managers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8933" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-08-05T16:50:52.440" Title="Would this be a duplicate?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5674" CreationDate="2015-08-05T16:50:52.440" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it would not be a duplicate, ask away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-08-05T16:50:52.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5676" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-06T08:14:09.520" Score="32" ViewCount="362" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG rules, in pursuit of flavour, can sometimes be flowery and ambiguous, even self-contradicting&lt;sup&gt;[citation needed]&lt;/sup&gt;. In doing research for improving one of my answers that tries to resolve an interaction of two character powers, I have encountered evidence of varying strengths for opposing conclusions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Consider both conclusions in a single answer, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post two answers, each putting forward a single conclusion and its arguments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, is the best practice different if only &lt;em&gt;part&lt;/em&gt; of the conclusion, or an interim conclusion, is different? If so, how much of the overall answer has to be 'different' to warrant a separate post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19575" LastActivityDate="2015-08-06T15:32:44.903" Title="Should I post two answers if I find contradicting arguments?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5676" CreationDate="2015-08-06T08:46:33.100" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;I look at this from the point of view of the voter, and I try to give answers which are clear to vote on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a voter, I feel tricked when two different answers that would each be sufficient on their own are lumped into one single post. It means I have to choose only one response to two answers, and that's not cool. (And it leads to &quot;I disagree&quot; comments, which aren't good either.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also not helpful to people in the future: the point of voting is to sort answers by how useful the groupmind thinks they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But on the other hand, I don't want to crowd up the page with multiple answers that are almost identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if I have two answers to a question I need to ask myself, &quot;Could these each stand on their own as an answer?&quot; and &quot;Is it clear what the difference between them is?&quot; If the answer to both is &quot;Yes,&quot; then I definitely make 'em separate answers. If both are &quot;No,&quot; then I leave 'em together. If one's &quot;Yes&quot; and one's &quot;No,&quot; then I make a judgement call based on how I'd feel about being asked to vote on them together or separately--if I think I'd feel compelled to leave a comment explaining my vote, I should definitely separate them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2015-08-06T08:46:33.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5676" CreationDate="2015-08-06T10:37:05.910" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Put both conclusions in but one answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory BESW's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5677/8610&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; is correct. Were the system perfect, each question about an ambiguity would get &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; answers, each answer addressing a different area of that ambiguity and reaching a different (or the same) conclusion. Voters would read each answer, recognize the nuances of each, and a best single-conclusion answer would float to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't work that way. The body of experts is too small to make that number of different answers a reasonable expectation, and the patience required to read and recognize subtleties between multiple answers is, for many, too vast. Finally, the tendency to consolidate earlier answers into a clearinghouse of a lone big answer &lt;em&gt;later&lt;/em&gt; exists, so were a dozen alternative answers presented individually, another later answer might piggyback on those, add others, include some uniques, and end up with a good, cool, useful (if massive) multipurpose answer with greater appeal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, an answer that &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; address at least &lt;em&gt;obvious&lt;/em&gt; alternative conclusions in favor of single-shotting a lone conclusion is often downvoted, even if the lone conclusion that's reached is elegant, reasoned, and playable. That's because those who &lt;em&gt;disagree&lt;/em&gt; with the lone conclusion downvote the answer because they think it's &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; rather than downvote the answer because they think it's &lt;em&gt;not useful&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; taking a side makes you uncomfortable, take sides for or against one of the sides you've presented &lt;em&gt;within&lt;/em&gt; the answer itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer that addresses multiple sides of the same issue is often considered &lt;em&gt;more useful&lt;/em&gt; than an answer that addresses just one side.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; I &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that users never need justify downvotes and can downvote for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; reason, yet the mouseover text on the downvote button really does say &lt;em&gt;This answer is not useful&lt;/em&gt; not &lt;em&gt;This answer is wrong&lt;/em&gt;, which I've always appreciated as a nod to &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; answers still having the possibility to be &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-08-06T10:37:05.910" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5679" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5676" CreationDate="2015-08-06T15:32:44.903" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It really depends on the details of your answer(s), and there is no one-size-fits-all rule you can follow that will always be the best course of action. Your exact &lt;em&gt;execution&lt;/em&gt; matters much more than the issue of together or separate, and we can't predict the details of execution. This is something that can only be figured out by doing it and learning from real experience with real answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So just write your answer or answers, and observe the resulting votes and community response. Repeat a few times and you'll develop a sense of what does and doesn't work. There is no substitute for learning from the live site's feedback system, because teaching users how (and how not) to answer is a large part of its purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is how every best practice we've developed locally at RPG.se has been discovered: people trying things, and the community discovering and discussing after the fact what works and what doesn't. Join us in that grand tradition!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-06T15:32:44.903" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5680" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5682" CreationDate="2015-08-08T13:10:57.617" Score="12" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65605/simplified-character-creation-rules-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about simplified character creation rules, and it's received a few answers, but I'm wishing that instead I'd omitted the word 'rules' and just asked about simplified (or simplifying) character creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if the two questions would actually get different answers, but I feel like the difference is significant. What's more, some of the answers do seem to cover what I &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; I'd asked, but not what I &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I choose the answer that fits the asked question best, and make a new question?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should I leave it alone and choose the answer that fits my needs best?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should I take what I need from different answers and self-answer?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should I do something else entirely?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21625" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-08-09T17:19:07.453" Title="What to do if I wish I'd worded the question differently?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5680" CreationDate="2015-08-08T17:29:21.190" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would do the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask a new question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the previous question to explain why the new one and ask the users whose answer is better suited to the second question to repost it there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Also comment on those answers, pointing out the same thing. &quot;I think your answer is good and I liked it, but please repost it there&quot;. They will lose votes, which is sad, but whatever, Those answers didn't really fit the original question in the first place so no loss.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(if it is possible, ask for answer relocation by the admins)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the old question there anyway, for posterity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2015-08-08T17:29:21.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5682" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5680" CreationDate="2015-08-08T21:37:58.220" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Edit the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does have the effect of potentially turning 'good answers for another question into bad answers for this question', but such is life.  The intent of editing for clarity is important even after an answer has been posted.  Answerers who see the edit should adjust their answer, or delete it.  Those who do not see the edit in the question will have their answers downvoted.  This is the intended purpose of the site.  There are only 4 answers to that question, so it shouldn't be that big of a deal.  It is a good idea, but strictly speaking not required, to leave a comment on the answer, so the answerer is notified of the change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if the question is DRASTICALLY different, just ask another question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2015-08-09T17:19:07.453" LastActivityDate="2015-08-09T17:19:07.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5683" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5684" CreationDate="2015-08-09T01:40:41.623" Score="2" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I see questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24328/can-a-lich-redeem-itself?s=1%7C3.5567&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; there is a high possibility that there is going to be two answers in one, and that creates a dichotomy of which the answerer could be right with one and wrong with the other. Although D&amp;amp;D 3.5 is the ancestor of Pathfinder, there are still different rules regardless of the crossover compatibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless a questioner is seeking both, should it be also incorporated into the question as such, without simply slapping on tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11343" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:31:32.867" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:31:32.867" Title="Pathfinder &amp; D&amp;D 3.5 Tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|dungeons-and-dragons|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5683" CreationDate="2015-08-09T01:53:47.127" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags should always be adjusted to suit the question actually asked. When someone tags with both and it's not 100% clear why from the text of the question, we'll comment to ask them to clarify what they were thinking when they added that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, don't edit the question to reflect the tags until it's clarified whether they are actually part of the intended question. Often enough they're just guessing that the other game from what they're actually playing &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be relevant — in those cases, they don't actually need both, and should leave it up to the answers to suggest that rules from the other game might be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, tags should reflect the game actually being played and the specific question being asked about it. If there are more game tags, the question should make it clear why and it should be a good reason. Without a good reason for using both tags, we remove the extra tags, as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the question you're using as an example, that should have either been clarified by the asker in the first place, or had the extra &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tag removed. Since it's an older question though, perfect tagging is not necessarily important enough to justify bumping the question back onto the front page, and I would normally wait for it to be bumped for some other reason (e.g., a new answer is posted) before making small edits like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-08-09T04:25:06.887" LastActivityDate="2015-08-09T04:25:06.887" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5685" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5686" CreationDate="2015-08-10T08:49:42.350" Score="11" ViewCount="278" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66893/can-any-creature-elect-to-make-touch-attacks-or-ranged-touch-attacks&quot;&gt;Can any creature elect to make touch attacks or ranged touch attacks?&lt;/a&gt; is a terrific question and it deserves the critical attention it is getting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that brings forth a very good conundrum brought forth by the comments in one of the answers. Regarding rules there could be an Open rule interpretation, and a Closed rule interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie stated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Closed&quot; is where only actions chosen from what&#xA;  the rules offer are legal (i.e., inputs must derive from and stay&#xA;  within the system: a closed system), while &quot;open&quot; is where actions are&#xA;  attempted and rules picked to implement them (i.e., inputs may come&#xA;  from outside the rules: an open system). Put another way, which view&#xA;  is operating in this Q&amp;amp;A: &quot;the rules must explicitly permit touching&#xA;  someone in combat for someone to do so&quot;, or &quot;you want to touch them?&#xA;  OK, we can resolve that using the touch attack rules…&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is using the Open-Rules-Mindset appropriate for RP.SE or is Closed-Rules-Mindset appropriate? Are they both appropriate? How should they documented?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11343" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T09:34:27.197" Title="Open-Rules-Mindset vs. Closed-Rules-Mindset" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5685" CreationDate="2015-08-10T09:11:06.237" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask questions according to the playstyle of the people who are facing the challenge, and answer questions in ways that you in good faith believe will be useful to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some RPG systems are explicitly closed while others are explicitly open; most systems  that I've encountered imply a stance but don't make it explicit. Naturally every group has the right to choose how they prefer to play regardless of their chosen system's stance (if any) on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this is a playstyle issue. We've affirmed, time and again, that &lt;strong&gt;there's plenty of room for every playstyle here&lt;/strong&gt; and it's inappropriate for RPG.SE citizens to tell people they're playing wrong (provided everyone's safe, of course).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So both the mindsets you've provided (as well as others; the vast array of RPGs means dichotomies of style aren't useful generalisations) are appropriate to find on the site. &lt;strong&gt;I see no need to formalise a system to indicate these philosophies.&lt;/strong&gt; Most of the time they're pretty obvious, and it's a simple matter to just &lt;em&gt;ask&lt;/em&gt; if clarification is needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because, of course, good posts explain themselves: if there's some confusion over the philosophy a querent or answerer is bringing to their post, it's totally appropriate to ask them to clarify their position. This isn't because we think one position's right or wrong, but because a post is most useful when we're familiar with the playstyle assumptions underlying it. (Please note: this is not a license to harass folk. It's mostly something you'd ask a querent rather than an answerer, and it's almost always pretty easy to infer the rules-ward playstyle from a post's content anyway. If you feel the philosophy in an answer is non-useful to the question's context, that's what the downvote button is for.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-08-10T09:34:27.197" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T09:34:27.197" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5687" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-10T17:01:11.337" Score="8" ViewCount="478" Body="&lt;p&gt;Now this is a small rant of mine but since I'm a new user I'm guaranteed to get maybe -1 or -2 on this post but here I go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;now this is related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2971/new-user-experience-why-allow-downvotes-esp-below-0-on-already-closed-questi&quot;&gt;New User Experience: Why allow downvotes (esp. below 0) on already closed questions?&lt;/a&gt; so read that a bit if you want but on with the rant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First question I put on RPG.SE I got a negative vote but I got good feedback: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65577/how-do-i-deal-with-a-dm-who-restricts-my-character-options&quot;&gt;How do I deal with a DM who restricts my character options?&lt;/a&gt; However I got a -1 so I thought well since I got a good answer I will put [Answered] as to stop people coming and giving negative votes. Only to have the post title edited not even 2 minutes later to remove that.. and then to get another negative vote. That feels like people are setting the bar a bit high. And then there is a reputation system.. like having to get 15 rep in order to vote or 50 rep to comment. To new users like me this is quite a high bar to jump over. the Rep system in general is a good idea it just makes getting into the sites main features quite hard for a new user unless you post several question a day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And onto the second part which gripes about the dreaded [On Hold] tag. The [On Hold] tag can mean your question may never be answered since no one can post answers. Maybe allowing for answer might be a good idea (since I have come across [On Hold] tag questions that I can easily answer) and add to that one of my other questions got [On Hold] when it was already answered: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66908/5e-striker-what-class-should-i-be&quot;&gt;5e Striker. What class should I be? [on hold]&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;so my questions are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would be the best way to allow new user to access the site easily ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can be done to improve the reputation system ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can be done to improve the [On Hold] tag ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And: What can be done to stop General Shin kicking for new users ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: This is a open ended discussion and will remain that way until a condition has been met [An Answers idea has been put into use]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24149" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-04-05T18:50:09.960" LastActivityDate="2018-04-05T18:50:09.960" Title="Question &quot;On Hold&quot; but its already been answered, Negative votes on new user posts, And general Shin kicking" Tags="|discussion|comments|new-users|down-votes|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="31" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5688" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2015-08-10T17:14:51.557" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;First let me say welcome to RPG.SE. In general a lot of the issues you've brought up have to do not only with RPG.SE's guidelines but overall guidelines followed by just about every site on stackexchange. I'll try to address each issue individually, but as a holistic approach I would simply say that Stackexchange expects a user to learn about how the site works and adjust their behavior to fit in and handles that by the privilege system and distributed user rights allowing the community to self-police its actions and users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On Hold is less a tag for users and applied after the fact when a question is put on hold by a vote of 5 users (with the rights) or a diamond mod. Questions are put on hold because they do not meet the quality and content guidelines for the site. When a question is on hold no new answers can be given for it until it is reopened. On hold is used to help improve questions without low quality answers coming in until the question itself is high quality. It also is the state a question will be in if it is deemed not an appropriate fit for the site and will remain so until deleted by the user or a moderator. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes are not a judgement on you personally but on the quality of the question itself. Downvotes are a tool for the community to encourage you to improve or delete the question as a way of maintaining and improving the overall quality of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general if you are looking for information both the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; page and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help&lt;/a&gt; page contain a wealth of information to help new users. Hitting those low rep privileges is actually easier than you think since a question upvote is worth 5 points and an answer upvote worth 10. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T17:14:51.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2015-08-10T18:33:04.890" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;First thing, I have to say right off that none of these things are under our power to change. The software is designed that way, and RPG.se doesn't have control over the software. I will attempt to explain why they work the way they do, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there will be no answer that is put into use, because RPG.se can't change the things you've brought up. (The place to propose change to SE network software is &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Meta.StackExchange.com&lt;/a&gt;, but as will become clear, these three things aren't up for negotiation anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Reputation is functioning as intended&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reputation system is a gatekeeper: only users who have learned how to contribute to the &lt;em&gt;main&lt;/em&gt; purpose of the site earn access to things that are not the &lt;em&gt;main&lt;/em&gt; purpose of the site. Anyone can ask questions and post answers, even anonymous users. Users have to figure out how to do those two things according to RPG.se's goals before they get access to any other abilities, and that's very deliberate. The Stack Exchange model strongly emphasises asking and answering questions, so only users who have figured out how to do that in the way SE needs can unlock more privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Held questions are functioning as intended&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of a question being on hold is to prevent answers. That's 100% the point of it. There will never be an option to answer questions that are on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Holding (and closing) questions exists because Stack Exchange specialises in only certain kinds of questions. Any question that is looking for discussion or opinions is off topic, because the point of Stack Exchange is to handle questions that have solutions, not discussion or argument. SE was invented to do what discussion forums do poorly (solve problems), and will never be altered to try to handle what discussion forums already do very well already (general discussion, brainstorming, and opinion sharing). When people submit questions that don't fit they get put on hold permanently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you mention, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66908/5e-striker-what-class-should-i-be&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66908/5e-striker-what-class-should-i-be&lt;/a&gt;, is on hold because it's asking for ideas. It will stay held, and in four more days it will graduate to &lt;strong&gt;[closed]&lt;/strong&gt; instead of &lt;strong&gt;[on hold]&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it will remain votable. The purpose of votes is to sort questions, and held questions still need sorting. Votes give or take away reputation for the post owner, because that's part of the point of the reputation system: useful questions are rewarded with positive reputation, and the kinds of questions that RPG.se doesn't want people to ask more of are rewarded with negative reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;General shin kicking either gets better or worse, depending on the user's choices&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The shin kicking isn't actually kicking. It's more like someone walking into a thorny bush and suffering the scratches that naturally causes. Getting ripped by thorn bushes stops happening when users notice there are signs marking the path, and stop walking off the path into the thorn bushes. The thorn bushes exist to protect the sensitive parts of the site, which if walked on, would eventually destroy the site's usefulness and reason for existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users generally don't already know that walking over there causes damage. Also, because most other places on the internet let people walk there, new users here often assume they can walk there here too. We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help centre&lt;/a&gt; that says &lt;em&gt;“don't walk over there, please stay on the paths, thank you,”&lt;/em&gt; but there are always 10 people who don't read that for every one who does, and of those who do read them, full understanding of their implications is rarely automatic. The negative reinforcement of the reputation system is to enforce the rules and protect the site, whether people have read the rules or not, and in general to teach the practical application of the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new user who keeps on running into the negative reputation effects (walking into the thorn bushes) is causing a problem for the site: they're not following the rules or purpose of the site. Rather than suffer the problem though, the site makes &lt;em&gt;that user&lt;/em&gt; responsible for solving the problem: it lets the user decide when they've had enough thorns. When a user decides they've had enough thorns, they do one of two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site is okay with this, because what the site is doing is very specific and is not what everyone is looking for. If someone personally doesn't work well with both negative and positive feedback, they won't like it here and leaving is the right choice. Similarly, if someone has mistaken RPG.se for a discussion site, they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; go elsewhere, because discussion sites &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;elsewhere&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Adjust&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site is okay with this too. A user to adjusts how they use the site until they start getting positive feedback has started using the site for what it was designed for. That's an improvement in the site's goals and purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's like learning to skateboard: when you fall it hurts, and when something hurts you learn to stop doing it. To stop falling, you either by giving up learning to skateboard entirely, or get better enough at skateboarding so you don't fall very often anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;In conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The held status and reputation system are functioning exactly as intended. They worked to make you do something different: post here! You decided to adjust a little bit, instead of leaving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means that you have another chance of learning how the site works and what it expects from users. You also know more now that RPG.se isn't designed to make everyone happy or be used for everything related to RPGs; it's designed to attract people who want to work with its system, and be unattractive to those who aren't interested in doing what it aims to do. It's not the only place for RPG stuff online and purposefully doesn't try to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now you have some context for understanding &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; holds, negative reputation, and a bumpy ride for new users exist, and if those goals sound worthy to you, you'll adjust a bit more to accept them as a necessary evil outweighed by the good they do. If not, you might be closer to deciding that what RPG.se &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; is about isn't what you were &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; looking for, now that you know a bit more about what RPG.se is for. Either way, the site moves that tiny bit closer to being in harmony with its purpose and the users who help it get there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T18:46:56.240" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5690" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2015-08-10T19:54:16.420" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5141/can-we-improve-the-way-we-treat-newcomers&quot;&gt;Can we improve the way we treat newcomers?&lt;/a&gt; for a discussion about putting questions on hold, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-users&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-users&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-users&lt;/a&gt; tag for previous discussions of all your points. The short form is that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The rep system is working as designed - you earn rep by knowing how to do things in our way, and then you get to do more things.  These boundaries exist because new users don't know how we do things, and won't learn without some guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closing questions is working as designed - we have specifically decided (we here and SE in general) that putting questions on hold while they are fixed up, rather than dealing with the resulting bad/confusing answer storm from leaving them open, is the right way to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Everyone can do a better job of being more welcoming to new users - welcome them, point out what they could do to improve, link them to the help center/relevant meta/whatever. It's easier to learn the rules and be happy if someone helps you.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in general this isn't a &quot;do what you want&quot; forum.  To maintain our super-high quality we have rules so that we don't turn into the other things out there.  If you want to blabber aimlessly go to Reddit, if you want hugs and personal validation go to Tumblr, if you want well curated clear answers to clear on topic questions, come here. So we should help new users learn the rules, but we are not interested in scrapping the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T19:54:16.420" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2015-08-10T22:27:44.327" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The &quot;Shin Kicking&quot; Happens To Induce Us To Ask Good Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pallas, I am a fairly new user and had to do a bit of work (trial and error) to figure out how to ask a good question and how to draft a decent answer.  (Even so, an answer I wrote last week was deleted by the mods ... so it goes).  If we have 'forum' habits from years of interacting on forums, there's bit of cultural adaptation to get the most out of this site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you have on hold looks like a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;character optimization question&lt;/a&gt;.  A good optimization question needs to meet certain criteria.  The quote below is from the best answer to a meta question on character optimization.  It got 18 votes: no other answer got even close, so there's some good guidance there.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please open the links in that question for each case, 1, 2, 3.  This should help you see what a good optimization question looks like.   If you can reshape your question to get into a better form, it may get taken off of hold and get more than one answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are 3 types of char-op questions that fall into the &quot;good&quot; category:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm 90% complete and I need help making the final selection or two.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I need some general advice on direction for a build. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The last kind of question that I see as useful is the challenge question. These are the most borderline Op questions IMO, but they can also be the most fun.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have you ever heard the adage &quot;there are no bad questions?&quot;  I've heard that in the work place, in safety meetings, at church, many places. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, there are bad questions here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T22:27:44.327" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5692" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-10T23:33:21.910" Score="5" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Links are suddenly blue. Personally, from a usability standpoint, I find this to be a significant improvement (blue is the standard link color on the internet, the dull red stands out poorly compared to black to my eyes), but it doesn’t seem to fit with the overall color scheme of the site and in any event is quite sudden and unannounced, so I suspect a bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="2973" LastEditDate="2015-08-11T04:42:30.043" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T04:42:45.033" Title="Links suddenly blue?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|css|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5692" CreationDate="2015-08-10T23:33:21.910" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I actually prefer the blue color, and wouldn’t mind seeing it stay. I bring up this up because I assume it is unintended, but not really because I want things to go back. This answer provided to give a place to vote on this as a change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T23:33:21.910" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5692" CreationDate="2015-08-10T23:50:31.893" Score="-1" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/23345578#23345578&quot;&gt;Blue text&lt;/a&gt; is a bit of a vibe killer. We have this cool customized Stack look and feel. This is totally breaking that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastActivityDate="2015-08-10T23:50:31.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5692" CreationDate="2015-08-10T23:50:54.097" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This happens occasionally. It seems to be associated with site updates and broken profile page layouts. I'm pretty sure the link blue (and its associated &quot;mouseover&quot; blue, &quot;visited link&quot; blue, etc) is the colour used for link text in the default Stack interface, so I'm guessing this is what it looks like when a site update breaks the site-specific interface and the default bleeds through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether the blue is added permanently or not, it'd be a good idea to re-visit the site design with thought for &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;accessibility to the visually impaired&lt;/a&gt;. Neither the blue link colours nor the older red-brown link colours are really great for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-08-11T02:15:46.823" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T02:15:46.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5692" CreationDate="2015-08-11T01:01:44.627" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is presently working on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/253359/152515&quot;&gt;some major CSS updates&lt;/a&gt; for our site and a few others. (These updates are for the Stack Exchange developers' sakes and aren't supposed to affect how our site actually looks.) These blue links showed up a few weeks ago and stuck around for half an hour, and various other things have broken occasionally recently, as BESW's mentioned. The redesign recently reached the stage where they were prepared to work on RPG.SE and several other sites, so this is probably a matter of things breaking and being repaired while they rejig their CSS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This stuff is in connection with &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244238/152515&quot;&gt;the profile page makeover&lt;/a&gt; which we'll receive sometime after the CSS updates are completed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T01:01:44.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5697" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2015-08-11T03:28:11.047" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to add a second answer that gets to the real problem you have.  You think your problem is that everyone's being mean and closing your question.  The real problem is that your question is incoherent and not able to be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that at its heart your question is a &quot;type 2&quot; charop question, so it has the capacity to be valid. If your question really was &quot;What's a good direction for a 5e build that has high dps and uses halberds&quot; we could probably answer that well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the experienced users of the site picked up on the context cues that you don't really know what you're asking. This isn't necessarily all your fault, but it's clearly the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;5e! (and now maybe using 3.5e in it?)  But asked using a mishmash of 5e, 4e, and 3e terminology.  This was a warning sign that either you were super confused or that y'all are playing an undefined variant of all these versions- turns out the latter is the case. If you guys are playing Calvinball D&amp;amp;D it's really hard for anyone to make constructive suggestions - God only knows what actual rules your group is using, and how the question's developed makes us think you're not totally sure either.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I want to take on something CR20 at level 8&quot; &quot;but I don't want to be overpowered, like by being able to hit something of my CR + 5&quot; - Besides not being correct for 5e, as SSD pointed out this is mathematically impossible.  You keep changing the wording on this clause (now it's hp of damage!  now it's something else!), but not in a way that makes us think you really know what you're asking, it seems pretty random. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't know what rules you are using. We don't know what kind of threats your DM uses really because &quot;CR20 werespider vs level 8!&quot; doesn't pass the sniff test; no one that level survives against a real CR20. Which means the information we're getting is wrong or the DM is playing Calvinball too (seems likely). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You don't want to outshine the other party members - which we know nothing about, or their general optimization level. So we really can't help you there.  Are these guys waving around Blackrazor playing 3.5e Uber Optimized Pounce Barbarians, or are they just rolling 5e default?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to us that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The DM may not even be sure what rules they're using, and/or rules may not matter a lot in that game.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are therefore not sure either, I think.  You are also not communicating very clearly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a result we don't know enough to answer.  Maybe we will if the communication issue gets cleared up, but it's seeming unlikely.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't necessarily bad.  People don't have to play a &quot;real version&quot; - my first D&amp;amp;D game I was in was in the back of a car going to Scout camp and we didn't even use dice, the DM just made up whatever was fun and kept us engaged. There's nothing wrong with that playstyle.  But, it does make it very difficult for us to help with a question about it that is kinda a rules question but then the rules are unclear. Also, you need to practice taking a step back, thinking about your problem and how someone who does not live in your brain might need context information to answer effectively, and try to do that when composing questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T03:28:11.047" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5698" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5692" CreationDate="2015-08-11T04:42:45.033" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Alas, that was not intentional but rather &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/263464/155160&quot;&gt;an oversight on my part&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should be fixed now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2973" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T04:42:45.033" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5683" CreationDate="2015-08-11T15:18:18.983" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, playing “3.PF” is extremely common, and initially, at least, Paizo touted “backwards compatibility” as a major feature of Pathfinder – that you &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; play 3.PF.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, the backwards compatibility isn’t as complete as it might be (they didn’t simply write new 3.5 feats/classes/spells/etc., they rewrote a number of the base rules and thus conversion is required), but it’s still nominally a feature, and in a lot of cases does more-or-less work out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue ends up being that because the two are “close enough” for a lot of groups, they don’t explicitly define which way everything is going. Certain, “big” items, those get might get definition – “Pathfinder feat progression, but use the 3.5 version of feats found in both,” for example, is something I have seen at a number of tables. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But stuff that tables don’t pay much attention to until the question comes up? Things that we actually see questions about here? Those things are not defined ahead of time. Indeed, querents typically would not even &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that the two differ on the asked-after mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It then becomes the answerer’s responsibility to address the conflict: to describe what each game states, with references as appropriate. It becomes the community’s responsibility to recognize the question’s requirements, and thus upvote only those answers that address both, and downvote those that address only one and ignore the contradiction between the two. The only good answers to such questions are the ones that get the details right for &lt;strong&gt;both&lt;/strong&gt;. I strongly believe it is the community’s responsibility to downvote an answer that gets one right but the other wrong – with a clarifying comment pointing out the problem. It is also everyone’s responsibility to come back to the answer and un-downvote, and perhaps upvote as appropriate, after the answer is edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes such questions, when they touch on areas where 3.5 and Pathfinder have disagreements, somewhat more difficult to answer, but far from being too much to expect of this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T15:18:18.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5700" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-11T16:27:41.433" Score="2" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62960&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a good system for a short adventure / one-shot in Westeros&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The players should play lowborns, so grim and gritty rules would match my thoughts quite well&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is required to confirm &quot;grim and gritty&quot; rules by our standards?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer was (for other reasons) D&amp;amp;D and I said that I personally find it grim and gritty at lower levels and that it &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be played grim and gritty all the way. Someone commented, that that's not enough by our gamerec guidelines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how do I confirm a game &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; grim and gritty? Does it need to have something in the rules? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have played campaigns (Ravenloft comes to mind as a prime example, but you can do so in any setting if the DM says so) where it was pretty clear that your character would die a horrible death, because sooner or later evil &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; win. I would have described those campaigns as grim and gritty. But there certainly is no rule in D&amp;amp;D that says so. It's the DM's personal campaign style.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to protect from people saying &quot;but that's not the way &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; played it, in &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; campaigns we had all fluffy bunnies jumping around and lived forever after&quot;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't mind their style of D&amp;amp;D. Depending on adventure, campaign and DM mood it might even be my style of play. But I do mind people telling me that it does not fit the requirements, because they &lt;em&gt;decided&lt;/em&gt; to have a different style in their games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &quot;I did it, it works, there is no rule keeping you from doing it&quot; should be sufficient for gaming style requirements. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T22:49:36.990" Title="&quot;Grim &amp; gritty&quot; in game recommendations" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5700" CreationDate="2015-08-11T18:36:24.767" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game style requirements, sure: we're not going to legislate what people can say about how they successfully play certain games in certain play styles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game recommendations, however, have very tight requirements, the main one is that the answer be based clearly and fully on experience doing what the question asks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment that appears to have prompted this meta is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It doesn't have to get as specific as &quot;Westeros,&quot; but so far this answer does not meet our game-rec standards as it does not describe experience with a game sufficiently like the OP's request (it does describe it with a non-magic-using D&amp;amp;D, but that still deviates from the request significantly - grim and gritty, no levels, etc.). –  mxyzplk&amp;hairsp;♦ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62960/whats-a-good-system-for-a-short-adventure-one-shot-in-westeros#comment143295_65825&quot;&gt;2 days ago&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That does contain a personal judgement of “grim and gritty”, and I expect you feel it is wrong. Mods can be wrong, and if that was the only reason the whole question was closed, it would have been the wrong thing to do, yes. However, it's only one point in a list of objections, and that one point being possibly misjudged still leaves the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the mods don't have a secret definition that was used to close the question. The closure isn't about the definition of “grim and gritty.” What is it about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The whole question was closed because the answers aren't indicating their or someone else's experience using their recommended games for the specific purpose in the question. Experience that partially matches means that the fatal flaw in the recommendation could easily be in the parts the answer shows no experience with, and there is no way to know (what with the lack of experience). Avoiding untested flaws is part of the point of the game-rec guidelines requiring actual experience on the relevant points. Pointing at a partially-compliant game-rec answer does not make for a slam-dunk example of mods being arbitrary about the closure — to the contrary, borderline, low-quality recommendations along with outright bad answers are a sufficient reason for the closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific answer pointed to as evidence the mods are making up policy is an example of a borderline answer, and may even be over the line. It indicates that it is based on experience with only some requirements of the question, explicitly saying experience is lacking for other requirements, and justifies its recommendation in the end with “I don't see any drawbacks.” The game-rec guidelines say explicitly that answers based mainly on “I think it would work” should not be posted. There are other issues with the answer, such as contradicting some requirements; which only a rock-solid experience-based answer should expect to have a chance to pull off, as frame-challenging is notoriously hard to do successfully on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This examination of the question is not to judge it: rather, it is to show that the mods' stated reasons for shutting down the question are sufficient, with no need for secret definitions of “grim and gritty.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a tangential note, commenting on game-rec answers that are non-compliant to ask them to shape up does not appear to be working very well. In fact, my personal experience of game-rec answers is that they've gotten significantly more lax about following the guidelines, on average, and are rarely improved when reminded about the guidelines. There are still some stellar game-rec answers being written, but instead of becoming the norm and majority as we hoped when the game-rec guidelines were brought in, they're becoming the exception.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't bode well for the future of game recommendations at RPG.se. Let's up our game, alright? The alternative is not having game-rec at all, and that ban being required — which strict game-rec guidelines was meant to avoid — seems to me to be visible again on the horizon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T18:36:24.767" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5700" CreationDate="2015-08-11T18:44:06.427" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Question You Asked But Don't Really Have - &quot;What's Grim And Gritty?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It means what it means to the poster.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever any poster uses a term you think is ambiguous, ask them to clarify it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is the sum total of what we should really say about it. No, we will not come up with a RPG.SE functional definition of &quot;what is grim &amp;amp; gritty.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Question You Really Have But Didn't Ask - &quot;Why Was My Answer Commented As Not Meeting Game-Rec Guidelines?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That question was mod-closed not because of &quot;lack of grittiness,&quot; but because of lack of following our game-rec guidelines. The OP looked for a whole list of items (seven bullet points and additional description), and best as I can tell you were only demonstrating one point of the list in your answer (no magic). You were closer to the line of meeting our standard than all the other answers, but you really only demonstrated that you had played a game in D&amp;amp;D not using magic, not that it met the various criteria the OP listed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was closed because all the answers, not just yours, didn't meet the criteria.  As I mentioned you came closest, the rest didn't come within a country mile. It just wasn't worth the trouble to try to get it on topic any more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD notes we established specific guidelines using the standard SE Good Subjective, Bad Subjective and Back It Up! guidance to try to save game-recs as an on topic item.  If the community finds itself unable to follow that guidance then we'll have to disallow game-recs as unsalvageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-08-11T22:49:36.990" LastActivityDate="2015-08-11T22:49:36.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5703" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5704" CreationDate="2015-08-12T15:27:17.530" Score="3" ViewCount="35" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just now I opened a question, saw something from a new poster that didn't meet guidelines, gave a down-vote and a helpful comment on how to fix. Then I noticed new review items, so I jumped into the review queue and then saw the exact same post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only I couldn't change my vote in the queue and I already had a comment. In this case, should I just skip it? Is there any harm in skipping review items like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-08-12T15:38:51.840" LastActivityDate="2015-08-12T15:38:51.840" Title="Should I skip review-queue items that I've already handled normally?" Tags="|support|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5703" CreationDate="2015-08-12T15:33:33.660" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Treat it like any review item: if you have something useful you can do, do that. If you can't, skip it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't harm in skipping review items &amp;mdash; it means the item just gets left there for the next reviewer to encounter and deal with. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/232140/152515&quot;&gt;It's even a useful tool for avoiding burnout.&lt;/a&gt; (If &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; skips it that's a problem, but an unlikely one.) If you're unsure, you can skip.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-08-12T15:33:33.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5705" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" LastActivityDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5706" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" Score="0" Body="For questions about the review queue system, where users can view and act on posts that the system or other users think may need attention." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" LastActivityDate="2015-08-12T15:40:16.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5707" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-12T22:33:12.737" Score="2" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got Nice Answer for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66983/how-to-deal-with-combat-immediately-after-entering-room-through-narrow-passage/66984#66984&quot;&gt;How to deal with combat immediately after entering room through narrow passage&lt;/a&gt; more than two hours ago, but no sign of Enlightened, though I'm pretty positive it meets the qualifications: there are no undeleted answers with an earlier timestamp (deleted answers [if there were any] don't count anyway) and the checkmark is hard to miss. Something wrong with the scripts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also notice that meta rep is similarly more than two hours behind, not that that really matters, but it's supposed to update every hour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-10-04T01:06:53.837" Title="No Enlightened badge to go with Nice Answer on first-posted accepted answer?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|reputation|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5708" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5707" CreationDate="2015-08-12T23:23:10.690" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Badges come as do&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Enlightenment and patience:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;On the wings of time&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-12T23:23:10.690" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5709" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5710" CreationDate="2015-08-13T17:15:39.883" Score="3" ViewCount="247" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66994/what-techniques-can-help-players-reach-consensus-quickly-on-group-actions&quot;&gt;In this question&lt;/a&gt; I spent some time in comments with @detly to refine and clarify his problem for a possible answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With further clarification, I read the question again and had one of those moments: the problem cited is a symptom of the different problem, a problem related to @GMJoe's answer on in-game leadership, or at-table leadership, as a path toward resolution.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fingerprints of the XY Problem were clear to me. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My assessment: &#xA;Based on information provided, this group of half a dozen has not formed a team, and has little-to-no leadership.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't necessarily a bad thing for TTRPG's.  Our hobby is a fun activity where success is usually increased as a result of all contributing.  Plus, peer leadership is one of the trickier bits of that art.  Leaving theories of leadership aside, &lt;strong&gt;I did not challenge the frame&lt;/strong&gt;.  &lt;em&gt;It was tempting&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;First instinct:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your problem won't go away, because what you describe is a symptom of a group that isn't a team, that hasn't got a team focus.  Until you address that group dynamics issue, this symptom won't go away.  An answer like that is a big time buzz kill.  As I try to parse the norms and memes of this community, such an answer would be condemned.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Second instinct:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Offer a bandage for the sucking chest wound, here's the first aid kit.  That's all the tool suggestion can be: a band aid.  No idea how well developed the group's social contract is, or will become. (One hopes nothing but success on that score). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Justification/Rationalization 1:&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tool is the kind of thing &lt;em&gt;@detly asked for&lt;/em&gt;.  (Con - If I look at the XY Problem, it's not directly addressing what looks to be a root cause, and so may not be helpful). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Justification/Rationalization 2:&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The teamwork / team building appeal may or may not work in this particular group.  It may be beyond the social skills of the querent, the DM, certain group members, and all-in-all &quot;too hard&quot; to fix.  This is a leisure activity, is &quot;fixing&quot; worth the effort and social risks associated with it? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All justifications (excuses?) considered, &lt;strong&gt;was it wrong Not To Frame Challenge once I recognized what looked like an XY Problem?&lt;/strong&gt;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this in part because I think @GMJoe's reply was a form of frame challenge, even if not explicitly identified as such.  Gears began turning in my head after @Miniman's early comment that &quot;this doesn't answer his question.&quot;  I was tempted to comment it being a frame challenge, but chose not to for &lt;em&gt;reasons&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-16T22:20:39.843" Title="Is it wrong Not to Frame Challenge?" Tags="|discussion|xy-problem|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5709" CreationDate="2015-08-13T17:34:46.770" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no right or wrong regarding frame challenges. Frame challenging is a piece of local jargon that just describes a certain way of approaching the problem and providing a solution. It's not special, just hard to do well, which is why it is a subject of discussion enough to be identified and named.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like all proposed solutions, whether it's &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; is a complex combination of substance, thesis, clarity, presentation, persuasion, zeitgeist leverage, and other intangibles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no right or wrong when it comes to these intangibles. In fact, it is exactly because such intangibles require complex, nuanced, and sometimes unquantifiable human judgement to evaluate fully that the up/down voting system exists. The wisdom of the crowd distills a judgement of the quality of these intangibles, whether it's a a frame challenge answer or another kind of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether the answer would be condemned or not depends on a lot more than just whether it is a buzzkill. Frame challenges are somewhat risky because poor execution on some of those intangibles can result in a poorly-received answer, but because they're intangibles, it's not always clear why. A well-executed frame challenge can be extremely popular however, if it hits near the sweet spot of all the possible intangibles voters are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: there's no right or wrong, only degrees of quality. Whether to frame challenge or not is a matter of personal judgement, and whether it is &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; or not must be decided in a practical, live test in collaboration with voters. That's the essence of the Stack Exchange model. Personally, I think it's often worth it to find out, but adopting that view requires being OK with the possibility that it will be poorly-received. (There's always next time!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-13T17:34:46.770" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5711" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5720" CreationDate="2015-08-14T17:24:06.050" Score="17" ViewCount="865" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our game recommendation guidelines are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;four years old&lt;/a&gt; this month. It's worth taking some time to reflect and review as a community how well they are working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What works well? What doesn't? Have they achieved the goals we set for them? Is there any way our guidelines could be improved, in expression or in execution? Is the community satisfied with moderation around game-rec questions and answers? Is the community satisfied with the quality of game-rec questions and answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any thoughts on the state and evolution of game recommendations are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-08-24T15:03:17.870" Title="Community self-evaluation: How are we doing with game recommendations?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5712" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-15T07:00:33.043" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think our current guidelines are working well and the moderation is effective.  I have had a game-req question answered usefully this year, and learned a lot from other people's recommendation questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57631/what-is-a-good-game-for-a-conflict-avoidant-disaffectionate-player&quot;&gt;What is a good game for a conflict-avoidant, disaffectionate player&lt;/a&gt; was my question).  Our restrictions/guidelines are &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, I think, and both too restrictive in certain areas and not restrictive enough in others, but the errors are slight and the guidelines seem to be largely effective in making our users-- especially new users-- actually think about answering the question properly rather than posting a 'FAE is the best'/'4e sux' shallow and inexpert psuedoanswer.  Moderation is very good, albeit not so much based off the actual game-rec guideline text so much as what that text is trying to model (which is better in some ways and worse in others).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things to improve one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) We still have popularity contest voting issues on rare occasions.  The new Fate stuff seems to get it worse (both up and down votes, but mostly up) in terms of popularity-based issues, and GURPS has similar problems.  D&amp;amp;D {AD&amp;amp;D, 3.5, 4e, 5e, etc} oddly, doesn't seem to suffer from this much at all, possibly because everyone knows about it at least somewhat so it's rarely the right answer to a game-rec and very often where the querent is coming from.  The populaity contest issues, though they exist, are really very infrequent and usually only effects answers that are at least somewhat reasonable, which is good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) It's really hard to know what criteria matters as a querent. You have the question for some reason, but the reason as initially explained is often 'too broad' because you don't realize the scope of the answer space within the initial bounds.  The thing to do, then, is to add more possibly important details until it turns out that some detail you thought wouldn't have affected much turns out to limit the answer space sufficiently for the expert community.  It's kind of like throwing darts in the dark and hoping to hit a small target, and there's really nothing we can ask &lt;em&gt;querents&lt;/em&gt; to do before posting to fix this; knowing a variety of solutions fitting their stated requirements basically precludes asking the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) This category of question is one of the kinds that's most often done flagrantly wrong by a new user who ignored all the signs and thinks the place is a normal forum (as in, when that kind of user posts, it's usually this, not as in most game-recs are that).  That's an indication of something.  Not sure what.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) Our explanations of our guidelines and the reasoning behind them could be much clearer and more helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-08-15T07:00:33.043" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-15T09:03:34.677" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The game recommendation guidelines probably started out with good intentions. The rules are set to keep answer to more than just an opinionated &quot;I like&quot; or &quot;it sucks&quot;. And that's great. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the implementation is bringing more problems than I am willing to tolerate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As the requirement is experience, I have at least twice been forced to add noise to my answers. Although my answer contained a lot of things that could only been learned through experience, people downvoted me because I did not put &quot;I did that&quot; in the post. So I did. Now it sits there and goes against the very spirit of SE: no noise, more information. The valuable thing should be the information, not the sentence &quot;Oh, yeah, I did that&quot;. Especially as this is the internet. I could write a post on how I flew to the moon on pink elephants. It gets neither better nor worse when I put &quot;yeah, I really did&quot; as a last sentence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our requirements are so strict, that by definition the voting can only be a popularity contest. Take the Westeros question as a good example: even if I &lt;em&gt;had&lt;/em&gt; played DSA on Westeros and there would have been no other errors in the answer, who here would have been able to judge? Who &lt;em&gt;else&lt;/em&gt; would have played DSA on Westeros to check if I'm correct or simply posting nonsense? Nobody. So voting on game rec is a popularity contest by definition of our own rules.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The strict requirements go only for the poster. I need to demonstrate experience, yet anybody can come by and vote. You don't need to demonstrate anything at all for that. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We are interpreting things into questions the OP probably never intended. Take the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62960/whats-a-good-system-for-a-short-adventure-one-shot-in-westeros&quot;&gt;westeros question&lt;/a&gt; again. The OP has written a very clear and good question. His requirements are the bullet points he set. And yet we have moderators that say it does not matter &lt;em&gt;what he asked for&lt;/em&gt;. You may not answer, if you cannot answer his question in the context of Westeros. However, that is purely their interpretation of the guideline. The OP only said he needs a system that follows his requirements. And the requirements he listed said nothing about Westeros at all. I'm pretty sure we have helped neither the poster nor the site, despite a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So personally, I will stop participating in game rec at the current state. It's just too frustrating trying to fill in all the bureaucracy, dodge the trigger happy downvoters that wait for you to make a mistake and all to have a bunch of people holding their popularity contest. That is not what SE is supposed to be and it's not what other SE sites manage to handle under the same constraints.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer the comments as that would be too long for a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not really advocating to ditch game rec altogether. That would not help anybody. But my suggestion is not a game rec suggestion either but goes for the whole site and pretty much any post: be less of a trigger-happy dictatorship. Don't go after mistakes. Make suggestions on how to improve and let people improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at what is on hold and who put it there. The last time I counted, it were 6 questions and of those, only a single one had actually been closed because of community consensus of 5 people. 80% of them had been closed by a binding mod vote. Because it was &quot;against the guidelines&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at the Westeros question. Yes, my answer is incomplete. Because I thought that as I recommended a system the asker already knew, some points on his list would be self-explanatory. So, it's &lt;em&gt;incomplete&lt;/em&gt;. Not spam or rude or off-topic or factually incorrect. Simply incomplete. Yet nobody came in and commented &quot;hey, your answer would be better, if you...&quot;. Instead, the answer was downvoted and the question closed. Not by the community. By the mods, in advance of the community, citing the guidelines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this inside the limits of the SE software? Absolutely. Is this the SE spirit? No. Not at all. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are spending time here trying to help people. For free. If a positive, constructive post written to help without factual errors is so bad that two people tell me to &quot;get this piece of s... off this site&quot; (which is the verbal translation of the downvote mechanic) &lt;em&gt;because it violates the guidelines&lt;/em&gt; then well, those guidelines are too strict for me. Actually, not the guidelines. I like the guidelines. But it feels like there is a secret guideline police that is out to catch you on any tiny mistake you make. The guidelines are not there to improve your post or help the poster, they are there as a means to justify downvoting and closing stuff. Regardless of the actual content. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are sites out there (and SO is one of them) that handle this &lt;em&gt;waaay&lt;/em&gt; better. Where when I get a downvote I know I have made a big mistake. But even on factually wrong things, you may get a comment saying &quot;hey, you might want to correct xxx, it's wrong, yyy would be correct.&quot;. And those commentators are 100K-700K rep users that could use the very same knowledge to make 1k $ an hour instead of helping you improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Professionally oriented sites seem to have a codex that says &quot;if someone is trying to be helpful and spending his time, I will not downvote on minor mistakes. I will just upvote the correct answer and maybe leave a comment.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am missing this attitude of professional courtesy here and I really don't advocate to do anything with the guidelines because in the absence of good, constructive behaviour, &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; we change the guidelines will not matter. They will continue to be used to put down people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-08-15T13:33:11.087" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-15T17:40:58.480" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first suggestion for improvement I'd offer is in how much help is given to ask a good question.  Because the bar has been set high, the necessity for many game rec questions to go through some liposuction, focus, and refining seems to be common.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this in mind, it would be beneficial for encouragement to use comments for this dialogue while the question is on hold, so that significant focus and refinement can occur before the question is opened up for answers. I would ask that &quot;take it to chat&quot; guidance be deleted from the process while refinement dialogue is ongoing, and then resumed once the question is reopened for answers ... once it is constructed well enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second suggestion, in the FAQ from the 4 year old post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recommend an edit to put this part up in the &quot;Questions&quot; part of the FAQ and not as an afterthought to the &quot;Answers&quot; section. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Also note the related question How to deal with questions that just&#xA;  don't understand the scope of the RPG landscape? - we get some&#xA;  game-rec (adventure-rec, etc.) questions that try to be &quot;flexible&quot;&#xA;  (e.g. &quot;anything I can conceivably adapt to my goals&quot;) and as a result&#xA;  are too broad. When asking your question you should focus it down on&#xA;  the exact thing you want to accomplish - don't worry, people will&#xA;  suggest a bunch of things that don't hit your criteria 100% as it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My Third Suggestion: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Answer to the question encompassed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;this meta post&lt;/a&gt; is a discussion, and as such pretty well written.  See my second answer for a recommended reorganization of that guidance in something more like the help format.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last thought on &quot;how is RPGSE doing&quot; in game rec:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a meta post where a variety of helpful forums are listed as answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may be value in a meta post (maybe there isn't) with links to style or category analysis of RPGs?  With so many games out there, that sort of meta/faq may exceed the scope of the ability of SE to help. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Setting the bar high is a good idea.  Getting a good question crafted, with community help, should make any answer useful to more than just the querent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T14:28:04.303" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-15T17:47:04.693" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current guidelines promote objectivity and answers backed up with experience and rationale. Having been on open forums that discuss the same topics, I think this isn't just a good thing, it's necessary for the SE format and a reasoned discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the guidelines do not currently suit the purpose of game recommendation questions. A rules question about diagonal movements with a fly speed is general question that is very likely to apply to other people and needs the best answer possible, regardless of how long it takes to get that answer. The current experience criteria for game recommendations are set up the same way: you should only answer if you have experience doing the &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; same thing as the querent, regardless of how long it takes. This is counter-productive for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unlike rules questions, game recommendations often involve the creative ideas of the querent. The boundless limits of creativity mean that no one having done exactly what you are asking for is very likely. Under the current guidelines, the more creative the querent's idea, the less likely they are to get an answer, regardless of how well they listed the requirements needed from the system. If I know exactly where to get all the features they need but haven't run a game that way, I can't help them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unlike rules questions, game recommendations are time sensitive. If I ask for a game recommendation for a project I'm currently working on, it's only useful to me while I'm working on that project. Furthermore, if my questions is very specific, it may never be useful to someone else. If it is answered in 5 years by someone with the perfect experience, it has done me no good and may never do anyone else any good.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules questions are curated for the good of the community in posterity. Game recommendations are different. You are helping an individual querent with an individual need. If your response helps others later, that's great, but that isn't the expectation. If questions and answers designed only for an individual's needs are deemed inappropriate for the SE format, they should be banned outright. It is more fair to the querents to ban them outright than to allow them to post a question that will not likely be answered while it is still useful to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concrete suggestion for improvement is to change the experience critera to the following: you must have experience with the &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt; you are suggesting and must provide a reasoned, detailed argument for how your suggestions matches the listed needs of the querent. This still ensures objectivity and discourages popularity votes while allowing for timely responses to unique questions that are specific to the game recommendation type. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24241" LastEditorUserId="24241" LastEditDate="2015-08-16T15:58:43.007" LastActivityDate="2015-08-16T15:58:43.007" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5716" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-16T16:01:12.967" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Note: Please read the entire FAQ linked below on game-recs, including the Meta.SE blog post and linked Arqade metas linked from it, to be sufficiently informed for your opinion to be taken seriously on this topic.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance on game-rec questions as explained in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, I believe, are still valid. We do have some debate about how tightly to interpret them, and this debate is largely driven by both the continued presence of low quality game-recs but also by a community minority that continues to kick against the rules and say &quot;why not let people say whatever they want.&quot; This causes those who do enforce the rules to have to monitor more, and more tightly, which then causes those unhappy with the restrictions to become more unhappy, as a vicious cycle. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, these aren't going well.  On RPG.SE we've had 13,204 questions of which 1010 (7.6%) have been closed.  We have had 427 game-rec questions, of which 106 (24.8%) have been closed. This means we're attracting low quality questions to that tag, and that it's requiring a disproportional amount of moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a couple options, I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Refine/clarify the game-recs as needed and then have the community do a &lt;em&gt;significantly&lt;/em&gt; better job of curating them. I have added a FAQ to the original game-rec rules to try to clarify frequently confused points about them. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Go the way of SE in general and disallow them entirely. If this is too complicated, then it's too complicated and we should cut scope.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am leaning towards #2 unless someone can come up with a way for us to make these kinds of question higher quality and more sustainable in the long term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply another note in the FAQ isn't going to help. In general people have already bypassed our site help, meta, the game-rec post notice, and some amount of community or mod guidance on their question or answer for a question to be permanently closed or an answer deleted - the problem is that the community isn't of an accord on how to handle these, and therefore is not leading adequately by example at a tactical level. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T13:09:14.453" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5717" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-17T01:16:06.890" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This answer does not entirely reflect my personal opinion, but I feel that it is important for the community to be able to vote on the idea of banning game-recs entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should ban game-recs because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They are obviously problematic. 25% of our game-recs are closed, and 36% have been closed at some point in their lifetime. And they have special rules, and everyone else has banned them, and there's this meta, and so on. I don't think anyone would deny that they're a problematic category.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's difficult for the community to judge (and therefore vote on) the answers. A well-written answer can convince me to upvote, but not having actually played that type of game in that system, I don't know for certain that the answer truly deserves that upvote. I'm judging the answer purely on its merits as an answer, not on the merits of what it's actually suggesting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Because game-recs have to be extremely specific, even a successful game-rec is only going to be useful to a very small group of people; sometimes, only the person who posted it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The moderators, and to some extent, the rest of us, are spending a disproportionately large amount of time policing these.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone who can think of more reasons to add should feel free to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T01:16:06.890" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-17T06:31:56.360" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see two problems with our game-rec questions (and answers) as they stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is perfectly possible to write what you think is an excellent question, with well thought out criteria that you think narrows down the field of possible answers, ticking all the boxes for our guidelines. However, by very definition of the fact you are asking in the first place, you can't possibly know this for certain, and questions do get closed by those who &lt;strong&gt;can&lt;/strong&gt; look at those criteria and make the judgement, 'nope sorry, too many possible answers there'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due to the relatively niche nature of many of these types of questions it becomes extremely difficult for most people to vote with any accuracy on the quality of answers. A 'perfect' answer demonstrates how a particular system has been used in the exact way requested by the question. The only way I can &lt;strong&gt;know for certain&lt;/strong&gt; whether that answer is good or not is to have done the same thing, and this is extremely unlikely in many of the cases we have. At the moment, I look at answers in very general terms and go through a mental check list - does it demonstrate good knowledge of the system? Does it show the actual answerer has used it in exactly the way the questioner asks? If not, does it show someone else has? If not does it show how it could be used it in that way?...........The thing is, without having done the same myself, any judgement I might  make of the quality of an answer for voting is guesswork.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So we have a set of guidelines it's impossible to know whether you've followed, and answers that are being voted on by people who are very unlikely to be best placed to accurately judge their quality. I'd say we have an issue.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2015-08-17T10:22:13.470" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T10:22:13.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-17T14:26:55.510" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A Suggested Improvement on the Guidance for Game Rec Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With many thanks to @mxyzplk for the time and effort put forth to preserve game-rec questions, the following is an attempt to distill the guidance post into something like what's on our help page for question &amp;quot;how to&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;this is what we expect.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feedback/review of this is desired.  Wherever it fails to fit the original guidance post will hopefully be identified.  Edits to clean it up shall be made.  Comments very much desired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Game Recommendation Questions (draft)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following guidance shall be adhered to for Game Recommendation questions and answers on RPG.SE.  This guidance covers questions, answers, and voting to ensure that SE quality standards are maintained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions must be specific enough that there can be a single or best&#xA;answer.  The purpose of RPG.SE is to help people with their actual&#xA;gaming.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't just ask about games.  Add context about what your needs are&#xA;that a game is expected to fulfill.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid Lists&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If your question is looking for a list, rather than a “best choice,”&#xA;it's a bad question. Polls or lists, or &amp;quot;community wiki&amp;quot; for game rec&#xA;questions are not acceptable questions. Quizzing people for the sake&#xA;of doing it or idle curiosity generate poor questions … which will be&#xA;closed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Examples of poor questions&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“What are all the medieval fantasy RPGs?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;What's a fun game?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of question will be immediately closed as &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; and/or &amp;quot;primarily opinion-based.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Outline of a good question:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I want to try a game that has these specific attributes (or covers X genre)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;List attributes (1)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Describe genre&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I want to use it in this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Describe style of play you seek, or kind of story you want this game&#xA;to tell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Who has done this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What game would you recommend and why?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The importance of listing requirements / attributes / criteria.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don’t establish what it is you want the game to help you do, the SE community cannot provide a high quality answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9691/what-role-playing-games-best-emulate-a-non-mystical-old-west-setting&quot;&gt;Wild West game question&lt;/a&gt; is a good enough question to be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is specific about the kind of game it wants.  It would be a better question if it explained more about the asker's needs and predilections.  If the person asking this question wants &amp;quot;gritty combat&amp;quot; then explaining what is meant by “gritty combat” in some detail is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Game recommendation questions shall be tagged [game-recommendation].&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers MUST adhere to the &amp;quot;Back It Up!&amp;quot; principle set forth in the SO blog post &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;To whit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under the SE premise of expert guidance from experts, you may only answer a game rec question if:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are familiar with the game you are recommending.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You have actually done it or seen it done, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have a detailed reference from someone who has actually done&#xA;it (with details like how and results).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example of an unacceptable answer:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FATE would be great for your ultra gritty combat system needs.  I've&#xA;never done that or seen anyone that has, but it is SUCH A GREAT SYSTEM&#xA;that I'm sure it will do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers of this sort can and should be vigorously downvoted, and even deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you have never even read the game, don’t answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone can Google &amp;quot;Wild West RPG&amp;quot; and offer something they've vaguely heard of but never done. That isn't expert advice from experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not an appropriate answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know someone put out a Western supplement for game X&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This the best kind of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We played a Wild West game, used system X, and here's how that turned out&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stay on topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn’t matter if you don't like a particular kind of gaming.  If someone asks for gritty combat and you want to reply with &amp;quot;people don't like gritty combat&amp;quot; - move along.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent is looking for a particular style and needs a game to do it.  If you don’t have experience and sound recommendations for how they can do it, and with what game, then you aren’t the one who can help them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Exception&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;You can make a parenthetical warning about pitfalls as part of an&#xA;otherwise legitimate answer if you want to, but first craft the&#xA;acceptable answer, then add warnings and caveats.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Your answer will be down-voted and / or deleted if you do not follow these&#xA;guidelines&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Voting on Game Rec Answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should be voted up based on the specific expertise they demonstrate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone who played that kind of game for a while &lt;em&gt;should be heavily&#xA;up-voted&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone who says that they have a game like that and has read it&#xA;somewhat &lt;em&gt;should be downvoted&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone whose answer shows that they just know about the existence&#xA;of a game &lt;em&gt;should be downvoted.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone recommending their pet system with no supporting points&#xA;relating to the requirements in the question &lt;em&gt;should be nuked.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;FAQs&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions FAQ&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;But what if I just want anything I could maybe hack to my requirements?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that try to be &amp;quot;flexible&amp;quot; (e.g. &amp;quot;anything I can conceivably adapt to my goals&amp;quot;) are too broad.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;When asking your question &lt;strong&gt;focus it down on the exact thing you want to accomplish&lt;/strong&gt; - don't worry, people will suggest things that don't hit your criteria 100% as it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To prevent a game-rec questions from becoming a litany of &amp;quot;everyone's favorite game,&amp;quot; you, the person asking the question, need to narrow down your needs - think about it a while, you probably are assuming some requirements you're not conveying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers FAQ&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what if I just lie (or pull out of my backside) about having experience with their requirements?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Review &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; requirements.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;An answer cannot just recommend a game for the poster's desired use; it must also explain how using that game for that purpose worked out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just saying &amp;quot;and I did it myself&amp;quot; isn't sufficient to help the&#xA;poster.  We at RPG.SE require more explanation than that,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We assume good faith here on RPG.SE.  If you think lying about a&#xA;game, or lying about your own experiences, will help someone else you&#xA;are mistaken.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How close does my experience need to be to their target requirements?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the request is well formed, then you don't have to have used a game in the exact specific way they intend to use it, but you should have hit the major points and need to address in detail your deviations from any of their requested attributes, requirements or criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone wants a &amp;quot;Wild West game with mechanics that help reinforce the genre, medium crunchy, with Indian magic and stuff, undead, and grey-type aliens,&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be fair to say&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I've played a lot of Deadlands and it addresses most of your points&#xA;(include detail); they don't include grey aliens out of the box but&#xA;did have an adventure with mi-go, you could easily re-skin them as&#xA;greys...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key virtue of this answer is experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not OK:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I have played GURPS and know they sell a Wild West supplement and&#xA;supplements for Undead and aliens both too, so I bet you could use it&#xA;to do that&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This lacks relevancy of experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your need to be hitting near the bullseye, not just getting somewhere on the target.  &lt;strong&gt;If you're not addressing at least 2/3 of their requirements or criteria, you shouldn't be  posting an answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T14:26:55.510" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5711" CreationDate="2015-08-17T18:31:18.533" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our guidelines serve two masters, and neither well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Helping the asker find a game or games that will suit what they are aiming to do.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ensuring that we can meaningfully judge and vote on the answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I've observed is that how well it satisfies one goal is inversely proportional to how well it satisfies the other: the more perfectly answers follow the guidelines the less useful they are to the asker; the more useful to the asker, the less the answers follow the guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this lies at the core of why the guidelines are no longer being followed — naturally, we are here to help people, and we will tend over time toward bending the rules in order to best help people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why are they inversely related? Because a &lt;strong&gt;helpful&lt;/strong&gt; answer is &lt;strong&gt;timely&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;novel&lt;/strong&gt; to the asker, while answers that correctly follow the guidelines (of a question that correctly follows the guidelines) are &lt;strong&gt;slow&lt;/strong&gt; to arrive and &lt;strong&gt;derivative&lt;/strong&gt; of requirements the asker can already imagine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A brief history of game-rec guidelines&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The guidelines were created because we found that the voting system didn't work — every answer was equally valid, which is the first reason our help centre mentions for why questions get closed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Help Center &amp;gt; Asking &amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[…] To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once we realised that recommendation questions were exactly off-topic, we had a choice: shrug and let them be closed as off-topic, or figure out how to make them not match a basic close reason. We chose the latter, and we forged some rules that would ensure that answers would not all be equally valid. To ensure that, the rules required that people refrain from posting answers that didn't follow the guidelines, or they'd be removed by delete votes and mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why this may have been foolish&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We made sure that game recommendation Q&amp;amp;As would fit how SE works. But SE doesn't work in a way that's useful for people looking for recommendations!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;SE is designed so that hard questions &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; get answers until the rare expert who can answer it finds and answers it; SE is designed to be insensitive to time for that reason, which is why it is never too late to answer an “old” question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;SE is also designed to solve a problem in the best way possible, and to make sure the solution isn't buried behind pages of posts; but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;a recommendation-seeker naturally wants to be educated about all the relevant games they don't already know about&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's no way to know which answer is the solution until they try it and it works. All answers are still equally valid, despite our efforts to craft guidelines to ensure otherwise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forcing game-recommendation questions and answers to fit the Stack Exchange format is forcing a round peg into a square hole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So why not ditch the guidelines and just answer their question? That would just bring us full-circle: game recs are naturally off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why are they off topic? Because in their natural state, their answers are all equally valid. But why is that bad? Because…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Stack Exchange is for what forums are bad at&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange was invented to be good at the things discussion forums are bad at, and in exchange for that superpower sacrificed the ability to be good at what forums are already good at. This is a smart trade-off, because SE doesn't aim to replace forums, but to complement them. Having multiple sites that each do one kind of thing well, people can choose and use the right tool for the right job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're seeing that here, now. If we wrestle a game-rec Q&amp;amp;A to fit SE's system, they stop being very useful to the asker, because SE is simply not good at what a game-rec asker is normally looking for. Game recommendations work really well at discussion forums though, so that really shouldn't be surprising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is simply bad at purchase recommendations. &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This was observed half a decade ago by the co-founder&lt;/a&gt;, and hasn't changed. Forums excel at purchase recommendations, because they generate a lot of responses that are valuable &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of the amount of material they generate, which the prospective buyer can then sift through to earn wisdom and ideas they can then move their exploration forward with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we see someone using a screwdriver like a hammer, why are we lecturing them on Best Practices For Using Screwdrivers to Hammer Nails? Why don't we just hand them a hammer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, our site is the screwdriver, which is good for solving specific problems, and the wealth of RPG discussion forums on the Internet is the hammer, which is good for gathering opinions, ideas, and further research material to help you make a new-game decision. Why don't we just direct them to a forum, where they can quickly get recommendations to their heart's content?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We should ditch game-rec guidelines and direct people to forums&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our problem is that we're trying to force well-meaning people to rewrite their questions for reasons that don't really make sense to them, and then we sit back, self-satisfied, and watch them &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; get useful answers very quickly, or shout at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5700/grim-gritty-in-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;well-meaning users who write answers in good faith that actually help&lt;/a&gt;. When the asker wonders why we're not helping, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;we tell them that it's for their own good&lt;/a&gt;. When answerers wonder why we're not letting them &lt;em&gt;just help already, dammit&lt;/em&gt;, we tell them that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;it's for the asker's own good, to ensure quality&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, none of that is for the asker's own good. It's all an effort to avoid saying that game-rec questions are off topic and closing their question, just so that we can give them weirdly-constrained answers slowly (or not at all) and pretend we're providing gold-plated help. Meanwhile, they put their faith in us and are poorly rewarded for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We really want to be good at game-recommendation questions, but we're not. Denial doesn't help the site, or the askers who innocently come here looking for help. Pretending these questions work here does nothing except lead askers on, when we could be honest and direct them to somewhere they can get help immediately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not cling to these askers jealously. We should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;send them to a forum&lt;/a&gt;, with a smile and a “Good luck!”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-08-17T19:38:05.343" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5721" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5723" CreationDate="2015-08-18T01:01:19.280" Score="4" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63051/where-can-i-get-miniatures-of-the-four-horsemen-of-apocalyse?noredirect=1#comment144303_63051&quot;&gt;Game recommendation applies to both the recommending of games and the recommending of products for games, such as tools&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;The recommending of game systems in particular is the basis for  our game-recommendation guidelines/banner&lt;/a&gt;. Do these guidelines need to be followed on other sorts of recommendation questions other than system recommendations? If someone asks, for example, whether to purchase &lt;em&gt;Complete Psionic&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Expanded Psionics Handbook&lt;/em&gt; for their 3.5 game, must I have actual play experience with &lt;em&gt;Complete Psionic&lt;/em&gt; to answer or is &quot;Complete Psionic is one of the worst books written for 3.5 &lt;sup&gt;[citation][citation][citation]&lt;/sup&gt; (none of which cite actual play directly, but rather cite thorough rules analysis, balance analysis, rpg theories, etc).  The &lt;em&gt;Expanded Psionics Handbook&lt;/em&gt; is one of the best books written for 3.5 &lt;sup&gt;[similar citations]&lt;/sup&gt;.  You should get the &lt;em&gt;Expanded Psionics Handbook&lt;/em&gt;.&quot; an acceptable answer, since it's not a recommendation for a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T16:42:58.280" Title="Do the Game-Rec Guidelines apply to all of the kinds of recommendation questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5722" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5721" CreationDate="2015-08-18T01:13:46.343" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The game-recommendation tag applies to any recommendation question, per earlier discussions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2711/has-system-recommendation-grown-too-big-for-its-britches&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt;. In fact, we changed the tag from system-recommendation to game-recommendation to genericize it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this guidance is really just a codification of general SE best practices for an edge case where people seem really tempted to ignore them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, no, personal speculative opinions are not a valid answer.  Neither is citing other peoples' personal speculative opinions. Only experience, personal or documented on behalf of someone else, is proper support for a subjective question. I'm not going to bother linking Good Subjective, Bad Subjective again, but read it, it applies to all subjective content on this SE. Of course, where there is objective content (e.g. this generates a higher DPS), that is not subjective and doesn't fall under that requirement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-08-18T20:23:20.727" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5721" CreationDate="2015-08-18T03:59:56.960" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do these guidelines need to be followed on other sorts of recommendation questions other than system recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. Our game recommendation guidelines never really got genericised. It is not universal. It applies spottily to some things other than the recommendation of actual games, but not to all recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What applies to all recommendation questions is &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective guidelines&lt;/a&gt;. Our game-rec rules just translate these with some extra specifics. The good subjective guidelines are the one that carry the famous Back It Up principle, i.e. our iron-clad rule you must be able to say you've seen it done, or else back your statements up with a conclusive reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've had some discussion on the generic-ness of our game rec rules. Here's the results:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2711/1204&quot;&gt;Has [system-recommendation] grown too big for its britches?&lt;/a&gt; (December 2012). The most conclusive answer in here opposes a genericised recommendation tag. Low support here for the rules being genericised.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3251/1204&quot;&gt;Can we add an adventure-recommendation tag?&lt;/a&gt; (December 2013) has an assertion game-rec should apply for published adventures too. We've taken up that practice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3335/1204&quot;&gt;Let&amp;#39;s make [game-recommendation] actually be for recommendations of games&lt;/a&gt; (February 2014) has a strongly supported assertion that the game-rec rules and tag &lt;strong&gt;should not&lt;/strong&gt; be generic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5399/1204&quot;&gt;What are our requirements for tool recommendation questions and answers?&lt;/a&gt; (March 2015) asserted that the game-rec rules apply but was never heavily supported. (As the author, I'm not sure what I was thinking at the time, I could have just referenced GSBS.) To date no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions have our blue game recommendations rules notice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community has never expressed strong support for universalising the game-rec rules. Historically stronger support seems to be for &lt;em&gt;not doing that.&lt;/em&gt; Game-rec rules have been extended into one place only: adventure modules and other published game material expansions. The important bits are already standard procedure: back it up, don't be too broad, don't ask a question that's entirely opinion based, etc, and we don't need the game-rec rules to implement those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-08-18T11:20:05.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5724" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5725" CreationDate="2015-08-18T16:59:10.503" Score="5" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;I spent some time looking for and mousing over some answers in multi-answer questions, hoping to arrive at a &quot;properties&quot; tab that give me a link to the answer, which is mid to lower page, not the link to the question at the top. (Which is in the URL bar for may browser, and is easily C&amp;amp;P'd from the orange/brown test with the question in it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed @BESW's answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67253/how-to-transform-a-bunch-of-strangers-into-a-friendly-group&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was able to link directly to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50954/4398&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; that me made to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50946/how-do-i-handle-large-conversations-with-multiple-npcs&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question link is: &lt;code&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50954/4398&lt;/code&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer link is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50946/how-do-i-handle-large-conversations-with-multiple-npcs&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am trying to find the &quot;a/50954/4398&quot; bit of the link or properties for the answer itself, to make a better link for a response I have in draft.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I find the linkable attribute of the answers to a given question: the nice and easy light brown/orange text isn't there to right click over?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am sure the answer will provide me with a &quot;Doh!&quot; moment, so I have doughnuts ready to mitigate any damage. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note. on this rig, I use IE browser, but also use Chrome. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T02:11:06.543" Title="How can I link directly to one answer in a question?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5724" CreationDate="2015-08-18T17:11:04.317" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a “share” link below each answer. Clicking it will give a little popup containing a link you can copy that goes directly to that post. It's easy to overlook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the desktop version:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TXJiF.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TXJiF.png&quot; alt=&quot;A cropped screenshot of BESW&amp;#39;s answer with a red arrow pointing to the share button&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Of course, the “mod” link won't be there!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A neat feature is that the last &lt;code&gt;/xxxx&lt;/code&gt; in the share URL is your own user ID. It's actually not necessary and can be removed from the URL, but if it appears in the URL posted off-site (say, on Twitter or a blog), then every incoming use of that URL containing your user ID counts toward the “broadcaster” type badges (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/54/announcer&quot;&gt;Announcer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/55/booster&quot;&gt;Booster&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/56/publicist&quot;&gt;Publicist&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-08-18T17:11:04.317" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5726" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-19T03:41:32.817" Score="5" ViewCount="261" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3563/15469&quot;&gt;Is it ok to drastically edit another&amp;#39;s answers?&lt;/a&gt; looks like a duplicate based on its title, but it's content is about editing things out of answers rather than the reverse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I've been seeing some fairly large edits made to answers. I'm concerned that some of them might be a little too much of an edit to make without any input from the person who wrote the answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/21180&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; edit looks to me as if it should really have been an answer of its own. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/4491/revisions&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; series of edits was very much in keeping with the original intent of the post, but nonetheless a large change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, if I'd been one of the reviewers who looked at these edit suggestions, I would have voted to reject. The fact that they were accepted suggests that my idea of what counts as drastic might be off the mark, so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How drastic is too drastic?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T13:56:49.650" Title="When editing, how drastic is too drastic?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5727" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5730" CreationDate="2015-08-19T04:06:59.550" Score="3" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GS/BS&lt;/a&gt; applies to everything subjective all the time across all stack exchanges and is one of our most frequently linked posts, to the point that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5373/could-we-have-a-shortcut-bracket-link-to-the-good-subjective-bad-subjective-pos&quot;&gt;we have a highly supported proposal to get a shortcut bracket link to it&lt;/a&gt;.  It was my impression that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;the game-rec guidelines&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(specifically &quot;&lt;strong&gt;You may only answer one of these questions if you have actually done it or seen it done, or if you have a detailed reference from someone who has done it (with details like how and results).&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;) are and were intended to be strictly stricter than GS/BS advice, and furthermore to address &lt;em&gt;answerers&lt;/em&gt; rather than &lt;em&gt;querents&lt;/em&gt;, among a number of other major differences.  I have recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5721/do-the-game-rec-guidelines-apply-to-all-of-the-kinds-of-recommendation-questions/5722?noredirect=1#comment15818_5722&quot;&gt;been told by a mod&lt;/a&gt; (@mxyzplk) that these guidelines are, in fact, identical to the aforementioned famous post.  I don't understand how this is the case.  Is it?  Could someone please compare and contrast them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T16:26:41.297" Title="Are the game-rec guidelines strictly equivalent to GS/BS?" Tags="|support|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5726" CreationDate="2015-08-19T04:13:36.520" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;From what I've seen, drastic changes to answers like the ones you've presented should be instead added as their own answer, instead of amending someone else's answer. If someone else was short, and to the point; and you edited their syntax to be long and drawn out with explanations for each point, you should have instead of editing it likely made your own answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing should keep in line with the original question or answer, making minor changes to syntax to better get the point across, or to correct spelling or grammar problems. Anything really drastic should be a new answer entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T04:13:36.520" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5726" CreationDate="2015-08-19T13:55:16.860" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no hard and fast rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general your edits shouldn't change the nature of the answer - if you're changing a yes to a no, that's bad.  But adding citations, etc., even extensively, doesn't do that. Note we've also had things like 5e's basic/phb/errata release progression that makes going back and including newer quotes/information very valuable, and really I'd rather have an existing answer get a new backing quote than have someone spawn a new answer that has the same line of reasoning plus the new backing quote. There's no value in that. We edit to add info, to add clarification from comments so comments can be deleted, to copyedit... Whatever seems like it's improving the answer, while maintaining the point of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your edits are drastic enough that the poster rolls them back, or reviewers find it inappropriate, then it was too much. That's really it. But there's no line of &quot;well if you've added more than 10% more volume to the answer then it's bad&quot; sort of guideline.  If it's better yes, if it's worse no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-08-19T22:41:35.050" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T22:41:35.050" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5727" CreationDate="2015-08-19T14:06:56.913" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;article&lt;/em&gt; Good Subjective, Bad Subjective is targeted at questions. But it's advice provides an outline of what we want out of answers (i.e. The Back it Up! Principle).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! means that your answers must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something you can &lt;em&gt;back up&lt;/em&gt; with a reference&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both GS/BS and the game-req guidelines basically boil down to one thing: &amp;quot;speak from experience.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble is, speaking from experience is more of a spectrum than a discrete point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've heard of a system, and it sounds like it might do what you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've played a system, and I don't think you'll break it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I read about someone doing something else with a system, so you can probably do your thing with this system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I read about someone else doing something similar with a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've done something similar with a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've done exactly this with a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GS/BS doesn't do much to draw the line at where the tipping point is on the spectrum (because it was written towards question authors).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game-rec guidelines apply GS/BS's guidelines in an answer-focused way. The idea being that our game-rec questions were getting crummy answers (&amp;quot;GURPS can do anything!&amp;quot;), and that the only way to &amp;quot;save&amp;quot; them was to improve answer quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... The game recommendation guidelines are a codified, aggressively enforced, version of GS/BS. This means that they allow a smaller subset of answers through (relative to the site at large), but there isn't a specific set of rules that are &amp;quot;added&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;missing&amp;quot; from one or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T14:22:15.783" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5727" CreationDate="2015-08-19T16:26:41.297" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are the same in all substantial points. The difference is in application: GS/BS is guidance for what makes good questions and good answers on a site with an inherently subjective topic, while the game-rec guidelines say “…and for recommendations they're not just suggestions, it's going to be enforced.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference is in the “MUST” in the game-rec guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers MUST adhere to the &quot;Back It Up!&quot; principle&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, they're the same. The difference is that answers not adhering to GS/BS will get a finger wagging and downvotes, while answers not adhering to the game-rec guidelines will get a finger wagging, a pause to see if the wagging helped, and then deletion if not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T16:26:41.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5721" CreationDate="2015-08-19T16:42:58.280" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes and no. Yes, officially, game-rec covers anything recommended for a game, not just the recommendation of games themselves. This includes everything under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag as well (which is just a tagging convenience due to volume, not a separate site-rules jurisdiction).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in practice the tool-recs aren't a problem like other game-recs are. Are they full of great answers? Not usually. They're usually pretty crappy list questions, actually. But in practice, we don't see the same massive partisanship and popularity-voting on those questions. So in practice, they're benevolently neglected as regards the game-rec guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They still get closed when they're too-broad list questions, mostly a matter of opinion, or insufficiently specified (i.e., unclear) though. Sometimes they're slow to be closed, as the community waits to see evidentially if they're going to be a good or bad question. That's the thing though: the normal SE processes tend to work fine, so those processes are left to take care of it as normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;de jure&lt;/em&gt; they are under the game-rec guidelines.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;But &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; they don't get the guidelines as zealously applied to them, so long as they don't make a nuisance of themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-19T16:42:58.280" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5733" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-21T02:44:29.963" Score="2" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are these good questions? - What does &quot;Dungeon&quot; mean in &quot;Dungeons and Dragons&quot;, and how did that meaning come about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also tried to scope stuff out around this on &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7071/are-either-of-these-dungeons-and-dragons-related-questions-good-questions&quot;&gt;the English.SE Meta&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7158/has-this-been-asked-before-how-did-dungeon-evolved-to-mean-place-where-adv&quot;&gt;Scifi.SE meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67422/why-do-dd-and-other-rpgs-players-use-dungeon-to-mean-the-places-they-go-to&quot;&gt;Why does “dungeon” mean the places adventurers go to kill stuff?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21941" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T07:14:16.393" Title="Are these good questions? - What does &quot;Dungeon&quot; mean in &quot;Dungeons and Dragons&quot;, and how did that meaning come about?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5733" CreationDate="2015-08-21T03:34:33.990" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's the title of a possibly &lt;strong&gt;topical&lt;/strong&gt; question, but it literally lacks body. Without seeing it in its full question form, we can't guarantee whether the community will think it's &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's certainly on-topic, within our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; tags, but beyond that mere topicality, judgement about quality would have to be determined the usual way, by people voting on it as a real question on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-21T03:34:33.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5733" CreationDate="2015-08-21T03:39:04.327" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sort of? As SSD says, you're missing the body of the question completely so it's hard to judge, but it's on topic for us. I'm also confused about what exactly you're asking for. &lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; might be confused about what you're asking for, since the Dungeon part of the title literally just refers to a Dungeon (it's meant to be evocative), but your other meta questions suggest you're curious about how the language is actually used nowadays and what's with the way people use it and why it came to be that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might want to just ask that straightforwardly: &quot;what's with D&amp;amp;D players using 'dungeon' the way they do to mean all kinds of places they go kill stuff?&quot; or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-08-21T03:39:04.327" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5736" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5738" CreationDate="2015-08-21T20:41:23.147" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;From these comments, I want to ask &quot;What is a dungeon crawl?&quot;, but does it feel worthy enough?:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I would add the concept of the dungeon crawl where a band of diverse adventurers (wizard, fighter, elf, etc.) battle monsters in an underground setting, including a final boss monster, is straight out of the Mines of Moria from J. R. R. Tolkien's The Fellowship of the Ring. –  RobertF 1 hour ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;RobertF: I think that point is worthy of its own question about &quot;what is a dungeon crawl&quot; ... I don't know if that particular scene is linked to where &quot;dungeon&quot; comes from. I agree that the template parallel looks obvious. –  KorvinStarmast 56 mins ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21941" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-08-22T07:14:22.420" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T07:14:22.420" Title="Is this a good question? - What is a dungeon crawl?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5736" CreationDate="2015-08-21T20:47:32.273" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;My dear, incorrigible Malandy :-)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I searched and found about seventeen pages of RPG.SE questions that appear to include reference to, in passing or otherwise, dungeon crawl or dungeon crawling.  The term is imbedded in the hobby, from the get go.   Neologisms eventually take root and become a commonly used term. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As a comparison:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;think about how quickly &quot;Radar&quot; became a word that began as a bit of tech speak for Radio Detection and Ranging.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Scuba was once an acronym for &quot;Self Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus&quot; but eventually that acronym became its own term/word).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is common usage, so maybe we'll need to ask @RobertF to elaborate on refining the question to address the &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DungeonCrawling&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trope&lt;/a&gt; involved: mixed party, underground adventure, and the Big Bad Boss at the end!  That is because the hobby has grown immensely to the point that dungeon crawl has become a sub set of a whole lot of different RPG adventure styles, both in Table Top form and in Video Game Form. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2015-08-21T21:04:18.363" LastActivityDate="2015-08-21T21:04:18.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5736" CreationDate="2015-08-21T20:55:30.057" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag: its presence indicates that terminology questions are generally on-topic. Ask away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, using meta to get pre-approval for every question will very quickly meet with &lt;em&gt;dis&lt;/em&gt;approval of that use of meta. Just ask your questions and find out if they're considered good the normal way, via people's comments, up/down votes, and close votes or lack thereof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-08-21T21:34:25.013" LastActivityDate="2015-08-21T21:34:25.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5739" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5736" CreationDate="2015-08-22T07:13:24.633" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't have &quot;not worthy&quot; for a downvote or close reason, so that's a question not worth asking. It's worthy if it's worth it to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do have &quot;no research effort&quot; for a downvote reason though, so make sure you do some googling and independent research first and come back to us if you're still not clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And like SevenSidedDie said &amp;mdash; don't overuse meta to pre-approve your questions. So far you've given us just the bare bones of questions we can't actually judge the quality of. I suggest you just go and ask first, and come to meta if you have significant trouble. We can help you if you're sure it would be a problem and need some assistance judging how (or whether) to ask it, If you're only worried about whether it's &quot;worthy&quot; just skip straight to finding out by asking it. (But do your research first.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T07:13:24.633" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5726" CreationDate="2015-08-22T13:37:11.447" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;Drasticness cannot be the sole disqualifier of an edit. Make edits that you think improve an answer's &lt;strong&gt;correctness&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;completeness&lt;/strong&gt;, even if drastic. Expect some to get re-edited or rolled back. Assume good faith and don't get your nose out of joint.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the perpetrator of both and a relatively new member, I hope I've got some valuable perspective to add:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see the two examples as representative of two categories of large&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; edits: &lt;strong&gt;explaining&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;completing&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;. Both strive toward what I think is this site's hallmark: providing &lt;strong&gt;correct and complete answers to well-posed questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Explaining&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Short answers obviously can be correct. And, as this is a site striving to be an authoritative source for correct answers to well-posed questions, for many visitors a one-liner is perfectly-suited to their needs: &lt;em&gt;&quot;if it's been up-voted on SE, that's enough for me!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But some questions--perhaps most?--are requiring of &lt;em&gt;explanation&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;references&lt;/em&gt; to common material. For the user who comes not with the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67269/can-a-monks-martial-arts-attack-be-used-on-a-second-opponent/67270#67270&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;can a monk...&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; but with the real question &lt;em&gt;&quot;how do I know the Monk can target two...&quot;&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;&quot;where can I point a monk 2/rules-lawer 30 to do his own research first&quot;&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;the explanation is the completion.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly I thought the first example could use some explaining, as the sticky point for someone in doubt--in my mind--was &lt;em&gt;&quot;when the monk makes the bonus attack is it some continuation of the previous attack, or a brand new attack action in its own right?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I've violated what probably should be a style guideline: &lt;strong&gt;answer first, explain second.&lt;/strong&gt; The way I've edited it the argument builds to the answer, rather than answer-with-supporting-explanation.&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Completing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the second case the question specifically asked for variance among editions. The accepted answer compared two versions. Most other answers each addressed one, and none addressed the 5e situation. So should 5e information spawn a new answer, or be folded in to the accepted answer? Even recognizing that addition of 5e increased the accepted answer's length by 50%, it seems to me that &lt;em&gt;'accepted answer with three versions'&lt;/em&gt; is better than &lt;em&gt;'accepted with two versions, filter through the other six&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt; answers to find any other versions you're looking for.'&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From there it's an obvious leap to pull in SSD's 2e information and a distilled version--in keeping with the answer's style--of the 3.5 info. (Again: I botched that. &lt;em&gt;Mea maxima culpa.&lt;/em&gt;) But assume I had done it correctly: we'd have an accepted answer with editions 2-5 represented, at triple the length of the previous revision. &lt;em&gt;Is that better or worse?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how I see the situation: &lt;strong&gt;there's a lot of different, correct, useful information dispersed among many answers: pull it all together.&lt;/strong&gt; perhaps this is the situation where we need a community wiki, rather than 'an answer?' I don't know enough about it to know the propriety, or even how it gets done.&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So, 'When to Edit?'&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edit help itself, particularly at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;&quot;When should I edit posts?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; strikes me as... conflicting, at best.&#xA;Let's keep in mind the example of adding 5e info to the second question: is that edit  &lt;em&gt;&quot;substantial and [leaving] the post better than you found it,&quot;&lt;/em&gt; or does that edit run afoul of the bullet points, all of which are much-more minor that the edit I made&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two frameworks that have guided some of my thinking are &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;WP:BOLD&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_content&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;WP:OWNER&lt;/a&gt;. I know &lt;strong&gt;we're not Wikipedia&lt;/strong&gt;. But we're a knowledge and information site, and ignoring the precedents and culture of the English-speaking world's dominant information site can only be harmful.&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Factors in Support of: Be Bold, No Ownership&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the edit button prominently at the bottom of each post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the assurance that edits from new users will be reviewed, encouraging even the least-reputable among us to attempt edits&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the existence of a revision history guarantees edits can be thoroughly reviewed, including to the level of moderator roll-back&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;edits are noted in the by-line, encouraging readers to look at revision history&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;edits move a post up in the &quot;active&quot; listing, further encouraging review of the edit&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;original authors may not be responsive, or even active&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Factors Opposing: Be Bold, No Ownership&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the original author receives permanent by-line&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the original author receives all reputation that will ever accrue to a post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;WP's 'no ownership' policy usually comes into play not in situations like this, but with a much-later user deciding &lt;em&gt;&quot;I'll assume the (sole) responsibility for curating the edits to this article.&quot;&lt;/em&gt; (Although maybe it appears that's what I did... I didn't intend that.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a highly reputable user--miniman--explicitly: &quot;with drastic edits like the ones you made to this answer you should ask the person who wrote it first.&quot; (8/19/15 1511 comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4490/is-it-possible-to-actually-kill-a-tarrasque/4491#4491&quot;&gt;second example&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the opposition factors, I think the safeguards and site infrastructure argue for a permissive attitude toward even large edits. I don't want to end up with 'edit-wars,' but I think our ideal should be &lt;strong&gt;correct and complete.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I say 'large' rather than 'drastic' as I think the question of &quot;what makes an edit &lt;em&gt;drastic&lt;/em&gt; is a matter of personal judgment. As evidenced by the various approvals/rejections/rollbacks of the two in question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, the second example is badly polluted by the gross error I made in reading the 3.5 situation. But I think it's clear--especially looking at the revision history linked--that my intent was to flesh out the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In part the structure flowed from a desire not to change the ordering of the original material, in part it's just my poor style.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As adding a 5e answer would have brought the total to seven.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Though if you, Dear Reader, do think that's the solution &lt;em&gt;please edit the answer's line to make 'wiki' a suggestion rather than question&lt;/em&gt; and remove this footnote! Improve the answer!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;To be sure, one bullet point mentions making updates, but prefaced by &quot;minor mistakes&quot;--certainly the feel I get from the bullet points is &lt;em&gt;&quot;keep it small, buddy!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying we need &lt;em&gt;adopt&lt;/em&gt; any of that site's policies, but we should absolutely be &lt;em&gt;informed&lt;/em&gt; by them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T13:56:49.650" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5741" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-22T22:49:30.750" Score="9" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;I answered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67378/can-an-arcane-trickster-rogue-learn-all-of-the-wizard-spells-from-the-low-levels/67389?noredirect=1#comment144988_67389&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question.  The OP clearly disagrees with my answer (or maybe just wishes the answer were different).  I've encouraged him to post an opposing answer if he disagrees, but he seems to want to just argue with me in the comments, or add more content to his original question, in the hopes of convincing me to change my answer.  He's going around in circles at this point, so there is nothing new that is going to convince me to change my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, should the OP be encouraged to post an opposing answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the &quot;right thing&quot; (if there is one) for the OP to do in a situation like this, according to this site's culture?  (I know it's not arguing in the comments...) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12270" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T22:26:45.380" Title="If you disagree with the answers to your question, should you post an opposing answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5742" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5741" CreationDate="2015-08-22T23:35:18.937" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;You cannot control what other people do, just what you do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post your answer.  If the OP or anyone else doesn't like it - that's their right, even if they're being a dink. If they post a comment that you think helps refine your answer, edit to take it into account; otherwise don't reply.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It takes two to argue in comments.&lt;/strong&gt; Don't enable it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What &quot;should&quot; the questioner do?  Nothing.  What can they do?  Post an answer, downvote, edit their question, nothing, etc. But that's not really your business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is he kinda being an argumentative goon who really, really wants the answer to his question to validate his viewpoint? Sure. You don't fix that by also being an argumentative goon. Answer, follow normal protocol, let it stand, get votes. Otherwise, leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-08-22T23:35:18.937" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5743" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5744" CreationDate="2015-08-24T02:30:00.167" Score="6" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many questions have simple answers... If you have the appropriate reference at hand. But should we expect the DMG is ubiquitous? I know that at my AL table there are plenty of players with only the PHB, and some with only freely-available materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions seem to be--at least, to a completist-- &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5270/23970&quot;&gt;&quot;Read the Book to Me Questions.&quot;&lt;/a&gt; But I wonder if they're not, instead, &lt;em&gt;&quot;I've downloaded and read the 114 pages of player's guide and even looked through the downloadable dm's rules. [63 pages, 55 of them monster/NPC stats.] Then I bought the Starter Set and got some more playing and GMing advice and content. So what the heck were the people at my table talking about?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm so glad that with amount of content in the freely-available &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;basic rules&lt;/a&gt; we can finally say to people with a straight face &quot;you can play in--or even run and design--games for free.&quot; Then the starter set gives you a lot of good playing and GM guidance beyond that, for only 20 bucks. And &lt;em&gt;&quot;if you're serious about playing, obtain and read the PHB&quot;&lt;/em&gt; is probably a fine sentiment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know we expect querents to do some research first. &lt;strong&gt;In the 5e world what should our expectations on resources be?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4852/23970&quot;&gt;Should we prefer...Basic Rules or Player's Handbook&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-08-24T03:24:48.880" Title="Should the DMG be an assumed resource?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5744" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5743" CreationDate="2015-08-24T02:33:26.167" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're asking a question about DMing 5e, you should have the DMG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, answers should not significantly reprint copyrighted material, so the right answer to any question of &quot;but how does X work&quot; that's completely and clearly covered in the book should be e.g. &quot;see DMG p.56 for an explanation of that&quot; anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-08-24T02:37:09.080" LastActivityDate="2015-08-24T02:37:09.080" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5741" CreationDate="2015-08-24T05:59:10.697" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because an answer is trivial to verify does not mean that a question is trivial to answer.  If someone asked &quot;How do you grapple in D&amp;amp;D 3.5?&quot; and you answered with a homebrew grappling system intended for GURPS, I can (and should) downvote your answer and/or leave a comment explaining how and that your answer is completely off base and possibly flag the question as 'not an answer' or 'extremely low quality'.  That doesn't mean I know enough to answer the question myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the same way, look at our (possibly dying :( ) game-rec guidelines.  We put a much higher barrier on answerers than those reviewing their answers, and this is for good reason and works well (at least, I think it does...)!  Answering these questions well is &lt;em&gt;hard&lt;/em&gt;.  Reviewing those answers can also be hard, but is generally much, much easier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes I ask a question on a niche subject in which I already am an expert here, and very often (unfortunately) the first answer I get will be something like the first answer I got to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59956/whose-actions-can-i-narrate-in-polaris&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;: not only completely off base and showing a marked lack of understanding of the subject material, but also plainly stating that the answerer doesn't actually know what they're talking about.  I generally downvote and comment on such answers because they are extremely unhelpful, preventing further attention from possibly actually qualified answerers and instilling their wrongthink into potential curious passerby.  This doesn't automatically mean that I have my own answer; if I did I likely would have posted it with the question or not posted at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;.  People disagreeing with your answer are not and should not be under any obligation to answer themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-08-25T00:44:29.690" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5741" CreationDate="2015-08-24T06:22:31.160" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can if you want to, but don't have to. Self-answered questions are encouraged on the site. What you shouldn't do is have arguments in comments about the answers you disagree with. Post your own answer instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2015-08-24T06:22:31.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5747" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-24T14:06:09.227" Score="22" ViewCount="2178" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game recommendation questions are sadly &lt;strong&gt;NOT on topic&lt;/strong&gt; here on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means the following kinds of questions are off topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I want to play (details) kind of game/story. What game should I use to do that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Which game does (thing) the best?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any games that let me do (thing) / have this specific mechanic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does a game meeting this criteria exist? (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5903/1204&quot;&gt;Can we ask about the existence of a game?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This list is not exhaustive. If your question will boil down to “here are some criteria” and answers will boil down to “here is a game / some games”, then it is a game recommendation and off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;History&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2011 we embarked upon a brave experiment.  &amp;quot;Shopping,&amp;quot; or recommendation, questions are generally banned on all SEs given specific meta.SE guidance on the topic in &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is Hard, Let's Go Shopping&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG recommendations are both popular and also do not have some of the more temporary attributes that make those kinds of shopping questions bad - people still play RPGs from 1974 so they don't really become out of date, and have attributes only discoverable in use as opposed to just reducing to &amp;quot;spec sheets.&amp;quot;  Therefore in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are game recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; we experimented with making such questions on topic, as long as they were well defined and both questioners and answerers hewed strongly to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; principles that SE uses to govern questions with subjective components. The most important part of this was the Back It Up! principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! means that your answers must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something you can &lt;em&gt;back up&lt;/em&gt; with a reference&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the theory that would prevent people from the usual issue with game-recs, which is everyone answering a) their favorite game because they're sure you could use it for that even though they never have but it's so great it could clearly handle that, or b) some game they vaguely heard of/just Googled for, both of which are crap answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately now in 2015 the community was not able to maintain those standards over time. Game-recs have became contentious, 25% of them get closed anyway, and therefore our grand experiment has come to an end - see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;Community self-evaluation: How are we doing with game recommendations?&lt;/a&gt; for more details on how that decision was arrived at. Therefore game-recs are now off topic on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What This Means/Does Not Mean&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Old game-recs will be historical locked as they pop back up to the front page organically (we see no value in doing a proactive locking, that'll just flood the front page with them).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New game-recs, we'll get a custom close reason added for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game-rec post notice and FAQ will be modified to match this new policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means all &amp;quot;shopping&amp;quot; questions are off topic. In many cases, however, instead of asking a shopping question (which game system/online tabletop/psionic subsystem/etc &amp;quot;is best&amp;quot;), you can ask a more focused question like &amp;quot;Does Roll20 do X, Y, and Z&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;How does the Dreamscarred Press Psionics Unleashed system work out balance-wise in play?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does NOT mean that Good Subjective, Bad Subjective is not the guiding principle on this SE for questions with subjective components.  With game-recs we were deliberately curating them hard and deleting answers not meeting GS/BS. But in other questions, everyone on this Stack should be answering from experience, not speculation.  Answers that show &amp;quot;you've done that&amp;quot; or have a reference will be upvoted and answers that are you just coming up with untested ideas on how you'd do that will be downvoted, and in extreme cases deleted. If you're not clear why, go read all of &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; over and over until you achieve enlightenment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:39:01.030" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:39:01.030" Title="Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic? [2015]" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5748" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-25T14:32:54.460" Score="3" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;Triggered by this question:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67626/how-if-at-all-do-gms-deal-with-secret-actions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67626/how-if-at-all-do-gms-deal-with-secret-actions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It currently has no system tag, which is fine because it's not about a specific system. But it is about a specific category of systems where players keep information hidden from one another. Possibly because the assumption is that the player knows everything the character knows and vice-cersa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This system is contrasted by other systems, which assume a strong split between player knowledge and character knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be some confusion, with people who are used to a system of the former not understanding how to work with the second system (giving us questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64125/how-to-do-mystery-based-storytelling-in-fate&quot;&gt;How to do mystery based storytelling in Fate?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33908/can-i-roll-for-a-pc-in-secret&quot;&gt;Can I roll for a PC in secret?&lt;/a&gt; which is also without a system tag and where only the third answer actually says &quot;depends on the game&quot; (with the first two assuming a game of the first category)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes me feel we should have tags to explain the different styles of play, because they invite completely different answers. Except I can't for the life of me think up good names for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I was wondering whether anyone agreed and had a good name for a tag to apply the question(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-08-29T18:07:23.643" Title="Do we need a tag to describe systems where players keep information hidden from one another?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5749" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5748" CreationDate="2015-08-25T14:41:13.907" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags are for categorising questions, not necessarily for categorising the game they're playing or a style of play involved. So we don't want a tag that describes a bunch of systems, because that's categorising the wrong thing (the game they're playing or their play style, instead of their problem).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the kind of tag we need here is something like [secrets] or [information-control] that would describe the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt;, not a bunch of game systems. Turns out we already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/communication&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;communication&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;communication&lt;/a&gt;, which cover both of those, and seems under-used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-08-29T18:07:23.643" LastActivityDate="2015-08-29T18:07:23.643" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3554" CreationDate="2015-08-25T17:37:42.547" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems to be a simple CSS bug / typo in the RPG.SE style sheet.  Specifically, the style declaration for &lt;code&gt;#system-message&lt;/code&gt; here on RPG.SE says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;clear: none;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;when it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; say (and on every other SE site I've checked, does say):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;clear: both;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that there's no reason to actually specify &lt;code&gt;clear: none&lt;/code&gt; here (it's the default value anyway), that every other SE site has &lt;code&gt;clear: both&lt;/code&gt; here, and that fixing the style makes the message appear the way it's presumably meant to appear, I'm going to bet that this a simple CSS typo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, here's a before-and-after comparison of current the site notice appearance, and how the same notice would look if this bug was fixed (click the images for full resolution):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Current buggy rendering with &quot;clear: none&quot;:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eoAyS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eoAyS.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of fake system message with CSS bug&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Fixed rendering with &quot;clear: both&quot;:&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/G8Ajd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/G8Ajd.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of fake system message with the bug fixed&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That actually looks pretty nice, doesn't it?  Clearly, some thought went into making these notices look good, but it seems there was a last-minute bug that broke it. :-(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ps. While waiting for SE to fix this bug properly (which will hopefully happen when RPG.SE gets the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/253359/list-of-communities-with-base-css-updates-completed&quot;&gt;CSS overhaul&lt;/a&gt;, if not before), I've added a client-side fix for it to the next version of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/4486/the-stack-overflow-unofficial-patch-soup&quot;&gt;SOUP&lt;/a&gt; user script.  (Of course, it won't actually &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; anything until the next time a system message appears here on RPG.SE, but if you're using SOUP anyway, you'll get it along with all the other fixes.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; Looks like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5912/updates-to-the-site&quot;&gt;new design&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;em&gt;sort of&lt;/em&gt; fixed this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Current read-only notice, as of December 5, 2015:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of RPG.SE read-only notice after redesign&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this is probably OK for things like temporary failure notices, if we ever wanted a more long-term notice (e.g. to celebrate an important milestone, like SO did for the ten millionth question), a bit of restyling could turn the new notice into something like it was presumably originally meant to look like.  Here's what I came up with, while waiting for the site to come back online after the recent outage:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;#system-message {&#xA;  clear: both;&#xA;  position: relative;&#xA;  box-sizing: border-box;&#xA;  width: 1000px;&#xA;  margin: 0 auto;&#xA;  padding: 10px 45px;&#xA;  border: 0px none;&#xA;  background: transparent url(&quot;http://cdn.sstatic.net/rpg/img/bg-nav.png&quot;) no-repeat scroll bottom;&#xA;  line-height: 1.3;&#xA;  font-size: 12px;&#xA;  color: #FFEACD;&#xA;  text-shadow: 0px 1px 0px #000;&#xA;}&#xA;#system-message a { color: #FFA92D }&#xA;#system-message a:visited { color: #EF9718 }&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;yielding this appearance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Current read-only notice, restyled as above:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xVFoC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xVFoC.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of restyled RPG.SE read-only notice&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The background image is the same as in the menu above the notice.  Reusing the menu background like that does risk the notice looking kind of ugly and broken if the text in it is long enough to wrap onto two lines.  Using a separate, vertically tileable background image for the notice would fix that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2015-12-05T15:00:39.380" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5751" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-27T00:31:01.027" Score="4" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;Earlier today at one point A question I had posted an answer on had 23 votes with an accepted answer of 11 votes on the question, and supposedly met all of the requirements to receive the Populist badge. It remained like this for about six or so hours, after which the person who asked the question changed my answer to the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what happened to my Populist badge? The accepted answer had more than 10 votes and my answer was double the score of the accepted answer. But I have no badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastActivityDate="2015-08-27T00:36:18.417" Title="Unawarded Badges?" Tags="|discussion|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5751" CreationDate="2015-08-27T00:36:18.417" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Badges are awarded by scripts that run occasionally to check whether their conditions have been met. Either the script did not run in the time interval when the conditions were met and the eligibility was never noticed, or it did run in that interval, but the awarding of the badge itself is still “in the mail,” so to speak, and will be awarded later. No way to know for sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is still not awarded by tomorrow, likely the script never ran in the interval when the conditions were met.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-08-27T00:36:18.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5753" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5755" CreationDate="2015-08-27T04:04:23.847" Score="10" ViewCount="474" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;A recent meta post about the efficacy of game-rec questions&lt;/a&gt;, which had the initial tone of &quot;How are we doing with this question type?&quot; became a tacit vote to ban the question type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is problematic.  Reading the question, and the first few answers does not make it clear that casting a vote of &quot;Yes, we need to look at this type of question&quot; (the tone of the original post), would be a vote to ban the post type.  This caught me off guard, and apparently one third of the users who saw the announcement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T18:32:06.263" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T18:32:06.263" Title="The policy change regarding game-rec questions needs review" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5753" CreationDate="2015-08-27T05:14:36.677" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The mods were surprised by the overwhelming support for the view that &quot;the guidelines don't work and should be abandoned&quot; (+19/&amp;minus;3, and twice the score of any other feedback).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the steadily increasing resistance to the guidelines in practice, followed by that unexpected and overwhelming support for a late suggestion to abandon them, holding a vote-to-confirm-the-votes to revert to Stack Exchange norms would have been superfluous. (We've all known the GM who calls for multiple rolls until a preordained result is rolled—calling for votes to confirm votes has the same problem.) Even then we sat on it to see if there was a reversal coming, until it was past obvious that it was a &lt;em&gt;fait accompli&lt;/em&gt; and was waiting only to be implemented. Or more accurately, for our peculiar policy to be recinded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also knew there would be objections after recinding it. That is the nature of policy changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless: the observed problems with recommendations under that policy, and the reasons for proposing abandoning it, haven't changed. Those reasons can still be challenged, and the feedback meta is still open to answers. Unless there is a clear reversal of consensus there and attendant support for reinstating the policy, there is no reason to return to the previous status quo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also nothing preventing, alternatively, a new suggestion for a policy to permit recommendations at RPG.se. What we have learned about the strengths and weaknesses of the previous policy might even give such a proposal a fighting chance at being effective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policy formation at SE is like that: formed organically by talking about what needs doing and coming to decisions. There isn't a formal process, just this free-form use of meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-08-27T15:51:31.080" LastActivityDate="2015-08-27T15:51:31.080" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5753" CreationDate="2015-08-28T19:06:59.257" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree this was unfortunate and inappropriate from the standpoint of jurisprudence.  Nonetheless, it's not clear to me that proper procedure would have yielded a different result and the inappropriate action was neither intentionally abusive nor particularly egregious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we agree that answering with a plan for community action drawing on the other answers on a 'Community Self Evaluation' meta is in bad form.  It should probably have been done as a second meta being like &quot;Ok, we've got this data from the community self evaluation, what do we think we should do from here?&quot; &quot;A: all this stuff, so lets not do game-rec any more&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand SSD's position that holding a vote to confirm a vote is superflous.  The problem is that the first vote never really happened in a nice clear unambiguous manner in the first place, and really shouldn't have been happening where it did anyways.  I mean, I disagree with a lot of what he said in the meta answer, but I upvoted it anyways because I thought it was well worded and extremely relevant for the follow up discussion I figured we'd have.  Luckily I realized it was turning into a 'lets decide to do this by upvoting this' post before I could no longer reverse my vote, but still.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I think trying to do anything about this specific issue other than agreeing that it was, in fact, a bit of a screw up, would be more work than it'd be worth and would likely go badly anyways.  We don't have mistakes like this very often and it's unfortunate that it happened on something as important as this, but important things are always woollier so it's not entirely unexpected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's hope to do better next time :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-08-28T19:06:59.257" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5758" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-08-29T16:37:30.020" Score="30" ViewCount="825" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There are a good number of questions, especially from users new to the site, that get closed as too broad or opinion-based. This is a post we can link them to for more guidance than what comments can reasonably provide, and more focused than &amp;quot;read the help center&amp;quot;. Feel free and add answers/tips of your own below.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hello and welcome to RPG.SE! If your question was placed on hold for being &amp;quot;too broad,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;unclear,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;opinion-based,&amp;quot; don't fear - a little rework can probably get you the answers you need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a focused Q&amp;amp;A site, we we believe that &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Real Questions Have Answers&lt;/a&gt; - while on forums, throwing out a topic and letting the posts on any tangent roll in is OK, our philosophy is different, expecting someone to be more clear about what they want and what their problem is so people can help them directly. Therefore we encourage those who can vote to put questions on hold (community members with enough reputation and moderators) to put questions temporarily on hold to get clarified well before we start answering them, so we don't get a bunch of answers that won't help you with your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a large number of very experienced gamers here that want to help you with your problem, but the first step is respecting their time by making a question clear so that they can answer it effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;help center definitions of these three close reasons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;unclear what you're asking&lt;/strong&gt; - sometimes we need more information in order to help solve your problem&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit your post to be more specific about what you're looking for, and be sure to address any concerns that other users brought up in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt; - if your question could be answered by an entire book, or has many valid answers, it's probably too broad for our format&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow down the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;primarily opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt; - discussions focused on diverse opinions are great, but they just don't fit our format well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than on facts, references, or specific expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Question = Problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why might this be?  First, you probably want to look at the kinds of questions that are not good to ask here on RPG.SE (well, any SE really). &lt;strong&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Don't ask&lt;/a&gt; questions where:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite ______?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there is no actual problem to be solved: “I’m curious if other people feel like I do.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you are asking an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if ______ happened?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;your question is just a rant in disguise: “______ sucks, am I right?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Too Broad/Unclear What You're Asking&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two reasons are often used interchangeably. If your writing is just totally incoherent then it'll pull unclear votes, if it just isn't clearly scoped it might pull too broad or unclear votes from community members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Incoherence&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question isn't using enough in the way of English sentences and providing information where someone can understand it enough to answer, your question will be put on hold. Specify (and tag) what game system you're playing, what exactly your issue is and what you want in an answer. Questions we can't even read, or figure out what game system they're for, are unanswerable. You don't have to give your whole life story (and shouldn't), but if someone who doesn't know you and your situation can't read the question and understand what you're even asking, then it'll be closed for clarification on your part.  Don't worry, questions can be reopened quickly.  Note that &amp;quot;Oh I was really tired/in a rush when I wrote this question&amp;quot; is not a good excuse, if you're not thinking straight for whatever reason you're probably not going to be asking clearly, take a nap first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Too Broad&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A common question formulation here that is a variation on the standard &amp;quot;Don't Ask&amp;quot; questions is &amp;quot;what's a good way to do X?&amp;quot; There are a lot of &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; ways. What do you mean by &amp;quot;good?&amp;quot; If you want help, you have to put in some work too; explain what attributes you want out of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are thousands of role-playing games. Maybe you have only heard of D&amp;amp;D and this is a surprise to you, but there are many games and they all work very, very differently. Asking about &amp;quot;how paladins work, you know, in all games&amp;quot; is an eye-roller, since paladins feature in only about 5% of the games in existence. See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt;. For newer players, keep in mind even implementations of specific things across the 40 years of D&amp;amp;D versions is very, very different. To get this kind of question reopened, it helps to consider what problem you really have that you're trying to solve and focus down on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are many different kinds of playstyles and play assumptions.  There is no &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; one, just ones with pros and cons that appeal to different people. See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;. You may be new enough that you don't even know that you have &amp;quot;a narrativist approach&amp;quot; or whatever, so to save a question being put on hold for this reason you need to state more about you and your group's preferences around the item at hand (for example - we play strictly by the book, or we prefer the GM to make up stuff that's entertaining, or we have a hot button about no PC should ever be under mental control...) Other people do not necessarily share these opinions so to get useful help you should state your assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for example, &amp;quot;What's a good way of handling character death?&amp;quot; is a closable question. There's a hundred ways, equally valid.  What specific problem are you having? (The time spent for a player sitting out?  The narrative consistency of your campaign with character turnover?) What have you tried and how did that work out with &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; group?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What's a good way of handling character death&amp;quot; has turned into these much more specific and useful questions here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58968/whats-the-best-way-to-kill-a-character-in-a-way-that-is-memorable-and-treated&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the best way to kill a character in a way that is memorable, and treated with respect by players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19189/how-do-i-not-cheapen-death-while-also-respecting-my-players-time&quot;&gt;How do I not cheapen death, while also respecting my players&amp;#39; time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(in fact there's a whole &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-death&quot;&gt;character-death&lt;/a&gt; tag with 55 questions in it).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your problem is &amp;quot;I have a player playing a paladin and he's bugging the other players being a stick-in-the-mud and it's causing bad feelings&amp;quot; - that's a good question! Instead asking &amp;quot;well how have paladins been handled across D&amp;amp;D versions&amp;quot; is a bad question - both by the rules, and because it's a lot less likely to actually help you! Ask about &lt;em&gt;your problem specifically&lt;/em&gt;. That overcomes most scoping issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Brainstorming Is Too Broad&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't do &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;brainstorm&amp;quot; questions; these are too broad. &amp;quot;I want a monk like Iron Fist build it for me,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Homebrew me a cool sword,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;What are some things I could have on my encounter table&amp;quot; are unbounded list questions, with no way to determine what's a better answer than any other except for a popularity contest (and therefore also opinion-based, since you probably asked for for best, coolest, or just &amp;quot;more ideas&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Primarily Opinion-Based&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can ask questions that aren't 100% objective, we're not just &amp;quot;RPG Rules Stack Exchange,&amp;quot; but if you do then you and especially answerers are expected to follow the guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and answer from experience. &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shopping questions&lt;/a&gt; about &amp;quot;what game is good for X&amp;quot; have been banned because they have a lot of trouble staying within these lines, for example. &amp;quot;Ideas on how to handle X&amp;quot; are not useful to you or anyone - &amp;quot;How you have handled X and how it worked out&amp;quot; is useful. You want answers people have used and tested, not a brainstorm. It can be hard to tell them apart in answers, but the former is immensely more valuable to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With what you've learned from reading this question and the Good Subjective article, check out the answers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/what-kinds-of-alignment-questions-are-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about alignment on topic?&lt;/a&gt; and it should make sense.  &amp;quot;Is X a good act&amp;quot; is the kind of question that can never be on topic, unless it is specifically laid out in a game text. For a question to be answerable here, it needs either an objective answer or an answer that can share experience, but anything that is asking for opinion, guesses, speculation, etc. is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But I Don't Want To Narrow It Down&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two kinds of endgames here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we do have bad closes, using a misinterpretation of this guidance that assumes questions must be about specific very narrowly scoped issues and not just looking for high level/newbie guidance.  But a tightly scoped question about &amp;quot;Where do I even get started with X?&amp;quot; is totally fine, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11033/im-at-a-loss-with-dungeons-and-dragons-how-does-one-play-it-anyway&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;m at a loss with “Dungeons and Dragons.” How does one play it, anyway?&lt;/a&gt; Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;guidance on character build questions&lt;/a&gt; is instructive in that it says that good questions are probably either &amp;quot;how do I get started&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;I have a very specific choice to make&amp;quot; but are probably bad if they are in the middle of &amp;quot;let's talk through every single possible option.&amp;quot; So it's possible your question is this type and just needs clarification. Keep in mind the &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; type - no one is going to explain the entire D&amp;amp;D combat system to you here, that question will get closed, but &amp;quot;The D&amp;amp;D combat system confuses me, how do I go about learning it?&amp;quot; is a valid overview question. This is also a good example of asking about your PROBLEM (I am having trouble learning the D&amp;amp;D combat system) and not an assumed answer (How do I houserule to make the D&amp;amp;D combat system simpler, Can you explain the entire D&amp;amp;D combat system to me...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's not, and it's just plain one of the kinds of questions we don't allow here - that's OK. It doesn't mean you're a bad person or gamer. It is not RPG.SE's intention to be appropriate for every kind of discourse. We want a very high signal to noise site where someone can come with a specific issue they are having in a real game and get high quality answers with either objective or experiential validation. In that case, try a forum, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2021-04-20T19:17:43.937" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T19:17:43.937" Title="Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|faq|questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5759" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5760" CreationDate="2015-08-31T14:15:56.540" Score="4" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was trying to add the &quot;dnd-5e&quot; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67889/can-i-employ-relentless-endurance-while-in-wild-shape&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. The system told me that I was making too few changes to grant the edit. Immediately, someone else managed to tag the question, adding no other changes. What's going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="932" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-08-31T15:55:21.923" Title="Couldn't add new tag to a question: &quot;Too few changes&quot;" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5759" CreationDate="2015-08-31T14:28:45.387" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;You had an edit collision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you said, someone else tagged the question immediately. That edit had probably already happened before you hit Save. (You just didn't find out about it until a few seconds later, because nothing is truly instant.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when you &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; try to hit Save, the system saw your edit amounted to changing nothing &amp;mdash; the tag was already there! &amp;mdash; and it complained. As you can probably understand, no changes at all is too few changes to save an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-08-31T14:28:45.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5761" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5762" CreationDate="2015-08-31T20:22:12.227" Score="10" ViewCount="204" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think I created the [Half-Orc] tag today when asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64100/23970&quot;&gt;Does the half orc&amp;#39;s Savage Attack work when wild shaped?&lt;/a&gt; It made sense to me to tag it, as it's a feature unique to the Half Orc+Druid combination. &lt;em&gt;'If I'm going to tag it Druid, why wouldn't I tag it Half-Orc?'&lt;/em&gt; I thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few moments later I thought to tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64100/23970&quot;&gt;Does the half orc&amp;#39;s Savage Attack work when wild shaped?&lt;/a&gt; with [Half-Orc]; that edit occasioned the following feedback: &quot;...Tags should help to describe what the question is about, not just what it contains&quot; and &quot;I'm not sure we need a tag just for half-orcs....&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This all got me thinking and digging through the tags (5e core, just 'cause that was the only rulebook I had with me). We currently have questions tagged by race or class in the following numbers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Class:&lt;/strong&gt; Barbarian 45, Bard 49, Cleric 122, Druid 123, Fighter 70, Monk 136, Paladin 69, Ranger 68, Rogue 96, Sorcerer 80, Warlock 92, Wizard 123.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Race:&lt;/strong&gt; Dwarf 6, Elf 11, Half-Elf 5, Halfling 10, Human 0, Gnome 0, Dragonborn 0 (though Draconic-bloodline 3), Half-Orc 1, Tiefling 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sure doesn't seem like the racial tags are doing much lifting. Is there any need to re-evaluate the usefulness of the tags? Or whether &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; questions should be racially-tagged? Such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67530/23970&quot;&gt;I Roll To Seduce The Dragon! (or, Do doublings of proficiency bonus stack?)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2020-01-12T01:48:15.080" Title="Should there be race-specific tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5761" CreationDate="2015-08-31T22:20:09.467" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I don't know if we should have race-specific tags. But I &lt;em&gt;believe&lt;/em&gt;, if we do have them, they should be for race-specific questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions you're asking about aren't really about half-orcs. They're about racial features which half-orcs happen to have. They would be exactly the same questions if elves, dwarves, or any other race had those features instead of half-orcs. The tag I'd suggest they probably need is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/racial-traits&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;racial-traits&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;racial-traits&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, this question - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62577/15469&quot;&gt;How do I name a Half-Orc?&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt;, fundamentally and specifically, about half-orcs. (It's not a particularly good question, admittedly, but that's besides the point here.) It had the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/half-orc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;half-orc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;half-orc&lt;/a&gt; tag until someone removed it. On that question, I think the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/half-orc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;half-orc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;half-orc&lt;/a&gt; tag was completely appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an example which is also a good question, this question - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59528/why-are-elves-immune-to-a-ghouls-paralyzing-touch&quot;&gt;Why are elves immune to a ghoul&amp;#39;s paralyzing touch?&lt;/a&gt; - while not about half-orcs, is very much about elves, and has the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt; tag to show that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-12T01:48:15.080" LastActivityDate="2020-01-12T01:48:15.080" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5763" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-01T17:19:09.503" Score="1" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15726/when-to-apply-xp-in-pathfinder?noredirect=1#comment146151_15726&quot;&gt;When to apply XP in Pathfinder?&lt;/a&gt; there is a comment answer which, unfortunately, I think is an important answer because it provides the only RAW information on the topic.  This information is not addressed by any of the (many) existing answers, and, in fact, many of them make unsourced and completely inaccurate claims as to the default state of the system.  The comment is highly upvoted, but rather than upvoting a comment answer, which seems inappropriate, I wanted the answer put as an actual answer.  My options at that point, it seemed to me, were:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) copy-paste the answer and post it myself, with some spruced up formatting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) leave a comment asking the original author to re-post as an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) Do nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) Flag the comment answer for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that, on 'not old' questions at least, option two is a community accepted response to a comment answer you agree with and which is substantial enough that there isn't much not-fluff you should add to it.  Option 4 is the other community accepted response, which is used on the normal half-assed kind of comment answers.  Option 1 is used if the comment answer is very incomplete and you can add substantive material to it in the process of forming an actual answer.  Option 3 is always acceptable, but doesn't get anything done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because I was not aware that we treated older (non-historic locked) questions differently &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;, I chose option 2.  &lt;strong&gt;What should I have done instead and why?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-09-01T19:59:41.183" Title="How should I have addressed this old comment answer?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5763" CreationDate="2015-09-01T19:59:41.183" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As always, there's not a black and white answer, there's just using judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The older the question is, the less useful &quot;subtle&quot; intervention (comments etc) are. In fact, they can be counterproductive because when you bump a question to the top like that, it might get comment-reaped.  In this case 7 upvotes on a comment stayed my hand on that count. But when an exchange is more than 3 years old, it's likely it's off the radar of people (often the users involved aren't even around any more).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The older a question is, IMO the more you should &quot;crap or get off the pot&quot; in terms of necro'ing it - make a meaningful change (add the answer yourself, edit) or leave it alone. You're welcome not to - but I have to say personally, I've gotten a lot of your old comments about some minor point of order pop to me on my super old Q/As on main and meta and often I find it annoying and out of context and don't bother to address them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not that you &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; leave a comment like that on an old question - just that it's unlikely to be helpful, as it will have a high chance of either being unseen or being &quot;too little, too late&quot; to bother with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-09-01T19:59:41.183" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5765" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5766" CreationDate="2015-09-02T16:54:41.620" Score="7" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;I remember when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57651/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was first asked. I also remember it getting &quot;modified&quot; by Community before, and it has now been &quot;modified&quot; again. In both cases, no modifications appear to have been made; neither question nor answer was edited, and the question's tags remain intact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an explanation for this phenomena?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-09-04T13:23:10.727" Title="Why does Community occasionally bump an unmodified entry?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5765" CreationDate="2015-09-02T17:01:52.787" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Community will occasionally bump old questions with an unupvoted answer to the top of the list. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/184485/community-seems-to-be-bumping-new-questions-more-frequently-than-usual/184511#184511&quot;&gt;Community ♦ seems to be bumping new questions more frequently than usual&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...posts eligible for bumping have gone at least 30 days with no activity, have at least one answer scoring 0 and none scoring more than that, and no accepted answer (also, they can't be locked or closed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(HT &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/23127/dan-henderson&quot;&gt;Dan Henderson&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-09-04T13:23:10.727" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5768" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5769" CreationDate="2015-09-04T21:12:53.473" Score="2" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;I complimented an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68025/how-to-summon-an-invisible-stalker&quot;&gt;How to summon an Invisible Stalker?&lt;/a&gt; in a comment today, and also requested whether the answer could be expanded to include magical items (possibly from &lt;em&gt;Princes of the Appocalypse&lt;/em&gt; adventuring supplement, which has elemental themes), and not only spells as Miniman had done a beautiful job of detailing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment was deleted, and I am befuddled as to why asking for an elaboration on a well-answered question is seen as deletion-worthy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17589" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-09-04T22:58:34.100" Title="Why was a seemingly constructive comment on an answer deleted?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5769" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5768" CreationDate="2015-09-04T22:58:34.100" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are no deleted comments on that question or its answers.  In your main site activity I see only one comment posted today.  Perhaps you thought you hit save and didn't? But this appears to be what we like to call a &quot;wetware error.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-09-04T22:58:34.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5770" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-07T06:30:41.387" Score="0" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/68169/4398&quot;&gt;A post was deleted&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ rep link) for containing an image (view &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a0T3X.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)  which used the word &quot;slutty&quot; in summarizing how D&amp;amp;D's depiction of the goddess Lolth could be viewed as slut-shaming a female figure for leaving her boyfriend and finding someone better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is such a heavy-handed ban on words regardless of usage appropriate in Stack Exchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11750" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-09-07T07:01:34.033" Title="Appropriateness of word monitoring" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5770" CreationDate="2015-09-07T06:43:01.843" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The image's attempt at tackling the issue of slut-shaming is fairly ham-handed. It not even obvious that's what it's doing, so it's going to go right over the average viewer's head. The giant word “SLUTTY” is really obvious though and won't be missed by anyone, however. Net score: very negative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So given that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the image itself is completely unnecessary for the post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it's a clumsy attempt at tackling a sensitive subject&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;tackling slut-shaming properly takes finesse at the best of times, never mind as a side-note left as an exercise for the reader&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it's not super-relevant to the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;…the sudden appearance of the all-caps term “slut” in a 34px font on RPG.se was gratuitous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We rarely, if ever, need to use the word here with gravitas. We definitely don't need it gratuitously, tossed off casually in an image macro.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-09-07T06:43:01.843" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5288" CreationDate="2015-09-07T07:30:09.627" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://movies.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EzmgO.png&quot; alt=&quot;Movies &amp;amp; TV Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24762" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:53:59.383" LastActivityDate="2015-09-07T07:30:09.627" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-09-07T07:30:09.627" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5773" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-08T20:42:11.363" Score="13" ViewCount="387" Body="&lt;p&gt;Basically, while there is a sort of search system on d20PFSRD, I still find certain categories of feats very hard to locate when I need them.  I would like to make a few questions asking for lists of feats that meet specific broad themes, and go ahead and put the results of my research into a CW answer that can then be edited, added to, and curated as more content is released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I know list answers (and questions that need them) are usually frowned on.  I think these questions and their answers would be of significant use to a reasonably large subset of the community.  For a few examples of things I've wished I could call up a list of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What feats improve _____?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ranged attacks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Channel energy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Companion creatures&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[Insert specific lore-recommended build, such as a sling-user or sword-and-pistol user]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make the lists finite and useful to everyone, I would ask for official sources only, without any third-party or homebrew material.  Would these questions pass muster on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14948" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-05-28T03:36:04.343" LastActivityDate="2016-05-28T03:36:04.343" Title="I want to post some questions that will require (finite, community wiki) list answers. Kosher?" Tags="|discussion|policy|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5774" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5775" CreationDate="2015-09-08T23:44:50.980" Score="1" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5288/15469&quot;&gt;community ads thread&lt;/a&gt;, ads will only be shown if they reach a score of positive 6. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5772/15469&quot;&gt;The ad from movies.stackexchange&lt;/a&gt; is at -3 (because it's an eyesore), but it just came up on the site for me (twice).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YMIjB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YMIjB.png&quot; alt=&quot;movies SE ad&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No freehand circles required here, it stands out on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-09-09T00:03:17.803" Title="Are our community promotion ads working as described?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5775" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5774" CreationDate="2015-09-08T23:51:44.203" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's not the ad posted to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5288/community-promotion-ads-2015&quot;&gt;community promotion ads list&lt;/a&gt;. That's a hot network question ad. Everything is working here by design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once in a while, the site will pick a random hot network question and present it in the same slot as our Community Ads. Here that one is in the SE network &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;hot questions list&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/al2lU.png&quot; alt=&quot;Why is penny less concerned about the &amp;#39;check engine&amp;#39; light?&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently the Movies &amp;amp; TV ads are pretty glary though, so I've &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/266038/152515&quot;&gt;requested an improvement&lt;/a&gt; on Meta Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-09-09T00:03:17.803" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5773" CreationDate="2015-09-09T00:06:15.027" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; OK. A constrained list of a very particular type of information which is not likely to change often isn't going to cause the kind of practical problems as asking for an unbounded list. Making the answer CW mitigates one possible issue even more, by allowing the infrequent additions to be put right into the canonical answer instead of spurring drive-by &quot;oh and one more&quot; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless some detail of execution causes problems, it should be fine. Worst case is that we learn the hard way and clean it up, which is not bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-09-09T00:06:15.027" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5777" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5778" CreationDate="2015-09-09T05:30:04.617" Score="7" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question asks: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68289/how-to-make-and-set-up-army-scale-battles&quot;&gt;How to make and set up Army scale battles&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I posted as a comment that the user should purchase the book &quot;Heroes of Battle&quot;, because the entire book deals with just this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However I'm not sure if &quot;Buy this book&quot; would qualify as an answer, the question is quite broad and generally any question that requires a book to be written on the subject is closed as such. But maybe I'm wrong and it can be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I post a link to the book and a short description of its contents as an answer, or is that not a complete answer since the question was not for book recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-09-12T07:24:35.167" Title="Does &quot;buy this book&quot; answer a question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5778" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5777" CreationDate="2015-09-09T05:58:10.757" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you answer with &quot;Here's a book on this thing, buy it&quot;, what you're effectively doing is making a recommendation. That's fine, if I was trying to build Atomic Robo in Fate and there was an Atomic Robo Fate RPG sitting right there (there is), I'd appreciate someone mentioning it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you should do what a good recommendation does:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You should be confident the product's any good and tell us it is. Have you read it? Does it have a stellar reputation among people who do what you're recommending it for? Does it do its thing well? This is that &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective&lt;/a&gt; requirement where you assure us it's actually decent and isn't trash.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You should tell us about the product. What does it cover? Large scale battles, sure, but what can you tell us about that? This is the point where we realise that not only is it good, that yeah, it talks about exactly the kinds of things we want to do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't so much how Stack Exchange works as how making a decent recommendation to someone works when they don't have inherent trust in your recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If my best friend recommends that I see a movie, I'll very likely see it without asking more. If someone on the bus recommends that I see a movie, I'll probably want to ask more about it, or look it up on Rotten Tomatoes and other sites. You're the person on the bus, not the one whose judgement I place inherent trust in, so I'd want explanation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your recommendation might answer the question. I can't tell you whether it'll be a complete and acceptable answer, or whether it'll be a good answer, because that will depend case by case. But if you want to make a &lt;strong&gt;stellar&lt;/strong&gt; answer, you should answer directly how large-scale battles work and provide a fairly complete answer on its own (if you've run multiple large-scale battles to great success, you should be able to talk about this) and recommend the book as &lt;strong&gt;further reading&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-09-12T07:24:35.167" LastActivityDate="2015-09-12T07:24:35.167" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5780" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5781" CreationDate="2015-09-12T02:26:29.963" Score="2" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Curious&quot; Badge is awarded when you &quot;ask a good question on 5 separate days, and maintain a positive question record.&quot; What is meant by &quot;good question&quot; in this? It's not the score of 25 required of a &quot;Good Question;&quot; is it just questions with positive net votes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2015-09-12T17:40:22.643" Title="What are the criteria for the &quot;Curious&quot; Badge?" Tags="|support|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5780" CreationDate="2015-09-12T02:57:19.607" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/234259/asking-days-badges&quot;&gt;Relevant Meta.SE post.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A well-received question is a question that isn't closed, isn't deleted, and has score&gt;0.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A positive question record is defined by the formula:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;(total questions - negative questions - closed - deleted)/total questions &amp;gt;= 0.5&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(A question that is negatively scored, and closed, and then deleted, will count triple.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user8248" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-09-12T17:40:22.643" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5782" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-13T14:55:44.290" Score="4" ViewCount="333" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to know if there is a good homebrew somewhere for dnd 5e. I see that we've revised our game recs policy, so I was curious how this extends to homebrewing. Is that something i can ask about here? If so, how can I ask it correctly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be more specific, I'd like to ask about armor rules. Most of the time, I'm just kinda wearing armor that gives me a set AC. if I wear, supposedly, boots or a hat or gloves, it doesnt matter unless they're magical. I want to find relatively balanced homebrew rules for specific slots of armor, rather than just one-covers-all&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19464" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-26T16:14:27.717" LastActivityDate="2017-06-26T16:14:27.717" Title="How do we ask for homebrew suggestions?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5783" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-13T20:40:15.307" Score="3" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given that game-rec questions are no longer on-topic for the site, should we change the tag description to make this clear? At the moment, its existence with a full description gives the impression that those types of question are still OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2015-09-13T21:03:34.427" Title="Changing the tag description for game-recommendation" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5784" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5783" CreationDate="2015-09-13T20:53:26.483" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag's excerpt and full description were edited in August when game-recs became off-topic, and currently read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“Shopping” questions asking for a recommendation on a game system, product, tool, or similar are off-topic at RPG.SE as of August 24th, 2015. Click “Learn more…” or “info” for details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;hr&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Recommendation questions, also known as “shopping questions,” are off topic at Role-playing Games Stack Exchange. Although once allowed under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;restrictive community-developed guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, these guidelines were &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747&quot;&gt;retired August 24th, 2015&lt;/a&gt; when it was deemed that the guidelines did not achieve their original goals. Thus ended RPG.SE's experiment with making &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“shopping” questions&lt;/a&gt; on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for eliminating the tag itself, it's unfortunately not an option currently because it would untag a number of existing questions and make existing game-rec questions unfindable. It also accurately describes those questions, and in the event that game-rec ever returns to RPG.se, nuking the tag now would cause more harm than good to the posts it's on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the time being, the tag is a necessary evil, despite the guidance in the help (which I recall but am failing to find right now) that says tags can be taken as a guide to what is on-topic. On the plus side though, it acts as “bait”&amp;dagger; to self-label questions for closing as off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&amp;dagger; No implications of wrongdoing intended, of course.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-09-13T21:03:34.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5785" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-14T15:55:00.803" Score="0" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a helpful answer to someone's question, but someone else has put the question on hold. Is there a good way for me to communicate my answer to them without breaking SE rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, one option would be to post my answer in a comment.  In this case I would be hoping that the questioner saw my answer before a moderator was able to delete it.  This seems like a poor communication dynamic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE rules (for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3426/how-can-the-policy-regarding-discussions-in-comments-be-improved&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) suggest that I could &quot;take any discussion to Role-playing Games Chat&quot; which is extremely unhelpful because the person I'm trying to communicate with is probably not in the chatroom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I really want is a way to direct message the person who asked the question, but poking around their profile doesn't seem to reveal that as an option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the question I am looking at is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68531/death-of-the-6-silent-stoic-adventurers-help-me-repair-my-group&quot;&gt;How do I get stoic loners to cohere into a group and care about each other?&lt;/a&gt;, and the answer I want to give is &quot;you can't resolve this in-character, you have to talk about it out-of-character&quot; and a link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bankuei.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/a-way-out/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://bankuei.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/a-way-out/&lt;/a&gt;. But I've had this problem before as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T17:18:17.423" Title="I have a helpful answer to someone's question, but the question is held" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5785" CreationDate="2015-09-14T16:14:51.977" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You wait until it's reopened. There is no other way that doesn't do harm to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question can be fixed, it should be before answering. If it can't be fixed, it should not be answered on RPG.se because it doesn't belong here in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions can be fixed two ways: by the original asker, or—more rarely—by another user who &quot;gets it&quot; and can rewrite the question so that everyone can understand it better. (It is best practices to leave a comment after a radical edit asking the OP if it still says what they meant. It's also not uncommon for others to object to something they see as a change in meaning and revert it; in which case one may have to wait for the asker to clarify personally anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, patience is important. No question is an emergency and can't wait, and &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; have an answer—no matter the quality—right now. The asker will come back and fix it if it's important to them. And if they don't care enough to return and fix it, it's better that it stay closed anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think you understand the question, and you think that understanding of the question is on-topic for the site, you can fix the question yourself. That way, it can be opened so you can answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, the question needs to be open to answer it. This ensures that answers undergo the scrutiny of peers via the voting system, which is vital to ensure the quality that makes RPG.se not just yet another noisy discussion forum. It also ensures that others have equal chance to write competing answers, which is also vital to our quality process. Any end-run around the closing process defeats the purpose of the site and is dealt with accordingly, which is why answers in comments are deleted on sight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, a direct-messaging system has been requested before and always denied. The founding purpose of Stack Exchange is that answers and questions are high-quality and available publicly. A system of personal messaging would not only hide useful answers, but also divert experts from putting energy into front-page answers. Everything about the main site is designed to force all user input to be focused on questions &amp;amp; answers, and to make people go elsewhere for any other purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-09-14T16:36:17.017" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T16:36:17.017" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5787" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-14T17:52:20.897" Score="12" ViewCount="214" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recommendation questions have been off-topic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;since August 2015&lt;/a&gt;. If I need a recommendation, how can I get help now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to the FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T15:41:25.457" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T15:41:25.457" Title="I want to ask for recommendations, but that's off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?" Tags="|support|faq|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5787" CreationDate="2015-09-14T17:52:20.897" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two major ways to get your recommendation question asked and answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;1. Rephrase the request as a problem to be solved&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recommendations can almost always be rephrased by stepping back and looking at the problem the requested item is expected to solve. You can still ask, by letting go of the assumption that you know what will solve it, and just asking about the problem you have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To rephrase “shopping” questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackexchange.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ask &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; instead of &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;: “How can I do X?” is a topical question, while “Recommend me a Y that will do X” is not. The idea is to lay out the problem to be solved (the &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;) and ask for help with that directly, instead of preemptively assuming the solution is getting a recommendation and asking for one (the &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; include recommendations for something, or may not. That's okay — answers providing recommendations are not off-topic at RPG.se, only questions asking for them. While an answer to a question asking for recommendations might be a simple “use X”, that's low-quality (and being technically answerable that way is part of why recommendation questions are off topic). By contrast, a recommendation answer to the real problem will usually (and be expected by voters to) put more work into it than just pointing at something; a good answer will explain how it solves the problem, not just say that it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;2. Take the question to a different site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recommendation questions are fun and popular, even if experience shows they don't work &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt; on Stack Exchange. You can take your question, unchanged, to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;a discussion forum or chat room&lt;/a&gt;. People love suggesting their current or perennial favourite things, and you'll get a lot of suggestions that way that you can trawl through for what you like best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T19:15:01.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5789" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-14T18:57:32.883" Score="2" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68450/12011&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; is not a particularly well written question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not sure if it's actually too broad. I'm not overly familiar with Pathfinder, but DnD 4E's Player's Handbook contains a section entitled &quot;The Core Mechanic&quot; (page 11) which explains how dice rolls work in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It basically just says you roll a die and compare it to a DC, but with more detail and examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seems like something like that would answer the question fairly well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did the user ever come back or respond to their question being put on hold?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T19:17:14.727" Title="Is this question about the dice mechanic really too broad?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5789" CreationDate="2015-09-14T19:08:47.643" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's closed as unclear, not for being too broad. We could guess about all the ways that they might be confused about the role of dice in the game and answer them all, but even that might not actually solve whatever their problem is. We want them to be more specific to avoid wasting our and their time, so it's closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They haven't been back since posting the question anyway. If it's not important enough to them to rewrite it to ask clearly, it's not important enough to answer either, and closing is working as designed when it filters out low-quality drive-by questions. If they come back and clarify it though, it'll likely get reopened; even basic questions, when asked well enough to be understood, are topical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-09-14T19:17:14.727" LastActivityDate="2015-09-14T19:17:14.727" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5791" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5793" CreationDate="2015-09-15T12:46:28.227" Score="7" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question that has been asked before by another member (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3168/what-is-an-appropriate-encounter-in-deathwatch&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).&#xA;There is an answer, which has been accepted as well and I think it would probably help me to solve my problem as well, but sadly I don't understand the answer completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I commented the answer, but haven't got a reply on that comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what should I do now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22239" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-09-15T17:40:28.047" Title="What if someone asked my question and it has been answered, but I don't understand the answer?" Tags="|support|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5791" CreationDate="2015-09-15T16:32:42.163" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask a (new) question, and include your confusion about the answer to the old one. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What is an appropriate encounter in Deathwatch?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(description of what you want to know)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/3196/77&quot;&gt;Aramis's answer to a similar question&lt;/a&gt;, which says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Now, it has to be shifted to positives; move both up the same amount so the lower is +1. In this case, PCs 1, NPC's 2. Now multiply by the numbers. I had 7 PC's, and used 4 NPC's... for 7 and 8. Then multiply by average skill as a percentage... PC average was 45, NPC was 33, for 7*0.45=3.15 and 8*0.33= 2.64. It's clear the PC's have an advantage, but a very weak one... and since in the initial stage, both were negatives, it's going to involve a lot of armor staging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I don't understand why he's multiplied the PCs' WS with the NPC damage. Can anyone explain this more clearly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-09-15T16:32:42.163" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5791" CreationDate="2015-09-15T17:38:10.543" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The way to get clarification is to do exactly what you did: leave a comment. Users who are active&amp;dagger; will likely respond, but you have to have some patience. If they are active and don't respond, consider leaving another message, perhaps explaining the problem differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also try to get the question more attention otherwise, by linking to it in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; and asking people there to help you understand the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have enough reputation, you can add a bounty to the question to see if that will attract better answers or prompt the original answers' owners to update their answers. A bounty bumps a question back to the top of the front page, where it will get noticed just as much as a new question would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the reputation to add a bounty though, you have to fall back on asking in a comment or a chat, and patience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&amp;dagger; You can see when a user was “Last Seen” by the site on their user profile; aramis was last here 17 hours ago — not long at all. They may have missed your comment, or may not want to update their answer.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, because you were given bad advice (duplicates are always marked as duplicates, no matter why they were posted), I have added the bounty myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, patience is still necessary — there is no way to ensure that clarification comes instantly, whether leaving a comment, adding a bounty, or even asking a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-09-15T17:40:28.047" LastActivityDate="2015-09-15T17:40:28.047" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5782" CreationDate="2015-09-15T18:30:11.833" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;“Give me your experience with homebrew armour rules” is not a question that would survive on the main site. It's a poll, which means every answer is equally valid, which is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;one of the kinds of question not to ask here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, ask about your problem, and ask it to be solved. Asking how to model armour as being location-based might make for a decent question, assuming it was written clearly enough to understand exactly what you wanted to achieve. Similarly, asking how to calculate your total AC when wearing piecemeal armour would be decent. (I can't tell what exactly your hoped-for question is, so those are just examples that might be close to what you're thinking of.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once asked, however, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/942/how-to-deal-with-feedback-questions-about-house-rules&quot;&gt;answers will have to be from experience&lt;/a&gt;. (Anyone can just make up an answer to a homebrew question on the spot, and we don't want dozens of people just slapping their brain-droppings onto the site with no supporting explanation of how &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; they work.) That means that you might end up waiting more or less time for an answer, since it's possible nobody has tried and tested doing what you're wanting to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The possibility that it may take a long time to get answers adds a separate, pragmatic dimension as well, which has nothing to do with “is it a question I &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; ask at RPG.se?”: are you sure you &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to ask it here? Some questions are better off elsewhere; we're not a one-stop RPG question shop, precisely because we have rules against certain kinds of questions. If you really want to ask one of those kinds of questions, you're probably better off asking it elsewhere, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So practically, if you can wait for an answer, go ahead and ask it here, knowing you might not get an answer for a long time. If, practically, you really need answers now or very soon and you do just actually want people to throw untested ideas at you so you can test them yourself, then — since RPG.se is unsuited to hosting those kinds of answers and won't — you might prefer asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;in chat or on a discussion forum instead&lt;/a&gt; where untested ideas are easy to come by in large numbers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-09-15T18:30:11.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5795" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5798" CreationDate="2015-09-17T04:13:59.333" Score="1" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two comments to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67800/23970&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; would, I think, be nice to incorporate into the answer proper. Is there a way to do this wholesale, or do I effectively need to re-create each of the commenter's references from scratch?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't mind that tiny bit of work. It just seems that a way to absorb the comment in would nicely (a) preserve a bit of a byline for the original comment author and then (b) remove the comment from their section, so it's not redundant. If there's a way to do that, I'd like to use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-09-20T16:17:12.697" Title="How best to incorporate a comment into an answer?" Tags="|support|answers|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5795" CreationDate="2015-09-17T04:29:10.500" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You manually recreate the references in your answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't need to attribute the comments' authors - they should know that comments are temporary, and are intended to help improve your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14988" LastActivityDate="2015-09-17T04:29:10.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5798" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5795" CreationDate="2015-09-17T12:27:48.097" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a standard way to incorporate comments into your answer, but if you are using quotes from the comments or just copying them into your answer, you do need to attribute them to be compliant with the CC-BY-SA license. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to incorporate them seamlessly, I recommend adding a parenthetical with a link to the user profile of the user noting that the idea/quote you are using is contributed by another user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because comments are ephemeral does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; mean they are not protected by the CC-BY-SA license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-09-17T15:10:55.897" LastActivityDate="2015-09-17T15:10:55.897" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5799" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5807" CreationDate="2015-09-17T23:41:35.403" Score="3" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;While in Chrome I have no problems.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;In IE 10 I &lt;strong&gt;cannot:&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comment  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flag a comment  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Review  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use CAPTCHA  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vote  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;See the WYSIWYG of a post while typing and formatting it.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the SE pull down menu in the left part of the banner to select an SE  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cannot separate review and help from my profile, in the banner  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Select a tag  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the click tool for the reply box: (bold, Italic, quotes, links)   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems related to the recent &quot;Back to SO&quot; announcement made on the main site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I forwarded a partial list to the &quot;contact us&quot; link and got no reply, but it's only been a day or so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are other browsers so degraded, or just IE 10?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT:&#xA;For those asking me questions in comments, &lt;em&gt;I am unable to create a Comment&lt;/em&gt; here or on the site.  I am also UNABLE to get to meta by itself, though I can get to it by clicking on the side panel at the site where some questions that are hot on meta are featured.  An attempt to create a comment to respond just sends me back to the top of the question.  Windows 7, IE 10.  This wasn't a problem a few days ago, and my system has NOT changed at all since then. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ALSO: unable to click on the banner where comments and rep notification shows up.  I had notice of five comments, on this post I think, but clicking on the red 5, which usually drops down the new comments, did zero, zip, nada. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2015-09-20T00:26:08.763" LastActivityDate="2015-09-22T13:32:07.817" Title="There is a bug that began a day or so ago, IE 10" Tags="|bug|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5799" CreationDate="2015-09-18T00:00:40.283" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;tried&lt;/em&gt; to test this, and found that there's a bug that prevents me from even logging in. (Don't know if it's the same bug.) Parts of the site are responsive, the login page is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I booted up IE11 for Windows 8, put it into Windows 10 emulation mode, and visited RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get the following console exception on every page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;SCRIPTS: Access is denied.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  File: openid.en.js, Line: 1, Column: 766&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the debugger catches the error here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IJT13.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IJT13.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a logged-out view, voting buttons pop up the &quot;thanks for your feedback&quot; panel OK, and the help dropdown and tour work, but the &quot;more hot questions&quot; link in the sidebar doesn't do anything but take me to the top of the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-09-18T00:00:40.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5801" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-19T14:51:57.127" Score="-3" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is about my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68765/how-can-a-lvl13-wizard-get-a-lvl17-wizard-to-fail-his-will-save&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question which was initiated by @Ruut user and is now closed as &quot;too broad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On my opinion, I gave so many details, that a closing vote as &quot;too broad&quot; was simply nonsense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From @Ruut user I've experienced earlier a generally negative attitude, too. He could have ask for clarification, or could answer any possibility if there is one. He didn't do it, he only clicked to VtC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect, the real reason of the close vote was that this site, compared to others, somehow really doesn't like new people here. But, of course, I don't have any evidence about his motives, although it is to me clear and obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A realistic possibility is to delete my account, but it didn't solve the problem, it only avoided it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course I try to save my question, ask for advices, etc, but I don't think it would be successful. Reopen votes have a very small chance to a positive result, especially if we compare this to the success rate of the close votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second thing what I do is that I try to clear the situation here on the meta, although I have a bad foresight that probably also this question won't survive too long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, if you have any advices to help this question to survive, I am open for them, even if it would be a major edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what other could I do out of these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23232" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-09-19T18:52:28.817" Title="How to handle the case if the closure of my question was clearly a misuse of VtC power against newcomers?" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-close|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5802" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5801" CreationDate="2015-09-19T18:08:22.750" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've undeleted this because I want to explain. (You may also want to take the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; before continuing to read this, as it covers some important basic concepts for how the site works, and I notice you haven't seen it yet.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close things here. It's an integral part of the process of maintaining the site's focus on practical, answerable, non-debate, non-discussion, problem-solving via questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also reopen things here. The voters can vote things open or closed, and the whole point of the system is to crowdsource a final judgement by leveraging individual judgements into a decision: open or closed? As you've seen, there is no need to panic when a question is closed, because it can just as easily reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's why there's no misuse of power involved here: someone might be &lt;em&gt;mistaken&lt;/em&gt; in their close vote, but that will easily be corrected by other voters reopening. Essentially, there can't be meaningful abuse of power because there isn't much &lt;em&gt;power&lt;/em&gt; involved in the first place — one person's vote can easily be undone by another's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, what's the point of closing? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5758/why-was-my-question-closed-as-too-broad-unclear-or-opinion-based?cb=1&quot;&gt;There is a lot to say about why questions get closed, enough to fill a FAQ about it&lt;/a&gt;, but the short version is that questions get closed when enough voters think that there's something about the question that will prevent it from being &lt;em&gt;answered&lt;/em&gt; properly. And you do want good answers, right? It may not feel like it, but closing a question is an important favour we do &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; the person asking the question. It's a “pause” that gives the asker, and the community, time to focus on identifying and &lt;em&gt;correcting&lt;/em&gt; any issues with how the question is written (is it unclear? is it accidentally asking too much in one question? is it asking for a type of answer we don't provide here?). This process makes sure that everyone understands the question, which is vital as a starting point to ensure that answers will be constructive, on-topic, complete, and helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a new user, having a question put on hold for any reason can be a bit of a shock. It &lt;em&gt;feels&lt;/em&gt; hostile. But it isn't done from hostility. It's a necessary site feature to deliver on our site's promise of quality, focused problem-solving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that process, and its results, are not everyone's cup of tea. That is OK, and we are OK with people deciding they don't like how the site works and going to find their help elsewhere. That's also an important reason we have closures and other things that might not suit a new user — we don't want to have anyone here who doesn't &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to do things the way our site does things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So relax, trust that the system works, and that nobody is being mean. It normally takes votes from five regular users to close a question, not just one (such as Ruut), and they're just doing what they think is best for &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; question and the site; it is nothing personal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-09-19T18:52:28.817" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5803" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-20T16:10:25.440" Score="3" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Still fairly new, need advice on this one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Jack Lesnie posted a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/68788/23970&quot;&gt;great answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68773/23970&quot;&gt;How do I, as a player, encourage more role-playing in Adventurers League?&lt;/a&gt; Unfortunately, I think it's a great answer to the question &lt;em&gt;&quot;How do I, as a player, encourage more role-playing?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; As well-written and useful as I find his suggestions, there's nothing in there that specifically addresses the challenges of AL play as opposed to any table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd love to see his answer have a +25 and a green check next to it, but &lt;em&gt;as an answer to the question posed&lt;/em&gt; I'm fighting the urge to downvote it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should I create the question &lt;em&gt;&quot;How do I, as a player, encourage more role-playing?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; and invite Jack to re-post his answer there? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should I edit the question to 'match' the answer(s), then separately re-ask my original question? (I don't think this does much harm to the two other answers, as one completely ignores the AL portion of the question, and the other makes one good AL-centric suggestion among a half-dozen others.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or should I rather leave some comments to this effect and let it play out from there?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-09-20T20:34:16.747" Title="How to handle an excellent answer to not-quite-my-question?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5805" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5803" CreationDate="2015-09-20T19:04:43.030" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first step to improving someone else's answer to your question is a comment.  Comment on the answer and explain what could be done to improve it.  If you feel that there needs to be some attention given to specifically calling out AL issues, then say that in a comment.  In general, if your thought is &quot;this answer is not as awesome as I'd like it to be&quot;, the right tool for the job is a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2015-09-20T19:04:43.030" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5803" CreationDate="2015-09-20T20:34:16.747" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers that don't help are, as the voting tooltip says, “not useful”. You don't need to fight the urge to downvote, as that is a perfectly acceptable way to indicate that there are problems with an answer. Remember that votes “unlock” and can be changed any time a post is edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can leave a comment explaining the problem, too. Just don't get into an argument if the author doesn't agree that it's a problem. (And at this point, since the answer is now virtually guaranteed to not improve by your standards, a downvote is easily justified.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer that would be good if only the question was different is still not a good answer to &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question. If the answer is really, really good by some other standard, someone else can ask the question it matches and it can be posted there. Sometimes, the author of the answer itself might choose to do this, and post it as a self-answer. The point is, there's no need to “go easy” on an answer that you think is well-made but off-target, since it can (and maybe should) be submitted to a different question and allowed to prosper &lt;em&gt;there&lt;/em&gt;. If the author wants everyone's upvotes and to avoid their downvotes, they need to hit the target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And remember that this doesn't have to be &lt;em&gt;objectively&lt;/em&gt; true. People can disagree on an answer's usefulness and vote differently. A vote &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt; to be one's own judgement, so the site can average the different votes. Just worry about your own standards, not what your single vote should be “objectively.”)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Votes exist to sort the good answers &lt;em&gt;for that question&lt;/em&gt; from the not-so-good, and put them in order from best to least-best. Vote early and often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-09-20T20:34:16.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5799" CreationDate="2015-09-21T15:37:00.453" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What finally resolved this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went into more of the tabs in IE.  What did the trick was when I made changes in the compatibility mode (deleted stackexchange.com).  @Miniman, via a comment, provided a link to the explanation from SE/SO &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/56161/which-browsers-are-officially-supported-and-what-else-do-i-need/71208#71208&quot;&gt;on how to troubleshoot an issue like this&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SE/SO help desk reply had suggested that I reset a bunch of the JavaScript choices, which I might have done had I not tried out various compatibility mode fixes and found one that worked.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-09-22T13:32:07.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5808" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5810" CreationDate="2015-09-22T22:17:39.517" Score="6" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;There has been renewed interest in my D&amp;amp;D 5e question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44736/7373&quot;&gt;Can a spell be prepared once and cast multiple times?&lt;/a&gt;, which has been marked as a potential duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44400/7373&quot;&gt;How does wizard &amp;amp; cleric spell preparation and casting work?&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They do have similar names, but  I don't feel that it is a duplicate because the other question is extremely broad, talking about all aspects of spell preparation. In fact, the accepted answer only has &lt;em&gt;two sentences&lt;/em&gt; a third of the way into the response that refer to my question about if a spell can be prepared once and cast multiple times. (Or to use another metric, 52 words in a 922 word response).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone came to the site wanting to know the answer to the same question as I asked, that's a lot of text they'd have to wade through to get to that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a similar situation in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5019/7373&quot;&gt;Non-duplicate question with answer in another question&lt;/a&gt; where a question was marked as duplicate and the OP thought that the duplicate question was too broad, and others agreed. I think that situation was a bit more cut and dry than this one though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is a question really a duplicate if the other question is so broad that the answer is such a small fraction of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-09-23T20:29:47.347" Title="Question tagged as possible duplicate, but the other question is overly broad" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5809" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5813" CreationDate="2015-09-22T22:30:52.003" Score="1" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;Everywhere on RPG.SE Meta, there is a clean, crisp serif font. Everywhere that is, except for the edit buttons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6v8XZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6v8XZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notice the B (for bold), the I (for italics), and the quotes (for block text). They are in this strange, Comic Sans-like font. This clashes pretty badly with the rest of the site's aesthetic, as it isn't anywhere close to the font used elswewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be possible to change this to a font more in line with the rest of Meta?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T18:42:31.533" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:42:31.533" Title="What's with the Comic Sans-like font for Bold and Italic?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5808" CreationDate="2015-09-23T00:18:33.870" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I agree that it shouldn't be closed as a duplicate.&lt;/strong&gt; The purpose of marking duplicate questions is, as you've mentioned, to make it easier to find the answer to a question. This particular attempt doesn't succeed at that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; to discover the answer to the new question through a careful reading of the older one, but that's like saying it's possible to find an answer to the new question by searching on google, or by re-reading the rulebook again with an open mind and no assumptions. The purpose of the SE format is to answer readers' questions efficiently and easily, without their having to wade through noise to get at the signal; Saying &quot;The answer is somewhere on this other page about a different topic&quot; is not conducive to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also, I think the older question was too broad to begin with, and that if it were to be asked today it would be closed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastActivityDate="2015-09-23T00:18:33.870" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5812" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-23T21:31:11.257" Score="3" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's what it looks like on Win7, Chrome 45.0.2454.85, 1304x660 viewport:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EBcLm.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EBcLm.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar issue in Firefox 40 and IE 11, yet it underflows instead of overflowing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fix: remove that useless one-cell &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;table&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; from markup and set&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;width: 100%;&#xA;box-sizing: border-box;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to your &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;input&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;. Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25041" LastEditorUserId="25004" LastEditDate="2015-09-24T07:42:20.613" LastActivityDate="2015-10-03T18:25:30.917" Title="Post as a guest: CSS bug" Tags="|bug|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5813" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5809" CreationDate="2015-09-24T09:45:57.657" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Once the site CSS updates are complete, the editor buttons will look just like they do on other sites (although only options relevant to RPG.SE will be here):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nfZPJ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nfZPJ.png&quot; alt=&quot;toolbar&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23590" LastActivityDate="2015-09-24T09:45:57.657" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5814" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5815" CreationDate="2015-09-25T00:42:09.563" Score="24" ViewCount="550" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new to this site and to RPG Stackexchange where I have been spending my time so far. I only have a moderate experience with DND and most of my friends have none. I've been looking for a reliable site to ask DND questions for months and when I stumbled onto this site I thought it was a godsend. However, upon joining, I've been having a little difficulty getting what I want out there as a newcomer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The tour and question guide give very general rules on how to write your questions, despite requiring them to be specific themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;you cannot reply to a moderators editing or deletion of your comment, and no private message system is available to speak to them about it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Very little advice is forthcoming on how to improve your questions. They often get put on hold or removed with no explanation of how to fix them besides &quot;make it specific and follow the rules&quot;. If you don't know how to do this... there aren't really any ways to to make progress in the right direction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Most people joining this site are going to have questions and want to answer other peoples questions in an attempt to help them. Your answers and questions getting deleted and then resulting in a question ban make it incredibly hard to improve your own abilities. If someone's answer isn't quite as good as someone else's, downvoting and deletion are a lot more punishing for attempting to help someone than if someone were trolling or being of no help at all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way to reduce the barrier of entry on such a useful site that seems so unfriendly to new faces?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good example is recently one of my answers got deleted by a moderator named Seven Sided Die (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/69012/1204&quot;&gt;10k link&lt;/a&gt;). He didn't do this for any malicious reason. I had replied to a question early and the question was then put on hold because the moderators wanted the question asker to edit the question to be more clear without just taking my answer and going with it for the sake of clarity. However, the person may never fix their question, or they may fix it in a way that invalidates my answer. I'm fine with this, but since Seven deleted it rather than asking me to, I lost 6 Reputation. Now, since Seven has over one-hundred thousand rep, this wouldn't seem like a big deal to him, however, since I had 19 at the time, this dropped my score back to 13, meaning I could no longer upvote answers or reply to protected questions. This is fairly serious to me, because I like being able to show support to good answers while I browse the site. Something I can't do until I regain that rep I lost through more answers that could lose me rep, questions that could get me account-locked, or waiting for the person to hopefully edit their question so I can get it back. This is a brutal up-hill climb for self-reliance when new people join the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25062" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2015-10-22T13:27:28.770" Title="The site's availability to newcomers seems startlingly low" Tags="|support|policy|new-users|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5815" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5814" CreationDate="2015-09-25T14:16:31.727" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE can be daunting to a newcomer especially one with expectations set by forums, Reddit, etc. To address your points in order...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The tour and help center by their nature can only give general guidance.  It's expected that a new user might read some other questions on the site and learn by example what a good question looks like.  It's really the only way to do it - imagine if we tried to provide &quot;question templates&quot; and 100 pages of requirements documentation on how to write a question, would that really help?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can reply - either in a comment on your question/answer, or, as you have correctly detected, here on Meta, in public.  SE does not and will never have a PM system because issues are for the entire community, not just mods.  We all share powers here, and the more rep you have the more powers you have - there are very few powers the three diamond mods have that high rep users don't. Discussion of moderation is not something to &quot;talk privately about&quot; with a mod - because it's not personal. It's users and/or mods trying to keep the site great.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes there's more advice given unsolicited and sometimes there's not.  Feel free and ask.  I know I personally don't always have the time to do so and I need to place on hold and run, trusting that the rest of the community will fill the gap. And you have to understand, a lot of the time a new user will post something pretty incoherent and then never return, never seeing or responding to the litany of helpers, so sometimes we kinda wait for a user to show interest in bothering to improve before really piling on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It shouldn't make it hard.  You can edit your own content, even deleted content, and flag for undeletion. On hold and deletion do NOT stop the learning process, they are part of it - only you giving up and stopping can make it the end of the story.  Downvotes and deletion are not punishment but they are guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, there are 1000 sites that work on the principle of &quot;post anything you want and only really egregious stuff will be edited or deleted or locked.&quot; We don't need 1001.  The reason you can get such great, comprehensive answers to questions without all the noise is because we take the opposite approach to our format.  That means that not everyone will be comfortable with the format - and that's OK. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the rep system, there's thousands of posts here and on Meta.SE discussing all of its ins and outs.  But the bottom line is yes, we want people to prove they can ask and answer questions in the SE way before they get much in the way of other powers. How do we know &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; know what a good question is?  How do we know you're going to make good edits, close/reopen for the right reasons?  You earn that trust via site participation.  You're new and what this rep dynamic is telling you is &quot;you don't quite get it yet.&quot; Once you get the SE way a bit more, you'll get the abilities as well. So keep at it.  It's not super easy and it can't and shouldn't be if we don't want to be just another 4chan/reddit/rpg.net/other place many of us can't stomach wading through when what we want is real gaming information for real gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-09-25T14:29:10.703" LastActivityDate="2015-09-25T14:29:10.703" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5814" CreationDate="2015-09-26T16:24:28.873" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;What you observe has been a concern to the community at RPG.SE for some time.  For a sampling of concerns about climate here, you can take a look at these meta discussions and see that there has been some effort to address this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/962/has-role-playing-games-stack-exchange-lost-its-appeal/972&quot;&gt;Has Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange lost its appeal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3460/voting-on-subjective-answers/3463&quot;&gt;Voting on Subjective Answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3512/why-people-are-being-so-rude/3513&quot;&gt;Why people are being so rude?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4970/this-sites-methode-of-doing-its-rating-is-so-hostile-should-i-bother-to-stay-wi&quot;&gt;This sites methode of doing it&amp;#39;s rating is so hostile should i bother to stay with it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the SE model, there is only so much that can be done. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A core problem is cultural.  The base model, before the RPG site was added, is that of a flesh based sorting algorithm, or &quot;whatever the crowd thinks is right, once the different answers are presented for consideration.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reaching consensus is messy, particularly when opinions get tossed into the mix.  If consensus is to work, inputs and options require expert or informed opinion, not just &lt;em&gt;an opinion&lt;/em&gt;.  SO/SE started in the programming world, with all of the cultural flaws that part of our world possesses.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other point is: asking a good question that is answerable with a &quot;best&quot; choice is an art.  There is, in this world, such a thing as a bad question, a stupid question, and in many cases a question that isn't presented in a way that a best answer can be recognized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't worry, hang in there, and ask the best questions you can.  Chances are, someone else has the same question.  If you have an answer that you can support, either through experience or documentation, and logical presentation, it will attract support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-10-22T13:27:28.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5817" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5818" CreationDate="2015-09-29T18:23:01.817" Score="5" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69222/how-do-i-get-my-game-reviewed/69241?noredirect=1#comment150906_69241&quot;&gt;How do I get my game reviewed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and in particular in response to &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We also don't want people to link their games here, unless the game's content itself is material to answering the question. Otherwise that opens the door to questions that aren't really questions but phrased as such just to be able to advertise here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;--&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I absolutely agree that advertising-spam would be bad, and that Not-Real-Questions should not be allowed here.  I don't understand, however, why linking to a system that comes up in a question, particularly if the system is not well known, is considered part of the slippery slope here.  It's a well established practice to link to systems covered in &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;, which would seem more likely to attract spam, so I'm not sure why it's not allowed in questions.  Do we have a history of spam problems or something? As far as I'm aware we've never had problems with egregious self-promotion, so this caution seems to me misplaced.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer initially suggested that the querent link the system they made to the text &quot;Made a system&quot; and &quot;available free online&quot;, and I was actually surprised that those text parts weren't already links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note:  I'm not really asking to change the policy.  I'm asking for someone to explain to me (better and with more detail) why this policy is the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-09-30T06:01:02.397" Title="Why can't someone link their game in their question when it's useful but non-critical?" Tags="|support|questions|spam|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5817" CreationDate="2015-09-29T18:41:43.310" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The URL is not necessary &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; sits on a slippery slope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Slippery slopes are fine when the information is critical to the question, because we can deal with any deliberate or accidentally attempt to move farther down the slope by firmly shutting down such moves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discouraging &lt;em&gt;unnecessary&lt;/em&gt; advertising in a post that is about how to gain attention for a game is exactly that — dealing with an unnecessary move down the slope by firmly shutting it down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not relevant to the question and would potentially cause us problems. There's simply no need to court problems when it's not even material to the question. There would be justification if it was relevant to the question despite potentially bringing problems, but it's not, so it gets no quarter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The state of RPG-related spam on the Stack&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do get questions where people say “here is my game! please play it!” and we close those. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68738/looking-for-playtesters-for-our-universal-rpg&quot;&gt;We got one a few days ago&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ users only). We get spam answers often, and, because it's actually OK to promote your game in an answer that is otherwise topical and helpful, we do the normal “please disclose your affiliation, read the ‘&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/promotion&quot;&gt;How to not be a spammer&lt;/a&gt;’ help article” dance with them — even if most often we still end up having to delete such user's answers when their posting pattern shows that they're really only here to advertise their game with the thinnest veneers of topicality that they think they can get away with — because we can't tell ahead of time whether they're going to be a good community member or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We definitely don't need to open the door wider to spam by making it an effective strategy to post questions where they ask how to advertise their game, while also using the question to advertise their game. Such questions also become &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/128094/what-is-the-meaning-of-the-broken-windows-tag&quot;&gt;broken windows&lt;/a&gt; that attract people who don't even want to ask a legit question and just advertise, and think it's OK (or argue it's justified) because other questions have links to people's games in them, creating more work for community and diamond moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potential spammers are a lot of energy to moderate effectively, especially when they verge on legitimate use of the site and it's not clear what side of the line they're going to slide down. The last thing we want is to encourage people to make their questions &lt;em&gt;closer&lt;/em&gt; to the spam borderline by encouraging them to include gratuitous advertising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-09-29T19:07:14.547" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5819" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-09-29T19:48:15.127" Score="6" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's suddenly showing 178 new items to review, all of which are late answers, all of which seem to be posted &lt;em&gt;years&lt;/em&gt; ago. I don't think it's a good idea if we start working on them, but if you aren't carefully checking the date you'll probably handle a few, which might bring the questions back to the frontpage for no reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-09-30T17:36:40.730" LastActivityDate="2015-09-30T17:36:40.730" Title="Is there a bug in the review queue?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5820" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5819" CreationDate="2015-09-29T19:56:08.380" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;A suggestion to have the reputation portion of the test that puts a new post into the Late Answer queue &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/266696/can-we-raise-the-bar-for-reputation-for-late-answers-to-enter-the-review-queue&quot;&gt;raised from 10 rep to 50&lt;/a&gt; has just been implemented. This dumped many old “new” late answers into the queue from users who have 11–50 reputation. This is network-wide — fellow mods from other sites started asking about their review queues spiking, and that post's fresh [status-completed] tag was the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's by design, not a bug, but somewhat questionably handled. Fortunately, it is a one-time event and once the new backlog is cleared, it will return to normal, just with slightly more items to review per day than before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the plus side, this is an excellent opportunity to work towards some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges&quot;&gt;Reviewer badges&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-09-29T21:03:29.577" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5821" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5817" CreationDate="2015-09-30T01:11:04.280" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can, when it's both relevant and not spammy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question of &quot;how do I do X in this game, here's a link&quot; is fine (assuming it's not your game). The information is also germane to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question of &quot;how do I get my game reviewed, here's a link&quot; crosses the line into direct self promotion and is not fine.  The information is also not particularly germane to the question, as it's not about that game but about &quot;a given game.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are not hard and fast rules on this, we use our judgement.  If there's a bunch of posts like type 1 above and it starts to smell spammy, then maybe type 1 isn't OK from that specific person any more. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD mentions we do indeed have both an explicit policy on self promotion and have not infrequent violations of that policy, which are taken care of so that, luckily, you haven't seen any. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general I agree with SSD but like to have some simpler TL;DR answers to policy questions so here's my bottom line, more details and justification in SSD's answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-09-30T01:11:04.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5823" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5824" CreationDate="2015-10-02T01:49:37.233" Score="9" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-2&quot;&gt;the Stack Exchange chat bot&lt;/a&gt; has developed a special place in its heart for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most people attempting a dice roll get a reply from &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-93/dice-service&quot;&gt;the Dice Service bot&lt;/a&gt;. But not me! The Stack Exchange bot follows me around with its own personal set of dice. When &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; request a dice roll, the Stack Exchange bot shoves the Dice Roller out of the way excitedly and does the rolling itself. This can be seen in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/16836&quot;&gt;our dice roller playground transcript&lt;/a&gt; (where we discovered it was &lt;em&gt;me specifically&lt;/em&gt;), in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/24460742#24460742&quot;&gt;general chat&lt;/a&gt;, and in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/24460929#24460929&quot;&gt;other rooms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I'm flattered and feel privileged that it's following me around personally, and while it might get tired after a day or two and leave me alone again, I should probably report this as a bug and encourage it to return to other business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="102" LastEditDate="2015-10-02T04:34:32.240" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T04:34:32.240" Title="The Stack Exchange bot is doing my dice rolls instead of the Dice Service bot" Tags="|bug|status-completed|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5824" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5823" CreationDate="2015-10-02T04:34:09.787" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;That can happen when for whatever reason (usually a network hickup or something like that) we fail to load the dice user. In that case we just use the default system user for a while. Whether or not this happens to a particular user depends on whether or not they are hitting the particular web server where this happened (which is a 1 in 9 chance), that's why it happened to you but not others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have restarted chat, so you should see the dedicated dice user again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T04:34:09.787" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5825" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-02T14:40:27.623" Score="6" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;Links have suddenly turned blue, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5692/links-suddenly-blue&quot;&gt;again&lt;/a&gt;. New question instead of bumping the old one because I can’t remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; from the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the CSS on the user pages is messed up, floats aren’t, well, floating correctly. Probably a width that is ever-so-slightly too wide, though I haven’t specifically investigated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bB0hd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bB0hd.png&quot; alt=&quot;My user page, with messed up formatting&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the different blocks continue down the left column, instead of doing two columns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably same &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/263461/old-user-page-developing-rendering-errors/263464#263464&quot;&gt;story as last time&lt;/a&gt;, but just in case this &lt;em&gt;isn’t&lt;/em&gt; a well-known, network-wide booboo, question. Plus, hey maybe this means we’re getting &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/253359/list-of-communities-with-base-css-updates-completed&quot;&gt;the long-awaited overhaul&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T20:16:12.753" Title="CSS woes: blue links, messed up user page (Are we getting an upgrade?!)" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|css|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5826" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5825" CreationDate="2015-10-02T14:45:57.003" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I still support adjustment to link colors here, favoring some variation on blue. This would improve visibility and be more consistent with the web as a whole. Particularly the dull red used for already-visited&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; links is very easy to miss for my eyes (some difficulties with red-green).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Might have been not-yet-visited links; I forget and I can’t check right now with all the links blue, heh. My point is the dull one. The brighter color is OK enough; at the least, I can clearly see a link embedded in the middle of a paragraph when it’s that color.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2015-10-02T14:55:13.233" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T14:55:13.233" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5827" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5825" CreationDate="2015-10-02T15:00:26.530" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah I don't personally have any problems with the blue links as they're easier to see, but the profile pages being skewed downward and whatnot is funny looking at the minimum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T15:00:26.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5825" CreationDate="2015-10-02T20:08:10.127" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, looks like it’s fixed (again).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-10-02T20:08:10.127" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5829" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-03T04:56:24.170" Score="6" ViewCount="206" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69392/can-you-backstab-with-a-siege-weapon&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asks &quot;Would any of the versions of D&amp;amp;D, as written, permit someone to backstab with a ballista?&quot;  To me, this seems like a simple &quot;yes or no&quot; question where a &quot;yes&quot; answer can easily be backed up by citing the appropriate section of a rulebook; a &quot;no&quot; answer is a bit harder to prove.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there something unclear about it, and if so, what can I do to fix it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15180" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-10-03T17:26:59.427" Title="What's unclear about this question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5829" CreationDate="2015-10-03T05:12:05.007" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Basically, the rules for both &quot;Backstab&quot; and &quot;Ballista&quot; are wildly different between editions.  An answer that applies to one edition would be totally inapplicable in another.  You're asking a question that would have several equally-good answers, which is bad on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if you changed it to be specific to an edition, it would be perfectly answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another alternative would be to specify which editions you care about, and asking for an answer that covers each.  Like, if you mostly played 2nd ed, but you also wanted to know how it worked in ODND and AD&amp;amp;D, then asking how it works in those specific editions would probably be focused enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site works best when asking specific questions about actual problems.  What problem are you facing that can only be solved by knowing the ballista/backstab rules in 40 years and ~10 editions?  Do you really want to know all of them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="3195" LastEditDate="2015-10-03T07:15:06.507" LastActivityDate="2015-10-03T07:15:06.507" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5829" CreationDate="2015-10-03T17:20:11.340" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's been reopened by five non-mod voters already, so this might be moot, but I think the question is fine. It's a yes or no question, it's possible to have a “best” answer (i.e., the answer with the most clearly-presented and solid evidence for its “yes” or its “no”), and there are a finite number of editions that could be used as evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are legit concerns here about questions that have undefined scope or broad scope, and this does sit near the borderline (which is reflected in the hold/reopen votes), but I think it's on the safe side of the line, and I don't see it causing us the same problems as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4490/is-it-possible-to-actually-kill-a-tarrasque&quot;&gt;the Tarrasque Question did&lt;/a&gt;. In particular:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We know better than to use an answer for “oh here's the answer for another edition, for completeness”, which wasn't true at the time the Tarrasque Question was asked, so it was already a mess when we tried to clean it up this year. By today's analysis the Tarrasque Question could have been fine as it was a plain yes/no + evidence question, but the answers took it as a playground rather than just answering the darn question, and that wasn't perceived as a problem back when the site was in beta. We know better now, and expect better of answers, and the mods don't expect questions with same yes/no+evidence pattern to get out of hand today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For the record, though the Tarrasque Question could have been fine, the mass of existing answers presented an intractable problem that made it cleaner to just lock than fix. This is why the precedent it sets is not straightforward.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Editions newer than the movie aren't valid as evidence to support an answer, so we won't have a steady drip of new answers as new editions come out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It has standing in a way the Tarrasque Question didn't. This is a media question, looking to see if a specific joke could possibly be “funny because it's true.” The Tarrasque Question was not of practical concern to anyone without specifying an edition, which contributed to its “here's the answer in the edition &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; care about” syndrome.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we can give a good answer to this question, and we know what a bad answer (which deserves downvotes) looks like, and we know what a bad answer (which deserves flagging for deletion) looks like. I think we can handle this question OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-10-03T17:26:59.427" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5833" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5812" CreationDate="2015-10-03T18:25:30.917" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, this is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/283939/flag-for-diamond-moderator-textarea-breaks-out-of-the-dialog&quot;&gt;yet another case&lt;/a&gt; of input field / textarea widths measured in ems being wildly inconsistent across different browser, OS and installed font combinations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added the CSS fix suggested by polkovnikov.ph into the next version of my &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/4486/the-stack-overflow-unofficial-patch-soup&quot;&gt;SOUP&lt;/a&gt; user script.  (It's already in the development branch, and yes, you've been credited.)  Since I can't actually get rid of the useless &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;table&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; with CSS, I just tweaked the selector to also apply the same styles to the table too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;.new-login-form .new-login-right input,&#xA;.new-login-form .new-login-right table {&#xA;    width: 100%;&#xA;    box-sizing: border-box;&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2015-10-03T18:25:30.917" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5834" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5838" CreationDate="2015-10-04T21:40:27.577" Score="8" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am looking for an expanded and explained explanation of when I should and should not comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I keep being told to stop posting inappropriate comments, and being pointed to explanations of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;what is appropriate&lt;/a&gt;. But I have read everything available, and am very careful with what I write so that it falls well within the range of how I would interpret these rules.  I don't know what to do. The first time I got some official moderate message, I replied with: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you don't consider that comment to be appropriate as per the RAW, then could you please explain that, as I am really confused. ~ Approximated from memory&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But got no response. I have had other comments just disappear, since then, but just now got another &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69465/are-random-encounters-supposed-to-supply-treasure&quot;&gt;message&lt;/a&gt; (in comment form) for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Metal can get stuck in digestive tracks. Monsters that eat humanoids could in theory carry around quite a stash, but it would be disgusting to get to..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my mind, that is no where near an answer, just a minor piece of information relevant to the question. Perhaps an entire answer could be built around this idea, but I really do not know. I have no idea how anyone handles role-playing loot drop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess, mainly, I need help explaining how to interpret: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only relevant example given is a link to a related question. What else is appropriate? How minor is minor? If I had just linked to an article that talked about how metal can get stuck in a stomach for years, would that be further away from an answer and therefore OK (or is any attempt to help with working towards an answer, no matter how minor, not appropriate for a comment)? The examples given almost make it seem more like they might be strictly limited to listing related questions and ~bookkeeping~.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have also had a comment that I considered &quot;constructive criticism&quot; be deleted. So any explanation of how to interpret that rule would be appreciated. I try to word my criticism in a non-criticizing way, do I need to explicitly criticize to fall within this ruling? Are there any other things I should consider when trying to write a comment to improve an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2057" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-10-19T06:13:30.120" Title="When should I comment?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5834" CreationDate="2015-10-04T23:06:12.667" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comments are directly used to improve the context of a question by requesting additional information, if your comments are being removed, its most likely because you could be straying off topic from the question at hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instances where the comment system are utilized are situations where the Question mentions something, but doesn't elaborate on that subject which could be important to the quality of the answers. Lacking that piece of information could change the entire scope of answers. ( Such as house rules being mentioned, but not being explained, etc. )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are also used in instances where close votes are being posted or a question has already been closed to ask for or elaborate on how the question can be re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things that you should keep in mind when using the comment system include &quot;Will my comment improve this question in any way?&quot; or &quot;Will my comment expand upon an issue the question currently has?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastActivityDate="2015-10-04T23:06:12.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5836" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-05T16:36:47.160" Score="4" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69407/can-you-see-the-moon-with-the-spot-skill&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt;.  The question was answered, and the question is not in question.  The title contained something, which is a tag, that was &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;organic to the conversational nature of the post&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.  It was edited out.  I reverted it back.  The person to edit this out has since LOCKED the post so their edit is final.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the poster NOT the arbiter of the content of their post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-10-05T21:37:43.860" Title="Is the poster the final arbitor of the content of their posts?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5836" CreationDate="2015-10-05T16:56:58.677" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;To answer the surface question — no:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;Why can people edit my posts? How does editing work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;All contributions are licensed under Creative Commons […] If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, a post is “owned” by the community.&amp;dagger; When it comes to what the question is asking it is pragmatic that the poster has final say about that (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3116/is-it-ever-appropriate-to-revert-someones-edit-to-their-own-question&quot;&gt;though we have exceptions even there&lt;/a&gt;) because we're here to answer real questions, not what we might wish people would ask. But when it comes to details of the post that amount to site-management, both the rules of the site and pragmatics mean community standards trump the post author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;To answer the unasked question which is actually at issue:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we don't put tags in titles when we can at all help it. “[question] in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e” and “In D&amp;amp;D 3.5e [question]” are both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;proscribed title formats&lt;/a&gt;. As that is a site-management issue, the author wanting to staple the name of the game onto the front of the question doesn't trump community management rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a rule of thumb, if the title can still be a comprehensible title without the game's name in there, it will be edited out. The only exceptions are when it is integrated inextricably into the grammar of the title and removing it is not possible. Since it is trivially removed in this case, it is not organic to the nature of the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind that anyone on the site can see the tags, and anyone seeing the question on Google will have the most popular tag on the question automatically prepended to the title, and &lt;strong&gt;dnd-3.5e - In DnD 3.5 can you see the moon with the spot skill?&lt;/strong&gt; showing up on Google makes us look like a bag of illiterate gerbils. The only place where no tags are visible either attached to the question nor prepended to the title is in the Hot Network Questions list, but we don't alter our titles to serve that view if it does a disservice to the two normal views (site and external search).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&amp;dagger; The legalities are more nuanced. Legally, the community has a non-exclusive, irrevocable, permanent &lt;em&gt;license&lt;/em&gt; to the version submitted to and hosted by the community, and has full rights to alter it regardless of the wishes of the author. That's not technically ownership in the legal sense, but for purposes local to the site is effectively ownership in the pedestrian sense. The author retains full rights to their original version, which they can do with as they like elsewhere, as they hold the actual copyright. So in common (not legal) parlance the community “owns” the specific copy of the content hosted here on RPG.se and the community's rules apply fully to it, but RPG.se can't stop the author from using it elsewhere.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-10-05T17:16:11.250" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5834" CreationDate="2015-10-05T17:57:52.333" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Except for linking to related questions, comments should only be left if you're OK with them being temporary and likely deleted at some future date. If you have material that you feel should have a more permanent home than that, then it almost certainly belongs somewhere other than a comment, such as in an edit to the post or another post entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a rule of thumb: &lt;strong&gt;Post comments only when they can reasonably be expected to help improve the post they are attached to.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two examples you note fall afoul of this rule of thumb:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;1. Comments that just repeat or add to arguments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mod message was in response to noticing a general pattern of being chatty in comments, not just that one incident. In general, chattiness is discouraged because it degrades the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal-to-noise_ratio&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;signal-to-noise ratio&lt;/a&gt; of the site overall. Taking the message as about a single incident was probably part of the confusion. (Note that it's typical for mods to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; respond to replies to mod messages — the original message is crafted to be as useful as possible for a user to help themselves learn, so questions that are answered by the original message are rarely replied to.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that one incident is illustrative of how to not use comments, beyond just avoiding adding noise to the site. When commenting while disagreeing with an answer, you have to constantly ask yourself before posting another comment: is this comment going to help improve the answer? If you have made a suggestion and the author has rejected it, arguing for your suggestion in a second (or third, fourth, etc.) comment is &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; likely to help than the first, rejected comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When an attempt to help is rejected by the author, more comments are very unlikely to help. Sometimes you will notice a miscommunication that will fix the disagreement and such follow-up comments are probably fine, but those are the rare exceptions — the majority of comment arguments on the site get worse, not better, with more comments. Since arguing more for a change is unlikely to help, that is the kind of comment that should be avoided. (The mantra “downvote and move on” can be helpful to remember at such times.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, when you have material that you think would answer the question, and for whatever reason it is not finding a home in an existing answer, consider writing your own answer around it instead of mounting an effort to &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; someone else to put it in their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;2. Comments that answer or partially answer a question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is good advice, but must not be misinterpreted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Partially answering a question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; adding relevant but minor information to a post, it's answering in a comment. If a comment would not make sense when literally added to the question by editing, it's not additional information that belongs attached to that post. It does not &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; the question, it attempts to resolve the question in whole or part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer-like material can sometimes belong in a comment if it's useful, additional material being attached to &lt;em&gt;an answer&lt;/em&gt; that might be improved by adding it. Those comments are fine, since the author of the answer might have overlooked it and be grateful for the idea, and edit it into their answer. (But remember to let it drop if they reject the idea, as above.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments that belong on &lt;em&gt;a question&lt;/em&gt; include links to related questions, links to possible duplicates that the asker may have missed, comments asking for clarification of details, comments suggesting alterations to the question that might improve it, and similar attempts to improve the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Save answers for answer posts. If you don't have enough material for an answer, or if you're not sure you can back up your answer well enough to justify making it into a proper answer post — then don't. There are lots of people here, and it's not any one single person's responsibility to make sure that specific question gets an answer from them &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; regardless of quality or lack thereof. Leaving pointers toward a possible answer in a comment just means the site's quality-control mechanisms can't be used to fact-check it, and so such comments are deleted to maintain the relevance of our quality controls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Comment to improve posts&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, comment are for the specific kind of help that results in improving posts, not for all kinds of help. The kind of help that involves giving or leading someone toward the answer is a privilege exclusively reserved for answer posts, with all the intense peer-review attention that answer posts involve. And the kind of help that devolves into an argument should be recognised as “not help” at the soonest possible moment, though I know that we humans sometimes have a hard time accepting that someone doesn't want our help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-10-05T18:04:40.877" LastActivityDate="2015-10-05T18:04:40.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5836" CreationDate="2015-10-05T21:37:43.860" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually yes, we try to respect the OP's content wishes and if there's an edit conflict we tend to let them have their way. That's not an absolute right, but we tend to err on that side in many cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course in some cases, when editing the content for cause, we do not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is admittedly an edge case. It's not something foul or illegal being edited out to where I consider the edit absolutely mandatory, but here on RPG.SE we try to not put game systems in titles, we do not consider that &quot;organic to the conversational nature of the post,&quot; see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1346/should-questions-include-system-setting-in-title-if-tagged-with-system-setting&quot;&gt;Should questions include System/Setting in title if tagged with system/setting?&lt;/a&gt;. You'll note by looking at the entire front page of posts that we don't do this unless the game name is a direct subject of the post title (e.g. &quot;How do I learn Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot; doesn't make sense without it, but &quot;How do I double-wield&quot; (with tag) does).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However there's nothing about this that requires having a snit fit on anyone's part, or discussions about deleting or dissociating or licensing or whatnot. We prefer not to put game names in the title when it's an indirect part and rely on tags and/or body, that's pretty simple. It got edited in a routine way for that. For that to get escalated from edit war to locking to meta posts to deletion threats is a sign that someone needs to go take a nap. It's really not a big deal and you should probably look deeper into why you think it is one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2015-10-05T21:37:43.860" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5840" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-07T03:54:51.910" Score="10" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;If someone asks a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69576/character-creation&quot;&gt;simple question&lt;/a&gt; that is closed for being too basic, there doesn't seem to be any way to help the poster, which would seem to disillusion new posters about using the site.  (I personally think the question is fine and specific enough, and voted to re-open, but that's not the point here.  I don't think I can make the question more acceptable by editing it, or I'd do that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was told that it would not be acceptable to put a link in the comments redirecting the asker to chat, and answer the question there.  Why would it be harmful to the site to say, &quot;This may not be a good question for the site, but I'm happy to help you in chat&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question can't be improved, there's no point in using closure / lack of an answer to incentive the asker to improve the question, so what benefit does the site gain by prohibiting people from answering &quot;bad&quot; questions in less official ways (such as chat)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12270" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-10-07T12:02:44.553" Title="Why is it unacceptable to answer a closed question in chat?" Tags="|discussion|chat|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5840" CreationDate="2015-10-07T12:02:44.553" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question is permanently closed, sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are just end running around the entire goal of having people improve their questions, get them opened, and get peer reviewed answers from the whole community, no, and your comment will be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-10-07T12:02:44.553" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5842" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-07T15:19:34.153" Score="2" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a place on the SE Network that deals with Tool Recommendations and its called &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Software Recommendations&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As RPG.SE &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5883/3324&quot;&gt;recently&lt;/a&gt; abandoned the tool recommendations I would propose to migrate them over to SR.SE where they could live on and be answered and make everyone better off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The requirements for good questions about tool recommendations are basically the same over on SR.SE as they were here, so everything that once was good here, will be good there. But for better understanding we have put together &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/q/336/94&quot;&gt;a guide&lt;/a&gt; for good questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only difference that SR.SE would make is that the RPG Context needs to be written out, but I'm certain that can be edited as soon as its over with us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As RPG.SE does not have an overwhelmingly high amount of such questions, the ones that come will get their attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, I invite you to come over and have a look at our &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg&quot;&gt;rpg questions&lt;/a&gt;. Maybe even subscribe to them, so you get notified when new ones are posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited?rq=1&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt; as linked from the tool-recommendations tag wiki.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5721/3324&quot;&gt;Do the Game-Rec Guidelines apply to all of the kinds of recommendation questions?&lt;/a&gt; that talks about if tool-recommendations should be off topic to, with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5732/3324&quot;&gt;answer of SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5843/3324&quot;&gt;Tool recommendations aren&amp;#39;t off topic yet, Or: Let the community actually decide on that first, because we didn&amp;#39;t&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:50:01.560" LastActivityDate="2016-02-24T21:46:02.180" Title="Migration Path for tool recommendations to SoftwareRecs.SE" Tags="|discussion|migration|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5843" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-07T16:49:01.693" Score="22" ViewCount="718" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few hours ago, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question was closed as off topic with the close reason we're now applying to game recommendation questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69544/way-to-manage-world-factions-and-events&quot;&gt;Way to manage world factions and events&lt;/a&gt;. Now I see the tag has been edited to declare tool-recs off topic, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the close banner universally refers to all recommendation questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider me pretty shocked that we're now banning tool-recs as well, because there has been no dialog on that at all, nor checking with the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;Community self-evaluation: How are we doing with game recommendations?&lt;/a&gt; covered just one tag and policy: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/1204&quot;&gt;whether game recommendations are on topic&lt;/a&gt;, represented by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. That policy almost exclusively concerns itself with recommendations of actual RPG systems (hence our original tag being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;), and later came to be used for adventures too. We talked about that one tag and its purpose. It had loads of problems, not least of which was shifting goalposts. Tool recommendations were never asked about nor discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions are something we've been handling separately. They never had much visibly to do with that policy or that tag. From what I've seen, they &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; experience identical issues, and they don't get the same level of draconian rule enforcement and mod attention that was necessary to keep game-recs functioning at the minimum functioning level. More than that though: &lt;strong&gt;we the community never talked about banning them nor endorsed doing so.&lt;/strong&gt; They've been banned without consultation, based on a discussion of &lt;em&gt;one different&lt;/em&gt; type of recommendation we host. This is not good due process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before you go closing tool-recs for the same reason, and banning those as entirely off-topic, actually get our endorsement on this plan please. We may as a community want to keep them on topic. (Or we might choose to say they &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; off topic, which is fine, but let's actually have some public agreement on that first.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-06-28T04:38:31.763" LastActivityDate="2020-06-28T04:38:31.763" Title="Tool recommendations aren't off topic yet, Or: Let the community actually decide on that first, because we didn't" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|tools|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2015-10-31T13:44:59.443" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5843" CreationDate="2015-10-07T21:34:09.893" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tool-recs have always been a subset of game-recs: a recommendation of a game or something for a game. Having their own tag was a tagging convenience, not a sign that they weren't shopping questions subject to our now-defunct special exception. Even if someone persuasively argued that the different tags were a significant separation, they are still self-evidently shopping questions and therefore off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that it's somewhat inaccurate to say that we banned the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag—we would ban question types, not tags, if we were to ban something. It's inaccurate in a different way to even say that we banned shopping questions—we just stopped making an exception for them, and watched the default network-wide ban reasserted itself. That might seem like semantics, but that's fine because this issue is tangled with semantics and it's important to understand what did and didn't happen when we the mods executed on the overwhelming agreement that our exception's rules did not work. &lt;em&gt;Everything&lt;/em&gt; that was only permitted by that exception is again off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since all recommendation requests are off-topic by default, if we want to host tool-recommendation questions, a new exception would have to be created. The old system did not work, and won't be restored wholesale or in part without some very persuasive arguments that it will turn out differently this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no reason we can't have a new exception, except that nothing has yet been proposed that might make them work in our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-10-08T03:41:12.043" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T03:41:12.043" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5845" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5847" CreationDate="2015-10-08T01:56:14.290" Score="16" ViewCount="759" Body="&lt;p&gt;While thinking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/69627/23970&quot;&gt;Does stuff strapped to the outside of a Backpack count toward the total weight a backpack can carry?&lt;/a&gt; I ended up looking at both the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag descriptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What distinction is being drawn there? Is it that &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;house-rule = a tweak to an existing rule to try to better (as defined by us) serve the purpose of that rule, &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;while&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;homebrew = a (set of) rule(s) devised to accomplish something not addressed by RAW?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I took a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1219/23970&quot;&gt;Differentiating between House rules, Homebrew and and game design&lt;/a&gt; and didn't come away much clearer. (Also, it's been 3.5+ years since that was touched, might the understanding have evolved/matured?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2020-01-05T05:22:51.357" Title="What distinction is being drawn between house-rules and homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5845" CreationDate="2015-10-08T02:08:23.053" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just throwing this out there as a starting point, but:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; is for situations where the DM has to invent a rule not in the books -- say if a situation isn't addressed at all by RAW, if a rule-as-written doesn't make sense in the context of the campaign, if a rule is buggy, or (overall) if repeated rulings on a situation need to be condensed into one place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; is for questions relating to &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; types of homebrew content, such as character classes/races, dungeons, or entire worlds and settings.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T02:08:23.053" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5845" CreationDate="2015-10-08T02:43:03.630" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll take a slightly different tack from Shalvenay:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; is for non-published &lt;strong&gt;content&lt;/strong&gt;. Feats, classes, abilities, perks, traits, talents, or any other mechanical component not published by the holder of the license, or appropriately authorized third parties, constitutes homebrew, whether it's written by the group in question or some random person on the interwebs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; is for new or modified &lt;strong&gt;rules&lt;/strong&gt;. Whether it's creating rules to cover situations that aren't handled by RAW or customizing existing rules (&quot;we don't use the RAW grappling rules, because they're stupid&quot;), house rules modify the &lt;em&gt;framework&lt;/em&gt; of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TLDR: House rules modify how the system &lt;em&gt;works&lt;/em&gt;, while homebrew adds to (or occasionally modifies) the content available &lt;em&gt;within&lt;/em&gt; the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: Now that I've typed this, it seems to me that from &lt;em&gt;our community's&lt;/em&gt; perspective, the two are largely interchangeable. Most people looking for non-RAW solutions to their problems don't particularly care whether the solution is a new/modified rule or new/modified content. We currently hold homebrew to a higher standard, but I'm not sure we shouldn't be holding house rules to that same standard. I can see arguments for leaving it as is, cracking down on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;, or even for making the two synonyms; if anyone has strong feelings about any of those options (for or against), a new question here on meta would be a good place to get some consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2015-10-08T12:56:55.840" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T12:56:55.840" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5843" CreationDate="2015-10-08T03:06:04.957" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie argues that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, and therefore banned along with that tag. While that's certainly worth discussing, it's also important to consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; on its own merits. And in that arena, I believe that it falls short.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tool recommendation questions are effectively identical to shopping questions, which are &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;banned on SO main&lt;/a&gt; for good reason, as well as on most of the rest of the SE network. Unlike some questions on, for example, Super User, RPG tool recommendation questions rarely can be rewritten to the more acceptable, &quot;Teach me what I need to know to make a good decision for myself,&quot; so even that loophole is closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So why are &lt;s&gt;shopping&lt;/s&gt; tool recommendation questions bad? They, pretty much by definition, lead to link-centric answers. While a good answer won't be &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; a link (an explanation of why the tool matches the asker's needs is pretty much mandatory), it will still be centered around a link that could stop working at any time. A lot of RPG tools are unlicensed 3rd party contributions made available for free on whatever no-cost/low-cost hosting is available to the creator. They can disappear at the drop of a hat, and even if they're still available, they may not be kept up to date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; is the RPG.SE equivalent of class of questions that the rest of the network has banned for good reasons, reasons that apply just as well here as they did everywhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T03:06:04.957" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5849" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5843" CreationDate="2015-10-08T03:15:17.007" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be very clear, this question largely exists to communicate there's been a mess-up in communication and action by the moderators over the banning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's what happened:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;Let's evaluate how game recommendations are going because they seem pretty shaky.&quot;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Lots of discussion that seems specifically centered on games and adventures, i.e. &lt;em&gt;the game recommendation tag's contents.&lt;/em&gt; Absolutely no mention of tools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;General agreement game recommendations aren't going well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;All shopping questions are now banned.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jumping straight to step 2 was itself pretty surprising: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5753/1204&quot;&gt;The policy change regarding game-rec questions needs review&lt;/a&gt;. It was generally agreed due process should've had an intermediate step where we discuss whether to actually carry out a ban, &lt;em&gt;but also&lt;/em&gt; that it wasn't worth going back and having that step.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how good communication and process would've happened:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;Hey, let's evaluate how all of our shopping questions are going. That covers game recommendations and tool recommendations and just about everything else you can think of recommendation-wise, so we're evaluating those things too.&quot;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Discussion happens on a variety of subjects. Tool recommendations get mentioned.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;Ok, evaluation's done. Do we ban recommendations of game systems, and adventures, and tools?&quot; (Or a separate question for each.)&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;We decide and say yes/no to each.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;Hey, we're banning these things you agreed we should ban.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mentioning the clear impact of things would've been good communication. Consulting us clearly on actually banning things would've been good process. Neither of those happened, and the interpretation of our game-rec discussion as being all shopping questions is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should probably now have a discussion on tool-recs and whether to keep or remove them, since that never happened. But the fact it didn't, but they got banned anyway, is a big problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T03:15:17.007" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5850" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5852" CreationDate="2015-10-08T15:13:25.057" Score="7" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just happened to randomly click on the &quot;deleted recent answers&quot; link in my profile, and noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68950/how-to-calculate-the-probability-of-the-outcome-of-a-vampire-the-masqurade-roll/68957#68957&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; had been deleted along with its question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68950/how-to-calculate-the-probability-of-the-outcome-of-a-vampire-the-masqurade-roll&quot;&gt;How to calculate the probability of the outcome of a Vampire the Masqurade roll?&lt;/a&gt; (both links 10k+ only).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I don't have 10k rep on this site, I can't see when, &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; or by whom the question was deleted.  Sure, it may not have been the greatest question ever, but it didn't seem &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; terrible to me.  And my answer was at +5 score, so I'm pretty sure &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that/5222#5222&quot;&gt;it couldn't have been deleted by the question author&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not terribly concerned about losing the answer itself.  Sure, I did spend some time on it, but in the end the content was just a trivial AnyDice script and some explanation of basic probability theory.  It's not the greatest answer I've ever written, nor even the greatest answer that could've been written for that question.  But the deletion of the question itself puzzled me enough that I figured it was worth asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that said, this is mainly just idle curiosity.  If the answer turns out to be that &quot;there were reasons, but they're kind of private and we'd rather not discuss them in public here&quot; or anything like that, I'll be fine with that, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T15:22:12.053" Title="Why was this question about VtM dice mechanics deleted?" Tags="|discussion|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5851" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5855" CreationDate="2015-10-08T15:19:07.633" Score="9" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now, it’s pretty common to have both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; on a question, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; In cases such as these, it’s not always clear if the tags are a union (“either-or-or-both”) or an intersection (“only-in-both”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I tend to interpret it as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it’s a “how do the rules work?” question, the tags are being used as an intersection: the querent wants to know how the rules work in both systems (assuming they are the same, since in these related systems they often are, but a good answer should double-check that and discuss any differences if there are any)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it’s a “how do I do this within these systems?” question, the tags are being used as a union: any material from either system is acceptable. These still run into problems when the same material is used in both systems (e.g. a recent question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; was asking about options for a paladin, and I finished my answer only to go back and comment asking “Wait, which paladin are you using?” – I got lucky that time and it was the paladin I’d based my answer on, but it could easily have gone the other way).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do feel that most users here have similar heuristics, and I do think it mostly goes pretty well. I’m not sure there really is a problem. But I also figure it’s worth a discussion, since there definitely have been times when there was confusion about this and it caused headaches. Should we expect questions with multiple system tags to each define how we are to treat things that differ between them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Since D&amp;amp;D 3.5 is supposed to &lt;em&gt;include&lt;/em&gt; everything in 3.0 excepting those bits it explicitly updated and changed, in that case part of this question is already answered for us (and often makes the 3.0 tag superfluous).&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2015-10-08T15:26:05.863" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T18:56:42.057" Title="Should we be more pro-active about seeking clarification on questions tagged with two systems?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5850" CreationDate="2015-10-08T15:22:12.053" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question was deleted at the request of the original poster.  In large part because it was cross posted on another stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can find the stat.se version of the question here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/174099/how-to-calculate-the-probability-of-the-outcome-of-this-convoluted-dice-rolling&quot;&gt;https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/174099/how-to-calculate-the-probability-of-the-outcome-of-this-convoluted-dice-rolling&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:00.363" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T15:22:12.053" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5853" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5863" CreationDate="2015-10-08T17:28:33.250" Score="8" ViewCount="462" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;Our game-rec discussion&lt;/a&gt; that ended in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;game-recs being banned&lt;/a&gt; focused &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5716/14848&quot;&gt;specifically on game-system recommendation questions (i.e. those tagged game-rec)&lt;/a&gt; for the meta-statistics used to support banning.  The same statistics do not hold true for tool-rec, which has not been discussed at all, since it's generally not been a very problematic tag.  I propose that until such time as the community decides to reverse &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide?cb=1&quot;&gt;it's current standing on tool-rec&lt;/a&gt; (i.e. that it is on-topic) it remains on topic, and that all tool-rec questions that have been recently been closed for 'shopping' be re-opened. Also the tag-wiki should be rolled back or rewritten. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the event that we have already revoked our recommendation guidelines for all questions, I propose we re-instate those guidelines for tool-rec.  The proposal is, in effect, to return tool-rec questions to the state they were in before they were affected by our game-rec discussion, or to avoid allowing tool-rec to be affected by that discussion by fiat, depending on what perspective one has on what has happened so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.857" LastActivityDate="2015-10-11T20:41:04.630" Title="Tool Recommendations Should Be Allowed" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|tools|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="14" ClosedDate="2015-10-31T13:42:49.520" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5853" CreationDate="2015-10-08T17:33:15.420" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our previous policy on how to permit and handle &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; recommendation requests was revoked by popular acclaim, for a simple reason:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Nobody liked following them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been asserted that the effect of that revocation on tool-recs was not intended, but that assertion doesn't change the fact that the policy &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; gone. Revoking the recs policy took tool-recs down with it for the same reason: nobody &lt;em&gt;liked&lt;/em&gt; following the policy for tool-recs, and so they were mostly not followed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we currently do not have a policy that could handle tool-recs being on-topic, even if we were to declare them so. Without such a policy permitting recommendation requests (to locally-supersede the SE policy against them), we cannot accept them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The previous guidelines did not work&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just asserting that tool-recs &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be on-topic is technically not implementable, as we lack a supporting set of rules to make it work. Proposing that the old rules should be reinstated with no rewrite is not practical either, as we have ample evidence they fail to do the job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We won't be re-using the previous guidelines as-written, as they did not work as intended: we were &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; at following them. Persuasive reasoning that the community will somehow follow them faithfully this time is, I suppose, not impossible in theory, but without at least attempting to show how they will work differently this time for tool-recommendations, they won't be reinstated as-written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new policy that integrates the lessons we've learned since 2010 would have a better chance of success, but as there are ample places on the Internet to make such requests, and this is a fringe use-case for RPG.se, I see no positive cost-benefit value to the effort of developing new draconian rules to allow our site to accommodate these marginal questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We-the-community like the &lt;em&gt;idea&lt;/em&gt; of *-recs but not the reality&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we like the idea of recommendation questions more than we like their reality. We want to share our love of awesome things, be they games or tools or whatever, and reap the rewards of others agreeing that yes, that thing is awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we don't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; like the discipline necessary to make them work here. We don't want to follow restrictive rules about what we can and can't recommend, and what we must and mustn't say about the things we love. Even worse, we can't control random new users who aren't even aware of the policy, and who don't understand why they're being hit with downvotes and comments telling them they did something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We cannot gracefully handle recommendation questions. We don't have the depth of will to do them well. Even those of us who do have the will are not able to pass that will onto new users as the community membership experiences turnover. We recognised that and abandoned the attempt as futile. We still &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; them, in theory, but in practice we don't actually want what it would take to host them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bottom line of our situation is that until someone comes up with a brilliant plan that will address the fact that nobody &lt;em&gt;liked&lt;/em&gt; following the rules, we won't be restoring any kind of recommendation request question to on-topic status. We all like them and wish we could host them here, but wish-based decision making doesn't lead to success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other places on the Internet serve the need just fine, and we don't. That's OK, and that's the current bottom line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-10-11T20:41:04.630" LastActivityDate="2015-10-11T20:41:04.630" CommentCount="28" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5851" CreationDate="2015-10-08T18:28:09.370" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, if the question lacks clarity enough to be a problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions should always be clarified if there is doubt as to what they mean. Especially when it's possible that the asker is misunderstanding how to use the tags, or is mistaken in an assumption that both do/can apply to their question, it is very useful to get an explicit explanation of why they are tagging for two different games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5684&quot;&gt;Quoting myself&lt;/a&gt;, we have a normative expectation that the substance of a question will support the tags, and not vice versa:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags should always be adjusted to suit the question actually asked. When someone tags with [two systems] and it's not 100% clear why from the text of the question, we'll comment to ask them to clarify what they were thinking when they added that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are pragmatic exceptions of course — we don't stick to the letter of needing tags to appear in the question content when there's no lack of clarity, because avoiding &lt;em&gt;unnecessary&lt;/em&gt; noise on a question (in the form of comments, closures, whatever) is also important. For example, we allow single-system questions to elide their system from the body of the question when the tags communicate it fully, because that causes no problems. Similarly we can allow dual-system tagging to pass unchallenged when it's abundantly clear what those tags mean for the substance of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we be more pro-active in seeking that clarity? &lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; we're having any problems with a lack of clarity as to the intent of dual-tagging, &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;. If it's just a desire for purity of principle though, then no — we don't have a practical need to more pro-actively clarify questions that aren't causing trouble or concealing a misunderstanding. As a principle to follow, we should intervene when it notably improves signal more than it causes noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T18:56:42.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5856" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5843" CreationDate="2015-10-08T22:55:38.470" Score="-10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shopping questions are/were off topic initially.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We decided we should allow &quot;system-recs&quot; initially and developed guidance to attempt to allow them.  As it became clear we were getting adventure-recs, tool-recs, etc. we changed the tag to game-rec and said &quot;and tag it with adventure or tool or setting or something too.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, as these questions remained both scarce and problematic, we had discussion on meta and ended up rescinding shopping questions.  This includes all variants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently not everyone participated in that discussion, or had the same understanding of it, or whatever. OK, that's unfortunate. But the mod interpretation of current state is as I've stated it above. Therefore it is fact, as we're the ones that have to enforce it, and we see no clear reason we should be interpreting past discussion in a different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More meta Qs just saying this is unfair or improper or generally complaining about how it's all &quot;mod abuse&quot; and the results of impropriety - this one and @darkwanderer's other one -  aren't going to help anything and frankly generally makes us want to ignore them. This will be my only post to this question and I do not intend to post to @darkwanderer's given its current frame. They're frankly patently offensive and I have better things to do than engage with people who are expressing themselves in this manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Proposing specific guidelines under which we might allow tool recommendations (or the &quot;close to rec&quot; class of &quot;does something exist?&quot; questions) that could be discussed and voted on would be. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, given the failure of game-recs I'm not sure what rules would be both easy enough to administer and effective, so I'd most likely be against that measure, though perhaps I might be surprised with a brilliant plan (other than 'do what we were doing again,' which is a non-starter).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2015-10-08T23:39:50.300" LastActivityDate="2015-10-08T23:39:50.300" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5843" CreationDate="2015-10-09T00:22:28.730" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had a big long answer written up, but I don't really think I need one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's turn back the clock and peer way, way back in time to the antediluvian period, in ancient August of that long-vanished year of 2015:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@doppelgreener If the game-recs go, then our draconian bandaid solution for them will go too, I have no doubt. Whether tool-rec and such will live on after is probably something that will take some time to shake out, but regardless they'll be managed on their own merits. –  SevenSidedDie♦ - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5721/do-the-game-rec-guidelines-apply-to-all-of-the-kinds-of-recommendation-questions#comment15848_5732&quot;&gt;Aug 20 at 3:50&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-10-09T00:22:28.730" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5858" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5853" CreationDate="2015-10-09T04:54:23.843" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tool recomendations can sometimes be on-topic,&lt;/strong&gt; I think, because they're sometimes not &lt;em&gt;shopping&lt;/em&gt; questions so much as they're requests for &lt;em&gt;ways of achieving things&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a user says &quot;I want a (software) random dungeon generator that lets me specify the extent to which the created dungeons are Euclidean,&quot; it's functionally no different to that same user saying &quot;I want a (homebrew ruleset for) random dungeon generation that lets me specify the extent to which the created dungeons are Euclidean.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;As long as a user is asking for tools that achieve a specific &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt; outcome, tool requests are no different to requests for homebrew&lt;/strong&gt; - and homebrew requests are most definitely on topic, provided they include sufficient criteria for evaluation and aren't just pure idea solicitation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Admittedly, tool-rec questions have one extra requirement that most homebrew request questions don't: That any proposed answer must involve a tool.&lt;/strong&gt; The reason for including that requirement is almost always the same: A software tool designed to perform a task will usually* achieve it more quickly, and with less human effort, than performing the same task by hand. This kind of constraint is nothing new or unusual; Several of our existing homebrew questions specify that quick and easy-to-use solutions are preferred, especially when they're intended to be used in play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Of course, sometimes it'll turn out that a software tool isn't the best solution to a user's problem&lt;/strong&gt;. Sometimes the benefit of a tool will be too small to be worth it, or the solution they've envisioned is more complicated than what their problem actually needs - &lt;strong&gt;but that's just the XY problem,&lt;/strong&gt; and any question can suffer from that; It's why we encourage questioners to explaining the problems they're trying to solve, and why we have guidelines for challenging the frame of the question. As long as we keep on following our existing policies, tool-request problems shouldn't present any special problems in that regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yeah. As long as a question includes a clear statement of the problem the questioner is trying to solve and the constraints they're operating under, we shouldn't have any problem allowing tool-rec questions: We just answer with things that work, ask for more details if the problem is unclear, and vote for the answers that best fit the requirements. Just like we do for any question, really. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*I work in software quality assurance, and it's conditioned me to never assume that software actually works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="2699" LastEditDate="2015-10-09T06:42:52.550" LastActivityDate="2015-10-09T06:42:52.550" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5859" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-09T12:47:18.267" Score="5" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a good reason to be actively closing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions in main &lt;em&gt;while&lt;/em&gt; the issue's being discussed here in meta? I imagine there might be good reasons: will some high-rep and long-time members who have seen the comings-and-goings explain a little?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands it seems that closing now &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; create extra work, if a new policy is implemented specifically allowing tool-rec questions. Proponents of tool-rec allowance would then want to go find the closed ones and re-open. Waiting a few days to start purging tool-rec questions seems--to me--not harmful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And perhaps this isn't someone's active efforts--it just so happens that this day, singular among all the days I've had access to the review queue, all of the close votes were for tool-rec questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-10-09T15:12:34.493" LastActivityDate="2015-10-09T17:58:21.567" Title="Can we put a pause on tool-rec VtC's in main while it's discussed here in meta?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|tools|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5860" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5859" CreationDate="2015-10-09T14:59:52.120" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The community appears to be arguing about the issue with their VTCs and flags, in addition to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a matter of semi-official policy the mods don't go digging up old rec/shopping questions just to close them. Things in the review queue are normally fair game, but at this moment I'm personally content to leave that battlefield to the community. But recs that show up in the front page, either as new questions or bumps, will get closed. Until the status quo is changed, shopping questions are still off topic, regardless of what is being shopped for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It shouldn't create new work, either way. Right now shopping Qs that pop up require a little work to close; should tool recs be made on-topic again, the same thing will be true just in reverse. And so long as tagging is done properly, nothing will get lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2015-10-09T17:58:21.567" LastActivityDate="2015-10-09T17:58:21.567" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5861" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5845" CreationDate="2015-10-10T03:05:46.153" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The two should be considered synonyms.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules are also content, and content includes rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new magic item has magic powers and effects which essentially change the rules for the person with the item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new rule can create new situations and possible actions, essentially creating new content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So creating rules is creating content, and creating content is creating rules. Hence, the two are used largely interchangeably, and even making the distinction between rules and content is a subjective decision that will differ from person to person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastActivityDate="2015-10-10T03:05:46.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5853" CreationDate="2015-10-10T08:03:31.160" Score="-10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tool recommendations should be off-topic&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;because they are.&lt;/em&gt; Not because of any relation to previous game-recommendation rulings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tool Recommendations are the ultimate offsite-resource.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange aims to be the place where you find a &lt;em&gt;solution&lt;/em&gt; to your question. Not a link to a blog to a forum to a post to a link that is down. &lt;strong&gt;No!&lt;/strong&gt; You open the Stack Exchange question and answer and you &lt;em&gt;got&lt;/em&gt; an answer. An off site resource as an answer is contrary to the foundations of Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A software tool can never be the answer. Because it will never fit in an answer. A tool will always have to be a pointer to an offsite resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Overflow has a default close reason for questions asking for tools. And those guys should know. Programming is &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; about tools. You cannot program without at least one tool (called a compiler or interpreter). And still, they have banned tool recommendations, even if tools are an essential part of the job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking us to recommend or find a book, tool, software library, tutorial or other off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A best-case tool recommendation is an opinionated shopping list of off-site resources. That really is all SE is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; supposed to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make tool recommendations off-topic, because they are off topic. They are not solving the problems by presenting a solution. They seem to solve problems by sending people on a wild chase through the internet, on a hunt for the solution. That is not what SE/SO stand for. SE/SO stand for helping people right here, with SE/SO being the &lt;em&gt;last&lt;/em&gt; site one needs to open to have a fix for a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-10-10T08:03:31.160" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5853" CreationDate="2015-10-10T20:23:42.947" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose that tool-recommendations stay on topic. With the same rules that are active on Software Recommendations.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/q/336/94&quot;&gt;For Questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/q/356/94&quot;&gt;For Answers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm biased here because I'm active on SR.SE and I'd love to have more questions and answers in the detail and quality of what I see here on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. But on the other hand I see that only very few of you are active there as well, so even if you migrate the questions, you most likely won't follow to provide the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of (at least my) intention when SR.SE started was to work out ways how tool recommendations questions could work on the whole SE network and then allow the local experts of the various SE sites use our experience to make recommendation questions on-topic on their sites again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other argument is that not all tool-recommendations here could be migrated to SR.SE because some tools are not asking for software tools (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65150/where-can-i-find-cyberpunk-face-cards&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in case you are against having tool recommendations here: Please do &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5842/3324&quot;&gt;consider migrating them&lt;/a&gt;. But I'd prefer them to stay here where more domain experts are around to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-10-10T20:31:08.097" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5864" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5865" CreationDate="2015-10-13T20:47:54.453" Score="3" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the recent years Onyx Path has released 20-year &lt;a href=&quot;http://whitewolf.wikia.com/wiki/Category:20th_Anniversary&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;anniversary editions of popular white wolf games&lt;/a&gt; which include both mechanical and plot/setting changes, like the removal of the metaplot that formed the World of Darkness in previous editions. To my knowledge, Vampire, Werewolf and, recently, Mage have been &quot;updated&quot; in this manner.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Currently the player base is split in mostly 3 fanbases, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;regular old World of Darkness (Vampire: the masquerade, 3rd/revised edition)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anniversary editions of oWoD without metaplot (V20/W20/M20)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;new World of Darkness products (Vampire: the requiem)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, a fourth group, for the upcoming 4th edition products that promise to take place subsequent to the events that &quot;concluded&quot; the earlier metaplots, seems likely to arise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I believe we should add tags ( [v20]/[m20]/[w20] or [vampire-20] maybe) for &lt;strong&gt;each&lt;/strong&gt; of these games given the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=v20&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; which already focus on them on the site. What do you think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3048" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-10-14T18:56:43.993" Title="Should we add V20/M20 etc tags for White Wolf Games?" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2015-10-25T12:50:56.767" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5864" CreationDate="2015-10-13T20:53:40.020" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;If they are sufficiently distinct that someone who's watching &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; would not be able to help a question about V20, then they should probably have separate tags. If they're close, then it could go either way and should probably wait on an obvious need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they should have separate tags, they should probably be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade-20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade-20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade-20&lt;/a&gt;, etc. rather than just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/v20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;v20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;v20&lt;/a&gt;, though synonyms from the abbreviations would be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And as usual, tags should/can only be created as-needed by existing questions, so if &lt;em&gt;Mummy 20th Anniversary&lt;/em&gt; is in the works, no need or possibility to preemptively create a tag for it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-10-13T20:53:40.020" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5868" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-14T18:14:13.243" Score="-2" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69853/actual-play-of-dont-rest-your-head-one-shot-exemplar&quot;&gt;Actual Play of Don&amp;#39;t Rest Your Head one-shot exemplar&lt;/a&gt; and wondered why this makes a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't get me wrong: it's well written, I understand the need to find what he's looking for, it's clear and concise, formally, it has all we can ask for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what would a good answer look like?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An embedded Youtube video? A link? A bunch of links?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the other questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt;, that's exactly the answers they get: a list of links, ordered by popular opinion. Because the answer &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; by definition be a link, that's the point of the question. And there is no other way to rank them then personal opinion. Apart from spam, there cannot be a good, better or worse answer. One answer is as valid as any other. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that's exactly what SE does &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; want to be. A &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/158809/why-are-shopping-list-questions-bad&quot;&gt;shopping list&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/225370/your-answer-is-in-another-castle-when-is-an-answer-not-an-answer&quot;&gt;offsite resources&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my point of view, any question rightfully being tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt; is most likely offtopic for any Q&amp;amp;A SE site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively (I have been wrong before...) what would convince me of the opposite is a possible answer to the above mentioned question, that, if stripped of any markup and links, is &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; a valid answer to &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question. That is the general SE guideline of where the line between &quot;good answer with link&quot; and &quot;bad, link only non-answer&quot; is drawn and we don't have any more specific ruling here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Try for a minute to imagine the above question would have been asked for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; instead of the rather obscure system. Would you want to read the flood of answers, would you think them to be SE quality?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another site in the SE network said in it's off-topic help:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Asking a question that doesn't draw upon the community's expert knowledge [...] but rather asking it to be a crowdsourced search engine falls into this area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I think that's a good description. I can feel the pain of not finding something with google. But we are a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a natural-speech-configurable search engine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-10-14T18:33:22.247" Title="Can there be a good use for [session-summaries]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5868" CreationDate="2015-10-14T18:30:03.387" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt; tag is one of those that just describes a noun, which are usually fairly flexible tags. It could describe a lot of kinds of questions: how can I find [specific old actual play series] videos, how do I write a good session summary for teaching purposes, what rules were used that made X happen at 4m28s in this podcast of a &lt;em&gt;Chuubo's Marvelous Wish-Granting Engine&lt;/em&gt; session, what RPGs produce written artifacts that look like session summaries as a direct result of core play procedures, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of those are more-or-less &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; session summaries, which sufficiently justifies the existence of a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt; on such a question that might exist here. Most or all of those glosses (okay, not the last game-rec one) also suggest an on-topic question. Given a question that's on-topic here, plus having session summaries as a fundamental “aboutness” of the question, a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt; is useful to categorise those here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-10-14T18:30:03.387" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5870" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5871" CreationDate="2015-10-16T00:58:40.893" Score="12" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suppose I wanted to put forth a policy for discussion, refinement, some sort of decision process, and eventually formal adoption/rejection. Say... a policy to explicitly allow tool-recommendation questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How would I do that? How do the arguments for and against get voiced? Is there a vote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine the policy posed as a &quot;question&quot; here in meta. Would there be two &quot;answers&quot;, containing the arguments for and against? As community wikis? Or is each interested user likely to post his or her own &quot;answer&quot;/position statement?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are our best practices on proposing policy, hearing and considering reasoned arguments for and against, and making a final-until-the-next-proposal-comes-'round decision?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-10-16T02:44:37.483" LastActivityDate="2015-10-16T21:47:30.817" Title="How does one propose policy?" Tags="|discussion|policy|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5870" CreationDate="2015-10-16T21:47:30.817" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a formal process beyond just proposing it. Meta is the place for “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;users to communicate with each other about Role-playing Games Stack Exchange (asking questions about how the websites work, or &lt;strong&gt;about policies and community decisions&lt;/strong&gt;)&lt;/a&gt;”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking questions about policy, making proposals, participating in discussions of policy — that's how policy is made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of examples in the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/policy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;policy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;policy&lt;/a&gt; tag that can be studied, whether for what makes a good answer on a policy discussion, or for how questions touching on policy can be framed for best effectiveness. A typical example is “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4805/is-trivia-on-topic&quot;&gt;Is trivia on-topic?&lt;/a&gt;”, which resulted in a “yes” outcome, but with well-articulated nuances that meaningfully advanced our collective understanding of why trivia questions sometimes do or don't work on the site and how to handle them in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-10-16T21:47:30.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5872" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-17T01:12:03.573" Score="7" ViewCount="336" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sci-fi's stack Badge is the rebel alliance symbol, some other stacks have other cool symbols that represent their badges. As is right now, we have dice that well... don't really look like dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They kind of just look like Hexagons. Regular normal hexagons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qrIK6.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of hexagon badges&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we find a way to make them look more like dice, or change them to swords, staves, daggers, or something more fantasy-like. I'd like them to be swords, but I have created some alternatives for those who still like dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been a while since this was looked over, does anyone still think that the badge icons should be changed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-16T20:42:13.853" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T20:42:13.853" Title="Can our badges be some symbol that's more recognizable than just featureless hexagons?" Tags="|feature-request|badges|user-interface|site-design|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5872" CreationDate="2015-10-17T02:14:12.190" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like the dice badges, and I appreciate their minimalistic design: they're dice if you look (the RPG.SE banner d20 is right there for the comparison) but they don't call attention to themselves. I think it's totally fine that they aren't obviously RPG-related symbols. It's not like &lt;a href=&quot;http://english.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;english.se&lt;/a&gt;'s badges are iconic of their topic, and they look great!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, making the badges more immediately recognisable as dice could be nice if they don't get too flash in the process. The trick is, badges are an ubiquitous part of the site design and shouldn't be overly complex or they clutter up every page they're on. Maybe a d6 with transparent pixels for the pips, similar to &lt;a href=&quot;http://movies.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;movies.se&lt;/a&gt;'s film-reel badge?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm firmly against a more &quot;fantasy-like&quot; design for the badges, though. Polyhedral dice are universally recognised in the RPG community as emblematic of our hobby; fantasy visuals represent only a portion of the hobby's subjects while also evoking other mediums which use those visuals too. A sword or dagger or staff doesn't say &quot;role-playing game&quot; to me, any more than a laser rifle or a shoggoth does. (I feel the scifi Stack's choice to draw on a single franchise for its badge design is a little tone-deaf, actually.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-10-17T07:50:21.227" LastActivityDate="2015-10-17T07:50:21.227" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5875" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5872" CreationDate="2015-10-17T04:19:46.890" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Make the Badge icons we already have even better.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've taken the liberty of creating a few mockups of possible badge designs that keep to the dice format while maintaining its linework at lower resolutions, as well as a badge edit of the favicon:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mhLkI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mhLkI.png&quot; alt=&quot;Dice Mockup White BG&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jhPEW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jhPEW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Dice Mockup Saturated&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/l3JtN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/l3JtN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Dice Mockup Black BG&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sMPSj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sMPSj.png&quot; alt=&quot;Dice Favicon Mockup&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's also some mockups provided by @MrLemon after taking the available sprite sheet and encoding it into a website via developer tools:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/T7LvK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/T7LvK.png&quot; alt=&quot;Top Toolbar mockup&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FbcSe.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FbcSe.png&quot; alt=&quot;Answer/Edit bar mockup&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see the dice lines are all still visible when spliced into the page code, and are very recognizable polyhedrons compared to our current badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The end sprite sheet can be found here:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NNGOX.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NNGOX.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastEditorUserId="14949" LastEditDate="2015-11-24T21:18:16.800" LastActivityDate="2015-11-24T21:18:16.800" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5834" CreationDate="2015-10-19T06:13:30.120" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is normal&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're going to get told, via comment, that you did your comments wrong.  You're going to try and do better (assuming you're a good user).  It's not going to feel like it's working.  External metrics (e.g. rep) will generally indicate that it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;, however, because it is.  Using this site is a learning process, and the 'correct' way changes not only as a function of time, but also as a function of rep.  You'll get better at it as time goes on, but you're always going to be making mistakes, and getting corrected, and your go-to thing to do at 200 rep might be a red-flag-people-on-your-case problem at 1000.  Plus 'the mods' here are largely not the actual official black-diamond mods, who are generally super hands off and very much Vox Populi, but the high-rep community (who counts as high-rep depends on who's involved), and the high-rep dude responding to you may well just be totally wrong.  Heck, even the actual mods are wrong sometimes, and certainly what you get out of their correcting you will frequently be inaccurate.  So here's what you do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1) You wanna post a comment&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Just think about it, at least for like 30 seconds.  Seriously, just considering that maybe you shouldn't post it is pretty much all we ask.  If you're wrong, we'll fix it with flags and comment deleting (and hopefully leave a helpful explanation too).  Just think about other similar situations and what happened when you commented, and go off that.  If you haven't ever done that yet and think it would make sense for it to be allowed, go for it! (or leave a meta post if you're skittish :P )  Basically, just learn from your mistakes and think before you post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2) A comment was deleted!  It might have been mine, even! There's no message about it!  Oh Noes! D:&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Yup.  That's what happens to comments.  Don't repost it, and don't change your commenting behavior.  Getting deleted doesn't at all mean your comment was bad; in fact, really good comments get deleted really fast-- after the post they are on is edited.  Deletion is just a thing that happens to comments here: it's normal and we need to not be bothered by it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3) My comment was deleted, and there's a message saying &quot;Don't [Do X thing] Please&quot;, but I don't think I was doing X thing!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, clearly at least two people did (probably).  Think about it, maybe read related metas a bit, and then post your own meta if you still aren't sure how your comment was bad in that way.  &lt;strong&gt;Do your best to make it clear you are trying to learn, not argue.&lt;/strong&gt;  We should really assume good faith on that, but we really don't.  Our bad.  It comes from repeated bad experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4) Other people did a thing! It was a cool thing!&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Yup.  They do that. Upvote the comment, obviously. If they have slightly more rep than you, try to learn from it/how to do it. If they have vastly more rep, don't bother trying; it tends to go badly.  If they have less rep, go through their stuff and give 'em some upvotes on things that deserve it; clearly they are pretty awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;5) Other people did a thing!  I do not like the thing!&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Flag it, probably as non-constructive, and leave a comment &lt;em&gt;explaining why the comment was not okay&lt;/em&gt; not why the content of the comment was wrong (unless that's relevant somehow).  You can do this even to high-rep users, it's okay.  The mods might be a little annoyed if you actually flagged their own posts though, I think.  I'm not sure about that, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's basically the building blocks.  The rest, you must discover for yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-10-19T06:13:30.120" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5872" CreationDate="2015-10-21T08:42:36.560" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;While they are dice, if we're going to change them, we might pick different types of dice for the different badges. A triangle (four sided die), a square (six sided die) and an octagon (12 sided die) for example could work. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are still quite minimal (just basic shapes) but I think most RPG'ers would recognize them for what they are (more easily than the current ones), especially if you order them from smallest number of sides to biggest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside, it also removes us a bit from using only the 20-sided die, because like the argument &quot;a sword does not represent all roleplaying&quot; one can also say &quot;a 20-sided die does not represent all roleplaying). I understand that funny dice are often involved, but still moving away from using only the one made big by D&amp;amp;D might also be a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastActivityDate="2015-10-21T08:42:36.560" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2690" CreationDate="2015-10-21T11:45:35.617" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asked to move this to this forum by Hey I Can Chan and SevenSidedDie after an awful, disappointing and avoidable experience of the RolePlaying Games site. The post was deleted (deleted by Miniman, okeefe, SevenSidedDie♦), the cynic in me thinks &quot;conveniently&quot;, which really did not go any way to improving the issues I have with the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope this isn't many people's experience but the existence of this question says otherwise. I've made some edits to make it more what I mean to say, I'm afraid you can't compare to my original post as it has, as already noted, been deleted. I wonder if it will be deleted from here given I don't necessarily answer a question, just express my opinion. Naughty me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@KorvinStarmast and @SevenSidedDie: I have to say that I don't think I am someone who is going to get anything meaningful from this site, because of the inbuilt attitude to new people. I have been playing RPGs for nearly 40 years, different systems, different people, different styles, different relationships and expectations. Tried all sorts of different formats and ideas, some worked some didn't. We (my gtoup and I) have developed two RPG's of our own and one of us even published an Ars Magica supplement which we playtested. Kinda been there, done that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it is useful to have a forum for exploring the rules of systems, for asking specific &quot;fact&quot; based questions only, I think a community that encourages anonymous, data-less criticism, discourages ANY opinion based discussion and the effect this has on anyone new joining (&quot;adapt to our way or go away&quot; is the message I am getting very loud and clear) rather than being accommodating, open and persuasive is not for me. I really was happy to have found a wide reaching open forum for discussion of games. It seems that's not really what it's purpose is. Really had too much of this kind of self-sustaining negative reinforcement behaviour which unfortunately seems strangely endemic to pockets of the gaming community. It's always seemed a bit like bullying to me, power gaming. Perhaps I am wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm not interested, my attention and time has been taken up with this &quot;meta&quot; rubbish rather than actually joining in on informed debate about games. I have no issues with positive criticism, informed disagreement and would have loved to have had discussions with those who had issue with my posts. I had quite a few interesting comments on many posts before they got &quot;meta-ed&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm someone who is really open to new ideas and will always change my position if arguments are persuasive. But what has actually happened has really soured my experience. Others who are not so outspoken as I am may feel the same. I hope not. Anyway life is too short (Ha, re-reading this I should have stopped there, I undermine my stated position by carrying on... hey ho).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been a school teacher for years and this system would never get near a decent educational environment, which is not a million miles away from what you seem to be trying to achieve here. But your system has a strong bias toward the use of negative reinforcement, even worse without expecting cues as to what is being done &quot;wrong&quot;, to produce your outcomes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The anonymity makes it all too easy to crack the whip without having to justify your position, especially with the little, but highly significant, detail of not being able to down vote comments. This all might be fine as part of a system, except that in this case it is the stated norm, the expected behaviour, rather than something frowned upon! Wow. Disheartened and amazed. I really can't think of anywhere in real life this would be tolerated or thought of as a good idea. Maybe this is a cultural difference between the UK and the US?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wish you well, but I will be &quot;closing&quot; my account (again I have undermined my stated course of action here by moving this post, but I am really quite angry with the treatment I have had here, in a forum where I expected to feel at home, safe in expressing my opinions based on so many years experience, and be able to make a positive contribution). Shame. I've had to move away from my regular group players and so don't get to have good discussions about games. Oh well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Protonflux.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ps. @SevenSidedDie thanks for some of your comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25255" LastActivityDate="2015-10-21T11:45:35.617" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5879" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-23T03:26:39.963" Score="2" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;[Headnote: in a few places I think linked examples would be nice, but I can neither think of nor find good ones. These are indicated by a &quot;()&quot; after a phrase. Please feel free to plug one in if you think of it. Thanks.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The State of Tool-Recommendation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions come to us which presume the existence of a tool which will solve the querent's problem. These questions are often problematic: often &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY problems&lt;/a&gt;, often &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67597/23970&quot;&gt;too broad&lt;/a&gt;, often primarily opinion-based(). These, and more, are the reason that recommendation (&quot;shopping&quot;) questions are &lt;em&gt;non grata&lt;/em&gt; in all of the SE sites().&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until recently RPG.SE had an explicit, local policy allowing for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/23970&quot;&gt;recommendation questions&lt;/a&gt;. This policy was recently debated &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5711/23970&quot;&gt;in meta&lt;/a&gt;--largely in the context of the game-recommendation tag--and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/23970&quot;&gt;revoked&lt;/a&gt;. It appears that many users did not realize that removing the (local) policy allowing game-rec questions--the larger &quot;allow recommendation questions&quot; policy--&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5843/23970&quot;&gt;would also be the undoing of tool-rec questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I confess to being one of those surprised by tool-rec questions losing the support of the now-defunct &quot;allow recommendation questions&quot; policy. I had followed the conversation with my eye toward game-rec questions. I also confess that had I understood better at the time the &quot;allow recommendation questions&quot; policy that ramification might have been obvious. (Though &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5721/23970&quot;&gt;maybe not&lt;/a&gt;.) &lt;em&gt;Yes, the policy that allowed for game-recs also supported tool-recs; tool-recs thus lost their support when game-recs did.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, from the answers and comments to many of the above-linked and from recent meta discussions we see that there is a desire in this community to provide assistance to these querents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cribbing largely from meta discussions had at softwarerecs.SE--&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5863/23970&quot;&gt;pointed out by @AngleoFuchs&lt;/a&gt;--I put forth the following proposal:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tool-Recommendation Question Guidelines (Proposed 10/2015)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recognize that successful Tool-Recommendation questions contain two &lt;em&gt;essential&lt;/em&gt; components: a goal to accomplish and a set of requirements to be met.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question Content must describe&#xA;- the task you're doing when you find yourself having trouble; the &quot;user story&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;ways in which your current 'solution' succeeds and fails--what it does and doesn't do&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;other things you've tried&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what you hope to achieve--a desired feature list&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what you absolutely do not want--things that would cause you to reject a solution untried&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what level of tech is acceptable/allowable: pen-and-paper, laptops, online, must run on phone-only, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what budget you have&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recommended Question Format:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What is the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; tool to ?&quot; Is to be avoided. Prefer &quot;How can I ?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't say you're looking for a replacement for X; tell us what you do with X that you're hoping to do differently/better.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Feature requirements should be listed in order of importance, with a clear distinction drawn between must-haves and gee-that-would-be-nices.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2015-10-23T04:22:27.787" Title="Policy Proposal: Allow Tool-Recommendation Questions" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2015-10-23T11:27:39.117" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5880" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5879" CreationDate="2015-10-23T03:26:39.963" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Reject&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've come around on this one during the last two weeks. I initially was very surprised to see tool-rec questions' ground fall out from under them; I'd not understood the rec-policy well enough while discussing game-rec to understand both would fall.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But a week of reflection and reading has convinced me that an explicit exception to the recommendation ban is unnecessary. In particular, TuggyNE's link to (an answer to) &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/185486&quot;&gt;Why are &amp;quot;shopping list&amp;quot; questions bad?&lt;/a&gt; helped me see how much better a hypothetical tool-rec question becomes if simply cast as a problem-question. &lt;em&gt;I.e.&lt;/em&gt; a &amp;quot;How can I do &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot; question rather than a &amp;quot;What's the best tool to do &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't had any sort of privileges long enough to understand why and how the exception it's a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; thing; but I &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;assume good faith&lt;/a&gt; and believe those longer-time users who say it's a lot of work to curate/moderate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe we can still help those querents get good answers, inherently improve the questions, and make less work for mods, by rejecting a tool-rec exception to the rec-ban. (Or creating a new local permission for tool-rec questions, however you like to think of it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My takeaway:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;A tool-rec can still be part of an &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt;; it shouldn't be a requirement in the &lt;strong&gt;question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-10-23T03:26:39.963" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5881" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-10-23T04:35:48.117" Score="26" ViewCount="951" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recommendations for games and published adventures are now off topic due to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/23970&quot; title=&quot;Are game recommendations on topic?&quot;&gt;our policy on them&lt;/a&gt;  being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/23970&quot; title=&quot;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&quot;&gt;rescinded&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5711/23970&quot; title=&quot;Community self-evaluation: How are we doing with game recommendations?&quot;&gt;general agreement&lt;/a&gt; was that we did have functioning rules for them, but enough users were intentionally disobeying them that the effort of enforcing them was no longer balanced by the value they added to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions, however, face a different set of issues, so it’s worth discussing those separately on their own merits. (It's also clear from recent events we're long overdue for policy on this.) Evidence may show they don’t face the same challenges as game recs, and may face different challenges. For example, one cannot sensibly suggest their favourite dice roller for every tool recommendation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should tool recommendations be on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If [tool-rec] questions should be on topic, what set of rules can we support them with that will keep them in order? Why will those rules work, and why will they work on RPG.SE in particular?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Will the rules we had all along (basically, GSBS: show you’ve used the thing or someone else has and it’s worked well) work fine? Were they being obeyed?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If [tool-rec] questions should not be on topic, why not? What about RPG.SE will prevent them from working?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Regardless of the above: are there things we cover with tool recommendations that can be better handled by not being tool recommendations but in some other form?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For both sides: Are tool recommendations unusually difficult for our culture? And, do users chronically ignore the guidelines?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I recommend that whether or not they are shopping questions is a red herring: game-recs survived as a good long while as an exception, the real question is whether or not we can handle these kinds of requests well.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assertions about matters of fact will preferably be &lt;strong&gt;backed up with evidence.&lt;/strong&gt; Citing other stacks’ precedents and policies will necessarily require backing up why those precedents and policies are relevant to us and our situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T03:30:46.320" LastActivityDate="2021-12-09T13:56:06.630" Title="Are tool recommendation questions on topic?" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|tools|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5881" CreationDate="2015-10-23T13:25:55.793" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;General SE guidelines&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A general guideline of Stack Exchange is that the core of an answer should not be an offsite resource. The test you can make is to &lt;strong&gt;strip&lt;/strong&gt; all &lt;strong&gt;links&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;markup&lt;/strong&gt; from an answer. If it's &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; a valid answer to the question, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; it &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be a good answer. If the main information is gone, then it's a bad, so-called &amp;quot;link-only&amp;quot; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/225370/your-answer-is-in-another-castle-when-is-an-answer-not-an-answer&quot;&gt;Source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example Question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to play a big, unruly grunt with an axe smashing things and people, what class should I play in D&amp;amp;D5&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Link only Answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should play THIS(link to barbarian) class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somewhat better answer (not good, but not &amp;quot;link-only&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should play a BARBARIAN(link to barbarian).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strip the link and markup and the second answer still is an answer, while the first is completely unusable once the link goes dead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tool Recommendations&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tool recommendation by design is something that at it's core has an off site resource. Because SE does not host tools. It might also be hard to pick a definite answer. If someone asks for a dice-rolling app, there are a bazillion out there and most do a good job of rolling dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;XY Problem?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we should look at this from a different angle. If someone identified the problem and narrowed it down to the fact that he needs a tool, I think it's trivial to google a few and test them. We cannot help with that process, that's not what SE was made for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be more interesting (and maybe a better fit to this site) to analyse how to solve the underlying problem. If the best solution happens to end with &amp;quot;You can download one such tool at xyz.com&amp;quot;, then so be it. But the solution should offer a description how the problem can be solved. That might as well be without a tool or maybe the tool is made of cardboard or a custom painted set of dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Ban tool recommendation, but embrace problem solving&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone has already solved his problem and decided a tool is his solution, then we are not the best fit for his needs. We should not allow that. However, we should be open for people's questions on how to &lt;strong&gt;solve their problems&lt;/strong&gt;. I think every question that cannot be trivially solved by a google search can be asked in a more open minded way, so that it loses it's narrow tool-focused context and can be answered here as a normal question. People need tools for &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;. Asking about &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; without taking the solution (a tool) for granted will yield better results and make for a better question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep the question but remove the constraint of tool-rec and instead ask about the underlying problem. &lt;em&gt;Those&lt;/em&gt; are valid questions answerable without any change to policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-10-23T13:25:55.793" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5883" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5881" CreationDate="2015-10-26T04:15:32.107" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tool recommendations are &lt;em&gt;off topic&lt;/em&gt; on RPG.SE.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, &amp;quot;shopping&amp;quot; questions are considered bad form Stack Exchange-wide.  The reasoning can be found in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A Is Hard, Let's Go Shopping&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/158809/why-are-shopping-list-questions-bad&quot;&gt;Why are &amp;quot;shopping list&amp;quot; questions bad?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other stacks have had problems with recommendation questions and closed them for similar reasons, e.g. our neighbor sites, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1491/what-should-be-done-with-questions-asking-for-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;Arquade&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/656/should-we-ban-game-recommendation-questions-done&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Our history and game-recs&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As is well known, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;tried to make game recommendation questions on topic for a while here&lt;/a&gt;. We figured the lifespan of an RPG is a lot longer than a computer product, so some of the &amp;quot;Shopping&amp;quot; critiques didn't apply, and that with strict application of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, such a thing could work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It did not.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;Given feedback on how those questions were doing&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;we had to rescind the exception&lt;/a&gt;. In practice, the community failed to enforce the game-rec rules and therefore game-recs turned into poor Q&amp;amp;As in a variety of ways (subjective, not paying attention to requirements, &amp;quot;here's the name of a game I heard of&amp;quot; answers).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tool-recs are only different in a bad way&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have to ask ourselves, why do we think this will work for tool-recs and not game-recs (besides wishful thinking)? Tool-recs are different from game-recs - but unfortunately are mostly different in the way that makes the general SE guidance apply directly to them!  They are much more time-limited (tools go obsolete or get Cease &amp;amp; Desisted or change), draw link-only answers, generate near-infinite lists...  Things that we hoped didn't apply as much to games, but certainly do to tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot;&gt;the real extant tool-rec questions&lt;/a&gt;. Click through them.  Most are links to Web sites with very little effort put into explaining how they fit the OP's requirements (in most cases, the requirements are minimal anyway). A good number of the linked tools/sites are dead. Also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot;&gt;look at the tools questions&lt;/a&gt;, as most of those are really tool-recs not labeled as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any event, trying to keep them but putting a set of question type specific rules in place has failed despite our best efforts to do that for game-recs, so I think that any question type requiring guidance other than normal SE guidance is bound to similarly fail, especially when it's an even smaller case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But what &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; we do?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trick is to do as described &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/158809/why-are-shopping-list-questions-bad/185486#185486&quot;&gt;in this answer&lt;/a&gt; to the shopping list meta.SE post - ask a question about your problem, and be willing to accept a variety of answers - technique, tool, etc. - to solve your problem.  In many cases asking for a tool is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem/66378#66378&quot;&gt;an XY problem anyway&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Observe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69861/need-a-wide-variety-of-iron-kingdoms-npcs&quot;&gt;this recent question&lt;/a&gt;, which I specifically re-edited to this format.  It could be a game-rec question (NPC supplements), or it could be a tool-rec question (NPC generators), but it's best as a problem - I need a bunch of various Iron Kingdoms NPCs, how do I do that?  In fact the partial comment-answers are urging gm-techniques answers (if only people would answer in answers and not comments, sigh). This is how we should handle these.  Pure shopping lists - off topic.  A RPG problem that might could be solved by a tool - on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some good older tools questions are of this sort - like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16/what-tools-or-strategies-have-you-found-useful-when-not-all-players-can-be-in-th&quot;&gt;What tools or strategies have you found useful when not all players can be in the same physical space?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6726/how-do-you-track-the-pcs-reputation&quot;&gt;How do you track the PCs&amp;#39; reputation?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27710/how-can-i-make-things-easier-on-my-dyslexic-and-high-functioning-autistic-player&quot;&gt;How can I make things easier on my dyslexic and high-functioning autistic players?&lt;/a&gt;  I submit that the better tools questions could easily be of this form, while the worse ones that are just &amp;quot;hey I want an android app for X&amp;quot; turn into bad lists of answers exactly like those in the examples of why shopping questions are bad.  The good thing is that turning these into good questions is standard SE guidance that people from other SEs should be well familiar with - &amp;quot;no shopping,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;ask about your real problem.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to go on at more length - all the rest of the backing detail should be apparent from reading the links already in this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Be Generous&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We know we'll continue to get tool-rec type questions.  Make this process go easy by doing a quick edit instead of closing and all when the only difference between the question being OK and not OK is changing &amp;quot;I want a tool for this&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;I want a tool/technique/fix for this&amp;quot; in a whole question... (assuming you have the rep, and put this meta's link in the edit reasons bar). On historical tool-recs, same thing, we don't have to go on a pogrom to close them, just edit them slightly or heck just answer from the frame of &amp;quot;well here's an alternate approach to X that isn't a tool per se...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-12-09T13:56:06.630" LastActivityDate="2021-12-09T13:56:06.630" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5881" CreationDate="2015-10-26T12:06:47.927" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tool-Recs should be &lt;em&gt;off topic&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[this is a &lt;em&gt;verbatim&lt;/em&gt; copy of my earlier post. I was encouraged to port it over here so that it'd be part of this conversation, though I've not yet re-addressed @Doppelgreener's particular (and proper) formulation. -nitsua60, 10/26/15]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've come around on this one during the last two weeks. I initially was very surprised to see tool-rec questions' ground fall out from under them; I'd not understood the rec-policy well enough while discussing game-rec to understand both would fall.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But a week of reflection and reading has convinced me that an explicit exception to the recommendation ban is unnecessary. In particular, TuggyNE's link to (an answer to) &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/185486&quot;&gt;Why are &amp;quot;shopping list&amp;quot; questions bad?&lt;/a&gt; helped me see how much better a hypothetical tool-rec question becomes if simply cast as a problem-question. &lt;em&gt;I.e.&lt;/em&gt; a &amp;quot;How can I do &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot; question rather than a &amp;quot;What's the best tool to do &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't had any sort of privileges long enough to understand why and how the exception it's a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; thing; but I &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;assume good faith&lt;/a&gt; and believe those longer-time users who say it's a lot of work to curate/moderate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe we can still help those querents get good answers, inherently improve the questions, and make less work for mods, by rejecting a tool-rec exception to the rec-ban. (Or by not creating a new local permission for tool-rec questions, however you like to think of it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My takeaway:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;A tool-rec can still be part of an &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt;; it shouldn't be a requirement in the &lt;strong&gt;question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-10-26T12:43:50.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5888" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5845" CreationDate="2015-11-05T20:29:11.513" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/house%20rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;House rules&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; are defined as what rules are in play at a given location or house, suchs as a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cactusbingosupply.com/bingo-house-rules/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;bingo hall&lt;/a&gt;, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.cartercasino.com/casino/house-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;casino&lt;/a&gt; or a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.melikamp.com/features/house-poker-rules.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;poker game at someones house&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/variant-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variant rules&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is the term since at least the 3rd edition of Dungeons and Dragons for optional rules different from the core rules. &lt;strong&gt;Optional rules&lt;/strong&gt; could work too, however, at the point the point they are an established house rule, they are no longer optional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/home%20brew&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Homebrew&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; literally means an alcoholic beverage brewed at your home, but generally means content you created. Although my homebrew is not your homebrew, collectively this content is homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/third-party&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Third Party&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; means a creation by a publisher intended to be compatible with a product by another publisher.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus a variant rule or optional rule can come from the publisher (first party), be a homebrew creation by the game master (second party) or come from a third party (third party publisher or a homebrewed option from another source than the second party). Whether or not any given rule is in effect is governed by the house rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/variant-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Unearthed Arcana: Variant Rules&amp;quot; from 2015 by Mike Mearls&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this month’s Unearthed Arcana, we’re showing off a few &lt;strong&gt;variant rules&lt;/strong&gt; that you can use in your campaigns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Up for discussion are the &lt;strong&gt;options&lt;/strong&gt; of [...].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The material presented in Unearthed Arcana will range from mechanics that we expect one day to publish in a supplement to &lt;strong&gt;house rules from our home campaigns&lt;/strong&gt; [...].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9671" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-05T05:22:51.357" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="5889" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5890" CreationDate="2015-11-07T03:07:44.890" Score="8" ViewCount="261" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31083/how-can-i-find-dice-shops&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which lay dormant since 2013 but was recently dug up and answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this question should have been closed, as the answer can totally be gotten by googling &quot;dice/gaming shops in (wherever)&quot;.  So, I tried to flag it for closing, but none of the criteria fit.  I then scanned the relevant Help pages to see if such questions were off-topic here, and came up empty, and also checked here on Meta (cursorily searched for &quot;Google&quot;) and came up with a related question that implied that while such questions were of poor quality, letting the user know that they could have Googled it was a sufficient answer.  In the end I just downvoted it for &quot;lack of research&quot; as per the tooltip and left it at that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was that the proper response, or &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; such questions be closed?  I feel like it's one thing if the user is looking for information that would be linked to via Google, like a gaming SRD, then the notion that the SE page on such a topic coming up first via Googling the topic is fine, but when the answer is literally a region-specific list of results gotten from Google itself, not so much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15113" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-11-07T18:26:25.810" Title="How should we handle &quot;Let me Google that for you&quot;-type questions?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5889" CreationDate="2015-11-07T03:16:38.410" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8724/how-should-we-deal-with-google-questions&quot;&gt;We accept such questions.&lt;/a&gt; (That's a link to the Meta.SE FAQ entry on this subject.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In part, we do because we &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; the content that Google serves up, and if we can provide better content or a better synthesis of content than what a current Google search turns up, we will have magically improved future Google results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In part, we do because we also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5280/embrace-the-non-googlers&quot;&gt;embrace the non-Googler&lt;/a&gt;. Google is a giant on the Internet, and so not everyone wants to put all their eggs in that one basket. Local, domain-specific knowledge-bases like RPG.se provide a way for knowledge to spread and be accessed without assuming everyone will/can/wants to rely on Google as their single choke-point to information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/8726&quot;&gt;how to answer such questions&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Either answer nothing, or give a correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no need to chastise the asker for not trying Google. (Note in particular that &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/15650/ban-lmgtfy-let-me-google-that-for-you-links&quot;&gt;the network has banned LMGTFY links&lt;/a&gt;.) Of course, trivial questions might still earn downvotes for not showing any research effort, but warranting a downvote isn't the same thing as being closable. Your downvote-and-move-on response was exactly right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-11-07T18:26:25.810" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5891" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" LastActivityDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5892" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" Score="0" Body="There's no Meta Meta Role-playing Games, so this tag is for discussing Meta Role-playing Games itself." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" LastActivityDate="2015-11-09T23:43:59.803" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5893" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-11-10T17:46:13.830" Score="26" ViewCount="1337" Body="&lt;p&gt;In our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;”, an answer was posted recently suggesting people might find 8chan a useful discussion site. The usual notes and warnings about *chans were given — radical anonymity is both a pro and a con, frothing creativity of all kinds, “lax” to non-existent moderation, illegal content, etc. — and some noises of distaste were made and downvotes cast, but on the whole it's a legitimate choice to spend one's time there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later, two issues of concern were brought up that brought into question — not the issue of personal choice — but of whether our community should be curating 8chan for our users:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Child pornography is apparently a thing there&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;GamerGate discussion is pervasive, due to it being founded as the place to go when GG discussion was banned at 4chan&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Among these two things, the moderation team is vastly more concerned with the kiddie porn issue — among illegal things that can be “laxly” permitted in an online community, that's one of the worst, and I put that mildly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due to these concerns the answer was deleted pending discussions. After consultations with SE staff, we were informed that we have no legal &lt;em&gt;requirement&lt;/em&gt; to ban linking to 8chan in general. That leaves whether we curate it or not up to us. We need to form a policy position on this matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(NB that linking &lt;em&gt;directly&lt;/em&gt; to sexual content is still an insta-suspension violation of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/legal/content-policy&quot;&gt;ToS&lt;/a&gt;, regardless. Direct linking is not at issue here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, granted that adults spending their time on any site is their free choice:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The individual right to choose doesn't require that &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; as a community must advertise/endorse all and every choice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not all our users are adults&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… what then is our position, as a community, on whether we should be including 8chan in a curated list of places &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; suggest people visit to have discussions about RPGs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community has the floor to speak on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-11-16T13:14:45.310" Title="Let's talk about 8chan" Tags="|discussion|policy|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5893" CreationDate="2015-11-10T18:04:40.117" Score="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I completely disagree with the notion that the list is “just a list” and that voting has no meaning there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The list is not just a list of random websites; it is a list of &lt;em&gt;our suggestions&lt;/em&gt;. Voting indicates (or should indicate) how much we, as a community, recommend a given website. Obviously, issues of differing topics mean that higher votes don’t strictly mean a better choice, or even a more-recommended choice for a particular purpose, but nonetheless a site with a decent number of upvotes should be one that we, as a community, feel is a good place to seek discussion of the topics the site covers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, a negative-vote suggestion is one that the community recommends &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt;. An entry saying “8chan exists, and we as a community recommend against going there,” is a reasonable judgment for us to make. Someone who chooses to go there anyway is not, I think, unduly attacked or judged by our recommendation against doing so. Statements about why we have recommended against it are not an attack on someone who chooses to go there anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, I don’t really see much &lt;em&gt;advantage&lt;/em&gt; in doing so. Personally, for a place like 8chan, I feel that there’s a risk of there being “no such thing as bad publicity,” and my preference would be to give them none. Our list is not in any way intended to be exhaustive. It’s clearly informal and subjective. We have no need to include 8chan on the list, and I don’t think we should.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2015-11-10T18:04:40.117" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5893" CreationDate="2015-11-10T18:40:56.150" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that we should not link to sites like 8chan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE is intended to be a SFW atmosphere, and on sites of that sort it's not like the bad content is truly restricted to areas outside the RPG sections we'd be linking to. The ToC directly bans linking to such content, but I think linking to pages where such content is likely to appear at some point is like unto it enough that it's imprudent. &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackexchange.com/legal/content-policy&quot;&gt;The SE Content Policy says&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sexually Explicit Material. Accounts that use Stack Exchange to post sexually explicit or pornographic material, or links to it, will be suspended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means that if that /tg (or whatever it is on 8chan, I try not to visit the chan sites) suddenly has bad stuff in it, and you've posted a link to a page that contains it, your account is at risk.  So I'd recommend not doing it and that we the community remove links to 8chan and sites of its nature as they come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-11-10T18:40:56.150" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5896" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6335" CreationDate="2015-11-10T19:04:43.997" Score="23" ViewCount="714" Body="&lt;h1&gt;MathJax Support has been enabled for RPG.se&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MathJax&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;MathJax&lt;/a&gt; support has been added to RPG.se. We should probably write up a guide on Meta for using it, but in the short version is that you can use &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt;…&lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt; to format the &lt;code&gt;…&lt;/code&gt; part using LaTeX's mathematics markup. In the meantime there is this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.martinkeefe.com/math/mathjax&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;MathJax Guide&lt;/a&gt; as a reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Original post:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The nature of tabletops overlaps a lot with statistics to the point where being able to simply write minor mathematical expressions would be beneficial to conveying simple mathematical explanations. For example, Math.SE has a plugin that allows for the direct in-line use of LaTeX math formatting within answer and comment texts, which they use to much success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70802/how-can-i-test-whether-a-die-is-fair/70803#70803&quot;&gt;Example Answer that could have benefited from LaTeX markup&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here we see a very beefy post about determining if a die is fair. This kind of post, though mathematically heavy, could be of importance to a vast portion of the RPG.SE audience. The construction of simple superscript and subscripts in LaTeX require only ^ and _. Where in RPG.SE currently, there is a need to apply html tags and italic markup to make expressions appear in math format proper, and even then it's difficult to get right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, those are the merits. Demerits would include the potential for the posts which contain the LaTeX equation bounding symbols (which are $ and $$) may end up wonkily applying math format to posts that did not intend it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to know how much a [item] costs in [system].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oh, it costs $100, but you can buy one during recessions for $50.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the above response, the LaTeX plugin will turn the section &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;100, but you can buy one during recessions for&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; into math format and treat anything within it as LaTeX markup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that such occurrences are rare, but I don't have a real basis for how often two dollar signs appear on the same line in answers or comments. Someone please feel free to prove me wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5896/latex-for-rpg-se-and-statistics-posts/5899#comment16627_5899&quot;&gt;In the comments, a solution has been found.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One can use other delimiters for in-line math mode, and SE already supports that. One site (economics?) already uses &lt;code&gt;\$...\$&lt;/code&gt; instead of &lt;code&gt;$...$&lt;/code&gt; for that reason. – Davide Cervone 2 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another demerit is that not many users of RPG.SE may be familiar with LaTeX already and will need to learn it to use it. This demerit is less of an issue as LaTeX is a very common markup with numerous resources available throughout the net. Not only that, but the mathematically-inclined users who want to use it, will most likely know LaTeX from their background.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, the introduction of LaTeX to the community where it would be used but currently isn't can't be expected to be enforced. If unknowledgeable users continue to mark-up math as 1 / (6^4) for the probability of getting four sixes on 4d6, would users be expected to edit the posts to wrap the math expressions in LaTeX?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that it would be a nice plugin to add to the community for when it's needed, and can't argue for the lack of it being a pervasive problem. Nevertheless, I'd like to open up the discussion about whether or not the community wants the plugin and how it should be handled if added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is my first time writing a serious meta post, if I'm remembering correctly, so bear with me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14873" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T12:29:15.643" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T12:29:15.643" Title="MathJax (LaTeX equations) for RPG.SE and Statistics Posts" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|mathjax|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5897" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5896" CreationDate="2015-11-10T19:50:46.557" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I support this. MathJax would &lt;em&gt;extensively&lt;/em&gt; help &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5896/mathjax-latex-equations-for-rpg-se-and-statistics-posts/5900#5900&quot;&gt;a lot of our posts&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Server-side performance&lt;/strong&gt; isn't an issue because we're a small SE, like others that already have MathJax enabled.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Client-side performance&lt;/strong&gt; isn't an issue because it's pretty fast, as demonstrated by those same small SEs that enjoy MathJax.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clearly-presented equations are &lt;strong&gt;topically relevant&lt;/strong&gt;, since we accept questions about statistics of complex dice mechanics, character build performance modelling, and the like.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's possible to implement with &lt;strong&gt;backwards compatibility&lt;/strong&gt; — without breaking existing posts that include multiple &lt;code&gt;$&lt;/code&gt; on the same line — since MathJax supports customising the delimiter. (The most sensible one for our purpose might be &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt;?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most critically, it would be &lt;strong&gt;useful&lt;/strong&gt; at RPG.se since we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5896/mathjax-latex-equations-for-rpg-se-and-statistics-posts/5900#5900&quot;&gt;a significant number of posts that would be substantially improved&lt;/a&gt;, just waiting to be made amazing with MathJax formatting. MathJax would let us get rid of our last remaining pockets of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/135112/inline-code-spans-should-not-be-used-for-emphasis-right&quot;&gt;misused code formatting&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the cost is negligible and the benefits are significant, there's little reason to not use the right tool for the job. Let's enable MathJax at RPG.se!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-06-02T21:33:18.250" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5896" CreationDate="2015-11-11T00:23:47.240" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, some performance impact (any) and user confusion (any) is a higher cost than the benefit of LaTeX notation on the tiny handful of questions where it could apply (and of that tiny handful, how many posters will go to the trouble to learn and use it?).  A possible incremental benefit on literally 5 or less Q's needs a flat zero cost to even entertain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-11-11T00:23:47.240" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5896" CreationDate="2015-11-11T11:58:25.427" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mathjax would be pretty cool. It's only relevant to a tiny portion of our questions though, so it had better have a &lt;em&gt;completely negiligible cost&lt;/em&gt; to the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One factor is performance impacts. I'll get to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/252284/254830&quot;&gt;one answer&lt;/a&gt; suggests that something like &quot;$100 is great, $200 is too much&quot; would partially become MathJax. That's insane and bad, especially when our Markdown convention suggests &lt;code&gt;*this *&lt;/code&gt; should never become italicised. That's a big usability negative for our crowd more concerned with talking about game currency and the prices of real-world products than complex mathematical formulae, which is most of them. That makes for a total no-go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When &lt;code&gt;$something like this$&lt;/code&gt;, no spaces either side, is the only way to get something parsed as markdown, then I'll consider that penalty nonexistent. (And it'll show the people who write &quot;100$&quot; what-for. Get with the convention, you reprobates!) Alternately, Davide mentions in comments that alternate delimiters like &lt;code&gt;\$ ... \$&lt;/code&gt; get used on some sites - this will work better for us too, 'cause who writes &quot;\$&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, performance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The performance penalty's bad, but it's only present on first load. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/252283/254830&quot;&gt;original conversation on featuring it on SO&lt;/a&gt; mentions a ~300ms additional delay when MathJax is present, which is a lot in web terms. (The first five or so seconds are &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; important; some people will decide whether to close our tab in less than that time.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not clear what the stats would be now two years later though: DNS was a huge contributor to that delay, and that 300ms is more like 250ms when you notice that &lt;em&gt;their own ad engine&lt;/em&gt; accounted for an extra ~50ms load time. They also describe MathJax's config load as &quot;blocking&quot; &amp;mdash; I don't know what they're seeing that I'm not, but the very graph cited seems to show concurrent downloads happening and the config not blocking much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowadays I suspect we can also use &lt;a href=&quot;http://caniuse.com/#feat=script-async&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;async script loading&lt;/a&gt; which will eliminate anything related to slowing down initial page load times. Page loads, MathJax loads a few hundred milliseconds after that or whenever's convenient. (If I'm understanding the async spec correctly?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-17T10:37:54.603" LastActivityDate="2015-11-12T07:41:44.067" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5896" CreationDate="2015-11-13T18:56:43.383" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a community-wiki post that everyone can edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its purpose is to compile a list of RPG.se answers that would significantly benefit from LaTeX markup, as part of the use-case argument for enabling MathJax here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shog9 &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/1438/mathjax-on-codereview#comment4244_1443&quot;&gt;said&lt;/a&gt; in response to the &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/1438/mathjax-on-codereview&quot;&gt;Code Review request to enable MathJax&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Unless there's a large population of posts that could benefit &lt;em&gt;extensively&lt;/em&gt; from it, there's no need to impose the cost on the rest of the posts. A few subscripts don't really necessitate this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They then compiled a list of answers that would benefit significantly from MathJax support, and the request was eventually implemented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to do our own due diligence and legwork!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;List of answers that would improve with MathJax&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70802/how-can-i-test-whether-a-die-is-fair/70803#70803&quot;&gt;How can I test whether a die is fair?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68938/can-i-randomly-determine-the-outcome-of-an-event-with-5-outcomes-with-a-d6/68966#68966&quot;&gt;Can I randomly determine the outcome of an event with 5 outcomes with a d6?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/67009#67009&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/66963#66963&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62736/calculating-6d6-similar-to-poker-dice/62741#62741&quot;&gt;Calculating 6D6 similar to poker dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62526/how-to-model-a-dice-pool-with-re-rolls-mechanic/62537#62537&quot;&gt;How to model a dice pool with re-rolls mechanic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59900/dice-probabilities-when-rolling-more-dice-than-needed/63789#63789&quot;&gt;Dice probabilities when rolling more dice than needed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58530/dealing-with-large-amount-of-dice-rolls-for-a-single-damage-roll-without-making/68351#68351&quot;&gt;Dealing with large amount of dice rolls for a single damage roll without making it drag on&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55911/using-anydice-to-determine-the-odds-of-getting-a-specific-number-sequence-on-mul/55917#55917&quot;&gt;Using AnyDice to determine the odds of getting a specific number sequence on multiple dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55911/using-anydice-to-determine-the-odds-of-getting-a-specific-number-sequence-on-mul/55913#55913&quot;&gt;Using AnyDice to determine the odds of getting a specific number sequence on multiple dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55720/what-is-the-average-roll-of-a-die-with-an-expanded-explosion-threshold-as-compar/56398#56398&quot;&gt;What is the average roll of a die with an expanded explosion threshold as compared to one with an expanded success threshold?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49710/dice-pool-success-probability-with-one-exploding-die/49714#49714&quot;&gt;Dice pool success probability with one exploding die&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33935/when-rolling-percentages-do-1d100-and-two-d10s-percentiles-share-the-same-pro/33973#33973&quot;&gt;When rolling percentages, do 1d100 and two d10s (percentiles) share the same probabilities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3274/are-earthdawns-dice-mechanics-as-unfair-and-wonky-as-my-player-claims/3280#3280&quot;&gt;Are Earthdawn&amp;#39;s dice mechanics as unfair and wonky as my player claims?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3274/are-earthdawns-dice-mechanics-as-unfair-and-wonky-as-my-player-claims/3276#3276&quot;&gt;Are Earthdawn&amp;#39;s dice mechanics as unfair and wonky as my player claims?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1528/what-is-the-statistically-superior-character-creation-method-twelve-3d6-or-six/2826#2826&quot;&gt;What is the statistically superior character creation method, twelve 3d6 or six 4d6?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59336/does-a-roleplaying-game-that-uses-continuous-probability-exist/59395#59395&quot;&gt;Does a roleplaying game that uses continuous probability exist?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48988/how-to-calculate-the-expected-damage-increase-from-empowered-spell/48996#48996&quot;&gt;How to calculate the expected damage increase from Empowered Spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average/61778#61778&quot;&gt;How much damage does Great Weapon Fighting add on average?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average/47173#47173&quot;&gt;How much damage does Great Weapon Fighting add on average?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44347/how-do-you-calculate-the-odds-of-success-for-an-ability-contest/44349#44349&quot;&gt;How do you calculate the odds of success for an ability contest&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44207/how-do-you-calculate-an-average-damage-when-damage-is-conditional-on-circumstanc/44210#44210&quot;&gt;How do you calculate an average damage when damage is conditional on circumstances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities/41385#41385&quot;&gt;Considering Complex Dice Roll Probabilities&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34190/how-do-i-calculate-the-chance-of-hits/44896#44896&quot;&gt;How do I calculate the chance of hits?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12953/whats-the-probability-curve-of-the-d10-storytelling-system/12968#12968&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the probability curve of the D10 Storytelling System?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7233/what-is-the-formula-for-average-damage-for-an-avenger-against-an-oath-target/7246#7246&quot;&gt;What is the formula for average damage for an Avenger against an Oath target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7233/what-is-the-formula-for-average-damage-for-an-avenger-against-an-oath-target/7244#7244&quot;&gt;What is the formula for average damage for an Avenger against an Oath target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74506/does-concentrate-poison-stack/74510#74510&quot;&gt;Does Concentrate Poison Stack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75954/how-far-do-you-fall-a-turn/75955#75955&quot;&gt;How far do you fall per turn?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55720/what-is-the-average-roll-of-a-die-with-an-expanded-explosion-threshold-as-compar/76073#76073&quot;&gt;What is the average roll of a die with an expanded explosion threshold as compared to one with an expanded success threshold?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75940/experience-point-calculation-for-encounters/76089#76089&quot;&gt;Experience point calculation for encounters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69064/is-unearthed-arcana-players-make-all-rolls-correct/69067#69067&quot;&gt;Is &amp;quot;Unearthed Arcana: Players Make All Rolls&amp;quot; Correct?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76318/what-is-the-formula-for-calculating-in-system-traveling-time/76319#76319&quot;&gt;What is the formula for calculating in-system traveling time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57165/what-happens-when-you-run-out-of-movement-while-jumping/76580#76580&quot;&gt;What happens when you run out of movement while jumping?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76958/what-is-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves/76959#76959&quot;&gt;What is the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76958/what-is-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves/76983#76983&quot;&gt;What is the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/66963#66963&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/67009#67009&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79841/what-is-the-maximum-number-of-simulacra-i-can-have/79844#79844&quot;&gt;What is the maximum number of Simulacra I can have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79942/what-is-your-chance-to-win-in-a-contest-where-you-have-advantage-and-your-oppone/79949#79949&quot;&gt;What is your chance to win in a contest where you have advantage and your opponent has disadvantage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79942/what-is-your-chance-to-win-in-a-contest-where-you-have-advantage-and-your-oppone/79949#79949&quot;&gt;What is your chance to win in a contest where you have advantage and your opponent has disadvantage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80246/how-many-rolls-does-it-take-to-get-to-six-coins/80248#80248&quot;&gt;How many rolls does it take to get to six coins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80246/how-many-rolls-does-it-take-to-get-to-six-coins/80263#80263&quot;&gt;How many rolls does it take to get to six coins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Deleted answers and answers with trivial uses of mathematical notation (i.e., MathJax would likely not improve clarity) have been skipped. Answers to closed questions have been included.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-05-17T15:45:19.030" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2015-11-13T19:36:31.067" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5901" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5893" CreationDate="2015-11-13T23:38:20.287" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we ought to let the list and users' votes speak for themselves. In a list curated by users for users with a strict voting system, I think potentially any website is fair game. If the community agrees that 8chan is not place we want to link to, the votes should reflect that. KRyan put it well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The list is not just a list of random websites; it is a list of our suggestions. Voting indicates (or should indicate) how much we, as a community, recommend a given website...As such, a negative-vote suggestion is one that the community recommends &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, given that information, it shouldn't really matter &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; we link them to, the votes will reflect the community's general attitude to both the site and the answer that contains the site (your suggestion should include reasons why 8chan is good, why it is bad, and especially mention the risks of child pornography). We can always remove largely negative suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the concern for child pornography, I think your question is moot. Whatever we vote here will be largely the same of what's voted on the list. But, there &lt;strong&gt;IS&lt;/strong&gt; the concern there, so lets dive into that. As others have noted, it's not necessarily illegal or against TOS to link to 8chan. Potentially dangerous, but a valid entry. In the interest of fairness and objectivity, we can't in good conscience eliminate a list item &lt;em&gt;if the community thinks it's a valid list item.&lt;/em&gt; If the community feels like linking to potential CP is not what it wants to suggest, let the vote reflect that. If you disagree, well......vote! We need not make this more convoluted for the sake of it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, given that, let's look at the guidelines for a list item&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Write answers with an eye to redirecting an off-topic question asker.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;  The answers should quickly help someone decide where to take their&#xA;  closed question. Focus on creating a collection of signposts to help&#xA;  them choose the best site for their current question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you've mentioned, complete anonymity has it's risks and rewards, as does the lack of moderation. Sometimes people make long questions that are really just rants or just a means to really explain what this issue is to themselves, and there are several good websites for that behavior, one of which is 8chan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Avoid answers that focus on suggesting a forum for its own sake, or&#xA;  just exist because you think it's a good site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a valid complaint against 8chan. We shouldn't list it as an option for the sake of it. Why is it good? why is it bad?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not all playstyles and personality types are good fits for every one&#xA;  of these forums; try to indicate the kind of player they cater to&#xA;  without being hostile/judgemental if that's not your cup of tea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the key, here. If SE isn't the website for this person, we ought to direct them to a potential site that is, or a website that can answer their specific question. 8chan is for sure a website where you can vent your frustrations in whatever language you please, and I'm personally an advocate for letting steam out in the right places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;, we ought to allow that entry as a valid option.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not the community thinks so is up to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a personal note, I don't know what 8chan can offer than 4chan can't, besides a particularly different set of people, and 4chan is closely moderated for illegal activity. As someone that has spent a significant amount of time there since 2009, it has its drawbacks and its benefits. If I want unfiltered opinions, that's a good place to ask an opinionated question. If I want any given question I have to be measured by its attention and not its score (every post bumps, so even a community that largely disagrees with you pushes the question to the top with every post, so you can garner a lot of opinions as long as people are talking, versus a site like reddit, where dissenting opinions can often get lost or deleted), I can post there. If I want broader guidelines of what constitutes an RPG question, I can go there. I would upvote a suggestion for 4chan's /tg/ on certain grounds, but personally not 8chan. That does not change the fact that I think we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; suggest 8chan if the community &lt;em&gt;wants&lt;/em&gt; to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19464" LastEditorUserId="19464" LastEditDate="2015-11-14T16:02:54.283" LastActivityDate="2015-11-14T16:02:54.283" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5893" CreationDate="2015-11-16T13:14:45.310" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say &lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;, but not for the reasons listed. I frequent 8chan's /tg/ (Traditional Games) board, which covers roleplaying games. And while there is plenty of enjoyment to be had there, it is not the most optimal place to ask your in-depth questions. Sure, there are topics for questions but a good number of them are ignored or are given conflicting or incorrect answers (or you get called slang for a cigarette).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am aware of 8chan's polarizing nature and the controversy surrounding it. This can result in people downvoting anything that contains a link to it. I do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; believe that &quot;people do not like this place&quot; is a valid reason to not link to a website. By that logic, we should not link to forums over at Giant in the Playground because there are quite a few people who do not like Order of the Stick, or not allow links to the Brilliant Gameologists boards because people do not like character optimization. Regarding the two posts in the question however:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Child pornography is a very serious issue and deleted on sight by the staff of both the boards themselves and the global staff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;GamerGate has nothing to do with the subject of roleplaying games. While there are other boards than /tg/ that discus the subject in depth, aside from the occational mentioning by users in a number of topics this is not the main subject of discussion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So these two have no bearing on the descision whether to link to 8chan. However, it is true that there are topics that include images of a graphic (sexual) nature. Board policy is that these are behind spoilers, so a user has to click a spoiler image (which is marked as such) to see the image. Unless the name of the image is an accurate description of what is behind the spoiler (or is false) this can end up with the reader get a screen full of genetalia. It is also correct that there are topics that share illegal copies of a variety of games and other sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the last two reasons are valid reasons to not link to 8chan as a place to discus things because of the rules and the spirit of Stack Exchange, I believe that the issue of the quality of the discussions on there an the focus on the questions at hand is a reason &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; to send people to 8chan. As such, I believe that asking questions that cannot be answered here should be asked somewhere else than 8chan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12455" LastActivityDate="2015-11-16T13:14:45.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5903" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-11-17T20:36:25.957" Score="11" ViewCount="398" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a type of question that sits right on the edge of our old game-recommendations set of questions: the “does it exist?” question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Viewed in one light, these are just game recs in sheep's clothing. In another light, they're asking for a discrete piece of knowledge about our field, not for us to tell them what game choose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So these present us with an uncomfortable corner case that isn't always clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One example that was contentious early after overturning our special permission for game recs was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68509/is-there-a-xianxia-role-playing-game&quot;&gt;Is there a xianxia role playing game?&lt;/a&gt; It's very much on this border, but the overt question is just “does this exist?” It's not overtly looking for recommendations of games, just for knowledge of whether it's a genre that has even appeared in the realm of roleplaying games. That would seem OK, wouldn't it? On the other hand, the worry (as the worry was then) is that it would just become a slowly-expanding list of every Xianxia RPG, as more are published, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/real-questions-have-answers/&quot;&gt;no way of meaningfully voting on the answers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example is today's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71167/is-there-a-generic-rulebook-for-powered-by-apocalypse&quot;&gt;Is there a generic rulebook for Powered by Apocalypse?&lt;/a&gt;, which I answered before even recognising that it was a question living inside this corner case. “I know &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; answer to that!” was what I was thinking, knowing that there's only one answer. And the question is, like the other, asking only for existence, not recommendation. What is the difference, then? A differences, I suppose, is that this question is asking for the (assumed) existence of a &lt;em&gt;singular&lt;/em&gt; game (a generic edition of Apocalypse World), which doesn't hint at an expanding list — and yet, it could still gather a list, so is that difference significant or superficial?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know. But I wonder if we &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; have room for “game existence” questions, or at least a subset of them that are safely on this side of some kind of line, where the line is defined by the other extreme of existence questions that are just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3398/whats-so-problematic-about-a-recommendation-question-having-potentially-hundred&quot;&gt;looking to compile a list of games that they can browse at their leisure&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you all think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2015-11-17T21:49:28.290" Title="Can we ask about the existence of a game?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5904" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-11-17T20:56:03.377" Score="10" ViewCount="466" Body="&lt;p&gt;I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/71169/revisions&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form&lt;/a&gt;), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second.&#xA;Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is: shouldn't mods consider &quot;hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place&quot;, instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user24050" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:01:37.307" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:01:37.307" Title="Why'd my second question get removed when surely people would be thinking about both?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|question-scope|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5904" CreationDate="2015-11-17T21:16:44.810" Score="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't agree that &quot;anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I do agree that anyone asking the first would likely benefit from seeing an answer to the second. That's why I hope you post the second question separately and slap a &quot;related question:...&quot; link onto each of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The benefit I see to splitting them is that someone searching for your Wild Shape+hit die question is more likely to be able to find it through search if it's separately posed, rather than as a tag-along to a Wild Shape+healing magic question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2015-11-17T21:16:44.810" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5903" CreationDate="2015-11-17T21:36:42.483" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;To my dismay, I think &quot;Does X exist?&quot; is &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; a very poor fit for our site. I'm not advocating a blanket ban, but they should be looked at carefully because they often fail to meet existing site definitions of Good Questions. This sort of question tends to suffer from not explaining the problem the querent is trying to solve; I'll talk about why that makes 'em hard to answer in a way the site will find useful, and how there's an existing solution to this problem when it arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I don't give an example to support an answer of &quot;yes,&quot; then most affirmative answers to this sort of question wind up being just a terse unadorned &quot;Yes, X exists.&quot; That's not the quality of information this site wants to accumulate. Answers should provide support for their conclusions; we frown on &quot;left as an exercise for the reader&quot; implications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However! If I do give an example to support an answer of &quot;yes,&quot; then it quickly becomes indistinguishable from a recommendation that doesn't explain about why that particular thing is being recommended. Each answer mentioning a different example can be equally right and the voting breaks down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often these questions are also running afoul of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/4398&quot;&gt;failing to understand the scope of the RPG landscape&lt;/a&gt;. It's very difficult to prove a negative, and while these answers can sometimes be useful, they're also contentious and easily toppled by someone with a better Google result: answering &quot;no&quot; to the question of whether something exists, without knowing what the thing is to be used for, is liable to wind up being wrong without its wrongness adding value to the site. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1476/4398&quot;&gt;We already know not to answer these questions until their scope is narrowed.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while I don't think we should ban all &quot;Does X exist?&quot; questions at this time, we should keep an eye on them and suggest that querents &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5788/4398&quot;&gt;rephrase the request as a problem to be solved&lt;/a&gt;. This is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5883/4398&quot;&gt;a solution we're already implementing&lt;/a&gt; for tool recommendation questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-11-17T21:49:28.290" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5904" CreationDate="2015-11-18T05:16:33.703" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;The biggest benefits here have little to do with questions.  It's about the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) When I post an answer to a 'question' that's actually a bunch of related questions, I have to address them all (at least, if I want to be a good site member); that's more work for me, not always possible to format smoothly, particularly if your 'related' questions turn out not to be related after all, and &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; when they're only related by a 'people are probably thinking about this now, right?' kind of logic train.  This makes your question harder to answer, but it's not because your question is &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NintendoHard&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;uniquely challenging&lt;/a&gt;, it's because &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;your question sucks&lt;/a&gt; (warning: TV tropes links.  The analogy is, in fact, illustrative, though, so I suggest you read the article intros at least).  This is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) When I post an excellent answer to a question, I am rewarded by upvotes.  When I answer any number of related questions posted as a single question, I still get one upvote.  That is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) When I am reading an answer, I have three primary voting options: upvote, downvote, or don't vote.  When an answer actually is a single answer, deciding what to do is easy; I upvote it if it's useful/right/etc, downvote it if it's bad/wrong/etc, and don't vote if I'm not expert enough to tell the difference/need clarification/etc.  If your question forces answers to have multiple parts, it is &lt;em&gt;normally the case&lt;/em&gt; that I find myself wanting to upvote an answer for one part, but wanting to downvote/abstain due to another.  This is one of the biggest cited reasons not to do the 'related question' thing, and, while the same thing can happen even on regular questions, substantially increasing the risk of putting voters through this is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) When I post questions like this (We higher-rep people do things wrong, sometimes, too), I usually find (at least) one of my questions ignored, in favor of another one, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70933/is-baleful-polymorph-really-this-weak&quot;&gt;as in this case&lt;/a&gt; (the top answer is just straight up not an answer to the question at all; ignore that one.  The rest are good examples, though).  This is frustrating, and while it usually feels like the answerers are the ones doing things wrong, the blame shouldn't be entirely on them; I should have posted the question as separate real questions to start off with.  Not doing so is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5) Answers are supposed to stand on their own.  When I answer a question like this, I may find myself needing to repeat an entire other answer in whole or long-part, because &lt;em&gt;it is the right answer&lt;/em&gt; to most of the question.  This makes my answer more of a comment on a part of that answer and there is no real good way of dealing with that when my answer is &lt;em&gt;completely&lt;/em&gt; identical for entire questions.  Leaving a comment &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; work, but it doesn't if the answerer is not persuaded by my arguments, and I shouldn't be using comment-arguments to persuade an answerer to change their mind anyways, ideally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, basically: &lt;strong&gt;No, we should not change the policy here&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. We &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; the mods and we &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; the policy.  I mean, there are elected mods, too, but even more than SE in general, this site is really and truly community moderated.  SSD is an elected mod, but the editing of your question was well within the purview of regular normal user activity.  Not trying to call you out or anything, just a heads up, in case you hadn't realized how we do moderation around here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Separately, &lt;em&gt;deleting&lt;/em&gt; a question because of this is excessive and silly, and that probably shouldn't be happening, so I'm with you on that one.  Locking makes sense in a content dispute, and deleting makes sense for old questions that we have reason to believe are abandoned, but it's very scary-looking and not something we should be doing without serious consideration, even if it is easy to reverse.  But I, at least, haven't ever seen a question &lt;em&gt;deleted&lt;/em&gt; because of this without signs of abandonment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T09:19:50.323" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5908" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5910" CreationDate="2015-11-18T09:41:35.443" Score="4" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am a bit confused about what to do with my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71156/optimizing-torso-body-slot-when-restricted-to-light-armor-no-metal-with-high-wi&quot;&gt;Optimizing Torso/Body slot when restricted to light armor, no metal with high WIS&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was expecting the answerers to suggest cool items existing in the books for the torso/body slot with specific properties that you can't get with the standard magic item creation rules. Instead of that, the two answerers focused almost uniquely on those rules and uniquely for amors, while my mood was more like &quot;&lt;em&gt;Ok, except if there exists an exceptional armor especially fitted for the situation, they probably will suggest me good vests or robes&lt;/em&gt;&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I enjoyed reading their suggestion about using an alternative material similar to mithral, I can't really accept it because even if it is technically legal by RAW, it breaks the spirit of the rule:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Her ethos requires a certain vulnerability that allows her to more&#xA;  fully empathize with those in their care&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the matter is not about not being able to using metal in which case using a material with similar properties would be ok. The matter is about keeping a certain vulnerability. So from my point of view I can't accept any of the answers. But the two people who answered already helped me a lot in the past with other questions I asked and I don't want to direspect them. Plus since english is not my mother language, I think I might have not used the good words to express the question I had in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what should I do now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Accept one answer and ask another question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other possibility?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10684" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T13:38:19.380" Title="Did I really asked how to get around Healers Armor limitations?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5904" CreationDate="2015-11-18T09:42:12.617" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Piggybacking makes it easier to accidentally stumble across questions we didn't know to ask, but makes it harder to find questions we're deliberately searching for. However, that doesn't mean we miss out on stumbling across related questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When two questions are intimately &lt;em&gt;connected&lt;/em&gt; such that each can't be wholly answered without addressing the other, they should obviously be united as one question; two questions that are closely &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt; but could be answered wholly if kept separate, should generally be kept apart to make it easier to find them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the good news: there's a &quot;Related Questions&quot; sidebar on every question page. It's pretty good at finding related questions! This is the mechanic you're looking for to find questions that you wouldn't have thought to ask on a subject you're already curious about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-11-18T09:55:08.623" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T09:55:08.623" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5908" CreationDate="2015-11-18T10:03:19.770" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You didn't &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; ask for loopholes, and if you don't want them then you probably should edit your question to explicitly tell people that there's any particular kind of answer you are disinclined to consider. Phrases like &quot;optimise&quot; tend to be interpreted as &quot;anything goes if the rules say it's okay.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing your question like that won't keep folks from suggesting such loopholes, but it does mean &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4398&quot;&gt;they should probably first spend a little effort showing why other answers aren't available&lt;/a&gt;. Chances are they don't know of any way to solve your problem without this bypass technique, but they don't see any need to demonstrate that lack before launching into an alternate solution because both options will seem equally desirable if you haven't made your aversion to the bypass solution explicit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T11:01:08.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5908" CreationDate="2015-11-18T13:38:19.380" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;All that BESW said, plus:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's in no way disrespectful to not accept one of the answers. If the answers don't answer &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; question--even if you fear that it's because you didn't state it clearly enough--then don't accept them. No one should take offense at that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you do edit the question to clarify it might be nice to drop a comment on each answer indicating such, so as to give the answerers a &quot;fair&quot; chance at modifying their answers into one that does answer your question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2015-11-18T13:38:19.380" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5912" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-11-18T15:19:57.797" Score="19" ViewCount="865" Body="&lt;p&gt;You may have noticed some updates to the design lately, they are part of a SE network-wide update to a new base css framework.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The updates allow us to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have sharper / more beautiful design on retina displays&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fix layout bugs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More easily add new features to all of our sites in the future&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But more importantly, it gives you access &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current&quot;&gt;to the new profile&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see any bugs please let us know in the form of answers (to this post) that illustrate one particular thing at a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25876" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-04-03T08:34:02.180" Title="Updates to the site" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="14" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="499" CreationDate="2015-11-21T16:38:20.893" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Maintenance is one's responsibility only insofar as&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one cares about avoiding downvotes for an out-of-date answer, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one wants edits to the answer to be in one's own voice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one doesn't care about either of those (which is just fine if so!), then one doesn't have to maintain one's answers. Others will grade it with votes, update it with edits, or both in an author's absence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words it's only a responsibility to oneself, not an obligation to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-11-21T16:53:32.827" LastActivityDate="2015-11-21T16:53:32.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3669" CreationDate="2015-11-23T10:56:21.070" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thank you, SE devs! With &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5912/1204&quot;&gt;the redesign&lt;/a&gt; (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5923/1204&quot;&gt;some prodding from KRyan&lt;/a&gt;) we finally have well-spaced headings and a distinctive H3 for the first time! &lt;sub&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(since beta)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not it suits our individual tastes it's a huge improvement and makes using all three heading levels viable. I'm happy, and this is just personal but I think the Georgia font is more gorgeous in headings than what we had before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Quisque sed lectus id augue vehicula pharetra.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Heading 1&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec commodo vel ipsum id mollis. Integer ut consectetur eros, ac semper dolor. Etiam eu diam pellentesque, scelerisque ex id, tincidunt arcu. Curabitur at dapibus sapien. Nullam imperdiet enim nec felis cursus, vel euismod erat mattis. Sed eu vehicula nunc. Sed sapien arcu, lacinia quis cursus et, vulputate id nulla.In molestie purus quis felis rhoncus euismod. Aenean id ultrices velit, et rutrum nibh.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Heading 2&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Nulla facilisi. Nulla ac congue enim. Donec finibus porttitor ipsum et tempus. Mauris molestie quam justo, non mollis nisi interdum quis. Donec laoreet blandit sapien, at porttitor nisl viverra vel. Sed sit amet tortor imperdiet, elementum metus nec, euismod tortor. Cras et leo et tellus euismod dapibus vel eget sapien. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Heading 3&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Vivamus ultrices quam tortor, molestie hendrerit augue consectetur ac. Curabitur nisl tellus, faucibus dapibus velit in, sollicitudin imperdiet eros. Etiam pulvinar pharetra eros, ut hendrerit velit finibus ac. Phasellus quam ante, lacinia et augue a, iaculis suscipit nisi. Aenean eget justo eget est aliquet eleifend. Donec tincidunt mi a dui faucibus, et molestie turpis blandit. Ut consectetur neque eu magna imperdiet, sed faucibus est vestibulum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jTOHym.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jTOHym.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;thank you!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(also the rest of the design is looking pretty beautiful too)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-11-29T14:15:53.623" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T11:19:15.350" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; We've got rid of Lucitana font and replaced it with Georgia. We haven't changed font size yet, only font face, because we want to see how this gonna work and if it's enough. You will see updated font with upcoming build on production.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Lucitana 12px: super tiny text in a whole lot of places.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bunch of places have acquired inconveniently tiny text as a result of Lucitana becoming the standard body font at 12px. It's an unusually tiny font; its 12px is more like 9&amp;half;px. The newly ensmallened text going to prove hard to read for some people, it's uncharacteristically tiny for a Stack Exchange page, and in some places it looks kinda ugly. Wherever it's bolded, the individual characters turn a bit blobby and become harder to distinguish from each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could benefit from Lucitana being bumped up to 14px, or switching to Georgia for the main body font.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Sidebar&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It becomes clear here that Lucitana's so tiny it's losing fidelity: the 'e' is missing its gap, the 't' and 'x' are getting wonky, and combinations like 'Fi' (the very last sentence in the last linked post) just look weird.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LJ1EK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LJ1EK.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's set to Georgia, the font used for posts like the one you're reading right now, it's far more legible and looks much better:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R4tsu.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R4tsu.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Elsewhere in the site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jTQoQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jTQoQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DhiUY.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DhiUY.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jmf4I.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jmf4I.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Eqnxk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Eqnxk.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other impacted spots that could definitely do with larger text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Close vote dialog.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A lot of the text in our profile pages: the 'Main User' &amp;amp; 'Network User' links, 'View more' links, the up/down/questions/answers in Votes Cast, just about all of the text in our About More.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The explanation text in our tour.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 'more' links in the footer. On the main site they're particularly hard to read.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our review queues. Queue descriptions, all the text on the stats page, the &quot;this queue has been cleared&quot; message.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our comment entry text area. (That overlarge 'x' is bugging me there.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example of the overlarge comment-entry 'x':&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sOJAU.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sOJAU.png&quot; alt=&quot;screenshot of exes from comment entry&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="25997" LastEditDate="2015-11-27T15:14:13.007" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T15:14:13.007" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T11:31:18.097" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed and will be live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our main site's footer links are growing envious of the header and appear to be marching upward for battle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6ZYgb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6ZYgb.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please subdue them and put them back in place before a war between the header and footer breaks out and destroys the whole page of content between them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta footer links seem OK for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="25997" LastEditDate="2015-11-27T13:46:25.120" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T13:46:25.120" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T12:46:17.210" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed as of April 1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions with favorited tags are no longer being highlighted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XNNxw.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XNNxw.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's difficult to get a good screenshot of this, but it's easy to check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-04-03T08:34:02.180" LastActivityDate="2016-04-03T08:34:02.180" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T14:47:41.083" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Major input lag when writing/editing answers in Firefox.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Maybe Chrome too? I don't know, I haven't tested that one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea what's causing this. I've never noticed it before even on other sites that have redesigns, but maybe I've just never written big answers on those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a post becomes decently big, there starts to be a lot of lag between me typing out a word and it appearing on my screen. I'm a fast typist, and it becomes a big problem for me. It makes it very slow just to correct small typos, since I have to wait for the text area to catch up, and then I have to wait for it to process my backspacing, and then I start typing again and waiting for it to catch up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I installed &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.bahraniapps.com/gifcam/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;gifcam&lt;/a&gt; to record this happening. The gifs are &lt;em&gt;accurate and real time,&lt;/em&gt; the lag you see is &lt;em&gt;real lag,&lt;/em&gt; not a problem with the gif.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uG05k.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fast fluid typing in a fresh answer, no problem.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9rqnU.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Massive input lag if I edit my big post about Lusitana.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some jerkiness at the very end of that laggy one: I end up highlighting some text somehow at the end while trying to scroll the text area in a very laggy Firefox. The lag isn't jerky though. The text I jammed out in that last gif? I did it by just bashing all the keys rapidly for a few seconds, and then I sat and waited a while for the text entry to slowly fill up with that text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-11-23T15:00:48.943" LastActivityDate="2015-11-23T15:00:48.943" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T16:02:07.720" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed and will be live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions with new answers bar doesn’t stand out as well as it used to&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3aEwk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3aEwk.png&quot; alt=&quot;Image of the questions with new answers bar&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The gray doesn’t stand out well against the paper-y background. It used to be yellow, and more importantly had a border so it stood out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T13:40:55.640" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T16:24:03.993" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed and will be live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cross-posted from our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3669/4563&quot;&gt;existing Q&amp;amp;A on the subject&lt;/a&gt;, to ensure it’s seen as part of this update.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Heading margins are still reversed, closer to the preceding paragraph than the following one.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;p&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;h1&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt;, and &lt;code&gt;h3&lt;/code&gt; all have &lt;code&gt;margin-bottom: 1em;&lt;/code&gt; applied. What this means is that, because of their differing font sizes, the margin beneath &lt;code&gt;p&lt;/code&gt; is set to 15px, while &lt;code&gt;h1&lt;/code&gt; has 21px, &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt; has 19px, and &lt;code&gt;h3&lt;/code&gt; has 17px. As such, all headers are, quite visibly, closer to the preceding paragraph than they are to the paragraph below, i.e. the one they are actually assocated with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ncf9r.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ncf9r.png&quot; alt=&quot;Image of existing heading spacing&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is still quite reversed. All headings should be closer to their associated content than the preceding, not the other way around. As such, 15px should be the maximum &lt;code&gt;margin-bottom&lt;/code&gt; on all of the headings, and smaller margins would be appropriate. I understand that there is some matter of preference between equal-distance above and below, versus being closer to the following paragraph, so fine, use 15px if you must: but going &lt;em&gt;above&lt;/em&gt; 15px is still terrible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the same page, but with all margins set to &lt;code&gt;15px&lt;/code&gt; instead of &lt;code&gt;1em&lt;/code&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/t5FoW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/t5FoW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Headings with fixed 15px spacing&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still not a &lt;em&gt;huge&lt;/em&gt; fan of that. Note that the margin is calculated from the bottom of the lower extenders (e.g. on the &lt;code&gt;g&lt;/code&gt;), not from the base line of the text. As a result, the top of the &lt;code&gt;H&lt;/code&gt; is still closer to the preceding paragraph than the bottom of the &lt;code&gt;H&lt;/code&gt; is to the following paragraph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, setting the bottom margin on all of the headings to &lt;code&gt;5px&lt;/code&gt; looks quite a lot better in my opinion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hibg5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hibg5.png&quot; alt=&quot;Headings with fixed 5px spacing&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, the headings have a clear visual association with the following content (i.e. the content they serve as heading for)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T14:06:18.840" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5924" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T16:37:21.243" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It is now fixed and will be live after production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Margins on lists create empty space in quote box&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you put a list inside a quotebox (i.e. start each bullet point with &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;*&lt;/code&gt;), you get an awkward empty space beneath the list, but still in the quotebox:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x1O7w.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x1O7w.png&quot; alt=&quot;Existing margins with blank space&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The margin above and below the list inside the quotebox should be the same. Most likely a LESS rule something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;ol, ul {&#xA;    #:last-child, li:last-child {&#xA;        margin-bottom: 0;&#xA;    }&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is the appropriate fix. That would look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PsKSD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PsKSD.png&quot; alt=&quot;Removing final margin to remove blank space&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of the extender on the 3 there, it looks like a small space may be appropriate, but I still like this much better than the combined &lt;code&gt;1.5em&lt;/code&gt; of final list item and list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T15:15:35.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5925" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T18:03:05.597" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed and will be live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Post score and vote buttons are not aligned&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post score and vote/favourite buttons are visually misaligned. Assuredly a minor issue, but it stands out. It's one of those “can't unsee it” things once you notice it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The visual vertical passes to right of centre of the zero here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hiNT6.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hiNT6.png&quot; alt=&quot;The visual vertical passes to right of centre of the zero&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With numbers like seven which don't fill much of the right-hand side of their bounding box the visual vertical misalignment is exaggerated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d1Bdd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d1Bdd.png&quot; alt=&quot;The visual vertical passes even farther to the right of centre on left-heavy numbers&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though these screenshots are taken from Win7/Firefox, the same alignment is present on iOS Retina displays.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Additionally&lt;/strong&gt; the numbers are closer to the upvote arrow than the downvote arrow. The issue is fairly pronounced on meta, less so on main.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="25997" LastEditDate="2015-11-27T13:34:42.197" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T13:34:42.197" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-23T18:42:10.517" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's now fixed and will be live after our next production build.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Post score looks greyed-out&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post score text colour is technically identical to the outer-rim colour of the vote buttons (&lt;code&gt;#777&lt;/code&gt;), but because visual colour bleed disproportionately affects thin shapes, the number's colour looks too pale beside the buttons and doesn't visually match.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The text colour looks about right around &lt;code&gt;#555&lt;/code&gt;. Here's a before and after shot, with post score as &lt;code&gt;color: #777&lt;/code&gt; (current) on left and &lt;code&gt;color: #555&lt;/code&gt; (tweaked) on the right:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yiCAk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yiCAk.png&quot; alt=&quot;Post score is &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;color: #777&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; on left and &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;color: #555&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; on the right.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;4&lt;/em&gt; on the right looks much more assertive of its existence and right to stand among those design elements than the ghostly &lt;em&gt;4&lt;/em&gt; on the left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other grey text on the page has this “being ghostly” issue too, but only the post score and the favourites count are so close to a non-text element using the technically-same but visually-different grey value that in comparison they look like a different colour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compare with here on meta, where text of colour &lt;code&gt;#777&lt;/code&gt; nicely visually matches the lighter button colour of &lt;code&gt;#9ea0a4&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="25997" LastEditDate="2015-11-27T14:12:55.640" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T14:12:55.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-24T05:33:05.520" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Visited tags are displayed with the link color, rather than the standard link appearance: &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/tag-you-probably-havent-visited&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tag-you-probably-havent-visited&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tag-you-probably-havent-visited&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;will be grey right now,&lt;/strong&gt; but when you visit it, it'll turn gold here, or red on main site. If you clicked that too soon, try &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/this-other-unique-one&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;this-other-unique-one&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;this-other-unique-one&lt;/a&gt; or delete the page for one of these made up tags from your history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't show up this way in post previews, which are always just grey, regardless of visited-ness. That's how it used to be, so this changed during the redesign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This affects the appearance when visiting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tags&quot;&gt;a tag without a tag wiki&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/M2XxD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/M2XxD.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0lZDI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0lZDI.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently this might just be a feature of the redesign though, since it occurs this way too on Meta Stack Exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kSIZB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kSIZB.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(usual tag appearance is grey)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-12-02T00:22:42.223" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5928" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" LastActivityDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5929" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" Score="0" Body="No seriously, listen up." OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" LastActivityDate="2015-11-24T06:44:08.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-11-25T21:37:51.010" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; It's is fixed now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The icons are stretched and cut off along the bottom using Chrome version 46.0.2490.86 (64-bit) on a 15-inch retina macbook pro, though it seems to occasionally correct itself. Safari and Firefox both seem fine so it's possibly more-so a problem on my end since we do have a lot of internet troubles at work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also works fine on my iPad mini and windows PC at home. Have not checked my laptop at home yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gnOxn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gnOxn.png&quot; alt=&quot;SE Community&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DBDgI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DBDgI.png&quot; alt=&quot;Hot Network Questions&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="25997" LastEditDate="2015-11-27T14:44:51.280" LastActivityDate="2015-11-27T14:44:51.280" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5931" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-11-26T05:34:42.087" Score="25" ViewCount="779" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://company.wizards.com/sitemissing/community&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://company.wizards.com/sitemissing/community&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dreaded &amp;quot;Not sorry&amp;quot; message from Wizards of the Coast as they took away the WOTC forums instead of keeping it all archived for posterity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for your interest in the Wizards Forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Social media has changed significantly over the last ten years, and discussions about games aren't exclusive to company-hosted forums. The majority of community conversation takes place on third-party websites (such as Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and many other fantastic community-run websites), and it is up to us to evolve alongside our players. All information posted to the Community Forums as of November 5 has been deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, they have changed their link formatting and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3123/report-broken-wotc-forum-links-here-help-us-fix-them&quot;&gt;we've have meta posts about getting them fixed.&lt;/a&gt; However, there is no &amp;quot;fixing&amp;quot; these links as their source content has been removed from the site. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/14506/14873&quot;&gt;Example of a post affected&lt;/a&gt; (Chuck E. Cheese is no longer a valid link.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should be done about these links now that there's no fixing them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14873" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T14:22:39.547" Title="How should all the broken links to Wizard's forums be handled?" Tags="|discussion|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5931" CreationDate="2015-11-26T05:56:43.790" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ideally, all these links should be updated to lead to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?538-WotC-Emergency-Evacuation-Lifeboat&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ENWorld's copy of the WotC forum&lt;/a&gt;. Sadly, this is (as far as I can tell) both somewhat disorganised and somewhat incomplete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think where possible, if the content is available at an alternative location, the link should be replaced with one leading to said alternative. For example, Chuck E. Cheese has been posted on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5788.0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Brilliant Gameologists&lt;/a&gt; forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2015-11-26T07:14:55.303" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T07:14:55.303" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5931" CreationDate="2015-11-26T13:50:53.023" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can often find archive copies of, um, &lt;em&gt;existentially challenged&lt;/em&gt; web pages on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://web.archive.org/web&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wayback Machine&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quick way to do this is to prepend &lt;code&gt;http://web.archive.org/web/*/&lt;/code&gt; to the URL; for example, a list of the archived snapshots of the original Chuck E. Cheese thread can be found at:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1164211&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1164211&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, to get a direct link to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://web.archive.org/web/9/http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1164211&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;latest snapshot&lt;/a&gt;, replace the &lt;code&gt;/*/&lt;/code&gt; with &lt;code&gt;/9/&lt;/code&gt; (actually, any number greater than 1 should work); for the earliest snapshot, use &lt;code&gt;/0/&lt;/code&gt;.  If a snapshot is found, these numbers will get replaced by the closest actual snapshot timestamp, in the format &lt;code&gt;/YYYYMMDDhhmmss/&lt;/code&gt; (&lt;code&gt;YYYY&lt;/code&gt; = year, &lt;code&gt;MM&lt;/code&gt; = month, &lt;code&gt;DD&lt;/code&gt; = day, &lt;code&gt;hh&lt;/code&gt; = hour, &lt;code&gt;mm&lt;/code&gt; = minute, &lt;code&gt;ss&lt;/code&gt; = second).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the archived pages can sometimes suffer from styling and/or scripting issues.  For example, on the linked page above you'll need to scroll down a bit to see the actual content.  Also, images and links may or may not work; sometimes, trying a different snapshot of the same page can help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ps.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/399314/posts-with-community-wizards-com-forum-links&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here's an SEDE query to find posts that need fixing&lt;/a&gt;, loosely based on &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/136845/posts-with-community-wizards-com-links&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this earlier query&lt;/a&gt; by Brian Ballsun-Stanton.  Or you can just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=url%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.wizards.com%2Fforum&quot;&gt;search for &lt;code&gt;url:http://community.wizards.com/forum&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-11-26T14:22:39.547" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5935" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5937" CreationDate="2015-12-02T14:07:27.573" Score="18" ViewCount="372" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently noticed that we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/total-party-kill&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;total-party-kill&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;total-party-kill&lt;/a&gt; tag.  It seems reasonably useful, if only to link together a bunch of related questions, but it's currently only used on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/933/total-party-kill-what-do-i-do-as-a-gm&quot;&gt;three&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53880/what-to-do-when-i-accidentally-kill-the-whole-party&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; (and I added it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71625/risk-of-a-tpk-vs-realistic-npcs&quot;&gt;one of those&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few highly voted questions that perhaps &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; use this tag, but currently don't, include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63594/my-pcs-have-a-plan-that-will-get-them-all-killed-how-and-why-should-i-save-them&quot;&gt;My PCs have a plan that will get them all killed; how and why should I save them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12823/how-can-i-prevent-a-tpk-without-obvious-deus-ex-machina&quot;&gt;How can I prevent a TPK without obvious Deus Ex Machina?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/40960/how-can-i-plan-a-tpk-finale-that-doesnt-look-planned&quot;&gt;How can I plan a TPK finale that doesn&amp;#39;t look planned?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70651/game-over-in-rpgs&quot;&gt;Game Over in RPGs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56626/how-can-i-dissuade-my-players-from-attacking-a-deadly-foe-who-isnt-meant-to-be&quot;&gt;How can I dissuade my players from attacking a deadly foe who isn&amp;#39;t meant to be attacked?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I add this tag to more questions, to make it actually useful for searching, or should I remove it from the few questions that have it?  And if the former, should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tpk&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tpk&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tpk&lt;/a&gt; (which currently does not exist) be made a synonym for it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK, looks like we have a fairly clear consensus that the tag should stay.  I've marked nitsua60's answer as accepted (since I can't pick more than one), and I've added the tag to the first four questions listed above, so that they can be found when searching for it.  From there on, it should be fine to let it grow organically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-12-04T18:17:25.557" Title="Do we want a [total-party-kill]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5935" CreationDate="2015-12-02T14:22:01.067" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total-Party-Kill probably wouldn't be that helpful of a tag, in fact I'd suggest scrubbing it off those three questions&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While a TPK is an RPG cliche and in some systems/tables a staple  as a grouping for questions on RPG.SE I can't see it being all that helpful. In almost every case the question ends up being very system specific because creating, avoiding, or figuring out how a TPK occurred always comes down to the balance, rules, and actions taken within the system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer SevenSidedDie's valid point, I feel like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-advancement&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-advancement&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-advancement&lt;/a&gt; serve to highlight a specific subsection of rules you want to look at whereas TPK is so overly broad as to be non-helpful. To focus on 5e for a moment, a TPK could be caused by DM fiat (&quot;Rocks fall, everyone dies&quot;), a slight misundertanding/miscalculation in balancing an encounter based on CR, due to bad play/poor opitmization of the players, or as the natural outcome of a story choice made by the players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion the tag is completely superfluous and and merely repeats information that should already be conveyed in the question title anyway. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2015-12-02T15:41:54.870" LastActivityDate="2015-12-02T15:41:54.870" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5935" CreationDate="2015-12-02T14:32:47.453" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keep the tag: we've got browsers, too.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users don't only come here when they've a specific question, but also to browse around in a repository of high-quality analysis and advice. While searching for &quot;TPK&quot; will likely get you a good sampling, utilizing a TPK tag would provide users another avenue to get to questions on the topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2015-12-02T21:54:41.223" LastActivityDate="2015-12-02T21:54:41.223" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5935" CreationDate="2015-12-02T15:41:06.600" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;*prepares rope swing*&lt;br&gt;&#xA;*swings from balcony*  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;ldquo;Folksonomyyyyy!&amp;rdquo;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*lands, escapes out second-storey window*  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags being emergent, they don't really need ratification to continue existing. When in doubt, the default is to leave a tag alone and let it get established (or not) on its merits of utility and appeal to the site's users. They tend to only need discussion when they're trouble or potentially trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one seems to describe a particular type of problem endemic to RPGs, and appears to be not misbehaving, so it meets the minimum requirements to join the ranks of our site's tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for requiring a system tag to make sense, that's an issue many of our tags share: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; to name just a few. That's just because of the nature of our subject, where many of our questions need a system tag as well as a tag that describes the subject of the actual problem (whether that's balancing issues or handling TPKs).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms, that means go ahead and use it where it seems to fit! If nobody protests, nor identifies a subtler problem that needs meta discussion to untangle, then it's evidently fine. My personal prediction is that using it will be uncontroversial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-12-02T15:48:11.240" LastActivityDate="2015-12-02T15:48:11.240" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-12-03T13:59:04.457" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our Filter button in the review queues is floating away. Not sure if this is a big deal?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FKfL3.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FKfL3.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;vs Meta.SE, where it's at least sorta in line with the heading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xcl6I.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xcl6I.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-12-03T13:59:04.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5940" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-03T23:40:34.220" Score="27" ViewCount="575" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71785/8610&quot;&gt;How can a nonpsionic character use the power hostile empathic transfer?&lt;/a&gt; later yielded another question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71800/8610&quot;&gt;How can I bring an evil NPC back to life after the PCs think they&amp;#39;ve killed him?&lt;/a&gt; The first answer to the first question is, essentially, &lt;em&gt;Make it up yourself.&lt;/em&gt; The first Comment (now deleted) on the second question was &lt;em&gt;Why not make it up yourself?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like &lt;em&gt;Make it up yourself&lt;/em&gt; could pretty much be an answer to most questions site-wide, therefore often adding little to the conversation. (This is not to disparage &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/71788/8610&quot;&gt;indigochild's answer&lt;/a&gt;, which otherwise makes some good points about rules-lawyering players.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I wonder if there is, like, a tipping point or something wherein a question goes from &lt;em&gt;This certainly deserves a perfectly reasonable, rules-based answer!&lt;/em&gt; to &lt;em&gt;Dude! Just make it up yourself!&lt;/em&gt; and, somehow, this two-question series reached it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, when a querent asks for a rule-based answer—even on a question lacking the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag—, when is &lt;em&gt;Make it up yourself&lt;/em&gt; appropriate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-12-16T01:06:21.280" Title="When is &quot;Make it up yourself&quot; a good answer?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5940" CreationDate="2015-12-04T00:11:38.737" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A good &quot;make it up yourself&quot; answer makes effort to demonstrate exactly why &quot;Do it yourself, I can't help&quot; is the best possible answer.&lt;/strong&gt; A &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; &quot;make it up yourself&quot; answer gives some examples of making it up; the answerer's own experience with similar situations would be valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're effectively talking about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4398&quot;&gt;challenge to the frame of the question&lt;/a&gt;, and we've got policies in place for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, &lt;strong&gt;the answerer must first show why other solutions are unavailable, insufficient, or inappropriate&lt;/strong&gt; before suggesting that the querent simply make stuff up on their own. This is simply part of the Stack's ever-present expectation that answerers will provide support to show why their answer is good: whether through citation, experience, evidence, or analysis, an answer should defend itself. The further from a &quot;typical&quot; solution the answer is, the more it needs to justify itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without that justification, &quot;make it up&quot; becomes a generic and lazy answer which insults the querent and undermines the Stack's goal of providing answers which draw on citizens' expertise and experience: it effectively says, &quot;Solve it yourself, I can't be bothered.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2015-12-04T00:21:38.757" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5942" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-04T16:10:23.877" Score="17" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;Cross-posting from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5920/4563&quot;&gt;Updates to the site&lt;/a&gt;, since it was a bug with that update that appears to have gotten missed. Comments on that answer haven’t seemed to get noticed, so giving this a little more visibility:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions with favorited tags are no longer being highlighted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XNNxw.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's difficult to get a good screenshot of this, but it's easy to check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m still seeing this, and based on the four upvotes on my comment to that effect, so are others. This is despite the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; entry on the answer, suggesting that it would be live after the next build (all other fixes marked the same have been visible for several days).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T02:56:20.697" Title="Questions with favorite tags are not being highlighted" Tags="|bug|status-completed|css|site-design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5943" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5954" CreationDate="2015-12-04T19:16:49.767" Score="14" ViewCount="308" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's rainy where I am because Wet Coast, but it will soon be snowing at &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2015.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;winterbash2015.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;. And just like last year, there will be &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;hats&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Hats&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Hats&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Hats&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hats&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So many hats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also, check out that sweet set of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5923/321&quot;&gt;differentiated and well-spaced&lt;/a&gt; headers and bold text!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;“Wait, &lt;em&gt;hats&lt;/em&gt;? What are you gibbering about.”&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Winterbash is a yearly Stack Exchange tradition in which actions on the site unlock &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/244075/what-is-a-hat&quot;&gt;virtual hats&lt;/a&gt; for your avatar to wear. (Last year size and angle customisation was added, so most hats can be made to fit most avatars, even weird ones like, I don't know, awkwardly-angled dice.) They're like badges, but for smaller or sillier actions and much more temporary — the hats go back in their boxes on January 4th.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2015.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Winterbash site&lt;/a&gt; lists the hats you have earned as well as those yet to be earned, with hints on how to earn them, as well as site and cross-network leaderboards so you can indulge the natural competitive millinery urges we all have but never admit to in polite company.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As they are every year, this year's hats are all-new. There are also secret hats, which will take some luck or skill to earn. But don't tell anyone I told you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And just like in previous years, hats with have an opt-out option in your profile, so if you don't want to see hats, you can banish all hats from your sight so they may not offend thine eye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Winterbash 2015 begins December 14th. Prepare for dapperness!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T22:41:57.320" Title="Winter is Coming… to bring us hats!" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|hats|winterbash-2015|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5944" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5945" CreationDate="2015-12-04T19:23:55.690" Score="7" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a quest to identify a product (a specific &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/role-playing-poem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;role-playing-poem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;role-playing-poem&lt;/a&gt; again), I found one that might be what I am looking for.&#xA;Now I am trying to track down more information about it, preferably the actual game in an accessible format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can I ask on the main site where to find a copy of it? Similar questions I found on the main are as follows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13103/where-can-i-get-a-copy-of-monsters-of-myth&quot;&gt;Where can I get a copy of Monsters of Myth?&lt;/a&gt; has been closed because “it takes no RPG expertise to answer.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9285/where-can-i-find-a-copy-of-thrilling-tales-first-edition&quot;&gt;Where can I find a copy of Thrilling Tales *First* Edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/351/where-can-i-get-old-dd-encounters-content&quot;&gt;Where can I get old D&amp;amp;D Encounters content?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35936/where-can-i-get-traveller-5-and-when&quot;&gt;Where can I get Traveller 5 and when?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we consider these questions generally on- or off-topic, or deal with them case-by-case as is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my question, should I post it as I intended, should I instead post it as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; and hope that someone suggests the one I'm thinking of with a longer description, giving me clarity, or should I ask it somewhere else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5843" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2015-12-04T20:24:10.467" Title="Where do I find “Where do I find Obscure-RPG-Document”?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5944" CreationDate="2015-12-04T20:24:10.467" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a bit sensitive to the exact nature and expression of the question, so it tends to be a case-by-case matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, asking a question of the form “What game/book is X from?” is a textbook example of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; category that we do accept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, “Where can I acquire [book]?” tend more often to be shopping questions, with only the occasional exceptional case where it falls on the safe side of that line for some reason particular to that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Checking out &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/looking-for-advice-on-looking-for-retrospect&quot;&gt;main site chat&lt;/a&gt; I uncovered a bit more about the context behind your question. I think that in &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; case it's a borderline shopping question — it &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; survive voting, but it would more likely be closed. And it's not a type of shopping question that could meaningfully be converted into a “how” question and still be useful. (“How do I locate the book this is from?” is what it would convert to, but then it's a general research technique question not specific to RPGs.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally I'd tentatively suggest trying in on the main site, with the caveat that it will probably be closed. But we'll never know, because I've saved that bother by engaging with your conundrum in the chat room already. :) This is the kind of thing that chat is good for, that main-site isn't!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-12-04T20:24:10.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-12-05T14:27:18.213" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's great that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3554/skin-does-not-handle-read-only-mode-well&quot;&gt;the site notice is no longer broken&lt;/a&gt;, but it still doesn't look &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3554/skin-does-not-handle-read-only-mode-well/5750#5750&quot;&gt;as nice as it was originally designed to look.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Current site notice appearance:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; alt=&quot;Current site notice&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What the site notice &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; look like, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3554/skin-does-not-handle-read-only-mode-well/5750#5750&quot;&gt;a few CSS tweaks&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xVFoC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xVFoC.png&quot; alt=&quot;Fixed site notice appearance&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize that this is a minor detail, and most users will never see it anyway.  But it would still be kind of nice to have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-12-05T15:01:59.470" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5912" CreationDate="2015-12-07T05:44:35.543" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Vote numbers in the close vote dialog are extremely tiny.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, this tiny: &lt;sub&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1 2 3 4&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;, vs regular size: &lt;strong&gt;1 2 3 4&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're sized at 10px in the vote dialog, while the text around them is 13.65px. The 10px would probably be fine on other sites, but Georgia uses &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_figures&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;lowercase numerals&lt;/a&gt;. (Which is awesome. I wish more fonts did that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they were still pretty small before, but either I've only really noticed &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; small now, or they've become smaller during the redesign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vRP5q.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vRP5q.png&quot; alt=&quot;unclear what you&amp;#39;re asking. (very tiny 2.)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD points out in comments, this also affects our featured count:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0GtZL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0GtZL.png&quot; alt=&quot;5 featured, with the number being quite tiny&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-12-08T01:55:03.680" LastActivityDate="2015-12-08T01:55:03.680" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5948" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2962" CreationDate="2015-12-11T00:19:53.503" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Real world research questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about &lt;strong&gt;real-world research topics&lt;/strong&gt;, such as history, geography and economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;are off topic&lt;/a&gt; when they are only tangentially related to RPGs and do not benefit from RPG expertise, such that an RPG expert would not give you a better/different/more specific answer than an expert in that particular field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I realise after submitting this that SSD covered this in his middle bullet point, but here's my drafting for tackling these.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2015-12-11T00:19:53.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5949" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5950" CreationDate="2015-12-11T00:21:50.210" Score="3" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the site review tab right next to the help tab, it said (3) and indicates there are 3 posts to review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I open it and all I get are zeroes indicating no questions to review. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I go back, refresh the page, and the tab indicates 3 questions to review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I click on it and again it is zero. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where are the questions to review?  First time this has happened to me since I got the review permission. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-12-11T00:59:37.250" LastActivityDate="2015-12-13T02:26:14.090" Title="Why's the review notification still showing up when I've reviewed everything?" Tags="|support|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5949" CreationDate="2015-12-11T00:51:30.420" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The review queue notification isn't actually specific to you. It's a sum total of the number reviews waiting across the site for &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt;. It will appear on RPG.SE anytime there's at least 3 total reviews currently in the queues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone over 10k sees it, which also means it bugs every 10k user to go empty all the review queues so it'll go away faster. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider it a sort of site health indicator. If that number's &lt;em&gt;large,&lt;/em&gt; something big's happening, including maybe one of the Stack Exchange devs just expanded the set of questions that get auto-added to queues and a ton of old stuff went in. If the number's &lt;em&gt;increasing,&lt;/em&gt; people aren't  pulling their weight in the review queues and it's probably time to bang some pots and pans on Meta and get people moving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Shog9 said &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/230802/152515&quot;&gt;when talking about its purpose&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;you're being given a birds-eye view of the actual state of review. It's one thing for the majority of reviewers to plow through their own tasks and move on, but someone needs to keep an eye on things to make sure stuff is actually getting done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other relevant meta stuff: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/191638/152515&quot;&gt;Notify users of possible reviews on toolbar&lt;/a&gt;, the original feature request for this thing. It replaced a similar notification that only described the number of suggested edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-12-13T02:26:14.090" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5951" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-12T13:01:09.080" Score="14" ViewCount="279" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gosh, it's been a bit since we had a WoD tagging thread, huh? As per today's announcement, the game lines formerly known as the New World of Darkness 2nd Edition are now being collectively called the Chronicles of Darkness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/announcing-chronicles-of-darkness/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://theonyxpath.com/announcing-chronicles-of-darkness/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reasons why are in the link. What's the best way to go forward? (I mean, aside from updating the tag wiki and such.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-03-22T16:36:28.050" LastActivityDate="2016-03-22T17:27:30.477" Title="Changing [new-world-of-darkness-2e] to [chronicles-of-darkness]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5952" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5951" CreationDate="2015-12-12T14:14:05.050" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;One way forward:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; goes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; — the way it was all the way back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; goes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; stays &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, since those books won't be rebranded and people will be searching for them under that name. The fact that these books are the historical antecedents of the CofD books remains a hiccup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2015-12-12T14:14:05.050" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5943" CreationDate="2015-12-14T00:10:29.987" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;THE HATTENING, IT BEGINS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/S3QeN.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/S3QeN.gif&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T00:10:29.987" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5951" CreationDate="2015-12-14T01:04:20.073" Score="9" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; goes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; — the way it was all the way back. (Jadasc's answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We really should make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; an alias for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.theonyxpath.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Onyx Path forums&lt;/a&gt; have entirely renamed what was the New World of Darkness to Chronicles of Darkness.  They don't yet seem to have a distinction between first edition and second edition, but I think we will want that distinction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; as well (with relevant short aliases).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T01:04:20.073" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5956" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-14T09:16:49.133" Score="7" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72110/how-to-optimize-a-supporting-cleric-that-deals-damage-at-range&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question and received a few useful comments over night. I managed to quickly check them shortly after waking up in the morning, but intended on really diving into them that evening and see if I could use the info contained there in to either improve my question or formulate an answer to my own question, not to mention actually look up what those comments were referring to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alas, someone mentioned in a later comment that some of that information could be the basis for an answer and a moderator swooped in and deleted all of the comments. Sigh.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is all that's left of my access to the comments.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5qepU.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5qepU.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to look into what the comments were talking about so that I could simply understand what was mentioned. All I can remember was a Pathfinder prestige class being mentioned, along with a feat and I wanted to explore them to see if they could help narrow my question and answer it. What was the comment contents?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7588" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T19:02:37.997" Title="I'd like to see the deleted comments from my question in one form or another" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5957" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5960" CreationDate="2015-12-14T11:06:42.023" Score="1" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was browsing the [play-by-post] tag and found this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/53270/23064&quot;&gt;How can a player in a PbP D&amp;amp;D 5e game ensure the health and fun of that game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it was tagged for Dnd 5e but reading the question, it seems pretty system-agnostic. Perhaps there were deleted comments but I don't see why it would need the DnD 5e tag with how this is worded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sidenote: I plan to open a bounty on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-04-07T08:09:21.033" Title="Why was this question given a 5e tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5957" CreationDate="2015-12-14T11:12:42.427" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Because the querent put it there.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think the question can be edited to be generic without changing the essence of the question, suggest the edit, and remove the tag.  As it stands, there is nothing wrong with keeping it tagged for 5E, and it MIGHT be relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T11:12:42.427" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5960" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5957" CreationDate="2015-12-14T13:12:00.763" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The point of the Stack Exchange is to provide actionable suggestions for resolving the specific challenges querents face, in a system that sorts itself for easy reference so we become an organised collection of solutions to problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is why &lt;strong&gt;we don't change someone else's question to artificially broaden its scope&lt;/strong&gt;: not only is it horribly pretentious to think we understand a challenge better than the person who has it, but the generalisation usually reduces the value of the contribution to the Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Years of experience have shown that answers to specific questions are often also useful to people with similar but not identical situations. The better an answer explains the reasoning behind its specific solution, the more broadly its principles can be applied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That same experience repeatedly demonstrates that answers to artificially broadened questions are rarely actionably useful to the person asking the question because they can't address the details of the situation. They can't provide solutions to the specific challenge being faced, they can only provide broad principles that may or may not actually be helpful to the querent. Those situations often wind up with every answer getting a comment from the querent saying &quot;Okay, but in my situation [edge case or exception which renders answer useless].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-12-14T13:32:24.760" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T13:32:24.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5956" CreationDate="2015-12-14T19:02:37.997" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comments weren't actually that useful. Someone mentioned Improved Precise Shot being useful for ranged PCs, but so hard to get for a spellcaster that you shouldn't bother. No prestige class was mentioned (only a monk archetype that gets IPS for free). Someone else made an off-topic suggestion of a tweak to your build that wasn't about ranged combat or damage optimisation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Barely-glimpsed comments always seem better than they actually are, like how a dream-idea you excitedly scribble down in the middle of the night inevitably turns out to be terribad when you read your notes the next morning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long and the short of it is that if they were worth making into answers, they were worth putting into answer posts; but they weren't, so they weren't. Since half-answers and off-topic brainstorming hanging around in comments can't be peer-reviewed like real answers, and in the meantime impair the signal-to-noise ratio that a Stack Exchange site lives and dies by, they were cleaned up and those regular users who left them were (gently, anonymously) reminded that they do know better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your frustration expressed here and elsewhere is a large reason &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; partial answers and off-topic discussion shouldn't be left in comments — they just taunt the reader with the false hope of something useful, and tempt people into using even more comments for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-12-14T19:02:37.997" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5962" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5963" CreationDate="2015-12-15T00:54:23.230" Score="9" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;to be more specific, should I post an answer to a question if I like at least one of the answers it already has, but I believe it is missing something that I myself could add, or should I just add said thing via a comment?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8233" LastActivityDate="2015-12-15T02:36:24.057" Title="should I post an answer to a slightly old question that already has some good answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5963" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5962" CreationDate="2015-12-15T02:36:24.057" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Two approaches, both valid:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Leave a comment on the answer you like.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suggest the improvement. &amp;quot;Favorite&amp;quot; the question so it's easy for you to come back and check on later. &lt;em&gt;Be prepared for the eventuality that the author may disagree, or may never respond.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. Post your own answer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think your additional content really adds something, the only way to guarantee its visibility is to post your own answer. In this situation be sure to point out how much of your answer is derivative of any others' work, and how your original contribution really makes yours the best answer. Then let the (long-term) voting sort it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your (presumably) better answer may never overcome the benefit of early-posting that the other answers received. But cream will rise, and wise future readers will look further than just the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2015-12-15T02:36:24.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5964" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-15T08:17:33.207" Score="18" ViewCount="1847" Body="&lt;p&gt;This album is for &lt;strong&gt;2015&lt;/strong&gt;. Check out the 2016 album here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6640/hatocalypse-2016-survivors-photo-album&quot;&gt;Hatocalypse 2016 Survivors&amp;#39; Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every year, there are beautiful fantastic displays with hats and avatars. We see others with avatars we &lt;em&gt;love&lt;/em&gt;, or we get that perfect dapper combination and enjoy it to bits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They get boxed up and disappear forever at the end of Winterbash. But they don't have to be! Let's preserve some of it, at least for a while longer. I'd like to try something about that this year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So let's have a fun and/or slightly embarrassing yearbook.&lt;/strong&gt; Post the great hats and hatments you've seen. Show off the ones &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; made for yourself which you think are fantastic or fabulous or the greatest. (I know I've been there, back with the bowler hat I put on Space Ghost in 2013.) If you spy an excellent thing in the wild, I guess you can stick that here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest maybe just one post per person, or at least a very small number. Make edits and expand your post over making new posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep it silly, keep it fun, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;be nice&lt;/a&gt;. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those not in the super secret partial screenshot skills club, here's how you do it. First, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshotting. Now, the method:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Windows 7 and above, you can use the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt; on your profile page (just hit start and type in the name). Otherwise, you may want to just take a screenshot of your browser window with alt+print screen, paste it into MS Paint, crop out your avatar region and save it as a &lt;strong&gt;PNG&lt;/strong&gt;. (GIFs and JPGs will probably come out low quality.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Mac, press CMD + SHIFT + 4 and then click and drag to outline your icon. When you let go of the mouse, it'll save a screenshot .png of the selection to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Linux... I also have no idea, someone edit this in!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those interested in who has the the most hats here on RPG.SE, the leaderboards can be found &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2015.stackexchange.com/leaderboard/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (as of this posting, Miniman has an astonishing 24 hats).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-12-19T09:56:28.567" Title="The Winterbash 2015 Hatmas &quot;Photo&quot; Album (&amp; maybe embarrassing yearbook)" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|winterbash-2015|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5965" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-15T08:27:00.443" Score="22" Body="&lt;h2&gt;TIMEY-WIMEY DOCTORS&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm putting a different Doctor in the &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2015.stackexchange.com/timey-wimey&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Timey Wimey&lt;/a&gt; hat and scarf every day. (Sepia tones are to keep my avatar moderately recognisable despite the rapidly changing images.) Hover over a link to see the Doctor's name and franchise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uoYdv.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uoYdvt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Oh, no, this won&amp;#39;t do at all! It&amp;#39;s too colourful!&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Oh, no, this won&amp;#39;t do at all! It&amp;#39;s too colourful!&amp;#39; The Second Doctor, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nNFiM.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nNFiMt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;So this is my replacement, then? A Bohemian in a Herbert Johnson?&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;So this is my replacement, then? A Bohemian in a Herbert Johnson?&amp;#39; The First Doctor, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9EmOW.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9EmOWt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Great Scott! This hat is heavy.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Great Scott! This hat is heavy.&amp;#39; Doc Brown, Back to the Future&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OA44A.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OA44At.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Don&amp;#39;t insult my hat. You wouldn&amp;#39;t like me if you insult my hat.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Don&amp;#39;t insult my hat. You wouldn&amp;#39;t like me if you insult my hat.&amp;#39; Mild-mannered Dr. Banner, The Incredible Hulk TV show&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mpJog.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mpJogt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;In time I hope you&amp;#39;ll allow me my eccentricities, Stack Exchange. Sometimes they&amp;#39;re all I or the world have got.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;In time I hope you&amp;#39;ll allow me my eccentricities, Stack Exchange. Sometimes they&amp;#39;re all I or the world have got.&amp;#39; The Doctor, Scream of the Shalka&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/C35z7.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/C35z7t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;This is a hat of very heavy-duty proportions.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;This is a hat of very heavy-duty proportions.&amp;#39; Dr. Teeth, The Muppets&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/m6zhy.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/m6zhyt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;I need this suit tailored! It&amp;#39;s an emergency!&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I need this suit tailored! It&amp;#39;s an emergency!&amp;#39; Dr. Hooves, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ozqaX.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ozqaXt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;The great doctors dare to believe in the unbelievable.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;The great doctors dare to believe in the unbelievable.&amp;#39; Dr. Magnus, Sanctuary&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NXmw2.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NXmw2t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;I&amp;#39;m a doctor, not a hatrack!&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I&amp;#39;m a doctor, not a hatrack!&amp;#39; Dr. McCoy, Star Trek&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ypyN9.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ypyN9t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Don&amp;#39;t call me Bones.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Don&amp;#39;t call me Bones.&amp;#39; Dr. Brennan, Bones&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uFz6g.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uFz6gt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;We are in this hat, but perhaps more important is that the hat is in us.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;We are in this hat, but perhaps more important is that the hat is in us.&amp;#39; Dr. Tyson, real life&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Roknc.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Roknct.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;There, my latest invention.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;There, my latest invention.&amp;#39; Dr. Who, Dr. Who and the Daleks&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HXHIP.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HXHIPt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;I&amp;#39;m an archaeologist.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I&amp;#39;m an archaeologist.&amp;#39; Dr. Song, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eE6RX.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eE6RXt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;All questions will be answered in time.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;All questions will be answered in time.&amp;#39; Dr. Honeycutt, TMNT 2012&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yLW0w.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yLW0wt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Not an alien doctor, a proper doctor. A doctor of medicine.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Not an alien doctor, a proper doctor. A doctor of medicine.&amp;#39; Dr Jones, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9RSc6.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9RSc6t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;But I made him this hat...&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;But I made him this hat...&amp;#39; Healer Katara, Avatar&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4kfBk.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4kfBkt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;This is a problem.&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;This is a problem.&amp;#39; Dr Watson, Elementary&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8IM1N.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8IM1Nt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Please explain to me the nature of the hat.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Please explain to me the nature of the hat.&amp;#39; Dr Scully, The X-Files&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/L6yXm.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/L6yXmt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;I do not even know who Tom Baker IS!&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I do not even know who Tom Baker IS!&amp;#39; Dr Dinosaur, Atomic Robo&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KHJ5q.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KHJ5qt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Not til I&amp;#39;m dead. And sometimes, not even then.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Not til I&amp;#39;m dead. And sometimes, not even then.&amp;#39; Dr. Jackson, Stargate SG-1&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YYRmI.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YYRmIt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;I like my hair.&amp;quot;&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I like my hair.&amp;#39; Dr. Octavius, Ultimate Spider-Man&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other people are doing the same thing! Here are Doctors I've seen so far. Images link to their user's profile page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3529/joshua-aslan-smith&quot; title=&quot;The Fifth Doctor, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JMjLhs.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/161917/ixrec&quot; title=&quot;The Tenth Doctor, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xI5qPs.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/161917/ixrec&quot; title=&quot;The Twelfth Doctor, Doctor Who&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6vAWos.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T09:33:22.470" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-15T08:43:02.747" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;I started out with &lt;a href=&quot;http://katamari.wikia.com/wiki/The_King_of_All_Cosmos&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The King of All Cosmos&lt;/a&gt; eating a cake. It's privately amusing to me to no end because it's a really big cake, and one of his catch phrases is &quot;it is too small, it must be bigger, yes.&quot; The same goes for him with the christmas tree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQExj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;nom nom nom&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQExj.png&quot; alt=&quot;nom nom nom&quot; title=&quot;nom nom nom&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r7Hoq.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;this tree is too small, it must be bigger, yes&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r7Hoq.png&quot; alt=&quot;this tree is too small, it must be bigger, yes&quot; title=&quot;this tree is too small, it must be bigger, yes&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the course of Winter Bash I've also acquired the coveted and fashionable Timey Wimey, and it turns out the King of All Cosmos looks pretty good in it. With his unusually shaped head, &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; hats fit... differently. It's fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a9wjy.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a9wjyt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Timey Wimey: the 4th doctor&amp;#39;s hat, hair, and scarf&quot; title=&quot;This keeps my chin warm.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2h97P.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2h97Pt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Specialist Hatsman: unicorn helmet&quot; title=&quot;With protection like this, I don&amp;#39;t even need to see!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tvfZg.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tvfZgt.png&quot; alt=&quot;I&amp;#39;m Batman!&quot; title=&quot;My spirit animal-human for justice in the cosmos.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LetLN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LetLNt.png&quot; alt=&quot;The Airing of Grievances: George Costanza&amp;#39;s bald head &amp;amp; glasses&quot; title=&quot;What&amp;#39;s everyone laughing at? What have I got on my face?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went back through our chat archives during Winterbash 2013 to see if I'd kept a screenshot of the extremely dapper Space Ghost in his bowler hat, but it looks like I did not. I did have &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=12731885#12731885&quot;&gt;a lot&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=12734778#12734778&quot;&gt;fun&lt;/a&gt; posting about &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=12752322#12752322&quot;&gt;some&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=12887353#12887353&quot;&gt;other&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=12693609#12693609&quot;&gt;getups&lt;/a&gt; though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-12-28T08:36:44.263" LastActivityDate="2015-12-28T08:36:44.263" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-15T10:27:11.673" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potos%C3%AD&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cerro de Potosi&lt;/a&gt; as a hat and it makes sense as headwear for Cthulhu. I probably won't change avatar just for the sake of having a different hat, as Elder Gods do not face rejection kindly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/30Jhp.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/30Jhp.png&quot; alt=&quot;I AWAKEN&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Understandably, even the mighty Cthulhu falls prey to the irresistible pull of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromniomancy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;cromniomancy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yUqf6.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yUqf6.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;I AM ETERNAL&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastEditorUserId="14670" LastEditDate="2015-12-28T08:35:02.810" LastActivityDate="2015-12-28T08:35:02.810" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-15T14:29:57.220" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;So far I've just got sad Eddie, Eddie-in-disguise, and Eddie-to-the-nines. Presumably he's on the way to a benefit/gala.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Anything else interferes too much with his beautiful, beautiful, big 80's hair.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/13X3fs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/13X3fs.png&quot; alt=&quot;sad Eddie&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UQfU5s.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UQfU5s.png&quot; alt=&quot;incognito Eddie&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/COiCfs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/COiCfs.png&quot; alt=&quot;Eddie to the nines&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the after-party, Eddie takes some fashion tips from Mark Knopfler:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8aAqd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8aAqd.png&quot; alt=&quot;Eddie and the &amp;#39;band&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2015-12-18T12:10:28.603" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T12:10:28.603" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-15T20:09:32.470" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a cat with food on its face, as &lt;a href=&quot;http://25.media.tumblr.com/583f5ffb1ae208adb09745d87b6caa89/tumblr_mm8knqg2DY1qgvkddo1_400.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;is traditional on the Internet&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SaZod.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Sufganiyot hat on nose&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.imgur.com/3gqZYSX.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;hurr durr I'm a dog&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5dBvY.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Researcher hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And because you can find &lt;a href=&quot;http://media2.popsugar-assets.com/files/2014/10/29/988/n/1922507/1dbc7e25a38663dc_1956723_10152762693172488_4021531078553772624_o/i/Thor-Cat.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;anything&lt;/a&gt; on the Interwebs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/STLRm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Odinson hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2015-12-22T18:00:15.753" LastActivityDate="2015-12-22T18:00:15.753" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5970" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-16T12:43:23.400" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I fear that I am about 1&amp;frac12; months late, but here's my dancing cactus cowboy dressed up as a Ghost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hxanN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hxanN.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10979" LastActivityDate="2015-12-16T12:43:23.400" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5971" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5972" CreationDate="2015-12-17T23:51:43.610" Score="11" ViewCount="445" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72203/15469&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question was put on hold as too broad. As far as I can tell, it isn't too broad - recalculating CR is a defined process, and we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68817/15469&quot;&gt;already&lt;/a&gt; have questions of this type on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, the question is clear, specific, and on-topic (not that that last was ever in question), so I'm struggling to see why it was closed, and why it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/24600&quot;&gt;attracted&lt;/a&gt; Leave Closed reviews in the Reopen queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72203/how-would-removing-tail-spikes-from-a-manticore-affect-its-challenge-rating#comment159755_72203&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; highly voted comment suggests that close votes might have been due to it being unclear why the user didn't recalculate the CR themselves, but that's not really a problem with the question. It might be a reason to downvote, since it suggests the asker didn't put any effort into it before asking us to do it for them, but it doesn't seem like a reason to close. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4825/15469&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing a good reason why this question was closed and should remain closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: Given that the question has begun attracting reopen votes, this meta was probably premature. Still, I won't delete it just yet, particularly since users who voted to close and leave closed may wish to give reasons why it shouldn't be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T04:21:45.720" Title="Why was this recalculating CR question closed as too broad?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5971" CreationDate="2015-12-18T01:05:16.027" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the patterns that I've noticed showing up persistently at RPG.se is what I'll call, for lack of a better term, &lt;em&gt;Low Quality Question Fatigue&lt;/em&gt;. The LQQF pattern is visible as the appearance of unusually stringent voting standards being applied to questions asked by certain citizens. The details vary, but it can be downvoting, withholding upvotes, or unusual close-voting (often in combination with slow reopen voting).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This pattern seems to be an emergent community response to a string of questions that seem to be lacking something, whether that's research, writing effort, effort at clarity, putting thought into what exactly the problem is, or… something else indefinable. A few questions like this are just the bread and butter of RPG.se, but the LQQF response kicks in when someone's string of questions continues with no apparent improvement over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Is this a problem?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes. And also no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, we want questions to be judged fairly, and we naturally &lt;em&gt;expect&lt;/em&gt; that a consistent standard is part of fair judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the community's collective “gut sense” of a question is what we're here to harvest via all these voting mechanisms. Though it often looks like we operate by rules and precedent (and we do in part — see the previous hand's point), we develop, refine, and &lt;em&gt;re&lt;/em&gt;define what “quality” means by observing our emergent judgments and the good (or bad) they do for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some ways, the collective is smarter than the individual citizens. The LQQF pattern is an interesting aspect of that: consistent quality-impaired questions over time are penalised, not on their individual merits as strict fairness would expect, but on their growing effect on the site as a set. That's a clever bit of emergent &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;optimisation for pearls&lt;/a&gt; that we can kinda appreciate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And sometimes the collective's decisions aren't so smart — or, more accurately I think, just need more time to fully emerge in a final “steady state”. The “guts” initial reaction isn't always right, even if their input is valuable and interesting. If the squooshy inarticulable sense of the community is the “guts”, I suppose we can think of the strong impulse towards overt rules-based fairness could be called the community's “superego”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, I think what happened was a Low Quality Question Fatigue reaction took hold and squashed that question, because the community is tired of &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; at the gut level (it's always hard to tell exactly what, it not being a unitary individual we can just ask) and it pushed back against that &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; it detected in this question. But the substance of the question seems fine from the view of fair judgement, and with a bit of light shone on it the “superego” is overturning what the “gut” had chosen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today*, the rational mind of the community wins out, and I think it's the right outcome for this question, as you obviously already do. In the next case of LQQF the visceral mind of the community might be the smarter one and reveal a problem our precedents don't handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsYourFriend&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Computer is Your Friend&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I suppose this is another installment in d7's series on “The System is Working as Intended, Trust the System.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* For the moment, at least. It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; still early say whether “leave open” is the eventual steady state for this question.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-12-18T04:21:45.720" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T04:21:45.720" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5971" CreationDate="2015-12-18T02:07:49.557" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The shorter form of explanation is that when people see someone ask a question that's clearly answered in the rules, they ask them &quot;have you read the rules? Are they unclear?&quot; With no response, the question gets closed as unclear, because the OP isn't clarifying what their problem is (not having read the book, or having read it and not understood it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty much fine, because if they can't be bothered to answer a clarifying question, it's also unlikely they'll ever be back for an answer. We don't just answer questions for kicks here, we do it to help posters that have the question. As a result, I support its closure as unclear, and think reopens would do better to see some engagement from the OP before white knighting them so hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T02:07:49.557" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-18T10:08:36.823" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In response to all the &quot;Jar Jar Binks is a Sith&quot; theories that have been circling the internet prior to the premiere, I present to you an alternative: Darth &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoidberg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Zoidberg&lt;/a&gt; (in Android form).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vnvRW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vnvRW.png&quot; alt=&quot;They said the Dark Side had cookies...&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Poor Zoidberg was crushed when he realized that, in fact, the Dark Side does not have cookies.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24817" LastActivityDate="2015-12-18T10:08:36.823" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5975" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="5976" CreationDate="2015-12-18T16:45:33.383" Score="4" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72219/how-do-you-introduce-someone-into-gming&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question got closed as a duplicate. However, the &quot;original&quot; question is not same as mine, and has no usable answers. I tried editing my question, to make the difference more clear, but it seems like it didn't work, as it soon got closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is about guiding a new GM in his learning experience, while the &quot;original&quot; is about encouraging players to try DMing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two answers given are not satisfactory to me, but the question is closed now, so I won't get any new answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do I do now? Where do I go from here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22774" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-12-19T00:06:38.773" Title="What to do when your question gets closed as a duplicate, but you have no usable answer?" Tags="|support|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5975" CreationDate="2015-12-18T18:04:42.167" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Editing the question to explain the difference is the first step, and that step has not been successfully done yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the paragraph you edited after the closure still doesn't sound like your question is different:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I want to know how I should fulfill my tutoring role, I do not need advice on how to encourage the player even further, neither do I need advice for the player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What's the difference between &lt;em&gt;fulfilling a tutoring role&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;encouraging them to GM&lt;/em&gt;? The average reader (myself included) probably doesn't see any difference between those two. If you do, you have to explain the difference. When the difference isn't explained by the question, the &lt;strong&gt;main point&lt;/strong&gt; of your question is missing!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How can you tutor someone &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; giving them advice? This part of your attempt to show the difference between the questions didn't work because it seems contradictory. Quite possibly there is a way that it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; make sense, but whatever that might be, it's missing from the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from the edit though, there is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am mainly interested in other's personal experiences, and possible blogs/articles on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/32153/153219&quot;&gt;we don't answer survey questions&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176/are-list-collection-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;questions requesting lists&lt;/a&gt;, making that the thing your question is “mainly interested in” guaranteed it would have been closed even if it wasn't a duplicate. Right now, even if you edited it to explain the difference in the questions, it would be reclosed as “too broad” because its central purpose is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion: It's still closed because the question needs a main point that isn't looking for a survey of experiences, and the question still needs to explain (in a way others will understand) what you see as the difference between the two questions or otherwise clarify why the answers to the other question don't solve your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether an edit works to clarify a question is empirical: if it doesn't attract enough reopen votes to reopen, it didn't fix the problem that caused the closure. At that point you can edit further, or ask in chat / on meta / in comments for help understanding the specific issues with the question and how (and whether) they can be fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2015-12-19T00:06:38.773" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5977" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-18T18:51:25.317" Score="15" ViewCount="252" Body="&lt;p&gt;We all love the hats,* and we covet the fashionable scarf of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2015.stackexchange.com/timey-wimey&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Timey Wimey hat&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But please, make edits that you would be proud of during the rest of the year. Edits should be, as always, either substantial improvements to the post or otherwise be important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trivial edits on old questions not only make the baby hats cry, but also threaten the integrity of the time streams.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* Apart from our resident hat-haters.**&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;** May not actually hate hats.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-04T00:45:32.863" LastActivityDate="2016-01-04T00:45:32.863" Title="Please avoid trivial edits during Winter Bash" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|winterbash-2015|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5978" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-21T04:25:14.813" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bgGBI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bgGBI.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and finally this one, I think it requires little explanation why I like this one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this one is pretty neat, it isn't the one I have been waiting for, but it tickles me enough to post it in the meantime&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/W4QZl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/W4QZl.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;now for what I was waiting to post here, not sure it ended up as awesome as I wanted, mainly it would have been better if there was an opening for the face to show through&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NWAK5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NWAK5.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;maybe it's better like this?&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yy9zM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yy9zM.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8233" LastEditorUserId="8233" LastEditDate="2015-12-31T22:12:38.737" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T22:12:38.737" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-21T13:05:30.810" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Surely, not one of the greatest that got posted here, but I am very proud of this dapper beguiler I created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/viTmV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/viTmV.png&quot; alt=&quot;A very dapper beguiler&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I noticed the harbinger also decided to preach and eat &lt;em&gt;in style&lt;/em&gt;. Classy, eimyr.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DsyZU.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DsyZU.png&quot; alt=&quot;A very dapper C&amp;#39;thulhu&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22774" LastEditorUserId="22774" LastEditDate="2015-12-21T16:26:15.100" LastActivityDate="2015-12-21T16:26:15.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-21T20:38:59.873" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This might not be good enough, and if it isn't feel free to smite it with your meta-privileges, but I find this Oracle to be particularly Crisp and Smooth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wbTQr.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wbTQr.png&quot; alt=&quot;Wow!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I got this hat, I immediately put it on, and then I sat and appreciated this image for a good 5 minutes before I decided to be a more productive being (after passing a wisdom save).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19580" LastActivityDate="2015-12-21T20:38:59.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-22T13:59:16.547" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am loathe to find a hat that would be better than this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HMiNh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HMiNh.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bP1TW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bP1TW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How about now? This white and gold hat is driving my mad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="23064" LastEditDate="2015-12-22T22:37:43.940" LastActivityDate="2015-12-22T22:37:43.940" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5964" CreationDate="2015-12-23T17:29:57.053" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/214536/can-we-have-a-royal-hat-next-year&quot;&gt;controversial royal celebrity hat&lt;/a&gt;…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HkHNz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HkHNz.png&quot; alt=&quot;The Fan-hat-ic hat upright, as it was meant to be worn&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… or is it a &lt;strike&gt;horrifying&lt;/strike&gt; charming cephalopod* lovingly sitting upon your head?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Uhgek.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Uhgek.png&quot; alt=&quot;Fan-hat-it hat worn upside down looks like an octopus&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the correct answer is clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* “But it only has four legs!” Obviously the other four tentacles are behind your head, for stability. You wouldn't want &lt;em&gt;widdle pwecious wookums&lt;/em&gt; to fall off, would you?&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2015-12-23T17:29:57.053" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5985" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-27T04:10:27.613" Score="8" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/16944/23970&quot;&gt;As a GM, what minimal geographic knowledge should I have to make realistic maps?&lt;/a&gt; was recently flagged for closure. Looking at it in vacuum, it appears (to me) to be off-topic: it doesn't seem to require any particular knowledge of RPGs to answer, even if its answers might be particularly &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; to RPGers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should it be closed as off-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should it be closed and somehow locked/preserved for historical interest? (And how would one suggest/achieve that?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I reading on-/off-topic too strictly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-12-27T05:05:53.593" Title="When should an old, upvoted, well-answered question be closed as off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5985" CreationDate="2015-12-27T04:56:22.827" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Map-making for RPGs has challenges and solutions that map-making for other purposes doesn't have. If a question's primary issue is something that requires RPG knowledge to solve, it's within our topic. That's one reason why the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/map-making&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;map-making&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;map-making&lt;/a&gt; tag exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question at hand is about map-making on-the-fly during an RPG session, which is something only RPG experts could give expert advice on: &lt;em&gt;practical&lt;/em&gt; mapping &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; RPGs isn't a knowledge domain available outside of the RPG community. The information the question needs to attract to count as answered just isn't generic: a general lesson in cartography and earth sciences that doesn't take into account what is (and &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt;) important to a GM running a game won't solve the problem at hand (as pointed out to the one answer-writer who made that mistake).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of skills that go into running and playing RPGs that are in theory generic, but in reality become specialised in order to be useful in RPGs. A good example is plotting: in theory it's a generic skill most often seen among authors and scriptwriters, but we all know how &lt;em&gt;badly&lt;/em&gt; a plot can go in an RPG if it ignore the unique needs of RPGs as a collaborative medium. Map-making is similar in being a generic skill that requires a &lt;strong&gt;Map-making (RPGs)&lt;/strong&gt; skill specialisation in order to be actually useful at the gaming table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2015-12-27T04:56:22.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5987" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5985" CreationDate="2015-12-27T05:05:53.593" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;To answer your titular question (which doesn't really match the body): close voting has nothing to do with a question's age, score, or answers. If it's close-worthy by our current standards, we close it, that's it. Sometimes answers help us recognise a question is good &amp;amp; worth keeping open, or not, but that's about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one seems on topic because it passes our rule of thumb about real-world topics &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;featured in the middle section of our on-topic help&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some RPG-specific stuff to map making. Some of it just closely resembles what you'd do for novels or whatever, but the accepted answer does bring up what you need to make an RPG session tick &amp;mdash; like they mention a session where they forgot a continental map, and the lack of one made problems for them. Doesn't seem egregious enough to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2015-12-27T05:05:53.593" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5988" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-27T10:20:36.927" Score="-11" ViewCount="502" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can only guess, but for me it looks like people put their own playstyle as a measurement what is good and what is bad for this site. Wake up. &lt;em&gt;Your&lt;/em&gt; playstyle is not the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; playstyle. Stop being so close-minded. This site is used to create a knowledge base on roleplaying games in general and not a style guideline for your personal table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm talking about an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72546/reduce-a-one-hand-weapon-to-a-light-weapon&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there any way to reduce a weapon's category from one-handed to a light weapon?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Easiest way to do so is to take a smaller weapon size, so if you are a medium creature, take a small weapon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's absolutely correct by any measure we have. &quot;Easiest&quot; may be opinion, but I think as this rule is from the players handbook and the ingame cost and time is negligible, this does indeed qualify as &quot;easiest&quot;. Not &quot;best&quot; mind you. Just &quot;easiest&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But two people have decided, this site would be better of if this answer was gone. They used the gamification of this site to send the message that all parties would win if this post was deleted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't mind people playing min-max games to the extreme. That's fine. It's not my table, I won't comment on their way to have fun. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But can we please stop to downvote factually correct answers based on what we would do at &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; tables with &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; characters? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-02-21T22:29:25.557" Title="Can we agree to stop downvoting non-opinionated, factually correct answers?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5989" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5988" CreationDate="2015-12-27T11:05:37.830" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your request is unreasonable and runs contrary to how our voting system works. We can't comply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, factual correctness isn't our only measure of whether to vote &amp;mdash; our real measure is whether an answer is &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;not useful.&lt;/em&gt; I don't know if that answer's a wise idea (I don't have the experience to judge), but bad options, even if factually correct, are still bad options. Our experience-based wisdom in determining good &amp;amp; bad answers is &lt;em&gt;why we're here to vote&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone considers taking a smaller weapon a bad enough idea to downvote it, they can; if you think it's fine and good enough to upvote, you can. Between you &amp;amp; the other person, the answer will develop a score that'll push it higher or lower. Exceptional flawless answers will rise to the top, OK but problematic answers won't, deeply flawed answers will sink. That's a feature of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: just cast your vote. Don't, however, ask someone to ignore their own experience in their own voting. They have different experience and judgement to you. If their judgement is different, insisting they stop voting the way they are is dangerously close to &lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/386/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;someone just being wrong on the internet&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real issue here is that, lo and behold, comments effectively saying &quot;this is wrong/bad&quot;, without providing any actionable improvement, are prone to starting arguments and causing discord. The person who left such a comment this time, who I'll leave unnamed, leaves a lot of these and is probably &lt;em&gt;well aware&lt;/em&gt; of the repercussions and arguments they'll start. I've flagged the comment as too chatty, like I'd do with any of this nature, and it's very likely to be removed quite soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2015-12-27T11:17:57.040" LastActivityDate="2015-12-27T11:17:57.040" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5988" CreationDate="2015-12-27T11:26:42.793" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer by doppelgreener says most of what I would say on this topic, but one point I feel needs to be addressed is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But two people have decided, this site would be better of [sic] if this answer was gone. They used the gamification of this site to send the message that all parties would win if this post was deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not what a downvote means. If you hover over the downvote button, you can see what a downvote does mean:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer is not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it. That's all a downvote means. We all like to read more into them, and there often is more to a user's decision to place them, but equating them to a delete vote or flag is pretty extreme, and not useful for discussion of this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2015-12-27T11:26:42.793" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5991" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6002" CreationDate="2015-12-28T00:21:04.953" Score="8" ViewCount="279" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1605/23064&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; being asked about actual podcasts of games and want to ask if there are any podcasts with x criteria. Is this regarded as off-topic or will it be otherwise closed due to some other failing (too broad, subjective)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, how can I post a good enough question for a recommendation of a podcast?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T14:05:56.627" Title="Are podcast recommendations off topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5991" CreationDate="2015-12-28T03:05:58.490" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, they're on topic. They need to cover an actual RPG-related problem, which will usually mean you're requesting actual play examples. Those are covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt;, and are valuable teaching instruments in learning how a game actually gets played, or how certain parts get handled. Podcasts in general also get covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;podcast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;podcast&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you're just looking for a cool podcast to listen to, it'll be closed as primarily opinion based because that's not what we're here for, but that should come as no surprise.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There hasn't been much major problem with them yet making them need to be off-topic. We only rule things off topic when a significant amount of historical evidence shows they're non-viable. With only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/podcast+or+session-summaries&quot;&gt;17 questions between the podcast &amp;amp; session-summaries tags&lt;/a&gt;, we've hardly tried them out yet. Until then, we just close problematic instances for our standard applicable reasons, if they apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Session summaries were discussed recently in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5868/1204&quot;&gt;Can there be a good use for [session-summaries]?&lt;/a&gt; and found to have merit, in fact.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They match the second of three patterns in &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is hard: let's go shopping&lt;/a&gt;. The second version's problematic primarily because of quick obsolescence, but that's not an issue here. Meanwhile, we accept many questions fitting that pattern: character builds (especially for games like D&amp;amp;D 5e and Pathfinder that still have new material being released regularly, which &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; face obsolescence issues), and requests for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot;&gt;online resources&lt;/a&gt; such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-sheets&quot;&gt;character sheets&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;referendum on game-recs&lt;/a&gt;, and the close reason that came from it, doesn't establish other kinds of recommendations (online resources or not) as off topic. The mods intended the discussion to represent community opinion on &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; recommendations, but the community doesn't agree such a discussion took place, thinking it specifically covered our draconian rules applied to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;s and &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; adventure-recs (see users' reactions: in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5843/1204&quot;&gt;1 and all responses&lt;/a&gt;; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5853/1204&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=26032730#26032730&quot;&gt;3a&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=26033220#26033220&quot;&gt;3b&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=24669136#24669136&quot;&gt;4&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=24669097#24669097&quot;&gt;5&lt;/a&gt;). Using our referendum on game-recs to suggest we've already discussed the topicality of all recommendations is disingenuous and acting as if the discussion is more complete than it actually was; &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; is our opportunity to discuss podcast recs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question won't be too broad or primarily opinion-based &lt;em&gt;by default,&lt;/em&gt; so unless it &lt;em&gt;really is&lt;/em&gt; a close-worthy criteria, it could totally stay open. How to keep it open is a &lt;em&gt;big&lt;/em&gt; question we can't answer fully, but it will help to remember there's a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of podcasts and they're not all neatly gathered together in any one place. Otherwise, stick to business as usual: tell us the actual problem you're facing, ask us how to resolve it, say if there's anything specific you need from us. You may want to review existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/session-summaries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;session-summaries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;session-summaries&lt;/a&gt; questions to see what they did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Incidentally I've voted to close that question you linked because I feel that particular one &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; too broad, it's just arbitrarily requesting any sort of podcast collection.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2015-12-30T23:57:16.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5991" CreationDate="2015-12-28T04:14:35.413" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll borrow from the close menu here, specifically the &quot;off-topic because&quot; bit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“Shopping” questions and other recommendation requests are off-topic, but can be asked on any one of a number of role-playing games discussion forums. For more information, see Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to find podcasts, a question about &lt;strong&gt;how&lt;/strong&gt; to find podcasts could be on-topic, or you could just try &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/15469&quot;&gt;a forum&lt;/a&gt; instead of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2015-12-28T04:14:35.413" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5994" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2015-12-28T04:47:56.447" Score="7" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;The off topic close reason for shopping questions is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“Shopping” questions and other recommendation requests are off-topic, but can be asked on any one of a number of role-playing games discussion forums. For more information, see Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;and other recommendation requests&quot; bit is over-broad. We need to rephrase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recommendations of games, published adventures, and tools went off topic. A great deal of &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; kinds of recommendation requests are still totally on topic: character build questions and social trouble questions very often involve recommendations or outright request them and are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; off topic, but sound like they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However the overbroad phrasing is a bit sloppy and is impacting other things occasionally. Most recently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5993/1204&quot;&gt;it was suggested the wording means podcasts requests are off topic&lt;/a&gt;. Those were never in the game-rec scope that we removed the rules for, and are just generally covered by Good Subjective, Bad Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;shopping questions&lt;/a&gt; blog posts expresses three patterns: &quot;what should I buy?&quot; (hugely problematic), &quot;what's the best option meeting Y criteria?&quot; (better, avoids most problems) &quot;how can I tell what a good option is?&quot; (best), from worst to best in that order. Many of our existing, good, on-topic types of recommendations fit the &lt;em&gt;middle&lt;/em&gt; scenario, and many are for games for which material is still being released (like D&amp;amp;D 5e and Pathfinder) so they share the exact same kind of problems. We haven't ruled that entire pattern of shopping questions off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to tighten up the wording to be more specific, but apparently there's a 400 character limit and this one's 426:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“Shopping” questions are off topic, which covers recommendations of games, supplement products and published adventures, as well as requests specifically for assistive tools. These can be asked on any one of a number of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;role-playing games discussion forums&lt;/a&gt;. For more information, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a fitting &amp;amp; accurate description we can use?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Code for the original/current version:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;“Shopping” questions and other recommendation requests are off-topic, but can be asked on any one of a number of [role-playing games discussion forums](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449). For more information, see [Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747).&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T03:02:47.453" Title="Our shopping recommendation off-topic close reason is too generic" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5991" CreationDate="2015-12-28T16:05:06.273" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are podcast recommendations off topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sadly, yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All recommendations are off topic, not some specifically enumerated list (well, you didn't mention GM screens...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historical reading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are tool recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason is the same reason for paid products, Web resources, tools, etc. Questions will tend to poorly define their criteria and generate a long list of soon to be outdated options (like the linked podcast req in the question). Or people will helpfully just &quot;Google that for them.&quot;  Or... All the other reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rec questions, also known as &quot;shopping questions,&quot; are banned network-wide.  We tried to allow them under limited cases.  While the discussion was about &quot;game recs,&quot; given our reasoning we allowed other kinds of recs under the banner of that experiment. But when that experiment failed because we couldn't do them well, that experiment ended, again the discussion was mostly about &quot;game recs&quot; but it applies whole cloth to all the recs brought in under that experiment's banner.  Therefore &quot;game recs&quot; now banned means all recs banned. There aren't any meaningful changes when it's &quot;but its an X-rec&quot; that eliminates the issues with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the answer is &quot;no, same reason,&quot; and what can we do about it is &quot;same thing.&quot; &quot;What's the best way to learn Savage Worlds by watching people play it&quot; could be legitimately answered with &quot;Among other options watching podcasts, and here are two good SW APs I listen to...&quot;  But &quot;I want a SW AP podcast&quot; fits into the exact same req category and will have the exact same problems, in fact nearly identical to tools in that they tend to go dead more often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are trying to argue through false analogy that &quot;well then anything where anyone is asked to give some opinion is banned.&quot; That's not true, it's requests for classes of off-site resources where there is no other more high quality answer possible than a list of one or more resources. &quot;I want your recommendation, as in your expert opinion, on this character option&quot; is not a &quot;rec question&quot; in this sense.  Consider it a &quot;resource recommendation&quot; ban if that helps you. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We tried to allow curated rec questions.  It didn't work.  We're not going to then try to re-allow it in corner cases, it takes way too much work for the value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that shopping/rec questions are off topic Stack wide as a general policy - we allowed game-recs (which was left as a deliberately vague term instead of having &quot;adventure-rec, setting-rec, etc. per a previous meta conversation) as an experiment, but once that experiment was ended there's nothing else rec-cy left on topic we need to explicitly remove. That was one umbrella exception and that umbrella's closed. We had to say that out loud in the tool-rec discussion, but don't really need to say it again for every *-rec discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I love podcasts, I hope this poster gets an answer somewhere, etc. I championed us trying to do recs and keep them on topic here.  We as a community failed in that, which disappoints me too but it's water under the bridge and we need to move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T14:05:56.627" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5996" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5988" CreationDate="2015-12-28T16:23:48.363" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, now that the lock is off, here's the real bottom line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should people not be voting down answers because it's a legitimate answer but doesn't fit their particular playstyle? Probably, especially if it'll be helpful to the OP and/or other viewers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can or should we somehow enforce that? No. You know the score, you &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; vote down something that's &quot;unhelpful&quot; but different people have different perspectives on that and vote their minds. We have no Big Brother-esque power to affect how and why people are voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look, we have an issue especially with our D&amp;amp;D 3.5e questions that we can't really do anything directly about.  We have a cadre of &quot;our way is the right way&quot; users that have a deep love for 3.5e optimization and any question or answer that mentions in a positive way monks, rogues, Sean K Reynolds, the D&amp;amp;D FAQ, Weapon Focus, using larger/smaller weapons, critical fumbles, and a list of other items that are &quot;hot button&quot; to that clique will get instantly downvoted and sassed as &quot;never good&quot; by members of that group. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This behavior presumes that every poster wants that kind of optimization, which is inaccurate (and in the case of the noobs, it's pretty clear that these issues are down in the noise in terms of weird choices they're making). We the community can intervene when comments are actually rude, but other than that people are free to vote however they want, even if it's just because they're grumpy that day. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These kinds of answers will never be deleted, because the community and/or the mods certainly won't allow playstyle advocates to censor others - downvotes aren't delete votes, however, and there is no mechanism (nor should there be) to override them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would recommend that people who consider an answer to be Advocating Suboptimal Play to find mildly more constructive ways of expressing that - &quot;This is a legitimate option but you might want to note that it's going to almost always be mechanically less optimal than X&quot; is a comment someone might actually incorporate into their answer and serve your actual goal. We know that just &quot;YOU ARE WRONG&quot; comments will get deleted eventually. They also cause fights, like this one. Such commenters are partially responsible for these fights, and can't just give that &quot;who what me?&quot; line when they are knowingly making absolutist statements and piling on people legitimately answering a question. Don't contribute to fights: even if you are right, you're still part of the problem. And &quot;He was rude, but he was right about games&quot; is a reasonably unfulfilling epitaph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would recommend that people who find those folks and their votes and comments obnoxious to just vote and comment (ONCE!) their mind and move on. As you'll note on this question, as more eyes not part of the 3.5e Quick Response Team land on the question, those other answers start to get voted up too. I know it offends your sense of justice in the universe, but part of participating on a social site with people with wildly varying belief systems is accepting that there will be some subgroup with strongly held beliefs that work counter to yours. Flipping out every time they do it doesn't help anyone. You don't need to 'wake up the sheeple,' we all know it's going on, but given the democratic nature of the site it has to be allowed to go on.  Counteract it with positive acts (answers, votes, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For everyone else, especially new users who contribute an answer that runs afoul of this debate. remember that any one given comment is only a statement of opinion of one of... looks like... 14,000-ish users of the site. Four downvotes is a pretty damn small clique on a site of this size. Evaluate the worth of comments, determine if your answer really could be improved by incorporating something from them, and then just let 'er ride. Consider what someone says, but don't feel the need to overreact to it.  Those comments will likely go away soon enough, remember. And upvotes are worth way more than downvotes rep-wise, and you'll get some ups as long as your answer really does make some sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2015-12-29T22:15:33.107" LastActivityDate="2015-12-29T22:15:33.107" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5994" CreationDate="2015-12-28T17:55:19.743" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the custom close reason might actually be unnecessary. Every question &lt;em&gt;correctly&lt;/em&gt; closeable with the &quot;shopping&quot; custom reason can be closed as either &quot;purely opinion-based&quot; if it's looking for recommendations that are all equally correct (and hence unvotable) or &quot;too broad&quot; if it's hoping to compile a list. The class of questions you're legit concerned might be caught in the overly-broad net of &quot;other recommendations&quot; aren't &lt;em&gt;purely&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based nor usually soliciting a list, so our standard close reasons are ironically more precise than the custom reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage of the custom reason is to convey that we really do follow the network standard ban on &quot;what should I get/read/watch/play next&quot; questions. In practice that seems to have mostly been useful to convey it to our own regulars, but that purpose has been fairly well served by now. If the wording of the custom close reason is creating more problems and arguments about what it &lt;em&gt;de jure&lt;/em&gt; means than it is solving, then it may have outlived its usefulness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-12-28T18:18:40.930" LastActivityDate="2015-12-28T18:18:40.930" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5994" CreationDate="2015-12-31T03:02:47.453" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like your new wording.  Change  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...any one of a number of role-playing games discussion forums&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...most RPG discussion forums&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and the 26 characters you need saved are saved at a minimal loss of quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that custom close reasons are the way to go even if they are entirely covered by existing reasons if they tell our users (especially casual/first time visitors) what's actually going on more effectively, and I think this should stay and be edited as our policy changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T03:02:47.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="5999" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6001" CreationDate="2015-12-31T15:49:00.483" Score="12" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;We currently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/age-of-rebellion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;age-of-rebellion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;age-of-rebellion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/force-and-destiny&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;force-and-destiny&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;force-and-destiny&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edge-of-the-empire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edge-of-the-empire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edge-of-the-empire&lt;/a&gt; tags for Star Wars.  These three games use very much the same system - they use the same quirky dice, the same skill and ability check system, the same advancement track system, etc.  They also share the same exact subset of the Star Wars universe.  And while I will acknowledge they are not identical systems, there is far more alike between them than there are differences.  More to the point, examining the questions already tagged with one or more of the game tags, the vast majority of the questions apply to all games.  A large proportion of them already carry the tags of multiple versions of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are far more alike in system and setting than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; and those are covered by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; 'parent tag'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not suggesting going out and editing all &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edge-of-the-empire+or+age-of-rebellion+or+force-and-destiny&quot;&gt;32 current questions&lt;/a&gt; (for now), but I am asking is if I were to ask a question applicable to one or more of those games, should I create such an umbrella tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3091/star-wars-edge-of-the-empire-and-subsequent-tags?rq=1&quot;&gt;previously discussed&lt;/a&gt;, with the conclusion that we should discuss this further when the new games come out.  Two years later, those games have come out.  As noted here, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wh40k&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wh40k&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wh40k&lt;/a&gt; to cover the exact same situation that Fantasy Flight has put us in for that universe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-26T01:08:02.647" LastActivityDate="2023-08-04T15:44:01.900" Title="Should there be a 'Parent tag' for the FFG Star Wars games?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5999" CreationDate="2015-12-31T16:34:07.963" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tagging is an &quot;emergent folksonomy.&quot; This means tags appear when they are needed.  If no one has asked a question meaningful across the games, then there's no need for the parent tag.  Once they do, then we should discuss if the tag is named right or whatnot.  Proactively creating tags, however, is bad for a variety of reasons and we should avoid it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T16:34:07.963" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6001" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5999" CreationDate="2015-12-31T19:37:57.520" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Part of the reason such a tag doesn't yet exist is: what would it be &lt;em&gt;called&lt;/em&gt;? There's no obvious umbrella term for these games. In theory we could have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-ffg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-ffg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-ffg&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ffg-star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ffg-star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ffg-star-wars&lt;/a&gt;, but the discoverability of those is low because it doesn't have much currency as &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; name for this set of games. Unlike WoD, there isn't a widely-used and -recognised parent term, partly because FFG has deliberately made the games difficult to refer to them collectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag for this set of games might be theoretically useful, and would even make sense from a searching standpoint to find Q&amp;amp;A relevant to all three games, but that theoretical utility is mooted by being not very useful in practice because there's no term that people would intuitively be searching for or trying to tag with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What appears to happen in practice is that people tag with the game they are playing, or if they are well-informed enough to know it applies to them all, tagging with all three of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, these could have a parent tag. But they shouldn't have one unless there is a natural name for the set of games already that would be obvious to new and casual users of RPG.se. The fact that there isn't one yet strongly indicates that such a natural name doesn't exist, since &lt;em&gt;someone&lt;/em&gt; would have used it by now if there was one. The current tagging has some flaws, but a parent tag that's a neologism wouldn't be used naturally there therefore wouldn't fix those flaws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2015-12-31T21:16:53.633" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T21:16:53.633" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6002" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5991" CreationDate="2015-12-31T20:30:36.877" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;General recommendations for podcasts are, being shopping questions, off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, like tool-recs, some of the questions asking for recommendations for podcasts of type X are really trying to solve an underlying problem which we &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; help with if we knew about it. These kinds of questions can often be rewritten to be about the underlying issue, or in some rare cases will be fine without rewriting because the underlying issue is already plain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of the latter is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69853/actual-play-of-dont-rest-your-head-one-shot-exemplar&quot;&gt;Actual Play of Don&amp;#39;t Rest Your Head one-shot exemplar&lt;/a&gt;: this question's underlying problem is clearly “I don't get how DRYH works/fits together in play.” Now, this could be rewritten to be something like “how do I figure out how DRYH works”, and possibly it would be better helped that way — but I rather doubt it. Pragmatically the answer is going to be some type of “observe other people playing it,” and given DRYH's niche appeal making attending a live demo close to impossible, there really is only one kind of answer possible: pointing to a session recording or summary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the exception also demonstrates the principle: general podcast recommendation requests that &lt;em&gt;lack&lt;/em&gt; a visible underlying problem can't be answered except with a laundry list of podcasts. These suggestions will be based on no more than guesses at their usefulness for the asker (because we don't know what problem they're supposed to be solving!) and the answer author's personal tastes. A set of answers like that defeats the purpose of using RPG.se instead of a forum because the voting will just be noise, and beyond being an ineffective use of the site, the sharp uptick in noise degrades the signal-to-noise ratio that the site's coding and rules revolve around protecting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusion: How to ask for podcasts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want to ask for podcasts that satisfy criteria X, the best way to ensure the survival of the question is to reorient to focus on explaining what problem you have (which inspired the desire for recommendations) instead, and leave the request for podcasts as a tangential mention: that you were thinking maybe a podcast would help you. Then the question's problem would be clear, and answerers would be free to answer with all their expert knowledge, podcast related or not, instead of just being a hive mind container to extract web links from (which is what a discussion forum and other social media excels at). As a bonus, mentioning that you &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; a podcast might solve the problem — assuming you've explained the problem in general already — can help give readers a bit more insight into your experience of the problem and possibly improve answers thereby, even if they don't end up being links to podcasts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2015-12-31T21:11:24.950" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6003" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-01T22:36:22.880" Score="2" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67399/1204&quot;&gt;answered How do I run a maze scenario without using a map?&lt;/a&gt; a while back; while I think my recommendation's a great one, I stipulate that the presentation's very hard to follow. (That is, I don't have any problem with the down-votes.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I've run one in-chat, rather than in-person, and I have some idea of how to re-present the idea in a much more concise form. I see three alternatives before me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;massively&lt;/em&gt; edit the current answer;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;delete the current answer and re-post from scratch;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;post anew, leaving the old answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My instinct is to post anew, so that readers could see both presentations and judge accordingly. But I'm not sure that's the best approach. Recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-24T22:36:25.587" LastActivityDate="2020-05-24T22:36:25.587" Title="How to best re-work answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6003" CreationDate="2016-01-02T06:49:13.677" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're presenting about the same thing, but in a heavily revised more useful way, I suggest you just do a huge edit. Having two answers which try to say about the same stuff is going to be confusing, so #3's right out. Whoever cares about comparing and contrasting will use the edit history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel it's wholly different such that the -2 score shouldn't reflect on your new version, you can delete and post a new answer. We can't really judge whether that's appropriate for you without seeing the new version. I suspect people won't object strongly or raise much of a fuss; this happens on rare occasions and isn't really a big deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a big deal if you've just deleted then reposted more or less exactly the same thing &amp;mdash; people have done that in the past to blatantly evade downvotes, and it doesn't get received well. I don't think we have to worry about this in your case. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're presenting an entirely different &lt;em&gt;position,&lt;/em&gt; you should read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4938/1204&quot;&gt;Do I edit or create a new answer when my view on my current answer changes significantly?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T06:49:13.677" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6005" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6006" CreationDate="2016-01-02T21:54:29.890" Score="3" ViewCount="52" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to find out if asking questions about table top turn based strategy games such as Warhammer, War Machine, Hordes, etc. are acceptable for this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20898" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-02T22:01:09.640" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T22:01:09.640" Title="Are table top battle games acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2016-01-02T22:02:25.583" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6005" CreationDate="2016-01-02T22:00:20.387" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. Wargaming questions are off-topic for RPG.se as they are not about roleplaying games. Wargaming questions are on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games SE&lt;/a&gt; though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2016-01-02T22:00:20.387" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6007" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6008" CreationDate="2016-01-03T01:23:23.937" Score="12" ViewCount="133" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally a colloquy on a post will prompt a commenter to move the discussion to chat, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72611/23970&quot;&gt;recently happened to me&lt;/a&gt;. The chat room thereby created: is it persistent, or does it expire after some time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T11:39:30.103" Title="How persistent are &quot;continue this discussion in chat&quot; rooms?" Tags="|discussion|comments|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6008" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6007" CreationDate="2016-01-03T01:29:52.647" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rooms with any sort of meaningful content exist forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As outlined &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/faq#retention&quot;&gt;in the chat FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, &quot;A room is considered worth retaining if it has more than 15 messages by at least 2 users.&quot; Any such room is available for everyone (including non site members) to find &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;on this list of RPG.SE chat rooms&lt;/a&gt;, for as long as the Stack exists. Also they're seeded to Google.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original Question/Answer page doesn't automatically get a link to that chat room, because anything productive to improving the main site content should be applied via edits to the questions and answers. The chat is there to &lt;em&gt;reduce&lt;/em&gt; the clutter so questions and answers are easily found, not to add to the reading someone needs to do to get a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-01-03T11:39:30.103" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T11:39:30.103" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6009" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-03T20:32:00.917" Score="-5" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to post the following answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72696/gurps-4e-space-combat-hexes-and-distance&quot;&gt;GURPS 4E Space Combat - Hexes and Distance&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but in the time it took me to write it, it got closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One-yard hexes are for man-to-man combat, usually in close quarters. It's awesome for brawls, combat with hand weapons (swords, spears), and close-range shootouts (in buildings with relatively small rooms). So I'd only use that scale with fighters if they are parked - or if they're flying over a combat, in which case they're pretty much be a several-hex-wide streak moving across the whole map in one turn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For fast-moving vehicles, yes, you want to use another scale. And space fighters are very fast. The minimum scale you might consider using for space fighter dogfights would probably have each hex be at least slightly larger than the size of the largest fighter - I'd use maybe 25 yards minimum, but probably more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little concerned from an accuracy point of view with the 100 MGLT to 55 yards/s conversion. 55 yards/s = 50 m/s = 180 km/hour = 111 miles/hour, so that's about as fast as a decent car can go on an open highway. A World War I biplane can manage twice as fast. I'd think space fighters would be faster still, and outside an atmosphere, would be unlimited and acceleration would be what would matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; try to build your own hex-based simulation of starfighter combat in GURPS using the existing rules. They do have rules for momentum and turning radius and to-hit modifiers for relative speed/range and so on. However you still have a lot of work to do to have it come out well, and your first tries may have errors or gameplay problems. If I were to do that, I'd look at how many seconds I wanted per turn, too, and watch (and time) the dogfights in the first Star Wars film for inspiration. I'd notice that there are several seconds of maneuvering trying to get an opportunity to fire, and that a lot of what determines who gets to fire and where the ships are relative to each other is based on the pilots' ability to notice and keep track of where everyone is, including communicating with each other to alert and coordinate actions. It's very much not a case of everyone seeing where everything is, and making decisions for each second. Also it's not about one fighter moving 300 yards and then another fighter moving 300 yards - they tend to chase each other, so the movement is actually the difference between the two, with a contest of skill and vehicle properties determining whether one pilot gets to line up a shot, or the other gets away, or a wingman gets on the tail of the guy going after him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One option is to use some of the existing GURPS rules for more abstract space combat, which don't even use maps. Before 4th edition, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/Space/3e/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS Space&lt;/a&gt; included an abstract space combat system. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/spaceships/spaceships1/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS Spaceships&lt;/a&gt; is the space combat system for &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/Space/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS Space 4e&lt;/a&gt; (which doesn't include one), which is mapless but a hex system is in the works. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/Lensman/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS Lensman&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/Compendium2/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Compendium II&lt;/a&gt; have 3e versions of a Space Opera combat system which is abstract but pretty good and more geared for Star Wars dramatic dogfights than simulation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another option is to integrate some other dogfight game, making a conversion system from GURPS to that game. For example, you could try using the Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game, though its scale is... interesting, but it comes at the problem of designing a Star Wars space combat game from the low-resolution side, which could at least be interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I were to do this, I'd probably look at all of the above, and pick the parts I liked. I'd probably use a combination where the character/strategy based system in 3e Lensman/Compendium-II is used, but results in corresponding movements on a 3D hex map to keep track of where things are, even if just in general terms. I might also be wanting to include larger ships which dwarf the fighters, so the hex scale might be closer to the size of a Star Destroyer, and fighters move into the same hex to do Lensman-style dogfight combat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are tons of choices - it depends on what you and your players want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want help and ideas and open-ended discussion on modelling such things in GURPS, the best place for it is probably the &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS forums&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T23:59:30.840" Title="Can I please post my answer to this question that closed while I was writing it?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6009" CreationDate="2016-01-03T20:34:38.757" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  Help the question get clarified and reopened, then answers can be posted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T20:34:38.757" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6009" CreationDate="2016-01-03T23:59:30.840" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It does need clarification first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answer above has some details that reassures me that closing was the right choice, as it has a number of mismatches with the fan rules they're using. You're currently benefiting from it being held for clarifications before posting, as it would possibly draw downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on those same investigations I am fairly sure that answers would be greatly improved in usefulness to the question asker if they would clarify the situation they're asking about. For example, the fan rules they are using say &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to put ships on maps, so why they have a TIE Fighter on the map will reveal important details about what the heck they're trying to accomplish that is critical to giving them an answer that usefully addresses what the heck they're trying to accomplish. There is evidently important information missing, even if it's only information that reveals their precise confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That energy isn't a waste though. Your work so far is saved in the text box by the site, so it will still be there when it unholds, ready to revise to take into account any new information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be reassuring to consider, too, that if they don't even bother returning to fix their question, then your work wouldn't have ever been seen by them to even partially help. The hold thus incidentally ensures that the asker cares enough about the question to actually read any answers that come in, so the wait is somewhat beneficial for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-01-03T23:59:30.840" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6012" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-04T18:24:39.207" Score="2" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;This started for me, and apparently others, today.  A user gets a new badge or a net-positive change in reputation, and the drawer icon does not change like it used to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I say drawer icon, I mean...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qicWV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qicWV.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am using Windows 10, Firefox 43.0.2&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At 20:30 UTC today, net positive rep triggered the drawer icon to highlight.  This may have been an anomaly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2016-01-04T20:50:54.213" LastActivityDate="2016-01-04T22:17:14.270" Title="The Achievement Drawer does not highlight on new net rep" Tags="|bug|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2016-02-04T13:04:26.603" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6013" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6012" CreationDate="2016-01-04T22:17:14.270" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was one who mentioned badges. I picked up &quot;Disciplined&quot; 8 hours ago: it shows up in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/23970/nitsua60&quot;&gt;my activity&lt;/a&gt; but never lit up my drawer. Then again, it's not listed in today's achievements, either, so perhaps I've just never noticed how long a lag there sometimes is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-01-04T22:17:14.270" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6014" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-04T23:38:56.663" Score="0" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hoping to hear some others' perspectives, so as to better-calibrate mine to the community's. I'm struck by two of yesterday's questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72712/23970&quot;&gt;one closed as too broad&lt;/a&gt;, the other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72706/23970&quot;&gt;answered many times&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I totally get that context matters: we can answer questions about spell use and expect relatively tight construction, and we would expect... looseness when it comes to GM advice. Really, I'd just love it if a fewpeople weighed in with their thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, here's the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;FAQ guidance on breadth&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt; - if your question could be answered by an entire book, or has many valid answers, it's probably too broad for our format&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow down the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-01-04T23:58:11.343" Title="When asking, how broad is &quot;too broad&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6014" CreationDate="2016-01-04T23:58:11.343" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no hard rules, though there is some good guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5758/why-was-my-question-closed-as-too-broad-unclear-or-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?&lt;/a&gt; (especially noting that unclear and too broad are often used interchangeably by people).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the cantrip question (&quot;can cantrips affect the environment&quot;) is a mix of broad and unclear, in that obviously some do and some don't, but he really is asking about one cantrip, and his real issue is understanding that spells do what they say and side effects aren't RAW.  Asking a more general question than you have throws up red flags to people and there's VtC, sometimes as broad and sometimes as unclear. You did a good job of answering it and covering all the bases, but when an answer requires multiple clauses about &quot;what you think you're asking, what you are asking, and what you should be asking&quot; it's a sign it's a poor question. Ask yourself, why does that question even say &quot;cantrip?&quot; Why isn't the question about any spell? Another muddy-thinking red flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The GM question, like many technique questions, was already closed once as unclear and then was reopened.  It is just barely on the other side of that line now IMO - which is why many of the answers are a frame challenge. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, both of these questions are on the line of &quot;I'd vote to close in their current state if I were mildly irritable today.&quot; I haven't VtCed either (I did the GM one in its previous way more incoherent state).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You note the second has lots of answers like that's a good thing, but actually that many answers can be a sign that it is indeed too broad or unclear. In this case I think after one close and reopen people kinda just think &quot;well, he's not going to get any more clear on this and that's actually his problem, because he thinks PCs pointing out logic holes in his plot is a bad players problem.&quot; So they reopened and are answering.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cantrip one could have used some more clarification - if only because the clarification process often helps the OP actually get their thinking straight and gain clarity even before answers roll in. In the end, your answer is the &quot;right&quot; one most likely, but we like to teach a man to fish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-01-04T23:58:11.343" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5951" CreationDate="2016-01-06T06:34:53.423" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that the official stance of Onyx Path (and by virtue of being the only mouthpiece I can find for the new White Wolf, presumably White Wolf), that 'New World of Darkness' branding is being retroactively sunset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theonyxpath.com/2015-heres-how-we-rolled-monday-meeting-notes/#comment-455090&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;A commenter asked&lt;/a&gt;... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Minor request when you have a chance, can you clarify the naming conventions on the Chronicles as far as how they relate to the nWoD versions? Is it only nWoD 2 that is the Chronicles and the old version is still nWoD, is it Chronicles 1 and 2nd Ed, or is it something else all together?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To which Rich Thomas (richt), head of Onyx, replied&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;All of the stuff we have previously or would call nWoD is now Chronicles of Darkness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By official naming, all the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; and similarly named tags should be transitioned to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; and similarly named tags &lt;em&gt;if we are going to encourage following the official product names&lt;/em&gt; - which is admittedly complicated by not being the name on some of the book covers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2016-01-06T17:41:59.083" LastActivityDate="2016-01-06T17:41:59.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6017" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6018" CreationDate="2016-01-08T03:55:21.563" Score="5" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;Up in the right corner, there is a search box. I know, based on clicking on things from profiles, that there are modifiers that can be added to the search to filter the return. At the least, you can search for only postings by unique users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that, is there a guide that details the parameters that can be entered to filter search results? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;EDIT&lt;/strong&gt; Following @waxeagle's answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A general guide for looking around the site exists on the help page, only shows you how to use the search function to find tags. While there is a poorly formatted &quot;Advanced Search TIPS&quot; drop down on the sideboard of the results display page, I'd expect educational notes about these modifiers to have their own hyperlinked wiki-esque page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &quot;Advanced Search Tips&quot; includes each available modifier, it may serve to include it as its own page via the Help center. I'd even volunteer to try and write it if that is a thing that can be done. If there are modifiers not detailed in the tips, perhaps someone else would enjoy some fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TLDR:&lt;/strong&gt; Can a guide that precisely describes the advanced methods for using the search function be added as a link on the help center?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25601" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-01-22T03:08:45.193" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T03:08:45.193" Title="Is there a guide on using the Search Function?" Tags="|support|feature-request|search|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6017" CreationDate="2016-01-08T03:59:30.450" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This link in the help center has a comprehensiv(ish at least) guide to using search: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/searching&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/searching&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also a handy reference that you can locate by clicking &quot;Advanced Search Tips&quot; in the right side bar on search results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Re: second part of your question: we do not have that ability. If you're looking for an additional guide, MSE may have it, else you could write it as a Q&amp;amp;A/series of Q&amp;amp;As on meta here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-01-08T04:19:12.720" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6019" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6017" CreationDate="2016-01-08T04:54:16.200" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The thing I was looking for specifically, exists in the Help center. I just had a strong difficulty in finding it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/searching&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/searching&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Provides precise guidance on using each modifier available for the search function, to included the parameters and logical tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I attempted to delete the question, but was harried against it by the warning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25601" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-01-08T04:54:16.200" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6020" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6021" CreationDate="2016-01-12T23:06:32.603" Score="1" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;I ask because something of interest has induced me to indulge in Thread Necromancy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45024/is-there-a-ogl-or-gsl-license-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;OGL/SRD for 5e D&amp;amp;D has been posted.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-01-14T09:08:13.480" Title="Is it OK to use Meta for announcements?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6020" CreationDate="2016-01-13T01:15:54.047" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, not really.  Ideally you'd post it to the relevant existing question.  Failing that, announce in chat.  In fact, looks like you already did post it to a relevant existing question. That's enough. Meta isn't for announcements of that sort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-01-13T01:15:54.047" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6020" CreationDate="2016-01-13T06:40:08.637" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Meta can be used for announcements about the site &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt;, but not for other things. Meta's topic is just as focused as the main site, just in this case &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;the topic is the use and workings of the main site&lt;/a&gt;. That makes it unsuitable for general news and announcements about things related to roleplaying games that don't impact policy and maintenance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-01-13T06:40:08.637" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6020" CreationDate="2016-01-14T09:08:13.480" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Stack doesn't have forum-type threads, so posting new content to an old question page isn't frowned upon: questions and answers never get too old to be modified with good content. We'll even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/44/necromancer&quot;&gt;give out badges&lt;/a&gt; for it! So if you're thinking of using meta to avoid &quot;thread necromancy,&quot; don't worry, that taboo isn't indulged by this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-01-14T09:08:13.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6024" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-15T03:03:41.010" Score="12" ViewCount="770" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's 2016 now, and we've &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272563/were-standardizing-the-sidebar-width-at-300px-on-all-sites&quot;&gt;made some changes to the sidebar size&lt;/a&gt;. As such, we can now restart the Community Promotion Ads for 2016!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind, we have updated some of the guidelines compared to previously - the changes are marked in bold in the Image Requirements section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be &lt;strong&gt;300 x 250 pixels&lt;/strong&gt;, or double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/6024&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:41:06.447" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2016" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|advertising|" AnswerCount="11" CommentCount="9" ClosedDate="2017-11-06T18:33:10.223" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-15T03:03:41.010" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QvIdY.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2016-01-15T03:03:41.010" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6026" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-15T10:44:58.083" Score="3" ViewCount="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;The sidebar got &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/272563/152515&quot;&gt;expanded to 300px&lt;/a&gt; the other day, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6024/1204&quot;&gt;the latest community ads&lt;/a&gt; look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QvIdY.png&quot; alt=&quot;wide-ish rectangle&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But our place holder on the CDN still looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://cdn.sstatic.net/img/ad-placeholder.png&quot; alt=&quot;tallish rectangle&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should become 300 &amp;times; 250 too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T03:07:28.177" Title="Our Community Ads place holder is still using the old dimensions" Tags="|bug|advertising|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-16T02:27:55.287" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/168&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhQCq.png&quot; alt=&quot;writers.se weekly chat event&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-22T06:15:14.077" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T06:15:14.077" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-16T14:31:35.980" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/suFRL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 Virtual Tabletops&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-16T19:32:43.663" LastActivityDate="2016-01-16T19:32:43.663" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6030" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-18T13:01:34.927" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z0Ojf.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;http://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;herokuapp.com&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2022-12-29T04:41:06.447" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T04:41:06.447" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-19T00:54:00.277" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvLbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool Virtual Tabletop&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-22T06:26:14.997" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T06:26:14.997" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6032" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-19T03:30:24.120" Score="3" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/6024&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ad Statics page&lt;/a&gt; is still using the old Community Ad dimensions, which makes the images in it squashed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3Vic1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3Vic1.png&quot; alt=&quot;squished ad images&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-18T15:09:01.870" LastActivityDate="2018-08-18T15:09:01.870" Title="The Community Ads Stats page is still using the old ad dimensions" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|advertising|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-19T17:19:39.733" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pc2BN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user19667" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:52:23.590" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T06:22:10.557" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6034" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-19T21:59:38.807" Score="1" ViewCount="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/6024&quot;&gt;The ad dashboard for 2016&lt;/a&gt; uses the old size for the ads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.imgur.com/Jl1hjn9.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.imgur.com/Jl1hjn9.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T03:08:18.037" Title="The ads dashboard uses the old ad size" Tags="|bug|advertising|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2016-01-19T22:07:10.680" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6035" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6084" CreationDate="2016-01-20T05:44:40.907" Score="9" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;The community ads from 2015 are still being served. I don't know if this is normal during some kind of transition phase or if it's a legit bug, as I never would have noticed were it not for the new ad sizes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, this is definitely not a 2016 ad:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ToR3P.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ToR3P.png&quot; alt=&quot;Old-style narrow Maptool ad showing in the front page sidebar with a link highlighted that goes to the 2015 community ads page&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That &lt;strong&gt;comment&lt;/strong&gt; link resolves to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5288#5294&quot;&gt;Community Promotion Ads - 2015&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Updated 2016-01-21&lt;/strong&gt;: The wrong year's ads are still being served, but now they're being stretched to fit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LnrsZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LnrsZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Updated 2016-01-29&lt;/strong&gt;: The 2015 ads are still being served, but I haven't seen a stretched one for several days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not yet seen one of the new ads, though several have passed the vote threshold needed to be served.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-03-09T06:08:55.947" Title="This year's Community Ads are NOT being served" Tags="|bug|status-completed|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6036" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-20T17:28:49.120" Score="13" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many of us enjoy the work of our friends over at worldbuilding.SE, and their ad here has been well-received. I wonder if we'd like to reciprocate with an rpg.SE ad to run in their community promotion? (Monica Cellio has invited us to do so.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thought I had was something that blends imagery native to each stack, and referencing some sort of transition from building a world to playing in it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's Century Gothic font, re-drawn icosahedron. Pending the font choice, I think this is the final effort I'll be putting into it. Thanks for all the feedback so far, everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YFfP5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YFfP5.png&quot; alt=&quot;icosahedron&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The pending suggestion was to look at the fonts, as the original was a bit... vanilla. Three possibilities:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kKD1E.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kKD1E.png&quot; alt=&quot;century gothic&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LS77p.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LS77p.png&quot; alt=&quot;trebuchet&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tYc5J.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tYc5J.png&quot; alt=&quot;sitka heading&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are Century Gothic (UL), Trebuchet (UR), and Sitka Heading (LL). Whichever we settle on I'll tidy up the centering; leave a comment below if you've a preference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note these still have the chunky/aliased icosahedron. Just look at the fonts.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Feedback requested on at least these fronts:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strike&gt;should we put a community ad over there?&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strike&gt;different transitioning image(s)? Background for them? (Starry background-&gt;our site's grid-background?)&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strike&gt;other taglines/phrases?&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strike&gt;better artists: create better image ideas?&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;which font?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr&gt; &#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Old versions, critiqued below&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;First thought:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yTM8S.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yTM8S.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg-&amp;gt;wb-green&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this might be &lt;em&gt;way&lt;/em&gt; to suggestive of CRPGs, and just lead to a lot of confusion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So another idea:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/59QSR.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/59QSR.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg-&amp;gt;wb-yellow&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;third idea, but RPG's icosahedron was too faded:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x4cuB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x4cuB.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg-&amp;gt;wb-orange faded&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;converging... but there's a sky-artifact that obscures the incomplete planet and the rpg.se address is a little clunky. (Back in the first iteration I thought the simple font and full URL lent a nice console/terminal effect, but now they're just cruft.) On the right I've made the bottom line a little less clunky, and replaced the planet-image with a better original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UDJ9r.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UDJ9r.png&quot; alt=&quot;rpg-wb-orange strong&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5DxwR.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5DxwR.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-01-24T02:14:15.143" LastActivityDate="2016-01-24T02:14:15.143" Title="community promotion ad to run on worldbuilding.SE" Tags="|discussion|advertising|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6037" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6036" CreationDate="2016-01-20T19:27:15.000" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, we should run an ad or ads&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the yesses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Feedback on designs&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the overall design! The top-left to bottom-right fade is just the right visual flow to both catch the eye and imply the message of build-then-game that we want to convey. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the background as-is. I do like the idea of an additional background transition, but it might make it too busy. And specifically, I think transitioning to a grid background would give the wrong impression: &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; associate that with play grids and grid paper used during play, but viewers are more likely to associate that with “building” and wonder why it's on the wrong side of the transition, confusing the visual message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the art in general. Having different colours for different messages is a nice touch that will make them stand out as distinct, should we submit more than one and more than one get accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another reason to not worry about the art: perfect is the enemy of good enough. This art is plenty good enough, and it would be good to just get an ad or ads over there sooner rather than later. We're also not locked into these ads forever should we come up with something amazing farther down the road.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Taglines: Hmmm.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The taglines don't work for me though. They're good starts, but carry unintentional messages:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;build complete. start game? [y/n]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree, this would often be misinterpreted to mean that we're about computer RPGs. We get that misunderstanding enough that we don't want to encourage it in any way. (I actually really like it otherwise: it's pithy and cute, so the unintentional message is all the more a pity.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;if you build it, we will play it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This implies something we don't offer: that they can find people here to pitch their worlds to / form a play group with. &lt;em&gt;They&lt;/em&gt; might want to play with their world, and RPGs are a good avenue for that, but we should avoid implying that we're a whole site of people just waiting to play in the ad-clicker's world.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternative ideas that dodge these problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Play with your world&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Game in your world&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Build a world, and then visit it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Done building? Now game in it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Set your world in motion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think any of these are brilliant! More ideas would be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-01-20T19:27:15.000" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6039" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6041" CreationDate="2016-01-21T23:23:44.773" Score="22" ViewCount="450" Body="&lt;p&gt;My answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73480/23970&quot;&gt;Can I move 240&amp;#39; and attack in one round by using two riding horses?&lt;/a&gt; is factually incorrect, but was accepted before I realized that. I cannot delete the accepted answer. Is there any way to remove the post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-01-21T23:43:50.603" Title="my accepted answer is factually incorrect--no recourse?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6040" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-01-21T23:34:54.803" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6024/community-promotion-ads-2016&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NUQeT.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotion Ads - 2016&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-01-30T07:07:21.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6039" CreationDate="2016-01-21T23:43:50.603" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;Flag as “other” and explain the issue in the custom flag area. Moderators have the ability to delete answers even when they've been accepted, and unless there's a good reason not to, such flags are generally acted on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before I got my diamond I ran into this at least once and used a custom flag to request my accepted answer be deleted, and that took care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-01-21T23:43:50.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6036" CreationDate="2016-01-22T09:34:03.923" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a enthusiastic lurker of both sites, a semi-regular contributor of worldbuilding.SE and the creator of the original ad I say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Yes please!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There should definitely be an ad for rpg.SE on worldbuilding.SE and your idea is excellent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Execution&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally the design looks good, I have a few small points of critique though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The font is a tad bland, perhaps you could use &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fontspace.com/category/dungeons%20and%20dragons&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a D&amp;amp;D related font&lt;/a&gt; like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fontspace.com/pixel-sagas/vecna&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Vecna&lt;/a&gt;. (Though that one is only free for non-commercial use, you could ask &lt;a href=&quot;http://opensource.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;opensource.SE&lt;/a&gt; for advice on this issue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The night sky is slightly visible at some points (the top right mainly) and distracts me a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The bottom right side of the planet should probably fade to black, so it really only shows the die.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; is a bit long, the relavant information is &lt;code&gt;rpg&lt;/code&gt; and the fact that it's a stackexchange site, this could be conveyed much more succintly and then be printed larger. I'm partial to &lt;code&gt;rpg.SE&lt;/code&gt;, but that's just a matter of preference I suppose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than that, I think it's fantastic. &lt;code&gt;set your world in motion&lt;/code&gt; really is a gorgeous phrase and very fitting. The idea of using the design of our own ad is brilliant, the way it's combined is very effective. and I think the contrast betweenthe simplicity of the new elements and the complexity of the planet really demands attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14696" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T09:34:03.923" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6043" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6044" CreationDate="2016-01-22T16:33:36.820" Score="33" ViewCount="602" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Context&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is in relation to this question here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73533/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-stuff-you-can-carry&quot;&gt;Is there a limit to how much stuff you can carry?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in particular &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73533/is-there-a-limit-to-how-much-stuff-you-can-carry#comment163426_73533&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt; from a mod:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] Age of Rebellion is not open licensed and quoting its rules here&#xA;  for everything not in the beginner book is piracy pure and simple,&#xA;  don't do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...which basically says &quot;don't answer this question (in any meaningful way)&quot;.  The exact same comment also appears on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73530/what-is-food-for&quot;&gt;different question&lt;/a&gt; with the same tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interestingly enough, other users question the rationale, and are basically threatened with having their answers deleted if they ignore the &quot;don't answer this question&quot; advice.  Which I think is &lt;em&gt;wholly inappropriate&lt;/em&gt;, and also contrary to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/360/26270&quot;&gt;accepted policy on this issue&lt;/a&gt;, which is to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid playing armchair layer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take down content if and only if a copyright holder complains.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and ironically enough was put forward by the same mod who's leaving behind these boilerplate comments and making preemptive threats about deleting people's answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I left my own comment pointing out that the rationale in the mod's comment was not technically sound, and it was silently deleted.  And...well here we are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is ANY discussion of private rules piracy/copyright infringment?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know the answer to this one and it's just plain &quot;no&quot;, for many reasons.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fair Use doctrine allows for summaries, paraphrasing, and direct quotation from copyrighted works, provided that the amount summarized, paraphrased, or quoted is reasonable.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;While the rulebook itself is a copyrighted work, individual rules are not.  Certain things just cannot be protected by copyright.  Individual rules/game mechanics tend to fall into that basket (similar to mathematical formulas and recipes).  A &lt;em&gt;specific explanation&lt;/em&gt; of a rule (or recipe, or formula) may be protected by copyright, but the rule itself generally can't be.  It's copyright infringement if you reproduce entire sections of text (and graphics) verbatim.  It's not if you explain the same concept in your own words.  For instance, if I give you a photocopy of a cheeseburger recipe from Mickey's Awesome Cookbook, that's copyright infringement.  But if I tell you in my own words how to cook a cheeseburger, that's fine even if the end result is the same as what you'd get by following the cookbook recipe.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Copyright doesn't protect against knowledge transfer.  For instance, a GM reads his core rulebook to learn all the rules he needs to run the game.  At some point, he'll probably need to explain some of the rules to his players.  Is he committing piracy by explaining to them how the game works?  No, of course not.  No more than I'd be committing piracy if I read a book to learn how to program, and then go on to teach someone else how to program based upon the knowledge that I've gained.  Copyright covers specific works and their derivatives.  It doesn't give you absolute authority over a concept.  The closest thing to that is a patent.  Though to suppress discussion of a game's ruleset, forcing everyone you tell your ruleset to sign an NDA &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; is probably the best option.  But we're not here to discuss (or enforce) NDA's.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's up to the rights holder (or their nominated legal representative) to enforce copyright claims.  And there are established procedures for doing so.  We should not be co-opting those procedures, nor acting on behalf of rights holders without their knowledge or consent.  Perhaps they'd actually &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; to have answers like &quot;Yes, there's a rule for that and it's basically X, you should go and buy an official rulebook because this is a super-fun RPG with deep mechanics and there are lots more rules that you need to play it properly&quot;, particularly as opposed to &quot;all discussion of this topic is verboten because we think the creator is a vicious copyright troll&quot;.  Which is what it sounds like what you've got moderator comments that basically say &quot;don't answer this&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there ANY validity to the boilerplate comment?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well yes, if you interpret it literally and ignore the surrounding context.  &lt;strong&gt;Quoting&lt;/strong&gt; rules for &lt;strong&gt;everything not in the beginner book&lt;/strong&gt; would indeed be copyright infringement/piracy.  But the question was asking for information about a specific rule, not a dump of all the rules.  Or even a dump of that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe there's a slippery-slope argument being made?  In the vein of &quot;if a question is eventually asked for every rule, we'll end up with a collection of answers that copy every rule out of the book, and that collection will constitute piracy&quot;?  Which is true, &lt;em&gt;should that slippery-slope eventuate&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even if we set aside the general issues with arguments of the 'slippery-slope' variety, there are at least a couple of issues with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We're not even close to the nightmare scenario yet.  There are a grand total of 18 questions with the &lt;code&gt;age-of-rebellion&lt;/code&gt; tag.  And as far as I can tell, only two of those 18 have answers which contain direct quotes from the rulebook.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Preemptively discouraging, suppressing, or deleting content goes directly against the currently accepted site policy.  What good is the policy if the very person who proposed it isn't going to follow it?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while technically correct when viewed in a vacuum, the boilerplate comment seems inapplicable in the contexts where it's been used, and its message of &quot;don't answer this&quot; and &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; the threats of &quot;answers will be deleted&quot; strike me as heavy-handed and inappropriate, bordering upon abuse of power.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should there be a clear and consistent policy on this issue?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think yes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should the policy be, if any?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what we're here to discuss.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestion is that the current policy is fine:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think that we need to do only two things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In the FAQ&lt;/strong&gt; or other prominent place, &lt;strong&gt;warn people against plagiarism&lt;/strong&gt;.&#xA;  (and/or copyright infringement, blah blah)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Take down stuff IF a copyright holder complains&lt;/strong&gt; or issues a DMCA&#xA;  takedown notice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We as moderators/site people do not need to be engaging in unschooled&#xA;  Lawyer Junior behavior&lt;/strong&gt;. In fact if we do we become more legally liable&#xA;  for policing the content on the site. Plagiarism is bad, and &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; should&#xA;  say &quot;don't do it,&quot; but &lt;strong&gt;should not try to make our own &quot;calls&quot; about it&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;  beyond the clear remedy by US law (DMCA).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just needs to be followed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The alternative appears to be a lot of cleanup, deletion, and censoring of existing content, followed by a long and pointless game of trying to preemptively stop people from talking about the things that they come here to talk about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or has a takedown notice actually been received?  My assumption is not.  I don't see how one could have been, given that the comments were cropping up &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; any answers were posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26270" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-01-23T05:34:50.163" Title="Can non-open-license rules be discussed, or not?" Tags="|discussion|answers|copyright|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6044" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6043" CreationDate="2016-01-22T18:17:27.007" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You'll notice, if you look around the site, that most of your concerns aren't reflected in our answers. Rules are discussed, quotes are posted, and knowledge is transferred. Copyright-enforcing mods don't regularly jump out and discourage answering. This example is an exception, for reasons which I hope will become clear by the end of this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Current practice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not be quoting text wholesale from books. Quotes are for demonstration purposes and should be selective and supportive of the answer's points, not &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; point. Gratuitous quotes are regularly edited out (but not purged from the edit history, note).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also noteworthy that the site governance has evolved since September 2010 (the infancy of the site and more than five years ago). The discussion then was mostly theoretical because we had no experience running this place. We have more practical experience now with what people are tempted to do and what works here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Things that are OK&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Paraphrasing and explaining rules in original words is fine. Rules themselves are neither copyrightable nor patentable, and paraphrasing is necessary and fine. But when possible, do avoid providing everything necessary to enable someone to avoid acquiring a book — we are not here for pirates and don't want to attract nudge-wink-I'm-not-a-pirate-I-just-want-help users. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/73549&quot;&gt;existing answer to the question in question&lt;/a&gt; is a good example: it paraphrases a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of the rules by way of explaining what the asker is missing out on by not having the full game, but leaves out critical things that are neither useful to the editorial explanation nor reasonable to provide (i.e., a list of encumbrance values necessary to use the rules discussed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quoting rules for demonstration purposes is fine — highly encouraged even. If a quote is the most expedient way to make it clear &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; is being discussed, it's warranted and improves the answer. Quotes should be minimal for that purpose, but “minimal” for a purpose doesn't always mean short: sometimes a whole block of text needs to be shown, maybe with bits emphasised, in order to support an argument or discuss a rule in its precise context. Generally it's obvious when this is necessary (and when it isn't), because it will be needed just to make the answer make sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why we remove gratuitous quotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Removing &lt;em&gt;gratuitous&lt;/em&gt; quotes is for a few reasons, in rough order of importance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They actively inhibit quality.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone can read the book if they want the rules. Our strength is explanation and exegesis. By those lights, an answer that is mostly a quote (especially if it's a large quote when only a small part is relevant, and no editorial emphasis has been attempted) is low-quality indeed and needs improvement. An easy improvement is paring down quotes to the relevant part and adding original explanatory material. Quotes that are wholly unnecessary when a simple page cite will do can be removed entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; people helped by editorial-free text dumps are those who don't need explanation and just need free access to the rules. We're not here to help that demographic, and answers that engage in zero-expertise-requried text-sharing degrade the purpose of the site and its overall quality. The shared-editing process here routes around that quality-damage to the site, naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, such text dumps don't happen very often. The point is to illustrate a failure mode that we're aware of and which in part motivates the “don't just paste the rules” point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Gratuitous quoting makes us bad RPG community citizens.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're a foremost result on Google because we're trusted. We aim to be a bright spot in the RPG community where people can get or provide help and expertise. (That latter includes game creators who are excellent sources of expertise.) For many reasons, we wish to avoid shady behaviour that plays by the letter of the law but which is insulting to creators. There are enough sites out there that engage in shady appropriation of game materials, so it's not like &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; need to serve that market anyway, even if we wanted to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides, how many games have creators/companies who can afford a lawyer to write a DMCA takedown notice once, let alone every time someone copies text beyond fair use? The number is probably is the single digits or low doubles, when the number of games themselves is in the thousands.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It's often a violation of copyright.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we really need to find out what kind of copying is OK and what kind isn't by testing it with our collective face? Not really. We have sufficient users educated in practical and nuanced application of copyright &amp;amp; such that we have no need to learn via being slapped down. Copyright is arcane, but we're &lt;em&gt;gamers&lt;/em&gt; — we handle arcana well. Yes we're amateurs and not lawyers, but knowing the law, discussing it, and following it doesn't require misrepresenting oneself as lawyer any more than reminding someone that speeding is illegal (and a bad idea for a host of non-legal reasons) is practicing law without license.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we have no need to flirt with the line between acceptable and unacceptable copying, and many reasons — inherent to our mission — to avoid even being near the line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So why was that comment written?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally it wouldn't be necessary, but from experience a question about a starter set of rules that is answered by knowledge of the full game is a temptation for people to just paste the rules into an answer and call it a day. Without that particular context the comment likely wouldn't have been left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our citizens aren't all regulars or long-time members, and out there in the wilds of the Internet there's a belief that anything goes so long as it's on the Internet. People have some strange beliefs about copyright law's application.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment was aimed at those people. Most of our regulars know full well that someone coming here with questions that aren't answered by their Beginner Box material shouldn't just be handed &lt;strike&gt;a fish&lt;/strike&gt; the missing rules from the full game, but all it takes is one of the many low-rep users passing through or lurking to make a mess that will need high-rep or diamond-mod users to clean up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only do we not want to be cleaning up copyright messes that could have been easily avoided, but we also want to be putting forth the message that we're not the Wild West Internet playground that some places are. The opportunity to pass on site norms is useful, especially when it does double duty preventing unnecessary cleanup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A note on open-license material&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a belief that it's OK to quote large swathes of OGL content here without considering fair use and such. In actual fact it's just as not-OK &lt;em&gt;legally&lt;/em&gt; as any other game's text! The problem is that the text is still copyrighted and we don't follow the license it's available under (the OGL is technically incompatible with CC BY-SA, so we can't freely mix the texts, and answers don't have room to include the OGL statement itself as it otherwise requires).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a consequence, our typical practice of being nonchalant about quotes from OGL material is rather odd. However, in practical terms it makes sense: it's mostly fair use and only the odd borderline case might not be, so the legal issue is mostly theoretical; WotC, WEG, or whoever is unlikely to send a C&amp;amp;D over text that they've already decided to put out there, since anyway we're not the people they're worried about abusing the license (competing publishers); and how we use those texts for quotes doesn't make us a poor citizen of the RPG community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Arguably sometimes large quote blocks degrade the answer (they become hard to read, unfocused, and the editorial explanation is sometimes lazy and leaves it as an exercise to the reader to interpret the quotes themselves), but there are only so many battles that need to be fought. Our handling of OGL material quotes could be better, but it's good enough to more-or-less satisfy our underlying motives for how we handle quotations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The take-away here isn't to panic over how we handle OGL quotes; the point is to demonstrate that our handling of quotes is focused on what is holistically best for the site's health and quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(These concerns also apply to some other open licenses than the OGL (excepting CC licenses compatible with ours, of course), but the OGL is by-and-large the most common one encountered in RPG publishing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-01-22T19:03:36.790" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6045" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6043" CreationDate="2016-01-23T05:34:50.163" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes and No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it is legally fine in most countries, even the copyright-paranoid US, to quote parts of copyrighted products under fair use, a significant number of long-term high-volume users of the site are, and feel the need to be seen to be as, staunchly &quot;anti-pirate&quot;.  Which is defined as going above and beyond copyright law in order to remove or discourage anything which could remotely be seen as reproducing copyrighted content in any form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, there is both a culture of rpg designer/publishers being extreme about copyright issues, fostered in part by WotC, the publisher of DnD's multiple takedown notices, threats of legal action, etc, and a culture amongst rpg players above the norm of fearing illegal action and wishing to be seen as law-abiding in every possible way, that I have no real explanation for but have witnessed due to long association.  The actions of the long-term users may be founded in these two cultural aspects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes answering some questions significantly harder, and is likely to result in less quality of answer to the site, but the firmness with which these views are held by these users, some of whom are moderators, others of which post answers or questions on a nearly daily basis, means that attempts to change this status quo are unlikely to result in anything but strife and argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, rules quotes in answers will be looked on unfavourably, deleted, or otherwise disincentivized, unless they are extremely minimalist.  This will result in some rpg questions not being answered in a satisfactory way, but as long as these users hold these opinions, their degree of involvement in the site will give them the ability to enforce them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I believe the likelihood of them changing their opinions as regards reproducing rules in answers is low, the answer to your question can be summed up as so:  &lt;strong&gt;While neither the site rules, the law, or the previous meta questions forbid you from reproducing relevant sections of copyrighted products in order to answer questions about that copyrighted product, in practice, reproducing relevant sections beyond a certain length (a few sentences) or beyond what some individuals consider the most directly relevant rules (no way to predict what will come under this) will likely lead to your answer being deleted and/or mods or other individuals posting to censure both you and others thinking of writing an answer with content they believe is 'too much'.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2016-01-23T05:34:50.163" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6046" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6047" CreationDate="2016-01-24T17:17:11.583" Score="2" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to see how much of your reputation has been earned from the various activities? So its broken down into the points for what you have asked, what you have answered, and the other ways you can earn points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23058" LastActivityDate="2016-01-25T02:00:08.820" Title="Reputation breakdown" Tags="|support|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6046" CreationDate="2016-01-24T22:59:34.197" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no page that shows a tidy breakdown, but there is a kinda-hidden page that can give you all the raw daily data:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/reputation&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/reputation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I know there's no direct link to that from any part of the site; you just have to remember that adding &lt;code&gt;/reputation&lt;/code&gt; to the main site's URL can get you there. Browsing that (or analysing it with some coding skills) can give you an idea of where each point has come from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A page of reports would be nice though, yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-01-25T02:00:08.820" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6048" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6358" CreationDate="2016-01-25T10:02:04.977" Score="12" ViewCount="452" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/54746-CD-PROJEKT-RED-and-R-TALSORIAN-GAMES-Announce-The-Witcher-Role-Playing-Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Witcher RPG game announced&lt;/a&gt; a while back. Would asking a question about the current state of the game be off topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly, as the game gets made and released, the question would need updating.  In addition, once the game is out, the question becomes obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be a bad or good question to ask? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73790/2100&quot;&gt;The final question...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-06-15T13:53:22.440" Title="Can I ask about the Witcher table top RPG beta?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6048" CreationDate="2016-01-25T10:39:48.740" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's fine, you can ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We do handle tabletop RPG betas&lt;/strong&gt;, including questions that are only valid or relevant during the beta process. We fielded a lot of stuff like this during D&amp;amp;D 5e's beta stages, in which a whole &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of stuff got chopped and changed all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't matter if the questions and answers will need updating or go obsolete as the game's development progresses. We already deal with stuff at the time for &lt;em&gt;finished and published&lt;/em&gt; games, like with all the supplements that were released for D&amp;amp;D 4e and are still being released for Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be careful if there's a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in place.&lt;/strong&gt; Some beta tests have more or less strict NDAs playtesters must agree to. If you've agreed to an NDA, you could breach your playtesting conditions by talking about the game material here. That won't break any of &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; rules (SE and its citizenry aren't responsible for policing NDAs) but it will be between you and the developer, and could compromise your position as a playtester. Check the conditions, if in doubt seek clarification from the developer and don't ask us until you're certain you can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-01-26T15:25:35.940" LastActivityDate="2016-01-26T15:25:35.940" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6048" CreationDate="2016-01-25T16:03:56.747" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about the game's &lt;strong&gt;content&lt;/strong&gt; (like &quot;Is there a limit to how many potions I can carry?&quot;) are almost certainly going to be fine. Games in beta are games in their own right too. They might not be answerable yet, but honest questions that will be answerable in time and remain useful (even if only niche-useful) over time are OK, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6049/321&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer covers some excellent details on that point&lt;/a&gt;. (The only thing to watch out for here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_video_game_terms#Camping&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“camping”&lt;/a&gt; a question: asking a question pre-emptively that one &lt;em&gt;knows&lt;/em&gt; can't be answered yet, just to be the one to get the rep for it later when the game is released and starts getting lots of attention. I don't think that's going to happen much, but it's something to be aware of and, if the temptation is felt, to avoid.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking questions about the game's &lt;strong&gt;state of development&lt;/strong&gt; (like &quot;Who is the lead developer&quot; or &quot;Is it out yet? What about now?&quot;) &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; get closed as too localised (in time) if it would be meaningless to host long-term. (“Too localized” isn't a prewritten close reason anymore, but it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185102/responding-to-your-too-localized-concerns&quot;&gt;still a reason to close a question&lt;/a&gt;.) This isn't a hard-and-fast rule: it's possible that some types of questions about a game's state of development will get a pass, but it's not something we can give a blanket “yes” or “no” to ahead of time. We can only say for sure after seeing the specific question, so the best way to find out is to try it on the live site and see the response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So TL;DR it depends on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update&lt;/strong&gt;: Now that you've asked the question, it falls squarely into the &quot;Is it out yet? What about now?&quot; type of question that we don't handle. Just like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11794/will-a-5th-edition-of-dungeons-dragons-be-released&quot;&gt;Will a 5th edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons be released?&lt;/a&gt;, the question becomes meaningless to ask at the exact moment that it becomes answerable, because it's just requesting that people share news. (Such questions are also magnets for speculation, which is secondary to the asking-for-news issue but still causes significant problems.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-01-27T17:45:10.390" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6051" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6054" CreationDate="2016-01-26T22:17:40.213" Score="5" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question in question is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73614/how-to-role-play-serious-characters&quot;&gt;How to role-play serious characters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing history: I acknowledge my first attempt to formulate the question was unclear and needed editing.In my view it was not because I did not have a specific thing to ask about, but rather because I did not get the point across the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since my first editing attempts in response to suggestions in the comments I decided to start from scratch and re-worded the complete question. I spent a lot of time and thought on it and think it is quite clear now. Also some people have expressed the same opinion in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What else can I do to get the question re-opened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-01-29T17:15:12.893" Title="What can I do to get my question reopened?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6052" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-28T20:09:10.900" Score="7" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am interested in knowing if a particular type of product exists, that is a campaign setting entirely divorced from a game system.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not looking for a list of products (though a single example would be nice).  I might be interested in financial/sales information, but I know that's a stretch for the industry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am working on designing the setting for our next campaign. My goal is to have a setting that I know well enough that I can can run a successful sandbox game  ( I am sometimes poor with improv, so having some points to extrapolate from is helpful ).   After outlining the content I want to create before we begin play, I realized that I am essentially writing a sourcebook for a campaign setting.  As I'm not sure of the game we're going to play, it is currently system free.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This made me curious if products like this exist, and if they do if there have been any financially successful ones.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the changes and extra information, would this be an acceptable type of question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21437" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-09T23:19:21.150" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T23:19:21.150" Title="Are &quot;Does this type of product exist&quot; questions acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6052" CreationDate="2016-01-28T21:11:30.247" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's probably not a good fit for the Stack's design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the only thing you're looking for in an answer is &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no,&quot; it's not really gonna work here. The Stack likes answers which provide explanation and support for their solutions, but in this case that would quickly turn into lists and suggestions. Each answer would be equally right, differentiated only by volume or voters' subjective preference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for a single example &lt;em&gt;sounds&lt;/em&gt; like a clever workaround because it's not a list, but it would run into the same problem as lists: every answer with a different example would be equally correct, and the voting system would break down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/4398&quot;&gt;We maintain a list of other resources&lt;/a&gt; for helping people with challenges RPG.SE isn't designed to handle, including &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;the RPG.SE General Chat room&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;I notice that you haven't said &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you're interested in this information. The why of a question can often salvage it because the Stack's users are experts who may have experience in the actual challenge you're facing and can give you information and advice about your situation. Instead of asking for a particular bit of information in a vacuum, consider presenting the Stack with the context in which you think that information is needed--what's the problem to which you've decided this is the solution? I can't guarantee the answer will stay open, but it's more likely.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A much better question, from the Stack perspective, is to ask about the viability (defined re: effort expended vs earnings, I suspect?) of self-publishing system-neutral setting material. This is something which, if you give good standards for &quot;viability,&quot; can be answered complexly with support from resources and experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2016-01-28T23:36:40.800" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6051" CreationDate="2016-01-29T17:15:12.893" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually, you just edit and wait. It takes time for closes and it takes time for reopens.  Mentioning the revision in chat also helps.  You can post to meta as you have done, though it does junk up meta a bit when everyone escalates what they want for any given post here. I'd counsel people to be patient a bit first. Sometimes a second edit and/or comment will re-bump it to the top of Active so people will re-visit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-01-29T17:15:12.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6055" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-30T00:01:20.533" Score="2" ViewCount="512" Body="&lt;p&gt;A brief history of the [rules-as-written] tag (though all the discussion is ~2 years old):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/a&gt; (A good summary of what the tag's for and other meta Q's related to it)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211/the-rules-as-written-tag-is-a-good-tag-but-weve-made-it-sick-lets-cure-it&quot;&gt;The [rules-as-written] tag is a good tag, but we&amp;#39;ve made it sick. Let&amp;#39;s cure it&lt;/a&gt; (newer, but I don't understand what it's saying)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4932/the-rules-tag-has-just-been-burninated-again-lets-blacklist-it&quot;&gt;The [rules] tag has just been burninated (again), let&amp;#39;s blacklist it&lt;/a&gt; (a &quot;rules&quot; tag is not useful and is blacklisted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5148/are-our-implicit-information-tagging-practices-becoming-a-problem/5151#5151&quot;&gt;Are our implicit-information tagging practices becoming a problem?&lt;/a&gt; (somewhat related, though that Q's about several things)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have noticed the [rules-as-written] tag is becoming extremely common on the site.  We are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot;&gt;up to 570 uses of it&lt;/a&gt;, are getting more than 1 new one a day on average, and it appears to me most of them are using it as a pure synonym of [rules] as in &quot;I'm asking a question about some rules&quot; - which is not useful per the third link above.  Of course you're asking about the rules; most questions not about gm-techniques or problem-somethings are. Of course questions about the rules should be answered with rules citations or at worst table-tested rulings that meet &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; criteria. Answers that just say &quot;well this is what I might do&quot; should be downvoted and potentially deleted as bad answers, whether there's a rules-as-written tag on the question or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag is adding nothing to the vast majority of these questions. It's really only useful for fringe questions that intend to say &quot;look I know that this is a pedantic loophole but come on and work the logic puzzle with me won't you&quot;? (e.g. commoner cannons). I'm not sure that's tag-worthy; having any tag starting with &quot;rules&quot; becomes a default thing someone thinks they should add to a question because it's a rules question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the recent ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73924/clarification-of-blink-mechanics-or-should-someone-have-punched-in-my-sandwich&quot;&gt;Clarification of Blink Mechanics, or &amp;quot;Should Someone have Punched in my Sandwich?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; - &quot;How does this spell work, there was disagreement at my table?&quot;  Slam dunk rules quote answer. No real &quot;RAW&quot; lawyering required.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73879/can-one-enter-leomunds-tiny-hut-from-below&quot;&gt;Can one enter Leomund&amp;#39;s Tiny Hut from below?&lt;/a&gt; - &quot;How does this spell work, there was disagreement at my table?&quot; As the spell doesn't say, all the answers are supposition and arguing from other perspectives anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73942/can-monsters-be-summoned-to-appear-in-mid-air-to-drop-onto-enemies&quot;&gt;Can monsters be summoned to appear in mid-air to drop onto enemies?&lt;/a&gt; - &quot;My PCs are trying an exploit is there a rule that says they can't?&quot; Slam dunk rules quote answer.  No real &quot;RAW&quot; lawyering required.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73761/hostage-situation-do-you-miss-hit-the-hostage-or-chance-of-either-one&quot;&gt;Hostage Situation: Do you miss, hit the hostage, or chance of either one?&lt;/a&gt; - &quot;We aren't sure if there's a rule.&quot;  Sadly the answers tend to jibber jabber about related things but a clear answer to the stated question is hard to find in there. Several of the answers are definitely not pure RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73689/can-i-use-relentless-endurance-after-failing-the-relentless-rage-constitution-sa&quot;&gt;Can I use Relentless Endurance after failing the Relentless Rage Constitution saving throw?&lt;/a&gt; - Slam dunk rules quote answer.  No real &quot;RAW&quot; lawyering required.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73602/can-you-take-a-squire-at-3rd-level&quot;&gt;Can you take a Squire at 3rd level?&lt;/a&gt; - two rules conflict, which way to rule?  Almost not RAW by definition, as the RAW is trivially in conflict.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so on.  I don't see what value [rules-as-written] is adding to these questions - zero from a searchability and SEO point of view clearly (it doesn't appear in the search keywords analytics mods have access to, though those are limited), and I don't see any in terms of scoping the question or answers as it's being used.  50% of the RAW-tagged questions above have non-RAW answers and the OP seems fine with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at a similar roundup of &quot;just plain rules questions&quot; they seem to be being answered identically.  Simple (or even not so simple) rules questions get rules quotes, where there's no clear RAW they get designer tweets, (hopefully tested) table interpretations, etc.  I contend if you took the questions tagged RAW off our front page, plus all the rules questions not tagged raw, took off the tags and mixed them up you would not be able to discern any difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're just tacking it on and the community's not e.g. enforcing no answers that aren't pure RAW on those questions (and there's no indication on any of them the OP objects to the non-pure-RAW answers), I contend the tag has effectively become [rules] and is superfluous and should be burninated and blacklisted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your thoughts are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T21:25:55.230" Title="The [rules-as-written] tag - still useful or is it junk?" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="21" ClosedDate="2020-02-19T13:39:45.813" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6056" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-30T00:15:45.690" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;[Addendum at the start: In the last few days the overall conversation has moved me toward a more moderate position on this tag's role--specifically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6066/4398&quot;&gt;I've been convinced of the tag's value in directing experts to their field of specialty, which makes me interested in seeking a less extreme fate for the tag&lt;/a&gt;. I will not delete this post however, as it is representing an option and argument that is important to have present in the discussion.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, &lt;strong&gt;the RAW tag is turning into noise&lt;/strong&gt;, and its signal was never very strong to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RAW's never been a very useful tag for search-ability, or for connecting experts to questions in their field. The intent the tag is used to convey is just as easily communicated through writing &quot;I'm interested in the written rules with as little interpretation as possible&quot; or something similar in the body of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at RAW questions on the site (including the ones Mxy links above), often the accepted answer deals with intent and best practices. That means many querents who request RAW are also okay with less stringent answers, and the citizens who enforce the tag tend to not be the querents themselves. This indicates to me that in this instance a tag isn't the right tool for indicating the kind of answer you want to get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, I've seen some debate over exactly what &quot;rules as written&quot; means outside of the tag use, with some folks feeling that it's actually impossible to entirely avoid interpretation of rules and so the phrase is just a matter of subjective degrees of what interpretations are &quot;acceptable&quot; or &quot;unavoidable.&quot; Having querents put their request as a full sentence in the question text will help mitigate this kind of confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problem with the tag is simply that new citizens don't know how to use it--well, we aren't consistently enforcing the proper use, which implies citizens who know about it don't care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whatever the cause of the tag's decline into noise, I'm not seeing it as a big loss. &lt;strong&gt;Put the poor thing out of its misery.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-02-02T01:18:07.173" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-30T00:18:14.057" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do think we need a tag for the “let's play around with the literal interactions within this game”. It's significant enough as a playstyle, with its own particular issues and problems and needs, that it is often inherent to the subject of questions. And describing the core subject of questions is what tags are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag has value for those who invest in a RAW-centric way of playing &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; because it can be used to filter and highlight questions related to their expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, I do also think that it's being mistaken as a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; by novice RPGers unfamiliar with the particular meaning that “rules as written” has for established RPGers. And we obviously get a lot of novice RPGers interested in D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a proposal to fix that problem then:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; so that it doesn't contain the substring &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt;, and don't make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; a synonym.&lt;/strong&gt; This will ensure that it's not used by those who are just looking for “the rules tag.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only downside is that, without a synonym containing the substring &lt;code&gt;rules&lt;/code&gt; it becomes less discoverable. However, someone who &lt;em&gt;deliberately&lt;/em&gt; wants answers that approach the question RAW-centrically will either find the correct tag, or failing that will declare this need in their question. Either way, questions truly &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; RAW will be explicitly so. We have enough tags that aren't discoverable without hanging around the site for a while that it's really not a problem to rename it to solve the “rules tag” problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-01-31T03:40:31.677" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T03:40:31.677" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6058" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-30T20:01:46.683" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I would like to see evidence that the tag is misused.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, the entirety of the alleged problem with the tag is the idea that it is used by people who don’t know what it means and don’t intend it. Yet in every single one of these discussions, we only get vague comments alluding to this problem, without any evidence. The last time we really dug down to look, someone came up with a list that they claimed were cases of misuse, and yet the majority of those questions that had accepted answers, had accepted the answer that followed the rules as written. Even, in some cases, above higher-rated answers that did not. Which is rather weak evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new list, in mxyzplk’s question, are all rules questions. As has been stated time and time again, rules questions do not require the RAW tag. &lt;strong&gt;However,&lt;/strong&gt; questions with the RAW tag are pretty much always going to be rules questions. It is applied to rules questions to constrain what is being asked about: the text in the books themselves. &lt;strong&gt;Just because it’s a rules question does not make the RAW tag superfluous.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see what value [rules-as-written] is adding to these questions [...] I don't see any in terms of scoping the question or answers as it's being used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every single one of those questions is asking about the rules text, and every one of the answers to it cites rules text. The tag indicates that this is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; a question of what should be done, or what would you have done, but what the rules actually say. That is how they have been answered. How is this a problem, again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, most importantly, &lt;strong&gt;what evidence is there that this was not the intent of the author when the question was asked and tagged?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the list that mxyzplk offers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73924/clarification-of-blink-mechanics-or-should-someone-have-punched-in-my-sandwich&quot;&gt;Clarification of Blink Mechanics, or &amp;quot;Should Someone have Punched in my Sandwich?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; - &amp;quot;How does this spell work, there was disagreement at my table?&amp;quot;  Slam dunk rules quote answer. No real &amp;quot;RAW&amp;quot; lawyering required.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So? The querent did not know the answer when they asked the question (that’s why they asked), so they did not know if would be a “slam dunk rules answer.” It is not necessary to “lawyer” in every rules-as-written answer, only in those where, ya know, it’s necessary. If this question had turned out to have a torturous interaction of rules, then it would have been – and an answer that didn’t, and just went with what they considered sensible without reference to the rules, would be a bad one where otherwise it would be a fine one by the default assumptions of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73879/can-one-enter-leomunds-tiny-hut-from-below&quot;&gt;Can one enter Leomund&amp;#39;s Tiny Hut from below?&lt;/a&gt; - &amp;quot;How does this spell work, there was disagreement at my table?&amp;quot; As the spell doesn't say, all the answers are supposition and arguing from other perspectives anyway.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here we have a problem with voting practices (many upvotes on a question that explicitly eschewed the rules as written; I for one have downvoted it), but since there is not yet an accepted answer to the question, we have no evidence that this answer is something that the querent wanted or will accept. The other answers do a better job of trying to work with only what is made available by the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, challenging the frame is still an option on rules-as-written questions. As noted in that meta, doing so is a risk (I would not have downvoted the answer on a question not tagged rules-as-written), but risks do sometimes pay off. I don’t think it should here, but that’s neither here nor there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP does accept this answer, then he or she has accepted a non-RAW answer, which definitely suggests that the rules-as-written tag was applied erroneously. It does not, however, make that conclusion absolutely certain: it could have originally been intended, and then the querent was convinced by the frame-challenge. Also possible. But I would support the removal of the rules-as-written tag from the question in that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73942/can-monsters-be-summoned-to-appear-in-mid-air-to-drop-onto-enemies&quot;&gt;Can monsters be summoned to appear in mid-air to drop onto enemies?&lt;/a&gt; - &amp;quot;My PCs are trying an exploit is there a rule that says they can't?&amp;quot; Slam dunk rules quote answer.  No real &amp;quot;RAW&amp;quot; lawyering required.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73761/hostage-situation-do-you-miss-hit-the-hostage-or-chance-of-either-one&quot;&gt;Hostage Situation: Do you miss, hit the hostage, or chance of either one?&lt;/a&gt; - &amp;quot;We aren't sure if there's a rule.&amp;quot;  Sadly the answers tend to jibber jabber about related things but a clear answer to the stated question is hard to find in there. Several of the answers are definitely not pure RAW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted answer goes through all of the available rules, and only at the end notes that a gap in the rules and suggests a houserule. That is a reasonable frame-challenge in a rules-as-written answer. (On a sidenote, I think that the claim that there is no rule for that is not actually true, and intend to research that topic and either suggest an edit to that answer or offer my own.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73689/can-i-use-relentless-endurance-after-failing-the-relentless-rage-constitution-sa&quot;&gt;Can I use Relentless Endurance after failing the Relentless Rage Constitution saving throw?&lt;/a&gt; - Slam dunk rules quote answer.  No real &amp;quot;RAW&amp;quot; lawyering required.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73602/can-you-take-a-squire-at-3rd-level&quot;&gt;Can you take a Squire at 3rd level?&lt;/a&gt; - two rules conflict, which way to rule?  Almost not RAW by definition, as the RAW is trivially in conflict.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-01T20:31:25.493" CommentCount="75" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-31T00:46:55.203" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR -- Figure out what to do with existing uses of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, then burninate/ban the tag, replacing it with a better tag -- likely &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/by-the-book&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;by-the-book&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;by-the-book&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a case of people who don't understand how the tag is intended to function -- i.e. splitting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A question about the rules that can be safely answered by a per-table house-rule or even an on-the-spot DM ruling (the &quot;hey, this rule is broken, lets toss it and replace it with something else&quot; answer), or is an &quot;obvious case&quot; -- we &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; get &quot;obvious case&quot; questions, especially for the larger systems out there, because there's simply so much material that people will not have run across something before and not know where to find it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;from&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A question about the rules that is seeking the rule itself to be interpreted, irrespective of how stupid it may be in anyone's eyes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new users on this site aren't grasping this difference, and thinking that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt;.  Pixie's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6055/the-rules-as-written-tag-still-useful-or-is-it-junk#comment17310_6057&quot;&gt;suggested synonym&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strict-rules-interpretation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strict-rules-interpretation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strict-rules-interpretation&lt;/a&gt; is a reasonable one, although I personally prefer Hey I Can Chan's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6055/the-rules-as-written-tag-still-useful-or-is-it-junk#comment17313_6057&quot;&gt;suggestion&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/by-the-book&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;by-the-book&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;by-the-book&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While both suggestions disentangle the tag from the RAW vs. RAI debate, I feel that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/by-the-book&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;by-the-book&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;by-the-book&lt;/a&gt; is an easier to grasp name for a newcomer -- this is the tag you use when you want a &quot;by the book&quot; answer to your question.  On the other hand, Pixie's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strict-rules-interpretation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strict-rules-interpretation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strict-rules-interpretation&lt;/a&gt; seems long, and slightly obtuse, in addition to risking more misuse from newbies who see the word &quot;rules&quot; in it and go &quot;oh, this tag is for rules questions&quot; when it really isn't, just like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; isn't for straightforward rules questions &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; questions where RAI, rulings, and houserules are OK answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll leave the problem of what to do with the existing uses of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; up to you folks, though -- I'm not fully versed in how Stack tags work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also: the intent of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an issue -- SO has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/language-lawyer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;language-lawyer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;language-lawyer&lt;/a&gt; for similar reasons, and it has not given them this much grief as far as I can tell!  This is most likely because the SO &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/language-lawyer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;language-lawyer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;language-lawyer&lt;/a&gt; is derived from a term the community generally agrees upon the meaning of, instead of having a Stack-specific meaning, though.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T00:46:55.203" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6060" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-31T03:25:03.767" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since there seems to be no consensus on anything other than the fact that we have very little data about any supposed issues with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; because all the data is in comment discussions that are getting cleaned up -- I have an even more radical proposal to share:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We put a hold on cleaning up comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; questions and answers until this situation is firmly resolved.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would allow us to aggregate the commentary that is being said to provide insight into this issue over space and time, and then analyze it as a &lt;em&gt;body of work&lt;/em&gt; instead of as a few, disjointed examples notable only because of their recency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T03:25:03.767" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6061" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-01-31T06:04:16.147" Score="15" ViewCount="339" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6050/14848&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6050/14848&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Camping was described as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;asking a question pre-emptively that one knows can't be answered yet, just to be the one to get the rep for it later when the game is released and starts getting lots of attention. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is camping wrong?  If so why?  Keep in mind that asking unanswerable questions is not, in fact, discouraged (well, officially.  It's SUPER discouraged/not allowed on this site in practice).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T22:33:56.577" Title="Is 'camping' bad? If so, why?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-01-31T18:48:11.173" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;About other uses of tagging&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond the inherent scoping and, well, tagging value of the tag, I am also confused by this claim:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;zero [value] from a searchability and SEO point of view clearly&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not clear to me. I don’t explicitly &lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt; for &lt;code&gt;[rules-as-written]&lt;/code&gt; that often (though it has happened), but I have the tag favorited so that (if things were working correctly) such questions are called to my attention (and I want this feature back, which is why I have attempted to push that bug report as much as I can). If I did not spend as much time on this site as I do, such a search would be more likely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for SEO, “rules as written” &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a term used in the broader RPG-playing community, at least within D&amp;amp;D. It is not implausible that it could be included in Google searches, though I have no independent knowledge that it actually is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T18:48:11.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6061" CreationDate="2016-01-31T22:33:56.577" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is bad, because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They're not questions about real problems yet&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They interfere with others' ability to later post &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; real questions about the issue&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making up a question that one &lt;em&gt;thinks&lt;/em&gt; will be a valid/useful question, when the game is eventually released, will often result in a question that is not quite useful or accurate in its details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, it hogs the rep for that issue, preventing future people who &lt;em&gt;honestly have that problem right then&lt;/em&gt; from earning the rep for bringing it to RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general principle, only people who actually have a problem now with an existing game should be composing questions looking for solutions to that problem. Writing questions in anticipation of future problems with future games messes with reputation, closures, and warps the utility and function of the site unnaturally in favour of established users who know the site well enough to even conceive of gaming the system in that strange way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are enough advantages to being an established user who knows the ins and outs of the site. Stealing valid questions from newer users with honest problems just to farm a bit of rep off an anticipated maybe-problem of an unreleased game is not being a good site citizen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-01-31T22:33:56.577" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6064" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6065" CreationDate="2016-02-01T13:48:19.320" Score="10" ViewCount="327" Body="&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/74047/23970&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/74047/23970&lt;/a&gt;: Korvin and I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; we've got everything right, but the spoiler hide/reveal text feature isn't working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="25004" LastEditDate="2020-01-07T11:47:18.663" LastActivityDate="2020-01-07T11:47:18.663" Title="Is the spoiler markdown broken?" Tags="|support|markdown|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6065" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6064" CreationDate="2016-02-01T14:04:59.853" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/144824/152515&quot;&gt;Yes, they're broken.&lt;/a&gt; They've been broken in this particular way for a couple of years now. There's no neat workaround. &lt;em&gt;One&lt;/em&gt; spoiler paragraph sitting in lonely isolation is always fine, but combining them isn't so easy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What you did to break it (aka what to avoid)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your problem was that you wrote out two adjacent paragraphs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! one paragraph&#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt;! another paragraph&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! one paragraph&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;! another paragraph&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That break between the paragraphs messes up spoiler quotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Fixing it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way to patch it up &amp;amp; retain roughly the same intended appearance is to break up the paragraphs manually:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! first paragraph can be left as-is&#xA;&amp;gt;! &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;other paragraphs need a `&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;` element at the start&#xA;&amp;gt;! &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;another paragraph&#xA;&amp;gt;!&#xA;&amp;gt;! &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;if you want to separate your paragraph lines in your editing, still use a `&amp;gt;!` on the empty lines like above.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; first paragraph can be left as-is&#xA; &lt;p&gt;other paragraphs need a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; element at the start&#xA; &lt;p&gt;another paragraph&#xA;&#xA; &lt;p&gt;if you want to separate your paragraph lines in your editing, still use a &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!&lt;/code&gt; on the empty lines like above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or to divide the spoiler paragraphs completely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! one paragraph&#xA;&#xA;&amp;lt;!-- --&amp;gt;&#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt;! another paragraph&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which gives you this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; one paragraph&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; another paragraph&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;!-- --&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; is an empty HTML comment. &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;!-- You leave comments in HTML like this. --&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;. The extra line breaks around the comment aren't important for the comment's sake. You can leave those literally anywhere and they're totally invisible,  there's one in the middle of this sentence. You do at least need a line break &lt;em&gt;above&lt;/em&gt; the comment to split the spoiler quotes. The line break after is optional but to me things look neater with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T08:42:51.300" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-02-02T00:46:56.617" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Burning the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag is extreme and would be damaging to the site; other, less drastic methods should be found to alleviate any problem behaviour arising from its over-broad use.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Eliminating the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag would censor RAW questions &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt;, though not &lt;em&gt;de jure&lt;/em&gt;. The tag focuses the attention of appropriate experts who would otherwise have to sift through many questions they're wholly uninterested in. Getting rid of it would alienate experts from a large and popular category of question, reducing the quality of the site's answers on this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; in place of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; also creates noise obscuring RAW questions from RAW experts. If this is really a common practice, it should be dealt with--but removing the tag entirely makes the actual problem (failing to attract experts in the RAW lens) &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt;, not better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I suspect that re-naming the tag would obfuscate the questions from experts almost as much, and should be considered a desperate measure.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have an answer to how this should accomplished, but that's not what the meta question's asking: it's asking if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; has outlived its usefulness and should be burned. I say, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is still very useful and should not be burnt.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-02-02T00:46:56.617" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6067" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-02T05:52:45.007" Score="12" ViewCount="278" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;Another meta answer&lt;/a&gt; gives one interpretation, which is different than the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/info&quot;&gt;tag wiki&lt;/a&gt;, which conflicts with how I have seen the tag used, and how it has been described to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we clarify the tag wiki to match the meta question, or vice versa, so there is a consistent definition of what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is intended for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question IS ABSOLUTELY NOT the place to discus what RAW is.  It is only about fixing the tag wiki to what it was already defined to be on the meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-19T04:30:24.687" LastActivityDate="2019-07-19T04:30:24.687" Title="Can we clarify the [rules-as-written] tag wiki?" Tags="|support|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6068" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6067" CreationDate="2016-02-02T06:58:48.763" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure, we can work on improving the tag wiki. It's expressed less clearly than it could be, and doesn't fully describe what we expect inside [rules-as-written] questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll point out the meta answer you're referring to is presented as a summary of how we tend to handle things inside the RAW tag, and was vetted by a number of people in the community as fairly accurate. (Apparently without objection! That's a nice surprise.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would not say the tag wiki conflicts with how we behave on the site: RAW answers &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; want to stick to game material, and providing stuff outside that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; more or less a frame challenge, but a perfectly OK one in the right circumstances (summarised in that meta answer), so that's not discouraged by any means. The wiki just doesn't make this stuff as clear as it could, so we should definitely revisit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-02-02T06:58:48.763" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6069" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-02T20:00:13.937" Score="12" ViewCount="350" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're getting a steady drip of D&amp;amp;D 5e questions that boil down to asking to confirm a CR calculation and reassure the OP that they've followed the DMG's monster-homebrewing instructions properly. So far these are them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60324/is-my-monsters-cr-correct&quot;&gt;Is my monsters CR correct?&lt;/a&gt; (April 29, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65662/what-is-the-effect-on-a-creatures-cr-if-it-can-choose-to-hit-on-a-miss&quot;&gt;What is the effect on a creature&amp;#39;s CR if it can choose to hit on a miss?&lt;/a&gt; (August 3, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69163/how-do-i-calculate-the-cr-of-a-monster-that-spends-their-turns-healing&quot;&gt;How do I calculate the CR of a monster that spends their turns healing?&lt;/a&gt; (September 28, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69206/ogre-cr-calculation-is-it-wrong-or-am-i-missing-something&quot;&gt;Ogre CR calculation: is it wrong or am I missing something?&lt;/a&gt; (September 29, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69637/goblins-challenge-rating-and-nimble-escape&quot;&gt;Goblin&amp;#39;s Challenge Rating and Nimble Escape&lt;/a&gt; (October 8, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74065/reverse-engineering-the-hydra-cr&quot;&gt;Reverse engineering the Hydra CR&lt;/a&gt; (February 1, 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74129/is-my-homebrew-lower-powered-lichs-cr-calculated-correctly&quot;&gt;Is my homebrew lower-powered Lich&amp;#39;s CR calculated correctly?&lt;/a&gt; (February 2, 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77303/does-lycanthropy-affect-challenge-rating&quot;&gt;Why is the Werewolf&amp;#39;s CR as high as 3?&lt;/a&gt; (March 17, 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96058/did-i-calculate-cr-correctly-for-my-homebrew-lich&quot;&gt;Did I calculate CR correctly for my homebrew lich?&lt;/a&gt; (March 6, 2017)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these &lt;em&gt;feel&lt;/em&gt; like the same question, but they're not technically duplicates because they're different circumstances. Do we really want to keep seeing iterations of basically the same question for the lifetime of D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related are questions that haven't tried to calculate a CR yet and just ask us to do it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90260/custom-npc-challenge-rating-help&quot;&gt;What is the CR of this custom Drow Elite Assassin?&lt;/a&gt; (November 10, 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95085/what-would-the-challenge-rating-of-an-adult-green-dragon-be-if-it-had-lost-its-w&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95085/what-would-the-challenge-rating-of-an-adult-green-dragon-be-if-it-had-lost-its-w&lt;/a&gt; (February 17, 2017)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95138/first-time-dm-looking-to-create-a-challenge-for-my-group&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95138/first-time-dm-looking-to-create-a-challenge-for-my-group&lt;/a&gt; (February 18, 2017)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a problem here? If so, what; and is there a solution? Do we need a canonical question to close such questions as duplicates of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-06T08:37:11.400" Title="Is there any problem with “5e: check my CR calculation” questions?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6070" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6069" CreationDate="2016-02-02T20:20:13.643" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR: 5E is still new, this might be an anomaly, lets watch it for now before we do anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It may be too early to judge&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5E is not a terribly old game right now, so while we may have a wealth of similar, but not identical questions, it may simply be the newness of the system compared to the 45 year history of gaming that predates this site.  We are a first-line solution for people with questions for possibly the first time in D&amp;amp;D's long run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are seeing issues that are usually solved in isolation, before a community instinct for the correct answers has really formed.  I believe that as time goes on, we will see these kinds of questions less.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, this is something we should keep an eye on in case it does turn into a real problem.  At that point we can do something along the lines of creating a generalized monster CR question, and close new questions as duplicates of that... or come up with a better solution.  For now, we should just watch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2016-02-02T20:20:13.643" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6071" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-02T22:59:45.347" Score="25" ViewCount="599" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, not that rarely, rules change in RPGs. Answers that were good &lt;em&gt;become&lt;/em&gt; objectively, definitely wrong overnight, through no fault of their writer.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;The accepted course of action is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5444/9552&quot;&gt;do nothing&lt;/a&gt;, hoping that the previous voters realize the change in the facts, and modify their votes accordingly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;em&gt;they do not&lt;/em&gt;. Either they do not know there was an errata, and even if they do, you can not expect people to follow all their votes, for ever. And if they do, they might not change their votes, because of the time constraint (&quot;&lt;em&gt;Your vote is locked unless the answer is edited&lt;/em&gt;&quot;). The &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; answer for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53188/can-a-druid-monk-make-unarmed-strikes-while-wild-shaped&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; has only 4 votes, 10 less than the &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; one. Half a year has passed since the errata, so our approach of waiting for the problem to fix itself clearly &lt;strong&gt;does not work&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Someone who is unaware of the errata gets the wrong answer, which is against the intentions of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update after a week:&lt;/strong&gt; The votes are now 11 to the right answer, 9 to the old one, &lt;em&gt;very far&lt;/em&gt; from convincing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we fix this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see 6 options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote the old answer, upvote the new one, comment on old one&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Does not offend anyone, moves things in the right direction, takes small effort&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; I just demonstrated that it failed to give the expected result even after &lt;em&gt;7 months&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a meta question about it&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Does not offend anyone, moves things in the right direction&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; I just demonstrated that it failed to give the expected result even after a week, also quite high effort (I planned doing this question for a month)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; Invisible for a casual user, who just wanted to find the right answer for the original question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Completely rewrite the old answer to reflect the new ruling  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Now the highest rated answer is also the best one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; Against current rules, more importantly could start editing wars&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the old answer, add &quot;&lt;em&gt;obsoleted by rules change&lt;/em&gt;&quot; as first line&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Low effort, highly visible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; The writer of the answer could delete it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the flag &quot;&lt;em&gt;in need of moderator intervention&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Low effort, highly visible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; Not immediatel clear why it was flagged&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create new flag &quot;&lt;em&gt;obsoleted by rules change&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt; Low effort, highly visible, and clear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt; Might not be technically feasible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would suggest option 4 or 6.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="9552" LastEditDate="2019-03-22T09:13:28.863" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T09:13:28.863" Title="When rules change but votes don't, how to handle it?" Tags="|discussion|answers|voting|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6072" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6073" CreationDate="2016-02-03T00:20:10.793" Score="3" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I spent all my 40 votes today and didn't get the &quot;Vox Populi&quot; badge awarded :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this a bug or did I do something wrong? Any other possible reasons?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26548" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-02-03T03:16:15.497" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T03:16:15.497" Title="Is the &quot;Vox Populi&quot; badge working?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6072" CreationDate="2016-02-03T00:36:12.823" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many badges don't get awarded the very moment you meet their criteria. Instead, they get checked and awarded periodically by scripts that run every few minutes or hours (sometimes &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of hours), according to how server-intensive the badge is to check for, and how often people get it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll probably get the badge later today. If you don't get it for a whole day, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; there's an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T00:36:12.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6074" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-03T03:32:04.547" Score="6" ViewCount="1099" Body="&lt;p&gt;With a lack of clear data on intended use being a major sticking point in the recent discussion on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, we’d like to make a proposal that should gather useful data on how often the tag is used for its intended purpose. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’d like to propose that we do the following: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Change the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written-only&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written-only&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written-only&lt;/a&gt; to clarify its intended use to new users just looking for a rules tag, and updating its tag wiki to clarify its use per the meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On any question where it’s not explicit in the body that the intent of the OP (and doubly so for new users) is for RAW we ask if they’re sure RAW is what they want with a canned comment that makes it clear the tag’s intended purpose (rules only, no common sense interpretation/house rules). &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove the tag when an OP indicates that strict RAW is not their intent &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Aggressively police answers on RAW posts to remove answers that rely primarily on house rules or common sense interpretations. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each question that has had the tag removed will be counted as an incident of misusing the tag. Cases of the OP not responding but then accepting non-RAW answers or objecting that the community removed non-RAW answers that were useful will be counted as mistagging as well, and the tag removed. Questions that keep the tag during the collection period will count as correct taggings. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current suspected problem with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is largely tied up in the fact that it A. gets applied to questions where the OP is simply looking for how to interpret the rules and grabbed the only tag that really starts with “rules”, and B. that it’s often answered with “this is what the rules say, and here’s interpretation/house rules that fill in the gaps.” These two suspected problems make the tag relatively meaningless in those contexts. The process presented here seeks to collect data on how often the tag is misused, if at all, allowing the community to proceed in a data-driven way toward resolving the perception of issues with the tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’d like to start this about a week from today, and run this data collection for about a month. In a month we can evaluate and summarize the data, with the intention of eliminating the need for any stakeholders to guess about whether and how much mistagging is a real problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community can help this process by aggressively flagging answers that are non-RAW on questions that have had the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written-only&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written-only&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written-only&lt;/a&gt; tag confirmed as understood and intended by the OP. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it would generate better data, we don’t think that question closures pending OP confirmations of intent is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-23T21:35:26.903" Title="A proposal for moving forward with Rules as Written" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-03T04:06:23.307" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should do this thing.  All three diamond mods support it.  It seems like a concrete step to gathering more data to make a decision in a way that is minimally disruptive to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T04:06:23.307" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6076" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-03T05:35:29.217" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a modification to your proposal to make it compatible with how RAW works when it's functioning just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer isn't an endorsement of the plan. Treat it as an &quot;&lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; this goes ahead, do it like this.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Be sensitive to the RAW tag's community during this&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be sensitive to the requests of the people active in RAW here, like HeyICanChan and KRyan, when you're moderating this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, this is just so that you don't risk looking like you're mucking things up &amp;mdash; it would suck to carry out this plan, keep a good score, and to reach the end of it with the community saying, &quot;yeah, but we only got this tally because the mods mucked things up.&quot; Put the ball in the court of the RAW tag's regulars by listening to them, that way if the experiment &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; indicate problems, the data's going to be fairly reliable (or at least, if there are problems, it won't be all your fault).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie have both expressed they don't like RAW play. To their credit, SevenSidedDie's expressed he'll fight to support it here anyway. You need to be careful you don't look like you're accidentally breaking things through ignorance or deliberate harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Police these normally, and by community consent.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of parts of this proposal are concerning in that they may hurt RAW questions &amp;amp; answers more than help them, but I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; it's pretty easy to make workable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Aggressively police answers on RAW posts to remove answers that rely primarily on house rules or common sense interpretations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5238/1204&quot;&gt;my answer on what the RAW tag is for&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;[Homebrew is] useful if the rules are terrible, such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46568/when-do-per-day-spell-like-abilties-recover-in-3rd-edition/46615#46615&quot;&gt;einn&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48488/what-happens-when-hiding-behind-ones-tower-shield/48492#48492&quot;&gt;tveir&lt;/a&gt;.&quot; Good RAW answers should absolutely definitely tackle the RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the examples I provide do that &lt;em&gt;and then also&lt;/em&gt; go on to offer alternatives from homebrew and common sense and whatnot. That comprises a good chunk of their usefulness. So really, this should be: &quot;Police answers on RAW questions that don't tackle the RAW situation at all.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest you also keep the policing &lt;em&gt;gentle.&lt;/em&gt; If nobody else has done so, leave a comment requesting improvement: &quot;You don't seem to have described the RAW at all, so this isn't answering the question. Could you do that? Also, have you tried these house rules you're suggesting, how did they work out?&quot; Do delete answers where the author refuses to do that (or never gets around to it), but that's just business as usual, I think. Implementing Game Rec levels of draconian deletion is unnecessary for data collection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Cases of the OP not responding but then accepting non-RAW answers or objecting that the community removed non-RAW answers that were useful will be counted as mistagging as well, and the tag removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Non-RAW here should be answers that never adequately tackle the RAW. As in, crap ones as I described above. If it handles the RAW but then also provides common sense and house rules, don't count it as a &quot;non-RAW&quot; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Keep a public register of RAW tag misuse&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I understand correctly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're going to be counting misuses and correct uses of the tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We're going to be keeping score of how many of these incidents occur, in order to get some data on what's going on.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I suggest: Start a meta Q&amp;amp;A recording these incidents publicly. When you encounter a question or answer indicating a misuse, record it there. Link to it, quote comments if it helps. This is so we can get eyes on what's happening as it happens, and make sure the data's good. (This is part of the whole &quot;don't risk looking like you're mucking things up&quot; thing I mentioned above, too.) I presume there'll only be like, a couple of dozen RAW questions max during the month this runs, so it should be manageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Allow for people to point out false matches if they can show why. Let's take &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46568/when-do-per-day-spell-like-abilties-recover-in-3rd-edition/46615#46615&quot;&gt;that &quot;einn&quot; example from above&lt;/a&gt;: it's a good RAW answer to a good RAW question, and also contains some homebrew. Let's assume a mod takes it as indicating a misuse: we're human, they're human, everyone makes mistakes. They put it on the list, it puts the score up 1, we get to point out &quot;uh, that's actually a perfectly good RAW answer&quot;, it goes off the list and the score goes down 1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discussion over whether something's a false positive should probably be confined to &lt;em&gt;the questions themselves,&lt;/em&gt; not the meta Q&amp;amp;A &amp;mdash; comments on the meta Q&amp;amp;A should draw attention to a question at best, the meat of the discussion shouldn't happen in there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T06:52:42.893" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-03T14:30:42.727" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't rename the tag during the study&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;With a lack of clear data on intended use being a major sticking point in the recent discussion on the rules-as-written tag, we’d like to make a proposal that should gather useful data on how often the tag is used for its intended purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you want to find out how people respond to and use the RAW tag, right? That's a great idea, and we need that data sorely so we can see what problems exist, and agree on where to go with it from here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then you say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Change the rules-as-written tag to rules-as-written-only to clarify its intended use to new users just looking for a rules tag, and updating its tag wiki to clarify its use per the meta question What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an admirable thing to do, but it compromises your earlier stated mission. We need data on how people are using a tag called [rules-as-written], right? Well, study that tag then, not a new one you're experimenting with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Renaming the tag here is a bit like saying &quot;we want to see how apes respond to bananas. But, also, first we're going to replace all the bananas we have with apples. Then we'll measure their response to apples. That will give us data on how they respond to bananas.&quot; Which is, y'know, a little nuts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get what you want to do is clarify things and that's a good idea, but it's going to equal tainting the data right now. Here's the process you should follow, which I think you're jumping ahead on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Study the behaviour in the rules-as-written tag as-is for a while.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Review data, see if we should take any actions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Assuming we decide it is a good idea: rename the tag to rules-as-written-only as a trial. Study that tag for a while.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Review data, see if it improved things, and if there's more action needed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your study's goal is to help us reach step 2, but it really gets us to step 4 but without even any data from step 2 to compare against.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You want to reduce misunderstandings, but how often that happens in the first place is actually valuable data we need for step 2. We also won't understand if a rename to [rules-as-written-only] has any effect without that data.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be like David Attenborough. If you want to observe the thing in its natural habitat with its normal behaviours and document it, leave it in peace as much as you can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-02-03T23:49:48.997" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T23:49:48.997" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6078" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-03T19:43:56.063" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, this is just patently absurd, and I cannot believe that this is what we have come to. I am just going to address the elephant in the room, because I believe that too much of this discussion has suffered for trying not to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The moderation team is not competent to perform the policing that they propose&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two-thirds of the moderation team have an avowed and public “hatred” for rules-as-written as a playstyle. The list of questions that mxyzplk chose to bring up this discussion, which he labeled as not being about the rules as written, was, in my opinion, poorly chosen, and further indicate that he is not in a position to make these judgments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, quite frankly, &lt;strong&gt;the moderation team cannot be &lt;em&gt;trusted&lt;/em&gt; to perform this policing.&lt;/strong&gt; Again, two-thirds of the moderation team have publicly stated a hatred for this playstyle. One of them has done an admirable job of mostly keeping his opinions out of his actions on this site, but the other has a long history of vitriol, personal attacks, inflammatory statements, and outright persecuting the rules-as-written community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On his personal blog, &lt;a href=&quot;http://geek-related.com/2010/06/19/i-hate-the-raw/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mxyzplk writes&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know what?  It’s time to bring back some of the pejorative terms of gaming 20 years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules lawyers.  Munchkins.  Power gamers.  Monty Haulers.  You’re on notice.  Somehow your filthy habits have become mainstreamed, over Gary Gygax’s dead body apparently.  But you’re not welcome, around here at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s from a personal blog, but that same attitude has influenced and informed his interactions with the rules-as-written community here, as well. This is difficult to demonstrate because of comments being deleted, so I can only assure you that it is the case—but for myself, I have literally never had a conversation with him in which he did not insult me and everyone I play with. That unwelcome is something I have experienced constantly on this site, almost entirely due to his presence—and while I have fought tooth and nail to carve out a place for myself and my preferences, he has driven off numerous others, and still more have avoided joining this website because of him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;mxyzplk not only has avoided suspension despite engaging repeatedly, flagrantly, and over a long period of time numerous activities defined as being cause for suspension, he has furthermore retained his moderator position, which is a strong sign to the rules-as-written community that they are treated here as second-class citizens. Leaving an avowed bigot in charge is not appropriate, but that is what has happened. So far as I can tell, the only result of his behavior has been that he has been told to tone it down and keep his opinions to himself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And now we are being asked to trust that self same opinion in the judgment and policing of a topic that he actively despises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. Under no circumstances will I accept this proposal from this moderation team. I am actually flabbergasted that they had the gall to think they were in a position to suggest it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the moderation team wants to try something like this out, they need to show that they are actually accepting of rules-as-written enthusiasts as a part of this community. They cannot do that while mxyzplk is still a moderator. He has to go, or this is just untenable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-03T20:10:02.337" CommentCount="31" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2016-02-04T14:41:04.950" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote and (optionally) comment the old answer, upvote the new answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This actually has a twofold effect. It notifies the OP of the old answer that there may be an issue that needs to be addressed, and it also serves to begin the process of floating the new answer to the top and dropping the old answer to the bottom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is still insufficient, you could (and I've done this myself), offer a bounty to award the new answer and thus draw attention to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the old answer is accepted, there may be issues there, but a note to the OP of the question that the ruling has changed is not out of line. In rare cases the answerer of the accepted answer will realize it's incorrect and that there is now an established correct answer and want to delete their answer. In this case the OP should flag it and ask the moderators to delete their answer since they cannot do it themselves. Moderators are typically quite responsive to these flags (though in rare cases they may see value in retaining the original answer if it's providing other value outside of the incorrect answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2016-02-09T22:26:52.763" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T22:26:52.763" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6080" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6081" CreationDate="2016-02-05T00:54:39.847" Score="20" ViewCount="1029" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit: A follow up question has been made by KorvinStormast &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has the potential to be a flame war, so I encourage everyone who involves themselves in this to self-moderate. On the other hand, since this is focusing on doubts about our moderators, I'm also asking that nothing gets deleted without a comment saying that it should be deleted either coming from the same side of the debate, or from someone who has been agreed upon as neutral. (At least until we agree on something better.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that not everyone trusts our moderator team anymore, and I don't know all the reasoning behind this. Earlier today, I &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/274163/what-to-do-when-community-lacks-trust-in-moderators-on-small-stacks&quot;&gt;asked&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta.se&lt;/a&gt; about what appears to be a schism in our community over our moderators. I didn't bring up too many details, as I hope that we can resolve this &lt;strong&gt;by ourselves&lt;/strong&gt;. If you have not noticed any issues, that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To go along with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/274164/259496&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; I received, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/274163/what-to-do-when-community-lacks-trust-in-moderators-on-small-stacks?noredirect=1#comment891042_274164&quot;&gt;comments&lt;/a&gt; left by our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1036/grace-note&quot;&gt;Community Representative, Grace Note ♦&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I am proposing three questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One question asking who everyone can agree on as neutral. &lt;em&gt;(This one.)&lt;/em&gt; This person will not be allowed to propose any arguments. If both those who do not fully trust the mods and the mods cannot agree, we'll have to put our big boy pants on, and keep going without a mediator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One question &lt;em&gt;(not this one)&lt;/em&gt; asking what went wrong, and how we got here. Answers would be whatever complaints &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;either party&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; has about the other, with the comments on each addressing these concerns. If we can reach an agreement in the comments, the answer gets edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last question &lt;em&gt;(also not this one)&lt;/em&gt; would address where we are going from here, and how we plan on avoiding this situation in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the best, most fair and impartial way I can come up with. Does anyone have a better idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14966" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-02-12T13:13:56.750" Title="Let's do that thing where we use our words" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="38" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6080" CreationDate="2016-02-05T18:15:01.457" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;I volunteer to mediate this process.  I am putting this in an answer as neither Smurfton nor I are sure how to volunteer, per our comment under the question.  I will guess that up votes and down votes will note the support (or lack there of) for me so acting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2016-02-05T18:15:01.457" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6080" CreationDate="2016-02-06T06:02:03.650" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I also volunteer to mediate. I made this question, and I do plan on following through with it if everyone else falls through. I'm likely not as good a choice as Korvin, but I'll likely be watching this closely anyway. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a problem with the mods, nor do i have a problem with the people who have a problem with the mods (aside from their arguing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14966" LastActivityDate="2016-02-06T06:02:03.650" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6035" CreationDate="2016-02-08T04:28:53.743" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Due to the new community ads requiring new dimensions, the Stack staff have deferred activating them, to give communities time to redesign and submit ads. They are tentatively scheduled to go live in mid-to-late February:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I've been holding off on the official activation of the new threads since people haven't had much time to design new ads to accommodate the new width (and also to look into some changes on the new filesize limits). […] – Grace Note♦ &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/273255/please-dont-stretch-the-old-community-ads#comment888053_273255&quot;&gt;Jan 18 at 15:31&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@GraceNote Do you have a rough estimate of when the new threads might get activated? Should we expect a few days, few weeks, etc.? – Szabolcs &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/273255/please-dont-stretch-the-old-community-ads#comment888055_273255&quot;&gt;Jan 18 at 15:33&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm thinking like until mid or late February at the moment. It'll depend a lot on how much new submissions we get. – Grace Note♦ &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/273255/please-dont-stretch-the-old-community-ads#comment888056_273255&quot;&gt;Jan 18 at 15:35&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Update: The new ads are live!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2016-03-09T06:08:45.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-08T13:21:21.910" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;With respect to the fact there's some ongoing matters to discuss connected to this (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words&quot;&gt;Let&amp;#39;s do that thing where we use our words&lt;/a&gt;), I'd like to suggest an &lt;em&gt;alternate&lt;/em&gt; proposal for moving forward that takes stock of the comments and answers thus far (and the hefty amount of upvotes distributed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is intended to replace the original five &amp;quot;We’d like to propose that we do the following&amp;quot; bullet points. Most of these changes are on the basis that &lt;strong&gt;if we want to gather data on business as usual, we should not be altering business as usual at the same time.&lt;/strong&gt; The rest are just expanding on how data gathering will happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we do the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Moderation (by the community &amp;amp; diamond mods)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On any question where it’s not explicit in the body that the intent of the OP is for RAW, we ask if they’re sure RAW is what they want with a canned comment that makes it clear the tag’s intended purpose (primarily, delve into RAW even when it gets complicated, propose house rules and common sense only when that's been done to satisfaction).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The canned comment is discussed by the community first because &lt;em&gt;we all know&lt;/em&gt; this is very likely to start fights if that doesn't happen first.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Diamond moderators moderate as they usually would.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RAW tag gets removed in the following cases, because they indisputably show misuse of the tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP indicates (in response to that canned comment) that strict RAW is not their intent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP uses the [rules-as-written] tag, then accepts an answer that does not cover RAW. (Or does so utterly and indisputably inadequately.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dispute over these actions gets discussed in the post's comments as normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Data gathering&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(This mostly was just compressed into the last bullet point of the original proposal. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written/6086#comment17497_6076&quot;&gt;Public logging is the plan&lt;/a&gt;, which is great, and it should get more detail in the proposal itself.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Data will be publicly logged in a public meta Q&amp;amp;A by &lt;em&gt;all participating users&lt;/em&gt; including diamond moderators, with links to the questions or answers involved. The following categories of events in particular will be highlighted because they're of particular interest and relevance to the debate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A RAW question gets asked at all. Some of these will have the tag removed, so we'll log them here anyway for later reference. (Because people would no doubt wonder &lt;em&gt;how many&lt;/em&gt; we've covered so far, I suggest we keep count by putting them in a numbered list, and number all items with &amp;quot;1.&amp;quot; in markdown - which is just a neat way to auto-number them.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The RAW tag gets removed for the above reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The accepted answer covers the RAW in nebulous detail.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The accepted answer covers the RAW, as well as house rules or homebrew.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Naturally, posts can belong to more than one of these groups.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other categories can come up, preferably as/before we begin in order to ease maintenance. Each category should be handled in a separate answer to minimise edit collisions (tightly related categories can stay in one answer, use your judgement). New categories can be brought up in new answers by whatever groups or individuals care to curate it, so that whatever details are of interest to various parties for debate &amp;amp; discussion purposes can be covered. (Some important categories may only become evident once we've already begun.) Duplicate categories should be avoided. Useless categories should earn downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Records that go obsolete (the accepted answer gets changed, for instance) should be kept on the list as a thing that &lt;em&gt;did happen&lt;/em&gt; and marked obsolete. (If in later doubt and we have such records, we might need diamond mods to tell us whether it's true.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Data will be considered &lt;strong&gt;indicative, not comprehensive&lt;/strong&gt;. This is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/a3121120.nsf/home/statistical+language+-+census+and+sample&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a sample, not a census&lt;/a&gt;, and has all the strengths and weaknesses of a sample. Statistical anomalies &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; creep in, but the data will at least give us a general idea of what occurs or can occur in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gone completely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Renaming the tag. Don't change anything about it. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6067/can-we-clarify-the-rules-as-written-tag-wiki&quot;&gt;Except maybe updating the tag wiki.&lt;/a&gt; Since tag wikis are notorious for rarely if ever getting read, and the existing one is already accurate, if a little lacking in straightforwardness, I expect it won't change behavior much.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any notion of &amp;quot;aggressive&amp;quot; moderation. It's completely unnecessary. Moderate per usual.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The notion that &amp;quot;RAW&amp;quot; means &amp;quot;no answers should ever mention house rules or common sense interpretations&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-08T16:02:32.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6086" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-08T13:33:18.157" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Extend the timeframe beyond 1 month&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I counted up the questions per month in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag since it can be counted fairly quickly. (This doesn't cover tag removals and deletions but since I have no info on that, I'm ignoring them.) There were:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;30 questions for January 2016&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;21 in December 2015&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;25 in November&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;31 in October&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;46 in September&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;39 in August&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;34 in July&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;33 in June&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;33 in May&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;31 in April&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;25 in March&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;History repeats itself and that looks like we usually get 30-ish RAW questions a month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;30-ish is a poor sample size to operate on. Uncommon events can be misrepresented by not showing up at all or being over-represented at that scale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we gather data for &lt;strong&gt;at least two months.&lt;/strong&gt; At the end of two months, we consider if we should run it for a third. As an &lt;strong&gt;absolute limit&lt;/strong&gt;, once we reach 100 questions, the month we're on becomes the last &amp;mdash; we'll keep gathering questions for that month, but we don't renew for another. That'll probably mean 3-4 months tops, and a quarter or a third of a year is a pretty decent sample. That's a while but good data collection doesn't come cheap and easy and if we're going to do it at all we might as well do a good job of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-02-09T01:17:36.267" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T01:17:36.267" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6080" CreationDate="2016-02-09T07:07:54.240" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I'm not sure if nominating other people is kosher, but I'm pretty sure everyone on this site has a great deal of respect for BESW.  If he's willing to help us sort this out, that would be super cool.  Not sure we're all agreed it's worth his time though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T07:07:54.240" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6055" CreationDate="2016-02-09T21:25:55.230" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think generically having a Rules-As-Written tag makes sense, but I don't think it makes sense to try to insist it mean a specific thing or warrant heavy moderation or deletion of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, if it were my site, the tag would just indicate the question is about the rules as written, and would prefer answers in that context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the main reasons I tend to avoid participating in this site very much, is what seems to me like excessive negativity and limiting of discussions for reasons I feel often limits the usefulness of the site even if the intention is to make the content better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So personally I'd keep the tag but go light on the moderation and downvoting of interesting answers that have non-RAW content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T21:25:55.230" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6089" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2016-02-09T22:49:52.403" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Part of the virtue of the Stack format is that no one person can enforce their view of which answers are correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That includes mods. That also includes you (whoever the &quot;you&quot; is that is reading this at the moment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the methods of dealing with an &quot;incorrect&quot; answer suggested in the answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This has already been done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This has already been done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not permitted because it alters the intent of the author of the post. It also invisibly hijacks the votes on a post to falsely endorse the lone editor's idea of what is correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not permitted because it alters the intent of the author of the post. It has a similar hijacking problem, though to a lesser degree because it is visible instead of invisible and therefore less likely to deceive readers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Moderators aren't allowed to make that decision. We even have a specific, hard-coded flag rejection reason that says so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't send us flags about incorrect answers. They'll only be rejected, which would only (with a lot of rejections) result in losing flagging privileges entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not technically feasible (since flag reasons are network-wide, and hardcoded, they cannot be customised per-site), and would be rejected even if it was possible (for the same reasons as #5).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically: &lt;strong&gt;chill&lt;/strong&gt;. Fixing this is not your job. You've already done plenty, and it's on the path to &lt;em&gt;voters&lt;/em&gt; correcting this, as is proper on a Stack. If you're so impatient for Truth To Win Out that a mere week is insufficient for the normal site mechanisms to work and you feel the need to immediately &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; it correct according to your own personal standard, you gotta seriously chill out. A year from now the votes will likely have a wider division.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's not good enough: sorry, no one user gets to decide which answers are correct and which aren't, so you just have to deal with being unhappy about the votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-02-09T22:58:45.260" LastActivityDate="2016-02-09T22:58:45.260" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6090" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6092" CreationDate="2016-02-11T02:40:43.883" Score="34" ViewCount="1784" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before you consider answering or voting, please read the whole question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the second of three questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words?cb=1&quot;&gt;mentioned in this meta,&lt;/a&gt; I wish to ask &lt;em&gt;if something is wrong&lt;/em&gt;.  The meta question was inspired &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6078/22566&quot;&gt;by this answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; and a bundle of comments that related to them.  Some of it got kind of testy. The moderators and some users are at odds over whether the moderation on this site is running as it should, and assertions of bias were made.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The process for response to this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you think something is wrong, add an upvote to this question.  If&#xA;you have more to say, describe it in your answer, NOT in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you thing something isn't wrong, a down vote to this question is a&#xA;great response, as is an answer explaining why something isn't wrong.&#xA;Again, comments are really not desired, but answers with meat are. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As various answers pro and con arise, votes on them will either accumulate or they won't.  What I ask you all is to NOT use the comments on any of them to answer or argue.  I request that we really try to use the SE format and voting to gage whether or not something &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; wrong.  The detail of &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; needs to be In Answers.  I also ask of you not to personalize this, even though it's a people thing and we are all people. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Be Nice&quot; rules really need to be adhered to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rules of Engagement:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't get to voice an opinion.  I volunteered to mediate this&#xA;discussion, if it becomes one, and will refrain from any input pro or&#xA;con.  I am comparatively new to RPG.SE, and offer my sincere thanks&#xA;to all who participate here for how it supports one of my hobbies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Getting personal is going to attract flags.  This is a bit delicate,&#xA;since mods act on flags and part of the question has to do with &quot;are&#xA;the mods doing it right?&quot; as regards this concern.  That's a&#xA;limitation of how this site works, and I'll work hard in&#xA;communicating with the mods to try to ensure that any chance for&#xA;&quot;conflict of interest&quot; is mitigated and removed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If nobody answers, and about ninety eleven of you down vote this&#xA;question, that will send a signal of a sort.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a load of answers arrive, that will send another signal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More likely, it will be something in between, and I offer you my very&#xA;best effort to mediate such dialogue as arises to keep it all on the&#xA;level&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you all in advance for any help or insight that you can offer on this matter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I offer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5988/can-we-agree-to-stop-downvoting-non-opinionated-factually-correct-answers&quot;&gt;these two&lt;/a&gt; posts as possibly related &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5814/the-sites-availability-to-newcomers-seems-startlingly-low&quot;&gt;to a cultural/community &quot;maybe there's something wrong&quot;&lt;/a&gt; data points not directly related to the dispute that got this question asked. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T23:55:40.407" Title="Is something wrong?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="75" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6091" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-11T03:07:22.850" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was a supporter of this facilitated discussion idea earlier, but I'm not now. Here's why, and what we should be doing instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mods have told us (repeatedly, for years) that if the problem is misbehaviour by a moderator, the right thing to do is bring it to the attention of the Community Managers, and that the more people talk to the CMs, the more seriously the CMs will take it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/240500/244929&quot;&gt;We don't need to be Archivists; in fact we shouldn't.&lt;/a&gt; If the issue is serious, it's serious no matter how often it's happened. If it's trivial, ditto.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, and because multiple individuals (including all mods collectively) have declined to participate in this meta discussion at all, I now think this meta-level airing of grievances is a mistake. It will dilute the effectiveness of using the official channel: folks will expend their frustrations here instead of in the official channel to the CMs where its effects will accumulate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To contact a Community Moderator: email the community team collectively at team@stackoverflow.com, or use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;the &quot;Contact Us&quot; link&lt;/a&gt; at the bottom of every page, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/99341/244929&quot;&gt;pick one from the list&lt;/a&gt; and email them or catch them in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-02-11T04:29:49.187" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-11T12:16:02.307" Score="41" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Matter of fact I think there's 2 things wrong with this site compared to other Stacks. And as they are connected, I'm not sure which is cause and which is effect. Or Hen and egg. I cannot say which was first. So I cannot necessarily blame the mods for it, it might just be their &lt;em&gt;reaction&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Community Behavior&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I would describe the more programming minded Stacks is &amp;quot;professional&amp;quot;. It isn't about liking an answer or liking the concept, it's about getting a working solution. That means people will generally respect any answer they get. They will be happy there's people out there trying to help with something they'd need to pay $1000 a days upwards to get otherwise. An up-vote is given when it leads to a working solution, no vote may be given if there is a clearly better solution in another answer and a down-vote is for singling out dangerous, incorrect and/or spam answers. Even for opinionated answers, votes are given based on how well the idea is presented. I'd never down-vote an idea that is presented well with sources and evidence that it will work, just because it's not my style. Obviously, everybody can vote however they like, but as a norm, this is how it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, I have encountered people that down-vote you because they don't &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; you, don't &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; your opinion or found your post &lt;em&gt;personally not useful&lt;/em&gt; (compared to &amp;quot;this answer is not useful for the site in general&amp;quot;). There is no professional courtesy for the guy who spent his time trying to help the OP. You need to craft a perfect answer, or no answer. There is no in-between.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That also means, that since down-votes have been used for personal preferences, there is nothing left for the community to use for policing the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been told by a 30K member, that we &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; strong mods, because we cannot delete bad answers otherwise. Yes, we can, it's a privilege, look it up. If the community &lt;strong&gt;knew&lt;/strong&gt; about their policing instruments and didn't use them for Facebook Likes, we would &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; need strong mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Moderator Behavior&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators on a Stack are supposed to be exception handlers. Doing things the community &lt;strong&gt;cannot&lt;/strong&gt; do. And for the record, that means handling voting fraud, sock-puppet rings, spam and harassment. However, here on RPG.SE I find our moderators being kind of Forum Moderators of old. They constantly use their powers to police the site in ways that originally belong to the community and the communities powers. When I read sentences like &amp;quot;aggressively police&amp;quot; then every inch of me screams &amp;quot;DON'T&amp;quot;. That's not your damn job. Your are the trusted exception handlers, not the community leaders.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, as I said before, I cannot figure out why this is. Are the mods policing this site so heavily because the community doesn't? Or is the community so free with down-votes because it knows that it won't need them for their intended purpose with the mods policing the site as they do? I cannot say. But I see both of it as two sides of the same problem and we need to fix that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-11T12:16:02.307" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6093" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-12T04:41:36.880" Score="5" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know this isn't an RPG question, but I need to know right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made an account on a computer where gmail is blocked and I can't log in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the tag is irrelavant&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27229" LastActivityDate="2016-02-12T05:06:53.393" Title="How Do I login if I haven't confirmed my email?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6093" CreationDate="2016-02-12T05:01:50.443" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;All is not lost!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you hadn't registered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/27228/warriorking9001&quot;&gt;your original account&lt;/a&gt; (the one that &quot;owns&quot; all your questions so far), it remains attached to the computer and browser you originally used. That can obviously present difficulties if you don't have access to that machine anymore, if the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_cookie&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;browser's cookies&lt;/a&gt; have been cleared, or if (as it seems) there is a security block interfering with logging in on that machine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you can regain access to that account with some help: someone from Stack Exchange staff (i.e., someone even higher up than a site moderator) can associate the original account with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/27229/warriorking9001&quot;&gt;the account you currently have access to&lt;/a&gt; and merge them together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can start this process by following the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/merging-accounts&quot;&gt;instructions on merging accounts&lt;/a&gt; in our Help Center. Since you've used the same email address for both accounts, it should be a speedy process for a staff member to merge them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-02-12T05:06:53.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6080" CreationDate="2016-02-12T13:13:56.750" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm happy to be part of the team to moderate the discussion. I'm not very active in the community, and have only just come across this issue on META. Regular lurker, noob RPG'r. Potentially a good outside view :) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a first glance it does seem like everyone's gotten a bit hot under the collar!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23683" LastActivityDate="2016-02-12T13:13:56.750" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-12T16:21:54.073" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the request of nitsua60 I've compiled my comments on nvoigt's answer into a coherent answer/comment from my outsider perspective as a relatively new member here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that mods are more heavy handed here on RPG.SE but I also understand that on RPG.SE you're more likely to encounter very low quality questions and answers due to the nature of this particular SE and the varying maturities of those who are likely to post questions and answers, as opposed to DBA.SE or SO where, as pointed out in nvoigt's answer, you are more likely to receive answers from professionals in the field of study. RPGs aren't a standardized thing so it's difficult to have standardized answers for every question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had one criticism of the mods here, I'd say that moderation of comments is inconsistent.  For example, many comments are deleted as too chatty, not constructive, or otherwise not adding anything useful to the conversation, but check out the comments on the answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/74123/9399&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; -- that's a pretty obviously chatty comment thread that really adds nothing to the answer or the question.  This is pretty inconsistent with how most comment threads are treated, and I can't tell if it's because the comments here weren't flagged by the community because they're fun and funny and no one wants to get rid of that and thus don't get moderator attention, or if they are left alone because ... well, I don't know, subjectivity?  I don't really care either way about comments, but I do wish there was a standard that was upheld across all comments regardless of their content because in light of this example there doesn't seem to be one.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'm all for more openness and less restriction on comments, but this example points to an inconsistency when I've seen more helpful comments deleted within minutes and moderator comments stating that comments are temporary, yet the ones in this example have been there for more than a week and add no substance to the answer.  This probably isn't an issue that needs to be brought to the attention of a CM, but if a newbie comes to RPG.SE and sees that comment thread on the answer for wild magic potted plants, they're going to get the wrong impression and think that that type of thing is accepted on this site when the mods have made it apparent that that is not what comments are for. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other side of things, if I could make one criticism of the community on RPG.SE as a whole, it's that it seems like individuals in the community here are more concerned with being right and less concerned with being helpful. That's not an indictment of everyone here by any means, just an observation I've made -- answers that aren't as good but still answer the question seem more likely to receive downvotes here than they would on other SE sites, and it's probably due to the highly interpretive nature of most P&amp;amp;P games.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll grant that my exposure on this site has been somewhat limited, mostly focusing on the dnd-3.5e, pathfinder, and dnd-5e tags.  Then again, those are three of the four most popular tags on the site so it's probably a pretty good sample.  I'll add that this behavior is something I might expect for a site related to a subject as contentious as tabletop gaming, where everyone seems to have their own idea of how it should be done and everyone else is having badwrongfun.  It's that mentality that chased me away from the Paizo forums; I got tired of all the constant arguing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if there is a solution to this, because it seems inherent to the nature of our favorite hobby.  You can't change the mentality of a community as a whole anyway, at least not without a lot of effort and a community that is willing to change.  And it probably doesn't need to change too much anyway, but I can say I'd like to see less direct arguing about rules (which I may contribute to, perhaps because of the general attitude re: how to play RPGs and in spite of the nature of the site) and more helpful information and clarification of rules, which is, of course, in the spirit of the SE family of sites.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-02-12T16:21:54.073" CommentCount="33" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2016-02-14T08:20:49.257" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comment on the old obsolete answer and the question. If there is no reaction to the comments, then edit a note on the obsolete answer, as per suggestion 4 in the original post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This gives the original asker and answerer an invitation and opportunity to consider the change (to edit their answer, to select another answer as the best one, to change their votes). If there is no action, then editing the obsolete note into the answer unlocks votes and is a usual case of editing useful content from comments to answers and questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The errata note might look something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After this answer was originally posted there has been errata / rules changes [link]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[the previous answer here]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Justification of adding in the errata&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the help center, &quot;When should I edit posts?&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To fix grammar and spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a mention of new errata fits the criteria 3-5. It somewhat conflicts the parenthetical clarification of criterion 2, but even this is arguable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some other quotes from the same web page, out of order, out of context:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All contributions are licensed under Creative Commons, and this site is collaboratively edited, like Wikipedia. If you see something that needs improvement, click edit!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing is important for keeping questions and answers clear, relevant, and up-to-date. If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="3263" LastEditDate="2016-02-14T11:58:26.450" LastActivityDate="2016-02-14T11:58:26.450" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2016-02-14T10:54:46.037" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6079/15469&quot;&gt;@waxeagle's answer&lt;/a&gt; is the correct one, but if you're unsatisfied with the results of that course of action, and you really want to mark a particular answer as being the correct one in a visible way, you could use a bounty. Obviously, it's up to you to decide if it is important enough to you to be worth spending your rep on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pros: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Draws attention to the question by placing it in the Featured tab.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Using a customised bounty message, you can explain why you're bountying so that the attention you draw can be directed the way you want it to.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Once the bounty is awarded, the answer it was awarded to has a thing on it to draw people's attention to it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Works much better while the bounty is active than once it's awarded.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;May cause additional, unnecessary answers that don't really add anything.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Obviously, it costs rep.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: There is a conflict of interest here, given the context of this meta, so I'm suggesting this for the general problem rather than your specific example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-02-14T14:26:33.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-14T19:24:35.793" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site, and its users and moderators, have several problems beyond those already mentioned. Here are the ones I've noticed. Most apply in meta or in meta-commentary on posts, but many also apply in all other interactions too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Focusing on personalities more than behavior, judgment more than characteristics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Writing this out and thinking about it, I realized I'm not doing as well on this as I'd thought or hoped. Sure, I might avoid &lt;a href=&quot;http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SetTheBozoBit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;flipping the bozo bit&lt;/a&gt; on people&amp;hellip; but it's still too easy to just express disbelief that someone could think doing XYZ is a good idea, rather than explaining why it's a bad idea. Here's why these are bad ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off as a hopeless malcontent or incompetent &amp;mdash; but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; removing them permanently from the site &amp;mdash; fosters lingering resentment and frustration, since they're still &lt;em&gt;there&lt;/em&gt;, still doing things, still having an obvious influence. Most of the people involved have fairly significant rep, and we all know that means they're being listened to. There's no resolution, just gritting teeth harder and harder.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Manually ignoring people turns out like &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3353/add-the-ability-to-ignore-users&quot;&gt;Add the ability to ignore users&lt;/a&gt;, but without software support. That's still a bad idea for all the reasons given there (especially &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.stackexchange.com/a/47356&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off also breeds a cavalier attitude toward anything those users are involved in. I think this has been particularly hard on one or two mods, resulting in saying things like &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words#comment17611_6080&quot;&gt;&quot;the five upset people will always be upset&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, which can easily drift into &quot;anyone who's upset about this is one of those five, oops I mean six, always-upset people&quot;. Once things truly spiral to this point, it's very hard to get back to a place where people can actually tell you you're wrong. And there's always a need for that, since we're all human.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off, &lt;em&gt;or seeing someone written off&lt;/em&gt;, breeds distrust and fear. Each developing &quot;side&quot; is unsure to what extent the others are able to cleverly manipulate things to hide their influence, or to what extent they themselves are being ignored with rolling eyes. The smallest of cues are seized on for evidence either way, even far out of proportion to any conscious intent. It becomes difficult to take even apparently friendly overtures as anything other than an even more deeply-concealed plot. Somehow.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Focusing on calling something a bad idea rather than explaining how it's a bad idea sparks defensiveness in anyone who thought (perhaps hastily, or perhaps even rightly) that it was a good idea. It's awfully hard to completely get rid of that reflex, but focusing on the facts first can defuse it to some extent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussing the factual up- and down-sides of an idea can lead to exploring more of the subtleties, possibly mitigating some of the problems, or at any rate allowing a deeper understanding of them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bad handling of critical fumbles&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't seem to be too good either at anticipating problems in communication, recognizing them when they arise, or preventing them in the future. Not only is this not something we're good at, it's not even something we recognize ourselves as being bad at. From various reports, it's taken us two years to actually get to the point of admitting we've got a problem with hard feelings and miscommunication. That's impressive!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're making the same mistakes repeatedly, as seen by various users bringing up old patterns of continued problems, and other users chiming in about having seen similar kerfuffles a year or two years ago about similar things. What's more, we're not learning from anyone else's mistakes either; there are thousands of years of human experience in how not to deal with interpersonal problems that we don't appear to be tapping very well at all. For that matter, there's the much more accessible pool of experience running SE sites (nearly all of which are considerably less wracked by drama than we are, &lt;em&gt;even on sites with userbases of similarly infamously poor social skills&lt;/em&gt;) that we're also somehow not managing to draw on well either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those boil down to &quot;work out an actual method to better avoid mistakes&quot;, which I've harped on a lot lately; the reactions I've seen have mostly appeared to be confusion at the idea or its benefits, or disdain for the effort necessary to do things right. (Or, perhaps, a feeling that all possible measures have already been taken, I'm not sure. I don't think that's reasonable either, though.) Well, this is what happens when you do things wrong: things get worse and harder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Unwillingness to accept responsibility or blame&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look, reconciliation with people is hard. That doesn't mean it's something we can just skip out on. If we keep doing so, there might not be much of a site left. This is something everyone needs to do, but, unfortunately, the role of ♦ mod comes with an extra share of this. We really need to drive this until it's actually &lt;em&gt;solved&lt;/em&gt;, not just sweep it under the rug for another three months. SE employees can probably help, although it's better if we're all trying to work together, rather than them having to come and negotiate a ceasefire with a bunch of people that aren't willing to come together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And when we make mistakes, we need to trust others on the site not to crucify us for admitting them. This is counter-intuitive, but locking up and refusing to accept blame generally just results in others doubling down on assigning it to you. Just feeling bad publicly isn't much good, though; what's really necessary is to figure out &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; you did wrong and publicly starting the process of fixing that and trying to prevent recurrences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. This took me a good bit longer to get started on, and then finish writing, than I really expected. Sorry for not putting this out within two days like I said in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T06:31:58.540" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:31:58.540" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3519" CreationDate="2016-02-15T03:29:00.227" Score="0" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'd note that you've accepted my answer rather quickly. If another, better--that is, provides &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; a better solution to &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; problem--comes along know that you have the ability to unaccept my answer and accept the other. Just un-check the green &quot;accept&quot; arrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Source for copying and pasting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;###[A] Hold your horses on accepting!&#xA;I'd note that you've accepted my answer rather quickly. If another, better--that is, provides *you* a better solution to *your* problem--comes along know that you have the ability to unaccept my answer and accept the other. Just un-check the green &quot;accept&quot; arrow.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2017-03-15T06:17:51.767" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T06:17:51.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2016-02-15T17:54:53.683" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the solution would be not make things more complex.&#xA;Maybe just to give more relevance to how old questions and answers are on the site would help people to realize that the once right answer seven years ago could not be correct today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To add functionality to solve things is not efficient. Rules can change... not only forward but backward. Some changes are reversed or again superseeded by future rules. Then, what you fix now, could be again wrong in a year or more. No one is going to track that madness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dates are small things on these sites, we can show them a little bit more and maybe add something that says &quot;5 months old&quot; or &quot;posted three years ago&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26443" LastActivityDate="2016-02-15T17:54:53.683" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6104" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6105" CreationDate="2016-02-15T18:53:27.680" Score="12" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;A long time ago in a country far away (from me) a system was born. It was named &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since then several others have taken up the work and created different yet similar systems based upon it. Some of those found a tag of their own (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mongoose-traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mongoose-traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mongoose-traveller&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mongoose-traveller-2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mongoose-traveller-2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mongoose-traveller-2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller-5&lt;/a&gt;) and others have not (see the traveller tag wiki).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, when new questions arise, how should they be handled? Should they have only the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; tag and specify their system in the question itself? What about when the asker is not aware that there are multiple ones?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should they have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; to honer their linage and their specific tag along with it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should they just abandon their ancestry and use only the most specific tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastEditorUserId="3324" LastEditDate="2016-02-15T19:16:29.020" LastActivityDate="2016-02-15T19:32:42.260" Title="Where goes the [traveller]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6104" CreationDate="2016-02-15T19:20:07.080" Score="14" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is some precedent in reserving the &quot;basic&quot; tag for a set of editions for only questions that are about &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; editions. That precedent was set by our discussions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2760&quot;&gt;how to tag D&amp;amp;D questions&lt;/a&gt; though, and D&amp;amp;D being the 800 lb gorilla of RPGs, it is somewhat exceptional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage of avoiding the extra tag is so that more room is available for other tags that might be needed for the question. D&amp;amp;D being a widely-known set of game editions makes this feasible because most questions start with the understanding that they &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to be about a specific edition, not just the non-specific “D&amp;amp;D”.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's also precedent for tagging questions about smaller games / games that generate fewer questions with both a general tag and the game-specific tag (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4933&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage of this approach is that all the questions about a particular game's editions can be found easily under the general tag. This can be useful when editions are very similar and have points of compatibility, or when people interested in one edition are often interested in many or all editions (which happens more often when editions are very similar).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; Traveller questions here fall into the second category: nearly always specifically about one game, but people who play one edition of Traveller seem to be interested in many other editions, as sources of ideas and rules to borrow. If that's the case, then I think we should tag with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; and the [game-specific-tag] when available, so that they can all be found under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; tag. In that case, &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; tag would mean either Classic or one of the other “old” editions, which we would have to see clearly indicated in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that's now. If we see an influx of many Traveller questions — which we might, if the recent releases of Traveller 5 and Mongoose Traveller 2 instigate a renaissance in interest in the games — then we may want to avoid the “tag tax” of needing to include the general tag, as with our D&amp;amp;D tags. That would also free up the general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; tag to mean something more specific, such as “questions relevant to most/all Traveller editions” or perhaps specifically GDW's 1977 &lt;em&gt;Traveller&lt;/em&gt; (though in either case, we would need to make a new tag to represent the other one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(A good heuristic for whether we might need to make that choice is if we get a lot of questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; that don't bother saying what game they mean and turn out to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be Classic. That would indicate that how to choose among our Traveller tags is not obvious and that we need more specific, obvious tag names to help guide new askers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is actually how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mongoose-traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mongoose-traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mongoose-traveller&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mongoose-traveller-2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mongoose-traveller-2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mongoose-traveller-2&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller-5&lt;/a&gt; came about: I noticed a small influx of questions that just assumed that readers would see “Traveller” and equate it with “current” Traveller (despite there being two-maybe-three). I knew we needed those three tags for fans of the recent Traveller games to pick, so they won't assume that saying “Traveller” means “obviously the current edition”.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt;: I think we should use both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; and [game-specific-tag] where available, unless we see a sharp rise in the number of questions about Traveller games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-02-15T19:32:42.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6106" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6107" CreationDate="2016-02-17T01:33:17.850" Score="22" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thrice recently I've placed a bounty on an old question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/3550/23970&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/3556/23970&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58530/23970&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;). My intent in each case was simply to reward an existing answer, and I indicated such in my bounty notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like these bounties are attracting some fairly low-quality new answers, down in the twelfth, fifteenth, even twentieth slots. Is this a problem? Should I refrain from using bounties in this manner? Is there a better way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-02-17T02:03:16.607" Title="Rewarding old answers with bounties" Tags="|discussion|answers|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6106" CreationDate="2016-02-17T02:03:16.607" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bounties always draw attention to a question, it's just part of the bounty effect. They encourage new attention no matter what because it gets highlighted for a while. That means new answers, but it also means people voting to moderate those new answers. Bad new answers will get downvoted like usual, good ones will get upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's not a problem. We're here to moderate the new posts like usual.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Go ahead and keep using bounties in that manner. They're intended to be used that way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Relax, get someone to give you a shoulder massage if you need it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1204/doppelgreener?tab=bounties&quot;&gt;I've placed a lot of bounties&lt;/a&gt; (31 on this site to date) and in general I've noticed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's going to be lots of new voting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with like 1-3 answers tops will get maybe one or two more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with lots of answers will get several more, but that's just because it seems really answerable for whatever reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nothing burns down and everyone survives.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-02-17T02:03:16.607" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6108" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-17T06:43:13.887" Score="-2" ViewCount="679" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was surfing the side-links today and came across an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/74469/10057&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; that had been edited to replace a word with another which, according to the comments relating to the edit, was intended to be a less problematic equivalent.  The comments indicated that the word violated the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;&quot;no bigotry&quot; rule&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bigotry of any kind.&lt;/strong&gt; Language likely to offend or alienate individuals or groups based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc. will not be tolerated. At all. (Those are just a few examples; when in doubt, just don't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The word in question &lt;em&gt;(obscured to preserve delicate sensibilities)&lt;/em&gt;  was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; twat&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sense of the usage was: &lt;a href=&quot;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/twat&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a foolish or despicable person&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to discuss this with the moderator who had made the change, with a nod towards the fact that it is quite likely that my perception of the word is quite different.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74457/is-it-appropriate-to-punish-a-player-who-snatches-thing-from-under-the-other-pla/74469#comment168045_74469&quot;&gt;He sent me here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my view there is nothing about the word which contravenes the &quot;no bigotry&quot; rule.  The specific usage of the word is gender neutral and does not touch on race, sexual orientation, religion or any other individual or group designation.  Obviously this is not true of whichever culture the mod is from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To further complicate things, the word was replaced with &quot;Jerk&quot; which - in the culture I was raised in - is a term applied exclusively to males and is generally considered to be a crude abbreviation for a particularly male activity.  By definition then it is gendered and in contravention of the rule in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not that I have a problem with either word, I honestly don't.  But since the given reason for the change was to correct a violation of a rule, I find it a little concerning that the replacement is a much more apparent violation of that rule &lt;em&gt;by the definitions of my culture&lt;/em&gt;.  If we're going to moderate away one, why not both?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or better yet: &lt;em&gt;neither&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not advocating for a complete lack of manners in questions, answers or comments.  I'm not asking to be able to use the common abbreviation of pusillanimous in my descriptions, since that one is mistaken as gendered fairly universally.  Nor am I insisting that all discussion be carried out in carefully neutered words to ensure that no possibly offense can be taken from any of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm concerned about is that petty words of neither impact nor importance are being treated as bigotry, regardless of intent or cultural considerations.  I'm hoping that I'm not the only one that finds this to be concerning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need better definitions as to what words are bad and banned, or could we perhaps put out a few of the fires on the censor ship?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10057" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-02-20T20:36:38.303" Title="Cultural relativity and the appropriateness of potentially offensive words" Tags="|discussion|editing|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-17T07:45:03.080" Score="13" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;An update note&lt;/strong&gt;: I'm no longer sure that “jerk” is actually offending anyone. The meta's asker has stated in comments that they don't believe anyone should be offended by any of these words, and nobody else has said anything that makes me believe that “jerk” is, in some locales, naturally offensive on actionable grounds. The original claim that it is appears to have been a false equivalence, made only to make a rhetorical point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The discussion is still well worth having, and I think this post still stands since it was already full of “ifs” regarding that point anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, removing &lt;em&gt;neither&lt;/em&gt; isn't an option if they're both inappropriate for civil discourse. If they're both inappropriate, then they both go — they don't cancel out with a shrug. Intent is also a distraction we can dispense with — our code of conduct doesn't allow for intent to excuse a term and let it stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But the point is worth examining&lt;/strong&gt;: we are an international site (apart from being strictly English-speaking), so North American standards of civility aren't the only ones relevant. In practice, what is probably the most sensible result is taking the union of inappropriate name-calling terms and tossing those out as “not constructive in civil international discourse.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've never been particularly happy with “jerk” as the boilerplate replacement for various nastier terms, anyway. It's still name-calling rather than describing the objectionable behaviours. It's pretty inoffensive where I and other mods come from though, so it got chosen more-or-less by default.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Aside, “twat” is probably more offensive here in the same way “jerk” is more offensive there: its slang meaning is highly visible and it can't be used casually without that other meaning being an inherent part of the insult. The effect here is to not only insult the person name-called, but also to insult female genitals as a category, by suggesting they're so bad that anyone &lt;em&gt;should be&lt;/em&gt; insulted to be associated with them. As gendered insults go North America certainly offers worse options, but it still crosses the bright line laid out in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; policy by a fair margin. Here “jerk” doesn't have that gendered connection at all (maybe it once did?), so we appear to have two terms that are perfect inversions in use, here and there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway. Being a thoughtless default doesn't make it sacrosanct, so it's worth considering…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How can we clean up posts that contravene our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; policy?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, replacing the inappropriate word has been the course of action, and “jerk” has been used because it has the virtue of being a drop-in replacement for most more vulgar terms, both for grammatically fitting into the sentences we're cleaning up, and for being (at least in North America) mild yet carrying a distinct meaning of opprobrium for someone's selfish, mean, or insensitive behaviour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Finding a different word that doesn't raise eyebrows anywhere in the English-speaking world is an option. What I doubt is that there's one that carries a meaning that can work as an inoffensive drop-in replacement. If anyone can think of a good alternative, that would be useful to hear.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More extensive rewrites of the sentences that step over the line is a possibility. This has the drawback of taking an order of magnitude more careful thought and time than just dropping in a word replacement, but it has the significant advantage of completely &lt;em&gt;avoiding&lt;/em&gt; calling people names, even mild ones. I like that. Being slower and hard means that cleaning up such messes gains a barrier to actually doing it consistently and punctually though; I don't like that aspect so much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another significant downside to this approach is that a minimal edit that retains their intent but changes their particular word choice is much less likely to get pushback from the original poster and turn into a big blowup. A more extensive edit that changes phrasing and tone entirely is more likely to inspire edit warring and other unfortunate dynamics. This downside may be the much more relevant one, now that I've thought on it more.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's always the possibility of just removing the inappropriate post entirely and instructing the poster to fix the problem. The difficulty here is that this remedy is only available easily to diamond mods, and is much more disruptive besides — and much less likely to result in the poster &lt;em&gt;wanting&lt;/em&gt; to cooperate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For possibility (1) I can't personally think of words that are better — that is, a mild name for someone that still expresses that they have earned opprobrium. Signing on to (2), due to its more significant commitment of editing time for the edit-privileged users and diamond moderators, probably requires buy-in from the community to be effective. (3) is always there as a fallback, but is rather a nuclear option, as it would be more disruptive in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this answer is far from a full and final answer that I wish I could give you, and is more attempting to lay out the practical dilemma, as I see it, and inviting further feedback and ideas from the community at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T08:11:23.423" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-17T09:10:45.717" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On the &quot;t***&quot;:&lt;/strong&gt; The word in the OP is definitely offensive in some cultures. In the US, there's a good chance that it will ring misogynistic. If one culture considers a word offensive, it doesn't belong on an international site like this, even if other cultures do not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, &lt;strong&gt;those who experience discomfort take precedence over those who don't&lt;/strong&gt;. One person perceiving a word as okay doesn't make it less hurtful to others. On the flip side, there is no harm in &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; using the handful of words this policy applies to. There are plenty of other ways to express oneself that don't carry unfortunate connotations (which exist regardless of the author's intent). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On &quot;jerk&quot;:&lt;/strong&gt; If it's really that bad in your (or any) culture, we should look at alternatives, as above. We don't want &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; harmed or put off by the language here. It's common on this site because it's one of the most innocuous American insults. It's so clean that even American children might use it without protest -- it's not on the default list of &quot;bad words.&quot; I've also never encountered a less innocuous reading of it, even online. That's why it's important to talk about it, though. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this word is a problem, it won't be easy to fix, but we should try. This is what we need to consider: &lt;strong&gt;if someone from your culture saw that word being used here, would they be harmed or put off from the site?&lt;/strong&gt; If the answer is &quot;yes,&quot; we should avoid it. If the answer is &quot;no,&quot; it may not be worth the effort. I would ask this of any potentially problematic word.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On being nice:&lt;/strong&gt; The rule against bigoted language is just one part of the &quot;Be nice.&quot; policy. Even if we hold that &quot;jerk&quot; is okay (not arguing either way myself), it's still an insult. Users should not be insulting other users. &lt;strong&gt;Directly insulting others is antithetical to to &quot;Be nice.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; We should discourage this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Talking about non-users gets a little hazier. Sometimes askers come to the site for advice about people who are rude, mean, manipulative, and so forth. In those cases, &lt;strong&gt;it's useful to emphasize to the asker that the behavior they're describing is truly not okay and should be dealt with&lt;/strong&gt;. Of course, we can say exactly that: &quot;[The behavior in question] isn't okay. Don't tolerate it.&quot; As BESW notes in his answer, specificity is often both less offensive and more informative than vague insults. I think this is ideal. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But people communicate in different ways, and when responding to destructive or malicious behavior, sometimes they reach for mild insults. Is this something that is worth an edit by itself (assuming the words used are otherwise inoffensive)? I'm not certain. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17801" LastEditorUserId="17801" LastEditDate="2016-02-17T15:08:55.353" LastActivityDate="2016-02-17T15:08:55.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-17T09:31:16.847" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Keeping loaded language to a minimum is part of our ongoing work to cultivate a welcoming and patient environment, so thank you for letting us know we've been ignorant of a word's loaded implications!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with the answers already posted dealing with policies; I'm posting to suggest an action for posters and editors to keep in mind going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Replace generic &quot;not behaving nice&quot; phrases with more specific and constructive words.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We really shouldn't be putting &quot;petty words of neither impact nor importance&quot; into our answers, whether they're rude or not. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/74469/4398&quot;&gt;In this case,&lt;/a&gt; I suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What happens in the real world when it becomes known that someone is greedy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's known that &quot;Chaotic Greedy&quot; gets more than her share of loot? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only is this hopefully less offensive, it's often more clear what specific problem is being talked about. Meaning is not lost, and is instead often gained, by using context-accurate descriptions in place of generic &quot;misbehaviour&quot; words, whether they're insulting or not. This change helps us Be Nice &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; be more helpful by shifting away from blaming people and toward solving problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, in cases where I can't take the time to understand the original poster enough to find better words for them, I use [snip]: &quot;What happens in the real world when it becomes known that someone is a greedy [snip]?&quot; and &quot;It's known that &quot;Chaotic [Snip]&quot; gets more than her share of loot?&quot; are still clearly meant to deride and don't add anything useful to the post, but they aren't using specific loaded language anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-02-17T22:52:42.897" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-17T17:54:29.727" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I read through the edit history and discovered that the T word was being used as a pejorative term for a female player.  That combination was inappropriate for this site, and would have been even if the T word not by itself on an auto-censor list. .  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I question the need for any of us who participate here to use name calling as a method of presenting a question or an answer.  Under the premise of the above noted &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt;&quot; rule at SE/SO family of sites, there are a lot of ways to characterize a difficult player &lt;em&gt;that does not involve name calling&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to feeling stuck between T-word and J-word, that argues for whomever is crafting the answer or question to &lt;em&gt;expand their vocabulary&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bottom Line: this isn't a problem.  The policy is sound, and the intent behind it sounder. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-02-17T17:54:29.727" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6113" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-17T22:04:52.107" Score="8" ViewCount="357" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; currently reads in point 3: &quot;Don't be a jerk.&quot;&#xA;Can we amend this to read &quot;Don't be rude&quot; along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(a) describing actions, not people, and &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(b) avoiding words &quot;likely to offend or alienate,&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6108/23970&quot;&gt;as was recently discussed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-02-29T23:41:10.483" Title="Can we amend &quot;Be Nice&quot;" Tags="|discussion|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6115" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-18T00:28:23.280" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Be Nice policy applies to the entire Stack Exchange, not just this site, so lobbying for a change to it will have to go to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange meta&lt;/a&gt; rather than this particular iteration of it. But there is some variation in enforcement of Be Nice from Stack to Stack, so let's look at that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Be Nice policy is deliberately vague, because the longer a list of what's not allowed gets the more it leaves off. This means that enforcement of the policy usually takes this form: Someone sees something that they don't think is Nice, and either edits it themselves or flags it for a moderator to look at. Moderators usually feel that if someone's taken the trouble to flag something, it's legitimately giving off Not Nice vibes whether the moderator sees it or not. Edits are, of course, expected to also be Nice, which means not changing the content of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't perfect, obviously. As you've noticed, a lot of Not Nice words get left lying around and sometimes things get a bit overzealous. But it allows a certain amount of leeway per site; exactly what Be Nice means for a particular group changes over time as our active user base shifts, and there's no universal solution for all time. It'd be unreasonable for &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt; to say what &lt;em&gt;others&lt;/em&gt; should or shouldn't find objectionable. This &quot;edit/flag it when you see it&quot; approach is a compromise that usually works pretty well by only kicking in when something's actually going wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The approach does, however, assume good will on the part of the users. Some sections of the Internet (and society at large) indulge in &quot;manufactured outrage&quot; and this isn't welcome in the Stack either. It's harder to detect though. Until a pattern indicates otherwise, we assume good will on the part of both poster and editor/flagger but err toward removing questionable material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this make the Stack seem oversensitive sometimes? Yes, of course. When someone goes on a word-changing spree it may get kinda ridiculous. But much more often people &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; react to things which really should be addressed, and the Stack (in general and this one in particular) gets noticeably more complaints that we're too rude than that we're too sensitive. So I don't think there's a big need to relax our already very laid-back approach to policing Not Nice behaviour. Nobody is asked to go looking for things to take offence at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more discussions on this topic, I recommend the Meta SE tags for [&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/behavior&quot;&gt;behavior&lt;/a&gt;] and [&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/etiquette&quot;&gt;etiquette&lt;/a&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-02-18T00:45:44.807" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6113" CreationDate="2016-02-18T02:54:22.573" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;As with many pieces of the text boiler plate that makes up the base system, the &quot;be nice&quot; policy is a global piece. That doesn't mean it can't be changed, but it would be a very difficult process that would require a good bit of effort for us to get it changed just here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a legitimate issue with the wording of the policy, it may be better to post about it on &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Meta.StackExchange.com&lt;/a&gt; as your concern may be shared by a wider audience who is also potentially offended by the term. I'd caution you to consider your argument and be prepared to defend it well if you want to make it there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="17995" LastEditDate="2016-02-19T19:59:24.643" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T19:59:24.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-18T08:28:09.020" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used to use a different account on here and deleted it because the moderation is just ridiculously heavy handed and offensive with it and I don't want to participate in such a climate. I've got a ton of questions I'd like to ask about various systems but there's no way I would ask them on this site as the experience of doing so is profoundly unpleasant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I'm concerned rpg.se has failed badly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't remember any of the specific questions I participated in but when comments that look a bit like an answer are removed within minutes of being posted it prevents any form of interaction with the original poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conversely there are questions where you might have part of an answer and because you can't use it in a comment you post it as an answer and get viciously downvoted and mocked in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which means that you are actively prevented from commenting &lt;strong&gt;or&lt;/strong&gt; answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Your voice is silenced&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a community, that's a repressive state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25415" LastEditorUserId="25415" LastEditDate="2016-02-18T13:13:24.383" LastActivityDate="2016-02-18T13:13:24.383" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-18T08:38:01.653" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm answering twice because there's another separate point I want to address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's assume the moderators are acting in good faith, responding rapidly, and following all the rules. Especially answering questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62960/whats-a-good-system-for-a-short-adventure-one-shot-in-westeros/65825&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; where every answer received a moderator comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer does not meet the requirements of our game-rec guidelines,&#xA;  which are based on the Back It Up! principles of having done or seen&#xA;  done what the OP proposes with the game. – mxyzplk♦ Aug 9 '15 at 14:52&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a simple question has each and every answer breaking the 'rules' then the rules are broken and need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Except it's nearly impossible to get rules changed around here because a certain section of the community loves having and enforcing rigid rules with no scope for interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Inflexible rules and zealous moderators make for an overbearing situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25415" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-02-18T08:38:01.653" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6119" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-18T22:52:07.440" Score="7" ViewCount="192" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75856/can-a-giant-fire-beetle-choose-to-not-emit-light?noredirect=1#comment168320_75856&quot;&gt;Can a Giant Fire Beetle choose to not emit light?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems clear to me that the question warrants the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt; tag over &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;, but I was told repeatedly that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; was more appropriate, and the discussion ensued. I'll post them here in case the comments are deleted for being non-pertinent: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q9oBA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q9oBA.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of comments&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand the claim that the tags don't mean what they're described as meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21427" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T05:47:59.957" Title="Should the descriptions of the [animal] and [monsters] tags be amended?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6119" CreationDate="2016-02-19T00:02:18.583" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag wikis should probably be amended. The whole &quot;more commonplace than a monster&quot; thing is weird, considering dire wolves could be considered both an animal and a monster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the conflict over tagging your question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5158/1204&quot;&gt;I'll cite mxyzplk himself&lt;/a&gt;, the moderator who's usually here to blow the &quot;it's a folksonomy!&quot; horn:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tagging is an emergent folksonomy. &lt;strong&gt;It does not need to be a strict logically correct hierarchy and overlap between two tags is not something we must do something about. Let people use the tags they find helpful and make sense to them.&lt;/strong&gt; Overly curated tagging is IMO harmful to the point behind them and turns it into an advanced-users-only Dewey Decimal system instead of just letting people use terms that are meaningful to normal players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two sentences bolded by me. That means: the fuss over &quot;it's this one, not that other one!&quot; is wasted effort and operating on an assumption it must be just one. Use both. (Count me surprised an edit lock got used over this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historically on this site, tag &lt;strong&gt;usage&lt;/strong&gt; defines the wiki. The wiki doesn't have the authority to define how a tag's used &amp;mdash; the people do through how they agree to use it, and they can change that wiki, and we've done so numerous times in the past to clarify what a tag should be about. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tag-excerpts&quot;&gt;Tag wikis just provide some guidance&lt;/a&gt; to reflect how we're currently using them. Neither, for that matter, does a moderator have the authority to just unilaterally decide what a tag is for. They're also citizens in this regard, not emperors, and they have to give other citizens the chance to say how the site should work unless it's violating some common agreement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T01:07:07.007" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6121" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6119" CreationDate="2016-02-19T04:49:15.410" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags need to be distinct or they're not useful. The only distinction that makes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt; useful to have on the site is that it labels something particular that's different from what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; labels. To do that it has to be distinct in how it's used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt; tag's history of use suggests that the community thinks that the distinct use for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt; is to label questions about normal, mundane creatures — the kind of creatures you might find in a farmyard, as a beast of burden, or in a hunting forest on Earth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's look at how the tag has been used. (In the process I found out that we had a pile of them that should have been tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal-companion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal-companion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal-companion&lt;/a&gt; instead, and fixed that in the meantime. This doesn't undermine my point because, at worse, it removes questions that would have supported my point.) The questions appear to fall into five categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Domestic animals and pets (5 of 23, 22%)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dog: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72937/can-a-normal-unaltered-animal-gain-battle-experience-and-levels&quot;&gt;Can a normal, unaltered animal gain battle experience and levels?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;pack animals, e.g. cart horses: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50191/what-are-the-pack-animal-rules-in-osric&quot;&gt;What are the Pack Animal rules in OSRIC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dog: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48327/how-to-handle-a-dog-in-add-2nd-ed&quot;&gt;How to handle a dog in AD&amp;amp;D 2nd ed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dogs: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41479/how-should-i-handle-a-pcs-pack-of-animals&quot;&gt;How should I handle a PC&amp;#39;s pack of animals?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;horse: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35055/what-do-i-have-to-roll-to-make-a-horse-squeeze-through-a-tight-space&quot;&gt;What do I have to roll to make a horse squeeze through a tight space?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wild mundane animals (8 of 23, 35%):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;hawks: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70532/what-are-the-limits-to-rearing-wild-animals&quot;&gt;What are the Limits to rearing Wild Animals?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;animals in general, e.g. a thrush: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57730/applying-an-intelligence-boosting-headband-to-an-animal-to-teach-language&quot;&gt;Applying an Intelligence-boosting Headband to an Animal to teach language?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;rat: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57673/how-are-statistics-determined-for-an-awakened-animal&quot;&gt;How are statistics determined for an awakened animal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;fox: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56620/how-does-pathfinder-handle-pcs-having-pets&quot;&gt;How does Pathfinder handle PCs having pets?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;fox: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48662/foxes-for-druids-and-rangers&quot;&gt;Foxes for druids and rangers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;viper: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37656/how-can-i-increase-the-dc-of-venom&quot;&gt;How can I increase the DC of venom&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;taming wild animals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/39517/how-to-tame-a-wild-animal&quot;&gt;How to tame a wild animal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;rhinoceros: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29952/help-me-buff-out-a-rhino&quot;&gt;Help me buff out a rhino&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unspecified animals, but mundane from context (6 of 23, 26%):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animal: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64725/can-i-use-trick-granting-items-to-learn-the-2nd-attack-trick&quot;&gt;Can I use trick granting items to learn the 2nd &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39; trick?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57732/where-do-i-find-the-rules-prohibiting-animals-from-learning-certain-skills&quot;&gt;Where do I find the rules prohibiting animals from learning certain skills?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55079/can-animals-take-aoo&quot;&gt;Can animals take AoO?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33991/what-is-required-to-only-mount-a-creature&quot;&gt;What is required to only mount a creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animal: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30384/player-as-animal-companion&quot;&gt;Player as animal companion?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unspecified animals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72938/how-do-i-keep-track-of-all-my-summoned-animals&quot;&gt;How do I keep track of all my summoned animals?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Giant versions of mundane animals (3 of 23, 13%):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;giant chameleon mount (two Qs by same asker): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64657/how-can-i-give-an-animal-or-mount-skill-ranks-or-feats&quot;&gt;How can I give an animal or mount skill ranks or feats?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64653/do-magic-items-granting-an-animal-extra-tricks-stack-with-already-known-tricks&quot;&gt;Do magic items granting an animal extra tricks stack with already known tricks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dire toad: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51562/how-does-a-dire-toads-tongue-attack-work&quot;&gt;How does a dire toad&amp;#39;s tongue attack work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Monsters that are only superficially like a mundane animal (1 of 23, 4%)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;shadow mastiff: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35077/leveling-up-a-non-companion-animal&quot;&gt;Leveling up a non-companion animal&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That makes for 83% (19) questions being about very normal, mundane animals, and 17% (four) being about animal-like monsters. Sliced another way, that makes for 97% (22) questions about Earth-appearing animals of normal or giant size and 4% (one) question about a creature that doesn't appear on Earth in any size.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question about the shadow mastiff is an obvious outlier, and is probably mistagged — it's probably more sensible to label it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fire beetle is &lt;strike&gt;similarly out of place: it's not a mundane animal, either domestic, wild, or giant. It's a D&amp;amp;D creature that's was invented and is only superficially like a mundane animal. In this breakdown it would be in company with the shadow mastiff; one question is the weakest of precedents.&lt;/strike&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6119/should-the-descriptions-of-the-animal-and-monsters-tags-be-amended/6121?noredirect=1#comment17885_6121&quot;&gt;[1]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; an oddity, in that it is and has been a D&amp;amp;D “monster” for decades without the connection to a real-world animal being obvious, but it's apparently (whether by design or accident) very similar to a giant &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.ca/search?tbm=isch&amp;amp;q=luminous%20click%20beetle&amp;amp;tbs=imgo:1&amp;amp;gws_rd=cr&amp;amp;ei=cqXGVv_7J4mEjwP1h4qQAQ&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;luminous click beetle&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So given this look at how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt; tag is being used, a clear distinction is being made between monsters and animals. That's good, because having a clear distinction is the only reason the tag is meaningful and useful enough to keep around, instead of merging it into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;. To maintain that distinction, questions about monsters should be kept out of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is probably room for, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6120&quot;&gt;as doppelgreener suggests&lt;/a&gt; (and which I already upvoted), a few odd creatures to have their questions categorised by both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt;, since there are examples that are on the borderline between them and not obviously exclusively either/or, such as the dire toad and the fire beetle (and possibly giant chameleons used as riding mounts…).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of putting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; on a question, regardless of what the wiki says, is so that when someone is looking for questions about monsters, they can find questions about monsters. Since giant toads, fire beetles, and such &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; widely considered monsters by the playerbase of D&amp;amp;D, they should turn up when browsing D&amp;amp;D questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;. Similarly, creatures that are archetypically animals should show up when browsing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;animal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;animal&lt;/a&gt;; I don't think fire beetles (or dire toads or giant chameleons) are what people browsing that tag will be looking for, given its overwhelming use for very mundane, domestic animals… but they're on the borderline, yes, and an argument can be reasonably made for including them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to answer the titular question: yes, the tag wikis don't seem to describe how the tags are actually used, so they should be amended to match actual usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T05:39:44.407" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6119" CreationDate="2016-02-19T05:29:30.380" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the underlying confusion here is procedural.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the Stack Exchange, tags are an &quot;emergent folksonomy.&quot; This means that each tag gets created by users at the moment a question needs it and is thereafter used as folks see fit. Nobody pro-actively curates them; tags are allowed to grow organically until/unless an active problem emerges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag wikis (what you're calling definitions) are accordingly &lt;em&gt;descriptive&lt;/em&gt;, rather than &lt;em&gt;prescriptive&lt;/em&gt;: a tag wiki should tell us how the tag is being used, not tell us how the tag should be used. &lt;strong&gt;You've stumbled across a set of poor tag wikis that need to be changed to match how their tags are commonly used.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-02-19T05:47:59.957" LastActivityDate="2016-02-19T05:47:59.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-19T21:02:19.843" Score="20" ViewCount="688" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG's users and moderators have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong&quot;&gt;a number of problems as summarized in this question's answers&lt;/a&gt;. However, several mods have said that they can't accept meta feedback in the form of anything other than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong#comment17913_6090&quot;&gt;individually-separated questions&lt;/a&gt;. While I think that's unnecessary and contrary to common meta practice here and elsewhere, in the spirit of taking all possible approaches to getting us started on resolving these problems, I'm reposting my observations as a series of questions instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong/6101#6101&quot;&gt;a single answer&lt;/a&gt;. I'm hoping for answers that generally agree with the problem statement and go on to give proposals for fixing that (and may post later with my own ideas), but answers that explain why the problems observed are less severe (or &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; severe) or characterized differently than stated would also fit well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is about…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Focusing on personalities more than behavior, judgment more than characteristics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Writing this out and thinking about it, I realized I'm not doing as well on this as I'd thought or hoped. Sure, I might avoid &lt;a href=&quot;http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SetTheBozoBit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;flipping the bozo bit&lt;/a&gt; on people… but it's still too easy to just express disbelief that someone could think doing XYZ is a good idea, rather than explaining why it's a bad idea. Here's why these are bad ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off as a hopeless malcontent or incompetent — but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; removing them permanently from the site — fosters lingering resentment and frustration, since they're still &lt;em&gt;there&lt;/em&gt;, still doing things, still having an obvious influence. Most of the people involved in the various site dramas have fairly significant rep that's still actively growing, and we all know that means they're being listened to. There's no &lt;em&gt;resolution&lt;/em&gt; from this, just gritting teeth harder and harder.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Manually ignoring people turns out like &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3353/add-the-ability-to-ignore-users&quot;&gt;Add the ability to ignore users&lt;/a&gt;, but without software support. That's still a bad idea for all the reasons given there (especially &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/47356&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off also breeds a cavalier attitude toward anything those users are involved in. I think this has particularly affected one or two mods, resulting in saying things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words#comment17611_6080&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;the five upset people will always be upset&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;, which can easily drift into &amp;quot;anyone who's upset about this is one of those five, oops I mean six, oh I guess it's seven, always-upset people&amp;quot;. Once things truly spiral to this point, it's very hard to get back to a place where people can actually tell you you're wrong. And there's always a need for that, since we're all human.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing someone off, &lt;em&gt;or seeing someone written off&lt;/em&gt;, breeds distrust and fear. Each developing &amp;quot;side&amp;quot; is unsure to what extent the others are able to cleverly manipulate things to hide their influence, or to what extent they themselves are being ignored with rolling eyes. The smallest of cues are seized on for evidence either way, even far out of proportion to any conscious intent. It becomes difficult to take even apparently friendly overtures as anything other than an even more deeply-concealed plot. Somehow.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Focusing on calling something a bad idea rather than explaining how it's a bad idea sparks defensiveness in anyone who thought (perhaps hastily, or perhaps even rightly) that it was a good idea. It's awfully hard to completely get rid of that reflex, but focusing on the facts first can defuse it to some extent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussing the factual up- and down-sides of an idea can lead to exploring more of the subtleties, possibly mitigating some of the problems, or at any rate allowing a deeper understanding of them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Summary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because someone is prone to causing trouble does not mean they should be routinely ignored, &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; they're causing trouble on purpose, in which case ignoring is the wrong response: site discipline is needed. And just because an idea seems stupid doesn't mean the reasons it is stupid are obvious, so take the time to think and maybe explain a bit more. All of us need to make sure we're doing a good job — a better job — on these, but ♦ mods have an especial need for this, due to their higher visibility and the greater trust necessary for them to do their jobs properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T03:04:57.563" Title="&quot;Is something wrong?&quot; Yes: Pervasive ad hominem and judgmental behaviors" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6108" CreationDate="2016-02-20T20:36:38.303" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a point of reference I (British, and somewhat given to formality) find &lt;em&gt;jerk&lt;/em&gt; very much more offensive than &lt;em&gt;twat&lt;/em&gt;. I am aware of the various shades of meaning of both, and since Stack Exchange is fond of American slang I appreciate that 'Don't be a jerk' is only unintentionally foul-mouthed. But if one of my posts uses the t-word (improbable) and some well-intentioned Yank substitutes the j-word, there will at best be an edit war and at worst an action for defamation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2451" LastActivityDate="2016-02-20T20:36:38.303" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6123" CreationDate="2016-02-21T03:40:45.660" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote a long response to this, and I might post it later, but it needs a lot of editing before I'm ready to post it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as I wrote it, I really started to think about &lt;em&gt;what's actionable&lt;/em&gt; in all of this. And really I think the problem is one of trust, and in order to rebuild trust we need a commitment both from the users and the moderators to work towards a culture of peace on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means that we &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; work to break up arguments before they turn ugly. We make a conscious &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; effort to stop arguing. We flag discussions (so moderators can step in) before they get heated. We call out &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; instances of moderator misbehavior on meta so they can be discussed and audited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I'm calling for &quot;if you see something, say something&quot; type behavior from &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt;. The best way for you to &quot;see something, say something&quot; when the behavior is problematic users is to flag that behavior (if no flag reason fits, a custom flag is fine, and if it's a general thing, any post is fine). That way we can be made aware of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue is with a moderator, flags can work there, but it probably is also wise to go ahead and open up a meta discussion about it to give the moderators a chance to talk about the reasons &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; behavior you might see as problematic is happening. That way issues &lt;em&gt;don't fester&lt;/em&gt; and things that &lt;em&gt;might look&lt;/em&gt; like they are abuses of power can be explained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know I'm not perfect, and I (and by extension we as moderators) make mistakes. We've made a number of them in the past few months alone that we recognize. We aren't going to get it right (or do things the right way) every single time. But what I hope is that when we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; make mistakes we can take a look at those mistakes with the community, move on and improve both individually and as a group. We're here to serve you, the community, so if we're not doing that well, and there are &lt;em&gt;specific, actionable&lt;/em&gt; things we can do to improve that, we really really want to hear about those things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2016-02-21T04:16:12.250" LastActivityDate="2016-02-21T04:16:12.250" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-21T04:23:29.003" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a very casual user of the site, and yes there seems to be a problem to me. The RAW tag creates a situation where a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of answers are either fairly reasonable or completely wrong according to whether it is present or not. I am &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; trying to reiterate the argument whether the tag should exist or not, but its existence has problematic consequences. These may or may not be worse than its non-existence and may or may not have solutions, I don't know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even worse, though, there seem to be subjective divisions within divisions, since people don't always agree as to whether a particular answer is or is not RAW. I think I've even seen this happen where people's interpretations of the text differ, such that someone in effect is saying, &quot;this is not a RAW answer, not because it doesn't attempt to be one, but because it attempts to be one and I disagree with your interpretation of the text&quot;. To me that doesn't mean it's not a RAW answer, although it might mean it's an incorrect RAW answer. &lt;strong&gt;The problem isn't that people disagree, it's that their disagreements are solemnised into site policy regarding the RAW tag and then the mods want to or have to get involved&lt;/strong&gt;. Something that ideally would be &quot;just site content&quot; is &quot;site rules&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought RAW was originally envisaged to distinguish questions asking for help with the rules vs. questions asking how the game can be altered to particular circumstances. For example, &quot;how can I make this fight with orcs harder?&quot; is a different question from &quot;RAW how can I make this fight with orcs harder?&quot;, since the former admits answers with house-rules to represent whatever in-fiction consideration means the fight should be harder, and the latter explicitly says not to give those answers because that's not what the question is about. Fair enough, I can think of &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; three really good reasons to want to keep a question like that RAW: you don't want to use house rules; you want to know what the published rules say before you start house-ruling for yourself; inviting house rules would make your particular question way too open-ended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/21320/can-many-days-represent-a-period-as-long-as-three-years-in-acts-923&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75706/can-raise-dead-revive-a-character-with-zero-maximum-hit-points&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; are about text interpretation, which is a different activity from roleplaying even if the text in question happens to be an RPG text, and even though most roleplayers do need to figure out rules from time to time even when their playstyle is nowhere near RAW. This example is entirely civil despite contradicting answers, so the matter clearly isn't hopeless, it just doesn't always work out like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has apparently resulted in some kind of armed stand-off between certain users and certain other users, including mods. I don't pretend to have a good overview of all the details and all the skirmishes, but it most certainly is a problem in that people are regularly getting into hostile discussions of playstyle &lt;em&gt;as a preamble to whether something is a legitimate answer to a question&lt;/em&gt;. It should not be that difficult and contentious on a SE site to figure out how tags dictate answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackOverflow has questions about standards and language-lawyering that have provoked similar &lt;em&gt;sorts&lt;/em&gt; of issues (basically, you get answers that say &quot;This works on my machine&quot; to questions that very specifically ask, &quot;is this guaranteed by the C++ standard to work everywhere?&quot;, but apparently without it descending into distrust of mods, and without mods needing to implement initiatives to ruthlessly clamp down on answers that fail to address the question as asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Skeptics has a similar property that it's very difficult to write adequate answers, but at least there the notion of what's a sub-par answer is built right into the site concept, and they're up-front about the fact that the whole site is not &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; people who don't want to read and write that sort of answer. RPG tries to be &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; all playstyles but it does this in effect by filtering questions by playstyle and then yelling at each other over any doubt concerning the boundaries of the filter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like what people really want, and that the RAW tag only approximates, is to recommend some sort of &quot;same page tool&quot; before even sitting down to ask and answer a question together, as if neither roleplaying nor RPG.SE can be a tolerant compromise. Does it really have to be the case that you agree with each other up-front or you're doomed, and it's &lt;em&gt;expected&lt;/em&gt; that all disagreements should result in irreparable schisms? This relates to what LegendaryDude says about criticisms of each other's badwrongfun being endemic in the hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure that from the outside it's not at all obvious:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why these different playstyles render so many answers &lt;em&gt;fundamentally useless&lt;/em&gt; to those in a different camp from the writer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why this tag needs to be somehow procedurally different from other tags identifying the context of a question, for example particular games. After all, there aren't continual rows and policing initiatives about people answering D&amp;amp;D questions with GURPS rules, the temptation to disagree seems not to exist in that case.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why people feel the need for the tag to be aggressively policed and even aggressively meta-policed (i.e. not just the tag itself is seen to need to be taken firmly in hand by mods and others, so are discussions of it). What about this site that means the mods even have to contemplate aggressively deleting answers because a tag on the question means the answers are wrong. What other SE sites need this kind of mod activity? Is the problem genuinely that people who want to know what the D&amp;amp;D rules say about 0 max HP cannot get answers to that question without the protection of an enclave created by site policy and aggressive moderator enforcement? Is the problem that people have different ideas about how the site should be curated (for example that RAW answers and house-rule answers must never mix on the same question)? Is that unless the site can reach and enforce a definition of RAW, the public are &lt;em&gt;so determined&lt;/em&gt; that this site must be perfectly curated without visible disagreement, that they won't allow questions about published rules at all (like the death of game-rec) and would rather get rid of them than allow them to exist with inappropriate answers? Is it mostly personal antipathy and playstyle advocacy, and question/answers themselves don't really have anything to do with it? I don't know, but maybe someone does.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why this division can't be handled by people just naturally ignoring stuff that's not relevant to them (for example, why are people so strongly drawn to answering RAW questions by saying, &quot;the rules are ambiguous or incomplete, but of the plausible interpretations I find the following most practical&quot;, drawing accusations of presenting house rules, instead of just not answering RAW questions, or saying &quot;the rules here aren't good enough to answer you question&quot; and leaving that to be voted against rival answers who think the rules do answer the question).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why people are both upset and hostile about consequences of the whole issue.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying this is a mod problem, I'm saying it's a situation which is nigh-on un-moderatable and therefore predictably spawns some problems between mods and users as well as between users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3639" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:47:41.863" LastActivityDate="2016-02-21T22:19:10.427" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5988" CreationDate="2016-02-21T21:49:05.553" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can choose to up vote your questions and answers if I like you, down vote questions and answers if I dislike you, and anything in between. (That isn't how I roll, but how one acts is a purely personal choice). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system as designed puts no burden on any of us who pushes that button to have a criterion.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/75917/22566&quot;&gt;This comment from @Cubic to this answer suggests&lt;/a&gt; to me what the community attitude is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@KorvinStarmast Downvotes don't mean anything in particular, just like&#xA;  downvotes don't. &quot;Useful/not useful&quot; are &lt;strong&gt;pseudo metrics&lt;/strong&gt; some people&#xA;  use, but generally speaking there are no hard rules like that on Stack&#xA;  Exchange (just like there's no actual rules on what answers should get&#xA;  accepted). – Cubic 3 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Cubic is not a moderator, but is active on a number of SE sites and has 7k+  rep at SO. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-02-21T22:29:25.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6123" CreationDate="2016-02-21T23:20:59.607" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is endemic to the online community, and it's about sending and receiving messages in the text based format. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76013/22566&quot;&gt;an error in an answer very early on as I was taking notes&lt;/a&gt;. I then went about six steps into a supporting point, having built upon a foundation of sand, and made the answer.  As I was puzzling over some down votes, and edited it a few times, two people chose to not play the all-too-common-AC and provided feedback on my error:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@xanderh wrote this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;you add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll&quot; seems pretty&#xA;  clear to me. &lt;strong&gt;I don't see how you could possibly interpret&lt;/strong&gt; that to&#xA;  mean that you don't add the superiority die to the damage roll.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;contrast the tone (I received it as hostile) in that comment with   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@ bmaderbacher &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Where do you get the idea that the damage has anything to do with the&#xA;  saving throw DC? The saving throw DC is clearly defined as&#xA;  8+prof+(Dex/Str) at PHB p.73 for all battle master maneuvers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As read, the tone in the former came across as hostile, the tone in the latter came across as neutral, &lt;em&gt;but it might have been identical in intent with both senders&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was @xanderh really being hostile?  He might have seen a few edits where my core error wasn't corrected, and was frustrated with my trying to polish a turd.  I can't mind read, so I don't know. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reply comment on how I arrived at that (since deleted) was a bit snarky, since his comment wasn't well received by me due to received tone.  My response to the other comment, which nailed the core problem to the floor, got a thank you from me.  I then sent a thank you comment to xanderh as it dawned on me that his feedback was trying to get me to see it differently. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the problem is sent/received communication.  We can't control how someone takes/receives our comments to them.  On my second read through of xanderh's comment, it &quot;felt&quot; less hostile since I had gotten the other comment and had had that &quot;aha moment&quot; through which to see it differently. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the more reason to take Be Nice! guidance to heart. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-02-21T23:20:59.607" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6129" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-22T10:29:42.160" Score="48" ViewCount="1940" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG's users and moderators have &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong&quot;&gt;a number of problems as summarized in this question's answers&lt;/a&gt;. However, several mods have said that they can't accept meta feedback in the form of anything other than &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong#comment17913_6090&quot;&gt;individually-separated questions&lt;/a&gt;. While I think that's unreasonable and contrary to common meta practice here and elsewhere, in the spirit of taking all possible approaches to getting us started on resolving these problems, I'm reposting my observations as a series of questions instead of &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong/6092#6092&quot;&gt;a single answer&lt;/a&gt;. I'm hoping for answers that generally agree with the problem statement and go on to give proposals for fixing that (and may post later with my own ideas), but answers that explain why the problems observed are less severe (or &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; severe) or characterized differently than stated would also fit well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is about…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Moderators being community leaders instead of exception handlers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderators on this site are very present and lead efforts to change the site (for example changing rules and tag meanings). I don't doubt that they do this in what they think is the site's best interest. But it feels very heavy handed and not like the very laid back moderation of other sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets look at SE policies and how they explain what the moderators should do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75189/who-are-the-diamond-moderators-and-what-is-their-role&quot;&gt;Who are the diamond moderators, and what is their role?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/site-moderators&quot;&gt;Who are the site moderators, and what is their role here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A theory of moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK, that's a lot to read and I'd like to quote those parts I think are a very general, but also very expressive guideline to moderator duties:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what do community moderators do? The short answer is, &lt;strong&gt;as little as possible!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even with active community self-regulation, moderators occasionally need to intervene. &lt;strong&gt;Moderators are human exception handlers&lt;/strong&gt;, there to deal with those (hopefully rare) exceptional conditions that should not &lt;em&gt;normally&lt;/em&gt; happen, but when they do, they can bring your entire community to a screaming halt -- &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; you don't have human exception handling in place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that while I absolutely agree with the accentuation, they are not mine but taken from the original posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we have a look at comparable sites (for example The Workplace was of equal size, we are now having more questions then them), then there are about an equal number of clearly off-topic questions. Right now, the front page over there has more [On hold] questions than open ones. But not a single one was closed by a moderator. They all were closed by a 5-people-consensus. While it certainly isn't wrong for a moderator to close a question when he sees it's off-topic, the fact that our moderators are quite quick to do it gives this site a quite heavy, moderated feel. Being closed by a diamond mod has a very different feel to being closed due to 5 normal community members agreeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking a recent example that lead to this whole number of posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aggressively police answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written&quot;&gt;Source of Quote&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not something I'd like a mod to do under any circumstance. The moderators are supposed to be the exception handlers. Handle exceptions. Answers are to be policed by the &lt;strong&gt;community&lt;/strong&gt;. The moderators are certainly part of this community, but using the mod powers is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should do this thing. All three diamond mods support it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6075/7665&quot;&gt;Source of Quote&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a reason to do anything about the site. The moderators are just three people. Of many. The answer is certainly not wrong, but it transports an attitude that I do not like in moderators of an SE network site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the mod interpretation of current state is as I've stated it above. Therefore it is fact, as we're the ones that have to enforce it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide/5856#5856&quot;&gt;Source of Quote&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This shows both points quite well: the message that is sent by the mods is that the moderators police this site by enforcing rules. But it's not a mods job to use moderator powers to police this site, it's the communities job. If game-rec questions are to be banned, then the community will close them by voting. In addition, it also shows the kind of &amp;quot;my way or the highway&amp;quot; attitude that gets transported in this message. The mods have spoken, therefore the issue is settled. I'm not saying the moderators are doing this in bad faith or an attempt to become absolutist monarchs, but the message the moderators are sending both written and as a general feeling is just that. It comes across more as a ruler than a referee.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yes, I cannot point a finger to a single action and say &amp;quot;see, &lt;em&gt;that's&lt;/em&gt; wrong&amp;quot;. Because it's not a single action. Every single action for itself might be fine. It's the sum of actions and it's the attitude that gets transported. The message the moderators send with those actions is that of a very heavy handed and direct moderation. Other sites manage way better to have their moderators solve the real problems (voting fraud, sock-puppets, harassment, SPAM) behind the scenes and not having their diamonds show up in everyday community business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T15:02:40.023" Title="“Is something wrong?” Yes: Too much moderation" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="11" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6130" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6135" CreationDate="2016-02-22T10:52:37.633" Score="7" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/74517/15211&quot;&gt;How to design a GMPC that will not push the story ahead?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has been closed as beeing off topic, given the reason that actually I recived many answers on something I wasn't looking for, so beeing unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been clarryfied by Erik with his comment on one of my comments on one of the answers where I was complaining of he just tells me aspects but not how to achieve them. He commented: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;right, I understand. I think the question is misunderstood then. You're getting answers for GMPCs who WILL NOT drive the story forward, but it seems you are looking for a GMPC who CANNOT drive the story forward, even when directly asked to do so? – Erik Feb 17 at 11:17&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which was pretty much on the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I actually have no clue how to make it more clear, since from my point of view it is totally clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since first of all in the title I'm asking for a character design that is &lt;em&gt;supposed to not do&lt;/em&gt;. My intention here was metaplaying not beeing supposed, I was assuming this is clear, since I'm asking about a design and not how to play it that way. Is the title the problem and not clear enough?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The introducing backgroundstory why I'm asking this I told to avoid 2 things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1st to make sure why I decided to handle it fits best this way for my given situation. So desputing answers that would recommend me avoid my problem by another gaming styl to avoid the GMPC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2nd to make clear again its me who will have trouble in rollplaying it competent not having informations I as player actually have, while the character is trying to get the informations. So that every one understands I'm not looking for a design that makes the character independent from getting the information when &lt;em&gt;rollplayed well&lt;/em&gt;, but I'm looking for a design that just makes an character willing to not share the informations even IF he would know about it, so it is working around my lack of rollplaying experience, and makes me stay in character by just saying &quot;I won't tell you&quot; without even exposing this is relevant information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And finally the TL&amp;amp;DR part was set, so everyone who might have missunderstood my intention of the introduction(You know, I'm used to be missunderstood, so I'm planing allready what one might missunderstand and how I could avoid it eventually), just sees as standalone the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How to design a character in a way, that his trait, behavior or background when &lt;strong&gt;roleplayed correctly lets him not participate in decision-making&lt;/strong&gt;(footnote:Should the character be forced by another PC into making a decision, it is acceptable, since it is an exceptional case not caused by the GMPC's player himself.), while it still is obvious that his motivations are a success of the &quot;party&quot;?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here I'm finally off. I don't even have a clue why this was missunderstood. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I said the thing I'm asking for &lt;strong&gt;lets the character not participate&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; and was even noting that the exceptional case of a situation where the character at least for given circumstances is able to participate, is aceptable. (AFAIK this would expresses that my given post by itself should express that this exception isn't even acceptable without the note).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what exactly is in my OP flawed that I was by a handfull of people missunderstood? And how to fix it, so the post becomes on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;sub&gt;actually my impression is this was instead understood as &lt;em&gt;only lets the character passively participate&lt;/em&gt; but again, no clue what makes the sentence sound like that?&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-02-22T21:46:12.203" Title="Need help in clarifying what I'm asking for" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-22T11:04:43.320" Score="32" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What to do?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my perspective, the moderators should do &lt;strong&gt;less&lt;/strong&gt;. A lot less. The site is fine. It attracts a reasonable amount of quality questions and answers. The next time someone posts an off-topic question and a moderators sees it? Let it slip. Wait 8 hours. By then, the &lt;strong&gt;community&lt;/strong&gt; might have already policed it. And if not, the moderators still can. The next time the moderators see a tag being treated in a way they don't like? Ask an open-ended question. And accept the fact that maybe &amp;quot;if it ain't broke, don't fix it&amp;quot; is an acceptable answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wielding mod powers always has an air of dictatorship. For example casting a single binding vote using the mod's powers, while other users need a 5 votes consent seems absolutist. Especially to the one whose question got closed. It's unfortunate that mods cannot &amp;quot;unmod&amp;quot; and use only regular user powers. In this light, it would appear a lot less direct and heavy to use the mods powers sparingly and only when the community did not react.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a moderator wants to lead, do so by being a role-model (you all write great answers, I'm sure that should not be hard), without taking moderator-style actions. Moderator actions are for &lt;em&gt;exceptional&lt;/em&gt; circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And on a personal note, maybe if you read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5988/can-we-agree-to-stop-downvoting-non-opinionated-factually-correct-answers&quot;&gt;my meta posts&lt;/a&gt; in the light of not asking for &lt;em&gt;actions&lt;/em&gt;, but asking for an &lt;em&gt;agreement on how to be a role-model&lt;/em&gt;, they might make a lot more sense. The first answer I always got was &amp;quot;we cannot do this within the rules&amp;quot;. I wasn't asking for &lt;em&gt;actions&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;enforceable rules&lt;/em&gt;, I was asking  on a consensus on how to behave if you want to be a role-model. That's a big difference.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-22T14:34:03.070" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-22T15:28:17.433" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll probably post another more general answer here. But I really want to address something very specific for the moment. The line that seems to have struck a nerve in my RAW data collection post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Aggressively Police Answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;All&lt;/em&gt; that was meant by that statement was that I was (and still am) in favor of deleting answers that do not &lt;em&gt;attempt to answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. We even have a whole flag just for these answers (Not an Answer). That's all that was meant by that statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, this is pretty cut and dried, you answer a 4e question with a 3.5 or 5e answer, that's not an answer, delete. You answer a FATE question with GURPs, not an answer, delete. All that statement was attempting to do was apply the &lt;strong&gt;same exact logic&lt;/strong&gt; to RAW questions. You answer a RAW question with a house rule, not an answer, delete. This isn't a change, just a commitment to &lt;strong&gt;paying more attention&lt;/strong&gt; to those questions during the period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That phrase wasn't talking about &lt;em&gt;hyper interventionist moderation&lt;/em&gt; it's simply about moderators &lt;em&gt;doing their jobs&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2016-02-22T15:28:17.433" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-22T16:51:35.480" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm seeing two major problems presented here, the first seems to be with moderators bringing up issues on meta. The second is with them proposing solutions to those problems on meta. I'm only going to address the first in this post as my opinions on that are solidified and coalesced properly. My opinions are the second are more nuanced, though a basic outline of them are written in the final question of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5518/1084&quot;&gt;nomination Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're garbagemen. But if the garbage can is on fire, we're going to do something about the fire too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a reason that often it's the moderators bringing problems before the community: because we're seeing first hand the fallout from these problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if we're consistently seeing &lt;em&gt;the same types&lt;/em&gt; of questions raising flags, causing arguments, raising hackles in chat and on meta etc, we're going to &lt;em&gt;say something about it&lt;/em&gt;, because that's &lt;em&gt;part of being exception handlers&lt;/em&gt;. Raising exceptions when the community isn't noticing (or can't notice) the patterns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By electing us as moderators, you aren't just trusting us to handle flags and delete garbage, but you're &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; entrusting us with identifying patterns of problematic behavior that may not be immediately apparent. This can be problems with users, or problems with site content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please understand that moderators are not bringing issues up on meta because it suits their digestion. We're doing it because we're noticing &lt;em&gt;patterns of problematic behavior&lt;/em&gt; (flags, arguments, edit/vote warring etc) that have been brought to our attention numerous times by site users or even sometimes automated system flags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, it is our role as &lt;em&gt;exception handlers&lt;/em&gt; to &lt;em&gt;raise exceptions&lt;/em&gt; when we are noticing problems that are escaping the community's notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, there seems to be an indication that we should &lt;em&gt;wait&lt;/em&gt; to use our powers. I disagree with this too, at least in the case of question closure. Again, here's what I wrote in my nomination post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This may seem odd, but I strongly believe that one of the best gifts we can give to a new user is a rapid close with a strong comment about what can be fixed followed by a rapid reopening. Yes, we can scare new users off with our friendliness and adherence to site policy at times, however, we can also get a user who is just off track right on very quickly if we can get to them early, get their question closed, edited and reopened in a few short minutes. It's important in these situations to communicate both site policy and how to repair a question quickly and concisely and to pair that with decisive action (Both on the close side and the reopen side)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's my personal theory on question closure. Do it fast so the user knows something is wrong, get them on the right track, and then get it reopened. This is because our users are &lt;em&gt;really good&lt;/em&gt; at answering quickly sometimes, and it's a lot harder to &lt;em&gt;get rid&lt;/em&gt; of a bad answer than it is to get the question work shopped so that the answers, when they do come in, are good and help the user as best as they can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd &lt;em&gt;much rather&lt;/em&gt; our users were closing these questions, deleting answers that need it, and raising issues with problematic tags on meta. But in reality, this kind of participation is pretty rare. We do have a pretty good set of users who do those things, but that process does break down and that's when moderators step in. If it seems like we're doing it &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; it might be because that system is breaking down more than normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-02-22T16:51:35.480" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6130" CreationDate="2016-02-22T20:47:13.163" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a number of reasons that your question was too broad -- these were addressed in the comments.  Another point is that any answer could be mostly  opinion, based on the question as originally written. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the bright side, you did provide your up front statement that you were using a GMPC and referred to a question about options for your situation.  That should have ruled out any answer of &quot;don't use a GMPC&quot; since you specifically stated that you had this as your plan, and that it was the core of your problem.  I tried to re emphasize that in the edit to your question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the less clear side, it did not to me look as though you folded in Erik's comment.  After your edits and revisions, that point Erik made still wasn't clear in the text of your question, nor in the title.  I tried to address that in the edit as well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;right, I understand. I think the question is misunderstood then.&#xA;  You're getting answers for GMPCs who WILL NOT drive the story forward,&#xA;  but it seems you are looking for a GMPC who CANNOT drive the story&#xA;  forward, even when directly asked to do so? – Erik Feb 17 at 11:17&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of what makes your question difficult is writing style: you use a lot of words to get to a point.  Don't feel bad, I have the same tendency. :-) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other problems were organizational.  Some of your ideas needed to be rearranged to flow better from point to point.  I tried to assist you with that in the edit. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You didn't identify the class of the PC, nor the GMPC.  Given the variety of combinations between the chosen PC class and your chosen GMPC class, getting a concise and good reply that meets your needs (and isn't mostly opinion) is hard to do without that detail -- nobody knows what class is supporting the PC's class, and thus is less likely to come up with a background and motivation to help answer your specific problem.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you saw, the answers were varied and some were not all that useful to you(albeit they attracted votes). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few things that might have helped clear up where your difficulty was coming from:   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You have the Starter Set, but do you have the Players Handbook(PHB),&#xA;and are you familiar with the variety of backgrounds?  If not, that&#xA;would be a good point to explain.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do you have the Dungeon Masters Guide(DMG), which has the section on&#xA;how to customize a background for a character?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You did mention that you do have the Monster Manual.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2016-02-22T21:46:12.203" LastActivityDate="2016-02-22T21:46:12.203" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6074" CreationDate="2016-02-22T21:37:35.673" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;March 2015 RAW question Analysis&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have examined all RAW tagged questions for March 2015.  My detailed notes are in a &lt;a href=&quot;http://pastebin.com/3D28a5vv&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;text file&lt;/a&gt; that can be found at this link. The games covered were mostly D&amp;amp;D/Pathfinder sorts of various editions, one from Spycraft, and an OSRIC which is AD&amp;amp;Dish.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Caveat: as I have no idea how many comments were deleted, I have no sense of how much back and forth happened on all questions.  Quite a few still have significant comments remaining. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did not do a detailed analysis of edit history on each question, but I am not sure I need to.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Summary. 25 total questions (two &quot;duplicates&quot; so 23 total questions assessed).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Results: (A second review was done to ensure that text supporting need for the tag was found in the question to support valid use of the tag.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good use of RAW tag in the question: 15&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Poor question and / or use of RAW tag not needed in the question: 8&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Good RAW answer: 26&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Poor or non-RAW answer: 9&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Deleted answer: 3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A few other notes:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Four questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57476/how-often-can-a-mount-be-ridden-at-a-gallop&quot;&gt;did what this one did&lt;/a&gt; and explicitly stated in text a very hard RAW requirement.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some answers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57725/22566&quot;&gt;this is an example&lt;/a&gt;, had text refer RAW tag and made a solid RAW type answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a five of the answers, the responses agreed that the rules are muddy at best -- at this point the better RAW style answers expanded upon that and the less good answers didn't.  In one muddy rules case, I'll pull a comment from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58681/can-a-sorcerer-with-an-int-of-2-still-cast-spells&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as an example of what was referred to in that other meta as where a RAW question may needs a frame challenge to get a decent answer.  Where the are hard to parse, the rules being messy should not negatively influence use of the tag.  (See also if there are so many books one knows not of a rule ...)  The other answer got more votes, though the gap in the rules didn't help.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;+1: While not exactly fulfilling the RAW tag, this is still a great answer as it provides a practical way of playing this scenario. – &gt; GreySage Jul 16 '15 at 16:21&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58724/does-shield-specialization-apply-to-an-unwielded-winged-shield&quot;&gt;This one could have done without the tag&lt;/a&gt;.  Neither the question nor the answers were of high standard. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57815/can-clerics-be-death-domain-and-neutral&quot;&gt;On this one&lt;/a&gt;, the usual trouble folks have with how alignment is handled in 5e, as opposed to previously.  I think that is a root cause for this poor question -- RAW or not.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58696/when-advantage-isnt-enough-other-circumstantial-bonuses-in-5e&quot;&gt;This one was a bit of an anomaly&lt;/a&gt;.  The accepted answer had one vote.  The comment from the querent was that the answer was accepted as the best at being RAW fosuced -- all of the answers were decent, one had 11 up votes ... three other answers total available with more votes than accepted answer. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-02-23T21:35:26.903" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6137" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-23T05:43:35.403" Score="10" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;Way back, a little while after its initial launch, the top bar was given a nice subtle but not-too-subtle alpha transparency which showed off our header art just that little bit more. It appears to have &lt;strike&gt;disappeared&lt;/strike&gt; been much reduced recently. I notice the same at &lt;a href=&quot;http://scifi.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy&lt;/a&gt;, where the transparency looks/ed fantastic with their particular header art, but now shows just the faintest smudge in-line with the brightest part of the background.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Inspecting the CSS, it seems to be set at 0.86 opacity. I at first thought that it was bugged and rendering wrong, but zooming in I can see a few faint pixels of background showing through here, and the aforementioned smudge at Sci-Fi.se, so it just must have been a lower opacity before. Fiddling with it a bit and eyeballing the results, I think it used to be 0.6–0.7 opacity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we get some of that greater transparency back? Please, with cherries on top? It was one of my favourite visual touches on the site, making that network-wide bar integrate oh so much better with the site design. The current setting might as well be full opacity for how little it shows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="25004" LastEditDate="2016-02-23T11:12:51.387" LastActivityDate="2016-02-23T11:12:51.387" Title="The top bar has lost most of its alpha transparency" Tags="|bug|design|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6137" CreationDate="2016-02-23T06:48:51.230" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The difference shows up when looking at the screenshots in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3554/skin-does-not-handle-read-only-mode-well&quot;&gt;Skin does not handle read-only mode well&lt;/a&gt; bug report. Ilmari's screenshots suggest it's been getting darker since August.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;August: moon very visible, fortress tower quite visible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/G8Ajd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/G8Ajd.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;December: moon less visible, fortress tower nearly imperceptible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOPcx.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now: on main site I can't see the moon through the top bar at all. I can make out the painting edges at either side and that's about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-02-23T06:48:51.230" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6139" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6140" CreationDate="2016-02-23T18:23:20.030" Score="8" ViewCount="352" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone (anonymous user) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/25948&quot;&gt;tried to edit in a link to open5e.com&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76037/is-a-pact-of-the-blade-warlocks-pact-weapon-metal&quot;&gt;one of my answers&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/25949&quot;&gt;another one&lt;/a&gt;.  I tripped over the edits via comment notification, and I rejected them both with the cause &quot;harmful&quot; -- I am not familiar with the site and something didn't smell right. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That the editor came up as &quot;anonymous user&quot; for the proposed gave me a bad gut feel.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personal opinion: editing in links to someone else's question or answer is one of those things that is sometimes helpful, and sometimes not. I'd prefer it be discussed in comments, but that's not required.  The SO/SE guideline on links being added to another's post is &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/the-great-edit-wars/&quot;&gt;supported in this blog post at SO&lt;/a&gt; on editing guidance: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;•Linking to other resources related to the post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps the user was trying to be helpful along those lines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I overreact?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T13:30:10.403" Title="Consensus on open5e.com?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6139" CreationDate="2016-02-23T18:35:05.943" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Anyone can edit, anonymous edits (just like those by low rep users) must be approved by two users with 2k reputation before they become active (or the power owner can approve). Repeatedly suggesting edits that are denied leads to a fairly quick automated IP level block.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following that, yeah, putting links in to dubious sources is suspect and those edits should be denied. For rulebook content, there is no reason to link to a source other than referencing the page number. If you want to link to a source though, the official sources (Basic D&amp;amp;D and the SRD) would be much preferred as they aren't going anywhere and are official. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is no reason for &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; (as a site) to be the judge of OGL compliance by a site like open5e.com. So links to there are not a problem. If that site is taken offline for some reason (C&amp;amp;D from WOTC or something else) then we will have to fix links to that content, but until then I don't see any reason to &lt;em&gt;actively remove&lt;/em&gt; links to that site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So basically, don't insert unnecessary links into other people's content, there's no reason for it, but also, there's no need to shy away from linking to this particular site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastEditorUserId="1084" LastEditDate="2016-02-23T21:30:33.403" LastActivityDate="2016-02-23T21:30:33.403" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-23T22:32:28.717" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Overall SE Norms&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's the deal - I think that this impression is caused by a mix of not really having visibility into what actually caused a given instance of moderator intervention (frequently it's flag driven, but there's no way for you to see that) and also a misunderstanding of what the limits of mod exception-handling should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me offer up a little anecdote. I thought that e.g. the idea of a moderator being able to cast a non-binding close vote was a good one, since it would let us not &quot;unilaterally close&quot; but still participate, and I went and duly championed it on meta.stackoverflow &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/41062/add-a-way-for-moderators-to-cast-a-normal-non-binding-close-open-vote&quot;&gt;in this question&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general response from the SO supermod community was very against this.   Here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/74070/150946&quot;&gt;Jeff Atwood's answer&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The purpose of moderators is to moderate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If they are afraid to do so, they should not be moderators in the&#xA;  first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As for educating the community, leaving instructive, explanatory&#xA;  comments is far more useful than casting a weak regular user vote in&#xA;  these circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So in summary: leave extensive comments, and learn to wield the big&#xA;  vote stick responsibly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I specifically objected to this answer and was told:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@mxy if you want to educate, leave comments explaining your actions. Good moderators should be doing this anyway. Pretending to hide in the cloak of &quot;oh, I'm just a regular user like you good folks&quot; is an abdication of responsibility as a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also Shog9's comments on the various answers on that question to the same effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I definitely hear how some of you have an expectation that we as mods shouldn't take action on e.g. closes until the community has exhausted itself.  The problem is, this is NOT the guidance we get from the larger SO mod community. Their guidance is often very much &quot;you're a diamond mod, do the right thing, screw the whiners.&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/230551/concerns-about-my-downvoting-with-comment-on-established-users-posts-as-a-moder/230553#comment757564_230553&quot;&gt;Here's another example thereof&lt;/a&gt;. I've taken a variety of community concerns from here to Meta.SE and generally get shot down with the reasoning &quot;people need to have a thicker skin about life,&quot; ironically usually over my objections. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you might see how we are sometimes a little ambivalent about how to proceed.  We get that some folks here who want us to &quot;do less,&quot; take a step back, etc., but we get feedback from the &quot;higher-ups&quot; that is &quot;abdication of responsibility.&quot;  It's a hard balance to strike.  I think that we end up being a lot more lenient and less harsh that the advice we're given recommends. But we do have a responsibility to the entire site to uphold, and I guarantee no one here knows more about building online communities that Jeff Atwood.  SSD has talked about how his perspective changed a lot once he couldn't just spout about his thoughts but was actually responsible for the site - it changes how you handle things, and it needs to. So yes, sometimes we have to do things that make some people unhappy. But that's part of the job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The RPG.SE Community&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously strictness varies amongst the &quot;new SEs&quot;. Some of this is because of the kind of community that SE serves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have some that are much more strict because people just can't handle the format. Christianity.SE comes to mind - they basically ended up having to say &quot;if it's not a written down doctrine of a specific denomination, don't talk about it&quot;.  It's as if we said on RPG.SE &quot;look - we're going to do RAW and only RAW because no one can keep it together once there's any opinion involved.&quot;  Then you have other SEs that are much more lax, and their quality suffers.  I'll be honest, I don't use some of the other new hobby SEs because their signal to noise approaches that of a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I further think we can all acknowledge that the RPG/geek community is more argumentative and opinionated than some other communities that SE serves. Less so than those drawn to something like a religious SE, but a lot more than many.  This does pose a challenge, especially while RPG.SE was growing (not enough high rep site users means hard to close, delete, etc, when needed), and also users can't delete comments - and running off at the mouth in comments is a beloved part of the RPG community's habits from forums et al. It results in needing slightly more stringent rules and enforcement thereof - hopefully not to the Christianity.SE degree, but I am sure, for example, that we have a stricter comment policy than some SEs mainly because we need it more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While our current stance isn't perfect and we've made some mistakes over the years, I think that if you review RPG.SE alongside the other SEs, we are one of the absolute best run SEs in the entire portfolio. New people show up, they ask questions, they get them answered, long term community members grow in rep - I think the results here on RPG.SE speak for themselves. In a previous question someone made a comment about the &quot;lower quality&quot; content on RPG.SE and I think that's completely and patently untrue, and even a basic canvas of our front page vs the front page of most other SEs indicates a much greater number of well-reasoned, coherent questions and answers, accepted answers, etc. - all the measures of &quot;is this site doing what it's supposed to do, which is provide the Internet with quality answers to its questions.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this isn't a result of &quot;draconian&quot; moderation. We've never banned someone from RPG.SE IIRC (well, except for the 0-rep spam accounts that show up).  We've handed out a small handful of short suspensions over the entire span of site operation. (Any of you that participate on &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; RPG forum can appreciate how different that is from what's required to keep order on the average RPG community- heck, even some of you are banned from rpg.net, ENworld, etc.) The vast majority of site operation is handled by the community and the mods chip in to a small degree.  Heck, I have a job and a kid - I spend maybe 10 minutes on flags/alerts/etc in the AM before work and then 15m-1h in the evening to vote, write answers/questions/comments, close things, delete comments, etc. all told. We really don't do that much.  Reviewing mod stats, looks like the entire mod team closes about one question a day on average total - and that's from all causes, including spam, flag response, etc. A lot of questions, answers, comments, etc. flow through here on any given day, we don't see them all let alone act on many. I don't even go into the review queues any more, when I bother to the stuff in there disappears as I watch as the community handles it - problem solved, believe it or not I'd rather spend less time moderating this site, not more. We mods talk with each other before taking any major action, we let community close votes pile up before acting ourselves on closes that aren't clearly for cause, etc. You have to realize that the restraint is invisible to you, because you only see the actions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SE format itself is more restrictive than many on the Internet, and as a custom sub-culture we have many years of guidance on meta etc.  Especially new users (though in the game-rec case, we learned that &quot;new&quot; can mean years) don't have all that context and tend to complain when they bump into the walls, and it's easy to say it's &quot;the mods&quot; (since that's the case on most other sites) when really it's the way the entire community works. We can comment and help people through that, but we have to realize that's also inevitable to some degree. Be careful about using &quot;the mods&quot; as shorthand for any way the site works - it's often not the case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Communication Issues and How You Can Help&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We try to communicate. Frankly, I feel like it backfires on us more than half the time.  I remember back years ago when aramis was taking me to task for being &quot;the mod deleting comments&quot; - I checked our mod stats, and I wasn't in the lead, Pat was deleting the same amount (today, SSD and I are basically tied in mod intervention stats too). However, I was more scrupulous about doing what people said they wanted us to do - leaving comments about &quot;comments have been deleted and here's why,&quot; etc.  But since me leaving that communication made my intervention more visible, he just replied &quot;well I only see YOU doing it!.&quot; He refused to even believe that I was telling the truth that I wasn't the one doing all the deleting - and the difference was that I was bothering to communicate about it.  That made a deep impression on me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We mods (and high rep users) alter tags and edit tag wikis make synonyms and stuff all the time, without asking anyone (except in some cases an edit queue). But here recently (leading to the current kerfluffle) I said &quot;here, let me post to meta about the RAW tag because I think there's an issue.&quot; The outflow of hate and yelling about how &quot;we dare&quot; to do so as a result was pretty daunting. We don't always communicate perfectly, but neither does anyone.  This kind of feedback makes us draw back from communicating and incentivizes acting unilaterally &quot;under the covers&quot; instead. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assume you all want us to be able to communicate openly with you. People are asking for that here in this question.  Sure - but please honor that by not making it easier for us to not communicate.  You can help that by tempering discussion and trying to stay rational about the issues at hand. Don't expect &quot;perfect&quot; communication, and we won't either.  Interpret things generously and assume good intent.  If someone's openly insulting that's one thing, if you are put off by their &quot;aggressive use of quotation marks&quot; you probably need to switch filters that you're using to read their words with. When there is a mistake, don't assume it's part of some evil-Illuminati agenda, and work towards improving next time, not &quot;assigning blame&quot; (I'd recommend some of you read &lt;a href=&quot;https://codeascraft.com/2012/05/22/blameless-postmortems/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this work on blameless postmortems&lt;/a&gt; to that end). Again, we'll do the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sidebar - Mod collaboration as an example of different communication needs&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of this discussion, we have had some folks recommend that a way to regain trust is for the mods to not discuss amongst themselves and come to a common stance on questions/issues before engaging with the community.  We talked to the Puzzling mods who tried that on for size. So we've been trying that in this discussion, we haven't been talking much between us during these metas. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, this has led to multiple people, in this very question, demanding we &quot;get our story straight&quot; and are otherwise upset at me, SSD, and waxy for having and expressing different attitudes and approaches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, both are right, in that they want different things out of communication.  Some folks, generally high rep users, who want to really be part of the &quot;action&quot; want us to engage without common agreement.  Others, and IMO this includes the 90% of site users who don't engage in meta etc., just want a consistent message. Different forms of communication are more useful to different people.  Given limited time and channels, we as mods have to make a lot of judgement calls about how we communicate, and it's not always going to be the same way (it can't be), we'll choose based on our anticipation of the level of discussion needed.  Please also keep this in mind.  If the kind of communication in a given instance isn't &quot;best for you&quot; - maybe it's best for the balance of the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Communication to/about Mods&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the perfect world people could be grotesquely nonconstructive at us but quote &quot;mods are supposed to be better!&quot; at us and we'd just merrily take it.  This isn't that world. We take way more abuse every week on this SE than any of you would take without (rightfully) generating hysterical pleas to meta and the community leads. Frankly I think that we've been too lenient about enforcing Be Nice! in chat especially when mods are the topic, since we don't want to be &quot;those censoring guys,&quot; but this looks like it's had the opposite of the intended effect.  So keep in mind that if you would reasonably expect to get your content deleted or get disciplined for saying something about another site user, it applies if you're talking to/about mods as well.  You can talk about the issues and &quot;use your words&quot; without needing that. We're human, so at the very least we're going to disengage. Tuggy wrote a whole other meta about the evils of &quot;writing off&quot; people, but if people are hostile and declare their utter resistance to change and/or open communication - well, no one pays us, and we really have better things to do than expend effort on cases where it's unlikely to make a difference.  Our job is not to be customer service agents running after everyone who's unsatisfied trying to satisfy them despite themselves, and we're not going to do that.  We'd love to have polite and reasoned discussion, but for those not up for that, we're not really interested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Other Ways To Help&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Help moderate the site!  You have the power.  Vote to close, don't not do it because it might be &quot;mean.&quot;  Flag comments when they're not appropriate. Vote to delete.  Improve tag wikis.  Aside from comment deletion, power-closes, and really back end stuff like user warnings/suspensions, you can all do as much with the site as we can. Meta questions, even, don't need us every time - the community can discuss and conclude as much as anyone.  In fact, you too can go chip in on meta.SE on network-wide functionality/policy suggestions, that's not just for moderators or anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now of course keep in mind that us acting on a flag still &quot;looks like&quot; us acting unilaterally because that's not shown anywhere on the site. But you'll know  you're contributing to it!  And you'll know your fellow site members are too. (If you don't, then you tend to assume other people aren't.) And in the end, the right thing getting done is the right thing for the site, whoever initiates the action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Run for mod!  We just elected 2 new ones you know. And the fact that the brand new mods are generally upholding how the mods act should carry some weight with y'all - we've been through 3 mod regimes so far on the site, and moderation has pretty much been consistent through them - because mostly, the right things are getting done (IMO).  Again, the other option is &quot;Illuminati?&quot;  There's folks in this argument who I personally urged to run for mod last election. No harm that they couldn't/didn't, but again, this isn't some closed clique.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we're open to discussion about how much intervention is required in certain things, none of the suggestions about &quot;mods shouldn't close questions till X time has passed&quot; or &quot;mods should stay away from certain tags&quot; or anything of that sort is going to happen. In the end we have a responsibility to the site, a responsibility that people up to Jeff Atwood clearly explain to us. We will continue to be the human exception handlers on the site in generally the same categories we do now (flag handling, closes, comment deletes, commenting to try to guide people, much-less-frequent everything else). We have to balance our community's perceived unique needs with the overall SE structure and best practices (it's not either-or).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary issue we have at the moment is trust, and that is largely based on a combination of communication problems and really attitude-about-communication problems.  Really it's more the latter than the former IMO (on everyone's part - when everything gets heated up I and the other mods also start reacting back by reading people's words badly because we feel under attack all the time). The solution to that can start today by everyone cooling off and discussing issues and assuming good faith on everyone's part. Repeating that over time is really the only solution to the only major problem we have.  The more everyone here participates in moderating the site and upholding the site norms - clear questions, quality answers, few comments, be nice, etc - the more this site becomes &quot;your&quot; site and not &quot;their&quot; site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2016-02-25T03:04:55.607" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-24T03:17:42.003" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to play the other side of much recent meta-action for a moment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We tapped three of our most-active users to moderate. So &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of their actions now carry a diamond.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we want to still their voices--either procedurally or just through pressure--just because they're now diamond-certified.&#xA;The same actions they'd always taken now carry a diamond and often carry more weight. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/41062/311001&quot;&gt;mxyzplk correctly points out&lt;/a&gt;, that's a stack-wide policy with desired effects: they don't get to be &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; &amp;quot;regular users&amp;quot; anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Moderators &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;/em&gt; moderators do as little as possible.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Meta posts linked above seem, to me, at odds with the reality of Stack moderation: those from among the most active users (usually) are tagged with a diamond and told to &amp;quot;do as little as possible&amp;quot;? I can only harmonize this by reading the Theory of Moderation to be addressing moderators' &lt;em&gt;moderator actions&lt;/em&gt;, as distinct from their &lt;em&gt;user actions&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Moderators &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;/em&gt; users are leaders. They were before being tapped, and shouldn't stop.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same behaviors which earned these mods our votes now have diamonds attached to them (both prospectively and retroactively) and stand as an example to all comers of what this community believes represents its best behavior. Obviously, not &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; action, comment, and answer lives up to that standard. But their everyday actions should stand as example to new users of how to run the site well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What should the moderators do to counteract the &amp;quot;heavy-handed&amp;quot; feeling?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine that the job of a moderator is a lot like that of watching over the plaground at recess. Let's watch everyone having fun, break up any shoving matches, keep an eye on the fences, step in and enforce some rules when things get rowdy. (I do not mean to trivialize the job of the moderator, nor the feelings of any involved who have had unpleasant experiences. I'm simply hoping to step back a moment from the current, &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; issues and take a big-picture look at what's going on. I also don't mean to trivialize the job of a playground supervisor.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the difficult things about the job of playground monitor is that &lt;em&gt;no matter how many times you tell the kids to stop shoving, they never do.&lt;/em&gt; That's because it's always new kids, year after year. No matter how many times you explain the rules, someone's always ignorant. No matter how many times you explain why you can't climb the basketball hoop, there's some yahoo climbing the basketball hoop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, too, do moderators find themselves having to explain themselves over and over again. It's a part of the job they may not have appreciated at first, and I've got to imagine it tries one's patience.&#xA;But they've got to stay patient, write (auto-write?) friendly and welcoming corrective comments, explain themselves &lt;em&gt;ad infinitum&lt;/em&gt; on Meta, and all without betraying an iota of impatience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a tall order, and I've seen them fall short sometimes. So when they do, let's gently correct them with a little patience, sympathy, and good-faith-assumption thrown in on our own part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Revisited, with a blue name:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I (one month in) still stand by what I said here, in my tenth post on meta just a few months into user-hood. But I do want to &lt;em&gt;reiterate&lt;/em&gt;, from my mod POV:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I will not always get it right. I may not know as much as you. I can use (gentle) correcting at times, too. I assume good faith, &lt;strong&gt;especially&lt;/strong&gt; from those who disagree with me.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Please go ahead and address me specifically when you think I've made a mistake. &lt;strong&gt;Someone&lt;/strong&gt;'s going to learn something, and that makes me happy.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T15:02:40.023" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T15:02:40.023" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-24T04:44:17.317" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr*&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I talk about &lt;strong&gt;waiting&lt;/strong&gt; I simply mean, give the community some time to see if the obviously broken answer is not actually broken at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Preface&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I never intended to post here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am fairly certain that I voted for the current mods whenever the previous election was.  If someone has access to the real data I don't care because quite frankly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I nearly always smile when I see @SevenSidedDie's avatar, which is bizarre given that he/she/it is just some stranger on an SE sub I mainly lurk in now; and I find that though I may disagree I always read @waxeagle's posts; and though I'd currently describe @mxyzplk as grumpy, and maybe even heavy handed, the claim that he/she/it is out to get RAW is nothing short of paranoid, as far as I can tell. Whoever that was, if you still feel that way after (re)reading these meta threads, and a stout drink/good night's sleep/or simply a deep breath, please get some help.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One final thing, I think all the examples here are my own questions, they should be taken as examples and no additional &lt;em&gt;complaint&lt;/em&gt; should be read into them beyond the concern they (hopefully) illustrate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Body&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;On waiting:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I definitely hear how some of you have an expectation that we as mods&#xA;  shouldn't take action on e.g. closes until the community has exhausted&#xA;  itself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, but I do expect that a moderator should give the community some time before taking action, and maybe not take action at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, a mod commented on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/14526/2102&quot;&gt;my answer here&lt;/a&gt;, indicating that the concern was the down votes that may result as it did not seem to answer the request. Given the comments, it seems fair to say that this was a case where the mod felt that NAA might apply, but here we are 4 years out and that post has +8/-0.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;On appeals to authority:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The problem is, this is NOT the guidance we get from the&#xA;  larger SO mod community. Their guidance is often very much &quot;you're a&#xA;  diamond mod, do the right thing, screw the whiners.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A sample to the contrary from &quot;the larger SO mod community&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/409313/13728&quot;&gt;My answer here&lt;/a&gt; is clearly viewed by a portion of the community as not even being an answer to the question, but oddly enough it hangs on even post moderator attention.  There was no whining on my part.  It even hurts my reputation (as I understand it) to leave it up there, but it stands (I believe) because it was an honest attempt to answer the question as asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also point back to @nvoigt's comment that pointed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/167624/can-we-have-an-unambiguous-official-ruling-on-what-the-not-an-answer-flag-is&quot;&gt;Can we have an unambiguous, official ruling on what the &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; flag is for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though sadly @waxeagle responded:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@nvoigt if that actually worked, I'd be OK with that. But it really doesn't in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, you guys need to get your story straight, either you're only &quot;taking orders from on high&quot;, in which case we get to quote the same scriptures, or what is said &quot;on high&quot; &quot;really doesn't [work] in practice&quot; in which case you can make no appeal to authority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;On why RPG.se is a unique snowflake:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Christianity.SE comes to mind - they basically ended up having to say &quot;if it's not a written down doctrine of a specific denomination, don't talk about it&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nope.  If that was the case we'd never have had &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/7067/359&quot;&gt;How can the logical impossibility of infinite self reference be reconciled in the case of God?&lt;/a&gt;. (Spending time discussing Computer Science on Christianity.se, what was I thinking?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I further think we can all acknowledge that the RPG/geek community is more argumentative and opinionated than some other communities that SE serves. ... but I am sure, for example, that we have a stricter comment policy than some SEs mainly because we need it more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, you just said that you are simply following advice from SO in general?  Why would you do that if RPG.SE is so unique?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know, I am certainly inconsistent in my own thoughts, and you mentioned how tight the balancing act is.  I'm really only here to present to you a different view of why we are unique, and one that might point to &quot;less&quot; moderator action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are unique.  We are not SO.  We are not trying to round out our resumes, or improve responsive design, or ensure that the next patriot missile system has the correct calendar algorithm. We are not dealing with wrestling with someone's view of GOD, patents, or worse yet people asking us for the codez! We are helping people spend their leisure time playing pretend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore we should be MORE relaxed than any of the others... though maybe not those si-fi people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;On Why this answer doesn't matter:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, I realize that none of what I've posted is a statistical drop in the bucket, but there are real people out here debating if they should bother spending time here and when anyone appears to be running around with a hammer hitting anything that even looks like it might be thinking about going off script... well I've already invested way too much time into this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;tl;dr&lt;/em&gt;**&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If SO itself can award &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/a/105617/19308&quot;&gt;230 rep for the wrong answer&lt;/a&gt;, maybe the mods and the rest of us can wait a day longer and see if the post that clearly does not answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12051/2102&quot;&gt;the question asking for canonical sources&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/12057/2102&quot;&gt;can become the top rated answer&lt;/a&gt;, or even if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/18856/2102&quot;&gt;the question that should have never been asked&lt;/a&gt; can maybe teach us all a bit about being better players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Should be tl;wr for won't, but convention wins out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;**Actual tl;dr.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2102" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2016-02-24T04:44:17.317" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-24T11:08:01.860" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;In the light of some of the moderators comments, I'd like to add an alternative to my first answer:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Educate the community&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets take the RAW and policing discussion as a prime example. What &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; ideally be done is that the community should down vote the answers that don't adhere to the RAW tags requirements. What you propose, because you think the community will not be able to handle it, is to flag it and moderate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a quite old, but very respected FAQ about Hacker communities, which at least SO is a part of: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How To Ask Questions The Smart Way&lt;/a&gt;. It's way older than any SE and older than the SO idea or implementation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community standards do not maintain themselves: They're maintained by people actively applying them, visibly, &lt;em&gt;in public&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, I think this is correct. For a community to learn and apply standards, those standards must be applied by their role-models. Visibly. In public. If you flag NAA and subsequently delete a post that is not up to our standards, &lt;em&gt;nobody learns anything from it&lt;/em&gt;. The community at large is no smarter than before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's like dragging the offender into a dark back-alley and spanking him. That &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; be effective for the offender, but if nobody knows about it, you will need to repeat it for every. single. offender.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And most won't even know what hit them. Because they never witnessed an account of wrongdoing and therefore did not even have a chance to see that what they did  was wrong before a moderator action struck them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets stay with the example. To set up and maintain a community standard, that RAW answer talking about house rules needs to sit at -10. With a comment nine times up-voted saying &amp;quot;this is a house-rule and we are looking for written rules only as per the tag&amp;quot;. For everyone to see that this behavior is wrong. Visible. In public. Because now everyone can see that we don't want house-rules in the RAW tag. Now the community can &lt;em&gt;learn&lt;/em&gt;, even without reading through tons of meta posts. New people will see what is expected from them and won't make the same mistake all over again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use your mod powers less, because using them in that way makes the site look pretty on the outside, but breeds a community that has no guideline on what is right or wrong. Flagging and mod powers that are invisible to the public add to the mistrust because they seemingly strike out of nowhere without any prior warning. The community should use their downvotes to police this site. Using mod powers for it is counterproductive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't trust the community to do this, have a chat and down-vote those you'd flag and close/remove as a team. A -3 and three comments why this is wrong is a pretty clear signal the community will see and understand. More importantly, it &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; a signal. Flagging and removing signals nothing. Literally. Any trace of what might be wrong is gone without any learning opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mistakes are a learning opportunity &lt;em&gt;if available&lt;/em&gt;. Removing errors behind the scenes teaches the community nothing. And we do need a well educated community to run an SE site. So police the site, but do so visibly in public with the means available to the public. That means down-votes and comments mostly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-24T11:08:01.860" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6145" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-24T13:13:47.503" Score="3" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;After you have answered a question, the page shows the &lt;kbd&gt;Add Another Answer&lt;/kbd&gt; button. Sometimes I combine all advice in one answer and may even include one or more alternatives to a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I supposed to post these individually, so that the &quot;best one&quot; can be accepted? I assumed it was frowned upon posting multiple answers to a question unless it was some sort of community wiki form, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://wordpress.stackexchange.com/questions/1567/best-collection-of-code-for-your-functions-php-file&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which currently has 108 answers, some of which are by the same author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of different authors giving different advice on a problem, the &lt;em&gt;same&lt;/em&gt; author gives advice in different answers (which don't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5676/should-i-post-two-answers-if-i-find-contradicting-arguments&quot;&gt;contradict each other&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10682" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:37:59.987" LastActivityDate="2016-02-25T00:55:25.543" Title="If I have multiple solutions or alternatives to a problem, should I post them as separate answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2016-02-25T01:13:27.317" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5842" CreationDate="2016-02-24T14:10:03.563" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, tool-recs are off topic here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have had very bad luck with question migration over time - just like us, all other new SEs have sometimes tricky rules about how they want to see stuff.  Most f not all of the questions we've migrated to B&amp;amp;CG, Arquade, etc. get closed.  (And vice versa.)  Rather than migrate I'd prefer to point the questioners over there to get the lay of the land and post organically when they are ready.  But given that caveat, sure, seems like a good destination for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-02-24T14:10:03.563" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5842" CreationDate="2016-02-24T19:46:51.950" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Instead of a direct migration path, it would be possible to alter the close reason for game-recommendation questions to be more generic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be one option (feel free to edit, its CW)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions looking for recommendation on &quot;what game to play&quot; or &quot;what tool to use&quot; are off-topic. They can be asked on any one of a number of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;role-playing games discussion forums&lt;/a&gt; or for software on &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/q/336&quot;&gt;our sister site&lt;/a&gt;. For more information, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747&quot;&gt;this discussion&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that the SR.SE Link intentionally goes to the &quot;how to ask a good question&quot; meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:52:38.620" LastActivityDate="2016-02-24T21:46:02.180" CommentCount="4" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-02-24T19:46:51.950" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6148" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-24T22:47:57.577" Score="35" ViewCount="751" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometime during the weeks of wrangling over the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag it occurred to me that, I am pretty sure, we've fallen into a fundamental error that may be the cause of all the problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tags aren't for sending encoded signals to answer-writers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the job of the question body itself, organically, by &lt;em&gt;being&lt;/em&gt; a question that people are voting on submitted answers to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, the job of a tag is fairly boring: categorise the topic content of a question post so that the Q&amp;amp;A can be found more easily by others interested in that topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somewhere along the line we've drifted into treating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; as a special signal about how a question should be answered. Somehow, we've stopped relying on the question itself to explain itself, and started leaning on this one tag to do part of its explaining.&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt; We've even embedded this meaning in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/info&quot;&gt;its tag wiki&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since that's not what tags are for though, it's unsurprising that it does a really bad job of that. New users don't necessarily know to even look at the tags, let alone that this one tag has a special meaning that's relevant to them. Established users argue over whether the tag applies to a question or not. Chaos ensues and madness takes it toll on the site and community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Clarifying, tagging, and moving on has been working&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The solution seems to me to return to the basics of how to clarify questions: ask for the question's important features to be clarified by the original poster, and if necessary, decorate the result with &lt;em&gt;matching&lt;/em&gt; tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's how every other tag&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt; on the site is used: they stay on questions that contain the matching content, are removed from questions that don't, and when they make us go “huh?” we dig deeper into what the question is &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to be about by asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This struck me as a lightning bolt of obviousness some time after the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written&quot;&gt;data-gathering proposal&lt;/a&gt; flew off a cliff and &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EveryCarIsAPinto&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;exploded in mid-air&lt;/a&gt;. We were including the step of &lt;em&gt;asking&lt;/em&gt; what someone meant when they used the tag as a necessary step to gather good data. So why weren't we already doing that, and calling the whole entire problem solved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been implementing this the past few weeks. I'll see a question that includes the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, but there's no body or title content that says “hey, this would call for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag if it weren't already there,” and I'll ask what they meant by the tag. Sometimes it means that they misused the tag, sometimes it means that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74625/how-can-significant-injuries-like-broken-bones-be-healed&quot;&gt;they left something out of the question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Net result? A clearer question. And here's the critical part: &lt;strong&gt;Nobody needs to know what the tag means to write an on-topic answer — they just need to read the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been working so well that I think the community should adopt it. Not only does it work, but:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;it's how tags are supposed to be used anyway&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it avoids anyone needing to guess at the intentions of the OP, which prevents conflicts based on different users' readings of the tea leaves (&lt;em&gt;q.v.&lt;/em&gt; “how tags are supposed to be used”)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;people who want to engage in RAW-focused questions can trust the tag reflects the question content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;people who want to avoid RAW-focused questions can trust the tag reflects the question content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it makes voting take care of the answers naturally, because answers that don't answer the question's body are more obvious to all voters instead of to just those who follow the site's arcane meta discussions&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;as a follow-on result of that benefit, mods have no need to police answers for being Not An Answer: votes down do the job they've always been meant to do, which is disincentivise poor answers and incentivise fixing poor ones / deleting unsalvageable ones&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it improves every question that receives such attention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it attracts more relevant answers to RAW questions in a natural way&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it shows that we care about curating quality questions for our citizens who enjoy deep engagement with the RAW analysis lens&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it doesn't require changing the tag's name, just using it like a normal tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it doesn't require adding any other tags to “catch” mis-tags from askers looking for “the tag for rules questions”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;it no longer has to be precisely and perfectly applied to questions anyway&lt;/strong&gt;, because the consequences of the tag's presence no longer includes answers being policed, just whose attention the questions attract; this means that my own and others' drive to find the &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; line between a RAW and non-RAW question can be set aside, and we can be more organic and relaxed about figuring out where to add/keep the tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is, overall, the absolute simplest and least-intervention way to resolve the issues that everyone has had, on all sides of the dispute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What to do, as a user&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of this requires mod powers. It's something we can all do to improve the signal-to-noise ratio in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;So when you see a question talking about RAW or engaging in implicit RAW analysis: that's what the tag is for labelling, so add it!&lt;sup&gt;[2]&lt;/sup&gt; It will signal to our RAW analysis experts that there's something worth their attention.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And when you see a question use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag without any content that would seemingly justify adding it as in (1) above, ask the poster to clarify what they were meaning when they added the tag. When they respond, revise the post to match, either by adding the overt RAW analysis material to the question's body, or by removing the tag. Don't forget to thank them for clarifying!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Feedback&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As strongly as I believe that back-to-basics treatment of this one tag works and will strip away the angst around it and around the subcommunity it's related to, I have experienced incorrectness in the past! If I'm totally out to lunch, let me know where this thing is in error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;I know that we make an exception to this rule for game tags. That's for good reasons that don't apply to any other tags.&lt;/sub&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Note that a question talking about just &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt; is not enough for it to be about &lt;em&gt;rules as written&lt;/em&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/363/what-should-the-rules-tag-include&quot;&gt;correct tag for “the question is mentioning rules”&lt;/a&gt; is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4932/the-rules-tag-has-just-been-burninated-again-lets-blacklist-it&quot;&gt;has been blacklisted since it's useless&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is not just a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Responses to objections&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This section contains responses to specific objections, in the manner of academic discourse in published papers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The objection that there is no problem that needs fixing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6152&quot;&gt;This is still a solution in search of a problem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are at least two overt problems that would justify seeking &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; solution, if not this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is considerable community friction over how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag is used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are concerns that altering the tag's usage at all, especially by mods, is a prelude to expunging RAW experts from the site. There are concerns that it is being used as a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; by site novices. There are concerns that the status quo involves excessive intervention among answers on questions with the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all real problems, in the sense that they are a source of community conflict. If this is a solution in search of a problem, finding a problem is by no means difficult, nor a reason to pre-emptively reject the solution as effective for solving the problem of conflict. A rejection must be based on the merits of the solution to resolve the problem of community conflict.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; to signal what answers are acceptable is a misuse of tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags must describe body or title content. The job of signaling what answers are acceptable is for the body or the title content. It is a &lt;em&gt;prima facia&lt;/em&gt; problem if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is being used for a job that is contrary to the purpose of tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, rejecting this solution pre-emptively because it has no problem to solve is invalid, as the problem it aims to solve has already been explicitly stated. A rejection of the solution must be based on its merits instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the problem of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; being used to encode information absent from the question itself, it is a direct solution to that problem. Other solutions may be better at eliminating the meta-use of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, but the possibility of multiple solutions that would solve the problem is not evidence that the present solution would not work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are at least two obvious problems that need fixing. Treating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; as a normal tag by getting clarification and making sure the question itself is complete before the tag applies is explicitly aimed at solving both the problem of community conflict and the problem of the tag being used for non-tag purposes. How it would accomplish this has been described in detail already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T15:32:43.587" Title="A low-intervention approach [rules-as-written]: back to tagging basics" Tags="|discussion|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6145" CreationDate="2016-02-25T00:55:25.543" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think, personally, that if the approaches are different &quot;enough&quot; that it makes good sense to post separate answers. I'll put forward two examples of mine: one I think is a clear-cut example of doing this appropriately, the other may be borderline.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71888/23970&quot;&gt;How are &amp;quot;non-damage&amp;quot; attack rolls determined?&lt;/a&gt; I present two different ways to handle OP's question. Both, I believe, are supported by the rules. But I think they're different enough that voters should be able to separately express their opinions. The disparity in votes on the answers may reflect the propriety of separating the answers, though it may just be a reflection of the post-dates for the two answers. (The high-voted answer was posted ten minutes after the question, the low-voted answer four days later.) In any case, &lt;em&gt;these answers are different in RPG-space, and certainly deserve to be voted on separately.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/69064/23970&quot;&gt;Is &amp;quot;Unearthed Arcana: Players Make All Rolls&amp;quot; Correct?&lt;/a&gt; I wrote two answers which--as a math teacher--I feel present markedly different ways of understanding the result. One is purely theoretical and tackles the general case, the other demonstrates the error in the UA article by looking at one specific example. I had in mind that one might seem obtuse and overwrought to some who might find the second perfectly suitable, while the second might seem underdeveloped and trivial to some who find the first a natural way of explaining. That said, they both arrive at the same conclusion (in mathematically identical ways) and don't fundamentally offer anything distinct &lt;em&gt;vis-a-vis&lt;/em&gt; RPGs. The distinction between them is in mathematical presentation, but this isn't Math.SE. &lt;em&gt;Perhaps these should have been one answer.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-02-25T00:55:25.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-25T05:31:16.587" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;When the Mods can't even leave a conversation about too much moderation alone in meta, there is too much moderation.   We've had mods go bad on another site and have to have them removed.  The mod removed was doing what he thought best for the site, there was no intentional malice but he was trying to clean up the site, by &lt;strong&gt;his&lt;/strong&gt; interpretation, not the community. At first I thought I was seeing another one of those situations in slow motion.  however, I think the problem boils down to choosing very active members for mods.  It's tough (frabkly it'd be impossible for me I think) to separate the mod actions from active members of the community.  Partly there is a perception problem and partly there is the moderation finality problem.  I also think there is a &quot;do something &quot; mentality as well that is completely at odds with the &quot;do little&quot; theory of moderation.   Case in point it what finally lead me to stick in an answer.  In this question you'll notice that much of the discussion (the entire point of meta BTW to post and discuss issues as a community) was moved to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seriously??  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I have nothing against any of the mods but that comes across as a real jerk (to keep it PG), spiteful move.  It smacks of being done to ensure no one can see the dissenting opinions. The absolutely last place a moderator should be screwing around with comments is in a discussion about how the mods do too much.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit: on the usefulness of chat for a meta discussion - from chat &quot;@SevenSidedDie The comment got moved to chat, so it is not handy at the moment&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21841" LastEditorUserId="21841" LastEditDate="2016-02-25T06:11:06.517" LastActivityDate="2016-02-25T06:11:06.517" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6151" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6090" CreationDate="2016-02-25T14:58:58.793" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes something's wrong, but not quite what I was asking about&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Intro&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The vote on this question is, as of this writing, 26 up to 8 down.  That tally doesn't tell us a great deal, beyond presenting the maximum number of people concerned or interested enough to vote: 34&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, out of a site population of two orders of magnitude larger.  Some folks think &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; is wrong. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question had problems with specificity.  The answers addressed more than what was behind all of this, which was rooted in a complaint about moderation on the RPG.SE site.  We got answers, and a veritable torrent of comments rife with arguments and finger pointing.  I asked that comment wars not be how we respond, but that appeal fell upon deaf ears.  People will respond as they will.   &lt;em&gt;Defects in the question contributed to this&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Two things are for sure wrong**&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Something Wrong #1&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something is wrong with the question.  It wasn't specific enough, it wasn't narrow enough, and it lent itself to answers that addressed multiple issues rather than one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do about that? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I discussed my disappointment briefly with @Smurfton, whose meta was the trigger for this to be #2 of a three part process (his original being #1), and we agreed that #3 won't be productive.  I gather from other comments by a variety of users that this sentiment is shared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Decision&lt;/strong&gt;: no meta #3 per the original proposal. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Something Wrong #2&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not using data to inform a decision, or to determine if a decision is needed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original issue can be addressed by a data driven analysis that leads to problem confirmation or identification (does it need fixing yes or no?), and a solution proposal process.  There are a couple of metas already with solution proposals that don't look to be data driven. (Even though there's some good stuff in them).  The need to look at actual use was a complaint levied in the initial discussion before the assertions of mod bias got us distracted form the original point.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recommended solution to what's wrong&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is beyond hope. Its shelf life has expired and early fixes to it were not applied. (No soup for me). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Using data to assess, scope, and define the problem (or whether one actually exists) with RAW tag usage should assure all parties that the way ahead is based on something more than opinion.  (What a concept, on an SE site ...)   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll offer time and effort to address the core issue (what to do, if anything, about the rules-as-written tag) via on data collection and analysis.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I already posted one month's worth of data and assessment from the last year's use of the tag.   Until we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6086/22566&quot;&gt;complete @doppelgreener's very sound suggestion on analyzing the last year's RAW questions&lt;/a&gt; to see what patterns of use have shown, any proposal risks overlooking actual usage and take on the form of &lt;em&gt;tampering&lt;/em&gt;. (I am using Deming's meaning of that in terms of process change). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will continue to present those in the thread where I already provided a link results of Mar 2015.  April 2015 will be posted in a day or two. I will use pastebin per SSD's suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's my answer to my own question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Follow up: after the negative feedback from two of the principles in the argument, my second month's of (of 12 total) for grinding away on RAW questions was abandoned: the reasons for throwing up my hands is twofold.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It looked to become another source of argument      &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The badly veiled insult to both my intent and my integrity was taken&#xA;as a sign that some people don't want my help.         &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; per @nitsua60's comment:  the most votes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1070/23970&quot;&gt;ever for a question on meta was 46&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T23:55:40.407" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T23:55:40.407" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6148" CreationDate="2016-02-26T02:51:58.017" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like this idea! However, I do share concerns over our history of comments that leave a sour taste in folks' mouths.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I don't think it's an exaggeration to say this proposal may sink or swim on the basis of how approachable our clarification-requesting comments will be.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something I've noticed--and several folks have told me they experience it too--is that having a well crafted pre-made comment really helps keep things on a steady emotional keel. Even when I need to modify a comment for a particular post, having that pre-made foundation is very useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/27821645#27821645&quot;&gt;I offered to make a new meta question&lt;/a&gt; as an update to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3519/4398&quot;&gt;this old thread&lt;/a&gt;, and after the upvotes on this post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6168/4398&quot;&gt;I've made the thing!&lt;/a&gt; It invites users and moderators alike to suggest situations in which a pre-made comment would be useful, and to workshop the best way to phrase such comments. That seems like a good place to work out some best practices for implementing this policy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6168/4398&quot;&gt;Pre-made comments: A resource-gathering &amp;amp; workshopping thread&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many moderators use &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/2116/autoreviewcomments-pro-forma-comments-for-se&quot;&gt;this script&lt;/a&gt; to make commenting more efficient, and I suggest anyone who plans to be active in enacting this proposal take a look and see if it will help them too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T12:12:58.530" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6148" CreationDate="2016-02-26T06:34:09.680" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I also like this idea, but I wonder if it's going to really fix the problem long term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;History of the RAW Tag&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's all the meta questions debating the RAW tag and its meaning, use, and validity, stretching back to 2012: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; (it makes for interesting reading, especially as many participants, including mods past present and future, change their minds about the tag over time). And it appears that the problem is festering, because every time the question comes up (posted by different people each time) you can see that it is the cause of an even larger explosion of bad feeling on the site, you can clearly see the escalation in each set of posts as time goes on.  &lt;em&gt;That's the core problem that needs fixing&lt;/em&gt;, and it's one that is brutally obvious and needs no further proof. We haven't been solving the problem, we've been saying stuff that sounds good and kicking it down the road, allowing it to snowball to where now it is nuclear to even discuss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We've Talked About This Solution Before - But It Didn't Stick&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these previous questions about [rules-as-written] we've gone through several rounds over the years of declaring &quot;tags should describe questions not answers&quot; and &quot;don't use it as a meta tag&quot; and &quot;tags shouldn't have special rules&quot; and all the same things we're saying here, all of which I agree with per se.  But we've said them all before. What exactly are we going to do this time to get this to stop being such a bone of contention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously the RAW playstyle is welcome here, just like other playstyles - very few of which we have tags for, I will note.  The discussion about tags and how to apply tags is completely separate from playstyle accommodation and shouldn't be viewed as an attack on it. (We planned to burninate the [gm] tag too, and not because of a player-led pogrom against gamemasters everywhere.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: We Need To Bring This To A Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a specific solution I am recommending at this time, but we need to solve the problem for good now - if we just kick it down the road again because &quot;it's painful and people are all heated up,&quot; we're just relegating the site to 10x as much vitriol and disruption in another X months when it comes up again, brought up by yet another user who perceives the unresolved ambiguities.  We should consider whether this proposal does enough or whether it's just a longer version of some of the answers that have already been posed for this problem over the last 4 years, and how we actionably intend for it to turn out differently this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T15:32:43.587" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6139" CreationDate="2016-02-26T13:30:10.403" Score="4" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The site does not seem to have anything obvious that would make higher traffic profitable for the owner, so I would exclude that malicious intent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They seem to be on the safe side of the law and probably won't have to fear legal action from WotC, which means we don't have to fear the consequences of the site being taken down (fixing the links, that is)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Consensus on quoting the Rulebooks is that it is generally tolerated, if the exact wording is relevant. Otherwise you are to paraphrase or reference.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In my opinion, the SRD5 and D&amp;amp;D5e are not exactly the same thing and if a question is on the topic of 5e, answers should relate to that and not to the SRD5.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus I suggest we stick to referencing and paraphrasing the official rules of D&amp;amp;D 5e and removing links to unofficial sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25757" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T13:30:10.403" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6157" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-26T14:42:28.410" Score="16" ViewCount="323" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This originally was an off-topic comment elsewhere. I think it's important enough to warrant it's own post.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As this is an international site, our language is English. However, many people play games in their native language, using translated books. Posting here means we can translate language from English to our native language and back quite well, but book layout does not translate at all. References to books should ideally mention texts that we can search for to find the mentioned sentences or paragraphs in our native language books. Because layout and maybe even cover pictures may change with editions and translations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The very first sentence on pg. 73 of the PHB proves you wrong!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a reference, non-English players have a lot of problems finding. Page 73 in the English book is somewhere between page 60 and 90 in my book. And a first sentence on a page will probably not be the first sentence on any of my pages. So I'd have to search 30 pages, sentence by sentence to check if one might prove me wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In the players handbook, in the Chapter &quot;Combat&quot; under the heading &quot;Attack Actions&quot;, the first sentence of the second paragraph proves you wrong (PHB pg. 73).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now this is way easier. I have the books name, the chapter and paragraph. I can find all of that by translating words and skimming over the table of contents. Maybe the chapter starts at page 68 and have have to flip over to page 69 to see the heading mentioned. But it is spot on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So please, if you reference books, think of the non-English speakers. We don't expect a reference into &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; books, but it's way easier for us to find it, if you provide context from &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; books instead of page numbers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Because context translates, page numbers do not.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They even translate &lt;em&gt;well enough&lt;/em&gt; the other way. I cannot quote verbatim or cite page numbers in any meaningful way (at least not to a non-German in my case) but I can give a description and Chapter heading. If I guess the chapter is named &quot;Combat&quot; and it happens to be named &quot;Battle&quot;, then my guess is still better than nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Please note that this is a suggestion how to improve your posts. I'm not looking to make this mandatory or downvote anybody if he does not. This will take a post from good to great, it's in no way required that you do this.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-02-29T18:12:13.343" LastActivityDate="2016-02-29T18:12:13.343" Title="Please consider using book references that will be understood internationally" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6157" CreationDate="2016-02-26T17:37:24.983" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Instead trying to accommodate non-English texts in general, I suggest a user of a non-English edition Comment how the desired information can't be located in that non-English edition and request from the querent or respondent more context. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because, while I think it's a great idea to accommodate non-English speakers, asking folks to use a text's headers, subheads, and sentence numbers instead of or in addition to page numbers is, I think, a burden too great and may possibly be even more confusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, consider this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke&#xA;  attacks of opportunity.&quot; (&lt;em&gt;DMG&lt;/em&gt; 213)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And compare it to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke&#xA;  attacks of opportunity.&quot; (&lt;em&gt;DMG&lt;/em&gt; 213 or Chapter 7: Magic Items on Handling Magic Items on Using Items in the paragraph Spell Trigger in the final sentence)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the second example does locate the text precisely, it assumes that, when translated, all of those terms &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; match up, and there's no way to be sure that they do. Further, there's not even a standardized international method of indicating page numbers, so using an even more complicated non-standardized &lt;em&gt;long-form&lt;/em&gt; of text location will be messy and difficult for English and non-English readers alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; suck when someone else's page numbers don't sync up to one's own, and you have my sympathy, but I think asking for clarification on a case-by-case basis is a better solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Just to be sure, a search for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=%22first%20sentence%22&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;first sentence&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; brings up about 50 results, and many seem to reference a quotation already presented, so rummaging through a text fairly to find that quotation should be fairly quick. And I totally know that's an imperfect measure.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-02-26T17:37:24.983" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6148" CreationDate="2016-02-27T02:09:02.183" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The tag really needs to be renamed or made a synonym.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not there's anything &lt;em&gt;directly&lt;/em&gt; wrong with the tag. For people who hang out in RPG forums and are familiar with RAW/RAI arguments it precisely describes what it's all about, and I know a lot of our users who follow the tag come from that environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, a lot of the new users who wander into RPG.SE &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; come from that environment, and aren't actually looking for a strict RAW analysis when they use the tag. They have a question about rules, that's the only major tag with the word &quot;rules&quot; in its name (since, as mentioned, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4949/3548&quot;&gt;blacklisted&lt;/a&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag for being both a meta tag and uselessly vague), so they slap it on their question even though their question has nothing to do with how the RPG.SE community would like the tag to be used (or with how the greater RPG Internet community would understand the tag's name).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Renaming the tag has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5163/3548&quot;&gt;proposed before&lt;/a&gt; and received a somewhat positive response from the community (as of this the post, the proposal is +6/-3). As mentioned above, the phrase &quot;rules as written&quot; has a very distinct meaning in a broad swathe of the community that perfectly encapsulates how the tag is &lt;em&gt;intended&lt;/em&gt; to be used, and the tag's adherents would be absolutely correct to say that changing it to anything else will cost it clarity with users coming from those parts of the greater RPG community. But the current phrasing is also causing a lot of misuse (which as mentioned, is the fault of the blacklisted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag rather than the RAW tag itself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, the tag is somewhat unique in the greater StackExchange ecosystem in that it partially exists to place a constraint on &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; rather than simply describing the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;strike&gt;While I think that's a mechanic that has its uses in this case as well as possibly on a few other stacks, it's definitely not the norm for tags on RPG.SE in particular or SE in general. To those who claim that the tag wiki explains its intended use: Don't kid yourselves, hardly anybody, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; new users (who are the most likely to misuse tags) reads tag &lt;em&gt;summaries&lt;/em&gt;, much less wikis. The only way to get the message through that this tag has a special use is to make the tag's name itself explain that use.&lt;/strike&gt; (Apparently that aspect of the tag is part of the problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To sum up, I &lt;strong&gt;strongly&lt;/strong&gt; feel that the RAW tag should be renamed/synonymed to something that better encourages, or even explicitly describes, its &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; use so we can finally put the recurring shitstorm that surrounds it to rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked proposal suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-must-quote-rulebook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-must-quote-rulebook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-must-quote-rulebook&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-requires-rules-citation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-requires-rules-citation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-requires-rules-citation&lt;/a&gt;. Those are... somewhat clumsy, and exacerbate the &quot;tag places requirements on answers instead of describing the question&quot; problem. On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/raw&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;raw&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;raw&lt;/a&gt; has been proposed and would solve the primary source of confusion, the word &quot;rules&quot; in the tag that keeps luring new users into misusing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.917" LastActivityDate="2016-02-27T03:15:28.140" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6160" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6161" CreationDate="2016-02-27T12:23:13.023" Score="2" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;On meta there is a 'x people chatting' window in the sidebar. On other sites I have seen that on the regular pages as well (like on superuser).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we have that here too?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should it be there and I just happen to not see it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastActivityDate="2016-02-27T13:57:20.837" Title="chat in sidebar on main page" Tags="|feature-request|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6160" CreationDate="2016-02-27T13:57:20.837" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There already is... usually.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would appear that, for the moment, it seems to have, as Ahriman put it, &quot;gone missing&quot; much like the community promo ads occasionally do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea why it happens (maybe someone who &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; know can address that) but it is there and, unless it's a major bug, it will likely return at some stage if you refresh the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastActivityDate="2016-02-27T13:57:20.837" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6162" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-27T14:04:02.713" Score="-4" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(As requested on my answer to a broader question about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6159/3548&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, I'm (re-)posting this as a new question.)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag has its current name for a good reason: For people who hang out in RPG forums and are familiar with RAW/RAI arguments it precisely describes what it's all about, and I know a lot of our users who follow the tag come from that environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, a lot of the new users who wander into RPG.SE &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; come from that environment, and aren't actually looking for a strict RAW analysis when they use the tag. They have a question about rules, that's the only major tag with the word &quot;rules&quot; in its name (since, as mentioned, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4949/3548&quot;&gt;blacklisted&lt;/a&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag for being both a meta tag and uselessly vague), so they slap it on their question even though their question has nothing to do with how the RPG.SE community would like the tag to be used (or with how the greater RPG Internet community would understand the tag's name).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Renaming the tag has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5163/3548&quot;&gt;proposed before&lt;/a&gt; and received a somewhat positive response from the community (as of this the post, the proposal is +6/-3). As mentioned above, the phrase &quot;rules as written&quot; has a very distinct meaning in a broad swathe of the community that perfectly encapsulates how the tag is &lt;em&gt;intended&lt;/em&gt; to be used, and the tag's adherents would be absolutely correct to say that changing it to anything else will cost it clarity with users coming from those parts of the greater RPG community. But the current phrasing is also causing a lot of misuse (which as mentioned, is the fault of the blacklisted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; tag rather than the RAW tag itself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked proposal suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-must-quote-rulebook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-must-quote-rulebook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-must-quote-rulebook&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answer-requires-rules-citation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answer-requires-rules-citation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answer-requires-rules-citation&lt;/a&gt;. Those are both clunky and have the added problem of emphasizing another aspect of the tag that has been the subject of contention (its tendency to restrict answers rather than describing the question). Personally I would prefer something that doesn't contain the word &quot;rules&quot; at all to properly take care of the tag's recurring misuse; at the very least any new tag name shouldn't &lt;em&gt;start&lt;/em&gt; with the word &quot;rules&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T01:22:54.770" Title="Should the Rules As Written tag be renamed?" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6162" CreationDate="2016-02-27T15:24:54.370" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, a lot of the new users who wander into RPG.SE [...] aren't actually looking for a strict RAW analysis when they use the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, [Citation Needed]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any renaming of the tag is premature at this point. We do not have the data demonstrating any need to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we’re going to be questioning the use of the tag when it’s used without reference to it in the body of the question,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Any misuse will be discovered and fixed &lt;em&gt;anyway&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We will be able to actually track how much misuse actually occurs. It makes far more sense to revisit this question &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; that happens.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2016-02-27T15:24:54.370" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6164" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6162" CreationDate="2016-02-27T15:25:03.923" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Issue&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do agree that the problem is usually new crops of players (and this is a big deal with 5e getting new players now) that have kinda heard the terms RAW and RAI and decide to use them without really knowing what they mean (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3690/rules-as-intended-and-designer-intent&quot;&gt;@KRyan himself wrote a good meta on how RAI is often used very incorrectly&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Tag Change&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would propose [rules-as-written-only] as the new tag. It's a very small change, both people familiar with the existing rules-as-written tag and newbs just typing it in will easily find the tag, unlike [raw] or [answer-requires-rules-citation] (the latter of which is about answers and is therefore a meta tag). [raw] as a synonym would be good of course. But I think the &quot;only&quot; would be a marker to new folks to indicate &quot;hey... we don't just mean rules questions, we mean questions strictly about the rules as written.&quot; [strictly-rules-as-written] would be similar but less catchy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we change it to something without the &quot;common use&quot; phrase (&quot;rules-as-written&quot;) in it we may as well just be killing the tag, as tags are properly for findability and collection, not primarily telling you how to answer. Only experienced site people would be able to figure out we have some custom weirdly named tag for rules-as-written, and lack of obviousness is the #1 sin a tag can make - they're not a taxonomy for the site elite, they need to be obvious to newbs and to Google searches. That's fixing the problem in a double wrong way - just killing the tag would be preferable to replacing it with something esoteric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Plus Some Tag Wiki&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that, plus maybe some tag wiki editing and a backing post on meta about raw/rai/etc aimed at newbs might solve the problem without moving the tag too far from its obvious naming.  The tag under any name can encourage sloppy questions that use the tag as a substitute for the questioner stating what they really want... Even &quot;RAW&quot; often needs more clarification (So, any published work for that game? Or do you mean just first party not third party? Do you accept the Rules Compendium and FAQ or no? What about Dragon Mag/Website/whatever freaky mobile thing it is now? What about designer tweets? etc....) I think in the tag wiki we should say something about &quot;don't use this as a substitute for using your words...&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of this is a 100% fix, as we know newbs don't always read tags or tag wikis.  But neither do they always respond to comments or edit their questions or use coherent English or anything else; the question is will this reduce the incidence of &quot;saying RAW when I mean just rules stuff.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Other Options&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[raw] is suboptimal because this problem wouldn't exist if all the newbs knew what RAW really meant in the first place. It will fix class 1 of question (newbs so newb they haven't even heard of RAW but are just looking for any tag with &quot;rules&quot; in it) but not class 2 of question (newbs who have heard the terms RAW and RAI and whatnot but are using them without full knowledge of what's up).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[answer-must-quote-rulebook] or [answer-requires-rules-citation] are actively bad because a) they are meta tags trying to control answers instead of describing the question and b) because they are custom items only usable by the elite of the site, with no SEO value or accessibility to newbs.  They also will be used incorrectly - &quot;well sure even if I'm not asking a RAW question I'd like people to cite the rules they do talk about!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-02-27T15:25:03.923" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6162" CreationDate="2016-02-27T18:03:03.723" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, at least not yet.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we have not yet put together a data driven basis from which to consider a decision, I'd suggest that the answer is no, at least not yet, since we collectively are still not quite sure if there is a problem that warrants action. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener has already suggested a two month look at current usage and I am working back through the past year to look at how it has been used. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's not get ahead of ourselves.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And while I am at it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59772/does-a-slung-magic-stone-have-the-same-normal-and-long-range-as-a-mundane-bullet&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; illustrates to me a few of the points in usage of that term that are of interest.  There are a number of users who very much use the RAW tag explicitly with a particular goal in mind, one of whom is @Sebkha.  This question isn't alone, but a number of querents take the same approach.  Look at these comments associated with the non-accepted (but pretty good anyway) answer.  @nvoigt wrote the accepted answer on a RAW basis: short, sweet, too the point.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have users for whom this tag has an explicit value. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I marked the 30/120 answer as accepted since this was tagged as a&#xA;  rules-as-written question, but I completely agree with your appeal to&#xA;  consistency. It'd be 120 at my table. – Sebkha Apr 20 '15 at 2:40&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sebkha and @nvoigt - good to know. I realised I was being a bit more&#xA;  creative than RAW often allow, though looking at the definition on&#xA;  rpg.se I'm not sure if I've actually missed the mark, as the tag&#xA;  definition is &quot;Interpretations and applications of rules that only&#xA;  take into consideration specifically what published game material&#xA;  states,&quot; and what I tried to do here was interpret and apply the&#xA;  published rules. I suppose the limits of interpretation and&#xA;  application are also subject to interpretation :-) – harlandski Apr 20&#xA;  '15 at 5:05&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I suppose the limits of interpretation and application are also subject to interpretation&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I sipped my coffee, I chortled.   Rule 0 lives IRL.  Using judgment is a Good Thing(TM).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T01:22:54.770" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6166" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-27T20:48:11.553" Score="7" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a few questions that are asking about the current state of affairs of something. Of course, “current” has a tendency to change with time. They're not off-topic or unanswerable, and unlike crystal-ball questions they don't become pointless once answered. Whatever answers they gather do tend to go dramatically out of date at some point, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1676/whats-the-current-state-of-the-kult-rights&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the current state of the Kult rights?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45024/is-there-a-ogl-or-gsl-license-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;Is there a OGL or GSL license for D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm sure there are more.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the site tools we have is setting a post to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit-community-wiki&quot;&gt;Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; (CW), which drops the reputation needed to edit it (without reviewer approval) way down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a mod-tool to lock out other answers, which prevents new answers that should have been wiki edits and focuses the page on the singular wiki post. It does a normal lock on the page and adds this banner:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question's answers are a collaborative effort: if you see something that can be improved, just edit the answer to improve it! &lt;em&gt;No additional answers can be added here&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other thought that inspired this idea is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6071/when-rules-change-but-votes-dont-how-to-handle-it&quot;&gt;we don't like editors to completely change someone else's answer&lt;/a&gt;, but this injunction seems intuitively (to me at least) to not apply to a community-edited wiki post. Seeing an accepted answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1686&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt; become obsolete, the value of completely rewriting it seems more evident, and if it had been a CW it would have been already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this be useful for any of our questions that are good but naturally prone to having their answers (and the votes on them) broken by the passage of time? Maybe it would be useful for some of these kinds of questions, but not others, based on a distinction I haven't thought of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just throwing the idea out there. CW is a site feature that has a poor reputation, but I wonder if something like this would make it sing. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T23:28:00.393" Title="Would Community Wiki be useful for questions about the “current” state of something?" Tags="|discussion|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6167" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-02-28T07:36:40.363" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, I don't think the mods here believe in the stackexchange model of leaving most &quot;moderation&quot; to the posters via voting. They are very quick to edit or make meta-comments. I envy them their spare time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15520" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T07:36:40.363" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6168" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-28T11:43:13.890" Score="18" ViewCount="595" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pre-made comments are &lt;em&gt;awesome.&lt;/em&gt; They're also super powerful tools. Let's workshop some new ones and improve the old ones!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've probably seen &lt;a href=&quot;/q/3519/4398&quot;&gt;pre-made comments&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;[i]&lt;/sup&gt; used across the site by moderators, both diamond and not. They're efficient and help reduce the busywork of moderation&lt;sup&gt;[ii]&lt;/sup&gt;, but they're also an important tool for setting the tone of interaction on our Stack: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A friendly and polite comment leaves folks open to correction, not defensive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comment linking to the relevant meta or help pages does wonders for community education.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comment indicating that rules and guidelines help improve a user's experience can lead a new user to participate in the site's culture happily and to pass it on to others.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When a comment needs to be customised for a particular situation, having a template to start from helps us write new comments which also do these things.  It’s hard to accomplish all of this on the fly all the time; pre-made comments mean most of the effort’s already been put in.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I've got two questions that I'm hoping this meta can answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What situations do we frequently encounter on the site which would benefit from pre-made comments?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;/q/3519/4398&quot;&gt;We've got a good start with an earlier collection&lt;/a&gt;, but there's currently &lt;a href=&quot;/a/6154/4398&quot;&gt;a widely acknowledged need&lt;/a&gt; for pre-made comments that cover other situations. What have you noticed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What pre-made comments do we need to meet those situations, and how can they best model the tone of discourse we want on the site?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Again, the &lt;a href=&quot;/q/3519/4398&quot;&gt;earlier “pro-forma” post&lt;/a&gt; gives us a good beginning. If those comments can be improved, please help us figure out how. And for our brand-new pre-made comments, we need everyone's help designing those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously everyone will take something slightly different away from this thread. Nobody's expected to use a comment they don't like, and I expect most of us will personalise the comments as we use them. If you think your personalisation would be useful to others, please come back and share it here! My goal with this thread is to foster awareness of the powerful tool these comments are, and to create a pool of resources so we can all use pre-made comments more effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for your service, citizens!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;i. &lt;sub&gt;Brian called them &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_forma&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“pro-forma”&lt;/a&gt; comments for &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_%28statistics%29&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“modal”&lt;/a&gt; situations, which is technically accurate but a) confusingly jargonistic and b) “pro-forma” has common connotations of “the absolute minimum we had to do” and that’s exactly what these comments &lt;em&gt;shouldn’t&lt;/em&gt; feel like. “Pre-made” is more accessible and means our comments will be Exactly What It Says On The Tin.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;ii. &lt;sub&gt;If you use pre-made comments and haven't seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/q/2116&quot;&gt;this auto-comment script&lt;/a&gt;, please check it out. A lot of folks find it very helpful when implementing pre-made comments on the site.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2016-08-18T14:07:59.773" Title="Pre-made comments: A resource-gathering &amp; workshopping thread" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6168" CreationDate="2016-02-28T17:23:15.030" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Question, answer, and accept all within a short timeframe. (&amp;lt;1hr, often)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This often happens with new/inexperienced users. This may discourage later answers from coming along. This may discourage voting, as voters my see diminished utility if their vote isn't helping to inform OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment I tend to leave looks something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for accepting my answer, @&lt;em&gt;user&lt;/em&gt;. I'll note that you've done so rather quickly. Please know that it's perfectly fine to wait hours or even days to accept an answer — if at all! Also, if another answer comes along later that better solves your problem know that you have the ability to un-accept mine and accept another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm trying here to both encourage the OP to wait a bit and to indicate to passers-by that the question's still 'live.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quick accept like described above on an incorrect answer I once gave led to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6039/23970&quot;&gt;my accepted answer is factually incorrect--no recourse?&lt;/a&gt; I'd have been glad for OP keeping their finger off the button so that I could have just deleted the wrong post, rather than needing mod attention and sitting out there causing arguments among other (correct!) answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-02-28T21:01:46.927" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2016-02-28T21:20:06.060" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is incomplete&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t have a suggestion for the tag wiki at this moment. That will take a little more time; right now I just have some ideas about what the wiki should and should not look like. But I wanted to get this out there and get feedback on some of these ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It’s not [rules]&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Merely asking a question about how the rules work does not mean the rules-as-written tag automatically applies. Only a subset of rules questions would use the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we reject any definition that would result in the tag being applicable to all rules questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It’s not [rules-lawyering]&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been hashed out to everyone’s satisfaction &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5036/4563&quot;&gt;previously on meta&lt;/a&gt;, but just to reiterate: rules-as-written and rules-lawyering are separate concepts and in most cases the tags would not even be used together, much less used to mean the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules lawyering is a social problem found at the game table. Rules lawyers often &lt;em&gt;claim&lt;/em&gt; (and may even be right) that RAW is on their side, but that’s largely irrelevant to the social problem. Questions about rules lawyering typically require social solutions: how to communicate, consider others’ feelings, and so on. It usually is not actually a question about the rules themselves, since the problem with a rules lawyer usually has nothing to do with whether he is “right” or “wrong,” and everything to do with the disruption he is causing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus we reject any definition that would result in the tag being applicable to questions about how to deal with rules-lawyers. Analyzing the rules in a RAW frame would only encourage a rules lawyer in thinking that lawyering is a valid and effective approach, even if he was wrong in one particular case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It’s not [optimization]&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RAW is often used in optimization, but it is not, itself, optimization or even devoted to optimization. RAW gives zero commentary on the rules, regarding optimality or anything else, really; optimization just (often, though not exclusively) uses RAW to determine how things work so that they may be &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; be compared for their value relative to achieving the optimization goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we reject any definition that would make the tag a synonym of optimization, and probably furthermore expect the definition to make this distinction clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It doesn’t require that the asker know the answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is true for all questions, and is pretty obvious when said like that, but this does have a couple of implications for RAW questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some kind of RAW analysis is not required to already be in the question. While “this is my analysis of the rules; is this right?” is a valid RAW question, it’s not the only sort of valid RAW question. Questions about RAW can, in fact, be asked without any idea which rules, if any, apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we reject any definition that requires the asker to have already performed RAW analysis. Asking &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; to do so is a valid question and would be a question we would expect the tag on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is not required to be one that itself requires torturous analysis of the rules from its answers. This goes back to the idea of questions where the asker has no idea what rules apply in the first place. In this case, the rules-as-written tag did not really affect the answers in any way, since we would answer the same whether the tag was there or not, by just citing the appropriate, clear rule. Nonetheless, rules-as-written is a valid tag to have on the question, since if nothing else, the asker didn’t &lt;em&gt;know that&lt;/em&gt; when asking. Clearly a tag that requires knowing the answer is not a useful tag for someone who has a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus we reject any definition that could not be applied by a user who doesn’t know the answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It’s not that answers are forbidden from challenging or supplementing&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is expected on our site that from time to time, an answer may “challenge” the question—in effect, say “this is the answer you asked for, &lt;em&gt;but&lt;/em&gt; I think you are asking the wrong question, and here is why...” It is also simple reality that the rules for many games are often not good, or simply do not cover some case, and at times it seems to us answering that supplying &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; the RAW without caveat or commentary is itself misleading (i.e. if a rule is problematic, we might want to warn about that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In both cases, challenging the frame or supplementing the answer to the question asked, such tangents are expected to be kept short, and they are inherently risky. We expect voters to treat such answers with initial skepticism, and that such answers have to justify their departure from strictly answering the question asked. We also do not allow such answers to entirely waive their responsibility to &lt;em&gt;answer the question asked too&lt;/em&gt;, and generally expect that &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we reject any definition that would make rules-as-written a unique exception to these rules. This is less a concern about what the definition &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;, and more a concern of how it is written. It is not necessary or desirable to &lt;em&gt;invite&lt;/em&gt; such departures from answering the question, but we also want to avoid making the tag seem special in this regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It is for questions that want &lt;em&gt;literal accuracy&lt;/em&gt; over &lt;em&gt;usefulness&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I put in a comment,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone answering RAW questions, someone interested in what the book says and &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; interested in something else if the book has &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt;, would be a question I am interested in answering and interested in seeing highlighted (¬_¬). From my perspective, I want to see the RAW tag if, should it be necessary, a torturous analysis of the text will be appreciated. If the asker would prefer to skip that when the rules are bad and just use someone’s recommendation, I’d rather the tag not be there. That is my rule of thumb criterion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus we expect any definition we use to cover the idea that literal accuracy will be appreciated even if it is not useful for playing the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It is for questions that are concerned with the establishing an “objective” shared baseline&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have written a lot of homebrew for 3.5 and Pathfinder, and I have done freelance work for Dreamscarred Press, a Pathfinder third-party publisher. I am at times &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; concerned about the “objective” state of the rules—because as a developer whose work will be used by people I will never get the opportunity to speak with or clarify to, I need to make sure that my work fits in with the remainder of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also frequently play RPGs online, which means I play with groups I don’t know very well. RAW, even if it is stupid, gives a common baseline: it is a touchstone from which we can depart, through houserules, to get everyone on the same page with respect to the rules of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, for these reasons and no doubt others, people need to know what the rules are officially and divorced from even the most reasonable subjective interpretation, even if they never intend to use them. It informs their work and it forms a basis for starting conversations about the rules with those they do not know well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus we expect any definition we use to cover the idea of the canonical. For instance, in the past it has been suggested that we codify what sources “count” for RAW questions; this is not actually what we want to do. More appropriate is for the definition to reference the idea of relying on the &lt;em&gt;publisher’s official statements&lt;/em&gt; for what does and does not count. WotC did not give the D&amp;amp;D 3.5 FAQ the authority to change the rules, making it less than useful in RAW discussions; Paizo has given that status to its Pathfinder FAQ, making it crucial that RAW answers consider it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-03-01T19:43:59.510" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6172" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6157" CreationDate="2016-02-29T08:39:15.273" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd consider this to be different by context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases where you cite something &lt;strong&gt;easily searchable&lt;/strong&gt; (a spell, a weapon, a creature) you must &lt;strong&gt;cite the book&lt;/strong&gt;, but usually not the page (or anything else). That is everybody, English speaking or not, can look up 'owl-bear' in the index and translate it to their relevant language easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases where you cite something that is buried in large text sections it becomes more complicated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest you &lt;em&gt;keep it as short as possible while still being searchable&lt;/em&gt;. It doesn't need to be understood by a machine, but by a human.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.&quot; (Chapter 7: Using Items, Spell Trigger paragraph)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note&lt;/strong&gt;: It might also be that your citation is lost due translation and just not there in another language (e.G. the Cyberpunk 2020 basic rules differ in the area of martial arts between the German and the English version).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a &lt;strong&gt;personal note&lt;/strong&gt;: I usually own German books and I pirated the English ones to be able to look up page numbers, so I can translate them and then look it up on the dead-tree. So, I totally agree that this is an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3324" LastEditorUserId="3324" LastEditDate="2016-02-29T09:45:39.567" LastActivityDate="2016-02-29T09:45:39.567" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6173" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-02-29T16:10:03.340" Score="24" ViewCount="568" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on the following question, which happens to be about a roleplaying game taking place within the (non-roleplaying) videogame of Terraria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76364/how-to-deal-with-erp-frequency-in-a-non-erp-setting&quot;&gt;How to deal with erotic role play (ERP) frequency in a non-ERP setting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recapping the original question; the user has joined a special server for a video-game that has been set up to permit its players to roleplay within that video-game. The question is specifically about the interaction between the players of said roleplaying game. The entire fact that it is played within Terraria is, in fact, almost irrelevant to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this question was asked about a game played over Skype, IRC, or Tabletop Simulator, it would definitely be on topic. Even if it were played in a Neverwinter Nights module set up for roleplaying, it would almost certainly be considered on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not feel that just because the roleplaying game takes place within the context of a more traditional video game, rather than a sandbox or a roleplaying game, it should automatically become off topic. I am very confident that people at Arqade cannot answer this question (and will almost certainly redirect the user back to here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, the question is about the act of shared storytelling, which seems to be what we are here for. That the roleplay happens within a video-game is provided for context only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I feel the question should be reopened and questions about roleplay within the context of a video game, as long as the question is about the interaction between roleplayers and not about the video game itself, should be considered on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-14T10:23:51.160" Title="Are questions about roleplaying within a video game context on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|close-reasons|video-games|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6173" CreationDate="2016-02-29T17:08:53.083" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it is obvious that the question being discussed is about role-playing games and should be on-topic. The video game is just a platform the asker is role-playing on, and has no real bearing here. The fundamental content of the question is not about the platform, it's about issues that could equally well happen in a forum game, a chatroom game or even a traditional pen and paper game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discriminating against questions using video games as role-playing platforms is counterproductive (such questions aren't well-covered on Arqade), arbitrary (we don't discriminate against other digital platforms either, do we?) and doesn't make sense to me (why close relevant questions just because they arose in a video game?). I think there's only one appropriate solution, and that is to reopen the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-02-29T17:56:34.623" LastActivityDate="2016-02-29T17:56:34.623" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6173" CreationDate="2016-02-29T18:06:53.480" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;The platform someone is using to roleplay will obviously have a practical impact on their situation and the relevance of solutions the answers might present, but that's par for the course here. Platform doesn't determine whether a question is on or off topic, so closing it because “video games” is part of the &lt;strong&gt;background&lt;/strong&gt; context is unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms though, the question may have other problems that would make it a poor candidate for reopening, so “no, it shouldn't be closed &lt;em&gt;for that reason&lt;/em&gt;” may not be the only or even most important factor when considering reopening. If it stays closed that won't be a sign of what is on- or off-topic: a question held for the wrong reason, but still worthy of being held for other reasons, is a question that should stay held until all its problems are addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, it's unclear what help the asker is seeking, since they've already solved their immediate problem. What they're asking for beyond the immediate problem they describe can &lt;em&gt;sorta&lt;/em&gt; be inferred from context, but questions with problems that can only be inferred tend to collect rafts of well-meaning but unhelpful answers that are just throwing darts in the dark. The asker would need to add a clear problem statement before we'd be able to judge whether that problem is enough not Too Broad or Primarily Opinion-Based to justify reopening the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-17T23:56:29.033" LastActivityDate="2017-02-17T23:56:29.033" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6176" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6173" CreationDate="2016-02-29T22:03:46.363" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question, if refined, is on topic here.  That doesn't mean this is the best place to ask it, however.  As you can see from the way the question is developing, it's a whole different subculture, where abbreviations like &quot;ERP&quot; are not well known in the tabletop community, actual functionality about &quot;servers&quot; and &quot;channels&quot; that is probably relevant with how to deal with the problem, etc.  This question would therefore probably get better answers on Arqade.  If clarified, we could certainly answer it here, but there'll be a lot of analogy-drawing (&quot;Well, if you had a real life tabletop group that was engaging in sexual RP that you weren't interested in, you'd...&quot;) that may or may not end up being on target and helping the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-03-02T04:01:11.223" LastActivityDate="2016-03-02T04:01:11.223" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6113" CreationDate="2016-02-29T23:41:10.483" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current be nice policy is the result of much gathered feedback, as explained here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/240839/the-new-new-be-nice-policy-code-of-conduct-updated-with-your-feedback&quot;&gt;The NEW new &amp;quot;Be Nice&amp;quot; Policy (&amp;quot;Code of Conduct&amp;quot;) — Updated with your feedback&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't be rude actually already is the first point of the policy!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Finding a different word that doesn't raise eyebrows anywhere in the English-speaking world is an option. What I doubt is that there's one that carries a meaning that can work as an inoffensive drop-in replacement. If anyone can think of a good alternative, that would be useful to hear.&quot; -- From the link you posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me &quot;jerk&quot; is unlikely to offend, and works as a stand-in for worse terms. - I like the idea of describing actions rather than people, but the guidelines can't be a comprehensive list, and the connotation of the word jerk does much of the lifting in carrying the meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you know an even more universally unoffensive &quot;bad&quot; word with similar connotations, go ahead and bring the conversation to meta as suggested by wax eagle and BSWE&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8307" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-02-29T23:41:10.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2016-03-01T01:45:40.277" Score="35" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not immersed in RAW, but I've been watching and listening and talking to folks about it for a long time. I'd like to offer my understanding of Rules As Written, as a tool and as a tag, so that others with more experience can draw on it as they see fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Rules As Written&quot; is a tool for understanding a game by looking at the game in a particular way. This view contains assumptions about the nature of the relationship between the designer, the rules, and the players, but RAW doesn't inherently seek to state that its perspective is correct or exclusive; it's simply one useful “place to stand” when studying a text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, we must understand why RAW exists. RAW's goal is no less lofty than universal understanding: &lt;strong&gt;That people from widely varying backgrounds and experiences may all independently reach the same conclusions about what a game does.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To do this, RAW has to define a “place to stand” that everyone can share. It does this by stripping away everything about a game which is irrevocably subjective (designer intent, GM adjudication, playstyle choices) until the game has been reduced to a singular shared experience: RAW derives understanding of the game solely through the text of the books which describe it, by approaching them as a set of primary documents from which all else can be inferred.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When studying the rules through the eyes of RAW, these are the basic guidelines we apply:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The rules are the only authoritative source of information.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/33393/4398&quot;&gt;Authorial intent is not significant to a RAW study&lt;/a&gt;, nor is the experience of an individual in using the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The rules are a shared objective experience.&lt;/strong&gt; As each reader learns to recognise and account for her own observational biases, their understandings of the rules will become increasingly alike.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Justification is irrelevant.&lt;/strong&gt; RAW is a tool for describing what the rules say. Its users may try to explain why the rules say certain things but this is not the goal or purpose of RAW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Value judgements are irrelevant.&lt;/strong&gt; RAW describes the rules, but offers no comment on their quality.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Narrative is irrelevant.&lt;/strong&gt; RAW doesn't care whether or how mechanics mesh with story. If a rule doesn't follow the law of gravity, or conflicts with common sense, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19861/4398&quot;&gt;doesn’t match up to the name the mechanic is called by&lt;/a&gt;, RAW won't offer comment (though its users often chortle or face/palm at the implications).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether we agree with the ideas in these guidelines isn't important; RAW is the study of what happens when we assume they're true, and that practice has proven to create useful spaces for dialogue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although Rules As Written makes no value judgements about the quality of mechanics, it’s a particularly useful tool when people of diverse backgrounds and experiences (eg, on the Internet) are working together to determine the comparative effectiveness of various mechanical choices in achieving a stated goal in play. (This is called &lt;em&gt;optimisation&lt;/em&gt;. While its goal is often assumed to be efficient combat prowess, optimisation may have any play goal and RAW has none.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all questions can be answered, or challenges solved, within the limits of Rules As Written. RAW is content to be an incomplete model insufficient for subjective dilemmas; that is the cost of being a tool for achieving shared understanding across many experience modes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-03-03T00:35:05.710" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6173" CreationDate="2016-03-01T19:53:45.690" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions about roleplaying in video games should be off-topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can that be, you ask? Is this site not for questions about role-playing games? Aren't these questions about roleplaying in games? Well, yes. But it's important to note that while those two things have a lot of the same &lt;em&gt;words&lt;/em&gt; in them, they're not actually the same &lt;em&gt;thing&lt;/em&gt;, much like the right to bear arms is only tangentially related to the right to arm bears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, this site is for questions about the content and use of rules systems for role-playing. If you're just free-form roleplaying, whether in person, over a forum or instant messaging program, or in a video game, you're not playing a role-playing &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt;. The objectives and social dynamics are distinctly different, and a community of experts on D&amp;amp;D, World of Darkness, Fate, and other such games aren't going to be much help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2016-03-01T19:53:45.690" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2016-03-02T05:22:05.693" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with all of KRyan's &amp;quot;what it is not&amp;quot; points. I fear all the &amp;quot;is&amp;quot; answers on this Q so far lack a certain conciseness that is probably needed to have something easily adhered to by querents. Let me try to collate their juicy parts into one answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But first, a thought exercise to indicate what parts of these answers are not juicy and should not be considered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why do people ask RAW questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes it's because they want to know the hard literal interpretation separately before they rule/houserule/write a sourcebook. Sometimes they want to eke out a &amp;quot;questionable&amp;quot; optimization advantage. Sometimes they want to write a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sjgames.com/murphys/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Murphy's Rules&lt;/a&gt; comic. Sometimes it's employed because someone is using a full-on RAW playstyle, or are participating in some venue like Organized Play that follows RAW (plus their own custom alterations, usually).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I think they &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; is not relevant per se - we've discussed playstyle tags before (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5215/should-we-have-game-style-tags?lq=1&quot;&gt;Should we have &amp;quot;game style&amp;quot; tags?&lt;/a&gt;) and the core problem is that tags of that sort attempt to describe &amp;quot;how we want you to answer,&amp;quot; not &amp;quot;what is the content of the question&amp;quot;.  Which makes them a meta tag, and meta tags have downfalls as described in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;.  I will also note that our experiment in &amp;quot;a magic tag that dictates how you should answer a question,&amp;quot; [game-recommendation], ended in abject failure. And especially, posters shouldn't have to answer the &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; and pull spurious &amp;quot;frame challenges&amp;quot; from those who just disagree with their goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we avoid most of the handwringing about the tag's ramifications if we just make it clear it's about the &lt;em&gt;content of the question&lt;/em&gt;.  This of course affects answers implicitly - a question about D&amp;amp;D, if answered with a Savage Worlds thing, is usually (though not always) a bad answer. But a normal rules question is really asking about gameplay (how do I best handle this situation in my game, using primarily the rules in the book but also other stuff) while a RAW question is asking about the literal interpretation of the rules in the book, divorced from questions about gameplay. We don't need &amp;quot;rules on how to answer&amp;quot; so much as clarity about the scope of the question, which I understand is a subtly different thing, but it is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Definition&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose the effective definition of RAW for purposes of this site can be boiled down to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are specifically about the objective literal interpretation of a game's rules content as written in its sourcebooks, regardless of whether the result seems impractical, unplayable, or silly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not use the [rules-as-written] tag if you just have a question about a game's rules or how to handle a situation in your game for maximum playability or realism using a combination of the written rules, gameplay experience, etc. There is no specific tag required for those questions (simply because that's what most questions on the site are about). If you are considering saying something like &amp;quot;I want RAW, unless there's not good RAW, then I want RAI or experience or house rules,&amp;quot; do not use this tag, and just explain what kind of solution you'd like in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because this tag implies an in-depth analysis of the relevant texts, you should clearly state in your question what books or resources are in scope (For example, a RAW question with a scope of &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e PHB/DMG/MM only&amp;quot; has a very different answer from one with a scope of &amp;quot;All first and third party published D&amp;amp;D 3.5e sourcebooks&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I reckon the first 2 sentences can be the tag wiki summary and then the rest in the tag wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the first paragraph captures what we mean by RAW scope and strictly states it in terms of the question content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second I think we need because of the confusion problem, which is to say &amp;quot;don't use this unless you really mean RAW.&amp;quot;  RAW questions of &amp;quot;do you really not ever have to sleep in 5e&amp;quot; should just be answered with &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;, not &amp;quot;here's how I've implemented fatigue&amp;quot; - that's for a general gameplay scoped question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third says &amp;quot;use your words.&amp;quot;  To speak to a recent contentious question, I think something like an &amp;quot;Adventurer's Guild Legal&amp;quot; question is fine and can use RAW, since the RAW scope can be defined as &amp;quot;the core books plus the AG rules&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;frame challenges&lt;/a&gt;, I don't think we need to say anything in the definition about them - they still apply 'as usual,' but remember that frame challenges are intended to be &lt;em&gt;rare&lt;/em&gt; and require significant cause, usually that there is an XY problem (the questioner has jumped to a solution instead of asking about their question).  This is usually appropriate only when the querent doesn't know any better - when they knowingly declare a scope, then frame challenges are unhelpful and should generally be downvoted because they're really just arguing with the questioner's playstyle. If the raw tag has huge numbers of frame challenges explaining rulings or house rules, that's a misuse of frame challenges and indicates that we haven't fixed anything about the issues with RAW tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Implementation&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as we guide querents and respond to answers on these questions, what should we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(with a pro forma comment ideally) If there's hints that the user's unclear as to whether they should have the tag or not (this usually happens either by saying RAW in the question and not having the tag, or having the tag and saying &amp;quot;RAW or something else,&amp;quot; or just having the tag and not saying anything and the question seeming like a more general gameplay question, clarify their intent and get the tag on or off as relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On RAW questions, downvote answers that are not RAW, even if it's the answer &amp;quot;you would use&amp;quot; in your game instead of RAW.  KRyan offered up a good example of a highly rated answer on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73879/can-one-enter-leomunds-tiny-hut-from-below/73909#73909&quot;&gt;Can one enter Leomund&amp;#39;s Tiny Hut from below?&lt;/a&gt; - a question tagged with [rules-as-written] and then a question that just plain starts out with &amp;quot;In the spirit of rulings instead of rules...&amp;quot;  That's not OK.  Sure, that answer is better from a non-RAW perspective, and it's the one I'd use at my table, but that's not what RAW questions are about. Unless questioning the querent indicates that they don't really want pure RAW only, that answer should be downvoted.  Comment and indicate why it has been downvoted - that both helps the answerer and, possibly, the querent by putting a finer point on the question - I've seen times when someone has objected to an answer not being RAW and then the querent comments &amp;quot;oh but I like it, it makes sense&amp;quot; - and voila, you've uncovered a mistagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this is perhaps questionable. On non-RAW questions, I suspect those who play RAW will continue to upvote RAW answers because they find them more helpful to themselves. Why not vote up answers you find helpful on RAW questions even if they're not RAW?  The upvote/downvote &amp;quot;this answer is [not] useful&amp;quot; is silent on whether that means to you or to the querent.  So this seems inconsistent.  But obviously if we keep submitting and upvoting non-RAW answers on RAW questions just because RAW folks are in the minority, it makes that tag effectively moot since then the questions and answers are no different from an untagged question.  I'd like help reasoning out this section more from you all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't flag those answers unless they suck for some other reason too.  We don't do a lot of &amp;quot;Not An Answer&amp;quot; deletes and downvotes teach better.  Of course the real exception to this is &amp;quot;if it all goes bad&amp;quot; - someone really wants a RAW question, but maybe asks it with a snazzy title, hitting network hot questions, and just gets flooded by noobs telling them &amp;quot;they're playing it wrong.&amp;quot; If any question threatens to go out of control, then yes flag and yes we may delete (and/or comment, protect, lock, etc etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As usual, questioners should accept the answer that helps them the most.  I had a puzzling occurrence on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74253/could-you-combine-the-effects-of-shield-master-feat-and-protection-fighting-s&quot;&gt;a recent non-RAW question&lt;/a&gt; where a querent &amp;quot;liked my answer best and was going to use it&amp;quot; but felt they needed to accept another answer &amp;quot;because it was strict RAW&amp;quot;.  That's a weird middle case where they didn't really want RAW but feels that for some reason it's required of an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-03-02T20:38:26.217" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6181" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-03T20:09:10.830" Score="3" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question about creating a custom monster for my campaign's final boss battle, and webbcode was kind enough to create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/62123/12011&quot;&gt;this awesome guy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I'm quite happy with how it turned out, I was concerned when I asked the question that it was only borderline on-topic due to a high degree of locality and the subjective nature of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd now like to ask a question about designing a battlefield for my party to fight that monster. I don't think of myself at particularly good at designing places to fight, and often forget to even do so before the encounter. For this encounter, I'd like an interesting battlefield that allows both the monster and my party to make the most of their abilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would that be on topic, and what kind of information should I include?&lt;/strong&gt; If I list all my party members classes and abilities that would make it more objective, but would also make it more local, for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't think it's on topic, might there be a related or sub-question that would still be helpful to me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; Question is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76546/help-me-design-the-skeleton-kings-throne-room&quot;&gt;posted&lt;/a&gt;. Feedback is welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12011" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T01:22:10.820" Title="Would this question about designing a battlefield be on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6181" CreationDate="2016-03-03T20:26:15.623" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think this definitely &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be on-topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concept of such a question seems easily as valid as questions about building a character, which we happily field all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to withhold comment on whether or not your question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; on topic, because I’m not rightly sure myself exactly what we should expect of such questions to be useful and answerable. But I can give you some advice:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Don’t get overly worried about things being too local&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Too localized” was axed as a close reason a long time ago. There still are &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; concerns about it (especially things that are too local in time, where an answer is guaranteed to go stale and require future clean-up), but it is not generically a problem for a question anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want all the detail we can get. A good answer will explain its process, &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; certain features were added (or avoided), in reference to the abilities of the monster, the PCs, any details you can give on the timing and context of the fight, and so on. Even for future readers who probably aren’t going to replicate your boss fight, it can serve as a good example of &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to design a good battlefield.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-03-03T20:26:15.623" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6183" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6181" CreationDate="2016-03-03T20:37:42.327" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing your older question had going for it was that it was about creating an homage to a specific character/monster that you could point to outside of your own head, which the answer used as a reference to build around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can include a similar element in your new question, it would be more similar (and therefore also likely to land on the right side of the line).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The description of your question above is pretty vague, and if that's all you've got for readers to work with, I think the actual question may end up too vague. Without something concrete to build towards though, the answers are likely to be opinions and stabs in the dark, and the question is likely to a) get poor answers, and b) attract close votes. (Naturally and by design, [a] and [b] tend to correlate!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you can find something concrete that answerers can build around or towards, you're a whole order of magnitude closer to a solid question that'll pass muster on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-03-03T20:37:42.327" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6181" CreationDate="2016-03-04T01:22:10.820" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this &quot;can&quot; be on topic but suffers from the same bad middle ground that CharOp questions can, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are character optimization questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want &quot;a last couple details&quot; that's easily done, if you want &quot;general guidance on how to&quot; that can be done, but &quot;let's cooperatively design the whole thing&quot; falls into the excluded middle that's both too broad and too subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T01:22:10.820" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6168" CreationDate="2016-03-04T15:30:19.797" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Scratchpad: Non-obvious use of [rules-as-written], please clarify&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A place to put comments that have been used/worked “in the wild” for getting clarifications about askers' use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, as a gathering process and prelude to figuring out a good pre-made comment for the purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can you put into your question the purpose behind using the [rules-as-written] tag? Currently this appears to just be a “rules clarification” question, not a “what happens when the rules are treated rigidly and logically” question. If it's not the former, can you add the missing portion that makes it the latter?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T15:30:19.797" CommentCount="9" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-03-04T15:30:19.797" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5203" CreationDate="2016-03-04T17:48:20.410" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Adding another answer to discuss one point specifically, the point that I think is the crux of the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the [rules-as-written] can be saved and has value if it is effectively &quot;only about the RAW,&quot; and if we have the community adhere to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the reasons why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lack Of Distinctness&lt;/strong&gt; - If a question just seeks &quot;RAW and rulings and houserules and whatnot&quot; - then that becomes identical to any rules question on our site.  All our other rules questions not tagged [rules-as-written] get answered with a mix of RAW and rulings. On the site, questions tagged RAW - 833.  Other questions and answers that explicitly reference RAW but aren't on a question bearing the tag - 1720.  Front page examples of normal questions being RAW answered: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57165/what-happens-when-you-run-out-of-movement-while-jumping&quot;&gt;What happens when you run out of movement while jumping?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76583/warlocks-and-the-ring-of-spell-storing-how-do-you-fill-it-up&quot;&gt;Warlocks and the Ring of Spell Storing: how do you fill it up?&lt;/a&gt;, etc.  Our RAW questions are getting answered with a mix of RAW and rulings too, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76467/can-two-characters-use-call-lightning-from-the-same-storm/76476&quot;&gt;Can two characters use call lightning from the same storm?&lt;/a&gt;.  It just doesn't make sense.&#xA;If you can show a bunch of Q&amp;amp;A's to someone and hide the tags, and they can't tell the difference between those tagged RAW and those not tagged RAW, it is a bad tag and should be burninated because we shouldn't have tags that don't add value. I had an earlier conversation with dopplegreener where he characterized the difference as &quot;90% rules vs 99% rules&quot; - 9% difference is NOT a clear criterion that it's reasonable to believe a large Internet community of part regulars, part drop-ins is going to be able to use coherently.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too Much Non-RAW Drives Off Those Who Want RAW&lt;/strong&gt; - I have had several users complain to me that &quot;I posted a RAW question once and got a bunch of non-RAW answers and so I gave up on it.&quot; This means to me that if RAW questions are not sufficiently RAW, then they don't serve the people who would ideally be served by the tag.  Here's an example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73879/can-one-enter-leomunds-tiny-hut-from-below/73909#73909&quot;&gt;Can one enter Leomund&amp;#39;s Tiny Hut from below?&lt;/a&gt; - tagged RAW, the lead answer just says &quot;rulings instead of rules&quot; and goes forward from there. I honestly believe if RAW questions were really RAW then there would be more people using it not less, because they would be more assured of what they'd get.  &quot;Frame challenges&quot; are supposed to be very occasional.  Saying RAW = RAW + whatever means you get combo answers like this one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74002/can-i-trip-or-disarm-with-the-extra-attack-provided-by-the-snap-kick-feat/74099#74099&quot;&gt;Can I Trip or Disarm with the extra attack provided by the Snap Kick feat?&lt;/a&gt; (for those who can see old revisions) that basically provides RAW and then goes on a tirade about RAW stupidity, which of course is not helpful in that context and generates community hostility.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Squabbling&lt;/strong&gt; - Similarly, this ambiguous setup seems to lend itself to &quot;playstyle voting&quot; which is generally bad and engenders hostility in the community.  (We've had several meta Qs about it; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;,  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5988/can-we-agree-to-stop-downvoting-non-opinionated-factually-correct-answers&quot;&gt;Can we agree to stop downvoting non-opinionated, factually correct answers?&lt;/a&gt;... That is, people are voting up or down RAW, ruling, whatever answers just because &quot;they don't like that approach.&quot;  That's why the rulings answer is top on the Secure Shelter RAW question, for example.  If RAW questions are understood to be RAW only, then the community should be able to (I'm frankly not convinced the community can do it but am willing to see them try) have clean voting in the RAW context at least. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sidebar Question on &quot;Tag Following&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've heard the requirement &quot;but I still find the tag useful to follow.&quot;  But is that just because there's no other [rules] tag?  So questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76578/is-the-fey-ancestry-racial-trait-common-knowledge&quot;&gt;Is the Fey Ancestry racial trait common knowledge?&lt;/a&gt; aren't distinguishable by tag from rules questions? Let's say there was a generic rules-clarification tag that divided up rules questions from random questions.  Would following that serve the exact same purpose, as one can happily give RAW answers there? (I'm not saying we should add one back, because I think we'd have trouble with its inconsistent application, but is that the case?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end this inexorably turns into a clear two-fold problem to me.  The first is pure logic - the tag has to distinguish the questions sufficiently from tags without the question to have value.  So either we need to define it so it describes Q&amp;amp;As that are sufficiently different from Q&amp;amp;As that don't have it, or we should give up on it. The second is community arguing - the current setup encourages &quot;challenging&quot; and then everyone fighting about the RAW approach instead of answering the darn questions.  These two interact, so that you get a baseline of hostility from the second issue and then when people detect the first issue and start asking about it on meta, it unleashes that hostility into a firestorm.  Making and enforcing distinctness or eliminating the tag thus become the only two feasible paths forward to solve both those issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T17:48:20.410" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-03-04T19:01:48.767" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new here, having spotted an RPG question recently while surfing StackOverflow. One of the first things I noticed about the site is that so many of the questions get edited by folks who didn't post them (in general, and specifically compared to StackOverflow). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a sanity check, I just went in and compared the edits made to 15 questions on Stack RGP and Stack Overflow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At StackOverflow, 2 out of 15 questions edited: on one duplicate content was removed, and the other, and obvious typo was fixed. (In the past, I know I've also seen broken English corrected as well, and the removal of punctuation such as &quot;superfluous quoatation marks.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At Stack RPG, 6 out of 15 questions were edited: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;One question was heavily edited to remove some sensitive languge. That is understandable.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On several, tags were added or removed (sometimes questionably so). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Content was moved around and reworked.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whole paragraphs were &lt;strong&gt;added to&lt;/strong&gt; questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Grammatical errors were &lt;strong&gt;introduced&lt;/strong&gt; into other people's writing (by accident, I am sure, but that happens when you edit too much)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At StackOverflow, I also see explanations (and apologies) in the comments when people get their posts edited. I don't see that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, I think there is merit to the &quot;too much moderation&quot; complaint. I think the guidance from the wider SE moderator community might be getting taken too much at face value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's just an observation, not a complaint. This place seems like a pretty nice neighborhood.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27529" LastActivityDate="2016-03-04T19:01:48.767" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6129" CreationDate="2016-03-05T16:13:45.953" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Policing questions before a community gets to see them, discouraging questions in comments by deleting them and jumping in before the automatic chat function kicks in.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my gripe is when a mod decides to police a question being asked before the community even gets on top of it. I posted a question very recently that already had two upvotes before the question itself was modified to only ask about a very specific functionality of the item instead of the actual function of the item as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the RAW tag was removed despite my objective in seeking a RAW answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this mod did leave an initial comment on the thread, to which I responded that I was looking for Rules as Written answers, and to which he responded that those were subjective so he was removing the RAW tag. Great. Everything in life is subjective as a technicality. I'm looking for supported, factual answers citing source material that definitively states things. I made this very, very clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So coming to Meta I've made some comments in the initial post about how moderators are too quick to jump on questions or insanely quick to police comments. Look, we know comments aren't for extended discussion. But when the discussion is on topic, especially for D&amp;amp;D, we're discussing specific nuances and potential miscommunications in the language itself. These are &lt;strong&gt;NECESSARY&lt;/strong&gt; discussions. Every D&amp;amp;D group has gone through them, which means if somebody is asking something in the comments, they're pointing out that the question is going to come up so the answer needs to be improved in order to address that potential question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you'd like, people could start prefacing everything with: This is intended to help you reword your answer in such a way that will address this following question which may occur. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally see that as completely pointless and a waste of characters in discussion. Some mods have pointed out that they've &quot;received invisible flags&quot; to the community about flagged comments. Great. That works when the comments have been sitting there for a couple of days or a week. When you're jumping on people within the first couple of hours a comment is posted, especially in an ongoing discussion that's still happening, you're not handling exceptions. The system automatically offers to move you to chat for those, and we normally utilize it &lt;em&gt;if the conversation gets that far in the first place.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let the site tools do their job. If the automatic chat bubble appears too far down for your liking, set it to happen after 6 comments instead of 10 or something. I don't know the settings behind it specifically, but unless you can't modify it, there's no reason to be jumping in before it pops to tell people to move discussions to chat. You also need to consider that people may not have permission or the knowledge on how to set up a chat room, and it's something worth considering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR version: Let the community decide if a question is good or bad before jumping in and editing it without permission from the author. Formatting a question is fine, since it doesn't change content. But the question/answer isn't yours, so don't touch it. Comment discussions are not always bad, and treating them as such is prohibitive to getting good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderator names and links to relevant posts were left out intentionally. I don't want to point fingers, I want to address the actual problem. The moderators here are patient, helpful and knowledgeable, but this complaint is about too much hands on vs not enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23110" LastEditorUserId="23110" LastEditDate="2016-03-05T16:38:54.940" LastActivityDate="2016-03-05T16:38:54.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6189" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6166" CreationDate="2016-03-07T00:33:46.600" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to answer your question with another question: &lt;strong&gt;Is answering questions about the current state of transient things in line with this site's intended purpose and function?&lt;/strong&gt; I say it isn't. After all, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;We don't want the information on our site to become obsolete, and so we try not to ask questions whose answers may change with time.&lt;/a&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about transient things have one major problem: Their answers are at constant risk of becoming wrong all of a sudden - and are unlikely to be updated once wrong, because they'll probably have fallen off the site's front page by that point. A major goal of this site is to provide answers that are useful, not just to the person who posted them, but to other users who search for the question at a later date. If the answers to a question are rendered wrong by the passage of time, they become &lt;em&gt;un&lt;/em&gt;useful to everyone who reads them, forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Admittedly, almost all questions are subject to changing real-world circumstances. It's not uncommon, for example, for games to receive new supplements or errata. However, this rarely presents the same problems that occur with questions about truly transient situations, because most real-world changes don't render existing answers completely incorrect and obsolete; Plenty of groups don't play with errata or supplements.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community wiki questions can be easily edited and updated by anyone. Unfortunately, that doesn't solve the problem with questions about transient things, because there's still no way for people to know that they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; make edits and updates when the situation has changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I'd say &lt;strong&gt;no, we shouldn't use community wiki questions for this type of question, because community wiki questions don't solve the problem that these sort of questions have.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-03-07T00:33:46.600" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6166" CreationDate="2016-03-07T10:15:43.707" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Maybe.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This provides a solution to a problem, but comes very close to ticking on very bad box: Unilateral conversion of posts to community wikis.  This is immensely unpopular, and for a good reason - it strips users of whatever fake internet points they earned.  Unilateral conversion can make users hesitant to answer these types of questions on the basis that the gamification of helping people has been removed from the equation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Make it a suggestion only.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this were not a policy, but a suggestion to posters (either in comments, or from the beginning by the users who agree to this idea), this would... help the situation.  I will not go so far as to say it will solve the problem totally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2016-03-07T10:15:43.707" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6166" CreationDate="2016-03-08T06:45:55.213" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Upon further thinking... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This really does not solve the inherent problem.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... And the solution (which keeps them as a single question) requires code changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real problem is two-fold: the querent is allowed the pick a top answer that will live on in perpetuity, and you cannot down-vote an answer you have already up voted, unless it's been edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent is the arbiter of what the best answer is.  And at the time of one of these questions, they will pick the answer that fit the facts of the time.  Many times, the querent will never come back, thus SSD's suggestion.  Changing the answer outright is kind of a kick in the pants to two (or more) people - the answering user, the querent who picked the answer as the best, and anyone who up-voted the answer.  (Thankfully, the final party at least has recourse; they can withdraw their votes on an edit.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With a community wiki, all of these problems persist, except the 'personal slap in the face' the the original answering user.  An answer that was picked as best is changed out from under the querent, and an answer voted for is drastically changed out from under the voters.  Community Wiki answers should still be fundamentally the same answer between edits; if they are encouraged to be totally changed, it wrecks the entire voting structure of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even community wikis should be careful to keep the intent of the original post.  Drastically changing answers, even CWs, is a generally bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So what's the solution that requires code changes?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make this kind of question really work, these types of questions would need to be somehow marked as 'Unable to accept best answer', and 'Always able to retract votes.'  This solves both the problem of a lingering green check mark, and old bad answers sticking around with huge vote counts, all without totally changing an answer (CW or not).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;That code change is never going to happen.  Ever.  I can promise you that.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;  That leaves the only options left to us being editing the top/accepted answer to totally change it (which is a bad idea, even as a wiki, I feel), or continue to just post new answers, hope they get votes, and hope the querent blesses the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which leads me to one of two conclusions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Mr. Freeze Conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first option that I can think of that both avoids totally changing answers of any kind, is to ask-and-self-answer a new question, with the updated information, and close the old question as a duplicate of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Thor's Hammer Conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Barring the Mr. Freeze conclusion, perhaps these questions just do not belong here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2016-03-08T06:53:58.573" LastActivityDate="2016-03-08T06:53:58.573" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6195" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-09T12:41:51.313" Score="13" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, meta (and the main site to a lesser extent) became a mess with a lot of critics blurting out from every side and people accusing each other of bad things and a lot of other bad stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question is not about any of this.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a really nice community, to be honest. Despite having people sometimes wanting to kill each other with the heaviest RPG book available on the nearby shelf, there are tons of times that people are polite, nice, helpful and in several ways, awesome. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can see glimpses of that in some of our comments and on chat. Even users that get a lot of flak (like the moderators) can have some really nice words here and there, helping an OP or a answer-poster, showing signs of kindness and politeness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I got myself wondering about this. We rarely see those comments/chat lines staying around because the way the SE system works, trying to keep the questions clear out of noise. I can understand that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as RPG players, we are mostly social people. Yes, with some levels of weirdness built-in (all of us. No exceptions), but we are social people. And as social people, most of us enjoy nice, kind words now and then. And, since we are dealing with a hobby here, we are touching things that we personally hold dear - so, seeing someone saying good things about something you like can be a really pleasant experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I think we should take actions to make the kind and nice actions we take - and we do take them - more visible. Let's move the Nice-to-Mean ratio toward the Nice side!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is, how? How to show everyone that strolls around the site that we are not basement-dwelling, light-avoiding anti-social trolls? How do we promote kindness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="11162" LastEditDate="2016-03-09T15:21:32.050" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T04:16:28.853" Title="How to make the community's Nice Actions more visible?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6195" CreationDate="2016-03-10T05:44:03.903" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Instead of changing our policies about comments which don't fit Stack-wide standards, we can simply work to make the comments which do fit our policies nicer. We're already doing this!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Go &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6168/4398&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and help us make our pre-made comments better model the tone we want for the site.&lt;/strong&gt; We need more people doing that work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack is all about getting answers, and comments which don't make suggestions or help with clarification shouldn't stick around any longer than they have to. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;But&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; we can make our clarification and suggestion comments more polite, appreciative, and inviting. Let's do that first and see what happens, before we start challenging policies which are actively helping us avoid flame wars and playstyle disputes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T10:46:12.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6168" CreationDate="2016-03-10T06:25:24.327" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to share some tools and tips I've found useful in making comments be nicer and more useful. If you've got some, please edit them in!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid &quot;you&quot; unless I really mean it. If I'm talking about a generic/theoretical individual who my audience may similar to, I'll re-write it to talk about &quot;users&quot; or &quot;querents&quot; or whatever that group actually is. This makes the comment feel less accusatory, whatever the subject actually is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid &quot;we&quot; unless I really mean it. If I'm talking about a group of people of whom both I and my audience are a part, I'll re-write it to talk about &quot;citizens&quot; or &quot;answerers&quot; or whatever that group actually is. &quot;We&quot; is sometimes presumptuous, or --more often-- sounds like &quot;we the people who are talking to you&quot; rather than &quot;you and I.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Look for opportunities to link to the Help, Tour, and relevant meta posts. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3301/4398&quot;&gt;Abbreviations like [help] and [about]&lt;/a&gt; are &lt;em&gt;awesome&lt;/em&gt; for this. It puts folks in touch with parts of the site they may have missed and helps them understand the context of the suggestions being made. Without that context the site can feel arbitrary and opaque.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If I've got room, I throw in a line about the reason my suggestion is personally helpful to the hearer, like &quot;so answers can better address your specific situation&quot; or &quot;so experts can find your question more easily.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When I'm leaving a comment for a new user, I throw on &quot;Hi, and welcome to RPG.SE!&quot; or something similar at the beginning.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The phrase &quot;a Q&amp;amp;A site rather than a traditional forum&quot; is useful in a ton of contexts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When suggesting a change to a question or answer, use the phrase &quot;please edit.&quot; This alerts folks that a comment response is neither necessary nor sufficient.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Really, avoid the unnecessary &quot;you.&quot; Whenever I can phrase something as &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; behaviour instead of someone else's, I do. I could've made these bullet points say &quot;unless you really mean it&quot; and &quot;if you've got room&quot; and &quot;when you're leaving a comment,&quot; but it's my experience and I can only hope you find it useful; I shouldn't imply I have authority to tell you how to write your comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T06:32:00.390" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6199" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6200" CreationDate="2016-03-10T10:28:57.057" Score="3" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;A recent meta question asked if role-playing in video games is on topic here.  The question was focused on one held question on main, and the answers seamed focused on the question.  But it got me thinking about the scope of the site, and I didn't find an answer on a cursory search of meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is a Role-Playing Game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a line we can draw between a straight up tabletop game with very little role-play elements and a 'traditional' RPG?  Is there a line between friends playing pretend or telling stories around a table and a traditional RPG?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we have those lines of demarcation of 'what is RPG enough to be on topic', what are they?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need those lines if they do not already exist?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not ask this because I have a strong opinion one way or the other, but purely to know the scope of the site.  I do not want to change the scope of the site (in this particular case), just to document where those limits are, if there are any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2016-03-10T22:00:36.473" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T22:00:36.473" Title="Should we define Role-Playing Games" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="35" ClosedDate="2016-03-10T21:31:22.813" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6200" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6199" CreationDate="2016-03-10T10:38:13.777" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, we can't and shouldn't draft a hard definition of RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now we've got a &quot;know it when we see it&quot; sort of attitude, and it works very well at least 95% of the time. The RPG medium is vastly diverse, and historically attempts to define it have been... fraught. Any definition will likely accidentally exclude stuff we really think ought to be on topic, and spark arguments in response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T10:38:13.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6199" CreationDate="2016-03-10T11:03:30.293" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Role-playing games are games where we do role-playing.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's as @BESW rightly said about as much of a definition that we need. It is appropriate to ask a question about roleplaying in game context regardless of the medium used - be it in-person session, Roll20, MUD, LARP, freeform over e-mail or countless others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact current practice shows that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76561/how-deep-information-should-players-have-in-a-political-negotiation-focused-edu&quot;&gt;questions less focused on the &quot;game&quot; part are also OK&lt;/a&gt; (like ones that deal with educational effort or creating a safe psychodrama space), so I would posit that it's the playing of a role that's central to the experience. That said, defining &quot;roleplaying&quot; is even more challenging and we should definitely not attempt to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In regard to the video-game question, it is not for us to decide arbitrarily whether the whole group is on or off topic here - we should consider these edge cases individually and carefully decide whether roleplaying is in the core of the question or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastActivityDate="2016-03-10T11:03:30.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6202" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-11T01:06:46.490" Score="4" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76906/22632&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question has been rightfully closed as a duplicate. However, I feel that some of the answers on the duplicating question are better documented than on the duplicated one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the best course of action in this case? Should the users move their answers to the original question? Given that the original already has an accepted answer and is quite old, I'm not sure how much visibility and votes they would attract.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22632" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-15T06:30:11.377" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T06:30:11.377" Title="Duplicate question with better documented answers" Tags="|discussion|answers|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6202" CreationDate="2016-03-11T02:25:14.753" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are several options here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cleanest might be to reverse the flow on the duplicate closure. If the answers in the new question are better, then this is a definite option. Normal users &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do this though it may be easier with a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; duplicates (not the case here). They can be merged and the answers from the new question can be moved via the merge to the old question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, there is the option of having the users move their answers. This is less than ideal, but does not require any major intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And final finally, you can totally just write a &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer on the original question that integrates the better sources and answers the question better than the old answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T02:25:14.753" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6195" CreationDate="2016-03-11T04:16:28.853" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We use discretion in what we delete and what we don't.  &quot;Niceness&quot; is an ineffable part of the equation.  In somewhat rough order of importance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvotes (more upvotes = more likely to stay)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flags (if it got flags it's likely to go)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Acknowledged obsolescence (&quot;incorporated that,&quot; &quot;thanks&quot;) - done its job&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Age (we try to let 'em ride for a little while)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Relevance (was that &quot;a good point&quot; or &quot;yammering about something tangentially related&quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Niceness (less nice = more deleted) &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Total frivolity/pointlessness (your joke is, usually, not funny)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being part of a huge comment thread (it becomes harder to save it if it's part of a big chunk of comment misuse)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make your &quot;nice&quot; comments stay by making them tick these other checkboxes too.  Or better yet, write a nice answer. Those are forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T04:16:28.853" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6205" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6207" CreationDate="2016-03-11T10:50:22.267" Score="8" ViewCount="264" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shaken is a status effect for Savage Worlds that creates a lot of confusion. We have 5 questions so far that explicitly cover it in some form, and others that mention it in passing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I created a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shaken&lt;/a&gt; tag for it as the use of it in game gets a lot of people confused and I know it would be helpful to be able to search for all the questions covering clarifications as to how and when to use it. However, another user has gone through and removed the tag from all of the questions I added it to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the answer from @BESW and various comments in chat, I believe there is a strong case for the tag's creation and use. There is precedent with other status effects having tags, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hit-points&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hit-points&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hit-points&lt;/a&gt;, and the fact that Shaken is used across a number of systems strengthens the argument for the tag. The fact that the tag use in SE is supposed to be emergent is another strong point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel very strongly this tag is useful, and given that tag use is supposed to be organic and grow naturally, I don't understand why the other user acted in the way they did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-03-14T16:17:18.997" LastActivityDate="2016-03-14T16:17:18.997" Title="Shaken tag for Savage Worlds" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6205" CreationDate="2016-03-11T13:12:12.137" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've edited your tag wiki to not be SW-specific. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=shaken+is%3Aquestion+-%5Bsavage-worlds%5D&quot;&gt;Shaken is used by other games&lt;/a&gt; including Pathfinder, Spycraft, and at least two editions of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T13:12:12.137" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6205" CreationDate="2016-03-11T16:02:10.837" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems fine to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is utility in having it tagged instead of just letting the full-text search find it, as you've said in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It is mentioned in passing in a lot of answers where the question doesn't explicitly cover the mechanic. Having it as a tag would allow you to filter these and find only those questions that explicitly cover an aspect of how to use it –&amp;nbsp;Wibbs&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And tagging is about what's useful and what's inherently the topic of a question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We have niche tags for other games, especially the 100 lb. gorilla that is D&amp;amp;D. Yesterday I saw &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aarakocra&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aarakocra&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aarakocra&lt;/a&gt; created, sighed in a knee-jerk way at its &lt;em&gt;tiniest&lt;/em&gt; of niches, and left it to be because it's fine as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Savage Worlds might have many fewer questions here than some games, but as a core mechanic that is often the direct subject of questions, a tag for the topic seems fitting even if it couldn't apply to other games. But it will certainly apply to more games than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aarakocra&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aarakocra&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aarakocra&lt;/a&gt; ever will, and to more of our current questions at this moment too.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I say let the folksonomy bloom. It is better to let the tagging folksonomy grow slightly wild and then occasionally trim it back&amp;thinsp;—&amp;thinsp;with a commensurately better view of what is used how&amp;thinsp;—&amp;thinsp;than to try to keep it bonsai-like and only growing in controlled ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-03-11T16:02:10.837" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6205" CreationDate="2016-03-12T01:03:24.277" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thought I'd chime in as the &quot;other user&quot; here. First of all, Wibbs, I didn't mean to whack at your effort. I'm sorry if it seemed like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are a very useful tool in filtering the content that interests you from other stuff that doesn't. Here, in rpg.se, that distinction mostly occurs among game systems and settings, with exceptions being much more general topics like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-advice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-advice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-advice&lt;/a&gt; rather than specific. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a very specific mechanic of a single game happens to get its own tag, nobody follows it, it just sits there. People follow the game/system/setting tag, but see all these very-niche keyword tags so they take example and make more of them. At some point it gets confusing which tag stands for what.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such tags also squat on a word. Many other games could use the same word for completely different concepts, and it may be impossible to list all of them in a tag wiki properly. Besides, if you list the tag's questions, you may end up with a set of completely unrelated questions, or not find what you are looking for, thinking that it doesn't exist. A good example is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt; tag that is dominated by the D&amp;amp;D concept of powers, but could well have been used by a number of superhero games out there with wildly different concepts of what &quot;powers&quot; are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's why I think such tags are unnecessary at best, and polluting if they happen to get out of hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe we would have a tidier and more usable tagspace if we clean up such tags. IMO, the best practice would be to mention the related game concept in the title of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a specific sub-part of a game gathers enough focused attention to warrant its own tag with some followers, then the better approach would be to namespace the tag to the specific game it refers to, so that the collection of questions it represents can show some consistency. So, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-powers&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds-shaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds-shaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds-shaken&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shaken&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shaken&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shaken&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having a more understandable and usable tagspace would make the site better for all of us, don't you think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="554" LastActivityDate="2016-03-12T01:03:24.277" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6209" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6210" CreationDate="2016-03-13T10:45:23.750" Score="2" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;So our DM ended on a cliffhanger last time. We just got to see the boss we're gonna fight and got a few very vague clues towards what it was... including the DM throwing over his DM barricade thing resulting in me getting a peak view on the paige of the source book he is using.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I'm an extreme munchkin I want to find out what it is and I was about to ask a question on RPG stackexchange, but I wanna make sure that I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than me having to be really ashamed of doing such a dirty thing, &lt;strong&gt;are there any site rules that prevent me from asking a pure metagaming question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2016-03-17T19:57:31.593" LastActivityDate="2016-03-17T19:57:31.593" Title="Are very &quot;metagamey&quot; questions allowed?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6209" CreationDate="2016-03-13T17:34:10.153" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What you're going to use it for doesn't affect whether it's on-topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not here to enforce your personal moral code or make sure that you don't use neutral information from the site to do dastardly things to your group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind though that once there is an answer, your question lives forever. If you don't want your GM to ever discover your duplicity, you might want to avoid asking questions in a public forum that's instantly indexed by Google. Even if you don't mention the reasons in the question, consider the possibility of the GM putting 2 and 2 together a week, month, or years later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're OK with the interpersonal risk, it's not really our concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, if you asked &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question on the main site and changed &quot;is it on topic&quot; to &quot;is this a good idea&quot;, expect to get a very different answer than this. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-03-13T21:08:51.497" LastActivityDate="2016-03-13T21:08:51.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6211" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2016-03-15T20:50:28.420" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily concerned with or seeking guidance for an individual question on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions with this tag are intended to discuss an individual question (post). This may reflect concern with an existing question, confusion with actions taken on a question, or guidance sought prospectively on formulating a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T17:26:51.780" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T17:26:51.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6212" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2016-03-15T20:50:28.420" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily concerned with or seeking guidance for an individual question on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange." OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T17:26:51.780" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T17:26:51.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6213" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6214" CreationDate="2016-03-15T20:57:47.697" Score="5" ViewCount="1543" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77169/23970&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77169/23970&lt;/a&gt; isn't a great question for the site. One step worse than a &quot;read the book to me,&quot; it's a &quot;read the ToC to me&quot; question. However...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would &lt;strong&gt;What are the official (WotC) playable races in 5e?&lt;/strong&gt; be an acceptable question for the site? The obvious answer would be a listing table listing races &lt;em&gt;and sources&lt;/em&gt;. Perhaps a community wiki? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6166/23970&quot;&gt;(What else are community wikis good for, anyway?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I know we shy away from list questions. But the problem with list questions isn't the enumeration of the list, it's the lack of discrimination among list elements, when submitted as single answers (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4987/23970&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;). If the questions starts as CW, does that circumvent the problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77247/23970&quot;&gt;here's the question and answer&lt;/a&gt;. Enjoy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was Community Wiki for a while, but after months of getting comment-pings asking &quot;should this be included&quot; and &quot;how's this edit look&quot; I went ahead and reclaimed authorship. That doesn't seem to have done anything to dissuade good edits from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-11-30T15:22:19.210" LastActivityDate="2017-11-30T15:22:19.210" Title="Where to find races and classes in 5e" Tags="|discussion|questions|community-wiki|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6213" CreationDate="2016-03-15T21:11:14.617" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this might be a good use of a single-answer Community Wiki, as the list would be relatively stable and wouldn't change simply by a drive-by reader's opinion, and would only need to be updated when new material is released. Having it be a CW would make it easier for low-rep users to do that updating, and also give a stronger signal that anonymous edits are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regular users would, of course, do the normal thing and check up on the changes when someone edits it, so I expect it wouldn't get out of hand or messy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The value add here, that makes it worthwhile hosting, is being a canonical list of playable races &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; sources. And remember: having a list as an answer isn't the sin questions must avoid, it's having an unmaintainable and indefinitely long list. At any one time, the list of &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question would be finite, and very easy to maintain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(That difference between Good and Bad lists is true regardless of whether the page is CW or not — a CW endlessly and opinionatedly edited is just as bad as an endless list of opinion-based answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, it sounds good to me. It's far better than getting new “so what races are available &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;?” questions every time a new AL season starts…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-03-15T21:19:24.277" LastActivityDate="2016-03-15T21:19:24.277" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6215" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6216" CreationDate="2016-03-18T14:49:23.237" Score="16" ViewCount="395" Body="&lt;p&gt;In response to this question:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77364/if-you-throw-a-melee-weapon-with-the-thrown-property-can-you-still-use-your-two&quot;&gt;Are you still two-weapon fighting if you&amp;#39;ve thrown one of your two weapons and are no longer holding it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A comment I made was responded to by the OP with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Actually, I knew the answer to the question but thought it an&#xA;  ambiguous enough scenario that it'd be helpful to the community. I&#xA;  knew I'd get answers pretty quick too so I didn't bother writing my&#xA;  own. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, the quoted rules he put in his question included:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the OP asking us to re-word the rules he posted so that some hypothetical person who doesn't understand them suddenly does?  How can we be sure our re-wording won't confuse someone who otherwise would have understood the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been told here before to not ask hypothetical questions - ask questions about a problem you have, not one you are trying to invent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So which is it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11818" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-23T09:09:45.990" LastActivityDate="2021-07-23T09:09:45.990" Title="When are the rules clear enough to not need a RPG.SE question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6215" CreationDate="2016-03-18T15:03:12.837" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm of two minds about this one. (Disclosure: I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/77365/23970&quot;&gt;answered it&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, all of the rules required to interpret it are included on the same page, even in the same named section: &quot;Two-Weapon Fighting&quot;, PHB p.195. That's usually my litmus test for making this a &quot;read the book to me&quot; question and getting my downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the act of throwing a weapon &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; put you in a state of no longer meeting the prerequisites for TWF. I could see someone being concerned that the RAW require melee-then-throw while disallowing throw-then-either, as the first would &quot;break&quot; TWF.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bonus:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On someone else's hand, &lt;del&gt;OP has now commented that he had no particular question about it and asked it prospectively, which isn't great. I've also been told--and agree it's good policy--to ask about &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; problems/confusion, not just hypothetical.&lt;/del&gt; OP struggled with this at one point, as he mentions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6217/23970&quot;&gt;in another answer&lt;/a&gt;, so it's a real--if, perhaps, small--problem to ask about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it rises to the level of flagging for deletion. It's not horrible, offensive, duplicate. &lt;del&gt;One might argue it's off-topic &lt;em&gt;because OP didn't really have that problem,&lt;/em&gt; but that's a bridge too far for me.&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote your conscience, though--this may be one question where the score appropriately hovers somewhere low.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-03-18T20:21:54.150" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6217" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6215" CreationDate="2016-03-18T17:23:14.757" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked the question because I thought it ambiguous enough that it could use a definitive answer, in the event that anyone else comes along with the same question -- i.e., &quot;how am I benefiting from two weapon fighting if I'm only holding one weapon after I throw my other weapon?&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the features of this site is that you can ask a question and answer it yourself as part of your initial post. While I didn't answer it myself, I had intended to (I didn't have the time to also write up the answer).  I also knew it would be answered fairly quickly, as it's a fairly straightforward question, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/77365/9399&quot;&gt;answer I received&lt;/a&gt; was along the lines of what I expected.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will point out that it's not entirely hypothetical -- while I was fairly certain of the rule, and said so in the comments, I still couldn't be 100% certain I was reading it right.  It's probably not a great question considering it's explained within the rules. My thought process was that if it gave me pause for consideration, then it might come up again when it gives someone else pause for consideration, and if that makes it a valuable question to at least one other person then it has served its purpose.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine if it's not an excellent question for this format but I don't think its off topic or generally a bad question, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-03-18T17:23:14.757" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5951" CreationDate="2016-03-22T17:19:47.297" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following merger and rearrangement has been performed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Synonyms are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storytelling-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storytelling-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storytelling-system&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Synonyms are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-god-machine&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-god-machine&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-god-machine&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The few questions previously tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; were also merged into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; to preserve their correct edition tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Synonyms are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/owod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;owod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;owod&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/classic-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;classic-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;classic-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wod&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are now no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod&lt;/a&gt; tags, nor a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; tag. They are also not tag synonyms, as that would encourage inaccurate tagging (i.e., when different askers assume the lack of edition marker means “current” and others assume it means 1st edition). Askers typing any will be presented with the CoD 1e and 2e tags and under normal circumstances will be prompted to make the choice between them. (If the tags get recreated and question clarification fails to keep them non-existent, we may need to revisit this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wikis have been minimally updated to reflect the changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One notable wiki change: the tag wikis no longer recommend a “setting” tag be used for pan-edition questions — such questions were formerly officially advised to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, but that was never actually done in practice and the tag was empty before the rearrangement was done. There is now currently no “setting” tag for the old or new WoD — setting questions should use the game being played instead, or multiple where overlap is involved. (This is consistent with our tagging practices for games with tight binding between setting and rules editions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that note, our major *(W)oD tagging guidance on meta is now obsolete (formerly contained in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4773/lets-get-a-clear-consensus-on-the-use-of-nwod-vs-nwod-god-machine&quot;&gt;Lets get a clear consensus on the use of [nwod] vs [nwod-god-machine]&lt;/a&gt;). Tagging guidance should either be redone in a meta post or (more ideally) be clearly presented in the three tags' wikis. Minimal guidance has been added in a &lt;strong&gt;Related tags&lt;/strong&gt; section of the three tags' wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-03-22T17:27:30.477" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6219" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-23T03:39:20.653" Score="10" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in finding out if &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/19273/a-descriptive-damage-hack-for-dungeon-world-world-of-dungeons&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this hack for Dungeon World (DW)&lt;/a&gt; works well or not.  Asking &quot;Hey, what do you guys think about X?&quot; is definitely not a good fit for this site.  Instead, maybe I could ask questions like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would this rule work well in DW?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77611/how-does-the-descriptive-damage-hack-affect-dungeon-world&quot;&gt;What repercussions would this rule have in DW?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any published works in the larger DW/etc. world that use this kind of rule?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are any of these good questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I even going about this the right way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-06T02:23:22.620" Title="I'd like to ask a question to explore a topic" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6219" CreationDate="2016-03-23T07:41:53.957" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me this is similar to the types of issue we have around questions asking about homebrew mechanics. It's very easy for those to be badly worded and/or answered, but the way to avoid both is to limit answers to those from people who have actual experience of what you are asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in this case, I think your question would work if it was of the format - 'How does this hack impact the way Dungeon World plays', along with a clear statement that only answers from people who have actually used the hack are acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2016-03-23T07:41:53.957" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6168" CreationDate="2016-03-23T16:22:21.653" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't signal edits&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bryan's got a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454/23970&quot;&gt;great post&lt;/a&gt; on the topic, which I often link to both in edit summaries and in comments. Something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hi, [user]. There's no need to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454&quot;&gt;signal edits&lt;/a&gt;, as the revision history is easily visible. (Just click on the &amp;quot;edited X ago&amp;quot; link.) In fact, it's preferable that posts read as a seamless presentation of your final ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optionally ending with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's why I've made the edit I did. Please check my work to be sure I've preserved your original meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-03-24T00:21:27.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6223" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-27T06:14:31.533" Score="6" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new to SE as a contributor. In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/77671/28034&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; I didn't initially think about the time to relay information to other players, but several other people pointed it out, so I added a note to my answer as well, in hopes of making a better complete answer. I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; that's consistent with what I've read about making answers stand on their own, but I've also seen complaints about copying answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: Did I do the right thing according to community standards? Should I have included some form of attribution, like &quot;as others have said&quot; or &quot;as Name pointed out&quot;? And would your answer change if the amount I copied was larger or smaller?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-03-27T13:55:51.107" Title="What are the customs for incorporating other answers into your own?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6224" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6223" CreationDate="2016-03-27T13:43:22.483" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is basically a big made-up game that drives people to compete or collaborate to provide the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; possible answer to any question the site accepts. That &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; means the most complete answer, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;every answer should independently fully answer the question&lt;/a&gt;. This encourages &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3571/what-should-i-do-if-the-most-valuable-response-came-in-a-comment-rather-than-an/3572#3572&quot;&gt;absorbing material left sitting around in comments&lt;/a&gt;. Absorbing material from other answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4837/1204&quot;&gt;is also fair game&lt;/a&gt;: you're making a more complete and helpful answer, good job. On principle, everything's fine here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the rub: &lt;em&gt;don't half-arse it.&lt;/em&gt; That's why you're feeling like you did something wrong. If you just add an inferior summary of another answer, your answer will look inferior and half-arsed, and you'll just be making the other answer look good by comparison. &lt;strong&gt;Don't update your answer just to &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;keep up with the Joneses&lt;/a&gt;. If you're going to cover new material in your answer, make a &lt;em&gt;stellar&lt;/em&gt; treatment of it that you can be proud of, and that we can be grateful you contributed.&lt;/strong&gt; Beat the other answer by a league. If you don't, you're probably just dragging your answer down, and you won't be winning the made-up game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll feel better for putting your whole heart and soul into making that amendment &lt;em&gt;awesome.&lt;/em&gt; You'll feel okay for leaving your answer as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, for crediting other users: that's only &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt; when you're obviously using their work, because you're falling into the terms of our site's CC-BY-SA license. Otherwise, it's discretionary. Provide it if you feel like they deserve it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3430/when-is-it-proper-to-thank-another-user/3431#3431&quot;&gt;Make it short and snappy and out of the way&lt;/a&gt;. As a rule of thumb, if you're legally obligated to cite someone else under CC-BY-SA, you probably half-arsed it. If you did a really good job, you might want to thank someone for putting you onto it anyway, because you can stand proud that you worked hard &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;and defer to the people who helped you get there&lt;/a&gt; without feeling like a cheapskate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also obligatory (not that you did this, good job): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3454/dont-signal-your-edits-in-text&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;. If you're going to update your answer to cover more stuff, don't include an &lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; section. That's being lazy. Revise your answer so that the update is just a natural part of it. It'll look better and flow better, and there'll probably be other parts of your answer that'll be more awesome for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-03-27T13:55:51.107" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6225" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6227" CreationDate="2016-03-29T03:08:18.390" Score="6" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just based on what I've seen so far, it seems like people generally are more excited about upvoting answers than questions, with the effect that for most questions with a good answer, that answer ends up with more points than the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrariwise, then, it seems like questions with a high score (so presumably of interest to the community) but with a low top answer score might have the most room for meaningful contribution. (Obviously so do new questions, and I do answer those when I can.) This general idea is what the &quot;Unanswered&quot; view is for, but many look like they're that way for a reason, usually dealing with games I can't help with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, question: is there a way to filter or sort by questions where the question score is at least N greater than the top answer score (or perhaps the sum of answer scores)? Frame challenges welcome if I'm missing something, but I'd appreciate it if you'd include a yes or no first. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-03-29T04:10:18.390" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T06:46:50.667" Title="Is there a way to sort questions by ones that have higher question scores than answer scores?" Tags="|support|questions|answers|search|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6225" CreationDate="2016-03-29T04:09:17.587" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a simple way using the site's own search feature, but the site's raw database is cloned regularly and can be accessed via SQL queries at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;StackExchange Data Explorer&lt;/a&gt;. I couldn't find an existing query that exactly matched what you're looking for with &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/queries?order_by=popular&amp;amp;q=score&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a cursory search&lt;/a&gt;, but I did find &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/43345/popular-questions-without-nice-answers&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Popular Questions without Nice Answers&lt;/a&gt; which says it returns&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;All non-CW questions with at least 1000 views but no non-CW answer scored at least 10.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the results of running that, there are a lot of well-scored questions with low-scored answers to trawl through, so it's might be close enough to what you're thinking of to suit the practical purpose of finding questions with a lot of room for contribution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have facility with writing SQL though, you could &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/new&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;write your own query&lt;/a&gt; that returns more precisely the results that are questions with highest answer score lower than the question score.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-03-29T04:09:17.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6227" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6225" CreationDate="2016-03-29T04:17:21.347" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a job for &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange Data Explorer&lt;/a&gt; (&quot;SEDE&quot; for short), like SevenSidedDie pointed out! Search can only do so much. Stack Exchange makes full data dumps weekly to SEDE which are fully searchable using SQL, which lets us do all kinds of advanced data searching, like this thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've written up an SEDE query for this. It's a big'un, but it's been a while since I wrote SQL and I had fun stretching my proverbial SQL muscles out with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/462091/questions-that-outscore-their-top-answer?MinimumQuestionScore=10&amp;amp;MinimumDifferenceInPoints=3&amp;amp;Tag=%25&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Questions that outscore their top answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Excludes questions that have been closed, deleted, and/or locked. Results will be up to a week out of date, because SEDE's data updates weekly (not live).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These parameters for customising this query:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MinimumQuestionScore&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; only shows questions with at least this score. &lt;em&gt;(Setting this below 1 may break the query because of Qual%, explained below.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MinimumDifferenceInPoints&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; only shows questions that outscore their top-scoring answer by &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; this much.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tag&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; Filter a specific tag (thanks to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/15469/miniman&quot;&gt;Miniman&lt;/a&gt; for the first version). You have these options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave it as the default of &lt;code&gt;%&lt;/code&gt; to just grab all questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Specify an exact tag name (e.g. &lt;code&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;fate-core&lt;/code&gt;) to get questions with that tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &lt;code&gt;%&lt;/code&gt; wildcard to search for partial names. The &lt;code&gt;%&lt;/code&gt; will match against any or no characters. &lt;code&gt;%world&lt;/code&gt; matches any tag ending in &quot;world&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/apocalypse-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;apocalypse-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;apocalypse-world&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-world&lt;/a&gt;), &lt;code&gt;fate%&lt;/code&gt; matches any beginning with &quot;fate&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;), and &lt;code&gt;%dnd%&lt;/code&gt; matches anything with &quot;dnd&quot; in it anywhere (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/odnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;odnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;odnd&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apart from the score of the question &amp;amp; the top answer, I've added a couple of other data points that may be of interest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Score diff&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; the amount of points by which the question outscored its top answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Qual%&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; the percentage of (top answer's score / question's score), i.e. the &lt;em&gt;relative difference&lt;/em&gt; between the two. &lt;strong&gt;The query sorts by this by default.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I added the Qual% column because the score diff, as it turns out, can also be big just from having a whole lot of points, such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8002/how-do-i-get-my-pcs-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T06:46:50.667" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6228" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-30T15:10:41.407" Score="10" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to paste in a Twitter URL and get a nicely formatted quote with a link back to the original, the Twitter user, date, etc. Lately—primarily due to the convenience of reaching D&amp;amp;D 5e designers—we've been &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77738/war-caster-feat-and-green-flame-blade-is-it-legit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;citing tweets&lt;/a&gt; by hand, and it could look a lot better if it were automatic in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-16T20:38:44.513" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T20:38:44.513" Title="Feature Request: Citing Tweets" Tags="|feature-request|citations|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6229" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-03-31T20:17:45.030" Score="7" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before I post on RPG and get closed out for being too opinion-based I wanted to ask here on Meta if my question is appropriate.  A friend came up with a character build in 5e that he believes is too over-powered and will disrupt game balance and create too many issues at the table.  From my perspective as a DM, I would have no problem with the character (note that I wouldn't actually be the DM for this character), but he is insistent that it's too powerful.  The question I want to ask is, &quot;Is this &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; too powerful?&quot; (very opinion based) and/or &quot;will this disrupt the game in a way that will create irreparable harm and skew every combat in favor of this one player, and if so how can a DM mitigate that disruption without creating other issues?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure if I post it it will be closed as too opinion based, but I know there can be good subjective answer based on experience to this question.  I also know that without the full context of the question (which I will add when I post the question), it is difficult to tell here if the question is too subjective.  What is the best way to approach these types of borderline opinion-based questions that &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; have great Good Subjective answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastActivityDate="2016-04-06T02:29:15.030" Title="Is this question too opinion based?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6230" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-01T03:21:20.713" Score="8" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;So here's what the Editing Help says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When should I edit posts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any time you feel you can make the post better, and are inclined to do so. Editing is encouraged!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Some common reasons to edit are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;to add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged - try to make the post significantly better when you edit, correcting all problems that you observe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But having just had an edit rejected as &quot;makes no sense as an edit&quot; (which I then put in a comment, which was then deleted), I suspect that the standard is actually &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; &quot;any time you feel you can make the post better.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last line especially confuses me; I would consider most spelling/grammatical fixes to be trivial unless you're missing a &quot;not&quot; or half a sentence. So I think this may have set me into thinkiing that edits should be more substantial than is normally accepted here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is: &lt;strong&gt;How do I know when to edit someone's question or answer vs. commenting and suggesting they do so?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2016-04-01T03:33:54.430" Title="Editing someone else's answer vs. commenting" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6230" CreationDate="2016-04-01T03:31:58.747" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think I'm kind of zeroing in on something, though it's still a little fuzzy. here goes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To add links and page numbers, and when appropriate, to cite exact rules instead of vague paraphrases&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To address issues of wording, grammar, or spelling that make the intent less clear (though it should still be pretty clear)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To update as rules and errata are released&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To correct specific factual errors like wrong page numbers or rules quotations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Comment&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you think the answer is mostly good but you wish it would address an additional point&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When the intended meaning is sufficiently unclear that you're not confident you can fix it yourself&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you want to be more polite about correcting a factual error in an otherwise okay post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Downvote&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When an answer is factually wrong or bad advice or doesn't answer the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Add Your Own Answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you have enough to say not covered in other posts that it's worth it; if it's mostly based on another answer plus your own spin, comment on that one instead and hope they agree&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Overall&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit to improve by &lt;em&gt;removing problems&lt;/em&gt;; comment to suggest improving by &lt;em&gt;adding content&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="28034" LastEditDate="2016-04-01T03:33:54.430" LastActivityDate="2016-04-01T03:33:54.430" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6232" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-04T03:40:41.040" Score="-6" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now there's a ton of old game-recs in the CV queue. There's no great urgency to closing those (per the original discussions that put them off topic), and dumping a bunch of them in from a search is not only annoying, but tends to lead to hasty decisions because of the repetitiveness. In case one of them might be salvageable, this is not the way to cultivate that possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T04:59:54.930" Title="Please do not flood queues with old posts found by searching without first clearing the flood with Meta" Tags="|discussion|flagging|review|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6232" CreationDate="2016-04-04T03:48:56.413" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Larger sites deal with a high count of review items on a regular basis and it works, because no single user is responsible for reviewing the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; queue and the system is built with that in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewers can just take bites out of it, and bow out when decision fatigue rears its head. Pressing &lt;kbd&gt;Skip&lt;/kbd&gt; when at all unsure helps a lot in that regard, too. Others will pick it up and take care of a few more, until the whole queue has been reviewed. Crowdsourcing at work!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much preferable for the queue to balloon occasionally, and be handled by the normal crowdsourcing mechanisms it has for precisely such events, than for people to &lt;em&gt;refrain&lt;/em&gt; from flagging when they see something that deserves a flag. All that refraining results in is different people having to—redundantly—each stop and ponder how much flagging is “too much,” wasting user energy that would be better spent just about anywhere else on-site or off, just so that we can, inexplicably, prevent the flood-management measures designed into the system already from needing to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearing each flood with meta (and then spinning off metas that seek to define what is and isn't a flood!) would be, for similar reasons, far more wasteful and inefficient than just using flags and the review queues as they are designed to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that on a site like this, where we have the luxury of a review-flag-notice-free page appearance the majority of the time, it can be annoying to see that count jump an order of magnitude more than usual. That reflex to conclude that something is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; with it jumping a magnitude is understandable. I know it and understand it because I get that feeling and that reflex myself. But it's not a useful reflex or correct conclusion, and is best responded to with a moment's breath, a reminder that “it doesn't have to be &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt;”, and a cup of tea if one is so inclined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As of this moment, the queue is down to 5 items.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-04-04T04:08:51.107" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T04:08:51.107" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6234" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6232" CreationDate="2016-04-04T04:32:35.317" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm the one who put those questions into the close vote queue, so I figured I should say my piece.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were game-recs &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; other old questions there, and I &lt;em&gt;didn't&lt;/em&gt; dump them in from search. I'll get back to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find it so annoying to deal with, I encourage you to leave the review queue alone at those times. There's plenty of other people to cover for you. If you feel you're being hasty (as in, making poor reviews), please step back from the reviews and get a drink and do something more personally important to you. You avoiding review fatigue is important, the site getting good reviews is important, so it's a win/win if you step back when the review queue's fatiguing you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree there's no urgency in closing them. There is, however, &lt;em&gt;importance&lt;/em&gt; in curating our site, and because our questions are timeless we can do that basically whenever. If we only leave curation 'til it's &lt;em&gt;urgent,&lt;/em&gt; I can't imagine what condition our site would be in &amp;mdash; it'd probably be a cesspool by then and you and I would be long gone. So, yeah, it's not urgent, but that doesn't matter or suggest we shouldn't be closing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, how those appeared was that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6227/1204&quot;&gt;they showed up in this query&lt;/a&gt;. That query shows up a number of places where our site can be improved. The low %'s showed up a number of questions that needed closure &amp;mdash; some were discussiony, some were game recs &amp;mdash; and closed questions don't show up in the query. So, I voted to close them to clear them out so we could focus on the more important stuff in that query.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also just vote to close poor quality, discussiony or off-topic questions whenever I find them, whether old or new. This happens to be one of those occasions, and I happened to find several.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I appreciate your concern for the review queues, I'm &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; going to clear my close votes with Meta first and ask for permission. I'm not going to do that for twenty questions the same reason I wouldn't ask it for one &amp;mdash; I already have that permission, and any effort asking it and getting it pre-reviewed and approved (or denied) is likely to be as much if not more effort than just casting the close vote and getting it reviewed to begin with (which you'd then have to do as well anyway).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find a question that needs to be closed, I vote to close it, others need to review it (but no individual has any obligation to do so, including you), there's nothing more to it than that. If you find that annoys you, then fine, but I'm not going to stop curating the site just because you're annoyed by the review queues getting content &amp;mdash; if you don't want to review them, don't review them and leave them to someone else. Relax and find something else to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from that: if I happen to put a large number of questions into the close review queue that &lt;strong&gt;shouldn't be closed,&lt;/strong&gt; please do call me out on it. Flag me for moderator attention on any of my posts (&quot;this person's filling the review queues up with junk that shouldn't be there, please have a word with them&quot;), ping me in chat, mention it on Meta (which I pay active attention to), whatever seems like an appropriate way to get me to cut it out. Do the same for anyone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also don't know what you mean by cultivating the possibility of salvageability &amp;mdash; I'm not trying to do that, I'm getting closed questions that should be closed. If you think something &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; salvageable, well, now there's eyeballs on it and an &lt;kbd&gt;Edit&lt;/kbd&gt; button right there in the review actions panel. Now's as good a time as any to try to salvage it, and I've salvaged multiple questions myself out of the close vote queue this way, when I sure wasn't going to see them any other way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-04-04T04:59:54.930" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6235" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-04T05:13:10.063" Score="9" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;These two questions seem like they're both about fundamentally the same thing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/29690/1204&quot;&gt;How to avoid players using the same Approaches?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/66899/1204&quot;&gt;How do I prevent PCs from spamming their top approach in every situation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm asking meta because I have a conflict of interest here. Usually I'd be inclined to keep the most useful question/answer set open and close the other, but I have my own answer on one of those giving me bias. As a result I wish to excuse myself from the decision making process about what to do, but I do want to bring this to the community's attention so action can be taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T20:52:00.013" Title="We have two questions about the Fate Accelerated top approach issue. How should we handle this?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6236" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6229" CreationDate="2016-04-05T04:52:26.940" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I hope this answer qualifies as a frame-challenge, because it's not going to actually answer your question:  &lt;strong&gt;Ask it!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At time of writing, your rep on RPG.SE is nearly 6,000.  You're not a newbie who refuses to learn the format with a history of closed and deleted posts.  You're clearly a contributing member in good standing:  One question that &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; not be a good fit for the site won't hurt you.  If it does turn out to be closed, it happens.  If it's downvoted so severely that you're ashamed to have it on your profile, you can always delete it later, but if it's enough of an edge-case that you're asking this Meta question about it, that's not likely.  On the other hand, it might be well-received and you might get some helpful guidance, either as to why the build is considered overpowered or why it's just fine (and how to explain that case to your friend).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; a newbie with a history of closed and deleted posts, however, I'd suggest you not ask it yet, as your account could be just one more bad post away from losing some site functionality.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14948" LastActivityDate="2016-04-05T04:52:26.940" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6237" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6219" CreationDate="2016-04-06T02:23:22.620" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&lt;/a&gt;. I can't really add much to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to your proposed questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Define &amp;quot;work well&amp;quot; please; as in what are you looking for the rule to accomplish. Without knowing your objective we don't know if the potential outcome of the proposed rule is a good thing for you or a bad thing for you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Better, but you should focus the scope, as in repercussions for what in particular.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This one is a pure factual question: &amp;quot;I want to do X. Does anyone know of a published rule that does X?&amp;quot; As such this is a perfect fit for the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I know nothing about DW and the linked information is way to long for me to bother reading (there's a hint right there) but a question that may be a good fit for the site is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am interested in a more descriptive damage system for DW along the lines of what is described here[link]. A summary of this system is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;5 line summary&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would anyone with experience of this or a similar modification please provide feed back on if this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Makes combat more or less deadly for PCs&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is quicker or slower to run&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Has knock on effects of the relative power of hackers versus spellcasters&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-04-06T02:23:22.620" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6229" CreationDate="2016-04-06T02:29:15.030" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Is this actually too powerful?&amp;quot; (very opinion based) and/or &amp;quot;will this disrupt the game in a way that will create irreparable harm and skew every combat in favor of this one player, and if so how can a DM mitigate that disruption without creating other issues?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are not good questions - they are bad-subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a question along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A player has come up with a build that can do X, Y &amp;amp; Z. he is concerned that this will be too powerful because of X, Y &amp;amp; Z.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this level of power out of line with other characters of the same level and in what ways?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is moving it more towards good-subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-04-06T02:29:15.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6239" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-06T16:50:06.243" Score="-12" ViewCount="358" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm not sure if this is the proper area to post this question. Please inform me to move it where appropriate.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it proper for a moderator to tell a user &lt;strong&gt;&quot;we're not your shrinks.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a &quot;discussion&quot; about politeness (&quot;Be Nice&quot; principle) no less...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need better and clearer standards in recruiting mods and in evaluating their performance? What about community input?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10201" LastActivityDate="2016-04-10T15:08:16.453" Title="RPG moderators behavior standards" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6239" CreationDate="2016-04-06T22:56:55.477" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;In one of many message you wrote to the moderators regarding your temporary suspension for repeated violations of the site's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;, you defended the behaviour in question by saying that you believe everyone is prejudiced and holds grudges, implying that accusing people of that shouldn't be a problem since you believe it's true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we responded there: you can hold whatever beliefs you want, but when a user defends prohibited behaviour by basically saying it's OK because they're a raging misanthrope, we are going to quite correctly point out that when evaluating users' behaviour on the site their psychological state is not our concern, nor our problem, nor even remotely relevant to our duty to temporarily suspend repeat violators of the site's code of conduct. We are, in short, not professionally interested in the mental state that makes you believe your actions were justified. Name-dropping various first-year college Psych textbook material isn't going to make us more interested in engaging with the life philosophy behind the violations, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was “we're not your shrinks” the most delicate way of telling you to knock it off with the misapplied pop-psychology self-justifications? Probably not. It's a bit shoot-from-the-hip at best. But we're only human, and don't like being repeatedly ignored or having our Voice of Mod instructions on how to behave in the future treated like an &lt;em&gt;argument&lt;/em&gt; you can somehow win by playing enough word games. Our patience with such shenanigans has limits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to repeat for the umpteeth time: We don't care why you feel compelled or justified to behave contrary to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; policy. Don't. Don't call people names, don't call people prejudiced, don't accuse people of holding grudges. In short, &lt;strong&gt;don't make any dispute over site &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; personal by talking about the &lt;em&gt;person&lt;/em&gt; you are in a dispute with&lt;/strong&gt;. Stick to constructively critiquing posts, not people, and you will do better here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And when in doubt — at all — just don't comment. Go do something else constructive on the site or elsewhere in your life instead of indulging in a possible policy violation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/support&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;support&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;support&lt;/a&gt;, the place to bring this inquiry is the Contact Us link at the bottom of every page, which bypasses the site's moderators and goes to Stack Exchange's team of Community Managers (CMs). CMs can help you with moderator issues, including reviewing your suspension or reviewing private messages regarding that suspension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T23:32:33.147" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6241" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6242" CreationDate="2016-04-07T21:14:12.400" Score="13" ViewCount="246" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be more specific:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/78349/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/78349/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm talking about change №3 by mzyzplk -&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;When did that happen&quot; - this line was removed by moderator - but actually, I feel that this was an interesting, and quite organic part of the question - it forms context and adds life to it. I never played 5e, but sometimes become interested about some minor design features. Also, it is interesting to know WHEN was the followers feature dropped from DnD as part of character development. So - at least for me - that removed question feels relevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is it ethical to redo edits of other moderators? Or better way would be starting new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27747" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-04-09T19:46:45.200" Title="I feel that moderator removed interesting part of question while editing - would it be ethical to undo his edit?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6241" CreationDate="2016-04-07T21:47:03.143" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do think this should be asked separately, and it was good to remove.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's two questions there: one's a very immediate, useful-right-now mechanical question answerable by anyone with D&amp;amp;D 5e expertise. The other's a more curiosity-oriented question that doesn't have the same useful-right-now impact, and requires an entirely different set of expertise (understanding fighters through the editions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those two questions hold each other back being asked together, because people who don't know or aren't confident on one will hold off on the other. Also, for the sake of the history question, it's probably better off we find out what &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; happen &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; asking when it happened. (Did they really lose the ability to get followers? Did it get moved instead? Don't know.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the matter of whether it's ethical to undo edits of other moderators: yes, sure, they're humans like the rest of us and aren't perfect at editing. Just be careful of two things: (a) make sure they weren't trying to end an edit war, (b) make sure you're definitely improving the question and, if you're rolling back an edit, make sure it definitely wasn't improving things (but this applies to any kind of editing, even not involving moderators).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're not sure, you can totally ask on meta (like you did here, good question!) or ping them in comments expressing your uncertainty about some part of their edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-04-07T21:47:03.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6241" CreationDate="2016-04-07T23:05:19.403" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Like @dopplegreener said, those are two separate questions and since that part of the question was basically represented with four words, I cut them to keep answers focused on your core problem.  If you really want a history-of-gaming question about it you can ask it.  Hint, the answer is &quot;they stopped giving followers automatically as a class feature in later editions of D&amp;amp;D.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-04-09T19:46:45.200" LastActivityDate="2016-04-09T19:46:45.200" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6244" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6245" CreationDate="2016-04-08T16:52:50.833" Score="6" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; on the main site appear to still get the banner defined in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3297/permanent-banner-for-game-recommendation-tag&quot;&gt;another meta question&lt;/a&gt; saying&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question, please adhere to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, the rules for subjective questions as outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;our rules for game recommendations&lt;/a&gt;. All responses must cite actual experience or reference others' experiences!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This banner is outdated and gives the impression that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; might still be on topic (which &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;they are not&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;), and should therefore be changed to clearly state that they are not and link to that Meta post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5843" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-04-15T13:03:15.463" Title="Questions tagged [game-recommendation] still show the old banner" Tags="|support|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6244" CreationDate="2016-04-08T17:27:36.630" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, that's an artefact of the way banners work and the fact that they were once on-topic. The short answer is that flagging and close votes is the only way to deal with it effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long answer is that banners are manually added or removed. (So fortunately, no new banners are going to happen.) The mods &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; go on a purging binge and remove banners while &lt;a href=&quot;http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.ca/2010/06/this-is-why-ill-never-be-adult.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;closing all the things&lt;/a&gt;, but that's a lot of work for minimal payoff. In practice what we've been doing is handling them organically: dealing with them as they get bumped, turn up in searches, turn up in comment or post flags, or get closed by five votes (which bumps them). Basically, when we notice them we deal with them. Dealing with them means closing them if that still needs doing and/or (preferably both) tossing a Historical Lock on them so that they stop getting bumped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we've been leaving the banners on. As contradictory as it seems, it doesn't make sense to remove the banners once it's got the Historical Lock's banner beside it. The old game-rec banner serves a useful purpose in directing people to the metas where it was explained how they used to be on-topic, even while the more recently-dated close notice points to the later meta explaining why they aren't anymore, and the Historical Lock's banner says these used to be considered good, on-topic questions but aren't anymore. The questions end up &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5457/how-can-i-run-sweeney-todd-as-an-rpg&quot;&gt;looking like this&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaving the game-rec banner on a game-rec question &lt;em&gt;that we've dealt with&lt;/em&gt; is helpful because it provides all the context necessary to a curious reader. And game-rec banners on questions that we haven't noticed and processed can't be removed because by definition we haven't seen and processed those questions yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing that can be helped though, and I've just done an edit to do so: the game-rec banner leads directly to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic/1071#1071&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; in our old game-rec policy meta. Though the meta Q itself has a duplicate banner clearly pointing to the new guidance (“sadly they are off topic”), the direct link to that answer makes it easy for curious readers to never see the link, and instead read a pageful of answer saying that they &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; on topic. Oops. To fix that I've added a pseudo-banner at the top of the answer saying it's historical and overturned, with a link to the new guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So thank you! I think that's an improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the short of it is, again: flag 'em when you see 'em, so we can throw closes and locks on them,  along with their attendant banners that explain all this more directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T17:33:34.957" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6235" CreationDate="2016-04-08T20:52:00.013" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;Since nobody else feels like proposing any solutions...&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's create a new canonical question for this topic and merge both existing questions into it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those unfamiliar with them, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/291992/1175868&quot;&gt;canonical questions&lt;/a&gt; are questions specifically designed to be the &quot;ideal&quot; (read: most searchable) version of a frequently asked question, so that all the other variations of it can be closed as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per SSD, mods have the power to merge questions; this is kind of like a super close-as-duplicate, which moves all the answers to the closed question over to the unclosed (canonical) question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, certainly a case could be made that we should use one of the existing questions, but they're both somewhat rambling, and I think we can do better. Hence, my suggestion of a canonical question. If you feel that either of the existing questions is close enough to ideal, you're free to downvote this answer and post your own; nobody's feelings will be hurt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T09:16:28.323" LastActivityDate="2016-04-08T20:52:00.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6239" CreationDate="2016-04-10T14:49:41.287" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the end, it's very simple. You were being Not Nice, you got suspended for it.  You seem to want to keep drawing it out into long arguments so you can jump on any other turn of phrase or word in those discussions saying &quot;look - that wasn't nice either!&quot; You did that in the mod message thread and now you're doing it here on Meta. But that's not very interesting, and certainly not a defense for the original behavior. &quot;Two wrongs make a right!&quot; is not a legitimate defense either here on RPG.SE or in the real world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the moderators agree your suspension was warranted.  It was a private thing that you could have just moved on past and participated constructively in the site now that you've returned without anyone even knowing about it, but you insist on turning it into a public argument. But we're not going to argue about it with you. This is not a discussion about site policy, even though you've made a token attempt at posing the question that way, this is a specific disciplinary action and it's not subject to debate (I think it was more than sufficiently debated in your many, many messages back to us on the issue). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To explain to you and the other community members you've brought into this conversation, you are not being &quot;discriminated against&quot; - but you are certainly being watched, as any user who starts to show a pattern of being argumentative and skirting/crossing the line of Be Nice gets watched more closely. That's how life works. No one is &quot;looking for an excuse&quot; to reprimand you, but we are looking out for the welfare and tone of the site in general and the combination of crossing the Be Nice line combined with extensive argument from you about how - whatever, some confused mix of &quot;you didn't/you're not responsible for it/everyone does it/you were justified in doing it/it's just the man trying to keep you down/whatever&quot; certainly doesn't give us a warm feeling that you plan to abide by site rules in the future. So yes, your posts are currently under a higher than usual level of scrutiny until we feel comfortable that you're calmly and nicely participating in the site again. This is not &quot;SSD is discriminating against you,&quot; this is &quot;all the mods are keeping an eye on you right now.&quot; You may or may not feel that scrutiny is justified; in the end we don't care, and the only way to turn the &quot;Eye of Sauron&quot; from you is to participate constructively in the site and Be Nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD said in comment, you can appeal to the CMs if you think other mods would think we were out of line (they're not going to, and I think the community is starting to see why from this argument) but that's all the site disruption we're going to have from it here. You can personally believe whatever you want, but here on this site you will stop arguing about this topic and you will adhere to Be Nice on further postings. Again, this is not an invitation to debate, this is an instruction we are giving you and expect to be followed. This is the last public response we'll make on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-04-10T15:08:16.453" LastActivityDate="2016-04-10T15:08:16.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6248" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6249" CreationDate="2016-04-12T02:24:05.360" Score="13" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, a user posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78491/what-are-kryans-full-set-of-houserules-for-dd-3-5e&quot;&gt;a question asking for a specific user's house rules&lt;/a&gt;. This question was promptly closed as off-topic, and I feel like the community made the right decision, but I can't put my finger on &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;What topics can I ask about here&lt;/a&gt; page, the question seems to fall squarely within the description of an on-topic question for this site: It's about role-playing games, and requires the attention of an expert; And it's definitely about &quot;RPG rules or mechanics&quot; as well as &quot;Techniques for running or playing RPGs.&quot; The page does list a few reasons why a question might not be appropriate, but the only one that might apply is about potentially becoming obsolete, and that one seems a bit of a stretch; KRyan is well-established as a GM, and their list of house rules is therefore unlikely to change much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking&lt;/a&gt; page doesn't seem to have any relevant guidance, either: The question is reasonably-scoped, isn't an invitation to discussion, has a single concrete answer... I can't find anything there that suggests this question should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We would have closed this question as 'Too Localised' back in the day, but that close reason doesn't exist any more precisely because it was too wishy-washy and subjective - so presumably we must have a more concrete one. Perhaps I'm just not making an obvious connection between what the help pages say and the features of this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why was this question closed?&lt;/strong&gt; I do suspect it should have been, but &lt;strong&gt;we need to know &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt;, because if it's a reason that isn't explicitly stated on our help pages, those help pages need to be amended.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-04-14T03:26:58.263" Title="Are requests for specific users' house rules on- or off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|closed-questions|specific-question|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6248" CreationDate="2016-04-12T03:04:26.850" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is off-topic because it's a very bad fit for the Stack Exchange's resources (crowds of experts) and mechanics (voting-based evaluation and sorting).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange is founded on the wisdom of crowds: multiple people give answers based on their expertise in the subject, then the voting of other experts lifts up good answers and pushes down poor ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we have here is a question in which only one individual has expertise, so RPG.SE's collection of experts isn't useful. And nobody except that one individual has experience to say whether it's a good or bad answer, so RPG.SE's evaluation-and-sorting process doesn't come into play either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having established that, it's crucial to recognise that the Stack Exchange is only interested in doing what it can do well. There's no need to become a one-stop-shop, no desire to replace other online resources, and no obligation to include everything related to the subject of RPGs. KRyan's house rules would make a great blog post, or a thread on a traditional forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-04-12T03:04:26.850" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6250" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-12T10:59:34.660" Score="12" ViewCount="549" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not strictly a DnD5 question, but I have not seen any other game where creators share rules interpretations via social media.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/06/great-weapon-smite/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Mike Mearls's tweet&lt;/a&gt; got me thinking about about the value and strength of these suggestions: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the paladin’s Great Weapon Fighting style apply to the radiant damage dice gained from Divine Smite?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  No – &lt;strong&gt;I'd rule&lt;/strong&gt; the benefit applies only to the weapon's damage dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is obviously against RAW, but on the other hand he makes very clear that this is only his &lt;em&gt;opinion&lt;/em&gt;. So it is just a house-rule from someone who intimately knows the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we consider tweets when answering questions about rules? Or are they only recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:48:36.530" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:48:36.530" Title="Are tweets an official rule source?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-12T11:46:04.257" Score="11" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should we consider tweets when answering questions about rules? Or are they only recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a false dichotomy.  Refusing to take the actual designer's thoughts into account when trying to understand a game's rules is deliberately ignorant at best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, for a pure Rules As Written question, obviously nothing outside the game's text is a legitimate source. But beyond that specific playstyle, ideally you are trying to actually understand and use working rules, and while you might end up disagreeing with a specific dev ruling, there are absolutely no legitimate reasons not to take them into account. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-04-12T11:46:04.257" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-12T11:57:34.043" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given context, it's better to have information than not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the probable exception of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; questions, I see no reason to tell people &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to mention if a developer has expressed an opinion or shared an insight about a rule. A good answer would of course compare and contrast the dev's comments with the published game materials to whatever extent is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-04-12T11:57:34.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-12T18:45:00.927" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Designers' tweets (or any other source of designers' words) are simply what the designers have said. We have no special site rules about how official they are or whether their words = game rules. Nor should we.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is using designers' words in an answer to a question, whether about the rules of a game or something else, it's up to that answer-writer to demonstrate how quoting a designer is relevant. Those that pull it off will get upvotes; those who don't will get downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-04-12T18:45:00.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-12T21:11:04.443" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;The designers made it clear that rules questions answered by Jeremy Crawford is the official stance of WotC, and many of his answers are turned into errata later on. Granted, that if a ruling isn't in the book yet, it doesn't exist to some strict RAW players. But generally Crawford's posts are what the rules already says, or on rare occasion what they will be with the next errata.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mearls tweets either what the book says or how he'd rule.  He's generally pretty clear on which his answer is depending on how he states it.  A lot of times, he will even say, &quot;Not RAW.  However, I'd allow it if...&quot; type statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, both are great sources for an answer to a question as the designers thoughts (as other answers here have stated).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25091" LastActivityDate="2016-04-12T21:11:04.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6248" CreationDate="2016-04-14T03:26:58.263" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;For my part, I found the question... kind of uncomfortable, for reasons I cannot quite articulate? I think it may in part be that I am not interested in inviting questions or criticisms of my houserules (even though I’ll happily volunteer individual cases where I use a given houserule if it is relevant, since that establishes that I have actually tried what I recommend), and I especially don’t feel like answering every “well why not this rule?” which I might even use and have forgot to include.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any event, as the only person who could have answered the question, even if it had stayed open I wasn’t planning to actually answer it. I don’t have a singular set of rules written down, since I use different rules for different games. There are definitely plenty of commonalities, but even there, they’re not written down; they’re just well-known among those I play with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2016-04-14T03:26:58.263" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-14T03:30:43.533" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This isn’t a question for meta, not really. The only context where “official rule source” matters is for discussions of RAW, and for those cases, it isn’t for meta to decide that, nor can it be decidable in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Official rule sources are those things the publisher labels as such. This is going to vary by publisher, and by edition; D&amp;amp;D 3.5 did not include developer commentary, such as it was; D&amp;amp;D 5e does, at least when it’s Jeremy Crawford’s commentary. D&amp;amp;D 3.5 did not include the FAQ; Pathfinder does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2016-04-14T03:30:43.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6257" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6259" CreationDate="2016-04-14T10:12:12.923" Score="13" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got into RPing while D&amp;amp;D 4e was waning in popularity, so on the advice from my FLGS, picked up the Pathfinder Beginner Box. Had fun with it for a few years and got some great answers and help on RPG.SE.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Being the impressionable and fickle creature that I am, I've moved to D&amp;amp;D 5e, so I can play with the Underdark and Strahd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that I'm using a different system, is it politic to reask questions that have answers based on a particular system? e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19429/any-gm-headaches-or-canon-reasons-not-to-let-resurrected-pcs-fight-their-reanima&quot;&gt;Any GM headaches or canon reasons not to let resurrected PCs fight their reanimated corpses?&lt;/a&gt; What about different editions of the same system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:55:27.273" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:55:27.273" Title="I've changed game systems, can I reask my favourite questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6257" CreationDate="2016-04-14T10:16:41.377" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, absolutely! If your old solutions don't work anymore with the new system or edition you're using, then it's quite reasonable to ask a new question about your new situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-04-14T10:16:41.377" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6257" CreationDate="2016-04-15T13:34:51.857" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do you have reason to believe that the answers to the new question might be different from the answers to the old one?  If so, sure, go ahead and ask it again.  It could be something as simple as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A couple of years ago, I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19429/any-gm-headaches-or-canon-reasons-not-to-let-resurrected-pcs-fight-their-reanima&quot;&gt;whether a resurrected player could end up fighting their own undead corpse in Pathfinder,&lt;/a&gt; and the consensus was that it probably wasn't possible strictly by the rules.  Is that still true in D&amp;amp;D 5e, or can I finally run my epic player-vs-ex-player battle without having to bend the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have specific reasons, besides your gut feeling, for expecting different answers (e.g. because some relevant wording in the rules is different), you may also want to mention those in your question.  In particular, if the answer turns out to be &quot;no, it's still the same&quot;, explaining why you thought it might be different will let answerers specifically address those reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-15T13:34:51.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6260" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6262" CreationDate="2016-04-16T12:32:55.673" Score="5" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role playing related topics are sometimes such, that taken out of context, or read by someone who doesn't understand the context, would seem... quaint, and not necessarily in a positive way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than worry about stuff like this, I'd prefer my account here to not be publicly linked with the rest of SE. How should I proceed, and what are my options?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11358" LastActivityDate="2016-04-18T14:06:54.550" Title="Disassociating account from the rest of SE network" Tags="|support|profile-page|user-accounts|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6260" CreationDate="2016-04-16T14:57:32.313" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Make another account, and use it instead, for either your gamer or professional persona.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ship's already sailed on your existing content, but there's not all that much there. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there are SE settings to &quot;hide&quot; stacks, using stack settings means you're trusting SE to maintain the separation for you, which is more convenient but leaves it in their hands. (As a commenter has mentioned, it looks like that hiding is not respected by the Android app, for example). If the separation is really, really important to you then you need to make different accounts so that the separation is in your hands not theirs. Use multiple browsers or private mode to be able to be signed in under two identities at once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-04-18T14:06:54.550" LastActivityDate="2016-04-18T14:06:54.550" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6262" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6260" CreationDate="2016-04-18T02:29:50.990" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is possible to hide stacks so that they don't show up on your profile for other stacks or your general network profile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/hidecommunities/current&quot;&gt;This link&lt;/a&gt; should take you to the options page for doing so; I &lt;em&gt;believe&lt;/em&gt; hiding a specific community hides that community on your network profile and all other community profiles, regardless of which community profile you do it from, so you shouldn't need to do it from any/each other profile (double-check, though).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-18T02:33:19.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6250" CreationDate="2016-04-19T20:13:06.117" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Oficial Rules&lt;/strong&gt; .There's a rule book. Those are written in &quot;stone&quot;(since they probably won't edit and publish a new version) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then theres the &lt;strong&gt;DM rule/Rule Zero&lt;/strong&gt; . The DM decides what the &quot;rules&quot; on his world are, even if is Mearls or even if it was something said by Gygax, you can use what &lt;strong&gt;YOU&lt;/strong&gt; think is fair, personalized to that moment , your world  and your opinion. You can take his rationalization has making more sense then whats on the book,  and with that  use it. &#xA;Just like you can do with ,  any person's  rationalization in any media or form of comunication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it does not become a &quot;canonical rule&quot; since those are published for everybody in the oficial material and serve has the basis for the games and the house rules.&#xA;That's what they are, with those, people take and leave and change what they wan't. &quot;Oficial&quot; in this games means &quot;published&quot;, equal basis to all. And gateway for your changes and preferences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15232" LastActivityDate="2016-04-19T20:13:06.117" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6264" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-20T03:11:22.203" Score="6" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking through the meta, I can only seem to find posts about people dissatisfied with problem player questions, so I'll ask here. I've always understood the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; tag as the tag you use when someone at the table is being...well, a problem player. &quot;That guy&quot; or meta-gamers or what have you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78894/how-do-i-handle-my-players-killing-things-by-catapulting-a-folding-boat&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I felt as if the question involved a player, but wasn't about them. I went to edit out the tag, but when I actually read the tag, it seemed it had a more broad umbrella than I had thought. It reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Participants in an RPG who, for whatever reason, contribute to difficulty running the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the question at hand, it makes sense. A player is contributing to the difficulty of running the game by being creative (MacGyverism, so to speak).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this the correct usage of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; tag? Or is it as I suspected, where the problem-player is more about misbehaving? How do we use it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19464" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-23T02:03:03.083" Title="What exactly is the [problem-players] tag for?" Tags="|discussion|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6264" CreationDate="2016-04-20T08:48:36.910" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem player tag is for when, from the perspective of the question, a player is the primary source of problems. If they behaved differently or (often) weren't there at all, things would be much better &amp;mdash; or at least, such a thought is easy to read into problem-player situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the classification is &quot;this player is cheesing things.&quot; That's enough to justify usage of the tag there. It's probably not worth analysing it too hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the tag wiki seeming broad, not every RPG has a clear cut GM vs Player distinction:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many RPGs are GMless (Penny for my thoughts)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many assert the GM is just as much a player as anyone else (Fate)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many have GM optional (Great Ork Gods)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many take no stance at all on whether there is or isn't a GM, and let the players form whatever construct they want (Roll for Shoes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing all games have in common are the players, who we consider the people who are playing the game. So the wiki casts an equally wide net. Who does or doesn't count as a player is up to the question to distinguish to whatever extent matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-04-20T21:10:50.917" LastActivityDate="2016-04-20T21:10:50.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6266" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-04-20T23:55:04.793" Score="21" ViewCount="247" Body="&lt;p&gt;In some cases, SE moderation by the community is working too well...  And when content gets deleted via system auto-response to flags, or power user editing/delete activity, we the mods never actually see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, @dopplegreener and @DaleM did a good job flagging and getting the system to auto-delete a recent super offensive post (the &quot;best mind #uck for a woman&quot; post, I'm sure it sticks in their minds) and left a comment saying we should probably look at the account responsible.  But sadly, when that happens all the flags get auto cleaned up by the system, and I just ran across it today more than a week later by pure luck.  Same with a recent very offensive/insulting comment - site users rightfully flagged it, it got deleted, we never found out till looking at deleted comments specifically on that post when doing other stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do feel free to @mention one or more mods in those situations, or do a custom flag on a nearby undeleted item, so that we can properly follow up, when it's something that rightfully might need more vigorous addressing (I have deleted the account responsible for the former hatefulness, for example).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't need to ping us for everything, but if it's something that you'd have every expectation a suspension or deletion would be issued for, and it looks like maybe offensive flags or the like got to it without it otherwise coming to anyone's attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks, and I'm logging various meta.se feature requests to help with stuff like this, but in general that's a low percentage play, so do feel free to &quot;if you saw something, say something.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2016-04-21T02:42:00.027" LastActivityDate="2016-04-21T02:42:00.027" Title="Please do bring &quot;bad stuff&quot; to mod attention if it doesn't look like we saw it" Tags="|discussion|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6267" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6268" CreationDate="2016-04-21T18:55:32.317" Score="4" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why is an edit to fix a 1-character spelling mistake required to be at least 6 characters long?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to edit the first line of a good answer to correct &quot;fulfil&quot; into &quot;fulfill&quot;. It seems silly that I am unable to do so, especially since spelling corrections are encourage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fixing spelling corrections in title or paragraph topic sentences can (unfortunately) affect people's subjective opinion on the authoritativeness of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a minimum, the system should permit short edits of the word &quot;spell&quot; is found in the edit reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28534" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-04-21T23:45:06.443" LastActivityDate="2016-04-21T23:45:06.443" Title="Why is an edit to fix a 1-character spelling mistake required to be at least 6 characters long?" Tags="|support|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6267" CreationDate="2016-04-21T19:50:01.873" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Firstly, “fulfil” is not an error, just an acceptable alternate spelling of the word.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly… I think that might partly answer the question. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thirdly and more generally though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits should be &lt;em&gt;significant&lt;/em&gt;, and 1-character edits (even to fix spelling) are most often not, which is why the help page for the full &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;edit privilege&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged&lt;/strong&gt; — try to make the post significantly better when you edit, correcting all problems that you observe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Free editing is a privilege earned with more reputation, the idea being that those users will have a clearer and more nuanced understanding of what kind of edits are useful to the site and what kinds aren't by the time they've earned that much rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That time also gives users the chance to observe existing editing practices to pick up what kinds of edits the community approves of, and which are seen as unnecessary disruption to the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When looking to fix spelling, always look for other changes that would improve the post &lt;em&gt;substantially&lt;/em&gt;. If there are none to be found, best leave it be—it's only when spelling errors riddle a post that it really starts affecting it, and at that point there are enough errors that a 6+ character edit is possible. If every other word is spelled correctly, a lone error won't adversely affect the reader's impression of the post. In such cases, its loneliness may even suggest that it's not really an error. This can especially happen with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3224/standardization-of-english-etc&quot;&gt;spelling variations between American English and British English&lt;/a&gt;, in which case it's best to avoid spelling-based edits, as they may just impose a foreign spelling standard on the original post author rather than improve the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's rare for an under-6 character edit to be &lt;em&gt;necessary&lt;/em&gt; for a post to be understood properly. Fortunately, given just a bit of time one of the higher-rep users will likely notice it and make the necessary edit. If enough time goes by with it uncorrected, it's entirely possible that it doesn't actually need changing and is considered fine how it is. Still, if it seems like a &lt;em&gt;serious&lt;/em&gt; issue with a post is going unnoticed, you can always use a custom flag to notify a moderator to take a look.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-04-21T23:44:09.140" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6267" CreationDate="2016-04-21T21:05:20.593" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The TL;DR answer is &quot;editing shorter than that is limited to higher-rep users who have probably figured out more nuances of the site, including having seen different British spellings, mass bumps on the front page from mass trivial edits, etc.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-04-21T21:05:20.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6264" CreationDate="2016-04-23T02:03:03.083" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;From the perspective of solutions and the expertise required to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; is for questions for which the correct answer is likely to be primarily social in nature, and not depend on the rules-set being used or game being played. A good answer to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; question informs the asker how to frame the discussion with the table and what outcomes they can expect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt; tags questions where the  &quot;problem-player&quot; has greater control over the game than the asker, and is (in the asker's eyes) misusing that power. As above, answers are likely to be social in nature, but for many questions, good answers often require advice on how to give GMing advice, and help a GM to improve, rather than just deal with disconnected expectations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastActivityDate="2016-04-23T02:03:03.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6271" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6273" CreationDate="2016-04-23T18:46:00.903" Score="13" ViewCount="459" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79175/how-can-tome-warlocks-back-up-ritual-spells-they-have-inscribed&quot;&gt;How can tome warlocks &amp;quot;back up&amp;quot; ritual spells they have inscribed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was put on hold because &quot;RAI is not a thing&quot;. (This surprises me since Jeremy Crawford, the arbiter of RAW, seems to think RAI is a thing. &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/588425967447609344&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/03/17/raw-and-rai-answers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt;. He gives a definition of it &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/03/17/raw-and-rai-answers/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. Of course since we can't &lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Detect%20Thoughts#h-Detect%20Thoughts&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Detect Thoughts&lt;/a&gt; IRL, we would have to infer RAI from RAW plus consistency.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the answer, I wanted either RAW, or a logical argument based on RAW. (E.g., &quot;Although the rules are not explicit, to be consistent with rules &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;, the simplest explanation is &lt;em&gt;Z&lt;/em&gt;.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I request such answers without my questions being put on hold?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28534" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-04-28T16:54:31.267" Title="A question I posted asked for answers to be RAW/RAI was put on hold. How can I ask my question better?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6271" CreationDate="2016-04-23T19:04:39.677" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with asking for RAI is that unless you have a specific statement from the designer of the game as to their intent, you are asking for pure supposition, which is largely then substituted with the answerer's opinion.  We have a previous meta question on the nature of and problems with RAI in a question. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3690/rules-as-intended-and-designer-intent&quot;&gt;Rules-as-intended and designer intent&lt;/a&gt;  You specifically use the term incorrectly as &quot;inferring&quot; intent. As you note, we don't have Detect Thoughts, and people arguing their own inference of intent litters RPG forums everywhere.  We prefer answers that Back It Up! here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an answer from pure RAW and strict logical implications of RAW, you ask for RAW.  You can modify your list of sources to include &quot;Tweets by Jeremy Crawford&quot; if you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an answer that takes into account not just the rules in the book, but common usage, play experience, guidance from other editions, etc. you just ask the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question about &quot;can I write spells into a normal book&quot; is a great example.  The RAW answer apparently is &quot;yes but you can't do anything with it...&quot;  The general answer is no, no one plays that way, a spellbook is the special kind of book you put spells in and any other &quot;book&quot; is not suitable. The only way to have a RAI answer is if someone asks that specific question to Crawford and gets an answer back.  The degree to which people don't understand that leads us to prefer you to just say &quot;RAW including designer tweets&quot; or nothing, not use the term RAI. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-04-23T19:04:39.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6273" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6271" CreationDate="2016-04-23T19:05:18.407" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your description of what you want (“either RAW, or a logical argument based on RAW”) &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; what RAW means all by itself here and in the wider community. You appear to be using “RAW” to mean just rules… but that doesn't need a special name, because that's called “the rules.” While what “RAW” actually means is a rules-interpretation method that involves analysing the logical meaning of the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if explicit rules statements and/or logical interpretation thereof is what you're looking for, just ask for RAW. If you're just looking for what the rules explicitly say, use no tag and make no special request, because asking a question about the rules is enough for answers to be about the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More precisely, it's not that there's no such thing as RAI (rules as interpreted or rules as intended), it's that rules as &lt;strong&gt;interpreted&lt;/strong&gt; is already a necessary part of a RAW analysis, and asking for the rules as &lt;strong&gt;intended&lt;/strong&gt; just attracts (based on past observations) a lot of answers that are merely guesses. When trying to mean “rules as intended”, instead of using that or the ambiguous acronym “RAI” to ask for the designers' intentions, just ask explicitly for what the designers have &lt;em&gt;said&lt;/em&gt; about how the rules works. Site history has shown that questions asking for designer statements result in solid (though sometimes difficult to produce) answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-04-28T16:54:31.267" LastActivityDate="2016-04-28T16:54:31.267" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6274" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6276" CreationDate="2016-04-30T02:44:37.210" Score="10" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you just want to ask rpg.stackexchange for homebrews and houserules you know the experts in the site have play-tested. This site's level of expertise and backing up just can't be matched on discussion forums. In asking the question, though, it has the tendency to be put on hold due to one reason or another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, &lt;strong&gt;how can I successfully do this without my question being closed?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/78168/23064&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and it has garnered some useful answers without getting closed, so I know it's possible, just not why, or how I can replicate a similar question that won't be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the linked question something the community would like to open up as a possibility for future questions? If so, how can an asker go about asking for houserules properly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-04-30T03:40:07.403" Title="Guidelines on asking for house rules" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6274" CreationDate="2016-04-30T03:08:09.560" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;With house rules questions, just like any other questions, the trick is to be at least somewhat focused and have a clear problem you are trying to solve (besides &quot;I am curious and want house rules&quot;).  Also, such questions need to really stress Good Subjective, Bad Subjective so they're not just untested ideas, which are usually very little signal to the noise. And of course shows understanding of the rules at hand already (a house rules question when there's simply a real rules answer the OP doesn't know will get closed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked question ticks both of these boxes. The poster is clearly wanting, after some research into the related rules, a playtested rule for fighting while holding one's breath.  That's specific (not &quot;cool new blast spells&quot;) and stresses real play experience. It is somewhat lacking in not clearly specifying what a best answer would look like, but it's at least decently implicit (&quot;a rule that more realistically simulates diminished capacity from holding breath while exerting yourself&quot;). To be better it would say more clearly that it's looking for - diminished fighting, or more limited breath-holding, or what exactly he feels like the effect is he'd like to simulate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's some really good ones (good questions, good answers):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77611/how-does-the-descriptive-damage-hack-affect-dungeon-world&quot;&gt;How does the &amp;quot;Descriptive Damage&amp;quot; hack affect Dungeon World?&lt;/a&gt; (great answer)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78151/what-would-the-effect-of-removing-death-saves-and-just-having-characters-die-at&quot;&gt;What would the effect of removing death saves and just having characters die at 0HP be?&lt;/a&gt; (note how the nature of this question means that you don't have to have played with that exact house rule to answer effectively)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, like the old game-rec questions, I would actually shy away from asking &quot;give me a house rule&quot; and instead ask about your &lt;em&gt;problem,&lt;/em&gt; perhaps showing you understand the area in question and saying you're open to playtested house rules. Then answers can be a playtested house rule, or they can be something else you haven't thought of. &quot;I want a more realistic treatment of degraded ability to hold your breath while fighting.&quot; Maybe there's some existing rule or set of rules, maybe there's a playtested house rule, maybe there's just a GM technique...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sadly in general we should downvote/delete answers that don't follow GS/BS, but very rarely a question may get closed simply because the community just can't get it into their heads they shouldn't be posting random ideas - it's unfortunate and it's not the OP's fault, but in the end if we need to intervene multiple times a day every day on some question we're likely to just cut bait on it. So definitely remind people of GS/BS when you post these to help keep your question from that fate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sometimes works the other way. Like this is a terrible question by these standards, but it's saved by people answering it in a better way: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71468/hobgoblin-as-a-player-character&quot;&gt;Hobgoblin as a player character&lt;/a&gt; - but effectively if a question can really only be answered with frame challenges it's not a very good question.  That one could have just gotten closed without comment, and probably would today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course that line is arguable.  This question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56037/looking-for-an-alternative-to-my-dms-favorite-fumble-table&quot;&gt;Looking for an alternative to my DM&amp;#39;s favorite fumble table&lt;/a&gt; is mostly answered by frame challenges &quot;fumbles are the devil&quot;, which to me makes it hitting the line for close-because-people-can't-keep-it-in-their-pants, but clearly those answering feel that it's in the &quot;we're saving this bad question with a frame challenge&quot; land. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-04-30T03:08:09.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6274" CreationDate="2016-04-30T03:14:59.083" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Requests for homebrew and houserules need to ask for actionable solutions to a specific problem; answers that draw on actual experience, which people can vote on from an informed stance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tell us what your problem is.&lt;/strong&gt; Why doesn't the system work for you? What dilemma has led you to want to make changes? A house rule might not be the best solution, so instead ask us to help solve your problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Show your work.&lt;/strong&gt; What have you researched? What have you tried? Why didn't those solutions work for you and your group?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be explicit about your context.&lt;/strong&gt; Your situation, playstyle, goals, obstacles, whatever seems relephant. This information doesn't just help us give you useful answers, it helps others vote critically and not by personal opinion (which is crucial to the Stack's goal of being a &lt;em&gt;neatly-sorted&lt;/em&gt; pile of solutions).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Remind us to support our answers with experience.&lt;/strong&gt; Really you &lt;em&gt;ought&lt;/em&gt; to be able to rely on site culture for this one, but assume potential answerers are new to the site and help them out with a nudge toward the applicable guidelines.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These guidelines should indicate that we aren't good at open-ended brainstorming or helping you figure out what your problem is. Skipping this step leads to what Mxy describes as questions which &quot;can really only be answered with frame challenges&quot; and those are frustrating for everyone involved. For support at that stage of the process, I find &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;the RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; is invaluable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-04-30T03:40:07.403" LastActivityDate="2016-04-30T03:40:07.403" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6277" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-01T23:09:54.487" Score="1" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the source material for the rpg.se cover art? Why are cyborgs shooting a dragon with beam weapons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25601" LastActivityDate="2016-05-01T23:09:54.487" Title="What is the Source of the Role-Playing Games cover art?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2016-05-01T23:42:51.097" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6278" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6279" CreationDate="2016-05-02T16:20:59.510" Score="2" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79439/how-to-deal-with-players-that-wants-their-characters-to-do-automatic-perception&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was closed as a duplicate of another question. However, I think that it is &lt;em&gt;related&lt;/em&gt; but not a &lt;em&gt;duplicate&lt;/em&gt; since the linked question is system-agnostic. Indeed, D&amp;amp;D 5e has specific rules and player options for perception/investigation-related &quot;standing orders&quot;, so I believe I could contribute a quality answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to vote to reopen the question, but lack the reputation to do so. What is the procedure to ask for a reopen vote to be cast?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16370" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:00:38.940" Title="What is the procedure to ask for a reopen when you don't have enough reputation?" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6278" CreationDate="2016-05-02T16:28:47.667" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a formal one; reopen voting privileges are granted based on demonstrated experience with the site and subject (measured approximately by reputation), and not having gained the close/reopen voting privilege means not getting a say in such things yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, there are two informal ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Flagging&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can in theory flag a closed question for moderation attention, but that's only useful in exceptional cases where something has clearly gone wrong, and moderator intervention is needed. For the more normal case of just wanting to cast a reopen vote and not having one, a mod flag would likely be declined in favour of letting close/reopen voters take care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask for input on Meta&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also make a case for reopening on Meta. This is useful for odd corner cases where it's not obvious why it should be closed/open, and the community can chew on it to figure out the best treatment for the question. That might be useful in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This question here is too general to inspire that kind of conversation though; a meta of that kind needs a specific line of reasoning or description of the problem or corner case that's causing concern for the community to engage with it productively. For example, it may not be obvious to others how there could be an answer unique to D&amp;amp;D 5e; bringing that up directly as an example of how they're different questions might be productive.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-05-02T17:00:38.940" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:00:38.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6280" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-02T17:20:10.010" Score="9" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79439/how-to-deal-with-players-that-wants-their-characters-to-do-automatic-perception&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was closed as a duplicate of another question. However, I believe it is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked &quot;duplicate&quot; question is system-agnostic and is good for general advice. However, the closed question is specific to D&amp;amp;D 5e, and 5e has specific mechanics for handling the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First off, the DM is missing the point on skill checks, because it is called out specifically that &quot;&lt;em&gt;The DM calls for an ability check when a character ar monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure.&lt;/em&gt;&quot; The DM calls for checks, the players don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, &quot;I am always vigilant&quot; is handled with passive checks: if the DC is greater than their passive check, they don't notice whatever it is. Increasing the ability score (Wisdom or Intelligence) is one way of raising their passive score, but there are also a handful of feats that provide a much larger improvement to passive scores:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Alert feat means they can't be surprised&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeon Delver grants advantage when looking for secret doors and when saving vs. traps&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Observant grants a flat +5 to passive Wisdom (Perception) and passive Intelligence (Investigation) scores—among other benefits&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe these three feats cover what the questioner's players are asking to do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;player: I check for traps and secret doors in the wall, the floor and the ceiling. I also want to hear anything unusual and walk silently.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Traps &amp;amp; hearing anything unusual are covered by observant. Secret doors are covered by observant and dungeon delver. When observant isn't enough to spot the hidden threat, dungeon delver helps mitigate traps, while alert helps to mitigate hidden foes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefor, I believe the linked question is related, but not a duplicate since there is a system-specific answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16370" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:20:10.010" Title="Can We Please Reopen a Related, but not Duplicate Question?" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6281" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-02T17:46:46.473" Score="2" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78206/can-a-character-elect-to-be-considered-running-or-sprinting-even-if-they-don/78350&quot;&gt;Can a character elect to be considered &amp;quot;running&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;sprinting&amp;quot; even if they don&amp;#39;t exceed their walk rate?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; has an accepted answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user disagrees with my answer, and started a long conversation in comments, instead of supplying his own contradictory answer. I have deleted my comments, because the comment-conversation was going nowhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can/Will somebody delete the other comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22138" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:53:55.127" Title="Can the moderators delete comments on an answer?" Tags="|support|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6281" CreationDate="2016-05-02T17:53:43.900" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please make sure to flag the offending comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flags are the primary way to notify moderators of anything that needs our attention directly (and only the user who made them or a moderator can delete a comment).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, if you feel that a comment thread is resolved, please feel free to clear your own comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1084" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:53:43.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6283" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6281" CreationDate="2016-05-02T17:53:55.127" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. Use the little flag icon beside one or more comments to pop up this menu:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IH4O9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IH4O9.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just choose the most applicable flag reason, or use the “other…” option to write a custom flag reason. (A custom flag is sometimes useful to indicate that a set of comments need attention without the labour of flagging each one.) These flags go directly to the mods, who will handle them by either completing the request or (if the flag is deemed invalid) dismissing the flag without action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-02T17:53:55.127" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6284" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-08T22:01:14.477" Score="4" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;&quot;What topics can I ask about here?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; still says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do some research before asking for games that have/do X so that you're asking an answerable question - also review the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;site guidance on asking game recommendation questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That &quot;site guidance&quot; link leads to an out-of-date ruling on game recommendations. It's closed with a link forward to our current policy, and &lt;em&gt;technically&lt;/em&gt; &quot;review the site guidance&quot; isn't saying game-rec is allowable, but it's a very misleading run-around:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do research before asking game-rec questions, and...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...read this link for guidance on asking game-rec questions:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sorry, that's an old link. Here's the new one:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Actually, don't ask game rec questions at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we have our on-topic page actually say game-recs aren't on topic, and link directly to the up-to-date meta discussion? It probably won't alert people who also miss the big &quot;OFF TOPIC--DO NOT ASK&quot; on the tag, but it can't hurt and will provide a consistent, less frustrating site experience for those beautiful unicorns who &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; read the Help pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-05-08T22:15:52.593" Title="Our &quot;On Topic&quot; page still implies game-recs are on topic" Tags="|support|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6284" CreationDate="2016-05-08T22:10:10.063" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the catch! It's been updated now. The current wording of that bullet is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If you're looking for a game mechanic or technique that does thing &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;, ask for how to do &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;, not for &quot;games that have &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;&quot;. Asking for one or a list of games is a game recommendation question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;which are off-topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also update the section “This is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the right site for questions about” to add a third bullet:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Computer RPGs or MMOs - for those, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;gaming.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Card games, TCGs, miniatures games, or board games - for those, see &lt;a href=&quot;http://boardgames.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;boardgames.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Recommendations for RPGs to play - for those, use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;an RPG discussion forum&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2016-05-08T22:15:52.593" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6286" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-08T22:33:01.193" Score="3" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our Help page &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;&quot;What topics can I ask about here?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; has some lovely site-specific advice for answerers under the heading &lt;em&gt;When replying to questions, be aware of our site guidelines&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Not everything here has an objectively correct answer, but subjective answers should be backed up with real play experience. See the blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; for how to answer subjective questions on Stack Exchange.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;There are many different tastes in games and different kinds of playstyle. All styles are welcome here, but attacking others' styles as wrong is not. As a rule, answer questions in the style they were asked - telling someone &quot;they are playing wrong&quot; is usually unwelcome and not constructive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Comments are for asking for clarification or providing constructive feedback on answers and should not be long discussion threads; comments are considered temporary and will be cleaned up by mods. If you have a major point to make, write your own answer and let people vote on it. Comment warring will not be tolerated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Help page &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;&quot;How do I write a good answer?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; mentions none of this. So far as I can tell, it doesn't have &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; site-specific advice at all. This seems... non-ideal and easily remedied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we please add our excellent advice to answerers to the page for advice to answerers? And while we're doing that, can we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3204/4398&quot;&gt;add a link&lt;/a&gt; to our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; post on &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/subjective-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;subjective-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;subjective-questions&lt;/a&gt;? We've got some good site-specific advice available for subjective answering, and I know &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; struggled with translating the GS/BS blog into actionable guidelines for RPG.SE on my own (especially since &quot;Back it up!&quot; is now a dead link).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-05-09T02:31:35.363" Title="We have better advice for answerers in our &quot;On topic&quot; page than our &quot;How to answer&quot; page" Tags="|support|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6168" CreationDate="2016-05-09T02:07:58.603" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are most of the comments I've felt are important/common enough to standardise for myself, or adopt others' standards. I often string together two or more comments, sometimes merging them into compound sentences so they feel less choppy and formulaic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GENERAL INFO &amp;amp; UTILITY&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Welcome to rpg.se! Please take a look at the [tour], it's a useful introduction to the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stack Exchange is a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a traditional discussion forum.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comments are for helping clarify or improve questions and answers. To thank someone for their contribution, upvote the post!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you want to discuss RPG things in a less structured format, the [chat] is always open.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's important to [&quot;back it up,&quot;](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/q/3204/4398&lt;/code&gt;) so answers should cite experience or other practical support of the concept.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please avoid untested speculation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[Links to external resources are encouraged](&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&lt;/code&gt;), but&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;please add context around the link so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;always quote the most relevant part of an important link, in case the target site is unreachable or goes permanently offline.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please don't link to third party hosts of proprietary content, as they [succumb to link rot](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/a/2773/4398&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Advertisements and self-promotion [must follow certain guidelines](&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/promotion&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's important that we each do our best to [be nice](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&lt;/code&gt;) even when others aren't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This comment discussion should be taken to [meta] so more folks can weigh in and it's searchably preserved for the future.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've edited this old question to better match our current understanding of what encourages quality answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Because [comments are temporary](&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&lt;/code&gt;), please [edit] useful information into your post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've edited your post to be a little more clear; if I've gotten the meaning wrong please feel free to revert the edit.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's preferable that posts read as a seamless presentation of your final ideas. There's no need to [signal edits](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/q/3454&lt;/code&gt;), as the revision history is easily visible: just click on the &quot;edited X ago&quot; link below the post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;QUESTIONS&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm not sure what you're asking.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Titles, while useful summaries for questions, do not replace the question itself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please describe the problem or challenge you're facing, rather than [just asking for help with the solution you've decided is best](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66377/244929&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please [edit] your question to tell us about your own research, and specifically what you're confused by in what you've found.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you feel that your question is not a duplicate of the one indicated, please [edit] your question to showcase how it's different.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please read [our guidelines for asking about house rules](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/q/6274/4398&lt;/code&gt;) and [edit] your question accordingly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;are value calls that we can't make for you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have follow-up questions, we welcome them as new questions, or as a clarifying [edit] to your original question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You'll probably find the [gaming.se] or [gamedev.se] Stack Exchange sites more useful than we can be.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tags structure our database of questions for sorting and searching, so correct tags are necessary to attract experts and to help future users with the same question (a core part of the Stack's mission).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The [[&lt;code&gt;tag:rules-as-written&lt;/code&gt;]] tag is specifically used to indicate that you're &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; interested in strict literal readings of the rules. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This question is off-topic because&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[answers rely on historical rather than RPG expertise](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1609/4398&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it's [asking us to reproduce rules, rather than explain them](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/a/5274/4398&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;undirected, open-ended speculation produces more noise than value.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it's a [request for system or setting recommendations](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5747/4398&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG-specific legal questions [are on topic](&lt;code&gt;http://meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5564/4398&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ANSWERS&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[Brevity is acceptable, but full explanations are better](&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&lt;/code&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question has been edited. Please check if you feel any edits to your answer are merited in response.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers need to focus on solutions to the problem being asked about.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can [ask new questions](&lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&lt;/code&gt;) independently.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please double-check that your answer matches the system the asker is using and [edit] it accordingly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please [edit] in sources for your information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If people are missing what I'm saying in my last paragraphs, I find it helps to re-shuffle my answer to lead with the answer itself, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; offers support and context for the solution.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Stack wants answers which connect all the dots, without leaving anything as an exercise for the reader.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-08-18T14:07:59.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-18T14:07:59.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6286" CreationDate="2016-05-09T02:31:35.363" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. We can edit the On Topic page, but sadly we can't edit the How to Answer page or other core help centre pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-09T02:31:35.363" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6289" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6290" CreationDate="2016-05-09T12:08:53.340" Score="7" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pretty much as the title. I would like to add more information and edit the organization of the answer I gave and was selected by the asker, is it bad practice? Will my answer lose the selected mark?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28089" LastActivityDate="2016-05-09T13:15:02.613" Title="Should I try to improve my answer even after it was selected?" Tags="|support|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6289" CreationDate="2016-05-09T13:10:19.397" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, go ahead and edit! Make your answer better. We all do it, even after the checkmarks or however many votes arrive. Usually it just means more votes - our answer &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; get better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You won't automatically lose your checkmark. The asker may change who gets it, of course, especially if the usefulness of your answer gets eroded by the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your edit would change your answer &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; majorly, you ought to check this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4938/1204&quot;&gt;Do I edit or create a new answer when my view on my current answer changes significantly?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-05-09T13:10:19.397" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6289" CreationDate="2016-05-09T13:15:02.613" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please feel free to improve your answers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack's a Q&amp;amp;A site rather than a traditional discussion forum: that means it's designed to be a long-term repository for actionable solutions to real problems, sorted by usefulness and quality. Improving the quality of posts is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; welcome, no matter how old they are, because we're always expecting people to be looking them up. The mechanics (like acceptance) won't automatically penalise you for it, and you may even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/77/excavator&quot;&gt;get a badge&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-05-09T13:15:02.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6292" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6293" CreationDate="2016-05-09T19:20:43.397" Score="8" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79885/how-much-optimization-do-published-dd-adventures-expect/79908#79908&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I asked a pretty specific question which I think can/will/is generating useful answers. However some of the comments (before they were removed) suggested that, incidentally, Curse of Strahd was a poor choice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know game-recs are offtopic, so I can't ask &quot;What's a good starting adventure for first-time players and DMs?&quot; And &quot;What do I need to know DMing DND for the first time?&quot; seems pretty broad. Would &quot;What do I need to know about running official DND5e adventures for the first time?&quot; fly? Or do I really need a forum for what I'm after?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-05-10T04:43:19.543" Title="Can I ask a question about DMing published DND adventures for the first time?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6292" CreationDate="2016-05-10T04:43:19.543" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, check out our existing questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bnew-gm%5D+AND+%5Bdnd-5e%5D+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;new GMs working with 5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm+gm-techniques&quot;&gt;techniques for new GMs&lt;/a&gt;. That may help, both with answering the questions you didn't know to ask but someone else already did, and with getting you thinking of specific questions &lt;em&gt;to&lt;/em&gt; ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally the Stack works best when we're answering specific problems. &quot;I have the new GM jitters&quot; is hard for us to answer. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/53527/4398&quot;&gt;&quot;Can my group still level up if I want to run a game without much combat?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; is easy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what is it specifically about &quot;official&quot; 5e adventures that you're worried about? Ask that, with the research you've done already, and we can help. It may wind up being multiple questions! If you're having trouble narrowing down what you're concerned about beyond a vague worry that you're missing something, that's a sign to do more research on your own, or ask for help in chat to pin down what to ask about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-05-10T04:43:19.543" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6294" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-10T08:50:53.077" Score="9" ViewCount="314" Body="&lt;p&gt;It turns out we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; tag. This is a bit of a problem. As KRyan put it in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;time seems a bit overloaded to me, since it can refer to both in-game time (how to measure it, how to track it, how long things take, etc. etc.) as well as out-of-game time (limited play time, speeding up play, etc. etc.). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree. &lt;em&gt;Time&lt;/em&gt; isn't something we can be experts on, and this tag gets used for lore time, game time, and just anything regarding the general passage of time in any subject. This tag's burnination-worthy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm presuming there'll be no strong objection to the notion we should burninate it &amp;mdash; by all means, if you have such objection, please voice it!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before it gets burninated, however, we should take a look at whether certain groups of questions in it might benefit from a more topically specific time-related tag. [Short-sessions] or [session-time] or so on could apply, from a glance, but I'm not in a good position to do a deep analysis right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are there any tags we would benefit from applying to certain groups of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; questions before we remove that tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-24T20:24:40.017" LastActivityDate="2018-03-24T20:24:40.017" Title="It's [time] to remove a tag, but are there some good replacements we can make first?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6294" CreationDate="2016-05-10T15:25:58.597" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt; tag might actually be a good choice for some of the questions about RL time; where that's not a good fit, I like &quot;time-management&quot; as Hey I Can Chan suggested in a comment. For questions about the passage of in-game time, I propose &quot;timekeeping&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23127" LastEditorUserId="23127" LastEditDate="2016-05-10T15:36:47.360" LastActivityDate="2016-05-10T15:36:47.360" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6294" CreationDate="2016-05-10T23:34:52.503" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd propose the simple yet clear [in-game-time] and [real-life-time].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like BESW said in a comment, [time-management] could refer to multiple things, as could [pacing] and [timekeeping]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think leaning on the side of clarity will help organize these questions the most, rather than trying to come up with snappy names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-05-11T00:12:22.477" LastActivityDate="2016-05-11T00:12:22.477" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6294" CreationDate="2016-05-11T00:58:14.563" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't see any reason for burnination — burnination is for tags that are causing problems, and there's no apparent problem the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; tag is causing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; tag might need splitting, but it needs to be shown that it's needed first. A point of order, a point of perspective, and a practical concern first:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A point of order. Tags aren't for subjects we can be experts in. They are for categorising questions by what they are about, so that they can be more easily found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;One&lt;/em&gt; reason we want them to be more easily findable is so that experts can focus on subjects they are interested in, but other reasons include being able to more easily search by subject or combinations of subject, being able to browse by subject, and being able to exclude questions types one isn't interested in. A tag only has to be useful to some of those to be worthwhile. It is not necessary for a tag to be about something we can be experts in for a tag to be worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A point of perspective. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; tag is five years old, yet only has 44 questions in it. That's less than a question a month, over five years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the reason that it has remained undifferentiated is for the same reason that for ages we only had one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; tag for all five (then six, then seven) editions: multiple even tinier tags weren't needed or useful for slicing up our question database efficiently. &lt;em&gt;Traveller&lt;/em&gt; games got more tags recently because suddenly there was an influx of questions about two new editions and the original edition, and it became expedient to have multiple tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; tag may be in need of splitting, but there should be a positive argument for doing so that is now relevant, and that wasn't five, four, etc. years ago. That it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be split isn't a sufficient reason to split it — splitting it should serve a need that has been identified in our question base, or from our askers and answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, being a tiny tag currently, there are two ways a tag split could go: it could make the new tags even more obscure and less used, or it could make the new tags more visible and more frequently used. A proposal to split a tiny tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; should give some consideration to whether it will improve spontaneous tagging or impair it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might sound like a “no don't do that!” point. However, if even just “insiders” would use new split tags more, that can be plenty improvement. Even just the expectation of improvement can justify a split — there's no need to prove it beforehand. The point is that the benefit of splitting does need to be considered. Categorical purity isn't by itself a benefit in a folksonomy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A point of practicality. The low number of questions in the tag make its ambiguity not an (obvious?) problem currently — it's easy to search within the tag and quickly find what you're looking for, which reduces the practical gains of replacing it with two more specific tags.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to sum, I've been poking at and thinking about this tag for a while. I've been deliberately increasing its use where I can see its application to a question, and yet it's still a very low-use tag. I've considered its ambiguity, and I'm not one to shrink from making changes to tags when I see an advantage, but I hadn't (so far) seen advantage in this case for making two even smaller tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That then is the background and context of the current tag, as the top answerer in the tag, and (probably?) the top tagger of the tag. If someone sees advantage in splitting it, that would be great to hear! But that it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be split is a poor reason, and if done without forethought can just result in two tags that are used even less, and give us less organic tags and messier tagging without benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; to be split, I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-game-time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-game-time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-game-time&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/real-life-time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;real-life-time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;real-life-time&lt;/a&gt; would make sense to me. They feel a bit stilted to me, but they're nicely clear. Slightly less stilted might be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/in-world-time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;in-world-time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;in-world-time&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/table-time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;table-time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;table-time&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt; should be pressed into service to have either meaning though: &lt;em&gt;pacing&lt;/em&gt; is a technical term relating to the creation of specific human-perceptual/psychological experiences of the flow of story events and other structural elements (beats, scenes, rising and falling action, or however one subdivides and quantifies them) and stands on its own as a subject and technique. Pacing is larger than time: it uses time, but time is not all it is and isn't even its most important part. (It's akin to &lt;em&gt;comedic timing&lt;/em&gt; this way, which is also its own thing.) Even if it were pressed into service to mean &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt;, it would remain ambiguous: does pacing more obviously mean within the game, or within real time? (Spoiler: It's neither, since it lies on the interface between in-game reality and out-of-game dramatic timing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-05-11T02:35:45.467" LastActivityDate="2016-05-11T02:35:45.467" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6294" CreationDate="2016-05-12T03:40:30.837" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't fix what isn't broken.  That's as true in car maintenance as it is with tags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2016-05-12T03:40:30.837" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6299" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6300" CreationDate="2016-05-17T15:16:39.247" Score="4" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;When searching for advice on a more general topic is asking for best practices for gming to broad. Examples like Combat encounters with lots of participants, Social combat, Murder mystery investigations, or even a specific system. There is no specific scenario the asker would be trying to deal with but they would be looking for detailed practical advice on a small subset of possible scenarios. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28709" LastActivityDate="2016-05-17T15:42:41.173" Title="Is asking for GM best practices on general topics too broad?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6299" CreationDate="2016-05-17T15:30:34.147" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yep, that's too broad. Without a specific problem or goal at hand, answers will be all over the place, trying to guess what best practices list is the &quot;right&quot; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The voting system just doesn't work under those conditions, and the Q&amp;amp;A devolves into a poor approximation of a discussion forum. At that point it would have been better served to ask the question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;an RPG discussion forum (such as one of these ones)&lt;/a&gt; in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that work well here are those that can have specific answers that can be recognized as having a &quot;best&quot; answer. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16715/how-can-i-speed-up-combat-with-a-large-number-of-enemies&quot;&gt;How can I speed up combat with a large number of enemies?&lt;/a&gt; is an example of a question that works well here because it's more specific than the hypothetical &lt;strong&gt;“What are GM best practices for combat encounters with lots of participants?”&lt;/strong&gt; It has a specific problem to solve that answers can target with laser-like focus in their attempt to answer it better than any other answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, Stack Exchange focuses on excelling at what discussion forums do poorly: having an easily-summarised question that is about a specific problem shared by many, and providing its answer/solution clearly and prominently. Meanwhile, SE has sacrificed many things that aren't necessary for that goal in order to pursue it more effectively, and is therefore bad (sometimes &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; bad) at what discussion forums are still great at doing. SE aims to complement traditional discussion forums rather than replace them, and we recognise that this means some questions will fit the SE model well and some won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A “best practices” question falls squarely into the “best for discussion forums” category, by that measure. More particularly, because it's unclear to a hopeful reader whether reading it will solve whatever particular problem they have, and even if it does have the answer to &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; problem somewhere on the page — since the page isn't focused on a particular problem — who knows where in the page it will be found. That kind of searchability and focus isn't improved by putting such a question on a discussion forum, but the result of putting it on a discussion forum is still better because the discussion won't be artificially constrained by our rigid Q&amp;amp;A format and ban on discussing the topic or tangents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, a “best practices” question will rarely be narrow enough or objective (or &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective&lt;/a&gt;) enough to fit RPG.se, but that's OK because it would be stifled here anyway. Leaving such questions out of our format also makes more room for breaking such things up into many specific questions, that can then by found by focused searches or browsing the related tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-05-17T15:42:41.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6301" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6302" CreationDate="2016-05-17T23:38:56.923" Score="7" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;What do we do when duplicate questions go missed, both questions have good answers (&lt;em&gt;full disclosure: I answered one of the questions in question&lt;/em&gt;), and both have been established and open for some time?  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69812/can-a-hidden-attacker-shoot-around-the-corner?noredirect=1#comment181321_69812&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was asked back in October and received some answers, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78873/should-a-rogue-be-denied-a-hide-attempt-if-he-is-around-a-corner-of-a-hall-and-h&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; was asked just about a month ago (particularly disappointing because I recall thinking there was a duplicate when I answered it and couldn't find one!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I flagged the earlier one as a duplicate because it came up in the activity feed this afternoon when it received a new answer and I incorrectly perceived it as being a new question, so I voted to close as a duplicate.  As @Miniman pointed out in the comments on that question, we generally don't close the older of the two questions when there are duplicates, but it also doesn't feel right to close the newer one, being that it's been open for a month now.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the general policy &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; to simply vote to close the more recent one, that's fine, but might it make more sense to merge the questions? I'm probably overthinking this and will go and vote to close the latter one as a duplicate anyway.  Anyway, what do?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-15T06:29:58.820" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T06:29:58.820" Title="What do we do when there are duplicate questions that get missed?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6301" CreationDate="2016-05-18T00:01:23.360" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mods have access to the &lt;strong&gt;merge&lt;/strong&gt; action, which moves all answers from one question to the master question, closes the duplicate as a duplicate (if it hasn't been already), and then locks the duplicate to make sure the connection “sticks” and can't be undone by voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in practice, how we handle missed duplicates that have already collected substantial answers is to wait for a duplicate close to happen and “settle” — that is, get the chance to be contested, have clarifications happen, or whatever until its open/closed status looks solid — and then someone can custom flag it and ask a mod to do a merge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing it this way takes longer than it might otherwise, but the plus side is that it avoids irrecoverably moving answers before it's 100% certain to be the correct course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T00:01:23.360" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6303" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-18T10:34:50.283" Score="4" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt; has 146 questions and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounters&lt;/a&gt; 58. They seem to be pretty much the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should they be merged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21861" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-05-18T12:38:39.433" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T16:30:33.640" Title="Are [encounter-design] and [encounters] redundant tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6304" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-18T10:36:21.360" Score="15" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm told our emergent folksonomy means the attitude toward tags is &quot;don't fix it if it's not broken,&quot; and I'm all for letting the garden grow wild until it needs pruning. But looking over our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/tags&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tags&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tags&lt;/a&gt; history, I can't really tell what constitutes &quot;broken&quot; for tags; what signals a need to curate? Curation, in this case, means starting a meta discussion about intervening to guide the growth of tags or prune back something undesirable. Tools for this include (but probably aren't limited to) synonymising, splitting, burninating, and blacklisting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked on meta.se about this and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/279398/244929&quot;&gt;their answer is&lt;/a&gt; that each Stack is independently responsible for deciding when to curate its own tags, without guidance from our Stack Overlords. Since there's some notable confusion about this topic on RPG.SE, it's been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279391/what-signals-a-need-to-curate-the-emergent-tagging-folksonomy/279398?noredirect=1#comment905397_279398&quot;&gt;suggested&lt;/a&gt; that we have a meta post on this site to gain a consensus on what patterns of tag use require active curation in the context of this RPG Stack Exchange and its particular eccentricities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, RPG.SE: What are red flags that indicate a tag should be considered for curation? What site behaviour patterns should tell me that a meta question about the tag might be necessary?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be very clear: I'm not asking for rules about how to curate tags. I'm asking for guidelines to help know when something on the main site means that maybe a tag should get put under the spotlight on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-05-20T21:24:43.377" Title="What signals a need to curate the emergent tagging folksonomy?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6305" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-18T11:01:57.433" Score="-3" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;If one has asked a very positive and good faith question about a subject concerning issues which may be problematic for roleplayers... That is, which touch on subjects to do with religion, past trauma, the relationship between fact and fiction etc in a way which has been shown to be distressing and/or triggering for members of the forum, should such questions be removed from the site, or is it acceptable just to have them heavily downvoted and left where they are?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25516" LastEditorUserId="25516" LastEditDate="2016-05-18T13:24:41.333" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T13:24:41.333" Title="Are good faith questions on problematic subjects allowable?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="11" ClosedDate="2016-05-18T13:29:17.373" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6305" CreationDate="2016-05-18T11:28:39.660" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE accepts difficult subjects like that; we've already got a number of them, including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51946/4398&quot;&gt;How do I use God as an NPC while being sensitive to players' real-life religious beliefs?&lt;/a&gt; (this is the only religion-specific one I could find quickly, though &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71860/4398&quot;&gt;Has Christianity ever been given stats?&lt;/a&gt; might also qualify for some folks)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37683/4398&quot;&gt;How to approach sexual violence so that it adds to the narrative?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24358/4398&quot;&gt;Is using the term “gypsy” in a game racist?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208/4398&quot;&gt;How should a GM deal with sexuality in an RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5227/4398&quot;&gt;How to roleplay a PC torture scene&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21942/4398&quot;&gt;Is there an alternate rule to allow different stats for Male/Female characters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51721/4398&quot;&gt;Dealing with difficult male players, when you're a new female player?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We even have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30906/4398&quot;&gt;posts explaining tools for handling this kind of thing in a game&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, such questions should follow all the usual RPG.SE guidelines for asking about subjective issues in a specific, actionable way. That's &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; important for these topics, and it also helps us recognise them as good faith questions. Occasionally we've closed and downvoted a good-faith question by accident, but after some comment discussion our mistake is usually quickly realised and --after judicious clarity edits-- reversed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the site is very mature about this sort of thing. So long as everyone remembers the importance of edits that don't change the nature of a post but might mitigate an extreme reception, we can deal with difficult topics quite well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When these questions &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; attract unfortunate attention (and they do, it's sadly inevitable on the Internet), the site mechanics of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/protect-questions&quot;&gt;protection&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/flag-posts&quot;&gt;flags&lt;/a&gt; are there to deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T12:02:14.150" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6303" CreationDate="2016-05-18T14:08:09.680" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think they're different and are sometmies being used differently.  Encounter-design questions are mostly all about designing encounters.  Encounter questions are frequently about post-encounter questions - though a couple prominent questions tagged encounters should be encounter-design (the diplomacy one and the plot device one just on the top page of results).  Some of the rest aren't about questions being asked in advance about how to design an encounter, however, they are being asked by players or afterwards.  But there's a lot that perhaps should be encounter-design instead.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;retag the outliers, and leave the questions that encounter-design isn't appropriate for (they skipped a fight do they get xp... when can I draw my sword in an encounter... &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;merge encounters with encounter-design and figure out what to do with the outliers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;merge them into encounters and not worry about it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think #3 is probably the best choice in terms of work for the value. This way [encounters] is mostly about encounter design, but also about the fringe of other related questions too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T14:08:09.680" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6303" CreationDate="2016-05-18T15:19:50.530" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;They &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; have overlap. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounters&lt;/a&gt; is a more general tag, and covers things that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt; doesn't; the design tag meanwhile focuses directly on issues around building/designing/etc. encounters, making it more usefully focused for some questions' purposes than the general tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this ideal? Eh, it's not lovely. I have personally been brought up short trying to figure out the tagging with these two, since it's not always obvious. But they do have distinct domains even though they have overlap, so they're appropriate subjects for tagging. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ecounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ecounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ecounter-design&lt;/a&gt; tag is the more frequently used one by a factor of 3 (design has ~150 questions; the general tag has ~50), which is what justifies its existence as a specialisation of the more general tag. The more general tag continues to justify its existence by just covering things that the design tag doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideal no, but “perfect is the enemy of good enough.” These tags do their jobs well enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As always though, tags tend to get misapplied or just not updated when a newer tag is made (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounters&lt;/a&gt; is newer than the design tag) — where this has happened with these two tags it's useful to retag old questions to use the tags more consistently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T15:19:50.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6303" CreationDate="2016-05-18T16:30:33.640" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;One option that could be considered is to to make the &lt;strong&gt;encounters&lt;/strong&gt; tag more clearly distinct from &lt;strong&gt;encounter-design&lt;/strong&gt; by giving it a more specific name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I don't have a good alternative for it right now either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21861" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T16:30:33.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6304" CreationDate="2016-05-18T16:37:47.310" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the most important rule of thumb is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When you're consistently having to &lt;em&gt;remove&lt;/em&gt; a tag from questions, there's something wrong with the tagging system: a poorly-named tag, a bad tag &quot;definition&quot; that conflicts with the tag's assumed purpose, or users are reaching for another tag that isn't there and using this one in error instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2016-05-18T16:37:47.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6311" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-19T03:59:07.987" Score="-3" ViewCount="209" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site is about fantasy role playing games. These games are games in our minds. Their worlds is the product of imagination.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I ask something about these world, it is not like if I would ask, for example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13570/if-the-pilot-cabin-loses-pressure-can-the-pressure-difference-lock-the-cockpit&quot;&gt;is the pilot cabin door hermetically sealed in a large passenger airplane&lt;/a&gt;. This question has a clear answer: yes or no. It is not about how do we feel it better, should it be sealed or not. It is not like how do we imagine the cabin doors or a passenger plane.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a very clear thing: they are either sealed or not. Anybody working on planes, or knowing their technical documentation, can answer this question and it will be a clear, well-defined answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The passenger planes don't exist only in our minds, they are very clearly defined objects in the objective reality. It is exactly the opposite as the things are in the RPG worlds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The case is exactly opposite if I ask, was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70390/was-the-ravnos-antediluvian-a-wight&quot;&gt;the Ravnos antediluvian a wight&lt;/a&gt;. The idea that he was a wight, it was my invention. I knew very well, that there is no canon answer for that, and that probably even the RPG developers of the White Wolf didn't consider this possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I really wanted: people knowing better the canon, the rules, and anyways: &lt;em&gt;the people having much better imagination of that world&lt;/em&gt;, to share me, what do they think about that. What I asked, was very clearly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; what I asked in the first example. I asked for: how do we &lt;em&gt;imagine&lt;/em&gt; that, how does this look better, what are the pros and cons in the case. Essentially, I wanted to validate my &lt;em&gt;opinion&lt;/em&gt; against the &lt;em&gt;opinions&lt;/em&gt; of others knowing much better the WoD as me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course this was exactly what I couldn't ask. It had been closed on the spot as opinion-based question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I inserted a beautiful image into the question, and formulated it as a question for game mechanics or canon references. A close vote was - as nearly always - initiated, but fortunately the question survived it. The result was a popular question, which - on my opinion - added some valuable to the site and didn't harm it. It made the site better and didn't worsen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the topic of this SE site essentially differs from the other SE alternatives: most question what people would ask, don't have an &quot;objective&quot; answer here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The engine of the SE &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; handle this. Everybody could write his/her, maybe contradicting answers, and then the voting counts and the pipes will decide, which is better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course there are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; opinionated questions, for example a question &lt;em&gt;&quot;Why is dnd4 so terrible?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; shouldn't be allowed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I suggest to make the VtCs lighter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The growth of the site, and the future of the site, depends on the newbies. And they need to work often irrationally hard to ask their questions on a site-conformant way because of rules invented for very different topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23232" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:59:54.003" LastActivityDate="2016-05-19T17:26:08.637" Title="There are practically no objective questions about imaginary worlds, I suggest to use the VtCs as &quot;opinion based&quot; not so seriously" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6312" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6314" CreationDate="2016-05-19T10:29:57.507" Score="5" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seeing that *W narrators (GMs, MCc, EICc,...) operate on principles and agendas and not so much on the Rule Zero, I want to try a DW game using an engine for GM-less play (such as Mythic GM Emulator).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a rough idea of how to make it work using a &quot;template&quot; Fronts, randomly choosing from the list of GM moves, and so on. Do I need to describe them in the question to show why I think that the idea is plausible at all and to allow the answerers to build and improve on them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasons for my wish to try it out: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I want to be a player as well. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am just so curious to try.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My group of friends seem to act out and participate in world-building more freely when it is a circle of peers and not narrator versus consumers. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do I need to elaborate on that in my question? I think that giving this information invites various frame challenges of &quot;How do I facilitate such a game? - You don't. Let someone else GM. It is not interesting at all. Play a different GM-less game.&quot; which I'm not really interested in. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have tried playing Fiasco, Microscope and DramaSystem - all was fun and everyone was involved in storytelling. A couple of games of Apocalypse World and Worlds in Peril came to a halt after a couple of sessions each.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Internet search on the topic netted me only a number of forum threads consisting primarily of the Question followed by a mix of &quot;I think it cannot work&quot; and &quot;I tried it and it sorta works&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also found a mention of &quot;Night Witches&quot; *W hack that is supposed to be GM-less, but is not available to me. So that at least must mean that it is mechanically possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that the question should have a clause requiring the answerer to support the answer with experience, but what else can I emphasize to better scope it? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;How could I formulate a question on how to facilitate a GM-less game of Powered by Apocalypse so it is answerable and a good fit for SE format?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8653" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-05-19T11:10:06.503" LastActivityDate="2016-05-19T16:58:34.923" Title="How could I formulate a question on how to facilitate a GM-less game of Powered by Apocalypse so it is answerable?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6313" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6301" CreationDate="2016-05-19T12:14:48.807" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;While @SevenSidedDie already answered the main question, I would like to make an observation: &lt;strong&gt;Age does not matter&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackExchange does not live by the &lt;em&gt;First Come, First Serve&lt;/em&gt; principle, but instead aims at providing quality answers to questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea behind duplicates is not to avoid repetition, but to concentrate all the knowledge on a particular topic/point in a single place. If you ever had to read pages and pages of forum pages to patch together the pieces of information you could glean, you should understand why it is so much more pleasant to be presented with a single coherent answer giving all the details in an organized fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do note that even closed duplicates are not removed, they are still useful after closure as they provide alternate wording pointing to the elected &quot;main&quot; question. This allows people searching with synonyms to still find the place where the information is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what should be done when considering two duplicates?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It depends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a new question pops up, closing it immediately as a duplicate is normally rather straightforward. However this is not necessarily the best decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What matters, ultimately, is to have the best quality question and the best quality answers as &quot;canonical&quot; and duplicate questions used as road signs to point there:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it may mean closing the older question in favor of the new one, if it is much clearer and attracted better answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it may mean merging the answers from one into the others (something moderators can do)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it may mean editing the &quot;favored&quot; question to improve it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it may mean editing an answer to improve it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it may mean created a brand new answer if the existing ones are found lacking&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;StackExchange is first and foremost about quality and a high signal/noise ratio&lt;/strong&gt;, authorship or age of posts matter not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1355" LastActivityDate="2016-05-19T12:14:48.807" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6312" CreationDate="2016-05-19T16:58:34.923" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's hard to give advice for improving a hypothetical question; in practice, it's nearly always more effective to just ask the question, and then deal with any edits it needs as they are brought to your attention. Often that kind of in-place editing is enough, but if it needs more intensive workshopping, that needs a real question to start from anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One red flag that I see here though is that it sounds like you have some ideas but haven't tried any of them to see if they have actual problems — the problems you want to ask about are as hypothetical as the question. That often gets a question closed for being vague, opinion-based, or too broad (maybe all three). This happens because it's very hard to write a question that clearly and precisely describes a problem before you know what the problem even is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Showing what you've tried already in order to discover the answer, and detailing what problems you have directly experienced in trying to find the answer, can help avoid writing a vague question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides, asking “I have ideas for how to do this, are they plausible?” can't be answered until &lt;em&gt;someone&lt;/em&gt; tries them. Other users are rightly going to wonder why the person who is in the best position to test the ideas to get some practical data hasn't yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my advice is twofold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Try out your ideas. You can even do this by yourself if you have no willing guinea pigs in your group — even a solo test can show where there are obvious problems during play that aren't obvious “on paper.”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When you have a concrete idea of what your roadblock is, just ask the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bonus bit of advice: Reconsider whether it's &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; impossible to learn from the design of &lt;a href=&quot;http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/night-witches/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Night Witches&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. Whether professional or whether just for house rules in a home group, designers learn by studying others' designs, and studying a ready-made method of doing exactly what you want is something that is worth reconsidering, since it's available online. At worse, if finances or online payment methods are barriers, you could just ask how the GM-less portion of &lt;em&gt;Night Witches&lt;/em&gt; works on a forum where the game is discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-19T16:58:34.923" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6311" CreationDate="2016-05-19T17:19:02.023" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm afraid I don't see the problem. Boiled down and paraphrasing, this is what I see this question saying:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“I wrote a question that was looking for opinions, which was closed because the site doesn't answer questions that are looking for opinions.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“I edited it to be a question the site could answer. I think the new version of the question is a valuable contribution to the site.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Therefore questions like my original question shouldn't be closed or changed.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first two points are great: that's the site working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 3rd point is a contradiction: changing the question resulted in a Q&amp;amp;A that you think has value and the site's community appears to agree, but it's claiming that the change being a good thing is evidence that it shouldn't have needed to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then you go on to suggest a change to how the site works — basically, to make it more like a freeform discussion forum — to support that invalid 3rd point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The basic problem with the suggestion, aside from being supported only by a logical contradiction, is that the site's purpose is to be &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; like a forum in certain ways. Yes, votes can be used on opinion-based answers, but just because they &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be cast doesn't mean that the &lt;em&gt;result&lt;/em&gt; is valuable. The purpose of the voting system is not to simply show what people agree with, but to sort the answers by quality. This works only when the answers are not wholly opinion-based. When the answers are wholly opinion-based the voting ends up sorting by popularity, not quality, which defeats the original goal the site was created to achieve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comes back to the purpose of the site: not being like forums. What you're asking RPG.se to do with opinion-based questions is already served excellently by RPG discussion forums, which this site was never intended to replace. Quoting myself from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6300&quot;&gt;another very related Meta&lt;/a&gt; two days ago:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions that work well here are those that can have specific answers that can be recognized as having a &quot;best&quot; answer. […]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In general, Stack Exchange focuses on excelling at what discussion forums do poorly: having an easily-summarised question that is about a specific problem shared by many, and providing its answer/solution clearly and prominently. Meanwhile, SE has sacrificed many things that aren't necessary for that goal in order to pursue it more effectively, and is therefore bad (sometimes &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; bad) at what discussion forums are still great at doing. SE aims to complement traditional discussion forums rather than replace them, and we recognise that this means some questions will fit the SE model well and some won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want to ask for everyone's opinions, do it! Just not on RPG.se — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;pick one of these discussion forums instead&lt;/a&gt;. And when you have a question that's not about opinions, ask here because RPG.se works better for that than a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like a hammer doesn't work when used to slice onions, RPG.se doesn't work when used to get people's opinions — it's the wrong tool for that purpose. RPG.se is not designed to be, and can't be changed to be, useful for all questions of all types that all people might wish to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-05-19T17:26:08.637" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6316" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-20T21:13:03.167" Score="11" ViewCount="187" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/civilisation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;civilisation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;civilisation&lt;/a&gt; does not have any description or guidance on its use, its used on only 6 questions all of which explicitly they are asking about civilization world building and the tag is created using the UK version of the word where SE has US english as the standard for tags. &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/23869/what-should-the-standard-spelling-be-british-or-us&quot;&gt;What should the standard spelling be - British or US?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-09T08:20:24.163" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T08:20:24.163" Title="Murder -Death -Kill the [Civilisation] tag" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6304" CreationDate="2016-05-20T21:24:43.377" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think it is in large part intuitive.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just submitted a tag discussion question on Meta for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/civilisation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;civilisation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;civilisation&lt;/a&gt; because I saw the tag, caught the UK spelling, and then proceeded to investigate its usage. The tag had no written up wiki, was only used on a handful of questions, and its use was merely to reiterate that they were talking about a civilization (which each question stated in the body of the question). I also confirmed that the SE standard for tag language is US-English.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;That said I think some process of highlighting tags could be pushed for&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags that do not have a tag wiki description for their use after a set period of time/questions should probably get reviewed to see if the tag is useful and if it is so that a description can be added to improve its use. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is the only example that immediately comes to mind where a metric could be used as guideline for review, every other case I can think of falls into a more subjective category. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2016-05-20T21:24:43.377" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6318" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6316" CreationDate="2016-05-20T22:14:25.267" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;All six questions look like they should have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-building&lt;/a&gt; instead. That makes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/civilisation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;civilisation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;civilisation&lt;/a&gt; a good candidate for destruction via synonyming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-20T22:14:25.267" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6319" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-21T08:04:21.910" Score="10" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was poking through the tags, looking for things to flag as favorites and I came across &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt;. It appears to be aliased to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, but that's not accurate: There were three other Storyteller-based games published by White Wolf: &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(role-playing_game)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;strike&gt;Aeon&lt;/strike&gt; Trinity&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberrant&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Aberrant&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure!&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Adventure!&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't seem to have any questions that cover any of the three, but their existence makes the synonym and it's description inaccurate. &lt;strong&gt;Is it worth fixing?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22138" LastEditorUserId="22138" LastEditDate="2016-05-23T17:27:36.093" LastActivityDate="2016-05-23T20:13:13.823" Title="The [storyteller-system] Tag Synonym - Inaccurate, but probably irrelevant?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6320" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6323" CreationDate="2016-05-21T21:23:34.620" Score="17" ViewCount="539" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our tag wikis are best when they have informative descriptions and excerpts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we have a low-grade but ongoing problem with copyrighted material being copied and pasted into our tag wikis. Often these are suggested edits, yet the problem isn't being caught in the review queues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The short version&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't just copy text into our tag wikis from elsewhere. It's almost never legal to do, &lt;strong&gt;even OGL or Wikipedia text&lt;/strong&gt;. (It's possible to cite OGL or Wikipedia text legally, but it's very difficult to do it correctly. If in doubt, just don't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When in the Suggested Edits review queue, check unusually nice suggested edits in a search engine to see if they were copied, and reject them if so. Be a bit more suspicious, a bit more alert for the natural human tendency to be “helpful” by taking the path of least resistance and just copying text from elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The long version&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just rejected two suggested edits to a tag's wiki, and rolled back four other tag wiki edits that had passed the suggested edit review queue. The first two used unattributed OGL text and the others used unattributed text from wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not naming any names because this stuff is legitimately not obvious, and no harm was done anyway in this case. It's a trend that's been developing over a long time, and these were just the most recent examples that tipped me toward addressing it explicitly. Things are pretty good actually — but we can always do &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; and better is awesome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;OGL material and wikis (like Wikipedia) are copyrighted&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's counterintuitive, I know, but both OGLed text and Wikipedia text are copyrighted works. The only way anyone is allowed to copy and reuse their text is by following their respective licenses. They &lt;strong&gt;cannot&lt;/strong&gt; be freely copied from the way that has been happening in our tag wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that both of them require specific types of attribution in order for their reuse to be legal, because their licenses say so, but the design of tag wikis makes proper attribution difficult or even impossible to include.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our tag excerpts are just plain too small to contain attribution. &lt;strong&gt;It's impossible to use open-licensed material that requires attribution in our tag wiki excerpts.&lt;/strong&gt; New tag wiki excerpts must always be original writing from the person making the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a bit more complicated in our tag wiki descriptions themselves, because there we do have a bit more room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Wikipedia and other wikis&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Attribution for Wikipedia articles is small enough to include in the full tag wiki description, so it's technically &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; to reuse the Wikipedia text in our tag wiki descriptions. &lt;strong&gt;If attribution is included, Wikipedia text may be reused in our tag wiki descriptions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To use Wikipedia text, refer to their citation guidelines available by clicking “Cite this page” in the sidebar of a given article. &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CiteThisPage&amp;amp;page=Dragon_%28magazine%29&amp;amp;id=711313301&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The guidance page looks like this.&lt;/a&gt; If figuring out how to write the attribution from the information on that page seems intimidating and confusing, that's a good sign that one isn't equipped to reuse text from Wikipedia on a public site like RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(You might see now why I rolled back those edits instead of attempting to add correct attribution, despite having a lot of experience writing Creative Commons license attributions. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag excerpts still need to be freshly-written, original text when using Wikipedia text in the larger tag wiki description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All this goes for wikis other than Wikipedia too, except they usually don't have even a confusing page about how to cite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Open Game License material&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Open Game License (OGL) also allows reuse of text, but to do so requires including a verbatim copy of the entire license along with the text, as well requiring specific edits to be made to the included copy of the license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We obviously can't put a copy of the entire OGL in the tag wiki excerpts. We could, in theory, past a copy of the 1,000-word OGL into each and every tag wiki description that uses OGLed text and update it in the way that it requires, but that's ridiculous — it's easier and saner to avoid copying and just write in our own words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even if we did, the tag wiki excerpts still wouldn't be covered by the license, because they routinely appear elsewhere on the site alone and the OGL doesn't allow that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The exceptions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are very few exceptions that work with the constraints of our tag wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are licenses which don't require attribution; these are rarely used for text though, and I've never personally seen RPG descriptions or reviews released under such a license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some people release their text into the Public Domain, which means it can be reused with no attribution at all, and for any purpose. In practice, this is even rarer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, if text appears elsewhere on the internet that matches one of our tag wikis, it has been improperly added to our tag wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What to do&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When submitting a tag wiki edit&lt;/strong&gt;, either avoid copying text, or commit to learning how to write correct license attributions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When reviewing suggested tag wiki edits&lt;/strong&gt;, test any unusually well-written text by plugging a sentence or two of it into a search engine. See if an SRD or Wikipedia or another (normal, non-open copyright) site comes up. If so, reject the edit as harmful, with a note that Wikipedia/OGL/copyrighted text cannot be used without a license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, if you're feeling flush with time and know what you're doing, click &lt;kbd&gt;Improve Edit&lt;/kbd&gt; and add an attribution to the appropriate part of the tag wiki description, according to the text's license.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But… Fair Use / Fair Dealing?!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's often unclear whether a case of text copying would be protected by fair use/dealing doctrine. There are arguments that could be made for and against tag wikis being covered by the doctrine. Copying that isn't a 100% crystal-clear case of fair use/dealing is best considered &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt;, and avoided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we have no &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to copy text for our tag wikis, it's both unnecessary to tread in grey areas of fair use/dealing, and that lack of need may actually be a strong indication that it's not a protected form of copying anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-30T05:13:05.223" LastActivityDate="2022-03-30T05:13:05.223" Title="Avoid just copying text into the tag wikis" Tags="|discussion|tags|copyright|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6321" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6320" CreationDate="2016-05-23T02:38:48.703" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;With respect, this does not deal with legitimate use of copyrighted material under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;fair use&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;17 U.S. Code § 107&lt;/a&gt;) or &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;fair dealing&lt;/a&gt; (Commonwealth) doctrines which, given we are an English language site, pretty much covers the field. Under these doctrines, copyright material may be used if it meets the respective criteria. Both Wikipedia and the OGL as US works fall under the fair use doctrine which is the more permissive of the two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Supreme Court has held that fair use is an affirmative defence to copyright violation (&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz_v._Universal_Music_Corp.&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lenz v Universal Music Corp&lt;/a&gt;); the Ninth Circuit has gone further finding that fair use is expressly authorized right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For fair use to apply the court will use a four factor balancing test:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the nature of the copyrighted work;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For use in a tag wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;this is clearly a non-profit educational use;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the work &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a product produced for profit which argues &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt; fair use;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the amount quoted must necessarily be small in relation to the work as a whole;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there is likely to be an insignificant effect (perhaps even a positive one) on the market for the work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this is only my opinion, I find it difficult to envisage a circumstance where use of copyrighted material on a tag wiki (or even in a Q or A) would &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; be fair use. I would even go further and opine that use would be fair dealing as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not advocating that this site should defend its rights to use the work if challenged; that would be both time and cost prohibitive. However, unless and until we receive a DCMA takedown notice (please inform us if this has happened) to outright ban this is needlessly draconian.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2016-05-23T02:38:48.703" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6319" CreationDate="2016-05-23T20:13:13.823" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It may or may not be worth fixing. Since tagging follows what we need in a practical sense though, it's not possible to tell whether it's important to fix until we actually have questions that show a need to be tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historically we had few to no questions that were actually tagged with just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt;; in practice it was (nearly?) always a redundant tag beside [cwod] or somesuch. My guess is that if we ever do have other games in the Storyteller system family, they'll only need game-name tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aberrant&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aberrant&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aberrant&lt;/a&gt; and won't benefit from being collected together under a family-system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we have or get questions that would benefit from an independent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; tag though, or there is a clear and present need to encourage people to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/storyteller-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;storyteller-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;storyteller-system&lt;/a&gt; tag itself, we can always detach it from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; and make that happen! It's just not really worth it for hypothetical uses, when the practical uses have (as far as I recall) always just been as a synonym for classic WoD anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-23T20:13:13.823" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6320" CreationDate="2016-05-23T21:20:18.533" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The most universally convincing argument I've heard for not pasting into tag wikis is simply that tag wikis have a pretty specific purpose (clarifying the sort of question they should be attached to), and it's next to impossible that any text from another source will be written with that purpose in mind. We could debate legal exceptions until the Sun burns out, but copy-pasting outside material into tag wikis simply makes for bad tag wikis--legal or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-05-23T21:20:18.533" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6324" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6327" CreationDate="2016-05-25T05:13:43.013" Score="14" ViewCount="376" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80490/how-can-i-get-my-players-to-focus-ooc-chat&quot;&gt;This question on OOC talk&lt;/a&gt; has changed significantly since it was originally asked and several answers given. When something like this happens, offering new information, is is best to edit an answer you've given, or to let it stand?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What about a case where the original question appeared clear? There was no need to flag this one, until after it was edited. Now it's a lot more confusing, but has also removed a lot of the information used to consider the original answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the best practice for a situation like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My main concern is situations when an edit totally alters the question, completely invalidating the answers given. Smaller edits to provide clarification or extra detail aren't a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15522" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T17:31:58.683" LastActivityDate="2020-04-07T17:31:58.683" Title="When a Question changes, should answers change, too?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|editing|question-scope|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6325" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-26T17:44:14.960" Score="2" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;The new edition of Mage the Awakening has not been finalized yet, should they have this post notice (if it's available on this stack)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening+chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot;&gt;list&lt;/a&gt; of all such questions (along with some false positives).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T13:08:41.480" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T13:08:41.480" Title="Should all Mage the Awakening questions have the 'rapidly evolving' post notice?" Tags="|discussion|world-of-darkness|post-notice|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6325" CreationDate="2016-05-26T19:10:50.137" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It doesn't need the Rapidly Changing template message — either the answer is knowable and answers will be submitted, the question will get closed as unclear, or it will just remain unanswered until an answer exists. If later changes to the rules invalidate a particular answer post, then the usual site processes that cope with such things (downvotes, edits, comments, new answers, etc.) should take care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this is a new edition, it likely also needs a new tag to isolate its questions from questions about &lt;em&gt;Mage: the Awakening&lt;/em&gt; 1st edition. A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-awakening-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-awakening-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-awakening-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag would probably fit the bill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-05-26T19:10:50.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6324" CreationDate="2016-05-27T00:08:06.273" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When a question changes, any answers that do not answer the new version of the question should be changed as well.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a very simple reason for this: &lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this site is to provide useful answers to questions.&lt;/strong&gt; If an answer does not fully address the question as it is posed at the top of the page, that answer is not a useful answer to that question. Our voting system functions by means of us upvoting useful answers, and downvoting (or even deleting) answers that address the question poorly or not at all. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If a question is edited after an answer has already been posted in a way that means that answer no longer fully addresses the question&lt;/strong&gt; (and the edit to the answer is unlikely to be reverted), &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;that answer ceases to be a useful one&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; - and like any non-useful answer, it should be downvoted, edited to be more useful, or (in extreme cases) deleted entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may sound harsh for those users who post an answers in good faith only to have the rug pulled from under them, but there's no real alternative. Answers that don't address the question &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to be downvoted or deleted, or we'll no longer be able to rely on the most-upvoted answers being the most useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As far as I'm aware, there are two issues that potentially complicate this question, but I don't think either of them is persuasive enough to make us give up the advantages of our voting system.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The first is that an edit to a question doesn't allow you to reverse your upvote on answers to that question. I'm not really sure why this is the case, but I suspect it's just something we have to live with.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The second issue is that potentially a questions can edited in ways that don't just refine it, but change it completely. As in, questions that get changed from &quot;what are the rules for dice&quot; to &quot;how do I kick my mother out of the game.&quot; Such changes automatically completely invalidate every answer they have. When this happens, our response should depend on the situation.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question was changed because the original wasn't a good fit for the site, answers to that question aren't appropriate either, and should be removed or changed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question was changed because the original poster decided that now they have their answer they don't need the old question any more, that user doesn't understand that questions are supposed to be persistent on this site. The user should be educated, a new question posted, and the edit to the question reverted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question was changed because the OP has refined what they wanted to ask as a result of feedback on their question... That's a grey area, and we'll have to deal with it on a case-by-case basis. In some cases it'll be appropriate to revert the change and ask a new question; In others, to let the edit stand and update or downvote and delete old answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We need to accept that if an answer isn't useful, it isn't useful.&lt;/strong&gt; It doesn't matter that it was useful once, or that the person who wrote it did so in good faith; If the answer doesn't address the question, that answer isn't a good one. Yes, it's unfair. But it's the only way to maintain this site's greatness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...On a slight tangent, when an answer is completely invalidated by a question change, it might be better to delete the answer and write a new one than to edit an existing answer into a completely new form, since this prevents votes from before the question edit sticking around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="2699" LastEditDate="2019-09-28T00:27:25.847" LastActivityDate="2019-09-28T00:27:25.847" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6328" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2016-05-28T03:38:38.230" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's much discussion on meta about list-questions and list-answers, and a lot of conflicting statements: &quot;list questions are a form we discourage,&quot; &quot;lists are fine, it's links that are the problem,&quot; &quot;voting breaks on lists,&quot; &quot;maintenance is a problem on lists,&quot; &quot;maintenance is fine, and CW makes it even easier,&quot; &amp;amp;c. &amp;amp;c. &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some point we need to sort out where we actually stand on lists; this tag makes it easier to find all the previous discussions and is a zeroth step in that direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-06-03T18:27:09.063" LastActivityDate="2016-06-03T18:27:09.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6329" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2016-05-28T03:38:38.230" Score="0" Body="Meta questions about mainsite questions asking for lists or likely to generate list-answers." OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-06-03T18:27:14.923" LastActivityDate="2016-06-03T18:27:14.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6331" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-05-31T10:06:20.847" Score="4" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;The meta post concerns this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/80982/3263&quot;&gt;Can I understand the &amp;#39;right to dream&amp;#39; by choices central to the agenda?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is on hold for being too broad. I really don't see why this is the case, as I explicitly say what kind of answer would be good and provide examples, which are not very verbose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A good answer provides an example of right to dream / GNS simulationist agenda and the central creative contributions/choices therein, or argues why providing such is not possible (and hence why this interpretation of creative agenda concept is flawed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Earlier, I give examples of central creative contributions. One of them, quoted here for reference:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tactical figure chess; the system might be for example D&amp;amp;D 4: The central choices are the actions you take in tactical play - where you move, what powers you use, etc. The central choices are framed by character build, fictional events in play, and previous tactical choices. The consequences of the tactical choices clearly show up in play and reveal whether the choices were good or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer of similar nature, but related to a right to dream agenda (princess play, for example, but any sim agenda is equally acceptable), would likely be of similar length and an acceptable answer. A better answer would consist of a couple of such examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, an explanation why this is not possible would also be an answer. It would likely be a longer one, though I don't know how long. A brief argument should be manageable in the format of this site, I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How and why is this question too broad?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone also voted to close as unclear. As should surprise nobody, I also don't see this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The structure of the question is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I give a way of understanding a theoretical concept.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I state that I can understand A and B very well in this way. Can C also be understood in this way?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I give examples A1, A2, A3 and B1 that apply this way of understanding the concept to A and B.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can this be done for C also?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also edited in part 2', which includes the common definition of the concept in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-05-31T10:35:31.627" Title="Why was a theory question closed as too broad or unclear?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6331" CreationDate="2016-05-31T10:24:50.347" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I don't think it's too broad,&lt;/strong&gt; but it has a common trait we see in questions that are too broad but trying to narrow themselves artificially:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experience has shown that a question which assumes it already knows what a good answer will look like is &lt;em&gt;artificially&lt;/em&gt; narrowing its scope by turning away answerers whose solutions are in a form the asker didn't think of (isn't the point of asking for help to get alternate viewpoints?). Good questions tend to present challenges and ask the Stack for any solutions its expertise can bring to bear on the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; think it's quite unclear.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference between the Big Model's standard definition of the Creative Agenda, and your own definition of the same, is nigh impossible for me to pick out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Definition of creative agenda on the big model wiki: &amp;quot;The players' aesthetic priorities and their effect on anything that happen at the table that has any impact on the shared fiction&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My formulation emphasizes (or at least tries to) the way the aesthetic priorities of players have an impact on the shared fiction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your formulation seems to be just a pithy re-phrasing of the first one: each is defining the creative agenda to be the players' aesthetic priorities as that modifies the play experience through table-level action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since your &amp;quot;alternative&amp;quot; seems to be just the same thing re-phrased, your question boils down to &amp;quot;Can I define the creative agenda with its definition instead of its definition?&amp;quot; Which sounds like nonsense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's not your intent, the question needs to be drastically re-written to better demonstrate how your definition is substantively different from the existing one. And please do also try not to tell answerers how to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you'd like some help copy-editing your question for clarity (eg, &amp;quot;This method is the central creative contribution&amp;quot; is the first use of the word &lt;em&gt;method&lt;/em&gt; in your question, so it's very unclear to what you're referring by &amp;quot;this method&amp;quot;), I'm sure someone will be happy to oblige.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-05-31T10:24:50.347" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6333" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-02T17:48:23.787" Score="33" ViewCount="1092" Body="&lt;p&gt;A certain kind of questions attract many answers which are essentially the same answer repeated in different words, or posted with different formatting, or expanded to include all sorts of only vaguely related things. (Overly long answers and lack of brevity could be another topic, but I just mention it here, since the two usually go together). Such questions have a common theme, the answer to many of them can be started with &quot;talk to your players/GM&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see you can add something small to an already posted answer, please do it in comments. And as far as I know there's a feature to view answers that were posted while you were writing yours, please use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I intentionally do not post any links to any examples here, since my intention is not to point fingers and make the people in question all defensive, nor to dissect every example and argue whether it was worth a different answer or just a comment. I feel that wouldn't lead anywhere. Thank you for reading and take no offense anybody :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1488" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T21:15:00.553" LastActivityDate="2020-09-15T05:39:19.000" Title="Stop repeating answers, please" Tags="|discussion|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6333" CreationDate="2016-06-02T21:29:02.277" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Indeed.  Frankly, there are two things going on that I find disturbing on &amp;quot;soft&amp;quot; questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and similar - they always happened some but they seem to be growing in magnitude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Repetitive answers, as you mention.  You should not post the same answer someone else posted, that's what voting is for.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pure opinion/speculation answers, not following &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't make the mods feel like we need to have some new rule or something to handle out of control bad behavior.  The community can control this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote new answers that say the same thing a previous answer did.  If they're better/more complete/have more backup that's fine.  If not, the datestamps are right there - downvote and comment &amp;quot;-1, exactly the same as Joe's answer.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote answers that don't convey experience and are clearly &amp;quot;ideas&amp;quot; - &lt;em&gt;regardless of whether you agree with the sentiment or not&lt;/em&gt; - and comment &amp;quot;-1, untested supposition&amp;quot; (or whatever's relevant in that case).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can all help make these questions better!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-09-14T20:34:55.813" LastActivityDate="2020-09-14T20:34:55.813" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6335" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5896" CreationDate="2016-06-02T22:07:02.057" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This one slipped a bit in checking in on, but we've turned on MathJax for the site now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5896/mathjax-latex-equations-for-rpg-se-and-statistics-posts#comment16641_5899&quot;&gt;Miniman's analysis&lt;/a&gt;, we've figured that we should turn it on with the delimiter as &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt; rather than &lt;code&gt;$&lt;/code&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-06-02T22:07:02.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6336" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-02T23:15:17.200" Score="26" ViewCount="961" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We have MathJax&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5896/23970&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; we discussed, requested, and gathered evidence for the utility of MathJax in RPG.SE posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Now it's time to &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; MathJax&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those familiar with LaTeX it will likely suffice to say that &lt;code&gt;\$ ... \$&lt;/code&gt; are our delimiters (&lt;code&gt;$$ ... $$&lt;/code&gt; for equations centered on their own line), and to let you experiment. Then there's this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.martinkeefe.com/math/mathjax&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;MathJax reference&lt;/a&gt; for your reference, and Math.SE has made &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/mathjax-basic-tutorial-and-quick-reference&quot;&gt;a MathJax basic tutorial and quick reference&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Let's put our &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt; where our mouths are...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the previous meta we identified forty-some-odd posts that could benefit from LaTeX treatment. I've copied them below to serve as a punch-list. If you've got five minutes go ahead and edit one, then strike it out on this list. And parse them out over time, to be sure!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6357/23970&quot;&gt;List of answers that &lt;del&gt;would&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; improve with MathJax&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Note: some have found on second pass that an post that looks &lt;em&gt;okay&lt;/em&gt; in HTML isn't really worth re-setting into MathJax. I suggest adding &amp;quot;(skipped)&amp;quot; to the end of a link to indicate that the post has been reviewed, but not striking it out in case some later user wants to tilt against that windmill. If you're the original author and think the post &lt;em&gt;should not&lt;/em&gt; receive any MathJax I suppose you should either strike it out or remove it wholesale from this list. -nitsua60]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;All done!!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SF0ul.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SF0ul.gif&quot; alt=&quot;mathematical!! -- finn from adventure time&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T12:29:01.090" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T12:29:01.090" Title="MathJax (\$\LaTeX\$ in posts) is live!" Tags="|discussion|formatting|mathjax|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="23" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-06-02T23:29:54.153" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6336" CreationDate="2016-06-04T05:57:30.073" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;A number of posts would benefit from MathJax's tables, if not its mathematics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5044/119760&quot;&gt;The &lt;code&gt;array&lt;/code&gt; environment&lt;/a&gt; can do tables quite well. (Thanks nitsua60 for finding this!) Here's an example. Note that because we are &lt;code&gt;\begin&lt;/code&gt;ing an environment, we don't need to have the surrounding &lt;code&gt;$$&lt;/code&gt;s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;\begin{array}{r|lll}&#xA;\text{Column One} &amp;amp; \text{Two} &amp;amp; \text{Three} &amp;amp; \text{Four} \\&#xA;\hline&#xA;foo &amp;amp; bar &amp;amp; baz &amp;amp; narf  \\&#xA;tinker &amp;amp; tailor &amp;amp; soldier &amp;amp; spy&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;\begin{array}{r|lll}&#xA;\text{Column One} &amp;amp; \text{Two} &amp;amp; \text{Three} &amp;amp; \text{Four} \\&#xA;\hline&#xA;foo &amp;amp; bar &amp;amp; baz &amp;amp; narf  \\&#xA;tinker &amp;amp; tailor &amp;amp; soldier &amp;amp; spy&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anatomy of this example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\begin{array}{r|lll}&lt;/code&gt; comes in two parts:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\begin{array}&lt;/code&gt; begins the array environment, like it says.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;{r|lll}&lt;/code&gt; sets up our column layout. This means we'll have a right-aligned column, a column divider, then three left-aligned columns. A center-aligned column would be designated with &lt;code&gt;c&lt;/code&gt;, and we can have any number of column dividers anywhere we want, including on either side.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\text{Column One}&lt;/code&gt; is an instruction to render “Column One” as plain text. If we didn't include the &lt;code&gt;\text{ ... }&lt;/code&gt; marker, it would render as \$Column One\$ instead of as \$\text{Column One}\$. Since MathJax is for writing mathematical formulae it defaults to interpreting symbols you give it as mathematical symbols, ignores spacing and uses its own spacing rules, etc — so it has to be told explicitly when you don't mean that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;&lt;/code&gt; is the column separator.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\\&lt;/code&gt; marks a new line at the end of a row.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\hline&lt;/code&gt; marks a horizontal line between rows.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;\end{array}&lt;/code&gt; marks the end of the array environment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with the rest of the whole MathJax-ificiation, we probably shouldn't actually table-ify anything that's just fine in plain text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some potential table-ey posts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76958/what-is-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves/76983#76983&quot;&gt;What is the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities/41385#41385&quot;&gt;Considering Complex Dice Roll Probabilities&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49710/dice-pool-success-probability-with-one-exploding-die/49714#49714&quot;&gt;Dice pool success probability with one exploding die&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41029/7373&quot;&gt;Odds of Tzeentch&amp;#39;s Curse in Mass Battles port&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4378/calculating-and-balancing-challenge-ratings/4387#4387&quot;&gt;Calculating and balancing challenge ratings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personal tip: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.sublimetext.com/3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sublime Text&lt;/a&gt; does multi-location and multi-line editing and has made converting posts a breeze so far. (Or at least, not quite so tedious as it could be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-11T12:38:28.843" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T12:38:28.843" CommentCount="7" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-06-04T05:57:30.073" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6336" CreationDate="2016-06-04T12:56:15.923" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Reference for Stack-Useful MathJax structures&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mathematics.SE's meta has a nice post detailing many of the tips they've found useful over the years:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/mathjax-basic-tutorial-and-quick-reference&quot;&gt;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/mathjax-basic-tutorial-and-quick-reference&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously we should take care around &amp;quot;dialect&amp;quot; issues: their delimiter is &lt;code&gt;$...$&lt;/code&gt;, for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TIL you don't even need the &lt;code&gt;\$...\$&lt;/code&gt; delimiters when &lt;code&gt;\begin{...}&lt;/code&gt;ing and &lt;code&gt;\end{...}&lt;/code&gt;ing an environment!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-06-04T12:56:15.923" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-06-04T12:56:15.923" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6339" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6340" CreationDate="2016-06-04T19:44:31.357" Score="8" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;The specific instance is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80470/should-i-adjust-encounter-challenge-for-pcs-with-damage-immunities&quot;&gt;Should I adjust encounter challenge for PCs with damage immunities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The situation is that I was looking ideally for a RAW answer or clear-cut advice for handling the case I presented. What happened is that there's several answers posted that have &lt;em&gt;fragments&lt;/em&gt; of what I'd consider a solid answer, but most of which also contain a lot of what I'd consider irrelevant-to-bad advice at handling the narrative background of my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't feel right checking off any of the given answers as correct, but if there were one incorporating the good points of each without the &quot;chaff&quot; of any of them, I'd consider the question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be correct to write an answer myself that encompasses all of these &quot;correct&quot; bits, credit the original authors and mark that as a solution? That feels a little...plagiaristic to me, but it's probably the only way this question is going to have an official answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11000" LastActivityDate="2016-06-04T19:58:02.630" Title="How should I handle a question without a clear answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6339" CreationDate="2016-06-04T19:58:02.630" Score="14" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Would it be correct to write an answer myself that encompasses all of these &quot;correct&quot; bits, credit the original authors and mark that as a solution? That feels a little...plagiaristic to me, but it's probably the only way this question is going to have an official answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, that's an appropriate thing to do! We even have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/bounty&quot;&gt;bounty&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/09/bounty-reasons-and-post-notices/&quot;&gt;reason&lt;/a&gt; we can put on questions to request this, though I don't see it use it very often around here, which says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Canonical answer required&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question is widely applicable to a large audience. A detailed canonical answer is required to address all the concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A “canonical” answer is one that is complete and includes all the important points in one place, rather than scattered across multiple places. Of course if you plan to write it yourself there's no need to actually offer a bounty — I only mention it because it's shows that such answers are officially encouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When writing a canonical answer that is based directly on other answers, you're right, you can simply give credit. Since our CC BY-SA license explicitly permits copying if credit is given, plagiarism is not an issue at all. We &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to encourage a best, complete answer to be submitted and rise to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simplest way is probably to write a note at the bottom saying &lt;em&gt;“This canonical answer is based on portions of the answers by Alice, Bob, Charlene, and Danny.”&lt;/em&gt; with each name linked to the appropriate answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-06-04T19:58:02.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6341" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6342" CreationDate="2016-06-05T14:14:09.670" Score="11" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few days ago, I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/81196/what-would-happen-if-i-removed-darkvision/82268?noredirect=1#comment184974_82268&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question about removing darkvision. After talking to various people, including my players, reading answers and looking around on forums, I have come up with various things I could replace darkvision with. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to ask a question about some of these replacements. The question would essentially be asking: &quot;I have done some research on the number of racial traits each race gets. It seems to be about 4. How powerful are these substitute racial traits in comparison to darkvision?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I edit that into the existing question, ask a new question, or do something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27994" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-06-05T14:18:28.707" Title="How should I handle asking for further information on a question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6341" CreationDate="2016-06-05T14:18:28.707" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a completely different question. So, ask it in a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions should be asked together when they're intimately related and don't make much sense being asked separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The impacts of removing dark vision, and the power levels of various racial traits compared to dark vision, don't fit that criteria. They're separate issues that can quite easily be asked separately, and should.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-06-05T14:18:28.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3301" CreationDate="2016-06-06T12:44:45.297" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;[tour] now also links to the tour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-06-06T12:44:45.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6344" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6345" CreationDate="2016-06-08T15:53:57.450" Score="12" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently someone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/82442/23970&quot;&gt;asked about a Rogue sneak attacking on another's turn&lt;/a&gt;. I poked around, sure we'd answered it, found nothing, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/82445/23970&quot;&gt;answered it myself&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later another user found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47692/23970&quot;&gt;the older duplicate question&lt;/a&gt;, flagged the newer question, and the newer question was properly closed through review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's where it gets fun: the author of the accepted (and only upvoted) answer on the older question--and a diamond, to boot--mentioned that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/82442/can-a-rogue-apply-sneak-attack-on-a-reaction-opportunity-attack/82445?noredirect=1#comment185438_82445&quot;&gt;my new answer would be an improved analysis of the older question&lt;/a&gt;. (And what a &lt;em&gt;mensch&lt;/em&gt;, to leave that comment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see this sort of situation coming up occasionally as a quick and good answer beats the race with duplicate identification.&#xA;So what's the best path forward? Some options I see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave it. All of it. Move on. The thing I dislike about this is that the duplicate question &quot;has an answer&quot; at all, which I think is sub-optimal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Delete the new question's answer, paste afresh on the old answer. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Migrate the new answer to the old question. I think this makes best use of our voting system and collects all the answers to one question in the same place, both of which seem to be unrestricted &quot;good&quot;s. But I don't know if it's a thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Smarter people come up with better ideas.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T14:42:54.490" Title="What to do with a good answer to a duplicate question after the closure?" Tags="|discussion|answers|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6344" CreationDate="2016-06-08T17:03:55.613" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Optino #3, migrating, is totally possible and the most sensible option in this case. Mods have access to the &lt;strong&gt;merge&lt;/strong&gt; tool, which—well, let me just paste the usage guidance beside its button:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions should be merged when they are 99% identical and it would be beneficial to have all the answers from multiple duplicate questions in one place. This deletes answers, moves them to the target question, and leaves the current question as a stub with a link to its merge target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This also merges all the comments on the page, apparently, which might be cause for tidying after the merge.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you can always use a custom flag to let the mods know that you think a question merger is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only caveat is that we're careful with merges, because unlike many operations on the site like duplicate closures and even deletes, merges &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; be fully undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This brings in option #2: when a merge isn't obviously the right choice, or when flagged and the flag is declined because mods either plain disagree or maybe just don't agree &lt;em&gt;enough&lt;/em&gt; to feel sure pulling the trigger, it's still within a user's purview to delete their own answer and post it elsewhere. That has the downside that votes don't migrate with it, but in this case that's a slight feature: the community gets a clean slate to judge whether it really is a answer, and how good, for the original duplicate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-04-27T14:42:54.490" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T14:42:54.490" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6346" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6344" CreationDate="2016-06-09T00:30:46.083" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another option I've seen done (not sure if it's been done on &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; SE site) is to reverse the direction of the duplicate link to point the older question &lt;strong&gt;to&lt;/strong&gt; the newer one. I've seen this done in the specific instance where something in the newer question is identified as making it a significantly better target than the older one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23127" LastActivityDate="2016-06-09T00:30:46.083" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6347" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-09T14:39:47.420" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/82481/1204&quot;&gt;Pathfinder explosive runes abuse&lt;/a&gt; describes a scenario and the asker (presumably the GM) is unhappy with it, and says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't like this in the least bit but I am not sure how can I argue that it won't work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well... it &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; work if things go as described, and they're well aware of it, so I'm not sure how we can help. And, well, if they have problems with someone wanting to &quot;use pathfinder's explosive runes as an offensive spell&quot; (considering it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; one) I'm not sure what we can really do for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... what do we do with this question? I'm at a loss here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-06-09T14:53:40.917" Title="What do we do with this non-starter question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6347" CreationDate="2016-06-09T14:53:40.917" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can probably solve the situation they describe, even if the solution isn't what they desire. The answers would be competing first on the most useful problem to identify, and second on the best solution for that problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The breakdown of potential problems I see there is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The spell being used offensively&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker not liking it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I think the real problem is (2) and we'll see good answers competing to solve their &lt;em&gt;&quot;I don't like it!&quot;&lt;/em&gt; problem. However, there's also room for an answer to come along and show a hitch in using the spell that way that might entirely prevent, or just prevent the worst of, this &quot;abuse&quot;. An answer might even tackle both angles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's much really to be done with the question otherwise. It's fairly clear, topical, not too broad, and doesn't solicit or require opinions. It's not really ever going to be useful for anyone else, so a downvote could be easily justified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-06-09T14:53:40.917" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6333" CreationDate="2016-06-11T17:59:25.533" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are definitely times when someone chimes in just to repeat a point others have made. Perhaps because they didn't read the other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But repeated answers can happen despite good intentions. Here's some advice if you have repeated an answer, or are tempted to do so because of problems with an existing answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Race (and that precious &lt;em&gt;reputation&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several users answered the question at the same time. It's tough to delete the thing you spend 20 minutes writing just because someone else only spent 18 minutes to say the same thing, and you think yours is a little better. Plus, yours got some upvotes so you got a little reputation out of it. (The community, then, should not consider an answer posted soon after another one a &amp;quot;repeat&amp;quot; even if it is similar - as they were being written at the same time.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this happens, take a look at all the answers. (It does not matter if yours was a little quicker or slower than the others.) Is there a good point you are making that the others don't? If so, expand on that point. Your answer doesn't have to be the all-encompassing, it just has to stand on its own, and add to the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer has no real reason to exist, please do your best to hit that delete button. The reputation will come. (And, if you've recently gotten more reputation, consider deleting some of your older, not-so-awesome answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&amp;quot;The Race&amp;quot; can be very bad over at Stack Overflow, where a quick and dirty answer to a simple question can get you 25 &lt;em&gt;precious&lt;/em&gt; reputation from the OP, who is just looking to fix their current problem. It's less of a problem here, but if folks down-vote &amp;quot;repeat&amp;quot; answers that get posted shortly after a sloppy answer that makes the same points, then we could inculcate racing here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Brevity&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another question might have answered the question, but left out strong evidence for support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might see an opportunity to &amp;quot;win&amp;quot; the question, but you'll make friends better if you first comment on the existing question, pointing out the missing evidence. (And anyone who notices your good teamwork may be more eager to provide comment to improve your answers, in the future.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unclear writing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes an answer answers the question, even though the language is not perfectly clear. Native English speakers might use colloqiualisms or regionally-known references that would leave others confused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, before writing your own improved answer, point these problems out in the commments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or edit the answer yourself if you can do so without changing the meaning of the answer. An example of amight be adding a metric version of some measurement. (The rules might use &amp;quot;feet&amp;quot; as a measure, but that doesn't mean all English-language players need to know about the difference between and ounce and a fluid ounce.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But sometimes, it is appropriate&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a recent example (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47692/do-rogues-get-sneak-attack-damage-added-to-attacks-made-outside-their-turn&quot;&gt;Do rogues get sneak attack damage added to attacks made outside their turn?&lt;/a&gt;) of a question that has an answer that repeats a previous one, but (I think) improves it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The existing answer, though correct, doesn't provide supporting evidence. Some strong supporting evidence (from the game designers) has been published since the question was originally asked and answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the existing question was a couple years old, so it is kind of a historical artifact now, and the original poster may be done with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's not a chat room or forum&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack is a very different place from most other social media site. It's going to be an adjustment for any newcomer to get acclimated to the no-nonsense culture here. The site interface encourages new users to post questions and answers right away, but watching and learning a little first might not be a bad plan either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-15T05:39:19.000" LastActivityDate="2020-09-15T05:39:19.000" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6350" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6356" CreationDate="2016-06-13T14:00:11.610" Score="12" ViewCount="253" Body="&lt;p&gt;We get a lot of questions that are better suited to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;forum&lt;/a&gt;, and it's customary when closing them to provide a link to that post. Since I've started doing moderation, though, I've noticed that we don't have a shortlink the way we do for [tour], [edit], etc. Could we make that happen to save a bit of time? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="68612" LastEditDate="2021-02-19T22:10:27.143" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T22:10:27.143" Title="Could we get a [forum] shortlink?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|magic-links|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6351" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-13T18:41:27.087" Score="8" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to add a comment on a question about disability in RPGs and it won't let me without &quot;50 reputation&quot;. What is that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29616" OwnerDisplayName="Isaac Buffenmeyer" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-06-13T19:12:12.780" LastActivityDate="2016-06-15T14:21:02.557" Title="What does it mean when it says I need “50 reputation” to comment?" Tags="|support|comments|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6353" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6351" CreationDate="2016-06-13T19:03:18.130" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange network has a reputation system, and you acquire privileges based on how much reputation you have. In particular, commenting on anyone's post requires having that privilege, which you get at the 50 reputation mark. Here're some links for information: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Commenting Privileges page&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;General Privileges track page&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;Reputation help page&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;A Handy Tour that explains how stuff works&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also find more stuff by browsing around the other content related to those pages, like looking at other privileges in particular or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19580" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-06-13T19:03:18.130" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6351" CreationDate="2016-06-13T19:04:53.740" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;Reputation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; is the site's “fake Internet points” system. It is earned by contributing to the site in positive ways, which are primarily &lt;strong&gt;asking good questions&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;writing good answers&lt;/strong&gt; about roleplaying games (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;as defined in our FAQ&lt;/a&gt;). Earning reputation unlocks site usage &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;privileges&lt;/a&gt; when you have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;certain amounts&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ability to write comments on other people's posts is unlocked when a user's account has earned 50 reputation. Why? Because a lot of new users look at the site an assume it works like other sites they are familiar with, such as discussion forums. While it may look like a discussion forum it works very differently (i.e., we don't do discussion!), so any ability that could give new users the wrong idea about what the site is for starts out locked. The idea is that after doing a few things that the site &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; designed for, a new user has a significantly higher chance of using privileges in a way that is useful for the site's purpose, instead of contrary to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that this is not about malicious use — even well-meaning comments can be off-topic and impair the intended goals of the site, causing work for other users and moderators who need to find and remove them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is an excerpt of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Help Center page about the “Comment Everywhere” privilege&lt;/a&gt; that explains what comments at Roleplaying Games Stack Exchange are (and aren't) for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;What are comments?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments are temporary &quot;Post-It&quot; notes left on a question or answer. They can be up-voted (but not down-voted) and flagged, but do not generate reputation. There's no revision history, and when they are deleted they're gone for good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[…]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;When should I comment?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should submit a comment if you want to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Request &lt;strong&gt;clarification&lt;/strong&gt; from the author;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leave &lt;strong&gt;constructive criticism&lt;/strong&gt; that guides the author in improving the post;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Add relevant but &lt;strong&gt;minor or transient information&lt;/strong&gt; to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;When shouldn't I comment?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments are not recommended for any of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Suggesting corrections&lt;/strong&gt; that don't fundamentally change the meaning of the post; instead, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;make&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/76251/how-do-suggested-edits-work&quot;&gt;suggest&lt;/a&gt; an edit;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answering a question&lt;/strong&gt; or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Compliments&lt;/strong&gt; which do not add new information (&quot;+1, great answer!&quot;); instead, up-vote it and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;pay it forward&lt;/a&gt;;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Criticisms&lt;/strong&gt; which do not add anything constructive (&quot;-1, see previous comments you scallywag!&quot;); instead, down-vote (and provide or up-vote a better answer if appropriate);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Secondary discussion&lt;/strong&gt; or debating a controversial point; please use &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; instead;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion of community behavior or site policies&lt;/strong&gt;; please use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See the full &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Help Center article about comments&lt;/a&gt; for the whole picture.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I don't know and can't find out whether the comment you wanted to leave actually counts as one of the above &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;dos&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; or &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;don'ts&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, so this is not to say that your comment was definitely uncalled for. It may have been just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, the point of the site is laser-focused, and as part of that laser focus we want any new user to engage in out core purpose of &lt;strong&gt;asking&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;answering&lt;/strong&gt; questions &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; they start exploring the other features of the site — because those other features only exist to support asking and answering, and that's not really obvious until a new user has some experience contributing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Now what?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; to learn more about the site. Many of the questions you might have right now are answered there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, if you like what you see, look around and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;see if there are questions&lt;/a&gt; you can answer, or questions you have that the community can answer. It takes only a few good posts to earn the reputation necessary to comment — and whatever comment you were hoping to leave, by then you'll have a better idea if it's a helpful comment, and the post you wanted to comment on is likely still going to be there tomorrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-06-15T14:21:02.557" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6350" CreationDate="2016-06-13T19:26:20.300" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/92060/add-data-se-style-magic-links-to-comments/&quot;&gt;Magic links&lt;/a&gt; are hardcoded into the site software itself and as a result are network-wide, not per-site, so although &lt;em&gt;technically&lt;/em&gt; possible in theory, the likelihood that Staff would add a magic link to every SE in the network that leads to RPG.se's meta about RPG forum alternatives is unsurprisingly &lt;em&gt;very low&lt;/em&gt;. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-06-13T19:35:25.810" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6356" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6350" CreationDate="2016-06-13T19:47:09.167" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although, as SSD explained, network-wide changes for an RPG.SE-specific code won't happen, there's still a labour-saving work-around available: add a premade comment with the forums link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/q/2116&quot;&gt;the auto-comment script&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:25:39.490" LastActivityDate="2016-06-13T19:47:09.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6357" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6336" CreationDate="2016-06-14T11:56:36.710" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;List of posts identified as candidates, then edited with MathJax:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6336/mathjax-latex-in-posts-is-live/6357#comment19108_6336&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79942/what-is-your-chance-to-win-in-a-contest-where-you-have-advantage-and-your-oppone/79949#79949&quot;&gt;What is your chance to win in a contest where you have advantage and your opponent has disadvantage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1528/what-is-the-statistically-superior-character-creation-method-twelve-3d6-or-six/2826#2826&quot;&gt;What is the statistically superior character creation method, twelve 3d6 or six 4d6?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59336/does-a-roleplaying-game-that-uses-continuous-probability-exist/59395#59395&quot;&gt;Does a roleplaying game that uses continuous probability exist?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44207/how-do-you-calculate-an-average-damage-when-damage-is-conditional-on-circumstanc/44210#44210&quot;&gt;How do you calculate an average damage when damage is conditional on circumstances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76318/what-is-the-formula-for-calculating-in-system-traveling-time/76319#76319&quot;&gt;What is the formula for calculating in-system traveling time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57165/what-happens-when-you-run-out-of-movement-while-jumping/76580#76580&quot;&gt;What happens when you run out of movement while jumping?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76958/what-is-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves/76959#76959&quot;&gt;What is the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/66963#66963&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/67009#67009&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80246/how-many-rolls-does-it-take-to-get-to-six-coins/80248#80248&quot;&gt;How many rolls does it take to get to six coins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(would appreciate a second set of eyes on this)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7233/what-is-the-formula-for-average-damage-for-an-avenger-against-an-oath-target/7246#7246&quot;&gt;What is the formula for average damage for an Avenger against an Oath target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip, spreadsheeting question, mathjax not appropriate)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7233/what-is-the-formula-for-average-damage-for-an-avenger-against-an-oath-target/7244#7244&quot;&gt;What is the formula for average damage for an Avenger against an Oath target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip, spreadsheeting question, mathjax not appropriate)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69064/is-unearthed-arcana-players-make-all-rolls-correct/69067#69067&quot;&gt;Is &amp;quot;Unearthed Arcana: Players Make All Rolls&amp;quot; Correct?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33935/when-rolling-percentages-do-1d100-and-two-d10s-percentiles-share-the-same-pro/33973#33973&quot;&gt;When rolling percentages, do 1d100 and two d10s (percentiles) share the same probabilities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70802/how-can-i-test-whether-a-die-is-fair/70803#70803&quot;&gt;How can I test whether a die is fair?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68938/can-i-randomly-determine-the-outcome-of-an-event-with-5-outcomes-with-a-d6/68966#68966&quot;&gt;Can I randomly determine the outcome of an event with 5 outcomes with a d6?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/67009#67009&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/66960/improving-fumbles-when-using-pools-of-d10s-in-tros/66963#66963&quot;&gt;Improving &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; when using pools of d10s in TROS&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62736/calculating-6d6-similar-to-poker-dice/62741#62741&quot;&gt;Calculating 6D6 similar to poker dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62526/how-to-model-a-dice-pool-with-re-rolls-mechanic/62537#62537&quot;&gt;How to model a dice pool with re-rolls mechanic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59900/dice-probabilities-when-rolling-more-dice-than-needed/63789#63789&quot;&gt;Dice probabilities when rolling more dice than needed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58530/dealing-with-large-amount-of-dice-rolls-for-a-single-damage-roll-without-making/68351#68351&quot;&gt;Dealing with large amount of dice rolls for a single damage roll without making it drag on&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55911/using-anydice-to-determine-the-odds-of-getting-a-specific-number-sequence-on-mul/55917#55917&quot;&gt;Using AnyDice to determine the odds of getting a specific number sequence on multiple dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55911/using-anydice-to-determine-the-odds-of-getting-a-specific-number-sequence-on-mul/55913#55913&quot;&gt;Using AnyDice to determine the odds of getting a specific number sequence on multiple dice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55720/what-is-the-average-roll-of-a-die-with-an-expanded-explosion-threshold-as-compar/56398#56398&quot;&gt;What is the average roll of a die with an expanded explosion threshold as compared to one with an expanded success threshold?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55720/what-is-the-average-roll-of-a-die-with-an-expanded-explosion-threshold-as-compar/76073#76073&quot;&gt;What is the average roll of a die with an expanded explosion threshold as compared to one with an expanded success threshold?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49710/dice-pool-success-probability-with-one-exploding-die/49714#49714&quot;&gt;Dice pool success probability with one exploding die&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3274/are-earthdawns-dice-mechanics-as-unfair-and-wonky-as-my-player-claims/3280#3280&quot;&gt;Are Earthdawn&amp;#39;s dice mechanics as unfair and wonky as my player claims?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3274/are-earthdawns-dice-mechanics-as-unfair-and-wonky-as-my-player-claims/3276#3276&quot;&gt;Are Earthdawn&amp;#39;s dice mechanics as unfair and wonky as my player claims?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48988/how-to-calculate-the-expected-damage-increase-from-empowered-spell/48996#48996&quot;&gt;How to calculate the expected damage increase from Empowered Spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average/61778#61778&quot;&gt;How much damage does Great Weapon Fighting add on average?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average/47173#47173&quot;&gt;How much damage does Great Weapon Fighting add on average?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44347/how-do-you-calculate-the-odds-of-success-for-an-ability-contest/44349#44349&quot;&gt;How do you calculate the odds of success for an ability contest&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41373/considering-complex-dice-roll-probabilities/41385#41385&quot;&gt;Considering Complex Dice Roll Probabilities&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34190/how-do-i-calculate-the-chance-of-hits/44896#44896&quot;&gt;How do I calculate the chance of hits?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12953/whats-the-probability-curve-of-the-d10-storytelling-system/12968#12968&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the probability curve of the D10 Storytelling System?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74506/does-concentrate-poison-stack/74510#74510&quot;&gt;Does Concentrate Poison Stack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75954/how-far-do-you-fall-a-turn/75955#75955&quot;&gt;How far do you fall per turn?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75940/experience-point-calculation-for-encounters/76089#76089&quot;&gt;Experience point calculation for encounters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76958/what-is-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves/76983#76983&quot;&gt;What is the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79841/what-is-the-maximum-number-of-simulacra-i-can-have/79844#79844&quot;&gt;What is the maximum number of Simulacra I can have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;(skip)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80246/how-many-rolls-does-it-take-to-get-to-six-coins/80263#80263&quot;&gt;How many rolls does it take to get to six coins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-06-22T13:59:05.343" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-06-14T11:56:36.710" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6048" CreationDate="2016-06-15T13:53:22.440" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nope. Question was close because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We don't want the information on our site to become obsolete, and so&#xA;  we try not to ask questions whose answers may change with time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2016-06-15T13:53:22.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6360" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-16T02:36:02.433" Score="-1" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;It appears that after a bad question/answer removal the reputation points are not returned to the downvoters. Why is it so? Shouldn't it be different?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28885" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-06-16T05:11:26.440" LastActivityDate="2016-06-19T03:00:42.263" Title="Why deleting a bad question/answer doesn't return reputation points?" Tags="|support|reputation|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6360" CreationDate="2016-06-16T02:50:36.173" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;Downvotes on questions don't take rep from the voter.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/5222/244929&quot;&gt;Deleted answers do restore rep lost from downvotes&lt;/a&gt; for both the poster and the voter, though it happens rather quietly. You should see a green +1 on your Achievements button but probably not any note about where it came from on the Achievements dropdown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=reputation&quot;&gt;Your profile reputation tab&lt;/a&gt; will list the events where you've been refunded that 1 reputation, along with a reason of &quot;removed&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If something gets deleted and you don't see a change in rep instantly, be patient. The Stack often doesn't update this sort of thing immediately--either to give time for an accidental click to be undone, or because running the checks at regular intervals is more efficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-06-19T03:00:42.263" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6362" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6363" CreationDate="2016-06-17T16:40:54.067" Score="-23" ViewCount="411" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR: Let’s make Stack Exchange into an RPG game!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;=CURRENCIES=&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There’re 2 currencies in the game: gold and diamonds. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Gold&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gold is the most common currency. It’s very similar to the existing “reputation.” You’re able to earn most of it the same way you earn reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on a question: +5 gold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An accepted edit: +2 gold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on an answer: +10 gold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A bounty given to you: +(bounty amount)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also earn gold in other new ways, different from how you can earn reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A player buys one of your items on sale: +(item price)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A player in your guild donates you gold: +(donation amount)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leveling up: +(level number * 100)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike reputation, gold can be lost and spent quite easily. Down-votes don’t make you lose gold. “Down-voting” will be explained later. It’s called “attacking” in this game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Buying an item: -(item cost)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Donating gold to your guild: -(donation amount)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Account deletion: other players will be able to take your gold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Diamonds&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Diamonds are the rare, premium currency. There’re only 2 ways to earn diamonds:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Buying diamonds from the shop: -(real world money), +(purchased diamond amount)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leveling up: +(level number * 10)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever you can spend gold, you can also do it with diamonds. You can even trade diamonds for gold. 100 gold = 1 diamond. There’re also items in the game that can only be bought with diamonds, so no gold equivalents allowed on those items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;=PLAYERS=&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We new refer to “users” as “players,” since Stack Exchange is now a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Classes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are 7 player classes, also known as “hero classes.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Warrior&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hunter&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rouge&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Shaman&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Paladin&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Druid&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each player class has access to different items and abilities. For example, every post a player posts is affected by their class’s posting ability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Warrior: flag-proof answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mage: your questions start with 1 up-vote&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hunter: flag-proof questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rouge: your answers start with 1 up-vote&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Shaman: edits to your questions must be approved by you&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Paladin: edits to your answers must be approved by you&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Druid: un-closable posts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Health&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All players have health. They can gain health and lose health. A player’s health can’t go above the health limit, and it can’t go below 0. A newly-registered player starts at 30 health, which is the limit for level 1 (more on levels later).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once a player’s health reaches 0, they’re considered “dead,” and they won’t be able to access their account anymore. Deleted players’ gold, diamonds, and items are available for taking by other players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ways to gain health:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use a health potion on yourself&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leveling up (Your health is automatically refilled every time you level up. Leveling up also increases the health limit by 100 each time. I’ll explain the leveling system later.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ways to lose health:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get attacked (A.K.A. “down-voted”)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sell or donate a portion of your health to another player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Guilds&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guilds are social groups. Guild members can chat with each other, trade items, donate items or currency, and sell items to another player in the guild. You can’t attack (A.K.A. “down-vote”) a post written by someone in your guild.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guilds are run my moderators. They’re the leader of the guild. They can kick players out of their guild if they like. It’s possible to not be in a guild, although joining a guild will help you progress faster in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Levels&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concept of player levels in this game is very similar to other RPG’s. It takes an amount of XP (A.K.A. “experience points”) to reach the next level (XP requirement to advance level = level number * 100). XP can be earned by making positive contributions to the community. You can never lose XP. The maximum level is 100.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on one of your questions: +10 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on one of your answers: +15 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One of your answers gets accepted: +25 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;=VOTING=&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The up-voting and down-voting system was changed to reflect the theme of this new RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Up-Votes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Up-votes work in much the same way the existing up-vote system does. Instead of giving reputation, up-votes give gold and XP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on a question: +5 gold, +10 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up-vote on an answer: +10 gold, +15 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Down-Votes (Attacking)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrary to the existing system, down-votes (hereby “attacks”) don’t subtract gold. Hence the name, “attacking,” this action subtracts some amount from a player’s health.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The amount of health subtracted from the player whose post you attacked depends on which weapon you use to attack. Weapons are a type of item, explained in more detail later. Unlike traditional down-voting, you can attack the same post multiple times. Each weapon has a limited number of uses, and it’s gone after you use it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FAQ: “How do I get the health back if I’m down-voted?”&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You can buy a health potion from the shop, buy a health potion from another player, accept a health potion donation from another player, or have your health automatically refilled when you level up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Accepted Answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one of your answers is accepted, you’ll earn:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+25 gold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+25 XP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A randomly chosen item&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer gets un-accepted, you won’t lose the rewards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;=ITEMS=&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Items are crucial to both the game’s progress and economy. Items can be bought, sold, traded, donated, or earned in many different ways. The prices of items may change as you level up. You’re allowed to have multiple of the same item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Inventory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The inventory is where your items are stored. The amount of items you can store is limited based on your level (item limit = level number * 5).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unlocking Items&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every time you level up, a set of items are unlocked. Unlocked items are available for purchase or receiving from a donation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FAQ: “If I unlock an item, do I immediately get to use it?”&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;No, having an item unlocked only means it’s available. You need to buy or receive an item as a donation in order to have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Weapons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Weapons are the type of item used for attacking (A.K.A. “down-voting”). Different player classes have access to different weapons. Weapons have limited “uses.” Once a weapon is used up, it’s gone, and you have to buy it again to keep using it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Free - Fist (-1 health) - Unlocked at level 1 - Class: all - Uses: unlimited&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;50 gold - Baseball Bat (-2 health) - Unlocked at level 2 - Classes: hunter, warrior, shaman, and paladin - Uses: 5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;100 gold - Bow And Arrows (-5 health) - Unlocked at level 3 - Classes: warrior, druid, mage, and rouge - Uses: 10&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;250 gold - Sword (-10 health) - Unlocked at level 5 - Classes: warrior, druid, and rouge - Uses: 20&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;500 gold - Gun (-25 health) - Unlocked at level 8 - Classes: all - Uses: 30&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1000 gold - Fire Sword (-50 health) - Unlocked at level 10 - Classes: warrior, druid, mage, and rouge - Uses: 100&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Potions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potions are the type of item used for activating special abilities. Potions only have one “use.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;50 gold - Magical Reviver (un-deletes a post of yours) - Unlocked at level 1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;75 gold - Blitz Freeze (makes your post attack-proof for 6 hours) - Unlocked at level 3&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;100 gold - Enchanted Rage (makes your answer always stay at the top) - Unlocked at level 5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Mining Tools&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a player’s account is deleted, their account actually stays, it’s just that they can’t log in anymore. But what happens to the deleted player’s gold, diamonds, and items? A deleted player’s loot is available for other players to steal. The link to their profile page will be placed on a list of free accounts, a page which is open to the public. Which mining tools you have access to don’t depend on your player class (A.K.A. “hero class”). You can use the same mining tool on the same player multiple times. Mine quickly, because other players in the community will be mining away as well!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mining tools are the type of item used for claiming those resources of a deleted player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;10 gold - Pickaxe (mines 40 gold) - Unlocked at level 1 - Uses: 10&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;25 gold - Gem cart (mines 3 gems) - Unlocked at level 2 - Uses: 1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;=ACHIEVEMENTS AND PRIVILEGES=&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Achievements and privileges are very similar to the existing “badges” and “privileges” system. Achievements and privileges can’t be bought, instead you automatically get them when you meet the requirements to earn them. You can never lose an achievement or privilege if you no longer meet a requirement after you earn one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Achievements&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Achievements are like badges. You do whatever the achievement says you have to do, and you earn the achievement. All achievements in this game are exact copies of existing badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Priveleges&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don’t earn privileges by meeting a specific requirement. Privileges are only unlocked at certain levels, so you need to reach that level to get the privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit protected posts - Unlocked at level 2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;View close votes - Unlocked at level 10&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderation tools - Unlocked at level 30&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR: Let’s make Stack Exchange into an RPG game!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29692" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-06-17T16:52:43.450" LastActivityDate="2016-06-17T16:52:43.450" Title="How about we make Stack Exchange into an RPG game?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6363" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6362" CreationDate="2016-06-17T16:52:35.187" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;We appreciate your enthusiasm for the site! However, major chunks of this proposal are infeasible for either one or both of these reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The proposed change is not technically feasible as it would require changes to the site's code. RPG Stack Exchange members or moderators do not (and will never) have access to the site's codebase.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The proposed change materially interferes with or contradicts the fundamental goals of RPG.se or Stack Exchange in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;welcome&lt;/a&gt;! We hope you put that enthusiasm to good use here in pursuing our core mission by &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;specific, researched, relevant, on-topic questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Providing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;clear, useful, accurate and well-researched information in answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cheers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-06-17T16:52:35.187" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6364" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6365" CreationDate="2016-06-17T16:54:35.190" Score="8" ViewCount="270" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simply put: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/82690/15211&quot;&gt;Does Water Breathing + a full waterskin = infinite “air”?&lt;/a&gt; in this post of mine, where alot of discussion started about chemistry, what is absolutely not what my post was aiming for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While another comment appeared and is saying:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At a glance, I misread &quot;7k views&quot; on this question as &quot;水 views&quot;. Given the content, it made me happy. (水 = water)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I absolutely have no clue what he is asking for or advising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I told him that I don't get what his comment means, waited like 1 day for him to calrify it after no response I flaged his comment as not constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While my flag of his comment got &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;not constructive – Zaibis 4 hours ago   declined&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My request for claryfing his comment got delted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can some one explain please to me a) what is he trying to tell about OP?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And b) Why his comment is ok, while me notifying him that this doesn't sound clear to me, was offtopic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-06-17T18:09:57.877" Title="I'm curious, why are comments talking about views and some equations I don't understand ok, while asking for what they mean isn't?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6364" CreationDate="2016-06-17T17:19:04.377" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a joke / amusing observation, not advice or a request. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;These things normally get deleted&lt;/a&gt;, but a rare few are spared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an explanation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the front page, the number of views is abbreviated when it gets into the thousands. At the time the post had approximately 7,000 views, or “7k” views.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The website's default font uses “&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_figures&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;oldstyle numerals&lt;/a&gt;” which drops the ‘7’ so it descends below the baseline, and as a result “7k” resembles the character “水” enough at a glance to believe one sees 水 for a moment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The character &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_85&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;水 means &lt;em&gt;water&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, and the question is about breathing water.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not a constructive comment, but it's not doing harm or adding distracting noise to the page, and the page isn't already cluttered with comments, so it can stay for now. Take it as an appreciation of your question, if you like. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment asking for clarification would have resulted in a bunch more comments explaining the original comment, which &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; have contributed significant noise. Removing it might or might not have been the correct course — I made a judgement call on it, hoping to avoid seeing the comments explode into an off-topic conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since what the comment is saying is going to be clear enough to enough people it doesn't justify having a lot of explanatory comments under it (which would also turn a small amusing comment into a source of major page noise), so coming here to ask to have it explained was an excellent choice, thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-06-17T18:09:57.877" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6333" CreationDate="2016-06-20T05:12:35.027" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let the votes decide the one to be kept. Many of the &quot;repetitions&quot; differ in key elements, and due to the non-forum nature, &quot;As X's answer, but...&quot; is not allowed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trust the userbase to be smart enough to spot the differences and vote accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several times, I've seen two answers where one was excellent advice but badly disjointed, with poor organization; another answer makes the same points but in more cogent order, and makes the logic train easier to follow. There's no reason to delete either - but the voting process should make the better one rise to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, stop the calls for deletions and simply vote more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Doppelgreener noted in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yes please. We can sort out the ones that suck pretty well. We very rarely get repeat answers - they're just very similar and not necesarily high quality. The situation where we tend to see this happen the most is when a question hits HNQ, and that vote noise + a drove of new (samey) answers is kinda just what happens. I doubt the people providing all those samey answers are even active meta users who will see this question or be aware of any rules we set. – doppelgreener 19 Jun 2016&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HNQ = Hot New Questions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="407" LastEditorUserId="407" LastEditDate="2016-06-21T07:22:37.853" LastActivityDate="2016-06-21T07:22:37.853" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6367" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6368" CreationDate="2016-06-25T14:57:27.677" Score="19" ViewCount="531" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand editing questions for clarity, but is there a style guide somewhere for Questions and Answers, detailing things like &amp;quot;These things should be italic, these should be bolded, capitalized these powers but not these in references, etc.&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to have some reference so that I can format my text in a manner that requires less editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29091" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-06-28T04:33:08.720" LastActivityDate="2020-06-28T04:33:08.720" Title="Is there a style guide for posts?" Tags="|discussion|faq|formatting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6367" CreationDate="2016-06-25T20:00:23.253" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't have a local style guide because we don’t have a house style to encourage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few common practices that we inherit from a few different sources though, which are practical matters rather than matters of taste/style. You’ll see these mentioned as ways to fix or improve posts, in the course of the usual feedback posts receive, but they’re &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; indications of a unified house style established by an unknown guide somewhere, they’re just technical corrections or clarity improvements:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Because we are using HTML (which is a format designed to be both human- and machine-readable), which gives specific meanings to certain kinds of markup, we benefit from recognising HTML semantics: italics for &lt;em&gt;emphasis&lt;/em&gt;, bold for &lt;strong&gt;keywords&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;technical terms&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(All-caps is, online, widely considered to be SHOUTING. It's never necessary to shout for emphasis!)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We benefit from following general English style expectations: italics for &lt;em&gt;Book and Movie Titles&lt;/em&gt;, quotation marks around “Song Names” and “words-used-as-words”. (Most often double quote marks, because single quote marks stand out less, visually. But this is a matter of personal taste and isn't generally edited.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, italicising every mention of RPG books can sometimes feel really unnecessary, so often RPG book titles get no special formatting here. From experience that's fine — rarely is it unclear what's meant when the italics are left off.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPG style has some influence: for example, it is common for D&amp;amp;D to use either title case for the Names of Magic Items and of Spells or italics for the &lt;em&gt;names of magic items&lt;/em&gt; and of &lt;em&gt;spells&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This varies by D&amp;amp;D edition though, so you'll see people disagreeing about this. Generally, this &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; be changed through editing, because both are correct and switching the style doesn't make a post even a little bit easier to read. This is similar to AmE and BrE spellings: it's not appropriate to edit someone's spelling of “realise” to “realize” or vice versa, since it wasn't wrong in the first place. As a rule of thumb, we try to be consistent with the original author's spells and spelling conventions when doing an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/83147/3&quot;&gt;this edit to your question&lt;/a&gt; is probably what inspired your meta question. It was unnecessary and did not actually help the post at all, and you shouldn't take it as a sign that there is anything wrong with the style you had already been using. If you wanted to, it would be appropriate to reverse the edit's changes.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Inline &lt;code&gt;code formatting&lt;/code&gt; should never be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1483/is-there-a-functional-purpose-to-putting-things-in-code-text-here&quot;&gt;used for emphasis, highlighting, technical terms, or quoting&lt;/a&gt;. Its HTML-defined meaning is “this is input to a computer”, and we have italics for emphasis, bold for highlighting and technical terms, and quotation marks for quoting, so no need to misuse code formatting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strike&gt;(The exception is tables, which we will often fake using non-inline code-block formatting to make the table columns align.)&lt;/strike&gt; There used to be an exception for tables, but since it was made available &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6337/23970&quot;&gt;we can use MathJax to lay out tables&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do occasionally have posts that mention literal computer input in their paragraphs, and inline code formatting &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; appropriate for those. We save it for that use.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Because it's standard English practice and how our formatting system is set up, large blocks of quotation go in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#simple-blockquotes&quot;&gt;blockquote formatting&lt;/a&gt;, which means starting each paragraph of the quote with a &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; character.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Book/page citation style varies in English and is only defined by various academic style manuals, so we don't naturally inherit anything in particular. Go with whatever is familiar, clear, and has a verbosity or brevity that suits the particular position of the citation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It helps sometimes to divide a post into sections with headers. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Never use bold for these section titles!&lt;/a&gt; Such “fake” headers are invisible to machine-reading and can seriously impair our site's accessibility to people who use assistance programs. Instead, use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#headers&quot;&gt;header formatting options provided&lt;/a&gt; to create semantic section headers. They will look better in a visual browser, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People will sometimes use horizontal lines to break up sections of a post too, when a separate title for the section doesn't make sense. It's easy to overuse them, but sometimes the judicious use of a horizontal rule makes a significant improvement in how the post reads.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#simple-lists&quot;&gt;list formatting input&lt;/a&gt; is unfortunately American-centric in its design: it doesn't recognise &lt;code&gt;1)&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;1.)&lt;/code&gt; style lists (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238957/will-commonmark-be-adopted-for-se&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;yet!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;), so list numbers always have to be written &lt;code&gt;1.&lt;/code&gt; like that, followed by a period. Otherwise, they don't render into into an HTML list &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practical terms, what these influences combine and add up to, in terms of a “common denominator” of how to format a post and have it be understood and not look “random” is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When in doubt, less is more so just leave out a piece of inline formatting when you're unsure about it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Standard emphasis is to use italics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put proper nouns in Title Case, in general, especially if there is a need to make it clear that they are a Name and not just words.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Powers are often proper nouns (but not always), so Title Case is often used and works fine. Sometimes it's desired to make them stand out though, and in that case use &lt;strong&gt;keyword formatting&lt;/strong&gt; to make it clear it's a special term.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Technical terms, similarly, often don't need any formatting, but when they do need to be formatted so that they're unambiguously seen as a technical term, use &lt;strong&gt;technical term formatting&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use double quotation marks by default. Single will sometimes be useful though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help&quot;&gt;Markdown's formatting features&lt;/a&gt; for outside-of-paragraph formatting whenever possible, to give a post visible and semantic structure that matches the structure of its existing intended meaning.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This looks like a big pile of rules, but what I wrote at the beginning is still true: we don't have a local style guide. We have various influences — English writing conventions, our Markdown formatting system's design, HTML's structural semantics, the styles that appear in RPG books and academic citation guides — that people are familiar with or that the human and machine consumers of our pages expect, so looking at those helps figure out good style practices. Seeking the lowest common denominator of all the styles that our readers &lt;em&gt;understand&lt;/em&gt; is the most effective way to format a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;clarity&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; is the foremost concern, so what's clear and unambiguous is always best. And when a post is already clear, it shouldn't be edited just to make it different without any clarity improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t have a style guide that mandates matters of taste, so if something isn’t improving technical formatting or clarity, nothing says it has to be a certain way. Go with your taste in style then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-11-18T16:10:45.320" LastActivityDate="2019-11-18T16:10:45.320" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6369" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6367" CreationDate="2016-06-26T01:39:32.667" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to come at this from a slightly different direction, addressing the writing style rather than the presentation style...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Answer the question quickly and obviously.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a lot that goes into some of these answers. But I think the best style advice I've seen and gotten was to &amp;quot;front-load&amp;quot; an answer post with your answer itself. Follow that with all your wonderful explanations, developments, examples, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For everything else I'll second &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6368/23970&quot;&gt;SSD's excellent answer&lt;/a&gt;. There's much good advice in there. (And you'll notice that he follows &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; advice--look back at his first sentence!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-06-26T01:39:32.667" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6367" CreationDate="2016-06-26T04:11:18.973" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think d7 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6368/28034&quot;&gt;covered&lt;/a&gt; the major points, but building off &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6369/28034&quot;&gt;what nitsua60 said&lt;/a&gt; about answering quickly, here are some thoughts on how to present your answers (both in terms of writing style and formatting) so they're easier to read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Make sure you answer the question asked.&lt;/strong&gt; Many an otherwise-good answer, clearly containing the &lt;em&gt;info&lt;/em&gt; the querent sought, has been marred by failing to correspond to the wording of the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; as actually asked, forcing you to read the whole thing before you can figure out what the answer's position is. If it's a yes/no question, start with yes or no!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Start at the end.&lt;/strong&gt; When you're wrapping up with &amp;quot;in conclusion&amp;quot; or&#xA;&amp;quot;TL;DR - &amp;quot;, go back and put that at the top, probably in a heading. (Think of it as the section heading for your entire answer.) This is a good time to check #1 as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Make it easy to skim.&lt;/strong&gt; If you're writing something long, instead of a big block of undifferentiated text, &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; the lists, headings, blockquotes, and other stuff d7 explained to add whitespace where appropriate. Bonus points if you begin each paragraph or list entry with a bolded summary of the point of that entry, as I've done here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's far from mandatory, but it is much easier to tell one post from another, find particular points to reference or rebut, etc. if you can effectively see an outline of the post by looking at just the headers and bolded text. (This is less important if you have the gift of keeping your answers under a paragraph, which I definitely lack.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No RPG.se styleguide would be complete without mentioning probably our most-broken rule: &lt;strong&gt;don't answer in comments.&lt;/strong&gt; Besides being against &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3211/how-much-of-an-answer-suggestion-should-be-in-comments-to-questions&quot;&gt;core site policy&lt;/a&gt; and having a length limit, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2115/text-formatting-now-allowed-in-comments-list-of-proven-and-disproven-abilities&quot;&gt;most formatting doesn't work&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-06-26T04:11:18.973" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6371" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-29T01:26:19.133" Score="9" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have fond memories of Wizards, by Avalon Hill. To me it's basically an RPG - your characters have stats and levels, roll dice for random encounters, etc. It has some issues, though, so I want to adjust the rules to make it more appealing to my pals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I said it was a board game, I probably wouldn't get much argument as there is a board involved. However, the specific question I want to ask SE involves homebrewing the rules to differentiate the spellcasting classes more, which seems like a topic people here would be better suited to answer. What's my best option here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2016-06-29T02:33:24.520" Title="Where to ask about a game that straddles the line?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6372" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-29T01:30:22.060" Score="6" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;The description of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to focus on game design, and I think 90% of the questions in it could/should be retagged game-design. Is this tag doing anything for us besides splitting up game design questions into two tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-06-29T02:02:05.600" LastActivityDate="2016-07-01T06:54:35.750" Title="Is the design tag still useful?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6372" CreationDate="2016-06-29T02:09:04.070" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; seems indeed to be (mostly) used as a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both tags cover asking practical game design questions (&quot;I'm making a game and stuck on this part&quot;) and cover asking why certain design decisions were made (&quot;Game X did this thing, why did they do that?&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception is a small number of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; questions that are about design of other things, which I've identified below. I've dropped the design tag from these or replaced it with a specific design tag (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we don't create a synonym, we should definitely be retagging most of these &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; questions to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions where I've dropped or replaced the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/595/what-to-do-in-the-shadowfell&quot;&gt;What to do in the Shadowfell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56138/are-there-advantages-to-descending-ac&quot;&gt;Are there advantages to descending AC?&lt;/a&gt; (also had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37806/show-off-your-character-sheet-designs&quot;&gt;Show off your Character Sheet Designs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41170/what-do-i-consider-when-populating-dd-4e-dungeons&quot;&gt;What do I consider when populating D&amp;amp;D 4E Dungeons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1721/has-anyone-released-castle-of-the-mad-archmage-upper-levels&quot;&gt;Has anyone released Castle of the Mad Archmage upper levels?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6059/how-can-i-turn-the-kobold-hall-delve-into-a-full-fledged-adventure&quot;&gt;How can I turn the Kobold Hall delve into a full-fledged Adventure?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1365/help-identify-a-medieval-city&quot;&gt;Help Identify a Medieval City&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4941/are-there-any-free-tools-for-designing-encounters-or-traps&quot;&gt;Are there any free tools for designing encounters or traps?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure the rest of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt; questions are just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-07-01T06:54:35.750" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6371" CreationDate="2016-06-29T02:33:24.520" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/828/wizards&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wizards&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is unambiguously a board game. (A very cool looking board game!) It's not unlike more recent examples of games that contain elements that look like RPG elements, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/104162/descent-journeys-dark-second-edition&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Descent&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/124708/mice-and-mystics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Mice and Mystics&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/59946/dungeons-dragons-castle-ravenloft-board-game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons: Castle Ravenloft Board Game&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, which are definitely board games despite passing resemblances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The place to ask about house rules for &lt;em&gt;Wizards&lt;/em&gt; would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://boardgames.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Board and Card Games SE&lt;/a&gt;, where they have &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot;&gt;a tag for house rules&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may be hard to ask an SE-appropriate question for what you're looking for though, as it may be more on the idea-generation side. In that case you might try…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The forums attached to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/828/wizards&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;BoardGameGeek listing for &lt;em&gt;Wizards&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1. &lt;em&gt;Castle Ravenloft&lt;/em&gt; and its kin have specifically been discussed before on meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284/are-questions-about-role-playing-derivative-board-games-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about role-playing derivative board games on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:38:49.807" LastActivityDate="2016-06-29T02:33:24.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6375" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-06-30T16:10:36.580" Score="4" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;Trying to delete question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6059/how-can-i-turn-the-kobold-hall-delve-into-a-full-fledged-adventure&quot;&gt;How can I turn the Kobold Hall delve into a full-fledged Adventure?&lt;/a&gt;, the confirmation text is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Delete this answered question?&#xA;  We do not recommend deleting questions with answers because doing so deprives future readers of this knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, if I confirm, I get this notification:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sorry, this question has answers and cannot be deleted; flag it for moderator attention instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the point, then?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="932" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-07-01T22:04:57.490" Title="Why ask if we're sure about deleting a question with answers, if it's not possible anyway?" Tags="|support|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6375" CreationDate="2016-06-30T22:14:49.520" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/232350/if-i-cant-delete-my-own-question-why-ask-us-for-permission-to-delete-the-quest&quot; title=&quot;Meta Stack Exchange question on the same topic&quot;&gt;This is deliberate behavior on the part of the system&lt;/a&gt;, speaking on the general point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's two component messages here. The first is, when clicking delete, you're always given a warning about what you're about to delete. The purpose of this message is to help ensure you understand why deletion is typically not recommended. It also is context sensitive, noting answered versus unanswered but &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/146781/how-can-a-question-banned-user-fix-their-questions-if-theyre-deleted/230660&quot; title=&quot;Another related Meta Stack Exchange post&quot;&gt;also warns users who may risk a post ban afterwards (or currently have one)&lt;/a&gt;. Two things generally result from this - the user understands that deletion isn't needed and stops there, or the user confirms the necessity for deletion and continues on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as you note, we restrict &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; answered question deletions - &lt;strong&gt;a question that has only received a single, unvoted answer can be deleted without requiring moderator intervention.&lt;/strong&gt; Any other one, then results in the second message, noting that a moderator is needed to perform the act. That way, when it's appropriate to go through with deletion, the user is provided a means to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We use a double message because it works out. The first one doubles as both a warning and a confirmation dialog. If we only provided the second message, users would just immediately go on to flag for moderator attention without considering the weight of the deletion. It's an extra enough step that helps reduce excess workload as well as reducing the number of more abusive deletion actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that in the case of on-hold/closure, as there's relevance to this particular incident (but I'm not speaking on the merits of the exact example question here). Closure as a whole was created to both gate and permit deletion. It marks stuff that users don't believe belongs on the site, but also provides ample opportunity to salvage a question into a state where it can remain. But the eventual destination of any closed question is not to remain closed, it'll either get reopened or deleted - there's no major need to hasten the latter, especially when there can be chances for the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-07-01T22:04:57.490" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6377" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6378" CreationDate="2016-07-04T16:23:51.270" Score="15" ViewCount="366" Body="&lt;p&gt;Does this website accept questions about &quot;real-life&quot; role-playing games? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my case, I have questions about &quot;escape games&quot;, where you are usually trapped in a room and you have one hour to solve a number of puzzles and escape the room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29990" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:55:07.263" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:55:07.263" Title="Are questions about escape games on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|larp|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6377" CreationDate="2016-07-04T16:43:32.893" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;We accept questions about LARPs (live action roleplaying games), as discussed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/165/are-questions-about-larps-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about LARPs on topic?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Escape puzzles would be &lt;strong&gt;off topic&lt;/strong&gt; here, however. Most escape games do not have any roleplaying component (besides a very bare premise of &quot;you must be a patient in this mental hospital&quot; or &quot;you must be a spy trying to ransack this room&quot;) - or really rules other than &quot;solve puzzles and get out&quot; - and therefore fall outside the fairly generous bounds of what an RPG is (like board games, computer RPGs, movie-marketing ARGs, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-07-15T13:32:26.287" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6379" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6380" CreationDate="2016-07-06T09:12:59.270" Score="14" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently, one of the off-topic close reasons reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about &lt;strong&gt;playing video games&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;developing video game&lt;/strong&gt; are off-topic here, but may be on-topic on &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/about&quot;&gt;Game Development Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, respectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shouldn't that be changed to &lt;em&gt;developing video game&lt;strong&gt;s&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:18:42.213" LastActivityDate="2016-07-07T05:40:14.533" Title="Typo in close reason" Tags="|bug|status-completed|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6379" CreationDate="2016-07-07T02:02:41.733" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it should be plural. Good eye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Changing a custom close reason in the system is (deliberately) a bit more difficult than just a simple edit so this won't be changed righty away, but it's now on the ToDo list. Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-07-07T02:02:41.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6381" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-14T10:03:54.853" Score="3" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;This post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/84078/15211&quot;&gt;Is it possible to stuff a Bag of Holding inside another Bag of Holding?&lt;/a&gt; made me ask, is it ok to ask questions here about specific rules, which are only unclear if you don't own the raw materials?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the case OP is asking there is an explicit mentioned case in each description of the item I ever read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So on the one hand asking about rules here just because you don't own the published material regarding it, seems to me like only adding noise, while on the other hand I could imagine that at some point this could even cause legal trouble, couldn't it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how to handle this kind of question, and in case some action is required, what is the border between on topic and off topic for that purpose?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-07-14T10:29:02.563" Title="Is it appropiate to ask here questions that only appear if you don't own the published rules?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2016-07-14T10:34:52.730" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6382" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-17T07:51:16.570" Score="-6" ViewCount="292" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's Back It Up &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/627/23970&quot;&gt;as originally suggested for RPGSE by SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel this is missing something, namely: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with &lt;em&gt;careful analysis&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While personal experience is very important for questions relating to story and 'fun', it doesn't work well with mechanics and statistics-based questions. Just because some specific mechanic did work out well at a table doesn't mean it's not problematic, and only analysis can show that. But folks around here seem to often require Back It Up for all kind of questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many rpg.se regulars have played RPGs for a decade or more, and so have experience with a variety of different systems, rulesets and mechanics, house rules and home brew. But often, that is not enough, and only a 'scientific' look at the rules and mechanics can help. Personal experience is not reproducible and not falsifiable, and therefore I propose this extension to Back It Up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The famous Good Subjective, Bad Subjective post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; features the xkcd comic about pure and impure science. RPG.se might be an outlier of most StackExchanges that RPGs encompass the full range, from soft/impure story- and experience-only questions over to the other extreme of math/statistics/rule mechanics hard/pure science. Back It Up is applied to all kinds of questions, but it's content currently only applies to soft/impure questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this extension, I hope to build a bridge between the people who prefer soft/impure and those more into hard/pure questions, so that we don't lose out on so many interesting answers just because mods push the soft angle so strongly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-07-17T16:13:05.130" Title="Is Back It Up! missing something?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="23" ClosedDate="2016-07-17T14:03:27.907" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6383" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6382" CreationDate="2016-07-17T12:11:02.710" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is excluded for a reason.  One man's analysis is another man's random opinion.  Note that the scientific method, for example, is not &quot;analyze, done.&quot;   While analysis can be part of formulating a theory or understanding the results of trying out that theory, if it's not tried then it stays a theory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Analysis can therefore be part of an answer, but an answer based on nothing but is a poor answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-07-17T12:11:02.710" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6382" CreationDate="2016-07-17T12:45:14.973" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! applies to subjective questions. It's part of our &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, and the quote in your answer is from there, word for word. Our GSBS guidelines are about questions and answers that are answered from experience and expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer's a subjective answer, you're expected to back it up with experience to differentiate armchair conjecture from actual demonstrated results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question can be answered purely by analysis, it's probably not a subjective question and GSBS and Back It Up! don't apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it needs both analysis and experience, by all means provide analysis, but back up the experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-07-17T12:53:03.277" LastActivityDate="2016-07-17T12:53:03.277" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6385" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-17T14:49:45.170" Score="-4" ViewCount="215" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am closing this. It's clear your real question is not about expanding the scope of back it up! in general, but about its applicability in one certain case or class of cases that you are not really bothering to define. Just waving hands about the generalities will continue with epic argument comment threads and no possible meaningful resolution. Ask about the problem you have, instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;mxyzplk closed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6382/23970&quot;&gt;my previous question&lt;/a&gt; with the reason stated above. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked my question because I want the scope of Back It Up to be extended, as explained in my post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The non-constructive background that is insinuated (a shady 'real question' I don't want to address) is not there. It's an appeal to motive, a type of ad hominem attack, pure and simple. I'm not handwaving, and there are of course meaningful resolutions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;extending the scope&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;good answers explaining why not&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that mxyplk has written his own answer in which disagrees with the suggestion while insinuating bad faith on my part makes the closing of my previous question seem at odds with diamond mod impartiality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should mods be allowed to close questions using their own ad hominem against the asker as reason?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-07-17T16:10:33.817" Title="Should mods close questions using their own ad hominem against the asker as reason?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6385" CreationDate="2016-07-17T15:27:22.403" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, they should not. And it doesn't appear, to me, that that's what's happened in this case.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You asked a generally-phrased question about the scope of Back It Up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In comments you mentioned that your concern was about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6382/is-back-it-up-missing-something#comment19222_6382&quot;&gt;questions like the Harry Potter one&lt;/a&gt;. Later comments from experienced users asked you to clarify what you're asking about. As one put it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6382/is-back-it-up-missing-something&quot;&gt;we need to have something actionable to look at&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's clear to me that a few things are true, or &lt;em&gt;should be Assumed to be true in Good Faith:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You see a problem with the application of Back It Up! to some questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Others would like to engage with, but don't quite &lt;em&gt;see&lt;/em&gt; the &amp;quot;class&amp;quot; of questions you've got in mind&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At some points people are talking past each other&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are many signs that not everyone involved in the discussion is even talking about the same thing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some of the above are signs that a question is unclear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the mod in question believes that straightening out the points above before answers and votes stream in will &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt;, not &lt;em&gt;stifle&lt;/em&gt; site-discussion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-07-17T16:10:33.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6387" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-18T12:03:05.427" Score="2" ViewCount="187" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today this simple yet very useful question about probabilities in Dungeon World was posted on the main site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84292/how-likely-is-success-in-dungeon-world&quot;&gt;How likely is success in Dungeon World?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the question itself is about Dungeon World, Apocalypse World and other Powered by the Apocalypse games use the same roll mechanic. Can I modify the question to make it non-specific to Dungeon World? It would be helpful for anyone looking for the same probabilities for other PbtA games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-07-19T04:15:39.897" Title="Can I edit a question to be more generic?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6388" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6387" CreationDate="2016-07-18T12:22:09.860" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;A solid question was asked and was given a solid answer. Leave it as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd give that advice if it was your own question, and I give that advice with double the firmness because it's someone else's. Radically changing the scope of someone else's question in a way that clearly doesn't match their original intent with it is not generally OK &amp;mdash; it's likely to create a mess along the way that's easily avoided by doing exactly nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to know about other PBTA games, ask that in a separate question. Reference that previous question's existence if you'd like to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest you stick to PBTA games you're actually interested in for your own sake, rather than being concerned about what's going to benefit others altruistically. They can ask their own questions. Asking about all PBTA games might be likely to get closed as too broad, as there's several of those, each involving their own mechanics which might differentiate win chances (like the Barbarian in the DW question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-07-18T16:01:09.857" LastActivityDate="2016-07-18T16:01:09.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6389" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6387" CreationDate="2016-07-18T12:28:28.027" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would suggest not. We generally advise that questions are about specific problems that the questioner is having, and I think this still holds here. The original querent had a specific question about a specific system, and they got a specific answer. Isn't that exactly the way the site is intended to work?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we start allowing other people to edit questions to make them artificially broader than the initial querent's problem, it opens up one &lt;strong&gt;massive&lt;/strong&gt; can of worms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2016-07-18T13:20:50.493" LastActivityDate="2016-07-18T13:20:50.493" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6390" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2016-07-18T14:30:20.747" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Angry GM&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theangrygm.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://theangrygm.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://theangrygm.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://theangrygm.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Angry GM writes on all matters of running games and designing adventures/campaigns. His posts split about half-and-half between truly system-agnostic (usually &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;) and D&amp;amp;D/PF-centric (usually monster-, dungeon-, encounter-, adventure-, or campaign-design).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He's often cited as either inspiration or further reading on this site, both in posts (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76532/23970&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/60569/23970&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/80573/23970&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/73129/23970&quot;&gt;4&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67979/23970&quot;&gt;5&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/73976/23970&quot;&gt;6&lt;/a&gt;) and in upvoted comments (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67190/what-is-the-challenge-rating-of-this-custom-volcanic-dragon#comment144325_67190&quot;&gt;7&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83644/nature-vs-nuture-how-much-of-a-races-abilities-and-stats-are-genetics-vs-upbr/83645#comment188648_83645&quot;&gt;8&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79326/how-to-build-an-interesting-dungeon-that-exists-to-kill-the-players#comment178475_79326&quot;&gt;9&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70538/do-crossbows-add-dex-to-damage/70545#comment155111_70545&quot;&gt;10&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67799/what-is-psionics/67800#comment145918_67800&quot;&gt;11&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77480/why-is-the-experience-point-progression-in-5th-edition-dd-uneven#comment173255_77480&quot;&gt;12&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; More telling, to my mind, is that a lot of different users are linking to him and that usually there's a follow-on comment from OP talking about how helpful the link was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;WARNING: Angry's posts are seasoned with profane and rude language. There's nothing worse than you'll find on prime-time US television, but that's bad enough to warrant some notice, methinks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - That's a completely random sampling, by the way, of the six top-voted posts and the six top-voted comments that mention or link Angry GM. All kidding aside, that sample gets you ten unique users, which is my basis for describing him as being broadly-linked. It's not just me, I swear!&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-07-18T14:30:20.747" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6387" CreationDate="2016-07-19T04:15:39.897" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the OP of the referenced question (and also the respondent to that question), I thought I should chime in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Backstory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked this question to help &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84034/how-often-should-monsters-act-in-combat&quot;&gt;someone else&lt;/a&gt; figure out a conversion from D&amp;amp;D 5e to Dungeon World. It seemed like a reasonable question that I could answer and keep for other readers, so I posted it as a question on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did consider other PBTA games. The consideration went like this: &quot;Gee, there are a few other games like this one. I'm totally unfamiliar with those; I should probably just stick to what I know.&quot; From that irrefutable logic, I chose to limit it to Dungeon World.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;My Opinion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree pretty strongly with the conclusions of Wibbs and doppelgreener in their respective answers. Here's my logic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If any other systems match closely enough that these stats are useful, then great!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they don't quite match, then I'd say the other system deserves a Q&amp;amp;A like this one. I'd even be happy to reply to that as well, if someone points me toward the rules for that system. However, expanding the current answer to cover rules from other systems would just dilute the content for the original target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-07-19T04:15:39.897" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6392" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6393" CreationDate="2016-07-20T14:28:12.863" Score="7" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/84414/23970&quot;&gt;How do I handle a player asking insistently about game secrets between sessions?&lt;/a&gt; and its answers seem (to me) to be verging on a few troublesome points:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a GM knowing better than his players what's fun for them,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answerers knowing better than the GM what's fun for his players,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answerers knowing how the GM &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; run his table&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words: the question, its answers, and comments are starting to make me a little uneasy. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/23970&quot;&gt;We embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt; here, but I'm not getting that feeling from that Q&amp;amp;A. (Including--full confession--&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84414/how-to-handle-a-player-asking-too-many-questions-between-sessions/84432#comment191012_84417&quot;&gt;my own comment to OP&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we rein in the degree to which answers are &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; telling the GM to change their style? Or should we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - I regretted it almost immediately, but not as quickly as someone upvoted it. So I'm letting it sit for a while but I'm not crazy about it =(&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-07-20T15:26:57.260" Title="How can we rein in playstyle conflicts on a Q&amp;A?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6392" CreationDate="2016-07-20T14:40:57.003" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unless an answer or comment is actively unpleasant and shouting down other playing styles we shouldn't. People answer questions from their own experience, and if that experience comes from playing a certain way, then their answers will reflect that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What generally tends to happen is that a variety of approaches and play styles will be covered across the answers that a question will get. Voting will then sort out answers that are more or less useful, and the questioner will choose the answer that is the most helpful to the way they are comfortable playing the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see anything wrong with this, as it seems the site is working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2016-07-20T14:40:57.003" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6392" CreationDate="2016-07-20T15:19:51.250" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I must say, as one of those that have answered, that I only stated my opinions on this situation and what I would do. Not that my opinion is superior thatn the GMs, or that he knows what is fun for the player, just what I would do if I was presented with that situation at my game table and if I didn't want to share these information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do like to keep secrets from my players, but I do not stop them from reading books. If they read the books they do so on their own intent - even though I do tell them that reading the monster manuals might spoil the suspense. Suspense can be one of the ways to achieve a fun game, but it is not all!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know one instance where I knew every player around the table had read a specific monster manual entry. However I still could use said monster to create an angsty feeling because they all didn't knew it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; that monster for I didn't named it at all and to them it was just 'a crazy monster-blanket that fell from above the door' - until I eventually told them at the end of the module that it was the classic Executioner's Hood. They did recognize the mimic they met later, but that is hardly a feat as the mimic is iconic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the same situation did play out pretty different in an other group: I knew only one might have known the entry at all, for he was GM in an other group. I named the monster as an Executioner's Hood from the beginning, and it made one of the player's eyes go wide with terror - and it wasn't said player that GMed elsewhere! I didn't knew this player (who was playing a d20 game the first time) had read some kind of blog entry about the &quot;most silly monsters in D&amp;amp;D&quot;, and it was starting to dawn upon him that the name I had given the module (House of Living Things) was meant like it was written. For the whole evening he started to become paranoid about entering any room as he said he feared to meet a Lurker or Trapper. He said it was all fun for him in the end, as it kept him on the edge all the time. Still, him knowing about the fact that there was a whole array of beings that played objects to eat their prey created a fully different type of suspense than the players just not recognizing the monster as what it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I want to say is... that Knowing and not realizing it is something or knowing and realizing or entirely not knowing all depends on the players and the adventure, even the game in question. In Cthulhu or a horror module, not knowing is (imho) the way to go, but other games live of being informed. And then again, there are groups and players that can do the split between meta/player-knowledge and character-knowledge and those that can not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, trying to find a common point across all systems and groups seems impossible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2016-07-20T15:26:57.260" LastActivityDate="2016-07-20T15:26:57.260" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4872" CreationDate="2016-07-22T15:31:53.127" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Also left, concisely, as a comment on the question itself.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a few things weigh in favor of leaving this open: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Significant new mechanic.&lt;/strong&gt; (Dis)advantage is a new mechanic for 5e, and it appears &lt;em&gt;everywhere.&lt;/em&gt; If one were considering 5e and flipping through the book, thinking &lt;em&gt;&quot;I've always liked rogues, I wonder what the 5e rogue is like&quot;&lt;/em&gt; you'd see lots of mention, but no definition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clash with plain usage.&lt;/strong&gt; (Dis)advantage is a commonplace-enough term in plain English that its use is not necessarily going to trigger alarm-bells in all readers' heads as to &quot;oh, yeah, I do something different with the dice.&quot; It's just as likely to spur the thought &quot;oh, I get an advantage. I wonder what advantage I get. &lt;em&gt;Do I get to be invisible? I really like being invisible!&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;(Typically) poor content layout.&lt;/strong&gt; The definition and description of (dis)advantage is separated enough from its usages in the book as to be likely-obscure to a first-time PHB reader. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6216/23970&quot;&gt;I've stated elsewhere&lt;/a&gt;, my litmus test for when something's &quot;too clear&quot; is whether &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of the rules necessary to interpret lie on a single page/in a single section. Once someone has to be flipping around to the &quot;right&quot; places in the book, I don't think it's unreasonable to be asking for help.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do with the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think it's on-topic, even if it's pretty low-hanging, just as WaxEagle said.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think it's worth having a pretty low score. It is one that doesn't show a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of research effort.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think it's worth our empathy: I just think neither TSR nor WotC has ever done a good job of assembling a PHB to be accessible to someone who hasn't already mastered a previous PHB.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-07-22T16:09:46.013" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6396" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6430" CreationDate="2016-07-22T19:38:18.703" Score="10" ViewCount="352" Body="&lt;p&gt;We recently got a tag suggested that had the description&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;dnd-3.x is a tag used to denote a specific and standardized hybrid play style using both the 3.0 and 3.5 versions of dnd simultaneously. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Play style is defined by allowing all rules of both systems, except where a rule from 3.0 was replaced or updated by a rule in 3.5. Thus 3.5 material has dominance in all cases over 3.0, but anything that was not updated or replaced from 3.0 is still valid and usable in-game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seemed like a neologism for a practice rather than a game in its own right, and I rejected the tag edit. (Although “D&amp;amp;D 3.x” is a common shorthand to refer to both games, that did not seem to be what the tag was being suggested for — nor would we need a tag just for that shorthand.) The author reiterated that it is not their own invention and that it is a widely-played game in its own right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this creature exist? Is there a specific, well-defined, and standardised game called “D&amp;amp;D 3.x”? And if so, is it widely-known and -played enough to transcend “we just use both game's books with this rule of thumb” and emergently become a singular, distinct game in its own right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, is this a distinct game and topic in its own right, such that we need/should support it as a distinct game with distinct tagging? Or is tagging questions about specific interactions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; the right way to categorise questions arising from this practice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-07-22T21:38:29.473" LastActivityDate="2016-08-01T17:04:49.393" Title="Does a widely-played and well-defined hybrid of D&amp;D 3e and 3.5e exist called “D&amp;D 3.x”?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6396" CreationDate="2016-07-22T20:14:31.223" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the risk of being cute: Yes. It's called 3.5. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3.5 is not directly compatible with 3.0. Skills are broken out slightly differently, some of the mechanics work differently (e.g. damage reduction), etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, 3.5 has guidance on how to convert most 3.0 material to 3.5, and what mechanical changes you need to make. So, the combined game you would commonly play actually is just 3.5 (it's possible some tables use a mishmash of mechanics, but I am unaware of any standard way of doing so). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's more likely in question is what level of scrutiny a table is applying to 3.0 material which did not receive an explicit update. For example, the Spelldancer was not reprinted in 3.5, but is  compatible with essentially no changes. Many groups would say it's not 3.5 material, many others might think it's fine. But you can find exactly the same divide in how easily tables allow Dragon magazine content, or third party supplements, or even psionics. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optimization questions pretty much always need a list of acceptable sources, and no tag set is going to cover every possible permutation. Splitting 3e from 3.5 is worthwhile, both for history questions and because they are subtly different engines, but trying to make tags describe sources will lead only to unhappiness. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2016-07-22T20:14:31.223" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6398" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6396" CreationDate="2016-07-23T00:13:25.310" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;My understanding and usage of the term &quot;D&amp;amp;D 3.x&quot; has always been as a blanket shorthand term covering the 3.5 material with the inclusion of any leftover 3.0 material which has not been updated. This is based on every example of it that I have ever seen used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;At the table&quot;, this is simply an inclusive example of 3.5 being played, where &quot;old&quot; material is presumed still valid. This is as opposed to an exclusive playstyle, where older material is presumed outdated and disallowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The method of reference is certainly not new, but it is not a truly separate variation of the game. It is simply a shorthand for referring to the overall system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the risk of throwing oil on the fire, there is also the even broader term 3.PF which does represent a hybridized game generally incorporating 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder rules. However, with no uniform method of sorting it out when a rules disagreement comes up, this would generally be a purely speculative/opinion-based tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30162" LastActivityDate="2016-07-23T00:13:25.310" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6399" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6416" CreationDate="2016-07-23T01:21:27.537" Score="52" ViewCount="2522" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I see RPG Stack Exchange has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/myfarog/info&quot;&gt;a MYFAROG tag&lt;/a&gt;, and MYFAROG questions in that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MYFAROG is a game by &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varg_Vikernes&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Varg Vikernes&lt;/a&gt;, an infamous Norwegian murderer/arsonist who espouses white-nationalist and &quot;Heathen Front&quot; (racist pagan) beliefs.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game's blurb (currently quoted uncritically in our tag wiki) talks around the whole white-nationalist part, but it's pretty transparent about the goal of using the game as a vehicle for Varg's concept of &quot;European values:&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;MYFAROG is a role-playing game based on European values, geography, (pre-) history, mythology, traditions and morals. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe part of the original shtick was to teach his kids white nationalism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read plenty about Vikernes by googling him. You can find information about the game and its content as well, but these days it's obscured somewhat by the sheer volume of stuff Vikernes himself posts about it. (Check web archives from last year?) The point is, you don't have to take my word for it, but I don't have a time to do some kind of preemptive deep-dive about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game is undoubtedly more staid than &quot;RaHoWa&quot; (the fecklessly awful neo-Nazi RPG, for neo-Nazis), but it's still very much a product of — and vehicle for — this dude's racial-hate-movement ideology.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, my question to you all is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should RPG SE recognize roleplaying games created by a hate-movement figure and inspired by hate-movement ideology as a valid part of the RPG ecosystem, or treat them as something beyond the pale?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If RPG SE is going to host discussion about such games, what's an appropriate way to at communicate to users that an RPG is by and for white nationalists?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-07-29T16:41:14.933" Title="RPGs by and for white nationalists" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-23T02:22:42.233" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether there's racism involved, even superficial examination of most games shows some pretty unpleasant themes, so this is either a double standard or one which ends with essentially all RPGs tarred. Unless MYFAROG has Dark Dungeons-style play (unlikely), it's still just fictional depictions of objectionable behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people believe games with Devils and magic are vile, corrupting influences; some people believe games with explicit racism are vile, corrupting influences. In all cases, trying to enforce a community standard on which RPGs are and are not okay will get ugly fast. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-07-24T11:26:38.677" LastActivityDate="2016-07-24T11:26:38.677" CommentCount="26" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-23T04:13:59.630" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, we do have a Be Nice policy, and no racist or otherwise offensive content will be allowed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, we don't want links to places where offensive content is prominent, like 4chan/8chan. So links to any MYFAROG sites with racist or white nationalist content is inappropriate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we don't blacklist discussion of specific games or authors outside that boundary.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Author&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the RPG space, a lot of people object to a lot of game authors.  I've read similar passionate screeds about how Vincent Baker, or Zak Sabbath, or H.P. Lovecraft, or whoever is bad and they and their games should be shunned. &quot;But that author is a bad person&quot; - including &quot;they were convicted of a crime&quot; - is not a reason for anything on this site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I am not interested in any of the Gamergate-style arguments that infect other sites.  If a game's author is a convicted criminal, or you think they are a homophobe, or a pervert, or a rip-off artist, or a Muslim, or a Christian, or a Republican, or a racist, or whatever other thing you and maybe most of us object to - it's not relevant, and as long as I'm a mod I will give any argument along those lines extremely short shrift.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Game&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a game's content is offensive, then we should not discuss that content here. Of course, different content is objectionable to those of different backgrounds, but I think it's fair to say SO generally abides by &quot;generally accepted enlightened civilized rules&quot;, which everyone knows even if they sometimes pretend they don't. We do want to be able to frankly discuss sex, sexism, racism, murder-hoboism, etc. in games and we have questions here already on those topics. Games like Call of Cthulhu are based on writings that can fairly be described to have previous-century racism embedded in them, but we discuss those just fine without having offensive content on site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone asks &quot;How do I calculate AC in MYFAROG&quot; - I don't have a problem with that. IMO worrying about the &quot;problem of association&quot; on the &lt;em&gt;public Internet&lt;/em&gt; is a pointless pursuit. People use D&amp;amp;D to act out rape fantasies, or in this case use MYFAROG to play an apparently non-racist game.  We don't need to get into deep dialectical analysis of &quot;which games we decree bad,&quot; we just need to not allow offensive content on this site, period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@SevenSidedDie brought up the issue of the pedigree of this game in mod chat when the question was first posted, but we discussed and agreed that the question itself was inoffensive and so there was no grounds for doing anything about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would certainly support putting a warning in the tag wiki to the effect &quot;Warning: This is a 'white power' game and Web sites about it are likely to contain racist content&quot; or similar, so that people have fair warning about it if they go to learn more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actions beyond that open our site up to the same factionalism that infests most every other social media site, with the flavor of the month inciting its members to decide which authors and works are currently allowed vs disallowed based on their real or perceived beliefs. Take it to Reddit, we don't want it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-07-28T20:23:13.023" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T20:23:13.023" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-23T05:10:14.813" Score="19" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should RPG SE recognize roleplaying games created by a hate-movement figure and inspired by hate-movement ideology as a valid part of the RPG ecosystem, or treat them as something beyond the pale?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we should recognise hate-inspired RPGs as RPGs (and as hate-inspired). They may be completely awful RPGs embodying abhorrent ideologies, some of which enjoy presence in RPGnet Wiki's &lt;a href=&quot;https://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Worst_RPGs_ever&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Worst RPGs Ever list&lt;/a&gt;, but they're still RPGs. Our hobby does have bad stuff in it the world would be better off without.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think what you're really going for here is whether we should allow them topically. Whether we recognise them as valid RPGs and parts of our hobby or whatever can be &lt;em&gt;totally separate&lt;/em&gt; to whether we allow talking about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I'm interested in being able to talk about these games academically, since they represent the worst parts of the genre and things not to do that I can learn from &amp;mdash; it's for similar reasons historians will discuss the worst parts of history to learn from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If RPG SE is going to host discussion about such games, what's an appropriate way to at communicate to users that an RPG is by and for white nationalists?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll rather go and consider: &lt;strong&gt;what should we do about these?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with warning people the game appears to be full of racist analogies and push a Norse white supremacy agenda. I agree with BESW's notion to warn people in the tag wiki summary itself, wording TBD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm also keenly aware of something else: allowing the game as a general topic of play is tacitly endorsing it as a reasonable companion to the various &lt;em&gt;more decent&lt;/em&gt; games play, despite it and its ideologies being distinctly concerning. Part of me wants to say &quot;let's ban it&quot; for not letting a racist game really gain much traction, but I'm not sure how to reconcile that with &quot;we should probably still be able to learn from this junk&quot;, or other games we'd ban for offending our sensitivities. Even D&amp;amp;D has concerning features such as its primary nomadic races being bloodthirsty savages who everyone else would be better off without.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-07-23T05:55:10.127" LastActivityDate="2016-07-23T05:55:10.127" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-23T17:22:02.010" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Racism&lt;/em&gt; is bad. &lt;em&gt;Racists&lt;/em&gt; are bad. Racist &lt;em&gt;games&lt;/em&gt; are bad. We should &lt;strong&gt;ban the MYFAROG tag and any questions about the MYFAROG game.&lt;/strong&gt; We don't &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; people who are experts on the game as part of our community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Devil's Advocate Post: I am posting this &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; so that people have it available as an option to vote on. It does not necessarily reflect my own feelings on the matter.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2016-07-23T17:22:02.010" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-23T17:23:42.640" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about RPGs are on-topic. MYFAROG is an RPG. Therefore questions about MYFAROG and answers to those questions &lt;strong&gt;should be allowed&lt;/strong&gt; so long as the content of the question or answer is not &lt;em&gt;in and of itself&lt;/em&gt; offensive. This will render some questions un-askable, and other questions un-answerable, but that's not the RPG.SE community's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Devil's Advocate Post: I am posting this &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; so that people have it available as an option to vote on. It does not necessarily reflect my own feelings on the matter.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2016-07-23T17:23:42.640" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-24T03:10:54.533" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thoughts. Here, have some thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I support SSD's decision to burn down the tag and kick the can down the road&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why twist yourself into a pretzel coming up with ways to discuss a committedly racist game non-racistly when you could just… not do it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any link-back, however negative, is still a bit of unnecessary free advertising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any discussion that actually fits the parameters of this site — which tends to be rules questions and play advice (not game reviews, critical reading, or abject mockery) — would be de-facto normalizing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tag wiki stuff: be honest, be clear&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author's ideas about &amp;quot;European values&amp;quot; are the game's raison d'être, as well as by far the most notable thing that sets it apart from other RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no reason not to label MYFAROG as white-nationalist. It would be deceptive not to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&amp;quot;Be nice&amp;quot; and hate groups&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Big communities always involve a bit of a compromise, wherein folks agree to overlook and talk around some of their fundamental differences to avoid butting heads. Call it &amp;quot;civility&amp;quot; or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now consider hate groups, such as neo-Nazis and their fellow travelers. &lt;strong&gt;These are folks who've built an entire identity around wishing harm, or death, or &lt;em&gt;industrialized genocide&lt;/em&gt; on you, or your family, or your friends.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why would you want to be around those people, ever, at all, if you can avoid it? I certainly don't want to, even if a site has rules that partially force them into &amp;quot;stealth mode.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Folks make the mistake of assuming that a space that doesn't explicitly exclude anyone is the most neutral and accepting and inclusive, but in reality plenty of people self-select out when they notice who else is floating around. That's not &amp;quot;factionalism,&amp;quot; it's &amp;quot;Why the hell should I bother being &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-07-29T16:41:14.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6408" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6410" CreationDate="2016-07-24T21:31:19.593" Score="6" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have the following problem: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinder/miniatures/pawns&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Pathfinder Pawns&lt;/a&gt; (their branding for a type of cardboard counter miniature) in about 7 boxes from different sets. Some of those boxes have the same or similar monsters, e.g. different types of orcs, named orcs from adventure paths, etc.. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to find a way how to organise them efficiently (not digitally, that's trivial, but the actual cardboard stock pawns from the boxes), so I can just lookup my db and know where to fetch them. I am willing to spend money for a good solution, but I haven't found any yet. Keeping them in the boxes is bad because after using them, some tend to fall out of the cardboard pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way I can ask for the best way to organise those pawns  that doesn't conflict with some rpg.se rules? How would I have to formulate that question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-07-25T17:14:08.800" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T17:14:32.567" Title="Is there a rpg.se compatible way to ask a question about counter organisation?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-24T23:03:52.423" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is clear that this kind of game goes directly against the &lt;strong&gt;Be Nice&lt;/strong&gt; policy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, whilst you can argue that all RPG's have maligned/evil races in them, I doubt any of them make it very clear that they are based on real world races.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would we feel comfortable hosting questions about a RPG for ISIS fan-boys that has them as the 'good guys'?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't give any space for racist and bigoted views on this site, even if they are just part of a 'game' - allowing people like this to build a small community on &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; site goes against everything that stackoverflow stands for&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/strong&gt;: I am not 'white' and my cultural background is often the target of white supremacists and other neo-nazi hate groups&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10125" LastActivityDate="2016-07-24T23:03:52.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6408" CreationDate="2016-07-25T01:03:27.673" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assuming you're talking about “&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinder/miniatures&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;miniatures&lt;/a&gt;”, questions about miniatures are generally on topic, so long as it's not a shopping question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to organise miniatures for best retrieval would be an on-topic question. But it's very hard to give advice for a hypothetical question that hasn't been asked yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on some experience, and guessing at what the question might be I can see it going a few ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How to organise and label them without us needing to care how your database works would probably turn out fine. People who use lots of miniatures would be able to draw on their experience organising their own collections for easy retrieval.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How to organise them for best retrieval using a custom database that we &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; need to care about would probably be closed as “unclear” or “too broad” or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Maybe “unclear” because we don't know how your software works, and a sufficiently complete description such that we could understand what you need is probably impossible in a question post.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Maybe “too broad” because crowdsourcing a bespoke organisation scheme that is tailored to your specific software system is going to have many possible answers, all equally valid.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br/&gt;The site works best when we're asked for the best way of doing something when you don't need answers to force themselves to fit extremely specific prerequisites. That's because asking for what has &lt;em&gt;already worked&lt;/em&gt; for people can leverage their experience; asking for a bunch of people to create something new and custom for you doesn't leverage anyone's experience, and that kind of request tends to result in a mess, a lot of discussion, and a closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want to ask how to organise a large number of miniatures for easy retrieval and your software is irrelevant to the question, that would work. If you want to ask how to custom-tailor the missing pieces of an organisation scheme that you've already partially devised, it will almost certainly not work as you'd hope, even if it didn't get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way to find out is to, well, just ask the question. It's very hard to give a solid “yea” or “nay” to a hypothetical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-07-25T17:14:32.567" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T17:14:32.567" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6411" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-25T10:44:37.137" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;A game, film, book or any other creative product which endorses or promotes racism should be banned (and often is).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, since it is a collective imaginative past-time, a roleplaying game session will inherently consist of the biases, preferences and ideologies of the players, be they in America, Saudi Arabia, Northern Korea or the Amazon Basin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also true that nearly any RPG can be accused of some racist tones (such as the caricature of nomadic races as barbaric). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the vast majority of RPGs do not actively promote or endorse racism &lt;em&gt;in their text.&lt;/em&gt; Rather, they provide an imaginative sandbox in which to create stories about the tensions such difference causes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While a forum should be open to as many people and ideas as possible, it is easy to get confused and assume that it needs to have no agenda of its own. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not true. A forum can be forthright and upfront about the fact that it is for people who are not racist, or sexist or anti-social etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Racists and sexists have the right to start their own forums. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing wrong with standing up and saying what the forum is against. There &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something wrong with allowing liberal ideology to lead you to paralysis and inaction (which is as bad as tacit agreement), and potentially dangerous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators of this forum are not obliged to tolerate all content, or to give air to all products.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators can choose to be activists against dangerous ideologies (for reference, they're the ones which promote division, fear, hate, abuse, violence, murder and war, and are identifiable by historical precedent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28574" LastEditorUserId="28574" LastEditDate="2016-07-25T11:08:01.643" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T11:08:01.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-25T17:51:02.610" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/myfarog&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;myfarog&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;myfarog&lt;/a&gt; gameplay imply racist gameplay, as the game itself is built to teach racism.  This isn't a game that contains racism, it is a teaching tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about what ways &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/myfarog&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;myfarog&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;myfarog&lt;/a&gt; is racist isn't intrinsicly racist, or how its mechanics and setting do/do not encourage/teach racism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would propose this for the tag wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions about the white power survivalist game MYFAROG.  MYFAROG embodies real-world racism, religious prejudices, and other forms of bigotry, and was designed to teach these concepts to the well-known racist author's children. Questions about actual gameplay of MYFAROG imply racism, bigotry, and other offensive conduct, as such content is embedded in the game itself, and are not tolerated on Stack Exchange websites.  Questions not about playing the game are permitted.  Don't take that as an invitation to say &quot;hypothetically&quot;, then ask a gameplay question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and for it to be enforced as written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This game is different than most RPGs about violent or other objectionable content, because the game is designed and intended to say &quot;this is what you should do&quot;, not &quot;you should only do this in the game&quot;.  An RPG that was actually designed to teach you how to rape or murder would be no different than this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8217" LastEditorUserId="8217" LastEditDate="2016-07-25T18:35:21.790" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T18:35:21.790" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6413" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6415" CreationDate="2016-07-25T20:35:37.403" Score="0" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I only see one question on this page, is that correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="231" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-07-26T08:40:16.107" Title="There seems to be only one question on this site" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6413" CreationDate="2016-07-25T21:22:22.167" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are having a technical problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Providing more information might help us help you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T21:22:22.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6413" CreationDate="2016-07-25T21:23:37.543" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are you by chance in the &lt;strong&gt;Featured&lt;/strong&gt; tab?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pnfpY.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pnfpY.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That has only one question in it, because it lists only the questions with bounties. When you pick one of these questions filters, Stack Exchange remembers it for a while. (The &lt;em&gt;Active&lt;/em&gt; filter is how the front page is sorted.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-07-25T21:23:37.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6416" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6399" CreationDate="2016-07-27T17:58:16.587" Score="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to write with a basic premise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;MYFAROG's content is unquestionably horrible and neither this question nor its answer are concerned with whether that's the case — we can consider that settled. So far the only defenses we've seen here of the game's &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; itself have been based on defending it sight-unseen, and we all know that arriving at a conclusion by starting with assuming it's true &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;is just noise&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't have to accept that premise. That's just square one based on what &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; know about the game and it's not possible for me to write as if that's not fundamental to the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Free speech is a bugbear — it is not relevant&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's another premise, actually. This one takes more words, because so many people misunderstand how this stuff works and how it relates to a site like RPG.se. This is here because we've already seen some reflexive defenses of MYFAROG based on no knowledge of the game; it's also here because inevitably someone brings up free speech as if it's the only thing that matters in discussions about whether a kind of content should be permitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Free speech 101: if you're not the government and control people's lives — in a literal 24/7 life-and-death way — you are not responsible for granting the ability for people to exercise free speech rights. Free speech is between a citizen and their government, not some website among billions and the troll (or whatever) who wants to write there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no free speech principle to stand up for here. It doesn't apply and doesn't compel us to permit things, when faced with a weight of reasons not to. It doesn't apply because RPG.se is not an exclusive platform, and we cannot compel people to silence — we don't control all communication methods or speaker's bodies in a way that could take away their ability to speak their views. Having no absolute power over people, we cannot violate their free speech rights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And no, we're not going to locally champion free speech &lt;em&gt;anyway&lt;/em&gt; and import it into the site's working principles, for some undefined “but free speech is good” reason. We're not a public utility — posting here is a privilege that people earn by contributing constructively and not behaving badly. Nobody is &lt;em&gt;owed&lt;/em&gt; our cooperation with using &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site to say or do whatever they want. We &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;regularly prevent people&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;doing whatever they want&lt;/a&gt;, because the site would be crushed under the weight of that burden otherwise. The site is too small and too not-the-whole-darn-world to support or be required to support anything and everything someone might want to post on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, just because what you want to say is not &lt;em&gt;literally illegal&lt;/em&gt; doesn't mean you get to say it &lt;strong&gt;here&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's not really touching on MYFAROG's current impact on our site at the moment, but it's a fundamental piece that needs to be laid down, otherwise “but my free speech!” is going to keep (irrelevantly) being brought up as if it's the end of any possible discussion of what we should do about games like it. It's not the final word here, and isn't even a minimally relevant word here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The problem of association&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know the quality of a person by the friends they keep. That's true too of a community. What a community accepts into itself speaks very loudly about what the community &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are good people who will have nothing to do with RPG.se if RPG.se has questions about a game that actively calls for the death of themselves, their family, or their friends. There are other good people who are not personally targeted by MYFAROG who will have nothing to do with a site that visibly welcomes questions about a game that calls for real-world genocide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we want to look and &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; welcoming to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;revolting bigots who like everything in MYFAROG&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the vanishingly rare person who plays MYFAROG but subverts it (there are only like 200 copies in existence, so we're talking on the order of ones or low tens of “good” MYFAROG “fans”)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… in exchange for encouraging&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a large number of people who have problems being anywhere near group (1)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to stay away from or leave RPG.se?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In straight exchange, that seems like a really bad trade. Considering we're custodians of a privately-offered service and not only &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; obliged to host all speech, but actually required to reject all kinds of &lt;em&gt;innocuous&lt;/em&gt; speech (too-chatty comments, off topic questions, etc.), let alone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;bigoted speech&lt;/a&gt;, that seems like a &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; bad trade. Standing up for inapplicable principles of free speech just to make our site &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt; is not what SE handed all of us, the community, self-rule for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The problem of the actual questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The actual questions here have a side problem: they're not actually &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; MYFAROG. MYFAROG is just background context, provided so that people know what kind of game the actual problems are operating within. One is a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84295/what-can-i-do-when-ive-introduced-an-overpowered-plot-element&quot;&gt;recovering from messing up a campaign development&lt;/a&gt; and the other is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84414/how-do-i-handle-a-player-asking-insistently-about-game-secrets-between-sessions&quot;&gt;a player wanting to know things that might not be their business&lt;/a&gt;. Neither is a problem &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; any part of MYFAROG — which is what tags are supposed to be for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ironically, it looks like part of the community's indecision about this game's presence on our site (I know it has been part of mine) is that the questions are themselves not even about MYFAROG — no part of MYFAROG is actually in them, and the game is just mentioned in passing. They're relatively innocuous, generally-applicable questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not being about the game, we don't actually have any obvious case of the game's awfulness coming to RPG.se. We're concerned about its presence, but its presence is mostly an artifact of not cleaning up the questions in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What I'm doing right now&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not banning the game (that would be rather unilateral, anyway). I'm not closing the questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;am&lt;/em&gt; going to remove the tag from both questions, though — by normal principles of how to use tags, they don't belong there.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to blank its wiki too, so that it decays and is removed from the site. We have no questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; MYFAROG here yet, and therefore we have no tag for it either.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I am also going to unlink the MYFAROG site from the questions, because even the questions' author says you should ignore the official web presence of the game and its author if you want to subvert it and extract anything decent from the text itself. We have no need to gratuitously link to hate speech, so let's not, eh? The link didn't even help educate answerers, who just assumed what they wanted about the game anyway when forming their advice. We'll be better without it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The name of the game is also not super relevant to the questions, so I'm removing it too. Normally we like system-agnostic questions to mention the game being played at least in passing, so that we have that context, but in this case not being associated with White Nationalist Calls To Real Violence is probably enough of an upside to balance removing that bit of convenience. (Not that it was actually a meaningful convenience! Nobody answering has apparently used that information to inform their question anyway, based on the numerous comments I had to leave explaining that their answer's assumption about how the book is organised were mistaken.) In the first question the game is &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; not relevant, because it's entirely about a homebrew setting. In the second question the game is only slightly relevant because of the way the book is organised, but see the recent parenthetical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, I am kicking the can down the road: MYFAROG has't really yet come to RPG.se in a way that RPG.se inherently doesn't tolerate, so we're working (badly) with a hypothetical. If MYFAROG itself got some questions, we'd have more to work with and we'd probably have an easier time coming to a consensus about how to handle it, based on real MYFAROG game and content questions. We might not even need a conversation — if the &lt;em&gt;awful&lt;/em&gt; MYFAROG content came here, normal procedures of “nope, this post violates our code of conduct and has been fired into the sun” &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6403&quot;&gt;would take care of it without any need for discussion&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's discuss the situation when it's less hypothetical, and pray that it never is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still not super happy with the game even being &lt;em&gt;asked about&lt;/em&gt; without the name or link or tag, because of the Problem of Association, but getting rid of gratuitous connections between us and it is still a big improvement in the Not Associating With a White Nationalist Teaching Game metric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm also not super happy with having just… &lt;em&gt;expunged&lt;/em&gt;… a game from the site. The different responsibilities and perspectives of the moderation role are often in tension with each other. I think that I'm only OK with it — on balance — because they're not irreversible or nuclear actions, and they're reasonable on their own to do. Still, wary discomfort is my companion from both ends of this thing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, this is a half measure. This answer is less “this is what we should do” as, “this is why it's a problem”, and a note that I'm making some overdue corrections to the posts in a way that almost incidentally significantly remove MYFAROG's real presence here. Most of this should have been done as a routine question-cleanup when I saw the first one, but I didn't because I was too busy being alarmed by the appearance of MYFAROG — so, my bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T17:18:17.553" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6417" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6418" CreationDate="2016-07-28T04:56:24.260" Score="7" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm apprehensive about asking this, because I'm very new to the site myself. However, I'm wondering if others have considered the possibility that certain badges on the site might be encouraging counterproductive behaviour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm being completely honest, this has come about because I keep seeing some &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; silly questions being upvoted - questions that often meet &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; of the criteria for downvoting (shows no research effort, unclear, not useful).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine this is either because:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am expecting too much of other users, &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt;   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that many users don't understand what votes are for, &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that some users are voting arbitrarily in order to gain lower-level badges.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something that can be addressed at all? Has it been previously discussed, and I'm just searching in the wrong places?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30345" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-07-31T22:31:41.573" LastActivityDate="2016-07-31T22:31:41.573" Title="Have the pros and cons of Badges been reevaluated recently?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6417" CreationDate="2016-07-28T06:09:59.960" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;To address your inner concern first, yes, people often vote in peculiar ways. It's a design feature though: the site's mechanics thrive on &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of votes, so encouraging voting is something it does at every opportunity. Silly or contrarian votes being easy to cast is the necessary “evil” (not really very evil) caused by the low barrier to voting, which is low to ensure having a healthy flow of votes. Besides which, the “bad” votes will in general be swamped by the more studious, serious “good” votes. And that increases the more voting happens — and voting happens more the easier it is to do, so ironically the easier it is to cast “bad” votes, the less those “bad” votes will ultimately matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting is lifeblood, so we always want to encourage more voting rather than less. And it means we don't need to police how and why people vote (which would be a nightmare).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address your outer concern, yes, badges are &lt;em&gt;constantly&lt;/em&gt; being poked and criticised by SE community and staff members to make sure they're still doing useful things for the site. You won't generally see that here, because badges are hardcoded into the SE system and aren't under the control of individual Stacks like RPG.se. To see the debates around badges you have to venture over to the Meta site for &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of Stack Exchange, &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; (MSE).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A portion of the questions in the [&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/badges&quot;&gt;badges&lt;/a&gt;] tag over there are questions challenging the existence or sense of particular badges; one recent example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279285/can-we-retire-the-reversal-badge-on-main-sites-and-keep-it-only-for-meta-sites&quot;&gt;Can we retire the Reversal badge on main sites and keep it only for meta sites?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T06:09:59.960" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6419" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6420" CreationDate="2016-07-28T08:26:16.120" Score="10" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84830/how-to-encourage-players-to-work-better-as-a-team&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question is tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/29341&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; suggested edit removes the tag, and replaces it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;, on the grounds that the question does not directly concern the pathfinder rules. However, the asker in question is playing pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tag only appropriate when the question directly concerns the rules of pathfinder, or should it be used whenever the asker wants a solution for a pathfinder game?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this the case for all system tags?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question is not a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/should-i-use-a-narrow-system-tag-or-go-broad-if-possible-and-use-system-agnosti&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, as it is asking specifically whether a requirement of system tags is that the question must directly concern the rules of the system.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27994" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:39:00.267" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:39:00.267" Title="Are system tags only for directly rules-related questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6419" CreationDate="2016-07-28T09:09:46.633" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;System tags are for more than just rules, and we're supposed to be providing solutions to the real problems folks are facing. Leave the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most game systems have playstyle assumptions and table etiquette built into them: the kind of stories being told, the relationship between GM and players, the interaction between PCs in the group, and much more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question can be answered in a way that doesn't rely on Pathfinder assumptions, that's great! But it doesn't make the question any less about how to encourage teamwork in a Pathfinder game, and by removing that information we risk losing out on PF-specific answers (I can't imagine any, but one thing this site has taught me is that the RPG world is far broader than my mind can encompass or even predict).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Experience has shown that attempts to artificially broaden a question's scope usually make answers vague and hand-wavy, of little use to anyone. Good answers to specific questions explain themselves so that others in similar situations also find them useful.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-07-28T09:25:24.370" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T09:25:24.370" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6421" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-28T14:54:09.203" Score="0" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22814/23970&quot;&gt;How to cause a missed shapeshift roll for Dungeon World&lt;/a&gt; should be closed: it fits all the hallmarks for the things that make list/idea-generation questions bad. There are a number of good, non-overlapping answers with no real way to tell which is &quot;better&quot; than another for voting purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's not a &lt;strong&gt;duplicate&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's possibly &lt;strong&gt;off-topic&lt;/strong&gt; for a &lt;strong&gt;custom reason&lt;/strong&gt; of... I'm-not-sure-what?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's not &lt;strong&gt;unclear&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's possibly &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt; because &quot;there are too many possible answers,&quot; but the fact that it's only generated three answers makes that seem a little petty&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It doesn't seem &lt;strong&gt;Primarily opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;, as the answers speak from excellent experience&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this question is an obvious candidate for closure. But &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T23:17:35.800" Title="(Why) should this question be closed?" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6421" CreationDate="2016-07-28T15:05:33.827" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It need not be closed.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the text of the question we get a &quot;how do I do this?&quot; which fits the general theme of problem solving. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;but how can you make shapeshifting turn out bad?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there is a trace of &quot;idea generation&quot; and the title looks that way, I edited the title to get rid of &quot;idea&quot; and the question is still OK.  The best answer, be it from pure rule citation or experience (you note that there is an answer with each feature) should receive support. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2016-07-28T15:58:11.317" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T15:58:11.317" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6421" CreationDate="2016-07-28T15:07:33.907" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's closeable it would be the &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt; reason because &quot;it's an idea-generation / infinite list question.&quot; Even if it hasn't been expanding steadily, unending ideas is what the question is asking for — the limited number of answers is just because of the smaller audience for DW questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it gets closed, too broad would definitely be why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, the answers aren't terribly list-y so far; if you squint, they could be answering a related, &quot;How do I choose miss consequences for the Shapeshift move?&quot; question instead. The question could be modified to no longer be asking for ideas in such a way that the answers are still properly answering the new question — the ideas provided in the answers then become working examples of their methods instead of just an idea list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, maybe on closer inspection that wouldn't actually work perfectly, or the answers wouldn't still fit quite right or they'd need modifying to fit the new question. But its a slightly out-of-box avenue to explore when something in a question makes us hesitate to vote it closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T15:07:33.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6424" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-07-28T17:24:39.393" Score="0" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;So this question is sparked by admittedly an answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/75964/can-contingency-plus-dispel-magic-be-used-to-mitigate-all-negative-wild-magic-ou&quot;&gt;I posted&lt;/a&gt; after an answer was already accepted but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53541/did-spirit-guardians-just-wipe-out-the-orc-army&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt; is also spurred me to post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is accepted and a later answer is a better fit and/or more accurate is the only recourse to let the voting resolve it assuming the OP of the question ever checks back on their already assumedly answered question? Or in the case of the linked instance where nitsua60 posted a bounty in what appears to be an attempt to sway the changing of the answer, in this case the original was correct until Crawford recanted and clarified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to draw the eye to help encourage &quot;re-voting&quot; with this new information?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First ever question so please let me know if you need clarification to help with your answer(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29513" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T18:27:57.507" Title="Answer posted after another is Accepted is the better choice" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2016-07-28T17:50:06.470" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6421" CreationDate="2016-07-28T23:17:35.800" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this question lives in a nebulous area between an infinite list question and a rules question. The rules question aspect is mostly a quirk of the Dungeon World system. The actual question asked is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;how can you make shapeshifting turn out bad? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In context of the system, it means the player rolled a 6-. The only possible answer within the rules is &quot;The GM picks one of the 12 GM moves to use in response&quot;. It only gets infinite-list-y if people start providing tons of different ideas about how to implement one of those 12 moves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers aren't exactly pouring in, and the currently Accepted answer is one that starts with a framework of the rules. As such, I think it's a case of a potentially too broad question that has successfully been reined in with a few good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastActivityDate="2016-07-28T23:17:35.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6426" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6428" CreationDate="2016-07-30T04:02:18.107" Score="4" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do I address a question where the description does not match the title? For example, the question's title asks for one specific thing, and in the description, a different (sometimes multiple) questions are asked in addition. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, say that a question has multiple parts to it - If I have answers to part of the question - but not all of it - should I answer the question at all? Should I only answer if my answer covers the question in the title?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30345" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:01:44.143" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:01:44.143" Title="What do I do with a question that contains multiple questions in its body and/or title?" Tags="|support|questions|answers|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6426" CreationDate="2016-07-30T04:24:53.207" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should vote to put the question on hold and work with the OP to refine their question in both cases.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-07-30T04:24:53.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6426" CreationDate="2016-07-30T04:27:11.610" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generally these are signs of a problem with the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; and indicate that it's not ready to be answered yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When a question contains multiple questions that can each be answered independently, they are probably separate questions that should be posted as separate question posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing to do here is leave a comment explaining that we need one question per post (so that each page can focus on fully answering just one question), and asking them to post their other questions separately. Then either edit the question to contain only one question by cutting out the rest, or (if that's not feasible) flag or vote the question closed as “too broad” and let the author sort it out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When the title and body of a question really mismatch, something is missing that's making what the actual question is unclear. Maybe they have two questions (as above), maybe they're the same question but they left out some of the description that would connect the title and body together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, the title is &lt;em&gt;secondary&lt;/em&gt; because it's the shortest and can contain the least information, so if you're going to answer one or the other, it's the body that should be answered. If it's so bad that you can't tell how the title is related to the question body, then the question has enough problems that it would be better to hold off answering until it's fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing to do here is flag or vote to close as “unclear” and (optionally) leave a comment asking for specific details that you think would clear it up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, trying to answer a question that's a jumble of different questions or ideas tends to just make for more work, because after the question is fixed the answers usually need complete overhauls to become relevant to the fixed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-07-30T04:27:11.610" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6417" CreationDate="2016-07-30T18:55:05.687" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you notice a question whose voting seems out of proportion, it may have been featured in the &quot;Hot network questions&quot; bar you can see to the right. Being listed there brings a lot of traffic and a lot of votes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been on that list twice over the last month and the influx of votes is crazy. I'd like to think I posted solid answers, but the voting makes it look like I was posting something incredible valuable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, sometimes voting is crazy. But as long as it's up-voting, be happy and enjoy it. Your turn will come :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case you wonder how a question ends up on that list, there are mutiple meta discussions about it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/60756/how-do-the-arbitrary-hotness-points-work-on-the-new-stack-exchange-home-page/61343#61343&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; one might be a good start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-07-31T06:18:41.717" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6430" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6396" CreationDate="2016-08-01T17:00:42.957" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The usage of 3.x I am familiar with is in discussions where the participants are talking about concepts and mechanics that are common to the two systems (i.e., most of them) and are specifying that the differences between 3.0 and 3.5 are not relevant to the current discussion.  This is primarily in discussions comparing 3.0 and 3.5 jointly to D&amp;amp;D editions that don't start with 3.   Additionally, I have never seen a RPG convention event list 3.x as the system of play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, no, 3.x is not a specific, distinct rule set.  It is a rule ecology containing 3.0 and 3.5 and a valid discussion tool.  The tag description is inaccurate and IMO the tag is less useful than tagging a post with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30403" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-01T17:04:49.393" LastActivityDate="2016-08-01T17:04:49.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6431" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6433" CreationDate="2016-08-04T03:15:54.023" Score="5" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/85166/23970&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was asked, answered, then largely edited. Now the original question wasn't great and got closed for reasons-I-can't-remember. But it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/85167/23970&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt; in good faith, and that good-faith answer now no longer addresses the (new) question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answerer were to delete their answer my understanding is that it'll count &quot;against&quot; them in some user analyses. Since it seems a bit misdirected for the answerer to &quot;take a hit&quot; because of the question edit, should we be looking at deleting the question instead, and asking OP to re-ask their (hopefully clearer) question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T20:51:38.153" Title="Should this question be deleted?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6431" CreationDate="2016-08-04T04:00:20.760" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that would be best. The question could definitely be altered to make for a more useful answer, but if there is penalty attached to deleting an answer should it no longer be appropriate, that penalty isn't being applied as intended in this case. That said I'm obviously not in an impartial position here, nor do I have enough experience with the site to make the most informed call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28966" LastActivityDate="2016-08-04T04:00:20.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6431" CreationDate="2016-08-04T04:18:49.397" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, just delete the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sucks when a question changes a lot, which is why we try to put unclear questions on hold quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there is no value in reasking.  It's why we have editing.  And in the end, you can't control what others do, just what you do.  Just delete the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-08-04T04:18:49.397" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6434" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6436" CreationDate="2016-08-04T21:28:09.297" Score="-9" ViewCount="282" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quoting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;the official description of downvoting priveledge&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Use your downvotes whenever you encounter an &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;egregiously sloppy, no-effort-expended post, or an answer that is clearly and perhaps dangerously incorrect&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing like &quot;Because I have a different opinion&quot; on the list, and all the possible reasons listed would also most likely require some other action, such as trying to improve the answer by commenting and/or editing, or, if it is so bad that it cannot be improved, flagging it so it is sooner or later deleted. In the last case things are obvious, downvoting is a temporary action so that the answer sinks in the bottom in the time before a mod can review it and delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In first two cases downvotes will remain even after the answer is improved, and make a negative impression for those who will read it later. As of my experience on other sites with voting system, if you see a vote before you vote yourself, score is very unlikely to change because of some strange form of hive-mind. If people see a negative score, they most likely vote down, often even before reading the post, and vice versa (vote up before reading the post) if the score is overwhelmingly high. This means that only the first couple of votes really tends to affect the overall public reaction to a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I understand SE's policy, it is more important to improve existing answers than to delete them, so a downvote may possibly mean &quot;Improve it&quot;.  However, I have seen a lot of answers downvoted without any reason specified, and some of my generally positively rated answers downvoted without any negative feedback in the comments, I would assume that everyone around has experienced this kind of stuff.&#xA;An upvote is a clear reaction of &quot;This is a good way you follow!&quot;. A downvote is &quot;You didn't do well!&quot; without actually specifying what's wrong, so it is not really helping the author to improve his post writing skills or his post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, here is how I would see a possible new voting system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Votes get hidden from public view&lt;/strong&gt;, and you can only see vote count after you vote yourself. You can try to guess the approximate score by question's or answer's position, but nothing more. This will make users think individually instead of behaving as a hive. You can always see a vote count for your own posts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New answers are shown at higher positions for some short period of time&lt;/strong&gt; than they should be based on their score only, just as comments on YouTube or game reviews in Steam Store, so they also have a chance to get public attention. Otherwise, on average, comments already in the top tend to get even more attention and be upvoted by hivemind, and new posts just don't get the same amount of views to hijack high positions. It is possible sometimes that a post is not relevant anymore. For example, the author asked for a rule clarification and the current accepted and/or top answer is based on interpretations and even some assumptions, and a new answer appears after a year when this rule is clarified by game developers or someone finds a clarification elsewhere in official sources. Of course, it is often important to help the asker in-time, when he needs to use a rule in a game session rather than after a year, but I see the primary role of this web-site as an archive of answers that you can read at any time after the question was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When you downvote, you are asked if you really want to do it by a popup, and have to confirm your choice. Then, if you do, you are forced to leave a special anonymous comment that describes your reason of downvoting, or vote for an existing one&lt;/strong&gt; (to avoid &quot;Me too!&quot; comments), you can select and write several reasons. Such downvote comments are only visible if you can see the post's vote count (it is your own post or you have already voted for it) and needed to give the user knowledge of what he did wrongly without breaking the anonimity of comments. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There should appear a special priveledge similar to voting for closing questions which would allow declaring a downvote reason irrelevant for the post&lt;/strong&gt;: if some given amount of users votes against a downvote reason. If a downvote has no more reasons marked as relevant, it is no longer counted. It should be used if a reason is irrelevant by the moment of removing it, such as if the post was edited or the reason was irrelevant from the beginning. For example, if users downvote a post saying that the question is about &lt;em&gt;Vampire: The Masquerade&lt;/em&gt; and the answer quotes &lt;em&gt;Vampire: The Requiem&lt;/em&gt; rules without even bothering to convert them, and the issue is solved by an edit, for example, by quoting relevant VtM rules, users can vote for this reason to be irrelevant and the downvotes will be removed. If, however, there is still another issue left, like &quot;This question has too much of irrelevant info&quot;, those downvotes that have also been associated with it will stay.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that my system isn't too complicated and it is clear what I mean. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a duplicate because I am suggesting a system to fix things rather than just naming what's wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:37:52.107" Title="Voting down has to be revised" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|comments|down-votes|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6434" CreationDate="2016-08-04T21:36:24.097" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;As part of the Stack Exchange network, RPG.SE's site mechanics are the same as every other Stack site: nobody on RPG.SE can change the voting system, we're just users of the system. Requests for changes to fundamental site mechanics need to be made &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;on the general Meta for the entire Stack Exchange network&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, though, I suggest you take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/down-votes?sort=frequent&amp;amp;pageSize=50&quot;&gt;the [down-vote] tag&lt;/a&gt; on META.SE and familiarise yourself with the history of the issues you've recognised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-08-04T21:36:24.097" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6434" CreationDate="2016-08-05T07:50:24.417" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some of these ideas have already come up in the same or similar forms in Stack Exchange's history. Many have gained no traction or been firmly rejected; there's a reason they aren't part of our system yet. I suggest you do some research into the topic so far on Meta Stack Exchange, and I'll be posting relevant areas here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The issues mentioned in your question and comments about how earlier answers tend to gather more votes is known as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9731/fastest-gun-in-the-west-problem&quot;&gt;Fastest Gun in the West Problem&lt;/a&gt; and even has &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fastest-gun&quot;&gt;its own tag&lt;/a&gt; on meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hiding vote counts for a while has gained no traction: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/68815/how-about-hiding-answer-score-for-first-few-hours&quot;&gt;How about hiding answer score for first few hours?&lt;/a&gt;. Hiding them &lt;em&gt;forever&lt;/em&gt; until voting is something I haven't seen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Randomly reordering stuff temporarily has received little support: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/1302/152515&quot;&gt;Randomly reorder all answers posted within ten minutes of each other&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm going to get back to the hiding votes &amp;amp; randomly ordering stuff at the end of this answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Requiring comments for downvotes comes up a lot, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/647/can-we-require-comments-on-downvotes&quot;&gt;including on our own site&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/31302/152515&quot;&gt;on meta stack exchange&lt;/a&gt;, and is eternally and forever declined. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/2373/152515&quot;&gt;The staff added a notice&lt;/a&gt; that says &quot;please consider adding a comment if you think this post can be improved&quot; and that's about it. They are never going to require explanation. Requiring a &lt;em&gt;formal reason&lt;/em&gt; picked via a dialog is something I can't search up as pre-existing, but my gut tells me it's probably been discussed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The system of invalidating other peoples' downvotes because you consider them invalid isn't something I've come across or can search up, but I expect it to go poorly. It's our vote to cast, and we don't cast votes just for kicks.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall you will want to pay attention to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/voting&quot;&gt;voting&lt;/a&gt; and (as already mentioned) &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fastest-gun&quot;&gt;fastest-gun&lt;/a&gt; tags on meta, and especially feature requests &amp;amp; discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please be aware that hiding votes and randomly ordering answers can actually be (and probably are) &lt;strong&gt;just really bad.&lt;/strong&gt; People visiting our site are looking for the best solutions to their problem. Our scores and answer ordering exist &lt;em&gt;almost solely&lt;/em&gt; to guide people toward those best solutions. You removing them means nobody has any idea which answer is any good, so it's almost certainly just an awful idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing that in the early stages of the question just means a person has to wait hours or days for their answer, when they'd &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; often rather have one quite soon. Remember that Stack Exchange is built first and foremost for Stack Overflow, Server Fault, and Super User, which are generally for people who have actual jobs to get on with, and time is of the essence. The fact it's also used for fun for RPGs is coincidental &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2015/09/were-changing-our-name-back-to-stack-overflow/&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow, the company, primarily exists to serve software developers&lt;/a&gt;. We're kinda just hitching a ride on their tangential effort to improve things in other fields with a good Q&amp;amp;A engine. This also means that the Fastest Gun in the West &quot;problem&quot; is also regarded by some &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/9758/152515&quot;&gt;as a positive effect&lt;/a&gt; because it &lt;em&gt;encourages&lt;/em&gt; people to answer fast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-08-05T07:56:28.137" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2016-08-05T16:06:02.827" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpgtheorist.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;RPG Theorist&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpgtheorist.wordpress.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://rpgtheorist.wordpress.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've just started a blog. The contents are to be primarily theoretical pieces about RPG construction and its implications, GMing tips, away-from-the-table resources for players and GMs and last but not least, an outlet for my own RPG designs. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-05T16:21:30.237" LastActivityDate="2016-08-05T16:21:30.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6438" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6443" CreationDate="2016-08-06T16:54:38.603" Score="0" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86316/is-there-a-list-of-cleric-and-wizard-spells-that-deal-lightning-or-thunder-damag&quot;&gt;Question about Spells with Thunder/Lighting&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;was closed by @SevenSidedDie and others for being too broad. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has 5 votes and is open:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76273/is-there-a-list-of-concentration-spells&quot;&gt;Question about Spells with Concentration&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I edited my question to be almost the same as the other, but that still didn't change the evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Concentration and Thunder/Lighting damage are just attributes of 5e spells, I fail to see a difference between the two that would explain the different treatment they get here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In comments, @SevenSidedDie refused (as is his right, of course) to tell me the difference between the two, as in why one should stay open while the other one should be closed. Maybe someone else can explain this to me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-07T03:00:23.117" Title="(Not) closing question for Spells with Concentration vs Spells with Thunder/Lightning Damage" Tags="|discussion|list-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6439" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6438" CreationDate="2016-08-06T17:01:52.477" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was originally closed because it was asking RPG.se to create a list, but it was the kind of list that would continue growing over the years. A list question that needs regular maintenance for its answers to stay correct is off-topic for RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general guideline, SEs want “timeless” questions—questions that will always be asked, and that have answers that will always be useful. List questions that have answers changing over the years aren't timeless; but neither are list questions with an arbitrary cut-off date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(RPG.se is okay with some questions being unaskable here. There are &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of places on the internet where questions can be asked, so RPG.se doesn't need and doesn't try to accommodate questions that don't benefit from the peculiar mechanics of a Stack.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might get reopened now. We'll see what the community thinks, as measured by reopen votes cast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-06T21:40:56.617" LastActivityDate="2016-08-06T21:40:56.617" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6438" CreationDate="2016-08-07T00:12:05.600" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The other question is a tool recommendation that was asked before tool recommendations became off-topic. I have voted to close accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that in both cases, the question could have been either a too-broad list question or a tool-recommendation question. The question about concentration was treated as a tool-rec, and yours was treated as a list question, but now that tool-recs are off-topic it doesn't really make a difference. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2016-08-07T00:12:05.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6442" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6444" CreationDate="2016-08-07T00:48:33.283" Score="16" ViewCount="842" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have some lack of clarity, I think as to what consists of a &quot;list&quot; question on the site and why they are undesirable, per recent meta Q &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6438/not-closing-question-for-spells-with-concentration-vs-spells-with-thunder-ligh&quot;&gt;(Not) closing question for Spells with Concentration vs Spells with Thunder/Lightning Damage&lt;/a&gt;. I think it's worth discussing this in a more general manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, let's start with some context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Context To Read Before Expressing Your Opinion, And Clearly Treat In Your Answer, If You Want To Be Taken Seriously&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Meta: SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/98334/list-questions-community-wiki/98366#98366&quot;&gt;List questions: Community Wiki?&lt;/a&gt; (TL;DR We don't host them)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176/are-list-collection-questions-on-topic/&quot;&gt;Are list/collection questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; (TL;DR No)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Meta.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/124450/what-is-the-definition-of-a-list-question&quot;&gt;What is the definition of a list question?&lt;/a&gt; (TL;DR Asking a question that will be answered with an unbounded list of things - not necessarily the same definition we used in the previous link, I'll note)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;List&quot; questions are often talked about in the same breath as &quot;shopping&quot; questions, so it might also be helpful to review 'the way to ask that right'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta.Gaming.SE &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1617/so-what-actually-is-a-game-rec/&quot;&gt;So what actually is a game rec?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And of course following this network wide guidance, after flirting with trying to do better and allow it here, we've banned shopping/game-rec/tool-rec questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this does leave some room for ambiguity.  There are unbounded &quot;opinion&quot; lists, where answers will be one or two of a large set of possible answers, often distinguished from each other only by opinion - the classic &quot;shopping&quot; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there are questions that are best answered with a list of things in a single answer. &quot;Here's the three magic items, two spells, and a whatnot that will make you permanently Large size in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Between these we have some other kinds.  There's the &quot;completable list&quot; - like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1023/comprehensive-list-of-wotc-dd-4-0-products&quot;&gt;Comprehensive list of WOTC D&amp;amp;D 4.0 products?&lt;/a&gt; It's a long list, but won't change any more because 4.0 is over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there's the &quot;can't be complete yet&quot; list - like a list of D&amp;amp;D 5e products, which at this point is &quot;evergreen.&quot;  On topic, or off topic?  It'd certainly require curation over time, but that's not the kind of &quot;list question&quot; Meta.SE bans network wide. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the &quot;maybe answer with a list, maybe with a resource&quot; questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47863/is-there-a-list-of-wizard-spells-by-level-by-school&quot;&gt;Is there a list of wizard spells by level by school?&lt;/a&gt; where the best answer is a link to an online spell DB or whatnot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then there's the &quot;short list, but no one knows how short when the question's asked really&quot; questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70137/sets-of-spells-that-have-explicit-bonuses-when-used-together&quot;&gt;Sets of spells that have explicit bonuses when used together&lt;/a&gt;, or the thunder-and-lightning question and its linked concentration question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have discussed some that short lists are OK, possibly if CW-ed - we almost never use CW any more, but even SSD recommended it in this context just a year ago per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5773/i-want-to-post-some-questions-that-will-require-finite-community-wiki-list-an&quot;&gt;I want to post some questions that will require (finite, community wiki) list answers. Kosher?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what kind of questions in this general category are on or off topic and why, and is the answer &quot;don't ask them&quot; or &quot;ask them in a different way?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly, &quot;individual answers make a list&quot; is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Very short lists are totally OK; many questions on the site end up being answered with &quot;these four classes fit that criteria&quot; or whatnot, and that's fine. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then we have two separate axes I see on these questions - how dynamic they are and how trivial they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Long ever-changing lists seem like a PITA. I'm not real sure of the value of us trying to keep these up and whether that really is an effective use of our format or not (probably not).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Triviality is in the eye of the beholder, but many of the list Q's that are just &quot;read books and list X for me that meet a criteria&quot; are on that line IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an orthogonal solution? With game-rec/tool-rec's we've said &quot;well - ask about your problem not your assumed answer.&quot; So can you ask &quot;how can I find all the spells that require concentration,&quot; and an answer that's either a short list (if short) or a link to a resource (if long/dynamic) be a good Q&amp;amp;A?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I leave it to the community to answer and vote.  Please try to make answers not &quot;discussiony&quot; - if they don't evolve into a clear actionable answer with the most upvotes, then it tends to be a waste of time. Answer, adapt your answer to take the aforementioned resources and peoples' comments into account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-08-08T13:23:35.613" Title="What are list questions?" Tags="|discussion|list-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6443" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6438" CreationDate="2016-08-07T03:00:23.117" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Also keep in mind that &quot;these other questions aren't closed&quot; doesn't mean they're good questions.  They might be from e.g. 2010 before we were clear on stuff.  They may just have snuck by.  Mods don't see every single question and answer on the site and the community doens't respond the same way to every single question and answer on the site.  &quot;Why is it different&quot; is often &quot;no good reason, except for different timing and participants.&quot;  (Like, I largely ignore 4e questions due to my inveterate 4e-hate so those question-examples that are 4e I wouldn't come across unless there were flags or other problems that would require my intervention.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-08-07T03:00:23.117" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6442" CreationDate="2016-08-07T12:48:07.373" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;List questions are as Shog9 describes in the Meta Stack Exchange question you linked, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/124450/what-is-the-definition-of-a-list-question&quot;&gt;What is the definition of a list question?&lt;/a&gt;: they're the types of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions from our Don't Ask&lt;/a&gt; which lead to unbounded opinion collection in which every answer is equally correct. These are for example the &quot;tell me your favourite X&quot; or &quot;what do you use for X?&quot; questions, which are discussions or surveys, and there's no opportunity to solve a problem nor provide an &quot;answer&quot; as such. Other formulas of questions can experience this problem, e.g. &quot;what are the ways to do this thing?&quot; may or may not be close-worthy depending on whether the thing is &quot;do magic&quot; (bad) or &quot;enlarge my AD&amp;amp;D 2e Fireball spell&quot; (OK).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You summarised it similarly in your linked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176/are-list-collection-questions-on-topic/&quot;&gt;Are list/collection questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;a list question means a question whose answers are a near-infinite, undifferentiated list.&quot; (There's very little other attempt in there to define &quot;a list question&quot;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most often these questions will specifically be &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt;, which has for its close reason: &quot;There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format.&quot; I'll note that &quot;too long for this format&quot; means about 30,000 characters (about a 16-page essay), and it doesn't mean &quot;very long&quot; &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/51145/1204&quot;&gt;we do long answers&lt;/a&gt;. Opinion poll stuff is &lt;strong&gt;primarily opinion-based.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following do not make a question a &quot;list question&quot; nor are they close reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lists of things in a single answer.&lt;/strong&gt; A question that asks &quot;I'm in this situation and need to achieve this result, how can I do that?&quot; regularly gets a response of &quot;here's your options, best to worst&quot;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/38050/1204&quot;&gt;That's good.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions that have many potential solutions.&lt;/strong&gt; As long as we can identify some &quot;best&quot; solutions, distinguished from the bad, destructive, or dumb ideas. Stack Overflow, our founding Q&amp;amp;A site, is about programming, and there's always lots of ways to program things, but there's usually only a small number of &lt;em&gt;wise&lt;/em&gt; ways and a smaller number of outstanding &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; ways. All of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; questions are in this category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions where answers will go outdated, and require maintenance to stay up to date.&lt;/strong&gt; I've been genuinely surprised to see this get brought up as a close reason. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185102/responding-to-your-too-localized-concerns&quot;&gt;Responding to your &amp;quot;too localized&amp;quot; concerns&lt;/a&gt; called this out specifically: &quot;Questions that are obsolete definitely need to be addressed, but most technical questions will eventually suffer that fate,&quot; and closing things for going out of date &quot;too soon&quot; wasn't working, and so it's not a valid reason to close a question, nor were these questions the main reason we had &quot;too localized&quot; anyway. Sometimes questions require work to keep up to date, but &quot;too much work&quot; isn't a close reason. All of our character build advice questions for &quot;evergreen&quot; games are in this category (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;), among other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Then there's the &quot;can't be complete yet&quot; list - like a list of D&amp;amp;D 5e products, which at this point is &quot;evergreen.&quot; On topic, or off topic? It'd certainly require curation over time, but that's not the kind of &quot;list question&quot; Meta.SE bans network wide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On topic. Let the people who want to maintain the list do so; we've demonstrably got people willing to work on crazily large lists, and we've got people willing to drop 500-rep bounties to encourage someone to get things back up to date. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1023/comprehensive-list-of-wotc-dd-4-0-products&quot;&gt;Comprehensive list of WOTC D&amp;amp;D 4.0 products?&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1138/how-do-you-tell-if-a-dd-book-is-3-0-or-3-5/36990#36990&quot;&gt;How do you tell if a D&amp;amp;D book is 3.0 or 3.5?&lt;/a&gt; for crazily large list examples.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;best&quot; answer for &quot;can't be complete yet&quot; lists is the one that is the most comprehensive and correct of all the things being asked for. That means it's not &quot;list one thing per answer&quot;, which also means we don't wind up with an unbounded list of equally correct answers, which also means answers providing just one thing should be downvoted as not useful. (People have talked about whether we need a rule about making answers here CW, but I don't see a need to set a rule. People can work out between themselves whether they want to post competing answers, edit other peoples' answers, create something that's CW, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also asked how we should handle these questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So what kind of questions in this general category are on or off topic and why, and is the answer &quot;don't ask them&quot; or &quot;ask them in a different way?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of times these things are just unsalvageable, like social quizzes. Close those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However when someone clearly has a problem, we can probably see there's a real, more answerable question there. Where possible questions should be asked in a way that encourages thorough and comprehensive answers. For example, questions phrased &quot;what are some ways I can do X?&quot; often result in streams of answers listing maybe 1-3 of a dozen potential possibilities, which is one of those Bad List questions because all the answers aren't great. Rephrase that question to &quot;I need to do X, how can I do that?&quot; and that more directly challenges people to list &lt;em&gt;effective&lt;/em&gt; solutions, and they can go list them comprehensively if they like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Where do the &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; kinds of list-ish questions stop being good?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Then we have two separate axes I see on these questions - how dynamic they are and how trivial they are. [...] Triviality is in the eye of the beholder, but many of the list Q's that are just &quot;read books and list X for me that meet a criteria&quot; are on that line IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Preliminary thoughts now that this has been outlined in the question. Will work on it further.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forethought: We've got a downvote tooltip that offers among its reasons, &quot;this question does not show any research effort&quot;. I do a lot of research into my personal or professional affairs to try to resolve them on my own, and only bring them to a Stack Exchange site when I've hit a roadblock I don't know how to get past &amp;mdash; sometimes that's right at the beginning if I don't even know how to &lt;em&gt;begin&lt;/em&gt; looking. I don't expect everyone to do this, but it might be a relevant rule of thumb here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; question that needs a list, like &quot;what are my options for doing X&quot;, &quot;what spells meet {difficult to place criteria}&quot;, involves researching and compiling options for an answer. Where that research requires non-obvious resources and/or significant expertise (such as in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70137/sets-of-spells-that-have-explicit-bonuses-when-used-together&quot;&gt;Sets of spells that have explicit bonuses when used together&lt;/a&gt;) I would suggest the question is non-trivial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The catalyst for this question was &quot;what are all the thunder/lightning spells?&quot; in a game with like, one, maybe two books of that stuff. Solving that question could've involved picking up the book and going through the pages. In those circumstances I think sufficient research wasn't done, the question was trivial, and as with a lot of cases of &quot;read the book to me&quot; questions, we ought to close stuff like that as unclear with a request that they actually read the book, then come back if/when they're still experiencing issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There might be people who legitimately would have trouble doing that though, e.g. a dyslexic individual, but hey, something saying &quot;I tried but I'm not sure it's complete&quot; or &quot;I can't really do that, I'm dyslexic&quot; will go a long way, plus an answer with whatever they've got so far (maybe they got the whole thing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1138/how-do-you-tell-if-a-dd-book-is-3-0-or-3-5/36990#36990&quot;&gt;How do you tell if a D&amp;amp;D book is 3.0 or 3.5?&lt;/a&gt;, given the listy answers it wound up with, is nontrivial because it requires significant research effort I would not reasonably expect the average person to know how to do, and expertise in being able to know how to distinguish which books belong in that collection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2016-08-08T13:23:35.613" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6445" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6448" CreationDate="2016-08-07T16:51:16.500" Score="1" ViewCount="401" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86316/is-there-a-list-of-cleric-and-wizard-spells-that-deal-lightning-or-thunder-damag?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86316/is-there-a-list-of-cleric-and-wizard-spells-that-deal-lightning-or-thunder-damag?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&lt;/a&gt; was downvoted, with a comment explaining that the &amp;minus;1 was for low effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it ok to downvote a question for low effort if the only way the question is low effort is when using pirated material? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More to the point, if the correct answer would require someone to read (let's say) five books with more than a thousand pages in total, isn't it a valid question to ask, even if a pirate can steal and digitally search materials to produce the answer within a short time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvoting for low effort would seem to say that I &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have pirated the material to solve my problem, and I don't think that's a base assumption that rpg.se should make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T16:38:51.057" Title="Is it OK to downvote for “low effort” when the only way to answer quickly is piracy?" Tags="|discussion|down-votes|copyright|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6445" CreationDate="2016-08-07T17:11:52.270" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have some material which is not legally available in electronic format and it is thus impossible to ctrl+f search it unless a lot of scanning and turning the images into text is done. That is surely a lot of work, but I don't feel it is tied to the effort as we mean it when casting downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, the problem is not &quot;how long it takes&quot; but &quot;how hard is it to grasp&quot;. Writing a list is more often than not just a matter of time spent parsing books, with no real judgement involved. Anybody can do it.&#xA;So, despite manual searching being a bothersome task, I feel like &quot;effort not shown&quot; is a valid downvote reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, effort is shown where the querent has problems understanding how a thing works despite reading the whole thing. An exception that makes a question good despite the low effort is when the material is scattered and hard to put together (the &quot;I don't even know where to start looking&quot; problem).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, I don't think this is really important. Unlike close reasons, users are not asked to state why they downvote, and if someone downvotes because they think there's no effort, well, &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; think there's no effort. Are they basing this assumption because they take piracy for granted? Their problem. Should they comment about their reasons, I would personally ask them how do they think it's short. It's usually enough to have other readers notice the problem and be aware that they might not want to believe the first commenter about the perceived effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2016-08-07T17:11:52.270" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6442" CreationDate="2016-08-08T00:42:30.627" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;List questions are not bad because they are list questions: they are bad because they may not fit the basic premises of the site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Focus on questions about an &lt;strong&gt;actual problem&lt;/strong&gt; you have faced. Include details about what you have tried and exactly what you are trying to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Tour&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;List questions are unlikely to be dealing with a specific problem - they are often tool-rec questions of the type &quot;I can't be bothered scouring the books for the answer that is in there but I would like someone to point me to a place where someone has done the work for me.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Don't Ask&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my mind, this is really the crucial point - above an indeterminate length a list becomes a catalogue - a catalogue is a book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with trying to set hard and fast rules on how long a list can get before it is a &quot;bad&quot; list (&quot;Bad list, no biscuit!&quot;) is that any decision made at a meta level will always be arbitrary. If we were to decide that the limit was 5, then too bad for questions where a complete, authoritative and brilliant answer needed 6.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The point I am making: the guidelines are there and are, by and large, working - why do we need more guidelines?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2016-08-08T01:17:18.787" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6448" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6445" CreationDate="2016-08-08T18:02:47.343" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Downvotes happen&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question or answer can be downvoted for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; reason. In a perfect world, it should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be, but taking the risk of asking or answering means that sometimes voters dislike a question or answer for whatever reason and &lt;em&gt;that reason doesn't matter&lt;/em&gt;. The reason &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; actually matter: even if the voter gives a tasteless or counterintuitive reason for the downvote, if the voter wants that question downvoted, downvoted it will stay (patterns of system-gaming, user deletion, and so on notwithstanding). Bribes, friendly persuasion, or links to a Meta post &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; get the voter to reconsider, but the voter never &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; reconsider. In fact, often, trying to force the voter to see the error in his downvote only reinforces that &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;—&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the question—&lt;em&gt;deserve&lt;/em&gt; the downvote. (I've seen a few questions and answers that now seem innocuous but when posted yielded comment wars (now deleted) that had folks pretty obviously downvoting the &lt;em&gt;user&lt;/em&gt; rather than the question or the answer, for instance.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seemingly well-researched and clear questions and, likewise, seemingly useful answers get downvoted for worse reasons than—and I totally agree that this &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a bad reason—&lt;em&gt;You should just use illegally obtained sources&lt;/em&gt;. (Worse reasons, in my opinion, include, for example, the voter believing a question's answer so obvious that the question shouldn't've even been asked in the first place despite the asker's sincerity &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the voter disagreeing with an answer's conclusion no matter how otherwise expertly presented and informative the answer is, respectively—both of which reflect of my own experiences.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking and answering questions eventually yields downvotes, and most of the time the voter's anonymous and the reason's opaque. In this case, though, you were fortunate to encounter a voter who explained the reason for the downvote, and—while this is certainly no consolation—that's more feedback (even if it is &lt;em&gt;terrible&lt;/em&gt; feedback) than most folks receive when their question or answer is downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; I've no horse in this race,&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;not interesting me, but I do answer many&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;et al. make-a-list-for-me questions, some of which receive downvotes for no apparent reason.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2016-08-08T18:02:47.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6449" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-10T05:27:27.927" Score="12" ViewCount="565" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am asking this because I was just banned from chat and I have no idea why. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe someone can explain this to me? These are &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; my statements &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/31583579#31583579&quot;&gt;in the chat&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@BESW You mentioned legal digital tools to search 5e spells for keywords. What did you refer to?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@BESW ? No, I am wondering what tool you refer to. Like, the name of the tool, so I can buy it and search spells in there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@BESW What are you talking about? I don't want to discuss all this stuff, this will only get seven mad again. I am looking for the name of the tools you mentioned so I can check them out.&#xA;  If you have a personal problem with me, sure, air whatever you want, but I really would like to know what you were referring to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...&#xA;  Seriously? I asked a question to find out how to search spells.&#xA;  This is obviously a problem I have.&#xA;  Sure, you don't have to help me, but .. well.&#xA;  Too bad, thanks anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I will read what you say, but I won't respond on topic to avoid further mod punishments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Trish It's about 5e&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Trish only PHB&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The original question clearly stated that I am interested in all 5e materials produced by WotC, but I was forced to change it multiple times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I own FantasyGrounds and it does not have useful functionality for that&#xA;  It allows to search for Monster Names etc only&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That's SRD only, and you know as well that the question would be tool-rec&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ok, not answering to this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Trish Yeah I know, what's why I got into all this trouble. Because I did not want to support piracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Trish I know!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;They seem pretty incompetent when it comes to digital tools :(&#xA;  They could have offered a 4e SRD, let people develop open source tools for that, and then put the full 4e behind a paywall&#xA;  using the open source code with private data&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Well I paid for the 4e tools until they didn't want my money anymore&#xA;  sigh&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason stated I was banned for this: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Mala, you just got off a site suspension for creating a mess in a crusade against a specific user, and you're right back at it in this chat room the next day. I'm suspending you from chat for a week. You can still use the main site right now; that allows you the opportunity to show that you can turn over a new leaf and leave off from the compulsive witch-hunting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How am I in a crusade? I multiple times &lt;em&gt;explicitly changed the topic&lt;/em&gt; when people tried to talk about 'the mess'. I inquired about stuff related to digital tools, because I was told not to comment any more on that question and I still need to find something so I can do queries like 'spells with lighting/thunder' easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please explain to me what I did wrong here. The whole text is here, and I cannot see where I went wrong. Which statements of mine caused this ban? I just don't understand, and unfortunately I cannot ask anywhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T23:54:16.837" Title="What did I do wrong now?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6450" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-10T07:46:11.837" Score="4" ViewCount="191" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86270/incorporeal-creatures-and-solid-creatures&quot;&gt;Can an incorporeal creature occupy the same space as another creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And a mod closed it as &quot;too broad&quot;. It clearly is not too broad and there is already an answer to it and a comment lead me to a book that can answer it even better and completely in a short space, but I can't even put that answer there now. (it also invalidates the current only answer, which I foolishly upvoted at first and now cannot downvote)&#xA;The mod told me to post here, otherwise I wouldn't for a simple issue like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10201" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T13:12:46.450" Title="Can I get my question reopened?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6450" CreationDate="2016-08-10T08:22:31.380" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see it was originally closed as it contained multiple questions. Reading your recent edit though, this still seems to be an issue because of the 'side issue' you include at the end of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T08:22:31.380" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6452" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6449" CreationDate="2016-08-10T08:22:49.330" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;First off, I'd like to acknowledge that you've asked this question quite nicely, presenting the situation as you see it and asking for an explanation rather than casting aspersions on the integrity of anyone else (if you really think somebody's acting out of line, flag it for site mod attention or report it to the community mods instead of making a public post asking us to judge them). Thank you for that effort!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that in isolation from the things other people were saying, and from recent events in chat, mainsite, and meta, none of your actions in chat earlier today seem quite ban-worthy. But week-long bans don't happen on first offenses, so that context is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You engaged in minor forms of several behaviours that citizens and mods have informally and officially asked you to stop doing, some of which you'd already received small bans for continuing to do, so I can certainly see how a mod might feel that at this point a ban without discussion is preferable to another fruitless talk. I'm not sure what could have been said that hasn't already been said more than once. And because it's not the first chat ban you've received recently, the duration is automatically increased by the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry I may have contributed to this chat ban, as I'm the one who first introduced some of the troublesome topics to the conversation--your responses, however, I can't take credit for. The tenor of this meta post indicates to me that you're working on changing those problem patterns, which I'm happy to see. I hope to see you in chat in the future for less fraught discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-08-10T08:28:37.737" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T08:28:37.737" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6453" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6454" CreationDate="2016-08-10T10:01:50.280" Score="15" ViewCount="540" Body="&lt;p&gt;A mod said I should ask if there is a rule that says one single (arbitrarily defined) question per post. Too Broad does not mention it. Is it an actual rule somewhere or a guideline or what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And how does it define 1 question? Questions can need very broad answers (like explaining how a spell works in many cases), or a single yes or no. Is it OK to ask a few yes/no questions, but not many broader questions (e.g. How does &lt;em&gt;magic jar&lt;/em&gt; work against ethereal creatures?&quot; / &quot;How does &lt;em&gt;magic jar&lt;/em&gt; work against constructs?&quot;)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a complete answer can be given in 10 lines of text, is it still too broad a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10201" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T14:52:59.577" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T14:52:59.577" Title="Is there a rule or guideline stating that each post should only ask a single question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|faq-proposal|question-scope|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6453" CreationDate="2016-08-10T10:59:39.113" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;A hard and fast &quot;follow this to the letter&quot; rule is unnecessary and counterproductive. Instead we apply principles of site design which we've learnt through years of experience are the best way to curate the quality of the Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest you read &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimizing for Pearls, Not Sand&lt;/a&gt; to understand why we're tougher on questions than on answers. I found it crucial background material for understanding the Stack's curation policies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our own @thedarkwanderer has written &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5907/4398&quot;&gt;a pretty good summation&lt;/a&gt; of the principles in play: experience has shown that questions which can be answered separately should be asked separately because it encourages more, better answers and makes it easier to find them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no invocation of length or complexity when dealing with this principle. It's about whether the questions can stand on their own, that's all. This helps the Stack be a &lt;em&gt;well-sorted&lt;/em&gt; pile of solutions to problems, by letting us sort each post on its own whenever reasonable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if you see an old question which seems to be two or more mashed up unnecessarily? We're fallible. Flag it for attention, it's probably slipped through the cracks or dates from an era when we didn't understand how important this is. The Stack doesn't take precedent very seriously; we're constantly updating old posts to fit our new understandings of how to best serve the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T16:48:14.943" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6455" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6453" CreationDate="2016-08-10T12:40:36.923" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's well established SE-wide best practice to ask one question per post.  You can read this post and its linked posts on meta.SE for all kinds of why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/257391/when-to-ask-multiple-questions-in-a-single-post-revisited&quot;&gt;When to ask multiple questions in a single post ? (Revisited)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, we tend to vote multi-question questions as too broad to prevent all kinds of other work later when it turns into a mess of answers addressing N of M of the questions, and then later needing editing or splitting once someone wises up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It serves both the OP better, and other users on the site and search, because they can more easily find specific answers to questions than muddled overlapping explorations of whole topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T13:25:17.840" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6450" CreationDate="2016-08-10T12:49:55.690" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is still composed of questions that are different enough that they should be asked separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What space does a creature occupy, and can incorporeal creatures share space with a corporeal and/or incorporeal creature?   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &quot;what space does a creature occupy&quot; is technically a different question, it's tightly related and small, so it would probably pass muster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can incorporeal creatures perform combat maneuvers like Bull Rush and Overrun on corporeal creatures?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has no relation to the other question except &quot;but incorporeal&quot;, so it's not a good candidate for combining. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do incorporeal creatures provoke AoOs from opponents?  Can they Tumble to avoid them?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get that AoOs may be provoked from moving into a space, and/or from a combat maneuver, so this is probably why you're lumping it all together, but they are separate issues that will have nontrivial answers unto themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A list of random other mini-questions.  How thick of a wall can an incorporeal creature pass through?  Can an incorporeal creature squeeze? etc.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one question per post guidance is already proven with response to your question - as the first answer tries to answer you, but of course only answers a couple of these widely ranging questions. It is for your own good, and to get you answers to the real problems you're having, that you should break it up into more targeted questions than &quot;tell me everything about how incorporeal works in every movement and combat case please.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-08-10T13:12:46.450" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T13:12:46.450" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6449" CreationDate="2016-08-10T13:04:17.213" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;You got banned from chat because you've already been told to lay off on the topic by mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, all this &quot;I'm being discriminated against because I won't support piracy!&quot; is a ridiculous twisting of what's going on.  We - meaning not only the mods but a large number of site users - have spent a lot of main site comment time, meta time, chat time, and private message time trying to explain things to you about this issue and you have proven completely unable or unwilling to understand.  That's fine, but as a result we have said &quot;we're not going to spend more site time on the topic.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you violate a topic ban, you get a further ban. Period, end of story. You've been given clear warnings, have decided to go ahead anyway with continuing to rehash it in every possible venue at any opportunity, and so yes, you're chat banned for a while so you can perhaps get over your internal processing of the event before continuing to participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is any &quot;one line&quot; of your chat per se inherently offensive?  No. But that's not the gauge we're using, so it's irrelevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with our other site rules, you can like this or not like this, but in the end that's not relevant either. While you're here you will abide by our rules. Many man-hours have already been expended in trying to explain those rules to you, so if you still don't understand them, then that's where it's going to have to lie.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be further clear, any additional traffic on this topic from you on the main site or chat will be met with further disciplinary action. Is that clear enough?  You can ask questions on meta like this, and you can go complain to a Community Manager if you think there is some reason they'd have a different perspective than all the mods and high-rep users here (IMO unlikely).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-10T15:22:50.670" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T15:22:50.670" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6449" CreationDate="2016-08-10T16:19:02.597" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I Can Tell You What You've Done Wrong in General: Time Management&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why time management?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;By applying the amount of time that you did on &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;posting and editing questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;typing and responding to comments&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;arguing about question holds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;various chat efforts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;comments on meta&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;questions on meta&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;now more arguing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to time spent building the tool / list you were looking for, you'd have been able to come up with the list of spells that you wanted by manually typing them into a spread sheet, with the columns and rows necessary to fill in the blanks for the features that you need to uses.  And you'd have had time to spare.   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do I know this?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When D&amp;amp;D 5e first came out, I spent a little time building a table in Word (like a spread sheet) will all of the cleric spells (by copying and pasting from the basic rules into the blocks) with the key information I needed.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I also did that for the Elemental Spells when the players companion for the first season came out.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later, I took the PHB and (because I can type) added the spells to my from the PHB. A little bit at a time, low level to high.  All I need to add now is anything I want from any further publications that come out.  (For use at home, only.  No piracy involved.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You type a lot.  I am sure that you can type as well and as fast as I can, possibly better and faster (I have a high error rate).   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Assessment as of today:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Time spent building a useful tool that you were looking for. &lt;em&gt;Not&#xA;much&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Time spent arguing with a host of folks on this site.  &lt;em&gt;Quite a bit&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Conclusion: a case of bad time management when looking for a labor/time &#xA;saving device.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's cruel irony in that, and it's something that happened to me IRL. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I've Walked a Mile In Your Shoes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few years ago at work we pursued a &quot;labor saving process&quot; intended to save us both time and money.  When all was said and done, and when we accounted for all of the man hours we spent on that project to get it running, it would take us no less than 3 and a half years to see a break even point -- providing nothing bad happens between implementation and then. Let's say the projected savings and what we saw actually being saved did not match up.  No points for time management for us.  (And no bonus).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-08-10T16:47:01.850" LastActivityDate="2016-08-10T16:47:01.850" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6445" CreationDate="2016-08-10T16:39:27.217" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's fair to downvote a post — period, full stop. Anyone can downvote for whatever reason they like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why are “wrong” votes allowed though?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a necessary feature of the site's functioning. To make the site work, we need accurate scores beside posts. To get accurate scores for posts, we need as much data as possible. To get that, the site's design and software encourages as much voting as possible of all kinds, because more votes means more accurate scores.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A consequence is that “wrong” votes (both up and down) must be allowed, because any barrier to voting would drastically decrease voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately, by encouraging many votes, the effect of “wrong” votes is automatically fixed: the more votes you have, the more “wrong” votes disappear into the statistical noise. What matters is what &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the votes say, not what one vote says.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So votes being at the full discretion of the voter is a necessary, non-negotiable feature of the site since, without it, the site would be really bad at the job it exists to do. It's a bug, not a feature. You get to vote however you like — so does everyone else. Enjoy the privilege, and accept that it means everyone else will too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But still, why is the question “low effort”?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although the basic fact is that the votes don't need to be justified at all, we can still look at why this question could be judged “low effort”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is your objection, rephrased: &lt;strong&gt;But if it would take a lot of effort to answer a question, how can it be low effort to ask it?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notice the difference: high effort to &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt;; low effort to &lt;em&gt;ask&lt;/em&gt;. The fact that these apply to different things — the answering and asking — is the key to understanding why a question can require high effort to &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; but still count as unacceptably low effort to &lt;em&gt;ask&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, “why is this low effort” is easily answered. The trouble with this question is that it already contains its solution, and the solution takes effort to use. The real problem you have is one that this site is not made to solve: that you just don't want to expend the effort to &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; the solution you already have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's low effort. “I know how to get the answer to my own question, but I don't want to do the work. Here is the work that needs doing; please do it for me so that I don't have to waste my own time,” is going to get downvoted for low effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Answering&lt;/em&gt; the question might be high effort, but that's not what the downvote means — the downvote is on the question. It means that the asker has not made enough effort to solve their own problem, or is asking the question to try to avoid making any effort to solve their own problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking other people to do work that you can do yourself (but don't want to) is making low effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More generally stated: how much effort it takes to &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; a question doesn't matter; what matters is whether the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; appears to exist to help the asker avoid doing work. When it does, it will naturally attract a few or many downvotes for low effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is statistical though, not absolute&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But keep in mind that voting is purposely statistical — what one voter thinks is low effort is not important, it's what the hypothetical “average” voter thinks that the site's voting mechanics are designed to harvest. So if some voters think a question is low effort, it will get &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; downvotes, and if many voters think it is low effort, it will get many downvotes. If there are many voters who disagree, these will be counterbalanced by upvotes. The collective judgement is what matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall the point is this: one downvote is nearly nothing. If you want to understand why &lt;em&gt;someone&lt;/em&gt; would vote a question for low effort, the above is relevant, but it's really a waste of time caring about &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; downvote. It's only when more or many votes agree that it becomes worthwhile to try to parse what they mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And this is why SE doesn't/won't ever require commenting when downvoting: it would wrongly focus on individual reasons for voting, when SE's voting system is designed to focus on an aggregate judgement, not individual judgements.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-12T16:38:51.057" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T16:38:51.057" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-08-11T18:04:47.693" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://bit.do/SECartography&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Spc8y.png&quot; alt=&quot;Help support the Cartography SE in Area 51&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30720" LastEditorUserId="30720" LastEditDate="2016-08-11T20:19:22.803" LastActivityDate="2016-08-11T20:19:22.803" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-08-11T22:38:35.810" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Taf3D.png&quot; alt=&quot;EN World RPG News &amp;amp; Reviews&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-08-12T02:03:07.970" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T02:03:07.970" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6449" CreationDate="2016-08-12T02:08:01.693" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is what you did wrong:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TUlWc.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Non-verbal communication&amp;#39; pie chart from www.dennisgingerich.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TUlWc.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Non-verbal communication&amp;quot; pie chart from http://www.dennisgingerich.com/&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Non-verbal communication&amp;#39; pie chart from www.dennisgingerich.com&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The words we use account for only 7% of the communication when we are talking face-to-face. When we communicate in writing we lose 93% of the information so we need to take great care that those words cannot be misinterpreted. This is hard enough to do when writing answers but it is even harder in a chat room where posts are flying thick and fast. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The receiver of the communication &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be aware of this limitation of the medium and make allowances that posts that appear terse, aggressive or argumentative may not have been intended that way, however, the onus is on the sender to pause before sending, re-read the post and think &quot;How could this be misinterpreted?&quot; and edit if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At face value, your posts seem to me (as a disinterested observer) to be terse and aggressive. People with knowledge of your history may be even more inclined to think so - this may seem like a case of &lt;a href=&quot;http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Give+a+dog+a+bad+name&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;Give a dog a bad name ...&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and that's because it is. Its unfair but so is life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have a lot of good things to say and a lot to contribute to the site. I speak as one who has myself been warned when flippant remarks that I thought of as humorous were being read as overly sarcastic and insulting. Learn your lessons and understand that what &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; think you are saying may not be what the other party is hearing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-08-12T23:54:16.837" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T23:54:16.837" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6463" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6431" CreationDate="2016-08-12T20:51:38.153" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although there's already an accepted answer for this meta post. I feel like deleting the answer takes away from the historical record of the knowledge base that RPG.SE develops overtime. At some point in time, the answer was provided to a question that was asked. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has since been lost due to editing, but the answer could still be of importance to future users with similar question or concern. The original question you answered will likely not get reasked by the original asker, so if you delete your answer, future users will not find it and benefit from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose that, if possible, you should edit a summary of the original question into the beginning of your answer and make a note in your answer that the question has since changed drastically since the time of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer does not seek to remedy any issues with user analyses as a result of decisions made in this regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14873" LastActivityDate="2016-08-12T20:51:38.153" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6464" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6465" CreationDate="2016-08-13T19:09:32.237" Score="19" ViewCount="328" Body="&lt;p&gt;On one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/83378/23970&quot;&gt;recent answer&lt;/a&gt; I saw the following box-text at the bottom:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nuuLO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nuuLO.png&quot; alt=&quot;citation needed&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nothing about it appears in the post's source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Why is it there?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Who put it there?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is a post that outright states &quot;this is how I would rule&quot; really on notice for deletion?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've never seen this notice anywhere else--should I be flagging speculative answers to receive this notice?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do we really want to be tagging speculative answers with [citation needed] stickers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short: &quot;huh? What's up with this?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T13:08:31.777" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T13:08:31.777" Title="What's up with this &quot;please edit to add citations&quot; banner?" Tags="|discussion|post-notice|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6464" CreationDate="2016-08-13T19:39:44.487" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a post notice. It's like the banners mods can put under questions, except this one is for any post, including answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The “notice added” event will show up in the post's revision history; this one just doesn't have an easy link to its revision history yet because of no edits done so far, but you can manually cobble together the link to see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/83378/revisions&quot;&gt;its revision history&lt;/a&gt;. On answers with edits it will be easier to see when/how it was added, so it's not meant to be a stealth action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Why is it there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The post notice serves to indicate that citations are needed, and the post lacks them. The implication is that it needs revision to say something of substance in response to a rules-based question; in particular, it needs to back up its assertions with experience or citations to experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also serves as notice and warning that it may be deleted in the future, failing revision. That last is might be the biggest job it's doing there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Who put it there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did! It's step 2 after mxyzplk's comment saying “Personal opinions aren't an answer to this question.” got no response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a relatively new tool (as in, sometime in the last year?) that was added quietly and we've only discovered recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is a post that outright states &quot;this is how I would rule&quot; really on notice for deletion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like bellybuttons, everyone has an opinion; that's why we close questions that are primarily opinion-based, because there are an endless number of opinions that can (and will) be submitted on them. We don't want endless opinions on non-opinion-based questions, like that one, either though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opinion-based answers that contain no justifications (citations to personal experience with it working) serve as &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;broken windows&lt;/a&gt; that make it seem like it's OK for other new and experienced users to just throw in “my 2¢” of opinion. The post notice also serves to say that answers like this aren't an example to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I've never seen this notice anywhere else--should I be flagging speculative answers to receive this notice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer doesn't Back It Up! or follow GS/BS and it &lt;em&gt;really should&lt;/em&gt;, sure, send a flag our way. We might not agree on every flag, but an equilibrium of understanding in how the notice gets / should be applied will eventually develop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do we really want to be tagging speculative answers with [citation needed] stickers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yep. This answer almost didn't get one, because we don't want to go overboard with this. Often, downvotes can take care of borderline cases. But in this case it's warranted. The answer starts by saying that it's not a rules based answer — which might be a fine introduction to a frame challenge — but then finishes up by saying that the reason it's not backed up is because they've never used these speculations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is not a rule-based answer&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  […]&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  I have never had to use the above concepts or rules because [I have never needed to.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a &lt;strong&gt;bellybutton answer&lt;/strong&gt;. Everyone's got one, but thankfully most people refrain from sharing when unasked. When someone does share, we don't want to encourage it, and often we're going to remove them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-13T20:46:49.087" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6466" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6468" CreationDate="2016-08-14T19:12:28.743" Score="3" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am fairly sure that there is exactly one person on this site who can answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/86624/23970&quot;&gt;the MERP question i just posted&lt;/a&gt;, due to it being about a fairly obscure game system. Is there any way to get in touch with that user specifically?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17991" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-17T04:36:44.590" Title="Is there a way to request an answer from a specific user?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6468" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6466" CreationDate="2016-08-14T19:23:15.170" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;1. Leave a comment on any of their posts.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will give them a little notification in their Inbox and, if your comment is sufficiently well-crafted, may motivate them to help you. A particularly useful comment to leave would be one requesting that person join you in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. &amp;quot;ping&amp;quot; them in a chat room.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; that user's been in a chat room recently you can &amp;quot;ping&amp;quot; them by addressing them directly in a message. Type &lt;code&gt;@&lt;/code&gt; and the beginning of their username--if it autocompletes then that user's been in the room recently enough to be &amp;quot;pingable.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-08-14T19:23:15.170" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6469" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-15T09:47:23.667" Score="3" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;if a person asks questions using an unregistered Profile, then creates a registered profile under the same email address, is it possible for the unregistered questions, notifications and reputation to be attached to the registered account? if so how?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27643" LastActivityDate="2016-08-15T09:58:15.547" Title="How can one resolve duplicate accounts?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6469" CreationDate="2016-08-15T09:58:15.547" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our help center has a page on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/merging-accounts&quot;&gt;merging accounts&lt;/a&gt;, which to save you the trip says this (it's short):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you have two accounts that you would like to join together, please sign into either account, visit the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;contact form&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and select ‘I need to merge user profiles’. After you contact us, the Stack Exchange Team will reach out to verify that you own both accounts. If we can confirm your ownership, we will initiate a merge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect the fact you reused your email address might help resolve the confirmation pretty quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-08-15T09:58:15.547" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2016-08-16T07:23:44.823" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpgbotch.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Botch Blog&lt;/a&gt;, a collection of stories of our failures. The idea originated in the chat, and all the contributors (so far) are chat regulars. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1421" LastActivityDate="2016-08-16T07:23:44.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6472" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-16T15:50:19.470" Score="10" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apologies for the lengthy title. I could not think of a more succinct way to phrase this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The events prompting this question: I posted an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86620/holding-two-weapons-but-not-using-two-weapon-fighting&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; in which I guessed the system that the author was asking about since it was not specified in the question or in the tags. My answer was removed since (understandably) guessing at the system the author intended is not good practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was closed as being &quot;unclear what you are asking&quot; but then edited by a separate user to add a tag specifying the version of the game (5e in this instance, although I'm not sure that matters). That edit was approved by the community and the question was reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is this: &lt;strong&gt;When the system is important to the question but not specified in the question, is it acceptable to guess at the author's intent when editing/tagging that post?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30420" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-17T10:12:40.920" Title="Is adding a tag to a question without the author's input acceptable when you can't be sure of the author's intent?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ClosedDate="2017-10-23T15:23:38.810" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6867" CreationDate="2016-08-16T17:31:23.070" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interact with the querent (person asking the question)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual way to approach the issue of &quot;the correct tag&quot; is to ask a question &lt;em&gt;in the comments under the question&lt;/em&gt; which edition (or what other &quot;thing that might warrant a tag) the question is about or is focused on.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the response to that comment is given:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the person asking the question hasn't added the tag, then you can add the tag yourself.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do add a tag based on guesswork, which occasionally happens, make a comment under the question and ask the querent if you got the tag right.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do something similar after an edit: make a comment asking the querent &quot;Did that edit fit/work/preserve your intended question?&quot;  Interaction is good. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2016-08-16T17:31:23.070" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6867" CreationDate="2016-08-16T17:43:49.447" Score="29" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't guess&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's up to the asker to tag the question with the correct system. In the case of a new community member who doesn't yet understand this responsibility, it's up to the community to determine from the asker the system in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are &lt;em&gt;absolutely&lt;/em&gt; certain of the unnamed system (having eliminated &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; other possibilities because of an achingly obvious tie to a particular system), then you can tag it, leave a comment to the asker that says you did, and recommend the asker change it if you're wrong.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the asker names in chat or comments the unnamed system, you can go ahead and tag the question with the system on the asker's behalf. When you do and it's not obvious how you learned the information, you may want to alert the community in a comment as to &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; you know the tag's correct to assuage fears that you might be guessing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/86620/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, originally the only system hints are that a rogue may or may not be two-weapon fighting with a quarterstaff and rapier. Thus this could've been a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; question or a question about one of a dozen other systems in which the same events could occur. Had it been tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; by a helpful community member without the asker's input and later revealed to be for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;, for instance, there would be lots of deleting of answers and sorrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-08-17T10:12:40.920" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6475" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-16T23:28:59.793" Score="6" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see that we've recently gained &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt; as a new tag.  It feels to me like it's both:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;too specific&lt;/strong&gt;, as it's a tag for one specific character ability, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;too general&lt;/strong&gt;, as it could be for any game with a rage ability, even though different games might use the concept very differently.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had to make a decision on my own, I'd get rid of the tag.  Thankfully, there's a whole community of more knowledgeable people than me here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt; useful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T02:42:19.530" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T02:42:19.530" Title="Is the [rage] tag useful?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6475" CreationDate="2016-08-17T00:34:29.103" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is presently one question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt;: unsurprising as it is a new tag. Searching for &quot;rage question&quot;, there are 113 questions across a multitude of systems that could benefit from it. There is a smaller number of hits from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sneak-attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sneak-attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sneak-attack&lt;/a&gt;, another class feature, but all of these are associated with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;. If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sneak-attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sneak-attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sneak-attack&lt;/a&gt; merits a tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt; certainly does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2016-08-17T00:34:29.103" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6477" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6475" CreationDate="2016-08-17T05:44:36.990" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't have enough information yet to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging on the Stack Exchange is an &quot;emergent folksonomy,&quot; which means we let tags grow as the community sees a need and we don't curate tags until an actual problem crops up--then we fix that particular problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not seeing any problem with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt; yet, so let's wait and see how it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2016-08-17T05:44:36.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6478" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-17T16:22:00.033" Score="22" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/31738218#31738218&quot;&gt;recently learned&lt;/a&gt; that d4, 8, 10, 12, and 20 interface well with screen readers, but that the d6 reads as &quot;bullets.&quot; Presumably, that's the interpretation given to pips.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we change the d6 to be numerically-represented, rather than displaying pips? This strikes me as a no-brainer as it disadvantages no-one but makes the service accessible to some for whom it currently isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-26T18:50:58.820" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T12:44:30.830" Title="Can we make the dice bot more accessible?" Tags="|feature-request|design|chat|accessibility|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6478" CreationDate="2016-08-17T17:05:27.280" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Foreword so I can actually sound trustworthy as I write about this: I've been an accessibility developer for the past few years doing things exactly like this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't actually have to change the appearance of the dice. Since we're dealing with screen readers, we can also make a change that targets screen readers specifically and gets them to read out a number like with every other die.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Old six-sided dice HTML&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div class=&quot;six-sided-die&quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;dot&quot;&amp;gt;•&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;dot&quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;    (plus 7 more dots)&#xA;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;New HTML&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div class=&quot;six-sided-die&quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;sr-only&quot;&amp;gt;d6: rolled a 5.&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;dot&quot; aria-hidden=&quot;true&quot;&amp;gt;•&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;dot&quot; aria-hidden=&quot;true&quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;    (plus 7 more dots)&#xA;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Changes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add a screen-reader only element &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/q/19758598/254830&quot;&gt;using Bootstrap's &lt;code&gt;.sr-only&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt; which describes the die and its result.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make each dot &lt;code&gt;aria-hidden=&quot;true&quot;&lt;/code&gt; so that screen readers will ignore them. (If setting this via JavaScript, it's important this is set as a &lt;em&gt;HTML attribute&lt;/em&gt; and not a DOM property.) Alternately instead of assigning that attribute to each of them, you can just wrap them all in a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div aria-hidden=&quot;true&quot;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; element for the same effect.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The result of this is screen readers read out &quot;d6: rolled a 5.&quot; while visually all that's shown is the dots. Telling us the size of the dice is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The message format is very deliberately constructed: it's the shortest unambiguous phrase I could work out. Consider how you'd speak if you were to read &lt;code&gt;d6: rolled a 5. d10: rolled an 8.&lt;/code&gt; to someone out loud: many would introduce pitch changes and pauses around the colon and full stop they wouldn't add if they weren't there, and good screen readers mimic exactly this behaviour. The full stop is very important so as to separate the descriptions of several dice rolls in a row; the &quot;a&quot;/&quot;an&quot; is also important to disambiguate whether I am rolling 5 d6's or a 5 on one d6. &lt;em&gt;We&lt;/em&gt; can disambiguate these things by looking, but this message is for people who can't do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I would suggest the same sort of message should be added to disambiguate other kinds of dice.&lt;/strong&gt; E.g. a d10 would change from this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div class=&quot;ten-sided-die&quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;value&quot;&amp;gt;8&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which a screen reader only pronounces as &quot;8&quot; (but on what kind of dice?), to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div class=&quot;ten-sided-die&quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;div class=&quot;value&quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;        &amp;lt;span class=&quot;sr-only&quot;&amp;gt;d10: rolled an &amp;lt;/span&amp;gt;&#xA;        8&#xA;    &amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which a screen reader pronounces as &quot;d10: rolled an 8.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the values 8, 11, and 18 need the &quot;an&quot; preposition just before them; the other values use &quot;a&quot;. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/1165936105&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Please don't bludgeon me with a giant N.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-22T12:44:30.830" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T12:44:30.830" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6478" CreationDate="2016-08-17T18:01:49.927" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, let's do this. &lt;strong&gt;Make the d6 use numbers instead of pips.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Theory background.&lt;/strong&gt; Using text to represent graphics isn't really accessible, and tends to be done primarily because it “works” for people without accessibility needs. Using layout tricks to move “&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2022/index.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;U+2022 BULLET&lt;/a&gt;” around the screen is a tidy example of how visual-centric design accidentally defeats accessibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even putting aside accessibility, tricks like that are clever, but break the purpose of HTML being a information-oriented medium instead of a visually-oriented medium (unsurprisingly, tricks that break HTML semantics also break accessibility). The whole point of modern HTML is to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; make assumptions about how the content is rendered or consumed. (That's a job reserved for independent layers like &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;CSS&lt;/a&gt;, even when they can't achieve all the same visual tricks as “breaking” HTML can.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Therefore&lt;/strong&gt;, we should just use numbers in the 6-sided dice's output HTML, like the rest. It will work properly for screen readers and visual browsers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice#/media/File:Dice_(typical_role_playing_game_dice).jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;A numbered d6 is even the standard used in polyhedral dice sets&lt;/a&gt;, so it's appropriately RPG-centric to use numbered instead of pipped d6s &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; respects the way accessible way HTML is supposed to be written.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-08-18T02:02:31.230" LastActivityDate="2016-08-18T02:02:31.230" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6481" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-19T04:11:13.887" Score="11" ViewCount="254" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13547/several-damage-reduction-clarifications-for-pathfinder&quot;&gt;Several damage reduction clarifications for Pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; has a &lt;em&gt;ton&lt;/em&gt; of questions in it. Some are closely related, others are not. I strongly suspect that if the question were asked today, it would be put on hold until multiple questions were made.&#xA;I see a discussion between some of our more senior members takes place in the comments regarding closing the question, and I think that Dopplegreener-of-the-past makes a good point. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we should split the question, it's already been very nicely answered, but now that it's back near the top of the &quot;recent activity&quot; pile I think we should close it to discourage confusion amongst new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26125" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-08-24T23:26:06.613" Title="Should this old, well-answered question be closed?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6482" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6481" CreationDate="2016-08-19T06:07:57.257" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Agreed, close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We always judge posts by our current standards, regardless of how old the post is, and I can't really see this passing muster as a new question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Closing the question doesn't make it or its answers any less accessible to people who will find them useful, but&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;closing it will avoid more noise like the various incomplete or non-answers it's already gathered (as of this writing three &quot;answers&quot; have been deleted so users under 20k can't see 'em).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The close will avoid confusing users who think that it being open means this kind of question collection is okay.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-08-19T07:57:44.337" LastActivityDate="2016-08-19T07:57:44.337" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6483" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-22T19:37:17.417" Score="5" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/87028/22566&quot;&gt;This answer got deleted&lt;/a&gt; as I was crafting a &quot;Welcome to RPG.SE&quot; comment and asking for some clarification.  At the bottom of the answer &quot;I am an actual Necromancer&quot; got me to ask &quot;in game or IRL?&quot; to which I realized, as this is a very new user, I ought to add a welcome in the usual style.  At the time of my review (I was cued to it as being in the review queue) the response was five minutes old. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have a corporate knowledge on the matter of RL necromancy not fitting in well on this site?  As I read the comments, I do agree that the answer didn't seem to fit the 5e FR question, but other &quot;not so great&quot; answers have previously been improved by the interaction comments elicit.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why the quick ban? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-08-22T21:32:15.580" Title="Why the quick deletion on the Necromancy answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6483" CreationDate="2016-08-22T19:48:05.580" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer was removed for being off topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question is about the status/nature of necromantic magic in a particular fictional setting. The status/nature of necromancy in the real world is not relevant or topical; as such, this post has been removed. If you have information to provide about necromancy in the Forgotten Realms (which adds something not already covered in other answers, or which covers the same ground in a valuably novel way), you can still [edit] this post and then flag it afterwards for mod attention and undeletion. Thanks! – SevenSidedDie♦ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45965/is-necromancy-necessarily-evil-in-5e-or-forgotten-realms/87028#comment196787_87028&quot;&gt;27 mins ago&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We get real-world adherents of religions, practices, and beliefs on occasion. The answer was describing real-world necromancy beliefs/practices, likely one of or based on one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voodoo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;varieties of Vodou&lt;/a&gt;, and defending it as not-evil. Since that's off topic for a question about the moral/alignment status of necromantic magic in the Forgotten Realms or D&amp;amp;D 5e in general, it was removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The beginning of the answer was at least minimally relevant to RPGs, but was off topic for the question itself: it shared that, because necromancy in D&amp;amp;D is unrealistic, they like to give players the option of playing a more realistic homebrew class. That's not topical to the alignment status of necromancy in the Forgotten Realms.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The speed of the deletion was just a combination of seeing it shortly after it was posted, and familiarity with this sort of post making for easy recognition and diagnosis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-22T21:32:15.580" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6485" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6486" CreationDate="2016-08-24T19:17:01.050" Score="5" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked a question at:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87050/how-do-i-convert-the-classes-and-monsters-of-the-dragon-warriors-rpg-to-dungeon&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87050/how-do-i-convert-the-classes-and-monsters-of-the-dragon-warriors-rpg-to-dungeon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I read the guidelines for raising questions carefully, it was deemed to be too broad, and put on hold. However there's numerous questions (please see the bottom of this question) that follow the same pattern (how do i convert system x to system y), and were considered a good fit for this site. In my opinion it is a well defined problem, it can't get any more specific (same as all the other examples that have been posted on the website). So I'd like to get the community's thoughts on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks in advance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples of conversion threads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1998/how-can-i-convert-dd-3-5-to-2nd-edition-or-older-add&quot;&gt;How can I convert D&amp;amp;D 3.5 to 2nd Edition or older AD&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/341/how-can-i-convert-2nd-edition-add-to-4th&quot;&gt;How can I convert 2nd Edition AD&amp;amp;D to 4th?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22897/how-to-convert-add-2e-planescape-pcs-to-nwod-hunters-modern-mid-campaign?s=2|1.1995&quot;&gt;How to convert AD&amp;amp;D 2e (Planescape) PCs to nWoD Hunters (modern) mid-campaign&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60169/how-do-i-convert-basic-dd-modules-to-5e&quot;&gt;How do I Convert Basic D&amp;amp;D modules to 5E?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23302" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T02:53:19.547" Title="Should questions of the type &quot;how do i convert system x to system y&quot; be classified as too broad?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6485" CreationDate="2016-08-24T20:16:00.483" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Normally? Yes, such questions are on-topic and (often) work within our peculiar site structure. It really depends on the individual questions though, and questions are judged less on rules and more on their individual merits relative to broad guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question in particular isn't a typical example of conversion questions, as it has several small problems that likely added up to a collective judgement to put it on hold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's not well-researched. Dungeon World already explains how to convert monsters, and the question itself says that reading the classes to see if they already work hasn't been done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lacking research ahead of time isn't by itself grounds for closure, but it sets the question up as particularly weak and therefore less likely to be “saved” by community action from any other problems it might be suffering from.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asking about both monsters and all the classes is kinda broad. Whether it's too broad or not isn't something we can define with a clear rule, but that's why voting is used instead, to judge more effectively on a case-by-case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, explaining how to convert all the classes and how to convert monsters in general makes for an unfocused question. That alone might not get it closed, but it weighs heavily on the question's overall evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally such a question would be expected to be split into two separate questions (one for monsters, one for classes), but the problem in (1) mean that doing that might not be useful anyway, again making a hold — to give time to sort things out — more attractive to the community in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question asked and the underlying problem seem to have a mismatch. The motivation for asking appears to be wanting to know whether Dragon Warrior classes and monsters have been made for Dungeon World yet, but the question is asking &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This adds to the general sense of being unfocused, or suggests that there's more going on behind the question, which will make it more likely for focused answers to miss the “real” target the asker is hoping they'll hit. Hold/closing is a way to head off the posting of answers when it seems likely they won't even be answering the real question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be yet another question asking whether Dungeon World can do low-magic campaigns, buried in the middle of the question. The more questions a question-post appears to contain, the more likely it is to attract Too Broad votes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lastly — and this is a really minor point that wouldn't merit a single hold/close vote, but contributes to the sense that there's something wrong with the question that needs to be fixed before it can be usefully answered — it refers to itself as a “thread”. It also expresses a hope for general feedback from people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.se is &lt;em&gt;frequently&lt;/em&gt; mistaken for a threaded discussion forum but works very, very differently from one. Calling a question page a “thread” or seeming like an experience poll are each a very minor red flag that the original post might have been composed under misapprehensions about what would happen next, based on a belief that this site is a typical discussion forum. Again, not close-worthy, but it's one more thing weighing down a question that is already weighed down with a number of warning signs of being not ready for answering.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The close/hold vote system is really granular, and doesn't really allow expressing every reason, doubt, and intuition that it relies on voters to use to make their judgements, so the overall reason “Too Broad” is often good enough, but sometimes (such as in this case) not anywhere near the full story. It falsely gives the impression in this case that there's one specific axis of problem when it's really many things, and “Too Broad” is just the closest match for the build-up of small problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;These problems aren't insurmountable though.&lt;/strong&gt; There are a few things you can do to move forward:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Take another spin through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; for a review of how RPG.se works in a way that is distinct from a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Finish reading &lt;em&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/em&gt;. It answers one half your question already (how to convert monsters), and finishing reading about the existing classes may solve the other half.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If questions remain after (2), keep in mind that questions get better answers when answers only have to answer one question. Ask specific questions about specific problems by focusing on one task that you're having trouble completing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Along with (2), this ensures that the question will be written with one clear hurdle that you're having direct trouble clearing, which answers can laser-focus on solving for you.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Decide which question you want to ask about first — the other questions may be moot by the time that first question is answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you finish reading DW and still want to know &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; Dragon Warrior classes have been already converted to Dungeon World by someone else, just ask that. If you finish reading and determine that you will convert them yourself, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; you ask “how” and stay focused on asking “how” while writing the question. If you want to know how to do low-magic campaigns in Dungeon World, ask that all by itself. (You might not have any of these questions, and may instead find yourself having a completely different or more specific problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This goes hand-in-hand with (3), in that it ensures each question post only contains one problem to solve rather than a muddle of many problems that could each be individually solved or ignored by any given answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T02:53:19.547" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6487" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6481" CreationDate="2016-08-24T20:27:58.333" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Close it, and add a Historical Lock&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;BESW has made a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6482/26125&quot;&gt;fantastic case&lt;/a&gt; for closing the question, but I think we should place a Historical Lock on the post in addition to simply closing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The wording on the Historical Lock reads&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question exists because it has historical significance, but &lt;strong&gt;it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site&lt;/strong&gt;, so please &lt;strong&gt;do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I believe that applies to the post in question perfectly. The First bolded article is true: The question is not a good question. It's on topic, but in an unacceptable state. The second bolded article also holds, similarly formatted questions would also be considered unacceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The case for a Historical Lock&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to the SE Meta the following should be taken into consideration when Historically Locking a post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The post is Off-Topic or Not Constructive,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the reasons outlined by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6482/26125&quot;&gt;BESW&lt;/a&gt; the question is no longer fitting for our Stack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The post is stellar, in spite of its off-topic nature,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the fact that the question is inappropriate for our format, the top-rated &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; to the question is detailed, correct, and well formatted. There is important information in that answer, and it's a great resource for future users to have access to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are a large number of views, upvotes and inbound links on the post, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm not an expert on this, so if someone with more familiarity wants to edit in more detail feel free&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my inexpert eyes, this post seems to fit all of the above criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The post is contentious; e.g., it has been closed and reopened at least once, or deleted and undeleted at least once&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the biggest miss we have for the Historical Lock: There isn't a lot of contention here. We seem to have a consensus that the question should be closed, and I don't see anyone railing against that, or confused by the reasoning. I have no real support for this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Reasoning for the Historical Lock&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Closing&lt;/em&gt; seems to cast the shadow of disapproval over the closed post. A closed post implies that it is incorrect, and not a proper fit for the site. It is considered &lt;em&gt;unsalvageable&lt;/em&gt; as noted in the Flag description for &quot;should be closed&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question is completely unclear, incomplete, overly-broad, primarily opinion-based or is not about role-playing games as described in the help center, and &lt;strong&gt;it is unlikely to be fixed via editing&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A historically-locked post, however, means that the community on the Stack has simply changed, and the post was &lt;em&gt;once&lt;/em&gt; appropriate, but no longer is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the post in question, it certainly would certainly be put on hold as &lt;em&gt;Too Broad&lt;/em&gt; were it posted today. However, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the post aside from the manner in which it was posed. Were it posted today, the asker would be encouraged to split the question in to several related questions instead of a single mega-question, each of the questions would receive answers, and everyone would move on happily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why not just keep it normally closed?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main reason I don't think we should leave the post Closed in a conventional manner is that I think the post provides sufficient value (and has been accessed and cross referenced by enough different people/posts in enough different ways) that it should be held safe from deletion. When searching google the post appears prominently on the first page of my results, and is linked to by 5 other posts on our Stack. The mechanical difference between a Close and a HL seems to be that the post is protected from deletion, and I think that sort of protection is valuable on the post in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26125" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.817" LastActivityDate="2016-08-24T23:26:06.613" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6488" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-24T22:09:55.973" Score="8" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;The standard five people have now voted to close &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87082/what-does-the-court-dialect-of-infernal-sound-like&quot;&gt;What does the court dialect of Infernal sound like?&lt;/a&gt; as opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm tempted to reopen it because it's directly asking for published material, and this doesn't appear to me to be any different from the situation of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8946&quot;&gt;What does Drow Speech sound like?&lt;/a&gt; A comment to that effect didn't appear to result in any retracted votes or prevent the final vote from being cast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe I'm missing something right in front of my nose, or something more subtle, that is obvious to the close-voters and makes it &lt;strong&gt;primarily opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;. What am I missing here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-08-24T22:40:57.353" Title="Why is the court Infernal language question being voted closed?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6488" CreationDate="2016-08-24T22:40:57.353" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was just looking at it, and was also tempted to reopen it on the same grounds. In fact, I'm going to, the &quot;but the info in your comment&quot; really isn't that crucial. I edited it in anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While sure, we want people to explain the problem they're having, this seems like a pretty clear &quot;I'm having trouble envisioning it, is there more canon on it&quot; question that doesn't need the OP to start posting phonemes to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-08-24T22:40:57.353" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6490" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6492" CreationDate="2016-08-25T04:59:23.823" Score="6" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/87082/15211&quot;&gt;What does the court dialect of Infernal sound like?&lt;/a&gt; I initially seemingly wasn't pretty clear about what I'm looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to clarify through edits, comments and help of other users editing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the morning I noticed that the post is much better received now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also noted on my mobile, through the notifications that some one was explaining what exactly made this post much more fitting to the network now. If I remember right it began with something along the lines of &quot;Your recent edits made it much clearer so...&quot; And there my mobile screen cut it off, and after I clicked on it I noticed it didn't exist anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I tried to read the reasoning, I saw all the comment had been deleted (probably as being obsolete). But it would helped me for the future to understand what was exactly the problem previously. What I didn't got 100% yet. So the comment could helped me for further posts here, but now it is gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is this a good thing?&#xA;Is there maybe a way for such situation where one can look them up in some kind of archive, and so this isn't as absolute as it seems to me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-09-04T23:02:09.247" Title="Should we be slower about deleting obsolete comments?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6490" CreationDate="2016-08-25T05:41:06.657" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;While it's very nice that someone tried to help you better understand the site's workings, and I'm sorry their contribution was lost, they chose a poor place to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should submit a comment if you want to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Request clarification from the author;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Comments are not recommended for any of the following:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  [...]&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Secondary discussion or debating a controversial point; please use chat instead;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Discussion of community behavior or site policies; please use meta instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Privileges: Comment Everywhere.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments get pruned because they easily get in the way of quick access to the answers which are the Stack's primary purpose, especially when they become conversations (the Stack is not a discussion forum).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments you describe sound like a secondary discussion about site design (it's not gonna help you improve that particular post, nor help anyone answer you). In that position, I'd likely have instead left a quick comment inviting you to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;the RPG chat room&lt;/a&gt; or linking you to any relevant pages for background reading; that'd put less &quot;noise&quot; on the page and the comment would probably have been allowed to sit longer. (Generally comments are deleted because a citizen notices them and flags them for moderator attention. Short, pithy comments attract get flagged less because they get in the way less.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only people who can see deleted comments are elected moderators and their superiors; one of our mods may be willing to reproduce the comments for you here or in chat. It's also very likely that someone in the chat would be happy to talk with you about your question and its editing progression.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T05:41:06.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6492" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6490" CreationDate="2016-08-25T17:13:41.307" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've looked over the comments and there isn't really one that talks about how the question has been made so much more fitting for the network. The thing is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6488/why-is-the-court-infernal-language-question-being-voted-closed&quot;&gt;it never &lt;em&gt;had&lt;/em&gt; a problem fitting the network&lt;/a&gt;, and among the removed comments there aren't any that are obviously giving advice to make it fit better. (That's not surprising, since it wasn't a problem the question had.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was one comment giving kudos for moving clarifications left in comments into the post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You've already clarified that it is FR (yay, J.Foster's comment worked as intended) and you have a comment to DaleM that has some points you could fold into the question in terms of what is giving you the most difficulty. Comments eventually go away, so capturing those thoughts can improve the question. Explaining how that wiki's info wasn't as helpful (with a link, since comments go away) also shows improved research and clarifies what hasn't helped you so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though you did these things and it marginally improved the post, those clarifications didn't make a difference in the voting that I can see. (It had +4/&amp;minus;0 the day before the edits and +3/&amp;minus;1 after the edits. Numbers this small can't be statistically significant though, so although before and after voting seems to shows a &lt;em&gt;worsening&lt;/em&gt; in voting, statistically it's more like “no difference”.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are still useful things to do (show existing research; explain how your attempts to solve the problem have so far been unsatisfactory) and &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt;, as the comment said, improve a post, the voting shows that the question was already good enough. Editing to improve one's questions is always welcome though, even when they aren't strictly necessary, and sometimes &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; make a difference, so thank you for doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T17:54:54.280" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3679" CreationDate="2016-08-25T21:58:24.920" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simply put as the person who asked the initial question, it was from a campaign perspective as we had a player character in a D&amp;amp;D 3.5 game who was playing a centaur. Part of our task was to climb down a descent that was very steep and rocky. Knowing we'd have to climb up again and also knowing that the centaur was not in back of the party we wanted to ensure that we were not going to have some incidents where we would slip on &quot;materials deposited&quot; so to speak.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe my assumption was incorrect in that I felt if a question pertaining to a mythological figure was presented within the RPG section of Stack Overflow, then by nature it would have been considered a valid RPG question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, given that I've been a player from version 1 on, I had also incorrectly assumed that some questions would be left to the imagination as the game (when played correctly) leaves some part for imagination, conjecture and discussion. I realize now that later versions, as they are tailored for younger players, have very specific and mathematical rules to be followed. Specifically version 4.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, I know the subject is crass and distasteful, but let's face it, we are playing a game where we decapitate and kill a multitude of creatures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12496" LastActivityDate="2016-08-25T21:58:24.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-26T03:46:46.413" Score="5" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looks like PurpleMonkey and Miniman both took the time to write good, thoughtful answers to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87156/do-dragons-of-all-sizes-get-lair-actions-and-regional-effects&quot;&gt;Do dragons of all sizes get lair actions and regional effects?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it looks like they were posted within 3 minutes of each other - so probably both were written independently, and one wasn't copying the other. But they're using basically identical reasoning, with many of the same quotes even, and coming to the same conclusion. So, strictly speaking, I don't think Posterity(tm) is improved by having both around. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, I also don't want to downvote or flag either answer - on their own, they're good answers! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do in this situation? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-08-26T04:11:21.237" Title="What to do when there are two similar answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6494" CreationDate="2016-08-26T04:03:31.570" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nothing needs to be done. They're not identical, so it's likely that over the &lt;em&gt;long&lt;/em&gt; term one will attract more votes than the other based on subtle differences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we want the best answer to float to the top, this is all as it should be. We can't know which one is best now, so we leave it to the voting system and time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-08-26T04:03:31.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6494" CreationDate="2016-08-26T04:04:16.193" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Upvote whichever answer(s) you think is good. If that's both, upvote both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're the asker, you can only &lt;em&gt;accept&lt;/em&gt; one. But you can &lt;em&gt;upvote&lt;/em&gt; as many as you like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14988" LastActivityDate="2016-08-26T04:04:16.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6494" CreationDate="2016-08-26T04:05:11.043" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I use this sort of situation as a little bit of micro-scale A/B testing. The answers are both right and both well-written, so I figure they'll both get a reasonable number of upvotes. Nothing's harmed, then, by &quot;withholding&quot; an upvote I might normally give based on small variations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So then it's looking at the small differences in presentation: more-explanatory vs. to-the-point, extent/appropriateness of citation, layout. I step back and do a ten second skim of both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, after that, one strikes me more positively I go ahead and upvote just that one; on the other I either leave a &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; gentle comment or chat with the author if they're pingable. Something along the lines of &quot;I think you could improve this by mentioning frobbing.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, I upvote both and move on. (Which was the outcome in this case.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2016-08-26T04:11:21.237" LastActivityDate="2016-08-26T04:11:21.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6498" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9586" CreationDate="2016-08-26T16:57:15.377" Score="76" ViewCount="1756" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a somewhat common habit at RPG.se to use &lt;strong&gt;bold sentences&lt;/strong&gt; to make the &lt;em&gt;appearance&lt;/em&gt; of a header for a section of text, rather than using our existing header formatting. This is probably because it's a common hack elsewhere on the Internet where heading formatting isn't available, and because the button in the editor for bold is more obvious than the button for a heading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This habit causes problems though, and is so easily avoided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Internet in general has many visually-impaired users, and we're no exception — we know of a number of site members who have said they are visually impaired. Visually impaired users commonly use one or more of a variety of accessibility software to navigate a question and its answers, and to have the part of interest read aloud. The problem with &lt;strong&gt;bold sentences&lt;/strong&gt; used to make fake headers is twofold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They aren't recognised as headings, so they can't be used for assisted navigation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They aren't read aloud as headings, making it harder to figure out what the text is supposed to mean when read aloud.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:02:53.617" LastActivityDate="2021-07-30T01:49:34.077" Title="Use real headers instead of fake headers" Tags="|discussion|faq|accessibility|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3418" CreationDate="2016-08-27T12:53:59.180" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that the first question would be better suited on the WB.SE rather than the RPG.SE. It's question format, asking how something would work lacking any particular mention of a specific system on a generally accepted trope to fantasy games, seems like it would belong there.I am am aware it is tagged as D&amp;amp;D 3.5e but there is no mention of it or it's wording on the subject in the question, neither is there a game play example.&lt;br&gt;It's because that it fits so well into another sites domain I understand why it would be closed and agree with the dicsion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the second question, that is asking how a particular spell works, and what affects it will have on the (N)PC. Though this could be quite a subjective answer, and might be better suited to a discussion in chat or on another forum it still fits within what I consider this sites accepted questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When are real life questions acceptable?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say when they have a direct bearing on the game and the enjoyment of it by the the players. Some DM's want to bring a splash of reality into their games, weather it is carrying capacities, starvation rules or some other such scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30758" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-08-27T12:53:59.180" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6498" CreationDate="2016-08-29T06:10:32.330" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Be careful with level 1 headers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title of the question is an H1 (source: I just checked), and the entire question should be subordinate to (&quot;below&quot;) the title.  If the question contains a separate H1 in its body text, then this semantic relationship will fail.  Putting an H1 at the top of an answer is not necessarily wrong, since the answer is a separate object from the question.  But if your answer contains an H1 and my answer does not, the semantic outline could get really messed up (read: my answer shows up as subordinate to your answer), so H1s should probably be avoided in answers as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19641" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-05T22:06:01.230" LastActivityDate="2019-11-05T22:06:01.230" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6501" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-08-29T18:18:55.417" Score="9" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed today that answers are sometimes blinking when clicked on. Very weird. Doesn’t seem to happen with questions, nor does it consistently happen with answers. When it happens, it happens consistently for all answers on that page, but reloading or going elsewhere and coming back may leave the page with no blinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-09-04T01:39:42.507" LastActivityDate="2016-09-04T01:39:42.507" Title="Answers blinking when clicked?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6501" CreationDate="2016-08-29T18:33:19.847" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a new bug, yes. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/283925/answers-disappear-briefly-then-reload-when-i-click-them&quot;&gt;It's been reported on MSE already&lt;/a&gt;, so we should go vote that up. This question is probably still helpful because it shows the extent of the problem among SEs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-08-29T18:33:19.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6503" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6505" CreationDate="2016-09-01T14:25:33.517" Score="5" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;In re: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77247/23970&quot;&gt;What are the playable D&amp;amp;D races in 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One recent user edited in races included in WotC's &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/magic/Plane%20Shift%20Zendikar.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Plane Shift: Zendikar&lt;/a&gt; supplement. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77247/what-are-the-official-wotc-playable-races-in-5e#comment198080_77248&quot;&gt;contends&lt;/a&gt; that those aren't official races.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than individual editors unilaterally deciding on the in-/exclusion of these races, can we hash it out here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please make your best arguments for and against Zendikar-race inclusion. Highest-voted answer should prevail, in my opinion, for the purposes of the linked question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-09-01T23:54:35.453" Title="Should the Zendikar expansion races be counted as &quot;official WotC&quot; races?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2016-09-01T23:54:45.880" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6503" CreationDate="2016-09-01T15:15:17.110" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, the Zendikar material is not official D&amp;amp;D 5e content. There's a pretty simple way to determine this: It doesn't say it's a D&amp;amp;D product in the first place. D&amp;amp;D products have &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; on them. Actually, every D&amp;amp;D product I can find has both &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; and &quot;Dungeons and Dragons&quot; on the cover, like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sJm1U.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sJm1U.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D2i1n.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D2i1n.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Zendikar material, on the other hand, has &quot;Magic The Gathering&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Oo79L.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Oo79L.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It says it's compatible with D&amp;amp;D, but it makes no claim to being a D&amp;amp;D product. It also includes this disclaimer, somewhat similar to that included in Unearthed Arcana articles:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The game mechanics in this supplement are usable in your &#xA;  D&amp;amp;D campaign but are not fully tempered by playtests and design iterations. For these reasons, material in this supplement &#xA;  is not legal in D&amp;amp;D Organized Play events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2016-09-01T15:15:17.110" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6503" CreationDate="2016-09-01T23:54:35.453" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Frame challenge: I don't think this is an appropriate use of Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta is for policy, not extended argument about a question clearly on topic for the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answerers on that question should include or exclude it based on the discussion there, and votes etc. should carry the day as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I consider a referendum on Meta on a main site topic, not a Meta topic, to be an end run around the primary SE process. We might as well re-ask any contentious point of fact around a game here to play &quot;inside baseball&quot; and get a ruling with less eyes on it than the main site.  That's undesirable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result I'm going to close this meta question.  We could have another meta question on whether main-site topics should be also debated on meta or not, if you disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-09-01T23:54:35.453" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6506" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6490" CreationDate="2016-09-04T23:02:09.247" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that (the case of particularly problematic comments notwithstanding), it's generally a good idea to avoid cleaning up comments too quickly after they're posted, in order to allow the users who receive a notification from the comment a chance to return to the site, see the notification, and click on it without the associated comment already being gone. I've had this happen a number of times as well (I don't recall whether on this SE site or others), and it's certainly frustrating to see a red icon in my inbox, click to see I've been @-mentioned in a comment to something I posted last night, and click through to find that the comment was deleted before I ever had the chance to read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, certain situations definitely warrant the rapid deletion of one or more comments, such as personal attacks, spam, or off-topic/tangential comments &lt;em&gt;that are also very likely to attract a high volume of subsequent comments,&lt;/em&gt; but in lieu of any such situation, the majority of comments should at least be allowed a minimum lifespan of around 24-36 hours before being deleted for ordinary cleanup reasons. At ~12 hours, a post may not have had enough time to attract a sufficient number of views for comment votes to have organically found the best ones yet. Let that system work for a little while first, and by the time a day has passed, the comment votes might reach a level where most will be collapsed on page load, reducing the need to delete any of them at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23127" LastActivityDate="2016-09-04T23:02:09.247" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6507" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-09-06T16:56:06.250" Score="18" ViewCount="463" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm asking due to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/87590/25893&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; in particular.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;It's a question about the 7th Sea 2e RPG, and we have a new user who was a designer for the game. Currently the answer he's supplied has a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6465/23970&quot;&gt;post notice&lt;/a&gt; requiring additional references, which seems a little absurd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a method to handle users like this who, in essence, are themselves a top-tier reference? Or should they just be treated as normal users?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25893" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:47:43.003" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:47:43.003" Title="Is there an established way to handle a game's designer on the site?" Tags="|discussion|game-designers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6507" CreationDate="2016-09-06T19:27:42.237" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no firmly established way to handle a game's own designer, mainly because it's so uncommon such a person shows up here to answer questions about their game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We treat game designers like regular users, but &lt;em&gt;slightly&lt;/em&gt; more lenient. We're more patient with introducing and explaining things to them because naturally we'd like them to stick around &amp;mdash; their contribution is immediately and clearly very valuable as foremost experts on their own material! (Plus a lot of us just give more respect and patience to the authors of the games we love.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we also have content expectations. We expect designers' contributions to meet those just like anyone else &amp;mdash; a low quality answer by an authoritative source is still a low quality answer. If citations and references are important and expected, we can and should request those of a designer as much as anyone else. (And we'll probably just be inclined to be a bit nicer in asking for them than if we're asking some random.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Prior discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3526/do-authors-overrule-users&quot;&gt;Do Authors Overrule Users?&lt;/a&gt;. SevenSidedDie and KRyan both explain that designers' answers aren't inherently correct or right or any good at all, they're still subject to our usual site standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-09-06T19:27:42.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6507" CreationDate="2016-09-06T21:56:40.443" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this case, the post notice was applied before he identified himself as a designer.  &quot;I'm a designer for that game&quot; is a valid source citation, and now that he's added it the post notice has been removed. It's really as simple as that...  Prior to that, his simple &quot;Only one!&quot; answer was treated as a low quality answer by the community like any other would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And before someone says it, no, putting your affiliation in your profile isn't enough; posts should stand on their own. (Plus, I don't read through people's profiles to try to determine the validity of their posts). Cite your reference, if it's yourself because you're a designer that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though do also keep in mind &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3526/do-authors-overrule-users&quot;&gt;Do Authors Overrule Users?&lt;/a&gt;; just because a designer asserts something doesn't mean that the community or OP is constrained to accept it as the &quot;right&quot; answer. But yes, designing on that game counts as a valid source citation (backing up with game text makes it better...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-09-07T00:25:16.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6510" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6511" CreationDate="2016-09-09T10:51:47.313" Score="7" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt; just went from &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; without apparent discussion about the change, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1274/can-i-send-private-messages-to-users&quot;&gt;Can I send private messages to users?&lt;/a&gt; became an &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;. I thought there'd be conversation involved first, so the lack of it is surprising for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the actual process around FAQ proposals? How do we provide input on whether they should or shouldn't become FAQ items? (And what decides whether a proposal becomes FAQ?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, where are we supposed to talk about it? In comments on the question itself, or in a new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given an FAQ item has been made with apparently no discussion &amp;mdash; how and where do we talk about items that &lt;em&gt;have become&lt;/em&gt; FAQ already, to re-evaluate whether they belong in our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;, if necessary?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T13:11:57.400" LastActivityDate="2023-02-05T13:11:57.400" Title="What's the actual process around [faq-proposal]s?" Tags="|support|meta|faq-maintenance|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2023-02-07T04:02:23.207" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6510" CreationDate="2016-09-09T12:43:09.780" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no formal process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something gets put on meta and if someone thinks it'd possibly be meaningful enough to be in the FAQ, it gets tagged with [faq-proposal] either at first or later on via normal Marquess of Queensbury editing rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Votes and/or discussion happen.  When the mods are satisfied that it's now a [faq], we make it a [faq] by changing the tag.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first question you cite, the headers question, has 51 upvotes and has been there for a couple weeks. Any meaningful discussion would have already happened; there's been no anti sentiment except a caveat of &quot;be careful with h1's.&quot;  That makes it clearly and overwhelmingly pass in our minds (51!  That's just about unprecedented on Meta.  I don't know why so many people care about formatting either, but eh.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The PM one has been tagged faq-proposal as well, because people ask that question all the time.  If you want to talk about it, yes indeed, do it on that question, in answers and comments and whatnot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't make separate questions to declare the FAQ-worthiness of a question that is proposed to be a FAQ, that just adds confusion. &quot;Here's a FAQ proposal!&quot;  &quot;Let us have a proposal about the proposal!&quot;  This isn't HP or IBM, it's a community site... [faq-proposal] means &quot;this is a FAQ proposal, please discuss its content and its FAQ-quiness.&quot;  FAQquiness is not usually much of a debate, it's really a matter of &quot;is this question asked a lot?&quot; (The PM one sure is), as in, you know, is it a frequently asked question, or is it normative guidance we think everyone should read even if you didn't know to ask it, like something about headers or comment use or whatnot.  There's not a tag for &quot;official declarations!&quot; other than [faq], so we use that for those too (I venture to say that's common in FAQs of the world).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-09-09T12:43:09.780" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6513" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-09-12T08:00:54.977" Score="4" ViewCount="295" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noted this now a few times that comments are never lasting very long here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a reason for this SE site handling it that way so much more strictly compared to other SE sites?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is it just as this is the way the mods here implement the network rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-09-12T08:56:17.917" LastActivityDate="2016-09-14T01:12:06.440" Title="Is there a reason for RPG.SE deleting comments especially &quot;radical&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2016-09-12T12:13:18.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6514" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6513" CreationDate="2016-09-12T09:21:44.360" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;In short: RPG.SE's comment curation is a citizen-facing action to avoid the divisive habits in which many RPG sites frequently indulge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In long:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;RPG.SE is in a sweet spot where we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; enforce Stack guidelines on comments.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE's attitude toward comments is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/19757/244929&quot;&gt;well within the Stack Exchange practices for comment curation&lt;/a&gt;. Some Stack sites are even stricter than we are (check out the history of comment curation on Christianity.SE or Gardening.SE some time) while others choose to be more lax, but often Stacks are &lt;em&gt;unable&lt;/em&gt; to enforce comment curation to the extent they'd like because the volume of curation needed overall is too much for their mods and high-rep citizens to handle. In those situations, comments run amok are usually deemed a very low priority. RPG.SE is small enough the volume of comments isn't a barrier to curation, but has enough active high-rep citizens that its moderators aren't totally swamped with other tasks either. So let's look at the choice:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Curation is not strictly a choice made by the moderation team.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While only elected moderators can delete comments not their own, they aren't spending their days hunting for comments to delete: they don't have the time, energy, or inclination. That's what flags are for: tools for every citizen to bring things to a moderator's attention because we &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; expect the mods to find all the fires on their own. Most comments get deleted because at least one non-moderator user flagged them. In this way, citizens tell the moderators how strictly they want the guidelines to be enforced on a day-to-day basis. (See below for links to the related meta discussions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Our choice to do so is a response to other RPG sites, not other Stack sites.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is remarkable in comparison to much of the online RPG community because it actively avoids arguments and tangents (focusing instead on the Stack's &quot;well-sorted, actionable solutions to real problems&quot; mission). Many people coming from other sites dedicated to RPG topics are pleasantly surprised at the contrast and they value our focused atmosphere. While it's true an occasional &quot;+1 I liked this&quot; wouldn't get in the way of that atmosphere &lt;em&gt;on its own&lt;/em&gt;, experience has shown they give people the impression comments which don't help improve questions or answers are okay, and act as seeds for more troublesome comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we curate comments aggressively for the same reason some other Stacks do: when a topic attracts an unusual number of out-of-line comments, pruning tangential comments of every sort is one of the best ways to keep the worse ones at bay. As a side benefit it keeps our actual questions and answers clearly visible without hiding important information in discussion threads or forcing extra unnecessary scrolling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside: You'll find that our moderators respect comment upvotes. Comments with upvotes have to be especially egregious in order for a mod to burn them, even after flagging. This is how the community can indicate comments they value and want to see remain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about RPG.SE's history of comment curation by searching through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/comments+discussion&quot;&gt;meta questions tagged &quot;comments discussion&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/4398&quot;&gt;the FAQ on the subject&lt;/a&gt;. The list of &quot;Related&quot; links on the right side of this page will take you directly to some of those discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2016-09-14T01:12:06.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2016-09-12T22:40:09.363" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the interests of visibility, I'll say &lt;strong&gt;I'm (part of) the reason comments are being deleted.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my year on the site I've flagged comments ~230 times for deletion. I'd estimate based on my &quot;helpful&quot; rate and the number of times I'm flagging as &quot;obsolete along with successors&quot;, that I've probably triggered the deletion of over 500 comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often the mods come under fire for &quot;zealously&quot; comment-hunting, even though they repeatedly tell us that they've got better ways to spend their time and that they're largely responding to automatic and community flags. The problem is: the mod deleting the comment is visible to those concerned. The user throwing a flag isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've poked around in some other rather-active users' profiles, and it seems most have also thrown hundreds of flags. I can't see any other's breakdown of flag type, but even if I'm the outlier at 78% comment-flagging and others average only half that, we're still talking thousands of comments being deleted on the prompting of a few dozen people. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I see a comment that's been edited into the post or that's off-topic, I flag it. I also flag comments that are constructive and on-topic if they've been sitting around for a few years and it doesn't seem like OP's interested in incorporating the feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2016-09-12T22:40:09.363" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6516" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-09-13T04:02:07.617" Score="15" ViewCount="157" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to the consensus over on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;, comments that have been folded in to a question or answer are eligible to be deleted because they are Obsolete. This helps to keep the site clean and canonical. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this mean that users editing a question or answer to include information from comments should then mark those comments as Obsolete?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-09-13T04:19:01.793" Title="Should answerers and querents flag comments they folded in?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6516" CreationDate="2016-09-13T04:19:01.793" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, and that is frequently done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-09-13T04:19:01.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-09-21T13:20:13.030" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/93238/literature?referrer=u5vtApCMzzlD4yRnMOivZg2&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/ads/proposal/93238.png&quot; alt=&quot;Support the Literature.SE Proposal&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10964" LastEditorUserId="10964" LastEditDate="2016-11-18T19:10:31.627" LastActivityDate="2016-11-18T19:10:31.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6519" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6520" CreationDate="2016-09-22T16:25:08.100" Score="16" ViewCount="331" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that at time questions are unclear, vague, or unanswerable in their original state and need to be edited.  I also see the value in the questions changing so much that some of the answers don't answer the question anymore.  However, there comes a point where we lose a good question, and its eventual answers, to editing that turns it into an entirely new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any rules or suggestions posted that could give users, especially new ones, to let them know how/when a questions should be an edit and when it should be a new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm thinking specifically of this question:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88269/strength-or-dexterity-pact-of-the-blade-warlock-build&quot;&gt;Can a Pact of the Blade warlock proficiently use weapons given by race?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;That started as a question about proficiencies, and morphed into a build question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25091" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-17T22:10:04.173" LastActivityDate="2021-04-17T22:10:04.173" Title="When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?" Tags="|discussion|faq|questions|editing|question-scope|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6519" CreationDate="2016-09-22T17:36:49.087" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions can be clarified, but &lt;strong&gt;new questions aren't clarifications and should be posted as separate, new questions&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct course of action is to revert to the last version that wasn't a different question. (Further edits may be appropriate to clean up, clarify, or whatever that revision still needs that didn't happen because of the new-question edits. This may be unnecessary if the question is closed or otherwise no longer of interest to the OP or anyone else.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Discussion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a topic that comes up semi-regularly, though I think this is the first meta question that has &lt;em&gt;directly&lt;/em&gt; asked whether completely changing a question is OK. Related meta questions (the first two are the closest to this one, but I don't think exactly the same):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4813/should-i-edit-my-question-or-create-a-new-one&quot;&gt;Should I edit my question or create a new one?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4999/reword-question-or-new-question&quot;&gt;Should I reword a question or ask a new one, if it&amp;#39;s not getting useful answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5318/massive-edit-to-a-question-undercuts-existing-highly-upvoted-answer&quot;&gt;Massive edit to a question undercuts existing highly-upvoted answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3116/is-it-ever-appropriate-to-revert-someones-edit-to-their-own-question&quot;&gt;Is it ever appropriate to revert someone&amp;#39;s edit to their own question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6324/when-a-question-changes-should-answers-change-too&quot;&gt;When a Question changes, should answers change, too?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, there can't be a general rule. The most workable guideline though appears to be “&lt;strong&gt;if it's a &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; question, it goes in a new question post&lt;/strong&gt;”. In other words, it relies on the “I know it when I see it” sense of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are of course muddy cases, but the general guideline is the place to start. One muddy case I've seen is when a badly-asked question was &lt;em&gt;so&lt;/em&gt; badly asked that fixing it basically created a completely different question — in that case, it was better to abandon it (and its multiple answers) as unfixable so it could start over in a fresh, new question post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, sometimes the clarification could have been guessed from the beginning, making it a true clarification and not just a new question, despite many answers initially guessing the wrong way. In that case, these related metas are relevant:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change&quot;&gt;What do we do with answers made obsolete by a question change?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5443/how-to-handle-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-change-in-real-life-circumstances&quot;&gt;How to handle answers made obsolete by a change in real life circumstances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3112/downvoting-answers-not-fitting-an-edited-question-anymore&quot;&gt;Downvoting answers not fitting an edited question anymore?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-09-22T17:36:49.087" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6522" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-09-29T19:32:47.677" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;We need to kill the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; tag with fire. It's generic to the point of uselessness. Most of the questions that are tagged with it are either asking for recommendations (now considered off-topic), or are much better described by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T15:38:27.310" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T16:12:42.417" Title="Tag Burninate Suggestion: [adventure]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6522" CreationDate="2016-09-29T21:04:46.970" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's generic, yes, but that seems to be part of the (tiny, withered) core of its usefulness, so I'm not sure it merits complete removal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we keep it though, I think it need some overdue pruning and TLC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Filtering out off-topic questions and closed questions, and ones that were posted before &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt; were created and now should be switched to one of those, all the remaining questions seem to be about &lt;strong&gt;running adventures&lt;/strong&gt; or (in the lone case of “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51227/what-is-a-funnel&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;funnel&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;”) directly about a type of adventure for which we don't have a dedicated tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those cases seem to accurately use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; to categorise the questions' core topic: “my question is about an adventure.” If we removed it, I think we'd lose some categorisation and sorting strength by not having &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; kind of tag for the purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we'd be OK leaving the tag as-is, if we also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;retag a bunch as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; and/or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;close (or ignore until bumped) the open recommendation questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Optionally&lt;/strong&gt;, we might also make the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; tag more self-explanatory and distinct from those former two by renaming it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/running-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;running-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;running-adventures&lt;/a&gt;, if we can figure out what to do with the remaining “just about adventures” question, “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51227/what-is-a-funnel&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;funnel&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;”. (Maybe leaving it a bare &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; question would be fine?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-09-29T21:07:00.980" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6524" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6525" CreationDate="2016-10-07T13:30:47.193" Score="18" ViewCount="406" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the beginning, RPG.SE was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/813/what-does-community-wiki-cw-mean&quot;&gt;Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; crazy.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wiki:1&quot;&gt;We used it for everything&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/59/how-should-we-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;We have an old Meta question on what to use CW for&lt;/a&gt;. But then we realized list questions were bad and CW was being used as a dumping ground for bad questions. So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/630/where-did-the-community-wiki-option-go&quot;&gt;now CW is anathema&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1170/should-we-be-closing-old-community-wiki-questions&quot;&gt;Some hunt down and kill old CW questions&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2253/are-there-any-role-playing-games-that-have-spawned-comic-books-or-vice-versa&quot;&gt;annoying old users&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2012 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1233/how-should-we-now-use-community-wiki&quot;&gt;I asked this question again&lt;/a&gt;, and the answer at the time was &amp;quot;lists and things about the future,&amp;quot; but since then we've come down firmly on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5286/should-answers-for-questions-about-resources-for-games-be-made-cws&quot;&gt;lists&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6166/would-community-wiki-be-useful-for-questions-about-the-current-state-of-someth&quot;&gt;things about the future&lt;/a&gt; being off-topic or, if tightly scoped, on topic but not CW, as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/630/where-did-the-community-wiki-option-go&quot;&gt;a mod-only option in 2010&lt;/a&gt;, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3545/community-wiki-auto-conversion-is-no-more&quot;&gt;autoconvert to CW functionality&lt;/a&gt; was removed in 2014.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We still flirt with &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6213/where-to-find-races-and-classes-in-5e&quot;&gt;well maybe, for a list question&lt;/a&gt;...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we come up with modern guidance on how to use Community Wiki?  It's &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki/&quot;&gt;fallen largely into disuse network-wide&lt;/a&gt; so &amp;quot;never&amp;quot; is legitimate, but we tend to just say &amp;quot;well... rare cases&amp;quot; which raises the question of what that rare case might look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual for questions like this, reading the linked Qs and having a firm grasp of the historical pros and cons is table stakes for your answer to be taken seriously - please do your research before giving your opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that CW can be used on questions (in which case all answers are also CW) or just on an individual answer. Its net effect on its subject is to remove rep and lower the already pretty low bar for editing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:25:37.600" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:25:37.600" Title="How should we use Community Wiki? [2016]" Tags="|discussion|faq|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6524" CreationDate="2016-10-07T15:04:34.990" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Community Wiki seems pointless.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading through the history of CW on RPG.SE, and the blog post about CW, it seems like there really isn't much use for Community Wiki here.  The main arguments that I have for this actually come straight from that blog post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is valuable enough that you believe it belongs on the site, chances are you don't need it to be community wiki!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main advantage of community wiki -- more editing -- was nerfed when we introduced suggested edits. With suggested edits, anyone, even an anonymous user, can edit anything -- so long as another experienced user reviews and approves their edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition to these two points, we have a very tightly-moderated stack, compared to others that I've seen.  We have a high enough ratio of high-rep active users to posts that our review queue response time is very good, and we rarely have a bad question that doesn't get closed quickly (and fixed quickly, if the querent isn't off-put by the close).  As a community, we exist in a sweet spot where we can encourage the kind of collaboration that Community Wiki is intended for by quickly approving suggested edits, obviating the need for CW entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this stack becomes massively more popular in the future and the time it takes for a suggested edit to go through grows, this might change, but for now I don't think there is much of a point to making any question CW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that effect, I propose the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Going forward, we don't make any new questions CW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We also don't make any new answers CW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We hold any existing CW questions and answers to the same standards that we hold all the other questions and answers on this site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't actually &lt;em&gt;enforce&lt;/em&gt; the policy to not make any answers CW, since that's up to the answerer, and there's no way to un-CW a post once it has been made so.  What I'm proposing here is more that we, as a community, generally agree to stop using that site feature because it's not appropriate for our specific stack at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-10-08T18:25:39.797" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6526" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6524" CreationDate="2016-10-07T22:29:11.277" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Never for questions, Up to the Poster on answers.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My understanding of how Community Wiki questions work is that if a question is a community wiki, there can be only one answer, and it too is a community wiki.  This should be discouraged as it disincentivizes many (most?) users to answer and provides no benefit for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, answers can be a community wiki at the original poster's discretion.  I see no reason to have hard and fast rules about when a poster should make their &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; a community wiki and see any guidelines as being &lt;em&gt;a bad idea.&lt;/em&gt;  Offering guidelines &lt;em&gt;other than&lt;/em&gt; &quot;It's your answer, do what you want, and accept the consequences (voting provides those)&quot; puts expectations on a poster of the type the auto-conversions of old did.  Those are a bad idea to implement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only viable action to take with this buck is passing it to the poster.  Anything else is a horrible idea - and would lead me to advocate banning community wikis outright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2016-10-10T15:23:31.077" LastActivityDate="2016-10-10T15:23:31.077" CommentCount="10" CommunityOwnedDate="2016-10-07T22:29:11.277" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6524" CreationDate="2016-10-08T18:35:38.230" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree totally with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6525/1204&quot;&gt;DuckTapeAl's proposals&lt;/a&gt;. CW's just about pointless for questions and answers, shouldn't be used, and CW material should be held to the same standards as anything else. However, CW-ing answers &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; available, so I'd like to provide some guidance on where it might actually have some relevance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Answers should nearly always not use Community Wiki.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post your answer as a regular answer. They almost never need community wiki. We'll still be able to contribute to your answer even if it's a normal one; the wiki does almost nothing beyond saying you get no points for your answer. If your post's worth putting on our site, chances are you've earned the reputation points, and we'd rather you had them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a slim circumstance in which CW is still relevant for an answer (but you'll probably never run into it), alluded to in our partly-obsolete &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/community-wiki&quot;&gt;create wiki posts&lt;/a&gt; privilege help page: you need largescale collaboration between more users than yourself, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; you are certain reputation will be an issue impeding collaboration. We're talking situations like: you need three other users to write three quarters of the post, and all of them are grumbling about someone else stealing their reputation for it; or you sincerely can't complete a large effort answer on your own and are relying on as-of-yet-unknown community members to chip in a large portion of the work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chances are you'll never be in that circumstance. That's at least in part because reputation is a fairly abundant resource on RPG Stack Exchange for those posting at least a few answers and people are probably going to be happy for you to get the rep for their contributions, and in part because we don't tend to deal with situations so large they're beyond one person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some caveats &amp;amp; don't-use-CW-for-this notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expect CW answers to be held to the same standard as regular answers. They're not a waiver of our rules and quality standards. (Voters will use their discretion and judgement.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;CW may sometimes assist with collaboration, but don't expect it to make collaboration spontaneously happen. You may still need to do 90% or more of the work yourself, and your workload may be no different to a non-CW answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People may still opt to post new answers in an attempt to beat your CW answer, even if they could collaborate with your answer. Expect this to happen sometimes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The TLDR summary:&lt;/strong&gt; You almost certainly will never need to make a Community Wiki answers. Don't use it. If you think you may need it, you probably don't. If you're dead certain it's definitely solving a visible problem, use it, but you might like to check with us first, because you still probably don't need it (or it's not going to &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; solve that problem).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-10-09T14:48:06.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6528" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6529" CreationDate="2016-10-12T14:46:34.307" Score="2" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've left a comment to this question:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89039/how-to-deal-with-players-rejecting-the-question-premise&quot;&gt;How to deal with players rejecting the question premise&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question had zero comments at the moment. Now it has zero comments as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was my comment deleted? Were all comments deleted? By whom and why? How can I know if my comment was inappropriate, in order to prevent making bad comments in the future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any kind of notification mechanism to let me know when my comments are deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-10-12T17:24:11.610" Title="Is there any kind of notification mechanism to let me know when my comments are deleted?" Tags="|support|comments|moderation|notifications|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6529" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6528" CreationDate="2016-10-12T14:57:34.530" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I flagged your comment as too chatty, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;a moderator&lt;/a&gt; followed up by deleting it. From my memory and yours, your comment was (quotes included):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Have you stopped beating your wife?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The wife-beating bit isn't important; you were chiming in with something character-building related. It could've been &quot;Have you stopped taking your vitamins?&quot; or something else dealing with a relatively harmless topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately comments on main site are primarily for one of two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;requesting clarification&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;suggesting an improvement&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was neither. At its simplest you were just chiming in with some kind of question-prompt idea, one could also surmise you might have been trying to hint at a point (maybe &quot;there's some questions people would of course rather reject&quot;?) but you never said that point, and comments aren't the place for making a point &amp;mdash; answers are, so long as you're also answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was a chatty comment that didn't add much and didn't do what comments are supposed to do, and had no reason to not be deleted, so I flagged it, and it got deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no notification mechanism for your comments getting deleted. Comment deletion doesn't matter enough to get notifications about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-10-12T15:02:44.127" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6528" CreationDate="2016-10-12T16:25:56.923" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The simple answer to the question is &quot;No.&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't a feature to indicate comments being deleted.  I doubt SE/SO will want to spend the time and effort on that tool since comments are not what is important: the questions and answers are. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But My Comments Are Precious&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Full disclaimer: I have as much pride in authorship as anyone, and during my early interactions on this SE I put too much value on comments.  I had to adapt). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Each of us makes comments for a variety of reasons.  I have found by&#xA;experience that the following attitude is the one to take: &lt;em&gt;expect&#xA;comments to be deleted, and be surprised when they are not&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An associated good attitude to take: once someone acts on a comment of yours either delete it yourself, move to chat, or expect&#xA;it to eventually go away.  &lt;strong&gt;The whole aim of comments is to improve&#xA;questions and answers&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A &quot;model citizen&quot; way to approach comments, along with the two&#xA;above: if you find comments that are too chatty or not constructive,&#xA;flag them for clean up.  Your mods now and again perform janitorial&#xA;services. (Term of phrase shamelessly stolen from SSD).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2016-10-12T17:24:11.610" LastActivityDate="2016-10-12T17:24:11.610" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6531" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-12T22:51:06.763" Score="12" ViewCount="330" Body="&lt;p&gt;Anecdotally, I've seen a couple times that it's very easy to tag something with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars&lt;/a&gt; thinking it's a substitute for the nonexistent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ffg-star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ffg-star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ffg-star-wars&lt;/a&gt; (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5999/should-there-be-a-parent-tag-for-the-ffg-star-wars-games&quot;&gt;Should there be a &amp;#39;Parent tag&amp;#39; for the FFG Star Wars games?&lt;/a&gt;) or other specific game tags, so it seems like there's at least one con to leaving it around. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So what are the pros?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several questions are using it specifically to talk about the setting... but they're either world-building or game-rec questions that have been closed. I was figuring there would be questions asking about how to handle certain Star Wars-y things in an RPG context that are setting-specific but system-agnostic, but there seem to be fewer than I expected:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26844/droid-hacking-in-star-wars&quot;&gt;Droid hacking in Star Wars?&lt;/a&gt; The part of this question that's not better answered by scifi.se seems pretty low quality to me. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15571/how-to-play-a-character-that-has-an-alien-mindset-and-thought-process&quot;&gt;How to play a character that has an alien mindset and thought process?&lt;/a&gt; This is solid - the question and answer are both more specific to Star Wars than the title would suggest. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7960/how-many-people-does-it-take-to-steal-a-star-destroyer&quot;&gt;How many people does it take to steal a Star Destroyer?&lt;/a&gt; is a good question with an amazing answer, but better suited to sff.se - there's really nothing RPG-specific there. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6026/who-took-the-star-wars-rpg-license-over-from-wotc-in-2011&quot;&gt;Who took the Star Wars RPG license over from WotC in 2011?&lt;/a&gt; is a fair question, but not likely to be what someone is searching for in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The best use of this tag I can think of would be a question like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88231/how-to-embed-a-force-user-w-metaphysical-powers-into-a-technical-party/88239&quot;&gt;How to embed a Force user (w/ metaphysical powers) into a technical party?&lt;/a&gt;, but that one's been closed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just about all the rest are rules questions so specific to particular game systems that it's tough to see how they would be useful outside the systems in question, which they're already tagged with (or should be). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do people think? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-26T01:08:11.103" LastActivityDate="2022-02-26T01:08:11.103" Title="Should we throw [star-wars] out the airlock?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|game-systems|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6531" CreationDate="2016-10-12T23:48:46.593" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, we don't need to jettison that tag. It's a setting and a topic people ask about; there's no reason to get rid of it. I could very reasonably go ask a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/stunts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;stunts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;stunts&lt;/a&gt; question tomorrow about emulating jedi mind tricks in a Fate stunt in a custom Star Wars game. It does need some housekeeping though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've brought up the topicality of a few questions, so I'll go through those too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26844/droid-hacking-in-star-wars&quot;&gt;Droid hacking in Star Wars?&lt;/a&gt;: I've voted to close this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26844/droid-hacking-in-star-wars#comment202655_26844&quot;&gt;as too broad&lt;/a&gt;. (And it's closed now.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15571/how-to-play-a-character-that-has-an-alien-mindset-and-thought-process&quot;&gt;How to play a character that has an alien mindset and thought process?&lt;/a&gt;: Totally solid. I agree with you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7960/how-many-people-does-it-take-to-steal-a-star-destroyer&quot;&gt;How many people does it take to steal a Star Destroyer?&lt;/a&gt; is notably asked within the framework of one &lt;em&gt;West End Game's Star Wars RPG&lt;/em&gt;, which we should have a tag for (and apparently don't). By our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1609/1204&quot;&gt;campaign research rules&lt;/a&gt; this whole question's fine: the question's inherently tied up with a bunch of players in an RPG, and the accepted answer goes into game advice &lt;em&gt;as well as&lt;/em&gt; actual fictional universe lore insofar as its author needs to. That author is Brian Ballsun-Stanton, and he has not been one to shy away from essay-length answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/51275/1204&quot;&gt;when given the chance&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6026/who-took-the-star-wars-rpg-license-over-from-wotc-in-2011&quot;&gt;Who took the Star Wars RPG license over from WotC in 2011?&lt;/a&gt;: Fair on topic question. It's also about Star Wars. But it could probably do with a game-specific tag. (Boy, am I counting &lt;em&gt;three&lt;/em&gt; different Star Wars TTRPG publishers now..? West End, Fantasy Flight, and WotC?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Summary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We're missing some tags for specific Star Wars games, maybe.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Star Wars as a tag has nothing wrong with it, can be used healthily, and we might as well leave the Star Wars stuff tagged as such.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say we let it die of natural causes (tag cleanup mechanisms) if we wind up without any questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars&lt;/a&gt; at some point, but it doesn't seem likely that'll happen, given we have a few of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-10-13T10:14:21.047" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6533" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6534" CreationDate="2016-10-16T03:16:41.427" Score="62" ViewCount="7151" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are situations, when you know &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; that is related to the question, but it's too insubstantial to be a proper answer. For example, let's imagine a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In which edition of game X dwarves are allowed to play as mages?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, let's say that I know a bit of game X, but I haven't played in a while and I know that in editions 1 and 2, there were no dwarven mages. I do a bit of search over the internet but can't find much, and since the question still has no answer, I put a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure that they are not allowed in editions 1 and 2, so it had to be in 3rd or higher&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; not enough to make a good answer, but at least it is useful information. Yet, I've noticed that such comments are getting moderated with &amp;quot;do not answer in comments!&amp;quot; messages from the mods. I'm just curious why? Isn't providing a bit of relevant information better than not providing anything at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is not in regard to any question in particular, but I've noticed this weird trend in RPG.SE that is not present in other SE pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15881" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2023-11-06T21:48:02.663" LastActivityDate="2023-11-06T21:48:02.663" Title="Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?" Tags="|support|faq|answers|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6534" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6533" CreationDate="2016-10-16T04:05:30.743" Score="52" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You should not answer in comments.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not partial answers, not full answers.  Not &amp;quot;leads on&amp;quot; an answer.  Not &amp;quot;I would answer but I'm tired/just woke up/am drunk so I'll just say this...&amp;quot; Not answers that you think aren’t good enough to post as answers. Not little helpful tips, not helpful suggestions, not useful anecdotes. These will be deleted. Answer in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if your answer isn’t even good enough for &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; to want to put it in an answer post, just don’t post it at all then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering in comments does the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It bypasses question closure. They're closed for a reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It provides an answer that can't be marked as an answer for future people's knowledge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It contributes to long comment debates as you can comment on an answer, but it's unclear what you're commenting on in a comment thread.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is &amp;quot;cheating&amp;quot; by locking your answer to the top. Accepted answers or answers with higher scores should go to the top to indicate their quality. Bypassing that by sticking your answer in a comment on the question is unacceptable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It bypasses &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; our quality control mechanisms: we can't downvote your &amp;quot;answer&amp;quot;, edit it, or comment on it to request clarification or improvements. Answers also bump a question to the top so that people will scrutinize the answer; comments don't do this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It gets in the way of people who are busy using comments correctly to improve the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long and short of it is, every part of how the site functions, all of which have lengthy justification as being part of the process of SE - rep, answers, accepts, edits, votes, etc. - is obviated by using comments for answers.  So every good goal of all that functionality is nullified by this practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, &amp;quot;but the hapless questioner could use that info!&amp;quot; In nearly all cases, someone posts the same information in a much more comprehensive answer.  Or take the time yourself to write a real answer.  We don't like crappy questions or crappy answers, and we'd rather not have the Q or A than to have one that doesn't meet site quality (hence closes/deletes, part of the standard SE functionality). If you don't care enough to write a real answer: don't. The likelihood that you're the only person in the world or on the site that knows that bit of info is very small.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While users are welcome to steal the info in the comments to generate answers of their own, that will not slow the pace of dealing with the answers-in-comments via flagging and deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-01-26T18:16:12.173" LastActivityDate="2023-01-26T18:16:12.173" CommentCount="29" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6535" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6533" CreationDate="2016-10-16T04:20:24.777" Score="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll step in and provide some background here -- the reason why you see things that resemble &quot;partial answers&quot; in other Stacks is because &lt;em&gt;troubleshooting is an iterative process&lt;/em&gt;.  &quot;Try turning it off and on again&quot; is &lt;em&gt;not an answer&lt;/em&gt; -- yet it may not be possible for &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; to answer the question well without the querent being guided through troubleshooting steps in the comments first, some of which may resemble speculative &quot;answers&quot; to the uninitiated.  This is an OK use of the comment system in context -- the commentator is helping the querent improve the question at that point, and speculative, &quot;throw it at the wall and see if it sticks&quot; answers are pretty much low quality by definition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the RPG.SE space, by and large, though, &lt;em&gt;that's not true&lt;/em&gt; -- we don't deal with the type of technical-troubleshooting questions that necessitate this iterative behavior much at all!  Since we don't need to accommodate these answer-bits-in-comments, we don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="16044" LastEditDate="2016-10-16T04:34:48.843" LastActivityDate="2016-10-16T04:34:48.843" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6536" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-17T16:00:29.673" Score="17" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89210/is-a-ruling-automatically-also-a-houserule&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; (which is really more about semantics) added the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rulings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rulings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rulings&lt;/a&gt; tag, and the author of that question is also the person who added the description to the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally feel that this tag is &lt;strong&gt;far&lt;/strong&gt; too generic to be kept as-is; probably at least one third of the questions on this site are about rulings as defined in the tag description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; was getting put on just about every question without actually telling you anything useful about the question? The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rulings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rulings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rulings&lt;/a&gt; tag is just asking to have that happen again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we keep the tag in its current state? Modify to make it more useful? Just get rid of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we seem to have consensus that the tag is not appropriate, I have removed it from the one question it was on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T14:56:51.920" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T14:56:51.920" Title="Do we really need [rulings]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6537" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6538" CreationDate="2016-10-17T17:36:07.850" Score="23" ViewCount="382" Body="&lt;p&gt;When people ask, answer, or comment, why must they keep using &quot;Emphasis mine&quot;? The section is bolded or otherwise emphasized so I feel that the statement is completely wasted. Am I missing some reason why it is used so often?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23058" LastActivityDate="2020-03-09T12:38:12.427" Title="Why do people use &quot;Emphasis mine&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|terminology|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6537" CreationDate="2016-10-17T18:01:36.410" Score="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;We say “emphasis mine” alongside a quoted passage where some part of the original text has been bolded/italicised, in order to indicate that the emphasis is not found in the original, but was in fact added by us. It's shorthand for “I added the emphasis here myself”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do this because emphasis in different places can change the meaning of writing, so it's important to note that any meaning read into the choice of emphasis is just part of us trying to highlight something, not some meaning that should be read into the original writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-03-09T12:38:12.427" LastActivityDate="2020-03-09T12:38:12.427" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6539" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6537" CreationDate="2016-10-17T18:02:16.627" Score="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a common English writing convention. “Emphasis mine” means that the emphasis was added by the person using the quotation. This is as opposed to “emphasis original”, which is used to indicate that the emphasis is part of the original quote, not added by the later quote-user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like bracketing changes, inserting ellipses, and using &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;sic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, indicating who is responsible for the emphasis in a quotation is a way of preserving the integrity of the original quote and establishing the bounds of the accuracy of the quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-10-17T23:02:17.190" LastActivityDate="2016-10-17T23:02:17.190" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6540" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-17T19:18:39.840" Score="5" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay, bear with me for a moment (please don't use a literal bear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are a somewhat big community, with lots and lots of experienced gamemasters and players. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also kinda know each other by our answers, comments and such. We know that, on average, the RPG.SE user is somewhat of a nice guy most of the time, at least, when compared to other people from other communities out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it got me thinking - We don't really &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; a blog, but it would be nice to have a &quot;lobby&quot; of sorts to organize and schedule games &lt;em&gt;within&lt;/em&gt; this community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do any of you have an interest in doing something like this? Or is this just an stupid idea? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2016-10-17T22:32:56.077" Title="RPG.Exchange Virtual Tabletop (or almost that)" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6540" CreationDate="2016-10-17T20:41:44.707" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a good idea &amp;mdash; and several of us have been using &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; for this purpose already:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;BESW used it to organise a series of RPG Stackizen Fate Accelerated games back when Fate Core/Accelerated were being playtested, based on the Enchanted Forest Chronicles.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Grubermensch ran &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=32800294#32800294&quot;&gt;a D&amp;amp;D 5e campaign&lt;/a&gt; connected to the Stack Chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are several users such as Nitsua60, BESW, and Shalvenay presently running a Dungeon World game on an external service, who organised it largely from here initially.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know of a convenient way to get in touch with users who don't already use chat though, other than leaving comments inviting them to chat. (Unless we use Meta sometimes to announce impending games open to community members..? IIRC some Stack sites have done stuff kinda like that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-10-17T22:32:56.077" LastActivityDate="2016-10-17T22:32:56.077" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6542" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6543" CreationDate="2016-10-18T14:33:22.867" Score="11" ViewCount="326" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89254/23970&quot;&gt;How many level 20 PCs with Tiamat (CR 30) on their side would treat Asmodeus (CR 40) as a Hard encounter?&lt;/a&gt; reproduces the stat block for Tiamat in its entirety. That struck me as reproducing rather more copyrighted material than is necessary, so I hid it in an HTML comment and left a (mainsite) comment to the effect. (Revision 5)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been brought back out into the open. I don't want to start an edit war, but I think something like &quot;I'm using Tiamat's stats from &lt;em&gt;Rise of Tiamat&lt;/em&gt;&quot; would give potential answerers enough information to go on without reproducing non-SRD material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should this question post that whole stat block?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-10-19T10:47:27.850" Title="Should we be including a whole copyrighted stat block?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6542" CreationDate="2016-10-18T14:41:29.983" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;No we shouldn't. It doesn't look like the restoration was deliberate though, but instead just an edit conflict while the OP was only trying to add a new paragraph. (I've noticed the automatic edit conflict detection doesn't seem to be as sensitive as it used to be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've re-removed the image and added a note for where they are taking the stats from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-10-18T14:41:29.983" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6544" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6545" CreationDate="2016-10-19T10:13:09.113" Score="5" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I wanted to ask about whether a homebrew item is fair or overpowered, or even underpowered. However, I'm not entirely sure if those sorts of questions fit the guidelines of the site, so I chose not to post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would be the best place to send someone to get that kind of question answered? Do we have any standard &quot;go to site XYZ.com&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26390" LastActivityDate="2016-10-19T12:25:33.663" Title="Where Can We Ask &quot;Is This Item/Spell/Ability Fair&quot; Questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6544" CreationDate="2016-10-19T10:16:31.653" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;These types of question are difficult to phrase in a way that fits with this site, but it is not impossible as far as I am concerned. The key is being able to define 'fair', 'overpowered' or 'underpowered' clearly enough so that the question is very specific and there can be a definite 'correct' answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2016-10-19T10:16:31.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6544" CreationDate="2016-10-19T12:25:33.663" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our site has guidance for how to ask balance questions. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4976/what-are-the-standards-for-balance-questions&quot;&gt;What are the standards for balance questions?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;Also consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/22190/140&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/22190/140&lt;/a&gt; on the main site about how we define &quot;Overpowered.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can ask item balance questions here as long as you're careful to do it with quality guidelines in mind and ask for Good Subjective answers.  Don't just toss out an item and say &quot;is it balanced.&quot; And hypothetical questions don't work well, maybe get some actual play in and have a real problem first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And don't ask &quot;fair,&quot; that's opinion bait.  &quot;Balanced&quot; is OK and &quot;analysis of a specific aspect of it&quot; even better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-10-19T12:25:33.663" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6547" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6548" CreationDate="2016-10-20T02:31:15.240" Score="4" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;A question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13618/randomly-generating-weather-for-a-sandbox-campaign&quot;&gt;asked years ago&lt;/a&gt;, was voted closed as off topic by the community.  It is a shopping question, and all shopping questions no matter how good or bad were &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;deemed off-topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was reopened by the moderator who deemed all shopping questions off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What gives?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I genuinely want to know the difference between an acceptable shopping question and an unacceptable one; given the foreknowledge that there is an 'acceptable' shopping question, I still would have voted to close that one.  I am rather confused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-10-20T13:20:14.430" Title="Why is this question not off topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6547" CreationDate="2016-10-20T03:09:39.543" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mxy explains in a comment on that question quite clearly what the distinction is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] it asks for a method [...], as opposed to asking for a specific product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes it not a shopping question. It's not an &quot;acceptable shopping question,&quot; it's &quot;the 'good form' of &lt;strong&gt;what would otherwise be&lt;/strong&gt; a shopping question.&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6537/4398&quot;&gt;emphasis mine&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's as simple as that, and a basic premise of good Stack questions everywhere: we should describe the problem and ask &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to solve it; we shouldn't decide ahead of time the kind of thing (like a system or app) we expect will solve the problem and ask &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; within that category we should use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more specific guidance on how to ask for help with a problem in a non-shopping way, check out last year's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5787/4398&quot;&gt;&quot;I want to ask for recommendations, but that's off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-10-20T13:20:14.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6549" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6550" CreationDate="2016-10-20T09:48:53.727" Score="8" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm asking because of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89365/23064&quot;&gt;How do I depower Magic items that are op without ruining the immersion&lt;/a&gt; tagged: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the help of Miniman, we commented a related question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67284/23064&quot;&gt;What can I do when I accidentally gave out an overpowered item?&lt;/a&gt; tagged: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/treasure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;treasure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;treasure&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it's not an exact duplicate but it is really really similar and the answers there could benefit the newer question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a potential answerer, and seeing the related question and the great answers there, I feel discouraged to write an answer that's already covered in the older question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the correct etiquette in this situation?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-10-20T12:21:52.403" Title="What is the site's policy on cross-tag possible duplicate questions?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6549" CreationDate="2016-10-20T10:04:35.273" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This comes down to whether or not the system really makes a difference to the content of answers to the new question. It may be that there are 5e specific mechanics that are applicable to the situation described in the question. If there are then the new question is not a duplicate. However, if there are no 5e specific information then the newer question is probably a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way this is decided is by the system experts who might answer the question, and this comes down to the vote to close process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2016-10-20T10:04:35.273" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6549" CreationDate="2016-10-20T12:21:52.403" Score="6" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If they are true dupes vote to close, but usually they're not.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Link the related question in a comment, as you have.  We don't delete those comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Go participate in the other question yourself, which will bump it onto the front page, and then others will too.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bounty that other question or perform other activities to bring attention to a question in general&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That's it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-10-20T12:21:52.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6552" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6553" CreationDate="2016-10-21T02:07:16.150" Score="5" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was linking to the tour page as I usually do in Markdown (square brackets followed by parentheses) when I noticed that typing &quot;[tour]&quot; was linking to the tour page by itself and the link in parentheses was just being displayed as plain text. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a recent addition to the site, or have I just been oblivious to it all this time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30420" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-07T21:45:17.150" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T21:45:17.150" Title="How long has [tour] automatically linked to the tour page?" Tags="|discussion|tour|magic-links|markdown|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6552" CreationDate="2016-10-21T10:51:38.793" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, comment shortcuts have been around since basically forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The [tour] link got added sometime soon before &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6343/1204&quot;&gt;June 6, 2014&lt;/a&gt; (officially confirmed on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/228303/152515&quot;&gt;June 11&lt;/a&gt;&amp;dagger;), a short while after our About page instead became a Tour, and references to it got renamed accordingly over the next few months. Before then, however, we used [about] to refer to the same page, so it's not so much a new link as a new name for an old link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like TuggyNE and Nitsua60 posted in comments &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#comment-formatting&quot;&gt;there's a bunch of post shortcuts like this&lt;/a&gt;, including one to every Stack Exchange site (our shortcut is [rpg.se]).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;dagger; &lt;sub&gt;BESW reported this being implemented a whole week before the staff did. Upcoming, a new meta on whether BESW is a time traveler.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-10-21T10:51:38.793" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6554" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-21T16:03:33.963" Score="6" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;p&gt;As D&amp;amp;D Next and eventually 5e were coming out there was a discussion about whether or not questions from the playtest should be tagged separately from questions about the edition upon its release (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3597/how-should-we-tag-the-next-edition-of-dd&quot;&gt;How should we tag the &amp;quot;next&amp;quot; edition of D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;).  The winning answer and policy we went with was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3598/3529&quot;&gt;Magician's answer&lt;/a&gt; to just transition &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym and let questions be updated to reflect the published released rules of D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For general questions I agree with this, however I have a few, and have seen a few other questions that are specifically asking about playtest rules or adventures written for D&amp;amp;D Next playtest versions (such as Dead in Thay, Ghosts of Dragonspear castle), where this seems less applicable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My own question asking about creating characters above level 1 for a Dead in Thay game (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/40749/3529&quot;&gt;Does D&amp;amp;D Next or Dead in Thay have rules for equipping new PCs above level 1?&lt;/a&gt;) just elicited &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/89364/3529&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; referencing the DMG despite it stating in the title and body of the question that this was a question about D&amp;amp;D Next rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should D&amp;amp;D Next have its own tag to prevent answers like this from popping on on playtest specific questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-11-07T15:15:35.460" Title="Revisiting whether D&amp;D Next needs its own separate tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6555" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6554" CreationDate="2016-10-21T16:08:37.150" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  Unless someone is really trying to run a game using playtest rules only, these questions are basically dead. There are very few dnd-next questions and the rate of people doing something with them is so low that it does not merit any kind of active policy response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone mis-chimes in on a question - comment and downvote just like you would in any situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want to use tags to describe every iteration of every rules system in the world, we use words in the question to do that.  Just like with 4e we just had 4e, not early 4e and post-Essentials 4e. Someone didn't read the words?  OK.  That doesn't bode well for them reading the tags either.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-10-22T12:52:10.000" LastActivityDate="2016-10-22T12:52:10.000" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6554" CreationDate="2016-10-21T16:43:53.003" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we could do with distinctly tagging some of the D&amp;amp;D Next Playtest questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are lots of questions which still apply to D&amp;amp;D 5e, and the idea is/was just to correct them with the finalised 5e rules, which seems to have been a pretty good idea for most of our playtest questions. For example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26254/how-does-bull-rushing-work-in-dd-next&quot;&gt;How does bull rushing work in D&amp;amp;D Next?&lt;/a&gt; was asked and answered in June within the &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot; playtest framework, and answered again in August after the full D&amp;amp;D 5e rules were released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there are also questions that were &lt;em&gt;very specifically&lt;/em&gt; about playtest material. They have no relevance to  D&amp;amp;D 5e and won't get updated for it, and don't make too much sense being tagged for 5e. These questions ought to be tagged with something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; (the &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot; name is still used synonymously with &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&quot; in some places, so it's better to distinguish it as a playtest). Beside your question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/40749/3529&quot;&gt;Does D&amp;amp;D Next or Dead in Thay have rules for equipping new PCs above level 1?&lt;/a&gt;), some examples that I can identify are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27121/where-does-the-damage-bonus-for-the-level-1-pre-gen-characters-come-from&quot;&gt;Where does the damage bonus for the level 1 pre-gen characters come from?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26951/do-any-of-the-pre-gens-have-daily-powers&quot;&gt;Do any of the pre-gens have daily powers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14655/how-does-monster-hiding-work-when-some-players-detect-them-and-some-dont&quot;&gt;How does monster hiding work when some players detect them and some don&amp;#39;t?&lt;/a&gt; (notably, asked in the context of a then-tiny playtest packet)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22932/how-are-dual-wielding-penalties-applied&quot;&gt;How are dual-wielding penalties applied?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/40792/does-dd-next-have-rules-for-gaining-experience-from-gold&quot;&gt;Does D&amp;amp;D Next have rules for gaining experience from gold?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28925/dnd-next-final-playtest-finesse-ability-modifier-damage&quot;&gt;DnD Next (Final Playtest) Finesse + Ability Modifier Damage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41862/what-are-the-major-differences-between-the-final-playtest-package-and-dd-5e-bas&quot;&gt;What are the major differences between the final playtest package and D&amp;amp;D 5e Basic?&lt;/a&gt; would be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Plus questions that cover material that no longer exists in D&amp;amp;D 5e, which I don't have the materials to identify.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, sticking coherently with the policy of &quot;tag what's in the question&quot;: questions strictly only about the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest material get tagged as playtest material, questions &quot;upgradeable&quot; to D&amp;amp;D 5e get tagged as such and improved to match the 5e state of affairs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll note that one of these playtest questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22932/how-are-dual-wielding-penalties-applied&quot;&gt;How are dual-wielding penalties applied?&lt;/a&gt;, was locked for historical significance. Doing that and clearly marking all of them as just playtest material is an option that's on the table, but I'm not advocating for doing that in this answer. (They should probably be marked more clearly than a comment if we do this &amp;mdash; something more like a boilerplate post notice at the top in a quote box.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-10-21T16:43:53.003" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="4817" CreationDate="2016-10-22T05:51:12.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would recommend that you use &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;World Building Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; for questions related to building a new world. Questions about designing the world and environment are perfect for that site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your questions are about a specific gaming system (e.g. rules, creatures, and characters), or are about world-building elements unique to roleplaying, then they may be on topic here if they meet all of the other criteria for a good question, as discussd in the other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23886" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:52:23.590" LastActivityDate="2016-10-22T05:51:12.520" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6558" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6559" CreationDate="2016-10-22T05:53:12.227" Score="5" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have an idea of the kind of monster I want my party to face in their next big encounter, but I don't have enough free time to go through the beastiary to find an existing creature that fits the idea I have in my head. I'd like to use an existing creature, or at least use one as a template, rather than invent all the stats myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that this would be a question that might have multiple answers that may be too subjective. I do believe I can phrase the question to invite specific answers, but I want to check that it's OK to try before I post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23886" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-10-22T15:07:40.277" LastActivityDate="2016-10-22T15:07:40.277" Title="Is a question asking for help finding a monster that meets a particular description on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6558" CreationDate="2016-10-22T12:46:34.363" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's on topic, we do &quot;identification&quot; questions, but it runs the risk of being:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closed as too broad - especially if you just want a chassis to build it off, how will it not be &quot;take any of these Large bipedal rock-themed monsters and add a gem-breath attack&quot; or whatever.  If you required an exact match it would avoid this but it also might not get answered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Downvoted as &quot;does not show research effort.&quot; &quot;I don't have time to look in the Bestiary myself&quot; doesn't inspire confidence - this is a community of expert gamers volunteering their time to help others, not to do your &quot;homework&quot; for you when you don't want to be bothered.  Spending time to do a meta post and then a real post here instead of using that effort to go and leaf through the Bestiary seems in poor taste and questionable judgement to myself at least.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are ways to narrow a search down (monster DB on d20pfsrd for example), you might be better served by asking a 'teach me how to fish' question about &quot;how can I narrow down to the kind of monster I want out of all 5 Bestiaries...&quot; (Assuming Pathfinder.  If you're talking about 5e or something with one monster book, see answer 2 above.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-10-22T12:46:34.363" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6560" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6561" CreationDate="2016-10-24T08:33:29.670" Score="3" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted this question&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89258/translation-from-classic-systems-to-complete-home-brew-game-rules&quot;&gt;Which classic ruleset monster description might give information to use for complete home-brew game rules?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;for which I got a very good answer for which I'm happy I asked this question here. Now my question has been closed. I don't know how important that is I just wonder where I did wrong so I don't repeat the same error. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since my question got closed I tryied to figure out what I could have done wrong, I figured that my tag homebrew was wrong since it is only meant for adaptation of existing systems and I changed it to game-design, since my question was about my own rules. However the question was not closed as off topic but as unclear. I got a perfect answer from SevenSidedDie, which couldnt be more on the point, so how can my question be so unclear to be closed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One idea would be that people don't want specific questions about homebrew systems, but then why have tags related to this? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ps: do I need to save a copy of the answer since the whole question might be errased?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25267" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-10-24T15:04:44.063" Title="Closed question as unclear but has good answer" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6560" CreationDate="2016-10-24T09:55:08.343" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, just because somebody puzzled out enough of what you were asking to give a correct answer doesn't mean it's clear to a general audience. One person gave you a good answer; five people voted to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, I suspect (though I can't speak for the voters) that the clarity problem lies in presentation rather than content: your question is buried at the end of your third full paragraph out of more than ten, with nothing to direct attention to it. Not even a question mark. Only a &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; attentive reader (like SevenSidedDie has worked hard to become) would easily figure out what you're asking for. A simple re-working of the format to emphasise your actual dilemma would probably go a long way toward making the question more clear. I like to re-state my question in bold at the end of my own questions, and always make sure the title's on point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second-and-a-half, five votes for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; kind of close reason will get a question closed, but it'll only show the close reason that the majority voted for. Two out of those three might have had a different reason to close it, and if so I hope they chime in on this meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, no, questions are not deleted unless they're egregiously inappropriate. &quot;On hold&quot; or &quot;Closed&quot; just keeps people from answering it until whatever issue has been cleared up--then people will vote to re-open it. A question that stays closed is only deleted if it gets a lot of negative votes and no positive feedback at all or has something seriously wrong like being abusive, or is just spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-10-24T10:09:43.480" LastActivityDate="2016-10-24T10:09:43.480" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6560" CreationDate="2016-10-24T15:04:44.063" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was one of the users who voted to close this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I did so was twofold.  First, I don't think your description gives enough system detail to let us know what kind of scale your monsters are operating on.  I can't tell from your description how or even if monsters scale in power over the course of a campaign, and one of the biggest reasons to use premade monster stat blocks is to make sure the challenges you're building match with your characters' growing abilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, I don't think there's going to be an answer that explains why any specific ruleset will be best that doesn't just boil down to 'I like this system best'.  The fact that the only answer that you have is basically a frame challenge is a bit telling, in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think your question is a good one, I just don't think it fits the SE format.  I think it would fit better in a forum, where you could have a more in-depth discussion while staying in-format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2016-10-24T15:04:44.063" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6563" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-24T21:38:59.933" Score="9" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I answered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/82489/how-can-i-generate-a-lot-of-characters/82490#82490&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question quite some time ago with a link that was useful to the asker at the time, but has since decayed (error 404). At the time, my answer was accepted, but it is now completely useless. Korvin's answer is still valid. I have flagged the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I be able to delete my (now useless) answer, even though at the time it was accepted? Even if flagging it will lead to its deletion, surely that is a waste of moderators' time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am fully aware of the dangers of link-only answers, and was at the time; I merely sought to be of use to the asker with their immediate problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27994" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-12-07T00:51:04.307" LastActivityDate="2020-12-07T00:51:04.307" Title="Why isn't it possible to delete an accepted answer?" Tags="|support|answers|accepted-answer|deleted-answers|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6563" CreationDate="2016-10-24T22:06:36.567" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;For a fairly pragmatic reason: the Stack Exchange software has guards to prevent people from deleting material that's critical to a Q&amp;amp;A site's usefulness. That includes questions that have non-negative scored answers, and accepted answers. Some people, out of dumb reasons or selfish tactics, might seek to delete those later, but doing so does significant damage to our Q&amp;amp;A platform, so it's not on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel something you can't delete &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; needs deletion, just flag it anyway. Moderators can decide what's not worth their time (or what shouldn't be deleted) by declining the flag, and they may give you pointers on what you need to do instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, Zaq found something you can do in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-10-24T22:48:45.213" LastActivityDate="2016-10-24T22:48:45.213" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6565" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6566" CreationDate="2016-10-27T20:10:19.013" Score="4" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6549/what-is-the-sites-policy-on-cross-tag-possible-duplicate-questions?cb=1&quot;&gt;recent&lt;/a&gt; question in the meta addressed whether cross-system questions should ever be combined if the answer to both questions was determined to be the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand (and agree with) the answers posted in response, but it made me wonder what the tagging policy on such a question would be. If I asked &quot;How does {Generic Mechanic that's identical between 3.5 and Pathfinder} work?&quot;* would it be best to tag that question as a 3.5 question, a Pathfinder question, both, or apply no system tag what so ever?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;*Please assume such a question exists and is valid, unless issuing a frame challenge that such questions inherently cannot exist.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26125" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-10-27T20:40:47.603" Title="Cross System Questions and How to Tag Them" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6565" CreationDate="2016-10-27T20:40:12.457" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tag to describe your question's context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're using both 3.5 and Pathfinder, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e+pathfinder&quot;&gt;tag for them both&lt;/a&gt;. If you're not actually using both in your game, only tag with the one you're using.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-10-27T20:40:12.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6565" CreationDate="2016-10-27T20:40:47.603" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is one of the cases where system expertise is necessary to tag correctly. That is, the asker might reasonably believe a mechanic to be identical between editions/systems, but turn out to be mistaken. If so, the question will just need to be retagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, starting out by tagging both systems (and indicating which one is primary in case of conflict) is the way to go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastActivityDate="2016-10-27T20:40:47.603" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6568" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6569" CreationDate="2016-10-28T00:58:26.207" Score="6" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most specifically referencing this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89692/does-a-natural-20-on-an-animal-handling-check-do-anything-special&quot;&gt;Does a natural 20 on an animal handling check do anything special?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stated question is more general than the one asked (and answered) in the post body. In this case, we have a general question, then some context around it, concluded with a different question about the context, not about the general concept. The accepted answer addresses the context as well without touching on the primary topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously it's the asker's prerogative to accept whatever answer they'd like, but the result here could be uninformative or misleading if someone goes looking for an answer to the general topic. Would it be correct to edit the title to reference the specific here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11000" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-10-28T02:37:15.070" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T02:37:15.070" Title="Should we be answering the question, or the question posed in the description?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6568" CreationDate="2016-10-28T02:30:26.763" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually, the specific question.  Titles have to be short and usually don't take into account the details.  In addition, you could submit an edit to the title to add &quot;on a grick&quot; and voila it's all good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general we're interesting in solving the problem the poster has, not artificially generalizing it. So this isn't the place to do that IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T02:30:26.763" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6568" CreationDate="2016-10-28T02:35:54.933" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The post body is the actual question, and the other part is just the title. Questions regularly have their titles adjusted to match the real question in the body, while the reverse (changing the body to match the title) is done only in unusual circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should answer the question — that is to say, the body, not the title. In this case, it would be fine to edit the title to make it more precise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T02:35:54.933" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6571" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6573" CreationDate="2016-10-28T17:20:29.070" Score="5" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is currently a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89435/a-witcher-and-their-apprentice&quot;&gt;question on the board&lt;/a&gt; (with a bounty even) that is asking how to make their game interesting for a specific character combination.   Oddly enough, a similar question from the player side &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89730/is-a-low-con-dex-based-eldritch-knight-viable&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; was put on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I think the question about the witcher and apprentice has merit in a discussion board, (who doesn't want to talk about Remo Williams?) it seems to me that it is also basically a question about &amp;quot;How to have fun in my game&amp;quot;.  Those kinds of questions are generally put on hold for being too subjective, and this one has existed for quite some time, and even had a bounty put on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I would think that the second question here would be more appropriate since it's asking about the efficiency of a specific class in a specific game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I don't want to sound like I&amp;quot;m attacking either poster, just trying to figure out why one was on hold, and the other was not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T18:50:10.447" Title="Question on opinion based posts criteria" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6572" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-10-28T17:23:13.283" Score="21" ViewCount="746" Body="&lt;p&gt;An answer has multiple downvotes but nobody has left a comment explaining what's wrong with the answer or why they downvoted. Why hasn't anyone explained their downvote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T17:32:48.893" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T17:32:48.893" Title="Why is an answer being downvoted without any comments?" Tags="|support|faq|comments|down-votes|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6573" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6571" CreationDate="2016-10-28T17:41:26.807" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89730/is-a-low-con-dex-based-eldritch-knight-viable&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89730/is-a-low-con-dex-based-eldritch-knight-viable&lt;/a&gt; has two problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. Literally asking for opinions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Among other things, the question asks for &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Suggestions for race and fighting style? Am I doing this wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Soliciting suggestions like that is almost always purely a matter of opinion. Given a clear charop goal, suggestions might be primarily objective instead of opinion-based, but (as we see below) clear goals against which recommendations could be objectively measured aren't provided, so this request is purely opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ditto for “Am I doing this wrong?” It's unclear what is even being asked there, but it does seem like it's looking for personal feedback rather than asking something concrete. Clarification is in order there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. Lacking or vague optimisation goals&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other problem is that “viable” is not a meaningful way to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;communicate the question's optimisation goals&lt;/a&gt;. What does it mean? The way RPGers casually toss around the word “viable” doesn't have a clear meaning outside a particular local group or charop board. It's often used because it has a more-or-less understood meaning &lt;em&gt;within&lt;/em&gt; a particular group or online community, but RPG.se contains a broad cross-section of the RPG community and such shorthand doesn't meaningfully communicate the same thing to our every reader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves us falling back on the common meaning, for lack of any other information. Unfortunately, “&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/viable&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;viable&lt;/a&gt;”, in basic dictionary definition terms, means being able to exist on its own or to be possible — as in, &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; possible — and clearly basic ability to create the PC is not what they're asking. Whatever “viable” means to them, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;their optimisation question need to tell us&lt;/a&gt;, but it doesn't. We could guess, but everyone's guess would be different and based on their own opinions about what “viable” &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; means, leading to a mess of primarily-opinion-based disagreement in the answers and votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking for GMing techniques is often more than a matter of opinion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89435/a-witcher-and-their-apprentice&quot;&gt;A witcher and their apprentice…&lt;/a&gt;, is asking how to handle a specific (anticipated, granted) GMing problem related to character skill disparity impacting spotlight time:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;However, I have a massive concern about it: the master Witcher will be clearly much better at everything than his apprentice [but] I want all the players to have equal screen-time and have their characters shine in and of themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the kind of thing that is a matter of art, but also a matter of objective techniques. GMing is not a science, but just as artists can recognise the objective pros and cons of a particular brush technique and recommend its effectiveness for a particular desired aesthetic result in a painting, so can we recognise effective GM techniques and recommend them for handling particular game-running goals and challenges. We have a lot of questions about GMing techniques, and they more-or-less work well in the Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Will there be some element of opinion involved in answering? Yes. But it won't be &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based — answers will be (expected to be) primarily based on real experience, that is provided as evidence to back up and demonstrate that a recommended technique or course of action is effective for the problem in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering from experience can't help the Eldritch Knight question, because we don't know what the asker's standard of “viable” is, so we can't know whether any of our experiences with Eldritch Knights is even relevant to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T18:50:10.447" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6024" CreationDate="2016-10-28T20:52:46.053" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://crafts.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BxVh9.png&quot; alt=&quot;Put some points in crafting!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user32130" LastActivityDate="2016-10-28T20:52:46.053" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6572" CreationDate="2016-10-30T15:20:51.050" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;If someone hasn't explained their downvote, chances are there's nothing much helpful they can say, or their comment would be the kind that historically causes problems. Or, they just haven't gotten around to it yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do leave comments when we can suggest an improvement, provide &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;constructive&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; criticism, or when we can ask for clarification. (Those are in fact the official uses of comments.) Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comment privileges page&lt;/a&gt; elaborates on some cases where one should or shouldn't comment. We can't always leave a comment immediately though &amp;mdash; most of us lead busy lives, and thoughtful comments take some time to compose and write. Some of us may just settle (reasonably) for downvoting the answer, and leave the task of constructive critique to later or to someone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, very often our downvoting reason is just along the lines of &quot;this is incorrect&quot; or &quot;I disagree&quot;, and there's nothing to be gained from posting that. The downvote tooltip (&quot;This answer is not useful&quot;) already expresses our sentiments. Comments with these sentiments usually cause arguments, or long discussions about who's wrong and why, and those get deleted or moved to chat. You, dear reader, may have every desire to remain calm and learn from such criticisms on your post &amp;mdash; but others supporting or against your answer may happily engage in argument, and we don't want that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We encourage that people who simply disagree or find an answer wrong should just &lt;strong&gt;downvote and move on,&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;strong&gt;upvote answers they do agree with,&lt;/strong&gt; and if they have an alternative position, &lt;strong&gt;post their competing position in its own answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange is part of a Q&amp;amp;A network that tries hard to eliminate the discussion and arguments found on forums that bury the useful information, to focus on a core business of cultivating excellent questions and expert answers. We want a high &lt;strong&gt;signal-to-noise ratio&lt;/strong&gt;, and we on this site take seriously the duty of keeping the &quot;noise&quot; portion of that ratio low. Comments are noise, and they're transient and liable to be deleted at any time unless they're doing something very valuable. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/1204&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;, and SevenSidedDie's additional explanation: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6682/1204&quot;&gt;a tidy site is safer from trolls&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T19:51:15.773" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6572" CreationDate="2016-11-02T19:35:56.230" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I know most of you will see this as a rant if I wrote it, so I would like to just offer some ideas and maybe you can craft a non-ranty addition to the existing answer:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE has a community working on a very fixed set of rules. We literally have rulebooks for our hobby. And we believe due to the fact that all of us operate on the same globally valid rulebooks, we must have the same experiences. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Workplace.SE for example is very aware that a programmer in India and a programmer in the US despite both having 10 years job experience as a programmer, have very different experiences and need very different advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackOverflow, while operating under the same premise of globally available rules (programming language), has a very easy option to validate an answer. Just run it through the compiler. It will work or it will not. A final independent arbiter. It even acts as an additional feedback channel. I have thought &quot;man this is so wrong, how can a high-rep user post such BS&quot; multiple times, only to see that my compiler could make sense of it and it actually worked. Learned something new. We are missing this feedback option here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are tempted to think we all must have had the same experiences, because we all operate on the same rules. At the same time we have no way to verify even the existing rules easily. I think this is one reason why we have so many downvotes without comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2016-11-02T19:35:56.230" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6578" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-05T16:09:29.207" Score="0" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a web developer I frequent a lot of Stack Exchange communities and never have I experienced one with such a community of judgement and nitpicking. Some of these exchanges don't even phrase topics as questions, but if you do that here you risk being down voted, or bombarded in the comments criticising your ability to communicate. RPGing is a conceptual topic, but if your answers and questions aren't as literal as possible you risk a flame war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it that this particular community fosters this kind of fickle behaviour, or is it just the luck of the draw of personalities?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I'm really frustrated - it's not fun to engage here when you have to agonize over your wording to avoid confrontation with people who can't see the forest for the trees.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to be a regularly contributing member of this exchange, and I would love to help lift the dark cloud I see over this place. I am open to ideas and suggestions to uplift this community, either personally or as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;PERSONAL EXAMPLE BY POPULAR REQUEST:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently posted a question in regards to a character mentioned in a campaign. I couldn't find him in the book and needed to know what page of the book, or what city I could find him in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wrote out:&#xA;&quot;What city is X in?&quot;&#xA;&quot;Who is X?&quot;&#xA;&quot;Where can I find x?&quot;&#xA;&quot;What page of the book is x's bio on?&quot;&#xA;&quot;Where is X in the book?&quot;&#xA;&quot;Is X in City Y?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I didn't know what question to use because even though an intelligent human being would know what I wanted from all of those questions, I felt like if I didn't ask it the exact right way I would receive criticism instead of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15590" LastEditorUserId="15590" LastEditDate="2016-11-05T16:46:22.840" LastActivityDate="2016-11-06T08:38:07.000" Title="How can we improve this community?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="23" ClosedDate="2016-11-07T19:35:42.387" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6578" CreationDate="2016-11-05T19:43:40.490" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to attempt an answer to this question by challenging the frame:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is there a problem?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You describe a &quot;culture of judgement and nitpicking&quot;. To test this, I decided to look at the three questions at the bottom of the main page at the time of writing (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89928/does-dispel-magic-cast-on-the-caster-of-spiritual-weapon-end-spiritual-weapon&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89976/how-does-the-staggered-condition-work-with-the-unchained-action-economy&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89980/is-mythic-haste-really-one-of-the-best-mythic-spells-ever&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;). I focused on the question, and first few answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first question received no comments, but was edited by a moderator for clarity. The user did not challenge the edit, so I think that it is safe to assume that they were happy with it. Users commented on the accepted answer, asking the answerer for extra information and clarifications. These were added, improving the answer. Answers that did not answer the question (as clarified in the edit) were downvoted, as per SE policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second question was edited by the OP, to add additional detail, then by a moderator to add extra tags. The question received an answer that was accepted. No comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third question was edited by another user for clarity. The accepted answer received a comment asking for additional information, which the answerer duly added, improving the answer. The other answer received no comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Analysis&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this, albeit limited, survey of questions and answers on the SE, I found litte evidence of nitpicking or judgement. What I have noticed is a culture of frequent editing of other's posts, and comments asking for additional information. I do not believe that editing a post to improve it can be deemed &quot;nitpicking&quot;, particularly when such edits have to be approved, and can be rolled back by the OP. Similarly, comments asking for additional information or clarification are useful for both askers and answerers to improve their posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Your Example&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forgive me if I misunderstand you, but it seems that you did not receive &quot;criticism instead of an answer&quot;, but thought that you would if you posted the  question. My advice is to post the question, and see what happens. I have often seen in this meta (although I can't find an example right now), questions along the lines of &quot;Can I ask this question?&quot;. The answer is almost always the same: ask it, and find out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Could we do better?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are certainly areas to improve. For example, the Stack can be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5141/can-we-improve-the-way-we-treat-newcomers&quot;&gt;a bit baffling for new users&lt;/a&gt;. Perhaps we are a little to quick to edit, or comment, but overall I have found this a very welcoming community to be part of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27994" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-11-05T19:43:40.490" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6578" CreationDate="2016-11-06T01:29:41.717" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously no community is perfect and there's always room for progress.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my experience, sustainable improvement follows a pattern of reflection on what's been happening, study of any relevant material, planning a course of action, acting on the plan, and then beginning again by reflecting on what effect the action has had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each Stack site has to go through this cycle on its own, because our subjects and communities are different. This is why RPG.SE &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6514/4398&quot;&gt;enforces the network-wide comment guidelines more strictly&lt;/a&gt; than many other Stacks do, but also spent four years &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;trying to accommodate a type of question which the rest of the network had given up on&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When citizens on RPG.SE ask for clarification and more details in a question, we're &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;optimising for pearls&lt;/a&gt; based on years of experience with RPG questions in the Stack format. The RPG landscape is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/4398&quot;&gt;ridiculously broad&lt;/a&gt;, and even within a single system there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/4398&quot;&gt;great variety&lt;/a&gt; in playstyles, goals, group compositions, and so forth. We regularly see cases where implying shared knowledge or assuming some common experience leads to lots of confusion. What's obvious and old hat to some is totally new and alien to others. This is very different from, say, a programming question which has a pretty strict set of possible variables and solutions which can be independently verified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We frequently have meta discussions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3095/4398&quot;&gt;specific problems we've identified on the site&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6168/4398&quot;&gt;share tools for making the site both friendlier and more efficient&lt;/a&gt;. Currently we're &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6572/4398&quot;&gt;collaborating on a meta FAQ&lt;/a&gt; to help explain RPG.SE's reasons for embracing the network-wide policy of not expecting comments to explain downvotes; it's something that's been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/647/4398&quot;&gt;reviewed&lt;/a&gt; for years, and writing this answer made me realise we need to include &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/27/4398&quot;&gt;this discussion of what voting means&lt;/a&gt;. I may even propose that we tag it as a FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I can't make any specific actionable suggestions to improve the community based on your &quot;dark cloud&quot; metaphor because it's unclear what specific actions you find objectionable. Apparently you're okay with that, and only want suggestions from people who already know what you're talking about; I hope I'm wrong in understanding your statements to mean that. Until you clarify the challenges you think the site is facing, many people will be unable to offer their insight and experience: we can't make useful, actionable plans without first reflecting on the reality of the situation we're hoping to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the intent of your question is to get people to say what they think is wrong, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6090/4398&quot;&gt;we've tried that, it's a mess&lt;/a&gt;. Please, express your concerns so we can face them with a shared understanding of what the problem is or we'll be talking at cross-purposes. What's obvious to you may be obscured and subtle to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-11-06T08:38:07.000" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6582" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6554" CreationDate="2016-11-07T11:15:08.450" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just unwittingly started an &quot;authoritative reference needed&quot; bounty for a question about a typo that appeared only in the D&amp;amp;D 5e playtest, because I thought it was a proper D&amp;amp;D 5e question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35692/spell-dc-saving-throws&quot;&gt;Spell DC Saving Throws&lt;/a&gt;. I was &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/33358070#33358070&quot;&gt;informed just afterwards&lt;/a&gt; it was playtest material. (I raised a flag requesting a bounty refund, and received it &amp;mdash; thank you, moderators.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was not familiar enough with the material to recognise it was only about the playtest &amp;mdash; but I was familiar enough with our system to recognise it lacked citations and needed improvement to meet Stack Exchange quality bars. It had just accrued a new answer from a new user so it arrived on the front page to my notice. Had I known it was a playtest, I would have done nothing. This is a bit frustrating for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My position has changed from a sorta-60%-support &quot;sure, could be good&quot; into more of a 90%-support &quot;yes, please make it clear what these questions are about so that I don't run into situations like this again.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; tag that question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt;, but it appears to be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dnd-5e/synonyms&quot;&gt;synonym&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. I have edited the question with a banner that makes it clear it was a playtest question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Playtest question only:&lt;/strong&gt; This question is about materials associated with the &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot; public playtest that ran through 2012&amp;ndash;2014, and is not about current materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-11-07T15:15:35.460" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6583" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2016-11-08T03:41:59.760" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We Value Quality&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here on RPG.SE, we strive to generally uphold Stack Exchange-wide best practices as the best way to keep a civil, information-rich discussion going in a community - gamers - that is somewhat easily tempted to schism and argument, if every single RPG forum ever is an effective gauge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderation will always turn some people off.  But &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2012/01/the-trouble-with-popularity/&quot;&gt;The Trouble With Popularity&lt;/a&gt; is that it's not necessarily the best thing long term.  We deliberately &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimize for Pearls, Not Sand&lt;/a&gt; and value well crafted questions and good answers over raw traffic or popularity.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean we're dying off - even though people are always &quot;certain&quot; this is impacting the growth of our community, our site traffic is doubling every 2 years, so IMO we're certainly not striking the balance so far over that it drives away most folks. But it will drive away some - and that's OK.  Stack Exchange is not for everyone. There's nothing wrong with wanting to discuss and argue and brainstorm - but there's dozens of forums and Reddit and whatnot out there to do that. We hold to our unique format to provide a unique value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But Also Being Nice&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But of course, we want to be nice to folks (in fact, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; is our entire site code of conduct), and not drive them away unnecessarily. SE has struggled with this dichotomy over time, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2012/08/stack-exchange-is-not-a-forum-the-role-of-niceness-on-a-qa-site/&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange is not a forum: the role of &quot;niceness&quot; on Q&amp;amp;A sites&lt;/a&gt;.  The network even had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2012/07/kicking-off-the-summer-of-love/?cb=1&quot;&gt;&quot;Summer of Love&quot; event&lt;/a&gt; to try to remind folks to be welcoming and nice in addition to (but not in place of) upholding our quality standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta.SE posts like &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/138173/etiquette-for-posting-civil-and-informative-comments/&quot;&gt;Etiquette for posting civil and informative comments&lt;/a&gt; help us understand how to better communicate with new users. On our meta we've tried to refine the FAQ, generate pro forma comments as suggestions for people to use when suggesting changes/putting on hold questions or critiquing answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We still need to vote to close, downvote, etc. as is merited.  But if you have some extra time, please add friendly, detailed comments. Brief comments are often more poorly recieved than no comments, but not everyone has the time to walk a new user through the paces.  If you do, we'd appreciate your help in doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end - everyone should try to be nice and communicate with some extra &quot;How To Say It At Work&quot; flair. But some people will take downvotes, edits, closes, etc. personally and hate our format.  When that happens we have to overcome the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Geek Social Fallacies&lt;/a&gt; and let them go. We don't want everyone.  We want people who will build something that's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; like Yahoo Answers, and &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; like Reddit, and &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; like RPG.net/ENWorld/Dragonsfoot/TheRPGsite. Our site appears to be super healthy - views/users are growing, new questions/answers are steady, so there doesn't appear to be significant hindrance to our mission. Fine tuning to ease in more newbies would, however, always be appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-11-08T13:59:08.893" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2016-11-08T06:59:56.763" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes. We can and we &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; improve the way newcomers are treated.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I value quality information and quality Q&amp;amp;A very highly. But, like always in life, quality comes at a cost. In the case of Stack Exchange models, quality enforced by community and mod policing comes at an &lt;strong&gt;opportunity cost&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically every negative comment/vote a new user gets, however appropriate it might seem to the veterans, will have an impact on that users perception of this SE. And thus, every negative comment will lower the chance of this user writing further questions, answering questions and generally staying active on RPG.SE&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly believe that the RPGSE community takes the &quot;striving to generally uphold Stack Exchange-wide best practices&quot; (to quote @mxyzplk)  quite a bit too far at times. I am active on maybe a dozen different SE sites, and compared to most RPG.SE sometimes feels like a totalitarian police state...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;--&gt; Yes, Q&amp;amp;A best practices compliance might be fabulous around here. But at the same time this is having a big impact on the growth of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel if RPG SE wants to stay active and alive &lt;em&gt;on the long run&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;community growth and development&lt;/strong&gt; must be a stronger focus point. This might also need for some of the quality standards being somewhat lowered, as I feel that these goals can be conflicting, especially when it comes to SE newcomers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Suggestion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest to show a bit of leniency towards new users when it comes to the RPG.SE policies. I'd rather leave a question open, even if it is not 100% optimal and abiding by our rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How about leaving a comment with your suggestions/remarks/... &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; putting the question on old or closing it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying do this all the time, but for new users this could go a long way in making them feel welcome: when you come here from other SEs, you are likely not be accustomed to the strict &lt;em&gt;on-hold&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;close&lt;/em&gt; policies around here and such 'drastic' actions might be seen very negatively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Compare this to using your cars signal-horn: there are societies on earth where this behaviour is very common, expected even, in essentially all traffic situations. But in some other societies, using your horn can be seen as aggressive and an affront.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7425" LastEditorUserId="7425" LastEditDate="2016-11-09T09:47:49.157" LastActivityDate="2016-11-09T09:47:49.157" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6585" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6586" CreationDate="2016-11-08T18:47:16.380" Score="8" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;Background -- I own and have read the Curse of Strahd, and know of some information that exists within the book but cannot for the life of me remember where I read it in the book.  Short of reading the entire book again, I don't know how else I can find what I am looking for. Is it off-topic to ask where I can find this information in the book?  Will my question be downvoted into oblivion for essentially being a &quot;read the book to me&quot; question, despite the fact I have read the book?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T03:45:45.913" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:45:45.913" Title="Is asking a question about the location (pg number, chapter, etc) of content in a specific book on topic?" Tags="|support|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6586" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6585" CreationDate="2016-11-08T18:55:21.900" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is on topic to ask along the lines of &quot;where are the rules/content/etc for this specific thing? I know it's there but can't find it.&quot; We handle this in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will point you to where it is in your book, but we (likely) won't be reproducing it for you unless it'd be within fair use &amp;mdash; that makes it not a &quot;read the book to me&quot; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A recent key example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/84730/1204&quot;&gt;What D&amp;amp;D manual describes this game dragons play?&lt;/a&gt;, where the querent was sure a particular form of game existed in-universe but didn't know the name or where to read about it, and both were provided along with a brief summary of the content being asked about. (This is the &lt;em&gt;Xorvintaal&lt;/em&gt; question, for those who may have seen it before.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll be downvoted if it's totally obvious, like if you ask where the combat rules are in a book with a big old all-caps &quot;COMBAT RULES&quot; entry in the table of contents, but that's normal research-effort basics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:46.013" LastActivityDate="2016-11-08T18:55:21.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6587" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-08T19:38:49.710" Score="9" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a bit of support for the idea of using meta to advertise about games we in the community are running or planning to run. I'd like to ask about whether and how we might do that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last month, Thales asked about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6540/1204&quot;&gt;RPG.Exchange Virtual Tabletop (or almost that)&lt;/a&gt; for organising and scheduling games within our community. Some of us have done this in chat previously, but not everyone is interested in SE chat. I floated the idea we could do that on meta; &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/33251538#33251538&quot; title=&quot;post by doppelgreener&quot;&gt;I posted in chat about it and got some stars&lt;/a&gt;, a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=33270277#33270277&quot; title=&quot;post by Al&quot;&gt;couple&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/33260983#33260983&quot; title=&quot;post by daze&quot;&gt;chatizens&lt;/a&gt; seem enthusiastic. That's not earthshattering demand, but it isn't nothing and seems desired enough to be worth considering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can we use  RPG Meta to organise and advertise for games?&lt;/strong&gt; And if so, &lt;strong&gt;how should we go about that?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like it's not necessarily totally outside our scope. Other sites have used their metas for community events, and I feel like this is reasonably in that vicinity. It's definitely up for discussion though and I'm not comfortable leaping into doing this without some OK from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A point to solidly consider for yourself: if we did this, would you use it, or feel better for it being a thing our community does with each other?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some thoughts that come to mind include using a specific new tag (like &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-games&lt;/a&gt;) for posting about games &lt;em&gt;in questions&lt;/em&gt; if volume is low, and if it becomes large enough, move to having a singular question with ads in answers that gets refreshed every now and then, like how our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-11-10T09:40:58.287" Title="Can and how should we advertise community games on meta?" Tags="|discussion|meta|community|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6587" CreationDate="2016-11-09T00:26:39.157" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta is specifically for discussing site operations, it's not a main site where the rules don't apply.  It's counterintuitive except for site insiders that anything besides site business would be happening here, and it certainly doesn't make use of our format well (the reason it wouldn't be done on the main site either).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe instead start a LFG chat room that can be used for that purpose.  Putting together games is a more transitory activity anyway, and better suited to a more transitory format.  People have enough trouble finding the key rulings on meta without digging through old game formation posts. And those posts are severely time-limited and of interest to only a couple people at a time - just a bad for for our site format.  We shouldn't push any kind of bad-fit content to meta, this is just one example of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-11-09T04:54:24.917" LastActivityDate="2016-11-09T04:54:24.917" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6587" CreationDate="2016-11-09T02:00:00.357" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm one of the chatizens mentioned in the initial question.  I'm very much in favour of having a place on Meta where members of this community can find and organize games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The motivation for this is pretty simple: I find that the members of this community that stick around are generally people that I'd like to play games with.  Currently, the only way to organize such a game is through chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find chat to be a pretty limiting vector for finding a group for two reasons.  First, there is a very small proportion of the site's userbase that uses chat.  I'm fairly certain that there are many RPG.SE users that would be potentially interested in an RPG.SE game, but aren't typically on chat.  The second is how localized a chat message is.  If I post a message in chat saying that I'm interested in starting a game, it's very unlikely that a chatizen is going to see it unless they're actually in the chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moving game ads from chat to meta addresses both issues. A much larger portion of our community reads meta than chat.  In addition, meta questions will occasionally be linked on the main site as Hot Meta Posts, increasing their general-community visibility significantly.  Also, a meta question is much more persistent and easy to find than a chat message, especially since searching through chat is so much more difficult that searching through meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary focus for Meta is to handle general site operations, but it's been used by other stacks as a place to handle various community gatherings.  As an example, Arqade has a community-events tag that they have been using for a while for their bimonthly movie nights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I propose is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As a temporary measure, we allow &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-games&lt;/a&gt; questions on Meta.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would work like our experiment with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; on Main.  We acknowledge that an ad for a community game might not exactly fit the mission statement of Meta, but it's also a really useful tool for our community if used properly.  We would then allow these questions to be on-topic for a fixed length of time, say, six months, and then we re-assess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; tag ended up not being a success in the end, I think it shows that we have the ability to run these sorts of experiments in expanding our ability to serve the needs of our community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we still want to avoid unhelpful or low-quality questions, we would need some additional rules for questions like this to be on-topic.  The intent behind these rules is to ensure that a reasonable community member can look at the question and know whether or not they would be interested in the game before responding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question must state what game system or systems are intended to be used.  Saying &quot;I'd like to run something either in Fate or Dungeon World&quot; is fine, but &quot;I'll run whatever&quot; is too broad.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question must give a brief summary of any important non-system details (like game setting, the software to be used, etc.).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A method of contacting the game-runner.  This doesn't have to be any kind of formal contact info like an email address, but could just be &quot;use @DuckTapeAl to contact me in chat&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A deadline for joining.  There should be a definite cutoff for times when it is appropriate to attempt to join such a game, so that we don't continually get posts on a particular ad, years later.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With such a list of requirements, I think we could have questions like this that have a high quality bar, and can reasonably be used to organize community games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe that this would appreciably add to the issue of clutter on Meta.  I haven't personally run into any issues finding important rulings on Meta, but I don't think that there will be enough posts of this type to make it more difficult to find things here.  Based on the frequency of game ads that I see as a moderately-active chatizen, I would expect roughly one game ad per month to end up on Meta, assuming that more game ads are posted as the idea gains visibility.  I count 23 Meta questions asked in the past month, so I don't think game ads will ever be a significant source of Meta posts.  In addition, it's fairly easy to exclude particular tags in a search with -[tag], or even hide them entirely if you're not interested in seeing them at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that community game ads like this would serve a valuable function to members of our community, while not hindering the normal functions of the Meta site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="3195" LastEditDate="2016-11-09T05:38:03.733" LastActivityDate="2016-11-09T05:38:03.733" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6590" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-09T08:51:33.073" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/90150/2100&quot;&gt;Base off the extended discussion on this question&lt;/a&gt;. I used the word &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/idiot&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;idiot&lt;/a&gt; which as the definition shows is &quot;formal&quot;. I, mistakenly, believed that this would be fine. It apparently was with a large number of upvotes (↑51, ↓4) but several flag were raised that the answer edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Just to be clear: I have no problem whatsoever in the answer being edited and being called out for using the term. None whatsoever. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; has done his job with great professionalism. This is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; about that.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a list of words/verbs that shall not be used? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, should there be one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a non-native speaker, I am sometimes baffled by what some of the members of this site think as offensive. And while offense is generally taken even if it is not intended, I wish to reduce the number of instances where I sound like an insulting cretin&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt;: I can insult myself right? ☺ &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.330" LastActivityDate="2016-11-09T08:51:33.073" Title="Words that shall not be used…" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2016-11-09T09:17:11.180" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6591" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-09T13:12:45.137" Score="10" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote an answer to a question, then after posting I realised that the actual answer I gave was precisely the same as the actual answer already given, so I deleted my answer, and upvoted the earlier one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer that was already there was simpler than mine and I believe had extraneous parts to it: i.e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Definitely check out some of the other answers here, especially ***'s&#xA;  answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe my answer is a better version of the same answer as it seemed more complete and therefore would compete better against other &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; answers, looking at the rules on editing I don't think I should add parts from my answer to the first one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I proceed as I believe adding multiple answers that have the same answer is wrong, but I want to have this answer compete against fuller answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25557" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T21:59:44.203" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T21:59:44.203" Title="How to proceed with an answer that is ultimately the same as a previous answer?" Tags="|discussion|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6591" CreationDate="2016-11-09T13:30:59.523" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general if you think you can write a better version of an existing answer, go for it. The arena floor is open, and &lt;em&gt;Internet Points&amp;reg;&lt;/em&gt; are on the line, there to encourage us to all compete in glorious literary battle to be the most helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer is &lt;em&gt;on some simplistic level&lt;/em&gt; suggesting the same solution as another answer, you may still be able to do a better job of &lt;em&gt;delivering&lt;/em&gt; that solution. You may give the topic a better treatment, give better advice, make your answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;more complete, independent, and thorough&lt;/a&gt;, or it may be your communication style helps the concept &lt;em&gt;click&lt;/em&gt; better for the querent or other readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer is &amp;ldquo;ultimately the same&amp;rdquo; because it &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; pretty much exactly the same in all ways then you should just upvote the previous one. Maybe edit it to improve it a bit if you think there's some small improvements you can make. You're saying you think you can write a &lt;strong&gt;better&lt;/strong&gt; version, so this isn't the case for your situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, make sure the post &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; visibly better. I said &amp;ldquo;in general&amp;rdquo; at the start because there's caveats to look out for lest your efforts backfire into downvotes or not gain recognition:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many users are loath to upvote a post that looks like it's contributing no more than a single previous answer did. But if various answers are only contributing a third of an answer and you provide a full one that handles the topic as well as any of them (preferably better), awesome.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question has &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of answers (like 10, 15+) new answers will not gain much attention or traction. Questions seem to acquire some kind of &amp;ldquo;answer fatigue&amp;rdquo; when they get enough answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.rt.com/uk/361201-ugly-friend-effect-study/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;scientifically demonstrated dating theory&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://pure.royalholloway.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/facial-attractiveness-choices-predicted-by-divisive-normalization(b7f67b5c-31fd-43d6-9f6f-1c5017385fde).html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;research paper&lt;/a&gt;) that if you bring along a second person who looks &lt;em&gt;a lot like you&lt;/em&gt; but &lt;em&gt;not as attractive&lt;/em&gt;, you'll look more attractive than if you're on your own. Make sure the other answer is the ugly friend making your answer look good, and be careful you don't wind up with &lt;em&gt;your answer&lt;/em&gt; being the ugly friend itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2016-11-09T15:55:27.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2016-11-10T22:59:17.200" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a situation I've encountered several times.  It's not quite identical to what you describe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A user posts a question which nobody can answer according to the rules of the site.  Maybe it's asking about a houserule, and we're not allowed to talk about houserules unless we have practical experience of playing with that houserule, which nobody has.  Maybe it's asking for an opinion, and of course any answer would be opinion-based.  Maybe it's asking for a list, and of course any answer would be list-based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;have a good answer&lt;/em&gt; for this user's question.  For instance, last week there was a question about &quot;modern games similar to Heroquest&quot;, and I could probably name six or seven off the top of my head.  Would it be an exhaustive list, such as StackExchange would expect for a high-quality answer to the question?  Heck no.  But would it be enough to make the user happy?  Heck yes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not allowed to post my answer to the user's question.  Maybe I start typing up an answer and the moderators close the question before I can finish it; maybe I don't bother.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I could just post my answer in the comments, y'know?  I wouldn't get any points for it, but at least the user would get an answer.  But a moderator would try to delete my answer before the user could see it, and I don't want to get in a situation where I'm trying to outwit the moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I watch as the question gets closed for being &quot;not suited to StackExchange&quot;.  I imagine the user wandering away frustrated because they didn't get an answer to their question.  I feel pretty frustrated too.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I want to do is be helpful and give answers to users, and sometimes the site really works against me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-- and, I mean, I'm a member of a few other stackexchange sites, and most of them are ghost towns where questions go unanswered and answers go unvoted.  So, whatever the moderators are doing here, I have to concede it's working pretty well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it's -- y'know -- it's really frustrating sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a solution that probably won't happen.  Remove the karma requirement to read chatroom contents (but keep the karma requirement to post in chatrooms).  If someone's question gets closed and is unsalvageable, people could comment: &quot;I wrote you an answer in this chatroom, here's a link to my answer&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2016-11-10T22:59:17.200" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6595" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6596" CreationDate="2016-11-15T18:55:26.900" Score="4" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed recently that a lot of old questions are showing up in the main feed on the site (what you get when you go to rpg.stackexchange.com under 'Top Questions' without applying any filters).  This is, presumably, because people are editing old answers or are answering old questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the Stack algorithm bumping old questions up and making them more visible to users or what?  I keep seeing questions there that I think are new that turn out to be quite old (on the order of years in most cases).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I click 'Questions' on the main site and sort by newest, I get what I would normally expect to see on the main feed (new questions, sorted by their &quot;newness&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, my question is specifically regarding the behavior of the main site feed -- the display of questions on the default rpg.stackexchange.com 'Top Questions' listing, which seems to have a lot of activity from very old questions lately.  It's not a concern or a problem, just wondering if the behavior of the main feed has been modified in some way, because it seems, well, &lt;em&gt;different.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="9399" LastEditDate="2016-11-15T20:25:09.413" LastActivityDate="2016-11-15T20:58:52.950" Title="What's with the recent uptick in old questions being edited and/or answered?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6595" CreationDate="2016-11-15T20:58:52.950" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you run through some examples, the reason for the bumps will be made clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes they are duplicates/related questions to newer questions that get attention that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes they are victims of zealous retagging from when a new tagging scheme for a game system is devised on Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes it's something else, but examples would help.  All these always happen, but as with any other human endeavour there are ebbs and flows.  Also, new questions have been down since early October so these would be more visible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2016-11-15T20:58:52.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6597" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6610" CreationDate="2016-11-17T09:34:13.870" Score="9" ViewCount="165" Body="&lt;p&gt;With Exalted currently in the 3rd edition (since this year), we should make sure that those 2nd/2.5th Edition Questions are marked distinct from those that target 3rd Edition specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, I know of 1 question about 3rd Edition specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90497/artifact-evocation-creation-guidelines&quot;&gt;Artifact &amp;amp; Evocation creation guidelines?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, questions about 2/2.5 are numerous (no reason mentioned means, it is specified to target 2/2.5 in the question). At times, those questions can not be pinned to either variant specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7606/exalted-land-speed-record-build&quot;&gt;Exalted Land Speed Record Build&lt;/a&gt; (references Dreams of first Age, a 2nd Ed Book)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56703/sixth-excellency-and-craft-abilities-is-this-as-awesome-as-i-think-it-is&quot;&gt;Sixth Excellency and Craft abilities- Is this as awesome as I think it is?&lt;/a&gt; (judging by date)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58474/can-the-infallible-messenger-find-an-alchemical-exalt&quot;&gt;Can the Infallible Messenger find an Alchemical Exalt?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41596/specialties-and-weapon-types&quot;&gt;Specialties and weapon types&lt;/a&gt; (references page in Main Book = 2nd Edition Core)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28861/can-a-player-with-harmonious-academic-methodology-train-himself-without-spendi&quot;&gt;Can a player with &amp;quot;Harmonious Academic Methodology&amp;quot; train himself without spending XP?&lt;/a&gt; (2nd ed charm in question)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27335/what-would-this-sorcery-fix-do-for-exalted&quot;&gt;What would this Sorcery Fix do for Exalted?&lt;/a&gt; (presumably 2nd ed by date)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21768/what-does-it-take-for-a-new-dragonblood-character-to-know-sorcery&quot;&gt;What does it take for a new dragonblood character to know sorcery?&lt;/a&gt; (specific about a 2nd ed book)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16264/how-deadly-are-extras-in-exalted-2nd-ed&quot;&gt;How deadly are extras in Exalted 2nd ed.?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15046/how-do-i-make-a-physical-challenge-for-dawn-caste-solar-exalted&quot;&gt;How do I make a physical challenge for Dawn-caste Solar Exalted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19066/what-is-a-challenge-to-a-perfect-character&quot;&gt;What is a challenge to a Perfect character?&lt;/a&gt; (judging by date)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11508/what-systems-use-an-initiative-system-similar-to-exalted-2nd-edition&quot;&gt;What systems use an initiative system similar to Exalted 2nd Edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10923/sorcery-and-occult-excellencies&quot;&gt;Sorcery and Occult Excellencies&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72181/are-any-solar-medicine-charms-effective-against-final-viridescence&quot;&gt;Are any solar medicine charms effective against Final Viridescence?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69452/are-fair-folk-charms-supposed-to-cost-12xp-for-eclipse-caste&quot;&gt;Are Fair Folk charms supposed to cost 12xp for Eclipse caste?&lt;/a&gt; (judging by date &amp;amp; XP cost scales mentioned)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65668/what-is-the-difference-between-being-inside-or-outside-of-fate-from-a-mechanical&quot;&gt;What is the difference between being inside or outside of fate from a mechanical point of view?&lt;/a&gt; (question about mechanics, most likely 2nd Edition, because it was before the release of 3rd)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10738/exalted-stacking-multiple-types-of-armor&quot;&gt;Exalted -- stacking multiple types of armor&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10302/exalted-sidereal-dice-cap&quot;&gt;Exalted - Sidereal Dice Cap&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10130/bonus-dice-and-flurries&quot;&gt;Bonus dice and flurries&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7469/exalted-limit-breaks-how-do-i-get-them-to-occur-more-often&quot;&gt;Exalted Limit Breaks - How do I get them to occur more often?&lt;/a&gt; (Virtues are mentioned, so most likely 2E)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10602/what-is-exalted-paranoia-combat&quot;&gt;What is Exalted Paranoia Combat?&lt;/a&gt; (Judging by date and reference to the Forum, which was the White Wolf Forum back then, now defunct).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7080/does-no-key-the-mushroom-king-appear-in-any-exalted-2nd-ed-sourcebooks&quot;&gt;Does No-Key the Mushroom King appear in any Exalted 2nd Ed Sourcebooks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is even one, that asks about tirst edition!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10613/alternate-locust-crusades&quot;&gt;Alternate Locust Crusades&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contested/unclear in edition is sometimes a case too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58669/do-alchemical-exalts-need-slots-to-learn-martial-arts&quot;&gt;Do Alchemical Exalts need Slots to learn Martial Arts?&lt;/a&gt; (1E or 2E? more likely 2E)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77762/can-you-cause-harm-through-crush-while-clinching&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77762/can-you-cause-harm-through-crush-while-clinching&lt;/a&gt; (March 2016 - could be based on 2.5, the leak of development/playtest materil of 3E or proper 3E&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7321/rules-modifications-for-exalted-clinches&quot;&gt;Rules modifications for Exalted Clinches&lt;/a&gt; (no clear ref to 1E or 2E, probably 2E)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/929/how-can-a-beginner-gm-deal-with-multitude-of-charms-in-exalted&quot;&gt;How can a beginner GM deal with multitude of charms in Exalted?&lt;/a&gt; (might refer to 1E or 2E, most likely later)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, my proposition is: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt;  for all of the background or version agnostic needs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;for the rule-specific ones:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-1&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-1&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2&lt;/a&gt;  and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-3&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-3&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-3&lt;/a&gt;, depending on edition. This would pick up the scheme of calling it &quot;E1&quot; etc, omitting the edition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;OR: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-1e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2e&lt;/a&gt;  and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-3e&lt;/a&gt;, to better to follow the tagging scheme on the site:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the need for a distinct &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2.5&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2.5e&lt;/a&gt; be there, it should be implemented, but tagging it as exalted 2.5 would have to imply tagging also exalted 2, because the difference between 2 and 2.5 is mainly made by just applying the huge errata document or ignoring it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-24T13:01:51.023" LastActivityDate="2017-11-24T13:01:51.023" Title="How should we revise the tags for the different Exalted editions?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6598" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-17T20:26:04.290" Score="7" ViewCount="262" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recommendations of games that fit desired criteria are off topic at RPG.se for established reasons (mostly: it breaks voting and everyone has an opinion they must add to the list).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Earlier today a new user asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/90530&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/90530&lt;/a&gt;, which was closed for obvious reasons, although the asker didn't quite understand how their question is a recommendation request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wanting to help, another user posted and self-answered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90532/what-is-the-name-of-this-dragon-ball-z-rpg&quot;&gt;What is the name of this Dragon Ball Z RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an obvious gaming of the policy that we don't answer recommendation questions. But does it avoid the problems, and so make it ok? Could it have unintended problems of its own? Is this something we want to see more of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-11-18T22:32:42.613" Title="Can we respond to a closed recommendation question by self-answering another question?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6598" CreationDate="2016-11-17T21:23:46.293" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted the &quot;responsive&quot; question and answer.  I don't think there is harm in it (obviously, or I wouldn't have posted it) but I'm not sure it was the correct course of action.  We probably don't want to promote this kind of activity, but it feels unnecessarily punitive to permanently remove or close the on-topic question that came as a result of the situation.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Were my question to be viewed in a vacuum, it'd be considered on-topic. This is a strange case.  On one hand, most product ID questions will not be self-answered because if you know the product you have no reason to ask the community, and self-answering that sort of question &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; seem, in some ways, like a point-grab.  But then there's a problem.  We can't disallow self-answering (because that goes against the nature of the site), yet we don't want to encourage that type of behavior because what is to stop every Shmoe from self-answering product-identification questions to farm rep?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To directly answer SSD's questions:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This is an obvious gaming of the policy that we don't answer recommendation question. But does it avoid the problems, and so make it ok?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it does avoid the problems of game-rec in this &lt;em&gt;very specific&lt;/em&gt; scenario.  Game-rec is problematic because there is no &quot;best&quot; answer to a &quot;what game should I play if I like X?&quot; question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This probably doesn't work if someone asks, &quot;I like dungeons.  What should I play?&quot;  And I'd be shocked if someone &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; ask this and it resulted in 300 different self-answered questions from people trying to help regarding every different dungeon-based P&amp;amp;P RPG out there.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I Q&amp;amp;A'd as I did because I know of only one licensed DBZ game that exists -- aside from the original print and it's sequel, there is a fan-made update of the same game, and there are probably some open-setting systems that could adapt fairly well.  Other than that, nothing exists. It's a very small edge-case where this type of response even works.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Could it have unintended problems of its own?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think so, given the above.  It's a pretty specific scenario where I knew there could be a single &quot;best&quot; answer to a game-rec/does it exist? type question, and I managed to answer it in a way that isn't off-topic (though it has obviously created some contention here).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is this something we want to see more of?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably not, but again this is a pretty specific case that is not likely to come up again.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My vote (and sure, I'm biased) is to keep the self-answered question (because it is on-topic and doesn't violate site policies) but not promote this type of behavior going forward.  Again, I think it's a pretty specific case without much (if any) harm done, with honest intentions (to help a new user find an answer in an on-topic way), and which resulted in a bit of a kerfuffle.  I don't think there's much opportunity for this type of thing to happen going forward (has it been a problem since game-rec was made off-topic?), but it's too early to tell if this is going to a bigger problem than what it is now.  If we do start seeing more of this type of behavior then we should work as a community to address the problem but as it stands, I see no reason to worry until it becomes a bigger issue.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastActivityDate="2016-11-17T21:23:46.293" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6601" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6598" CreationDate="2016-11-17T21:30:53.633" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;To SSD's points:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does [this Q&amp;amp;A] avoid the problems, and so make it ok?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt;. If nothing else, it's a new approach to an old problem: users want to ask game-rec questions, users want to answer them, and direct game-rec Q&amp;amp;A doesn't work. I'm not crazy about asking a question that's known to be off-topic, so that first step needs reconsideration. But I've got no problem with the self-answered product-ID Q&amp;amp;A, no matter the motivation of OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Could it have unintended problems of its own?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certainly it could. I argue below it might also have some unintended benefits. Still urging a wait-and-see approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is this something we want to see more of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Facially, we've got on-topic questions about non D&amp;amp;D/PF games. That sounds like something that, yes, we generally do want to see more of =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Product identification is on-topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a (little-used) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; tag for this purpose, and by way of full disclosure I'll throw out there: I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/90476/23970&quot;&gt;just asked one of those&lt;/a&gt; yesterday.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;problem&quot; I was having was &lt;em&gt;&quot;people are talking in chat about time travel and that reminded me of something someone--I can't remember who--once said to me about a time-travel game, and my google-fu is on the fritz.&quot;&lt;/em&gt; Small problem, small question posted, small amount of rep earned, and half an hour later an excellent answer came in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case that occasioned this post the &quot;problem&quot; seems to be &lt;em&gt;&quot;I wanted to mention a game that does this, but the question it would have been answered is off-topic.&quot;&lt;/em&gt; It's kind-of a strange one, worth looking at deeper, but not facially off-topic or offensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This case: where are the harms?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The harms done in this case are (IMO) rather small and theoretical:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OP asked a question about something that wasn't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; causing them trouble.&lt;/strong&gt; Thing is, the urge to encourage querents to have actual problems comes from wisdom about the mutability of questions when they're not stemming from an actual problem. That's not a risk here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OP asked a question that, functionally, was just a soapbox to announce to the world the existence of a game.&lt;/strong&gt; And here's the reason I linked my product-ID question from yesterday: I'd encourage you to compare the two. Aside from the self-answer, I wonder what features tell you that mine &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; just an announcement for &lt;em&gt;Time &amp;amp; Temps&lt;/em&gt;? I mean, I say it's not, but do you trust me? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that an &quot;honest&quot; product-ID question and an &quot;announcement&quot; product-ID question are indistinguishable, I can't countenance this being a black mark on either of them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OP provided another user an &quot;answer&quot; to their off-topic game-rec question.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/23970&quot;&gt;Game-rec questions are off-topic&lt;/a&gt; because they cause problems. In this case what we saw was a game-rec question get handled appropriately. It was closed quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again I want to propose a thought experiment: suppose I had read that game-rec question and thought to myself &lt;em&gt;&quot;hey, there was a game I played that would be good for this person, but I can't remember the name. It had oodles of dice and just felt like the show.&quot;&lt;/em&gt; I don't try to answer the off-topic game-rec question, but I do ask a product-ID question. What's wrong with that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If--as I believe--there'd be nothing wrong with that, what's wrong with OP's product-ID question?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OP is gaining rep they &quot;shouldn't&quot; have.&lt;/strong&gt; First of all, OP gets rep when some user upvotes them, and that's always got to be fine. We don't get to dictate how others vote. And product ID questions... there are, like, four of them that got 20 or more votes. Nobody's getting rich off these things.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Finally, the elephant(s) in the room:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This will encourage game-rec &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; An earlier user asked a game-rec question and, after a fashion, got &lt;em&gt;an&lt;/em&gt; answer. Won't this encourage others to ask game-rec questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might. And they'll get closed, quickly. All the problems that game-rec Q&amp;amp;A had are not problems we've seen with product-ID questions. There might be new problems that crop up, but until we see them I think it'd be far too reactionary a response to start judging on-topic questions more harshly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This could encourage more &quot;fake&quot; product-ID questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one's true. There's nothing stopping me from self-answering a dozen product-ID questions to &quot;advertise&quot; some games I like. And that's... not great, but I don't see it as too horrible, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;advertiser gets &quot;unearned&quot; rep but it's not much, and it's only to the extent that another user upvotes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;games off the D&amp;amp;D/PF tree see some sunlight. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1475/23970&quot;&gt;Not exactly a bad thing?&lt;/a&gt; Seriously, if for the rest of time we got one &quot;advertising&quot; product-ID question each day it'd take more than a decade to cover the RPGs currently listed on rpggeek. And these questions would comprise a couple-percent of our question base.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was a little odd. It bears watching to see if it happens a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt;, or if it causes problems. It's too soon to say it's harming anything, and it may even have a silver lining.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-11-17T21:41:44.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6602" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6603" CreationDate="2016-11-17T21:33:37.937" Score="5" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed a blank ad, and clicked on the Stats link to see this: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/6024&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fPJ1J.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotions Ads page Nov 17, 2016, 4:31 PM EST, showing several blank ads&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something seems broken. I note that the Community Promotion Ads meta question is fine, all the images are there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-18T15:09:22.807" LastActivityDate="2018-08-18T15:09:22.807" Title="Community ads broken?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|advertising|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6602" CreationDate="2016-11-17T22:07:56.147" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Argh. This issue popped on a few other sites as well but it's difficult to spot every instance. We're rolling out a fix to clean this up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for bringing this to our attention!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;::high five::&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32444" LastActivityDate="2016-11-17T22:07:56.147" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6604" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6605" CreationDate="2016-11-18T20:14:10.443" Score="6" ViewCount="329" Body="&lt;p&gt;So the general consensus of some of the highest rated users here is that the official Wizards of the Coast FAQ is to be ignored when answering questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60044/what-is-wrong-with-the-dd-3-5-faq&quot;&gt;What is wrong with the D&amp;amp;D 3.5 FAQ?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is hard for me to wrap my head around so I'm asking: at what point is an official source not enough?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9437" OwnerDisplayName="Mr Tumnus" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T19:23:39.800" Title="At what point is an official D&amp;D source unacceptable?" Tags="|discussion|citations|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6605" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6604" CreationDate="2016-11-18T21:42:23.293" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer you linked contains this explanation of the problem with the FAQ:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D 3.5 FAQ inherited the reputation of its predecessor, the “Sage Advice” column in Dragon magazine. [...] The common problem with the Q&amp;amp;A articles, both “Sage Advice” and the FAQ, is that they were written by second parties with no better judgment than a good DM or StackExchange contributor. Yes, Williams and his successors were employees of the game publisher, and hypothetically had inside knowledge, but in practice they mostly worked from the rules and first principles like the rest of us do. Overall, their rulings were decent, but they also published quite a few screamers. As a result, online forums and Usenet groups like rec.games.frp.dnd regarded the Q&amp;amp;A folks as no more reliable than a smart player, and rejected arguments that used “Sage Advice” or the FAQ as authorities on the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is when is an official rules source not enough. But the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e FAQ is not a rules source. It's a source trying to clarify things, just as we are. It also lacks credibility with the community because it's just interpreting rules like anyone else so it has no specific first-hand authority, and it has made terrible judgment calls over time, so it is no better than the effort of anyone else. (Notably, they have no authority or basis on which to declare their word law.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An official source is not enough when that official source has no credibility. The D&amp;amp;D 3.5e FAQ isn't a &quot;rules source&quot; to begin with, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-11-18T22:01:26.573" LastActivityDate="2016-11-18T22:01:26.573" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6604" CreationDate="2016-11-18T22:16:53.243" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, this question is &quot;too broad...&quot; because there's a lot of games and communities of gamers outside the D&amp;amp;D domain and you're asking about the problem of normative textual sourcing in general. But here's the deal somewhat specifically to this situation with some more general philosophy mixed in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It comes down to the community of play around that game (as I point out in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/60191/140&quot;&gt;my answer to that question&lt;/a&gt;). For a variety of reasons a substantial chunk of the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e rules folks out there have decided &quot;no we don't accept the FAQ.&quot; So they don't.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't mean you can't accept the FAQ, or that others don't.  Feel free and use it in your game and here in questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, on a site like this one with votes driven by the community, those super against the FAQ can and do downvote answers that justify themselves based on the FAQ because they don't personally find it useful (even though the OP might).  I don't agree with that, but one of the tenets of SE is &quot;people can vote however they want for any reason they want - we can provide guidance on how to use your votes usefully but in the end users click the button they want to click.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end this is a religious problem. As gaming is distributed, there's no &quot;authoritative source&quot; per se - the company may have a stance, groups of gamers may have a stance, none of it really matters.  The only circumstance in which it matters is in Organized Play events where the controlling group says what rules are normative in that situation. You can &quot;not like&quot; the FAQ but if Living Greyhawk uses it, then you are using the FAQ for that context.  There is no meaningful answer to what textual authority is normative outside the rules of the specific gaming group for any game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a discussion forum so I'll give the bottom line answer from the RPG Stack Exchange official policy perspective - there is no definition of &quot;what's official.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;A source is never unacceptable, it just may pull downvotes from certain users.&lt;/strong&gt; The D&amp;amp;D 3.5e FAQ is not &quot;officially off limits&quot; and you are welcome to use it, with the understanding that there's a group of people who don't accept it as normative. The 3.5e FAQ specifically seems to be one of the &quot;hot-button&quot; topics that cause conflict and mutual downvoting but that's not the case for pretty much any other game, their FAQs, their rules, etc., so the more general case isn't as much of a bother.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do wish voters would be more... discerning in their downvotes. Not liking some of the rulings in the FAQ, or not considering it &quot;letter of the law&quot; normative because the books say &quot;only other books can supersede me&quot; is fine, but discarding the whole thing as &quot;certainly there is no helpful guidance of any sort or peeks into RAI it could provide, I will just downvote any answer wherever I see the word FAQ&quot; is not the level of intellectual engagement we'd like to see here on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I think that's a problem that will fix itself over time, as 3.5e recedes and newer D&amp;amp;D versions are deliberately taking a less legalistic approach to the game, so that arguments of this sort are harder to have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-11-18T22:53:57.150" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6598" CreationDate="2016-11-18T22:26:22.223" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it is not acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This just turns us into a weirdly encrypted discussion forum, where newer questions can be used to sub-rosa answer previous closed questions. The problems with this aren't small and theoretical, they are clearly providing junk/off-topic content on the site. game-IDs are questionable anyway, frankly, (for the same reasons as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6052/are-does-this-type-of-product-exist-questions-acceptable&quot;&gt;Are &amp;quot;Does this type of product exist&amp;quot; questions acceptable?&lt;/a&gt;) but misuse of them (or other questions) to answer off topic questions is not allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The justifications around all this center on &quot;well we want him to get an answer&quot; and &quot;I'm not real happy with game-recs being off topic&quot; - both of which I sympathize with but both of which are still not relevant to how our site operates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go use a forum to be a forum, don't try to squeeze it into our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine this happened once. But please don't start trying to use other questions to answer off-topic questions as a technique to game the site, that is not appropriate and won't be allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-11-18T22:32:42.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6608" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-20T19:22:26.113" Score="4" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90630/target-of-divination-when-magically-altered&quot;&gt;Target of divination when magically altered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was recently closed as &quot;Too Broad.&quot; While a specific question about the way a specific spell works would have allowed me to write a more specific answer, and I left a comment to that effect, I believe that the question was answerable in its current form (and I answered it). If the question was too broad to be answerable, that would necessarily imply that my answer was too broad to be useful - and I don't think that is the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why was this question put on hold?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T21:18:04.880" Title="How is this question about divination too broad?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6609" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6604" CreationDate="2016-11-20T19:23:39.800" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There is no easy way to tell.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D FAQ is generally given short shrift because of the factors given in the question you link, but there is no real way to know that a particular source is considered &quot;unacceptable&quot; on a particular site without knowing that site's community very well.  I asked that question because I had recently cited the D&amp;amp;D FAQ in an answer, and gotten some flak from doing so.  I now know why people don't like that document, and have since stopped using it in answers, but without asking about that specific document, I would never have known.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the situation with the D&amp;amp;D FAQ is pretty much unique to D&amp;amp;D, and D&amp;amp;D 3.5 in specific.  For D&amp;amp;D 5th, tweets from Mike Mearls are considered a rules source, and the GURPS forums take posts from Sean Punch (a senior GURPS writer) as gospel.  You're generally pretty safe in quoting any statements made by employees of an RPG company, or citing documents that company when answering questions here.  If you want to be extra safe, make sure you cite actual rules text as well as supporting information from non-rulebook sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T19:23:39.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6610" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6597" CreationDate="2016-11-20T20:45:21.937" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fibericon mentioned &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=33577628#33577628&quot;&gt;in RPG chat&lt;/a&gt; that &quot;The editions are very different, and somewhat polarizing among players.&quot; He described himself as being &quot;pretty firmly in the 2.5e camp&quot;, which suggests to me that even 2.5e is different from 2e. (If that's inaccurate, dear reader, I suggest you leave an alternative answer! I'm not an Exalted player myself, I'm going by second-hand information.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that in mind and our tagging convention for games with editions, I suggest the tags would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt; for the series, if we need it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-2.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-2.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-2.5e&lt;/a&gt; separately&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted-3e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't tell you which questions are 2e or 2.5e though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-11-20T22:54:24.353" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T22:54:24.353" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6608" CreationDate="2016-11-20T20:50:02.953" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Without an extensive knowledge of the game, the fact that there are not that many spells that could have the desired effect might not be evident.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your current answer anyway builds on the fact that the question talks about finding an object, but you should also consider that it asks about divinations in general. How would a polymorphed animal react to Detect Animals? (...and so on)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T20:50:02.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6612" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6608" CreationDate="2016-11-20T21:18:04.880" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's two questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the first one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happens when you have a distinct item that is easily searched for with divination spells, and that item gets magically changed. How does it being changed affect it as a target of the divination spells?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of this could be a very distinct statue which has been stone shaped into another form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's all about objects. That's totally answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the second one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or someone under a polymorph or even transmutation effect. At what point would the divination spell stop considering it [the creature] as being the same target?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's huge and deserves its own question. That will likely require an answer that demonstrates experience with high-level divination effects as well as form-changing magic and the ins and outs of the various methods of bringing back the dead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chop off that second example, and the question should be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-11-20T21:18:04.880" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6613" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-21T18:31:25.840" Score="0" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90590/what-rules-effectively-model-severely-over-the-top-style-of-powers-combat-and&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90590/what-rules-effectively-model-severely-over-the-top-style-of-powers-combat-and&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is currently marked as a duplicate, but has been determined (post edit) to no longer be a duplicate. How does one remove the duplicate tag and incorrectly linked answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See comments for additional points of confusion regarding the question, namely why the question is being deemed inappropriate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30200" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-11-28T04:38:22.583" Title="question determined to not be a duplicate is still marked duplicate?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6613" CreationDate="2016-11-21T18:59:46.633" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Typically, duplicates are determined by a combination of feedback from the question-asker and the community's agreement or disagreement (as expressed by people casting or declining to cast reopen votes). In this case, the community doesn't appear to agree that it's not a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as the other question doesn't seem to solve your problem, it probably isn't a duplicate. So, I used my discretion and super-vote to reopen it to remove the duplicate link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However again, the question is asking for a solution to a design goal that can be solved in hundreds — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;perhaps thousands&lt;/a&gt; — of different ways, none objectively better than the others. That alone makes it too broad because it makes the voting system non-functional. Additionally, those many solutions can only be expressed by entire complete game systems, making it too broad in another way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question simply isn't going to work effectively in our site's Q&amp;amp;A system. It would be quite at home on a discussion forum though — the question isn't bad, it's just that this site is the wrong tool for the job. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt; for our curated list of RPG discussion sites if you decide to go that route.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-11-28T04:38:22.583" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6615" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-11-30T20:47:01.253" Score="36" ViewCount="484" Body="&lt;p&gt;As foretold in prophecy and by the tales of our surviving elders, the Hatpocalypse is nearly upon us once again. Every year, when the air gets cold and nights get long,&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; hats descend upon the site. Some are merry in their frivolity. Some are terrible to behold. All are earned by the choices we make in the secrecy of our hearts&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt; and may be worn jauntily upon our avatars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The impending Hatpocalypse, also sometimes called &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2016.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Winter Bash&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, will begin &lt;strong&gt;December 19th&lt;/strong&gt; according to the reckoning of the Time of Universal Coordinates, and will mercifully end &lt;strong&gt;January 8th&lt;/strong&gt;. The jolly chaos will be tracked in our situation room at &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2016.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;winterbash2016.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;. There will be leaderboards, to chronicle our fellows' relative descent into millinery. There will be secret hats with secret ways to earn them, known only to the keepers of the Stack but discoverable by those who dare to explore into the unknown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who hate hats will have an aegis to save themselves (but no-one else) from the impending &lt;s&gt;reign&lt;/s&gt; rain of hats: there will be an &lt;kbd&gt;I hate hats&lt;/kbd&gt; button in the Hatpocalypse drop-down menu in the topbar (marked by the Six-Armed Sign of the Hatpocalypse: ❄️), upon which one may click to banish the hats. (But only from their own, veiled sight. For in truth, the hats will still be there, lurking, though these Unwoken Dreamers will continue to use the site in blissful unawareness.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So prepare yourselves! For we go to face our hatted fates with courage. May we survive the jollity unscathed and see the sun rise upon another new year. We will emerge cleansed by hatty fire, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5943/winter-is-coming-to-bring-us-hats&quot;&gt;as we have before&lt;/a&gt;, and be stronger for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Iä! Iä! Hathulhu Fthagn!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;1. Unless you're in Australia,&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; where instead the dropbears' blood runs hotter and claws grow longer.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;2. Or Guam. In Guam it's &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=31999759#31999759&quot;&gt;spaghetti snakes&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;3. Only insofar as our hearts' secrets&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt; are reflected in observable actions on the site.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;4. Secrecy &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thebalance.com/why-are-so-many-competitions-void-in-quebec-896835&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;void in Quebec&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-09T16:22:13.820" Title="As foretold in prophecy, the Hatpocalypse approaches!" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|winterbash-2016|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6616" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-01T10:42:42.963" Score="5" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just had an answer to the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53469/what-can-someone-do-while-forced-to-doff-armor-from-the-heat-metal-spell&quot;&gt;What can someone do while forced to doff armor from the heat metal spell&lt;/a&gt; removed, with the suggestion that it might be better as a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I initially started writing the response as a comment on an answer that had a significantly incorrect part to it. However a comment was not long or detailed enough to have made it clear what I meant. The response appeared to be a partial answer even though in a &quot;negative&quot; manner (as in the opposite sense, not in the &quot;this is rubbish&quot; sense: it is a good question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems cumbersome to ask another question and answer it myself, and then to refer to that from a comment, but this appears to be the only way of providing a detailed response to an answer with an issue in it other than writing a full answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the preferred way to respond to an incorrect answer when a comment is not long or detailed enough and your response is not perceived to be a full and/or direct answer to the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25255" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-12-01T23:49:39.440" Title="What is the best way to respond to an incorrect answer when a comment is not enough?" Tags="|discussion|answers|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6616" CreationDate="2016-12-01T11:05:43.517" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvote it. Leave a concise comment. If I can, write a better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvote because I find the answer unhelpful: this gives the writer a signal that there's something wrong, and more importantly it helps the site sort answers by quality so future readers can tell the answer's got something fishy going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leave a comment saying &quot;I think X is wrong&quot; without explaining it. Give the answerer some credit and just point them in the right direction as much as I can in a single comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Write a better answer because we need good answers. In the long run, it's more important that a good answer be provided than that a bad answer be fixed. It's always nice to help improve answers, but that's just another path to the same result of &quot;providing good answers.&quot; (If an answer is flat-out wrong, or irrelephant, what good will a comment do? There's not something to fix, the whole post is fundamentally flawed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I can't figure out how to help improve it AND I can't write a better answer myself, that's okay. Downvote and move on, trusting if the writer can't figure it out on their own from the downvote then somebody else will probably help where I couldn't. That's the power of crowd-sourcing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And let it go. It's okay for &lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/386/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;someone to be wrong on the Internet&lt;/a&gt;; I'm not the only person who will feel the need to correct them, if indeed they need correcting at all. Again, it's more important that there be a good answer than that the bad answers get told why they're bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2016-12-01T23:49:39.440" LastActivityDate="2016-12-01T23:49:39.440" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6618" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-05T00:00:01.387" Score="11" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have noticed, in my time on all the Stacks, but RPG.SE especially, a tendency for some users to collect all the answers already given for a question, and post them as one big omnibus answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These answers usually don't add much, if anything, new.  They usually just collect the wisdom, or bad ideas, of everyone else in one space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not like these answers; I feel they are a lazy attempt to earn fake internet points.  But are they problematic?  Should there be policy about them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2016-12-08T22:15:13.287" Title="Are Omnibus answers problematic?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6618" CreationDate="2016-12-05T00:50:11.790" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think voting is sufficient to take care of it. The downvote tooltip is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer is not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find omnibus answers actively not useful, go ahead and downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the flip-side, the upvote tooltip is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the (rare?) occasion that you find yourself saying &quot;well, it really is nice to have all the stuff I just read together in one post,&quot; that sounds like an upvote =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you're talking about, meanwhile, are probably the dozenth-or-later answer in the long tail of &quot;meh&quot; answers coming after the top few excellent and thoughtful ones. They're going to attract attention/votes from regulars the day they're posted, then languish in that long tail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless they're somehow particularly excellent, garnering a dozen upvotes their first day and rising above &lt;em&gt;hoi polloi&lt;/em&gt;. So the only easy points someone's getting out of them is in proportion to how useful others find having that omnibus answer in existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I, personally, &lt;strong&gt;don't find them problematic, nor do I feel they need concrete policy.&lt;/strong&gt; Voting will out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2016-12-05T00:50:11.790" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6620" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-06T21:24:00.937" Score="3" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure where the best place to report site bugs is, but this is currently happening:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7waaz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7waaz.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-12-07T19:27:00.937" LastActivityDate="2016-12-07T19:27:00.937" Title="Every &quot;Hot Network Post&quot; and Featured post link icon just changed to the 3D Printing stack icon" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6621" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6623" CreationDate="2016-12-07T15:29:28.827" Score="15" ViewCount="245" Body="&lt;p&gt;I flagged an answer as 'Very Low Quality,' which has a description of &quot;This answer has severe formatting or content problems. This answer is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer was terribly formatted and was full of spelling and grammar errors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also happened to be incorrect, however I didn't flag it because it was inaccurate.  I flagged it because it seemed to me that it couldn't be saved through edits.  It was a 'Very Low Quality' answer by a first time user.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My flag was declined:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;declined - flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an&#xA;  altogether wrong answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I didn't flag it for this!  I flagged it because it &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[had] severe formatting or content problems. This answer [was] unlikely to&#xA;  be salvageable through editing&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess what I would like to know is, &lt;strong&gt;what satisfies the criteria for a &quot;very low quality&quot; answer&lt;/strong&gt; if what I flagged doesn't?  I'll note it's probably the lowest quality answer I've seen in my time on the site in terms of grammar, spelling, formatting, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll also note that I haven't linked the answer here so as not to alienate or &quot;call out,&quot; so to speak, the user; if needed I can edit the link in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="9399" LastEditDate="2016-12-07T15:52:34.350" LastActivityDate="2016-12-08T00:21:32.703" Title="An answer I flagged as very low quality was declined despite answer being of very low quality?" Tags="|discussion|support|flagging|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6621" CreationDate="2016-12-07T15:59:56.320" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Very Low Quality flags don't get reviewed directly by moderators (usually). They put the post into the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/stats&quot;&gt;Low Quality Posts&lt;/a&gt; review queue. The decline message you saw was almost certainly &lt;em&gt;automatic&lt;/em&gt; and not intended to be totally accurate &amp;mdash; it just indicates people chose not to delete it. You'll see that response for any outcome other than &quot;people agreed to delete that post&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have &gt;10k reputation, so you'll be able to view the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/history&quot;&gt;Low Quality Posts review queue history&lt;/a&gt; and see what review actions people took in response to your flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I guess what I would like to know is, &lt;strong&gt;what satisfies the criteria for a &quot;very low quality&quot; answer if what I flagged doesn't?&lt;/strong&gt; I'll note it's probably the lowest quality answer I've seen in my time on the site in terms of grammar, spelling, formatting, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't really answer this because we don't &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; what you flagged. Some may disagree it's all that bad; you can check that yourself in the queue history. I see a lot of posts in the review queue history that genuinely wound up deleted; there are almost no &quot;looks OK&quot; responses present, so I can't even guess at what post that was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's really as bad as you described, I would've taken a massive edit-stick to it. If it was contributing nothing valuable, chances are I would've kept it around. But I'll be sparing with deleting stuff unless it's a one-liner not-useful answer. Downvotes are about enough to cover most stuff that isn't egregiously awful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-12-07T15:59:56.320" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6621" CreationDate="2016-12-07T16:42:15.397" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry, that was my fault. This is an unfortunate side effect of the way flag handling works on the mod side. What happened there is that it was flagged VLQ… and also flagged Not An Answer, which wasn't a valid flag. Declining the one NAA flag declined both flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So apologies for the confusing feedback. Your flag was correct, and you just got caught up with another flag on the post that wasn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; there's supposed to be new functionality to enable handling flags on the same post separately, but if so it's new enough and — if I recall correctly — visually obscure enough in the flag-handling UI that I have to admit I haven't had the chance to properly figure it out, let alone remember to go hunting for it when there are multiple flags. I'll be looking at this more carefully next time, whenever that is.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This won't have any negative effects on your account though, no worries. Yes, there's that confusing decline reason there now, but only you and mods can see it, and it doesn't do anything to your account's standing or abilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6624&quot;&gt;mxyzplk covered well how mods generally handle VLQ flags&lt;/a&gt; — TL;DR, poke them if it looks like poking will help, signal-boost any poking the community has already done, and/or delete them if it looks like poking probably won't help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I sometimes let a VLQ flag linger to give the Review Queues a shot at handling it, but when I leave it and when I just take care of it right away is far from codifable, and probably has more to do with if something more important is demanding attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2016-12-07T19:39:12.547" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6621" CreationDate="2016-12-07T18:17:00.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, so in general there's no fixed answer to this.  SSD has identified the issue that happened with this exact answer - it showed up with a NAA flag that got declined - but in general, VLQ gets processed by either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Random reviewers in the review queue, in which case the answer is &quot;whatever they think&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A mod, in which case it's &quot;whatever they think.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally act on VLQs like I do most other flags. If it seems justified (and we certainly do get incoherent, poorly reasoned, etc. answers here and I don't like those on the site) I'll just comment or +1 on other comments to &quot;fix your answer&quot; if there seem to be any indications that's happening, or I'll delete it and say &quot;you can always fix this answer and flag it for undeletion&quot; if I figure the chance it'll get fixed is under 50%. Making that determination is basically a bunch of factors filtered through wisdom however, I'm not sure it can be codified any more than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2016-12-08T00:21:32.703" LastActivityDate="2016-12-08T00:21:32.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6625" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-07T21:18:23.523" Score="4" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I post a question then someone answers said question as a comment how do I say that’s the right answer, (what button do I click) so that they get the proper recognition? How do I vote a comment as helpful? If these aren't features yet I feel like they should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32760" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2016-12-07T21:52:23.377" LastActivityDate="2016-12-09T01:16:34.870" Title="what button makes a comment appear as an answer?" Tags="|support|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6625" CreationDate="2016-12-07T21:51:42.887" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The person posting an answer in a comment is doing things wrong. They’re not supposed to do that, and there are good reasons they’re not supposed to do that, and so they get no “credit” for doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The correct response is to post an answer yourself with the correct information, and accept that. If you are feeling generous, you can mention them in your answer. If you are feeling &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; generous, you could respond to their comment, suggesting they make it an answer, and wait a little to see if they do so before just answering yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2016-12-07T21:51:42.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6625" CreationDate="2016-12-07T21:51:51.140" Score="15" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If I post a question then someone answers said question as a comment how do I say that’s the right answer, (what button do I click) so that they get the proper recognition?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You cannot mark a comment as the right answer. Nor should you. Answers-in-comments &amp;mdash; as in, comments wherein someone attempts directly and succinctly to answer the question partially or wholly &amp;mdash; are unacceptable by this site's generally accepted policy, and flagged and deleted on sight. For some reading on that policy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-partial-answers-in-comments/6534#6534&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt; which explains the issues. (also, yes, do refrain, always.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5065/how-to-deal-with-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;How to deal with answers in comments?&lt;/a&gt; (we delete them)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5418/1204&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s with the policy on deleting answer comments on on-hold questions?&lt;/a&gt; (the policy is they get deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only answers can be marked as the right answer, because only answers &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be getting used to post answers. They're the only thing on the site with all the facilities necessary for managing answer quality. For more on that, see the first bullet point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to mark a comment's content as the accepted answer, &lt;strong&gt;ask them to post it as an answer, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3572/1204&quot;&gt;just post it as one yourself&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (especially if they refuse or take longer than a day). You should also flag that comment for deletion. The comment's author won't get the reputation and acknowledgement if they don't post the answer, but they had their chance to follow site policy and didn't &amp;mdash; so you get the points for helping us rescue valuable information. Their content was released under our CC Attribution Share-Alike license, so you get to re-use it (and need to attribute them, &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; your answer doesn't resemble theirs by the time you're done drafting it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How do I vote a comment as helpful? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you reach 15 reputation you will unlock &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-up&quot;&gt;the &lt;em&gt;vote up&lt;/em&gt; privilege&lt;/a&gt;, and then you will see an upvotey doodad beside comments. The number to the left of comments shows how many people have clicked this upvotey doodad already. (Comment upvotes confer no reputation to the commenter.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ySeEP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ySeEP.png&quot; alt=&quot;the little triangle upvotey doodad&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may notice there isn't a downvotey doodad. This is one of the (many) problems with answers-in-comments: we have no recourse for expressing when they suck, are wrong, etc; instead we have a flag button we use to get them deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2016-12-09T01:16:34.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6625" CreationDate="2016-12-07T22:48:51.830" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6627&quot;&gt;Normally, yes&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6626&quot;&gt;put it in an answer and then accept that answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91439/where-in-the-phb-is-the-information-on-the-different-regions-dwarves-come-from&quot;&gt;in this case&lt;/a&gt; those comments are trying, with some difficulty, to figure out what the question is asking. The question itself has some issues — but it's hard to tell what the issues are exactly, or why it has issues. The comments were attempting to achieve common ground in order to achieve understanding of the missing parts of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notice that the question is still not answered (paraphrasing):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; Where did I read about dwarven homelands in the 4e PHB?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;Not-A:&lt;/strong&gt; There's no such thing…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question's problem — where did I read this, and/or what are the types of regional dwarves — doesn't appear to have been solved. (Or has it? It's unclear, because the question has issues.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, the comments will prompt a reflection on what the question is asking, and an edit to refine the question to become more understandable to others, and hence more answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2016-12-08T02:00:56.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6629" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6618" CreationDate="2016-12-08T22:15:13.287" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been accused once or twice of this even when I do add new content.  My goal is to give a complete answer, which will contain content already said, but offering clarification or addition. I won't answer if one answer or the thread of answers is/are already complete, but upvote the answer(s) I agree with.  If I roll up other answers into my answer, the content I add from other posts will typically be paraphrases and may mention the other post I rolled up (but not depend on them being read).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25091" LastActivityDate="2016-12-08T22:15:13.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6630" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-12T20:54:38.353" Score="13" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;As shown below, it's very difficult to see what the new privilege is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8CQLt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8CQLt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Example&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(but it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; there &amp;uarr;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5989" LastEditorUserId="7976" LastEditDate="2016-12-14T17:27:58.993" LastActivityDate="2016-12-14T17:27:58.993" Title="Color &amp; layout issues with &quot;You earned a new privilege!&quot;" Tags="|bug|design|profile-page|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6631" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9046" CreationDate="2016-12-12T22:44:41.133" Score="16" ViewCount="214" Body="&lt;p&gt;This may be a bit of a small issue but I was wondering if there's any guidance on whether one should flag all comments in a thread for deletion if they're no longer helpful (or never were to begin with) or only flag one in order to bring the thread to the mod's attention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I ask is because on the one hand it's a bit of a selfish reason in that I would want to flag them all (or at least most) in order to raise my own &quot;helpful flags&quot; stats but on the other hand I don't want to go annoying the mods by pinging them with, potentially, a half dozen, a dozen, or more flags if only one is sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: this is kinda answered by a mod &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6283/14878&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; but that's more-so how to grab the mod's attention in the first place, not whether there's any reason for or against flagging one or more comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2019-06-13T03:35:22.333" LastActivityDate="2019-06-13T03:35:22.333" Title="Flagging comments for deletion: flag one or all?" Tags="|support|comments|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6633" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6631" CreationDate="2016-12-13T00:03:15.057" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;For obsolete or too-chatty messages, you can flag one with a custom flag describing which ones need attention, or flag them each individually — whichever is more convenient for you. (That includes “selfishly” individually flagging comments because “I want more helpful flags!” — after all, you &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; identifying multiple comments that you think need attention.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tools on the moderator side are pretty well designed to handle whatever people throw into the flag queue in a way that isn't annoying for the moderators. They &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to be — these same tools are designed for handling the firehose of flags that Stack Overflow mods get! For example, all flags for comments under the same post show up as one notification/“ping”, and as one flag-handling “job”, making it easy to review and navigate even when there are lots of flags under multiple posts. So you don't have to worry about flooding us, even with &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; flaggable comments on one post. We can take it! We get astronomically fewer flags than SO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Handling&lt;/em&gt; (as opposed to getting notified for or viewing) one or many comment flags is also pretty similar in practice, since deletion = accepting the flag, and usually that's what was going to happen regardless of whether it's was one flag or many that drew our attention to the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception I would urge is for “bad” flags, like rude/offensive: those get noted on an account (for human reference only), so it's useful to have those actually flagged individually even if your preference is for one custom flag. (Usually “bad”-flaggable comments come in singles or low single digits anyway though, so it's rare that you will need to decide between many or one flag. Thankfully!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2016-12-13T00:27:41.200" LastActivityDate="2016-12-13T00:27:41.200" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6634" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-14T00:38:36.680" Score="17" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;In order of their folksonomic creation, we currently have the tags&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; (May 16, 2011), &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; (Oct 1, 2014), and &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; (May 26 of this year).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, the more general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; tag lays claim to “… smithing, alchemy, &lt;strong&gt;magic item creation&lt;/strong&gt;…”, while the newer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; obviously lays full claim to magic item creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the wild these are being used in a few combinations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items+crafting+-magic-item-creation&quot;&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/a&gt; (most common, being the oldest tags)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation+-magic-items+-crafting&quot;&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items+magic-item-creation+-crafting&quot;&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(&lt;em&gt;no question uses all three&lt;/em&gt;) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items+crafting+magic-item-creation&quot;&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty inconsistent. It makes it a guessing game what tags to use when asking, editing, and searching. I think we should probably fix that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should our tagging convention be for questions about making magic items?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2016-12-20T14:12:00.040" Title="How should we tag questions about making magic items?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6635" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-14T17:19:38.057" Score="8" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;See the two following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/31471/23970&quot;&gt;How can I convert D&amp;amp;D 5e Saving Throws into Defences?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/69064/23970&quot;&gt;Is &amp;quot;Unearthed Arcana: Players Make All Rolls&amp;quot; Correct?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two questions fundamentally ask the same thing: &quot;What's the math behind converting a monster's save to a player's roll?&quot; (In D&amp;amp;D 5e)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wonder if they're properly duplicates? If they are, which is the &quot;better&quot; question to let stand as the canonical reference? And would it make sense to migrate the answers to all live together?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm torn. On one hand, mathematically the questions are really identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, reading the answer to one as a response to the other question would be... jarring, to say the least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just slap a &quot;related, near-duplicate&quot; link on each?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-01T02:11:13.510" LastActivityDate="2020-03-01T02:11:13.510" Title="Are these two questions about converting saving throws into rolls against a fixed number duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6635" CreationDate="2016-12-14T18:20:26.363" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One asks how to implement a mechanic, and the other asks if an implementation is correct. Thus, they concern the same mechanic, but the context to the questions is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you mentioned, reading the answer of one in regards to the other is jarring -- I think that's argument enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A 'related' link seems appropriate in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25893" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2016-12-14T18:20:26.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6634" CreationDate="2016-12-15T20:44:23.810" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; whenever it's about any character crafting any object, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; whenever magic items are key. Whenever systems have commonality between different types of crafting, it's better to use a single tag instead of splitting between two different crafting-specific tags, whereas whenever there's a difference, the system tag and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; should always be able to distinguish well enough to make searching and tag following effective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; should just be burninated. It's nothing more than a specific combination of two other tags, like having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e-classes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e-classes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e-classes&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastActivityDate="2016-12-15T20:44:23.810" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6639" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6641" CreationDate="2016-12-19T00:17:23.030" Score="4" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just been awarded First Responder:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yLI33.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yLI33.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;You earned First Responder on Role-playing Games!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the fact that shouldn't be possible for 2017 yet:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iu32g.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iu32g.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;post a message in chat within ±12 hours of the UTC New Year’s begin that gets starred&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I did have a message starred in chat around new years' during last Winterbash. Did the year not get set properly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't had a message posted by me starred in chat for a few days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[wears his buggy hat nevertheless]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2016-12-19T00:35:43.077" Title="I just got First Responder (and it isn't New Years yet)" Tags="|bug|winterbash-2016|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6640" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-19T00:29:46.353" Score="33" ViewCount="882" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This album is for &lt;strong&gt;2016&lt;/strong&gt;. Check out the 2017 album here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7622/the-hatmas-interdimensional-breach-2017-photo-album&quot;&gt;The Hatmas Interdimensional Breach 2017 Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6615/1204&quot;&gt;As prophecy foretold&lt;/a&gt;, the Hatocalypse is upon us. Some of us may survive. Some may only be uncovered later under the debris of so many hats; rest assured our thoughts will be with you. Some of us have this cozy vault to enjoy, sealing us off from the millinery hazards outside.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's not let the dreaded hatocalypse keep us down though: let's keep another &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5964/the-winterbash-hatmas-photo-album-maybe-embarrassing-yearbook&quot;&gt;fun and silly yearbook&lt;/a&gt; of the events (and hats) that unfold, for those of us who survive the wave of hats to look back upon and enjoy in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep it fun and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;be nice&lt;/a&gt;. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.) Go for one post per person, or a very small number.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those not in the super secret partial screenshot skills club, here's how you do it. First, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshotting. Now, the method:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Windows 7 and above, you can use the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt; on your profile page (just hit start and type in the name). Otherwise, you may want to just take a screenshot of your browser window with alt+print screen, paste it into MS Paint, crop out your avatar region and save it as a &lt;strong&gt;PNG&lt;/strong&gt;. (GIFs and JPGs will probably come out low quality.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Mac, press CMD + SHIFT + 4 and then click and drag to outline your icon. When you let go of the mouse, it'll save a screenshot .png of the selection to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On Linux... I also have no idea, someone edit this in!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check the &lt;a href=&quot;http://winterbash2016.stackexchange.com/leaderboard/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;leaderboards&lt;/a&gt; to see who has been cursed with the largest number of hats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-13T11:25:47.397" LastActivityDate="2017-12-13T11:25:47.397" Title="Hatocalypse 2016 Survivors' Photo Album" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|winterbash-2016|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6639" CreationDate="2016-12-19T00:35:43.077" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, that was a bug. Fixed now, thanks! The details are in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/288273/first-responder-hat-of-the-2016-winter-bash&quot;&gt;First Responder hat of the 2016 winter bash&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="102" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2016-12-19T00:35:43.077" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6643" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-19T01:31:59.803" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Much to the surprise of people who know me, I have been ruled not a grinch. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tuk6F.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tuk6F.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y74Ot.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y74Ot.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vvgz4.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vvgz4.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The caption for the second one is: &lt;em&gt;I find your lack of sources disturbing, commander.&lt;/em&gt; The third one looks like a spork. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2016-12-21T03:01:56.240" LastActivityDate="2016-12-21T03:01:56.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6644" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-19T01:45:21.857" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The March of Dark Fathers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last year I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5965/4398&quot;&gt;put doctors in the Fourth Doctor's hat and scarf&lt;/a&gt;. This year, every day a famously awful father gets to wear Darth Vader's mask. Hover over an image to see the bad dad's name and origin; click to see him unmasked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DW1eXt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/I8yn2t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Jack Torrance (The Shining)&quot; title=&quot;Jack Torrance (The Shining)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MkMELt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XhvkZt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Robert Ford (Westworld)&quot; title=&quot;Robert Ford (Westworld)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y3cuJt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/smV7ht.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Trigon the Terrible (Teen Titans Go!)&quot; title=&quot;Trigon the Terrible (Teen Titans Go!)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x7gOat.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vduqdt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Dr. Evil (Austin Powers)&quot; title=&quot;Dr. Evil (Austin Powers)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vrZyrt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/U6B21t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Immortan Joe (Mad Max: Fury Road)&quot; title=&quot;Immortan Joe (Mad Max: Fury Road)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOvget.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HYSrFt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Marty (Steven Universe)&quot; title=&quot;Marty (Steven Universe)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0IJ3Gt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GD9nVt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;System Lord Apophis (Stargate: SG-1)&quot; title=&quot;System Lord Apophis (Stargate: SG-1)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Wof6t.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/H6pw3t.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;King Henry VIII (British history)&quot; title=&quot;King Henry VIII (British history)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eeZtZt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ihvGft.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Ming the Merciless (Flash Gordon)&quot; title=&quot;Ming the Merciless (Flash Gordon)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hgfeYt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6kLcst.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Fire Lord Ozai (Avatar: the Last Airbender)&quot; title=&quot;Fire Lord Ozai (Avatar: the Last Airbender)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xCWGnt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6ghpbt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Shou Tucker (Full Metal Alchemist)&quot; title=&quot;Shou Tucker (Full Metal Alchemist)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5RFelt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2MqfIt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Anakin Skywalker (Star Wars)&quot; title=&quot;Anakin Skywalker (Star Wars)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/M1tTqt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vH3wCt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Leland Palmer (Twin Peaks)&quot; title=&quot;Leland Palmer (Twin Peaks)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cFADnt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KM1rnt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Thanos (Marvel Comics)&quot; title=&quot;Thanos (Marvel Comics)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Sm5Wft.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fAOLFt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Howard Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe)&quot; title=&quot;Howard Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cMS4Tt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/k1BZNt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;The Dark Savant (Wizardry, the Dark Savant trilogy)&quot; title=&quot;The Dark Savant (Wizardry, the Dark Savant trilogy)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tiw0yt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VlKcKt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;King Laius (Oedipus Rex)&quot; title=&quot;King Laius (Oedipus Rex)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nHvIet.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ad63Ft.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Hunson Abadeer (Adventure Time)&quot; title=&quot;Hunson Abadeer (Adventure Time)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hvhUGt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V8gkTt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Gehn (Riven)&quot; title=&quot;Gehn (Riven)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PJYtNt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uvm7Ht.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Denethor II (The Lord of the Rings)&quot; title=&quot;Denethor II (The Lord of the Rings)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And please, drop by &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; with suggestions for bad dads!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-01-07T21:33:27.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6645" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-19T05:16:23.783" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LG6yEt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I didn&amp;#39;t think the helmet would work on a sheep, but the daisy really pulls it together.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LG6yEt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Sheep Vader&quot; title=&quot;I didn&amp;#39;t think the helmet would work on a sheep, but the daisy really pulls it together.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jaX5gt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;It&amp;#39;s sub-zero in the Northeast: needed a fur coat for the bits that didn&amp;#39;t already have a wool sweater.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jaX5gt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Abominable Sheep&quot; title=&quot;It&amp;#39;s sub-zero in the Northeast: needed a fur coat for the bits that didn&amp;#39;t already have a wool sweater.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://jeanluc.cornec.de/arbeiten/tribut/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/exyBnt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Sheep Phone&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;Can you hear me now? The connection was baaaaad on the cell.&amp;#39;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/24lbct.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m on a high-fiber diet.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/24lbct.png&quot; alt=&quot;Bunny Sheep&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m on a high-fiber diet.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dandelion_Wine&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0V6HVt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Trophy Sheep&quot; title=&quot;I hate little yellow flowers. I just use their stems as straws for my dandelion wine.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/s9VpQt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Taste the rainbow... taste it!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/s9VpQt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Rainbow vomit sheep&quot; title=&quot;Taste the rainbow... taste it!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&amp;amp;ion=1&amp;amp;espv=2&amp;amp;ie=UTF-8#q=you%27re%20a%20mean%20one%20mr%20grinch%20lyrics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/taH4Wt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Grinch Sheep&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m a baaaaaaaad banana with a greasy black peel.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VSFNAt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I like the way it accentuates my curves.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VSFNAt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Taco Sheep&quot; title=&quot;I like the way it accentuates my curves.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CLccCt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Wait, this is made of *what*? Maaaaan, that&amp;#39;s taaaaacky.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CLccCt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Took Sheep&quot; title=&quot;Wait, this is made of *what*? Maaaaan, that&amp;#39;s taaaaacky.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/J1NTjqaAKBo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p7THQt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Spork Sheep&quot; title=&quot;&amp;#39;I can&amp;#39;t use that spork. I got hooves, man!&amp;#39; (Very profane click-through)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventure_of_the_Copper_Beeches&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a8YF2t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Deerstalker Sheep&quot; title=&quot;The lowest and vilest alleys of London alleys in London do not present a more dreadful record of sin than does the smiling and beautiful countryside.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eNqPCt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I look better from the side.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eNqPCt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Sheep Falkor&quot; title=&quot;I look better from the side.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sNl7ut.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;If you need to, you can just baaaaack up.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sNl7ut.png&quot; alt=&quot;Sheeparound&quot; title=&quot;If you need to, you can just baaaaack up.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dragonlancenexus.com/lexicon/index.php?title=Goldmoon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jmRH8t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Goldmoon&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m hiding. I don&amp;#39;t like being counted. Find some other way to get to sleep.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SEEUdt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Do you have any idea how hard it is getting syrup out of wool?&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SEEUdt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Waffle Sheep&quot; title=&quot;Do you have any idea how hard it is getting syrup out of wool?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/m30ePt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;ve got nothing. Ping me in chat with an idea.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/m30ePt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Yoda Sheep&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;ve got nothing. Ping me in chat with an idea.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/t7IHPJ0k9Bg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;MORE EXCITING THAN SHEEP!?!? You&amp;#39;re dead to me, Ernie.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BdXbWt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Ernie Sheep&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/guy-fieri/leg-o-lamb-with-rosemary-au-jus-recipe.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/INzuut.png&quot; alt=&quot;This Sheep&amp;#39;s on Fire!&quot; title=&quot;I look so good, they&amp;#39;re going to call it a &amp;#39;sheeptee&amp;#39; from now on.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iuqpXt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m an aqua-sheep. No, it never really caught on. Yes, the wool slows me down. No, I have no idea why my eyes look like this.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iuqpXt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Blue-footed sheep&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m an aqua-sheep. No, it never really caught on. Yes, the wool slows me down. No, I have no idea why my eyes look like this.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jo22zt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jo22zt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Bert Sheep&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.georgianjournal.ge/discover-georgia/29025-land-of-the-golden-fleece.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sxD7it.png&quot; alt=&quot;golden sheep&quot; title=&quot;Anybody seen Jason?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://books.google.com/books?id=EJ8etFDmxEsC&amp;amp;pg=PA15&amp;amp;lpg=PA15&amp;amp;dq=sheep+dreidel&amp;amp;source=bl&amp;amp;ots=wHRkY9xcJB&amp;amp;sig=g1MOUOiIvFj4DBBmZ-nwfdlel_g&amp;amp;hl=en&amp;amp;sa=X&amp;amp;ved=0ahUKEwiUw_j9p43RAhXJ6iYKHWR0D_cQ6AEINzAI#v=onepage&amp;amp;q=sheep%20dreidel&amp;amp;f=false&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2O2X3t.png&quot; alt=&quot;dreidel sheep&quot; title=&quot;Wait, what&amp;#39;s that thing made of?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/RDfjXj5EGqI&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/N2Uqyt.png&quot; alt=&quot;noel sheep&quot; title=&quot;I preferred the other fire-hat =(&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/34321537#34321537&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7JDRBt.png&quot; alt=&quot;trendsetting sheep&quot; title=&quot;Is this because of that convo about hairstyles?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zyZeot.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;What, did someone let Fieri in here again!?&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zyZeot.png&quot; alt=&quot;bacon sheep&quot; title=&quot;What, did someone let Fieri in here again!?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aransweatermarket.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0wK6Kt.png&quot; alt=&quot;irish sheep&quot; title=&quot;Do *not* kiss me.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sheep&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5IyvLt.png&quot; alt=&quot;sheep hatter&quot; title=&quot;The top hats are nice, but I&amp;#39;m really more of a took guy&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VXf5gt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VXf5gt.png&quot; alt=&quot;selfie sheep&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2PP8At.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Can&amp;#39;t pony the horrorshow lewdies &amp;#39;round here, eh?&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2PP8At.png&quot; alt=&quot;sheep alex&quot; title=&quot;Can&amp;#39;t pony the horrorshow lewdies &amp;#39;round here, eh?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2tiyat.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m trying to find the girl who took my lamb!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2tiyat.png&quot; alt=&quot;angora sheep&quot; title=&quot;I&amp;#39;m trying to find the girl who took my lamb!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-01-05T16:17:23.843" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T16:17:23.843" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6647" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-19T20:40:56.937" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CN7JZ.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Abominable hat&quot;&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/1f/9f/f9/1f9ff9cebc79d7c68c69d2ac7ee61511.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;has been found&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gKheU.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;I Am Your Father hat&quot;&gt;I can has &lt;a href=&quot;https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/48/01/6d/48016d154cf3ba949698c8f4d33728ee.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;moar cats&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/x6oBs.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Cutting the Cord hat&quot;&gt;Could you guys &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.imgderp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2012/09/cat-on-the-phone.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;keep it down&lt;/a&gt;? I'm trying to order a cheeseburger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HXKp2.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Where in the World hat here&quot;&gt; Now I just need a &lt;a href=&quot;https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/dd/e5/7f/dde57fd1d198ffcf2a05eff7c23f0cc2.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;magical girl&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HeGL2.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://d13yacurqjgara.cloudfront.net/users/1019863/screenshots/2417255/yoda_the_cat.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Grumpy, I am.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2016-12-21T00:57:56.650" LastActivityDate="2016-12-21T00:57:56.650" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6634" CreationDate="2016-12-20T14:12:00.040" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since it appears it's going to get removed one way or another, I'm going to just put a list here of the questions that had the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt; tag at this point for historical record:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91651/can-a-ioun-stone-be-made-cracked&quot;&gt;Can a Ioun Stone be made cracked?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91659/what-is-the-price-to-deliberately-create-a-cracked-ioun-stone&quot;&gt;What is the price to deliberately create a cracked Ioun Stone?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90793/skill-checks-for-magic-item-creation&quot;&gt;Skill checks for Magic Item Creation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90809/by-how-much-is-a-wands-price-raised-if-unicorn-horn-is-added-during-its-creatio&quot;&gt;By how much is a wand&amp;#39;s price raised if unicorn horn is added during its creation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90190/if-a-wondrous-item-was-dynamically-created-as-slimy-can-i-remove-the-smell-with&quot;&gt;If a wondrous item was dynamically created as slimy, can I remove the smell with prestidigitation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88297/how-do-i-price-command-word-activated-items&quot;&gt;How do I price command-word activated items?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88155/can-a-machinesmith-take-scribe-scroll&quot;&gt;Can a machinesmith take Scribe Scroll?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86322/how-much-do-multiple-weapon-enchantments-cost&quot;&gt;How much do multiple weapon enchantments cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84296/are-there-any-rules-for-creating-intelligent-items-by-pcs-in-3-5e-if-not-p&quot;&gt;Are there any rules for creating intelligent items by PC&amp;#39;s in 3.5E? If not..., please help!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83963/magic-item-creation-and-round-usages-rules-instead-of-duration&quot;&gt;Magic Item Creation and round usages rules instead of duration&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80755/how-much-does-a-shield-that-is-also-a-magic-weapon-cost&quot;&gt;How much does a shield that is also a magic weapon cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80753/can-a-shield-that-has-both-armor-and-attack-enhancements-exceed-10-total-enhanc&quot;&gt;Can a shield that has both armor and attack enhancements exceed +10 total enhancement?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-12-20T14:12:00.040" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-21T18:17:55.160" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hats often don't fit my avatar, so the few that do look good are always a treat. This is my favourite:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8vrj7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8vrj7t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Where in the World? hat&quot; title=&quot;I really like the sparkles&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this one somehow catches my fancy too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/n2z8x.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/n2z8xt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Cutting the Cord hat&quot; title=&quot;Guess where I am? I&amp;#39;m calling from the plane. I&amp;#39;ll call you when I get there. &quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some more whimsical hattery:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BNG8q.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BNG8qt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Bûche de Noël hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fqPoB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fqPoBt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Like Clockwork hat&quot; title=&quot;Ultraviolence&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qqmz4.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;The Case of the Secret Hat&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qqmz4t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Elementary hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vQTwb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vQTwbt.png&quot; alt=&quot;I Have A Little Dreidel hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I admit that these latter hats are not &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; fitted to the angles of my pentagonal prism because I don't want to mess with the positioning, so I can switch back to the Where in the World? hat exactly as it was. It's really grown on me. Some do sit nicely on the &lt;strong&gt;7&lt;/strong&gt; itself though.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-01-12T20:05:02.417" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T20:05:02.417" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6650" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-22T09:07:52.140" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IFpOi.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IFpOi.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mAjT4.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mAjT4.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this hat is the first secret hat I remember getting any Winterbash, seems like it works for this picture to me&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xwMTg.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xwMTg.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/U4Vkv.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/U4Vkv.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ok, I kinda had to add these two when I saw how they looked XD ( I lied, there are 3 now)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8233" LastEditorUserId="8233" LastEditDate="2017-01-01T11:28:51.113" LastActivityDate="2017-01-01T11:28:51.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-24T11:29:25.617" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most times I feel like a dude (left), but other times I feel like a sweet lass (right). Either way, I'm really feeling the winter cheer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kK29U.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kK29U.png&quot; alt=&quot;Dapper duder pon.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0nuGP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0nuGP.png&quot; alt=&quot;Pictured: The sweetest lass, who still doesn&amp;#39;t see the point of all this.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastEditorUserId="4576" LastEditDate="2016-12-25T06:13:56.977" LastActivityDate="2016-12-25T06:13:56.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6652" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2016-12-30T05:01:29.517" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Doot and snoot&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Q3qE0.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Q3qE0.png&quot; alt=&quot;Doot&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D9g4M.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D9g4M.png&quot; alt=&quot;snoot&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I will find a fancier hat for my greyhound soon&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28283" LastActivityDate="2016-12-30T05:01:29.517" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6653" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6654" CreationDate="2016-12-30T18:21:08.977" Score="5" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just made a very minor edit to my answer to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91161/can-a-creature-swap-places-with-another-willing-creature-on-their-turn&quot;&gt;Can a creature swap places with another willing creature on their turn?&lt;/a&gt;. My only changes were syntax, changing hyphens to em-dashes. As such, I don't think my changes add enough value to justify improving it's position in the active questions queue. Is there a way to make minor edits such as these without pushing it up in the active questions queue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2016-12-30T19:33:50.090" Title="Can I edit an answer without bumping the question?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6653" CreationDate="2016-12-30T19:33:50.090" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe the tl;dr is: no.  I believe that the community managers had a way of doing this a long time ago, but that was never made publicly available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if the edit doesn't actually add anything content wise to the post, or make it better in general, then it's best to just leave it as-is.  In particular, the edit you're talking about, imho was pointless and didn't help your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2016-12-30T19:33:50.090" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6655" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2016-12-31T13:03:12.093" Score="2" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see, the problem of changing British English to American English and vice versa is continuously happening. Some people don't care at all, others feel slightly irritated and some even become enraged. Could something be done to fix this issue? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, an option to flag the post with &quot;This is American/British English post&quot; would be great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28885" LastActivityDate="2017-01-01T00:16:09.020" Title="Could something be done to prevent correcting British English to American English?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2017-01-01T04:14:48.677" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6655" CreationDate="2016-12-31T13:56:45.107" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think this is important enough to require that someone programs a flag, and I don't think the flag would add anything to what our site is for. At most, it will generate some edits and, hopefully, some edit reasons like &quot;it was British English, not a misspelling&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2016-12-31T13:56:45.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6657" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6655" CreationDate="2016-12-31T19:13:33.717" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Trouble with such a flag (apart from the SE staff developers are super-never going to entertain such an idea) is that BrE and AmE aren't the only correct English spelling standards, and even within those two, there are acceptable less-well-known spelling variants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3224/321&quot;&gt;The solution&lt;/a&gt; is generally to use the existing tools: re-editing to honour the original spelling, comments to settle confusions, and a heaping helping of respect and patience for each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It won't make the “incorrections” ever end, but it will make the process of holding back the tide of hypercorrection more pleasant and sustainable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-01T00:16:09.020" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6658" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6659" CreationDate="2017-01-02T00:36:31.430" Score="4" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, say some dashing rogue with an angry black star in a purple circle for an avatar visits the site and asks a question along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Hey, where can I get cheap, quality [iso graph paper/regular graph paper/d4/d8/d10/d20/d100/d7/fudge dice/human slaves/dry ice (for atmosphere)/whatever else]?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/props&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;props&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;props&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/atmosphere&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;atmosphere&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;atmosphere&lt;/a&gt; questions are on-topic, and some of these may fall under that umbrella (i.e. the dry ice thing). On the other hand, finding art, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendations&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendations&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendations&lt;/a&gt;, and snacks have all been said to be off-topic, not to mention this kind of question could very easily draw solicitation, which isn't really something you want outside of SO. When that dashing rogue (who absolutely doesn't live in his mother's basement) had this question before, he played it safe and ventured into chat (his biceps gleaming in the moonlight, completely unobscured by cheeto-induced and -dusted flab).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, again, would asking for places to find quality supplies be on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25739" LastActivityDate="2017-01-02T00:53:39.713" Title="Would questions on where to find gaming supplies on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2017-01-04T14:58:38.290" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6659" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6658" CreationDate="2017-01-02T00:53:39.713" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.  It's a shopping question and therefore off topic for all the reasons shopping questions are off topic here and across the network; I'm not going to reiterate all those reasons as they are readily discoverable.  Those questions are not a good fit for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-01-02T00:53:39.713" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6660" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-03T02:58:46.827" Score="2" ViewCount="55" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed something odd in the sidebar just now: an ad for &quot;01&quot; bounties with no total bounty amount. So I went to check it out, and found &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eiRRL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eiRRL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of Featured tab&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After hard refreshing, this remains. I checked my ignored tags, and they're not set to hide questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastActivityDate="2017-01-03T03:51:15.470" Title="One featured question or none? Make up your mind!" Tags="|bug|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6660" CreationDate="2017-01-03T03:51:15.470" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;For some context: I had a bounty on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78967/which-dragon-magazine-issue-did-this-unusual-rat-like-race-appear-in&quot;&gt;Which Dragon Magazine issue did this unusual rat-like race appear in?&lt;/a&gt; that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/92454/revisions&quot;&gt;the revision history&lt;/a&gt; says I awarded at &lt;code&gt;00:46:13Z&lt;/code&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zones/z&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the &quot;Z&quot; means &quot;UTC+0&quot;&lt;/a&gt;). At the time, it was the last bounty active on the site. You posted this at &lt;code&gt;02:58:46Z&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say &quot;caching&quot; but 2 hours is a long time for caching on the &lt;em&gt;featured&lt;/em&gt; tab.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-03T03:51:15.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6662" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-03T17:41:47.080" Score="18" ViewCount="396" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role-playing games often concoct their own rules governing in-text presentation of game terms, and these rules sometimes violate the rules of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_English&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Standard English&lt;/a&gt;. For example, in &lt;em&gt;Dungeons and Dragons, Third Edition,&lt;/em&gt; and its kin, initial &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalization&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;capitalization&lt;/a&gt; is used in the term &lt;em&gt;Hit Dice&lt;/em&gt;, periods are omitted from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym#Nomenclature&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;initialism&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;AC&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_type#Usage&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;italics&lt;/a&gt; are used for the names of magic items and spells (including spell-like abilities), and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, sometimes a common term will have a different use such as &lt;em&gt;fortune&lt;/em&gt; (not capitalized when used generally for the celestial powers of Rokugan—the setting originally for &lt;em&gt;Legend of the Five Rings&lt;/em&gt; role-playing game but included in the &lt;em&gt;3e&lt;/em&gt; product &lt;em&gt;Oriental Adventures&lt;/em&gt;—but capitalized when used as a proper noun as in the Seven Fortunes or the Fortune of Storms—as originally used in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/78459/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;). Also, sometimes a word may be wholly fabricated like &lt;em&gt;nonepic&lt;/em&gt; (used in &lt;em&gt;Dungeons and Dragons, Third Edition,&lt;/em&gt; and its kin to describe a thing of less than epic stature—as originally used in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/92548/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should an editor make game terms into Standard English for readability or for Standard English correctness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Although it may seem like I'm picking on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3548/oblivious-sage&quot;&gt;Oblivious Sage&lt;/a&gt; for&lt;/em&gt; daring &lt;em&gt;to edit&lt;/em&gt; me &lt;em&gt;or whatever, I'm really not; I appreciate the time taken by&lt;/em&gt; anyone &lt;em&gt;to read any of my often loquacious questions and answers and doubly so if they're afterward edited. But I do want them to&lt;/em&gt; start out &lt;em&gt;as good questions and answers, and if they're better and more useful in Standard English than in game terms, that's cool, but I'll have to make some mental adjustments.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-01-06T02:37:11.363" Title="Does Standard English overrule game terms?" Tags="|discussion|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6662" CreationDate="2017-01-03T18:19:58.193" Score="34" Body="&lt;p&gt;For clarity, you should use the terms the way the game does.  There is negative value in changing, for example, AC to A.C.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some cases people don't know and happen to mis-edit, then just like with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3224/standardization-of-english-etc?rq=1&quot;&gt;AmEnglish vs BrEnglish follies&lt;/a&gt;, everyone should just be calm, the OP should revert to their intent and the editor should take it in good grace.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T20:17:14.570" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6640" CreationDate="2017-01-03T23:59:43.383" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm ready for my close-up…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2RKx0.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2RKx0.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2017-01-03T23:59:43.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6665" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-05T16:42:49.870" Score="-10" ViewCount="521" Body="&lt;p&gt;Okay, I have found your Meta site and as directed am writing directly to you concerning the question you put on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am VERY displeased with your interference with my question and seem to think you just have some personal issue with me and completely unbeknownst to me. You said we could talk here and then if not resolved I would be directed to your superiors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will let you know that I have read and re-read the Help section on asking questions and all of the other &quot;Rules&quot; for the site. I will contest that there was nothing wrong with my posting of my question and the body that included the points that reference WHY the question was asked. The research that I provided only reinforced the ambiguity of the mechanic. It in no way &quot;answered&quot; or was not valid towards the question...it in fact is the EXACT reason for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I spent 3 hours formulating my question with exact details needed and spent another 30 minutes on the phone with an official Wizards of the Coast representative discussing the question which was confirmed by him as ambiguous and could very well be a topic to be directed towards the designers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will also contest that this is not a subjective question as it stands for now...someone out there may very well have a concise answer...but then again they may not...that is not for me to contemplate; I'm looking for a direct answer not a discussion (as per the site rules).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't even begin to find words for the amount of comments that woke up to this morning. I'm pretty sure that can't be appropriate for this site or proper behavior for a moderator to allow. You have now singled me out and created a nightmare of embarrassment for a new member...NOT COOL! Your hack job of an edit is absolutely absurd and completely destroys my original question...again not something your supposed to do I believe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am HIGHLY displeased and will probably follow up with your supervisors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'll await your response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user33129" LastEditorDisplayName="user33129" LastEditDate="2017-01-05T19:04:46.147" LastActivityDate="2017-01-06T16:22:53.753" Title="SevenSidedDie - problem with your moderation!" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="9" ClosedDate="2017-01-07T02:14:19.610" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6662" CreationDate="2017-01-05T17:27:35.753" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The issue I would take with Standard English is that it changes over time. To use an Oxford comma or not, is it you and me or you and I, do I put periods after each letter in an acronym or not (what if I'm trying to reinforce that I'm an evil corporation?). In short, Standard English is anything but standard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I do land development and many township ordinances will use terminology that can vary from town to town. One town defines 'impervious cover' to include buildings and paved areas, another just includes paved surfaces, and a regulatory body that focuses on surface water will tell me it's all of those things as well as any area that has compacted gravel and Type D soils. In short, the audience matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, because we are discussing terminology with defined definitions in a distinct rule book, I think it makes the most sense to retain the rule book's spelling and grammatical preferences as it not only makes the text more universally recognizable, we also avoid the issue of instilling our own personal definitions onto what these defined terms mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T17:27:35.753" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6665" CreationDate="2017-01-05T17:43:04.193" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a help centre topic on what to do when we disagree with a question being put on hold: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/reopen-questions&quot;&gt;What if I disagree with the closure of a question? How can I reopen it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, the advice it gives can be summarised as “address the concerns brought up by the community, in an effort to change their minds about the hold/closure.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The response to the community's concerns (less the mods' concerns) about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/92644&quot;&gt;the question&lt;/a&gt; appears to have been (paraphrasing) “the feedback is appreciated, but it's exactly how I want it phrased.” That's fine, but it does leave little room for any steps towards convincing fellow users to cast reopen votes. The response to mods' concerns about the question amounted to (paraphrasing) “I disagree with that assessment.” That's also fine, but it's not much more effective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The experience of interacting with this account has mostly shown&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Repeated statements of lack of ability, interest, and time to learn how the site works or how to even operate its interface&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Insistence on knowing what is and isn't appropriate for the site better than its experienced users, despite the preceding lacks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Suggestions that sufficient D&amp;amp;D expertise should make up for any lack of understanding of the site or its rules or guidelines&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A generally inflexible and argumentative approach to disagreements, small or large&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be fair, how the site works &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be unintuitive. It tends to vary individually — some new users find it intuitive and get the hang of it very quickly, others find it highly unintuitive and find it takes much more effort to get the hang of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In sum, there is an apparently deliberate lack of effort or concern for doing any work to understand how to be a productive member of the site, which obviously hampers using it. This has resulted in the community attempting to compensate for that seeming lack of effort, with users and mods putting in significant effort to educate, negotiate, and otherwise find positive outcomes and get a new user successfully on board with how the site functions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addressing this appearance of deliberate neglect of the basics and details of having an account on this site would go a long way to positively integrating into the community. As a helpful side effect of working to gain understanding of how anything here works, it will be easier to work with other community members to get questions such as that one reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can reach the SE staff by using the &lt;strong&gt;Contact Us&lt;/strong&gt; link at the bottom of any page on the site. This bypasses the elected moderators, contacting the staff Community Managers directly. For convenience, here's the link directly: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;Contact Us&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T17:43:04.193" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6665" CreationDate="2017-01-05T18:01:30.940" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just to add some information to help you understand what's going on.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE and the whole Stack Exchange network are a Question and Answer site.  We have a decent amount of rules and processes in place to keep it that way.  We are NOT a chat room or message board or a subreddit.  We are a place where people go to get to information they need to solve their problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The core question, which it seems that Seven has edited the question down to, seems to be a good, legitimate question.  If you want to post an answer to your own question, have at it, that's perfectly fine on this site.  However, when a question is worded poorly the community's job is to make it work better so that future readers can get at the solution.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close questions to prevent others from saying &quot;Well this question was allowed.&quot;  We have to enforce certain rules on the site, or risk it being over ran by garbage questions and driving away the experts.  If you are unwilling to use the system as it's laid out before you, then RPG.SE and the Stack Exchange network might not be suited for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, a question being closed isn't a death sentence.  It's a mark that the question wasn't up to snuff.  You can edit the question and get it re-opened if the community thinks it's a a viable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you find this informative.  There is no personal attack here, we just have somewhat strict expectations for questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T18:01:30.940" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6669" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6665" CreationDate="2017-01-05T20:02:21.467" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;No inappropriate moderation activity was conducted on you.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry that your first experience on the site was confusing. You seem to have run up against several different issues, which have convinced you you're being &quot;picked on by a mod&quot; while in reality it's just a variety of community members and several mods working to curate questions, answers, and comments as usual.  Let me explain to you what has transpired from the point of view of an experienced site member.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Timeline&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You had a couple initial questions go by fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then you asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92597/can-a-creature-use-its-free-interaction-with-an-object-during-a-bonus-action&quot;&gt;Can a creature use its &amp;quot;free&amp;quot; interaction with an object during a bonus action?&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You clearly had some investment in how the answer to this turned out.  LegendaryDude answered it, you disagreed, and this led to a lengthy comment thread turned argument that drew flags. There were several flags from site users about wanting to edit in the example to the question but reluctance due to you showing hostility about doing so. You took exception to LegendaryDude's comments and sent us flags about them being hostile, both before and after he really tried to build bridges with you, e.g. &quot; @TrollBourne Neither did I say your question is dumb nor imply it. I am genuinely trying to help you, and genuinely am not sure where the miscommunication has occurred. I sincerely hope you re-read what I have written in that light.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I then moved the comment thread on LD's answer to chat, as it was turning into lengthy back and forth which is not what comments are for on this site; see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You threw more flags about the comment deletion, and SSD provided a link to Meta you had trouble using. You self-posted an answer which wasn't well received and got downvoted. This led to another comment argument on that answer, which SSD deleted, as we do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far we're at 35 deleted comments and 8 flags on one question. This is unusual and draws additional attention from site power users and moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile you had answers on a couple other questions downvoted - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92591/can-the-portent-ability-of-a-diviner-wizard-negate-a-critical-hit/92636#92636&quot;&gt;Can the Portent ability of a Diviner Wizard negate a critical hit?&lt;/a&gt;, another I'm having trouble finding - and started posting complaining comments about the downvotes.  You also started sending mod flags for a variety of reasons, including trying to PM us I guess and also complaining about other questions on the site that are perfectly on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then you asked your second question, which I have to admit I didn't find extremely coherent in its initial formulation either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92644/is-a-bonus-action-an-action&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92644/is-a-bonus-action-an-action&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People tried to help via comments and suggested edits and the question was placed on hold, which is routine for questions that need some workshopping before people try to answer them.  But then comments and edits escalated to arguments and flagging. That question is now up to 6 flags and 30 or so comments. Again, a big warning flag to site regulars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now we're at the point where you are refusing to take any guidance on how we like to conduct our Q&amp;amp;A here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Ladifas, Hey I Can Chan, Nitsua60, and friends...As I appreciate your input to instruct me in the ways of formulating a question, I am a college graduate and think I can word a question in exactly the manner that I would want it to be portrayed. &quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;SevenSidedDie...I've got some major problems with you my friend and the next few comments are for you.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so you've decided you're being &quot;singled out.&quot; Your further commenting has come very close to our site &quot;Be Nice&quot; behavior guideline and from my viewpoint seems to be more like escalating and lashing out than &quot;appreciating input.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So what to do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, take a moment to calm down.  No one's out to get you.  In fact, ironically, much of this is being caused by people trying to help you.  They may not be trying to help you in the exact way you want, but that's frequently the price of getting help from others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While you're welcome to write whatever question you want, it'll get closed if site members don't think it's a good question.  Answers people don't agree with will get downvoted.  Downvotes don't have to be explained. And too chatty comments or comment arguing will be deleted/put to chat, per that other linked meta post.  That's just the way the site works.  People suggest edits that you are free to accept or revert, but they're just trying to help you get your question reopened as clear and answerable within our site guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something like a half dozen site users have tried to help you by trying to explain how to get your questions on track and why your answers got downvoted - commenting, editing, answering, etc. You've interpreted this as being dogpiled on while they intend it as help.  You've also misinterpreted the collective editing, closing, flagging, and deleting action of SSD, me, and other site users as being &quot;SSD singling you out.&quot;  It's not.  At most, it's site moderators reacting to an extremely unusual amount of flags and arguments, which is well within your power to quell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't understand why something is happening or why the site works a certain way, feel free to ask.  We understand that this site is a lot more focused than reddit or forums or whatever and that can mean some behaviors seem unexpected here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But getting wound up about it to the point of being disruptive and hostile isn't a good answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-01-05T20:14:50.333" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6670" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6662" CreationDate="2017-01-06T02:37:11.363" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;My personal opinion would be that, when discussing a specific game, it's usually better to stick to the terminology and spelling conventions used by the official sources, however idiosyncratic they may be, &lt;em&gt;as long as doing so doesn't get in the way of clear communication.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the point where something gets in the way of communication, or simply feels annoying, is necessarily subjective.  Thus, to avoid needless arguments over trivial matters, it's IMO better to defer to the original author's preferences, even if they happen to differ from your own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yes, IMO both &quot;Hit Dice&quot; and &quot;hit dice&quot; are perfectly fine, and I would not edit a post to replace one with the other (at least, not unless I had other reasons for extensively copyediting it anyway, and was reasonably sure that the original author wouldn't mind).  But, &lt;em&gt;all else being equal&lt;/em&gt;, I would generally prefer to use whichever spelling the official sources used &amp;mdash; again assuming, of course, that this did not compromise readability in my view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the specific case of &quot;nonepic&quot;, I must admit that, official or not, the unhyphenated spelling kind of annoys me, simply because my brain keeps trying to parse it as &quot;none-pic&quot;.  So, despite everything I just wrote above, I do personally feel that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92544/can-a-non-epic-character-use-an-epic-item/92548#92548&quot;&gt;your answer&lt;/a&gt; looks better with the hyphens.  But if you were to edit them out, I certainly wouldn't object, especially not after you'd made your preference clear in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-01-06T02:37:11.363" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6665" CreationDate="2017-01-06T16:22:53.753" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I debated tossing in my 2 cents on this, but I think they might be helpful given that I am relatively new to the site (about 3 months). In addition, I wished to build a little on SSD's answer that the way the site 'works' can be a little unintuitive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record, I have little understanding of the moderator duties and things like that. I'm aware of up votes, down votes, close votes, etc. but with regards to 'knowing' exactly what constitutes a 'bad' question is a definitely a little more vague and will vary from user to user. I can say that a little trial and error on my part helped me to figure it out as well as getting called out once or twice for some mistakes that I made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is one thing that is consistent about whether something's a good question or a bad question and it's does the audience agree that it's a good question. Obviously, if you post something that gets 10 up votes, it's probably a good question. If something gets 10 upvotes and 10 downvotes, although this nets a score of 0, I would likely still say that it's a good question because apparently the answer isn't obvious to everyone so it may have been worth asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, if you post something and it garners 10 down votes and no up votes, then it's probably a bad question and requires introspection on the asker to improve upon. And indeed they should rely upon comments to guide them towards improving their question. And this is the clutch on the whole thing; I didn't see any effort to improve your questions. I feel like you wanted to 'win' up votes by trying to find minutia in the rules that weren't really problems, but more like 'gotcha' questions. But in general, these aren't problems that come up around the table and that was what stood out to me when you couldn't provide an actual example of your problem. This told me that although you found some minutia in the rules that might be a contradiction, it wasn't a real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In summary, I felt you you were looking for problems that didn't exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2017-01-06T16:22:53.753" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6672" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-08T04:59:04.837" Score="22" ViewCount="644" Body="&lt;p&gt;For what reasoning was this question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92729/what-to-do-about-a-player-who-takes-risks-and-dies-without-consequence/&quot;&gt;What to do about a player who takes risks and dies (without consequence)?&lt;/a&gt;) with 21 upvotes and no downvotes On Hold as opinion based and most of the (IMO more interesting/agreeable) answers marked as needing evidence on unspecified points?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me an interesting question with some interesting answers, whereas this other question ( &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37374/dealing-with-fearless-players?rq=1&quot;&gt;Dealing with &amp;quot;fearless&amp;quot; players&lt;/a&gt; ), to my mind rather similar and perhaps even a duplicate. (It has 53 upvotes and 0 downvotes.) I wonder how the people who put the first question on hold feel about that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I note too that the accepted answer to the second question, with 80+ upvotes, and second answer with 20+ upvotes, seem to lack citations while expressing similar opinions to the answers being warned about possible deletion for lack of citation on the first question. Why are those answers marked, and what are the answerers expected to do about them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't understand, and without explanation, greatly disagree with shutting down the question and proposing to remove content without seeming good explanation. I would think it would do well to leave it open a bit longer for people to finish adding interesting things to it, and then mark is as a possible duplicate to the &quot;fearless&quot; question, but not delete it, as there are interesting perspectives all around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then again, perhaps I ought to just avoid this site altogether, as it seems like every time I think I've made peace with the policies, some new level of weird censorship in the name of improvement comes along and deletes interesting content and/or considerable effort. I wish I understood better - as it is it seems really bizarre and disrespectful to people trying to contribute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-12T21:14:59.057" Title="Why is one +21 question On Hold when a similar question is ok with +53 votes?" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|subjective-questions|citations|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6672" CreationDate="2017-01-08T17:18:19.353" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is complicated, because there's a lot of different things going on here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In general, &quot;Why is question X treated different from question Y?&quot; isn't a real good question.  Well, they're nearly three years apart, different people participated in each,  maybe a mod hadn't drunk coffee that day, etc.  Proof by &quot;but but another question did it&quot; is never helpful.  In fact, if you see something wrong with an older question please feel free to flag it or perform other corrective activity, as mods don't read every post on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In this specific case, the questions are not duplicates. The earlier one is about &quot;I have players that don't bother to fear death, because I don't kill them ever.&quot;  This question is about &quot;A guy has a stack of character sheets and doesn't mind dying.&quot; Not only are they very different, they thus demand a different level of Back It Up!.  Most every GM has had to struggle with the balance between killing PCs and not killing PCs and its effects on PCs' attitudes toward the world - I think it's fair to say that's a basic GM technique. Thus there's a lot less demand for Back It Up! on the first question (and some of the answers &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; cite experience). This second question, someone with a stack of character sheets, is obviously much more unusual and we'd like to hear from someone who's dealt with a serial character-suicider to understand how to handle that. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even the previous question you link didn't go down super smoothly, as you can see from the comments and edits and such on it, and I can see from the flags, deleted comments, and load of short/partial answers (these even generated an automatic flag from the system to us - &quot;hey there's a bunch of kinda junky looking answers appearing on a question, want to go check it out?&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question hasn't been deleted, it's just put on hold for improvements to be made, which is not some crisis.  I find most of the angst around stuff like this is driven by people taking &quot;on hold&quot; as other than what it's meant to be, a temporary hold to improve before we get even more junky answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective and Back It Up! are crucial to running a site like this. Gamers have loads of opinions, and they all think they're smart enough to answer someone else's question even if they have never done that thing. If this were my question, I would very much want to know that an answer was &quot;I had this problem, here's what I did and here's what happened,&quot; not &quot;oh a random guy brainstormed me something that might work or might backfire or whatnot because they have absolutely zero experience in what they're talking about.&quot;  I am not going to argue here for why we use GS/BS and Back It Up!  - we do, and we're not going to stop.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The community, like any other, goes in waves.  We've had times where everyone generally understands GS/BS, writes good gm-techniques type questions and answers show experience.  Then we have times like now, where we have new users that haven't run across it yet from the sea of rules-questions, and an answer gets asked and we get a dozen answers, nearly all of which appear to be pure brainstorming speculation, which is off topic here per #5 above.  So more enforcement is needed in the short term to train everyone.  We encourage the rest of the community to participate to make that a quicker and easier transitional period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You like questions like this.  Well, me too!  Believe me, I don't stay on this SE for the min-maxing and rules lawyering.  GM techniques is just about all I need/care about after 30 years of gaming. And since I'm interested in those questions, I want to hear people's real experience with that problem, not some half assed guess they just came up with in their basement. I can guess myself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;But you want freer discourse and brainstorming and no need to show experience on answers.  Super, there's plenty of forums out there that do that.  In fact, all of them. We can't have it both ways.  The reason SE has such high quality Q&amp;amp;A is that we curate - we curate questions and answers, we close, we edit, we delete, we flag, and not just the mods, the community.  It's why when you Google a question and get a link to a forum or Reddit or Yahoo Answers you're 90% likely to get total garbage and when you get a link to a SE you're 90% likely to get a high quality, community vetted answer.  You don't have to pick one or the other!  Spend some time crafting homebrew and &quot;what if&quot;fing on forums.  Spend time asking specific questions and taking a little quality time to share your hard won experience in decent quality form here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the question becomes, what do we do in these cases?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ignore it, or at best pop in some comments about GS/BS.  That results in questions that get out of control, like this one, turning into junk.  As I read all those answers I see lots of untested opinion that it's a waste of time reading. Or add those post notices, which are a lot of work and just perplex people it appears.  Doesn't work well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Delete answers that don't show experience and say they can be undeleted once they've been deleted to Back It Up!  No one likes getting their content deleted, and it's definitely not something we intend to do regularly just because it's a lot of work on the mods.  We will do this once in a long while as a &quot;shock treatment&quot; to get all the noobs aligned but it's not acceptable general practice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Close the question and say &quot;it'll get reopened if this shapes up.&quot;  Now, one can say it's not the question's fault...  But usually in these cases the question could do a lot better about requesting GS/BS itself, where it goes into opinionland like this is when it's perhaps not as focused as it could be. However, it's unlikely everyone will shape it up. This is the least problematic of the three solutions so far, but it leaves a good question unanswered.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Community members remember that GS/BS is what separates us from the animals. Downvote any answer that does not show experience with the situation in question, add comments explaining it should be added.  This is turning into a &quot;mod thing&quot; because other folks aren't holding up their end. If all those answers were at -5, their owners would be falling over themselves to correct or delete them.  This solution works and makes the site better.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am in favor of #4, but it is not under my control.  When #4 fails, we do 1, 2, or 3 based on our judgement and amount of energy at the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-01-10T02:38:22.033" LastActivityDate="2017-01-10T02:38:22.033" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6674" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6672" CreationDate="2017-01-08T21:44:10.087" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is gonna be long. You've asked some very important, very complex questions and I'll try to do them justice--&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1WzS_k0qQ8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;but you don't have to take my word for it&lt;/a&gt;. As we get deeper into the material I'll be offering links to references, histories, and further explanations of various themes and topics. I highly recommend using those links as jumping-off points for your own research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;First:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're absolutely right that sometimes folks are overzealous about curating the RPG Stack. People get excited or anxious or just plain crabby, or a particular topic strikes a little close to home. We can misread a post, or misunderstand a policy, or just be so thrilled about a new tool that we overuse it for a while. This behaviour needs to be called out --&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;kindly!&lt;/a&gt;-- so we can improve both as individuals and as a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What happened here specifically?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The examples you've invoked are, to my eye, edge cases which can swing either way. There is no “close questions exactly like this” memo you didn’t get, people are just making judgement calls from experience-based site principles. Our community usually makes reasoned calls and is open to reasoned challenges--I've successfully argued for reversals myself, but arguing a specific vote reversal is different from challenging a general principle. Trying to do both at once usually accomplishes neither.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the community and its policies grow and change, we don't do active witch-hunts for older questions no longer consistent with new policy or understandings of what works here. Older material was handled in ways out of sync with how we currently operate. One question was asked two and a half years ago and the other was asked yesterday; different members of the community responded to each according to the era. Questions like yours are often how older questions get modern curation applied to them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92729/what-to-do-about-a-player-who-takes-risks-and-dies-without-consequence#comment213308_92729&quot;&gt;Mxy's comment&lt;/a&gt; explains what new learning was applied to the newer question: experience shows that even if a question seems superficially fine, serially poor answers indicate there's some underlying problem which needs addressing. (You may not feel the answers are poor; that's something I'll talk about downstream.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Closing policies in GS/BS: A Big Topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your broader question is about closing policies in general and GS/BS in particular, and that's a really big topic! I've taken years to feel like I've wrapped my head around it. [deep breath] Okay, here goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first thing I had to figure out is that each Stack site is a dynamic organism. They've all got the same skeletal structure of site mechanics, and the same broad directives and guidance from the network, but it's a living process to learn how a particular Stack's community and subject matter best weaves those elements into a good Stack site for their topic. RPG.SE is always learning more about itself and shifting its behaviour accordingly. What it looks like today is radically different from five years ago, and it'll be just as different five years from now. I expect this question will influence that future!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Early on RPG.SE was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/571/4398&quot;&gt;eager to accept&lt;/a&gt; every &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1071/4398&quot;&gt;kind of question&lt;/a&gt; even vaguely related to our hobby; later on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/4398&quot;&gt;folks realised&lt;/a&gt; this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/4398&quot;&gt;wasn't always viable&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also RPG.SE has learnt it's different from other Stacks because many RPG experts are used to traditional RPG forums. And, well, a lot of those forums have a reputation for caustic behaviour which is not so normalised in many of the other Stacks' wider related communities. Over the years this community has clung increasingly to the Stack network's central principles and guidelines --much more than some other Stack sites-- because it's sadly necessary. &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/a/617&quot;&gt;This isn't unique to RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt;, but you may not spend a lot of time in Stacks like Christianity.SE, parenting.SE, or gardening.SE (yes, really!) which have had it even worse than we do at some point and/or have had longer to figure out how to deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderation and curation are organic processes that need to adapt to emergent conditions. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6673/4398&quot;&gt;As Mxy points out&lt;/a&gt;, sometimes a bit of extra zealotry is necessary in the face of an influx of newcomers who are taking a while to process how this Stack is different from what they're used to. So when current policies get discussed, proposals for change should take into account both the history which brought us to this point and the current condition of the site. I'm glad you've asked about the background of these issues, and I hope this answer can help give some context for your concerns--and please do check out the links I'm providing, too! Don't just take my word for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're absolutely right that the Stack can sometimes seem cavalier about our contributions to the site, and disdains fascinating opportunities related to a site's subject material. This can be very disheartening, but there are a few notions which may help explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; it happens and how it's often a feature rather than a bug (however bitter a feature it is to swallow). To that end, I'd like to take some space specifically addressing some of the mechanics and policies you alluded to in your question, and some references to RPG.SE's history with them. For whichever of these things you already totally get, just consider me nauseatingly thorough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Subjectivity is awesome and we like it.&lt;/strong&gt; However, over the years RPG.SE has learnt &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;what the Stack network already knew&lt;/a&gt;: subjective answers need to be backed up with someone's relevant experience (not necessarily the answerer's own!). &lt;em&gt;Unsupported&lt;/em&gt; speculation causes a lot of problems, from comment arguments to sorting difficulties to just plain useless answers. Besides, really good answers explain why and how their proposed solution is a useful one. GS/BS is just a codification of that principle. The Stack wants to draw on its users' expertise with whatever situation is being asked about, rather than collect a bunch of untested guesses that may not work or may even cause serious harm to games, interpersonal relationships, or people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some types of questions just don’t work in the Stack format. We couldn’t find a way to have game recommendations work (&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping&quot;&gt;most of the rest of the stack had already forbade them&lt;/a&gt;), and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation+discussion&quot;&gt;boy howdy did we try&lt;/a&gt;. Some of those types may &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/185486/244929&quot;&gt;get confused with&lt;/a&gt; types of questions which take more effort to work, or are only useable in a subset of cases. There are strategies for re-jiggering questions to be a better fit (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5787/4398&quot;&gt;we found a way for game-recs&lt;/a&gt;) but none are one-size-fits-all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-up&quot;&gt;Up voting&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;down voting&lt;/a&gt; are wholly unrelated to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=closed%3A1+score%3A10&quot;&gt;close voting&lt;/a&gt; and to delete voting.&lt;/strong&gt; I semi-regularly upvote questions which I also vote to close, because each kind of voting has separate unique criteria. The Stack network's goal is to provide well-sorted actionable answers to problems people are really facing, and up/down voting is (alongside tagging) &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/130046/244929&quot;&gt;how we do the &quot;well-sorted&quot; bit of the job&lt;/a&gt;. A well-upvoted question or answer should be useful (probably well-researched, clear, and interesting), but that doesn't make it any more or less in line with, eg, the site's topicality guidelines. It's also important to know that while there are &lt;em&gt;guidelines&lt;/em&gt; for voting, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/902/4398&quot;&gt;everyone is free to vote as they see fit&lt;/a&gt; with no repercussions or oversight except for automatic checks against rampant vote-spam abuse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10582/what-is-a-closed-or-on-hold-question&quot;&gt;Closing&lt;/a&gt; is not a punishment, it's a reprieve.&lt;/strong&gt; Closing a question gives the querent space to improve the question before they get inundated with answers that don't quite match what they were after (thus wasting everyone's time). It's also a firm flag to the querent that they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; improve their question; we can't just hope somebody gets lucky and guesses a useful answer, it forces us to do our bit keeping up the site's content quality if we want solutions. Which leads me to the next bit...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;The Stack optimises for answers, not questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; Questions are a dime a dozen and we can afford to be picky about 'em. The Stack wants good answers, and experience has slowly taught each site what sorts of qualities in questions attract more chaff than wheat. Please read the linked article; there's a cost/benefit analysis at work in the network which errs toward quality over quantity. You may have also seen some Stack sites where that priority is not given its due, often out of a desire to be welcoming at the cost of being useful. This causes problems because...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Our questions define our answers.&lt;/strong&gt; This is implicit in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;advice on questions to avoid&lt;/a&gt; (admittedly a weird place to put this): &quot;Constructive subjective questions: inspire answers that explain 'why' and 'how;' [...] tend to have long, not short, answers; [... and] invite sharing experiences over opinions.&quot; If all the answers on a particular question are poor in the same sort of way, we should look to the question to see why.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/5221/244929&quot;&gt;Deletion&lt;/a&gt; is not automatic,&lt;/strong&gt; nor (with &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/92006/244929&quot;&gt;one exception&lt;/a&gt;) is it an escalation from being closed: it's a different mechanic entirely. (When questions are put on hold, they switch to &quot;closed&quot; after some days but it's just a cosmetic change and they aren't in danger of being deleted simply by virtue of having been closed.) It’s reserved for only the most egregious cases, usually spam, offensive content, or obviously non-Stackly answers. The stock notice about adding sources or the answer will be deleted is addressing those extreme cases so folks can't say they weren't warned: it's not a common or casual thing. (There was a period on RPG.SE when deletion was wielded more liberally for a very specific subset of poor answers to a very specific kind of question, but that era is past; it was a last-ditch effort to retain our ability to usefully answer game-recommendation questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And now, some harsh and often unpopular parts of the Stack Exchange philosophy. These are the &quot;love it or leave it&quot; bits where a user can either live with it because the results are effective, or can't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange is not and never has been interested in being a one-stop-shop for all questions on a Stack site's target subject. There are many great forums which handle certain kinds of questions very well, and the Stack is mostly interested in filling some of the gaps which more discussion-y sites &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; handle well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, the Stack isn't interested in everyone's participation. Maintaining and growing a well-sorted stack of actionable answers to practical questions can be daunting, difficult, and requires cordial disagreement. Folks who aren't interested in doing that for free... well, we're okay with losing them quickly because it wastes less of their time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Understanding what’s going on now&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm gonna speak to your last two paragraphs directly now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree totally that the community can be lax in explaining clearly why questions are being deleted, or why certain guidelines are enforced for answers. We struggle with this constantly: if we explain too much, it's dogpiling and lecturing. If we explain too little, it's esoteric and elitist. It's a fine line to tread and you can help us. Perhaps you could start by offering improvements to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6168/4398&quot;&gt;this sadly underdeveloped resource&lt;/a&gt;, or suggesting some new strategies entirely?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can be unwelcoming when my hard-worked content goes away, even if I understand why. Our Stack network overlords believe quality content is more attractive to experts than warm fuzzies--though our overlords are happiest when warm fuzzies are also available to the users, that comes a distant second to content curation. We attract and keep active users more through making sure our site has lots of great content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the closed question you linked to will not be deleted, nor do I think any of its answers are particularly likely to be deleted. The existing content remains, sorted and tagged for everyone to benefit from. The closure was just a plug to so more users won't spend their time and energy on creating and curating unsupported speculation--which while interesting, doesn't attract and keep experts. Closures are easily reversed when the cause is addressed, and I hope this one gets addressed. It's only been a couple days now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you find RPG.SE palatable and continue to help us create and curate this excellent stack of solutions. If you do decide it's not your style, though, there's no harm nor foul. Not all Stack sites are equally appealing to me either; there are a couple with topics I love but whose communities and/or policies don't mesh with me at all. It's a little sad, but very understandable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's important for folks to give (respectful, constructive, supported) feedback on how each site can grow, so thank you for yours. I recently gave another Stack an earful, myself. I hope I've given you some context for what's going on here, and I look forward to your continued activity. Thanks again for asking those questions, it's been good for me to re-examine this stuff too!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-01-11T04:18:21.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6615" CreationDate="2017-01-09T00:32:08.327" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://stackoverflow.blog/2017/01/say-farewell-to-winter-bash-2016/&quot;&gt;Once again&lt;/a&gt;, the hats have been driven into hatboxes and sealed within by powerful wards, to be watched over forever by guardian golems with visages terrible to behold. May &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6640/hatocalypse-2016-survivors-photo-album&quot;&gt;our tales of this time&lt;/a&gt; help those who come after.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A fresh invasion of hats will come next year, as every year, but we have vanquished &lt;em&gt;these&lt;/em&gt; hats and shall not see their like again, until this Age vanishes beyond myth and is forgotten and comes again, as the wheel of time turns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.flickr.com/photos/yourcastlesdecor/13477376875&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/gfLUNl.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Ancient hatboxes of power and their eternally watchful guardians&quot; title=&quot;Vintage Hat Boxes by Jean L. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yourcastlesdecor/), used with permission under CC-BY 2.0&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-09T16:22:13.820" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6676" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6677" CreationDate="2017-01-09T22:17:15.370" Score="15" ViewCount="351" Body="&lt;p&gt;The asker of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92839/can-you-take-a-short-rest-while-unconscious&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92839/can-you-take-a-short-rest-while-unconscious&lt;/a&gt; decided that account deletion was their preferred future on the site, leaving behind a question that's a bit of a mess. (There is also the detail that, very likely, they were not supposed to be using the site while their real account was serving a suspension.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has a very nice canonical title, but its details are extremely specific to the one — now non-existent — account's problem. The details of the problem were also likely invented for effect. It's a bit of a shame to have such a straightforward title occupied by such a narrow question, when that question is very likely to need answering properly and directly at some point in RPG.se's future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What shall we do with this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-01-22T19:29:00.030" Title="What to do with “Can you take a short rest while unconscious?”" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6676" CreationDate="2017-01-09T22:22:02.687" Score="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Close and delete&lt;/strong&gt; the post because the sockpuppet was used to bypass a posting ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then let a new question on the topic be asked organically again--perhaps by someone with a good answer so they can SAQ it, perhaps by someone else much later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For a less drastic solution, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6678/4398&quot;&gt;my other answer&lt;/a&gt;, separated so folks can vote for each uniquely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-01-09T22:23:38.113" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6676" CreationDate="2017-01-09T22:24:49.720" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Close the post&lt;/strong&gt; because the sockpuppet was used to bypass a posting ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Change the title&lt;/strong&gt; to better reflect the question's specific dilemma.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then let a new question on the topic be asked organically again--perhaps by someone with a good answer so they can SAQ it, perhaps by someone else much later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For a more drastic solution, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6677/4398&quot;&gt;my other answer&lt;/a&gt;, separated so folks can vote for each uniquely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-01-09T22:24:49.720" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6679" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6680" CreationDate="2017-01-10T20:54:30.650" Score="5" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was trying to find a chat room associated with an answer to a few different questions, but in all instances I kept getting hit with a 'Page Not Found' presumably because I lacked the 20 rep to participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was under the impression that in order to participate in chat I need 20 rep on the relevant site (in this case RPG SE). Is this assumption erroneous?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, do I need rep on Stack Exchange, if so, how do I do that? This might seem like a dumb question, but it appears that their page is a list of questions from a litany of different sub-exchanges such as RPG SE, Mathematica SE, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically this post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19679/31402&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19679/31402&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and this post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/38202/31402&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/38202/31402&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-07T17:54:57.500" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T17:54:57.500" Title="Why are certain chatrooms giving me a Page Not Found?" Tags="|support|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6679" CreationDate="2017-01-10T21:08:44.643" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You already have enough reputation to participate in chat. That's not what's going on there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since forever, chat rooms that aren't active get automatically frozen (read-only), then eventually possibly deleted (inaccessible). &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/faq#retention&quot;&gt;The criteria for deletion&lt;/a&gt; nearly perfectly matches the typical chat room that is created when comments are moved to chat, but the move-to-chat feature is younger than the delete-disused-rooms feature, and they have never been reconciled by the SE developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This results in getting “Page Not Found” when you go look for old chat rooms that were spawned from comments moved to chat, because they've been auto-deleted. These deleted rooms are technically still archived, but no longer publicly accessible. That's also for great reasons that make sense in other cases (a deleted room shouldn't be accessible, right?!), but doesn't quite make sense for moved-comments chat rooms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a feature request on Meta.SO to have it changed so transcripts of such rooms are still readable — because wouldn't it make sense for those logs to be available still? — but it doesn't appear to have much traction: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/288612/make-chat-room-transcripts-forever-public-if-the-room-was-auto-deleted&quot;&gt;Make chat room transcripts forever public if the room was auto-deleted&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is there a workaround?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a room is particularly important to humans despite not meeting the algorithm's sense of importance, it can be resurrected. Most aren't super-interesting, but your second example kind of has the &lt;em&gt;intention&lt;/em&gt; of being longer-living: the idea was for it to be a place to discuss a certain topic, but as a room it never took off. (The actual activity in that chat room was almost non-existent.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time, it &lt;em&gt;won't&lt;/em&gt; be worth it, but in the rare cases where it is, a mod can resurrect a room by undeleting and unfreezing it; the easiest way being a flag on the associated moved-to-chat comment. If it garners sufficient activity after that, it will avoid auto-deletion again (though not freezing, but those are at least readable still). No promise that such requests will always be fulfilled, but then again, it's neither much work on our part nor much disruption if it was done without good reason, since it'll revert to the deleted state if it's not used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2017-01-10T21:19:31.387" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6679" CreationDate="2017-01-10T22:01:25.947" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie's pretty adequately explained why you can't view those chat rooms, which is the core of the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to clarify what's going on with the reputation and access, since you're correct about some things and mistaken about others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Chat counts your network reputation as the sum total of your reputation on each Stack Exchange site you're a member of. You already have at least 2k Stack Exchange rep by the chat's count. (There is otherwise no concept of &quot;Stack Exchange rep&quot;.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat&quot;&gt;You are correct that you need 20 rep to participate in chat&lt;/a&gt;. However once you unlock that privilege you can participate in &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; chat room. You do not need to earn 20 rep per site. I can speak in chat rooms for sites I don't even have an account on. (Stack Overflow is different: since it has its own chat servers, it only counts reputation from Stack Overflow.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You do need 20 rep to participate in chats, but you &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; need it to view them. Chat rooms are public, even to people who have no account anywhere on the Stack Exchange network &amp;mdash; try viewing a room in private browsing mode. If you're having issues finding a room, this would have nothing to do with it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-01-10T22:18:58.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6682" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2017-01-11T20:33:14.607" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A tidy site is safer from trolls&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another, way less obvious reason to ruthlessly remove comments used for anything other than managing Q&amp;amp;A posts: innocent but chatty comments would provide “weeds” that give cover for trolls and other bad actors to better blend in with our good users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By contrast, removing everything that's not focused on improving Q&amp;amp;A quality &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/289629/how-does-stack-exchange-stimulate-honest-open-discourse-while-limiting-the-effe&quot;&gt;makes trolls stick out like a sore thumb&lt;/a&gt; compared to acceptable uses of comments. If the only way a troll can use the site is by asking good, on-topic questions and providing thoughtful, well-supported answers, they're effectively &lt;em&gt;unable&lt;/em&gt; to achieve their mission and end up achieving ours instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a major reason why SE in general and RPG.se in particular isn't overrun with toxic accounts. Cutting out the grey zone between productive and destructive uses of the site means people who use the site have to declare for one or the other purpose: work together on Q&amp;amp;A, or out themself as here for trouble. Since eliminating the in-between stuff creates a fairly bright line between welcome behaviours and unwelcome ones, everyone with community moderation tool privileges can tell when someone is here to make trouble, as they stand out clearly from our good-faith users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This clear space between also gives us much more room for our established good-faith users to be human and imperfect, to err without making anyone suddenly wonder if, wait, have they really been a troll all this time? It gives us a clear basic level of mutual trust that is very valuable for productively tackling conflicting views.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It's like keeping the land around a castle clear of scrub&lt;/strong&gt;: there's nowhere for an approaching army to hide, and it gives a lot of clear space to easily see how people present and conduct themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:37.900" LastActivityDate="2017-01-11T20:33:14.607" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6683" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6689" CreationDate="2017-01-12T10:19:44.813" Score="16" ViewCount="455" Body="&lt;p&gt;I attempted to answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93009/new-girl-gamer-in-our-dd-group-is-causing-weird-tension-what-to-do&quot;&gt;a question about group dynamics&lt;/a&gt; today, which I did by talking about how I think this issue would be best resolved. I received two comments, suggesting that I should provide whether I had personal experience on the matter, in order to create a more cohesive, less speculative answer. Also, SevenSidedDie wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We do prefer answers backed up by specific experience. If it does not exactly match, to be honest that is helpful for the reader to better validate its relevance, evaluate its effectiveness, and adapt it to their particular circumstances. It also helps separate the sounds-good-but-questionable-worth armchair advice from the hard-earned wisdom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm willing to accept that and edit my answer accordingly, but I can't find a way to do that without - in my opinion - lessening the helpfulness of it. My answer is based on personal experience, but that seems like an irrelevant factor to me because each constellation of players will be different, so talking about experience just makes the answer unreasonably complex for no gain to the questioner (unless they're from my group themselves), and while I can add &quot;this happened to me before&quot; (I'm paraphrasing), the answer doesn't get any better by adding it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me give you two example paragraphs, of which the first is something like what my answer contains, and the second what I believe bringing personal experience into it entails:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;The DM might be equally affected by the issue, or might escalate the situation even further if they adjust the adventure according to the problem&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I've experienced a DM adjusting the scenario in the attempt to solve a specific social problem, which did not have the intended result and everyone - including the player originally addressing the issue - ended up disappointed and less satisfied than with the original situation&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second sentence is longer and more convoluted, therefore less easy to grasp it's statement. It includes personal experience, but in turn sacrifices the &quot;this may happen&quot; clause, possibly suggesting to the reader that this is what I think will always be true. Specific to this sentence, it seems to always put the blame on th DM because they were in fault in my experience, while this doesn't have to be true - assuming this is valid advice, the questioner might discard it because they take the specifics from my personal example, skipping over the point I originally tried to make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, I believe that the second answer is the less optimal one. I'm thankful for any advice regarding where I'm &quot;wrong&quot; (or at least not following the guidelines), or even specific feedback to the example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to also add one of the comments to this question, which very well describes my own viewpoint:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think an important question might be 'Why does everyone assume that an answerer has no experience?'. There shouldn't be an absolute requirement to back every answer up with 'proof' unless that answer is somehow lacking in other aspects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30677" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-30T17:43:41.347" Title="How should I provide examples of experience as support for my answer?" Tags="|discussion|support|answers|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6683" CreationDate="2017-01-12T10:31:35.280" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like to refer to the advice about what good answers look like which can be found in (strangely enough) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;&quot;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; It tells me to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;explain “why” and “how”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;write long, not short, answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;use a constructive, fair, and impartial tone&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;share experiences over opinions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;back up opinion with facts and references&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken together, this means explaining clearly not just what my advice is, but also sharing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how I learnt the techniques or insights I'm offering&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why I think it's a good solution to the situation being asked about&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what effect I think the advice will have&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leads naturally to sharing my experiences as part of my answers. It improves my advice (not replaces it!): specificity helps people judge the answer's usefulness to the original querent (making it easier to vote effectively) &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; helps future users tell whether my advice will be useful in their similar-but-not-quite-the-same situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a few examples of well-received answers I've written in this style:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/53264/4398&quot;&gt;How to build an evil campaign&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/19631/4398&quot;&gt;How can a GM justify changing a player's alignment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/58845/4398&quot;&gt;How do I convince my group to try a new system without always having to DM it first?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is, I'm not really clear what actionable advice you're offering the querent at all. Your answer describes a useful-sounding perspective, but empathy and a recognition that it's a primarily social challenge don't obviously point to specific solutions. We need you to connect the dots between the attitude and the action for us; the Stack doesn't do &quot;we leave the solution as an exercise for the reader.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T11:22:29.507" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6685" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6683" CreationDate="2017-01-12T13:31:31.820" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The second one is better, if a little tortured and perhaps better broken up into two sentences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the thing.  Without any experience cited, you're just some guy giving opinions off the top of their head.  &quot;The DM might do X!&quot;  Well, the DM might be kidnapped by aliens too.  The world is full of people with opinions about situations that they've never been in and therefore have very little insight into.  Using their advice is like rolling a die at random.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this question, it's a very good signifier to take advice seriously if it comes from someone who's had this or a similar dynamic problem in their group, or has seen one, or read about one. It doesn't have to be identical, but the description of the experience then helps to indicate what parts of the advice are on stronger ground and more applicable in this case and which might be weaker (e.g. &quot;we had a new male player join an all male group and act helpless and other PCs picked up his slack all the time&quot; would cover about half the dynamic in play here, but not the gender/sexual issues).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only reason you think the first sentence is stronger is because you think anyone has any reason to take what you're saying seriously.  But we don't.  It's the Internet.  As far as I know you've never talked to a girl and never played in an RPG. You have to ask yourself, &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; is your insight in this case better than someone's opinion who doesn't know what they're talking about?  Well, part of the challenge is to communicate to us why. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We feel strongly enough about this on the stack that if all answers are just opinions with no experience, we close the question down or delete the answers. We're not a forum, we want to have high quality questions and answers for site members and the Googling public. The community may like an answer and vote it up - but if there's no evidence in the answer, then it's one of the times the community has stopped thinking clearly and gone the popularity-contest route, and again, that's not what we're here for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for everyone - what Back It Up! means is that you need to provide some evidence!  From a book, from your game, from some podcast talking about the issue.  Doesn't have to be yours, and it doesn't guarantee it's going to work because sure, every person and group is their own special little snowflake, but in the end there's a heck of a difference between &quot;this is what we did and here's how it worked in one case&quot; and &quot;here's some random opinion no one has ever used, successfully or unsuccessfully.&quot;  The latter is a waste of space on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &quot;how&quot; - not sure how to answer that, use your words.  Keep in mind the &lt;em&gt;valuable&lt;/em&gt; part of your answer, to others, is what you've done in similar situations and how it turned out.  The random un-backed-up &quot;you should do this&quot; is not the valuable part.  So spent more answer-time on the former. As BESW points out, the answers that get really voted up and stand the test of time weave in experience in multiple ways. Check out the following &quot;evil campaigns&quot; answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53260/how-to-build-an-evil-campaign/53264#53264&quot;&gt;How to build an evil campaign&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24705/what-are-the-essential-features-of-a-successful-evil-campaign/24707#24707&quot;&gt;What are the essential features of a successful evil campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's how.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T14:57:08.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6686" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-12T16:42:44.697" Score="5" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just cleaned up the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; meta tag. This isn't a big deal, but I'd like to leave a record of what changed and why a few very old questions just got edited. This tag had two kinds of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;questions which were proposed for the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;very old questions which were proposing changes to our help documentation, which several years ago involved a document called the &quot;FAQ&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second type has been retagged with &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/help-center&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;help-center&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;help-center&lt;/a&gt;, consistent with &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/help-center&quot;&gt;the same tag used on Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; now exclusively features questions that at least one person thinks would be a good fit for our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;, and I've added a description that explains this. (The Meta Stack Exchange tag equivalent is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq-proposed&quot;&gt;faq-proposed&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T17:01:14.903" Title="Small cleanup of the [faq-proposal] tag done" Tags="|discussion|tags|meta|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6687" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6688" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" Score="0" Body="Candidates for using our [faq] tag, and joining our site FAQ repository." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" LastActivityDate="2017-01-12T16:44:11.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6683" CreationDate="2017-01-12T23:05:28.517" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question restated:  &lt;strong&gt;How should I provide examples of experience as support for my answer?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use an organized packaging method (see below). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm willing to accept that and edit my answer accordingly, but I can't&#xA;  find a way to do that without - in my opinion - lessening the&#xA;  helpfulness of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As written, it's not very helpful.  It won't be helpful until you add some of the experiences that you've had that led you to offer the recommendations in your answer.       &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How to package your experiences in an answer when you use experience to support the answer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Explain the similar situation you were in (identical is not necessary, similar suffices)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Explain the conflict/problem&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Explain the resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Explain which bits of your experience fit (in your judgment) with the problem posed in the question.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's how you do it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of this format is in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63723/22566&quot;&gt;this fairly long answer&lt;/a&gt;. I'd shorten it today, but its virtue is organization and specific examples of what I did, rolled into what you can do, as well as how to take what I did (which used older technology) and adapt it to modern technology. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a good experience example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/84064/22566&quot;&gt;from a DM trying to fold advanced weapons into a D&amp;amp;D 5 campaign&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-30T17:43:41.347" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6690" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6691" CreationDate="2017-01-13T18:13:53.377" Score="8" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is specifically for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93114/how-do-you-determine-the-most-potent-effect-for-overlapping-spells&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; but I believe is generally applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I have answered a question, whether it is a good or bad answer, but another user writes an answer which is more correct and clear, should I remove my own answer, to help focus on the correct answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm asking to ascertain whether preservation of ideas and ways of looking at things is important, or if we would rather focus on clarity and correctness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively to deleting it, should there be an edit to the answer, pointing to the one I believe is correct, or should I incorporate the information from the other answer into my own? I'm leery of the second, because it feels like plagiarism, and not doing either could leave me with an answer that I believe is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks in advance for any clarifications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32508" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-13T21:19:20.043" Title="Another poster has answered correctly, should I delete my answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6690" CreationDate="2017-01-13T18:17:26.123" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no need to remove an answer just because there's another that's correct. The concern about taking focus away is already accounted for by the voting system, which will promote (i.e., make more visible and garner more attention) whichever answers voters collectively consider the better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also possible that you'd be &lt;em&gt;removing&lt;/em&gt; the better answer — until a long tail of voters have their shot at all the answers, it can be difficult to tell which will eventually rise to the top. And even if an answer doesn't rise to the &lt;em&gt;top&lt;/em&gt;, so long as it receives upvotes there is something of value in it that voters are seeing and promoting, despite any other answers' scores.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general rule, there's no need to remove answers at all. The only time one might consider removing an answer is if the system is exerting pressures that incentivises removing the answer (such as if receiving multiple downvotes). Otherwise, what the site thinks you &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be doing doesn't include removing the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-01-13T18:22:26.933" LastActivityDate="2017-01-13T18:22:26.933" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6692" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-13T19:28:42.240" Score="18" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shog9 has put together a bunch of statistics on question closing and reopening in 2016 for all the sites on MSE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/289797/2016-a-year-in-closing&quot;&gt;2016: a year in closing&lt;/a&gt;. I've pulled in the data for just RPG.se here, for the community's edification and discussion, and to put it in a more digestible format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;\begin{array}{rrr}&#xA;\text{Questions…} \\&#xA;\text{Asked} &amp;amp; \text{Closed} &amp;amp; \text{%} \\ \hline&#xA;5127 &amp;amp; 1605 &amp;amp; 31.30&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Breakdown per close type:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;\begin{array}{l|rr|rr}&#xA;\text{Close Reason} &amp;amp; \text{Closed} &amp;amp; \text{% of Total}  &amp;amp; \text{Reopened} &amp;amp; \text{(%)} \\ \hline&#xA;\text{Duplicate} &amp;amp; 244 &amp;amp; 15.20 &amp;amp; 34 &amp;amp; (14.93) \\&#xA;\text{Off Topic} &amp;amp; 344 &amp;amp; 21.43 &amp;amp; 25 &amp;amp; (7.27) \\&#xA;\text{Unclear} &amp;amp; 356 &amp;amp; 22.18 &amp;amp; 166 &amp;amp; (46.63) \\&#xA;\text{Too Broad} &amp;amp; 345 &amp;amp; 21.50 &amp;amp; 84 &amp;amp; (24.35) \\&#xA;\text{Primarily Opinion-Based} &amp;amp; 316 &amp;amp; 19.69 &amp;amp; 63 &amp;amp; (19.94) \\&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that there's one oddity in how the stats work: the questions closed in 2016 may have been asked in any year. That means that the asked:closed ratio is more a matter of site activities than whether the questions asked this year were closed or not. (See the line for Anime in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/289797/2016-a-year-in-closing&quot;&gt;original data&lt;/a&gt; for an example of how this, plus unusual activity — a massive cleanup last year, in their case — can give counter-intuitive numbers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-01-01T23:27:57.873" LastActivityDate="2020-01-01T23:27:57.873" Title="Statistics on RPG.se Questions Closed and Reopened in 2016" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|close-reasons|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6690" CreationDate="2017-01-13T21:19:20.043" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought your answer was helpful and may've influenced the 'correct' answer to come out. The question I'd posed has an element of personal preference I think and if someone in the future has this question and finds the thread, it may be helpful for them to see your point of view. I think you should leave it, but the choice is certainly yours. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2017-01-13T21:19:20.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6694" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-15T00:35:00.250" Score="-1" ViewCount="260" Body="&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a question about my Role-playing Games Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93186/are-there-any-published-sources-on-what-a-templar-should-be&quot;&gt;Are there any published sources on what a &amp;quot;Templar&amp;quot; should be?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A member of the community incorrectly placed my question on-hold for &quot;being about video games&quot; when all edited versions of the stated question make no reference to video games. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sample definitions of a Templar were provided from video games, but this was only used as a point of reference in the absence of pen and paper references, of which my question asks for in the first place. My question was bolded and separated with a horizontal line across all versions and clearly makes no distinction as to being about &quot;video games&quot; or &quot;game development&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33457" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-01-15T00:57:41.420" Title="My question was incorrectly put on-hold for &quot;being about video games&quot;" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6694" CreationDate="2017-01-15T00:46:00.297" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your description of the on-hold status of the question seems somewhat disingenuous to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You engaged in a long conversation in the comments on it which include statements such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the reason given is just what received the most votes, which may have been due to misunderstanding. But even if it’s on-topic, it is still hopelessly too broad, and primarily opinion-based. No one here can speak for the entirety of the RPG audience as to what “templar” means to them. There is no way to authoritatively or even credibly answer this question. Speculation and blatantly asserting one’s personal preference is universal are the only ways this might be answered, and those are not answers we want or allow. – KRyan&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yes, RPGs have published descriptions of what templars are within their own system. But that isn’t what you’re asking (and asking for statements of that sort from all systems that have ever done so is massively too broad). No one has, or even could, state definitively what the word means for all RPGs ever. – KRyan&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The problem is that this site works around a correct (and best) answer. But also works around that it (the answer) should be precise. Your question does not have an objectively good answer. The question is good in itself, is the possible answer that is bad. It is too broad. We can cite maybe a hundred or even more fantasy works, and each of them would be correct. You can even throw a stone at any game (with Templars) and find a correct answer, but not THE correct answer. – Chepelink&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not every question asking for source material is a valid question here. That depends on what it is asking. For example, if I ask for the best tabletop game utilizing sources and so on, it would be a very bad question. On the other hand, if I ask &quot;Is there an RPG that is widely acclaimed as an economical success and has over 1,000,000 players?&quot; That would be close to what this site can answer. – Chepelink&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the original close reason may have been incorrect (I'm not entirely convinced that it is, since all the supporting material you mention references video games and not TTRPGS), the question (in its current state) is a poor fit for the site and should remain closed (just for different reasons) unless and until it is improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="277" LastActivityDate="2017-01-15T00:46:00.297" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6694" CreationDate="2017-01-15T00:47:08.463" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question was put on hold for other reasons, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93186/are-there-any-published-sources-on-what-a-templar-should-be#comment214683_93186&quot;&gt;as KRyan explained&lt;/a&gt; in a comment on your question (bolded). Immediately afterwards, he goes on to explain the real reason why it's remaining closed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ultimately, the reason given is just what received the most votes&lt;/strong&gt;, which may have been due to misunderstanding. But even if it’s on-topic, it is still hopelessly too broad, and primarily opinion-based. No one here can speak for the entirety of the RPG audience as to what “templar” means to them. There is no way to authoritatively or even credibly answer this question. Speculation and blatantly asserting one’s personal preference is universal are the only ways this might be answered, and those are not answers we want or allow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93186/are-there-any-published-sources-on-what-a-templar-should-be#comment214685_93186&quot;&gt;You responded to this comment&lt;/a&gt; so I presume you read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question needs significant improvement, we place it on hold. Having a precisely accurate reason isn't really important; the fact it is closed &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; is what's important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several of us have, in comments, explained at great length why it is closed and asked you to reframe your question into something actually workable. If it's going to be adjusted, it's only going to be adjusted to be closed for the proper reason: too broad or primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-01-15T00:55:36.997" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6697" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6694" CreationDate="2017-01-15T00:50:27.190" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thank you for taking this to Meta: comments on the question itself were clearly not a productive channel for improving your post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I need to clear up one misconception above: you say that &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; member of the community put your question on hold. That's not true. &lt;em&gt;Five&lt;/em&gt; members of the community put the question on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As one comment pointed out, only the most-votes-getting close-reason gets displayed. If I recall correctly there were three close-votes for being off-topic as about video games, one as too broad, and one as primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking back at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/93186/2&quot;&gt;early version&lt;/a&gt; of your question--which was the one visible when the close-votes were cast--I hope you can understand how someone would think it was about video games. It mentioned players and a session in one sentence, while devoting six paragraphs to video game examples and most of two paragraphs to sweeping generalizations about what &amp;quot;people&amp;quot; think of Templars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/93186/5&quot;&gt;latest revision&lt;/a&gt; doesn't do much to make things clearer, but you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93186/are-there-any-published-sources-on-what-a-templar-should-be#comment214673_93186&quot;&gt;indicate in comments&lt;/a&gt; that you are actually asking about TTRPGs, and just thought the video-game examples would communicate your question well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;So now your question's [on hold]. And it's for the wrong reason.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's okay. The hold is there to stop people from answering a question that's unclear, or off-topic, or a bad fit. Your question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; some combination of those. So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5413/23970&quot;&gt;the hold's doing a good job&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many users have commented, asking you for clarification or suggesting other ways of approaching the question. Now you should take a look at those comments and look for how to improve and focus your question. If you think you've addressed the issue a comment raises, flag the comment for deletion. (I usually put in the custom reason &amp;quot;obsolete: I now address this in the post.&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Once you edit the question (as long as it's during the next five days), &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/196078/311001&quot;&gt;it will be placed in a review queue for reopening&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; Other users will come along, look at the question, and vote on whether it seems site-ready. Any user's reopen vote will also place the question in that queue, and you can always flag it for an elected moderator's attention if you think everything's in good order and it should be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-01-15T00:57:41.420" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6698" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-15T17:46:02.187" Score="17" ViewCount="403" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen a strange question and it's accumulating poor responses from its owner. Stuff like this is happening to me or someone else:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;left a comment asking for a clarification, and got a response from OP. But the response didn't really address my request, and raised new issues to sort out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;left a comment suggesting an improvement; and OP responded by nitpicking at the commenter's understanding of the site, or was overly argumentative and unreceptive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;left a comment explaining a down-vote or close-vote in a comment, and a response came challenging that user's vote, linking to examples of other questions that OP claimed provided examples of inconsistency in voting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, nothing &lt;em&gt;wrong.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this continued for ten, twenty, thirty comments. A handful of regular site users are engaging and seeing the same sorts of responses from the OP, and none of the OP's comments ever deal with the original post, and many are tending to be complaints about site process and about the very users trying to be helpful to them in comments, or they are spending more effort in arguing against site policy advice than in trying to understand it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Intentional or not, this user's actions seem to only be serving to agitate the community, not to improve this Q&amp;amp;A resource for posterity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should I do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-12-13T13:07:58.450" LastActivityDate="2021-12-13T13:07:58.450" Title="Eek! A troll in the Stack! What do I do?" Tags="|support|faq|etiquette|users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6698" CreationDate="2017-01-15T17:46:02.187" Score="21" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You may have met a troll (intentional or not). Don't worry, the Stack's got you covered.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is actually really easy: you do nothing. Nothing different to normal, that is. All the habits you've developed interacting with good-faith users are going to fix this problem, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone's truly acting in bad faith, keeping to your usual behaviour will make them stick out like a sore thumb; if they are in fact trying to act in good faith but are making mistakes then that can get resolved sooner or later with a positive helpful experience along the way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Stay Calm&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You leave a comment in good faith, OP seems to misunderstand or disagree, you respond again, another response from OP, and you're starting to get annoyed.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Step away. Calm down. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6616/23970&quot;&gt;It's not your job to convince someone else they're wrong&lt;/a&gt; or make them see your way. Your first comment, presumably, did a pretty good job of summarizing what you saw as problematic. Just leaving that one was a courtesy, an attempt to help another improve their post. If your first comment isn't well-received there's no burden on you to &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; it get a good reception. (And you can't, anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In other words: act &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the same way you would in any other case.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/flag-posts&quot;&gt;Raise Flags&lt;/a&gt;, When Necessary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;One or more of the OP's comments or chat messages strike you as getting hostile, aggressive, rude, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flag it as &amp;quot;rude.&amp;quot; Just as you would if I left a message you find hostile or rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;But it's not rude. There's nothing overtly hostile. In fact, OP is &amp;quot;signing off&amp;quot; a lot of comments with &amp;quot;Thanks!&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;I appreciate the considered response!&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remembering that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comments are intended to improve posts&lt;/a&gt;, if it seems comments are descending into a conversation about something other than the post, flag as &amp;quot;not constructive.&amp;quot; It's not a &lt;em&gt;conversation&lt;/em&gt; button, it's a &lt;em&gt;comment&lt;/em&gt; button. And &amp;quot;comment&amp;quot; has a very precise meaning around here. (See also these meta posts (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3426/how-can-the-policy-regarding-discussions-in-comments-be-improved&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3711/when-is-a-comment-not-a-comment&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;), along with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bcomments%5D+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;just about every meta about comments&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In other words: act &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the same way you would in any other case.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If in doubt, if things seem to be going off the rails, raise a flag for moderator attention and explain what you're seeing as a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, we try our best to keep this site unrelentingly focused on productive behaviour &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6682/1204&quot;&gt;to keep it safe from trolls&lt;/a&gt;. When we work hard at just doing what we usually do, someone isn't making effort to be productive will stick out like a sore thumb: trolls out themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Pop into &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; (for those with 20+ rep)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You're getting a strange feeling, but feel like flagging is really extreme. You don't want to get someone in ~trouble~, after all.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If another user's comments and/or activity strike you as odd go ahead and pop into RPGSE's main chat room. There's usually a good amount of experience lurking around there, so &amp;quot;hey room, can I get a sanity-check here?&amp;quot; will usually get a response. More eyes, more (aggregate) experience, perhaps a few more votes and comments... all of which are the mechanisms by which the site is designed to operate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On occasion OP will also be in chat, and you can see they're starting to workshop the question with others. Join in. Or don't. Whichever you prefer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In other words: act &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the same way you would in any other case.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Quietly disengage&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've interacted--voting, commenting, perhaps a meta post.&#xA;Recognize that at this point you've gone well beyond anything that is required of you. Remember: no actions are required of you to use this resource. Anything you do is a volunteer effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are not enjoying the interaction or do not think it is helping, just walk away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;That was easy. Thanks, Stack.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S.: this is exactly the sort of community moderation that has led to feedback about us being &amp;quot;the most heartwarming place in whole SE&amp;quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/34788106#34788106&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;) or someone expressing it's &amp;quot;a bit flabbergasting to find the Roleplaying Stack Exchange is a healthy community full of knowledgeable, considerate people.&amp;quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63626/how-do-i-cater-to-the-three-stooges-and-good-roleplayers-at-the-same-time#comment136978_63626&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-01-19T04:00:14.050" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6700" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-17T16:56:12.330" Score="2" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am actually &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/11343/ruut&quot;&gt;Ruut&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That e-mail account was hacked by someone from China (literally) that I used to log-in with that account; I made a new account just so I could ask new questions (as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/29953/zangief&quot;&gt;Zangief&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What on earth can I do? Can I combine my accounts? Can a moderator combine the accounts? Is my reputation as &quot;Ruut&quot; forever gone? Help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29953" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T07:20:13.453" Title="Problem with Accounts. Please Advise" Tags="|support|user-accounts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6700" CreationDate="2017-01-17T17:02:49.233" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Mods can't merge accounts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't fix this for you, because account merging is a power that SE doesn't give to moderators. Account merges can only be done by SE employees.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To ask for an account merge you need to skip meta and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;contact Stack Exchange directly via their contact form.&lt;/a&gt; (That link takes you directly there. You can always find that link as “&lt;strong&gt;contact us&lt;/strong&gt;” on the main site, in the footer.) They don't process merge requests on meta. Once you contact them, they'll work with you to get your accounts merged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next time though, don't wait six months! This doesn't take long and could have been resolved long ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T07:20:13.453" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6672" CreationDate="2017-01-17T23:17:50.160" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we're optimizing for expert answers, I can understanding needing some way to prevent sloppy, subjective answers from being submitted when the question sort of &quot;baits&quot; them out. I don't think that's what happened here - I think the question is fine, but the community should be more diligent about downvoting answers that don't meet GS/BS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Observation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing a question prevents someone who might be able to submit a good answer from doing so. I don't think it makes sense to solve this problem at the question level by closing it - if we're trying to optimize for expert advice, closing a question when it gets a few poor answers is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there's desire in this community to be able to have these subjective questions - we aren't optimizing for some kind of rulebook database, where all the questions are primary keys with exactly one correct answer. Sharing experience is specifically called out in how to make a Good Subjective question on-topic, and we should strive to be able to do that in a way that makes sense as a Stack site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Theory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Poor answers that don't meet GS/BS standards, or don't back it up should simply be downvoted rigorously. Let the mechanics of the site sort them to the bottom. I think the underlying problem is that we can't rely on the community to do that - sometimes, we want to be a forum so bad that we simply accept and upvote everything that we like on these sorts of questions, instead of on their merits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Practice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For lack of being able to completely change the community, the mods have to respond by closing the question. I don't think anyone is going to be really happy with that solution, but it's the only one we'll have unless there's some consensus from the community on helping curate poor answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28283" LastActivityDate="2017-01-17T23:17:50.160" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6703" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-20T09:21:45.540" Score="4" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the same vein of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2770/links-to-dd-tools-dndtools-eu&quot;&gt;question about dndtools&lt;/a&gt;. Realmhelps.net too have complete description of non-OGL item.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This time the scope of use is way smaller, we have only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=url%3A%22*realmshelps.*%22&quot;&gt;39 istances&lt;/a&gt; where the site is used, in both questions(15) and answers(24).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27822" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-04-03T11:34:30.330" Title="Links to RealmHelps.net" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2017-01-20T13:45:23.863" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6703" CreationDate="2017-01-20T09:21:45.540" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;While probably the site won't be closed soon (Wotc have moved on from 3.5 and, as far as I can tell, they are not striking any of the new dndtools clones), I think, for coherence at least, we shouldn't make use of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27822" LastActivityDate="2017-01-20T09:21:45.540" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6707" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6676" CreationDate="2017-01-22T19:29:00.030" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Transfer it to Community, part of whose &lt;em&gt;raison d'etre&lt;/em&gt;  is &quot;Own community questions and answers so nobody gets unnecessary reputation from them&quot;.&#xA;The question can then be CW'd, and edited into respectability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This was the chosen solution when &lt;a href=&quot;https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3298/8019&quot;&gt;a similar problem&lt;/a&gt; arose on English.SE). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2451" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:02:41.670" LastActivityDate="2017-01-22T19:29:00.030" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6708" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-27T20:18:34.480" Score="12" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had posted an answer to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93876/can-a-druid-get-out-of-wild-shape-to-avoid-an-opportunity-attack&quot;&gt;Can a druid get out of wild shape to avoid an opportunity attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which I think was rightly refuted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some consideration, I considered my answer to be completely wrong and deleted it. Is it preferred to leave the answer, edit it, or delete it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-01-27T20:40:01.777" Title="Should I Delete My Answer If I Now Think It's Wrong?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6709" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6708" CreationDate="2017-01-27T20:40:01.777" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Deleting that answer is fine, yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general it's up to the writer of the answer. An answer that's left up is implicitly supported by its writer, and it is the writer is who earns (or suffers) the reputation effects of votes on it. It's fair to delete an answer you don't support anymore, especially so soon after it was submitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some exceptions — deleting many old, good answers for no good reason shouldn't be done, for an extreme example — but those are exceptions. &lt;em&gt;In general&lt;/em&gt;, it's up to the writer. When it's a young post, it's even more up to the writer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-01-27T20:40:01.777" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6710" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-30T11:42:01.670" Score="3" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3505/how-do-we-handle-it-when-the-askers-problem-is-just-that-theyre-confused&quot;&gt;Related&lt;/a&gt;, maybe even duplicated, but it really did not seem to address my question/problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let say that I found a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93989/what-ways-are-there-of-reliably-getting-attacks-in-others-turns?noredirect=1#comment217134_93989&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; that is based on a fundamental mistake (e.g. a misunderstanding of a rule, in this case how many actions he can do with the ready action in DnD-5e). The first thing to do is to give a comment to the OP that his question is based on a mistake. The problem is that is highly probable that if the mistake is fixed the question is not longer relevant or be substantially different. In that case it should be voted to close or, at least, flag it (but wouldn't flagging it be redundant?). The thing is, the options given to vote to close are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Duplicate question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Off-topic (with sub-reasons)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unclear what you're asking&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Too broad&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primarily opinion-based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not a duplicated question, nor an Off-topic, unclear (it is clear what he is asking, just fundamentally wrong), too broad and opinion based. Which one should I have to choose, &lt;em&gt;if any&lt;/em&gt;? As the related meta question stated, the problem is not the question itself, but the foundation of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29680" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-01-30T11:42:01.670" Title="What is the option I have to choose to close a topic when the question asked is fundamentally wrong?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ClosedDate="2017-01-30T14:19:27.280" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6711" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-01-31T16:05:46.813" Score="10" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;In regards to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94050/should-a-player-know-their-mounts-exact-hp/94052#94052&quot;&gt;Should a player know their mount&amp;#39;s exact HP?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm hesitant to upvote @fectin's answer. I agree with it completely, but feel it doesn't answer the question as fully as my own. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meaning, from my experience the player should know the HP, but in the grand scheme of things, I feel consistency overrules and the GM/DM should make the ruling depending on the tone of the game they're playing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I upvote it because I agree with it? &#xA;OR should I downvote it because I don't feel it fully answers the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What's the etiquette for this sort of thing on SE?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30319" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-03T09:58:09.487" Title="Should I upvote an answer I agree with even though I feel the one I posted answers it fully?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6712" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6711" CreationDate="2017-01-31T16:54:50.063" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You should upvote any answers that you feel contribute to the overall understanding of the topic and help the asker understand the situation.&lt;/strong&gt; This includes partial answers, where the answer provides &lt;em&gt;good and useful&lt;/em&gt; information about some of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should downvote &lt;strong&gt;bad or misleading&lt;/strong&gt; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a site like Roleplaying, where many questions are about how to run games, some answers recommend play styles you might disagree with, but explain the philosophy behind them well. In this case, I'd upvote, or not vote at all if you feel strongly that the advice is bad (even though it's well explained).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, the only exception is where an answer includes only aspects of a previous answer, with no added value (additional discussion, clear formatting, images).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the example in question, the two answers are both relevant. fectin's goes into detail about why they hold a certain absolute stance on the matter. Yours covers some of the question's additional details. They're both different answers that can be seen to contribute in different ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4499" LastEditorUserId="4499" LastEditDate="2017-02-03T09:58:09.487" LastActivityDate="2017-02-03T09:58:09.487" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6711" CreationDate="2017-01-31T17:32:30.857" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Voting is subjective.  While there are guidelines for how to vote (as seen in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6712/9399&quot;&gt;Samthere's answer&lt;/a&gt;), it is ultimately up to you to decide if an answer is helpful, unhelpful, or neither.  Ultimately, how you vote as an individual matters very little as long as a majority of users are following the voting guidelines.  If you disagree with an answer on principle, even if the conclusion is the same as what you provided in your own competing answer, it's okay for you to downvote if you think it isn't helpful in explaining why it was answered that way.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, as long as you are voting in good faith -- that is, you genuinely think an answer is or is not helpful and aren't voting out of spite or simply to boost your own answer -- then you shouldn't worry about the outcome, no matter how you vote.  And the truth is, even if a few users vote spitefully the margin for error is small enough that votes from good faith users will override those negative votes and they'll get lost in the static anyway.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is a democracy, so even if you think an answer is not helpful, there may be more than enough other votes to offset your not helpful vote with helpful votes.  It's not up to each of us as individuals to decide if an answer is helpful or not; voting results are in fact greater than the sum of their parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, don't forget that you also have the option not to vote on an answer at all if you're torn.  If an answer is good but needs that last little push to make it great, you can withhold an upvote until you feel the problem has been addressed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9399" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-01-31T17:32:30.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6711" CreationDate="2017-01-31T21:06:13.837" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Aside from the other (excellent) answers, I'll add that I won't be offended in any way if you don't vote for my answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel strongly that there is a correct answer to the question asked, and hopefully my answer captures it, but SE overall is trying to create a curated collection of good answers. Your vote is part of that curation!  You should vote/abstain/downvote based on whatever criteria make sense to you, and you don't need to apologize for or explain it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2017-01-31T21:06:13.837" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6716" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-02T01:49:59.510" Score="1" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, the question that inspired this is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94086/where-does-the-number-added-to-a-roll-for-damage-come-from/94088#94088&quot;&gt;Where does the number added to a roll for damage come from?&lt;/a&gt; .&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is short, clear, and concise.  It's clear what the asker is confused about, and what sort of answer they expect.  This sort of question is normally an excellent fit for our site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But wait!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The external reality the querent doesn't have access to does not correspond to the artificial facsimile of that reality that they have constructed in their head!  As a result, people who understand more than them about the subject or subjects to which their question pertains see the question as at best unanswerable and at worst nonsense.  However, without 'answering' in a way the erroneously grounded question they have formed, they will not be able to realize the truths that make said question poor.  What are we to do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can close questions like this as 'unclear what you're asking', which seems wrong because what they are asking is in no way unclear except for how we are to answer it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can close questions like this as 'too broad', which seems wrong because the questions aren't phrased in any way broadly, they just have no clear answer because of some piece of information the querent lacks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can answer these questions by explaining the piece of information the querent is missing that makes their question problematic, but this seems wrong because it's often not a real answer to the question they are asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can answer these questions by explaining the piece of information the querent is missing that makes their question problematic in a comment, but this seems wrong because comments are ephemeral and future querents with the same question are unlikely to benefit from this form of resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideas?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T01:49:59.510" Title="What about questions that only make sense because the querent lacks knowledge" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2017-02-02T02:00:55.090" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6717" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-02T13:52:16.993" Score="14" ViewCount="649" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is a bit late into this new year, being that we're already in the second month, but we are now cycling the Community Promotion Ads for 2017!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/6717&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T02:52:33.410" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2017" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="14" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2020-03-05T11:04:43.453" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T13:52:16.993" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QvIdY.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T13:52:16.993" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T16:48:04.127" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://literature.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lqqtH.png&quot; alt=&quot;Literature StackExchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user30848" LastEditorDisplayName="user30848" LastEditDate="2017-03-08T01:55:10.777" LastActivityDate="2017-03-08T01:55:10.777" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6720" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6721" CreationDate="2017-02-02T17:28:02.620" Score="2" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;Or better said, &lt;strong&gt;Can I ask a question which as been already asked years ago and which the answer may, or may not, be different?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;why this question:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I just asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94188/how-much-of-pathfinder-still-broken-since-release&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; which got close. I didn't realized right away how much flame it could attract and I'm ok to leave it close until it's in a better state.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;That said I started to rework it, trying to deal with the problem and I realize that the straighter way to make it more neutral is just to ask again, more or less unchanged, the same &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1/differences-between-dd-3-5-and-pathfinder&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; I used as reference and example to build my own.&#xA;Now I'm trying anyway to improve my old question, but I'm still dubious if it is ok to re-ask a question which may have different answer today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27822" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T18:42:11.340" Title="Can I ask to updated a question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6720" CreationDate="2017-02-02T18:02:21.103" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In general, post a bounty instead of creating a new question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is an existing question that is the same as yours, but is outdated, the best thing to do is to create a bounty on the old question with the following reason:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Current answers are outdated&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;The current answer(s) are out-of-date and require revision given recent changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that isn't an option, or it won't get you the answers you are looking for, then that probably means that your question isn't the same, and you should make it clear why it isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This particular question was closed for other reasons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The close reason wasn't that your question was a duplicate of the other (which would mean the two questions are the same), but rather that it was primarily opinion based. As some of the commenters pointed out, the question as it currently stands is basically &amp;quot;Is Pathfinder still worse than 3.5?&amp;quot;, which is an invitation for opinion. Some people may share that view, others disagree with it, but none of it is really fact based. Some alternative questions that are fact-based and answerable would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has Pathfinder addressed X concerns with Y mechanic since its release?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How is Pathfinder different between its release and 2017?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have there been any changes to X mechanic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have developers of Pathfinder ever commented on why X mechanic is the way it is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these are clearly answerable with an objective answer that doesn't involve personal opinions over how a gamer feels about Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other issue with this question is that it depends on a certain link. If that link ever goes down, the question is useless because it can't be understood or answered anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T18:42:11.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6722" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T18:44:37.987" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Taf3D.png&quot; alt=&quot;EN World RPG News &amp;amp; Reviews&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T18:44:37.987" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T18:46:03.093" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6717/community-promotion-ads-2017&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NUQeT.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community Promotion Ads - 2017&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T18:46:03.093" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6724" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T18:47:40.300" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvLbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool Virtual Tabletop&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T18:47:40.300" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6725" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6726" CreationDate="2017-02-02T20:57:17.610" Score="5" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92529/is-awakened-intelligence-hereditary&quot;&gt;&quot;Is awakened intelligence hereditary?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, I'm curious about what can be done to improve the question, since it was closed for being unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't look like the original poster is going to update the question (they have not edited the question in the month since it was asked). However, despite a consensus of 5 people voting to close it for lack of clarity, and I don't know the correct course of action to resolve the issue because I don't really understand what is unclear and I don't know what the proper process is for remedying it. I think the question is interesting for posterity and worth salvaging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have thought about improving the question myself by removing or refactoring the second paragraph (about being able to teach the offspring) while keeping the first paragraph (which is just about whether INT is hereditary) but I'm not really sure about the etiquette in this situation. Here are some of my concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm not sure it's right for me to try to edit the question and make it canonical by presuming to know what the intent of the question was on behalf of the person who asked it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Given that I was the only one who posted an answer to the question and I stand to benefit from the reopening of the question if my answer is accepted, I'm not sure it's ethical for me to consider being the one to try to fix the question. Nevertheless, I think the votes on my answer indicate that it is a respectable answer to &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; form of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I could post a new self-answered question based on what I think the intent was and re-answer with the same answer I gave, but that has the potential to get voted as a duplicate and I don't see the point in cluttering things up with another question if an existing one can be improved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my meta question is, &lt;strong&gt;What can be done to improve the question cited above to warrant reopening it as a good, canonical question?&lt;/strong&gt; Thanks for any insight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T23:55:23.483" Title="How to improve &quot;Is awakened intelligence hereditary?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6726" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6725" CreationDate="2017-02-02T21:30:13.517" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's probably salvageable&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest problem with it is that we don't know if they're a DM or player (as #3 below), which makes it harder to write quality answers. &lt;strong&gt;But by itself, that's not actually a huge hurdle.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other problem is that they've abandoned the question, which means (per below), that there some question about the value in salvaging it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, problem #2 identified below, which contributed to much of the appearance of problems with the question, appears to have been caused by a series of too-many-cooks editing errors, myself included in that set of editors. With that problem resolved as “not their fault” it's not actually a red flag. That means the remaining issues with the question are much more academic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We can probably reopen this question.&lt;/strong&gt; It only has one real problem, and that's not usually a problem that leads to a question being permanently closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The below is the answer as it stood before the editing error in the question's history was pointed out. Its discussion of the situation is still relevant apart from #2, but the above re-evaluates the weight of the other data in light of #2 being resolved, and arrives at a different conclusion.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why it's closed (now)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are three reasons for the close votes (judging by the current and removed comments, and the timeline of voting):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It didn't say what game it was about. This reason was fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It linked to a D&amp;amp;D 3.5e spell, which is a red flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linking to the wrong resource can imply many different possible problems with the question, non of which can be resolved except by the author. For example, they say they're playing 5e, but did they say “5e” to say they were playing &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;3&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.5e and not 3.0e? Perhaps they're playing D&amp;amp;D 5e, but the question only exists because they looked at the wrong game's rules — perhaps from the spell itself, or some other page for 3.5e connected to it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author resolving that issue could reveal that the problem is something entirely different than what can be gleaned from the existing question's text, making it impossible for us to guess.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They didn't say whether they were the DM or a player, which causes a difficulty when trying to write answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're the DM, then one possible answer (basically, “ask your DM”) becomes not-an-answer. If they're a player, then one possible answer (“you're the DM, you get to decide this for your world”) becomes invalid. Even for answers that aren't of that type, the kind of explanation that separates good answers from just-okay answers can be in how pointedly it addresses the specific situation of the asker — and we don't know what that is.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These aren't individually particularly lethal problems for a question, once #1 was resolved. We could make a reasonable guess at #2, and the answerers for #3 could just suffer the ambiguity and hedge their bets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But all together, they're somewhat red flags. And one thing multiplies them: &lt;strong&gt;the asker abandoned the question&lt;/strong&gt;. We asked for some basic clarifications, and they've never answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So though those two problems aren't unfixable, &lt;strong&gt;we don't have a way to fix them &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, the question &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be useful for posterity, but rather than clean up an ambiguous, abandoned question so that new bet-hedging answers could be added, it's sometimes more valuable to let questions that the asker &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; doesn't care much about stay closed, so that some future asker who has a similar question that's clearer and that they won't abandon has a chance to ask, without it being closed as a duplicate of an old not-very-good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not quite a science why questions like this get or stay closed. It's more a fuzzy decision made by the emergent intelligence of the RPG Collective Consciousness, as given life through the voting mechanics. I can see why this one got held and stayed closed, and I mostly agree with it, at least enough to not want to super-reopen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal feeling is that abandoned questions don't merit the efforts to rehabilitate them, especially when it might shoot down a future, better question that a future user might honest ask. That future new-to-the-site user will have a better time if their (good, clear) question gets positive feedback, earns them rep, and gets clear answers, rather than being closed as a duplicate of an old, crummy question with answers that are trying their best but inherently hampered by the crumminess of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What you can do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the plus side, that emergent intelligence can be “asked” if maybe it'll reconsider its decision. My personal feeling on the question isn't necessarily shared. It can be asked by nominating it for reopening, either with a vote (for 3k+ users), a flag, or by editing it — which latter you've already done. Any of those will put it into the reopen review queue, putting it in front of voters again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So regardless, we'll soon enough see what the Virtual Brain thinks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-02T23:55:23.483" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T23:55:23.483" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T21:44:01.413" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/suFRL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 Virtual Tabletops&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T21:44:01.413" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T21:52:08.960" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ftzzy.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T17:59:48.887" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T17:59:48.887" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T21:55:20.907" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://bit.do/SECartography&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Spc8y.png&quot; alt=&quot;Help support the Cartography SE in Area 51&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T21:55:20.907" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T21:57:09.080" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://crafts.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BxVh9.png&quot; alt=&quot;Put some points in crafting!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T21:57:09.080" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-02T22:20:30.263" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/168&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhQCq.png&quot; alt=&quot;writers.se weekly chat event&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-02T22:20:30.263" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6732" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-03T01:03:49.710" Score="5" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote this long answer and couldn't finish it in one sitting (attention span issues) so I figured I could just close the site and pick up the saved draft where I left off some time later. That works for me most of the time. I hardly have this issue at all, but when I do I find that just the last 1 or 2 sentences I wrote weren't saved, not a problem; it allows me to rethink if I could word it better. This time, as I was writing an answer, I lost 2 paragraphs being unsaved.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know there's some sort of text that pops up and says &quot;draft saved&quot;, but I miss it &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the time(it's so tiny and it disappears fast). &lt;strong&gt;Is there something I can do to check if the post was saved?&lt;/strong&gt; Or maybe there's a way to manually save on-site, or do I have to save it in a notepad before closing the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="23064" LastEditDate="2017-02-03T01:16:53.850" LastActivityDate="2017-02-03T01:16:53.850" Title="How can I make sure my unposted answer was saved?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6733" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6734" CreationDate="2017-02-06T22:35:15.587" Score="11" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently made edits to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94394/im-trying-to-optimize-a-paladin&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. It was a rather new question at the time of editing, but it was already put on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would the edits made be considered too trivial? I got to thinking about it after I made the edit, and it didn't really feel like that great of an edit besides correcting the spelling and grammatical issues, some of which were in the title  thus appearing on the main site's feed. It fit one of the common reasons to make an edit outlined &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;in the help section&lt;/a&gt;. Should have I at least waited until the OP improved his question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still rather new here, just started being active in the community this past month and would like to follow best practices on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31489" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T10:51:19.207" Title="Am I making too trivial edits to closed recent questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6733" CreationDate="2017-02-06T23:48:10.117" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your edit was fine, and it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/33178&quot;&gt;approved by two others&lt;/a&gt;. You made several good changes where they should've been made &amp;mdash; we don't use text speech here, etc. If your edit was a problem it would've been rejected, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/31489/kumosagosta?tab=activity&amp;amp;sort=suggestions&quot;&gt;so far your edits have been helpful and approved&lt;/a&gt;. Thanks for suggesting those improvements, good work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that editing a closed question is low priority (unless I can help it get reopened), but there's no harm in editing them. You'll show the querent a higher quality bar, and may clear the way for others to do some editing and help get the question reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look out for the things you think you can fix in the post and address them if you feel you can. As long as you do that your questions won't be too trivial. If you can't, it's OK to leave things to other people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record these are the options we get when choosing to reject a suggested edit. You'll notice there's no &quot;too trivial&quot;: to get an edit rejected you basically have to make the post actively worse, or do nothing at all helpful, like making stylistic changes which have zero impact on readability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cTwCl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cTwCl.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;spam or vandalism&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;no improvement whatsoever&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;irrelevant tags used&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;clearly conflicts with author&amp;#39;s intent&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;attempt to reply&amp;quot;, or &amp;quot;causes harm&amp;quot; (that last one lets us fill out a custom message saying how it&amp;#39;d make the post worse)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is a screenshot from Stack Overflow.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-02-07T19:00:02.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6735" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6736" CreationDate="2017-02-08T05:55:36.793" Score="21" ViewCount="431" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/33209&quot;&gt;An edit&lt;/a&gt; was suggested to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94462/l%E1%B4%87%E1%B4%9B-%E1%B4%9Cs-%E1%B4%85%C9%AAs%E1%B4%84%E1%B4%9Css-%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%C9%AAs-%EA%9C%B0%E1%B4%9C%CA%80%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%E1%B4%87%CA%80&quot;&gt;my recent Polaris question&lt;/a&gt;.  The edit reason was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;replace the weird font tricks with regular characters, for search engine and translation software compatibility&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I rejected the edit because smallcaps are used in the Polaris rules to denote key conflict phrases and this markup is particularly important in making my question easy to read.  We have an established tradition in other system's Q&amp;amp;A of using the published formatting when possible to denote e.g. spell, magic items, so I figured this would be good practice in general, in addition to particularly being useful for my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it would be bad if people are unable to read the question because of smallcaps, or if they were unable to find it via Google for that reason (though in the latter case that sounds like a problem Google would probably be interested in solving).  Are the objections given as reasons for the edit well founded?  Should I remove the smallcaps?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T07:57:13.460" Title="Is the accusation that smallcaps significantly hurts my question's software compatibility well founded?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|formatting|accessibility|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6735" CreationDate="2017-02-08T10:33:04.157" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, the small caps you're using are bad for machines. People also may have issues with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AceCalhoon pointed us in comments to &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/q/1160295/50208&quot;&gt;a question on Super User&lt;/a&gt; about the usage and purpose of these glyphs. The top answer explains they're not intended for usage as regular written text, and that trying to use them that way breaks stuff:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Those characters are not intended for regular Latin-alphabet text but for phonetics, Cyrillic-alphabet text, for use as mathematical symbols (representing variables), or similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend just bolding or italicising your special terminology (e.g. as &lt;strong&gt;Let us discuss this further&lt;/strong&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Let us discuss this further&lt;/em&gt;), and picking a more ordinary sort of title. I would recommend this even if machines &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; handle the small caps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This analysis strictly applies to using the Unicode smallcaps characters to assemble smallcaps text, and does not reflect upon small caps in general. PDFs have a way to make small caps machine-friendly via providing a machine-friendly layer. Websites can also make screen reader friendly smallcaps via CSS styling, but that isn't available to us via markdown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Screen readers: unintelligible&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I downloaded the latest version of &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.nvaccess.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;NVDA&lt;/a&gt;, one of the popular screen readers I'm accustomed to from my accessibility work, and ran it through your question. What it read out was mostly unintelligible. The small caps sections were gibberish, and it was hard to recognise when the normal English words were starting again before the screen reader had already dived right back into another section of gibberish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of concern your generator may be using &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrillic_alphabets#Common_letters&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cyrillic characters&lt;/a&gt; where it should instead be using &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_caps#Unicode&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the Unicode standard small caps&lt;/a&gt;, I assembled the text &quot;ʜᴇʟʟᴏ ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ&quot; using excusively those Unicode small caps. It was similarly unintelligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Unicode wikipedia article I just linked has certain paragraph text in small caps. It's perfectly legible. It's rendered in small caps due to the CSS styling I mentioned above, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Google: can't work with your smallcaps text very well&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I google for the text &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?#q=site:rpg.stackexchange.com+%22struggling+with+escalating%22&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;struggling with escalating&quot;&lt;/a&gt; on our site, I find your question just fine. Google has your question indexed. You'll notice the &quot;struggling with escalating&quot; phrase is bolded in the search extracts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I turn it into &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.co.uk/webhp#q=site:rpg.stackexchange.com+%22struggling+with+escalating%22+but+only+if&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;struggling with escalating&quot; but only if&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.co.uk/webhp#q=site:rpg.stackexchange.com+%22struggling+with+escalating%22+but+only+if&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;struggling with escalating&quot; let us discuss this further&lt;/a&gt;, none of the small caps text is bolded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I search specifically for your smallcaps text with &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.co.uk/webhp#q=site:rpg.stackexchange.com+%22struggling+with+escalating%22+L%E1%B4%87%E1%B4%9B+%E1%B4%9Cs+%E1%B4%85%C9%AAs%E1%B4%84%E1%B4%9Css+%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%C9%AAs+%EA%9C%B0%E1%B4%9C%CA%80%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%E1%B4%87%CA%80&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;struggling with escalating&quot; Lᴇᴛ ᴜs ᴅɪsᴄᴜss ᴛʜɪs ꜰᴜʀᴛʜᴇʀ&lt;/a&gt;, Google bolds that text just fine, indicating it doesn't treat the Unicode smallcaps characters as equivalent to ordinary text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google Translate has no idea what to do with the text &lt;a href=&quot;https://translate.google.com/#en/es/L%E1%B4%87%E1%B4%9B%20%E1%B4%9Cs%20%E1%B4%85%C9%AAs%E1%B4%84%E1%B4%9Css%20%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%C9%AAs%20%EA%9C%B0%E1%B4%9C%CA%80%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%E1%B4%87%CA%80&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;Lᴇᴛ ᴜs ᴅɪsᴄᴜss ᴛʜɪs ꜰᴜʀᴛʜᴇʀ&quot;&lt;/a&gt; but can work with &lt;a href=&quot;https://translate.google.com/#en/es/Let%20us%20discuss%20this%20further&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;Let us discuss this further&quot;&lt;/a&gt; just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;People: may dislike it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Small caps usage can be a useful formatting convention sometimes. When established as a standard style in a document it can be very useful for helping special terminology stand out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE doesn't use that convention. Instead, our formatting choices include bold and italic for special terminology, and we can use those regardless of how they're formatted in the RPG's text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bucking our common formatting conventions can be unwelcome. In this case, the esoteric title and body text can be seen as an attempt to grab attention, and Stack Exchange users generally dislike attempts to grab attention whether via esoteric titles, funny images, or other methods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The book using small caps as a convention is fine, but that's a convention that requires translating into a different equivalent convention here: bold/italics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:04:27.397" LastActivityDate="2017-02-09T13:26:31.270" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6733" CreationDate="2017-02-08T10:51:19.207" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There is one bit of potential harm from editing a closed question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you edit a question, people with the power to re-open closed questions are automatically notified of the edit, and are prompted to vote to either re-open the question or leave it closed. However, this only happens on the &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; edit of a closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users with the power to vote to re-open won't be notified if the question is edited in a way that justifies it being re-opened. They can still happen across the question and place their votes to re-open it when they do, but they're less likely to notice that an edit has taken place... Which means that making trivial edits to a closed question slightly reduces the chance of it being re-opened if it's later edited in a way that actually makes it site-appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, it's entirely possible that the question will never be edited again, and so will never be re-opened; It's also possible that the question shouldn't have been closed in the first place. In either case, making trivial edits does no harm. Besides, as doppelgreener's answer says, you're allowed to make trivial edits to closed questions regardless of the circumstances, so you should feel free to do so. Just be aware that such edits just &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; prevent the question from being re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T10:51:19.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6739" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-08T14:48:14.553" Score="3" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/94490/1204&quot;&gt;flagged a particular post as Rude/Abusive&lt;/a&gt;. I then had a further detail to report about the post (the username is offensive), but when I went to use the flag dialog again, I found that despite being visibly enabled, I could not actually select the last option for &quot;in need of moderator intervention&quot; to supply a custom message pointing it out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/j1rkK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/j1rkK.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;you already have a pending flag on this answer&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's me trying to at first tap on the selection with my touch screen (some feedback), then clicking it furiously with my mouse:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/E2Fw7.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/E2Fw7.gif&quot; alt=&quot;tap tap tap tap click click click click click click click&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually when Stack Exchange wants to tell me &quot;I can't let you do that, Dave&quot; it'll be pretty explicit about it, and this isn't consistent with that kind of error handling. There were also no console errors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T15:26:44.547" Title="I can't use other flag options after raising one, and there's no feedback saying why" Tags="|bug|flagging|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6735" CreationDate="2017-02-08T16:01:24.900" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;F&lt;/code&gt; in your iterations of &lt;em&gt;Let Us Discuss This Further&lt;/em&gt; appears as a white box for me. Kind of a case-in-point: if this is happening to me, it’s happening to others, it’s degrading the readability and accessibility of the website, and therefore it should not be done. This site does not offer any feature that will correctly render small caps, and faking it through abusing obscure Unicode characters is a terrible idea (here and anywhere else).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T16:01:24.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6735" CreationDate="2017-02-08T18:38:39.183" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The observation is founded&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Style is secondary to comprehensibility&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though we do prefer to maintain the style used in sources, this isn't a hard rule and is always secondary to making sure posts are comprehensible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a limited palette of styling tools available and have to make do with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. These aren't small-caps anyway&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These aren't small-caps versions of letters for the most part, they're mostly &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;International Phonetic Alphabet&lt;/a&gt; (IPA) symbols, with the &lt;code&gt;s&lt;/code&gt; being a normal lowercase &lt;em&gt;s&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/a730/index.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;ꜰ&lt;/code&gt; character&lt;/a&gt; being the only real small-cap character, but part of the unreliably-available &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Extended-D&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Latin Extended-D block&lt;/a&gt; (“a Unicode block containing Latin characters for phonetic, Mayan, and Medieval transcription and notation systems”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Semantically these strings of characters are gibberish — it just happens that sighted non-computer readers see their &lt;em&gt;resemblance&lt;/em&gt; to small capital Latin alphabet letters and can parse the result as words. This is much like how &lt;code&gt;•&lt;/code&gt; can be typed in front of a sentence, but it only visually resembles list formatting and doesn't create an actual semantic list item, or you could write ‘Р’ instead of ‘P’ but the computer will still think (correctly) that you want it to transmit a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Er_(Cyrillic)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cyrillic letter Er&lt;/a&gt; and that you mean a rolled r sound should be produced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory, a computer could be taught to “understand” that &lt;a href=&quot;http://fsymbols.com/generators/smallcaps/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;humans misuse Unicode characters for visual effect&lt;/a&gt;, and be given a translation table to be able to figure out which semantic characters the writer intended another human to believe they were seeing. In practice this is impractical until we have near-AI though, because though such a translation table would be easy to implement, it would be very difficult to teach the computer when to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; apply the translation and instead interpret them as their actual meanings — syllables in IPA, or Cyrillic letter sounds, or whatever. That kind of fine, contextual nuance is currently beyond or barely within our programming abilities. And besides, avoiding having to make the computer guess what a character is “supposed” to be is why Unicode was invented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that's a tangent. The bottom line is that these letters have specific meanings already and a computer is going to do what it's been told, which is to treat them as strings of (mostly) IPA symbols.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Use available styling instead&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For game technical terms, we typically capitalise or bold them. In this case capitals would be less faithful to the source, so bold it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This won't be misunderstood by anyone or -thing, and serves to accurately delimit which parts of the question text are mentions of game-mechanical phrases and which parts are the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A tangent about Unicode in URLs&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some browsers can paper over it in some circumstances, but the fact is that most bare Unicode characters aren't legal in URLs and there's a special scheme to encode them so that the page fetch request will be correctly understood on the other end. That scheme makes &lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94462/lᴇᴛ-ᴜs-ᴅɪsᴄᴜss-ᴛʜɪs-ꜰᴜʀᴛʜᴇʀ&lt;/code&gt; actually be the URL &lt;code&gt;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94462/l%E1%B4%87%E1%B4%9B-%E1%B4%9Cs-%E1%B4%85%C9%AAs%E1%B4%84%E1%B4%9Css-%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%C9%AAs-%EA%9C%B0%E1%B4%9C%CA%80%E1%B4%9B%CA%9C%E1%B4%87%CA%80&lt;/code&gt; (notice the hyphens and lowercase &lt;em&gt;S&lt;/em&gt;s scattered in there, which didn't need percent encoding). That's why sometimes copying and pasting the URL of the question visually preserved the small-caps-hack characters and sometimes it didn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-08T18:52:56.107" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T18:52:56.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6742" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6735" CreationDate="2017-02-08T19:28:52.340" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reasons are well-founded. The original question was not written in English. This meant it was extremely difficult to access the page using a screen reader. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SuperUser question &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/questions/1160295/why-shouldn-t-i-use-unicode-characters-to-simulate-typographic-styles-such-as-s&quot;&gt;Why shouldn’t I use Unicode characters to simulate typographic styles (such as small caps or script)?&lt;/a&gt; (linked a couple of times already) has a lot of reasons but it misses the important one, that is, &lt;em&gt;tricks like that make the web harder for disabled people to use&lt;/em&gt;. We should be making things easier to use for disabled people, not harder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside, making things easier for screen readers also makes things easier for search engines. One of the early goals for the StackExchange network was to be the top search result in Google.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7698" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:04:27.397" LastActivityDate="2017-02-08T19:28:52.340" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6743" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-10T12:49:19.840" Score="1" ViewCount="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently we had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/templates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;templates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;templates&lt;/a&gt; tag on these questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87887/how-many-templates-can-be-applied-to-a-summoned-creatures&quot;&gt;How many templates can be applied to a summoned creature(s)?&lt;/a&gt; (asked September 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88048/where-can-i-find-extra-templates-for-pathfinder&quot;&gt;Where can I find extra templates for pathfinder?&lt;/a&gt; (asked September 2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93696/can-a-pc-apply-a-template-to-a-construct-gained-as-a-class-feature&quot;&gt;Can a PC apply a template to a construct gained as a class feature?&lt;/a&gt; (asked January 2017)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94633/how-to-create-a-custom-lycanthrope-in-heroforge-anew&quot;&gt;How to create a custom Lycanthrope in HeroForge Anew?&lt;/a&gt; (asked today, February 2017)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-templates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-templates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-templates&lt;/a&gt; tag for this stuff so I've burninated the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/templates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;templates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;templates&lt;/a&gt; tag and replaced it on these questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-templates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-templates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-templates&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/templates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;templates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;templates&lt;/a&gt; is also way too generic a tag name to have around (or make a synonym of anything specific) since we could also have document templates, design templates, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/burninate-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;burninate-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;burninate-request&lt;/a&gt; but the burnination has already been done.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T14:57:56.840" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T14:57:56.840" Title="The [templates] tag has been burninated/re-tagged away into [character-templates]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6744" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5130" CreationDate="2017-02-10T18:44:29.870" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;At some point this was either turned on for RPG.se, or became a network-wide default, judging by the activation of automatic answer-bans on various user accounts I've seen since being a mod.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T18:44:29.870" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2933" CreationDate="2017-02-10T19:10:21.007" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since this was asked, &lt;a href=&quot;http://charcoal-se.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Smoke Detector&lt;/a&gt; (“Smokey”) has started running on SE. Smoke Detector is a bot (run by Good People™ who work closely with SE staff, and some of whom are mods) that watches Stack Exchange for exactly these kinds of things. The bot doesn't have enough reputation on Stack Exchange to auto-flag these posts, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a relatively &lt;a href=&quot;https://github.com/Charcoal-SE/SmokeDetector/wiki/Autoflagging&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;new feature&lt;/a&gt; of Smokey allows users to sign up to voluntarily delegate their flagging privilege to Smoke Detector, which gives Smokey a secure token from your RPG.se account so that it can flag as if it were you on RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are limitations built into Smokey to prevent this delegated flagging permission from being a problem, and &lt;em&gt;past&lt;/em&gt; accuracy is in the 99.9% range, but technically the responsibility for an account's flagging behaviour still lies with the owner of the account, not with Smokey. Obviously not everyone is going to be super-OK with a bot having that kind of permission on their account, so it's necessarily &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; voluntary. It's for those who have faith in this kind of technology and want to volunteer to help out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To learn more about Smokey, visit the bot's &lt;a href=&quot;http://charcoal-se.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;homepage&lt;/a&gt; and the wiki page on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://github.com/Charcoal-SE/SmokeDetector/wiki/Autoflagging&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Autoflagging&lt;/a&gt; feature. You can also talk to helpful humans about Smokey and see the bot in action in the &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11540/charcoal-hq&quot;&gt;Charcoal HQ chat room&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This doesn't merit marking this feature request &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; since Smokey is more of an external tool or workaround. Perhaps something like Smokey will be built into SE some day and this can be marked completed, planned, deferred, or somesuch.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T20:45:48.883" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T20:45:48.883" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6746" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6789" CreationDate="2017-02-10T19:19:19.647" Score="4" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94646/1204&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94646/1204&lt;/a&gt; has come with the creation of the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/videogame-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;videogame-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;videogame-role-playing&lt;/a&gt;. Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6173/1204&quot;&gt;Are questions about roleplaying within a video game context on topic?&lt;/a&gt; roleplaying situations that occur in video games are not inherently off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &quot;video game&quot; is &lt;a href=&quot;https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=video+game%2Cvideogame&amp;amp;year_start=1800&amp;amp;year_end=2000&amp;amp;corpus=15&amp;amp;smoothing=3&amp;amp;share=&amp;amp;direct_url=t1%3B%2Cvideo%20game%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cvideogame%3B%2Cc0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;two words, not one&lt;/a&gt;. Can we rename the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/video-game-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;video-game-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;video-game-role-playing&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-14T10:24:01.487" Title="Rename [videogame-role-playing] to [video-game-role-playing]" Tags="|support|tags|video-games|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6746" CreationDate="2017-02-10T19:24:26.927" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I don't think we need a tag for this.&lt;/strong&gt; We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/play-by-chat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;play-by-chat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;play-by-chat&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, and indeed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; itself. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6748/321&quot;&gt;I've suggested an alternative name&lt;/a&gt; for if we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; keep the tag, but this post should be considered support for removing it altogether.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6173&quot;&gt;If video game roleplaying is on topic &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; it's not distinguishable from play-by-chat&lt;/a&gt;, then distinguishing it via tag is a bit of a contradiction. We don't make such a distinction for other platforms for playing by chatting.*&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting it another way: are we expecting to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/video-game-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;video-game-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;video-game-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; experts now? No, we aren't! And a singular tag for them to be experts in would be absurd anyway: no-one can be expert in that tag because the scope of video games is &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;ridiculously large&lt;/a&gt;. Expertise in roleplaying within one video game can't translate to expertise in roleplaying within a different video game… &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; the video game itself is irrelevant, in which case so is the tag. For the same reason that we have system tags, we would need specific-video-game tags, which development would make it obvious how off topic the whole thing is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a &lt;strong&gt;secondary&lt;/strong&gt; problem, it will likely encourage people to misinterpret the tag and submit questions about CRPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* Though we do have, e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roll20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roll20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roll20&lt;/a&gt;, that's because questions specific to that software's features are on-topic by its own merits, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anydice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;anydice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;anydice&lt;/a&gt;'s relationship to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt;, or both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2017-02-17T20:31:01.093" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6748" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6746" CreationDate="2017-02-10T19:40:42.030" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If we &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; have a tag with “video game” in the name, it should have the hyphen between the two words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplay-in-video-games&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplay-in-video-games&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplay-in-video-games&lt;/a&gt;* would be better and clearer, seeming less like a tag about CRPGs and more obviously about using them as a platform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* We appear to have standardised our tags on &lt;code&gt;roleplaying&lt;/code&gt; rather than hyphenating it, despite our title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-02-10T19:45:45.310" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T19:45:45.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6749" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-10T21:04:27.957" Score="4" ViewCount="1307" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76364/30214&quot;&gt;a long forgotten question about avoiding unwanted ERP in online roleplaying by sandbox video game server&lt;/a&gt;. I have experience at such games since 2013, so I felt like I may share some important knowledge. The question was closed, though, for various reasons, one of them being &quot;the asker left our site, no actual problem to solve&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of RP can be wrongly understood as just playing a computer RPG, but it's not. There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6173/are-questions-about-roleplaying-within-a-video-game-context-on-topic&quot;&gt;related Meta discussion&lt;/a&gt; with a conclusion that such questions are generally on-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/discussion-on-reopening-or-self-answering-a-question-about-erp&quot;&gt;asked in chat&lt;/a&gt; about what should I do if I want to share the knowledge that I have, and the general response was that I should make a self-answered question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94646/30214&quot;&gt;So I made one&lt;/a&gt;, and it got me a lot of downvotes. Apparently, there is a huge problem with this question that I don't see, or even more then one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are those problems?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The close reason stated by a moderator no longer applies, and downvoters just downvote without giving any reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-02-17T20:22:34.933" Title="What is the problem with my question about erotic roleplay in online RP?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6749" CreationDate="2017-02-10T21:52:30.970" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;NOTE: I am not an RPG.stackexchange regular, but this question about &quot;what are those problems&quot; with regards to downvotes are generically able to be answered across all of any StackExchange site; as a moderator on &lt;a href=&quot;https://askubuntu.com&quot;&gt;Ask Ubuntu&lt;/a&gt; here on the StackExchange network, also, I am well versed in the evils of how downvotes are used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most evil problems with the SE system, in some opinions, is the downvote option.  People use it for a wide variety of issues, ranging from:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Issues with the post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not liking the content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's been closed and therefore 'people' in the community want to make sure the question goes into a more-hidden state (and while this is discouraged on StackExchange, people still do it)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One or multiple people just don't like you and are serial-downvoting your content (which of course moderators will be able to reverse and put a stop to if this is actually happening, and the penalties for this can be quite harsh so people usually aren't doing this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or, any of fifty billion possible other reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless an individual comments with their downvote, explaining &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they downvoted it, there's no way to determine exactly why you got a ton of downvotes.  Which means that your query here in Meta is not really able to be reliably answered except by people who have downvoted (who may or may not actually visit Meta here), or by people like me who are &lt;em&gt;guessing&lt;/em&gt; (see below) as to what people may see as the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for my two-cents on the problem(s) with your post...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First glance, the main issue I can see is that you ask an infinitely broad question that can't reliably be answered in any frame of reference (either in the online Arquade SE website sense of an online RPG game, or the RPG.SE sense of it being an RPG).  As I stated in the chat from a general &quot;systems / server administrator&quot; perspective from when I used to run some RPG game servers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[A]s someone who had to mod a few online RPG servers at one point, before bringing a nuclear strike to the server to kill said servers (because people were getting out of hand with ERP), the answer form the &quot;server&quot; perspective is &quot;You can't, technically, but if you make sure the rules are known, and routinely check what's been going on and what's been 'abuse reported', you can retroactively condemn such evil[s]&quot;. -- &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/33991/thomas-ward&quot;&gt;Thomas Ward&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/35358215#35358215&quot;&gt;9:09 PM UTC, 2017-02-10&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key problem here is, though, as your question says there's no GM Oversight on this server, so there's no real way to do regular enforcement, except to retroactively ban people who are breaking the rules.  (However, that goes away from the RPG.SE site and into &quot;How do I reliably enforce rules on an online game server&quot; discussion that belongs elsewhere.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that while I give you a &quot;This is why it's infinitely broad and unanswerable&quot; response here, the point is that your question is too broad, because there's numerous approaches, all of which may or may not work.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33991" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-02-10T21:58:17.673" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6751" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6749" CreationDate="2017-02-11T01:27:43.577" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Why the downvotes: It's a perfect downvote magnet&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know why all those downvotes were cast &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt;, but over time I have noticed some trends as to what sorts of questions attract downvotes &lt;em&gt;more easily&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voters hold questions and answers about sex to a &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; high standard, since sex is a subject that can easily be mishandled. Great questions/answers about sexual issues get a lot of upvotes, but ones that are at all less than “great” tend to attract a few downvotes, and ones that are merely “meh” attract many downvotes. Actually &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; sex-related posts are often outright deleted by community delete voting. The voting standards for sex-related posts is notably quite a bit higher than for other subjects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions that seem to just be a variation on another question are sometimes downvoted even if they're not quite close enough to be closed as duplicates. This is even more so the case when the other question is closed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hypothetical questions can attract lots of downvotes. They sometimes continue to attract downvotes even when rewritten to not be hypothetical, if people suspect that the edited version is maybe still hypothetical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Voters hold self-answered questions to a higher standard than most other questions. It seems that a self-answered question has to be well-written, clearly useful, not make voters suspect it's just rep-seeking, and stand on its own as a decent question without the answer. Without those, votes tend to be absent, or down.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are near or on the border of our site topic can attract downvotes, especially if it's still controversial where to draw the dividing line.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this question seems to fall into all those categories, raising the quality standard it will be judged by &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; high: the question and answer are about sex; the question's a variation on another question, which happens to be closed; it started as a hypothetical, to allow a self-answer; it's a self-answered question; and there is some uncertainty (or at least, the consensus is in question) about whether RP within video games is on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is not to say that it necessarily has the potential problems of these categories — just that it has several ways that voters tend to expect excellence, and therefore many more opportunities to be found lacking enough to justify a downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which brings up another trend:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions with multiple problems attract more downvotes than the problems alone would attract.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question or its answer &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; have any problems in these regards, they are probably multiplying their effects in the eyes of voters, attracting downvotes more quickly than the problems would separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why it's (still) closed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed by a mod. I didn't close it, but another mod judged that the hypothetical-ness of the question made it too unclear. That judgement call isn't absolute… but nobody has voted to reopen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if the downvotes do indicate real problems with the content of the posts, even if the question would be considered clear enough to some reopen voters, they may be refraining from voting to reopen. After all, why reopen a question that's still sinking?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's what's happening with reopen voters, it's not necessarily a sensible policy-driven reaction, but it's a “gut feeling” reaction that the site's design is actually built around harnessing. Sometimes the community doesn't have to &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; exactly what's wrong — just that &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; is, and that's enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I can tell you why it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; closed: one mod thought the hypothetical-ness problem was enough to mark it as unclear. Now that it's been rewritten to not be hypothetical, I can't tell you why it's &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; closed. But I can say that it looks like the community thinks there's &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; wrong, and won't vote to reopen it while that “something” remains. And if the “something” that's wrong is multiple somethings, or complicated, or actually inherent in the question and therefore can't be changed, then it may not be salvageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why it was closed again later&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After being changed to be about dealing with reports of or prevention of ERP within an unsupervised video game community, in the context of being the server operator, the question is now solidly off topic and has been closed as off topic with the “video games” custom close reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's no longer a question about how to personally respond to unwanted roleplay being imposed on oneself, it's now a question that requires domain-specific knowledge — to be precise, knowledge of Minecraft server management and Minecraft community management. Those are two topics I am personally familiar with enough to know that such off-topic expertise is required to be able to even begin to usefully answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Minecraft expertise? What Minecraft expertise?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those who aren't familiar with hosting Minecraft servers and communities, or with Minecraft at all, running a MC server presents a few peculiar difficulties that are basic knowledge needed to answer a question like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How investigating abuses via Minecraft chat logging works (or doesn't work, and how it can be made more robust)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The difficulties of communicating with new players (which requires either &lt;code&gt;motd&lt;/code&gt; tricks, command blocks, using bukkit, whitelisting, or a combination; never mind the problem of getting them to &lt;em&gt;read&lt;/em&gt; your command-based or link-based policy communication attempt; not to mention the relative practical merits of in-server &lt;code&gt;help&lt;/code&gt;-based vs. off-server website-based policy documents)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The difficulties of communicating with &lt;em&gt;existing&lt;/em&gt; players (same as above, plus &lt;code&gt;/tell&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;/tp&lt;/code&gt;, requiring email registration [and the various methods for that], or 3pp community services [same])&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Jailing or kicking techniques, and how banning works&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;…&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The list goes on and on. These are just the things peculiar to Minecraft, too — it will be different for each video game, requiring game-specific expertise which is not reasonable to require of experts who are here to answer RPG questions. For a lot of reasons, hosting a Minecraft server is not the digital equivalent of running LARPs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why video game questions are off topic, part &lt;em&gt;n&lt;/em&gt; of &amp;infin;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, &lt;strong&gt;these are not obvious&lt;/strong&gt; problems with questions like this, to readers who are not already video game experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An RPG expert could look at that question and assume that, because it's open, that their RPG experience is useful and that nothing about the video game itself is necessary to understand… and proceed to post a &lt;strong&gt;completely useless&lt;/strong&gt; answer. That's something we never want to happen here — we want someone who is an expert in RPGs to be able to tell when their expertise is relevant to a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a large reason why previous questions related to video games&lt;sup&gt;(e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59638&quot;&gt;[1]&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/9536&quot;&gt;[2]&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sup&gt; have been okay: no part of their problem related to the video game itself, and only RPG expert knowledge was required to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's also why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6747/321&quot;&gt;we probably don't need a tag for roleplaying in video games&lt;/a&gt; — nobody here should be expected to be an expert in the details of every video game in order to understand a question's problem, let alone answer it usefully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-17T20:22:34.933" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6752" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-12T03:45:39.503" Score="14" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel like the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94713/8610&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94713/8610&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; an answer, but even &lt;em&gt;considering&lt;/em&gt; the question—and bracing for an onslaught of similar questions like &lt;em&gt;How did Gygax's narcissism influence AD&amp;amp;D?&lt;/em&gt; or whatever—makes me uncomfortable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are questions that ask users to connect the dots between a designer's personal life and his game on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-02-12T05:31:27.227" Title="Are questions probing a designer's personal life and its influence on his games on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6753" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6752" CreationDate="2017-02-12T04:23:23.247" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Game design influences are on topic, but personal ones most often hard/impossible to answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's necessarily off topic, just usually a poor question. That sort of thing is often going to be difficult to impossible to answer, and could be asked just as productively without so narrowly focusing on that one specific source of a game's influence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's still technically on topic because the history and nature of the development of an RPG is on topic, and the influences of a game's design is on topic. It's just that the personal qualities of a designer that are among those influences is going to be a really hard question to answer. And it's probably an unnecessary question to ask (unless you have unusual motives, like our example question does).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe there are interviews that cover a designer's personal life influences on their games, or maybe there aren't. A more productive question would be to simply ask what a game's influences are — in general — since a complete answer to that will cover any personal influences, if any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Despite topicality, attracting speculation would still merit closing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of topicality though, It's also a likely bad question in many cases simply because most such questions would be phrased in a way that they would attract many answers that &lt;em&gt;speculate&lt;/em&gt; about any possible connections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's a reason for closing, since despite even good intentions in a question, Primarily Opinion-Based is a valid close reason even when it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be objectively answered, but will mostly &lt;em&gt;tend&lt;/em&gt; to not be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A note on “probing”&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It almost goes without saying that only publicly available information is relevant in this context. Digging into a designer's personal life more aggressively than that in order to merely answer an RPG.se question is the sort of thing we aren't OK with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But this particular question is unsalvageable for other reasons&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble with that question goes deeper than merely being self-hobblingly narrow though, as the up-front reason to even want to focus so narrowly on one source of influences is being openly repulsed by the designer. That kind of thing may be the reason for wanting to focus on one kind of influence, but the stated reason itself is unacceptable to even express here per our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they'd been clever, researched the site they were posting on, and thought about it, they might have been able to write the broader question and got answers that would have allowed them to privately make the determination they had in mind. They weren't that clever though, and just tracked mud all over our carpets while barging in blindly, so we're not going to un-see the violation of acceptable behaviour and try to rehabilitate the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though we &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; polish this turd, we shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All people are welcome, but to ensure that is true, not all ideas are welcome. In particular, ideas that some people &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; be welcome because of who they are, are especially unwelcome ideas here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-12T05:31:27.227" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6754" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6752" CreationDate="2017-02-12T04:23:31.643" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't think so.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personal life is personal. And although every creation is affected in one way or another by a persona of it's author it's not constructive to dig into another person's life. Especially, from point of view of personal judgement towards the designer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, there are myriads of things that can affect the game starting from co-authors and editors and going to events and political situation at the moment of the game's birth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can be interesting in a historical way. Just like writers lifes are researched in order to understand what influenced their creations at given time. But I'm sure that this kind of things will be off-topic, because it's still a subject for theories and discussions and won't fit well in Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Still, questions like this are salvageable.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's unclear what's OP consider to be a manifestation of designer's views. If the question was like &quot;Does this game have this or that?&quot;, &quot;How does it handle that thing?&quot; or in any form that asks about what OP would like to know about product regardless of it's authors, it would be answerable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And question like this should be more specific. I'm afraid that in most cases questions like &quot;I'm a conservative. Is this game is influenced by liberal political views?&quot;, even though disconnected from game designer's persona, will be too-broad and unclear to have high quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24169" LastEditorUserId="24169" LastEditDate="2017-02-12T04:33:03.177" LastActivityDate="2017-02-12T04:33:03.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6755" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-13T17:37:03.153" Score="26" ViewCount="497" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few days ago I was discussing an amusing RPG concept with a friend and decided to ask a question about it on rpg.stackexchange to see if the community has good ideas: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94575/how-to-let-my-players-fail-their-rolls-intentionally-but-covertly&quot;&gt;How to let my players fail their rolls intentionally, but covertly?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much to my amazement, the question got very popular and dozens of answers accumulated over the weekend. I was mostly away from the computer during that time, so I didn't have the time to review most of the answers properly. I noticed many of them were in breach of &quot;Good subjective, bad subjective&quot; and that our moderators SevenSidedDie and mxyzplk were doing a good job policing such answers. Thanks for that to both of you (and any other moderators who did the same without me noticing)!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now the question is on hold, because it attracted too many bad subjective answers. I am a bit puzzled by the situation and don't know what I should do now. The question is apparently of significant interest to many of our users, and I would like to know how it can be helped. I don't think allowing a bunch of bad answers to ruin a popular question with good answers is the way to go here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-13T20:05:23.737" Title="My question got too popular - what should I do now?" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6755" CreationDate="2017-02-13T20:05:23.737" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately you're the second case in recent history of a popular question being dragged afield and closed (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6672/why-is-one-21-question-on-hold-when-a-similar-question-is-ok-with-53-votes&quot;&gt;Why is one +21 question On Hold when a similar question is ok with +53 votes?&lt;/a&gt; discussed the other). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An incontrovertible truth of RPG.SE is that we don't do subjective discussion or idea generation. We use &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective criteria&lt;/a&gt;; a question should ask for working fixes not supposition and answers should Back It Up! with something they've done or seen done (or can cite a source of being done).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gamers, of course, always think they're brilliant and are sure the idea they just came up off the top of their head with will work just fine for you, despite them not having tried it, or seen it tried, or indeed thought more than 15 minutes about it.  &lt;strong&gt;We don't want that kind of content on this site&lt;/strong&gt; - SE is 100x better than &quot;Yahoo! Answers&quot; for a reason. I want to be clear to everyone that this is not under discussion; it's how the site works.  Go to a forum to brainstorm.  We're not going to rehash that discussion, anyone interested should go read all the other meta posts and SE philosophy about that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this is the question's fault.  &quot;Hey give me some ideas!&quot; it'll say.  Those are easy to nip in the bud early, the question gets closed by community members out of the gate and refined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But sometimes, as in this case, it's not really the question's fault.  Your original problem statement was fine and I edited it to even more specifically say &quot;&lt;strong&gt;Does anyone have a system they have used or seen used that works given these criteria?&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; That is a completely legitimate question and it's asking for the right thing. Furthermore I personally like this question, and think it's a great topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in some cases, especially popular questions on &quot;squishy&quot; topics like [gm-techniques], we get overwhelmed by answers that just toss out ideas and don't bother to indicate if it's a tested answer and how it turned out for them.  In these cases we try to police it by putting post notices, reminding the community how they're supposed to act (downvote and flag subjective answers), etc. Sometimes that works.  But in these two cases, it didn't.  So then we're left with the Catch-22 choice of trying to &quot;save&quot; the question with mass answer deletes or of closing the question. And since we get approximately the same amount of shrieking from a deleted answer as a closed question, and deleting bad answers doesn't stop more from coming in, we regretfully close them once it's spun out of control.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So your question is &quot;what can you do now?&quot; Unfortunately, I'm not sure there's a way to save the current question. The ship has sailed, the cow has left the barn and it's too late to close the door, whatever tormented analogy you'd prefer applies. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, for future questions - while your question was licit, you can always try to make it more &quot;drool-proof&quot; by adding prominent notices, bolding, etc. to make it clear &quot;I don't want to hear your guesses, I want to hear tested solutions.&quot;  You've probably seen questions on the site that have anticipated trouble of one sort or another and added a stanza to proactively call that out. &quot;Should&quot; that be needed?  No, of course not, but unfortunately this is the other option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Of course, if you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; want to hear guesses, then the close is righteous.  I am proceeding on the assumption that you don't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, in the long term, everyone in the community can help questions like these stay open by acting right.  Downvote, vote to delete, flag, don't answer with some junk you made up.  If this question had 10 answers but all the ones without any backing were downvoted into the negatives, I'd be all about leaving the question open.  Act right, teach others to act right. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've lost two good questions to this problem lately.  There's nothing we mods can do to &quot;fix it&quot; ourselves.  We need you, the community, to uphold our content standards. Coach users.  Don't put up with poor quality answers or those who advocate for it. You can be why we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; have nice things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-02-13T20:05:23.737" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6757" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-15T23:26:47.920" Score="18" ViewCount="304" Body="&lt;p&gt;For a mild example of what I'm talking about, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94815/unearthed-arcana-does-warlock-invocation-kiss-of-mephistopheles-require-you-to&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; 5e question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have now been three answers (two deleted, one (currently) undeleted) pointing out that by 5th level, a Fiend patron warlock would have Fireball on their patron's Expanded Spells list and, therefore, there is no scenario in which they can have that invocation but not know fireball. This answer is incorrect, as unlike most other similar expanded spell list features (likely the common cause of confusion), warlocks do not automatically know the spells on their expanded list and therefore do not automatically know Fireball. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should be done in scenarios like this where there's a common misunderstanding causing people to give an incorrect answer that they delete after realizing, which leads to another person with the same misunderstanding doing the same thing because they don't see the corrected mistake of the previous answerer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92652/how-do-long-rests-work-for-small-parties#comment212918_92652&quot;&gt;In the past&lt;/a&gt; when dealing with common mistakes that pop up in several answers, I've left a comment on the question in hopes that answerers notice before answering, but I have no idea if that's the proper method of handling this vs. simply continuing to correct the most recent 'wrong' answer in comments when it pops up again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15614" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-03-26T03:33:37.943" LastActivityDate="2021-03-26T03:33:37.943" Title="What should be done when there is an incorrect common answer that keeps getting deleted when the answerer realizes their mistake?" Tags="|discussion|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6758" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6757" CreationDate="2017-02-15T23:38:45.270" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Put a comment on the question, submit an edit with that note in the question, or submit an answer that says &quot;while it's a common misconception that...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-02-15T23:38:45.270" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6759" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-16T20:45:50.777" Score="-1" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just noticed several of my comments are gone and I didn't delete them. I don't comment lightly - it's generally looking for clarification from a question or response, or to point out issues in response. I will delete my own comments once I think the issue is resolved, but many are deleted, presumably by a moderator, while the issue still stands, implying I now no longer take issue with the response. That seems awful cavalier and defeats the &quot;community&quot; spirit. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9671" LastActivityDate="2017-02-16T21:20:38.293" Title="What is the delete comment policy?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2017-02-17T16:03:05.413" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6759" CreationDate="2017-02-16T21:15:17.487" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comment deletion policy is in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; and is guided by the &quot;When should I comment?&quot; and &quot;When &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; I comment?&quot; sections of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;help article about the commenting feature&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those two comments were removed as being no longer constructive — the post author rejected the suggested change, and having no further purpose, the temporary notes were removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-16T21:20:38.293" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6761" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-18T13:48:48.933" Score="-7" ViewCount="293" Body="&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a question about my Role-playing Games Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95110/what-other-benefits-can-the-mind-sphere-1st-dot-have&quot;&gt;What other benefits can the Mind Sphere 1st Dot have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&#xA;Why is someone who knows nothing about the game I am asking a question about telling me that my title and body do not go together? Wouldn't it make sense for someone with knowledge of the game, who can then make an educated decision on what does and doesn't go together, comment or edit it? And if he felt it was more of a discussion topic then question, why didn't he just make it a wiki?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34161" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-02-20T03:43:47.550" Title="Why is someone one with no specific knowledge judging the worthiness of my question?" Tags="|support|moderators|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6761" CreationDate="2017-02-18T13:52:07.377" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because they are a mod and understand how the site works. They are trying to teach you how it works, but you're being remarkably resistant to learning. Try listening instead of just insisting that your question is perfect as formed, when you are new to a site and its format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One question per question. This is irrelevant to game system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't repost to get around holds. This is irrelevant to game system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The title should ask the same question as the question (it causes confusion when they are different). This is irrelevant to game system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-02-18T13:52:07.377" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6763" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6761" CreationDate="2017-02-18T18:09:52.787" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Sometimes it's good to also have a regular user's perspective on questions like these.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;Why is someone who knows nothing about the game I am asking a question about telling me that my title and body do not go together?&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the title and the body really may &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; go together. A user need not have any experience with a game to offer suggestions as to how to improve a question. A really good question should be clear enough, interesting enough, and make enough sense to attract readers who don't know &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; about the system, and such a question should invite experienced players to offer answers to the question. A question that doesn't sync up with its title can backfire and fail to yield answers you want. (For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/53213/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; originally had an awesome attention-grabbing title (if I do say so myself) but the top-scoring answer is absolutely &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; what I was looking for because that answer addresses that since-changed awesome title rather than the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An unclear title leaves even those who &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; answer definitively, instead, &lt;em&gt;guessing&lt;/em&gt; what you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;Wouldn't it make sense for someone with knowledge of the game, who can then make an educated decision on what does and doesn't go together, comment or edit it?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, there's no way to judge a user's familiarity with a system unless the user states his degree of familiarity with the game system. Second, a user who's taken the time and trouble to try to help with your question now has a stake in a good answer to it—&lt;em&gt;whatever&lt;/em&gt; those reasons may be—, even if the user lacks familiarity with the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question, to some degree, is yours: You can accept or reject edits, edit it yourself, or do whatever with it. However, &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; can't mandate how other people &lt;em&gt;interact&lt;/em&gt; with the question. Once it's out there where the community can get at it, it's &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; the question that's &lt;em&gt;sort of&lt;/em&gt; under your control. Others have tried—and, mercifully, failed—to mandate &lt;em&gt;who&lt;/em&gt; exactly &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; interact with their questions, and the site resists such attempts that mightily. It should: It's entirely possible that someone with &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; experience at all with a particular game system nonetheless possesses valuable insight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; edits from users that are unfamiliar with a game system should be rejected, but &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; edits from users that are unfamiliar with a game system shouldn't be rejected out of hand just &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; a user is unfamiliar with the system! Wrong information &lt;em&gt;remains&lt;/em&gt; wrong information, but good writing also remains good writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also, bad &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; from users that are unfamiliar with a game system tend to receive downvotes so such answers don't happen often, but good answers from users that are unfamiliar with a game system—while rare—can &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; be Useful or, at least, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; Not Useful.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question:&lt;/strong&gt; And if he felt it was more of a discussion topic then question, why didn't he just make it a wiki?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6524/8610&quot;&gt;Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; label is applied on this site only in very rare cases and &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; to a &lt;em&gt;conversation&lt;/em&gt; that's masquerading as a question. For example, I don't think I've &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; applied the Community Wiki label to any of the 150-plus questions I've posed, and I think I've applied the label only &lt;em&gt;once&lt;/em&gt; to one of my 1,100-plus answers (specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/60107/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;). In the same vein, no moderator has applied the Community Wiki label to one of my questions or answers &lt;em&gt;for me&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than try to make the site behave in a way it's ill-equipped to behave, it's better &lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; to rephrase the question so it can be answered &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; to have the conversation you want to have elsewhere, like a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/8610&quot;&gt;discussion forum&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-02-18T18:09:52.787" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6764" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6765" CreationDate="2017-02-19T03:02:25.747" Score="13" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a new(ish) member of this SE, I'm curious of of the duplicate policy as it applies to different games and different editions of games. I've been thinking about asking a question based on my Dragonborn getting an extra attack and if he could switch between his breath attack and his weapon attack. Looking though the site, I found almost the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30203/can-one-use-a-breath-weapon-and-a-melee-attack-in-the-same-turn&quot;&gt;identical question&lt;/a&gt; I wanted to ask, but the question is for 3.5 instead of the edition I play which is 5th. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a few other details that make it slightly different, but in general are questions about the exact same game mechanic, but across different editions of the game considered duplicates? I'm assuming since the mechanics of the game may be different they are not duplicates, but I'd just like to be sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33161" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-02-22T17:28:38.843" Title="Are questions about the exact same game mechanism, but across different editions of the game considered duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6765" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6764" CreationDate="2017-02-19T03:27:16.610" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about the rules of different games are inherently different questions, because the rules are different. By definition, different questions can't be duplicates of each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only wrinkle is that not every different &lt;strong&gt;edition&lt;/strong&gt; of a game is actually a different &lt;strong&gt;game&lt;/strong&gt;. An example of this is that most editions of &lt;em&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/em&gt; are different publishings of the main book, but the rules they contain describe are effectively the same game. By contrast, D&amp;amp;D editions are the opposite: each published edition contains different rules, and is therefore a different game that merely “takes over” the name from the previous game of that name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So go ahead and ask your question about Dragonborn in D&amp;amp;D 5e! The question about Dragonborn in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e can't answer a question about a different game's rules, so there is no concern about duplicating it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Sometimes people like to add a note to the ends of their questions in these cases though, saying “This is similar to [link to question], but for a different edition.” That's sometimes useful in case someone finds one question via, say, a search engine, but they were looking for a question about the other game — the link to the similar question about a different game can help them get where they were trying to go.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Pathfinder &amp;amp; D&amp;amp;D 3.5e: A special case&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 3.5e share many rules, being directly related games by different companies. In many cases a question about one will have the same rules and answers as the same question about the other. We handle these on a case-by-case basis, for lack of a better handling system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, &lt;strong&gt;err on the side of asking the question&lt;/strong&gt;. More experienced users will help sort out if it's a duplicate or not. Often it won't be a duplicate, but even if it is one, that's okay: you'll have your answer, and duplicates are useful here and don't reflect poorly on the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-19T18:09:09.760" LastActivityDate="2017-02-19T18:09:09.760" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6766" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-19T20:45:29.623" Score="2" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6735/is-the-accusation-that-smallcaps-significantly-hurts-my-questions-software-comp/6736&quot;&gt;fake smallcaps are bad&lt;/a&gt;, and SE doesn't have real ones.  Do we want real ones?  I assume the increased page lag would be comparable to the overhead increase we got when we implemented MathJax (or less than that).  Also it would take the dev team time to implement, which they could spend on other stuff.  Do you guys think it's worth asking for it to be implemented? (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/291259/could-we-have-smallcaps-formatting-on-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Related question on Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-20T10:29:38.063" LastActivityDate="2017-02-22T19:16:01.723" Title="Can we have smallcaps?" Tags="|feature-request|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6767" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6766" CreationDate="2017-02-19T21:37:27.120" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Small caps won't be implemented at SE any time soon because they can't be represented in the flavour of Markdown used by SE currently, and all feature requests that require extending the Markdown parser, which aren't mission-critical, have been turned down. (The one mission-critical extension SE has done is spoiler blocks, and they're &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; buggy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current Markdown flavour that SE uses is slated to (eventually) be replaced by something that implements the &lt;a href=&quot;http://commonmark.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;CommonMark&lt;/a&gt; flavour, which is a better behaved specification of Markdown. However, small caps doesn't appear to be one of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://spec.commonmark.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;features included in CommonMark currently&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This lack of support is almost certainly due to small caps being styling rather than semantic content, like font colour is a matter of style rather than meaning. Small caps also have no representation in HTML for this reason: to get small caps in an HTML document requires a designer to decide that certain semantic parts of a document should be conveyed by small caps, using CSS styles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Markdown is designed to represent only content and is agnostic about style, very likely small caps will never be supported by any flavour of Markdown SE uses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This all despite the fact that, personally, I would love to be able to use small caps here. I just know that matters of styling aren't going to find their way into Markdown.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-02-19T21:52:58.790" LastActivityDate="2017-02-19T21:52:58.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6768" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6771" CreationDate="2017-02-19T23:18:53.340" Score="8" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; currently features &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92374/are-hags-fey-or-fiends&quot;&gt;Are Hags Fey or Fiends?&lt;/a&gt;. One of the answers featured begins with &quot;To add to Dressy's answer ...&quot; which might not be setting the best example of what kind of answers we expect per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is configurable and not just random from time to time, could it be set to a different question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't have a specific suggestion for &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; question right now.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-25T00:58:56.473" Title="Change the question featured in the Tour" Tags="|support|tour|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6769" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-02-19T23:20:39.227" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-02-19T23:20:39.227" LastActivityDate="2017-02-19T23:20:39.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6770" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-02-19T23:20:39.227" Score="0" Body="For questions concerning the tour page found at http://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-24T15:11:10.127" LastActivityDate="2018-12-24T15:11:10.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6768" CreationDate="2017-02-19T23:25:55.970" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;What we should probably do is deal with the answer post's content issue, either by deleting it, editing it to be minimally complete, or converting it to a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, this is a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; example of why answers need to be complete answers on their own — they won't always be shown with other posts the way the answer-writer sees them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="17995" LastEditDate="2017-02-25T00:58:56.473" LastActivityDate="2017-02-25T00:58:56.473" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6761" CreationDate="2017-02-20T03:29:20.237" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the course of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/95103/revisions&quot;&gt;revision history of your question&lt;/a&gt; (deleted, so 10k+ users and author only), there were &lt;strong&gt;five&lt;/strong&gt; related but different questions asked. These were being mixed together, so that no author-approved revision contained fewer than two of them, until the last revision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, that one final question was, even by itself, too broad by this site's standards to attempt to answer, so that revision had a different but still fatal flaw.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are the five different questions that were asked, paraphrasing, with the first revision they appeared in noted, and with emphasis to help highlight the distinctions between them as necessary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1 dot in the Mind Sphere lets you restructure your mind to do [Thing A and Thing B] — is there &lt;strong&gt;anything else&lt;/strong&gt; that you can gain by the way you structure your mind?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/1&quot;&gt;(revision 1)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is fine by itself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does anyone have &lt;strong&gt;any ideas&lt;/strong&gt; on how to structure your mind to trap beings and gain access to their minds?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/1&quot;&gt;(revision 1)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was off topic, because asking for ideas is off topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I&lt;/strong&gt; cage people that enter my mind, and/or gain targeting on them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/3&quot;&gt;(revision 3)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also a fine question. Clearly a variation on Q2, but thankfully asking a concrete question about what &lt;em&gt;is true&lt;/em&gt; rather than soliciting ideas, making it on-topic. This is a specific question about what part B of Mind Sphere 1 already says it can do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can I&lt;/strong&gt; cage and/or target mental intruders with Mind Sphere 1?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/4&quot;&gt;(revision 4)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a variation on Q3. I wrote this during the attempted refinement of the post in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/4&quot;&gt;revision 4&lt;/a&gt;. I include it only for completeness, only because “can I”  is technically a different question than “how can I”.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is &lt;strong&gt;everything&lt;/strong&gt; 1 dot in Mind Sphere can do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/6&quot;&gt;(revision 6)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fourth question written by you. Obviously, &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; it can do is different than &lt;em&gt;what else&lt;/em&gt; it can do, or how to use one specific part of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is also &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt; a question. Although plenty clear, being too broad is one of our stock reasons for putting a question on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How did one post spawn five different questions? Let's look at the revision history:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/1&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 1&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; asked Q1 and Q2. Q1 is on topic but Q2 is off topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/2&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 2&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; was me removing the off-topic Q2. I rewrote the post to focus clearly on Q1.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/3&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; added Q3 to the mix with Q1, with heavy emphasis indicating that Q3 was the problem that needed solving.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/4&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 4&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; was me removing Q1, since obviously Q3 was the real question, judging by the emphatic phrasing. I tweaked the phrasing of the question as well, rewriting Q3 (“how can I”) as Q4 (“can I”). I didn't consider that a major change, but will own that it's a technically different question. If it had been changed back to Q3 I wouldn't have blinked or bothered myself with the difference.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/5&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 5&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; did restore Q3, but &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; restored Q1. Now the post contained two questions: Q1 and Q3. Q1 is about &lt;em&gt;what other&lt;/em&gt; things Mind Sphere 1 can do than Thing A or Thing B, while Q3 is about how to use Thing B to accomplish a couple of more specific things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now the state of the question was that &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; mutually-exclusive questions had been added in a most emphatic fashion. Rather than attempt to guess which emphatic question was the real question, I closed the post as unclear and simply asked which.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point the comments went in circles for a while: I insisted there were two questions, you insisted there was only one question. Unmoved, I suggested picking the question before (Q1) or after (Q3) the ampersand (the ampersand appeared in a revision that only existed briefly, because of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/21788/how-does-editing-work&quot;&gt;editing grace period&lt;/a&gt;*, but was only a minor variation on revision 5), and I began to disengage and attend to other things, but not quickly enough before…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/6&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 6&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; removed everything, replacing it with Q5, which superficially resembled Q1 but was different again by replacing “other” with “all”. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95103/7&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Revision 7&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; edited the title to match, removing “other” from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, a single question, but unfortunately an unworkable one. I pointed out that this was too broad, so it wouldn't be reopened since it would just have to be closed again. You insisted twice in the comments that this was the same as Q1 (before ampersand) in revision 5 and accused me of shutting you down for something I just suggested for you to do, but Q5 (“all”) and Q1 (“other”) seemed to me to be clearly two different questions, and not at all what I suggested you do to revise the question. Had it actually been Q1, I would have immediately reopened the question, but that's not was I was seeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was somewhat confused that you would insist that this new Q5 was the same as Q1, especially since your edit to the title afterwards in revision 7 was clearly acknowledging the need to make that very distinction. However, at that point I was already disengaging and I declined to respond or engage with the inconsistency, and just suggested reading the tour — which I note you still haven't done, as of this writing — and the help centre, and closed the page. (Because this site is managed by the community, there was no specific need for &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt; to solve the mystery of what was going wrong with your attempt to ask the question.) In response, you deleted the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's the whole story as I see it: each revision written by you contained either two questions, or finally one question that was too broad. My attempts to focus it on one question, and then to ask for help identifying the single question it was supposed to be about, were rejected. Comments explaining that too many questions was the problem I saw didn't go anywhere useful. There was clearly frustration on your side, and I could see that communication failure was the direct source, but I couldn't figure out why communication was failing so spectacularly and eventually gave up. At no point did you leave the question in a state that could have merited taking the hold off, so I was unable to un-hold the question at any point and was obliged to leave it on when I gave up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was also some strong assertions made that a moderator of this site doesn't know what they're doing and shouldn't have been involved in trying to revise the question to follow our question guidelines, which I chalked up to legitimate frustration and didn't bother engaging with. Ironically, deleting the question prevented anyone else more acceptable to you from being able to make an attempt. I feel that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6762&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt; has addressed that subject well enough that I don't need to now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* However, I'm surprised the revision was disappeared in the grace period. Adding a new comment is supposed to end the grace period for exactly this situation, and the revision that disappeared the ampersand revision was certainly in response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95103/what-benefits-can-the-mind-1-have#comment220288_95103&quot;&gt;a new comment&lt;/a&gt; (10k+). I can only speculate that the asker already had the editor open at that point, and read the new comment without closing it. Perhaps that doesn't end the grace period, since the edit was already started.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-02-20T03:43:47.550" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6773" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6776" CreationDate="2017-02-20T18:13:00.923" Score="10" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; right now, which is just the current “brand name” for D&amp;amp;D 5e playtest material. Why not call a spade a spade and have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-material&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-material&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-material&lt;/a&gt; tag for all our playtest material question needs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; would be a synonym, so it would still pop up for people looking for that tag name when writing questions, but what would show up after submitting would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-material&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-material&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-material&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side benefit, this might also solve our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6554/revisiting-whether-dd-next-needs-its-own-separate-tag&quot;&gt;old tagging problem&lt;/a&gt; with old D&amp;amp;D Next questions that can't be rewritten to be about the published D&amp;amp;D 5e rules, especially since the consensus that developed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6554/revisiting-whether-dd-next-needs-its-own-separate-tag&quot;&gt;that meta&lt;/a&gt; was that we &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; tag them distinctly somehow. I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-material&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-material&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-material&lt;/a&gt; is the natural solution to that specific problem as well as to the general problem. We wouldn't go on a tagging spree for old Next questions, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-material&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-material&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-material&lt;/a&gt; could be added to them reactively as they get noticed or bumped, slowly putting that difficulty to rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other games occasionally see questions about playtest materials too. I think it would be useful to be able to distinctly tag questions about playtest materials regardless of game, for searching and future clarity. I think that would be an improvement over having brand-name tags for playtest material for different specific games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-materials&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-materials&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-materials&lt;/a&gt; would be useful and we should adopt it. Are there any thoughts on downsides that should stay our hands?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-02-21T23:35:01.983" Title="How about a generic [playtest-materials] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6773" CreationDate="2017-02-20T23:52:35.367" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;One slight concern, that I think can probably be safely ignored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Unearthed Arcana&lt;/em&gt; has been the name for optional rules for D&amp;amp;D for several editions - a book of that name is part of the 3-3.5e SRD, and another was published for AD&amp;amp;D (1e?). While these are &lt;em&gt;optional&lt;/em&gt; rules, they are not specifically &lt;em&gt;playtest material&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But having a quick look at questions with that tag, all are 5e, so I think it should not cause any confusion with these other UA's. There have been several 3.5e questions about &lt;em&gt;UA 3.5&lt;/em&gt; that do not use any tag to signify it - it's just another source in the 3.5 library.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14988" LastActivityDate="2017-02-20T23:52:35.367" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6775" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-21T19:10:25.763" Score="4" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;While poking around on my profile page I noticed that the &quot;folded&quot; versions of rep events don't contain the proper number of individual events once unfolded. It looks like the methods used to filter the events by time isn't uniform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;folded - 5 and 4 events, respectively:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0nb3Z.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0nb3Z.png&quot; alt=&quot;folded: 5 and 4 events&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;unfolded - 9 duplicated events each:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D6iUI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D6iUI.png&quot; alt=&quot;unfolded: 9 duplicated events each&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-28T17:58:00.480" LastActivityDate="2017-07-28T17:58:00.480" Title="Incorrect filtering of rep events when unfolded" Tags="|bug|reputation|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6773" CreationDate="2017-02-21T21:40:09.223" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not think we should make this change. I mulled it over and I do not feel it solves any problem we have, nor do I feel we have any compelling reason to have a generic tag like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The current tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; calling a spade a spade. As you may be aware, &lt;a href=&quot;http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/call+a+spade+a+spade&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the &amp;quot;call a spade a spade&amp;quot; idiom&lt;/a&gt; means to speak plainly and straightforwardly. What's more straightforward than &amp;quot;I'm asking about material from the Unearthed Arcana column, so I'm going to tag this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;? There are no problems cited here with the Unearthed Arcana tag; neither of us have observed any ambiguity problems &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6773/how-about-a-generic-playtest-materials-tag#comment20691_6774&quot;&gt;as you mentioned in a comment&lt;/a&gt;. The folksonomy seems to be working just fine here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't solve our D&amp;amp;D Next issue. If I see a question about so-and-so game mechanic tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-materials&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-materials&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-materials&lt;/a&gt;, is this a question about the olde D&amp;amp;D Next, or Unearthed Arcana publications, or some other source of playtest material such as from a third party publisher testing new content slated for release under the &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e OGL&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact this creates new ambiguity, since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; is already quite clear it is neither D&amp;amp;D Next nor playtest material from any source beside Unearthed Arcana.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I am not aware of any tagging or communication problems around any other game's playtest on the site so far. None have been cited here other than the D&amp;amp;D Next issue. We could speculate on when and how we might use the tag, but tagging is based on current need, not projected need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact the only other playtests I've been aware of so far have had a form of non-disclosure agreement (NDA) attached, so we couldn't ask questions about them here even if we wanted to. For example, we have no questions about the recent Dresden Files Accelerated playtest — my playgroup participated in it, and we had questions, but we couldn't really ask them without giving away information we agreed to keep secret.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I am concerned that I cannot really meaningfully say I'm an expert in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-materials&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-materials&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-materials&lt;/a&gt;. I would rather see us examine case by case whether a particular playtest would benefit from certain tagging practices, or communication in posts about it (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6582/1204&quot;&gt;as I did for a D&amp;amp;D Next question&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think presuming a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/playtest-materials&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;playtest-materials&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;playtest-materials&lt;/a&gt; tag is appropriate for all playtest-y stuff is also jumping the gun — BESW's &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=29329119#29329119&quot;&gt;Surgadores&lt;/a&gt; is a perpetual no-NDA playtest; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/great-ork-gods&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;great-ork-gods&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;great-ork-gods&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.greatorkgods.co.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;unfinished&lt;/a&gt;; both are quite playable on their own. This may be a strike against using the tag at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite responding in the negative I approve of you coming forward with such an idea. We might see a need for it in the future, but at present I don't think we benefit from this tag, and replacing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; with it is unwarranted and probably does more harm than good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-02-21T23:35:01.983" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6777" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6778" CreationDate="2017-02-22T07:45:32.640" Score="9" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46976/&quot;&gt;Can a party function without a Cleric or Paladin?&lt;/a&gt; was asked in 2014. It has answers from 2015 and 2016, whereby the latter answers adds nothing fundamental to already given ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46352/&quot;&gt;Does a reach weapon allow you to threaten squares 10 feet away or not?&lt;/a&gt; - asked in 2014, has been recently answered one more time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It it OK by the SE standards, or should I flag such answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-03-08T11:16:20.490" Title="A question was asked years ago. Is it still OK to answer it?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6778" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6777" CreationDate="2017-02-22T07:54:44.107" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's cool to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5962/4398&quot;&gt;add good answers to old questions&lt;/a&gt;. We even have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/44/necromancer&quot;&gt;badges&lt;/a&gt; for it! And answers are always held to the same basic standards no matter how old the question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if what you're focused on is answers which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/654/4398&quot;&gt;mostly re-state existing answers&lt;/a&gt;, sometimes a different way of explaining something is useful--everybody's got a slightly different way of looking at things and multiple perspectives can be helpful. If you think the information isn't presented in a usefully new way, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6334/4398&quot;&gt;please vote accordingly&lt;/a&gt;: voting is how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3562/4398&quot;&gt;the useful stuff floats to the top and the less-useful stuff settles to the bottom&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-02-22T07:54:44.107" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6764" CreationDate="2017-02-22T17:28:38.843" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's always good to note your research in your question.  If you ask &quot;What die do I roll to see if my attack hits the enemy in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&quot; and we already have an answer for AD&amp;amp;D 1.0 or D&amp;amp;D 3.5 or something for the same question your question may get closed as a duplicate, especially if the answer there explains that the d20 is used across all editions of D&amp;amp;D.  If you're aware of a potentially-identical question and &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; unsure of the answer, you should link it in your question and say something like &quot;I've read X, but I'm concerned that the answer may be different because Y&quot;.  At that point your question is not a duplicate, and it won't be closed as one even if the answer is &quot;No, Y is irrelevant, X is still the answer&quot;.  &quot;I've read X, but I'm concerned that the answer may be different because of the changes in editions&quot; is pretty much carte blanche for your question not being a duplicate even in situations where the different editions are nearly identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We as a community try and assume good faith, but it's easier to assume good faith when you demonstrate it is well-founded by making it clear you know what you're asking about and, if you're asking about something that has a seeming answer on our site, that you in-fact have a good reason why that Q&amp;amp;A doesn't work for you.  Plus, you should be doing this anyways, because well-researched, clear, and useful questions will hopefully get you lots of upvotes ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, I personally upvote any question that contains a link to research the asker did (not counting SRD-link-by-names for 3.5/pathfinder), regardless of how basic, unless its secretly-offensive; unfortunately it still seems like most of our questions aren't asked that way :(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-02-22T17:28:38.843" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6780" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-23T01:13:36.680" Score="17" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm still new to the site and while I've found the community insanely helpful I'm unclear sometimes on what is and isn't allowed as a question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be appropriate to post a question detailing a specific part of our campaign (specifically a long-running puzzle) that went less than optimally and ask for feedback / ideas on how it could have been handled better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand this is obviously quite specific to me and my players and our campaign. I'm looking for ideas of how this specific puzzle could have been handled better on my part to make it more fun for all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand I expect it might be met with more general answers involving GM tips and puzzle tips and the like. I could use more generalized advice for planning future puzzles based on what I messed up this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could focus the question on how to create and handle complicated puzzles, but that's already been asked before. I'm hoping to get insight from some of the minds in the community but that does, by default, make it specific to me. With that in mind &lt;strong&gt;I'm leaning that this probably isn't an appropriate topic to ask in a question&lt;/strong&gt;. Am I right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastActivityDate="2017-02-23T01:59:49.867" Title="Is it appropriate to ask for a GM postmortem if I'm specific about what went wrong?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6780" CreationDate="2017-02-23T01:46:50.997" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Where you're going wrong is in saying you're &quot;looking for ideas&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE doesn't do idea generation. Requests for ideas break our format when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;all answers are equally valid&lt;/a&gt;, and they get exactly what they ask for: they tend to get inundated with crap short answers from people shooting off a short suggestion they've never tried and which probably won't even solve any significant part of the problem because that technically fulfils your request; you &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; ask for ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're a Stack Exchange site; we focus on finding &lt;em&gt;comprehensive practical solutions&lt;/em&gt; to real problems people face. Describe what happened, describe how it went wrong and what you can identify, tell us what &lt;em&gt;specific, clear&lt;/em&gt; outcome you would have wanted out of it, and request of us comprehensive expert guidance on how you could have achieved that outcome for learning in the future. Your question should invite nothing less than &lt;em&gt;complete and thorough solutions.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be closed as opinion-based or too broad (only one way to find out) but at least you'll be in scope for the format we target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-02-23T01:52:01.510" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6780" CreationDate="2017-02-23T01:59:49.867" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6781/23970&quot;&gt;Doppelgreener's absolutely right&lt;/a&gt; that &amp;quot;looking for ideas&amp;quot; is a poor formulation, likely to be poorly met. I think they're also right in their third paragraph, that there's &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; formulation of your problem that could be met with great expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;only one way to find out...&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll say one different thing: I don't view question closure as a stigma, or a punishment, or necessarily a sign that &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;'re doing anything wrong. We don't have a perfect prescriptive guide to what will make a question on-topic or off-. We have lots of areas where we know things are definitely on-, and lots where we know things are definitely off-. But many possible questions lie in areas that haven't yet been crowd-adjudicated. When sincere querents bring well-posed questions in a grey area discussion starts, sometimes contrary views are expressed, and we all learn a bit more about the boundaries we want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those boundaries can shift over time. Sometimes those boundaries are clear to some but need more explication. It's (usually) in tackling question posts that those necessary discussions find their root.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you posed--less the problematic idea-generation formulation--isn't &lt;em&gt;obviously&lt;/em&gt; off-topic. It's not a shopping question, it's not about a CRPG, it's not &amp;quot;I want a super-cool adventure, anyone got ideas?&amp;quot; So go ahead and post it. Hopefully you'll get some great answers. Possibly it'll get closed, with some elucidation as to why. Either way the Stack benefits, thanks to your contribution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-02-23T01:59:49.867" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6783" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-02-23T23:57:07.667" Score="9" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some of our questions, especially good ones, draw a LOT of answers.  Unfortunately, a lot of the time many of those answers make the same points over and over, often without introducing &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; new information.  Even when they do differ somewhat we often have a situation where someone asks something like &quot;Does X let me do Y?&quot; in a given system and gets &quot;No, because A&quot;, &quot;No, because B&quot;, &quot;No, because A&amp;amp;B&quot;, &quot;No because A, B, and/or C&quot;, &quot;No because A and B &lt;em&gt;but definitely not C&lt;/em&gt;&quot;, &quot;No, because A, phrased differently&quot; as answers.  This is a problem if I believe the answer is 'Yes, because D' because the pile of answers,  as long as they are above 0 votes (and in such cases the majority of them will be, albeit just slightly), but adding another answer to a massive pile of answers seems problematic because the signal/noise ratio on the page is so low and even if I'm reasonably convinced my answer is correct and the existing answers are incorrect it is hard to justify the inherent increase in page noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally it's not that we have a lot of &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; answers — that would be fine because then probably there's an answer I agree with and can upvote instead of posting another one.  It's that we have a lot of the &lt;em&gt;same&lt;/em&gt; answer, kinda spread out into a mess.  Usually it's not so obvious that the answers are the same and each one repeats a lot of stuff (often unintelligibly unless you've read the rest of the answers), but also makes a perhaps-off-topic, perhaps-on-topic point or two that feels like the real reason the answer was posted.  Sometimes, though, they are &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; redundant and add no new material whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything we can do about this?  Are other people also experiencing this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76526/&quot;&gt;Make the player roll even if there is no chance of success?&lt;/a&gt; has duplicate and semi-duplicate answer pairs of the nature I'm talking about. Note in particular:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76530&quot;&gt;#76530&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76532&quot;&gt;#76532&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76528&quot;&gt;#76528&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76564&quot;&gt;#76564&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50261&quot;&gt;#50261&lt;/a&gt; seems particularly bad, copying &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50216&quot;&gt;#50216&lt;/a&gt; and only adding a minor violation of the Be Nice policy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67146/how-to-deal-with-closed-minded-rule-lawyering-players&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt; with a lot of regurgitation of material in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-03T17:15:13.937" LastActivityDate="2017-05-03T17:15:13.937" Title="Is there anything that can be done about duplicate answer spam?" Tags="|discussion|answers|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6784" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6785" CreationDate="2017-02-24T19:46:30.387" Score="11" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;I haven't posted many questions, but in my two most recent questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/93900/32426&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95552/32426&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;) I used a convention where I introduce the background information, ask the question in bold, and then follow that with clarification on what answers should and should not be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if stipulating what an answer should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be is considered helpful or unhelpful, especially because it leads to a slippery slope: sometimes people will answer in ways that remind me, oh yeah, I need to add &lt;em&gt;yet another&lt;/em&gt; non-answer answer to that list. And before long it looks very pedantic and probably makes me seem unthankful and rude and boring. So, basically...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What's the etiquette regarding how to describe what not to include in an answer, or should that even be specified at all?&lt;/strong&gt; Answers should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; involve any meta-humor like the kind I am employing in this sentence &lt;em&gt;right now&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-25T05:09:54.943" Title="Is it appropriate to define what should *not* be in an answer?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6784" CreationDate="2017-02-24T20:17:38.433" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;That is perfect, especially your incorporation of GS/BS guidelines on those questions, and I surmise that it leads to extremely better answers to the question.  Because &quot;better&quot; is inherently defined as &quot;more useful to the questioner,&quot; so both general quality guides and specific answer scope guides are great. By doing this you are signaling that you know about these avenues and you don't need someone to &quot;clue you in&quot;, and clearly delineate what a best answer would look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wish more questions would do that so they wouldn't become swamps of junk answers that aren't really helping anyone except for providing an outlet for those who really want to talk on the internet right this second.  Like several I'm looking at right now (sigh). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, you should do this, and everyone should follow your example whenever at all possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for concerns that it's &quot;bossy&quot; - I would rather have clear assertive questions and clear assertive answers than the other thing we have a lot around here, amiable but confused. I don't think the way the questions above are stated would at all dissuade any of the knowledgeable site experts here from answering.  (Now, questioners that get demanding later after they've already gotten answers - that is taken more poorly.  &quot;Why is everyone not answering the way I want&quot; is not good form, but that's not what the examples we're talking about here do.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-02-25T05:09:54.943" LastActivityDate="2017-02-25T05:09:54.943" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6787" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6784" CreationDate="2017-02-24T22:42:19.350" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If your list of stipulations includes basic reiterations of generally-applicable site rules, like GS/BS, not just links, and so forth, those are generally redundant and tend to produce bad results. After all, if the question &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt; those, then so do most questions, and the result of that is a bunch of extra noise. Instead, site rules need to be spread through comments, the help center, meta, and so forth. There is a possible exception for posts that have proven to be remarkably good bad-answer magnets, which can get a post notice or similar to discourage them. (Or can even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6755/my-question-got-too-popular-what-should-i-do-now/6756#6756&quot;&gt;be closed&lt;/a&gt;.) Still, better site culture would reduce the frequency of those, and that's what we should focus on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, on the other hand, it's highly-specific criteria that define your situation &amp;mdash; including potential specific classes of solutions that won't work &amp;mdash; then that's an excellent part of the question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your first question has these stipulations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;Answers should be based on experience, not conjecture. That is, I'm looking for a solution that proved to be objectively effective for whichever person employed it or experienced it at their game table.&lt;/s&gt; &lt;strong&gt;In addition, answers should not depend on altering the seating order of the players. Assume the seating order is arbitrary and fixed for the entire session.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Note that answers suggesting alternative methods for tracking standard initiative (whether they be tents, cards, placards, lists, or so on) do not actually answer the question I am asking. Correct answers to this question must establish a house-rule for calculating initiative in a non-standard fashion, not just for recording standard initiative using a different medium.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've struck through the restatement of GS/BS. All responsible answerers and voters on the site need to be aware of that as a basic fact of site use, so tying it to this particular question, as though other questions do not need the same consideration, is noise, and may tend to even encourage ignoring GS/BS when there is no explicit disclaimer in the question! The bolded section is an excellent, well-stated limitation that defines the question better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second paragraph is a bit more problematic; RPG has a long history of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;frame challenges&lt;/a&gt;, and outright saying &quot;this type of answer is NAA&quot; isn't really the way to handle those. Instead, like the earlier restriction, it should be phrased in a way that makes the &lt;em&gt;problem statement&lt;/em&gt; clearer &lt;strong&gt;without assuming anything about the answers&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this deserves a bit more emphasis. Questions should not assume things about the answers. That's for the answerers to do, and the voters to judge. They should state the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt;, and let the ones who are trying to solve it do the solving!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this paragraph is just restating what the title and bolded question summary have already said, I don't think it's necessary to include at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;Cite rules or authoritative rulings if available.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;Otherwise, recommend house-rulings which have been demonstrated to&#xA;  be feasible and balanced through actual use at a table.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;Suggest untested or hypothetical house-rulings.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Suggest adding features such as the &lt;em&gt;find steed&lt;/em&gt; spell to the player character.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Suggest removing the &lt;em&gt;Shadow Blend&lt;/em&gt; feature entirely or nerfing it beyond recognition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;Suggest that I am wrong to want to allow a shadow mastiff as a mount.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;Suggest that I just use the naive answer described above, which I already rejected.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here again, there are restatements of basic rules like GS/BS, as well as restatements that, in fact, the problem statement described is the one intended. Voters and answerers are not stupid; a reasonably-well-written question will generally get upvoted answers that do actually respect the boundaries stated&amp;hellip; or that give extremely sound reasons for &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; doing so, which are even more valuable. If you got an extremely cogent argument for why, say, shadow mastiffs are a surprisingly bad choice for reasons you had not considered, it is not beyond reason that you, or someone else with a similar problem, might be convinced and decide to do something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not clear why &lt;em&gt;find steed&lt;/em&gt; is a problem. That should be explained, if possible, rather than flatly stated. Similarly, the reasons for wanting specifically Shadow Blend could be expanded on a bit more in cases there's a better way to accomplish those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T16:03:02.877" LastActivityDate="2017-02-24T22:49:39.107" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6784" CreationDate="2017-02-25T02:10:31.453" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, it's important to specify what you don't want.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95497/22566&quot;&gt;Here's an example of why.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Had the asker been more specific about what wasn't desired, I'd not have answered at all.  Legendary Dude did a nice job in comments to coach the asker to get more specific, since he felt it was turning into an idea generating question/answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once it got ironed, out, the question clearly identified answers like mine &lt;strong&gt;that weren't what he was looking for.&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-02-25T02:10:31.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6789" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6746" CreationDate="2017-02-25T21:19:16.133" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tag gone. Boom! The can has been kicked down the road for us to tackle this some future day.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been a couple of weeks, and the votes have settled down to be pretty close. I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; what they mean is that the community hive-mind generally thinks we can do much better than [video-game-role-playing] as a tag &lt;em&gt;but also&lt;/em&gt; we feel that we don't really need the tag at all. (Not right now at least, if ever.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94646/how-to-deal-with-unwanted-erotic-roleplay-on-a-roleplaying-focused-server-of-a-s&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76364/how-to-deal-with-erotic-role-play-erp-frequency-in-a-non-erp-setting&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; around this topic cited so far, both of which have not-insignificant quality issues and which are closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we go for a kick-the-can-down-the-road approach: remove the tag entirely, and if/when it seems like we should have it because we've gathered at least a couple of solid on-topic questions for which it seems totally appropriate, we can figure out what it should be called &amp;mdash; probably [roleplay-in-video-games]. (This might never happen.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless there's some strong objections I'll accordingly remove the tag from the only question it's on a week from now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-03T17:49:06.853" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-02-27T13:21:54.730" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/09GSv.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;herokuapp.com&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2947" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2023-01-06T02:52:33.410" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T02:52:33.410" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6791" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-01T00:50:25.877" Score="7" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edge-of-the-empire+force-and-destiny+age-of-rebellion&quot;&gt;8 questions&lt;/a&gt; that are tagged with all three of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edge-of-the-empire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edge-of-the-empire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edge-of-the-empire&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/force-and-destiny&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;force-and-destiny&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;force-and-destiny&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/age-of-rebellion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;age-of-rebellion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;age-of-rebellion&lt;/a&gt;. That's out of 44 EotE, 20 FaD, and 29 AoR questions. In other words, &lt;strong&gt;a sizable proportion of questions in &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; of these tags have &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of these tags.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know the system at all, but it seems to me that that somehow the three separate tags are overloaded. I mean, just from an information-theoretical standpoint it seems like those questions are devoting 3/5 of their tag-space and not getting much for it. Is one of these two things likely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;some of these questions need re-tagging?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;we need an umbrella tag for the three related games?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-01T00:50:25.877" Title="Do these tags need an umbrella?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2017-03-13T14:33:33.090" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6792" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6794" CreationDate="2017-03-01T10:56:18.587" Score="3" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't clearly understand why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/95766&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95678/&quot;&gt;What reasons have the designers given for why unarmed strikes aren&amp;#39;t &amp;#39;light melee weapons&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt; was downvoted and deleted. How could I make the answer eligible?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP asked:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that Unarmed Strikes do not have the light property, this implies that you can't use your bonus action to attack with them. Unless you're a monk. However, why is that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mechanically speaking, why can you attack twice with two daggers, but you can't attack with a dagger and then punch, or even punch twice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my point of view, the confusion arises when you treat &amp;quot;unarmed strike&amp;quot; as a single punch with left or right hand (hence &amp;quot;why can't I punch twice&amp;quot; question - pretty logical, since you have two hands). OP was asking about kind of a special rule, that explicitly restricts unarmed strikes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my answer was based on the official Basic Rules, which says&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP asked for any &amp;quot;stated reasoning behind this rule&amp;quot;. That was the reasoning - since &amp;quot;Unarmed strike&amp;quot; is a not a term for hitting with one (left or right) hand, but for making an attack when being unarmed, you still make a single attack per action (unless something - a specialized weapon or a special class feature - gives you more opportunities). Mechanically, there are no other special rules or restrictions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast, &amp;quot;Light&amp;quot; weapon property is explicitly about two-weapon combat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A light weapon is small and easy to handle, making it ideal for use when fighting with two weapons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it's not about just having two hands. It's the weapon that actually gives you an opportunity for a more dangerous attack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the answer was deleted with a comment &amp;quot;New answers still need to be an answer to the question asked&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any reasons for undeleting the answer, or is it really off-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:57:15.460" Title="What made my answer invalid?" Tags="|support|answers|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6792" CreationDate="2017-03-01T12:36:26.317" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;From what I understand, there is actually a mechanical difference to unarmed attacks being considered light vs not. Right? You're describing the nature and intricacies of the mechanical difference to us here and in your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the question is &lt;em&gt;not asking for&lt;/em&gt; an explanation of the nature and intricacies of the mechanical difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is acknowledging there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a difference, and is asking: “What gives? Why did they create that difference?”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if they got the details of the difference wrong, explaining the difference accurately does nothing to convey &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; there is one. It doesn't really matter what difference they acknowledged or whether it was correct; consider that they could've left out describing what the difference was at all and it would've still been the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that they ask explicitly for the designers' explanation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mechanically speaking, why can you attack twice with two daggers, but you can't attack with a dagger and then punch, or even punch twice? &lt;strong&gt;What is the stated reasoning behind this rule?&lt;/strong&gt; Is it for balance terms, or is it so the Monks have a defining feature other classes don't have? Or is it even historical?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in short, this would be a good answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They did because (reasons). Here's a quote explaining the reasons and a link to the interview the quote is from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, you're confused on the difference this makes. It actually works like this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not an answer at all, it's a tangent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're confused on the difference this makes. It actually works like this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Great, now we understand better &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; the difference is, but we still don't know &lt;em&gt;why it exists.&lt;/em&gt; Explaining more mechanics to me doesn't explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they decided to write the mechanics to behave that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-01T12:36:26.317" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6792" CreationDate="2017-03-01T12:38:44.843" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your logic was excellent, but according to the title and body of the question (in its latest iteration) the asker wanted to know what the designers themselves have said is the justification for the rule. This means that a correct answer must include a statement from the designer (or documentation indicating that there is no such statement if that were the case).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, while your logic was good and based on a sound interpretation of the rules, we don't know what the designer's intent was behind writing those rules in that way. They could have chosen to write the rules in a different fashion, yet they chose to write them as they did. So it's entirely possible that the designer's intent for writing those rules in that way was based on motivations that are not captured in the rules themselves and are completely unknown to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can get a response from Mearls or Crawford indicating that your line of reasoning was indeed their design intent, then you could get your answer undeleted and add the appropriate citation. Otherwise, your answer is just very sensible speculation about what the intent might have been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2017-03-01T12:47:38.763" LastActivityDate="2017-03-01T12:47:38.763" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6795" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6796" CreationDate="2017-03-01T16:25:56.967" Score="7" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;Me and another high-rep user came into conflict over the editing process and authorial intent at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95825/help-with-problem-player&quot;&gt;Help with problem player&lt;/a&gt;.  Specifically, I think that if an edit fundamentally changes the question asked it should be authorized only by pre-existing author approval, whereas he is of the position that as long as a request for authorial approval is present changes in fundamental meaning should not be undone/further edited.  Which of us is right about that and how should this have gone down?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-08T20:31:29.393" Title="What should have happened here?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6795" CreationDate="2017-03-01T16:34:46.580" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The edit overstepped and I have rolled it back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@legendarydude may be correct about the source of the problem - &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; the way their group can have fun is by adopting a deeper in-character RP stance. But the place to address that is in an answer, not by changing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits should not change authorial intent, and if an edit is proposed to the OP should be engaged (some are too hapless to do the edit themselves but at least get their buy-in in comments). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP doesn't come back/won't engage, then there's zero worth in spending time working on their question/answers anyway.  Getting them to engage will often improve the question in unexpected ways and makes sure we're spending all this work with a meaningful benefit at the end. Don't be afraid to ask questions/make suggestions and wait.  Patience is the hardest thing to have, but it's the right answer here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general once an edit or whatever is contentious enough that it's been made but then someone objects, don't just keep rolling forward/rolling back especially if you're not the OP.  Take it to meta and/or revert it and have patience.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="12408" LastEditDate="2017-03-08T20:31:29.393" LastActivityDate="2017-03-08T20:31:29.393" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6792" CreationDate="2017-03-01T18:15:45.383" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It was deleted because it was not an answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A comment on the post pointed out that the post didn't answer the question. You replied with a comment that seemed to me to say that you didn't think it was necessary to answer the question, because another post already did:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think your commentary is reasonable and accurate, but it doesn't technically answer the question because the asker wants to know what the designer's intent was. You've given a very sensible justification of your own, but you are not one of the designers (to my knowledge), so I think that's the reason for the downvotes. – [a user]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;hr&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@[user] but the rest was alreasy covered by Adam's answer – enkryptor&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the post didn't answer the question, and it seemed to me that you knew the post didn't, I deleted the post for not being an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because I wasn't sure whether you were already aware that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;answer posts need to answer the question themselves&lt;/a&gt;, I left this comment as an explanation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;New answers still need to be an answer to the question asked, regardless of what other answers have done already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, knowing or not isn't really the issue. Regardless of knowing or not, it remained that the post &lt;em&gt;didn't&lt;/em&gt; answer the question and that was enough for me to delete it. The comments just supported that decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you wish to revise the post to contain an answer to the question though, the post can still be edited while it's deleted. If the post was edited to be an answer, it would be valid to undelete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Related FAQ: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-03-01T22:22:37.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6798" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6801" CreationDate="2017-03-01T19:40:20.603" Score="8" ViewCount="193" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95802/bonus-action-before-action-for-crossbow-expert&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; was asked regarding the bonus action granted by the Crossbow Expert feat in D&amp;amp;D 5e. There's been a large amount of &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/54584/discussion-on-question-by-shem-bonus-action-before-action-for-crossbow-expert&quot;&gt;contention&lt;/a&gt; about whether or not the question is a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51525/shield-master-can-the-shield-push-be-taken-before-an-attack&quot;&gt;not one&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64157/can-i-use-a-bonus-action-before-my-action&quot;&gt;not two&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83132/bonus-action-timing-when-is-it-specified&quot;&gt;but three&lt;/a&gt; other questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The feature in question has a different name and wording than the Shield Master feat, which was asked about in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51525/shield-master-can-the-shield-push-be-taken-before-an-attack&quot;&gt;the first potential duplicate&lt;/a&gt;. The difference between the wording, and that they're questions about different features may exclude these from being duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question makes an effort to include research about the order of actions and bonus actions, which is the content of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64157/can-i-use-a-bonus-action-before-my-action&quot;&gt;the second potential duplicate&lt;/a&gt;. This may be a duplicate because, if the wording of the feature doesn't imply a necessary order, then the answers to these questions would be the same. It additionally may not be a duplicate, because the asker seems to want to know whether the wording does imply an order or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, if the question is asking about whether the order is specified in this case, answers would be the same as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83132/bonus-action-timing-when-is-it-specified&quot;&gt;the third potential duplicate&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question actually a duplicate of any of these questions? Could any of these questions be considered duplicates of each other? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-11-30T17:21:13.610" LastActivityDate="2020-11-30T17:21:13.610" Title="Is this question about bonus actions a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6798" CreationDate="2017-03-02T06:12:53.473" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The second potential duplicate fits as a canonical answer.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After careful analysis, I think the second linked &amp;quot;duplicate&amp;quot; fits the best as a canonical question and answer. With a simple edit to the one existing answer, to include that certain abilities grant bonus actions when certain actions are taken, but don't necessarily specify the order in which the action and bonus action must be taken &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; allow for the action and bonus action to be taken in any order, the answer to that question would correctly answer all 4 questions, which is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10844/348188&quot;&gt;basis for a duplicate&lt;/a&gt;,  and the question it is linked to is arguably the most straightforward and canonical of the bunch. If that edit is made, or another answer created and accepted, the other questions should all be marked as a duplicate of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-03T19:24:03.933" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6777" CreationDate="2017-03-02T12:05:00.623" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;For that specific question, I suspect the fundamental issue is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/47417&quot;&gt;the accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; from 2014 is openly speculative, and basically says &quot;I think the answer is 'no', but we'll need to wait and see.&quot;  The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46978&quot;&gt;currently second highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt;, posted a month and a half later, also pretty much says the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the mean time, a lot of people have had time to playtest this since 5e was published, and many seem to have come to the personal conclusion that the answer is actually &quot;yes&quot;.  However, since the top answers still don't reflect this accumulated knowledge, several people have posted their own anecdotal answers (which &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; OK here, if based on actual play experience) to supply contrasting evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I'd say the system is working as designed here.  Which is not to say that it's working &lt;em&gt;ideally&lt;/em&gt;, but this is what's supposed to happen in the SE system, if people disagree with the accepted and/or top-voted answer(s).  I would expect the influx of new answers to taper out once either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the author of the accepted answer edits their answer to incorporate the more recent alternative viewpoints, or&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;one of the contrasting answers gets enough upvotes to show up at second place in the default sorting order.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that, currently, the answers at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46983&quot;&gt;third&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/87788&quot;&gt;fourth&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/60405&quot;&gt;fifth&lt;/a&gt; place all express variations of &quot;yes, a 5e party can function without a dedicated healer,&quot; mostly backed by specific play experience.  That includes the most recently posted answer (out of the ones currently visible, anyway; it's possible that there have been more recent answers that have been deleted) that has risen to fourth place in less than five months (pretty well for such an old question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, as for what you can and should do, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6778&quot;&gt;BESW's answer&lt;/a&gt; pretty much says it all: upvote the good answers that you agree with, downvote those that you think are clearly wrong, unreadable, useless or superfluous.  Over time, the best answers will float to the top, and the bad ones will sink to the bottom.  If you wanted to speed up the process, you could always consider awarding a bounty to one of the answers that you like, which would have the side effect of increasing the question's visibility while the bounty is active, and thus attracting more voters to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; need to do is flag any of the answers, as long as they're on-topic at this site (and not, say, spam or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;rude&lt;/a&gt; or questions mistakenly posted as answers).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-03-02T12:05:00.623" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6801" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6798" CreationDate="2017-03-02T15:18:53.830" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's a duplicate.  The heart of the question boils down to the specific &quot;When you use...&quot; wording, which is mentioned in passing as making a difference in some low-voted answers on at least one of those other questions but not treated specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So given the question is &quot;normally you can use bonus actions anytime, except when order is stated like &quot;immediately after.&quot; But when it says &quot;when you use X&quot; can you take the bonus action anytime or just anytime after X?&quot; None of the extant questions clearly treat this edge case, hence the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-03-02T15:18:53.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6802" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-02T22:12:46.837" Score="6" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had a clarification question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95785/can-a-creature-use-both-its-melee-and-ranged-natural-attacks-during-a-full-attac&quot;&gt;Can a creature use both its melee and ranged natural attacks during a full attack?&lt;/a&gt; so I left a comment which actually helped me formulate an answer.  On writeup and review of the question over the last two days, I noticed there were 10 or so comments on the ticket (question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I went back to respond to some feedback on my answer, there were 0 (on the question, the comments on my answer were there).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This really surprised me since the question comment I asked actually helped me answer the question, so I assumed it was valuable (maybe I'm wrong?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, is it bad form to ask why it was deleted (in another comment)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; and I don't believe it answers my Q but I wanted to semi-tangentially note that while the first answer bashes mxyzplk specifically a bit, one thing I've noticed is he generally posts why he removed a bunch of comments when he does so.  As does SevenSidedDie.  Not trying to suck up but at least that'd potentially prevent this question from being relavent if everyone did that regularly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS: I am pretty sure there's a level of rep which lets you see more details but I think this question is still pertinent for folks that don't have that or are ignorant of that detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19541" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.660" LastActivityDate="2017-03-06T16:39:40.650" Title="Is it bad form to ask why a comment was deleted (in comment)?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6802" CreationDate="2017-03-02T22:42:28.827" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The comments were all deleted because there were 10 of them and none needed to stay.  In your case, you got an answer to your question, so you could go write an answer - so they were obsolete.  The others were answers in comments and tangents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On big comment threads if they seem to be going somewhere (debating a point) I'll move them to chat, but delete otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't leave comments for all deletions.  First, that would lead to the heat death of the universe.  Second, we delete hundreds of comments a month and there's not enough time.  Third, having gotten crap about it in the meta q you link, we are more reluctant to leave comments because it riles up the rubes.  So we pick and choose when to instruct and when to sift a big thread for gold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with your answer by the way, a stat block is not a &quot;table&quot; and that line looks like every other monster with ranged and melee options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-03-02T22:42:28.827" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6804" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6805" CreationDate="2017-03-03T01:09:51.640" Score="11" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have two tags that appear to me to be synonyms, and both have been around for a while:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-effects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-effects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-effects&lt;/a&gt; &amp;times;&amp;nbsp;37 questions†&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(created Apr 23, 2014)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Status effects are game keywords which affect a creature's status, e.g. unconscious, weakened, on fire, poisoned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conditions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conditions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conditions&lt;/a&gt; &amp;times;&amp;nbsp;61 questions†&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(created Oct 1, 2014)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A condition suffered by a creature, typically negative and as a result of an enemy's actions during combat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(† As of March 2, 2017)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there any reason to not make one a synonym of the other?&lt;/strong&gt; If we don't need both, which should we keep?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-03-03T15:43:11.897" LastActivityDate="2017-03-16T17:11:15.700" Title="Is there any value to having separate [status-effects] and [conditions] tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6805" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6804" CreationDate="2017-03-04T03:56:21.923" Score="11" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This merge has been done now.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need both tags — they mean precisely the same thing, so they're perfect to be made synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &quot;condition&quot; is the more general, less jargon-sounding word, while still being specific enough to be an effective tag, so I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conditions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conditions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conditions&lt;/a&gt; should be made the master tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T17:11:15.700" LastActivityDate="2017-03-16T17:11:15.700" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6806" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6809" CreationDate="2017-03-04T06:24:36.737" Score="8" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;... a text-based online game created in 1988? Or strictly tabletop paper &amp;amp; pencil games? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I can see, there has been general discussion regarding online text-based games there. However what I am not seeing are any prominent tags dedicated to any one online MUD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is simply this: if a community of text-based (online) RPG'ers were looking for a closely-moderated stack to seek answers regarding aforementioned game mechanics &amp;amp; such, would RPG be an appropriate place to do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34462" OwnerDisplayName="FurryWombat" LastEditorUserId="34462" LastEditDate="2017-03-04T06:45:08.773" LastActivityDate="2017-03-04T10:53:34.660" Title="Would RPG be an appropriate stack to discuss the text-based online MUD, Gemstone IV?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6806" CreationDate="2017-03-04T06:57:19.180" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site is for RPGs, games where a number of players get together and engage in a group activity that creates an emergent story (though the story may not necessarily be the focus of the activity).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CRPGs (computer RPGs) are not usually RPGs in that traditional sense.  It is possible to play an RPG meeting this site's definition of RPG through the medium of a CRPG. Questions about the RPGing part of such an activity would be on-topic.  However, questions about the video-gamey CRPG aspects would not be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, for example, if you run a MUD server to emulate a West Marches style campaign and modify the game as needed to interact with your players' exploration and you want to ask about, e.g. how to build suspense or deal with imbalance between characters in a party or whatever that would be on-topic.  If your players wanted to ask what to do about their jerk server admin nerfing anyone who interferes with the plans of his GMPC, that would be also be on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you wanted to ask about what mobs are located in such-and-such a region, or more generally speaking, if you wanted to ask any question not having to do with a hack of the game turning it into an RPG, those questions would be off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-03-04T06:57:19.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6809" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6806" CreationDate="2017-03-04T07:05:13.683" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt;, the gaming SE, is probably a better option&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I briefly looked over the New Player's Guide on the Gemstone IV Wiki, and while it does have quite a lot of elements that are similar to a table-top RPG, I think it fits the mold of &quot;video game&quot; more closely than it fits &quot;table-top RPG&quot;. While this site does address RPGS that are played over the internet, using services like play-by-post or tabletop simulators, Gemstone IV has much more of a video game system surrounding it. Moreover, I think discussions of (programmed, non-social) game mechanics decidedly do not belong here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;That being said, role-playing questions are welcome here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the discussion in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6173/are-questions-about-roleplaying-within-a-video-game-context-on-topic&quot;&gt;meta post&lt;/a&gt;, questions &lt;strong&gt;about&lt;/strong&gt; roleplaying that relate to the social, non-video-game aspects of Gemstone IV would be welcome here. I think that such questions will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and would be generally a bit controversial, but it really depends on the type of questions you want to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Give it a try!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that you should go ahead and give it a shot. If the community doesn't like it, it will be closed and the question will disappear, with no lasting harm done. I can certainly imagine some possible questions that would be within the scope of the site, so there's some nonzero chance that your question will be accepted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:09:35.757" LastActivityDate="2017-03-04T10:53:34.660" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6802" CreationDate="2017-03-04T07:45:10.567" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, it's bad form.  Unless there's a good reason for a comment &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to be deleted (there almost never is), it's kinda bad form to ask about it.  It makes it look like you don't really get how comments work.  Comments aren't supposed to stay around, ideally (almost) every comment should be deleted shortly after its posting, having served its purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say you post a request for clarification (a totally valid use of a comment).  Ideally, the thing the request is posted on is edited by it's author and is no longer unclear.  Probably they ask you in a comment if the problem is resolved.  You say it's much better.  Ideally at this point both parties delete their comments, but in actuality usually at least one party doesn't.  Eventually someone helpful comes along and flags as obsolete, and mods come and delete them for you (you lazy comment-litterer ;P)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say you add additional important information to a question or answer in a comment.  Ideally the poster agrees that that information is important and relevant, and incorporates it into their question or answer, respectively.  At that point the poster flags your comment as obsolete and it's nuked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, Let's say you post one of the above comments and before anyone responds to it, it's deleted.  What should you do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, in the second case, it's probable that someone decided your supposedly helpful and relevant additional information was actually 'not constructive', and at least one mod agreed.  Sometimes they'll leave you a comment letting you know why they thought it non-constructive, but other times they won't, and they don't have any particular obligation to do so.  In any case, your information has been processed and you should move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first case, perhaps the poster decided that their post is clear enough already and again hit you with a 'non-constructive' flag.  Or maybe you meant to be requesting an explanation but they felt it was too flame-bait-y, that is, 'too chatty'.  In any case, again, you should move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All this isn't to say that there's &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; a good reason to talk about deleted comments.  Deletion of meta comments, for example, might be worth talking about, because meta comments are different and valuable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-03-04T07:45:10.567" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6811" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6783" CreationDate="2017-03-06T05:48:41.580" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There is plenty to be done: its called voting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;em&gt;theory&lt;/em&gt;, the voting system allows better answers to float to the top and poorer answers to sink into the swamp. In addition, the OP has the power to bring a single answer right to the top by accepting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;em&gt;practice&lt;/em&gt;, a question with many answers will usually result in new viewers only reading the first few answers and voting (or not). This is unfortunate, however, voting by participants is neither compulsory nor deliberately subject to guidelines (unlike accepting an answer where it is suggested that people wait a day or so).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this dissuade latecomers from provided what might be the best answer to the question? Possibly. If they overcome their trepidation does it mean that this world's greatest answer gets mired 3 posts from the end? Probably. Is this a problem? No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a problem because the stack is not about providing the world's greatest answer: its about providing an answer that satisfactorily solves the OP's problem and then leaving &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; as a legacy for those who follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that attract a lot of answers (&gt;5) are &lt;em&gt;typically&lt;/em&gt; subjective (hopefully good subjective) and, by definition, there are better and worse answers to those types of question but there is no &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; answer. As an example, there isn't be a &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer to the following question but there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; lots of good answers and many, many bad ones:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;War and Peace is a historical novel. Tolstoy made great efforts to ensure the accuracy of his facts and dates, and the characters of Tsar Alexander I, Napoleon, Speranski, and other dignitaries generally respect historical factuality. Yet almost all the important and interesting characters in the novel are fictional. Why does Tolstoy merge fact and fiction in this fashion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Anyone want to guess what I happen to be reading right now?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-03-06T05:48:41.580" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6798" CreationDate="2017-03-06T06:28:55.283" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I may address the general rather than the specific: When is [any given] question a duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has the answer: When it is closed as such. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is up to each of us to decide if we consider it to be a duplicate and lodge a close vote accordingly. Like every other part of the voting system this is inherently subjective and individual. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you encounter a closed as a duplicate question that you think &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate then it is your prerogative to try and get it reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that there are huge numbers of duplicates that do not get marked as such because doing so relies on someone being aware when reading the new question that there is a duplicate &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; being able to find the original from half remembered keywords from possibly years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to the particular, if you think it's a duplicate vote to close. If you think it is a duplicate of more than one question then &lt;em&gt;ipso facto&lt;/em&gt; they must be duplicates of one another so vote to close all but one of them. If you don't, don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal opinion is that this should be allowed to play out on the main site and/or in a chat room - running a shadow discussion on it here in meta doesn't help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2017-03-07T23:47:16.940" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T23:47:16.940" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6813" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-03-06T14:16:35.737" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.StackExchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kTGgQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28250" LastActivityDate="2017-03-06T14:16:35.737" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6802" CreationDate="2017-03-06T15:31:34.537" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;How to capture comments without relying on comments remaining in place&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@joedragons: I have learned on SE sites to take any comment I find to be helpful and do the following: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Copy it and then paste it into a .txt file file &lt;em&gt;as soon as I have&#xA;the &quot;aha, that's a good point&quot; response to the comment&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use it, and credit it when I feel that is warranted, when I can&#xA;finally get around to writing that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This saves me the &quot;aw nuts&quot; feeling when a comment thread is eventually deleted. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65827/22566&quot;&gt;See this answer for how&lt;/a&gt;  it helped me in one case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's also OK for a user to ping a mod (flag on the post, or in chat)&#xA;  to say they thought a comment was useful but it was removed before&#xA;  they could incorporate it, and could a mod retrieve it for them?  That&#xA;  also has the benefit of highlighting where a comment removal was too&#xA;  hasty, which helps mods adjust their judgment of when to remove them.&#xA;  (credit to @SevenSidedDie♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:47.950" LastActivityDate="2017-03-06T16:39:40.650" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6815" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-07T07:24:04.130" Score="4" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I'm struggling with improving my answer to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95986&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;.  I've written out several major partial edits, but I keep discarding them because they all change my answer to address the way the querent approaches the issue in comments rather than in the question body.  Each time I go 'I can't write a better response to the question body than KRyan's post, I'll just leave it'. But then additional material is added to the comments that makes it even clearer that the OP's fundamental misconception is different than the one it would seem to be based on their question.  I don't know how or if I should address the comment-based and chat-based material (and there is a LOT of it), given that comments can disappear and then my (newly improved) answer would look really presumptuous and heavy handed given just the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've considered editing the question but a lot of the commentary material is patently offensive (or seems so to me), and I don't want to look like I'm trying to make the OP look stupid and mean through a harmful edit but if I tactfully avoid quoting them directly it may be unclear how what I'm changing is justified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question (in both forms!) is a good question and a stubborn one and I'd like to be able to address it cause it's something I've dealt with extensively, but I feel like responding to comments directly is extremely bad practice and I'm not sure how to proceed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case it matters, the key thing missing from the question is 'I've had spells as the problem experientially explained to me, but that can't be right because my changes make ALL the spells weaker, right?  If it's not enough I could just do it a little harder, right?  I might ban one or two spells, but surely it wouldn't be that many!&quot;.  Or at least that's the best summary I've got so far ^^;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm aware the question is currently on-hold.  I think it's a fine question, although the querent's behavior is comments leads to bad answer proliferation, so I think it is reopenable.  The closure of the question is (I think) not relevant to this question-- please don't dismiss the substance of this question just because the exemplar is closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T15:17:10.657" Title="How can I respond to important information brought up in comments in my answer?" Tags="|support|answers|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6815" CreationDate="2017-03-07T09:07:16.140" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask the querent to edit their relephant comment information into the question. Don't worry about changing your answer until your answer's improvements will reflect the question as asked. (This may also help get the question re-opened.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T09:07:16.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6817" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-07T14:09:53.227" Score="1" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;The OP doesn't seem to be responding to the comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96063/optimizing-a-wizard-that-does-no-direct-damage-in-dd-5e/96074?noredirect=1#comment223471_96074&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but I think I've narrowed down his real concern as to what actions can be taken in combat that are not dealing damage or using resources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it okay to make such a drastic change to someone's question or should I just ask it anew?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.070" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T14:14:39.450" Title="How much should you edit a question?" Tags="|discussion|editing|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6815" CreationDate="2017-03-07T14:09:54.400" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes temporary comment discussion yields insight into what's going on with the OP.  If it's in line with their question then it should be edited into their question.  When it's an XY problem this is harder, as the information doesn't seem to fit in the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to quote comments in answers, and say &quot;Comment discussion has indicated that you think spells are X but they are Y&quot;, keeping in mind that frame challenge answers are often not accepted well by the question asker, and you should probably internally debate whether &quot;being right on the internet&quot; is really helpful if the OP is not listening to answers, or whether it's casting pearls before swine. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will provide explanation even if people can't see the comments any more that you are responding to a stimulus outside your own brain on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-07T15:17:10.657" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T15:17:10.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6817" CreationDate="2017-03-07T14:14:04.633" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general making a drastic change to a question without the OP's collaboration is not appropriate, and it's not in this case.  &lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; may think that's the root of their problem, but you may be wrong and/or they may disagree.  Given the amount of comment argument over there I'm not sure you can claim that everyone else is in agreement with you on this, either.  So let it lay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for you asking it separately - why, is it a problem you have? We find that when people ask questions where they don't have standing - in other words, the question is not a question they really have - those questions and answers end up sucking. As it's hypothetical no one can get good clarification on it, answers tend to be cursory, etc.  It's &quot;legal&quot; to do but I would never do it personally and find it gauche. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-03-07T14:14:04.633" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6821" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-09T15:43:28.440" Score="10" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; sits on five questions currently. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some are about the d20 system titled &quot;A Game of Thrones.&quot; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some are about the setting of the &lt;em&gt;A Song of Ice and Fire&lt;/em&gt; books and the &lt;em&gt;Game of Thrones&lt;/em&gt; television show.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some of those ^^ are about the setting, and about the system &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg&lt;/a&gt; (8 questions as of this writing).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it seems to me that the GoT tag is doing double-duty: covering a published system and covering a setting employed by multiple game (and other) products.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do? I see some options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nothing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Restrict each tag to its published &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt; and remove it from questions where it seems to only be indicating setting; trust that readers will understand that questions about either game necessarily imply the shared setting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones-rpg&lt;/a&gt; and apply that to questions about the d20 GoT game; leave the ASoIaF tag as is, and create a new tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/name-tbd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;name-tbd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;name-tbd&lt;/a&gt; which describes the &lt;em&gt;setting&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it's only a dozen questions, but no path forward strikes me as terribly good. Some of the questions are about each &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt;. Some do really seem to be about the &lt;em&gt;setting&lt;/em&gt;. And I, at least, was confused by the dual-usage of the GoT tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there strong arguments for/against any of the above options? Are there better ideas I haven't thought of? Is this a non-problem, and I should untwist my knickers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-03-19T03:19:50.323" Title="A Game of Thrones is doing double-duty" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6823" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6824" CreationDate="2017-03-10T03:02:56.697" Score="6" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some time ago, I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/95967/2&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; about how to save against fear with a DC of 21 if your wisdom is +0. It was closed because it was too broad, and I understand why. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's because the question is too hypothetical: I have no specific character in mind, which could have greatly narrowed the possible answers. I also could have put in more restraints for the answers, here's some possible narrowing edits I thought up of: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask not to list how to get immunity from fear, and ask it in a separate question. Something along the lines of &quot;I know you can get immunity from effects like spells, but I'm looking for straight bonuses to the rolls.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't ask for how to get Advantage against fear. Advantage can't get me past 20. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask only for abilities that allies can give me, and not features that only benefit self, making features like Mindless Rage and Stillness of Mind out-of-scope (sorry, Icyfire). This is because of the hypothetical-ness of the question, with only a platonic PC in mind, you'd need to rely on what your allies can give you instead of what you have for yourself (obviously a barbarian with mindless rage wouldn't have this problem!)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really want this question reopened, as I can see it being a valuable resource for players to tap. Will any or all of the above edit proposals help my question? Any more ideas on how to get it reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-10T05:35:26.433" Title="How can I get my question about impossible saves vs frightened reopened?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6824" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6823" CreationDate="2017-03-10T03:30:07.140" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;You shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions are always weak when they don't solve a real problem the poster has. You want to add artifical limitations to get the question open, but those limitations are totally random and may or may not apply to someone with the actual problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't ask questions because &quot;you think it'll be a good resource for people.&quot;  It won't, it'll be an impediment to them asking their own question that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; really scoped to someone having a real problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't seed questions.  Ask about real problems you have.  Let others ask about their problems, don't misuse the format to try to &quot;proactively help&quot; them - it's our experience you'll do more harm than good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-03-10T03:30:07.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6823" CreationDate="2017-03-10T05:35:26.433" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;With respect (and apologizing for the fact that I always sound way more confrontational than I intend to), I challenge the value of the question, because it seems to be presupposing its own legitimacy by assuming there is a problem that needs to be fixed and should be fixable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a player at my table asked me, &quot;How can I ever hope to overcome a DC 21 Wisdom save with only a +0 modifier in Wisdom?&quot;, my response would be, &quot;By going back to when you created your character and not choosing to be average in Wisdom.&quot; The fact that a DC 21 Wisdom save is impossible by default with a +0 in Wisdom is an abstraction for the fact that commoners are not wise enough to overcome the Frightful Presence of the dragon. It takes at least a +1 in Wisdom, which is by definition above average, to be able to succeed. It is intentional that most characters cannot reliably succeed on a saving throw against a combat feature of a CR 24 dragon, because most characters that are not player characters are average, and not all player characters excel in Wisdom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, your question seems to be founded on the premise that there should be a solution, as if the player in this situation deserves one, when the problem is more a matter of poor planning or alternative priorities on the part of the player at character creation. Your question might as well be, &quot;How can I ever hope to hide from a Beholder's passive perception when I have -1 in Dexterity and I'm not proficient in Stealth?&quot; There are plenty of tasks that are impossible to achieve for an arbitrary character that was not designed to be able to achieve that task. Basically, the only natural answer to your question is a frame challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those reasons, my conclusion is similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6824/32426&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt;: you shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-03-10T05:35:26.433" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6826" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6821" CreationDate="2017-03-10T07:57:26.973" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;My apologies. I appear to be one of the perpetrators of this confusion. I have removed the &quot;a-game-of-thrones&quot; tag from my question in an attempt to revert my mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest a mixture of 2 and 3, as that will help make the tags distinct, and to avert further confusion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, my own mistake was committed out of ignorance: I searched for an &quot;a-song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg&quot; tag, but when I did not find one, I added the &quot;a-game-of-thrones&quot; tag instead. I was oblivious of the fact there was indeed a &quot;song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg&quot; tag (without the &quot;a&quot;) until someone else added it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do realise it was incompetence on my own part that was the source of this fault, not unclear tags, but I believe it nevertheless to be positive to make the distinction clearer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30594" LastActivityDate="2017-03-10T07:57:26.973" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6827" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6821" CreationDate="2017-03-10T16:31:09.253" Score="13" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This rename has been done now.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the remaining four questions (after &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6826&quot;&gt;Arizan removed&lt;/a&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; tag on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96239/how-do-i-deal-with-op-super-soldiers-in-my-game-of-thrones-campaign&quot;&gt;their question&lt;/a&gt;), two are game-recs about the d20 GoT game&lt;sup&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83758/what-published-adventures-are-officially-set-in-westeros&quot;&gt;[a]&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7702/game-of-thrones-d20-tri-stat-vs-song-of-ice-and-fire-rpg-which-has-the-most-s&quot;&gt;[b]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; (which have now been closed), and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7625/a-campaign-based-on-a-novel-let-the-plot-deviate-or-make-the-pcs-thread-unrela&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; is a question in which GoT is just background to a plotting/campaign-dev problem and the tag doesn't describe that problem (which has had the tag removed now).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11791/how-to-make-a-dothraki-screamer-in-dd-4th-mounted-combat&quot;&gt;a single open question&lt;/a&gt; that might just barely deserve the setting tag. However, it's a “how do I make &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; character from fictional setting &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt; in D&amp;amp;D 4e” question. We don't make a setting tag for the &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt; in every “I want to make &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; character from &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;” question we get, so I suspect it may even be an invalid tag on that last remaining question too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which would mean there are only a pair of closed questions that merit the tag used as a system tag. In which case, we would have no &lt;em&gt;present&lt;/em&gt; need for a GoT/ASoIaF setting tag at all, since we only have a tag if there are questions for it to live on. We would then kick the can down the road on deciding what to name a setting tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I propose&lt;/strong&gt; that we rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/a-game-of-thrones-d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;a-game-of-thrones-d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;a-game-of-thrones-d20&lt;/a&gt;. Although the proper name is &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/703/game-thrones&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;A Game of Thrones&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and we prefer to have a game's tag match the game's title, we do seem to need to add a disambiguating suffix to the tag. Rather than add &lt;code&gt;-rpg&lt;/code&gt;, I propose adding the more specific &lt;code&gt;-d20&lt;/code&gt; because it's far less likely to still be misconstrued as “tag about playing RPGs in the GoT setting”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-19T03:19:50.323" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6828" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6829" CreationDate="2017-03-11T07:34:17.320" Score="6" ViewCount="133" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've already asked a couple of fairly well-received questions about LARP here. My system has recently asked me to start helping out in a somewhat more official capacity. My role isn't fully defined yet, but I'm thinking about the places I could go for help and advice if I need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine that a significant part of my role will involve some pretty hefty number crunching. I'll have a hand in the game's economy and crafting system, so I'll need to think about how &quot;valuable&quot; having access to various LARP-specific mechanics would be to a player. I also anticipate that I'll need to think about how best to a make-believe micro-economy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, questions about balancing game mechanics are probably more on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;gamedev&lt;/a&gt;, and questions about modelling how resources flow through an economy are probably more on-topic at &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.stackexchange.com/users/85606/ymbirtt&quot;&gt;maths&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://stats.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;stats&lt;/a&gt;. On the other hand, LARPs are predominantly about roleplay, and the people on the RPG stack exchange will likely have more insightful answers about exactly how LARP specific mechanics might balance against others, and how players will react to various incentive structures. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should questions about economics and game design, as they relate to LARP, be asked here or elsewhere?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11930" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:00.363" LastActivityDate="2017-03-11T12:39:58.190" Title="Are questions about economics and game design, as they relate to roleplaying, on-topic here?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6829" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6828" CreationDate="2017-03-11T12:39:58.190" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our rule of thumb for this is found in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;the help center's &lt;em&gt;What topics can I ask about here?&lt;/em&gt; page&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, may be off topic if they are not RPG-centric (or better belong on another Stack Exchange site, such as History). A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(If you're interested in context, this came from the meta discussion &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/1204&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic, part two?&lt;/a&gt; where I suggested it based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/a/14/2698&quot;&gt;the rule of thumb Game Dev adopted for a similar struggle&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ask yourself that rule of thumb. We're a community of RPG and LARP experts here to share our expertise on playing and designing those games, and we're here to share that expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact your question is tied into considerations of LARP design sound like it passes that rule of thumb. You'll have experts on LARP sharing their experience, and there's the potential for frame challenges such as “don't do it that way, it doesn't work, do it this way instead.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's difficult to judge the topicality of theoretical questions, so the best way to find out whether it's on topic here is to ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-11T12:39:58.190" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6830" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-13T15:27:40.770" Score="3" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am writing a heavy edit to my own question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96394/do-players-know-that-wizards-dont-wear-armour&quot;&gt;Do players know that Wizards don&amp;#39;t wear armour?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ShadowKras mentioned the ability to make a knowledge check to determine class features and abilities. If I had known of this, I would have asked a very different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But now that I have this information, and am making a large edit to make the question less terrible, should I:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask a question that implies I don't know of the feature, and therefore make the answer valid?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask a question that includes that knowledge, and therefore makes the actually helpful answer invalid?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Just... abandon the bad question and ask a new one? (This doesn't seem very ethical, but the easiest solution on a purely personal level.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15423" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-27T07:44:52.937" LastActivityDate="2020-11-27T07:44:52.937" Title="When editing, should I make the question into the one it should be, or the one I now need?" Tags="|support|questions|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6830" CreationDate="2017-03-13T15:35:22.993" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It depends on the situation, but in this case it's best to ask a new one. There are several answers already, and changing the question would make them invalid. That fact, plus that you now know something that gives you a new question to ask, tips it substantially towards being simpler, cleaner, and truer to post a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-03-13T15:35:22.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6832" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6833" CreationDate="2017-03-14T09:42:56.737" Score="1" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire:_The_Masquerade_%E2%80%93_Bloodlines&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade &amp;mdash; Bloodlines&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is a PC game from 2004. This game is very old, and does not have an active community on Arqade. There are forums, but forums aren't as good as SE. If I want plot clarifications based on oWoD canon, I would benefit from expertise in the tabletop roleplaying game more than from computer game expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, may I ask here about plot clarifications (such as &quot;How could the protagonist develop immunity to Dominate&quot;) here, or should I go to Arqade just because it's a computer game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-14T12:27:36.307" LastActivityDate="2017-03-16T13:47:28.777" Title="Am I allowed to ask questions about Vampire: The Masquerade -- Bloodlines plot here, or should I go for Arqade?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|world-of-darkness|video-games|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6833" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6832" CreationDate="2017-03-14T13:14:06.517" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think this depends heavily on how the question is phrased.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are &lt;em&gt;purely&lt;/em&gt; about the plot belong on Arqade. Questions that try to understand the plot of the game from the perspective of the pencil &amp;amp; paper rulebooks would probably be OK, on the other hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &amp;quot;What in-game justification is given for the protagonist's immunity to Dominate?&amp;quot; would be off-topic; it has nothing to do with the pencil &amp;amp; paper RPGs that are this stack's focus. On the other hand, &amp;quot;The protagonist of V:tM Bloodlines seems to be immune to Dominate; how could that be accomplished in the V:tM rules?&amp;quot; &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be on-topic, because it's about the pencil &amp;amp; paper V:tM rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-14T13:14:06.517" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6834" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6840" CreationDate="2017-03-14T20:31:56.423" Score="2" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was searching recently for a way to grant Wizards in Pathfinder a way to cast cure spells when I ran across &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74373/what-are-the-ways-for-a-wizard-to-get-cure-spells#&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a year old and I know a lot of stuff has come out since this question was answered, would it be eligible for a bounty to try for new answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the point where a question should be given this bounty? Should a user know for sure the answer is outdated first?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8933" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T20:28:23.480" Title="At what point can an answer be considered outdated" Tags="|discussion|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6835" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-15T08:58:23.813" Score="2" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;I bring this up with regards to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96448&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96448&lt;/a&gt;, but it is something I have encountered repeatedly on this site, and something that apparently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6092/3714&quot;&gt;others&lt;/a&gt; have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6129&quot;&gt;also&lt;/a&gt; noticed: Heavy-handed moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is something I &lt;strong&gt;specifically&lt;/strong&gt; object to, with regards to the linked question as well as in general:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There's a dispute. (In case of the linked question, whether it is &quot;unbounded&quot; or not, whether it is &quot;generic research&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/3548&quot;&gt;and thus off-topic&lt;/a&gt; or something &quot;an RPG expert [would] give me a better/different/more specific answer to&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;and thus on-topic&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comments are being made pro and contra the point. (This is not about whether such discussion should be done in the comments or in meta. Bear with me.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Moderator steps in&lt;/strong&gt; (which is his right), but &lt;strong&gt;deletes comments from one side of the argument only&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is unacceptable.&lt;/strong&gt; That is, effectively, muting the opposing POV, and turning a community into ex-cathedra teaching of what the moderator thinks is &quot;right&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is even more unacceptable that this happens without any notification that it happened at all. All that remains are the arguments of one side, undisputed, making it look as if the other side had nothing to say about the matter in the first place. (Which is just inviting serial downvoting, but I that is not the point here, just an annotation.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not leaving any notification also means the moderator in question does not &lt;strong&gt;identify&lt;/strong&gt; himself. It is quite possible, even likely, that the moderator who selectively deleted comments &lt;em&gt;was part of the initial dispute&lt;/em&gt;. In a &quot;real&quot; discussion, that would be tantamount to one side shouting the interlocutor down, or putting fingers in your ears and go &quot;lalala, your argument is invalid, lalala&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I flagged the remaining comments &lt;em&gt;twice&lt;/em&gt;, asking them to be deleted as well. No, the ex-cathedra &quot;we are right and you are wrong, your words are deleted while ours stand&quot; is upheld.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; unlike the moderation on any of the other SE sites I have experienced so far, confrontational, and, I might add, quite detrimental to discussion culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify, what I would have considered &lt;em&gt;acceptable&lt;/em&gt; outcomes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Removing the comments wholesale.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove all but the last line: &quot;[There was discussion, but] the author has indicated they don't want to do anything more on this question so it'll probably stay closed.&quot; (To indicate that the fact that the question was closed need not be further discussed.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moving the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; discussion to chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moving the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; discussion to meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing I take exception to is removing any indication that there were adults with a well-founded dissenting opinion involved in a discussion, &lt;em&gt;and leaving behind the &quot;you're wrong&quot; part&lt;/em&gt;. Either delete both (the discussion was pretty much done anyway, as I gave up on it), or &lt;em&gt;move&lt;/em&gt; both to a more appropriate place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; handled, in this question and elsewhere as well, is a &quot;don't talk back to me, I'm the law here&quot; attitude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3714" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T19:45:36.457" Title="One-sided comment moderation" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6836" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6835" CreationDate="2017-03-15T12:07:26.147" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR: I don't see malice or incompetence, just a couple of &lt;em&gt;positive&lt;/em&gt; trends about how mods curate comments which came together to look a little weird this time. (1) It's common practice to leave comments which explain the reason a question is closed, and (2) it's common practice to remove extended discussion about whether it should be re-opened because that belongs in meta. (3) We also rarely delete upvoted comments. In this context, that means preserving part of a comment discussion because it fits the first and third qualities while removing another part of the discussion because it fits the second.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been vocal about my dissatisfaction with moderator behaviour here whenever I see it, but even in the &quot;darkest&quot; times on rpg.se I've never had reason to suspect a moderator of abusing their moderation tools in the way you describe. Our moderators have a long-standing pattern of NOT using comment tools on threads they've gotten involved with, instead letting other mods handle those flags. They also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6492/4398&quot;&gt;share deleted comments&lt;/a&gt; if asked on meta. (Moderators used to leave more messages explaining why a thread had been deleted, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6803/4398&quot;&gt;don't do it so much any more&lt;/a&gt; because it just invited more comments heaping personal abuse on them.) I don't see the corruption you describe in this situation, and overall I've seen a marked improvement in moderation recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you're comparing rpg.se's comment curation to that of Stacks you're also familiar with, please read this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/4398&quot;&gt;meta post&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6514/4398&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. They offer history and context regarding why rpg.se's comment curation policies are more like Christianity.se's than Stack Overflow's--it's not an arbitrary or petty decision, it's not unique among Stacks, and it's rooted in our experience as a specific site with connections to RPG communities outside the Stack (a relationship other Stacks don't have to take into account).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there was a debate about topicality or listiness in the comments, I can see why they were removed: as you say, that's not what comments are for. The Stack Exchange network is not interested in &quot;discussion culture&quot; on main site pages, only on meta. In fact, discussion culture is exactly the behaviour SE was designed to sidestep!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that comments aren't for discussion and it sounds like that's why comments on the question were burned, I agree it'd be mighty suspicious if the remaining comments were still discussion-y. I'm inclined to give the mods the benefit of the doubt, but let's take a closer look at what's still there and why, because --since you clearly already understand that discussion should happen in meta-- that's the crux of your accusation: a moderator is applying the &quot;no discussion in comments&quot; policy preferentially.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Three of the four comments on the question are significantly upvoted. It's common practice here for moderators NOT to delete upvoted comments no matter how frivolous or obsolete. It's a sad truth that when comment threads spiral out of control (I don't know if this one did or not, but it seems likely), useful comments get trashed along with everything else, &lt;em&gt;except&lt;/em&gt; highly upvoted comments of whatever kind (so long as they aren't rude, obviously). In this case those comments also explain why it got closed, with meta links, which is a pretty standard practice and seems quite useful to leave in place for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So between &quot;explaining the close&quot; and &quot;ridiculously well up voted&quot; I'd've been shocked if those three comments had been removed. Obviously I can't see if any now-deleted comments were upvoted as well, but based on past moderation actions I'd be honestly surprised if well-voted (and non-rude) comments had been deleted (there's a couple pet peeve comments I flag about twice a year but they've got too many upvotes for any mod to trash 'em).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fourth comment is a moderator comment which ISN'T upvoted--and it basically summarises the comments made by other users. However it does add some additional information from the author's statements, which is valuable. I'm not sure why it replaces the author's statements; often a moderator leaves a comment summarising important content when the original commenter's statement was self-deleted, or had to be removed because of rudeness, neither of which I hope applied here. So it IS a bit weird. However, that's a far cry from eliminating a point of view. Assuming the new comment conveys the original intent clearly (and I assume if the moderator's comment put words into your mouth you'd have said so!) I don't see how it's doing anything except re-stating what other users have already said. I suspect that after the thread was deleted the moderator summarised the bits which he thought would be salient to anyone coming along later and hoping to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's pretty much NOT a moderator inserting his own perspective--and no moderator took part in the closure so I don't see how he'd have a personal stake in the thing anyway. Since the author apparently indicated disinterest in further edits to the question, it'd make sense for the mod to tell people not to bother the author with comment pings giving unwanted advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my distant perspective this doesn't look like muting an opposing point of view, or suffocating discussion: the remaining comments are perfectly in line with the sorts of comments I'd expect to see on a closed question; &lt;strong&gt;regardless of their original context they now just explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; it was closed&lt;/strong&gt;. There's no need for a dissenting opinion on &lt;em&gt;whether&lt;/em&gt; it should be closed--&lt;strong&gt;while those comments were useful before, the context has changed now that it's been closed&lt;/strong&gt; and meta is the place for appeals. The closest I see to potential foul play is a moderator preserving something from a deleted comment by making one of his own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discussion needs to happen in a place where it'll have room to breath, get a proper audience, and be preserved for the future--and comments aren't that place. This instance of comment deletion appears to be simply enforcing the proper use of the site's tools. As Pokémon Go taught us, not all public spaces are equally suitable for all purposes. If anybody wants to pursue getting the question re-opened, or to challenge to the site's topicality policies, I urge them to take their concerns to meta exactly like you took this concern to meta (for which I thank you).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T13:06:42.557" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6835" CreationDate="2017-03-15T18:05:18.123" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This ended up quite long. Here's the short version:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of comments are noise. We don't expect people who are trying to use the site, or help manage the site with their tool-access powers from high rep, to wade through a swamp of comments to understand what's going on. We doubly don't expect that on a question that's been abandoned by the author. We triply don't expect that when the comments move into argument territory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When comments are noisy and the post they're on is a “current event”, we remove any that are unnecessary. What comments are necessary depends on context. The context here was 1) the question was closed, 2) the author had abandoned it, 3) there were reopen voters who commented some &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; wrong things about what's on topic at RPG.se. Comments were &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; removed, except the comments that served to address (3), or which were informative to maintenance-privileged users about why (1) and (2) were the case. (2) also meant that there was no point in preserving any comments that were part of dispute or discussion about the closure, beyond what was necessary to explain (1) to users who arrived late to the party.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No comments were left that didn't need to be there to serve those needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trying to childishly manipulate the perception of an argument that was no longer even visible was not a motive in any of the decisions to remove or keep a comment. Rest assured, the comments were handled in good faith and adult fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the difficulty with these comments appears to be that &lt;em&gt;several&lt;/em&gt; unrelated subjects were all mixed together at once (closure, topicality, sibling sites, voting habits, the nature of comments, the nature of meta, author intentions — to name a few), making it very easy for what any given comment meant to be misunderstood and the responses to deepen the misunderstanding. This is exactly why comment chains that get messy like this are nuked and the participants redirected to start over in a fresh meta question, where there is room to untangle and avoid messes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another problem is that the question is &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; off topic according to our precedents. If there is nuance to the question that means our precedents need to be be re-examined, that's something to happen on meta, not in comments. (Note that though we are now on meta, this meta question about comment handling is also not the place to tackle re-examining precedents. If that is desired, a meta on that subject should be asked.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the short version. Read on for the long version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Foreword: Why precedent makes it &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; off topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's dispense with this quickly. There were definitely misunderstandings in the comments about this point, and I believe that contributed to the volume of comments and well as many misunderstandings and disagreements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is, on its face, clearly off topic. It is a question asking for a vague list, and it's asking for information that is not the domain of RPG experts. It doesn't matter if RPG experts would answer it better than Mythology.SE experts, as one comment contended. The fact remains that we are experts in RPGs, not in South European folklore. We don't have a folklore SE, but the existence of a more fitting SE has never been relevant to whether a question is topical, only the existence of more relevant &lt;em&gt;experts&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that it was a real-world folklore question and asking for a vague list, there was nothing to dispute — it's not a question about roleplaying games. Perhaps this is something wrong with our precedents — in which case, a meta about that should be started.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing happening was a fight (based on a misunderstanding) that the mods were called in to break up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Preface: Behind the curtain regarding comment pruning&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When comments are removed, we always weigh the effect that the removal will have on several possible audiences, including: the author of the post; the author of the comment(s); the readers who saw the comment(s); the readers who will never see the comments; any voters; any answerers; and any high-rep users who have taken moderation-tool actions on the post such as edits, close votes, or reopen votes; any high-rep users who haven't yet taken such actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ideal comment-handling choices for each of those groups don't fully overlap, so every time we consider removing comments we necessarily have to make some compromises and try to decide what is the most productive for the question itself and the site as a whole. We also have to make the choices in a reasonable amount of time, both in order to have any useful effect on a comment chain that might need action, and in order to move on to other tasks waiting for us. We get a lot of practice, and are pretty good at making these choices quickly and in a principled way, while knowing perfect action is unachievable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do this in good faith, and with an eye for what is best for the site. In case that sentence provokes an objection that we shouldn't be deciding what's best for the site, allow me to ground that a bit in the utter pragmatism that moderation demands: when we say “best for the site”, we have in mind our mandate to prevent the site from going down in flames, not our personal idea of a utopian RPG site. When we are considering what's best for the site, we're mostly working to prevent or interrupt things that are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; best for the site: flame wars, edit wars, comment arguments, using the site for discussion, insults, provocation, stalking, serial downvoting, not using answers posts for answers, not using question posts for questions, “fun” off topic questions not being closed, difficult question being closed that shouldn't be, sockpuppeting, trolling, spamming, … and I'm going to stop myself there, because that list could go on for a few more paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in context, when we remove comments, we are always acting to prevent or end a problem that is occurring or about to. “We're right, you're wrong” is so far down the list of motivations that we can't see it from here. We're too busy with more important considerations to get around to &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; ones like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We take care of those janitorial, maintenance, and site management issues so that y'all don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to (but with enough rep, can), and can focus on the site's &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; in a way that moderators aren't able to. Y'all have the ability to get personally invested in a way we don't, because you don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to first think about site management (but can if you want) before you can think about how many arms a PC needs to be able to use sixteen zweihanders.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in case it needs saying again: comments are by-design temporary. Removal is the default, and leaving any given comment un-removed generally serves a site management purpose. (Though sometimes that purpose &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; merely “there is something more important to deal with right now”.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, that's the very long version of where we're coming from when we're looking at a bunch of comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;In this case&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened is that a lot of comments were written. This automatically flags the question for moderator attention, because the purpose of posts and comments on Main is such that there should never be that many comments on a post long-term, and therefore it's time to do some weeding to get rid of the unnecessary, unconstructive, obsolete, or inappropriate comments in order that the useful ones (if any) remain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is my evaluation of the first set of removed comments in roughly chronological order, and my explanation for their removal:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some discussion and suggestions about other places to take the question. The author interacted with these, therefore the information had been received. These didn't need immediate removal, but would eventually be removed as no longer needed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A user relatively new to their reopen vote ability expressed some rather wrong ideas about how the site works. Perhaps their &lt;em&gt;general&lt;/em&gt; position about the question's topicality was correct, but their reasons weren't. These were removed because disinformation doesn't serve the site, even if it's well-meant. They were also removed because they were obsolete once the commentors were asked to take it to meta instead. They were also obsolete when the question was abandoned. So they could have been removed three times, but we can only remove a comment once.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments debating whether the question merits closing, or is okay to have on RPG.se. Those that were removed for being obsolete. I'll comment on this more below.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discussion of the voting on the answers. Entirely out of place in the comments on the question and easily removed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many comments, including those mentioned already just above, were arguing unproductively. Tempers appeared to be heating. In such cases, comment removal is like digging a firebreak to contain the spread of a forest fire — remove the things that are making people angry and that are inspiring new comments, and the argument will disappear unless it's a &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; hot fire. (We have other ways of dealing with fires that refuse to be contained by modest means like removing comments.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The comments debating the close&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were some comments debating the close. All were removed except one, and I want to address why that is, since it seems to be part of the objection in this meta question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recall the various groups who are affected by comment removal decisions. Who is the most important group to consider? In this case, it's those users with moderation tool access who have acted on the question and those who haven't yet seen the question, and those users who were involved in the fight. The first need context for what's going on with the question, and need to see the explanation offered for the Too Broad closure, so that they can evaluate it for themselves and vote accordingly. The second group need to not have new inbox notifications to respond to. This entirely explains the comments about the debate that were removed, and the ones that were left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One comment giving context for the closure was left, as above. (This is the only comment that was &lt;em&gt;part&lt;/em&gt; of the debate.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Two were left pointing to relevant meta discussions. These help spread awareness of how the site works for users who are new to their close/reopen vote privilege, which was an issue in this case. Leaving these is useful to improve how our collective site maintenance works. (They were in the middle of the debate, but didn't take part in it — they merely provided a neutral resource that disputants could consult and refer to.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One comment that came after the dispute was over was left existing. This was a moderator's comment that did two things: correct a misapprehension about list questions that the author restated in response to the second link (perhaps the author missed the first link in the flurry of comments), and noted for the sake of others that the author had abandoned the question. (This comment overlaps the two sets of comments. See below for more.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comments that were heating things up instead of calming things down were removed, though mostly this was redundant with the aim of having minimal comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, the moderator wasn't involved in the dispute. From a moderation perspective, there &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; no dispute to get involved in, just a number of users who were correctly applying established precedent on a fairly clear case of an off topic question, who were being given a hard time by users who didn't appear to be familiar with these established precedents.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't picking sides, unless you count “the site” as a side a moderator can pick. This is a moderator breaking up a fight and dousing the flames by removing the comments that were fueling them, while retaining just enough to keep high-rep voters informed about what's up with the closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The second set of comments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the first set of comments. Fairly tame, nothing too unusual there. The &lt;em&gt;second&lt;/em&gt; set of comments is where things seem to have gone off the rails.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These comments started with a pair of comments from a mod addressing the significant misunderstandings that were in the first set of comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comment explaining why the question was closed. Previous comments about the closure were largely missing the point, and this comment aimed to remind everyone of the fairly clear reasons available to close the question: it was asking for a list, and it was a campaign research question that did not ask anything that needed RPG expertise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comment explaining that it's not unusual for voters to downvote answers to questions that are obviously off topic. This wasn't to justify, so much as point out that it happens: it's a thing that voters do, and up/down voters can do exactly as they please (apart from serial voting), and objecting is needless use of yet more comments. Explaining that this happens was in response to several previous comments on the subject.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What followed were mostly increasingly heated comments asking what the point of that mod's comments were, and (ironically) strenuous objections that the two comments artificially continued the debate. These comments were largely unconstructive. The moderator's comments addressed a number of misunderstandings, but the number of new misunderstandings that arrived with further comments indicate, to me reading them after the fact, that there were too many misunderstandings to fruitfully deal with in comments. I am unsurprised that the moderator cut bait and deleted the lot of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, one of the two comments that began the second set of comments &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; removed: the one that explained why it was closed and likely to remain so was left to serve as context for other users with site maintenance on the mind. The second comment addressing the misunderstanding about how people vote on answers was removed, likely because that whole tangent had proven fruitless to address in comments. The rest were removed, because comments aren't for angry arguments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Allow me to address the alternatives you propose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Removing the comments wholesale.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would have left no context for our community members with access to moderation tools, so would have been inappropriate for a freshly-held question that had been the subject of dispute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Remove all but the last line: &quot;[There was discussion, but] the author has indicated they don't want to do anything more on this question so it'll probably stay closed.&quot; (To indicate that the fact that the question was closed need not be further discussed.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first half was addressing a point being missed by the author (that we don't do list questions, and it clearly was one). This is important, because it's material context for why its closed and likely to remain so in its current form. I addressed this in more detail above. The second half was addressing the general fact that it's likely to remain closed, because the author indicated they would be allowing the question to remain in its current obviously off-topic form. These two halves only really made sense together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Moving the whole discussion to chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Productive discussions do get moved to chat, but arguments never do. That wouldn't serve our function as fire-fighters, as it wouldn't remove the fuel from the fire. We're not here to enable arguments, we're here to prevent them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Moving the whole discussion to meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no such moderator power. Since there's no site mechanism for converting comments into posts anyway, such a power is unlikely to ever be added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, we ask that people having a dispute take it to meta. That was done twice by a moderator. Since the suggestion wasn't followed, that was the extend of our powers to move a dispute to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess we could have also locked the post against further comments with the “no really, use meta for that” reason, but that seemed unnecessary here. It's often too strong an action to merely repeat the request to use meta for its purpose instead of misusing comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other things of note&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Which is just inviting serial downvoting”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The term “serial downvoting” seems to have been misused here. Serial downvoting is when someone goes to the user page of a particular other user to find the list of their posts and starts casting downvotes on all their posts. That's an abuse of the system and results in reversal of the votes and possibly a temporary suspension for the abusing account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meaning that seems to have been intended is that “Which is just inviting more downvoting”. Perhaps it will or perhaps it won't. How comments might affect the choices of our voting public is pretty much irrelevant when we're considering whether it's time for a comment to be removed — there are &lt;em&gt;far&lt;/em&gt; more important considerations that leave no room for such a minor issue as how others' votes on the question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; change based on the visible comments, which isn't even our business anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“quite detrimental to discussion culture”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Excellent. RPG.se doesn't have, and is designed to kill, discussion culture. As wonderful as a healthy discussion culture is &lt;em&gt;on&lt;/em&gt; a discussion site, on RPG.se it's a sign of disease — much like a healthy human gut culture is wonderful when it's &lt;em&gt;in&lt;/em&gt; a human's guts, but in another part of the body is a sign of disease. If what we're doing is successfully killing any growths of discussion culture, we're on the right path.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“deleting a question with answers to it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/question-bans&quot;&gt;can lead to a question ban&lt;/a&gt;” &lt;em&gt;(from one of the removed comments)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not how question bans work. Someone has to have a &lt;em&gt;really terrible&lt;/em&gt; question record to earn a question ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The exact formula for the bans is not disclosed, but users are only banned if they have a significant number of heavily down-voted, zero-voted, or deleted posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T18:05:18.123" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6835" CreationDate="2017-03-15T18:52:58.217" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I haven't read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6836/23970&quot;&gt;BESW's&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6837/23970&quot;&gt;SSD's&lt;/a&gt; answers yet--from which I expect to learn useful things--but I want to explain my +1 to the question here: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed the &quot;one side left standing&quot; thread yesterday and had some pretty similar thoughts to OP: the detritus struck me strangely, and I'd have preferred to see something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one comment left standing, along the lines of &quot;this is off-topic, if you want to discuss it take it to meta&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;all comments (barring anything rude/offensive) moved to a chat with a note/link&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174/23970&quot;&gt;comments should be pruned&lt;/a&gt; to the least-acceptable amount: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6515/23970&quot;&gt;I'm a defender&lt;/a&gt; of our (noted-upon by many visitors) vigorous deletion practices. But I'd note that it's not only the &lt;strong&gt;end-result&lt;/strong&gt; of such conversations that inform/educate the citizenry: we can learn a lot from seeing what sort of objections/misunderstandings users are expressing, what reasoning mods are using to explain things, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way this one was left (at the time) just left me wondering, not any wiser....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-03-16T15:45:25.903" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T18:52:58.217" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6840" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6834" CreationDate="2017-03-15T20:28:23.480" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can set the bounty whenever for whatever reason; they're highly personal things, like voting. We're not going to moderate it or tell you how to use it unless you're causing trouble which is unlikely. I say this to emphasize it's up to you, there's no &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; behaviour here, and you won't get in trouble for doing something inappropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you post a bounty asking for things to be updated, and they're already up to date, the most damage you've done is spent some rep and time and energy that you didn't have to spend. For that reason it's &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; in your favour to make sure you'll actually be getting something out of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also helps to understand the size of the of undertaking you're asking for. What if you've actually asked for an enormous task, but only posted 50 rep for the bounty? Will people really respond? Or what if it's a trivial task, but you overestimated it and posted 500 rep for that task? The bounty should be proportionate to what you think the work will be like. Our estimates of how much work's involved may not pan out as accurate, but they're estimates, not exactimates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-03-15T20:28:23.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6832" CreationDate="2017-03-16T12:29:52.060" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If  you want to ask more like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/96472/4&quot;&gt;the kind of question you asked&lt;/a&gt;, you should just go to &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Scifi&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original version of the question was really not appropriate for our site. It reads like this in essence: &amp;ldquo;Please explain to me how this thing could've worked that happened in this video game, using the tabletop game rules which the video game only kinda-sorta uses, and preferably only using features that also showed up in the video game.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is seeking an explanation about the video game from someone who's an expert on the video game. You're &lt;em&gt;trying&lt;/em&gt; to stretch it into source material that's not all that relevant &amp;mdash; the tabletop game rules, which you acknowledged yourself the game blended with another ruleset so that it's not &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; using those tabletop rules at all but instead some beast unique unto itself &amp;mdash; because you really want an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we're not the appropriate experts to consult for this. Explaining a video game on the video game's terms is not our business. We can't give you a good answer about the video game, and a answer from us based on material the video game &lt;em&gt;isn't really using&lt;/em&gt; isn't going to do much good for you or anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/96472/5&quot;&gt;edited your question&lt;/a&gt; so that it would no longer be a weirdly twisted pseudo-TTRPG-but-actually-video-game question, mostly to show you at what point it'd be a functional appropriate question for our site: something happened in a video game, but now let's ask about it on the roleplaying game's terms, drawing on TTRPG expertise and producing an answer useful to TTRPG players, instead of something reliant on and for the video game's players. I'm not sure it will give you the answers you want about the video game's events, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-16T13:47:28.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6842" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6843" CreationDate="2017-03-16T15:53:40.100" Score="44" ViewCount="7910" Body="&lt;p&gt;So there's a ton of questions about how to present a frame challenge, or how not to frame challenge, and I've had people mention it on the comments on questions of mine in response to others' comments...and I have no idea what it means. I did a quick spin through meta but couldn't find a direct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From context I'm getting it means something like &amp;quot;structuring the question / answer to assume certain guidelines are met&amp;quot; but that doesn't seem to apply in all scenarios. Am I missing something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-06-28T04:30:47.223" LastActivityDate="2021-08-06T17:24:45.240" Title="What's a frame challenge?" Tags="|support|faq|terminology|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6842" CreationDate="2017-03-16T16:23:53.907" Score="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;A frame challenge is where an author answers a question in a wholly different way the querent never asked for, or potentially expressly forbade, but in a way the author feels will &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; solve the problem. (Or otherwise improve the querent's life quality or prevent them from making some terrible mistake.) This is as opposed to answers which answer the question at face value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;ldquo;frame&amp;rdquo; being challenged here is specifically the way the question was framed &amp;mdash; the way they put it forward, the parameters they offered, the kinds of answers they're driving for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Frame challenge” is Stack Exchange jargon. You might know this by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7579/1204&quot;&gt;some other more common phrases&lt;/a&gt; such as challenging the assumptions of a question, or questioning its premise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frame challenges are &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;risky&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;; sometimes they're a good idea and sometimes you just cop a whole lot of downvotes. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/1204&quot;&gt;We advise you &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; answer the question at face value&lt;/a&gt;, though you may prefer not to do so (and sometimes, it's a very good idea to not do so).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; My wizard needs to get from the Undead Asylum to Blighttown by sundown. What's the fastest steed for riding there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Regular answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Ask for a bronze steed down the hill. It's very quick, but the earliest you can make it there is past midnight.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Frame challenge answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Don't use a steed to get there at all. There's a crow nearby who'll fly you there in minutes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; This other player killed my character. I'm furious, and I want to harass him and give him hell until he cries and leaves the group never to return. How can I do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Regular answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Start by slipping poison into his character's drinks, and...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Frame challenge answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Don't do this at all, you'd be terrible for doing it and you'd bring the game down. Talk to the dude and with your GM to resolve this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; How can I teach my warlock &lt;em&gt;foo?&lt;/em&gt; I refuse to do &lt;em&gt;(thing)&lt;/em&gt;, it's bad because reasons, so don't answer with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Regular answer:&lt;/strong&gt; You can't. Sorry.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Frame challenge answer (sort of):&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;(thing)&lt;/em&gt; is the only way to do it. It's actually a good idea, so you should do this. Plus I think you're mistaken about those reasons, let me explain...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-15T10:16:28.950" LastActivityDate="2019-01-15T10:16:28.950" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6844" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-16T23:49:44.147" Score="14" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This post is likely of interest only to those who are curious about networking and security protocols, or Stack Exchange infrastructure projects.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;Or those wondering if they were only merely imagining the URL being different at some point.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of &lt;a href=&quot;//meta.stackexchange.com/questions/292058/network-wide-https-its-time&quot;&gt;upgrading the entire Stack Exchange network to use secure HTTPS links internally&lt;/a&gt;, our meta site has had a very tiny move to a slightly different URL. You probably won't even notice because all the buttons and even in-post URLs have been updated,* but anyone who's in the habit of typing in the URL manually (other people do that too, right? … no? okay) will eventually have to adjust their muscle memory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of &lt;code&gt;meta.rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt;, our meta is now at &lt;code&gt;rpg.meta.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt;. Just the &lt;code&gt;meta&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;rpg&lt;/code&gt; have swapped places. Trying to visit the old domain name now receives a redirect — that is, it tells browsers to go away and automatically visit the HTTPS-enabled domain name instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because of the way security certificates work, only one (costly, fragile) certificate is needed for all &lt;code&gt;*.meta.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; sites, but every &lt;code&gt;meta.*.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; site would have to have its own and there are just too many of those for SE to be able to manage that many certificates. Hence the move to put all the metas on one mega-meta domain name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More details for the curious and network-geeky at &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/292058/network-wide-https-its-time&quot;&gt;Network-wide HTTPS: It&amp;#39;s time&lt;/a&gt;, and background on why the domain name polka is happening is in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1240/nick-craver&quot;&gt;Nick Craver&lt;/a&gt;'s 2013 blogpost, &lt;a href=&quot;https://nickcraver.com/blog/2013/04/23/stackoverflow-com-the-road-to-ssl/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“Stackoverflow.com: the road to SSL”&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* But existing meta links in comments haven't been automatically updated yet. Those are apparently going to be done in a separate step a while later.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-26T07:42:45.693" Title="Just FYI, the RPG Meta site's link has changed (because HTTPS)" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6845" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-17T00:37:21.727" Score="12" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I came upon a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96622/how-does-the-life-domain-blessed-healer-work-with-a-spell-like-regenerate&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;, where the asker referenced the rules incorrectly (the question in general was also rather hard to follow). Later on someone edited the question and formatted the incorrect reference as a quote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to help out and edited the question, so that it included the correct quote now. I was then told that I was just confusing the asker further by meddling with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am of the opinion that leaving it incorrect will just make it harder to follow for anyone who might find the thread later on. We should help anyone with a similar question, so even though the OP could be surprised by the changes, this way other people will not be misdirected by incorrect quotations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, am I in the wrong here? Should we leave it up to answers to clarify the relevant rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;leave an incorrect reference as it is&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;delete the reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;edit and correct it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33200" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-17T16:38:36.667" Title="Should we correct rules references in questions?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6845" CreationDate="2017-03-17T13:06:08.307" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Leave incorrect references in the original question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the stack, the goal to provide good answers which help solve real problems. Well, the misquote might be the cause of the problem in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a real problem is being generated by a misunderstanding of the rules, then correcting that flaw with an edit fundamentally changes the scope of the question. Now instead of clarifying whatever it is that is really confusing the querent, their question is changed, and the answers won't accurately address their problems anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that &amp;quot;No, you've misunderstood the rules, &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; is how it really works...&amp;quot; is a perfectly acceptable answer, and one that will more accurately address the issues that the querent is facing. For that reason, We should leave misquoted text in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Feel free to communicate your concerns through comments though&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you wish to determine whether the misquote was intentional, you can leave a comment on the flawed quote saying: &amp;quot;Hey, that's a misquote, was it intentional?&amp;quot; Or &amp;quot;Hey, that's incorrect, did you mean it like that?&amp;quot; If the querent truly just mistyped or misquoted a section, they will either confirm that to you, or edit the quote themselves. If they seem confused or respond something like &amp;quot;What do you mean?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;what's the difference?&amp;quot; Then you know that they really meant their misquote, and you can make an answer which addresses their confusion in the &amp;quot;That isn't quite how it works&amp;quot; format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32395" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-17T13:06:08.307" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5065" CreationDate="2017-03-17T14:48:17.083" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.serverfault.com/questions/1886/how-to-handle-unanswered-questions-that-have-the-answer-in-a-comment-or-edited-i/1931#1931&quot;&gt;this approach to answers in  comments&lt;/a&gt; is the one we should follow rather than the &lt;em&gt;overly&lt;/em&gt; speedy deletion of comments that we have right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Steal comments that answer the question and post them as an answer.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/117251/what-should-be-done-with-questions-that-have-been-self-resolved-as-a-comment-ins&quot;&gt;backed up as the right resolution&lt;/a&gt; in meta.stackexchange and is an answer stolen from a comment by Jeff Atwood and you can't get much better than that!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously once you've created such an answer the comment should be flagged for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user28291" LastActivityDate="2017-03-17T14:48:17.083" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6845" CreationDate="2017-03-17T16:38:36.667" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Sometimes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's an error whose correction doesn't materially change the question, correct it. For example, misspelling a rule or ability's name can safely be corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's an error that is entwined with their problem, the mistake is part of their question and should be left intact. For example, mixing up two rules or abilities should not be corrected in the question, but in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-03-17T16:38:36.667" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6849" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6844" CreationDate="2017-03-18T21:50:17.860" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;:(  I was hoping the original post on this was right and the stack overflow language adaptations would be saddled with *.meta.etc while we would keep meta.*.etc .  I often get to meta by prepending 'meta.' to whatever page I'm on so as to change sites relatively quickly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not that big a deal, and I guess the security benefits are probably important, but it is still annoying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, according to @Ilmari Karonen, it's likely that the redirect from meta.* to our new address will be kept around indefinitely.  So we can keep using that format to access the site ^^ Yay!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-03-26T07:42:45.693" LastActivityDate="2017-03-26T07:42:45.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6850" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6844" CreationDate="2017-03-18T22:04:56.247" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wow, this actually is going to have a significant negative effect on me. I can no longer use &lt;kbd&gt;Ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;T&lt;/kbd&gt; &lt;kbd&gt;m&lt;/kbd&gt; &lt;kbd&gt;Enter&lt;/kbd&gt; to go to Meta, or &lt;kbd&gt;Ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;T&lt;/kbd&gt; &lt;kbd&gt;m&lt;/kbd&gt; &lt;kbd&gt;Tab&lt;/kbd&gt; to use Meta’s search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shouldn’t the certificate for &lt;code&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; (there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; going to be one of those, right?) cover &lt;code&gt;meta.rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; too?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-03-18T22:04:56.247" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6851" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-19T12:49:57.237" Score="3" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;How can I retract or revoke my decision on a suggested edit review?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I accepted an edit suggestion that, at that time, looked sensible to me. After I accepted the edit, it clicked to me that it was not right. I tried to revoke or retract my decision but I could not find how.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way of doing it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29680" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:35:40.037" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:35:40.037" Title="How can I retract or revoke my decision on a suggested edit review?" Tags="|support|review|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6851" CreationDate="2017-03-19T13:26:44.333" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't believe you can retract that approval-vote.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/5212/311001&quot;&gt;What are the limits on how I can cast, change, and retract votes?&lt;/a&gt; doesn't say anything about edit-approval votes, and neither can any other meta.SE questions about &amp;quot;edit&amp;quot; &amp;quot;approve&amp;quot; &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;retract,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;revoke,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;rescind,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;take-backsies.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But you can &lt;em&gt;revert&lt;/em&gt; the edit.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the bottom of the post should be a clickable link: &amp;quot;edited [$TIME] ago.&amp;quot; Clicking there brings you to the post's revision history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look to the most-recent version of the post you like--in this case probably the second-to-last post. Click &amp;quot;rollback.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe there's a way to leave an edit-comment on a rollback, so I suggest you leave one on the main post explaining why you object to the edit. (That way if there ever is some reason to dig through the post's revision history others aren't left wondering why this one reversion happened.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-19T13:36:52.173" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6853" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-19T13:32:06.783" Score="4" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; today, which tag-wiki starts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;About finding resources online.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me this immediately screams &quot;off-topic, recommendation.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the 44 questions tagged with it (11 closed, 33 open) I'm not seeing much to change that opinion. It looks (to me) like a lot of those questions should be closed, and the tag either destroyed or at least wiki-modified to read &quot;this is not an on-topic question-type.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-03-19T21:39:01.120" Title="Are [online-resources] on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|tags|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6853" CreationDate="2017-03-19T14:24:45.453" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, questions asking about online resources are on topic. There is nothing that makes them off topic; contrary to the tag wiki &lt;strong&gt;they are not categorically and inherently about recommendations.&lt;/strong&gt; The tag wiki doesn't accurately reflect usage of the tag, and is from the year before game recommendations were ruled off topic; I'm updating it (see end of post).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They &lt;em&gt;contain&lt;/em&gt; a lot of recommendations, but that's just because it's one of the things people asked for recommendations of. The fact that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt; contains a large proportion of a no-longer-accepted question category does not make it synonymous with that category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/81093/where-can-i-find-the-various-dd-4e-web-articles-if-they-even-still-exist&quot;&gt;Where can I find the various D&amp;amp;D 4e web articles? (If they even still exist.)&lt;/a&gt; — not a recommendation, it's asking how to navigate WotC's site to find material after a site migration.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45357/how-can-i-continue-to-access-wizards-of-the-coasts-dd-3-5-web-articles&quot;&gt;How can I continue to access Wizards of the Coast&amp;#39;s D&amp;amp;D 3.5 Web articles?&lt;/a&gt; — same again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9035/are-the-wotc-archives-of-d20-character-optimization-forum-forever-lost&quot;&gt;Are the WotC archives of d20 Character Optimization forum forever lost?&lt;/a&gt; — asking about the impact of the WotC forum closure on key community resources.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41181/where-can-i-find-a-complete-timeline-of-the-history-of-points-of-light&quot;&gt;Where can I find a complete timeline of the history of Points of Light?&lt;/a&gt; — not a recommendation. It's a community-compiled resource that exists but which I lost track of (much like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/73875/1204&quot;&gt;The Rules of Hidden Club&lt;/a&gt;); I asked about where it's currently located. It was found and provided.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59356/1204&quot;&gt;Are there any Handbooks for the &amp;quot;Expert&amp;quot; NPC Class?&lt;/a&gt; — not a recommendation. The D&amp;amp;D 3.5e optimization community has compiled a number of guidebooks/handbooks on optimizing certain classes. Any given class has a small number (as low as &amp;quot;just one&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;none&amp;quot;) of such handbooks that the optimization community recognises as the standard go-to; this question was looking for what they were for one class after being surprised they couldn't actually find any.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83103/where-can-i-find-an-exhaustive-and-constantly-updating-list-of-5e-reference-an/&quot;&gt;Where can I find an exhaustive (and constantly updating) list of 5e reference and adventure books?&lt;/a&gt; — not a recommendation. There are a number of products connected to this game; the author was asking where we find them actually listed and collected together. Such a library exists and was provided.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59838/where-can-i-find-a-proper-library-of-free-adventures-for-fate-core-and-accelerat&quot;&gt;Where can I find a proper library of free adventures for Fate Core and Accelerated?&lt;/a&gt; — same again. There are three key libraries and they were provided: Evil Hat's own, the Drive Thru RPG store through which Evil Hat distributes electronic versions of their games, and RPG Geek which is effectively our hobby's Wikipedia.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Concerning those last two, let's recall that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5711/community-self-evaluation-how-are-we-doing-with-game-recommendations&quot;&gt;a definitive part of recommendations&lt;/a&gt; is that we are bringing to the asker a variety of suggestions for things they could use in hopes of finding a best-fitting one. They ran afoul of &amp;quot;every answer is equally valid&amp;quot;. Here, providing what is factually the canonical resource is not a recommendation of something equally valid, it is &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; correct answer. These are like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; requests. An answer that says &amp;quot;use this&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22how+do+i%22&quot;&gt;is not, inherently, a recommendation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've updated the tag wiki to the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Excerpt:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for questions about using or finding online resources. (Recommendations of &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; resources are not on topic, but we can provide guidance around identifying canonical resources.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Wiki:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions around using online resources or identifying canonical resources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Recommendations for game materials are now off topic&lt;/a&gt;, but we can provide guidance around the existing canonical resources available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related tags are: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/play-by-post&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;play-by-post&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;play-by-post&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tools&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tools&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tools&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-19T21:39:01.120" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6855" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6856" CreationDate="2017-03-20T18:46:07.110" Score="15" ViewCount="327" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently noticed a couple questions that seemed like &quot;make me some suggestions for this homebrew idea I had&quot;. I voted to close both as an off-topic Shopping/Recommendation request, as to me they both seemed like asking for recommendations and idea generation, which is clearly off-topic here. I see that both were actually closed as opinion-based. This makes sense as homebrew ideas would be opinion-based, without a clear way to determine a &quot;best&quot; answer. I, however, have a (possibly mis-) conception that &quot;on-topic&quot; close reasons can generally be improved to be good questions, whereas these clearly cannot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which of these close reasons is the better option?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-03-21T20:05:53.227" LastActivityDate="2017-03-24T06:47:31.380" Title="Close Reason for &quot;Homebrew this for me&quot; questions" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6856" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6855" CreationDate="2017-03-20T19:54:33.007" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have often seen &quot;too broad&quot; and &quot;opinion based&quot; as reasons to close homebrew requests.  I'd recommend using &quot;opinion based&quot; as the close reason.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-03-20T19:54:33.007" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6857" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-21T10:36:40.747" Score="10" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96782&quot;&gt;How are Animated Objects created?&lt;/a&gt; and it was suggested that it was a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56008&quot;&gt;What are the rules for making constructs other than golems?&lt;/a&gt;. I can see that they are indeed very similar but I was not happy with the answer on the original question so believe it is right to ask a separate question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far the answer I have received on my question does add a little information that wasn't in the original question's answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a case like this is it right to ask a duplicate question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25557" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T20:41:01.077" Title="What should you do if a question already asked doesn't provide a satisfactory answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6858" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-22T03:05:49.157" Score="10" ViewCount="302" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96863/what-level-should-this-exhaustion-causing-spell-be&quot;&gt;What level should this exhaustion-causing spell be?&lt;/a&gt; was asked and includes an element of homebrew, but has only 11 specific answers it can possibly be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question presents a given spell, and asks which level it should be. The possible answers here, given the 5e system, are: cantrip, 1st level through 9th level, and no level (ie, the spell is unacceptable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On further checking, justifications that answer givers have provided have a fair bit of opinion, but seem to all be based on sound reasoning and experience. There was even a frame challenge to update the spell and make it better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To contrast, I have asked two questions along the same lines before, and neither were closed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77547/how-many-sorcery-points-should-this-homebrew-metamagic-cost&quot;&gt;One was of a homebrew metamagic&lt;/a&gt; asking for how many Sorcery points it should cost, of which there would only be a specific numerical answer; and the other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77520/what-should-be-the-rarity-rating-of-this-homebrew-item&quot;&gt;of a homebrew magic item&lt;/a&gt; asking for the appropriate rarity rating, of which there can only be five answers (Common through Legendary).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though the question about spell level is about homebrew, it seems that it can be answered based on comparing the effects of this to pre-existing spells and conditions. For instance, the given spell was clearly better than a cantrip or a 1st level spell. There are guiding principles at play that experts can draw on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose, bringing up the existence of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot;&gt;the homebrew tag&lt;/a&gt; also justifies this a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the question have been closed, and why? And the more general question here is, should all questions of &quot;[How Many/What Level/etc] of X should this Homebrew thing have&quot; be closed as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-04-03T13:14:53.633" Title="Should the exhaustion spell level question really be put on hold?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6858" CreationDate="2017-03-22T03:12:51.047" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with this question is not &quot;how many answers there are&quot;, it's that answering it has a too heavily subjective component.  There are &quot;too subjective&quot; yes/no questions as well, the set of answers is completely irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The spell is very unusual.  Has anyone playtested a spell like this before?  If so, they'd have standing to answer. But all the answers and comments-in-answers are pure guesses. The answers to your questions were more tightly scoped and got more objective content (though the accepted answer to the second one notes that this might be opiniony in its first sentence).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an example of a question being declared subjective because it's pulling subjective answers.  In some other world where it didn't, it would be fine.  But the assumption is that if a question is pulling subjective answers there's something wrong with the question.  So it gets closed to retool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So no, &quot;all questions about homebrew categorization&quot; should not be closed. Neither should they all remain open.  They should be evaluated on their own merits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't believe that question should be closed in its current form, vote to reopen.  If 4 people agree with you, it'll get reopened. If not, help it get fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-03-22T03:19:43.480" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T03:19:43.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6860" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6857" CreationDate="2017-03-22T03:19:10.400" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it's never OK to ask a duplicate question.  Bump the old question with an edit, consider leaving a comment, or even better, place a bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the questions are not truly duplicates, then it's fine. The questions as they are asked are duplicates.  But it sounds like your real question is about costing a manual of animate object, which would not be a duplicate.  So in this case it's possible asking about your actual problem would solve a variety of issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-22T20:41:01.077" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T20:41:01.077" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6861" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6862" CreationDate="2017-03-22T08:20:13.893" Score="11" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;An experienced member's edit to an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/96819/33751&quot;&gt;answer of mine&lt;/a&gt;, placed a part of it into a quotation block. The thing is, it isn't a quotation, I paraphrased an idea from the source text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Marking something as a quotation, as I know it from academic or journalistic writing, is for word for word reproduction of a source. Paraphrased passages get a reference, but aren't formatted in any special way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it okay or even desirable to put paraphrased ideas into quotation blocks to make the formatting clearer? If not, is a somewhat lengthy quotation with omissions and added emphasis preferable to paraphrasing in running text? What's the preferred approach here?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I searched the meta and glanced over the help center, but didn't find anything beyond basic rules for quoting which didn't mention paraphrasing. Sorry, if I missed something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33751" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T14:07:29.890" Title="Paraphrasing in Quotation Blocks" Tags="|discussion|editing|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6861" CreationDate="2017-03-22T10:09:36.530" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your Spidey sense is right. You weren't quoting something, you were summarising or restating or paraphrasing a point. They were your own original words authored for that post, and quotation marks and quotation boxes are not appropriate formatting for your own words. (Except when you're quoting yourself, which you weren't doing here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quote box or quotation marks would suggest I should expect to find that text within your link, with allowance for the possible exception of edit notes such as &amp;ldquo;[&lt;em&gt;sic&lt;/em&gt;]&amp;rdquo;. This is not the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've rolled back the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-22T14:07:29.890" LastActivityDate="2017-03-22T14:07:29.890" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6863" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6864" CreationDate="2017-03-22T18:01:09.160" Score="15" ViewCount="398" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have hit the 2k-rep threshold recently, and hence my edits should now be automatically accepted without a peer review. However:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My English, though fluent, is very far from perfect. I can't edit a post written by a native speaker if I don't want to spoil it by a stupid mistake, even if I have something to add -- because my mistake will persist until someone fixes it. Sometimes I have even used edits to fix obvious mistakes and clarified in the edit summary that some more editing is needed, attracting attention of edit reviewers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sometimes I may just be wrong due to being a noob, and a peer review might fix my mistake before I mislead someone by wrong information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even though most of my edits were accepted, I just don't feel confident enough to put my edits in place without someone reviewing them. I would like my ability to edit without review revoked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2017-08-13T13:21:51.487" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T13:21:51.487" Title="Could I please have my privilege to edit without a peer review removed?" Tags="|support|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6864" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6863" CreationDate="2017-03-22T18:12:46.613" Score="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is super unlikely to happen; there's nothing in the system for revoking specific privileges from specific individuals. You have this feature now and it's going to be sticking around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basic principle: &lt;strong&gt;you shouldn't edit unless you're sure you're doing the right thing anyway.&lt;/strong&gt; The suggested edit review queues are a safety net against obvious badness or abuse of the system, but they &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; a peer-review service that ensures everything going through is also factually correct, or that the spelling/grammar is impeccable. People reviewing suggested edits may not know better than you about the post, and may take your word for it because you seem to know what you're doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I just don't feel confident enough to put my edits in place without someone reviewing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's fine. You're not. See the front page? Every time you edit something, it's going to get bumped to the top so that people can scrutinise what you've done:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3JFU.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3JFU.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;modified 17 minutes ago by doppelgreener&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The post's author will &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; scrutinise what you've done, because the author gets a notification about your edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SgHBP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SgHBP.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;answer edited&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can @-ping you about your edits if we feel the need to, and anyone including yourself can open meta questions about &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/editing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;editing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;editing&lt;/a&gt; for guidance (such as earlier today: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6861/1204&quot;&gt;Paraphrasing in Quotation Blocks&lt;/a&gt;). If you're not sure, you can check with people in chat, or just leave comments suggesting changes for the author and let them decide if and how the edit should be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're stepping over the precipice into a lot of new power and responsibility, and it can definitely be a bit scary &amp;mdash; you can now do a lot, and you alone are solely responsible for your actions! I'm really happy you're conscientious of your possible weaknesses and where your edits can go wrong, but that doesn't mean you should stop editing altogether &lt;em&gt;nor&lt;/em&gt; were the review queues necessarily going to stop that. Just be extra careful in those circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've got your back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-15T12:53:48.330" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T12:53:48.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6865" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-23T04:06:33.030" Score="3" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, the protection requirement has always seemed extremely low to me.  You can't post an answer on a protected question unless you have at least 10 rep, which is one upvote.  My default behavior, now that I can protect things, would probably just be to preemptively protect all the things all the time whenever possible-- that threshold is really low and you can only protect a question that's been answered by at least sub-ten-rep user.  But if I'm gonna go around protecting all the things ever, I want to make sure that's not a horrible idea for some reason I haven't thought of yet before doing it.  Are there situations where the system would let me protect a question but I should let it set unprotected anyways?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-18T01:37:56.097" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T01:37:56.097" Title="When should I NOT protect questions?" Tags="|support|moderation|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6866" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6865" CreationDate="2017-03-23T04:12:07.353" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should only protect questions in unusual circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite rumors to the contrary, our site likes new users. New users get rep mainly by answering questions.  If new users can't answer questions, then we won't get new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only protect questions when they have &quot;gone wrong.&quot;  Usually that's some lurid question that is bringing in loads of crap answers from new users seeing it in &quot;hot network questions&quot; or something and coming and dumping junk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than that, don't protect, and we'll quickly unprotect questions that have protection for no clear compelling reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-03-23T04:12:07.353" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6867" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6869" CreationDate="2017-03-23T10:20:50.710" Score="34" ViewCount="1513" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Note: As of September 3rd, 2021, this policy has been removed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/33569&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this policy is no longer in effect. New guidance pending.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the question does not specify a system, but an educated guess can be made, other users often edit the tags themselves without waiting for the querent to confirm the system they are interested in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this appropriate? If not, then is it OK to roll-back the edit and comment? At what point is it considered safe to make an educated guess?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Revisited in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2018: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8417&quot;&gt;Revisiting our &amp;quot;never guess the game system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2020: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2021: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/33569&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T16:43:18.027" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:43:18.027" Title="What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6865" CreationDate="2017-03-23T10:35:20.097" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your default shouldn't be to protect questions, so this isn't a matter of when you &lt;em&gt;shouldn't,&lt;/em&gt; but when you &lt;em&gt;should.&lt;/em&gt;  Consider that protection &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; just always be automatic, but it only is in certain circumstances (e.g. when a question has attracted multiple spam/offensive answers). As Mxyzplk is getting at, one of Stack Exchange's &lt;strong&gt;core values&lt;/strong&gt; is having a bar to entry as low as possible so that new people (&lt;strong&gt;including game developers!&lt;/strong&gt;) have the easiest possible time going from their first visit to answering questions — &lt;em&gt;unregistered accounts&lt;/em&gt; are even a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blog announcement &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2014/04/08/changes-and-guidelines-for-the-protected-question-status/&quot;&gt;Changes and guidelines for the Protected Question status&lt;/a&gt; lays out these guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do&lt;/strong&gt; protect questions that are attracting a lot of non-answers or very poor answers (spam, etc.) &lt;strong&gt;from new users.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don’t&lt;/strong&gt; protect questions just because they’re linked to on a high-traffic news site like Reddit or Ars Technica. While there’s certainly some correlation between sudden spikes in popularity and associated non-answers, not all popular questions suffer from this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;unprotect&lt;/em&gt; questions that aren’t currently attracting a lot of attention and don’t have a long history of unproductive answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Judicious use of this feature is critical to allowing these sites to handle large amounts of external attention, but &lt;em&gt;over-using&lt;/em&gt; it breaks the system: Stack Exchange sites depend on a constant influx of new blood, both to answer new questions and provide updated information on old ones. When in doubt, err on the side of letting new users prove themselves before locking them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This announcement also introduced some new restrictions to using the protect feature. It was previously available on any question over a day old, no matter the nature of its answers — but some communities had members which were protecting every popular question or HNQ or everything linked on any news site, and &lt;strong&gt;unnecessary protection was doing sufficient damage to our communities that the staff made feature changes to prevent it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear that in mind both that and the fact we can &lt;em&gt;unprotect&lt;/em&gt; stuff before you go clicking every &lt;kbd&gt;protect&lt;/kbd&gt; button in sight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Myself, I just protect stuff that's accumulating one of our typical spam patterns (witch doctors, vampires, magic spells, etc) because the spammers historically revisit the same questions with special keywords repeatedly and ignore all the others. I also protect questions that are attracting a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of bad attention, or highly popular questions which over several months or years have kept accumulating questions-in-answers from people who think this place works like a forum. Everything else, I leave alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-03-23T10:35:20.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6867" CreationDate="2017-03-23T12:12:01.807" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not appropriate to edit based on a guess.  Make the OP clarify the question themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why?  Because we're also trying to train new users on how to use the site.  And worst case, you bait people into bad answers when you guess wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP never bothers to come back to clarify their question - then what good are answers going to do them anyway?  Patience can be hard, but it is rewarding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone else guesses at the tag, revert or flag it and explain why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T15:32:06.593" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T15:32:06.593" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6870" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6867" CreationDate="2017-03-23T12:19:42.503" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't guess the system when editing or tagging &amp;mdash; we should make the author clarify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We could guess wrong. Lots of games and editions share similar verbiage. If we guess wrong, we're not helping the querent, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3001/1204&quot;&gt;we'll have a significant mess to clean up if/when they correct us&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes their clarification will show us a problem we weren't aware was there. Every now and then, the reason someone doesn't understand so-and-so material in their published adventure is because it's made for D&amp;amp;D 3e and they're playing D&amp;amp;D 5e (and they both just say &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot; on the title, so they never figure this out), and their incompatibility is the whole reason the querent's getting so confused. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94714/what-does-at-mean-in-dd&quot;&gt;A recent question was likely caused by this&lt;/a&gt;, but we never got clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We expect people to be clear about the game they're playing, and it's good to teach them that &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; need to do this themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, roll back and comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's only 2&amp;ndash;3 occasions in the whole time I've been here where I haven't rolled back such an edit, and they were exceptional, and on each occasion I pinged the editor in comments to suggest they do not do this in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-12-11T18:57:00.650" LastActivityDate="2019-12-11T18:57:00.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6871" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6872" CreationDate="2017-03-24T03:15:32.913" Score="3" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, when looking as an edit review for a thing I posted I noticed this line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Community has approved 545 edit suggestions and rejected 123 edit suggestions and improved 1 edit suggestion&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is referring to the Community bot account that's used to help out in various automatic ways around the site.  While I'm a little surprised that it rejects edits, I'm even more surprised that it edits and then approves them.  How can it do this and what is that 'improved edit suggestion' that it has?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-13T17:25:06.657" LastActivityDate="2022-05-13T17:25:06.657" Title="How can Community improve edit suggestions?" Tags="|discussion|editing|suggested-edits|community-bot|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6871" CreationDate="2017-03-24T04:46:28.637" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;That did strike me as odd, so I went digging in Community's review history, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/92073/revisions&quot;&gt;found the answer&lt;/a&gt;. Obvious in retrospect, but I had to see it to understand it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This can be caused by a user being deleted&lt;/strong&gt;, because all database activity of a deleted user is reassigned to Community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User A writes a post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Another user makes an edit suggestion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/92073/revisions&quot;&gt;User A approves and edits the suggestion, creating an improvement event.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Time passes and User A is deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Community inherits all post activity from the deleted User A, including the improvement event.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm surprised that's only happened once so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community. Always there to catch things we drop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-24T04:46:28.637" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6855" CreationDate="2017-03-24T06:47:31.380" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I still wish we had an 'idea generation' custom close reason.  This is yet another case where it would serve us well and where we are using 'too broad' and 'opinion based' as unhelpful and misapplied substitutes for it.  We may dislike idea generation in general because of the large number ('too broad') of taste-based (opinion) answers, but neither close reason is clearly applicable to any given specific instance and the names and associated text is patently useless to a user receiving such information in response to an idea generation question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-03-24T06:47:31.380" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6875" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1195" CreationDate="2017-03-26T21:07:23.693" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why are meta tags bad?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;These tags are a problem because people don’t realize this and will often use that as the question’s only tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hmm, doesn't seem to be a problem here.  Either A) this isn't a meta tag, and it's fine, or B) this isn't a problem, and it's fine.  Either way, it's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-03-26T21:07:23.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6876" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-03-27T21:12:23.650" Score="14" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;For some reason we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; tag. I propose that we burninate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It tells you nothing about the content of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can't be an expert on &quot;RPG books&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68478/3548&quot;&gt;exactly&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/34615/3548&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; questions that have only the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; tag, and both of those would be better served by having a tag that explicitly focuses on &lt;em&gt;acquiring&lt;/em&gt; RPG rulebooks (physical or electronic).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discussion of the tag has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3467/3548&quot;&gt;come up before&lt;/a&gt;, but it 1) was lumped in with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resources&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-resources&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-resources&lt;/a&gt;, which is &lt;em&gt;somewhat&lt;/em&gt; more defensible, 2) didn't receive a lot of attention from what I can see, and 3) happened before we decided to ban recommendation questions. For that reason I think it's worth rehashing the topic in a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T14:58:17.243" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T14:58:17.243" Title="Let's burn [books]!" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6876" CreationDate="2017-03-27T21:39:38.330" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are 73 questions currently tagged with it, and the majority seem to be correctly using the tag. It doesn't appear to be causing problems, which is one reason to burninate a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would the site benefit notably from the tag not existing? I don't see any particular benefit that would motivate a burnination, but I could be overlooking something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do see some losses though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The tag's meaning is questions about books &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;/em&gt; books. We have a substantial number of questions that are about books as objects in and of themselves, rather than their contents (where the tag shouldn't be used / should be removed). These would mostly end up with a single system tag if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; were burninated, and become indistinguishable from uncategorisable questions about a game, and unsearchable. That curated data would be lost.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's possible to be an expert in books in and of themselves. Librarians, collectors, and booksellers come to mind as common examples. Although it's a very small part of the site, our topic does include the book-collector aspect of the RPG hobby.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People interested only in book contents and RPG play can add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; to their ignore list. I can't imagine this will ever be a popular use of the tag, but it's a legitimate use.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People who are experts at locating books, how to tell book editions apart, publishing histories, and book identification, and the other subjects about books &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;/em&gt; books could favourite the tag. Again not a popular use of the tag (currently 0 people have favourited the tag), but a legitimate use.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-06T19:57:02.390" LastActivityDate="2017-04-06T19:57:02.390" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6878" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6879" CreationDate="2017-03-28T17:10:37.290" Score="8" ViewCount="298" Body="&lt;p&gt;For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/97189/31634&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, as well as a few others, I've used quotes from the SRD as a source. How should I cite those properly, to help back up my claims, and prove that I'm not pulling quotes from my bum?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T06:19:36.443" Title="How should I cite the SRD?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6878" CreationDate="2017-03-28T19:35:01.437" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I generally use a link followed by a blockquote, if the quoted text is central to the answer, or just a link if it's a less central example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to steal from your answer, I would say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://5e.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Haste&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is identical to what's in your answer, except that I made the word &quot;Haste&quot; into a hyperlink to the SRD entry you're quoting from.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if Haste were just an example, my answer might say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You should try using buff spells (e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;http://5e.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Haste&lt;/a&gt;) to help your party.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...without the blockquote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2017-03-28T19:35:01.437" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6880" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6881" CreationDate="2017-03-30T09:52:03.460" Score="1" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lately, there's some activity in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games&quot;&gt;The Back Room: Live Tabletop Games&lt;/a&gt;, which was just recently &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/35940132#35940132&quot;&gt;unfrozen&lt;/a&gt; for the purpose of catering to the good-people-of-this-stack who wanted to run or play RPGs with fellow good-people-of-this-stack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, some playtesting has been done here and there, but advertising seemed lacking- asking it in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; works but only for those who are online at that moment or who check previous messages, unless it's starred or something. It'd be nice to get a broader audience for the game or playtest I'm advertising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of months ago, a question in meta was asked about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6587/23064&quot;&gt;how to advertise games to be played with the stackizens&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that question, I think the majority of the interested parties agreed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6588/23064&quot;&gt;meta is a pretty bad medium to advertise games&lt;/a&gt;. But instead, a Looking-For-Group chat room shall be created for this purpose. So, &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; we're doing that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are some guidelines that should be followed in the LFG chatroom?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we have only one message per game advertisement? What information would be needed to advertise your game, at a minimum? (System? Player Count? Starting Level? Date and Time? are you a GM or looking for one?) Can all of that information even fit into one message? How should chatizens interested in the game voice out their interest? What other things do we need to look out for when implementing this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-03-30T10:01:20.763" LastActivityDate="2017-03-30T11:20:36.413" Title="The Looking-For-Games Chat Room" Tags="|discussion|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6880" CreationDate="2017-03-30T10:16:29.567" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen a lot of chat rooms on a lot of Stacks, and I'm sorry to say a dedicated LFG room will just freeze and die. An LFG room is only as useful as its traffic volume, and most users simply don't want another room to keep track of. A dedicated room has all the problems of the main chat PLUS fewer eyes on the material and less activity to keep it from freezing over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, ping a moderator or room owner (me!) in RPG General Chat to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/faq#star&quot;&gt;pin your (short, clear) LFG message to the star bar&lt;/a&gt;. Pinning puts a message at the top of the star bar for two weeks, getting it the maximum potential exposure this site can offer--far more than a dedicated LFG room ever could.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the content of the message to be pinned in General Chat, keep it short and sweet--then add more information in further messages afterward. People will click through to the transcript to read the details if your pinned message got them interested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can think of least a dozen games off the top of my head which were started through RPG General Chat discussion; it works. There's no need to formalise or formulise the process beyond getting the announcement (not the full details, just the pitch) pinned (again, just ping me!) if you want to make it an open call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-03-30T11:20:36.413" LastActivityDate="2017-03-30T11:20:36.413" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6882" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6884" CreationDate="2017-03-30T19:26:46.067" Score="6" ViewCount="770" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5382/whats-our-policy-with-answers-advocating-piracy-accidentally-or-not&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s our policy with answers advocating piracy (accidentally or not)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2770/links-to-dd-tools-dndtools-eu-and-similar-sites/2773#2773&quot;&gt;Links to &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Tools&amp;quot; / dndtools.eu and similar sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I posted the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97294/why-do-crawfords-tweets-seem-to-be-treated-on-par-with-the-actual-rules&quot;&gt;Why do Crawford&amp;#39;s tweets seem to be treated on par with the actual rules?&lt;/a&gt; , and got an excellent answer.  That answer, in part, addresses the disjoined nature of the books and Sage Advice/Twitter by explaining that the results of PDF ctrl+F's were the empty set.  This information is useful, directly related to the question and answer, and does not improperly provide any copyrighted information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless the answerer has attracted the comment &quot;Why do you possess pdfs of the rule books?&quot; and then a request by SSD that the answer be edited.  Namely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Hey there Artemis. We don't condone piracy here, though I am aware that certain countries don't outlaw copying of copyrighted works. For the sake of operating in polite company on a US-hosted website though, please don't casually drop mentions of how you're consulting D&amp;amp;D 5e books that many of our members and readers would consider “pirated” regardless of local laws. Could you please revise your post? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;in response to my question regarding the assumption of piracy from a US-law perspective (there are US-legal ways to have a PDF, just they are very unlikely), the following clarification was provided:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Legal PDFs are not available (barring the vanishingly unlikely case of someone hand-crafting their own PDFs from legal private scanning). Pirated PDFs are abundantly available though. As sometimes happens too, I'm also operating from some additional context not necessarily publicly available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the purposes of this question, let's assume that additional context makes it unambiguously clear that a given user, were they in the US and not somehow immune to its laws, would have committed piracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is our stance on such behavior?  Do we want to take the stance of explicitly disapproving of piracy?  Do we define piracy the same way as US law does if we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T06:19:02.247" Title="What's our stance on Piracy?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6883" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6882" CreationDate="2017-03-30T19:26:46.067" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should not punish piracy as a matter of site policy&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different countries define piracy differently, and different people have wildly varying ethical stances with regards to copyright.  While I or another user may approve or disapprove of copyright-violating behavior alluded to in a question or answer, that is a matter which can be addressed by our voting habits. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use of copyright violations in an answer &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; makes that answer worse, and most of the posts 'advocating piracy' amount to very unreliable link-only answers.  Obviously those are 'very low quality' and reasonably deleted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in the case mentioned here and presumably other future cases, the information meaningfully contributes to the site and enforcement of US copyright law, even were it to result in the user's incarceration or assassination,  would have no legal basis on which to damage the answer.  The material should thus be allowed and subject to review by the community through the normal, vote-based channels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-03-30T19:26:46.067" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6882" CreationDate="2017-03-30T19:37:07.347" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a bad look to openly talk about using pirated materials here, and so easily avoided. As a poster, one should studiously avoid it. As stewards of the site we should actively discourage it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is primarily a matter of &lt;strong&gt;who we want to attract as our audience&lt;/strong&gt;. If we wink and nod and look away from overt piracy, we signal to the large pirate community that we welcome them in their role &lt;em&gt;as pirates&lt;/em&gt; specifically. We are our audience, so that's no trivial thing. And that's not a &quot;slippery slope&quot; argument — that's a fact of how website audiences are made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Attracting the pirate community and increasing open discussion of pirated materials is not a situation that I think SE would approve of. We are here as stewards of the site. Creating a situation where Staff and Legal might need to intervene would be a failure on our part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-03-31T06:19:02.247" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T06:19:02.247" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6882" CreationDate="2017-03-31T01:02:28.823" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As usual, this is being made way more complicated than it needs to be.  As already cited,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5382/whats-our-policy-with-answers-advocating-piracy-accidentally-or-not&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s our policy with answers advocating piracy (accidentally or not)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2770/links-to-dd-tools-dndtools-eu-and-similar-sites&quot;&gt;Links to &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Tools&amp;quot; / dndtools.eu and similar sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which means RPG.SE doesn't want to be associated with illegal activity (pirating).  So we prefer not to have links to pirated content or content advocating piracy. Yes, this is illegal in most countries not just the US, and while there are a handful of non-Berne Convention countries, the bulk of the site is not from those and the site is not run there. Sometimes, it can be useful even to avoid the impression of piracy. We present RPG.SE as a civilized, SFW place suitable for professionals - to be blunt the sewers of *chan and reddit and whatnot are all there for those who want to go there.  To distinguish ourselves from them, we try to look respectable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in some cases where those two things seem to come up, we may edit or otherwise act to remove the association.  This can be done by many site members, or escalated via flags to diamond mods. Sometimes this requires judgement calls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case, was an edit needed?  Maybe. I personally probably not have done so had I happened across the question and answer with that language in it.  I might by the time there were comments starting to escalate the issue.  I for sure would by the time there was a big ol' off topic comment thread arguing about the ins and outs of PDFs and piracy in a place where that discussion doesn't belong; comments aren't for discussion.  Not &quot;comments aren't for discussion of points you don't have strong opinions about.&quot; And I for sure would by the time it gets to this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I think you're running down a pointless rabbit hole with SSD's answer about &quot;pirates,&quot; turning it into a referendum on whether pirates are bad people or not and whether they should get that bad bad discrimination. I'm not going to argue about any of that because it's pointless and irrelevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's very simple.  We remove stuff that seems to associate the site with piracy.  On the answer in question, the technical details of owning a PDF are not germane to the factual heart of the answer, so it's a poor hill to choose to die on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't mean &quot;we should start a pogrom on every mention of a pdf.&quot; But as is frequently a problem with meta questions like this, it conflates asking about the specific situation with What Shall We Do Globally About This Forever.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We try not to be associated with piracy, by direct links and direct reference but also by stuff that &quot;looks bad.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In this case it was marginal whether an edit was needed, until things escalated making it necessary for sure. SSD has the diamond because he has the experience to make judgement calls, so he made one. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nothing else. This isn't a complicated issue, don't make it one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-03-31T03:41:40.487" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T03:41:40.487" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6887" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6878" CreationDate="2017-03-31T05:58:57.477" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll assume you intend to quote directly from the WotC document and not through a website's transcription. If you give the page number that helps, but if you want to link directly to a specific page in the SRD you can add a hash #page=&lt;em&gt;num&lt;/em&gt; to your link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example if I want to reference the &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf#page=75&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD p.75&quot;&gt;Grappler&lt;/a&gt; feat that is included in the SRD I could write my link like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Grappler](http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf#page=75 &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD p.75&quot;)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then if I want to quote from it I'd use a blockquote and copy+paste. &#xA;Like so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf#page=75&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD p.75&quot;&gt;Grappler&lt;/a&gt; feat (SRD p. 75) says in part:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You    have    advantage    on    attack    rolls    against    a&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  creature    you    are    grappling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could also link the page reference if you prefer.&#xA;The Grappler feat &lt;a href=&quot;http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf#page=75&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD p.75 Feats&quot;&gt;(SRD p. 75)&lt;/a&gt; says in part:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You&#xA;  can    use    your    action    to    try    to    pin    a    creature&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  grappled    by    you.    To    do    so,    make    another    grapple&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  check.    If    you    succeed,    you    and    the    creature    are&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  both    restrained    until    the    grapple    ends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or use an inline link for more informal references.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27883" LastEditorUserId="27883" LastEditDate="2017-03-31T06:19:36.443" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T06:19:36.443" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6888" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6889" CreationDate="2017-03-31T18:23:08.837" Score="20" ViewCount="276" Body="&lt;p&gt;…And so did 43 other folks. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/14/generalist&quot;&gt;Simultaneously.&lt;/a&gt; How does that happen?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:49.553" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T19:59:03.467" Title="I just earned the Generalist badge…" Tags="|discussion|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6888" CreationDate="2017-03-31T18:30:58.280" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site itself &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/85049&quot;&gt;only just met the minimum qualifications&lt;/a&gt; to award the Generalist badge:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;One thing the badge doesn’t say, is that there must be at least 200 questions in all 40 of the top tags before this badge is awarded to anyone. ... I don’t feel you can accurately measure a generalist until the top tag list settles down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Approximately seven minutes ago a script ran and noticed that RPG.se finally reached 200 questions in all 40 of the top tags. Congratulations, us!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simultaneously, everyone who had already qualified for the badge was finally awarded it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… This is one of those badges that works &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; more as-advertised on larger sites like Stack Overflow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a point of trivia, the threshold seems to have been crossed by the “graduation” of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/movement&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;movement&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;movement&lt;/a&gt; tag. It seems to have crossed the threshold when I edited &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97379/can-i-use-lightning-lure-as-a-grappling-hook&quot;&gt;Can I use Lightning Lure as a grappling hook?&lt;/a&gt; to include the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, that seems to have put the tag to &lt;em&gt;20&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; questions, not 200, and the script didn't trigger on 200. I suspect there is an off-by-one error in the Generalist badge that actually makes it need 201 questions in the top 40 tags, rather than 200.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/293205/is-there-an-off-by-one-error-in-the-generalist-badge&quot;&gt;Apparently&lt;/a&gt; it's not a bug in the script, it's a “bug” in the original description of how it works, and &gt;200 (i.e., 201) is correct: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/67397/list-of-all-badges-with-full-descriptions/68258#68258&quot;&gt;List of all badges with full descriptions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-03-31T19:59:03.467" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6858" CreationDate="2017-04-01T19:55:33.330" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;mxyzplk's answer is generally correct, but I prefer aggressive answer deletion to closure of otherwise good questions.  I'm voting to reopen this question, and if you wanna help by voting to reopen as well and downvoting existing insufficiently supported answers en masse, that'd be cool too.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mass downvoting seems superior to both closure and forced deletion in many ways-- if we can reverse the trend in voting on insufficiently supported answers to these questions we wouldn't need to close anything just for 'attracting bad answers'-- we could protect such questions from new users who don't get it yet by using the protect feature, while the rest of the site would learn not to post such answers because they will be scored negatively.  Most of our users avoid behaviors that result in significantly negatively scored answers, as a general policy, even if those behaviors actually still generate reputation (like, if I get two upvotes and end up with an answer at -7 total, I've gained 2 rep.  Nonetheless, I'll likely delete that answer and even if I don't it's grayed out and at the bottom of the page, below even new answers, and no longer a problem). Not sure we can actually change voting trends like that, but hey, it's probably worth a try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-01T19:55:33.330" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6891" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6858" CreationDate="2017-04-03T13:14:53.633" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I did provide an answer to this question and the one thing that's really irking me about the question is the overall format we have on this site. Specifically, that the querent picks the 'right' answer without any vetting on their part. I personally feel strongly that the spell should be at least 7th level, but an answer suggesting that it's 5th level was chosen as 'right' and I don't think it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be fair, no one can know for sure without at least some playtesting and I'm not sure how we negotiate that issue. Regardless, as we cannot compel someone to playtest to ensure that it works, I'm sort of leaning towards closure of the question if for no reason other than avoiding the appearance that there is a 'right' answer when none of us have done the necessary due diligence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that necessarily all homebrew questions should be closed. As was mentioned previously, I also think that each needs to be evaluated upon its own merits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2017-04-03T13:14:53.633" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6892" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6893" CreationDate="2017-04-05T15:41:41.880" Score="2" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are three &quot;fate&quot; tags at the moment: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FAE emphasis makes sense, but distinguishing Fate Core from &quot;just Fate&quot; seems redundant:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; is supposed to be a &quot;generic&quot; Fate tag, then &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-accelerated&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-accelerated&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-accelerated&lt;/a&gt; questions should always include it. Therefore, this tag gives no unique information about the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many Fate variations are based on Fate Core. There are no &quot;just Fate&quot; rules, even the FAE is basically a hacked Fate Core.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are many questions (including FAE-related) that randomly have or have not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; tags (or both). The difference between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; doesn't seem to be clear.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shouldn't we merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2942/cross-system-fate-tag-protocol&quot;&gt;Cross-system Fate tag protocol&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-05T16:31:02.723" LastActivityDate="2017-04-05T16:31:02.723" Title="What is the difference between the [fate] and [fate-core] tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|fate|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6892" CreationDate="2017-04-05T16:11:16.033" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're a little confused on the relationship of Fate to Fate Core. This is a bit like proposing we merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Fate RPG stretches back &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_(role-playing_game_system)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;as far as 2003&lt;/a&gt;. It had an original standalone iteration, then was implemented as the foundation in many different games through the years like &lt;em&gt;Spirit of the Century&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Dresden Files RPG&lt;/em&gt;. Eventually in 2013 Evil Hat produced a definitive standalone &quot;core&quot; edition of the game, appropriately named &lt;em&gt;Fate Core&lt;/em&gt;, which consolidated various mechanical improvements that'd been developed so far in its various iterations, and made some further improvements, simplifications, and clarifications of its own. This is just one version of the Fate RPG, you see, and it's now being implemented and improved on in subsequent games, so I expect by the year 2030 we'll see a Fate Core 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, no, we shouldn't merge them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for how we're tagging these questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; are asking about issues inherent to all Fate editions. (There are no &amp;ldquo;just Fate&amp;rdquo; rules, but that doesn't prevent there from being &amp;ldquo;just Fate&amp;rdquo; issues.) Questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; are asking about issues inherent to that specific edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are two different scopes, and a question can reasonably be about just one or the other or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There might be some consistency we can work on in how we tag, but that's separate to the merge proposal presented here, and we can talk about that in a separate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-04-05T16:11:16.033" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6894" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-08T23:38:48.010" Score="3" ViewCount="216" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97710/is-there-an-official-streamlined-simplified-version-of-the-d20-system&quot;&gt;Is there an official streamlined/simplified version of the D20 system?&lt;/a&gt; was actually answerable by a yes-or-no response with some backing evidence. The OP even grants that an acceptable answer (&quot;no&quot;) was provided by a moderator in the comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, said moderator put the question on hold -- with no other votes -- as being a &quot;shopping&quot; question. Not because it's &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; a shopping question, but due to fears that it would be &lt;em&gt;turned into&lt;/em&gt; a shopping question by respondents. (&quot;But that's not what our helpful members would answer with — they would say no, and then start compiling all kinds of 'but this 3rd party variant…' material...&quot;) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a more general observation, the moderation on RPG.SE is completely out-of-line with any other forum on the SE network, being vastly more draconian than any other community in its application of the rules. Will this aggressive level of hyper-moderation continue to be the norm?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26241" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-04-09T01:42:34.253" Title="Should a question be put on hold because a moderator fears in advance that respondents will go off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2017-04-09T02:42:00.663" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6895" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-10T19:25:06.607" Score="33" ViewCount="2224" Body="&lt;p&gt;We wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels like things are going on the site. A little more than a year ago, we had a pretty lengthy discussion about site problems; it mixed in a specific debate about the [rules-as-written] tag, concerns with comment deletion, concerns with question closure, concerns with downvotes without comments, concerns with toxicity in chat, concerns with posts getting edited... Basically a wide ranging set of things that had ended up all bubbling up together at one time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of that, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6141/140&quot;&gt;we took some guidance we thought would be constructive&lt;/a&gt; and worked with the community to implement it. It's been a year, and it seems to me like the site's going pretty well.  New users are up (the rate of new user addition's been going up dramatically since November). Page views have nearly doubled year over year. Visitors and active user stats continue strong growth along the line they've been following since 2014 (+50% YOY).  But also, we've seen much less in terms of flame-wars on the site/in chat, and subjectively from the moderator point of view it's seemed like a much more constructive and less contentious than in some of the past.  We'd like to share our thoughts, and also get yours on what is going well and what could improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how I'd like to run this specific Q&amp;amp;A so that we can get good value out of it. I'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things we think still need improvement. Please do the same. Try to post one kind of thing per answer, so that when people upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not it's more clearly actionable - if you write an essay about 4 different things, it's not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, Be Nice applies to meta as well as the main site. You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote based on your agreement.  Let's not have long comment threads - if you disagree with an answer, post your own answer.  This isn't just being pedantic - if we have a 30-comment thread on an answer, what does that tell us we need to do? Mostly it tells us whether one person is really irritated instead of whether a large part of the community disagrees, which is what we kinda want to get to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here we go - my thoughts on things that are going well or need improvement, feel free and add on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-04-30T01:10:11.507" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T01:29:41.277" Title="How is the community doing? [2017]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="27" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2018-04-26T03:54:59.233" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T19:25:06.607" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We've seen the community step up their role in moderation much more (good IMO).&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the key takeaways I had from the debate early last year was that people thought mods were acting &quot;too much&quot; instead of just handling exceptions.  But discussion revealed we felt like we had to act because the community wasn't doing so themselves (flagging comments, closing questions, editing, etc.).  The community said, and I paraphrase, &quot;well we feel like we don't need to do it because you guys are.&quot; A vicious circle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, while we didn't accept some of the more dramatic proposed solutions like &quot;mods shouldn't close-vote any more,&quot; we tried to step back and let the community act more and act first.  Specific leaders stepped up and then the rest of the community did too, and the results I've seen are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chat is much more civil&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most questions that need revamp are closed/edited/reopened by the community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most problematic comments/comment threads are flagged by the community - it's now rare that I go to a question and see a big 10-comment argument that hasn't been flagged already, in fact it surprises me now when it happens. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Great job to the community and it's resulted in a big improvement to the site's tone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T15:41:37.393" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T15:41:37.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6897" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T19:27:05.820" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We're going to have another mod election ASAP.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, other commitments have caused @waxeagle to not spend much time with us.  So we've asked for a mod election to backfill his position.  Given the changes, the site's not too much work per se for @SevenSidedDie and I, but having a diversity of viewpoints is always desirable.  So look for an announcement of that soon. We'd love for the folks who have been doing great work curating our community to run!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The April 2017 election &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3&quot;&gt;is now underway&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T17:19:43.920" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T17:19:43.920" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T19:35:19.933" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We still have some contentiousness around putting answers on hold.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We get many new users who ask multiple questions in one question, or are unclear, or don't say what game they're talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general the community's doing a great job of putting these on hold, getting clarification, and reopening once they're good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where I see this going off the rails, though, is there are people - who are motivated by wanting to help the user - that do a couple things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They answer too fast when the question is obviously going to be closed&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They object about questions being put on hold&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They edit the question dramatically without input from the OP to try to get them on topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be fine, kinda, but then it leads to conflict with the other people trying to work the questions according to site policy, and then people get heated and start to violate Be Nice. Over the last year we've had to issue a couple warnings and suspensions when discussion over a closed question went from 0 to inappropriate between site users in a short amount of time, and we hate having to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I see, all the questions that should be open have gotten reopened after their workshopping - the only ones that remain closed are the ones that are off topic or the OP never came back to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the solution here is &quot;trust the process&quot; - getting put on hold and clarified, IMO, isn't what is driving off users.  Fights amongst the locals on their first question, that drives off users.  If a question is unclear, let it close, work with the OP to engage them and get it worked up and then reopen it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T15:40:18.550" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T15:40:18.550" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T19:40:45.840" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We weathered a hostile user/sockpuppet attack very well.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing of note is that during this year we had a specific new user who quickly went off the rails, and then decided to create sockpuppets to continue to cause problems. It's hard to find socks once someone starts to put effort into it, so that person's still on the site.  It was our first time on the site to really have a persistent adversary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, the disruption was limited by virtue of the community doing the right things and not rising to the bait, both initially and then in the long run.  That user then seems to have given up being disruptive because it's just not fun here. Bad comments get flagged and deleted, hostile posts get edited, yelling on meta gets downvoted by all the site users that know how to behave. While he/she did get some peoples' goat, they chilled and let the process work instead of taking up their part in a conflict.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we mods were the &quot;tip of the spear&quot; in responding to this when it happened, I believe it's just the community doing its thing that really brought the problem to a close. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T19:40:45.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:02:48.167" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comment deletion levels are appropriate, even though it still upsets some users.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, feel free to submit your own alternate answer... But I believe, and have seen other site members say, that our policy of deleting comments per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted?rq=1&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; continues to make the site strong. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Answers in comments&lt;/a&gt; circumvent the basic theory of the site, off topic comments hide the quality content in our answers, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that in general this works.  Much of our comment deletion is flag-driven so I think others agree; they don't want arguments and clever quips getting in the way of the information either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some folks disagree.  They want to discuss more.  Or they had a good comment get deleted once - this happens. But comment deletion is routine and daily, and &quot;I had a comment deleted once in '14 I liked and now I hold a grudge about it&quot; overlooks the vast overall benefit to the site. Or people are concerned that &quot;other SE/site X doesn't do it this way&quot; - well, we're our own site and we have the freedom to implement SE best practices in the way that works best for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while comment deletion a isn't perfect process, I believe it's currently at a level that reflects the majority view.  You hate your joke going away, but it's less cruft for the other 5000 people hitting the site that day. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But how to make it less upsetting to folks that don't like it?  We've tried linking metas, we've tried doing it with explanation and without explanation. The one thing I think has helped the experience is we do move long threads to chat instead of just deleting them now that we have that functionality, and that's helped some I believe, balancing in-context discussion with brevity - some users even have initiated those on their own, which is boss.  I think more setting up chat when discussion starts is the best answer to balance the site hygiene with the desire for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T19:41:16.933" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T19:41:16.933" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6901" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:09:43.580" Score="23" ViewCount="594" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange is scheduled for an election &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3&quot;&gt;next week, April 17th&lt;/a&gt;.In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&amp;amp;A with the candidates.  This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6973/2017-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how it'll work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Until the nomination phase, (so, until Monday, April 17th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post &lt;em&gt;one question per answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of &lt;code&gt;[text](link)&lt;/code&gt;, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at current.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select &lt;strong&gt;up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community&lt;/strong&gt; provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. That said, if I have concerns about any questions in this fashion, I will be sure to point this out in comments before the decision making time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, containing 10 questions in total.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="1036" LastEditDate="2017-04-17T20:04:06.577" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T20:04:06.577" Title="2017 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="17" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:09:43.580" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&amp;amp;A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, what do moderators do? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:09:43.580" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:16:02.167" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:16:02.167" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6904" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:51:47.413" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:51:47.413" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:54:44.643" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What presence, if any, do you have, or would plan to have if you became a moderator, on the main Meta? Would you be willing and able to help RPG push for things there?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:54:44.643" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:55:34.413" Score="18" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Copying &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5470/4563&quot;&gt;Wibbs’s excellent question from the 2015 election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:55:34.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T20:56:17.083" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T20:56:17.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-10T21:00:19.030" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T21:00:19.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T22:12:17.497" Score="40" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have some meta process problems&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still upset about the whole &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide&quot;&gt;game-rec/tool-rec thing&lt;/a&gt;.  Since then, I feel like there have been at least a few other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6882/whats-our-stance-on-piracy&quot;&gt;failures of process&lt;/a&gt; regarding mod/community interaction on meta.  It's frustrating to me that moderation takes such a hostile stance to disagreement regarding appropriate site procedure and policy, and that you guys seem incapable of listening to loud, ignorant, angry, poorly informed users and figuring out where they are coming from and in what manner their complaints are valid.  I get that that's hard, but it's also really important to moderating well.  Sometimes I feel like the problems the mods have in listening to people who are wrong and behaving badly extend to people who are maybe not wrong, and maybe not behaving badly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, I do my best to remain reasonable and compassionate in discussion (sometimes I mess up.  That seems to be happening more frequently lately), but me and mxyzplk don't get along, I guess.  Most of the time I post something on meta I think is important, I pretty much assume that I'm going to get an insulting, patently offensive comment or answer from them.  I don't flag them anymore because at some point in the past I got the impression that that came across as insulting or something.  I wish I could talk about stuff on meta in a respectful way without having to deal with that; it's pretty annoying.  &lt;em&gt;Usually&lt;/em&gt; I can count on SSD to post something reasonable anyways, so that's nice, but it's also frustrating because (since we as a community really value our moderators and their opinions on meta issues) if I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; like what SSD is saying and think it's wrong or whatever I can't really address that well since the existence of the question as a topic has already been indicated to be offensive to another moderator and I generally try to avoid behavior that I think will agitate the moderation community (like participating in meta discussions that they don't want happening).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a serious issue, and I hope it will be resolved at some point.  I dropped out of the site at the tail-end of that game-rec stuff for like a year or something because it was frustrating and there was acrimony everywhere and continued site activity wasn't really worth it.  I'm glad things have died down, but the underlying problems are still there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T05:58:54.757" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T05:58:54.757" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T22:16:03.947" Score="42" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We aren't D&amp;amp;D5e.stackexchange.com&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yay!  We still have a hugely active 3.x and 4e community, so our that-new-thing-only issues have somewhat diminished.  We are still largely D&amp;amp;D.stack, but Fate seems to have carved out an okay market share with our users and Apocalypse World isn't doing bad either.  Overall I think we've made some small positive motion in the direction of diversity&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T22:16:03.947" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-10T22:20:02.623" Score="42" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have a high-quality site!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I go to this site for expert answers on RPGs, and it still meets my standards most of the time.  I am kinda biased towards and against certain users at this point, but new user posts are still frequently quite good and sometimes someone surprises me.  Participation in other sites similar to ours, like writing and worldbuilding, really highlights how good of a job we are doing at producing a high-quality stack.  Our questions are frequently well-asked and often well-answered, and questions like 'how does I cast wizerd spells in D&amp;amp;D' don't dominate the home page.  This isn't a change, but it's sort of the core metric I use for site health, so...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-10T22:20:02.623" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T00:52:33.700" Score="-24" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The existing moderators should resign, and let new moderators be elected.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation on RPG SE is so wildly out-of-line with any other site on the SE network that it's an ongoing blemish for SE. Aggressive moderation in questions, answers, and comments is unparalleled. A highly narrow and intrusively bureaucratic interpretation of SE guidelines is taken in contrast to all the other sites with which I am familiar. The prior Meta threads had their most-upvoted answers ignored in favor of lower-voted moderator answers. That's crazy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would challenge anyone with access to the data to compare proportional moderator activity here (including closures, deletions, and comments) to non-moderator activity, versus any other SE site. This definitely appears to be an outlier. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only way this can be improved is for the existing moderators to pass the torch to other members of the community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26241" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T00:52:33.700" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-11T04:58:04.130" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T22:39:50.803" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T22:39:50.803" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T05:24:18.373" Score="22" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We don't comment answer!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seriously, it's not even a problem anymore.  It's so nice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually it makes it hard for me to use other SE sites because increasingly the network norm seems to be for high-rep users to leave answers in the comment section on questions they think are too trivial, or bad answers on questions they think are too hard so as to avoid downvotes, and running into that so frequently after doing stuff here is jarring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Apparently, this is still an issue for the mods, who have to respond to our comment answer flags.  Hopefully, network-wide community management will improve things at some point)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T16:46:48.740" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T16:46:48.740" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6916" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T13:52:10.500" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We have been more proactive in issuing mod-messages and suspensions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This came up and I realized we hadn't mentioned this and it bears mentioning, so full disclosure...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back in the blowup last Feb, one of the things I say in my linked answer is that &quot;we've never banned anyone from the site except the spammers.&quot; After the blowup when we were seeking advice from other SE diamond mods on how we could improve, that raised some eyebrows. &quot;Well that's your problem right there.&quot; Talking with them and reviewing how we'd issued a bare handful of suspensions in 4 years of site activity, we realized that suspensions are not supposed to be some kind of &quot;nuclear option&quot; but instead are a well crafted escalating teaching tool. They let us know that we were significantly underusing that functionality and that could be contributing to the site toxicity level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's not just about &quot;the meanies.&quot; Here's the list of reasons we get from the Great SE Machine when we start a mod message as things that could lead to messages/suspensions when repeated despite warnings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;consistently low quality questions over time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;question repetition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sockpuppet upvoting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;targeted votes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;abusive to others&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;revenge downvoting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;self-destruction of useful content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;using signatures or taglines&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;excessive self-promotion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;excessive discussion in comments&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;plagiarism&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;something else...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these are about people being rude, but some are about just normal bad content behaviors that are repeated.  The more the community has to intervene in a user's content over time, the more likely fights will emerge. I think everyone could probably name a couple usernames where you had come to expect a large incoherent question every time, or the like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when issues repeat, we march down the list this functionality gives us. After it gets bad enough it's on our radar we message, then the suspension app itself suggests an escalating series of &quot;cool-off&quot; periods each time it recurs - 1 day, 3 days, 1 week, etc.  It takes a lot of work to get up to the 365 day one, but some people have managed (the sockpuppet attacker was the first). An important thing to understand is that the offenses don't have to get &quot;worse.&quot; If you come back from a 30d suspension for rudeness and say something rude, you're headed out again, it doesn't have to be &quot;super rude&quot;; if you are trying to skirt the line then clearly the learning process isn't over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some folks, it serves as an important message that &quot;look - we are serious, you can ignore comments telling you not to do that but you can't just do anything you want here.&quot; For some, it has had to ramp up till they're on a long break (still a small handful). But it does help them - and the site - to cool off by not having the disrupting behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one likes hearing about suspensions, but I wanted to be transparent about this. I believe our using these features in a way similar to other SEs (instead of largely ignoring them) has contributed to the improved climate I see here over the last year. (I'm also active on Workplace and they finally year-suspended one of their top rep users... I was sad to see him go but agreed that it needed to happen, he had been chronically insulting folks at random.) People are of course welcome to appeal &quot;unjust&quot; suspensions to the community mods, and we tell them that, but the first question is &quot;well, did you do the thing on the list they said you did?&quot; and if the answer's yes, then that appeal probably isn't going to have legs. &quot;But I like excessive commenting/being abusive to others/sockpuppeting/etc.!&quot;  &quot;Yes... I am sure you do.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact no one has noticed we've changed this means we've still been pretty light on the trigger, but the improved climate from having fewer arguments and things to argue about has been positive IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The conspiracy theorists may posit we are using this feature to &quot;stifle dissent.&quot;  Not really. If you look at the folks not around vs still around, I think you'll see our actual critics are still here whereas noob hotheads and the chronically incoherent are the ones that are gone. Certainly, if you post &quot;The mods are stupid!&quot; in comments across several main site questions, you'll be taking a nap, but same deal if you spray comments about &quot;BESW is stupid!&quot; Not nice is not nice, you know it when you see it. You have nothing to fear if you just take complaints to Meta and Be Nice. And again, suspensions can always be appealed to the community mods. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T13:52:10.500" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T14:15:33.400" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Unconstructive criticism is still posted in comments, which are then deleted&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96749/my-dm-insists-on-rolling-a-single-save-for-groups-affected-by-aoe-save-spells-h/96756#96756&quot;&gt;AoE saves being rolled once by the DM&lt;/a&gt; which was asked by LegendaryDude, I posted a response that drew a lot of ire in the comments. Not from LegendaryDude (who countered some of the negative comments), but from others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am more than happy to see these arguments get deleted afterwards. The points that were gone over in those discussions served as a good place for me to improve the answer by addressing the issue more specifically. And as far as I understand, the down-voters disagreed with my approach to the solution and I so am happy to take those down votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What irritated me greatly, however, were those comments made by high-rep users such as &quot;This answer doesn't understand math&quot; or thereabouts: something posted to bash and undermine the effort that went into the answer, without justifying the action. As far as I know, that comment only got deleted. I don't follow people closely, so I don't know if this was a once-off behavior. But I hadn't thought to flag it at the time, and now it no longer exists for me to flag. My memory may be wrong, but I believe there were more than one such style of comment posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not sure how to address this myself. There is no down-vote for comments, only flags. And I am not sure how often it happens around this stack. But I did consider leaving after I witnessed such toxicity. Thankfully I took a break and cooled my head off before nearly deleting my account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:45:48.023" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T14:15:33.400" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T14:37:17.313" Score="29" Body="&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like seeing vocal (while respectful) disagreements on Meta; I believe it's a healthy sign. I feel like I'm seeing less of that this last year and it worries me. (A little.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I worry about a lack of diversity of opinion on Meta/in Meta discussions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels--and I'm sorry, but I just can't point to a simple series of posts that create this impression--like we've heard less diversity in opinion expressed in Meta discussions this last year. I don't know whether that's good or bad, because I can't deconstruct how much this impression may be coming from (at least) the following factors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I joined at what appears to be one of the most tumultuous times in the site's history, so my lasting first impressions were of pretty-vigorous debate. (Recs, then RAW, anyone?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My own acculturation/indoctrination, such that what once appeared to me as &amp;quot;that's an interesting different POV, I'm sure glad someone took the time to write that up&amp;quot; might now look like &amp;quot;this person just doesn't get it.&amp;quot; (I'm not saying that's the &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; interpretation, just recognizing that I'm as susceptible to groupthink as anyone.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A few notable personalities &amp;quot;took a breather,&amp;quot; and that might have an outsized impact on my perception of the range of discussion. (I'm thinking of more than just KRyan who has self-identified as such in this discussion already, but don't feel it's proper to &amp;quot;out&amp;quot; anyone else by name.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Signal discrimination, as applied to the user-base: if we're doing a better job of quickly rejecting poor users, then by necessity we're probably also upping the rejection rate of &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; users. (Just the inevitable evil of any system that discriminates with imperfect criteria.) If we are inevitably rejecting some voices that might be productive and valuable at the same time as we reject more low-quality contributions, then let's recognize that as a cost as well as a benefit.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Perhaps we're just doing the good job community-moderating on mainsite that's already been mentioned in other answers, so that fewer users grow frustrated and &amp;quot;escalate&amp;quot; to meta? But it feels a little confirmation-biasey, so let's give that a hard look.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T14:37:17.313" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-11T14:45:57.150" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-11T23:30:18.757" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T23:30:18.757" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6920" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6934" CreationDate="2017-04-11T15:30:47.187" Score="7" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing&quot;&gt;How is the community doing?&lt;/a&gt; is currently &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; (as of 13 hours ago), but not showing up in the &lt;strong&gt;Featured on meta&lt;/strong&gt; section of the community sidebar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NHCOW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NHCOW.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Featured on meta: 2017 moderator election Q&amp;amp;A&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is however showing up in the hot meta posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could this be because &quot;hot meta posts&quot; overrides &quot;featured&quot;? I feel like that shouldn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T20:54:35.990" Title="A Featured meta question isn't showing up as &quot;Featured on meta&quot;" Tags="|bug|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-11T15:37:12.253" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What presence do you have on our site's Meta and on the core &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; (if any)? Do you feel your behaviour on one or both would change once becoming a moderator, and if so how?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T12:14:58.210" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T15:37:12.253" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T16:20:23.830" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes I wish we were less aggressive about closing questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes I'll see a question go by, and I'll say to myself: &quot;I could give a good answer to that!  I could post an answer that would be helpful to the person asking the question and to other people reading the site.  But, this question violates one of the site rules -- like, it's too broad, or it's opinion based -- so it's inevitably going to get closed.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Waxeagle wrote: &quot;...one of the best gifts we can give to a new user is a rapid close with a strong comment about what can be fixed followed by a rapid reopening.&quot;  But, in practice, when a new person posts a question and it gets closed, they tend to leave the site and we never get to answer their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm on this site because I like answering people's questions; people post questions on the site because they like getting answers. When moderation steps in and prevents questions from getting answers, it feels like that's not serving the needs of either group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I've brought this up before.  SevenSidedDie wrote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5785/i-have-a-helpful-answer-to-someones-question-but-the-question-is-held&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;The asker will come back and fix it if it's important to them. And if they don't care enough to return and fix it, it's better that it stay closed anyway.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now.  RPG.SE is a really active and healthy community compared to some others I've tried, so from a certain perspective, whatever the moderators are doing is working and we shouldn't mess with it.  And I'm not even sure what we would change to fix this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But -- well -- you asked if there was anything bothering me about the community, and this still bothers me, so I thought I'd mention it again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T16:20:23.830" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6920" CreationDate="2017-04-11T17:57:50.057" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your hypothesis seems to be correct — &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/131390/dont-show-meta-posts-that-are-also-linked-as-community-bulletins&quot;&gt;duplicates are prevented&lt;/a&gt; in the Community Bulletin space, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/130893/153219&quot;&gt;the exact precedence is deliberate but not clearly explained&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably, yes, it's just that being Hot overrides being Featured. I personally would do it the other way around, but maybe SE feels that Hotness is more significant than Featuredness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do feel like this might instead be a precedence-order bug though, so I'll leave it to a staffer to weigh in with the correct [status-*] tag response and/or an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T17:57:50.057" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6924" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-11T18:01:39.053" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;What minority tags do you frequent?  How will your election contribute to diversity on the main site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-11T18:01:39.053" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6925" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-11T23:01:09.880" Score="37" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Well-intentioned help-piles are occasionally problematic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the &lt;em&gt;mea culpa&lt;/em&gt;: I have been guilty of this as often as anyone else I've seen. Here's the problem, generally:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New user posts a poor question. Downvotes and close-votes come quickly. &lt;strong&gt;This is proper: we should close unclear or OT questions quickly, and votes are for sorting useful and not-.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of users &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; want to help... three, four, five comments come in very quickly along the lines of &quot;can you provide X, Y, and Z, I think they're the reason you might be getting downvotes&quot; and &quot;can you explain the problem you're having; as it stands this just feels like a discussion prompt.&quot; &amp;amp;c. &amp;amp;c. &amp;amp;c. &lt;strong&gt;Each individual comment is proper: they're factually correct, they're friendly and they assume good faith, and they--if understood--would help improve the post.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New user is overwhelmed. Sometimes it gets sorted out, sometimes it contributes to a &quot;this site sucks you're all a bunch of tools screw you&quot; comment, self-vandalism, and rage-quit. In the worst instances, the user's inappropriate comment gets deleted and their post-deletion gets reverted--&lt;strong&gt;both actions are proper!&lt;/strong&gt;--while they're still watching, which only exacerbates the seeming idiocy of what can only be a back-room cabal. (Never mind the fact that occasionally there's evidence of an &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; back-room cabal, as chatizens are actively discussing unfolding events in real-time.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true that the rage-quitter might not have been a good fit anyway. It's true that the one who ends up working out may never suffer any long-lasting ill will. But the mere fact that there are new users whose first impression is &quot;overwhelmed&quot; I find problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear: in the cases I'm thinking of everybody is saying correct things, saying them nicely, and is well-intentioned. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/97923/23970&quot;&gt;Here's an example&lt;/a&gt; (10K only). I cite this example only because it was easy to find--not to chastise the users featured there in any way. (So many of these end up deleted that they're hard to go back and find.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what to do? I think we need to coalesce around a norm of &lt;em&gt;patient helpfulness&lt;/em&gt;. Let me suggest some good practices:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vote (up/down, close/open) as always. This is not intended to change how the &lt;em&gt;post&lt;/em&gt; gets handled, just the &lt;em&gt;user&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're the first to comment, leave a welcoming and friendly comment, thanking them for contributing. Pick one or two of the largest issues you see &lt;em&gt;and have acted on&lt;/em&gt; (downvote, hold-vote). Don't offer the &quot;this might be why people are...&quot; comment, say &quot;I voted to hold this because....&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you don't have time to comment thusly, don't leave a briefer/terser comment. Someone will come along within five minutes and leave such a comment. We've got a really responsive citizenry. (Can a SEDE expert verify that? I wonder if it's possible to see a distribution of time between first close-vote and first comment, filtered on posts by users with under 200 or so rep?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6957#comment21405_6925&quot;&gt;Great suggestion&lt;/a&gt; from @thedarkwanderer] Be a little more-liberal with editing than you might be with an established user. With an established user it's common practice to leave a comment along the lines of &quot;I think this post would be improved by....&quot; With the brand-new user, though, we suggest you go ahead and make the edit, &lt;em&gt;and leave a comment&lt;/em&gt; along the lines of &quot;Hi $USER--it seems to me that your use of two systems' terms is confusing, so I cleaned up your post a little to just use terms from $SYSTEM-TAGGED. I hope this helps, and if I've gotten anything wrong you can just [edit] your question again or revert my edit by clicking on 'edited $TIME ago.'&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once a few comments like these are on the post... &lt;strong&gt;wait.&lt;/strong&gt; Let's see if the user's responsive before giving them a ten-item checklist they have to wade through. &quot;Uhh, okay. I'll read the tour, then this meta about one post. Then I'll edit down to one question and post another separately. Now I'm getting two streams of comments! What the what, what?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &quot;on hold&quot; terminology: avoid referring to close-votes and closure as such. After all, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/173497/311001&quot;&gt;the change was made explicitly to try and send gentler messages to new users&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it appears an experienced user is working productively, restrain the urge to chime in. Even if they say something you disagree with! In a similar vein, if one of the established users working with the new user says something you disagree with, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6957#comment21340_6925&quot;&gt;don't argue with them in comments&lt;/a&gt;. Nothing is going to sour a new user like two established users yelling at each other, drowning out their question. Either wait for the comments to die down, ping the tour-guide in chat, or wait until the post's reopened to fix minor issues of accuracy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The moment you get any flak/pushback from a new user, just step away. I, personally, have recently been trying to hold myself to a two-comment per post maximum. Trust that the system will work: if a new user engages in good faith they &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; get help in a useful way. If they're not they won't. It's not our job to directly shove them from one category to another, it's just our job to &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; the site-response that prompts their self-training.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think these all boil down to a few fundamental principles:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep your eye on the prize: getting the question &lt;em&gt;good enough&lt;/em&gt; to be on-topic/reopened. We can fix the small things later, focus on the big things while closed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Trust your fellow citizens to do a good (enough) job,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be patient.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whether this user ever comes back--whether the post ever gets one more minute of their attention--the site's better off if they leave with a neutral-to-positive impression rather than a negative one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T01:29:41.277" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T01:29:41.277" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="6926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:27:22.633" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is one of the more tightly run Stacks I've seen, and that's a &lt;em&gt;very good thing&lt;/em&gt; considering the broader context of the RPG world online&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First off -- hats off to the whole RPG.SE community for the tight ship we run here.  We augment our diamond mods &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; well, to the point where even as a 5k user, I have had to do very little work around here because we have so many folks stepping up.  (This is relative to the fact I have already cast over a thousand close votes on EE.SE in a span of 6 months -- that site has a &lt;em&gt;nuts&lt;/em&gt; close vote queue!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the helpfulness dogpile phenomenon is an issue that nitsua rightly raises in his answer here, by and large, we don't suffer from the instant-abandonment that plagues DIY.SE or the near-curmudgeonliness of significant chunks of EE.SE (granted, that's hard to avoid given the volume of LQ stuff they get coming in vs. the main answering audience they have -- I can barely work the close queue on that site due to the sheer volume of questions that are the EE.SE equivalent of someone who hasn't read the PHB asking &quot;how do I wizard in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e?&quot;).  This is an &lt;em&gt;impressive&lt;/em&gt; achievement for a Stack working a topic where truth can be hard to come by and acrimonious debate is extremely common.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking of that acrimonious debate, this is one of the few fora I've seen or even &lt;em&gt;heard of&lt;/em&gt; that has been willing to take on the tough questions regarding playstyles and playstyle conflicts, problem players and GMs, and other such meta-table matters without devolving into argument or punting questions into the bleachers.  I suspect the Q&amp;amp;A style of SE combined with the tight moderation is why we pull this off so well, and that's again something we should be proud of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="16044" LastEditDate="2017-04-12T03:47:48.140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:47:48.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:38:02.443" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;What game-design or RPG-analysis understanding do you bring to the moderation team, and how do you plan to help the community understand the complexity of the subject we deal with?  As RPers, we are all game designers, but many in the wider (online-RPG) community do not understand this very well, leading to poorly framed questions or even poor answers to questions, and a lack of understanding of extant answers or even arguments from new or modestly established users who do not understand why a problem is more complex than it looks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:38:02.443" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6928" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:48:20.643" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We do well as far as diversity of games, and are fairly good about diversity of playstyles, but we could do better in a couple regards&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do very well at representing a &lt;em&gt;broad cross-section&lt;/em&gt; of the RPG world as far as the games themselves.  Again, this is something we should be proud of, as it seems that more traditional fora specialize on only a few games (there's no point in trying to ask a Fate or Shadowrun question on GitP, for instance).  We also extend this to the games we try with each other as Stackizens -- I would have &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; been exposed to Roll for Shoes, Little Adventures, Dungeon World, or even Traveller if not for this Stack, and I know we as a Stack have tried to put other things together as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also do a fairly good job of representing playstyles -- while the fallout from the RAW debacle was quite annoying for a while, our two main 3.5e experts have stuck with the RPG.SE program as a whole and are doing &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; well there since we decided tags-for-playstyles is not for us.  (I think that's something we should decide as a generalization of the results of the RAW debacle combined with the &quot;no meta tagging&quot; rule of Stackdom as a whole, but that probably should be a whole another Meta question!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where we can improve, I feel, though, with representing and understanding playstyles is with understanding simulationist play.  We grasp narrativist, fiction-first play extremely well out here in RPG.SE-land and also have a good understanding of balance concerns in various systems, which takes us a long way to dealing with the issues most tables bring to us, whether they focus on slash-and-hack (or run-and-gun) beer-and-pretzels play, tactical warfare, high intrigue no matter the setting, or epic character arc development.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Immersion-oriented simulationist play, though, whether it be in the grittier, DM-common-sense driven OSR styles that harken back to early AD&amp;amp;D or more modern rules-as-metaphysics styles that bring us to where Rules as Written matter the most, is something we have problems with at times.  Granted, it is not an issue peculiar to us -- it is likely one of the toughest playstyles to grasp from the outside for anyone, and I, even as someone who tends toward that style of play, struggle to explain it to others.  (If someone has ideas as to how we can improve on this, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; share!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:48:20.643" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:49:49.310" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We could use a replacement for wax eagle, as he got kidnapped by a dragon ;)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, I do feel we are short diversity in our diamond mods -- not that SSD and Mxy don't do a good job on the whole, but I really feel we miss the deeper understanding someone who is rich in RPG metatheory and game design knowledge could bring to the moderation team.  (Basically, a Brian-lite -- I don't think Brian will be doing another moderation stint for a while, and we lost one of our finest metatheory minds in Bankuei from this community a while ago which saddens me greatly, but we still have a few folks about who could bring this viewpoint to the mod team if they were up for it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastEditorUserId="16044" LastEditDate="2017-04-12T11:40:08.173" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T11:40:08.173" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:51:22.100" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Meta and chat both could use some more diversity in the regulars&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that some of our subcommunities are underrepresented, both in Meta and the chat.  Right now, both fora are relatively evenly split between our Fate-folk and our traditional D&amp;amp;Ders among our regulars -- we could use some more folks from non-D&amp;amp;D trad game backgrounds, especially outside of fantasy settings.  (Are all the runners out there afraid their Mr. Johnson will catch them in Stack chat and slap them silly for it? ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:51:22.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:52:40.927" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We can't afford to loosen up on the moderation much more than our regulars have already proposed, probably &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sadly, the broader context we operate in is quite an acerbic one, and we can tell from how it spills over into our Stack.  New users come here with their fight-or-flight instincts primed from previous RPG forum experiences, expecting either to be answered no-questions-asked or heckled and argued with.  This makes our new user moderation &lt;em&gt;far&lt;/em&gt; more delicate a task than it is on other Stacks.  Aviation, for instance, is able to get away with a somewhat looser moderation style because of the surrounding culture it lives in; namely one largely of professionalism and precision, mainly out of necessity, and even with new users from outside the surrounding culture, the workshopping process flows far more smoothly there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While avoiding dogpiling will definitely help in defusing the instincts of new users who would otherwise treat a help dogpile as an attack on their question or, worse yet, as a personal attack, this may be the biggest problem we have to work out how to defuse if we want to make RPG.SE more attractive to new users.  In a way, this is a clash between online-RPG-forum argument culture, where dominance is established through argument over matters of opinion and a new user's only hope to gain respect is to argue their way into the community, and Stackizen culture, which is largely a self-critical, professional culture similar to that which surrounds say Aviation.SE.  (Even traditional fora covering aviation are largely recognizable as &lt;em&gt;reasonable discussion&lt;/em&gt; from what I can tell from the threads I've read, whereas fora in the RPG space become almost bewildering in the tone and forcefulness of their arguments -- they're applying the kind of stern tone I reserve on DIY or EE for &quot;you are trying to do something &lt;em&gt;horribly dangerous to life and limb&lt;/em&gt;&quot; to something that is purely a matter of &lt;em&gt;fun&lt;/em&gt;, and worse.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:52:40.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T03:54:11.893" Score="-9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We are a shining star in the dark, and that's a good thing, but being a beacon in the darkness is not enough in the wider online-RPG world&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I leave you with a question: how can we apply the lessons of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://code7700.com/preaccident_investigator.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;pre-accident investigator (note, linked video is 45mins long)&lt;/a&gt; to what ails the online-RPG culture as a whole?  How can we bring even a few of the lessons we have learned here on this Stack about supporting multiple, widely-separated playstyles and radically different systems side-by-side, tackling tough metatheory and game design issues in an accessible way, and understanding the root causes of common table-botches to other RPG communities?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16044" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T03:54:11.893" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-12T19:14:26.997" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;For D&amp;amp;D 5e's release RPG.SE was able to organize a drive for questions and have a raffle contest (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4753/rpg-stack-exchange-dd-5th-edition-contest-dungeon-masters-guide-edition&quot;&gt;RPG Stack Exchange D&amp;amp;D 5th Edition Contest - Dungeon Master&amp;#39;s Guide Edition&lt;/a&gt;)  to give away books to help encourage and reward the community. I believe this was a major boon and helped the site cement itself as THE online resource after the official D&amp;amp;D articles (and Jeremey Crawford's twitter) to ask and find answers on the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How would you help to cultivate similar events to strengthen and promote the site? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T19:14:26.997" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6934" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6920" CreationDate="2017-04-12T20:54:35.990" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems to be fixed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5pywI.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5pywI.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of the front page&amp;#39;s meta box, in which both &amp;quot;How is the community doing?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;2017 Moderator Election Q&amp;amp;A&amp;quot; are in the &amp;quot;Featured on Meta&amp;quot; section and only &amp;quot;I just earned the Generalist badge...&amp;quot; is in the &amp;quot;Hot Meta Posts&amp;quot; section.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; tag was added to the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/6895/3&quot;&gt;more than six hours after the post was created&lt;/a&gt;, I speculate that the front page just took a while to notice the change and update itself accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T20:54:35.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6935" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-12T21:25:51.733" Score="22" Body="&lt;h2&gt;From the perspective of an outsider who wasn't around for most of the context, there's some anomalously combative mod behavior.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, disclaimers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is a great, useful site, and I've upvoted other answers that say so.  I'm writing this answer not because it's the primary answer I have to &quot;how are we doing,&quot; but because it's the only thing I have to say that isn't already expressed in another answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I used the word &quot;anomalously&quot; in my header because the concerns I'm addressing here are &lt;em&gt;anomalies&lt;/em&gt;.  This isn't &quot;this mod is generally a jerk.&quot;  It's &quot;this mod is normally totally fine, but specific triggers and topics seem to cause them to suddenly act like a jerk, and they seem to have limited awareness of this.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the comments to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6910#6910&quot;&gt;the dark wanderer's answer&lt;/a&gt;, @mxyzplk mentions that specific examples would be helpful.  The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6895/30299&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; specifically discourages long comment chains, so I'm adding some as a separate answer rather than adding to the (already rather long) comment thread on that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific examples @mxyzplk is looking for are right in the question that @the dark wanderer linked in their answer.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide&quot;&gt;Both&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6882/whats-our-stance-on-piracy&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; have answers from them that received a decent amount of downvoting and pushback.  The first characterizes the asker's behavior as &quot;offensive,&quot; while the second says &quot;this is being made way more complicated than it needs to be&quot; and features a comment that &quot;I'm very much not happy about how this conversation has gone so far.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is characterized by @BESW in that comment thread as &quot;brusqueness,&quot; but it doesn't really look like brusqueness.  Brusqueness is a no-nonsense answer to the question, without this kind of additional editorializing.  These answer look more like grumpiness-bordering-on-flaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the thing is - both questions have other answers that a) say basically the same thing, and b) aren't grumpy.  So it's not like this is impossible!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am certain (both because I understand at least a little about how online communities work, and because I've read some of the old meta discussions) that this isn't just random acts of grumpiness - it has context, history, and reasons behind it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But from an outsider's perspective, it's weird and off-putting, and not to put too fine a point on it, it kind of seems like it always centers around @mxyzplk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if I may offer a piece of gentle advice:  mxyzplk, when somebody you don't like (possibly for good reason!) posts a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take a deep breath.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Write your answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take another deep breath.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Read over your answer and remove the grumpy bits, even if you think they're justified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you can't bring yourself to do (4), refrain from answering.  SSD seems to be excellent at addressing these sorts of things with more equanimity, and no doubt picking up a third mod (as discussed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897/30299&quot;&gt;elsewhere&lt;/a&gt;) will also help make it more of an option for you to just not answer some questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Obviously this applies only to writing public content for the site.  You're allowed to be grumpy when you're writing, say, suspension messages; I have no reason to believe you have behaved inappropriately in the context of mod actions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For newcomers like me, I suspect this will cause this community to seem more like an entirely functional community, and a little less like a mostly functional community with a distressing amount of drama lurking just below the surface.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2017-04-12T21:25:51.733" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-13T03:03:25.820" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the last year or so, we've seen some direct and harsh criticism of some moderator choices. I've also seen moderators lament their own heavy hands. For example, they can't vote to open or close a question like a non-mod, they can only force it open/closed. So, I'd like to steal KRyan's question and ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T03:03:25.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-13T03:53:49.860" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the single biggest problem that the site faces? As a moderator, what would you do to help fix it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8256/81002&quot;&gt;Stolen&lt;/a&gt; from the 2014 Arqade mod questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T03:53:49.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-13T03:56:17.133" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8277/81002&quot;&gt;Stolen&lt;/a&gt; from the 2014 Arqade mod election questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T03:56:17.133" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6939" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-13T13:11:10.707" Score="12" ViewCount="200" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97975/why-is-the-word-r%C3%B6tschreck-spelled-with-an-umlaut&quot;&gt;Why is the word &amp;quot;R&amp;#246;tschreck&amp;quot; spelled with an Umlaut?&lt;/a&gt; was temporarily closed with the reason that it is 'drawing primarily &lt;strong&gt;speculation&lt;/strong&gt;/opinion' (emphasis mine).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to point out that there is a difference between speculative answers that propose a theory based on facts and ones of opinion and that the close flag is stated to be for opinion not speculation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert&#xA;  experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost&#xA;  entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific&#xA;  expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current set of answers are speculative but it feels like this question has been pre-emptively closed by a moderator without allowing the rest of the community a chance to consider whether or not it is opinion based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we have some clarity on whether opinion based is meant to be a catch all close reason or not and whether or not we are allowing speculative answers based on deduction or extrapolation please? because there's not much point in participating in a Q&amp;amp;A site if all we can do is cut and paste sections from the rulebooks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user28291" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T15:28:01.147" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T19:33:34.877" Title="Should questions be closed because there are speculative answers?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closing-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6940" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-13T13:21:27.527" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I feel that the site is overly strict and doesn't represent the RPG community as a whole, over emphasises the rules-lawyering aspect of it, and doesn't match the expectations you get from working with other SE sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate that the RPG community does have a fairly hefty history of flame wars and that there's no point in letting it erupt here but at the same time I wouldn't consider recommending this site as a resource for someone in need of an answer because there's so little room for leeway in the process of asking a question. If a newbie gets it wrong first time they are often repulsed by the swift and firm response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just wish things could be 10% more mellow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum - I was checking on mxyzplk and 7sided's activity profiles and noticed that both are nearly identical in terms of what they are interested in, mostly pathfinder/dnd and gm-technique. Although that's probably representative of the whole community it does leave us with a very narrow field of focus within our mod crew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to see things approached from different angles other than the mechanistic approach of D20 systems, it feels that such an approach does not do well when moderating storytelling type systems where the rules are more 'bendy'. Players primarily from systems like WoD will have quite different expectations than those primarily D20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user28291" LastEditorDisplayName="user28291" LastEditDate="2017-04-24T14:10:30.643" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T14:10:30.643" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6941" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-13T14:50:59.600" Score="4" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;While reading the answers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97975/why-is-the-word-r%C3%B6tschreck-spelled-with-an-umlaut&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I noticed this &lt;em&gt;thing&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nPAlE.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nPAlE.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to propose one of these &lt;em&gt;things&lt;/em&gt; on another stack I am active on. However, I'm not sure what the terminology is (what do I call it?) or how it works (does it appear through votes by the community or does a mod apply it?).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The CSS refers to it as a &quot;post notice&quot; - something which I have never before heard of on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So ... what is it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16058" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T14:50:59.600" Title="What is this thing?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2017-04-13T15:09:05.463" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6942" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6939" CreationDate="2017-04-13T15:43:33.323" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Generally: yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer the general question, yes, a question that is drawing speculation gets put on hold. There's something wrong with the question if that's happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is because speculation = opinion. This isn't unprecedented: when questions are drawing &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; opinions, that indicates that (for whatever reason), there is something wrong with the question's formulation such that those are the answers that it is drawing. The trigger for using the &lt;strong&gt;primarily-opinion based&lt;/strong&gt; close reason is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question that has only answers that are “almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise” is irrefutable evidence that that is the kind of answer it will tend to have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Specifically for that question: it's not clear what's going on with the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difficulty with this question appears to be a slightly complicated intersection of a few issues. It's asking a primarily language-based question, but it's also asking “why”. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68778&quot;&gt;precedent for questions about how to pronounce game terms and names&lt;/a&gt;, but we have no precedents for questions asking why a game term is linguistically formed the way it is. We have a precedent of closing questions that ask “why” a game detail is the way it is, unless asking specifically for the designers' &lt;em&gt;reasons&lt;/em&gt; why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I held that question, that followed this reasoning process:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't held because people were constructively reasoning about language. That kind of logical construction is pretty commonplace here in answers. However, there's the problem that &lt;em&gt;how languages work&lt;/em&gt; is off topic — &lt;strong&gt;if how German words are constructed is what the question is asking, it's on the wrong site.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One point on the side for “leave open”, one point on the side for “hold”. &lt;em&gt;(I don't actually use a discrete points-based system when making these decisions, but it's useful illustration right here.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's more to the question. It's asking “why” the word was chosen. This can be either a request for why it's that way in terms of how German works (off topic) or why the game term was chosen (on topic). However, historically a question about why a game detail was chosen will draw answers based on guesses, rather than facts and expertise, &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; it explicitly asks for designer statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus, it's &lt;strong&gt;unclear&lt;/strong&gt; whether the question is asking how German works or whether the question is asking why the designers did what they did, which is a hold reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One point for “hold” from being unclear, &amp;frac12; point for “hold” for possibly &#xA;being about how German works (off topic), &amp;frac12; point for “hold” for possibly asking a “why” design question without being explicit.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That's two hold reasons checked off, with a very little bit of uncertainty (precedent for asking how to pronounce game terms being OK) on the other end of the scale.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Which hold to choose — primarily opinion-based or unclear? I was already charitably assuming the question &lt;em&gt;wasn't&lt;/em&gt; off-topic. I assumed that the first part of the question (“Why is Rötschreck spelled as it is then?”) wasn't merely about how German words are formed – I assumed it was topical, and so the “why” must be about why the designers chose the word, just failing to clearly indicate that to prevent guessing answers. With that assumption, I saw the answers as guessing at this topic point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“They chose a heavy metal umlaut because Rule of Cool!” &amp;times;1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“No, they derived it from a declension of &lt;em&gt;rot&lt;/em&gt; that is spell with a &lt;em&gt;ö&lt;/em&gt; because of their grasp of authentic German!” &amp;times;2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All answers claim to know why the designers spelled it this way, but do not support the claims. Looking back to the question it seemed obvious that this failure was because, the way it is worded, the question can be validly answered with speculation rather than requiring evidence. That motivated choosing the original close reason of “primarily-opinion based”. I put the question on hold without any further hesitation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(This assume-it's-topical view was just the lens through which I was already evaluating the question and its answers, so it was closer to instant than this unpacked retelling of this step suggests.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Now&lt;/strong&gt;, the problem is that the question is currently still unclear on whether it's even on topic or what its topic is. Pronunciation? That's fine, that's on topic. That appears to be why it was voted un-held. But this is the problem with compound questions: that's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the only thing it's asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also asking &lt;strong&gt;“Why is Rötschreck spelled as it is then?”&lt;/strong&gt; Is that a question about how German works, as the first close-voter feared, or is that a question about why the designers made that spelling choice, as I charitably assumed? &lt;strong&gt;This &lt;em&gt;remains&lt;/em&gt; unclear.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers do nothing to resolve this problem either. On the subject of how to pronounce it (on topic), they're fine. On the subject of why it's spelled that way, the answers are primarily focused on how German works, which validates that experts perceive this as a question about how German works — &lt;strong&gt;which is off topic&lt;/strong&gt;. To the degree which they pay attention to the issue of why the designers made that spelling choice, the answers are entirely speculative, unsupported by references to designers statements — &lt;strong&gt;which is opinion&lt;/strong&gt;. Both support holding the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So right now the question has been reheld as “unclear” with a link to this post. If it's about how German works — as the first close voter worried it was — then it will remain held or it will be moved to &lt;a href=&quot;https://german.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;German.se&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; more discussion will be had about where the line between off topic language questions and on-topic pronunciation stuff is). If it's about why the designers made that spelling choice, then it will remain held until it is edited to be the different question about designer statements, instead of the current question about our opinions on “why”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T19:33:34.877" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T19:33:34.877" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-13T21:08:08.140" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a fairly new user to only RPG.SE (just a couple months), I think RPG.SE is very well maintained. The content of questions and answers are usually always great quality thanks to the mods and high-rep users. Every time I've had a question on the main site, I've always been able to find another question that helped me in the way I was needing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I've seen on the main site and meta, the mods and users are typically both very respectful. From what I see that others might perceive as &quot;strictness&quot;, I see it more for maintaining quality questions and answers that can stay relevant. In my perceptive, it's about keeping the bar high. I came for the RPG content, stayed for great community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31489" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T21:08:08.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6944" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6945" CreationDate="2017-04-13T22:16:41.410" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally, I see a question for which I don't know enough to write a good answer, but I happen to know something that I think would be useful for someone asking that question to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94633/how-to-create-a-custom-lycanthrope-in-heroforge-anew#comment218859_94633&quot;&gt;Example 1&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  Arthaban wants to know how to do something in HeroForge.  I don't know how to do the thing they want to do in HeroForge, so I can't write a good answer.  But I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know the developer of HeroForge, who probably knows the answer.  So I comment with a link to where they could get in touch with her.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98082/how-should-a-substitution-level-be-read#comment230523_98082&quot;&gt;Example 2&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;  HeyICanChan wants to know what exactly gets replaced when you take a substitution level.  I can't find satisfactory rules text that would tell us what &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; happens - but I have noticed a regularity that might help them out in ruling on these things in a way that makes sense, so I post a comment briefly mentioning it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, these smell a little bit like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments/6534#6534&quot;&gt;partial-answers-in-comments&lt;/a&gt;.  On the other hand, they're not really answers - they're just things that the question makes me think the asker would probably want to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are such comments acceptable?  If not, is there a different venue by which it would be more appropriate to communicate this kind of information?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2017-04-13T22:22:45.317" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T08:08:40.740" Title="Are comments an appropriate place for tidbits that would be bad answers, but good info for the asker to know?" Tags="|discussion|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6944" CreationDate="2017-04-13T22:57:01.723" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, these aren't acceptable. These are partial answers in comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &quot;lead&quot;, an &quot;idea&quot;, and something that starts with &quot;not an answer but...&quot; are all answers in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your options are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take the time to find out and write an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hit them up in chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Let it lie.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually #3 is the best, because usually the helpful tip isn't really that helpful.  Most of them are some variant on &quot;LMGTFY&quot;.  Your example of &quot;you could go here and contact the developer&quot; - realistically, they know that, or could with a token bit of research. But they're asking here. Everyone knows they could Google or go ask the author/designer on Twitter or go post on some other forum for thing X and ask there.  But that's not an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone with the wherewithal to actually contact the developer and find out - &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; deserve to post an answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your second example - so there's a 50% chance the lead is wrong and deceptive as to an approach, because you don't really know the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I totally know everyone throwing out &quot;tips&quot; is doing it to be helpful. I am certainly not questioning any motives.  But the fact is, these &quot;tips&quot; in comments are often a) wrong, b) pointless, and/or c) lead to comment arguments when people try to rebut them since comments don't have downvotes and their own comments like a proper answer does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, don't do it. The likelihood you have the critical piece of information some real answerer doesn't have is slight.  And by posting a piece, you disincentivize someone from writing an actual answer around that, since &quot;Well... It's there in a comment and they've already read it... I'll go spend my time somewhere else.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-13T22:57:01.723" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6944" CreationDate="2017-04-14T08:08:40.740" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You do &lt;em&gt;technically&lt;/em&gt; have a fourth option.  If you actually have a good, substantial partial-answer but can't finish it off for whatever reason, consider posting it as a community wiki answer in its incomplete form.  Community wiki answers should be rare, because we can generally answer a question without needing multiple different experts specialized in different areas, but they are there if you want to use them and posting partial answers is still officially okay.  I don't think either of the test cases you mention pass muster for that, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T08:08:40.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6939" CreationDate="2017-04-14T09:13:59.080" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, mod stuff:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The current set of answers are speculative but it feels like this question has been pre-emptively closed by a moderator without allowing the rest of the community a chance to consider whether or not it is opinion based.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem here is that you don't understand how closure works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question can be closed or opened by any 5 users in sufficiently good standing.  Closure is easier because of the way traffic works, but the system itself is fairly symmetric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, special users with special gold tag badges can close or open things with a single vote for being dupes.  Maybe someday they'll &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/230882/288652&quot;&gt;get to do it unilaterally like mods&lt;/a&gt;, but also maybe not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also additionally, black-diamond mods can open or close questions with a single vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a moderator closes your question, that doesn't mean it can't be opened again.  In this case someone VTCed your question, left a reason, and we disagreed with that reason so we reopened it.  That's fine behavior.  The fact that the person who thought your question should be closed was a mod is irrelevant.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order for SSD to be '[not] allowing the rest of the community a chance to consider whether or not it is opinion based' he'd have to do something like post a comment saying &quot;don't reopen this question because we've decided so cause INCOHERENT POWER TRIP&quot; or something.  That's not something that's ever going to happen because, unlike certain other democratic processes, we only elect people competent enough to understand the very basics of the powers of the office they've been given.  If the mods wanted to close a question without community review they wouldn't cast a close vote: they'd delete it.  Or lock the post.  Or any number of other things that regular users can't just override if they disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a problem, no malfeasance occurred, and the assumption of malfeasance was overly uncharitable. Having less power in a system than someone else can be frustrating, but that doesn't make it okay to be mean to people.  Remember mods are people too. This is especially directed at the people posting uncharitable and inappropriate things in the comments on SSDs answer.  The OP's post is misguided and belies frustration/upsetness at perceived failings in the system, but is not unacceptably uncharitable, at least by my reading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Actual question time&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speculation is kind of a bad word.  In modern times it specifically refers to &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; reasoning, so answers that are 'speculation' are automatically bad by definition.  It's true that speculation isn't necessarily opinion, but it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; necessarily baseless and unsubstantiated in critically important ways.  Lots of people believe that bad baseless claims and opinions are interchangeable.  I would agree with you that they are not, but that is not really relevant to whether or not speculation is okay in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our current site policy is that it is okay to close questions based on the answers they are getting rather than the question itself.  That policy is something we could change if we decided to, but that's something to discuss elsewhere (i.e. another meta) if you are so inclined. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The network's policy is that close reasons are a courtesy, and don't need to match up with the problems a question has in actuality.  This is problematic and not a good policy, but it's the way things work.  This means that if your question is closed as unclear and you edit it so that it's now clear but way too broad, we don't change the close reason to 'too broad', we just leave it closed as 'unclear'.  This means that even if 'Opinion Based' wasn't the best reason to close this it shouldn't be reopened just because it's not 'Opinion Based'-- you'd need to wait for people who think the question really should be opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, Opinion-Based &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; the wrong close reason.  The right close reason, if we agree with SSD that the question is drawing too much speculation and should be closed as a result, is &quot;This question is drawing too much speculation and should be closed as a result&quot;.  Unfortunately, we only have the following options to pick from:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;dupe&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;off topic&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;custom reason!  But as a subcategory of off-topic...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;too broad&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;opinion based&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unclear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if we've decided that 'is drawing bad answers' is the reason it needs to be closed, we have to cram that into one of those reasons.  Opinion based and too broad are the most wibbly wobbly of the reasons, and so those are the ones we (ab)use when we have to cram in a reason that, while possibly good or even site-required, isn't on the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyways, that's my take on why 'opinion-based' happened here, and why really that was probably the most appropriate reason to list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T09:13:59.080" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6948" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-14T09:41:34.323" Score="6" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;Writing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6947/14848&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; has convinced me 'is drawing too many bad answers that aren't getting dealt with properly' is a close reason we really should add to our custom close reason list. Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I remember reading another recent meta where a good question had to be closed because of this as well, and the poster was civil about it and everything.  I think it would make people feel better if we could discriminate between closures on the basis of answer quality and closures on the basis of observable question quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example time! (feel free to add more if you have any, metas preferred.  I'm trying to go newest--&gt;oldest):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6947&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6947&lt;/a&gt; (assume the question wasn't unclear anymore)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6859&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6859&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6673&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6673&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6273&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6273&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T20:17:04.257" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T20:17:04.257" Title="Should Bad Answer Attraction be a Custom Close Reason?" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6948" CreationDate="2017-04-14T12:58:44.363" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question that receives multiple bad answers shows that something in the question needs clarification or tinkering. If the question were in an answerable state, to the standards of the Q&amp;amp;A nature of the stack, then it wouldn't generate bad answers except for duplicates, unsubstantiated claims, or spam. Each of those can be dealt with by the voting system, flagging, and protecting the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, if we were to hold questions and provide a reason of &amp;quot;bad answer generation&amp;quot;, that doesn't give the querent any feedback on how they can update their question to get it open again. So then we have to have a long discussion in chat/comments about the direction that the querent needs to take their update, which will likely end up being one of the standard hold reasons: too broad, opinion based, or unclear. So it's less work and less confusing for everybody to just use those hold reasons from the beginning&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32395" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T13:08:20.023" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6948" CreationDate="2017-04-14T15:24:29.260" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two criteria being evaluated in this discussion: quality of the question, and quality of the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the sake of discussion, let's say quality can either be high or low. For this discussion, the querent is putting forth: &lt;em&gt;what if there are high quality questions that receive low quality answers?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thinking is that if a question is low quality, it will &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; attract low quality answers. Whereas, if a question attracts low quality answers, the question &lt;em&gt;must be&lt;/em&gt; low quality as well. Well... not necessarily. This doesn't always happen in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an example of a well-formed question (as decided by the community), take the following: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96863/what-level-should-this-exhaustion-causing-spell-be/96918#96918&quot;&gt;What level should this exhaustion-causing spell be?&lt;/a&gt;. While it is open &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;, it was closed twice and re-opened twice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6858/should-the-exhaustion-spell-level-question-really-be-put-on-hold&quot;&gt;meta discussion&lt;/a&gt; regarding this in which it has been expressed that this question is still too broad and opinion-based, even after the 2nd re-opening. Because of the apparent lack of great answers and visibility, a Bounty was also placed on this question by Ceribia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top answer for the linked meta discussion states the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is an example of a question being declared subjective because it's pulling subjective answers. In some other world where it didn't, it would be fine.&lt;/strong&gt; But the assumption is that if a question is pulling subjective answers there's something wrong with the question. So it gets closed to retool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems, then, that the closing of the question was because &lt;em&gt;it pulled in bad answers&lt;/em&gt;. But the quality of the question itself is not actually poor. A support of this is (1) the decision of the community to keep the question open, and (2) the similarity of that question to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77520/what-should-be-the-rarity-rating-of-this-homebrew-item&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77547/how-many-sorcery-points-should-this-homebrew-metamagic-cost&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; -- similar questions which were not closed for pulling in high quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In other words:&lt;/strong&gt; it can be shown that in reality, sometimes, a good question does get closed by no fault of the querent's, but simply because it has attracted low quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, we should be able to close questions with the reason that the answers it has pulled are of low quality, and not because of the question being of poor quality itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another answer in the linked meta discussion brings up the alternative option of aggressive answer deletion instead of closure of otherwise good questions. This can be considered as well, and while it seems like it might be controversial, it does seem like a good solution for, say, answers with very low scores due to a large amount of down votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T15:29:31.100" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T15:29:31.100" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6951" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-14T17:46:05.453" Score="8" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;While researching up some examples for my recent suggestion for a new close reason, I found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6674/14848&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.  It's pretty awesome, so I want to bounty it.  But I can't find the bounty button!  After some experimentation, it looks like it's actually just &lt;em&gt;not there&lt;/em&gt;.  I have one on the main site but not here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some different amount of rep you need for meta bounties?  Is this a bug?  Is meta rep secretly tracked differently?  What's going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="2973" LastEditDate="2017-04-17T21:20:30.993" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T21:20:30.993" Title="Can we bounty things on meta?" Tags="|support|bounty|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6952" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-14T18:34:08.113" Score="1" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought about this while answering &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98123/can-you-have-advantage-disadvantage-on-your-initiative-check&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. The question doesn't ask for a list, just for an explanation of whether or not it can happen. Several respondents list singular examples and one answer gives an incomplete list. Understanding the different ways very much is helpful, but does an incomplete list create more confusion because it 'looks' exhaustive? Is it better to overanswer incompletely or to not do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T19:06:38.037" Title="When answering a question, is it good to give a partial list of possibilities?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6951" CreationDate="2017-04-14T18:51:39.597" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a thing on meta--participation here is its own reward =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the stack-wide answer on the topic: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/77687/311001&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/77687/311001&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T18:51:39.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6951" CreationDate="2017-04-14T18:53:32.953" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Meta just &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/78264/cant-post-bounty-on-a-per-site-child-meta&quot;&gt;doesn't have the bounty feature&lt;/a&gt; at all. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75866/cant-place-a-bounty-on-meta-questions&quot;&gt;MSE is the exception&lt;/a&gt;.) The only canonical reason &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/78342/153219&quot;&gt;I have found&lt;/a&gt; is that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There is no bounty system on per-site metas because &lt;em&gt;per-site metas have no reputation system&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… but of course one then wonders why can't main site reputation be sacrificed for a bounty on meta! The sense I get is that SE just doesn't want bounties to influence the per-site child metas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth noticing too that on &lt;em&gt;main&lt;/em&gt;, bountying a question makes it Featured, while on &lt;em&gt;meta&lt;/em&gt;, Featured questions are controlled by a mod-only tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is an open feature request though: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/231215/bounty-like-feature-on-metas&quot;&gt;Bounty-like feature on metas&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T18:53:32.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6952" CreationDate="2017-04-14T18:58:36.873" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've done some partial lists. I've always felt poorly when posting them, because they never feel like a complete answer. Here's why:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Partial lists aren't clear&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A partial list leaves the impression that it may be a complete list. Upon my first look at that answer I had thought that it was meant to be a complete list or ways to gain advantage on initiative, not just Dexterity checks, and was surprised that it missed the one I included in my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Partial lists invite additions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone with additional examples can edit a list to add things to it. That can help make it exhaustive, but it can also become too long, and at that point become less useful as an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T18:58:36.873" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6956" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6952" CreationDate="2017-04-14T19:01:35.377" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a content-level decision that authors can make at their discretion. Sometimes it's helpful and enhances the answer, sometimes it's unhelpful and makes it harder to understand. It all depends on execution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, it's fine to provide full or partial lists of examples in an answer to support a general point being made. Whether that's a good idea or not will be revealed by the voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Personally&lt;/em&gt;, speaking as a post writer, I tend to avoid adding such things. I tend to stick to a minimal number of representative examples in-paragraph (and make it abundantly clear that they're just examples), which can be as few as one, because I find that adding lists to an answer when the list is just “bonus” information makes the whole post harder to evaluate and process. With the torrent of material we produce, simply getting readers to &lt;em&gt;read&lt;/em&gt; a post is part of the challenge of writing a good answer. But again, this is just my personal preference, as a writer of posts, and in writing there are few rules that can't be broken for good effect in the right circumstances!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T19:06:38.037" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T19:06:38.037" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6957" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-14T21:26:53.753" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Handling subjective questions and answers is still messy&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a popular category of question that gives community and diamond moderators some headaches: the &lt;strong&gt;advice or technique question&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These tend to be long on details, and require judgement, experience, and creative solutions to answer well. Unfortunately, they attract bucketloads of armchair advice as well. Often it's well thought-out advice, but it's unclear whether it's just made up and sounds good on paper, or actually works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We expect our answers to subjective questions to be drawn from experience, and on that point, we expect such answers to provide that experience to help the voters evaluate the answers. It's very uncommon to do so, though!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions have been with us forever. They're very popular to answer, and voting tends to be highly active. They tend to draw a number of answers into the double digits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We generally seem to like these questions.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But we're not sure how to handle them.&lt;/strong&gt; The questions themselves are sometimes closed and reopened multiple times, and often involve a lot of comments to clarify and refine the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For mods specifically, we're not sure how to handle them. Closing the question is contentious and unpopular, and is sometimes hard to firmly justify. Getting hard-nosed about Good Subjective/Bad Subjective in the answers turns out to often be a losing strategy (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6755/my-question-got-too-popular-what-should-i-do-now&quot;&gt;with some exceptions&lt;/a&gt;), involving a lot of manual intervention, custom comments, and multiple rounds of interaction with the authors — &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; the authors even respond. When they don't, our only recourse is deletion of the answer, which is a heavy intervention for something that isn't blatantly off topic. In both cases, the improvement is overwhelmingly not proportional to the effort expended – sometimes it's even non-existent. Meanwhile, this direct, manual intervention from mods is extremely disruptive, and sometimes seems to create more bad blood than it seems to create positive change. Yet, just letting these questions run wild (and they do) doesn't seem to be desirable either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have any proposal for this — I just present it as an unresolved issue I think is currently facing the site. It's not a great situation, and it has no obvious solutions. This is a type of question where our quality-control tools built into the site appear to fail us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say this is one of the larger unresolved content-based issues that is currently simmering on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only because it's currently an exemplar of the situation, showing all the spectrum of answer quality and the contentious hold voting, I provide as an example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98055/how-can-i-best-implement-a-recurring-villain-when-the-players-are-not-opposed-to&quot;&gt;How can I best implement a recurring villain when the players are not opposed to killing?&lt;/a&gt;. I was just there attempting to implement &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6464/whats-up-with-this-please-edit-to-add-citations-banner&quot;&gt;the post notice solution to the issue&lt;/a&gt;, when &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_fatigue&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;I ran out of steam and the ability to judge fairly&lt;/a&gt; halfway through (it is &lt;em&gt;exhausting&lt;/em&gt;) and removed all the comments and notices since I couldn't fairly only do &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; of them. Then I came here to write this post, which is one I had been intending to write even before that specific question was originally posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Notably, the post has &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; pending flags on it that have just been sitting there, because as mods we can see clearly it's got some issues, but resolving them is non-trivial, and we don't want to just dismiss the flags and look away.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There has been a lot of meta ink spilled regarding these questions. Some related reading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6755/my-question-got-too-popular-what-should-i-do-now&quot;&gt;My question got too popular - what should I do now?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6672/why-is-one-21-question-on-hold-when-a-similar-question-is-ok-with-53-votes&quot;&gt;Why is one +21 question On Hold when a similar question is ok with +53 votes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6464/whats-up-with-this-please-edit-to-add-citations-banner&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s up with this &amp;quot;please edit to add citations&amp;quot; banner?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-14T21:37:05.363" LastActivityDate="2017-04-14T21:37:05.363" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6951" CreationDate="2017-04-15T02:09:25.917" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;While bounties aren't really in line with the way meta works, I'm a big fan of showing appreciation for exceptional effort and I've been thinking I should do it more with exceptional meta participation as well. So here's a couple thoughts on how I might be able to do so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta's a bit more lax about comments than mainsite, so an appreciative comment is often not out of place. I shouldn't tack it onto an already bloated thread, though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Often I find active meta users on &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; as well, where an @ ping can send them an appreciative word without adding to meta comment bloat. (If you're not an elected moderator, @ pings only work in chat if the name auto-completes; if it doesn't, the target user hasn't been in that room recently enough to continue getting notifications.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T02:09:25.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6959" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6961" CreationDate="2017-04-15T06:39:47.603" Score="6" ViewCount="304" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98107/what-is-dd-saving-throws-distribution-across-attributes&quot;&gt;the distribution of saving throws for spells&lt;/a&gt;, the question was closed as &quot;too broad.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is too broad about this question? How should it be workshopped to be re-opened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T20:00:52.290" Title="Is asking about the distribution of saving throws across all books too broad for this site?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6960" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6959" CreationDate="2017-04-15T07:04:17.913" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a very specific type of question. The asker wants someone to go through books with a fine comb, cataloguing abilities. Notably, there's no expertise involved here. Just a bunch of work that the OP doesn't want to do, and is hoping someone else will do for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps more importantly, it's not a type of question we see a whole lot of. And normally, when we see them, they're in the form of a list question. For example, the 2 questions mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6438/15469&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what does all this have to do with it being closed? Well, when users see a question that they think has problems, they tend to either downvote, close vote, or both. In this case, the resemblance to a list question has, I think, influenced people towards voting to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a more general sense, this isn't a type of question we see a lot of, and while I might be wrong (someone please tell me if I am), I don't think we have an established policy towards them. So some users, myself included, aren't going to be sure what to do here, and one of the obvious reactions to a problematic question is the VTC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T07:04:17.913" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6959" CreationDate="2017-04-15T10:05:02.227" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, I always thought a balance question would not be considered too broad. As someone pointed out in the comments, all classes have&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;one of Dex, Con, and Wis and one of the remaining three&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but we can still see that Constitution falls slightly behind. As the answerer said, however, this gets balanced by other saving throws, like poison, which balances things out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The answerer provides a (paid?) source which I didn't even know about, so I'm guessing not all players in the community have access to such (official) information.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While Miniman points out that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker wants someone to go through books with a fine comb, cataloguing abilities. Notably, there's no expertise involved here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aren't most rules questions similar to this? I've asked about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95007/if-i-shape-shift-is-my-movement-reset&quot;&gt;movement speeds&lt;/a&gt;, and answered about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95743/why-choose-mass-suggestion-over-suggestion/95745#95745&quot;&gt;comparisons&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96100/why-would-i-use-scorching-ray/96101#96101&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; on highly voted questions. It is my opinion that many questions out there could could be answered by just &lt;em&gt;fine combing the books&lt;/em&gt;, but as not everyone have all the resources available out there, then we group this information here in short segmented questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, I'm honestly not sure how to improve the question. The help center shows it as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on-topic&lt;/a&gt;, and not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;undesired&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;avoid asking subjective questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe the help center should have a note on avoiding list-based questions, or questions that, despite having short answers, require a thorough analysis of a large amount of information. So basically,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoid questions whose answers rely on statistics that require a thorough analysis of a large portion of the rules&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a final note, if a question is VTC or downvoted by whatever reason, usually comments show how it can be edited and improved (e.g., split into 2 questions or something). In this case, how could it be improved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31589" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T10:05:02.227" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6963" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-15T18:57:55.060" Score="28" ViewCount="846" Body="&lt;p&gt;When we asked Stack Staff for an election to fill wax eagle's spot, we were thinking just in terms of bringing our active moderators back up to three. We didn't think about it much farther than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea of electing more than one more mod came up &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897&quot;&gt;in comments&lt;/a&gt;, and Grace Note (who's the CM taking point on our election) asked us as well if we'd thought about more than one slot for this election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We just hadn't thought about it much. So I wanted to get the temperature of the community on this: &lt;strong&gt;do we want three mods or four?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a step in information gathering rather than an Official Vote Thing, so just speak and muse freely. We want to know what you think and why so we can proceed while well-informed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of what more mods are good for, it's mostly about handling workload. Paraphrasing Grace Note, “workload” in this sense includes not just flag handling (though that's important), but also includes things like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the amount of work to be done on meta&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;depth of communication, with the community and outside it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;better coverage of timezones&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7051&quot;&gt;settled on four&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for all the input!&#xA;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7051&quot;&gt;this answer for the broad strokes reasoning&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-01T01:56:25.470" LastActivityDate="2017-05-01T01:56:25.470" Title="Do we want three moderators, or four?" Tags="|discussion|election|moderation|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6959" CreationDate="2017-04-15T20:00:52.290" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;[largely-reproducing my comments on the question itself]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It is not too broad.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At most, it generates discussion of saves across six attributes. Even if one took OP at their fullest and did an analysis of monsters' spells, that would only add a paragraph or two describing that result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's just not a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worse than a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5270/23970&quot;&gt;read the book to me question&lt;/a&gt;, it's &amp;quot;read all the books for me.&amp;quot; Since the downvote-tooltip includes &amp;quot;lack of research effort,&amp;quot; go ahead and downvote it. OP knows exactly what would be required to answer all the questions, and there's zero &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt; required, plenty of &lt;em&gt;effort&lt;/em&gt; required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T20:00:52.290" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6965" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-15T20:43:51.003" Score="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;Four could be helpful for the situation mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing#comment21210_6897&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yep, mxyzplk and I are often on the same wavelength (enough that the times we aren't can stand out), but we're also keenly aware that a mental monoculture in the mod team is undesirable for the site. I'm personally looking forward to the stable instability that is magic number 3. – SevenSidedDie♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simplifying things, we could take this as meaning that you and mxyzplk mostly share the same perspective on stuff, and this manifests to the diamond moderator team's disadvantage. If it's virtuous to have three distinct perspectives available on the moderator team, four moderators are likely to give us that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Timezone coverage would also be a benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally neither of these things are guaranteed to shake out that way: we could wind up electing 2 more US-based moderators who add to the monoculture. (That's probably unlikely though, just due to the diversity of our established user base.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have a &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; for a fourth moderator though; I'd be okay with three or four.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T20:43:51.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-15T20:49:14.630" Score="31" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think it's obvious that we need &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More than two, that is. It's obvious, because you two (@mxyzplk and @SevenSidedDie) say so. There might be other possible signs that a third was needed, I don't know. Your say-so is &lt;strong&gt;sufficient&lt;/strong&gt;, by my thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's not obvious that we need &lt;em&gt;four&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that having another perspective in the conversation will be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that having another citizen learn the moderation ropes will be good. (I believe strongly in an organization rotating through key positions not only to bring new ideas to that position, but to push those experiences to the broader community.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know how to judge whether one new mod is &amp;quot;enough&amp;quot; or whether two will be &amp;quot;necessary&amp;quot; on the above fronts. I think more &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be better, but am wary that 50% new might also be oversaturating existing mods' responsibility to both continue moderating and teach new mods the ropes. [@greener's answer, though, brings up a good point: if 3 distinct &lt;em&gt;perspectives&lt;/em&gt; is the goal, four may, in fact, be necessary to achieve that.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I think I'd be happy with one new mod &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt; if it were clear how we could request a fourth if it seemed necessary/useful.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems obvious that if you asked @GraceNote to run an election, say, six months from now for #4 that would happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would need to happen if I and a dozen other &amp;quot;regular&amp;quot; users thought a fourth was needed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-16T02:18:00.560" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-15T22:58:46.517" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm in agreement with the ideas floated thus far--it doesn't sound like we're sure there's a need for four modsworth of effort, but given the current team makeup we might need four mods if we want to be sure of three &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6969/4398&quot;&gt;diverse perspectives&lt;/a&gt; at the elected table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leads me to a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been clearly established, I think, that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6896/4398&quot;&gt;elected mods doing too much of the work the community can do causes toxic effects on the site&lt;/a&gt;. I'm worried that too many moderators with too little to do might lead to that situation happening again. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable, though; sufficient self-control on the part of the mods would obviously nip that in the bud... but it might also be kinda cruel to elect people &lt;em&gt;knowing&lt;/em&gt; we're asking them to sit on their hands. So, in the spirit of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;GS/BS&lt;/a&gt; I think it's important to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the Stack network have any &lt;em&gt;experiential learning&lt;/em&gt; about what happens if a site elects moderators in excess of its practical needs for moderator action?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-04-15T23:47:49.393" LastActivityDate="2017-04-15T23:47:49.393" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-15T23:22:35.967" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've never really needed more than three.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could have four - or five, or 20 - that's fine - I just don't think that it gains us anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why We Want One Above SSD And I&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The workload is fine with two, we just want a suitable number of perspectives and to be able to take a vacation without it all falling on one person.  Since the shift to better community moderation, however, we've done that several times without issue (waxy's been checked out for a long time, and SSD and I do have real lives and have been away for a week or two at a time without incident). It would just feel more polite not to have it just reduce to one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why Other Reasons For More Probably Don't Help Anything&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Time zone coverage is not very important IMO - have we really had problems that have gone out of control in a short time that the community hasn't been able to handle? Users can close and vote to delete and such just fine, so this is isn't a problem we've ever had. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need &quot;more perspectives&quot; because &quot;SSD and I think exactly the same.&quot; We disagree on topics and we differ on how we'd handle various incidents - you can look in meta on questions where we've both posted and there's a lot of variance. Heck, I disagree with him on the question closure in that other recent meta Q that the OP user won't behave enough to get reopened; if he ever did I'd chime in on it with a different perspective. But people that are expecting any mods to be super different will probably be disappointed.  We've had many mods over the history of the site, and the group has always been well aligned -&#xA; before I was a mod, when it was Ace and Pat and RC Conley, when it was me and Brian and CRoss, and when it was me and SSD and waxeagle. All these folks are really different people, I bet long timers could read a post from any of these 8 people and guess who it was.  But for some reason, once the kool-aid is drunk, we all end up being pretty aligned on how to run the site.  Why?  There's two factors at work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The people who are willing to run for mod, which is generally a thankless job, have a high degree of sense of responsibility and buy-in to the site in the first place. We tried to get a couple folks to run last time who didn't want the hassle. So by the time you self-nominate, you're either obviously in over your head and don't get voted for, or already have a pretty good alignment with major policy issues.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Once they're elected and get to &quot;patrol the streets&quot; for a while, the remaining happy slappy libertarian theory dries up.  Ask SSD about how his perspective changed from just being a high-rep user and becoming a mod. I'm sure he won't mind me quoting him from mod chat from a year after he got elected:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I had a pretty sharp perspective shift when I moved from loud-mouthed regular user to diamond mod; some things are just clearer from here because moderating them underlines practical concerns that were only theoretical from a user perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for those that think &quot;well certainly more mods will mean changes,&quot; and by changes you mean suddenly comments won't be deleted and questions won't be closed and site norms won't be upheld - or that those mods won't sometimes do what they think is best even when people are yelling - you'll probably be disappointed. Once a person with a sense of responsibility gets responsibility, they end up doing the responsible thing. I don't see that as a &quot;lack of diversity,&quot; it's called a helpful and constructive alignment. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why More Might Be A Problem&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, we need qualified nominees.  We had an election just a couple years ago and many of the most qualified people on the site that we specifically urged to run wouldn't.  So in the reductio ad absurdum, if we elected 5 more mods tomorrow, would some of those not really be great candidates just because we want to fill seats?  But I imagine we can find 2.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other potential downside is for those who want &quot;less mod intervention&quot; - with more mods, there's going to be more people at keyboards that will feel like they should intervene in something.  If they were just high rep users doing it, it would probably be fine, but once it's a &quot;MOD!&quot; then people get into this weird us vs them mode. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And one final one - the concept of more mods got brought up on a recent meta question in response to discussion of a kind of activity that wasted mod time. The answer to time-wasting activities is not add more mods to handle it - we're exception handlers not garbage-men. I really wouldn't want &quot;well there's more mods, so, they can handle it&quot; to be a justification for poor site behavior or hygeine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to me, there's not a huge problem with more, just not particularly any benefit, so why go for &quot;bigger government&quot; unless there's an actual need? Remember high rep users can do 95% of what we can, and do, and should...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-04-16T04:23:26.960" LastActivityDate="2017-04-16T04:23:26.960" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-15T23:47:23.743" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a lot of talk about &quot;perspectives&quot; and &quot;diversity&quot; regarding moderator composition, and I'd like to share my thoughts on the subject because it recently (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6968/4398&quot;&gt;about five minutes ago&lt;/a&gt;) became clear to me that people may be meaning VERY different things when we talk about these ideas. Here's where I'm coming from:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I think about what's valuable in &quot;a diversity of perspectives,&quot; I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think about agendas or policy opinions. Instead, I think about how a diversity of experience can help with constructive dialogue by broadening our ability to see where somebody else is coming from and understand a tangential perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historically some of our biggest dust-ups have boiled down to communication breakdowns like confusion about historical context (tool-rec) or what jargon implies (RAW). This very answer is in response to my recognising that I was probably misunderstanding how others were using terms!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both Mxy and d7 have taken visible pains to improve the clarity of the site's communication (see above &quot;this is a step in information gathering rather than an Official Vote Thing&quot;), and I don't mean to diminish their ongoing successes in any way when I say: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a third mod brings a significantly different set of communication skills and play experiences from either d7 or Mxy I think that'd be a great boon to the entire community's culture of constructive dialogue. And if it's a &lt;em&gt;communication&lt;/em&gt; monoculture that d7 meant by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6965/4398&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;, then I can see the value in a fourth mod from that perspective--though on its own I don't see that contribution being sufficient to justify opening an entire fourth mod slot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-04-16T01:49:31.827" LastActivityDate="2017-04-16T01:49:31.827" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6970" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6901" CreationDate="2017-04-16T15:18:00.603" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's a question which may seem silly at first glance, but then once you take into account the number of people who proudly proclaimed &quot;I did not vote!&quot; last election it is actually of some level of importance: Why should I vote? Not specifically why should I vote for you, but why should I vote at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally probably will vote but I'm just curious as to the answer that I'll be getting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35170" LastActivityDate="2017-04-16T15:18:00.603" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-17T01:58:37.060" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;4 is a bad number&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't like even numbers in governing bodies.  It makes ties possible, and even if 'voting' isn't a concern per se I think it negatively affects the way people talk when there's an even split.  I'd prefer 3 or 5, and 5 seems unnecessary and unreasonable.  So I think 3's good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What about better moderator accountability?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wax Eagle has been gone for kinda a long time.  I really don't like having only 2 mods.  I think it would be good to do something to have rules/guidelines for our mods to call an election sooner next time.  Gradual drop outs are gonna be, I think, the most prevalent kind of drop outs in our future and guidelines make deciding something like that easier and less punitive-feeling.  Maybe if you're gone for 30 days without telling people (i.e. the other mods) you're taking a vacation?  Idk.  Something helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T01:58:37.060" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-17T02:06:45.550" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know it feels like a pretty odd criteria but - least for us on SU, the single moderator slot apparently discouraged some people from standing cause there were one or two candidates who had a near certain chance of winning. I don't really know this community, and who would stand for mod, but its worth taking into consideration.  You may have more people standing simply cause they feel &quot;Oh, I have a chance&quot; rather than &quot;X is almost certainly going to win, what's the point&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its also worth considering more mods can be handy when &lt;em&gt;you don't know what to do&lt;/em&gt; - On the rare occasions where we need to make a tough decisions, having other active moderators means you can bounce off ideas. SU tends to have 3-4 mods active in any timezone (overlapping of course!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its also worth remembering chat's a pretty good way to communicate with users, build and tap a brain trust and generally exercise &lt;em&gt;soft&lt;/em&gt; power, and its worth considering that in a future moderator. It may not have the same weight and importance as meta but there's situations where its handy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd also say, sometimes its better to have &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; mods with lower workloads than skirting on &quot;enough&quot;. We do fine when I see 3-4 flags a day. I got grumpy when a user threw 20-30 &quot;profanity&quot; flags on old posts. Likewise, spare mods are handy when a user gets on your nerves and you want a cooler head to handle it. I once had someone get on my case, went the heck with it, and went to bed, &lt;em&gt;trusting&lt;/em&gt; that my fellow mods would handle it. And they did.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, Its &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; choice and I'm pretty much an outsider to this community, but going for the additional mod feels like a good idea, with a 2 place vote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19453" LastEditorUserId="19453" LastEditDate="2017-04-17T02:24:15.687" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T02:24:15.687" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6973" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-17T20:03:03.033" Score="15" ViewCount="1166" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&amp;amp;A thread for the candidates. Questions collected &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6901/2017-moderator-election-qa-question-collection&quot;&gt;from an earlier thread&lt;/a&gt; have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Not every question was compiled - as noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/66136145-ff6e-4448-a35a-f3e566dd8862/view-source&quot;&gt;copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes&lt;/a&gt;.Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck to all of the candidates!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6980/23110&quot;&gt;Lino Frank Ciaralli&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6981/1204&quot;&gt;Doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6983/22566&quot;&gt;Korvin Starmast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6985/23970&quot;&gt;nitsua60&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6986&quot;&gt;Erik&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6994/12456&quot;&gt;Marshall Tigerus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6998/&quot;&gt;The Dark Wanderer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6993/27327&quot;&gt;Michael&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7017/3529&quot;&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7019/33317&quot;&gt;Bryant Jackson&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T20:10:03.473" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T20:10:03.473" Title="2017 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Questionnaire" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6974" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-17T20:03:45.497" Score="4" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2017 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T20:03:45.497" Title="2017 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|moderators|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-04-17T20:03:45.497" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6975" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-17T20:19:42.030" Score="9" ViewCount="296" Body="&lt;p&gt;A moderator (and then the community) put on hold &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98184/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. Even were sufficient reopen votes garnered &lt;em&gt;again&lt;/em&gt;, based on &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/57221/discussion-on-question-by-hey-i-can-chan-in-gamings-infancy-were-pcs-expected&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; about the question and Mxyzplk's closing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98184/in-gamings-infancy-were-pcs-expected-to-distrust-mistreat-and-work-against-o#comment230830_98184&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; on the question (&quot;This question is closed because there's no real way to answer it in a manner on topic for this SE&quot;), I suspect it would be, once more, placed on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a complaint! I know my question has issues. But I &lt;em&gt;really do&lt;/em&gt; want an answer to this question: &lt;em&gt;Did the culture of role-playing gaming's early days encourage PCs to betray each other?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/57221/discussion-on-question-by-hey-i-can-chan-in-gamings-infancy-were-pcs-expected&quot;&gt;criticisms&lt;/a&gt; have been leveled at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98184/8610&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rather than drawing from a variety of verifiable (preferably published) sources like the question recommends, prior experience on the site leads to the belief that individual answers will nonetheless be of the unverifiable and one-lone-personal-anecdote variety. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Obtaining a general impression of gaming culture during that era is impossible because of a dearth of evidence. For example, gamers weren't required to take surveys and gaming groups' campaign details weren't consistently made public.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even were a monumental amount of era-appropriate evidence somehow marshaled, no amount of evidence is sufficient to paint a general picture of an era. That is, &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; answer will be wrong at its core because generalizing omits specifically different groups.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My goal isn't to refute these criticisms. My goal is to get an answer to my question. How can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98184/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; be rephrased or a new question posed so that my curiosity can be sated and &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; run afoul of the criticisms above? Or, instead, if the question just can't be asked here, what's a better venue for contacting experts about this topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T15:27:25.683" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T15:27:25.683" Title="How should I phrase my question about gaming's early days?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6976" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6977" CreationDate="2017-04-17T20:45:04.580" Score="17" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;I notice the election candidates all have &quot;candidate scores&quot;.&#xA;I don't want to be a moderator, but I do want to view my candidate score. Is there a way to view this without being a candidate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I self-nominate, will there be a way to un-self-nominate after viewing my score?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-17T21:38:14.843" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T11:02:49.150" Title="Is there a good way to view my candidate score?" Tags="|support|election|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6977" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6976" CreationDate="2017-04-17T20:57:42.137" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Data.StackExchange.com has a lot of very useful tools for doing things like this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/253781/154443&quot;&gt;This meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; has the general calculation and query, but for a specific one for RPG you can use &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/298418/candidate-score&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this query&lt;/a&gt; and all you need is your user id which can be found in your profile link (for example mine is 33161).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your score using this query would be 24 out of 40.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33161" LastEditorUserId="33161" LastEditDate="2017-04-17T21:44:14.890" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T21:44:14.890" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6978" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-17T21:10:20.513" Score="2" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;To help inform voters on the up coming election, I would like to have more information about our current Moderators on RPG SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie's question in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6914/30319&quot;&gt;2017 Moderator Election Q&amp;amp;A - Question Collection&lt;/a&gt; is what sparked this idea, as well as Lino Frank Ciaralli's nomination.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What knowledge, availability, skills, background, etc. do our current Mods have?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question is intended for SevenSidedDie &amp;amp; mxyzplk as it seems wax eagle is stepping down&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30319" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-17T21:18:51.967" Title="Information about current Moderators" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6975" CreationDate="2017-04-17T21:27:26.017" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Disclaimer:  This isn't a definitive statement on what the guidelines on this type of question are, but a statement of what I would like them to be.  Upvote/downvote agreement/disagreement accordingly, and if a mod comes along with a more definitive statement, feel free to ignore entirely.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The only change this question needs is a more prominent reminder not to answer it badly.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions are difficult to answer.  They might require extensive research, they might need to pull from hard-to-find sources, they might need answers to be pretty long in order to cover all the important stuff, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people on the stackexchange network are willing to go above and beyond to write good answers to difficult questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they come up with &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6441218/can-a-local-variables-memory-be-accessed-outside-its-scope/6445794#6445794&quot;&gt;enlightening&lt;/a&gt; extended &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11227809/why-is-it-faster-to-process-a-sorted-array-than-an-unsorted-array/11227902#11227902&quot;&gt;analogies&lt;/a&gt; that explain difficult programming problems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/86594/30299&quot;&gt;drink sangria upside-down in a bathtub&lt;/a&gt; to check if you can open a potion underwater without spilling it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they do &amp;quot;an embarrassing amount of research&amp;quot; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/105743&quot;&gt;identify a story&lt;/a&gt; based on woefully inadequate information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they comb through &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78967/which-dragon-magazine-issue-did-this-unusual-rat-like-race-appear-in/92454#92454&quot;&gt;10 years of Dragon Magazine&lt;/a&gt; looking for ratfolk.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they &lt;a href=&quot;https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/80808/can-sufficiently-finely-ground-matzo-meal-substitute-for-flour-in-leavened-bread/80836#80836&quot;&gt;bake a loaf of bread with matzo meal&lt;/a&gt; just to see if it's possible [/humblebrag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't close questions just because they're difficult to answer, or we're discouraging this kind of beyond-the-call-of-duty excellence!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; shouldn't hold ourselves to impossible-to-meet standards of evidence when answering &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/history-of-gaming/info&quot;&gt;history of gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions.  This is a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a peer-reviewed sociology journal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm curious about whether a given behavior was accepted by mainstream gaming culture at a certain point in time, I'm happy to be presented with half a dozen magazine articles, blog posts, or campaign stories written by prominent community figures that treat that behavior as normative and/or unexceptional.  I consider that to be pretty good evidence that, when those things were written, the behavior was broadly accepted (after all, the writings of prominent community figures often &lt;em&gt;shapes&lt;/em&gt; community norms).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; need to see survey data from a guaranteed-to-be-representative sample of the population of gamers from the exact year in question.  Like, obviously, if that data exists, I'd love to read about it.  But if it doesn't, we don't have to jump straight from &amp;quot;this question can't be quantitatively answered to three significant digits&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;no good answer to this question is possible.&amp;quot;  If the best info available to answer the question is what Gary Gygax and friends wrote about it, then &lt;em&gt;I would like to read that&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98184/in-gamings-infancy-were-pcs-expected-to-distrust-mistreat-and-work-against-o&quot;&gt;The question&lt;/a&gt; points out that the writings of &lt;em&gt;a single&lt;/em&gt; community figure, even a prominent one, would just be an anecdote.  This is true!  But the writings of a few &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; community figures would be useful info; we shouldn't go straight from &amp;quot;one essay is just an anecdote&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;only scientifically collected survey data from a representative sample of the population of gamers is valid information.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the specific criticisms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rather than drawing from a variety of verifiable (preferably published) sources like the question recommends, prior experience on the site leads to the belief that individual answers will nonetheless be of the unverifiable-one-lone-personal-anecdote variety.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;This question can only be answered badly&amp;quot; should be a valid close reason.  &amp;quot;This answer has attracted lots of bad answers and no good answers&amp;quot; &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be a valid close reason.  &amp;quot;Someone might answer this question badly&amp;quot; should definitely &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be a valid close reason.  If people write bad answers, we should downvote them.  If we don't give people the opportunity to write good answers to difficult questions, we're missing out on some of the best content that could otherwise be on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Obtaining a general impression of gaming culture during that era is impossible because of a dearth of evidence. For example, gamers weren't required to take surveys and gaming groups' campaign details weren't consistently made public.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even were a monumental amount of era-appropriate evidence somehow marshaled, no amount of evidence is sufficient to paint a general picture of an era. That is, any answer will be wrong at its core because generalizing omits specifically different groups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are covered above.  We're not a peer-reviewed journal.  Our standards of evidence don't need to be this high.  I would &lt;em&gt;love&lt;/em&gt; to read an essay that attempts to answer Hey I Can Chan's question drawing from a half dozen articles written by figures from gaming history.  I wouldn't treat it the same way I would treat a scientific journal article, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T16:03:07.330" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-17T21:34:28.630" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3&quot;&gt;Nomination Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I'm Lino and I want to be a moderator for this community. Find out why below!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, and Seven can attest to this, I am certainly not aligned with the moderation team. We've butted heads a few times in the past and don't actually tend to see eye to eye on many issues initially. Frankly, I think this is a good thing. Because while we don't agree initially, we're also very good at discussing the situation like mature adults and coming to a consensus. This is a skill a moderator who finds themselves frequently at odds with the moderators should have, the ability to compromise or acknowledge error. Because of this, I would bring a fresh perspective to the moderating team, but one that is tempered by the ability to cooperatively discuss an issue and come to a conclusion which appeals to everybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for similarity, the reason we are able to come to a conclusion when we have conlficting viewpoints is that we're all logical and rational people. Despite any differences, we are able to communicate using firm logic and change our position accordingly. It's this very similarity that makes the differences a strength rather than a weakness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is actually something I have to deal with in real life all the time, and thankfully, I'm actually qualified for this. Moderating on forums isn't much different from real life, except thanks to the internet shield, people are much more willing to answer questions bluntly, cutting through a lot of time in resolving the issue. The format I use is called an interests based approach. Rather than focussing on the negatives, you start with what both parties want, and discuss the overlaps in the positives. After that, the negatives don't have everybody on the defense, and compromise is much easier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the event a moderator made a decision a person or group of people don't agree with, I would learn their side, use my own judgement to formulate a response, and rather than give that response to the person, I would address the other moderator and ask why they responded the way they did. If there seems to be a personal conflict there, I'm not hesitant to point it out to try to rectify it in the future. Second to this, you can register your complain in the meta, which has occurred in the past. People are happy to patiently explain why a question was closed, why your comment was deleted, or why you received a message from a moderator (or two in my case early on.) Then you have chat rooms, where you can take a complaint to an actual discussion instead of a fight in the comments of a Q or A. Failing all else, you can always complain up the chain of command if necessary, giving a 4th potential option. Basically what I'm saying is, there's an abundance of tools at my disposal to assist a person who thinks they have been wronged, and the moderator position would expand this more fully. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would cease taking action. If a person or persons feels I personally wronged them and is angry with me, odds are they are not going to listen to me explain myself. Instead, I would much rather ask one of the other mods to address the person(s) complaints so that from the complainants end, it's a 3rd party who is unbiased addressing the problem, and to them, the source of the problem is no longer involved. I think this would be fair to them, and would be in their own best interest. I'm not infallible, and if I make a mistake and somebody is angry about it, having fresh eyes on it would help alleviate the situation. That way it can be rectified if necessary, and I could learn from it. And if I was in the right, the other mod will confirm it anyways, at which point the complainant will have a harder time convincing a 3rd mod that the other two are ganging up on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the moderation is excellent. I don't have anything in particular that I disagree with that's still outstanding. Anything I did have an issue with I addressed in the meta question about too much moderation, which has long since been resolved. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My job as a moderator isn't to arbitrate. Otherwise the job would be called arbiter. Because of this, if the community reaches a consensus, my personal opinion on the outcome is irrelevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for issues that fail to reach a consensus, that's a little vague. Since these are going to be exceptionally rare, they're also going to be unique issues. They could be resolved a matter of different ways, but without an actual example, the best I can offer is: Analysis, Evaluation, Deliberation and Conclusion. Whether these steps will involve anybody outside the moderation team is going to be highly situation dependent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know much about the code used to format here. I just haven't sat down and tinkered with it enough to be fully fluent in it. However I'm also a very fast learner. When I don't know how to do something, I go to a post where it's already been done, click Edit, and see how to do what I want. Then I lock that information away in my brain and move on to the next issue. That's about all I'm worried about, and I'd be happy to have somebody help me out with that when I'm constructing an involved Question or Answer that requires multiple links, quotes, and images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for what I'm looking forward to: To be blunt, nothing. I'm volunteering to spend extra time doing work for which I'm not paid. I don't think anybody gets up and says, &quot;YES! I have a bunch of unappreciated and unpaid work to do today!&quot; No, to me it's my way of giving back to a community that I love.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same thing I would do to defuse arguments with users of any standing. Your rep number means less than nothing to me. The users will be addressed systematically. First with a reminder in comments. Then with a second reminder, asking them to take it to chat. Then an email. Then a discussion in a chat room with me and the other mods. And then, if they just won't stop, temporary suspensions. Should it require more than that, I would be extremely shocked. They're members in good standing, as the question stated, so for this to persist doesn't seem realistic to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;LOL. My answer to number 6 already addressed this. I want to do this job to help a community which I love. Somebody has to do it, and I know I would do it well, so I am volunteering. I am very patient, and very friendly. As for dealing with the worst the net has to offer, I've dealt with flat-Earthers who can accept we have cameras and electronics, but won't believe a live video feed from the space station. Do your worst internet, I've already dealt with the Balrog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How DID you deal with me Seven? :) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would discuss the format of the site more in depth with the user, pointing them at good questions and good answers, and illustrating why they're good and what the comments are for. If the user still isn't understanding, I'll explain a different way. Ultimately, the end goal is to have quality Q and A, with as little moderation as possible. If absolutely necessary, I'll start instructing the user to self moderate. Every flag I get, they'll get a message from me telling them to fix it. I don't mind passing the buck to the responsible party to get a point across.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question seems like a legendary rare level of occurrence. The community handles open and close votes, so for a moderator to step in and do it themselves seems to be a little extreme. I've only seen it a handful of times over a year, and those closures were usually because the user had been banned prior and had just made a new account to start another fight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But let's say the hypothetical above happened, the answer, as always, is that I would discuss it with them. If we can't agree as a moderation team, that's grounds alone for the community to be deciding vote (in my opinion). Let's say there's four moderators and 2 of us say Open, and the other 2 say Close. I would motion that we let the community have the invisible 5th vote, and leave it to the community to decide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record, I don't think this would ever happen. It just doesn't seem like a plausible premise in this particular format. It would be like asking, &quot;What would you do if another moderator deleted the answer to a question which had 400 upvotes just because they didn't like it?&quot; Sure it's POSSIBLE somebody might do something like that, but then the question should be: What would you do if another moderator decided to actively abuse their power?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that case the answer is simple: I'd discuss it with the other moderator, including evidence, and staff it up the chain for review and action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it for me folks. Vote as you will, and thank you for taking the time to read this through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23110" LastEditorUserId="23110" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T18:08:46.177" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T18:08:46.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-17T23:31:28.843" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Doppelgreener&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98275&quot;&gt;Nomination link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know the moderator team and I don't see eye to eye on everything. During the issues surrounding the game recommendations ban, I gave enough of my 2 cents of disagreement that it could've been exchanged for bank notes. The diamond mod team's original &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6074/1204&quot;&gt;rules as written proposal&lt;/a&gt; wasn't received well, and I was able to make multiple responses with a counter-proposal which people supported pretty strongly. (SSD later &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/&quot;&gt;proposed a way of handling the tag which I think is working well for us&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; that's not on the back of what I did, but I feel I'd be doing SSD a disfavour not acknowledging that success in this context.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems I'm pretty good at understanding where people are coming from, even if they are having trouble expressing it themselves. (It's part of what got me editing so much on here.) I think that contributed to my successful responses to the RAW proposal, and will benefit me working with the moderator team.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have professional training in handling difficult interpersonal situations. I work as a consultant, and that involves an awful lot of careful negotiation, managing a professional appearance, and knowing what to say and how to say it. That means at a basic level I don't put my foot in my mouth and make everyone look like an idiot, but I've also been able to navigate and resolve some very strenuous situations with people acting very poorly toward each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk's very good at dealing with people who're stirring up trouble. He's very good at calling people out who need to be called out. I think I can be equally firm on people. Mxyzplk's copped flak for poor behaviour in the past, and in the recent few months has become far more civil &amp;mdash; I can work with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also come from different cultural backgrounds probably (I'm British/Australian, currently residing in London), and I'm LGBT. I don't say those because it could potentially make me the Token Diversity Pick, but because I genuinely believe these factors mean I can offer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6969/1204&quot;&gt;different perspectives, as BESW described&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been a relatively ordinary member of the site for a long time, without the diamond attached. That fresh perspective will help for a while, but that applies to all of us nominating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd want to find out more from the people who know more. That might be other users (if it comes up in chat or comments, for example), another moderator, or the very specific moderator in question. I'd want to see what actually happened in our public records, if it happened on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's lots of ways this can happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderators winding up treating people unfairly is real and can happen; moderators are not perfect. Sometimes it's accidental, sometimes they're genuinely out of line.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Fair&lt;/em&gt; treatment that &lt;em&gt;feels&lt;/em&gt; unfair is also a thing &amp;mdash; this happens sometimes when someone gets their questions closed or unconstructive comments deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6665/sevensideddie-problem-with-your-moderation&quot;&gt;Sometimes it's a troll&lt;/a&gt; who's trying to take us for a ride.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6761/why-is-someone-one-with-no-specific-knowledge-judging-the-worthiness-of-my-quest&quot;&gt;Sometimes they might mean well but don't understand how we work&lt;/a&gt;, and that misunderstanding is causing a lot of strife.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different scenarios have different solutions. If valid, I have options of reaching out to the victimised individual to explain things or make amends, speaking to the moderator about it, and/or reaching out to the community team if it's quite serious. It may be appropriate for the moderator themselves to speak to the individual and clear things up or make amends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's important the moderation team avoid conflicts of interest, or even &lt;em&gt;appearing&lt;/em&gt; to be in a conflict of interest. If it's a sufficiently big thing and involves a significantly large group, we might address things on meta, and talk about what happened and what we've done to remedy the situation. That's for extreme scenarios though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That'd suck! I'd do my best to avoid this, but it's a good question to consider since it might actually happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar to the last question I'd want to verify what we're dealing with. If I've genuinely behaved poorly or improperly, I'd want to know about it &amp;mdash; I do have flaws, but learning about them has helped me address and overcome them and grow as a person. Getting to where I am today has involved a lot of that already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise on the conflict of interest front, depending on what it is, it may be best I not get involved directly in investigating and resolving the situation. I'd forward it on to another moderator, or consult with the community team if necessary. (I'm not sure if there's an established policy for how moderators must handle this kind of scenario, but I'd find out.) Sometimes it will be appropriate for me to resolve it myself by speaking with people, but I'd be cautious doing that &amp;amp; avoid doing it if I'm uncertain. Moderators can be scary and intimidating, and a person who feels wronged or abused may be best not being confronted by the person they feel wronged or abused them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderation on mainsite is 95% good. The relationship between the community &amp;amp; diamond moderators is a major obstacle and impedes our ability to moderate mainsite better and &lt;em&gt;massively&lt;/em&gt; impedes our ability to work together on meta. I've written at length about that here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7018/feedback-on-healing-our-community&quot;&gt;Feedback on healing our community&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I were on the diamond moderator team I'd be working to support the existing diamond moderators in taking the necessary actions to improve that relationship. I can't take the actions for them, but I can act as both a community member and diamond moderator to work with them and help things turn out OK. Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie have already shown intention to improve &amp;amp; resolve issues with the community, and had started on identifying and resolving the issues even before I wrote that post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd work to make sure the bugbear (described in the question I just linked) doesn't latch on to me as well, and will check in with the community from time to time to make sure it stays that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that as a new moderator, I'd sometimes be seen in the light of the worst parts of that community/diamond relationship, and sometimes not, with no particular rhyme or reason, so I'd work carefully with that in mind and do what I can to help improve that relationship directly and bridge the community/diamond gap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, I'm also just a community member. I'd engage in those community discussions and contribute where I can. Sometimes we'll go with what I think or what I want to do, sometimes we won't, and that's that. Once the community's decided on a sensible course of action, I'd help implement it as a community member. If that requires doing Mod Stuff, I'd do whatever Mod Stuff is needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception is if the decision's contrary to stack principles, or totally unworkable. However we're a pretty smart community, and that's always come up in the discussion itself. Maybe I'd be the one to bring it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Consensus I disagree with: I go with it and help it work. I've already done this lots of times, and I'll continue to do that. (I disagreed with tool recs being banned, but once the discussions around it were settled I went with it.) If I seriously think it has problems and is unlikely to work out, the best thing I can do is support it as best I can in its implementation. Then, if there's actually problems with it, they'll show up, if there aren't problems, hooray!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unsettled consensus: This has happened a lot too. If I feel I can offer a stance, I'll do that and maybe it'll help resolve things. If I can't, well, we'll get there in due time. It's not important, nor my job as a moderator, to ensure all community disucssions are settled.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly probably the scariest part is I don't want to somehow wind up as everybody's enemy. I'd still like to have good friendships with the people on here and in chat, and allow people to feel relaxed around me. I think that's quite possible though, Brian Ballsun-Stanton showed as much while he was a mnoderator. (That said, I don't think I can ever take my &quot;mod hat&quot; off on this site. Mod-hats get fixed on with glue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be editing less. I don't want us to become a half-literate wasteland of junk posts like Stack Overflow, so I'm keen on people picking up where I'm not editing stuff. Thankfully I've already been deliberately lowering the amount of editing I've been doing to make sure other people get an opportunity to become good editors, and that already seems to be happening!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm mostly looking forward to this as a way to help take care of the site, as a well-behaved functional place full of good knowledgeable people. Like Nitsua60's said, we're an amazingly helpful place, and I want that to keep going. I want to help take care of troublemakers and flags and spam and other nonsense so y'all can keep doing what you're doing so well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's an ongoing debate or discussion, and it's civil and constructive, I think that's helpful and I wouldn't do anything about it, just so long as it's happening in the right places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's uncivil argument, and people are being jerks to each other, I'd need to step in and get things to simmer down. I'd remind people of our community standards, and realistically sometimes people would need a few minutes away from the site to calm down. (I'll have to learn more about how suspensions get handled in these scenarios.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's neither, and it's just an unsettled sort of frustration that's roving everywhere, well, there's times I've been able to defuse arguments by helping people understand each other and guide the discussion to someplace more civil. I can't resolve every discussion though. Nobody was able to just hit all the [rules-as-written] tag discussions with a magic stick to fix them all for &lt;em&gt;years&lt;/em&gt;, and nobody, least of all the moderators, was expected to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the discussion's happening in inappropriate places where it's causing disruption, I might have to forbid it from those places or forbid those users from bringing it up there; if there's one place it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be discussed (its own chat room, or one specific meta thread) I'd point them there, potentially creating that place for them in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I care about this place, I like it and the people who use it, and I like what it can provide for others. I want to help keep things maintained. I think I'm one of the few people who can do it (moderator positions aren't for everybody), so I want to do it. To quote Aperture Science: &quot;We do what we must because we can.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't have to be me though. If one of the other candidates I believe will do a job also gets picked, I'll be happy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've got a good community full of people who behave well. We need to keep up that standard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone who's abusive or a genuine problem for the site needs to improve themselves to meet our behaviour expectations, or they need to go, and escalating suspensions (accompanied by explanatory mod notes as necessary) will see to it one of these two things happens &amp;mdash; all of that needs to happen &lt;em&gt;regardless&lt;/em&gt; of the quality material they're bringing to the site. Good answers can't offset problem behaviour, and we have a broad userbase able to handle one expert leaving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone who's just regularly causing a lot of low-key trouble would probably need some speaking to, and we'd see if they can adjust. Most people here are capable of behaving reasonably.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edge cases between these will be edge cases. Naturally we'd need to handle things case by case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd try to find out what was going on from their comments or from asking them directly. Our other mods know what they're doing, but we're also human and make oversights and mistakes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's time pressure to reversing the action, I'll make a judgement call if I can't find out from them in time. Sometimes I'll reverse the action and sometimes I'll leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I see &lt;em&gt;absolutely nothing wrong&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;absolutely no cost to undoing the action&lt;/em&gt; I'll reverse the action and ask questions later. It's very unlikely this scenario will occur.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T23:12:39.543" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T23:12:39.543" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-18T01:24:12.640" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Hi, I'm Korvin Starmast  - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98288&quot;&gt;Nomination Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Full Disclosure: not the name on my birth certificate): &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Vote for me and I'll set you free. ( 8^D )&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Two points for guessing the song reference without using Google).   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the&#xA;  skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators?  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In other words, what about yourself do you expect to bring in&#xA;  terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of&#xA;  similarity?  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am disappointed that in &lt;em&gt;question one&lt;/em&gt; we ask more than one question in a single question, which is a habit that we generally frown on at SE's.  While nested questions &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; work on this site, this is a poor example of one.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE's model works (when it works) with a concise, well researched and well asked question that attracts a concise, or very detailed, well formed and well supported answer.  &lt;em&gt;The inability of the hive mind on this site&lt;/em&gt; to craft a clear and concise question &lt;strong&gt;as question number one&lt;/strong&gt; is an example of a place where my experience can be of value.  I earned IRL a reputation as the guy who speaks up and asks the question that prevents the group from deciding to &lt;a href=&quot;https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/files/content/upload/16-Harvey-Abilene-Paradox-redacted.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;go to Abilene&lt;/a&gt;.  Over time, I learned how to be less abrasive in doing so.  If I think we are setting a bad example, I will speak up.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bottom line of this question is element 3.  Element 2 is speculative, at best.  Element one asks about future moderators as well as current, which is also speculative.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My skills with people have been honed over about four decades of being (in chronological order) Naval officer, spouse, parent, manager, and a Catechist in our church.  In each of these arenas one is immersed in the environment where you deal with people as they are, not as you'd wish them to be.  I've learned -- &lt;strong&gt;here is the philosophy bit&lt;/strong&gt; -- that if you want to engage with someone, it takes a bit of back-and-forth until you each find your comfortable spot to communicate sincerely and effectively with each other (see also marriage ... big time).&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  As a casual user, who uses this site as an outgrowth of a hobby, I don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to draw on the depth of such RL experience.  As a diamond mod, I'd pull up that skill set and use it here.  I can, and will.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Insofar as getting along with SSD, mxy, and whomever else: as we have a common mission, I'll get along.  I adapt, as needed since I see no basis for a problem.  We're all adults here, and this is a site about something we all enjoy.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is two separate questions, each requiring its own answer.  (I noted the strike-through on the question; bad example of how to write a questionnaire question).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point 1: If I am the one being perceived as treating someone unfairly, and I learn of this, the answer for me is simple; recuse myself immediately, contact another mod, and ask them to handle it.  Once the issue is resolved, try to find a way to discuss, in a neutral setting, how we (the user and me) can get back on the same page, talking &lt;em&gt;to&lt;/em&gt; each other again.  We do this for fun.  I don't want me being the source of stress.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point 2: If it's another mod ...   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discuss off line, with user(s), to make sure I understand.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discuss, off line, with mod, and see if we both see what's going&#xA;on.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Note: I've had to investigate multiple Sexual Harassment complaints IRL.  To do that right takes effort, listening, and patience.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use my experience to inform efforts in resolving such a potential&#xA;conflict, &lt;strong&gt;with the objective of building a bridge&lt;/strong&gt; so the two parties can meet each other half way.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Is there anything in particular you disagree with?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  If so, why?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Four questions in one.     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My view.   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Moderation works somewhere between &lt;em&gt;well enough&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;very well&lt;/em&gt;, as&#xA;compared to most of the sites where I participate in (SE sites and&#xA;other sorts).  I am a mod at another site, not RPG related.  The&#xA;community there needs very little 'hands on' intervention so 'a light&#xA;touch' there is easy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Both diamond mods have received input from me on what I like and&#xA;don't like.  Taken as a whole, while it works, I feel that we may be&#xA;putting too much burden on too few people.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897/22566&quot;&gt;My comment on that&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;has grown into a meta question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6963/22566&quot;&gt;&quot;three or four mods&quot;&lt;/a&gt; --&#xA;maybe more than three is a better idea, but still an odd number.  I&#xA;thought 5 may be the better choice, based on what I have seen at&#xA;Christianity.SE.   Maybe three is fine.   We can workshop this, and&#xA;if this is a case of &quot;if it ain't broke don't fix it&quot; I think we will&#xA;(collectively) figure that out as well.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I see no obstacles to working with either of the current mods, and&#xA;for that matter, with any of the folks who volunteer.  There are some&#xA;great people who participate here who come from a delightful mix of&#xA;backgrounds and experiences-to include those who have already&#xA;answered up.   (Lino, doppel, nitsua60, Michael, Erik, Marshall as of&#xA;this writing).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: on SE sites in general, I don't care for the perceived latent hostility to new users, but as best as I can figure out it's a Feature of the SE model.  I had my share of frustrations with this community as I first encountered it, but as above: I adapt, and I also learn.  All I can do, all any of us can do, is to try to provide a warm welcome to new users, and to encourage them to adapt to our norms.     &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you&#xA;  disagree with?  How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which&#xA;  the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you&#xA;  personally favor one particular side in the debate?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point 1.  In me you are voting for mod as an exception handler not as a dictator.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Point 2.  If the community fails to reach a consensus, if there is some pressing need to make a decision on something, that's still a consensus issue at the decision point.  Discuss.  Most stuff is not time critical, so &lt;strong&gt;Don't Rush&lt;/strong&gt; is my mantra.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tool Kit: Communicate.  Listen. As appropriate, discuss with the&#xA;mods, and engage with the community.  Check for potential &quot;what about&#xA;that third path?&quot; options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bottom Line: Deal with issues on their own merits.  Unless there is a significant breach of SE/SO guidelines, then listen, encourage input, kick ideas around, explore the edges of the art of the possible, and &lt;strong&gt;Don't Rush&lt;/strong&gt; to a decision. None of what we do here is critical to flight safety.     &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big&#xA;  opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition&#xA;  to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward&#xA;  to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas&#xA;  should you be elected as a new moderator?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not in the least bit worried.  If I didn't think it would be worth my while, I'd not answer the call.  The major concern is time, and sharing the &quot;who is on watch&quot; responsibilities with the other diamond mods.  Teamwork.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over&#xA;  a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the&#xA;  site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta&#xA;  posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to&#xA;  defuse arguments among users in good standing?   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Move arguments to a chat room. Keep them off the main site. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Direct some disagreements to a meta Q/A where getting the voice of other smart folks (this site attracts those) may help resolve a disagreement.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Point out (where needed) the need to remember to &quot;be nice!&quot; and &lt;em&gt;if that guidance is ignored&lt;/em&gt; take action to remind the user in an unambiguous manner.  Regardless of how deeply we disagree, this site is NOT a place for flame wars.  Beyond that, I can offer myself as a sounding board to any two parties who find themselves at odds.  Done that IRL as well.       &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which&#xA;  there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of&#xA;  your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and&#xA;  we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is&#xA;  your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the people here.  I like the hobby.  I like the site.  You're &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; worth it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each problem on its own merits.  If I deem &quot;a quiet word&quot; necessary, contact via email with my suggestions/guidance in terms of &quot;are you aware that this is working against RPG.SE goodness?&quot; as an opening move.  I do not have such d-mod tools in my hands now, so I am not sure what all of my tools are. Communicate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc&#xA;  a question that you feel shouldn't have been?   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either open a Meta or an off-line discussion with that mod.  Depends on the topic and the environment at the time.  Communicate.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T17:59:19.447" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T17:59:19.447" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6984" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6975" CreationDate="2017-04-18T02:55:21.440" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Perhaps Try This&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How much focus on antagonism between player characters, if any, existed in the early RPG products and/or their ancillary publications? In later revisions or editions, was there any change in that focus (or lack thereof)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is research-able, and may possibly come up with a usable answer. It's rather broad, so perhaps it could be pared down to relate to one or two particular systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23650" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T02:55:21.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6985" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-18T03:16:22.890" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;nitsua60&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98276&quot;&gt;nomination link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First off, I'd be coming to this as a student: the current team has experience I don't, and I'm hoping to learn. But this will also force them to articulate their experiences, their practices, their beliefs in ways they may not have for years. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, I'm coming to this as a relatively new user. (~21 mo. as of this writing.) I've been fairly active in that time, particularly in the last year, but I still remember asking my first question and getting slammed. (It wasn't a good question.) I remember discovering meta, and the red-faced embarassment I felt the first time a mod corrected me by name. (&quot;nitsua, you really shouldn't be grazing over there...&quot;) I'd hope that this &quot;new-user&quot; perspective can help us as we think about how the community's growing and evolving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for similarity, the most-obvious point is that I really appreciate the site as-is. It's got some blemishes, but it's full of people willing to volunteer their time to help others, willing to take a breather and consider a different point of view, willing to argue heatedly in one moment and recognie common purpose the next. To the extent that the current team's philosophy/skills have contributed to that I hope mine align.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;And I'm going to take a moment while I've got the soapbox and say a big thank-you to the elected moderators, community moderators, and users who've created this culture over the years. I'm only standing for election because I've seen how a bit of grunt-work, openness to discussion, and liberal helping of civility can create a bastion of calm in the broader culture. If I can help, I'm glad to devote some time to it. See also these similar sentiments: &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=30740258#30740258&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=18029758#18029758&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63626/how-do-i-cater-to-the-three-stooges-and-good-roleplayers-at-the-same-time#comment136978_63626&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;.... If you've thrown flags, left a supportive and helpful comment, contributed to a meta discussion, or even just taken the time to write an explanatory edit-summary, you deserve some thanks. Thanks.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Encourage them to take a breath, then take it to meta. Asking them sincerely to compose their experiences is invaluable: to them, to the mod in question, to posterity. It gives everyone a little space to breathe. It invites the user to take a moment to user their words in a way they know will be (re)viewed by their peers. It (hopefully) gives the mod in question some reasoned concerns to ruminate on. And most importantly, it gives every user to later come upon this a sense of what the site's like.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Listen. Assuming good faith, assuming that all involved are sincere and well-intentioned. Not to put too fine a point on it, but there's no way a team of moderators will ever act in a way that every user thinks is &quot;right.&quot; But we can act in a way that every user is respected and heard.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Talk to the other mod, privately. (I assume the team's got some good communication tools.) My intention here is not to convince them of their rightness or wrongness in actions, nor to adjudicate the facts of the case. It's to make sure the mod sees the &lt;em&gt;effect&lt;/em&gt; they've had. But it's also to be a voice for users: it can be intimidating as hell to stand up and tell a person who has the power to ban you what you think of them and their (volunteer) work. So it's incumbent on me to tell them my honest opinion of the affair. Point them to where I think they can learn something.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(a) watch for circling: if the user is starting to retread old ground, it's time to take a breather. I often have to look in the rear-view and say &quot;you can argue all you want, but there's no bickering!&quot;&#xA;(b) Ask a CM for a fresh set of eyes. I assume they're there as a support/backstop for the moderation team: they've got some separation, much great experience, and they've a whole team around &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt; for when they've got questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one I face occasionally IRL, as a teacher, and it can get pretty tough. Some keys takeaways I've got:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They may be right. I have tacked up on my office wall a handwritten note to myself: &quot;what am I going to learn today?&quot; Before trying to deconstruct each little bit, run a blow-by-blow analysis, take a step back and look at the whole picture. &quot;They might have a point&quot; can save a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of trouble.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm going to want help on this one. I'm going to sincerely want to understand the miscommunication, the misinformation, the misstep that led to a user feeling unfairly treated. But I know that there are times it will be impossible for a user to feel that I'm sincerely engaging. &quot;Nitsua's giving me the runaround, they're just going to talk me to death, they're just nit-picking....&quot; Given the frustration that likely presages a user speaking up against a mod, this may be intractable. That's why there's a team. &quot;I don't think I can help this user, I need your help here&quot; is a proper response sometimes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As above, engage sincerely, explain the my reasoning, don't retread old ground. Above all, this site's taught me how unimportant it is to get the last word. Saying my peace and stepping back... it's growing on me.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned above, I really like the result in most ways: we've got a good site. A few places where I've previously expressed some concern, and probably still will:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't like seeing the &quot;well, this site isn't for everyone&quot; attitude as much as I do. While it's true that &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=34714733#34714733&quot;&gt;not every question is a nail for RPGSE's hammer&lt;/a&gt;, I don't much care for the writing off of &lt;em&gt;users&lt;/em&gt;. My dad always said &quot;the wise man believes &lt;em&gt;each&lt;/em&gt; notion he holds to be true, while knowing &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; of them are false.&quot; I take the same approach to users: I assume &lt;em&gt;each&lt;/em&gt; is the next valuable contributor who will help make this site an ever-more healthy and caring community, while know that some will be uninterested in our model.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I also cringe when I hear the argument &quot;things are really good the way they are, so we shouldn't change anything.&quot; IIRC the numbers are something like 1% of users ever engage on meta, and 1% of page-views are from users. That's a &lt;strong&gt;huge&lt;/strong&gt; blind-spot we've got! I don't know what we can do about our myopia, but I think &quot;we're doing a great job&quot; is an inferior attitude to &quot;we're doing a great job &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; we have a lot to learn.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'd also like to see a little bit more proactive moderator engagement. The &quot;community check-in&quot; meta has been great, and I hope those'd continue at some regular intervals. I'd like to see topical metas on a regular basis, rather than just when things flare up: &quot;how are new users being treated,&quot; &quot;do we have a good consensus around 'too broad,'&quot; &quot;how's our system-coverage,&quot; &amp;amp;c. Perhaps even chat-events? (I agree that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3291/the-role-of-chat-at-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;we don't want to make chat a parallel track to meta&lt;/a&gt;, but I also recognize that it's a lower barrier to entry for some folks and can achieve different goals than a meta &quot;discussion.&quot; I'd love to try something announced in meta, moderated by a volunteer other than an elected mod, with a topical focus, transcript of the event linked back in that announcing-meta.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe mods have to balance a dual-mandate: exercising the will of the community while exercising their own best judgment. When there's not clear consensus but I see a path I believe in, I'm not going to be afraid to take that--&lt;em&gt;and explain my thinking.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When there is consensus with which I disagree, it's a little trickier-seeming. First step is a deep breath, a little separation, then re-reading the consensus position with a &quot;what can I learn today?&quot; attitude. As long as it doesn't violate some SE-wide principles, then there're a few possibilities: (a) voice disagreement with reasoning and enforce consensus; (b) voice disagreement with reasoning and announce that I'll not be enforcing this madness; (c) voice disagreement and step down. Obviously I think either of (b) or (c) are pretty-extreme cases, and I'd only undertake them after discussion both with the other mods and the CMs. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, I'm worried that I won't do a good job. I'm relying on your voting judgment, your sincere feedback, the other mods' support, and the instruction of the wider SE community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking forward to learning a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; more about Stackizenry--I casually browse meta.SE now, but it'll be part of my responsibility! I think the best thing you can do is what you already do: give honest and well-intentioned feedback, and trust that I'm doing the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I do anticipate one little milestone, which I'll confess to even though it'll probably cost me lots of votes: the first &quot;obsolete&quot; or &quot;too chatty&quot; comment-flag I see and agree with, and click whatever magic button it is that deletes it... that'll be a memory =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, I'll reiterate the distinction between arguing and bickering that I drew earlier: arguing is good for the site, I believe. Bickering's bad. When arguments start circling the drain, it's time to step back and take a breather.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, it's got to stay focused on actions rather than people. I think spirited, productive argument can only thrive in an environment where users are able to engage without fear of personal attack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, argument on mainsite needs to quickly move to meta. Two reasons: it keeps mainsite high-quality for the 99.99% of people who use it, those who have no dog in the fight, and it teaches those who are interested that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a space for those arguments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, in chat it's largely a matter of staying on top of Be Nice. If users want to hash out an argument in real-time, we can do that. It's got to stay Nice, it might have to move to the NAB or a dedicated room, but that's a venue we've got, too. (Excepting, of course, that we don't want to be building nearly-invisible consensus there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I care for this site, and the site needs mods to do the janitorial work, and I think I can do a good job of it. I think there are other people who would do a good job of it, too--I already know I'll not have any trouble casting votes for people who I think would make good moderators. I'm just raising my hand to say &quot;I can take a turn helping out.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for my personal gain, patience with poor treatment is a life skill I know I need: I'm a parent and a (partial) school administrator. I think I'm already pretty good at it, and I know I have lots to learn about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tell them exactly that. &quot;You're contributing good stuff, and you're also contributing chaos. We want good stuff, we don't want chaos. Please, let's figure out a way to keep you contributing good stuff but eliminate the chaos. (We will eliminate the chaos.)&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remind them that the purpose of the site is not only to give the &quot;right&quot; answer, but the &lt;strong&gt;useful&lt;/strong&gt; one. Flags/arguments are a sign that things are causing trouble. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Share my philosophy of learning from every interaction, no matter how wrong you think the other party is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, if it can't/won't stop, the user might have to take a break. Again, while I hope &lt;em&gt;each&lt;/em&gt; user will be an amazing contributor, I know that not &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; one will be, at every time, on every question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same way I have already: talk to them, &lt;em&gt;listen,&lt;/em&gt; and almost certainly learn something. I know I've always felt in the past that the current team has listened to my questions/objections, even if they didn't agree. If we-all are doing so, we're going to get a great site out of the process, we'll have a working mod-relationship, we'll have an engaged user-base. No one question is worth sacrificing any of that over, especially when one adopts (as I do) the default assumption &quot;I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be wrong, of course.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry it's so long. If nothing else, perhaps I've convinced you that I won't be holding anything back =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your time, both in the election and on the site each day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T14:48:21.147" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T14:48:21.147" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-18T10:34:16.560" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Erik - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98298&quot;&gt;Nomination&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm bringing in terms of diversity is at least in sort part that I'm from a different part of the world. Being in Western Europe puts me in a different timezone. I'm also not a native English speaker, although I'm not sure if that's a plus or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of philosophy, I believe strongly in letting people make decisions. If you make people feel valued and respected, the vast majority of them will handle that responsibly. As such, I much prefer communicating our vision over telling people how to act. I'm also more likely to ask questions about things than I am to give answers. In the end; it's not my job to decide how to run things (or to run things at all), only to let the users think about it and remind them of their choices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the currently active way of working and moderating, I agree with it as it stands. So I think for the end-result I'd agree with the current team, although perhaps my path to it involves (even) more talking with people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Depending on the severity, either open a chat with that user and ask them about what is happening and how it's bothering them. If necessary, same thing with the moderator. I feel that many minor grievances can be solved by an open talk with those involved, and maybe a conclusion that they can figure out themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more serious issues, I would most likely discuss with the non-involved moderator(s) first to make sure we're on the same page, then try and gather data on the situation as it's been. Then, talk to the involved parties together with the other moderator(s). For a serious situation, it helps to have more people listening in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general; such a chat would consist primarily of listening to both sides and trying to understand what is causing the feelings of unfair treatment. I would trust both moderators and users to not be actively malicious towards one another, so feelings of unfairness are likely to be an issue in communication (quite common between people of different cultures and languages) or a case of ignorance or unawareness, which can likely be discussed rationally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assume good intentions in all. The rarest of cases that involve active malice between members and/or moderators aren't something I'd want to have a fixed plan for. Those cases are too situational.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I learn from that user directly, because they tell me, then I would engage with them directly. That takes a certain level of courage and openness that I feel deserves a reaction in kind, and I would take that &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; seriously. Talk about the issues, why they perceive they are being treated unfairly, apologize and mend my ways if needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I learn indirectly, then that means direct communication might be a bit overwhelming, so I would request intervention from another moderator. I would be open to talk it through with the user, but I also understand that they might not want to speak with someone whom they do not trust to be fair. So I would ask someone else to investigate; I trust the judgement of the moderation team and the community also when it comes to my own conduct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't anything I particularly disagree with at this time. That said, there are a lot of things I disagree with overall and you just learn to live with it. As long as I am fully behind the goal and vision of a project, I can deal with disagreeing over the details. We're all in it for the same reason, so I see no point in letting my personal opinion get in the way of moving towards it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I've pointed out already; the community is in charge. Unless their consensus grossly violates the Stack vision, they have the final say in how we work here. I would expect to be able to agree with them most of the time. If it does go against the vision, I would rather re-iterate that vision instead of weighing in with my opinion. It's very easy for people to agree with a moderator just because they're a moderator, so I feel my opinion should take a backseat most of the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for when no consensus can be reached, even after continued discussion, I would rather flip a coin than decide. Both because it's not the moderators job to decide on policy and because I don't want users in the other camp to feel like they're being overruled by the &amp;quot;people in charge&amp;quot;. That would only cause more friction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not fearful quickly as I have trust in my abilities and my previous experiences with coaching and moderating. That said, I do think it's a responsible position and I don't know exactly what I'm getting myself into. The key thing that (in my opinion) do to support others is to let them know how they are doing. I'd rather hear that I'm screwing it up than get only silence and being left guessing. So should I be elected, and you have an opinion on what I do, &lt;em&gt;let me know&lt;/em&gt;. Even if it's negative. I'll thank anyone for constructive feedback, no matter how much it stings. You can't grow without that fuel.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remind them that &amp;quot;everywhere&amp;quot; is not a good place to have a discussion. Offer to open a chat-room for them. Offer to listen in and/or help them get over their differences if required. If they keep posting about it in unrelated places, remind them again in private, that they have a private room to talk it out and their behavior is not helping us be the best Q&amp;amp;A site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's mixed between really liking this place and wanting to help it grow even better, and feeling I can learn something in this position.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the first, I think this is a wonderful resource for learning more about RPG rules, but even more so, it's a wonderful resource for becoming a better player. I've been running games for over 10 years, but the DM and player advice here has still taught me a lot. We should strive to keep that quality here, and if that means shoveling junk; I'll gladly donate some of my time to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is more personal; I think it's important for me to be able to handle difficult, social situations. Both for my day-job and for myself. As such, I tend to seek them out in a productive way, so that I may learn from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be interested in knowing why they feel the need to argue with people. I'm also quite capable of arguing over (possibly irrelevant) details, so I know the feeling of wanting to do it. It reduces the quality of the stack, but fortunately comments are easily purged and sometimes a comment chain does lead to something useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once it becomes clear that a discussion &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; going anywhere, then I'd move it to chat with a reminder that comments are not the place for discussion; only to give suggestions to improve the question/answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing that could really &lt;em&gt;stop&lt;/em&gt; a user from commenting too much, is realizing that it doesn't help anyone. Whether that's achievable depends on the user, but only understanding why they do it in the first place will help us find out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ask that moderator about it. This doesn't seem to come up very much on this site, and I doubt that any situation would arise that couldn't be solved by a short chat session.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T10:34:16.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6987" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6976" CreationDate="2017-04-18T11:02:49.150" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can calculate it yourself, if you're so inclined. It's kind of fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Candidate Score = Capped Reputation + Badge Count&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Capped Reputation&lt;/strong&gt; = Your reputation divided by 1000, rounded down. (Max 20)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Badge Count&lt;/strong&gt; = The number of badges you've earned from the following list. Earning the same badge twice counts as earning it once for this purpose. (Note there are 20 of them)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Civic Duty &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cleanup&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Constituent&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Convention&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Copy Editor&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Deputy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Electorate&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Enthusiast&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Explainer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Investor&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Marshal&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Organizer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Quorum&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Refiner&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sportsmanship&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Strunk &amp;amp; White&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tag Editor&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Reviewer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Steward &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yearling&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T11:02:49.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2017-04-18T14:59:00.893" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the posters just need to know that &quot;there are thousands of RPGs in every category ever thought of&quot;, it's not too hard to create a polished FAQ entry to that effect with some links out to more info, point the OP to that, and close the Q...?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23947" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T14:59:00.893" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6989" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-18T15:08:40.083" Score="8" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm aware of a few different types of voting for elections, but the two that seem most likely are plurality voting (each individual may vote for 1 candidate) or approval voting (each individual may vote for any number of candidates that they consider acceptable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which of these systems is used for the Moderator election (or is a different one used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T15:31:23.887" Title="What Sort of Voting Method is Used During the Election?" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6989" CreationDate="2017-04-18T15:14:45.657" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/77541/how-are-moderator-election-votes-counted-in-plain-english&quot;&gt;This post&lt;/a&gt; explains how the voting process works for Stack Exchange moderator elections. It works the same here. Hope that helps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T15:14:45.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6991" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6989" CreationDate="2017-04-18T15:16:00.513" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The election itself uses a variety of Single Transferable Vote. &lt;em&gt;Very&lt;/em&gt; roughly: you rank your top three candidates in order of preference, and initially your vote is counted for your top candidate; if &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; candidate makes it over the “is elected” line after the initial count, the least-voted candidate is dropped and the votes that were initially counted for them are redistributed to those voters' second choice (or dropped, if no second choice was given); if a candidate is already elected, then &lt;em&gt;surplus&lt;/em&gt; votes they don't need are reallocated. This continues until someone crosses the finish line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's much more detailed and precise information available from SE's explanation of the voting system (e.g., how does reallocation actually work? [spoiler: interesting math]). On the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;election page&lt;/a&gt;, you can see this in the sidebar if you click on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3?tab=election&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;election&lt;/strong&gt; tab&lt;/a&gt; (currently, you see the &lt;strong&gt;nomination&lt;/strong&gt; tab by default):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In the &lt;strong&gt;election&lt;/strong&gt; phase, up to 10 candidates advance to final community voting. Candidates are displayed in &lt;em&gt;random&lt;/em&gt; order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any community member with &lt;strong&gt;150&lt;/strong&gt; reputation may vote in the election. Each voter may select up to three candidates. Please make your selections in order of preference, with the most desirable candidate as first choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We will calculate the winners using &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;OpaVote&lt;/a&gt; with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meek&amp;#39;s_method#Meek.27s_method&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Meek STV method&lt;/a&gt;, which automatically weights users' votes in the way that does the most good for the candidates they have selected, in order of preference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When the election is complete, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/help/overview#blt-file-format&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ballot file&lt;/a&gt; will be freely downloadable from this page for the life of the site. Individual users' voting choices are always private; only the aggregated tally will be made public.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T15:31:23.887" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T15:31:23.887" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1475" CreationDate="2017-04-18T15:16:48.093" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry to go all nerdy (here of all places) but there's even a term for answering a (vague) question with a (helpful probing) question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_interview&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_interview&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the TL;DR from the above link:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Welcoming&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Gathering general information from the user and getting an overview of the problem&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Confirming the exact question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Intervention, such as giving information, advice or instructions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Finishing, including feedback and summary&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23947" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T15:28:45.433" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T15:28:45.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-18T15:30:17.503" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Michael&lt;/strong&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98322&quot;&gt;Click here to read my &lt;em&gt;short&lt;/em&gt; nomination speech!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;what do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, I've been on a. lot. of. forums. I know what moderation is. I'm happy just to get the job done, and learn from the existing mods what their &quot;flavor&quot; is, but as I'm relatively new to this SE and I don't have too much previous XP invested in it, I'm happy to ask why and be pretty honest if I have other ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would just go straight to the relevant post, take a look myself and bring it up with the mod in question. I think we all want to help each other here. I don't see any need for drama and I wouldn't be interested in getting involved in any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would take time out to chill, read the relevant post again, and then go ask another mod what I should have done different. Then go apologize. Please see above :-)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems fine. As noted, I just like RPGs and learning more, and want to help others do the same as a fun aspect of that. I've actually spent my whole career doing some form of &quot;helpdesk&quot; / &quot;knowledge management&quot; / whatever buzzword and it's kind of a habit forming thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really know what &quot;policy&quot; is in place but I'm a quick study and I'm happy to give feedback (I mean give feedback, not telling anyone what's wrong and then trying to make 'em fix it :-D )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pretty much as above, give my 5c worth and then read any feedback with interest. And. that's. it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure why it should be so bad, can you provide horror stories as examples? ;-)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seems like a super fun way to give something back. If there's something I don't get, I'm happy to ask for help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a good question. I don't have a ready-made answer and I'd look to the existing mods for advice on this. I would say though that my instinct is usually to ask questions before giving info/suggestions/directions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;XD&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As above. Fun topic, cool people, already in the habit so whatever, it's a great excuse to check in more than once a month...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See above; I really never experienced this issue before on any net forum... ask for help?!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just directly politely ask the mod in question why. Then get burritos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23947" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-19T12:42:07.200" LastActivityDate="2017-04-19T12:42:07.200" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6994" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-18T17:06:58.137" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/12456/marshall-tigerus&quot;&gt;Marshall-Tigerus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that in most of the SE community, moderators are very quick to take action.  The beauty of this format is that through votes and scores, much of the actual moderation is handled by the community as a group.  This helps preserve the integrity of the community as a whole.  Moderators should only be acting when it is absolutely necessary.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a team member, I regularly ask the question of &quot;Why&quot; something is being done.  Action should only be taken if there is a clear reason to, not just because something is done that an individual moderator doesn't like.  This is one of the many reasons we have a Meta, and why issues and rules can be discussed and decided upon in that forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team as a whole would need to be made aware of the situation as a first step.  Then the team as a whole would need to decide how to handle the issue.  It is not the duty or within the scope of power of one moderator to control another (particularly the newest moderator in the group).  The team as a whole would need to decide whether there is any issue present and any action to be taken.  This can be a little difficult if there are only three moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In either case, there must be a conclusion brought to the issue.  Whether that is the original moderator explaining themselves to the effected parties, or a general policy brought forward to remind those users why things have happened the way they have.  It is important to reassure everyone that the moderators are here to support the medium of the RPG-SE, not rule over it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As in answer 2, I feel that this issue should be known to all members of the moderation team before any action is taken.  It is possible one of the other moderators has information on who is feeling this way.  In any case, if I could figure out who feels this way, I would try to have a conversation with them, and ask for their side of the story and how they feel.  I would try to explain my actions as best as I could, and bring the entire thing into a discussion with the other moderators to see if some part of my behavior needs to change (as I cannot be an objective judge of my own character).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it became a persistent problem, I would step down as a moderator.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not had many moderation issues on this SE.  I feel that it is important that the RPG-SE continue evolving through the use of meta discussions and regular conversations about the policies of the site.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A moderator who is unable to follow the rules the group has decided upon should step down.  I believe I will be able to enforce rules I do not agree with, but I will certainly lend my voice to the discussion while the rule is being discussed.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if there is no consensus about a rule change, I think that the existing policy before the discussion should be followed.  If there was no clear policy before the discussion, then the moderation team should decide on a consistent policy until such a time as the community can clearly decide.  All moderators should follow that policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a participant in several SE communities, I am not very up to date on particular policies for this SE community.  Patience while I learn the ropes would be appreciated, and a recognition that I will make some mistakes.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I, admittedly, do not know the current mods, so that's an area I will need to spend some time on if elected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such users should know the appropriate forum for their discussion (which by this question sounds like it should be in chat or in a meta post). Such things are a reason why the moderator position exists, to move those conversations to the appropriate venue.  Anyone who participates sufficiently should recognize that there is an appropriate area for these discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I enjoy RPGs and game design.  Being a moderator here will give me a good reason to interact with areas outside my current gaming expertise, and spread my knowledge of gaming systems (for example, reading through posts I would not otherwise look at).  Having been a retail Customer Service Manager, I understand that the &quot;customer relations&quot; aspect of this position is not glamorous, but necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no right answer to this question.  Arguments and flags may not be the result of the user themselves but from someone who disagrees with them vehemently (I had an issue in the SO-SE where a user that disagreed with me went through and flagged and downvoted everything I had ever posted going back years).  If the issue is with the user themselves, a brief conversation should suffice to help them along the right path to cleaner answers, reminding them that while they are contributing in good ways, they should look to improve X, Y, or Z.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One moderator should not unilaterally override another.  The Moderator team should discuss this issue, and a consensus reached.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12456" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T17:06:58.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6975" CreationDate="2017-04-18T18:56:17.717" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't propose that it was a dichotomy of either backstab or not&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find parts of the question self contradictory. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;early-days-of-gaming player as &lt;em&gt;nearly always playing a heartless&#xA;  dastard PC&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's an embedded assumption that appears to be a case of assuming the answer in the question, and assuming that &quot;jerk events&quot; are mutually exclusive to &quot;team play events&quot;. They aren't.  It just doesn't depend on the table, it depends on where that group/table is in their gaming career.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you appear to be asking is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How common was PC's screwing with each other as compared to the basic team based model of a given game's rule set?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the early games were built on a model of a party in a Player Versus Environment scheme (Traveler certainly was) but Player Versus Player not only could happen, it did happen.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I got into a duel in Traveler due to me and another player arguing&#xA;over something stupid -- we were teenagers -- and my character ended up dying. &#xA;My Blade just wasn't up to it for that fight.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For that matter, in the flagship RPG game --D&amp;amp;D-- the campaign system almost begged for PVP at some point.  Once you got to name level, you could indeed raise your own armies as Cleric, Fighting Man, or Wizard and battle it out on the table top. (I played a lower level sub commander in one such table top battle, as the others had been in the campaign about two years longer than me).   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The PvP happened anyway at tables (I certainly saw it) even though that isn't what the game was designed for.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's some stuff on the web about Tenser, Cuthbert, Moredenkainen, and a few other Greyhawk luminaries to include Robliar having a falling out.  Can't recall where I read it, perhaps Canonfire web site?  Maybe one of Rob Kuntz' reminiscences.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd ask you, in your question, to do a better job of asking about how common it was, rather than the &quot;either or&quot; tone that I get out of the question's as it's set up.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-18T22:02:17.667" LastActivityDate="2017-04-18T22:02:17.667" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6996" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="6997" CreationDate="2017-04-19T03:49:26.623" Score="0" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;A useful kind of comment we get on both questions and answers frequently goes as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Related: [link description](link target)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or, less helpfully:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[Related](link target)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When this is, in fact, related material these comments are very useful to anyone interested in the question and answer.  Unfortunately, our current system is to leave these sitting as comments for years, because that just feels like the natural place for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments should get deleted, where possible, and there's no real record of them once they have been deleted.  I think it would be good if these sorts of helpful links, where helpful (as judged by upvote quantity and not being a joke), could be edited into the body of post they ride on as a footnote.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While nothing stops us from doing this at present, I was hoping for community approval before I start mass-editing old material as I come across it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-02T13:49:45.350" LastActivityDate="2020-06-02T13:49:45.350" Title="Further Reading in Questions, not comments" Tags="|discussion|comments|editing|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6996" CreationDate="2017-04-19T04:06:12.090" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related links are one of the good uses of comments, and we don't delete them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-19T04:06:12.090" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-19T05:35:58.927" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Dark Wanderer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98371&quot;&gt;Nomination&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about yourself do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, when we talk about a need for diversity and a need for improvements in process, we're mostly talking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6969/&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;When I think about what's valuable in &quot;a diversity of perspectives,&quot; I don't think about agendas or policy opinions. Instead, I think about how a diversity of experience can help with constructive dialogue by broadening our ability to see where somebody else is coming from and understand a tangential perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;    &#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Historically some of our biggest dust-ups have boiled down to communication breakdowns like confusion about historical context (tool-rec) or what jargon implies (RAW). This very answer is in response to my recognising that I was probably misunderstanding how others were using terms!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;    &#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Both Mxy and d7 have taken visible pains to improve the clarity of the site's communication (see above &quot;this is a step in information gathering rather than an Official Vote Thing&quot;), and I don't mean to diminish their ongoing successes in any way when I say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;    &#xA;    &lt;p&gt;If a third mod brings a significantly different set of communication skills and play experiences from either d7 or Mxy I think that'd be a great boon to the entire community's culture of constructive dialogue. And if it's a communication monoculture that d7 meant by this comment, then I can see the value in a fourth mod from that perspective--though on its own I don't see that contribution being sufficient to justify opening an entire fourth mod slot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what I bring here in terms of diversity is a difference in playstyle, background, values, and culture.  Specifically, I don't play games just for fun-- I view RPGs as a literary medium in which to holistically discuss complex issues.  This means that I'm on more of the same page as people who use RPGs to teach their kids, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86962/can-a-dd-campaign-be-successfully-used-as-a-sunday-school-teaching-instrument&quot;&gt;explore the nature of religious devotion&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57698/&quot;&gt;or further language and communication skills&lt;/a&gt;.  It is not necessary that something be fun for it to be worthwhile, and sometimes insistence to the contrary can be frustrating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also engage in material within our scope that &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; playing rpgs.  I have participated in my fair share of theoretical optimization, both with groups and individually, and also read, write, and discuss RPG theory as published in books, blogs, and our games we run.  Questions in these areas often run into problems with our 'must be about a real problem' policy, not because they aren't about a real problem but because the subject material is abstract and certain members of the community don't feel like it's 'real' RPG stuff.  Diversity here may help lead to the acceptance of these subdisciplines as authentic (i.e. anthropologically authentic).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My primary game system at present is Mist, a d12-based vaguely FATE 2.0 inspired rule system that I'm maybe hopefully someday gonna publish.  I also play, in descending order of frequency, FATE 2.0, an awesome diceless Pokemon-Silver-Inspired solo-campaign-specific-homebrew system, Pathfinder, Fate Core (specifically either 'Nu Scions' by Ms. Megan Carmody (still in playtesting) or 'Secrets of Cats' by Mr. Richard Bellingham), D&amp;amp;D 3.5, and then other stuff.  I think this matters in terms of informing you guys how I think about RPGs and what I value in them, but there's significant disagreement as to that, so I'll move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of understanding where people come from and listening to them, that's sort of what I aim to do in life nearly all the time.  I'm sure the other moderators and candidates feel similarly about themselves, though, so I don't think that's a very good indication of my ability to do so, at least on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really this depends too much on the situation.  In the broadest terms, I would decide whether or not to try to solve the issue and then stick with that approach until or unless it became clear that a change in approach was needed.  Probably, if I decided to do anything, I would both solicit and provide information on meta. Most of the time I suspect the complaint would look something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6939/14848&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, and I would just leave it alone and not get involved at all.  I will trust my co-moderator and the community member or members who are upset to work things out without my shoving my nose in it unless there's good reason to think otherwise.  But really, everything from the rep of the users involved, to how much I like or dislike them, to whether I think they are right or not, to the subtle class-race-gender-nationality-playstyle-etc biases I have as influenced by how each party writes, to whether or not I'm hungry will influence how I deal with it.  I'd &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; to always deal with such things in a manner appropriate to my religious principles of compassion, charity, and righteousness so that the mediation might be both just and merciful but I rather doubt that will ever be the case :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by you? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd talk with them.  If the complaints were valid, I'd apologize for that and explain what I'm doing in the future to try and prevent it from happening again, if anything.  If they weren't I wouldn't apologize for that, but I might still apologize for making them feel bad.  Mostly I'd just listen to what they had to say and ask questions.  If time and energy permitted I'd try to do something like &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/56333/2017/3/31&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My current view is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6910/14848&quot;&gt;there are some problems with our moderation with respect to meta process&lt;/a&gt; (and apparently the community overwhelmingly agrees, but I worry that not all of us have the same idea what we mean by that), but also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6912/14848&quot;&gt;that our community is doing well overall, and thus that moderation is generally running effectively&lt;/a&gt;.  While I don't like parts of the way things are going, I have confidence that the other moderators are also unhappy with the deterioration of trust between them and the community (not that we don't trust our mods, but I feel like we trust them a lot less) and so aware that a problem exists and willing to work to solve it.  I mean, even if I'm not elected mod I think we're all planning on working together to do that anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will react to community consensus I disagree with by posting a meta answer explaining why I think I'm right and the community's wrong, just like if I was not a moderator, but with more weight behind what I'm saying and so more pre-post thoroughness.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming that fails to alter community consensus I will either abide by the consensus (most cases) or stubbornly refuse to do so as a matter of principle (where my religion requires me to do so.  This shouldn't happen unless y'all transform into magical neo-nazis or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.wired.com/2014/05/dark-dungeons-movie/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Chick Tracts start to match up with reality&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On issues where the community has failed to reach consensus, I would upvote some stuff and downvote others.  I might also post things, if I had things to post.  I would put a bit higher of a bar on posting answers because the black diamond can summon forth the votes of the dead and the damned, which seems a little unfair.  It's okay for the community to not reach consensus, though.  Better no answer yet than a bad answer no one likes. Plus we can always propose temporary solutions if there's a need for that sort of thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suck at chat.  I'll have to learn that.  Y'all could help me out with that; that would be nice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;'Looking forward to' is a little strong, but I think I would like being able to use my mod powers to make the new user experience easier. Also it'd be good to be able to help resolve the rift that's starting to form in our site from the moderator side.  Also it'd be good to have another easy busywork task to do (i.e. resolving flags and routine comment cleanup).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oh man, I'm, like, the dude ending up in those too much right now.  I guess I'd tell me to just give up and stop responding to @ShadowKras and just flag the rediculous multi-question-spanning comment argument for deletion, only I already do that with varying success.  Maybe ask another mod what to do about it?  Not really sure why that keeps happening, my bad guys.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it wasn't me, it'd be easier.  I'd just nuke the comment discussions with prejudice and tell them to take it to a question I'd post aiming at the underlying cause of dissent.  I just think nuking a comment flame war that just realized was a flame war and which I'm a part of might come across as overly heavy handed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being a good Catholic is a public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation.  You invest decades of your free time dealing with the worst humanity has to offer, and God expects you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.  You know that section in DITV about Stewards?  They got that bit pretty right, so I'm gonna quote it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Check this out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;    &#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Brother Zachary is the worst thing in Steward Joseph's world. It's not just that he's sinner, it's that he's unteachable, unreformable. Too mean and too proud. Brother Zachary is single-handedly destroying Steward Joseph's branch. But when Steward Joseph goes to the King of Life for guidance, it's all: see to his needs, call him to repentance, cultivate him, serve him, help him, show him compassion. That, after all, is Steward Joseph's job: look after each person in his care. The King of Life tells Steward Joseph what's best for Brother Zachary. Steward Joseph has invested more time and care and worry in Brother Zachary in any other single thing in his life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really know why we do it, or why I do it.  It just seems right, I suppose.  People shouldn't just do things because of extrinsic motivations.  Hell, people shouldn't just do things because of &lt;em&gt;motivations&lt;/em&gt;.  Radical freedom, yo. (&lt;a href=&quot;http://existentialcomics.com/comic/72&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;exercise yours responsibly, please&lt;/a&gt;). Motivation is insufficient to describe the fullness of human decision making. There is always an essential element of freedom, and there was always a choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, bad comments on their good answers, consistently?  Or they leave bad comments?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first case, I'd try to figure out what was causing people to leave argumentative comments and flag their post.  I'd leave a comment explaining what I thought was happening to the poster if I could figure it out, and maybe a meta post like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; if I thought the real problem was the community's behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the second case, I'd try to figure out what was triggering them to leave bad comments.  Is there a playstyle they don't like?  Do they react particularly badly to people leaving bad highly upvoted answers on questions about whether or not druids can wild shape into swarms that misapply exegetical techniques to present an answer as RAW that is anything but?  Maybe the problem is the 'someone is wrong on the internet' thing.  Maybe it's something else.  Regardless, I would try to figure out what it was and bring it to the poster's attention the next time I saw them make a commentsplosion of hate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hear mods get PM powers.  This seems like a good time to use those.  Anyways, the message, public or private, would be something like &quot;Hey, we've noticed your comments are resulting in a lot of flags and arguments.  That means that something about the way you comment in at least some circumstances is problematic.  I think it's probably that (X thing) makes it hard for you not to post argumentatively, so maybe watch out for that.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problem persisted, other measures would need to be used, up to and including suspension, but I don't know anything about this really-- it's sort of a 'what tools do we have and what are the guidelines for using them' question so I'd definitely take direction from more senior mods there (especially since they've just gotten some advice on this from GraceNote).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I might talk to them, I might just leave it and let the community deal with it, I might post a comment and let the community deal with it, I might make some minor edits to it and reopen it.  The last one's pretty unlikely.  Mostly, I'd just support any community action towards re-opening.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting questions is kinda serious.  If the question wasn't spam/offensive and was deleted without being closed/any sort of deletion process allowing for community weigh in, I'd undelete the question and talk with the mod about it to confirm that the deletion was an accident, especially if the mod failed to leave any comment explaining the thought process there.  We don't really delete questions off the bat that often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-04-19T16:38:31.670" LastActivityDate="2017-04-19T16:38:31.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="6999" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7000" CreationDate="2017-04-19T21:01:10.137" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was skimming through the site's awarded badges and noticed that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/24/pundit&quot;&gt;Pundit badge&lt;/a&gt; has only been awarded 92 times, which seemed rather low considering the requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that mods will do comment clean up fairly regularly, I'm inclined to assume that highly rated comments may be getting deleted thereby preventing others from earning the badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is my assessment on this correct and if so, should we not delete comments that have 5 or more up votes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-19T21:03:15.727" LastActivityDate="2017-04-19T21:03:20.863" Title="Does Deleting Comments Impede People from Earning the Pundit Badge?" Tags="|discussion|comments|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6999" CreationDate="2017-04-19T21:03:20.863" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do not delete highly rated comments except for cause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-19T21:03:20.863" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7001" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-20T04:12:19.140" Score="2" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new user has asked a question about map making, specifically on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98436/how-can-i-figure-out-distances-for-a-map-im-using&quot;&gt;how to figure out distances&lt;/a&gt; for a map they made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the question, in its current form, is off-topic for the site's format, it seems like there is useful information there if only it were phrased in a more specific, RPG-related way. Map making is part of the job of most DMs, after all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this question be workshopped? What are the problems with it and how should those be addressed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T17:03:15.250" Title="How should this question about maps be workshopped?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7002" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7001" CreationDate="2017-04-20T04:47:33.313" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not off-topic. Asking for help with mapmaking is a perfectly valid question for the site. As SSD points out, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/map-making&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;map-making&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;map-making&lt;/a&gt; tag, and it has some perfectly good questions in it. Note that it wasn't closed as off-topic, it was closed as unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which brings me neatly to the next point: It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; unclear. The OP made this map themselves, and is asking &quot;How big is it?&quot; How should we know how big it is? It's not our map, and it's not a map of our imaginary world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also opinion-based. The only way to answer it is to answer &quot;How big do you think it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be?&quot;, which is pretty much directly a survey for opinions. Both of the answers provided have elected to answer with &quot;Well, how big do &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; think it should be? It's exactly that big.&quot; They include some suggestions for how to make that decision, but ultimately it still boils down to the OP deciding for themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as I'm going through close vote reasons, it's also pretty broad. Even ignoring the above problems, answers could easily justify anything from &quot;That map is the map of a tiny archipelago in the middle of the ocean&quot; to &quot;That map is a world map for a planet of similar size to Earth&quot; or even &quot;That map is the map for a world that is both flat and square&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to improve it, one way to go about that would be to tailor the question to the answers it received. This sounds kinda backwards, but given that the OP accepted SSD's answer, clearly they found it useful. So a question like &quot;How can I determine the overall scale of my map?&quot; might be better, and allow for answers that suggest things like &quot;pick a small distance, decide how long you want that to be, and scale up from there&quot; (example borrowed from SSD's answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-04-20T04:55:15.413" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T04:55:15.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7003" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-20T11:22:11.490" Score="4" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97735/how-to-balance-time-a-campaign-where-a-player-character-is-the-final-boss/&quot;&gt;How to balance/time a campaign where a player character is the final boss?&lt;/a&gt;. It was deemed off-topic by the mods and users decided to down-vote it, according to the comments because the question was unclear (which in their opinion makes for an unclear answer, regardless of actual content of the answer). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't agree with the opinion that you need a clear question to frame-challenge it's very clear premise, but ok. Enough people thought that a frame challenge is off-topic. To quote a mod:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Notably, this answer is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; on topic to the question now that it's been clarified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I came back and lo and behold, guess what has made the top-voted answer, with no comments on how off-topic it is? Yes, the very same frame-challenge I posted 5 hours earlier. Basically, an answer that says &quot;I did what you ask, RPGs are not made for this, don't do it&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it better formatted? Sure. Is it better written? Maybe. Does it have an extra section on mitigation? Sure. But I guess in the 5 hours in between both answers, the same basic frame-challenge content suddenly &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; on-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There even is an answer that seems to have &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt; experience at all. None. And it does not seem to have gathered significantly more down-votes or &quot;off-topic&quot; comments than all the answers from experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what happened here? Can anyone explain the voting behavior to me? Why is the same frame-challenge to the same question suddenly on-topic 5 hours later?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-20T12:06:29.857" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T20:32:24.630" Title="Can somebody explain the inconsistent voting on this?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|voting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7003" CreationDate="2017-04-20T12:30:18.030" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;My guess would be temporal shenanigans. The original question that you answered is &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; different in tone and formatting and details than the one that stands currently. So there's a lot of disconnect between your answer and the current version of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because you answered it while it was still in &quot;this is my idea; any opinions?&quot; state, your answer doesn't address a lot of the details in the current question. It also doesn't &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; answer the question, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;even if you frame challenge, you should still answer the actual question.&lt;/a&gt; Your answer does not do this, mostly because all the relevant parts hadn't been written at the time you answered. They were added later, in an attempt to make the question on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new, higher voted answer does answer the original question. It starts off with &quot;you shouldn't do this&quot; (since it's a frame challenge) but it follows up with &quot;but if you really want to...&quot; in order to provide an answer in case the user wants to try it anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think if you update your answer to go over the details in the new question and give ways to accomplish it properly, it'll also be up-voted. (Although, at this point, you'd be better off leaving it deleted and making a new one I guess)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-20T12:44:15.440" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T12:44:15.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7001" CreationDate="2017-04-20T17:03:15.250" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As posed, this question has no answer and it might not be able to get work-shopped into an answerable form.  Critically, though, &lt;em&gt;I do not think that this makes it off-topic.&lt;/em&gt; I think that is often, and definitely in this case, a category error.  Knowing the reasons that a question cannot be answered can be useful both for the asker and the community as a whole.  But, I stress, there must be strong and well-articulated reasons for &quot;there is no answer&quot; to be a good answer.  &quot;I can't think of an answer,&quot; doesn't cut it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In this case, the reason is that terrain maps are widely understood to have fractal properties, meaning that it is nearly impossible to say if those features are small islands, big islands, or continent-scale land masses just by inspection.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to be answered, what has to happen is that the asker's underlying (and probably at the time unconscious) assumptions about the map need to be teased out.  (Probably in chat.)  The existing answer takes one tack-- the underlying assumption about travel times.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another tack is run with the idea that the planet is earth-sized, and then confirm that the map is the maps of the whole planet.  And then try not to think too hard about map projections, because clearly if the asker had been thinking about map projection styles they would have had a characteristic scale in mind. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A third (related) tack would be to ask questions about, say, cold zones in the north or south (i.e., are there polar effects that would break the fractal assumption at high ends.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without such information, the answer is, &quot;There is no answer, here's why.&quot;  With such information, the question might have a more direct answer or estimate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T17:03:15.250" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7003" CreationDate="2017-04-20T20:32:24.630" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Three factors I can see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You answered while it was an unclear question, which drew some of the downvotes (as explained in the comments on your deleted answer). Many people downvote answers on clearly OT questions. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You deleted your answer and never undeleted it, so it didn't get upvotes once the question was reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I downvoted the new similar answer too, as IMO 'don't do that' is a simplistic and non-game-style-respecting frame challenge on this question, so my voting isn't inconsistent :-)  The new answer has some &quot;well but if you do&quot; advice which makes it a better frame challenge, and it clearly cites experience as well.  Hmm, maybe I should remove my downvote. I still don't like the way it's stated as &quot;don't do this&quot; instead of &quot;the pvp feel isn't for everyone,&quot; however, so will let it stand.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-20T20:32:24.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7007" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-20T21:51:34.123" Score="10" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98500/29639&quot;&gt;Can you make a single roll multiple times?&lt;/a&gt; was marked as duplicate and at first &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49239/i-failed-to-open-a-lock-now-what&quot;&gt;I failed to open a lock. Now what?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; was the only linked 'duplicate' question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking a look at its answers I found that most of them, while still talking about the same issue, would not be helpful for the questioner from the new question because they were way to DM oriented ('when should you ask for a roll', 'what should be the consequences of a fail', ...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So I think, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98500/29639&quot;&gt;Can you make a single roll multiple times?&lt;/a&gt; is not a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49239/i-failed-to-open-a-lock-now-what&quot;&gt;I failed to open a lock. Now what?&lt;/a&gt;, because the answers are not applicable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now a second question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84883/how-many-times-may-a-character-attempt-a-skill-roll-for-the-same-test&quot;&gt;How many times may a character attempt a skill roll for the same test?&lt;/a&gt;, was linked as duplicate with (in my view) better fitting (but not perfect) top answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98500/29639&quot;&gt;Can you make a single roll multiple times?&lt;/a&gt; could be a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84883/how-many-times-may-a-character-attempt-a-skill-roll-for-the-same-test&quot;&gt;How many times may a character attempt a skill roll for the same test?&lt;/a&gt;, because the answers are applicable.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem now is, that the answers are applicable, but in my eyes missing something especially relevant for the new question, but when removing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49239/i-failed-to-open-a-lock-now-what&quot;&gt;I failed to open a lock. Now what?&lt;/a&gt; from the duplicate-question-list I wouldn't be able to answer on the new question nor on any linked duplicate, because they are themselves marked as duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My additions would also not fit in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; question, &lt;strong&gt;thus my request:&lt;/strong&gt; Remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49239/i-failed-to-open-a-lock-now-what&quot;&gt;I failed to open a lock. Now what?&lt;/a&gt; from the duplicate questions and reopen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84883/how-many-times-may-a-character-attempt-a-skill-roll-for-the-same-test&quot;&gt;How many times may a character attempt a skill roll for the same test?&lt;/a&gt; so we have one question asking for the general rules about skill-check-repeating and one question asking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29639" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T14:31:28.360" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T14:31:28.360" Title="This question about a problem from a player's perspective is not answered by the linked duplicate question from a DM's perspective" Tags="|discussion|questions|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6975" CreationDate="2017-04-21T13:56:26.663" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is too broad along several axes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's for &quot;any game&quot;.  Even in the 1970s there were many games. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's for &quot;the 1970s.&quot;  A whole decade of different groups, evolving playstyles, etc. in the infancy of the hobby.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's asking for a generalization of what all groups did, from anecdotes.  This effectively proves nothing - if you find 100 anecdotes of backstabbing, does that mean it was a general expectation among all/most/10% of groups? In those groups was it routine or occasional or a freak event and hence they're sharing the anecdote?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answerer is supposed to take those anecdotes and turn it into an assertion of what people &quot;nearly always&quot; did.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is closable along all 4 of those axes and would need to be fundamentally retooled to be viable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T13:56:26.663" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7010" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-21T14:51:26.900" Score="-1" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;When we mark a question as a duplicate and they are only 75% similar, there is a chance that the answers to the linked questions are not always applicable and thus useless for the questioner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially when there are 15 answers each about 300-500 words and all but one are too general/specific to fit in the context of the new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there should be a functionality to instead of this hint-box:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question already has an answer here:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another question &lt;em&gt;15 answers&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;strong&gt;can&lt;/strong&gt; make a hint-box like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question already has an answer here:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer by Username to another question &lt;em&gt;15 answers&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And link directly to the useful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can especially happen if one question is asking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and another one for pure rules. Or one question is very general and another one is quite specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29639" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T15:09:43.480" Title="When a linked duplicate question has dozens of answers we should be able to link to a specific one" Tags="|feature-request|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7010" CreationDate="2017-04-21T15:00:22.240" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is one of the (many) reasons why we are only supposed to mark question as duplicate when they are 100% the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we stick to that site rule, the situation shouldn't ever arise where we have to pick one answer to be the “right” answer for a duplicate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, we would only need this feature if we were already doing something wrong, so instead let's just keep making sure that we use duplicate closes right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Besides which, hold voters shouldn't ever have the power to designate answers as right and wrong. That would undermine the voting system that is the bedrock of the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T15:09:43.480" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T15:09:43.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7013" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-21T16:29:53.770" Score="3" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;An interesting aspect of the site (to me anyway—you might find my threshold for &lt;em&gt;interesting&lt;/em&gt; a little low) is that viewers of a user's profile can learn where the user is… &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; the user fills out his or her profile's &lt;em&gt;Location&lt;/em&gt; field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet many users leave their profile's &lt;em&gt;Location&lt;/em&gt; field empty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; knowing &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; people are. This isn't because I'm some creepy stalker dude or anything but, instead, because knowing where people are gives me just a tiny bit of insight into their words. For instance, it helps me put a voice to questions, answers, and comments. I mean, a recent comment said &lt;em&gt;Cheers!&lt;/em&gt; but because the user's profile's Location field was blank my headvoice didn't know if that &lt;em&gt;Cheers!&lt;/em&gt; was to be read &lt;em&gt;cheers&lt;/em&gt; like the title of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheers&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the long-running U. S. sitcom&lt;/a&gt; or, instead, &lt;em&gt;chirs&lt;/em&gt; like James Bond. Also, the user's location gives me a bit of context: for instance, it lets me know if the user posted the question, answer, or comment at, like, at 4 AM, noon, or 3 PM the user's time, which doesn't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; make a difference in the long run, but if the user later says that, for example, he was tired, that &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; kind of pull things together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I know this is really minor, but I'm interested. Is it already known why so many users are reluctant to fill in their profile's &lt;em&gt;Location&lt;/em&gt; entry? Is &lt;em&gt;RPG.SE&lt;/em&gt; unique among &lt;em&gt;SE&lt;/em&gt; sites in having a larger than normal percentage of users who &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; fill in their profile's &lt;em&gt;Location&lt;/em&gt; field? Can moderators reassure users who are reluctant to fill in their profile's &lt;em&gt;Location&lt;/em&gt; field that the information entered goes no deeper than what the field says so that the user privacy is assured despite the profile listing, for example, a user's city or even nation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T16:43:24.547" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T09:23:58.810" Title="What stops users from putting their locations in their profiles?" Tags="|discussion|profile-page|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7014" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-21T16:41:35.757" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As someone who filled in his profile and location only this week, after being a member for over 2 years, the reason I did it was because with the upcoming election is was going over a bunch of profiles and realized mine was still empty, and I wondered if anyone was checking mine and finding nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I hadn't done it before was simply because I didn't really see the point in filling it out. It's only with the election (and the previous one) that I feel a need to try and find out some &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; information about people. The rest of the time, it doesn't really matter who you are, where you're from, or what time it is when you post; you are judged on the stuff you write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And to be honest, I'm really happy the usernames are &lt;em&gt;under&lt;/em&gt; the posts, and I wouldn't mind an option to remove them entirely, as I'd rather judge the questions and answers without being biased by who's writing them. I like the feeling that, for the most part, it doesn't matter who you are here, as long as you're contributing value.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T16:41:35.757" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-21T16:43:41.383" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's probably &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_effect_(psychology)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the default effect&lt;/a&gt;: most people leave things in forms in their original state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People are even more likely to do that since our Location isn't really important to any of our day-to-day activity on the site. It's also out of the way; most users wouldn't even think about the fact they have an empty Location field.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need to take any specific action or assurance, it's okay to leave things this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T16:43:41.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-21T17:20:13.810" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's another perspective: I just don't like filling that stuff out. Call me paranoid, but I try to keep an air of mystery on anything that would link to me personally unless someone (beyond a text field) asks me specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I do fill it out, it's only because of one or more of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It would be relevant to most of the things I would discuss on the site (such as on SEs like Workplace, Travel, and Academia)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being anonymous would be counterproductive (such as when seeking employment, like filling out a Developer Story on SO)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or, alternatively, because the site is perfectly fine with being fed a joke in that field, and so I make use of that fact to help build my persona online.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that in mind, sites like Workplace, Travel, Academia, and StackOverflow probably have a higher percentage of users who fill that out. Here, though, location has little relevance to the topics at hand, so less people would feel inclined to bother, I imagine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25739" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T17:20:13.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-21T18:50:12.323" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Joshua Aslan Smith&lt;/strong&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3#post-98331&quot;&gt;Moderation Nomination&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about &lt;em&gt;yourself&lt;/em&gt; do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've certainly had differences of opinion with Mxyzplk during his moderatorship and with SevenSidedDie as a user in the past. I disagreed strongly with the handling of rules-as-written by the mod team at the time and over game-rec questions being moved off topic. On a philosophical point I believe that once that Diamond goes next to your name all of your actions reflect on the mod team. Users can and will attribute actions a mod take as a user as a moderator action because the diamond can signal in a lot of the same ways a uniform or a badge does. My professional background working in Information Systems gives me a lot of experience at working towards solutions with stakeholders and sourcing direction from the ground up where this has not always been the strong suite of the moderator team in the past and I could help improve that with my experience. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said I do believe that I can really work with Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie in the moderation of the site. Both are very quick and effective at handling comments, spam, junk/troll answers and questions and doing a lot of the manual labor of moderation. I believe that they both have the best interests of the site at heart and that together we can work to improve and maintain RPG.SE. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would ask those who feel this way to talk to me and describe what happened, how they feel the moderator acted incorrectly and just generally listen to everything they have to say. I would then seek out the moderator in question and ask them what happened from their perspective. I would bring up the issues raised by the users and discuss among the mod team how we could address their concerns and make changes to prevent similar issues from occurring again in the future. Once we had a plan of action I would initiate contact with the users and try to resolve the difference of opinion, if needed I would create a meta question to find community consensus on the resolution. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by &lt;strike&gt;another moderator&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first step would be to invite those who felt mistreated to explain their side of the issue, going into detail of where they believe I acted wrongly and what their preferred outcome would have been. I would also talk to to the other moderators about this issue because they may also be able to see the any mistakes made where my virtue of my personal perspective I might not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would try to smooth over any problems that occurred if I was able to see how I was wronged, but if I could not see what happened, and they still felt aggrieved I would ask a respected 3rd party (a high rep user not involved) to look at the issue and help myself and those affected find the right solution and modify my own behavior if it is causing problems. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally the site runs pretty smoothly: users handle a lot of the review and flagging. The current mods do a good job of handling flags and handling the activities only a diamond mod can. That said there are reputation issues that the Mod team faces over past actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I myself as a user have felt spurned my the Mod team's previous Judge Dredd-esque  &quot;I Am the Law&quot; attitude on the meta site and while I get along with Mxyzplk now I was party to some of the less then stellar comments he used to leave during the RAW disputes on D&amp;amp;D 4e questions. I believe the site moderation is moving in the right direction, Mxyzplk's more recent activity is a kinder, gentler version of his moderation. The &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing&quot;&gt;How are we doing&lt;/a&gt;&quot; meta question displayed an openness and willingness for critique that has at times been lacking in the past. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that myself, Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie could &quot;do business&quot; and work together in the moderation of the site. My interactions with SevenSidedDie have always gone well and after 4e and rules-as-written dispute died down I've also maintained a good relationship with Mxyzplk. I believe that working together we could continue to improve the Moderator and community interactions and make sure that Moderators act purely as stewards and mechanics letting the community drive the decisions whenever possible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the first, If I disagree with the community, but the community has consensus and there is nothing against site policies then my job is to get out of the way and support the community consensus regardless of my personal opinions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the second situation the best action would be to do nothing and revisit the issue at a later time to see if the community is then able to form a consensus on the right course of action. As moderator I would contribute my own answer to a meta question that is seeking to find consensus on the issue and try to prompt more discussions to help reach consensus. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am worried that a casual comment or a simple misunderstanding based on how I wrote a statement may lead a new user to feel disgruntled or rebuffed by our site. As a moderator I feel I will need to be extra judicious about my wording to prevent this. I think this is something I can achieve but if there was a fear about moderation it would be negatively affecting new users by accident. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that working with Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie in addition to regular interaction with the community in chat I can help avoid that and I will always be ready to seek the advice of some of the long standing members of the community like BESW as I interact with users in the community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am excited at the prospect of helping facilitate community events and growth like those that occurred around D&amp;amp;D 5e's release. I know we can't have a contest to give a away books for every major RPG release, but I believe we can have more community events and interaction to boost site membership and help grow the content in RPG.SE. I'm also looking forward to helping the site run doing whatever I can to keep the engine that is RPG.SE functioning without errors and overall continuing to work with the users in the community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Earlier in my RPG.SE life I definitely was a participant in some lengthy chat arguments that were ultimately not beneficial to anyone and I've personally seen the disruptions that can occur in answers, comments and questions when high rep users feud over philosophical and site policy issues. The Rules-As-Written tag controversies exemplified these type of issue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As moderator I would encourage civility and respect between all users on the site regardless of their reputation. I would specifically remind high rep users causing disruptions of the Site policies and our goals towards creating high quality questions and answers and frame the issues against that. How does a rambling comments argument across multiple questions help the questions and answers and the site itself?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments would be moved to a specific chatroom if they wished to continue the discussion or deleted if the comments themselves were against site policy. I would encourage discussion be limited to a Meta question(s) on the issue and create a chatroom as an appropriate place for the discussion/argument to continue so long as those involved remained civil. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've gotten a ridiculous amount of value out of being a member of the community at RPG.SE and while I feel I certainly contribute as a regular member I want to do more and help moderate the site as a diamond mod. I take intrinsic value from helping people and solving problems, and doing my very best to help maintain a standard of service and quality in my work and personal life. This includes doing behind the scenes support tasks (most of my professional work).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First if there were any offensive comments or serious behavior issues (flame wars, attacking other users directly, etc.) I would take action immediately and any appropriate responses (deleting content, chat suspensions, etc.) would be levied. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However if it was a  more well-meaning, but poorly executed communication issue I would observe if any regular community members had or were already taking steps to address the issue. There is a lot of great self-regulation within the RPG.SE community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If non-mod users had or were approaching the issue I would wait and see if they could affect change by their actions. However if it did not work or no one else had talked to the user yet I would invite them to a private chat on SE to discuss the issue. I would reiterate the site policy on comments and their use and explain how they were a valuable member with their contributions but that their comments were causing issues and a distraction. I would ask them if they had any questions from me or any of the other mods for how to improve and avoid flags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would privately discuss it with the other mods first to find the reasoning and hear their justification for their actions.  In the case of a closed question if I still disagreed I would let the community handle deciding to reopen the question as there are a large number of users capable of casting reopen votes.  In terms of deletion if I found I something truly egregious and after their explanation still could not support it I would bring it to the attention of the Stack Exchange community team to review. I should not that since I've gain accessed via Rep privilege to view deleted items I have never seen something deleted that I thought should not be. In the end I believe its import to communicate and generally try to reach consensus on moderation application. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2017-04-21T18:50:12.323" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7018" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-21T19:18:49.007" Score="26" ViewCount="578" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;This was originally a response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6895/1204&quot;&gt;How is the community doing?&lt;/a&gt;, but has been moved to its own question on request.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The community’s situation is improving, but acknowledgements &amp;amp; commitments need to be made so we can heal the wounds in our community.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's safe to say that we all share the same goal of improving the site and moving forward rather than dwelling on the past. But that doesn't (can't) mean ignoring the past. In particular we need to resolve the difficulty and poor health of our meta context, a situation which is the direct result of past actions. Those past actions are still prominent in the text of our site as well as in the collective memory of the community. We need to face the cause of our meta problems by addressing them with decisions that are mindful of the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider: we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6910/1204&quot;&gt;an answer about meta process issues&lt;/a&gt; voted to the top of our community check-in feedback request; many of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6901/2017-moderator-election-qa-question-collection&quot;&gt;election questionnaire submissions&lt;/a&gt; are about fair or unfair treatment and trust; surprisingly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6913/1204&quot;&gt;an unfounded complaint&lt;/a&gt; with an astronomical number of downvotes is nevertheless garnering several upvotes. Members of the community feel a vibe of something being not quite right between ordinary users and the diamond moderator team, and neither group are sure how exactly to relate to each other anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m going to talk about what’s going on and what we can do from here. I believe nobody is incorrigible, and I’m not out for revenge or recompense. I honestly believe everyone wants to work together to get through this and improve our community’s atmosphere of collaboration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Ideal&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to start the meat of this post with my thoughts on the roles of moderators and the community in a Stack Exchange community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators should see themselves and be seen by others as just ordinary community members; they are not administrators nor the bosses. The community should set policy as a whole, and the mods should work to enforce it. Some of these moderators get entrusted with a diamond to perform some sensitive tasks only a few can do: mostly &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75189/who-are-the-diamond-moderators-and-what-is-their-role&quot;&gt;handle flags and trouble&lt;/a&gt;. According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/site-moderators&quot;&gt;the diamond moderator help page&lt;/a&gt; most of their work “is mundane”, and they do “as little as possible”. They will sometimes have to “deal with controversial issues on which not everyone agrees”, but they should mostly just have to deal with it like the rest of the community (this quote's context is in a paragraph asking other community members to be compassionate toward them while they do so). They are, after all, just ordinary community members and moderators. Those diamond moderators should “lead by example” and “show respect for their fellow community members in their actions and words.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rest of the moderation community (all site members) should feel comfortable relating to their elected diamond moderator representatives as roughly equals. The community’s newer and less experienced members may look to the older and more experienced members from time to time for guidance, including but not exclusively the diamond moderators. Those experienced members (diamond moderators included) should share their wisdom and set a good example. The community members should work to empower the diamond moderators to handle the tasks they were elected with privileges to perform. Community members should take the diamond moderators’ input on board as they would with other members. Community members (diamond or not) should all be answerable to each other without exception.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our Current Situation&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I stated everything in the previous section because &lt;strong&gt;right now our community doesn't look like that at all.&lt;/strong&gt; There's a crisis of identity between established members and the diamond moderator team which is still visibly affecting us. I feel that it comes down to two generally identified factors. There's no way to sugarcoat this so I'm going to speak plainly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mxyzplk's general behaviour was unacceptably poor until recently: ad hominem, reframing of members’ positions as foolish straw man versions, and generally multitudinous violations of Be Nice. Any ordinary citizen (let alone a diamond moderator who must lead by example) should be brought in line or suspended for doing these things for this long, but Mxyzplk has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written/6078#comment17528_6078&quot;&gt;publicly asserted they’ve never committed any wrongdoing&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past six months Mxyzplk turned around his behaviour. However Mxyzplk’s past misbehaviour is still prominently displayed by the site with Mxyzplk yet to take responsibility for it and edit it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many established members feel the power dynamic is not as it should be. Their meta voice has been lost or diminished. They feel the site is now run by and answerable to the diamond moderators. They don't see the diamond moderators working alongside others to direct the community’s course, and feel that somehow the diamond moderators have become exceptions to the rule of everyone being answerable to each other.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might not find these factors totally encapsulate what you feel and think and have seen. It’s my attempts to summarise my thoughts after more than a year of processing all of this stuff, and I’m trying to encapsulate dozens of meta posts and hundreds of comments and chat posts. This is difficult subtext to distill and I’m just one person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What Happened&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first of those issues needs no more words said right now. The second requires some explaining of how we got there. Basically, we got there via the events following game-rec ban. I want to be clear: that they were banned, and remain banned, is not the problem and never was. The problems emerged in the events that followed. I’m not sure the diamond moderators fully understand and appreciate what damage was done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn’t go through these events if I didn’t need to. However I think it’s necessary to do so here. I need to establish the context of where issues originated or escalated, and what effect those events had that is still relevant to our current situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5711/1204&quot;&gt;a feedback thread on game-recs&lt;/a&gt; (which had no indication of being binding), the diamond moderators made a ruling to ban game-recs and other (unmentioned) subjects. It was within the diamond moderators’ purview, given the site’s history with game-rec and their poll of the community’s thoughts, to make this ruling. However the diamond moderators never took responsibility for independently making this ruling: their line was, and remained, that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5755/1204&quot;&gt;they merely did what voters told them to do&lt;/a&gt;. (See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide/5849#comment16221_5849&quot;&gt;Oct ‘15&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27489770#27489770&quot;&gt;Feb ‘16&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a community member &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5753/the-policy-change-regarding-game-rec-questions-needs-review&quot;&gt;pointed out the lack of confirmation was an issue and due process was not followed&lt;/a&gt;, and garnered significant agreement and support from the community, that member was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5756&quot;&gt;personally attacked by a diamond moderator&lt;/a&gt;, and their complaints were dismissed simply &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27490134#27490134&quot;&gt;by virtue&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27490161#27490161&quot;&gt;who they were&lt;/a&gt; with no regard to the content of their complaint or the community's general support for the complaint. The aforementioned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5755/1204&quot;&gt;“we just did what you told us to do”&lt;/a&gt; line emerged here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When community members &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5843/tool-recommendations-arent-off-topic-yet-or-let-the-community-actually-decide&quot;&gt;protested that subjects never even mentioned in the Game Recommendations feedback had been banned&lt;/a&gt;, the diamond moderators said &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5856/1204&quot;&gt;this is how it is now because the mods say so, too bad&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] the mod interpretation of current state is as I've stated it above. Therefore it is fact, as we're the ones that have to enforce it, and we see no clear reason we should be interpreting past discussion in a different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The diamond moderator team &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27489653#27489653&quot;&gt;apparently believed their actions to be completely right&lt;/a&gt; (see also &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27489629#27489629&quot;&gt;this following message&lt;/a&gt;) even after all these protests, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27490105#27490105&quot;&gt;consciously dismissed all negative response&lt;/a&gt;. When &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words&quot;&gt;a community member attempted to have us discuss what was going wrong so we could improve things&lt;/a&gt;, the diamond moderators &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/#comment17611_6080&quot;&gt;publicly disengaged&lt;/a&gt; and Mxyzplk expressed that they felt the effort was just “the usual suspects muckracking”. (To the diamond moderator team’s credit, they &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; engage in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6090/is-something-wrong&quot;&gt;a subsequent “let’s talk please” question&lt;/a&gt; and listen to and engage with the community regarding peoples’ concerns.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some point the diamond moderators understood that &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/27489510#27489510&quot;&gt;many voters had a different understanding of game recommendation policy to them&lt;/a&gt;. However when confronted by the fact many community members did not know as much about the policy history as they did, they had to this point consistently responded with belligerence and blame, instead of trying to understand where those users were coming from or helping those people understand the historical context and policies. These policies were after all discussed and established in 2011, which was before most of our active meta community was even on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Where That Leaves Us&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk and SevenSidedDie, you never intended to do any harm, but you’ve succumbed to a bugbear that’s poisoned the Mod Voice. Since or perhaps even prior to the game-rec ban, your conversation with the rest of the community has been infused with a sense of superiority, and you pervasively dismiss the input of others as uninformed, emotional, trivial, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5991/are-podcast-recommendations-off-topic/5995#comment17050_5995&quot;&gt;confused&lt;/a&gt;, etc. Objections get dismissed on the basis &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5856/1204&quot;&gt;they’re just claims of mod abuse&lt;/a&gt; (even when they aren’t, and such claims should not be lightly dismissed anyway); or simply because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6080/lets-do-that-thing-where-we-use-our-words/6087#comment17611_6080&quot;&gt;they’re “the same five people” who “will always be upset”&lt;/a&gt; — which as TuggyNE pointed out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6101/1204&quot;&gt;in point 3 of this post here&lt;/a&gt; can always just be used to dismiss any arbitrary individual, and was in fact used to disengage with a good-faith discussion above: see the “muckracking” comment. Several users expect to be dismissed outright by the diamond moderators irrespective of the content of their words simply because of who they are, and anybody can become one of these users at any time. This poisons the meta well and disempowers the community. You have also exhibited a tendency to shift responsibility for your own actions onto the community: the community is responsible for the diamond moderators’ decision to ban game-recs, not the diamond moderators themselves; the community is responsible for not having fully understood the ancient game-rec contexts of 2011, the diamond moderators aren’t responsible for clarifying things to them; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing#comment21315_6910&quot;&gt;the community is responsible for fixing up Mxyzplk’s indiscretions&lt;/a&gt;, not Mxyzplk. You need to recognise this bugbear for what it is and extricate it from your behaviour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve seen signs you both might already be recognising the bugbear and making efforts to eliminate it. However, simply stopping bugbear behaviour isn’t enough to change the meta atmosphere and help the community heal. You’ve engaged in this behaviour for a long period of time. The community needs to see that you recognise it was a problem and that you intend to not repeat it. The community hasn’t seen that, so instead we see a tacit signal that you believe such behaviour was totally OK, and that we should expect to see the bugbear again in comparable circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves the community working in an uncomfortable context: we try to avoid circumstances that would see the bugbear re-emerge, which limits what we’re capable of doing since we expect to see the bugbear in such circumstances as “comment on problematic behaviour” or “discuss policy”. Concurrently with the bugbear’s extermination, community members need to un-learn the habit of evaluating the moderators’ words under the bugbear-poisoned version of the Mod Voice. Steady periods without bugbear behaviour, and suspicions it might finally have disappeared, are set back by events such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6457/1204&quot;&gt;a user being told they were suspended because they disobeyed a mod&lt;/a&gt; (as opposed to “you ignored a Stack guideline/policy”): those events reinforce our paranoia that the bugbear is in fact still out there waiting for us; that we should continue to be fearful of it re-emerging, and so we continue to see the community in this light:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Things work the way the diamond moderators say they work. The community does what they say, not the other way around.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Diamond moderators get to say how policy works. The rest of the community only has any say in how policy works if it is compatible with what the diamond moderators say.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If anyone in the community has an issue with what the diamond moderators are doing, it doesn't matter.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These phenomena had a disastrously harmful effect on our community as the game-rec fiasco was unfolding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multiple members left the site completely or reduced their activity to almost nil. (This is not speculation — there are individuals who have explicitly cited to me the game-rec fiasco and the diamond team’s behaviour as their reason for reducing their activity or leaving the site.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multiple members have expressly stated in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing&quot;&gt;How is the community doing?&lt;/a&gt; that they just left meta completely. (If they don’t have any voice anyway, what’s the difference?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I and some others sharply decreased our curation work and/or meta activity following all of this because we felt this was no longer our site (so why bother?).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The degradation of the community/diamond relationship escalated very soon afterwards &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6074/a-proposal-for-moving-forward-with-rules-as-written&quot;&gt;when the diamond moderator team proposed re-assessing another tag’s topicality&lt;/a&gt;. A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6078/1204&quot;&gt;significant number of individuals in the community&lt;/a&gt; (22 people!) indicated lack of trust in the diamond moderator team’s ability to act in good faith and manage a conflict of interest appropriately. They backed concern that the diamond moderators would not act in the interest of the community but in fact in their own self-interest. This being mere months after the game rec issue, I think it is reasonable to further assert the meta community was largely unwilling to entrust the moderators with another re-evaluation over whether a topic should be banned. The community's mistrust in these fundamental moderator qualities (that they will act in good faith, in the community’s interest, and manage conflicts of interest appropriately) is a major breakdown in the community/diamond relationship.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trust between the community and the diamond moderators is still enormously damaged and has never been repaired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Where Do We Go From Here?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The diamond moderators can't change the past, and they want to move forward with everyone else and do good work with the community. However that's difficult to do properly without acknowledging the past and consciously working to address its effects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I myself have accepted the policy outcomes of what happened (various things getting banned), but I’m still frustrated that the diamond moderators did everything I listed as a problem and I’m not sure how on earth they never realised the extent of the damage they were doing. This is stuff I still need to get over myself, because this frustration gets in the way of interacting with the diamond moderators, including my writing this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie and Mxyzplk, I feel you need to do the following at minimum:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Acknowledge specifically what things you did that were in breach of acceptable behaviour as community members and as diamond moderators. Show understanding of what you did and why it was a problem. Take responsibility for these actions. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6123/is-something-wrong-yes-pervasive-ad-hominem-and-judgmental-behaviors/6125#comment17940_6125&quot;&gt;See this comment&lt;/a&gt;, and note the degree of support it received. (Do this however works for you. I am not expecting it to be a response to this post, nor am I expecting that it must happen immediately.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reflect on how you can restore your interactions with the rest of the community to a healthy working relationship: you need to engage with everyone else as equals and as fellow community members. You must no longer interact with everyone as if you are the site administrators. You must leave behind the bugbear that's poisoning your conversations. In whatever way works for you (doesn’t have to be public), commit yourself to new ways of behaving that foster a healthy site of equals. I see signs you've already started doing this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clean up (yourselves) the past misbehaviour that’s still floating around, rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing#comment21315_6910&quot;&gt;shifting the responsibility to everyone else&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our community’s current situation is unhealthy and unsustainable. I don’t feel a necessary fix is for either of you to step down. If you can’t do any of these things, though, we’ll remain on this unsustainable course and &lt;em&gt;somehow&lt;/em&gt; things are going to get worse. I don’t think any of us want the current meta atmosphere to persist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rest of the community shares responsibility for our site's health, too. Members need to engage in meta dialog with good faith toward the diamond moderators. The diamond moderators can hardly even propose discussion nowadays without setting off alarm bells. I’ll grant that this is because of the poisoned Mod Voice, but if the diamond moderators take this seriously and work to reintegrate with the community, the whole community needs to give them room in which they can do that. Ordinary community members should give feedback to the diamond moderators on whatever they’re doing that &lt;em&gt;works&lt;/em&gt; so that they can do more of that. All of us need to use our community moderation tools courageously and thoughtfully to curate a positive environment by modeling and encouraging desired behaviour and by calling attention to and addressing toxic behaviour, whether through flagging, voting, meta discussion, CM involvement, or any of our other tools as appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Special thanks goes to BESW, without whose dedicated editing, guidance and balancing perspectives this post could not have been finished.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-21T21:00:25.617" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T13:42:11.160" Title="Feedback on healing our community" Tags="|discussion|meta|community|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="35" ClosedDate="2017-04-30T18:24:11.403" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7019" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6973" CreationDate="2017-04-21T21:24:25.223" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In terms of working relationship, the current moderation team has a good level of alignment — and a lack of diversity. In what ways do you see your skills and philosophy complementing the skills and philosophy of the existing (and future) moderators? In what ways do you see your moderatorship aligning? In other words, what about yourself do you expect to bring in terms of diversity of modding approach, and what in terms of similarity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as alignment, I'm as aligned as they come. Lawful Neutral to be exact. I don't see that clashing too much with the current moderation team. Unless one of them's a halfling. Can't stand those chaotic neutral jerks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a thorough (and convoluted) investigation, I will point my index finger Layton-style and banish the offending party. Should I find the moderator innocent, then my finger of banishment shall turn unto the stone-slingers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator you? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, verify them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue was with me? I would apologize. And give you donuts. Sugar heals all wounds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like the policies as stand. I shall uphold them and vehemently oppose any party who shall try to amend them without approval from 2/3rds of... oops, that would be wrong document I'm thinking of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't reiterate this enough. I'm a Modron. I am law and order. No consensus? I will make one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do I look forward to? The power.&#xA;What do I fear? The power corrupting.&#xA;What can you do to help? More power.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sometimes, we end up with multiple mid-to-high rep users arguing over a question, or a meta policy, or something else that happened on the site. These arguments can often range all over the site: from meta posts, to chat, to the main site. As a mod, what would you do to defuse arguments among users in good standing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a Lawful Modron, the only answer to this would be to choose a winning party with my (correct and just) intuition and banish the losing party. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I live on the internet. It's only right that I become unto the internet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, from the phrasing of the issue, it sounds like the issue is with the commentators. No action needed on the part of the answering party, but swift justice will be netted out to the offending commentators. With a net. I own a net. Definitely not a Pokemon bedspread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per the Gentleman's Bylaws, Article 7 I would issue a challenge of duel. I may be a loose cannon, but I stand by tradition!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33317" LastEditorUserId="33317" LastEditDate="2017-04-24T14:57:09.650" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T14:57:09.650" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-22T00:50:14.273" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;For interest's sake, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;41% of our users&lt;/a&gt; have filled in their Location. (Surprisingly, removing 1-rep users only boosts this to &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;47%&lt;/a&gt;. On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;76%&lt;/a&gt; of the users who have put anything in their About Me.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For comparison's sake, only &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;17% of SO users&lt;/a&gt; have done the same. Workplace manages &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/workplace/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;48%&lt;/a&gt;. Travel has &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/travel/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;38%&lt;/a&gt;. Academia, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/academia/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;36%&lt;/a&gt;. MSE, &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/meta.stackexchange/query/661524/percentage-of-users-with-a-location&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;49%&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy to do any other sites that people are interested in seeing (it's just a couple of clicks), but I'll wait for that rather than picking ones at random. Personally, my conclusion is that we're probably pretty average in this respect. Given that 76% of users who filled out their About Me also filled Location, it seems more likely to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7015/15469&quot;&gt;the default effect&lt;/a&gt; than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7016/15469&quot;&gt;privacy&lt;/a&gt; that is the issue at play here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-04-24T00:07:20.610" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T00:07:20.610" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7021" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-22T04:39:13.650" Score="21" ViewCount="244" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's an election going on right now, and as a result there's rather a lot of discussion about the role that moderators play on this site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...actually, that conversation has been going on for quite a while. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the hardest problems that faces those hardy souls who step up to nominate themselves in an election is the question of &lt;em&gt;what they hope to accomplish&lt;/em&gt;. An awful lot of what moderators do on a day-to-day basis is not terribly visible; I've seen a lot of moderators compare themselves to janitors: you only tend to notice them when a mess &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; get cleaned up promptly. As a result, many candidates go into the election process without a clear idea of what to expect should they emerge on the other side with a diamond next to their name...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the start of the year, I &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/340815/2016-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;posted a list of moderator actions&lt;/a&gt; for 2016 on Stack Overflow, with the goal of making the work handled by moderators - diamond or otherwise - a bit more transparent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's get some of that information visible here too, shall we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2017-04-22T04:39:13.650" Title="What do moderators do here?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7021" CreationDate="2017-04-22T04:39:13.650" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;As requested by myself, here's a birds-eye view into what actually happened on Role-playing Games Stack Exchange moderation-wise over the past 365 days, for your collective edification and bemusement:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Action                                  Moderators Community¹ &#xA;--------------------------------------- ---------- --------- &#xA;Users suspended²                              23          8  &#xA;Users destroyed                               81          0  &#xA;Users deleted                                 20          0  &#xA;Users contacted                               40          0  &#xA;User suspensions lifted early                  1          0  &#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Suggested Edit queue         68       2082  &#xA;Tasks reviewed: Reopen Vote queue             56       2071  &#xA;Tasks reviewed: Low Quality Posts queue       10       1212  &#xA;Tasks reviewed: Late Answer queue              7        751  &#xA;Tasks reviewed: First Post queue              24       2662  &#xA;Tasks reviewed: Close Votes queue             87       3788  &#xA;Tags merged                                   21          0  &#xA;Tag synonyms proposed                         17          2  &#xA;Tag synonyms created                          21          0  &#xA;Revisions redacted                             1          0  &#xA;Questions unprotected                          2          5  &#xA;Questions reopened                           269        166  &#xA;Questions protected                           27         72  &#xA;Questions migrated                             5          1  &#xA;Questions merged                               5          0  &#xA;Questions flagged⁴                             9        766  &#xA;Questions closed                             735        980  &#xA;Question flags handled                       356        419  &#xA;Posts unlocked                                16          9  &#xA;Posts undeleted                               45        125  &#xA;Posts locked                                 104         83  &#xA;Posts deleted⁵                               683       1551  &#xA;Posts bumped                                   0        143  &#xA;Escalations to the CM team                     6          0  &#xA;Comments undeleted                           193          0  &#xA;Comments flagged                             683       1841  &#xA;Comments deleted⁶                          15644       5200  &#xA;Comment flags handled                       2386        138  &#xA;Bounties canceled                              3          0  &#xA;Answers flagged                               41       1658  &#xA;Answer flags handled                        1145        554  &#xA;All comments on a post moved to chat         183          0  &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &quot;Community&quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the vast membership of RPG&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/340791/why-doesnt-the-user-community-have-a-more-personal-name&quot;&gt;affectionately referred to&lt;/a&gt; as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 3 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 3, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ This ignores a good chunk of deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastActivityDate="2017-04-22T04:39:13.650" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-22T06:27:02.363" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, because I haven't figured out how to edit my profile. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't obvious the few times I looked, and I am not particularly motivated to spread personal info around. So, &quot;not immediately obvious&quot; was a high enough barrier to make me leave everything blank.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2017-04-22T06:27:02.363" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7024" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7018" CreationDate="2017-04-22T17:52:39.310" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Preface: The Devil's Advocate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me begin by saying: &quot;I don't have a dog in this fight.&quot; I was not there to witness the explosion and the fallout. I did not know of either side's issues, woes, or agonies. And while this hurts my expertise in terms of my factual knowledge, I believe it gives me plus points for impartiality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not personally have a side, but I will play the Devil's Advocate (at least, until the conversation picks up from the other parties) and voice what I believe to be impartial criticisms of your question, doppelgreener, in defense of the moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Arena is Rigged&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener, what you have done is publicly accuse another member of this community for actions that they have denied doing in the past. Due to this fact, this conversation is tipped in favor of you and your camp from the beginning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you are publicly accused of misuse, malpractice, or otherwise bad behavior, the best response is to not respond at all. This is because anything the accused party has to say will now and forever be shaded by the accusations that have been put forth, and there is no way for them to respond without seeming defensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so, unless SevenSidedDie and Mxyzplk engage with you in this conversation beginning with &quot;you're right,&quot; their backs will be against the walls should they decide to engage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless a third party steps in to bridge the gap, they cannot speak on their behalf without falling prey to the traps in this discussion that I outlined above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Throwing Doubt on the Evidence&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To begin your question, you have presented &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6910#6910&quot;&gt;the top voted answer in the community checkup&lt;/a&gt;. The claim is, because it is the top-voted answer and is well-supported by upvotes, it must represent the community consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have also presented &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6901/2017-moderator-election-qa-question-collection&quot;&gt;the Election Questionnaire&lt;/a&gt; as evidence, submitting them as being about &quot;fair or unfair treatment and trust.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, you mention in the opening to your question with a severely &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6913#6913&quot;&gt;downvoted answer&lt;/a&gt;, but cite that it has garnered some upvotes, and so many people seem to share the unfounded sentiment that the moderation community should step down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken as a whole, this sets the tone that there is mistrust between the moderation team and the community in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is An Upvote Necessarily A Statement Of Full Support?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider the problems of the upvote/downvote system: it is binary, and it is either &quot;I agree&quot; or &quot;I disagree.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you (the hypothetical &quot;you&quot;) see a Meta answer discussing the issues of problems in our process, it is possible you may not fully agree with each and every point raised in that answer. However, you might agree with most of those points, and since you generally agree with their answers, you upvote. If you agree with 80% of the statements made, for example, it is reasonable to upvote that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6910#6910&quot;&gt;top-voted answer's&lt;/a&gt; main message is that we have process problems, and goes on to illustrate this with some specific instances of things they perceived as problems. Is an upvote evidence that they agree with all the stated examples, or is it evidence that they think some of these examples are good enough for an upvote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider that answer's many distinct points raised in the first paragraph:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;game-rec/tool-rec thing&quot; was a problem (first point, and evidently many agree with this)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There have been many failures of process since then (second point, second sentence)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Moderation takes such a hostile stance to disagreement regarding appropriate site procedure and policy (third point, third sentence)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Moderation seems incapable of listening to &quot;loud, angry [..] users&quot; (fourth point, third sentence)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first point seems to me to be generally agreed upon, and it seems to me that many agree with this strongly. Given that, would it not be likely that they will upvote only for that specific example? Have you asked the 34 upvoters if they agree with the exact stance of the given answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is A Top-Voted Answer Necessarily Representative of the Community?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a third option to upvote/downvote, and that is no vote at all. Consider how many people go to Main vs Meta. Further consider how many people may have read the current top-voted answer and decided not to vote. Do we know the stats? What is the rate of answer-viewing to upvoting? What are the reasons of those who saw this answer and downvoted (there is one) and those who saw this question and chose not to vote? Have you asked them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A Weak Conclusion: Upvotes Are Not Enough Grounds&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we are talking about generating consensus, especially about Moderator behavior, a binary &quot;I agree&quot; or &quot;I disagree&quot; does not cut it. We need to know the specifics. We need to know what each upvoter thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not dismantle your opening statements, but it is a way to poke a hole in it, no matter how tiny.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our Current Situation, What Happened, Where That Leaves Us: Are You Suffering from Confirmation Bias?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have presented your personal thoughts on the matter, and you bring as evidence the community votes as well as the voices of some other community members who agree with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How many people did you have this conversation with, and was there a dissenter in that conversation? Or did the conversation include only a few people who were already inclined to share your point of view? If there was a diverse and even opposite view point from a non-moderator, how did you approach their dissenting opinion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your discussions, did you consider the possibility that your stance might be wrong, and if so, how did you go about that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Moderators are not asked to sit on their hands&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk has said before &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6141/27327&quot;&gt;that it is an abdication of responsibility&lt;/a&gt; to participate as a moderator in a non-moderator fashion. They receive instructions from the powers that be that, to do moderation, you must actively curate. No less than Jeff Atwood said that if a moderator is afraid to moderate, they should not be a moderator. You must close a question if you believe it is supposed to be closed, you must ban a user if you believe they are supposed to be banned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is my impression that this was not the only time Myxzplk and SevenSidedDie received such instructions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The chat logs show multiple users &quot;ganging up&quot; on a mod&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the moderators attacked someone and was unable to separate the person from the question, then that is a separate issue from how defensive they were made. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27490161#27490161&quot;&gt;chat logs you provided&lt;/a&gt; show multiple people asserting to one person &quot;You were wrong, just admit it!&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I tend to think that regardless of the person, when you are called out publicly as being wrong, it is natural to be on the defensive. These conversations in the past have clearly put the moderators on the defensive, and that is fair. In a conversation where the core of the discussion is &quot;you're wrong&quot; and &quot;no I'm not,&quot; you will never get anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mxyzplk garnered support (12 upvotes) when he explained why he banned Mala&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With a score of +12/-2, Mxyzplk seems to have garnered support from his decision to ban Mala, despite him saying &quot;you were banned because the mods say so.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mods did not ban lightly, but they provided a reason why the banning happened. Let us not downplay the fact that they had their reasons why and tried to be transparent about them. And then twelve people agreed with him (which I am only using here in the way you used the upvotes to support your statements).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Moving On From The Past: A Public Apology?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certain people seem bent on needing an apology from the moderation team. Why? Is it because a grudge has been held by one or both camps, and it is satisfying to see the other party admit they were wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Issuing an apology is a sign that the offending party has recognized they have done something wrong. But that is the point of contention. As you say, the mods do not believe they were in the wrong. And as you say, they disengaged from conversations about showing them why they're wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that that behavior -- disengaging from a conversation where the idea is to blame you -- is not at all surprising. It would wear anyone down. It would certainly tire anyone out. Especially when there are only a handful of mods answering to an entire community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This Well Is Poisoned Regardless of Mod Behavior&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my perspective, this conversation will never end until the moderators give in and say, &quot;fine, you're right, we're wrong.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if the mods truly believe they were &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; wrong, this conversation will only have the effect of &quot;we've heard this before, we've explained ourselves already, I'm tired of this.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not seen a question or an answer about a non-mod looking at things from a mod's perspective. Is this the right arena, is this the right approach, is this the right method for pursuing this line of inquiry?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mods are people too, and people get tired. And tired people, when they give up and say &quot;screw this&quot;, they resign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How Does This Affect The Elections?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener, as a candidate for the upcoming elections, what does this mean for your working relationships with the current moderator team, should you be elected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Repeat Disclaimer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not aim to make a watertight defense for the moderation team. That is on them if they wish to participate. But I believe that unless someone steps in and tries to negate the accusation from a non-mod perspective, they cannot respond to this question in any way without looking like they're on the defensive, or seeming like they are ignoring all the arguments directed against them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I have no dog in this fight. I do not even want to be a mediator between sides here. It seems like it's in my best interest to step back (which I plan to do after posting this). I may not even know what I'm talking about. Again, I was not there when all of this happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I believe in fair play, and in my eyes, this question has rigged the arena of discussion against the mod team. Hopefully, I have managed to break the ice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I apologize in advance for any mischaracterizations I have made. I assure you it was not intentional on my part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-22T17:52:39.310" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-23T00:43:24.410" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Part of my generally old-school pre-social media mentality in general:  My location isn't really germane to the discussion.  What I write stands or falls on its own merit, not on where I'm from.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The fact that I use my real name here is explicable only by a moment of weakness or thoughtlessness when I signed up for the Stack system in general.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2017-04-23T00:43:24.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7026" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-23T18:06:11.250" Score="3" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do I link or copy/paste the Player's Handbook passages to my post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28382" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-23T18:59:37.573" LastActivityDate="2017-04-23T23:47:25.520" Title="How do I link Player's Handbook passages to my post?" Tags="|support|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7026" CreationDate="2017-04-23T18:57:51.183" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Pasting isn't always necessary&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mostly you don't need to paste any PHB material into posts. Anyone who can answer already has their own copy to read, so &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; you just need to say what you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your first question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98668/how-complex-can-my-commands-be-with-the-conjured-animal-spell&quot;&gt;How complex can my commands be with the conjured animal spell?&lt;/a&gt; is plenty clear on what it's asking about, and is an example of a question that doesn't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; need to quote or link to the spell's text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Linking is a nice bonus&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you just want to have a clear link to the information you're talking about, that is a nice bonus, since it saves people time opening their books or finding a link to their favourite SRD. You can do that by linking to any of the online copies of the &lt;em&gt;free&lt;/em&gt; portions of the &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt;, which is called the &lt;em&gt;System Reference Document&lt;/em&gt; or SRD. There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;amp;q=D%26D%205e%20srd&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a bunch of online copies of the 5th edition SRD&lt;/a&gt; — choose whichever you like best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Find the information there that you want to link to, and then copy it's URL from your browser's address bar. Then add it as a link to your question. You can add links by highlighting the words you want to become a link (for example “Conjure Elemental”) and clicking the “chain” icon in the editor's toolbar. Alternatively, you can do it by hand, by typing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Conjure Elemental](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/c/conjure-elemental/) is a spell that…&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which will look like this in the final question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/c/conjure-elemental/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Conjure Elemental&lt;/a&gt; is a spell that…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, compared to quoting the whole text you're asking about, just using a link saves space in the question and makes it easier to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If you do want to paste though…&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really need to point at something in a passage — like you want to say “&lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; line here is the confusing part I'm asking about, see how it's confusing?” — then it can make sense to include a quote of what you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can do that by typing the quote and then highlighting it and pressing the “quote marks” button in the editor's toolbar. Alternatively, you can just do it by typing a &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; in front of the quote. Just try to quote the smallest amount of the book you need to be clear — nobody wants to read a whole spell description just to find the one word that you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the editor the quote will look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Who counts as a “companion” for Conjure Elemental? It says (PHB p. 225):&#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt; The elemental is friendly to you and your companions for the duration.&#xA;&#xA;… but I'm not sure what that means. Do they have to be friendly with me,&#xA;or just *with* me? For example, would the elemental be friendly to a&#xA;prisoner we have, or would it attack our prisoner?&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which would look like this (but without the outer quote box) in the actual posted question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Who counts as a “companion” for Conjure Elemental? It says (PHB p. 225):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;The elemental is friendly to you and your companions for the duration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;… but I'm not sure what that means. Do they have to be friendly with me,&#xA;  or just &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; me? For example, would the elemental be friendly to a&#xA;  prisoner we have, or would it attack our prisoner?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Using both is good too&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can link to an SRD reference as well as quote the passage you're asking about. For an example of that, take a look at the question in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98632/what-counts-as-a-curse&quot;&gt;What counts as a curse?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-23T23:47:25.520" LastActivityDate="2017-04-23T23:47:25.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7013" CreationDate="2017-04-24T09:23:58.810" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;People judge me based off stuff like that.  I don't like being judged on the basis of my race, skin color, religion, gender, nationality, country of origin, country of residence, etc.  There's so much authenticity of knowledge BS that goes into anything I say about anything important when people know that stuff.  If they &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; know, people instead evaluate my statements on their own merits and then decide what they think my race/religion/sexuality/country/political affiliation/value as a person/whatever is based off of that.  That means they have to actually listen to what I say, at least a little bit.  They can't be like 'oh, you must not know anything about Physics, cause you're a Christian, so I'mma ignore your stuff about Aristotelian ballistic models and the effects of air resistance' or 'oh, you must not know anything about treating menstrual cramps cause you're a guy, so if you so much as mention menstruation I'm gonna judge you'. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of it, like my religion and gender, are basically impossible to hide when talking with people for extended periods even online.  Other things, like my location, are not immediately obvious to people unless I provide them.  I don't want you to associate me with where I live because then you might dismiss claims I make solely on that basis.  I don't mind being told I'm wrong, but I don't like being dismissed and ignored for stupid reasons.  So I limit what I tell people and, separately, what I tell people frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T09:23:58.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7029" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7018" CreationDate="2017-04-24T11:00:21.333" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally I think that the problem is that the current mods have been in their roles for too long and are suffering from too much meta/too much work/or just too much time spent moderating and it has distorted their views in a distinctly authoritarian direction. there is too much emphasis on this site being 'clean'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much like a long serving policeman can get to the point where they assume everyone is a criminal a long serving mod can become overly intolerant and assume that every mis-step is a deliberate attempt to attack the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer seems simple to me - the current moderators should step down and give the community a chance to elect all new mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should probably have more than three mods too so that there is a wider range of views within the 'mod community'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly mods should serve for no longer than a given period (my personal opinion is a maximum of one year but the length can be readily determined by the community) which means we should have a new election at least that often to ensure that we have a regular infusion of new insight or at the very least a chance at some change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user28291" LastEditorDisplayName="user28291" LastEditDate="2017-04-24T13:42:11.160" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T13:42:11.160" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7030" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-24T12:14:51.717" Score="17" ViewCount="274" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shortly before the moderators opened their &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing&quot;&gt;feedback thread&lt;/a&gt; I was suspended for 7 days. If you know me, you may have wondered why I did not participate (and maybe you were happy about that, that's perfectly fine, everybody is allowed to not like what I say or how I say it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;we have asked you to not &lt;strong&gt;abuse&lt;/strong&gt; members of the site. &lt;strong&gt;Forcefully and repeatedly asserting that the mods are acting in bad faith&lt;/strong&gt; counts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have temporarily suspended your account; you may return after 7 days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now as far as I know (I've been here a long time, so don't take absolutes too literally) I have never &lt;em&gt;abused&lt;/em&gt; anybody. I have never called anybody names, attacked anybody &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; or singled out one of the mods. What I &lt;strong&gt;did&lt;/strong&gt; do is criticize the &lt;strong&gt;behavior of the mods&lt;/strong&gt; acting in their role as mods. On meta, where it should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even there, if you look at the posts, they say things like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I cannot necessarily blame the mods for it, it might just be their reaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't doubt that they do this in what they think is the site's best interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have never said or implied that there is &amp;quot;bad faith&amp;quot; (i.e. fraud, personal gain, intentional deceit) involved. I'm pretty sure of that because I still don't believe there is. That would be stupid, who'd volunteer their time to act in bad faith for no gain at all. But acting in good faith is not the same as doing a good job. There is a German saying that roughly translated would mean &amp;quot;the opposite of well done is well meant&amp;quot;. So for me, it's unclear how the mods came to the conclusion that I am implying bad faith when I criticize their behavior as mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I cannot link or quote the two comments on meta that lead to this because they have been deleted and I have neither photographic memory, nor do I take screenshots of all my comments and posts in the unlikely case that I need them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the mods are the only ones with access to what was deleted: Feel free to quote the offending comments and any other context you deem necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; think I wrote is (in the context of a post saying &amp;quot;the mods are very heavy-handed here&amp;quot;) &amp;quot;That's right, we discussed that in the past, they have not changed, you will have to live with that&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After that comment was deleted, I said &amp;quot;Deleting that comment proves my point [moderation too heavy handed] far better than my original comment could.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said... not direct quotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what I can take away from this encounter is that the mods think that criticizing &lt;em&gt;moderation behavior&lt;/em&gt; is taken as &amp;quot;abuse of the moderators&amp;quot;, a suspendable offense. Something I will get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6916/7665&quot;&gt;suspended for again, if I do it again&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how am I supposed to participate in either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing&quot;&gt;Mod Feedback&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7018/feedback-on-healing-our-community&quot;&gt;Community Feedback&lt;/a&gt; when &lt;em&gt;the moderators understanding&lt;/em&gt; of my current opinion on how they do as moderators is a suspendable offense?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-26T01:03:51.007" Title="How to give feedback that is not in line with mod opinion without getting temporarily suspended?" Tags="|discussion|community|account-suspension|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7030" CreationDate="2017-04-24T14:15:56.153" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The General Answer To Your Question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give feedback on mod behavior, you would cite specifics in a meta question or an answer to a meta question about mod behavior, citing the behavior and why you think it's against the rules or otherwise undesirable. Not threadcrapping in a meta about something else, not on the mainsite in comments, not in comments on a closed question, or anywhere else that is not the right place for unrelated content in general.  (To use a gaming analogy, you know how people say &quot;don't argue rules with the GM at the table, bring it up after?&quot; There's a right time and place to contest actions and &quot;in whatever comment thread is at hand&quot; isn't always it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You would also do so by addressing the behavior and not attacking any individuals or groups.  Incidentally, this is how you'd address questionable behavior from any individual or group on the site you believe to be misusing the system or violating Be Nice.  (And of course to officially contest something like a suspension you can also escalate to the CMs).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Your Specific Case&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While in general we are not at liberty to share details of user suspensions and similar, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/293213/why-dont-we-keep-public-records-of-suspensions&quot;&gt;a recent meta.SE has said&lt;/a&gt; that we can share some minimal details when a suspension is questioned in the interests of transparency, and since the user in question has brought it up, I would like to assure people that such actions are not taken quickly or lightly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, a first suspension was issued by a mod (in consultation with the rest of the mod team) after a series of issues (both on main and meta). Several mod-messages had already been issued explaining the issues with site behavior, one as recently as April 7, 3 days before it came up again. Your last comment (in the comments on a closed question) was part of a continued pattern of inappropriate commenting (both in tone and in nature - &quot;extensive discussion in comments&quot; and &quot;be nice&quot; are both relevant). When a problem is recurring, the &quot;last straw&quot; isn't always the most egregious. When you inquired about your suspension via mod-message all these multiple issues were linked to you again and explained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't expect you to always agree with the mods or to be happy about your suspension, that would not be a reasonable ask from us. But if you simply constrain your issues with us (and others in the community) to the right place and address issues instead of attacking people, it'll all be fine. I'll note you've done exactly that with this question! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;About Be Nice&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple important notes to the community about how Be Nice is enforced, just in general (these quotes are hypothetical and not from nvoigt's content, though are derived from real comments etc. we've seen on the site).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Attacking groups isn't better than attacking individuals.&lt;/em&gt;  &quot;Oh this community here is so stupid&quot; or whatever is Not Nice. This was brought up in the Q above, so it's worth saying that a specific attack directed at a person is certainly bad but generalizing it to more people doesn't make it better.  It also applies to people and groups not on the site.  &quot;All the mods on ENWorld are morons&quot; isn't OK either, even if you somehow know for a fact none of them ever read the site (hint: you don't).  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Attacking mods isn't better than attacking other community members.&lt;/em&gt; When writing, consider - if you saw a comment where someone called some other site member &quot;a bigot&quot; and told them &quot;they'll never learn&quot; etc. you'd flag it and expect that person to be told to Be Nice. We're not just taking a mulligan if that comment is about a mod. If we're all supposed to be peers here, and mods are also to Be Nice, then you are also to Be Nice to mods.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Small attacks over time count.&lt;/em&gt; They get responded to, deleted, annotated, you get mod messages - please don't take these prior more gentle corrective steps to mean &quot;if you suddenly get even worse and more offensive we'll do something.&quot;  They mean &quot;if you keep doing what you've been doing we'll do something.&quot; The goal of these steps is to show how the behavior is affecting the community so that you can alter it; doing the same right after a mod-message to that effect demonstrates that the lesson isn't being learned.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Be Nice also counts on meta.&lt;/em&gt; Or at least, &quot;be respectful,&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/293213/why-dont-we-keep-public-records-of-suspensions&quot;&gt;to quote the SE meta about discussing suspensions&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Correct misinformation, but don't go out of your way to make people look bad. Focus on the evidence of what happened and avoid assigning motives. Assume good faith and take the time needed to remain civil. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not hard to discuss behavior instead of people and say you think something's wrong without hyperbole and attacks. If you'd expect trouble from calling someone something on the main site, you should expect the same trouble from doing so on meta. There are plenty of meta questions about &quot;Why was this question closed&quot; &amp;amp;c that can be used as examples. (Be Nice counts in chat, it counts in replies to mod messages... There's not a place on SE that it is suspended.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We Get It&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We understand that people feel things deeply about certain aspects of this site and gaming and whatnot, and that it's easy to get heated up when discussing something you're passionate about. We know it can be hard to stay objective, which is why there's a good length runway of steps before we get to suspension.   And even suspensions aren't meant to be a &quot;punishment&quot; - when issued, they say &quot;to cool off.&quot; Believe it or not, a good number of times we have to issue one, we get a message back saying &quot;OK, you're right, sorry, I was getting worked up.&quot; Sometimes it's OK to need to cool down.  You're not going to miss anything - all the new Q&amp;amp;As issued over that time are still here, etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just please understand that everyone - not just the mods and the regulars on meta and those into the &quot;inside baseball&quot; of the site, but the casual users, the Googlers, etc. - are here for gaming content for their hobby, not arguments and drama and such spread all over the site.  Instead of a comment on a main question about &quot;this site sucks so bad and the community is all dumb...&quot; - even if that's what you're feeling - take a couple minutes off and then if there's an issue bothering you enough you feel like it should be addressed, post it here on meta just like @nvoigt has done with this question - this is great and the right way to question something. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-04-25T22:19:21.120" LastActivityDate="2017-04-25T22:19:21.120" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7032" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-24T16:26:56.263" Score="3" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was suggested that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98626/how-can-i-make-hack-and-slash-less-mandatory-and-more-interesting&quot;&gt;this question of mine&lt;/a&gt; be split into multiple questions. I agree with this suggestion and apologize for the burden this now places on the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is, it has two sizable answers already, so closing/deleting it and re-creating it in two or three questions might not be a great option. So, at the risk of great irony, I will ask two questions here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I retain the answers and split this question into multiple questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should it be two or three questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: I've since split it into a second question addressing only the formerly third part of the original question, visible here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98761/how-can-i-describe-hack-and-slash-effects&quot;&gt;How can I describe Hack-and-Slash effects?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33511" LastEditorUserId="33511" LastEditDate="2017-04-25T16:01:27.343" LastActivityDate="2017-04-25T18:23:40.840" Title="How can I split my multi-part question into several questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7032" CreationDate="2017-04-24T16:34:47.517" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;How to split your question:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/98626/edit&quot;&gt;Edit&lt;/a&gt; your first question down to include only one of the questions it currently includes, then &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;ask&lt;/a&gt; the now-removed separate question as a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should I do about existing answers?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While not required, it's polite to leave a comment on existing answers saying something like &quot;I've edited my question; you may want to revise this answer accordingly.&quot;  This is mostly important so the answerer gets a notification and knows to take a look.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Should it be 2 or 3 questions?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd say you'd be fine with 2.  The things you've listed as questions 1 and 2 seem to me to be a &quot;How do I do X, or if I can't what would be a good alternative&quot; pair, which is fine and not too broad (and the second part wouldn't make much sense without the first as context).  I'd separate the part you have listed as question 3 and ask it separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T16:34:47.517" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7034" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7032" CreationDate="2017-04-24T16:36:26.323" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;OK, I placed the question on hold so that we can figure this out before it gets more answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's only 2 answers so far so if either author is &quot;with us&quot; it should be easy to split the Q and have them migrate their answer over.  With any question that gets answers when it's too broad, question changes may require some tuning to the existing answers; that's OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'd say ask a second Q with the part of the Q that seems less addressed in the current answers and invite those authors to edit and repost their &quot;other parts&quot; on the new Q.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-04-24T16:36:26.323" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7035" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-04-24T18:31:46.753" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/125268/my-account-has-been-temporarily-suspended-what-does-that-mean&quot;&gt;Account suspension&lt;/a&gt; is the act of temporarily blocking the account of a specific user. This covers both site suspensions and chat suspensions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/04/06/a-day-in-the-penalty-box/&quot;&gt;several reasons&lt;/a&gt; for which this can happen. For more information, see &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/23366/suspension-reasons&quot;&gt;suspension reasons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/account-suspension&quot;&gt;[account-suspension] tag&lt;/a&gt; on Meta Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T23:11:18.960" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T23:11:18.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7036" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-04-24T18:31:46.753" Score="0" Body="For questions about account suspension, the act of temporarily blocking the account of a specific user. This covers both site suspensions and chat suspensions." OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T23:11:18.960" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T23:11:18.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7037" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7038" CreationDate="2017-04-25T17:21:25.830" Score="7" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I flagged a &quot;moved to chat&quot; comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76631/are-class-features-abilities-and-feats-that-allow-%E2%88%925-to-attack-to-get-10-to-d/76641#76641&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer as the chat it links to gave a page not found error. To my surprise the flag was declined as apparently the chat works fine for others. I am logged in (tried logging out and back in actually) on chat but still getting page not found. Is there another requirement to view old chats that I may be missing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21165" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-07T17:55:26.407" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T17:55:26.407" Title="A &quot;moved to chat&quot; comment appears to be a broken link for me but works for others" Tags="|discussion|bug|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7038" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7037" CreationDate="2017-04-25T18:19:37.543" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/87761/is-there-a-list-of-se-chat-privileges-and-the-minimum-reputation-required-for-t/87773#87773&quot;&gt;this Meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; you need 10k reputation to view frozen/deleted rooms. It looks like neither you, nor any of the other users that can't see this room have at least 10k reputation on any site so you wouldn't be able to see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14817" LastActivityDate="2017-04-25T18:19:37.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7032" CreationDate="2017-04-25T18:23:40.840" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it should be three questions.  There's no real downside to splitting it all the way, and I disagree that the questions are related enough to leave 1 and 2 together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-04-25T18:23:40.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7040" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-25T19:31:18.683" Score="14" ViewCount="415" Body="&lt;p&gt;As in individual games rather than the game system itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98723/what-is-this-story-i-recall-about-an-extremely-long-ever-changing-character-back?noredirect=1#comment232593_98723&quot;&gt;What is this story I recall about an extremely long ever-changing character backstory?&lt;/a&gt;, had the following comment discussion (that really should have been a meta discussion instead guys):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;10&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;  I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because RPG.SE is not a &quot;find this random anecdote somewhere on the Internet&quot; service. – Oblivious Sage 23 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@KorvinStarmast If someone posts a sufficient description of the book, or better yet a picture of the cover, then we can identify that book with 100% certainty. There are countless RPG anecdotes on the Internet, though, so there can't ever be a &quot;best&quot; answer. Also, an RPG book is an RPG, whereas an anecdote merely happens to involve RPGs. What's next, a question along the lines of, &quot;I think I saw a movie one time, it was a sci-fi movie, and there was this one scene where some random guys were playing D&amp;amp;D or something then got attacked by a monster. What movie was that?&quot; – Oblivious Sage 22 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; @ObliviousSage If that Comment ended instead with What adventure were the random guys playing? would that be okay? – Hey I Can Chan 22 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@HeyICanChan Assuming it contained the actual name of the movie in question then yes. Because it's a question about an RPG that happens to involve an anecdote, rather than a question about an anecdote that happens to involve an RPG. – Oblivious Sage 22 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@HeyICanChan To put it another way, &quot;Identify/locate X&quot; is only on-topic if X is itself an RPG; including RPGs in your description of X to try to help us identify it does not make the question about RPGs. – Oblivious Sage 22 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;19&lt;/strong&gt; @ObliviousSage Huh. I dunno. That sentiment seems rather… elitist? Exclusionary? Although still developing, RPG culture already has important anecdotes that serve as touchstones for concepts, issues, and problems within the community, and we — as part of that culture — should expect and encourage new ones to develop. They have value. Especially if a user's new to the scene it seems unfair — perhaps even unkind — to deny a user who's interested the Head of Vecna or the Dread Gazebo just because such stories are about an individual's campaign rather than about an RPG generally. – Hey I Can Chan 22 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; @HeyICanChan Users should be gently encouraged to share their anecdotes, and questions about anecdotes, in chat. The site itself should be reserved for questions that more definitively on-topic. If that approach occasionally excludes questions that have value then that's OK. RPG.SE does not exist to meet every need the RPG community might have; that's why we direct people to forums when they have questions that would work better in that format. – Oblivious Sage 22 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; Speaking of, SeanFromIT, feel free to hop into Role-playing Games Chat, where we would be delighted to swap stories about hilarious, amazing, or otherwise interesting things that happened while playing RPGs (even if they only vaguely involve RPGs!). – Oblivious Sage 22 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;8&lt;/strong&gt; @ObliviousSage I am comfortable with saying that I think this question is definitively on-topic and that asking about important or potentially important gaming anecdotes here rather than in chat (where an answer may not be forthcoming or where a user doesn't feel entirely comfortable or welcome) or on a forum (where wading through guesswork is the norm) is perfectly appropriate. I totally respect your right to disagree with my opinion, though. – Hey I Can Chan 22 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;15&lt;/strong&gt; The question is answerable, and has only one right answer. Further, it is almost certainly already answered correctly by guildsbounty. Old Man Henderson is as much an RPG touchstone as Tuckers Kobolds, and questions about them would unquestionably be on topic. (My opinion, but strongly held) – fectin 20 hours ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3&lt;/strong&gt; Thanks for not deleting! First post in this StackExchange and you guys nailed it. I asked knowing it might be flagged, after spending an unacceptable amount of time searching and not finding it among decades of D&amp;amp;D anecdotes on the Internet :-) – SeanFromIT 16 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and then a bunch more comments from people who should have upvoted another comment instead of reposting what is substantively the same point as a previous comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, this is something we should, as a community, decide.  Are questions about individual groups' home campaigns on topic here?  What about specifically questions about identifying a particular group's campaign?  Many campaigns were not documented in any form and do not have any wider significance past their participants, but then again many campaigns &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; documented and many campaigns, documented or not, have a wider significance with respect to RPGing as a whole or even society at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do we want our policy on questions asking about home campaigns to be, and more specifically what should be done with questions about identifying a home campaign or an aspect of a home campaign?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:55:42.430" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:55:42.430" Title="Are questions about specific people's campaigns on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|policy|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7040" CreationDate="2017-04-25T20:01:44.123" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, this question reads as a Story Identification question, rather than a Product Identification question.  IMHO, this should be off-topic for this particular site.  Sure, it's fun to read such stories, but I think allowing people to ask Story ID on this site would detract, rather than add, to the quality of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the story elements in that question are SUPER vague.  It's not a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2017-04-25T20:01:44.123" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7040" CreationDate="2017-04-25T20:43:07.517" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question should 100% definitely be on topic, but that doesn't mean every story-identification that has anything to do with RPGs should.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One heuristic I've seen referenced on a few meta posts for topicality is, &quot;Would this question receive more useful answers from a community of RPG experts than anywhere else?&quot;  The answer to that for the linked question is &quot;&lt;strong&gt;Yes, absolutely.&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Old_Man_Henderson&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Old Man Henderson story&lt;/a&gt; isn't just a random story that happens to have an RPG in it.  It's a piece of role-playing lore, passed around and linked by communities like this one.  It's spawned community in-jokes like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://1d4chan.org/wiki/The_Henderson_Scale_of_Plot_Derailment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment&lt;/a&gt;, has its own &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Fanfic/OldManHenderson&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;TVTropes entry&lt;/a&gt;, and gets referenced in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?276496-Greatest-campaign-derailments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;threads like this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, I immediately recognized the question as about the Henderson story upon reading it, and was partway through writing an answer to that effect when guildsbounty, who &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; immediately recognized it, posted theirs.  This sounds like strong evidence that RPG experts were highly qualified to answer this question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, this question isn't just &quot;an anecdote [that] merely happens to involve RPGs&quot;, it's a question about role-playing history and culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, my proposed policy on such questions would be:  &lt;strong&gt;If the question is about a story that's sufficiently related to role-playing as a hobby that RPG experts are uniquely qualified to answer it, it's on topic.  If the story just happens to incidentally mention an RPG (like ObliviousSage's movie example from the chat), it's off-topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Miniman brings up an excellent point in the comments, which is that the approach outlined in this post doesn't tell you whether a question is on topic or not until it's been answered.  This is obviously a problem and I'm not sure how to deal with it.  Questions about that one time my friend's cousin told me about something awesome they did with a lute probably won't improve the site, but at the same time it seems ludicrous to me that questions about mainstays of RPG oral history like Henderson or Tucker's Kobolds would be off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My upvote finger is ready to click on any answer that comes up with a good solution to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2017-04-26T00:25:51.823" LastActivityDate="2017-04-26T00:25:51.823" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7043" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-26T00:18:56.943" Score="7" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98785/23970&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; about a homebrew 5e race's balance was closed as off-topic, with a comment about primarily opinion-based. But it seems to me that it's objective enough to compare the constellation of proposed features to the usual suspects in published material. What's the thinking that this &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; be answered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For reference, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/88015/23970&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;'s the only balance question I've answered.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-19T20:53:26.527" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T20:53:26.527" Title="Is this werewolf homebrew question on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7044" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7040" CreationDate="2017-04-26T02:49:38.717" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, they're on-topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;the help center&lt;/a&gt; they concern &amp;quot;RPG adventures and campaigns.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a second piece of evidence pointing toward topicality, they certainly pass the rule of thumb presented in the same help-center page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Two further considerations:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Notability is not anythig we have to worry about: the Stack will take care of it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question concerns a notable campaign/character (OMH, Tucker's Kobolds) it'll get answered correctly and quickly, as in the case that spawned this question. If voters think that sort of information/reference is useful to add to the site &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;/em&gt; repository of RPG knowledge, it'll garner upvotes, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question concerns a not-very-notable campaign it probably won't get an answer very quickly. It probably also won't get many upvotes. It may even garner downvotes, along the &amp;quot;this question is not useful&amp;quot; criterion. (As in &amp;quot;I think it's not useful for the site to have this specific Q+A as part of the database.&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;They do no harm, in small numbers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How many of these things do we really expect to get, anyway? If we start seeing one a day come across our bow, you'll have me in the &amp;quot;shut it down&amp;quot; camp. But these questions (IME) pop up at the once-per-month level, at most.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In summary: vote your conscience.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; think the site will be polluted by the presence of questions like this, vote to close them as off-topic. (And post a really convincing answer here as to why they should be categorically off-topic.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; think they add something to the site, upvote them. Answer them. If a particular one is closed and you think you have a good answer that demonstrates how the question's good, too, bring that to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to have perfect bright-line rules ahead-of-time on every category of question. When we have enough experience with a category to draw a line, we can do that. And when we don't, we can simply take them as they come, &lt;em&gt;and be transparent in our reasoning&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-26T02:49:38.717" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7045" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-26T14:16:05.873" Score="4" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's say someone is wondering about something, do a quick search and find nothing relevant, so post his question. Then some people point out that the answer already exists on some other question (and they are right!), like in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98832/does-an-magic-item-used-as-an-improvised-weapon-counts-as-a-magic-weapon&quot;&gt;Does a magic item used as an improvised weapon count as a magic weapon?&lt;/a&gt; the OP wants to know about whether magic items count as magic weapon too and the answer is in two other questions that wouldn't be found for a search like &quot;improvised magic weapon&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So now the guy who posted the question got his answer, nice! But other people who will look for the same question will find the guy's question, with no answer but links to the duplicates. That's not that bad: they just have to follow the links. In some case however it can become quite bothering when you have to follow a link and then look through all the questions to find the one that is answering your problem. And then you can't really ask for more precision as the answer can be very old and you could even be off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, on the example I linked the problem is very minor (there are only two answers on each questions), but I remember to have seen on stackoverflow (not rpg.se) links that send you to another question which is also closed as a duplicate, which send you to another one with more than 100 answers... etc. Obviously we are not going to have any problem of that scale, but &lt;strong&gt;shouldn't we try to promote new questions that have a better title instead of old ones that won't be stumbled upon by most of people?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-18T22:24:12.623" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T22:24:12.623" Title="What to do when the question has already been answered, but with a bad title?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7045" CreationDate="2017-04-26T14:39:05.260" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Part of the purpose of duplicates is to help people find a question's answers. We like duplicates &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they often have different titles and ways of asking the question — it gives searchers more ways to find the information. (See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/10841/311001&quot;&gt;this meta.SE FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, at the penultimate paragraph.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that part is working just as designed. Yes, having to click a link can be a minor bother, but it's built deep into the way SE works, so its not avoidable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, yes, we do have a minor preference for duplicating toward the &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; question &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10844/153219&quot;&gt;with the better answers&lt;/a&gt;. However, merely having a better title is not enough to count as the better question— the duplication process already takes care of differences in title for us. To count as a duplicate worth marking as duplicate forward in time instead of the usual backward, from observation it has to be the clearly superior question &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; have better answers, in order to get that kind of community support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for process, voting for the duplicate to be closed in the other direction is one way to start. However, that can't happen without answers. When it's already been duplicate-closed though, or more attention needs to be drawn to the matter (maybe because to get the desired “main” question answers, it needs to be reopened, or merged, or something similarly drastic), the way to make that happen is to ask a meta question about the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/specific-question&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-question&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-question&lt;/a&gt;, proposing that we handle the duplication in a particular way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This specific question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question clearly superior? Maybe. &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; like it, personally: it's clear, the example is unambiguous, it has a good title. I don't think my like of it is enough for the decision to be made though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To get clarity on that from a broad section of the community, you might want to ask a question specifically proposing what you think we should do and why, without mixing it together with the general question of how duplicates get handled. This meta question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; draw clear answers on the specific question instead of the general matter though, so you might still want to wait to see if a clear community consensus on the specific question develops here. If not though, a clear meta question without clutter about a more general issue is a good way to get clear, focused discussion on the specific question's handling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-03-18T14:57:58.593" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T14:57:58.593" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7045" CreationDate="2017-04-26T14:52:18.923" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What you describe is the stack working as advertised&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Let's say someone is wondering about something, do a quick search and&#xA;  find nothing relevant, so post his question. Then some people point&#xA;  out that the answer already exists on some other question (and they&#xA;  are right!), like in {the linked question}.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People have varying skills with using search terms, when they bother to search before asking a question.  This stack's community of users have enough depth of experience, in aggregate, that the community can helpfully alert someone, and all reading the question, to this issue already being addressed by another question and answer.  (Or that it probably is, depending on what one writes in comments when raising that alert).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;but shouldn't we try to promote new questions that have a better&#xA;  title instead of old ones that won't be stumbled upon by most of&#xA;  people?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you mentioned already, we don't have the scale of problem you saw on the other stack, so while we can assist with edits as questions are posted and worked into good shape, I don't see a significant problem, in terms of scope. The editing of titles in my view ought to be done as a question arises and the text/title don't match very well.  It should be self contained.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-04-26T14:52:18.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7040" CreationDate="2017-04-26T15:16:13.727" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I don't think we should allow this sort of question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I described in the comment chain the dark wanderer helpfully reproduced in this question, I don't think requests to identify/locate anecdotes on the Internet should be on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should come up with a different approach (see below) for the few anecdotes that are clearly notable enough, and forbid anecdote location/identification questions in general so that we can easily avoid a slippery slope of deciding notability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; question is salvageable, though!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone who recognized the content the asker was looking for could have edited the question to be &amp;quot;Who is Old Man Henderson, and why is he relevant to RPG history?&amp;quot; They could then have given an answer that not only includes a link to the anecdote in question but also explained the cultural impact of Old Man Henderson in the RPG hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This approach has two benefits. First, it creates a much more &amp;quot;google-able&amp;quot; question, making it easier to find for other people who are curious. Second, it provides more information about the notable anecdote beyond just, &amp;quot;Here's where you can find it.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For another example, see the edit history for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/38201/3548&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which was originally something along the lines of &amp;quot;I think I once saw a ranking of 3.5 classes by power, can somebody link me to it or make a new one for me?&amp;quot; The question was edited into &amp;quot;What are tiers, and what tier is each class?&amp;quot; by someone who knew what the asker was looking for (me, in this case), resulting in a question that is vastly more beneficial to the RPG.SE community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-26T15:16:13.727" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7049" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-26T23:01:12.910" Score="6" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to change my profile, but for some reason the profile page breaks cause I blocked scripts from maps.googleapis.com. Whatever map feature that is, it cannot be so essential to the site that the page should not need to bother with graceful degradation, can it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also I know the google recaptcha is a really handy thing, but aside from allowing google to track stackexchange users, recaptcha is also hardly the most secure captcha.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even the ajax.googleapis.com could be backed by secondary cdns easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point is, it shouldn't be hard to modify the site to allow its use to users who block google scripts. Maybe I am just 'one of those', but in my experience a suprising amount of people seek to avoid google tracking. So wouldn't it be worth the (little) effort?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35271" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-27T00:10:25.013" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T00:10:25.013" Title="Blocking google.com and maps.googleapis.com breaks the site" Tags="|bug|profile-page|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7043" CreationDate="2017-04-27T03:51:36.667" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, it is on-topic, but I propose a limit.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an answerer, it was long to write out, yes, definitely on the broad side of the spectrum, but doable. I think, with this particular homebrew, the querent was adding class-like traits to his/her race (i.e. adding Saving Throw proficiencies and 4 skills), which made the homebrew race do a lot of things (and, subsequently, lengthens the answer). That is no fault of the question, but part of what should be in the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like there should be a limit to the length of a homebrew that can be evaluated in this site. If someone came up and wants us to evaluate a &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UAMystic3.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;UA-mysticv3-length&lt;/a&gt; homebrew, complete with disciplines and class archetypes, that is simply too broad. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, here's what I think (applicable only to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;): &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Races and subraces are ok, they're usually short and objectively can be compared to other races.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spells and Feats are a little tricky especially for non-damaging ones, and we have run across problems with homebrew spell evaluations in the past. I am unsure how to propose moving forward with this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Class Features are ok, provided given enough context, and the intent of the feature. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whole classes are not ok, and too broad. We should ask the querent which part he is struggling with, and narrow it down to the specific Class Feature/s as above. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T03:51:36.667" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6963" CreationDate="2017-04-27T05:55:40.123" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We've asked Grace Note to give us two election slots, for a total of four mods.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After this consultation with the community we heard ideas for and against 3 and 4, but the overall sense we got from you all collectively was “eh, either is fine and maybe four would be useful, but we don't see a clear and present &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; for more than three.” It's good to know that the community is comfy with either possibility, even if it didn't help make up our minds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What decided us was that we like three active mods, and having four means that each of us can more easily take short breaks to recharge the batteries. The last few mod resignations were from major burnout, and the chance to drop out for a little sabbatical and still know the site is still being minded by three active mods should make a big dent in the mod attrition rate. (I just now noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6963/do-we-want-three-moderators-or-four/7051#comment21506_6968&quot;&gt;Baskakov_Dimitriy suggested this very reason in a comment&lt;/a&gt; last week.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we have such a wide and interesting field of candidates, now is a great opportunity to expand the mod team just a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we've asked Grace Note for two slots in this election. &lt;s&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;election page&lt;/a&gt; hasn't been updated yet though (the “moderator positions available” number in the sidebar), since Grace seems to be a bit busy. Rather than wait for the button to be pushed officially though, we wanted to let you know sooner rather than later.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;election page&lt;/a&gt; has been officially updated to show 2 positions up for election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't expect that this will change the progress of the election much, since it seems to be roaring along quite well regardless already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-04-29T01:19:24.177" LastActivityDate="2017-04-29T01:19:24.177" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7052" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7043" CreationDate="2017-04-27T11:10:49.530" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, it's on-topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's about material for a Role-Playing Game, it requires RPG expertise to answer well, it doesn't fall afoul of our rec-categories that've been judged off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;They're just not &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions like this have a lot of fiddly little bits, require a lot of work to answer well (as @daze413 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/98908/23970&quot;&gt;has done&lt;/a&gt;), and are of limited utility down the road.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these factors act as natural rate-limiters: the question's not getting many upvotes, so nobody's getting a signal &amp;quot;post lots more of these, you'll get all teh pointz!&amp;quot; And it takes a while for answers to come in, if at all. All-told, we only get a few &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/balance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;balance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;balance&lt;/a&gt; questions a month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But they are &lt;em&gt;good enough&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers do teach future readers something about &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to analyze the balance of their homebrews. So let 'em live, and they'll sit in the long tail of questions that have limited utility and poor reward-effort ratios.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-02T07:47:54.247" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7053" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-27T12:03:19.330" Score="15" ViewCount="299" Body="&lt;p&gt;When a new user posts their first question, there is often a need to clarify certain aspects of how this site works. This is usually done by a friendly comment starting with &quot;Welcome to the site&quot; or something similar followed by an explanation such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98926/would-it-be-a-bad-idea-to-make-a-joke-campaign&quot;&gt;in this question&lt;/a&gt;. I always thought these were always done by moderators or some very experienced users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3519/we-could-use-some-more-pro-forma-comments&quot;&gt;a list on meta&lt;/a&gt; of frequent comments that includes a welcoming message but I could not find guidelines on who should be doing this. Does this mean anyone can/should be doing this sort of thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T15:56:46.427" Title="Who should make welcoming comments?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7053" CreationDate="2017-04-27T12:15:19.040" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, anyone can and should do this. Go for it. (Well, anyone with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;50+ rep&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general here if you have the rep to do something, you are welcome to do it as much as anyone else is (of course, congruent with our site guidelines).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-04-27T12:44:05.060" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T12:44:05.060" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7055" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7053" CreationDate="2017-04-27T12:19:21.937" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, anyone can do it. Including you! No pressure though. It was started by an experienced user (BESW), I think, but it's just a community practice we've adopted together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally I leave it on a new user's first post, welcome them, point then to the tour or acknowledge that they have the Informed badge indicating they've already read it (and thank them for doing so), give constructive advice on their post, and point them to the chat. We can use the &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; magic comment links for these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It tends to also help when we're giving constructive criticism. The comment suddenly sounds sort of official and supportive rather than, say, an arbitrary angry user on the internet telling someone they did something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T12:19:21.937" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7056" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7053" CreationDate="2017-04-27T12:19:33.190" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;strike&gt;Everyone&lt;/strike&gt; Anyone!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, anyone can make a comment welcoming a new user. We don't want to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6925/23970&quot;&gt;help-pile&lt;/a&gt;, so it's better not to have a half-dozen welcoming comments flooding the new(ish) user's inbox where one or two would suffice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; the question is in need of some work, the &quot;format&quot; I tend to follow (and followed in that message) is the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[When you get a chance, check out the tour/help center.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Single out the largest problem or two I see with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Offer action-item or resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-04-27T15:56:46.427" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T15:56:46.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7053" CreationDate="2017-04-27T12:55:47.247" Score="21" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; should welcome new users!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going from lurker to user is an enormous risk that the community should recognize. It's easy to overlook that someone has taken that risk and, instead, focus on what the user's done &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; in the question or answer. So, if a user hasn't already been welcomed to the site, welcome that new user &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; jumping in to critique the user's answer or question! There's no &lt;em&gt;privilege&lt;/em&gt; associated with welcoming a new user, and the more current users that are nice and welcoming to a new user, the better the site will get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How I do it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I try to do this often, and I try to make the experience positive. I tend to use a welcome message on a question that's like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to the site! Take the &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt;! [Then insert your own version of &lt;em&gt;Good question&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;This question could be improved by…,&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;The site doesn't handle this kind of question&lt;/em&gt; or whatever, omitting brackets.] Thank you for participating and have fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I read a study that exclamation points in text messages make the writer sound more sincere, so I end the first sentence with one. Also, putting &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; in brackets in a comment automatically links to the site's tour page. Finally, to avoid an accusatory tone, I try not to use the word &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; in the bracketed portion at all, instead aiming for &lt;em&gt;This question could be better were it edited to include…&lt;/em&gt; or something.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And my welcome message on an answer tends to look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to the site! Take the &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt;! [Then insert your own version of &lt;em&gt;Good answer&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;This answer could be improved by…,&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Unfortunately, this isn't really an answer to the question because…&lt;/em&gt; or whatever, omitting brackets.] Thank you for participating and for helping [or &lt;em&gt;trying to help&lt;/em&gt; if the answer wasn't appropriate, again omitting brackets] strangers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See above.) I view each welcome message's last sentence as &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; important in recognizing the user's transition from just looking around to putting words on the Internet for all to read. However, there's no set format, and if come up with your own welcoming message, that's totally okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2017-04-27T12:55:47.247" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7058" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6336" CreationDate="2017-04-28T14:44:14.810" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since it comes up a fair amount in fantasy settings like Faerûn, handling accents in a MathJax setting (i.e. table) is... awkward. The &lt;code&gt;û&lt;/code&gt; character uses the wrong font in MathJax, for example &lt;code&gt;\text{Faerûn}&lt;/code&gt; produces \$\text{Faerûn}\$, with the û in a glaringly-different font (non-text contexts are even worse: \$Faerûn\$).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either accents and diacritics have similar problems: \$ú\$, \$ù\$, \$ü\$, \$ū\$.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MathJax has its own way of doing accents though: &lt;code&gt;\hat&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\acute&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\grave&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\ddot&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\bar&lt;/code&gt;. So &lt;code&gt;\hat u&lt;/code&gt; produces \$\hat u\$. Likewise, &lt;code&gt;\acute u&lt;/code&gt; for \$\acute u\$, &lt;code&gt;\grave u&lt;/code&gt; for \$\grave u\$, &lt;code&gt;\ddot u&lt;/code&gt; for \$\ddot u\$, &lt;code&gt;\bar u&lt;/code&gt; for \$\bar u\$.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These can wrap around a text block, for example &lt;code&gt;\hat{\text{u}}&lt;/code&gt; produces \$\hat{\text{u}}\$. This gets awkward, though, when you are already in a text context: you have to start a new math context with &lt;code&gt;$&lt;/code&gt; to use &lt;code&gt;\hat&lt;/code&gt;, so \$\text{Faer$\hat{\text{u}}$n}\$ requires &lt;code&gt;\text{Faer$\hat{\text{u}}$n}&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-04-28T14:44:14.810" CommentCount="13" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-04-28T14:44:14.810" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7059" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-28T16:16:34.770" Score="0" ViewCount="54" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99012/how-does-the-throne-card-work&quot;&gt;Throne card from the Deck of Many Things&lt;/a&gt; has attracted three answers which all say the same thing. That is, all three answers are duplicates of each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should the Stack vote for these answers, and should the question be closed for attracting them? What is the normal policy for this scenario?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-28T16:16:34.770" Title="How should the answers on the question about Throne card be handled?" Tags="|discussion|answers|specific-question|closing-questions|up-votes|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2017-04-28T16:33:21.263" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7061" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-04-29T19:44:39.080" Score="10" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, I want to link to some online character or NPC generators. However, I know that some of the online resources, especially spell lists, are actually copyright violations. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these online generators ok? &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpgtinker.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Here is an example&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastActivityDate="2017-05-03T02:50:47.520" Title="Is recommending an online character generator ok?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7061" CreationDate="2017-04-29T20:11:34.693" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommending &lt;em&gt;an&lt;/em&gt; online generator is OK.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's nothing &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt; wrong with recommending a tool. Keep in mind, though, that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;link-only answers are bad&lt;/a&gt;: you should be explaining in your answer post &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; the sort of resource you recommend is the best solution, such that a future reader who found your link had rotted would still know what they're looking for and why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;That&lt;/em&gt; online generator is certainly not good to link to.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That generator's creating characters for D&amp;amp;D 5e.&#xA;Any Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition product that's using material beyond the &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;SRD&lt;/a&gt; and isn't licensed to do so by WotC is in violation of US copyright and/or trademark laws unless it falls into one of several narrow categories of works exempt from said laws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site you link does not describe a special license agreement, so when the first result I saw included the Goliath playable race--a race not in the SRD--I knew already that it was very probably living outside the law.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Note that products distributed through &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dmsguild.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DMs Guild&lt;/a&gt; hew to their own license: read &lt;a href=&quot;http://support.dmsguild.com/hc/en-us&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;their help pages&lt;/a&gt; for some more info. I've personally found their staff to be very responsive: do reach out to them if something's not clear.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2773/23970&quot;&gt;we shouldn't link to resources that we &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; are in violation of US copyright/trademark law.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-03T02:50:47.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-04-30T06:45:44.220" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Moderation, including community moderation, can be... terse&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of moderation-type-activities that are really repetitive - deleting answers in comments, moving discussions from comments to chat, and asking new users to specify what system they're talking about are just a few that come to mind. New users, old problems that never go away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, as I understand it, moving comments to chat is an automated process that includes the boilerplate comment about what happened. But the other two, while tedious and repetitive from the perspective of experienced users and mods, are new and potentially confusing for new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have some users (BESW comes to mind) who are great about going the extra mile to give a warm welcome, explaining in detail what they're doing and why, and inviting people to make constructive changes. Others (mxyzplk comes to mind, though they're far from alone) are much more matter-of-fact, to an extent that sometimes rubs me the wrong way, and seems, from what I can tell, to be more off-putting the newer you are (regulars who've seen such messages before and understand the reasoning don't think twice.) It's not about doing anything wrong, per se, just a style that IMO is suboptimal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxy specifically &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/36942017#36942017&quot;&gt;defends&lt;/a&gt; this style, but if you like terse communication and you get warm, you might roll your eyes and feel mildly irritated; if you're expecting warm and you get terse, it can send strong subtextual signals along the lines of &amp;quot;you are wrong, &lt;em&gt;and I personally dislike you too much (or think that you are too stupid) to waste my time politely explaining how and why.&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; That's not a message we want to send, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.askamanager.org/2015/05/my-manager-says-im-too-abrupt-with-coworkers.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;even unintentionally&lt;/a&gt;. So I think it's better to err on the side of warm, at least with new people who are still forming opinions about site dynamics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, obviously, being super nice and polite all the time and explaining everything in detail is exhausting work - part of the reason I've stepped back from RPG.SE in the last several months is that I haven't had the energy to be confident that I was contributing &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt;. But I think we have enough experienced users now with enough energy that between us, we ought to be able to be extra nice to all the newbies (including for mod-only stuff with a third active diamond mod). It's basically an extension of both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6896/28034&quot;&gt;mxy's answer&lt;/a&gt; about increased community moderation, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6925/28034&quot;&gt;nitsua's point&lt;/a&gt; about not leaving less helpful comments if there are others who can leave more helpful comments a few minutes later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR - If you can be polite, step up; if you don't have the patience right now, consider stepping back for a bit and seeing if someone else takes care of it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-04-30T20:52:58.290" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7064" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-01T06:19:56.767" Score="35" ViewCount="1106" Body="&lt;p&gt;For frequently-asked questions common to all sites in the network, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For official guidance from Stack Exchange, visit the &lt;a href=&quot;//rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;Help Center&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/544/what-kind-of-questions-can-i-ask-here&quot;&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic? [2015]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are tool recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/what-kinds-of-alignment-questions-are-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about alignment on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are character build or optimization questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic? [2012]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5385/are-choose-your-own-adventure-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are &amp;quot;choose your own adventure&amp;quot; questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176/are-list-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are &amp;quot;list questions&amp;quot; on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12157/52137&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on-topic? [2022]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5787/i-want-to-ask-for-recommendations-but-thats-off-topic-is-there-any-way-to-ask&quot;&gt;I want to ask for recommendations, but that&amp;#39;s off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/should-i-use-a-narrow-system-tag-or-go-broad-if-possible-and-use-system-agnosti&quot;&gt;Should I use a narrow system tag, or use a broader tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8833/how-is-the-system-agnostic-tag-supposed-to-be-used&quot;&gt;How is the [system-agnostic] tag supposed to be used?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1346/should-questions-include-system-setting-in-title-if-tagged-with-system-setting&quot;&gt;Should questions include System/Setting in title if tagged with system/setting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Writing answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a frame challenge?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Comments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572/why-is-an-answer-being-downvoted-without-any-comments&quot;&gt;Why is an answer being downvoted without any comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7111/52137&quot;&gt;A question has some facts majorly wrong: should I be correcting them in comments or an answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Etiquette&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4765/is-this-site-for-experts-or-not&quot;&gt;Is this site for experts, or not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3573/is-profanity-allowed-on-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Is profanity allowed on RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6519/when-a-question-changes-completely-should-it-be-a-new-question&quot;&gt;When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6698&quot;&gt;Eek! A troll in the Stack! What do I do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10055/what-is-an-edit-war-and-is-it-ever-appropriate&quot;&gt;What is an &amp;quot;edit war&amp;quot; and is it ever appropriate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Editing and formatting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3454/dont-signal-your-edits-in-text&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1483/is-there-a-functional-purpose-to-putting-things-in-code-text-here&quot;&gt;Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/is-there-a-style-guide-for-posts&quot;&gt;Is there a style guide for posts?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10074/mathjax-guide-for-rpg-se-how-to-format-pretty-tables-and-equations&quot;&gt;MathJax guide for RPG.SE: How to format pretty tables and equations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Community moderation and curation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5758/why-was-my-question-closed-as-too-broad-unclear-or-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1475/how-to-deal-with-questions-that-just-dont-understand-the-scope-of-the-rpg-lands&quot;&gt;How to deal with questions that just don&amp;#39;t understand the scope of the RPG landscape?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/942/how-to-deal-with-feedback-questions-about-house-rules&quot;&gt;How to deal with feedback questions about house-rules?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/437/what-should-i-do-about-spam-questions&quot;&gt;What should I do about spam questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6524/how-should-we-use-community-wiki-part-iii&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki? [2016]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7353/does-ask-the-dm-gm-equate-to-primarily-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Does &amp;quot;Ask the DM / GM&amp;quot; equate to &amp;quot;Primarily opinion based?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl&quot;&gt;If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11722/what-should-i-do-when-a-question-does-not-specify-the-game-system-being-used&quot;&gt;What should I do when a question does not specify the game system being used?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Miscellaneous&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2895/how-does-all-the-various-stack-exchange-functionality-work&quot;&gt;How does all the various Stack Exchange functionality work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1274/can-i-send-private-messages-to-users&quot;&gt;Can I send private messages to users?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;External links&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/2010/08/29/writing-the-perfect-question/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Writing the Perfect Question by Jon Skeet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://catb.org/%7Eesr/faqs/smart-questions.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How to Ask Questions the Smart Way&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;What is the XY problem?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/08/16/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;Gorilla vs. Shark&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is your question missing? How to add a question to this FAQ:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First check whether it's part of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;FAQ for Stack Exchange sites&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also check to see if a question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; matches your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question doesn't exist at all on meta yet, you'll need to create it first: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;ask a new question on meta&lt;/a&gt; asking only the question, stated plainly and simply, in the question body. The answer goes in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given you've checked all of the above, you can propoes a question for this FAQ using the following procedure:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag it as &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Propose its addition to the FAQ in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9961/faq-proposal-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Proposal Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When the community is in favor of adding to the FAQ, diamond moderators will add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-container&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag plus a “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;” link at the end of the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:40:15.980" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:40:15.980" Title="FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange" Tags="|support|faq|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7065" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3519" CreationDate="2017-05-01T17:38:25.307" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I use the “&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/2116/autoreviewcomments-pro-forma-comments-for-se&quot;&gt;AutoReviewComments&lt;/a&gt;” userscript&lt;sup&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/tags/userscripts/info&quot;&gt;?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sup&gt; extensively to give me a base selection of frequently-used comments. It gives me a menu attached to comment fields, and lets me choose from (and edit before sending) a menu of pre-written comments I can customise. It gives me a good base of “tone” to work with, especially for comments which are repetitive and (if I had to type them out manually every time) would probably come out in a more brusque tone than is ideally useful for those comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the userscript can work with an external text file hosted online, I have my comments file publicly posted on gist.github.org. It's very moderation-centric in its selection of comments and some of the wording, but anyone is free to use it directly or as inspiration, especially anyone who finds themselves doing community moderation using comments. As a working document, it's frequently being revised and is never in a perfect, “polished” state (I'm sure some of the more rarely-used comments have outdated wording), so &lt;em&gt;caveat utens&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The “raw text” link is what the AutoReviewComments userscript needs for its external file option.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gist.github.com/eggdropsoap/d7221e1581bb93137344&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;rpg-se-pro-forma-comments&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gist.githubusercontent.com/eggdropsoap/d7221e1581bb93137344/raw/992ecbe411a0e71496add8f5f87e435e9af284c3/rpg-se-pro-forma-comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;(raw text version)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T12:40:12.223" LastActivityDate="2017-05-01T17:38:25.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6895" CreationDate="2017-05-02T18:12:52.153" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The operating differences between this and other Stacks could be more transparent&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been a longterm user of Stack Overflow, and came here expecting a QA site that mimicked the style of SO, but focusing on RPGs. I did get that, but certainly not in the way I expected... My comments vanished without explanation, my posts were edited in ways that I was a bit uncomfortable with, and so on. I now recognize these traits for what they are - the result of a culture focused on keeping this Stack focused and high-quality - but my initial interactions with RPG.SE were &lt;em&gt;really confusing as a seasoned SO user&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it would be a good idea to create a collection the meta posts where these operating principles were distilled, and find a way to make it highly visible to new users - particularly those migrating from other Stacks. I find it odd that we're seemingly okay with confusing people that are &lt;em&gt;familiar&lt;/em&gt; with our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-02T18:12:52.153" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7067" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-02T20:01:13.940" Score="37" ViewCount="429" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role-Playing Games' &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3&quot;&gt;third moderator election&lt;/a&gt; has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the 2 new moderators are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1204&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/1204.png&quot; alt=&quot;doppelgreener&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/23970&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/23970.png&quot; alt=&quot;nitsua60&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They'll be joining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the existing crew&lt;/a&gt; shortly — please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/results/6222615786029056/0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;view a summary report online&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-24T17:15:46.143" LastActivityDate="2017-05-24T17:15:46.143" Title="2017 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="9" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7068" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7067" CreationDate="2017-05-02T21:24:31.410" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Be Careful of What You Wish For, As You Will Surely Get It! ( 8^D )&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Grats to you both!  I daresay that our two sitting mods will be tickled pink to have the both of you on side.  Great choices by those who voted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Advice?  Uh, be yourself.  That's what got you voted in.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Post Mortem&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primaries indicated to me that it would be a three-horse race with you two and Josh.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/results/6222615786029056&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The actual results surprise me somewhat&lt;/a&gt;, since I took a look at the primaries and noted that I accrued a good number of down votes to offset up votes.  I figured Joshua would pull ahead as the elimination rounds proceeded.&#xA;Like at the soon-to-be-run Kentucky Derby, nits and dopp hit the clubhouse turn and left the rest of the field in the dust (or mud). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good thing I didn't bet (uh, all of) the rent money on that prediction. (Turns head and calls across the room: &lt;em&gt;Yes, Honey, I'm cooking red beans and rice for dinner, why do you ask?&lt;/em&gt;)   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Interesting stat&lt;/em&gt;: 3,005 voters were eligible, 906 visited the site during the election, 769 visited the election page, and 366 voted. No analysis of those numbers will be provided.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Enough Analysis, It's Time To Party Like It's 2017!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Goodonya both, looking forward to the diamonds adorning your handles on site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I shall now retire to the bar with Joshua, and work on my concession speech.  I think it starts with &quot;Hey, Josh, we wuz robbed!&quot; or something like that. 8^D &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wait, is this mic on?&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Primary Upvote/Downvote pairs without names, per @darkwanderer's point.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;+61/-16; +226/-4; +288/-7; +134/-10; +33/-26; +18/-33; +83/-23; +17/-79; +12/-52; +147/-16; +25/-33  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="307" LastEditDate="2017-05-10T04:28:06.520" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T04:28:06.520" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7067" CreationDate="2017-05-02T23:08:09.673" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Congrats to @dopplegreener and @nitsua60, and thanks to all the candidates, voters, and our Community Moderator team for participating in the election in their various ways. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-02T23:08:09.673" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7070" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7075" CreationDate="2017-05-03T16:54:47.847" Score="4" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99237/perception-check-vs-passive-perception&quot;&gt;Perception Check vs Passive Perception&lt;/a&gt; was posted today and was then closed as a dupe of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48256/passive-perception-confusion&quot;&gt;Passive Perception confusion&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that the initial question (along with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48281/does-passive-perception-supersede-active-perception&quot;&gt;Does passive perception supersede active perception?&lt;/a&gt;, which was also closed as a dupe of the Passive Perception Confusion question), are not duplicates of the Confusion question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither were questions about understanding the difference between Passive/Active, but asked whether or not Passive acted as a floor for an Active roll - specifically for Perception, but could possibly be used for other skills.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should those questions be reopened? Should they be handled differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-03T17:50:42.623" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T14:25:28.100" Title="Should these questions about Passive/Active checks be marked as duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7071" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-03T17:44:52.767" Score="3" ViewCount="237" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag has been a &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; contentious issue here. We have highly debated questions related to the RAW tag's usage (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/&quot; title=&quot;what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What's it for?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/&quot; title=&quot;a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;Changing the approach&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6055/&quot; title=&quot;the-rules-as-written-tag-still-useful-or-is-it-junk&quot;&gt;Keep it?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6162/&quot; title=&quot;should-the-rules-as-written-tag-be-renamed&quot;&gt;Rename it?&lt;/a&gt;), but not one regarding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/info&quot; title=&quot;RAW Tag Wiki Entry&quot;&gt;RAW tag's Info page&lt;/a&gt;, itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're happy with the current iteration, then this question's answer is 'yes, leave it alone.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, however, the answer is 'no, it's not right' or even 'kinda, but...', then what's the best tag wiki we can make? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good tag wiki should be intuitive so that both New Users &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; Long-Time Users get good use out of it. Make sure you have a complete tag wiki in your answer, plus a (maximum 460 character) excerpt, which appears at the top of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; title=&quot;RAW Tag list&quot;&gt;Tag page&lt;/a&gt; and in the hover-over popup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23650" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T16:59:39.783" Title="Are we satisfied with the Tag Wiki / Info entry for the RAW Tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7071" CreationDate="2017-05-03T19:08:32.650" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211/the-rules-as-written-tag-is-a-good-tag-but-weve-made-it-sick-lets-cure-it&quot;&gt;discussed&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;many&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6055/the-rules-as-written-tag-still-useful-or-is-it-junk&quot;&gt;times&lt;/a&gt; before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's good, but like most things on the site, there may be room for improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I consider a situation where I want RAW responses, I want:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer that explains the rule as written.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer that mentions notable interactions between the question and rules it may commonly interact with.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer that highlights room for ambiguity, such as certain English phrasings that can have multiple meanings.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer that indicates if the rule does not actually function in its current form.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm not interested in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer that proposes alternate solutions/homebrew to the rules in question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer stating the intent is different than written*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer with opinions on the quality of the rule.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Personally, I find references to the author/designer/publisher talking about the rule in question to be a great &lt;em&gt;comment&lt;/em&gt;, perhaps not so much an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are not complete lists, but merely some of the concerns I personally have for RAW situations.  I do not intend for my personal concerns to be policy/the definition for the standard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current tag definition communicates the general idea of what RAW is and what it is used for.  It lets the reader infer what the question is looking for.  It indicates the question is looking for a particular type of response, but its presence doesn't enforce any special rules.  It does indicate certain responses may conflict with other site rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18" LastActivityDate="2017-05-03T19:08:32.650" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7071" CreationDate="2017-05-03T21:24:52.657" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki workshop space&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Wiki excerpt&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions that are about the logical interactions of a game's rules under a strictly literal reading. Not for questions about normal clarifications of the written rules.  Answering rules questions with house-rules and opinions will already be restricted by our site's rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Wiki&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions that are about the logical interactions and application of the game rules, when their written form is interpreted as strictly as possible, without reference to explanations or considerations outside of the rules texts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Bringing in sources outside of game rules is not discouraged &lt;em&gt;per se&lt;/em&gt;, but should only be attempted when certain it is a practical solution to the problem. Such attempts are &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;“challenging the frame of the question”&lt;/a&gt; and best approached according to the guidelines of that meta post, to maximize the chance of being practically useful to the problem instead of merely off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;hr&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag is not a generic “I have a rules question” tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For questions looking for normal clarification of game rules&lt;/strong&gt;, do not use this tag. Instead, use the tag named after the rules being asked about, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr4&lt;/a&gt;, and any other tag relevant to the subject of the rules, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grappling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grappling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grappling&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/movement&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;movement&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;movement&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For questions seeking to avoid answers based on house-rule or opinion&lt;/strong&gt;, simply say so in the body of the question. Not everyone who will attempt an answer understands our tagging system, let alone that a tag might mean they should answer a certain way, so tags should not be used as a replacement for simply stating what you need from the answers. Answers at RPG.se are also expected to be based on more than mere opinion anyway, so no special efforts need to be made to prevent such answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T06:36:03.153" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T06:36:03.153" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-05-03T21:24:52.657" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7074" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7071" CreationDate="2017-05-03T23:30:08.880" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Yes, leave it alone.&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It ain't broke, don't fix it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that the question specifically called this out as an acceptable answer. It is the &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; answer, so I'm giving it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2017-05-03T23:30:08.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7070" CreationDate="2017-05-03T23:58:31.027" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;While the title of the Q is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99237/perception-check-vs-passive-perception&quot;&gt;Perception Check vs Passive Perception&lt;/a&gt;, the question body itself doesn't ask for the differences between an active and passive check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What they are concerned about is, can you use Passive Perception anyway, even if your Perception check result is lower?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Player 1 has a passive perception of 15. Player 1 does a perception check and rolls a 6. Player 1 still notices what is going on in the area because of their passive perception being 15.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is this correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is a question already asked and answered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48281/does-passive-perception-supersede-active-perception&quot;&gt;this question which is also a duplicate&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the two duplicate questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48256/passive-perception-confusion&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48281/does-passive-perception-supersede-active-perception&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt;) are not duplicates of each other. It would be good if they were unlinked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T14:25:28.100" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T14:25:28.100" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7076" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7071" CreationDate="2017-05-04T01:07:55.297" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, I am satisfied.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For new users, the chances of any of them (informed by my own&#xA;experience) to put deep thought into which tag to use is nil.  Thus,&#xA;as new users do or don't use tags correctly, many of us who moderate&#xA;as the community does will add or subtract tags, this one included, in order to help as we assist new users in various ways.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For moderately experienced users the tag wiki, if they've gotten&#xA;feedback that their tag usage was off, or they see the tag removed&#xA;in the course of various edits, probably won't evoke a strong reaction one way or the other and but they may use tags (this one included) with a tad more care.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To the experienced users, it'll get used correctly with that tag's guidance as written.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Motive for change&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To the small number of people who look at tags for the sake of tags,&#xA;and tagging as an art form (it's the internet, and tagging is an&#xA;area of expertise) I wonder:  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How happy we need to make the perfectionists?    &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the point of diminishing returns?   &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This (tagging) expertise has value because &lt;strong&gt;good tagging helps search, good searches help users ask good questions that aren't dupes, and to make good posts in general&lt;/strong&gt;. (This from my own experience on this site and other internet sites, not just SE sites).  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Provisional Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The perfect is sometimes the enemy of the good.  It's working well enough, and the wiki explains well enough how this tag ought to be used.  There is no need to fix what isn't broken.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why this answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A year ago I offered to do some research on tag usage, and collect data, and in good faith I began to do so.  The tension/animosity was bothering me since it was not accompanied by data.  I discovered, as I concluded my second of 12 batches for analysis, that two very experienced users &lt;em&gt;on differing sides of the disagreement&lt;/em&gt; had no use for my efforts.  When a volunteer is told (in effect) &quot;Screw you, I don't need your input&quot; it puts a damper on the motivation to volunteer.  I thus stopped wasting my time.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag &lt;em&gt;in and of itself&lt;/em&gt; is not worth the amount of time and &lt;strong&gt;wind&lt;/strong&gt; that has been expended upon it over the past four years.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommendation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is better use of our time, as RPG.SE community leaders and supporters, in our various collective efforts that are aimed at keeping this site good.  So let's spend our time a bit more wisely.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T16:59:39.783" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T16:59:39.783" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7077" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7080" CreationDate="2017-05-04T11:27:53.923" Score="6" ViewCount="581" Body="&lt;p&gt;The specific question I'm talking about is: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46591/does-dd-5e-have-a-rule-for-character-knowledge-about-monsters&quot;&gt;Does D&amp;amp;D 5e have a rule for character knowledge about monsters?&lt;/a&gt; and for what it's worth I'm not trying to start a flame war or call out users for doing something bad or wrong, I'm just bring up something I see as potentially problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Within the last month we've gotten three new answers to this question. However, these answers are personal rulings; how these specific users use skills to allow PCs knowledge about monsters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel this is slightly problematic for 3 reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Though it's not actually, specifically stated in the question, I feel like the spirit of the question is asking about &lt;em&gt;official&lt;/em&gt; rules or at the very least guidance &lt;em&gt;using&lt;/em&gt; official rules. These answers do not provide this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(And this may then be a problem with the question). These answer could potentially encourage &lt;em&gt;even more&lt;/em&gt; answers that are only &quot;here's how I use skills&quot; with little to no provided backup. And &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; that happens then eventually the signal-to-noise ratio on that question drops significantly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;These answers don't provide any &lt;em&gt;guidance&lt;/em&gt;. They just state the end result.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As is though, I'm conflicted about actually flagging these answers as &quot;not an answer&quot;. Mostly, honestly, because I feel users won't see my reasoning behind those flags but partly also because I'm not sure if there is actually a problem to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so I bring this to meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What, if anything, should we do in this situation?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we remove these answers because they &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; answer the question? Should we edit the question to specifically ask for official-guided answers? Should we ask the OP to clarify what they're looking for (it's worth noting that the OP hasn't been active for over a year though)? Is 'downvote and move on' sufficient here? Should we ask the answerers to add details to their answers (which can also be done &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; they get deleted)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T11:38:08.560" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T14:46:38.913" Title="What to do about (some of) the answers for the DnD 5e 'character knowledge about monsters' question?" Tags="|discussion|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7078" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-04T12:27:46.457" Score="7" ViewCount="230" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the context, I am speaking about KRyan's answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99276/how-much-money-can-i-make-up-with-class-features&quot;&gt;How much money can I make up with class features?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is I completely agree with it, except for the last sentence I find completely wrong. On top of this I don't think this sentence is essential to the answer nor that it helps the OP in any way:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At the same time, though, he might be happy to do so—the gunslinger class, unfortunately, is hideously weak and needs all the help it can get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I posted an answer myself it would be a big paraphrasing of this answer just without the last sentence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could also just downvote the answer and let it as it is, but that would imply I don't agree with it, where most of this answer is exactly what I would answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have thought about just leaving a comment saying &quot;I approve this question, except for the last sentence&quot;, but KRyan reacted defensively to my suggestion to alter the post and then dopplegreener just deleted the thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the last sentence was answering to a part of the question I could make an other answer covering only this part of the question and refering to KRyan's one for the rest, but this sentence doesn't cover at all any interrogation from the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the solution to this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to be clear, my question is not about whether this last sentence is right or wrong, it's about what I should do if I considered it wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T14:34:10.090" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T15:39:48.683" Title="What if you agree with an answer, except for one part that is not really on-topic but you find very wrong?" Tags="|discussion|answers|voting|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7078" CreationDate="2017-05-04T13:10:08.330" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;That sentence is appropriate, on-point, and on-topic for responding to the question, so I'm going to put that aside and focus on the &quot;I think this bit of the answer is wrong/unhelpful&quot; part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, here's your options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You might want to make a suggestion to the post author about that one bit. Provide an actionable suggestion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whether they decline, accept and edit, or do nothing: &lt;strong&gt;vote and move on.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Provide your own answer if you're not satisfied with the ones presently there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments along the lines of &quot;I agree but not with this part&quot; are likely to get deleted; I don't advise it as a very fruitful course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In &lt;em&gt;this specific case&lt;/em&gt; I suggest skipping #1.&lt;/strong&gt; You and KRyan have a philosophical difference about the accuracy or wrong-ness of the statement in question. It's valid from a certain playstyle &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;and we embrace different playstyles&lt;/a&gt; including that one. You acknowledged in comments you'd already had a discussion about this with KRyan before. (I deleted the comments on that basis: I decided to save you both the time and energy of having a second discussion, because I know neither of you are likely to convince the other. KRyan had already declined at that point to action your suggestion to remove that sentence.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On #2:&lt;/strong&gt; Voting is personal so how you vote is up to you. It's tricky to know what to do when part of an answer is good but there's some other part that feels like a deal-breaker. I tend to upvote answers that contain good and not-quite-as-good material; if I feel it contains suggestions that I believe would be altogether damaging for anyone to follow, I err on downvoting it. That's just how I do it though. Not voting at all is also an option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On #3:&lt;/strong&gt; As you've noted, re-pasting the same answer sans one sentence wouldn't be received well, but you've still got the option of writing an answer from scratch. I find that for myself, doing so is more easy after a mental break (like a night's sleep) has cleared my mind of clear memory of the original post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that excerpts of another answer would have to be attributed by our CC Attribution-ShareAlike licensing. Paraphrasing is fine.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Super short version: leave a suggestion (if it'll do anything); vote your conscience and move on; provide your own answer if you want. Remember that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;we embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt;, and not all of those playstyles will sit well with everybody, but it's OK for people to hold benign perspectives other members may disagree with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-10T13:12:12.973" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T13:12:12.973" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7077" CreationDate="2017-05-04T14:35:58.923" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Voting should, and probably will, take care of this&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, voting appears to be working as intended.  The accepted answer has a rules citation to support the answer, and various other answers address that you have to use your judgment to apply what is in the books. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I Don't See A Problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For Dnd-5e, an answer that advocates &lt;em&gt;Rulings over Rules&lt;/em&gt; is consistent with the game's build unless a question is explicitly RAW, though for this question, RAW is vague at best, and as I've read the books it appears to be &lt;em&gt;Intentionally So&lt;/em&gt;.  There's a lot of descriptive versus prescriptive writing in the 5e rule books.  (See also Captain Jack Sparrow on things that are guidelines more than rules).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What do any of us as community members do?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual.  Make comments to the lower quality answers on what needs improvement, if we feel so moved. Vote, or don't, as necessary to indicate answer quality.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-05-04T14:46:38.913" LastActivityDate="2017-05-04T14:46:38.913" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7078" CreationDate="2017-05-04T16:39:21.480" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Use comments to raise objections where you find them.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been leaving comments on the site to a variety of answers and questions, explaining what issues I have with a given answer or question.  That's the same as what you did.  We can't control if someone responds defensively, but we can control our reaction to that.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What to do?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave your comment (as you attempt to be helpful) but accept that&#xA;the person who wrote the answer may not agree.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you feel strongly enough, down vote.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If not move along to another question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I may agree that that line in the answer was a digression (I have similar one liners in some of my answers) is that a reason to get into an argument about it?  There are other options.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one feels that an answer, or part of an answer, is wrong enough to argue about then posting an excellent answer of one's own is a fine way of resolving that.  (@nitsua60's comment paraphrased) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-05-10T15:39:48.683" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T15:39:48.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7082" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-04T17:46:35.763" Score="22" ViewCount="330" Body="&lt;p&gt;This may not stay open for long; but I am unsure how to give thanks where I feel thanks is due.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, since I have been here for 2+ years now and several questions and answers, can I give thanks to those few who stand out and the many others who participate in this website who do not stand out as much?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few of those who stand out:  KorvinStarmast, NautArch, Miniman, Markovchain, Dale M, Purple Monkey, Nitsua60, and of course SevenSidedDie; have all been integral figures in asking and answering the hard questions and, when necessary, editing mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just want everyone (even those who's names I do not remember) to know how important and helpful this website has been to me and my D&amp;amp;D experience.&#xA;Thank you RPG Stack Exchange. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21362" OwnerDisplayName="Airatome" LastActivityDate="2017-05-09T00:30:51.507" Title="Can I just say thank you to those of RPG SE?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7083" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-05T16:26:19.040" Score="8" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;I accidentally voted to reopen a question that I just meant to make some improvement edits to. When I attempted to reclick the 'reopen' link I was told that I'd already voted to reopen and there was no option to rescind my vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-05T16:34:48.813" LastActivityDate="2017-05-05T16:34:48.813" Title="Can I Rescind a Reopen Vote?" Tags="|support|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7083" CreationDate="2017-05-05T16:34:36.633" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reopen votes can't be rescinded. Alas! Don't worry too much about it though. No harm's done, and this just happens sometimes so we take it in stride.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Four other people still have to agree to reopen it (or make exactly the same mistake), and other users can re-close the question if it really still needs work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-05-05T16:34:36.633" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7071" CreationDate="2017-05-07T00:49:11.297" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7071/are-we-satisfied-with-the-tag-wiki-info-entry-for-the-raw-tag?noredirect=1#comment21949_7071&quot; title=&quot;Hey I Can Chan&amp;#39;s comment&quot;&gt;requested&lt;/a&gt;:&#xA;I see the definition of Rules As Written as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This&lt;/em&gt; is how the rules, alone, say &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The utility of this, as others have said, is to have a baseline to compare other metrics against. RAW is free of balance constraints or intent. Effectively that's where I think the RAW info wiki should be focusing. The only part that anyone who's not familiar with the site will likely look is in the &quot;Usage guidance (excerpt)&quot; section, so it should be as complete as possible. Like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about how the rules work when interpreted only as they are written, including errata, but without respect for balance, explanations, intent, or other factors outside the rules text itself. If using this tag to avoid house-rules, spell it out in the question. Unsupported opinion will be avoided without using this tag, since the site already expects answers to be based on more than opinion alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;The rest of the info wiki is fine, but I'd change the last paragraph thus:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For questions seeking to avoid answers based on house-rule or opinion&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;del&gt;simply&lt;/del&gt; &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; say so in the body of the question, &lt;em&gt;don't just use this tag&lt;/em&gt;. Not everyone who will attempt an answer understands our tagging system, let alone that a tag might mean they should answer a certain way, so tags should not be used &lt;em&gt;as a replacement&lt;/em&gt; for simply stating what you need from the answers. &lt;strong&gt;Answers at RPG.se are also expected to be based on more than mere opinion anyway, so no special efforts need to be made to prevent such answers.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This emphasizes that using the RAW tag is not &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; shorthand for &lt;em&gt;no house-rules&lt;/em&gt;, and that unsupported opinion will already filter out, but still has use for anyone filtering for RAW questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23650" LastActivityDate="2017-05-07T00:49:11.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7086" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-07T12:17:35.650" Score="4" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99421/can-a-blinded-caster-with-blindsight-use-spells-that-require-them-to-see-the-tar&quot;&gt;casters with blindsight and the Blinded condition&lt;/a&gt;, which has been marked as duplicate to a question which asks if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91773/can-a-creature-with-blindsight-that-is-not-immune-to-the-blinded-condition-suffe&quot;&gt;creatures with blindsight can have the Blinded condition&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why they are not the same&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not agree this question is a duplicate of the linked question. The other one asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Can creatures with blindsight be affected by the Blinded condition?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one I opened asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Can casters with blindsight and are Blinded cast spells that require them to see the target?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question already assumes the answer to the first one: yes, they can be affected by it, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/91774/27327&quot;&gt;creatures with blindsight are not necessarily immune to the Blinded condition&lt;/a&gt;. We begin with the assumption that they are. It is a more specific question, and an application of the answers of the first one, which might not have the same answers as the one it has been marked a duplicate of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The policy on duplicating: duplicate Q's based on the answers, not the questions?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer to Question A is the same as the answer to Question B, and Question A was already answered, should we duplicate Question B to Question A? I thought the policy was to duplicate Q's based on the questions asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if the answer to Question B can be trivially answered by Question A's answers (so they have the same answers), but Question B is more specific than Question A (A covers more ground than B), should they be duplicated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Analyzing spell descriptions -- a case for the need of more detailed inspection?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question I asked assumes the caster cannot see (Blinded condition), but has blindsight (can perceive the surroundings via other senses). Spell descriptions specifically ask for sight when sight is needed. Blindsight is normally a way to get around the Blinded condition, but is that still the case for spell descriptions that ask for creatures &quot;that you can see&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The duplicated Q does not have an answer to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-07T12:44:06.717" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T02:34:05.680" Title="Are these two questions about Blindsight and the Blinded condition true duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7086" CreationDate="2017-05-07T12:21:58.647" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The way this works is if you think they're not duplicates, you explain why not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question would seem to be trivially answered by the answer to &quot;can a creature with Blindsight that's blinded still see people&quot;, as seeing people lets you cast spells on them.  Make a case for why that's not the case and perhaps people will vote to reopen. 5 folks that disagree can override even a mod close, and unless there's something really severely wrong (real strong cause) with a question we're happy to let the crowd's closes/opens stand if they disagree with us.  This doesn't stand or fall on you convincing me, but I'm going to vote my conscience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still stand by my close vote, because to me this is like saying &quot;OK so someone blinded with blindsense can see someone&quot; and then having questions for &quot;yes but can they target them with a spell?&quot;  &quot;Can they shoot them with an arrow?&quot;  &quot;Can they  hit them with a melee attack?&quot;  It's all the same answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we do with duplicates is we like having duplicates asking questions from these different perspectives - but it suits the site best to have them pointing at the same set of canonical answers instead of a different batch each time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T02:34:05.680" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T02:34:05.680" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7067" CreationDate="2017-05-07T17:54:45.877" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nice.  Congrats to you both.  Especially for @nitsua60, who gave me encouragement early on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26408" LastActivityDate="2017-05-07T17:54:45.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7089" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-08T09:57:34.230" Score="4" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel that legitimate downvoting is disincentivised by the rep penalty. What are the reasons this penalty exists?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T17:53:17.687" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T17:53:17.687" Title="Why does downvoting hurt my reputation (but upvoting does not help it)?" Tags="|support|voting|reputation|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2017-05-08T17:52:57.810" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7090" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7089" CreationDate="2017-05-08T10:31:34.537" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Downvoting &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; disincentivised (it's not just you), and that's deliberate. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;The help page on downvotes&lt;/a&gt; says this: &amp;ldquo;Voting down answers is not something we want you to take lightly, so it is not free.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange's engineers want us to think carefully before we downvote something, want us to make sure it's worthwhile. A tiny -1 ping to our reputation is just enough to make that happen. I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; go downvote every single post for fickle reasons, but that tiny little penalty gently gamifies me into only downvoting when it's serious and necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes on questions are &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;free&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; however. That's the case because we badly need people to downvote bad questions so that the site only has good material to respond to, and don't want them thinking twice about whether it's worth it. The downvote help page links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimizing For Pearls, Not Sand&lt;/a&gt; to explain this philosophy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Upvotes don't come with penalties nor benefits (such as a corresponding +1 rep for the voter). We want people to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/10/19/vote-early-vote-often/&quot;&gt;vote early and vote often&lt;/a&gt;, so there's no cost. There cannot be a +rep benefit for upvoting though. Reputation is strictly only awarded for those activities which concretely benefit the site: posting good questions and answers, making good edits (as a low-rep user), and accepting an answer that's helped you. People want to do things that give them reputation, reputation rewards need to be implemented with the careful question: &amp;ldquo;what would happen if people did this as much as possible without stopping?&amp;rdquo; If we were all just contributing awesome questions and answers, good helpful edits, and accepting the answers that solved our problems, we've got a lot of constructive users. But if people were voting constantly on everything, we compromise the upvote as a signal of &amp;ldquo;this is good&amp;rdquo; because it could also mean &amp;ldquo;this is crap but I wanted +rep for voting on it&amp;rdquo; and our scoring system would collapse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-08T14:36:07.397" LastActivityDate="2017-05-08T14:36:07.397" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7091" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-09T00:07:34.497" Score="18" ViewCount="350" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/99412/23970&quot;&gt;What can I read about how we tie the stochastic characteristics of conflict resolution into statements about the nature of a game?&lt;/a&gt; Is occasioning a lot of odd behavior. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's drawn automatic comment-flags a few times. A number of those comments are users arguing (in 600 chars or fewer) why the question is good/bad/on-topic/off-topic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's got one answer that's basically &quot;here's some references which I don't think address this; maybe video game people know more.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's got another heavily-downvoted answer that seems to be just one user's description of how they believe/percieve distributions to play out. (And then there's that strange tagline at the end.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first point alone makes me think we need this meta to more-fully explore the question's merits, flaws, clarity: as much ink's been spilt arguing the question' status and understanding its details as on answering it. The perplexing existing answers strike it home for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For now I'm holding the question, moving the comments to &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/58427/discussion-on-question-by-the-dark-wanderer-how-do-we-tie-the-stochastic-charact&quot;&gt;a dedicated chat room&lt;/a&gt;, and I encourage all who've engaged with the question on mainsite to discuss it here where I hope the space and tools at everyone's disposal can help make it a great contribution to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Just to be clear: I'm not really sure one way or another on the question. I thought it merited holding because of the storm I saw swirling around it. My hope is that in this meta supporters and opponents can make the longer arguments the question seems to deserve. If, as a result of this, five reopen-votes accrue, great. If not, great. The community of people involved with and knowledgeable about the question can do their thing better than I can.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-05-09T15:33:54.370" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T05:50:33.710" Title="What's to be done with the &quot;stochastic characteristics&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7082" CreationDate="2017-05-09T00:30:51.507" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;RPG.SE, &lt;a href=&quot;http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/kevin-durant-mvp-speech&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;you da real DMG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I started playing 2 years ago, about the same time I joined this stack, actually. I've found this site to not only settle tough rules questions, but also the softer sides of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;. The site, and its members are a dragon's hoard of knowledge, skills and information. But even more than that, the site and people have taught me &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to think, and if there's anything that I can take home from this site, it's &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; skill. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I can say, with confidence, the stack... is working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-05-09T00:30:51.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7093" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7091" CreationDate="2017-05-09T05:20:56.630" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;On re-opening the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be reopened, the question needs to show work done. Sources the querent is already familiar with and thinks may lead somewhere, but hasn't gotten there yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If re-opened, the community/moderators should also be more aggressive about answer deletion here, for the sake of preserving the quality of the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The question is poorly scoped&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite its looks, the core of the question is actually improperly posed. This is because the querent is unable to form the question itself, as he is unable to articulate his own confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Below is a snippet from that question which I believe shows this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For example, I can tell you that the absence of dice in Amber significantly changes the feel of the game v.s. a similar setting modeled and run in FATE 2.0.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm much less articulate as to what the actual differences &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt;, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short: the querent does not know what he wants to know. And so how can the question be properly asked?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The answer to this question is very likely &quot;there is no effect&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is asking &quot;what is the effect of the statistical properties of chance on a player's experience&quot; is asking a very high level question that -- to &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt;, intuitively, though I haven't done the legwork for it -- is very likely to yield &quot;there is no significant effect.&quot; On my part, this is just a hunch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due to the combined factors of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No work has been shown when posing the question&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is poorly scoped because the querent is uncertain about what he wants to know&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The most probable answer is there is no effect&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then this leads to a very unique question which leads to this situation where it may not always reap the best answers. I submit that a question which is unable to articulate what it is asking about, but has an underlying answer of &quot;there is no effect,&quot; will draw confused answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can be fixed by better scoping down the Q to specific aspects of the game's dice mechanics that the querent is interested in. A question of &quot;does statistics generally affect the feel of the game?&quot; is unclear and too broad. A question of &quot;does more variance change the feel of the game?&quot; is better scoped. And if the querent is interested in more than one facet of statistics, they can ask more questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Recommendations&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said in my opening, the if the question is re-opened, the community and moderators need to be stricter about enforcing deletion of bad answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-09T11:35:42.787" LastActivityDate="2017-05-09T11:35:42.787" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7091" CreationDate="2017-05-09T09:21:25.500" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think part (much) of the issue is that the question sounds like its asking for an answer upfront for most of the body and only makes it clear that it's looking for sources to consume for an answer later.  I've made an edit to that effect. I hope that by making it more clearly a reference request type question it will be less confusing to viewers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-05-09T09:21:25.500" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7091" CreationDate="2017-05-09T10:02:08.403" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&amp;quot;What does academic literature have to say about [subject within roleplaying]?&amp;quot; is a suitable question for this site.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I don't think the linked question is very clearly written (or was, as of a couple edits ago).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On academic questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is plenty of academic literature on games. There is a significant number of literature on roleplaying games, though with a focus on education or Nordic larp. For example: International journal of roleplaying, Analog game studies, Solmukohta/Knudepunkt/Knutpunkt books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.se is, to me, a natural place for questions and answers related to this literature. Many of the researchers are active roleplayers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A typical academic question asks for references or what is known about a subject. There questions can be answered. In an ideal situation, the answer is a review article or a PhD thesis; in a less ideal world, it consists of some keywords and a couple of central references; in the real world, it often consists of some related articles and the fact that the answerer believes that is the best there currently is, as far as related literature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-10T05:50:33.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7091" CreationDate="2017-05-09T20:49:05.683" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see the following issues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The actual question is obfuscated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The length isn't a problem. Introducing a bit of background to set shared expectations is fine, especially for more nuanced, &quot;feels-y&quot; questions. There's a bolded &quot;thesis statement&quot; at the end that tries to summarize the question, so you're not left searching through multiple paragraphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That thesis statement, though, is really vague (in my opinion):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How do we tie the stochastic characteristics of conflict resolution into a statement about the nature of a role playing game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Stochastic&quot; is formal jargon but that's fine if you're chasing academic literature anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Conflict resolution&quot; as used here is kinda mismatched with what &quot;conflict resolution&quot; means in non-academic RPG theory (&quot;conflict&quot; vs. &quot;task&quot; resolution) or in academic social literature (a process of deescalation, negotiation, mediation, et cetera).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;A statement about the nature of a roleplaying game&quot; is... well, it's kind of a blank. Based on the preceding information, it &lt;em&gt;seems&lt;/em&gt; to be about user experience. But maybe it's more? It kinda reads as an invitation to say &lt;em&gt;anything,&lt;/em&gt; except that &quot;anything&quot; must also be deep and rigorous on some highly unspecific level (the very &quot;nature&quot; of a game).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Stringent requirements make the scope problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In particular I'm interested in the impact of the magnitude of the stochastic variance of the resolution system on the system, as well as the impact of greater or lesser volatility, and of polynomialization of the distribution (i.e. how binomail, trinomial, etc distribution graphs affect the feel of the game). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is laser-focused on a small part of the overall &quot;surface area&quot; of player interaction with the mechanics. It may not be something that's easily &quot;separable&quot; from other features as discussed in the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, okay, that's not quite a deal breaker: you can easily write a frame-challenge answer that says &quot;here's a paper on roll-the-dice resolution mechanics that takes a wider view and comes to the following conclusions, demonstrating how your concern is just part of a greater whole, and likely to be eclipsed by other factors&quot; if such a paper is out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, coupled with the technical language and open-ended notion of &quot;a statement about the nature of a role playing game,&quot; it seems like we're being asked a very detailed question about a very specific thing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's a question that's both hard to answer (this is okay), but I think, as it stands, &lt;strong&gt;it's also hard for anyone but the OP to evaluate the answer at all&lt;/strong&gt;. That's a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E.g. I've had to go back and forth between Thanuir's answer and the question several time to figure out whether or not it's actually an appropriate reply. I'm still not entirely sure. (Now, I'm not a full-time academic, but I've read a ton of non-academic RPG theory, and at least one formal game design book that touches heavily on how systems design affects both outcomes and player experience, &quot;immersion,&quot; &quot;flow,&quot; &amp;amp;c. We've got, what, half a dozen users who've done more than that?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2017-05-09T20:49:05.683" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7097" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7098" CreationDate="2017-05-12T15:38:28.917" Score="8" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/23650/chemus&quot;&gt;Chemus&lt;/a&gt; was kind enough to go through and fix broken links in many questions and answers—lots of them mine—on May 11, 2017, and at least one user upvoted some of those questions and answers—again, lots of them mine. I awoke May 12 to Voting Corrected, having lost about half of yesterday's rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I be concerned? Is this a black mark on me, on Chemus (who took on a task that I found overwhelming), or on the user who thought &lt;em&gt;Wow, there are a lot of useful questions and answers from that Chan guy that I missed before&lt;/em&gt; and upvoted my questions and answers that all happened to pop up in a row?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that my loss of rep points &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; isn't the issue. I just don't want suffering to ensue because of a good deed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2017-05-13T08:10:37.610" LastActivityDate="2017-05-13T08:10:37.610" Title="Is serial voting an infraction or anything?" Tags="|discussion|voting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7097" CreationDate="2017-05-12T15:53:11.497" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a serial voting FAQ available on Meta Stack Exchange: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/126829/152515&quot;&gt;What is serial voting and how does it affect me?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Nobody is in trouble. There are no black marks as a result of this.&lt;/strong&gt; You and the user whose votes were reversed don't have to worry about any harm coming to yourselves or each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This appears to just be an automatic voting reversal because someone gave you a lot of votes in a short period of time. I'm surprised the algorithms got tripped, and if I had a say I would've un-tripped them, but at least there's no serious harm. This was just an automated system that roots out voting fraud getting a false positive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-12T15:59:25.700" LastActivityDate="2017-05-12T15:59:25.700" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7099" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-15T03:03:21.367" Score="13" ViewCount="351" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/295936/311001&quot;&gt;Chat events&lt;/a&gt; are a thing, I recently learned. They range from project meetings to movie nights to happy hours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there ideas people have for events around here? Propose topics, time-frames (recurrence?), objectives, &amp;amp;c. I don't know how/whether any of this will work, but that won't stop me from trying =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-05-30T00:53:35.207" LastActivityDate="2017-05-30T00:54:43.557" Title="Let's brainstorm some [chat] events" Tags="|discussion|chat|chat-event|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="6" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T03:03:21.367" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Micro-RPG play/playtests&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our Very Own&lt;sup&gt;TM&lt;/sup&gt; chatizens have written a number of small RPGs. (And there are hundreds of other micro-RPGs out there worth trying!) Often people will take them for a test drive, but I know I forget about them pretty quickly, since they're not often in my RL-group's rotation. But plenty are amenable to play-by-chat. Let's do it some time(s)!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some that I know of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2016/rpg/2016/04/13/COLONYPUNKaresistanceassimilationgame.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;COLONYPUNK&lt;/a&gt; by Our Very Own &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4398/besw&quot;&gt;@BESW&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2015/rpg/finalist/2015/04/01/TheDuel.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Duel&lt;/a&gt; by OVO &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28881/rabalias&quot;&gt;@Rabalais&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2017/rpg/2017/04/20/Gtterdmmerung.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Gotterdammerung&lt;/a&gt; by OVO &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1421/magician&quot;&gt;@Magician&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ccuveFwDK05dWyOqbsR6gwHuYRrt-jAv45pAUQhjEVc/edit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Long Live the King of Monsters&lt;/a&gt; by OVO &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4398/besw&quot;&gt;@BESW&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io//2017/rpg/2017/04/15/Quarantine.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Quarantine&lt;/a&gt; by a Stackizen&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2017/rpg/2017/04/17/ShonenRPG.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shonen RPG&lt;/a&gt; by OVO &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28479/anne-aunyme&quot;&gt;@AnneAunyme&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Scheduled:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;COLONYPUNK: &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games?tab=schedule&quot;&gt;00:30 2 Jun 2017, hosted by nitsua60&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-30T00:54:43.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T03:15:05.353" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Book Club!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alright, I'll admit it: I've had &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15784870-playing-at-the-world&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Playing at the World&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; for over a year, and I'm not quite halfway through. But with your help, maybe I could make it by 2018?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, there are (of course) hundreds of other books out there I could be pleasantly reading, if only I knew which ones they were....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-15T06:30:35.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T03:46:31.480" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Movie Night!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK, it's entirely unoriginal. And, OK, most of the movies that are on-topic for us are terrible. But it's not like we're under any obligation to keep these events relevant to our site's purpose, and movie nights are a really fun thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;TV Night!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@KRyan's suggestion, and presumably easier for people to find a 20 or 40 minute time to watch an episode of something than a 2 hour slot to watch a movie.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T13:14:05.810" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T10:41:47.777" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Tabletop Tasting Time!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of people visiting the chat (including myself) have awareness of only so many different RPGs, with some folks only familiar with D&amp;amp;D or D&amp;amp;D-and-friends. Let's have an evening when we discuss, review, share and raise awareness of less known but not necessarily obscure games, especially ones that are small, free and different. Obvious candidates for such tasters are Cthulhu Dark, Lady Blackbird, Great Ork Gods, Lasers and Feelings, Honey Heist, Dog Eat Dog; or if going for something larger (that we are more likely to discuss than play) Fiasco, Dogs in the Vineyard, Night Witches, Lovecraftesque, 13th Age, ... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastActivityDate="2017-05-15T10:41:47.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T17:11:13.243" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Crazy idea. I don't know how this will work, but what about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Let's Play &lt;a href=&quot;http://coup.thebrown.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Treason&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone wrote an online version of &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/131357/coup&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Coup&lt;/a&gt; and the designer, Rikki, &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgamegeek.com/article/20521965#20521965&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;has no issues with it&lt;/a&gt;. It's quite fun even without using the chat interface (but it also has a chat interface, which is useful). For warming up, it even offers an AI mode.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something about playing deception games is just so appealing. Give it a try!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-16T06:24:10.140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T06:24:10.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-15T17:19:13.507" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a silly one, but also a relatively little-known site...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Let's try &lt;a href=&quot;https://drawception.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Drawception&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The pitch: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnKZygaAjqE&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;draw a picture&lt;/a&gt; from a random prompt using MS Paint level tools in 10 minutes. Someone describes your picture, and someone else draws from that description. Down it goes in a chain until everyone has either drawn something or described something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can create &quot;private games&quot; when you reach a certain level (Level 3, I believe), wherein you can invite 6, 12, or 15 people to participate in that private game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see all the pictures and prompts at the end of the game. The spirit of the game is like &quot;Pass the message&quot; where you start with a prompt and watch the message get distorted as it goes down the line. Usually, the result is entertaining. And no, you don't have to be good at drawing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seriously, it's fun. These are recent games between newbies. Notice the intentional misreading and misinterpretations. And note that any given person only has access to the one panel (whether drawing or prompt) before them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Game 1&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/waRaq.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/waRaq.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Game between vets (people who own Wacoms and level 15+)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rzFs1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rzFs1.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-16T17:33:05.417" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T17:33:05.417" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7106" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-16T09:25:02.833" Score="4" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;I placed a bounty on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62762/what-does-a-confused-creature-do-when-it-has-to-attack-the-nearest-creature&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and it's coming to its end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is there is no question that really answer my problem, even if one provides a beginning of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I award the bounty to this one or just let it wear out?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T10:16:18.163" Title="Should I award my bounty if the best answer is not that good?" Tags="|discussion|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7106" CreationDate="2017-05-16T10:11:15.127" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a mix of suggestions for you in this scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Award the bounty to the answer most helpful to you or that you find most deserving.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask a new question asking about resource expenditure during the confused state.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bounties actually get awarded automatically (at &lt;strong&gt;half value&lt;/strong&gt;) after they expire if there's an answer eligible for the automatic award. You can read about that in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/16067/152515&quot;&gt;the bounty FAQ&lt;/a&gt; under the heading &quot;What is automatic awarding?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers are eligible for automatic awarding if they were posted during the bounty period &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; meet one of these criteria:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you accepted the answer during the bounty period, &lt;em&gt;or if you didn't do this...&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it has a score of at least +2 and the bounty author didn't post it themselves. (In case of multiple answers, the one with the highest score is chosen; if two have equally higher score, the oldest is chosen.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently that means &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/99649/1204&quot;&gt;Wannabe Warlock's answer&lt;/a&gt; will receive half the bounty value (25 points) automatically when the bounty expires.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since somebody is going to get it, you might as well award the full value to somebody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also recommend the following caution:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Assume that nobody at all might actually read the bounty.&lt;/strong&gt; If you're lucky, they'll at least read the &lt;em&gt;reason&lt;/em&gt; you chose: &amp;ldquo;The current answers do not contain enough detail.&amp;rdquo; They may not keep reading to actually read the message you wrote out (it's easy to miss). &lt;strong&gt;Assume that most people will only see the point value of [+50] and try to provide a super awesome answer to the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say this because the information you requested &amp;mdash; &amp;ldquo;how much resources the confused creature is supposed to spend, if any&amp;rdquo; &amp;mdash; isn't actually requested in the question itself. It's a request for new detail. People will miss it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this scenario, you're asking for extra/deeper detail, and the best way for you to get it is &lt;strong&gt;ask a new question entirely.&lt;/strong&gt; In that one, link back to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62762/what-does-a-confused-creature-do-when-it-has-to-attack-the-nearest-creature&quot;&gt;What does a confused creature do when it has to &amp;quot;attack the nearest creature&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; and say you want to know to what extent the confused creature is meant to use up their own resources. If you hadn't posted the bounty yet I'd suggest editing into the question (it seems in line with what it's asking for), bolding it, then posting the bounty. Right now though I recommend asking a new question primarily because it will give you the best chance of learning what you want to learn, and it's distinct enough from the basics covered in that question to stand on its own as a non-duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-16T10:16:18.163" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T10:16:18.163" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7108" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7113" CreationDate="2017-05-16T15:54:53.323" Score="4" ViewCount="204" Body="&lt;p&gt;I left a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99925/how-should-i-handle-a-limit-curse/99928?noredirect=1#99928&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; on an answer which I believe is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; a frame challenge to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99925/how-should-i-handle-a-limit-curse&quot;&gt;the question about imposing a &quot;Limit Curse&quot; on a player&lt;/a&gt;. This is what I said in that comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer is only a frame challenge, and therefore it does not answer the question asked. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/27327&quot;&gt;You are supposed to answer the Q first, and then challenge the frame later&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I link to the answer to the question, &quot;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&quot; because it gives the following guidelines, in my own words:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Still answer the question, even if you don't like it&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make sure the frame challenge is not most of your answer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't be upset if you are downvoted&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For leaving the above comment, I have been told I was doing an inappropriate action. That is, I shouldn't let people know answers that are &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; frame challenges are not actually delivering what the querent wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My view of it is, even if I disagree with a particular Q, if I have the knowledge to challenge the frame of it, then I should also have the foresight to suggest ways on how to execute ideas which I believe can make the best out of a bad situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, in the linked question, if Ben truly wanted to go with executing his Limit Curse, then I have suggestions for what I believe to be the best way of executing that despite my opinion that it's best he should not do it at all. However, after giving my answer, I will still challenge his frame afterwards. I believe that is a proper frame challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is also why I think answers that are only frame challenges are not actually answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so, to the thing I would like to hear the Stack's answers for: if an answer is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; a frame challenge, is it appropriate or inappropriate to point it out in the comments? Should I leave it be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T11:33:43.010" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T11:33:43.010" Title="When an answer is *only* a frame challenge, is it appropriate to point it out?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7108" CreationDate="2017-05-16T16:09:36.083" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do not need to point it out. You can always suggest improvements, but there's no need for frame challenges to also include an answer to the question, and the author is almost certainly aware they have done a pure frame challenge and so don't really need it pointed out to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've updated the frame challenge guidelines to make this clearer. I'm sorry you went through that confusion and trouble, and I can see how you got there. Point 1 has been rephrased to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Provide your critique as part of an otherwise legitimate answer. (This isn't strictly required, but we &lt;em&gt;very strongly recommend it.&lt;/em&gt; Sometimes declining to answer the question and instead going straight to a frame challenge &amp;mdash; e.g. &amp;ldquo;don't do that at all&amp;rdquo; &amp;mdash; is the right answer, but it's also risky and liable to backfire. This is a judgement call for the author and voters to handle.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The intention is that 2 and 3 &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; firmly required, but not because of any special rules, but because we require them anyway:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We do require you to substantiate your frame challenge: if you don't, it's the kind of Bad Subjective opinionated answer that gets downvoted and deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We do require that you don't cause trouble if people disagree: that's just site policy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-16T17:35:09.533" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T17:35:09.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7108" CreationDate="2017-05-16T16:14:20.693" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Guidelines&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our meta material on frame challenges are only guidelines. They're not rules, nor do we enforce them. (That way lies madness for the enforcers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These guidelines aren't soft rules either — they're very much guides toward best practices for those who want to give themselves a better chance at a successful, well-received frame challenge. They're help intended for authors to improve their content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since they're not rules, but suggestions and help, this is not the case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is also why I think answers that are only frame challenges are not actually answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts that attempt to answer the question are answers. Whether they're good answers or bad answers is to be determined by the quality of the content and the voters' reception of the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly though, guidelines can sometimes be incomplete, or even wrong for a specific case. There are corner cases and exceptions that will, despite violating the recognised guidelines for quality answer-writing, manage to buck the trends and be good answers anyway. We want those trend-defying answers to be able to be posted here so they can help us continue improving the Internet, and rules prohibiting them would be counter-productive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Commenting&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to comment pointing someone towards the frame-challenge guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as with any suggested change to a post though, the author may decline to take the suggestion. This should be received with equanimity and good grace, an appropriate vote, perhaps a parting comment (if it's not going to inflame the situation), and moving on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-16T16:17:14.130" LastActivityDate="2017-05-16T16:17:14.130" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7111" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-16T16:56:45.883" Score="11" ViewCount="345" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've come across a question where the querent has some facts majorly wrong, and they seem to be a substantial cause of the problem they're describing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;we refrain from answering in comments&lt;/a&gt;, and I could imagine pointing out those corrections in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I handle pointing out these errors and correcting them? At what point should I point out the corrections in a comment (basically suggesting an improvement), or at what point does that become an answer-in-comments I should instead post an answer for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-06T14:44:40.657" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T14:44:40.657" Title="A question has some facts majorly wrong: should I be correcting them in comments or an answer?" Tags="|support|faq|questions|answers|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7111" CreationDate="2017-05-16T16:56:45.883" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest the guideline of asking yourself this question: &lt;strong&gt;to what extent is correcting the errors itself solving the problem they're facing?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're substantially solving their problem by correcting them, then post an answer and include the corrections as part of that answer. (Make sure you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;answer the question independently&lt;/a&gt;. Answers that solve just a little part of the problem don't get well received.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're not solving their problem and the factual inaccuracies are tangential to their problem, please do leave a comment suggesting improvements. If you feel it's appropriate (use your judgement) you can also try to edit it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For our general guidelines on handling questions where simply being mistaken or confused is a substantial part of the querent's problem, see here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3505/how-do-we-handle-it-when-the-askers-problem-is-just-that-theyre-confused&quot;&gt;How do we handle it when the asker&amp;#39;s problem is just that they&amp;#39;re confused?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-17T11:23:50.290" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T11:23:50.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7113" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7108" CreationDate="2017-05-16T22:25:43.460" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes, it is appropriate to point out that pure frame challenges are often problematic in a comment on the answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question and answer have gone through substantial revisions, but in the end, I expect users to respect the playstyle of the asker and help them in a way they will use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, you can certainly comment on the question, &quot;Hey, you seem to be leaping to a single solution and should probably ask about your problem instead.&quot; It looks like SSD has actually edited the question at hand into that format, I would assume with the OP's consent.  Then, it's easier to answer with info on which of a variety of solutions are good or bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if they don't want to ask about that, but ask about their specific solution - answer about their specific solution. If you just say &quot;don't do that,&quot; expect people (including me) to downvote it and comment &quot;You should give more help than just a frame challenge.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because here's the deal.  Everyone's got their opinions. And in the past, on this site, before we derived the frame challenge guidelines, here's what happened.  There were always fights.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I am doing survival horror in D&amp;amp;D and want good gun rules. Where are some good gun rules for D&amp;amp;D?&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Don't use survival horror for D&amp;amp;D, use another game! D&amp;amp;D sucks for any genre other than heroic fantasy.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I want a RAW answer to how to do X.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;RAW is bad and is for fools!  Just swag it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Et cetera. I realize everyone always thinks they know better than the OP in cases like these.  And maybe you do. But maybe you just know different, and so it's not your place. Sometimes the mob loves the frame challenge and gives it a lot of votes.  It doesn't mean it's helpful, it just means it's turned a Q&amp;amp;A into a playstyle war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question stays scoped to the proposed solution, if you just simply a priori disagree with the solution - move on to another question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case - if you actually have experience with a &quot;limit curse,&quot; or other similar kind of workaround, well then it's a legit answer to say &quot;well we used something like that and here's how it worked out, and it worked out poorly.&quot;  GS/BS to the rescue. But &quot;in my opinion that's bad, just, you know, because I'm a gamer and have opinions&quot; - you are allowed to have that opinion, but it's not helpful.  So &quot;someone's wrong on the internet,&quot; get over it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-19T04:07:21.447" LastActivityDate="2017-05-19T04:07:21.447" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7114" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7115" CreationDate="2017-05-17T02:25:38.523" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently received a couple of relatively large bounties from fellow members of this Stack, and I've not known how to thank them for their generosity. I know we don't have a private message feature here. Meanwhile, leaving comments on the answer I gave doesn't seem to be the way to do it, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I reach out to these people and let them know I appreciate their gesture?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T04:20:32.413" Title="How do I privately ping someone?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2017-05-17T04:04:24.590" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7115" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7114" CreationDate="2017-05-17T03:15:46.203" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I don't know the etiquette or conventions that might otherwise be used here, you can invite them to a semi-private chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And upon following @nitsua60's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/431/311001&quot; title=&quot;Any way to send a personal message to another user?&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;, there's a link to a related question with a detailed &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/57538&quot; title=&quot;How do I contact other users?&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; which details how to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Precis:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Go to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/users?tab=all&amp;amp;sort=recent&quot;&gt;Chat Users Page&lt;/a&gt; then sort by searching for the desired username. Once you have the chat user, you can 'Start a new room with this user.' The user should be notified with a message in their 'mailbox'. However, don't make this a gallery (no public posting) since the other user will have to request permission to post messages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23650" LastEditorUserId="23650" LastEditDate="2017-05-17T04:20:32.413" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T04:20:32.413" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7111" CreationDate="2017-05-17T03:30:43.167" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll contribute my thought - there's not one right answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a matter of degree.  If it's a short thing, put it in a comment, as it certainly improves the question to correct a clear error in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it requires a bunch of explanation or would be a long back and forth, it's better to add it as an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A downvote to the question can be performed in either case if you feel it's merited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you'll choose wrong and the comment thread will spin out of control or the answer will get flak. C'est la vie, there's no perfect answer, just do your best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T03:30:43.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7099" CreationDate="2017-05-17T03:41:35.483" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Blog Club!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bite-sized book club. Short enough to read and comment on in an hour or two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T03:41:35.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7118" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-17T23:28:52.977" Score="3" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100005/10642&quot;&gt;How to create a logical system to run a divination engine based on d&amp;amp;d magic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I help OP to get this question clarified and possibly reopened (on Worldbuilding on here, depending what he really wants)? I can't comment or edit on Worldbuilding because it was migrated and site redirects me here. And I can't comment or edit here because migration was rejected. Is there no hope? Is this question lost?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T23:33:38.793" Title="Migration rejected - and now what?" Tags="|support|specific-question|migration|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7118" CreationDate="2017-05-17T23:33:38.793" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have unlocked it. Enjoy. 4 more characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-17T23:33:38.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2892" CreationDate="2017-05-18T00:12:34.740" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you bounty a question, you used to be able to award it to an answer you posted (even a self-answer on a question you posted).  You wouldn't get the rep from the bounty, but the added attention from the bounty could well get more rep than that from upvotes due to the question being featured.  Furthermore, the blue &quot;+ \d&quot; notation would appear beside the self-bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowadays, self bounties can't be awarded to yourself, but you can still draw attention to your own work that way.  You can read more about the foibles of self-bounty awards &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/116567/can-i-award-a-bounty-to-myself-if-i-provide-the-best-answer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also our site, as a matter of culture, doesn't tend to do self-promotional answer bountying much, if at all.  We reserve that mostly for questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-05-18T00:12:34.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7122" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7124" CreationDate="2017-05-19T17:28:45.027" Score="6" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you repeatedly slide your mouse back and forth over the tags listed for a question (that is, toggling their hover status many times), the user box slides farther and farther to the right, stretching the question frame (as seen by the bottom border) and causing the box to go under the right-hand sidebar and eventually off the screen, causing horizontal scrollbars (ew).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Happens both main and meta. I am using Chrome 58.0.3029.110 (64-bit) on a Windows 7 computer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-19T20:53:05.470" LastActivityDate="2017-05-19T20:54:31.010" Title="Amusing display bug when hovering over tags in a question" Tags="|bug|status-completed|user-interface|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7123" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7122" CreationDate="2017-05-19T17:37:19.323" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is one of the loveliest bugs I've ever had the pleasure of reproducing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nDiOH.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nDiOH.gif&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go, little KRyan user banner! Go, be free!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1YTXX.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1YTXX.gif&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wait, he came back! ... He's showing SevenSidedDie's user info the way out! Go, little ones! You can do it!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-05-19T17:48:32.830" LastActivityDate="2017-05-19T17:48:32.830" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7122" CreationDate="2017-05-19T20:54:31.010" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;From Meta SE, reproduced, explained, and fixed here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/296193/153219&quot;&gt;User card senses danger when chasing tricky &amp;quot;edit tags&amp;quot;, runs for dear life&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Turns out it was a weird JavaScript/jQuery/CSS interaction bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-05-19T20:54:31.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7125" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7127" CreationDate="2017-05-20T01:36:13.437" Score="4" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was going to edit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100107/in-fighting-fantasy-books-what-is-considered-one-item&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; by adding a tag for Fighting Fantasy, because I noticed that he had missed it, but then I found out that there isn't a tag for it. That seems odd, given that Fighting Fantasy books are basically a gateway drug into the world of tabletop/pen-and-paper roleplaying games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35170" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-20T02:18:43.807" LastActivityDate="2017-05-20T02:28:36.157" Title="Why isn't there a tag for Fighting Fantasy?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-declined|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7125" CreationDate="2017-05-20T02:10:03.290" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You could always add the tag yourself, which will get reviewed after some time has passed. But...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I think the question would be better off in &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;sci-fi&amp;amp;fantasy.SE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a question about a book with some decisions to be made by the reader, the same reason we deem &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2719/23064&quot;&gt;MUDs&lt;/a&gt; off-topic, it lacks the interactive element of tabletop RPGs, where soft skills and rules-clarifications are inevitable in the game. With interactive books and RPG-esque games, the soft skills and rules-clarifications are moot, as it is limited by not having an actual Game Master person. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-05-20T02:10:03.290" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7125" CreationDate="2017-05-20T02:28:36.157" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We don't have a tag for them because they're off topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the FAQ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/544/what-kind-of-questions-can-i-ask-here&quot;&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We &lt;strong&gt;do not&lt;/strong&gt; include[…]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Choose Your Own Adventure–type books, even if they have dice mechanics3&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And from the question revisiting the issue five years later, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5385/are-choose-your-own-adventure-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are choose your own adventure questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;CYOA books, a.k.a. &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebook&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;gamebooks&lt;/a&gt;, are not RPGs and are off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;RPGs based on a gamebook line (e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpggeek.com/rpg/1832/advanced-fighting-fantasy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Advanced Fighting Fantasy&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;) are on topic, since they're RPGs. Questions about using gamebooks in some way for an RPG are also on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Basically, if it's just about gamebooks, we're not the relevant experts. If it's about using gamebooks in an RPG context then we can help, just as we can help with other things (like music or computer hardware) being used in an RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Gamebooks could need a tag if the community decided they should be on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although we don't need a tag for them because they're currently off topic (and what there are tags for is one of the ways to hint what's on-topic on a given Stack), they could in theory be &lt;em&gt;made&lt;/em&gt; on-topic by community discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until that happens though, they're off topic and don't need a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-05-20T02:28:36.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5385" CreationDate="2017-05-20T06:55:58.513" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;CYOA books are at least &lt;em&gt;nearly&lt;/em&gt; on topic, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/solo?sort=votes&amp;amp;pageSize=50&quot;&gt;solo RPGs&lt;/a&gt; are barely on-topic (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.flyingbuffalo.com/solo.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;example of solo RPG stuff I think we would want to be on-topic&lt;/a&gt;).  Embarrassingly, Lone Wolf Game Books are &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; on topic as solo RPGs, according to that tag, despite this meta seeming to imply otherwise, that the apparent contradiction has existed for the last several years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that CYOA games have always been kind of a gray area on account of they don't &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; identify as RPGs but &lt;em&gt;sometimes&lt;/em&gt; they do, and we aren't really very sure at all what an RPG even &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;CYOA books, however, as well as solitaire play and everything else relevant to this gray area, seem to be quite unpopular; we don't really get any questions on them or anyone arguing that they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be on topic, just because it seems like no one coming here is much interested in them.  The fact that the meta sat for several years without ever really coming up helps to show the degree of non-interest our extended community has in such questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we ever had a community subset demonstrate active interest in these questions being on topic, I think it would be appropriate to review the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-05-20T06:55:58.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5385" CreationDate="2017-05-20T15:39:16.660" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Computer RPGs are already definitively off-topic.  Choose Your Own Adventure books strike me as being CRPGs with a printed book and a lookup table in place of the electronic computer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being the case it would never even occur to me that CYOAs would be anything but off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2017-05-20T15:39:16.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7130" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7136" CreationDate="2017-05-22T05:43:19.230" Score="14" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the title asks. The two tags, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fumbles&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fumbles&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fumbles&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-fail&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-fail&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-fail&lt;/a&gt;, are both highly similar. It makes sense for them to be marked as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/critical-fail/synonyms&quot;&gt;synonyms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T00:41:53.507" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T09:43:49.997" Title="Should the [fumbles] and [critical-fail] tags be synonyms?" Tags="|discussion|tags|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7131" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-22T21:22:16.003" Score="1" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question: A warlock has been reduced to strength 0 while underwater. Can he activate and use Fell Flight to move while underwater? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a link to the thread: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100222/warlock-flying-underwater-while-helpless&quot;&gt;Warlock Flying Underwater while helpless&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been marked as too broad by @SevenSidedDie. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand his point -- there are multiple questions that need answering in order to answer this question. I can think of three that seem like important factors to me, and there may be more that I haven't considered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can fell flight be activated by a helpless creature;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does Fell Flight use mechanical wings to fly or magical means;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does fly provide any swim benefit, and if so, under what constraints?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He indicated I should split the thread into multiple questions. I think that is a bad mod ruling. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I split it into individual questions, I could easily miss some important detail. For example, if I want to know whether my barbarian can toss a goat 100', under SevenSidedDie's reasoning, I might ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How much does a goat weight? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How much strength is needed to throw X lbs 100 feet? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then draw my own conclusions. If I were to do that, it would preclude someone from helpfully pointing out that the goat might get an attack of opportunity, or opposed grapple check, or whatever else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have one question: can a warlock with strength 0 use fell flight to fly underwater. I think this single question should be in a single thread, so the responders can answer the question holistically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23007" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-22T22:53:21.453" LastActivityDate="2017-05-22T22:53:21.453" Title="Compound vs. Simple Questions" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7131" CreationDate="2017-05-22T21:52:51.350" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reading the edit history of that question gives me a headache. It keeps thrashing between asking a list of discrete questions, mods trying to workshop it into the &quot;just one question&quot; format you say you want, and then you reverting/adding to the edits to add lists of questions again. The close is in response to that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you just say &quot;my warlock is Str 0 underwater - can he use Fell Flight to move away?&quot; I imagine this would get reopened (SSD did that in edit 2), but you keep editing it to have more questions in it!  Quit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-22T21:52:51.350" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7131" CreationDate="2017-05-22T22:33:01.960" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If you want to ask &lt;em&gt;Can a warlock with strength 0 use&lt;/em&gt; fell flight &lt;em&gt;to fly underwater?&lt;/em&gt; ask that&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not necessary to make a question &lt;em&gt;easier&lt;/em&gt; to answer by pointing out all of a question's disparate parts using bullets. In fact, this question's specificity almost &lt;em&gt;guarantees&lt;/em&gt; that the question hasn't been asked before nor will it ever be asked again. And although answering the question may allow future folks to answer a question like &lt;em&gt;Can a creature take purely mental actions while helpless?&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Can a creature fly underwater?&lt;/em&gt; more easily, there's no reason for &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question to have to link to those &lt;em&gt;imaginary&lt;/em&gt; questions &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; before asking &lt;em&gt;Can a warlock with strength 0 use&lt;/em&gt; fell flight &lt;em&gt;to fly underwater?&lt;/em&gt; It's just a complicated question with a complicated answer that requires looking at a variety of stuff, but it's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; necessary to tell those folks that are considering answering &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; stuff needs to be examined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, ask the &lt;em&gt;real&lt;/em&gt; question that you want the answer to. Let the folks who want to answer determine what the answer to that question is and (&lt;em&gt;ahem&lt;/em&gt;) how deep they need to go to get that answer. If an answer fails to address parts you need, Comment to ask for expansion or downvote the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2017-05-22T22:33:01.960" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7130" CreationDate="2017-05-23T07:54:22.750" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The concept of 'An abysmal failure that leaves you worse off than if you had not attempted the thing in the first place' (critical failure), and 'things have gone horribly wrong' (fumble) are distinct concepts in some games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FFG's Star Wars (for example) allows actions that result in Success, Success and a Fumble, Fumbles, and Critical Failure without a Fumble (translating similar concepts to the tags in question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be hesitant to jump on merging the two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T07:54:22.750" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7130" CreationDate="2017-05-23T09:18:17.057" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;A quick glance at the questions using these tags suggests that instead of synonyms, perhaps the first step in straightening this out is just re-tagging to use the accurate mechanical terms for the system each question is asking about. I don't yet see any question about the generic concept of a fumble or natural 1 fail; just questions about specific mechanics in specific systems. So how about we tag for the games' own terms?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging for specific mechanics should also increase the likelihood people Googling for help with a particular game will find our site! That's part of what tags are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at the suggested synonyms &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/430/4398&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;: few if any are mechanical terms, and for good reason. Synonyms are &quot;alternate spellings or phrasings,&quot; not replacing one mechanical term for another. I don't think we'd want to force Fate questions to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feats&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feats&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feats&lt;/a&gt; tag instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/stunts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;stunts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;stunts&lt;/a&gt;, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when we need a generic tag for the concept (and we don't yet), lets find a way to do it which lets questions about specific game systems also use those systems' designated terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-05-23T09:43:49.997" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T09:43:49.997" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7137" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7138" CreationDate="2017-05-23T16:32:04.573" Score="5" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a recommendation type question which I know are strictly off topic due to the nature of the question. I know in other stack exchanges there is a chat room where such questions can be asked openly. Does this stack exchange have a chat room or another place where I can ask these types of questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5787/i-want-to-ask-for-recommendations-but-thats-off-topic-is-there-any-way-to-ask&quot;&gt;I want to ask for recommendations, but that&amp;#39;s off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23217" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T16:35:25.520" Title="Is there a chat room to ask off topic questions?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7137" CreationDate="2017-05-23T16:35:25.520" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can already ask whatever you like in &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt;, and people discuss game recommendations there sometimes, so that is the chat for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-05-23T16:35:25.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3584" CreationDate="2017-05-24T06:18:35.613" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It appears this question was quietly closed and locked some time ago.  Did the opinion on whether or not this was an appropriate question change somewhere along the line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastActivityDate="2017-05-24T06:18:35.613" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7140" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-25T02:51:10.570" Score="7" ViewCount="295" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a few questions I've raised in the past, it's been pointed out to me that it is not enough to just include the tags you categorize the Q into, but also call it out in the body of the Q itself. I've had this pointed out for a statistics Q, a designer-reasons Q, and most recently, a rules-as-written Q.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is fair enough: it helps with clarity. But we don't seem to treat a family of tags the same way. Game system tags (3.5e vs 4e vs 5e D&amp;amp;D, for example) are added in without need of mentioning them in the body. And in fact, even if the body makes it clear which system it is using, if the Q is not yet tagged with the specific system (&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the same as using the system-agnostic tag), we wait until the querent tags it with a specific game system first before answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using game systems tags is one of the first things a new querent will learn. If they have a 5e question, it is easiest to find the 5e tag. Therefore, game systems have the most used, most visible tags, and they are the most demonstrative of how tags should work. If there is an exception being made for them that the other tags do not share, it is not entirely clear. If adding the 5e tag to a question is enough to mark it as a 5e question, then a new user will understandably rationalize that adding a rules-as-written tag will make it a RAW question. And adding a statistics tag will make it a statistics question. And so it goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has this been discussed before? If so, where? If not, why do we consider game system tags to be different from all the rest, in the regard that you have to be explicit with the latter in the body, but the former does not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-25T02:57:09.077" LastActivityDate="2017-05-28T22:16:37.040" Title="Why do we ask for the body of the question to demonstrate the tags it uses?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7141" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7143" CreationDate="2017-05-25T06:46:27.980" Score="0" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I didn't know there was a previous discussion on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3584/just-for-fun-request-show-off-character-sheet-thread&quot;&gt;contests about making character sheets&lt;/a&gt;. The discussion there goes back and forth between the merits and demerits of allowing such exceptions to the normal rules, as long as they are tagged &quot;just for fun.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3585/27327&quot;&gt;top rated answer&lt;/a&gt; discusses rules to follow when starting this. It also discusses how much confusion the tag created between users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3610/27327&quot;&gt;second top rated answer&lt;/a&gt; says that it doesn't seem to be a good fit in general for the Stack. It adds no value other than what you would get in a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100016/how-long-can-creatures-with-no-swim-speed-travel-in-deep-water-before-they-die&quot;&gt;a similar question&lt;/a&gt; about a situation in 5e where you must use stats to arrive at the correct answer. While it didn't quite rack up as much attention or answers as I'd hoped, it does fall into the category of &quot;just for fun.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do these styles of question provide benefits for the site, in such a way that it is still differentiated from any other regular forum? What benefits are those, if any? Can we all agree on these benefits and reframe &quot;just for fun&quot; into something on-topic and useful, such that it is not &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; an exception to the normal rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-25T07:10:34.350" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T12:08:18.047" Title="Revisiting the [just-for-fun] tag" Tags="|discussion|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7141" CreationDate="2017-05-25T07:07:20.443" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There is a potentially large value add to the Stack&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that the Stack is unsure about how to go about making such questions, as well as their utility or value-add to the Stack as a whole. However, are are things that haven't been mentioned in the linked discussion thread before:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Big list questions in the &quot;character sheet creation&quot; style provides free, high quality, custom-made resources curated by experts. You will find nowhere else where you can go and know that you can grab free resources that receive this treatment. The closest is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dmsguild.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DM's Guild&lt;/a&gt;, but minus the curation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Big list questions in this style establishes domain expertise in a way that tags cannot show. Tricks of the trade that is known to some of the users of this Stack may never be shared if a relevant question is never asked. And even if it is, if the user doesn't see it in time, or answer it quickly enough before it receives a lot of answers, they might not be incentivised to post their answer anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-05-25T11:46:41.960" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T11:46:41.960" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7141" CreationDate="2017-05-25T12:08:18.047" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should not do this.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While lists of cool things have value to folks, it isn't something that is well facilitated by the Stack format and therefore belongs on blogs or forums, not here.  Our track record in curating posts over the long term is terrible, leading to even on topic uses of community wikis to fade away.  And our experiences with recommendations is poor (and a list of resources is essentially recommendations with the normal Stack expectations of a best answer removed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We were more avid about this before we, as a new Stack, had come to terms with the fact that there's certain things we do and certain things we don't do, and that it's OK to not be the answer for everything.  Let's do fun challenges!  Let's have blogs!  Let's do other things that are not expert Q&amp;amp;A!  How about, let's not. Let's focus on achieving our core mission well, that's not a solved problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T12:08:18.047" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7140" CreationDate="2017-05-25T12:55:41.193" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game systems are not demonstrative of how tags should work in general: their usage is exceptional and breaks the rules of how tags get used, but we do it that way because it works really, really well without causing any trouble. &lt;em&gt;Every other tag&lt;/em&gt; is demonstrative of how tags should work: we tag based on information already in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Tagging basics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Describing the content of the question is how tags work by default. From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;our help center on tags&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the text of a question seems to carry no indication of why a tag is there, the tag does not belong and gets removed and never added. Tags exclusively describe the content already there, and do not add new information themselves. A question about casting a fireball doesn't get (or keep) the armor tag unless it's clearly a question that is also about armor, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the default, at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Game system tags are a useful exception&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some stacks have tags that are an exception to that rule. On RPG.SE it's the system tag: we don't need you to say &quot;I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&quot; somewhere in every question if the question is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;. This is like how on Stack Overflow nobody asks you to tell them the programming language you're using as long as your question is given a programming language tag such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/python&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;python&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;python&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/c%2b%2b&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;c++&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;c++&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an &lt;em&gt;exception&lt;/em&gt; to the norm. It's an exception we've developed because it causes no trouble and is pretty intuitive. So you're right, we don't treat them the same way. But this doesn't mean we can start using other tags the same way without causing trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We did treat RAW that way for a while, and we specifically stopped because it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; causing trouble. I'll get to that in moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And in fact, even if the body makes it clear which system it is using, if the Q is not yet tagged with the specific system (not the same as using the system-agnostic tag), we wait until the querent tags it with a specific game system first before answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not quite how it is. When it's clear what system they're using, we just add the tag and move on. However there's only one circumstance we count as being clear: they say explicitly what system they're using in the question text. In all other cases, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/1204&quot;&gt;we don't &#xA;guess&lt;/a&gt;, and we do what you're describing there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Rules as Written is not (any longer) an exception&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until 2016, we handled Rules as Written like system tags: if you add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag to something then suddenly, regardless of what's in the question text, it's now a rules-as-written question and only rules-as-written answers count. This was a problem because a lot of people didn't understand what using rules-as-written &lt;em&gt;meant,&lt;/em&gt; and thought it was equivalent to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community collectively endorsed a change to that plan in February 2016: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;A low-intervention approach [rules-as-written]: back to tagging basics&lt;/a&gt;. As the name suggests, we've gone back to the basic tagging practices I described at the top for how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag gets used: the question gets the tag if it's clear the tag belongs, otherwise, it does not get the tag. If it has the tag despite it not belonging we ask for clarification on why they added it, and then modify the question to clarify why the RAW tag belongs &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; to remove the RAW tag because it doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There aren't other exceptions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We judge the content of your question and what tags it should have by what's written in the title and body. It gets tags that correspond to that content, and tags never add new information that wasn't already there. The sole exception is the system tag which is allowed to clarify the game being used all on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is only a statistics question as long as it would be read that way going solely by the question's title and body. Then we add or remove the tag based on whether it is &lt;em&gt;truly&lt;/em&gt; a statistics question. Adding the statistics tag does not, itself, make an otherwise not-statistics question a statistics question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T12:55:41.193" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7140" CreationDate="2017-05-25T13:35:21.180" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Eh, I'm just going to repost my answer from the linked Q since we seem to be doing this again here, mildly edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not a problem specific to tags.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone can always make an unclear question. They can do it with words in the title, words in the question, or words in the tags. The site response to lack of clarity is, I trust, well trod enough not to require me to go over it. Get them to clarify, vote to close if needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags do convey implicit information, which is why they exist, have tag wikis, etc. It's good, and a useful shorthand. If someone wants a system-agnostic technique they don't need to spend a paragraph explaining &quot;I want a technique I can use across the various games I run, man&quot;. I can only imagine most attempts at doing this would lead to even more pedantic arguing in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a long way to go for a pretty simple answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, game system tags are pretty self explanatory. If it says [dnd-5e] then it can be assumed to be a normal D&amp;amp;D 5e question. Some uses of tags are clear and don't need further elaboration. (It's possible to have a question tagged [dnd-5e which isn't just trivially about the scope of D&amp;amp;D 5e, in which case you do need more information, see below.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, just adding a tag sometimes doesn't really give enough information, or at least is going to create bad answers. Let's take as an example &quot;Give me a way to alternate melee and ranged attacks in one full attack&quot; simply tagged with [feat] isn't going to sufficiently signal to an answerer that you only want feats as an answer to the question. Maybe it's just a &quot;suggestion,&quot; maybe it's because you already mentioned a feat in your question, maybe it's because you're a noob and think &quot;well of course the only way to get this would probably be a feat.&quot; &lt;em&gt;This question is unclear despite the application of a tag.&lt;/em&gt; Your [statistics] question is an example of this - is the tag describing your question, the answers you want, is it just a semi related add on (people do this too much out of tag lust or something)...?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules-as-written is a special case, it's a meta tag that we are tolerating that IMO causes more problems than it solves, as it's not a term unambigiously clear to everyone, so you really need to use your words more (scope of sources allowed? what do you personally mean when you say RAW?) when using it as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If your question is not clear - make it clear, using tags, words in the body, words in the title, etc.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you do not understand a question - including its tag use - ask for clarification.&lt;/strong&gt; It's the one actual intended, constructive use of the comment system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-05-25T13:35:21.180" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7140" CreationDate="2017-05-25T16:45:22.977" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;1. Because in practice most people don't read the tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; years of experience observing how questions and answers interact here, it is very common (not a majority, but definitely still a common event) for someone to read a title, find it interesting and click to open the question, read the body, and then start writing an answer without ever reading the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is a source of a steady drip of answers that are off topic for non-D&amp;amp;D questions, since they skip reading the system tag, assume it's D&amp;amp;D, and write an off-topic answer based on D&amp;amp;D rules.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many people don't read tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;2. Because it's not the answerer's responsibility to check the tags for extra info, it's the asker's responsibility to write a clear question first&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are for &lt;em&gt;searching&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;sorting&lt;/em&gt;. Their job is to categorise a question after the fact, for the convenience of future searchers, and to help connect the question with the relevant experts. That's all tags are designed to be for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone clicks through to a question, the behaviour observed and described above — answering based on the title and body, not the tags — is a pretty reasonable response most of the time. We here at Stack Exchange are about leveraging normal human behaviours to best create a repository of expertise on a site's topic. The more we have to fight human nature, the worse we're accomplishing our mission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, as a result, we cater to that normal human cognitive process — read question, write answer — and we have a small horde of editors who are ready to revise questions so that they are &lt;strong&gt;easily answerable&lt;/strong&gt;, and we have tools to hold questions that can't be knocked into answerable shape by a 3rd party editor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To this end, questions are expected to completely describe their problem, before any tags are applied, and be understandable without reading the tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(We make an exception for system tags because it works in practice, with the few times it doesn't work being low-frequency and causing little difficulty to fix by 3rd parties.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;3. Because we need to be able to agree how to tag a question without reading any minds&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags belong on questions only if they categorise the question. It's not enough for the writer to “know” whether a tag applies, because &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; have to be able to curate it independently of their hidden brain-knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to be able to each individually look at a question, and be able to basically agree on how to tag it according to objective criteria. In the long term, that objective criteria can only exist in the title and body of the question itself, nowhere else, or it gets lost. We don't have permanent guaranteed access to the question-writer every time we need to reconsider how a particular question is curated; we don't have (public) access to old comments; we can't go haring off searching chat or meta on the off chance that the question was once discussed and there exists clarifying material elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, the question itself needs to fully contain its justification for its tags, and tags aren't self-justifying just by their existence (because tags categorise question content, not themselves).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-28T22:16:37.040" LastActivityDate="2017-05-28T22:16:37.040" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7147" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-27T21:05:43.680" Score="11" ViewCount="287" Body="&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100464/5834&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question has a very odd edit history, being closed as primarily opinion based by five users, re-opened by five-users, and finally being closed by a diamond mod.  The reason this is such a strange question is that all of those open/close votes came consecutively, with no additional edits happening between them.  Clearly, this represents a kind of tug of war between people who think the question stands on its own, and people who think the question isn't appropriate for the site as worded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How should we, as a community, deal with questions like these when there's no real consensus on how to deal with them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorDisplayName="user5834" LastEditDate="2017-06-01T03:27:01.917" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T03:57:32.487" Title="How to deal with tug-of-war close reopens?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7148" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7147" CreationDate="2017-05-27T21:30:25.183" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;These things happen — they're not out of the ordinary or the system malfunctioning, merely uncommon events. Everyone with hold/reopen privileges theoretically gets a vote in whether a particular question is open or not, but more often there are only a few people who choose to cast their votes and the community in general is generally in agreement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When there are greater multiples of 5 who wish to vote &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; they are split in their votes, we see a question's hold/reopen state cycle a few times before reaching an equilibrium — that is, when all the remaining voters agree with the current open/closed state of the question and stop casting contrary votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question may currently have reached an equilibrium, or it may not. We'll see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, the state of a question is in sufficiently grey area that someone will feel the need to open a discussion on Meta about what should be done with the question. If voting seems to be insufficient to decide a post's status (or worse, it turns into an ongoing war of votes that doesn't seem to settling down, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/237263/proper-course-of-action-for-a-close-war&quot;&gt;“close war”&lt;/a&gt;), then it makes sense to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/237263/proper-course-of-action-for-a-close-war&quot;&gt;bring it to Meta to discuss what to do with the question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-05-27T21:30:25.183" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7147" CreationDate="2017-05-29T22:14:12.960" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;While closing a question in general is an appropriate moderator activity, closing or opening a contentious question multiple times is not appropriate without some kind of meta discussion, because that throws the way the VTC/VTO system works off significantly.  I believe there's a locking tool that the mods could use that would be more appropriate in such cases, so that community input doesn't get stifled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-05-31T21:30:20.480" LastActivityDate="2017-05-31T21:30:20.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7150" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-30T00:53:11.940" Score="5" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;We're &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7099/23970&quot;&gt;trying to schedule some [chat] events&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;COLONYPUNK: a resistance and assimilation game&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're LOCALS. a FOREIGN power has colonised your nation....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus begins &lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2016/rpg/2016/04/13/COLONYPUNKaresistanceassimilationgame.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;COLONYPUNK&lt;/a&gt;, a 200-word RPG by Our Very Own&lt;sup&gt;TM&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4398/besw&quot;&gt;@BESW&lt;/a&gt;. I'll host a game, and you may &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games?tab=schedule&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;register here&lt;/strong&gt; for 00:30 on 2 Jun 2017 in The Back Room&lt;/a&gt;. (That link also contains the event info; that's UTC time. 8:30 PM Eastern US on Jun 1, if anyone cares to check my math.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a GM-less game, so I'll really just play host. Please take a look at the (micro-sized) ruleset before coming, and register (at the link above) if only so I can see what difference that makes =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spectators welcome!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat transcript: &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13/conversation/colonypunk-playtest-pt-i-the-colony&quot;&gt;part I (2 Jun 2017)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part II coming 9 Jun 2017 00:30 UTC. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games?tab=schedule&quot;&gt;Register here&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-03T00:11:14.150" Title="Chat event: COLONYPUNK" Tags="|discussion|chat-event|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7151" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7152" CreationDate="2017-05-30T01:50:46.627" Score="11" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are dozens of Powered by the Apocalypse questions out there, and they're all similar enough that it's conceivable a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99604/how-do-i-handle-a-situation-that-doesnt-have-a-player-facing-move&quot;&gt;Tremelus question&lt;/a&gt; could be duped to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15847/what-do-you-do-in-dungeon-world-when-someone-wants-to-perform-an-action-they-don&quot;&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/a&gt; one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if I'm looking for advice on a PbtA game that doesn't have any questions asked here yet, but for which generic PbtA guidance still applies, how could I find those questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powered-by-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powered-by-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powered-by-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; tag, but the questions under it are not of high value to my scenario relative to the game-specific questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-18T16:09:06.610" LastActivityDate="2022-07-18T16:09:06.610" Title="How can I find all Powered by the Apocalypse questions?" Tags="|support|game-systems|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7151" CreationDate="2017-05-30T02:51:33.563" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Search.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[sagas-of-the-icelanders] or [tremulus] or [apocalypse-world] or [dungeon-world] or [the-sprawl] or [powered-by-the-apocalypse] or [monsterhearts] or [monster-of-the-week] is:question&lt;/code&gt; should do the trick. (Results of that search &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bsagas-of-the-icelanders%5D+or+%5Btremulus%5D+or+%5Bapocalypse-world%5D+or+%5Bdungeon-world%5D+or+%5Bthe-sprawl%5D+or+%5Bpowered-by-the-apocalypse%5D+or+%5Bmonsterhearts%5D+or+%5Bmonster-of-the-week%5D+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[foo]&lt;/code&gt; in the search bar specifies a tag; &amp;quot;or&amp;quot; works as you might presume&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;is:question&lt;/code&gt; limits the return to question-posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That list of tags was generated from &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/677697&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this SEDE query&lt;/a&gt;, helpfully created by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/15469/miniman?tab=profile&quot;&gt;@Miniman&lt;/a&gt;. It only finds tags whose description mention being powered by the apocalypse. (If you find some tags missing this in their description, please edit it in! It'll improve the site and your ability to find them... win-win!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-30T03:09:46.103" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7153" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-05-31T08:50:45.357" Score="-1" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am talking about this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100464/why-do-the-tiers-of-classes-change-so-little-regardless-of-what-additional-mater&quot;&gt;Why do the tiers of classes change so little regardless of what additional material is used&lt;/a&gt;. I am aware that it already generated another meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7147/how-to-deal-with-tug-of-war-close-reopens&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, but my question is about what to do with this specific question and not about what precedent to set for the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the question be edited/closed or should we just let it as it is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-05-31T15:24:17.423" LastActivityDate="2017-06-04T15:52:11.017" Title="What to do with the Pathfinder question about tier fixedness?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7153" CreationDate="2017-05-31T08:51:28.477" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question should be closed, for these reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the title is not the real question. The title is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do the tiers of classes change so little regardless of what additional material is used&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and the questions bolded in the content are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What reasons has Paizo had for not changing the core classes' tiers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What reasons do the Pathfinder developers have for maintaining the original power discrepancies between classes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Considering the tags the title indicates that the question is about how each additional Pathfinder material is changing the tier list. A phenomenon is identified (&amp;quot;additional materials in Pathfinder doesn't make the tier-list change&amp;quot;), it's on-topic because related to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then by reading the core of the question it shifts to: &amp;quot;I know the developers are trying to do that, what is their motivation?&amp;quot;. I agree a small change in meaning is not always avoidable but here it could be easily corrected by editing the title to something like &amp;quot;What is the motivation of Paizo behind preserving the tier-list?&amp;quot; which would be less misleading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly the whole question is imputing motives without at all considering that maybe its premise could be wrong. I presented an answer with tangible elements that contradict it and the reaction of the OP is &amp;quot;I'm pretty sure we can all agree is false&amp;quot;, without presenting any element in this direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, I think these bolded questions are simply not very nice. Maybe not un-nice enough for requiring anything, but it adds up with its other issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-05-31T09:46:08.597" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7155" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7156" CreationDate="2017-05-31T15:44:28.023" Score="5" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/the-same-page-tool/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;same page tool&lt;/a&gt; is promoted a lot by people here. I'm in no way shape or form saying that this is a bad thing; I personally find it very useful myself and I have never had a game where I've run a successful session 0 fall apart due to disputes among the party. However, that said, I've noticed that the one website is promoted a lot here, and I would like to know whether it's just that everyone really finds it useful or if there's any official endorsement by the staff here thus leading to this level of popularity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35170" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-05-31T21:58:48.483" LastActivityDate="2017-05-31T21:58:48.483" Title="What is RPG.SE's relationship with the makers of the Same Page Tool?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7155" CreationDate="2017-05-31T16:09:30.977" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no official endorsement or relationship going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Same Page Tool's author was formerly a member of this community. They shared it here, several members found it quite useful and also shared it in other contexts, and it's frequently relevant to a certain type of social issue (expectation mismatch) which we run into a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Members promoting it are doing so for their own reasons (such as because they feel it's useful); there's no ulterior motive there. If you see it promoted here more than elsewhere, that's just because there's been some powerful hearsay about it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-05-31T16:09:30.977" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7157" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7155" CreationDate="2017-05-31T16:11:09.230" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking as one of the people who mentions it fairly frequently, I have no formal relationship with bankuei - it was just an epiphany moment when I first saw it and contextualized some previous RPG-related issues I'd had through that lens, and I'm guessing the same is true for others. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the Same Page Tool &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt; is not actually a great answer for most questions; it covers a limited set of variables. It's more the &lt;em&gt;idea&lt;/em&gt; that people should agree in advance on what game they're playing if at all possible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2017-05-31T16:11:09.230" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7147" CreationDate="2017-05-31T21:03:26.227" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the first part of the question already has an answer.  To quote doppelgreener:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You only get to vote to close a question once, even after it gets reopened. Those same 5 close voters can't participate in closing it again, and the same 5 reopen voters can't vote to reopen it again. That tends to give these tugs-of-war a natural ending point, since new people have to get involved for each &quot;tug&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The natural followup from SevenSidedDie in another answer here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sometimes, the state of a question is in sufficiently grey area that someone will feel the need to open a discussion on Meta about what should be done with the question. If voting seems to be insufficient to decide a post's status (or worse, it turns into an ongoing war of votes that doesn't seem to settling down, a “close war”), then it makes sense to bring it to Meta to discuss what to do with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorDisplayName="user5834" LastEditDate="2017-06-01T03:57:32.487" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T03:57:32.487" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7153" CreationDate="2017-05-31T21:28:17.493" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Question should be left open&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The three questions that are all related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Why do the tiers of classes change so little regardless of what&#xA;additional material is used?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What reasons has Paizo had for not changing the core classes'&#xA;tiers?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What reasons do the Pathfinder developers have for maintaining the&#xA;original power discrepancies between classes?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;are all, at their core, appropriate questions for the site.  Whatever the motives behind asking the question, the questions are all, at least in theory, answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Rant questions should be distinguished by primarily Content, Not Tone&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question, before the edits, had a ranty &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt;, if nothing else.  That should be avoided and removed since it drives away good answers.  The question may have needed to be closed before the &quot;rantiness&quot; was edited away.  However, the question is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; &quot;____ sucks, am I right?&quot;, nor is it a disguised version of that kind of question.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has several potential answers, such as &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Paizo has changed class tiers with supplementary material&quot; (frame&#xA;challenge)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Paizo believes in preserving the feel of 3.5&quot; (not a frame&#xA;challenge)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Paizo is unaware of the problem&quot; (as one of the current answer&#xA;states)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;or even &quot;Paizo's adventures are balanced for encounters where&#xA;versatility rarely matters as much&quot; (Another potential non-frame&#xA;challenge answer).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a good rule of thumb is this: &lt;strong&gt;If there are multiple good potential answers that are not frame-challenges, the question is not a rant question&lt;/strong&gt;.  The only really good answers to rant questions are frame-challenges or no answer at all.  Obviously, there are exceptions to this rule of thumb (rules as worded questions usually have one correct answer), but those exceptions should be obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-06-04T15:52:11.017" LastActivityDate="2017-06-04T15:52:11.017" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7160" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-01T03:54:35.867" Score="-7" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;Relating to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100464/why-do-the-tiers-of-classes-change-so-little-regardless-of-what-additional-mater&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question on main, and a spin-off of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7147/how-to-deal-with-tug-of-war-close-reopens&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question on meta, I noticed an odd trend: five votes to close, five votes to open, and one diamond close, all without any editing.  This is far from common, and the question has since been edited, reopened, and edited again, but it did prompt one of two questions (the other in the linked meta).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should RPG.SE have a set of principles/internal guidelines for diamond mods on votes to close/votes to reopen on contentious questions?  If so, what should that be?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be an internal set of guidelines used by the diamond mods to guide their votes, and can't and shouldn't be a hard set of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorDisplayName="user5834" LastEditDate="2017-06-01T04:06:58.907" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T12:01:19.920" Title="Should Diamond Mods have a set of guidelines on voting to close/reopen contentious questions? If so, what should that policy be?" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-close|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7160" CreationDate="2017-06-01T04:00:16.113" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Diamond mods should generally avoid closing/opening contentious questions, at least initially&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions like the above, or more contentious questions with a couple rounds of open/close, I don't think it's a good idea for a diamond mod to intervene &lt;strong&gt;except&lt;/strong&gt; to close the question &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; to be discussed in a meta question or somewhere else appropriate.  Questions where there isn't a strong consensus on its appropriateness for the site tend to lead to policy discussions about what sort of question is appropriate, and that shouldn't be left to the winning open/close vote on very contentious questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a footnote: Diamond Mods should feel free to offer open/close votes when they would be the fifth vote on a question.  They're still members of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T04:00:16.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7160" CreationDate="2017-06-01T04:49:42.273" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Mods know the rules&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The power of a mod is often confused with the responsibility of being a mod*. Mods don't close/open a question because they feel like it, they do so, because they know what the SE standards are. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, you will only see a diamond close on a question that is clearly off-topic, otherwise you will almost always see a comment explaining &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they chose to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact is that it's a mod's job to make sure the standard is kept. The community is usually in charge of weeding out the rubbish, and mods step in when things get a bit much. But the fact is they are part of the community already, so it's not like they're above and out-of-scope with everybody else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While yes, I can understand that sometimes this sort of &quot;power&quot; might &lt;em&gt;seem&lt;/em&gt; a bit unfair, but it's really not. It's a responsibility that is given to them, by the community, for the community**.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All in all, the system, as it stands, works 90% of the time, and if it doesn't it is always dealt with appropriately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good example of this is actually one of my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100933/12193&quot;&gt;latest questions&lt;/a&gt;***. While some would consider it a good question - on topic, answerable; it could quickly get out of hand for some who might see it in a different light. A mod stepping in and closing it immediately removes that confusion, allowing for it to be dealt with appropriately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;*Uncle Ben is always wise&#xA;&lt;br&gt;**I also apologise for all the Patriotic talk&#xA;&lt;br&gt;***Only viewable to people with the appropriate permissions - has since been deleted&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="12193" LastEditDate="2019-06-28T12:01:19.920" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T12:01:19.920" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7160" CreationDate="2017-06-01T05:13:25.960" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sure, guidelines are good&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm always a fan of explicit guidelines.  Explicit guidelines for reason makes action more easily predicted and thus, in this case, makes moderation seem more transparent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We probably shouldn't write them, though&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way for these guidelines to be made is for the moderation team to take some time to write up a post on how they actually make these sorts of decision.  The moderators shouldn't need community guidance on this because our moderators should already be making these decisions competently and consistently. It's possible that the guidelines each mod currently uses are significantly different, but that's not really a problem since we have 4 mods and that's a reasonably small pool of perspectives to get answers from.  It's also possible that for at least some of the mods the guidelines are not parsimonious, but I think a simplified, parsimonious version with an 'actually not this parsimonious' disclaimer would suffice to increase transparency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T05:19:42.297" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7164" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-01T14:22:29.580" Score="12" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100749/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, are questions that ask about a specific detail (like, for example, the color of a creature's blood) or specific incident (like how a specific action could occur) on topic &lt;em&gt;when the question springs from a novel (or other work of fiction) that takes place in a role-playing game setting?&lt;/em&gt; Or should such questions be migrated to a different stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T17:44:24.650" Title="Are questions about specific details found in RPG-based novels on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7164" CreationDate="2017-06-01T15:22:26.343" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If it fits into the category of [lore] question, then maybe.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have both [lore] and [history-of-gaming] question categories, and tags, that &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3276/22566&quot;&gt;if asked well&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; are often acceptable questions.  That said, there are a variety of [history-of-gaming] questions, and [lore] questions, that get closed due to &lt;em&gt;not being well asked questions&lt;/em&gt;.  I thus recommend that examining the question to see if it is well asked, like any other, be the first criteria used before seeing how well it fits into the [lore] or [history-of-gaming] class. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Is there an element of what's going on at the table in the question?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A further examination point would be to see if the question is being asked in aid of folding such literary/lore details into game play: while that's a more &lt;em&gt;on topic&lt;/em&gt; question, there are some [lore] questions that do not necessarily get asked in a &quot;help me with this at table issue&quot; that are good questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-06-01T15:42:23.370" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T15:42:23.370" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7164" CreationDate="2017-06-01T15:37:38.347" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing to note in this particular case: WH40k is predominantly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an RPG setting, it's a model wargaming setting. The setting itself has since taken on a life of its own, where it has become an piece of IP independent of any particular expression thereof. The novels and (multiple) RPGs aren't even made by the same companies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consequently, the novels aren't even novels about an RPG setting, they're novels set in an independent setting, which happens to have RPGs set in &lt;em&gt;it&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is equivalent to getting questions about Star Wars novels here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Only if the question is about RPGs or related to RPGs&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question that inspired this is about a setting that happens to have RPGs set in it, but &lt;strong&gt;is not an RPG setting&lt;/strong&gt;. The novels have no particular relationship to RPGs, and nor does the question. The question is asking about a setting detail in a science-fiction novel.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, it is firmly off topic, just like a question about a character's words in &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_Prime&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Vector Prime&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; would be off-topic. Fortunately, it's in the domain of Science Fiction and Fantasy Stack Exchange, so unlike many off-topic questions we get, it has a home in the network to go to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question had been seeking information for using it in an RPG, that would have been on-topic (I hope nobody is going to go and make that question-laundering edit to the question now, though). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/544/what-kind-of-questions-can-i-ask-here&quot;&gt;Our minimum bar for “is it about RPGs?” isn't hard to clear&lt;/a&gt;. But it's merely a question about a plot detail in a novel unrelated to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A development: off-topic confirmed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker has clarified that they're asking about armour painting and blood colour because they're thinking about how to paint their WH40k wargaming miniatures, for wargaming. They've been directed to Board &amp;amp; Card Games SE, where they're at risk of being shut down again because &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1056/are-questions-about-flavor-acceptable/1057#1057&quot;&gt;lore questions are marginal there&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[…] if someone started asking questions about plot points that are best accessed through books, &lt;strong&gt;I might advise them to use the SciFi/Fantasy Stack Exchange instead&lt;/strong&gt;. I think an analogous situation would be if someone asked questions about, say, making a custom table for board gaming. I think a lot of questions about its functionality and design would be on-topic here, but if they started asking what kind of glue to use for the joints there's probably a construction or DIY stack exchange better suited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Though being marginal, maybe it'll be fine there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This development confirms that the question about the character's words in the novel is solidly off topic &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;. Their question would be &lt;strong&gt;helped&lt;/strong&gt; best by the setting-lore experts that populate Sci-Fi SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I would do a migration right now, except that doing so in the middle of a discussion would be presumptuous. However, I'm concerned that in practical terms this discussion is now hindering the user getting expert help as soon as possible.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-01T17:44:24.650" LastActivityDate="2017-06-01T17:44:24.650" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7167" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-04T22:33:57.653" Score="5" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100920/what-limitation-is-intended-by-seemings-basic-arrangement-of-limbs&quot;&gt;What limitation is intended by Seeming&amp;#39;s &amp;quot;basic arrangement of limbs&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;, requesting a rules clarification, and it has been put on-hold for being primarily opinion-based. Frankly I'm not clear on how a request for rules clarification &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be opinion-based, thus I'm not sure how I can edit the question to solve the problem. What about the question should I be focusing on fixing, and what's SOP here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-04T23:50:00.457" LastActivityDate="2017-06-04T23:50:00.457" Title="How can this question be edited to be less opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7167" CreationDate="2017-06-04T23:42:34.850" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reason it's opinion-based is that everyone (including you) has the same information to draw on when answering this question. The question could easily be rephrased as &quot;how do I interpret the phrase basic arrangement of limbs&quot;. The only way to answer this is to say &quot;here's how I interpret the phrase basic arrangement of limbs&quot;, so answers will be everyone posting their own interpretations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that, the answer you got, and which is getting upvoted, is the one that says &quot;actually, it doesn't really matter how you or I interpret the phrase, because the only interpretation that matters is that of the DM running a game&quot;. For all practical purposes, it's the right answer, but if the question was reopened, it would probably be swamped by answers saying everything from &quot;humanoids only, duh&quot; to &quot;it obviously lets you disguise yourself as a snake, since they have vestigial legs&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2017-06-04T23:42:34.850" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7169" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7170" CreationDate="2017-06-05T19:31:58.867" Score="10" ViewCount="482" Body="&lt;p&gt;Third party publishers themselves are awesome, so their existence isn't in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather, I'm wondering about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt; tag. Ostensibly it's meant to indicate the question's referencing third party material, but&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it barely gets used (6 questions since its creation in February this year).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;we haven't generally needed it for discussing third-party stuff, and I don't see what it adds.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I get the feeling it might be a meta tag: it doesn't even mean much on its own, it just means &quot;not by whoever made this game&quot;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dreamscarred-press&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dreamscarred-press&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dreamscarred-press&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;et al.&lt;/em&gt; would be more meaningful. This means the tag describes what it &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; about (first-party material) better than what it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; about (any specific third-party publisher).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging's a folksonomy and all that, so we tend to go with whatever people feel should be tagged, but this is a tag I feel we &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; need and would be better off removing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we get rid of this tag? Is it beneficial to have or are we better off without it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Wr6T.png&quot; alt=&quot;This tag has been burninated!&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've removed the tag from these questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88448/are-psionic-powers-considered-extraordinary-supernatural-spell-like-abilities&quot;&gt;Are psionic powers considered extraordinary, supernatural , spell-like abilities or spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90283/how-does-a-witch-hunters-spellbane-ability-work&quot;&gt;How does a Witch Hunter&amp;#39;s Spellbane ability work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93696/can-a-pc-apply-a-template-to-a-construct-gained-as-a-class-feature&quot;&gt;Can a PC apply a template to a construct gained as a class feature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94131/can-i-jump-while-flying&quot;&gt;Can I jump while flying?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98706/in-pathfinder-does-shank-and-its-minor-major-variant-stack-with-improved-crit&quot;&gt;In Pathfinder, does Shank (and its Minor/Major variant) stack with Improved Critical/Keen?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100993/is-an-inveiglers-failed-charming-falsehood-obvious&quot;&gt;Is an Inveigler&amp;#39;s failed Charming Falsehood obvious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will note expressly this was regarding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt;'s use to indicate &quot;I am asking about material which happens to be from a third party publisher in this circumstance&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't preclude ever having a tag that is for questions specifically about the third party publishing process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-08T18:23:01.527" LastActivityDate="2017-06-08T18:23:01.527" Title="Should we get rid of [3pp]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7169" CreationDate="2017-06-05T19:46:25.103" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt; when it was first created and was quite dubious about it then,&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; but didn't go out of my way to interact with it, preferring to let the community's folksonomy process chew on it a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My sense now is that it hasn't had much uptake, hasn't turned out to categorise anything one can be expert in or want to search for, and so it isn't needed or useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should get rid of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Not &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; because it should have been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3rd-party-publishers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3rd-party-publishers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3rd-party-publishers&lt;/a&gt;, but that's definitely an additional flaw.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-05T19:46:25.103" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7169" CreationDate="2017-06-05T22:04:25.753" Score="-8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The alternative Point of View&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been useful six times, does no harm, causes no controversy, and may be helpful a seventh (or more) time(s) on a future questoin.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommendation: don't fix what isn't actually broken.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-06-05T22:04:25.753" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7172" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7174" CreationDate="2017-06-06T07:36:20.037" Score="6" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question and, thankfully, I got more than one good answer.  Essentially, both are correct, but I consider one of them is more universal, precise or interesting.  According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1140/what-to-do-when-theres-more-than-one-good-answer&quot; title=&quot;this meta answer&quot;&gt;this meta question&lt;/a&gt;, I accepted it, upvoing the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Considering that the reasons for choosing one are reasonably brief and objetive, it is a good idea to explain that reasons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, where is the best place to do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31188" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-06-06T13:38:40.527" LastActivityDate="2017-06-12T20:13:28.547" Title="Is it a good idea to justify your choice between two good answers? Where?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7172" CreationDate="2017-06-06T07:58:03.647" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You don't need to explain why you accepted the answer you did. It is understood that the accepted answer is simply the one the querent found most helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to explain why you made the choice you did, though, you can do so in a comment. However, be aware that the comment will eventually be deleted. In the long run, you will have an answer in which it was no different, had you not explained your choice to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-06T07:58:03.647" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7172" CreationDate="2017-06-06T14:25:45.580" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Giving feedback for what you found useful is a generally good idea.  This includes when multiple good answers appear on the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site doesn't provide good ways to do that beyond accepting an answer.  nitsua60 mentions in another comment that as a Mod, they wouldn't immediately delete comments used for such, but also supports the paradigm that such comments eventually do get purged.  If Mods generally hold to this laid-back approach, your comment should be seen by the intended recipient before it gets deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-06-06T14:25:45.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7169" CreationDate="2017-06-06T15:11:25.983" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was all set to agree with d7 on this, but something caught my attention and I figure is worth bringing up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That whole &quot;can't be an expert in this&quot; thing makes sense of why it feels like such a problem that the tag defines itself by what it isn't. One can be an expert on specific publishers (who may sometimes be third-party, like Paizo was for D&amp;amp;D, or sometimes first-party, like Paizo is for Pathfinder), and an expert on publishing, but one cannot be an expert on &quot;third party publishers&quot;. – doppelgreener♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would actually disagree here—publishing as a third-party &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something one could have specific expertise in that someone who is an expert in publishing &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt; would not necessarily be. Being a third-party publisher means dealing with the licensing framework offered by the first-party publisher. And someone who published as a third-party to a lot of different first-party publishers would perhaps have expertise in how to understand and work within these licensing frameworks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that said, I’m not really trying to save the tag here. The above clearly isn’t how the tag is being used, and even if it were that does seem exceedingly narrow (or, conversely, not narrow enough; questions about specific licensing frameworks seem far more useful, commonplace, and likely to have real experts). But just food for thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-06-06T15:11:25.983" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7176" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7177" CreationDate="2017-06-06T22:01:28.413" Score="4" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having read through &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;the Help again&lt;/a&gt;, and having found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3426/22566&quot;&gt;this meta a nice starting point, I am still not satisfied with the policy guidance on comments&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5186/22566&quot;&gt;A concise pieces of policy on comments was written by Brian&lt;/a&gt; at the end of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/22566&quot;&gt;play styles meta answers&lt;/a&gt;.  I think it's been overlooked or lost in the shuffle.  To me, this post gets to the heart of what comments are to be used for.  I'd like to see this post added to the Help on comments, in raw form or perhaps with a bit of editing.    I think that removing most of the second paragraph, as it's &quot;play style content based&quot; or editing it would make it a better phrased policy statement about not arguing in comments.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-06-06T22:18:41.343" Title="Can we improve the detailed guidance on comments in the Help Center for RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|help-center|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7176" CreationDate="2017-06-06T22:18:41.343" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, Help pages other than (part of) the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on-topic page&lt;/a&gt; are static and can't be edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Brian's statements are useful though and we should probably fold them into a more directly topical FAQ about comments, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;, or (perhaps even better) a new &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; like “What should I (not) do if I disagree with an answer?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-06T22:18:41.343" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7178" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7187" CreationDate="2017-06-06T23:46:58.427" Score="1" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Content-ID is just a duplicate of Product-ID with a excerpt that is presumably objecting to the implicit classification of certain kinds of material as 'product'.  Since Product-ID is widely used for everything content-ID covers, and since the wiki has just been updated to make clear its broad applicability, content-ID should be made a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T17:52:27.980" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T18:08:43.610" Title="Synonymize content-ID with Product-ID" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7178" CreationDate="2017-06-07T00:57:52.623" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; can easily be mistaken for being about the same thing, but they are used for distinctly different questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; is for identifying forgotten or unfamiliar content based on given details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;e.g., “I forget what it's called, but I remember a feat/class/spell/etc. that does XYZ. What is it?” or “What's this thing in this piece of official art?” or “This character sheet has ability TUV on it I've never heard of, what is it?”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; is for identifying forgotten or unfamiliar products based on given details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;e.g., “What book is the feat/class/spell/etc. named ABC found in?”, or “I know there's a book with a cover that looks like such-and-so, what is it?” or “I found this book. What is it, and what game is it from?”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although answers to a content-ID question might identify the content &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; where to find it, this doesn't make them product-ID questions — the source product is not inherently part of a content-ID question. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93340/what-are-the-scenes-monsters-on-the-covers&quot;&gt;What are the scenes &amp;amp; monsters on the covers?&lt;/a&gt; is an extreme example demonstrating that content identification and product identification are independent types of questions, since it's a content-ID question that &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; be a product-ID question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This distinction can be seen by browsing the tags. Although they can easily be conflated when simply looking at the tags' names, in practice the tagging is pretty good, with only a few cases where tagging is been questionable. Although some cleanup would help, I don't see any way to make the case that these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/85192/where-is-the-swarm-rule-in-the-cypher-system-rulebook&quot;&gt;Where is the swarm rule in The Cypher System Rulebook?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93340/what-are-the-scenes-monsters-on-the-covers&quot;&gt;What are the scenes &amp;amp; monsters on the covers?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90160/where-in-the-book-can-i-find-the-origin-of-this-curse-of-strahd-characters-defo&quot;&gt;Where in the book can I find the origin of this Curse of Strahd character&amp;#39;s deformity?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… should have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; instead, as proposed by this meta question, since they have clearly-identified products already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7187&quot;&gt;An argument &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be made for merging the tags into a new tag-name that did capture a true category covering all these questions&lt;/a&gt;, but “they're already the same” isn't a persuasive argument for merging because it's not the case.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T18:08:43.610" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T18:08:43.610" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6522" CreationDate="2017-06-07T15:09:11.723" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to work through this tag retagging things with other tags where they're appropriate. From looking over the 17 [adventure] questions we have, I agree [adventure] does not seem to be a useful tag -- [adventure-&lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;] might be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example I've removed [adventure] from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51227/what-is-a-funnel&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;funnel&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; mentioned in SSD's answer. This question isn't &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; adventures, it's about terminology (that, coincidentally, shows up in places such as adventures).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's useful in its own right then there will be questions I can't improve by removing the tag or retagging with something more accurate. We'll see if it survives its questions receiving some gentle tag revision. If it doesn't survive, we'll call this tag burninated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Flambé status&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Wr6T.png&quot; alt=&quot;This tag has been BURNINATED!&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Retagged (or had another tag) such that [adventure] is redundant/unnecessary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51227/what-is-a-funnel&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;funnel&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt;  as mentioned&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100131/where-can-i-find-a-list-of-fantasy-grounds-mini-dungeons-adventures-by-level&quot;&gt;Where can I find a list of Fantasy Grounds mini-dungeons/adventures, by level?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97672/is-there-a-repository-of-fan-made-adventures-for-numenera&quot;&gt;Is there a repository of fan-made adventures for Numenera?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79326/how-to-build-an-interesting-dungeon-that-exists-to-kill-the-players&quot;&gt;How to build an interesting Dungeon that exists to kill the players?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/45238/make-npcs-hard-to-interrogate&quot;&gt;Make NPCs hard to interrogate&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44910/how-do-i-make-random-adventures-relevant-to-player-motivations-in-a-sandbox-hexc&quot;&gt;How do I make random adventures relevant to player motivations in a Sandbox Hexcrawl Campaign?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33865/free-pathfinder-low-level-urban-adventures&quot;&gt;Free Pathfinder low-level urban adventures?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22327/converting-a-3-5e-campaign-shackled-city-to-a-4e-campaign&quot;&gt;Converting a 3.5e Campaign (Shackled City) to a 4e Campaign&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-path&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-path&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-path&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2394/are-there-any-megadungeons-available-for-non-dd-systems&quot;&gt;Are there any megadungeons available for non-D&amp;amp;D systems?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4283/how-do-i-run-a-maze-scenario-without-using-a-map&quot;&gt;How do I run a maze scenario without using a map?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5582/how-do-i-help-my-players-not-get-caught-up-on-smaller-plot-points&quot;&gt;How do I help my players not get caught up on smaller plot points?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8273/adventuring-within-cthulhu-mythos-without-realizing-it&quot;&gt;Adventuring within Cthulhu Mythos without realizing it?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/investigation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;investigation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;investigation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6739/collections-of-two-player-free-form-adventure-ideas&quot;&gt;Collections of two-player free-form adventure ideas?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10533/what-should-be-included-in-a-standard-4e-dd-encounter-how-would-this-be-writte&quot;&gt;What should be included in a standard 4E D&amp;amp;D encounter? How would this be written in the adventure?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14247/what-happens-in-adventure-locations-between-adventures&quot;&gt;What happens in adventure locations between adventures?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-building&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79269/running-a-senate-based-game&quot;&gt;Running a senate-based game&lt;/a&gt; has been deleted rather than retagged; it's an idea-generation with no lasting value or significance to our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leaves &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76738/where-can-i-post-a-d20-adventure&quot;&gt;Where can I post a d20 adventure?&lt;/a&gt; as possibly the one and only question here that might actually benefit from a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt; tag. It's closed as a recommendation request, has no special significance, and the only reason it's not already automatically deleted is because it has a score of +2, where auto-deletion ignores questions above a score of +1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;hellip; I don't feel like keeping the tag around just for that one closed abandoned off-topic question, so I've opted to delete that one question. Maybe in the future we'll have cause for an [adventure-publishing] tag or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T16:12:42.417" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T16:12:42.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3189" CreationDate="2017-06-07T16:35:40.360" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've burninated away the few dozen uses of this tag. Nowadays with our more developed tagging taxonomy we had no shortage of more preferable tags. The only questions I felt might still deserve the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm&lt;/a&gt; tag in some sense were closed, which I don't think is worth keeping the tag around for: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13181/how-do-dms-avoid-burning-out&quot;&gt;How do DM&amp;#39;s avoid burning out?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36994/how-to-make-the-gms-job-easier&quot;&gt;How to make the GMs job easier?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zm85C.png&quot; alt=&quot;trogdor: this tag has been BURNINATED&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T16:43:04.297" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T16:43:04.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7182" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-06-07T16:57:35.767" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-07T16:57:35.767" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T16:57:35.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7183" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-06-07T16:57:35.767" Score="0" Body="For proposals to eliminate a tag by removing it from all questions using it (called burnination)." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-21T03:05:00.337" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T03:05:00.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7178" CreationDate="2017-06-07T17:20:36.537" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should synonymise them. They're a bit different in usage but I think it's splitting hairs and that it's a little confusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90044/where-is-rotharr-hatherhand&quot;&gt;Where is Rotharr Hatherhand?&lt;/a&gt; is asking where we'd find information on an identified person so it's tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt;. But then...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101117/where-are-vicious-weapons-detailed&quot;&gt;Where are Vicious Weapons detailed?&lt;/a&gt; is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; because it's about really just identifying the product already-known content is in?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't keep that straight in my head. They're both [&lt;em&gt;thing&lt;/em&gt;-identification] and that's all I need to know really.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my head, the content inside our books &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a product. In D&amp;amp;D a feat is a commercial product, a class is a commercial product, races are commercial products, and because they're useless distributed one-by-one publishers compiled them together into books which are also, themselves, products. I can also access those products other ways, like through D&amp;amp;D's subscription databases and character builders.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd rather just call 'em both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; and accept the terminology might not be strictly accurate in some corner cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T17:20:36.537" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7185" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-07T17:31:12.633" Score="1" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the support request &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7178/synonymize-content-id-with-product-id&quot;&gt;Synonymize content-ID with Product-ID&lt;/a&gt;, the argument is made that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; are the same and should already be synonyms (and requests that this please be actioned). The (so far lone) answer there is that they not the same and are currently distinct, so actioning that request isn't valid, and it's been well-received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; an argument for merging them that doesn't rely on the assertion that they're already the same, and it might be profitable to have that discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument I see that could be made is, perhaps the current distinction between identifying content and identifying products is unnecessarily splitting hairs, and it would be simpler and more useful to have a single “identification request” tag. The former only has 20-odd questions and the latter 100-odd questions, and I'm not sure there's a relevant distinction in expertise or searchability served by having separate tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we merge &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; into some kind of master “thing” identification tag? If so, what word should “thing” be?&lt;/strong&gt; (Note the tag size limit is 25 characters.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T17:31:12.633" Title="Should [content-identification] and [product-identification] be unified?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2017-06-07T17:58:05.260" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7185" CreationDate="2017-06-07T17:31:12.633" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes, I think they should be merged into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/materials-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;materials-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;materials-identification&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;(24 chars)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why they should be merged&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because it's splitting hairs to have a tag for identifying &lt;em&gt;stuff in books&lt;/em&gt; and another for identifying &lt;em&gt;stuff that &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; books&lt;/em&gt; (to somewhat oversimplify the current split). We get plenty of identification requests, so having a tag for that kind of thing makes sense, but there's no utility I see in saying there are two different areas of expertise involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is a case of the folksonomy coming up with a distinction that, in the fullness of time, isn't useful — even if the overall idea of tagging ID questions was a useful folksonomic realisation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why “materials”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we want a general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;identification&lt;/a&gt; tag, so there needs to be something qualifying it. Without stopping to really brainstorm many, I get the feeling that that would cover way more types of questions that what it would be replacing, and being so general it wouldn't directly teach a reader what it should be used for. (I could see someone putting [identification] on “My player is doing X, are they a powergamer?”, and that's a kind of recurrent retagging headache I think we would be wise to avoid pre-emptively!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm taking “materials” from the phrase “gaming materials” that's relatively common in RPG communities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So “materials” is kinda dry and stuffy on its own, but as the only “identification” tag I think it would naturally catch the right questions when people start typing stuff in the tag field, and I think it clearly restricts the scope of the tag. We won't get questions about identifying player types, tactical plans, the inventor of metacurrency, and other such things being tagged with it (or if we do, it will be an obvious mistag to the regulars who have retagging privileges).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; synonyms would be beneficial, as I could see someone typing &lt;code&gt;product&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;content&lt;/code&gt; into the tag bar of the right kinds of questions, choosing one of those old tags, and then the question would be automatically retagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/materials-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;materials-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;materials-identification&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T17:31:12.633" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7178" CreationDate="2017-06-07T18:07:48.487" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Although &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7179&quot;&gt;they are not currently the same&lt;/a&gt;, they &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be made so&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be useful to merge them, but not into either current tag's name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a merge would be useful because&#xA;it's splitting hairs to have a tag for identifying &lt;em&gt;stuff in books&lt;/em&gt; and another for identifying &lt;em&gt;stuff that &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; books&lt;/em&gt; (to somewhat oversimplify the current split). We get plenty of identification requests, so having a tag for that kind of thing makes sense, but there's no utility I see in saying there are two different areas of expertise involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is a case of the folksonomy coming up with a distinction that, in the fullness of time, isn't useful — even if the overall idea of tagging ID questions was a useful folksonomic realisation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tag them as “materials identification”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Product” identification used for the contents of products (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98723/what-is-this-story-i-recall-about-an-extremely-long-ever-changing-character-back&quot;&gt;content that wasn't even part of any product&lt;/a&gt;) is a bit artificial, so I don't think that's a clean solution. “Content” identification used to e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97726/looking-for-a-non-fiction-book-on-rpg-gaming-from-the-late-80s&quot;&gt;help identify a remembered book&lt;/a&gt; is similarly stretching it. &lt;strong&gt;I don't think the current names overlap enough to be merged as-is.&lt;/strong&gt; A merged tag would therefore need a different name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Identification” is what these questions are about… but&#xA;I don't think we want a general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;identification&lt;/a&gt; tag. Without stopping to really brainstorm many, I get the feeling that that would cover way more types of questions that what it would be replacing, and being so general it wouldn't directly teach a reader what it should be used for. (I could see someone putting [identification] on “My player is doing X, are they a powergamer?”, and that's a kind of recurrent retagging headache I think we would be wise to avoid pre-emptively!) So there needs to be something qualifying “identification” in the tag's name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think what covers both content and products is the phrase “gaming materials” that's relatively common in RPG communities, so how about “materials identification”?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though “materials” is kinda dry and stuffy on its own, I think it works. As the only “identification” tag I think it would naturally catch the right questions when people start typing stuff in the tag field, and I think it clearly restricts the scope of the tag. We won't get questions about identifying player types, tactical plans, the inventor of metacurrency, and other such things being tagged with it (or if we do, it will be an obvious mistag to the regulars who have retagging privileges).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; synonyms would be beneficial, as I could see someone typing &lt;code&gt;product&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;content&lt;/code&gt; into the tag bar of the right kinds of questions, choosing one of those old tags, and then the question would be automatically retagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/materials-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;materials-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;materials-identification&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-07T18:07:48.487" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7188" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-08T07:17:04.900" Score="4" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been pondering this, as shopping questions tend to be thrown out across the whole of SE. Still, it'd be a useful question to ask sometimes for some people, with potentially singular answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can they be asked, and should they be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-12T15:44:06.433" LastActivityDate="2017-06-12T15:44:06.433" Title="Are questions in the form of &quot;is there an RPG based on X&quot; on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7189" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7188" CreationDate="2017-06-08T08:11:51.280" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, as these are a form of game recommendation question and these are generally not accepted on this site. There is a long, complex and contentious history behind the eventual decision to disallow this type of question, and there is still some ill-feeling about the way it was handled. However, the decision to ban them still stands.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're interested, do a search for the [game-recommendation] tag on meta to get the whole story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-06-08T08:11:51.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7188" CreationDate="2017-06-09T03:02:42.003" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes. They are distinct from shopping questions, so long as X is specific enough (e.g. x = &quot;Star Trek&quot; is fine, x = &quot;comics&quot; is not). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it helps to think of it differently, &quot;how many RPGs have been based on X?&quot; asks the same question in a different way, and is much more clearly not a shopping question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2017-06-09T03:02:42.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7192" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7195" CreationDate="2017-06-09T11:44:09.090" Score="0" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101192/augury-how-does-it-work-with-regards-to-signing-contracts?noredirect=1#comment240161_101192&quot;&gt;The Q about Augury and contracts&lt;/a&gt; has been closed as a duplicate to a Q that (IMO) it is not a duplicate to. The reason is, as I have stated in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not a duplicate because that linked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96655/how-does-augury-work-exactly&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt; is asking about the &lt;em&gt;timing&lt;/em&gt;, this one is asking about the &lt;em&gt;validity of signing contracts as a course of action&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has also been duplicated to a third Q on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96655/how-does-augury-work-exactly&quot;&gt;how Augury works&lt;/a&gt;, which is certainly not a dupe of the Q in question. Duplicates are supposed to be exactly the same or nearly exactly the same questions expressed in different ways, so there is a transitivity here. If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96666/how-does-the-timing-on-augury-work?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Q1&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96655/how-does-augury-work-exactly&quot;&gt;Q2&lt;/a&gt; are not duplicates of each other, then they cannot both be duplicates of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101192/augury-how-does-it-work-with-regards-to-signing-contracts?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Q3&lt;/a&gt; at the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q1 is distinct from Q2 because Q2 was originally part of Q1 and removed from there, asked as a different Q, because it was distinct enough to require a separate Q. They should not both be duplicates of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101192/augury-how-does-it-work-with-regards-to-signing-contracts?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are my questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Why is it a duplicate? The answers of one question do not address the answers of the other. The premises are not identical, despite the components being the same (spell and contract).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How should it be updated to be distinct from the other?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-06-09T12:38:20.423" LastActivityDate="2017-06-10T15:21:26.077" Title="What needs to be changed in this question about Augury?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7192" CreationDate="2017-06-09T12:41:26.527" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not a D&amp;amp;D 5e expert, but I do understand D&amp;amp;D, have passing familiarity with 5e, and I understand how our system works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find your question &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; weird and I do not really understand what you're looking for from us that isn't already covered by the two prior questions it's currently closed as a duplicate of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96655/how-does-augury-work-exactly&quot;&gt;How does Augury work exactly?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; which clarifies how the spell works.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96666/how-does-the-timing-on-augury-work&quot;&gt;How does the timing on Augury work?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; which clarifies the time span the spell operates within in terms of the feedback one ought to expect it to provide.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's your specific questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When using &lt;em&gt;augury&lt;/em&gt; to sign a contract, are only some contracts viable for the purposes of this spell, given the following course of action: &quot;I will sign this contract and agree to be bound by its terms&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the case that it cannot process all contracts, what are some illustrative examples of contracts that cannot be parsed by &lt;em&gt;augury&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the case that the course of action &quot;I will sign this contract and agree to be bound by its terms&quot; is not actionable or specific, is there an alternative formulation of the plan, such that the same goal is achieved -- ie, &lt;em&gt;augury&lt;/em&gt; advises the caster if it's a good or bad idea to sign it?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, these read as the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please prove a global positive or negative on all possible contracts having a meaningful augury response from this question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please come up with some contracts that cannot be augured.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If that question I listed isn't a valid one to ask of augury, tell me a different one.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that this is all &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; vague and beyond our reasonable scope to handle. This is a spell to which a DM indicates one of the following in code language: &quot;good things await you&quot; (weal), &quot;bad things await you&quot; (woe), &quot;both await you&quot; (weal and woe), or nothing to say at all on this front. Bearing that in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're requesting us to handle the &quot;viability&quot; of all potential contracts and come up with some for you in a super abstract form. A contract is just an agreement. What's the problem here? Why is it not clear how augury works in this circumstance? Why do you need a global proof? How is this not already just answered by how augury works and the timeframe of the feedback?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Further, &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; is a viable question for augury. You just tell it something you're gonna do and the DM responds whether they feel that's a good idea. Why &lt;em&gt;wouldn't&lt;/em&gt; signing a contract be something they can respond to?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're asking us to generate meaningful content along these super abstract lines. This is along the lines of idea generation the way you've requested it, because this doesn't seem like the kind of thing we can give a meaningful single best response to in the broad abstract scope you've requested it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we've got one weird question about a sweeping abstraction with no real problem to it and I don't understand why you're even really putting it forward, which is worth action all on its own, and you're adding in two further questions asking us to come up with any examples of a broad set of stuff, which strike me as fairly different anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things are probably much clearer to you in what you're going for, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around what's being asked or why it even &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really know what to do with your question. I find it has some major content issues so I wouldn't really know where to begin. I was strongly considering closing it as unclear because of the content issues I found it to have, but I opted to instead close it as a duplicate and point it back to two existing questions covering the scope and behaviour of augury.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should note this isn't a Moderation Ultimatum Wherein This Question Will Remain Closed Forever . I'm just casting a fifth and final vote as a site user in this circumstance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-09T13:01:33.313" LastActivityDate="2017-06-09T13:01:33.313" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7192" CreationDate="2017-06-09T14:22:37.867" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Direct answer: your question sounds a lot like the question &amp;quot;is it possible to cast &lt;em&gt;augury&lt;/em&gt; at a contract at all?&amp;quot; and we've already answered this question. I happen to feel that we've answered it incorrectly -- I really don't think the dm should allow this -- but we should solve that by fixing the wrong answer, not by answering it again on a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(You've pointed out that there do exist contracts that produce effects within the 30 minute window, and that's technically true but I don't feel that it redeems the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Side comment: I think it's really weird that you posted the question asking for &amp;quot;Rules As Written only&amp;quot;. There are no rules as written about this. It's just the one paragraph in the description of &lt;em&gt;augury&lt;/em&gt;. Asking the question in this way is going to attract a lot of wrong answers which claims to be Rules As Written but are actually shaky interpretations of that one paragraph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This concern would seem to point to a close reason of &amp;quot;opinion based&amp;quot; rather than &amp;quot;duplicate&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Side comment II: A lot of the time, when we get questions of this nature (&amp;quot;here's something that should be open to DM interpretation, tell me the One Correct Way to do it, my question is slanted in a way that makes it look like I want X answer&amp;quot;), it's because people are trying to win an argument with their DM. We try to discourage people from using the site in this way. I'm not necessarily saying you're doing this, I'm just saying we get a lot of questions like this that are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most recent version of your question is better, because it asks a question which has a clear answer (even if it's still mostly a duplicate of the other augury-contract one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it still makes me unhappy, because it reminds me of playing &amp;quot;spot the loophole&amp;quot; with my more rules-lawyer-y players.  &amp;quot;Spot the loophole&amp;quot; goes like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Player: &amp;quot;Hey, can I do X innocuous-sounding thing?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Me: &amp;quot;Oh, um, sure, that sounds fine.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Player: &amp;quot;Just to be clear, X innocuous-sounding thing works in all circumstances, right?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Me: &amp;quot;Yeah, I guess.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(at the table)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Player: &amp;quot;Okay, I do X thing in combination with Y loophole and Z, and it kills the villain instantly.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Me: &amp;quot;Wait, that's not how X thing works --&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Player: &amp;quot;But you &lt;em&gt;explicitly said&lt;/em&gt; that X thing worked in all circumstances!&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question asks &amp;quot;are there any circumstances under which contracts don't work?&amp;quot; but omits to mention the specific circumstances you're wondering about.  This makes me feel like you're trying to ask the question in a way that tricks us into giving an ill-considered answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that you're writing your question under some constraints here, and you're probably trying to optimize for having a really short question.  But the longer version you had originally didn't mention this exploit, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-10T15:21:26.077" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7195" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7192" CreationDate="2017-06-10T03:58:30.190" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Q needs to be deleted&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like the reception of the Q in this meta is such that the genuinely Q does not add knowledge to the Stack. Be it a duplicate of 2 other questions, or too broad, etc, it seemed to be asking for too much and as such is not answerable. It has also been hinted that it is irredeemable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I asked the Q to address, what I felt, to be a narrow concern about a certain spell, and changing its meaning away from &quot;are only some contracts viable for augury? which ones are not?&quot; makes it into a Q that I am not interested in learning the A to, because then I would not be learning the answer to the Q I am actually asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a dissonance between myself and the Stack at large somewhere with regards to this Q, but I cannot see where it is. It is cleaner and less work to just delete the Q.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-06-10T09:11:54.673" LastActivityDate="2017-06-10T09:11:54.673" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7196" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7197" CreationDate="2017-06-11T01:13:13.723" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;How does one help a new user reformulate their first question, when the question needs serious work, when they have no reputation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101329&quot;&gt;Do I just suck as a DM? Players are too powerful!&lt;/a&gt; was rightfully put on hold as too broad, but there might be a specific, answerable question in there.  There are various permutations of helping a user with a question including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking for details in comments.  I think that's not viable, here, as the Q+A session would be very long.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Inviting the user to take it to a chat sessions.  That is not currently viable here, as the user has insufficient reputation to chat, and it's not likely that a question which needs work will get them over that hump.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are then combined with one of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The user goes back to edit the question themself&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone who likes editing questions on behalf of people does it for them&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the question goes to the reopen vote.  As noted above, though, both of the first paths seem unlikely to be successful.  What is the best practice here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="26952" LastEditDate="2017-06-11T07:14:38.900" LastActivityDate="2017-06-11T07:14:38.900" Title="How can I help a new user reformulate their first question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|new-users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7196" CreationDate="2017-06-11T01:30:48.667" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Trust the Stack =)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go ahead and ask for details in comments. &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; suggest, though, asking only for the two or three most-important-seeming details. Avoid &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing/6925#6925&quot;&gt;help piling&lt;/a&gt;. I think it's important to get a few clarifications and edit them in to give the user a taste of the system working than it is to present them with a litany of their imperfections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wait for the response. This, then, can go a couple of ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User never responds, question ages to [closed] rather than [on hold], eventually gets auto-deleted as abandoned. That happens, and is a Good Thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User responds by editing. This is a Good Thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User responds in comment, and someone else edits. This is a Good Thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User responds, that occasions further comments, further responses, and eventually comments are auto-blocked and what appears is only the &amp;quot;comments are not for extended discussion, would you likek to &lt;strong&gt;move this to chat?&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;quot; message.  Here's the great thing: &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; chat room gives the OP explicit write-access to the room, by dint of being attached to their post! They &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; chat about the question, and get clarification. And this is a Good Thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-11T01:34:41.153" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="75" CreationDate="2017-06-11T21:29:41.623" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, these questions are perfectly on topic. Ask away! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Too localized&quot; is no longer a close reason, but localized questions still pull from a limited pool of experts.  While that doesn't make questions about such events off topic, it does mean it may take a while for you to get an answer, and some questions may never be answered.  This is ok.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, we have a number of community organizers and other people heavily involved with most major RPG conventions, as well as people who &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; involved with some major RPG conventions back in the day, so this is actually a pretty good place to ask that sort of thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-06-11T21:29:41.623" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7172" CreationDate="2017-06-12T13:15:23.810" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't say it's a &amp;ldquo;good idea&amp;rdquo; to leave feedback, as that implies it's recommended or a best-practice course of action, and I wouldn't wish to imply that. Rather, it's something you &lt;em&gt;could do&lt;/em&gt;, if/when you feel comfortable doing so and wish to do so. You should not feel pressured or obliged to leave any feedback along these lines. It may be beneficial, but it's up to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting and accepting answers are both deeply personal actions. You don't owe an explanation to anyone about either.&amp;Dagger; The Accepted checkmark is for the answer which best solved your problem, and you may use that in a way which doesn't correlate to how people are voting. Note that not even diamond moderators have a way of controlling the checkmark &amp;mdash; we can't un-accept an answer or force another answer to be the accepted one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone gets upset you didn't accept their answer and demands feedback or explanation, you don't &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to give it to them &amp;mdash; you can ignore that, and you can also flag their messages for moderator attention and we'll come in and clean things up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;Dagger; except under extreme circumstances where one's actions seem to be abusive or conducted in bad faith, at which point the user's actions may receive some due scrutiny. These are extremely rare and basically unheard of on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-12T20:13:28.547" LastActivityDate="2017-06-12T20:13:28.547" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7200" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-13T02:39:00.710" Score="-9" ViewCount="247" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/78918/22566&quot;&gt;With this question in mind&lt;/a&gt;, there are others, I'd like to suggest a cheese tag as a clear identifier of people looking for fun exploits.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101455/22566&quot;&gt;This particular question&lt;/a&gt;, and the comments in response, is why I am asking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/22566&quot;&gt;We support a plurality of play styles&lt;/a&gt;.  Munchkin/cheese merchant is a play style. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Proposal: tag [cheese] with the deliberate intent of asking for cheese/rules exploiting fun.  We play games for fun.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/93911/22566&quot;&gt;Here is the kind of fun answer that is perfectly suited for a cheese tag kind of question&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I now don my helmet and flak jacket&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NOTICE #1: nothing in this question has anything to do with the RAW tag.  Zero. Zip.  Nada.  Do not even go there. This is about fun, because Pun-Pun was silly fun when whomever came up with it arrived at the formula.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NOTICE #2: For reasons (?) two different mods removed / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101455/22566&quot;&gt;edited the reference to cheese in the title of the post&lt;/a&gt;, but did leave the text at the end.  This happened after this meta was posted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-19T11:54:35.160" LastActivityDate="2017-06-19T11:54:35.160" Title="Proposing a [cheese] tag that is a category of rules exploits/fun" Tags="|discussion|tags|cheese|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7200" CreationDate="2017-06-13T02:47:11.557" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Fun&quot; is subjective.  We already have a tag for &quot;exploits,&quot; the rules-as-written tag, which is on that question already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More than that, we shouldn't even have that tag in the first place - we don't have tags for other playstyles, because doing so is a meta tag, not describing the actual question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Removing that tag has proven problematic for reasons everyone knows all too well, but compounding that error is pointless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure why you would propose something and then shout &quot;I don my helmet and flak jacket,&quot; as if you already know it's a bad idea but want to stir up arguments and passions about the RAW topic.  Maybe reconsider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-06-13T02:52:29.690" LastActivityDate="2017-06-13T02:52:29.690" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7200" CreationDate="2017-06-13T02:49:00.950" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;We support a plurality of playstyles, but we're &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2803/4398&quot;&gt;really super careful&lt;/a&gt; about introducing tags for them because they're probably meta tags--to the point that we arguably don't have &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; yet. If we want to experiment with playstyle tagging, I don't think &quot;fun&quot; is a good concept for the first try (no matter what we call it) and [cheese] is a term which has vastly different connotations for various corners of the RPG community: it's already caused unnecessary confusion on this very page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-06-13T09:12:06.467" LastActivityDate="2017-06-13T09:12:06.467" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7203" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-13T03:29:36.000" Score="6" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it would be useful for questions to have links to any meta-discussions about them. This is inspired by The Oracle, which posts new meta questions to Chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Could the site automatically post a comment like &quot;This item has been referenced in [this meta question]&quot; to any questions or answers so referenced?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additional options around user experience include a default-on check box for posting this message, and including the original question title on the link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An alternative proposed by @nitsua60 is to allow Linked questions to work between main and meta, rather than just within their own sites. This creates an automatic, bidirectional connection between two questions by creating links in the Linked section of the sidebar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another alternative, inspired by my own misinterpretation of nitsua's idea, is to have another section to the sidebar specifically for out of site references. For both this idea and his, I think I prefer my original suggestion because it gives the ability to refer to specific answers as well as specific questions. I am open to changing my mind on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2017-06-13T21:35:08.773" LastActivityDate="2017-06-13T21:35:08.773" Title="Could the Stack automatically post a ping-back comment on referenced Questions?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7204" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7205" CreationDate="2017-06-13T04:06:20.920" Score="1" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not convinced that voting would not have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/101439/22566&quot;&gt;taken care of this answer.&lt;/a&gt;  Beyond that, providing a link to a XKCD comic rather than an SE meta struck me as bad form.  The justification for the mod hammer was that a devil's advocate position is not a valid answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/1432/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;We don't need a devil's advocate.&lt;/a&gt; In formal debate lingo, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;devil's advocate position&lt;/a&gt; &quot;refers to when, for the sake of debate, a person presents a point of view that they don't necessarily agree with just to make another consider an opposing point of view.&quot; That's necessary for certain forms of formalised debate but we have no need of it here. If you seriously believe in this perspective, please expand on how it's worked out for you in real play, and don't hedge it as a devil's advocate response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, someone needs to speak up.  Granted, the hive mind/group think of RPG.SE would likely attract a lot of down votes here, and some rage votes, and it's not the solution I would have presented (my answer was quite different) but it is an answer and it violated no SE policy.  Is the problem that it didn't have enough support or wasn't long enough?  If so, then make that the comment/criticism.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is in fact an SE policy against using a devils advocate approach, or deliberately posting what may be an unpopular answer, then link to that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(PS, I've seen a few answers where the same person gave two different answers and let the votes take it from there ... but it's not that common).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-14T08:24:24.157" LastActivityDate="2017-06-14T10:51:50.303" Title="Was it really necessary to mod delete this? Why are there votes?" Tags="|discussion|answers|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7205" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7204" CreationDate="2017-06-13T06:31:36.063" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This answer was borderline — I would have left it to be beaten up by voters, but another mod would (did) choose to more actively act on it as the Very Low Quality post it was. Voted into oblivion or nuked by a mod: it's a choice of poisons that makes only a little difference in the end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no policy against Devil's Advocate answers — but there is a mod prerogative to remove posts that do not benefit the site, and moreso those that may do ill to it. (Being an explicitly — and importantly, &lt;em&gt;shallowly&lt;/em&gt; — Devil's Advocate answer just underlined its low quality by emphasizing that not even the author thought it was a good answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said, I would have left it. But in leaving it, I was prepared to need to watch it and keep the comments from getting too heated. When I spoke with the other mod after the deletion, I noted that a benefit of their action was that the post wasn't going to consume/inflame community attention, which I felt was an additional benefit that supported the call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, these are marginal cases that will be called slightly differently by different people (mod or not). I didn't feel that any harm was done, so I said most of this post to the other mod and affirmed that their call was within the normal margins of moderation variation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So was it &lt;strong&gt;necessary&lt;/strong&gt;? No. Was it &lt;strong&gt;wrong&lt;/strong&gt; to? I don't believe so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And though we don't have a policy against Devil's Advocate answers, I am reasonably sure we wouldn't benefit from &lt;em&gt;encouraging&lt;/em&gt; trivial ones like this case.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-13T06:31:36.063" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7200" CreationDate="2017-06-13T14:47:41.247" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If someone explicitly wants cheese, let them ask for it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's not use a tag as a substitute for asking, in a question, for exactly what we are looking for to solve a problem or achieve an objective.  The emphasis on what is wanted needs to be clear in the text of the question, not a tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the example question, in both the title and in the body of the question (before edited out by two mods), the person asking for some cheese explicitly spelled out that cheese was desired content in an answer.  &lt;strong&gt;This is a good thing&lt;/strong&gt;.  It is similar to questions that include  criteria for how to evaluate answers, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;a good answer will address {points X, Y, and Z}&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;as I am the DM, please don't say &lt;em&gt;talk to the DM&lt;/em&gt;&quot; .&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A sample criterion in seeking exploit/cheese might read: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Any exploit is welcome, the cheesier the better.  I want my&#xA;DM's eyes to roll.&quot;   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Like at Burger King, you need to ask for cheese on the Whopper to have it your way.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-06-17T12:51:06.010" LastActivityDate="2017-06-17T12:51:06.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7207" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-13T21:36:40.137" Score="9" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found a spot on our site where links haven't been updated to HTTPS yet: our custom close reasons. The links in them still point to HTTP:// locations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DPryG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DPryG.png&quot; alt=&quot;http links&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-13T22:19:16.953" LastActivityDate="2017-06-13T22:19:16.953" Title="Our custom off topic close reasons need updating to HTTPS" Tags="|support|bug|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7204" CreationDate="2017-06-14T10:29:08.213" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Like SevenSidedDie said, I deleted it because it was a very, very low quality post &lt;em&gt;that also&lt;/em&gt; had a major issue undermining its very presence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently it provides no subjective experience per the Back It Up! principle. I was pretty confident the community would find that answer to be a &lt;em&gt;terrible&lt;/em&gt; course of action &amp;mdash; it was at &amp;ndash;2, and like you, I suspect votes would communicate very strongly it's not a good answer. That's not the whole of why I deleted it though and if that was all I would've left it for voters to handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The quality issue was compounded by the devil's advocate thing. This suggested to me the author not only wrote a poor quality post proposing a terrible course of action, they did so &lt;em&gt;insincerely&lt;/em&gt; because they thought we'd benefit from them proposing a terrible course of action to downvote. (Maybe that's not how they meant it, but that's how I read it.) We &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; need people doing that. Would you want to see experienced posting deliberately crap answers around the place so we have something to downvote? I wouldn't, I'd rather they post great answers and advise against poor courses of action inside those if they feel it's helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I removed the post because my reading was it was deliberately nonsense out of a misplaced motivation to contribute. I left a comment pointing out this lack of need for a devil's advocate &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; requesting they add subjective experience per &lt;em&gt;Back It Up!&lt;/em&gt; if they really meant it. I didn't feel the need to explain in detail the need to back up their post with actual experience, since I figured a long-term user would already be familiar with this principle and understand the need to include experience or citation. (Plus my comment was too close to its length limit to fit that in.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer has been revised so I've undeleted it, and I've left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101428/how-can-we-handle-firing-our-dm/101439#comment241068_101439&quot;&gt;a new comment&lt;/a&gt; focusing on the need for them to back up their post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;About the snark: I meant none. That XKCD comic is, to me, a concise way to convey the problem with someone proposing a devil's advocate position wholly unnecessarily. Maybe to some others it just comes across as snarky; I'll bear that in mind and be more careful with it in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-14T10:51:50.303" LastActivityDate="2017-06-14T10:51:50.303" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7209" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7210" CreationDate="2017-06-14T12:21:20.880" Score="5" ViewCount="237" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101557/do-temporary-hit-points-from-heroism-accumulate&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; references dnd-spells.com, which is not an official WoTC and property and has even been temporarily shut down by them in the past. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the policy on these references?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-16T04:05:23.097" LastActivityDate="2020-02-16T04:05:23.097" Title="What is the policy on linking to non-official sites?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7209" CreationDate="2017-06-14T12:39:55.740" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You may link to non-official sites. It's fine. We have for a long time facilitated links to &lt;a href=&quot;http://d20srd.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d20srd&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d20pfsrd&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://fate-srd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fate SRD&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dandwiki&lt;/a&gt; and so on, where none of those are official. There's no problem here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception is if the site is basically a piracy database. Our stance is to not link to such sites:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6882/1204&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s our stance on Piracy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2770/1204&quot;&gt;Links to &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Tools&amp;quot; / dndtools.eu and similar sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5382/1204&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s our policy with answers advocating piracy (accidentally or not)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we encounter these sources, revise the post to reference an official source instead &amp;mdash; we don't want to appear to support or endorse their existence. I recommend you assume that anyone reading owns the books they need, so a feature/section name combined with a book name and page number will often be enough, and an SRD link would be beneficial if available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for legitimate non-official sites you may link to and reference whatever you like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-24T22:43:39.020" LastActivityDate="2017-06-24T22:43:39.020" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7211" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-06-14T13:10:27.843" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.mipui.net/app&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KenZ0.png&quot; alt=&quot;Mipui - a free collaborative map editor&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36595" LastEditorUserId="36595" LastEditDate="2017-06-14T13:17:45.173" LastActivityDate="2017-06-14T13:17:45.173" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7212" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-15T01:40:21.453" Score="11" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;Holmes, Moldvay/Cook, and Mentzer D&amp;amp;D releases all colloquially and officially present as &quot;Basic&quot; D&amp;amp;D. We currently have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-bx&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-bx&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-bx&lt;/a&gt; with 32 questions, referring to Moldvay/Cook. (Master tag to synonyms &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-moldvay&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-moldvay&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-moldvay&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bx-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bx-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bx-dnd&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-becmi&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-becmi&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-becmi&lt;/a&gt; with 12 question, referring to Mentzer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(hot off the press!) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; with 1 question, referring to Holmes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101607/what-are-the-differences-between-holmes-dd-and-original-dd#comment241274_101607&quot;&gt;This comment&lt;/a&gt; on the one Holmes-centric question argues for a different nomenclature for the tags. What should the tagging be on these questions/editions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-15T03:58:19.407" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T04:48:03.560" Title="How should we tag Basic D&amp;D editions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7212" CreationDate="2017-06-15T02:00:38.597" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I were just looking at the tag's name, I would assume that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; referred to all three of the Basic D&amp;amp;D editions (Holmes, Moldvay, Mentzer), since they're collectively called that in the wider community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If Holmes needs its own sibling tag to the other Basic editions, I think something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-holmes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-holmes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-holmes&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic-holmes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic-holmes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic-holmes&lt;/a&gt; (a bit backwards but fits our tagging patterns) or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/holmes-basic-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;holmes-basic-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;holmes-basic-dnd&lt;/a&gt;) (more like what it's called, but bucks our tag pattern) or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-holmes-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-holmes-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-holmes-basic&lt;/a&gt; (our “dnd-” prefix with the common “Holmes Basic” it's called attached),  would be more fitting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if Holmes' tag gets renamed, I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; would need to be retired — none of the three Basic editions have a better claim to it than any of the other two, so it doesn't work as a synonym of any of them, and they're each &lt;em&gt;juust&lt;/em&gt; different enough that a Basic D&amp;amp;D editions umbrella tag probably isn't useful either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt; I just &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/684836/posts-that-have-ever-had-dnd-basic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;did some digging through SEDE&lt;/a&gt; and it appears that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; only existed for a short while, and was only ever used on questions that were later determined to be more correctly tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-bx&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-bx&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-bx&lt;/a&gt;. So there isn't an active precedent on the site for using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; to tag Holmes. (It also appears that the original incarnation of the tag — and its rejected use for labelling Moldvay Basic — was my fault!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrary to that though, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dungeons-and-dragons/info&quot;&gt;our [dungeons-and-dragons] tag wiki says&lt;/a&gt; does suggest to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; for Holmes. That's based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2761&quot;&gt;our original meta about how to tag the D&amp;amp;D family in general&lt;/a&gt;. In that answer, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; is listed for Holmes in the proposed hierarchy, which explains where the tag wiki got the suggestion. However, it's followed with this bit of discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;dnd-basic was being used inconsistently and often redundantly with dnd-bx and no one was using the right Moldvay tag because it was bx-dnd instead of dnd-bx (I synonymed it). I propose that we either a) make dnd-basic just for Holmes or b) make it a collection of all three Basics, though I am unclear what purpose that would serve. or c) remove it in favor of the three specific tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that we never ran into the practical question of how to tag a real Holmes question until now, so we never formally resolved which of (a), (b), or (c) to go with. In practice (as seen in the SEDE query), (c) is what happened to the tag, for lack of real Holmes questions or pan–Basic D&amp;amp;D questions to test out the other two options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I find it likely that (b) would be confused and used as an umbrella tag instead of meaning Holmes, and (c) has worked well &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; agrees with the sense of the issue I had before I went digging, I still think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-holmes-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-holmes-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-holmes-basic&lt;/a&gt; or a variant is what we should use for Holmes, rather than resurrect &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-basic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-basic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-basic&lt;/a&gt; for Holmes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-15T04:48:03.560" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T04:48:03.560" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7212" CreationDate="2017-06-15T04:19:08.187" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;B/X and BECMI are well used terms in the community and don't need to change.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basic is what Holmes Basic is called for short when all those are talked about together, but is confusing in isolation so [dnd-holmes-basic] or any variation on that theme is a fine addition, given of course that if there's not 2 or more questions using it it'll just disappear again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T04:19:08.187" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7215" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-15T14:43:02.753" Score="4" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is some good info on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.icewebring.com/ice-products/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;various editions throughout it's history&lt;/a&gt;.  At the very least it might be helpful to get tags to distinguish between the Rolemaster Standard System or RMSS and Rolemaster Fantasy Roleplaying or RMFRP, since these were the most popular versions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of right now, the Editions are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster First Edition or RM1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster Second Edition or RM2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster Standard System or RMSS&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster Fantasy Roleplaying or RMFRP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster Classic or RMC (an update of RM2)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rolemaster Express or RMX (a rules lite version of RMC)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unified Rolemaster &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be happy to write up the tag info as needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26408" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-15T14:49:14.247" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T15:25:17.983" Title="How should we tag the editions of Rolemaster?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7215" CreationDate="2017-06-15T15:25:17.983" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, we don't need to plan tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging here is an emergent folksonomy.  Tags are created because someone's asking questions about something, and for no other reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We go from a generic tag down to version tags if and when it matters.  For many games it doesn't. For Call of Cthulhu, we just have a [call-of-cthulhu] tag because a) the differences between the versions are not all that much and b) the play community for those games doesn't care all that much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently we have a [rolemaster] tag.  We don't need further breakdown of the tag unless people are asking questions that are version dependent and really need those tags.  And per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3482/what-are-the-differences-between-the-first-and-second-editions-of-rolemaster&quot;&gt;What are the differences between the first and second editions of Rolemaster?&lt;/a&gt; the versions don't seem to be that different to merit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, having to break down tagging based on version is a necessary evil to be avoided unless it really is necessary because it hinders people from following/participating across the whole larger scope of the game - for D&amp;amp;D that's the right thing to do, but in very few other cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T15:25:17.983" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7217" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3530" CreationDate="2017-06-15T18:18:02.863" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;After three more years (!) and considerably more questions, it became clear that a division developed between old playtest questions and questions that are or can be made into questions about the current published D&amp;amp;D 5e rules. This lead to some old questions (tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;) that were only meaningful in the context of the original playtest documents attracting new answers citing the published hardcover books, as seen in these examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;[Meta] &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6554/revisiting-whether-dd-next-needs-its-own-separate-tag&quot;&gt;Revisiting whether D&amp;amp;D Next needs its own separate tag&lt;/a&gt; (mainsite questions mentioned in answers)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35692/spell-dc-saving-throws&quot;&gt;Spell DC Saving Throws&lt;/a&gt; (deleted answers, 10k+ only)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14584/ack-where-do-i-find-the-spell-descriptions-for-casters&quot;&gt;Ack! Where do I find the spell descriptions for casters?&lt;/a&gt; (deleted answers, 10k+ only)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end, the need to section off questions that could only be about the playtest materials became clear. That's now been done, and they live under the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-15T18:18:02.863" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7218" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-16T03:46:14.580" Score="60" ViewCount="8588" Body="&lt;p&gt;[modeled on &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2617/12207&quot;&gt;this well-posed and highly ranked meta&lt;/a&gt; over at WB.SE]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've got some answers that've really gone above-and-beyond in answering rigorously and completely some superlative questions. And by &quot;superlative&quot; I don't mean that the questions are excellent, I just mean that they contain superlatives. Like &quot;what's the most I can carry?&quot; or &quot;what's the highest fall I can survive?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some might call these &quot;cheese.&quot; If so, they are the finest cheeses, to be enjoyed on the back porch on a cool summer night. Let's start a cheese club, stackizens! Please answer by linking a single post that you find the cheesiest, the best-explained &lt;em&gt;augmentum ad absurdum&lt;/em&gt; you've seen come grace these pages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep to these simple rules:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strike&gt;one submission per user&lt;/strike&gt; [that rule was present in the WB version; doesn't seem necessary here]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;each post only once&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;include a few words explaining what you like so much about this particular post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your favorite post is already mentioned, upvote that and submit your second-favorite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-08-13T22:22:32.277" LastActivityDate="2022-11-19T02:53:35.860" Title="Purveyors of fine cheese!" Tags="|discussion|just-for-fun|cheese|" AnswerCount="41" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-16T04:35:02.873" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;A fine cheese to go with your favorite bread, toasted, with beverage of your choice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/93911/22566&quot;&gt;How many creatures can attack another creature&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Aggresso absurdum&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-06-16T04:35:02.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-16T04:41:32.350" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is more of a combination cheese: Brie, Cheddar, and a little Mozzarella, all melted into one. Goes well on pizza.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99161/can-pcs-create-a-mob&quot;&gt;Can PCs create a Mob?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2017-06-16T04:41:32.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-16T04:57:42.047" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;While odorous, and definitely an acquired taste, this maximum movement speed cheese is one I have found to be quite delectable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/58645/23064&quot;&gt;What is the Fastest a Character Can Move in One Turn?[closed]&lt;/a&gt; [dnd-5e version]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-06-25T02:32:42.723" LastActivityDate="2017-06-25T02:32:42.723" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7222" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-16T06:34:33.617" Score="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not just cheese, but a cheese factory. From this cheese is created even more cheese, for days, and possibly indefinitely. An eternal wellspring of cheesy cheesiness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78918/does-this-cheesy-character-concept-violate-raw-and-if-so-how&quot;&gt;Does this cheesy character concept violate RAW, and if so how?&lt;/a&gt; [5e character build that generates arbitrarily-many spell slots on all short rests, no long rests.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-06-25T02:30:16.093" LastActivityDate="2017-06-25T02:30:16.093" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-16T07:38:21.837" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; a superlative, but still darn cheesy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94821/can-a-wizard-cast-a-spell-strong-as-a-small-nuke&quot;&gt;Can a Wizard cast a spell strong as a small nuke?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In which we learn specifically about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/94823/1204&quot;&gt;the Locate City bomb&lt;/a&gt;, which combines some metamagic which pushes people out of a spell's radius, and metamagic which deals a bit of damage from distance travelled, with a spell with a radius hundreds of miles wide, helping us learn what it might be like if you took &lt;em&gt;fus ro dah&lt;/em&gt; and turned it up a few notches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-16T07:55:07.153" LastActivityDate="2017-06-16T07:55:07.153" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7224" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-19T02:02:51.347" Score="6" ViewCount="245" Body="&lt;p&gt;For consideration:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage&lt;/a&gt; tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we feel that these have value? Can someone be an expert in those areas?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that there was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3073/3548&quot;&gt;a proposal to burninate [attack]&lt;/a&gt; about 4 years ago; the consensus seemed to be burn it, but it doesn't look like action was actually taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-26T16:31:53.173" LastActivityDate="2017-06-26T16:31:53.173" Title="Should we burninate [attack] and [damage]?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7225" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7224" CreationDate="2017-06-19T08:16:35.630" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not keen on burninating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; it's being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack+fate&quot;&gt;used in Fate questions&lt;/a&gt; (also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27972/what-should-happen-in-a-legendarily-successful-attack-against-a-mook&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;) as a tag for one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://fate-srd.com/fate-core/four-actions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;four actions&lt;/a&gt;, alongside &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/create-advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;create-advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;create-advantage&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/overcome&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;overcome&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;overcome&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/defense&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;defense&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;defense&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-06-19T08:16:35.630" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7224" CreationDate="2017-06-19T12:36:49.550" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Let's kill [damage]... with &lt;em&gt;fire!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener has made a reasonable case for preserving [attack], or at least for retagging certain instances of it, which should maybe be hashed out in a separate meta question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nobody has come up with a way that [damage] adds any value, though, so I propose that it be burninated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-19T12:36:49.550" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7227" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-19T21:03:53.423" Score="2" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently collected together our various &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;-tagged meta questions in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, as inspired by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;network-wide FAQ&lt;/a&gt; on MSE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange#comment21895_7064&quot;&gt;this raises the question&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;strong&gt;How do we add new questions to the FAQ index?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;MSE FAQ&lt;/a&gt; has a section at the end defining the process MSE uses. We could adopt that wholesale, we could adopt it with modifications, or we could develop an in-house process — say, if RPG.se has needs it doesn't accommodate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How shall we manage &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;our FAQ&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-19T21:10:22.087" LastActivityDate="2017-06-21T20:11:01.020" Title="How shall we add to our FAQ index?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7227" CreationDate="2017-06-19T21:03:53.423" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should adopt &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;the process MSE's index uses&lt;/a&gt;. That formalises our current process, basically, in which anyone can ask a question, and a combination of community activity and mods judging the proposed FAQ to be mature results in it being tagged with the mod-only &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag. It would just be a clearer and cleaner set of instructions for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd propose adding this text to the end of our FAQ index:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;How can a question be added to this FAQ?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask only the question, stated plainly and simply, in the question body.&#xA;  The answer goes in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Link back&lt;/strong&gt; to this index. Paste this at the end of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Return to FAQ index](/q/7064)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tag as &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/support&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;support&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;support&lt;/a&gt;.  When a post seems&#xA;  to have hit a mature state, it will have &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; added by a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Flag for a moderator to mark &lt;strong&gt;community wiki&lt;/strong&gt;.  Any FAQ post not yet&#xA;  community wiki should be made into a community wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;After the post has the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag added to it, add a link in the above &lt;a href=&quot;/q/7064&quot;&gt;table of contents&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This has minor modifications from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/faq-for-stack-exchange-sites&quot;&gt;the original&lt;/a&gt;, just making the tag names and index links match our site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A minor con&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one con for this is that, over time, we'd want to rework our existing FAQs to follow the instructions to make the meta Q be just a plainly-stated question and leave the answering for the answer posts. Our current FAQs are all over the place in terms of their structure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reworking them is something that I think would be a somewhat low priority though, and wouldn't meaningfully impair the value of the set of FAQs as a whole (after all, they work now), or impede using this process for future potential FAQs. It's something we could work on over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-21T20:11:01.020" LastActivityDate="2017-06-21T20:11:01.020" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7227" CreationDate="2017-06-19T22:53:41.923" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not Needed&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On meta.SE maybe it's necessary, but here we have only 32 &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; questions easily reviewed by checking the faq tag. And the rate of new FAQs reduces over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe in not adding more process or work where there's not a compelling need for it so that we can keep our structure here lean.  Every extra special process, every extra post we need to curate, is a necessary evil that needs to more than justify itself in terms of what it fixes or empowers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And FAQs should be lean themselves - we don't want a run on &quot;hypothetically asked questions,&quot; we only want things that really are frequently asked and causing  user confusion, and we've been filling those rare gaps in fine. The current informal process of anyone puts on a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; to something that they think qualifies, and if there's consensus and interest in our judgement, it gets the [faq] tag is working perfectly and is low overhead. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So just say no to the Deep State (tm)!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-19T22:56:15.830" LastActivityDate="2017-06-19T22:56:15.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7224" CreationDate="2017-06-20T00:21:21.143" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, you have not demonstrated that there is a problem.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The [damage] tag has 184 uses. Can you please illustrate how it has been misused?  There is a distinct lack of evidence in the OP that the tag is not useful.  As with the RAW tag, How About Some Evidence?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Show Me.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using &quot;how do you feel?&quot; as a criterion is inconsistent with objective based answers and issues, and thus inconsistent with Anything.SE.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As they say in Missouri: Show me.  Where's the evidence?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The &quot;I feel&quot; approach got us that lovely bun fight about game rec and RAW. Please understand that my lack of enthusiasm is colored by that experience.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-06-21T14:28:03.567" LastActivityDate="2017-06-21T14:28:03.567" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7231" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-20T12:54:15.613" Score="2" ViewCount="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-miniatures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-miniatures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-miniatures&lt;/a&gt; tag on main site which has 8 questions and no tag wiki, and I'm not sure what to add for one, nor what this tag gets used for exactly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There seems to be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons_Miniatures_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D Miniatures game&lt;/a&gt; that was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94/what-is-the-difference-between-dd-and-dd-miniatures&quot;&gt;unrelated to other D&amp;amp;D games&lt;/a&gt;, but it was discontinuned in 2011&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wizards of the Coast also sells &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/miniatures&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D-branded miniatures&lt;/a&gt; which I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; don't have any accessory game, and are just intended for use in D&amp;amp;D 5e, but I'm out of the loop on this stuff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It also gets used for things which I think are disconnected from those entirely, such as questions just asking about miniatures for D&amp;amp;D. These might be better off using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/miniatures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;miniatures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;miniatures&lt;/a&gt; or some other tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's this tag actually for? How should we wiki-ify it, and how should we revise its usage if necessary?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-22T20:44:35.137" LastActivityDate="2017-06-22T20:44:35.137" Title="What is the [dnd-miniatures] tag for, and can we give it a tag wiki / revise its usage?" Tags="|discussion|support|status-completed|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7231" CreationDate="2017-06-20T12:54:15.613" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's what I think is the case. Questions using this tag are covering one of these categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about the D&amp;amp;D miniatures game, and we should rename the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-miniatures-game&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-miniatures-game&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-miniatures-game&lt;/a&gt; to make it clearer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4971/what-does-the-symbol-on-the-bottom-of-a-wotc-miniature-mean&quot;&gt;What does the symbol on the bottom of a WotC miniature mean?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8174/pre-painted-miniatures-for-dd-other-than-from-wizards&quot;&gt;Pre-painted Miniatures for D&amp;amp;D other than from Wizards&lt;/a&gt; (also probably a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; that we'd close)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94/what-is-the-difference-between-dd-and-dd-miniatures&quot;&gt;What is the difference between D&amp;amp;D and D&amp;amp;D Miniatures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55298/are-stats-from-dd-miniatures-compatible-with-dd-4e&quot;&gt;Are stats from D&amp;amp;D Miniatures compatible with D&amp;amp;D 4e?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1959/are-dd-miniatures-compatible-with-dd-heroscape&quot;&gt;Are D&amp;amp;D Miniatures compatible with D&amp;amp;D HeroScape?&lt;/a&gt; seems to be comparing the D&amp;amp;D Miniatures game to &lt;a href=&quot;http://heroscape.wikia.com/wiki/Heroscape&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Heroscape&lt;/a&gt;, and I'm not sure what that is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Totally unrelated, should just have the tag dropped:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14780/configurations-for-dd-dungeon-tiles&quot;&gt;Configurations for D&amp;amp;D dungeon tiles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/miniatures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;miniatures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;miniatures&lt;/a&gt;, I think:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19681/what-is-a-good-way-to-get-a-large-range-of-fantasy-miniatures&quot;&gt;What is a good way to get a large range of fantasy miniatures?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35504/good-miniature-for-a-dancing-weapon&quot;&gt;Good Miniature for a Dancing Weapon&lt;/a&gt; (also, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; again)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-06-20T12:54:15.613" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7224" CreationDate="2017-06-20T13:36:46.830" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should not remove either of these, because they're pretty par for the course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On RPG questions, once you get beyond the game system, you start tagging with the thing you're fretting about.  Maybe it's attack and damage.  Maybe it's feats or skills, or a class.  None of these things are really things you can be an expert in &quot;across all games&quot; but that's not the bar - the question is, can you be an expert in - or be interested in following- questions about D&amp;amp;D 3.5e feats?  Or attacking in 5e?  Yes you can, and people are.  I suspect the AnyDice Attack Squad would be interested in attack and damage questions for example, so they get to do those lovely DPS graphs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If these aren't legit tags, which describe large and common parts of many rulesets, then we only have about 10 legit tags on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-06-20T17:19:28.813" LastActivityDate="2017-06-20T17:19:28.813" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7234" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-20T20:55:53.680" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;For sheer absurd argumentation, I doubt anything will ever top the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/17144/4563&quot;&gt;dragonwrought kobold: true dragon? controversy&lt;/a&gt;, which I have tried to document. Covering the minutiae of at least three books as well as getting extremely technical about the rules regarding each one’s precedence (and no small amount of intense arguments over semantics in the English language), the controversy is actually quite a bit larger than even the two answers I have offered here. The two answers I wrote up are but two of many arguments made for or against the kobolds’ status as true dragons, the two I personally found most compelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-06-20T20:55:53.680" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7235" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7236" CreationDate="2017-06-21T13:26:49.457" Score="14" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101984/what-could-an-npc-use-to-keep-pcs-from-noticing-something&quot;&gt;how to hide something from PCs&lt;/a&gt;. It got closed as too broad, which I can kinda see, but I got an answer before it was suspended that gave me exactly the information I was looking for. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What am I supposed to do now? Editing it to make it less broad might invalidate the answer I got that I liked, and from my perspective, I'm all set. My use-case is pretty specific and I'm not sure the question would be of much help to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to delete since I like that answer and would like to let them keep the rep boost as thanks, but keeping the question up as &quot;on hold&quot; seems to be the wrong move.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a procedure for this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-21T14:10:14.353" LastActivityDate="2017-06-21T14:10:14.353" Title="Question flagged as too broad, but I got an answer I liked... what now?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|etiquette|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7236" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7235" CreationDate="2017-06-21T13:52:49.470" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can just leave it as-is. If you have more specific questions to ask, you can follow those up via posting new questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't want to delete since I like that answer and would like to let them keep the rep boost as thanks, but keeping the question up as &quot;on hold&quot; seems to be the wrong move.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's actually OK to leave it on hold if you're not sure what you'd do with it to make it appropriate for the site. You won't get in trouble. We'll keep the question around as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might seem odd from an initial sniff test because this &lt;em&gt;superficially&lt;/em&gt; resembles a pattern we don't like: person drives by with low quality question, gets answer, question's closed, that person leaves with a &amp;ldquo;ha-haaa, suckers, i got all i need, peace out losers.&amp;rdquo;   However we don't like that pattern specifically because it's parasitic and the user's acting in bad faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're engaging with us in good faith, and actively working to do the best you can for the site and community, and that's admirable. Categorically this is not one of those bad situations. You're just not really sure what to do with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All's OK here, you can leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-21T14:09:33.160" LastActivityDate="2017-06-21T14:09:33.160" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7237" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-21T21:56:26.773" Score="9" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102000/23970&quot;&gt;Combat without dice/with minimal dice&lt;/a&gt; strikes me as, fundamentally, a desirable question.* I know I'd like to see answers to it! But I wonder if it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66377/311001&quot;&gt;an XY problem&lt;/a&gt;. OP seems to have a simply-identifiable problem: &quot;We like playing 5e in lots of ways, but would like less rolling in combat.&quot; And &lt;em&gt;they've&lt;/em&gt; identified using the DMG's &quot;minimal dice&quot; guidance as their route to take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we be advising this user that they should simply pose their problem, and trust that &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; &quot;use the DMG's 'minimal dice' guidance, here's how I did it&quot; is a good answer, it'll come?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - It looks like we don't have a good, canonical question on making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=%5bdnd-5e%5d%20%5bcombat%5d%20is%3aquestion&quot;&gt;5e combat&lt;/a&gt; less of a grind, believe it or not.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-06-21T23:14:00.673" LastActivityDate="2017-06-26T06:17:15.967" Title="Does &quot;combat without dice&quot; suffer from an XY problem?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7237" CreationDate="2017-06-22T02:22:49.930" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, it does&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that the reason the DMG optional rule is mentioned as the solution is to legitimize the question, so that it wouldn't become an opinion-based Q. While it does the job, it now falls into the XY question category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could be improved by citing the DMG optional rule as a precedent, or one of the options they would consider acceptable. If a different solution exists, and since it seems they are open to house rules or homebrew to remove dice from their game, then that solution should not be a frame challenge but instead a valid answer to their Q.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-06-22T02:22:49.930" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-22T18:05:27.903" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/98027/22566&quot;&gt;Activating an Immovable Rod at a distance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is self professed cheese to address that most desirous of props, the Immovable Rod, and its activation &quot;at a distance.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I can only add cheesy ideas where if I were DM, I'd have a hard time allowing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While not a serving of camembert, Velveeta&lt;sup&gt;TM&lt;/sup&gt; is good for hot queso dip during football season.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-13T12:33:39.120" LastActivityDate="2020-02-13T12:33:39.120" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-22T18:14:10.373" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99704/is-there-a-limit-to-the-number-of-unseen-servants-i-can-have/99705#99705&quot;&gt;Is there a limit to the number of Unseen Servants I can have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is Unseen Servant use and abuse cheese, is it silly fun, or is it both?  We find yet another tasty Ementhal &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/99705/22566&quot;&gt;here in the asking of how many Unseen Servants can one have active at a time&lt;/a&gt;, with the linked answer being 600, made particularly pleasing by the additional flavor in the comment under the answer: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;600 Unseen Servants is incredibly impractical, unless... Cantrip: Minor Illusion. Issue a bonus action: &quot;carry a kitchen utensil and make it dance around me.&quot; After 10 minutes, you can recreate &quot;Be our guest&quot; :)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @markovchain May 12 at 3:11&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:01:05.273" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:01:05.273" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-23T09:20:21.707" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102108/how-do-you-efficently-create-the-biggest-demiplane&quot;&gt;How do you efficently create the biggest demiplane?&lt;/a&gt;: A Pathfinder spellcaster is having trouble with the itty-bitty living space which their phenomenal cosmic powers are limited to creating. The &lt;em&gt;create demiplane&lt;/em&gt; spell just doesn't create a demiplane big enough! The Dark Wanderer replies by helping them understand how to make a killing on the real estate market to get the generously large space they need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This cheese is probably made out of molten lead; don't try it at home.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-06-23T09:20:21.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7242" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-23T12:04:20.560" Score="4" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no official sandbox for RPGSE, so I'm hoping it's cool to get my question refined here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I run a homebrewed D&amp;amp;D 5e campaign for two players. We're fairly heavily into the roleplay side of the game and really enjoy all the storytelling aspects. This is my first time DMing so we've tried a couple different things along the way to see what we do/don't like. We tried a dungeon crawl and were not a fan at all (too grindy, limited chance for story, combat got too repetitive) and I've been haunted by the dungeon combat feel ever since. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question that basically boils down to &lt;strong&gt;how can I make combat more interesting for my players&lt;/strong&gt;, but with the understanding that I'm looking for ways to make it interesting from a roleplay perspective. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a good question? Is there some way I can refine it? As it stands I'm worried it'll get closed as too broad, subjective, or potentially a dupe if I don't explain myself well enough. There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/35673/how-can-i-use-improvised-consequences-to-make-combat-more-interesting&quot;&gt;plenty&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69528/how-to-make-combat-more-tactically-interesting-for-me-as-a-dm&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; about making combat more mechanically interesting, but I didn't find one about storytelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My ideal output is suggestions on both how to design a better encounter to give my players more options, and also possibly things I can be thinking about to keep my monster movements/choices more interesting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Edited to add:&lt;/em&gt; Stepped away and came back, and I'm now wondering if the above &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; too broad, if I can instead try something like &quot;How to show (not tell) my players that roleplay is always an option, even in combat&quot;. Ie, how to introduce roleplay elements naturally from my side to teach them that they too can choose to roleplay instead of just whacking it with a stick until it goes away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-06-27T14:36:50.650" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T11:13:33.260" Title="Would this question about combat be closed as too broad or subjective?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2017-06-23T13:53:53.237" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;As requested, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14505/4563&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5 edition of the fastest character&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notable for the inclusion of not one but &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; “theoretical-optimization” builds and world-record holders (for highest speed and highest Diplomacy check, respectively).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/14506/4563&quot;&gt;Chuck E. Cheese&lt;/a&gt;, can break (by a significant margin) the &lt;em&gt;speed of light&lt;/em&gt;. Chuck E. Cheese is the only TO build I am aware of to have been directly targeted by errata (though whether or not the errata was successful in dismantling Chuck is debatable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second, known as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/27093/4563&quot;&gt;Jumplomancer&lt;/a&gt;, achieves significantly lower speeds, since it accepts the errata on &lt;em&gt;footsteps of the divine&lt;/em&gt; as preventing Chuck’s trick. However, it also works in the exemplar prestige class, which focuses solely on one chosen skill—in the Jumplomancer’s case, that skill is Jump. Because, you see, you gain a +4 bonus to Jump for every 10 feet faster you are. And even though he doesn’t break the speed of light, the Jumplomancer is still quite hypersonic, so that’s a big bonus (five digits’ worth). And the exemplar can use his chosen skill to make a Diplomacy check, so that means everyone who sees the jump instantly becomes a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#diplomacy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;fan&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-06-23T13:53:53.237" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7244" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7245" CreationDate="2017-06-23T16:11:30.200" Score="0" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have posted a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102136/do-the-rules-imply-i-am-a-perception-savant?noredirect=1#102141&quot;&gt;reasonable Q&lt;/a&gt;, in my opinion: one that presents a line of reasoning, backed by rules, and asks for validation. However, I would like it to be removed. It's currently on hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for removal is, I'm not willing to improve this Q to the standards of the Stack. As I have said above, I believe it is already reasonable. I am not willing to adjust to a discrepancy between me and the Stack in terms of question asking &lt;em&gt;for this particular case&lt;/em&gt;, because I'm already aware of the uphill climb that particular resistance and refining is going to take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In its current form, it is what the Stack considers to be low quality. Given the Q is on hold as opinion-based, the two answers that have been given must not be factually based but rather are simply opinions. Currently, they have a low upvote score (3 on one, 1 on the other).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a prime candidate for deletion, so, my Q here is simply, may the linked Q be deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-06-24T00:54:43.340" LastActivityDate="2017-06-24T16:39:53.043" Title="Deletion of a Q" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|specific-question|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7244" CreationDate="2017-06-23T16:19:36.510" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure, I've deleted it. Enjoy.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind that we don't always delete questions at the OP's request - there's a reason the system doesn't allow that after there's upvoted answers. Maybe you've given up on a question but it's not yours any more, it's the community's. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, in this case, it was still closed and highly downvoted, and there were only 2 low voted answers both of which were basically opinion, so IMO it fit the &quot;OK to delete&quot; criteria. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note another recent question that requested deletion didn't get deleted - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102049/how-will-this-much-gp-impact-our-game&quot;&gt;How will this much GP impact our game?&lt;/a&gt; - because even though it's closed it has a lot more upvoted, activity, and an accepted answer.  So just in case you're wondering what the line is for us to accept a self-delete request, it's somewhere between those two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-06-24T16:39:53.043" LastActivityDate="2017-06-24T16:39:53.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7246" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-23T23:44:57.990" Score="4" ViewCount="99" Body="&lt;p&gt;At first the questioner asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102091/can-you-use-uncanny-dodge-against-extra-damage-effects&quot;&gt;Can you use Uncanny Dodge against extra damage effects?&lt;/a&gt;, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/102093/29639&quot;&gt;first answer&lt;/a&gt; does not answer the question to the questioners full satisfaction, so he asked for a specific case (which he should have included in the question, but is passively included by asking for &quot;extra damage effects&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user and the answerer mentioned, that he should ask this question with the additional details in a different question, which he did by asking this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102096/does-uncanny-dodge-halve-poison-damage&quot;&gt;Does Uncanny Dodge halve poison damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that question got closed as a duplicate because it is really the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Luckily there was a user which could post a useful answer including the specific case mentioned by the questioner. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I suggest merging the two questions, because they are about the same issue, but some users might not agree on the definition of &lt;em&gt;extra damage effects&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29639" LastEditorUserId="29639" LastEditDate="2017-06-23T23:58:12.093" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T03:16:15.430" Title="Should those two questions about uncanny dodge be merged?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7247" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-24T16:24:44.370" Score="1" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agreed with SevenSidedDie's Argument, that the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102177/what-does-thieves-cant-sound-like&quot;&gt;What does thieves&amp;#39; cant sound like?&lt;/a&gt; is off-topic because it asks for the sound of an existing language/slang and thus belongs to another SE and I voted to close it (as off-topic).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I clearly disagreed with the reason that it is opinion-based (because it is a real thing). Now when you look at it, it displays my name as I would have voted for it being opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I do not see it that harsh, I would say that it is basically misquoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I ask for a system, where the close system waits for 5 close votes for the same reason, or which shows clearly when some user closed it because of a different reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29639" LastEditorUserId="29639" LastEditDate="2017-06-27T02:41:46.003" LastActivityDate="2017-06-27T02:41:46.003" Title="Differentiate between close reasons in terms of required votes when displaying close-voters" Tags="|feature-request|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7237" CreationDate="2017-06-26T06:17:15.967" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I believe analyzing the consequences of 'canon' optional rules certainly has its place, it may really not be what this asker is after. Still a legitimate question in its own right though (even the Original version).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastActivityDate="2017-06-26T06:17:15.967" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7249" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7282" CreationDate="2017-06-26T21:47:46.283" Score="6" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a cavalier attitude to closing questions and deleting comments. As a newcomer to the site, it's off-putting. I would like to see a change in the core moderation philosophy here. I want the rules to be enforced on posts or comments that are causing a problem, not enforced through some holy doctrine of respecting &quot;&lt;strong&gt;THE RULES&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102289/why-is-the-basilisk-s-cr-so-low&quot;&gt;Why is the Basilisk’s CR so low?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's closed purely on a semantics. The original poster didn't put his question into precisely the right form, so it gets closed. The questions is clear, clearly answerable (and indeed answered), so why should it be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's closed because the OP didn't speak in the correct words. To me, it seems like it was not a good reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that this comment may not be well received, so please take it as it's intended, an impression from the perspective of an outsider who wants to participate in this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11376" LastEditorUserId="11376" LastEditDate="2017-06-27T00:07:20.387" LastActivityDate="2017-07-06T01:49:11.407" Title="This site is too heavily moderated" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7249" CreationDate="2017-06-26T23:38:41.130" Score="12" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's closed purely on a semantics. The &quot;querent&quot; (ugh that word) didn't put his question into precisely the right form, so it gets closed. The questions is clear, clearly answerable (and indeed answered), so why should it be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s closed as primarily opinion based. The comments explain this. It looks like a discussion starter to me &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;and we avoid those&lt;/a&gt;. There’s a few different things they could potentially be after, so we’d like to seek some clarification before more answers arrive &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change&quot;&gt;so that we don’t have a mess to clean up&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed an hour ago. If the author works with us, it’ll probably be clarified and reopened pretty quickly again. If the community at large doesn’t think it was actually primarily opinion-based at all, we’ll have 5 reopen votes in not too long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You’re clearly alarmed by this so I imagine you’re not used to stuff like this occurring on other Stack sites you’re a member of. This is pretty ordinary for us, doesn’t cause major problems, works out to the benefit of everyone (including the question owner), and saves us trouble down the line. Stick around a bit longer and you can see how it shakes out. Our activity level lets us handle situations like this fairly well, and we can do things more busy sites cannot. I see you’re a member of Stack Overflow; brace for things to be different here. You might see other alarming stuff but we’ll be genuinely interested in helping explain what’s going on and why we’re doing it &amp;mdash; or in taking action on it if it alarms us too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to be well received then a major part of that is just being polite and respectful with us. We also want the site to work well, just like you might. We are willing to engage constructively, respectfully and in good faith with you on improving it when there’s major problems occurring because we want to avoid them, but only if you approach us similarly. Flippant or rude behaviour will have community members withdraw their goodwill and tempt them to respond in kind, and it will prompt them to send a clear signal of a post being not OK via downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You guys need to chill with closing questions and deleting comments. As a newcomer to the site, it's off-putting. I would like to see a change in the core moderation philosophy here. I want the rules to be enforced on posts or comments that are causing a problem, not enforced through some holy doctrine of respecting &quot;THE RULES&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This paragraph seems to complain that we enforce our rules, but that’s not really a legitimate complaint we can handle. We have those rules because we have experience with certain problems erupting, and find that handling things this way prevents those problems erupting in the first place. Yeah, we respect and enforce the rules, what else would we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, we may handle things differently from other stacks &amp;mdash; each one moderates differently &amp;mdash; but we do this stuff because we find it’s necessary to keep our site working smoothly, and we’re not really interested in just stopping keeping the site working smoothly. It does alarm and discomfort people at times, but that’s part of the learning curve of figuring out how a stack site works. We want to help people up that learning curve, and we can't just stop enforcing our rules for comfort's sake. People genuinely uncomfortable with our site’s requirements are welcome anywhere else; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;we even actively curate a list of other RPG communities&lt;/a&gt; that we direct people to when we can’t handle their content appropriately (e.g. they’re looking for a discussion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there’s some legitimate issue our rules are causing, please highlight the actual problem occurring with evidence. Right now, we’re just doing standard stuff that doesn’t really cause trouble. Wait a couple of days and the question will be open again if the asker cares to interact with us at all. We can’t action “how dare you close a question”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-26T23:50:27.423" LastActivityDate="2017-06-26T23:50:27.423" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7246" CreationDate="2017-06-27T02:42:17.027" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;In its strictest sense, &quot;duplicate&quot; means &quot;exactly like something else&quot;, however, that would mean that a question needs to be a verbatim copy to qualify. The way it is used on all se sites is &quot;this question is trying to solve the same problem as that question and if the OP reads that question and its answers they will have their answer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I would be very reluctant to merge duplicate questions for several reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The structure of the site specifically (and reasonably elegantly) handles duplicate questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP is looking for an answer to their question and will return to that question to find it - they can then follow the link but not if the OP is no longer there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The way different OPs pose duplicate questions may stimulate different, possible better, answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Future searches for a similar problem are more likely to find one of the posts if there are more than one out there. This is particularly relevant to the two questions you link because a Google search for &quot;uncanny dodge poison&quot; finds the latter but not the former.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Merging questions moves all answers to the primary question - if they are near duplicates then this is fine, if not then some of the merged answers may become nonsense. Also particularly relevant here: the duplicate question deals with poison damage and so do the answers - if they were moved to the original question which is about secondary damage these answers make a lot less sense.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2017-06-28T03:16:15.430" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T03:16:15.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7242" CreationDate="2017-06-27T02:59:03.227" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have an idea for an answer to this question, however, that, of itself, does not make the question not too broad or not too opinion based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid this you need to focus the question. You need to be very clear in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what the problem is that the home brew is trying to solve, &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what, within the rules or as home brew, you have tried (or thought of trying) and why this was inadequate,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what a solution would look like in general terms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These sorts of things help answerers narrow their focus (minimizing &quot;too broad&quot;) and direct their attention (minimizing &quot;opinion based&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, are you looking for ways to avoid combat altogether, for role-play to occur during combat (and, if so, will it have a mechanical effect), for combat to transition to and from combat etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also avoid non-specific phrasing like &quot;more interesting&quot; - I find solving differential equations interesting but for some reason this is not considered interesting by some people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, you are trying to make a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3206/what-questions-are-subjective-and-what-does-good-subjective-bad-subjective&quot;&gt;good subjective&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-06-27T02:59:03.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7253" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-27T09:05:33.963" Score="18" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question about a spell in Deadland Reloaded.&#xA;But I'm french and every book I have about it are in french. I have hard time find the english translation of many point. Making it hard to ask about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I actually have a question about a skill that allow a mad scientist to craft one object once per day. It has any spell in it and half of his mana point. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an exemple for a more genereral issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to ask about a skill/spell you do not know the name?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me the choice are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Making global description of the thing I can't name.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Let some blank or &lt;code&gt;[X]&lt;/code&gt; in the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Making a poor&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; question about &quot;what is the name of the spell that&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Directly asking for help in comment, in question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr/&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;*, By my standart&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33079" LastEditorUserId="33079" LastEditDate="2017-06-27T09:17:16.990" LastActivityDate="2017-07-01T22:20:46.433" Title="How to ask a question when you don't know the english name and references of a spell?" Tags="|discussion|questions|language|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7253" CreationDate="2017-06-27T11:45:30.413" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask on the chat for the English name, then you can post your question with the correct terms. That's usually what I do when I have questions that are, or so I think, too precise to be used by someone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can't access the chat or if nobody is able to help you there, make a question about the English name. It may be poor quality in your standards but it is a valid question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastActivityDate="2017-06-27T11:45:30.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7255" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-27T18:49:29.527" Score="7" ViewCount="253" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102341/dm-is-playing-mind-games-with-us&quot;&gt;DM is playing mind games with us!&lt;/a&gt; under impulse, focusing on sharing concerns and not on overall quality. So varied answers and some comments made me think it's almost too opinion based or &quot;not a question&quot;. Additionally hasty translation provided early misunderstandings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to ask this question anew, but my primary trouble is &quot;I &lt;em&gt;feel&lt;/em&gt; the game is unfair&quot;, even though the problem is real. And because of &lt;em&gt;feeling&lt;/em&gt; I can't objectively describe how exactly it is wrong without sounding ridiculous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see couple ways to go on from there. I could:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave question as is and accept an answer in couple days that seems most relevant.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer the question myself based on all existing answers, which will seem out of place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Redo the question from scratch, leaving answers bit inadequate&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dwell on examples, hopefully explaining situation in detail enough to get on my train of thoughts.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Emphasize the &lt;em&gt;feeling&lt;/em&gt; like in previous paragraph, which imo will result in closing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a new poster, but not a new visitant. How should I proceed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36848" LastEditorUserId="45" LastEditDate="2017-07-04T21:50:03.893" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T21:50:03.893" Title="Refining &quot;DM is playing mind games with us!&quot;" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7255" CreationDate="2017-06-27T19:11:35.320" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question is &quot;why is what the DM is doing wrong, and how do I approach talking to him about it&quot;, yes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, I suggest breaking the question apart into 2 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is my DM wrong to answer these questions like this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How should I talk to him about my concerns?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tenor of the second question is dramatically affected by you and the community having come to an agreement about the first question, and it is quite difficult to discuss the second question while the first one is left without a consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you broke the question up like that, I'd only have to copy-paste my own answer from the original question to answer both of them, so from my perspective, it won't change anything for me unless you were able to dramatically change the information presented relative to the first question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastEditorUserId="35386" LastEditDate="2017-07-04T04:16:36.090" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T04:16:36.090" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7257" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-27T19:47:28.230" Score="1" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;There have been a few times that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/102365/23024&quot;&gt;answers&lt;/a&gt; have come up with an interesting twist of the rules. They are neither RAI or RAW, but instead a novel way to use something that's cool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the stack voting accommodate for those answers (with either up or downvotes) or should we try and avoid BASING answers on RAF and just include them as addendums to an RAI/RAW answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T21:55:37.387" Title="How should we incorporate Rules As Fun (RAF) into answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7257" CreationDate="2017-06-27T19:52:25.260" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nope. RAF will &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; be a GM prerogative-based choice. Even mentioning GM prerogative in an answer is kind of silly - the GM &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; has prerogative, even in systems that explicitly deny it or systems that don't explicitly grant it. Trying to use it as a justification is putting the cart before the horse. Answers should focus on providing the justification a GM could use to explain an interpretation or ruling, not as the &lt;em&gt;substance&lt;/em&gt; of the ruling itself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22138" LastEditorUserId="22138" LastEditDate="2017-06-28T19:20:18.617" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T19:20:18.617" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7257" CreationDate="2017-06-27T22:26:49.360" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't really have — or want — more than our basic rules about how to answer. The only rules we have are &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; basic: it has to be an answer rather than discussion or gibberish, and it has to be at least somewhat on topic for the question. Any more rules layered on top would just be undermining the role that we've given to voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(We've tried adding rules on top for a few question types in the past, and it has invariably gone badly, with the system helping us to enforce them not at all. Overall it's better to not try to get in the way of voting taking care of answer quality.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we really shouldn't have &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt; about whether Rules As Fun / Rule Of Cool is okay or not in answers, or how such answers should be specially handled or written. It likely won't help, and may well make the site work &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, I think we should do what we do best: vote our conscience on each answer on its own special merits and fittingness for the question. Good RAF answers would get voted up and bad ones voted down, and middling ones would float about in the middle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-28T06:07:13.820" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T06:07:13.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7255" CreationDate="2017-06-27T23:19:26.267" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, once a question has answers we don't like to change it drastically, or the existing answers and upvotes won't really make much sense. Your question and several answers have received many upvotes, so if it's not satisfactory to you then I would not accept an answer or accept a close enough answer and try to post a new, more refined question. In this case, based in part on the answers you received, I think the question you are trying to get at is something closer to &quot;My preferred play style seems to be very different from the rest of the group, and I am feeling very frustrated. What is the best way to proceed?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20973" LastActivityDate="2017-06-27T23:19:26.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7262" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7263" CreationDate="2017-06-28T11:36:58.717" Score="1" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often questions are closed/set on hold with the reason that it is unclear what is asked. In almost all of those cases I come across I'm more or less certain that's not the real reason because it is too obvious what's being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;put on hold as unclear what you're asking by moderator x min ago &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to&#xA;  highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard&#xA;  to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help&#xA;  clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the&#xA;  rules in the help center, please edit the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question doesn't fit the rules that's something else entirely as it being unclear what's being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me it is often very much unclear what is asked of the one who asked the question. Other closure reasons like too broad or too subjective tend to be more helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefor I want to know if it is possible to make this closure reason more clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102417/alignments-subjective-or-objective-intent-or-outcome#102417&quot;&gt;example&lt;/a&gt; I wanted to give was reopened after a system tag was added. I would never have guessed that would be a solution - hence it's unclear, at least for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be more clear: I do not want to say the closures are unwarranted but it is often unclear what is unclear about the question. And for the one asking the question in the first place it would help a lot to be told more exactly what is unclear about the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And sometimes I feel this closure reason is used when a mod feels a question should be improved but all other closure reasons don't fit. But that makes it hard to improve the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96495/what-is-the-wizard-proficiency-for-the-spell-save-dc/96517#96517&quot;&gt;example&lt;/a&gt; the question was clearly not a good one but I still feel it is very clear what was being asked (that's why I answered it despite close votes). Being more clear with the question's problems would have been more encouraging for a potential new member.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31047" LastEditorUserId="31047" LastEditDate="2017-06-28T12:09:21.210" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T22:01:44.233" Title="Could we rework/reword the &quot;unclear what is asked&quot; closure reason?" Tags="|feature-request|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7262" CreationDate="2017-06-28T14:12:58.560" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The built-in close reason wordings are hardcoded and the same on every Stack in the network to ensure consistency in the basic SE rules. We don't have the ability to customise how the Unclear reason is worded. To change the wording, the Stack developers would have to change it on every Stack. To get it changed would require making a clear case on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta SE&lt;/a&gt; for a network-wide rewording and having it gain a lot of support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone does generally leave a message when the reason for a question being unclear isn't obvious, which did happen in the first case (with two users asking for the system to be clarified before and as it was closed). It seems like the closure happened as it was supposed to and was accompanied by sufficient guidance on what needed fixing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the latter example it looks like people just think how the question is unclear is sufficiently obvious that it requires no comment; either that, or its &lt;em&gt;so&lt;/em&gt; unclear that no-one knew what to even ask for to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-28T22:01:44.233" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T22:01:44.233" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7257" CreationDate="2017-06-28T21:55:37.387" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In the text of the answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If in writing an answer the recommendation solution includes a consideration such as using the RAF approach, this needs to be addressed in the text of the answer so that there is no misunderstanding about what is meant.  There need not be a global rule, tag, or site policy for this.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply write a concise and soundly reasoned answer. (Harder than it sounds, I suppose).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-06-28T21:55:37.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7265" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7266" CreationDate="2017-06-29T03:24:22.547" Score="5" ViewCount="216" Body="&lt;p&gt;A user recently flagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37204/23970&quot;&gt;How to represent an &amp;quot;Abhorsien,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;Speaker for the Dead,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Shepherd of Souls&amp;quot; type of theme?&lt;/a&gt; Their flag comment was &quot;should probably be historically locked.&quot; At first glance that last line makes it look suspiciously like a discussion prompt....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On closer read, though, it looks pretty firmly like a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/23970&quot;&gt;Type I charop question&lt;/a&gt; with a bit of polite-but-now-widely-regarded-as-unnecessary fluff for a last line. However, I don't know the system at all, so I'm reluctant to make the call either way without some experts' recommendation(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please, if you care to, make an argument below for whether this question is on- or off-topic. Further, if off-topic: is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/126587/311001&quot;&gt;historical lock&lt;/a&gt; really appropriate, or should it just be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-07-11T15:42:18.103" Title="Should this post be historically locked?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7266" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7265" CreationDate="2017-06-29T04:46:05.913" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions asking for appropriate ways to capture the concept of a character aren’t just on topic, they’re a major subject for the site and literally a large part of the &lt;em&gt;point&lt;/em&gt; of the site. It isn’t purely objective, clearly, but it’s very much something that we can have expertise in and use our expertise to judge others’ answers on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-06-29T04:46:05.913" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7267" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7272" CreationDate="2017-06-30T15:54:46.720" Score="11" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/77552/revisions&quot;&gt;very first question on this site&lt;/a&gt; was edited to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1346/should-questions-include-system-setting-in-title-if-tagged-with-system-setting&quot;&gt;remove the edition&lt;/a&gt; from the question title. OK, not a big deal either way, but I guess I can see how stylistically it's a little more polished to not have it. But, when trying to avoid that just now, d7 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/102575/revisions&quot;&gt;added it back in&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I'm sure there's a valid reason for both edits... but is there an agreed-upon standard that I'm missing here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-28T18:23:07.160" LastActivityDate="2022-02-28T18:23:07.160" Title="When does it make sense for a question title to specify the edition?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7267" CreationDate="2017-06-30T16:34:36.713" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1346/23970&quot;&gt;Should questions include System/Setting in title if tagged with system/setting?&lt;/a&gt; holds our current thinking on why it's preferable to omit system from titles. (And I include a link to that meta in the &quot;edit summary&quot; whenever I peel a system off of someone's post, and encourage you, Dear Reader, to do the same.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your question: when &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; the system/edition be in the title?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've only needed to do that when it's &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; cumbersome/confusing to write a title that &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; have the system in the title. For example, say I wish to ask &quot;Can I backstab a creature with no back?&quot; in D&amp;amp;D2e. But we've already got &quot;Can I backstab a creature with no back?&quot; for 1e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could rewrite my title to say &quot;Can I backstab a creature that lacks the named anatomy?&quot; Or &quot;My target has no back, can I still backstab it?&quot; Or &quot;Can I &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; backstab a creature with no back?&quot; to avoid the title-crash. But in my opinion, this is where &quot;Can I backstab a creature with no back in 2e?&quot; makes fine sense as a title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other use I've seen (though I don't think I've had occasion to use) is when asking a question that really is about the &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt;. &quot;Why does $SYSTEM use only d12s?&quot; or &quot;Why did $SYSTEM2 drop $THING_I_LOVE from $SYSTEM1?&quot; Clearly, in those cases omitting system would lead to inferior titles: &quot;Why only d12s?&quot; or &quot;Why drop $THING_I_LOVE?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-06-30T16:34:36.713" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7269" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-06-30T16:41:32.413" Score="3" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;So Pinnacle Entertainment Group, the company behind Savage Worlds have forums that ordinarily house official answers and clarifications to rules written by Clint Black. These are generally regarded by the Savage Worlds community as RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for what seems like many months now the forums have been down. There is a progress message when you try to access them indicating they trying to upgrade the forum, but that message is now over a month out of date, and there's no indication as to when the ongoing problems with them are going to be resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a problem on this site as a quite a few answers to questions about Savage Worlds directly link to official posts on the forums as evidence. Whilst the forum is down, these links are broken and useless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do we do here? Given there is no indication of when the problems with their forums are going to be resolved, is there an interim measure we can put in place? Something more permanent we should do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T23:07:28.723" Title="Ongoing issues with Pinnacle Entertainment Group's forums" Tags="|discussion|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7270" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7271" CreationDate="2017-06-30T16:49:31.347" Score="6" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Briefly&lt;/strong&gt;: Is it okay to ask for additional, possibly opinionated, answers to a question that I've already resolved?&#xA;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Less Brief:&lt;/strong&gt; I have a perfectly legitimate, self-resolved, solution to a problem however it would be interesting to know how others would solve it. The current struggle is that my solution is perfectly simple (i.e assign value elsewhere) but I feel like there should be a more creative way of doing it (i.e stand upside down while being tickled and throwing lawn darts at a target to assign the value). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is not completely dissimilar from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2960/whats-the-proper-way-to-ask-for-new-answers&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the proper way to ask for new answers?&lt;/a&gt; except for the fact that it is not &quot;time-sensitive&quot; in that  character creation methods tend not to change within a particular version/edition of a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36852" LastActivityDate="2017-06-30T17:49:46.053" Title="Is it okay to ask for additional possible answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7270" CreationDate="2017-06-30T17:19:01.167" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately no. That's precisely one of the types of questions our Help Centre says to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; ask&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For that kind of interaction, a Stack is poorly suited. On the plus side, forums (which are bad at things Stacks are good at, and good at things Stacks are bad at) are a good place to have that kind of discussion. (We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;a list of RPG discussion forums&lt;/a&gt; to help direct people when this kind of situation arises.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;However…&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, there is a related but different kind of question that you could ask instead, which might get the same end result while also serving the Stack's goals: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot;&gt;a self-answered question&lt;/a&gt;. Ask about the problem in clear, full detail, and then provide your own solution as an answer at the same time. This &lt;em&gt;allows&lt;/em&gt; others to provide competing solutions, without actually asking for a list of other ideas. It might not result in anything else (maybe your solution &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the best already!), but it might.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trick here is to avoid asking for a list of alternatives. Just present the problem to be solve, asked how to solve it, and let the normal Stack process work. Definitely avoid asking for more ideas or more creative alternatives — just let that happen naturally, if it's going to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Or, circling back to it, use a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;forum&lt;/a&gt;! That is sometimes cleaner and &lt;strong&gt;faster&lt;/strong&gt; than figuring out how to fit a question into the Stack format.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-06-30T17:49:46.053" LastActivityDate="2017-06-30T17:49:46.053" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7267" CreationDate="2017-06-30T17:40:39.490" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem with “modern” in that title is that it isn't clear what it means now, and isn't future-proof — twenty years from now that question will exist here or in a database of “RPG Knowledge” somewhere, and it won't make any sense. We write for posterity here, so questions should be evergreen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also &lt;em&gt;over&lt;/em&gt;correcting for the tag-in-title problem. Normally, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;avoid putting “tags” in titles&lt;/a&gt;, but that refers to specifically artificially adding tags to titles and writing things like “How do I frob the fibitzer? [The Dark Eye]” or “In Paranoia, how can I earn a higher clearance?”:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Should I use tags in titles?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should not &lt;em&gt;force&lt;/em&gt; a tag into your title. Because the tags appear below the question and tags are indexed by search engines along with the content of your question, you can trust that other people will be able to find your question based on tags they follow or search for. Additionally, tags appear on the question page, so other people will take them into account when answering your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Avoid&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; inserting tags into titles in any of the following formats:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;[tag]: [question title]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;[question title] -- [tag] [tag] [tag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;[question title] in [tag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;[tag] [tag] [question title] [tag] [tag] [tag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;[tag] [tag] [tag] [tag] [tag] [tag] [tag] [tag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The only time you should use tags in your title is when they are organic to the conversational tone of the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last sentence is important though! Things that match our tags do belong in the title when it's the most natural way to write the title. So in the case of your question, “Is there a modern equivalent of the e6 variant style?” is overcorrecting by avoiding even &lt;em&gt;mentioning&lt;/em&gt; the game system, rather than merely avoiding slapping tags into the title. “Is there a D&amp;amp;D 5e equivalent of the e6 variant style?” is organic and clear, and doesn't unnecessarily force a tag into the title — it naturally belongs there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To demonstrate by argument &lt;em&gt;ad absurdum&lt;/em&gt;, removing “D&amp;amp;D 5e” from the title by force is like removing “e6” (also a tag) from the title: forced and unnatural, and possibly resulting in something like “Is there a modern way to maintain the sweet spot of of power?”, which would be contorted, unclear in the question list, and nearly impossible to search for later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-06-30T17:40:39.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7253" CreationDate="2017-07-01T22:20:46.433" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just explain in your question.  Say something like &quot;I am asking about the skill which is referred to as 'pelear' in my Spanish copy of the D&amp;amp;D books (I am unable to find the correct English game term)&quot; etc etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-07-01T22:20:46.433" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7255" CreationDate="2017-07-02T07:14:50.827" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You need to show a problem that needs solving. The question was too much of a rant. I read that question twice asking myself &quot;where is the real question&quot;. So you need to take one aspect of the issue and dissect it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Stack questions, objectivity is king. Death to the author. Your opinion is worthless. Stick to the facts, and show us a problem that needs solving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your particular quesiton, you just sound salty. There is subjectivity &lt;em&gt;peppered&lt;/em&gt; everywhere (bolding mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;I'm just answering your questions&quot; he commented. &lt;strong&gt;(Oh, the irony)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And borderline paranoia...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In my opinion&lt;/strong&gt; (...) &lt;strong&gt;it was just another way to plant doubt in us.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;..that is not shared by the rest of the table:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In my opinion the game had pacing problem, &lt;strong&gt;but other players didn't think it was&lt;/strong&gt;. However, during one prolonged in-character group chat our DM spontaneously rolled his trusty Munchkin d10. Apparently, nothing happened, it was just another way to plant doubt in us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right at that point, a reader of your question can challenge that the problem is with you, not with the GM or the way the game is being run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then it becomes a problem of faith:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I can't really pinpoint how exactly that attitude is wrong, but &lt;strong&gt;it definitely is&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't go with your guts. Guts are unreliable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything you mention the GM doing can be attributed to a particular gamemastering style (of being cryptic and using riddles for everything).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, once again:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where is the objective, well defined problem that needs solving?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-04T00:06:43.740" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T00:06:43.740" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7276" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-02T14:56:55.767" Score="5" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed we have two tags which are pretty similar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag when asking about the target numbers rolls are trying to achieve, in systems which call them &amp;quot;difficulties.&amp;quot; (d20 System questions should be tagged [difficulty-class].)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;difficulty-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;difficulty-class&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag when asking about the target numbers rolls are trying to achieve, in systems which calls that the &amp;quot;difficulty class.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They seem to be basically the same concept, except that it instructs us to use a very slightly different name for systems which give that same fundamental concept a very slightly different name. I consider it noteworthy that the [difficulty] has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/difficulty+dnd-5e&quot;&gt;five questions tagged D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt; against instruction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we make these tags synonyms, or keep them separate (and maybe do some retagging)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-03T03:08:01.937" Title="Do we need both [difficulty] and [difficulty-class]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ClosedDate="2017-07-03T07:07:16.700" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7277" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7276" CreationDate="2017-07-02T23:47:57.020" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Depending on the game system, &quot;difficulty&quot; and &quot;difficulty-class&quot; may not be synonyms&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102633/22566&quot;&gt;DC/Difficulty Class is a thing&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5138/22566&quot;&gt;Some game systems use difficulty all by itself&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we should leave well enough alone. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-07-03T03:08:01.937" LastActivityDate="2017-07-03T03:08:01.937" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7278" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-04T07:18:22.483" Score="28" ViewCount="818" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday, in a bit of boredom, I wandered upon SEDE and wrote &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/edit/691337&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this query&lt;/a&gt; (since corrected by doppelgreener) to see just how dominant is the Dungeons and Dragons scene on this site, using the metric of total page views - one that I find provides a good estimate on each post's total impact. Here's the query data (made a bit more legible):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{r|r|l}&#xA;\text{D&amp;amp;D Views} &amp;amp; \text{Total Views} &amp;amp; \text{Percentage}&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;34{,}202{,}874 &amp;amp; 42{,}286{,}900 &amp;amp; 80.88290699\%&#xA;\\ &amp;amp; &amp;amp; (\approx 81\%)&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ratio of DnD question views to all question views was higher than I expected: a whopping 81% of our views are to DnD questions. This worries me a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, DnD has some really good reasons for being on the top. It's a very popular system, with several editions that are still actively being played, and each of those editions has its own, reasonably complex rule-set and lore for players to ask about. Answers also come quick and accurate, as DnD has a sizeable, active pool of experts who know the rules by heart.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the numbers have a grim side: system-agnostic questions and non-DnD system questions, &lt;em&gt;all of them&lt;/em&gt;, share only 19% of our total page views. That seems way too little - it's as if everything not DnD was niche here, and I fear good questions may be neglected or even be left unasked because of this. With this number in mind, I raise to you the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the page view count indicate a problem, in your opinion?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are we attracting enough quality content for non-DnD systems? If not, what should we do?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is the content accessible enough? Should posts pertaining to non-DnD systems be promoted somehow to improve visibility (and possibly attract more experts)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-16T04:50:42.537" LastActivityDate="2020-10-17T13:21:14.627" Title="Dungeons and Dragons is dominating the site in terms of page views" Tags="|discussion|game-systems|dungeons-and-dragons|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-04T11:02:29.717" Score="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think things are OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to offer an additional stat: we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder+or+dungeons-and-dragons+or+*dnd*&quot;&gt;16,002 D&amp;amp;D family questions&lt;/a&gt; (which &lt;strong&gt;includes Pathfinder&lt;/strong&gt;) out of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;22,167 total questions&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;72.2%&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; D&amp;amp;D family questions. (This means the view count is somewhat weighted toward D&amp;amp;D questions: they get an extra 8% share.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These view and question statistics are unsurprising to me. They are reflective of D&amp;amp;D's dominance in our hobby. They're also reflective of the fact D&amp;amp;D just has &lt;em&gt;so much content&lt;/em&gt; to ask questions about, and it's regularly confusing trying to put two pieces of content together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mentioned everything non-D&amp;amp;D seems sorta niche here: as a non-D&amp;amp;D player, I think that's sort of accurate for our whole hobby. In fact if you told me 20% of tables played games other than D&amp;amp;D, I'd be pleasantly surprised by that figure being so high!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On the potential for us being D&amp;amp;D.SE&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we're not in much danger here. The community is generally looking out for other games and are very thankfully expending effort to guard them from D&amp;amp;D centrism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Non-D&amp;amp;D views are at ~20%, and question proportions are at ~30%, which is awesome.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When people answer a non-D&amp;amp;D question with a D&amp;amp;D answer (as if every game is just like D&amp;amp;D) they get slammed pretty hard by voters and NAA/VLQ flags. Yay!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Our community is very mindful not to export D&amp;amp;D concepts across the site D&amp;amp;D-centrically. In metas like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5134/what-should-the-dc-tag-be-called&quot;&gt;What should the dc tag be called?&lt;/a&gt;, there was a decision to just let games be each to their own tagging-wise. SevenSidedDie called out that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5134/what-should-the-dc-tag-be-called#comment12535_5138&quot;&gt;exporting D&amp;amp;D verbiage to other games is probably D&amp;amp;D-centric&lt;/a&gt;, which I agree with.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People also avoid treating D&amp;amp;D as the default on things, and each gaming segment has plenty of room to define their own policy within RPG.SE's norms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-04T13:18:08.567" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T13:18:08.567" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7242" CreationDate="2017-07-04T11:13:33.260" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;You could make the question have a specific focus.  For example, if you are looking to spice up combat then take a specific part of combat that doesn't work and ask a specific question on that aspect; an actual example were rules could help you out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are looking for storytelling questions then yes, this would probably be closed as too &quot;opinion based&quot; - you might be better asking in a storytelling or worldbuilding forum.  Afterall everyone has a different take on GMing and we couldn't look up rules or rulings to help you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the meta, I don't think this is the right place to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32436" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T11:13:33.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7249" CreationDate="2017-07-04T14:08:31.343" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is the way the Stack runs&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand your frustrations, and I've been around for a much shorter period of time than the high rep Stackizens around here, so I haven't personally experienced the issues Doppelgreener alludes to in his answer. They are legitimate issues, and you can read through the Stack's history on policy by browsing the meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is nothing you can do about this. The one who must adjust is you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Stack is not friendly to question askers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack format &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt; is not welcoming to new users, so I am taking this for granted. The Stack, in general, is not user friendly. This is not the same as &quot;hostile,&quot; but it can seem unwelcoming to a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a forum, when you start a thread, that thread doesn't usually get closed for being chatty or opinion-based. Not so for the Stack, in general. When you open a new question, it has to meet certain standards or it gets closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my own meta question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7140/why-do-we-ask-for-the-body-of-the-question-to-demonstrate-the-tags-it-uses&quot;&gt;why we say information in the body of the question, when the tag already shows it&lt;/a&gt;, in the comments to an answer from Doppelgreener, I was shown this blog post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;Optimizing for Pearls, not Sand&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jeff Atwood (the designer of this site) mentions that the Stack is optimized for answerers, not question askers. We see this in this quote he chose to highlight:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Users intuit that answers are the real unit of work in any Q&amp;A; system and tend to favor answers in their voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And he says this explicitly here (emphasis not mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Perhaps you’ve noticed a theme here. Incoming questions are a universal constant, all around us in countless billions. But answers — truly brilliant, amazing, correct answers — are as rare as pearls. &lt;strong&gt;Thus, questions are merely the sand that produces the pearl&lt;/strong&gt;. If we have learned anything in the last three years, it is that &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;you optimize for pearls, not sand&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optimization for answerers is, of course, going to come at the cost of question askers. We see this in his final paragraph (emphasis not mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We feel that the world is awash in questions, but not answers. Answers are the real unit of work in any Q&amp;A; system. Therefore, the only logical thing to do is to &lt;strong&gt;maximize the happiness and enjoyment of answerers&lt;/strong&gt;. If this means aggressively downvoting or closing unworthy and uninteresting questions, so be it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a central design philosophy of the Stack, and in particular, RPG.SE upholds this philosophy very strictly. Questions which do not conform to the standards we set do not have a home here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(My own opinion is, this is not a good design philosophy; it is also factually incorrect for RPG.SE specifically. But I mention it here because it is central to your issue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;New Users tend to be most affected by this&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is put on hold, new users tend to see this as the rejection of their question rather than as an opportunity to improve the quality of the question. Indeed, being put on hold &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a rejection. The Q has not met the standards of the site, and now the asker is given some time to mull it over and improve it. Once it has been improved, it usually gets reopened quickly. The initial putting of the Q on hold, however, could cause new users to disengage altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also the chance that new users will tend to ask questions before they write answers, if they're also new to the system they're curious about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This combination: that new users tend to ask questions, and that questions put on hold are seen by the new users as rejections of their questions; means that the lack of user friendliness of the Stack in general, and RPG.SE in particular, will definitely hit new users the hardest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This is seen as a Good Thing&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a popular notion here: if you are not willing to adjust to the Stack, then you are better off not spending your time here, and the Stack is better off not seeing you spend your time here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The things you have to adjust for are all geared to create a good and orderly user experience for everyone -- at least, in theory:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Write high quality questions&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Write high quality answers&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Be nice and respectful to all&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't chat in comments&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tag questions appropriately&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So of course, if you (the hypothetical you) are not willing to adjust to these rules, you are most likely going to be a problematic user. This is not the place for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I do have a differing opinion, once again. But this is another key notion RPG.SE users accept, and it is relevant to your issue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On &quot;heavy handed&quot; moderation&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation of this Stack is done &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7021/what-do-moderators-do-here&quot;&gt;primarily by the non-moderators&lt;/a&gt;, so there are no fingers to point to when saying the quick question closing should be blamed on the mod team. However, questions &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; closed quickly, and sometimes the mod team takes the flak for it (especially because comments vanish quickly).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see people airing their frustrations in this heavily down-voted answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7029/27327&quot;&gt;calling for moderators to step down&lt;/a&gt;, this other answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7063/27327&quot;&gt;wishing for friendlier comments to new users while moderating&lt;/a&gt;, this answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6922/27327&quot;&gt;wishing we would not close questions right away&lt;/a&gt;, this answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6940/27327&quot;&gt;airing out how strict he/she perceives moderation by the mod team to be&lt;/a&gt;, and this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6913/27327&quot;&gt;very heavily downvoted answer calling for the mod team's resignation&lt;/a&gt;, this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6129/27327&quot;&gt;relatively high rep user's complaints about too much moderation&lt;/a&gt;, and finally, this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4970/27327&quot;&gt;new user's rant about upvoting/downvoting being so strict on RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Understand that the mod team is not that strict -- if they delete comments, that's because someone (probably a high rep user) flagged them for deletion. Most questions are closed by the community, most duplications are done by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, the frustration around the attitude of the community on question handling exists, has been aired many times, and has not really seen a resolution. I believe it's simply because that's how the Stack is supposed to run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Dealing with dissatisfaction with this process&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frequently, when people air their concerns, they are asked for specific instances that can be corrected, or to justify their feelings that there is something to be corrected. You can see this in Doppelgreener's answers, as well as the comments your Q received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, people cannot really name one specific instance that they see. It's just a general feeling they get. Coming to meta and airing out these frustrations, and then being asked to justify yourself, is a bit like going to the doctor and saying &quot;it hurts, but I don't know where&quot; and the doctor going, &quot;if you can't tell me where it hurts, I can't help you.&quot; Yes, the doctor can't help you, but it &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; hurts. Then you will tend to see another doctor who can do a better job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is RPG.SE: if you cannot fit into the mold, then we will show you another place where you might be fulfilled (forums, or RPG.SE's chat), but ultimately, we cannot help you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, this is where people end with, &quot;we hope you stick around and see how things run here, as we do value your contributions.&quot; This &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; true, because as a potential content creator, your input is very much held in high regard, but it is only half-true. We value your contributions if they fit our mold, and some content we value more than others (hence, upvotes and downvotes). We are not willing to expand or bend the rules we've already established (they have been wrought through much discussion, debate, and even strife; they are thoughtfully made and are there for a reason) -- you may &lt;em&gt;try&lt;/em&gt; to change us, but it will be a difficult climb. So we hope you adjust yourself to us, following which, you join and participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RPG.SE mold is not for everyone, and this is seen as a Good Thing. It is really on you if you are willing to accept this perspective. However, it is both useful and fun to ask and answer questions here. You said you nearly disengaged from the site, but posted this Q instead. If you are alarmed by our attitude or philosophy, I advise you to weigh the perceived pros and cons of your participation in RPG.SE and decide based on that. Whichever decision you choose will receive the support of the Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-07-06T01:49:11.407" LastActivityDate="2017-07-06T01:49:11.407" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7283" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-04T14:45:30.053" Score="-7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Are we attracting enough quality content for non-DnD systems? If not, what should we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we are. Non-D&amp;amp;D questions are usually left alone by the community, even if we (self-labelled &lt;em&gt;experts&lt;/em&gt;) could answer the question with some degree of design mastery of rpg systems and a quick reading of the rules on a game system we are not familiar with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, if I am not familiar with a game system, and I can spend the same amount of time I would spend searching for a d&amp;amp;d answer (aka &lt;em&gt;researching&lt;/em&gt;), I give it a shot and try to answer it. I will lose nothing but a few &lt;em&gt;internet points&lt;/em&gt; upon failure and will learn from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what I noticed is that even if one or another person bother doing some research to answer non-D&amp;amp;D questions, &lt;strong&gt;viewers ignore those questions&lt;/strong&gt;, either due to lack of knowledge of the system or because it simply doesn't interest them as a system, &lt;strong&gt;even if the answer is well-formulated and correctly answers the question&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, with a &lt;em&gt;gamist perspective&lt;/em&gt; of the site, looking at the front page and the available questions, I would be much more &lt;strong&gt;inclined to attempt to answer D&amp;amp;D questions&lt;/strong&gt;, which are solid game systems as far as we are aware, and obtain &lt;strong&gt;lots of vote-ups&lt;/strong&gt; if my question is correct, than to attempt to answer a question about non-D&amp;amp;D systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a community, &lt;strong&gt;we could do better&lt;/strong&gt; on this subject, even if we don't want to learn a new game system, at least voting on those questions if they are of good quality and show that the person put some time and thought on the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21153" LastActivityDate="2017-07-04T14:45:30.053" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-05T07:53:38.727" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the D&amp;amp;D family (including PF) there are several editions still played and supported by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that this is less the case with other systems. The few shadowrun questions I've seen around here, for example, have all been about SR5. And while I consider myself a SR3 expert the same is not true for later editions because I decided to stick to SR3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same is true for dark heresy. While I played dh1 frequently in the past and often consulted the designers at FFG about rules questions at that time the questions here are all about dh2 and thus my knowledge is &quot;wasted&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And another point I see is that the wargame-like* nature of the D&amp;amp;D family makes it more important to know the exact interaction of various abilities than is the case with other RPGs I know and play/played. If you only have a hand full of special abilities there is less potential for unclear interactions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus I felt it much easier to get rules answers directly from the designers for some other games (for example FFG) than, say, Pathfinder where direct feedback is very mixed in in the past was often plain wrong, condescending or even insulting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So perhaps the D&amp;amp;D games just need more questions answered than other games in addition to being played more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*It is my subjective opinion that the D&amp;amp;D family is wargame-like. If you disagree let's not derail this question with a discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31047" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-05T20:54:55.777" LastActivityDate="2017-07-05T20:54:55.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7285" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-05T09:46:21.163" Score="9" ViewCount="535" Body="&lt;p&gt;Never heard of it? That's probably because it's still in its playtesting stages, but here's the run-down:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great Ork Gods&lt;/strong&gt; is an indie role-playing game - an anarchic game of savage and violent Orks and the cruel and fickle hand of the Gods that watch over them. Grab a beer, a handful of d10s and get ready to stiff your mates, burn buildings, kill anything that moves and smash stuff for fun. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.greatorkgods.co.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.greatorkgods.co.uk/&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designed by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/7377/jack-aidley&quot;&gt;Jack Aidley&lt;/a&gt;, Great ork Gods is a tongue-in-cheek role-playing game where you play as vicious marauding orks &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; as the gods that hate them. It hasn't left its playtesting stages, but it has &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/search?q=ork%20gods&amp;amp;Room=11&amp;amp;page=1&amp;amp;pagesize=50&amp;amp;sort=newest&quot;&gt;garnered some impressive (unsolicited) reviews&lt;/a&gt; from chatizens:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=37165930#37165930&quot;&gt;doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt; May 4 4:20 PM&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @MadMAxJr Your table would enjoy Great Ork Gods.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=36870477#36870477&quot;&gt;BESW&lt;/a&gt; Apr 21 10:12 PM&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  (great-ork-gods is my group's go-to system for &quot;We want a night of slapstick violence and sudden meaningless character death.&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=36250518#36250518&quot;&gt;Joel Harmon&lt;/a&gt; Mar 24 2:20 AM&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  [...] Great Ork Gods, wherein multiple deaths per session is totally expected&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=29308665#29308665&quot;&gt;trogdor&lt;/a&gt; Apr 28 '16 7:36 AM&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  except stuff like Great Ork Gods, cause that whole system is built for you to have fun while several of your Ork characters die XD &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=25582260#25582260&quot;&gt;Sandwich&lt;/a&gt; Nov 21 '15 3:49 AM&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  I've heard that Great Ork gods is a blast to play&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.greatorkgods.co.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; are simple enough to pick up as we go along, and are a whopping 9 pages long (7 if you skip the intro and sample scenario).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Place your suggestions for the schedule and run time in the comments. I'll see you then!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-06T12:22:05.350" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T01:14:56.207" Title="Let's play some Great ork Gods!" Tags="|discussion|chat-event|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7286" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-05T13:58:08.133" Score="7" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;After asking this question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102811/functionally-how-does-power-word-kill-work&quot;&gt;Functionally, how does Power Word Kill work?&lt;/a&gt;), it was suggested to me in the comments that I may instead want to ask how Power Word Kill compares to other level 9 spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wanted to know if questions of this type are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a) On-topic - while I am tempted to say yes, since I would classify them as based on game mechanics and the spells tag would seem appropriate for questions of this type, I have been known to be wrong in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;b) Sufficiently objective - this is more of my concern. Developing a set of objective criteria for questions of this type may be difficult, especially if the source of the question comes from an attitude along the lines of, &quot;This spell seems really overpowered - compared to other similarly leveled spells, is it?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, are questions asking &quot;How does spell X compare to other spells of the same level&quot; on topic and sufficiently objective?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, are there suggestions for how questions of this type could be reworded, rephrased, or generally adjusted to become on topic? I know, at least for myself, being able to ask questions of this type would be immensely helpful in deciding which spells are worth preparing and which are not (especially at higher levels).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15689" LastActivityDate="2017-07-05T15:53:10.853" Title="Are spell comparison questions on-topic and sufficiently objective?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7286" CreationDate="2017-07-05T14:30:12.063" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Its definitely on-topic, and possibly sufficiently objective.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Depends on your wording and the desired answer to the comparison.  The main trouble being that nothing upon nothing is broken in a vacuum, it requires a context.  In this case, the context needs to be a set of spells that are considered balanced with which to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the question needs to be sufficiently narrow to avoid devolving into &quot;compare this with every other spell&quot;, cause that's quite outside the target question-type to be answered here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Is PW: Kill the most powerful 9th level spell, please provide comparisons&quot; would, imho, be fine, while &quot;How does PW: Kill compare to other 9th level spells&quot; is going to be a subjectivity-fest.  Basically, it comes down to this:  Can you identify the &lt;em&gt;RIGHT&lt;/em&gt; answer on the basis of something other than eloquence and verbosity?  If not, its not a good question for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-07-05T14:30:12.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7286" CreationDate="2017-07-05T14:50:52.423" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The good, bad, and ugly of comparison questions can be found analysed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/08/16/gorilla-vs-shark/&quot;&gt;the Gorilla vs. Shark blog post&lt;/a&gt;. They can work well as long as you're specific about the scope of the comparison. That tends to mean specifying these facts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are we comparing, and what are we comparing it to? (You've covered that here.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On what basis are we comparing it? What traits are you looking at, or what purpose are you looking for?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What circumstance are you using it in? What are your limitations?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you've described, &amp;ldquo;How does &lt;em&gt;Power Word: Kill&lt;/em&gt; compare to other 9th-level spells?&amp;rdquo;, would be closed as unclear. It's such a big and vague question we wouldn't know where to start or finish with it. What are you looking for in terms of comparison? All I could respond with is &amp;ldquo;well, &lt;em&gt;PW:K&lt;/em&gt; does what it does, and other spells do what they do, what's the issue here?&amp;rdquo; which isn't very helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102811/functionally-how-does-power-word-kill-work#comment245107_102811&quot;&gt;The comment you're referring to&lt;/a&gt; suggested asking &amp;ldquo;Is &lt;em&gt;Power Word: Kill&lt;/em&gt; more powerful than other spells of its level?&amp;rdquo; and that's also too unclear: more powerful at what? If all you need is a glass of water, the &lt;em&gt;Conjure Water&lt;/em&gt; cantrip is more powerful; if you need to heal someone, &lt;em&gt;Power Word: Kill&lt;/em&gt; ranks pretty close to the bottom of the pile. If you actually need to kill someone, it depends on the circumstance &amp;mdash; will they reliably have more than 100hp, and do we get to deal damage to them via other means first, and do they have any restorative powers like the Tarrasque does?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So they can work, but be specific about what you're doing and what circumstances you're doing it in. This hearkens back to the following guidance from our &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions to avoid asking&lt;/a&gt; help page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have an actual real practical situation you're dealing with, tell us about that and the decision you need to make between the options you have, and we can probably reliably give you some pretty useful advice. The more theoretical your question gets, the more likely it is to run into Gorilla vs Shark problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-05T15:53:10.853" LastActivityDate="2017-07-05T15:53:10.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-05T14:54:15.410" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the page view count indicate a problem, in your opinion?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are we attracting enough quality content for non-DnD systems? If not, what should we do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no reason to assume that quality non-DnD content would be a greater proportion of our site than the overall proportion of non-DnD players.  There's no reason to assume, with DnD being so fiercely popular, that non-DnD gaming accounts for more than 20% of on-topic gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taken together, there's no reason to assume there's a lack of quality content without statistics concerning things you haven't made an effort to prove in your OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the content accessible enough? Should posts pertaining to non-DnD systems be promoted somehow to improve visibility (and possibly attract more experts)?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Countering unfair* bias is one thing, but you've failed to make that case.  And without an &lt;em&gt;unfair&lt;/em&gt; bias, we should not show bias in favor of what is apparently a low-popularity topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*By unfair, I mean something such as the mean stack user downvoting non-DnD posts simply to homogenize the stack.  A fair bias would be something like...an rpg who's system resulted in far fewer proportional objective questions compared to DnD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-07-05T14:54:15.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7285" CreationDate="2017-07-06T02:20:19.433" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Game 1: July 18, 2017 - 14:00-16:00 GMT +0&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Great success! We &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/38853673#38853673&quot;&gt;steam-cleaned some socks&lt;/a&gt;, developed a &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/38854130#38854130&quot;&gt;fear of water&lt;/a&gt;, among other things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/38851028#38851028&quot;&gt;Full transcript of the game here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GM:&lt;/strong&gt; daze413&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Player count&lt;/strong&gt;: 3-7 (excluding GM)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Venue&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games&quot;&gt;The Back Room&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Run-time&lt;/strong&gt;: 2 hours  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose I should talk about what I expect from players? I've run GOG a couple of times, and it worked best when I let the players take the reins, so my main job as GM will only be to describe the situation, and judge which god should apply for a particular action.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Register for this chat event in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games?tab=schedule&quot;&gt;The Back Room's event page&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="23064" LastEditDate="2017-07-19T01:14:56.207" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T01:14:56.207" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-07-06T02:20:19.433" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-06T02:40:29.957" Score="8" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Are we attracting enough quality content for non-DnD systems?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crux here is whether our humble site is the best place on the internet to find information about various RPGs, even for people who don't already know about us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Science!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I turned on incognito mode, fired up google, and asked it a bunch of questions. I opened up the Tags page, sorted by popular, and took a random selection of 10 non-D&amp;amp;D tags from the first five pages, 10 more from the last five pages, and tacked on three systems I was just curious about. An x simply means there was no stackexchange result on the first page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{r|r|l}&#xA;\text{Questions on ____} &amp;amp; \text{How do I play ____} &amp;amp; \text{Tag name}&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;3 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{world of darkness}\\&#xA;3 &amp;amp; 3 &amp;amp; \text{savage worlds}\\&#xA;4 &amp;amp; 8 &amp;amp; \text{fate}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 1 &amp;amp; \text{shadowrun sr5}\\&#xA;3 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{dungeon world}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{vampire the masquerade}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 1 &amp;amp; \text{chronicles of darkness 2e}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{rogue trader}\\&#xA;3 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{gurps 4e}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 5 &amp;amp; \text{star wars saga edition}\\&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;1 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{traveller 5}\\&#xA;4/x^1 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{the black eye}^3\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 1 &amp;amp; \text{the dark eye}^3 \text{ (alternate translation of &quot;the black eye&quot;)}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{storyteller 5e}\\&#xA;x &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{star wars aor}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{iron kingdoms}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; 9 &amp;amp; \text{mutants and masterminds}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 6 &amp;amp; \text{deadlands}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; 10 &amp;amp; \text{burningwheel}\\&#xA;4 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{shadows of esteren}\\&#xA;2 &amp;amp; x &amp;amp; \text{pendragon}\\&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 6/7^2 &amp;amp; \text{great ork gods}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 1 &amp;amp; \text{roll for shoes}\\&#xA;1 &amp;amp; 6 &amp;amp; \text{lasers and feelings}\\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; The 4 here was actually from workplace.stackexchange; rpg didn't make the cut here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; A &quot;let's play&quot; meta was 6, main site was 7&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt; Despite being common words and phrases, I didn't put these in quotes when searching because I don't believe it would be common to do so as a first approach. Incidentally, in a later test it made no difference anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So overall, we clearly did much better on &quot;questions on X&quot; than &quot;how do I play X&quot;. This seems mildly unfortunate, but in keeping with the site's overall mission of answering questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the page view count indicate a problem, in your opinion?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the numbers I gathered above, I'd say page view isn't much of a problem. Others have hashed and rehashed the proportionality and popularity of D&amp;amp;D enough in this question and elsewhere that I can just say I generally agree with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is the content accessible enough? Should posts pertaining to non-DnD systems be promoted somehow to improve visibility (and possibly attract more experts)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, based on the numbers I'm seeing, rpg.se has excellent visibility all along the RPG popularity spectrum. I don't see a particular need to expose them any more than they already are on the main site, sidebar, and hot network questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2017-07-10T02:57:50.160" LastActivityDate="2017-07-10T02:57:50.160" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7292" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-06T11:48:21.310" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I filter all D&amp;amp;D related questions out as I care nothing about D&amp;amp;D whatsoever whatever form it takes. This makes the site much easier to use (except in the truly abysmal mobile app) and I can focus on the questions that I am interested in. Those are varied, well asked, and generally attract many different answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Quantity is irrelevant compared to quality&lt;/em&gt; and the quality of non-D&amp;amp;D questions is great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2017-07-16T13:31:12.860" LastActivityDate="2017-07-16T13:31:12.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-06T19:46:23.300" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I think D&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; eaten the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's what the site looks like if you ignore-list D&amp;amp;D3/4/5, Pathfinder, and D20. (N.B. I'm not ignore-listing &quot;general&quot;/&quot;legacy&quot; D&amp;amp;D questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LnCSW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LnCSW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screeenshot with 24/27 questions greyed out by a D&amp;amp;D/PF/D20-related filter, leaving 3 non-D&amp;amp;D questions&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1526/should-magic-the-gathering-have-its-own-stackexchange/1527#1527&quot;&gt;I straight-up used this site as an example of what &quot;drowning out other content&quot; looks like on B&amp;amp;CG Meta last year&lt;/a&gt;. I think it'd be very easy for a drive-by browser to pop by and conclude this is a D&amp;amp;D site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, well, what can you do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the best answer is pretty much, &quot;carry on.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;D&amp;amp;D is a huge part of the hobby.&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not sure our numbers specifically match the current distribution of 3.x/PF vs. 4e vs. 5e play, but they match the general observation that a lot of people are playing these games.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;These flavors of D&amp;amp;D generate a ton of questions.&lt;/strong&gt; The D20/post-D20 D&amp;amp;D model involves:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A lot of books with a lot of mechanical tidbits you can mix-and-match. Details galore. Often written in kinda-legalese templated language.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A culture of play that often stresses technical fidelity to the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A significant and constant influx of new players, due to D&amp;amp;D's positioning as a brand within the roleplaying hobby.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A few structural and conceptual quirks that are rather hard to understand without preexisting familiarity with the game and its history.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This site would be slow as molasses without D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/strong&gt; There's just... not that much content. Especially within RPG SE's niche of focused answers to focused questions. You need the churn of questions and reputation points to keep a critical mass of regulars engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The D&amp;amp;D content would be worse without the other RPG content.&lt;/strong&gt; Building a user base of RPG players, many of whom play or have played a recent edition of D&amp;amp;D, is better than building a user base of exclusive-D&amp;amp;D-fan D&amp;amp;D players. The greater breadth of experience is great for generating more thoughtful answers to social and structural questions, in particular.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, for the most part, there's nothing to do. The site reflects the focus of its format, the buying habits of the hobby, and the tastes of RPG SE's own user base. You can try to stimulate other activity, and it may benefit you to do so, but the site's likely going to be 80-90% D&amp;amp;D stuff for the foreseeable future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2017-07-06T19:46:23.300" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7294" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-06T21:47:49.707" Score="14" ViewCount="428" Body="&lt;p&gt;Several times, a valid question arises about some topic that unfortunately is not covered by any official source book. These questions do have merit, and the very fact a canonical vacuum exists make them even more worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But people very often look down (downvote, vote-to-close) those questions and the few brave that attempt to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102977/what-is-the-fair-market-price-of-a-tressym-in-forgotten-realms?noredirect=1#comment245667_102977&quot;&gt;What is the fair market price of a Tressym in Forgotten Realms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95613/how-much-does-a-slave-cost&quot;&gt;How much does a slave cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions have answers with downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think so long the question is not restricting answers to official sources, One could go to the effort of writing an original, plausible answer. Probably using outdated source material, probably from his own campaign notes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to make a good answer that can fill that vacuum, or is it a doomed endeavour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T11:24:09.823" Title="How can I write a good answer for a topic that no official source book covers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7294" CreationDate="2017-07-06T23:14:31.430" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously there's a way to do it and a way not to do it - see the &quot;How much does a slave cost&quot; question.  There's one answer that is based entirely on speculation and historical antecedent (&quot;I'm gonna guess from Roman prices...&quot;), and then there's one that is based on not perfectly canonical but much closer sources (3pp for the same game, etc.). The first one is +8/-11 and the second is +17/-0. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's not a binary answer here.  To the degree to which your answer is not backed up in a compelling way, it'll draw downvotes.  To the degree to which it is, it'll get upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that when you answer a question, you should stop and think - how far are you stretching?  Are you ignoring closer data?  (On the Tressym question, if there was an answer in 5e material and someone answered for Pathfinder, I'd expect downvotes and even delete votes.  Since there appears to be not, a Pathfinder analogue is moderately well received at +2/-1.) If you're drawing analogies from really far away (&quot;historical Rome!&quot;) you should expect deserved downvotes, while if you're super close you shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! isn't binary.  Answers that completely don't back it up may get deleted, post-noticed, etc.  But ones that back it up poorly will get more down than up votes, and those that do it well will get more up than down.  The System Works (tm).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember - &quot;there is no answer&quot; is OK if there is no answer.  Asking for a rule for example, &quot;There's no rule but here's the house rule I've used and here's how it worked out&quot; is the limit as far afield as we want to get - &quot;here's what I'd make up if faced with this&quot; is over the line. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you want to answer the Tressym question with reasoning from Roman slavery or from exotic pet stores in your neighborhood assuming a Tressym is like a wombat and a gold piece is like $1 - keep it zipped. If you want to reason it as &quot;exotic familiars in related systems cost about 200 gp&quot; - go for it.  Between those, you pays your money, you takes your chances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T11:24:09.823" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T11:24:09.823" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7294" CreationDate="2017-07-07T01:18:37.703" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Stack isn't always right.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question of how to do &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; is predicated on the assumption that in these cases, the exampled answers are poor answers.  However, reviewing both questions, I stand by both of them.  Especially the Roman one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My best suggestion for these cases is give answers like those you're referencing, and then if people object, go on Chat and attempt to convince people that these answers are right to compensate for any initial reactions.  Do remember to utilize any improvements to the answer that are uncovered as part of the aforementioned convincing, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastEditorUserId="35386" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T06:13:05.063" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T06:13:05.063" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7297" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-07T05:36:00.370" Score="-1" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, there is an user that is posting a series of questions that seems to be bent on creating some Rudeberg machine out of unseen servants, alarms and a familiar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102901/11402&quot;&gt;Is a Familiar smart enough to execute delayed orders?&lt;/a&gt; - July 6th&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102877/11402&quot;&gt;Can an Unseen Servant trigger an Alarm spell, and can said Alarm be customized?&lt;/a&gt; - July 6th&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102753/11402&quot;&gt;Are conditional, sequential and looping instructions understood by an Unseen Servant?&lt;/a&gt; - July 3rd&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only the point of the questions is hard to understand but also they seem to be just cogs in some bigger plot. To me it seems like a XY issue: they are asking about the viability of parts of his implementation, instead of disclosing what they really want to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems it is not only me that share this opinion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You've asked a string of questions that amount to asking how you can kitbash a Turing machine out of D&amp;amp;D spells. However, this looks like a classic case of the XY Problem: asking for help with X while failing to disclose what actual problem Y you're trying to solve with all this Rube Goldbergery. This is a dysfunctional approach for RPG.se questions. I urge you to carefully consider your end goal and ask about solving that instead of whether further spell-programming ideas work. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102901/is-a-familiar-smart-enough-to-execute-delayed-orders#comment245364_102901&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie♦ yesterday&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They insistently comment on the answers and in the questions trying to push a point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/102879/11402&quot;&gt;Answer&lt;/a&gt;) (...) Alarm reacts to creatures; Unseen servant doesn't create a creature, so it can't trigger Alarm. Note that this has nothing to do with size.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102877/can-an-unseen-servant-trigger-an-alarm-spell-and-can-said-alarm-be-customized/102879?noredirect=1#comment245282_102879&quot;&gt;Comment&lt;/a&gt;) Oh. Dammit. Right. Creature. Forgot about that. But...... If an Unseen Servant is holding an insect, then maybe... - GaelL&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102877/can-an-unseen-servant-trigger-an-alarm-spell-and-can-said-alarm-be-customized/102879?noredirect=1#comment245424_102879&quot;&gt;Comment&lt;/a&gt;) Unseen servants can't attack, they can't grapple tiny insects. @GaelL – Mindwin&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102877/can-an-unseen-servant-trigger-an-alarm-spell-and-can-said-alarm-be-customized/102879?noredirect=1#comment245707_102879&quot;&gt;Comment&lt;/a&gt;)&#xA;   @Mindwin Including unconscious ones ? – Gael L&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102877/can-an-unseen-servant-trigger-an-alarm-spell-and-can-said-alarm-be-customized/102879?noredirect=1#comment245727_102879&quot;&gt;Comment&lt;/a&gt;)  @GaelL you are going so far with this that you are losing sight of what is happening. So, your US finishes a task. Then you command it to move up to 15 feet and pick up a unconscious but living insect. Then you use ANOTHER command to make it move up to 15 foot and trigger the alarm. Just to let you know that it finished a task, and you just issued two commands after that. So I beseech you, what is the point in doing all this? – Mindwin &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, really seems there is a hidden goal behind all this automation shenanigans:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Mindwin Ah, friend, do not be sorry for giving accurate information ! After all, the reason I'm verifying all of my ideas is that I want to challenge by possible bias. There are several things I thought possible ut that weren't, and knowing it enabled me to think of other feasible ways to achieve my goals. (...) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102901/is-a-familiar-smart-enough-to-execute-delayed-orders#comment245705_102908&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything actionable here, or should we (I) just disengage and let it die down? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T12:11:20.323" LastActivityDate="2017-07-08T00:49:17.263" Title="A user's chain of XY questions is becoming concerning. How should we take action?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7297" CreationDate="2017-07-07T06:02:20.383" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see no reason to take &lt;em&gt;extra&lt;/em&gt; moderation actions to guide him when his response to SevenSidedDie's clear rebuke was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sorry for that. I'm a bit of a goof-head sometimes (but I have other qualities). Next time I have a goal in mind, I'll ask for the goal itself instead of each step separately. I'll make further efforts to respect how the website works. Good day !&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially given that the user has stopped creating sub-questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And by &quot;extra&quot; moderation, I mean over and above what's already happening around those questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T06:02:20.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7265" CreationDate="2017-07-07T07:27:40.843" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Considering:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the question cannot have a &quot;correct&quot; answer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the author answered it himself&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;with his own Homebrew&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I fail to see how it fits this website, and how it can be of use to any visitor. It would be more appropriate for the author's blog, and should be closed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2900" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T07:27:40.843" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7297" CreationDate="2017-07-07T11:15:08.443" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you believe his Q's suffer from the XY problem, you are free to downvote (if it warrants it), VTC (if it warrants it), or flag (if it warrants it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD did, you could have engaged him in the comments by pointing out what he was doing. Rather, you engaged him by answering his follow-up Q's in the comments, which encourages his behavior to keep doing what he's doing, since he was getting the results he was looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, unless you have gotten into an argument with him, there is no need to disengage. There was an actionable thing (pointing out what he was doing), but it was already done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-07-08T00:49:17.263" LastActivityDate="2017-07-08T00:49:17.263" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7301" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7303" CreationDate="2017-07-07T17:02:43.887" Score="12" ViewCount="365" Body="&lt;p&gt;After asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103030/how-can-i-deal-with-a-dm-and-plot-device-targeting-my-character?noredirect=1#comment245858_103030&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question, I received a comment which troubled me, and is the source of this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There was some conversation about the veracity of your story in chat during your last question, and I voiced the opinion that you deserved the benefit of the doubt. This question, however, makes me wonder if I was wrong. Are these real situations you're describing, or are they just made up? Either you've got the worst GM ever, and you should walk away as I suggested on the previous question, or you're making these scenarios up. I can't be sure anymore, and the benefit of doubt has been consumed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The commenter makes a good point - the situations I have been facing recently have been extreme, and certainly beyond the realm of my expertise playing DnD thus far (hence my questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To provide some background, I met my current group at a popular game shop in Toronto. I am easily the least experienced player, having only began playing 5e with this group. While I do have some experience in 3.5, and am learning the game through playing and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102268/can-i-combine-shield-master-and-great-weapon-master&quot;&gt;asking&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102500/which-magical-items-impose-disadvantage-on-attacking-creatures&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102957/the-power-level-of-the-sword-of-sharpness-doesnt-justify-its-very-rare-rating&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, as I'm quickly realizing, a lot of what our group deals with is beyond what my experience in DnD so far is able to handle. My ~1 year of experience playing DnD is dwarfed by the decade(s) of experience of the other players, with the exception of our DM who is more experienced than me, but undoubtedly less experienced than the other players at our table. This has resulted in some, erm, dysfunction in our group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of why it is happening, it has resulted in me posting a few questions in recent weeks which, when taken together, do seem extraordinary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;May 26 - &lt;a href=&quot;http://Dealing%20with%202%20Immature%20Players%20Who%20Detract%20from%20the%20Experiences%20of%20Others&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dealing with 2 Immature Players Who Detract from the Experiences of Others&lt;/a&gt;. The outcome of this question spawned the next question,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;June 26 - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102283/pcs-using-disciplinary-talk-from-dm-as-leverage-leading-to-group-dysfunction&quot;&gt;PCs using disciplinary talk from DM as leverage, leading to group dysfunction&lt;/a&gt;. From the same scenario, I had another related but different question,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;June 27 - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102350/does-alignment-drive-character-actions-or-should-character-actions-drive-alignm&quot;&gt;Does alignment drive character actions, or should character actions drive alignment?&lt;/a&gt;. I then asked a question in anticipation of our most recent session last night,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;July 7 - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102894/how-do-i-deal-with-my-characters-role-in-our-party-being-overtaken-by-other-pcs&quot;&gt;How do I deal with my character's role in our party being overtaken by other PCs?&lt;/a&gt;. Finally, after our session, I had another question about Dm railroading and plot devices,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;July 8 - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103030/how-can-i-deal-with-a-dm-and-plot-device-targeting-my-character&quot;&gt;How can I deal with a DM and plot device targeting my character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the frequency and similar issues threaded throughout these questions (thanks to SevenSidedDie for pointing this out!), I was going to post an ultimate question about malicious behaviour by the DM targeting PCs, and my PC specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But before I do this, I want to see if there are ways that I can head off this disbelief. While I recognize that RPG.SE is a community, I do have concerns that in posting this culminating question I will not be believed, and as such will suffer downvotes (not really my main concern, such is life on SE), but more importantly that the quality of answers will be harmed or individuals will simply not answer, since I am now aware that there are suspicions surrounding the truth and motivations behind my questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, how can I assure the community that the group I am in does exist, and that the unique situations we face are real? &lt;strong&gt;More generally, how can I deal with this doubt?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything I can be adding to questions (I've been trying to link back to my previous questions where appropriate), clarifying in my phrasing, information I could be providing (maybe more background info about our group's dynamics?), or doing more generally to (re)gain the confidence of the community? Should I be waiting longer to space my questions out, or even finding another community in which to ask my questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is suspicion of my questions and my motives for asking them just a part of life on RPG.SE, understanding that there will simply be people who doubt a poster's motives?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15689" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T17:05:57.330" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T21:59:48.450" Title="I'm worried I'm not being believed, but I'm telling the truth. What can I do?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7301" CreationDate="2017-07-07T18:36:32.667" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's part of life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The pattern of questions does seem suspicious, and, to be frank, with a username that starts with &quot;B.S.&quot;, that trips people's troll meter. There's no way to validate this online, so the best you can do is post in good faith, allay fears in chat, etc. like you've already done. But I'm not sure &quot;disbelief&quot; is the primary challenge facing your questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With such a litany of complaints about your GM and all the rest of the players, it starts to seem inconceivable that you are not just finding another group, and so some folks figure even if you're not making it up, you're hapless to the point that answering isn't going to help any more, either because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you are fundamentally misreading the situation (frequently a problem when EVERYONE but YOU in the WORLD is BAD and OUT TO GET YOU), which means the questions we get are so far from the actual situation the answers are off base, or &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you're not taking the advice you've already gotten, so more is a bad investment of time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming good faith and that these questions are legit (I personally believe they are), you're having a hard time asking these as independent questions because they're not really independent questions - you have a lot of life-experience to learn about social interaction in groups, and while the community's been trying to answer the points one by one, it's not within our power to do that here.  Stack Overflow can answer a programmer's questions, but it can't teach anyone to become a programmer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even without the same asker behind them all, these kinds of questions are often frustrating because the only real answer tends to be &quot;Talk to the GM/players and ask them to stop .  Enlist the GM/other players in this enterprise if possible.  If the situation is intractable, deal or leave.&quot;  You've been told this in various ways in a whole set of questions and answers.  Before asking your &quot;culminating&quot; question - ask yourself, is there any meaningful answer other than that? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are you just looking for validation? This isn't a community who's here to &quot;sympathize with&quot; people, we're here to answer focused questions. Mindwin's point about these seeming ranty is a good one - on Workplace.SE they have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://workplace.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2644/good-subjective-bad-subjective-and-agony-aunt-questions/2649&quot;&gt;category of off topic questions they call &quot;agony aunt&quot; questions&lt;/a&gt; that are basically people complaining about how work life is treating them without any truly actionable content (talk to you boss... deal... quit... sound familiar?). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T21:59:48.450" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T21:59:48.450" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7303" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7301" CreationDate="2017-07-07T19:11:01.840" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;In Stack, one of our principles is to take everything at face value. I think we should not assume malice and stick to the text. I have engaged with you in comments on several of your questions, but the real issue I have with them is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are spending too much text &quot;getting stuff out of your chest&quot; with what basically reads like a rant, and too little with the actual question. The questions are too subjective and very often you punctuate them with personal remarks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mxyzplk stated above, those personal problems are related to RPG, but are actually not a strict RPG problem. There is no rule in any tabletop rulebook regarding social interactions between people. There are LARP rules (don't run, don't touch, etc...) but they still don't cover social attrition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the same coin we don't take the stories you post in the question as lies - being personal and subjective is still truthful - you also can't take the interactions of the community as personal prosecution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For these already asked and answered questions, the best you can do is &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do not take it personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Read the answers given at face value.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't dwell too much on comments. Comments are noise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On future questions, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep the walls of text to a minimum.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Try to separate facts from your opinion. Post the facts only.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't seek validation of your point-of-view or your actions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't attempt to answer the question yourself in the body of the question. It is totally fine to post both question and answer yourself, but separate them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoid subjective qualifiers at all costs. &quot;Dealing with &lt;em&gt;immature&lt;/em&gt; players (..)&quot; is one, for example. We can't validate those subjective qualifiers without meeting your group in person, and it won't happen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, Q&amp;amp;A in the stack are better treated like one night stands. You come, post your question, get your answers, and move on to the next question. So it takes some work getting the best question out as the first move. Work the text of the question for some time, before posting. Once posted, it should receive very little change aside from adding extra details or correcting typos. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But to do that, you need to first post a good answerable ontopic question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck, and remember we are here to fulfill two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Help you get the best out of your RPG gaming&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Build a collaborative knowledge base on RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the questions and answers are not about you. they are about RPG. Don't take them personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T19:11:01.840" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7304" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7306" CreationDate="2017-07-07T21:00:11.480" Score="7" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;In event of a question being asked that does not have an actual answer, is it appropriate to provide advice on how the asker &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; handle it instead? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example: a question asking about how the rules work for a game mechanic that is not actually outlined in any game materials, such as asking how Crouching works in D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the answer simply be &quot;There are no rules that cover this, thus it is left to your DM's discretion, go ask them&quot;? Or is it acceptable to give advice based on how you, the answerer, would handle such a ruling in-game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16358" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T21:40:35.380" Title="If a question does not have a 'true' answer, is it acceptable to give advice or input based on past experience?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7304" CreationDate="2017-07-07T21:26:27.900" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the &quot;correct&quot; answer would be &quot;There are no rules that cover this, thus it is left to your DM's discretion, go ask them&quot;, but such an answer would be improved by adding personal advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T21:26:27.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7304" CreationDate="2017-07-07T21:30:49.367" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here on RPG.SE, we expect all answers to meet the criteria put forth in the Stack Overflow blog post &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;.  This means answers should &quot;Back It Up!&quot;  In our world this means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stuff from the actual rulebook or other relevant sources - with some addition of logic, direct comparisons, etc. allowed.  (&quot;How much does this exotic familiar cost?&quot;  &quot;It's not listed, but a pseudodragon costs 200 gp, so that seems fair&quot; is fine, that's a direct analogy.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Citable experience - have you done it or seen someone else do it?  How did that turn out?  (This last part is crucial.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you are NOT allowed to do is say &quot;how you would&quot; handle that.  That's Bad Subjective, aka speculation.  RPG.SE isn't for brainstorming or idea generation, and we're not really interested in what someone who's thought about the problem all of 30 seconds tosses off the top of their head of what they'd do. We don't want speculation, we want experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, if you have or have used (or have watched an Actual Play video where they do it, or whatever) a crouching rule, that's fine.  If you want to answer from the perspective of &quot;there's no crouching rule, but of course crouching might give you more cover according to the existing cover rules for this reason&quot; that's fine.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to say &quot;well how about it takes a bonus action and then you have to rise to kneeling first from prone and it gives you a -1 AC and and...&quot; because that sounds good in your head, that's not fine, and you can expect downvotes and delete votes, because we want to leverage the actual experience of our community for solid answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you say &quot;well, our group implemented a rule where you had to use a bonus action to crouch or stand up, you couldn't move faster than a walk while crouched but it gave you a +1 AC.  We ended up never really using it because it was too fiddly | It worked out great for our tactically minded players | It ended up being abused in combination with the DwarfStomper feat | whatever.&quot; that's a great Good Subjective experience-based answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference between that one and the previous is having really tried it and seen in play if it's a good idea or a terrible idea or what mix of those it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-07-07T21:40:35.380" LastActivityDate="2017-07-07T21:40:35.380" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-08T22:14:57.957" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we're actually doing better now than we used to be. On the '&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6911/14848&quot;&gt;How are we doing?&lt;/a&gt;' meta I talked about our success in this area a little, with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;We aren't D&amp;amp;D5e.stackexchange.com&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yay! We still have a hugely active 3.x and 4e community, so our that-new-thing-only issues have somewhat diminished. We are still largely D&amp;amp;D.stack, but Fate seems to have carved out an okay market share with our users and Apocalypse World isn't doing bad either. Overall I think we've made some small positive motion in the direction of diversity&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;as a highly upvoted status report.  Comments seem to agree and provide some also-highly-upvoted further insight into specific positive improvements and ways we got there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an ongoing issue for the site, but it's one we are well aware of and have been tackling for a while&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-07-09T17:34:26.230" LastActivityDate="2017-07-09T17:34:26.230" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-09T15:52:56.293" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This stack has aggressively-enforced norms which favor D&amp;amp;D. The same trends which keep the stack from dissolving in flame-wars lead inevitably towards strictly by-the-book games and explanations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-10-17T13:21:14.627" LastActivityDate="2020-10-17T13:21:14.627" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7309" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-10T00:36:36.703" Score="10" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103090/23970&quot;&gt;How can I calculate the probability of being able to purchase a card in my custom die system?&lt;/a&gt; has had an interesting life so far:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;closed (3 votes, incl. a diamond mod) as unclear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;bunch of comments asking for clarification on the die-system being described (now moved to chat)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;edits to better explain the system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(automatically) placed in queue for reopen review, which looks like it was rejected&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;migration to B&amp;amp;CG suggested (which I declined, not being sure it'd be on-topic there)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;further editing for readability&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;more and more comments about whether it's on- or off-topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;comment-discussion about how to program it in anydice, moved to chat&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;locked&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unlocked&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;reopened by 5 regular users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;closed by me, because it sure looks off-topic to me and I'd like to hear why it's on-topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[this narrative assumes I'm interpreting the &quot;timeline&quot; (&lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; obscure tool) correctly, which may also be a problem--others please feel free to correct my read!]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, have at it: on-topic, or off?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[update] I've reopened the question to favor a &quot;default: leave it open&quot; policy. Too much waffling--someone should take my hands off the mod-stick!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-07-11T03:36:36.273" LastActivityDate="2017-07-14T18:01:37.163" Title="Is this dice mechanism calculation question on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7309" CreationDate="2017-07-10T01:12:54.737" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am using the same mechanics for both systems one for an custom RPG and the Card game for an in game game in the RPG, as the mechanics for the card game are a simpler function of a more complex system, using them to work-up with the game.&#xA; Just one is not intending to ask how to fully develop the dice mechanics on the full rpg as that misses the point of asking for help to understand the basics so that can upscale with main game. The Question originally did explain that it was for a both an In game RPG Card game, but was edited down and removed due to the question being to verbose.&#xA; However it does raise an interesting point about having the 'Anydice' tag and covering Anydice issues, If it is a matter of moving away, then having a Stack Exchange dedicated to AnyDice might work better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37069" LastEditorUserId="37069" LastEditDate="2017-07-10T01:19:27.347" LastActivityDate="2017-07-10T01:19:27.347" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7309" CreationDate="2017-07-10T01:41:38.613" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This question has precedent&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;BESW asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/80246/27327&quot;&gt;probabilities with coins, for the purpose of game design&lt;/a&gt;, with 33 upvotes and 6 answers. That Q received no VTC's or controversy, but it is effectively the same type of question as this Q under fire: &lt;em&gt;I am designing a game with randomness built in, what are the probabilities for this aspect of it?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;WrongOnTheInternet has asked about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55720/what-is-the-average-roll-of-a-die-with-an-expanded-explosion-threshold-as-compar&quot;&gt;purely statistics-type question concerning exploding dice&lt;/a&gt;, receiving 11 upvotes and 3 highly technical answers, but is again on the same lines: &lt;em&gt;I am designing a system, but how do I calculate the probabilities?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HeyICanChan asked about calculating the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37270/how-can-i-examine-the-distribution-of-successes-counting-mixed-dice-pools&quot;&gt;probabilities with Anydice on a dice-based system based on multiple types of dice&lt;/a&gt;, which is a Q along similar lines: &lt;em&gt;here is a system, how can I calculate the probabilities?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new user has also asked for a mostly similar Q about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99386/is-this-the-right-formula-for-the-total-permutations-of-a-set-of-dice&quot;&gt;formulas for permutations&lt;/a&gt;, another new user asked for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64437/help-calculating-opposing-dice-pool-in-anydice&quot;&gt;help about using Anydice&lt;/a&gt;, another new user asks about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49710/dice-pool-success-probability-with-one-exploding-die&quot;&gt;exploding dice probabilities&lt;/a&gt;. All three of these questions have in common that they are not attached to any specific gaming system, and are actually purely statistics-based questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this one Q is off-topic, the the six listed above should also be closed, for consistency's sake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;These types of Q's are on-topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaning on historical precedent, there has been no push back for the above six questions in terms of VTC's. Nothing has changed about the sites policies about these types of statistics Q's in the intervening time, and so since those 6 Q's did not receive the VTC or on/off-topic controversy, this Q shouldn't be off-topic either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the Q is not about a problem in the sense of &quot;X happened, what do I do?&quot; or a rules clarification for an RPG system (the typical questions), it is still a Q related to an RPG -- just an unpublished, untested one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the presence of the statistics tag allows these types of questions to be asked. If a policy change happens, then we will have to move the statistics tag to be off-topic as well, in the same way that shopping questions were made off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorDisplayName="user27327" LastEditDate="2017-07-10T12:59:34.697" LastActivityDate="2017-07-10T12:59:34.697" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7312" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7265" CreationDate="2017-07-11T15:42:18.103" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Realize that the type 1 you link to was written 5 years ago, when &quot;too localized&quot; was a close reason and attitudes back then were even more restrictive compared to current SE standards. Nothing has changed to make that type of question off topic now, so the use of historical lock not appropriate. Historical locks are for questions that are of good quality, but no longer reflect the current on-topicness of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the historical lock meta states, these locks should also be reserved for contentious posts. Is the question receiving many up and down votes continuously? Are people constantly VTC or flagging it? A bunch of useless comments from non-new people? No? Then leave it alone. It doesn't merit being historically locked. A single flag should not result in a historical lock.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the last sentence, you can edit the fluff out and be done with it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36988" LastActivityDate="2017-07-11T15:42:18.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7313" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7323" CreationDate="2017-07-11T20:21:13.117" Score="21" ViewCount="726" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’ve recently discovered Stack Exchange has a feature called &lt;strong&gt;tag warnings&lt;/strong&gt; which cautions a person with further information about how a tag should be used. Tag warnings look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/grqkT.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This example comes from Biology SE’s [species-identification] tag. You can &lt;a href=&quot;https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=species-identification&quot; title=&quot;Click the tag field and then click out of it to get the warning to show up.&quot;&gt;try it out yourself here&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; click into the tag field then back out to see it show up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that such a feature would be beneficial for our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, but that’s just me, and I’d like to know what the rest of us think about this. &lt;strong&gt;Should we have such a tag warning on the [rules-as-written] tag, and what should it say?&lt;/strong&gt; (Related material: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, I think it’s beneficial because of these statistics:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{|l|l|l|}&#xA;\hline&#xA;\text{Questions created...} &amp;amp; \text{in last 16 months} &amp;amp; \text{17-32 months ago}&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;\text{RAW tag removed} &amp;amp; 235\;(52.2\% \text{ of total}) &amp;amp; 90\;(15.9\%)&#xA;\\\text{RAW tag added}   &amp;amp; 29\;(6.4\%)   &amp;amp; 59\;(10.4\%)&#xA;\\\text{RAW tag kept}    &amp;amp; 186\;(41.3\%) &amp;amp; 416\;(73.6\%)&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;\text{Total questions covered} &amp;amp; 450 &amp;amp; 565&#xA;\\\hline&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a table of questions created during the past 16 months and the 16-month period before that which are connected to the RAW tag in one of three ways. 16 months ago is the time period since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;the “back to tagging basics” proposal&lt;/a&gt;&amp;dagger; was suggested and endorsed and changed the way we handle the RAW tag, so these time periods were chosen to compare before/after that meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This table expresses these quantities:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RAW tag removed:&lt;/strong&gt; Questions that had the RAW tag in the original revision, which do not have it in the current revision. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/681853/questions-with-a-specific-tag-at-first-revision-and-without-that-tag-now?Tag=rules-as-written&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;source 1&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RAW tag added:&lt;/strong&gt; Questions that didn’t have the RAW tag in the original revision, but have it now. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/681846/questions-with-a-specific-tag-now-and-not-at-first-revision?Tag=rules-as-written&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;source 2&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RAW tag kept:&lt;/strong&gt; Questions that had it in the original revision, and the current revision. These could be the same revision if it was never edited. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/681986/questions-with-a-specific-tag-both-at-first-and-current-revision?Tag=rules-as-written&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;source 3&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total&lt;/strong&gt; of questions in row 1+2+3 for that column.  All percentages in a column are a percentage of this total.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Further notes: &lt;strong&gt;(a)&lt;/strong&gt; Intervening revisions aren't counted. This means back-and-forth add/remove actions don't affect these statistics. &lt;strong&gt;(b)&lt;/strong&gt;  These statistics go &lt;em&gt;exclusively by creation date&lt;/em&gt; so recent activity won’t change the period to which a question belongs.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You may notice what I notice in these stats:&lt;/strong&gt; before 16 months ago, questions almost always kept the tag. Since the &quot;back to basics&quot; meta&amp;dagger; we've seen a dramatic change: &lt;strong&gt;in the past 16 months, 52.2% of these questions arrive with the tag and then have it removed&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;mdash; more often than the question gets the tag added or kept in total. Out of the 421 usages of the tag by the OP (sum of &lt;em&gt;tag removed&lt;/em&gt; + &lt;em&gt;tag kept&lt;/em&gt;), 55.8% usages result in it getting removed. On average a question that gets the tag removed arrives every 2-3 days. I’m hoping that adding a tag warning would reduce these cases of it needing to be removed, and would reduce the maintenance effort involved in this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;dagger; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;&quot;Back to basics&quot;&lt;/a&gt; changed the way we handle the RAW tag: we nowadays handle it like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7140/1204&quot;&gt;any other non-system tag&lt;/a&gt;, which means we require questions to make it clear in the body why a tag is present, and if it isn’t clear, we seek clarity from the author and either clarify the post or remove the tag. Prior to that meta (before 16 months ago) the RAW tag was handled differently and it we didn’t have a good way to clarify whether the tag should be on a question or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-08-27T10:21:33.130" LastActivityDate="2020-02-22T07:35:40.470" Title="Should we add a [rules-as-written] tag warning, and what should it say?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rules-as-written|tag-warnings|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7313" CreationDate="2017-07-11T20:49:01.960" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it is a good idea and I think it should read something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A Rules-as-written question does not simply ask about the rules of a game. It implies finding out the most literal (even if improbable) reading of what has been written in the game aids.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By adding this tag, you're asking the answer to avoid speculation about authoral intent taking precedence over what the text actually says.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is often important to people to know what the rules &lt;em&gt;say&lt;/em&gt; before deciding which houserules to apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or something like that. I'm not too good at this, and even finding a definition of what RAW is that is good for everyyone is hard. Workshopping accepted!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-12T19:05:24.297" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7313" CreationDate="2017-07-12T15:12:15.760" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site operates on a definition of rules-as-written that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does not conform to its wider usage outside this site, and ignores the folk taxonomy&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Was unilaterally determined by two members of the site&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Who, it must be pointed out, have an avowed “hatred” of the very concept. Their word.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ignores community consensus disagreeing with that definition.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is enforced silently and unilaterally by those same two users; comments are not used to try to educate users, or even to determine if it is appropriate to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quite frankly, the definition of rules-as-written as it is enforced here is wrong. The net effect is to marginalize and minimize the usage and placement of the tag on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any warning would have to either include this special definition—which I adamantly oppose—or else would have to fix these issues before the warning is written. These issues are not with the community’s consensus, they are not with what has been discussed on meta, they lie solely in how the tag has been moderated above and beyond what was agreed upon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2017-07-12T17:04:35.103" LastActivityDate="2017-07-12T17:04:35.103" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7316" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-12T16:01:33.263" Score="9" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;p&gt;While poking around for interesting tags to fill my favorites I noticed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/loaded-dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;loaded-dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;loaded-dice&lt;/a&gt;. Currently there are only two questions tagged, and in both circumstances it seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dice&lt;/a&gt; would suffice. Kill it with fire?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-03-10T17:57:45.987" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T17:57:45.987" Title="Let's unload [loaded-dice]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7316" CreationDate="2017-07-12T16:48:44.743" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;It doesn't seem to be a tag that has much utility &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; community support, either of which I think is enough reason to clean up a tag. I'd be happy to see it made a synonym pointing to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dice&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-07-12T16:48:44.743" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7319" CreationDate="2017-07-13T01:54:58.123" Score="2" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new tag has just been created: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crystals&quot;&gt;crystals&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shall we keep it? What is this tag about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-13T03:43:20.940" Title="Crystals tag: keep it?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7318" CreationDate="2017-07-13T03:43:20.940" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't worry about it much, tags that are only associated with one question are &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/48418/350545&quot;&gt;automatically deleted after 6 months&lt;/a&gt;. I suggest just wait and see if there are other people that find value from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-07-13T03:43:20.940" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7316" CreationDate="2017-07-13T08:29:45.660" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd prefer to keep it. It's a specific topic that people can have interest in and expertise in, and it's useful for searching for anyone who wants to learn about loaded dice. It ticks all the boxes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't have much activity to its name, but that's the only issue with it, and since it's fine to have only one or two questions in a tag that's a &lt;em&gt;non&lt;/em&gt;-issue. It does absolutely no harm sitting there and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the tag otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dice tag can suffice, but there's no reason we need to suffice with just that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-13T17:14:55.017" LastActivityDate="2017-07-13T17:14:55.017" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7321" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-13T16:00:53.817" Score="4" ViewCount="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZeyRf.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZeyRf.png&quot; alt=&quot;On this screenshot one can see 2 bounties being offered at the same time for the same question by the same user, of the same amount of rep. Clearly, it looks like a bug. &quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's how my &quot;bounties&quot; tab looks like now. It seems like my current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78967/which-dragon-magazine-issue-did-this-unusual-rat-like-race-appear-in&quot;&gt;bounty&lt;/a&gt; is being shown twice (as my previous bounty on the same question was made a bit earlier than 5 hours ago). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-13T16:26:31.427" LastActivityDate="2017-07-13T16:26:31.427" Title="Bounties are being listed twice on profile page" Tags="|bug|bounty|profile-page|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7313" CreationDate="2017-07-13T18:42:43.493" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What is actually [rules-as-written]? We should find out!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some time ago, being very new to the site, I tried to understand the nature of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag. I did make a mistake (?) of marking my question about game rules with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag, and I did make a mistake of basing my answer for a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; question on a house rule, because nothing in the question body was implying that the answer was expected to be written in a very special way. So it was definitely a good idea to ban describing what kind of answers you can provide using a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, my quest of googling for what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is actually failed. I found too many more or less different definitions. I think, before adding the tag warning, a single definition has to be chosen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Rules_as_Written_(terminology)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;According to dandwiki.com&lt;/a&gt;, &amp;quot;Rules as written in the D&amp;amp;D game refers to the rules that WoTC publishes. In a wider sense it means the rules of the game being played. Rules as written is used to distinguish these from both house rules and what may have been intended that the rules were to be, such as a reference in a blurb to an ability that the class in question does not actually get or that is being used incorrectly. It is important to note that often the rules as written are open to interpretation as there may be multiple viewpoints on what the RAW is.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, &amp;quot;RAW is &amp;quot;official (not house) rules, but there may be more definitions&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.urbandictionary.com/tags.php?tag=rules%20as%20written&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the only definition in the Urban Dictionary&lt;/a&gt;, &amp;quot;Rules As Written. Used by players of D&amp;amp;D and other RPGs to indicate a literal interpretation of the rules, often to gain some unintended, overpowering game effect.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;According to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/info&quot;&gt;tag wiki&lt;/a&gt;, in short, RAW is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a &amp;quot;no house rules, please&amp;quot; sign, nor is it for clarification of the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.implausiblenature.net/laeroths-blog/rules-as-intended-rai-vs-rules-as-written-raw&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this article on implausiblenature.net&lt;/a&gt;, RAW is considered the opposite of RAI (Rules-as-intended). RAW basically says &amp;quot;if the rules don't allow it exactly this way, you can't do it this way&amp;quot;, RAI says &amp;quot;if the rules are shady on that part, but you clearly see the intent behind, do as you think it was intended&amp;quot;. Notice that the article is written for a war game, Warhammer 40k, not a role-playing game, but the problem still persists: even in a war game you cannot describe all of the possible situations, and sometimes there are still non-trivial spots in the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://de.wiki-aventurica.de/wiki/Rules_As_Written&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this article written in German language&lt;/a&gt;, if I haven't botched my Linguistics check, RAW means simply &amp;quot;read rules exactly as they are written, word by word&amp;quot;, notifying that it may lead to some very absurd situations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Also, &amp;quot;Rules As Written is &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.listennotes.com/channels/1656788/rules-as-written-1/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a podcast&lt;/a&gt; by four friends who discuss their interpretation of the rules in D&amp;amp;D and tabletop and how certain combinations of the rulesets can create for unusual and likely unintended consequences. While many of these discoveries fall out of game play organically during Tony's or Bethany's games as DM, conversation also includes attempts to find odd combinations that spark intrigue and laughs at trying to find the most unusual circumstances.&amp;quot; I couldn't listen to it, though, as the server doesn't allow downloading files anymore.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's all that I found on the first page of Google search results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we basically have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RAW meaning &amp;quot;read rules exactly as they are written, do not add &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt;, read as literally as you can, even if it leads to absurd situations&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RAW meaning &amp;quot;do not use/refer to house rules&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two definitions seem to be both relatively common, and &lt;em&gt;perhaps&lt;/em&gt; we should stick to one of them, writing a tag warning saying which one &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; use here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-22T07:35:40.470" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7313" CreationDate="2017-07-13T19:08:17.940" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7314/1204&quot;&gt;what Zachiel drafted up&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7322/1204&quot;&gt;Baskakov_Dmitriy's conclusions&lt;/a&gt; plus the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for&quot;&gt;What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?&lt;/a&gt; meta's answers, I suggest this as a possible tag warning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about the &lt;em&gt;rules as written&lt;/em&gt; are those which:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are investigating as a priority &lt;em&gt;literal&lt;/em&gt; interpretations of the rules, even if it leads to absurd situations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are not usefully answered solely by homebrew, house rules, or speculation of intent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please express what you're looking for in terms of these criteria in your question body. If you're just asking about the rules of a game without these additional expectations, you don't need this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-27T09:15:18.747" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7324" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-13T19:31:32.257" Score="11" ViewCount="301" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has come to my attention that how we have been handling dice statistics, and probability questions in general, has created a perception that they are on topic even when they have nothing to do with RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To be clear, this is not asking about whether blatantly off-topic stats questions are actually on topic or not.&lt;/strong&gt; The question isn't about topicality — it's about whether we have set misleading precedents and what (if anything) to do about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A representative quote from a recent discussion, responding to my asserting that &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats and dice questions, absent RPG context, are obviously and axiomatically off topic (because we're not “Dice and Stats SE” or “RPG, plus oh also Dice and Stats SE”):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You ask me to accept as an axiom that mere stats/dice questions are off topic, but what is an example of that? To me, those last three Q's are mere stats/dice questions. […] I believe those last three Q's are on topic, and I believe they are mere stats/dice Q's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is troublesome, because such questions that aren't about RPGs are clearly off topic — we're not the place to come to if (e.g.) a grad student is studying dice probability academically and wants to ask about a particular complex rolling system's statistical properties, but unrelated to RPGs. Yet, that appears to be the impression that we're giving to our newcomers-becoming-regulars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, the issue seems to be that we have in the past extended the benefit of the doubt to stats/dice questions that are plausibly being asked for RPG design reasons (else, why would they come here?), without requiring that the question be explicit about this. However, it seems that not everyone notices that obviously a benefit of the doubt was given there, leading to scope creep from us being RPG.se to being “RPG and also RPG-unrelated Dice Stats SE”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If how we handle dice questions is causing active community members — and hold/open voters! — to believe that such questions &lt;em&gt;unrelated&lt;/em&gt; to RPGs are also on topic, then &lt;strong&gt;that's a problem&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it time to make a change? Should we require questions to be explicit about the RPG nature of their dice system questions, and close any that aren't until they're cleared up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or do we not need to change how we're handling questions, but instead need to reassert that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3276&quot;&gt;our topic isn't “Everything Ever”&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-14T19:03:56.330" LastActivityDate="2017-07-15T05:37:06.160" Title="Is giving the benefit of the doubt to dice/stats questions that don't mention RPGs resulting in site scope creep?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7325" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7324" CreationDate="2017-07-13T21:01:57.773" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Axiom, imho, is &quot;Players of games we represent will find this question/answer useful&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dice questions that fail this check have, imho, no place here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a thing, though.  I can't, for the life of me, come up with a reasonable dice question that won't be useful under the Axiom I presented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-07-13T21:01:57.773" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7324" CreationDate="2017-07-14T08:56:13.710" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So long as we hold to the old axiom:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Statistician/Mathematician?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this comes with a caveat: our best &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; to these questions should give the better/more specific advice.  I'd like to volunteer an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55720/5834&quot;&gt;old question&lt;/a&gt; of mine for tribute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, an answer to this question, in addition to probabilities, would talk about how the abilities should be priced (in relation to each other), how they might value certain levels of success with a small dice pool (you only need one to succeed versus you want as many successes as possible).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top rated answer, at least, addresses pricing indirectly.  However, I think there are many dice/statistics questions that have an accepted answer that's 100% statistics; the kind of thing Mathematics.SE could answer.  We should be wary about these, since they indicate the better/more specific criteria doesn't actually apply to the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;strong&gt;any&lt;/strong&gt; case, dice or statistics questions that have no explicit link to RPGs should be closed as off-topic, as the lack of a link makes it not possible to give a better answer than a mathematician.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user5834" LastEditorDisplayName="user5834" LastEditDate="2017-07-15T01:11:51.207" LastActivityDate="2017-07-15T01:11:51.207" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7327" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-14T15:49:50.063" Score="3" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;These questions&quot;, asked by different people, are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97766/&quot;&gt;Can sub-races breed and produce half-subraces?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67962/&quot;&gt;Which are races, and which are species?&lt;/a&gt;, closed as &quot;opinion based&quot; and &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I have no idea, how can it be &quot;unclear&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In every particular setting there are finite number of species (which are traditionally called &quot;races&quot;). Some of them can naturally interbreed, others can not. In the end of the day, the questions are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What species are able to create hybrid offspring?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would be that offspring infertile?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that you can ask this only in context of a particular setting. If the setting wasn't explicitly specified though, the question can be answered like &quot;this setting has various interbreeds, and this one has only half-orcs and half-elves&quot;. So these questions &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the only related question that wasn't closed was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69761/&quot;&gt;How could I play a Half-Dwarf Half-Elf?&lt;/a&gt;, and the answer was &quot;use the 'Creating a Race' chapter of DMG, page 285&quot;, so it actually didn't answer were there dwarf-elf hybrids &lt;em&gt;in the world&lt;/em&gt; or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Racial traits are base properties of a setting.&lt;/strong&gt; If you play, let's say, a faerunian setting, you can't just &quot;make up&quot; such important details. There are different species. Some of them are intelligent, others are not. Some of them can interbreed, others can not. There are official sources, describing how are the things going in the world, for this particular setting. I don't understand how can it be &quot;opinion based&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers can vary between editions, I thought, so I've asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103530/&quot;&gt;What D&amp;amp;D editions describe any hybrids of non-human races?&lt;/a&gt; This one was closed as &quot;too broad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we improve these questions to make them answerable? Or would it be better to ask another one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2017-07-14T17:17:21.430" LastActivityDate="2017-07-14T17:47:38.987" Title="How can we save these questions about cross breeds?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7327" CreationDate="2017-07-14T17:16:07.520" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Detail the problem and request a family-friendly solution&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To salvage such questions, they should include a description of the problem that needs solving. Idle curiosity is fine to a point, but when it's idle curiosity about &lt;em&gt;breeding&lt;/em&gt;, folks' buttons get pushed, especially if indulging that curiosity requires an answer that delves into topics unsuitable for nonadults.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In the case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/97766/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, comments encouraged the asker to edit into the question the problem that needs solving. At the time of this answer, the asker hasn't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67962/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; demands research across multiple editions of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; so as to compile breeding information, but how that information will be &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; remains a mystery. At the time of this answer, there's no &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; except that the asker doesn't have the information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions would benefit from a description of the problem, starting with explaining how the question applies to a campaign the asker's involved in or planning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I've asked a breeding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51657/8610&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; myself and emphasized that answers be kept family-friendly, and that's not because I'm a prude or anything but because I want answers to take the question seriously. Such an inclusion in any breeding question is probably a good idea if only so the asker isn't perceived as possessing unusual predilections (not that there's anything &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; with that—this is the Internet, after all).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2017-07-14T17:47:38.987" LastActivityDate="2017-07-14T17:47:38.987" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7324" CreationDate="2017-07-14T17:38:10.763" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The featured quote above is mine, and here is the full text would show I was (and still am) asking for a concrete example of a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You ask me to accept as an axiom that mere stats/dice questions are off topic, but what is an example of that? To me, those last three Q's are &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice questions. You looked at them and you have a different perspective. So clearly, your &amp;quot;mere dice/stats Q's&amp;quot; is different from my &amp;quot;mere dice/stats Q's.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I accepted or rejected that axiom, it would mean nothing, since we don't seem to agree on what to agree on. I asked you to evaluate those last three Q's, but your reluctance to evaluate them leaves me unable to establish a baseline for what is a &amp;quot;mere stats/dice question&amp;quot; in this discussion. In the absence of that baseline, my acceptance/rejection of the axiom is not meaningful at this moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best I can provide you is, I believe those last three Q's are on topic, and I believe they are mere stats/dice Q's. But it seems that what a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice Q is, is unclear and ill-defined, leaving me unable to accept that all mere stats/dice Q's are off topic. What is a mere stats/dice Q to me is evidently not, to you, and by extension, possibly to other users of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Concrete examples from myself&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am interested in seeing a conclusion to this myself, and so I offer up my personal categorization of a few recently asked stats and dice questions. We shall hopefully see in the comments if the Stack agrees with my classification, and whether these are on topic or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Method of Classification&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will be adopting the following criteria, as put forth in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7326/27327&quot;&gt;WrongOnTheInternet's answer&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7326/27327&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's comment&lt;/a&gt;, to classify questions as on or off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Statistician/Mathematician?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is presumed that, as this criteria has been established a long time ago and proposed by a diamond moderator, it should fit with the querent's criteria (another diamond moderator). That is to say I am expecting a level of equivalence between two senior members of the site. So a question that does not have answers draw upon RPG experience is a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice question; whereas one that &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt;, is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal illustration of this criteria runs like the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Suppose Bob has no experience with RPGs (but he is capable of researching it if needed, probably via Google), and he encounters a question, Q. He provides for it an answer, A1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Suppose, in an alternate but nearly-identical reality, Bob has plenty of experience with RPGs, and he encounters the question Q. He provides for it an answer, A2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q can be said to draw from RPG experience (or would draw better answers from an RPG expert over a mathematician) if A2 would be meaningfully different from A1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Results of Classification: On Topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103475/advantage-on-damage-rolls-is-it-still-balanced&quot;&gt;Advantage on damage rolls - is it still balanced?&lt;/a&gt; Probability is an aspect of this question, but ultimately they want to consider a mechanical balance in a specific RPG system, and the accepted answer mentions alternative strategies rooted in the game mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102030/does-sacred-flame-or-firebolt-do-more-damage-on-average-to-a-shadow-over-an-arbi&quot;&gt;Does Sacred Flame or Firebolt do more damage on average to a Shadow over an arbitrary but finite number of rounds?&lt;/a&gt;. This question can ultimately be formulated in a way a mathematician can answer with no RPG knowledge, but the accepted answer shows information about various related game effects that take familiarity with the system to have suggested in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101856/what-is-the-average-benefit-of-this-particular-stats-rolling-scheme&quot;&gt;What is the average benefit of this particular stats rolling scheme?&lt;/a&gt; You can calculate the answer of this using pure probability. However, the accepted answer doesn't stop at presenting the results of his calculation, but also offers ramifications of the answer from an RPG perspective, so it has benefited from RPG experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100133/how-can-i-compare-the-damage-gain-between-bless-and-faerie-fire&quot;&gt;How can I compare the damage gain between Bless and Faerie Fire?&lt;/a&gt; This question received many answers which consider situations that arise at the table, on top of pure number-crunching.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100016/how-long-can-creatures-with-no-swim-speed-travel-in-deep-water-before-they-die&quot;&gt;How long can creatures with no swim speed travel in deep water before they die?&lt;/a&gt; The answers take into account game-related settings, on top of the actual number-based question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Results: Off Topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103090/how-can-i-calculate-the-probability-of-being-able-to-purchase-a-card-in-my-custo&quot;&gt;How can I calculate the probability of being able to purchase a card in my custom die system?&lt;/a&gt; This question is related to RPG game design &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7310/27327&quot;&gt;as explained by the querent here&lt;/a&gt;, but it is not something that you have to draw from RPG experience on to answer. A mathematician could crank out a set of formulas the way they developed pot odds for poker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100799/how-does-halfling-luck-affect-the-probability-of-surviving-my-death-saves&quot;&gt;How does Halfling Luck affect the probability of surviving my death saves?&lt;/a&gt; If a mathematician researched what halfling luck and death saving throws are (it's not that hard), they can provide the same answer the accepted answer here has given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100035/how-does-halfling-luck-re-rolling-my-nat-1s-affect-my-dice-outcome&quot;&gt;How does Halfling Luck (re-rolling my Nat 1's) affect my dice outcome?&lt;/a&gt; For the same reasons as (2), it is off-topic. Notice also that all the answers it drew involved no RPG-related content. It is pure stats/math/programming skills (it even drew an answer from someone who has never played D&amp;amp;D before).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99386/is-this-the-right-formula-for-the-total-permutations-of-a-set-of-dice&quot;&gt;Is this the right formula for the total permutations of a set of dice?&lt;/a&gt; This question asks about d2's and d3's (you won't find those at your typical gaming table). The answers draw from no RPG experience at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98738/modelling-rolling-for-stats-in-anydice&quot;&gt;Modelling rolling for stats in Anydice&lt;/a&gt; This question is related to RPGs, but someone who has never played an RPG but has used Anydice before will be able to provide the same answer that has been accepted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Observation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my application of the critera to the top 10 most recent, un-closed stats questions, it seems half are off topic. The ones that are off topic under this criteria are all those questions a mathematician could answer if they took the time to research some of the game terms. The list includes some Q's that have received a considerable number of upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ones that are on topic, according to this criteria, seem to be those that ask about specific game effects or game mechanics that happen to involve random chance. But the Q's do not seem to be about the stats in its essence (and the answers it drew picked up on that), but about the impact of those stats on gameplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would love to list more questions. There's a lot of highly upvoted Q's that, in my opinion, fail the given criteria. However, I think these can serve as a starting point for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which of these questions have I incorrectly classified, and why? Hopefully, with a concrete starting point, we can begin to understand what is a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Ramifications, and an anecdote&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the first answers I gave on this site is one about stats, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/76656/27327&quot;&gt;about the net effect of GWM and SS on average damage&lt;/a&gt;. The top two answers for this particular Q draw on no RPG experience at all, and are just statistical calculations. They are also the two A's that fully address the Q. It was followed by four answers that no longer address the Q, but draw upon RPG experience on how to apply the information in the top 2 answers. These four answers have received low upvotes despite drawing upon experience (one even has a negative score), and I believe it's because they did not actually answer the Q.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this Q fails the given criteria. You can plainly see that the two A's that address the Q do not need RPG experience. Those that did draw upon experience did not manage to answer the Q. It fails all around. And yet it was also the first Q I came across that made me think: I'd like to see more of these, because they're fun to answer. It was my first accepted answer of the three answer's I'd given at the time, and it made a positive impact on me, thinking, perhaps naively, there is a fun place on the internet that can combine RPGs and math.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of the tag usage, I seem to have reached second highest top user next to nitsua for answer score, and sixth highest for question score. In other words, it seems to be one of the tags which I am, through some metric, most expert at, relative to all the other tags I seek out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moving these &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice questions to become off topic (a concrete action to close; not a hypothetical &amp;quot;if they are... then they are...&amp;quot;) will decrease my personal satisfaction with RPG.SE. I am not aware of any others who draw fun from RPG.SE in a similar way I do, but I do know there are some users who haunt the stats questions as well, which I have noticed personally by perusing many of the stats Q's myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I admit that I have been, over time, finding RPG.SE less fun to haunt. Something about the rigid nature of the Stack (that everybody agrees we can do nothing about) and the massive backlash since I gave this appropriately &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/96756/27327&quot;&gt;stats-based answer on fairness of a swingy saving throw mechanic&lt;/a&gt;. I am constantly re-evaluating if RPG.SE is still fun for me, and so far, of course, I find that it is. For now, the tags I look out for are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; (other than the 5e system tag, it goes without saying). It seems to me that a lot of the existing stats questions on RPG.SE are &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice questions -- specifically, the fun ones for me -- and of course, good gm-techniques questions are much rarer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I am asking for examples of what a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice question is, is because I want to know if all these questions I see as &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice questions are aligned with what they should be aligned with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are those five Q's I listed as off topic &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice Q's? Yes, I think so. Do I think they're off topic? No, I don't think so. Will I vote to close them anyway? Sure, I'll go with the flow. But give me a baseline of what is a &lt;em&gt;mere&lt;/em&gt; stats/dice Q so that I do not inadvertently VTC what seems to be half of the open statistics questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-14T17:38:10.763" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7309" CreationDate="2017-07-14T18:01:37.163" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I edited the question to be readable there was no indication that the system had any significant relation to an RPG at all.  The OP said in the post at that point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK working on a dice game as part of an in game system where players can play a dice Game that requires a players roll specific results in order to gain a card,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok its a game within a game&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This plus the content of the game made it appear that the game mechanics asked about had no bearing on the RPG they were being played in at all.  The question, as it appeared, was &amp;quot;How can I get probabilities for this card game I'm developing?&amp;quot; with the only RPG context being that the OP was planning on having the people playing an RPG with them play this card game, too.  The question did not and does not invite commentary on how to integrate such a game or anything like that, it is and was solidly about the probabilities of a card game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This differentiated it from arbitrary questions about statistics, in my mind.  Were the mechanics intended for use in an RPG (as the OP's answer here indicates) our expertise would be applicable, and we could talk about the stochastic characteristics of this method in the context of its use in RPG conflict resolution (well, somebody could.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/99412/&quot;&gt;I have trouble doing that with non-math terms&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we ask a question about arbitrary statistics on this site, it is understood that we are asking about those statistics in an RPG context.  That context is necessary for the questions to be on-topic, and the principle of good faith tells us we should assume that's the context the question is in unless there is strong evidence to the contrary.  If somebody asks &amp;quot;Are sequential coin flips good random bytestring generators?&amp;quot; here, it's appropriate to respond with &amp;quot;No, because that takes way too much table time&amp;quot;, because we're answering from an RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, questions about using tools primarily used for RPGs are, in my opinion, also on-topic here.  We have the experts to be able to answer such questions to a high standard, because the experts in those tools have that expertise as an extension of their RPG expertise.  Dice are a tool we use extensively, but dice are also used extensively outside RPGs.  Asking about dice in general should be on-topic, I think, since they are ubiquitous and quintessential RPG tools, but asking about dice in the specific context of a non-RPG (like, 'what are the odds of me being able to take this space in Risk') is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; on topic.  This is kinda weird because the underlying question of 'what are the odds that A beats B with this weird dice pool mechanic?' &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt;  be on-topic, but somehow because that pool is called 'playing the board game Risk' it becomes off topic.  I'm not sure that this division is &lt;em&gt;fair&lt;/em&gt; but it is the division that seems most appropriate to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about a Board or Card game with no significant RPG context shouldn't be on topic here, even if they are just a question of statistics, even though general questions about statistics with no context are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the OP made it clear here that these mechanics are intended to be used in the actual game system as well, so I'll edit the question to mention that (since the OP still hasn't), and it should be open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-14T18:01:37.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7331" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7324" CreationDate="2017-07-14T18:29:56.870" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I'm not gonna argue that questions without an RPG context are on-topic (they're not). However, I'm gonna say that we should keep allowing questions without an explicit RPG context, i.e. that those questions are on-topic. Not, like, despite not having an RPG context but because we are allowed to assume a relation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dice are a ubiquitous and quintessential tool for RPG players.  I think questions about the proper use of such tools and even just about the tools themselves ought to be on-topic, as the tools have such a huge history with the RPG industry.  For example, I think questions like &quot;Who made the first d20?&quot;, &quot;Why are all platonic solids standard dice shapes?&quot;, &quot;Why are higher numbers 'harder to roll'?&quot;, &quot;How many more hp does a Fighter have than a Wizard assuming identical Constitution on average?&quot;, and &quot;How does an exploding die affect the expected result?&quot; are totally fine questions, even though none of them have anything to do with the skill of role-playing per se.  They still have a lot to do with RPGs, because they are about dice, which are intrinsically tied to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We allow questions on the use and history of RPG paraphernalia.  For example, we allow questions on how to use AnyDice, which is not an RPG, because it is explicitly an RPG aid.  We similarly allow questions about the use of any other RPG aid, with the understanding that these are sufficiently related to be on-topic.  If it is scope creep, I think this is good scope creep resulting from (re)growth in RPGing as an activity in society and the associated development of increasingly complex tools for use in RPGing. Basically, as the RPG community as a whole grows, people get better at RPGing and better at using and making tools for RPGing.  When an RPG tool is refined and expanded and refined across many dedicated users and across significant time, it is no surprise that a skill-based barrier to entry would develop.  This site should help new users by providing answers to their questions on the use of such tools, even as the basic questions become increasingly dissociated from RPGing by reason of increased internal complexity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we allow such questions, and we should, then this is yet another reason statistics questions are eminently on-topic.  Statistics questions are &lt;em&gt;inherently questions about the use of an RPG tool&lt;/em&gt;.  That tool is randomness.  Randomness has been harnessed to power conflict resolution in RPGs since the advent of the hobby.  While there are games that do not employ the tool, there are many, many games that &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; it, and a good understanding of probabilities, to play properly.  We should allow questions about randomness, even separate from dice, since dice are often just a tool for leveraging the bigger tool of randomness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true there are other experts on randomness.  But questions asked here should get the benefit of the doubt as regards RPG scoping, because that's how we ('re supposed to) roll.  We assume good intent and expert background on the part of the asker unless they demonstrate otherwise.  And even if a question turns out not to use RPG expertise to differ from the answer a mathematician would give, that's not to say that RPG expertise isn't involved in reaching that conclusion.  I don't think that it's necessary for non-math RPG expertise to be superior to math expertise in answering a question for it to be on-topic, but identical answers don't show that because RPG expertise is often needed to ascertain that, in fact, no extraneous non-math thingies apply to the problem in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion, I think these questions are on-topic within our scope both as questions about RPG paraphenalia and RPG tools, and furthermore often benefit from RPG expertise in either an obvious or non-obvious manner, and certainly should remain on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-07-15T05:37:06.160" LastActivityDate="2017-07-15T05:37:06.160" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7278" CreationDate="2017-07-15T19:36:26.180" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Happy this came up, glad to give my answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I consider myself a &lt;em&gt;former&lt;/em&gt; rpg.se member. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at my activity records, you'll see I used to be pretty active around here. But I don't play any edition of D&amp;amp;D or PF, so it felt like there was really nothing for me to contribute or to get out of being here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I chanced to see an opportunity to answer a question recently because I came by to search for a link to an old answer to share elsewhere. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that D&amp;amp;D is, as it has nearly always been, the 800-pound gorilla. But before 5e there was room for GUMSHOE, Fate, PbtA, and the rest of the indie scene. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="696" LastActivityDate="2017-07-15T19:36:26.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7333" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7334" CreationDate="2017-07-16T20:38:25.990" Score="13" ViewCount="219" Body="&lt;p&gt;A lot of the times we close a question for being unclear, it's because it's missing a system tag. I would guess that's the case for over half of our closed-as-unclear questions. With this in mind, could we have a separate close reason for it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest advantage of a separate close reason would be being more explicit to the new users of the site - the ones who need explicit instructions far more than us others. It would also serve as a visible reminder for other users to include the system tag and flag questions missing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T14:07:10.090" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T14:07:10.090" Title="Could we have a separate close reason for missing system tag?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|game-systems|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7333" CreationDate="2017-07-16T21:12:04.657" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two downsides, one technical and one communicative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The technical issue is that we've used up our allotted number of custom close reasons: we get three, and we currently have &lt;strong&gt;board/card game&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;video game playing/dev&lt;/strong&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;shopping&lt;/strong&gt; reasons as ours. It's in theory possible to petition the SE devs to give us a fourth, but in practice it's only granted if we can show dire need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The communications issue is that these close reasons aren't &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; custom — they are all hardcoded to say that the question has been put on hold for being &lt;strong&gt;off topic&lt;/strong&gt;. That sends mixed signals to the post author, possibly mixed enough to defeat the purpose of having a custom message attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To overcome these issues we would have to show that there is overwhelming need and that a custom reason would substantially solve the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-07-16T21:12:04.657" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7335" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7340" CreationDate="2017-07-17T20:35:19.830" Score="30" ViewCount="1368" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103654/could-a-lone-wizard-act-as-a-citys-law-enforcement&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, a user repeatedly left comments suggesting 'correction' of gender pronouns in cases where the original text wasn't itself incorrect. These comments were later deleted by moderators. No posts were actually edited by the person suggesting the corrections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Independent of the actual reasons for asking for such changes, the effect of those comments was not to improve the answers but instead an effective derailment, unsurprisingly generating user comments about gendered language. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should RPG.SE enforce a specific language standard (here: with regard to gender) even when the original text is correct according to the rules of English grammar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="48793" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T20:04:20.300" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T20:04:20.300" Title="Should RPG.SE enforce a specific standard for handling gender pronouns?" Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="13" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-17T21:57:33.257" Score="35" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't enforce specific expectations around how people gender things and should not really do so. It's up to individuals to determine how they want to handle things: I like &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;singular &lt;em&gt;'they'&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, others like to use &lt;em&gt;'he or she'&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;'he/she'&lt;/em&gt;, others use default male. Use whatever works for you and the discussion. Sometimes I catch myself using default male and make a point of using default female instead because why not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stay consistent with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt;: call people by the appropriate pronouns, respect a trans individual's gender expression, etc. That's business as usual though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our goal is to be a valuable RPG Q&amp;amp;A site. Respecting gender diversity is an admirable goal and something we should aim for. I don't much like default male either myself. Having an enforced policy of gender pronoun usage however is going to cause a lot of trouble for our community &amp;mdash; that's the kind of thing that requires major buy-in, and it requires people to understand how to navigate this gender space appropriately. It's a significant expenditure of energy which I don't believe will be worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those interested in getting that buy-in would do better by opening up a conversation and requesting a certain practice. That may secure buy-in from individuals interested who can voluntarily write their own posts this way. I believe when SevenSidedDie mentioned opening a meta about it whilst correcting that user, SSD probably meant less &quot;propose a policy&quot;, more &quot;point out there's a lot of default-male and make a constructive request that we can handle it another way, and open the floor to discussion on the matter&quot; which would work better to that end. (That's not to say you were attempting to follow SSD's suggestion, just that's what I imagine SSD meant.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-17T22:58:12.307" LastActivityDate="2017-07-17T22:58:12.307" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-17T22:03:16.377" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Enforce? No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Encourage? &lt;em&gt;Absolutely.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me quote from a very important document that governs how our site is run — and  how it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be run when we forget:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Be welcoming, be patient, and assume good intentions. […]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Language likely to offend or alienate individuals or groups based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc. will not be tolerated. At all. (Those are just a few examples; when in doubt, just don't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[…]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We're proud to be a large, user-driven space on the internet where name-calling, harassment, and other online nastiness are almost non-existent. It's up to all of us to keep it that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In summary, have fun, and be good to each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt;, our policy on acceptable behaviour on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be Nice is usually invoked when someone is doing something &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, but that's not its only purpose, just the most common time we remind people about it. &lt;strong&gt;Be Nice is also, at its core, an aspirational statement about who this site is for.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have that policy of what's okay only to stop people who don't follow it — we have that policy also because it describes &lt;em&gt;who we are and want to be&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And who is that? Everyone. And how does it say we achieve that? By including everyone, and requiring that everyone be included.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is that relevant here? Because as a community, the RPG community is really, really bad at including women and girls as fully-fledged members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as we all know, words are important — things like game rules can turn on a single word. How we use words on the site reflects who we are, and who we welcome, and how well we accomlish that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Words have power. So that's why people raise things like using default “he” as an issue  — because that word choice has power, in a way that practically and directly impacts the core mission of our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The wider RPG community has a poor gender record&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The roleplaying games community has &lt;a href=&quot;http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Roleplaying_Games&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a bit of a gender problem&lt;/a&gt;, in that girls and women are generally not noticed, ignored, minimised, or otherwise not included when we talk about RPG fans. The image of RPG fans is generally male — and that's self-perpetuating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our policy on inclusiveness seeks to amend that, but preventing people from being &lt;em&gt;mean&lt;/em&gt; isn't enough. People who are traditionally put on the “outside” looking in — like girls and women have been in the RPG community — need to be actively shown that they're welcome in order to overcome the barrier that past (and ongoing, elsewhere) exclusion created. It's not enough to be neutral — as the document says, we have to be &lt;em&gt;welcoming&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have to create that welcoming atmosphere on our site, and being a site &lt;strong&gt;made&lt;/strong&gt; out of words, we do that with our words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A side trek: Grammatical correctness is a red herring&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Grammatical correctness is a red herring. There are many things which are grammatically correct which &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; merit changing a post. Being grammatically correct is not the minimum bar for quality here — far from it! Grammatically incorrect posts are generally just fine, and are sometimes fixed up, but we have no rule about requiring it. Conversely, we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have rules that require fixing up a post when it crosses certain lines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I saying that using “he” as a default is crossing a line? No — maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that's not the point this section is making. The point here is that grammatical correctness is utterly irrelevant in discussions like this about how we govern ourselves as a community. Defending something because it's “grammatically correct” is at best a misunderstanding of what's important to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A further historical side trek: Default Masculine is neither grammatically correct nor incorrect&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Believing that default masculine is the correct English grammar is actually a relatively new invention. &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Trend_to_prescription_of_generic_he_from_19th_century&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;It was created in the 19th century by England grammarians&lt;/a&gt; specifically to attempt to make it incorrect to use singular “they” for entities in a sentence of unknown (grammatical) gender. (Yes, that's right! &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Usage&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Singular “they” is older than the default-masculine rule&lt;/a&gt;, dating at least to the 1700s, and obviously likely earlier too.) The official reason they did it is what we now recognise as stupid reasons: because “they” has weird number-agreement, grammatically. (This is a stupid reason because singular “you” has the exact same number-agreement dynamic — and a well-documented potential replacement in “thou” — yet they saw no need to “fix” &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; pronoun.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So masculine default has no special historical or grammatical weight that makes it more correct, and the Victorian and Georgian grammarians who falsely taught that it did (along with &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;other invented “rules”&lt;/a&gt;) were engaging in language revisionism that still causes problems today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Side-trek ended.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What we should do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said, we encourage everyone to feel welcome here. And we &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; that people assume good faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when someone in good faith proposes that a post's writing is reinforcing the perception that &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt;, the RPG.se community, consider men to be the default RPG audience, through transforming gender-unknown subjects into masculine subjects, we should in good faith listen to that critique of the writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When possible, we should strive to show that we are &lt;em&gt;actively&lt;/em&gt; including people who are generally given a harder row to hoe in our community, and we can do that in such small ways as correcting unnecessary re-gendering. (Or mis-gendering! We not only get unknown genders transformed into ‘he’s, I've seen even &lt;em&gt;female&lt;/em&gt; characters in questions transformed into men by the answers.) We can rearrange sentences to not need a pronoun. We can use “he or she” or “she or he” or singular “they”. We can do like some RPG texts do and use default-she for GMs and default-he for players. We can alternate, looking at what's already on the page and choosing the other pronoun to balance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And if we do enough of that, the occasional default-he becomes better: just another stylistic choice among many, instead of the most common default used on the site. Doing &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; to avoid default-he means, paradoxically, that we don't even have to strive for some kind of perfection of non-masculine writing — which would go right past inclusive and comes back around to excluding some people.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can, in short, approach this thoughtfully and with consideration. We can show that we're making an effort, and not just dismissing or ignoring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Should this be enforced?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like I said at the beginning, &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;, this shouldn't be enforced. We don't need a mandate, just a shared aspiration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to imagine that girl or woman reading a particular post and feel like they can see themselves in our writing, even if only because the writing doesn't &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; they're a boy or man. Some of us &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; that girl or woman who wants to see us included in the site's writing! (That should go without saying, but sadly it still needs saying.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should not be enforced. It should be &lt;em&gt;encouraged&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I encourage each and every one of us to &lt;em&gt;help&lt;/em&gt; in our own small ways, as authors and editors. I encourage everyone to be part of welcoming everyone. We have our small powers granted by the site, and we can use them for the betterment of this site for all our community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Not just for girls and women&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although “he or she” is what prompted this meta, and so I address that specifically throughout, the principles I talk about are much more general and making girls and women feel welcome is just a specific application thereof. I'm a bit uncomfortable making this an endnote, but I'm not sure how best to convey that earlier or throughout while addressing the actual situation at hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would hope that it's obvious how this applies to all people though. If not — focus on the principles underlying the answer. …Or tell me how to fix it. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-07-19T15:44:47.307" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T15:44:47.307" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-17T23:30:45.773" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our policy should be as politically neutral as &quot;Be Nice&quot; allows.  This means that pronouns not used to refer to specific people should be allowed as written by the author of the post within the constraints of readable grammar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it comes to Pronouns used to refer to specific people, one should follow one of two patterns:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use a suitably 'correct' pronoun of the person referred to, as defined by that person.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't use pronouns.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of a person's political opinion, the above guidelines can be followed, without offending anyone.  There is simply no excuse for using a contentious pronoun because pronouns are optional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is largely in agreement with doppelgreener's answer, but that answer does not address a case that should, imho, be addressed directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastActivityDate="2017-07-17T23:30:45.773" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7339" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-18T00:21:03.957" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I care not one bit for &lt;em&gt;political&lt;/em&gt; correctness; but am a stickler for correctness. Uses of &lt;em&gt;he or she&lt;/em&gt; invokes a feeling of annoyance in any place I see its use but they produce no more annoyance than the use of &lt;em&gt;he&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;she&lt;/em&gt; when used individually when not applying to an &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the site should encourage the use of singular they. I can put up with my feelings of annoyance but my annoyance isn't coming from some sense of political correctness but purely one of accuracy. Now &lt;em&gt;encourage&lt;/em&gt; is different than enforce. Just saying: &lt;strong&gt;We like singular they but &lt;em&gt;he&lt;/em&gt; is accepted here, as well as &lt;em&gt;she&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;he/she&lt;/em&gt; or like variants&lt;/strong&gt;. Should be enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: &amp;quot;How many spell slots does a wizard have at level three?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;He or she&lt;/em&gt; has X spell slots.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm thinking: [insert favourite expletive], it's an abstract question! There is no actual person just say &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;They have&lt;/em&gt; X spell slots.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is fantasy land, it could be a sentient animated rock wizard, or a self replicating amoeba wizard, both incidentally have no gender while the later could still reproduce. I digress, the point is when asking a RPG rules questions you generally don't need gender and introducing it is just an annoyance in keeping things simple. It's just Occam's razor don't go adding things when you don't need to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now another example which has to do with role playing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: I'm playing Henrieta a female barbarian gnome with a penchant for baking, she lives in the great mushroom forest of [some made up land], what should she bake for a group of visiting elvish dignitaries?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: She should bake mushroom strudel because it's loved by elves and gnomes alike and is a well known delicacy of [some made up land].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously &lt;em&gt;she&lt;/em&gt; is appropriate [you could replace she with &lt;em&gt;Your barbarian gnome&lt;/em&gt;... but that's a bit obtuse].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the context of this question by the OP, the actual question as far as I'm concerned is: &lt;em&gt;Should people use he/she in contexts for which pronouns aren't needed as they aren't referencing anyone&lt;/em&gt;? And the answer should be yes, lets be tolerant, I just want to be painfully clear that tolerance is good and I hope the above makes it clear that it is still just wrong, but we're gracious and can overlook it [although with the above I hope we are in agreement that such people are still the worse for doing so].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Further issues with use of pronouns when not referring to actual people&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hopefully the above is enough but personally speaking pronouns have deep meaning, and I think they have deep meaning for more than just myself, consider if a friend spoke the following sentence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[pronoun] was walking down the street and [pronoun] was [adjective].&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say the above sentence is evocative, that is it would conjure vivid imagery for most audiences and would be filled with vivid detail from the type of day to the type of person and clothing. Taking into consideration the speaker and the assumed environment. This sentence is about as devoid of content as possible and it still packs a punch. So kindly, if one doesn't need to be introducing some character into my though processes, because there isn't one, don't do it, it annoys me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of how fundamental pronouns are we start building context off them immediately and you &lt;strong&gt;can't&lt;/strong&gt; have a &lt;strong&gt;he-or-she&lt;/strong&gt;, logically it isn't possible, it feels awkward because we are going to create a contextual frame [correct or not] and then have it screwed up in an way that can't even logically exist. To be clear someone is either: He, She, Both, Neither, or one of the previous but currently indeterminate... Unless someone wants to be a jerk and creates a situation where Schrodinger's cat is inseminated and the moment of conception is held in some sort of quantum state... other than that you can't have he-or-she.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Oxymoron's despite their name should be beautiful, who can't appreciate &lt;em&gt;deafening silence&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;seriously funny&lt;/em&gt;, or &lt;em&gt;burning cold&lt;/em&gt;. Our brains build a context, in this case the appropriate connotation and meaning from the first word is determined by the second, if it is something that can be adapted but isn't typically we spend a bit more time, but we savour the moment, it deepens meaning. But if we hit something like he-she, my mind pauses and then says: &amp;quot;[expletive] you&amp;quot;. It's just a bloody awkward expression, that seemingly only exists to state: I want to derail your reading process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not that everyone will agree but I hope to have conveyed why I &lt;strong&gt;hate&lt;/strong&gt; the expression, in such a way that you could see how a lot of people could very reasonably come to the same opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33194" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T17:21:23.660" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-18T14:58:24.953" Score="41" Body="&lt;h2&gt;All pronouns are neutral and should be enforced as such.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally think that nobody should be harassed, or be in the red for guessing wrong on how someone wants to be called, and this should extend to RPG.SE. no pronoun should have a negative connotation, whether being misused or otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unless otherwise stated, all questions are gender agnostic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that 'he/him', 'they/their', and 'she/her' pronouns are correct, and none of them are incorrect. Good answers simply maintain continuity, and don't switch to refer to the same people. The answer may decide to change pronouns if the answerer wishes, but there is no &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; gender. An answer should never be &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; because the gender is 'incorrect', because no gender option is incorrect. If the OP puts in the post that this is a gender-issue, then correct pronouns should be used. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29904" LastActivityDate="2017-07-18T14:58:24.953" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6717" CreationDate="2017-07-18T16:18:25.887" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cUHFm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Board &amp;amp; Card Games Stackexchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5675" LastEditorUserId="5675" LastEditDate="2017-07-18T18:01:49.743" LastActivityDate="2017-07-18T18:01:49.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7342" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-07-18T17:39:46.907" Score="15" ViewCount="462" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has come up in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103572/what-is-the-cost-for-a-reload-of-f4-fusion-block-missiles&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. The answerer, Clint Black, is the official brand manager for Savage Worlds, and (when their forum is up) he is responsible for all official rules clarifications and corrections. I believe the user is the person claimed, otherwise they went out of their way to find an actual photo of Clint in order to impersonate them. However, others may well disagree, and one commenter has asked for additional evidence of the fact, with some kind of citation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So a couple of related questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;To what extent do we go on trust that a named user known within the RPG community is who they say they are?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When that user has official responsibility for rules questions and clarifications, how should they evidence their answers? This is especially an issue when an answer is a clarification that does not exist in published material.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:47:57.483" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:47:57.483" Title="To what extent does a well known representative from an RPG company who represents their product need to provide evidence of this in their answers?" Tags="|discussion|game-designers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7342" CreationDate="2017-07-18T18:34:57.127" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the moment, I don't think this is really controversial to say:  Answers require supporting evidence here, and &quot;I'm a developer for this game&quot; is not in some way protected from that burden of proof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And honestly, its in the best interest of the real Clint Black that we enforce proof on this point, as the potential for highly damaging situations is too high if we allow a charlatan to represent Savage Worlds on our stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I opine that we require proof for such assertions, but assume good faith for a reasonable amount of time while the user goes to provide it.  Basically exactly how we handle any other assertion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see two additional questions involved in this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;How&lt;/em&gt; do such assertions get proven.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When is it relevant?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as how such an assertion is proven, options include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An official statement from the company linking this account to them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Photo evidence from the user identifying himself as himself, and linking this account to himself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as when it is relevant:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being a developer is only relevant in as much as the developer is making an official ruling, not otherwise source-able.  If the developer is citing the rules, his status as the developer is irrelevant, and the rules should be directly cited.  This should be made clear whenever and where ever it isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35386" LastEditorUserId="35386" LastEditDate="2017-07-18T18:48:57.023" LastActivityDate="2017-07-18T18:48:57.023" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7344" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7313" CreationDate="2017-07-18T20:37:47.090" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Update the tag wiki and the tag description; don't add a warning flag&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The KISS principle needs to apply.  If the tag wiki and tag description do not sufficiently embody what the tag means, then update them, or upgrade them, so that they explain the tag better, more clearly, or more concisely.  That offer was made sometime back, but whatever upgrade did (or didn't) get written obviously needs more effort or improvement.     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a warning to this tag strikes me as a case of picking at a scab.  Using a warning makes it look to me that you are discriminating (perhaps unintentionally, and with the best of intentions) against this tag and its users.   The road to hell is paved with good intentions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fix the tag wiki, and the tag descriptions.  Let the informed user know what the tag is used for.  The uninformed user won't care either way, and you can't fix that.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104549/22566&quot;&gt;Here's an example where two informed users can't seem to agree on how we use RAW tag here on the site, but neither user is the question asker&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't think this question is answerable--I did a quick search and&#xA;  did not find any monsters that are immune to all magic. Because your&#xA;  full immunity to all magic damage isn't in the rules, you have to&#xA;  decide how it works in your homebrew. – Icyfire 2 hours ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Icyfire I thought it was answerable. Granted, the Kensei is a UA,&#xA;  but it does &quot;magical damage&quot; just as the Monk's martial arts damage&#xA;  does at level 6. – KorvinStarmast 20 mins ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @KorvinStarmast, it's not the &quot;magical damage&quot; part that's at issue. There's no RAW 100% immunity to magic damage, and no precedent for dealing with that in the books. Because that ability is homebrew, it's up to the homebrewer to decide how it works. Your answer gives some context to make that decision, but the direct answer is &quot;this is not addressed in the books&quot; IMO. – Icyfire 5 mins ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @Icyfire No RAW tag, so I disagree with your assertion of how rigid&#xA;  this question is. &quot;I would like a RAW answer if possible&quot; is not the&#xA;  same class as what you are stating in that comment. Please check out&#xA;  the various meta posts about the [rules-as-written] tag. –&#xA;  KorvinStarmast 2 mins ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-08-01T18:41:25.997" LastActivityDate="2017-08-01T18:41:25.997" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7342" CreationDate="2017-07-19T10:45:29.827" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is the Internet: assume no one is who they say they are. I'm certainly not me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, this site is a meritocracy based on the quality of the answers. Good answers can incorporate an appeal to authority but that authority has to be authoritative, however, this is not the only measure of a good answer. If a poster has a position of responsibility within a game company that has an &lt;em&gt;official&lt;/em&gt; channel for rules clarifications then that poster should post &lt;em&gt;there&lt;/em&gt; - they can then refer to it &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T10:45:29.827" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7347" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7342" CreationDate="2017-07-19T21:00:47.650" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's not a way we have to validate such claims and note them in a persistent way - and we're not really interested in doing so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers' value should be taken in and of themselves; and as a user builds up a reputation, that can also help inform people of the likely value of their answers. We've had people on the site who said they were everyone from Frank Mentzer to 3pp developers and WotC AD League organizers; I see no real reason to not take them at their word because in the end it doesn't matter if they are or not.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they seek to make an official ruling, they should make it on their own game's faq/forum/whatever and we can link to it from here, instead of trying to come up with some identity-validation process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T21:00:47.650" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7335" CreationDate="2017-07-19T21:06:32.910" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to give you the super short mxyzplk version of this.  No, we are not interested in enforcing gender pronouns.  Feel free and promulgate a voluntary best practice people can use here on meta. More inclusive language is welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even better, lead by example by YOU writing questions and answers that use inclusive language in the way you want it to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not hassle individual questioners and answerers about it via comments unless it's objectively wrong (e.g. used him for a woman).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can submit edits in specific cases, but if you submit edits on every question/answer ever changing &quot;he&quot; to &quot;he or she&quot; or the like that's going to end very quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are also not interested in the arguments that infest other Internet sites between the usual two sides. So take it to reddit. Here we are professional and polite and that's it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-07-19T21:06:32.910" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7349" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7350" CreationDate="2017-07-20T23:00:17.623" Score="8" ViewCount="278" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the Storyteller System (Classic World of Darkness, Orpheus, Trinity, Exalted, etc.) and Storytelling System (New World of Darkness) White Wolf included the &lt;em&gt;Golden Rule&lt;/em&gt; (their version of &lt;em&gt;Rule Zero&lt;/em&gt; which expressly defines ST/GM Fiat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... when questions come up that are not &lt;strong&gt;expressly&lt;/strong&gt; RAW but there is a RAW GM Fiat rule which one takes precedence?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related question: (?)&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5395/how-to-answer-a-raw-question-when-the-raw-are-silent&quot;&gt;How to answer a RAW question when the RAW are silent?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I made a valiant (my opinion) attempt at answering a question that consisted of a RAW portion and one that, arguably(?), needs GM fiat for full clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Granted, there are edition issues which I did not know/account for but the root question remains.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36852" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:57:11.733" LastActivityDate="2017-07-22T06:20:07.557" Title="How to answer when GM Fiat is included in RAW?" Tags="|discussion|world-of-darkness|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7349" CreationDate="2017-07-20T23:30:32.843" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just answer RAW with RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most games explicitly or implicitly don't constrain their GMs to the RAW.  But when someone is asking a RAW question, they are wanting to engage just with the game text and not &quot;what you would rule&quot; - any question on the site that's not tagged RAW is answered with a mix of book rules and judgement calls.  If you just answer that to a RAW question then it's not different from a non-RAW question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So even when the game says &quot;or make it up,&quot; a RAW question should not be about that.   Of course, the more a game leans on that, the goofier it is to ask a RAW question for it, but that's the OP's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-07-20T23:39:18.800" LastActivityDate="2017-07-20T23:39:18.800" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7351" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7349" CreationDate="2017-07-22T06:20:07.557" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;People ask questions because they want answers.  If we allow that the people asking the questions are experts in the things that they are asking about unless there's evidence otherwise, the number of situations in which &quot;Rule 0&quot;, on its own, is a good answer to a question about the rules of a system is extremely small.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I ask &quot;What are the rules for vehicular combat in FATE 2.0?&quot; I'm not asking to be told to make up my own rules or that the rulebook says I can make up my own rules.  I'm asking about 'the' rules, for some given value of 'the', certainly including the FATE 2.0 rulebook, but possibly including other stuff.  An answer can certainly say &quot;Hey, here's some rules, and also I made up some better rules and I use those now&quot; and that's cool, but a good answer definitely needs to talk about any and all rules that the system actually has for the thing, because that's what those sorts of questions are about.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;There aren't any rules, because you're supposed to use GM Fiat for this&quot; is a reasonable answer, though, when it's true.  But the part where it talks about the absense of rules is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-07-22T06:20:07.557" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7353" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7354" CreationDate="2017-07-25T16:05:42.143" Score="27" ViewCount="719" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that in some cases people vote to close as Primarily Opinion Based when they think the only possible answer is &amp;quot;Up to the DM&amp;quot;. There's a slight twist in this community where it's not always the opinion of the Asker; its often the opinion of the Dungeon Master / Game Master.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In those cases is the answer really &amp;quot;Primarily Opinion Based&amp;quot; or would the actual answer be, &amp;quot;You'll need to talk with your DM.&amp;quot; Hopefully with some elaboration about possible rational they'll come up with and discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Primarily Opinion Based stock definition reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is quite different from &amp;quot;Ask the DM&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However,  if &amp;quot;Ask the DM/GM&amp;quot; is widely considered equivalent to &amp;quot;Primarily Opinion Based&amp;quot; on this community, than a slight adjustment to the close reason to indicate that could be beneficial. Or giving it its own custom close reason (space permitting).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35172" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:04:19.757" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:04:19.757" Title="Does &quot;Ask the DM / GM&quot; equate to &quot;Primarily opinion based?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|faq|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7353" CreationDate="2017-07-25T16:33:34.240" Score="37" Body="&lt;h1&gt;They're not the same&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a common equivalence that I've seen applied too, but it's a false equivalence. The idea seems to be that every GM could rule differently, so the answer is as diverse as the number of GMs in the world, so it must be primarily opinion-based, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that doesn't quite pan out in practice in regards to how to use our Primarily Opinion-Based (POB) hold reason: If everyone agrees that the correct &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt; is “Ask the GM”, then it's hard to see how the answer &lt;strong&gt;here&lt;/strong&gt; — that everyone agrees on — is a matter of diverse opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our hold reasons are based on what happens here on this site, not what does or might happen at the many play tables out there. If the answer is singular and objective here — “that's up to the GM” — then it's not a matter of diverse opinion &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt; and shouldn't be held as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The exception&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally there's an exception: when the correct answer is that it's up to GM ruling, but the question is nonetheless gathering &lt;em&gt;piles&lt;/em&gt; of actual opinions about how to make the ruling. We can't always tell why a particular question is inspiring people to directly submit their opinions, but when it does, that's incontrovertible evidence that — for some reason — &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question &lt;em&gt;as written&lt;/em&gt; matches the “will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions” for the Primarily Opinion-Based hold reason, and should have it applied. (Maybe during the hold the problem can be discovered and fixed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if a question that is correctly answered with “that's a GM ruling” isn't drawing &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; opinions, it should not be assumed that it will, and shouldn't be held for with the POB reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-07-25T16:33:34.240" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6775" CreationDate="2017-07-25T16:41:07.220" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This problem has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/139091/271348&quot;&gt;reported on Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt;, and can be reproduced by generating a sufficiently large (~10) number of rep events over a time period of ~1 hour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bug has not been fixed as of July 2017.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="31575" LastEditDate="2017-07-28T15:42:42.753" LastActivityDate="2017-07-28T15:42:42.753" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-07-25T16:41:07.220" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7356" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-07-27T10:14:03.243" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on meta about tag warnings, notices that advise an individual about particular issues with using a tag, above and beyond the tag wiki excerpt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-28T00:11:15.487" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T00:11:15.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7357" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-07-27T10:14:03.243" Score="0" Body="For questions on meta about tag warnings, notices that advise an individual about particular issues with using a tag, above and beyond the tag wiki excerpt." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-28T00:11:15.487" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T00:11:15.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7358" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7361" CreationDate="2017-07-27T14:19:50.573" Score="26" ViewCount="392" Body="&lt;p&gt;Back in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7313/should-we-add-a-rules-as-written-tag-warning-and-what-should-it-say&quot;&gt;Should we add a [rules-as-written] tag warning, and what should it say?&lt;/a&gt; we came to a general agremeent on a couple of tag warnings for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is a feature request directed to Stack Exchange staff to secure their assistance in implementing those tag warnings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;1. For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; on main site, the following tag warning:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about the &lt;em&gt;rules as written&lt;/em&gt; are those which:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are investigating as a priority &lt;em&gt;literal&lt;/em&gt; interpretations of the rules, even if it leads to absurd situations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are not usefully answered solely by homebrew, house rules, or speculation of intent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please express what you're looking for in terms of these criteria in your question body. If you're just asking about the rules of a game without these additional expectations, you don't need this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or in code formatting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Questions about the *rules as written* are those which:&#xA;&#xA; * Are investigating as a priority *literal* interpretations of the rules, even if it leads to absurd situations.&#xA; * Are not usefully answered solely by homebrew, house rules, or speculation of intent.&#xA;&#xA;Please express what you're looking for in terms of these criteria in your question body. If you're just asking about the rules of a game without these additional expectations, you don't need this tag.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;2. For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; on main site, the following tag warning:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag to ask questions about the entire series of D&amp;amp;D games as a whole, from 1974 until now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not use this tag to ask about a specific edition; there are appropriate tags for that, such as [adnd-2e] or [dnd-5e].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most questions should specify a single edition because mechanics vary greatly across them.  This tag is usually used for historical inquiries or similar cross-edition concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was support that having this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7313/should-we-add-a-rules-as-written-tag-warning-and-what-should-it-say#comment23036_7313&quot;&gt;is a no-brainer&lt;/a&gt;, and this is more or less what it ought to say. (Please respond here if this tag warning should say something else.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-09-01T20:28:03.650" Title="Add tag warnings for [rules-as-written] and [dungeons-and-dragons]" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tag-warnings|dungeons-and-dragons|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7359" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7360" CreationDate="2017-07-28T00:46:57.850" Score="20" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I ask a FATE question, with the SOLE exception of the edition differences question, I always get a terrible Fate Core answer that seems to completely fail to understand that I'm not asking about Fate Core.  When I point this out, generally people go &quot;Oh, well, it'll probably work anyways&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used to flag these as non-answers (because they are not answers to the question asked, in the same way &quot;I like sandwiches, you should use a sandwich!&quot; isn't a good answer to &quot;What advantages does a melee attacker possess against a prone target that a ranged attacker doesn't in D&amp;amp;D 3.5?&quot;), but I've been asked not to do that because the non-answer flag should only be used for answers that are not even attempting to answer any question nor offer any advice, regardless of whether or not that question is the one that was asked.  So I've stopped, and constrained myself to downvoting and devoting increasingly large amounts of space to specifying the edition I'm using. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At first, I just said &quot;I'm playing FATE 2.0&quot; in the question, and tagged it 'fate', cause that seemed reasonable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People didn't get it, so I started saying &quot;Please keep in mind this question is about FATE 2.0, not third edition Fate.&quot; in addition to specifying at the top that it was a second edition question. Some people corrected me about the edition history, saying that Fate Core/ FAE should be thought of as more of a fourth generation of the system than a third, but still no dice.  Always somebody posts something for Core and it gets upvoted and I can't get rid of it and it is completely wrong and unhelpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I thought maybe the tag was the issue.  I made a new tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-2.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-2.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-2.0&lt;/a&gt;, and started using that.  No dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I posted a question with the following paragraph at the end:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please support your answer with actual play or GMing experience using FATE 2.0 (or other appropriate FATE-2.0-specific support). Answers based on a modern Fate perspective are exceedingly unlikely to be helpful here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, today, I got an answer clearly written for Fate Core, with 1 upvote already in before I got a chance to read it.  Looking over the question, I realized that if you just ignored the entire question body and only addressed the title maybe you wouldn't have realized what edition I was talking about, and that doing that might be easyish because the text isn't heavily formatted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I edited the final passage to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please support your answer with actual play or GMing experience using FATE 2.0 (or other appropriate FATE-2.0-specific support).&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Answers based on a modern Fate perspective are exceedingly unlikely to be helpful here.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then I thought that that might come across as kinda mean, like, yelling and stuff.  I've left it that way for now, but I'm interested in finding a better way to tell people to use the right friggin edition.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far the best idea I can come up with is to make up a euphemism with no words in common with any other game system title and make a tag for it synonymized with the fate-2.0 tag so that that euphemism shows up instead and people have to click on the tag or google it to find out what system I'm using, but that seems like an idea I just have cause I'm mad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can I do to not get these answers on my questions?  Better yet, is there anything I can do to get these answers off my questions if I am cursed with one, or must I resign the question to perpetual misinformedness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-07-28T09:08:33.187" Title="What do I need to do to not get upvoted, completely inappropriate Fate Core answers on my FATE 2.0 questions?" Tags="|support|questions|fate|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7360" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7359" CreationDate="2017-07-28T02:54:23.367" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;NAA flags are appropriate for answers that have been accidentally made for the wrong game. If you're concerned that the problem might not be obvious to the mod handling the flag, as usual you could instead use a custom flag to point out the problem. If we decline a regular NAA flag in these situations please retry using a custom flag. Explain briefly that the answer is not an answer and is using an incorrect edition of the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For clarity, NAA flags should only be avoided when the problem with an answer is &lt;em&gt;quality&lt;/em&gt;. Those are what we decline. Voting is for poor quality, flags are for problems.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-07-28T09:08:33.187" LastActivityDate="2017-07-28T09:08:33.187" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7358" CreationDate="2017-07-28T11:10:56.427" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D one is a bit wordy. It looks like a wall of text. We want people to read the tag warning, rather than gloss over it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, &quot;edition&quot; now sounds weird in my head after reading it so many times. Let's trim that out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Use this tag to ask about the series of D&amp;amp;D games as a whole, from 1974 until now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do not use this tag to ask about a specific edition; there are appropriate tags for that, such as [adnd-2e] or [dnd-5e].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Most questions should specify a single edition because mechanics vary greatly across them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user27327" LastActivityDate="2017-07-28T11:10:56.427" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7362" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7358" CreationDate="2017-08-01T18:47:11.553" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;A lot of good this does... right!   Data point&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let the informed user know what the tag is used for.  The uninformed user won't care either way, and you can't fix that.  On the other hand, even informed users seem to have trouble agreeing with how this tag and concept fit into a question or an answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104549/22566&quot;&gt;Here's an example where two informed users can't seem to agree on how we use RAW tag here on the site, and what constitutes a RAW answer, or question, but neither user is the question asker&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I don't think this question is answerable--I did a quick search and&#xA;  did not find any monsters that are immune to all magic. Because your&#xA;  full immunity to all magic damage isn't in the rules, you have to&#xA;  decide how it works in your homebrew. – Icyfire 2 hours ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Icyfire I thought it was answerable. Granted, the Kensei is a UA,&#xA;  but it does &quot;magical damage&quot; just as the Monk's martial arts damage&#xA;  does at level 6. – KorvinStarmast 20 mins ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @KorvinStarmast, it's not the &quot;magical damage&quot; part that's at issue. There's no RAW 100% immunity to magic damage, and no precedent for dealing with that in the books. Because that ability is homebrew, it's up to the homebrewer to decide how it works. Your answer gives some context to make that decision, but the direct answer is &quot;this is not addressed in the books&quot; IMO. – Icyfire 5 mins ago&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  |&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  @Icyfire No RAW tag, so I disagree with your assertion of how rigid&#xA;  this question is. &quot;I would like a RAW answer if possible&quot; is not the&#xA;  same class as what you are stating in that comment. Please check out&#xA;  the various meta posts about the [rules-as-written] tag. –&#xA;  KorvinStarmast 2 mins ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-08-01T18:47:11.553" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7363" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-02T18:30:56.237" Score="14" ViewCount="302" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the past few months I've noticed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104628/31575&quot;&gt;a&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104479/31575&quot;&gt;ton&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104176/31575&quot;&gt;of&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100522/31575&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; - particularly in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; - which are answered in part by suggesting that the GM have a session 0 (a pregame session where the ground rules of the campaign are laid out).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that a community Q/A detailing resources, strategies, and topics of discussion that facilitate a productive session 0 would be of great benefit. When a session 0 is suggested, we could link to this question to help guide the asker in the right direction while they are tailoring a session 0 for their campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The obvious problem with such a question is that it veers almost immediately into &quot;primarily opinion-based&quot; territory. Could it be asked in a way that is on-topic, or is that impossible given our format? What about creating something akin to our page of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;forum suggestions&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="31575" LastEditDate="2017-08-02T18:49:40.480" LastActivityDate="2017-08-03T17:50:56.820" Title="Can a question about what makes a good session 0 be made on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7364" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-02T19:21:33.807" Score="-5" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47920/&quot;&gt;What is a slam attack?&lt;/a&gt; - the question is about &quot;Slam&quot; attack name, particularly the Doppelganger's attack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Slam.&lt;/strong&gt; Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) bludgeoning damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP asks: &quot;What, descriptively, does an attack of this kind entail?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see several problems with this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question implies all &quot;slam&quot; attack are the same, however, a Doppelganger's &lt;em&gt;slam&lt;/em&gt; might differ from, say, a Water Elemental &lt;em&gt;slam&lt;/em&gt;. It's just an attack title, like &quot;Bite&quot; or &quot;Claw&quot;. Besides the generic word meaning, it is impossible to find exact but universal &quot;slam&quot; attack description, thus, answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is about a particular attack title from the MM. I can't understand why only the &quot;slam&quot; was chosen. Why shouldn't we ask &quot;What is a Bite attack?&quot; then, &quot;What is a Claw attack?&quot;, &quot;What is a Shortsword attack?&quot;, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In 5e MM many attacks aren't actually described, all the descriptive details are up to the DM and, in the end of the day, are opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However there were no &quot;primarily opinion-based&quot; VTCs so far and the question has a decent positive score. Why shouldn't it be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2017-08-02T19:35:38.087" LastActivityDate="2017-08-02T19:51:41.553" Title="&quot;What is a slam attack?&quot; question - should it be closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7364" CreationDate="2017-08-02T19:51:41.553" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Because it is answerable&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Bite implies that you attack a target with your teeth, claw with your claws. It is very likely that slam similarly implies certain unifying characteristics. The accepted answer on the question addresses this. &lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; might not have known what the unifying characteristics were, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Because the method of delivery for those attacks is obvious - they lend themselves to visual description by default.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No, but most lend themselves to visual description - an eye ray is exactly that. Slam is abnormal in that it does not.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31575" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-02T19:51:41.553" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7363" CreationDate="2017-08-02T20:16:07.530" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The trick to asking and answering a techniques question here is to have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clear criteria in the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clear experience in the answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's a &quot;good&quot; session 0 is too broad/opinion based and will be closed.  &quot;How do I run a session 0 to prepare my players for the heavy resource management aspect to my campaign&quot; is a good question - inasmuch as the answers aren't people spitballing what they &quot;think&quot; would be good and instead sharing what they've seen work for that use case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-08-03T00:16:08.540" LastActivityDate="2017-08-03T00:16:08.540" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7363" CreationDate="2017-08-02T20:32:43.347" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to disagree very slightly and say that it's not so much that &quot;what's a good session 0?&quot; is too opinion-based, it's that it's too &lt;em&gt;broad&lt;/em&gt;. The point of session 0 is to establish expectations for your game; thus, how to do that well will depend strongly on what expectations you're trying to convey. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What should every session 0 contain?&quot; &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be answerable, but even there you'd probably have to be system-specific; a session 0 for DND is going to look very different from a session 0 for Burning Wheel. Sticking to one system, though, there are probably some things that every (say) DND session 0 would do well to mention - do we care about encumbrance, what level are we starting at, how important are backgrounds, is this game using Inspiration/feats, etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, if you're looking for a starting point, a &lt;strong&gt;terminology&lt;/strong&gt; question might be appropriate. &lt;em&gt;&quot;I keep hearing people say I should do a Session 0 - what is that, and why is it important?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; could probably have a best expert answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2017-08-02T20:32:43.347" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7369" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7370" CreationDate="2017-08-05T05:20:38.053" Score="4" ViewCount="189" Body="&lt;p&gt;Concerning this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104757/&quot;&gt;Where online do Danish roleplaying conversations happen?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could someone explain why it is a recommendation question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is asking a well-defined question (Danish language online roleplaying communities which are significant in the sense that most Danes know of them if they discuss roleplaying games online). The answer might be that such do not exist, but more likely would consist of a list of one to three such discussion platforms, with some commentary on their cultural relevance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is not asking for the best forums or anything like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could answer the same question concerning Finnish forums and the answer would be quite objective (there are two major Facebook groups and everything else struggles or is small; of the struggling ones, one Discord channel and the Pathfinder society forum are worth a mention), and would include a brief history of how the situation came up to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But maybe I am again tripping myself on the fact that, evidently, &quot;Define all the members of this small and clearly defined set.&quot; is considered a recommendation question. Or maybe there is something else I am not understanding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe I should simply ask about the history of major Danish roleplaying forums, though that seems a strange question when I don't know if such exist or have existed, even.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3263" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-05T11:17:21.690" LastActivityDate="2017-08-08T16:56:08.853" Title="Danish roleplaying forums off topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7369" CreationDate="2017-08-05T21:49:21.390" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question has all the problems of a classic &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/11/23/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;shopping question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer will be based on the answerer's opinion of the choices available.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answers become obsolete (in the sense of being no longer correct) over time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last is the worst one, in practical site-management terms. Though it's a practical problem you have, its not one that, by solving it, will create a durable, permanent knowledge resource for the next ten or twenty or hundred years or so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-06T17:20:34.237" LastActivityDate="2017-08-06T17:20:34.237" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7371" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-05T22:11:32.520" Score="6" ViewCount="192" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Worldbuilding metastack has a &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/635/sandbox-for-proposed-questions-2014-2017&quot;&gt;Sandbox for Proposed Questions&lt;/a&gt;&quot; where questions can be workshopped after a fashion to get them into a form where they will be less likely to be closed for opinion, inclarity, et cetera.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More than in any of the other stacks I participate in, I see questions here put on-hold or closed, but with Rule Zero of RPGs being essentially universally in effect, questions here are inherently more likely to provoke discussion and opinion - and even though there's a wealth of fanac out there on the web, there's always going to be something new that nobody's thought of. With question after question marked &quot;[on hold]&quot; or &quot;[closed]&quot;, it presents a rather forbidding vista; how can I fit my question into the guidelines?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think perhaps we need a sandbox, or to relax the constraint on discussion and/or opinion - there are good questions that simply can't be rewritten to avoid them, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104782/what-fee-would-you-recomend&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, which &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be sort-of answered if one views it less as &lt;em&gt;How should I play my character?&lt;/em&gt; and more &lt;em&gt;This homebrew career is incomplete. How can I develop rules to complete this missing aspect?&lt;/em&gt; - and figuring out if that's really what the querent wants answered is exactly what workshopping/sandboxing it should be for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33000" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T22:15:37.867" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T22:15:37.867" Title="Should there be a sandbox for question development?" Tags="|discussion|questions|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7371" CreationDate="2017-08-05T23:16:03.843" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;For reference, I'm just going to reproduce wholesale a comment-discussion on the matter. It doesn't in any way &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; the question, but I think it's useful background to collect into a place it can be found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This came from a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7242/23970&quot;&gt;meta question&lt;/a&gt; workshopping a mainsite question; in the body of the meta Q OP noted &quot;there's no official sandbox for RPGSE, so I'm hoping it's cool to get my question refined here.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Just for reference, it's definitely cool to workshop the question via its own meta question. – nitsua60♦ Jun 23 at 20:06&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I was browsing through the site a bit and saw this post. For reference if you think a Sandbox might be a good idea on RPG.SE you can look at other sites such as WorldBuilding. Though it's not without problems and we are currently rethinking. CC @nitsua60 – Secespitus Jun 27 at 8:26&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Secespitus I just created and threw a [sandbox] tag onto this question: it seems to me that something like that hits a lot of the functional requirements described in WB (collects them all together, makes them easy to follow) without engendering some of the difficulties (lots of manual work to maintain list with links and delete &quot;graduated&quot; answers to maintain visibility, won't suffer auto-protection). I wonder if tags of [sandbox] and [sandbox-graduated] might be the solution over there? – nitsua60♦ Jun 27 at 14:32&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Hmm... come to think of it, a [sandbox] tag might be problematic here, as it's a play-mode that gets mentioned a lot so might create confusion. Will have to ponder.... – nitsua60♦ Jun 27 at 14:37&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@nitsua60 Monica already suggested something that in this discussion (inspired by shog9). If you ask me it introduces the problem that you don't have one post that you can link (or you make a different meta post that introduces user to search for a tag...) and it's more difficult to keep track of. I also think it's too big in the sense that some people will write big elaborate answers as suggestions and reading everything when you want to help new users is demanding more time from helpers. – Secespitus Jun 27 at 14:38      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@nitsua60 But we are currently rethinking our Sandbox model. So yeah, it might work. I will regularly check back on how RPG handles it. Might be interesting to see. It currently looks like there is no &quot;perfect&quot; solution. PPCG uses a Sandbox like ours and just removed auto-protection from the whole Meta Site. As far as I can tell they are pretty happy. Maths uses something they call a Sandbox, but that's mainly for writing long answers that take time and having a place to dump them while working on them. So quite a bit different from our definition of &quot;Sandbox&quot;. – Secespitus Jun 27 at 14:41      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think for RPG the sandbox is to just ask it on main site. If it's not quite up to snuff, it'll get closed, we'll work on it in comments and revisions, and then it'll get reopened. ☺️ – doppelgreener♦ Jun 27 at 15:43      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@doppelgreener If I can interject a newbie's opinion here; I know to seasoned vets getting a question closed is nothing, but for newer guys it's pretty alarming. I'd much rather workshop in &quot;private&quot; - here in meta where votes don't affect my overall status - than endure downvotes from well meaning citizens that can majorly impact my ability to do things on this site. It just feels friendlier to work on meta first. – Alex Jun 27 at 17:14      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Alex Thanks for offering that up, that's some useful perspective. – doppelgreener♦ Jun 27 at 17:15&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Links and upvote counts lost in translation, so it might be worth looking at the original comment-thread. Full disclosure: I have not pondered as I said I should--my bad =(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-08-05T23:16:03.843" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7371" CreationDate="2017-08-06T14:18:59.760" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have three ways to workshop questions in use, in increasing order of complexity/escalation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comments on the question.  This works in 90% of cases where the OP bothers to engage at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Site chat. This works for the really confused and newbies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Opening meta questions when it's a real sticky one.  This works for more advanced users seeking to ask a tricky question. The &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/specific-question&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-question&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-question&lt;/a&gt; tag contains examples.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need a fourth.  Firstly, because it only helps if the user is sophisticated enough to find the sandbox (so the &quot;but they're new but don't have rep to come into chat&quot; - the only real gap in the above 3 - isn't a high percentage play).  And secondly, because it's not our job to make every question workable.  If someone has a question so unworkable that 1-3 above don't work - they need to stop and not ask it until they've engaged more with the site to focus their thoughts.  Or get some rest, or whatever.  We do get questions asked that are incoherent and the OP eventually admits they were &quot;sleep deprived&quot; or &quot;drunk&quot; or &quot;didn't have time to write properly&quot;... Those are THEIR problems not OUR problem.  If they don't have enough rep to get into chat, maybe they should participate in the site a little before asking.  Remember, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;we optimize for pearls, not sand&lt;/a&gt;.  So while I understand wanting to help people with their questions, we believe that meeting them more than halfway teaches people to be help vampires and doesn't make them a good participant on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, this question was opened - with good intent to help, I understand - but spurred by a question from a user who has asked a long, long series of incoherent questions on this site, all closed and/or deleted, under 6 different usernames because they also aren't sophisticated enough to log in.  That's exactly the kind of questions we don't need to do even more work to engage with - that user's unteachable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand Worldbuilding has one, but Worldbuilding is quite an experiment that has just about nothing to do with the SO format.  It might as well just be a forum with up/downvotes like reddit (though with a Be Nice rule, so better...).  We adhere to all the usual Good Subjective/Bad Subjective and other standard SO quality guidelines here so really don't have anything in common with what's effectively a brainstormy format.  If someone wants to make &quot;RPG Brainstorm Stack Exchange&quot; feel free, I'll be happy to not visit it, since I already belong to a bunch of forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-06T17:15:08.897" LastActivityDate="2017-08-06T17:15:08.897" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7374" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-07T00:31:04.113" Score="5" ViewCount="304" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I have seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30941/what-rulebooks-should-i-get-for-an-e6-campaign&quot;&gt;an awesome question about useful books for a E6 campaign&lt;/a&gt;. However, the question is for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, while I am interested in playing Pathfinder, so I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104823/30214&quot;&gt;the same question, but about PF&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed as a shopping request, while the first question was not. Since the last close vote was put by a mod and there were 3 more, I believe all of those 4 voters have actually seen both questions, and the older one is not closed, even though they are pretty much identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think that any of them has any of the problems related to shopping requests mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/11/23/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is Hard, Let’s Go Shopping!&lt;/a&gt;, and both should stay here, as they are not real shopping questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But consider the voluminous amount of information you need to even begin properly answering a shopping question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your budget?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Irrelevant, PF and 3.5e books are not that expensive, and content may be accessed for free in SRDs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where do you live?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Irrelevant, content may be accessed through Internet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are your preferences?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specified in the question, to play Pathfinder E6 (or 3.5e E6, respectively) with more stuff than present in the the Core.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which alternatives will you consider?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, no alternatives, the choice is specified in the question, it is PF under E6 rules. Or 3.5e under E6 rules in the case of the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When do you want to buy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask what books can I use to make my PF game better. The other question asks the same about 3.5e E6. It is not even specified if something is to be &lt;em&gt;bought&lt;/em&gt;, not just legally accessed for free through SRDs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s say the question asker provided all that information. Fat chance, I know, but let’s pretend for a moment they did — and we were able to provide the perfect, ideal shopping recommendation to them. Even if that was the case, technology moves so rapidly that the best shopping recommendations will be utterly obsolete within a year!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Irrelevant, the books that were good for 3.5e in 2013 will still be good at 2017 or 2020, so will the books for Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, both questions actually aren't shopping questions. The first one got a cool answer by KRyan, the second question could get one too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-08T18:56:33.140" Title="What makes my Pathfinder question off-topic, while the same 3.5e question is allowed to stay?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7375" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7374" CreationDate="2017-08-07T01:49:31.060" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The previous question has (barely,  admittedly) criteria - which books have the most usable content for an E6 game.  This provides some sort of objective goalpost, as then &quot;Bestiary 5, which has mostly monsters of CR12+&quot; or &quot;Prestige Classes of the Inner Sea, which has all prestige classes you take at levels 6+&quot; (not purely correct examples) are bad answers. Now, shopping questions are OT now anyway, but at least this one had one semi objective criterion to hang its hat on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question just says &quot;what should I get?&quot;  There are no criteria at all besides &quot;what you think is cool bro.&quot; You then say &quot;not just what you think is cool,&quot; but you fail to provide any other criteria than that; &quot;work well&quot; or &quot;is good&quot; is effectively just a synonym for that.  So it could also be closed as opinion based or too broad.  There were a variety of different close type votes IIRC - it's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;shopping question&lt;/a&gt;, and too broad (all PF and 3.5e books ever?), and opinion based (what works).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We tried for quite some time to have these kinds of questions on the site, with Good Subjective, Bad Subjective criteria as the yardstick.  The community proved it was unable to do that reliably. Therefore shopping/recommendation questions are off topic here, as they are network wide in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to debate theory about why they are or could be or whatnot.  We tried it, with quite a bunch of effort and permutations, and the quality of the questions and answers were poor.  In fact, this question is a good example of a poor quality shopping question, so it's not even standing or falling on how it might be answered. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-08-07T18:33:31.437" LastActivityDate="2017-08-07T18:33:31.437" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7374" CreationDate="2017-08-07T16:20:41.583" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both questions are opinion-based (personal definitions of &quot;useful&quot;) shopping questions. The major difference is that one was asked after our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;no-recommendations policy&lt;/a&gt; was put in place, and one was asked before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And per the no-recommendations policy, we don't hunt down old questions to close, and instead only deal with old questions when they come back to our collective attention by being bumped to the front page, turning up while doing a search, or mentioned in a meta as a reason that a new question shouldn't be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because an open meta is running on the subject I would hold off for now, but had I seen your question when it was first closed, I would have also taken care of the old recommendation question it's based on too, by closing it as a shopping question and putting a &quot;historical lock&quot; on it that explain that, though it was once considered a fine question, it no longer meets our standards as a fitting, on-topic question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-08-07T16:20:41.583" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7377" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-07T16:51:48.703" Score="13" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;Every now and then we get questions from someone who might not understand there's actually more than one edition of D&amp;amp;D, or they have rulebooks from two or three different editions &amp;mdash; but they all say &quot;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&quot; on the cover, so they were thinking they're all for the same game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been considering for some time whether we might benefit from having a viable canonical question we can point people to so they can identify which edition their books correspond to. We can point people to this when they need to determine what edition they're using (since the books don't exactly say on the cover), but also specifically my impetus for requesting this now is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7358/1204&quot;&gt;it would be a great thing to link to in the dungeons-and-dragons tag warning we're planning to add&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question comes in a few parts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is this a good idea and viable, or has my brain cranked out an unworkable idea? (I won't take it personally if you think this wouldn't work.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we do this thing?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is viable, how should we go about making it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it isn't, is there some other way we should handle this, or something else we should do instead?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm guessing the most reliable thing to do would be to point them to the logos, since each edition has a fairly distinctly unique logo.  I'm not sure how universal or reliable that is though, especially when it comes to supplements, if we cover those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For clarity the intention here is &lt;strong&gt;one question&lt;/strong&gt; that serves as a canonical resource we point people to, not to OK a category of questions for specific books each. (I'm sure they'd be individually OK.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-30T23:58:57.947" LastActivityDate="2020-05-30T23:58:57.947" Title="Could we make a viable &quot;what edition of D&amp;D are my books for&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|questions|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7378" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-08-07T16:54:36.963" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For meta questions specifically about &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt;. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns D&amp;amp;D as a whole (or editions thereof), not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the mainsite tag, see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:48:36.530" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:48:36.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7379" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-08-07T16:54:36.963" Score="0" Body="For meta questions specifically about Dungeons &amp; Dragons. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns D&amp;D as a whole (or editions thereof), not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about D&amp;D. (See also: the [dnd-5e] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:48:36.530" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:48:36.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7377" CreationDate="2017-08-07T19:24:16.960" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes &quot;What Edition is [instert Book here] for?&quot; for would be a very well defined &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While not mandatory, a picture showing the cover of the book would be great in that case. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The logo is good as a first indicator, but it can be unreliable in case of those books that were made during the edition change - especially 3rd Party publishers might have caught on late.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But another great question might be for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; tag: &quot;How did the D&amp;amp;D Logo evolve over time?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2017-08-09T06:57:08.410" LastActivityDate="2017-08-09T06:57:08.410" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7374" CreationDate="2017-08-08T04:57:17.507" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In addition to the fact that the 3.5 post occured earlier than the ban on reccomendations, the 3.5 question is largely saved by KRyan's excellent answer, which is fully well supported, well organized, and highly practical.  The actual &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; is rather broad and doesn't really give clear judgement criteria, but KRyan took 'best for &lt;strong&gt;new&lt;/strong&gt; players' from the description and that scoped the question enough to be answerable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll note the answer is &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; a detailed overview-- there's information about what to get to make things simple, then information on what to get to get the most stuffs per book for various areas, as well as an explanation of why you might want to use each criteria-- because the question failed to provide clear criteria to evaluate books based on; in my opinion it's this thorough analysis of which criterea are relevant and why, coupled with good, well supported answers for each criterea, that 'saves' the otherwise problematic question.  Obviously, a new question doesn't have that answer posted on it, so it needs to stand on its own merits.  You can fix your question, though, so that you can more probably get the answer you're looking for, just by rewriting it to ask for that answer.  So:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ask for how to best expand your options in terms of &lt;em&gt;a single thing&lt;/em&gt; (like 'first-party E6 full caster spell options' or 'first-party E6 player race options' or 'first-party high-level E6 feats')&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ask for an overview of the different directions one might go in terms of expanding one's library for the purposes of expanding the material available for an E6 game&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, you're still going to possibly run afoul of the 'too broad' close votes (though I think you really shouldn't), but there's not a whole lot you can do about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-08-08T18:56:33.140" LastActivityDate="2017-08-08T18:56:33.140" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7382" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7369" CreationDate="2017-08-08T09:22:18.037" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;If what you are looking for is to meet up with Danish people online for RPGing, you could just ask about that instead.  Like, &quot;I live in Finland, where X and Y are the major online RPG communities, but I would like to RPG with people from Denmark. I am aware of these major Finnish communities because &amp;lt;reason&amp;gt;, but that approach hasn't helped me in finding suitable Danish communities so far (more explanation speculating as to why and detailing the results of some attempts). How can I find equivalent Danish, rather than Finish, communities?&quot;.  Because this question is about &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to find the RPG community for Denmark, rather than what site is currently used, it is likely to be accepted, and the answers received, even if they don't link directly to some such site (though they may well do so), should help you find what you are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-08T16:56:08.853" LastActivityDate="2017-08-08T16:56:08.853" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7383" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-08T22:41:46.850" Score="11" ViewCount="431" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Thanks for your help everybody!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we seem to have covered all the major cases I'm locking this for posterity. &lt;strong&gt;If there are any other tags that should be renamed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=support+tags&quot;&gt;please request it in a new question.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just a few minutes ago &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/197889/raising-the-25-chars-limit-for-tags/299490#299490&quot;&gt;we recieved an announcement&lt;/a&gt; that the maximum tag character length has been increased from 25 characters to 35 characters. Hooray!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I figure it's a good idea to see if there's any tags in our system that should be renamed to take advantage of that new limit, that we had previously squashed down to fit in the original 25 character limit. &lt;strong&gt;Please respond with your suggestions here of tags we should rename!&lt;/strong&gt; Once it's clear that rename is a good idea &amp;amp; the community seems happy with the rename, us diamond moderators can use our ⚡ &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfTfXLLJlzM&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;phenomenal cosmic powers!!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; ⚡ to rename the tag swiftly with minimal disruption to the front page. We'll leave a tag synonym pointing from the old tag to the new one unless there's some reason we ought to not do so (thanks Baskakov for suggesting that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's stick to &lt;strong&gt;one tag that should be renamed per answer&lt;/strong&gt;, and please suggest what we should rename it to — we might revise that and go with something different, but your suggestion will help us understand the nature of the rename that ought to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IIRC there's some World of Darkness tags that we shrunk to fit, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2934/requesting-ideas-for-adventures-in-time-and-space-tag&quot;&gt;a doctor who tag we could potentially rename&lt;/a&gt; if it would be a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some clarifications:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can undo the tag rename if it turns out to have been a bad idea, or re-rename it. The best thing we can do is make sure to avoid making such a mistake in the first place though, so please do vote and/or comment to show your support or bring forward concerns with a given rename.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This won't revoke any badges or tag badge progress. Those of you who have earned a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/11/taxonomist&quot;&gt;taxonomist badger&lt;/a&gt; keep your badger no matter what happens to the tag that earned you it. (The rename might interrupt earning a new taxonomist badger for that tag, though.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Renames unrelated to tag length constraints should be proposed in their own question, not here, please. :)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 35 character limit isn't adjustable by us, and probably won't be increased further for a long time due to some architectural concerns in the software that powers stack exchange.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:23:54.593" Title="The tag length limit is now 35 characters - let us know if there are tags we should now rename" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="13" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-08T23:38:50.840" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-aitas&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-aitas&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-aitas&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This one has been re-renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-roleplaying-game&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-roleplaying-game&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-roleplaying-game&lt;/a&gt;, since I learned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2934/requesting-ideas-for-adventures-in-time-and-space-tag/7402?noredirect=1#comment23346_7402&quot;&gt;they changed the name of the game&lt;/a&gt; -- &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_Roleplaying_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;see Wikipedia.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the Doctor Who one should definitely be renamed.  Lets go for BESW's original inclination, but add the 'dr who' part so it shows up with other stuff it seems like it should show up with.  I'd add 'doctor who' but that puts us at &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;39&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; characters, which is four too many.  I thus recommend &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-aitas&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-aitas&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-aitas&lt;/a&gt; becomes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&lt;/a&gt;, until some point in the far future when we can have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&lt;/a&gt; and feel very silly about the length of our tag names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suggestion, btw, is exactly 35 characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-11T10:57:11.837" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T10:57:11.837" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7385" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7454" CreationDate="2017-08-09T10:22:30.117" Score="3" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp-mes-camarilla&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp-mes-camarilla&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp-mes-camarilla&lt;/a&gt; tag for a LARP organisation devoted to Mind's Eye Theatre (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-theatre&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-theatre&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-theatre&lt;/a&gt;), a World of Darkness LARP game &amp;amp; ruleset. However, the tag's own wiki suggests this name might not be the best name for the tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The Mind's Eye Society (formerly known as the Camarilla) is an international club for the LARPing of World of Darkness games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we rename this tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-society&lt;/a&gt;? It seems like something we should do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it names the tag after the thing the tag's for, which is &lt;em&gt;Mind's Eye Society&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;naming it appropriately means we're more likely to show up in search engines for that thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a World of Darkness / Mind's Eye Society player, so I'd like to check this past those who know more before doing anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-31T21:20:08.823" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:20:08.823" Title="Should we rename/synonymise [larp-mes-camarilla] -&gt; [minds-eye-society]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7385" CreationDate="2017-08-09T12:21:09.977" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The MES in the tag is meant to represent &quot;Mind's Eye Society,&quot; but the most common name for that organization is still &quot;The Camarilla.&quot; In fact, at the national meeting a few weeks ago, the Board of Directors said they were in negotiations with the new White Wolf to regain access to that name. I'd hold off for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2017-08-09T12:21:09.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7387" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-09T22:58:32.357" Score="23" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;(This is related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7063/28034&quot;&gt;one of my previous posts on moderation&lt;/a&gt;, but I didn't think it would be appropriate to add another answer there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I've noticed that when comments are deleted, questions (particularly questions from new users) are closed, etc., the mods (diamond mods and everyone else) are working together to write one or two fairly detailed, friendly comments explaining what happened, why, and what the appropriate response is, instead of either a single short comment (which might seem cryptic to a new user) or one of the confusing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6925/23064&quot;&gt;&quot;help piles&quot; that nitsua60 was mentioning&lt;/a&gt; in that same Meta thread. This is a good thing! It strikes me as being a much better experience for newbies, and speaking for myself, &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; enjoyment of the site has gone up a bit thanks to the subtle change in tone as we do the necessary work of curating high-quality questions and answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other thoughts on this topic? Those who've been writing such comments, any particular techniques to share, and do you think it's a manageable/sustainable amount of work? For the really daring - the last big Meta discussion we had (resulting in two new mods, if nothing else) was a few months ago; is there any data on how we've been doing since as far as new user retention, question reopen rate, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="28034" LastEditDate="2017-08-11T17:15:20.177" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T17:15:20.177" Title="Moderation-related comments seem friendlier recently!" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7388" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-09T23:10:12.510" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edge-of-the-empire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edge-of-the-empire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edge-of-the-empire&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/age-of-rebellion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;age-of-rebellion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;age-of-rebellion&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-age-of-rebellion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-age-of-rebellion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-age-of-rebellion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/force-and-destiny&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;force-and-destiny&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;force-and-destiny&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-force-and-destiny&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-force-and-destiny&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-force-and-destiny&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All with synonyms. Any of these may need their synonym broken later if/when we get something else called &quot;age of rebellion&quot; or whatnot, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I submit that for clarity, the new Star Wars games should include that prefix: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-edge-of-the-empire&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-age-of-rebellion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-age-of-rebellion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-age-of-rebellion&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-force-and-destiny&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-force-and-destiny&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-force-and-destiny&lt;/a&gt;. (Age of Rebellion in particular could refer to just about anything to the casual observer who was unfamiliar with the product line.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is rejected for some reason, they should at least have synonyms such that they show up when you start typing &quot;star wars&quot;! Currently only AoR and previous games do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-13T13:35:42.287" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T13:35:42.287" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7389" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-10T16:57:56.853" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; both with synonyms&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seems like a good candidate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m-2e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/m-and-m-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;m-and-m-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;m-and-m-3e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-13T13:35:35.203" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T13:35:35.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7390" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-10T17:18:27.237" Score="17" ViewCount="246" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was prompted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104987/mid-to-late-1970s-space-based-rpg-what-was-it&quot;&gt;Mid-to-late 1970&amp;#39;s Space Based RPG: what was it?&lt;/a&gt;, a question I've put on hold briefly so we can assess clean-up. The question needs some refinement (and this question will be updated later to provide guidance on what's useful to specify in an ID question), but the most alarming development was that every answer was basically just this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's {game name}.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;{cover image}&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(One answer mentions &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; feature in common; another answer mentions multiple.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another problem here is all of those answers are upvoted multiple times. Two of them have one downvote each. This isn't good. This is really bad. (To the community's credit, two answers were downvoted and deleted which were even worse than the quote above.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I sound alarmed, I am: answers not meeting basic quality expectations, and voters not enforcing and demanding those expectations, was what lead to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5720/1204&quot;&gt;the community voting that game system recommendations was no longer a viable topic here&lt;/a&gt;. I really want to see product identifications continue to have high quality expectations for answers and from voting and not head in the same direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What we need from answers to identification requests&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When answering a product identification request, &lt;strong&gt;we need you to express &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you think the identification you found is the appropriate one.&lt;/strong&gt; You did the research effort, and you should be explaining to us what is with this product such that we can be confident you're right (or wrong). One of our post notices (called &amp;quot;insufficient explanation&amp;quot; in our mod tools) says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't go by the gut feeling or guess of some random person on the internet saying &amp;quot;I think it's this.&amp;quot; We &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; you to give us confidence in what you're saying being the right thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Voters: Please downvote answers that have no explanation.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dear voters: the entire community depends on you to enforce these expectations. If an answer doesn't include evidence and a convincing argument inside that answer that makes you think the answer might be right, &lt;strong&gt;downvote it.&lt;/strong&gt; Request they improve, request they provide explanation and an argumentation case that can demonstrate this is the right product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please do this even if you think it's the right product from your personal knowledge. We need answers to meet a default quality bar, and &amp;quot;I think it's this&amp;quot; is not past that quality bar, nor anywhere near it. (In fact it's so not-above-our-quality-bar that if this were an Olympic event, those answers would be a misinformed athlete doing limbo at the high jump qualifiers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-24T21:28:45.507" LastActivityDate="2021-07-24T21:28:45.507" Title="When answering a product/content identification, please explain *why* you think you've found the right thing" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-10T20:52:15.547" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pokemon Tabletop Adventures was the only one not given a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The others are alphabet soup that look much more understandable renamed. Please &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=support+tags&quot;&gt;let us know&lt;/a&gt; if any of these renames were counterproductive, such as if people search for the acronym and never the full name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of less common RPGs would benefit from a name change:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/merp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;merp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;merp&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/middle-earth-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;middle-earth-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;middle-earth-role-playing&lt;/a&gt; (keep old as synonym, note that there is a space between &quot;role&quot; and &quot;playing&quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lotfp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lotfp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lotfp&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lamentations-of-the-flame-princess&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lamentations-of-the-flame-princess&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lamentations-of-the-flame-princess&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pokemon-tabletop-adv&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pokemon-tabletop-adv&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pokemon-tabletop-adv&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pokemon-tabletop-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pokemon-tabletop-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pokemon-tabletop-adventures&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rmfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rmfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rmfrp&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rmss&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rmss&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rmss&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-standard-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-standard-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-standard-system&lt;/a&gt; (keep old as synonym)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tsoy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tsoy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tsoy&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-shadow-of-yesterday&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-shadow-of-yesterday&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-shadow-of-yesterday&lt;/a&gt; (keep old as synonym)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tftfv&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tftfv&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tftfv&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tales-from-the-floating-vagabond&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-floating-vagabond&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tales-from-the-floating-vagabond&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-13T13:35:21.353" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T13:35:21.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-10T20:57:49.880" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-declined&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-declined&lt;/a&gt; (both/either?) this was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7416/1204&quot;&gt;renamed instead&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&lt;/a&gt; due to the relative support between the two options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could change &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp-mes-camarilla&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp-mes-camarilla&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp-mes-camarilla&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp-minds-eye-society-camarilla&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp-minds-eye-society-camarilla&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp-minds-eye-society-camarilla&lt;/a&gt;, but given that the tag has both the current name and the former name in it, we might change it to something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-31T21:23:54.593" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:23:54.593" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-10T21:05:55.143" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; though with the short form (wfrp) kept as the primary tag as it's well known and potentially the primary search target. This is similar to how we have dnd-Xe rather than dungeons-and-dragons-Xe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_Fantasy_Roleplay&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay&lt;/a&gt; series of tags, possibly with the old tags kept as synonyms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-1e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-2e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-3e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-3e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-22T22:48:53.703" LastActivityDate="2017-08-22T22:48:53.703" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-10T21:12:57.597" Score="3" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cr-calculation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cr-calculation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cr-calculation&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/challenge-rating-calculation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;challenge-rating-calculation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;challenge-rating-calculation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="7373" LastEditDate="2017-08-11T14:13:14.967" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T14:13:14.967" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7396" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7420" CreationDate="2017-08-10T21:22:39.483" Score="13" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;We currently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/besm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;besm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;besm&lt;/a&gt;. Should we rename it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-eyes-small-mouth&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;big-eyes-small-mouth&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;big-eyes-small-mouth&lt;/a&gt;, and keep the old as a synonym?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's under 25 characters, so it's not impacted by the extension in tag length.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T15:23:26.587" Title="Should we rename [besm] to [big-eyes-small-mouth]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7390" CreationDate="2017-08-10T22:32:55.440" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is nothing alarming about bad answers; they happen.  We have tools to deal with them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is apparently a need for better guidance on how to answer a product identification question, and quite possibly better guidance on how to ask a product identification question.  Having a meta with guidance on both (or one each) seems a good idea. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The proposed guidance proffered in this meta question, as regards answering the product identification answers, is so-far-so-good.   I move that we adopt the following elements of the proposed guidance as something formal, or perhaps something added to the tag, or a bit of both.  This can be workshopped.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When answering a product identification request, express &lt;strong&gt;why&lt;/strong&gt; you&#xA;  think the identification you found is the appropriate one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;You did the research   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;you explain why this product is what the question is looking for&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Insufficient explanation&quot; (as @doppelgreener cites from the mod&#xA;  tools) says this:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context.  Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer&#xA;    is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include&#xA;    explanations may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;That, if it appears on your answer, is a flag to you.  Give the answer&#xA;  more explanation or better support.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Guessing can be expected to attract down votes, and question deletion,&#xA;  because this site aspires to a high signal to noise ratio.  A bunch of&#xA;  guesswork isn't high signal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, that's my recommended way to provide some guidance.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2017-08-10T22:32:55.440" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7396" CreationDate="2017-08-11T01:16:07.667" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whether or not we do a rename, those two should be syns.  Either a new tag should be created and the old one made a syn or the proposal should be made a syn of the current tag.  I don't really care which and I don't think it much matters, but if there's a good reason I'm missing I'm sure it will come up in discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T01:16:07.667" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7400" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-11T01:54:03.570" Score="2" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have two kinds of example tags, from what I can see.  The first is when you ask a new question, before tags are entered, three are provided as suggestions.  For example, today it says (for me) &quot;at least one tag such as (fate monk feats), max 5 tags&quot;.  Previously, I've seen (fate monk feats) replaced with stuff like (rules-as-written pathfinder gm-techniques) as a random example I might not actually have ever seen, so I know those tags change, probably frequently. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, on the side of the new question page we have, when the tag line is selected, the &quot;How to tag&quot; guidance.  This guidance states, in part: &quot;combine multiple words into single-words with hyphens (e.g. dnd-5e), up to a maximum of 35 characters&quot;.  I don't know that it ever doesn't say dnd-5e, but it might.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we set these tags?  Are they automatically selected?  If so, how?  Can we blacklist stuff like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-rec&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-rec&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-rec&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-for-fun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-for-fun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-for-fun&lt;/a&gt; to keep them from showing up as a fill-in-the-blank here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T03:25:21.237" Title="Where do our example tags come from?" Tags="|support|tags|help-center|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7401" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7400" CreationDate="2017-08-11T03:25:21.237" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/206907&quot;&gt;How are &quot;Suggested Tags&quot; chosen?&lt;/a&gt;, the ones below the tag field are generated by analysing the text of the question as compared to our existing questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't found how the one in the sidebar is chosen, but I expect it's something similar but based on all questions we get. That one is there before the asker starts typing, so it's general guidance and can't be text-sensitive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have any tools for influencing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T03:25:21.237" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="2934" CreationDate="2017-08-11T09:34:08.840" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;This has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7384/1204&quot;&gt;recently been renamed&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-aitas&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-aitas&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-aitas&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dr-who-adventures-in-time-and-space&lt;/a&gt; now that the tag limit is 35 characters.&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's been re-renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/doctor-who-roleplaying-game&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;doctor-who-roleplaying-game&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;doctor-who-roleplaying-game&lt;/a&gt; since they changed the name of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-11T10:53:45.500" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T10:53:45.500" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-11T14:13:53.450" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; -- renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/virtues-and-vices&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;virtues-and-vices&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;virtues-and-vices&lt;/a&gt; since &quot;nwod&quot; isn't a thing anymore (&lt;em&gt;new world of darkness&lt;/em&gt; was officially renamed to &lt;em&gt;chronicles of darkness&lt;/em&gt;) and the prefix isn't necessary anyway. It's not a tag length thing but we might as well do this. If the name should be further modified (e.g. if [virtue-and-vice] resonates better) please feel free to open a question requesting that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We may consider expanding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nwod-virtue-vice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;nwod-virtue-vice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;nwod-virtue-vice&lt;/a&gt;, which is referring to the mechanic in the New World of Darkness RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-31T21:07:11.957" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:07:11.957" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-11T14:14:19.477" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; (sort of)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After consultation with a couple of L5R players I've opted to add the longer forms as synonyms pointing to the shorter form. We may do the same with WFRP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legend_of_the_Five_Rings&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Legend of the Five Rings&lt;/a&gt; series of tags, with synonyms for the old tags given that &quot;l5r&quot; is a common abbreviation. While the first one is under 25 characters, the rest are over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend-of-the-five-rings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend-of-the-five-rings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend-of-the-five-rings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-1e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend-of-the-five-rings-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend-of-the-five-rings-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend-of-the-five-rings-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-2e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend-of-the-five-rings-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend-of-the-five-rings-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend-of-the-five-rings-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-4e&lt;/a&gt; -&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend-of-the-five-rings-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legend-of-the-five-rings-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legend-of-the-five-rings-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-15T15:24:31.607" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T15:24:31.607" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7405" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-11T21:55:52.883" Score="4" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;When a comment that is &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; non-constructive offends me, but I am unsure whether it passes muster as &lt;em&gt;patently&lt;/em&gt; offensive (i.e. offensive beyond a reasonable doubt), should I flag it as non-constructive or as offensive?  (Or, in the new system, I guess, abusive v.s. 'no longer needed')&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I got the comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not wishing to be dismissive, but both these versions have been replaced and substantially updated and revised by Fate Core. I would strongly recommend using that in stead of either of these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a question, recently, which I found kind of offensive because it seems to be thinking that my favorite system is 'obsolete' or something, and the question it's posted on (differences between 1e and 2e FATE) doesn't even have anything to do with that at all!  It's like someone trying to add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; to every AD&amp;amp;D question on the site cause obviously no one should &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; play that system.  It's dismissive and offensive, but it's cause of ignorance and ethnocentrism, I think, rather than malice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I flag such comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-11T22:43:04.233" LastActivityDate="2017-08-12T04:07:30.767" Title="How should I flag comments criticising my choice of game/edition?" Tags="|support|comments|flagging|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7405" CreationDate="2017-08-11T22:31:46.237" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105156/1204&quot;&gt;your question on main&lt;/a&gt; this seems to be part of a pattern of responses you're seeing criticising your choice of game. It looks like you feel harassed and that's pretty understandable. RPG.SE has a firm goal of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; facilitating edition wars &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;or playstyle wars&lt;/a&gt; or wars about which games suck and which don't. Not having all the arguments you see in other RPG communities is part of why we have all the comment moderation we have here. (There's some &lt;a href=&quot;https://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Worst_RPGs_ever&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;truly exceptionally awful games in our hobby&lt;/a&gt;, but calling those out is something we'd do &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/16442452#16442452&quot;&gt;in chat&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6399/4398&quot;&gt;on meta&lt;/a&gt; when it's appropriate, constructive, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;rule-abiding&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; it's not something to do on main site where people should be able to focus on just questions &amp;amp; answers for their games.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please flag them as &lt;em&gt;No Longer Needed&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. That flag reason is also intended to cover stuff that isn't and has never been needed ever, like chatty stuff. If someone's being a huge jerk about it, flag it as &lt;em&gt;Rude&lt;/em&gt;. If we dismiss the flag, please re-flag it with a custom reason and tell us it's bagging on your edition and should be deleted. (Ideally we shouldn't be dismissing it in the first place, but we're human and maybe we goofed and read something incorrectly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some point any of the diamond mods might've been dismissing those flags thinking it was helpful messaging. (I'm not sure, I haven't seen one of those yet.) But at this point it looks like an issue us diamond moderators should be acting on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know that Stack rule we implement where comments are for requesting clarification or suggesting improvement? That helps make situations like this &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; black-and-white: it's neither of those things, so we'll remove it if anyone brings it to our attention and says it should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-12T00:31:59.817" LastActivityDate="2017-08-12T00:31:59.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7269" CreationDate="2017-08-11T23:07:28.723" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The forum situation has now (sort of) been resolved. Unfortunately, it is in a way that irreparably breaks all old links to content. What they've done is archived the old forum, so its accessible, but the links are all different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What this means in practice is that we have a host of Savage Worlds questions and answers with broken links that need editing. The only way to find the correct links is going to be to search the archived forums &lt;a href=&quot;http://archive.pegforum.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, which is laborious and will take some time. I will start gradually working my way through my answers to start with, but any help with this would be greatly appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-08-11T23:07:28.723" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7408" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7405" CreationDate="2017-08-12T00:53:36.960" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;For my part, edition warring here is something I take a dim view of — someone can blog or tweet about how edition &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; sucks and that's fine in their own space, but in a RPG community it's quickly toxic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would process either rude or no-longer-needed (NLN) flags, unless someone's being really nice about it. Safest is NLN for the variety of mods, but do flag as rude if someone is actively proselytising or crusading at you. We don't need that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-12T01:02:57.307" LastActivityDate="2017-08-12T01:02:57.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7405" CreationDate="2017-08-12T02:45:49.320" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Offensive flags should be used for patently offensive.  I don't intend to take the time to find out the rich history behind an offensive flag, if it's clearly offensive I'll uphold the flag but if it's not I'll decline it, because some people like to use offensive flags as part of a turf war with others and I don't think much of that. So offensive = patently offensive; if someone with no context read it they'd think &quot;hey that person's throwing some shade there.&quot;  If you find it personally offensive for (rich internal life of the mind reasons here) mark it as no longer needed, and I'll process that without comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also - consider some people may be giving helpful suggestions and not &quot;edition warring.&quot;  There are a variety of philosophies of edition out there in RPGs.  Editions of D&amp;amp;D are completely different games.  Editions of Call of Cthulhu, 7e excepted, are pretty much the exact same game with new layout and art.  Some games are editioned specifically to improve them.  Like if someone's trying to play Silhouette v1 and is like &quot;hey there's no weapon table and a skill is missing and and...&quot; it's a helpful legitimate comment to say &quot;they issued a Silhouette v2 that fixes all that.&quot;  Smaller companies don't always spend infinite time playtesting or bother to put together official errata - they fix problems with a new edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The right answer to &quot;what's the difference between SilCore 1 and 2&quot; is indeed &quot;1 is a worse version clearly proofread by cracked out primates.&quot; The best answer to &quot;what damage should weapons do&quot; is legitimately &quot;the ones on the weapon table from SilCore 2.&quot; I don't know that's the answer to the difference between Fate 1 and 2 but if you're asking the question and prepared to be offended if the answers give you an answer you don't like - you need to chill out.  Sometimes, an edition is just a reprint + errata, or with some new rulesystems bolted on, and is indeed a superset of the previous version. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-08-12T02:45:49.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7405" CreationDate="2017-08-12T04:07:30.767" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just to throw a fourth answer in there, I might have flagged that as &quot;not constructive,&quot; on the theory that it's a tiny stub of a badly-executed frame challenge in a comment, rather than in an answer post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it's not seeking clarification/improvement for the post to which it's attached, it's noise. That's Not Constructive. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the commenter's point is that the other edition is somehow better &lt;em&gt;for your stated purposes&lt;/em&gt; that could make for a good frame-challenging answer. Putting any sort of answer in a comment is &lt;em&gt;harmful&lt;/em&gt; to the repository we're creating, and so is Not Constructive. (Destructive, in fact!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side note, I'll throw out there that I am sure I've made mistakes in handling &lt;em&gt;comment&lt;/em&gt; flags, in particular. The interface is a little nonintuitive,  and I'm often unsure when my action causes you to get a &quot;helpful&quot; or &quot;declined&quot; notice. Sorry! Still learning, here =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-08-12T04:07:30.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7413" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-12T21:39:19.270" Score="5" ViewCount="302" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7374/what-makes-my-pathfinder-question-off-topic-while-the-same-3-5e-question-is-all&quot;&gt;What makes my Pathfinder question off-topic, while the same 3.5e question is allowed to stay?&lt;/a&gt; discussion the problem turned out to be that some members treat my question as a shopping question. It is also too broad, but I can narrow it down to my specific situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But reading the policies, I did not actually find a clear definition of a shopping question, and this is the point of the discussion I am starting now. There just is no exact wording of what constitutes for one. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/124450/what-is-the-definition-of-a-list-question&quot;&gt;here is the definition of &lt;em&gt;list questions&lt;/em&gt; on Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt;, and we also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6442/what-are-list-questions&quot;&gt;have one on Meta.RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there is no such a thing for shopping requests. Neither does the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/11/23/qa-is-hard-lets-go-shopping/&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A is hard, let's go shopping!&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;give an exact&lt;/em&gt; definition of a shopping question, only listing some of the properties. It seems like the article assumes those questions to be about actual shopping, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopping&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;as defined by Wikipedia&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Shopping is an activity in which a customer browses the available goods or services presented by one or more retailers with the intent to purchase a suitable selection of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E.g. visiting an actual retail store or choosing and buying something in an online one. It also lists some problems related to &quot;shopping questions&quot; that are definitely relevant to actual shopping, but not always relevant for game recs or tool recs (even though the latter two also &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have some other shopping-related problems, not those mentioned in the blog post, though):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The price is usually low enough for all of the products to be affordable. There is usually no such a difference as with computers or photo cameras, and RPGs that can still be legally bought typically cannot wipe one's budget if you just buy a few books. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPGs typically can be accessed by everyone from anywhere, PDFs and SRDs can be read by anyone who has Internet access, while a smartphone or a computer has to actually be available in a store nearby, or you would have to pay big shipping costs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The information is unlikely to become obsolete in a reasonable period of time, because RPGs don't really go outdated. Computers and computer programs do, though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again -- I am &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; implying that shopping questions have no problems at all, I am saying that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;there is no definition given&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the real problems are not mentioned in the blog post.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gaming.SE has &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1617/so-what-actually-is-a-game-rec/&quot;&gt;a question asking for a definition of game recs&lt;/a&gt;, but it is not really given, it just states a couple of problems related to them (being list questions, being primarily opinion-based). Plus &lt;em&gt;computer games&lt;/em&gt; actually do have the problems listed in the blog post, as they go outdated pretty fast, very few of old unsupported games actually getting new players, are subject to regional restrictions, price does matter, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what actually is a &quot;shopping&quot; question? How do we define it in an RPG context and how do we identify such questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Meta discussion is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; to argue whether recommendation questions are good&lt;/em&gt;, it is to &lt;em&gt;find a definition of shopping requests&lt;/em&gt;, which seems to be a bit broader than simply &quot;game recs are off-topic&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-21T00:12:34.177" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T00:12:34.177" Title="What actually is a shopping question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7413" CreationDate="2017-08-13T00:35:49.773" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/37082&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; seems to imply that the terms &quot;shopping question&quot; and &quot;game recommendation&quot; are synonyms. A game recommendation is exactly what it says, a question asking for a recommendation on what game to play. For (a completely made up) example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;I am looking for an RPG that involves rolling dice. Can someone point me towards an RPG that involves rolling dice?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously there is no way to answer this question while staying within the site's guidelines for &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective/Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; since there are way too many RPGs with dice rolling for an answer to be anything other than an expression of personal taste/opinion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Identifying a shopping question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;1. Shopping questions will (generally) include some required features:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think about &lt;em&gt;shopping&lt;/em&gt; for something like a new car. You are probably going to list some features that the car requires for it to even be considered. RPG shopping/recommendation questions are similar in that they too usually include some features that the asker is looking for (dice rolling, pre-made settings, dark and gritty etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;2. Shopping questions will (often) not reference a specific system:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my understanding, a question such as &quot;Does D&amp;amp;D 5e include dice rolling?&quot; is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; a shopping question since it is specific to 5e and can be definitively answered based on the rules. To put it simply, asking if system X contains features A,B,and C is allowed, whereas asking if there is a system that contains A,B, and C is not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;3. Shopping questions might be asking for a comparison between two (or more) different products.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This criteria is more flexible than the others since many legitimate questions can be asked about things like &quot;What are the differences between 4e and 5e with regards to combat?&quot; and other objective, quantifiable differences. It is when the questions are things like &quot;Which handles combat better: 4e or 5e?&quot; that we run into issues. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to request clarification/ recommend additions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37082" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T00:35:49.773" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7413" CreationDate="2017-08-13T08:14:22.597" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7414/30214&quot;&gt;the answer of Saladani&lt;/a&gt;, two basic criteria can be formulated. &quot;Shopping&quot; questions are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that ask for a recommendation of &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; kind of product that meets given criteria, has a given list of features. For example: &quot;What RPGs feature pirates in space?&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that ask which one of the 2 (or more) products is better (not just for the difference between the products). For example: &quot;Which game is better, D&amp;amp;D 3.5e or Pathfinder?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2017-08-13T08:19:38.497" LastActivityDate="2017-08-13T08:19:38.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7416" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-13T13:39:55.943" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp-mes-camarilla&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp-mes-camarilla&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp-mes-camarilla&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The organisation is known as both Mind's Eye Society and &quot;The Camarilla&quot;. The second is its original name, then it lost the rights to that name, and now the organisation's in negotiations to get rights to that name back -- and everyone still calls it &quot;The Camarilla&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's helpful to expand &quot;mes&quot; to &quot;minds-eye-society&quot; for SEO &amp;amp; recognition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need &quot;larp&quot; in the name and IMO this flows pretty well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-31T21:08:48.613" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:08:48.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7417" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-14T10:22:11.697" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/do-potft&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;do-potft&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;do-potft&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/do-pilgrims-of-the-flying-temple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;do-pilgrims-of-the-flying-temple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;do-pilgrims-of-the-flying-temple&lt;/a&gt; (32 characters)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-15T15:25:02.900" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T15:25:02.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-14T13:59:54.760" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/harp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;harp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;harp&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/high-adventure-role-playing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;high-adventure-role-playing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;high-adventure-role-playing&lt;/a&gt;. It's not for questions about harps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-15T15:26:06.823" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T15:26:06.823" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7396" CreationDate="2017-08-15T11:56:27.930" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've played BESM for a while, some years ago, and my impression when I did was that the acronym was used almost exclusively, similar to how everyone would say GURPS, never &quot;Generic Universal Role Playing System&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;True, BESM is not as easy to say as a word as GURPS, but I still feel it should stay as an acronym, and have the full name point to it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T11:56:27.930" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7396" CreationDate="2017-08-15T15:23:26.587" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've added [big-eyes-small-mouth] as a synonym pointing to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/besm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;besm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;besm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-08-15T15:23:26.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7421" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7422" CreationDate="2017-08-16T00:50:21.170" Score="11" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt; tag and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrative-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrative-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, as I was about to use one of them for a question in mind, I found their descriptions as:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrative-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrative-techniques&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Methods for describing how events unfold in the game world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  The act of describing the events that unfold in the game world, either as player or gamemaster. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are very similar, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques+narration&quot;&gt;if you search questions that contain the two tags&lt;/a&gt;, you get 4 questions tagged with both, out of the 43 questions tagged as either, as of this writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what's the distinction between the two? Should we make them synonyms? Is there any merit to that? Can we just improve the tag wiki instead, to better distinguish the two?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Afterthought: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt; already has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/description&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;description&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;description&lt;/a&gt; for a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-25T23:58:29.737" LastActivityDate="2017-08-25T23:58:53.943" Title="What's the difference between [narration] and [narrative-techniques], should they be synonyms?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7421" CreationDate="2017-08-18T07:36:17.590" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Merge them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And keep the longer (aka &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrative-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrative-techniques&lt;/a&gt;) as the synonymous one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2017-08-18T07:36:17.590" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7390" CreationDate="2017-08-18T19:19:18.913" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This problem could be solved by ok-ing the deletion/flagging for deletion of ID answers that don't sufficiently support themselves. Upvotes shouldn't prevent deletion-- we know upvotes don't track utility on answers like these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-08-18T19:19:18.913" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7424" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-18T21:01:31.510" Score="3" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/starfinder&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Starfinder&lt;/a&gt; is now released but I notice there is still no tag for it.  I cannot make one yet, but are there plans for someone else to?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35677" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-18T21:16:37.347" LastActivityDate="2017-08-21T06:36:47.190" Title="When will Starfinder become an available tag?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7424" CreationDate="2017-08-18T21:14:53.647" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags only exist when they're on a question, so a Starfinder tag can't be made until we have a Starfinder question. (Since tags don't exist without questions, we also don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; a Starfinder tag until we have at least one question about it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to ask a question and the appropriate tag isn't available, just ask it, then leave a comment asking someone to make the tag. Someone who has the account privileges (anyone with 300+ rep) for tag creation will take care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-21T06:36:47.190" LastActivityDate="2017-08-21T06:36:47.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7426" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-22T06:54:57.620" Score="16" ViewCount="560" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta is about:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105657/how-do-you-roleplay-a-suddenly-free-slave&quot;&gt;How do you roleplay a suddenly-free slave?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was asked yesterday, then answered (with a good answer), then closed, and just now (after asking this meta) has been reopened. The content of the question has not been edited beyond a change in tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be some disagreement on whether or not it's close-worthy, so I'd like to ask for opinions. I have seem some other questions in the theme of &quot;How do I roleplay X?&quot;, including for example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55152/how-do-i-handle-roleplaying-these-giant-sorta-smart-ants&quot;&gt;How do I handle roleplaying these giant sorta-smart ants?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71/how-do-i-roleplay-a-character-more-intelligent-than-i-am&quot;&gt;How do I roleplay a character more intelligent than I am?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62479/roleplaying-a-multiple-personality-character&quot;&gt;Roleplaying a multiple personality character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these seem to have been received well. Is it something to do with the subject matter of my question? The close reason was unanimously &quot;opinion based&quot;, but I'm not sure why &quot;suddenly free slave&quot; is more opinion based than &quot;highly intelligent&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-23T20:25:37.950" LastActivityDate="2017-09-04T18:30:53.350" Title="Why is asking how to roleplay a slave close-worthy?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7426" CreationDate="2017-08-22T12:05:28.303" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The question lacks cultural context&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question provides no setting information that would enable answers to address the question directly. There is nothing in the question that explains, for example, the setting's history of slavery, how the setting's slavers treat slaves, the setting's attitudes toward slavery and freed slaves, or even the cultures of the creatures that were previously enslaved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means any answer is &lt;em&gt;forced&lt;/em&gt; to transfer &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; wildly different experiences with slavery to &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; here-ill-defined fantasy world's experiences with slavery. That does &lt;em&gt;neither&lt;/em&gt; set of experiences justice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Dark Wanderer's otherwise excellent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105663/8610&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; perfectly illustrates this: It provides a list of examples from different media that have slaves suddenly freed, but—despite it being a good answer—it can't actually &lt;em&gt;answer the question&lt;/em&gt; because the question provides no context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers must be guesses about a trigger topic, and that's a bad combo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; In Review I voted that the question remain closed, and the Comment that I'd intended to leave was running long so I didn't leave it. In other words, thank you for asking.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2017-08-22T12:05:28.303" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7426" CreationDate="2017-08-22T12:37:50.977" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because I'm not sure how answers aren't just an undifferentiated stream of brainstormed ideas.   What makes &quot;they are happy and worship the PCs&quot; better than &quot;they are super depressed&quot; as an answer?  If there could be more basis for an answer (historical?) then maybe - as it is, it's purely opinion based (as are some of the other Qs you link IMO).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-09-04T18:30:53.350" LastActivityDate="2017-09-04T18:30:53.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7429" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7430" CreationDate="2017-08-22T13:46:39.630" Score="0" ViewCount="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tormenta RPG is a very popular game on Brazil, with many expansions, there's two main systems, one based on 3.5 D&amp;amp;D and other based on Pathfinder, many brazilian players speak english and search for answers in this language, mainly for GM techniques, i think a Tormenta (or TormentaRPG) tag would be relevant&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38925" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-22T14:03:40.647" LastActivityDate="2017-08-22T14:03:40.647" Title="Should we create a &quot;Tormenta&quot; tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7430" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7429" CreationDate="2017-08-22T13:52:24.830" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answer shamlessly ripped wholesale from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7425/15469&quot;&gt;d7's answer to a similar question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags only exist when they're on a question, so a Tormenta tag can't be made until we have a Tormenta question. (Since tags don't exist without questions, we also don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; a Tormenta tag until we have at least one question about it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to ask a question and the appropriate tag isn't available, just ask it, then leave a comment asking someone to make the tag. Someone who has the account privileges (anyone with 300+ rep) for tag creation will take care of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2017-08-22T13:52:24.830" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7383" CreationDate="2017-08-22T19:21:09.427" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-crawl-classics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-crawl-classics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-crawl-classics&lt;/a&gt; → &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-crawl-classics-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-crawl-classics-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-crawl-classics-rpg&lt;/a&gt;, which matches the canonical name of the RPG (as opposed to the umbrella brand for the modules + RPG), but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1523/should-we-create-a-tag-for-the-dungeon-crawl-classics-rpg-system#comment3529_1523&quot;&gt;was 1 character too long originally&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Synonyms: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-crawl-classics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-crawl-classics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-crawl-classics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dcc-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dcc-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dcc-rpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-08-22T19:21:09.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7426" CreationDate="2017-08-23T01:41:54.850" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's not.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7353/does-ask-the-dm-gm-equate-to-primarily-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Does &amp;quot;Ask the DM / GM&amp;quot; equate to &amp;quot;Primarily opinion based?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; for an analogous question class.  The question sort-of seems to think there's a single right way to run this experience, which is false.  Nonetheless, the fact that it is false is useful in answering the question, by talking about both the existence of multiple options and how one would in fact go about deciding which of the options to use. The answer is &amp;quot;the one that best communicates what it ought to be communicating&amp;quot; (aka &amp;quot;Make it up&amp;quot;), and similar to questions where the answer is &amp;quot;consult with the person or set of people in whom you and your group have vested the authority to utilize this decision for communicative purposes&amp;quot; (aka &amp;quot;Ask your DM&amp;quot;), these sorts of questions aren't actually opinion based (though a question about the actual right thing to make up would be), but nevertheless are closed as opinion based due to a documented common false equivalence in the minds of our site base, and also sometimes draw bad answer floods providing without good support &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; should be made up, rather than that making up should occur, in which case closure is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This particular question has not drawn any such flood.  While I personally think that Sardathion's answer is bad, because it equates slavery in general with the chattel slavery of the USA in specific rather than with e.g. forced labor from prisoners of war and because history is rarely as objective as people would like to think which returns the issue to a question of picking between multiple accounts while thinking there's only one right one, nonetheless it's still fundamentally about answering the actual question--&#xA;Q:What do I do to do this thing? / A:Base it off history-- rather than a specific thing to be made up.  Additionally, I, of course, think my answer avoids this problem.  Since our answers are the only two answers, there appears to not even be a &lt;em&gt;single&lt;/em&gt; bad post just giving a random opinion on what to make up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in conclusion, I don't actually think it should be closed at all.  If we're worried about troll answers, we can preemptively protect the question, but the question itself I don't think is primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-24T06:18:47.627" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7433" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7444" CreationDate="2017-08-24T04:11:01.397" Score="6" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag game-systems is apparently a synonym for game-recommendations.  I think that this should be changed is self-evident. Please fix this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-08-24T05:38:33.647" LastActivityDate="2017-08-29T16:35:53.473" Title="Unsyn game-rec and game-systems" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7434" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7433" CreationDate="2017-08-24T05:38:08.380" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we have a valid use case for the tag as a non-synonym, and without a use case there's no compelling reason to un-synonym it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I think it's too generic to be useful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105808/is-tormenta-an-rpg-system-or-a-campaign-setting-for-3dt&quot;&gt;question that prompted this&lt;/a&gt; currently has tag “types” of (generic-campaign-setting-tag)(specific-system)(main-Q-subject)(specific-system).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like a question about the Forgotten Realms with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/forgotten-realms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;forgotten-realms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;forgotten-realms&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; also need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt;, that question doesn't seem to need us to have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt; tag to allow adding a “(generic-game-system-tag)” to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There's almost no attempted usage over 7 years&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further data on whether we have a valid use case, historical usage shows near-zero demand for the tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Before being made a synonym, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt; had &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/684836/posts-that-have-ever-had-game-systems&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;near-zero usage&lt;/a&gt; and all its uses (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/5287/revisions&quot;&gt;[1]&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/7294/revisions&quot;&gt;[2]&lt;/a&gt;) were of the the kind described above: a superfluous tag that wasn't doing any useful work for us.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After being made a synonym early in the site's life (~6 years ago, April 2011), it has only ever been selected for a new question once before today's question. (See the ‘2’ in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/190477/what-does-renames-mean-in-the-list-of-tag-synonyms&quot;&gt;“Renames” column&lt;/a&gt; beside &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt; in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms&quot;&gt;list of tag synonyms&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, there does not seem to ever have been much call for the tag. That doesn't surprise me since it seems like it's a superfluous tag in meaning and historical usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see, we just don't have any questions, or any potential future questions, that would be correctly tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt;. Seems like such a question is either properly tagged with a specific system's tag instead and only, or that such a question would be asking for game recs and be off topic anyway. Lacking questions that are properly tagged with it, we would have no need for the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What to do with it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the three options I can see, I'm okay with (1) and (2):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave it as-is, because what ain't broken doesn't need fixing. This has the virtue of keeping a tag that I think is hopelessly generic from getting used, and there's some logic (if you squint only a bit) for it being a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unlink it as a synonym and ignore it, thereby effectively burning the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is somewhat unclear why it was made a synonym in the first place. Being a low-use tag on non-rec questions, it's a slightly odd decision. It was done by a mod &lt;em&gt;pro-tempore&lt;/em&gt; before we had elections, and there doesn't appear to be any discussion on meta that might illuminate the reasons. Then again, as a site we were still figuring out how to make this whole thing “go”, so maybe it's not that odd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unlink it as a synonym and encourage its use as a master tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of being hopelessly generic and there being no real demand, I don't think this is a course to take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said, I'm okay with either (1) or (2), with a slight preference for (1) because it's less intervention to do and the situation's been fine for about six years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-08-25T01:08:38.367" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7421" CreationDate="2017-08-25T13:21:04.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This merge has been done. Here's some historical info in case we want to reverse this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the questions which had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrative-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrative-techniques&lt;/a&gt; but not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105439/should-i-immediately-tell-players-when-a-monster-dies&quot;&gt;Should I immediately tell players when a monster dies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103927/am-i-allowed-to-cut-away-from-the-player-characters-to-show-things-happening-els&quot;&gt;Am I allowed to cut away from the player characters to show things happening elsewhere?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92907/how-do-i-narrate-a-failed-damage-roll&quot;&gt;How do I narrate a failed damage roll?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19203/balance-between-planning-and-improvising&quot;&gt;Balance between planning and improvising&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96643/how-can-i-efficiently-convey-different-perceptions-of-the-same-thing-to-differen&quot;&gt;How can I efficiently convey different perceptions of the same thing to different players?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95257/how-can-i-foreshadow-the-identity-of-a-villain-without-making-it-too-obvious&quot;&gt;How can I foreshadow the identity of a villain without making it too obvious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92870/how-do-i-narrate-a-players-pcs-actions-without-causing-unintended-consequences&quot;&gt;How do I narrate a player&amp;#39;s PC&amp;#39;s actions without causing unintended consequences for the PC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88515/narrative-explanation-of-wand-creation-cost-pathfinder&quot;&gt;Narrative Explanation of Wand Creation Cost [Pathfinder]&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67006/how-to-begin-a-role-playing-scenario-in-medias-res&quot;&gt;How to begin a role-playing scenario in medias res?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55121/what-game-made-leading-questions-a-gm-technique&quot;&gt;What game made leading questions a GM technique?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68188/how-do-you-convey-the-feeling-of-a-crowded-area&quot;&gt;How do you convey the feeling of a crowded area?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60005/how-much-creative-and-descriptive-power-should-i-offer-my-players-is-it-differe&quot;&gt;How much creative and descriptive power should I offer my players? Is it different for sandbox campaigns?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55865/pros-and-cons-of-2nd-person-narration&quot;&gt;Pros and cons of 2nd person narration?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18932/mechanics-and-methods-for-playing-a-quantum-superposition-of-worlds&quot;&gt;Mechanics and methods for playing a quantum-superposition of worlds&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/17052/how-to-convey-the-tone-of-shadowrun&quot;&gt;How to convey the tone of Shadowrun&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15798/fantasy-and-magic-in-a-primarily-realistic-setting&quot;&gt;Fantasy and magic in a primarily realistic setting&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I noticed a lot of these are about narration.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions had both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narrative-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narrative-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narrative-techniques&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72778/what-type-of-speech-do-i-use-when-gming&quot;&gt;What type of speech do I use when GMing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70605/how-can-i-deal-with-pc-access-to-myriad-sources-of-subtly-conflicting-informatio&quot;&gt;How can I deal with PC access to myriad sources of subtly conflicting information in a game where those conflicts matter?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47258/being-descriptive&quot;&gt;Being Descriptive&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36861/how-can-i-be-more-descriptive-about-actions-and-events-in-my-game&quot;&gt;How can I be more descriptive about actions and events in my game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-25T23:58:53.943" LastActivityDate="2017-08-25T23:58:53.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7436" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7437" CreationDate="2017-08-26T00:57:01.440" Score="28" ViewCount="617" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, so this meta post isn't so much a &lt;em&gt;&quot;can&lt;/em&gt; I ask&quot; but a &quot;I am asking&quot;. Though I suppose if meta isn't the place for such a thing then &lt;em&gt;&quot;can&lt;/em&gt; I ask&quot; may be worth addressing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I woke up this morning to find that someone had decided go through and downvote a bunch of my posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KkHZP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KkHZP.png&quot; alt=&quot;downvotes and rep loss&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally I wouldn't care too much about getting downvoted - if I've made a mistake, someone disagrees, or I'm just plain wrong then that's fine, that's the system and community working - but in this case I feel as if someone's specifically targeting me and downvoting because they don't like me or perhaps they feel I've wronged them in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day the rep loss doesn't worry me, if you don't like me that's fine, I'm a big boy, I can live with that and move on, but I would like to try and address the issue and ask what I have seemly done to wrong a user, what I can do to improve in that area, and whether we can resolve the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. I'm not looking to get anyone in trouble, I just wish to resolve the issue before it potentially gets out of hand. If not then I'll just leave it and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-08-26T01:44:55.013" LastActivityDate="2017-08-26T01:44:55.013" Title="Can I ask who has a beef with me and why?" Tags="|discussion|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7436" CreationDate="2017-08-26T01:33:16.293" Score="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;Though you can &lt;em&gt;ask&lt;/em&gt; we can't answer due to votes being a private affair. &lt;strong&gt;Never fear though&lt;/strong&gt;: all kinds of targeted-voting is detected by the system and, when the daily scripts run, it reverses the votes that are part of the offending vote pattern. Targeted voting is contrary to our goals of having votes reflect &lt;strong&gt;content&lt;/strong&gt; quality, so though even targeted votes should remain private, we don't want them to continue &lt;em&gt;existing&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mods have some tools for inspecting voting patterns in aggregate, so we can also track down the culprit(s) manually when need be, such as to issue warnings or suspensions. We know who's responsible and will take appropriate action, if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do let us know if the votes &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; reversed within 24 hours — in this case it seems unlikely that the system would miss it, but when it does the votes can be manually reversed by us contacting a Staff member.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for bringing this to our attention!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-08-26T01:33:16.293" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7438" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7441" CreationDate="2017-08-29T13:31:37.057" Score="11" ViewCount="260" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a person doesn't have &quot;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Exact Perfect Answer&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; but tries to help with some suggestions or a bit of brainstorming.  After all, there are multiple playstyles, but frequently I see those &quot;secondary answers&quot; being down voted.  Which of those behaviors would be considered appropriate?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38925" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-08-29T19:33:13.170" LastActivityDate="2017-08-29T19:33:13.170" Title="Should every answer be &quot;The Answer&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7439" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-08-29T13:49:08.303" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For all questions that are primarily about answers - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:03:58.790" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:03:58.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7440" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-08-29T13:49:08.303" Score="0" Body="For all questions that are primarily about answers - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:03:58.790" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:03:58.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7438" CreationDate="2017-08-29T14:28:23.057" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a mixture of things you might be referring to. I'll go through our policy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We expect that answers should be an attempt to wholly and independently answer the question, such that it could work if no other answer existed. We don't do &quot;tack-on&quot; answers, though you might see those on other stacks. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We also expect people to never answer in comments. You can suggest an improvement to an existing answer, but comments that are not suggestions and are wholly attempts to answer the question are deleted on sight. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You mention &quot;help with some suggestions or a bit of brainstorming&quot;: we expect homebrew to be backed up &lt;em&gt;by actual experience&lt;/em&gt;, either yours or someone's you can cite. Anyone can just come up with homebrew from their armchair without ever trying it, but we're looking for &lt;em&gt;solutions that actually work.&lt;/em&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't need to have an exact perfect answer, but we have quality expectations. The short summary is answer the question directly, and cite and back up your answer with facts/experience. We don't want armchair speculation, anyone can do it, we're fine without it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-08-29T14:28:23.057" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7442" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-29T15:17:25.493" Score="4" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Without&lt;/em&gt; getting into the content if at all possible, I was browsing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6123/is-something-wrong-yes-pervasive-ad-hominem-and-judgmental-behaviors&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Is something wrong?&amp;quot; Yes: Pervasive ad hominem and judgmental behaviors&lt;/a&gt; and noticed that links in that post cause HTTPS warnings because they still link to meta.rpg.SE rather than rpg.meta.SE. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IIRC, a while back the magical Community fairy came and edited every post on RPG.SE to fix those links if necessary. Did this happen on Meta as well, and if so, how was that post missed? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-31T19:27:01.727" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T19:27:01.727" Title="Have links on Meta been rewritten for the new HTTPS domains?" Tags="|bug|status-reproduced|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7443" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7442" CreationDate="2017-08-29T15:25:14.443" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The magical Community fairy edited HTTP links to HTTPS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue here is it didn't also edit &lt;code&gt;meta.something.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; links to &lt;code&gt;something.meta.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt;. The former domain pattern is not HTTPS-protected, so you are leaving a HTTPS domain, entering a domain that is &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to be HTTPS but &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; (you're requesting a &lt;code&gt;https://&lt;/code&gt; version after all), and that domain is then forwarding you onto an entirely different (actually HTTPS) domain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Browsers just don't like that for all sorts of reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Community fairy should probably do another pass to update our Meta links to the new format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-08-29T15:25:14.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7433" CreationDate="2017-08-29T16:10:13.283" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm in favour of doing the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove the synonym. There's no reason nowadays &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt; has to be a synonym of anything, and &quot;game systems&quot; doesn't mean &quot;game recommendation&quot; so the synonym doesn't make much sense.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do nothing else special with it. We don't need to burn it or encourage its usage or anything — just remove the synonym then let it be a normal ordinary nonexistent tag with no special attention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After that we let people figure out whether they'd like to use it for anything per normal. If nobody uses it then there is no harm done. If people find a good usage for it, great. If people find a bad usage for it we can address that then per ordinary protocol: correct its usage, discuss it on meta, burninate and/or blacklist it, whatever. That's a bridge we'll cross when we come to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whilst I acknowledge SevenSidedDie might not see a legitimate usage for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-systems&lt;/a&gt; tag, I see that as a wholly separate and unrelated matter to whether or not this tag should be a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-29T16:35:53.473" LastActivityDate="2017-08-29T16:35:53.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7442" CreationDate="2017-08-30T03:06:26.960" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Pace&lt;/em&gt; doppelgreener, I don't think it's exactly a problem with Community &amp;diams; forgetting to rewrite domains. Rather, it was my custom at the time to use protocol-relative URLs just in case someone was able to hack HTTPS out of the broken setup of the day. Those now still work in the same way, but because the link format is different, they weren't caught and domain-rewritten like the others. After all, they're &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; HTTPS-ready, with no rewriting necessary, so Community &amp;diams; never touched those posts at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've edited the post in question. There are doubtless some others scattered around, and a suitable SEDE query can probably find them if the devs don't want to run a pass themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17995" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T03:06:26.960" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7446" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-08-30T14:08:16.680" Score="7" ViewCount="274" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question of mine, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106158/what-games-other-than-ars-magica-encourage-troupe-play&quot;&gt;What games other than Ars Magica encourage Troupe play?&lt;/a&gt;, was just closed as off-topic. Specifically it was judged to be a question asking for recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was never my intention. There is a specific mechanic from the game in question which I have heard has been reproduced/re-implemented in other games and I was curious to know which ones, since I had never played any. There is no subjective judgement here: a given game either does, or does not, use the mechanic in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seemed to me to be pretty clear from the original question, although I have made a small edit to try and make it more so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Presuming, then, that my original intention was clear, this question on factual relationships between games was still deemed off-topic. I'm struggling to see why this is problematic for the Q&amp;amp;A format?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10635" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T15:10:41.083" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T06:41:57.500" Title="Why is it off-topic to ask for a list of systems that share a specific feature?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7446" CreationDate="2017-08-30T15:03:57.190" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I said in a comment: There are thousands of published systems, many more are unpublished and any of them might have been influenced by troupe-like play from Ars Magica or a related game that uses a similar mechanism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a shopping/recommendation because you are asking for games that feature a specific feature -- &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/2100&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;. It is a list of things which stack does terribly and are generally closed as off topic. Finally, it is massively over broad. There could be hundreds of such, each listed as one answer making this a long list without a best possible answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[&lt;strong&gt;Aside&lt;/strong&gt;] &quot;Troupe style play&quot; &lt;em&gt;is a subjective feature&lt;/em&gt;. It can vary in meaning massively between Ars Magic players let alone between different games. Is it okay for me to play your main character or are all characters common? Do I get to pick a character or many to play at once?… Of course, if the question means &quot;just like Ars Magica interprets it&quot;, then there is only one answer: Ars Magic. But that is beyond the point…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T15:03:57.190" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7448" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7449" CreationDate="2017-08-30T17:17:23.497" Score="9" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;I added a comment to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106167/what-are-the-indications-of-an-investigation-in-crime-network-cosa-nostra&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question explaining what I thought it needed in order to get the question reopened. As far as I am concerned, my comment was no different to the countless comments I and other people write to help get questions into shape. It certainly wasn't an answer, and was constructive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would be extremely grateful if the moderator responsible for deleting the comment could explain their reasoning, as I'm sure I must be missing something but have no idea what it might be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T17:53:08.083" Title="Why was my comment deleted?" Tags="|discussion|comments|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7449" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7448" CreationDate="2017-08-30T17:46:21.680" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I removed the comment. It said the following: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At a minimum we need some indication of how this relates to a role-playing game you are running or planning for. A system and genre would also be helpful, as an answer for a medieval setting would be completely different for something science fiction based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They specified a system already. It's a game called Crime Network Cosa Nostra. I thought it specified no system at first as well, but it turns out it did. Since it's clear enough about genre, system, etc, I removed the comment as no longer needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Originally it just had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crime-network&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crime-network&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crime-network&lt;/a&gt; for a tag which doesn't look like a system, but the tag got renamed at some point around when both you and I were looking at the question, so now it's clearer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually it looks like I might have not understood clearly, and I've made an assumption about what they were saying based on some edits. I'm closing the question temporarily so we can seek clarity and confirmation. I apologise for that mixup. Let's see what we can do getting the question clear with the author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-08-30T17:53:08.083" LastActivityDate="2017-08-30T17:53:08.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7446" CreationDate="2017-08-31T06:41:57.500" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this instance the features isn't &quot;specific&quot; (or at least not specific &lt;em&gt;enough&lt;/em&gt;) and to ask for a list of &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; games is too broad and never ending as new games are constantly being produced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the feature was a specific game mechanic or about the origins and development of a more general mechanic we could be in business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T06:41:57.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7385" CreationDate="2017-08-31T21:13:25.430" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7416/1204&quot;&gt;this suggestion here&lt;/a&gt; I've renamed the tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-camarilla-minds-eye-society&lt;/a&gt;, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/larp-mes-camarilla&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;larp-mes-camarilla&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;larp-mes-camarilla&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/minds-eye-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;minds-eye-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;minds-eye-society&lt;/a&gt; as synonyms. This way both names it's well known by get covered. We can revisit this together when we know the outcome of the name re-acquisition effort. Best of luck to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual if we should change the tag name or for some reason I shouldn't have done this, please let us know, and tell us if there's anything specific we should do instead, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=discussion+tags+world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;by asking a new question about the tag&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-08-31T21:13:25.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7455" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7456" CreationDate="2017-09-02T21:22:52.770" Score="16" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2017 version of &lt;em&gt;Paranoia&lt;/em&gt; is a pretty big departure from older versions. Instead of a single d20, perversity points, and communists, we have a pool of d6s, XP points, and terrorists. In other words, there are pretty big changes to the game mechanics and setting and a question relevant for an older version might not be relevant to this version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this new version is still called &lt;em&gt;Paranoia&lt;/em&gt; and doesn't have a specific edition. So should we keep using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia&lt;/a&gt; tag for questions about the new versions? Or should we create a new tag (and if so, what should it be)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastActivityDate="2017-09-02T23:58:31.687" Title="Should questions about the 2017 version of Paranoia be tagged differently than older versions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7455" CreationDate="2017-09-02T23:58:31.687" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions about it should probably have a different tag, because it'll help prevent people from answering based on the wrong game, and help people find answers for the right game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For different games with the same name, we can add a bit on the end with the most useful disambiguating phrase. E.g., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-wars-d6&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-wars-d6&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-wars-d6&lt;/a&gt; is our tag for the game officially named &lt;em&gt;Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia-2017&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia-2017&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia-2017&lt;/a&gt; works best, since it's clear and has a good chance of being the wider community's unofficial name for it anyway, and will likely lead to better tagging. (And if we need to change it later, that's easy if things are well-tagged.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-09-02T23:58:31.687" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7457" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7461" CreationDate="2017-09-05T09:05:47.217" Score="1" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at questions tagged rolemaster-rm2, they are all also tagged with the rolemaster tag. This doesn't feel right to me. I'm a little confused as to what the rolemaster tag represents. Is it a general tag similar to the dungeons-and-dragons tag, in which case it shouldn't be used at the same time as a rules-edition specific tag? Alternatively, does the rolemaster tag represent a specific edition of the rules? If this is the case, should the tag wiki be made clearer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, it looks like the current use of the two tags isn't working properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-09-05T11:14:39.283" Title="Use of the rolemaster and rolemaster-rm2 tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7458" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7460" CreationDate="2017-09-05T09:40:25.597" Score="1" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;Relating to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/356136/strange-reputation-behaviour&quot;&gt;this question on Stack Overflow Meta&lt;/a&gt;, I'd just like to confirm that there's no odd voting behaviour going on with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53503/modifying-hobby-ranks&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, as it's an old question and I've just had two upvotes for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14937" LastActivityDate="2017-09-05T10:04:09.433" Title="Strange reputation behaviour" Tags="|support|voting|reputation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7458" CreationDate="2017-09-05T09:53:44.660" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Almost certainly nothing odd happening there. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/53503/revisions&quot;&gt;It got edited&lt;/a&gt;, which bumped it back to the front page. When this happens to a question, it generally gets some eyes on it which haven't seen it before, and this often leads to some more votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2017-09-05T09:53:44.660" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7458" CreationDate="2017-09-05T10:04:09.433" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just in case I've just checked in on our tools for spotting strange voting behaviour and there's nothing weird going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with Miniman, your question just got new attention from being bumped by an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-09-05T10:04:09.433" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7457" CreationDate="2017-09-05T11:03:44.180" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tagging is OK. Things seem to be working properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;That tagging rule&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're referencing a rule we have for the D&amp;amp;D tags where we don't use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; if we're only asking about a specific edition, but that rule is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; for the D&amp;amp;D tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The default is just &quot;tag with whatever makes sense at the time&quot;. Questions for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster&lt;/a&gt; and others frequently get a series tag as well as an edition tag because it makes sense at the time. There's no standardisation there and I'm not aware of any pressing need to establish any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently that rule for D&amp;amp;D tagging was created &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6892/what-is-the-difference-between-the-fate-and-fate-core-tags/6893#comment21139_6893&quot;&gt;to resolve some problems&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The “do it whatever way suits us at the time” is the default, yeah. For those who weren't here for it, the only reason D&amp;amp;D gets special treatment is that its tags started to cause problems and needed stronger guidance.  – SevenSidedDie♦ Apr 5 at 17:38&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm one of those people who wasn't there for it so I don't know about the specifics. By the time I was properly active here the D&amp;amp;D tagging protocols had already been pretty much sorted out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Rolemaster tags&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Rolemaster system involves &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolemaster#History&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a lot of editions and offshoot material&lt;/a&gt; (first edition was 1980, fourth edition was 1999). Its fans use &quot;RM2&quot; colloquially to refer to first and second edition material, which the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-rm2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-rm2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-rm2&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki excerpt clarifies. That works for the Rolemaster community, so it's good enough for us. That tag was originally just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rm2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rm2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rm2&lt;/a&gt; but worked its way into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-rm2&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-rm2&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-rm2&lt;/a&gt; instead to clarify it's a Rolemaster tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster&lt;/a&gt; tag refers to the whole series. There's also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-fantasy-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rolemaster-standard-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rolemaster-standard-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rolemaster-standard-system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the Rolemaster players here feel like it needs to be sorted out a bit further or they need some standardisation, that's up to them and they're welcome to discuss it here on Meta to figure it out. But the way it currently is working is OK per site protocols (specifically the default &quot;tag it however&quot; protocol ), and appears to work for Rolemaster players well enough, so it doesn't need any specific intervention right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-05T11:14:39.283" LastActivityDate="2017-09-05T11:14:39.283" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7462" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-07T01:51:29.703" Score="1" ViewCount="345" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106407/steal-the-gold-wait-does-it-even-exist-what-is-it&quot;&gt;Steal the Gold: Wait, does it even exist, what is it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am sure this is common, but a post I made that started off as a rant/opinion generator, revealed a deeper question I wanted answered, however, it took some time to elicit this, so a lot of comments back and forth.  It seems there was interest in the question in each of its various forms.  However, to an extent, I feel I had gotten some negative reviews based on assumptions from people who had read the original question (in fact one moderator mxyzplk♦ wrote something to the extent of &quot;oh, good for you, getting revenge for your previous question.&quot;)  That is probably not the case at this point though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am recently trying to ask a question regarding gold in roleplaying game, particularly the Dungeons and Dragons games.  I was told that it was too broad in scope of editions of the game.  However, I feel the only relevant piece of info is that gold adds abilities to your character sheet you can do in a combat round, so it applies to any edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Realizing the converse of that, I realize a question on any edition would actually answer &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; question on all editions, so I am willing to change it to 5e specific.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are numerous out-dated comments that make it look worse than it is at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, I actually have an answer to the question.  I believe my answer demonstrates that the question can be answered.  Sorry for jeopardy, but is it possible to ask, &quot;what is the question that this answer answers?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not sure what to do at this point, is it just locked for too many comments, or did a moderator lock it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33272" LastEditorUserId="33272" LastEditDate="2017-09-07T04:08:41.917" LastActivityDate="2017-09-08T03:16:10.757" Title="My question started out unpleasant, then changed, but people are still focused on the old question" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7462" CreationDate="2017-09-07T02:36:51.123" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Lack of focus is a core problem with the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you never focused on one edition, and did not clearly elucidate what problem you were trying to solve (per my next to last comment), the question never got itself scoped clearly enough to get an answer because the question &lt;em&gt;cum&lt;/em&gt; rant was not focused enough for this format.  Dale M tried valiantly to answer part of your question early on, but due to the various efforts to edit the question that answer may or may not be what you are looking for.  (I think he came close, but apparently you don't).  You made a series of assertions in various edits to the question that were quite frankly wrong.  (For example, your assumption/assertion that it didn't matter across editions.  That is factually wrong).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments to support this response include but are not limited to the following: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;This cannot be answered for all editions of D&amp;amp;D — the mechanical role of gold is extremely different in each major edition. This does&#xA;  have to be limited to one edition. – SevenSidedDie♦ &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What problem are you actually trying to solve? Answer me that so that I can either help the edit, consider a vote to reopen, or at&#xA;  least try to understand better. There is a difference between&#xA;  editions, and I am not sure you have played enough editions to&#xA;  understand that.  Pick an edition and roll with it, otherwise this&#xA;  question contradicts itself.  For example, in OD&amp;amp;D, 1 GP = 1 XP. Not&#xA;  so in some other editions. –  KorvinStarmast&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Have you seen the movie &quot;Pirates of the Caribbean?&quot; &lt;em&gt;Gold is like XP or its not.&lt;/em&gt; PS. false dichotomy. You presume a step function, an&#xA;  on/off differential that is not necessarily so. – KorvinStarmast   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked that about &lt;em&gt;Pirates of the Caribbean&lt;/em&gt; since in all editions of D&amp;amp;D, to a lesser or greater extent, rules are guidelines that govern a considerable amount of the game outside of the combat mechanics.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to your jab at my comment regarding the false dichotomy, you did just that.  &quot;Gold is like XP or it is not.&quot;  It is not a strict either or relationship.  Each has its own role in the game as a whole.  Your attempt to set up a false dichotomy is simply bad reasoning.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I applaud your arriving at the recommended approach of limiting the question to simply one edition of the game.  5e is fine.   Suggest that you once again edit the question to get rid of false assumptions and ask only about one edition.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's OK to try to eat an elephant, but at RPG.SE we have to eat it one slice at a time.  That's how this format works.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-09-07T02:40:08.023" LastActivityDate="2017-09-07T02:40:08.023" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7462" CreationDate="2017-09-07T16:17:08.263" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is a place to ask a question, not have a discussion.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the course of 37 edits (not all yours, but even so), you fundamentally transformed your question several times. Even this meta question's gone through 5 edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While a certain amount of refining a question is good, this goes way beyond refining to just pure mutation.  No one can answer in a way that's going to be valid for more than 15 minutes. Complaining people are &quot;still focused&quot; on some previous version of a question when it gets changed under them 37 times is... in poor taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to belabor every single thing wrong with every single version of your post, you can go through the comment history and see them. But what you need to do is stop and compose a question first, and then ask it. If you need to fundamentally change the question, especially after there's answers, you need to ask a new question.  But don't do that 10 times either. You consume work and good will from the community every time you thrash and require others to comment, edit, change their answer, get mods involved, etc. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you need this amount of back and forth and interactivity, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;you should be using a forum&lt;/a&gt;. If you can order your thoughts and ask a clear, well-scoped on topic question that's fine.  But it's not reasonable for it to require this amount of community intervention to get it to that place. It's valid to want to gripe about another player stealing loot; do that on reddit.  It's valid to want to write an Alexandrian-style screed about dissociated mechanics and gold; do that on a blog.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-09-08T03:16:10.757" LastActivityDate="2017-09-08T03:16:10.757" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7466" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-10T13:47:53.450" Score="17" ViewCount="459" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106561/23970&quot;&gt;How long does it take to build a wall?&lt;/a&gt; has been closed as being off-topic as a real-world research question (per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1604/23970&quot;&gt;campaign research questions, II&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that real-world research could answer this. I disagree, though, that it's the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; way to answer that question: I believe that answers that do depend on RPG expertise exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the answer I'd have written:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5e doesn't have rules that cover this sort of thing. But fear not! You're in luck! (I go on with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=castle+guide+user%3A23970&quot;&gt;my usual praises for 2e's Castle Guide&lt;/a&gt;, provide examples of how well 2e plays with 5e.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So then I'd detail how I arrive at a production multiplier of ~2/3, factor in overhead costs, blah blah blah, and it's &lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$X\$&lt;/span&gt; weeks&lt;/strong&gt; (and about &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$Y\$&lt;/span&gt; gp).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be an inspiring answer, clearly based in my expertise sitting alone in a room with my RPG books, designing towns and structures in far too much detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the question should be reopened. But I think it worth laying out before my vote overrides those of other 5e gold-badge-holders and another diamond. Please express 'yea' or 'nay' as you see fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-09-15T14:50:03.523" Title="Don't tear down this wall [question]!" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7467" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7466" CreationDate="2017-09-10T14:09:51.317" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would rule in favor of the question because primary source material could cover such stuff in an official way, even if it is hidden in a little known supplement. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, there is old (outdated) material from an older version, that was never touched again and thus holds some good start for an estimation based on rules, not on research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there might be 3rd Party supplements that (more recently) covers such topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, with the right supplements, one doesn't need to do any non-RPG research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also: Instead of doing research on roman forts or real construction times, it can be looked upon as an applied RPG-math question: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How much circumference is there? See question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That is how many trees? Assume an average tree diameter, divide circumference by that, get number.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How many are needed for bracing? assume such and such length needs so and so many trees for bracing, add to number.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That is how many acres of woodland (which is 'healthy' with 40-60 trees and overgrown and almost impassable with 100-200 per acre)? Divide number of trees by tree density per acre to see how much you have to strip bare... and go on to Part 2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, the rest is pretty much estimating a time for cutting the trees (maybe something in the survival chapter? Otherwise: just assume something), calculating the travel times (for heavy load) between the various acres that are to be cut clear and then add some (estimated) time for construction. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is like 5 minutes or research (to find out what is a usual tree density) and &lt;em&gt;some estimations/assumptions based only on RPG Expertise&lt;/em&gt; followed up by hacking it all into a spreadsheet and calculating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2017-09-10T14:17:52.243" LastActivityDate="2017-09-10T14:17:52.243" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7468" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7466" CreationDate="2017-09-10T16:02:03.950" Score="20" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions asking about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics might more likely belong on another Stack Exchange site (e.g. History) than here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&#xA;  If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the above guideline regarding research questions, is the wall question on-topic? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I believe the answer is: yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, consider what other (potential) experts could provide information. A history expert (since building walls like this would be similar to field fortifications) or a construction expert and lumberjack combo (to cover chopping and building) could provide the information. &lt;em&gt;However&lt;/em&gt;, an RPG expert would provide &lt;em&gt;different/more specific&lt;/em&gt; information than these other experts. For example, depending on how much HP a tree has (since this is an RPG, trees have some form of HP representing how hard they are to chop), a character may be able to do enough damage in one hit to chop it down, and then move and chop down another, cutting two trees in 6 seconds (a lot faster than possible in our world, but in a world of magic, who knows?) There may also be spells capable of speeding up other processes like digging holes or erecting the wall that a non-RPG expert would not know about. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, as currently formulated the question is (in my opinion) still too broad, since without knowledge of party composition all we can do is speculate about potential ways and means the party could improve over a group of 5 average Joes.     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37082" LastActivityDate="2017-09-10T16:02:03.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7469" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7466" CreationDate="2017-09-11T01:25:47.460" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think it is on-topic...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried searching questions that ask similar things but we do not have a tag for it and it turned out to be ineffective (I tried &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=buildings%20-character%20-pc%20-%5Bmonsters%5D%20-%5Boptimization%5D%20-%5Bcharacter-creation%5D%20-%5Bmagic-items%5D%20-%5Bminiatures%5D%20closed%3Ano%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;this search&lt;/a&gt; but it's really weak -could someone with better SE-search-fu improve this?). (Quick meta-ception: is there value to add a tag for this topic? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/buildings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;buildings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;buildings&lt;/a&gt; perhaps?)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Failing that, here are a few questions I can recall from memory that are similar (limited to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; only, though):  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/92992/23064&quot;&gt;Is it possible for a PC to create a permanent floating castle or island?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58354/23064&quot;&gt;How much does a house cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104959/23064&quot;&gt;What is a reasonable player cost for Manor rebuilding?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we do have questions of similar topic, and they are all well-received. With that, I don't see why this one should be off-topic.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;... but it is very unclear as to its parameters&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP has given us nothing but the circumference needed, and that 5 people are going to be building it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do these 5 people have magical capabilities- can one cast &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; and be done with it in 6 seconds? Fabricate? Illusory Reality? Are they all wizards who don't have spells to deal with this sort of situation?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How many of them know carpentry?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is edited out now, but we need the number of people who &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/106561/1&quot;&gt;will probably help in the construction.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the potential Castle Guide answer in your post could make a great answer, I think your comment asking for more details is a tell-tale sign that this question is unclear. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR Question is still close-worthy as unclear&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-09-11T01:25:47.460" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7466" CreationDate="2017-09-15T14:50:03.523" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this should be reopened (and appears to be now). However I would like to add a point of note to this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that real-world examples should be a fall-back, not the primary source. Effectively we should view questions in this context in terms of priority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Always source rules/context first. If there is a related RAW or RAI it should be used before any others.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there is no RPG context to draw from, use real world as the fallback. This should never be used if there is no in-context answer though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This gives a solid base as to how the question should be answered (using in-context first, and using real world to fill in the gaps).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25239" LastActivityDate="2017-09-15T14:50:03.523" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7472" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7475" CreationDate="2017-09-16T13:16:48.770" Score="1" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site told me that I am very close to getting Electorate badge. I voted a bit, and then the system told me that I got it. I clicked on the link on my profile, and there was some text like &quot;Baskakov_Dmitriy didn't get the badge&quot;. I clicked on the list of recommended badges to track -- Electorate isn't there. Apparently, something went wrong, and I cannot get it anymore. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-17T03:57:27.507" LastActivityDate="2017-09-17T03:57:27.507" Title="Didn't get the Electorate badge" Tags="|bug|status-norepro|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7473" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7474" CreationDate="2017-09-16T23:37:47.510" Score="12" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89420/has-there-ever-been-a-quasi-lich-in-an-official-tsr-or-wotc-publication&quot; title=&quot;rpg.se: Has there ever been a quasi-lich in an official TSR or WoTC publication?&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; a while back about quasi-liches and got a few responses and even selected a suitable answer. But now I have found a newly published answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I go about adding an answer to my own question? What happens to the originally selected 'correct' answer and it's poster's reputation? The answer would be of interest to anyone reading the question but the original also answers it very nicely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30184" LastEditorUserId="30184" LastEditDate="2017-11-03T18:30:43.310" LastActivityDate="2017-11-03T18:30:43.310" Title="Etiquette for revisiting an old question" Tags="|discussion|questions|etiquette|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7473" CreationDate="2017-09-17T01:10:12.263" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;No question is too old to answer, and there's no stigma against giving a good answer even if it's to your own question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As counter-intuitive as it may seem, the Stack Exchange isn't really about giving answers to the people who ask questions; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244534/244929&quot; title=&quot;meta.se: We&amp;#39;re working on a new stat to help convey the reach of your posts here&quot;&gt;its primary goal&lt;/a&gt; is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/118536/244929&quot; title=&quot;meta.se: When answering old questions, is there a limit to how old it should be?&quot;&gt;collect good answers to the future users who have the same question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/23999/244929&quot; title=&quot;meta.se: Does it make sense to answer old questions?&quot;&gt;questions never get &quot;too old&quot; to revisit&lt;/a&gt;, and it means that if the asker is the one who finally found a good answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot; title=&quot;rpg.se help: Can I answer my own question?&quot;&gt;that's just as awesome&lt;/a&gt; as if anyone else found it. We even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3142/4398&quot; title=&quot;What should I consider before posting a question and answer it myself&quot;&gt;encourage people to self-answer questions they hadn't asked yet!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, some details: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the existing answer is mostly the same as the one you'd make, but you have more details that'd be useful to add, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5963/4398&quot; title=&quot;rpg.meta.se: should I post an answer to a slightly old question that already has some good answers?&quot;&gt;you might consider leaving a comment or editing the original rather than adding your own new answer.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you use the &quot;Answer Your Question&quot; button at the bottom of your own question's page, the answer will get added to the list like all the others. You can choose to remove the &quot;accepted&quot; checkmark from the previous answer and give it to your own if you think that's accurate--but you don't have to, it's totally your call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you move the checkmark to your own answer, the original answerer will lose the 15 rep from having an answer accepted--but you won't get 15 rep because it's your own post you're accepting and that'd just be weird. The original answerer will &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; lose any vote-based reputation, and you'll get vote-based rep on your own answer as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-17T01:27:17.697" LastActivityDate="2017-09-17T01:27:17.697" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7475" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7472" CreationDate="2017-09-17T03:57:20.333" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;You now have this badge -- the system awarded it a couple of hours after you made this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many badges don't arrive the instant you qualify. There are scripts that run throughout the day which check for people who should get a badge and award it to them. Badges not earned frequently are checked for fewer times per day, leading to potentially a few hours' wait time before a badge arrives.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(We didn't do anything on the diamond team since we don't have any control over badges.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure what messages you were seeing but I'm sorry to hear you had a confusing experience with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations on the shiny new gold badge!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-09-17T03:57:20.333" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7476" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-17T14:02:48.700" Score="7" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a tag for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paragon-tier&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paragon-tier&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paragon-tier&lt;/a&gt; with seven questions. It's got no usage guidance nor wiki, and I don't know the system at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can someone describe it and edit the tag guidance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it related to/synonymous with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paragon-path&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paragon-path&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paragon-path&lt;/a&gt;, a tag in the same system whose excerpt seems to describe a tier?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-26T15:24:06.310" LastActivityDate="2017-09-26T15:24:06.310" Title="What's [paragon-tier] all about?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7477" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7476" CreationDate="2017-09-17T14:13:56.827" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The paragon tier is the range of character levels from 11 to 20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The paragon path is a specialization of the class that gives the character some extra features and powers on top of those coming from the base class. The path gets chosen at character level 11 and gives its last feature or power at character level 20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2017-09-17T14:13:56.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7478" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7476" CreationDate="2017-09-17T14:49:49.347" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;They're very close companions but not quite synonymous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e introduced the paragon tier concept to describe a level range (11-20). We've also got paragon paths, which are bundles of skills &amp;amp; benefits a D&amp;amp;D 4e character obtains over the course of the paragon tier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we've got questions about paragon paths, but also questions not specifically about paragon paths but about things during that level range (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8244/how-to-build-a-thief-in-paragon-tier&quot;&gt;How to build a Thief in Paragon tier&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55590/what-paragon-tier-modules-can-i-use-to-showcase-the-underdark&quot;&gt;What Paragon-Tier modules can I use to showcase the Underdark?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29650/how-can-i-view-paragon-tier-feats-in-the-character-builder&quot;&gt;How can I view Paragon Tier feats in the Character Builder?&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's weird and they have a significant overlap but I'd leave them separate since they're fundamentally separate game concepts. I've added some usage guidance to both tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-18T04:24:12.043" LastActivityDate="2017-09-18T04:24:12.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7479" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-18T14:05:01.220" Score="7" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37103/what-is-my-guy-syndrome-and-how-do-i-handle-it&quot;&gt;What is “my guy syndrome” and how do I handle it?&lt;/a&gt;. It is a good one, with a direct question, good answers: exactly what we wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is if a new player/GM is experiencing the syndrome and wants to ask for it on this website. What will he do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the best case, he will search a bit for questions about &quot;problem-players&quot;, or other tags he thinks are relevant. Then he will write his question (for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/107025/how-to-deal-with-a-chaotic-evil-player-character-as-a-player&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and even if the question about &quot;my guy syndrome&quot; pops as a possible duplicate he will just think that he is just looking for how to handle his specific case, not asking a question about what that expression he has never heard about means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the end the question will be posted, and probably quickly closed as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we make it easier for new users not to post this kind of duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastEditorUserId="28479" LastEditDate="2017-09-18T14:17:11.047" LastActivityDate="2017-09-18T15:46:57.843" Title="problem with considering questions as duplicates of a question about terminology" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7479" CreationDate="2017-09-18T14:26:21.470" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Variations on a theme&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had voted to close that question because the My Guy Syndrome &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; the same issue. There are always going to be variations on the specifics of individual situations, but overall, the problem has been addressed and answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this does make it difficult to answer anyone's specific needs, but I had thought that the Stack was aiming to answer questions that apply to all and not just to an individual's scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Prevention?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I don't see that there is a way to help 'train' users in how to identify either the source of their problem or if it will even help if the jargon of &amp;quot;My Guy Syndrome&amp;quot; is more well known amongst the users. Ultimately, there are these types of people out there and tables have to deal with them and come to places like the Stack to see how others have approached it. I think that by letting them vent, and then showing them to My Guy Syndrome provides a space for them to learn and understand what can be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-09-18T15:46:57.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7481" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7479" CreationDate="2017-09-18T15:10:17.157" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;The duplicate-close feature itself exists to solve exactly this problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How it's supposed to work, is 1) someone searches and fails to find our canonical question on their problem, 2) they post a new question with different wording, 3) we close it as a duplicate, thereby creating a link between that different wording and our canonical question for future searchers. The next time someone has the same problem and uses similar wording, they are more likely to find the canonical question and not post a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few iterations of this with different wordings, and we then have a &quot;web&quot; of duplicates all connecting to the canonical question, making it easy for people to find it via different ways of phrasing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So a new duplicate is not a problem so much as it's part of its own solution. We like duplicates: they help build our site's web of questions. We don't need to (and shouldn't) try to manually prevent duplicates from being asked, since that would just interfere with the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a way of acknowledging and thanking users for asking well-written and well-phrased duplicates, I like to give them an upvote for their contribution to the success of our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-09-18T15:10:17.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7482" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-21T14:44:39.033" Score="8" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should we be flagging answers that basically say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;John's answer is great and I agree with everything he said, and also&#xA;  this!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On other SE sites, this should be a comment on the answer and the person who posted the answer would choose to edit their answer to include it or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it should be flagged, how would I flag it? Other SE site have a flag that basically says &quot;me too&quot; where the poster isn't really answering the question, but I don't see that option here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just want to make sure I am flagging things properly before I actually do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35025" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-21T23:13:56.583" LastActivityDate="2017-09-22T11:23:46.173" Title="Answers that agree with other answer" Tags="|discussion|answers|flagging|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7483" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7482" CreationDate="2017-09-21T14:56:44.207" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We expect answers to be independent — after all, the other answer might get deleted, or changed, or buried in a long list of other answers, and it's not useful to force readers to search just to understand a new answer. (For more, see the FAQ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flagging is probably unnecessary. You can take care of this with a comment that links to that FAQ and asks them to make their answer not rely on other answers. If you do run into a case where flagging seems right though, just use the custom flag reason, which lets you write a short description of the problem for the mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-09-21T14:56:44.207" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7482" CreationDate="2017-09-21T15:01:22.027" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;If an answer repeats another answer, that's fine--sometimes there's more than one way to say the same thing, and maybe a later user has a more cogent way to express the concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer relies on another answer and would be incomplete if the referred-to post is removed, that's a problem and should be responded to with commenting, voting, editing, flagging, etc., as appropriate. As always it's usually good to start with the gentlest, lowest impact solution and escalate as needed, so I wouldn't use a custom flag until commenting and editing failed to produce an improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2017-09-21T15:01:22.027" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7482" CreationDate="2017-09-22T11:23:46.173" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;On other SE sites, this should be a comment on the answer and the person who posted the answer would choose to edit their answer to include it or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On other SE sites, the comment will live longer. If it were Stack Overflow, where there is no time for mods to comb through posts and delete comments, I'd say post it as a comment to the answer. It will live forever and be helpful that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, this comment will vanish &lt;em&gt;fast&lt;/em&gt;. I've had comments vanish over the time I needed to go out and grab a pizza from the store, doubting my memory of posting it in the first place when I came back and it was nowhere to be seen.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I guess it's a matter of how much of it is an answer and how much is just agreeing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I sometimes post disclaimers saying that my answer is not &lt;em&gt;exclusive&lt;/em&gt; and that while I think it's valid on it's own, it does not mean you couldn't or shouldn't do &lt;em&gt;$OtherAnswer&lt;/em&gt; as well. I think that's valid. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69988/how-do-i-help-my-players-stay-engaged-with-the-game-and-each-other-at-the-tabl/70016#70016&quot;&gt;Example for &quot;not exclusive&quot;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I sometimes post answers that come to the same conclusion as existing answers, but for a completely different reason or using a completely different rule. I do mention the other answers to signal that I don't &lt;em&gt;disagree&lt;/em&gt; with them, just take another reasoning to the same end. I think that's valid as well, because while one answer with that conclusion might have been enough, the other answer might get invalidated by time, new editions, comments on how their reasoning is wrong or they might just get deleted (could not come up with an example on short notice, this is more the case in other SEs).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It rarely happens, but sometimes, the obvious, correct answer is not &lt;em&gt;the answer&lt;/em&gt;. Personally, I think quoting with a reference is the right thing to do, as it keeps the answer from being incomplete should the other get deleted. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83972/how-to-handle-modern-day-weapons-in-dd-5e/83977#83977&quot;&gt;Example of referencing another answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what I want to say is: there is no single answer. Check the post. If it's good information, keep it. If it's just a one-liner or no real information when you take away the &quot;I agree with the other answer&quot; part, then flag it as low quality. Because it is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2017-09-22T11:23:46.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7486" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-26T14:54:14.723" Score="0" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not a Stack bug. This bug was caused by &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/4486/the-stack-overflow-unofficial-patch-soup&quot;&gt;SOUP&lt;/a&gt;; I'll keep this around a while so the patch author can be informed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag markup in our tag warnings is illegible, as you can probably see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AcQAQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AcQAQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The text in those two tags is pale yellow on white and I can only barely make it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag warning. Here's a link that'll help you trigger it: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=dungeons-and-dragons&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;. Click/focus the tag field then click/focus something outside it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure it wasn't like this 3½ weeks ago &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7358/1204&quot;&gt;when these tags warnings were added&lt;/a&gt;, so it must be a very recent breakage. I tested both tag warnings at the time and would've pointed this out if things were this broken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-26T15:19:11.050" LastActivityDate="2017-09-26T15:19:11.050" Title="Tag appearance in our tag warnings is broken; can't read them" Tags="|bug|status-norepro|css|tag-warnings|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7487" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7488" CreationDate="2017-09-27T02:04:28.447" Score="8" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/107477/how-do-you-calculate-spell-ability-and-spell-save-dc&quot;&gt;this recent question&lt;/a&gt; is probably a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96539/calculating-wizard-spell-casting-ability-and-spell-attack-bonus&quot;&gt;duplicate of this question&lt;/a&gt;. However, as a recent recipient of the 5e gold badge, I'm hesitant to unilaterally close it as a duplicate. I have the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it really a duplicate? The first is asking for confirmation, I suppose, and the second is asking for the information itself, but they do strike me as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Both questions have attracted a number of downvotes. Should this factor into how I think about the close vote, or which question is a duplicate of which?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastActivityDate="2017-09-27T02:13:58.483" Title="Highly-downvoted duplicate questions" Tags="|discussion|close-reasons|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7487" CreationDate="2017-09-27T02:13:58.483" Score="11" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No. Usually we close the newer as a dupe of the old unless there's a dramatic disparity in quality that would make the newer one more canonical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-09-27T02:13:58.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7490" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" LastActivityDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7491" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" Score="0" Body="for issues concerning the navigation bar found at the very top of our stack exchange site, featuring the inbox, achievements, search bar, etc." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" LastActivityDate="2017-09-29T17:46:17.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7492" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-09-30T21:24:08.707" Score="16" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;One criteria i've seen for whether a tag is worth having is whether someone could be an expert in that topic. I find it difficult to believe someone could be an expert in all [published-adventures] but fairly easy to see people being experts in specific adventures. I myself have a ton of experience with Tales From the Yawning Portal and Tomb of Annihilation, but little to no experience with Hoard of the Dragon Queen, for instance. So while I'd be interested in answering questions about the campaigns I know well, I have no ability to answer questions about others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what I'm asking, is why do we use [published-adventures] instead of more specific tags for individual adventures?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-01T19:18:13.097" LastActivityDate="2017-10-06T05:25:34.427" Title="Why do we use [Published-Adventures] instead of more specific tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7492" CreationDate="2017-09-30T21:33:14.470" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's any particular reason we don't already do that other than we hadn't felt a need for it and nobody had gotten around to tagging for them. There weren't a lot of specific named adventures people needed help with in D&amp;amp;D 3.x and 4e, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; was doing us just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently there's a more pressing reason to actually do so: D&amp;amp;D 5e's now drawing a lot of questions about specific named adventure paths, and it's probably pretty helpful to tag the major ones by name, not least of which because it'll help people ignore adventures they don't want to see spoilers for. (I got to thinking about that a couple of days ago, so it's nice I wasn't the only one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've also had &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/197889/raising-the-25-chars-limit-for-tags/299490#299490&quot;&gt;the tag limit increased to 35 characters&lt;/a&gt; (from just 25) so now tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tales-from-the-yawning-portal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&lt;/a&gt; are also feasible. Might've been part of why we hadn't tagged for these beforehand; the titles were all too long to tag for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-10-06T05:25:34.427" LastActivityDate="2017-10-06T05:25:34.427" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-01T17:17:13.167" Score="16" ViewCount="616" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we agree that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;we embrace all styles of roleplay&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/107501/player-vs-player-fight/107521#107521&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt; a question and made a remark about &quot;good roleplaying&quot; or &quot;good roleplayers&quot; being people that would play a role, seperating character knowledge from player knowledge. Now, telling people whether something is good roleplaying obviously is pretty judgmental and I would not consider a &lt;em&gt;playstyle&lt;/em&gt; good or bad &lt;em&gt;roleplaying&lt;/em&gt;. They are all equal. If everybody has fun, no harm no foul, right? However, I do consider &quot;playing a role&quot; to be fundamental to role playing. If no roles are played, in my mind it's a tabletop or boardgame. Both great fun, but not role playing. Because no role is played. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So where does a &lt;em&gt;playstyle&lt;/em&gt; start? Really acting it out in costumes would certainly a &lt;em&gt;playstyle&lt;/em&gt; of roleplaying and playing table tennis with a hardcover version of the rulebook would not be roleplaying at all, despite literally using the rules. But between the comic extremes, where is the line, &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; is something actually role playing (compared to lets say a tabletop skirmish game) and when is doing something a playstyle, one of the many &lt;em&gt;variants&lt;/em&gt; of roleplaying?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would you consider keeping character and player knowledge separate a key feature, too?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(not considering games where meta gaming actually &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; part of the game, or where your &quot;role&quot; is to be yourself)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2017-10-10T23:44:53.403" Title="What exactly is a playstyle?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7494" CreationDate="2017-10-01T18:05:18.170" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;The relationship between the players and the characters does fall under playstyle. There are playstyles in which metagaming of the kind you say is not “good” is accepted, and there are RPGs in which it’s even built into the rules. These are still all RPGs in some sense — just perhaps one that isn't recognisable to everyone coming from a different playstyle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, I can see why saying that “good roleplaying [is] separating character knowledge from player knowledge” would be seen as a shot across the bow for other playstyles, even though it was unintentional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not a problem though, so much as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.xkcd.com/1053/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;learning opportunity&lt;/a&gt;. Today you (and perhaps some of the present audience) learned that there are valid playstyles that don't consider that idea as axiomatic, and now we can proceed with more perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-10-01T18:05:18.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7494" CreationDate="2017-10-02T21:04:11.567" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;We accept all playstyles here.  That doesn't make them all equal, and that doesn't make all aesthetic choices made in playing or constructing an RPG of equal value. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Some&lt;/em&gt; theories of aesthetics hold that what constitutes good art is merely a matter of taste-- that is, that it is entirely subjective and, in fact, all art is in some sense equal.  Other theories hold that there are real differences in the value of different works of art, and that those differences are in some sense knowable.  There are also people who claim that there are or may be differences, but that the differences are inherently completely unknowable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While all of these meta-aesthetics are accepted here, our policy of &lt;em&gt;tolerance&lt;/em&gt; means that expressing any of them should be done carefully.  Our goal is to avoid belittling, invalidating, or dismissing people, and to avoid doing that to anyone's belief set without significant justification is an important part of presenting such a question, answer or comment.  That doesn't mean, for example, that the idea that freeform play is inherently inferior to structured play (or vice versa) is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, it just means that you aren't allowed to express that view without meeting a higher bar for topicality and support.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For example, I might ask &quot;What is X group's position on structured&#xA;roleplaying?&quot; and you, being a part of that group, might respond &quot;We&#xA;believe structured roleplaying is inherently inferior to freeform&#xA;roleplaying because of X, Y, and Z.&quot;.  That's fine.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, when someone asks &quot;How do I structure my roleplaying?&quot; and&#xA;you respond &quot;Don't!  It's bad!&quot; because you think it's an X Y&#xA;problem where the querent refuses to provide the X, that's not-okay.&#xA;It's basically a mild form of systemic oppression, which is what we&#xA;are trying to avoid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are groups that think various methods of RPGing are better than others for whatever reasons, and there are groups that think all methods are always exactly as good, and we want to be a place where as many of these groups' participants can come to ask questions and get good answers as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our position on playstyle is that &lt;em&gt;proselytizing is not what this site is for&lt;/em&gt;.   If someone indicates that they want to play or are playing a game a certain way, telling them to instead do it differently is outside of the solution scope unless it is really and truly &lt;em&gt;directly&lt;/em&gt; related to the question being asked.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I'm bringing this up is that I think you are confusing &quot;all playstyles are welcome&quot; with &quot;all playstyles are equal.&quot;  This means that when you accept our nice-sounding policy, you are setting yourself up for failure because anything that is clearly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an equally valid choice to you must, then, not be a matter of playstyle.  This limits your conformance to our policy to a tolerance of playstyle decisions that you see as equally valid, which sort of defeats the entire point of the policy.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, while our policy is about playstyle differences, because those in particular draw a lot of loud and vexatious discourse, the principles actually apply equally well to most matters of aesthetics in RPGs. The best way to go about supporting the goals of that policy is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't casually dismiss anything, regardless of how you feel about it.  If you can't avoid casually dismissing something when posting about it, avoid all Q&amp;amp;A where you would end up doing so. Casually dismissing someone's position is a violation of our Be Nice policy.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're going to say something or someone is wrong, bad, evil, etc, be really extra careful.  Make extra sure you support each and every aspect of each such claim, and that they are all necessary to your answer and pertinent to the question.  Avoid doing any of these things in comments (if it's important enough that you really should post a comment, it's likely important enough you should post a meta instead. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6399/rpgs-by-and-for-white-nationalists&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;).  If you do it in a question, make sure they are all central to the question, make sure the question is not just a veiled attack on someone/thing but an honest effort to learn, and &lt;strong&gt;don't&lt;/strong&gt; support your accusations, since they had better be what you are asking about, and supporting them just leads to comment arguing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you think something is an X-Y problem, check yourself.  In fact, you should probably post a comment before answering, in this case: &quot;It seems like you're asking about Y but really you want to solve X.  Would an answer that solves X without doing Y be acceptable?&quot;   Be extra careful about this when the problem is a gm-techniques or group-dynamics thing.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you think something is an X-Y problem, where Y is something well-scoped and answerable, but X is something like &quot;get my players to have more fun&quot; or otherwise patently overbroad/opinion-based/etc, don't frame-challenge with an answer addressing X.  If 'X' isn't something we think it's okay to directly ask about, it's not something that you should be treating the querent as indirectly asking about either, because we have good reasons for disallowing those sorts of questions.  If you really think that the querent doesn't realize the situation, a comment on it might be appropriate, but probably not.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you know you have problems with a subset of the RPG community, don't answer questions primarily for and by that group.  If you hate optimizers, don't answer optimization questions.  If you hate D&amp;amp;D 4e, don't answer questions on it.  Answering out of hatred is just not a good idea. This is related to not casually dismissing things.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If someone posts a wrong-headed comment on your stuff, saying something like &quot;no sane GM would allow [your suggestion]&quot;or whatever, flag it for deletion, don't respond.  Engaging leads to pointless arguments. Ignoring it leads to someone else engaging, more pointless arguments and your answer getting drive-by downvoted and/or not drive-by upvoted or your question getting not drive-by-upvoted and/or closed on fictitious grounds.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-10-10T23:44:53.403" LastActivityDate="2017-10-10T23:44:53.403" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7494" CreationDate="2017-10-03T01:13:07.350" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR I'm frame challenging your meta but your original answer's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;It doesn't matter where &quot;playstyle starts.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren't &quot;accepting of all playstyles, but eager to hassle people over their choices about gaming that don't fit into the definition of playstyle.&quot; Therefore which of these decisions we categorize as &quot;playstyle&quot; instead of &quot;social preference&quot; or whatever other category is irrelevant to how we should treat other folks on the SE. So given this frame I am not eager to define playstyle, because that would imply that elements outside that definition are OK to not respect in others, which is false.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's OK to say what you think is good.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, on the other hand, people are way too sensitive about this, and all you really need to do at most is stick an &quot;IMHO&quot; in front of that statement in your answer- you value separating player and character knowledge and you believe good roleplaying does that. That's cool; &quot;respecting all playstyles&quot; sure as heck doesn't mean you can't talk about yours!  Especially in your own answers.  It's one thing if you're heckling someone else's answer in comments - &quot;No!  You're wrong!  The only good roleplay is...!&quot;  But if someone doesn't like you saying &quot;good roleplaying separates knowledge/values fun over rules/is where you lose yourself in a role and wake up in Baltimore without pants&quot; - tough nougat. You're stating your preference, and late 2010's tumblr whining notwithstanding, sharing your opinion does not equate with attacking someone else's opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;But other people are free to civilly try to change your mind.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, other site folks are welcome to downvote an answer if they feel it's not correct, and best as I can tell the commenter in question, Anne, did not even downvote but left a perfectly civil comment saying &quot;hey that's not good to everyone...&quot; and when rebuffed said,and I paraphrase, &quot;it's just a word it's fine I don't care, just trying to help you see another perspective.&quot; So I don't see anything wrong with any of the exchange, either on your part or her part - civil exchange of ideas FTW. There's no comment fight, no flags... Nothing which I would consider an escalation of any sort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T01:13:07.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7498" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6453" CreationDate="2017-10-03T23:22:58.680" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Reposted by request from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5904/whyd-my-second-question-get-removed-when-surely-people-would-be-thinking-about/5907?noredirect=1#comment23574_5907&quot;&gt;Why&amp;#39;d my second question get removed when surely people would be thinking about both?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest benefits here have little to do with questions.  It's about the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) When I post an answer to a 'question' that's actually a bunch of related questions, I have to address them all (at least, if I want to be a good site member); that's more work for me, not always possible to format smoothly, particularly if your 'related' questions turn out not to be related after all, and &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; when they're only related by a 'people are probably thinking about this now, right?' kind of logic train.  This makes your question harder to answer, but it's not because your question is &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NintendoHard&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;uniquely challenging&lt;/a&gt;, it's because &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;your question sucks&lt;/a&gt; (warning: TV tropes links.  The analogy is, in fact, illustrative, though, so I suggest you read the article intros at least).  This is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2) When I post an excellent answer to a question, I am rewarded by upvotes.  When I answer any number of related questions posted as a single question, I still get one upvote.  That is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3) When I am reading an answer, I have three primary voting options: upvote, downvote, or don't vote.  When an answer actually is a single answer, deciding what to do is easy; I upvote it if it's useful/right/etc, downvote it if it's bad/wrong/etc, and don't vote if I'm not expert enough to tell the difference/need clarification/etc.  If your question forces answers to have multiple parts, it is &lt;em&gt;normally the case&lt;/em&gt; that I find myself wanting to upvote an answer for one part, but wanting to downvote/abstain due to another.  This is one of the biggest cited reasons not to do the 'related question' thing, and, while the same thing can happen even on regular questions, substantially increasing the risk of putting voters through this is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4) When I post questions like this (We higher-rep people do things wrong, sometimes, too), I usually find (at least) one of my questions ignored, in favor of another one, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70933/is-baleful-polymorph-really-this-weak&quot;&gt;as in this case&lt;/a&gt; (the top answer is just straight up not an answer to the question at all; ignore that one.  The rest are good examples, though).  This is frustrating, and while it usually feels like the answerers are the ones doing things wrong, the blame shouldn't be entirely on them; I should have posted the question as separate real questions to start off with.  Not doing so is &lt;strong&gt;bad&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5) Answers are supposed to stand on their own.  When I answer a question like this, I may find myself needing to repeat an entire other answer in whole or long-part, because &lt;em&gt;it is the right answer&lt;/em&gt; to most of the question.  This makes my answer more of a comment on a part of that answer and there is no real good way of dealing with that when my answer is &lt;em&gt;completely&lt;/em&gt; identical for entire questions.  Leaving a comment &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; work, but it doesn't if the answerer is not persuaded by my arguments, and I shouldn't be using comment-arguments to persuade an answerer to change their mind anyways, ideally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, basically: &lt;strong&gt;No, we should not change the policy here&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. We &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; the mods and we &lt;em&gt;make&lt;/em&gt; the policy.  I mean, there are elected mods, too, but even more than SE in general, this site is really and truly community moderated.  SSD is an elected mod, but the editing of your question was well within the purview of regular normal user activity.  Not trying to call you out or anything, just a heads up, in case you hadn't realized how we do moderation around here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Separately, &lt;em&gt;deleting&lt;/em&gt; a question because of this is excessive and silly, and that probably shouldn't be happening, so I'm with you on that one.  Locking makes sense in a content dispute, and deleting makes sense for old questions that we have reason to believe are abandoned, but it's very scary-looking and not something we should be doing without serious consideration, even if it is easy to reverse.  But I, at least, haven't ever seen a question &lt;em&gt;deleted&lt;/em&gt; because of this without signs of abandonment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T23:22:58.680" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7499" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" Score="0" Body="&lt;h3&gt;How can a question be added to the FAQ?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make sure the question, stated plainly and simply, is in the question body. The answer goes in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Link back&lt;/strong&gt; to the index.  Paste this at the end of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Return to FAQ index](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq)&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tag as &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposed&lt;/a&gt;.  When a post seems to hit a mature state, it will have &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; added by a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7500" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" Score="0" Body="Proposals for new entries for the FAQ repository on this site should use this tag." OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" LastActivityDate="2017-10-03T23:36:25.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7492" CreationDate="2017-10-05T05:44:06.607" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As Doppelgreener said, it's probably just that no one has done it yet, but there are enough questions about specific popular adventures that it could be a useful grouping. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could imagine redefining the tag wiki for [published-adventures] to say &quot;don't just slap it on any question in which there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a published adventure, any more than you'd put [wizard] on every question where someone mentions wizards. Instead, reserve this tag for questions that are specifically &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; buying, running, playing, or writing published adventures. For questions that are strictly about the content of a single module like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89222/what-ability-is-the-save-dc-of-orcuss-voice-lair-action-in-out-of-the-abyss/89228#89228&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, use the more specific tag instead. For more general questions where the particular module provides context that may or may not be necessary to answering the question, use both.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously the wording would be more polished, but I think that preserves the usefulness of the broader tag without making it redundant or strictly a superset of the individual adventure tags. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2017-10-05T05:44:06.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7502" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-05T15:38:56.360" Score="18" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;Following the highly supported answer here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7492/why-do-we-use-published-adventures-instead-of-more-specific-tags&quot;&gt;Why do we use [Published-Adventures] instead of more specific tags?&lt;/a&gt; I feel like adding specific tags to questions about specific adventures is a good idea. However, if I do so, I'll bump tons of old questions, which could drown out some of today's actual questions, making them less likely to get good answers and attention. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the most responsible way to mass-update tags on many questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastActivityDate="2017-10-10T23:26:44.333" Title="Is it irresponsible to bump numerous questions by adding tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7502" CreationDate="2017-10-05T17:13:13.287" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;You raise a valid point since there's 132 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; questions and the vast majority are about to get a named tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's been a couple of ideas about how to do significant retags in the past:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do like, five or ten a day tops. Keep an eye on the front page and don't do another retag session until the last retag session (yours or anyone else's) has already flowed off the front page.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do all the editing you can in one session (if there's a limited and reasonable amount to do) so that you limit the front page to being disrupted for just one day. Most users on this day will just check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?sort=newest&quot;&gt;Newest Questions list&lt;/a&gt; instead of the front page to see what questions need attention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case &lt;strong&gt;I suggest using method #1.&lt;/strong&gt; There's 100+ edits to do and we haven't actually made named tags for this category before. It'd be better to take it slow and steady so that errors can be fixed, and potential debate over how to tag these (e.g. whether or not to keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag on some/all of them) can be done along the way on meta with time to spare.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-05T19:57:13.350" LastActivityDate="2017-10-05T19:57:13.350" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7504" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7505" CreationDate="2017-10-05T17:15:11.367" Score="9" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7492/23970&quot;&gt;Why do we use [Published-Adventures] instead of more specific tags?&lt;/a&gt; suggests that we might start tagging some of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; questions with adventure-specific tags. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/isle-of-dread&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;isle-of-dread&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;isle-of-dread&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keep-on-the-borderlands&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keep-on-the-borderlands&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keep-on-the-borderlands&lt;/a&gt;, for instance. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone has tagged a few questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tomb-of-annihilation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tomb-of-annihilation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tomb-of-annihilation&lt;/a&gt;, as we've seen a recent flurry of questions about that product. I started to write up a wiki for it and realized that there's probably a lot we can be repeating across specific-published-adventure tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, have at it: what do you think the template for a tag description for a specific published adventure should be? If we can do a decent job here, perhaps we'll make our lives easier going out as these tags multiply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-05T17:17:49.857" LastActivityDate="2017-10-12T16:04:17.860" Title="Can we brainstorm a tag description/wiki template for specific published adventure tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7504" CreationDate="2017-10-05T17:34:53.617" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we can keep it short and sweet. Tag wikis and excerpts &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tag-excerpts&quot;&gt;are intended&lt;/a&gt; to contain site-specific instructions for their tags' usage rather than a general description of the topic. Usage instructions naturally include enough description of the topic so that tags can be accurately chosen for a question, but they don't need to go into detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For just usage instructions, I would go with something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about the adventure &lt;em&gt;&amp;lt;title&amp;gt;&lt;/em&gt; (&amp;lt;year&amp;gt;) published by &amp;lt;publisher&amp;gt;. Please keep your question's title spoiler-free and use &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1191/add-markdown-support-for-hidden-until-you-click-text-aka-spoilers/71396#71396&quot;&gt;spoiler blocks&lt;/a&gt; in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Easy, short, and informative. If we want to get fancy, we can make the title a link to the publisher's page for the adventure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-10-06T05:22:52.580" LastActivityDate="2017-10-06T05:22:52.580" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7506" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-05T18:32:35.360" Score="0" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just created &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&lt;/a&gt; and think it would be a very good idea to add a synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hotdq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hotdq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hotdq&lt;/a&gt;, considering how common that abbreviation is. However, when I go to suggest it, I'm told I need 5 score in that tag before I can suggest synonyms. That's fine, but... do I not already have 5 score in that tag, based on having added it to questions I've asked and/or answered? Or is the system specifically not counting my score because I created the tag myself (which would be weird)? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is it just like certain badges, etc., in that it takes a few minutes for the SE hamsters to run around and record that I do in fact have a score of 5, and I should just be patient?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2017-11-04T19:39:13.673" Title="What's required to create a tag synonym?" Tags="|support|tags|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7506" CreationDate="2017-10-05T18:48:46.440" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;This looks like a hamster thing. I've just now suggested it as a synonym myself just to check it had nothing to do with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hotdq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hotdq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hotdq&lt;/a&gt; tag not existing. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/hoard-of-the-dragon-queen/synonyms&quot;&gt;You do have an answer score of 5 in the tag&lt;/a&gt; and meet the reputation prerequisite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-10-05T18:48:46.440" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7508" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7510" CreationDate="2017-10-08T07:18:54.403" Score="15" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we used to have 'too chatty', 'not constructive', and 'obsolete' as separate flag options, which moderation could use to see, for example, if someone was posting lots of unconstructive comments because there's some correlation between comments being flagged and a per-user statistic or something.  Not being a mod, I'm unclear on the details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now we just have Super Bad, No Longer Needed, and Custom Flag of Mod Summoning +1.  My issue is that 'No Longer Needed' incorporating most things that were &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; helpful seems like it would make it hard to differentiate between someone who posts lots of excellent comments (who should accumulate a lot of NLN:Obsolete flags) and someone who posts lots of annoying, argumentative, and/or unhelpful-- but not offensive-- comments (who should accumulate a lot of NLN:Too Chatty/NotConstructive flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this an actual detriment to our site policing situation, or am I just not understanding things properly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-10-09T01:48:57.090" Title="The new comment flags seem like they fail to track some info we used to be able to track" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7508" CreationDate="2017-10-08T08:42:48.027" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my eyes, this is a valid concern:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I often do go through my posts and then correct stuff based on comments, which I subequently flagged as obsoltete, and soon were removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the new system putting the &quot;Chatty&quot; and the &quot;Obsolete&quot; together, it might create an overwhelming number of &quot;Chatty/Obsolete&quot; tags for some of those that used to get tons of obsolete but not chatty flags. As they now are tracked together it might become a problem &lt;strong&gt;IF&lt;/strong&gt; that number is used to determine removal/suspension of comment privilege. However &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; it used to determine comment privileges? &lt;em&gt;THAT&lt;/em&gt; is a question that has to be solved first, and I am not in a position to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, even if this number of removed Chatty/Obsolete is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; used to determine removal/suspension of privileges, then it is still not a good thing to put &quot;Constructivve but now incorporated and thus obsolete comment&quot; and &quot;nonconstructive or chatty&quot; into the same bin. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2017-10-08T11:09:23.643" LastActivityDate="2017-10-08T11:09:23.643" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7510" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7508" CreationDate="2017-10-08T19:07:26.940" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, the new flags end up working differently, being used differently, and giving us different immediate&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; information. From what I've seen this is mostly positive though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of the change as I understand it was to make it easier for flaggers to tell which flag to use, and for mods to be able to understand faster why a comment was flagged. It seems to succeed on this point so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of tracking flags, the No Longer Needed flag is the only one that doesn't go in the “bad flags” list in the moderation tab on a user's profile. This does mean that &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; people use flags exactly as before and map (Not Construction, Obsoletely, Too Chatty) ⇒ (No Longer Needed) 100% of the time, then we're losing some of the intended flagging messages. The upshot is twofold though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; using flags 100% the same as before (as intended by the change).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flags that do get cast tend to be more accurate, because the there's much clearer separation between their meanings.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result I'm seeing what looks like a few subtle shifts in how flags get used around problem comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Low-level annoyance comments&lt;/strong&gt; are being more deftly dealt with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These used to be flagged with “bad” flags, but now tend to get a NLN flag that effectively means “please remove this but it's not a problem.” Since it's faster for mods to evaluate the accuracy of this flag, the comment gets dealt with faster. This frequently removes the irritation quicker, helping to defuse a low-level situation's potential to &lt;em&gt;become&lt;/em&gt; a real problem. (People can't engage with annoying comments that aren't there.) Often de-escalation rather than an intervention is the right level of mod response, so this is nice as the new default. And since this doesn't go on our mod view of profiles, the list of problem comments on an account no longer contains comments that, individually, don't seem to belong when reviewed later.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Patterns of problem comments&lt;/strong&gt; are better documented and involve a touch more community moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These aren't documented now by strings of low-level comments… which used to require mods to laboriously reconstruct them by trawling through lists of “why was this comment flagged ‘bad’?” comments. Instead, patterns made out of individually-meh comments spur non-mod users to escalate to descriptive Custom flags. This means that a) only active problems that merit putting in that much effort get logged, and b) the exact problem is documented textually for us and for posterity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that the overall effect of the change will be that &lt;strong&gt;our data is sparser but richer and more accurate&lt;/strong&gt;. There's just less noise in the signal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a nice side effect, accounts no longer earn “black” marks that are actually &lt;em&gt;grey&lt;/em&gt; marks that we have to mentally filter out when quickly checking someone's posting history. Now everything in that list from after the change is actually a significant data point. And since we can still always go into yet another view&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; to see &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; someone's flagged comments regardless of reason, we don't lose the data if we do need it later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We have another view where all comments of a user &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; flagged can be reviewed, so what doesn't get shortlisted to the “bad” list is still recorded and available to review. It just doesn't immediately jump to our attention when looking at the mod tab of a profile.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-10-09T01:48:57.090" LastActivityDate="2017-10-09T01:48:57.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7502" CreationDate="2017-10-10T23:26:44.333" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another possibility is to not edit the old posts until they pop back to the top organically.  As how the community handles locking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/37348&quot;&gt;Game Recommendation Questions&lt;/a&gt;.  This would give the benefit of not bumping a large number of questions, while still getting the active ones specific tags quickly.  This also isn't particularly actionable on anyones part.  Simply if you happen to see a [published-adventures] question, tag it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37348" LastActivityDate="2017-10-10T23:26:44.333" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7504" CreationDate="2017-10-12T16:04:17.860" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Keeping the spoilers in the wiki to a minimum seems like a must for me, but items that seem to be a must:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Publishing/Reprint dates&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Author&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Publisher&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Campaign Setting (if available)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides these general information, some slight overview might help. Something like the first sentence of a Wikipedia article or from the back book cover. For the Tomb of Horrors this might read &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tomb of Horrors was designed as a challenge for expert players who boasted of having mighty player characters able to best any challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2017-10-12T16:04:17.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7513" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-12T20:30:05.493" Score="14" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I made an edit on a one-year-old answer. The content of the answer is excellent, but it had many typos and grammatical errors, so I fixed them. In my mind I thought I was doing a nice thing: (1) The post reads better, particularly for people like me who get distracted by such errors; (2) It would benefit the original author of the answer as it will register as new activity and in general will increase the chances of more upvotes for him/her.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edit was first approved (by reviewers), then got rejected by the owner. I got curious why it was rejected, and asked, but received no answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is weird that you spend effort that would benefit someone, but it gets rejected. Now my question is what to do about it. While it is probably possible as long as I cite the original author under CC, making a copy of the original post would be very weird; just for such small changes. But it is also possible to argue that such behaviour is not beneficial to the community; why not read something edited nicely when already the effort for it has been spent?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an arbitration mechanism to improve answers even when the owner does not approve? If not, is there an official way to indicate an alternative version of an answer; something very similar, with essentially the same content, but better edited?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS: I tried to find an answer on the meta, but the only relevant Q&amp;amp;A that I could identify does not appear to really cover this issue: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6230/editing-someone-elses-answer-vs-commenting&quot;&gt;Editing someone else&amp;#39;s answer vs. commenting&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS2: If you want to see the kind of edit I am talking about, here is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/82780/revisions&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;. Please note that I am posting in good faith with no intention at all to argue about a particular edit. I am posting it ONLY to clearly demonstrate what I am talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-12T20:42:12.230" LastActivityDate="2017-10-12T20:42:12.230" Title="How to handle rejected edits that appear to be objectively positive?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7514" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7513" CreationDate="2017-10-12T20:41:46.577" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually you leave it be and accept the author doesn't want your changes, and/or take what you've written and write a better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases like this where you're confident your changes were an objective improvement, you can flag it for moderator attention or bring it up here like you've done. In this case you did correct a bunch of errors &amp;mdash; it's fine that they were made but we should definitely accept those improvements. It improves our site's quality as a resource to put those corrections in place, and it degrades our service to undo corrections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've rolled the answer back to include your revisions and asked the author to revise further if there's something they don't find satisfying in how it's currently written, rather than roll back entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-10-12T20:41:46.577" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7515" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-13T12:05:11.117" Score="2" ViewCount="335" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can't reproduce this on other sites (n.b. other site had a Featured/Bounty tab).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To reproduce:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Navigate to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=active&quot;&gt;Active Questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click the link to the Hot Questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actual:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A different set/order of questions appears for a brief, split second, before a second set resolves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Expected:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Switching tabs goes directly to that set of questions, without flickering other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Environment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chrome 61.0.3163.91 (Official Build) (64-bit) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Variations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;c68ab9a3-3f4a17df&#xA;3095aa95-3f4a17df&#xA;7c1bc906-f55a7974&#xA;47e5d3db-3d47f4f4&#xA;2a33b90e-8c6be03e&#xA;d43bf3e5-bd7cd813&#xA;ba3f87da-45bda656&#xA;79616653-3f4a17df&#xA;5ca89f9-3f4a17df&#xA;9e201a2b-7e3ae057&#xA;5b3ed0a1-3f4a17df&#xA;68812885-4d2fac87&#xA;f347910c-3f4a17df&#xA;b791c1b8-3f4a17df&#xA;9773d3bd-f23d1dea&#xA;99144bc3-3cc2175e&#xA;9e5c75f1-40093a1&#xA;f79cb77b-3d47f4f4&#xA;27219e67-b2047178&#xA;23a898eb-aaaaf5b1&#xA;4ea303a6-ecbb250e&#xA;d92562a9-ca7d8d80&#xA;447469ba-ca7d8d80&#xA;7aa46da5-4ae2ba07&#xA;de03e059-e65e20f2&#xA;fbe6bb40-3d47f4f4&#xA;1354da85-489348db&#xA;494d8760-91c810ef&#xA;f47ae82a-86f22ee5&#xA;3ac60855-486e2a9c&#xA;f296190c-6e597ede&#xA;4442aae2-6bdfffe7&#xA;ed1d377-e1cc0f14&#xA;75f0f0a0-e1cc0f14&#xA;e2b18481-6754d7b7&#xA;e7e71889-e1cc0f14&#xA;644b8345-ca7d8d80&#xA;94e68624-f23d1dea&#xA;828a5926-ca7d8d80&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;edit: I can't reproduce this now. Same version of chrome. Caching?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="7976" LastEditDate="2017-10-13T16:46:20.417" LastActivityDate="2017-10-13T16:46:20.417" Title="Switching betwen active and hot questions flickers another set of questions" Tags="|bug|status-norepro|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7516" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7517" CreationDate="2017-10-13T15:31:03.657" Score="13" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;Say that I see a question about the &lt;em&gt;Shadowrun&lt;/em&gt; setting. I happen to know that the answer to the question can't be found in the RPGs, but it is answered in the novels and/or video games. Can I use that as an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give an example, over on Sci-fi/Fantasy Stack Exchange, there was &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/q/166256/13217&quot;&gt;a question about the legitimate uses for decking&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/166262/13217&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; relied on the  &lt;em&gt;Shadowrun&lt;/em&gt; novels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As documented in the Shadowrun novels such as &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://shadowrun.wikia.com/wiki/Source:Never_Deal_With_A_Dragon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Never Deal with a Dragon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, the virtual reality access methods used in Decking was standard for corporations, as Sam has a (very basic) Avatar for use at Renraku. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would that answer have been acceptable on this site? Or do we need to stick with questions and answers that are related to RPG books?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7373" LastActivityDate="2017-10-13T15:43:24.597" Title="Can I answer a lore question with information from non-RPG media?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7516" CreationDate="2017-10-13T15:43:24.597" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answering from related media is fine, but be careful to be explicit, as how things work in the RPG is not always completely aligned with the a) different mechanics in video games and b) fictional liberties taken in novels.  For some questions, answers from those might be appropriate and for others they may not be. Lore questions should be safe (though even there, there can be splits between different continuities, like the Shadowfist card game world split from the Feng Shui RPG world...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-10-13T15:43:24.597" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7518" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-15T18:11:35.543" Score="7" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;several times i get this warning when tagging questions,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;you seem to be attempting to create the tag &lt;code&gt;[spell]&lt;/code&gt; but the tag &lt;code&gt;[spells]&lt;/code&gt; already exist. Did you meant to use &lt;code&gt;[spells]&lt;/code&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or something to that effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we get a synonym mapping?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-15T19:59:45.300" LastActivityDate="2017-10-15T19:59:45.300" Title="Make [spell] a synonym of [spells]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7518" CreationDate="2017-10-15T18:30:38.227" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Done!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally we don't make synonyms for plural forms and such because the system redirects people, as you found, but this is such a high-traffic tag that an exception is likely very useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-10-15T18:30:38.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7520" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-16T17:01:16.407" Score="11" ViewCount="422" Body="&lt;p&gt;I came across a question today tagged with the (partial) name of the specific spell the question contemplates. Now I like a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tiny-hut&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tiny-hut&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tiny-hut&lt;/a&gt; as much as the next sheep, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; I do believe in emergent folksonomy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is this a point where we, as a community, say &quot;hmm... maybe not?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be a little clearer, here are the uses I see tags performing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;help direct expert eyes to a question (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;the help center on tagging&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;help browsers find questions (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5937/23970&quot;&gt;our meta on the TPK tag&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the first point, I have a hard time understanding what expert we could be catching with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/your-spell-here&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;your-spell-here&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;your-spell-here&lt;/a&gt; that we aren't getting with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system&lt;/a&gt;+&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;. On the second point, I don't see what we're getting with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/your-spell-here&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;your-spell-here&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;your-spell-here&lt;/a&gt; that we don't get with a search for the spell's name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I leave you with another quote from the tagging article: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a general rule, you should avoid creating new tags if possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-10-16T19:02:44.953" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T19:56:41.860" Title="Should we be tagging individual spells?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2017-10-16T17:46:45.987" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we should make a habit of having tags for specific spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Short version:&lt;/strong&gt; too many specific nontransferrable names which overlap with fundamental game concepts of those very same games let alone other games, which takes up tags we should be using for those fundamental concepts instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our tag taxonomy is predominantly high level game concepts, portable between multiple editions or even game systems. This is a great sweet spot to go for because it's unlikely a question will be about more than 2-3 of these concepts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of our tag taxonomy is about games &amp;amp; editions, and some of it is about specific printed products (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hoard-of-the-dragon-queen&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7492/1204&quot;&gt;as a published adventure tag&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spells are beyond that sweet spot. An awful lot of our questions about spells are about how 2-3 different spells interact &amp;mdash; in addition to the system tag, possible &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag, and other mechanical systems that would interact such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/armor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;armor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;armor&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They also use up common names while not being even a little bit transferable. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dnd-spells.com/spells&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e has 400+ spells&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/indices/spelllists.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Pathfinder has 1,700  spells just in the official list&lt;/a&gt; (excluding third party products), D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and 4e have also gone similarly bananas. These spells cover common names like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/witness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;witness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;witness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/veil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;veil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;veil&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/refuge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;refuge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;refuge&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jump&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jump&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jump&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/invisibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;invisibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;invisibility&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fear&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fear&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fear&lt;/a&gt;. That's me just picking out a handful from the Pathfinder list. These are all names of ordinary gameplay concepts, real-world experiences, or even features of the very same game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By eating up those names you're also causing trouble for people who play other games and don't need tags for their basic game concepts to be taken up by existing games. Did you know Spite is both a Pathfinder spell and a fundamental mechanic of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/great-ork-gods&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;great-ork-gods&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;great-ork-gods&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-16T18:00:41.313" LastActivityDate="2017-10-16T18:00:41.313" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7522" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2017-10-16T18:22:53.997" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ditch 'em.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having specific spell tags make people think they need to do that, and as this isn't &quot;D&amp;amp;D Stack Exchange&quot; it's going to take way too much word-space away from other games. If you want to find, for example, all &quot;tiny hut&quot; questions we do have site search, it's not like it's impossible. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-10-16T18:22:53.997" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7523" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7524" CreationDate="2017-10-17T10:44:32.677" Score="17" ViewCount="874" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5019/&quot;&gt;Non-duplicate question with answer in another question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8059/&quot;&gt;Should/can we change the Duplicate notification?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Situation — there are two different questions A&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; and B&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt;. Question A&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; has a specific answer A&lt;sub&gt;a&lt;/sub&gt;. Question B&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; has a good detailed answer, which includes points A&lt;sub&gt;a&lt;/sub&gt;, B&lt;sub&gt;a&lt;/sub&gt; and C&lt;sub&gt;a&lt;/sub&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should A&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; be closed as a duplicate of B&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt;? Or does &amp;quot;duplicate&amp;quot; imply that B&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; has to be a duplicate of  A&lt;sub&gt;q&lt;/sub&gt; as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:04:29.947" LastActivityDate="2021-12-08T21:29:14.993" Title="If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?" Tags="|discussion|faq|duplicates|closing-questions|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7523" CreationDate="2017-10-17T11:03:51.343" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;We close Question A as a duplicate of Question B only when &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of the following is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered &lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; as a subset of Question B. &amp;quot;Obvious&amp;quot; here means I can tell at a glance that Question A would be covered by Question B.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question B has an &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; answer to Question A. &amp;quot;Obvious&amp;quot; here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There isn't a strong, compelling reason to cover Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met, this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea here is that it's the same question with an obvious answer. Someone redirected from Question A to B should be able to see obviously why they were redirected, and be able to find a satisfactory answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen people decide something like &amp;quot;Well, this question about this specific feat is already covered by this other question about combat in the third paragraph of one answer&amp;quot;, which isn't good enough to warrant closing the question as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On timing:&lt;/strong&gt; We prefer closing newer questions as a dupe of the older question, unless there's a major quality benefit the other way around. Some examples of when there's such a quality benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The older one isn't answered (or has bad answers), and the new one has good answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The newer question is flat-out better written, easier to follow, and generally more useful for anyone interested in that line of inquiry. Answers to it are equal or better (&amp;quot;both have no answers&amp;quot; is equal).&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This typically occurs when we establish &lt;strong&gt;a high-quality canonical question&lt;/strong&gt; to straightforwardly handle a subject that's previously been handled messily in various earlier questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-08T21:29:14.993" LastActivityDate="2021-12-08T21:29:14.993" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2017-10-17T16:27:57.127" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag system is emergent, and if we're getting a substantial amount of questions about a single spell, a tag should be made for it. To say that any question asking about a particular spell needs a tag for that spell though, is asking too much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastActivityDate="2017-10-17T16:27:57.127" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7526" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2017-10-18T08:33:44.580" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We only can have 5 tags.. Let's see how tagging goes on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need at least one tag for the edition, let's assume &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;, one for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt;, possibly to narrow it down a tiny bit more to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage&lt;/a&gt; as we ask about magic missile and maybe one for the class of the caster, who's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;. Wait, we only have ONE tag left! Do we need that for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bard&lt;/a&gt; because we ask about a bard buffing the wizard and how that changes spell damage or do we use it for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-missile&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-missile&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-missile&lt;/a&gt;?!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then: D&amp;amp;D/Pathfinder alone has over 500 spells. The Dark Eye has about 150 in the german 4.1 edition, Shadowrun has a technically infinite number because you can make spells. That'd demand us to make about that many tags, identify all questions about each of them, then retag appropriately and run into the 5-tags-only problem a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;tl;dr: It is not worth the effort you will have to make as you'll run into the tag limiter, most tags will have just one or two questions at all and even tagging just &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; spell with its name opens a can of worms I don't want to be seen opened. Not until we may have 10 tags at minimum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2017-10-18T08:33:44.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2017-10-20T01:49:24.907" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, ultimately, I think the answer in an ideal world would be &lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;.  Some individual spells in certain games get a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of distinct questions just about them.  For example, I bet we have more upvoted questions about the mechanics of Pathfinder's &lt;em&gt;Blood Money&lt;/em&gt; spell than involving Human Occupied Landfill (3:2 by my count).  If the community is asking so much about an individual spell that we end up being like &quot;okay, this really needs its own tag&quot;, then yeah, it makes sense to have a tag for that specific spell and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. It helps both of your use cases, at that point.  For comparison, we have 153 questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wild-shape&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wild-shape&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wild-shape&lt;/a&gt;, and that's a single specific class feature a tiny minority of classes get in some but not all D&amp;amp;D systems.  It's reasonable we might want a tag for e.g. &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;However&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, mxyzplk is right.  We already have a pervasive D&amp;amp;D-rules-all problem, and letting people do this will make it worse.  I think it's better to lose the tiny benefit spell-specific tags might have if it helps to encourage system diversity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-10-20T01:49:24.907" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7528" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-20T13:15:31.900" Score="35" ViewCount="2285" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta exists to explain some issues with the &lt;strong&gt;RAI&lt;/strong&gt; acronym. It has a couple of issues with its usage, and often get asked to clarify it. You've probably been pointed to this meta in relation to a request to clarify some usage of the acronym in a post. It attempts to summarise a couple of issues people will regularly have to cover in requesting such a clarification &amp;mdash; this meta exists to save them the effort of re-explanation when it's difficult to explain in the size of a comment what's going on behind their request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they've pointed out which issue's going on, please refer to that section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;First issue: RAI can mean two completely different things.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can stand for either of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules As Intended &amp;mdash; an assertion about what the person who wrote the rules meant by them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules As Interpreted &amp;mdash; what you think they say.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can also have other readings, and some readers may not be aware of the reading you intended to convey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than use the &quot;RAI&quot; acronym, it's often better to say &amp;ldquo;rules as intended&amp;rdquo; or &amp;ldquo;rules as interpreted&amp;rdquo; in full so that people know what you mean. If you do want to use the acronym, please make sure it's very clear in context, such as by only using the acronym as shorthand after you've already spelled out those words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind that while we're a site &lt;em&gt;by&lt;/em&gt; experts, we're also trying to assist and guide beginner and intermediate audiences. They may be unsure what you mean based on their colloquial experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Second issue: Making assumptions for Rules As Intended.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's lots of precedent for errors in RPG writing. An author picks some ambiguous wording which reads differently to what they intended; mechanics get changed or dropped during production which changes how a feature functions; an editor &amp;ldquo;helpfully&amp;rdquo; makes a revision which breaks something; or an author has a deadline of ten spells to finish by sundown and are focused on quantity without time to spare on polish (as RPG designers sometimes describe in podcasts).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're honest, we usually really don't know &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; designers intended for the words we're reading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite that, there's a common trend in RPG advice: an expert will make an educated guess about what the writer intended, conclude their guess is correct because it makes sense, and then provide advice asserting what they guessed is the case. That's done with the best of intentions, but really, there's no guarantee the guess is correct, so doing this can be misleading and problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We prefer (and may require) that if you make an assertion about an author's intentions, you back it up with evidence of their intentions: a reference to the game text discussing the game's philosophy, a quote from the designer, etc. Doing so improves confidence in your answer and teaches people more about the game they're playing. If you can't produce such a citation, it's probably best to drop the part where you're asserting about their intentions, and focus instead on working with what you do know for sure. It's okay if you don't know for sure what they meant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-20T22:21:33.210" LastActivityDate="2020-01-28T05:56:45.717" Title="Please avoid using the RAI acronym, or use it carefully &amp; be clear in context" Tags="|discussion|terminology|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7529" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-22T15:23:18.900" Score="17" ViewCount="366" Body="&lt;p&gt;The link structure in the wizards site has changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has gone from&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;http://dnd.wizards.com/go/we/20060327a&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;too&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are dozens of broken links in our site right now. Can we get someone at the StackExchange team to cast &lt;em&gt;Database Regex Fixup&lt;/em&gt; and mend them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-05-27T11:53:08.353" LastActivityDate="2023-03-27T20:25:41.943" Title="Can we do a mass update on old wizards links?" Tags="|discussion|hyperlinks|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7528" CreationDate="2017-10-23T04:17:39.523" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;One does not have to ask the author to analyze their intent&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that were the case, studying Shakespeare would be pointless (or more pointless if you are of a scientific rather than humanities bent :-))&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some ways of thinking of this that may (or may not) bring clarity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Literary Theory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the rules are to be considered as a literary work then Rules as Intended is a function of how to deal with &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Authorial Intent&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These range from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Criticism&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;New Criticism&lt;/a&gt; view which holds that the intent of the author is irrelevant &quot;the text is the primary source of meaning, and any details of the author's desires or life are secondary&quot;. This is essentially what we mean by Rules as Written&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_School_(intellectual_history)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cambridge School contextualism&lt;/a&gt; which states that we need to consider the social environment in which the work was made - for role-playing games this would include the prior works that influenced it and the social norms of the community at the time it was written. This is &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; what we mean by Rules as Intended but it spreads the net wider than authorial intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Weak Internationalism which says that both the readers' response and author's intent must be combined - generously this could be what the OP refers to when saying &quot;an expert will make an educated guess about what the writer intended&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then there are the strange ways of looking at it - I would &lt;em&gt;love&lt;/em&gt; to see a Marxist interpretation of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Legal Theory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively (or as well as), RPG rules could be thought of as akin to laws and the techniques that courts use to interpret them can be applied. The primary methods are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the literal approach - our RAW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the golden rule - reject RAW if it results in an absurdity or is inconsistent with the rest of the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the mischief rule - what is the problem this rule is trying to fix? This is really only applicable to errata.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;purposive approach - what are the rules trying to achieve? Interpret them so that is achieved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a legal context, these rules are applied in the context of looking beyond the statute to the &quot;intent&quot; of the legislators to the extent that this can be determined (e.g. from speeches made or press releases explaining the new law etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2017-10-30T10:58:00.127" LastActivityDate="2017-10-30T10:58:00.127" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7531" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7532" CreationDate="2017-10-24T11:28:35.803" Score="19" ViewCount="337" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title basically sums the question up, but let me elaborate: If you have a question that you don't actually need an answer to, but that you think would benefit the site and users looking for answers in future, can (and should) you ask it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39946" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-27T07:50:47.567" LastActivityDate="2020-11-27T07:50:47.567" Title="Is it reasonable to ask a question that you don't actually need an answer to?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7531" CreationDate="2017-10-24T11:38:49.527" Score="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our help center &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;advises&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally if you're not actually experiencing a particular problem it will be difficult for you to ask a stack-appropriate question for it or respond adequately to requests for clarification or further detail (because there is none to give). We deal best with actual concrete situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you mean you're experiencing a problem but you don't &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (plus emphatic underscores) an answer, since you think you can figure it out on your own, you can still ask us, just make sure you convey research effort you've done to solve it. It'll help us pick up from where you're at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've recently experienced a situation and want to show the problem you faced and show how you solved it, you may post a self-answered question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However in general if you've just thought up a situation you haven't experienced, don't think you ever will, and you're sure someone would want to ask about it... the best thing you can do is just leave it be and let someone who actually experiences that problem ask about it themselves whenever things come to it. Seeding artificial questions is not considered helpful, and mostly leads to low quality material. The fact the situation doesn't exist makes us ill equipped to handle its specifics, due to there being none.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've asked about problems I think I might be about to run into, but not problems I'm sure I never will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to provide more detail on the kind of question you're thinking of then I can get more specific, but we can't really answer specifically what may be going on with an unspecified theoretical question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-24T12:04:03.503" LastActivityDate="2017-10-24T12:04:03.503" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7531" CreationDate="2017-10-24T18:38:09.477" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please don't.  Experience shows us question seeding ends up poorly.  Because the poster doesn't actually have the problem, they are unable to really answer questions about it or clarify.  Then answers tend to be poor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, when someone who &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; actually have the problem shows up, they get pointed to a crappy dupe instead of getting answers. &quot;Why don't you bounty it, guy with 10 rep?&quot; they are asked. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let the people that really have the problem ask the question.  It ends up better for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-10-24T18:38:09.477" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7534" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7528" CreationDate="2017-10-24T18:41:52.277" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I personally have never heard &quot;Rules As Interpreted&quot; for RAI, and always knew it as &quot;Intended&quot; - ironically, people generally substitute their own opinion for &quot;intended&quot; anyway.  Unless the question is asking for developer citations and is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;, &quot;RAI&quot; is a signpost saying to me &quot;look at this question and see if it needs to be closed as opinion-based.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want to know intent ask a question that fits the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; tag. If you are just looking for a reasonable interpretation or you are just saying &quot;how you read it&quot; - say that, you don't need an ambigious abbreviation for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-10-26T00:26:03.053" LastActivityDate="2017-10-26T00:26:03.053" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7537" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-27T00:19:26.470" Score="17" ViewCount="407" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A possible problem&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, I am not trying to pick a fight with anyone, I am only trying to make the site better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having only been a member on this site for a few weeks now, I am concerned by a perceived trend in answers to D&amp;amp;D 5e questions.  Having done some digging, I suspect that this trend may be in part due to people answering 5e questions like one would answer a 3e or Pathfinder question.  The trend I am referring to is that of starting from a rigid &quot;No&quot; stance unless something is explicitly stipulated in the rules.  The 5e rules simply do not cover as much as 3e and Pathfinder, and that is by design, in an effort to lessen the importance of rules in favor of empowering the DM to do it the way that is best for their group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Guilty until proven innocent?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize that sometimes &quot;No&quot; is the only good answer, but it seems that many answers get written and up-voted that assume that the answer &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; to be &quot;no&quot; unless you can find where it explicitly says in the book that the answer is &quot;yes&quot;.  I do not believe that this logic can work in 5e, there are just too many things that were purposefully left out or left vague.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I worry that this tone will lead to frustrating budding new DMs and players that don't realize that the rules are their to guide, rather than stifle their creativity.  I fear that by approaching answers to 5e questions as if they were dealing with the more rules-heavy 3e and Pathfinder questions could give new DMs an erroneous belief that they are supposed to run 5e just like 3e, which causes problems, since the rules for many situations simply are not elaborated on in 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 5e we are seeing growth in the tabletop community that we have not seen during any previous edition.  A seasoned DM may understand that &quot;Rule 0&quot; is always in effect, but I worry for the new DMs and players who may get the opposite idea from the experts on this site and think that &quot;DM fiat&quot; is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Good intentions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that the people who submit answers are doing so because they legitimately want to help and that nobody wants to foster bad practice on purpose, but I worry that harm may be being done by accident.  We need to be careful of those things that we may unintentionally imply by the tone of our answers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The core of the issue?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I am seeing is probably only a symptom of the real issue, if there even is an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the problem people not sticking to the system and letting 3e experience color their 5e answers?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it the way the questions are worded that are limiting answers to more strict interpretations of rules?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it an assumption that everyone already knows that a DM can overrule anything that they don't think is right for their group?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some Examples&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am including this section at the request of commenters and to improve clarity, it is not personal against any of these users, who I am sure have plenty of other good answers on the site.  The following are from a few of the more recent &quot;Can I&quot; questions about 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108997/can-you-help-a-prone-character-to-stand-up&quot;&gt;This answer from Szega&lt;/a&gt; places unnecessary restrictions on bonus actions, but at least reminds the user that rulings can fix it.  Compare with encryptor's better answer to the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108891/can-larger-than-medium-creatures-use-two-handed-weapons-with-one-hand&quot;&gt;This answer from NautArch&lt;/a&gt; implies that there is no way to use the rules to allow a Large sized creature to use a Medium sized weapon as if it were a lighter weapon sized for them, going as far as to claim that &quot;Size doesn't matter&quot; when it clearly does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108663/can-i-start-a-new-rage-before-the-previous-one-ends&quot;&gt;This answer from Val&lt;/a&gt; claims that RAW says &quot;No&quot;  but then explains that RAI says &quot;Yes&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108635/use-of-mage-hand-during-combat-to-gain-advantage&quot;&gt;This answer from Erik&lt;/a&gt; is a &lt;strong&gt;great&lt;/strong&gt; example of a 5e &quot;No&quot; answer &lt;strong&gt;done the right way&lt;/strong&gt;.  Compare with the answer from disobedient tiger to the same question.  Luckily, in this case the better answer got more votes, but the other answer still got a lot of votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108630/can-a-warlock-teach-a-spell-to-a-wizard&quot;&gt;This answer from Val&lt;/a&gt; illustrates both striking an initial negative tone and taking an overly restricted view of the RAW.  The answer by Joel Harmon to this same question is also unnecessarily restrictive, though it is better because it at least submits potential alternate avenues of approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108397/can-i-cast-bestow-curse-twice-at-greater-than-5th-level-on-the-same-creature&quot;&gt;This answer from chaoticgeek&lt;/a&gt; presents a case where the answer treats &lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Bestow%20Curse#content&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a unique spell&lt;/a&gt; as all other spells.  The rule cited in the answer probably assumes that the overlapping spells in question are producing the same effect, which is not the case in the question being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108375/what-does-phb-stand-for&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; illustrates the type of person I am afraid might get the wrong idea from overly restrictive answers to 5e questions.  Can you see how someone like this may see &quot;RAW says no&quot; and think that their hands are tied?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that these examples help to illustrate the points I am trying to make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39671" LastEditorDisplayName="user39671" LastEditDate="2017-10-28T13:20:45.770" LastActivityDate="2017-10-28T16:17:59.257" Title="Are habits from D&amp;D 3e making answers to 5e questions more prone to overly rigid answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|dnd-5e|community|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7537" CreationDate="2017-10-27T17:41:13.460" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the deal. Everyone (most people at least) know they can do whatever they want in their games.  But they are asking a question not because they need someone to tell them &quot;sure you can! make it up! let your freak flag fly!&quot; but because they want to know what the game rules actually say, if only as a starting point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore if the question is &quot;does rule X work this way&quot; or &quot;can I do this&quot; and the answer by the game rules is no, then an answer of no is the right answer.  If you personally want to add &quot;but of course you could make it yes...&quot; well, they already know that. It's a valueless appendage to an answer, but add it if it makes you feel better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no explanation needed of &quot;why no makes the game better.&quot; That way lies random opinionated arguing best left to forums. If someone really needs help on that, they can ask &quot;would changing this unbalance the game&quot; or &quot;how can I make it so all PCs can fly at will but not mess up lower level encounters...&quot; Then that specific question can be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reviewing the new examples, my point stands.  If an answered wants to add &lt;em&gt;tested&lt;/em&gt; homebrew suggestions to an answer to a non-RAW-only question that’s fine.  But what we don’t want is untested “ideas” on how to do something.  Seeing some of your answers to those questions, they include untested speculation.  “Here’s how I might rule” is not answering from experience per Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, and site users tend to downvote that content as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to expand on a topic - that’s for a discussion forum or blog.  Here we answer questions.  In fact all the answers you link are good, and many of them add in “you could rule otherwise” or “here’s how it works at my table.” I shall upvote all those answers now for being good. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand your concern about clueless newbs being lured into a RAW-only playstyle by accident, but do not see any actionable suggestion that meets site content standards to address that.  If you wanted to ask a question like “Do I have to play D&amp;amp;D 5e by the rules” (hmmm...  didn’t we have one of those in the last month?) new folks can be referred to that’s fine.  But we expect rules questions to answer with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what the rules say&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;designer clarifications&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;documented instances&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;tested home-brew&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I did it this way and here’s how it turned out&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;wild guesses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;declarations of “RAI” with no evidence of that intent&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“how I’d do it”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;here’s a new rule/ruling I just wrote I’m sure it’s good&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2017-10-28T16:17:59.257" LastActivityDate="2017-10-28T16:17:59.257" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7539" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7540" CreationDate="2017-10-29T22:11:55.120" Score="17" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I play an obscure game that has very little Web presence. Over the years, the group that I play with has struggled through many questions about rules, implementation, DMing, etc. for this game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can I ask and self-answer some of the questions we've dealt with, in the hope of sparing possible future players the baleful journey of discovery that my group has endured?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39646" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-31T17:40:21.943" LastActivityDate="2017-10-31T17:40:21.943" Title="Can I ask self-answered questions about obscure games?" Tags="|support|self-answering|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7540" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7539" CreationDate="2017-10-29T22:18:32.233" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you may do that. This is in fact &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the kind of scenario for which self-answered questions exist: describe a problem you've experienced and ask how to resolve it, then provide the solution you used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for thinking to share what you've learned with others, I appreciate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have financial/business ties with the game, please remember to follow our aptly-named advertising policy: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/promotion&quot;&gt;How to not be a spammer&lt;/a&gt;. This includes disclosing your affiliation. Financial/business ties means you work for/with the producer, you stand to gain financially from sales, etc &amp;mdash; having bought the product or being a kickstarter backer is not necessarily an affiliation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-10-31T13:38:58.837" LastActivityDate="2017-10-31T13:38:58.837" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7539" CreationDate="2017-10-30T04:26:43.110" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Can and should. The stack welcomes this kind of FAQ behaviour by design.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is a network of sites with one goal in mind: To build a knowledge base on each particular subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can I answer my own question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes! Stack Exchange has always explicitly encouraged users to answer their own questions. (...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And from Jeff Atwood himself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/07/01/its-ok-to-ask-and-answer-your-own-questions/&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It’s OK to Ask and Answer Your Own Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be crystal clear, &lt;strong&gt;it is not merely OK to ask and answer your own question, it is explicitly encouraged.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A search on the subject of self-answering can lead to more opinions on the network. Here are some:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/256644/is-a-short-description-of-a-question-ok-if-self-answering&quot;&gt;Is a short description of a question OK if self-answering?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5048/self-answering-questions-without-other-answers&quot;&gt;Self-answering questions without other answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/250204/can-you-answer-your-own-questions-on-stack-overflow&quot;&gt;Can you answer your own questions on Stack Overflow?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-10-30T04:26:43.110" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7542" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-10-30T13:49:00.297" Score="2" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ever since I joined the SE system, when I am editing an answer or a question I can see how it looks before I hit &quot;submit&quot; or accept the edit. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have found, this morning, that I have to submit the edit (with possible errors in look or content) to find out if it looks as intended. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I hit a switch that I am unaware of, or did the SO/SE mega powers make a change?  I tried an edit at Christianity.SE and it worked as before in terms of WISIWYG while editing.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later that same evening: on a different PC, using Chrome rather than IE or Edge, same issue on my answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/109133/22566&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but not on this meta question that I am asking.  Odd bug.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="7976" LastEditDate="2017-10-31T12:39:59.423" LastActivityDate="2017-10-31T13:24:22.573" Title="Do I have a setting wrong? I can't see what I am editing" Tags="|support|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7542" CreationDate="2017-10-31T12:37:48.373" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;A case of operator error&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some help from @Oded, I found the &quot;show preview&quot; / &quot;hide preview&quot; which I'd never used before. (It's in the lower left under the box full of text that we type into).   What I  must have done yesterday was hit &quot;hide preview&quot; by accident, and it carried over to my browser on both different PCs' : IE on the one I originally had open when I created the answer, and Chrome on my other PC where I tried to edit it and found once again that I didn't see the preview. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hide Preview did what it is supposed to do; when I selected &quot;Show Preview&quot; it also did what it was supposed to do. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DOH! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-10-31T13:24:22.573" LastActivityDate="2017-10-31T13:24:22.573" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7544" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7546" CreationDate="2017-11-02T03:24:10.543" Score="31" ViewCount="800" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen three questions in the last few days that have a similar, and unusual, life cycle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;OP poses question,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;some good answers come in,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;time passes,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;OP comes back to report how it went.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last bit, though, seems to get a little problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/109040/23970&quot;&gt;one case&lt;/a&gt;, it's posted as an answer and drawing Not An Answer flags. &lt;del&gt;But they've been disputed.&lt;/del&gt; It's been removed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59146/23970&quot;&gt;another case&lt;/a&gt; OP came back and added it as an addendum to the question. (Looks like they were prompted to do so by a comment explicitly asking for this sort of update.) This edit occasioned a &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/40893871#40893871&quot;&gt;conversation in chat&lt;/a&gt; asking for a mod's input, and it strikes me as clear from that conversation that there's not an abundance of clarity/consensus on this sort of thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/109139/23970&quot;&gt;third case&lt;/a&gt; (10K+ only) is a little different: the question asked if something was balanced, it wasn't, but from the answers the OP was able to come up with something that &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; balanced, and wanted to share that back. But they got conflicting advice on how to do that from two high-rep users (one with a diamond).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So (some) new users are getting conflicting advice/direction and (some) experienced users (incl. me) are unsure where the consensus lies.&#xA;In the interests of developing and showcasing expertise, it seems like the result of a situation should have &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; place in the Q&amp;amp;A. But where?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-10T22:06:52.083" LastActivityDate="2019-07-10T22:06:52.083" Title="&quot;Update: here's how it worked out....&quot; Where does it go?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7544" CreationDate="2017-11-02T07:03:58.440" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Status Quo&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I joined the site several years ago, advice on this was more common.  People were encouraged to put what happened as an addendum to the question.  Adding it as an answer could certainly be appropriate instead, but it's usually going to be only part of a larger answer.  I don't think I've seen people get told not to chameleon here, but that would be relevant if it started happening; for the record, you should not have extra new questions in your 'what happened' addendum (or, if you do, they should just be links to new questions where you actually ask your new questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-11-02T08:33:09.133" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7544" CreationDate="2017-11-02T16:58:14.877" Score="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assuming that this update is offering something new and useful, “how I did it” is an answer. That is, quite frequently, exactly the sort of answer we expect from everyone else who answers the question. And so answers are the most appropriate place to put such answers. They &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; answers. In fact, they can make a decent case for being &lt;em&gt;the accepted answer&lt;/em&gt;, though it may be better to accept the answer that led to the answer posted (this is up to the OP).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But adding them to the question makes no sense, and comments aren’t the place for anything of value. An answer is the correct place, the &lt;em&gt;only possible&lt;/em&gt; correct place, for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the recap is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; providing anything new or useful—say, the user just went with one of the answers—then I think a comment on the question is the most appropriate place for it, if it appears at all (realistically, the accepted answer checkmark should inform us what the user ended up doing in these cases). Such a comment would presumably garner upvotes, and probably deserves not getting cleaned up with other comments, but by putting it in the question, you clutter the question, and you either have to signal your edits and make it clear that the update is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; part of the question, or else risk confusing new readers who wonder why the answers aren’t taking that part of the “question” into consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if the user finds that the answer(s) to the first question have prompted more question(s), then those should go in new questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2017-11-02T17:07:36.600" LastActivityDate="2017-11-02T17:07:36.600" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7547" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-03T21:25:55.093" Score="16" ViewCount="231" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions that are scoped across any and all editions of D&amp;amp;D we have the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; for that (among its uses).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Twice in three days I've noticed questions about monsters across D&amp;amp;D editions and tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; being voted closed as “unclear” and comments asking for which edition the question is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109219/does-an-ooze-gelatinous-cube-float&quot;&gt;Does an Ooze (Gelatinous Cube) float?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89420/has-there-ever-been-a-quasi-lich-in-an-official-tsr-or-wotc-publication&quot;&gt;Has there ever been a quasi-lich in an official TSR or WoTC publication?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a bit perplexed by this, because from my ancient, hoary perspective on tagging, these seem to be well-scoped, on-topic question that are correctly tagged with the “pan-edition” D&amp;amp;D tag. That perspective does mean that (as in some past meta discussions) my understanding of “the way things are done” is sometimes dated enough that I'm out of sync with what a large of the active community thinks is “the way things are done”, so I'm honestly wondering what's going on behind these events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there something I'm missing? Is there a shift in how the community expects edition tagging to be done — and by extension, is there a change in whether we accept pan-edition D&amp;amp;D questions? If so, is this a change we want to enshrine via consensus discussion, or is it something that needs course-correction?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-05T14:52:45.123" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:52:45.123" Title="Has how we want to use our “pan-edition” D&amp;D tag changed?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7547" CreationDate="2017-11-03T23:09:16.897" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unless the OP's writing a novel, I don't see how the gelatinous cube one shouldn't be edition specific.  Even if you ask an e.g. dnd-5e question you can always say &quot;if there's not info on this in 5e but there is some old Ecology of the Gelatinous Cube article or something that speaks to it, please let me know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Exact same thing with the quasi-lich question - &quot;I'd like to introduce my 4th level party to a sentient undead wizard with a single-minded obssesion that carried him past the threshold of death. I could create a character from whole cloth but I'm interested in any references that might detail a similar monster.&quot;  So they're playing in a specific edition.  The best answer would have info for that edition.  They should tag for that edition.  Wanting to know stuff from other editions is a fallback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I endorse hassling these two OPs to specifying the edition they're using, they're both already saying &quot;you know, or other info from wherever.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think especially in D&amp;amp;D there's an obvious hierarchy - from same ed, first party from different ed, third party from same ed, third party from different ed, from a novel or whatnot... for questions stretching for lore info for game purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking lore just to know lore - which usually makes me sad and most historical survey questions seem like a giant waste of time as they are often not tied to any real problem - then the all-eds tag may be appropriate.  But if you need an werehamster for 5e and you're not sure if there is one yet and you say &quot;failing that from another semi compatible edition&quot; that's fine and awesome and tagged [dnd-5e].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-11-03T23:09:16.897" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7547" CreationDate="2017-11-04T07:30:07.053" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the Ooze one is properly tagged pan-edition, but the Lich one is not.  This is because, in writing an answer to the lich one, I realized that the question, if it is pan edition, is &lt;em&gt;horribly&lt;/em&gt; overbroad.  All first and third party published material for all editions of D&amp;amp;D?  That's... a LOT of failed liches.  There's like 3 in Pathfinder alone, plus one or two in 3.5, and then there's I-don't-even-know-how-many in AD&amp;amp;D.  I'd bet at least one.  That, plus 'I wanna make it fight my level 4 party', makes me suspicious that they tagged because they didn't know better and not because they meant it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is; the lich one &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be tagged pan-edition, but if it were then I would expect a good answer to thoroughly survey all failed liches across all editions as well as failed liches in popular 3PP material, before then making a recommendation, regardless of if that recommendation is a frame challenge or not.  The current question provides very little guidance on what makes a good suggestion for a failed lich, and that's a problem if answers are gonna just be individual monster from individual editions, like they currently are (including mine).  That answer format is basically identical to bad game-rec.  I voted unclear not primarily because of edition confusion, but rather because I don't know what they want.  What 4th level party?  It really matters what their party is capable of, and edition is probably the biggest/easiest piece of figuring that out (high-op 4th level 3.5 characters, for example, might have a decent shot at failed lich variants that 5th edition characters would be literally incapable of affecting in any detrimental way).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other unclear thing is which editions count.  Specifically, they call out WoTC and TSR but I don't know if Paizo would count via Pathfinder stuff or just via their 3.5 3PP work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All this is to say that I &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think we are changing how we use it, just being more sensitive to people using it wrong when they meant '5e' and picked the shiny tag.  The Ooze question, for example, is a fine pan-edition question and definitely does not need to be edition scoped.  I don't feel overwhelmed by the prospect of typing up a review of every discussion of floating gelatinous cubes in every edition; I was surprised that there was even the one result that was found.  I do feel overwhelmed about trying to do the same for 'lich-like undead spellcasters', though.  And I don't have enough faith in proper tagging to VTC as Too Broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-11-04T07:30:07.053" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7531" CreationDate="2017-11-04T18:17:07.907" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Disclaimer:  This answer is a policy proposal, not a definitive answer.  Please vote agreement/disagreement as you see fit!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These questions are sometimes okay.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to ask a question to which you don't actually need an answer, &lt;strong&gt;as long as it is an otherwise good question.&lt;/strong&gt;  Many good, well-received questions on this site were asked with no motivation besides &quot;the asker was curious.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7473/who-created-the-idea-of-experience-points&quot;&gt;Who created the idea of experience points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98791/how-does-a-bard-grant-7d6-sonic-damage-at-level-seven&quot;&gt;How does a bard grant +7d6 sonic damage at level seven?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98128/how-can-an-astral-travellers-silver-cord-be-severed-how-difficult-is-it&quot;&gt;How can an astral traveler's silver cord be severed?  How difficult is it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91954/can-glyph-of-warding-be-cast-on-a-weapon-or-ammunition-so-that-an-attack-activat&quot;&gt;Can glyph of warding be cast on a weapon or ammunition so that an attack activates the glyph?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29367/how-has-dd-changed-over-time-in-its-guidance-to-dms-as-to-when-to-extrapolate-f&quot;&gt;How has D&amp;amp;D changed over time in its guidance to DMs as to when to extrapolate from written rules and when to improvise?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect there are many, many more good questions on this site that were asked merely because the asker was curious; I've chosen these examples because I'm &lt;em&gt;sure&lt;/em&gt; that's why they were asked, either because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...there's no possible way they could solve any other type of problem (the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...they explicitly mention that they were asked for a reason like &quot;I saw this other question and it made me wonder if...&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...I asked them, so I know that's why I asked them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What these questions have in common is that they are &lt;strong&gt;answerable&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;objective&lt;/strong&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;divorced from context&lt;/strong&gt;.  The rules for severing a silver cord in 3.5 don't change from game to game, absent houserules.  Who invented XP is an objective question about history, it doesn't depend on your DM's preferences.  Etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These questions are at elevated risk of being bad for other reasons.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That guideline in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt; wasn't just thrown in for no reason.  Hypothetical questions are much more likely to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;bad subjective&lt;/a&gt; and/or impossible to answer well than questions about how you should handle a real situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, I feel pretty confident that &lt;strong&gt;any hypothetical question about table dynamics is practically guaranteed to be a bad question&lt;/strong&gt;.  If your question has any of the following tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...it should &lt;strong&gt;absolutely&lt;/strong&gt; be about a real problem you are &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; facing in a game you are &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; playing.  The answers to these kinds of questions inevitably depend too much on the specifics of the table for anyone to answer them well otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This probably isn't an exhaustive list of the tags that should never have hypothetical questions.  Any time the answer is going to depend on table-specific context, it's important for the asker to be able to provide information about that context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If you want to ask a question like this, take extra care to make sure it's good.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Read the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; post.  I know you've already read it; read it again!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take a deep breath.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Read over your question, with an eye toward whether it's really a good fit for this site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Think about what a possible answer to your question might look like, and whether it's really possible for that answer to be &quot;correct,&quot; given &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; the information presented in your question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Look over the tags on your question and check if any of them seem like the kind of thing where table context matters.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Take another deep breath.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If and only if&lt;/strong&gt; you are satisfied after all of the above, post your question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2017-11-04T18:17:07.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3277" CreationDate="2017-11-04T22:04:36.097" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Of course, the PFSRD often has the errata'd version, while PRD has the original, such as the case for Double Barreled guns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21802" LastActivityDate="2017-11-04T22:04:36.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7552" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-05T10:15:57.267" Score="-6" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question about the efficient use of downvotes. People are downvoting without any comments; such behaviour is not necessarily constructive, but I generally agree with the logic presented in earlier questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572/why-is-an-answer-being-downvoted-without-any-comments&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/647/can-we-require-comments-on-downvotes&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. However, there are clear downsides for this as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Without any comments at all, there is no way for the poster to know how to improve her/his post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even in the case that the poster &quot;guesses&quot; what could be disliked, and significantly improves the post, there is no way to inform the people who downvoted. When there are comments, you can always respond to the comment and let the downvoter know about the improvement, but without that you can just hope that somehow they come back to the post and reread, which is not very likely.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such behaviour discourages efforts to improve posts, particularly for the inexperienced people. In order to improve this situation, would it be possible to implement a feature to &quot;ping&quot; the downvoters in the event of significant updates? This would also discourage downvoting, perhaps better than assigning negative reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or alternatively, could be possible to implement a middle ground solution like this: When a downvote is cast, apply a negative reputation penalty only if NONE of the following is done:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Write a comment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Upvote an already existing comment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Agree to be pinged back&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way, if you are in a bad mood and downvote, you still get the reputation penalty; but if you spend the effort to give constructive feedback, you will not. Moreover, the posters will have a better incentive to improve their posts, as they have a chance to reach back to you and get you to reconsider your downvote and perhaps turn that into an upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="38699" LastEditDate="2017-11-05T11:47:46.197" LastActivityDate="2017-11-20T17:11:52.920" Title="Downvotes - comment or negative reputation?" Tags="|feature-request|comments|down-votes|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7552" CreationDate="2017-11-05T12:23:00.333" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The request to have a ping for @downvoters &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/37123/152515&quot;&gt;has been requested and declined by staff on Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; because of the badness that would come from it, so I'll move past that part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may also be interested in reading: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572/why-is-an-answer-being-downvoted-without-any-comments&quot;&gt;Why is an answer being downvoted without any comments?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've made this request on a premise that isn't reliably true: the premise that there's usually a helpful comment we can leave to improve a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most common reasons for downvoting a post though is &quot;I think this post is wrong / giving bad advice / incorrect / fundamentally something I disagree with.&quot; There's no useful comment we can leave there to suggest improvement when we feel that way. In this circumstance we prefer the voter &lt;em&gt;does not&lt;/em&gt; leave a comment; actually expressing that they think the post is wrong reliably creates prolonged or heated arguments which moderators have to intervene in and delete an hour later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People already very regularly leave comments when a post can be genuinely improved, so I'm satisfied that's happening enough. (Not 100% of the time, but enough.) Sometimes a post will look blank because these comments have already been acted upon and removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many strongly downvoted posts go without comments, and most of the time, that's for the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-11-05T12:23:00.333" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7554" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7531" CreationDate="2017-11-05T15:48:08.140" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A question should be about a real problem you are familiar with&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s an example of a question I asked that I already knew the answer to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88103/are-listed-gem-values-the-buy-or-sell-price&quot;&gt;Are listed gem values the buy or sell price?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why did I ask it? Because the others I played with were unaware of the relevant rule, and were confused about how to handle the situation — and it was causing arguments at a table I was playing at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After finding this question had never been asked here, I suggested that someone at my table ask the question here, but got no volunteers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it was a real problem that actual players were having, and I was familiar with the details, I was confident I could decently represent the question. There were no concocted “what if” scenarios.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, it is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; better for someone who is actually having a given problem to be the one to ask the question. Such a person does not have to guess whether an answer might clear up confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-11-05T15:48:08.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7555" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-05T22:52:13.737" Score="1" ViewCount="399" Body="&lt;p&gt;The subject web-site is black-listed, which disallows me to save an edit of one of my answers that links to the said web-site. What issues does it have? Should I delete the link from my answer even if I do not apply the edit? A search didn't yield anything. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-06T00:13:31.117" LastActivityDate="2017-11-06T16:39:37.867" Title="Why is &quot;http://dnd.arkalseif.info&quot; blacklisted?" Tags="|support|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7555" CreationDate="2017-11-05T23:15:40.737" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Arkalseif seems to be a repository of D&amp;amp;D data not belonging to the SRD, i.e. they don't have the licence needed to publish those information on their site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;StackExchange does not support piracy (even if it was not for ethic reasons, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2773/4398&quot;&gt;pirated sites are often targeted by cease &amp;amp; desist letters and might therefore be forced to close, causing link rot&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2017-11-05T23:17:14.450" LastActivityDate="2017-11-05T23:17:14.450" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7555" CreationDate="2017-11-06T14:12:51.753" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;That domain is one of several that have been blacklisted for the reasons given &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7556/1204&quot;&gt;in Zachiel's post&lt;/a&gt;: it's a piracy site and we don't want links to those on RPG.SE for reasons of ethics and link rot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD sites are fine and unaffected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please do remove links to blacklisted sites if you find them. Even if that is all you're editing, we'd appreciate it. There are members such as myself working to remove piracy links from the site, so all of them will be gone sooner or later; your help would be appreciated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Consider linking instead to one of the many D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD sites available where the same material exists in the SRD: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.5esrd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5esrd.com&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://5thsrd.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5thsrd.org&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/BookIndex&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Roll20's D&amp;amp;D 5e compendium&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://open5e.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Open5e.com&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd5e.info/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dnd5e.info&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;http://5e.d20srd.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5e.d20srd.org&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;(️ not HTTPS)&lt;/em&gt; to name a few.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you want to reference book material that doesn't show up in an SRD, you may use a book title and page reference. Pretend the reader already has the book and can look it up pretty easily. (If they don't have the book, the idea is they need to get it themselves if they need access to the stuff inside it.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You may of course &lt;a href=&quot;https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;quote part of the text under fair use&lt;/a&gt; for the purposes of analysing text, but reproducing the full text of something like a class feature in full is rarely necessary for analysing it. (The rare exception is usually when there's only a sentence or two in it.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If somehow we have wound up blacklisting a site that is doing nothing wrong, please let us know, and we will investigate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-06T16:39:37.867" LastActivityDate="2017-11-06T16:39:37.867" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7558" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7563" CreationDate="2017-11-06T16:28:41.213" Score="5" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;I assume the Meta is the correct place to ask such a thing. I hope the question  itself is generic enough to get an answer that isn't too specific to my example, but I think I can better explain it using my example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A while ago, I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/98744/35259&quot;&gt;question about blowguns&lt;/a&gt;, which in retrospect was quite broad, but as comments and answers came in, I started to realise that the part of the issue I had with blowguns was only a very specific aspect of what I had originally outlined - the martial proficiency. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to cut the question down, but by that point, it had already gained a lot of clutter (although some of the comments have since disappeared) regarding various answers to the original version of the question, and the question itself still containing details from the original version of the question (since I didn't want to render any existing answers completely irrelevant, especially since they helped me realise this one aspect that I didn't like).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I want to ask a new question about the martial proficiency aspect specifically, ideally with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; tag, since I think that is the only way to get such an answer. Although I'll probably reference my old question, the new question will ask only about this one aspect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should I ask a question that is a refined version of an existing question?&lt;/strong&gt; Or more specifically, should I ask this question about blowguns that is more specific that my previous question about blowguns?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anyone has an opinion about if I should ask this specific question, I assume that's fine to include in the answer, but I'm guessing it's best for a more generic answer to be included as well (for example, someone might answer with &quot;Yes, that's alright to do generally because ... but no, the specific question you want to ask about blowguns wouldn't be good because ...&quot;)? However, I'm obviously not expecting answers that talk about blowguns or proficiencies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:57:00.160" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:57:00.160" Title="Asking a more concise revision of a previously asked question" Tags="|discussion|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7560" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-06T22:16:36.993" Score="17" ViewCount="1057" Body="&lt;p&gt;The concept of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;a frame challenge&lt;/a&gt; is fairly ubiquitous in our community, at least for meta users or those who've been around long enough to have seen it a few times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's an issue here though: I'm pretty sure nobody else uses that terminology but us. All the results on Google or DuckDuckGo for &lt;a href=&quot;https://duckduckgo.com/?q=frame+challenge&amp;amp;t=hf&amp;amp;ia=web&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;frame challenge&quot;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://duckduckgo.com/?q=challenge+the+frame&amp;amp;t=hf&amp;amp;ia=web&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&quot;challenge the frame&quot;&lt;/a&gt; (both DuckDuckGo links) bring up photo/art design challenges, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=frame+challenge%2C+challenge+the+frame&amp;amp;year_start=1800&amp;amp;year_end=2000&amp;amp;corpus=15&amp;amp;smoothing=3&amp;amp;share=&amp;amp;direct_url=t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20frame%3B%2Cc0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Google NGrams&lt;/a&gt; barely even recognises the existence of one formulation of the phrase and has no records of the other formulation. That makes it internal technical jargon that's primarily only meaningful to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be a non-issue except we use this technical jargon in answers written primarily not for us, but for the broad internet community arriving here from links on Reddit, forums, or Google. We up-front announce we're &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22challenging+the+frame%22&quot;&gt;challenging&lt;/a&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22challenge+the+frame%22&quot;&gt;frame&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22frame+challenge%22&quot;&gt;making a frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;, and only a few hundred people inside our own community would understand what on earth that means. We're not writing these answers just for our insular community &amp;mdash; others should be able to understand what they mean &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;without having to ask us about our own jargon&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a more ordinary colloquial English phrase we could use to describe this stuff we call frame challenges? If there isn't just one phrase &amp;mdash; maybe what we call &quot;frame challenges&quot; is more a bucket of lots of different things &amp;mdash; are there a few such phrases or expressions we could use to describe these things we currently call frame challenges?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this because I'd &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; us to migrate away from calling these frame challenges, and instead start calling them ... whatever it is people usually call these things in English.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This isn't a diamond moderator thing, just an invested citizen thing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-21T09:47:58.380" LastActivityDate="2018-02-26T21:20:09.890" Title="Is there an expression (or some expressions) we can use instead of &quot;frame challenge&quot;?" Tags="|support|terminology|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7560" CreationDate="2017-11-06T23:31:28.667" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, much as it's useful jargon to discuss how the site operates, I've noticed it being used in answer content lately and I don't think that's a helpful trend. I think it actually makes frame challenges &lt;strong&gt;less effective&lt;/strong&gt;, because they're not really fully explaining and supporting the choice to challenge!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although some phrases to use instead might be useful, I think it might just encourage the same shortcut-taking, just using different words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I don't think a replacement or ban on the words would be useful or even effective. The problem with saying “frame challenge” on mainsite isn't the words, but because it's too-often used (often unintentionally, but always ineffectively) as a replacement for &lt;strong&gt;actually making their case against the frame&lt;/strong&gt;, and because as jargon it's often &lt;strong&gt;meaninglessly opaque to a reader&lt;/strong&gt;. (The former seems like the bigger problem to me, since doing it right would fix the latter as a bonus.) A ban won't fix unintentional shortcut-taking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think instead that we should encourage people to just &lt;em&gt;do it&lt;/em&gt; instead of saying they're doing it. We shouldn't necessarily edit it out, because that still just leaves their challenge unexplained, leaving a hole in the answer. We should encourage people to unpack their statement of “frame challenge” so they explain exactly their thoughts on how the frame is part of the problem, and why their replacement frame is the right way to frame it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of encouraging “just do it” challenges, I think we should amend our frame challenge meta to say so, and to point out that “I'm challenging the frame” won't be understood by 99% of readers and usually actively worsens their attempted challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-21T04:06:38.467" LastActivityDate="2018-02-21T04:06:38.467" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7560" CreationDate="2017-11-07T20:49:11.203" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't worry about it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/frame&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Frame&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/challenge&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;challenge&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is not &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jargon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;jargon&lt;/a&gt; because the meaning of the phrase flows naturally from the meaning of the simple words that make it up. In context, anyone with a basic grasp of English should be able to divine that the poster means to &quot;challenge&quot; the &quot;framing&quot; of the OP's question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting words together in novel ways is how language works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-11-07T20:49:11.203" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7558" CreationDate="2017-11-07T23:36:50.893" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask away. If the answers provided to your general question have allowed you to formulate a more specific question then that is a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-11-07T23:36:50.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7564" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-08T02:07:40.900" Score="9" ViewCount="259" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question that triggered this for me was: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109575/is-there-a-class-achetype-pestige-class-feat-that-can-absorb-the-lifeforce-of-it&quot;&gt;is there a class/achetype/pestige class/feat that can absorb the lifeforce of its ennemy to fuel it&amp;#39;s power ?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a querent wants to know how to do X thing in Y system.  That's usually fine; there's often not more than three or four ways to do a single thing in even 3.X-level-complicated systems.  Sometimes, though, there are a LOT of ways to do something, and without more direction as to what makes one way better than another for the querent, it seems like the question could be Too Broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's often not possible for a querent to realize how broad what they are asking about is, though, without the same knowledge they'd need to answer their own question.  For example, there are a LOT of ways to get past a door in 3.x (though not so many that asking how to do so would &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; be Too Broad, I think), and it's unreasonable to expect a querent to necessarily realize that.  Even if we scope down to just beating a door open via violence, there're still two entirely decoupled ways to handle that mechanically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How broad is Too Broad with questions like these, and how should we handle them when they show up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-11-08T04:01:59.073" LastActivityDate="2017-11-11T18:55:56.280" Title="What should we do when a querent doesn't understand the full breadth of the material they're asking about" Tags="|discussion|questions|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7565" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7566" CreationDate="2017-11-08T02:12:48.347" Score="4" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a LOT of tags that are basically about closure.  Can we synonymize some of those?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt; can't all be sufficiently independent, can they?  I do see that except for &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt; they are all pretty close in terms of usage rates...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-08T03:00:52.470" LastActivityDate="2017-11-08T03:06:12.300" Title="Do we really need all of these closure-related tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7565" CreationDate="2017-11-08T03:06:12.300" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are all distinct topics and should not by synonymised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt; is for discussing our canonical and custom close &lt;strong&gt;reasons&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt; is for raising meta discussions about specific closed &lt;strong&gt;questions&lt;/strong&gt;, and the concept of a closed question in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt; is about a type of &lt;strong&gt;vote&lt;/strong&gt; and its related privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt; is about discussions about the closing &lt;strong&gt;process&lt;/strong&gt; itself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closes (and holds) are an important part of how the site functions and has many moving parts. These tags are natural categories that arose to label some of the distinct moving parts of this critical site feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-11-08T03:06:12.300" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7567" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for discussions about the closing process itself.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For posts raising meta discussions about specific closed questions, or about the concept of a closed question in general, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For support questions or discussion about close votes and related privileges, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" LastActivityDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7568" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" Score="0" Body="This tag is for discussions about the closing process itself." OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" LastActivityDate="2017-11-08T04:06:50.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7569" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:08:15.910" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For posts raising meta discussions about specific closed questions, or about the concept of a closed question in general, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For support questions or discussion about close votes and related privileges, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions and discussions about the closing process itself, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T18:13:44.027" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:13:44.027" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7570" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:08:15.910" Score="0" Body="This tag is for discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons." OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T18:13:44.027" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:13:44.027" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7571" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:11:09.980" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for posts looking to raise meta discussions about specific closed questions or the closure of a specific question, as well as for questions about the concept of a closed question in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For support questions or discussion about close votes and related&#xA;privileges, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For questions and discussions about the closing process itself, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-18T00:03:31.560" LastActivityDate="2021-09-18T00:03:31.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7572" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:11:09.980" Score="0" Body="This tag is for posts looking to raise meta discussions about specific closed questions or the closure of a specific question, as well as for questions about the concept of a closed question in general." OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-18T00:03:31.560" LastActivityDate="2021-09-18T00:03:31.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7573" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:13:56.363" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for support and discussion of close votes and related privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For posts raising meta discussions about specific closed questions,&#xA;or about the concept of a closed question in general, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For questions and discussions about the closing process itself, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For discussion of votes to reopen, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vote-to-reopen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-reopen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-reopen&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T19:41:33.597" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T19:41:33.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7574" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2017-11-08T04:13:56.363" Score="0" Body="This tag is for support and discussion of close votes and related privileges." OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-11-08T04:13:56.363" LastActivityDate="2017-11-08T04:13:56.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7564" CreationDate="2017-11-09T10:17:45.163" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should each make our own decision about if its too broad or not and vote accordingly. Viva democracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2017-11-09T10:17:45.163" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7560" CreationDate="2017-11-09T19:42:47.027" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Rather than seeking a new term, or new jargon, use available tools&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider instead proposing guidance about the use of the frame challenges in an answer to include the link to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;very helpful definition that you provided&lt;/a&gt; in this answer, and which you include in your question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While you feel that the issue is that the &lt;em&gt;term&lt;/em&gt; is the problem, I disagree and tend to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7562/22566&quot;&gt;see it as Dale M does&lt;/a&gt;.  We already have a means to mitigate it: the use of a link. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;challenge the frame&lt;/a&gt; of your question&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This (answer) is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the casual user is coming to us from Google, as you say, they'll have a link to mouse over.  If they don't know what a frame challenge is, one click on the link and Bob's your Uncle!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommended course of action&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;this answer by @doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/22566&quot;&gt;FAQ listing for RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of how to make a clear frame challenge, in terms of &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/60721/24204&quot;&gt;dealing with the defects within the body of the question&lt;/a&gt;, is here (from a different SE).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure, I was mightily tempted to entitle this response &quot;I challenge the frame of this question&quot; for purely humorous purposes, but maybe I'd be the only one who'd appreciate that jest. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-11-16T15:59:01.003" LastActivityDate="2017-11-16T15:59:01.003" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7577" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7578" CreationDate="2017-11-09T21:19:56.350" Score="16" ViewCount="281" Body="&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/109498/8610&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; at the time of this writing includes the following sentence: &quot;She's also an only child, so she's used to getting her way.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While still present in the popular imagination, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Only_child&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;only child&lt;/a&gt; stereotypes—like &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_order&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;birth order&lt;/a&gt; stereotypes—&lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt;, in fact, stereotypes, dismissive at best and dangerous at worst.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment on the question—20 min. after it was posed—was &lt;em&gt;Please don't perpetuate this stereotype&lt;/em&gt;, yet the question remains unchanged. I flagged the question for moderator attention; the question remains unchanged. Eventually—having no other recourse—, I just downvoted what I thought was an otherwise acceptable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am uncomfortable editing the question to remove the line I found offensive: claiming offense &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; editing the offending text myself seems to me a pretty clear path to an edit war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm willing to let this one go, but, for future reference, should I edit questions and answers to remove terms and phrases that I find offensive and risk that edit war, or should I—as I have in the past and in a way that's worked fine until now—alert the asker, answerer, or moderator to the offensive language and hope that it's changed either voluntarily or by executive decree?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2017-11-17T18:32:04.000" Title="Is a user responsible for removing language he or she finds offensive?" Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7578" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7577" CreationDate="2017-11-09T22:07:26.057" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I saw that question and your comment, and looking at the data it seems I was the one who handled the flag you raised. You asked for moderator intervention on that line, and I just moderator intervened on the question but didn't visibly do anything regarding that line, so I mishandled that flag and I apologise for that. In hindsight I should've left a comment responding to (and agreeing with) your comment, or something like that, so I apologise for leaving you in the dark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to address this specific scenario and then your general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This scenario&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with you that the stereotype is pretty bad. However, I also consider it to be an important piece of context for how this person is approaching this social situation and thinking about the object of the post. It's informative as to how we should frame our solutions to them &amp;mdash; if we know they think this kid is a spoiled brat, we can remind them &lt;em&gt;maybe they're not so don't do those things you'd do if they were.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My hope in that stereotype staying put is &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; that people, in answers, will challenge that stereotype just like you did in comments, and explain to them that being an only child doesn't mean someone will expect to get their way, so they shouldn't approach this child like that's the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, as a worse example, let's say someone was asking how to make a character for a girl in their group, and they said &amp;ldquo;she's a girl so she doesn't understand this stuff.&amp;rdquo; That is &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; offensive. Frankly it's terrible. And I could foresee answers spending a considerable number of paragraphs &lt;em&gt;each&lt;/em&gt; telling this person off for their sexism, and telling them to treat this person with some damn respect, and telling them to just make their new player an ordinary character like they would for anyone else. If we remove that sentence, we lose context and don't get to respond to a major problem in the asker's perspective that needs addressing in the course of solving their problem. (Because they're creating most of the problem themselves.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's kind of a difficult situation because it's hurtful, but I feel that hurtfulness warrants being there to be challenged, corrected, and the person possessing the hurtful perspective being educated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the question also being closed means that isn't so likely to happen. We could revise it to be less matter-of-fact, but I'm torn between that &amp;amp; avoiding bumping the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's something you think we should do, or which should have been done differently (to what happened, or to what I'm describing) please let me know so I can better learn how to handle these situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Should you remove stuff you find offensive?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's clear-cut enough, like they're swearing or using slurs, please do edit it. If it's especially bad, edit &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; raise a custom moderator flag telling us there's an issue with a previous revision so the diamond moderators can be aware of what just happened and log it &amp;mdash; we may keep an eye on the user and do further investigation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're uncertain, please do request revision, and/or flag moderators for attention, as you've been doing. This flag wasn't handled the way it ought to have been. Part of the job of the moderators is working to make sure community members can feel safe from attack. Victims should not be left having to confront attacks upon them directly &amp;mdash; they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be able to appeal for assistance, for another party to step in and assess things and help them out and (if necessary) back them up and support them. Your broader community (especially the moderators) are here to provide that assistance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also check with &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, which has many even-handed considerate members active, or at least members who'll be happy to discuss your perspective and sanity-check it with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we do have to walk into our own stereotypes. You might seek to get your way with a person complaining someone like you seeks to get their way. Diamond moderators delete material from users complaining the diamond moderators are engaging in censorship or similar. Don't let that stuff prevent you from doing what you know is right &amp;mdash; would you do it if you were anyone else? If so, do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-09T22:14:20.767" LastActivityDate="2017-11-09T22:14:20.767" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7560" CreationDate="2017-11-10T00:20:06.067" Score="14" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a more ordinary colloquial English phrase we could use to describe this stuff we call frame challenges?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would most naturally say one would &lt;strong&gt;question the premise&lt;/strong&gt; of something. However, since the subject is itself a question, the construct &quot;question the premise of the question&quot; is a bit awkward. I'd instead use &lt;strong&gt;challenge the premise&lt;/strong&gt; of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another phrase that comes to mind is &lt;strong&gt;challenge assumptions&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=challenge+the+frame%2Cchallenge+the+premise%2Cchallenge+the+premises%2Cchallenge+the+assumption%2Cchallenge+the+assumptions%2Cquestion+the+premise%2Cquestion+the+premises%2Cquestion+the+assumption%2Cquestion+the+assumptions&amp;amp;year_start=1800&amp;amp;year_end=2000&amp;amp;corpus=15&amp;amp;smoothing=3&amp;amp;share=&amp;amp;direct_url=t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20frame%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20premise%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20premises%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20assumption%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cchallenge%20the%20assumptions%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquestion%20the%20premise%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquestion%20the%20premises%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquestion%20the%20assumption%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquestion%20the%20assumptions%3B%2Cc0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;google n-gram&lt;/a&gt; courtesy @doppelgreener shows &quot;challenge/question assumption(s)&quot; as the clear winner. It is more than five times as popular as &quot;question the premise(s)&quot;, ten times &quot;challenge the premise(s)&quot;, and over 100 times &quot;challenge the frame&quot;. That said, I still prefer &quot;question the premise&quot; as the most neutral and natural for the context of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LGrl4.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LGrl4.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;(&quot;frame challenge&quot; is not recognised at all by ngrams)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These phrases do suffer from the minor drawback that they become less searchable when modified for the surrounding grammar. You end up splitting it with modifiers like your, their, and the (as in &quot;question your assumptions&quot;). I still think any of these suggestions are self-evident to a native or non-native speaker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-26T21:20:09.890" LastActivityDate="2018-02-26T21:20:09.890" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7558" CreationDate="2017-11-11T01:04:57.493" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no problem in asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even if the community rules it is not a different question, we will just close the least-quality one and create a link to the highest-quality question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I state &quot;least-quality one&quot; does not imply the question can't be upvoted. If it is a well asked question, it deserves upvotes even if it is a dupe. And the other way around too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no problem in posting duplicates. The alternate wording helps people searching for those terms to find their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And making people find their answers is what the stack is all about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastActivityDate="2017-11-11T01:04:57.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7564" CreationDate="2017-11-11T18:55:56.280" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should explain in comments how broad the question is and give the person that asks the question a certain amount of time to edit their question. For example i just asked a question regarding how to run a game for a single player and after being told it was too broad in the comments i decided to reword the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40305" LastActivityDate="2017-11-11T18:55:56.280" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7582" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-14T17:33:32.063" Score="4" ViewCount="219" Body="&lt;p&gt;On a few other stacks, I've come across questions that people here would probably consider &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt;, and closed accordingly. However, many of those were actually very helpful to me as a curious investigator, looking for solutions to my own problem. These questions don't typically ask for a list (like &quot;What are all the cake recipes you know?&quot;), but are typically fairly open-ended within some limited subspace. While I've seen a lot of these with bad answers, many have thoughtful, analytical solutions that either walk through finding the solution yourself, or explain several key possibilities. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the same thing that worked for one situation might not work for another, and having multiple ideas or suggestions can help figure out what's going on. Other times, I'm not really sure what I need, and having a set of answers that fit a given criteria gives me things to review, and come to my own conclusion about what's best for my situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm furthermore interested in answering some of those types of questions. If someone were to ask &quot;What can I multiclass my bard with in order to expand my spellcasting abilities?&quot; it would be fitting to have an analysis about how class X, Y, and Z, all offer different strengths and synergies with the bard, and how to choose a class based on that. If someone asks &quot;What 5e adventure can I run to try and scare my party with lots of undead?&quot; an answer explaining that of the many 5e campaigns, only two really revolve around undead would be quite fitting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that they're off topic here, but I don't fully understand what makes them bad. Can I get a better explanation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-15T21:23:37.173" LastActivityDate="2017-11-15T21:23:37.173" Title="Why do we close questions asking for a range of practical options?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7582" CreationDate="2017-11-15T19:30:56.673" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I appreciate the value in having a “menu” of answers to read through and learn from. These can be really informative and a great way to self-learn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a question generating that kind of set of answers has some inherent problems when asked &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, the kind of question you're thinking about is considered incomplete here. “What can I multiclass my bard with in order to expand my spellcasting abilities?”  could be a great question, but if we have to resort to guessing what &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be the solution, that means the question is missing vital information for both answer-writers and &lt;strong&gt;voters&lt;/strong&gt; to determine the best answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If voters have to guess when voting, the site's systems break: voters who refrain from voting out of doubt don't help raise up the real right answer(s), and voters who vote anyway are just contributing to what's effectively a popularity poll.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lack of well-considered votes, and a surplus of popularity-votes, fails to fulfil the site's mission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;“But… Huh? Didn't you say those answers are valuable?”&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I started by agreeing that those sets of varied answers are valuable. Why would we throw out that value just because they cause some seemingly minor problems for voting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does, despite appearances, come back to the same reason we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/176/321&quot;&gt;reject list questions&lt;/a&gt;: SE wasn't designed to generate those sets of answers, while discussion forums are pitch-perfect for them. RPG.se exists in symbiosis with the other RPG help and resources sites that are our neighbours, and it throws sand in our site's gears when we try to duplicate badly what those other sites already do smoothly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By rejecting questions that go against the system's intended purpose and fail to properly trigger its quality assurance features (voting, etc.), &lt;strong&gt;we ensure that this specialised site works well for the questions it was made for&lt;/strong&gt;: the ones that &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; work well elsewhere. That's our core service and mission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to serve our intended function and audience, we need to be a bit tough-love on questions that don't fit here, even if they seems like they'd be fun or interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also means that questions that would get &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; results elsewhere are more likely to be posted in those places. Those fun and interesting questions have a home on the Internet already, and should hurry to where they can flourish, instead of being stunted by our constraining mechanisms, like a square peg in a round hole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The silver lining: We still generate these “menus” of answers, just differently and more slowly&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We actually do still have a way of hosting menus of answers. Instead of being strung out under one incomplete question though, we host them by having fewer answers under a set of related, complete &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;. By closing questions that are too broad — in the sense that they can only be answered by guessing at possible solutions — we encourage question-askers to add details to make it possible for voters to tell which submitted answers are &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A set of such questions about, e.g., rangers and spellcasting means that all the answers that might have been guess-submitted to a vaguer question will have homes under more specific questions. The system works at high efficiency with such questions and answers, fulfilling our mission and preventing noise from interfering with our core audience's use of the site. Browsing all our questions in a search for rangers and spellcasting will turn up the same set of answers — except that they will be well-vetted, quality answers with documented conditions under which they work and don't work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This obviously takes longer, as it takes time for varied but related questions on a topic to be asked naturally. So the Internet is enriched by the different approaches: &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt; there will be a curated set of quality answers that accumulates slowly, and meanwhile &lt;em&gt;elsewhere&lt;/em&gt; on our neighbours' discussion forums there will be more raw-and-uncut discussions that happen more quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-15T21:21:08.607" LastActivityDate="2017-11-15T21:21:08.607" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7585" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-17T16:05:35.153" Score="1" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109671/how-can-i-balance-adventures-around-one-of-the-party-members-being-a-monarch&quot;&gt;How can I balance adventures around one of the party members being a monarch?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On RPG stack exchange the question was held for being too broad, but I edited it so it would be asking a more concrete question. It was edited within a day or so of the hold, but I think nobody got around to it in time, as it was closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to have it reopened if the edit is considered acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33480" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-20T11:57:03.153" LastActivityDate="2017-11-20T22:51:26.173" Title="Reopen &quot;How can I balance adventures around one of the party members being a monarch?&quot;" Tags="|support|specific-question|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7586" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7577" CreationDate="2017-11-17T18:32:04.000" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd be fine with a flat out edit by a moderator or even a general user on something like this. &quot;Used to getting her way&quot; is an observation, and is fine and germane to the question. The reason why she is used to getting her way requires some degree of mind reading on the part of the poster and is therefor a stereotype that should be excised out of hand. We wouldn't hesitate in the &quot;she's only a girl&quot; extreme example you posited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A also think that once it has been brought up in comment, that Hey I Can Chan did the correct thing by bringing it to moderator attention. Once you have pointed it out and the poster has not responded, having someone else make the call reduces the chance of an adversarial situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If Hey I Can Chan had simply made the edit (which is minor, positive and doesn't affect the meaning of the post), that would be fine. Once it was brought up publicly though, mods are the way to go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28927" LastActivityDate="2017-11-17T18:32:04.000" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7587" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7585" CreationDate="2017-11-20T07:18:26.153" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Reopening needs 5&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; votes to reopen, and currently it is in the queue. At the time of this writing, 4 people believe the edits (4 lines) do warrent a reopening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You did add/change about 4 or 5 sentences since it as closed. They illustrate the problem, but do they cut down the broadness? That is the question each of the users that has enough points has to ask themselves when answering that vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't state my opinion on this question without possibly influencing the vote, so I abstein from stating it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*&lt;sub&gt;Five reopen votes by users with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/close-questions&quot;&gt;reopen voting privileges&lt;/a&gt;, or one reopen vote by a moderator.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-20T22:51:26.173" LastActivityDate="2017-11-20T22:51:26.173" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7552" CreationDate="2017-11-20T17:11:52.920" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on doppelspookers answer it seem like we don’t want to force comments on downvotes because we don’t want unhelpful arguments to ensue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, down voting without a reason leads to new users feeling unwelcome, and potentially leaving. This is an undesirable outcome. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that’s the case, why can we request a 3rd option: standardised downvote reasons, specified by the moderators of the relevant se. Downvotes could then be disallowed if they don’t select a reason. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I’m imagining is that they would be similar to tags, which would show the number of downvotes that have been given for particular reasons, without identifying the particular users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid it polluting highly upvoted posts, there could be an option to hide these downvote reasons after a post has attracted a net of [insert number here] upvotes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would enable the poster to get valuable feedback, while also avoiding comment fights (because there would be no one specific for the poster to argue with). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastActivityDate="2017-11-20T17:11:52.920" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7528" CreationDate="2017-11-20T21:30:40.913" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;For D&amp;amp;D 5E, the term is defined in &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sage Advice Compendium&lt;/a&gt;. RAI means Rules As Intended by the game developers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RAI&lt;/strong&gt; Some of you are especially interested in knowing&#xA;  the intent behind a rule. That’s where RAI comes in: “rules&#xA;  as intended.” This approach is all about what the designers&#xA;  meant when they wrote something. In a perfect world, RAW&#xA;  and RAI align perfectly, but sometimes the words on the&#xA;  page don’t succeed at communicating the designers’ intent.&#xA;  Or perhaps the words succeed with one group of players&#xA;  but not with another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25091" LastActivityDate="2017-11-20T21:30:40.913" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7590" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7591" CreationDate="2017-11-21T07:04:21.577" Score="14" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just a quick bit of backstory. When I'm posting on Stack sites, I'm typically at work, so unable to devote my entire attention to the post.   Quite often, small typos/errors in maths/etc will slip through my fingers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often this is picked up by another member of the community, who'll go through and edit my post to fix up the errors, which brings me to my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way to specifically call out an edit that's been completed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23186" LastActivityDate="2017-11-25T00:18:17.543" Title="Is there a way to thank/upvote someones edits on your Question/Answer?" Tags="|discussion|editing|voting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7591" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7590" CreationDate="2017-11-21T09:03:39.587" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;A better knowledge base and a cleaner stack is its own reward. Editors aren't expecting any thanks, and there's no need to thank them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it is nice to be appreciated, and you'll think of leaving a @mention -ed comment on your post thanking them for the edit. We are more lenient with &quot;thanks&quot; comments, as @SevenSidedDie explains that &quot;thanks&quot; comments are valid as good feedback for the edit. However, they still do tend to get cleaned up, especially when the post is attracting more comments, so don't expect them to last long.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have also experienced getting an inbox ping on a deleted comment, as @thedarkwanderer suggests, you can @mention the editor in the comments (even if their name won't show up in the autocomplete, thanks @doppelgreener). However, the text the pinged user can see is limited to a few characters, and I cannot totally vouch that a user gets the ping 100% of the time, and how long it will last in their inbox.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, you can drop by &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, @mention the editor and say thanks there. This will only work for users who have been in chat for at least a week (most editors check in sometimes, anyway), you'll know that the ping will work if it auto-completes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="23064" LastEditDate="2017-11-25T00:18:17.543" LastActivityDate="2017-11-25T00:18:17.543" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7592" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-22T19:24:47.320" Score="5" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;I currently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; open in three different tabs.  In one of them, the right-hand sidebar has links to two rpg.se-relevant chat rooms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SSuwn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SSuwn.png&quot; alt=&quot;screenshot of rpg.se right-hand sidebar with chat links&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the other two, there's just ads (&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y85YP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;example 1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IcnyC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;example 2&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is this determined?  Is it randomized each time I load the page?  Is there a setting I can customize somewhere to change this behavior?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2017-11-22T19:24:47.320" Title="Why does the chat link on the right-hand sidebar only show up sometimes?" Tags="|support|chat|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7593" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-23T09:06:14.587" Score="1" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;Newcomers don't know all the rules. Even if they have read all the rules and have all good intentions, it is very hard to understand the SE philosophy by the first grasp because of how special this site is, particularly if compared to the typical RPG forums. What is even more important, newcomers don't know the &quot;unwritten rules&quot;, which also seem to be abundant here, and they mostly don’t read all the policy agreed on Meta before making their first post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is hence a common thing that a newbie comes, posts something that they sincerely find good, but which is not good here on SE, and the newbie gets 9000 downvotes. If their downvoters don't think that the post can be improved in any way, if they simply don't believe that said individual author would cooperate, or if they are just fed up with negative feedback from newcomers who they wanted to help, downvoters don't post anything to tell why are they downvoting. They just press the button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reaction of the newcomer is surprise. They have invested effort, it was not appreciated, and the newbie isn't even told why! &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6434/30214&quot;&gt;Voting down needs to be revised!&lt;/a&gt; Force comments upon downvoting! Only allow downvotes under specific reasons!.. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...And the newbie gets even more unexplained downvotes, now on Meta, likely also unexplained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At best, our newbie asks very politely why do people downvote. At best, they admit being likely wrong and show that they want constructive feedback to work on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But people are different. While a polite reaction is natural for some, it is not that natural for everyone. Someone comes from an adult-oriented friendly forum, someone comes from Reddit, or another toxic place. They can even accuse people of trolling, because a huge amount of it in some problem communities makes people's troll detector yield a lot of false positives. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the newbie was polite and showing readiness to work to improve, even if their content really can't be improved, at least they will learn why. I don't know how many of them do, but I suspect that not many.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some newbies may just think that this site is aggressive to beginners (as many sites are) and leave. I don't know how many of them do, but I suspect that most of them do. They are lost to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some will leave a toxic comment and leave, perhaps non-voluntarily. I don't know how many of them do, because, thanks to our mods, extra-toxic comments are deleted, but I suspect that even some of those could learn and participate here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To sum up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Newcomers don't know the rules, including the unwritten ones.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Newcomers can get very upset with unexplained downvotes, moreover, they don't learn from them. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People are discouraged from leaving feedback comments on posts that cannot be improved by the site policy. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are also discouraged from leaving any kind of comments on newcomers' posts by some toxic newcomers. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hence, some of the newcomers are lost to us, unless they are very eager to participate and improve. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now — what can we do here on RPG.SE to fix the problems I mentioned? How can we help those who want to learn learn? How can we encourage those who can help the newbies, even if some of the newcomers react very negatively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-23T16:35:17.407" LastActivityDate="2017-11-27T14:27:32.957" Title="How can we solve a problem of newcomers getting unexplained downvotes?" Tags="|discussion|down-votes|new-users|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7593" CreationDate="2017-11-23T10:44:32.743" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;So the usual answer is: we just downvote when we have to, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572/why-is-an-answer-being-downvoted-without-any-comments&quot;&gt;and we try to leave a comment when we can and when it wouldn't start an argument&lt;/a&gt;. Life is messy, and as in any social circumstance, some people can decide they don't like it here for reasons that may or may not be under our control. The most we can do is do our best for &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given our current feature-set I don't think there's much more we can do about that. Sometimes people are just wrong, or misinformed, or incomprehensible &amp;mdash; those are the kinds of things we don't leave comments for because it starts arguments. (As in, it's not great they don't get feedback, but it's usually even worse if they do &amp;mdash; at least for our site, and we're prioritising the site working well over any specific individual's notion of a good time, which I hope is understandable given what some peoples' idea of a good time is.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;That said&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7588/1204&quot;&gt;I like illustro's suggestion&lt;/a&gt; of letting people give an anonymous category of feedback on posts wholly separate to comments. It's a novel idea I haven't seen brought up in the long history of meta discussion in this area. On the other hand, I am not sure if replacing &quot;my post is at +0/-3 and I'm not sure why&quot; is actually &lt;em&gt;improved&lt;/em&gt; by being replaced with &quot;my post is at +0/-3 and two of those people think I'm just wrong&quot;. It may work better for those people who can handle that kind of criticism well, but I'd venture those are the people who are already handling the unexplained downvotes well. There's another category of people who come out fists swinging whenever our voters think they're wrong or don't acknowledge their unparalleled genius: they take downvoting badly, and they'd probably still take the anonymous feedback badly and turn things ugly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-23T12:38:58.410" LastActivityDate="2017-11-23T12:38:58.410" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7593" CreationDate="2017-11-23T14:12:49.450" Score="0" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Group dynamics 101: SE's form of a &quot;rite of passage&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All social groups have these features to varying degrees: how do you get &quot;in&quot; to the group? Your question is about the 10th meta I've read since I arrived here and noticed the barrier new users need to work through. &lt;a href=&quot;https://aviation.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3338/17262&quot;&gt;(We had a similar discussion on aviation.se a meta few months ago&lt;/a&gt;). As was explained to me when I first brought it up, and has been answered in numerous metas regarding the latent hostility of the SE format as regards down votes, comments, and new users -- which is a side effect of how to make sure the voting system works as desired so that &lt;strong&gt;a favorable signal to noise ratio&lt;/strong&gt; is achieved on a given SE site -- all that can be done is to encourage that those who engage on a question or answer provide useful feedback to the asker or answerer &lt;em&gt;in a positive tone&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, nobody here can control how someone reacts to an internet post. All one can do is one's best not to be hard edged or mean in a response or a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Encouragement in a &lt;em&gt;positive&lt;/em&gt; manner is roughly covered in the Be Nice! policy. No matter how nice one is, in aid of keeping the quality standards up, reactions to &quot;read the book to me questions&quot; still need to clearly signal to the asker that a bit of research before asking a question is required, certain forms (game rec) of question need to be closed, and any question that simply does no research before hand is eligible for &quot;this isn't good enough&quot; as a response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If Illustro's suggestion is taken for action by the SE/SO gods, which doppel linked to, then that might change the state of play somewhat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, I had similar &quot;barriers to entry&quot; on over a dozen internet forums long before SE was a thing. Part of my being accepted there, as well as being 'accepted' here (I got an early zing from a mod over my reaction to what I read as a hostile comment) was on me: showing that I belonged in the group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Group dynamics, 101. Part of the deal is that the entrant still has to fit in. We've had a number of users with a lot of RPG experience who eventually decided &quot;nope, this isn't the group for me.&quot; That's also normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;An example of &quot;the system is working!&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example of a &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/110311/22566&quot;&gt;I disagree / you are wrong&lt;/a&gt;&quot; downvote where a comment was left for me.  What I find interesting is how often opinion gets tossed into a vote, given that I explained how to answer the play test material taking two slightly different takes on a bit of rules text.  Note that two people found it helpful, and two down voted but only one pointed out what about the answer didn't satisfy them.  (note: I edited the reply as a direct result of that comment, so it had to be &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; as I see it).  The other is not required to, and did not.  For that matter, the other down vote may have completely agreed with the first bit of feedback.  (So that's not a hostile down vote, is it?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now let's think about this for a minute: in a collegial manner one person disagreed and downvoted with an explanation, and another did not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's how our site works; it's how any SE site works. Newcomers have to get used to it, just as I did.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bottom Line&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given SE format, I am not sure (beyond a change similar to what illustro suggested) what can &quot;solve&quot; a standard group dynamics feature of people joining a new group, or choosing not to.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2017-11-23T14:23:43.153" LastActivityDate="2017-11-23T14:23:43.153" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7597" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7593" CreationDate="2017-11-23T16:14:10.217" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;One thing to be aware of is that &quot;newcomers who have a bad first experience&quot; are a tiny minority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They only seem like a larger percentage because of the usual perceptual warps we humans experience, where &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;events associated with negative&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;strong emotions&lt;/a&gt; are much more prominent in our memories, so we overestimate their number and frequency. We don't notice the overwhelming majority of newcomers who have a fine first experience — because they slip smoothly into a good working relationship with the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's one point: &lt;strong&gt;A huge majority of newcomers are actually fine.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Hence, some of the newcomers are lost to us, unless they are very eager to participate and improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that this is by design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't suit everyone, so the site's been designed to suit &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; people &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; instead of many people poorly. We &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to select for those who are eager to participate and improve. Those are our future answer experts. Someone who isn't excited by this site might still ask the occasional question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;but the site isn't really made for them, and doesn't &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; care whether they stay or go&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, those who for whatever reason actively clash with the site and have no eagerness to resolve the clash, are encouraged by the site, on purpose, to not use it more. The site doesn't suit them and it doesn't want us to spend our time &amp;amp; energy on those clashes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's another point: &lt;strong&gt;The site is made to quickly turn away newcomers it isn't able to help.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result of those two points, I don't actually think there's a problem. We &lt;em&gt;talk&lt;/em&gt; about this a lot and that &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_cascade&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;makes it seem more true that it's a problem than it actually is&lt;/a&gt;. I think we should concentrate instead on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Appreciating the value we deliver to the overwhelming majority of newcomers &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of the very same things that don't suit the tiny minority.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7053/who-should-make-welcoming-comments&quot;&gt;Remembering to be friendly when we can.&lt;/a&gt; We won't convert the tiny minority — and we don't want to, since they wouldn't work out well here anyway — but we do want to welcome that majority that we keep forgetting about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-25T21:10:52.030" LastActivityDate="2017-11-25T21:10:52.030" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7598" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-23T16:59:24.577" Score="0" ViewCount="45" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should we merge (and make synonyms) the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-23T17:12:17.667" LastActivityDate="2017-11-23T17:12:17.667" Title="Merge [resistance] into [damage-resistance]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7598" CreationDate="2017-11-23T17:10:16.300" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Systems have a variety of different types of resistance, including magical, arcane and normal weapons and not all of these relate to damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2017-11-23T17:10:16.300" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7593" CreationDate="2017-11-24T08:10:42.670" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Direct them to meta&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't need to know why each person is voting your answer down as a new user.  You &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; need to know why &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; people are voting your answer down, if you can't figure it out yourself.  So, when you are confused about what's wrong, you should ask on meta, just like an experienced user.  &amp;quot;Why am I getting downvotes on X&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Why is Y closed&amp;quot; are very similar questions, yet for some reason we only really get questions on the latter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; this boils down to confusion about how downvotes work and when they should be used, a confusion that no amount of meta discussion will help with (only site experience seems to change that)-- that said there are sometimes complex issues at work that an answerer might not have noticed as unusual and which meta discussion can really help with, like how frame challenges are likely to get downvoted and need to be extra specially good, how homebrew needs more support than &amp;quot;The DM can do whatever! How about X?&amp;quot;, how this isn't a forum so behavior that gets you upvoted in forum places can often get you downvoted here, how each answer really for serious needs to not be just a reply to another answer, how &amp;quot;how do you guys do X?&amp;quot; is insulting rather than friendly/inviting, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, if you want the site to help you with the site, meta is the right place to do that, and our newcomers &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; fail to use it enough, &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;especially&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; the sorts of newcomers who we most want to see using it-- that is, those that aren't getting question banned, answer banned, tons of downvotes and closures, etc.  We direct people to meta when they say 'hey, what can I do to get this open?', but maybe we could start pushing it right in our hello messages, like &amp;quot;If you need any help, feel free to ask about stuff on [meta], or maybe you'll find your question's already answered there!&amp;quot;.  Or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people might think 'why not chat?  Chat is good for workshopping questions and answers!'.  I don't really know about that, cause I'm terrible at using chat myself, but I have some bigish reasons I think meta is better for this, too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta Q&amp;amp;A is permanent.  Sure, chat rooms are too, but not really.  See, chat rooms aren't easily searchable and indexed by subject material and so chat posts not attached to a question or answer don't really contribute to overall site quality the way Q&amp;amp;A does.  Meta Q&amp;amp;A on what makes us downvote stuff adds to a ever-growing useful body of knowledge.  Chat posts don't, because the knowledge can't be used.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta Q&amp;amp;A cuts down on noise.  Sure, you can star stuff in chat, but that's like voting with no downvotes.  And you sure can't flag a chat post just cause it's advice for the wrong edition!  So on Meta the mod who posts an answer that basically tells you to bugger off gets 20 downvotes and 5 upvotes and has a net score of -15, which sends a pretty strong encouraging message, but on chat that mod's post would carry a mod diamond and 5 stars, and that's much less representative of how much the community agrees with that position.  On Meta posts can be ranked by vote, and answers can build up over a long time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta Q&amp;amp;A has no rep requirement.  50 or 30 or 20 or however much it is now may not seem like much rep, but it can be for new users.  Meta has a rep requirement of 1.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chat's the fun hang out zone, I think.  I admit I don't really get it.  But I wouldn't want my fun hang out zone to suddenly be the newbie complaining hole and productive response gallery!  Idk.  It just seems like chat isn't for mainline use like educating newbies.  Maybe I'm wrong about this one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta isn't time sensitive.  People can post whatever.  Chat has to happen in real time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta is more established-users-not-being-jerks sensitive.  People of probable high community stature in the eyes of newcomers (e.g. mods, high-rep users, highly active users) seem to feel more comfortable flagrantly violating our Be Nice policy via gossip, handwaved dismissals of ideological paradigms, personal attacks, highly charged language, etc in chat than in Meta.  I don't really know why, and maybe this isn't a good reason for modifying behavior cause we should change chat instead, but it's a thing at least for now.  On meta, calling the person you're responding to's ideological paradigm for the interpretation of RPGs &amp;quot;stupid&amp;quot; gets you deletion flags and downvotes galore.  Doing that in chat seems to be socially accepted a lot of the time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Meta answers and questions can be edited and reedited until the expression of an idea is just right.  Chat posts don't work that way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in any case, I think meta is a good place for newbies to sort out their confusions by asking questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-11-24T08:10:42.670" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7601" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7602" CreationDate="2017-11-24T12:50:59.290" Score="3" ViewCount="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was a tag that was forgotten in the longer names update: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/marvel-heroic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;marvel-heroic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;marvel-heroic&lt;/a&gt; for the Margared Weis Productions: Marvel Heroic Roleplaying. It should get its own tag updated/aliased to something more fitting. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/marvel-heroic-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;marvel-heroic-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;marvel-heroic-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; would be the official title, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mhrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mhrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mhrp&lt;/a&gt; would be a valid shortcut that might be aliased in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-24T14:54:58.520" LastActivityDate="2017-11-24T14:54:58.520" Title="Tag rename: Marvel Heroic Roleplaying" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7602" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7601" CreationDate="2017-11-24T14:54:51.240" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Done: The tag has been renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/marvel-heroic-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;marvel-heroic-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;marvel-heroic-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; to fit the name of the published game. Thanks for pointing this out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-11-24T14:54:51.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7593" CreationDate="2017-11-27T14:06:10.193" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rant - Describing how a newcomer sees the issue&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for bringing this question up. While the &amp;quot;experienced&amp;quot; users are defending the current system based on their own experiences, I would like to offer a counter view as a newcomer. &lt;strong&gt;This section of the post is written in a way that I don't usually find productive, but I decided to share the frustration&lt;/strong&gt; so others might feel easier to put themselves in the shoes of unhappy new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you spend time working on some project for a long time, when you see it grow gradually, you get an attachment to it and have difficulty seeing it approached in a new form. It is a bit like parents seeing their children get married. How hard the suitor tries, you always see him/her as some sort of competition, not really worth your daughter/son. (This is how experienced users see rpg.se, as a community whose unwritten conventions you need to live by. I am pretty sure I will also be like them if I decide to stay for long.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The rate at which &lt;em&gt;productive&lt;/em&gt; newcomers choose to leave needs to be measured in a meaningful manner.&lt;/strong&gt; While to keep a high signal/noise ratio you need to remove bad apples, you also need to make sure you are not removing potentially delicious ones. I see myself in that camp because &lt;strong&gt;I believe&lt;/strong&gt; (I might be wrong) that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am a well-behaved user: I have read every relevant rule, whenever I earned the necessary privilege.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am usually very polite. I apologize quickly, I accept my mistakes easily, I try to find compromises, I don't refrain from deleting. Actually very often people around me complain about my being too polite and too agreeable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I do not come from other internet forums where people just troll each other. I have experience as a longtime wikipedia editor; and know how to collaborate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am a scholar in &amp;quot;real life&amp;quot;. Hence I have a lot of experience in writing, editing and refereeing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I honestly care about first-hand references. In many of the answers I have posted on to rpg.se you will see detailed research with links to official answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am decently productive, as reflected in the reputation I have gathered in a rather short amount of time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I usually do a lot of research before asking questions (and providing answers). You can see that I have asked a single question only so far on rpg.se and that was in response to a disagreement over another question's answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I tend to my answers; quite often I improve the answer with new information.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if the climate is causing people like me to leave, and &lt;strong&gt;if the experienced users are unable to see this as a negative thing, it is quite sad&lt;/strong&gt;. Regarding downvotes, based on what I read on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;the instructions that were shown to me&lt;/a&gt; when I first received its privilege, I think a reasonable number of users are too liberal in their use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Suggestion for improvement&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on this, &lt;strong&gt;at the very minimum rpg.se should have an upfront wording of this problem, and an &lt;em&gt;honest&lt;/em&gt; description for the use of downvotes&lt;/strong&gt;. It should be clear in the documentation that often enough the correct answer will get lower votes (this is obvious, but it helps to see it written), and more importantly, you will sometimes get downvotes just because people simply &amp;quot;disagree&amp;quot; with you (and not for the reasons currently listed on the downvote-priviledge documentation, which I quote below, and which have been outlined in another question hyperlinked from the current question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use your downvotes whenever you encounter an egregiously sloppy, no-effort-expended post, or an answer that is clearly and perhaps dangerously incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The up-vote privilege comes first because that's what you should focus on: pushing great content to the top. Down-voting should be reserved for extreme cases. It's not meant as a substitute for communication and editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-11-27T14:27:32.957" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7604" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-11-27T15:40:51.930" Score="10" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;Specifically, are questions that specifically target the maximising of a specific character attribute value (at any cost or means) on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, for D&amp;amp;D3.5: &quot;How to maximise a Wizard's effective Caster Level for the greatest number of spells, at character level 12?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think they would be on topic because they are specific and answerable, but also not because they can easily lead to one-upping answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-11-27T18:51:13.760" LastActivityDate="2017-11-30T02:26:38.403" Title="Are optimization questions about maximizing a specific attribute on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7605" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7604" CreationDate="2017-11-27T15:46:09.673" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Given that there is a clear answer, it seems like these should be on-topic. One-upping is fine, because it will ultimately lead to the correct answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question arises if there are multiple ways to do it and how to differentiate those that may devolve into opinion-based arguments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="17995" LastEditDate="2017-11-30T02:26:38.403" LastActivityDate="2017-11-30T02:26:38.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7604" CreationDate="2017-11-27T17:47:35.880" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think ultimately they are on-topic—I certainly don’t think they cause any kind of problem that should lead to our deciding otherwise—but I would comment that Stack Exchange tends to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be a great format for &lt;em&gt;performing&lt;/em&gt; optimization. The format works far better when an answer can point to and summarize the optimization work already done elsewhere. This is because an expert in the subject may easily be familiar with optimization work already done, and is in a good position to find and summarize it, but even a subject-matter expert here has no way of ensuring that a given approach is &lt;em&gt;strictly&lt;/em&gt; optimal—as you say, there can always turn out to be another option to bump things up, or a better approach that hadn’t been considered. Optimization is often a collaborative, iterative process, and Stack Exchange doesn’t really do that very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is, in this regard, far better at finding &lt;em&gt;a good&lt;/em&gt; answer than it is at finding &lt;em&gt;the best&lt;/em&gt; answer. That said, frequently a good answer is more useful—because finding the absolute best is hard. To block these questions on that basis would effectively be a matter of siding with the perfect against the good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-11-27T17:47:35.880" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7607" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7608" CreationDate="2017-11-30T18:40:34.003" Score="4" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;An issue recently came up with regards to two similar Ettin questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110780/does-a-half-beheaded-ettin-take-bleeding-damage-of-some-sort&quot;&gt;Does a (half) beheaded Ettin take bleeding damage of some sort?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110808/when-partially-beheaded-does-an-ettin-retain-full-control-of-its-body&quot;&gt;When partially beheaded, does an Ettin retain full control of its body?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community closed the second question as a duplicate of the first. I was one of the close-votes and had done so because both questions are basically asking the same thing &quot;What happens when you cut off the head of an Ettin?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a mod reopened it saying they didn't think it was a dupe - overriding a community decision. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this/should this be standard practice? Or should a mod begin a reopen vote and let the community decide if it's worthy to reopen or should stay closed instead of overriding a community decision?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/41460233#41460233&quot;&gt;some additional discussion from the chat&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2017-11-30T18:59:08.073" LastActivityDate="2017-12-04T22:30:49.123" Title="When the community closes a question, should a Mod be allowed to reopen without community votes?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7607" CreationDate="2017-11-30T19:02:02.943" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is standard practice within the diamond moderator mandate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This happens &lt;em&gt;rarely&lt;/em&gt; though. We do this when there's a clear and urgent need, or when a community decision was in clear error. This community has its stuff sorted out so this kind of situation doesn't present itself more than once in a blue moon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was one of those situations: an error was made, and I'm sorry to say that, though I'm sure it was with good intentions. In this case, closing that question as a duplicate was incorrect: although they are two questions about handling Ettin semi-beheadedness, our duplicate votes are for when two questions are &lt;em&gt;the exact same question&lt;/em&gt;, not merely covering different sides of the same topic. I think we can agree that “do they take bleeding damage for this?” is not the same question as “do they lose control over half their body?”, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stated purpose of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;the duplicate close votes&lt;/a&gt; is to collect the answers to the same questions in one place so that people don't have to go looking. But a person looking for whether an Ettin maintains control over their body isn't going to be helped by answers telling them whether the Ettin takes bleeding damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie reopened the question on approximately that basis. I'd been keeping my eye on the question myself, and planned to do exactly the same if SevenSidedDie hadn't beaten me to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if there was a singular “So how do we handle an Ettin losing their head?” canonical question that covered various niche scenarios like this, both of those questions would be viable duplicates of it. We don't have one of those questions yet though, and right now what that person's doing is OK. It's fine to have multiple separate questions exploring a specific confusing phenomenon &amp;mdash; it's how we get all our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polymorph&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polymorph&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polymorph&lt;/a&gt; questions for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Or should a mod begin a reopen vote and let the community decide if it's worthy to reopen or should stay closed instead of overriding a community decision?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We actually &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; do that. Diamond moderators get a unilateral close/reopen vote power and that power doesn't come with an off switch. It's why you'll see our close votes so rarely and often at the end of the list (unless it was from before we became diamond moderators) &amp;mdash; we only add our votes when we're sure, and whatever we vote for happens immediately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-11-30T19:10:51.333" LastActivityDate="2017-11-30T19:10:51.333" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7609" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-04T16:53:14.717" Score="12" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;By the nature of tabletop games, rule books will come out that provide RAW answers to questions that have been asked before, were answered, and that answer was accepted; however, due to the new rule book that accepted answer is no longer correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59359/when-does-a-flying-creature-start-and-end-falling&quot;&gt;question's&lt;/a&gt; not an ideal example, but close enough for these purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the burden solely on the original querent to remove and reassign the checkmark? Should we flag the question for moderator intervention? Or do nothing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternately, is it appropriate to edit the accepted answer to indicate that it was provided prior to the release of material that contradicts or refines the answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-04T18:20:09.223" LastActivityDate="2017-12-09T06:07:55.237" Title="How to resolve the checkmark sitting on answers now made incorrect/inaccurate by rule changes/updates?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7607" CreationDate="2017-12-04T22:30:49.123" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes it's standard practice, and yes it should be.  The system gives moderators that power for a reason and, while we can discuss the circumstances under which it's appropriate to use it, it's clearly the intent of the network that moderators have that power and therefore that they be &lt;em&gt;allowed&lt;/em&gt; to use it.  It also happens to be the case that the network intends moderators to use it prolifically in this particular case, but that's beside the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-12-04T22:30:49.123" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7612" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7614" CreationDate="2017-12-04T22:50:07.487" Score="1" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I realize we don't actually have a consensus definition of what a recommendation question is at this point, but bear with me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110979/what-can-i-do-to-polish-and-refine-my-new-homebrew-class?noredirect=1#comment268312_110979&quot;&gt;A question was asked&lt;/a&gt; recently about how to get feedback on a homebrew pokemon/D&amp;amp;D crossover class.  The question was put on hold, not because the question was asking for reccomendations of sites, but because the querent expected that a recommendation to a site would probably be the best solution. That seems bizarre.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To wit, the question was essentially as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have a homebrew thing, and I want feedback on it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have tried asking people about it locally, and that was useful, but I want to get feedback from a broader and more diverse and experienced audience.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't think posting it on a random forum would be helpful, because in my experience that follows a particular unhelpful pattern&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How can I get good feedback?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true that what the OP thinks they want is a site or lists of sites that solve their problem.  But the OP was open to the changes that made this about feedback in general, rather than sites in specific, since it's still about solving the problem they want solved.  And it's true the best answer &lt;em&gt;may well be&lt;/em&gt; &quot;go to X community, which was established for providing feedback on pokemon/D&amp;amp;D crossover classes and has an active userbase with a similar playstyle to you&quot; or whatever, but our prohibition (at least, as of the last time the moderation team for this site talked about it) is on content in questions, not answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like &quot;How can I get a certain kind of feedback on X specific thing?&quot; is a question we really ought to handle, since it's entirely in line with the purpose for which Stack Overflow was created (sharing insider tricks by experts for common-yet-niche problems experts face), and I see no reasonable way that can be understood as a shopping question, whatever the querents preconceptions about what a good answer would be.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's little point in ropening the question now, as the querent was a volatile user and I'm pretty sure they've abandoned it after the most recent changes, but this is yet another casualty of our seriously flawed tool-rec situation, and the ongoing fallout from that meta-fiasco.  I think it's something to be aware of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-04T23:12:11.130" LastActivityDate="2017-12-05T01:22:36.670" Title="I really don't think this question on how to get feedback on homebrew material was a shopping question" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7613" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7612" CreationDate="2017-12-04T23:58:51.163" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;They can get their question reopened once it fully reads as “how do I get home brew feedback” (though that is a dupe IIRC) instead of being a site-rec.  We’ve discussed how to ask about your problem instead of asking a rec question plenty, I fail to see anything new or interesting About this instance of the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-12-04T23:58:51.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7612" CreationDate="2017-12-05T01:16:10.247" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Asking for how to get feedback is fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to get feedback is fine. Asking &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to get feedback is fine because it's something we can handle, with voting for the objectively best experience-backed solution on how to get useful feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question never asked for how to get feedback though — it explicitly, and later implicitly, asked &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; to get feedback. In your list of the core parts of the question, you left off the core part #5 that directly lead to the mod-blessing of the community's closure, and which I partially quoted in an explanatory comment under the question at the time. The question said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“I'd like to present it to a more public domain for revision critiques[…] An online community seems like it would be ideal, but I don't know which ones will have the qualities I'm looking for.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; to get feedback is asking for a site recommendation, which is off topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this question was asking &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; quite clearly, and very much not asking &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt;. We &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; interpret that &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; as a &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; instead, sure. But we can't make every answer-writer reinterpret it too, without making that reinterpretation explicit by just editing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking where to go to do something inherently requires us to recommend a place to go, and that's what it was asking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Briefest review of the history of rec questions here: Recommendations were restored to their SE default of being explicitly off-topic after our experiment with making them on-topic, because they proved to attract a supermajority of opinion-based answers [a standard close reason] rather than experience-based answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since asking for &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; to go is a straightforward PoB close target, it was closed by the community. (But closed with our custom shopping reason, which is more helpful than the standard PoB banner due to having links to alternative places they can ask such questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's true that what the OP thinks they want is a site or lists of sites that solve their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, and that's a problem. If a question is explicitly or implicitly asking for recommendations… that what people will answer with. (Remember that closing is to prevent &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; that are inappropriate.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But the OP was open to the changes that made this about feedback in general, rather than sites in specific, since it's still about solving the problem they want solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is great, and an attempt at those changes have now been made that erases any suggestion of looking for recommended sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're just waiting now for the OP to explicitly bless the result, in case the result is something they really hate and/or don't find useful. They've yet to weigh in, and we can afford to wait for them to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is this a casualty? (No.)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There's little point in ropening the question now, as the querent was a volatile user and I'm pretty sure they've abandoned it after the most recent changes, but this is yet another casualty of our seriously flawed tool-rec situation&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is actually the site working as designed. &lt;em&gt;Either&lt;/em&gt; they actually want to ask a question that is on-topic, &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; they don't. If they do, great — we will have an on-topic question after the hold is lifted. If they &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt;, then great — we haven't lost an on-topic question because there wasn't one in the first place. Either way, there's no question that's become a casualty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless you mean the casualty is a user who's put off the site. In which case, again, that's the site being unfriendly to unsuited users by design, to save the site from friction and problems that would drive away the people it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; designed for. That's not a casualty, that's the site helping that user in the best way possible: helping them not waste their time here, being frustrated that RPG.se isn't what they wish it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This user may simply be the sort who doesn't actually want to be here, but hasn't accepted that fact yet, judging from their statements across their multiple previous accounts. Or they might not — but luckily, that's their job to figure out and act on, not ours. We just have to follow our content rules and let the chips fall where they may.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-05T01:22:36.670" LastActivityDate="2017-12-05T01:22:36.670" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7615" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-05T16:13:59.613" Score="11" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;What the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/draconic-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;draconic-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;draconic-bloodline&lt;/a&gt; is about? Is it relevant? Should we burninate it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, can we do a tag wiki on it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-13T15:30:22.630" LastActivityDate="2017-12-13T15:30:22.630" Title="Burninate [draconic-bloodline]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7615" CreationDate="2017-12-05T17:19:06.603" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;5 questions about a class feature that is endemic to D&amp;amp;D is not much, but it is a rather complicated and wide spectum one. while it is not necessary much, we do have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wild-shape&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wild-shape&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wild-shape&lt;/a&gt; (166 questions) - thus I vote to stay for the time...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2017-12-05T17:19:06.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7615" CreationDate="2017-12-06T02:46:08.697" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/draconic-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;draconic-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;draconic-bloodline&lt;/a&gt; tag has been merged (but not synonymed) with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Draconic Bloodline is like a subclass of sorcerer in Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 5e. Having a tag for this is kind of like having the tags [archfey-pact], [the-fiend-pact], and [the-great-old-one-pact] for the different kinds of core D&amp;amp;D 5e warlock subclasses — which is to say, it's a little bit odd for this tag to exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's a good or useful tag; of the questions currently bearing it…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60203/does-draconic-breath-qualify-for-metabreath-feats&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; is (mis)using the tag for an unrelated concept.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74589/why-are-there-damage-differences-with-these-breath-weapons&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111010/will-these-low-level-sorcerer-spells-and-abilities-stay-useful-for-a-high-level&quot;&gt;using&lt;/a&gt; this tag &lt;em&gt;instead&lt;/em&gt; of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; tag they should be using as well as (or instead of) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/draconic-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;draconic-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;draconic-bloodline&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67530/i-roll-to-seduce-the-dragon-or-do-doublings-of-proficiency-bonus-stack&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; is using it to label a part of the question that is merely background* for the actual problem about bonus stacking.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59168/does-the-natural-armor-bonus-from-the-draconic-bloodline-stack-with-racial-bonus&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; is even actually worthy of the tag (assuming the tag merits existence), since that question is actually directly about a draconic bloodline's mechanics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think past usage demonstrates any value to the tag, and looking at analogies to parallel D&amp;amp;D/PF concepts shows that we simply don't have tags for that sort of thing — such as the various D&amp;amp;D 5e Warlock Pacts, or the Eldritch Knight subclass, or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these questions could be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/draconic-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;draconic-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;draconic-bloodline&lt;/a&gt; should just be merged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; That would make all questions currently using the tag get a sorcerer-related tag relevant to all five questions, and eliminate a tag that's pretty useless. (And by merging with mod tools, we'd avoid question-bumping edits.) And by merging them without also synonymising them, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/draconic-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;draconic-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;draconic-bloodline&lt;/a&gt; tag stays possible to re-create if it should ever actually be useful. As doppelgreener pointed out, the current minimal usage suggest a redirection isn't needed to help people find the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;sub&gt;Labelling background info is nearly always a harmful use for a tag, since it pollutes the search results with irrelevant questions.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-13T15:29:28.797" LastActivityDate="2017-12-13T15:29:28.797" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7609" CreationDate="2017-12-08T23:15:11.937" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should be able to add a notice that an answer may no longer be accurate. That notice should probably go in the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; though, because the answer should be to the question as posed. After all, we are &lt;em&gt;curating&lt;/em&gt; a set of questions and answers, not blindly preserving them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This situation should be fairly rare though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Above is to establish a position. What follows is a strawman for how we might implement it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest that a reasonable method for doing this might be to ask a new question about how some answer has changed since the original question (and link the original), and cite at least one new source which plausibly changes a previously accepted answer. Then we preserve the normal voting process. If there is reasonably strong support for an answer saying there has been a change, we can add a notice (ideally standardized) to the old question, indicating something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: the rules for [game] may have been updated since this question was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See [link] for details.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-08T23:15:11.937" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7609" CreationDate="2017-12-09T06:07:55.237" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The only way to move a checkmark is by the question-asker doing it. Not even mods can override which answer the asker found most useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no expectation set by SE that the checkmark will correspond to the best answer anyway. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/accepted-answer&quot;&gt;The opposite is actually considered fine&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Accepting an answer is not meant to be a definitive and final statement indicating that the question has now been answered perfectly. It simply means that the author received an answer that worked for him or her personally. Not every user comes back to accept an answer, and of those who do, they might not change the accepted answer &lt;strong&gt;even if a newer, better answer comes along later&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is mindfully designed to frustrate any attempt by a single user to impose their view of correctness. Only the result of the voting system over time is given that privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The urge to see our view of what's correct at the top of a page has to be channelled through the checks and balances of the existing tools: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6071&quot;&gt;voting and, sometimes, writing better answers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2017-12-09T06:07:55.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7620" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-09T19:47:05.660" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;several times i get this warning when tagging questions,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;you seem to be attempting to create the tag [feat] but the tag [feats] already exist. Did you meant to use [feats]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or something to that effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we get a synonym mapping?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7518/make-spell-a-synonym-of-spells&quot;&gt;© Ctrl+C Ctrl+V&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-10T13:19:00.173" LastActivityDate="2017-12-13T01:53:10.433" Title="Add [feat] as a synonym for [feats]" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7620" CreationDate="2017-12-10T10:46:20.323" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Synonym added!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same reasons &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7519/1204&quot;&gt;as wot SevenSideDie sed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the way, after typing out a tag's name, you can press &lt;kbd&gt;&amp;darr;&lt;/kbd&gt; or &lt;kbd&gt;tab&lt;/kbd&gt; to pick the first option in the autocomplete. With a tag like this it'll usually be the right one after just a couple of letters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-13T01:53:10.433" LastActivityDate="2017-12-13T01:53:10.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7622" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-13T11:23:33.587" Score="10" ViewCount="671" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This album is for &lt;strong&gt;2017&lt;/strong&gt;. Check out the 2018 album here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8617/1204&quot;&gt;The Large Hatron Collider Experimental Hatastrophe 2018: Winterbash Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's that time of year we fear every year: the interdimensional barriers between the dimension of hats and our own has broken down to critical and inevitable degrees. The rifts are open. The hats are upon us, here to consume us and preoccupy us like so many intellect devourers and to compel us to celebrate this horrific reality breakdown cascade. So without further ado...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Hooraaaayy! Hatmas time!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This only happens once a year for a few weeks, and then the hats go away again and the dimensional breaches close, hopefully forever and ever. But the memories don't have to! We can take photos and keep those! And study them later when our free will returns to us, to better identify ways to defend our noggins from these creatures! Thus: &lt;strong&gt;a photo album!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The album!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take screenshots of fun or memorable hats you've worn or seen others wear, and share them here. Go for one post each (with any number of photos therein) or a very small number.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep it fun and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;be nice&lt;/a&gt;. Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How do I take screenshots?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lightshot&lt;/strong&gt; is a popular simple screenshot extension &lt;a href=&quot;https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/lightshot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Firefox&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lightshot-screenshot-tool/mbniclmhobmnbdlbpiphghaielnnpgdp?hl=en&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Chrome&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; that will let you screenshot just a small portion of the page.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Windows 7 and above:&lt;/strong&gt; Use the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt;; just hit start and type in the name. Otherwise you can take a screenshot of your browser window with &lt;kbd&gt;alt&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, paste it into MS Paint, crop it down to just the avatar, and save it as a &lt;strong&gt;PNG&lt;/strong&gt;. (GIFs and JPGs will probably come out low quality.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mac:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;cmd ⌘&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;4&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click and drag to outline the space you want to screenshot. When you let go of the mouse, it'll save a screenshot .png of the selection to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On Linux:&lt;/strong&gt; Gnome/Ubuntu: press &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click-and-drag over the area on the screen you want to screenshot. A prompt window will appear giving you a choice to save or copy the image to clipboard. If the shortcut doesn't work, either set it up in System Settings/Keyboard/shortcurts/screenshots or use a tool like &lt;a href=&quot;http://apt.ubuntu.com/p/shutter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shutter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://winterbash2017.stackexchange.com/leaderboard/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;leaderboards&lt;/a&gt; to see who has been victim to the largest number of hats attempting to gnaw at their head.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-12T11:44:36.343" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T11:44:36.343" Title="The Hatmas Interdimensional Breach 2017 Photo Album" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-13T11:24:48.643" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DJoEF.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DJoEFs.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JdrY7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JdrY7s.png&quot; alt=&quot;bow&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/851UT.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/851UTs.png&quot; alt=&quot;mario hat&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did some Green Diamond hats, then decided... someone else would wear them better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PERIDOT DOES! So I'm going to celebrate Peridot with a Peridot of hats. (That's a collective noun now.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5FgKV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;THE FUZZ IS HERE! CEASE ACTIVITIES AND PUT YOUR TOUCH STUMPS IN THE AIR!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5FgKV.png&quot; alt=&quot;peridot with a mario hat&quot; title=&quot;THE FUZZ IS HERE! CEASE ACTIVITIES AND PUT YOUR TOUCH STUMPS IN THE AIR!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gc6Gp.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;GIANT BEANIE!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gc6Gp.png&quot; alt=&quot;ginormous rep cap&quot; title=&quot;GIANT BEANIE!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AjqdE.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;IT&amp;#39;S YULEMAS!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AjqdE.png&quot; alt=&quot;santa hat&quot; title=&quot;IT&amp;#39;S YULEMAS!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zvG0i.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;ONLY THE BEST MMYES&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zvG0i.png&quot; alt=&quot;peridot with a top hat and monocle and fine moustache, licking a rock&quot; title=&quot;ONLY THE BEST MMYES&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mvuTA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;PERIDOT.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mvuTA.png&quot; alt=&quot;yellow diamond with a mod hat&quot; title=&quot;PERIDOT.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6IzEO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;NYAAAAH.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6IzEO.png&quot; alt=&quot;jester hat&quot; title=&quot;NYAAAAH.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YajkW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;THE HATS! THEY ARE EVERYTHING!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YajkW.png&quot; alt=&quot;mad hatter&quot; title=&quot;THE HATS! THEY ARE EVERYTHING!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/J1Qg6.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;I DON&amp;#39;T KNOW WHY WE&amp;#39;RE CELEBRATING A SUCCESSFUL ASTRAL ROTATION BUT THIS IS FUN&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/J1Qg6.png&quot; alt=&quot;2018 glasses&quot; title=&quot;I DON&amp;#39;T KNOW WHY WE&amp;#39;RE CELEBRATING A SUCCESSFUL ASTRAL ROTATION BUT THIS IS FUN&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/awwK1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/awwK1.png&quot; alt=&quot;ze goggles&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-02T14:43:21.493" LastActivityDate="2018-01-02T14:43:21.493" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-13T11:27:42.350" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Detectives: The Deerstalkerening&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2015 I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5965/4398&quot;&gt;put doctors in the Fourth Doctor's hat and scarf&lt;/a&gt;. In 2016, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6644/4398&quot;&gt;famously awful fathers got to wear Darth Vader's mask&lt;/a&gt;. This year detectives will take turns trying on Sherlock Holmes's iconic deerstalker and using his magnifying glass. Hover over an image to see the detective's name and origin; click to see them unhatted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/M3eJg.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4mUyQt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Leroy Brown (&amp;#39;Encyclopedia Brown&amp;#39; novels by Donald J Sobol)&quot; title=&quot;Leroy Brown (&amp;#39;Encyclopedia Brown&amp;#39; novels by Donald J Sobol)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QFcX5.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/t3Xi3t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Police Constable Peter Grant (&amp;#39;Rivers of London&amp;#39; novels by Ben Aaronovitch)&quot; title=&quot;Police Constable Peter Grant (&amp;#39;Rivers of London&amp;#39; novels by Ben Aaronovitch)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/g3S4V.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9tbazt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Goldie Vance (&amp;#39;Goldie Vance&amp;#39; comic by Hope Larson, Brittney Williams)&quot; title=&quot;Goldie Vance (&amp;#39;Goldie Vance&amp;#39; comic by Hope Larson, Brittney Williams)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ekeo0.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3g5Vot.png&quot; alt=&quot;Victoria &amp;#39;Vikki&amp;#39; Allen (Nan-Lynn Nelson in &amp;#39;The Bloodhound Gang&amp;#39; on 3-2-1 Contact TV show)&quot; title=&quot;Victoria &amp;#39;Vikki&amp;#39; Allen (Nan-Lynn Nelson in &amp;#39;The Bloodhound Gang&amp;#39; on 3-2-1 Contact TV show)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FtBgb.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/buHN3t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Detective Dee (Andy Lau in &amp;#39;Detective Dee and the Mystery of the Phantom Flame&amp;#39; film)&quot; title=&quot;Detective Dee (Andy Lau in film &amp;#39;Detective Dee and the Mystery of the Phantom Flame&amp;#39;)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VUPWu.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/J5fSIt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Ezekiel &amp;quot;Easy&amp;quot; Porterhouse Rawlins (Denzel Washington in &amp;#39;Devil with a Blue Dress&amp;#39; film based on Walter Mosley&amp;#39;s book of the same name)&quot; title=&quot;Ezekiel &amp;quot;Easy&amp;quot; Porterhouse Rawlins (Denzel Washington in film &amp;#39;Devil with a Blue Dress,&amp;#39; based on Walter Mosley&amp;#39;s novel of the same name)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xoral.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ybHAqt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Maddy Magellan (Caroline Quentin in &amp;#39;Jonathan Creek&amp;#39; TV show)&quot; title=&quot;Maddy Magellan (Caroline Quentin in &amp;#39;Jonathan Creek&amp;#39; TV show)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jLPbb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FHkfHt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Justice Bao Zheng (11 April 999 – 20 May 1062, statue in Xiqing Park)&quot; title=&quot;Justice Bao Zheng (11 April 999 – 20 May 1062, statue in Xiqing Park)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6z0mb.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/szEkNt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Brülightly (&amp;#39;Britten and Brülightly&amp;#39; comic by Hannah Berry)&quot; title=&quot;Brülightly (&amp;#39;Britten and Brülightly&amp;#39; comic by Hannah Berry)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kRxAX.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/blKeot.png&quot; alt=&quot;SO-27 Detective Thursday Next (&amp;#39;Thursday Next&amp;#39; novels by Jasper Fforde)&quot; title=&quot;SO-27 Detective Thursday Next (&amp;#39;Thursday Next&amp;#39; novels by Jasper Fforde)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z17jK.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2ys1rt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Detective Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier in film &amp;#39;In the Heat of the Night&amp;#39; based on  John Ball&amp;#39;s novel of the same name)&quot; title=&quot;Detective Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier in film &amp;#39;In the Heat of the Night&amp;#39; based on  John Ball&amp;#39;s novel of the same name)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5WeHt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ANXAAt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Gwen Dylan, née Gwendolyn Price (&amp;#39;iZOMBIE&amp;#39; comic by Chris Roberson &amp;amp; Michael Allred)&quot; title=&quot;Gwen Dylan, née Gwendolyn Price (&amp;#39;iZOMBIE&amp;#39; comic by Chris Roberson &amp;amp; Michael Allred)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0dwVP.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EBetnt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Albert Campion (Peter Davison in 1989 TV series &amp;#39;Campion&amp;#39; based on Margery Allingham&amp;#39;s novels)&quot; title=&quot;Albert Campion (Peter Davison in 1989 TV series &amp;#39;Campion&amp;#39; based on Margery Allingham&amp;#39;s novels)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oAH7T.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BvBiNt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Nate the Great (&amp;#39;Nate the Great&amp;#39; novels by Marjorie Weinman Sharmat, illustration by Marc Simont)&quot; title=&quot;Nate the Great (&amp;#39;Nate the Great&amp;#39; novels by Marjorie Weinman Sharmat, illustration by Marc Simont)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uNqpz.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V7wG4t.png&quot; alt=&quot;Erast Petrovich Fandorin (&amp;#39;Fandorin&amp;#39; novels by Boris Akunin)&quot; title=&quot;Erast Petrovich Fandorin (&amp;#39;Fandorin&amp;#39; novels by Boris Akunin)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UoQKG.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dC3est.png&quot; alt=&quot;Lovejoy (Ian McShane in &amp;#39;Lovejoy&amp;#39; TV series inspired by Jonathan Gash&amp;#39;s novels)&quot; title=&quot;Lovejoy (Ian McShane in &amp;#39;Lovejoy&amp;#39; TV series inspired by Jonathan Gash&amp;#39;s novels)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sWORS.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ynrwlt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Osmosis &amp;quot;Ozzy&amp;quot; Jones (&amp;#39;Osmosis Jones&amp;#39; film)&quot; title=&quot;Osmosis &amp;quot;Ozzy&amp;quot; Jones (&amp;#39;Osmosis Jones&amp;#39; film)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/w62Ka.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KkLVUt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Doctor Joan Watson (Lucy Liu in TV series &amp;#39;Elementary&amp;#39;)&quot; title=&quot;Doctor Joan Watson (Lucy Liu in TV series &amp;#39;Elementary&amp;#39;)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bGhR2.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uyB7Ot.png&quot; alt=&quot;Carl Kolchak (Darren McGavin in TV series &amp;#39;Kolchak: The Night Stalker&amp;#39;)&quot; title=&quot;Carl Kolchak (Darren McGavin in TV series &amp;#39;Kolchak: The Night Stalker&amp;#39;)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xcFc4.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xXJYlt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Agent Cleopatra Jones (Tamara Dobson in film &amp;#39;Cleopatra Jones&amp;#39;)&quot; title=&quot;Agent Cleopatra Jones (Tamara Dobson in film &amp;#39;Cleopatra Jones&amp;#39;)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XFGf2.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/STz22t.png&quot; alt=&quot;James Ellison (Richard T. Jones in TV series &amp;#39;Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles&amp;#39;)&quot; title=&quot;James Ellison (Richard T. Jones in TV series &amp;#39;Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles&amp;#39;)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And please, drop by &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; with suggestions for hatworthy detectives!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2018-01-02T20:53:26.433" LastActivityDate="2018-01-02T20:53:26.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-13T12:02:45.703" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This year I've made a &quot;no hat-chasing&quot; resolution--we'll see how it goes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BMVZlt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BMVZlt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2k0tvt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2k0tvt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rEnIIt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rEnIIt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/enVnPt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/enVnPt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CiZHPt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CiZHPt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/c0pPmt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/c0pPmt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tXbYBt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tXbYBt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5oQjFt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5oQjFt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zZRrst.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zZRrst.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q10FIt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q10FIt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yJ0iCt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yJ0iCt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JxbHGt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JxbHGt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kf7Vct.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kf7Vct.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OrzOSt.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OrzOSt.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-12-16T13:44:06.673" LastActivityDate="2017-12-16T13:44:06.673" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7626" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-13T20:33:37.947" Score="11" ViewCount="282" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over on Meta Stack Exchange, I announced &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/304445/1438&quot;&gt;an experiment&lt;/a&gt; that would:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Turn on the review queue indicator whenever there's a task available in any queue.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All queues with at least one task will be marked with a red dot. There are no grey dots:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5Dvps.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5Dvps.png&quot; alt=&quot;Inbox Zero indicator&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; mean you'll be notified of outstanding tasks you can't clear.&lt;/strong&gt; We are aware of a problem that people will be notified of queues that they don't have the privilege to access. That's next on the list to fix. The goal is to be more aggressive with the indicator to see if we can clear tasks more quickly. Please let us know if we've gone too far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in general, we're interested in any feedback to this change: positive, negative or noncommittal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastActivityDate="2017-12-18T22:17:33.710" Title="Experiment: More aggressive review queue indicator" Tags="|discussion|review|top-bar|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7627" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-14T04:52:15.970" Score="0" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/111702/30214&quot;&gt;a now closed question&lt;/a&gt; that I have noticed from the VTC queue. The problem was that 2 of 3 players are going to miss a few sessions, but one player wants to continue. The author asks about a way to balance an encounter for just one adventurer who stays. This is indeed a very broad subject, partially because the OP didn't even include any details about this potential lone adventurer aside from being level 5. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have also never played D&amp;amp;D 5e and don't plan to do it in the near future, so I would not be able to give any kind of advice on balancing a solo adventure in D&amp;amp;D 5e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think that the question suffers from an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66377/337535&quot;&gt;XY problem&lt;/a&gt;: it asks about an attempted solution (balancing a solo adventure), while a correct solution is not to continue the campaign while the majority of the group is absent.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I have experienced similar situations myself, my friends have experienced them too, and a tested solution was that this particular campaign needs to be suspended while someone cannot attend a session or two, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/111709/30214&quot;&gt;which I have given as an answer&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My opinion is that this knowledge is very useful, 5 people who have upvoted my answer likely agree. However, the question itself is indeed too broad and close-worthy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is also interesting: the original title &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/111702/1&quot;&gt;in the first revision&lt;/a&gt; actually lists the problem as 2 of 3 players being temporarily out, not as having to balance a solo encounter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What, if anything, can and should be done in this case?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2017-12-14T05:00:22.077" LastActivityDate="2017-12-14T13:24:06.287" Title="What, if anything, can (and/or should) be done with &quot;How do I determine appropriate challenges for a solo PC&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7626" CreationDate="2017-12-14T13:13:58.690" Score="14" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This will mean you'll be notified of outstanding tasks you can't clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; going too far. You know when you go to some site that you don't even have an account on and it's got a fake bar at the top with a &quot;notification&quot; lit up to make you click on it, and it doesn't really go away or do anything?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know you don't mean it to be, but this is like that. Over time, it will simply teach people that those notifications are frippery and should be ignored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="904" LastActivityDate="2017-12-14T13:13:58.690" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7629" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7627" CreationDate="2017-12-14T13:24:06.287" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You should encourage the poster to clarify their question that it might be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-12-14T13:24:06.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7626" CreationDate="2017-12-14T16:08:39.737" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm appreciative of the change: if I see no indicator, I now &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; there's no reviews.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It used to be there could be 1-2 sitting there and I'd just have nothing telling me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a bit over-tuned in that it shows me everything I can't even work on, as mentioned in the question, but over-tuned is a nice departure from under-tuned, and I appreciate there's further work to tune it just the right way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-14T16:54:01.350" LastActivityDate="2017-12-14T16:54:01.350" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7631" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-14T18:21:48.787" Score="9" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've just been informed that we're taking part in an experiment on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7626/experiment-more-aggressive-review-queue-indicator&quot;&gt;more aggressive review queue indicator&lt;/a&gt;.  Apparently, this should make it so that a red dot appears on the review queue icon in the top bar as long as there's at least one pending review task.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My top bar currently does not have a dot on the review queue, red, gray, or otherwise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yrYBA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yrYBA.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the best of my knowledge, I have &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; seen an indicator on this icon.  It's always just a bare icon, like in that screenshot (although it has, of course, undergone some formatting changes over time).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a pending review task right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NvzJz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NvzJz.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should be giving me a review notification of some kind, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm using Chrome version 62.0.3202.94 on Windows 10.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-19T04:29:35.677" LastActivityDate="2019-07-19T04:29:35.677" Title="Review queue indicator doesn't show up, despite apparently being aggressive now?" Tags="|support|bug|status-completed|review|top-bar|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7632" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7626" CreationDate="2017-12-14T21:43:04.830" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will note that I was definitely looking at the new (new top-bar, before this experiment) review indicator much less than I had looked at the old (numerical) one. Probably because of all the times there were (3) that I couldn't act on...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In previous weeks I'd been making a conscious effort to click in to the review queue, so I'm glad to see it being experimented with, at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-12-14T21:43:04.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7633" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7636" CreationDate="2017-12-15T00:00:27.120" Score="1" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; tag.  It's a fine tag, and there's nothing majorly wrong with it.  Part of its usage advice in the tag wiki, though, says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that merit more specific tags should not also use magic. Instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about the interpretation, use, or interactions of specific spells should use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, that's good advice.  Usually, general and specific tags sit side by side when new users are trying to figure out what to put on their question and haven't figured out the folksonomy yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In actuality, though, sometimes the tag &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be next to specific tags, even the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104224/14848&quot;&gt;Is a caster aware of a thin sheet of lead blocking detect magic?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;is primarily about the usage of &lt;em&gt;detect magic&lt;/em&gt; in 3.5, but is also substantially a question about how magic itself works in 3.5 and what the &lt;em&gt;absence&lt;/em&gt; of magic auras is, if that's even a thing.  Basically, it's &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; about the &lt;em&gt;detect magic&lt;/em&gt; spell &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; about magic in general, because those things happen to be weirdly and inordinately tight in 3.5's system (like, for example, lots of rules about magic in general that have nothing to do with &lt;em&gt;detect magic&lt;/em&gt; appear nowhere other than the &lt;em&gt;detect magic&lt;/em&gt; spell description, or other discussions of the spell's abilities elsewhere).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, it's against SE policy for us to have meta tags (i.e. tags with special rules about their usage beyond those inherent in categorizing the question), which this policy, as-is, self-mandates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, it seems like this advice is misguided and should be excised.  However, possibly I am misunderstanding something or ignorant of a pressing need.  Is there a reason this advice ought not to be/have been eliminated? (I'ma go edit the tag wiki now, while we discuss this).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-15T14:05:41.413" Title="Why can't [magic] sit with a more specific tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7635" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-15T13:57:29.447" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Last year, I didn't get into the hat craze, this year I'm making up for it!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a dog cosplaying a dog while playing DnD while his beverage and PHB is on fire, he looks just a bit dismayed, if I'm honest:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pThMW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pThMW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastActivityDate="2017-12-15T13:57:29.447" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7633" CreationDate="2017-12-15T14:00:33.947" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's okay to use both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; together. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic+spells&quot;&gt;We have 79 questions doing that.&lt;/a&gt; If a question is about magic, we tag it as magic; if it's about spells, we tag it as spells; if it's about both we tag it as both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That tag's guidance doesn't seem right and doesn't correlate to how we use our tags. I think it was trying to say “don't tag everything that is somehow magical with this tag” but was too strong in its wording. I've edited the tag wiki to replace that guidance with something I think better represents our current practices:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; tag is about magic as general a concept, system, quality, or so on in gameplay, mechanics, or game lore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; tag isn't aiming to be a catch-all for every single question about magical things, so in general if you're asking about something more specific that is also incidentally magical (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;), you don't need to use this tag, unless you are also asking specifically about magic as a concept/system/quality/etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's some other changes you think should be made to that description to help it match what we're currently doing, please do edit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, it's against SE policy for us to have meta tags (i.e. tags with special rules about their usage beyond those inherent in categorizing the question), which this policy, as-is, self-mandates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This issue doesn't really have anything to do with meta-tags. As I noted in comments, that isn't how meta-tags are defined, so I think you've misunderstood them somehow. (Frankly though that's not hard at all, they're a confusingly abstract concept and it took me a while for it to click.) Tags are for describing the content of the question for categorisation purposes — when a tag is doing anything other than that, we call it a meta-tag. The theoretical tags [easy] and [subjective] are typical examples of meta-tags. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;; this lines up with the second big quote block.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can have rules around how to use tags; that's not forbidden.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you're thinking of something brought up during recent discussions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;. It was noted that this tag's presence was taken to magically introduce new constraints and rules around answering the question that were not described in the question. That's doing something other than describing the content of the question, which meant that tag was behaving as a meta-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-15T14:05:41.413" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-15T19:29:36.780" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2xGbG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2xGbG.png&quot; alt=&quot;Bespectacled octopus with Oprah Stache!&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought to go easy this year,&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;as most hats cover my glasses,&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;but what's more joyous and festive&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;than molluscs wearing moustaches?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14670" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-16T11:04:18.090" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7638" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-16T00:41:06.273" Score="12" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;A number of questions come our way, usually from D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder, that are of the following form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What are all the [spells|creatures|feats|items|...] that have the [fire|supernatural|undead|concentration|forces-a-save|...] property?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See, for instance,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/111888/23970&quot;&gt;anyone know of a list of spells for the arcane archer&amp;#39;s imbue spell ability&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/86316/23970&quot;&gt;Is there a list of Cleric and Wizard spells that deal lightning or thunder damage&lt;/a&gt; (deleted; 10k+ only)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76273/23970&quot;&gt;Is there a list of Concentration Spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67532/23970&quot;&gt;What are all the sources of Constitution damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which are just a few I found by searching &quot;what are all the&quot; in question posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They tend to get closed, but they also tend to have people arguing for their topicality. Thus I'd like to see a good, community-led discussion on these types of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I don't think these are &quot;list questions&quot; &lt;em&gt;per se&lt;/em&gt;, in the Stack-defined sense. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6442/23970&quot;&gt;What are list questions?&lt;/a&gt; on this meta, and its linked sources on meta.SE.) In Stack parlance &quot;list questions&quot; are those that present the likelihood of producing a long tail of answers, each of which would present an item in the list. List questions of the Stack-type are off-topic: see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/176/23970&quot;&gt;Are list/collection questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather they're asking for an answer to be a big list. And there are extant examples of those questions being well-received here. I'll put mine on the chopping block and point out that my second-highest-voted question is a blatant list request: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77247/23970&quot;&gt;What are the playable D&amp;amp;D races in 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So have at it: do we or do we not want Q&amp;amp;A that generates lists? In some cases 'yes' and some 'no'? What sorts of common features do you see differentiating good from bad, desirable from undesirable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-16T01:05:24.360" LastActivityDate="2017-12-18T10:40:32.727" Title="Are questions of the form &quot;what are all the X with property Y&quot; on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7639" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-16T08:05:20.113" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iUItW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/iUItW.png&quot; alt=&quot;head volleyball, also two silly hats in one picture&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;here we go, this is the complete post, both hats on two different heads, I may or may not bother with any others&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zT18u.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zT18u.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I accidentally done get secret hat? I figured I would give it a shot on here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zVEOO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zVEOO.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ok, so this one is two other new hats, I figured they went well together (I dunno, like an eyepiece looking at a sun thingy, wtv right?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8233" LastEditorUserId="8233" LastEditDate="2017-12-22T12:54:50.723" LastActivityDate="2017-12-22T12:54:50.723" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7640" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7638" CreationDate="2017-12-18T10:40:32.727" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a 'too broad' close reason.  We should use it more often (and more on things that are broad, not just things that are hard).  These questions are usually pretty terrible in a down-vote-worthy way cause they generally show no research effort and provide no metrics to gauge the quality of content by, but when they don't do that (and when related questions that have the same sort of answer but get there a different way, like &quot;How can I prepare my 7th level wizard to deal with a falling block trap?&quot;/&quot;How should a 13th level wizard protect his shop?&quot; are asked) there's nothing inherently wrong or off-topic about them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-12-18T10:40:32.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7631" CreationDate="2017-12-18T12:19:02.353" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm getting this too. The review queue indicator right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/u2eqH.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/u2eqH.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when I open it, lo and behold, a review item!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zrE7G.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zrE7G.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same is happening on main site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zmpa1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zmpa1.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XcOv3.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XcOv3.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-12-18T12:19:02.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7626" CreationDate="2017-12-18T22:17:33.710" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is actually much &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; prone to false-positives, so far as I can tell, than the old (numerical) one, which was false-positive all the time. I prefer false-positives to false-negatives for this, anyway, but so far in this experiment I haven’t had any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2017-12-18T22:17:33.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7643" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-19T17:48:39.110" Score="6" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112067/implementing-passive-wisdom-perception&quot;&gt;Implementing Passive Wisdom (Perception)&lt;/a&gt; was flagged as a potential duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101169/how-does-passive-perception-work&quot;&gt;How does passive perception work&lt;/a&gt;. The latter is a closed question, specifically flagged for being too broad and does not have an accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this ok? Or should we only link to questions that are open and deemed 'acceptable' by the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't seem like the burden for opening a closed question should be on the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-15T23:16:08.417" LastActivityDate="2021-11-15T23:16:08.417" Title="Should this question about passive Perception be closed as a duplicate of a closed question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7644" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7643" CreationDate="2017-12-20T02:34:24.393" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a dupe, but the closed question isn't actually too broad.  In the case that a question is asked with clear effort/quality that is a dupe of a question seriously lacking in effort/quality, closing as a dupe the other direction (i.e. closing the older question as a dupe of the new one) is the preferable course of action.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case the older, much worse, question is closed, probably the thing to do is make a meta post or flag a moderator if it's really clear cut.  We can't make a dupe of an already closed question (viz. we can't have an already-closed question &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; be a duplicate of a new question, because posts can only have one close reason), so if we really want to have things closed in the ideal manner in that circumstance we might have to open the old question and then dupe it, or just delete it so there's no duplication. In the meantime the new question should be closed for whatever reason it needs closing (e.g. too broad in this case) so it's easier to see the real reason why it's closed instead of having to follow links.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the close reasons are dealt with, if it's still a dupe of the other question we can figure out what to do with it on meta.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the existence closeworthy/uncloseworthy dupes of uncloseworthy/closeworthy (respectively) questions will always be a contentious issue when it crops up.  That's because being a dupe means that two questions are the same in terms of substance (i.e. the things that matter in terms of answering it), so their receiving differing treatment is/would be indicative of our community doing something it disagrees with, like treating questions/people differently based on how they talk or what background they come from in a question, or whether certain users asked or answered it.  That's not to say these situations don't come up, just that when they do and you go to post on meta about it you should be aware that the question about how to handle the duping will necessarily entail a discussion of why one of them ended up closed while the other didn't and if that's okay and what we think about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2017-12-20T05:39:07.103" LastActivityDate="2017-12-20T05:39:07.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-20T11:00:43.187" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;Community&lt;/a&gt; has a hat!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mAve0.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mAve0.png&quot; alt=&quot;van hellsing hat and crossbow at a jaunty angle&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-12-20T11:00:43.187" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2017-12-20T18:01:55.923" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7647" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7648" CreationDate="2017-12-21T16:58:46.783" Score="2" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112187/is-there-a-particular-version-of-dd-that-is-easier-to-convert-to-5e&quot;&gt;Is there a particular version of D&amp;amp;D that is easier to convert to 5e?&lt;/a&gt; on the main site, seeking advice on converting prior editions to D&amp;amp;D 5e. It has been put on hold as too broad and primarily opinion-based. How can I revise it to make it work with their format?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39217" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-21T19:00:34.647" LastActivityDate="2017-12-21T19:00:34.647" Title="Revising my question to not get opinion-based answers" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7647" CreationDate="2017-12-21T17:14:22.170" Score="6" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cut out the bit looking for recommendations of specific modules. It's too broad, among a whole host of other problems that recommendations generally cause. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt; if you want to read more, start following links there if you really want to fall down a hole.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once you've done that it's starting to look more approachable. There are only ten or so (depending on how you count) different editions of D&amp;amp;D, after all. And I know experienced site members have done conversions, and have experience with lots of D&amp;amp;D. And are willing (and happy) to write up high-quality answers that look at lots of editions' material. (I'm thinking of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/108454/23970&quot;&gt;How do interpretations of Hit Points vary among D&amp;amp;D editions?&lt;/a&gt; which was recently referenced, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/13212/23970&quot;&gt;What are the big differences between the D&amp;amp;D editions?&lt;/a&gt; for example.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do think it perhaps necessary to lay out your priorities a bit. Specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you say you have AD&amp;amp;D experience--any other editions? A little bit about how much you know them could help&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what your desired playstyle focuses on--combat, role-play, exploration, combat-as-war vs. combat-as-sport, many-year campaigns, one-shots, monty-haul vs. edge-of-survival, and all the things I haven't thought of&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;then share any experience you do have with converting: which bits did you find enjoyable, which a slog, what're problems that cropped up in your 5e that you didn't foresee, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2017-12-21T18:20:00.157" LastActivityDate="2017-12-21T18:20:00.157" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7649" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7651" CreationDate="2017-12-22T00:32:41.157" Score="9" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;What do we do when a question asks about a particular D&amp;amp;D spell/feature/race/skill/etc that's been published twice in official D&amp;amp;D books?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I know, it's only happened &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72138/23064&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (but I have not browsed any other system than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, so these might also be happening in other systems)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the linked question specifically asks about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/EE_PlayersCompanion.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Elemental Evil Player's Companion&lt;/a&gt; version of Catapult. Two years later, &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/rpg-products/xanathars-guide-everything&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Xanathar's Guide to Everything&lt;/a&gt; released a newer version of Catapult, and the question got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/112206/23064&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; based on that version.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think the answer is relevant to the question about the EEPC version of catapult, so I flagged it. But how do we signal that a question is for a specific version in a particular book?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of ideas come to mind:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add a [$book] tag (maybe something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elemental-evil&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elemental-evil&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elemental-evil&lt;/a&gt;?) &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the question to signal that they know there's a newer version of the spell, and is only interested in this version.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-22T10:41:57.740" LastActivityDate="2017-12-23T21:10:54.413" Title="What do we do with questions about a different version of a spell but with the same D&amp;D edition?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7649" CreationDate="2017-12-22T15:16:47.310" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Officially, there aren't different versions of the same thing in 5E — the later versions supplant them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/107-new-spells-appearing-in-d-ds-xanathars-guide-to&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this interview&lt;/a&gt;, Jeremy Crawford says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The spells from Princes of the Apocalypse that reappear in this book ... some of the spells have been revised, and in some cases, we've expanded which classes are getting those spells. So there are a few spells that, in Princes of the Apocalypse and the Elemental Evil that maybe only one class got that now, several classes get. And when it comes to revision, in most cases, we've just clarified things in the spells. But in a few places, we've also enhanced the spells, because there were a few of the spells that just weren't quite hitting their marks, and so we improved them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, in the official &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/errata-november-2017&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;November errata&lt;/a&gt;, we have this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Among the new spells in &lt;em&gt;Xanathar’s Guide to Everything&lt;/em&gt; are some that originally appeared in &lt;em&gt;Princes of the Apocalypse&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;Elemental Evil Player’s Companion&lt;/em&gt;, an online supplement. When adding the spells to &lt;em&gt;Xanathar’s Guide to Everything&lt;/em&gt;, we made refinements. Those changes are reflected in the following two PDFs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/PotA-Errata.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Princes of the Apocalypse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; Errata&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/sites/default/files/media/EE-Players-Companion_0_0.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Elemental Evil Player’s Companion&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that in the second case, the whole supplement has been updated. So, in the specific case of &quot;Oh, I want the Elemental Evil version!&quot; — now the updated version &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; that version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, a table could decide to play with the older rules and ignore the errata or updates. In those cases, the question should state that explicitly. But that's a corner case that I don't think we need to do anything special about in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="904" LastEditorUserId="904" LastEditDate="2017-12-22T17:57:46.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-22T17:57:46.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7652" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7649" CreationDate="2017-12-23T21:10:54.413" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Flag answers that fail to answer the question because of stuff like that.  If a querent specifically says &quot;I want to know how this works using the second printing of the 8th edition of the rulebook&quot; or whatever and someone answers with an answer that &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; from that specific version, that's not a real answer to the question and it should be deleted.  It's just as unhelpful as when someone puts an answer on a question that's not even for the right system, and we delete those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that there's a subjective judgement here between answers that clearly understand they are sourcing advice from a different edition/game/what have you and answers that clearly don't realize D&amp;amp;D 5e isn't the only RPG system ever.  If an answer says &quot;There's no information from [desired edition], but there is information from [other product] and I think that that information should work well for you in this case because [reasons why this isn't terrible].&quot; that's an answer, and if it's nonetheless completely unhelpful it's got to be downvoted before it gets deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need a tag for this, yet, because people rarely specify they are interested in the interpretation of material that has been officially errata'd in the absence of said errata, and when that's a common decision (e.g. ignoring Complete Psionics in favor of Expanded Psionics Handbook) its a sign update material was truly &lt;em&gt;terrible&lt;/em&gt; and our community seems to similarly assume said update material doesn't exist unless it's central to the question.  If people need a tag for this at some point, they can make one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, your cited question isn't really a great example, because it &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; specify that it's only about a certain version of a spell, but rather uses text from a particular now-updated version.  That's very different and referencing the updated material is an &lt;em&gt;excellent&lt;/em&gt; response to questions like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2017-12-23T21:10:54.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7653" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-24T10:58:22.503" Score="6" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;The rules for the bounties make it clear that you cannot award your own answer. However it makes no reference to the automatic rewarding of half the amount to the highest scoring answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After the bounty ends, there is a grace period of 24 hours to manually award the bounty. Simply click the bounty award icon next to each answer to permanently award your bounty to the answerer. (You cannot award a bounty to your own answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do not award your bounty within 7 days (plus the grace period), the highest voted answer created after the bounty started with a minimum score of 2 will be awarded half the bounty amount (or the full amount, if the answer is also accepted). If two or more eligible answers have the same score (their scores are tied), the oldest answer is chosen. If there's no answer meeting those criteria, no bounty is awarded to anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second paragraph reads as an &amp;quot;else&amp;quot; condition, it is the case when &amp;quot;you&amp;quot; do not award. It seems to imply that the automatic awarding can also choose your answer if it is the highest voted answer. Could this be rephrased to clearly state that your answer cannot receive any reputation at all irrespective of the outcome?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-24T19:06:27.413" Title="Update the Bounty auto-award information to clarify your own answers are ineligible" Tags="|feature-request|bounty|help-center|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7655" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-26T23:23:43.010" Score="6" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the situation. Someone asks a good question about a specific rule interpretation. User 1 responds with an answer along the following lines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The rules on page [x] establish this as a case of [thing], which means it must follow the rules on page [y]. Contrast with case [other thing] which behaves differently, and it's clear that [answer].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;User 1's reasoning is valid, and they arrive at the correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the question, I realize that I know an official source (say, an Errata or Sage Advice) that explicitly states the answer to the question being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I definitely think I need to provide this information. An answer relying on reasoning and interpretation of the rules is open for debate and may not satisfy everyone. However, a direct and official ruling is beyond debate and provides an additional weight of authority to the answer. However, I'm unsure how to provide this information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post a competing answer relying on the source instead of exegesis?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add a comment with a link to the source?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the answer to include a link to the source?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28329" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2017-12-27T01:32:02.487" LastActivityDate="2017-12-27T01:32:02.487" Title="What if you find an official source supporting an existing answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7655" CreationDate="2017-12-26T23:37:58.860" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;All of those are acceptable. There’s no “right” answer, it depends on how much work you want to put into it, how much rep you have, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2017-12-26T23:37:58.860" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7657" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7655" CreationDate="2017-12-26T23:40:19.987" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two possible treatments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The exegesis/ruling would be a small part of an answer.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're feeling friendly, leave a comment complimenting the author on their existing (correct) answer with a pointer/link to the authoritative source. &amp;quot;I agree completely, and so did $DESIGNER--I think this correct answer would be made &lt;em&gt;even better&lt;/em&gt; with a link to that explanation.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or just post your own answer that relies only on the authoritative statement. It might be neighborly to reference the previous answer in a complimentary fashion, but that's by no means &lt;em&gt;necessary&lt;/em&gt;. Remember: each answer should stand on its own such that if all other answers were deleted yours would still completely address the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The exegesis/ruling would be a large part of an answer.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that case it probably doesn't make sense to leave a comment suggesting its inclusion in the existing answer. Just write your own. The Stack functions best when there are multiple, good answers to a question, and that sounds like exactly what you're describing. Then sit back and wait for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/44/necromancer&quot;&gt;your badge&lt;/a&gt; to arrive =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2017-12-26T23:51:55.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7658" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7659" CreationDate="2017-12-27T14:57:05.940" Score="13" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed that the system flags some questions as being '&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112418/is-he-still-attached-to-the-lamp&quot;&gt;On hold&lt;/a&gt;' when we vote to close it and others are flagged as '&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63947/how-should-i-go-about-stabbing-my-friend-in-the-back&quot;&gt;closed&lt;/a&gt;'. Are there differences between each label?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-27T15:14:07.543" LastActivityDate="2017-12-27T15:27:46.117" Title="Difference between 'On-Hold' and 'Closed'?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7659" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7658" CreationDate="2017-12-27T15:08:49.560" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;When we close a question, it becomes &quot;On hold&quot; for 5 days, then becomes &quot;Closed&quot; thereafter. They're functionally the same thing (closed) except for two differences:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When a question is On Hold, an edit performed on it will push it into the Reopen review queue. (I don't know if this can happen more than once.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;On hold&quot; sounds &lt;strong&gt;temporary&lt;/strong&gt;, and this is the reason we have this thing at all. Back in early 2013 and prior, questions would just go straight to &quot;Closed&quot;. New users who are used to forum environments interpret &quot;closed&quot; as &lt;em&gt;forever and final&lt;/em&gt;, and would often not return to revise their questions to meet the requests for improvement people were leaving in comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2013/06/25/the-war-of-the-closes/&quot;&gt;&quot;On hold&quot; was introduced in June 2013&lt;/a&gt; to convey the temporary nature of closures here and that if the question is revised to improve its quality or suitability it can be reopened &#xA;&amp;mdash; hence the bump into the review queues on revision.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you'd like to read more around this subject, there is also a Meta Stack Exchange FAQ item on the closing markers: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/10582/152515&quot;&gt;What is a “closed”, “on hold”, or “duplicate” question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2017-12-27T15:27:46.117" LastActivityDate="2017-12-27T15:27:46.117" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7660" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2017-12-28T10:42:16.823" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Last year I had a nice white hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NzGw5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NzGw5.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This year I've turned to the dark side, with this secret hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IaPNs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IaPNs.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19580" LastActivityDate="2017-12-28T10:42:16.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7661" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7662" CreationDate="2017-12-28T16:32:31.567" Score="6" ViewCount="293" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112458/37154&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. I was looking specifically for an official source, which I expressed by using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag. However, it was quickly removed with the following reasoning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[raw] tag is only for strict literalist interpretation problems, not for &amp;quot;official rules&amp;quot; problems: removing to not dilute tag&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't object to the removal, and I do now (to some degree) understand the difference between what that tag is supposed to indicate and what I used it to indicate, but I'm left feeling like the sentiment I started with should still translate to a tag even though I didn't find one more suitable than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a tag that already exists, but I missed it? Or is &amp;quot;official material only&amp;quot; the default? Alternatively, should I have asked a broader question (i.e. &amp;quot;What is the source...&amp;quot; rather than &amp;quot;Is there an official source...&amp;quot;) and expected an answer identifying an official source to rise to the top naturally?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-07-06T04:22:29.683" LastActivityDate="2020-07-06T04:22:29.683" Title="Is there a tag for &quot;Official rules problems&quot;?" Tags="|support|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7661" CreationDate="2017-12-28T16:39:58.997" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't such a tag. 95% of what our site does is &quot;official rules problems&quot; and at that level it's not useful to have a tag. Several tags along the lines of &quot;rules&quot; or &quot;mechanics&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4949/1204&quot;&gt;have been blacklisted&lt;/a&gt; for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When to have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag and when not is kind of fuzzy... but it's important to make sure it's not just &quot;I am asking about the rules&quot;, or it's equivalent to [rules], which is bad &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4949/1204&quot;&gt;because rules is blacklisted&lt;/a&gt; and that would mean removing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; too. Accordingly we tend to reserve &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; for something like &quot;super literal interpretations of the rules&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Side note, I requested that blacklisting years before becoming a diamond moderator, so this is the kind of thing any user can request and it'll be acted on if it's reasonable; though that's rare. It's by no means a diamond moderator thing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-09T01:37:32.793" LastActivityDate="2018-10-09T01:37:32.793" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7661" CreationDate="2017-12-29T00:09:33.927" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7661/is-there-a-tag-for-official-rules-problems/7662#7662&quot;&gt;@doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt; is right, but it's worth saying that some things can't be described by tags. If you care what exact sources solutions come from, you just need to say that out loud in your question. Official first-party sourcebooks only? Any published book? Third-party PDF stuff? Unearthed Arcana included?  That problem set is too complicated for a tag.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So most questions are about rules, so we don't have a rules tag. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is for &quot;no, really, super-legalistic readings only&quot; interpretations. Neither dictates what sources are legit; you have to specify that yourself. Most folks will generally default to official books, but if you care, say what you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-07-25T23:54:53.673" LastActivityDate="2018-07-25T23:54:53.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7631" CreationDate="2017-12-29T03:36:43.563" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7626/experiment-more-aggressive-review-queue-indicator&quot;&gt;gotten the red dot&lt;/a&gt; in Edge, IE 10, nor in Chrome in the top bar before opening.  I have at seemingly random intervals gotten a red dot next to whatever item in the review queue I need to take a look at, but most often they are still gray.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will update this answer if I ever do get the red dot in the bar.  I had no idea that the red dot was supposed to tell me to open the reviews, I just open them because that's something I do to see what community mod assistance I can offer.  I have run into that off and on since the red dot thing began.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above is true on all SE's where I participate and am able to do community modding things: RPG, Christianity, Aviation, History, SFF.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My further problem is that with the red dots, it frequently stays red after I have completed the action of the review.  Just did that this morning at Christianity.SE.  Had a long review queue with the red dot, went through them, no questions left to review for &quot;low quality posts&quot;, and when I opened it again the red dot was still there but nothing to review.  Browser = Chrome; it had happened in Edge and IE previously.  Neither Aviation nor History review queues showed red this morning, but one review choice in RPG.SE had red dot and it cleared fine when I was done.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of this morning, as a follow up a few days later, the red dot appeared in  my menu bar for reviewing various actions on RPG.SE.  Two review queues indicated via red dot that I had things to review, and the red dot stayed in the second of the two queues until I had completed each review.  It appears for the moment that the red dot may be working as intended. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then again, as of this afternoon, I got no red button alert but when I opened the drop down to see if there's stuff in the review queue, there was a red dot indicating that I had a task to review.  Still not working as intended, apparently.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A day later, it works differently again, in terms of no red dot on the menu bar but red dots on a couple of review queues.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-01-05T17:23:09.987" LastActivityDate="2018-01-05T17:23:09.987" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7665" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2017-12-29T14:02:28.673" Score="-3" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had a thought last night that when people are leaving a comment on a question or an answer, they are trying to engage with the person who wrote that question or answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many times, there is hope that they will respond in the comments or adjust their post - but often times it falls on deaf ears. Other times, the comments go back and forth so much that it generates an automatic chat room offer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the nature of comments is ephemeral, and they're there to try and improve a post, why not just automatically create a room where it can be discussed? Those rooms can be removed over time, which keeps the question/answer section much cleaner as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would keep the comments section incredibly clean and let those who do want interact do so in a place that is separate from the main question/answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm probably missing something here, but wanted to raise the idea to the group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2017-12-29T14:17:54.217" LastActivityDate="2017-12-29T16:38:05.497" Title="Have we considered generating a chat for each comment section?" Tags="|discussion|comments|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7665" CreationDate="2017-12-29T14:15:52.883" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;So from what I understand, you're raising the idea of being able to create a chat room at square 0, without the long ABAB trail that offers to generate one for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have some concerns with that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it doesn't actually fix the engagement issue. I get pings about comments left on my posts, except where they're specifically pinging someone else. I actually get &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; pings about chat; people have to deliberately ping me on each message to get me a notification for it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;part of what Stack Exchange does for us is keep all the useful information publicly in one place in the same question &amp;amp; answer page. When I ask for information you can see it's been asked for, and you can see the clarification it received. If peoples' mode of interaction is to spawn off 2-3 chat rooms to converse with the asker, instead of leaving comments, then the same information gets sequestered away and is harder to find. As an author, you might find yourself in situations where you're saying &quot;as I said in the other two chat rooms people opened...&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment sections do get messy on developing situations, but personally as a community member and moderator I'd prefer you tame the mess by flagging stuff for me to delete. We can help the important stuff stand out that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2017-12-29T14:15:52.883" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7665" CreationDate="2017-12-29T16:38:05.497" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Coming at this from a different angle, there's nothing stopping a (20+ rep) user from doing exactly what you're suggesting. You could, if you like, instead of leaving a &quot;usual&quot; first comment take a moment to create a new room, copy its URL, and leave a comment saying&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have some thoughts about this question's formulation and the situation where it arose. Please join me in &lt;code&gt;this chat room&lt;/code&gt; when you have a chance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &lt;em&gt;automatically&lt;/em&gt; doing so... the answers and comments elsewhere do a pretty good job of explaining some reasons this isn't currently supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2017-12-29T16:38:05.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7631" CreationDate="2017-12-31T17:36:00.263" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wow, look at what I found this morning!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lHHnH.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lHHnH.png&quot; alt=&quot;review queue indicator&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I can figure out more about the indicator's new behavior, I'll update this answer, but for now, it looks like it's working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Followup:  As of my next login (~8 hours after this answer was originally posted), I found no indicator on the review icon, but one pending review task.  Perhaps this morning's success was due to the fact that there were &lt;em&gt;several&lt;/em&gt; pending review tasks?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2018-01-01T01:55:20.943" LastActivityDate="2018-01-01T01:55:20.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7669" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7671" CreationDate="2018-01-02T19:59:40.967" Score="27" ViewCount="2074" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the release of dndbeyond, and seeing it used a few times around the site, I wanted to ask if we have (or should have) a policy regarding using direct links to a paywall shielded website, instead of referring to physical books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally, we encourage pasting in the relevant text in case of link necrosis but for quotations that would come out of physical books--if we're going to cite sources, should we continue to cite the actual physical rulebooks? Or is it acceptable to link off to a creator-controlled site that exists behind a paywall, such as dndbeyond, and may thus be inaccessible to the average user?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the upside...such sites tend to be completely up to date, and we don't have to worry about errata differences between printings. But it does prevent a typical user, who does not have access to get behind the paywall, from actually pursuing the source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I, personally, think this is fine...but wanted to toss it up to the rest of you. (You have to buy the book to have access to the physical citations, after all)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16358" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-02T23:34:39.220" LastActivityDate="2019-10-03T14:59:36.773" Title="Stance on using D&amp;D Beyond for references?" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7670" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7669" CreationDate="2018-01-02T20:23:51.767" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Common Sources are the best sources&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the Wizards site is new and we don't have any known subscription numbers, I don't know if we want to be pushing our knowledge behind that wall. Given that everyone who comes here &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have had a legal physical copy (as that's been the only legal copy), it's best to provide citations that the majority have access to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Online sources are absolutely easier, but citing evidence that is hidden behind a new paywall (even if the source is legitimate) makes life harder for those using the site. It is best to cite something that everyone/anyone have historically had access to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are online legal resources, you can use those as well, but if they are 3rd party you risk errors that might not be there with the originals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linking to the paywall resources is totally legitimate, it just sets a higher bar for access than it needs to be in comparison to the physical status quo that was in existence before the recent development of D&amp;amp;DBeyond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Forward Thinking&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7671/23024&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose&lt;/a&gt; in that moving forward we should be using both. But if you are picking one, one should pick the one that more people use and/or have access to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-02T21:06:12.963" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7669" CreationDate="2018-01-02T20:48:53.673" Score="36" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Use both whenever possible&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's really no difference between the paywall for a book and the paywall for a site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever I get the chance I cite both the book and online: (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/glyph-of-warding&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;PHB p. 245&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Barriers to entry&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To someone that doesn't have a book, (DMG p. 270) is exactly as inaccessible as &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#InitiativeVariants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#InitiativeVariants&lt;/a&gt; is to someone without access to Beyond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we are talking barriers to entry, online is arguably lower: they cost less, they are available instantly from a browser, and they are appealing to a generation of people raised in the digital age.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this is not a book vs ebook argument. I think the greater barrier to entry would be to take a stance against either source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discouraging online sources could be very off putting especially to newcomers to D&amp;amp;D who are coming in excited at the possibility of using official electronic resources. WotC gave us this lovely official online resource. Let those who want to use it, use it. Discouraging books would be off putting to the older experienced users (or those of us that just like books).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Accept either&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as we keep to official sources, I think the best policy would be to just encourage users to use whatever sources they have access to and to use both if they can. Someone else can always add in whatever source one didn't have if they care that much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also a note, but the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;basic rules&lt;/a&gt; are also on Beyond and free and available to all — anyone can see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/glyph-of-warding&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;glyph of warding&lt;/a&gt; spell's details. So, I try to use links from the basic rules whenever possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-03T17:58:34.740" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7622" CreationDate="2018-01-02T21:50:40.860" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;During Hatmastide, the Stack and Chat has been visited upon by Sagely Otters on their quest for joy and discovery. But heavens, upon closer inspection, what do we notice? There is only one Sagely Otter, and the very convincing change in appearance is due to naught but change of headgear! So verily, the Forest Gnome Otter (Top Left), the Fashiotter (Top Right) and the Casual Casual Otter (Bottom Left) are all the same Sagely Otter! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lLzxP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lLzxP.png&quot; alt=&quot;Hatmas photos of otter in blankets&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also included for reference a Sagely Narwhalrus (Bottom Right).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2018-01-02T21:50:40.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7673" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-05T14:52:15.123" Score="1" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;When quoting tweets, is it acceptable to correct punctuation and other edits for readability? If so, what syntax would you use to indicate it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example the tweet quoted in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/112840/28591&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer would be improved by fixing the punctuation and capitalization. But there are even more (and less) egregious examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example of an edit that I think might be appropriate is removing the @ and other Twitter syntax that break up the natural language of the text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we rigidly adhere to the quoting of the material over its readability and usefulness as an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-01-05T15:01:25.050" LastActivityDate="2018-01-06T20:14:59.317" Title="Editing quoted tweets for readability" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7674" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7673" CreationDate="2018-01-05T15:06:15.567" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;In regards to aspects like this, (funny seeing as it is my answer which has the offending tweet,) I'd say it doesn't matter as long as the point is expressed clearly. As long as the formatting is clean and you can differentiate the question tweet from the response tweet, and then the tweets from the stackexchange answer, there shouldn't be an issue. I expect most users to be able to read relatively clean text even if there is a short burst lacking in grammar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41481" LastActivityDate="2018-01-05T15:06:15.567" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7673" CreationDate="2018-01-05T15:30:26.660" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quotes are quotes — it is important to accurately reflect the original source we're quoting, and it's generally frowned upon to “revise” a quote such that we give the impression it says things it didn't (or says them in a different way).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, we don't need to use the quote as-is with all flaws intact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's editorial standards that let us add insertions or corrections or summaries in square brackets. Where we're not doing that, we can use [sic] to indicate an error (such as a typo) is present in the original source and wasn't introduced by us. Combining them, I'd quote someone saying “that thing is rely bad” as “[The vow of poverty] is rely[sic] bad” to help make it clearer. These bracketed bits let me add/clarify details, but without suggesting it was a literal part of the original quote — and [sic] lets me make it clear the typo isn't a flaw in my recreation of the original text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;like most spells can a known cantrip be cast at a higher spell slot lvl. Aka sacred flame lvl 1 for 2d8 radiant dmg&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... that'll be a lot of square brackets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'd be preferable to use another tool, &lt;strong&gt;paraphrasing&lt;/strong&gt;, and make it clearer we're doing that. So I could write:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q (paraphrased):&lt;/strong&gt; Can a known cantrip be cast at a higher spell slot level? For example can Sacred Flame be cast at level 1 for 2d8 damage?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; No, since cantrips don't use spell slots. — Jeremy Crawford, Lead Rules Designer D&amp;amp;D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't know if that paraphrasing is accurate, but it's my best attempt not knowing the D&amp;amp;D 5e rules being discussed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-05T17:24:23.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7673" CreationDate="2018-01-06T00:44:52.260" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the writing in tweets &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; should be preserved, unchanged, as it appears in the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Twitter is an inherently abbreviated medium and that leads to all kinds of spelling, grammar, and orthography shortcuts. It's hard enough to quote tweets with decent formatting; correcting them too is a lot of work — and worse, how to correct the abbreviated nature of tweets is going to be subjective!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But more importantly, I think we should not correct tweets at all for this reason: &lt;strong&gt;We started quoting tweets in order to preserve them in case the link breaks or changes.&lt;/strong&gt; If we start correcting them, then:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;…We are no longer accurately preserving the text, in all its details and (possible) ambiguity, and are instead making our own judgements about what it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; say or actually &lt;em&gt;means&lt;/em&gt;. This impairs it as a citation source if the link becomes unavailable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the changes don't affect the understandability of the meaning of the quote, then the changes aren't necessary for our citation needs. And if the changes would help explain what a quote means, we risk erring. Besides, our answers usually explain significance of a quote outside the quote already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;…We may lose the exact text, especially if the uncorrected text never appears in an edit revision. An exact text is one of the few ways to find all the places a quote is referenced in discussions online. Changing the text makes that maneuver difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, if the link becomes unavailable, the exact text is one of the few ways to search the vast Internet for a location where it might be archived. &lt;em&gt;We&lt;/em&gt; may even be that archive location, should Twitter itself ever disappear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Imagine someone working from some old notes that contained copies of Crawford rulings pulled from twitter. They want to locate the tweet again, and they enter the &lt;em&gt;exact&lt;/em&gt; text into Google, and an RPG.se page pops up in the results. If we correct the tweet, that doesn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may seem an implausible need, but entering exact text into Google to find its original is something that I've long had a need to do for various reasons, and altered quotes are the bane of my existence when I'm doing that kind of research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So both because it's &lt;strong&gt;unnecessary work&lt;/strong&gt; and because it &lt;strong&gt;alters our backup of the link&lt;/strong&gt;, I suggest that we should leave tweets, specifically, in their original form. I think they're more valuable and useful to us in their unaltered form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-06T20:14:59.317" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7669" CreationDate="2018-01-06T21:51:56.830" Score="-7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say, definately not - at the time of writing. Its not yet a complete product, being still in beta and its missing a huge amount of key rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23609" LastActivityDate="2018-01-06T21:51:56.830" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7678" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-09T09:04:59.863" Score="0" ViewCount="335" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have noticed that people want to give answers and leave comments that the question is not asking for. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46234/how-to-deal-with-a-character-that-does-not-fit-my-plot&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question, for example, has people immediately saying &quot;don't&quot; instead of just answering the question. Why? Why do people try to say &quot;don't&quot; or similar things instead of simply providing an answer to the question that was asked? Why does there need to be discouragement for certain courses of action just because it might not be a course of action other individuals might agree with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After receiving certain answers about this being a sort of database for everybody instead of just the asker:  what use is an archive if it is filled only with variations of the same answer?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39336" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-01-10T19:40:49.463" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T19:40:49.463" Title="Why do people want to give answers that were not asked for?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7679" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7678" CreationDate="2018-01-09T10:13:47.517" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's called a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's often the answer the querent &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt;, even if it isn't the one they asked for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A common issue with people, especially those new to a hobby or a craft, is that they don't really know what the problem they're encountering is in nature. This can cause them to confuse problems they're having with the problems of the solution they're trying. We call this the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY problem&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;XY problems are common on many fields. In computing, they often involve novice programmers struggling to implement a function for a task, where one already exists in the standard library. In strategy gaming, it could be trying to solve a recurring hopeless position to one's advantage instead of trying to not get into that position in the first place...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and in RPGs, it often revolves around GMs or other players trying to solve their around-the-table problems through in-game scheming, retaliation or other such action, while the actual problem is conflicting game expectations around the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG culture does have some remnants of the occasionally very antagonistic around-the-table attitudes more common in the past decades. Therefore, it's an understandable mistake for a newcomer to assume that the way to solve problems is to be a jerk in-character (or to be a jerk GM) - this is why we reserve the right to give them a better solution to consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, it is always the answerer's choice on whether to answer a question with a frame challenge or with a straightforward answer to the presented question - or even something in between (&quot;you shouldn't do it because of X, but if you choose to, here's how you make it work with minimal harm...&quot;). Therefore, if you find a frame challenge you disagree with, you can post a straight answer to compete. Suggesting courses of action widely considered detrimental are still likely to earn you downvotes, so be prepared to argue well for any answer you make, frame challenge or otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2018-01-09T11:58:52.593" LastActivityDate="2018-01-09T11:58:52.593" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7678" CreationDate="2018-01-09T15:47:37.723" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Because we're not robots&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire mission of RPG Stack Exchange is to solve problems, not to robotically answer every question as if it's superficial and simple. It does that by programmatically harnessing human intelligence and discernment. Because we're human, we make human judgements about how to best solve someone's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That the answers are written by, and scored by, intelligent humans with discernment and judgment to see beyond the words and into the heart of the problem is the entire value proposition that RPG.se offers. It's why the site exists at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually you're right and the problem is actually what the question asks. Sometimes the problem is well-described and yet obviously &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; what the asker thinks the problem is. Sometimes it's in between. You'll find questions all over the spectrum here. You'll see answers that say “don't do that” which are heavily punished by the other thinking humans, and then other answers that say “don't do that” which are heavily supported by the voting humans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is RPG.se function as designed, harnessing the heuristic processing power of many humans minds to ensure that questions get the answers their text is &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; asking for, rather than the answer that the question-writer wishes for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-01-09T15:47:37.723" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7681" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-09T21:43:45.537" Score="44" ViewCount="477" Body="&lt;p&gt;We get questions every day that need to be put on hold while we wait for a new querent to specify what game/edition they're playing. As of this writing I've seen three so far today--they get quickly closed, get a comment asking about system/edition, and reopened if OP specifies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently when asking a question one finds, below the text of the question, the following field:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rVFrA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rVFrA.png&quot; alt=&quot;empty tag field with greyed-out suggestions&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's clear from this message that one must provide at least one tag, and the system rejects a submission without any tag. It's also clear that the suggestions have come from our list of tags. (There's a question on meta.se about &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/279519/311001&quot;&gt;where the example tags come from&lt;/a&gt;; it's not clear to me the answer's very authoritative.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can we make one of the suggested (greyed-out) tag suggestions be a system tag?&lt;/strong&gt; I've got to assume it would help nudge people in the right direction if submnitting a question included the subtle hint that &quot;tell me what game you're playing&quot; might be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part 2: the ugly truth. It's usually D&amp;amp;D/PF that's the problem. Should the &quot;suggested&quot; tag be one of the D&amp;amp;Ds? Is it 5e that's the worst offender, and should that be one of the provided suggestions? I ask because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm not good enough with SEDE to figure out which system tag--not that &quot;system tag&quot; is actually a thing in our software--tends to generate the most close-comment-edit-reopen cycles, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't know user psychology enough to know if prompting toward the &quot;worst offender&quot; is most helpful--perhaps a near-neighbor is better?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-13T15:21:36.340" LastActivityDate="2019-11-13T15:21:36.340" Title="Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|status-deferred|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7682" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7683" CreationDate="2018-01-10T01:25:13.370" Score="5" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm about to kick off a second D&amp;amp;D 5e campaign for a set of friends interested in trying D&amp;amp;D for the first time. They've got nearly zero experience with the game, and we're hitting some hurdles I didn't expect. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of these is that two of them are playing classes with spells, and they've ended up with total choice paralysis. Both of them are terrified of choosing the &quot;wrong&quot; spells and keep changing their minds on a practically minute-to-minute basis. (Seriously, the amount of texts I've gotten from each of them...) But it's hard to explain what the spells do or how useful they'll be when your audience has no personal experience with the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL:DR; I'd like to make choosing spells more newbie-friendly, but I don't know how. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However that ^^^ question (if actually phrased as a question) strikes me as something that might get closed as too broad, or maybe subjective. Are my instincts right? Can I phrase it differently to make it RPGse acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-01-10T02:09:48.000" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T02:09:48.000" Title="Would this question about lowering the barrier to entry on choosing spells be closed?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7682" CreationDate="2018-01-10T02:07:55.680" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that might work. Your problem is a people one — introducing new players to an unknown game. That's the sort of thing that's amenable to other people saying “hey! I've been there exactly before. Here's what worked and what didn't when I handled it.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing a question like this needs to survive is to fend off the people who want to answer “I think that you should…” who have no experience with this problem. When a question like this gets a lot of that kind of answer it suggests that the question itself is somehow attracting them, and then it gets closed as Primarily Opinion-Based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So with that in mind, you can craft the question carefully to make sure those kinds of answers are &lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; off topic early in the question. That makes it more likely for people who just have an opinion to notice and rethink their desire to spill their untested impulse thoughts onto the site. Something like…&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I could really use some advice from someone with experience with new players dealing with D&amp;amp;D spell analysis paralysis.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm about to kick off a second D&amp;amp;D 5e campaign for a set of friends interested in trying D&amp;amp;D for the first time. They've got nearly zero experience with the game, and we're hitting some hurdles I didn't expect.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T02:07:55.680" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7678" CreationDate="2018-01-10T02:47:53.867" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244534/311001&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;You gotta get this to get us....&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linked there ^^ is, in my opinion, a super-important bit of Stack philosophy. Take a moment to read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hmm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;it's not just about the one asker, or the four voters, but rather the fifteen thousand searchers with the same problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a large part of why allowing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/23970&quot;&gt;frame challenges&lt;/a&gt; is not only acceptable, but a good idea. Frankly, we're not &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; trying to answer querent's question. Sure, any individual answer-author might be, but the big &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt;,&amp;quot; the collective knowledge-base that emerges from all of the editing and voting and commenting and hashing out practices in metas and arguing and, and, and... &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt;'re trying to create a well-sorted database of expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some time ago there was a question I'll paraphrase as &amp;quot;I was playing with some friends and got totally hosed by the GM and some other players. It really sucked, and I was really hurt by it. But I'm the GM for the next series of adventures, and I'm totally going to long-form double-screw them back. What's the best way?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Many&lt;/em&gt; answers came in saying &amp;quot;don't do it, man. Here's why I say that....&amp;quot; And those answers got lots of upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original querent may not agree. They may not have liked the answers, they may not have agreed, they may, for all I know, have vowed to long-form double-screw &lt;em&gt;us&lt;/em&gt; if ever they're sitting at the same table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt;'re creating a well-sorted database of expertise. And now that database has a clear message in it: &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; think holding onto your anger for years and trying to spin it out in this manner is a poor idea.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You seem to think it disrespectful not to answer the question as presented on its face. That's fine--you don't need to agree with the current stance RPGSE takes on frame challenges. You can&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;vote down answers that challenge frames&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;vote down answers on the meta that affirm the reasonableness of challenging frames&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;write your own answer(s) on meta that argue for why the larger site would end up providing a better resource if we discouraged frame challenges&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;and probably a dozen other things I'm not creative enough to think of.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as to your titular question, &amp;quot;why do people want to give [those] answers?&amp;quot; Because they think they're the best answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T02:47:53.867" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7685" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7678" CreationDate="2018-01-10T13:01:47.813" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is in response to your added question about the value of a Stack with repeated answers, and your concern about us or yourself just getting answers to everything of “don't do that”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;don't actually want&lt;/em&gt; answers that just say “don't do that”. They're low quality. You'll be right to call those out if we get them. They don't provide actionable solutions to real problems. They're along the lines of saying “the GM should figure it out” or “it's an imagination game, just make something up.” Such answers should be downvoted, helped to improve, and/or flagged for moderator inspection and probable removal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And of course, any answer which belittles the querent or otherwise violates our &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice guidelines&lt;/a&gt; is inappropriate, regardless of its answer-ish-ness. We're also not interested in “you're playing the game wrong”-type answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/1204&quot;&gt;since we embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt;, and sometimes an answer that only says “don't do that thing” is falling into this unwelcome area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/4398&quot;&gt;frame challenge guidelines&lt;/a&gt; don't make any of that go away. They're an extrapolation from the general advice in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;help&lt;/a&gt; pages that say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What, specifically, is the question asking for? Make sure your answer provides that – or a viable alternative. The answer can be “don’t do that”, but it should also include “try this instead”. [...] Brevity is acceptable, but fuller explanations are better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These guidelines specifically demand that &lt;strong&gt;every &quot;Don't do that&quot; needs an accompanying &quot;do this instead,&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; preferably with an explanation of why the frame challenge is necessary. It's the &quot;do this instead&quot; that adds new, useful content to the Stack and makes a frame challenge a Stack-compatible answer like any other. Kviiri &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7679/1204&quot;&gt;mentioned the XY problem&lt;/a&gt; in their answer: if we determine someone has a deeper problem, and we want to refuse the question they asked in an attempt to solve that deeper problem, we actually have to provide a solution to the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the original question you brought up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46234/how-to-deal-with-a-character-that-does-not-fit-my-plot&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; question, for example, has people immediately saying &quot;don't&quot; instead of just answering the question. Why? Why do people try to say &quot;don't&quot; or similar things instead of simply providing an answer to the question that was asked? Why does there need to be discouragement for certain courses of action just because it might not be a course of action other individuals might agree with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Kviiri's also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7678/why-do-people-want-to-give-answers-that-were-not-asked-for#comment24171_7678&quot;&gt;pointed out accurately in comments&lt;/a&gt; that the querent was looking for general guidance in how to handle this situation. Here's what they asked us:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My question is, as a new and hopefully long-lasting DM, how do I kill off a character? Do I make it fair? Is it better to instill the idea of hopelessness? Or am I overreacting and should let him play?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The whole “let them just have their character, and adjust the plot to fit them into it” is pretty reasonable along the lines of “you're overreacting, let him play”. The answers are also telling the DM not to kill the character off, but they're not just stopping at “don't do that” &amp;mdash; they're going into depth on explaining how to resolve the problem sitting at the heart of that question: “there is a character who doesn't fit my plot, and I don't know what to do about it.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: we're not going to wind up as a database of answers that just say “don't do that thing” without providing actionable solutions. If we are getting those answers, please raise those to our attention. If you are encountering people largely trying to tell people their playstyle choices are wrong, please bring it to our attention (and bear in mind there's a difference between “that playstyle is wrong because I disagree” and “don't do that because it will get people genuinely hurt, and you appear to not be aware of this”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mentioned in comments you had a campaign with lots of player vs player activity. If you happen to be in that situation again, and want assistance handling something in that situation, we're not going to give you answers of “stop doing that” which decline to further attempt to solve the problems you're experiencing, and if you do get those, I'll hope for people to be raising it to our attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said: if you want to attempt to change our meta policies around frame challenges, the correct approach is to visit our meta post for that policy &amp;mdash; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/4398&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; and write your own answer to that question so we can see and understand your proposal for policy on this issue. We can make only loose inferences about your own perspective through the questions you're asking and the issues you've raised in comments, but can't understand your full stance from them. We get you strongly disagree with something in how we're handling things, but responding in comments about how you disagree isn't going to create policy change on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't promise your proposal will be received well, and I'm concerned there's something you're missing in our quality requirements around these answers. I'm also concerned about the broad generalisations you've made, which aren't backed up by evidence or may even be contrary to evidence (our body of player-vs-player conflict questions is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; full of “don't do that” answers). We deal best in resolving real problems that demonstrably exist, which means generalisations should also correlate with substantial evidence. For an example of a question that successfully demonstrated a generalised problem and resulted in concrete change to our practices, see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3095/1204&quot;&gt;The gremlin in our answers: &amp;quot;Fate is narrative&amp;quot; answers to mechanical Fate questions&lt;/a&gt;, which brought up a problematic answering pattern in our Fate questions which was corroborated by substantial evidence to show us (a) that the problem was real, and (b) what the problem was like in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-10T13:39:16.360" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T13:39:16.360" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7681" CreationDate="2018-01-10T13:48:01.400" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NB: I no longer think that this is a good idea after more experience on this site&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this has its heart in the right place. But I'm also not in favour of forcing every question to have a system tag of some kind (even if it were technically viable): that just makes it a tag tax, and unnecessarily puts redundant tags on questions that don't need them. The idea is that not every question is about a system, so not every question needs a tag about system. – SevenSidedDie ↵ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7681/can-our-tag-prompt-nudge-toward-including-system#comment24188_7686&quot;&gt;Jan 10 '18 at 14:44&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Alternate solution: require a system or system agnostic tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a decent solution would be to require a system tag or the system agnostic tag to any new post before allowing it to be submitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that as long as we were able to have a group of tags of which at least one was required to be present to make a new post then it would largely solve the issue (albeit in a very blunt fashion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I have no idea if such a thing is technically possible or viable in SE. Now that it is pointed out however, I do realize that this meta has a system just like I am talking about here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A downside I just realized would be that, because tags would have to be manually assigned as system (and thus required), first questions about a particular system would be difficult to handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-29T16:37:33.457" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7687" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-10T15:01:02.227" Score="9" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;Quite often we get questions on here with no system listed. Often they are by new users. This seems like a fault with the workflow of the site and something that should be able to be corrected. And, moreover, I think it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having all these questions is a bad experience for new users some of whom just want a quick answer to a question and don't understand all the mechanics of a site. This, again, is a flaw in the site's flow I think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is also an issue for mods and other users because we want to answer the question and help the person, but are unable to do so because of site policy against guessing which system OP intended (often restricting our ability to answer the question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since that requirement is in place, is there some way we can improve this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7681/can-our-tag-prompt-nudge-toward-including-system/7686?noredirect=1#7681&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is one such proposal already. I was hoping we could use this question as a place to list proposed solutions as opposed to scattering them around in different questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think similar to the linked question, that the best solution is one that catches the problem before the question is submitted, but I'm curious to see what ideas are out there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-22T23:20:46.367" LastActivityDate="2019-12-10T09:52:57.663" Title="Is there a way to decrease the amount of questions submitted without a system tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7689" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7690" CreationDate="2018-01-10T15:15:02.570" Score="6" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;To start with the simple case: with DnD, we tag by edition like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; etc. It's an understandable practice, as rules and content vary wildly by edition. A question regarding a particular edition could almost never be answered by sources of another edition, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; is used for questions that consider the franchise as whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that sort of difference between editions, while not limited to DnD, is not universal among RPG systems. For example, Apocalypse World 1e and 2e are very similar in content and especially underlying mechanics, to the point where edition-specific questions are far, far harder to come by than edition-agnostic ones. This makes me sort of fuzzy on how we should actually tag the questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/apocalypse-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;apocalypse-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;apocalypse-world&lt;/a&gt;, by far most of the questions would have identical answers for 1e and 2e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/apocalypse-world-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;apocalypse-world-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;apocalypse-world-2e&lt;/a&gt; doesn't have a single question whose answer isn't equally relevant to 1e. Knowing that any answers are likely to apply to both editions makes me want to tag questions as both, but if one always wants to use two tags, couldn't they just be one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the proper usage of the edition-specific tags with Apocalypse World and other systems, where edition differences tend to remain minor?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T21:42:26.603" Title="Is there a general usage guideline for tagging between editions of the same system where editions are very similar?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7690" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7689" CreationDate="2018-01-10T21:42:26.603" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general when editions are very similar, we don't bother with different tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially we trust the community to emergently tag stuff in a way that makes sense for that play community.  No one on God's green Earth cares about Call of Cthulhu version 1 vs 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 (possible exception for 7th) so there's just a call-of-cthulhu tag. If you do know you're asking for a version dependent thing in that world, you just say &quot;Hey is that sample haunted house adventure from 5e in the 6e book?&quot;  But for games that are more crunchy and rules vary, the community does the same thing they organically do on forums and whatnot, and say &quot;no, this is for Mutants and Masterminds 2e...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Artificially adding versions when it doesn't help is harmful and fragments discussion especially for less popular games (i.e. anything but D&amp;amp;Dworld). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes people do overzealously split tags, like with Apocalypse World.  Then new folks see the version differences and use it in good faith, even if a &quot;1e answer is the same.&quot;  C'est la vie, cat's out of the bag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically be very conservative about adding versioned system tags, because once they're there, the damage is done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-01-10T21:42:26.603" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7691" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-11T17:21:00.713" Score="8" ViewCount="265" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked a question about out-of-game ways to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113168/need-out-of-game-solution-for-spell-choice-paralysis&quot;&gt;help with choice paralysis&lt;/a&gt;. It now has 14 answers, and at least 3-4 of them have solutions that a) contain something I will be using with my players, and b) are, in my biased opinion, &quot;good&quot; answers. Usually whichever one fit both of those criteria would be the one I accepted, but in this case there's multiple.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I now have no idea how to choose an official answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some unspoken guide on RPGse about picking an answer when there's lots to choose from? Does one generally go with the community and (if it was on my shortlist anyway) select the highest upvoted or is there some other preffered methodology?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Incidentally, this is possibly the best kind of problem to have :D&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-22T14:10:40.110" LastActivityDate="2018-01-22T14:10:40.110" Title="Too many good answers...now what?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7692" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7691" CreationDate="2018-01-11T17:53:02.093" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Usually the accepted answer is to mark “this fixed my problem”. So, try your favourites out in practice, see what you find, and if any one answer is the one you go with that solves it, accept that one. (If any go untried, well, luck of the draw.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your findings are that an answer gets 90% there, but you need to do something extra to make it fully work at solving the problem, I'd suggest accept that one &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; modify it to reflect your findings. (Consider this to be helping others in a similar position. When you revise the answer, it may help to think about it as talking to past-you who still hadn't tried this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find that no one answer does it, or a combination of answers are necessary, I would invite you to post an altogether new answer sharing with us what you did, and accept that. If you utilised other answers' methods in your own answer, you can attribute those linking to the other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-11T18:06:15.233" LastActivityDate="2018-01-11T18:06:15.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7691" CreationDate="2018-01-12T03:24:45.930" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Everything &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7692/23970&quot;&gt;doppelgreener says in their answer&lt;/a&gt; is perfectly correct. Those are all good solutions. Here's one more:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't accept any. If you feel like accepting one of the four would lend too much weight to that one over the other three, just don't do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that case, given that you've indicated four that you'd all give a check-mark to if you could, I &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; suggest that you, as a courtesy, make an edit to include such information at the bottom of your question post. Something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I struggled a bit and just can't accept any one answer: Alpha's, Bravo's, Charlie's, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; Delta's [link each] really are all good and helpful enough that I'd accept any of them if the other three weren't also present. So thank you, Alpha and Bravo and Charlie and Delta, for helping me sort this out. And you, Dear Reader, if you've gotten this far, I'll beg one last favor of you: give a look at all four of those fine answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-01-12T03:24:45.930" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7691" CreationDate="2018-01-12T16:08:57.833" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The correct answer should be the one which solved your problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would recommend to wait with accepting until you tried the proposed methods in the real world. Then accept the answer which proposed the method which was most successful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When that method was mentioned by multiple answers, then it's basically about which of them you considered the best written one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5704" LastEditorUserId="5704" LastEditDate="2018-01-19T15:04:14.227" LastActivityDate="2018-01-19T15:04:14.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7695" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-12T18:59:25.790" Score="11" ViewCount="271" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106977/8610&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; about repeated images in various editions of the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt; has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/113301/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; that's good (and probably right) but that would be vastly improved were it to include the actual illustrations. Usually, I'm a begging-for-forgiveness-is-better-than-asking-for-permission dude, but it's my question not my answer, and I didn't want to suggest to the answer's writer to include the illustrations without making sure first that their inclusion is okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, for the purposes of critique, comparison, or review, is including illustrations in a question or answer acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-01-12T19:57:45.653" LastActivityDate="2018-01-13T23:39:49.907" Title="Illustrations in questions and answers—legit or not?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7695" CreationDate="2018-01-13T23:39:49.907" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, but&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your stipulations as to the use of the material in positing this question essentially leads to you asking if the use of images specifically permitted as Fair Use is permitted by site policy.  It should be, since we already allow the use of copyrighted material under Fair Use in other, non-image, contexts, and (as you have pointed out) other stacks already do this with images, thus indicating that there isn't a stack policy against it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already use copyrighted material via a Fair Use justification when we quote from copyrighted works, especially when those quotes contain stuff beyond game-mechanical information. For example, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/94043/14848&quot;&gt;this answer as to items used by Gord the rogue&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/109988/14848&quot;&gt;my answer to the question about owlbear sounds&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109219/does-an-ooze-gelatinous-cube-float&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; addressing floating gelatinous cubes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The default image-hosting stuff uses Imgur.  Imgur doesn't allow any material except material you can grant Creative Commons licensing to.  So, you can't use Imgur (and thus can't use the normal image hosting methods).  You &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt;, however, link to an externally hosted image file (but not through the imgur hosting method).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-13T23:39:49.907" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7697" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7681" CreationDate="2018-01-15T17:09:32.077" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something like this tag placeholder might work well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;tag which game you're playing, if any (such as: dnd-5e, world-of-darkness), max 5 tags&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This requests  the single most important thing to know: the game they're playing. The format has changed from the original since we're not just suggesting a bundle of random tags, we're suggesting a list from which they might pick just one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this format, two tags should be picked from two different groups:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the first tag is one of [dnd-5e], [pathfinder], [dnd-3.5e]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the second tag is one of [world-of-darkness], [savage-worlds], [fate]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These represent the three most popular game tags &lt;em&gt;inside&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;outside&lt;/em&gt; the D&amp;amp;D family.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This setup conveys how we specifically tag D&amp;amp;D games (two thirds of the time, at least) and it conveys that we service a range of RPGs, both within and outside the D&amp;amp;D family of games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-15T17:59:50.447" LastActivityDate="2018-01-15T17:59:50.447" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7698" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-15T18:07:59.063" Score="6" ViewCount="319" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am a little uncomfortable with some dnd-5e questions. I would guess what I am going to address in this question might be an issue with any other RPG which is still in the process of being updated/improved, but I will restrict myself only to dnd-5e; as it is the most obvious example on the site at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please have a look at the following Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113383/can-a-weapon-be-both-adamantine-and-silvered&quot;&gt;Can a weapon be both adamantine and silvered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is reasonable, but the answer is bothering me. The core point of the answer is that there is no current rule which is inhibiting the silvering process to be applied to adamantine weapons. But there is a difference between saying &quot;no rules forbid this&quot; and &quot;yes it can be done&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I feel part of the reason why we, the answerers, equate the above two statements is the stance of D&amp;amp;D 5e designers themselves. They try to maintain that the rules are all encompassing, in the sense that if something is not expressly forbidden, it should be doable. However, this is such a bold statement to make: a couple of gaming books cannot cover the laws of an entire fantasy multiverse, the answers to some questions are better left to the gamers themselves. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62774/how-far-away-can-you-see-light&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as a 'trivial' example of why we don't expect that the rules are meant to cover everything about the gaming world, such as basic real-world optics.) One must accept that some things are bound to have been missed by the game designers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that it appears that they themselves occasionally reinterpret the rules as they see fit, but strangely there appears to be a culture of encouraging everyone else to follow RAW strictly. (When I say everyone else, it is really the community here at rpg.se, as I do not follow any other forums.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me illustrate my point with two concrete examples: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/629526633683103745&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/629526633683103745&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;See how Mike Mearls himself implies that the auras of multiple paladins do not stack, but how he is &quot;diplomatically&quot; corrected by Jeremy Crawford. It seems obvious to me that the two of them think (or thought) differently on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWOsPhKNyPk#t=27m20s&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWOsPhKNyPk#t=27m20s&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;See how Jeremy Crawford is &quot;retracting&quot; the possibility of true polymorphing creatures to magic items.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if anyone else is bothered by this. I &lt;strong&gt;feel&lt;/strong&gt; that if the answers were given in the style of &quot;nothing RAW bars you from doing that&quot;, the site would become &quot;more neutral&quot;. I just want to know what people (particularly the older residents of the site who might have experienced these sort of things in other games) think. If enough others think similarly, is there anything that can be done to encourage the more neutral style?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="38699" LastEditDate="2018-01-24T08:09:08.730" LastActivityDate="2018-02-06T23:02:37.133" Title="What to do with semi-opinion questions in dnd-5e?" Tags="|discussion|answers|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7698" CreationDate="2018-01-15T20:13:22.697" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a matter of principle — in terms of what the site is for, how it's been designed, and how it works in practice — we cannot legislate how people answer questions. The minimum and only standard that an answer has to meet is that it be on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have different (and complex) standards for questions, but these don't and can't apply to answers. The idea is that if the question is fine then the answers will be too, so we make sure questions are good, and then being on-topic for a good question is all that constrains the answers. This allows more answers to compete more freely for votes, in a marketplace of ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Besides which, due to that aforementioned design, there is &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; effective way to enforce an idea of how answers &quot;should&quot; be written, even if the community decided to try.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is not to say that we can't encourage answers to be done a certain way, but we can't do it &lt;em&gt;legislatively&lt;/em&gt; from meta consensus or moderator fiat. Encouraging answers to be more like what we individually think they should be is the province of voting. We each only have one vote per post, so that influence is limited — but that's by design. Individual opinions aren't what the system cares about, but rather the aggregate of voters' opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to discourage what you think are bad answers, downvote; to encourage answers that are better constructed and considered, upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On the idea of objectivity/neutrality&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no special value to &lt;strong&gt;neutrality&lt;/strong&gt; of answers here. To the contrary, we expect answer-writers to actively argue for why their answer is right. How they do that is the answer-writer's prerogative, and we do no prescribe that they do it in any particular way; we definitely don't require or expect some kind of neutral phrasing or (worse) prescribe neutral content. Answer writers can write the answer they want to write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding &lt;strong&gt;objectivity&lt;/strong&gt;, we don't require that either. We do expect that answers that make statements of fact to support those statements (if those facts need support) with citations or experience (or citations to others' experience). This is a substantial difference from what people mean when they say “objective”. Subjectivity is acceptable here, especially when supported by direct experience that their answer worked. We want answers to contain the judgements of game experts, especially when those judgements are more practically valuable than a commentary-free recitation of what the rules say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What SE requires is that an answer be well-written and supported; SE does not require that answers are neutral or objective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-01-17T20:15:33.113" LastActivityDate="2018-01-17T20:15:33.113" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7700" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-15T23:30:35.253" Score="4" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have recently noticed that, on the mobile version of rpg.stackexchange, all notifications (red or green) redirect to the appropriate mobile page... except for the &quot;question edited&quot; notification (which, when clicked, redirects to the Desktop version, which of course displays in a weird way on mobile).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is it so? Is it a bug or an intended behavior?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36796" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-17T12:05:27.677" LastActivityDate="2018-01-17T12:05:27.677" Title="Why does the &quot;question edited&quot; notification redirect to the Desktop website even when on mobile?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|editing|notifications|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7700" CreationDate="2018-01-16T00:28:01.460" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no mobile version of that page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a lot of site functionality that doesn't have mobile versions. This isn't the most commonly used page, so it's not really a big deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-01-16T04:10:26.833" LastActivityDate="2018-01-16T04:10:26.833" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7669" CreationDate="2018-01-16T03:16:01.773" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Use either for convenience, but prefer the physical book if available at hand&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasoning is that books have a permanence that digital media (in the format of D&amp;amp;DBeyond) lack. Most of the online material for 3rd and 4th edition is either gone, or requires a trip to the Wayback Machine, resulting in many broken or re-directed links. D&amp;amp;DBeyond or other SRD online sources, either WotC's PDF or the numerous hypertext adaptations, are very convenient for citing, since they are always at hand: if you are writing a post, you are at a device that has Internet access, ipso facto. But you may be nowhere near the physical books. For this reason, &lt;em&gt;requiring&lt;/em&gt; book citation is unrealistic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you do have the books at hand, their page numbers are unlikely to change at any point, barring a major re-write. 20 years from now, the books will still exist. D&amp;amp;DBeyond likely will not, or if it does, will be serving 7th or 9th edition. Many people on our site play editions going back to AD&amp;amp;D 1e. We can assume that in 20 years, some people will still be playing 5e. The books will likely be there, albeit banged up, used, or ins some way digitized. I just don't see D&amp;amp;DBeyond having a comparable &quot;shelf life&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28927" LastEditorUserId="28927" LastEditDate="2018-01-16T05:29:22.807" LastActivityDate="2018-01-16T05:29:22.807" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7703" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7698" CreationDate="2018-01-16T23:31:32.700" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;On top of what @SevenSidedDie has said about answering in general, I want to say something about the answer you are speaking about in particular, and similar answers too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is indeed a pretty popular opinion that if rules don't explicitly prohibit you from doing something, you can do it at GM's descretion. If rules give you an option (coating your weapon with silver) and don't restrict it, it is not restricted until your GM says so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are right saying this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;a couple of gaming books cannot cover the laws of an entire fantasy multiverse, the answers to some questions are better left to the gamers themselves&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you ask about the game's rules here on RPG.SE, you get an answer about what the rules say. When you ask if using some option provided by the rules in some way is possible, you get an answer if rules directly prohibit such a usage or not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your GMing style is strict, or if you simply don't like the option being used in such a way, you can still prohibit it on the grounds that it is not explicitely allowed. The rules and the information in them that you find reinterpreted here on RPG.SE is a mere starting point for you to work with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastActivityDate="2018-01-16T23:31:32.700" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7698" CreationDate="2018-01-17T10:34:19.773" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I understand correctly, this is roughly the shape of what you saw: A question was about a grey area in the rules, where the rules &lt;em&gt;appear&lt;/em&gt; to permit a thing, but don't explicitly permit it, but don't explicitly forbid it either. Someone answered &quot;yes you can do the thing&quot;; you think that affirmative confirmation was a bit much and would prefer to say &quot;the RAW doesn't forbid doing the thing&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't &amp;amp; shouldn't really prefer one or the other though. One person's “yes, you can use Jump to jump up and get a rope” is another person's “yes, you can silver an adamantine weapon.” The same thought and logic process goes into both: it seems reasonably within the bounds of what's permitted, you're doing normal unremarkable things, and the rules &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; forbid it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Imagine if you were asked not to say “you can use Jump to jump and grab a rope” but instead “the RAW doesn't say you &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; use Jump to jump up and grab a rope.” You'd be stunned, right? It doesn't need wording like that, does it? Well, it's probably the same thing for the person saying you can silver an adamantine weapon. (D&amp;amp;D has a lot of grey areas, and I hope we agree it would get tiring both to read and write if we presented all our treatment of them as negations of fact, instead of just suggesting you can do it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Statements of “you can do the thing” and “RAW doesn't say you can't do the thing” are both valid and have their place. It's subjective judgement when we should use one or the other. The first is used more when it seems perfectly fine and we have no doubts; the second is used more when it seems like it shouldn't be working that way, or is stretching incredulity, or we're just exploring what the rules say without seriously saying it should work that way, and we usually see an implicit or explicit &lt;em&gt;“but...”&lt;/em&gt; attached to it. Things &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; have doubts about, and which stretch incredulity for you, don't necessarily do the same for the person writing that answer however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote your conscience, and if you think the answer is &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; stretching things then downvote it. If you think you can provide actionable feedback, do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-17T15:05:16.017" LastActivityDate="2018-01-17T15:05:16.017" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7705" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7698" CreationDate="2018-01-17T16:33:02.640" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It's not a matter of either / or&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's both. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But there is a difference between saying &quot;no rules forbid this&quot; and &quot;yes it can be done&quot;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference lies in the attitudes and philosophy of the people playing at the table, and the GM.  It is beyond this game system's intent to micromanage that issue further &lt;em&gt;in this particular system&lt;/em&gt;.  Other game systems may have a codification along the lines of &quot;If it doesn't say you can, then you can't&quot; but the D&amp;amp;D 5e game system does not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is left up to the discretion of the DM and for that matter the whole table's general approach to the game.  Each instance of D&amp;amp;D 5e is somewhat different from each other instance.  That's by design.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, &lt;em&gt;either form of the answer&lt;/em&gt; is appropriate if properly supported by evidence and reasoning.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-01-17T18:08:23.697" LastActivityDate="2018-01-17T18:08:23.697" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7706" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-22T17:17:13.013" Score="2" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113874/polearm-with-reach-but-without-heavy-or-special-property&quot;&gt;Polearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question does not seem answerable objectively in its current form. It seems to have attracted mainly opinion-based answers and may accumulate more if something is not done to clarify and refine the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the OP seems to be asking us to adjudicate a homebrew weapon but without specifically giving us what exact solution / combination of properties they are proposing. So either is is opinion-based or it is a request for us to make something for them, or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I right here, or off-base?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2018-01-22T17:49:55.147" Title="Close or edit &quot;Polearm with Reach, but without Heavy or Special property?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7707" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7706" CreationDate="2018-01-22T17:43:55.327" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question could use an edit for clarity and to better define their goals, but since we're working in a fairly narrow category (weapons and their relative balance) with fairly well defined edges, I don't think it is inherently opinion based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relevant text from the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What I'm looking for must...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...be a &lt;strong&gt;polearm.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...have &lt;strong&gt;Reach.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...not be &lt;strong&gt;Heavy&lt;/strong&gt; or &lt;strong&gt;Special.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is such a weapon necessarily unbalanced?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given this, we have a fairly good framework to work from.. The only thing missing is the damage die, and any other relevant properties.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32508" LastEditorUserId="32508" LastEditDate="2018-01-22T17:49:55.147" LastActivityDate="2018-01-22T17:49:55.147" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7708" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7711" CreationDate="2018-01-22T22:21:38.590" Score="10" ViewCount="334" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103041/does-a-life-cleric-casting-goodberry-at-higher-spell-levels-get-more-potent-berr&quot;&gt;Does a Life Cleric casting Goodberry at higher spell levels get more potent Berries?&lt;/a&gt; should be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a generic concern with the closure in that it does not seem helpful to mark something as a duplicate of multiple completely different answers. Asking the user to search through and then provide the context and logical framework that would allow them to answer their question using multiple answers doesn't seem to follow the SE ethos described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5810/28591&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; meta answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The purpose of the SE format is to answer readers' questions efficiently and easily, without their having to wade through noise to get at the signal; Saying &quot;The answer is somewhere on this other page about a different topic&quot; is not conducive to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see this play out in this specific question which I think bypassed some of the nuance and logic that OP needed and that was lacking from the other two answers. OP clearly was still confused and expressed what seemed to be valid differentiating factors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the fact that a spell does not need a &quot;if cast at a higher level&quot; language to be cast at a higher level is not said in either of the linked duplicates. This clearly that was a big stumbling block for OP and would have been something that would have to be included in an answer to the closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I do not think the linked questions fully and unambiguously answer the original question and that it would be good to open it again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we open this one back up? Or am I completely off base here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-11T12:58:13.530" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T12:58:13.530" Title="Can we reopen this question that is marked as being a duplicate of two completely different answers?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7709" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-23T11:38:22.460" Score="16" ViewCount="594" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113959/can-an-oven-and-melting-be-used-to-further-alter-an-existing-dies-biases-or-bal&quot;&gt;Can an oven and melting be used to further alter an existing die&amp;#39;s biases or balance?&lt;/a&gt; was closed as off topic. Is this area really off topic for our site? If it isn't, can this question be reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it is off topic. Dice are a medium used in pretty much every tabletop role-playing game, which means that things that involve dice at least have some analogous connection to tabletop games, on a fundamental level. Being able to change the primary medium of agency between players and the rules by which they gauge their success could have serious ramifications as to the success or failure of a role playing game in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, As one of the two actors in a role-playing game, the first being the player through their character, the second being the dice which determine whether the actions of the player succeed or fail; Loaded dice have a direct implication on the standards of play and the success of a role-playing game in the long term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question itself was closed because it was perceived as off-topic, but the help center directly states that &quot;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs (including running them online)&quot; and &quot;Matters which are specific to table-top pen and paper RPGs&quot; with specific, identifiable answers are on-topic questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65206/is-the-saltwater-float-represented-in-this-question-a-good-way-to-test-for-loade&quot;&gt;The Saltwater Float&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112091/does-microwaving-a-die-significantly-alter-its-balance&quot;&gt;Does Microwaving a die affect its balance&lt;/a&gt; are questions similar to this question but were not closed. Both deal with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/loaded-dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;loaded-dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;loaded-dice&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cheating&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cheating&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cheating&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt;, and methods that could be used to identify cheaters which could have a negative outcome on a non-electronically hosted role-playing game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the latter of the above two un-closed questions, the primary answer in question goes into depth and even shows instances of dice melted that could be used to identify cheating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since these things all have to do with role playing games, with the direct implication that someone using a pair of dice affected in such a way would be subverting the table and intentionally altering the outcome of rolls to their advantage, we owe it to ourselves to investigate just in case the knowledge becomes useful at some later date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14949" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-23T12:09:56.920" LastActivityDate="2018-01-27T04:10:45.393" Title="Are questions learning about loaded dice and creating and detecting them on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-23T15:30:12.193" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, those are not RPG questions.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the effect of those loaded dice (or learning how to detect them) does apply to RPGs, the posted question and similar ones are more about manipulation of materials and how to recognize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;WHY&lt;/em&gt; you are wanting to learn more about it is relevant, but these are &lt;em&gt;HOW&lt;/em&gt; questions that belong more in materials science or something else that is &lt;strong&gt;directly&lt;/strong&gt; related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-24T14:46:36.477" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7711" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7708" CreationDate="2018-01-23T18:50:13.487" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Should be reopened.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is distinct from the questions currently linked as a duplicate. It was my understanding that the policy here is that the &lt;strong&gt;question&lt;/strong&gt; needs to be identical for it to be a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the answers in the &amp;quot;duplicate&amp;quot; questions do answer this one, the question itself IS different. The other questions do not address the specific question of upcasting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We wouldn't mark this as a duplicate of another &amp;quot;does upcasting X do more if the spell doesn't state that it does&amp;quot;, so we shouldn't mark this as a duplicate just because another answer is relevant to this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T10:28:39.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7712" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-24T00:01:48.293" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;These questions are fine&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dice &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; rpg tools, even if there are other uses for them as well.  Questions about the workings of dice are at least as on-topic as questions about the workings of RPG-assisting software, and we tolerate those even when they don't pertain to a specific game in progress.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt; says, &amp;quot;Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs (including running them online)&amp;quot; is part of our scope.  Questions about them are as much on-topic as questions about &amp;quot;A specific problem with playing or running a table-top RPG&amp;quot;, because these tools are a part of the gestalt idea of RPG expertise that we have.  We allow questions about Scabbard, maptool, etc, and we should certainly continue allowing questions about dice as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-24T03:16:54.400" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-24T00:23:02.653" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;(I'm posting this separately because I don't want to tie votes on topicality (i.e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7712&quot;&gt;my first answer&lt;/a&gt;) to votes on the problems with this question in particular)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Your question is problematic, though&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's two reasons.  The first is that it is rather overbroad, and in particular is poorly written.  The answer to your question is trivially 'yes', but what you really want to know is 'and how' and there's like a bunch of different things you want to know how to do there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other problem is that it reeks of XY problem stuff/lack of research.  Neither microwaving nor cooking is how you make loaded dice.  You're doing this wrong for no discernable reason without any indication that you even understand how to do it right, and that can irritate people who are knowledgeable about the subject you are inquiring about, as well as meaning that we aren't really sure what you want since it's clear you want to do this wrong for some reason but it's not clear why.  This makes your question unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really, though, there's a bigger, albeit unofficial, problem with your question.  You are asking answerers to do a lot of work, but you aren't showing very much work in your question.  I see you've put a 200 rep bounty on the linked answer to the other question, so I don't think you intend to do this, but when you post a question that's asking for some pretty serious stuff to be done, it helps people react a lot better if you demonstrate a general familiarity with the subject matter as well as some specific leads in the question.  Something like &amp;quot;I'm aware that X, but I nonetheless am interested here only in Y, because Z&amp;quot; as well as &amp;quot;so far, I have found &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dURhrY9Z-xg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;example&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://cons.wonderhowto.com/how-to/hack-bake-regular-dice-into-trick-dice-339307/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;example&lt;/a&gt; and... but they don't answer the question for me because Reasons&amp;quot;.  Doing this makes it clear that you are invested in the question and taking it seriously, which makes potential answerers feel better about you and your question, and thus more likely to answer it and treat it well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potential answerers that get upset at your question are &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to just downvote it, but downvoting doesn't feel powerful unless it puts a question to 0 or negative votes.  As a result, people are going to look for any excuse at all to VTC or flag or otherwise shut down questions they don't like, even if the reasons involved wouldn't be considered by them for a question they did like.  Rather than combatting closures in these cases, it's better to avoid the problem entirely by making your question better liked by people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-01-27T04:10:45.393" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-24T01:26:50.683" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://crafts.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://crafts.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; might be a better fit for this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is watched by RPG experts, and &quot;how to properly cheat at dice&quot; is not something that we expect is in their skillset.  It's not something we expect they would enjoy answering.  Some of them might actually be offended by the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The nice folks on crafts, on the other hand, might know a lot about the proper use of tools for softening plastic, the best plastics to use to get mild deformity, et cetera.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; could also work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2018-01-24T01:26:50.683" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-24T02:30:01.080" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, these questions are not on topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While dice are indeed used in RPGs, RPG expertise has nothing to do with answering these questions. While some RPG experts might also have die-making/materials science expertise, that is irrelevant - we have all kinds of other expertise but those domains belong to other places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114004/if-the-saltwater-float-can-with-difficulty-be-used-to-determine-a-dies-balance&quot;&gt;If the saltwater float can (with difficulty) be used to determine a dies balance, would a more dense liquid such as galium be better at doing so?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113959/can-an-oven-and-melting-be-used-to-further-alter-an-existing-dies-biases-or-bal&quot;&gt;Can an oven and melting be used to further alter an existing die&amp;#39;s biases or balance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the reasoning in the answers to these questions leverages RPG expertise in any way.  Therefore, they are off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those previous questions were tolerated as barely on topic.  Now that we're getting a raft of similar questions, it's time to take action. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasoning for this is basic &quot;what belongs on a given SE&quot;.  We already covered this in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic, part two?&lt;/a&gt;.  To cut and paste from that answer,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We are not the first ones going down this path.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Game Development.SE&lt;/a&gt; had this problem a while ago. Game Development is a very wide topic, and as such, ended up with questions on a lot of very different topics: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/animation&quot;&gt;animation&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/art&quot;&gt;art&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/programming&quot;&gt;programming&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/physics&quot;&gt;physics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/networking&quot;&gt;networking&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/html5&quot;&gt;web development&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/math&quot;&gt;mathematics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sound&quot;&gt;sound&lt;/a&gt;, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In summary, their problem was this:&lt;/strong&gt; A whole lot of topics which could be asked elsewhere, and many questions which &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;, but all these topics genuinely relate to Game Development! How do we decide what's on topic and what isn't!?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Our problem is this (seem familiar?):&lt;/strong&gt; Topics like history, geography, boat speeds - many of which can be asked elsewhere, and many questions which &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;, but all these topics genuinely relate to RPGs! How do we decide what's on topic and what isn't!?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Game Development.SE's solution&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest question for them was about which programming questions are off topic and which aren't, and they &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3/programming-questions-here-or-belongs-on-stackoverflow&quot;&gt;discussed that and came to a pretty decent conclusion&lt;/a&gt;. Likewise our main problem areas seem to be history, geography, and other topics which are just asking about the state of the world at a certain point in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can get the best wording by directly quoting &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/faq&quot;&gt;Game Development.SE's FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, where it's specific to programming:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;General programming questions more likely belong on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; instead of here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would a professional game developer give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than other programmers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here. For more discussion on that topic, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3/programming-questions-here-or-belongs-on-stackoverflow&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on our meta site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note: the &quot;this question&quot; link is the discussion I linked at the beginning of this section)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our solution, from learning from Game Development.SE&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions asking about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics might more likely belong on another Stack Exchange site (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;) than here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a directly analogous situation. The question is &quot;about&quot; dice and dice are &quot;used in&quot; RPGs but the question has nothing to do with RPG expertise and a RPG gamer will not give a better answer than a modeler, chemist, et al.  Therefore it isn't on topic for our community, because we rely on applying RPG expertise to problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-01-25T02:57:27.617" LastActivityDate="2018-01-25T02:57:27.617" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7716" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-24T02:46:52.120" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;They are if you are dealing with the RPG issue involved: cheating.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you have an X-Y problem going on here.  The problem with loaded, or badly balanced,  dice is that they can (but not necessarily in the latter case) lead to some non-trivially bad at-the-table experience if someone is not relying on RNG but is instead using a loaded or badly balanced dice on purpose to achieve something at the table.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That has at-the-table ramifications that can get ugly.  I have seen this IRL, and I threw a guy off of my table for it.  There were RL issues that followed and a friendship more or less destroyed.  (Mid 80's).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The science is interesting, sure, but for RPG purposes, the &lt;em&gt;Problem To Solve&lt;/em&gt; is either cheating, or one player always getting that high roll when everyone else gets the broader distribution.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd suggest that you re-frame the question along those lines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-01-25T18:07:26.993" LastActivityDate="2018-01-25T18:07:26.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7718" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7719" CreationDate="2018-01-24T14:25:49.233" Score="13" ViewCount="193" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if this is too specific a question for meta, but I figured if it happened to me and I was confused it may be helpful to others to understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yesterday, I flagged a bunch of comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103041/does-a-life-cleric-casting-goodberry-at-higher-spell-levels-get-more-potent-berr&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; for not being needed anymore since they were all talking about past edits and debating whether it was a duplicate or not (it was reopened after a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7708/can-we-reopen-this-question-that-is-marked-as-being-a-duplicate-of-two-completel&quot;&gt;meta post&lt;/a&gt; came to the conclusion it was not a duplicate yesterday).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today it looks like all my flags were declined, but the comments themselves have been removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OjZzS.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OjZzS.gif&quot; alt=&quot;declined comments&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can anybody explain why that might have happened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was there a reason for the declines or was this all related to some sort of mod system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And why were all the comments deleted despite the declined flags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-01-24T14:37:45.017" LastActivityDate="2018-01-24T14:47:27.180" Title="Why were comment flags declined but comments deleted?" Tags="|discussion|comments|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7718" CreationDate="2018-01-24T14:43:33.757" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;That was me. Sorry about the mix-up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I received your flags I looked over the situation. I thought it was still a developing situation, which means the comments would need to stay. I dismissed the flags. (The only option we get for comment flags is to delete the comments or dismiss the flag — there is no “mark helpful but do nothing”.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... Then I looked over it again and realised, whoops, the situation had been sorta settled. I'd be inclined to let comments stay for longer in case the situation develops further but in this case anything really important to the situation is occurring over in meta. So after declining the flags I removed the comments anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yeah, knowing what I know now, I would've just deleted them, which would validate all your flags as helpful. Having them dismissed shouldn't have major ramifications for you. If there are ramifications  then please let us know and I'll see what I can do for you to clean up a mess I created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's a comment chain like this, it's often helpful for me to do something like flag the last comment that needs deleting and use a custom reason to say &quot;these changes were all made and the question is reopened, please remove these comments up to here.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-24T14:47:27.180" LastActivityDate="2018-01-24T14:47:27.180" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7709" CreationDate="2018-01-25T06:43:34.443" Score="22" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It depends on whether it's about RPGs or not&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions here must be about RPGs. That's the site topic, and it's a hard requirement for questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That goes especially — not less — for questions about things that can be about RPGs or not about RPGs, depending on the context of the problem behind the question. Things like dice are RPG tools, but not &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; dice are RPG tools, nor are all questions about dice RPG questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time, if there's no reason to doubt a question's topicality, it will do fine on the site. It's mostly an honour system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when a question about one of these “RPG adjacent” topics demonstrates that its problem is nothing about RPGs and is just posted here because… we're usually helpful? It gets shut down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It gets shut down even more firmly if there's some sense that it's trying to get past our topic requirements by rules-lawyering our own rules or something. That's just taking advantage of our benefit of the doubt. I don't think you're doing that! But I've seen it attempted before, and the community didn't react kindly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Learning about / making loaded dice &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt; is not an RPG topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's what happened with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113959/can-an-oven-and-melting-be-used-to-further-alter-an-existing-dies-biases-or-bal&quot;&gt;oven-dice question&lt;/a&gt; and with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114004/if-the-saltwater-float-can-with-difficulty-be-used-to-determine-a-dies-balance&quot;&gt;gallium float question&lt;/a&gt;. They showed a distinct and noticeable lack of RPG context, and were shut down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are shoehorning themselves into our topic without actually having any RPG content to their problem. You've said right here that your goal is to learn more about loaded dice and how to make them. There's no gaming group, larger goal, campaign, GMing technique, cheating player, etc. involved in these questions. They're just looking to learn more about loaded dice — a subject that's its own topic that exists independently of RPGs, and that separateness isn't being mitigated in the questions by any clear-and-present connection to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrast this with the two questions that they were inspired by (they're &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the same):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65206/is-the-saltwater-float-represented-in-this-question-a-good-way-to-test-for-loade&quot;&gt;Is the Saltwater Float represented in this question a good way to test for loaded dice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a question asking if a dice-testing method that's been talked about in the RPG community is actually practically useful for RPG players to test their RPG dice with. That's automatically miles more RPG content than the gallium float question, which has no background in RPG discussion and no apparent practical application to RPGs specifically — it is, as you say, just motivated by a desire to learn more about testing dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Worse, it requires expertise that cannot be expected to be inherent to RPG experience. While saltwater floats, by virtue of the method being discussed within the broader RPG community means that it's obvious that RPG community members will have practical experience with it, a gallium (or other float) has no precedent in the RPG community, and therefore there's no reason to believe that RPG experience would be relevant to being able to answer the question. (In fact, it turned out that material science is what was needed to answer that question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if it luckily turns out that some user here &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; answer an non-RPG question based on their non-RPG expertise, that's insufficient — we also need to expect that our community of voters are sufficiently expert in the answer to &lt;strong&gt;vote knowledgeably&lt;/strong&gt; on the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112091/does-microwaving-a-die-significantly-alter-its-balance&quot;&gt;Does microwaving a die significantly alter its balance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one has slightly less obvious RPG context, but it gets that benefit of the doubt mentioned at the beginning of this post. It cites a “a rumor online a long time ago” — readers will presume that, since the question is being brought here, that rumour was in the context of RPGs or within the RPG community, and therefore RPGers are particularly likely to have been exposed to the rumour and need it examined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's more borderline than the original saltwater float question, because it's only a very thin and implied connection to RPGs, but it was lucky and didn't get looked at too hard at the time. (Ironically, all these questions are under the microscope now because of the attention brought to them.) As a sense of how borderline it is, we have one mod who's inclined to close it; one who's inclined to reopen it; and another who's right on the fence and wouldn't object to it being open, but also wouldn't object to it being closed. It's very borderline. But as long as it flew under the radar, it didn't get looked at too closely and it wasn't important to get it “right”.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the questions that these are being modelled on are inherently different: while the earlier questions were rooted in RPG-related discussions out there in the RPG-playing community, which gave them RPG-related context enough to have demonstrable or presumed RPG topicality, these new questions aren't rooted that way. They're just derived from the other questions themselves, just hypothetical and untested idea extensions, with no origin in actual ideas rooted in the wider RPG community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We've been here many times before&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This debate on where to draw the line isn't new. The flawed idea that if one question about a thing isn't off topic then &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; questions about that thing must be on topic isn't new, but is still no less flawed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We used to allow campaign research questions, until we realised that allowing them turned the site into “Everything Stack Exchange”, which was untenable (and at the time, if left uncorrected, could have resulted in the site being terminated). So we stopped allowing campaign research questions unless it was about a particular RPG setting. We brought it back into the basic site scope of “RPGs”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For another example, we field a lot of questions about interpersonal conflicts and group dynamics. Tonnes of them. We consider those questions on topic. But that doesn't meant that suddenly every possible question about interpersonal conflict is on topic, not by a long shot! These questions are only on topic because they're about group dynamics that RPG playing groups run into and need to solve in order to play RPGs effectively. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3365&quot;&gt;As a former moderator put it so well&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Yes, depending on what you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you want a question situated in &quot;how did you get your groups to choose a leader?&quot; than RPG Experts can answer that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you want a question situated in &quot;how does the cognitive theory of nudging provide a way to hint towards a group leader&quot; welllll... We're probably not the best bet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, it's about how you frame your question. We certainly have questions about RPG groups and the problems they face, but they exist within our jargon and our sphere of expertise without any sort of well-controlled trials or studies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone comes to us and asks something about group dynamics that requires deeper psychological expertise than what can be expected of RPGers' just learning things for practical game-playing purposes, then it's going to be off topic. And it will still be off topic if the asker insists that it must be allowed because we allowed other questions about how people behave in groups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone comes to us and asks a group dynamics question that has zero RPG content, then it's definitely off topic, and pointing at our existing on-topic group dynamics questions is a non-starter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As another mod put it in response to that post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;if it's a general human interaction question no, if it's specific to RPG scope yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Non-RPG topics are only on topic here if they have RPG aspects inherent to the question/problem. General questions/problems about non-RPG topics don't make the cut.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Our topic page clarifies our scope, it doesn't expand it past “RPGs”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible to read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our topic page&lt;/a&gt; as saying that things like dice are on topic &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt;, so that anything about dice is on topic. It even says “In general, if you have a question which covers: […] Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;“Dice are tools used in RPGs,”&lt;/em&gt; someone might think, &lt;em&gt;“so any question about dice is on topic. It says so.”&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's one way to read the topic page, but it won't help avoid having questions closed. It's not the reading the help pages were written under.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ages ago, we were tasked with defining what a Q&amp;amp;A site “about RPGs” meant for what questions we would answer. As part of that we asked ourselves &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/544/what-kind-of-questions-can-i-ask-here&quot;&gt;What kind of questions can I ask here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that conversation, we explored the boundaries of “RPGs”, as a topic, for our purposes, to clarify what that topic covered. In doing so, we looked for what it already covered, and the plain reading of our site topic — RPGs — continues to be the guiding light for what is on topic. We've since had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/on-topic&quot;&gt;many other conversations&lt;/a&gt; refining our understanding of “what is RPGs”, but none have expanded our site scope beyond what Stack Exchange gave us this site to cover: roleplaying games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what we &lt;em&gt;didn't&lt;/em&gt; do was decide that our site would be about RPGs &lt;strong&gt;plus&lt;/strong&gt; things that overlapped with and went beyond the edge of “RPGs”. When our help pages list off things that can be asked about, those aren't there to &lt;em&gt;expand&lt;/em&gt; our site's topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put visually, our site's topic &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5LxVG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5LxVG.png&quot; alt=&quot;A bubble diagram with RPGs in the middle and the seven other topics mentioned in our help page as separate bubbles overlapping and expanding beyond the middle RPG bubble&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather, that list in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our help page&lt;/a&gt; exists to reassure people that all things &lt;em&gt;inside&lt;/em&gt; the RPG topic are on-topic, even if it's not RPG rules — yes, even their niche RPG interest that maybe they've been told elsewhere isn't “real” roleplaying. People regularly mistake RPG.se for being only about rules questions, or only about tabletop RPGs, or only about D&amp;amp;D, or only about face-to-face games, etc., etc. We've had conversations where we needed to explain that, yes really, LARPs count, and so does RPG-assisting software, and yes, non-rules RPG campaign setting questions are on topic and don't need to be migrated to &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy&lt;/a&gt;. (Those are all assumptions about the site I've seen semi-regular users state, and have had to personally intervene to prevent them from chasing off a new asker!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site's topic looks like &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhI79.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uhI79.png&quot; alt=&quot;a bubble diagram: just one bubble labelled “RPGs”, with the sub-topics from the site help page scattered within its boundary&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our topic page exists to &lt;strong&gt;affirm the scope of RPGs&lt;/strong&gt; for those who fear our topic is &lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt; special-purpse and narrow and doubt whether their RPG question fits here. It's not to expand our site's scope beyond the boundaries of RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Site scope must exist, and be enforced&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, we have to have scope boundaries. We play games of imagination that model all of reality and some parts of unreality though — &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt; is potentially related to RPGs. We must draw some lines that allow us to curate questions and not turn RPG.se into a mushy pile of questions about everything anyone can think of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't be Everything Stack Exchange. We are mandated to be RPG Stack Exchange, and to draw lines. Sometimes that means a well-meaning question just isn't enough about RPGs and will get closed, even if there are other similar questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every question is different in myriad subtle ways, so every question is judged on its own merits. There's no riding the coattails of other questions to get the “on topic” blessing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-01-25T18:14:21.807" LastActivityDate="2018-01-25T18:14:21.807" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7721" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-29T04:18:42.887" Score="10" ViewCount="369" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's almost February in 2018, which isn't supposed to be the proper time to cycle these, but for this year it'll be once again, so we'll be refreshing the &lt;strong&gt;Community Promotion Ads&lt;/strong&gt; for this year now!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/7721&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-29T18:35:55.087" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T02:54:24.823" Title="Community Promotion Ads - 2018" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2019-02-07T13:27:56.980" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7722" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-29T04:18:42.887" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QvIdY.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1036" LastActivityDate="2018-01-29T04:18:42.887" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-29T09:10:20.303" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ftzzy.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-01-29T09:10:20.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-30T01:01:56.513" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/suFRL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 Virtual Tabletops&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T01:01:56.513" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7726" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-30T01:03:24.230" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.mipui.net/app&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fxCox.png&quot; alt=&quot;Mipui - a free collaborative map editor&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="36595" LastEditDate="2018-01-31T01:33:31.563" LastActivityDate="2018-01-31T01:33:31.563" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2018-01-30T13:14:09.047" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-30T01:04:47.197" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Taf3D.png&quot; alt=&quot;EN World RPG News &amp;amp; Reviews&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T01:04:47.197" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-30T13:59:53.997" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://literature.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lqqtH.png&quot; alt=&quot;Visit Literature Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33315" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T13:59:53.997" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-30T14:02:50.723" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.StackExchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kTGgQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Visit Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy Stack Exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33315" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T14:02:50.723" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7730" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-30T16:29:15.337" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really want to find a nice, high-quality map of Faerun for D&amp;amp;D. I've found plenty of copies, snips and scaled-down versions but they're all horribly blurry up close and make reading any of the names an entertaining but useless guessing game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is whether a high-quality, full-size map is available for download or purchase online somewhere (buying a physical copy is an unideal but legitimate option), but I think that counts as a shopping question, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="33531" LastEditDate="2018-01-30T16:42:49.953" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T17:44:42.980" Title="Is this a shopping question?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7730" CreationDate="2018-01-30T17:01:00.617" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7413/8610&quot;&gt;shopping question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such a question would likely be closed as an inexact duplicate of this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112127/8610&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;. While the new question would have slightly different guidelines and requirements, those who respond can't currently and legally produce (or &lt;em&gt;re&lt;/em&gt;produce) what the question asks for, but only explain &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; what's asked for can be acquired. This makes such questions out of scope for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest asking for information in chat or on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/8610&quot;&gt;forum&lt;/a&gt; where discussions can be held instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2018-01-30T17:44:42.980" LastActivityDate="2018-01-30T17:44:42.980" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-01-30T22:13:34.333" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Surprisingly, this post of mine is a generator of both metaphorical - and literal - cheese!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114163/can-you-milk-an-ivory-goat&quot;&gt;Can you milk an Ivory Goat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure if entirely relevant here (although the possibility of generating food at a steady rate without expending spell slots is certainly cheesy), but you know... goat cheese and stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36796" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-08T06:09:19.697" LastActivityDate="2019-10-08T06:09:19.697" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7733" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-01-31T01:49:59.287" Score="10" ViewCount="271" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to ask a question about how well the 5e Unearthed Arcana rules regarding mass combat actually work in practice. The answer that I'm looking for would describe how playing with the UA mass combat rules fit a certain set of criteria (speed, player engagement, etc.), and would draw from personal experience using those rules. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this question be on topic? I feel like it would be similar to questions regarding variant rules (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108177/can-i-let-a-single-pc-use-the-spell-points-variant-rule-without-unbalance&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72559/how-do-you-handle-until-next-turn-effects-with-the-speed-factor-initiative-var&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;) and to questions asking whether specific homebrews are balanced (of which there are many). However, I could see it being marked as opinion-based or as a survey question, so I wanted to pre-emptively ask about its topicality here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-04T08:11:54.017" LastActivityDate="2020-01-04T08:11:54.017" Title="Is asking about whether Unearthed Arcana rules work on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-01-31T02:17:18.387" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvLbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool Virtual Tabletop&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2018-01-31T02:17:18.387" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7733" CreationDate="2018-01-31T10:09:48.557" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would venture yes, probably. I think this is new ground on our site (or relatively unexplored ground) and we'd need to experiment and find out what works. If they're not workable we'll find out by trying first like usual. If they're workable only in certain ways, we'll better know from having tried.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Critically: you should definitely specify what you want it to work &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt;. A theoretical rule of “any character who attacks and misses is instantly obliterated by a divine lightning bolt” could be said to &lt;em&gt;“work”&lt;/em&gt;, but for what I have no idea (really short and/or peaceful campaigns?). The thing you bring up around mentioning criteria is useful, though criteria like “player engagement” aren't since player engagement isn't a well defined subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This strikes me as having some parallels with homebrew balance evaluation, where the “is it balanced &lt;em&gt;for this purpose&lt;/em&gt;” is important.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd suggest saying something like this: “I want to do (specific thing, describe your plans) with my game/character/etc. Unearthed Arcana Rule XYZ purports to do this but does it work well for this purpose? How did it work out when you tried it?” Don't ask us about metrics — we work best when dealing with an actual real scenario you're facing, so describe that scenario to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-01-31T18:32:08.057" LastActivityDate="2018-01-31T18:32:08.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7733" CreationDate="2018-02-01T16:51:59.347" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Establish criteria for experience based answers with playtest rules&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question specifies asking for an experience based answer, that should tighten the scope to ensure that only answers that meet GS/BS guidelines are in the queue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A good answer will ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;say this  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;address that  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;be based on having tried these rules in play at least 1/2/x times ...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something like that should keep the &quot;does this work&quot; type questions within bounds. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-01T17:21:27.890" LastActivityDate="2018-02-01T17:21:27.890" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7737" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7738" CreationDate="2018-02-01T17:38:47.000" Score="6" ViewCount="204" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114642/is-a-firbolgs-hidden-step-intended-to-deactivate-due-to-spells-such-as-booming&quot;&gt;Is a firbolg&amp;#39;s Hidden Step intended to deactivate due to spells such as Booming Blade?&lt;/a&gt; has a specific stipulation from the asker that the accepted answer must have a supporting tweet from a developer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114642/is-a-firbolgs-hidden-step-intended-to-deactivate-due-to-spells-such-as-booming#comment278700_114646&quot;&gt;a comment on one of the answers&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Either way, both of us can only speculate what the designer's exact intent with the feature was, &lt;strong&gt;so unless you or someone else can provide a clear statement from any of the designers (doesn't have to be Jeremy Crawford), I won't mark any answer as accepted&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This further confuses the issue by stating that a non-official twitter response from someone other than Jeremy Crawford is considered an official and valid response for the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer requires this type of response and the developers have not yet written anything like that, is it a valid question or should the asker simply try to get an answer themselves through Twitter directly with the Developer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, it becomes the responsibility of the answerer to try and generate that Developer Twitter response which seems to invalidate the question as stack-answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T22:14:52.910" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T22:14:52.910" Title="Are rules questions that require a developer (official OR non-official) response ONLY valid for our stack?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|designer-reasons|citations|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7737" CreationDate="2018-02-01T19:04:21.853" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's OK for a question to be unanswerable at the time it is posted as long as it meets all of the general requirements the site has for question quality. This happens most often for questions with the [designer-reasons] tag, which is generally included when a question asks why a system does things in a particular way. The only people who can answer these questions are those that designed it. There are a million reasons why a question might be difficult to answer though, and the querent is perfectly entitled to specify in their question the types of evidence they want their answers to be based on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand why the need for a potential answerer to go away and get evidence would make this type of question invalid. In general, evidence for answers can and does come from all sorts of different sources, and this is just a type of question that requires a particular type of source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As to whether the fact that the querent could do the research themselves, getting a tweet or whatever, isn't that the case for a lot of the questions on the site? Even if they could do the research themselves, that doesn't invalidate the question they are asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-02-01T19:12:26.490" LastActivityDate="2018-02-01T19:12:26.490" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7739" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7737" CreationDate="2018-02-01T20:51:59.920" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I believe the answer is yes.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I do not personally like the particular questioning of the RAW in combination with requiring a developer citation, it is a valid line if inquiry.  The highest voted response is informative, and clarifying errata may arise in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, digging through archived and cached copies of Crawford, Mearls, or Gygax could potentially turn up a suitable answer.  Tweeting at the developers is not the only way to answer questions of this nature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="38434" LastEditDate="2018-02-01T20:53:23.987" LastActivityDate="2018-02-01T20:53:23.987" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7737" CreationDate="2018-02-01T21:19:25.447" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more general question, about whether we allow asking about developer statements which may or may not exist, appears to be &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;. That's based on precedents and on it not transgressing any rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's also fine to leave it as “yes” after meta discussion, since I don't believe it causes any structural problems that the site isn't equipped for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why: these can often be “long tail” questions, which SE handles well&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that point: one of the ways that the site handles questions gracefully is allowing questions to be “forever” both forwards and backwards, and the site rules are built to accommodate that. In the usual case, this manifests in our understanding that there are no questions “too old” to submit new answers to: questions are always open for new answers if they are still on-topic. Even if it's not obvious how new answers could be useful, people are allowed to make the attempt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rarer case is the “long tail” question, of which this might be one. “Long tail” questions are those that we &lt;em&gt;don't know&lt;/em&gt; whether they have an answer. Whether they do or not can only be discovered by leaving them open forever, so that in the long, shrinking tail of their diminishing views accumulation, the right someone might discover it and have the answer it's been waiting for. There may never be an answer, or it might be answered soon (just, maybe, not as soon as the average we're used to). Either way, we allow and accept that answers may stay unanswered for a potentially long time, so that we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; eventually collect the answer, if it has one, and add it to our hoard of curated solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I think that feature answers how we should handle questions about the existence of developer-statement that may or may not have ever (or be ever) made by the developers: leave them open, protect them from (off topic) speculative answers that add noise to the page and remove the question from the Unanswered Questions list, so as to leave it dangling out there until it catches the eye of exactly the one expert who can help, if they do or will exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, this requires a certain degree of patience among the community that we're sometimes unused to, especially in a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; where we're used to questions getting answers super quick.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-02-01T21:19:25.447" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-02-02T11:33:45.490" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wfNRw.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;herokuapp.com&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2023-01-06T02:54:24.823" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T02:54:24.823" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7742" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-03T03:31:32.383" Score="6" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question is being handled on mainsite instead:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114911/is-dd-beyond-an-official-rules-source&quot;&gt;Is D&amp;amp;D Beyond an official rules source?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following some discussion (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/42675104#42675104&quot;&gt;in chat, starting here&lt;/a&gt;) it was decided this question basically came in two parts: whether D&amp;amp;D Beyond was official, and whether we should handle it as such. The first half is better suited to main site and will be investigated there where more eyes will find it. If the policy position we ought to take from the answers is unclear, we can resume policy discussion here in a new meta question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is being closed to keep the discussion in one place. This closure should not be taken as reflective of the policy nature of this question being off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/114753/28591&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; answer (comments now deleted) implied that DnDB is not considered an official rules source. Is that correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it considered official in the same way as the published PHB, DMG, etc? If not, why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is not considered official, why do we allow its use for citations per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7669/stance-on-using-dd-beyond-for-references&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; meta post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since D&amp;amp;D Beyond hosts multiple types of content answers should be clear what they are referring to and if there is any difference in official status between them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Source books (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/phb&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;PHB&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/dmg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DMG&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/mm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;MM&lt;/a&gt;, etc.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Basic Rules&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unearthed Arcana (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/wizard#ArcaneTraditions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;School of Invention Wizard&lt;/a&gt; eg)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3rd Party (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/blood-hunter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Blood Hunter&lt;/a&gt; eg)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Homebrew (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/homebrew/feats&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;feats&lt;/a&gt; eg)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-02-05T23:59:48.250" Title="Is D&amp;D Beyond an official rules source?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2018-02-06T00:00:11.110" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7743" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7742" CreationDate="2018-02-03T06:05:56.870" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe it should be treated as an official source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, WOTC considers D&amp;amp;D Beyond to be an official digital toolset for the game (though it's worth reiterating that it isn't made by WOTC directly, but licensed through them):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/ddbeyond&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This morning, Curse launched D&amp;amp;D Beyond—an official digital toolset for Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons fifth edition.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, the books on D&amp;amp;D Beyond are considered to be 'digital sourcebooks', which, on their own site, are defined &lt;a href=&quot;https://dndbeyond.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012441707-What-is-a-digital-sourcebook-&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;thusly&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A digital sourcebook is a completely digital version of one of the published books, such as the Player's Handbook or adventures like Curse of Strahd. You will get the book re-created in digital format, as well as unlock all of that book's content for use throughout the toolset - both for current tools and anything on the roadmap (such as encounter building/ combat tracking, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As they are considered a 'completely digital version of one of the published books', I'd say they're as official-source-worthy as said books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, BadEye (Adam Bradford, D&amp;amp;D Beyond product lead at Curse) also &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/news-announcements/5335-release-date-august-15th-pricing-details-announced?comment=1120&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;calls D&amp;amp;DB an official source&lt;/a&gt;, mentioning that their site is meant to be kept up to date with the rules as new changes come in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Errata will be incorporated as it comes in. As an official source, it's important that we always stay current.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, due to the above, I feel D&amp;amp;D Beyond's version of the content should be considered as official as the books themselves. If there's a discrepancy between their content and the most recent errata/printed version of a book, then the book wins, sure, but I don't think the potential for that kind of mismatch/data entry/out of date error would make the rules from the site overall considered 'unofficial'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: The above only applies to content on D&amp;amp;DB from the official sourcebooks. D&amp;amp;DB also hosts usermade homebrew and unofficial sources such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/blood-hunter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Blood Hunter class from Critical Role/Matthew Mercer&lt;/a&gt;- these are usually kept separate in the site's navigation. The SRD &amp;amp; Basic Rules are &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;also hosted there&lt;/a&gt; in a combined section, but even the WOTC-hosted PDF/printed versions of the SRD &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/949111823990534144&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;is considered unofficial&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sword of sharpness deals an extra 14 slashing damage when you roll a 20 on its attack roll. The SRD incorrectly says otherwise. Note that the SRD is not an official rules source for D&amp;amp;D. #DnD&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@JeremyECrawford, 9:54 PM - 4 Jan 2018&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(On the topic of &amp;quot;what's considered an official sourcebook?&amp;quot;, @nitsua60's longstanding question/answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84836/where-do-i-find-the-official-rules-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Where do I find the “official” rules for D&amp;amp;D 5e?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; is worth a read as well.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15614" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-02-05T16:49:08.700" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7745" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-06T21:56:06.490" Score="5" ViewCount="308" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is the name of the question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114878/23970&quot;&gt;How do I have my PCs fight one another in an arena setting but then allow them to group up for the last encounter in the arena? [on hold]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have added extra information but I do not see where this is alleviating the hold. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42198" OwnerDisplayName="Mark" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-02-06T22:08:33.227" LastActivityDate="2018-02-06T22:29:38.193" Title="How do I have this taken off hold?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7745" CreationDate="2018-02-06T22:29:38.193" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm one of the people that voted to close your question. @GreySage's comment on your question pretty much nails it, but I will elaborate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I think your question is awfully close to being off-topic for the site: it strikes me as an idea generation and discussion question (&quot;Help me come up with ideas to do X&quot;). To me, it seems like you're asking us to help plan your session in general. Stackexchange is better at addressing specific questions, and this one is pretty open-ended. We can tell you &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to plan your session, but we can't do it for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to re-open your question, you need to present &lt;em&gt;less,&lt;/em&gt; not more. The tooltip says, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please clarify your &lt;strong&gt;specific problem&lt;/strong&gt; or add additional details to highlight &lt;strong&gt;exactly what you need&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that there are a lot of different questions inside your text. Here are a few: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I have PCs fight each other?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I have the PCs lose against a hydra but not die?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I make a 4-on-2 arena battle?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I prevent a split session after a PVP fight?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each one of these is more than enough to be a separate question on its own. I suspect that some of these are answered on this site somewhere, as well. You need to pick one of these questions and focus on it, rather than asking about how to do everything all at once. If you do need answers for all of those things, you can ask multiple questions, for which there is no penalty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastActivityDate="2018-02-06T22:29:38.193" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7698" CreationDate="2018-02-06T23:02:37.133" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But there is a difference between saying &quot;no rules forbid this&quot; and &quot;yes it can be done&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that equating or not equating these two phrases is a personal judgement. The fact that your personal judgement came down on the other side from the poster(s) personal judgement doesn't invalidate the answer. It just invalidates it for you and those who agree with your judgement, those who agree with the poster(s)' judgement will have no problem with the answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2018-02-06T23:02:37.133" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7748" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7749" CreationDate="2018-02-08T17:15:28.973" Score="10" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/72881/discussion-on-answer-by-korvinstarmast-does-a-multiclassed-spell-slot-higher-tha&quot;&gt;a discussion on an answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/949111823990534144&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Jeremy Crawford has said:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The sword of sharpness deals an extra 14 slashing damage when you roll a 20 on its attack roll. The SRD incorrectly says otherwise. Note that the SRD is not an official rules source for D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Agree with the man or not, we have to deal with the things he says.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this mean that the SRD is unsuitable for citing in answers? Or is it fine to keep doing so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any potential downside to allowing an &quot;unofficial&quot; source to be cited?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only real concern (besides the few known and existing discrepancies) is if this being considered &quot;unofficial&quot; means that they do not keep it up to date with errata gives a greater potential for confusion in answers. But of course this is a hypothetical based on an assumption.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record, I (clearly mistakenly) actually thought it was already policy that SRD not be used to cite things. For example discussion here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114752/language-discrepancy-between-srd-and-phb&quot;&gt;Language discrepancy between SRD and PHB&lt;/a&gt; and I think other places led me to believe this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't care one way or another but thought a clear answer would be helpful since there is some confusion about the matter (and not just limited to me either).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-02-08T22:12:21.460" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T10:34:09.907" Title="Is it fine to cite the SRD in answers even if WotC does not consider it an official rules source?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7749" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7748" CreationDate="2018-02-08T17:48:39.640" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes it is fine to cite the D&amp;amp;D 5e SRD; some caveats may be needed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the most part, the rules texts match.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue is that in some cases, the SRD rules don't perfectly align with the rule books, but in other cases the official errata got folded into the SRD before the rules errata are published. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A classic case was the rules text for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59857/22566&quot;&gt;Polymorph Self spell; the&#xA;  permanent language&lt;/a&gt; in the 1st printing that I still have was in&#xA;  conflict with &quot;until dispelled&quot; that first cropped up in the SRD, and&#xA;  then we later found that the SRD version was right ... since the later&#xA;  PHB errata and later printings have that rules text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In those cases where the rules don't match each other, it is worth noting the discrepancies as being useful to both questioners and answerers.  Then let the table decide with full information, and let the votes fall where they may.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Best practice recommendation:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When citing the rules text, make sure to cite where you are getting it from.  If there's a conflict between sources (which is rare but not that rare) anyone noticing that can comment and the answer or question revised as needed, or down voted as needed.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tweets get cited with some frequency: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8787/how-should-we-handle-answers-that-use-jeremy-crawfords-now-unofficial-tweets&quot;&gt;see this meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have no prohibition on citing dev tweets, which are also an unofficial rules source beyond sometimes clarifying intent.  When a tweet becomes a part of the Sage Advice Compendium, and posted at WoTC's site, it gets closer to &quot;official rulings&quot; or intent; caveat is that a given tweet may not meet that standard.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-09-06T10:34:09.907" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T10:34:09.907" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7750" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-08T21:05:29.027" Score="4" ViewCount="32" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/email/settings/current&quot;&gt;Edit Email Settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, the save button has illegibly colored text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/E02ph.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/E02ph.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I deleted my email from this field just for the screenshot. It looked like that even when I had one entered.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same happens on the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/email/newsletters/current&quot;&gt;Newsletters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; settings page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SS6TM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SS6TM.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Buttons should look like this instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yMc9F.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yMc9F.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-02-08T21:15:46.890" Title="Buttons in the email settings pages look wrong" Tags="|bug|design|css|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7751" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10000" CreationDate="2018-02-09T15:24:33.913" Score="8" ViewCount="133" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's what happens in a bulleted list that also has subbullets when a bullet's text continues &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; a subbullet:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. [&lt;em&gt;Yuck!&lt;/em&gt; This is the problem!]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For readability and standardization, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carriage_return&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;carriage return&lt;/a&gt;, empty line, or whatever you want to call it should be between the text of the subbullet and the continuation of the text of the main bullet (that is, between the paragraph beginning &lt;em&gt;Ut enim&lt;/em&gt; and the paragraph beginning &lt;em&gt;Duis aute&lt;/em&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, this is no emergency, arises rarely enough that it's possible I'm the only one who's noticed, and may never concern &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;, but I've &lt;em&gt;restructured answers&lt;/em&gt; so as to avoid having that continuing bulleted text flush with subbulleted text, so I figured I should bring it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-09T18:07:27.240" LastActivityDate="2020-06-18T14:59:26.860" Title="Really specific formatting issue with bulleted lists" Tags="|bug|formatting|css|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7751" CreationDate="2018-02-09T18:07:22.583" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This issue doesn't occur on the mobile version of the site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/azlPe.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/azlPe.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I suggest the SE devs grab whatever they're doing there and do the same on the desktop site. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-02-09T18:07:22.583" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7753" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-09T19:57:47.620" Score="22" ViewCount="552" Body="&lt;p&gt;So this has come up a few times now, with different systems. Most recently the main issue has been with Dungeon World questions. We've had a rash of these, with answers from people that know nothing about the system who answer in a general, vague way. I generally supported the deletion of these answers, as the system is so far removed from Dungeons and Dragons that it made the answers useless at best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, today we had an Eclipse Phase question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115133/how-do-i-make-my-hacking-narration-more-interesting&quot;&gt;How do I make my hacking narration more interesting?&lt;/a&gt; A couple of answers were given that displayed no system-specific knowledge, and moderators deleted them. This one has made me feel a little less certain that we should be relying so much on deletion where perhaps we should allow voting to do its job. The question is fundamentally asking about how to narrate something as a GM and keep it interesting. I get that &lt;strong&gt;good&lt;/strong&gt; answers will draw in Eclipse Phase specific expertise, but I am really unsure that a system-agnostic answer is so bad that it justifies being deleted as opposed to down-voting. In my view moderators deleting an answer should be a last resort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So where do we draw the line here? It feels like the policy is slowly becoming stricter and more commonly used, and I'm not sure that's warranted or a good thing. What does the community think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-02-09T21:05:41.453" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T15:20:40.607" Title="Are we comfortable with our current position on deleting general answers to system specific questions?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|game-systems|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7754" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7753" CreationDate="2018-02-10T02:25:09.540" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Honestly, it depends on the question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it comes to questions about mechanics specific to a particular game system, then I agree that deletion of the answers regarding a different system is appropriate. There is no way to meaningfully answer a mechanics question without knowledge of those mechanics, and thus no way for an answer about a different system to be helpful or relevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, the same cannot be said when the question is fundamentally about something which can be applied across systems. In the example provided, the question isn't actually about how to narrate hacking, its about how to narrate a task that should be tense/exciting, but doesn't feel that way due to the mechanical abstractions. For these types of questions, it seems possible that expertise in the system is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; required in order to provide a helpful answer, and as such the answers should be allowed to stand and be judged by the community. The asker is of course well within their rights to downvote an answer outside of the desired system or to upvote/accept an answer that deals with the desired system. As the asker, that is their right. But to remove answers someone else may find useful because of system restrictions seems like it would be counter-productive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tldr: If the question is mechanics focused or otherwise requires system knowledge to answer, delete. Otherwise let the community decide.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37082" LastActivityDate="2018-02-10T02:25:09.540" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7753" CreationDate="2018-02-10T02:34:44.770" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that such answers should be deleted, because they don't answer the question as posed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, what is the criteria for deletion? From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that&quot;&gt;meta.stackexchange&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For answers, any post that is not an answer (should be a comment, doesn't answer the question, etc.) should be deleted. Answers that are wrong or that dispense poor advice should be downvoted, not deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what is &quot;the question&quot;? The question comprises both the question text and the tags used. For example, &quot;What's the maximum AC?&quot; is a very different question depending on whether the question is tagged for D&amp;amp;D 3.5 or for 5e. Likewise, the question &quot;How do I make my hacking narration more interesting?&quot; is actually, &quot;How do I make my hacking narration more interesting in Eclipse-Phase?&quot;. If the question asker wanted a system-agnostic question, they could have tagged it that way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, system-agnostic answers do not answer system-specific questions. If an answerer is not familiar with the system, they will likely be missing important context or information in their answer. Of course, sometimes the best answers are &lt;em&gt;somewhat&lt;/em&gt; system agnostic, but even then, useful answers usually draw from some system-specific expertise. Critically, people who don't know the system &lt;em&gt;don't know&lt;/em&gt; what they're getting wrong in their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, I think that it's better to err on the side of being strict. Sure, an uninformed answer might happen to address the question, but then we run the risk of becoming like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109306/why-does-dandwiki-have-a-poor-reputation/110244#110244&quot;&gt;DanDwiki&lt;/a&gt; for less-popular systems. This risk is especially perilous for smaller RPGs, because drive-by voting might result in inflated scores for answers that are not actually suited to the system. On the other hand, we don't have much to gain from letting these answers stay, given that they would be downvoted if they weren't deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-10T19:51:21.540" LastActivityDate="2018-02-10T19:51:21.540" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7756" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-11T23:29:38.600" Score="3" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115246/what-happens-if-you-cast-counterspell-on-a-creature-that-is-not-casting-a-spell&quot;&gt;What happens if you cast Counterspell on a creature that is not casting a spell?&lt;/a&gt; is a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96327/what-happens-when-a-caster-targets-an-object-that-looks-like-a-creature-with-a-s&quot;&gt;What happens when a caster targets an object that looks like a creature with a spell that targets only creatures?&lt;/a&gt;. In fact, besides the fact that they both deal with targeting, the question is not at all the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that we only mark as duplicate when the questions are the same, and not because the answers could overlap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-12T00:13:50.813" LastActivityDate="2018-02-12T00:13:50.813" Title="Can we Reopen &quot;What happens if you cast Counterspell on a creature that is not casting a spell?&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7756" CreationDate="2018-02-11T23:47:52.423" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;They're completely different questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're correct in your understanding. We close questions as duplicates only when they're genuinely the same question and the answers in the target obviously answer the supposed duplicate. (Usually those are one and the same.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not the case here. It looks like these questions could possibly touch on the same concepts, if I'm reading correctly, but that doesn't make for a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-02-11T23:47:52.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7758" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7759" CreationDate="2018-02-12T15:22:41.313" Score="4" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115306/does-supernatural-fury-replace-the-rage-feature-entirely&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, and the use of the DMs guild tag it made me wonder if the DMsGuild tag is an equivalent to Homebrew or if it should get both tags (one to identify it from DMsGuild and the other to let everyone know this still qualifies as Homebrew.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that the DMs Guild creates a platform for people to publish and monetize their homebrew. It is not vetted, balanced, or managed (other than as a place to sell) by Wizards. The difference between Homebrew and DMs Guild seems to only be that it is sold by Wizards - but is that enough to make it official?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-02-12T15:48:23.507" LastActivityDate="2018-02-12T16:24:28.147" Title="Is the DMsGuild considered Homebrew and if so, should we always use the homebrew tag in parallel?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7758" CreationDate="2018-02-12T15:42:37.520" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Homebrew is not an appropriate tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the tag wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Homebrew, so called by analogy to home-brewing beer, is the creation of new game material by fans (&lt;strong&gt;not the publisher or licensed third party publishers&lt;/strong&gt;) for an existing game system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; seems to be to indicate that the poster is looking to modify the game in some way and requires some assistance from us to do so. It is NOT intended to be a flag that simply points out that some material in the question is 3rd party or unofficial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The distinction in the tag wiki makes it  clear that it the tag is only for content that is not published. Regardless of how you want to define published, we must keep in mind the whole reason we tag something in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; as a &quot;3rd party content&quot; tag goes against the purpose of tagging&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. &lt;strong&gt;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions&lt;/strong&gt; they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to the help center on tags, tags are supposed to deal with the content of the question only to connect question askers to question answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are not intended to be signposts warning people about certain aspects of the question that aren't directly related to the question itself. For example, having a tag saying &quot;this is third party content&quot; doesn't actually help to characterize the question or to help potential answerers find and answer it. That kind of distinction needs to be in the question itself not in a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, we used to have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt; tag, but it was removed for some of the reasons I have just discussed. See here for more: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7169/should-we-get-rid-of-3pp&quot;&gt;Should we get rid of [3pp]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end, I wonder even about the usefulness of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dms-guild&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dms-guild&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dms-guild&lt;/a&gt; in this post. According to it's tag wiki it should be used only for questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the DM's Guild not material &lt;em&gt;from&lt;/em&gt; the DM's Guild. Using it in this way makes it a meta tag which is not acceptable use according to our guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-12T16:24:28.147" LastActivityDate="2018-02-12T16:24:28.147" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7758" CreationDate="2018-02-12T15:44:01.730" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dmsguild.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DMs Guild&lt;/a&gt; doesn't look like homebrew to me: it's a shop of published products selling for real money. At that point you're graduating from “homebrew” to “third party publishing”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DMs Guild is a third-party publishing retail outlet. Its material is third-party published material, and the material's author is a third-party publisher and/or independent author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew is stuff like people posting fun junk they came up with for free on a wiki or sharing it around on the internet. Once you've got a PDF you're selling, it's definitely no longer &lt;em&gt;that.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-12T15:45:53.837" LastActivityDate="2018-02-12T15:45:53.837" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7762" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7763" CreationDate="2018-02-12T19:24:47.890" Score="6" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;Assume a question has four answers. One has 0 upvotes, the other three all have 1. Is there any logic to which will show at the top of the page if you refresh?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From testing it looks like the 0 will always be at the bottom, but the 1's change in order. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assume there's some kind of logic here but I'm really curious what it is. My best guess is they rotate to give equal &quot;above the fold&quot; page time, but I welcome more educated answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-12T19:31:09.173" LastActivityDate="2018-02-19T10:04:59.987" Title="What logic dictates the order answers show up in?" Tags="|support|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7763" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7762" CreationDate="2018-02-12T20:02:40.090" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;By default, answers are sorted in vote order, with tied answers being sorted randomly each time the page is loaded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can change the sort order using the &quot;order by&quot; control on any page. You can sort by votes (the default), age, or latest activity. (As an active editor I long ago changed my sort order to latest activity; I find this still most useful as a mod.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception is that accepted answers are pinned to the top regardless of their vote score or the sort method chosen. (Unless it's an accepted self-answer — in that case they aren't pinned and are sorted as if they didn't have the acceptance checkmark.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-13T01:12:11.157" LastActivityDate="2018-02-13T01:12:11.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7765" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-15T12:02:40.677" Score="3" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently asked my first question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115485/should-players-know-each-others-secret-backstories&quot;&gt;Should players know each others&amp;#39; secret backstories?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;It was put on hold as being primarily opinion based. I do understand that there might be no absolute answer to this. Still, I'm hoping for expert opinion that is helpful in forming a decision in such a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What information (about my players, about my world, the campaign, our agreed-upon meta rules, etc.) do I have to add to the question in order to make it less opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24343" LastActivityDate="2018-02-15T12:35:54.490" Title="What can I do to get my secret backstories question reopened?" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7765" CreationDate="2018-02-15T12:35:54.490" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;In cases like this sometimes a simple rewording is effective.  “Should I” is asking for opinions and will draw unhelpful yes or no answers.  “What are the pros and cons of”, on the other hand, draws expertise and gives you the information you need to draw your own conclusions.  Your question is good and pro/conny on the whole, but the “should I” is a magnet for drive-by opinion boyz.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-02-15T12:35:54.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7767" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7768" CreationDate="2018-02-17T20:22:18.900" Score="-4" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m trying to improve my question asking abilities, but I can’t do it if I can’t ask questions, could someone please reopen my question asking privileges please?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30985" LastActivityDate="2018-02-17T20:49:10.043" Title="Could you please reopen my question asking privileges please?" Tags="|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7768" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7767" CreationDate="2018-02-17T20:30:41.270" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We &lt;strong&gt;cannot&lt;/strong&gt;. Moderators are not given the power to lift an automatic question ban — as explained in the mod message we sent you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/86997&quot;&gt;What can I do when getting &amp;quot;We are no longer accepting questions/answers from this account&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-17T20:49:10.043" LastActivityDate="2018-02-17T20:49:10.043" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7770" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7771" CreationDate="2018-02-20T18:56:17.970" Score="18" ViewCount="311" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know there's a pretty strict policy on swear words on this site. I just wrote an answer referencing an article by The Angry Gm, the title of which is &lt;a href=&quot;http://theangrygm.com/how-to-build-awesome-encounters/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;How to Build F$&amp;amp;%ing Awesome Encounters!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I cited it pretty much exactly like that ^ in my answer. Is it okay to use a swear word like that given that it's the title of the article? I can edit it out if the consensus is that I shouldn't name it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-20T23:00:27.583" LastActivityDate="2018-02-20T23:00:27.583" Title="Can I use a bleeped-out-swear if that's the name of the article I'm referencing?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7770" CreationDate="2018-02-20T19:54:39.460" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, perfectly fine.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3573/is-profanity-allowed-on-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Is profanity allowed on RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt; for our guidance - you can actually use swear words if they're in the original, but it certainly doesn't hurt anything to 'bleep' them and that's appreciated. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-02-20T19:54:39.460" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7772" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-21T02:37:37.123" Score="1" ViewCount="244" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not find this to be helpful at all, and it is the direct result of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7560/22566&quot;&gt;Bad Policy&lt;/a&gt; having bad side effects. &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/115899/22566&quot;&gt;Here is the commment chain.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I've edited out &quot;frame challenge&quot; because &lt;strong&gt;policy&lt;/strong&gt; is not to signal&#xA;  that since it is too jargony. – Rubiksmoose 5 hours ago    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Rubiksmoose - Good to know. In general should I still be indicating&#xA;  that I'm breaking away from the premise, or are we just dropping that&#xA;  habit altogether? – Alex 5 hours ago    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Excellent question, I think&#xA;  that the best &lt;strong&gt;policy&lt;/strong&gt; is just to signal it with more colloquial&#xA;  language, but signalling itself still is good. (That is just my&#xA;  impression so I could be wrong) – Rubiksmoose 5 hours ago  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the real world, in real life, and in real work places, when you make bad 'policy' you open the door for petty bureaucrats and poor mid-level managers to use it as a hammer for no good reason, because it happens to be there lying around.   I think most of us have run into this at least once in our real lives.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is the dynamic that is going on here with the ill-advised &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7560/22566&quot;&gt;initiative&lt;/a&gt;&quot; to try to ban the perfectly useful term, frame challenge, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;which has in fact a meta to define it&lt;/a&gt;.  In this case, a sincere and helpful user is falling into the trap that mid-level managers and bureaucrats fall into time and again with &quot;it's that rules ... really&quot; when in fact is was bad policy to begin with.  It can happen to any of us, and IMO this user was set up by &lt;strong&gt;Bad Policy&lt;/strong&gt; to be moved to make this comment.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no value added in exchanges like this.  Can we please not villify the use of the term frame challenge?  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7576/22566&quot;&gt;I objected to the policy then&lt;/a&gt;, and I am objecting to it again.  The term is useful, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6843/22566&quot;&gt;and we have a meta that explains what it is&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-02-21T03:01:24.267" LastActivityDate="2018-02-21T14:01:51.693" Title="Can we please correct the &quot;bad words&quot; mistake in policy?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7773" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7772" CreationDate="2018-02-21T02:54:21.017" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is not policy to avoid the term &quot;frame challenge&quot; on mainsite. At most it's a mild recommendation to avoid it for the sake of quality, since it's jargon opaque to the reader, and a crutch for the writer that helps them avoid remembering to make their full case for challenging the/an assumption of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd be the first to recommend avoiding the term in a mainsite answer, but also the first to remind that avoidance is not policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also agree that we generally don't need yet more rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it's human to err, we'll always have instances of misinterpretations, especially among newer users. Giving guidance and mentorship is part of the role more longer-term users can serve on the site. Especially with newer users who are engaged with meta discussions enough that they &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; err on advice or policy details, it's good to recognise that the impulse behind it is wanting to help. If we can offer correction while encouraging that impulse, that's ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't anything we can really do to ensure perfect understanding across the whole userbase, so that community effort to guide each other is the most effective real solution to misunderstandings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can also amend meta posts when there are misunderstandings. I think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7561&quot;&gt;my answer about avoiding using “frame challenge” on mainsite&lt;/a&gt; was clear enough on being a recommendation, but evidence to the contrary, so I'm going to amend it to say explicitly that the answer isn't anywhere saying that a ban is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-21T03:50:00.770" LastActivityDate="2018-02-21T03:50:00.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7772" CreationDate="2018-02-21T05:00:37.883" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think that nothing needs to be changed from the way it is concerning the treatment of &amp;quot;frame challenge&amp;quot; terminology.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie's post correctly explains that the post in question does not say, nor is there any site policy that says that &amp;quot;frame challenge&amp;quot; is not allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, obviously I made a mistake in making the edit and in how I interpreted and instructed others in the issue. I don't feel like anybody is blaming me or anything but I wanted to briefly address how that mistake happened and why that leads me to think that nothing needs to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwQW3KW3DCc&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;I've made a huge mistake&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was told at some point by another user not to use the term (I honestly don't remember when, where, or in what way it was phrased) and linked to the meta, which I did indeed read. However, I filed that away mistakenly in my brain as &amp;quot;site policy says this is bad&amp;quot; without actually questioning whether that was, in fact, true (even after reading the meta article several times after). I'll chalk it up to reading it with preconceived notions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been learning a lot about the way the site functions the last 3 months that I've been active and, in an effort to help, have started to try to help and to educate newer users to learn the things that I have learned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I obviously overstepped what I actually knew and ended up being called out and corrected by more experienced members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Educating new users&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see that as a mistake or a problem with the meta post talking about &amp;quot;frame challenge&amp;quot; terminology or the mods or site policy or anything/anybody else. In fact, I see this as a case where the site is operating correctly. I did something that was incorrect, and more experienced members called me out and helped me understand my mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure there is any way the site could have preempted my error because it was a case of preconceived notions on my part; I did not know what I did not know. It takes an instance of actually making a mistake and getting corrected to learn it correctly. And so I have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the same way, I learned how to correctly format headers by having mods correct my first several answers. I'm still learning and observing how duplicate questions are handled from more experienced people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I think things are fine just the way they are. Or, at least, I cannot think of any way in which they could be improved at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-02-21T14:01:51.693" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7775" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-23T17:40:29.573" Score="9" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a new tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-delta-green&lt;/a&gt;. Since what's &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; is relative to &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt; and now keeps changing, that's obviously not a good long-term tag. I'm having a hard time deciding on a replacement though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the situation is that the &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; Delta Green is a full-fledge roleplaying game. The &lt;em&gt;old&lt;/em&gt; Delta Green is a line of setting supplements for &lt;em&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In considering the different ways we disambiguate tags, none of them strike me as sufficiently self-explanatory and “good tagging practice” to be obviously the way to go, leaving me unwilling to just mod-change them unilaterally. The ways I thought of are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-setting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-setting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-setting&lt;/a&gt; (changing both). This would give primacy to the RPG itself, but these wouldn't get used right: [dg] would keep getting used for both, and [dg-setting] would &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; get used for both.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-2016&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-2016&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-2016&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green&lt;/a&gt; (leaving old alone). Old one would get used for the RPG too. It also implies that there was a pre-2016 RPG, so it would be a confusing pair.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-rpg&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-coc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-coc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-coc&lt;/a&gt;* (changing both). This is clear enough and they likely wouldn't get used wrong, but it's not called “Delta Green RPG” so that rubs me the wrong way. But maybe it's the best of the lot?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(* Notably, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; fits in our tag limit. It might be worth considering instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-coc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-coc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-coc&lt;/a&gt;, but it looks to me like the &lt;em&gt;CoC&lt;/em&gt; part might overwhelm the &lt;em&gt;DG&lt;/em&gt; part. On the other hand, perhaps it should — to emphasise that old DG is a sub-topic of CoC, we might consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&lt;/a&gt;?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we tag &lt;em&gt;Delta Green&lt;/em&gt; the RPG and Delta Green the &lt;em&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/em&gt; setting supplement line?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-23T18:16:28.043" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T20:03:30.693" Title="Crowdsourcing how to tag old and new Delta Green questions" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7775" CreationDate="2018-02-23T17:57:26.830" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-rpg&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-coc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-coc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-coc&lt;/a&gt; (changing both) Looks the best to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This clearly disambiguates the 2 products. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It forces tag users to pick one or the other, there is no default &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green&lt;/a&gt; to mistakenly choose.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Which tag to use on a given question will be obvious (the acronym and the tag description make it clear)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think that both tags will be findable by someone searching for them, ie., someone googling &quot;Delta Green Call of Cthulhu&quot; will find and recognize &quot;delta-green-coc&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2018-02-23T17:57:26.830" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7753" CreationDate="2018-02-25T14:04:29.323" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Do not mod-delete content posted in good faith&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my personal opinion, nobody writing an answer here in good faith trying to help another community member should ever have their post deleted by a single person that thinks the contents of the post is not good enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think SE makes it pretty clear in multiple places that that is a general guideline.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main argument for using moderator tools to delete answers based on content seems to be that an answer that is too generic and broad is &amp;quot;Not an answer&amp;quot; and as such can be deleted just as the other NAA flags if valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But simply put, that is wrong. To quote from the policy (emphasis taken from the source):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Any post that attempts to answer the question—however badly—is still an answer!&lt;/strong&gt; Do not use the &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; flag for wrong answers. Moderators do not judge the technical correctness of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can downvote such answers as a signal that they are bad answers and not useful, but they are still answers, so you should not flag them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/265552/when-to-flag-an-answer-as-not-an-answer&quot;&gt;Source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or to quote a different source on the same topic, when &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to use the NAA flag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer makes an attempt to answer the question, even if it is wrong or inaccurate or you disagree with it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185073/how-do-i-properly-use-the-not-an-answer-flag&quot;&gt;Source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The question was raised that if it's not NAA, would it count as a VLQ?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, there is already SE consensus on this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The VLQ flag should be used for unrecognizable gibberish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts that should be flagged as VLQ don't make any sense as a question or answer: it is not salvageable through editing. Every post that is human readable (it might still need extensive editing) can't be flagged as VLQ. It can be flagged as spam, abusive / offensive, not an answer, etc, if that does apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't use the VLQ flag for questions or answers that are not well-researched, unclear, or just plain wrong. A downvote and/or close vote in the case of a question will do then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/291598/how-should-the-very-low-quality-flag-be-used&quot;&gt;Source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or a higher voted quote from a Tim Post, a Community Manager:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is wrong, but the author seems to have read and understood the question, use your down vote. Moderators judge the quality of posts, not the accuracy. Well, we do judge accuracy when we're knowledgeable, but we do that with our votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/111108/what-kind-of-answer-should-be-flagged-as-very-low-quality-but-not-flagged-as&quot;&gt;Source&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the examples given in the question here, would be neither NAA nor VLQ. They are readable answers of individuals that have read and understood the question and answered it in good faith. They might be &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, but that is no reason to get deleted by a mod.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do we keep those answers around forever? No:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Use Stack Exchange the way it's meant to be used&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is not useful because it's not specific enough, that's the stereotypical &amp;quot;not useful&amp;quot;. In other words, &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; is what downvotes are for. After three people downvoted, people holding the required privilege can even vote to delete. &lt;em&gt;That&lt;/em&gt; is the way a post that is not good enough vanishes: through 3 (more likely 5+) members of the community casting their votes. Content is removed when the subject matter experts deem it &amp;quot;not useful&amp;quot;, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; when a moderator thinks is not good enough. (Not saying moderators cannot be subject matter experts at the same time, but they should not use their mod tools for something they aren't meant for. They can use the same process of downvoting we all use.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;On a personal note: for some people coming from forums, the quality of posts is what makes SE unique and they want that enforced at all costs. I'm also coming from forums, but obviously different one's. For me, a moderator ruling supreme over content is the one thing I want to escape from in forums. This site has the ability to actually have the community judge content. That's a privilege we should not give away lightly to let the moderators take care of that for us just because we are too lazy. Freedom is something we have to use or it get's lost. We have the tools to handle this. It's not a moderators job. It's &lt;strong&gt;our&lt;/strong&gt; job.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-02-26T19:14:40.210" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7778" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-25T22:38:01.030" Score="17" ViewCount="211" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just burninated &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/multiple-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;multiple-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;multiple-systems&lt;/a&gt;. I'm leaving this post for record-keeping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It had the following tag wiki excerpt (and no full tag wiki):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions that involve multiple rules systems at once, or interactions between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was on these questions, almost all of which now have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conversion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conversion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conversion&lt;/a&gt; tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11552/how-can-i-stat-up-a-troll-in-5-different-systems&quot;&gt;How can I stat up a troll in 5 different systems?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113371/applying-paranoia-techniques-to-dd-5e&quot;&gt;Applying Paranoia techniques to D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112562/travel-between-dd-editions-or-gaming-systems&quot;&gt;Travel between D&amp;amp;D editions or gaming systems&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108507/hit-points-replacements&quot;&gt;Hit Points replacements&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14605/running-a-dungeoncrawl-with-several-game-systems-at-once&quot;&gt;Running a dungeoncrawl with several game systems at once&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19506/what-system-produces-characters-that-are-easiest-to-convert-to-another-system&quot;&gt;What system produces characters that are easiest to convert to another system?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compared to other game/edition-bridging tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conversion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conversion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conversion&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt; which say &lt;em&gt;in what way&lt;/em&gt; the multiple systems relate, this tag didn't say anything other than &amp;ldquo;there is more than one system here&amp;rdquo; ... but we'd already be able to tell that from seeing those game systems' tags &lt;em&gt;right beside this one&lt;/em&gt;. Ironically its presence using up 1 of the 5 allowed tags would also only make fitting those other game systems' tags in more difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is also woefully underused compared to our body of questions &lt;em&gt;actually about&lt;/em&gt; multiple systems. Evidently it did not catch on as useful to tag questions about multiple systems with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/multiple-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;multiple-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;multiple-systems&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only legitimate usage of this tag left looked like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14605/1204&quot;&gt;Running a dungeoncrawl with several game systems at once&lt;/a&gt;, but I didn't feel that merited hosting a tag that was otherwise flawed &amp;amp; underused for its explicit purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-24T20:23:40.800" LastActivityDate="2018-03-24T20:23:40.800" Title="The [multiple-systems] tag has been burninated" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7753" CreationDate="2018-02-26T11:36:03.643" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to offer my perspective on what went on there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time I removed answers, that question had two low-quality answers that don't meet our citation requirements. One was from a user saying “I've never played this game but try this, I'm sure it will work”; the other was from a more established high-rep user posting another answer &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; without backing it up as remotely workable. (If a thing in a game is fundamentally boring, colourful narration usually doesn't make it interesting &amp;mdash; it makes it boring &lt;em&gt;and a drag.&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That high-rep user should know better. High-rep users set an example for other users to follow (whether they want to or not) and this was setting the example: “yes, it's fine, come post your arbitrary untested zero-expertise answers.” The longer those posts sat there, the more likely we were to get other answers exactly as inappropriate and low-quality as these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were two outcomes here: the posts get downvoted and/or removed, correctly signalling their inappropriateness. Or, the posts get upvoted, which is not only damaging to our site's viability as a useful resource, it's damaging and misleading to people facing this issue in Eclipse Phase. This second route is bad for everybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I chose to fast forward down the first route and remove those posts early to reduce the chance of attracting more crap. I also posted a warning comment on the question specifically to avoid getting more crap. One of the answers didn't include explicit statements they'd never played eclipse phase &amp;mdash; I left them an offer to revise their post and flag for undeletion, an offer they haven't taken up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our site needs to remain one for expert guidance.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This meta discussion is pretty healthy to have. The actions I took were examples of cleanup activities the moderators have been doing just because it's the kind of thing RPG.SE diamond moderators do &amp;mdash; it just sort of worked out that way in the site's early years. Revising whether and how we want to keep going with that is pretty good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am open to moderators continuing along our current practices, or leaving things to the community to downvote and sort out. Either one can work well and I have faith in the community's ability to overall sort things out effectively and make good decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However: we &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to remain a community that curates &lt;em&gt;expert guidance.&lt;/em&gt; That means, at its simplest, advice and solutions from someone who has any clue at all what they're talking about. When someone is suggesting a homebrew solution, or custom subjective solution, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective&lt;/a&gt; suggests they should mention their experience with how that solution actually worked out in practice. This isn't a burdensome request: it takes a sentence or two to mention it worked effectively and did so-or-so thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who play Fate or Dungeon World or other non-D&amp;amp;D games might emphathise with me when I say: seeing zero-expertise attempts at solutions from people who haven't even played our games sucks. Normally they come in the form of a D&amp;amp;D player assuming our game has zero difference from their game so whatever works there will work here. (Not always D&amp;amp;D players, but usually. Non-D&amp;amp;D players seem to generally get that other games have huge divides and expertise isn't necessarily transferrable.) Normally, those solutions are completely wrong. Such a post amounts to crap and clutter, if it isn't actively annoying that someone can conclude they can guide us on our game's function without even so much as cracking open one of its books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're a useful site because &lt;strong&gt;we specifically curate expert guidance&lt;/strong&gt;. If we just accumulate crap and don't filter it effectively, we're not much different from Yahoo! Answers or forums. We have a quality bar and it doesn't take very much to meet it &amp;mdash; it just takes actually having a clue, and sticking to answering where you have a clue. Curating this means the community &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt; to downvote, and push for substantiation, where none is provided and someone seems to be just shooting a crap guess from their chair.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116065/&quot;&gt;Players skipping side quests just to have a laugh at the DM&lt;/a&gt; was sitting with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/116168/1204&quot;&gt;an answer whose author said they'd never even played an RPG before&lt;/a&gt; at +3/-3 yesterday. That was worrying to me. It is a relief to see it at +3/&lt;strong&gt;-5&lt;/strong&gt; today. RPG expertise is kind of important here... because an RPG player would hopefully spot that the answer is predicated on “prepare material for both choices!” when in an RPG players can make up their own third or fourth choices and engage with neither prepared choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wanted to ask this person to back their answer up... but they admitted they couldn't, and I didn't have the heart to call them out on it. I want to go to that question, request everyone provide any subjective substantiation at all for their solutions (when those solutions are subjective), and clean up the ones that don't &amp;mdash; this meta's giving me pause because I want to see how the community can work out situations like this without moderator intervention. So far it seems to be working out OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been meaning for a few months to create a meta question asking what our post substantiation requirements are, or what the subjective substantiation requirements are at the very least, so that our community can collaboratively express &amp;amp; establish our standards together to then point people to when substantiation is needed. Currently they're just expressed in the super-generic &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; post (which talks more about questions than answers) and in super-specific contexts &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/1204&quot;&gt;like this one about homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. I'll take a look at asking that later this week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Side thought: on the importance of downvoted posts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So a couple of things occur to me around the voting dynamic on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, content that is &lt;em&gt;present&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;strongly downvoted&lt;/em&gt; is instructive to users. It sets an example and warns people not to do the same thing. It's kind of like that &lt;em&gt;Pirates Ye Be Warned&lt;/em&gt; sign that Captain Jack Sparrow sees at the start of &lt;em&gt;Pirates of the Caribbean&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vxGyG.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vxGyG.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;The corpse of a pirate hanging from a noose, long since delayed. Beside him hangs a sign: &amp;quot;pirates ye be warned.&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;“Don't do this thing.”&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators erring on removing inappropriate content removes the examples of badness users should be avoiding. (Users are free to take down their own low-quality content, but moderators don't necessarily need to do it for them. This is something &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7777/1204&quot;&gt;nvoigt is getting at&lt;/a&gt; in their own post.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This requires judicious downvoting though. If moderators are removing a lot of stuff, it could mean the examples of “don't do this” go away and users don't get trained on what they shouldn't do as much. It might also lead voting users to give things too much of the benefit of the doubt, since anything left behind can't be too bad right, the terrible stuff is already deleted right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd definitely encourage users to downvote to set examples of the content they do not want on the site (such as unsubstantiated or crap posts that don't appear to convey any game expertise at all) and we'll see how we can work with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-02-27T15:20:40.607" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T15:20:40.607" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7775" CreationDate="2018-02-27T03:33:14.707" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-rpg&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu-delta-green&lt;/a&gt; leaves the least scope for confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-02-27T04:14:34.700" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T04:14:34.700" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7753" CreationDate="2018-02-27T14:38:31.347" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Focusing on experiences where I was the person asking the question,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Inapplicable answers force more work on the question-writer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My experience has been that when I ask a question and get an inapplicable answer, the story doesn't end there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have to go over and explain why the answer is inapplicable. If I don't, &lt;em&gt;my question will tend to accrue more inapplicable answers.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, this process is annoying but salutary, because it causes you to go back and clarify something in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other times, it feels like a colossal waste of time because you're just having to write personalized notes to the tune of &quot;I'm not playing The World's Most Popular RPG right now, not every game is exactly like The World's Most Popular RPG&quot; over and over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, if you don't take the time to do it — or maybe if you do, because not everyone answering reads every answer &lt;em&gt;and comment&lt;/em&gt; before composing their own… more answers you can't use will come along, inspired by the first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the extent that some system-tagged questions have kinda &quot;system-agnostic&quot; answers, it's not hard to communicate you're paying attention, I think. If you're borrowing from another system or genre, it only takes a sentence to explain why it's relevant. (And I think you'd need that sentence even without the threat of deletion looming over you: it's important information on its own because it signposts where to go to get more ideas like this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also not hard to at least get a vague impression about whether your experience is relevant by researching a game you haven't played before answering questions about it, in my experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it's frustrating to have your answer axed, but I honestly don't see a lot of it happening &lt;em&gt;just because.&lt;/em&gt; The answers I see getting deleted are the answers that would actually force me to do more work, as described above, if I were the question-writer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T14:38:31.347" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7775" CreationDate="2018-02-27T18:53:23.063" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the principle of not having a generic &quot;delta green&quot; tag left to be confusing and ambiguous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we go with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-rpg&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-rpg&lt;/a&gt; is the same as what you brought up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;delta-green-for-call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt; is better by a hair than the other options for this edition, I think. It comes in at 31 characters (just within our 35 character limit) and clearly establishes the relationship. It also puts &quot;delta green&quot; first, which is the product people are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T18:53:23.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7783" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-02-27T19:48:19.700" Score="2" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question in question is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116345/14848&quot;&gt;To what extent are half-breeds treated as humans?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with KRyan that the older question(s), while duplicate, is/are not written or supported nearly as well as the new one.  I know that sometimes when that happens we dupe the other way with answer migration.  Is this a good use-case for that?  Can we do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, can we move things around to close &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104286/do-the-elf-blood-racial-trait-allow-you-to-fulfil-being-an-elf-prerequisites&quot;&gt;Do the Elf Blood racial trait allow you to fulfil &amp;quot;being an elf&amp;quot; prerequisites?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102003/can-a-half-elf-take-human-traits&quot;&gt;Can a half-elf take human traits?&lt;/a&gt; as duplicates of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116345/14848&quot;&gt;To what extent are half-breeds treated as humans?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2018-02-27T19:55:55.670" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T20:00:41.300" Title="Can we dupe this question about Pathfinder half-humans the other way?" Tags="|discussion|support|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7784" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7783" CreationDate="2018-02-27T20:00:41.300" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm reopening it with no further closures yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't close as dupe of a question with no answers, and this question doesn't appear to be the same as the others so it looks reasonable to reopen it and do nothing further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's going to be a good canonical question on this subject worth pointing to as a dupe target, I'd like to see it gather answers that show we should do that with it.  Consider this reopen a chance for it to prove itself before we re-assess what ought to be closed as a duplicate of what (if anything).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T20:00:41.300" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7775" CreationDate="2018-02-27T20:03:30.693" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the community actually uses 'new delta green' to refer to the new system, then that's not actually a problem in naming.  Consider 'world of darkness' which has two major editions, the newer of which is actually referred to as NWOD/&quot;New World of Darkness&quot; by the community.  It's true the name will be a bit humorous once a new line is released (if ever), but that doesn't make the term ambiguous or unclear. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: Modernist Philosophy &amp;amp; (separately) Art, Pre-History, New Age, New York, New School Hip Hop, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the community and author does seem to use 'delta green rpg' rather than 'new delta green', at least as far as I can tell.  Nonetheless, the problem with the tag is that it doesn't accurately reflect what people will search when looking for questions about that topic rather than that it calls itself 'new' and can't be new forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T20:03:30.693" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7721" CreationDate="2018-02-27T22:47:02.087" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bOhAm.png&quot; alt=&quot;Visit Writing Q&amp;amp;A&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user19667" LastActivityDate="2018-02-27T22:47:02.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7787" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-01T04:37:14.993" Score="6" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2481/8610&quot;&gt;2010 question&lt;/a&gt; and this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50893/8610&quot;&gt;2014 question&lt;/a&gt; are identical. Both have a significant number of upvotes and well-received answers. Should the 2014 question be marked as a duplicate of the 2010 question &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt; in 2018?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-15T06:24:06.787" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T06:24:06.787" Title="Should an old duplicate of an even older question be newly marked as such?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7787" CreationDate="2018-03-01T04:48:57.243" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;One should &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; be closed as a duplicate of the other, and then the duplicate's answers merged with the canonical question. Which one is mostly a matter of which question is better posed. (A impending merge means which answers are better becomes academic.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cleanest way to do this is for someone to case a duplicate vote on the one they think merits being the canonical one, and see if the community agrees enough to give their close votes too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have an opinion either way — but I can say that, yes, it's fine to close a 2014 question as a duplicate of a 2010 question (or vice versa), even four years late. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-03-01T04:48:57.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7789" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7787" CreationDate="2018-03-02T01:23:15.790" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Moderation is timeless, so we act on closures regardless of timestamps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of people happened to nominate the 2010 one as a duplicate of the 2014 one, and I'm inclined to agree. In general 2014 content toes better to current quality expectations than 2010 content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm personally disinclined to merge them though. The answers in the 2010 question were before some more recent standards (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;), so I'd rather leave the collection of &quot;what about this one very specific thing I'll just mention vaguely&quot; answers behind in the old 2010 question. I'd be more inclined to post a +500 bounty for a comprehensive answer on the new 2014 question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-03T14:51:42.690" LastActivityDate="2018-03-03T14:51:42.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7790" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12405" CreationDate="2018-03-02T16:17:19.093" Score="10" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/116557/6&quot;&gt;this answer revision&lt;/a&gt;: the images are floating above the heading's text-bottom line. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ngqMh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ngqMh.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is caused by images having a &lt;code&gt;margin-bottom: 0.5em&lt;/code&gt;. This declaration isn't needed inside headings because those headings already have a margin to space them away from surrounding text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a68Ix.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a68Ix.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead images inside headings should have &lt;code&gt;margin-bottom: 0&lt;/code&gt; which will let them sit at text-bottom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5w2vB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5w2vB.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest adding the following CSS:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;.post-text h1 img,&#xA;.post-text h2 img,&#xA;.post-text h3 img {&#xA;  margin-bottom: 0;&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-03-22T20:08:43.613" LastActivityDate="2023-03-22T20:08:43.613" Title="Images in headings should have no bottom margin" Tags="|bug|status-completed|formatting|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7791" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7792" CreationDate="2018-03-05T16:31:27.190" Score="8" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;How should we handle if a question has been edited and the current reason for its closure no longer holds, but it is now close-worthy for another reason? For example if it was closed as a duplicate, then edited to be different from that question, but it is now unclear or POB.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could technically be achieved by reopening and then closing it again, but voting to reopen a question that should be closed seems counter-intuitive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another option would be to leave it closed and add a comment with your opinion. But the close reason bar is so much more prominent than a comment that it might become lost. I feel &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; notification should be given to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a community consensus? If not, what is your take on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33200" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-08T11:58:42.960" LastActivityDate="2018-03-08T11:58:42.960" Title="How do we handle changing the close reason on a question?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7791" CreationDate="2018-03-05T16:35:06.303" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would flag for a moderator to act, as they can open the question and close it with the new reason by themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-03-05T16:35:06.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7793" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7794" CreationDate="2018-03-07T18:41:01.880" Score="17" ViewCount="269" Body="&lt;p&gt;So the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag was created today, and assigned to five questions. We already have &lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/s&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7818/4563&quot;&gt;Conjuration spirited away&lt;/a&gt;), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/divination&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;divination&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;divination&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; tags, so it’s not without precedent, and I can buy that enchantments, as found in D&amp;amp;D, lead to a series of issues that can raise related questions and a tag may be worth grouping them. There are probably more questions deserving of the tag, but that can be worked on naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I would stress that the precedent here is for “a type of spell,” &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; “something D&amp;amp;D calls a spell school.” The tag excerpts for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; make no mention of “spell school”—they just focus on spells that deceive and spells that animate the dead in unlife, respectively. Notably the latter doesn’t actually cover the entirety of the D&amp;amp;D spell school Necromancy—other effects in that school should not be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt;, but rather &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curses&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curses&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;curses&lt;/a&gt;, or in AD&amp;amp;D and 5e, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/healing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;healing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;healing&lt;/a&gt;. These terms are used because they are the natural, English-language terms for these kinds of spells, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; because they are used by D&amp;amp;D as spell schools, and they do not necessarily match the D&amp;amp;D definition. (The tags &lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; and&lt;/s&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/divination&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;divination&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;divination&lt;/a&gt; lack tag info entirely, but should be defined similarly, probably about &lt;s&gt;summoning and&lt;/s&gt; magical information gathering, respectively.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which brings me to my issue with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, the name. “Enchantment” is the term in WotC-era D&amp;amp;D for mind-affecting magic, charms and compulsions and the like. There is some narrative precedent for that, and AD&amp;amp;D used the term for a weird hybrid for a wizard kit (&lt;em&gt;The Complete Wizard’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt;, TSR 1990), though that was specifically “Enchantment/Charm” and it was the charms, not the enchantments, that were used to affect people’s minds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically everywhere else that isn’t directly derived from D&amp;amp;D seems to prefer to use “enchantment” to the process of imbuing magic into an object. Video games use it that way, other game systems use it that way, and even &lt;em&gt;The Complete Wizard’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt; used it that way. So tagging such questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; seems heavily D&amp;amp;D-centric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand... this site is heavily D&amp;amp;D-centric. Not in any official way, certainly not in any way that should suggest other systems are unwelcome or second-class here, just by pure coincidence of the questions that get asked here, are more often D&amp;amp;D questions than they aren’t. And D&amp;amp;D players may very well be looking for this subject under the name “enchantment.” After all, that is the name chosen by the emergent folksonomy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point is that, no matter what this site wants an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag to mean, it’s very likely to be misused. If we decide to reject the D&amp;amp;D-centric definition, D&amp;amp;D players will misuse it thinking it means what it does in D&amp;amp;D. If we don’t reject the D&amp;amp;D-centric definition, non-D&amp;amp;D players (and, to be honest, some new D&amp;amp;D players as well, since we have had plenty of D&amp;amp;D players use enchant to refer to items) will misuse it, thinking it means what it does... pretty much everywhere outside of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could instead block the tag from use altogether; blocking the tag solves the issue of misuse. But then that leaves people who search for “enchantment,” &lt;em&gt;whatever&lt;/em&gt; they mean, unable to find the correct tag, assuming we do want to create tags that group these sorts of questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; probably covers imbuing items with magic already; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mental-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mental-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mental-magic&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/compulsion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;compulsion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;compulsion&lt;/a&gt; or something could maybe be used for the mind control stuff).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have thoughts on how this should go, or any suggestions for handling it beyond what I’ve thought of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2018-03-15T15:13:15.660" LastActivityDate="2018-03-15T15:13:15.660" Title="New enchantment tag, not sure about this" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7793" CreationDate="2018-03-07T19:14:37.733" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, I share your misgivings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(But let me say that I appreciate the good-faith desire to improve the site behind the tag's creation. That it may have problems is not anyone's fault! Its potential problems turn on &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; obscure parts of community site management, too.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D-centric problem &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a significant problem. We have lots of D&amp;amp;D-derived tags, but those have been OK so far in that they &lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; have the same meaning outside of D&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; they have no meaning at all outside of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, used in this particular meaning, is a new thing under our sun without precedent (that I can think of, that is). It would represent favouring D&amp;amp;D over other games, by giving D&amp;amp;D exclusive claim to this generic tag name.* We haven't done that before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestion is that &lt;strong&gt;we should just remove the tag entirely from the site&lt;/strong&gt;. It can never have a single correct and consistent meaning in all the uses it would get used in, and is therefore a not-useful tag. (&lt;em&gt;Not&lt;/em&gt; blacklist it — just remove. Blacklisting is only for recurrent recreation that becomes a problem. We can just retag as normal with the correct tag(s) if/when it's ever used again.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have the more generic and cross-game tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; for all the difficult problems that D&amp;amp;D enchantment spells bring up, so we don't even really &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; it for D&amp;amp;D, except out of a misplaced sense of “completing the set” (not a tag-creation principle we use). For the other meaning of enchantment as imbuing an item with magic, we already have the (more-or-less) cross-game tag combination &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the questions it's on now&amp;dagger; are obviously appropriate for carrying the existing tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; instead (i.e., &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114701/when-does-a-target-know-its-under-the-effects-of-a-charm-enchantment-spell&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93415/do-any-charm-spells-stop-working-when-the-caster-is-in-an-antimagic-field&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76286/is-charm-person-obvious&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;), and would be sufficiently categorised by the combination of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The remaining two questions are less obviously about the outcome of charm effects, so they should probably have no enchantment/charm–related tag because they're not singularly about charming targets or the effects of being charmed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83348/break-enchantment-v-feeblemind&quot;&gt;Break Enchantment v. Feeblemind&lt;/a&gt; is about a spell interaction situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For spell interactions, a complete and completely-searchable title and tag combination is &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; [game-tag][spells] + the two spell names (correctly spelled) in the title and/or body. Though some spell interactions will have general principles come in, or are in a category of spells that are &lt;em&gt;particularly&lt;/em&gt; troublesome (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt;, I'm looking at you), D&amp;amp;D enchantment spells don't seem to — as a &lt;em&gt;spell&lt;/em&gt; class — rise to that level of unique problem-categorisation. (The charmed condition/effect/outcome itself does rise to the level of needing problem-categorisation, and we've already got a tag for that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably it could carry &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;curse&lt;/a&gt; as well but it doesn't really benefit from having that extra tag either. Spell interaction questions are generally easy to find so long as they have [game-tag][spells], and though there's a bit of site benefit having another problem-category tag on them, it's tiny enough to be swamped by the problems that using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; presents to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question should probably have only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68839/can-a-school-of-enchantment-wizard-use-instinctive-charm-against-spell-attacks&quot;&gt;Can a School of Enchantment Wizard use Instinctive charm against spell attacks?&lt;/a&gt; has the tag describing a &lt;em&gt;type of wizard&lt;/em&gt; instead of a category of effect — again, the existing tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; would be sufficient if such a thing were needed (but I don't think it's actually on-point here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should be leery of tagging for sub-classes of classes. We already have a bunch of D&amp;amp;D-centric class-name tags, many which have no meaning outside the game — tagging for D&amp;amp;D-centric subclasses of D&amp;amp;D classes really does feel like special-casing D&amp;amp;D enough to represent the thin edge of the wedge of becoming or appearing to be D&amp;amp;D Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, what this question needs and lacks is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* Avoiding the exclusion problem &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be done with [dnd-enchantment], but that tag name is so clunky that I can't even begin to like it enough to endorse it. If someone thinks it's a worthy idea to consider, I'll leave it to them to propose it directly for voter consideration. I wouldn't vote it down but I couldn't vote it up.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt;&amp;dagger; At the time that sentence was written that was 5 questions; it's expanded significantly since then due to industrious users spreading it in the meantime. (Which is fine! It helps identify the set of questions that might need attention, whatever this discussion concludes.) Analysing them all now is probably not a necessary addition to this answer since the subset makes the point well enough, I think.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-08T17:49:28.890" LastActivityDate="2018-03-08T17:49:28.890" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7795" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7793" CreationDate="2018-03-07T20:01:45.803" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Combine the related tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; into a new tag - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I completely agree with you that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; is very confusing. Even in D&amp;amp;D, it means two different things (the school of Enchantment, and magic item enchantment). The magic item part is taken care of by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; and  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; but the &amp;quot;magic that controls someone's mind&amp;quot; aspect is currently only partially served by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only is &amp;quot;charmed&amp;quot; a game-specific term, but it also doesn't fully cover the landscape of spells that enchant. A creature that is enchanted might be charmed, or fascinated, or dominated. A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; tag will cover all of that, as well as cross-genre implementations (such as being Mind Tricked by a Jedi, or hypnotized by a KGB secret agent, or shot with a mind control ray by a mad scientist).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we should get rid of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, and make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27068" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-07T20:34:07.933" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7793" CreationDate="2018-03-07T22:54:26.373" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Do nothing, everything is fine. Keep the tags as they are.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my thinking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one game gets to lay claim to a tag and say &amp;ldquo;this tag represents &lt;em&gt;only this exact concept&lt;/em&gt;; no other game with a marginally different concept by the same name can use this tag.&amp;rdquo; Different games can have different concepts sharing the same name: more than just Fate can have something called aspects, and they may not mean the same thing, for example. (They're usually very similar, so we can label them and summarise them quite easily.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means tags can be contextual to the game. Tags don't have absolute universal meaning in a void, they have meaning connoted to the game the question is about. This is fine, we are not attempting to provide 100% bulletproof universal definitions of what every term means, and shouldn't try because games don't use terminology in such a way we could &amp;mdash; terms mean different things in different games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag usage guidance (the tag wiki excerpts) &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; tag wikis are not for us to rigidly define a concept. They're to guide people on how to use the tag, and to provide some more information where it applies. Notably I &lt;strong&gt;rejected&lt;/strong&gt; a suggested edit for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki &amp;amp; excerpt that defined it as only referring to the D&amp;amp;D school of magic, and replaced it with the following tag wiki excerpt: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;for questions related to enchantments as a game concept, such as enchantment magic in the D&amp;amp;D line of games&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... which is just another way to say &amp;ldquo;use this tag for the thing in your game called enchantments.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're asking about a game concept, we use a tag by the name of that concept. Usually most games will share the same general concept in a way we can summarise it in a few words. Sometimes there's going to be small variations between what that thing means in two different games; sometimes there will be larger ones. That's fine, we don't care. Our tag system can accommodate that because it's not there to define these tag names to mean any one exact concept, they're just trying to group stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No tags should be removed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to suggest that two games having a variation in what a tag means, means we cannot have the tag for &lt;em&gt;any games at all,&lt;/em&gt; that's destructive to our tagging system. I don't want that precedent set. It's flexible enough to accommodate this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No tag synonyms should be created.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also means: the charmed, enchantment, and mind-control tags should not be merged or synonymised in any way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply: charmed doesn't mean mind-control. Neither one means &quot;enchantment&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They only mean approximately a similar thing in &lt;em&gt;one game&lt;/em&gt;... and this isn't D&amp;amp;D Stack Exchange, so that one game doesn't get to solely control our tagging taxonomy and take useful words away from other games where &quot;charmed&quot;, &quot;enchantment&quot;, and &quot;mind control&quot; are entirely different things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Consider that I could make someone charmed in James Bond: The Ballroom RPG, an entirely theoretical micro-RPG I'm making up on the spot, by flirting with them. That's charmed in the English sense of flattered, not in the magical mind-control sense. This is different to Mind Control, which only the villainous Dr Mortner's latest invention can do.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If the name-sharing is intolerable, find a more specific, unambiguous name.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other day I renamed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;focus&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt;, because it was about arcane foci and not just the general concept of, y'know, focusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If D&amp;amp;D's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; is somehow incompatible with the general concept of enchantments, give it a different tag name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Let's re-evaluate this if/when we find a tagging name clash that cannot work.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My core point above might not always work. Right now across our entire body of tags and asked-about games, I think we can accommodate different games sharing a tag for similar (but possibly different) concepts which share a name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe that won't stand the test of time, at which point we can and should re-evaluate it for whatever specific tags need it. (See the previous section.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But right now, if we define our tags or boot them out just because of D&amp;amp;D's weird concept of enchantments, ironically I think we &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; be more &quot;D&amp;amp;D Stack Exchange&quot; than if we do nothing and just accommodate variances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-07T23:24:54.470" LastActivityDate="2018-03-07T23:24:54.470" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7797" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-08T04:22:49.550" Score="8" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;In many places online, people refer to all games derived from &lt;em&gt;Apocalypse World&lt;/em&gt; as &quot;PbtA&quot;, short for &quot;Powered by the Apocalypse&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pbta&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pbta&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pbta&lt;/a&gt; a synonym for our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powered-by-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powered-by-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powered-by-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2460" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:00:34.933" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:00:34.933" Title="Can we make [pbta] a synonym for [powered-by-the-apocalypse]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7798" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-08T04:36:18.053" Score="2" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;There doesn't seem to be any location to find this information, and I have a few questions that don't fit with many of the current meta questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-08T10:01:59.550" LastActivityDate="2018-03-08T10:01:59.550" Title="What is on topic for Role-playing Meta Stack Exchange" Tags="|support|on-topic|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7798" CreationDate="2018-03-08T04:52:55.823" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Meta is for questions about the site itself&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;Help Centre&lt;/a&gt; we have the article &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;What is &quot;meta&quot;? How does it work?&lt;/a&gt;. (It's in the “Our model” list, visible if you click “View more”. It starts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Meta Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is the part of the site where users discuss the workings and policies of RPG Stack Exchange rather than discussing role-playing games itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if you have a question about RPG Stack Exchange, Meta is the place to ask. Browsing the questions on Meta will give a sense of the variety of topics covered back here, and browsing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;list of meta tags&lt;/a&gt; will give another view of what categories of questions get asked &amp;amp; answered here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-03-08T04:52:55.823" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7793" CreationDate="2018-03-08T10:21:33.570" Score="-8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I created originally the Enchantment tag because I noticed other schools of spells like Necromancy, Divination, Conjuration, or Illusion also exist as tags already.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Charmed should not go into 'mind-control' as not everyone being charmed is mind-controlled (at least not in 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mind-affecting is a condition which includes mind-control as well&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Charmed could be included into Enchantment tag, but the overlap is not full&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Enchantment school of magic includes Bless and the Power Words, it is not all about mind-control or charmed condition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you want to combine some tags consider Conditions, and include Charmed into that instead&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I can consider as best alternative is to make clear that certain schools of magic are D&amp;amp;D related. Create or rename as such the tags to D&amp;amp;D:Necromancy, D&amp;amp;D:Abjuration, D&amp;amp;D:Illusion, D&amp;amp;D:Evocation, D&amp;amp;D:Enchantment, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There exist other system-specific tags already, like for VTM, and the many schools of spells in all the D&amp;amp;D editions should justify the existence of these, and would also make it much easier to browse for specific questions and answers related to a single school of magic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More than 5 editions have these schools of magic (do we calculate 3 and 3.5 as two editions?) if you add the ones like Pathfinder even more. Can you imagine how much easier it would be browsing for a School of Magic by these tags than currently? From personal experience when I looked for an answer I found that it is currently hard to find such school-specific answers for a D&amp;amp;D edition. That's what made me decide to create Enchantment as tag and to expand the use of the other tags like Conjuration in the future as well. You know 5th Edition won't be the last edition for D&amp;amp;D, the use and importance of these school of magic tags will only become more important in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only problem I see with keeping Enchantment as it is that it can be mistaken for being related to magic item creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41891" LastEditorUserId="41891" LastEditDate="2018-03-08T11:03:22.170" LastActivityDate="2018-03-08T11:03:22.170" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7801" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7802" CreationDate="2018-03-08T15:21:07.050" Score="9" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;So we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7793/4563&quot;&gt;a discussion&lt;/a&gt; about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, and one of the sources of confusion is the assumption that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; refer to the D&amp;amp;D spell schools of those names. Meanwhile, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; has tag info that focuses on raising the dead—which does not cover the entirety of the D&amp;amp;D school of Necromancy—and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; has no tag info at all, but is tagged on questions about summoning a creature or object, which is what the word means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, this means that things that fall in these D&amp;amp;D schools—say, curses, or healing, or teleportation—shouldn’t actually get these tags, but rather &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curses&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curses&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;curses&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/healing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;healing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;healing&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teleportation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teleportation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teleportation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(On the other hand, we also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/divination&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;divination&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;divination&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt;—the latter of which is also defined as a type of spell rather than  a reference to a D&amp;amp;D spell school—, but those seem, to me, to be less confusing, less likely to be assumed to refer to the spell schools, and in any event those D&amp;amp;D schools lack “surprising” effects.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this mean we should rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt;, to be clearer that they refer to a specific sort of effect that is a sub-set of what falls under those D&amp;amp;D spell schools? Say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt; (which already exists anyway, and is on way more questions than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt;) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/undead-animation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;undead-animation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;undead-animation&lt;/a&gt; or something. Or should we just rely on the tag info to clarify, and appropriate moderation to correct mistakes where they occur?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These seem far less dire than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; to me, but there was enough discussion of them in the other question that I thought the issue should be raised. Particularly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt;, where &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teleportation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teleportation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teleportation&lt;/a&gt; (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/healing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;healing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;healing&lt;/a&gt;, at least in some editions of D&amp;amp;D) already exist and are much bigger, and it’s unclear what questions should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; instead of one of those. “Conjuration” is not necessarily the first term most people think of for these effects, except perhaps coming from a D&amp;amp;D background. “Necromancy,” on the other hand, probably &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the first word most think of when it comes to animating the undead (even if the word’s origin is as a form of divination performed with dead animals).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2018-03-08T15:29:25.033" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T01:10:22.667" Title="About conjuration and necromancy, then" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7802" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7801" CreationDate="2018-03-08T15:34:52.087" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I would leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; alone, but I probably would re-tag things tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt;; the latter’s the bigger tag, and probably the more common name for those effects, and it seems to apply to each of the questions currently tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt;. I am undecided on the issue of synonyms here, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;UPDATE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7818/4563&quot;&gt;Conjuration (mostly) spirited away&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2018-03-13T01:10:22.667" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T01:10:22.667" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7803" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7804" CreationDate="2018-03-09T01:18:12.907" Score="7" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering when new moderators are chosen and if this information could be added to the bottom of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40654" LastActivityDate="2018-03-09T17:51:13.243" Title="When is the next moderator election?" Tags="|support|election|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7804" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7803" CreationDate="2018-03-09T02:52:18.103" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no set timetable for elections--they come when we (the community) feel new/more moderators are necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some context, here's (roughly) how the most recent election (2017) came about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6895/23970&quot;&gt;How is the community doing?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This meta surfaced a number of concerns, including some with moderation. The existing moderators had already been discussing the need for another moderator--note that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897/23970&quot;&gt;&quot;we're having a mod election ASAP&quot;&lt;/a&gt; was posted as an answer to &quot;How is the community doing?&quot; something like two minutes after the question was posted. The other moderation-related feedback confirmed the existing belief that an election would be beneficial, and off it went.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6963/23970&quot;&gt;Do we want three moderators, or four?&lt;/a&gt; was discussed in relation to that upcoming election, and 4, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6963/do-we-want-three-moderators-or-four#comment21484_6963&quot;&gt;being the second number reached&lt;/a&gt;, was chosen. 5 was right out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And then the election ran as you can see detailed in the /election page. Notably meta saw the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6973/23970&quot;&gt;2017 Moderator Election Q&amp;amp;A - Questionnaire&lt;/a&gt; followed by voting and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7067/23970&quot;&gt;2017 Community Moderator Election Results&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one feels that a new election is needed a meta post to that effect would be the most likely starting place. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one feels that a regular timetable is desirable, that's a separate case to be made. (If you're considering that I'd recommend reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/984/311001&quot;&gt;Should Community Moderators be &amp;quot;elected for life&amp;quot;, or have terms?&lt;/a&gt; and many of its linked brethren &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; starting that conversation. This is a well-trod topic; that is not to say that it cannot be re-examined, but rather that one should clearly demonstrate familiarity with the existing consensus if they wish to be taken seriously.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-03-09T17:51:13.243" LastActivityDate="2018-03-09T17:51:13.243" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7805" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-10T15:29:51.773" Score="-8" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116982/is-it-possible-to-affect-targets-with-spells-from-the-other-side-of-an-anti-magi&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; drew my attention to the method used for minority opinions in questions that don't have a clear cut answer. While I understand the democratic approach to answers, what seems to happen in practice is viewers read through the top answer (or maybe the first few) and upvote or downvote as they see fit. This makes answers below those receive less attention in general than others which is frankly undemocratic, similar to the suppression of opposition in totalitarian regimes (not that this is to that level). Anecdotally, the posts I've had that are in minority opinions received 6-8 votes total (up or down) compared to up to at least 20 for the top answers in some questions (This seems to be widespread). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a way to fix this problem? Do we not see it as a problem?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are a couple solutions I've thought up (none of my arguments are based on my answers, but could come up in other situations)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Display upvotes and downvotes separately sorting by upvotes only. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This system would allow minority opinions with substantial merit on one side of a potentially close debate to be seen despite the downvotes from the other side.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do not display downvotes from people who upvotes other answers (or answered the question themselves)&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Since this tactic essentially votes twice and exasterabates the condition I described earlier. Of course there is no reason these votes shouldn't be factored but displaying them and considering them for answer order is problematic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allow for a promoted minority opinion.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Enable an answerer with an opinion directly contrary to promote the answer (pending enough votes similar to reopening a question) to be placed on the second position on the order hiding the vote count. Then, when it s received enough attention (by days or up/downvotes), a vote could be started to determine if it should remain there or be  returned to it's original state permanently.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any combination of these options&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some other examples of why this system would be an improvement by allowing opinions contrary to the majority to be more easily accessed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67301/41726&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67301/41726&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In this case a reasoned argument for the other option to affecting the magic item is given without much hope of ever being seem from the much more accepted modifying the item answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63618/41726&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63618/41726&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In this case, the answer provides an elegant solution not accounted for by the too voted answers that addresses the question in a unique way but is likely not to get the attention of the other answers since they appear so widely accepted&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/107356/41726&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/107356/41726&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This answer outright states it's intent to provide an alternative to the other answers which for the most part support finding ways to make the rolls work. It is a wholly different approach to the question which isn't disqualified as a non-answer but may be the right answer to another asker who finds this question with a slightly different mindset.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-03-10T18:59:34.493" LastActivityDate="2018-03-11T03:59:24.727" Title="How to deal with the suppression of minority answers inherent in the system?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7805" CreationDate="2018-03-10T18:30:59.620" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to take a crack at this even though my points are very basic. I want to say upfront that this my answer (like your question) is not at all a commentary on any of my own answers (even the one you linked where we clearly disagreed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say that the problem is the lower voted answers receive less attention, but I think that only #3 would potentially accomplish that (and definitely not without creating serious side issues).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What constitutes a &amp;quot;minority opinion&amp;quot;?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The SE system is designed to find the &lt;strong&gt;one answer&lt;/strong&gt; that best answers the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The whole system is based off the idea that a community of experts can through up and downvoting give rise to a singular best and correct answer to the question. In this system there are not &amp;quot;minority opinions&amp;quot; so much as answers that are judged to be less good (to varying degrees) answers to the question than those with more votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this system, both the up and downvotes are key and meaningful indicators of the perceived quality of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;#1 Regarding sorting by upvotes only&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first problem here is that this does not seem to solve the problem you perceive. You imply that downvoted or low-upvoted answers do not get read or voted on as much as the top answers and seek to try to equal that out. However, if an answer is getting a lot of downvotes it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; being read and people simply see an issue or issues with the answer (there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/121351/382836&quot;&gt;many reasons&lt;/a&gt; to downvote an answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second problem is that it seems to be contrary to the way the SE voting system has been set up to work. Changing the sorting of answers to ignore downvotes would mean that an answer with +1/-10 (an answer that clearly has exceptional problems) would be displayed at the same level of community approval as one with +1/-0 which seems to defeat the entire purpose of downvoting and makes the entire idea a non-starter for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also say that the downvotes are &amp;quot;from the other side&amp;quot; but I disagree with that assessment. This implies that there are only two sides for one thing (which is definitely not always the case). For example,  there is no reason that I couldn't or shouldn't downvote an answer that does not meet whatever standards even if I do not agree with the other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;#2 Hiding downvotes from people that have upvoted/answered&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you perceive as voting twice is not cheating the system. It is the system working as intended. If a question has a terrific answer and an awful one, upvote the former and downvote the latter. The fact that you have voted on other answer does not mean you have a conflict of interest or that my opinion of other answers is any less valid. Anybody in the community with high enough rep is welcome to do the same. What makes you think that if this was enacted, that people wouldn't just choose to downvote the &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; answer instead of upvoting others?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;#3 Promoted minority opinion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am disregarding any potential technical complications of such a request because I have no idea if they would be problematic or how bad they would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am confused, isn't the current best way to promote an underappreciated answer (possibly a minority opinion) just to upvote it? It seems highly unlikely that people would want to upvote the answer through another system when they declined to vote on it the normal way the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;In the end, the person that asks the question is the one who decides the answer that is most helpful by selecting it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these systems deal with vote sorting, but, in the end, it is the person who asked the question that gets to choose whatever opinion they want and select it as the answer. Votes are simply used as a means of sorting and indication, but it the querent find the minority opinion more helpful they are welcome to choose it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-10T18:44:42.960" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7805" CreationDate="2018-03-10T18:54:18.560" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to tackle the larger issue right now, but I do want to make an important procedural observation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This feature request could only be implemented for the whole Stack Exchange network, not just RPG.se. Consequently, any debate we have here has at best an infinitesimal chance of causing such a change, since our little site is unlikely to merit overhauling the bedrock systems for over 200 sibling sites, many of them vastly larger than ours.*&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is merit in discussing the minority opinion issue, but discussing it only through the lens of nigh-impossible technical solutions may detract from the utility of the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* In practice, the most likely means by which a discussion here could have technical impact is if the technical discussion here was used as an example, along with similar discussions on other Stacks' local Meta sites, to demonstrate widespread support to change the whole network's systems. Then a [feature-request] at the network's Meta site, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, would have the beginning of evidential support for a discussion of technical change. Then, if it got widespread support and the network owners agreed, it would go into their design &amp;amp; development queue, to be implemented at some point.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-10T19:08:46.150" LastActivityDate="2018-03-10T19:08:46.150" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7805" CreationDate="2018-03-11T03:26:40.027" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The system has various ways this is supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can sort answers not by votes, yourself.  Look at a question and look at the top of the list of answers - see that (active, oldest, votes) option?  You can do &quot;active&quot; and get answers getting newer activity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can bounty an answer, one of the reasons is &quot;deserves more attention.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You seem to think downvoting is more of a problem than it usually is.  The normal pattern is that some answers get upvotes and others don't.  Downvotes are not usually given to &quot;all other answers&quot; - they're given to particularly bad ones, or ones someone disagrees with very strongly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take your example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67284/what-can-i-do-when-i-accidentally-gave-out-an-overpowered-item&quot;&gt;What can I do when I accidentally gave out an overpowered item?&lt;/a&gt;.  At the time of this writing, the votes on the answers are (+73/-3), (+172/0), (+103/0), (+70/0), (+15/0), (+7/-1), (+7/-2), (+4/-1), (+3/-1), (+2/-1), (+4/-5), (+2/-3), and so on down to (+1/-6).  You will note:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A minority answer is the one that got accepted, raising it above other higher rated answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most good answers have no downvotes.  The really poor answers at the end do, but all the answers that have decent upvotes aren't downvoted by all the others who agreed with another answer. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's not a lot to do about &quot;people don't read many pages of answers&quot; or &quot;people don't go back to read new answers to old questions&quot; (though the latter bumps the question and gets put in the &quot;Late answers&quot; review queue, which gets eyeballs esp if combined with viewing by active). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR it's not a problem; to the degree that it is there's compensating functionality in place already. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-03-11T03:59:24.727" LastActivityDate="2018-03-11T03:59:24.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7809" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7813" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:27:10.603" Score="1" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7793/4563&quot;&gt;The discussion&lt;/a&gt; on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag is overwhelmingly in favor of &lt;em&gt;doing something&lt;/em&gt;, in agreement that the status quo is unfavorable. The creation of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; tag, and moving most existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; questions to it (or to the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; tag), also seems to be pretty well endorsed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the questions that the existing discussion is much &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; clear is what to do with enchantment going forward: should it be blacklisted as a tag name in the future? Or synonymized with some other tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-12T19:02:35.263" LastActivityDate="2018-03-12T19:02:35.263" Title="Should Enchantment be blacklisted as a tag name, or synonymized with another tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7809" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:27:10.603" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, it should be banned&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The term “enchantment” has two major, widely-used, mutually-exclusive definitions. Questions about the subject of each definition should definitely not be grouped with questions using the other definition, so using one tag for both definitions is not workable (and there seems to be strong community consensus on this point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anything we define &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; to be, is going to clash with some of our users’ expectations, and that’s going to lead to misuse. This fundamental problem with the term is not going to go away. No matter what future development happens, it seems inconceivable that either definition is going to stop being used (even if D&amp;amp;D dropped its usage of the term, people will continue playing the editions of it where it did, to say nothing of spin-offs from those editions that will also most likely continue to use it). And a third usage appearing in some future product does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; make the situation better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we should avoid ever having a tag by this name. It will never &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No, it should not be synonymized&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that there are two more-or-less-equally valid targets for a synonym: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;. Picking one seems to sort of “favor” that definition. Synonyms can be helpful here, in that they convert for the user so they can see “oh, this site means this thing when they say that,” but there is no way to present the user with a choice between the two tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even just thinking about it, I find myself going back and forth on which direction I would favor for the synonym, if forced to pick one. That, to me, is a strong indication that there shouldn’t &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-12T17:27:10.603" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7811" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7814" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:34:42.433" Score="13" ViewCount="688" Body="&lt;p&gt;This concerns &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117226/what-have-designers-said-for-why-they-made-worn-items-fireproof&quot;&gt;What have designers said for why they made worn items fireproof?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Short summary of events:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question was asking what the RAI was behind worn items being fireproof.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An answer arrived providing reasonable speculation without citation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After some brief back-and-forth with the asker, the question was clarified. (At the time of writing, all comments remain undeleted, so the full history of that brief exchange is visible.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to prior discussions on this topic (primarily &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5239/are-questions-of-designer-intent-on-topic-for-this-site/5240#5240&quot;&gt;Are questions of designer intent on-topic for this site?&lt;/a&gt;, also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3690/rules-as-intended-and-designer-intent/3691#3691&quot;&gt;Rules-as-intended and designer intent&lt;/a&gt;) our community stance is that when a question is investigating designer intent, we expect answers to cite clear evidence of what the designer intent is. Reverse-engineered speculation is generally not accepted. So, that question now requests citation. That's standard practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case I gave the benefit of the doubt that maybe &quot;they haven't said anything, here's the obvious reason&quot; might be a reasonable way to answer the question, sort of like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;a frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;. That might have been a bad call. I was also interested in seeing whether it would be well-received, but that's been distorted by the question having hit HNQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been a handful of comments and flags (all from different users) raising concern about the question's quality and its current course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'd like your input on what to do here. Do we:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave it open as-is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Purge the answers that don't provide citation (all of them) and carry on as we normally do for questions investigating designer reasons (strictly require citation as a baseline, reject uncited speculation completely and remove it)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Revert the question to its first revision and close it as not workable on the site?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't personally care about purging the answers if our site quality materially stands to benefit &amp;mdash; if we deem they're not above our quality bar we don't stand to benefit from keeping them, and reputation points can be replaced some other time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following up on this: the question's been community-reopened. Only one answer remained undeleted, and was removed for not providing designer citation &amp;amp; consisting of speculation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My take-away is the community here has affirmed a desire for cited designer reasons on questions that request designer reasoning/intent/etc. We cannot accept personal speculation. As an extension of that, we also cannot accept answers of the form &amp;ldquo;they didn't say anything, so here's my speculation instead&amp;rdquo; since it simply becomes an avenue to provide speculation we don't want to gather. If there's no designer commentary available, the question can remain unanswered until it is available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:55:31.143" LastActivityDate="2018-04-24T06:56:46.227" Title="How should we handle this &quot;fireproof worn items&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|moderation|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7812" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7817" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:35:21.893" Score="1" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7793/4563&quot;&gt;The discussion&lt;/a&gt; on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag has sided pretty strongly with the idea that it should be replaced with another tag—namely &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; and/or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; tag does not yet exist, but it covers a need, so it will be created either way. The question here is whether or not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; should be treated as a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument for is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; is often going to be a subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;. People searching for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; may very well expect to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; included, and tagging questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; seems redundant in a meta-tag kind of way. After all, all forms of magically befriending someone would logically go under the heading of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The counter-argument is that it is entirely reasonable for a game to use the term “charmed” for both magical and mundane forms of charm. The hypothetical 007 RPG might have someone become “charmed” the same whether it is James Bond’s charisma or the KGB agent’s mind-control ray or the voodoo priest’s hypnotic drug that is triggering that, and it seems a little weird to classify Bond’s one-liners as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;. Whether or not such a game exists is kind of immaterial; it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; exist, and by synonymizing things will make it a pain to handle such questions should they ever come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2018-03-12T22:22:42.040" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T02:40:47.947" Title="Should charmed be synonymized with mind-control?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7813" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7809" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:45:20.700" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Removing the tag is fine. It should not be blacklisted.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Removing the enchantment tag is fine if we deem it's not necessary for the D&amp;amp;D questions right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blacklisting the tag at this stage is overkill. It's also not an appropriate use of the blacklisting tool (I'll get back to that shortly).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not currently facing any specific problem with it warranting blacklisting. We have reasonable concerns we may run into confusion someday, because D&amp;amp;D disagrees with a popular interpretation of the term. We are not, however, currently experiencing that problem or that confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange content moderation works best when it's in response to &lt;em&gt;problems we are currently experiencing.&lt;/em&gt; Whilst we tend to not resolve problems like this pre-emptively, we also especially don't bring in last-resort tools like blacklisting at the pre-emptive step.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I seriously need to emphasize that &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/239192/152515&quot;&gt;blacklisting is last resort and done only when we continuously experience a problem&lt;/a&gt;. Doing it merely pre-emptively is very much not the appropriate way to use blacklisting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the future, if we see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; tag come up again in the scope of another product, we'll see how it goes, see if any serious problems come up, and if they do, see exactly what those problems are. &lt;em&gt;At that point&lt;/em&gt; we can make decisions about what needs to happen: renaming tags, blacklisting, thoughtful retagging, etc are all on the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-03-12T17:45:20.700" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:57:27.067" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;My opinion is that we should purge the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Designers are the only appropriate source for designer questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If OP wants designer reasons, the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; authoritative answer we can give them is going to be based off of designer guidance in some way. Designer guidance directly addressing this issue (or an answer based off of related designer guidance) is the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; way to offer an expert opinion on matters asking why the designers did something. Thus, any answer that does not contain this is not answering the question up to our standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is the best standard that we have right now for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see no way to clearly and consistently handle these types of questions in a way that maintains their usefulness as a stack Q&amp;amp;A other than being very strict about this requirement. I can think of no enforceable guideline that would allow answers without designer evidence that wouldn't create a situation that was incredibly confusing to the point of making moderating these questions a nightmare.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the problem is that it is &lt;em&gt;so easy&lt;/em&gt; to come up with a reasonable and logical-sounding explanation by guessing and &lt;em&gt;much harder&lt;/em&gt; to dig up designer guidance on any specific issue. Thus, this type of question will always have issues with people speculating unless we have a clear guideline on what is allowed and what isn't. My line right now is that it must contain directly cited evidence from designers. If the community can come up with a clear but more lenient guideline I'm all ears, but, until then, non-supported answers should be downvoted and/or deleted with prejudice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I do not think this a proper frame challenge&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the frame challenge, I do not even think the question being referred to really can be considered one. You can't reasonably say to the OP that you think that they actually really &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; want designer guidance but would rather just hear your opinion. There is no justification ever given for this besides the fact that designer guidance is hard to find or that the answer seems really obvious, neither of which I find compelling. The former because sometimes allowing a question to sit for a long time in order to get a right and useful answer is always preferable to just having a quick answer. The latter because it is incredibly subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, I think it is much more like the answers that try to answer a D&amp;amp;D 5e question with a D&amp;amp;D3.X rules explanation. A 3.X rules explanation &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; give an accurate answer to a 5e question, but it is essentially a guess and, maybe more importantly, not what the querent was asking for. Same goes for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Addendum: Why so many upvotes?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is worrisome to me that the community as a whole upvoted several answers on the mainsite question despite, site standards aside, ignoring a major part of the question. I think the ramifications of this disconnect between community perception and moderation guideline may be something that has to be addressed. But I think this is another discussion unto itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T21:46:13.147" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7815" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-12T17:57:28.823" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The argument that adding the tag makes it hard/impossible to give an answer to the question should not be allowed as a reason to ignore the tag's existence on a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Equally, allowing answers that challenge the need for this tag is dangerous. We generally accept that the use of the [designer-reasons] tag makes answers much more difficult to give, but some users struggle with this idea. By allowing answers that argue 'well its so obvious that we don't need to ask for designer reasons' we are effectively invalidating the whole purpose of the tag, allowing answers to speculate as to why something is the case without any clear evidence to back it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-03-12T17:57:28.823" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7812" CreationDate="2018-03-12T23:08:45.803" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mind-Affecting would work better than Mind-control. Also, Charmed is basically a Condition which tag already exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41891" LastActivityDate="2018-03-12T23:08:45.803" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7817" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7812" CreationDate="2018-03-13T00:36:16.067" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Between the linked discussion and the discussion here, I think I have come to a personal preference:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; separate, focus &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;em&gt;control&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Already we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7816/4563&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; suggesting that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; should be broadened to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-affecting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-affecting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-affecting&lt;/a&gt;, apparently thinking that being that broad is the idea behind &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; anyway. I dislike that suggestion because I don’t think there’s a compelling need to group all questions about any form of mental influence together, since things like fear tend to operate very differently from things like charming. But if that confusion is already happening, it suggests that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; emphasizes &lt;em&gt;control&lt;/em&gt; rather than more subtle forms of influence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I say we own it. As noted in the question, we already had some reasons to leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; separate, as discussed in the previous question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;. This just adds another one. On the whole, I think there is room for a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; tag that covers things that allow you to take over another character, but does not cover things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fear&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fear&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fear&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; that influence a character’s behavior without giving you control over them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T00:36:16.067" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7818" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7820" CreationDate="2018-03-13T01:09:01.767" Score="4" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;So per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7801/4563&quot;&gt;the discussion about conjuration and necromancy&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; has been &lt;s&gt;mostly&lt;/s&gt; removed from questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was removed from each of the following, and replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117153/4563&quot;&gt;Does a dagger summoned by Minor Conjuration overcome resistances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117150/4563&quot;&gt;Can I conjure a dagger or dart in my offhand and use bonus action to attack with it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112254/4563&quot;&gt;Does a “Minor Conjuration” object contain details of the original even if the caster did not see those details?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112222/4563&quot;&gt;Can “Minor Conjuration” create a physical key?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/96180/4563&quot;&gt;What exactly is the difference between conjure animals and woodland beings?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95241/4563&quot;&gt;When you lose control of Conjure Elemental, is it still hostile towards your enemies or just you?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/79610/4563&quot;&gt;Do you have to be the ritual leader when creating an ally spirit?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/79578/4563&quot;&gt;Could you replicate a spell book using minor conjuration?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67404/4563&quot;&gt;How fragile are Minor Conjurations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67918/4563&quot;&gt;What happens if I Minor Conjuration an object I have seen - but didn't know it was magical?&lt;/a&gt; (also added &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55502/4563&quot;&gt;Can conjured creatures bring back something (objects or creatures)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47885/4563&quot;&gt;Limitations on the Conjurer's Minor Conjuration ability&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28835/4563&quot;&gt;Do conjurations still appear if you miss?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14866/4563&quot;&gt;Do the Onyx Dog's temporary hit points disappear when the party takes a short rest?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was also removed from the following, which already had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/74278/4563&quot;&gt;Losing concentration on Conjure Elemental if you summon an Invisible Stalker?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;s&gt;There are two remaining questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/63880/4563&quot;&gt;Flaming Sphere AOE&lt;/a&gt;—Literally the only place in this question that the text “conjur” appears is in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; tag. While &lt;em&gt;flaming sphere&lt;/em&gt; is a Conjuration spell, its status as a conjuration has nothing to do with the question. I suggest just removing it altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28835/4563&quot;&gt;4e question about conjurations appearing if you miss&lt;/a&gt;, which is about &lt;em&gt;Bigby’s icy grasp&lt;/em&gt;, may provide precedent for treating non-creature/non-object conjurations as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt;. At all, the flaming sphere persists and you can move it around, which does overlap some with summoning a creature.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100751/4563&quot;&gt;My Wizard is conjuring a piece of the sun. How will this affect my setting?&lt;/a&gt;—I would support calling this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt; despite it only being a piece of the sun, but it’s different enough that I wanted to highlight it before I touched it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two remaining questions have been dealt with per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7820/4563&quot;&gt;doppelgreener’s answer&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conjuration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conjuration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conjuration&lt;/a&gt; is gone!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-14T21:20:59.793" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T21:20:59.793" Title="Conjuration spirited away" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7812" CreationDate="2018-03-13T02:40:47.947" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose we synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be fairly uncontroversial at another time (possibly debatable still, but not quite so &lt;em&gt;controversial&lt;/em&gt;), but at the moment there are a few things I think are causing misunderstanding that I'll work through before giving the reasoning for the proposal. Skip to the end for just the rational for the proposal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Preamble: Tags are for subjects, not game terms&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are for question subjects, which are usually expressed in the natural language most likely to be found by searchers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags aren't meant for technical game terms directly. The only time a technical term gets its own tag is when the subject of enough questions &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; that technical term and there are enough of those questions to need them to be gathered together under one tag. Even then, it gets a tag not &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; it's a technical term, but because it has risen to the level of a subject here, in its own right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I bring this up because there is an active misconception that something being a technical term in D&amp;amp;D is relevant to tagging, although it isn't. The only thing that's relevant is what topics questions are about, and being or not being a technical term is an incidental attribute of a tag, not a core reason to exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why does that matter? Because the relationship in D&amp;amp;D between &lt;strong&gt;charmed&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;mind control&lt;/strong&gt; (or &lt;strong&gt;mind-affecting abilities&lt;/strong&gt;) has been cited, but is irrelevant when we are considering the relationship between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; (or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-affecting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-affecting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-affecting&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In sum, we don't care what “charmed” means rules-wise in D&amp;amp;D — whether it's a Condition or a sub-category of Mind Affecting Spells or whatever system-specific details — because that has no bearing on how we manage our question topic categorisation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some examples of tagging subjects, as they arise in questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags should cover the question's topic directly rather than indirectly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/355/james-bond-007&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Jame Bond 007&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; has a &lt;strong&gt;skill&lt;/strong&gt; to cause a charming effect on an NPC (and IIRC my old copy, it does), then it almost certainly falls under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;. That latter tag was created to cover mostly the strong, compulsion type of charm that is usually magical or supernatural; its tag description doesn't lend it to using (e.g.) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; whenever Bond seduces a henchman or a D&amp;amp;D bard uses Performance to mundanely sway a crowd. Such a question shouldn't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; in the first place, so shouldn't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; either even if they're made synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If, for example, a Fate game has ways to charm people, it's almost certainly not going to be a question about how charm effects work — it's going to be about how Aspects work in that situation. Tagging such a question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; is out of place, because the question isn't about those except incidentally — it's about how Aspect rules work in Fate, and would take &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aspects&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I can imagine &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; being added to a subset of such Fate questions, on &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; it would not be doing useful categorisation work, since charm-type effects is not a useful division of expertise in Fate. It certainly wouldn't belong on all Fate questions about fictional situations involving charm magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This hypothetical is here as an example of a technical term rising to the level of RPG.se first-class Subject: it is often the main topic of a question, and those are useful to gather together, so it got a tag due to that subject-ness, regardless of its technical-term-ness.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, we have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusions&lt;/a&gt; tag because how illusions work became a subject needing categorisation. The tag doesn't represent the School of Illusion, it represents the larger concept of illusions themselves, and there are possible questions about the School that &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; have the tag due to not actually being about illusions themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example question I can think of that is about the School of Illusion but not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusions&lt;/a&gt; is one that asks about designer reasons why an AD&amp;amp;D 2nd ed. Illusionist doesn't get access to Necromancy. Such a question would actually have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;, and not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusions&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Proposal: synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;, and worry about other tag subjects as they come up&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In common parlance, &lt;em&gt;magical or supernatural&lt;/em&gt; charm is a form of mind control, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; is, in intent and in current tagging practice, only really for that kind of non-social, supernatural charming effect. For non-supernatural mind control charming, we have sufficient tags already to categorise those questions, so we don't need to account for them here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since concepts that have become widely-applicable question subjects are what we tag with, we should tag accordingly. Since that kind of charm is covered by the concept of mind control, and since there has been some mention that people have looked for a mind-control tag (I have too!), it makes sense to make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are other adjacent topics that need tags, or we for some reason really need to subdivide questions between “hard” mind control and “soft” mind control, those needs will assert themselves and become clear as we move forward. We can take care of those at that later time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T02:40:47.947" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7820" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7818" CreationDate="2018-03-13T11:56:03.083" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/63880/4563&quot;&gt;Flaming Sphere AOE&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; I don't think this needs the conjuration or summoning tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question isn't materially about summoning, it's asking about a fireball that happens to &lt;em&gt;get&lt;/em&gt; summoned. If I asked about how to make a weapon attack with my axe, that I happened to summon from over there a minute ago, the question still wouldn't be a summoning question, it would be a weapon attack question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;From what I understand of the discussion in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7801/about-conjuration-and-necromancy-then&quot;&gt;About conjuration and necromancy, then&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7793/new-enchantment-tag-not-sure-about-this&quot;&gt;New enchantment tag, not sure about this&lt;/a&gt;, tagging by what school a spell happens to belong in isn't useful.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; questions that are about the activity of raising undead &amp;amp; doing similar hijinks: we don't tag a healing spell with [necromancy] just because it's in the necromancy school. We should tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt; questions if and when the question is materially about summoning a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100751/my-wizard-is-conjuring-a-piece-of-the-sun-how-will-this-affect-my-setting&quot;&gt;My Wizard is conjuring a piece of the sun. How will this affect my setting?&lt;/a&gt; &amp;mdash; should have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt; tag. He's summoning a piece of the sun. He scried its location (and got his eyes fixed afterwards, phew), and wants to make it wink out of existence over there and wink into existence over here. That's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/summoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;summoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;summoning&lt;/a&gt;, and it's materially about the activity of doing that. (The answers dive into &quot;I don't think that counts for the summoning spell you're using&quot; territory.) It's also materially about other things, like what kind of total havoc and/or burnination this is going to unleash.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does that sound reasonable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T11:56:03.083" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7821" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-13T17:07:59.107" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that the question of why does it work this way, (RAI) questions are desired by the community at large, and that answers that speculate should be judged on their merits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think perhaps a better way to view these questions is &quot;How can I explain to my friends playing the game with me as the DM, why this works this way?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can answer that question and the community can vote on the answers value.  This is how the site is supposed to work.  Becareful taking a SE about a creative process and trying to force it to become too much Wikipedia and not enough I have a problem and maybe solving it will help someone else in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other-words I suggest you consider backing off on the back it up rule for questions about RAI unless the original author specifically requests them.  Let the community handle the RAI questions based on how the community feels about them.  Remove any rules you have banning them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user2015" LastActivityDate="2018-03-13T17:07:59.107" CommentCount="31" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7822" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-14T01:09:18.067" Score="10" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117386/crossbow-expert-feat-for-spells&quot;&gt;Crossbow Expert Feat... for Spells?&lt;/a&gt; was marked correctly as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48173/does-crossbow-experts-point-blank-attack-benefit-apply-to-all-ranged-attacks&quot;&gt;Does Crossbow Expert&amp;#39;s point-blank attack benefit apply to all ranged attacks?&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the latter only has one positive answer which has only one sentence and no citations. The answers on the first question both have at least official support. (Full disclosure: one of them is mine if it matters at all.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that it would only be an improvement to switch around the duplicate marking in this case or to merge the Q&amp;amp;As. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2018-03-15T13:21:24.740" Title="Can we merge or switch the duplicate of the Crossbow Expert questions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7822" CreationDate="2018-03-14T01:13:27.183" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Good point. I've gone ahead and done it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T01:13:27.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7824" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-14T05:04:20.987" Score="7" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47885/limitations-on-the-conjurers-minor-conjuration-ability&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; contains a second question that should be removed&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And as a related issue...conjured items radiate a 5' radius dim light. Is this light visible in, say, bright daylight?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People also seems to ignore or just don't realize it exists. What is the proper etiquette in this situation? Comment and hope the owner remove it themselves? Edit/suggest edit to remove the question? Or simply close it for being too broad?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T05:19:43.620" Title="Second question in an old question" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7824" CreationDate="2018-03-14T05:07:43.380" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Any of those you have rep to do.  The end goal is to remove it.   I have done so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-03-14T05:19:43.620" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T05:19:43.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7826" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7828" CreationDate="2018-03-14T19:46:41.023" Score="11" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5787/i-want-to-ask-for-recommendations-but-thats-off-topic-is-there-any-way-to-ask&quot;&gt;I want to ask for recommendations, but that&amp;#39;s off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm starting a new 5th edition D&amp;amp;D game with a group of friends. I've DM'ed before, but they're all new. I'd like to get started without having to buy an &quot;expensive&quot; ($30-$40) module before really getting a feel for how they are as players and what sort of game they expect. I also don't want to just wing it and/or homebrew adventures for much the same reason, and I feel it would do them a disservice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to ask something along the lines of &quot;Where can I find adventures for first-level characters for cheap/free?&quot;, but that sort of question generally gets closed as &quot;shopping&quot; around here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I ask a better question while still getting what I want?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-14T20:29:45.850" LastActivityDate="2018-03-16T22:13:20.860" Title="How can I ask for recommendations without getting my question closed as 'Shopping'" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7827" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7831" CreationDate="2018-03-14T19:55:21.653" Score="8" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;With Paizo's announcement of Pathfinder v2 play-testing commencing, it got me thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When do/should we make tags for new game systems? As soon as its announced, so people have a tag to use? When the content is actually in playtest? Not until its publicly available? Something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-02T19:56:17.447" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T19:56:17.447" Title="At what point in development is a new system tag added?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7826" CreationDate="2018-03-14T20:20:09.087" Score="29" Body="&lt;h1&gt;All content suggestion questions are simply off-topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is primarily because there &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a right or best answer for 'what adventures work for these criteria' in a world where there are dozens of on- and off-brand adventures available. Similarly, 'what books are best if I can only buy some' is inherently subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The going response is to visit various &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;forums&lt;/a&gt; or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;sort=active&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Chat section&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A communication back and forth will result in more accurate suggestions for where/what to get for your particular case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T20:30:04.890" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7829" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7827" CreationDate="2018-03-14T20:27:42.333" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;We make the tag when we need the tag. Which is to say, when someone asks a question about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2018-03-14T20:30:57.347" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T20:30:57.347" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7826" CreationDate="2018-03-14T21:43:23.193" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Asking on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;an RPG discussion forum&lt;/a&gt; is the way. Even if recommendations were on-topic here, you'd get &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt; recommendations here than at a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a regular reader (less often poster) on two of those forums, and it's ridiculously easy to get recommendations on them. The ease of getting recommendations of all kinds — even super-subjective ones, like what ideas they should use next for their campaign — is so significant on an RPG forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that forums work so very well for recommendations, and RPG.se &lt;em&gt;struggled&lt;/em&gt; to be good at them even when we experimented with it, there's zero reason to need or want to post them here. The nature of recommendations means that we are actually worse at it — forums simply suit that kind of inquiry like a glove, and the quality of recommendations are therefore much higher.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most oft-cited reason to want to ask here is because of the quality of our answers for other questions, but when it comes to recommendations specifically, that perception is a trap. The quality measures here just don't translate to that different task. RPG forums' answers are simply better in every way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-03-14T21:43:23.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7827" CreationDate="2018-03-14T21:49:48.620" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;A tag actually can't even exist until there's a question on the subject, so in all likelihood, that means when playtest actually begins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6554/revisiting-whether-dd-next-needs-its-own-separate-tag&quot;&gt;reasons&lt;/a&gt; we discovered after the D&amp;amp;D 5e playtest, that tag should also be something &lt;em&gt;separate&lt;/em&gt; from whatever tag the non-playtest published edition is eventually tagged with. (It turns out that too many questions on playtest material simply don't match the later game enough to share tags, since they're effectively different rulesets. And it's easier and less confusing to searchers to update still-relevant questions to the non-playtest tag as we find them, than the other way around.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in practice, it will have to be when the first question is asked, and the tag name should be something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-v2-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-v2-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-v2-playtest&lt;/a&gt; or something like that (playtest game's working name + &lt;code&gt;-playtest&lt;/code&gt;), much like our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-15T00:07:08.907" LastActivityDate="2018-03-15T00:07:08.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-15T10:09:40.063" Score="-2" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Revert the question to its first revision and close it as not workable on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits to questions that invalidate existing answers - particularly answers with high votes always grate my gears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2018-03-15T10:09:40.063" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7833" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7822" CreationDate="2018-03-15T13:21:24.740" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;As asker of the original question, I don't have a &lt;em&gt;strong&lt;/em&gt; opinion, but I think mine is really the better dupe target as it covers non-spell, non-crossbow ranged attacks as well. If someone comes along later and asks about longbows or blowguns, that'd be a duplicate of mine but not of the new one, and if mine is closed as a dupe of the new one already, oops.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="904" LastActivityDate="2018-03-15T13:21:24.740" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7834" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-16T12:38:28.143" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I believe that this may be a place for experience based answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that experience is the basis for the answer with a lot of up votes.  There have been a couple of design decisions in this edition of this game that remove additional die rolls, fiddly bits, etc, that had been present in the attempts at greater simulationism in other editions.  Being able to compare&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;they used to do it this way, &#xA;and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you look at the design intent statements (not necessarily on this spell) of streamlining the game, this is a logical implementation of that intention&quot; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;makes this an answerable question on the basis of showing how this feature, or lack of it, reflects a balancing between gamism and simulationism.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It takes two things to do that in the answer, I think: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Knowing what the impact was on the game when everything had to make that save. (AD&amp;amp;D 1e, or GURPS, or any &quot;crunchy&quot; game, for example) &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The overarching design commentary that we already have references to in various other questions and answers on what D&amp;amp;D next/5e is about. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is similar to the 5e &lt;em&gt;called shot&lt;/em&gt; questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designer quotes on the &lt;em&gt;fire ball&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;fire bolt&lt;/em&gt; spell specifically are nice, but they are not necessary &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; one can form a well reasoned answer that fits together the pieces of the puzzle for where granular detail like that has been omitted.  The lack of &quot;hit that part of the body&quot; feature is related to this bit about protecting mundane items on the character.  We have a number of answers on the called shot.  Previous editions had that feature, but this one does not.    &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72836/22566&quot;&gt;Here's one question on called shots.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72821/22566&quot;&gt;Here is another one.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, as I read it again, the question is wrong.  None of the items are fire proof.  Once removed from the character they are burned.  What they are is protected by the player's mechanic of being the player.  (A gamism)  The answer needs to address that &quot;This is a gamism&quot; element.  An approach including &quot;There are elements of this game that are not attempts a simulating reality.  This is one of them.&quot;  (Similar to the lightning bolt issue ...)  Comparing it to the lack of &quot;hitting specific parts of the body&quot; might be a good way to show similarity of intend to not be as granular/simulationist.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-03-17T21:20:25.453" LastActivityDate="2018-03-17T21:20:25.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7826" CreationDate="2018-03-16T22:13:20.860" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask about how to find the answer, rather than for the answer itself.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The canonical example of a shopping question is 'What’s the best low light point-and-shoot camera?'.  The canonical way of fixing it is to instead ask 'How do I tell which point-and-shoot cameras take good low light photos?'.  Applying that to your situation, you'd want to ask about how to tell what modules are good before buying them or how to find modules that are good/cheap or whatever.  That's sort of what you've already done here, though, and I'm not sure the site will tolerate anything beyond 'go to a forum instead'; recommendation questions are a somewhat contentious issue and meta discussion on them doesn't always go well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do want to ask about how one tells what modules are good before buying them or whatnot, and you want to talk on meta to figure out how to do that first, I'd recommend you take a look at our questions regarding the game-rec and tool-rec tags so that you understand better where people are still mad about stuff and what sorts of things are going to spur strong reactions that would otherwise be unexpected before doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-16T22:13:20.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7836" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-03-17T15:25:59.167" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;When it comes down to it, there's two things we can do with questions like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Close them as opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;, because they just get everyone's own pet logic-train as an answer. @korvinstarmast alleges that &quot;he's experienced, so he can answer this question from experience&quot; - that's a logical fallacy, appeal to authority. You may have experience with a game but you're still effectively guessing about the reason the game reads that way - &quot;this version is simpler so it makes sense,&quot; &quot;I had a character always getting his stuff burned off in 1986 and it was annoying so it makes sense,&quot; &quot;I've always hated Mike Mearls so it must be his fault, that makes sense...&quot;  Answers need evidence or experience of the actual thing in question, not simply the hubris of being generally experienced.&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;We should close as opinion-based when the question is at its heart opinion-based, and effectively saying &quot;I (or my players) don't like&#xA;this rule, justify it to me.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;  That's forum fodder, like &quot;sell me&#xA;on this game.&quot; In most cases even getting a designer reason doesn't&#xA;make these people happy, because their core problem (they don't like&#xA;the rule, it breaks immersion/is too simplistic/is too complex)&#xA;isn't solved by a quote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Require designer commentary&lt;/strong&gt;, as per Back It Up!  This is the only way to legitimately answer a question like this.  &quot;Frame challenge&quot; is for when someone's not asking the question they have, not a way to subvert standard site Good Objective rules. In this case, if the OP was saying &quot;I really want to be able to destroy items on a PC, so I'm trying fireballs, but they won't burn their stuff, why not?&quot; a legit frame challenge would be &quot;Yeah that doesn't work but here's some other ways to destroy items on a PC.&quot; Not &quot;whee here's my opinions on that&quot; - that's not a frame challenge to the question, but a frame challenge to the site rules, and they don't like that. &#xA;&lt;strong&gt;We should edit to add designer commentary requirements and keep a question open when that's really what's going to help the OP. Most commonly this'll be because they're designing themselves.&lt;/strong&gt;  &quot;I'm making a magical flask of oil that will burn someone's gear but not their flesh. But the usual rules say you can't do that, I'd like more information so I don't screw up balance too badly - has a designer said why that is?&quot;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously we as a community have tried to &quot;be helpful&quot; and keep questions open by adding designer-reasons to them. This is now backfiring as people can't follow that rule (much like with recommendations) so we probably need to stop, close the questions as opinion-based, and save designer-reasons and reopening and enforcing that rule for only the cases where it really is the solution to the OP's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-03-17T15:25:59.167" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7838" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7840" CreationDate="2018-03-19T11:56:47.027" Score="2" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;First off, sorry, this is more of a direct question for the mods than meta, but I don't know how else to reach them.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently conversed with Stack Overflow employees about a suspension last year on this site. Topic aside, this is a quote from their message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Right now, you have about 11 months. Maybe a little less, &lt;strong&gt;if I count a certain thread back in June that only got you a warning&lt;/strong&gt; - but suspension-wise, 11 months. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea what they are talking about. In my mind (and that is obviously very subjective) I posted very little and only petty, stupid questions and answers since my suspension. Nothing controversial (I would call it interesting) at all. So I looked through my global inbox and found nothing there. No controversial posts and certainly no warning. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have asked them directly what they meant, but they did not reply. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... what were they talking about? What &quot;warning&quot; did I get in June? I guess we &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; have a hard time believing I got a warning &lt;em&gt;and stayed completely silent about it&lt;/em&gt;. I don't think I deleted stuff from my inbox, not sure if that is even possible, I don't think I ever tried.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't mind (and frankly don't care) if I got a warning. I left here for a reason, if I got a warning and it was justified, so be it. But I don't remember any, the logs available to me don't say anything about it either. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So can you shed any light on that? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As always: I brought it up here, feel free to post whatever you feel is needed to answer my question, please err on the side of too much information, you can sell my privacy on ebay to the highest bidder as long as I get to know what people are talking about.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2018-03-19T15:28:05.497" Title="&quot;A certain thread back in June&quot;" Tags="|support|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7838" CreationDate="2018-03-19T12:43:27.617" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Upon review of your account, your annotations and warnings seem to stop with the suspension last April.  There’s nothing annotated on your account since then on this site (I can’t speak for other sites or other accounts).  It’s possible someone said something vaguely disciplinary in a comment somewhere since, but that’s harder to track down.  You might consider asking them what they mean...  but from a site mod perspective there’s nothing obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-03-19T12:43:27.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7840" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7838" CreationDate="2018-03-19T15:28:05.497" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I did a bit of digging. Based on following the same kinds of breadcrumbs that the Community Managers (CMs) would see in the moderation records on an account, my guess is it's referring to the flag and verbal warning in June 2017 that resulted from the 23 deleted comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/102336&quot;&gt;this deleted answer&lt;/a&gt; (link is 10k+ rep only). It's the right time and kind of event to fit the implied reference in&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Maybe a little less, if I count a certain thread back in June that only got you a warning&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, it was a repeat of the same things that lead to the previous suspension, but our lack of hair-trigger to re-suspend for new offences resulted in it only getting an informal warning. (Sometimes that's enough of a touch to head off a return to a previous problem.) It didn't also get recorded as an official annotation. Depending on context around that CM quote you've provided us, I can understand how that might not be seen as fully counting, but still meriting mentioning, in relation to the reason for the April suspension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-03-19T15:28:05.497" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7841" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-23T03:50:05.507" Score="11" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;I mean the image of the androids fighting the dragon above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks cool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where does it come from?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43296" OwnerDisplayName="mr. man" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-23T09:29:40.953" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T21:38:47.480" Title="Where does the header banner image come from?" Tags="|support|design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7842" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7841" CreationDate="2018-03-23T04:58:05.613" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The header graphic is an original artwork by &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.deanspencerart.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dean Spencer&lt;/a&gt;, commissioned for RPG.se. It hasn't been used anywhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about our design in the original announcement unveiling the site's graphic design: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;Design for RPG.se&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-10-25T21:38:47.480" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T21:38:47.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7844" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7845" CreationDate="2018-03-23T13:42:33.903" Score="4" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;About implementing decisions made about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7793/4563&quot;&gt;New enchantment tag, not sure about this&lt;/a&gt; (A: Yes, it’s an issue and needs to go away.), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7812/4563&quot;&gt;Should charmed be synonymized with mind-control?&lt;/a&gt; (A: No.), and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7809/4563&quot;&gt;Should Enchantment be blacklisted as a tag name, or synonymized with another tag?&lt;/a&gt; (A: No.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-23T14:08:46.717" LastActivityDate="2018-03-23T14:08:46.717" Title="Break [Enchantment] cast" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7845" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7844" CreationDate="2018-03-23T13:52:51.207" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt; had been added to a question already, but its tag info had not been created. I did so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag for questions about effects that grant the user mental control over another target, or how targets that are controlled are supposed to behave. For other forms of mental manipulation that do not give the user control, see related tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mind control is the ability to take over someone else's mind and control their actions. Questions in this tag may be about how to gain that control, how the control works, or what lingering side-effects there may be after the control is ended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is not for all forms of mental manipulation. For other forms of mental manipulation, consider appropriate specific tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fear&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fear&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fear&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could be better, I’m sure, but it gets across the ideas that came out of the discussion for synonymizing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, the following questions have been edited to conform to the meta decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; removed without replacement:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/90492/4563&quot;&gt;Does Staff of Sleep and Charm's property work offhand?&lt;/a&gt; (the item is used for charming, but the question is solely about whether or not the item works in a particular circumstance, not about the things you do with it)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103435/4563&quot;&gt;Does the caster of an enchantment spell always know if the spell worked or failed?&lt;/a&gt; (really just about spell mechanics in general, already had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/83348/4563&quot;&gt;Break Enchantment v. Feeblemind&lt;/a&gt; (about the interaction of two spells, already has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question lost &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt;, and gained &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-features&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-features&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-features&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68839/4563&quot;&gt;Can a School of Enchantment Wizard use Instinctive charm against spell attacks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions have had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114701/4563&quot;&gt;When does a target know it's under the effects of a charm/enchantment spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/93415/4563&quot;&gt;Do any charm spells stop working when the caster is in an Antimagic Field?&lt;/a&gt; (arguably not really about charming itself so much as various magic mechanics, but the question does basically want to know if charms have a special exception)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76286/4563&quot;&gt;Is Charm Person obvious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44775/4563&quot;&gt;How do enchantment spells work with V/S components?&lt;/a&gt; (this one is debatable; it’s basically asking whether the D&amp;amp;D spell school Enchantment has a special exception, but I went with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; because it seems most relevant with enchantments that are trying to be subtle)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These question had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/63463/4563&quot;&gt;Does Protection from Evil protect you from Suggestion?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113554/4563&quot;&gt;Is Dominate Person's telepathic link one-way or two-way?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45271/4563&quot;&gt;What happens when you cast dominate person on yourself?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30427/4563&quot;&gt;Do you remember what happened during Dominate Person?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22494/4563&quot;&gt;What's a Dominate Person between allies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question replaced &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;, and actually lost &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt; because despite that keyword appearing in the question, the question focuses solely on &lt;em&gt;dominate person&lt;/em&gt; (that mention of charm was also removed from the question body).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113553/4563&quot;&gt;Can Dominated person/creature which receive no command remember they are being dominated?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/charmed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;charmed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;charmed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mind-control&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mind-control&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mind-control&lt;/a&gt;, and also lost &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conditions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conditions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conditions&lt;/a&gt; in order to make room:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76729/4563&quot;&gt;Do charmed people realise they were charmed after the end of the spell?&lt;/a&gt; (despite the title, the question asks about both &lt;em&gt;charm person&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;dominate person&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And with those, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/enchantment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;enchantment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;enchantment&lt;/a&gt; no longer has any questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-23T13:52:51.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7846" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-03-23T17:06:25.413" Score="10" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can I ask a question if I know the answer but I think it may be useful for future viewers? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, I had a question that detailed research revealed the answer to but I could see other people having difficulty finding the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-03-23T17:18:36.483" LastActivityDate="2018-03-23T17:18:36.483" Title="Question for others as opposed to me" Tags="|support|on-topic|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2018-03-26T16:11:04.917" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7846" CreationDate="2018-03-23T17:13:29.853" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Absolutely, in fact its encouraged and I believe there is even a badge you can earn for doing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-03-23T17:13:29.853" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7848" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7850" CreationDate="2018-03-26T17:09:55.740" Score="10" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask about game design for a totally homebrew game I'm doing. But having read the rules it appears the questions are specifically known tabletops. Is asking about how I can design my game against the rules? If so, any suggestions for where else I should look?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42301" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-26T17:39:27.080" LastActivityDate="2018-03-26T22:53:22.907" Title="Is this the sort of place to ask about game design for my own game?" Tags="|support|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7849" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7852" CreationDate="2018-03-26T20:07:20.220" Score="7" ViewCount="322" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119145/how-much-time-does-it-take-to-take-a-move-and-immediate-action-when-falling-out?noredirect=1#comment290030_119145&quot;&gt;How much time does it take to take a move and immediate action when falling out of combat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've read the linked-to thread three times now, and I still am not clear on the answer to my question.  There are at least four distinct possibilities:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are clear - no, this cannot be done no matter the height. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are clear - yes, this can be done (from at least height X). &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are not clear, but there is an easy answer. A wise DM would rule that this can be done in such-and-such a way. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are not clear and there is no easy answer, so this is subject to DM ruling on a case-by-case or campaign-by-campaign basis, and here is some useful information from the rulebooks to provide a context for that ruling.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having read the thread, I have only been able to rule out #1 as a possibility. 2, 3, and 4 all seem like possibilities (although #2 seems less likely). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point is -- the linked-to thread doesn't answer the question in a satisfying way. It appears to have answered that question to the satisfaction of the poster there, but I'm still at a loss on how to rule my question regarding a move action and a swift action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I am just dense -- is it clear to you guys how to rule my question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, how do I go about skillfully using this question-and-answer site to get the answer to my question? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23007" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-26T23:10:29.233" LastActivityDate="2018-03-27T08:40:27.097" Title="Question closed as being already answered -- so what's the answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7850" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7848" CreationDate="2018-03-26T20:49:15.883" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Game design questions, broadly speaking, are on-topic. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;, and also our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tags-about-design-im-forgetting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tags-about-design-im-forgetting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tags-about-design-im-forgetting&lt;/a&gt; tags. But they still need to be good Stack-answerable questions, which are sometimes tricky in the world of design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Too broad&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;unclear&lt;/strong&gt; are likely tripping points. One key when writing questions is to go ahead and be selfish: ask a very specific question. You don't have to worry about making the question too pointed: good &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; will tend to expound design principles and processes that future readers can leverage for their own uses. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Idea-generation&lt;/strong&gt; is not going to go well. &quot;I want to have ten distinctive tribes of goblins, what should their dress look like?&quot; is the sort of thing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/23970&quot;&gt;better suited to a forum&lt;/a&gt;. Sometimes those questions get re-phrased as &quot;how do I go about designing ten distinctive tribes' garb?&quot; which is passable, but (in my opinion) don't tend to get great answers. If what you're stuck on is coming up with names for goblin tribes, just pop into one of those fora linked above and ask. Not every bit of your homebrew process will fit the stack model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When you're not sure&lt;/strong&gt; go ahead and make use of our resources. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7848/is-this-the-sort-of-place-to-ask-about-game-design-for-my-own-game#comment24794_7848&quot;&gt;HeyICanChan mentioned in a comment&lt;/a&gt; it's always fine to post a &quot;first draft&quot; of a question here on meta to ask if it's going to work on mainsite. [Chat] is also a helpful resource, usually when someone's looking for a vaguer &quot;will asking about this topic work?&quot; up/down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, remember that if down- or close-votes do come the way of any of your eventual questions please remember: they're not a reflection on &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;, they're a reflection on &lt;em&gt;the post&lt;/em&gt;. I hope to see some posts about your game start dribbling in and hope you, too, find RPGSE to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63626/how-do-i-cater-to-the-three-stooges-and-good-roleplayers-at-the-same-time#comment136978_63626&quot;&gt;a healthy community full of knowledgeable, considerate people.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-26T22:53:22.907" LastActivityDate="2018-03-26T22:53:22.907" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7851" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7853" CreationDate="2018-03-26T22:00:00.520" Score="4" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please let me know if this question fits or if it can/should be adjusted to fit within the main site and how. Its kind of long but thats because our play system has aspects I feel I need to explain so people understand the full picture but I understand if that might be a bit much. Thank you for your time and help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I run an rp forum(thats the best I can describe it as) for roleplaying entire countries. You can make news posts, individual character stories, plan covert ops, pretty much whatever you can imagine. Unfortunately &quot;Do whatever&quot; doesn't seem to be to be much of an incentive anymore. Writing has dropped off and sometimes days can go by without a post. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have suspicions about parts of the game might be contributing to an issue. We also have tech and time progression. Tech progression is where you say your country is researching a thing(usually near future tech like better prosthetics or better robots) and then give it a time to completion. This feeds into the time progression. Every IRL day is 12 in game days. We calculated it this way because a 30 day month irl is about a year in game. I quite like the research system because it gives the world a sense of progression and also gives me something to write about in the news section from time to time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Anyway, what can I do to get people writing more? Is there something I can do to enthuse them? To incentivize them? Should I make this thing more gamey or less if that's the problem?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42301" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-26T22:03:29.437" LastActivityDate="2018-03-26T23:14:21.040" Title="Will this work for the main site: &quot;How Do I Get Players to Post More?&quot;" Tags="|support|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7849" CreationDate="2018-03-26T23:09:47.053" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree, there's no clear answer present in the duplicate target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your questions are substantially the same: &quot;when during a fall do I get to do stuff? How soon?&quot;. On that basis the duplicate closure is more or less the right decision. (It wasn't closed as already answered, it was closed as being substantially the same question that should get the same answers. The dialog does say something like &amp;ldquo;your question may already have an answer here&amp;rdquo;... but it might not; this seems to be one of the cases of Not.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address the lack of a proper answer arriving in the duplicate target, &lt;strong&gt;I've posted a 250-point bounty on it&lt;/strong&gt; with the following message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Current answers lack a clear answer to the core question being asked: When, during a fall, does one get to act? Does one get to ensure they act at the very start of the fall? Note the example scenario, where the querent needs to teleport very soon -- within the first second, preferably -- in order to have any desirable effect at all; any teleport taken once they're falling too fast is just a faster way to hit the ground and die. So, what kind of timing is allowed during falls?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've pinged the authors of the two answers inviting them to add detail to their answers to provide this information clearly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone else is welcome to post an answer if they think they have evidence of what the solution is. If you believe there is no clear answer at all, that is also a valid response, though you should make us have confidence you're right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I caution potential answerers to also check out our policy on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question/5154#5154&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt;: tl;dr being well-justified homebrew solutions &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; come with cited experience of how it works out in practice. (We're not interested in collecting &quot;here's something I just made up, maybe it'll work&quot; suggestions; we need tried-and-tested solutions that we know for sure will work and where we can judge based on your cited experience &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; it works.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-03-27T00:42:59.017" LastActivityDate="2018-03-27T00:42:59.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7853" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7851" CreationDate="2018-03-26T23:14:21.040" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I still consider myself a bit new to rpgSE, so take this with a grain of salt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I expect your question might get closed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either as Too Broad or as an &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; question. As it stands there's not a lot to go on other than that you run a roleplay site, and people are starting to use it less than they used to. Your question seems to be &amp;quot;what are some ways I can incentivize or entice people to play on my site&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While that's a valid question, it isn't well suited to SE's style of question-and-answers because there won't be an obvious single good answer, rather you might end up with lots of different ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you still wanted to ask it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll probably need to narrow your focus. rpgSE &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; respond well if you could ask, for example, &amp;quot;I'm having problem with turnout, here's an idea I have, will it bring in more people?&amp;quot; or even &amp;quot;Players are losing interest in my site, here's a bunch of details about what my site is like, what is causing it?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;**Disclaimer, I can't guarantee either of those would stay open either. It's still kind of broad and hard to answer without intimate understanding of your site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This stack is best suited to solving a specific, well-documented problem. As it stands I think your question is too open-ended to be answerable in this format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-03-26T23:14:21.040" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7849" CreationDate="2018-03-27T08:40:27.097" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the author of the question... er... in question, I thought I'd weigh in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked this question after a scenario that ame up in a game, but in that game the issue became moot (because another character was able to help mine out) so I wasn't particularly concerned at not getting an answer. That D&amp;amp;D 3.5 game ended shorty thereafter, and since then I've been playing other editions where the rules for this sort of scenario are different, so I still haven't been all that concerned at not getting an answer. Had I known that the answer was being used to close others as duplicates, I would have come back and tried to make sure it got a decent answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands, I think the answers are very slightly tangential to the thing I was asking. KRyan's answer is probably closest, but ideally I'd like to see something that combines the referenced info from DMG2 with an understanding of the action timings to say something more concrete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To restate (and I'll go make sure the question says this clearly enough), the main thing I was looking for in an answer is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If I've just fallen from somewhere and I do have time to act, how do I work out how far I've fallen by the time my action happens?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other useful information would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How far do I have to fall in order to be falling long enough to take any kind of action during it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How far do I fall during each kind of action?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What's a fair, reliable, and preferably rulebook-supported way to determine how much time passes between an instantaneous trigger and a character starting to react to it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8599" LastActivityDate="2018-03-27T08:40:27.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5687" CreationDate="2018-03-30T20:09:59.827" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm really new to this, but I've seen several issues with the implementation.  I tend to agree with @Pallas, even though I understand where the established users are coming from (in most cases).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Human beings are not interchangeable cogs, and many human beings do not understand this reality.  The way I think, the way I process things, the ways in which I formulate my thoughts, is not the same as other people.  In fact, it helps me immensely to kind of talk out my thoughts, and it's especially helpful if I can debate them with someone else.  When I do this, I'm not debating to prove you wrong, I'm trying to figure out if I'm right.  In your personal way of doing things, this might be viewed as argumentative, or pushy, or arrogant, but if you were truly unbiased, you'd realize I'm posting a concept, and then trying to get others to poke holes in it so I can correct the errors.  I'm sure gaps exist, but I need outside help to fill them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is definitely a certain kind of personality type that is attracted to a moderator role on a Q&amp;amp;A group such as this one.  That personality type is diametrically opposed to mine.  If the local regulars are already saturated with that type, I'm probably going to drop out after a very short time.  Thus, the entire system is a self-licking ice cream cone.  You only get more of your own kind.  Some of you sit back and think to yourself, &lt;em&gt;Good.  I don't like you people anyway.&lt;/em&gt;  That's fine by me, except you've advertised yourself as something else, when what you really are is an echo chamber.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In terms of the On Hold system, I've run into several (5 in 2 days) instances of a question that's On Hold that I thought I could resolve quite quickly.  I read the question and thought, &lt;em&gt;Sure, there's a relatively simple solution to this.&lt;/em&gt;  But I couldn't answer, because the user(s) who put it on hold couldn't think outside of that particular type of box.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, this is why I left Reddit after just a few weeks.  The dogpiling, the downvoting to hide unpopular ideas, the forum sliding.  Maybe this is where the internet naturally goes for people like me.  Emotionally, it's tough.  I feel like I have a lot to contribute.  I don't mind conforming to most of the rules, even the ones I think are a knee-jerk reaction to something stupid.  It's the rest of the community that's my problem.  Your biases are doubleplus good, and mine are wrongthink, Comrades.  Yours don't really exist, because they're shared by your like-minded friends who have accumulated the larger amounts of rep, just like you.  My biases are unacceptable, because they grate on you, not necessarily because they actually violate a rule or have hurt another user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a diatribe.  It's my experience.  I'm not angry about anything.  Honestly, it's disappointing and disheartening more than anything.  As I'm typing this I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up out of another online community again.  Every time I feel like I've found a cool community where I might share some ideas and get some good ones in return, I find out that the personality differences make me incompatible with the community, and I might as well leave now instead of trying to change the culture, because it's firmly entrenched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43462" LastActivityDate="2018-03-30T20:09:59.827" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7856" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7857" CreationDate="2018-03-30T20:45:10.613" Score="7" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;The relevant question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1948/dice-notation-dice-that-start-at-0&quot;&gt;Dice Notation - Dice that start at 0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Top answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;According to Wikipedia, this is called zero bias notation, and you simply use a &quot;z&quot; instead of a &quot;d&quot;. I.e., your example would be written as 3z8. The only reference provided for this is an RPG.Net post. I've never seen any signs that the notation caught on anywhere, but I do like it as a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top-voted answer is correct, in spirit at least. However, the answer is short and there are many things wrong with it. These include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cites Wikipedia on something that was removed on 29 November 2010.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The example is incorrect (according to the cited RPG.net post). An eight-sided die labelled from 0-7 is denoted z7. So the correct example would be 3z7.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The RPG.net hyperlink is actually to the post &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the one that is being referred to.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is dated. The notation has caught on somewhat by now and is used in some places.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I can spot at least one typographical error.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing the answer to correct all of these errors/mistakes would almost necessitate a full rewrite. Suggesting an edit that would almost completely rewrite the answer feels wrong to me. Writing a new one would also feel wrong since the top answer is correct at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43388" LastActivityDate="2018-03-30T21:33:10.550" Title="Overwhelming amount of edits needed in correct answer; what to do?" Tags="|discussion|editing|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7856" CreationDate="2018-03-30T21:22:32.540" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The guiding principles for good edits are &lt;strong&gt;“Does it improve the post?”&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;“Does it preserve the intended meaning?”&lt;/strong&gt; Changing the original author's intended meaning, or not improving a post, are the main reasons that an edit gets rejected or undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By that measure most of those are fine edits to do, as they need not change the meaning of the post, only its accuracy. Specifically, this is how I could see them being made:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Citation standards in general (rather than simply here) are to consider them to be specific to their usage date, since sources can change and a date nails down a cite to a specific text and time. Simply leave the cite in, but add an “(as of [date])” to it. The date should match that of the answer's edit history revision where that cite was added. This will allow accurate attribution, and if someone wants to, the ability to dig into the Wikipedia article's revision history for that date.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Since it's reporting what a source says, it's okay to make tweaks to more accurately report. Changing it from “3z8” to “3z7” is fine.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fixing links is always good! No problem with that change at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I would leave the statement about spread as-is, possibly adding an “(as of [date])” to the statement, since it's difficult to correct someone's &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; observations for accuracy reasons. The answer's posting date and it being their personal observation makes it mostly okay how it is now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for this it would be suitable to add a comment indicating that the notation is more widespread now, especially if the comment included details or links that can be verified. That provides the information without rewriting someone's personal observation. It also may lead to the post author incorporating the information themselves, revising this own observation report in a faithful way.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Typographical errors are always fair game!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These edits, leaving out #4, would result in a post that is faithful to the original and to its sources. I think that would be a strict improvement, and not conflict with the original author's intent. I'm pretty sure it would pass an edit review if you submitted such an edit as a suggested edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do make such an edit, you can also include a link to your meta question in the edit explanation box, so that reviewers and future edit-history readers can follow it for context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-03-30T21:33:10.550" LastActivityDate="2018-03-30T21:33:10.550" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7858" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7860" CreationDate="2018-03-31T03:32:30.763" Score="13" ViewCount="265" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119490/how-can-i-use-roll20-to-reroll-some-dice-until-i-get-no-duplicates&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I gave an answer without knowing a functionality of roll20 (I didn't know it could do cards). There is now a better answer that uses roll20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While rep is great (and delicious), we all really want the best answers available to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should accepted answers be updated with the best information (at the allowance of the poster of the best content, of course) or should we &quot;trust&quot; that the user will come back and change the accepted answer to the better answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6424/answer-posted-after-another-is-accepted-is-the-better-choice&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; seems to be asking the same thing, but was closed as a duplicate, but I don't understand how the duplicate question answers my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastActivityDate="2018-04-05T01:11:08.333" Title="When a better answer is supplied after my answer was accepted, what should I do?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7858" CreationDate="2018-03-31T03:43:40.770" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Upvote the other answer.  Comment on it explaining the issue if desired. Bounty the question. All the usual ways to draw attention to something on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do NOT crib the answer into your answer.  Let the OP decide which is better. There are many cases where there's an answer upvoted more by the community than the answer the OP accepted, that's part of the system (feature, not bug).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not delete your answer.  Same reasoning as above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-03-31T22:53:15.980" LastActivityDate="2018-03-31T22:53:15.980" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7860" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7858" CreationDate="2018-04-01T22:20:43.247" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You should always try to ensure that your answer is factually correct.&lt;/strong&gt; &#xA; If your answer says that &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; cannot do &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;, and it later turns out that &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; in fact do &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt;, you should update your answer to reflect this new information.  This applies to &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; answers, but especially so to accepted ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, as long as your answer presents a valid solution, even if you believe it to be an inferior one, it's still a valid answer.  Some users might legitimately prefer your solution to others, or feel that it provides a useful addition to the other answers.  Instead of unnecessary self-censorship, it's better to let the OP and the community judge the relative merits of the answers via voting and accepting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really feel that your answer is giving &lt;strong&gt;undue prominence to a poor solution&lt;/strong&gt; (whether due to being the accepted answer or otherwise), you can always edit it to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;mention that a better solution (in your opinion) exists, and that you're only providing your solution for the sake of completeness and historical record;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;provide a prominent link to the answer that describes the better solution; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;clearly describe any disadvantages (and advantages!) of your solution.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Indeed, this is exactly what I'd recommend doing in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/119492&quot;&gt;your specific case here&lt;/a&gt;: fix the incorrect impossibility claim, provide a link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/119499&quot;&gt;Tim Grant's answer&lt;/a&gt; explaining how to do it, and keep the alternative solutions in your answer for completeness, as they seem to have been useful for the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(You could also simply ask the OP to unaccept your answer, but it looks like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119490/how-can-i-use-roll20-to-reroll-some-dice-until-i-get-no-duplicates#comment291249_119492&quot;&gt;you and nitsua60 have already done that&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What you generally shouldn't do,&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7859&quot;&gt;as mxyzplk notes&lt;/a&gt;, is simply copy another answer into yours.  Even if you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/referencing&quot;&gt;correctly attributed&lt;/a&gt; the copied solution to its original author, and even if you marked the copied answer as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/community-wiki&quot;&gt;community wiki&lt;/a&gt; to disavow any rep gains from it, doing that would still result in two essentially identical answers to the same question, which we don't really want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, in some cases quoting &lt;em&gt;a brief excerpt&lt;/em&gt; from another answer (with correct attribution, of course) may be useful.  Off the top of my head, I can't think of a good example of such a situation here on RPG.SE, but e.g. on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; it could sometimes be reasonable to quote a short piece of code from another answer, to illustrate a better or more general solution to the problem, before describing an inferior or more specialized alternative solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted above, you also generally shouldn't delete a well received answer &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; it's factually incorrect and fundamentally unfixable, or unless fixing it would essentially turn it into a copy of another answer with no originality left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; believe that your accepted answer was clearly and objectively wrong, and impossible to fix without turning it into nothing but a copy of (or a link to) another answer, you &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; technically flag it for moderator attention and explain the situation in a custom flag.  Although &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/349685/can-i-ask-a-moderator-to-unaccept-my-incorrect-answer&quot;&gt;even moderators cannot unaccept an accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; (except on their own questions, of course), they &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; delete an answer even if it's accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="2620" LastEditDate="2018-04-02T00:45:40.033" LastActivityDate="2018-04-02T00:45:40.033" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7861" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-02T14:21:07.223" Score="7" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119661/will-an-electrum-shortsword-do-bonus-damage-against-lycanthropic-creatures&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I have an unclear understanding of when and how to use the Houserule and Homebrew tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew tag has some clearer guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about homebrewing new rules content for an existing system&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That seems to be imply the tag is for when you are creating, or homebrewing, new content and asking about it's balance, etc. If that is incorrect, we should probably change that language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Houserules tag states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;House rules are small fan created additions and replacements to core rules in a rules set. In most cases, they are not officially sanctioned by the designer, in contrast to optional rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike Homebrew, this tag does not talk specifically about &quot;homebrewing new rules&quot;, but instead seems to be more general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we return to the question cited above, it is unclear to me as to whether or not the House-rules tag should be included.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is asking how a house-rule item, the Electrum Shortsword, and how it interacts with the existing rules regarding Lycanthropes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that because the item is a non-standard item and was house-ruled in creation, we can &lt;em&gt;try&lt;/em&gt; to answer based on the existing rules but that any true answer needs to understand the specifics of the house-ruled item and the house ruled tag &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be included.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All in all, when a houseruled/homebrewed item is being discussed and a question revolves around it's interaction with existing rules should the house-rules tag be included as an identifier for the querent and answerers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2018-04-02T15:21:03.217" Title="When is the Houserule tag appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7861" CreationDate="2018-04-02T15:21:03.217" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Drawing on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5845/what-distinction-is-being-drawn-between-house-rules-and-homebrew&quot;&gt;What distinction is being drawn between house-rules and homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; is used when there are locally-created &lt;strong&gt;rules&lt;/strong&gt; at the core of the question. This is as opposed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;, which is when locally-created &lt;strong&gt;content&lt;/strong&gt; is at the heart of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the magic electrum sword, the sword itself is content, ergo &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. If there are additional rules created by that group about how &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; sword functions, that's still homebrew content — unique effects generally don't rise to the level of house rules, they're just part of the new content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that group generally uses added rules for electrum weaponry, magical and mundane, that would be house rules and would merit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;. (I don't see any question content about house rules there though.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-04-02T15:21:03.217" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7863" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7869" CreationDate="2018-04-02T18:30:47.550" Score="6" ViewCount="573" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been thinking about this for a while.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you guys think about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://discordapp.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Discord&lt;/a&gt; Server for our Stack? I mean, we do have the chat rooms already, but Discord would enable a few other ways of getting social with each other:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We would have video and voice chat, for those interested in it;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can use the humoungous amount of Discord Bots that are available on the net, including one of the most powerful dicerollers I know for a non-rpg oriented software;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can more easily contact each other in a private manner if we wish so;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can actually keep in touch with each other. I'm probably not the only one, but I made some friends here and I've met some really nice people all around. It would be interesting to have a more usual place to hang out that is more usual than our current chatroom. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few other things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discord has a Desktop app, a mobile client and a web client.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Discord Mobile App is very, very good.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can set it up so the Diamond mods are mods there too to solve any problem, if there is need to do so (If they want that, of course!). Alternatively, we can set up independent Discord Mods to keep the vitriol levels down. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's free!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A big one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discord is easy to use as a online platform for playing RPG with others, be it text- or voice-based. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6540/rpg-exchange-virtual-tabletop-or-almost-that&quot;&gt;This isn't the first time I've been thinking about this&lt;/a&gt;, but back then Discord wasn't really a thing, at least not in the way it is today for the gaming community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any interest in this, or is this just a stupid idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll let this question sit for a couple days to gather some answers/votes, and then if there is enough interest I'll cook up a Discord Server for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;About Discord&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discord is a bit of a blend of Skype, TeamSpeak, Slack and a few other social apps. It was since the begining geared towards gamers, with a very large swat of features inteded to make the social part of multiplayer games, like World of Warcraft, Overwatch, League of Legends, etc. more interesting. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It enables you to create &quot;Servers&quot;, that are in a sense a bunch of chatrooms with text capabilities, with optional audio and video that can be categorized by different topics. It also has fully searchable log, Mod tools, and a lot of other features. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has since then replaced Skype entirely for me, and I'm running quite a few text-based RPGs over it, plus a WoW guild and managing real-life tabletop group. It is that good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not in anyway affiliated to Discord - I just like it a lot. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for all the feedback. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading all the answers, it seems that the way to go is to set a personal discord up and treat it as that - a personal discord server that happens to be populated by some faces from RPG.SE instead of something official.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That will be the path I'll be taking. I'll come back to this with a invite for those that want to join after I finish setting things up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your time, everyone!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="11162" LastEditDate="2018-04-17T12:54:39.267" LastActivityDate="2018-04-17T12:54:39.267" Title="Is there any interest for a Discord server?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7864" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-02T19:29:50.963" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;As for &amp;quot;Is there interest?&amp;quot;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;From me? Yes&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a fairly avid user of discord. I like it's interface and functionality. I really like the way that mentions work and sub-channels. It would certainly allow me to view fewer non-work windows AT work. And I'm sure that there is/could be a kick-butt bot that could be plug-in'd (plugged in?) to the channel.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;However...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stackexchange already has this &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;main chat room&lt;/a&gt; where a few of us hang out (among others). Then, someone would have to &amp;quot;own&amp;quot; the server and it would need mods. &lt;sub&gt;(as a note to non discord users, I mean &amp;quot;own&amp;quot; in that there needs to be an account tied to the service, not that anyone has to buy anything)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of services don't like their users being absconded to other places (though, I don't think SE would mind).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, my return question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How would a pseudo-official discord be more beneficial than functionality the site already has?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Just to be perfectly clear: I will click on the discord link the minute it is dropped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-02T21:22:19.897" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-02T20:34:53.857" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Personally, no. I have no interest what-so-ever in discord.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it were skype or google hangouts or facebook, maybe. I'm not sure if they've fixed it yet or not but last time I checked there were alot of bugs. You would have to make a new account for different platforms instead of one for all of them. It really slows down the computer. A facebook friend of mine complained endlessly about that specific issue when he decided to try discord.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's just naming a few to get started.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Discord also doesn't suit my personal tastes. The layouts and design choice, at least to me, seem like they are trying way too hard and failing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also the point goodguy5 made about taking people away from the main site chat. I think I want to expand that from just the main site chat to &quot;taking people away from the site&quot; as a whole. I've seen discord move in and kill websites or at least divide them so horribly nobody knows what's going on anymore. Inevitably you're going to have some people that don't want to use discord and stick with the main chat and you'll have people that want to use discord exclusively, which can easily lead to communication falling apart. I can't imagine stackexchange would be very pleased with that result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you might want to list the downsides and issues discord has instead of just the positives.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38999" LastActivityDate="2018-04-02T20:34:53.857" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7866" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-03T01:12:46.747" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not personally, but why not do it anyway?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I have no interest in participating in a Discord server. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as @nitsua60 points out, there is no SE policy regarding discord servers or communities offsite. In fact, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/431/any-way-to-send-a-personal-message-to-another-user&quot;&gt;SE officially discourages direct contact between individual users&lt;/a&gt; on the site itself. Barring some kind of site-wide change, any RPG.SE discord would be an unofficial channel. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you believe that having a discord server amongst your friends from this stack would be useful, why don't you just go ahead and make one? Nothing's stopping you from doing that, and it's all you could do within the limits of site policy anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastActivityDate="2018-04-03T01:12:46.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7867" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-03T14:40:16.293" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just to throw into the mix...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Stack-relevant policies:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is no &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/431/311001&quot;&gt;private messaging between users&lt;/a&gt; anywhere on the network. This is seen as a &amp;quot;feature&amp;quot; that would actively harm SE's core mission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If you want private conversations with people you've met here, it's not going to happen here.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Actions taken on-site must be transparent to site-only users. I bring it up because we've run into problems before with conversation in chat generating edits/voting/&amp;amp;c. on mainsite in a way that left mainsite users in the dark as to &amp;quot;why.&amp;quot; (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3291/23970&quot;&gt;the role of chat&lt;/a&gt;, and I'll throw a &lt;em&gt;mea culpa&lt;/em&gt; out there as I've probably been guilty of it as much as anyone.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If conversation away from main--be it meta, chat, or elsewhere--influences actions on main those actions must be explained &lt;strong&gt;on main site&lt;/strong&gt; (edit summary, comment) such that a main-only user could understand and learn from it.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-03T14:40:16.293" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-03T20:54:56.953" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having personal Discords springing off the site with subsets of its community is a fine idea. There's at least a couple already, mostly centered around specific groups of people who went off to organise games together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However, you should not create a Discord server that purports to be &amp;ldquo;the&amp;rdquo; RPG Stack Exchange server.&lt;/strong&gt; It won't be able to mirror, represent, or accommodate the RPG.SE community. It would be disingenuous to create a server that claims to have that role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Chat currently benefits from its presence as part of the Stack Exchange ecosystem, and we should consider strongly the implications of separating that social space from the site into a private external space, and how it would change users' ability to control or even access the flow of information and interaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat is public, and everyone on this site has an immediately-available chat account connected to their mainsite profile in a verifiable and accountable manner. The avoidance of private spaces is a conscious design choice: everything users do is publicly visible. This solves a lot of problems before they start by putting up a large barrier against attempts to harass, coerce, or conspire. This also is a major benefit for Stack Exchange curation, where sometimes discussions in chat can prompt revisions or other activity on mainsite &amp;mdash; chat conversations here can be linked back to and reviewed by anyone, but the same is not true for discussions in a private Discord channel.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RPG.SE community also collaboratively closely enforces many Stack Exchange guidelines that other Stack sites can be loose about, in large part because many of the online RPG communities our users are accustomed to are not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Nice&lt;/a&gt;. I and many others frequent RPG.SE specifically because it is a Nice RPG space in a sea of Not Nice RPG spaces. Our public communication plays a major role in maintaining that atmosphere. It also takes continuous work from all members of the community collaboratively moderating to keep this site and its social spaces Nice, and to keep it one that does things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;affirm all playstyles&lt;/a&gt; instead of getting into vitriolic community-fracturing war over playstyle differences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange site moderators are very likely not going to be joining private Discord channels to enforce the same rules there &amp;mdash; we don't have the tools nor availability.&lt;sup&gt;(1)&lt;/sup&gt; Any user who starts up a Discord server, that's their server, and they should take responsibility for its tone and the behaviour of its occupants. The RPG.SE chat rooms are curated via flags by &lt;em&gt;everybody&lt;/em&gt; in the room, and those flags are immediately reviewed by any online user with at least 10k reputation. A Discord channel doesn't have those safety nets, and will quickly grow its own un-Stack-ian room culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I appreciate the ambition to create a space for everyone offsite with all the bells and whistles, I suggest it is better to find those you want to share such a space with, and specifically create a space for yourself and those you trust and want to work and talk with in private. It will be your space, and not the Stack's, and it matters a lot to keep that distinction very clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(1): I'm not speaking on any of their behalves here, just saying what's probably the case. Any of us might of course join any channels, but we'd be doing it as normal average people, not as Stack Mods to enforce Stack Rules.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-04T13:04:42.433" LastActivityDate="2018-04-04T13:04:42.433" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7870" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7863" CreationDate="2018-04-04T06:45:20.800" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not to say &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no&quot; to the inciting proposal, just to give some context for what already exists, because I get the impression perhaps some people aren't fully aware of what the RPG.SE chat community currently looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;We have a dedicated chat service.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;It's quite active.&lt;/a&gt; Sometimes it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3291/4398&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt; active&lt;/a&gt;, but we're getting better about that. We talk about all sorts of things, not just the site and RPGs, to the extent that we sometimes use &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13848/not-a-bar-but-plays-one-on-tv&quot;&gt;a pressure valve room&lt;/a&gt; for conversations that would otherwise get in the way of a site-specific discussion (which, of course, we prioritize).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's very robust, with a good mobile interface, integrated one-boxing, strong reply support, conversation bookmarking, built-in immediate-response attention to flags, and so forth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/16836/dice-roller-formatting-tests-playground&quot;&gt;There's even a dice bot!&lt;/a&gt; It's simple but effective and we sometimes write &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/q/6150&quot;&gt;scripts to expand its utility&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do that because &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/25435/roll-for-shoes&quot;&gt;we play games in chat&lt;/a&gt;. We play games in chat &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/13/the-back-room-live-tabletop-games&quot;&gt;a lot.&lt;/a&gt; No, really; &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/8403/fate-chat-and-game-room?tab=conversations&quot;&gt;there's more than thirty sessions bookmarked for Fate alone&lt;/a&gt; (scroll to the earliest conversations).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we can't talk to each other privately on Stack chat. But many of us consider that a feature, not a bug, because it reduces the spaces where harassment, backbiting, and other negative behavior can flourish. It also lets us talk to strangers without giving away any more of our identity than we already have, while adding another service provides people with another point of triangulation on our IRL identities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the chat interface becomes insufficient for whatever reason--privacy, disability needs, insufficient mechanical support for gaming--we move to  other services &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/89949/4398&quot;&gt;depending on needs and circumstances of the specific group&lt;/a&gt;. But &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; remains the hub for the (very small, relative to the Stack as a whole) group of people who want RPG.SE to be a conversational community in addition to its primary purpose as a &#xA;Q&amp;amp;A platform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2018-04-04T07:20:26.803" LastActivityDate="2018-04-04T07:20:26.803" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7871" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-04T16:14:56.467" Score="2" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119800/how-can-i-modify-meat-grinder-death-saves-to-have-less-coup-de-grace&quot;&gt;How can I modify Meat Grinder Death Saves to have less Coup de Grace?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was closed as too broad. Why? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It very specifically asks for a mechanical solution for a very specific problem: namely, that a successful attack on a downed creature automatically uses up 2/3 of available death saves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-04T16:18:40.857" LastActivityDate="2018-04-08T04:47:35.527" Title="Why was this question closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7871" CreationDate="2018-04-04T17:53:23.093" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The question almost contradicts itself.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm DMing a Tomb of Annihilation-based campaign and we're using Meat&#xA;  Grinder Mode (DC for Death saves is 15).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ToA is designed as a more lethal module in the first place, and the meat grinder option is deliberately built to be more lethal than normal 5e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You then ask how to make it less lethal, based on your problem with death saves, and your desire to attack characters who are at 0 HP since that does indeed fit the situation that your characters were in. (Quite frankly, your ruling on that makes perfect sense to me, in terms of the beasts involved and the situation the characters were in during that fight).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's kind of like &quot;how do I go whitewater rafting but instead go canoeing&quot; as a question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that you have edited the question, and I have offered an answer, I still perceive a modest &quot;XY problem&quot; in the question. Since the question is open again this meta appears to have been overcome by events.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-04-05T12:54:24.323" LastActivityDate="2018-04-05T12:54:24.323" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7858" CreationDate="2018-04-05T01:11:08.333" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Comment on the answer recommending that the asker switch the accepted answer, and suggesting why. Not all askers pay close enough attention to do this, but it's worth a try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer is entirely incorrect, and deleting yours would leave a correct answer as the top answer, consider doing so. Visitors who find this question on Google tend to assume the top answer as the correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaving an incorrect answer up should be avoided. The goal of the site is to provide accurate information, and making numbers go up is secondary to that goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is no other option, editing your answer to make it correct, noting the correction and crediting the original answerer, is the least worst solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-04-05T01:11:08.333" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7874" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7876" CreationDate="2018-04-05T13:19:12.953" Score="6" ViewCount="214" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question:&#xA;Is 'what is the rationale behind the design of X' a proper question for rpg.se?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To elaborate:&#xA;The question is motivated by my current predicament:&#xA;D&amp;amp;D 3 and 3.5 have certainly shown that some features are better designed than others. Some are completely, obviously, irredeemably broken and should be just banned by GM. Others are not beyond repair, with some goodwill and work can be made functional and balanced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But after reading D&amp;amp;D 5 warlock three times and failing confusion saving throw three times, I find myself beyond confused. Stupefied. This... what is that supposed to even be? What was the designer even thinking? How is that even SUPPOSED to work? &amp;lt;- these are important questions, because how would I fix something if I don't even know how it was supposed to work in a first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea is that while certainly we cannot know what exactly was the developer thinking at the moment of writing the feature X, with both practical experience in using the feature and through quotes and talks with the developers we should, in principle, be able to get a pretty good approximation of the thought that was standing behind the design of the feature X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, I ask here if this sort of question is allowed on rpg.se&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38694" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:54:52.190" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:54:52.190" Title="Is 'what is the rationale behind the design of X' a proper question for rpg.se?" Tags="|support|questions|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7875" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7874" CreationDate="2018-04-05T13:34:24.987" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What you want is a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It will give you the rationale from the perspective of the designers as far as that is available. Answers that don't cite sources can get deleted when you frame your question accordingly. Just be sure to explicitly state &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; part you are interested in. A broad &quot;How is the Warlock class supposed to work?&quot; is far more difficult than a &quot;What did designers say why they wanted to have Warlocks regenerate all of their spell slots after each short rest?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-04-05T13:41:59.117" LastActivityDate="2018-04-05T13:41:59.117" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7874" CreationDate="2018-04-05T13:45:08.520" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This type of question is OK, but will not be allowed to receive speculation, so you should consider strongly whether asking “what's the rationale for why it is this way?” will actually give you the answers you're looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can easily tell you &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; it does, and whether it really means you can do a specific thing, according to what the text there says. If you're wondering if it's &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to do that, what you're going to be asking about here is the designer's intent: you want to know why they did what they did. This type of question is usually tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5240/1204&quot;&gt;multiple&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3690/1204&quot;&gt;previous&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7811/1204&quot;&gt;discussions&lt;/a&gt;, questions about a designer's intent, reasoning, etc, has only one acceptable type of answer: an answer that cites explicit designer statements &lt;em&gt;demonstrating conclusively&lt;/em&gt; what they were thinking or what their intent or reasoning was, because they are saying so and we are quoting them saying so &amp;mdash; or something &lt;em&gt;very close&lt;/em&gt; to equally convincing. Answers not providing citation of this level get deleted.&lt;sup&gt;(note)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These rules exist because otherwise we get a lot of answers containing pure speculation on what somebody &lt;em&gt;thinks&lt;/em&gt; the designer might have been thinking. Sometimes these answers also attempt to reverse engineer conclusions from some limited amount of related output in the game, but that doesn't make the speculation any more correct &amp;mdash; it just means it now has &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;truthiness&lt;/a&gt;. It's making guesses either way. Those answers aren't OK, and get removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The alternative to having these rules right now is that these questions just get closed as primarily opinion-based, since they just invite tons of opinion on “here's why I think things are this way” and then the question gets five different answers all providing different contradictory speculation on why things are this way, not all of which can be true and all of which have no conclusive evidence whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The idea is that while certainly we cannot know what exactly was the developer thinking at the moment of writing the feature X, with both practical experience in using the feature and through quotes and talks with the developers we should, in principle, be able to get a pretty good approximation of the thought that was standing behind the design of the feature X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only kinds of answers that we'll accept are those that &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know, and &lt;em&gt;show you&lt;/em&gt; they know, because they are quoting the developer saying so. We won't accept answers that just try to get a sort of good approximation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are no such quotes available, you may get no answers, or you may get speculation (which we'll delete).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Note: These special rules are frequently attributed to a magical attribute of the [designer-reasons] tag, that exist if and when that tag exists, but it's nothing to do with the tag. It's the class of questions that has these rules &amp;mdash; that class of question just usually coexists with this tag. Tags don't apply rules, they just describe the content of the question.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-18T11:31:12.230" LastActivityDate="2018-04-18T11:31:12.230" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7877" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7878" CreationDate="2018-04-06T01:37:35.180" Score="7" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I acquired a gold badge for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges?tab=tags&amp;amp;filter=gold&quot;&gt;Gold tag badges&lt;/a&gt; allow a user to single-handedly mark questions with the appropriate tag as duplicates and reopen them as needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, one problem I've run into is that there doesn't seem to be an option to actually &lt;em&gt;vote&lt;/em&gt; to close a question as a duplicate instead of closing it straight up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing something? Is there a way to simply vote to close instead of closing outright?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:15:17.690" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:15:17.690" Title="Is it possible to vote to close a question as a duplicate (instead of single-handedly closing it) when you have a gold tag badge?" Tags="|support|duplicates|badges|vote-to-close|privileges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7877" CreationDate="2018-04-06T02:04:51.743" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;No. This was requested and denied, several times. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231507&quot;&gt;Quoting a community manager&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've no plans to make &amp;quot;opting out&amp;quot; an option. This is in keeping with existing behavior: once you gain the ability to vote to close, you can no longer flag for closing. The system trusts you more, and there's no way to tell it to trust you less.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if you do make a mistake, you have the ability to immediately re-open the same question you immediately closed. Reopen votes on duplicates are binding for badge holders in the relevant tags as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user22233" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-06T02:04:51.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7879" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7880" CreationDate="2018-04-06T09:02:28.047" Score="7" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;p&gt;I stumbled upon the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trying-new-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trying-new-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trying-new-systems&lt;/a&gt;. Sadly it has neither a tag wiki excerpt nor a full tag wiki, and I can't find any discussions about the tag to learn something about the reasoning behind the tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's currently used for four questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58965/34863&quot;&gt;Fate based minigames in a historic/fantasy realm?&lt;/a&gt; was locked as &quot;Shopping Request&quot; - this is the earliest question with this tag&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67451/34863&quot;&gt;Any good, lightweight systems for a Borrowers-based RPG?&lt;/a&gt; was closed as &quot;Too Broad&quot; because it didn't adhere to the &quot;Shopping Request&quot; guidelines of the time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/108732/34863&quot;&gt;New to roleplaying, how do I start off a sort of superhero game with my sister?&lt;/a&gt; was closed as &quot;Too Broad&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/90712/34863&quot;&gt;What GM preparation would help with a first try at Valiant Universe RPG?&lt;/a&gt; is still open &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we still need the tag? If so, could someone update the tag wiki to explain how the tag is supposed to be used? Most questions with the tag are closed and it seems to be from a time when shopping requests were allowed. Part of what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trying-new-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trying-new-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trying-new-systems&lt;/a&gt; seems to want to achieve could be already covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; and the rest seems to be about shopping requests, which are off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-11T13:53:07.570" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T13:53:07.570" Title="Do we need the [trying-new-systems] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7880" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7879" CreationDate="2018-04-06T09:38:55.297" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Destroy it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it currently is, that tag seems to have two uses: shopping questions and trying a &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; new system. The former is off-topic and the latter is better covered by the specific system tags, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; if the GM is new to RPGs as whole, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; if the question specifically addresses picking up a new system. There's little value in keeping the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trying-new-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trying-new-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;trying-new-systems&lt;/a&gt; tag along, although it could possibly be a synonym to the more defined &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Potential future usage&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a more abstract level, such a tag might have a purpose for questions concerning trying out more systems in a more abstract sense, not regarding a particular system. A good example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58829/11660&quot;&gt;How do I convince my group to try a new system without always having to DM it first?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, those questions are still covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; so for there to be value in a separate tag, there'd need to be some distinction between the two, and I can't think of any at this time. Let it burn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2018-04-06T09:47:18.973" LastActivityDate="2018-04-06T09:47:18.973" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7871" CreationDate="2018-04-08T04:47:35.527" Score="0" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It very specifically asks for a mechanical solution for a very specific problem&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is - there are an infinite number of mechanical solutions to any given problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To narrow the scope of the question it needs to be focused more tightly on the type of mechanical solution you are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2018-04-08T04:47:35.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7882" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-09T02:52:37.513" Score="7" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112616/current-status-of-the-ua-revised-ranger&quot;&gt;Current status of the UA Revised Ranger&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does that Sourcebook exist yet?&lt;/strong&gt; If not, have the devs given an update or told us their intentions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bolded question seems similar to the reason we frown on question about shopping recommendation: they get outdated quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When this type of question asked, it might or might not have been released yet, but some time in the future (like 6 months after), the correct answer might change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this type of question okay?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-04-09T21:14:13.417" Title="Does this type of question count as &quot;getting outdated quickly&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7883" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7884" CreationDate="2018-04-09T09:52:34.380" Score="9" ViewCount="206" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today, I started wondering why in 5e, the DMG calculates encounter difficulty as &quot;adjusted XP&quot; which is adjusted by the total number of enemies in the encounter, but doesn't award the adjusted value as XP to the players. Turns out we have a question for that already, from 2014: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47518/why-dont-players-get-extra-xp-for-large-encounters?utm_medium=organic&amp;amp;utm_source=google_rich_qa&amp;amp;utm_campaign=google_rich_qa&quot;&gt;Why don&amp;#39;t players get extra xp for large encounters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question doesn't use the DMG terminology of &quot;adjusted XP&quot; and &quot;total XP value&quot;, so  thought I should create a duplicate to point towards it for improved searchability. However, the 2014 question is asking for reasons behind rules &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7876/11660&quot;&gt;without requesting designer citations&lt;/a&gt;, so if asked today, it would be closed as opinion based guessing question. None of the answers cite designer reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I or should I not create the signpost dupe?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:56:30.323" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:56:30.323" Title="Should I opt not to create a signpost duplicate for a question that would be opinion-based if asked today?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7883" CreationDate="2018-04-09T11:23:25.717" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask a new question using the DMG terminology, and make sure it follows current policies by requesting designer citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then flag the old one for closure (either as opinion-based or as a duplicate of the new one, whichever feels better to you) because we open and close questions based on current policy no matter the policy when they were originally asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And if there are any existing answers that you think would transfer over, maybe consider leaving a comment on them pointing the author to your new question?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2018-04-09T12:33:20.993" LastActivityDate="2018-04-09T12:33:20.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7885" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7882" CreationDate="2018-04-09T15:49:40.967" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is effectively a content identification question: “Surely this content exists but I don't know where to find it.” However, as part of the question we're also acknowledging the possibility it might not actually exist yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've yet to discuss as a community whether we should support questions that ask about release dates. However, I think this question is OK to keep open, as it doesn't fit the pattern of those questions: it's not certain it's going to be obsolete, only the answers can really tell us that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-09T21:14:13.417" LastActivityDate="2018-04-09T21:14:13.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7883" CreationDate="2018-04-11T00:26:57.600" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;That's not a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's fine to ask about rules without asking for designer citations.  We require designer citations for questions about &lt;strong&gt;designer intent&lt;/strong&gt;, not as a blanket requirement for all questions about how or why rules work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking what purpose a rule serves is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; inherently a designer intent question-- what the designers thought it did may well not be what it actually does after all-- and is a question about how that rule relates to the rest of the system.  It's answered by things like 'this is what breaks if that rule isn't there' or 'that rule mirrors this other rule and reinforces the idea that X mechanical construct should be the baseline' or 'that rule's important for X, Y, Z reasons'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific question linked isn't very high quality, and it's phrasing is very imprecise as to what's being asked about, so I don't really mind it being closed, but that &lt;em&gt;category&lt;/em&gt; of question ought not be conflated with designer intent questions, which are fundamentally different in how we approach them.  I think we shoehorn users away from asking about rules from a game design perspective into asking about them from either a 'what do they say' or 'what reasons did they say it for' perspective even when doing so disguises or subverts the real question sometimes, and that's something we should avoid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T00:26:57.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7887" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7890" CreationDate="2018-04-11T16:01:30.537" Score="4" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was recently asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120082/what-spells-are-available-to-resurrect-characters&quot;&gt;What spells are available to resurrect characters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it is a good question, in that the answer is important general knowledge. The answer is obtainable by doing some simple, but time consuming research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have seen other questions get closed because they were asking for information that could be found by doing research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What distinguishes a question that shows lack of research?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39217" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T21:42:55.233" Title="What distinguishes a question that shows lack of research?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7888" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-11T17:12:01.723" Score="2" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120248/how-an-undead-statblock-differ-from-its-living-counterpart&quot;&gt;How an undead statblock differ from its living counterpart?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has been changed from the original question. However it seems people think it can be improved to be stackable. The &lt;em&gt;current&lt;/em&gt; question itself already has an answer in a comment (and possibly another one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this current state, the question ask &quot;is there a pair of monsters, that provide statblock for its living and undead counterpart?&quot; which is basically a content identification (if my interpretation is correct). The content is already been proven by another user that it exists, and I don't think it's opinion-based, too broad, or unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What this question needs to be opened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T18:18:44.677" Title="How to salvage this question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7888" CreationDate="2018-04-11T17:46:33.057" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;What you ultimately want to do is Primarily Opinion-Based. But a question for the data you're looking for as a basis is not. I'd remove the background so as not to confuse the question or the answerers. That way you've got a clean stack-focused question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question is purely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;is there a pair of monsters, that provide statblock for its living and undead counterpart?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;then I so no reason why it can't be reopened after you clean it up to just ask that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you're looking to find an underlying commonality between the existing pairs in order to create your own living/undead pairing, then I think that is where it enters the world of Primarily Opinion-Based unless someone has made and played with a homebrew set.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-04-11T18:18:44.677" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T18:18:44.677" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7887" CreationDate="2018-04-11T17:54:34.763" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two issues in your question, so I'm going to untangle them a step at a time. You're asking about questions that get closed, and you're asking about how the amount of research in a question is distinguished. These are actually separate for reasons you'll see in a moment. I'll untangle the close issue first, since that makes the research-amount issue relatively simple.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are three kinds of research questions that I can think of that tend to be handled differently from each other at RPG.se. The first two are exceptions to the third, which is the general rule. (I'll discuss distinguishing degree of research effort in that last category.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. Campaign research / real-world research&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are like “when did phones become common in America?” or “what does a bireme's deck plan look like?” We had a number of these in the site's very early days and we discovered they worked poorly enough here that they were made off-topic. We even have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;FAQ about them now&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that RPGs can be about potentially anything and everything, but we're not Anything And Everything Stack Exchange, nor are we experts on anything or everything. And though RPGs do tend to inspire us to learn more about anything and everything, the site's focus on &lt;em&gt;RPGs&lt;/em&gt; means we had to cut out questions that had no RPG content apart from “this knowledge could be relevant to an RPG”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Campaign / real-world research questions are off topic, so they are closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. Legwork questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last category doesn't have any formal recognition or handling. But they have been a point of contention, and sometimes get closed. There's no formalised handling, but we can often predict that this kind of question will be contentious and sometimes rejected by the community based on its details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the “I would like someone else to do some easy but tedious work” question, like “what are all the spells that allow Wisdom saving throws?”, or the “I haven't bothered to read what the book says so I'm going to ask here”, like “how do I roll an attack?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These don't show research effort, which normally would just be worth of downvotes. They however do sometimes get closed though. The idea behind the closes depends on the question's details, but usually is some variety of “you know the solution to your problem, but you just don't want to do it yourself”. The community isn't settled yet on whether we want to be the site for this kind of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Some examples of existing/previous discussion where the community is trying to get a handle on legwork questions [&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an exhaustive list!]: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions&quot;&gt;What Do We Do With &amp;quot;Read The Book To Me&amp;quot; Questions?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7638/are-questions-of-the-form-what-are-all-the-x-with-property-y-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions of the form &amp;quot;what are all the X with property Y&amp;quot; on-topic?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6959/is-asking-about-the-distribution-of-saving-throws-across-all-books-too-broad-for&quot;&gt;Is asking about the distribution of saving throws across all books too broad for this site?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6445/is-it-ok-to-downvote-for-low-effort-when-the-only-way-to-answer-quickly-is-pir&quot;&gt;Is it OK to downvote for “low effort” when the only way to answer quickly is piracy?&lt;/a&gt;, for just a few. Note how some are about closed questions, some about open ones, and that varies based on fine details of the questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120082/what-spells-are-available-to-resurrect-characters&quot;&gt;The question you cite&lt;/a&gt; is a good example of this ambiguity: it hasn't been closed, but since it's a &lt;em&gt;self&lt;/em&gt;-answered question, it doesn't exist to ask someone else to do tedious but obvious work for the poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Legwork questions &lt;em&gt;sometimes&lt;/em&gt; get closed because the community isn't sure if they belong here, and sometimes-closed, sometimes-not is a symptom of that state of affairs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;∞. All other research questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the other research questions generally stay open. This is the default state of affairs: being about research isn't a strike against a question. The two examples above are the exceptions to this general rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question that shows insufficient effort is liable to get downvotes, but close votes tend to stay away, or reversed later with a reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is the amount of research generally distinguished? It's part of the voting system, so it's really a sum of individual judgements — for which guidance is provided by the site, but nothing in the way of &lt;em&gt;definitions&lt;/em&gt;. The up/down vote buttons simply say this (in their pop-over text when you hover a mouse cursor over them a second), and these are the roots of people's voting judgements:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;▲ This question shows research effort; it is useful and clear&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;▼ This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People judging &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; research effort tends to be saying thinking things like “this is answered by Googling / reading the rules for [question subject] &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;”. These questions are still &lt;em&gt;on-topic&lt;/em&gt;, so it's usually not appropriate to close them for simply being easily answered elsewhere. They're just not &lt;em&gt;very useful&lt;/em&gt; questions to anyone else, which is what the voting system is designed to rate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-11T21:42:55.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7891" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7892" CreationDate="2018-04-12T14:50:33.333" Score="14" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the community has marked a Question as On Hold (for whatever reason), it seems odd that the Stack system can allow the Querent to choose an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if the question isn't stack ready yet, why do we allow an answer for it to be chosen? If anything, that's bypassing the On Hold aspect. While answers are good, it's better to have answers to good questions so that the answers are usable to the larger community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If there is a consensus, I'd like to recommend that On Hold questions prevent answers from being chosen.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-04-12T18:16:51.493" LastActivityDate="2018-04-13T17:17:28.070" Title="Why are Questions marked as ON HOLD allowed to have an answer chosen?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7891" CreationDate="2018-04-13T17:17:28.070" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;They have no bearing on each other, so there's no reason one should affect the other. Just like we can vote regardless of close status, and close regardless of votes, accepted answers and close status are also just totally separate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being closed doesn't prevent any existing answer from actually winding up solving the answer's question. Having information that it solved their problem is useful for future visitors and we wouldn't want to prevent ourselves from getting that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;if the question isn't stack ready yet&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closure doesn't indicate it's not stack ready yet, it indicates five or so people thought it was. They may be completely wrong, and the question can get reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, questions might be stack-ready &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt;, because they're looking for opinions, or off-topic, etc. Still no harm in getting an accepted answer marked in that situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mention in comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;but the main difference is closure vs Hold&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“On Hold” is the same as Closed. It was just a new name introduced to convey the temporary and non-punitive nature of our question closures to newbies, who are used to forums where questions being closed is permanent and a punishment. (Well, also, an edit to an on-hold question can bump it into the reopen review queue where an edit to a closed question won't do the same, but that's it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-04-13T17:17:28.070" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7893" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-14T20:19:07.397" Score="0" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, the question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5784/what-monsters-are-depicted-on-the-4-0-dm-screen?rq=1&quot;&gt;What monsters are depicted on the 4.0 DM Screen?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; has 3 answers that each contribute a bit of answer to the question and collectively answer it.  Rather than 3 separate answers, I think they should be appended one after the other into a single answer, since that's the entire point of the Community Wiki option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-04-15T13:59:58.453" Title="Can we get the answers to this question merged into a single CW answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7893" CreationDate="2018-04-14T22:01:33.600" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I've soured on CW answers after &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6213/23970&quot;&gt;my brief dalliance&lt;/a&gt; with them. I'd be more interested in seeing you assemble the parts into one comprehensive answer, with attribution liberally sprinkled about. Nobody's likely to accuse a top-20 name in the reputation league of trying to pad their stats, and they'd be wrong if they did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think either way's right or wrong in this case, though. That there ^^ is what my instinct would be if I were looking at such a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-04-14T22:01:33.600" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7893" CreationDate="2018-04-14T22:35:39.303" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree this seems like a decent use case for Community Wiki. I'd also like to see a comprehensive answer that's verifiable and not just &quot;maybe it's this?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've posted a Community Wiki answer with numbering: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120494/1204&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120494/1204&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks to a later edit by TDW, #2 is the only one left without a conclusive answer. If anyone knows for sure what that one is, feel free to add it in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This isn't endorsing this as a scenarion which others should use CW as well; I just chose to do so in this case because I can.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-15T13:59:58.453" LastActivityDate="2018-04-15T13:59:58.453" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7896" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7899" CreationDate="2018-04-15T15:25:53.003" Score="2" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have some old 4e tags that should probably be cleaned up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/s&gt; (burninated)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/s&gt; (burninated)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/s&gt; (burninated)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sustained-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sustained-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sustained-powers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;strong&gt;(preserved at doppelgreener's request)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These should be replaced with the more general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt; tag. This change is in a similar vein to the recent decision not to have tags for the 3.P schools of magic, and to instead use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag as well as possibly more thematic tags such as mind control, creating undead, etc. as needed by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far the following tags on these questions have been replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powers&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120504/is-it-possible-to-use-fey-step-to-bypass-locks&quot;&gt;Is it possible to use Fey step to bypass locks?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt; (a recent question which brought the issue to light)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77132/do-i-have-to-prepare-wizards-level-2-encounter-spells&quot;&gt;Do I have to prepare wizards level 2 encounter spells?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55055/can-a-character-with-ghost-of-the-rooftops-climb-like-spider-man&quot;&gt;Can a character with Ghost of the Rooftops climb like Spider-Man?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36792/responding-to-opportunity-attacks-with-snarling-wolf-stance&quot;&gt;Responding to Opportunity Attacks with Snarling Wolf Stance&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36746/how-does-skilled-companion-work-in-dungeons-and-dragons-4e&quot;&gt;How does &amp;quot;Skilled Companion&amp;quot; work in Dungeons and Dragons 4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33403/does-glowering-threat-work-the-same-way-as-a-mark-or-differently&quot;&gt;Does glowering threat work the same way as a mark or differently?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15223/how-often-can-secondary-powers-be-used&quot;&gt;How often can secondary powers be used?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/utility-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;utility-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;utility-powers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58497/using-an-encounter-power-with-combat-challenge-martial-power-ii&quot;&gt;Using an Encounter Power with Combat Challenge? [Martial Power II]&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57111/how-exactly-does-phrenic-strike-work&quot;&gt;How exactly does Phrenic Strike Work?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27510/why-does-infernal-wraths-burst-10-target-1-enemy&quot;&gt;Why does Infernal Wrath&amp;#39;s burst 10 target 1 enemy?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26404/how-many-encounter-powers-can-i-use-during-an-encounter&quot;&gt;How many Encounter Powers can I use during an Encounter?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15942/replacing-dilettante-power-with-a-level-13-encounter-power&quot;&gt;Replacing Dilettante power with a level 13 encounter power&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6528/does-readying-an-encounter-or-daily-power-expend-it-automatically&quot;&gt;Does readying an encounter or daily power expend it automatically?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/10707/are-the-victims-of-wrathful-aspect-spared-if-they-are-immune-to-fear&quot;&gt;Are the victims of Wrathful Aspect spared if they are immune to Fear?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6107/does-bolt-of-genius-restore-all-of-a-clerics-uses-of-healing-word-or-just-one&quot;&gt;Does Bolt of Genius restore ALL of a Cleric&amp;#39;s uses of Healing Word or just one?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5673/is-a-utility-power-that-has-the-encounter-keyword-considered-an-encounter-power&quot;&gt;Is a utility power that has the encounter keyword considered an &amp;quot;encounter power&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/encounter-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;encounter-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;encounter-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78528/is-reapers-challenge-really-that-broken-did-i-get-it-wrong&quot;&gt;Is Reaper&amp;#39;s Challenge really that broken? Did I get it wrong?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71044/is-there-time-after-a-free-action-triggers-to-use-another-free-action-before-con&quot;&gt;Is there time after a free action triggers to use another free action before continuing?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62307/warlocks-shadow-legion&quot;&gt;Warlock&amp;#39;s Shadow Legion&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22679/can-the-pixies-teleport-trick-make-you-invincible&quot;&gt;Can the Pixie&amp;#39;s Teleport Trick make you invincible?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26981/persistent-threat-and-rain-of-steel&quot;&gt;Persistent Threat and Rain of Steel&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15324/are-pathfinder-daily-spells-24hours-or-date&quot;&gt;Are Pathfinder daily spells 24hours or date&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13786/whats-the-duration-of-savage-transformation&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the duration of Savage Transformation?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5316/how-often-per-day-can-the-living-missile-attack-power-be-used&quot;&gt;How often per Day can the Living Missile Attack power be used?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/daily-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;daily-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;daily-powers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T07:04:53.563" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T07:04:53.563" Title="Burnination of D&amp;D 4e power type tags" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7897" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7898" CreationDate="2018-04-15T20:04:50.377" Score="6" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;Would a question specifically about maptool functions (i.e. Macros) be off-topic here, given the &quot;tools&quot; and &quot;gm-techniques&quot; tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41438" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-15T20:22:09.383" LastActivityDate="2018-04-15T20:22:09.383" Title="Can I ask about Maptool?" Tags="|support|tools|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7897" CreationDate="2018-04-15T20:07:33.027" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you can. We offer advice on using game-adjacent tools such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roll20&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roll20&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roll20&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pcgen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pcgen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pcgen&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We had a past question already about maptool to which I've added the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/maptool&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;maptool&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;maptool&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-04-15T20:07:33.027" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7896" CreationDate="2018-04-16T23:35:47.527" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would request you don't burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sustained-powers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sustained-powers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sustained-powers&lt;/a&gt;. Leave it as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other tags are &quot;a power, but with this timing or categorisation&quot;. That's not all that functionally important. I don't personally object to burninating those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But sustained powers are a whole bag of mechanics on their own requiring unique understanding because of what's involved in a power being sustained. That's a distinct topic materially worth tagging and enabling people to search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-16T23:50:29.840" LastActivityDate="2018-04-16T23:50:29.840" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7900" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-19T15:28:54.903" Score="7" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag has (only) 4 questions and is only recently created (early March). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/specialabilities&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specialabilities&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specialabilities&lt;/a&gt; seems useless and should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we burninate this tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-21T20:33:44.933" LastActivityDate="2018-04-21T20:33:44.933" Title="Make [specialabilities] not special" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7901" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7900" CreationDate="2018-04-19T16:07:18.050" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree. The tag should be removed. Of the 4 questions it is attached to (one of which is closed), 3 would be better categorized by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; and the fourth apparently tries to apply it to spell effects which falls under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;. Additionally it seems like an unnecessary and confusing tag to even have (without really coming up with a narrow definition), after all what &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a special ability in D&amp;amp;D 5e for example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag name is formatted incorrectly as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For, all the reasons above, I say let it burn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: Tag has been removed by @ObliviousSage and is no longer special.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-04-21T17:50:19.170" LastActivityDate="2018-04-21T17:50:19.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7874" CreationDate="2018-04-20T11:54:29.377" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;You might want to ask specific questions about the things you want to change. So don't ask about designers intent, ask about Homebrew. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Would it unbalance the game/have unintended sideeffects if I changed X&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35874" LastActivityDate="2018-04-20T11:54:29.377" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7904" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7905" CreationDate="2018-04-22T02:19:16.003" Score="8" ViewCount="687" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently created a Q&amp;amp;A (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120959/can-i-trigger-an-opportunity-attack-by-forcing-an-opponent-to-move-out-of-my-rea/120960#120960&quot;&gt;Can I trigger an Opportunity Attack by forcing an opponent to move out of my reach?&lt;/a&gt;) for the purposes of having a general question to dupe questions dealing with forced movement causing OAs to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I subsequently went through and closed 6 questions as duplicates of it (5 old, 1 current) and added it to 3 questions that were already closed as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if it would have been more proper to post this to meta &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; I did this (in retrospect the answer is clearly &quot;yes&quot;), but given that one user has disagreed with one of my choices I figured I'd post what I did here to make sure everything is kosher and agreed upon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions I marked as duplicates:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56481/does-sentinels-opportunity-attack-trigger-when-i-shove-someone&quot;&gt;Does Sentinel&amp;#39;s opportunity attack trigger when I shove someone?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73160/can-a-shove-give-an-opportunity-attack&quot;&gt;Can a shove give an Opportunity Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70408/if-a-warlocks-repelling-blast-hits-an-enemy-engaged-with-an-ally-does-that-a&quot;&gt;If a Warlock&amp;#39;s &amp;quot;Repelling Blast&amp;quot; hits an enemy engaged with an ally, does that ally get an attack of opportunity from it moving away?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68098/can-pulling-with-thorn-whip-generate-an-opportunity-attack&quot;&gt;Can pulling with Thorn Whip generate an Opportunity Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120934/if-a-pc-levitates-an-opponent-away-does-the-pc-get-an-opportunity-attack-agains&quot;&gt;If a PC Levitates an opponent away, does the PC get an Opportunity Attack against them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104219/do-you-get-opportunity-attacks-on-creatures-that-are-pushed&quot;&gt;Do you get opportunity attacks on creatures that are pushed?&lt;/a&gt; (already closed as duplicate)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95317/can-i-make-an-opportunity-attack-against-a-grappled-creature-if-its-being-moved&quot;&gt;Can I make an opportunity attack against a grappled creature if it&amp;#39;s being moved out of my reach?&lt;/a&gt; (already closed as duplicate)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96130/can-i-grapple-and-drag-someone-to-grant-opportunity-attacks-against-them&quot;&gt;Can I grapple and drag someone to grant opportunity attacks against them?&lt;/a&gt; (already closed as duplicate)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99340/does-the-infestation-cantrip-cause-the-target-to-provoke-opportunity-attacks&quot;&gt;Does the Infestation cantrip cause the target to provoke opportunity attacks?&lt;/a&gt; (reopened)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last one has already been reversed because another user disagreed with it. I still think it is a duplicate, but I can see why it might not be considered that as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were other questions dealing with the topic that were outside the scope of my general question so I let them be of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyways, I guess I am posting this as more of a record of what I did and so people can clearly go through and debate/reverse any of the things I did. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please let me know if there is any disagreement about anything I have marked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll accept my lumps as well if what I did was out of line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T14:07:24.910" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T17:56:42.183" Title="Forced movement and OA duplicates" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7904" CreationDate="2018-04-22T02:45:44.147" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;So... have you ever seen even a diamond mod suddenly go close that many questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s a tip you should probably post before going on a mass rampage of this sort.  Heck, people post before making half as many tag changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t have the time to go root through them all on a Saturday night, but yeah, post before making mass changes in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Time passes...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK after review I think this is working fine.  The slightly different questions remain as signposts, but there's no sense having a rush to get free rep with the first &quot;no&quot; to every iteration of the question.  The infestation one was slightly different as it begged the question of whether the movement was indeed &quot;forced&quot; in the same way, so fair enough.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a lot more tightly scoped than the earlier &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/65461/23064&quot;&gt;&quot;canonical surprise&quot; question&lt;/a&gt;, which was more &quot;here's an essay on surprise, link everything about surprise here.&quot; That's too broad.  I think &quot;forced movement and OAs&quot; is pretty tightly scoped though. A dozen questions about a one line rule (mostly obviously resulting from just not having found that specific clause) is different from a dozen questions about an entire page-long rules subsystem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T17:56:42.183" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T17:56:42.183" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7906" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-23T09:38:38.423" Score="21" ViewCount="370" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121109/sentinel-raven-uses-too-much-awesome-magic&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; about a subclass feature from an Unearthed Arcana article. I know that Unearthed Arcana stuff is playtest material and therefore might not be balanced. That’s why I wanted to clarify it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my question I described the problematic situation as it happened in my game, which involved a homebrew magic item. This homebrew magic item itself is not the focus of the question, it’s just related to it. I didn’t mention that there is a homebrew magic item involved, because the problematic situation could also come up with a similar, official magic item. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another reason why I avoided to mention that I use homebrew stuff is, because it seems to me, that a lot of answers to homebrew-related questions are of lower quality compared to the rest. Plus, answers to such questions tend to be in the vein of “Oh, you use homebrew and now you have a problem? That’s your fault, stupid, we can’t help you with that”. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The people commenting on my question seem to insist on me mentioning that homebrew stuff is involved. I disagree, mainly because a situation like the one that lead to my question could also come up in a game that’s 100% official. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The next time I ask a question about the goings-on in my game, would it be better to come up with a fictional scenario that only involved official stuff, rather than describing what actually happened? That seems stupid to me, but I would probably do it, if I can avoid (unnecessary) discussions in the comments about whether something is homebrew or not. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40660" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T14:26:06.573" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T18:53:23.960" Title="Keep my homebrew stuff secret in order to avoid biased answers" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7906" CreationDate="2018-04-23T10:08:03.763" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've cleaned up the comments on your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The benefit of mentioning the ring is homebrew is that, if you don't, people will respond going &quot;wait, there's a ring that lets me do that!?&quot; and go looking for it, both out of curiousity and because it may materially relate to your situation. You mentioned you weren't sure if you were applying the rules correctly — well, what if there was something in that ring's rules that you had also missed? It's worth mentioning it's homebrew to take that factor out of the equation. If you didn't mention that, you'd get people asking what ring let you do that, for the above reasons. I recommend leaving that mention in, but if you have trouble as a result of it, please flag for moderator attention if you'd like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The next time I ask a question about the goings-on in my game, would it be better to come up with a fictional scenario that only involved official stuff, rather than describing what actually happend? That seems stupid to me, but I would probably do it, if I can avoid (unnecessary) discussions in the comments about whether something is homebrew or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack exchange works best when we ask “practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face” (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;). Usually that means describing your situation using its actual details and asking us to resolve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Describing theoretical situations &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; work. If you can come up with a simple situation to distill your issue, separated from any extraneous details, you can ask about that. That's how a lot of our rules interactions questions get written. That relies on your situation being simple though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it's more complex, like this one where you're running into a complex gameplay situation, doing that doesn't work so well. People may ask for extra details like party composition or how you're running encounters, the question will get closed as unclear because those details look that important to voters that we can't proceed without them, but you won't be able to answer because the situations totally theoretical and those details don't exist. When providing clarifications has come down to &quot;well I made this up so let me make up extra stuff&quot; in the past, it hasn't gone well and has been a mess. Describe your actual situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Plus, answers to such questions tend to be in the vein of “Oh, you use homebrew and now you have a problem? That’s your fault, stupid, we can’t help you with that”. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to be keeping an eye out on that. Thanks for bringing this up. We embrace a plurality of playstyles here (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt;) and should be fine with people using homebrew. D&amp;amp;D homewbrew can be difficult to create and is often a source of the problems being asked about, &lt;em&gt;however&lt;/em&gt; we shouldn't be coming across as berating them for daring to try. If you see stuff like this, please flag it for moderator attention. Use the &quot;in need of moderator intervention&quot; flag and point us to where it's happening in the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T16:21:03.767" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T16:21:03.767" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7908" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7909" CreationDate="2018-04-23T16:43:55.820" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question about an issue I'm seeing in my current D&amp;amp;D 5e campaign but I'm not sure if it'll get closed or not so I figured I could try workshopping it here first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Background:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My players have missed a reoccurring &amp;quot;theme&amp;quot; in our campaign. I've dropped maybe 6-7 (relatively subtle) hints about it existing but they haven't picked up on it. Knowing the hint will make some future events clearer, but it isn't a be-all-end-all scenario and they can make it through without realizing the hint, it'll just be harder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, imagine that there's an ongoing motif of there being four things. Four-sided-icons, four pillars in the temple, the god has four names, etc. The quest is to find the god's missing magical macguffins. If they know four is a theme here, they know they're looking for four items. Otherwise, it's going to be rather nebulous from their side and make long-term planning difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Question:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think my question is &amp;quot;If my players have missed all my hints for a non-critical story element, should I spoon feed it to them?&amp;quot; but that's pretty opinion-based. Basically I'm trying to figure out if I should cave and tell them the hint out-of-character to make sure they get it, or if I should just let them proceed without it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know there should be the typical &amp;quot;looking for DM and players' opinions based on experience&amp;quot; disclaimer, but is that enough to keep the question open?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-08T01:53:55.123" Title="Would this question about spoon feeding my players hints get closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7908" CreationDate="2018-04-23T16:51:39.410" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, that would be opinion-based and closed. Asking us &quot;should I cave or should I let them proceed?&quot; is fundamentally a matter of asking us for our opinion and prompting discussion. That's the kind of things for forums (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;) or for &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;our chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may instead want to ask us how to deliver clues and/or help them piece together the clues they've seen so far, or help them recognise you were dropping clues at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See for example this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/15148/1204&quot;&gt;How can I help my PCs remember clues that they found?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T16:51:39.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7908" CreationDate="2018-04-23T17:42:35.617" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Any question that contains the phrase &quot;should I do X&quot; is opinion-based and &quot;should&quot; be closed.  The primary problem is that this way of stating a problem pulls low quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually what you mean to ask is either &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;How can I effectively do X in my situation&quot; (define effectiveness per your values), or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What are the pros and cons of doing X&quot;?  (Teach a man to fish...)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously good answerers will answer a &quot;should I&quot; question as if stated as &quot;pros and cons&quot; so sometimes this happens naturally.  But it also draws all the people out of the woodwork that want to say &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no,&quot; turning off the parts of their brains that consider that there may be other playstyles, that something might work in some cases, some groups, some games but not others...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T17:42:35.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7911" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-23T18:48:47.240" Score="2" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something an old DM of mine has done with an NPC has bothered me for going on 20+ years now and wanted to leverage the community to help me settle it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue is this particular NPC hated by all (I mean absolutely reviled) has been in every iteration when we change editions. He has been updated and tweaked, supposedly to meet the requirements and limitations of the current edition. Unfortunately I don't buy it one bit as this DM won't share any details of the build although he swears it is legal in all editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I first met this NPC in 2nd edition but had been also in 1st. My question revolves the maximum number of attacks in each edition given a specific limitation, in this case I know that the NPC was at least mostly a Thief-Acrobat from the Unearthed Arcana.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have looked around for specifics on editions and the maximum number of attacks but none of them answer my particular quandary. So...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it acceptable to ask this question knowing it spans multiple editions and decades in play and in reality is a series of questions albeit tightly spun with a specific purpose? When a 2nd edition character exceeded 25 attacks in a single round I worried but it has gotten worse in later iterations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29513" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:36:53.150" Title="How do I ask a question across multiple editions but is tightly coupled?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7911" CreationDate="2018-04-23T19:04:02.070" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is a stackable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either, you are asking if NPC-X is possible D&amp;amp;D Nth Edition&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or, you are asking &quot;how has Build-Y changed between editions?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of which (theoretically) have finite answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T19:04:02.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7911" CreationDate="2018-04-23T19:19:27.493" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is stackable&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/dungeons-and-dragons/info&quot;&gt;tag description&lt;/a&gt; says &quot;Questions relating to Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons as a whole, or to &lt;em&gt;multiple versions of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt;.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question just applies to multiple editions. Just make sure you state the question and issue clearly to avoid the Too Broad flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-04-23T21:36:53.150" LastActivityDate="2018-04-23T21:36:53.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7914" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7917" CreationDate="2018-04-23T22:13:47.240" Score="34" ViewCount="1014" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we have a bit of a problem with designer reason questions on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A little history: designer-reasons questions were our attempt to save &quot;what is this rule for&quot; questions.  Those were being answered entirely with rank opinion and causing those questions to be closed as opinion-based. The logic was that the only way to actually know what a rule is for is either direct designer commentary, or extrapolation from clear textual evidence. Otherwise it's all effectively guessing.  However, as with game-recommendation questions, the set of rules we've built around these to try to maintain them is not being effectively upheld by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have 10 Meta questions about designer reasoning questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we have 66 of them on the main site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's an about 15% &quot;Need to take it to Meta&quot; ratio.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More and more, we're having to delete answers, close questions, protect questions, take it to meta, delete long comment threads, and so on for these questions.  On the last 10 designer-reasons questions, there are 10 total deleted answers. Most require editing to clarify &quot;NO SPECULATION,&quot; add the tag, correct people asking &quot;can I speculate&quot; in comments... For some reason, these questions are providing a extremely disproportionate amount of required moderation and intervention as compared to normal questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've gone over the &quot;right way&quot; to answer designer intent questions a bunch on meta and we've been trying to just set good examples with questions in the hope that the community in general will start doing the right thing (both in using them right and in using their rep-powers to effectively moderate issues with them).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last time &quot;it didn't happen&quot; in this way we had to get rid of game-recommendation questions.  We aren't going to heavily mod-police any specific type of questions regularly; it makes users sad and burns our limited pool of effort.  If a kind of question is going to be a problem on average, we'll just ax it instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have any ideas (besides &quot;keep doing what we've been doing&quot;) to make &quot;Why is this rule the way it is&quot; questions from pulling disproportionately subjective answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm afraid some of the problem is that some of them are legit inquiry, and others are &quot;I don't like this rule justify it to me.&quot;  I can't figure out a way to sift the two apart (though I know them when I see them) and it's the latter that are most problematic.  Or the third category that inherits a bit from both, which is &quot;this rule seems different in this new edition, but surely it's not!  Tell me it's not!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, unless you're designing a game or house-ruling something and wondering about its balance, I'm not sure what actual, practical problem these questions help people solve - and that's coming out in the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:41:21.113" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:41:21.113" Title="How do we save designer reasoning questions? [2018]" Tags="|discussion|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="18" ClosedDate="2018-05-04T02:51:25.610" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7811" CreationDate="2018-04-23T23:12:42.933" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The concern I have with Designer-Reasons Questions in general is this. &lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt; If the answer is available online it is probably googleable, and any answer given will be a simple copy and paste, link, or citation. If this is the case it probably indicates a lack of research on the part of the asker, or ignorance of canon source materials.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Most games have some kind of FAQ or similar Q&amp;amp;A type of method for finding the answers to direct &quot;What do the designers say about X?&quot; Some like 5e have things like Jeremy Crawford's twitter where you can specifically ask them your question. Most of the games even tell you what they consider canon. If a person researches all canon sources and doesn't find their answer, asking on RPG-se isn't going to get them a canon answer.&lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt; This seems to make these types of questions useless as far as RPG-se is concerned. Since nobody can answer them until an official answer is published, and answers like &quot;I looked here, here, here and here but didn't find anything&quot; are not allowed. It does not allow any useful information on the subject. At least being allowed to say &quot;I don't know&quot; gives the asker the knowledge, that by and large the RPG-se community doesn't have the info they want. &lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt; My personal recommendation would be to refer the asker to the appropriate sources for official rules of the game in question, remind them that we are not the designers of their game and cannot answer their question of designer intent authoritatively, and either have them rework the question so that it can be used for constructive answers on the subject in question or close the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44027" LastEditorUserId="44027" LastEditDate="2018-04-24T06:56:46.227" LastActivityDate="2018-04-24T06:56:46.227" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7916" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7906" CreationDate="2018-04-24T02:01:37.903" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am one of the users who advocates that you should mention that your PC is using a homebrew magic item. But first, let me preface my answer that this:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Oh, you use homebrew and now you have a problem? That’s your fault, stupid, we can’t help you with that&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is unacceptable in this site. We have a strict &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt; policy around here (RPG is one of the most strict SEs when it comes to enforcing this), and this is a safe environment to be open about your playstyle preferences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's why I &quot;strongly suggested&quot; you mention that your player was using a homebrew ring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that specific question, you were asking about how different mechanics interact with each other, if said interactions were legal, and how you could solve it in-game. Then you presented three game elements that the player was using (the raven-familiar, the ring, and the wand). As an answerer, I will be looking at all three of these features, along with existing rules, to see how they interact and maybe spot something you missed, if any. And if those features cannot be found anywhere, we're going to ask about where you are getting those from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions also need to be sufficiently sourced, not just the answers. A question about an unknown item or class feature cannot be evaluated, it would be closed as &quot;Unclear what you're asking&quot;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For that specific question, it was sufficient to say that both the ring and the wand were homebrew, that you made them yourself, and that there was nothing about your homebrew that made the interaction illegal (this part is important! I've seen people insist that askers post the homebrew verbatim, and that is because it isn't explicitly stated that the homebrew wasn't the problem. Make it a point that that is not the case, here. This also tells potential answerers that this homebrew should not be &quot;touched&quot; in the answer, and that if anything was wrong, it's the UA content. That was a long side note, sorry.), with those, you don't need to go into the details of your homebrew, your homebrew cannot be the source of the problem- it's not like rings that enable the wearer to cast spells is unheard of. That would leave answerers one feature to look into, the raven.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Let's play 'what if'&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What if&lt;/em&gt; there was nothing you missed and the warlock could freely use the raven as they were and that the class feature or homebrew was the problem? If you had gated the information as you proposed, we'd never know that, and couldn't give you a sufficient answer on how to approach the player about nerfing either the class feature or the homebrew.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is why you should always try to be as specific and as close to the actual problem as possible; we want to help you solve your problem, whether it's something in the interaction of the rules you missed, or whether it's pointing out a weird interaction that is breaking the game, or if it's approaching a player about nerfing the feature, homebrew or both; we're here to help.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T18:53:23.960" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T18:53:23.960" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-24T06:18:55.760" Score="33" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Designer reasoning questions should be banned.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've come to the conclusion that we should consider designer reasoning questions off-topic for the site. In brief, such questions do not have much value to the site, and there is precedent for banning developer intent questions. Additionally, the useful designer reasoning questions can be reformulated into acceptable balance questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Many designer reasoning questions are not about users' problems.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our tour states,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Focus on questions about an actual problem you have faced. Include details about what you have tried and exactly what you are trying to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, designer reasoning questions don't actually address DM/player issues. What actual problem does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111271/why-is-the-dd-gorgon-a-metal-bull&quot;&gt;knowing why D&amp;amp;D's gorgon is a metal bull&lt;/a&gt; solve? A lot of these questions, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109605/what-are-the-designers-reasons-for-blowguns-requiring-martial-proficiency&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, appear to be aimed more at satisfying curiosity or settling a bet rather than dealing with a real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As other rpg.meta questions have demonstrated (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5641/game-rec-and-designer-intent&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7342/to-what-extent-does-a-well-known-representative-from-an-rpg-company-who-represen&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6507/is-there-an-established-way-to-handle-a-games-designer-on-the-site&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3526/do-authors-overrule-users&quot;&gt;4&lt;/a&gt;), developers do not have any privileged status. If our aim is to address practical issues in playing RPGs, then developer &lt;em&gt;intent&lt;/em&gt; is actually &lt;em&gt;worthless&lt;/em&gt;; what really matters is what other people who have played the game have experienced. Developers might have some useful input through their playtesting, but there is often a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121057/is-hunger-of-hadar-seriously-overpowered-or-am-i-reading-it-wrong&quot;&gt;disconnect between apparent intent and reality&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Useful designer reasoning questions can be reframed into on-topic questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A number of designer reasoning questions are secretly other kinds of questions, and can be rewritten as such. For instance, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120644/what-is-the-rationale-behind-the-comparatively-low-number-of-spells-known-for-so&quot;&gt;What is the rationale behind the comparatively low number of spells known for Sorcerers?&lt;/a&gt; can be reframed as, &quot;Is it unbalanced to increase the number of spells known for Sorcerers?&quot;. Likewise, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117226/what-have-designers-said-for-why-they-made-worn-items-fireproof&quot;&gt;What have designers said for why they made worn items fireproof?&lt;/a&gt; can be rewritten as, &quot;Will making worn items flammable break my game?&quot; (yes, it will). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These DMs are really asking about the practicality of homebrewed rules, which doesn't require a developer to weigh in. In fact, questions like these are probably &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; served by other DMs who have firsthand experience with similar homebrew rules. Unfortunately, their current formulation actually bans such answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this way, many of the more borderline designer intent questions can be reframed into other topics. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22944/how-do-touch-spells-work-in-pathfinder&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt;, about the wording of the rules, is a good example: it is a question about the rules that has some designer intent flavor, but is arguably not a designer intent question per se. Likewise, questions about game design can be asked that are about the game design itself, and not necessarily intent specifically. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, then, it's &lt;em&gt;asking&lt;/em&gt; about designer intent that's problematic here. &lt;strong&gt;I think it's fine for designer intent arguments to support answers, but not to form the basis of a question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Banning intent questions has a precedent on Arqade.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The gaming stackexchange, Arqade, has banned questions centered on developer intent (&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7385/on-questions-of-developer-intent-and-the-routing-around-thereof/7388#7388&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3436/why-this-question-is-bad-for-this-site/3443#3443&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11370/are-questions-about-hardware-design-decisions-classified-as-developer-intent-q/11372#11372&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;). The rationale given is,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The reason &quot;Why did they design it that way?&quot; is off-topic is because it can only be answered by the developers, either directly or indirectly. If a developer hasn't answered the question in the past then the only way the question can be answered is if they happen to be browsing Arqade and see the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether or not this rationale is compelling, Arqade seems to be doing quite well without developer intent questions. Therefore, I don't think that banning these questions will cause our site to burn down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We can't seem to leave unanswerable questions unanswered.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary guidance I've seen for these questions seems to be, &quot;let unanswerable questions stay unanswered.&quot; This argument has some precedent (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/20638/should-you-accept-the-best-answer-for-problems-that-cant-be-solved-yet/20639#20639&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/48013/what-do-i-do-when-a-question-cant-be-answered&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/140570/what-should-we-do-about-potentially-unanswerable-questions/140572#140572&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;), in meta, although some think unanswerable questions are bad (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/97720&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/48015&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as @mxyzplk has demonstrated, we can't leave these unanswered. People keep trying to answer them with speculation, and they keep having to be deleted, which wastes everybody's time. While these questions might ideally be left alone, that has not played out in practice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As much as I love getting reputation for just Googling things, I believe that we should close designer reasoning questions as off-topic. They don't bring much value to the site, and they cause a lot of controversy and hurt feelings. Any benefits of designer reasoning questions can most likely be retained by rewriting the question to be about balance or homebrew, and other sites have banned these questions without issue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastEditorUserId="32262" LastEditDate="2018-04-24T20:03:01.723" LastActivityDate="2018-04-24T20:03:01.723" CommentCount="27" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-24T16:45:26.380" Score="32" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Instead focus on: What problem are you trying to solve at the table?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a rule looks weird or feels out of whack, a lot of different questions arise, one of which is &quot;what were they thinking?&quot;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;What they were thinking&quot; doesn't matter in our RPG.SE context.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=42972950#42972950&quot;&gt;I will quote @BESW for a good idea&lt;/a&gt; of why &quot;we are here&quot; on this stack: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We aren't here on the Stack to read the rulebooks to people. We're&#xA;  here to help people learn how to synthesize the mechanics, the&#xA;  non-mechanical text, the social context, our personal experience, the&#xA;  learning of the broader community, to apply all that to a particular&#xA;  real-life problem someone's having and find a solution for it  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to get the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; pointed at the problem to solve &lt;em&gt;so that play at the table isn't impeded by a given rule or decision&lt;/em&gt;, rather than being pointed at discomfort with a given design decision.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;To save them, close them until they are edited&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a variety of question classes that require a bit of tweaking to meet SE standards.  That is a feature of this site, not a bug.  We have a whole community to aid and assist question askers with the asking of questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issues that evoke designer reasons are often related to how a rule plays out, a perceived mismatch in tone or style, a feeling of &quot;we didn't used to do it that way&quot; and even a clash with play at a given table.  The direction of the edit assistance is to arrive at a question aimed at a problem that needs solving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Some of these questions are thinly disguised rants&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Close these as opinion based.  (Which in some cases is being done).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside: if enough design decisions make people not enjoy the &quot;feel&quot; of a game, the option to play others games is happily available, but that doesn't strike me as where should go with answers to question like this.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-04-24T20:15:36.730" LastActivityDate="2018-04-24T20:15:36.730" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-25T00:23:31.980" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my opinion the designer-reasons tag does not add enough value to RPG.SE in its current form to warrant the amount of oversight it seems to require to meet restrictions it imparts on the answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this I decided to put together some pro's and con's for a couple options that could be considered. This is by no means meant to be an exhaustive list but I thought it would be a good place to start collecting ideas for direct comparison. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anybody wants to add more pros and cons to the ideas I had or have other possible solutions you think should be considered, feel free to add them or comment so someone who who can edit my post or I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some possible solutions are:&lt;hr&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. Remove the tag altogether.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;br&gt;The justification for this would be; most questions asked in designer-reasons can be reframed in a way that can meet the needs of the asker, without having an actual quote on the subject from the designer.&lt;br&gt; &#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;This would remove the tedious oversight that the tag is creating.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&lt;br&gt;Those people who really truly need a designer quote because (insert reason here) can't specify that.&#xA;&lt;br&gt;I don't think this is the best option but it is an option&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Allow answers that use designer published sources but aren't direct designer responses to the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;The justification for this would be that it allows the do or die people mentioned above a medium to request designer quotes but it doesn't restrict answers to direct quotes from the designers specific to the subject matter.&#xA;&lt;br&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;More freedom to actually convey any information at all about the question if a direct designer quote is not available.&#xA;&lt;br&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;Askers may never get an answer that satisfies if there is not a quote that satisfies them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44027" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T02:43:22.463" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T02:43:22.463" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-25T01:31:32.883" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/51944/15469&quot;&gt;someone who asked one of them&lt;/a&gt;, I think the best way forward is to &lt;strong&gt;let 'em burn.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're a hassle for the mods, they end up being a hassle for the people who ask them, and I presume it's annoying to answer them thinking it's simple and then have it deleted. And after all that, what does the site (and the querent) get out of it? Generally either nothing or an answer that is, at its core, just a link to somewhere that has the actual answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are exceptions, of course, but as evidenced by the existence of this very meta question, they are the exceptions, rather than the reverse. On the whole, I think this is another example of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5720/15469&quot;&gt;something this site just doesn't do very well&lt;/a&gt;, and that's ok.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2018-04-25T01:31:32.883" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-25T13:46:10.293" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Designer-reasons questions should be off-topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;RPG expert&lt;/a&gt; isn't substantially more capable of answering a designer-reasons question than a non-RPG expert, because all either of them is going to do is Google until they can find the right blog or tweet or interview. Answering doesn't really require RPG expertise so much as skill with phrasing search queries, plus a dash of luck in being the first to find the right quote, if one even exists. If there appears to be no such quote, you can't prove that anyway, rendering it unanswerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, this isn't much different than asking the community to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions&quot;&gt;read the book to you&lt;/a&gt;, except in this case the book is Google and the entire book is self-indexing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could easily ask a designer-reasons question of a person who knows &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; about RPG's and they could find the answer for you with a browser and a few minutes of their time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think these sorts of questions are off-topic. The tag should include a warning, and questions like this should be held until they are edited to be on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's up to the person asking the question to decide whether it's worth the effort for them to rephrase the question into an on-topic form. If they're desperately in search of an actual statement from a designer, then maybe SE isn't the venue to fulfill that need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-04-25T13:46:10.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7914" CreationDate="2018-04-25T15:05:31.960" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Treat these questions similarly to Charop questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta brain trust was able to arrive at a nicely organized &quot;how to write a charop question&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/22566&quot;&gt;meta that helps a lot in getting the charop style of questions to fit SE format, or be closed&lt;/a&gt;.    It ended up being a community wiki sort of answer, that has three examples of charop, and points to the kind that work well on RPG.SE.  This answer is placed to collect the proposals to break down, and clearly define the various &lt;em&gt;designer intent / what's behind this / was this a mistake&lt;/em&gt; style of questions in order to clearly identify which kind of this question class can be asked well enough to fit the SE format, and which ones need to be closed.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following is a list of the different types of designer-intent questions, and how they should be dealt with. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Rants:&lt;/em&gt; These are not questions, and should be closed. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Was this a mistake?&lt;/em&gt;: These are either more polite rants, or rules clarification questions. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;I don't like this rule, justify it to me&lt;/em&gt;: These are also a type of rant. While we can explain the practical functionality of rules, the designer-intent aspect of these questions usually are usually critical of the designer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Homebrew fiddling&lt;/em&gt;: We can easily handle homebrew questions--developer intent is not necessarily relevant to the success of a homebrew.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;this rule seems different in this new edition, but surely it's not! Tell me it's not!&lt;/em&gt;: This is a rules clarification question.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Designer intent questions are off-topic, but your question might be on-topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The site prefers questions that marshal its users' expertise. A question asking only about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; doesn't marshal that expertise. Further, the site's users have no special way to communicate with game designers. Essentially, a question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; asks the site's users to duplicate research that's already been done or should've been done prior to posing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;With that in mind, many &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions are about modifying or understanding existing rules, which is something we can address. Examine carefully the question's premise to see if the question is actually one of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Why did the designers make this terrible rule?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  An alternative question that is better suited to the site is&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;What impact will it have on the game if this rule is changed?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Keep in mind that the site frowns upon rants disguised as questions.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Is this rule's outcome intended by the game's designers?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  An alternative question that is better suited to the site is&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Have I been using this rule correctly?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;  or&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Is there a different way to implement this rule that yields superior results?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; way a question can be answered is with the words of the games designers, then that question should be posed to the game's designers directly. If only the designer's words will answer the question satisfactorily, the site's users &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; answer the question; the designer must instead. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In rare cases there may be a question that &lt;em&gt;demands&lt;/em&gt; a response from the game's designers. In such a case, that question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; include an explanation for that necessity demonstrating that no matter how experienced a player of that game is, a player's justification will fall short.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Finally, answers for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; contain direct citations from developer statements. Do not use this tag unless you want to intentionally restrict answers in this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this is &lt;em&gt;so&lt;/em&gt; high a bar that I (@HeyICanChan) can't think of any examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Please help to build this answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits to this answer are requested to improve it so that it is able to serve as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/22566&quot;&gt;charop answer did&lt;/a&gt; in formulating a method to save the few designer intent questions that are worthy of saving, and give better points on which ones to close as &quot;something we don't do well.&quot;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot;&gt;The search @mxyxplk did shows&lt;/a&gt; that there are already some good ideas on how to handle some of the subsets of this general question class. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7914/how-do-we-save-designer-reasoning-questions#comment25046_7917&quot;&gt;Per @HeyICanChan's comment&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Duck I agree that player experience can be as valuable as designer&#xA;  intent with regard to pedestrian questions, but for serious&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/75916/8610&quot;&gt;pants-on-head crazy nonsense rules&lt;/a&gt; wanting to know why they exist&#xA;  according to the designers before you adopt them into your homebrew&#xA;  heartbreaker seems—to this user, anyway—a perfectly valid use of the&#xA;  tag. (I totally admit, by the way, that this validity is really niche&#xA;  and won't stop the Has the dumb designer justified this stupid rule?&#xA;  questions, but I also really don't like losing a site function I may&#xA;  use!) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="32262" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T03:22:19.917" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T03:22:19.917" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7924" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-25T20:08:03.097" Score="0" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I have noticed that the order in which answers are displayed does not necessarily go from highest voted to lowest. It used to, at least for me... maybe a function of privilege change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this now a standard until acceptance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I ask is that it appears that most people looking at a question only read the first one or two posted answers, those late to the party with actually better answers or at least things no one else has considered don't seem to get votes by virtue of the person looking at them doesn't bother to scroll and read through all posted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize this is human nature and the nature of these types of venues but would it be possible to withhold the ability to vote until you actually have at least scanned through all answers. This seems to be fairer to me instead of fastest to post wins as it seems now. I might be over simplifying it or might be interpreting it incorrectly but it could be that some don't post because they realize they won't get read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most people want that dopamine hit for a good answer and even going into old posts where rules have changed and posting to them doesn't seem to glean any benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29513" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T10:34:40.420" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T10:34:40.420" Title="Is there a way to prevent simply upvoting the highest voted answer simply because it is easiest?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7925" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-26T02:57:32.830" Score="26" ViewCount="1687" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Largely cribbed from the 2017 check-in)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We, the elected moderators, wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels like things are going on the site. About &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6895/23970&quot;&gt;a year ago we did this&lt;/a&gt; and felt that it was pretty helpful in putting specificity on some issues, productively talking through some things, and recognizing where communication breakdowns were happening. It also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897/23970&quot;&gt;prompted an election&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of that we were reminded of some things going well. We encouraged more and have seen more involvement/leadership from &amp;quot;regular&amp;quot; moderators--users who have reached &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;moderation privileges&lt;/a&gt;. We've quickly dealt with some abusive users--hopefully quickly enough that few of you even noticed! (Though some did, and your flags and pings are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; helpful when you see something going wrong.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So again we'd like to share our thoughts and also get yours on what is going well and what could improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How this specific Q&amp;amp;A is run so that we get good value out of it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things we think still need improvement.  Please do the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post one kind of thing per answer, so that when people&#xA;upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not it's more clearly&#xA;actionable - if you write an essay about 4 different things, it's&#xA;not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote based on your agreement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's not have long comment threads -&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with an answer, post your own answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't just being pedantic.  If we have a 30-comment thread on an answer, what does that tell us we need to do?  Mostly it tells us whether one person is really irritated instead of whether a large part of the community disagrees, which is what we kinda want to get to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As usual, Be Nice applies to meta as well as the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. Focus on actions rather than characterizing people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here we go - our thoughts on things that are going well or need improvement. Feel free and add on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-10T06:17:05.927" LastActivityDate="2021-04-10T06:17:05.927" Title="How is the community doing? [2018]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="9" ClosedDate="2021-04-10T11:01:48.883" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7924" CreationDate="2018-04-26T04:57:40.363" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Welcome to democracy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The candidate(s) with the highest profile will win irrespective of their quality - this is true in all forms of democracy ever tried.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For stack exchange &quot;highest profile&quot; means at or near the top so all we have to do is use the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;best&lt;/a&gt; algorithm for ordering the answers. Fortunately, we know what that is - the lower bound of Wilson score confidence interval for a Bernoulli parameter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunatly, stack exchange doesn't use this method - the default method is the really, really bad Up votes - Down votes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7762/what-logic-dictates-the-order-answers-show-up-in&quot;&gt;method&lt;/a&gt;. They do this even though they have &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9731/fastest-gun-in-the-west-problem&quot;&gt;known&lt;/a&gt; it was wrong for 7 years. It isn't going to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T06:29:29.333" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T06:29:29.333" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-26T08:57:26.800" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We are thriving!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post counts per month are at an all-time high - March 2018 was the most active month in the site's history! (&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/revision/752104/1042804/posts-per-month&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ugly Data engine query&lt;/a&gt; for posts-per-month)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The popularity of this site is clearly ramping up in long-term. While increasing traffic occasionally brings forth new needs for moderation (such as the hot topic of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7914/how-do-we-save-designer-reasoning-questions&quot;&gt;designer reasons&lt;/a&gt;), overall I see the increased traffic as a healthy sign of the relatively rigid format of the Stack (compared to the more &quot;noisy&quot; forums) gaining traction and acceptance among the RPG communities around the world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T08:57:26.800" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7928" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-26T09:28:16.343" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We have an active and healthy chat&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; is active and remarkably nice. Discussion topics include (but are not limited to) tabletop RPGs, culture, curation of the main site content and birdwatching. Occasional arguments over matters of RPG paradigm flare up, but people are generally very good at managing their passionate opinions. No feuds, no vendettas. The occasional discussion that threatens to &quot;clog the chat&quot; gets neatly extracted to a dedicated side room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It could be more open, though&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chat is an excellent place to get more personalized advice in matters not covered by the main site (eg. idea generating questions) as well as to reach out to more experienced site users for informal guidance, but despite the site getting more posts recently, the chat remains rather small - at times it feels more like a secret clubhouse than an open discussion space. The discussion is largely by the same, small set of regulars, with new users finding their way in very infrequently. The chat link being hidden in the footer of the site is not exactly a good way to promote its existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm in favor of promoting chat to more users, eg. by reinvigorating the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7099/lets-brainstorm-some-chat-events&quot;&gt;chat event idea&lt;/a&gt;. However, at the same time, it needs to be stressed that the chat's purpose is not to replace any other site functionality (main or meta) and the present discipline of raising policy questions in Meta instead of &quot;informal&quot; discussion in chat needs to be maintained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2018-04-26T10:08:59.140" LastActivityDate="2018-04-26T10:08:59.140" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-26T14:13:48.687" Score="26" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I'd like to see less answering in the comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Current status&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are too many answers in the comments. Not only from new users but experienced ones as well. The only metric I have to quantify this is my own flag history, but I have flagged 16 comment answers this month alone which seems like a lot to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users are understandable especially because other stacks have different enforcement policies. However, I've seen a surprising amount of this from experienced (and sometimes very experienced) users. This may mean that the community is not in agreement about the comment policy or that we are failing to educate even experienced members. In at least one case a comment answer from an experienced user was at least partially responsible for derailing attempts to fix/answer a question completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this is the only stack site that I frequent, so if this actually really good then that is fine, but I think we can do better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Suggestion - comment when deleting/flagging&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from the obvious things we should already be doing (not answering in the comments, flagging answers in comments aggressively) I do have a proposal that I think might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that we should try to always leave a comment when we remove a comment answer. I know we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; do this, but I don't think we do it enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I say this something we should be doing more is that as a new user this was exactly the way I learned how to behave. Seeing &amp;quot;comments are not for extended discussion&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;don't comment in the answers&amp;quot; comments in a lot of places is what helped me learn what is accepted in the community without having to make those mistakes myself first. It makes sense that this could be the case for other users as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, if the comment tags the person, they know that their comment was removed and why and hopefully won't do it again. This is helpful in cases where the person just leaves a comment then never reads the question again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, to be clear, this is something that every person in the community that has the rep to comment can and should be doing. This is not the sole responsibility of diamond moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr&lt;/strong&gt; When you (yes you) see an answer in the comments, flag it then comment saying that it goes against our policy. Doing so should create a greater awareness of the policy for new and experienced users alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This answer is now part of an answer to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7937/what-to-do-about-comment-misuse&quot;&gt;What to do about comment misuse?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-28T16:50:25.733" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-26T15:18:01.063" Score="20" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It feels like comments have gotten more argumentative.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I first began posting answers on this site, I enjoyed it a lot. The last few months, I have not enjoyed it, so I've stopped answering for anything but the most trivial questions, even though I visit and read every day. This is my own perception, but I feel like comments on my answers and other people's answers have a disproportionately high number of unhelpful arguments in them now. I would call it trolling, and although I might be alone in calling it that, I see it affecting other people besides just myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand the need for comments that help to improve answers by pointing out ambiguities or weak areas to be edited, and I appreciate them and I try to incorporate genuinely helpful suggestions whenever I can, or I politely decline if I disagree. I try to do the same in turn. All of that works well. However, it feels like whenever I post an answer now, I expect a couple of those helpful comments... plus a slew of comments from people who will argue with my answer no matter how many times I may revise or reword troublesome sections or explain what it's actually saying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often the arguments are from those who posted different answers and could be summarized as &quot;your answer is not correct because mine is correct instead.&quot; I'm uninterested in talking specific occurrences or culprits, but it's usually the same individuals, and every time I see their usernames show up in the comments for my answers or other people's answers I know I'm in for an unnecessary argument, as if I were on a forum and not SE. It's usually about red herrings, unrelated questions, straw-man interpretations of my actual answer, and misunderstandings of how English or first-order predicate logic works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this trolling has continued to happen even after word-of-god from a designer confirmed that my answer was correct and the querent accepted my answer as correct/helpful for them. I've actually been told my answer is ridiculous &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; adding in a designer quote and having my answer accepted as correct. A lot of times it feels like they're arguing with me about my answer because they actually disapprove of the paradigm or designer intent that informs the answer, not my reasoning. It strikes me as the &quot;badwrongfun&quot; that I've heard about, or in general a sort of &quot;badwrongthink.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I find answering stressful anymore because of a handful of people with very unhelpful behavior on this site. It's possible my stressed reaction is not shared by others, but I doubt I'm the only one less inclined to post due to perceived trolling behavior. The comments on RPG.SE look a lot more like the comments on YouTube or Tumblr now, and that's discouraging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even posting this meta is stressful because now I'm expecting to be lambasted for being too touchy or sensitive or something. However, the vast majority of RPG.SE users are respectful and helpful with their comments and have genuinely helped me to improve my answer-writing skills and online-anonymous-interpersonal-communication skills, and for that I thank them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-04-27T22:00:13.810" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T22:00:13.810" CommentCount="27" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-26T17:04:55.420" Score="37" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Homebrew-related questions need to be received better&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's taken me a while to find a way to say this, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7906/22566&quot;&gt;but this meta question puts a finger on it.&lt;/a&gt;  There is (or seems to be) a &lt;em&gt;perceived&lt;/em&gt; bias against homebrew that is likely dampening some questions where the community's &lt;em&gt;experience&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt; in this game form could be of great value.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the risk of being a Jonny-one-Note, I will again offer a cogent observation on &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=42972950#42972950&quot;&gt;a core value of RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt; from @BESW  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We aren't here on the Stack to read the rulebooks to people. We're&#xA;  here to help people learn how to synthesize the mechanics, the&#xA;  non-mechanical text, the social context, our personal experience, the&#xA;  learning of the broader community, to apply all that to a particular&#xA;  real-life problem someone's having and find a solution for it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of the fun of many role playing games is homebrew, or minor adaptations to a rule set &lt;em&gt;to get the game to fit better at a given table&lt;/em&gt;.  What appears to be happening in some cases (though it's hard for me to put a magnitude on it) is a &lt;em&gt;received negative connotation&lt;/em&gt; of homebrew.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tripped over &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7906/keep-my-homebrew-stuff-secret-in-order-to-avoid-biased-answers#comment25093_7916&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt; and began to wonder how prevalent this perception is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This underscores my complaint that moderation by people who are&#xA;  concrete reasoners vs those who are abstract reasoners creates lot of&#xA;  tension on SE, in general. It's probably the #1 reason I see questions&#xA;  on hold, because the questioner used abstract thought process in&#xA;  posting, but the people who put the question on hold are concrete in&#xA;  their reasoning, and can't get beyond the depth of something that was&#xA;  worded just out of their reach. It's painful to watch. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7906/keep-my-homebrew-stuff-secret-in-order-to-avoid-biased-answers#comment25093_7916&quot;&gt;user9570789&#xA;  20 hours ago&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As @doppelgreener pointed out in a comment under the meta in question, some of this has to do with being open to multiple playstyles, but there may be more to this.  If I can put a name to it (I can't at the moment) I'll either add it to this answer or open another meta.  Full disclosure: I am pretty sure I have been guilty of what that comment complains about at least once, if not multiple times. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Actionable Suggestions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1) Flag and report hostile comments (we should already do that), and be alert for dismissive comments directed at home brew content in questions.       &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It seems that VTCs as 'primarily opinion-based' are a common response to such material, as if anything that isn't first-party rules would somehow be off-topic.  (thank you @the dark wanderer).  That does not relieve the requirement to &lt;em&gt;back it up&lt;/em&gt; -- GS/BS guidance must be respected.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(2) Work with querents to assist with the elements of a homebrew related question that can get an SE style answer, and identify those elements which remain within the domain of a table.  &lt;em&gt;Tone matters.&lt;/em&gt;    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There was a time when questions involving homebrew got comments along the lines of &quot;How open are you to changing your homebrew?&quot;  These were more common a few years ago than they are now, and are an example of &lt;em&gt;how comments can help form and frame a question&lt;/em&gt;. (@daze413 thank you)  Part of sharing our expertise is in helping someone to form a better question.  As I learned the first few times I asked questions on RPG.SE, asking a good question (that shows some research) is a bit of an art form.     &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(3) Use experience with similar homebrew/modification as applicable.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;make sure to link this experience to the problem to be solved in the question, and show how the two situations are similar enough that your experience adds value.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(4) We (the RPG.SE braintrust) need to create a canonical (faq-worthy?) meta post on how to ask good homebrew questions.  Some research project taxonomizing the current homebrew questions would be the next logical step.  (a call of #NotIt has been heard from @nitsua60)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-04-30T18:24:28.230" LastActivityDate="2018-04-30T18:24:28.230" CommentCount="40" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7933" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-27T13:46:34.640" Score="2" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;I ninja-answered the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121419/can-one-still-deal-non-lethal-damage-if-they-trigger-the-automatic-kill-feature/121420#121420&quot;&gt;Can one still deal Non-Lethal Damage if they trigger the Automatic Kill feature?&lt;/a&gt; with an answer right before it got closed due to being a duplicate, because I didn't check the close votes before hitting submit on my answer. In fact, I'm one of the people who voted for it to be closed, after answering and as soon as I realized what is effectively my mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer is more or less identical to (or, at least, roughly as helpful as) the accepted answer on the related question. &lt;strong&gt;Should I delete my answer or leave it?&lt;/strong&gt; And, to help me with learning decorum, please explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; the correct choice is the correct choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My guess is there's no reason to delete it, since the duplicate question acts as a sign-post and the unnecessary answer isn't really going to do any harm as part of that sign-post. However, I'm not sure if the goal of SE is to consolidate all answers to duplicate questions into a single question. Also I feel a little guilty about earning reputation for an answer I shouldn't have posted, even if I didn't know I shouldn't have posted it until right after I finished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for any insight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T13:46:34.640" Title="Should I delete an answer I posted too soon before knowing the question was a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|policy|etiquette|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="11" ClosedDate="2018-04-27T14:00:50.380" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7934" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7936" CreationDate="2018-04-27T14:52:03.130" Score="6" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just answered this question about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121438/i-feel-like-my-pc-isnt-important-in-a-campaign&quot;&gt;player feeling left out&lt;/a&gt; in a gaming group. It came to light after I posted that the DM is his teacher, rather than a peer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems plausible to me that the DM might be intentionally favoring certain players because they're &quot;problem kids&quot; at school. This club could be a social outlet for them to feel like they're doing something amazing where they otherwise might be struggling in school. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I base this speculation on an almost identical situation that happened to me in grade school with an after-school gaming group. One player was socially and academically struggling in school and the teacher overseeing the group favored him to give him a positive experience within a (technically) school environment. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously it's entirely speculation here since my experience isn't guaranteed to match the OPs, but mentioning this dynamic might shed some light on why the teacher is favoring certain students. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly have no idea if I should include this detail in my answer. If I'm wrong about it it could possibly be seen as super insulting to the players. If I'm right, it could make the situation make more sense. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm leaning leave it out but would welcome thoughts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33531" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T18:54:22.067" Title="Should I bring up interpersonal speculation in an answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7934" CreationDate="2018-04-27T16:15:10.127" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, speculation is not welcome in SE answers (&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&lt;/a&gt; etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in this case it's based on real experience, and you can share your experience - &quot;hey here's a similar situation and what happened in my case&quot; - without specifically speculating about who may be what at their table.  &quot;I was in this situation, this is what caused it for me, what I did about it, and how it turned out&quot; is a perfect SE answer, and they can analyze whether it matches up with the details in their case or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And from an offending people standpoint, &quot;Maybe that guy is mentally deficient/off his meds/suffering from personality disorder&quot; is way more hostile and speculative than &quot;I had a similar problem that was like this.  In that case the problem player was mentally deficient/off his meds/suffering from personality disorder and here's what we tried...&quot;  Lets the learning transfer without stigma transfer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-27T18:54:22.067" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T18:54:22.067" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7937" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-27T16:45:41.697" Score="13" ViewCount="996" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the recent community checkin post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018&quot;&gt;How is the community doing? [2018]&lt;/a&gt;, the two most highly voted complaints (at the time of this writing) are about comment misuse - namely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answering in comments (mostly on questions)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Arguing in comments (mostly on answers)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have existing guidance on comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; and more in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/comments&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;comments&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;comments&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5065/how-to-deal-with-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;How to deal with answers in comments?&lt;/a&gt;, and more in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answers-in-comments&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answers-in-comments&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answers-in-comments&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For metrics, we have deleted 2000 comments (exactly!  That's weird) in the last month.  It was 2000 comments over three months in 2013 per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2981/can-we-re-evaluate-our-comment-deletion-policy-or-at-least-have-access-to-the&quot;&gt;Can we re-evaluate our comment deletion policy? (or at least have access to the data?)&lt;/a&gt;, a 3x growth over 5 years (not bad really given overall site growth).  But since only mods have comment deletion ability, it's a large part of our workload.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that the community feels strongly about this warms the cockles of an old mod's heart, because early in the site many people didn't understand the harmfulness of using comments in these ways and there was quite some arguing about it that you might see going through those older guidance posts. (How dare you delete comments, it's censorship, etc etc.) It's nice that proper use of comments has become normative, and it certainly helps that the community has been flagging and such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is, what can we do (other than what we're doing now) to further reduce the misuse of comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-27T17:00:54.727" LastActivityDate="2021-02-12T23:31:29.207" Title="What to do about comment misuse?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-04-27T16:47:49.467" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flag Inappropriate Comments&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19756/how-do-comments-work&quot;&gt;How do comments work?&lt;/a&gt; on Meta.SE:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Who can delete comments?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A user may delete one of their own comments at any time by clicking on the (x) icon that appears to the right of the comment's timestamp when the comment is moused over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments that are flagged by multiple users are deleted automatically. The number of flags needed is based on the comment's score. It currently takes &amp;quot;3 + (Score / 3)&amp;quot; flags to delete a comment. Comments containing certain keywords can reduce this amount.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators can delete any comment, or purge all comments from a post. They also have the ability to move all of a post's comments to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So not only will flagging bring misuse of comments to moderator attention - &lt;em&gt;if enough people do it, deletion will be automatic&lt;/em&gt;.  So you have the power!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T16:47:49.467" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-04-27T16:51:50.883" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tell Them To Quit It&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make yourself a stock comment, possibly with a link to one of the main metas on answering in comments or commenting.  Make it pleasant, and then reuse it. When someone is answering in comments or otherwise misusing comments, post it there.  That will help them, especially new users or even old users who are just letting their fingers get out ahead of them a little, realize what the normative behavior is and that it bothers other site users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Hello @user!  While it's great you're trying to help, here on RPG.SE we believe that answering in comments is harmful to our format, and those comments may be deleted taking your hard work with them.  Please consider answering in an answer instead.  Here's a reference on our policy: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's for answering in comments, but you can do similarly for ongoing comment discussion.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the text above, but in copy-able format:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Hello @user!  While it's great you're trying to help, here on RPG.SE we believe that answering in comments is harmful to our format, and those comments may be deleted taking your hard work with them.  Please consider answering in an answer instead.  Here's a reference on our policy: [Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6533)&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-05-11T06:33:59.297" LastActivityDate="2018-05-11T06:33:59.297" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7940" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-04-27T16:57:15.463" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't Engage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know how your mother said it takes two people to have an argument?  Well, she was right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, it's unhelpful when someone posts a comment basically saying &quot;you're wrong and I disagree&quot; on your answer.  But responding to them, short of an addressing an actual factual issue they're suggesting you look at, tends to devolve into a lengthy &quot;Is not! Are too! Is not! Are too!&quot; session.  That's what votes are for, if 100 people think your method of handling problem players is bad they'll vote you down, one comment doesn't make a difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's a legit critique proposed - edit emendations into your answer, or don't if you disagree with them.  Flag the comment as obsolete either way because you've handled it.  Don't argue in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At most, you should curtail a comment argument with a single comment saying &quot;I disagree with that and my answer stands, but feel free and contribute your own answer.&quot;  Or if you really want to hash it out with them, a chat link to take it to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you didn't know, &lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; in a comment automagically expands to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;Role-Playing Games Chat&lt;/a&gt;--you don't even need to dig up the link!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-04-27T20:52:52.413" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T20:52:52.413" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-04-27T18:11:46.493" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Educate users, make policies visible by leaving comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I consider this answer to be in  agreement with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7939/28591&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt;, but I feel like the rationale here is different in a way that is important in the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from the obvious things we should already be doing (not answering in the comments, flagging answers in comments aggressively) I do have a proposal that I think might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that we should try to always leave a comment when see an answer in the comments (after flagging/deleting). I know we do do this, but I don't think we do it enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I say this something we should be doing more is that as a new user this was exactly the way I learned how to behave. Seeing &amp;quot;comments are not for extended discussion&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;don't comment in the answers&amp;quot; comments in a lot of places is what helped me learn what is accepted in the community without having to make those mistakes myself first. It makes sense that this could be the case for other users as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, if the comment tags the person, they know that their comment was removed and why and hopefully won't do it again. This is helpful in cases where the person just leaves a comment then never reads the question again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, to be clear, this is something that every person in the community that has the rep to comment can and should be doing. This is not the sole responsibility of diamond moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr&lt;/strong&gt; When you (yes &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;) see an answer in the comments, flag it then comment saying that it goes against our policy. Doing so should create a greater awareness of the policy for new and experienced users alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This answer was spawned from my answer to a previous question (one of the answers that actually inspired this question): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018/7930&quot;&gt;How is the community doing? [2018]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-28T16:32:16.023" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7942" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-04-27T20:48:20.460" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flag Backtalk&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both @korvinstarmast and @wibbs mention in comments on other answers here that they sometimes get hostile backtalk from people when they give nice &quot;please don't answer in comments&quot; or &quot;please don't discuss in comments&quot; comments that make them more reluctant to do them.  Please flag those as &quot;rude or abusive&quot; instead of engaging and we'll give them a little diamond-ranked talking to. I know it can be intimidating for people to snap back at you, but it's OK, if they don't take being educated about the site in good grace we have other tools and that doesn't have to be on you to handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's helpful for us to know what flags are &quot;business as usual&quot; and which are people actively arguing about the site rules; we figure everyone can handle the former but we're here for the exceptions (the latter).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, people especially from &quot;not around here&quot; don't always get our ways and some of them are going to get upset. Can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs. Some folks will leave the site if they can't comment when and where they want - unfortunate, but in the end then we don't want them here. One of the stock mod message/suspension reasons is excessive discussion in comments, and we'll use it if people just refuse to play by the rules the community expresses to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-04-27T20:48:20.460" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-27T21:36:56.763" Score="-8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Concrete vs Abstract Reasoning&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most frustrating hurdles I come across in the various SE sub-sites is moderators who are quick to put a question on hold, because &lt;strong&gt;the moderator&lt;/strong&gt; (or even a group of moderators), cannot grasp the context of the question.  This might be due to the questioner being a poor communicator.  It might also be due to the fact that I have a very high intuitive ability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, moderators put a question on hold, and I'm looking at it thinking &amp;quot;this is easy to answer, you just have to suss out the questioner's context a bit&amp;quot;.  As a new user who's had this happen to him, I can tell you it's quite embarrassing to have your comment put on hold, because it's &amp;quot;off topic&amp;quot; when you're quite sure it's on topic, and you just don't know how better to express what you're trying to get across.  In fact, from your perspective, the meaning couldn't be more clear, and you don't understand why you're having to babystep adults through your already clearly communicated issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of what you might think of the MBTI test, I liken it to the difference between Sensors and Intuitors, which is doubly apt in my mind, since a lot of SE is comprised of software developers who tend to be Sensors.  Let me define these two words:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sensor: This is a person who processes input from the world around them via concrete reasoning.  They must step through A, B, C, and D to get to E or they will get lost.  They will not assume any intermediate steps, unless they can personally experience those steps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Intuitor: This is a person who processes input from the world around them via abstract reasoning.  If they see A, C, D and E, they will assume B and F and keep on trucking.  This might get them into trouble from time-to-time, but if they feel like they've got 80% of the data, they know they're probably okay to assume the other 20%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a very base description, as no person is all one or the other.  It's a sliding scale, and each person falls on that scale somewhere.  As a high Intuitor, I can tell you I often see patterns and can pick out other peoples' meaning even when they've done a very poor job of communicating their thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In an environment like this one, it is the Sensors who are going to tend to rise through the ranks fastest, as they are most likely to follow the rules to the letter, and to punish those who fail to follow the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the same token, it is the Intuitors who are most likely to allow things to slide, to get taken down a path as it were that the site expressly forbids, because they &amp;quot;kinda get where the other person is coming from&amp;quot; and so don't need them to follow the rules to still achieve the desired result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying either one is better or worse.  Both are excellent for some things and terrible for others, but it certainly helps explain the greatest areas of tensions between the two types of users, especially new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More to the point, I don't think this is the type of thing you can teach someone.  It's kind of hard-wired into people.  But I believe it's the biggest reason certain types of users are driven away, and why the moderators seem to exist within their own echo chamber.  They will naturally agree with each other, especially because they all will tend to view sticking to the rules of the site the same way.  To people like me, it's going to feel very draconian, and that's coming from someone who sees the other perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To wit, me and a lead developer at my first job would have legendary arguments.  We couldn't talk about anything for more than 5 minutes without shouting at each other.  We were clearly at opposite ends of the spectrum.  He'd regularly shout the words, &amp;quot;You can't know that!&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;You can't make that assumption!&amp;quot;  Whereas, I'd be the one shouting, &amp;quot;Christ, you can see X, Y, and A1.  Z HAS TO FALL IN BETWEEN!&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worse when people operate under the common misconception that &amp;quot;Other people think like me.&amp;quot;  I used to despise people who &lt;em&gt;refused to talk about the obvious elephant in the room&lt;/em&gt;.  It took me years to realize that I really was the only person who could see it, and that it was my responsibility to walk the rest of the group through the process to get to the point I'd been standing on for weeks.  Moreover, that same realization is what allowed me greatly value what other people brought to the table, even when it wasn't my brilliant ability to intuit seemingly unconnected events.  The diligence embodied in the aforementioned software developer is what made him really great at his job.  He is, bar none, the best developer I have ever known.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does this translate here?  I don't know.  I'm just trying to draw a road map of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Optimizing for Sand, and Smashing the Pearls&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie turned my on to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;this blog post&lt;/a&gt;, which describes why StackExchange shifted their focus to questions.  Having read that post, I have a much better understanding of how the leadership of SE has actually helped to create the problem I've described above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we don’t do our part to cull the bad questions, then we risk&#xA;alienating the true experts who provide what really matters: the&#xA;answers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This quote took me by surprise.  I had to read it a few times, because the context seemed very strange in terms of an effort to better serve the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt;.  That is, until you realize that the community is the answerers, and not the questioners.  If StackExchange were a for-profit enterprise charging for answers, it'd go out of business very quickly.  No one will pay to be insulted, regardless of how much of an expert the answerer is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a recognized industry expert in a highly technical field.  I've written dozens of whitepapers, given talks to groups of 80+ people.  I worked at my first company for 15 years and established myself with companies around the world.  5 years after leaving, I still have customers hunting down my cell number to talk to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used to troubleshoot extremely complex industrial equipment over the phone.  It was great when I could teach my customers to contact me with the right information (Asking the right question in the right way), but much of the time I had to guide them through the process to get to the answer.  Had I taken the attitude that I couldn't or wouldn't help you without properly formatting your questions, I would not have the reputation I have today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site doesn't exist to stroke the egos of some experts.  It exists to help people around the world find answers to their questions.  Based on some of the comments below, some people have either lost sight of that, or they couldn't care less.  The questioners are your customers, guys.  I don't care that they aren't paying for the service.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps you’ve noticed a theme here. Incoming questions are a&#xA;universal constant, all around us in countless billions. But answers —&#xA;truly brilliant, amazing, correct answers — are as rare as pearls.&#xA;Thus, questions are merely the sand that produces the pearl. If we&#xA;have learned anything in the last three years, it is that you optimize&#xA;for pearls, not sand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This quote is a stunning mindset.  Questions are merely the sand that produces the pearl?  Holy cow, what an arrogant mindset.  If your experts are so full of pearls, why don't they just sit down and write wikis on their specific areas of knowledge?  Then, all the low-sloping foreheads can muddle through searches of wikis-of-wisdom to find the answers they seek.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a weird set of mutually exclusive mindsets at work at StackExchange.  An Executive Vice President writes a post that he wants SE to come off as friendlier, easier to use, more inclusive.  Yet, here's a co-founder explaining why that will never happen.  It demonstrates that SE really doesn't have alignment from top-to-bottom in the organization.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43462" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T20:12:02.980" CommentCount="43" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7944" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-28T02:45:33.287" Score="11" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;Consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/96063/23970&quot;&gt;Optimizing a Wizard that does no direct damage in D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asked thirteen months ago,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;closed as &quot;too broad&quot; that day by 5 users,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;some commentary prompted OP to specify criteria, still on the same day,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;reopened by five different users after those ^^ edits,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;closed two hours later by a diamond mod as &quot;too broad,&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;edited non-substantively (mostly trimming it up a bit) today,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;reopened by 5 users today.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sum total rep of the sixteen close- and open-voters above is approximately one billion--these contradictory votes should all be taken as a sign this post needs discussing rather than just ping-ponging back and forth between open and closed, in my opinion. We're clearly in a grey area!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've gone ahead and locked it for a week so we can hash it out here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question be closed as &quot;too broad,&quot; or is its unusual direction of CharOp well-described?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T10:12:00.087" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T10:12:00.087" Title="Wizard God: too broad?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7944" CreationDate="2018-04-28T03:01:50.567" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, it is too broad&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasoning is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question can be split on these steps, from my understanding:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;What are all the Wizard spells that don't do damage?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Put all those spells in a tier-list, according to my criteria&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Justify your tier-list.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's basically asking for an extensive guide, given some (still broad) criteria. In the end, the expected answer seems to be the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?450158-Treantmonk-s-Guide-to-Wizards-5e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Treatmonk's guide&lt;/a&gt; after removing the spells that do damage. This is a lot, not a specific question about a specific problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say still broad criteria because optimization on something like DPR is one thing - you have a reward function (DPR) to maximize, while minimizing some cost function or given some restrictions. It's still math. &amp;quot;Team synergy&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Versatility&amp;quot; are not a clear reward/cost funcion and must be quantified by the answerer through some subjective way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-28T03:01:50.567" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7944" CreationDate="2018-04-28T10:44:01.903" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;On topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question describes how to build the character with respect to its party and level range. It allows multi-classing, feats, and standard point buy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Standard point-array, feats and multi-classing allowed. Wizard supports the following party members: monk, warlock, barbarian, ranger. We can focus on levels 1-14.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has a base concept already researched and assumes that this base concept can be improved by improving its spell list (how else is a Wizard optimized aside from its spells?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I seek feedback on how to optimize my spell list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it does mention that any suggestions aside from spell lists are taken into account and valued. While the question was based in a guide with its own suggestions, other options are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, recommended feats and schools of magic to get the right fit for this concept are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question also lists how answers are to be judged, and has already 2 detailed answers (one of which actually points out how the concept cannot be done within the current ruleset, which is also a valid answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, if there is some way to improve this question and make it less broad, feedback is appreciated (either here or on the question itself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31589" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-04-28T10:44:01.903" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7944" CreationDate="2018-04-30T00:37:16.153" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;On topic in theory - too broad in practice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory it should be simple enough to make an argument about the pros and cons of any given spell and compare them to one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the devil is in the details: the OP is asking for the best at each level from 1 to 14 - the daily spell list for this wizard goes from 3 to at least 16 (and probably more) - that's a lot of spells. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, the wizard now has access to a large range of spell slots which means spells that were good at low levels but cannot benifit from higher level spell slots may fall off the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, we need to optimise this to support 4 other PCs who will each make their own (unknown) choices about an increasingly wide array of character options. Now throw some unknown magic items into the mix too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, in my experiance, a lot of synagies between PCs are emergent - it is very difficult to see how &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; spell combined with &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; ability against &lt;em&gt;those&lt;/em&gt; monsters turns out to be &lt;em&gt;totally awesome&lt;/em&gt; until that exact circumstance comes up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What would be on topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have this pacificist wizard who is level 4 going to level 5 in a party of A, B, C. I have these spells in my spellbook now. What spells should I add and what should I prepare for my 7 slots?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2018-04-30T00:37:16.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7948" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7949" CreationDate="2018-04-30T10:02:48.707" Score="4" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-components&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-components&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-components&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Physical items that are required for use in the casting of certain types of spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the description, it seems the tag refers to only spell material components, and excludes verbal and somatic components.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the questions using this tag seem to correctly include verbal, somatic, and material components of a spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should we put in the description to correctly include all components of a spell?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T06:11:47.627" Title="Is [spell-components] description correct?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7948" CreationDate="2018-04-30T10:21:25.933" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Probably something like this instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about the components that go into spells, or how they get involved in spellcasting. In Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, those components are usually materials, words, and/or motions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki excerpt's main job is to guide people in how and when to use the tag, and to help them work out whether the tag fits the question they might apply it to, so I'm frontloading that. After that, we can summarise what it usually means in brief. Tag wiki excerpts don't need to define a thing thoroughly, so I'm just doing a general indicator in brief; the second sentence would be totally optional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T06:11:47.627" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T06:11:47.627" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-04-30T14:20:16.517" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This site needs to be humanised&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please don't take this as an attack but I find it amusing that I see this post just after reading the blog (Linked on this very page) about being nicer and more inclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is the very definition of the elitist 'don't do this, don't do that' thing that was referenced in that blog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 'kindest' sentence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things&#xA;  we think still need improvement. Please do the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You actually used the word please, but managed to make it sound like you are a teacher scolding a naughty pupil.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site is FULL of that kind of attitude. There seems to be no place for sounding like an actual human and I think that is a shame.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastActivityDate="2018-04-30T14:20:16.517" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7952" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-04-30T23:57:58.327" Score="13" ViewCount="456" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before I start: I thought about the matter when reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7932/38495&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018&quot;&gt;How is the community doing? [2018]&lt;/a&gt; post, which claims a larger percentage of negative reactions towards homebrew questions compared to other questions, and also urges more open-mindedness towards homebrew questions. The latter could potentially be relevant when answering this question, while the former will be of relevance down below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To provide a short summary, &quot;is this balanced&quot; questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=relevance&amp;amp;q=title%3ais%20title%3athis%20title%3abalanced&quot;&gt;RPG SE search query&lt;/a&gt;) usually present a homebrew &quot;thing&quot; and ask the community about their assessment of its balancing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; like these questions, both because it's refreshing to see other people's creative content (so-to-speak) and because answering them allows me to participate in this creative process, I don't feel like they fit in with the general objective and evidence-supported answer style that is commonly encouraged (or enforced) on the site. Sure, we have the knowledge and experience on the site to evaluate the balancing aspects of homebrew - but so do /r/dndnext or many other forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, usually, homebrew questions should be supported by experience instead of simply being reformulated brainstorming results. But how could you possibly provide an experience-based answer if the only person who has ever been in contact with the respective homebrew so far is its creator, who also asked the question? I highly doubt that anyone is ever going to take some potentially unbalanced homebrew (or even their own, rebalanced version) and actually playtest it, just to provide an answer to an RPG SE question. Yes, it might happen on occasion, but I don't believe that those &lt;em&gt;very rare&lt;/em&gt; (if not &lt;em&gt;legendary&lt;/em&gt;, to use 5e game terms) cases should be relevant for answers to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another argument against such questions is that they're not really going to help future readers - which doesn't automatically disqualify a question, but hugely limits is usefulness (after all, providing signposts is one of the main upsides of duplicates).&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Asking homebrew questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117500/does-not-having-flight-nerf-a-warlocks-familiar&quot;&gt;Does not having flight nerf a warlock's familiar?&lt;/a&gt; could be useful for future readers, and not just for someone who wants to restrict familiars with the ability to flight, but also someone who's trying to figure out what to actually &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; with a familiar (RP aside).&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89297/is-this-homebrew-elemental-spear-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew elemental spear balanced?&lt;/a&gt;, however, are highly unlikely to help future readers, even if someone else needs to balance an almost identical homebrew item of their own (or would you do an extensive, unlikely-to-yield-useful-results google search to see if someone already made a similar item, before you simply asking right away if it's balanced?). The only thing those questions are good for - aside from solving OP's issues, of course - is giving someone reading the question ideas for their own homebrew items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While researching existing questions before posting this, I also stumbled upon these questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2912/are-homebrew-evaluation-questions-ok&quot;&gt;Are homebrew evaluation questions OK?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/942/how-to-deal-with-feedback-questions-about-house-rules&quot;&gt;How to deal with feedback questions about house-rules?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of the linked question's answers would classify most &quot;is this balanced&quot; questions as unfit for the site. Still, many of the questions that are listed by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=relevance&amp;amp;q=title%3ais%20title%3athis%20title%3abalanced&quot;&gt;search query mentioned above&lt;/a&gt; have neither been closed as &quot;primarily opinion-based&quot; (or for similar reasons), nor have they have received notable numbers of downvotes (questions that show a lack of research effort aside).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, I believe we should establish a policy of sorts on how to treat the described questions currently floating around somewhere between the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/balance&quot;&gt;balance&lt;/a&gt;- and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;-tag. In the case that they are considered on-topic, then either a custom tag or changes in the description of the &lt;em&gt;balance&lt;/em&gt; tag would probably appropriate - I personally can't really tell what the 7-year-old phrasing&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about perceived inequities between characters derived from differences in capability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;actually tries to tell me - but it's not what I would expect from the &quot;balance&quot; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T00:03:09.823" LastActivityDate="2018-05-09T21:49:45.323" Title="Are &quot;is this balanced&quot; questions on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7952" CreationDate="2018-05-01T00:45:02.533" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have seen a few questions and answers that provide both a structured, answerable question, in a &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no&quot; format. As a very simple example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121183/is-this-timberwolf-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this &quot;Timberwolf&quot; balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question provides the Homebrew (in this case, a creature), with all information required to give an answer. And the answer is &quot;No, and here's why...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What this does is provides, firstly, a source of information for other users - in this case, the CR calculation table that might often get overlooked (I personally didn't know of its existence until recently, and even reading through the PHB for the first time, I overlooked a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of stuff, simply because I didn't know what to look for).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over on Gaming.SE, there is a very similar problem with Minecraft crash questions. A lot of the time, people will simply say &quot;Minecraft crashed. Halp.&quot; Obviously not very informative. Other times people might provide system information, situational information, and sometimes a crash dump, which on its own can be enough information to provide and answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm getting at is that while Homebrew questions can be very open, non-specific, or highly situational, when formulated in the right way, you still can get information from them, and more importantly, inspiration as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T06:14:59.477" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T06:14:59.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7952" CreationDate="2018-05-01T01:29:14.740" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't have a strong opinion on whether they're on-topic or not, but  they often go like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question: Is X balanced?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer: No, here's what would need to change for X to be balanced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Here's where things go horribly wrong...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question edited: Is X balanced now that I changed it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not something that works in the SE format. It undercuts answers, undermines the voting system, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm posting this because it happens so often. Understandably, homebrew creators don't want to stop at &amp;quot;is version 1 balanced&amp;quot;, they want to go through the process and have a balanced end product. And that highlights a problem with this type of question - it really works better as a back-and-forth dialogue, rather than a static question-answer. That makes them &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5720/15469&quot;&gt;another thing forums do better than us&lt;/a&gt;, which doesn't necessarily mean that they're off-topic, but it is a potential reason why they maybe should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T01:29:14.740" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-05-01T05:40:17.223" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This stack is run as a tight ship — thank all the gods!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little bit more immersed in Stack Exchange culture than I was last time one of these threads rolled around, and I've had the chance to spend some time looking at how things are done on other stacks.  One thing that's struck me is how &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; this stack implements the &quot;we're a Q&amp;amp;A site, let's optimize for useful questions with useful answers&quot; approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are other answers here lamenting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018/7930#7930&quot;&gt;answers-in-comments&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7931/30299&quot;&gt;argumentative comments&lt;/a&gt;, and no doubt these are genuinely areas where we can improve.  But on the other hand, guys...have you &lt;em&gt;been&lt;/em&gt; to other stacks?  It took me a while to realize this, but we are &lt;em&gt;so good&lt;/em&gt; at this stuff.  Our comment sections could look like Worldbuilding.SE (once &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2636&quot;&gt;aptly described&lt;/a&gt; by our very own nitsua60 as &quot;a lightly-threaded brainstorming site&quot;) or Interpersonal.SE (the poster-child for &quot;how far can we push the boundaries of the Q&amp;amp;A model&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, the SE model here is &lt;em&gt;working&lt;/em&gt;.  People ask questions.  They almost always get answers (our list of unanswered questions is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/unanswered&quot;&gt;tiny&lt;/a&gt;).  Most of the answers don't suck.  Problematic content quickly gets closed/flagged/downvoted/commented with suggestions for improvement.  The review queue practically never has more than maybe five items in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's not like this site &lt;em&gt;couldn't&lt;/em&gt; have gone the other way.  I imagine most folks here are (or have been) active on at least one other RPG-centric online community.  We &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; the kind of discussion that's typical in the arguing-about-RPGs-verse.  Whatever bumps it's hit along the way, this place deserves credit for becoming a functional, Q&amp;amp;A-focused stack, instead of just one more place to get in a shouting match about whether Monks are decent this week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good job!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T05:40:17.223" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7956" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7952" CreationDate="2018-05-01T11:20:55.373" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, they're on topic and should remain so. We can answer them effectively and can get pretty satisfying answers to these questions that are good examples of our quality guidelines. We agree they're relevant to RPG expertise and they get answered based on a mix of subjective expertise and objective reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Declaring a category of RPG questions off topic usually only happens after there's clear evidence of ongoing systematic major breakdowns &amp;amp; malfunctions inherent to handling the topic on our site. Whilst these questions have some hitches (like sometimes OPs revise/update the homebrew in the question after feedback and expect answers to update accordingly, which isn't how we work here) that's nowhere near the kinds of breakdown levels that renders stuff off topic and can be handled well by normal community moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Citation standards on homebrew balance questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, usually, homebrew questions should be supported by experience instead of simply being reformulated brainstorming results. But how could you possibly provide an experience-based answer if the only person who has ever been in contact with the respective homebrew so far is its creator, who also asked the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You seem to be referencing our policy on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question/5154#5154&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt;, but you're taking it too broadly: it's not meant to be applied to every answer that is in some way dealing with homebrew. The context of this meta policy is that we were running into situations like the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; How can I speed up combat in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bad homebrew answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Here, use this custom super-fast combat system I made up just now in about ten minutes. I'm sure it will work great and speed up combat, even though I've never used it nor even seen anything like it and have no evidence it even works at all in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Good homebrew answer:&lt;/strong&gt; My group was also dissatisfied with combat speeds. We used these techniques/​mechanisms/​tools/​homebrew to speed it up. Here's how it worked out for us in practice, and here's the specific benefits and drawbacks we experienced. Here's how I recommend applying it to your situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That policy was written in the context of parsing apart those bad answers from the good answers. It's a narrower application of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;the Back It Up! principle from Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. Boiling it down, you should ground your answers in objective references and/or in comparable subjective experience by you or someone else whose experience you can cite. In that narrow application, it means we don't want random ideas but actual tried-and-tested solutions that we can see will work. In general it means we want to have some confidence you know what you're talking about and aren't basing your answer entirely off your personal opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The homebrew balance questions I usually see reference back to both personal experience &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; objective fact. I'd check &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/balance+homebrew&quot;&gt;the homebrew+balance tag intersection&lt;/a&gt; as well as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=relevance&amp;amp;q=title%3ais%20title%3athis%20title%3abalanced&quot;&gt;your own query&lt;/a&gt;: answers to these questions frequently use existing game features as a comparison baseline (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120162/1204&quot;&gt;comparing a homebrew cantrip to other spells&lt;/a&gt;) or point to the game's own balance guidelines (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12927/how-do-i-balance-elder-scrolls-soul-gems-with-the-loot-progression/12928#12928&quot;&gt;the loot guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/121189/1204&quot;&gt;monster construction guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/121659/1204&quot;&gt;encounter difficulty guidelines&lt;/a&gt;). One of the questions you cite (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89297/1204&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew elemental spear balanced?&lt;/a&gt;) received relatively mediocre answers, but they still reference standard wealth-by-level guidelines and draw comparison to other similar items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117500/does-not-having-flight-nerf-a-warlocks-familiar&quot;&gt;Does not having flight nerf a warlock&amp;#39;s familiar?&lt;/a&gt;, you're answering based on both objective comparison to other familiars and based on subjective experience about how familiars work out in gameplay. This is the kind of subjective expertise we like to see people draw upon when they back up their answers: you're demonstrating an understanding of how things play out at the table, and using that to inform the advice you're providing, so as to give us some confidence your advice can work out. Similar expertise gets drawn upon when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/26568/1204&quot;&gt;examining a pokémon master class's balance&lt;/a&gt;: an experienced player can draw upon comparable personal experience to advise on the homebrew in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;General helpfulness now &amp;amp; in the future&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another argument against such questions is that they're not really going to help future readers - which doesn't automatically disqualify a question, but hugely limits is usefulness (after all, providing signposts is one of the main upsides of duplicates).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our primary mission is to answer the question someone has and solve their specific problem. Helpful guidance for future readers is our secondary goal that's produced as a side-effect that we also value and curate. Our homebrew balance questions meet both goals: (1) we give the person feedback on the relative balance implications of the homebrew they've brought up, and (2) we provide a source of homebrew balance advice that may apply to future readers in comparable situations. (They may be few and far between, but we don't aim solely for those questions that maximize impact and relevance.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;All seems OK here.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, homebrew balance questions are relevant to our expertise and are answered drawing upon that expertise in line with our objective and subjective citation guidelines. There are some mediocre answers and some bumps we run into from time to time, but that's par for the course. There's no major breakdown or mismatch warranting off-topic-ness. We can assist people effectively, and over time build up a body of relevant advice about homebrew balance. Everything seems OK enough to leave them on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-09T21:49:45.323" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7957" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1483" CreationDate="2018-05-01T12:06:36.533" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Code has just few valid aplications for RPG, it should not be used for others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;proper code&lt;/em&gt; in a programming language&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;by extent &lt;em&gt;command code&lt;/em&gt; for a plugin/program/page such as anydice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;pseudocode&lt;/em&gt; isn't proper code but highly relies on code structuring&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Examples&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example for &lt;em&gt;proper code&lt;/em&gt; using BASIC. This is a non-aborting loop that just continiues to print the line 10 onto the screen until the program is manually halted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;10 print this SPAM was made using 2 lines of program code&#xA;20 goto 10&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example for &lt;em&gt;command code&lt;/em&gt;, using the cmd of your PC to access the system32 folder in windows and then listing the contents:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;C:&#xA;cd windows\system32\&#xA;dir&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of &lt;em&gt;pseudocode&lt;/em&gt;, using the TDE rules for HP at 5 or lower. The formating chosen here is &quot;LSL Style&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;if (5&amp;gt;=HP&amp;gt;=0) &#xA;  {&#xA;   Dying = FALSE;&#xA;   if (&quot;Iron Will&quot; == TRUE)&#xA;      {Unconscious = FALSE;}&#xA;   else&#xA;      {Roll = 1d20;&#xA;       if (Roll&amp;lt;=CONstitution)&#xA;         {Unconscious = FALSE;}&#xA;       else&#xA;         {Unconscious = TRUE;}&#xA;      }&#xA;   }&#xA;else if (0&amp;gt;HP)&#xA;   {&#xA;    Unconscious = TRUE;&#xA;    Dying = TRUE;&#xA;   }&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T12:06:36.533" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-05-01T12:12:04.610" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the rules on opinion based answers are a mismatch for a forum which is about role playing games.  Especially some which are deliberately designed to encourage interpretation - which is of course opinion based. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I post mostly on stack overflow, I develop.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;The rules on there make sense under most circumstances.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Boolean logic is Boolean logic and your code will work or not work due to fixed rules which are not re-interpreted by any reader.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Even then, development is often more art than science.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I notice some questions there which are closed as opinion based where it's not terribly helpful and I can see the OP really could have done with some help.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Overall the rules generally make sense on Stack Overflow.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Over there if you don't have a &quot;full&quot; answer but have some suggestion to offer then you are actively discouraged from posting an answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack overflow's rules seem to have been adopted as is for dnd 5.&#xA;Since rpg is largely opinion based this seems an inherent mismatch.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Maybe someone should be considering whether somewhat different rules ought to apply.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;What seems particularly strange is where different rules already apply.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Any comment that could be interpreted as helpful ( some sort of an answer ) gets deleted.  This seems particularly strange and I don't see how that helps anyone or makes the site better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43697" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-05-01T13:38:58.873" LastActivityDate="2018-05-01T13:38:58.873" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 3.0" />
  <row Id="7959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-05-01T20:16:05.773" Score="36" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't call it a &amp;quot;comment&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this feature enabled, you can't &amp;quot;add a comment&amp;quot;. You can only &amp;quot;suggest improvements&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JDu0F.png&quot; alt=&quot;share/edit/flag // suggest improvements&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is only a change in wording, so the mechanics of it aren't any different (e.g. it still requires 50 rep). The real change is psychological.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The change in wording has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/299195/323179&quot;&gt;very successful on Area51&lt;/a&gt;. It was also tested on regular Q &amp;amp; A sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On Interpersonal Skills, which has objectively worse comments than this site and a similarly strict comment policy, this feature was tested for a month and &lt;a href=&quot;https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2839/8354&quot;&gt;the results are out&lt;/a&gt;, which Shog describes as &amp;quot;an improvement&amp;quot; but not a &amp;quot;dramatic improvement&amp;quot;. The same experiment (but this time for two months) also ran on &lt;a href=&quot;https://workplace.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5498&quot;&gt;The Workplace&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2021-02-12T23:31:29.207" LastActivityDate="2021-02-12T23:31:29.207" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7960" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-02T01:30:43.590" Score="14" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to see an answer on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018#7925&quot;&gt;2018 community survey&lt;/a&gt; about user retention, as it's clearly an important issue. Unfortunately, I'm unfamiliar with (or lack access to?) the various tools to put one together myself. I'm left with only my own vague impressions, which are a lot less useful than data. So instead, I'd like to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is the main site doing with user retention?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is intended to cover both converting one-shot users to recurring ones, as well as retaining active yearlings. A good answer would bring statistics to bear on this, preferably broken down into some kind of demographic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:45:23.603" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:45:23.603" Title="How can we effectively measure user retention?" Tags="|discussion|new-users|site-statistics|community|users|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7960" CreationDate="2018-05-02T01:54:00.403" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure!  So, we're not free to share the specifics of the diamond moderator version of the site analytics with the public.  And beyond that, we don't have a specific &quot;bounce rate&quot; metric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I can say is that there's a healthy growth in new user rate, which is at an all time high over the last three months.  There was a significant lull last Sept/Oct but since then it's grown at a significant rate month over month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a visitor and active user stat that is also showing growth.  Users that visited at least one day in the month tracks the new user stat. Frequent visitors and occasional actors are maybe 1/3 of that, and then frequent actors is the lowest but showing steady growth. These numbers are also at their all time high over the last three months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's all the data we have at our disposal. What we don't really have is a &quot;conversion rate&quot; or a &quot;bounce rate&quot;. New users don't become active users for a lot of reasons and we don't have the data to determine more than that really, the site analytics even mods get is super limited - not &quot;Google Analytics,&quot; but &quot;a dozen line graphs&quot;. But our numbers are at historical highs, so that's good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean we shouldn't work on being welcoming and retention of course. But that's a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2018-05-12T07:26:28.467" LastActivityDate="2018-05-12T07:26:28.467" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7962" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7960" CreationDate="2018-05-02T21:24:56.090" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's possible to get at this kind of information with &lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;StackExchange Data Explorer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When users sign up, how many of them come back?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/846980/user-retention-query?RetentionDays=7&amp;amp;ReportingPeriodDays=365&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This query&lt;/a&gt; computes the proportion of users active in the last &lt;strong&gt;365&lt;/strong&gt; days who logged back into the site at least &lt;strong&gt;7&lt;/strong&gt; days after they created their account for the first time.  It turns out that, as of this posting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;80.0% of users from the last year stuck around for at least a week&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To provide a bit of context for this number, I ran the same query on a few other StackExchange sites (I chose ones that are similar to rpg.SE in either size or subject matter, plus a couple of particularly high-visibility sites).  Here are the results:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;StackOverflow - &lt;strong&gt;85.9%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;codereview.SE - &lt;strong&gt;82.9%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;worldbuilding.SE - &lt;strong&gt;74.2%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Arqade - &lt;strong&gt;67.6%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cooking.SE - &lt;strong&gt;64.2%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;judaism.SE - &lt;strong&gt;62.6%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;interpersonal.SE - &lt;strong&gt;60.2%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...so it looks like we have better retention than most other similarly-sized sites and most other &quot;hobbyist&quot; sites, but slightly lower retention than the more professional/work-related sites.  Not sure what exactly to make of this; perhaps people are more invested in getting answers to questions that they need for their jobs? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How many users remain active year-over-year, and how does this change over time?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/850891/year-over-year-user-retention-query?FirstYear=2017&amp;amp;SecondYear=2018&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This query&lt;/a&gt; computes the proportion of users who posted in one year who also posted in another year; I've used it to estimate year-over-year retention since the site started in 2010.  Each row gives the percentage of the users who posted in the &lt;strong&gt;first year&lt;/strong&gt; who also posted in the &lt;strong&gt;second year&lt;/strong&gt; (so the first row is the proportion of 2010 posters who also posted in 2011):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2010 - 2011:  &lt;strong&gt;35.8%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2011 - 2012:  &lt;strong&gt;33.9%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2012 - 2013:  &lt;strong&gt;27.1%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2013 - 2014:  &lt;strong&gt;30.6%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2014 - 2015:  &lt;strong&gt;26.6%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2015 - 2016:  &lt;strong&gt;25.5%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2016 - 2017:  &lt;strong&gt;26.7%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2017 - 2018:  &lt;strong&gt;18.7%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't take the exceptionally low final entry too seriously here (it's probably just an artifact of the fact that 2018 isn't even halfway over yet), but even ignoring that entry we see a slight downward trend over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't too surprising to me.  According to our &lt;a href=&quot;http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/2208/role-playing-games&quot;&gt;Area 51 proposal&lt;/a&gt;, this site graduated six years ago (it's proving oddly difficult to find the exact date).  I'm guessing those first two years represent high-buy-in beta users being more engaged with the site than the average user from after graduation.  Ignoring those two years, year-over-year retention looks flat, rather than downward-trending.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quick check of the 2016-2017 numbers found that we're similar to judaism.se (25.7%), and higher than scifi.se (16.0%) and codereview.se (18.1%).  The query timed out on Stack Overflow; guess they have too many posts!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are pretty simplistic queries (I don't know SQL at all, I just threw these together by frantically Googling documentation for a bit).  I invite anyone more skilled to improve this answer (or submit their own)!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those who don't know SQL, I'm also happy to take requests if you have specific questions you'd like investigated (with the caveat that I still don't really know SQL either, so I might not be answer everything).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2018-05-11T22:53:02.980" LastActivityDate="2018-05-11T22:53:02.980" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7963" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-05-03T19:51:19.570" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Make a button to automatically start a chat room where one could write a comment&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is currently possible for a mod to move a comment thread to chat. Once a threshold is reached, you can also press a button to move to chat a thread you participate at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, sometimes I understand that I want a chatty discussion about something instead of suggesting improvements. It would be nice to always have a button to open a chat room that will be automatically linked in comments as if comments from this thread were moved to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could be a good idea to call the &amp;quot;add a comment&amp;quot; button &amp;quot;suggest improvements&amp;quot;, as mentioned before, AND also have a button called like &amp;quot;Open a chat room&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-03T23:24:35.330" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7964" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7968" CreationDate="2018-05-04T02:50:35.090" Score="35" ViewCount="2622" Body="&lt;p&gt;A reasonably common type of question on RPG.SE is &amp;quot;Why does this rule exist&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;why is a rule this way?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions come in several flavors, which are not mutually exclusive:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;I hate this rule, someone justify it to me.&amp;quot; Sometimes this is just a rant, sometime's it's like the &amp;quot;Sell me on...&amp;quot; questions you find on RPG forums.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;I play other games and/or other editions of this game and that rule is different in those other games. Is it &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; different in this game? Surely it's a mistake.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;I am houseruling or otherwise messing around with that rules set because I don't like its current form, but want to understand it more before changing it.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The majority of these questions had historically been closed as opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the last couple years, answers about rules, especially with regards to D&amp;amp;D 5e, pushed past arguing pure rules as written and started to appeal to &amp;quot;RAI,&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;rules as intended&amp;quot;. Arguments arose about how &amp;quot;you can't know that&amp;quot; and how such answers are opinion-based, without actual statements from game designers as to the intent behind rules. But in the modern Internet world and especially with the D&amp;amp;D 5e designers, statements and tweets about the reasons behind game design decisions - their intent, how rigidly they are used by the designers, why they are a certain way - are more accessible than ever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we decided to try out a guided application of our universal SE norm &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; to these questions, and require some kind of documentation about designer intent besides &amp;quot;well it makes sense to me&amp;quot; in these questions and answers.  The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; was then applied to these questions as a marker to indicate the required quality bar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This went kinda roughly.  You can see some of the development of this on the many Meta posts on the topic about &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;. Unfortunately, these questions still ended up pulling purely opinion-based answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore a couple of weeks ago we asked how to save designer-reasons questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/23970&quot;&gt;How do we save designer reasoning questions?&lt;/a&gt;. The response was overwhelmingly, rather, to declare them off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community found it was not able to effectively moderate these issues as a group and they are burning time and community goodwill disproportional to their value.  People found questions that linger unanswered because no designer statements have been found irresistible to answer with opinions instead, and people would argue about their right to post their subjective opinions on these questions despite it being clearly outside our site's standard operating procedure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are questions about the &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; of a rule on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:40:54.300" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:40:54.300" Title="Are questions about rule intent on topic? [2018]" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2022-07-28T16:43:51.513" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7965" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-04T14:15:38.673" Score="4" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120875/how-can-i-prepare-for-creatures-with-damage-resistances-or-damage-immunities&quot;&gt;How can I prepare for creatures with damage resistances or damage immunities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I saw a lot of questions floating around the Stack about damage Immunities and Resistances and troubles therein for players (Lycanthropes, and Puddings, and Ooze, oh my!). I hoped to create a unifying question so that we could stop dealing with all of these ad-hoc things and just point to a single answer (as the answers are all usually the same sort of &quot;prepare better, know your enemy&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The inspiration was another one-stop-shop question for forced movement, provided by Rubiksmoose: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120959/can-i-trigger-an-opportunity-attack-by-forcing-an-opponent-to-move-out-of-my-rea&quot;&gt;Can I trigger an Opportunity Attack by forcing an opponent to move out of my reach?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can my question either be reopened as-is, or is there something that we can do to make it Stackable, while also keeping my original intent?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:33:45.180" Title="Can this question be opened, or be changed to be reopenable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-05-04T21:49:41.577" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We suck at not answering questions, especially in popular tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good questions often don't have easy answers.  Officially, you're allowed to post a question within our scope whose answer would, at least theoretically, fit well within our format, yet which is in practice unlikely to be answered because of how difficult it is to answer/how few people have the required experience.  For example, it is officially &lt;em&gt;totally okay&lt;/em&gt; to ask a question about the best way to handle a specific technically complex mechanic in an obscure not-digitally-available rule system and require/expect a competent answer-- I might ask &amp;quot;When calculating fire trajectories in &lt;em&gt;Phoenix Command&lt;/em&gt;, how can I best do it quickly?&amp;quot;.  In practice, such questions draw really terrible answers that get upvoted and deleting them just makes more get posted: our site hates to see questions unanswered and our site community on some level believes a &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; answer is better than &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; answer, which is both wrong and against the SE corporate paradigm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's take the example Phoenix Command question.  Questions for obscure rule systems fare &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; better in terms of this particular problem, but I &lt;em&gt;actually did&lt;/em&gt; post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101444/what-book-contains-the-rules-for-riot-shields&quot;&gt;this not-nearly-as-complicated Phoenix Command question&lt;/a&gt; and, as you can see (10k only), it got a terrible answer.  It's been okay since then, I think mostly cause it's an obscure rule system with no popular tags and an &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; not-subjective, not-advice-seeking category of question ('Is X content in Y book or not?'), but it still demonstrates the point.  If a question isn't posted on quickly, people start posting terrible stuff in an attempt to help.  These answers will often admit in their preamble that they are not real answers, saying something like &amp;quot;I've never played that game you're talking about, but here's my gut reaction anyways&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;I've never run that module, but why don't you XYZ?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the users doing this don't see the difference between that and &amp;quot;I haven't ever [X], but I've [X'] extensively, and here's why I think that is relevant&amp;quot;, which is a form often used in good answers to difficult questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think this is one of the major factors leading to designer-reason questions going badly (the other being querents being steered into asking said questions to skirt site rules when what they really want is not allowed), but that's a separate conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-04T21:49:41.577" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7965" CreationDate="2018-05-05T14:33:45.180" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;So here's the problem with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rubiksmoose ran afoul of this too, and really needed to have gathered feedback and consensus on meta before doing it.  As do you. See previous discussion about the question you link here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7904/forced-movement-and-oa-duplicates&quot;&gt;Forced movement and OA duplicates&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Canonical answers&quot; are tricky things.  They are usually good if a problem space is pretty tightly scoped. &quot;Does any kind of forced movement trigger OAs&quot; is tightly scoped.  &quot;What about forced movement from A?  From B?  From C?&quot;  But the question you've asked has potential &quot;too broad&quot; issues on its face.  &quot;What are all the ways to hurt something that has damage immunity&quot; is in a sense &quot;list every single way of hurting something in the game besides hitting it with the specific thing it's immune to.&quot; And in D&amp;amp;D, there's a crap-ton of ways of hurting something, yeah?&#xA;The question vaguely hints that maybe it's just talking about martial characters but even martials can use magic, and since you say immunity and resistance, even &quot;just hit it harder&quot; is an option. You're in a party so &quot;fend them off while the others kill them&quot; is an option.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end this is a case where a specific case may well not be answered by the &quot;canonical&quot;.  A barbarian, rogue, or bard would certainly use different coping mechanisms.  At level 1 'carry a couple weapons' is a good answer, at high levels there are many many ways to accomplish it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-05-05T14:33:45.180" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7964" CreationDate="2018-05-06T16:11:23.033" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No - but...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions about rule intent (RAI) are generally off topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just asking &quot;why is this rule here/why is it this way&quot; is asking everyone to air their opinion, which is fine on a forum, but is not what we do here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;em&gt;tag&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; was mostly acting like shorthand, enabling querents to shortcut describing their actual problem;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rampant speculation that a tighter stance on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; was intended to rein in still proliferated. So its attempt to save intent questions failed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the previous meta &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/23970&quot;&gt;How do we save designer reasoning questions?&lt;/a&gt;, I'm comfortable saying the community's stance is: &lt;strong&gt;questions specifically and solely asking for the intent of a rule are off-topic, &lt;em&gt;even if they require documented designer commentary in their answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Designer intent questions are off-topic, but your question might be on-topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're facing a problem that you suspect the designers may have already struggled with, go ahead and describe your actual problem. (That's usually a pretty good way to have a question fit the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site prefers questions that marshal its users' expertise. A question asking only about designer intent doesn't marshal that expertise. Further, the site's users have no special way to communicate with game designers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that in mind, many &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions are really about modifying or understanding existing rules, which is something we can address. Examine carefully the question's premise to see if the question is actually one of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Why did the designers make this terrible rule?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;An alternative question that is better suited to the site is a well scoped homebrew question like &#xA;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;What impact will it have on the game if this rule is changed in this way?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Keep in mind that the site frowns upon rants disguised as questions. And that  homebrew questions of this sort also require cited experience in their answers; many of those get closed too when people can't resist giving their &quot;I've never tried it but I like it/don't like it off the top of my head&quot; answers. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good examples might be &quot;What unbalancing effects should I watch out for if I remove the need for material components for spellcasting&quot; instead of &quot;Why the heck do people need material components anyway that's really fiddly, right?&quot; Or &quot;Would a bard that didn't need to play an instrument to activate their powers be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22184/what-makes-a-character-creature-power-ability-etc-over-powered&quot;&gt;overpowered&lt;/a&gt;?&quot; instead of &quot;Why does my bard have to have an instrument?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Is this rule's outcome intended by the game's designers?&quot; or &quot;Is this the RAI for this rule?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;An alternative question that is better suited to the site is&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Have I been using this rule correctly?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;  or&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Is there a different way to implement this rule that yields different results I'd prefer?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind &lt;strong&gt;that designer statements are a perfectly fine thing to include in an answer!&lt;/strong&gt;  Information from the game designers can help us with all kinds of real problems in our games.  But &quot;I disagree with the game designer&quot; is not one of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a corollary, we will be retiring the [designer-reasons] tag as a &quot;trap&quot; like we did with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendations&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendations&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendations&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going forward, we ask that you:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Kindly comment on new &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; that these are recently-off-topic questions with a link to this meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you've the time, gently try to guide a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; querent into asking about their core problem, instead. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/117449/revisions&quot;&gt;I just saw it happen today&lt;/a&gt;, and it was pretty nice to see in action: I think the final question is a better resource for the site to be serving up, personally. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be patient&lt;/strong&gt; with users who may bump up against this. You, reading this, are part of the 1% of registered users who visit meta; registered users are only a few percent of those who view mainsite pages. The &lt;em&gt;vast&lt;/em&gt; majority of people who will see these questions, see them get closed, see confused comments and edits... have no idea what's behind it all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Refrain from any campaign to root out and close old questions. (It's unnecessary as churn will get us there, and we should stay open to the possibility that in a few weeks someone comes along with a brilliant perspective/solution that nobody engaged in the last meta thought of.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-08T00:52:40.987" LastActivityDate="2018-05-08T00:52:40.987" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7964" CreationDate="2018-05-06T19:07:19.567" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, they are on topic, but they should be closed anyways&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are (mostly) on-topic but the problem is that they unclear, because 'why' is ambiguous when used this way in English. When asking why, a querent may in fact mean:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For what reason did the designers put this here? (actually, this is still ambiguous, but whatever, we've thrown out the whole bathtub full of 'em)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For what reason should I leave this rule here?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What purpose does the rule serve in the larger framework of the system?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What, historically, led to the prevalence of rules like this in systems like this at the time this system was made?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This rule should not be here (the question is rhetorical).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What principally leads players/GMs/designers to think that this thing is reasonable, given that it seems prima facie unreasonable and furthermore is, in fact, unreasonable?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And probably several other things as well.  These questions are not categorically off-topic; of the 6 examples listed 1 (the non-question) is actually off-topic, 1 (the designer intent question) is no longer permitted because of issues entirely unrelated to topicality, two (What does this do in larger system context? What makes people think this works when it obviously does not work?) are usually closed as opinion-based, but really shouldn't be, and two are rare but usually well-received (History, why shouldn't I change this?), except when 'why shouldn't I change this?' is a chameleon homebrew question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion, these are almost never off-topic, but should nonetheless be closed until it's clear what they are asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-06T19:07:19.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7971" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7972" CreationDate="2018-05-08T19:18:13.357" Score="1" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122064/changing-paladins-oath&quot;&gt;Changing paladin&amp;#39;s oath&lt;/a&gt; was closed as primarily opinion based.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that this is possibly another case of 'homebrew prejudice'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer there clearly shows that the question is answerable with RAW content. My answer also received 6 up votes and one down vote. The down vote apparently coming from a close voter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42354" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-05-09T03:13:10.113" LastActivityDate="2018-05-09T03:13:10.113" Title="Should this question really be closed as opinion based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7971" CreationDate="2018-05-08T20:29:14.753" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The post in question contains the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any other rules for renouncing an oath are replacing it with another one? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If presented with such problem as a GM, how would you rule the situation? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would he face some curse? Would he lose access to clerical spells for being irreligious or would his conviction to the Cause be enough to retain spellcasting ability? Could that warrant or require change of alignment? [In other words, what are the consequences of doing this]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First off, these are 3 separate questions and so should be asked in different questions. The third really could be subsumed into either the first or second, and a good answer to either one would explain enough to not warrant asking it anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second off, &quot;Are there any other rules for renouncing an oath are replacing it with another one?&quot; is a stackable question, it clearly has an answer and it can be found. Meanwhile, &quot;If presented with such problem as a GM, how would you rule the situation?&quot; is pretty much the definition of an opinion-based question. It's asking for opinions and is an idea-generation question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question were edited to be focused on that first question then I would vote to reopen it, but as long as it has 2 questions and 1 is opinion based it should stay closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2018-05-08T20:29:14.753" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7973" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7975" CreationDate="2018-05-09T05:06:42.593" Score="1" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;Has anyone else noticed - the favicon for &lt;a href=&quot;http://engl393-dnd5th.wikia.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5th Edition Wikia&lt;/a&gt; looks to be copied from this meta SE. Is there a reason for this? Does anyone here care?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose it looks like it's not &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; the same... but it is basically impossible to tell from a glance when I have 50 tabs open in Chrome. Definitely still seems copied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16395" LastActivityDate="2018-05-10T15:36:58.963" Title="D&amp;D 5th Edition Wikia - favicon" Tags="|discussion|copyright|site-design|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7973" CreationDate="2018-05-09T05:39:11.190" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I mean... you'd have to ask whoever runs that wikia. Only they could answer where they chose the favicon or whether they took it from here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does appear identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't know if someone here originally created the favicon for this meta site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-05-09T05:39:11.190" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7975" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7973" CreationDate="2018-05-09T06:09:07.053" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are not necessarily the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE meta's favicon is a gray d20 outline. I'm not able to upload the .ico file here, but it has a MD5 hash c7f81da9029121051950ae912546a092.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The engl DND5 wikia's favicon is a black d20 outline. The .ico file has a MD5 hash 82f5514407b95ad867762108f1e02953. This means it's a different file.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(For those who want to check sources: Go to either site, view page source, find &quot;shortcut icon&quot; in the page header HTML, and download the file from the URI. Then check the file's MD5 hash.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, on their front page, they have the following disclaimer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;d20 dice favicon was created by Andrew Doane from the Noun Project and is licensed under the Creative Commons CCBY.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible that the wikia owners copied RPG.SE meta's favicon, changed the color, and then used it for themselves? Yes. But we have no proof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is entirely possible that, like this site, they decided to use a d20 icon because their site features information about a d20 system. RPG.SE doesn't have a copyright on the d20 outline design. It's a minimalistic design and, if you &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/search?q=d20%20icon&amp;amp;tbm=isch&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;image search for &quot;d20 icon&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, you will find that most of the results have a similar appearance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastActivityDate="2018-05-09T06:09:07.053" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7973" CreationDate="2018-05-09T14:44:49.313" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Very probably not copied&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I took a look at the two icons, zoomed to 1600%. I looked especially at the edges of the lines to see if there were matching aliasing patterns. An icon can be recoloured, but matching gradients in the semi-transparent aliasing pixels would be a likely result even after a recolour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn’t look like they’re derived one from the other. There are many similar parts, but no matches. The Wiki icon is also one pixel wider, and the centre horizontal line is one pixel higher. Each of the left and right sides have vertical aliasing that doesn’t appear in the SE one, and there’s aliasing in the centre in very different patterns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although it’s technically &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; it’s a copy, it’s practically &lt;em&gt;implausible&lt;/em&gt;. The amount of pixel-level doctoring to hide copying would have been immense, negating several times over any time or effort savings copying would offer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s likely just that the design was independently arrived at. At worst, the design (rather than the file) was copied and independently created. Even that’s somewhat unlikely given the obviousness of the design. There are just too many aliasing details that don’t match for it to be a file copy, making it highly unlikely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-10T15:36:58.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7977" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-10T10:41:36.277" Score="5" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few weeks back, this yes-or-no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120628/is-your-proficiency-bonus-a-class-feature/&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; got asked and answered by the OP, with the answer &lt;strong&gt;YES&lt;/strong&gt;. I eventually replied &lt;strong&gt;NO&lt;/strong&gt; and my reasoning, and the community votes pended towards my answer. The OP has not accepted an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question came from another &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120511/does-gaining-a-proficiency-via-shapechange-let-you-add-your-original-proficiency&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;, on which a very similar thing happened (OP did not agree with most upvoted answer, argued quite extensively with me, and accepted another answer). On the second question, an answer was at least selected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there something we can do in these situations? It seems strange to me that any user can ask a question, answer his own question and (if he wants to) accept his own answer, without any sort of validation. As far as I know, the question can't even be deleted (as it has answers), and it should not be closed (as it might in fact be a good question, such as these both are).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mind you, I don't want to sound petty, it's not about 15 rep from having the answer accepted or not. It's an actual potential issue I can see with having the community votes to validate answers, but having the OP choose whatever answer he/she wants to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31589" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-29T16:32:40.753" LastActivityDate="2021-11-29T16:32:40.753" Title="Can something be done when OP does not agree with an upvoted answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|accepted-answer|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7978" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7977" CreationDate="2018-05-10T11:36:19.863" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nothing really needs to be done. How people vote and accept answers is entirely personal and beyond the control of anybody including diamond moderators. And as the old adage goes, you cannot make anyone agree with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please handle this situation with business as usual: vote and let the querent accept the answer that works for them, and if arguments break out in comments, please flag them for moderator attention so we can step in. If they don't want to accept anything, that is also OK&amp;mdash;whatever the community hive-mind decides is the best answer will get sorted to the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many legitimate good-faith scenarios for a user to accept an answer that doesn't coincide with majority opinion. They are, after all, the one having the problem. We can only suggest what probably works well, and they're the only one that can say what worked for them to solve it. Usually however if an accepted answer is altogether terrible or wrong, it gets downvoted pretty heavily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; rare problematic scenarios where someone has a vested interest in getting a particular viewpoint approved by the community, and when we disagree trouble and conflict starts. Usually they genuinely think it's the best/correct answer, and are trying to act in good faith making this a good and accurate Q&amp;amp;A resource, but their methods are causing trouble. Please assume good faith and carry on as normal including flagging inappropriate comments; it handles these situations remarkably well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If something has been done that significantly compromises our Q&amp;amp;A resource quality, that's also worth bringing up. Mention the specific Q&amp;amp;A, what the state is, and what's wrong and suggest what might need to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, the situation is already on the diamond moderation team's radar. We'll appreciate your assistance via those flags if more stuff like this happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-10T12:00:52.363" LastActivityDate="2018-05-10T12:00:52.363" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7979" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-10T23:23:35.617" Score="5" ViewCount="212" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122300/30214&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; to the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122297/30214&quot;&gt;Finding ways to “nerf” a PC that is too strong with base stats, after a long period of playing&lt;/a&gt;&quot; question raises 5 different points which are 5 different methods to solve the problem. They all don't seem to be compatible, it seems to me that each solution is supposed to be used alone. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like if it had been posted as 5 distinct answers, I would have upvoted some of them, downvoted some of them, and probably kept the rest untouched, but I cannot do it because their scores are currently not separate. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this situation OK? What, if anything, can be done to solve it if it is not OK?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T12:06:08.723" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T12:06:08.723" Title="Should this answer have been split into 5 different answers?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-05-11T09:18:06.827" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't mis-identify valid comments as misuse&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tend to add comments (in lieu of a downvote) when I see an inaccurate answer.  This gives the answerer a chance to improve his answer, or discuss my feedback. I prefer this approach over giving someone a drive by downvote with no explanation.  This is even the preferred way of doing things on the Stack Exchange sites, as evidenced by the UI you receive when you use the downvote button, see the screenshot from the RPG site below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R51Jy.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R51Jy.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, I have personally observed that my constructive comments get deleted (without even notifying me that they've been deleted!).  It's very valuable to have discussions in the comments about the veracity of an answer, even if the comments are incorrect.  By having a visible log of the discussion, you can address common misconceptions, and avoid more people commenting about the exact same issue.  Deleting discussion comments just invites the same comments from different people ad-nauseum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="579" LastEditorUserId="579" LastEditDate="2018-05-11T09:51:19.100" LastActivityDate="2018-05-11T09:51:19.100" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7979" CreationDate="2018-05-11T18:13:33.967" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;When an answer's posted, the answer rises or falls on its own merits. Unless an answer is offensive, potentially damaging, or off topic, an answer can say whatever it wants in whatever way it wants, and one of those ways certainly &lt;em&gt;can be&lt;/em&gt; a list of solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; don't have to like how an answer says something. I, too, tend to prefer answers that take the sniper approach (i.e. an answer that offers one good, detailed solution to the problem) to answers that take the shotgun approach (i.e. an answer that offers a bunch of short, seemingly random solutions to the problem), but my personal preference—or yours!—doesn't make one approach superior to the other, especially &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;in all circumstances&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yes, this situation is okay. Folks that find the answer &lt;em&gt;not useful&lt;/em&gt; because it presents too wide a variety of solutions in too little detail without enough support can inform the user that the answer is &lt;em&gt;not useful&lt;/em&gt; by downvoting it, and folks that find the answer &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; precisely &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; it quickly and succinctly presents a variety of techniques that can be applied to solve the problem can inform the user that the answer is &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; by upvoting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That does leave folks who find &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; of the solutions in the answer &lt;em&gt;useful&lt;/em&gt; and other solutions in the same answer &lt;em&gt;not useful&lt;/em&gt; unable to express their feelings indecision about the answer (except here on Meta), but, because there's no obligation to vote on every answer (or, for that matter, every question), it's totally okay to read an answer, utter a quiet &lt;em&gt;Meh&lt;/em&gt;, not vote at all, and move on to the next answer—maybe you'll like that next one more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2018-05-11T18:13:33.967" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7979" CreationDate="2018-05-11T21:04:51.100" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, but we don't do that here (for some reason)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, multiple answers by the same user should absolutely be posted separately rather than all together in some sort of giant pile of answer.  However, we don't do that here, and posting a large number of answers as a single user is looked down upon, which will result in all the posts getting downvoted unless you are very careful or your answers are very good.  I don't know why we don't do that, but we don't, and you should be aware of the large potential for backlash going in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, just as a note, &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the time a question seems like I ought to write several answers to it, it's too broad.  A lot of the time it's fine and it's just that different answers apply in different playstyles, but most of the time it's indicating a closure-worthy problem in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-11T21:04:51.100" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7983" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-12T19:31:38.587" Score="2" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7961/30214&quot;&gt;a post by mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;, mods can see &quot;a dozen line graphs&quot;, from which the high-rep users can only see 3 and others can see none.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are all those graphs (the 9 and the 3)? &#xA;Why is this info only disclosed to the mods?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:44:54.167" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:44:54.167" Title="Which &quot;dozen line graphs&quot; can the mods see?" Tags="|support|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7984" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7983" CreationDate="2018-05-12T20:26:48.403" Score="7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What are all those graphs (the 9 and the 3)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/site-analytics&quot;&gt;25k users are granted access to an analytics tool&lt;/a&gt; in which they can see the overall number of posts and votes, and overall traffic, for the community as a whole (and not for any one user).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Diamond moderators get an analytics tool that is basically the same thing with more knobs and dials, and with additional kinds of stats. We can also see things like edits, closures, reopens, and some other things related to understanding overall site activity levels and moderation activities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given we're not allowed to share the specifics in public, I don't think I can say much more than that about what's in there exactly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These analytics tools help us see big picture trends about how the community is operating. It's about understanding community health, like what's our close rate look like, how many questions get closed and reopened, etc. If we (the community, or just the diamonds) think there might be a problem in overall site activities then these analytics tools help us understand what's happening exactly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Why is this info only disclosed to the mods?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm guessing it's because this is relatively secret information. Some users are given the 25k analytics because by that point they're fairly trustworthy as more or less acting as a good-faith member of the community. Diamond moderators are given a bit more because they've been verified by the electing community as being trustworthy. (&amp;amp; If this data leaks there's four people at most who could have been accountable for it, as opposed to a hundred.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-15T13:05:19.243" LastActivityDate="2018-05-15T13:05:19.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7985" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-05-13T16:42:39.337" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Fix the problem instead of hiding the symptoms&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People don't answer in comments because they hate the site or can't find the answer box. People put &amp;quot;answers&amp;quot; in comments because it solves a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that stackexchange really loves the format of asking a precise well-phrased and well-researched question which is then answered with a precise well-phrased and well-researched answer. Unfortunately that's not always how it goes. Sometimes the question comes from a misunderstanding. Sometimes you have an incorrect assumption. Sometimes you cannot phrase your question properly because you are asking about a thing you don't know about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example when you have a question of the form &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;How do I do X?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; someone might want to answer &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;There is an obvious answer Y, but that is a trap.&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; That is not a proper answer, or at least it shouldn't be. But it also doesn't ask for clarification, so it should not be a comment either. It's also too important not to say. So people just put it in a comment anyway, because it's the best of the existing options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the community is fairly good at deleting those comments it is extremely frustrating to have your valuable contributions deleted which can lead to more problems later on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There are valuable contributions that are neither answers nor comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least not answers and comments that are currently accepted. Identify what those are (besides the above example). Find a place for them. Once you do that &amp;quot;comment misuse&amp;quot; and more importantly frustrating users will be less frequent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case you think there is no such thing as a valuable contribution that is neither an answer nor a comment I propose you use the following rule: Instead of flagging or deleting comments that are answers convert them into answers. You will quickly discover that many of those comments that were being deleted for being answers are not answers either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36151" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-13T16:42:39.337" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-05-14T22:36:41.227" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45492/22566&quot;&gt;We have the tower of rage, stack 'o mounts&lt;/a&gt; that has raging barbarians, all the way down.  Best served with a red wine, and rye crackers.  As the creator observes:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Awakened Cat Barbarian riding a Gnome Barbarian riding an Orc Barbarian/Warchanter with war Drums riding a Minotaur Barbarian riding a Huge-Ass War-Mammoth is essentially 90% of the point of playing Dungeons and Dragons.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-05-15T12:39:17.687" LastActivityDate="2018-05-15T12:39:17.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7987" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7988" CreationDate="2018-05-15T17:22:19.793" Score="3" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122423/whats-the-simplest-class-for-a-child/&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; which, having read answers and comments, Should have been a very different question. Probably should have been flagged as opinion based =]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've accepted the answer from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28402/carcer&quot;&gt;Carcer&lt;/a&gt; as they rightly questioned my throwing someone in the deep end of 5e, but in actual fact I'm first going with a suggestion from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/19484/engineer-toast&quot;&gt;Engineer Toast&lt;/a&gt; (in a comment on the question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was about to post an answer myself as such, in case other people stumble into the same problem - but my chosen solution (I'll try Heroes of Hesiod, and she can level-up to a lvl1 adult-5e-person once the basic mechanics are understood) isn't actually an answer to the question so my self-censor-mode kicked in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this the correct way of dealing with the situation? I didn't want to change the title as it would invalidate good answers to the original question. But in hindsight it's not the question I should have asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43700" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-05-15T18:32:58.170" LastActivityDate="2018-05-16T11:26:06.627" Title="My solution derives from several answers and comments, what to do?" Tags="|discussion|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7987" CreationDate="2018-05-15T17:47:17.973" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks like EngineerToast has now posted their own &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122693/28591&quot;&gt;answer based on their comment&lt;/a&gt; (after some encouragement and help from the community), so you might consider choosing that for your accepted answer if it meets your criteria and solves your issue. If not...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Post your own answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering your own question is not only acceptable, but it is actually encouraged! If none of the answers were what works best for you and you found another option, it is absolutely the best way to go to write up what worked for you in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the solution actually happens to be a frame challenge to your question, which is a perfectly acceptable way to answer a question. Basically, instead of answering the question directly, you challenge the premise of the question and offer a solution based off of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side note, this is one of the reasons we do not allow answering in the comments. Had EngineerToast put their answer as an actual answer they would now be getting the rep and the checkmark from writing a good answer and you would not be in a position where you were forced to write your own based off of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Regardless, the checkmark should go to the answer that helped you solve your problem the best. And if you need to write your own answer to reflect that then that is the best way to go.&lt;/strong&gt; :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-16T11:26:06.627" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7989" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-17T18:51:59.223" Score="6" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should we reverse the duplication on this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122804/can-i-cast-blade-ward-and-then-make-my-monk-unarmed-strike-with-a-bonus-action?noredirect=1&quot;&gt;Can I cast Blade Ward and then make my monk unarmed strike with a bonus action?&lt;/a&gt; and make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79321/can-a-monk-make-a-bonus-unarmed-attack-after-using-shocking-grasp&quot;&gt;Can a monk make a bonus unarmed attack after using shocking grasp?&lt;/a&gt; the duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The newer answer is much more fleshed out and seems a better Q&amp;amp;A to point to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-05-17T19:05:10.643" LastActivityDate="2018-05-18T19:53:32.683" Title="Should we dupe the older question to this newer question about unarmed attacks and spells?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7990" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7992" CreationDate="2018-05-17T20:26:27.693" Score="4" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62566/can-eldritch-blast-be-twinned?rq=1&quot;&gt;Can Eldritch Blast be Twinned?&lt;/a&gt; is currently listed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53714/does-a-sorcerers-metamagic-work-for-non-sorcerer-spells&quot;&gt;Does a sorcerer&amp;#39;s metamagic work for non-sorcerer spells?&lt;/a&gt;, but the answer to that question is not correct for this one.  It seems to me like it should be either reopened and answered as-is or listed as a duplicate to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53600/does-twinned-spell-work-with-magic-missile&quot;&gt;Does twinned spell work with magic missile?&lt;/a&gt; - which is asking about a different spell but does have the correct answer for the correct reason.  I've voted to reopen in an attempt to get the process of a fix started, but it'll take more than just me, and it's an old enough question that I suspect it won't get where it's going without at least a bit of a push.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just for clarity, what &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the correct response to this sort of situation?  I feel rather strongly that &quot;left as-is&quot; is the wrong answer due to... well, providing the wrong answer, but what should be done with it?  Is &quot;question about a different spell with the right answer for the right reason&quot; enough to deserve a duplicate close, should it be answered independently, or is it that I'm just wrong and it should be left as-is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastActivityDate="2018-05-17T20:53:22.560" Title="Question listed as duplicate of wrong other question" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7991" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-17T20:39:46.380" Score="4" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Context&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, we got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122505/43856&quot;&gt;this question about Wizard spellcasting&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed as a dupe and, from the OP comments and my answer being accepted, it's clear that he was carrying over a concept from Pathfinder to the 5e which was simply wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This problem is pretty frequent, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44736/can-a-spell-be-prepared-once-and-cast-multiple-times&quot;&gt;this confusion for 3.x players&lt;/a&gt; as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my experience, this is a common issue from players coming from 3.5e or Pathfinder to the fifth edition, mainly when they were used to play &lt;strong&gt;only&lt;/strong&gt; 3.5e/PF and not other systems as well. It happened to me when I started playing 5e, it happened to an entire group of players I DM'd to. It keeps happening now and then when someone decides to try out 5e after playing 3.5e for 15 years. Point being it happens frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is: these questions don't reflect, from my point of view, the real problem. &amp;quot;Can a spell be prepared once and cast multiple times?&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Do wizards get bonus spell slots from intelligence?&amp;quot; are questions easily answered by reading the PHB, and yet experienced players (that are able to read, and usually &lt;strong&gt;did&lt;/strong&gt; read the PHB) still get confused because the problem is not the ruling of the current system, but them carrying misconceptions from the previous one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that question and answers &lt;strong&gt;focusing&lt;/strong&gt; (instead of just mentioning) on the &lt;strong&gt;differences between editions&lt;/strong&gt; rather than just &amp;quot;How this edition works&amp;quot; might help these 3.5e players during their transition. I wanted to create a Question that they might refer to when doing so. The thing is: I want to focus on the fact that the editions/systems are different and the general &amp;quot;confusion&amp;quot; that happens, not on a specific question like &amp;quot;Can I prepare more spells than I can cast? What I do with them?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously this will get edited by me and the community many times if it gets posted, but the sketch follows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Title&lt;/strong&gt;: &amp;quot;Coming from 3.5e/PF, I'm confused on how prepared spellcasting works&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Body&lt;/strong&gt;: In D&amp;amp;D 3.x, Wizards would prepare spells and cast them, while Sorcerers were spontaneous casters, which could cast any spell they knew as many times as their spell slots let them. The concept of preparing spells still exists in 5e, but Wizards now also have spell slots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the Wizard's class table, I have two spell slots at 1st level. But I can prepare a number different from that. Should I be using the minimum between both? More broadly, how can I translate 3.5e/Pathfinder spellcasting to the current Prepared Spellcasting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;My Meta Question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel this either gets too broad or becomes a duplicate of the linked questions (or many other questions about Wizard's spellcasting). For example, in the current state of the question, it's two questions in one - the first is already answered more than once and the second is too broad. I really like the idea of the question but I can't write it in a way it seems decent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is my reasoning for the question valid? I.e., should this question actually exist or I'm just overthinking things? And if it should, how can I make it stackable, not too broad or duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-17T23:38:10.013" Title="Carrying misconcepts from previous editions - is this Question fine?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7990" CreationDate="2018-05-17T20:53:22.560" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have reopened that question because it is not a duplicate of either question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The source of OP's confusion was with the &quot;targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self&quot; part of the Twinned Spell description which indicates that the confusion was not based on the spell being from a different class' spell list. So not a duplicate of the non-sorcerer question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aditionally, I don't think it is a direct duplicate of the magic missile question either because magic missile can target more than one creature by default while eldritch blast can only target more than one at certain levels. It is a subtle but important distinction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2018-05-17T20:53:22.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7991" CreationDate="2018-05-17T23:38:10.013" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with your initial feeling that such a question about &quot;how can I translate 3.5e/Pathfinder spellcasting to the current Prepared Spellcasting&quot; would be too broad, even as a signpost. More specific formulations of it are already covered by the duplicates you mention. I don't think we really need such a &quot;signpost&quot; question; the people asking those kinds of question clearly have not seen the existing questions that already cover the issue, so I doubt yet another question asking the same thing would really accomplish much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do encounter other common misconceptions that haven't already been asked here (and aren't too broad), you could probably try and ask those on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-05-17T23:38:10.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7994" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-18T17:33:57.657" Score="12" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;While a question that's &lt;strong&gt;on hold&lt;/strong&gt; or &lt;strong&gt;closed&lt;/strong&gt; is indicated in brackets &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;in the general list of questions&lt;/a&gt;, a question that's &lt;strong&gt;locked&lt;/strong&gt; isn't. (For example, at the time of this writing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122574/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a reason &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to display a bracketed &lt;strong&gt;locked&lt;/strong&gt; after a locked question in the general list of questions? If there is &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; reason, would it be possible—so folks don't get their hopes up about answering such questions—to indicate in the general list of questions also that a question is &lt;strong&gt;locked&lt;/strong&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2018-05-18T17:33:57.657" Title="Can there be a bracketed locked after locked questions like with on hold and closed questions?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7989" CreationDate="2018-05-18T19:53:32.683" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If the intent is to make the stack a better Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question duplication link direction would better serve to direct visitors to the better answer.  That means that the definition of &quot;duplicate&quot; is slightly different than the vernacular interpretation in that the earlier question could be a duplicate of a future thing.  The temporal relationship then has dissonance with the usual meaning of duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Better Q&amp;amp;A is more useful&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I want a question answered or when I want to know the answer to a question, I'd like the best answer.  Making that answer closer to the surface of the investigation is useful to the reader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If the intent is to make the stack a history of questions and their answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The duplicate question link should always point from more recent to more distant in time.  The aim being to prevent a proliferation of repetitive answers to the repetative questions.  Basically, record the acceptable and voted for answers for an OP's question and point to the history to avoid being drown by the noise of repeated questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Add a comment linking the two questions or answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Solve the issue by adding a comment or question addendum linking to the more complete answer.  That would side step the issue of using &quot;duplicate&quot; in an unconventional way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastActivityDate="2018-05-18T19:53:32.683" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7996" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-20T00:58:39.187" Score="5" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been here for a little while and wanted to ask this before I went asking a question that could be less acceptable than this one. I want some help homebrewing a class for 5e, but before I do, I figured I should ask if it's acceptable to so so. Sorry for any inconvenience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39274" OwnerDisplayName="RoiRoiHe'sOurBoy" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-20T01:40:06.053" LastActivityDate="2018-05-20T02:01:53.230" Title="Is it frowned upon to ask for help homebrewing a class on this forum?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2018-05-20T02:12:08.650" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7996" CreationDate="2018-05-20T02:01:53.230" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as i know (If im wrong and a mod sees this pls comment) you can do homebrew, if you cant on the &quot;forum&quot; then im almost positive you can on the chatroom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44689" LastActivityDate="2018-05-20T02:01:53.230" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7998" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="7999" CreationDate="2018-05-21T20:34:56.280" Score="6" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is actually one of our top tags.  That said, it's entirely an umbrella tag for our tags describing specific kinds of questions that have to do with social dynamics.  We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-player&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-player&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-player&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; etc.  It seems to me that any question &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; tagged social and to which a more specific tag didn't apply would garner close votes as 'too broad' quite quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there is certainly some value in being able to favorite all those tags at once rather than doing so individually, that relies on people consistently tagging questions with the social tag, which is a waste of tag space and also conforms not only this site's particular definition of meta-tagging but actually the network-wide one as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus it seems to me the tag should be disused.  Is there a reason we shouldn't burn it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-27T21:14:52.600" LastActivityDate="2019-12-27T21:14:52.600" Title="Do we need the [social] tag anymore?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="7999" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7998" CreationDate="2018-05-21T20:59:37.753" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It passes all the tests for a tag and it's not causing any problems. Of the 145 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social+-problem-players+-problem-gm+-group-dynamics+-gm-techniques&quot;&gt;69 of them (almost half) aren't tagged&lt;/a&gt; with any of group-dynamics, problem-players/gm, or gm-techniques. Nearly all of those are open. There doesn't seem to be a problem here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a reason we &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; burn it? Tags are in when someone feels like adding one, and removed only once they demonstrably are causing problems by existing or have no reason to exist. That doesn't seem to be the case here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-05-21T20:59:37.753" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7998" CreationDate="2018-05-21T21:50:39.320" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel like the tag is not particularly useful or consistently used, but it’s also not sticking up as a nail that seems to need to be hammered down. I can’t think of any damaging snags it’s causing; the only problem it seems to have is inconsistent use, which isn’t much of a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-05-21T21:50:39.320" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8001" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7998" CreationDate="2018-05-22T03:48:15.110" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;There is no need to fix what isn't broken.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What problem are you trying to solve?  The question as presented does not move me to believe that there is a problem.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7998/do-we-need-the-social-tag-anymore/8001#comment25502_7999&quot;&gt;It takes up space&lt;/a&gt; on questions that would really benefit from a more&#xA;  specific tag&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What?  There is a limit of five tags and they all occupy the same row/text line.  No space management problem is in evidence. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That people often may use tags badly (I have done so myself) is not something a policy or a burnination can fix.   We have a sizable body of community-moderation-motivated members who can clear off, discuss in comments, or change tags as needed to get the tags to match the question in instances where tag usage seems a bad fit for the topic/question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last point: not everyone is a native English speaker, so now and again a tag selection may be an honest error in that aspect.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-05-22T03:48:15.110" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8002" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-22T13:05:36.260" Score="10" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm looking to better understand how to best answer questions on homebrew content and what our policies surrounding it are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, I had thought that the Stack wanted either rules-based answers or play-tested answers for mechanical questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123048/paladin-ranged-smiting&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on Ranged Divine Smite viability, I was concerned that the answers provided both by users and a Mod do not meet community standards for answers to a question on homebrew content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do we require answers to questions on homebrew to be backed up by experience?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If so, do the answers in the example meet that standard?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If not, do we have any policies regarding what is acceptable support for an answer to a question on homebrew rules?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I'm not asking how to vote, but looking more on how to approach answering questions like this in the future as a user and to understand if they meet our expected standards.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that if we can answer a house-rule question with untested opinions and/or &quot;try it yourself and see&quot; is not helpful to the OP or the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-05-22T13:56:48.423" LastActivityDate="2018-05-22T14:51:02.603" Title="When do non-rules or experience-based answers on house-rules questions meet community standards?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8002" CreationDate="2018-05-22T13:10:00.647" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Do we require answers to questions on homebrew to be backed up by experience?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;So the top answer that cites experience - good. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The low answer that&#xA;says &quot;this is all opinion&quot; - bad.  Feel free and downvote it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nitsua's answer does some analysis in that it won't unbalance the&#xA;party in an all-paladin party (valid analysis) and then says &quot;well, I&#xA;guess you'll have to try it&quot; - true but not super helpful.  I gave it&#xA;neither an upvote or a downvote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am unsure what you are asking, however, other than &quot;do answers get posted that don't meet our quality standards&quot; (yes, obviously) and &quot;what do I do about them&quot; (vote your conscience).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-05-22T14:31:42.010" LastActivityDate="2018-05-22T14:31:42.010" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8004" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-22T13:50:03.297" Score="3" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103652/compared-to-the-other-phb-races-where-does-mousemen-homebrew-race-stands-in-te?rq=1&quot;&gt;Compared to the other PHB races, where does Mousemen homebrew race stands, in terms of balance?&lt;/a&gt; has been closed as off-topic.  The only stated reason for close, is 'because &quot;Evaluate my Homebrew&quot; are offtopic'.  The quote on the autogenerated &quot;closed&quot; text is &quot;This question does not appear to be about role-playing games within the scope defined in the help center.&quot; and includes a link to the &quot;on-topic&quot; page of the help center.  That page has at least some text specific to rpg SE, but absolutely nothing implying that &quot;Evaluate my Homebrew&quot; questions are offtopic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not really an issue in this &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; case, as the author of the question was one of the people who voted to close, but the fact that the helpful link on the close text telling you &quot;go here to find out why your question was closed&quot; has woefully insufficient information about what does and does not cause questions to be closed seems like a source of concern to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way to have that page changed so that it more accurately reflects the actual rules-as-enforced on the site?  If there's not, could we have such a way added somehow?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastActivityDate="2018-05-22T13:50:03.297" Title="Is there any way to fix the Help Center &quot;Scope&quot; page?" Tags="|feature-request|close-reasons|help-center|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8002" CreationDate="2018-05-22T14:51:02.603" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The linked consensus is more limited than you are interpreting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific question that inspired this meta-question is &amp;quot;I want to homebrew something&amp;quot;. The meta consensus linked about &amp;quot;only suggest homebrew if you can cite experience&amp;quot;, by my reading at least, is more specifically &amp;quot;only suggest homebrew &lt;em&gt;as a solution to a general problem&lt;/em&gt; if you've tried it&amp;quot;. In other words, if the question was &amp;quot;One of my players wants to make a Ranged Paladin, but losing Smite effects seems harsh. What should I do?&amp;quot; then an answer saying &amp;quot;homebrew a way to make ranged smites&amp;quot; would need experience playing with their homebrew (Icyfire would still have an excellent answer to that question). Other answers might have mentioned ways to accomplish something hopefully similar-enough without homebrew, maybe a combination of feats that allows making melee attacks while staying out of range.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if a question asks &amp;quot;I'm trying to homebrew [exactly this]&amp;quot; then there are valid answers other than &amp;quot;I've tried [exactly that] and it (worked / didn't work)&amp;quot;. Experiences with homebrew that's only similar, or analysis showing how the homebrew is/is not balanced against official content are also useful. In other words I think the problem with the low-voted answer is more &amp;quot;gave very narrow and specific recommendations without citing even slightly relevant experiences or similar official situations&amp;quot; while the middle answers are in the &amp;quot;here are some challenges you might face, and here are some ways to deal with that&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-22T14:51:02.603" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8006" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-24T14:08:46.553" Score="6" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;While this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123219/how-can-i-tell-how-many-damage-dice-to-roll-for-an-npcs-cantrip&quot;&gt;How can I tell how many damage dice to roll for an NPCs cantrip?&lt;/a&gt; does have a duplicate here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53800/at-what-level-do-monsters-cast-cantrips&quot;&gt;At what level do monsters cast cantrips?&lt;/a&gt;, the example for the older question limited the scope of the answers to Innate Spellcasting while the newer question is more comprehensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we reverse the duplicate for this reason?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2018-05-24T14:10:07.677" Title="Old Question about Cantrip Level is limited in scope" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8007" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8006" CreationDate="2018-05-24T14:10:07.677" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Reverse!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I do not agree that the question was limited in scope, the answer was limited in it's response. The questions do seem entirely identical, but your answer covers the full range of cases and is superior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd recommend that Tiggerous' question become the primary and mark the older question as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-24T14:10:07.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8008" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2018-05-25T06:56:43.480" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2018-05-25T06:56:43.480" LastActivityDate="2018-05-25T06:56:43.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8009" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2018-05-25T06:56:43.480" Score="0" Body="The question you're asking is designed to solicit opinions or best-practices on a particular topic, with the goal of reaching community consensus." OwnerUserId="44819" LastEditorUserId="44819" LastEditDate="2018-05-30T05:46:13.243" LastActivityDate="2018-05-30T05:46:13.243" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8010" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-25T12:37:36.263" Score="19" ViewCount="359" Body="&lt;p&gt;While our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1398/41726&quot;&gt;policy on homebrew-critique questions&lt;/a&gt; makes a lot of sense as the questions are certainly able to be answered effectively by experts and fit all the criteria for an on-topic question, these questions often take a sharp turn fast. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Soon after the answers to these questions come in we often get one of two paths. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answers say the homebrew is balanced, one answer may be accepted, and the question is largley left alone. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122986/41726&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answers say the homebrew is unbalanced and the original poster sometimes makes edits to the question accounting for the points made in the answers. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/123258/revisions&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter case is the problem I have with our current approach as it devalues current answers (which hold value not only in addressing the homebrew but for other homebrewers to get an idea for how to approach balancing their handiwork). It also leads to a seesaw of edits (Q &gt; A &gt; Q &gt; A) that StackExchange does not handle well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing I've done in the past is stop this chain early by just inviting the person to chat to refine the homebrew to a high level (which is also the most common choice for me when a question is off-topic leading me to believe something is up). (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/75806/2018/4/10&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One option seems to be to close it once the OP has started down the seesaw chain (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/121026/41726&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;), but this doesn't seem right to me either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are there any ways to address this issue more formally or should we adjust our policy on homebrew questions as a whole? On the other hand, is our current method fine and are there few enough cases of this latter behavior that our policy is okay?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-24T21:26:22.747" LastActivityDate="2018-09-24T21:26:22.747" Title="Can we develop a system to avoid/discourage subsequent homebrew critique question edits?" Tags="|discussion|editing|policy|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8010" CreationDate="2018-05-25T13:53:01.950" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't usually post in meta, so I'm not used to it and maybe my approach or format are wrong, but I felt like I could give my opinion here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem about homebrew is that by design, you look for improvements on your work. So as suggestions on how to do it start to appear, an instinctive reaction would be to edit the question with the changes and ask &amp;quot;Is it good now?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously as you said this devalues the already given answers, so it's a bad practice. If the asker keeps editing until he gets the OK on the answers, all we get are pretty &amp;quot;OK&amp;quot; homebrews, with answers that say &amp;quot;It's fine&amp;quot;, and nothing else. You lose the building process, as @David Coffron explained so well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Self-answer homebrew questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestion would be to encourage self-answering homebrew questions if the answers from other users don't feel right to the asker. In that case, the asker can use all the knowledge the other answers have and build his improved homebrew, giving credit to whom it is deserved, in the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer can be further edited, always adding the steps of the homebrew building, never deleting it alltogether and building anew, so not to lose the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end we would have the original question, an accepted answer with the final homebrew made with the help of the comunity, and all the other answers that are steps towards building that homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not perfect, but I think It's better than closing the question to edits, or closing it alltogether. The alternative is asking about your homebrew, getting answers, then asking &lt;em&gt;again&lt;/em&gt; in a new question with your edited homebrew, getting answers, rinse and repeat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25963" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-25T14:08:44.387" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8012" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8010" CreationDate="2018-05-25T13:56:47.833" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The stack should not be used for iterative design&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way the Q&amp;amp;A system works on this site is not intended for, nor should it be used (IMO), for iterative design processes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits for clarity or for focusing a question or for major improvement (eg allowing a closed non-stackable question to be reopened) are all good reasons to edit and the answers should follow those edits. These edits are things that are terminal (in that they have a defined endpoint: when the question's quality issue is resolved) and have to do with improving the quality of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a question should generally not be allowed to make major revisions that continuously change the core nature of the content of the question in response to feedback from answers. As you point out, the biggest offenders of this tend to be questions about homebrew in my experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a previous meta on this topic (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6324/when-a-question-changes-should-answers-change-too&quot;&gt;When a Question changes, should answers change, too?&lt;/a&gt;) this point was brought up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question was changed because the OP has refined what they wanted to ask as a result of feedback on their question... That's a grey area, and we'll have to deal with it on a case-by-case basis. In some cases it'll be appropriate to revert the change and ask a new question; In others, to let the edit stand and update or downvote and delete old answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this behavior is one of those cases that we can have a generalized response to. This behavior of trying to iterate homebrew designs using answers as a feedback loop fits into this category I'd say. And further, that this usage should not be allowed because our system is just not made to handle such things. If a question about homebrew content is allowed to continuously make changes based on the feedback in the answers, it is going to leave a trail of irrelevant and outdated answers and maybe not even end up getting an answer at all. This is not how the system is supposed to function.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How should we handle the behavior when it is observed?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think we need a new system to handle this. In my opinion we already have all the tools we need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Revert edits and comment&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we see OP making an edit on their homebrew question that incorporates major feedback from an answer such that it changes the core question in any significant way, that edit should be reverted. Then a comment should be left explaining to OP why the Stack should not be used in this manner and pointing them towards possibly writing a self-answer (see below) or asking a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When writing answers, look beyond the obvious flaws (if possible)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is somewhat easy to look at homebrew, find a glaring flaw, and tell OP that it is broken based on that. An answer that does only this can be useful for sure, but not always as useful as they can be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if the obvious flaw can easily be removed, suggest that and evaluate the rest of the homebrew based off of that so that OP gets feedback about the whole homebrew and not just one glaring flaw in it. Sometimes the flaw can be serious enough to sink the whole homebrew sure, but that is certainly not always the case. Giving a more complete answer might disincentivize OP from iterating their question because the answer has already suggested a fix and next steps and evaluated the rest based off of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Encourage self-answering&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8011/28591&quot;&gt;@Helwar's excellent answer&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As always, OP is allowed and encouraged to self-answer. This might be useful in the case that they have taken the feedback from one or multiple answers and come up with a drastically new homebrew that they are content with as a result. Instead of putting this in the question as an edit which one might be tempted to do, it could be appropriate to encourage OP to add it as an answer instead. However, it should be made clear that they cannot ask questions in their answer so what they are putting there should be a solution to their issue and not something that they still require assistance with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T18:40:50.330" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8014" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8017" CreationDate="2018-05-27T14:13:36.117" Score="6" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/123289/28591&quot;&gt;answers&lt;/a&gt; (deleted now, 10k rep only) had a score of -8 within 10 min or so. I don’t think this is possible. My answer may have been wrong but it’s unlikely that that many people would see it so soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44595" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-05-27T19:05:57.847" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T23:33:36.533" Title="I believe I was a victim of sockpuppetry. Who do I report this to?" Tags="|support|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8014" CreationDate="2018-05-27T14:31:06.370" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Oh, the sacred flame vs swarm question.  Nope, looks legit.  New 5e questions get a lot of views, the top answer got 27 votes, and there’s other rules-wrong answers that pulled a bunch of downvotes too.  Sorry, citing rules incorrectly pulls quick wrath on D&amp;amp;D questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-05-27T14:36:11.303" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T14:36:11.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8014" CreationDate="2018-05-27T14:31:24.660" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is the place to come.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Raising the issue on meta flags it to moderators' attention and creates a nice starting-point to and container for any investigating we or, in a serious case, the SE staff would have to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say that a few things argue more in the direction of &amp;quot;this could be natural behavior&amp;quot; than the question here indicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123287/23970&quot;&gt;The question&lt;/a&gt; your answer's posted on has over a thousand views--eight downvotes on an answer isn't out of the realm of possibility.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123287/what-does-sacred-flame-do-to-a-swarm/123290#123290&quot;&gt;Another answer&lt;/a&gt; (10K only) got a similar number of downvotes in the hour before it was deleted, simmilarly-timed to yours.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One of those downvoters left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123287/what-does-sacred-flame-do-to-a-swarm/123290#comment303743_123289&quot;&gt;a comment explaining their reasoning&lt;/a&gt; (10K only again)--that would be really-unusual behavior for a sock-voter, as &amp;quot;leaving no trace&amp;quot; other than the vote would most keep them under the radar.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your answer was flagged as low-quality, bringing it into the review queue and in front of high-rep users' eyes more quickly than it might have been otherwise.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using the tools we moderators have it's... inconclusive. Frankly, you haven't been active long enough nor have had enough votes cast your way for the system to start including you in the cross-reference reports. So we can't (yet) see if votes coming your way are from the &amp;quot;usual suspects&amp;quot;--high-rep experts in the tag you posted in who are daily-active--or from some suspicious collection of accounts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, after some more activity, you still feel like downvotes are coming suspiciously fast do post again or ping one of the moderators in chat to look again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T14:31:24.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8014" CreationDate="2018-05-27T15:13:47.080" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;I doubt you were the victim of unwarranted downvotes. I actually wanted to downvote but couldn't because it was deleted before I got there. While I don't want to seem overly negative, I'd like to explain why I would have downvoted it from a regular users's perspective (not as a mod), and I strongly suspect these are also reasons that others did so before the answer was deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Your answer implied rulings contrary to the rules as written and the rules as intended by the designers, so it was counterfactual and looked like an uninformed armchair ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Your answer included no citations or rules in support of its ruling, so there wasn't enough to comment on to elicit you to improve it, leaving downvotes as the easiest remedy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Your answer was very short and failed to include an actual answer to the original question, which is how to resolve the spell, so the answer wouldn't have been enough for the original question poster to be able to resolve the spell even if it weren't counterfactual.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answer was quickly drawn to the attention of many people. See @nitsua60's answer for an explanation of the tools and venues that brought this about. However, as a regular user I can confirm that your answer was brought to my attention multiple ways: I saw it while posting my own answer, while revieweing other answers, while reviewing the low-quality flagged queue, and at the top of the QA listing for D&amp;amp;D 5e due to the frequent updates to the QA as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't be discouraged, but try to learn from the experience. The next time you post an answer, consider what support it needs and whether your post will be helpful enough for the person posting the original question to solve all their problems. I think it should be fairly clear in hindsight that your answer would have left the original question poster scratching their head for lack of insight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, you can't see them (it requires 10,000+ reputation), but there were 2 other counterfactual answers to the question that also got enough downvotes to prompt the mods and/or those who posted the answers to delete them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-05-27T23:33:36.533" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T23:33:36.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8010" CreationDate="2018-05-27T23:46:16.023" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s often worth exploring the Stack Exchange network to see if other sites have found good solutions to a given problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, in this case, we have Code Review, which is basically an entire Stack devoted to “homebrew” critique. They therefore have had to address this issue, and appear to be quite successful. So taking a look at their policy could be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1763/35096&quot;&gt;Code Review’s policy on editing in revisions&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have several options for follow-ups:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h1&gt;Accepting an answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h1&gt;Posting a new question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h1&gt;Posting a self-answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h1&gt;Posting on an external site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;In addition...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You &lt;strong&gt;must not edit the code in the question,&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You also &lt;strong&gt;should not append your revised code to the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To end on a positive note, here is an example of what I consider to be a fruitful iterative review:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.stackexchange.com/q/38452/9357&quot;&gt;Python Port Scanner&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.stackexchange.com/q/46842/9357&quot;&gt;Python Port Scanner 2.0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.stackexchange.com/q/46866/9357&quot;&gt;Python Port Scanner 2.1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(see full policy answer for detailed descriptions, explanations, and examples)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relevant to the situation here is #2, and the two &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt;s. I think this is absolutely the approach we should generally take here. I don’t think there’s any particular risk of the site being inundated with these iterations; we don’t really get &lt;em&gt;that many&lt;/em&gt; homebrew critique questions, and many of them don’t really require iteration. (For those that don’t really need iterating, the other suggestions are appropriate.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-27T23:46:16.023" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8019" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8022" CreationDate="2018-05-28T08:51:14.160" Score="5" ViewCount="296" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120609/9552&quot;&gt;accepted and most upvoted answer&lt;/a&gt; is horribly wrong to a question. The &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; does not matter now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third answer I find really great, and I wanted it to get some attention. So I placed a &quot;bounty to reward existing answer&quot;, which had the opposite effect, it generated 4 upvotes for this answer, and about double for the first one. This is the second day of the bounty, and I expect this will be similar for the next 5 days too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I finally award the bounty, and it will become visible which one I meant to promote, the question will not be featured any more.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;So we can safely say, the bounty completely backfired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there anything I can do differently in the future, so I can really promote the answer I want?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-05-28T14:16:05.663" LastActivityDate="2018-06-10T10:47:37.133" Title="How can I reward a good answer without driving more attention to the bad one?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8019" CreationDate="2018-05-28T14:23:00.820" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you are using a bounty, then you're not going to be able to prevent attention on the bad answer(s); that's not what bounties are for. They are designed for the opposite - to draw attention to a &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; for up to one week. Anyone coming to the question will be able to participate as much as you were; upvoting content that is helpful and high quality, downvoting content that is not, etc. It does not make sense to want to prevent users from participating in the way that you already did on a certain question; we should be careful when talking about user behavior with regard to participation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for drawing positive focus and attention to the answer you want, you get to write a custom reason for your bounty. I just did this myself for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123139/is-there-a-way-to-ask-in-game-i-e-in-a-non-meta-way-what-a-characters-class&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt; where the accepted answer was flat-out wrong and there were other, better answers with lower scores. I mentioned as much in the bounty text, though I didn't specify exactly which answer I thought was the best one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the subject of continued attention where you don't want it because of the bounty's time period... you can manually award a bounty after 24 hours. You don't have to wait the whole 7 days+24 hour grace period. This obviously will end the attention notice to the community for the good answer, but it will also ensure people don't continue seeing the bad answer in the same fashion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may seem less than ideal to end the bounty (and the extra community attention) early, but keep in mind that you just gave the post author a total of 60 reputation all by yourself (50 for the bounty plus an assumed 10 for an upvote). That's equivalent to six people coming along and voting up the content, which is a great boon, and not something you can manage by yourself in another way without violating site rules. Even &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; my answer didn't get upvotes from any other people, I'd &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; be pleased that someone thought my answer was so good that it was worthy of a bounty, whether it was 50 rep or 500. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Outside the bounty function, the best way to promote an answer is off-site, as there is not really an on-site function to promote specific answers (that's not how the site is designed). There is a built-in way to share content off-site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Click the Share option below the answer:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p79Jh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p79Jh.png&quot; alt=&quot;Share option and related modal&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can either post the link to a social media site like Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ (those are included as one-click options by the mechanism itself), or you can post it to a discussion board somewhere like Reddit. Using the Share link comes with the added bonus of earning you, the sharer, a series of badges - Announcer (bronze at 25 unique visitors), Booster (silver, at 300), and Publicist (gold, at 1000). Note that the only way to earn these badges is to share a question or answer using the URL provided by the Share mechanism, which includes a URI fragment containing your account number in order to link visit credit to a person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30830" LastEditorUserId="30830" LastEditDate="2018-05-28T15:00:03.310" LastActivityDate="2018-05-28T15:00:03.310" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7964" CreationDate="2018-05-28T22:05:41.950" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, they are on topic and should be left open.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designer intent can be found on blogs, interviews, lectures, conference presentations, and more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This logic of restricting designer questions is flawed. &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;The site prefers questions that marshal its users' expertise. A question asking only about designer intent doesn't marshal that expertise.&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for designer's intent marshals the expertise of the community across all the resources above. Active users like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/321/sevensideddie?tab=answers&amp;amp;sort=votes&amp;amp;page=2&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt; have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89399/is-morrowind-based-on-a-tabletop-rpg/89416#89416&quot;&gt;given answers with eloquent insights into designer intent&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most powerful ways to find difficult to find information is to &lt;strong&gt;crowdsource a community&lt;/strong&gt;. Given the size of this community and depth of their expertise reading those resources listed above, this community may be very well one of the only reasonable ways to find answers to these designer-intent type questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not address the issues of moderating those questions which one could posit is &lt;em&gt;a separate issue from whether the questions are on or off-topic.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23760" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-28T22:05:41.950" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8019" CreationDate="2018-05-28T22:55:03.170" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Microscopic answer: give a bigger bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously this answer ignores a lot of the larger picture here, but I'll say that a 50-pt bounty doesn't do much to draw my eye to the &quot;other&quot; answer needing recognition, especially if it's not identified in the bounty-message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Throw a couple-hundred rep and name the author, and that says to me &quot;Andras (who's got enough rep around here that I should look where they point) is putting a big sign pointing me here. It'll be worth a minute to see what they've noticed.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-05-28T22:55:03.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8023" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-29T15:04:43.513" Score="3" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are all questions asking about re-roll abilites (such as the lucky feat) and critical successes or failures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123496/9625&quot;&gt;Can Lucky be used on an attack roll if the roll is a &amp;#39;Nat 1&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt; (Today; Already closed as a duplicate)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122760/9625&quot;&gt;When exactly is the outcome of a roll determined?&lt;/a&gt; (From 12 days ago)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/69811/9625&quot;&gt;Do reroll and dice-adding abilities work on critical hits and critical failures?&lt;/a&gt; (From 2 years ago)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the answers seem to be the same, with differences in length and substance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should these questions be closed and rolled together, and if so how?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9625" LastEditorUserId="9625" LastEditDate="2018-05-29T16:08:24.387" LastActivityDate="2018-06-01T01:43:27.583" Title="Multiple questions about re-roll ability interactions with critical rolls" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8023" CreationDate="2018-05-29T16:22:26.773" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Close the dupes as dupes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the same approach as always. The questions are clearly duplicates, the body text is essentially the same. The first one is a particular case of the other two, but the second (which is mine, just to be clear) and third are the same, with the exception that I include Death Saving Throws as an example besides the Nat 1s and Nat 20s. The third question clearly states &amp;quot;My issue is understanding the concept &amp;quot;Before the outcome is determined&amp;quot;.&amp;quot;, which is exactly what I ask about in my own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Which one remains?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I vote for my own, even though it was asked way more recently. My reasoning is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 3rd question also asks about Portent and Bardic Inspiration. Portent is not &lt;strong&gt;before the outcome&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;strong&gt;before the roll&lt;/strong&gt;, so it's a completely different question. This part of the question seems to be ignored by the answers, and I would say if it is important the question should be closed as too broad as it's two questions in one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;More importantly, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122761/43856&quot;&gt;Vigil's answer&lt;/a&gt; to my question has more backing up from actual rulebooks (citing the fundamental rules of D&amp;amp;D and quoting Illusory Step, which are vaguely mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/69813/43856&quot;&gt;Derek's answer&lt;/a&gt;, which is accepted in the original question).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question itself can be improved, but I already think it states a single problem better than the original one, and I certainly think the answer is better than the answers in the original question. For both these reasons I'd say close the &amp;quot;original&amp;quot; question as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-29T16:22:26.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8026" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8029" CreationDate="2018-05-29T19:21:21.813" Score="12" ViewCount="476" Body="&lt;p&gt;mxyzplk is - and has been for a long while - a very active user and moderator. Ever since I've started reading RPG.SE, every time I visited the site, I've seen his signature on post after post, either providing quality content or helpful moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, one thing I couldn't figure out was: why did he choose such a &lt;em&gt;bizzare&lt;/em&gt; avatar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tHqVD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tHqVD.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was really odd, and didn't fit the theme of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then I would click on his avatar,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LJboC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LJboC.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and all would become clear. What I was seeing&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WCM5u.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WCM5u.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;wasn't quite the thing that everyone else was seeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sO4HW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sO4HW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As in, it's not a misshapen, shrugging, single-toothed Looney-Tunes-style gold-digger.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yeom1.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yeom1.gif&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And to this day, this optical correction keeps haunting me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24742" LastActivityDate="2020-11-13T04:07:35.597" Title="The Mystery Behind mxyzplk's Misshapen and Non-Thematic Avatar" Tags="|discussion|moderators|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8027" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-05-29T19:38:41.120" Score="-10" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;This stack appears to be entirely designed for Rules Lawyers and has little to no useful content for players who want to enjoy the game they choose to play, any suggestions for somewhere else one might find a more congenial community? I feel this issue is systemic affecting all aspects of the site and since it stems from the core rules the stack is based on it can't be remedied. So, please point me at a more useful and roleplay rather than roll-play relevant community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user40081" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-05-29T21:05:39.707" LastActivityDate="2018-05-29T21:05:39.707" Title="What stack do I go to for RPG information designed for people who actually want to enjoy the game?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ClosedDate="2018-05-29T22:38:33.030" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8027" CreationDate="2018-05-29T19:49:01.760" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry to hear you haven't enjoyed your time here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can find any number of other communities we'd recommend for discussing games here in this big list of forums and other communities: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Best of luck &amp;amp; happy gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-05-29T19:49:01.760" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8029" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8026" CreationDate="2018-05-29T20:14:08.813" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;That's a picture of &lt;a href=&quot;http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Venger&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Venger&lt;/a&gt;, the force of evil and villain of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons_(TV_series)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; cartoon show&lt;/a&gt; from the mid-80s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He was voiced by Peter Cullen, a.k.a. Optimus Prime and Eeyore the donkey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Venger has wings and can fly. He rides a horse that does not have wings, yet also can fly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The show is campy and did not age well, but I recommend watching it anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the avatar is entirely thematic due to its obvious connection to D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2020-11-13T04:07:35.597" LastActivityDate="2020-11-13T04:07:35.597" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8030" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8027" CreationDate="2018-05-29T20:18:29.670" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Reddit&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are subreddits for role playing, D&amp;amp;D, and so much more.  They also have voting and comments.  You can post things that aren't just questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DnD subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDBehindTheScreen/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DM's subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDNext&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5e subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Homebrew&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/RPG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;General RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;4e subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/DMDadJokes&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bad DnD puns and jokes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-05-29T20:18:29.670" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7937" CreationDate="2018-05-30T14:10:54.687" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over on &lt;a href=&quot;https://robotics.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Robotics&lt;/a&gt;, I have several &lt;a href=&quot;https://robotics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/177/37&quot;&gt;Copy-pastable comment text for common problems with questions&lt;/a&gt; templates related to comments. I use these frequently, but I've also seen non moderators help out with problem comments using my templates too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you can go and read the &lt;a href=&quot;https://robotics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/177/37&quot;&gt;full text&lt;/a&gt;, I won't copy them here, but the main thing that I try to get across is that comments are for helping to improve questions and answers, and are distracting, so we try to keep them to a minimum. I also explain that comments should be considered ephemeral and that any comment which no longer actively helps to improve a question or answer may be deleted at any time to &lt;em&gt;tidy up&lt;/em&gt; a post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1658" LastActivityDate="2018-05-30T14:10:54.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8032" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8023" CreationDate="2018-05-31T23:49:41.187" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Duplicates are about duplicate &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;, not duplicate answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, some questions will have the same answers: for example, \$2+2=4\$, \$2^2=4\$, \$6-2=4\$. They are not duplicates &lt;em&gt;merely&lt;/em&gt; because of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be duplicates if the questions are about different specific examples that are symptomatic of a more general problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my mind, these questions do not obviously meet these criteria: each OP had a different problem - &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; of the solutions to which may be common to all of them but remember the stack embraces a plurality of answers. Other solutions may be unique to the specific circumstances and these can be lost by prematurely marking posts as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-06-01T01:43:27.583" LastActivityDate="2018-06-01T01:43:27.583" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8033" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-01T04:02:15.813" Score="7" ViewCount="375" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123545/18269&quot;&gt;about the fairness of a 7-sided die&lt;/a&gt;, troubles me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is in my opinion well-thought out and well-formulated.  It is asking if a particular die has had any sort of rigorous analysis (physics-based or statistics-based) performed to test its fairness.  That is simple, direct, and if such analysis had been done would lead to an answer of, &quot;Yes, see this link,&quot; and a paraphrase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also seems directly on topic:  We have tags for dice, for statistics, and for scientific-validation, all of which apply.  (Although... why &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; we have a tag for scientific-validation?  That is the only question with that tag.  What's up with that, exactly?)  Two of those tags, at least, are properly employed, so I will view, &quot;This is off-topic,&quot; somewhat skeptically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, to the best of anyone's knowledge, the analysis does not exist.  But negatives are hard to prove, so a technically correct answer is wishy-washy and time-limited at best:  &quot;So far as we know, as of the date of this answer... no analysis, so we don't know.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, the answers generated are really poor.  In particular, there is an analysis that is really a series of assertions, with no source or reference, and which is basically wrong.  A peer-reviewed article can show that the assertion/analysis is wrong, but can't (and doesn't purport to) provide a real answer to the question other than, &quot;It could be.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am qualified to summarize that peer reviewed article, but haven't done so because I still can't answer the question, I can only attack an existing answer.  Perhaps I am wrong, but this seems out of bounds for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What to do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-02T01:23:19.947" LastActivityDate="2022-11-02T01:23:19.947" Title="What To Do When There Are No Right Answers, Only Wrong Ones" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8034" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8033" CreationDate="2018-06-01T05:52:42.753" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What to do: Wait for a right answer to be submitted.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s talk briefly about closed questions. Closing prevents answers, and it’s done for a host of reasons. But one thing closing always means: no new answers can be submitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The complement of this is open questions. No matter how old an open question is, it’s never too old to answer. It’s a gap of knowledge patiently waiting to be filled, possibly &lt;em&gt;years&lt;/em&gt; later. A question doesn’t ever need to have a wrong or poor answer submitted — it’s not going to be made better by filling that gap with garbage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like the one you’re looking at might not have an answer that seems right, right now. It might never have a right answer… but it also might one day. &lt;strong&gt;That’s fine, it’s an open question and will be there when and &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; that right answer ever exists.&lt;/strong&gt; It’s not going anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn’t need fixing. Just a bit of trust in the system. It’s not a hole that we need to anxiously shovel something — &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; — into so that it stops being an uncomfortable hole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make peace with the unanswered. Sit placidly with it. Let the worldly concern about its emptiness fall away. Be one with the emptiness, to see that empty is right for it here and now. Be at peace.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;:)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-06-01T05:58:51.157" LastActivityDate="2018-06-01T05:58:51.157" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8033" CreationDate="2018-06-02T04:49:58.127" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There is a right answer.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...it's just that nobody has provided it yet. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The right answer is a well-controlled experiment in which someone acquires a bunch of those dice, rolls them many times, and then does the statistics to determine if they're fair.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look closely, the question is not about any general 7-sided die; it's about the specific 7-sided die that GameScience produces, which presumably has a specific geometry. Therefore, doppelgreener's question is fully testable, and we just have to wait for someone to do that test. Doppelgreener alludes to this experiment by citing a youtube video that attempts to do this test but ends up being inconclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that those dice are out of stock on GameScience's website, we might have to wait a long time for this true answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a bit of digging, I have made my own attempt to provide an answer to the question. While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/123787/32262&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; is not exactly original statistical analysis, I hope that it's closer to the ideal correct answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Downvote wrong answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think an answer is bad, you should downvote it. If you think an answer is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, you should explain in a comment, too. I've completely reworked answers in the past based on commenters telling me I'm wrong, so critical comments and constructive comments are not mutually exclusive. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's unfortunate that your &quot;informed&quot; downvote only counts as a -1 against a flood of &quot;uninformed&quot; upvotes. This is a problem for many other types of bad answers, too. However, I don't see much of an alternative to this system, given that it would probably be a bad idea to let non-moderators unilaterally delete answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32262" LastEditorUserId="32262" LastEditDate="2018-06-03T04:48:09.247" LastActivityDate="2018-06-03T04:48:09.247" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8036" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-02T20:18:18.700" Score="12" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I was fifteen seconds into a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7053/8610&quot;&gt;welcome comment&lt;/a&gt; on a new user's first question on which no comments had been made when the question was closed—without comment—as a duplicate. I posted my welcome comment, but the event left me uneasy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing the question as a duplicate is absolutely &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the issue: the question really &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate. The issue I have is that the question was closed without first welcoming the new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should a new user's status be acknowledged before managing the new user's question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Exceptions abound, of course. Managing misogynistic, racist, antisocial, or other loaded questions&lt;/em&gt; first &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; then &lt;em&gt;dealing with the new user appropriately is, indeed, the proper course. This question concerns itself with the vast majority of nonevil new users who pose in good faith real questions that seek real solutions from the site's experts.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2018-06-02T20:23:32.323" LastActivityDate="2018-06-02T23:20:15.333" Title="Should a new user be welcomed before the new user's question is closed?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|new-users|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8037" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8036" CreationDate="2018-06-02T20:41:40.353" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7053/who-should-make-welcoming-comments?rq=1&quot;&gt;YES&lt;/a&gt;, but...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, probably two workflows overlapped: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone that isn't really into commenting noticed the duplicate, tagged it&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Others that just read the queue gave the &quot;yep, is a dupe&quot; vote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone (YOU) spotted the question of a new user and wrote the welcome. 1.1 is done by the time they still type the comment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is this a problem?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably yes, as it would be best if the one finding the problem question would write the welcome comment. And indeed, we had earlier itterations about our behavior to newcomers, especially these I feel somewhat related: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2690/handling-new-users-with-bad-answers?rq=1&quot;&gt;Handling new users with bad answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5141/can-we-improve-the-way-we-treat-newcomers?rq=1&quot;&gt;Can we improve the way we treat newcomers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7053/who-should-make-welcoming-comments?rq=1&quot;&gt;Who should make welcoming comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2018-06-02T20:41:40.353" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8038" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8036" CreationDate="2018-06-02T20:52:22.117" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Either can happen in either order. There's not a material difference between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact I'd encourage you to close &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; so as to not leave moderation measures waiting 2-5 minutes longer than necessary because of writing a comment first. If something needs closing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change#comment5750_3001&quot;&gt;closing it ASAP is important.&lt;/a&gt; Most of the time you'll only be close vote #1&amp;ndash;4 and you'll have plenty of time before something actually gets closed to write your comment after your close vote. On the rare occasion you might be close vote #5 or be closing the question unilaterally, get that done ASAP once you're sure it's the right course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've closed plenty of questions, and more often than not I do so prior to leaving any comments (including welcoming comments). The vast majority of the time it makes no apparent difference: I leave feedback and the user responds, makes revisions if it's the kind of situation where that can happen,  etc. A couple of times they've asked a &quot;why was this put on hold?&quot; in the time it's taken me to write that, then they get their answer and we carry on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-06-02T20:52:22.117" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8036" CreationDate="2018-06-02T23:20:15.333" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's OK to have an awkward moment when entering a new group. This group can be frustrating to enter.   The only reason I stuck around at all after my initial rebuff was because I am ornery and stubborn.  Not everyone has those {virtues?} traits.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's at least offer the benefit of the doubt.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-06-02T23:20:15.333" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8040" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8042" CreationDate="2018-06-03T02:12:39.427" Score="3" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am curious as to how the bounty was awarded on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/120604&quot;&gt;Is Greatsword superior to Greataxe?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All four answers were posted before the bounty was placed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The top answer was accepted before the bounty was placed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It appears that the top three answers received the same number of up votes during the bounty period.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I am curious as to why it was awarded to the third most popular answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS: I'm not digging for more rep. Just curious as to if there is something I'm missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42354" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-14T18:10:05.133" LastActivityDate="2018-06-14T18:10:05.133" Title="Why was the bounty awarded to the third most popular answer?" Tags="|discussion|bounty|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8040" CreationDate="2018-06-03T03:42:14.373" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bounties are awarded by users, and not by some democratic process or measure of correctness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bounties may be awarded for any reason, or no reason. The user may decide to award a bounty to an answer simply because it looks like the answerer spent a lot of time on it. They may decide to award a bounty an answer they feel has some particular insight despite not being entirely correct. They may decide to award a bounty to an unpopular answer as a consolation prize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you would have to ask the user their personal reasons for choosing to give the bounty to that particular answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is the exception when a bounty times out. Bounties have a time limit, and if the user does not specify an answer to award it to, then automatic awarding takes place:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happens if I feel my question is still unanswered? / What is automatic awarding?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Approximately 24 hours after the end of the bounty period (once the grace period ends), if the bounty starter has not manually awarded the bounty, the bounty may be awarded automatically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the author offered the bounty, and accepted an answer that was posted after the bounty was started, that answer is awarded the full bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, all or half of the bounty is awarded to the highest-scored answer out of those which...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...were posted after the bounty was started, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...have a score of at least 2 (at the time the automatic awarding takes place), and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...were not written by the bounty starter.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the chosen answer was accepted by the question owner, it will receive the full bounty. Otherwise, it will receive half the bounty. If two eligible answers have the same score, the older answer is chosen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If no answer meets any of the above two criteria, the bounty is not awarded to any answer, and is not refunded to the bounty starter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more info on how bounties work, check out the StackExchange Meta question &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16065/how-does-the-bounty-system-work&quot;&gt;How does the bounty system work?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-03T04:13:36.007" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8040" CreationDate="2018-06-03T04:00:46.587" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In this rare case, we know the exact reason.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because the bounty-offerer posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8019/23970&quot;&gt;a meta &lt;em&gt;about that bounty&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; a few days back. Quoting the relevant portion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third answer I find really great, and I wanted it to get some attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I think I recall in conversation with the user that it's the &lt;em&gt;presentation&lt;/em&gt; and depth of analysis in the third answer that knocked their socks off.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-03T04:00:46.587" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8044" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8049" CreationDate="2018-06-04T13:02:57.747" Score="17" ViewCount="363" Body="&lt;p&gt;the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; is described as &quot;Pathfinder class that blends martial prowess with spell casting, from the book Ultimate Magic.&quot;, yet that is very very system centric. The term magus/maga is also used in RPGs (among others!):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;as a generic term for Mage in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;as a term for any male guild mage in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;as the title of an hungarian RPG: &lt;a href=&quot;http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/TabletopGame/MAGUS&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;M.A.G.U.S.&lt;/a&gt; (TVTROPES!)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;as the german title of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mage-the-ascension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mage-the-ascension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mage-the-ascension&lt;/a&gt; is Magus die Erleuchtung&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;several other RPGs use magus as a synonymous term for mage or magican&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, I believe the tag istself is misleading and needs to either burn, or get changed radically!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2018-06-04T13:12:53.553" LastActivityDate="2018-06-05T12:04:46.703" Title="&quot;Magus&quot; is a bad tag - let's fix it!" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8045" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-04T13:05:34.627" Score="10" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;This discussion is inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123829/34863&quot;&gt;Magus Spell Scars&lt;/a&gt;. The question doesn't clearly state which system it uses in the text, which is normally a case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6869/34863&quot;&gt;Don't guess the system&lt;/a&gt;. But the author tagged the question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt;, whose tag wiki excerpt reads: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Pathfinder class that blends martial prowess with spell casting, from the book Ultimate Magic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag describes the system, even the book, that the question is about. In my opinion a tag that describes a system is a system-tag and should suffice to exclude all other options of what the question could be about. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we don't trust users to correctly tag their questions with such a specific tag, why would be trust them when they use a more generic tag such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that we are requiring everyone to tag their question with a system, but there is no clear definition of &quot;system-tag&quot;. It seems to be &quot;general tag about a system&quot;, which in my eyes makes the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; tag a bad tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do in such a situation? Leave the question and ask the OP to choose from a narrow yet-to-define list of &quot;system-tag&quot;? Add the generic &quot;system-tag&quot; because the OP already defined a subset of the system that the question is about? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is this simply an example of a bad tag and we should either change the tag wiki to be more generic or change the tag name to be specifically about the system (for example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-magus&lt;/a&gt;)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-02T06:54:21.910" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T06:54:21.910" Title="What to do when encountering a non-system tag that describes a system?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8045" CreationDate="2018-06-04T13:41:10.767" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think this is an issue of trusting users to tag things correctly. In this specific instance, this is a single bad tag confusing a new user. In the future, I think we should do the following when we encounter a question without a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-tag&lt;/a&gt;, but that has another tag that implies system:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask the user to add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-tag&lt;/a&gt;, and put the question on hold until the system is clarified.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Investigate the tag that implies system to determine if it needs to be removed, made more generic, or otherwise improved to avoid having this confusion in the future without harming any of the past questions using the tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current tagging model is quite good in my opinion. Having tags broken out into broad categories like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-tag&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-tag&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/issue-tag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;issue-tag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;issue-tag&lt;/a&gt; means we can have fewer tags that cover the same ground. If we were to start adding more granular tags, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-magus&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-magus-spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-magus-spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-magus-spells&lt;/a&gt;, the tags on the stack would be cluttered and a pain to use. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastActivityDate="2018-06-04T13:41:10.767" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8044" CreationDate="2018-06-04T14:14:57.637" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;For starters, M.A.G.U.S. should probably have it's own tag: probably &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus-rpg&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Differentiating between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; is difficult, since in several of the examples above, as well as in the dictionary, they are synonymous. So we have to differentiate it based on it being different in the system, rather than in definition or usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter&lt;/a&gt; usage guidance provides us a nice framework for a new usage guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Used for games that feature a Fighter class or character archetype. Typically a skilled martial warrior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking cues from that, I would suggest changing the tag usage guidelines to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Used for games that feature a Magus class or character archetype. Typically a learned spell caster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes it clear that it is similar to a wizard in that a magus is a spell caster who is not an innate caster, but at the same time lets it be a separate class/tag from wizard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastEditorDisplayName="user39842" LastEditDate="2018-06-04T16:27:18.017" LastActivityDate="2018-06-04T16:27:18.017" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8044" CreationDate="2018-06-04T15:17:11.267" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The description should be updated to be more generally about the concept of a magus. The Pathfinder-specific language should be kept as an important example of what the tag represents, since it is still and likely for a long time going to be the primary, and perhaps only, use of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It shouldn’t be burned or radically changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Tags that have demonstrated usefulness don’t get burned just for conflicting with another idea that could use its name or a similar name.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general rule of thumb, tags should have one distinct concept they represent. When there are multiple concepts that could use the same &lt;strong&gt;name&lt;/strong&gt;, which concept gets to use that &lt;strong&gt;name&lt;/strong&gt; as that concept’s tag, depends on what is the least surprising to the average RPG.se user. The other concepts that might claim that name have to use slightly but clearly different names as their tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the &lt;strong&gt;concept&lt;/strong&gt; of a character type is the predominant usage, so that concept should get to use the &lt;strong&gt;name&lt;/strong&gt; “magus” for its &lt;strong&gt;tag&lt;/strong&gt;. The RPG should get to have a modified name for its tag — I would use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus-rpg&lt;/a&gt;, going with our standard way of disambiguating tags. All the other suggested usages fit the existing tag, once its description is gently adjusted to be less Pathfinder-exclusive. I wouldn’t actually expect many of those other uses to actually use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; tag on a question, but after adjusting it, then it wouldn’t be wrong or confusing if they did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether people use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; is something I don’t think we need to worry about: on questions, people will usually use whichever is most fitting. If there’s an obviously misused tag (like using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; on a AD&amp;amp;D 2e question instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;), more experienced editors can/will fix that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-06-04T15:22:30.110" LastActivityDate="2018-06-04T15:22:30.110" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8044" CreationDate="2018-06-04T15:45:06.290" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've updated the tag wiki from this old text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Pathfinder class that blends martial prowess with spell casting, from the book Ultimate Magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to this new text:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A type of magic user or spellcaster in various systems, or a Pathfinder martial/spellcaster class. Use this when the thing you're asking about in your game system is called a Magus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(looks I didn't save it properly yesterday, whoops. &lt;em&gt;Now&lt;/em&gt; the tag wiki's updated.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is more in line with tag wikis of e.g.:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;for questions about a game's Fighter class or character archetype. Typically a skilled martial warrior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/16444/revisions&quot;&gt;updated this tag's description&lt;/a&gt;, since &quot;used for games that have...&quot; is a very weird and sort of incorrect line to see used in the tag guidance.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A character who learns and casts arcane magic through study. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue&lt;/a&gt;:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A character class that is stealthy and dextrous. Often capable of finding and disarming many traps and picking locks. Some even have the ability to sneak attack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of those are defined in terms of just D&amp;amp;D or just Pathfinder or just this one version of this one RPG, we leave the door open for the tag to be used in describing similar concepts in other RPGs as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the tag &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; describing exclusively only the Pathfinder Magus in exclusion from any other form of magus, we'd probably more rightly make a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-magus&lt;/a&gt; tag. We haven't needed to do that before though because a general tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; has been good enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that we should have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus-rpg&lt;/a&gt; tag, though tags can't exist before there's a question to apply them to, so we'll gain that tag whenever someone asks a question about the M.A.G.U.S. RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-05T12:04:46.703" LastActivityDate="2018-06-05T12:04:46.703" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8044" CreationDate="2018-06-04T16:07:55.510" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So my objection to a number of suggestions here is that they focus on the &lt;em&gt;word&lt;/em&gt;—magus—rather than any particular concept behind it, which is due no doubt to the fact that it’s a really generic word that games turn to when they need yet-another synonym of “wizard.” Unlike “wizard,” or even “sorcerer,” whose D&amp;amp;D definitions have largely been exported to other systems and are &lt;em&gt;fairly&lt;/em&gt; consistently used (at least, in my experience), “magus” hasn’t had nearly that level of penetration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of gets to a fundamental question about what tags, particularly class tags, should refer to—a word, or a concept? We’ve kind of been lazy about addressing this question because to date we have largely relied on the D&amp;amp;D definitions to be more-or-less global and there haven’t been any conflicts raised about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The case for concept-based tags&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ll state up front that I &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; tags to refer to concepts, to be usable—and mean more-or-less the same thing—regardless of other tags applied to the question. The motivation for this desire is quite simple: it’s what tags are supposed to be for, and it is how they are most powerful. For example, say I am interested in designing my own system that has a kind of fighter–mage hybrid, and I want to look up all the questions that come up about them so I can try to avoid pitfalls from previous games—what is my search?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The problems with trying to do so here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, we have a word, “magus,” that is most-often used (on this site anyway) for a Pathfinder class. From that class, we also have a concept, a kind of fighter–mage hybrid, and that concept is pretty common—found in many systems—but there is no consistent term for it. Pathfinder uses “magus,” D&amp;amp;D 5e uses “eldritch knight,” D&amp;amp;D 4e uses “swordmage,” D&amp;amp;D 3.5e’s got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/30834/4563&quot;&gt;at least a dozen different classes that do something like that&lt;/a&gt;, and that’s just one lineage of games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So unless I’m familiar with Pathfinder, my search is probably not “magus.” And unless we apply the Pathfinder term to all kinds of other systems that don’t use it (or use it to mean something entirely different), even if I know to use “magus,” my search isn’t going to turn up the right data. We &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; synonymize all of those classes, but that’s a mess and then we’d still have to pick just one as the “main” tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this particular case, I &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; suggest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gish&lt;/a&gt; as our main tag, and synonymizing all these other classes to that. It’s a &lt;em&gt;somewhat&lt;/em&gt; common term as a catch-all for the concept of fighter–mage hybrids. In certain circles, at least, it would be the emergent-folksonomy term for this concept. But it’s jargon-y as hell, the game system it came from is pretty old (and there it was a specific thing, not generalized to all fighter–mage hybrids), and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30829/4563&quot;&gt;we already have a question wondering where on earth it came from&lt;/a&gt;. None of the game-systems discussed above use the word &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;. And on top of that, the term is very likely to run afoul of Wizards of the Coast’s claims to the gith as product identity, so any non-D&amp;amp;D game using the term would be in very troubled legal waters. So not only do most games not use the term, but non-D&amp;amp;D games largely &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt; use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The even-greater problems with trying to do so generally&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even ignoring all the problems with that approach for the sake of “gish,” it doesn’t necessarily generalize outward. For one thing, other conceptual spaces may not have any term used anywhere for the concept, making any suggestion even worse than “gish” is for fighter–mage hybrids.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could go even farther afield—&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8044/magus-is-a-bad-tag-lets-fix-it/8050?noredirect=1#comment25668_8050&quot;&gt;one comment&lt;/a&gt; suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/martial-spellcaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;martial-spellcaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;martial-spellcaster&lt;/a&gt;, for example, or we could use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter-mage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter-mage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter-mage&lt;/a&gt; as I have repeatedly used in my prose—but then, what? do we ditch the already-more-or-less-working &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;? Surely not—this leads to a very-poor situation that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8044/magus-is-a-bad-tag-lets-fix-it/8050#comment25666_8049&quot;&gt;doppelgreener warns of in a comment&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;an abstract conceptual taxonomy which nobody understands unless they're experts in both the RPG landscape and our tag taxonomy, and which has no SEO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But really, even &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; isn’t the worst of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a thought experiment, suppose a system decides to make their “wizard” class the passionate, spontaneous one, and their “sorcerer” class as the studied, bookish version. Probably done literally out of a desire to challenge the expectations that D&amp;amp;D exports.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; How should we tag questions about these classes for that system? Should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/this-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;this-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;this-system&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; refer to what that system &lt;em&gt;calls&lt;/em&gt; “wizard,” even though that contradicts the description and example in that tag? Or should they be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/this-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;this-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;this-system&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt;, matching concepts but completely inverting the usage expected in that system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Concepts simply may not have any useful term that can be widely applied consistently to them. In fact, it’s entirely plausible for a game to re-use words in ways that directly contradict convention, quite possibly expressly for the &lt;em&gt;purpose&lt;/em&gt; of contradicting convention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That makes it impossible for us to really tag based on concept and keep tags for classes consistent across different systems. Ultimately, we are probably forced to just tag based on words and accepting that those tags become totally system-dependent. But it’s not a good situation, and I, for one, am not happy with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;I am not aware of any RPG that does this, but it’s not totally hypothetical—the world of the &lt;em&gt;Diablo&lt;/em&gt; games certainly has sorcerers as the more erudite and respected spellcasters, as compared to the radical upstarts who call themselves “wizard.”&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-04T19:52:46.123" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8045" CreationDate="2018-06-05T00:30:51.163" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;We shouldn't guess the system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a couple of other cases where the tag specifies one system but people use it for another or where the tag specifies one system but &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be used for another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag. The excerpt says D&amp;amp;D 5e and although all the questions using the tag are currently D&amp;amp;D 5e questions, unearthed arcana has been around for multiple previous editions so it's a tag that &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be used with other system tags and shouldn't automatically indicate D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt; tag is another example. While the excerpt says it's for the D&amp;amp;D 4e mechanic we have questions using it in relation to D&amp;amp;D 5e, Pathfinder, and D&amp;amp;D 3.5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bottom-line is that questions that don't specify the system, either by using a system tag, a mention of the system in the question, or an afterthought comment, should be put on-hold with a comment asking which game/edition the question is about until &lt;em&gt;the querent&lt;/em&gt; confirms which system they're asking about. And at the end of the day there's nothing wrong with that. To quote Mxyzplk from the linked question above:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the OP never bothers to come back to clarify their question - then what good are answers going to do them anyway?&lt;/strong&gt; Patience can be hard, but it is rewarding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also the issue that users, especially new ones, don't always &lt;em&gt;read&lt;/em&gt; the tag info - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; (and such related tags) being a good example since we still get shopping questions. So &quot;trusting&quot; a question using a tag that describes a system &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; an actual system tag isn't always reliable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/magus/info&quot;&gt;was created 6 years ago&lt;/a&gt; and the last &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/48765/revisions&quot;&gt;excerpt edit was close to 4 years ago&lt;/a&gt;. Stack Exchange has grown and changed a lot since then and even though the excerpt says Pathfinder and all the current questions using the tag are Pathfinder questions that still shouldn't be the &quot;nail in the coffin&quot; confirmation that the querent is, in fact, asking about Pathfinder. Nor should that be used &lt;em&gt;as&lt;/em&gt; the system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="14878" LastEditDate="2018-06-06T21:50:43.677" LastActivityDate="2018-06-06T21:50:43.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8052" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8054" CreationDate="2018-06-05T04:14:32.913" Score="7" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5845/43856&quot;&gt;meta discussion&lt;/a&gt; on the distinction between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. Fine for me, that's exactly how I understood them. But we have some (good amount) of questions tagged wrongly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a few examples, these questions are tagged as Homebrew but (at least for me) are actually about House Rules:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123869/43856&quot;&gt;Asks about house ruling putting manacles on resisting characters&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123315/43856&quot;&gt;I'm not sure what this is&lt;/a&gt;. - This is adding an extra feature to the Paladin Class. Is this a house rule or could be read as homebrewing a &quot;new class&quot; (or a new feature for an existing class)? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, these questions are tagged as House Rules but are actually about Homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/121656/43856&quot;&gt;Homebrew feat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122878/43856&quot;&gt;Homebrew weapon&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122706/43856&quot;&gt;Homebrew ranger subclass&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Admittedly, it seems that the House Rules tag is used for Homebrew more often (and clearly) than the opposite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;what do we do about it?&lt;/strong&gt; Simply edit every question tagged wrongly? To be fair, &lt;strong&gt;do we even need two tags for that?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2018-06-05T16:36:50.347" Title="Homebrew and house-rules tag - community seems to be using them wrong, what to do?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8045" CreationDate="2018-06-05T11:52:00.400" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do what we've currently done: ask them to clarify what's going on. Another user and I have left comments asking them to clarify what game and edition they're playing or, if the game &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; MAGUS RPG, to clarify that. (In which case we'd replace that tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus-rpg&lt;/a&gt; to disambiguate it, and then reopen the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like you're focusing here too much on the tags, when your focus should be on having a clear question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some background on that: as a rule, tags are never supposed to add information not already present in the question. The reason why a tag is present should be self-evident from looking at the title and body of the question. We break this rule when it comes to people mentioning their system, because to us it's usually pretty clear what &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; How do I activate a magic wand?&quot; means, and we don't need people to always also say &quot;also I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&quot;. The tag makes things clear enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now we've got someone making a Magus/Rogue character. They tagged it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt;. It is &lt;em&gt;remarkably&lt;/em&gt; likely the querent is not &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; playing Magus, but instead playing something in the D&amp;amp;D family of games, and tagged Magus because they had to tag &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;. (It is very common for D&amp;amp;D players new to our site to leave off the D&amp;amp;D tag entirely, because of some mistaken assumption maybe it's the only game we service or all games are the same anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So on this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If we don't trust users to correctly tag their questions with such a specific tag, why would be trust them when they use a more generic tag such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; trust people, but in this situation, we can use our judgement to assess that something is almost certainly missing, that someone didn't specify their system and that it's safer to put it on hold and await confirmation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent has just a few minutes ago clarified their system is Pathfinder, so the question has been reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-06-05T11:52:00.400" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8052" CreationDate="2018-06-05T13:40:35.120" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we need both, per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5845/what-distinction-is-being-drawn-between-house-rules-and-homebrew&quot;&gt;What distinction is being drawn between house-rules and homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual if someone misuses a tag, you should edit, comment, etc. to address the error, as applicable for your rep level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-06-05T16:36:50.347" LastActivityDate="2018-06-05T16:36:50.347" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8055" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3010" CreationDate="2018-06-06T01:00:23.117" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, a discussion came up in some comments to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123881/&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; which was tagged for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;.  I thought that it warranted me to hazard an additional opinion, so here goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not very active here.  However, on other Stack Exchange sites, tags are normally used to help notify eager or knowledgeable perusers of a new question in their area of interest or expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are usually never used to categorize the questions nor to limit the answers desired — &lt;a href=&quot;https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Puzzling&lt;/a&gt; being one exception there, of course.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;If the person asking, or anyone else, thinks that adding a tag would be useful to help attract answers, then they do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; doesn't seem to be synonymous with something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/any-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;any-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;any-system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;It seems to me that it is for answers which do not, at all, make reference to anything pertaining to any certain system.  Usually, such an criterion would be one which the asker had added or requested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short:  I would recommend that you &lt;strong&gt;do not&lt;/strong&gt; use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; — unless you want an answer which doesn't constrict itself to any system; if you want answers of broad pertinence, whether in a specific answer or in the general slew of answers, then don't tag for any system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34310" LastActivityDate="2018-06-06T01:00:23.117" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8056" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8057" CreationDate="2018-06-06T12:36:16.487" Score="1" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I asked a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123953/which-system-mechanics-maximize-on-character-time?noredirect=1#comment306061_123953&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; that was put on hold for being a &quot;Shopping&quot; question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that is solved, asking not for a specific game but which ruleset allows what I was looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, though, I think it is interesting to see if there exists any actual game with such ruleset implemented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the question I included the following wording:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Bonus (off-topic) question: Is there any actual game that follow those&#xA;  mechanics? While this will not be valued for chosing best answer, I'd&#xA;  appreciate any answer to this question either on the answer or&#xA;  comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd been pointed on the comments that it's a bad practice, being it an &lt;em&gt;entirely unrelated and non-essential extra question&lt;/em&gt;. I'd like to understand if it's the case and whether or not it's bad practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I see it (and the reason why I kept the bonus question):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are many published rpg-systems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Given a specific rule-set, it's very probable that a game following it had been published.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Giving an example of a rule-set being applied helps understand it and empirically proves (or disproves) that such rule-set achieves the desired dynamics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22733" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:01:58.893" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:01:58.893" Title="Are &quot;bonus question&quot; allowed?" Tags="|discussion|questions|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8056" CreationDate="2018-06-06T13:16:47.640" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;As can be seen by even this meta question, mixing up multiple questions in one creates a mess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is asking about existence of a game on topic?  Usually no, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5903/can-we-ask-about-the-existence-of-a-game&quot;&gt;Can we ask about the existence of a game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can you ask multiple questions in one question?  Usually no, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6453/1-post-1-question-is-it-a-rule-or-a-guideline-or-what&quot;&gt;1 post - 1 question , is it a rule or a guideline or what?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6426/what-do-i-do-with-a-question-that-contains-multiple-questions-in-its-body-and-or&quot;&gt;What do I do with a question that contains multiple questions in its body and/or title?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is a shopping question not a shopping question because you are asking for a rule set not a game?  No, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7826/how-can-i-ask-for-recommendations-without-getting-my-question-closed-as-shoppin/7835#7835&quot;&gt;How can I ask for recommendations without getting my question closed as &amp;#39;Shopping&amp;#39;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what can you do?  First, ask about your problem not a thing - see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5787/i-want-to-ask-for-recommendations-but-thats-off-topic-is-there-any-way-to-ask&quot;&gt;I want to ask for recommendations, but that&amp;#39;s off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&lt;/a&gt; -and ask one question per question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-06-06T13:16:47.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8058" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8056" CreationDate="2018-06-06T13:20:50.540" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As it is at the moment of this writing, it can't be opened twofold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Question-list-argument&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lists of questions that are not tightly compacted, rhetorical or serve to show where confusion lies (&quot;Did I apply this rule correctly? Did I overlook a special rule?&quot;), any question that contains questions outside of this manner that ask for an answer, is to be closed as a List-question. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6453/1-post-1-question-is-it-a-rule-or-a-guideline-or-what&quot;&gt;1 post - 1 question , is it a rule or a guideline or what?&lt;/a&gt; [RULE]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Forbidden Fruit and you&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, we all agree that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;it is not allowed to ask for game recommendations under the current rules&lt;/a&gt; and call it a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;fruit of a poisonous tree&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, let's abstract this a little and make each reopening akin to a legal case that was based on some sort of evidence that was obtained in some illegal manner and shot down for that. The case can't continiue the trial and has to be dismissed if no new evidence comes up that is equally convincing and much more: &lt;strong&gt;the item&lt;/strong&gt; (evidence) &lt;strong&gt;may not even be mentioned&lt;/strong&gt; in trial, nothing may base on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using this as my (personal, non-moderator) guideline, I advocate, that even the &lt;strong&gt;mentioning&lt;/strong&gt; of asking for a game makes the whole question a game recommendation question, and thus holdable till that part is completely omitted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2018-06-06T15:52:13.507" LastActivityDate="2018-06-06T15:52:13.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8059" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-07T03:53:19.727" Score="10" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently, the duplicate notification says&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question already has an answer here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and links to the &quot;original&quot; question. I find this, at least, misleading, considering we close questions as duplicates if &lt;strong&gt;the questions&lt;/strong&gt; are duplicates, not if &quot;This question already has an answer somewhere else&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, the current wording implies that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a question was already made and has no answers, it's fine to ask it again, instead of giving a bounty. (By the way, is it not? Reading the flag for duplicate, it also states &quot;and already has an answer&quot;, but I believe a bounty is the right way to proceed even if the original question has no answers.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If Question (1) has a broader/more general answer than what was asked, Question (2) &quot;already has an answer in Question (1)&quot;, even if the question themselves are different. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5019/43856&quot;&gt;Example when I searched for &quot;duplicate&quot; before asking this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second case seems frequent enough, specially from new users. I, myself, flagged wrongly two or three questions because a good answer for another question already answered that, before understanding better the actual concept of duplicate questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we (and, maybe more importantly, can we?) change it to something more accurate with our policies? My first thoughts were&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question was already asked here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or, exactly as written in the Flag for duplicate&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question has been asked before and already has an answer here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T05:14:06.743" Title="Should/can we change the Duplicate notification?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8060" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8059" CreationDate="2018-06-07T04:36:53.950" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a solid idea, but it's not something RPG.SE can implement: the default close reasons are shared by all Stack Exchanges. Each site gets a few custom slots for its own close reasons, but we can't edit the default ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By using the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feature-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt; tag, however, you've caused your post to get the attention of our Stack Overlords so they can consider the proposal. You might also consider sharing this idea on &lt;a href=&quot;http://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot; title=&quot;Stack Exchange Meta&quot;&gt;meta.se&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T04:36:53.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8061" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8059" CreationDate="2018-06-07T05:14:06.743" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;That notice is tuned to be as accessible as possible to all possible question askers and readers. New askers, and the overwhelming majority of readers, don’t know or care about the nuances of our duplicate decision process, and that notice is written for them. It’s focused on exactly what the reader or asker needs to know — the question is already answered — and doesn’t distract them with more words that aren’t for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rest of us have the help pages, a few thousand rep worth of site familiarity, and, when we’re pondering a duplicate vote, the more nuanced text of the actual vote option. That one’s written for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each has a different audience and is focused on serving them best. And yes, it’s beyond our power to change. :) But anyway, best that we don’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T05:14:06.743" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8062" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8068" CreationDate="2018-06-07T15:59:20.970" Score="14" ViewCount="301" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today someone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124054/how-do-i-make-my-brother-understand-that-we-want-to-roleplay-in-private&quot;&gt;asked a question&lt;/a&gt; that, at its heart, is an interpersonal behavior/advice question. Seeing this while browsing the questions list, I stopped by and made the comment (to the best of my recollection since it was almost immediately deleted):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This might be better asked on &lt;a href=&quot;https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP responded with a comment shortly thereafter saying they asked here because they felt the fact that it was a role-playing game was critically important to resolving the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was in the process of responding to that in an attempt to explain that the underlying issue was not one of understanding role-playing or RPG-related rules/solutions, but rather of respecting boundaries and privacy (which is a topic-agnostic behavioral issue), when my comment (but not OP's response) was deleted by a moderator, who basically told me not to recommend the interpersonal site for interpersonal questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this approach was an inappropriately hostile one and I'm still a little taken aback at the accusation from the moderator that I'm trying to undermine one or both of these sites; on any other Stack Exchange site, comments recommending more appropriate sites for certain questions are &lt;em&gt;encouraged&lt;/em&gt;, not censored. I don't spend a &lt;em&gt;ton&lt;/em&gt; of time here comparatively; is this kind of response the norm on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderator said that leaving a comment that IPS.SE &quot;also handles IPS questions&quot; is fine, but the reality is the other way 'round: IPS.SE doesn't &quot;also&quot; handle it, IPS handles these questions and (apparently) RPG.SE also handles them &lt;em&gt;when related to RPGs&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leaving aside whether it is actually a better site for the question or not, how am I supposed to recommend a different site when I think it is a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; fit for the question than RPG.SE&lt;/strong&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the full (now deleted) interaction (minus my first comment, which was deleted much earlier by the moderator):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D0qRU.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D0qRU.png&quot; alt=&quot;comment exchange&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did not receive any kind of comment response or moderator message from the moderator; the comment thread was just silently deleted, rather than moved to chat. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30830" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-07T17:24:11.263" LastActivityDate="2018-06-08T01:38:37.997" Title="How are users supposed to suggest questions might get better answers on a different SE site?" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|etiquette|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8062" CreationDate="2018-06-07T16:18:52.627" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;It comes down to that we're having some problems with IPS.SE users undermining the domain expertise of RPG.SE, and dissuading users from asking interpersonal questions here. I removed your initial comments because they looked like an extension of the same pattern. I also then cleaned up that comment thread because it's not the kind of thing I'm interested in a new user being burdened by &amp;mdash; they're just trying to seek a solution for a problem and an argument has broken out in their comments section for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange users are, as a community body, experts at understanding and resolving interpersonal problems surrounding the RPG sphere. RPG interpersonal situations are explicitly on topic within our domain. Someone on the site has been there, experienced that situation, and found a way to resolve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interpersonal Stack Exchange is similarly eminently capable of dealing with interpersonal situations, with some users having domain expertise in RPGs. That means we're in a situation where the same question may be on topic on two sites. That's fine, and normal business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem comes about by the fact that over the past few months, most if not all RPG.SE interpersonal questions have received comments like this one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You may be able to find more specific advice on handling this player at: The Interpersonal Exchange. Just be sure to phrase your question more as &quot;how do I tell this player ____?&quot; instead of just &quot;what do I do?&quot;. The first is more on-topic for the exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Telling a user that another site will give better or “more specific” advice about an RPG interpersonal problem than, y'know, our site that &lt;em&gt;explicitly deals with the RPG interpersonal domain&lt;/em&gt; is crossing a line for me. It undermines our users' expertise and (deliberately or not) amounts to eroding our site scope. We're quite capable of handling those questions, and want to continue receiving and handling them. (It's not just me either: others on the mod team on this site have been removing these comments as well.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these comments have even wrongly asserted that interpersonal questions are off-topic on RPG Stack Exchange, and sometimes users have even voted to close those questions as off topic. That makes this a significant problem for us that requires diamond moderator intervention. You didn't do that, but it's an ongoing part of the problem we're experiencing, and comments advising that another site is a “better” option aren't helping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, your comment saying Interpersonal.SE might be a better place for an RPG interpersonal question is concerning to me, and an extension of the same pattern. (Do you get people on IPS.SE trying to direct all the workplace questions to Workplace, or all the RPG questions to RPG.SE? I'm really hoping not, because it sucks.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I respect IPS.SE's scope and the expertise it has available, and I'm interested in it succeeding&amp;mdash;but I'm also interested in that respect being mutual and the two sites not coming at a cost to each other. Comments like “your question is better on another site” corrode the relationship between the two sites and what could be a healthy relationship instead becomes one where one site is succeeding at a cost to another. That turns potential healthy cooperation into a competition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead I recommend a template like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Just FYI, [interpersonal.se] also accepts interpersonal questions, this may also be on topic there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not positioning one site as better or more suitable than another. It's just saying the other site is there as an option. Great! Awesome. Do that if you'd like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But saying IPS.SE is a “better” place for it is when it becomes not so OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone's asking about an interpersonal situation, and it's occurring in the vicinity of an RPG, it's on topic here and we're well equipped to answer it. If it's an interpersonal situation not occurring in the vicinity of an RPG, we'll send it over to IPS.SE to take care of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-07T17:05:36.227" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T17:05:36.227" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8064" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-07T16:58:55.593" Score="2" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;On this question:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123957/what-happens-to-a-ghost-when-the-possessed-creature-polymorphs&quot;&gt;What happens to a Ghost when the Possessed creature polymorphs?&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;the top-voted answer has several warts: it cites multiple contradictory rulings without a clear way to reconcile them, it makes the citations in a weird way (it cites other rpg.stackexchange answers citing the actual game designers), and the top-level answer claims (possibly incorrectly) that there is no rules-as-written answer and it should be left to DM discretion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual way that we resolve this is we post a comment saying &quot;hey, this answer could be improved if you...&quot;  I went to do this, but there was a message from mxyzplk saying comments should only be posted in a chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chat comments are designed to be low-visibility.  I went and posted my comment in the chat, but I doubt that it will be noticed or acted on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The weird thing is that only five comments were moved to the chat -- it hardly seems like the sort of dogpile where moderation tools would be necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;mxyzplk: what's going on here?  Why don't you want me to post a comment on this answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-07T17:09:14.323" LastActivityDate="2018-06-08T14:48:04.337" Title="what's up with comments being moved to chat for this question?" Tags="|support|comments|chat|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8065" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8064" CreationDate="2018-06-07T17:12:44.773" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There were 11 comments on that. Some early ones were constructive and positively acted on by the author; those were fine, but then a bunch came in basically chatting about their personal thoughts on Crawford versus Mearls rather than attempting to help the post with its errors. So they were moved to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple comments came in after the move-to-chat which were minor suggestions. I wouldn't have removed them, but they were &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; minor suggestions that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;should probably have just been direct edits instead of comments&lt;/a&gt;… so in the context of having &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; cleaned up a bunch of noisy comments, I can also see the motive in removing these little suggestions. (What with different mods having different workflows and different takes on minor judgement calls like these.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a suggestion for improving a comment's chance to survive a potential “man, I &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; swept this floor!” moderator reaction, make it substantial and specific and really need the author's engagement. If a comment is clearly doing good work best done with a comment, it's more likely to be left to its work. If it's something like (for one example of a removed comment, not picking on the example though) just suggesting clarifying who MM and JC are, then it'll have a better and more productive life as an edit to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-06-08T14:48:04.337" LastActivityDate="2018-06-08T14:48:04.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8064" CreationDate="2018-06-07T18:12:52.240" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Overall that question and its answers have 6 flags and 24 deleted comments on them, so it's pretty high on the scale of requiring unacceptable amounts of mod intervention in the first place. I had to come move comments to chat in the first place because everyone was being too chatty.  Once comments are moved to chat, to me that means keep further discussion in chat.  Other comments can't be migrated into the chat so the only choice remaining is delete them or leave them.  I chose to delete V2Blast's 2 additional comments after that point (why 2?) and had to add another comment saying &quot;no really use the chat&quot; to make the point that you should use the chat once the comments have already had to be cleaned up. You can ping the OP from chat just as well as you can from a comment. While I'm sure those comments were great and actionable and the most on topic comments ever, on Q&amp;amp;As where there's runaway discussion my experience tells me it's likely it's going to continue - those 2 comments, then more people responding - and yay, we get to clean them up again. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once comments are moved to chat, use the chat. You may not think you're being part of the problem, but there's a problem when there's enough comments it has to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-06-07T18:31:17.160" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T18:31:17.160" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8067" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8062" CreationDate="2018-06-07T19:51:37.340" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I note several broad issues with doppelgreener's response above that I will try to address in order (as an answer due it to being far too long for a comment). My apologies if I have any unfinished thoughts or repeat myself at any point, this response took on several phases as I wrote it and re-ordered sections.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Making several problematic assumptions&lt;/strong&gt;; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that I am &quot;an IPS.SE user&quot; (I'm not sure what prompted this kind of isolated site membership classification, but if I had to be compared between my activity on this site and that site, it would be quite clear from even a cursory glance that I contribute more [and in more varied ways] to this site than IPS. More on why this issue is problematic in general on point 2). I find it problematic that a moderator is holding so hard and fast to the notion that I am &quot;from&quot; IPS.SE without bothering to do the most basic research into that opinion. &quot;Research first&quot; is supposed to be the hallmark of the Stack Exchange network, after all...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that I am attempting to undermine the site or have some ulterior motive. I have no ulterior motive; my only desire is for OP to ask the question on the most appropriate site so that they get the best quality answers. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that OP is a new user and prone to confusion (they've been around for over four years and have multiple &lt;em&gt;linked accounts&lt;/em&gt; on different sites where they have participated, so they have a decent notion of how the network operates). Even without making this assumption, their first comment in response to mine clearly showed an awareness of the situation and a thoughtful reason for posting it here. So... the argument that the comment was deleted because OP might be confused about the network doesn't hold any water, in my opinion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;that incorrect closure of questions is a serious problem that requires moderator intervention. This is not true; the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt; has the ability and &lt;em&gt;responsibility&lt;/em&gt; to re-open improperly-closed questions. Moderators should be &lt;em&gt;exception-handlers&lt;/em&gt;. If you see a spate of users coming from another site telling people that on-topic questions are off-topic, the moderator's role is in stopping those people from coming, but it is the community's purview to decide what should or should not be on-topic here. Your role there is just another community member and you should not abuse your diamond to unilaterally declare a topic on-topic if the community deems it off-topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If enough of these people were coming from another site to actually close a question (it doesn't matter how many come here and flag; 1 flag or 1,000 flags both affect a question the same way -&gt; into the CV Queue it goes, in the order of flag age), you could revert that by reopening the question, but at the point where you have enough people with 3,000+ reputation on a site that five of them agreed the question is off-topic, perhaps you are mistaken and the community already has spoken. It's hard to make a serious argument otherwise when there's no meta or FAQ page that provides a counterargument.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Separating people into arbitrary groups based on (assumed) site membership for the purpose of pitting one against the other&lt;/strong&gt;; maybe it's a benefit I have of being active on multiple sites (and higher-traffic sites), but people here should be considered &lt;em&gt;SE Community&lt;/em&gt; members first. It's destructive in my opinion to consider someone a member of &quot;a site&quot; in the context of pitting users from one site against users from another. By posting here, I am&amp;mdash;if anything&amp;mdash;a member of &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site, not of IPS.SE. I don't think it's healthy for a moderator to consider people as being part of the &quot;other&quot; here; especially when they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have the system knowledge and familiarity required to check a user's public activity on a different site. Or they could just ask an IPS moderator in the Teachers Lounge.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mis-characterizing what I said&lt;/strong&gt;. Multiple times the moderator has now paraphrased what I said. Unfortunately I cannot access the exact words of the deleted comment on my own, but I &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; it was not “your question is better on another site” which is what has been claimed multiple times now. I think it's harmful for a moderator, of all people, to mischaracterize what was said repeatedly. If a moderator is going to bother repeating a deleted comment, they should use the exact quote (or better yet, provide a screenshot) rather than paraphrasing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I said was something very close to &quot;I feel like this might be better asked on IPS&quot;. This carries totally different connotations than stating matter-of-factly that it doesn't belong here or that it definitely is better to be asked on a different site. It was &lt;em&gt;my gut feeling&lt;/em&gt; that a different site (&lt;em&gt;which focuses on the kind of question OP was asking&lt;/em&gt;) &lt;strong&gt;might&lt;/strong&gt; be a better fit than this one, where there's only a tangential relationship between the topicality of the question and the topicality of the site, which leads me to...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(and I didn't want to go here on this question because its mixing two different topics) ...&lt;strong&gt;Making the erroneous argument that this is related in some &lt;em&gt;key&lt;/em&gt; way to role-playing games&lt;/strong&gt;. OP is not asking about the game, its rules, its plot lines, its players, or player dynamics/interaction. OP is asking about someone walking by. You can replace the scenario here with buddies playing Mario Kart 64, or work colleagues working on a job-related project, or a sports team gathering to watch a sporting event on TV, and the same problem will occur: the brother got upset that the group didn't want him to sit there and watch them do whatever it is they were doing, and/or felt it was an unreasonable request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When someone's asking about an interpersonal situation, and it's occurring in the vicinity of an RPG, it's on topic here and we're well equipped to answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find it hard to believe this is the standard by which you consider RPG.SE more appropriate. By this standard it would be on-topic here if two customers are having a heated argument in a coffee shop and someone asks how to get these people to stop arguing when you are DMing a game in said coffee shop. It has nothing to do with the game! Even if you tell them you are DMing an RPG and want them to stop... it is still about them abiding by your wishes and respecting your boundaries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That the group is role playing is irrelevant. The issue is that the brother is not respecting the group's wishes for privacy, or in other words, that he is having trouble respecting the boundaries the group has set. This is, at its heart, an interpersonal issue of respect, and has nothing to do with what the group is doing (given the broad assumption that it is not anything illegal or illicit that would otherwise draw a reasonable person's attention). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If OP were asking about how to make the players comfortable with roleplaying while a non-participant is watching them or able to see/hear them, it would perhaps be a different story, because that's about &lt;em&gt;player&lt;/em&gt; dynamics. But some random external stimulus not under your immediate control can't seriously be argued to be &quot;domain knowledge&quot; of RPGers moreso than of interpersonal behavior folks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I don't have a dog in this alleged fight between RPG.SE and IPS.SE or certain members who are leaving comments here and there, and I don't mind being informed that RPG.SE has explicitly decided to answer interpersonal questions wherever an RPG is involved to the smallest degree. That's fine! I'm all for the community deciding to take those questions on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that note, I look forward to the site updating its Help Center's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;On-Topic&lt;/a&gt; page to include &quot;interpersonal questions where an RPG is involved&quot; so that moderators and community members have something concrete to back this position up, because it doesn't mention that subject currently, nor could I find any meta discussion here on the subject, let alone one where the community at large agreed to accept them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What I do care about&lt;/strong&gt; is a moderator jumping in and assuming ill intent from the get-go, and worse, persisting with that assumption after being told there is no ill intent or ulterior motive. That shouldn't happen to anyone on any Stack Exchange site. If moderators or the community notice a trend in people commenting/voting questions as off-topic that go against the community's wishes/consensus, then &lt;strong&gt;you need to make a meta post&lt;/strong&gt; asking the site community about it or to serve as a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; and then &lt;em&gt;link to it&lt;/em&gt; in future moderator comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mentioning the prior issue or linking to an existing meta discussion, plus assuming good faith rather than ill intent, would have prevented this situation from flaring up beyond the first moderator comment; I could have read the explanation or meta post and understood where the hard line response was coming from. Instead I was left wondering why a moderator was deleting a comment that on any other site would have been encouraged, and accusing me of an ulterior motive without any kind of evidence or forewarning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30830" LastActivityDate="2018-06-07T19:51:37.340" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8068" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8062" CreationDate="2018-06-08T00:24:45.270" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me TL;DR this for the casual reader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE handles all kinds of interpersonal questions that are RPG related (as we handle a variety of topics which overlap with other areas, some of which have SEs for them and some of which don't, as long as they're in the RPG domain).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comments saying anything interpersonal should/should better be put on IPS.SE (just like anyone trying to drive any other question off the site - dice?  You should go to statistics.SE.  Plots?  Go to worldbuilding.SE) will be deleted as erroneous and against our site policy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no &quot;fight,&quot; every time there's a new SE you have enthusiastic people wanting to drive traffic over to it. But anything about RPGs (with the obvious examples you can see with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/on-topic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;on-topic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;on-topic&lt;/a&gt; tag here on meta) is on topic for RPG.SE and we believe we can usually provide a better answer given the context of RPGs, as an interpersonal problem with your GM, your boss at work, your child, etc. probably get a more nuanced answer on the relevant SE (RPG, Workplace, Parenting) than the more general IPS site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-06-08T01:38:37.997" LastActivityDate="2018-06-08T01:38:37.997" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-06-08T15:39:06.463" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;New User Experience &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;remains a problem&lt;/a&gt;; it's never been solved&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And maybe it can't be solved&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;.  It's so easy to hide behind &quot;this is now SE works&quot; and &quot;this site's not for everybody&quot; attitude&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt; that comes from the top.  The extended discussion under various answers in the linked question in this title made SE/SO top level leadership's view on this abundantly clear.  The response to one of our most experienced users captures the attitude in a nutshell: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;... it is very unwelcoming to have your first efforts be shut down, to have to read all of meta and then all of the SE blog to figure out what the {censored}'s off topic or an acceptable answer ... (@&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability/873#comment1771_873&quot;&gt;mxyzplk, from a comment under the linked question/answers&lt;/a&gt;)   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reply  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@mxy well, our traffic graph data respectfully chooses to disagree with your opinion. :)  (@&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability/873#comment1774_873&quot;&gt;JeffAtwood&lt;/a&gt;)      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The discussion in more detail is under the linked question in the title. The reason that I included this specific bit, rather than other stuff from that extended discussion, is to illustrate that what comes off now and again as RPG.SE being &quot;tone deaf&quot; to new user disorientation starts at the top and isn't new.  (The motorcycle analogy further down in that meta might be more apt as an example ... and I've been advised that some of the top leadership has since changed ...)   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I know that it's easy to fall into the trap of contributing to barriers to the new user experience?  Because I've done it myself ... and I've even &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6114/24204&quot;&gt;defended it&lt;/a&gt; on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6122/24204&quot;&gt;different SE&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A variety of users have expressed frustration with barriers to new users.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2971/new-user-experience-why-allow-downvotes-esp-below-0-on-already-closed-questi#comment5649_2979&quot;&gt;Common new user experience observation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why this Answer?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I've discovered over the three years of participating here, there is a limited set of ways to ask a question that won't get it closed, and &lt;strong&gt;it's not uncommon for new users to not yet have figured that out.&lt;/strong&gt;    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What needs to change&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each new user needs to be treated as a person, not as a name connected to a question that may or may not meet our usually accepted style of how to ask a question.  Add to that the fact that &lt;em&gt;not all of our new question askers are working in their native language&lt;/em&gt; and I will assert that helping new users is the better initial response for that case as well, rather than hoping that maybe a given new user will &quot;get&quot; how SE works as their initial offering is characterized as somehow not up to RPG.SE standards.      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was encouraged during some chat to raise this in on meta, after having reached my limit of frustration with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124040/22566&quot;&gt;the responses to new users during the early phase of this question&lt;/a&gt;.  After three years of watching new users get this kind of treatment too often, I am no longer willing to just put up with it.  This question is a single example of a long running pattern that I've seen since I first began to participate three years ago.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Scenario: a brand new user and brand new DM asked about &quot;How should this work?&quot; in the LMoP published adventure where she ran into a knotty problem.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was an opportunity for the body of experience based expertise resident at RPG.SE to provide a helpful answer to this problem.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I (1) noticed a few spoilers and (2) a method of phrasing that was likely going to get the knee jerk &quot;close as opinion based&quot; responses that often crop up with first time question askers.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I did was edit the question to add two spoilers, and to adjust the phrasing to something closer to an answerable form than was originally offered by our new user.  &lt;strong&gt;This person can't be expected to be familiar with our informal style guide.&lt;/strong&gt;  I then left a comment letting them know what I had done, welcoming them to the site, and offering a suggestion for a site search on some related questions that might address stuff related to that published adventure.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is what I see as the core problem: while I was doing the above, and before I finished the edit in an effort to positively engage with and help a new user, I noticed that the standard lazy response arrived: drive by close vote, with no comment.  (I know how this works, this lazy drive by close vote, since I know that I am guilty of having done that in the past when going through the review queue).     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A later close vote at least included a comment that a DM question is an opinion based question (that's since been resolved via the usual process and the question got reopened); what made the response more negative in my view was that it was not &lt;strong&gt;helpful&lt;/strong&gt; to a new user, and as it worked out it wasn't even right.  (Another user in a comment under the question pointed to a meta on why that reason to close wasn't suitable to this question).     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The straw that broke the camel's back for me was how that &lt;em&gt;attitude&lt;/em&gt; is not helpful to a &lt;strong&gt;new user&lt;/strong&gt;, but at least the commenter had the courtesy to explain what was behind &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; of the close votes.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please note: that comment would not be an issue for &lt;strong&gt;an experienced user&lt;/strong&gt;.  Once any of us gets used to this site's tone, style, limitations and nature, the various styles and flavors of response become familiar and are far less likely to be annoying or off-putting. We already feel welcome enough to participate.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Repeated For Emphasis: this answer is about the new user experience only&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No other topic is relevant to this answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This response to &quot;how are we doing&quot; is (1) rooted in the negative experience I received in first interacting on this site, is (2) a small subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/&quot;&gt;a larger SE/SO tone problem that is finally getting addressed by SE's current overlords&lt;/a&gt;, and (3) is a standing problem on this SE that was explicitly labeled by Brian Ballson-Stanton (a former diamond mod) as a problem with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/869/site-approachability&quot;&gt;How Approachable This Site Is To New Users&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;As an unsolved problem, it's at least six years old for this SE.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Experiential point&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making a first impression can be done well, but too often on this site it is done poorly. (See above example, and below I offer you an example of a good one).  Were it not the fact that I am stubborn, I'd not have returned to this site after my firsts few interactions with people responding to this new user.  &lt;sub&gt;Being me, I returned fire on what I felt was a cheap shot in comments, and I got some feedback from a mod on along the lines of &quot;let's not do that flame war in comments thing.&quot; Thanks to @SSD for that &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;RPG.SE made a lousy first impression on me.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;sub&gt; Getting hostile and rude comments under answers from experienced users like @Dyndrilliac and @KRyan didn't help, but we already have an answer to this meta on on garbage in comments; I won't digress further and I have since made peace with @KRyan&lt;/sub&gt;     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE has also made a poor first impression on a variety of experienced SE users, not just new users to SE's system (this was my first SE).  I'll use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7066/22566&quot;&gt;Conduit's point as an example&lt;/a&gt;; over the last 3 years, TuggyNE, nvoigt, and some others who are stack experienced have sounded off in a similar vein, each with their own concerns.  Some of the other answers to this Meta Question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6922/22566&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7950/22566&quot;&gt;and here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7958/22566&quot;&gt;and here too&lt;/a&gt; look very much like the are addressing symptoms of what is the same problem.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8027/22566&quot;&gt;This question reflects a similar level of frustration with overall site tone, but it may not be a good fit for the new user issue.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;OK, Korvin, you see a problem: what do I do about it?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In response to @mxy's encouragement for actionable items: &lt;strong&gt;you do three things&lt;/strong&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When a new user (150 rep or lower to account for cross-stack movement) asks a question, &lt;em&gt;before you do anything else&lt;/em&gt; you click on their profile and see &lt;strong&gt;who&lt;/strong&gt; it is.  Remember that you are responding to a user, a person, not to a question.  When I started doing that, I stopped doing the drive by during my community moderation actions in the review queue.   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do it like @DuckTapeAl &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an example of how to do it right, look at these two comments that Al left for a new user.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124079/would-love-some-feedback-and-answers-physically-blind-pc-but-uses-3rd-eye-and-c#comment306465_124079&quot;&gt;Would love some feedback and answers; Physically blind pc but uses 3rd eye and chakras to see the environment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124079/would-love-some-feedback-and-answers-physically-blind-pc-but-uses-3rd-eye-and-c#comment306463_124079&quot;&gt;Would love some feedback and answers; Physically blind pc but uses 3rd eye and chakras to see the environment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a fantastic example of how to treat a new user well; thanks to @DuckTapeAl.  Another user here who sets a superb example is @HeyICanChan.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But that's more work for me ...&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes, you are right, it's more work for you and &lt;strong&gt;our new users are worth that little bit of effort to treat them like a person, rather than to treat their input as the question&lt;/strong&gt; (which is not a person)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A brief bibliography of things that ...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;having read a while back, I had to go and find again&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/964/22566&quot;&gt;scaring off new users&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4803/22566&quot;&gt;even experienced users get put off by tone&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1163/asking-for-advice-looking-forward-to-answers-questions-closed-now-disillusion#comment11358_4803&quot;&gt;other SE user sees RPG.SE behavior as an outlier&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1163/asking-for-advice-looking-forward-to-answers-questions-closed-now-disillusion#comment11362_4803&quot;&gt;New User Experience obstacles&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1591/22566&quot;&gt;New users addressed here, but maybe nobody bothers reading that far back, and some of the response looks like a case of newbie unfriendly as a norm being accepted&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1594/22566&quot;&gt;A diamond mod makes an appeal for eltism because SE is meant to be about experts&lt;/a&gt;, {Note: this might have been before the diamond in this case, and I generally appreciated waxy's modding} ... &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1621/22566&quot;&gt;Comments under this answer send signals easily received as “newbie unfriendly” even if not so intended&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2690/22566&quot;&gt;One a number of unhappy new users&lt;/a&gt;, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5814/22566&quot;&gt;problems with how newcomers get treated 2015 version&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2971/22566&quot;&gt;Dogpiling new users with downvotes is OK&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2971/new-user-experience-why-allow-downvotes-esp-below-0-on-already-closed-questi#comment5649_2979&quot;&gt;Common new user experience observation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Which takes us into the time frame where I began to participate in some meta discussions.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3171/22566&quot;&gt;insular tight knit community&lt;/a&gt;, {which from the inside looks good, and from the outside looks unwelcoming, &lt;strong&gt;particularly to new users&lt;/strong&gt;}&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3170/22566&quot;&gt;Users from other SE’s surprised by RPG.SE norms&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3512/22566&quot;&gt;Rude in general, and to new users specfifically&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4816/22566&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;it isn’t just me who sees this&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I am going to make a note here: I have in a number of conversations, with other users and with mods, applied my own term/neologism for this received rudeness, this atmosphere. I will now call it &lt;em&gt;inherent hostility&lt;/em&gt;: I firmly believe that it is a byproduct of the format far more than any intentional stance by vast majority of users on this SE.  I’ll break that term down here.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;inherent&lt;/em&gt; in that it exists within the machine/organism and is part of it due to how the machine is built&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;hostility&lt;/em&gt; being &lt;em&gt;how it is received&lt;/em&gt; with some frequency by new users.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;It is certainly what I received on arrival, even if nobody intended to be mean.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;How to mitigate inherent hostility?  Mitigation can only be procedural (you can't remove the heart without killing off the patient).&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I believe that &lt;strong&gt;the three steps proposed in my answer above&lt;/strong&gt; will act as useful mitigation so that &lt;em&gt;new users are less likely to experience that&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018/8069?noredirect=1#comment25752_8069&quot;&gt;... the structural hostility is a founding principle of all parts of the site design&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-06-08T21:20:33.047" LastActivityDate="2018-06-08T21:20:33.047" CommentCount="35" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8070" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7925" CreationDate="2018-06-08T21:03:28.307" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's not much to do here if you don't like Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Try it: put the main D&amp;amp;D tags (dungeons-and-dragons, dnd-5e, dnd-4e, dnd-3.5e, and pathfinder) on your ignore list and look at the main page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kdM5c.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kdM5c.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG SE front page with most of the content greyed out&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's more or less how it looks every day.  For everyone trying to do this yourself: on the left, under the &amp;quot;frequent questions&amp;quot; view, there's a &amp;quot;favorite tags&amp;quot; -- you can click &amp;quot;edit&amp;quot; and a list of ignored tags pops up. It's really easy to un-ignore so don't be afraid to play around with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have the exact numbers, but my immediate impression is that about 85-90% of the content is D&amp;amp;D content — often quite specific &amp;quot;really only relevant to D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot; content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a bad thing in some kind of fundamental categorical way, because there's nothing wrong with having a question specifically about Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons. There's nothing wrong with D&amp;amp;D being by far the most popular category, either: it's a big and popular game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, given the sheer volume of D&amp;amp;D over everything else, I think it does mean that the site is rather overspecialized compared to its stated mission. (For context: B&amp;amp;CG did some soul-searching about &amp;quot;are we just a Magic cards website?&amp;quot; after MTG was found to take up about 30-50% of the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if there's a &lt;em&gt;solution&lt;/em&gt; here, because, on the face of it, we actually do have an expert base that can answer questions about a significant range of systems (PBTA-style, Fate-based, WoD, many other popular &amp;quot;second-tier&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;indie&amp;quot; games, in a pinch), and I don't think any policies overly favor D&amp;amp;D, but it's worth observing that right now the usage patterns very much make this a D&amp;amp;D-centric site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-09T00:37:21.673" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8071" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-09T00:51:18.670" Score="5" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally I will do so for a few reasons.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;One, and the most important one, is in the vein of &lt;strong&gt;“Now, let me see if I got this …”&lt;/strong&gt; responses.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Similarly, it can offer a different perspective on the implications or repercussions with the proposal of an answer.  There, other readers can see it and maybe it will get included in the answer some day.  Et c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did this for one answer, but it was later deleted.  I then decided that I would convert it to a suggested edit so that I could get the author to respond.  I rather expected that suggestion to be rejected, as it was rather presumptuous.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Of course, I never did hear back from the author of the answer as to whether my assessment was congruous or not …&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/43477&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/43477&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am looking for recommendations on ways I can mark or format such comments in future and not have them misunderstood as — anathema or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34310" LastActivityDate="2018-06-09T03:17:32.770" Title="Use of comments to summarize an answer or request confirmation thereof" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8071" CreationDate="2018-06-09T03:17:32.770" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Phrase it as a request and/or suggestion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another mod handled that comment, but I took a look at it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Good perspective! Maybe the friends aren't being malicious but capricious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, it looks like a common type that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comment privilege Help page&lt;/a&gt; discourages — an “I agree” comment. It wouldn’t occur to me to read that as looking for confirmation of the accuracy of your understanding of the answer if I hadn’t read this meta question first. Even having done so, it’s still not reading very much to me as carrying that meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(We delete “I agree” comments pretty quickly. They’re not bad comments, but they’re content-free — and better done by a vote — and so get swept up whenever we come across them and aren’t on a more important task.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make a comment like that clearly convey a request for confirmation, phrase it as a question and possibly a change suggestion. Something like,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So if I understand correctly, you’re saying that their friends aren’t being malicious, just capricious?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So if I understand correctly, you’re saying that their friends aren’t being malicious. Is that right? If so, I think it would improve the answer if you said so at the start or in a summary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;are likely to survive longer. With a question and/or call to action like that in the comment, they’re less likely to be removed before the author responds, and more likely to be acted on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-06-09T03:17:32.770" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8019" CreationDate="2018-06-10T10:47:37.133" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I likely regard this site quite a bit differently than most of its members, but personally I would say this question on the meta caught my attention more than any bounty would. In general I don't pay much mind to questions that are not in tags I follow or that don't interest me, regardless of whether there's a bounty on it or not, so a question tagged with &quot;5e&quot; and &quot;weapons&quot; would have never been on my radar in the first place. Even if it was on the front page I would have &lt;em&gt;at most&lt;/em&gt; read the name and moved on to reading the names of the rest until something got my attention. Seeing this question in the &quot;Hot Meta Posts&quot; got me to look at the main site question being referenced and the answers that went along with it though. Usually if another question is linked for some reason to one I look at 95% of the time I will look at that one too and its answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if you ask me I would say that this question was a good way of bringing attention to your preferred answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38999" LastActivityDate="2018-06-10T10:47:37.133" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8074" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-11T12:04:00.560" Score="8" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;When making a welcoming comment, one usually also points out anything that might need to be fixed in the question, the most common of which being a missing system tag. Most of the time I am confident enough to point these things out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, specifically pertaining to close votes, I am not sure if I should include them in the comment. Since my vote to close is only one of five needed to actually close a question, saying something like &quot;This question seems to be opinion based&quot; and &quot;here's a list of forums you should check instead&quot; may be a bit premature when it is just my own opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be more explicit about my worry in doing this: I know it is fine to add a comment explaining why you voted to close but I feel that welcoming comments in particular may look more &quot;official&quot; to a newcomer thus taking whatever is written in such a comment more seriously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of what I am worried may happen. Suppose the following comments happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;PersonA: welcome to the site, take tour, etc. This question seems to be opinion based please check this and that or make this fix.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;PersonB: @PersonA nah the question is fine because &amp;lt; reasons &gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new user may believe PersonA more and think that PersonB is just a &quot;random internet guy&quot;, specifically because PersonA included a pretty welcoming message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I handle this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2018-06-11T13:11:55.780" LastActivityDate="2018-06-11T13:19:46.950" Title="When making welcoming comments, should I include my own opinion on close reasons?" Tags="|discussion|comments|etiquette|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8074" CreationDate="2018-06-11T12:11:13.213" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's better to start the discussion early and point new users to useful resources than to have no discussion and their question suddenly closed. You think you are only one of many - what if others feel the same and nobody tells the new user what to do and where to go? Maybe by pointing them to the help center and explaining how to make a question less opinion based they could fix the problems in such a way that it doesn't get put on hold at all. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The worst thing that might happen is that someone else comments that they disagree with your opinion and are voting to leave open. Seeing how such discussions play out can be useful for new users and there would be no harm in this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you vote to close it's a nice thing to point that out to the OP, either by upvoting existing comments that do that already or by providing your own. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also makes the task for other reviewers more easy. They can simply upvote comments that already explain what POB is, what the help center says and where to find forums to show the support for this opinion. There is no need to wait and leave this part for others. If you are voting to put a question on hold you should mention what that means for the question, especially when it's a new user, and how this process works because it's very different from what most forums are doing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially if you feel that &quot;welcome comments&quot; are more &quot;official&quot; you should make sure that they are explaining the official standard procedures of the site that are likely unknown by new users and can be confusing and intimidating at first. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-06-11T13:19:46.950" LastActivityDate="2018-06-11T13:19:46.950" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8076" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8078" CreationDate="2018-06-12T02:02:15.813" Score="9" ViewCount="275" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/124279/30299&quot;&gt;answered&lt;/a&gt; a question about resolving attack rolls when you roll a result that's within your weapon's critical threat range, but isn't a natural 20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;KRyan &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124278/do-attack-penalties-affect-critical-hits#comment307076_124279&quot;&gt;commented&lt;/a&gt; to suggest that my answer might be improved by noting that, if you roll an 18 on a d20 and still miss, you might be out of your depth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;KRyan is 100% correct.  The advice he's providing is good advice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We have pretty good reason to believe that his advice might be useful to the querent.  It's noted in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124278/30299&quot;&gt;the question&lt;/a&gt; that this is a group that's &quot;all pretty new to D&amp;amp;D,&quot; and there's a mention of making an attack at a -1 or -2 penalty while wielding a rapier in two hands.  It seems like there's a pretty good chance that something is going wrong here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe the inexperienced DM is running encounters that are too hard&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe the player is making melee attacks with a character that sucks at melee attacks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe they're doing their attack roll math wrong&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making a note that missing on an 18 is an exceptional outcome could help them figure out that they have a problem, and improve their game.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, the fact that the querent is apparently fighting MC Hammer at level 2 has nothing to do with their about how to resolve attack rolls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should answers include this kind of &quot;By the way...&quot; aside?&lt;/strong&gt;  If not, is there a better way to share this kind of information?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115107/my-caster-level-calculation-is-a-hot-mess-how-do-i-determine-it&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, I provide details of my character build as necessary context for a question about calculating my caster level.  KRyan &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/115113/30299&quot;&gt;answers the question&lt;/a&gt;, but also tacks on a paragraph of build advice.  I don't mind - I'm a charop geek, I love build advice!  But it has nothing to do with my question about caster level.  (Sorry, don't mean to pick on you KRyan, I'm just scraping my post history for examples and we both post in 3.5 a lot.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/94965/30299&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; includes an aside about an example given in the question that isn't really part of answering the core question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can't find a link to an example, but an obvious possible case:  If a question includes a straightforward rules error, but the error doesn't impact the answer to the question at all, should answers address the rules error?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-06-14T13:09:08.580" Title="Should answers include true, useful info that doesn't answer the question?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8076" CreationDate="2018-06-12T03:05:23.783" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It's up to you&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people prefer answers that are to the point and answer the question.  This can run the risk of being too brief, as sometimes querents are unclear in a blast radius around their actual question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others prefer to pen long essays on every thought they have tangentially related to the topic.  This can run the risk of burying the actual thing the querent needs to know, confusing them with a bunch of random facts (especially if they're kinda confused to begin with), and can annoy other readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I prefer to answer the question with only mild &quot;additional facts.&quot;  I've gotten similar comment-suggestions to the one you note, and sometimes I do it and sometimes I delete as &quot;no thanks, won't do.&quot;  All approaches are valuable - some querents want and need a crisp answer and others want to noodle over all the ramifications.  Sometimes you can tell from their question which it is. Otherwise, it's fine for them to have different kinds of answers to pull from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be honest, I have rage-downvoted answers that I consider to be too much 'value add' for no good reason than to make the poster feel smart...  Just as many of us downvote too-curt one-liner answers.  Keep to your natural inclination and keep it out of the extremes, and you'll be fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-12T09:48:02.287" LastActivityDate="2018-06-12T09:48:02.287" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8078" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8076" CreationDate="2018-06-12T08:05:18.503" Score="28" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Add whatever you find useful &lt;em&gt;for the asker&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's my approach, at least. I'm obviously guilty of the essay answers mxyzplk mentions. From my experience, many users, especially new users and new players, often state &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; that are not their &lt;em&gt;problems&lt;/em&gt;. I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122507/43856&quot;&gt;this question exemplifies it the best&lt;/a&gt;. The question states&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do wizards get bonus spell slots from intelligence?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you simply answered that, &amp;quot;No.&amp;quot;, and restated the rules, you probably would not solve the actual problem. (Which was that they were confusing Prepared Spells and Spell Slots, from their 3.5e/PF background)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Okay, but then you are still adding detail that is relevant for the problem itself. I'm talking about things that are not related to that.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/124223/43856&quot;&gt;this other example&lt;/a&gt; (I am going through my own answers because it's easier to remember what the question was about and what I answered, rather than reading everything we have about 5e). I added a bunch of explanation about damage types. Gave an example of calculation, including Radiant damage, that has nothing to do with Barbarian's Rage and resistances. Even added Hunter's Mark and Sneak Attack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The community seems to accept both types (direct and essays) equally.&lt;/strong&gt; From my experience with my own answers, though, essays get accepted more frequently. This indicates, to me, that they are being more helpful &lt;em&gt;for the asker&lt;/em&gt;, which usually is my &lt;strong&gt;main&lt;/strong&gt; goal, while helping the rest of the community is secondary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your question, you state many reasons why you think that advice would be useful for the asker. I would say &lt;strong&gt;add it to the answer&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt;: If it helps, add it. By the way, if it gets too long, adding a TL;DR that directly answers the question is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-13T15:44:08.240" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8079" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-12T17:52:27.770" Score="17" ViewCount="335" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, the asker includes misconceptions in their question. The most recent example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124219/43856&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, where OP assumes the Barbarian resistances from rage only work for non-magical effects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these questions, we usually get a comment in the question saying &quot;Hey bro, that's not how that rule works&quot; from someone trying to help the asker. Usually these people are told that it should not be done in comments. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what should the person trying to help do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I couldn't find more examples because we can't search for comments. But this happens quite frequently from what I see. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3505/43856&quot;&gt;How do we handle it when the asker's problem is just that they're confused?&lt;/a&gt; - but there, the misconception is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; problem&lt;/strong&gt;. In this case, it &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be a minor detail, like in the middle of a question saying that &quot;flanking is RAW&quot; when it's an optional rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-07-06T04:26:27.787" LastActivityDate="2020-07-06T04:26:27.787" Title="I was told to not correct misconceptions in the question comments, what should I do instead?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8079" CreationDate="2018-06-12T17:52:27.770" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Correct the misconception(s) in the answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless the misconception makes the question unclear about what the asker is actually asking, usually these questions can be answered. If the misconception is clear, but a fundamental/core problem in the question, an answer substantially dedicated to clarifying that misconception should be fine - then proceed to answer the actual question after having clarified that concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the misconception is minor and you don't think an answer only for that would be enough, answer the question normally and add that as a detail/side note. If you don’t have time, energy or can't provide a full answer to write an answer, wait for &lt;strong&gt;someone else to do it&lt;/strong&gt;. If the someone else doesn't touch the misconception, check the next paragraph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, if the misconception is minor and there are already other answers that answer the core problem (as in the example question) and you don't want to replicate an answer just to include that detail, I would suggest to add that as a comment &lt;strong&gt;to an answer&lt;/strong&gt;, suggesting them to add that detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-12T20:56:40.727" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8081" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-13T14:57:44.030" Score="3" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124309/handling-critical-hits-easily-when-using-average-damage&quot;&gt;Handling critical hits easily when using average damage&lt;/a&gt; and literally every answer is good. I've up-voted them all accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For context, I accepted Rubiksmoose's answer, then later Glen_b posted an answer that is mathematically equivalent but expressed in a more intuitive fashion. After some comment exchanges, Rubiksmoose updated their answer to mention the more intuitive phrasing (with attribution to Glen_b) and Glen_b also revised their post to be more supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still like all answers. Those two answers, Rubiksmoose's and Glen_b's, are the most helpful. When all is said and done, Rubiksmoose's answer is still the most helpful for me, but I feel like Glen_b's deserves more than the few up-votes it has gotten (which I suspect are just due to the late-to-the-party effect where early answers get more up-votes and later answers go unseen).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible/viable/sensible for me to un-accept Rubiksmoose's answer, start a bounty, award the bounty to Glen_b when the bounty is finished, and then accept Rubiksmoose's answer, so I can mark which answer was truly most helpful to me while also rewarding Glen_b?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, is there something else I should do instead? Maybe the obvious answer is to just accept Glen_b's instead, but I think that would be a little disingenuous because it doesn't match how I feel about the two answers, whereas the bounty idea does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, I've never done a bounty before. I read over the SE page about bounties, but I'm afraid to pull the trigger if this idea is bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-06-13T15:12:40.867" Title="How to reward an answer that isn't my accepted answer" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8082" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8081" CreationDate="2018-06-13T15:12:40.867" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Awarding a bounty of the “reward existing answer” variety to another answer you like is a fine idea. You should be able to do so without fiddling the accept checkmark — I don’t believe starting a bounty is affected by the checkmark. (It only affects awarding, and only if you forget to award it before it expires.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can award a bounty the day after you start it, so you don’t need to wait the full week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-06-13T15:12:40.867" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8076" CreationDate="2018-06-14T13:09:08.580" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am a big fan of value-add. Probably more so than just about anyone else here, and definitely to a point beyond which some users find it helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don’t have to be. You can ignore my suggestion, or even flag it as No Longer Needed if you aren’t going to act on it. It’s your answer, and that’s totally up to you. I would add it, but as stated, I’m a big fan of value-add. If you feel like it’s too tangential or prefer really direct and concise answers, that’s completely valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the Stack serves as the best resource when &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; types of answers are available. It gives people more options for voting, accepting, and reading, so that people are more likely to find an approach to answering the question that works well for them. And the voting mechanisms on the Stack automatically promote those that perform their chosen approach well, and dismiss those that really are either too brief or too large, where the community at large feels an answer really does need more, or that an answer really does need to stick more to the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2018-06-14T13:09:08.580" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8040" CreationDate="2018-06-14T17:05:59.197" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I awarded the bounty&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I really think the awarded answer is great, and obviously a lot of time and effort went into it, I consider those the norm on this site, so I would not have spent 50 points just for this.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question lacks the &lt;code&gt;optimization&lt;/code&gt; tag, but it is only relevant for those who care about being as effective as they can. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; motivated me was how much I disliked the accepted and most popular answer, because it was a non-answer answer*. I downvoted it, but it did not seem enough. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Netzach Sephira's answer is very deep and thorough, but it is mostly about a niche case, relevant for less than 5% of all potential Greataxe users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I awarded the bounty to Jack Aidley to highlight the answer most people will find useful: if you are not a Half-Orc Barbarian, Greataxe is simply inferior. He also provided very sound reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*I have the feeling it comes from someone who does not &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;understand&lt;/em&gt; the importance of math in RPGs. The summary makes the difference between Greatsword and Greataxe seem mostly decorative. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastActivityDate="2018-06-14T17:05:59.197" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8085" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-19T17:28:24.827" Score="7" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124766/43856&quot;&gt;this question about Eladrin's Fey Step&lt;/a&gt; brought some confusion because Eladrin is &quot;talked about&quot; in DMG as an Example Subrace (for creating new subraces) while the actual, playable/official subrace was published in MToF.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D questions (in particular for 5e, which I'm obviously more active), it's also common that the asker uses some random Homebrew content from the wiki, or simply states &quot;the feature X of monster Y&quot; - without quoting the feature X or telling us where the monster Y can be found. While it might seem laziness from me, I would prefer the asker to tell us where he found that. Also, it seems obvious that the Ancient Red Dragon he's talking about is the one on MM, but people might not remember instantly where the heck Boneclaw was published, and at first google glance the top result is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Boneclaw_(5e_Creature)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;bad link for a homebrew in dandwiki&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point being: &lt;strong&gt;Asker stating his sources makes the question more clear, easier to answer and requires less effort from the asker than from the answerer to remember/guess the source&lt;/strong&gt;. We have high standards for source-citing for answers, but questions seem to be at some lower steps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So... Can we encourage the asker to put that in the question? Can we, ourselves, edit the questions and add that info whenever possible? And do we have other options to encourage that behaviour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-05T18:42:19.107" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T18:42:19.107" Title="Can we encourage askers to provide the source or quote of their things?" Tags="|discussion|citations|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8086" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8085" CreationDate="2018-06-19T18:34:13.497" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Source Requirements are more of an edge-case&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we require/recommend that questions regarding specific rules be accompanied by either tags or citations for the books that the focus of the question includes, things will likely get squirrely pretty quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the few examples where this presents a problem is magnifying the problem. Overall, there are few examples of either Playtest content that has been revised or published officially with changes. When these issues come up, it's loud and clear, but I think making a site-wide push for better sourcing of questions will be problematic and possibly offputting to users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have a strict policy for even quoting the rules/books within a question and leave correcting misunderstandings of those rules up to the answers and not put that on the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A better policy would be for us to put a question on hold until the Querent states which source they are referring to if multiple sources are possible.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-19T18:34:13.497" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8085" CreationDate="2018-06-19T19:28:23.737" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is the classic &amp;quot;easy&amp;quot; case for voting to close as unclear.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You read a question about Eladrin in D&amp;amp;D5e and thought &amp;quot;I wonder if it's the DMG eladrin or the MToF one--it matters.&amp;quot; Or you read about a monster and thought &amp;quot;I don't recognize that, and I own all the books....&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote to close as unclear. If you've got a moment leave a comment which may help others with the privilege of close-voting notice the question's deficiency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those sorts of comments are the #1 way that new users learn the site's practices. (Only something like 1% of registered users ever look at meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-19T20:07:49.933" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-06-19T21:26:58.980" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Kobolds and Traffic Tickets&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/118718/22566&quot;&gt;What is the farthest someone can travel in 8 hours without teleporting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How fast a kobold tribe can move across country to take advantage of housing prices &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/118718/22566&quot;&gt;has an answer here&lt;/a&gt;, thanks to David Coffron.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We recommend this gouda cheese to be thin sliced, toasted on sliced baguette, and served with a dry white wine.  No fast food, as the Kobold's don't have time to stop at the drive through!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:00:32.783" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:00:32.783" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8089" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8085" CreationDate="2018-06-19T21:45:10.327" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Orthogonal to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8087/321&quot;&gt;good point about voting as “unclear”&lt;/a&gt;, the community is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; encouraged to improve questions and answers when it’s useful. It’s just not &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt;. Permitted and recognised as good, but not required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding sources, or asking for the addition of sources, seems to me like a solid way to improve a question, both for the benefit of answer-writers and for posterity as the question ages. I don’t think we need any additional policy on top of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go for it. Just don’t feel the need to punish questions that don’t. (And of course, a vote to close as unclear is not a punishment when the question isn’t clear.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-06-19T21:45:10.327" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8090" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8091" CreationDate="2018-06-20T01:52:41.510" Score="6" ViewCount="386" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've got a couple of &quot;list&quot; questions asking about official D&amp;amp;D 5e content and resources already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84836/where-do-i-find-the-official-rules-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;Where do I find the &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; rules for D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77247/what-are-the-playable-dd-races-in-5e&quot;&gt;What are the playable D&amp;amp;D races in 5e?&lt;/a&gt; (discussed on meta here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6213/where-to-find-races-and-classes-in-5e&quot;&gt;Where to find races and classes in 5e&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would a question asking about available classes published by WoTC, including archetypes/subtype (preferably including Unearthed Arcana if that doesn't put the question in jeopardy), be appropriate to ask here following the same principles made on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6213/where-to-find-races-and-classes-in-5e&quot;&gt;Where to find races and classes in 5e&lt;/a&gt; meta question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few problems I can see that might make such a question an issue and too broad though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; more class options scattered throughout the available resources than there are races.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The inclusion of Unearthed Arcana material expands this list tenfold (I would really like to include this though, if possible).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;New Unearthed Arcana material gets realised every month(?) or so which means the question would need to be updated more frequently than the one about races.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe we have these sorts of questions for previous editions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46600/what-are-all-the-playable-races-and-starting-classes&quot;&gt;there is this one for 3.5e&lt;/a&gt; that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; closed as too broad and heavily downvoted, though it is asking about &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; races and classes). Focussing too much on 5e could open the door to these types of questions for previous editions (which may or may not be a problem).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure how well such a question would hold up over time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It's done.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/125278/23970&quot;&gt;What are the official, WotC-published classes and subclasses in 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-06-28T13:05:02.120" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T13:05:02.120" Title="Is a question asking what WoTC-published, D&amp;D 5e classes are available a viable Stack question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8091" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8090" CreationDate="2018-06-20T02:07:02.430" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't have much of an argument to make other than&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the reasoning in the linked meta, and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the good reception the two linked canonical-list questions have gotten.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But here it is, for people to vote for or against:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dXmv2.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dXmv2.gif&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;About UA/unofficial classes and features&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have a separate question for them to both avoid clutter, and to also allow that question/wiki to fit with playtest tags, etc.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-06-21T20:05:32.623" LastActivityDate="2018-06-21T20:05:32.623" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8092" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-20T04:43:21.817" Score="14" ViewCount="302" Body="&lt;p&gt;See the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124788/whats-a-good-method-of-giving-a-certain-monster-resistance-to-ranged-attacks-ma&quot;&gt;What's a good method of giving a certain monster resistance to ranged attacks made against it?&lt;/a&gt; as a recent example. The question has been fundamentally edited in order to get it reopened, and bears little resemblance to its original form. In cases like this, where there is no input from the original querent, it is impossible to known whether the new form of the question comes anywhere near close to useful to solving the querent's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen an uptick in this type of edit, where people will make massive changes to make a question fit the site, but in doing so they effectively completely change what the actual question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this kind of edit justified/OK/desirable given that there is a good chance the question we end up with is so different it doesn't actually help the querent?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-06-20T04:51:14.417" LastActivityDate="2018-06-20T17:32:42.580" Title="Heavy edits to get a question reopened that change the fundamental underlying question" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8093" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8092" CreationDate="2018-06-20T07:30:32.697" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I would say that such edits are not justified.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The core purpose of this community is to answer the community members' questions. This means working with the members to discover what those questions are and whether they are an appropriate fit for the format of the community. It does not mean guessing the intent of the members so that they can be answered. To use a poor analogy, we are not a puppy mill for answers, but rather a bespoke breeder of answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have an established precedent of not guessing at the intentions of users when it comes to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;guessing at system tags&lt;/a&gt;. I think that the guidance of waiting for the user to clarify their intentions is equally applicable in this scenario as well as the tagging scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastEditorDisplayName="user39842" LastEditDate="2018-06-20T11:31:19.520" LastActivityDate="2018-06-20T11:31:19.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8092" CreationDate="2018-06-20T17:26:57.163" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Heavy &lt;strong&gt;provisional&lt;/strong&gt; edits that try to be &lt;strong&gt;faithful to the original question&lt;/strong&gt; are warranted &lt;strong&gt;if the author is asked if they approve&lt;/strong&gt;. Often, it is best done only after the question is already closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened here wasn’t helpful — the intervention caused more harm than good:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It wasn’t closed, so justification for an overhaul to make it reopenable didn’t exist yet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 3 existing close votes were for it being &lt;em&gt;unclear&lt;/em&gt; — except when it’s a formatting and spelling issue or similar problems, edits by non-authors can’t fix clarity problems. That means the edit wasn’t even justified as preventative against further “unclear” close votes — and it didn’t prevent them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The author was not asked if the edits reflected their problem and continued to be useful to them. This is another reason to wait to do an overhauling edit until the question is closed: it means there is a pause during which the edit can be made and feedback can come from the author.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The author did not approve of the changes and wrote an angry answer about it, and tried to fix the problem by putting the removed material into an answer. This answer had to be removed by mods, further complicating the situation and requiring explanation and diplomacy to try to head off an escalation from a frustrated user unfamiliar with how the site works.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A teaching moment was missed here, a question thrown into turbulence, and the hold process was interfered with by unrelated changes that didn’t at all affect the hold vote outcome. The question had not been clarified, the hold voters’ votes lost in a reopen that was done based on a now-obsolete revision, and the only person who can provide clarifications is busy being angry and diverted away from providing the requested information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How to overhaul a question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A measured, patient, and collaborative approach to overhauls has worked for me for years. It involves not doing anything unless sure, not worrying about preventing close votes, and explicitly inviting the post’s author into the iterative, collaborative process that SE uses to revise questions. It focuses on improving and least change, reserving drastic change only for where it’s needed to polish the core of the question and raise it up above noise. It’s about making a question a better expression of its true self. It reserves edits to make it suitable for RPG.se’s topic rules only for when the change is superficial and leaves the heart of the problem unchanged&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with most guidelines and methods, there are always exceptions, but below is the general approach that fulfills the above principles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rule zero in overhauling a question: &lt;strong&gt;Have patience.&lt;/strong&gt; Haste makes waste. Then:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Understand the underlying problem first. If you’re not sure, stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If there are close votes, consider whether the overhaul can be done faithfully while addressing the concerns of the close votes. If unsure, stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit with an eye to expressing the problem faithfully and clearly. If making a question on-topic can’t be done without remaining useful to the problem confidently identified in (1), stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When done editing, immediately leave a comment saying you’ve overhauled and asking whether it accurately represents their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally this includes five elements: 1) that you’ve overhauled the question to 2) fix &amp;lt;&lt;em&gt;topic problem here&lt;/em&gt;&amp;gt;, and 3) asking whether the question is still true and useful with 4) a note that if not they can roll it back including 5) a link to the post’s edit history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This measured, patient, and faithful approach had polished many questions at RPG.se over the years. It’s tested and successful, avoids alienating askers, and gently draws them into how the site works with a positive experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-20T17:32:42.580" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8095" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-27T19:56:54.580" Score="9" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125232/what-happens-when-a-small-army-runs-through-teleportation-circle#125232&quot;&gt;recently locked post&lt;/a&gt; it came to my attention that the comment proceeding the Locked banner was unclear in a way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This post has been locked while disputes about its content are being resolved. For more info &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;visit meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Where &quot;visit meta&quot; just links to this meta site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This led me and &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/45368741#45368741&quot;&gt;at least one other person&lt;/a&gt; assume that a meta post already existed (or would exist) addressing the problem. Instead it seems to be an invitation to open a question in meta. There may be a better way to the word this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I considered whether it would be good to just change the link to: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but that seemed like it would result in more work down the line as the link would then have to be edited to accomodate an actual meta that discusses the question (to avoid needless duplicates).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to change the phrasing to be more clear as to the intent of the message (or is this not the intent and we should update the default message anyway)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-27T20:20:05.150" LastActivityDate="2018-06-27T20:41:43.280" Title="Can we make the locked question default messages more clear?" Tags="|feature-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8095" CreationDate="2018-06-27T20:41:43.280" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree that the message is confusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, visit meta &amp;mdash; but why? What's there? Where's the info? (For many people, this might be their very first time seeing meta at all.) We just point them to somewhere where information &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be &lt;em&gt;somewhere&lt;/em&gt; if they can dig it up or ask about it. So we might as well just tell them something like that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This post has been locked while disputes about its content are being resolved. For more info, ask on meta, or search there for mention of this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a way to change the phrasing to be more clear as to the intent of the message (or is this not the intent and we should update the default message anyway)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't change it ourselves, but we can make a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feature-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt; suggesting it should be changed. Which you've done! Hooray!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-06-27T20:41:43.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8097" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-28T02:56:50.997" Score="6" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;A user asked this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125265/is-a-characters-official-alignment-their-acted-or-intended-alignment&quot;&gt;Is a character's OFFICIAL alignment their ACTED or INTENDED alignment?&lt;/a&gt; After much fuss over someone answering the question before it was tagged with the correct game, the question was put on hold as primarily opinion based. mxyzplk then declined to re-open the question on the grounds that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic&quot;&gt;questions about alignment&lt;/a&gt; are off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I argue that this question is on topic because it objectively answered within the &lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/additionalRules.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Pathfinder core rules&lt;/a&gt; here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Alignment is a curious creature; it summarizes the philosophy and morality of a person, and yet no two characters with the same alignment are exactly alike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T22:49:39.580" Title="Is this alignment question on or off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8097" CreationDate="2018-06-28T04:23:23.220" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is certainly on-topic, which has nothing to do with being opinion-based or not.  However, you are wrong that the rules indicate that Utilitarianism is an invalid RAW alignment coder for pathfinder.  If Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; indicate an anticonsequential alignment resolution system, then the question would not be opinion based.  However, since Pathfinder does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt;, in fact, indicate that (rather, it indicates that alignment refers to the 'philosophy and morality' of a person, which is 'internal' only if morality is internal, which it isn't in many ethical frameworks), the correct answer is 'this depends on what moral framework you've coded alignment onto in your game', but when that's the correct answer we historically also have a lot of VTCs as opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T04:23:23.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8097" CreationDate="2018-06-28T04:58:48.873" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is subjective for the same reason most alignment questions are subjective, as covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about alignment on topic?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, the alignment rules (in all editions) are a contradictory mess. This requires people to overlay their own philosophy and value system to make any sense of it.  But this is what makes questions about them hopelessly subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, you say &quot;obviously&quot; the answer is intended, and you might quote&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A creature's general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(A stronger argument than the line you do quote, which isn't all that clear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But of course if you read deeper into the rules, you find&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When a character performs an action that is out of character for his listed alignment, the GM decides whether the action is enough to shift the character's alignment on the appropriate alignment track, and if so by how much...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, this is like debating &quot;is salvation through faith or works?&quot;  (Like, as in pretty much exactly like.) Pathfinder has a wide variety of examples in its rules, adventure paths, NPC collections, monster collections, etc. of alignments that seem more &quot;heart&quot; driven, more &quot;action&quot; driven (the redemption of the succubus in Wrath of the Righteous for example). There's no single right answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in the end, we had that meta and have this rule not because of a legalistic argument that these questions are off topic - but because they have a history of degenerating into subjective messes.  This question is well on its way there. 37 comments. +6/-4 voted answer. If we reopen it, it'll just turn into the usual giant mess, require lots of community and mod intervention, cause hurt feelings and general problems between users, and get closed again.  We've seen it dozens of times and aren't interested in seeing it again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T04:58:48.873" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8100" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8102" CreationDate="2018-06-28T08:52:42.380" Score="8" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117158/&quot;&gt;How to stop players from making the game X-rated&lt;/a&gt; tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I know, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag is supposed to be used for questions about Dungeons and Dragons editions comparison and history. If the OP would not edit the question, what should we do with this (presumable incorrect) tagging?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author asks about a specific problem emerged when playing a specific D&amp;amp;D edition (5e, I guess). The problem itself is kind of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;, but it is not possible to just remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag, because it would screw up the most upvoted and accepted answer, which specifically mentions &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot; several times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2018-06-29T10:11:53.860" LastActivityDate="2018-07-07T17:24:48.453" Title="Is [dungeons-and-dragons] tag OK for questions without particular D&amp;D edition in mind?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8101" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-28T08:52:59.557" Score="4" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related to the question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125162/share-monk-ac-bonus-with-animal-companion-mount&quot;&gt;&quot;Share monk AC bonus with animal companion mount?&#xA;&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user clearly describes the problem, and the qualities that are looked for in answers, namely something that requires less character investment than an example solution (&lt;em&gt;sohei monk archetype&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One possible answer is &lt;em&gt;ki mount ki power&lt;/em&gt;. However, this isn't a particularly good answer: while it technically fits the question, it is not helpful to the asker because the cost is &lt;em&gt;higher&lt;/em&gt; than what was already mentioned in the question. In general, posting bad answers does not seem to be very helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, one quality of that answer is that it offers an alternative approach to the one who asked and a starting point to improve the answer. There might be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125230/do-any-archetypes-for-non-monk-classes-get-ki-powers&quot;&gt;a way to bypass the requirements for the &lt;em&gt;ki power&lt;/em&gt; approach&lt;/a&gt;, even though the person posting the answer wasn't aware of it. This is what I would call a &quot;leads on&quot; answer (referring to the wording &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;from this question&lt;/a&gt;), that is not useful but might lead to useful answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would be the recommended approach in this situation? Should the alternative solution be posted as an answer, despite being considered a &quot;bad answer&quot;? Or should the answerer give up and not make the asker aware of the alternative solution because it might not be useful information at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19638" LastEditorUserId="19638" LastEditDate="2018-06-28T10:01:29.843" LastActivityDate="2018-07-07T14:29:14.710" Title="Are &quot;leads on&quot; answers considered helpful?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8100" CreationDate="2018-06-28T10:30:20.943" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tagging's OK. It's not the “wrong” game tag. We use [dungeons-and-dragons] when the question isn't about any one edition in the series, which is normal for history questions about the series, but can also be the case for other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case knowing it's D&amp;amp;D is relevant, but we didn't care which edition when it was asked because just knowing it was any edition of D&amp;amp;D was enough information to answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like any game system, D&amp;amp;D introduces a set of gameplay expectations, social dynamics, and a specific set of tools in-game and at a general game management level to help resolve the issue. Other games don't have the same set of those things. Knowing we were working with what D&amp;amp;D generally brings to the table was enough for us to work with. (Consider that we'd have very different responses if this was Monsterhearts or Apocalypse World, which have explicit mechanics and expectations around X-rated content, where D&amp;amp;D expects none whatsoever.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For many social issues, the exact edition isn't going to affect things beyond the mere knowledge it's D&amp;amp;D, so we didn't need to ask specifically for the edition. There are definitely some social contract variations between different editions though (e.g. expectations around the GM vs player relationship, and how adversarial it is, have changed over time) so in those situations we're likely to ask for more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: knowing &amp;amp; tagging it's D&amp;amp;D was appropriate and good enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking them to provide their edition as you've done in comments is fine, as that's a standard request for information. They might provide it or not. If things remain just as they are though, I think that's OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-07T17:24:48.453" LastActivityDate="2018-07-07T17:24:48.453" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8103" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-28T12:28:03.103" Score="4" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here and at many Stack Exchange sites, there's a tendency for the chronologically first answer to receive the most votes. Once an answer has acquired a lead, it almost always retains that lead. I suspect this happens for the following reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users rely on the wisdom of crowds. If the first answer has 10 votes and the second has 2, it means more people liked the first, which, all things being equal, suggests that it's better (but it may be that it merely hasn't received as much attention).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users seem to rarely return to a question twice. New answers to existing questions do not receive much attention because the user already saw that question yesterday and is unlikely to revisit it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It appears that users often upvote the current top answer and ignore the rest, even if those are also good or correct answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once an answer has acquired a sufficient lead, it rarely loses that lead, and newer answers receive fewer votes than their quality suggests, or no votes at all. This encourages users to lurk and answer quickly, and penalizes users who visit infrequently or take longer to write better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something we can or should fix?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-28T13:09:49.687" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T20:50:53.897" Title="Can/should we do something about early answers getting the lion's share of votes?" Tags="|discussion|voting|fastest-gun|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8104" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2018-06-28T13:11:09.623" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the “Fastest Gun in the West” problem, the phenomenon where the first answer tends to pick up a major advantage in votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is also discussed on Meta Stack Exchange in the topic &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/9731&quot;&gt;Fastest Gun in the West Problem&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-14T03:39:24.413" LastActivityDate="2018-12-14T03:39:24.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8105" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2018-06-28T13:11:09.623" Score="0" Body="For questions about the “Fastest Gun in the West” problem, the phenomenon where the first answer tends to pick up a major advantage in votes." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T05:36:17.760" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T05:36:17.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8097" CreationDate="2018-06-28T13:17:15.880" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question is on topic because it's a rules question with a mechanical answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two guidelines primarily apply to questions on alignment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The meta &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about alignment on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, which defines that some questions on alignment are on topic, and some are not&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The general rule that answers may be closed if they are inherently subjective&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted meta answer is that &lt;strong&gt;mechanical&lt;/strong&gt; questions about game rules are valid, and as are &lt;strong&gt;social&lt;/strong&gt; questions such as how to deal with alignment problems at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conversely, debates over what alignment you think Batman is are inherently subjective because it's always &quot;primarily opinion based&quot;, and these are not allowed on the grounds of being inherently subjective, and ultimately being duplicates of the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125265/is-a-characters-official-alignment-their-acted-or-intended-alignment&quot;&gt;The question&lt;/a&gt; asks &lt;strong&gt;what alignment means&lt;/strong&gt;: beliefs, or works? This is &lt;strong&gt;objectively answerable&lt;/strong&gt; within the Pathfinder game rules, which define alignment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The asker is not asking what alignment people think a character is. They're asking &lt;strong&gt;what a certain game rule means&lt;/strong&gt;, and the answer to that is contained &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alignment-description/additional-rules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;within Pathfinder's game rules&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mod mxyzplk, who opposes re-opening the answer, makes a number of points, with which I politely disagree:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;That alignment is inherently subjective.&lt;/em&gt; While that's generally true, I disagree in the case of this question because it's asking about a specific facet of the alignment rules, and can be answered objectively on those grounds.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;That Pathfinder's rule are contradictory or unclear.&lt;/em&gt; Many rules in D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder are contradictory or unclear, and the answer to such questions is often to cite the relevant rules and any official game FAQ entries, then to note that it may still require the GM to adjudicate. This has always been considered a valid answer when applied to other questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;That the top answer is controversial because it has many downvotes.&lt;/em&gt; These downvotes were acquired because the user jumped the gun and answered the question before the asker clarified which game system they were speaking about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;That the question already collapsed to pointless debate in comments.&lt;/em&gt; While there were &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/79473/discussion-on-answer-by-seraphswrath-is-a-characters-official-alignment-their-a&quot;&gt;many comments&lt;/a&gt;, they were largely discussing whether or not the question was on topic, and whether it was valid for the user to assume which RPG system was being discussed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;That the question cannot be answered without resorting to subjectivity.&lt;/em&gt; I have on occasion here seen questions with a note that only objective rules-based answers will be accepted, and subjective answers will be deleted. If not for the unnecessarily strict enforcement of a taboo on alignment-based questions, this question could readily be answered under those conditions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-06-28T14:57:09.797" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T14:57:09.797" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8107" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8108" CreationDate="2018-06-28T14:09:04.187" Score="4" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125232/what-happens-when-a-small-army-runs-through-teleportation-circle&quot;&gt;What happens when a small army runs through teleportation circle?&lt;/a&gt;, I read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This post has been locked while disputes about its content are being resolved. For more info &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;visit meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I couldn't find the info regarding how the disputes are going to be resolved and when we're going to be able to vote again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38764" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T14:56:22.427" Title="Where is the info regarding the dispute resolution of &quot;What happens when a small army runs through teleportation circle?&quot;" Tags="|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8108" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8107" CreationDate="2018-06-28T14:13:41.760" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was locked temporarily because of an edit dispute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've unlocked it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That post notice is a bit confusing and misleading and we don't have control over what it says, which is being discussed elsewhere on meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8095/23970&quot;&gt;Can we make the locked question default messages more clear?&lt;/a&gt;. It's just an automated notice that gets added when we lock something for the reasons of content disputes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-06-28T14:56:22.427" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T14:56:22.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8103" CreationDate="2018-06-28T20:50:53.897" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's a feature, not a bug&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fastest-gun&quot;&gt;Fastest Gun in the West&lt;/a&gt; has been accepted &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/9731/311001&quot;&gt;as a feature of SE&lt;/a&gt; for quite some years, and is not likely to change despite some suggestions to require &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/9770/380710&quot;&gt;a dwell time or cooling off period&lt;/a&gt; with votes initially hidden so that it isn't as pronounced.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You will note the dates of those answers as being in 2008.  This&#xA;feature of the voting/rep system was seen early on for what it was&#xA;and what it did, and retained.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The overarching consensus in SE so far, which was driven quite a bit by SO's needs as this model was forming, is that this isn't a problem that needs solving.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T20:50:53.897" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8097" CreationDate="2018-06-28T22:38:58.460" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This question is objective because the game as it stands cannot be played without knowing the answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spells within Pathfinder, such as Detect Evil and See Alignment cannot work, and Paladin, Inquisitor, Oracle, and Cleric classes break if the answer cannot be known. These spells and classes are extremely important to the game, and thus, rules for the system have been put in the Core Rulebook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question asks about how the system works, for which there is a definitive answer in the Core Rulebook. It asks whether Alignment is based on Intent or pure Acts, which is most certainly defined within the PF system, and the accepted answer demonstrates several sources straight from the Core Rules which demonstrate an objective answer to a question that the Pathfinder Developers anticipated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming otherwise would say that Paladins are entirely homebrew despite having official rules, because the system upon which their are based, which is &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; established in the core rules, is somehow &amp;quot;inherently subjective.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;To say that the answer cannot be known, or is inherently subjective, means Organized Play cannot exist.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming that any answer to this question is inherrently subjective means Organized Play can't exist, since the Alignment rules are &amp;quot;entirely subjective&amp;quot; and could never be agreed-upon widely. The &lt;strong&gt;objective fact&lt;/strong&gt; that Pathfinder Society somehow has managed to exist globally for years despite this obviously critical apparent flaw in the rules only goes to show that the Core Rules have an answer that is objective according to Official DMs, Developers, and Judges around the world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, it must be ruled that the question of Acts-based Alignment versus Intention-based Alignment &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; an objective answer which is present in the rules, and that this question therefore is objective because there is an objectively-correct, rules-based answer to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Finally, the Question has a Mechanical Answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted answer shows that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;, in-fact, a mechanical answer, and cites the Core Rules as proof. The answer is well-defined in the core rules, which means that there is an objective answer to the question, which, in-turn, means that the question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; inherently subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25068" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-06-28T22:49:39.580" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8111" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-06-30T13:36:50.607" Score="8" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question title says it all really. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/materials-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;materials-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;materials-identification&lt;/a&gt; is only used in four questions, and I'm struggling to see why it exists. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-information&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-information&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-information&lt;/a&gt; is far more established as a tag, and I have no issue with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/materials-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;materials-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;materials-identification&lt;/a&gt; exist?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically it's tagged on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101444/what-book-contains-the-rules-for-riot-shields&quot;&gt;What book contains the rules for Riot Shields?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124674/what-book-had-rituals-to-upgrade-animal-companions-to-keep-them-viable-at-high&quot;&gt;What book had Rituals to &amp;quot;upgrade&amp;quot; animal companions to keep them viable at higher levels?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108192/where-do-i-find-greater-globe-of-invulnerability&quot;&gt;Where do I find Greater Globe of Invulnerability?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103951/what-feat-heals-a-spells-caster-when-that-spell-deals-damage&quot;&gt;What feat heals a spell&amp;#39;s caster when that spell deals damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-07-01T09:18:04.560" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T19:55:23.177" Title="What is the difference between the [product-identification] and [materials-identification] tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8111" CreationDate="2018-06-30T14:24:44.157" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks like this cropped up in July 2017 in response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7178/1204&quot;&gt;a discussion around synonymising content-identification and product-identification together&lt;/a&gt;. Specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7187/1204&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie suggested&lt;/a&gt; they shouldn't get synonymised directly together, but could be both synonymised into materials-identification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It didn't catch on, but its introduction might've just gone unnoticed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we ought to retag these into content-identification or product-identification case by case and let the tag vanish again for now, unless/until we're ready to merge them together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aug 7 2018: I've just now removed the tag from those questions and replaced it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T19:55:23.177" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T19:55:23.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8113" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8114" CreationDate="2018-07-02T04:44:08.267" Score="12" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;Clearly somebody's noticed that sometimes questions appear in the active list with only a url of some sort for a non-stackexchange site as the title because when I try to go to the question to flag it so it will get deleted its already been deleted. It seems like its happening alot more recently though. I noticed one just earlier today and a different one within the last week or so. So, I'm wondering why this kind of thing had increased in frequency? Who is responsible and why? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38999" LastEditorUserId="38999" LastEditDate="2018-07-07T08:53:14.520" LastActivityDate="2018-07-07T08:53:14.520" Title="What's with the weird questions I see in the list with URLs in their titles?" Tags="|discussion|spam|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8113" CreationDate="2018-07-02T07:44:37.213" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;They’re spammers (which these days are sophisticated combinations of bots and humans paid to defeat captchas), and they were caught by our resident anti-spam bot, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272516/what-is-the-right-place-to-ask-questions-about-the-smokedetector&quot;&gt;Smokey&lt;/a&gt;, plus one regular user casting a spam flag to confirm Smokey was right. Smokey is &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; fast, on the order of seconds, and posts alerts to our main chat room, so it disappeared before you got to it just because someone else was slightly faster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have only been four in the past month. That is an uptick though: we hadn’t seen any so far since last year until this mid-June. It’s still an infrequent type of spam though (until this batch we’d only seen seven total), and quickly dealt with, so it’s in the realm of business as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2018-07-03T20:21:02.463" LastActivityDate="2018-07-03T20:21:02.463" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8115" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8118" CreationDate="2018-07-02T12:02:30.013" Score="5" ViewCount="774" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/backstory&quot;&gt;two questions&lt;/a&gt; tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/backstory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;backstory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;backstory&lt;/a&gt; so far, both are closed. Is this tag useful, do we really need it? We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/backstory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;backstory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;backstory&lt;/a&gt; at the moment, I guess they do intersect. For me, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; looks like the 5e thing, despite 5e isn't mentioned in the tag description. Should we merge these two? Or clarify the difference in the tag description? How exactly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-06T21:24:13.480" LastActivityDate="2018-07-06T21:24:13.480" Title="&quot;Backstory&quot; vs. &quot;background&quot; — what is the difference?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8115" CreationDate="2018-07-03T06:28:12.113" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are... somewhat distinct but usually interchangeable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Backstory&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is most often the (untold) history of the character, explaining why they are an adventure. &lt;a href=&quot;http://thenoobcomic.com/comic/248/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Usually, their family was slaughtered by orcs&lt;/a&gt;, but there may be better stories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Background&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can be synonymous to back[ground ]story, but it &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; could be a game mechanic &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the unplayed world at large, then being synonymous with &lt;em&gt;backdrop&lt;/em&gt;. In the later use, it comes from theatre/film. For examples of game mechanical terms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;WoD has a distinct set of benefitial items, that are classed as Background and appear as such on the sheets. They are named, because they happen to be &lt;em&gt;in the background&lt;/em&gt; and only get pulled to if needed or because they are &lt;em&gt;justified from the backstory/ground&lt;/em&gt; of the character. Two random ones that appear in almost all subgames: Resources, Allies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfinder has a set of tables that allows to &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCampaign/characterBackground/backgroundGenerator.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;roll up a Background&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; from various elements that make one qualify for traits (~1/2 Feat) in .&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;DnD 5th Edition has Background packages, that grant predefined alterations to the sheet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In Mechwarrior/Battletech RPG, generating the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;background story&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; is synonymous to wading your way throgh the life path system.&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...it features a unique character creation system [life path] that generates game abilities and background story at the same time.&lt;sup&gt;3rd Ed Backcover&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Solution?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3 steps:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;redesign &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; to be a thing that is &lt;strong&gt;but system independant&lt;/strong&gt; and should be used when the game calls some mechanic (or way to derivate a mechanic from) is called this way, such as the recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8044/magus-is-a-bad-tag-lets-fix-it&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rebrand Backstory as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background-story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background-story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background-story&lt;/a&gt;, which applies to questions about making, working with or expanding the history of a character. Like &amp;quot;how to write a background story&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Filter the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background-story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background-story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background-story&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-04T16:39:44.373" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8115" CreationDate="2018-07-04T17:22:10.647" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should just merge them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because we tag for &lt;em&gt;topics&lt;/em&gt; and they are basically the same topic. There's some mild differences between what the terms can mean in RPGs and &lt;a href=&quot;http://dramatica.com/questions/what-is-the-difference-between-backstory-and-background&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;in adjacent mediums&lt;/a&gt;, but considering that both tags have only 73 questions between them, splitting that hair is not practically useful to &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I also suspect that &lt;a href=&quot;http://dramatica.com/questions/what-is-the-difference-between-backstory-and-background&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this literary/writing division&lt;/a&gt; may be &lt;em&gt;inapplicable&lt;/em&gt; to RPGs, seeing as the writer of a PC’s background/story often has no way to know at the time of writing them which parts of it are back&lt;em&gt;ground&lt;/em&gt; information by that literary definition and which parts become future-plot-tied back&lt;em&gt;story&lt;/em&gt; in that literary definition.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other ways of splitting them don't serve any need we have either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;One for mechanics and one for actual story? No:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do some games mechanise back(ground|story)? Yes, many! Fate, Burning Wheel, Traveller, Warhammer 1e — to name a few that aren't D&amp;amp;D 5e without even trying hard. Does that mean we need one tag for background mechanics questions and one tag for background… not-mechanical questions? Not really. They are all about background in their particular RPG and situational context, which is enough to accurately tag a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;One for D&amp;amp;D Background and one for everything else? No:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/800-pound_gorilla&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;gorilla&lt;/a&gt; in the room throwing sand into the air and obscuring things is that D&amp;amp;D 4th and 5th editions anointed the term &lt;strong&gt;Background&lt;/strong&gt; as a mechanised technical term. That doesn't at all mean that we should define &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; to be either exclusively about background-mechanics, nor as exclusively for D&amp;amp;D meanings of “background”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a long-standing precedent of not allowing any one game, and especially not the biggest among them, to snag a generic term for use as the name of a tag that means something game-exclusive. Defining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; as “for questions about the Background mechanics in D&amp;amp;D” would be going against that well-reasoned precedent for no real gain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, we don't tend to create pairs of tags for the mechanical and non-mechanical sides of the same topic — we usually just use the one tag and let the question itself describe the specific problem the user has in that topic area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Merging&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should just merge them so that we have one tag. We don't need two tags that mean approximately the same thing, especially when the names don't clearly funnel uninitiated question-askers into using them correctly. For the positive phrasing of that argument, one tag will serve our question labelling needs just fine without causing confusion or inaccuracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for which to keep — if we not doing any renaming (but see below) — we should keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt;. It has the pedigree, being created in the first year of the site and used steadily since then. The only reason &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/backstory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;backstory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;backstory&lt;/a&gt; seems to have been created was due to it being a natural synonym, and the creator not finding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; tag first. As far as I can tell, the only reason the split &lt;em&gt;persisted&lt;/em&gt; and it wasn't quickly made a synonym, is because an impression that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; was focused on D&amp;amp;D 5e had somehow grown up around that tag, I think simply due to the explosion in D&amp;amp;D 5e questions within the tag making it appear at a glance to be a D&amp;amp;D-focused tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; tag is even defined, since 2014, to cover “backstory” explicitly (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A background is the origin of a character before they are created and appear in play. &lt;strong&gt;Also called backstory or character history.&lt;/strong&gt; Usually most relevant to player characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we can just step back a little bit, recognise that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/backstory&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;backstory&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;backstory&lt;/a&gt; was destined from creation to be synonymed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt;, and today &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be useful for helping people find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt;, and merge them together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is simple to do with a few clicks in the mod tools.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Additionally, we should help people use it right by renaming it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-background&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/death&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;death&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;death&lt;/a&gt; (not a tag currently), there's the potential for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;background&lt;/a&gt; to be misinterpreted from its name. It's supposed to be for character backgrounds but currently has a few questions in it that should be tagged instead with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metaplot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metaplot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metaplot&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; (one even should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sanity&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sanity&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sanity&lt;/a&gt; instead!). We can avoid that by, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-death&quot;&gt;like we did with “death”&lt;/a&gt;, making it clear that it's about &lt;em&gt;character&lt;/em&gt; backgrounds: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-background&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-background&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-background&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is also simple to do with mod tools.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-04T20:44:07.387" LastActivityDate="2018-07-04T20:44:07.387" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8101" CreationDate="2018-07-07T01:55:36.730" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I, for one, really hope you post an answer suggesting it—and references &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/125230/4563&quot;&gt;my other question you answered&lt;/a&gt; as ways in which &lt;em&gt;ki mount&lt;/em&gt; might be more useful than sohei, despite requiring 6 levels rather than 4.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But to be clear, I would have been happy to see the answer even without including any means to avoid the 6 levels—because there always &lt;em&gt;could be&lt;/em&gt; some way to accomplish it, and more ways of approaching my quandary are good. Without knowing some way of getting around the 6 levels I wouldn’t have &lt;em&gt;accepted&lt;/em&gt; the answer, but I would upvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2018-07-07T14:29:14.710" LastActivityDate="2018-07-07T14:29:14.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8121" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-07T15:21:15.407" Score="45" ViewCount="2117" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to post some homebrew material I've made, and I want people to review it so I can ensure it will work well. How can I ask a good question like this? What are our guidelines for handling these questions well as an asker?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8171/how-should-i-ask-about-my-dd-5e-homebrew-being-balanced&quot;&gt;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127783/how-do-i-evaluate-whether-my-homebrew-race-is-balanced&quot;&gt;How do I evaluate whether my homebrew race is balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-17T10:50:22.817" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:11:39.870" Title="How can I ask a good homebrew review question?" Tags="|support|faq|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8121" CreationDate="2018-07-07T15:21:15.407" Score="43" Body="&lt;h2&gt;1. State what you want to achieve, and why you want a review.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to give you feedback on whether your material is functioning well at its purpose, we need to know what that purpose is. Please also tell us if there's anything you're particularly worried about or looking to improve or fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you share your homebrew, tell us:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What it should accomplish, or what your aims for it are.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it's an item or class, what kind of power level you're going for, if such a concept applies to your game.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're sharing a monster or challenge or obstacle, include who is supposed to be challenged by it, which might mean briefly informing us about the player characters if you're a GM. (Feel free to be specific to your situation.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To help others (and yourself) keep track of and differentiate the questions, please put the name and any key information (such as what option type it is) in the question title.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. Iterate in follow-up questions, not by editing the same question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to incorporate feedback, but still want review on your material, then &lt;strong&gt;post a new follow-up question&lt;/strong&gt; with the updates. Please &lt;strong&gt;wait a few days first&lt;/strong&gt; so you can get multiple sources of feedback on this version, and so you have time to think on it. Follow-ups should be substantial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9151/52137&quot;&gt;we ask that you wait for 72 hours (3 days) as a minimum&lt;/a&gt; before asking about a follow-up iteration. We'll close iterations asked sooner than that as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To post a good follow-up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Say &lt;strong&gt;which question&lt;/strong&gt; you're following up. Link to it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Say &lt;strong&gt;what changes&lt;/strong&gt; have been made since the last version.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Still make sure this is an independent question being clear what you want and why you still want review.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a ground rule, &lt;strong&gt;do not&lt;/strong&gt; revise your question with feedback from answers, unless it's just fixing a typo, or clarifying things that already exist in your homebrew. This includes by appending those revisions to your post. Instead, ask a follow-up later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concern here is that revising inside your question makes answers obsolete, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change&quot;&gt;which requires cleanup and create a mess&lt;/a&gt;. We would prefer to keep the advice present for future visitors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;3. Try playtesting, and share the results if you have.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's possible, do some theoretical playtesting of your material yourself to see how it works out in practice. For example, if you're brewing a D&amp;amp;D monster, you can run a short battle using your player characters to see how they might fare against it. This might give you some immediate things to do before you even ask us, but it might also give you some concerns to bring up as you ask us about the material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-29T00:11:39.870" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:11:39.870" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2018-07-07T15:21:15.407" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-07T19:33:44.690" Score="19" ViewCount="577" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that character optimization questions are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-build-or-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;on topic&lt;/a&gt;, but what details must I provide in order for it to be a good answerable question that results in a useful answer to me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2019-06-03T03:28:40.130" Title="How do I ask a good character build/optimization question for D&amp;D 5e?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8123" CreationDate="2018-07-07T19:33:44.690" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;List your goals or requirements for the build&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Always be as specific as you can about what you're trying to do. It would be difficult for you to be too detailed in outlining these details; the points below are a minimum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please also be clear about what is a &lt;strong&gt;requirement&lt;/strong&gt; (must-have) and a &lt;strong&gt;preference&lt;/strong&gt; (optional but preferable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What goal are you seeking to achieve with your character? What do you want them to be good at, or what kind of role do you want them to play effectively in the group?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What research have you done so far? What options are you aware of that you think you'd like to pick up, and which ones would you like to avoid?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What &lt;strong&gt;level(s)&lt;/strong&gt; are you building the character for?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're optimising for something: When do you want your character to peak and be the strongest? (Your character won't be at their peak for the full 1&amp;ndash;20 level range.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're pursuing or allowing &lt;strong&gt;multiclassing&lt;/strong&gt;, what are your requirements (if any) for the multiclass level composition? For example, if you want an optimized fighter build, how many levels of fighter would you require that build to have?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;List your group and campaign situation&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Who are the other members of your party?&lt;/strong&gt; Their rough level, class, and party role will help us understand your circumstances so we can ensure our advice will help you make a build that works well in the group, instead of clashing or being somehow redundant.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are you playing in a custom setting with any &lt;strong&gt;custom restrictions&lt;/strong&gt;? For example, your campaign could be low magic or certain classes/races might not exist.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are you restricted in what &lt;strong&gt;sourcebooks&lt;/strong&gt; you are allowed to use? Is &lt;strong&gt;Unearthed Arcana material allowed&lt;/strong&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are you playing in &lt;strong&gt;Adventurers League&lt;/strong&gt;? If so, please mention that and also use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-adventurers-league&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-adventurers-league&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-adventurers-league&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are creating a brand new character from scratch, are you using point-buy or rolling for &lt;strong&gt;stats on character creation&lt;/strong&gt;? If you're rolling, what's the roll method?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What &lt;strong&gt;optional rules&lt;/strong&gt; are you playing with? Some of the most commonly applicable optional rules are: Feats, Multiclassing, and Flanking.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What kind of &lt;strong&gt;equipment&lt;/strong&gt; can we include? Is your build allowed to include &lt;strong&gt;magic items&lt;/strong&gt;? Is there any limit to the magic items that can be included?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If your build is focused on damage as a goal:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Are you optimizing for nova damage or consistent damage throughout an entire adventuring day?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nova damage means that you are optimizing for doing the largest burst of damage in one go no matter how many resources it burns. You are likely only able to do this once per day or some small number of times. If there's some minimum number of times you need to use this nova damage, mention that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If optimizing for an entire adventuring day of damage, how many encounters per day should be assumed?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should it be assumed that the character is acting alone, or can we assume that there are some members of the party that can provide buffs/support? If there are other party members, what are their classes and levels? If we can make up some or the rest of the party for this exercise (i.e. the party members aren't defined or don't exist yet), let us know that as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For damage calculations, should we assume all attacks hit, or should we approach  based off of a miss chance based off some given AC? If the latter, what AC should we assume for hit chance calculations?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should we assume average damage rolls or maximum damage rolls?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2019-06-03T03:28:40.130" LastActivityDate="2019-06-03T03:28:40.130" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2018-07-07T19:33:44.690" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8125" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-09T19:02:37.993" Score="13" ViewCount="419" Body="&lt;p&gt;The entire &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/307862/311001&quot;&gt;SE Network is going through some redesign this year&lt;/a&gt;. TL;DR: giving each site a really nicely-tuned theme (color scheme, iconography, artwork) wasn't a sustainable model. This greatly slowed down some navigation redesign that's rolling out, and made adding features and fixing bugs across the network a nightmare for the devs, so themes are being stripped down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/312365/311001&quot;&gt;The first group of redesigns&lt;/a&gt; just went live. There's your chance to see what level of differentiation is still being preserved and what the new left-navigation menus will look like. And imagine how much of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1416/23970&quot;&gt;RPGSE's design&lt;/a&gt; will persist or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have questions, concerns, or suggestions about what's coming I &lt;strong&gt;strongly&lt;/strong&gt; suggest you read up on the network-wide meta Q&amp;amp;As linked above (and further linked from those) and comment/answer there. We--local elected moderators--have no influence on this process beyond what any meta.SE poster would. (Many of you greatly out-rep me on meta.SE, for instance!) I'm only posting here in hopes of making the upcoming change less of a surprise to RPGSE users who may not follow meta.SE activity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, I would like to take a point of privilege to thank &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/75/jin&quot;&gt;Jin&lt;/a&gt; for the work they did assembling this awesome design in the first instance. &lt;strong&gt;Thank you, Jin!!!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-09T20:02:58.750" LastActivityDate="2018-07-09T20:02:58.750" Title="New RPG.SE theme coming this summer" Tags="|discussion|site-design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8126" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-09T21:27:35.490" Score="0" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should questions that require omnipotent knowledge to truly answer be ignored, and the lack of answers be the &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the question &quot;Is there life on Mars?&quot; You can only answer &quot;Yes&quot; if indeed there is life on Mars. If there truly is no life on Mars, nobody is qualified to say that with absolute certainty, as nobody has scoured every inch of the surface looking for it. We can only answer with things like &quot;Nobody has found any yet.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32655" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-07-10T01:09:00.750" LastActivityDate="2018-07-10T01:09:00.750" Title="Should questions without an affirmative answer be ignored?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2018-07-09T21:53:41.187" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8127" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-10T04:52:17.130" Score="6" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126004/why-do-people-think-you-can-flank-on-a-ranged-attack-in-dd-3-5&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;[auto-deleted, now only visible 10K+]&lt;/em&gt; in response to not being able to respond to a question thread, my thread was stopped by site moderators as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Purple Monkey, Miniman, KRyan, mxyzplk♦ 8 mins ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I build rep through discussions if I cannot discuss here? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user45708" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-07-11T13:40:45.163" LastActivityDate="2018-07-11T13:40:45.163" Title="How does one build enough reputation to respond to threads?" Tags="|support|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8127" CreationDate="2018-07-10T05:22:24.837" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange model is very different from that of discussion boards. We don't really &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; discussions here. Instead, the whole thing is focused on (hard) questions and direct answers to those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to discuss about role-playing games that's great, and we're collected a bunch of places where you can do that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, but this is not the place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to earn reputation on this site so you can get access to new features like commenting on other people's questions or answers, the requirement is that you show you understand how the site works by:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asking a good, on-topic question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;providing a good, focused answer to an existing question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even when you have some reputation and are allowed comment-privileges, you are still not supposed to discuss with people in the comment section, because that is not what it is for. The comment section is only to ask for clarification (when placed under a question) or for suggesting improvements (when placed under an answer). Other comments will usually be deleted in short order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to know more about how we work, check out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16477" LastActivityDate="2018-07-10T05:22:24.837" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8129" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8130" CreationDate="2018-07-11T12:57:27.370" Score="4" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;There was a question on RPG.SE about the game system called Advanced Fighting Fantasy. I think it was the only question that used the tag for that game (there was also a tag, probably called &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advanced-fighting-fantasy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advanced-fighting-fantasy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advanced-fighting-fantasy&lt;/a&gt;, but I can't remember exactly). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I can find neither the question or the tag. Did they get deleted? Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2018-07-11T13:04:24.343" Title="I'm sure there was an Advanced Fighting Fantasy question somewhere - what happened to it?" Tags="|support|tags|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8129" CreationDate="2018-07-11T13:04:24.343" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is this the one?: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105519/is-the-way-my-gm-is-using-smite-correct&quot;&gt;Is the way my GM is using smite correct?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added back the tag. It likely expired on account of not having a description, so I've added one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There are no deleted questions about Advanced Fighting Fantasy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-07-11T13:04:24.343" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8131" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8133" CreationDate="2018-07-12T15:21:54.653" Score="2" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm building a homebrew magic item and I know the wording could be improved, but I need more eyes because things are clearer to me by nature of me knowing the intent. Is this appropriate for RPG.SE or should I head to the forums and chats?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Here's my question on RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126157/what-is-unclear-about-this-homebrew-magic-item-description&quot;&gt;What is unclear about this homebrew magic item description?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45430" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-07-13T02:38:02.430" LastActivityDate="2018-07-13T02:38:02.430" Title="Is &quot;What is confusing or unclear about this wording&quot; a proper question for rpg.se?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8131" CreationDate="2018-07-12T16:01:18.750" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Potentially Stackable...but probably not.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While writing clarity may generally fit better on Writing.stackexchange.com, but given the specific use of wanting/needing a clear and concise description for RPGs, then the audience on our stack seems like a legitimate one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Homebrew review vs language review&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is legitimate for this stack, and if you do post it, then I would also suggest being abundantly clear in your question that you are NOT looking for homebrew review but only in clarity of language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Upon further review - Primarily Opinion-based&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126157/what-is-unclear-about-this-homebrew-magic-item-description&quot;&gt;seeing the Q&amp;amp;As so far&lt;/a&gt; I'm rethinking my initial reaction. I'm not sure how you can determine which answer is correct and the resulting answers will only be Opinion-Based. I'm not sure there is a way to not only get &amp;quot;objective&amp;quot; answers, but a way to determine which of the answers is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-12T16:59:54.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8131" CreationDate="2018-07-12T16:27:25.110" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Requesting feedback on your wording is viable, but asking it like that will not be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, it's a survey of individual reactions, not a question with a single best or correct answer. No response by anyone pointing out they found something confusing will be better or more correct than any other response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More direly though, it won't get you the feedback you need: what if nothing at all is confusing, and it looks perfectly clear, but isn't remotely communicating what you want it to say? (Which happens all the time in the industry.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, show us the text, tell us what it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be doing that you're unsure that you're communicating clearly, and ask if the text you wrote expresses that clearly. That way we can tell you whether it does or doesn't, and whether it's being confusing in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please also see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-07-12T16:27:25.110" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8134" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-13T13:44:08.893" Score="6" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126185/does-sunlight-sensitivity-impose-disadvantage-from-holy-nimbus&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126185/does-sunlight-sensitivity-impose-disadvantage-from-holy-nimbus&quot;&gt;this new question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;em&gt;&quot;Does Sunlight Sensitivity impose disadvantage from Holy Nimbus&quot;&lt;/em&gt; is definitely a different question from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100363/does-the-holy-nimbus-emanate-actual-sunlight&quot;&gt;older question&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&quot;Does Holy Nimbus emanate Sunlight?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;. One is a question about how Holy Nimbus works while the other is about whether or not Holy Nimbus interacts with a specific racial trait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer for the Racial Trait question does rely on the currently marked duplicate Holy Nimbus/Sunlight question and the last paragraph of the body of the Racial Trait question recognizes this - but I'm not sure that means it's a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's close enough that I could see it being a duplicate, but the question isn't &lt;em&gt;&quot;Does Holy Nimbus generate Sunlight&quot;&lt;/em&gt;, but &lt;em&gt;&quot;Does this racial disadvantage trigger from Holy Nimbus&quot;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's incredibly close, but I wasn't sure it was a duplicate - what is the correct call on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-13T17:56:46.860" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T08:12:20.727" Title="Is a question that relies on another question for an answer a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7681" CreationDate="2018-07-13T17:27:08.587" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another option is to provide guidance in the sidebar help box. Currently, it looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;How to Ask&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is your question about role-playing games?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We prefer questions that can be &lt;em&gt;answered&lt;/em&gt;, not just discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Provide details. Share your research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your question is about this website, &lt;strong&gt;ask it on meta&lt;/strong&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;                               visit the help center »  &#xA;                                         asking help »&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could a line be added to this box to the effect of  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your question is about a specific system or edition, be sure to tag it as such (dnd-5e, dungeons-and-dragons, pathfinder).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This could even be in the &quot;How to Tag&quot; sidebar box that appears when editing the Tags box. Or in both, with &quot;How to Ask&quot; indicating that you should choose tags - &quot;Be sure to properly tag your question&quot; and &quot;How to Tag&quot; having the plea for system and edition info.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43719" LastActivityDate="2018-07-13T17:27:08.587" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8134" CreationDate="2018-07-13T17:55:20.917" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;They look like the same question to me, just with different wordings. Words stripped away and just looking at meaning, both are asking if Holy Nimbus sheds &lt;em&gt;sunlight&lt;/em&gt;-sunlight such that things that care about &lt;em&gt;sunlight&lt;/em&gt; care about Holy Nimbus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a new question will have more to it such that its &lt;em&gt;meaning&lt;/em&gt; is related and close but still different from an existing one, but that doesn't appear to be the case here: their meanings match. They're worded in reverse, but that's just kind of like how “What is 5 + 3?” is the same question as “What is 3 + 5?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The issue of one’s answer relying on the other is a bit of a red herring, I think: it doesn't matter if an answer relies on the other, but whether the question-post has the same question-meaning as the other. That there's an answer that uses the other as support is a hint to us that we might want to check if they're same question, but it's not the &lt;em&gt;reason&lt;/em&gt; they're duplicates.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see that the new is already marked a duplicate of the old. I think that's the right state of affairs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-07-13T17:55:20.917" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8137" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-13T22:16:32.993" Score="3" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is the following question within guidelines?  If not, what are some suggestions for how I might modify it to be within guidelines?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;How does PC access to life-restoration magic affect a westmarchian campaign?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;One of the hallmarks of a &lt;a href=&quot;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;westmarchian&lt;/a&gt; game is danger, with a high likelihood of character death.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Grand Experiments: West Marches&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;The environment is dangerous. Very dangerous. That’s intentional, because [...] danger unites. PCs have to work together or they are going to get creamed. They also have to think and pick their battles — since they can go anywhere, there is nothing stopping them from strolling into areas that will wipe them out. If they just strap on their swords and charge everything they see they are going to be rolling up new characters. Players learn to observe their environment and adapt — when they find owlbear tracks in the woods they give the area a wide berth (at least until they gain a few levels). When they stumble into the lair of a terrifying hydra they retreat and round up a huge posse to hunt it down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This implies that life-restoration magic is hard to come by.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;However, it's not unreasonable that back in town Clarice the Cleric is willing to cast &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/raise-dead&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;raise dead&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; for a price (&quot;Get yer raisies here! 500 gp, plus 10% tithe for the faithful, 25% for the rest of you faithless damned heathens!&quot;).  Even 625gp doesn't seem a crazy amount for even a low-level party to pony up to save a valued comrade.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My question is this, how has access or lack of access to life-restoration magic in a west-marchian game that you have DMed or played in affected the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-14T16:22:35.573" LastActivityDate="2018-07-14T16:26:03.267" Title="Is this question within the guidelines?" Tags="|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8137" CreationDate="2018-07-14T00:43:09.690" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s fine except for the meat of the question at the end, and would have to be changed to stay open. Why is subtle but important. Fortunately the subtlety means it’s easy to fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking how it has affected individual GMs’ games means that every answer is equally correct — because any answer that describes how it affected &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; game is correct &lt;strong&gt;that it affected their game that way&lt;/strong&gt;. That’s a poll, and would be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To fix this, ask a question of universal fact rather than a poll of individual experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers are already expected to be &lt;em&gt;supported&lt;/em&gt; by factual such as experience, so you don’t need to ask for experiences and risk accidentally undermining the question with wording that makes it a poll question. Instead, ask &lt;strong&gt;how it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; affect a West Marches game&lt;/strong&gt;, so that answers can all compete to best correctly state how it does affect it. Let the answers worry about how they support their positions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would change it to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My question is this, how does access or lack of access to life-restoration magic in a west-marchian game affect the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The tags are inaccurate too, but that won’t affect close votes — they’d just get edited. It’s not about any edition of D&amp;amp;D, nor is it about any particular GM technique. For that question, accurate tags would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sandbox&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sandbox&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sandbox&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resurrection&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resurrection&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resurrection&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, the easiest way to ascertain the Stackability of a question is just to &lt;strong&gt;post it&lt;/strong&gt; on the main site. There are myriad systems available there to produce the same outcome, but more eyes to get it sorted quickly, and no need to post twice before it’s live in a Stackable form. Assuming one is patient and not afraid of a possible temporary hold, it’s designed to do this job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-14T16:26:03.267" LastActivityDate="2018-07-14T16:26:03.267" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8139" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8140" CreationDate="2018-07-16T17:49:47.297" Score="8" ViewCount="229" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the first time in two years of being a member of RPG.SE I feel the way my question was put on hold was unfair. It's about this one: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127355/&quot;&gt;Are there examples of priests/clerics having water creation abilities that predate D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I might sound biased, but I think such &quot;trivia&quot; questions actually can be useful. Answers to these &quot;Where did feature X came from&quot; questions help players to get inspiration from history and/or pop culture and find ways to role-play their characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My English is not very good, but I was hoping the community would be fine about poor wording. Indeed, there were people who actually helped me to polish and narrow the question down. But then the problems started.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I might be wrong, but I saw a few people started to play this &quot;find a weak spot and close the question&quot; game. For instance, one person edited the question's title AND voted to close as &quot;too broad&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, if you think the question is too broad, it is fair either edit the question to narrow it down, or vote to close it. When you edit the question (under the pretense of making it &quot;accurately reflect what you want&quot;) and then close it because now it is clearly &quot;too broad&quot; in its current state — that doesn't seem right. I didn't want my question to be closed. I wanted it to be improved and salvaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another argument was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The high vote rating on this answer is itself evidence that this question should be closed. It’s a bad answer being heavily upvoted: people like the guess and don’t care that it’s just a guess, which means the voting system is breaking down&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, 43 upvoters who think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127356/27377&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; was useful are wrong, because one person says that it was a bad answer (and this person is right for unknown reason), that also means that &quot;the voting system is breaking down&quot;, and this is also an evidence that the question itself should be closed. For me, this logic is at least strange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can I do, are there ways to salvage the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2018-07-16T18:20:34.927" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T12:18:13.813" Title="How can I handle this cleric water creation question being closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8139" CreationDate="2018-07-16T18:37:07.607" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Your question needs a metric for a &quot;good&quot; answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stack format revolves around deciding whether or not a question is &quot;good&quot; in order that a &quot;best&quot; answer can be determined by you and the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As is, there are too many &quot;good&quot; answers (far too many to count) as each example could be it's own answer. Also, the &quot;best&quot; answer (one that incorporates all examples in fiction) is likely far too long to be expressed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think Too Broad suits the question in its current form.&lt;/strong&gt; If you find a way to narrow scope either by providing criteria  for answerers or limiting the listing to a lesser scale than all of literature, it would be much better for the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask on other stacks&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may also want to consider asking a question or something similar on &lt;a href=&quot;https://literature.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Literature Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://mythology.stackexhange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Mythology Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; if you can more easily make it fit their criteria for a good question. &lt;strong&gt;Make sure those stacks will accept this question first, though. I'm unfamiliar with the rules of those stacks myself, and you may have to adjust the question in some way&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-07-16T19:05:02.413" LastActivityDate="2018-07-16T19:05:02.413" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8139" CreationDate="2018-07-16T18:55:13.983" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;“Do any precedents exist?” is Off-Topic and Too Broad&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is “were there any examples of priests producing water in religious, mythological, or fantasy literature prior to 1974 [the original publication of D&amp;amp;D]?” then the question has no business on the RPG Stack to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Mythology or Literature Stacks might take it; I don’t know and you’d have to consult their rules. But I truly doubt either would take it, because regardless of whether or not you found a Stack where it’d be on topic, the question is far too broad. The answer is “yes, there are thousands, if not millions, of examples of this in the relevant literature.” You would never be able to produce a single authoritative answer on the subject; every one would just list their favorite(s) and then voting would be a popularity contest based on everyone’s favorite examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the question was allowed to run for a while here, and we got some answers already, it seems pretty clear that the Bible’s Book of Numbers is winning the popularity contest—but that’s irrelevant, because Stack Exchange does not run popularity contests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;“Which precedent(s) influenced the D&amp;amp;D spell?” is either Off-Topic or Too Broad, if not both&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This form of question is not problematic when the challenge is finding &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; antecedents, because the subject in question is really specific or unique. In such a case, we can have a reasonably high confidence that a matching antecedent is &lt;em&gt;the actual source&lt;/em&gt; of the subject’s presence in a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is not the case here. This is, as established, massively broad, filled with far too many examples, rather than the reverse. Since we have something really common and generic, finding antecedents isn’t hard, the hard part is figuring out which one(s) actually were the ones that the designers had in mind when they wrote what they did. And that is a designer-reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In theory, an actual answer would not be too broad, since presumably some finite subset of antecedents were foremost in the minds of the authors on this subject, and it clearly is to do with RPGs, so the RPG Stack is the correct Stack for it. I doubt any other Stack would be interested in it. However, designer-reasons questions have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/4563&quot;&gt;recently been declared off-topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because there is just no way of knowing what influenced the designers without digging into their own words. Maybe Arneson and Gygax, or whoever originally wrote this, actually commented on it and provides an answer to this question. Maybe someone could do an analysis of the history, precedents, and context of the publication and build up some kind of case for a particular alleged source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;But in practice, people rarely did that and mostly weren’t doing it here.&lt;/em&gt; I know nitsua60 started to, and those with the appropriate privilege can see their deleted answer doing it. But already the question was exhibiting exactly the problems that difficult designer-reasons questions always have, namely a plethora of unsupported speculation that makes absolutely no attempt to make the jump from “plausible explanation” to “the &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; explanation.” Even in the absence of the recent ruling, it would provide a strong example of why we need that ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;In short, there is nothing anyone could have done to salvage the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your invitation to edit the question to make it fit is nice, but ultimately it doesn’t help: &lt;em&gt;the thing you want to know is not a thing we are prepared to provide here.&lt;/em&gt; No amount of editing can get around that fact. That is why the question was downvoted and voted for close without offering suggestion for improvement: no improvement was possible that would actually save the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Being “interesting” or “useful” is not relevant here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question wasn’t closed for being uninteresting, or for being useless, so there is no need to defend its interest or its utility. Being uninteresting or useless might be a reason to downvote, but the current vote rating is quite positive so anyone who thinks the question is either of those things are in the minority. But that isn’t why it was closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-16T19:24:55.440" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8139" CreationDate="2018-07-16T19:15:57.527" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure I have an ~answer~ for you, but I'd like to address a number of the things in this post, in reverse order. (By way of complete disclosure, I'm an author of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127389/23970&quot;&gt;a self-deleted answer on that question&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should also note that there was a &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; going on with the post in the last day. Edits, comments, answers coming and going, responses to comments, upvotes and downvotes, and now a meta and a content-dispute lock. It behooves readers to sort through as much of that on their own as they can before reading my interpretation of things. And I hope it wasn't too disorienting for you and apologize to the extent that I compounded any of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, 43 upvoters who think this answer was useful are wrong, because one person says that it was a bad answer (and this person is right for unknown reason), that also means that &quot;the voting system is breaking down&quot;, and this is also an evidence that the question itself should be closed. For me, this logic is at least strange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is some strange logic here, but I think it's strange in the Stack-sense, not that the commenter in question is guilty of acting unreasonably. First off, the commenter was not the only person saying that it was a bad answer, there are other downvotes and a number of high-rep commenters (including me, disclosure again) had mentioned the paucity of evidence the accepted answer used in presenting how they know &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; biblical account has any bearing on the spell in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now we get to a sticky bit: for some part of the question's history it boiled down to &quot;why/how did this spell/concept of clerics creating water come into D&amp;amp;D&quot; but for some other part (including now) it boils down to &quot;what are some examples of magic creating water?&quot; I'm going to call those questions A and B, respectively, because that reflects the order I saw them in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A: why/how did this spell/concept of clerics creating water come into D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/strong&gt; The upvoted-accepted answer is a bad answer to question A because the answer in no way describes how one could know that an early D&amp;amp;D author had the quoted passage in mind when making up the clerical spell list. Since there's no support for the (implied) answer &quot;they were thinking about Moses drawing water from a stone&quot; it should be downvoted. I'd considered putting a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6464/23970&quot;&gt;post notice&lt;/a&gt; asking for support, but since I was (briefly) another answer-author to question A I recused myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, then, is the evidence that the voting system is breaking down: a question hit the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/questions?tab=hot&quot;&gt;HNQ&lt;/a&gt;, got a(n objectively) bad answer, but is getting lots of upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; implicates the bit of logic that may seem strange: their comment about answers being evidence of the question's quality. This is a point that many people (including me, years ago) find strange: answers can tell us what's actually in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often when questions are near a boundary of topicality it's hard to see whether they are clearly on- or off-topic. (And &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/23970&quot;&gt;designer intent questions&lt;/a&gt;--&lt;em&gt;close&lt;/em&gt; to question A but not quite the same--have recently been discussed a few times in this light.) In those cases many people will sit back and let the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; help guide one's evaluation of the question. This seems strange, asinine, even wrong-headed to some people. But the value in it is that any question can reasonably be read many ways by different readers; answers can help one appreciate what is actually &lt;em&gt;in&lt;/em&gt; a question beyond that subset one read themself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B: what are some examples of magic creating water?&lt;/strong&gt; The upvoted answer is a fine answer to question B, but the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; is bad: it's a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/list-question&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;list-question&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;list-question&lt;/a&gt;. (Note that &quot;list question&quot; is a bit of a term of art in Stack-world. Not all questions whose answers are lists are &quot;list questions,&quot; and one should read further in the meta tag for some discussion. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/176/23970&quot;&gt;Are list/collection questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; from the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; is a good place to start.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For me, if you think the question is too broad, it is fair either edit the question to narrow it down, or vote to close it. When you edit the question (under the pretense of making it &quot;accurately reflect what you want&quot;) and then close it because now it is clearly &quot;too broad&quot; in its current state — that doesn't seem right. I didn't want my question to be closed. I wanted it to be improved and salvaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are not mutually exclusive actions, nor should they be. The charitable interpretation is that one user saw (a) a title that didn't seem to reflect well the content of a post and (b) a question that should be closed. They acted to address both of those things. Based on their comments on your question, on my interactions with them in chat over the last year, and on observations of their activity around the site I, personally, have no reason to doubt they are acting in good faith rather than &quot;play[ing] this 'find a weak spot and close the question' game.&quot; See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6568/23970&quot;&gt;Should we be answering the question, or the question posed in the description?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think such &quot;trivia&quot; questions actually can be useful. Answers to these &quot;Where did feature X came from&quot; questions help players to get inspiration from history and/or pop culture and find ways to role-play their characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What can I do, are there ways to salvage the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that trivia questions are great for world- and adventure-building and roleplaying inspiration. They're &lt;em&gt;sometimes&lt;/em&gt; great Stack questions. (Sooooo many of our questions are utter trivialities!) But &quot;what magical water-creating predated D&amp;amp;D&quot; is just as broad as &quot;what would be some interesting enemies for my level 1 party?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, I'll say that I think &quot;salvage the question&quot; isn't a goal one should pursue. Your first stab at this didn't go well and that's fine. If you want to post anew &quot;where did the D&amp;amp;D idea of clerics creating water come from&quot; I think that'd be fine. (Note that this is not a unanimous opinion; see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8139/how-can-i-handle-this-cleric-water-creation-question-being-closed#comment26050_8141&quot;&gt;Kryan's comment on his answer for an opposing and reasonable viewpoint&lt;/a&gt;.) It may get a good answer along the lines &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127355/are-there-examples-of-priests-clerics-having-water-creation-abilities-that-preda#comment315062_127356&quot;&gt;HeyICanChan described&lt;/a&gt;, or it may draw dreck and we have to moderate those answers. But that's not your fault.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-07-17T12:18:13.813" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T12:18:13.813" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8134" CreationDate="2018-07-17T04:09:36.713" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're looking at it all wrong. When you boil both questions to their core, it is &quot;Is Holy Nimbus Actual Sunlight?&quot; Sure, one is in regards to a particular racial trait, but it is affected by Sunlight. Holy Nimbus is Sunlight, therefore it affects the Kobold's Sunlight Sensitivity. While the specific application of both questions is different (one looking in general and the other at a specific instance)...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They are asking for the same fundamental answer: &quot;Is It Sunlight?&quot; to which the answer is a resounding &quot;YES.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41481" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-17T08:12:20.727" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T08:12:20.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8144" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-17T11:19:09.023" Score="-13" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why do moderators ban people from posting the truth? Are false notions more valuable than integrity? Every time I try to correct a false answer with a direct quote from the book, I am deleted by the moderator who posted the false answer. Why cant he just be a man, admit he is wrong and apologize for answering before he knew what he was talking about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chain of events spans 2013 and 2018:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2110/how-do-vulnerabilities-combine-when-taking-multiple-types-of-damage/25649#25649&quot;&gt;How do vulnerabilities combine, when taking multiple types of damage?&lt;/a&gt; Answered in 2013&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25650/how-does-resist-work-against-1-attack-that-deals-2-separate-damage-types&quot;&gt;How does Resist work against 1 attack that deals 2 separate damage types?&lt;/a&gt; Asked in 2013, closed as a dupe of the previous question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25739/how-does-resist-all-apply-to-an-attack-that-deals-two-types-of-non-combined-da&quot;&gt;How does resist all apply to an attack that deals two types of (non-combined) damage?&lt;/a&gt; Answered in 2018 with a new account, deleted for low quality &amp;amp; having no rules backing, later revised after deletion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reposted and self-answered in 2018 in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127430/damage-resistance-vs-added-damage-by-the-raw&quot;&gt;Damage resistance vs added damage by the RAW&lt;/a&gt;, which was closed as a duplicate of the previous question, along with another non-answer on this question which was deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127438/who-moderates-the-moderators&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127438/who-moderates-the-moderators&lt;/a&gt; which was moved here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="46800" OwnerDisplayName="Chaz II" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-07-17T22:48:13.277" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T00:20:57.583" Title="Who moderates the moderators?" Tags="|support|moderation|moderators|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8144" CreationDate="2018-07-17T11:55:57.473" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site does not allow for duplicate questions.  I note that you appear to have asked or answered this exact question several times on two accounts. You can't ask the same question multiple times, even if you disagree with the answer, without that question being closed as a duplicate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6757/what-should-be-done-when-there-is-an-incorrect-common-answer-that-keeps-getting?rq=1&quot;&gt;standard way&lt;/a&gt; to correct an answer you believe to be incorrect is to place your own answer to the existing question. This will not always work well since the existing accepted answer usually has a vote lead, but it's possible (even &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/93969/is-changing-the-accepted-answer-frowned-upon&quot;&gt;encouraged&lt;/a&gt;) for the asker to change the accepted answer to a new one if it's more correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127283/40971&quot;&gt;deleted answer&lt;/a&gt; of which you speak appears to have been nominated for deletion (including by Oblivious Sage, who has the accepted answer) due to your use of a rude and argumentative sentence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There is no passage limiting DR to one damage type per attack. &lt;strong&gt;If you downvote without quoting such a rule you are promoting ignorance.&lt;/strong&gt; Rule is written as intended. ANY time damage of resisted type is taken, reduce damage. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I prefer mech's approach of simply removing that sentence, but if I had to guess the moderators' reason for deletion, it's that you appear to be using the site to force through your own reading of the rules rather than the site's intended purpose of asking for and providing answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not know why your answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127430/38502&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; was downvoted twice. It's good form, when downvoting an answer, to explain in a comment. It appears that this was not done &lt;s&gt;(or, if it was, moderators deleted the comments, which often happens)&lt;/s&gt;. Your second answer was essentially a comment, and was deleted as it is not an answer to the question. The answer box is only for answers to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your literal question, it is most likely that the other user will not admit that they are wrong because they do not believe that they are wrong. You yourself appear to be in the same position. The case appears to be arguing over an ambigious rule, which is common in D&amp;amp;D and difficult to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend moving to D&amp;amp;D 5th edition and leaving this awkward edge case behind. Your miniatures will still work and you will be able to receive official rules answers on issues like this by asking Jeremy Crawford and Mike Mearls on Twitter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addendum: The user's entire post history on two accounts, which appears to be entirely arguing over this point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/25649/40971&quot;&gt;How do vulnerabilities combine, when taking multiple types of damage?&lt;/a&gt; answered May 19 '13 at 3:20 &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25650/40971&quot;&gt;How does Resist work against 1 attack that deals 2 separate damage types? [duplicate]&lt;/a&gt; asked May 19 '13 at 3:26&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/25655/40971&quot;&gt;How does Resist work against 1 attack that deals 2 separate damage types? [duplicate]&lt;/a&gt; answered May 19 '13 at 4:51 (accepted self-answer)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127283/40971&quot;&gt;How does resist all apply to an attack that deals two types of (non-combined) damage?&lt;/a&gt; answered two days ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127430/40971&quot;&gt;Damage resistance vs added damage by the RAW [duplicate]&lt;/a&gt; asked 2 hours ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127432/40971&quot;&gt;Damage resistance vs added damage by the RAW [duplicate]&lt;/a&gt; answered 2 hours ago (self-answer)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127433/40971&quot;&gt;Damage resistance vs added damage by the RAW [duplicate]&lt;/a&gt; answered 2 hours ago (deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-07-17T13:33:40.087" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T13:33:40.087" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8144" CreationDate="2018-07-17T11:56:07.720" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;From what I gather from comments on your question, and its edit history, &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;you've been acting in bad faith.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I highly recommend taking the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Tour&lt;/a&gt;. You may need to get oriented with how the different aspects of the site (questions, answers, comments, Meta, etc.) function.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange does not work like a forum. It is at its core a Q&amp;amp;A. Everybody here wants to help you find the answer you're looking for, but you have to help us do that. Please don't assume that anyone here is acting towards you or your question in bad faith; with malice or ill intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments and edits are for clarification. We are not inherently the owners of the posts we make, but the original querrent has the ability to currate an answer that was useful to them. If an answer isn't useful to you, that's okay; Just wait until another user submits another answer. There's no need to act with hostility towards an answer you do not find helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions please check out the links above and, when you have enough reputation, members in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; are always more than happy to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note: I am not a moderator, and also did not witness the entire event. I am assuming by comments there are deleted answers and comments that I cannot see.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9625" LastEditorUserId="9625" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T00:20:57.583" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T00:20:57.583" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8144" CreationDate="2018-07-17T11:58:48.497" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange sites are moderated by the entire community of users, who &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;unlock moderation privileges&lt;/a&gt; through contributions to the site. Some users also get elected by the community to become &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamond moderators&lt;/a&gt; which is like a glorified janitor position.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here on meta is where we the community members moderate each others' activity where necessary (including the diamond moderators being moderated). “We” here includes you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am deleted by the moderator who posted the false answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only one of your answers (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127283/1204&quot;&gt;10k link&lt;/a&gt;) has been removed by community members. One of the three users who removed it had a competing answer, which is usually an appearance of conflict of interest people should avoid. However, it was removed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/127283/1&quot;&gt;in its initial revision&lt;/a&gt; for being very low quality and having no citation&amp;mdash;it appeared to mainly just be calling out others as being wrong, but without providing a substantial case of its own. The comment you left on that answer (also since removed) did not help your case here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more recent version of your answer is a major improvement, and if it were in that state from the beginning it would not have been removed. The rant was removed by a fellow community member, and this was correct to do as well because answers are for answering the question directly. The space for observations about the community is here on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for who's right and wrong, we leave that to community votes and discourse to determine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S.: Please note many of your peers on the site will not be male.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-17T12:12:14.823" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T12:12:14.823" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8148" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8149" CreationDate="2018-07-17T13:27:54.423" Score="5" ViewCount="250" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question on the main site. This is the current draft:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;How does Time Stop interact with the duration of other spells?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When someone casts &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/time-stop&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Time Stop&lt;/a&gt; (in this case an &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/archmage&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Archmage&lt;/a&gt;), they take turns while everyone else is stopped in time:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;You briefly stop the flow of time for everyone but yourself. No time passes for other creatures, while you take 1d4 + 1 turns in a row&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am having trouble determining how this is supposed to affect the duration of other spell effects. That is, whether these extra turns taken by the Archmage count towards the duration of spell effects that were already present at the time of casting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am assuming (possibly wrongly) that the answer depends on the nature of the spell/effect. The main point that I want to know is what factors, if any, are used to determine wether a spell duration is affected. I have considered this (non-exhaustive) list of factors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Whether the spell affects only the Archmage, only other creatures, both or no creatures at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Whether the spell was cast by the Archmage or someone else&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Whether the spell is a concentration spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Combinations of these factors&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Specific spells that I am concerned about (since they may come up during the encounter) include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The Archmage's self casted &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/mirror-image&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Mirror Image&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/globe-of-invulnerability&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Globe of Invulnerability&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The Archmage's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/banishment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Banishment&lt;/a&gt; cast on an opponent&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;PC's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/blindness-deafness&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Blindness/Deafness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/compelled-duel&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Compelled Duel&lt;/a&gt; cast on the Archmage or an Archmage's ally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;PC's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/bless&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bless&lt;/a&gt; only on PCs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So which factors are used to determine whether the extra turns one takes during Time Stop affect a particular spell?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, to me, screams &quot;too broad&quot; for having way too many things to consider. &#xA;It may also attract valid answers that simply say &quot;this what happens with this spell or in this case in particular&quot; which is not what I want. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand asking individual questions on the interaction of each of these spells with Time Stop seems excessive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I solve this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question has been asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127555/33707&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; following &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8149/33707&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose's answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2018-07-18T11:48:04.630" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T11:48:04.630" Title="How should I split/improve this question so it is not too broad?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8148" CreationDate="2018-07-17T15:52:54.473" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask about one spell with a few different conditions at first&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The assumption seems to be that you need to investigate different spells to figure out the different cases, but one spell can be used to investigate multiple conditions in one question easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, ask &amp;quot;How does Time Stop interact with the duration of bless?&amp;quot; but then in the body ask about the cases where it is cast:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;by the archmage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;by not the archmage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;only on the archmage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;only not on the archmage&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;on archmage and others&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By lowering it down to just one spell in different cases you greatly reduce the workload and the broadness. And even with just one spell you are going to get a lot of information that will help reduce the number of questions you have to ask, and possibly might answer them all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Best case:&lt;/strong&gt; you are going to get a general answer that happens to cover your other spells as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Worst case:&lt;/strong&gt; you will answer 3/4 of your #1, all of #2, and probably #3 as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the worst case, you have already greatly reduced the number of questions going forward. Not that asking multiple questions is even an issue!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-17T15:52:54.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8150" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8151" CreationDate="2018-07-17T19:25:38.400" Score="6" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm given to understand, based on questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7877/is-it-possible-to-vote-to-close-a-question-as-a-duplicate-when-you-have-a-gold&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, that tag badges (only gold tag badges?) come with some privileges that apply only when acting on posts with that tag.  However, I'm unable to find any description of these privileges, either in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;privileges page&lt;/a&gt; or in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges?tab=tags&amp;amp;filter=gold&quot;&gt;description of tag badges&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What exactly do tag badges let you do that you couldn't otherwise?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do tag badges other than gold come with any privileges?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it possible to make this info easier to find, or are the privileges and badge-description pages stack-wide and unable to be edited by rpg.se specifically?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:11:38.797" LastActivityDate="2020-03-15T18:01:17.067" Title="What privileges, exactly, come with tag badges?" Tags="|support|tags|badges|privileges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8151" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8150" CreationDate="2018-07-17T19:45:38.853" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bronze and silver tag badges confer no privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a gold tag badge then you earn some privileges related to duplicate closures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231212/152515&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Dupehammer:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; When a question has your gold-badge tag, your votes to close it as a duplicate are &lt;strong&gt;unilateral.&lt;/strong&gt; This means it is immediately closed as a duplicate of whatever you said because you said so. This is like what diamond moderators can do except only for duplicate votes. Your dupehammer doesn't work if you were the one that added your gold-badge tag, or if you approved the edit that added it, in order to prevent funny business. (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/268281/152515&quot;&gt;uno&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/308573/254830&quot;&gt;dos&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your reopen votes are also unilateral if the question has your gold-badge tag and is closed as a duplicate. (This is the reopen hammer, or the un-dupe-hammer. Its name is less cool.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/291824/gold-tag-badge-holders-and-moderators-can-now-edit-duplicate-links&quot;&gt;You can edit the duplicate targets of a question closed as a duplicate.&lt;/a&gt; You may add or remove which questions this question is a duplicate of.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bXcXa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bXcXa.png&quot; alt=&quot;little &amp;quot;edit&amp;quot; link in the duplicate close banner&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have these powers because once you've earned a gold tag badge you have seen &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; of questions within that tag, and you probably know very well what's a duplicate of what.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who earn a gold tag badge find it takes some getting used to: remembering they have it, and figuring out how to use it well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-03-15T18:01:17.067" LastActivityDate="2020-03-15T18:01:17.067" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8152" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-18T10:19:43.387" Score="2" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer&lt;/a&gt; tag has a number of questions that are asking about a very wide variety of topics. They range from Warhammer 40,000, the Warhammer game rather than a tabletop RPG, and questions about Warhammer Fantasy. We already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wh40k&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wh40k&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wh40k&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue-trader&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue-trader&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue-trader&lt;/a&gt;, and others that cover most of the Warhammer universe. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given this information, should we remove the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warhammer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warhammer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warhammer&lt;/a&gt; tag because it is so generic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T10:27:19.070" Title="Should the 'Warhammer' tag be removed?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8152" CreationDate="2018-07-18T10:27:19.070" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, we shouldn't remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It covers questions about the Warhammer systems and its settings. It is not generic&amp;mdash;it is very, very specific (to Warhammer). Given we have only seven(!) questions tagged with it in totality, it will help the Warhammer crowd in discovering questions about the topic that are otherwise very few and far between.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not broken as a tag, it's working fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T10:27:19.070" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8154" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8155" CreationDate="2018-07-18T12:43:13.950" Score="4" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon&lt;/a&gt; tag is not currently a synonym of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapons&lt;/a&gt; tag. The tag synonym guidelines state that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you know of common, alternate spellings or phrasings for [a] tag, add them here so we can automatically correct them in the future. For example, suggest “bike” as a synonym for bicycle, or “sock” for socks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on that, it seems like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon&lt;/a&gt; is a good fit to be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-18T14:04:22.313" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T14:04:22.313" Title="Is the 'weapon' tag a synonym of the 'weapons' tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8154" CreationDate="2018-07-18T14:04:16.703" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks! &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon&lt;/a&gt; (2 questions) has now been made a synonym of the much-more-used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapons&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T14:04:16.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8156" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-18T17:03:03.050" Score="0" ViewCount="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's really a subject for the main questions area, it's too subjective and discussion drive. Open a chat? But how would poeple find that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45731" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T17:03:03.050" Title="What's a good place to get feedback on / iron out a homebrew's balance?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2018-07-18T17:06:52.967" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8157" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8158" CreationDate="2018-07-18T19:34:40.530" Score="1" ViewCount="59" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question/suggestion is pretty straightforward. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alternate-class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alternate-class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alternate-class-feature&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to be very narrow and rarely used, and it has no tag info so it's not clear how it's different from the existing and more commonly used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/alternate-class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;alternate-class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;alternate-class-feature&lt;/a&gt; tag be merged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T19:42:04.720" Title="Should [alternate-class-feature] be merged with [class-feature]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8157" CreationDate="2018-07-18T19:42:04.720" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, the tags should remain separate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 3.5 and Pathfinder, at least, ACFs are their own thing, with &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;their own rules&lt;/a&gt; that differ from the rules for normal class features.  People &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?444354-3-5-Alternative-Class-Features-(ported-from-Wizards-community-boards)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;collect lists of them&lt;/a&gt;, they have &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advancedPlayersGuide/advancedCoreClasses.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;their own header in rules docs&lt;/a&gt;, they generally appear in a different chapter in source books from regular class features, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, ACFs are their own topic, and it's useful to have a category about them.  It's easy to imagine questions that are specifically &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the rules for ACFs, like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can you trade away the same class feature twice for two different ACFs?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you gain a class feature as an ACF, can you then trade it away again for a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; ACF?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm honestly surprised neither of these questions is already on the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's reasonable to have a tag in place for questions like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-07-18T19:42:04.720" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8159" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-18T21:37:50.787" Score="5" ViewCount="144" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127678/41726&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; just got asked with a specific mention of experience with substance editing, and a request to not be edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(Due to past experiences on this site, please do not edit my original posting with valid context)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I believe that much of the context is not as important as the asker believes and could be made less wordy. &lt;strong&gt;Should this question be edited despite the OP's request?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally I would just edit it down myself, but since the OP specifically asked against it, I would prefer some extra backing from the community or a mod. Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A prior question from this user (likely the one alluded to) with a resolved Content Dispute can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/124788/revisions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and involved the removal of contextual combat tactics by one of the other users. (see Revision 2). This context may have indeed been pertinent, but a lot of the more recent question feels more like a rant disguised as a question than anything else. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2018-07-19T04:58:25.087" Title="How to resolve excessive background information?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8159" CreationDate="2018-07-18T21:49:09.850" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the amount of detail is truly excessive beyond what's necessary for answering the question, you can take a machete to it: a question being 5x longer than necessary will kill peoples' patience to read and understand it, influencing both the likelihood of answers and well-informed votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;However,&lt;/em&gt; also consider what's going on for the user: if it's mostly workable then go with it. They had a bad experience last time they came here because their question was basically messed around with by overenthusiastic editing. We don't want this to be a norm to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the question's not excessively long (it's &lt;em&gt;long&lt;/em&gt; but broken up, only a few paragraphs, etc). I'd be inclined to leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-07-19T04:58:25.087" LastActivityDate="2018-07-19T04:58:25.087" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8161" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-18T23:41:27.463" Score="11" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;When we get a question asking what others have done as GMs or players in their games, the question is almost always closed as “primarily opinion-based”. Sometimes they’re not put on hold, but they’re still edited to ask the same things but slightly differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What’s wrong with asking what others have done? Don’t we want people to share their experiences?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What’s the difference between the wordings that get held and the wordings that stay open?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/q/7064&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-07-22T20:26:34.090" Title="Why is it a problem to ask what other people have done in their games?" Tags="|support|close-reasons|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8159" CreationDate="2018-07-19T03:48:25.980" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm aware that this goes against some &lt;em&gt;SE&lt;/em&gt; guidelines, but this advice is based on excessive personal experience from a user who genuinely enjoys helping others by editing. (I've the Copy Editor gold badge and everything.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Do yourself a favor and &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; edit that content&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user specifically requests that their content remain untouched, respect that and leave the content alone, no matter how much better an edit—big or small—would make that content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some users, their content is profoundly sacred, untouchable, and flawless, and an editor doesn't know this until &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; he's edited that content in good faith and been subsequently excoriated by such a user for doing so. In the case of a user who straight-up &lt;em&gt;says&lt;/em&gt; that their content is off-limits, editing it &lt;em&gt;anyway&lt;/em&gt; is a sure path to unhappiness, no matter how much any edits actually improve the content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be safe and let someone braver, thicker-skinned, or less invested take a crack at editing that content instead of you. Even if your edit's only to show the user how much better their content could be &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; the edits, the user will still see &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; edit as a violation of their content's purity, roll back that edit, complain about the edit, and usually take it personally that you edited it anyway. Often you'll have made an Internet enemy by trying to be helpful, and it's just not worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Eventually, an &lt;em&gt;SE&lt;/em&gt; user must get comfortable with the idea that their content will be edited, but that user isn't comfortable with that idea yet. Be patient and wait until that user is comfortable before touching their content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2018-07-19T03:48:25.980" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8163" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8164" CreationDate="2018-07-19T10:50:44.183" Score="3" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1067/&quot;&gt;Question &amp;quot;bumping&amp;quot; - is it ok?&lt;/a&gt; (apparently, it is not)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say there is an answered and solved question that was asked back in 2016. It wasn't active for a couple of years. Now a community member edits one of its answers — let's say, by fixing formatting or adding a tag. The question itself bumps to the top of the default &quot;active&quot; questions list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it OK? Should I refrain from editing old questions in order not to bump them? If it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; okay, what can I do if I want not to see these &quot;false active&quot; questions and prefer to see only recently asked, commented, or answered ones?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-07-19T18:08:19.897" LastActivityDate="2018-07-19T18:08:19.897" Title="Is it OK to bump an old question with minor edits?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8164" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8163" CreationDate="2018-07-19T11:01:43.693" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is OK to edit old posts. There are even badges for doing so: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/77/excavator&quot;&gt;Excavator&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/76/archaeologist&quot;&gt;Archaeologist&lt;/a&gt;. Questions and answers are timeless on here, and so is editing them to improve them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to make improvements to older material. The bump is so that the community will check your work and ensure there's no funny business going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What isn't OK is doing these things &lt;em&gt;solely&lt;/em&gt; for bumping. Edits should be a genuine improvement. Sometimes people will make many trivial edits to bump a question, and in those cases they are asked to stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;what can I do if I want not to see these &quot;false active&quot; questions and prefer to see only recently asked, commented or answered ones?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, they're not “false active”, they're genuinely active&amp;mdash;they were modified just now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you may visit the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;questions page&lt;/a&gt; and sort by “newest” to see only recently asked questions, by order of how recently they were asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no way to filter by “recently commented” since comments don't get marked as any sort of activity. There is also no filter that will get you only recent answers or modified recent questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-19T12:22:37.520" LastActivityDate="2018-07-19T12:22:37.520" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8165" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-20T01:22:25.463" Score="11" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DNDBeyond&lt;/a&gt; is Wizards of the Coast's official 5e digital support site/tool. It contains a rules compendium, monster listings, spell and item descriptions, and space for homebrew spells/items/races/feats/&amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many old(er) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions do not link to DNDBeyond, as it didn't exist at the time. We &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7669/23970&quot;&gt;have affirmed&lt;/a&gt; that it's perfectly fine to link to DNDBeyond in questions, generally noting that its non-SRD content is behind no more of a paywall than the printed products themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently some editors have been making good-faith edits to add DNDBeyond links where there were none before. That hadn't caught my eye until someone pointed out to me that the texts that made their way into DNDBeyond don't &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; perfectly match printed texts. [I don't have any examples at hand: readers please feel free to add a few examples.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we be &lt;em&gt;adding&lt;/em&gt; DNDBeyond links to questions where the author didn't include them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-07-27T13:15:37.900" Title="Should we be adding DNDBeyond links to old posts?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8166" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8175" CreationDate="2018-07-20T02:52:37.717" Score="7" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel as though I've seen a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of new-member questions that are (not that surprisingly) less than amazing, and therefore get close votes. I think that's pretty logical, and usually the close votes are accompanied by well written, friendly and constructive comments welcoming the new user and helping them to see how to improve their participation in rpgstackexchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What seems less helpful, though, is that their progression to more fully qualified members can be slowed, reducing their interest in persevering, &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;when their question is downvoted&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, as this reduces their reputation. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wonder - would it be effective to &quot;shield&quot; new members from reputation hits based on downvotes of their first question? Give them a little extra grace to work out what we're about here before sending them backwards? Or am I misunderstanding how this works so far?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-07-20T12:06:13.147" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T12:51:49.753" Title="Downvoting first questions - can we be more welcoming?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|reputation|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8167" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8166" CreationDate="2018-07-20T04:40:14.983" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;One if the biggest things to remember is that down voting is only &lt;em&gt;seen&lt;/em&gt; as a negative thing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been many posts discussing this already, across lots of the stacks sites, about dealing with the &quot;negative impact&quot; of downvoting on new posts, as well as potential &quot;fixes&quot; such as forcing a comment to explain why you downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, none of that is really necessary, as the system is purely logical, and there is plenty of explanation to go along with how the system works. The downvote button even has a tooltip:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Poor quality or not useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty self explanatory. If a post gets downvoted, especially a post by a new user, they're being told that their post isn't useful, or is pretty poor quality. We can then help further by leaving a comment, explaining exactly how they can improve it, but again, these comments are often paraphrasing the &quot;How to ask&quot; section of the site tour. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, yeah, it's always a bit of a kick in the gut when you get a downvote. We're only human. But after all I've already mentioned, the system is in place to incentivize users to improve and do better; and when/if they do, downvotes can be retracted, and even changed to upvotes.  Removing that functionality to protect their pride completely goes against its intended purpose. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &quot;protecting new users&quot;, well, unfortunately that opens up a lot more problems. Firstly, what determines a &quot;new user&quot;? Number of posts? Time on the site? Reputation? These things can be used to determine a &quot;new user&quot;, but it's not overly definitive. There's always going to be people who slip through by not being overly active, have a few posts that have all received votes, both up and down, keeping them in that low threshold, but still have been a member for at least a year. The logic is not really something that can be defined. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And ultimately, changing user privilege is a system-wide thing, not just relevant to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T04:40:14.983" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-07-20T04:59:56.140" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Physicists don't always make the best cheese, but it doesn't mean they can't try! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/109644/12193&quot;&gt;Can you throw a hand axe upwards over a wall and into a group of enemies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:56:56.997" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:56:56.997" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8165" CreationDate="2018-07-20T06:30:43.830" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Adding links to DNDBeyond has the potential to make a question somewhat nonsensical. We have a lot of questions where the answer was &quot;that wording was ambiguous/confusing, here's the errata&quot;.  If a question of that variety has a link to DNDBeyond in it, with its updated wording, someone reading the question may end up going &quot;the answer is right there in the question, what is this question even about?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a major problem? Not really. But it does represent a larger issue, which is: We shouldn't be editing old posts carelessly. We have a lot of questions and answers which turn on a single word, so unless you're certain that you're not changing the meaning of something, you should probably leave it alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T06:30:43.830" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8166" CreationDate="2018-07-20T10:42:10.613" Score="12" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I wonder - would it be effective to &quot;shield&quot; new members from reputation hits based on downvotes of their first question? Give them a little extra grace to work out what we're about here before sending them backwards? Or am I misunderstanding how this works so far?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You probably have misunderstood something. This thing you're describing here ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;their progression to more fully qualified members can be slowed [...] when their question is downvoted, as this reduces their reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... isn't a problem but a feature. It is in fact exactly how things are meant to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Site privileges can be destructive in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to use them well or who doesn't understand how our site works. This is why they're gated behind incremental reputation barriers: you can only progress through them by contributing good quality content over time and demonstrating you understand how our site works. Over time you also see and learn how things like comments, edits, and closures and reopens work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; understand how our site works, or is contributing low quality material, they are not yet ready for those privileges. They are also (not coincidentally) probably picking up some downvotes. This has the result of slowing down their progression toward privileges for which they aren't yet ready. If a user obtained those privileges anyway, they may cause trouble, and I or one of the other diamond mods would have to step in. I'd prefer they slow down and learn more over us having to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there won't be shields against downvotes and rep loss for new users. We need those mechanisms, both for the protection of our knowledge base, and for the protection of the new users themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-23T06:04:13.330" LastActivityDate="2018-07-23T06:04:13.330" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8171" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-20T11:06:03.020" Score="13" ViewCount="1046" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bdnd-5e%5D+%5Bhomebrew%5D+balanced+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a number of D&amp;amp;D 5e homebrew questions&lt;/a&gt; that present a piece of homebrew (a race, a class, etc) and ask if it is balanced. Some get closed as too broad or primarily opinion-based, others are readily accepted and get answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I needed to ask about whether my homebrew thingy is balanced, how should I do so? What do I need to do to ensure it's well-received and has acceptable answers? What's going on with the closures that I should look to avoid?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127783/1204&quot;&gt;How do I evaluate whether my homebrew race is balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-08-02T16:28:36.837" LastActivityDate="2022-08-02T16:28:36.837" Title="How should I ask about my D&amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?" Tags="|support|homebrew|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8172" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8165" CreationDate="2018-07-20T13:26:37.327" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The point of editing (particularly of somebody else's post) should be to make things clearer. I don't think the specifics, of whether it's adding a link to D&amp;amp;D Beyond, or adding a page number, or whatever, is really the question here. If editing is adding an irrelevant detail then it's probably unnecessary, though I don't see as it does any harm other than perhaps bumping an old post that probably didn't need to be bumped. If editing makes it clearer what the post is trying to say by providing a reference for what the author was looking at, then it's probably helpful and that's the whole purpose of editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's important that any prospective editors, though, be absolutely certain that what they're doing is providing a reference for what the author was looking at and not just trying to hyperlink every rules reference on the site. Editing needs to be looked at on an individual basis: All problems with the post should be addressed at once, and it's important to realize that what the author was looking at may not be what the current version in D&amp;amp;D Beyond says. I know that at times I've been quite confused when reading a question (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55324/how-long-do-creatures-from-a-bag-of-tricks-last&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;) where I couldn't figure out why it was being asked because the answer was quite obvious to me, but it turns out that my copy of the book had been updated with the answer and the question was from before that updated printing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if an edit makes a post clearer (which could be done by adding references to D&amp;amp;D Beyond or by rephrasing a confusing sentence) then it's probably helpful, and if it doesn't make a post clearer then it isn't. But I don't think that the guiding principle here is really anything specific to adding D&amp;amp;D Beyond links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user37158" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T13:26:37.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8171" CreationDate="2018-07-20T15:24:02.470" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;As usual, first present your problem, not your solution&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, homebrewing something is about creating a new thing that does some particular stuff that you want, but is inexistent in the original published content, or to solve something you think it is a problem. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124216/43856&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is about rebalancing winged races, which OP sees as problematic/unbalanced. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122861/43856&quot;&gt;This one&lt;/a&gt; is about elemental flavor. &lt;strong&gt;State your problem&lt;/strong&gt;, what you wanted to achieve with that homebrew. This opens up for better answers than &amp;quot;Your homebrew is too strong&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Your homebrew will never see play&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Present your efforts&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, after presenting your problem, you might present your solution and why you want to solve it that way. This is where you will present us your homebrew stuff. Try to explain your thought process behind each feature, what flavor it had, why did you think it was a good idea. As an example of &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; doing it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127781/43856&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; got some downvotes and even was closed (probably) because it presents nothing on the thought process behind those features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think these two points are the most essential for getting a good answer. We can always give a broad mechanical answer comparing it to published races and the overall balance and synergy, but it might not actually solve the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Ultra Bonus&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a specific campaign in mind where you are using that homebrew, &lt;strong&gt;tell us about it&lt;/strong&gt;. Many (and when I say many, I say &lt;strong&gt;MANY&lt;/strong&gt;) features fluctuate between useless and overpowered depending on the campaign. Flying is probably the best example I can think: it's utterly broken in open areas in Tier 1 campaigns, it does nothing inside a cave with a 7.5ft ceiling. Damage resistances are strong &lt;em&gt;if and only if&lt;/em&gt; there are enemies that actually use that type of damage against you. Anyway, most features are situational and providing us the situation you're expecting them to show up is incredibly important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T15:24:02.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8171" CreationDate="2018-07-20T15:25:49.657" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen these questions about homebrew classes and races appearing for a while, and to be honest, they've never sat well with me. I personally think they should all be closed. The reason is twofold: They are examples of &quot;bad subjective&quot; questions, and they won't be helpful to future readers on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are several issues that lead me to believe questions about homebrew classes are bad subjective. In the overwhelming majority of cases, no one on this site (often not even the asker) has actually played the homebrew class in question, so it's impossible to answer them with direct evidence or experience. While there are homebrew classes that are clearly over- or underpowered, oftentimes what will be balanced for one group will be unbalanced for another due to differences in playstyles and how the groups' campaigns are going, so it's difficult to speak authoritatively about whether a class is balanced. &quot;Balanced&quot; can be a loaded term that means different things to different people. And since the question asks about homebrew, it necessarily takes us well out of the territory of understanding rules as written or rules as intended and asks us to try to tune an entirely new addition to a game system altogether. With all of these issues piled on top of each other for each question about a homebrew class or race, it becomes impossible to write an answer that doesn't, at some level, incorporate one's entirely subjective opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even if someone asks a question about their homebrew race that avoids these issues - say, by giving a very clear definition for what they consider balanced that can be largely calculated numerically, making the question objective - I still think the questions aren't a good fit for this website. This is because the StackExchange network isn't primarily about helping people with their questions; rather, it's about building a knowledge base that can be searched through by people with some expertise to get common questions addressed quickly. Given that the overwhelming majority of homebrew classes are only played by a small number of people, the only person who's realistically going to benefit from having a question about balancing a specific homebrew class is the question's asker. After that, the question will be noise. By allowing these questions on this site, we are diluting the signal-to-noise ratio on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8838" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T15:25:49.657" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8166" CreationDate="2018-07-20T16:47:06.887" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&quot;We&quot; apparently can't, but individuals can.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a given occasion, any individual who provides close votes, down votes, or comments on a new user's question can choose to engage in a warm and personable style.  There is no policy requiring that yet, even though the churn currently going on at SE.META on &quot;how to be more welcoming&quot; and the draft &quot;code of conduct&quot; may result in an adjustment to that.  There is also no policy against that, with the caveat that using the standard tools is still necessary for the stack to function as intended and designed.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The down vote is a standard form of communication across the SE network that has an intended purpose.  For a question, that purpose is to say this as a minimum: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear, or not useful&lt;/em&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Call it a form of shorthand, if you like.  Until SE-writ-large decides, after the above mentioned churn, that it no longer wishes for the down vote to communicate that message, it is a standard and approved response to a question that displays those shortcomings.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was stated quite clearly by a diamond mod that encouraging users to treat the new user as being as important as their question, to approach a new user's question while keeping in mind their being a human being behind the screen name,  is to operate against the SE model.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;... misunderstand the point of RPG.se — we are not supposed to treat questions as people, we are to treat them as questions. The decades-long goal of RPG.se is to curate good answers to questions. Helping people is the method, not the goal, of getting a good database of posts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's an excerpt; see the detailed comments stream under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8069/22566&quot;&gt;this meta answer&lt;/a&gt; and these particular comments if you are interested: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018#comment25747_8069&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; , &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018#comment25752_8069&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018#comment25754_8069&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nobody can stop you from engaging in a warm and human style if you choose to do so.  I cited in that meta both DuckTapeAl and HeyICanChan as two good examples of that, but many others are likewise inclined.  It takes some effort, and a bit of time to do that.  What anyone can do is decide if the time to do that is worthwhile. One still must remember to use the tools provided to achieve the objectives of SE: good-to-excellent answers to good, properly scoped questions.  It's the stack of good-to-excellent answers that gives any SE site its value.     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&quot;We&quot; apparently can't, but you (and anyone) can.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go with your gut, and lead by example if you are so moved. Leadership by action is quite often effective.  Don't look for a policy change any time soon.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-07-20T18:42:05.383" LastActivityDate="2018-07-20T18:42:05.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8176" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8177" CreationDate="2018-07-21T13:48:40.533" Score="5" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;I often see the word &quot;unregistered&quot; as a part of a nickname:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;greenmonster15 (unregistered)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/46936/greenmonster15&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/46936/greenmonster15&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does that mean, is it just a somebody who are not registered on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why they are allowed to post questions then? If a person doesn't bother registering, they probably won't put more efforts to the question itself. Usually they post a couple of vague phrases, or an unintelligible wall of text, and then disappear. Community can salvage their question thereafter, but is it worth it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are examples of questions from &quot;unregistered&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127861/&quot;&gt;How do I DM for a player who gets angry when he doesn&amp;#39;t get his way?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127452/&quot;&gt;Is this possibly deadly encounter fair to run?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127820/&quot;&gt;Hand Crossbows and Ranger Woodchippers in 5e?&lt;/a&gt; (see the edit history)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the latter example the question was closed, then edited and reopened by the community, not the original poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-08T06:08:10.707" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T06:08:10.707" Title="What are &quot;unregistered&quot; members and why they are allowed to post?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8176" CreationDate="2018-07-21T14:26:06.200" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;They truly aren't registered on the site (yet) (technically).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to decrease the barrier to entry, Stack Exchange offers a &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; frictionless flow for posting questions to brand new users: you can post a question or answer simply by entering a username and email. An &quot;unregistered&quot; account then gets created for you tied to a cookie in your browser, and you're sent an email invitation (I think) to complete your registration and make a normal fully registered account. If you wipe your browser at this point, you lose the cookie and access to your unregistered account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This flow is only offered in limited circumstances. You won't be able to use it from your PC since Stack Exchange will recognise that it's associated with a registered user, and suspected spam origins don't seem to be able to use it either. Stack Exchange in both circumstances will gate you by making you properly sign in or register an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unregistered users also do not show up in user searches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This frictionless flow exists because Stack Exchange &lt;em&gt;wants&lt;/em&gt; people to post their first questions and first answers, and not get turned away at the door because they don't want to go through the effort of making an account yet. Later, once they decide they'd like to make a full account, they can do so. Many do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-21T14:33:08.533" LastActivityDate="2018-07-21T14:33:08.533" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8161" CreationDate="2018-07-22T20:16:01.260" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask us to solve your problem, don't &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; survey us for our experiences&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a Q&amp;amp;A community, RPG Stack Exchange focuses on practical problems you may face. We're interested in questions and problems that can have a single best or correct answer or solution. We have voting mechanisms for sorting answers  as better or worse (or more correct/incorrect), and an “accepted answer” feature for marking which answer solved your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast to forums, we don't handle discussion or surveys on peoples' thoughts (“let's talk about X”). We also cannot handle questions where every answer is equally valid (“What's your favorite ____?”) or where there is no specific problem to solve. Our Q&amp;amp;A features aren't set up for this and they invalidate our voting and acceptance features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This means avoid asking just for what we've seen or done:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have a problem with ____ in my game. What have you done when running into this problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Has anyone seen/run games where ____ has happened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a situation or a problem presented here, but we're not being asked to solve it. Instead, we're just being surveyed for arbitrary things we've seen or done, regardless of what outcome it has. Every answer of what someone's seen or done is equally valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Instead, ask us to solve your problem:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have a problem with ____ in my game. Here's the situation that's happening. How can I resolve that problem so that I can get this specific outcome? How have you managed it in your games?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This presents us with a specific problem and a specific kind of outcome you're after. It prompts us to share our experience on how that solution has worked out in practice as part of asking for that solution. This means we can present actual solutions to your practical problem,  and we can judge the best answer among them by which one seems to have presented a desirable outcome in actual practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also just ask this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have a problem with ____ in my game. Here's the situation that's happening. How can I resolve this problem to get this specific outcome?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to prompt us to explain how we've handled it—we usually should be telling you that anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-22T20:26:34.090" LastActivityDate="2018-07-22T20:26:34.090" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8179" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-22T21:29:30.750" Score="4" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/312850/311001&quot;&gt;The second draft of our Code of Conduct is available for feedback and review&lt;/a&gt; over on Meta.SE. This is an update to/evolution of the &quot;Be Nice&quot; policy which currently guides site use and moderation. Importantly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This just codifies the rules that we already use, moderation is still at the discretion of the individual moderators, and we've clarified that in this revision. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/312850/the-second-draft-of-our-code-of-conduct-is-available-for-feedback-and-review#comment1024785_312850&quot;&gt;Tim Post♦ Jul 19 at 16:43&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're interested, go ahead and take a look at the main post on meta.SE, follow linked conversations and read the suggestions--or even make your own!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that conversation here won't necessarily be seen by SE employees. If you have concerns about/suggestions for the Code of Conduct they should be made on meta.SE. If you have concerns about/suggestions for the &lt;em&gt;implementation of the CoC here on RPG.SE&lt;/em&gt;, then I suppose those would go well here where the elected mods can take a look and consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-08-13T01:26:24.677" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T01:26:24.677" Title="Stack Exchange is developing a new Code of Conduct" Tags="|discussion|moderation|policy|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8180" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8181" CreationDate="2018-07-23T00:22:21.180" Score="5" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-5e&lt;/a&gt; has only two questions, and appears to be synonymous with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr5&lt;/a&gt;. It should be made a synonym of the much more popular tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr5&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-23T03:00:46.937" LastActivityDate="2018-07-23T03:01:07.143" Title="Make 'shadowrun-5e' a synonym of 'shadowrun-sr5'" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8180" CreationDate="2018-07-23T03:01:07.143" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for noticing that. Done and done!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-07-23T03:01:07.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-07-24T02:52:15.887" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've got some Hall of Fame material right here. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/128015/15469&quot;&gt;You can shoot any kind of ammunition out of any kind of weapon that uses ammunition.&lt;/a&gt; Personally, I can't wait to start firing blowgun needles from my longbow - 50 shots instead of 20, for the same price and weight!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2018-07-24T03:22:18.093" LastActivityDate="2018-07-24T03:22:18.093" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8183" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-07-24T03:52:13.703" Score="34" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127968/is-there-a-maximum-attainable-beard-thickness/127975#127975&quot;&gt;Is there a maximum attainable beard thickness?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes cheese gets in your beard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a sad fact of life, but there it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:02:29.533" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:02:29.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8184" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8185" CreationDate="2018-07-25T13:32:22.683" Score="5" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have marked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128082/can-you-contingency-a-spell-from-a-ring-of-spell-storing&quot;&gt;Can you Contingency a spell from a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt; as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124689/can-contingency-be-used-with-a-spell-cast-from-an-ioun-stone&quot;&gt;Can Contingency be used with a spell cast from an Ioun Stone?&lt;/a&gt;, but there was some disagreement in chat as to the validity of that decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main reason for my closure is that the wording of the two magic items at the heart (as I perceive it) of the questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/ring-of-spell-storing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Ring of Spell Storing&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/ioun-stone&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Reserve Ioun Stone&lt;/a&gt;) have virtually identical wording. This, in my mind, makes the questions mechanically identical. However, they are still different items in name which makes them technically different questions and not exactly the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in my never-ending quest to understand the way that we use duplicate closure as a tool I pose the question to you all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should these questions be marked as duplicates?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Given the direction this seems to be going I have reopened the Question. Better to have a duplicate be answered and active and close it later than to unjustly close a question that shouldn't be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-07-25T19:07:11.113" LastActivityDate="2018-07-25T19:07:11.113" Title="Should this question actually be marked as duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8184" CreationDate="2018-07-25T13:51:59.127" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe these shouldn't be marked as duplicates because, as you say, they are about two different items. My understanding of the way duplicates work is that broadly, it is the questions that have to be the same rather than the answers. In this case, the questions are clearly about two different things that just happen to work in almost the same way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-07-25T13:51:59.127" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8186" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8187" CreationDate="2018-07-26T01:55:44.723" Score="2" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;After reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/234259/asking-days-badges&quot;&gt;this Meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; and reviewing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5780/what-are-the-criteria-for-the-curious-badge&quot;&gt;this question and answer&lt;/a&gt; I can't seem to work out why the progress noted for my 'curious' badge is only 2/5 instead of 3/5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a positive question record:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;(total questions - negative questions - closed - deleted)/total questions &amp;gt;= 0.5&#xA;(4               - 1                  - 1      - 1      )/4                = 0.25&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(darn that stupid question that got downvoted, closed and then deleted! Perhaps a speedy 'delete before it gets closed' would have saved me a point!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I can't earn this badge until I ask at least one more positively received question that is neither closed nor deleted, but I have three well received, open, undeleted questions - wouldn't that mean that the badge would read as 3/5, positive question record required?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Added both bug and support tags, as while I'm guessing there's some functionality here that means the tracking is, in fact, correct, this could be an incorrect guess. Also, if I'm right, maybe there's a good place to clarify how this feature works more fully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastActivityDate="2018-07-26T09:40:53.280" Title="Why doesn't my curious badge count all my well received questions?" Tags="|support|bug|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8186" CreationDate="2018-07-26T08:31:35.963" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The script that checks the progress for this badge only runs once per day, as the question has to be well-received at the end of the day (UTC time). That also means the question must have had a positive net score. That means that you don't get the progress for the question you asked today in the progress bar today. But tomorrow it should get updated and show 3/5. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;About the reason why it currently doesn't show 3/5: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/123387/revisions&quot;&gt;Can you take different archetype options at different levels?&lt;/a&gt; was closed at some point and as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8186/why-doesnt-my-curious-badge-count-all-my-well-received-questions#comment26180_8186&quot;&gt;Laurel pointed out&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you ask at least one well-received question in a UTC day and &lt;strong&gt;none of your questions that day are&lt;/strong&gt; deleted, downvoted, or &lt;strong&gt;closed&lt;/strong&gt;, you get one more day of credit toward the badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that your question was closed prevents it from being counted towards the badge, even if it was reopened shortly thereafter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127794/34863&quot;&gt;If an attack alerts someone to your presence, can their initiative save them from being surprised in time?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127945/34863&quot;&gt;Are there ways other than Kensei Weapons or Hex Warrior to use an ability other than STR for non-finesse melee weapons?&lt;/a&gt; haven't been closed and had a net positive score on their first day of being on the site as noted by the daily running script. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-07-26T09:40:53.280" LastActivityDate="2018-07-26T09:40:53.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8188" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8189" CreationDate="2018-07-27T12:20:56.070" Score="6" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/antimagic-field&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;antimagic-field&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;antimagic-field&lt;/a&gt; tag that I've recently seen edited into a couple dozen questions. I searched and noticed that there are 300+ results for posts including &quot;antimagic&quot; and all but a handful of them are also tagged for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By contrast, we don't have tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/counterspell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;counterspell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;counterspell&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dispel-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dispel-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dispel-magic&lt;/a&gt;, yet there a few dozen more posts about D&amp;amp;D's &lt;em&gt;counterspell&lt;/em&gt; than than &lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt; and 500+ about &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;. (I picked those two for contrast because they have similar use cases to &lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt;.) There is, however, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/counterspelling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;counterspelling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;counterspelling&lt;/a&gt; tag that seems to sound system-agnostic, although there doesn't seem to be any tag associated with the &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt; concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This scenario seems inconsistent to me for two reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I thought we don't usually tag for system-specific concepts like one particular spell in one (admittedly overwhelmingly popular) family of games.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we tag for that one particular spell (&lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt;), it seems we also ought to tag for those related spells that happen to be more popular topics here (&lt;em&gt;counterspell&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we're going to tag for a concept related to areas that suppress magic then I would think at the very least the tag should be named in a system-agnostic fashion, such as simply &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/antimagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;antimagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;antimagic&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-suppression&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-suppression&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-suppression&lt;/a&gt; along with any necessary helpful tag synonyms pointing to them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the appropriate resolution to this (as I perceive it) inconsistent tag scenario?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-07-27T15:54:31.757" Title="Inconsistency around the [antimagic-field] tag" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8189" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8188" CreationDate="2018-07-27T12:42:43.043" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I thought we don't usually tag for system-specific concepts like one particular spell in one (admittedly overwhelmingly popular) family of games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do tag for system-specific concepts, e.g. we do have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aspects&lt;/a&gt; (mostly Fate) or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/racial-traits&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;racial-traits&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;racial-traits&lt;/a&gt; (mostly the D&amp;amp;D family, including Pathfinder). We don't tag for specific spells because there's a million of them: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;Should we be tagging individual spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If we tag for that one particular spell (antimagic field), it seems we also ought to tag for those related spells that happen to be more popular topics here (counterspell and dispel magic).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's something we could do. They're specific unique mechanics with rules unto themselves. We shouldn't do them for consistency with antimagic though (that's not a reason to have a tag); we should do it if we decide those things are worth tagging in and of themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just so happens antimagic is a large weird subject with lots of weirdness connected to it, so I feel the tag's worthwhile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Actually SevenSidedDie pointed out in comments there is in fact already a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/counterspelling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;counterspelling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;counterspelling&lt;/a&gt; tag; I've made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/counterspell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;counterspell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;counterspell&lt;/a&gt; an alias of it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If we're going to tag for a concept related to areas that suppress magic then I would think at the very least the tag should be named in a system-agnostic fashion, such as simply &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/antimagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;antimagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;antimagic&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-suppression&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-suppression&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-suppression&lt;/a&gt; along with any necessary helpful tag synonyms pointing to them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now there's only two systems I know of that have antimagic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The D&amp;amp;D family, where it exists as a field.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Warhammer Fantasy or 40k, where it also exists as a field.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to go for a system-agnostic name unless it actually helps the tag apply to other situations where we need it. As in: until the naming is a problem, we don't need to change it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now since the antimagic we're tagging is always an antimagic field, it's fine described as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there were questions about antimagic that &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a field then maybe we'd have [antimagic]. There's no benefit in going to a term no games are using ([magic-suppression]).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-27T15:54:31.757" LastActivityDate="2018-07-27T15:54:31.757" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8165" CreationDate="2018-07-27T13:15:37.900" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, I would suggest not editing a lot of old posts this way, for the following reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Editing old questions would bump them on the front page.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This would see unnecessary new answers to old already-answered questions; &quot;thread necromancy&quot;, as they call it on forums.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It would clutter the front page with questions that don't need answering.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D Beyond links are mainly of use to askers/answerers of new, currently open questions who benefit from the ability to quickly and easily verify information (perhaps in a book they don't own) before answering or accepting. While links may still be of use to readers for convenience, I'm not sure it's worth a high number of bumped threads.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'd be concerned that users would expend a lot of effort modifying old posts for XP rather than asking/answering questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-07-27T13:15:37.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8191" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-29T22:52:42.310" Score="7" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm really interested to know if there are any gaming systems in which a situation described in a meme would be possible. It seemed like something interesting to ask here, and like a clear question pointing towards a verifiable best answer. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128350/when-dwarves-fly-is-this-possible-in-a-published-rules-based-system?noredirect=1#comment318375_128350&quot;&gt;So I tried&lt;/a&gt;. And it got downvoted and closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have since edited it, but over more than 24 hours have had almost no change... What is still wrong with it? How can I fix it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify: In an answer, as well as linked as part of the hold reason, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic Revisited&lt;/a&gt; was referenced. The closest thing I could find to a passage that deals with what my question is was the &quot;more focused question&quot; indication in this quote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This means all &quot;shopping&quot; questions are off topic. In many cases, however, instead of asking a shopping question (which game system/online tabletop/psionic subsystem/etc &quot;is best&quot;), you can ask a more focused question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also of interest, that meta post was from August '15, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94575/how-to-let-my-players-fail-their-rolls-intentionally-but-covertly&quot;&gt;How to let my players fail their rolls intentionally but covertly&lt;/a&gt; (a question that is literally asking for a gaming system that will behave a certain way) which was asked in Feb '17 is protected. It also has a comment from a mod that calls it a great question and laments that it seems to be attracting poor answers- the reason given in comments below for not accepting questions of similar formats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-07-30T15:08:11.217" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T15:08:11.217" Title="How can I ask this question in a 'stackable' format?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8192" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8193" CreationDate="2018-07-30T00:43:13.103" Score="4" ViewCount="73" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on some questions I have been poring through lately regarding the usage of Insight and Deception rolls in D&amp;amp;D 4E, I came across the idea to add a sort of &quot;gambling mini-game&quot; to my campaign for my players. What I want to do is create a rather simple algorithm, primarily using a character's Deception and Charisma scores, along with the RNG of their rolls and &lt;em&gt;something else&lt;/em&gt; to create a fair algorithm -- after all, it should be something quantitative, so the players know they aren't getting cheated; who would want to gamble off the whim of someone else, after all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyhow, I'd like to ask a question here regarding what else I should put in the formula. Simply saying &quot;get a score above 20 will make you win that round of poker&quot; is too basic, boring, and easy to manipulate. I debated posting this on StackOverflow, but because this algorithm is designed to work in a decently balanced fashion using the rules and standard practices of 4E, I figured this would be significantly more relevant here. Is such a question allowed/encouraged here? I've never seen anything on this SE related to algorithm design, as discussion is usually focused on how to best use pre-existing systems, so I figured I'd check in here first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44126" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T00:59:14.087" Title="Inquiring about creating an algorithm" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8192" CreationDate="2018-07-30T00:53:53.510" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this isn’t an algorithm design question, it’s an algorithm &lt;em&gt;ideas request&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could help with an algorithm, given available inputs and expected outputs. But we can’t help with “give me ideas for another term in the equation” — every answer is equally correct for such an answer, because they are all ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such idea-generation questions aren’t suited to SE’s Q&amp;amp;A design. They work fine on a discussion forum though, such as one from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/321&quot;&gt;our list of RPG forums&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it may also be an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66377/153219&quot;&gt;XY Problem&lt;/a&gt;: focussed on an algorithm, when the purpose of that is to solve a more fundamental problem. You could ask about the base problem instead: how to resolve a gambling game of skill. Such a question is essentially on topic (pending seeing the actual wording as usual, of course).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-07-30T00:59:14.087" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T00:59:14.087" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8191" CreationDate="2018-07-30T01:41:51.830" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often with off-topic questions, there’s simply nothing that can be done to make a question work. You want to know “are there any systems that do X?” and we have decided that we don’t answer questions asking “are there any systems that do X?” No matter how you reword it, that is still what you want to know, and still not something we are prepared to offer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are &lt;em&gt;truly&lt;/em&gt; very sorry we cannot help you with your question—by definition, users on this site like answering people’s questions—but questions like this have caused too many problems in the past. And on this site, when we say “caused too many problems,” we basically mean “the questions aren’t getting answered, at least not well.” We &lt;em&gt;tried&lt;/em&gt; support these kinds of questions, but it just didn’t work. We’re sorry, we really wanted to be able to help with these kinds of things. But we couldn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which basically is to say, making such questions off-topic is &lt;em&gt;as a favor to you&lt;/em&gt;. It’d be nice to claim we can help with these kinds of questions, but experience has shown us that it wouldn’t be true. Closing your question is our way of being honest and up-front with you that we aren’t equipped to handle your question. Sorry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T01:41:51.830" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8195" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-30T05:01:59.507" Score="3" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;Literally as I started making this question it changed to what it should be, but I'm still curious as to why it was the case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had two tabs in Chrome open, one on meta and the other on rpg.stackexchange, and the rpg one (which I had been using) had higher rep. Confused, I closed the meta tab (which had been sitting idle for an hour or so) and in the fresher rpg one, switched over to meta. My rep was still different. I closed the browser and opened one tab in each again - still different. All of this in the space of about 2 minutes, but there was 20 rep difference, which I don't think happened as quickly in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why would my rep read differently in the different parts of the site?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-07-30T08:31:37.217" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T08:31:37.217" Title="Why is my meta rep briefly different from my normal rep?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|reputation|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8195" CreationDate="2018-07-30T07:04:15.467" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The reputation on Meta is only updated once an hour. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/96606/352819&quot;&gt;&#xA;My “Meta” rep on Photo.SE differs from my main rep&lt;/a&gt; on MSE. The highest answer links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;&quot;What is Meta?&quot; in the Help Center&lt;/a&gt;, which states (emphasis mine): &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Votes on meta do not affect your reputation; your meta reputation is the same as your reputation on Stack Overflow (&lt;strong&gt;synchronized hourly&lt;/strong&gt;), though you earn separate badges. You must have 5 reputation to participate on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same can be seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;here on RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt;, which is why your reputation only gets updated occasionally. Don't worry about it, it's &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-bydesign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-bydesign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-bydesign&lt;/a&gt; that there is always a certain amount of time between your main site getting higher and your meta &quot;rep&quot; being shown as higher. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T07:04:15.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8197" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-30T09:43:54.633" Score="6" ViewCount="335" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7598/merge-resistance-into-damage-resistance&quot;&gt;Merge [resistance] into [damage-resistance]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seem to be three closely related tags on RPG.SE at the moment: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-resistance&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, at the moment, it's not clear what exactly the difference is, or when each tag should be applied. The linked question above has a single response that frankly doesn't explain the difference very clearly or distinguish when either of the two mentioned tags should be used (or what differentiates them from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-resistance&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Systems have a variety of different types of resistance, including magical, arcane and normal weapons and not all of these relate to damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; has tag info:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D mechanic that represents an ability to shrug off or ignore damage of certain types and amounts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Damage Resistance is the D&amp;amp;D mechanic that represents an ability to shrug off or ignore damage of certain types and amounts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It typically represents resilience against mundane attacks or to a specific type of energy. It usually functions as a static reduction of damage taken by the entity. It may be possible to bypass it by some means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides the tag wiki suggesting it's specific to D&amp;amp;D, the description also doesn't seem to match its actual usage in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; seems to be used on all sorts of questions relating to resistances (mainly in 5e, and to a lesser degree in 4e and rarely in other systems), whether it's to types of weapon damage, types of spell damage, or damage from other effects. Apparently 85 questions have the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-resistance&lt;/a&gt; is used much less often; only 9 questions have the tag. All but one of them are for 3.5e or Pathfinder (I'm not very familiar with the systems). This might refer to a unique type of resistance that is separate from what the previous tag covers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; seems the most generically named of the bunch, and is used on 13 questions. 8 of them are for 5e, 3 for Pathfinder, and 2 for AD&amp;amp;D 2e. Given the generic name, I'm not sure this tag covers any unique situation that's not already covered by the previous two. If it does cover a unique situation, it should almost certainly be renamed, because I think the very nonspecific name is causing it to be used in place of a number of different situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a difference between these 3 tags? If so, what is it?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is indeed a difference between each of the 3 tags, the tag info should be edited to clarify that difference. If there is no difference between some of the tags, they should be merged (or synonymized, or whatever the proper terminology is).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T15:16:38.880" Title="What's the difference between the [damage-resistance], [spell-resistance], and [resistance] tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8197" CreationDate="2018-07-30T12:17:31.480" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will split the answer in a brief explanation (that I can see) for each tag and what makes them different. I know you are more familiar with 5e (so is most of our site anyway) so I'll try to exemplify with that when possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Damage Resistance&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the most common kind of resistance. It shows up as either resistance or immunity to some kind of damage. I believe there is no mystery behind it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Spell Resistance&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 3.5e (and probably in PF), Spell Resistance is a thing by itself. It's like an AC against magical attacks (actually it's literally described this way).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could also think of this tag applied broadly for, e.g., creatures with advantage in saving throws against spells in 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this is considerably different from Damage Resistance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Resistance&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, this one is too broad. One question that is not about damage or spells, but broad resistances is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113716/43856&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, though: Legendary Resistance simply saves the creature from a failed Saving Throw, not specifying spell or damage or whatever. Resistances against specific conditions or effects also could fit here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T12:17:31.480" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8166" CreationDate="2018-07-30T12:51:49.753" Score="-3" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The purpose of Role-playing Games Stack Exchange site is to help people who have questions about role-playing games. All else (policy, rules, the XP system) is a servant to that goal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New users are often unaware of site policy. The Internet has an old tradition of old users encouraging newbies and educating them in &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;netiquette&lt;/a&gt;, a term for the politeness and social traditions of an online community. Emphasis mine:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When someone makes a mistake – whether it's a spelling error or a spelling flame, &lt;strong&gt;a stupid question or an unnecessarily long answer&lt;/strong&gt; – be kind about it. If it's a minor error, you may not need to say anything. Even if you feel strongly about it, think twice before reacting. Having good manners yourself doesn't give you license to correct everyone else. &lt;strong&gt;If you do decide to inform someone of a mistake, point it out politely&lt;/strong&gt;, and preferably by private email rather than in public. &lt;strong&gt;Give people the benefit of the doubt; assume they just don't know any better. And never be arrogant or self-righteous about it.&lt;/strong&gt; Just as it's a law of nature that spelling flames always contain spelling errors, notes pointing out Netiquette violations are often examples of poor Netiquette.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My personal policy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't downvote a newbie below zero.&lt;/strong&gt; Most new users are acting in good faith, and merely aren't aware of the site's various rules yet. Downvoting their first question may be perceived as hostile.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't downvote in general without commenting why.&lt;/strong&gt; If the user knew why their answer was bad, they probably wouldn't have made that answer. Something obvious to you might not be obvious to that user.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't vote to close without commenting why.&lt;/strong&gt; The site will come off as arbitrary and unfair to newbies if we cannot help them to understand why their question was rejected.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answer even obvious questions.&lt;/strong&gt; I often see questions downvoted because it's such a newbie question that the player could have found the answer simply by reading the Player's Handbook, or by googling. But the first hit on Google for a question often &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; this site. Further, what's obvious to experts isn't always obvious to every newbie.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T12:51:49.753" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8200" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8197" CreationDate="2018-07-30T15:16:38.880" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder, at least, these are very different concepts&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which, of course, is problematic because it’s just two systems (that are nearly the same system anyway, at least as these are concerned). They have entirely different mechanics and all raise a number of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Damage Resistance&lt;/strong&gt; is only found as “energy resistance” and reduces certain types of energy damage—the phrase “damage resistance” is avoided because of...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Damage Reduction&lt;/strong&gt;, the physical counterpart to energy resistance—but unlike energy resistance, which reduces damage from a certain sort of energy damage, DR reduces all physical damage &lt;em&gt;except&lt;/em&gt; those from certain sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Spell Resistance&lt;/strong&gt; uses different mechanics entirely, forcing a spellcaster to roll a special check against a certain number in order to affect the target at all, rather than being a flat reduction in damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Resistance&lt;/strong&gt; is just a bonus type, most commonly found on &lt;em&gt;cloaks of resistance&lt;/em&gt;. These systems use a “typed bonus” system where you can only use the highest bonus of a given type, rather than add them all together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So energy resistance and damage reduction are somewhat related, but are complete inversions of one another on one key point. Spell resistance, and “resistance” by itself, are completely separate from these two and from each other. Within the scope of these systems, these are absolutely meaningful distinctions that make sense to separate and categorize through tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to actually support that, however, in a tagging system that should be usable by all systems, I don’t know. It may not actually be worth doing, perhaps. But these are the relevant definitions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T15:16:38.880" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8201" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-07-30T17:07:42.917" Score="4" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I recently triggered the 10k threshold and gained access to some moderator tools, but the only thing of real note seems to be the ability to cast Delete votes. Per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;moderator tools&lt;/a&gt; guidance, it just says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Closed questions that are of no lasting value whatsoever should be flagged and deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...as well as some stuff about not deleting when good answers are present.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've a ton of 'help me make a character' kind of questions that are scattered all over, which I think should be removed if just for the sake of minimizing them, but the definition of 'no lasting value,' is very broad such that I'm kind of iffy on deleting anything. I mean, there might be 2 people trying to create a vampire/werewolf hybrid homebrew race that's balanced, but also not terribly likely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assume the answer is going to be personal similar to the nature of voting, but is there a general preference for what should be and should not be deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T18:23:48.203" Title="Is there guidance on when we should vote to delete posts?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2018-07-31T10:03:14.020" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8202" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8201" CreationDate="2018-07-30T18:23:48.203" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has to have no lasting value &lt;strong&gt;whatsoever&lt;/strong&gt;. It must be of no value to anyone, not merely something so obscure that only one or two people would ever be interested in this question or its answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things that I would delete:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spam&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Abusive comments&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Jibberish&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things I would not necessarily delete:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Off-topic questions (if they can be moved to another Stack Exchange where that question would be on-topic)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvoted answers (they may serve as good examples of wrong answers)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would only delete things that &lt;strong&gt;need to be deleted in order to improve the experience of the site's users&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-07-30T18:23:48.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8203" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8204" CreationDate="2018-07-31T12:57:48.133" Score="4" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;The badge description confuses me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ask a well-received question on 100 separate days, and maintain a positive question record&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only part I get is &quot;ask a well-received question&quot;. What I don't understand is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do you &quot;ask a question on 100 days&quot;, what does that mean?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is &quot;a positive question record&quot;, how do you &quot;maintain&quot; it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2018-07-31T23:04:39.073" LastActivityDate="2018-08-01T07:52:26.407" Title="How does one earn the &quot;Socratic&quot; badge?" Tags="|support|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8203" CreationDate="2018-07-31T13:40:00.967" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;You have to ask at least one new question on 100 separate days. The earliest time you can get this badge is therefore after 100 days of participating on the site, where you ask one well-received, not-closed, new question each day. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example: if you ask one today, it counts as one. If you then ask two more questions tomorrow, they count as one for that day and your total will be two. If you then ask ten questions the day after tomorrow, those will, again, only count as one towards your progress and you will have a total of three after these three separate days. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can make at most one count progress per day. Basically, the goal of the badge is to encourage continuous participation over a long time instead of spamming a hundred somewhat acceptable questions on the site to hunt this badge. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be well-received, the question must have a net positive vote count. That means a question with +3/-5 and therefore a total of -2 doesn't count. A question with +0/-0 doesn't count. It needs to be something like +3/-2 resulting in a net +1 or something higher. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also need to show that you are not simply spamming the site every day in hopes of getting a positive question every now and then. That means that if half of your questions are closed and/or deleted, you don't have a &quot;positive question record&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The script that checks your progress runs once daily at the end of the UTC day. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question also only counts if it hasn't been closed at any point on the first day. Even if it gets reopened before the script runs, a one-time-closure makes it a question that belongs to the &quot;closed&quot; category. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8186/why-doesnt-my-curious-badge-count-all-my-well-received-questions/8187#comment26180_8186&quot;&gt;@Laurel points out in &lt;em&gt;Why doesn't my curious badge count all my well received questions?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you ask at least one well-received question in a UTC day and &lt;strong&gt;none of your questions that day are deleted, downvoted, or closed, you get one more day of credit toward the badge&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a real example I looked at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/27377/enkryptor?tab=questions&quot;&gt;OP's profile&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you only ask one question, you can only get one count towards that badge. You need to ask a &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; question on 100 &lt;em&gt;separate&lt;/em&gt; days. According to your profile, your progress is currently at 61/100. That means the earliest date you can possibly get this badge is in 39 days. And that is only if you ask one new well-received (and therefore positively voted), not-closed question each day from today on. Your total question count right now is 76, which means that you might have asked multiple questions on some days before or had some of them closed/downvoted. You therefore need at least 115 questions total to be eligible for the badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The basic problem is that the sentence &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ask a well-received question on 100 separate days, and maintain a positive question record.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;basically means something like &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Ask a new question each day. If, at the end of the day, it has a positive total vote count and was never closed throughout that day it counts as one well-received question.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;If you do this for a total of 100 days, meaning you have asked a total of at least 100 well-received questions, you can get this badge.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;But if more than half of your total questions are negatively voted or closed/deleted, you are not eligible for this badge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's important to note that the above says &quot;closed&quot; in a few instances. A question is disqualified when the question is put on hold as every question is first put on hold and only &quot;closed&quot; after 7 days, which wouldn't make sense in combination with this badge which only looks at the first day. You can see that in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8186/34863&quot;&gt;linked discussion about the &quot;Curious&quot; badge&lt;/a&gt;, which is basically the bronze version of Socratic, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/123387/revisions&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which was put on hold and didn't count for the person that asked the linked question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question that is put on hold, even briefly, is disqualified for that day. And it also disqualifies any other questions you might post that day. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-08-01T07:52:26.407" LastActivityDate="2018-08-01T07:52:26.407" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8205" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8224" CreationDate="2018-08-01T03:15:07.900" Score="12" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;SSD just closed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128617/player-stats-include-additional-attribute&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as off-topic because it's about a video game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is about DNDBBS, which appears to stand for &quot;Dungeons and Dragons Bulletin Board System.&quot;  &lt;a href=&quot;http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/DNDBBS/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This site&lt;/a&gt; describes it as &quot;An attempt to bring Dungeons and Dragons to the BBS Experience.&quot;  That makes it sound more like a setup for doing traditional (non-CRPG) role playing over a computer system, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6173/are-questions-about-roleplaying-within-a-video-game-context-on-topic&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be on topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, DNDBBS appears to be ancient (can only be run &lt;a href=&quot;http://ifdb.tads.org/viewgame?id=vvxrgb7kscv7u6r8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;via DOSBOX these days, according to its creator&lt;/a&gt;), so finding reliable info about it is proving somewhat difficult.  The question makes it sound like its own system, with its own stats and rules, which would be weird if it was just BBS software; that makes it sound more like it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a video game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has anybody actually used this software, or is anybody familiar enough with it to tell us definitively whether DNDBBS is a video game (off-topic) or a system for doing traditional role playing online (on topic)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(SSD, if you already know the answer to this and that's why you closed the question, then apologies in advance for questioning you!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update:&lt;/strong&gt;  A &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/80968/discussion-between-a-s00-and-eoredson&quot;&gt;conversation&lt;/a&gt; with the querent has revealed that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;He's the creator of the software.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's &quot;not a video game, and it IS a multi-node traditional campaign-type game.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not gonna lie, I'm still confused and unsure whether the question is on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2018-08-01T03:55:55.027" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T18:46:09.930" Title="Are we sure DNDBBS is a video game?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8205" CreationDate="2018-08-01T04:22:23.747" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;After some &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/80968/discussion-between-a-s00-and-eoredson&quot;&gt;further conversation&lt;/a&gt; with the querent, it sounds like it's probably sufficiently video game-ish that it's a better fit for Arqade than here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-08-01T04:22:23.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8207" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-01T14:28:17.593" Score="8" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards use their &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Unearthed Arcana blog&lt;/a&gt; to disseminate new 5e material for playtesting before publication. Material published there is either adapted for publishing, revised and reissued for further playtesting, or quietly forgotten.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People occasionally ask questions on the main site related to using UA material in their own games &amp;mdash; there are (at time of writing this) 136 main site questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/unearthed-arcana/info&quot;&gt;tagged as relating to UA&lt;/a&gt;. The UA blog has a wide following and lots of DMs are more lenient about allowing UA content to be used in their own games than they might be about homebrew content from other sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should balance questions about UA be on topic here? And if such questions are on topic, how should they be best approached?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potential pros of UA balance questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The UA content is publicly available and widely read, so unlike most homebrew questions, answerers may have first hand experiences to draw from.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;UA material is provided by an external source, so if flaws are spotted questioners won't be tempted to revise the original question in line with feedback they receive (breaking the Q &amp;amp; A format in the way that homebrew questions sometimes do).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussions about the balance of UA material are quite common online (reddit etc.) but often peaks soon after the material is posted, and before anyone has actually playtested the content, so there is a low signal to noise ratio. The SE voting system might allow for a clearer idea of community consensus on this material &amp;mdash; something which is hard to find elsewhere especially as Wizards don't often seem to comment on the community feedback they receive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potential cons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Because UA material is popular, balance questions could promote low quality answers, answers which add nothing to the discussion or aren't based on genuine play experience. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Policing the questions could become an administrative headache. Especially seeing as there's a lot of UA material, going back years, that people could suddenly begin asking about. Not sure if rules could be established to rule out some of this content &amp;mdash; i.e. If content has been updated and published in some form as an official release it's no longer on topic to ask about UA version? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Much of the UA content is new sub-classes. Evaluating an entire subclass in one question could be unwieldy but also doesn't make much sense splitting down as class features often build on each other, their usefulness contingent upon how they interact with each other.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;With all this in mind, how should these questions be best approached?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a hypothetical 'test case' is useful, feel free to look at the Stone Sorcery sorcerous origin from &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/26_UASorcererUA020617s.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Unearthed Arcana: Sorcerer&lt;/a&gt;. It's an example of a sub-class that was released via the UA blog, to fairly positive reception but hasn't yet been revised or picked up for publication.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potentially relevant discussions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7952/are-is-this-balanced-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are “is this balanced” questions on-topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8171/how-should-i-ask-about-my-dd-5e-homebrew-being-balanced&quot;&gt;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Main site:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127783/how-do-i-evaluate-whether-my-homebrew-race-is-balanced&quot;&gt;How do I evaluate whether my homebrew race is balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="17995" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T09:30:29.420" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T09:30:29.420" Title="How should balance questions about DND 5e UA material be best approached?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8207" CreationDate="2018-08-01T20:04:51.710" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;UA content is fine to ask about, as long as the questions follow our other rules/requirements.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll address your potential cons point by point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because UA material is popular, balance questions could promote low quality answers, answers which add nothing to the discussion or aren't based on genune play experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think UA material is &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; popular for the most part (with limited exceptions), and it certainly isn't more popular than the tons of non-UA content already in the game. We allow balance questions relating to those as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policing the questions could become an administrative headache. Especially seeing as there's a lot of UA material, going back years, that people could suddenly begin asking about. Not sure if rules could be established to rule out some of this content - i.e. If content has been updated and published in some form as an official release it's no longer on topic to ask about UA version?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that this is much ado about nothing. As I believe SevenSidedDie and/or other mods have mentioned before, the rules of RPG.SE should deal with real problems that occur on the stack, not hypothetical situations that &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; become a problem at some point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much of the UA content is new sub-classes. Evaluating an entire subclass in one question could be unwieldy but also doesn't make much sense splitting down as class features often build on each other, their usefulness contingent upon how they interact with each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This issue is already handled by our current rules. Either the question follows the guidelines (it's clear, not too broad, not totally opinion-based, not a duplicate) and it's fine - or it doesn't follow the guidelines, and will be closed/put on hold until it can be edited into a form that follows the guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't really need special rules to deal with UA content; I don't see any unique problems such questions are causing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-01T20:04:51.710" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8209" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8210" CreationDate="2018-08-02T06:53:10.283" Score="6" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Low Quality Posts&quot; review queue presents me with four options for each post.  The guidance it provides on which one to pick is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Looks OK&lt;/strong&gt; if nothing is wrong with this answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit&lt;/strong&gt; if you can fix all the problems with this answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recommend Deletion&lt;/strong&gt; to recommend that this answer be deleted&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Skip&lt;/strong&gt; if you are not sure and want to go to the next item&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My impression based on questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8201/is-there-guidance-on-when-we-should-vote-to-delete-posts&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; is that the threshold for when to delete a post is pretty high; involving phrases like &quot;no lasting value whatsoever.&quot;  It's also telling that all of the built-in comments when you click the &lt;strong&gt;Recommend Deletion&lt;/strong&gt; button are variants on not-an-answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time, the posts I see in this queue are bad, but not obviously so bad that they meet the stringent criteria for being expunged from the site; they're more the kind of thing that I would toss a downvote on, maybe a &quot;this answer could be improved by...&quot; comment if there isn't one there already, and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I'm not sure what that means in terms of the review queue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Looks OK&lt;/strong&gt; if nothing is wrong with this answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not this one; there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something wrong with the answer, namely it's bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit&lt;/strong&gt; if you can fix all the problems with this answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Great option if I can fix all the problems, but frequently I can't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recommend Deletion&lt;/strong&gt; to recommend that this answer be deleted&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think I'm only supposed to click this if it's egregiously terrible or not-an-answer, not if it's merely bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Skip&lt;/strong&gt; if you are not sure and want to go to the next item&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what I usually end up clicking, but doesn't this just kick the can down the road for the next reviewer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-08-02T10:06:47.107" Title="Which option should I choose for bad but not-obviously-deletion-worthy posts in the Low Quality Posts review queue?" Tags="|support|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8209" CreationDate="2018-08-02T10:06:47.107" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;“Looks OK” is appropriate here. If in doubt, feel free to Skip and save your energy for posts you can more comfortably figure out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the wording, “Looks OK” is also fine for posts that might get downvoted or need additional info added by the author. It's OK as in this post isn't nonsense or spam or whatever, and that it can actually viably survive on the site and doesn't need to be deleted. It might not be 100% OK, but that's fine, you're not vouching that it's awesome, just that it is OK &lt;em&gt;enough.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-02T10:06:47.107" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8211" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8212" CreationDate="2018-08-02T21:25:06.783" Score="12" ViewCount="191" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128814/how-to-handle-a-potental-conflict-caused-by-2-allied-gods-supreme-priests-wanti&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; just got asked, then closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I saw it in the Close Votes review queue, took a look, and saw that it was indeed close-worthy (on the merits of the question, not the querent), so I slapped on a VTC.  Then I took a look at the querent's profile, and saw that they were an unregistered user without the Informed badge, so I gave them a pretty bog-standard &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128814/how-to-handle-a-potental-conflict-caused-by-2-allied-gods-supreme-priests-wanti#comment319635_128814&quot;&gt;&quot;Welcome to the site, take the tour, this question could be improved by...&quot;&lt;/a&gt; comment, on the assumption that they were a newbie who had asked a bad-but-in-good-faith question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128814/how-to-handle-a-potental-conflict-caused-by-2-allied-gods-supreme-priests-wanti#comment319636_128814&quot;&gt;Turns out&lt;/a&gt;, they're actually a known suspended user trying to dodge a ban by posting under a new account.  SSD, who knows this, asks the rest of us to take action:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Everyone else: please flag James if he shows up so we can respond in a timely manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way for non-moderators to know to do this, &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; than happening to stumble across moderator actions as they're happening?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, I personally will now know to flag new accounts that have the username &quot;James Marshall,&quot; but unless I'm missing something:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nobody who doesn't happen to see SSD's comment on this one closed question will know to do so.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If James comes back and picks a different username, I won't know to do so.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I didn't know to do so on this question, because I wasn't aware of James' past suspension.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything we can do to improve this situation, or is this just one of those things that has to be left to the diamond mods in their exception-handling capacity?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-08-02T22:44:13.553" Title="Is there a way for non-mods to spot &quot;new&quot; accounts that are actually suspended users trying to dodge a ban?" Tags="|discussion|account-suspension|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8211" CreationDate="2018-08-02T22:38:33.963" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn’t, for both better and worse. Mods have some ways to investigate whether two accounts are controlled by the same person, and Community Managers have more, but for good reasons none of the sensitive data involved is available to the community at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, that does make it hard to notice some of the rare bad actors abusing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8176/what-are-unregistered-members-and-why-they-are-allowed-to-post&quot;&gt;our easy account creation&lt;/a&gt;. (On the plus side, that keeps all your account info safe.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;James Marshall is a bit of a special case though. He’s easy to spot for anyone who knows his history because he always uses the same username. He’s been doing it for years, apparently oblivious to our rules and anything said to him, including suspensions. We’ve moved on to technical instead of social means to limit the damage he does to the site, but in the meantime flags on that username (just flag a post since users can’t be directly flagged) are nice since they’ll help us a spot him just that little bit faster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No worries if he doesn’t get flagged though—some people, their behaviour makes it impossible to escape moderator notice for long. And no worries about flagging an account that’s actually innocent—we have ways to be sure before we do anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mostly, the community doesn’t have to worry about finding people using multiple accounts. That’s diamond-level worries. In this case I figure that, since he’s persistent and clueless, I could save a few more people a bit of wasted effort to help his hopeless posts improve, by making that comment. But it’s not usually necessary to recruit the community to spot this sort of thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, do send us a flag if someone is behaving in a concerning way or seem to be a secondary account of someone’s, but don’t worry too much about it otherwise. More important is that we as a community focus on spotting and addressing &lt;em&gt;poor behaviour&lt;/em&gt; rather than focusing on the users themselves. If someone can behave perfectly and not break any rules while running multiple accounts, that’s almost fine by us. By all means, we encourage disruptive users and trolls &lt;a href=&quot;https://xkcd.com/810/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;to be &lt;em&gt;so stealthy&lt;/em&gt; that they cause no disruption at all&lt;/a&gt;. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-02T22:44:13.553" LastActivityDate="2018-08-02T22:44:13.553" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8213" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-03T00:58:06.643" Score="2" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are badges that require a &quot;positive question record&quot;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/234259/asking-days-badges&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; gives the following way of calculating whether you have such a record.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;(total questions - negative questions - closed - deleted)/total questions &amp;gt;= 0.5&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm having trouble reconciling this, however, as I can't actually find records for my deleted questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Total questions:&lt;/strong&gt; I'm guessing this includes not just the total of the questions listed on your profile, but also deleted ones. In my case, at the time this was written my RPG account has 7 questions on record, but I know there was a question that was deleted in the past. However; &lt;em&gt;I can't see this anywhere&lt;/em&gt;. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;There is a link to click for &quot;deleted recent questions&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; but this only contains questions less than 60 days old, and apparently this question is older than that. If the fact that I can't find it means it doesn't count, &lt;strong&gt;this value is 7&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Negative questions:&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not exactly sure what makes a question negative, but my best guess is it's &quot;A question that has more down votes than up votes against it.&quot; By this definition I have one negative question on record now. While the deleted question was almost certainly negative, if I can't find it I can't verify/count &lt;strong&gt;which leaves only a value of 1&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Closed questions:&lt;/strong&gt; Again, because the deleted question was (I'm pretty sure) closed first, it may count, but I can't find it &lt;strong&gt;so this should be 2&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Deleted questions:&lt;/strong&gt; The whole point of this question - I can't find it to count it, or even verify that there are no further deleted questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From memory I believe the question that was deleted was negative and was first closed, so my calculation should be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;(7-1-1-0)/7=0.714 without the deleted question and&#xA;(8-2-2-1)/8=0.375 with the deleted question accounted for.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I still don't qualify, so the second one is right. &lt;strong&gt;If this is how it's calculated, shouldn't I be able to access/verify records of deleted questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="43956" LastEditDate="2018-08-03T03:54:00.107" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T09:04:22.540" Title="How can I find my deleted questions?" Tags="|support|questions|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8213" CreationDate="2018-08-03T01:17:03.573" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can see deleted questions in my profile, I guess it may be a rep thing.  Anyway, your one deleted question on main is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123382/is-there-a-tabletop-system-with-space-combat-integrated-or-will-we-need-to-home&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123382/is-there-a-tabletop-system-with-space-combat-integrated-or-will-we-need-to-home&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T01:17:03.573" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8215" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8213" CreationDate="2018-08-03T01:24:22.687" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can access mine by:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Going to my profile&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clicking on the &quot;Activity&quot; tab&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Selecting &quot;Questions&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Scrolling down to the bottom&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Clicking the link in the bottom-left that says &quot;Deleted Recent Questions,&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KDTgW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;like so&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For you, this should lead to:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/recently-deleted-questions/43956&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/recently-deleted-questions/43956&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not sure whether this is rep-locked, as mxy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8214/30299&quot;&gt;speculates&lt;/a&gt;, nor am I sure what exactly constitutes &quot;recent&quot; (do sufficiently old deleted questions not appear here?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2018-08-03T01:29:47.190" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T01:29:47.190" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8213" CreationDate="2018-08-03T01:50:07.400" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the other 2 answers have already mentioned you can find your most recently deleted questions by going to your profile's &quot;activity&quot; tab, selecting &quot;questions&quot;, scrolling to the bottom and clicking the link that says &quot;deleted recent questions&quot;. This, however, only works for questions deleted in the past 60 days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; other way to view your own deleted question but it requires at least &lt;strong&gt;10k&lt;/strong&gt; rep. As discussed on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/145060&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; Meta Stack question you can input &lt;code&gt;deleted:1&lt;/code&gt; into the search bar and it will show you your deleted content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-03T09:04:22.540" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T09:04:22.540" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8217" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-03T02:23:44.513" Score="7" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently wanted to ask a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128350/when-dwarves-fly-is-this-possible-in-a-published-rules-based-system&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; to see if something was possible RAW in any published RPG systems. It was eventually put on hold as Off Topic - Game Recommendation, and I proceeded to try to edit it into a stackable format. What I ended up with could be distilled to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any X that are Y?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, this format only wants a confirmation (yes/no), though it would be implicit (and in my case explicit) that an example would qualify such an answer, in much the same way as someone's experience might qualify a homebrewing answer as &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;good subjective&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some effort there and some research here (including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8191/how-can-i-ask-this-question-in-a-stackable-format&quot;&gt;asking how I might fix it&lt;/a&gt;) I found out lots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are discussions on what exactly should be disallowed as &lt;em&gt;shopping&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;game recommendation&lt;/em&gt; all over this meta, including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5994/our-shopping-recommendation-off-topic-close-reason-is-too-generic&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7413/what-actually-is-a-shopping-question&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6284/our-on-topic-page-still-implies-game-recs-are-on-topic&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. That last one actually points to the line in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;help center asking guide&lt;/a&gt; that says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're looking for a game mechanic or technique that does thing X, ask for how to do X, not for &amp;quot;games that have X&amp;quot;. Asking for a game, or a list of games, is a game recommendation question, which are off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is starting to get close, but still is focused on a &lt;em&gt;specific system&lt;/em&gt; (or list of them, which is also a list question) as the answer, rather than a simple confirmation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;This discussion&lt;/a&gt; was frequently referenced to me, but all I could find was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In many cases, however, instead of asking a shopping question (which game system/online tabletop/psionic subsystem/etc &amp;quot;is best&amp;quot;), you can ask a more focused question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which would seem to suggest my question was fine, as it was &lt;em&gt;pretty clearly&lt;/em&gt; a more focused question. There are actually whole heaps of other similar questions that haven't been closed, and similar meta questions where others have been similarly confused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What should be considered off topic, and why?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was in the comments to my meta question that I discovered what was actually going on - KRyan told me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in my experience, here’s how this would go: you ask if there are any systems that do this, and you’re very specific and exact about what you want. And it turns out that no system does it, or at least no system anyone knows. But people don’t just leave it unanswered (which they should). No, they start supplying “the best answer they can think of.” Which is their own personal opinion of the game system that’d be most amenable to such a thing. Nevermind that you required it be explicitly in the rules-as-written, they’ll give you something that doesn’t do that. At that point, we have a problem: people are submitting whatever answer they like, the actual question’s requirements be damned, and they’re getting voted on. Some of them are being rated quite positively, in fact—because people like the idea or like the system or whatever else, not because they’re good answers. And then the mods have to come in and clean up, and delete popular answers, and there is much gnashing of teeth—and you still don’t have an answer. That’s what keeps happening with these kinds of questions, and why we close them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it would seem that this is another situation like that lamented in the comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendations On Topic Revisited&lt;/a&gt;: &amp;quot;so 'this is why we can't have nice things' is now recorded for posterity&amp;quot; which is understandable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if this is going to be the case, &lt;strong&gt;can we make it clear somewhere official (perhaps in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;asking guide&lt;/a&gt;) that &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Are there any X that are Y?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; or even &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Are there any Systems that are Y?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; is also Off Topic&lt;/strong&gt; as it shares some of the difficulties regarding (unfortunately) likely answers that don't actually answer the question and lower the quality of this site's content?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-05T12:35:37.613" Title="Can we clarify Game Recommendation/Shopping questions further?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8218" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8220" CreationDate="2018-08-03T12:50:29.443" Score="12" ViewCount="272" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128856/is-it-possible-to-use-a-weapon-as-a-normal-weapon-and-an-arcane-focus-at-the-sam/128861#128861&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, the quote provided from Roll20 incorrectly capitalizes the &quot;a&quot; in attack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, should we:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fix the quote so it's correct but leave the citation link&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fix the quote so it's correct and link or cite a source that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; correct&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave it alone and let downvotes sort out the inaccuracy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-08-03T19:51:30.257" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T12:28:38.673" Title="How to handle incorrect quotations from 3rd party sources" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8218" CreationDate="2018-08-03T13:12:45.523" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;As it is a quote it should be preserved the way the original is - everything else is simply wrong from an ethical standpoint by saying &quot;Some other person said this&quot; when in fact you know they didn't. That the source is wrong is a different problem, but when you want to use this source or the author of the answer wants to use it, the quote should be preserved the way it is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual thing to do in academic papers that need citations is to point out that something is different from the original or that something in the original is wrong and you realized it, but still want to quote it because it's still relevant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could for example add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;[sic]&lt;/a&gt; after a typo to show that the typo was in the original text, that you have seen it and that you are aware that, according to current rules, this should be changed. For this specific example adding a &lt;strong&gt;[sic]&lt;/strong&gt; and then explaining in the normal text after the quote why you added this little bit and what the difficulties with roll20 are would be perfect to show the reader what the problem is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another way would be to write something like &lt;strong&gt;[a]ttack&lt;/strong&gt; and then mention why you changed the capitalization. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, to be very explicit, you could add something like: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Attack [this should be lowercase attack - see [this meta discussion](link/to/this/discussion) for more].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might also be a good idea to add a comment, poiting out the problems and the correct capitalization that is used in books/ official sources. Maybe even poiting to a better source they can use for their claim. The OP can then decide whether to use the source you provided or the one they originally used. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-08-03T17:46:15.743" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T17:46:15.743" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8218" CreationDate="2018-08-03T13:12:55.073" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you're quoting something, it's important to quote it accurately—don't misrepresent the source as saying something it doesn't. However, we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; add revision, or indicate that there is an inaccuracy in the quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's work with an example here:&lt;/strong&gt; A well-known RPG has a line that says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You must foo the sprocket.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A theoretical third party source called &lt;em&gt;Roll6&lt;/em&gt; accidentally wrote “bar” instead of “foo” (oops!):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You must bar the sprocket.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What not to do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't revise the quote and present it like that's the original text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You must foo the sprocket. — &lt;em&gt;Roll6 SRD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're misrepresenting the source. This is generally considered unethical from an editorial point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Good ways to resolve an error in a quoted source&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notify the source they have an error! If you can edit it (like with Wikipedia), double-check your official sources then edit the third-party source to represent the official sources correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for citing an incorrect third-party source:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Find a different, more accurate source which does not have the error, such as the official source. Cite and quote that instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You must foo the sprocket. — &lt;em&gt;Example RPG core rules, page 7&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Indicate the error with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/sic-meaning-usage-editorial-citation&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;(sic)&lt;/em&gt; marker&lt;/a&gt;, in which case you may write in your post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;You must bar &lt;em&gt;(sic)&lt;/em&gt; the sprocket. — &lt;em&gt;Roll6 SRD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Note: Roll6 incorrectly says we bar the sprocket, but should be saying we foo it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Indicate your correction &lt;a href=&quot;https://depts.washington.edu/engl/askbetty/changing_quotations.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;by using square brackets&lt;/a&gt;, and note the correction you made:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;You must [foo] the sprocket. — &lt;em&gt;Roll6 SRD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(Note the original sources says to foo, which I'm correcting here. Roll6 has an error in its transcription.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Square brackets aren't exclusively a tool for correction, but they're there for when we're adding or changing words to make it clear that is &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; change and not in the original quote.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I prefer approach #1 since it avoids all the extra effort involved in #2 or #3, but if that's not possible then #2 or #3 are about equal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-13T12:28:38.673" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T12:28:38.673" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8221" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8222" CreationDate="2018-08-03T15:38:52.580" Score="2" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based off of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8218/how-to-handle-incorrect-3rd-party-sources&quot;&gt;this meta question&lt;/a&gt;, I think we should address how to handle source citations that are known to be incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If Roll20 (or other 3rd party sources) are known to have errors, should we allow linking? Is it up to the user of that source to make sure it's correct or is it up to the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we/should we limit sources based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-01T05:13:31.087" LastActivityDate="2019-11-01T05:13:31.087" Title="How should we handle potentially untrustworthy sources?" Tags="|discussion|citations|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8222" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8221" CreationDate="2018-08-03T15:41:51.823" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Answers: Downvotes and constructive comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sources are the responsibility of the cite-writer, not the responsibility of policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way to handle this then is business as usual: downvote answers that have errors, and optionally help them correct such errors with constructive comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Questions: Solve the problem in answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Business as usual here too. (We run into this a lot already with DandDwiki homebrew mistaken for official material.) As usual, we solve someone’s problems with a comprehensive answer, including “part of your problem is that you read a misleading/incorrect page on the Tubernets” when necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Making a policy against bad sources would be ineffective&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New policies don’t tend to make people do things. Outlawing a kind of link (or requiring rules to use it “right”) would be largely ignored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But downvoting? &lt;em&gt;That&lt;/em&gt; gets people’s attention. For example, the main motivator for our decreasing number of links to 5e.d20srd.org is downvotes with comments pointing out that it’s full of errors. We didn’t need to make a policy, just needed to penalise answers that were wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People in general don’t follow rules. People speed, cheat on their taxes, and break SE rules all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE is set up to handle that by instead making it painful to write bad answers (to discourage it, and encourage fixes) and by demoting or disappearing bad content (to handle the remainder that’s neither discouraged nor fixed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T18:03:09.247" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8224" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8205" CreationDate="2018-08-03T18:46:09.930" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, regardless of what kind of a game &quot;DNDBBS&quot; really is, I feel that the OP's actual question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If there is stats for Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Dexterity, Constitution, Piety, should there be one for Charisma? Is this standard DND?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;would probably a better fit for RPG.SE than for either Arqade or GameDev.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, as currently asked, the question also seems to be either way too broad and subjective and/or missing some essential context that would be needed to make it a valid and answerable question here (or anywhere else on SE).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, the OP has not said whether their &quot;DNDBBS&quot; game tries to follow the rules of some specific tabletop D&amp;amp;D edition, or whether it's just drawing inspiration from D&amp;amp;D but not always using the exact same rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the former case, this would essentially be a valid (if rather basic) rules question about classic D&amp;amp;D, and IMO technically on-topic here, with the whole DNDBBS thing being little more than a red herring.  In the latter case, the only real answer we could give (at least without a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; more details about what the OP wants to achieve with their game) would be &quot;it's your game, do whatever you want&quot;, which would pretty much make the question too broad and/or subjective for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; SE site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I agree that the question in its current form is not a good fit for this site, and should remain closed.  &lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; it's edited by the OP to turn it into an on-topic RPG question (e.g. about the stats used in early D&amp;amp;D editions, or something), then it &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; qualify for reopening.  But until and unless that actually happens, there's not much point in speculating about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastActivityDate="2018-08-03T18:46:09.930" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8225" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8226" CreationDate="2018-08-04T16:24:15.427" Score="20" ViewCount="229" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have various folks who ask D&amp;amp;D lore questions, and they get forced to pick a setting in the same way we force people to choose a rules edition, or have their question closed.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128959/in-the-history-of-the-forgotten-realms-has-a-nightmare-ever-been-cleansed-of-ev&quot;&gt;In the history of the Forgotten Realms, has a Nightmare ever been cleansed of evil?&lt;/a&gt; is a recent example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a certain point of view, this makes sense - settings are different, right, halflings only strap you to the feast-stone in Dark Sun (unless you really deserve it otherwise I guess), so doesn't that stand to reason?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, here's the problem. D&amp;amp;D itself - across its editions - has NOT been clear about maintaining that division. Even the &quot;core&quot; races, religions, etc. in the Player's Handbook form a sociology and mythology that some settings trump but do not require a setting to define.  The majority of older Dungeon Magazine articles about the ecology of this or society of that, for example, were not labeled for a specific setting like the Realms or Greyhawk, but were just &quot;generic&quot; setting content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This had been bothering me for a while, but I came to this realization after listening to a recent Plot Points podcast that discussed this commonality and being led from there to the new Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes where they explicitly talk about items in the &quot;D&amp;amp;D Mythology,&quot; a continuing mashup of things from various worlds (or that were generic in the first place, like the demons and devils).  Drow being the children of Lolth etc. - while there are settings that override that, it's not a &quot;Greyhawk&quot; or &quot;Realms&quot; or whatever thing, it's a &quot;common across many D&amp;amp;D settings thing.&quot; The Dragon Mag &quot;Wizards Three&quot; articles with their Wizards Three (representing Greyhawk, the Realms, and Dragonlance) gave an imprimatur to this whole multiverse mash-up effectively utilized by, I would dare say, the majority of D&amp;amp;D groups over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So just like we can ask GM techniques questions not specific to a specific edition of a specific game, or use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;, because while games differ there's lots common to all trad games, for example, do we need to &lt;em&gt;command&lt;/em&gt; questioners to specify a setting at the risk of question closure?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are using a specific setting, then obviously they should mention that.  But that's not how many people play D&amp;amp;D.  D&amp;amp;D is often played as a partially made up mashup of whatever books and adventures and ideas people have at hand. Is it really in anyone's best interest for them to be forced into &quot;uh... in the Forgotten Realms I guess?&quot;  Does that solve their problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given this, how should we provide guidance on D&amp;amp;D lore questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-08-02T13:55:02.027" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T20:20:18.873" Title="Do D&amp;D Lore Questions Need To Specify A Setting?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8225" CreationDate="2018-08-04T16:48:21.527" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not always.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are different kinds of lore questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;One kind is looking for information about an actual setting ...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... whether the asker knows it or not. In this case, if they know the setting they should tag it, but if not knowing that is part of their problem then it should go in the answer.  For example, someone asking &quot;I was reading about the Wizards Three, I know Mordenkainen and Elminster but who the heck is Dalamar?&quot; It would be Orwellian to require them to tag the question 'dragonlance' if that's part of what they don't know in the first place.  Same thing with differences between the various editions/ages/reboots of campaign worlds - &lt;em&gt;just answer the darn question and note the change&lt;/em&gt;.  It's fine to elicit more details from them in comments, just don't make it a &quot;demand to not be closed&quot; or couch it in &quot;you must be new here and not know how this non-forum works.&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Example: someone asking &quot;I wanted information on playing a cleric&#xA;of the god Bane in 3.5e.&quot; &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's fine to ask them &quot;So are you playing&#xA;in old FR pre-Time of Troubles?  Because Bane got killed back then.&quot;&#xA;But it's an equally valid answer for them to say &quot;eh whatever canon&#xA;is lame we're mixing and matching what we want,&quot; in which case &lt;em&gt;just&#xA;answer them&lt;/em&gt;.  3.5e Bane cleric ports? Good Bane lore information&#xA;that should be portable?  Stop tormenting the OP for not being a&#xA;Canon Setting Drone and post it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128408/location-of-the-cloak-of-stars-brothel-in-silverymoon&quot;&gt;Location of The Cloak of Stars brothel in Silverymoon&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maybe the OP doesn't post it as forgotten-realms because they don't know (believe it or not, many players are kinda hazy about their DM's setting).  Feel free and add the tag if it's the right thing to do.  Though in this case the question ends up being a non-canonical addition anyway.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A second popular kind is asking &quot;has thing X ever happened?&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These could indeed be too broad if you're asking &quot;Was there ever an owlbear with black feathers in any published D&amp;amp;D product ever?&quot;   I tend to not like these questions because the real question is &quot;I am not confident in creating new content and ideas myself and feel enslaved to whether there is precedent.&quot;  The question that got me started on this meta (about redeeming Nightmares) is like that; I refrain from answering them because the answer I'd give is &quot;who cares, do it if it's interesting for your game.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But does making them specify a setting really make it better?  Is &quot;black owlbear in all 3,000 Forgotten Realms products&quot; less broad than &quot;black owlbear in all 10,000 total D&amp;amp;D products&quot;?  Not really. If a lore question is a fishing expedition it's &quot;too broad&quot; regardless of whittling down the scope. But this isn't a problem with &quot;you didn't say a setting&quot; that specifying a setting fixes, this is a question too broad by its nature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The third popular kind is asking about more general pseudo-historical things&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions in this class are like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128529/where-do-gorgons-come-from-according-to-dd-lore&quot;&gt;Where do Gorgons come from, according to D&amp;amp;D lore?&lt;/a&gt;  This one was correctly left open even without a setting specified, but over the body of deleted comments and close votes over the issue. (One of the goals of this meta is to make it clearer when that needs to happen).   The lead answer cites the kind of &quot;D&amp;amp;D Mythology&quot; articles I mention in the question, Dragon Ecologies articles, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;There are some questions that definitely need to be more specific&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because the particulars &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; vary.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/127332/what-is-under-the-underdark&quot;&gt;What is under the Underdark?&lt;/a&gt; is a good example; while there's a lot common about the Underdark in &quot;D&amp;amp;D Mythology&quot;, what is &quot;under it&quot; is definitely something more setting specific. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What's &lt;em&gt;actionable&lt;/em&gt; about this answer?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before forcing a poster to specify a setting and/or age, consider first whether you are helping them and the site in that case by forcing it. &lt;strong&gt;If you do not have enough knowledge about that thing and/or setting to tell, then leave off for those who do.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-08-02T20:20:18.873" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T20:20:18.873" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8227" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8228" CreationDate="2018-08-05T06:10:49.917" Score="2" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got my second Yearling badge a few weeks ago. I've learned a lot about RPGs during my time here, I've also learned a lot about the StackExchange culture, which took a good bit of time to get a grasp of. My English is still pretty bad, but it has also improved significantly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the help, guys! I wouldn't be able to get better without your help, your advice on how to do stuff, your reminders about the rules, etc. RPG.SE has the most friendly culture I have seen. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I believe that it's now the time for me to go through my old questions and answers and edit/remove them if needed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is, while I can sort them by the date they were posted, I cannot distinguish those that were edited recently from those that stayed the way they are since the beginning. Eventually, I will probably go through all of my posts, but I am not 100% positive about that, and I want to focus on the oldest posts for now, the ones written in 2016 and not edited since then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So, how can I sort my posts, including both questions and answers, by the day they were last touched by me?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="34863" LastEditDate="2018-08-05T06:33:22.807" LastActivityDate="2018-08-05T06:33:22.807" Title="How can I sort my posts by &quot;Last Time Edited&quot;?" Tags="|support|questions|answers|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8227" CreationDate="2018-08-05T06:30:29.517" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can use the search bar with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=active&amp;amp;q=user%3a30214&quot;&gt;user:30214&lt;/a&gt; to find all posts from you. You can easily find this search entry by clicking on your profile - it automatically fills the search bar in the upper part of the site. After that you click on &quot;active&quot; in the row that shows on the left side the number of posts found (161 for you) and on the left the different sorting categories &quot;relevance&quot;, &quot;newest&quot;, &quot;votes&quot; and &quot;active&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;active&quot; will give you a list of most recently edited posts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will not necessarily give you posts touched by &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; though because the system doesn't care about &lt;em&gt;who&lt;/em&gt; edited the post. This means that edits from other people will make a post appear further ahead in the results. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing though (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, I believe that it's now the time for me to go through my old questions and answers and edit/&lt;strong&gt;remove them if needed&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not sure why you would want to remove your posts. Your old questions and answers may very well help people in the future that have a question you answered or that have the same question as you, so there wouldn't be a need to remove them.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34863" LastActivityDate="2018-08-05T06:30:29.517" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8217" CreationDate="2018-08-05T12:35:37.613" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've added the following summary to the top of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/1204&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This means the following kinds of questions are off topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I want to play (details) kind of game/story. What game should I use to do that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Which game does (thing) the best?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Are there any games that let me do (thing) / have this specific mechanic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This list is not exhaustive. If your question will boil down to “here are some criteria” and answers will boil down to “here is a game / some games”, then it is a game recommendation and off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That kind of summary was probably long overdue. The post looks like it is mostly written for people who already understand what's going on, but leaves it hard for someone who only joined in the past 1–2 years to understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5903/1204&quot;&gt;Can we ask about the existence of a game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-05T12:35:37.613" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8230" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9451" CreationDate="2018-08-06T06:36:37.167" Score="19" ViewCount="356" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've browsed through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; questions and found these ones:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about issues with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; aspects of role-playing games or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about a random TRPG problem, in which players are involved somehow&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are more descriptive tags for types 1-3 questions, and type 4 is basically the majority of questions on RPG.SE. Do we really need the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2019-09-20T18:07:14.480" LastActivityDate="2019-09-20T18:12:09.363" Title="Burninate [players]. The tag, I mean" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8230" CreationDate="2018-08-06T22:21:12.913" Score="23" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We don't need it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will agree with what was stated in the answers of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2789/43856&quot;&gt;Worth of &amp;quot;GM&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;players&amp;quot; tags question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My opinion on tags is simple: if I go into the tag query, I should know what I will be looking at. IMO tags are mostly used for filtering and searching. If I have a metagaming problem and I want to check if it was already asked, I will search the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metagaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metagaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metagaming&lt;/a&gt; tag. If I feel I have decent lawyering skills, I will put the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; in my favorites and look for answering these. Point being: the tags I personally consider useful are tags that describe what the question is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag doesn't. As you said, if I look through this tag, I don't know if I'm looking at &amp;quot;I am a player&amp;quot; questions (which doesn't actually need a tag, imo), &amp;quot;I have a problem with a player&amp;quot; questions (which can be either my problem with him being as a &lt;em&gt;player&lt;/em&gt; or as a &lt;em&gt;person&lt;/em&gt;, so either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; or something &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; as you said) or even simply &amp;quot;There are players involved&amp;quot; (which any question about an actual table will have, supposedly). Point being: &lt;strong&gt;I don't have a clue what I would be looking at if I went through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/strong&gt; (tbh I didn't even know it existed until now). Many of the questions are actually &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; questions, and I wouldn't expect that in a tag called &amp;quot;players&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay but how do we know that's not just you being dumb?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, I searched through the tag. I &lt;strong&gt;still&lt;/strong&gt; don't know what the tag is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125736/how-can-i-interest-a-player-in-playing-online&quot;&gt;How can I interest a player in playing online?&lt;/a&gt; - this is simply &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; and possibly a system (in this case, tagged as agnostic, but I do think the system makes a difference here.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119850/how-can-i-as-a-player-help-a-struggling-gm-at-a-one-time-game&quot;&gt;How can I, as a player, help a struggling GM at a one-time game?&lt;/a&gt; - this is a question that I can't think of a good describing tag, but it's also not a question I would&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125289/keeping-the-world-alive-whilst-pcs-take-a-rest-mid-adventure&quot;&gt;Keeping the world alive whilst PCs take a rest mid-adventure?&lt;/a&gt; - the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; tag doesn't tell me anything (actually it's more like a gm-techniques than anything actually related to players), the LMoP, dnd-5e and rests do. They are enough. I actually took the liberty to edit out the players tag and add the gm-techniques. :P&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124571/how-to-extract-yuan-ti-poison&quot;&gt;How to extract yuan-ti poison?&lt;/a&gt; - &amp;quot;There is a player involved and he wants to try something, are there rules for it?&amp;quot;, really, we don't need a tag for the &amp;quot;there is a player involved and he wants to try something&amp;quot; part. The tags just need to tell what is &amp;quot;it&amp;quot; (monsters, poison) and where should we look for these rules (i.e. the system, dnd-5e), imo.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28019/43856&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player missing the first session of a campaign&lt;/a&gt; - this is the &lt;strong&gt;only&lt;/strong&gt; case where &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; was the only tag in the question. We have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; for it, though, which actually describes something (that we are dealing with a problem related to players missing one or more sections). Reason I am saying &amp;quot;was&amp;quot; the only tag - I edited it :P&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to paste and justify all the questions, but I have at least read the title of most of the 123 questions and I didn't see a case where the tag was useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T22:24:14.180" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8232" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-06T22:34:29.160" Score="10" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;While answering another question here in meta, I noticed we actually have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; tag. It had few questions tagged as it, though (and one tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/missing-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;missing-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;missing-players&lt;/a&gt;, which should be a synonym imo, but I don't have score in any of them to suggest it). It draws attention that we have a good number of &quot;What to do when a player can't come to a session&quot; but most of them are not tagged with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; tag. Is this because the tag is redundant or not useful at all or what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T07:45:10.197" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T12:25:22.297" Title="Is [absent-players] a useful tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8232" CreationDate="2018-08-06T22:34:29.160" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, the tag is useful.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, it describes the problem very well. It's clear what we are looking at when we see this tag - we are looking at a problem about one or more players missing one or more sessions, and probably what to do due to this absence. This is as descriptive as, for example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt;, IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even contrary to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powergaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powergaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;powergaming&lt;/a&gt;, I don't think this tag is a specific subset of the [problem-players] tag. I went on and edited some questions adding the tag that I think are representative to my point here: the problems are closely (or exclusively) related to a player missing. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124568/43856&quot;&gt;How can I quickly adjust encounters for variable party sizes?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1273/43856&quot;&gt;How do you deal with missing players?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28019/43856&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player missing the first session of a campaign&lt;/a&gt;. Note that, as with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/28019/43856&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player missing the first session of a campaign&lt;/a&gt;, for example, there isn't a problem-players problem, people just can't show up every session, it happens, and it's useful for us to know how to (better) handle it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;Yes, I think the tag is useful. I don't think we should be rallying to edit the tag into old questions, but if we come across one that is about players missing sessions, the consequences to it and how to handle it, we should add the tag to the question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T12:25:22.297" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8234" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8235" CreationDate="2018-08-07T11:41:15.317" Score="7" ViewCount="239" Body="&lt;p&gt;About an hour ago, I asked a question on rpg.stackexchange. As many times before, my question was edited by another user. I am always thankful when someone goes to the bother of cleaning up my messy questions. But I noticed one thing in particular, that always gets edited, not only in my questions, but in other questions as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My quotation marks and apostrophes that look like this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;” ’&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;, get replaced with quotation marks and apostrophes that look like this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot; '&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a font expert, so I don't know if one set of punctuation marks is better than the other one or if there is some other reason, why the straight quotation marks and apostrophes are preferred over the curvy ones. I usually write my questions in Microsoft Word, then copy them over here and edit them a little. English is not my native language, so I use Word to check my spelling. That seems to be the reason why my questions contain the curvy ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why are curvy quotation marks and apostrophes undesired on stackexchange?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40660" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T13:25:41.297" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T20:41:42.620" Title="What's wrong with my quotation marks and apostrophes?" Tags="|discussion|editing|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8235" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8234" CreationDate="2018-08-07T12:06:41.730" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are not undesired. Please do feel free to use curly quotes and apostrophes. Those curly quotes and apostrophes should not have been removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall we respect your writing decisions as the original author, and should not seek to “fix” someone else's writing preferences by replacing them with our own. We may choose to replace your writing style where it increases the post's legibility or readability, but since curly quotes stand to &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; legibility we don't have that reason to remove them either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More broadly we don't have a sitewide preference either way. Use &quot;straight&quot; or “curly” quotes as you please, and don't go overwriting either one with the other in other peoples' posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've reverted part of that edit and pinged the user who made it. Please let us know if this continues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-08T20:41:42.620" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T20:41:42.620" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8236" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-07T12:18:33.547" Score="4" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;em&gt;Hey, I see that [some role playing issue] is bothering you, and you speak English. [Here] (link) is a good thread about it. You can also check out this web-site, it's full of interesting content about RPGs! It's a Q&amp;amp;A site, but it's not like Yahoo! Answers, really, just trust me, it's not bad! It's more like a good RPG forum, but not a forum, and anyone can ask and answer freely, and you can edit anyone's post like in a wiki, and your posts can be edited... Oh, wait, you don't understand what it is?! Not eager to join?! Why?!&lt;/em&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK, now seriously: StackExchange is a very special place. It's certainly a good place, but it takes time to understand how it works. It takes effort. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I &lt;em&gt;briefly&lt;/em&gt; describe RPG.SE to someone I know who is interested in RPGs and speaks English, knows about Q&amp;amp;A sites and forums, but not about the StackExchange culture?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="30214" LastEditDate="2018-08-07T22:17:52.353" LastActivityDate="2018-08-10T20:42:54.450" Title="How to tell someone about RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8237" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8236" CreationDate="2018-08-07T15:23:38.157" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&quot;Do you need something specific answered?  Go here for the experts!&quot;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing I've noticed about RPG.SE is that I no longer have any questions to ask.  They're all here.  There's no need to sift through a ton of information to find the one thing that &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be relevant to what you're looking for.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any question you &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; have usually gets answered in 1-2 days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other places have opinions, but we &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; that everything has a basis in some source of facts, whether that's experience, rules, or straight up knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You know that almost everything you read here comes from the truth, or the closest thing to it.  Sometimes, the answer is &quot;there is no answer to that question&quot;, but good luck getting that same, verified answer somewhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45619" LastActivityDate="2018-08-07T15:23:38.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8238" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-07T19:32:57.207" Score="11" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129145/has-a-designer-clarified-whether-using-your-class-features-are-optional&quot;&gt;recent question&lt;/a&gt; asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was there [a specific statement] made by [a designer with special ruling privileges in the game] or other official sources?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am only looking for this quote, I am not interested in logic/quotes from the books since I know they do not explicitly answer this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This borders on designer intent (but is probably not) and is similar to a Shopping question (but also not quite). How should we handle questions like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T02:50:00.017" Title="Are questions asking for references tangential to rules on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|game-designers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8239" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8245" CreationDate="2018-08-07T19:44:46.050" Score="8" ViewCount="192" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3rd-party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3rd-party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3rd-party&lt;/a&gt; just seems to be a reincarnation of 3PP, a tag that was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7169/should-we-get-rid-of-3pp&quot;&gt;previously burned&lt;/a&gt;. This tag seems to be used in the exact same way and have the exact same issues as the previously burned tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original was burned for a lot of reasons, but the big one in my mind is that tags are not meant to categorize where the content of the question comes from, but what the content of the question actually is in a way that makes it easy for people to browse topics of interest to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless there is some shift and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3rd-party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3rd-party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3rd-party&lt;/a&gt; is suddenly a useful concept for us, I think the tag should be burned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-14T19:06:17.867" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T19:06:17.867" Title="Should we burninate [3rd-party]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8238" CreationDate="2018-08-08T02:39:48.430" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Close it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you said, it is just too similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is not a problem to solve. The actual problem (if class features are optional or not) doesn't need designer's quote for an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is hard to prove a negative, especially when the answer saying &amp;quot;He didn't say it because the rules are not like that&amp;quot; is not accepted by the asker. You simply can't prove Crawford never said anything about Fireball not being Cold damage as well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While, &lt;strong&gt;usually&lt;/strong&gt;, these reasons would only be reasons for down voting (at least IMO), the similarity with designer-reasons leads me to believe that if this kind of question becomes popular, then we will have the same (usually moderation) problems again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T02:39:48.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8238" CreationDate="2018-08-08T02:50:00.017" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;That looks like it’s trying to solve the same problem  to me, making it a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Is X true about Y?” has a problem to solve: what is the rule about X and Y. Asking a second question about whether a designer had said so is trying to solve the same problem: what is the rule about X and Y.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, a question that amounts to “Is the answer to that other question &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; right?” is going to be a duplicate, no matter what new angle it’s trying to bring in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There’s an additional issue in that we’re not an Internet sleuth service, and it’s asking us to hunt down a thing. That’s often iffy. But to me, looking like a duplicate is a bigger issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-08-08T02:50:00.017" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8242" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-10T09:15:27.280" Score="12" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;This issue of the confusion between the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; tags has been brought up twice in the past (years ago):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1151/how-should-the-story-and-plot-tags-be-used&quot;&gt;How should the “story” and “plot” tags be used?&lt;/a&gt;, in November&#xA;2011 (eventually closed as a duplicate of the later post...)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5094/do-we-need-both-plot-and-story&quot;&gt;Do we need both [plot] and [story]?&lt;/a&gt;, in October 2014&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Also semi-related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2907/should-story-and-campaign-development-be-merged/&quot;&gt;Should “Story” and “Campaign-development” be merged?&lt;/a&gt;, from May 2013&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Both prior discussions seem to have been inconclusive, with no clear consensus - resulting in the continuation of the status quo.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5095/33569&quot;&gt;T.Sar's answer to the more recent question&lt;/a&gt; suggests a theoretical difference between the two tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plot is something that &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt;, or at least, &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; happen. Your campaign have a plot - the planned events that you want to put the players in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Story, on the other hand, is something that already happened or is more or less static: your character background, the lore regarding a magic item, the tales regarding the founding of a dungeon, that kind of stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;Plot&amp;quot; tag should be more about planning stuff, while the story tag would cover telling stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least, that is how I would use each tag. If this is the way they are being used, that's another matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5094/do-we-need-both-plot-and-story#comment12338_5095&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie's comment&lt;/a&gt; on this answer questions whether this hypothetical distinction is how the two tags are actually being used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5623/33569&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt; points out that this is not how the tag was being used at the time:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we don't need them both, and we should make one a synonym of the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Multiple dictionaries define &amp;quot;plot&amp;quot; as primarily meaning &amp;quot;secret scheme&amp;quot;, and secondarily meaning &amp;quot;story&amp;quot;. We've been using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; in the second sense, which means we're using it exactly as a synonym of story. We can't get much more of a solid synonym than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[The other answer] makes a distinction between them that plot is forward-looking narrative and story is backwards-looking narrative. The definitions we're operating on don't make such a distinction though, and neither have the users — both tags are being used both ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, since the issue was most recently discussed, the problem has only gotten worse. That theoretical distinction between the ways that the two tags &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be used (as T. Sar proposed) is not how the tags have actually been used (as doppelgreener pointed out).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two tags are very inconsistently and quite interchangeably used. In fact, even the tag info for the two tags doesn't at all make it clear how they're supposed to be used or how they're different from one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; tag info says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sequence of events that take place in the fictional environment of a roleplaying game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; tag info says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The narrative arc of the story cooperatively told by all participants in the RPG, including both planned and unplanned elements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a ton of overlap between these two, and the brief tag info (and nonexistent tag wiki) does not sufficiently differentiate the two tags or really explain how they are used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Given what a long-standing (and still unresolved) problem this has been, the two tags should be synonymized.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had to suggest a direction for the synonymization/merging, I'd suggest we make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of the main tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt;; the latter seems less generic and thus less likely to be misused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T09:51:26.027" Title="The [story] tag should be merged with the [plot] tag" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8236" CreationDate="2018-08-10T15:20:34.970" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Show them a specific example that addresses a problem they're having, then lightly explain the format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Yeah, simulating probabilities on exploding dice in Burning Wheel wasa real headache for me, but we eventually found a way to model it in AnyDice. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/31458/2570&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a face-to-face conversation, I might also explain that it's a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a forum, so posts are sorted by votes and not date order, and people try to only post whole answers while marginalia ends up in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2018-08-10T15:20:34.970" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8244" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8236" CreationDate="2018-08-10T20:42:54.450" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I provide links to answers on questions that come up in other venues.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either in email or in-game chat, or on various forums where I discuss RPG's, if I &#xA; remember a question and answer on the topic, I add a link to one I think is helpful from here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In re this bit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How can I briefly describe RPG.SE to someone I know who is interested&#xA;  in RPGs and speaks English, knows about Q&amp;amp;A sites and forums, but not&#xA;  about the StackExchange culture?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I explain that it isn't a discussion forum, but it is a place with questions and answers for the topic at hand.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-08-10T20:42:54.450" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8239" CreationDate="2018-08-11T12:32:24.887" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;With very much the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7170/30306&quot;&gt;same reasons&lt;/a&gt; as had been in the 3PP case and most notably &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;but one cannot be an expert on &quot;third party publishers&quot;. – doppelgreener♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I vote to unleash the Imperial Inquisition on this one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Burn the Heretic, Kill the Mutant, Purge the Unclean&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2018-08-11T12:32:24.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5668" CreationDate="2018-08-12T17:20:11.463" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Your question is not &lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt; broad&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is as broad as it needs to be.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Surprise is a confusing topic, its parts could be and were covered in several standalone questions, but the more parts it is broken into, the harder it is to actually understand it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question helped a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Our interpretation of &quot;too broad&quot; &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; too narrow indeed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately it encourages duplicates, and decreases the usefulness.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Duplicates&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have about 20 questions about the relationship between multiclassing and spell slots in 5e, one asking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123731/9552&quot;&gt;Eldritch Knight and Wizard&lt;/a&gt;, some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106905/9552&quot;&gt;Eldritch Knight and Cleric&lt;/a&gt;, some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115117/9552&quot;&gt;all casters combined&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;They should all be linked to a &lt;em&gt;sufficiently broad&lt;/em&gt; question, and closed as duplicates.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Decreased usefulness&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frequently comments ask for more details about the situation. Sometimes it is necessary, but mostly not.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Yes, the question about Dual Wielder can be narrowed down to 3rd level Elven Trickery Clerics, and the answer tailor-made, but than the answer is only useful for dual wielding 3rd level Elven Trickery Clerics, so basically one person.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I do not think this should be our goal, so I always try to go broader in the answer at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think the current habits are diminishing the site's usefulness.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastActivityDate="2018-08-12T17:20:11.463" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8247" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-12T21:13:53.540" Score="5" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teamwork&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teamwork&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teamwork&lt;/a&gt; tag has no usage guidance or tag wiki, but it's currently being used on 11 questions about a variety of systems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;4 of them are tagged as being about Fate Core&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 is tagged for Fate and the Dresden Files RPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 is generically tagged as science fiction and GM techniques&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 is tagged as Shadowrun 5th edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 is more broadly tagged as Shadowrun&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 is tagged as D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;and 2 are tagged as Pathfinder&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Teamwork&quot; seems to be the name of a specific concept in Fate, and the name of a feat in Pathfinder. However, these are different things, and the term &quot;teamwork&quot; is also generic enough that it's getting used to refer to working with other players or characters in any capacity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two other tags that relate to inter-party dynamics and working with other characters are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/helping&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;helping&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;helping&lt;/a&gt;, whose tag wiki says it refers to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;mechanics whereby one character can help (aid, assist) another and grant the recipient some sort of mechanical benefit&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;party&lt;/a&gt;, whose usage guidance says it's for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;questions about composition or interplay of a character party in-game&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teamwork&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teamwork&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teamwork&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to be getting used interchangeably with both of these concepts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teamwork&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teamwork&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teamwork&lt;/a&gt; tag meant to be used, and how is it different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/helping&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;helping&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;helping&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;party&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T16:27:57.657" Title="What is the [teamwork] tag meant to be used for, and how is it different from [helping] or [party]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8247" CreationDate="2018-08-12T21:55:10.920" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag was originally created by me for Fate Core questions about using its teamwork mechanic. The mechanic was called teamwork, so I tagged them [teamwork].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shadowrun also appears to have a mechanic called &lt;em&gt;teamwork tests&lt;/em&gt;, which one of those Shadowrun questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95746/teamwork-on-matrix-actions&quot;&gt;Teamwork on matrix actions&lt;/a&gt;) is asking about using. The other (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73262/im-the-teamleader-not-gm-and-one-of-my-team-members-is-a-total-jerk&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;m the Teamleader (not GM) and one of my Team members is a total jerk&lt;/a&gt;) is just asking about people generally working together as a team.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should not really also describe &quot;people working together as a team&quot; in the general sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the number of things the word can mean, I would be comfortable making this a namespaced tag: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-teamwork&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-teamwork&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-teamwork&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-teamwork-feats&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-teamwork-feats&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-teamwork-feats&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-teamwork&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-teamwork&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-teamwork&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;how is it different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/helping&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;helping&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;helping&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;party&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Fate and Shadowrun mechanics both seem to be in the vicinity of &quot;give mechanical benefit to allies&quot;. Helping seems to get used to refer to Aid Another or Help actions in Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 5e respectively. They seem to all be in roughly the same mechanical area.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No real relation to [party] except that the tag has been adopted to also mean &quot;working together in a party&quot; sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-12T21:55:10.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8249" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8250" CreationDate="2018-08-12T23:48:18.443" Score="0" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in the possible ramifications of switching to a hex grid for combat within DnD5e. It seems to provide a better reflection of how being adjacent/surrounded etc works (there's always a &quot;side&quot; of a cell that you share with adjacent cells) and also how movement works (diagonals, again, being an awkward consequence of squares.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that DnD, across all editions, is designed with square grids in mind. For this reason there will be rules that require some massaging to make them work, and there &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; even be a few that need to be completely re-worked. Likely there are play elements that would come up differently too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm hoping that there are people out there who have tried this, and/or combat-experienced rules-lawyers who would be familiar with the difficulties involved here, who's experience/expertise I might draw on to inform my own attempts. I don't want to open a debate or discussion so much as get an overview of what difficulties might arise and thereby how compatible a hex grid could be with 5th Edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously analysis from experience would be ideal, though if there are specific rules that would &lt;em&gt;obviously&lt;/em&gt; require significant revision I'd be interested to know about them even if people haven't tried it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would the above&lt;/strong&gt;, with slight re-wording so it's not a description of a question, but rather just a question &lt;strong&gt;be considered off topic as it's not &lt;em&gt;hard facts&lt;/em&gt; enough, or for some other reason?&lt;/strong&gt; It seems kinda borderline to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T01:24:35.500" Title="Is this question (or some permutation thereof) on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8249" CreationDate="2018-08-13T00:55:41.373" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;What problem might arise?&amp;quot; is never as good a question as &amp;quot;I'm having this problem, how can I solve it?&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you describe above is one of a class I'll call &amp;quot;pre-problem solving.&amp;quot; They anticipate that $SOMETHING may go wrong if $THING is changed, and ask questions about that expectation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often they're broad, or vague, and when comments try to drill down to specifics they start to unravel. Not always, but often. Very often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So are they on topic?&lt;/strong&gt; To this I answer a resounding &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(negative)#%22Unasking%22_the_question&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;mu&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. They facially are, but they're often troublesome and so we tend to avoid them....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, my response to this is &amp;quot;first try the thing you're proposing. If it causes &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; problems, ask about those problems.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;P.S. the DMG has guidance for hex-based combat, which were developed with the feedback of a year's iterative playtesting. You should look there, too.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T01:24:35.500" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8247" CreationDate="2018-08-13T16:27:57.657" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the tag is meant to be system-specific, then its usage guide and tag wiki should state it. For example, based on the format from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;party&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about the Teamwork mechanic in Fate Core. For questions about generally working together with a team instead, use the [party] or [helping] tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without a usage guide, I'm not surprised people tagging their own questions would find it and use it assuming it's intended in the general sense of the word.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this is only a reasonable solution if we don't want tags for the other systems with mechanics named &quot;teamwork&quot;. Since those only have 1 question each I think it's reasonable to not include them, but separating them into more explicitly system-specific tags is also valid, in which case each tag should be named appropriately as in doppelgreener's answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2018-08-13T16:27:57.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8252" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-13T22:20:52.900" Score="2" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;2018 200-word RPG contest&lt;/a&gt; results have arrived.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can &lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/winners&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;see the finalists here&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2018entries&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;all 2018 entries&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're not aware, the 200-word RPG contest is a free, public competition in which numerous stackizens have participated over the years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here we collect stackizen reflections/reviews/impressions of entries from the 2018 contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's have each &amp;quot;answer&amp;quot; be one game+one person. So if you've got multiple games you want to talk about, go ahead and post multiple &amp;quot;answers.&amp;quot; If you want to write about a game that's already been written about either speak up in an existing answer's comments or post anew if you've got more to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I am a reader for the contest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T03:15:02.183" Title="2018 200-word RPGs: user testimonials" Tags="|discussion|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8252" CreationDate="2018-08-13T22:26:45.317" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2018/rpg/winner/2018/05/18/Sidewalkia.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sidewalkia!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Read it and immediately wanted to go out and give it a try. (Probably doesn't hurt that I work on a school campus and could group-text my RPG club to witness the start--they jumped right in.) A good, quick, game for a group/setting when acting bizarre in full public view isn't a bad thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rule about expanding doesn't quite parse--we just expanded when people were jostling for space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T02:28:25.777" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8252" CreationDate="2018-08-13T22:28:39.780" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2018/rpg/finalist/2018/05/21/LetterstotheHomeFront.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Letters to the Home Front&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Teared up just reading through this one. I haven't found the person in my life to sit and try this with, but I won't consider it complete until I do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[note: replacing the word &amp;quot;moral&amp;quot; with &amp;quot;morale&amp;quot; is the reading I gave it]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T03:15:02.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8255" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-13T22:31:34.003" Score="1" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is it on topic to ask about the specifics of established homebrew content (such as the house rules used by Matt Mercer on Critical Role) or where such things can be found?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43956" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-08-14T12:07:48.807" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T15:30:10.797" Title="Established homebrew specifics: is asking on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8252" CreationDate="2018-08-13T22:42:56.823" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://200wordrpg.github.io/2015/rpg/winner/2015/04/01/EscapePodOne.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Escape Pod One&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fast paced, easy, betraying your friends, &lt;strong&gt;actual gameplay mechanics&lt;/strong&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's not to love about this game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Takes hardly any prepwork.  You need a 30 second stopwatch (like your phone), and a bunch of coins (like those pennies in your couch).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This game seems like it'd be so freakin' tense, waiting for someone else to make the first move.  The winning strategy is to wait until the last second to go all in, but if you wait too long you die!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't wait to round up a bunch of friends to try this one out.  Most of the listed RPGs are just creative (and sometimes awkward) ways to write stories, but this one is likely the best example of the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;G&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; in &lt;strong&gt;RPG&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45619" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-08-14T02:18:23.040" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T02:18:23.040" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8255" CreationDate="2018-08-14T15:30:10.797" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Questions about homebrew content can be on-topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew questions aren't categorically forbidden. Taking the Matt Mercer/Critical Role homebrew / 3rd party content you mentioned, there are a handful of decently received questions about aspects of it (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/129053/37154&quot;&gt;example&lt;/a&gt;). There are also various other questions about homebrew, which can mostly be found at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag, or the related &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific types of questions you mention have some potential to be problematic for other reasons. When asking about &amp;quot;the specifics&amp;quot; of homebrew, there's a chance of treading too far into either &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;opinion-based&amp;quot; or sometimes &amp;quot;unclear&amp;quot;. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113735/37154&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; approximately of the form &amp;quot;My DM said this item exists what does it do?&amp;quot; can't be usefully answered because we aren't capable of reading a DM's mind like that. Critical Role content is less likely to fall into this category, especially if you can link and/or quote a source for its rules text. &amp;quot;Where can I find X?&amp;quot; is essentially covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5944/37154&quot;&gt;a prior meta question&lt;/a&gt;, and the conclusion seems to be &amp;quot;probably off-topic&amp;quot; but you can ask in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With regards to whether being &amp;quot;established&amp;quot; has an effect, it mostly means that you're likely to get better answers due to greater familiarity. It shouldn't have a substantial impact on whether your question is on-topic or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T15:30:10.797" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8258" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-14T15:39:12.807" Score="2" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/readied-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;readied-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;readied-action&lt;/a&gt; tag (101 questions tagged, 43 asked this year) with the following guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;An action &quot;held&quot; to react to an anticipated circumstance. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/triggered-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;triggered-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;triggered-actions&lt;/a&gt; tag (only 12 questions tagged, only 2 asked this year) and no guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these two tags distinct? If not, should one be a synonym of the other? Otherwise, if so, what should be the tag guidance for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/triggered-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;triggered-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;triggered-actions&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T18:32:10.430" Title="The [readied-action] and [triggered-actions] tags" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5668" CreationDate="2018-08-14T15:47:14.607" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The problem isn't the question, it's the game mechanic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's three years later, and I finally take up @SevenSidedDie's suggestion (made in a comment) to offer an answer.  The question on the main site was wrestling with the hot mess that surprise became in D&amp;amp;D 5e due to previous edition carry over.   A lot of us walked into this edition with expectations on how surprise works and what mechanical if/then conditions are met for surprise to exist, based on the previous editions of the game.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After playing this game for a while, and seeing different DMs apply surprise differently, I find that the question needs to be left as closed but available as a resource.   We have a great many old questions that are closed for a variety of reasons.   Dale's effort to make sense of surprise is a result of something &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6395/22566&quot;&gt;@nitsua remarked upon regarding an early question about advantage&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I just think neither TSR nor WotC has ever done a good job of&#xA;  assembling a PHB to be accessible to someone who hasn't already&#xA;  mastered a previous PHB.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When asking &quot;what problem are you trying to solve&quot; Dale's question asks about a problem that every DM and every group I've played with has tried to solve: how to make it work so that it is clear at the table how surprise works.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer appears to be: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Forget anything you ever knew about surprise in D&amp;amp;D, and pretend that&#xA;  this is a brand new game feature.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd even offer that as an answer if the question were re opened, even though to a great extent Dale offered a rational way to treat it as a new mechanic in his comprehensive answer.   But after reviewing the comments and this meta, I agree that it should remain locked; I don't think it ought to remain deleted.  Per Seven's comment then:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;locked by SevenSidedDie♦ Oct 4 '15 at 3:56 This question exists  because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site, so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here.  &lt;strong&gt;This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommendation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Undelete, but leave locked.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Experience based piece of this answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found that Answer very helpful in discussing how surprise works and doesn't work &lt;em&gt;in three different gaming groups&lt;/em&gt; for full group discussions, and with two other DM's in one-on-one discussions.  &lt;em&gt;The link to that answer was a key enabler to all of those discussions&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of us had engaged in quite a bit of head scratching over 5e's presentation of surprise.  This comprehensive answer is a worthy bookmark, but it is useful only people can read it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bottom Line&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please leave locked, but re-open so that it is viewable.  The caveats in the comments under the question are quite clear on why it is locked.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-14T16:52:12.067" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T16:52:12.067" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8258" CreationDate="2018-08-14T16:22:48.487" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The difference is the active choice in priming the action&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A readied action is an action that a player would choose to hold onto until a trigger occurs, at which point the action is performed. They have to have the forethought to expect some circumstance that they wish to react to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A triggered-action doesn't require that kind of forethought. It's an action that is effectively &amp;quot;always on stand-by&amp;quot; without you needing to do anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Take for example, attacks of opportunity&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For many games, an attack of opportunity would be a kind of triggered action because you don't have to explicitly have to be on the look-out for a situation to arise to take one. An enemy moves out of your reach, or casts a spell in front of you, or drinks a potion while engaged with you and it triggers a response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;That could be the tag guidance for triggered-actions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Triggered actions are actions that you take in response to some stimulus without having to explicitly anticipate that circumstance beforehand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32395" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T18:32:10.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8258" CreationDate="2018-08-14T17:10:44.677" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think &quot;readied action&quot; is fine as-is, and &quot;triggered-actions&quot; could probably use a usage guide if it's meaningful. My gut says that it doesn't have meaning beyond &quot;stuff happens when other stuff happens&quot; and it's impossible to be a system-agnostic expert on the concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, they are not synonyms, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/readied-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;readied-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;readied-action&lt;/a&gt; should stay, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/triggered-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;triggered-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;triggered-actions&lt;/a&gt; should probably be removed unless someone can make a usage guide that merits keeping it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2018-08-14T17:10:44.677" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8262" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-15T19:36:33.953" Score="5" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question on trial:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129721/what-creatures-can-a-moon-druid-transform-into-that-would-benefit-from-humanoi?noredirect=1#comment322122_129721&quot;&gt;What creature(s) can a Moon Druid transform into that would benefit from humanoid armor?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL, DR: When druids shapeshift, is there a valid form that benefits from their armor?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed as too broad, likely due to the armor only applying if the DM says it seems reasonable, and I defined the DM's response as &quot;Anything roughly humanoid&quot;.  This seems somewhat based on the reader's opinion, but hold off on that decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I further refined it by mentioning what armor I had, and that the natural armor of the beast could not stack with the armor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, I was looking for this information:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A DnD 5th edition Beast&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That was &quot;roughly humanoid&quot; (in any sense of the term)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Who's natural armor &amp;lt; studded leather&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone had answered, with a thorough response.  But the answer said there were virtually no options, and the only options available required you to be wearing large armor, meaning I would have to be large myself.  Being large is not normally possible for a Druid PC in 5E, and is only available from unofficial sources or extreme edge cases of multiclassing/magical items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if the term &quot;roughly humanoid&quot; was in the most relaxed sense, I don't think it would have opened up any more possibilities.  Even further, if I specified that my character wasn't large, but just a standard, official size, then there would be exactly 0 possible answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the question was closed for being too broad.  Which seems a bit counterintuitive.  Could someone educate me on what I missed with my question, and why it should be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;strong&gt;Note&lt;/strong&gt;: it's now open again, but I would still like to know the answer to this question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[The existing comment-thread on the mainsite question as of the opening of this meta is copied below. -n60]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For those voting to close, could you let me know what's concerning about the question? It seems pretty straightforward to me. – Daniel Zastoupil 2 hours ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@guildsbounty that's probably the topic of another Q&amp;amp;A. – KorvinStarmast 2 hours ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I voted to close because the question is equivalent to the following: &quot;List the monsters that a DM might consider to be humanoid-shaped.&quot; This is opinion-based because it depends on the DM, and it's effectively a &quot;do my homework&quot; question because we can't ask your DM and all we would do is look through the stat blocks for artwork that kinda looks humanoid-shaped. So I don't see how it's possible to answer the question in a factual and canonical way or rate answers as more or less right. Hence the vote to close. Others may have different reasons for voting to close. – Bloodcinder 1 hour ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Bloodcinder I tried to address those kinds of concerns pretty heavily. Even going as far as to explain what the DM would consider acceptable (roughly humanoid), which even the most lax use of the term would strongly limit a list of beasts. It's further limited by bringing up only beasts that can actually get benefit from wearing armor. So far, of a list of monsters, I've gotten 2 options, that are barely different, and none are even usable in most instances (since they are large creatures, and there are no official large PC races). Few questions could have a more refined answer pool. – Daniel Zastoupil 1 hour ago       &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I disagree, but I have no additional information to add. I'm just telling you why I voted to close. I can't speak for others, but the community hive-mind seems to think there's a problem of scope or factual nature. – Bloodcinder 1 hour ago      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Bloodcinder Sorry, I realize that sounded defensive. I honestly didn't know why the question should be closed, and it looked very well refined and specific. I appreciate your insight, though. – Daniel Zastoupil 53 mins ago       &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm voting to reopen this because &quot;Ask the DM&quot; questions are not equivalent to being opinion-based at all. We answer DM-dependent questions here all the time, and the only answer thus far shows that this is a well-defined and answerable question. – Rubiksmoose 49 mins ago       &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Rubiksmoose agreed. I think I've noticed a general trend where people are voting to close any question which requires even the slightest opinion about anything – Wibbs 2 mins ago  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45619" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-08-15T21:08:41.970" LastActivityDate="2018-08-15T21:08:41.970" Title="My question was closed as too broad, but I thought it was very filtered and refined. Why?" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8242" CreationDate="2018-08-15T20:58:57.220" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Unpopular Opinion: Story tag should be burninated&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Lets analyze the story tag excerpt a bit more.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt;: The sequence of events that take place in the fictional environment of a roleplaying game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tells us nothing about what questions it's appropriate for and when to use it, leading it to be tagged based on the definition that's in the excerpt of the tag. The nature of these questions lends it to be more of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;WorldBuilding.SE&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Writing.SE&lt;/a&gt; tag (and even then it's probably too broad for them, and would broken further down into elements such as magic, science based, alternate history, etc), rather than a RPG.SE tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Let's see how the questions that utilize the tag look like.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking through the first couple of pages of various questions (that are open) with the tag, there was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120348/is-dd-a-suitable-tool-for-fleshing-out-my-own-fictional-world&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; question that it made sense as a tag in. Instead &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; makes more sense as a tag for most of the questions, given  their questions involved handling plot points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;FAQ of asking good questions&lt;/a&gt; provides a good reason on why questions with it tagged tend to be poor questions for here.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you ask a vague question, you’ll get a vague answer.&lt;/strong&gt; But if you give us details and context, we can provide a useful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of the story questions are just too broad in nature to be a good question, instead they need to be broken down to be a good question, which gives us questions about plot points which plot is more suited for rather than story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Now going through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/250933/how-do-tag-removal-burnination-requests-work&quot;&gt;burninate FAQ&lt;/a&gt; for helping determine when a tag is bad.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a tag implies no clearly defined meaning&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While story does have a defined meaning, the nature of it often leads questions tagged with it to be too broad, or to be questions which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; is better suited for. While there are a small handful of questions that it can suit and that plot wouldn't be better suited for (such as the one linked above), those are far and few between, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/narration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;narration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;narration&lt;/a&gt; could serve as a tag in those circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a tag has a clearly defined meaning, but is still misused often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said earlier, many of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; questions should instead have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; tag on them. It's obviously being misused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a tag can be replaced with a combination of more generic tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; could replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; for a series of questions about creating a quest for a magical sword, since this question would need to be narrowed down to plot points for relevant portions in order for it to not be too broad anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite my points above, I could see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;story&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt; becoming a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/plot&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;plot&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;plot&lt;/a&gt;, which would help it make sense on RPG.SE; However, it definitely shouldn't be left as it currently is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-19T19:50:30.250" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8264" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-16T01:49:31.463" Score="9" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question at hand: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/129734/28591&quot;&gt;In-universe, why is &quot;Waterdhavian&quot; the adjective form of Waterdeep?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question seems to be very close to a designer intent question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;which are off topic&lt;/a&gt;). It does not fit the definition perfectly because it is not asking about the origin of why a rule is a certain way. Instead it is asking why a certain design decision (in this case a name) is a certain way. I'm not sure if the fact that they are asking for an in-universe explanation helps it to be further away from a designer intent-type question or not, but it actually feels like it does for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, and, I think, significantly, it seems to be displaying at least one of the same issues that designer reasons displayed. Many of the answers don't seem to be citing any sources and seem to be relying on speculation instead. (Disclaimer: I have since added an, hopefully properly-evidenced, answer to the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, by my reckoning, at the very least we have an issue with answers. But when we have several answers all displaying the same problem I begin to smell an issue with the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this question on-topic?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If it is on-topic, what, if anything, should we do about the answers currently under the question?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I have since added an answer to the question since I found the answer while looking around for it. I still think the question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be off-topic, but I didn't think it would be improper to give an answer while the community discusses it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-08-16T04:31:01.947" LastActivityDate="2018-08-16T13:51:09.390" Title="Is the question about the origin of &quot;Waterdhavian&quot; on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8265" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8266" CreationDate="2018-08-16T13:08:26.840" Score="10" ViewCount="282" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/129734/43484&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asks whether there is an &quot;in-universe&quot; explanation for a particular piece of lore in a particular setting. Note that there is already &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8264/43484&quot;&gt;a meta question about the question's topicality&lt;/a&gt;. The appropriateness of the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; aside, how does one provide an acceptable &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; to such a question if the answer is &quot;no&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it happens, the lore question that occasioned this meta question is susceptible of a &quot;yes&quot; answer, and one was eventually posted. But the larger problem remains. If there is no clear &quot;yes&quot; answer to a question of the form &quot;Does X exist in the lore,&quot; then the answer requires proof of a negative. As far as I know, the only way to prove a negative is by inductive reasoning. Induction depends on supportive argumentation to make its probabilistic conclusions more probable. Where the question demands that an answer rely on in-universe sources, and no such sources exist from which to argue, what is the best practice? To &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8076/43484&quot;&gt;provide information the querent might find useful even if it doesn't actually answer the question&lt;/a&gt;? To simply leave the question unanswered indefinitely, as suggested &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8034/43484&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;? Something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing other potentially related meta questions, I observe that the querent wasn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5903/43484&quot;&gt;asking about the existence of a &lt;em&gt;product&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, but the issues raised seem similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T00:50:23.423" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T00:50:23.423" Title="What is an acceptable form for a &quot;no&quot; answer to a question of the form &quot;Does X exist in the lore?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8266" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8265" CreationDate="2018-08-16T13:23:57.087" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;The well-received “no” answers I've seen followed this kind of pattern:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;No, that lore tidbit isn't defined anywhere. I have read this vast swathe of material about this setting [like most of its novels and supplements]. Based on my experience, if the answer was anywhere, it would be in these specific books I'll name/describe, all of which I have read and double-checked for an answer. There is no answer in any of those about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This gives us a pretty good idea that you've gone to good efforts to check all reasonable sources and found nothing, which is close enough to a “no” for many people. It's not 100% comprehensive and it's not 100% guaranteed but it's pretty good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone may answer with a “yes” later, citing a source this previous answerer had overlooked or citing a single paragraph in one of the books they'd checked (but they'd missed or misread that paragraph). This is OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a lot of work involved in this kind of answer. Nobody is obliged to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is OK to leave a question unanswered.&lt;/strong&gt; If you don't know of a “yes” and can't prove a “no”, just leave it for someone else. Eventually we'll get a “yes” with a good citation, or a good-effort “no”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not recall ever seeing an attempt to prove a “no” without the bookreading effort backing it up that has been received well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-16T13:23:57.087" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8267" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8264" CreationDate="2018-08-16T13:51:09.390" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is on topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is not one of designer intent. It's a question about the existence of lore. We don't generally close questions about the existence of lore or a rule even if it's difficult to prove a &quot;no&quot; answer. In this case, not only is there a &quot;yes&quot; answer (making it answerable objectively) but a sufficient correct answer does not require citing a designer's intent (just because a designer is the source of information about the lore doesn't make it merely designer intent--the sources in the top voted answers are a FAQ and sourcebook about the lore that happen to be written by the designer in question, but almost all lore is, uh, written by the person who thought of it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the answers to the question, the system is working as intended: the two answers that are based in evidence from the lore are being up-voted and those that are not have been down-voted to the negative range. Other than the warning note that you left on the question itself discouraging non-evidential answers, there doesn't seem to be a need for any other sort of fix. If the question becomes a problem in the future, it could be protected to discourage lazy answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-08-16T13:51:09.390" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8265" CreationDate="2018-08-16T18:29:39.473" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Answering &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; is not an excuse to give purely opinion answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8266/28591&quot;&gt;@dopplegreener answered&lt;/a&gt; what to do to make a good &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; answer. I wanted to add at least one thing that good &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; answers should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, X does not exist in the lore. So now I will spend the rest of my answer telling you what I think the lore would say but I can't prove or substantiate any of it. These words sound good and make sense but none of them are drawing from lore. But that is ok because the lore says nothing so a best guess is better than nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of answer is not acceptable. We saw this issue all the time with designer intent questions and we see it a lot with &amp;quot;Does X exist&amp;quot; questions as well. Just because there is no clear answer does not give license for people to give straight opinions and call it an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is asking for lore, the answer should explicitly draw on lore or other tightly related sources. If there is no lore-based information about the topic to draw off of, then either do as dopplegreener said in their answer or just don't answer at all. A pure opinionated guess (no matter how educated) is never better than nothing. We actually prefer nothing over low quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long  and short of it is that if you don't have the information to back up your answer (either &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;no&amp;quot;) just don't answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-17T04:44:06.883" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8269" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-16T20:51:57.093" Score="18" ViewCount="247" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, this has happened to me multiple times now, and to be honest it's getting frustrating as a casual user of this particular SE (especially since the judgements seem less cut-and-dried than other SE's I'm on). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a really hard time figuring out whether a partial answer should be a comment or a new answer. I've had both versions deleted multiple times no matter how I word them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be a bit more clear, in cases where there are questions that are a bit lengthy and perhaps have multiple issues embedded in them, answerers frequently post perfectly reasonable answers that cover &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the issues.  I come along and have thoughts that could cover some of what I think haven't been covered, so I want to add those thoughts b/c I think they may be useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case where I tried adding that to a comment, it was deleted by a moderator with a note telling me I shouldn't post an answer (even an incomplete answer) as a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case (different question) where I tried adding my thoughts as a new answer (acknowledging that other people had answered everything else), I got downvoted to and flagged for deletion for not answering the question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't understand how I'm supposed to handle a partial (but in theory additive) answer, given those examples.  Should every answer rehash everything covered by existing answers?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10363" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-17T12:30:24.910" LastActivityDate="2018-12-07T10:24:38.090" Title="I have some information to add to help someone solve their issue, do I answer or comment?" Tags="|discussion|answers|comments|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8269" CreationDate="2018-08-16T21:00:15.557" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6534/9625&quot;&gt;a previous Meta answer by mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Now, &quot;but the hapless questioner could use that info!&quot; In nearly all cases someone posts the same information in a (much more comprehensive) answer. Or take the time yourself to write a real answer. We don't like crappy questions or crappy answers, and we'd rather not have the Q or A than to have one that doesn't meet site quality (hence closes/deletes, part of the standard SE functionality). If you don't care enough to write a real answer don't, the likelihood that you're the only person in the world/on the site that knows that bit of info is very small.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is always better to write a full-fledged answer over a partial answer or an answer-in-comments. Please take the time to do so if you feel your information is valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From your comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...This answer is a recommendation to solve &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;part of the problem&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; (i.e. compromising on the race), which I thought covered ground the other answers had not covered. (emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please consider posting an answer that addresses the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;entirety&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; of the problem. If the additional information you add is useful and/or integral to a solution your answer will rise to the top through votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answer popped up in the review queue because it was receiving downvotes. I recommended deletion (as did others) because it didn't meet the quality standards of an answer the site would like to keep; it was incomplete and did not address the core problem of the OP. Since you seem to have had this problem a few times, please try and self-examine the methods you are using and how they clash with the expectations of the site. Drop in to chat and ask for help, or browse the Meta for explanations of good answers and quality control.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9625" LastEditorUserId="9625" LastEditDate="2018-08-16T22:25:14.943" LastActivityDate="2018-08-16T22:25:14.943" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8269" CreationDate="2018-08-16T22:56:46.403" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's two expectations going on you're running into:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're attempting to partially or completely solve the problem, exclusively do that in an answer.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6533/9625&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're writing an answer, try your best to directly and comprehensively address the problem in the question. We will judge your answer based on how well it stands on its own as a solution in isolation from all other answers.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3326/1204&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means if you just have a small tidbit to throw in, but no holistic solution to provide, there is no real space for that at all. That's by design and not seen as a problem. Realistically there is an endless quantity of small tidbits that can be tossed in but we're not trying to collect them. If someone is broaching a similar area in their answer you can suggest a thing as an improvement to that answer, but that suggestion may be declined and removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you have a substantial original solution, but don't want to retread ground another answer has provided as part of expressing it, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3328/1204&quot;&gt;there is advice in this answer&lt;/a&gt; on how to do that: provide a holistic solution, summarise existing advice, point to where it exists in full. However, this doesn't get received well when it's done to merely add another tidbit because a tidbit is nothing new as a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-17T00:15:27.650" LastActivityDate="2018-08-17T00:15:27.650" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8273" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-17T20:36:23.167" Score="7" ViewCount="276" Body="&lt;p&gt;We occasionally get history questions along the lines of, &quot;What's the origin of such-and-such saying,&quot; or, &quot;What was going on in the game that inspired this anecdote/comic/video/whatever,&quot; or, &quot;This anecdote/comic/video/whatever appears to misuse the rules for X, were they using houserules or a different edition or something?&quot; This meta question is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; about the validity of those questions (though that might be a reasonable topic for discussion in a separate meta question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions sometimes attract answers from new (1 rep) users saying, &quot;I was actually the guy who said that,&quot; or, &quot;I was one of the players in that game,&quot; or some other similar claim to authority. Then they lay out their explanation for the quote, rules quirk, or whatever was being asked about. Recent examples can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/129939/3548&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/128892/3548&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these answers acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-30T12:15:36.227" LastActivityDate="2019-06-30T12:15:36.227" Title="How should we handle posts from new users claiming to be notable figures?" Tags="|discussion|answers|game-designers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8273" CreationDate="2018-08-17T20:36:23.167" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We should ask for links to verifiable 3rd-party websites.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone can claim to be a relevant notable figure; StackExchange has no method of verifying these users, the way &lt;a href=&quot;https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/about-twitter-verified-accounts&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Twitter does&lt;/a&gt;. Because we can't verify such claims, they are essentially hearsay, i.e. opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, notable figures can still provide answers. If you really &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; That One Guy, then you can post on That One Guy's blog saying, &amp;quot;I recently saw a question about X over on RPG Stack Exchange. Man, what a crazy game that was! Here's what &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; happened: ...&amp;quot; You can then answer the question by linking to the blog post, which is a verifiable communication from the person in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This approach benefits the stack in two ways: First, it makes these answers trustworthy, rather than just, &amp;quot;Well, some guy on the Internet claims that he was really there and it was X.&amp;quot; Second, it helps drive additional traffic to the stack (assuming the notable figure actually references RPG.SE).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone wants to go the trouble of making a blog where they pretend to be That One Guy just to spread fake information or get a sock puppet some rep, that's a problem for That One Guy (and his lawyers) rather than for the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put this a little bit differently, &lt;strong&gt;who&lt;/strong&gt; posted an answer shouldn't matter; the content of the answer needs to stand on its own merits. When someone answers a rules question by claiming that the rules work a certain way, we ask them to cite the relevant rules (in a quote and/or with a link) to properly support their answer. Answers to questions about specific real-world events should be held to the same standard. An answer that starts with, &amp;quot;I'm Bob and I was actually there,&amp;quot; is ultimately no better supported than an answer that starts with, &amp;quot;I heard a rumor that...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like we would ask someone who answered a rules question to properly support their answer so it can stand on its own, we should ask people who answer anecodotal questions to properly support their answer so it can stand on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T15:36:15.280" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8275" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8278" CreationDate="2018-08-18T18:27:40.227" Score="9" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;On this question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129985/can-players-teach-each-other-the-magic-initiate-feat-or-other-feats&quot;&gt;Can Players Teach Each Other The Magic Initiate Feat Or Other Feats?&lt;/a&gt;) the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-initiate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-initiate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-initiate&lt;/a&gt; has been created, referring to the Magic Initiate feat from D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this tag seem too specific to deserve existing? Could we potentially end up having a tag per feat, or even a tag per equivalent-of-a-feat for every system? Or am I being a bit too dramatic here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2018-08-19T16:32:13.040" Title="Is the Magic Initiate tag too specific?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8275" CreationDate="2018-08-18T20:55:23.730" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It seems too specific&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;help page about tagging&lt;/a&gt; says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general rule, you should avoid creating new tags if possible, and new users are not allowed to create new tags. Even if you have sufficient reputation, you should only create new tags when you feel you can make a strong case that your question covers a new topic that nobody else has asked about before on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-initiate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-initiate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-initiate&lt;/a&gt; tag is too narrow. In particular, the Magic Initiate feat is not even the focus of that question (it's just one example of a feat), so it seems far too specific to be necessary in that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose the Magic Initiate feat might be something one could be an expert on, but that particular question is not a good argument in favor of keeping it. The larger issue is that, as you point out, it'd be a system-specific tag for a specific feat; using the same logic, we could create individual tags for every feat/feature in every system that has more than a few questions about it, and that's clearly not the ideal goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-18T20:55:23.730" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8277" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-19T05:05:25.527" Score="6" ViewCount="99" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question is pretty straightforward. Currently, we have two different tags: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The intended uses of these two tags are pretty self-evident; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; is for questions about players missing sessions, whereas &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; is potentially slightly broader and covers all questions involving attendance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two tags seem very closely related. I can't think of any issues involving attendance that doesn't involve absent players. Though only a few questions have both tags, most of the questions with either tag do seem to involve some players being absent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are these two tags different enough to warrant separate tags, or should they be merged/synonymized?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8232/is-absent-players-a-useful-tag&quot;&gt;Is [absent-players] a useful tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-08-21T16:39:29.317" Title="Are [absent-players] and [attendance] different enough to warrant separate tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8275" CreationDate="2018-08-19T05:11:02.590" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's too specific, it will be eliminated after a period if it's the only instance of the tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't fret too much over tags.  It's an emergent folksonomy, deliberately.  There are many tags not used much.  We only should be bothering to take action on tags if they are actually causing an issue. &quot;It's not used much&quot; or &quot;it's too specific&quot; is not a real issue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-08-19T05:11:02.590" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8275" CreationDate="2018-08-19T16:32:13.040" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's not too specific&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Too Specific&amp;quot; isn't an actual problem with tags.  Extremely specific tags are totally fine, provided we have the question activity that leads to their generation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It doesn't describe that question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That tag has nothing to do with that question, so it's been removed.  Unless it's used on several questions before the next clean up phase, it will be deleted automatically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-19T16:32:13.040" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8280" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8282" CreationDate="2018-08-20T13:58:44.100" Score="10" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; was created recently and used in a now closed question and for this question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130073/are-there-published-rules-for-navigating-and-travelling-through-jungles#&quot;&gt;Are there published rules for navigating and travelling through jungles?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I removed it from the latter question because jungle is not a topic that one can be an RPG expert in and the tag does nothing to enhance searchability (since searching for &quot;jungle&quot; would easily turn up these results).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the user disagreed saying that they felt it was useful: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags are also meant to make it easier for non technical users to find related questions. The type of environment is a key portion of this question, and thus useful in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we keep it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-08-20T14:50:51.523" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T19:34:24.690" Title="Do we need a [jungle] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8281" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8280" CreationDate="2018-08-20T14:24:35.383" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tagging is a folksonomy. Tags get added when someone finds them useful, and kept as long as they're not causing problems. This means if there isn't a problem, don't stress and don't overthink it; err on keeping tags that aren't doing harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone's managing jungle stuff, the jungle tag will help them find stuff that is about jungle adventure stuff and not only incidentally mentioning jungles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind tags mostly get evaluated in context of a game: one could feasibly know stuff about D&amp;amp;D jungle stuff for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's really not that useful it won't get used much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments brought up &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8275/is-the-magic-initiate-tag-too-specific&quot;&gt;Is the Magic Initiate tag too specific?&lt;/a&gt;, which in turn relates back to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;Should we be tagging individual spells?&lt;/a&gt;. I want to draw attention to the fact we specifically choose not to have tags for spells &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they cause problems; they add too much tag tax and the ten thousand spells chew through our site's shared tag namespace in unacceptable ways. The same arguments can be made for feats. Those arguments don't however apply to having a [jungle] tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-20T15:03:57.473" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T15:03:57.473" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8280" CreationDate="2018-08-20T17:14:11.197" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nah, we already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; and (if applicable) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/environmental-hazards&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;environmental-hazards&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;environmental-hazards&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although tagging is a folksonomy, we have a &lt;em&gt;mature&lt;/em&gt; tagging folksonomy. When something new is created, we have eight years of folksonomy and community experience to say “hey, we have a tag for that already.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; is a solidly-used but still only modestly-sized tag. It covers myriad different terrains. Super-specific tags have the potential to encourage people to go on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;a tagging spree&lt;/a&gt; to cover “the rest” of the larger category: jungles, plains, rivers, forests, mountains, hills, badlands, caves, tunnels, waterfalls, streams, grassland, swamp, marsh, fen, bog, wetland, everglade, … .&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A super-specific tag that covers only one of those myriad terrains only makes sense if that particular terrain &lt;em&gt;needs&lt;/em&gt; the special attention that only a tag can bring but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; can’t do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; make it easier to find questions about jungles? No, searching &lt;code&gt;jungle&lt;/code&gt; already does that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; make it easier for RPG jungle experts to find it? No, because those don’t exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; collect together a significant sub-category of questions about terrain that should be collected together in their own right? No, such a nexus of question subjects has not emerged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it help group together related questions? &lt;strong&gt;No, it actually harms Q grouping, a main purpose of tags&lt;/strong&gt;: someone tagging with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; and leaving off &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; actually removes it from the collection formed by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; tag. (This has already happened on &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; Qs recently tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt;!) Even with both, the only tag actually doing real grouping work there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; is superfluous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; is useful, but only as a synonym to make sure that a Q gets the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The novice tagger’s mistake&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A common mistake of novice tag curators (such as many of our first askers, and many of our regular users who don’t work on the tagging part of the site project) is to tag for all the nouns in their question. That’s a mistake because that’s not what SE tags are for — they’re for a focused set of tags pulling out the subject(s) of a question. Tags beyond the subject are noise, and our database gets worse with noise, and noise is worse the larger our database gets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(That last bit is why a mature folksonomy needs judicious pruning, as soon as the pruning need is noticed — when noticed, else it gets forgotten. Noise’s impact gets worse the larger the collection, because human attention doesn’t scale up with the size of a search result.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our asker has made this honest mistake. They’re asking about jungles, so they throw on a tag for jungles. Perhaps thinking that jungles are unique enough concepts to be distinct, not realising that real-world distinction doesn’t matter here, and only RPG-relevant distinctions apply. Perhaps not knowing or caring that our tags aren’t freeform and aren’t largely irrelevant, like they are on most platforms. Most sites, tags are a throwaway feature and mostly useless and full of redundancies — because on most sites, curation is not the point of the tag system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, tags &lt;em&gt;matter&lt;/em&gt;. They’re a core part of making the site function now and for future knowledge-seekers. That’s why we aren’t given more than five per Q: we are expected to use our limited tagging space on a Q thoughtfully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; should be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt;, because the latter is useful and the former isn’t, and it’s already harming the purpose of tags collecting related question subjects by helping people forget to add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-20T19:34:24.690" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T19:34:24.690" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8283" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-20T19:48:14.857" Score="2" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, in quite a few Adventurers League questions, we are getting comments asking the poster to spell out common AL terms, such as HC, T2 and adventure names like ToA. Most recent example here - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/130065/43856&quot;&gt;Can a PC that played only part of ToA be resurrected in a later adventure?&lt;/a&gt;, but not the only situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we be asking the posters to spell them out? Should we (as the poster) be spelling out these terms? Finallly, as someone who knows what these terms mean, should we edit them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T19:48:14.857" Title="Should I be asking clarification on terms?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8283" CreationDate="2018-08-20T19:48:14.857" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask only if you are familiar with the context of the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is a site &amp;quot;for experts&amp;quot;. While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4767/43856&quot;&gt;our definition of experts is a little broader than usual&lt;/a&gt;, it doesn't change that fact and terms are part of that expertise. For me, this is a similar issue to the one found here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5507/43856&quot;&gt;Should I ask a poster to quote the rules he or she is confused about?&lt;/a&gt; - the question is supposed to be read by people that are familiar with the context of that question, i.e., a question about Pathfinder is supposed to be read(able) by people familiar with Pathfinder's rules, and a question about AL should usually be read(able) by people familiar with AL, including their terms. Another way of seeing this is: We don't ask people to spell out RPG, D&amp;amp;D and other common terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't mean we should be a closed group that speaks an underground language that nobody else understands, but if someone is confused with usual RPG terminology, we do have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is &lt;strong&gt;exactly&lt;/strong&gt; for &amp;quot;I don't know what this means, can I haz explanation?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On the other hand&lt;/strong&gt;, if you &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; familiar with the context and it is still unclear on what that term means, then you should ask for clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Edit only if you are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; familiar with the context&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD mentioned in his &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130065/can-a-pc-that-played-only-part-of-toa-be-resurrected-in-a-later-adventure#comment323125_130065&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, some terms have &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; meaning as the acronym than as the spelled out version. Edits for clarification should only be made if you are &lt;strong&gt;completely sure&lt;/strong&gt; it is not going to change the meaning of the question in a significant way. Also, only edit if the term isn't, somehow, part of the problem which leads to the question - obvious examples are the terminology questions asking what the term means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“HC” means “hardcover” — ironically it is &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; meaningful spelled out, because only in jargon-y “HC” form does it carry any meaning relevant to AL&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T19:48:14.857" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8277" CreationDate="2018-08-20T19:57:22.550" Score="0" Body="&lt;h3&gt;A difference exists&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki specifically mentions &amp;quot;attendance issues&amp;quot; and mentions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; as related tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; focuses on mechanical consequences, listing &amp;quot;how to handle player characters&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;handling missed progression&amp;quot; as example topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, based on the current tag wikis, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; is about the players who miss sessions, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; is about the &lt;em&gt;characters&lt;/em&gt; of players who miss sessions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The difference isn't clear to users&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I certainly wouldn't be able to guess what the difference is between those two tags from reading them, and definitely wouldn't assume the one with &amp;quot;players&amp;quot; in its name to be the one to focus on the characters. On top of that, despite the tag wiki considering &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; as related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt;, there are zero questions tagged with both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A different division might be more useful&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall there do seem to be two types of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Handling a campaign when a player is absent, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124568/37154&quot;&gt;adjusting difficulty&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114336/37154&quot;&gt;consuming resources&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64604/37154&quot;&gt;controlling another player's character&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/19243/37154&quot;&gt;distributing rewards&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dealing with scheduling challenges, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/982/37154&quot;&gt;irregular session timing&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89784/37154&quot;&gt;inconsistent attendance&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/78562/37154&quot;&gt;open parties&lt;/a&gt; with players coming and going as they please.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is definitely some overlap. In particular, inconsistent attendance is likely to result in some characters lacking their player most sessions. But there are also questions tagged with either or both of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; that aren't really about a player missing a session as much as intentional variance in what players are participating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Proposal&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; is considered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8232/37154&quot;&gt;useful&lt;/a&gt;. It should be kept, but its description should be updated to indicate that it covers any situation caused by a player being absent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; doesn't seem to add anything. The most recent question that used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; but not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; was in 2013, so I favor keeping the more current tag. Even if we wanted some nuance in the topic of &amp;quot;sometimes players aren't here&amp;quot;, a more distinct tag should be considered so that the difference can be understood from the tag itself rather than requiring careful comparison of the tag wikis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scheduling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scheduling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scheduling&lt;/a&gt; tag might be useful, though it would only cover a handful of questions. Scheduling problems don't necessarily involve sessions taking place with a player missing, so at least some questions that fit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/scheduling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;scheduling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;scheduling&lt;/a&gt; would not fit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt;. Repurposing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; for this doesn't appeal to me, since the meaning is too similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Alternate&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although the Attendance tag hasn't been used much recently, it's the best word to fully encompass all these questions: whether your campaign has people joining and leaving at-will, players missing sessions enough to cause tension, or scheduling difficulties that leave large gaps between sessions, all of these challenges could be called &amp;quot;attendance&amp;quot;. Thus, unifying &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; and grouping &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of these questions there would simplify categorization quite a bit. However, it would also end up being a muddy megatag that covers extremely distinct actual topics, so I don't think it's the best solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T19:57:22.550" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8277" CreationDate="2018-08-20T20:54:47.867" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is not enough daylight between them; we should make them synonyms. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T20:54:47.867" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8287" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:06:55.597" Score="1" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/5e/info&quot;&gt;5e&lt;/a&gt; tag again, that's distinct from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;.  Should we synonymize it or just wait for it to be cleaned up again? (pretty sure I've removed this tag to let it die before...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T21:29:36.667" Title="Syn 5e to dnd-5e?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2018-08-21T13:19:26.440" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8287" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:10:53.677" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's definitely not the first time that tag's come up, and I've removed it once or twice myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll get it added to our tag blacklist. Specifically, we'll blacklist a tag that's composed just of number followed by an &quot;e&quot; (or &quot;ed&quot; or &quot;edition&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not inclined to synonymise it: other 5th editions exist, and since this isn't D&amp;amp;D Stack Exchange, our tags shouldn't be synonymised like that. If we instead blacklist it we can use this as a learning opportunity about our taxonomy, since blacklisted tags can come with information about what to do instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blacklist request has been raised here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8290/blacklist-edition-tags&quot;&gt;Blacklist #-edition tags&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-20T21:29:36.667" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T21:29:36.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8277" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:13:37.723" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Neither is useful. There are only 18 answers tagged to either tag, and neither is a good tag anyway:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are overly narrow. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They try to summarize the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, they are poorly suited to tags' core function. I do not believe they will help answerers find questions relevant to their interests/expertise: It seems unlikely that anyone is waiting &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; to look at questions about missing players, as opposed to generally about group dynamics. It is possible that this tag might help an asker find existing answers, but that is only true to the extent that it summarizes the question (which is discouraged).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T21:13:37.723" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8290" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8292" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:16:42.010" Score="13" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D editions sometimes colloquially go by their edition number alone, and people sometimes enter just the edition for a tag. We've had to burninate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;5e&lt;/a&gt; tag a few times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like the following regex pattern to get blacklisted in tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;^\d-?(e|ed|edition)$&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This ought to blacklist any tag that's simply a digit followed by &lt;code&gt;e&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;ed&lt;/code&gt;, or &lt;code&gt;edition&lt;/code&gt;, optionally separated by a dash. (And not blacklist [dnd-5e] or similarly formed tags.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend the following for the blacklisted tag popup message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Our site caters to hundreds of tabletop RPGs. Say which game you're playing, not just its edition, e.g.: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/7th-sea-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;7th-sea-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;7th-sea-2e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Our site caters to hundreds of tabletop RPGs. Say which game you're playing, not just its edition, e.g.: [tag:dnd-5e], [tag:7th-sea-2e], [tag:shadowrun-5e], [tag:gurps-4e]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-02-12T14:27:51.627" LastActivityDate="2023-02-12T14:27:51.627" Title="Blacklist bare [#-edition] tags" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tags|tag-block-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8277" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:28:53.737" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;They are naturally related but I see important daylight between them. I see no problems they're causing. (And if there's a problem to solve, and we were to combine them, the synonyming should retain the more general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; and eliminate the narrower &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Detailed in reverse order:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If forced to pick one, the concept “attendance” is more useful than “absent players” for tagging&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Absent players is a subset of attendance issues, and if we were to keep only one, we should keep the tag that can already cover both and make the other a synonym. That would mean making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; the main tag and making the synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attenance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attenance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attenance&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There's no problem they're causing&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only problem I can see them causing is redundancy, assuming for the moment and the sake of argument that they're &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; distinct. If they are distinct, being small isn't enough to get rid of a tag, if it accurately describers a common subject of a collection of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without problems such as causing harm or being redundant with existing tags, there's no reason to get rid of a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;They're distinct enough&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attendance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attendance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attendance&lt;/a&gt; covers more than just the problem of absent players: it covers figuring out attendance, how to encourage attendance, how to schedule groups to ensure attendance (rather than other problems related to scheduling), how to manage games where attendance is &lt;em&gt;designed&lt;/em&gt; to be variable (which doesn't qualify as players being “absent” — absence implies you're supposed to be present).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/absent-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;absent-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;absent-players&lt;/a&gt; describes a potential subset of attendance, but &lt;strong&gt;it's a distinct and acute problem that RPG players encounter regularly&lt;/strong&gt;. To my eyes that immediately promotes the subject of absent players to being an important issue all by itself that can have experts who have solved the problem before, distinct questions that should be interconnected in our system, and a specific first-class problem category that &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be easily found directly rather than as part of a more general “attendance” question collection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Absent players is a high-profile problem that GMs and groups do have, and it deserves the high profile of having a tag here. Attendance is also an ongoing source of problems and difficulties that aren't always about &lt;em&gt;absence&lt;/em&gt;, and so it is distinct too and can't be readily dispensed with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Therefore: We should keep them both&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're both useful, and neither are causing problems. If they're not being applied consistently, we aware tag-managers can edit to make them more consistent — one of the very first editing privileges we give to users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-21T16:39:29.317" LastActivityDate="2018-08-21T16:39:29.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8292" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8290" CreationDate="2018-08-20T21:52:24.563" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Went with &lt;code&gt;^\d+(st|nd|rd|th)?-?(e|ed|edition)$&lt;/code&gt; just to discourage obvious work-arounds:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=5e%202-ed%20267th-edition&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9VqGf.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2018-08-20T22:05:37.067" LastActivityDate="2018-08-20T22:05:37.067" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8293" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-21T00:43:12.193" Score="6" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall&lt;/a&gt; tag is relatively small, but it is currently split between two types of questions. There are 10 questions that use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall&lt;/a&gt; tag in reference to a &lt;em&gt;wall of X&lt;/em&gt; spell from D&amp;amp;D or Pathfinder, which seems a little against the spirit of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;not having tags for individual spells&lt;/a&gt;. There are also 3 questions on actual physical walls. Since these are obviously two different topics, it seems like this tag is causing confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this a problem, and if it is, what can be done to clean it up?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user39842" LastActivityDate="2018-08-21T02:40:20.353" Title="Is [Wall] a good tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8293" CreationDate="2018-08-21T02:33:48.287" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; tag, but it's fine (and maybe we can improve it!)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First a point of order: the “tags for individual spells” idea is a red herring: “wall” isn't an individual spell, just a category of thing that (presumably) comes up enough here to warrant collecting together in someone's view. This makes it like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt; (named for the effect type, not the school), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teleportation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teleportation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;teleportation&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polymorph&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polymorph&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polymorph&lt;/a&gt; (named for the effect type, not the spell &lt;em&gt;polymorph&lt;/em&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that way it's in the pattern of some of our harder-working tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's not great, but it's a valid tag&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed it when it was made. When I saw it I didn't think we strictly needed it, but somebody did and I didn't see any reason to override that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because despite my reaction, it ticks a number of big boxes that I look for in a new tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It represents a problem category that keeps coming up. For whatever reason, wall-type spells tend to generate questions, and the confusion is frequently due to the “wall”-ness of those spells: things like placement rules, spacial interactions with other rules, and other things based on it being a “wall” spell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It collects together a set of questions with commonalities, that might be helpful for a reader to study as a set.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People can have spent time getting really good at understanding how wall-type effects work in a given game, so it's possible for there to be experts looking for the tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So despite my reaction, it actually seems like a pretty decent tag to me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's one fly in the ointment that I've been ignoring until now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's getting misused&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not a great thing. The tag is getting used for things that aren't a natural set: it's getting used primarily for wall-type spells and effects, but also for physical walls. That indicates a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it enough to sink the tag though?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, because it's a fixable problem, and fixable in a way that's less involved than tearing out the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(optionally) Rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall-effects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall-effects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall-effects&lt;/a&gt; to more accurately reflect its meaning as representing wall spells and wall-type effects. This should prevent it from being misapplied in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we don't do that, that's fine too. The size of the tag means that the frequency of it being misapplied is so low that we can easily fix it with manual retagging as we notice it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We remove it from these two (I don't see a third) questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13197/what-effects-can-hit-a-phasing-creature-in-a-nonmagical-wall-square&quot;&gt;What effects can hit a phasing creature in a nonmagical wall square?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cover&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cover&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cover&lt;/a&gt; at best (I think it's a stretch), or no replacement tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106561/how-long-does-it-take-to-build-a-wall&quot;&gt;How long does it take to build a wall?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should maybe have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/realm-management&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;realm-management&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;realm-management&lt;/a&gt;, or a hypothetical &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/construction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;construction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;construction&lt;/a&gt; tag (if we have more Qs that would merit such a tag), but probably no replacement tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-21T02:40:20.353" LastActivityDate="2018-08-21T02:40:20.353" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8295" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8296" CreationDate="2018-08-21T16:40:40.420" Score="2" ViewCount="225" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130182/why-is-two-weapon-fighting-considered-subpar&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; has generated two answers (one deleted) that link to reddit discussions or sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a policy on whether or not links to Reddit are legitimate for an answer or is that handled through up/down votes? If there isn't, should there be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This includes cases where a 'discussion' is referenced as well as compilation of data done by redditor (which may or may not be complete or correct.) This is not a question about linking in general, but linking to something as integral part of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-08-21T17:08:33.103" LastActivityDate="2018-08-24T17:26:10.123" Title="Is there a policy on linking to Reddit as part of an answer?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8295" CreationDate="2018-08-21T16:59:35.800" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no policy against linking to Reddit, or anywhere else for that matter. It's completely legitimate. The only exceptions are sites that somehow breach our TOS or are somehow truly exceptional, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2770/1204&quot;&gt;we do not link to piracy sites&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6399/rpgs-by-and-for-white-nationalists?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;sites about white nationalist games&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5893/lets-talk-about-8chan?rq=1&quot;&gt;4chan/8chan&lt;/a&gt; for many reasons including ethical imperative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not the source is any good, or it makes for a decent citation or reference for the answer, is up to you: resolve this with upvotes/downvotes. Would a D&amp;amp;D guide be any different whether it was published on Giants in the Playground or Reddit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-08-24T01:31:17.177" LastActivityDate="2018-08-24T01:31:17.177" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8295" CreationDate="2018-08-21T18:02:29.237" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no policy against linking to Reddit (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8296/32426&quot;&gt;dopplegreener's answer&lt;/a&gt;) nor should there need to be a policy without a clear reason (even something like the dreaded &lt;em&gt;dandwiki&lt;/em&gt; isn't forbidden).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you are referring to have likely been downvoted and/or deleted due to being low quality (in my opinion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One is effectively a copy/paste of the content of a linked Reddit thread without adding any significant transformative commentary. There are scenarios where a discussion could be meaningful content, but not without substantial content in the answer itself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The other refers to a Reddit thread but doesn't really incorporate its content in any noticeable way. It includes some scattered commentary but doesn't really look to answer the OP's question. For example, it addresses the mechanics of a different class than the one the OP asked about. So the Reddit thread is only part of the problem in that it isn't helpful.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The references to Reddit aren't the problem. It's just a case of two problematic answers coincidentally referring to external sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-08-24T17:26:10.123" LastActivityDate="2018-08-24T17:26:10.123" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8298" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-21T20:09:13.337" Score="1" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question refers to the closing of a question I submitted a few years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53972/is-the-omission-of-a-racial-2-to-wisdom-intentional&quot;&gt;Is the omission of a racial +2 to wisdom intentional?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time, Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition had a gap, in that there were no player races with a +2 Wisdom modifier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't know why this was the case. Was it an oversight? Was it a game balance issue? Was it prohibited? Was there errata I had overlooked, or a supplement that would fill it? Particularly in the context of January 2015, the question of whether 5th Edition allowed, prohibited, or merely overlooked allowing a +2 racial bonus to Wisdom was something I thought was fair game. The manner in which I asked strictly discouraged speculation. I was seeking a published statement. Rules. Confirmation. In the first few months of 5th edition, a lot of rules were clarified and defined by statements from the designers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is now closed, because the verbiage of the title and some of the discussion rely upon the opinions of game designers. I disagree with the closure. The question can easily be rephrased as &quot;Is a +2 racial modifier to Wisdom prohibited?&quot; without changing anything else, and it would seem to me to remain on topic. The question has a clear answer, now, in that there are publications--that is, not designer opinions--with racial counterexamples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, then, why do I not simply rephrase the question and submit it for reopening? I consider it a bad move for three reasons. The first is the relationship between the title and the URL, and it seems a shame to interfere with that after nearly two and a half years. The second is that rephrasing the question adds little value to a conversation that took place years ago. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, if I overhaul the question, it may interfere with the quality of the responses, which were so well written for the original question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For these reasons, I would like to politely challenge the notion that questions touching upon designer intent should all be considered off-topic. Questions for which the gist is to understand whether some detail is by design have value. To me, an answer of, &quot;The designer explicitly intended it to be this way, and here is the tweet/errata/website/supplement that confirms this as a rule&quot; means the same thing as, &quot;These are the rules.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the definition of on-topic for this exchange be relaxed somewhat on questions such as this, or does the community agree that questions like mine no longer have a place here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19718" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-08-22T13:22:32.320" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:03:16.003" Title="Should questions touching upon designer reasons be off topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2018-08-22T01:24:57.647" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8298" CreationDate="2018-08-22T01:15:20.470" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You say &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions for which the gist is to understand whether some detail is by design have value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Absolutely. Agree. However, the problem isn’t that they have no value, the problem is that asking and answering questions about what designers intended is fundamentally broken in RPG.se’s Q&amp;amp;A design, and since it doesn’t work, was decided by community consensus it would not be something we would keep trying and inevitably failing to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s why they’re off topic. Not for being valueless, but for being unworkable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some of the history that lead to that decision, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/23970&quot;&gt;How do we save designer reasoning questions?&lt;/a&gt;. For the final decision, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-08-22T01:15:20.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8298" CreationDate="2018-08-22T02:10:07.333" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Your question did not need to be closed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a number of reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It has an accepted answer that clearly and concisely answers the question: Was X intentional? No, X was not intentional, here is the source.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You also call out in the question that it could be definitively answered with the release of new content, which did happen, and someone did then post such an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It had no activity for 11 months prior to being closed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What this shows is that the question is unlikely to attract the sort of speculative answers that caused designer intent questions to be declared off topic in the first place.  Importantly, such questions were declared off topic because the volume of speculation was such that it frequently required moderator intervention, and the community agreed that this is not a good use of their time.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not to say that the question did not at one point attract some speculation: it has 2 such answers.  But the down voting mechanism is sufficient to deal with that, as it can be used to signal that these simply aren't answers. If we saw a sudden flurry of speculative answers to this question &lt;em&gt;today&lt;/em&gt;, my answer here would be different, but that is hardly a serious risk were the question left open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It is entirely appropriate to ask questions like this on Meta&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You ask if the definition of on-topic should be relaxed, and if the community agrees on whether questions like yours have a place here.  The best way to address that is to ask questions like this so people can weigh in, because the answers aren't cut and dried.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying we need to re-litigate the entire discussion from the beginning. What I'm saying is that your question is an edge case in a number of ways that we didn't discuss:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we go back and close any/all old questions that were asked when designer intent questions were very much on topic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is every question that references intent/intention a &quot;Designer Intent&quot; question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could consider handling questions like yours the way we handle questions that attract a lot of opinion-based answers.  Even if all parties agree a question &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be answered with &quot;just the facts&quot;, we'll close it any way because of the poor answering behavior we observe. In your case it got some good factual answers, and since then there's been no bad behavior, so it's safe to leave open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the community consensus is still forming about designer intent.  Note that the Meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on topic?&lt;/a&gt; that you've been linked to was asked &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the decision (no) was already made, and some less frequent users have since weighed in that they feel differently. But the comment period had already been closed, as it were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, rather than reading the linked Meta strictly as we should close anything that, as you say, 'touches upon' designer intent, we should insteads be using Meta to suss out &quot;Should this question have been closed?&quot; issues around designer intent when there is ambiguity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27761" LastActivityDate="2018-08-22T02:10:07.333" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8301" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8302" CreationDate="2018-08-23T06:31:17.107" Score="5" ViewCount="108" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just created a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hack-and-slash&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hack-and-slash&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hack-and-slash&lt;/a&gt; tag and added it to a bunch of questions. I know generally we don't create tags for specific spells, class features etc, but in this case I feel it is warranted. Hack and Slash is one of the basic moves available to all player characters, and there are a lot of questions on the site relating to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before I continue adding the tag to questions, and possibly create tags for some of the other basic moves though, I thought I should double check whether it is necessary....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-08-24T06:29:06.697" LastActivityDate="2018-08-24T06:29:06.697" Title="Tags for basic moves in Dungeon World" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8301" CreationDate="2018-08-23T09:24:22.870" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This should be fine. We have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;tags for actions in D&amp;amp;D: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/readied-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;readied-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;readied-action&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/opportunity-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;opportunity-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;opportunity-actions&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/touch-attacks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;touch-attacks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;touch-attacks&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sneak-attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sneak-attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sneak-attack&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt;, to name only a few&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;tags for concepts and actions in Fate: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/create-advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;create-advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;create-advantage&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/overcome&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;overcome&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;overcome&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/defense&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;defense&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;defense&lt;/a&gt; (the latter 2 being used for a number of things as well)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;tags for basic game concepts: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/inspiration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;inspiration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;inspiration&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rituals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rituals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rituals&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-points&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-points&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-points&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/invokes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;invokes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;invokes&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/free-invocations&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;free-invocations&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;free-invocations&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/compels&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;compels&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;compels&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If Hack &amp;amp; Slash is a move a lot of people have been asking about in Dungeon World, then it's good to have a tag to bring those things together and make those questions more discoverable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we said Dungeon World &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; have a tag describing one of its actions that get asked about frequently, I'd instead be quite concerned at the situation Dungeon World questions on this site would be getting put in, given all the other tags I just listed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People have been citing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8275/1204&quot;&gt;Is the Magic Initiate tag too specific?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7520/1204&quot;&gt;Should we be tagging individual spells?&lt;/a&gt; a lot in the past couple of days so I'm going to pre-empt that here: the reason we don't tag magic spells is because there's like ten thousand of them &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; across D&amp;amp;D's history, and that would cause some problems we described in that meta. Feats look like they're in a similar position. Dungeon World moves aren't even on a comparable scale; they're someone's marble collection compared to all the grains of sand on a beach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-23T10:16:19.157" LastActivityDate="2018-08-23T10:16:19.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8303" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-25T20:56:55.997" Score="3" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag description says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A character in an RPG whose decisions and actions are handled by the game-master or a designated assistant. An initialism that stands for &quot;non-player character.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this is a description of the NPC term, not the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag. It answers a question &quot;what is an NPC&quot;, not &quot;what is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag for&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compare this with the majority of tags, like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about becoming or tutoring a game master &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly this description is about what is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what should we write in the NPC tag description? What is this tag for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was browsing through &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc?sort=votes&quot;&gt;highest voted 'npc' questions&lt;/a&gt; and saw a few examples when the tag is used presumably excessively: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98242/a-player-always-wants-to-recruit-npcs-into-the-party-how-do-i-handle-this&quot;&gt;A player always wants to recruit NPCs into the party. How do I handle this?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/3093/what-is-a-good-way-to-become-a-better-npc-monster-actor&quot;&gt;What is a good way to become a better NPC/monster actor?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71625/risk-of-a-tpk-vs-realistic-npcs&quot;&gt;Risk of a TPK vs realistic NPCs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88553/how-to-deal-with-a-dm-who-controls-us-with-powerful-npcs&quot;&gt;How to deal with a DM who controls us with powerful NPCs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Any questions about any situations where NPC are significantly involved&quot; seems too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2018-08-26T09:46:07.747" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T19:00:07.160" Title="How can we improve the description of the [npc] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8304" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-25T22:23:25.927" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to salvage &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130493/what-map-scales-have-you-found-useful&quot;&gt;What map scales have you found useful?&lt;/a&gt;, which was put on hold as too opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would make it more acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-25T22:40:45.237" LastActivityDate="2018-08-25T22:40:45.237" Title="How to ask about map scales?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8304" CreationDate="2018-08-25T22:40:02.127" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions to avoid asking&lt;/a&gt; help center page come some relevant guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The whole page is worth a read, but this part is the pithiest here: what problem are you having? What current or impending situation are you dealing with that you need our expertise to help you resolve?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tell us about that and request a solution or answer from us about how you can resolve the situation. We may tell you what map scales you should be using in the course of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't have any particular problem to resolve then it's just a poll and there is no way for it to be on topic. You can poke us about in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; or ask on a forum: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind the the scales are just for different maps, at different scales. What kind of map are you making? A world map, a continent map, a battle map? You're going to use different sizes. What maps someone finds useful is kinda just arbitrary depending on what scales they're operating on, so I'm not sure what kind of use you expect that poll to give you anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-25T22:40:02.127" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8303" CreationDate="2018-08-25T23:24:22.327" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s for questions about NPCs?  I think you are way overthinking this, we don’t need drool poof wording in our tags that always starts with “questions about...”, that’s obvious. For a tag about an abbreviation, defining the actual term is useful.  We don’t need to be prescriptive about the tags use unless it’s become a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, dopple’s turn of phrase “tag curation intricacies” turns me off.  Tags are meant to be obvious and simple, added by anyone, applies to questions by anyone, tag wikis and edits to them submitted by most.  Fretting over tags on meta should be restricted to when there’s an actual functional problem that has arisen, and I fail to see where anyone has trouble with tagging their questions about NPCs with npc.  They may overtag sometimes, but that is an issue with every generously scoped tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-08-26T12:55:01.447" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T12:55:01.447" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8303" CreationDate="2018-08-26T02:45:17.583" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag description isn’t great, but that’s a side effect of the tag being mostly self-explanatory: it hasn’t needed to be great to get used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like any tag, regardless whether the tag description is any good, it’s for describing the subject of a question — so when NPCs are the main thing. It’s not just for when NPCs are involved at all. That would be overtagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So these would use it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Do NPCs gain XP?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Players hate my NPCs, what am I doing wrong?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“How can I RP two NPCs arguing without boring the players?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But these probably wouldn’t:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“The PCs are murdering everyone they meet”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“How can my rogue start a thieves guild?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“What skill is used for haggling?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The description might lack guidance, but general tagging guidance applies (and mostly makes it not a problem): tag for the subject of the problem rather than incidental details, and the tags will mostly turn out right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn’t mean the description can’t be improved, but it does mean it’s not going to cause problems with every question mentioning NPCs being “technically” taggable with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T02:45:17.583" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8308" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-26T02:51:37.860" Score="2" ViewCount="567" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130493/what-map-scales-have-you-found-useful&quot;&gt;&quot;What map scales have you found useful&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, was put on hold as too opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to reformulate it.  Will this question get put on hold as too opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried hard to adhere to &quot;What types of questions should I avoid asking&quot; and &quot;Good subjective, bad subjective.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While no doubt this question will elicit subjective answers, I'm aiming for good subjective and constructive objective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Title: How can I make useful campaign-level maps?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've made maps in various different ways and they've been variously useful.  I would like to improve the usefulness of my mapping though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, one issue is the issue of scaling.  The DMG, on p 14, suggests three levels of scaling, at 5 miles per inch, 30 miles per inch, and 300 miles per inch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I'm talking about campaign level maps, maps intended to provide a view of a fairly large to very large stretches of territory, as opposed to town or city maps, or dungeon or encounter-level maps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm particularly interested in D&amp;amp;D 5e, but answers from any RPG might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I make useful campaign-level maps?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TAG: [maps]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-08-26T03:20:55.787" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T04:21:39.030" Title="Will this question about mapping not get put on hold as too opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8308" CreationDate="2018-08-26T04:09:10.357" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;describe the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt;, to the extent you can&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've made maps in various different ways and they've been variously useful. I would like to improve the usefulness of my mapping though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This ⇑, I believe, is where your question could use some work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go ahead and tell us &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; they've been variously useful: what's working well, what's not doing what you want. Along the way, what &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the purpose of your maps? What are you trying to achieve when producing those artifacts? How do you know when they're failing you? What makes you think that scale is the particular issue causing trouble? What have your players said that worries you, and when have friction points come up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crux, I think, is that you want to make &amp;quot;useful&amp;quot; maps and believe that scale has something to do with it, but we don't know what's useful &lt;em&gt;for you and your group&lt;/em&gt;. If you can tell us what you're trying to do and why you think that's not happening, then each answerer isn't left to just describe what works well for them, with voters having little or no way to discern whether an answer is useful or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will second a comment made on your other, recent meta: I think that a forum (especially our &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;) could be an excellent resource. It may not solve your problem, but it might help you suss out exactly what your problem &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T04:21:39.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8303" CreationDate="2018-08-26T19:00:07.160" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've very slightly edited the tag usage guidance to focus on its intended usage rather than just on the definition of &quot;NPC&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For questions about NPCs (non-player characters).&lt;/strong&gt; NPC refers to any character in an RPG whose decisions and actions are handled by the game master (or a designated assistant) rather than by a player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-08-26T19:00:07.160" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8311" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8312" CreationDate="2018-08-27T05:27:30.560" Score="4" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, now when I flag comments I get a &quot;We take your reports seriously&quot; message popup.  I just wanna make sure I'm correct in identifying that as corporate-speak (i.e. a lie) and we don't actually take flags seriously.  Specifically, it's still okay to flag stuff for removal without there being anything wrong with it, right?  I mean, someone said, like, &quot;I think it'd be clearer if you swapped paragraphs 3 and 4&quot;, and I did so and then flagged it.  They aren't going to get in trouble for this, right?  Cause that'd be stupid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T06:34:44.207" Title="We still don't actually take flags seriously, right?" Tags="|support|flagging|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8312" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8311" CreationDate="2018-08-27T06:26:08.997" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s corporate boilerplate, yes, but it’s not wrong either. We do take flags seriously — we consider each one on its merits and on its context and take appropriate action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether someone gets in trouble for what they wrote is part of “appropriate action”. Taking care of comments that aren’t needed anymore doesn’t get anyone in trouble; taking care of foul awfulness that someone wrote does. (Happily, the first kind is the &lt;em&gt;massive&lt;/em&gt; majority of what we handle.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Serious doesn’t equate to severe consequences. It just means that flagging isn’t just spitting into the wind. That’s the unfortunate reality on too many Internet sites, but here at SE flags are taken seriously and pretty swiftly handled with personal attention and careful thought. That distinction is what the pop-up is trying to convey: flagging isn’t futile and aren’t just theatre.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I mean, wow, thoughtful and accurate flag handling is &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of what mod energy goes toward achieving most days. I don’t mean that it’s a burden, just that handling flags well is a significant part of what the site’s human resource that is the Mod Team is for.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect, happily, that part of the disconnect is from being around enough to take for granted that flags aren’t ignored. If that’s the baseline expectation the site has fostered, so much so that it wouldn’t even occur to find the pop-up a necessary reassurance, that’s a flattering reflection on the site. In that case, it’s mostly for the hundreds of non-regulars: “we take your concern seriously, your effort isn’t wasted.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-27T06:34:44.207" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T06:34:44.207" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8313" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8314" CreationDate="2018-08-27T15:00:38.310" Score="7" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have recently been down-voted on one of my answers and I suspect the user that down-voted it thinks I have copied content from the accepted answer, which could be a fine motive to down-vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the situation happens to be reversed, and the user who would have taken content from another answer is a much-higher ranked user than I am and has become the accepted answer by OP. I have flagged his answer as a near duplicate of mine, but I don't know if actions are taken when a question is flagged, as a new-ish user...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to point fingers or start arguments, I'm just wondering if and why this is a fair and accepted system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129358/is-a-teleportation-circle-usable-as-a-destination-during-the-one-year-setup-peri/129362#129362&quot;&gt;Link to question and answer(s)&lt;/a&gt; Looking at the dates and times, the answers are clearly delayed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear: The thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth is the possibility of down-votes from users who might, at a glance, think I am stealing the answer of a higher reputation user not necessarily the potential duplication of the answer itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47455" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-08-27T16:18:33.803" LastActivityDate="2018-09-04T06:55:13.073" Title="How should near-duplicate answers be handled?" Tags="|discussion|down-votes|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8313" CreationDate="2018-08-27T15:24:43.180" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Let the votes sort them out.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yours and the currently accepted answer by Rubiksmoose are very similar - but there is a major difference in your final sections that is the difference maker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The downvotes you have (of which I am not one, full disclosure), are potentially due to the opinion you end with that isn't supported. The upvotes and final selection of the other answer may be due to the extra destination and 1-way access may have been what pushed them over the top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Duplicate answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, duplicate answers are okay and the community will vote to determine who laid out the argument the best. Variations in wording may be enough to decide, but there really isn't an issue with one contributor building off of another's answer (or developing one simultaneously.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I myself have another answer that is very similar to another (and mine went up first), but that other answer has more votes. Why? maybe it's better written. Maybe it resonates more with more people? But that's for me to determine, assess, and decide if it changes how I approach my answers in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Suggest Improvements vs Write Your Own&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often times, users have the choice of recommending improvements/additions/changes to existing answers or deciding that it's better to write their own. Either of those options are good choices, and the determination of which way to go is going to be personal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But both options are legitimate, even if it feels like someone has 'stolen' your answer. Think of it more like Standing on the Shoulder of Giants :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T15:53:47.120" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8313" CreationDate="2018-08-27T15:57:18.643" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will leave the determination of what is correct or not to others as I obviously have a bias here, but I thought that maybe some insight into the thought-process here might help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I wrote my answer was indeed because of your answer. I saw your answer and it had good points but, to me, they were unclear and the answer could use some improvement. The logical progression also seemed to not make much sense to me. And the final factor was the line at the end which seemed both unclear and not solidly-based in rules to me. This is just my personal perception of your answer, I think it was good overall though and am not trying to slam on you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, when I can improve an answer by commenting I will do that. However, as these comments would involve shuffling around the entire logical structure of the answer and debating a potentially controversial statement at the end, I decided that it would be too much work to be able to do through comments (if you even agreed that the changes should be made). As such, I decided to write my own answer with the style and structure that I wanted and with additional emphasis on certain aspects of the question that yours did not seem to touch on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For what it is worth, I also did not downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T15:57:18.643" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8316" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8317" CreationDate="2018-08-27T16:28:54.787" Score="6" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130539/involuntary-lichdom&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is currently being looked at for various reasons, but I note the following (I assume Mod) comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hey, guys, voting to close and downvoting don't have to go hand-in-hand. VTC as unclear, and hold off on the downvotes unless you actually think there's something bad or not useful about this question. It doesn't seem to warrant a -3 score to me, at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-down&quot;&gt;guidelines&lt;/a&gt; on downvoting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When should I vote down?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use your downvotes whenever you encounter an egregiously sloppy, no-effort-expended post, or an answer that is clearly and perhaps dangerously incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the offending post at time of posting this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm making a campaign that involves a half-elf named Ebveron being captured by half-ling followers of Nerva and being turned into a lich against his own will &amp;amp; used as a high-level assassin. Until he (finally) after 5 years musters up the courage to escape (WITH HIS PHYLACTERY). Unfortunately this whole &amp;quot;killing people and using their souls&amp;quot; crap doesn't exactly work with him (keep in mind he's a calligrapher/sage &amp;amp; a pacifist) so in complete desperation he make a deal with a grandmother hag and is tricked into staying in a mountain for 35, only breaking out when the party (including his daughter Phina[PC]) kills the hag, and in the process sees him reform in front of his phylactery (i've shortened the time to reform but the mountain is a week away from the nearest town) in turn breaking his illusion spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IS THIS OK?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other facts: at the time of posting this is currently at a stable &amp;quot;0&amp;quot; equilibrium of votes. Last night it was at least at -3. My &amp;quot;downvote&amp;quot; is still highlighted red.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting this all together, it seems that the Mods stepped in and &lt;em&gt;removed&lt;/em&gt; downvotes on a post that people are voting down because it clearly fits the guidelines of what to vote down:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post is &amp;quot;egregiously sloppy.&amp;quot; It includes vast amounts of unnecessary information (such as character names), is an incoherent ramble of a storyboard, and the question itself makes no sense&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post is low-effort. It has poor punctuation, poor idea separation, a poorly formed question, poor formatting (E.G. &amp;quot;IS THIS OK!?&amp;quot;), etc&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So getting to the final point of the question:&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Did mods actually remove votes on this question and/or why is it acceptable for mods to remove votes?&lt;/strong&gt; Why is that even a feature?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we consider designing a system to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;See how many votes have actually been cast thus far&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be able to validate that those votes are real so that someone like myself can ask this question is a less conspiratorial manner&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get that I have some tinfoil going here, but the correlation of the downvotes getting cancelled out and someone saying &amp;quot;hey we shouldn't be downvoting this&amp;quot; is obvious and seems to show that the voting system has been subverted. I have a hard time believing people upvoted this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apologies if the tinfoil is unwarranted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44960" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T18:16:19.220" Title="Removing downvotes?" Tags="|feature-request|status-bydesign|voting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8316" CreationDate="2018-08-27T16:44:46.890" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Mods can’t and didn’t cancel any votes here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No worries, mods are unable to affect votes. That’s not a feature or power we have. Votes are sacrosanct at RPG.se and people can vote however their consciences are called to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Only Staff — Stack Exchange employees who rank above the volunteer mods — can invalidate votes, and then only when &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/serial-voting-reversed&quot;&gt;revenge voting&lt;/a&gt; or similar &lt;em&gt;serious&lt;/em&gt; abuses of voting privileges are absolutely confirmed. This is rare enough that I can’t remember when the last time I saw it happen at RPG.se was. Mods don’t have this vote correction power.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside, the user who commented isn’t a mod. You can tell us by the diamond after the name, and there’s a full list of us found by following the link at the end of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help&lt;/a&gt; article “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/site-moderators&quot;&gt;Who are the site moderators, and what is their role here?&lt;/a&gt;”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Aside to the aside, because voting is sacrosanct here, we’re not fond of seeing anyone on the main site telling people how to vote. I’ve deleted that comment. How to best use votes does get discussed here on meta, but on main it’s rarely appropriate to tell others how to vote.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Yes, people did upvote it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened here is others have upvoted. The score shows the total of up- and downvotes, so at a score of zero you’re seeing an equal number of upvotes and downvotes. Currently that question is sitting at +3/&amp;minus;3 for a net Post Score of 0:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R8MFZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R8MFZm.png&quot; alt=&quot;A close-up screenshot of the vote buttons and score beside the question under discussion. The score has been clicked, so instead of showing “0” between the two vote buttons, it shows a green “+3” and a red “−3”.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 1,000 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;reputation&lt;/a&gt;, you’ll unlock the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/established-user&quot;&gt;“Established User” privilege&lt;/a&gt; and be able to see the actual vote totals split out by direction like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But why are there &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; upvotes?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why would anyone upvote though? I can only guess, but I’ve seen enough around here to offer a reasonable guess: they objecte to the downvotes and wanted to balance them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a good reason? &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; don’t think so, but it’s their vote, so they can vote that way if they want. Personally, I think it’s a bad idea because it’s not neutral to cancel votes this way: a downvote plus an upvote may cancel out in the &lt;em&gt;score&lt;/em&gt;, but they’re asymmetrical in reputation: a downvote is −2 at most (and −0 when they’re still at 1 rep) but an upvote is +5 on a question, leaving this asker with (what I think is) an unearned +15 reputation. Sure, they can’t do much with 16 rep and they’re unlikely to get anywhere near important privileges without turning out to be a good community member, but it does &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; irk me to see that side effect of people voting to balance downvotes on what I think is a pretty downvote-worthy question regardless of whether it’s hold-worthy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other may not have thought about that effect, or they may (with some truth) deem that side effect small or unimportant enough to not matter. This is why I stress “personal” in my view in the previous paragraph: again, votes are sacrosanct and I can’t assume that those voters are voting badly, just that I disagree with their valid votes — and if I wish, I can vote &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; conscience. ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-27T18:16:19.220" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T18:16:19.220" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8320" CreationDate="2018-08-27T17:51:06.320" Score="7" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/130574/28591&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; (now deleted) was added to a question that is now closed because the system wasn't detailed by the querent. In it, the user first attempts a system-agnostic answer, and then gives the answer guessing that it is a D&amp;amp;D 5e question. Is this ok?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have guidance about guessing the system identity in &lt;em&gt;tags&lt;/em&gt;, but not &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; as far as I can tell. Is it against policy or bad practice to attempt system-agnostic answers to questions whose system has not been specified?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the comments to the answer in question, the user specified their reasoning for placing such an answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first paragraph provides a system agnostic answer and is unlikely to be improved if the OP were to provide a specific system. The second paragraph provides an answer for the system most frequently asked about by new players and members. AsSwearingOakTree is a new user, we are admonished to be friendly and courteous, and this is the way I feel most aligns with the new CoC. I'll eat a few downvotes if it provides the best experience for a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we feel that this kind of answer is helpful to a new user? Is it friendlier?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T17:07:14.163" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T17:07:14.163" Title="Is it against policy or bad practice to attempt system-agnostic answers to questions whose system has not been specified?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8318" CreationDate="2018-08-27T18:09:26.477" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s &lt;em&gt;technically&lt;/em&gt; okay. We don’t need to do “hard” interventions to prevent it or make policy about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn’t recommend it though, and I’d recommend &lt;em&gt;against&lt;/em&gt; attempting such answers. It almost always makes for a bad answer (and therefore is unhelpful or even harmful to the asker), and I’d expect voting to reflect that. It’s fair to do “soft” interventions to encourage answerers to avoid this fate or correct their choice after the fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-08-27T18:09:26.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8318" CreationDate="2018-08-28T00:38:52.360" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is bad practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end the answer poster tried to answer a clearly terrible and under-specced question.  They should know better and that how you get spells is totally game dependent, and should also know not to guess game systems. This is already covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, their answer got downvoted and then deleted by other site members, as it should.  I mean, I guess it's a cosmic question whether it's &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot;, but if you don't like getting downvoted and deleted, then yes, it's bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's &amp;quot;friendly&amp;quot; to get the question poster to clarify their question so they get a good answer.  The new SE guidance on rudeness does NOT alter anything about site SOP in terms of how we handle questions and answers, and we are not throwing out the usual ground rules because it's not &amp;quot;huggy enough.&amp;quot; I see this tenor coming up in several areas and I want to be clear that this is not what it means and not how this site/mod team are taking it. With new users we should take extra time to explain and be polite, but we are NOT eliminating all the usual SE best practices in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 The linked discussion is obsolete, but left here to preserve the original thought. The most up-to-date guidance concerning posts that do not specify the system can be found here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11722/what-should-i-do-when-a-question-does-not-specify-the-game-system-being-used&quot;&gt;What should I do when a question does not specify the game system being used?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T14:04:07.483" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T14:04:07.483" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8321" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8322" CreationDate="2018-08-28T04:07:15.653" Score="7" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/130018/47188&quot;&gt;I answered this question&lt;/a&gt; a couple weeks ago. Today the publishers put out an update to the system that changed the answer to the question, and I edited my answer to account for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I have just edited my previous answer (which the asker might not look at and see) or should I have created a new answer to alert the asker?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-24T22:49:19.700" LastActivityDate="2020-05-24T22:49:19.700" Title="How to handle late updates to answers for questions?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8322" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8321" CreationDate="2018-08-28T05:00:51.817" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's a hard and fast policy either way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think that if you're going to totally (or almost entirely) overwrite your previous answer because it's invalidated by a change, you should simply write a new answer (and maybe delete the old one). The votes on the answer were on an answer that is totally different from its current form, for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternately, if your old answer is invalidated by the change but you still want to acknowledge that there was a change in the rules, you could edit your original answer to state the new/current answer front and center, and then briefly summarize what changed/what the old answer was before that change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, whether you edit the original answer or simply post a new one, the question will be pushed back to the top of the front page when there's answer activity (whether it's a new answer or an edit to an old one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T05:00:51.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8323" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-28T13:41:50.050" Score="7" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the advent of the Pathfinder 2 beta, we're sure to start seeing questions on the Stack here. Just today I saw &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130628/what-are-the-differences-between-pathfinder-and-pathfinder-2&quot;&gt;one&lt;/a&gt; pop up in the review queue, and it piqued my interest. This particular question is likely too broad (though it's possible a sufficiently detailed answer could do a good job of answering it) but the bigger issue is the one addressed in the comments of the question, answers might quickly become outdated!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current community consensus seems to be to close such questions until the final version of Pathfinder 2 is released, and then answer new questions when they arise post-release. This will likely lead to a weird situation, however, where identical questions might be asked and one will be closed and another upvoted and well-answered based simply one when they were asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this unavoidable and acceptable, or is there another way the community could better-address this situation? Perhaps with a Pathfinder2-beta tag, similar to the situation (I seem to recall) we had with the D&amp;amp;D5e playtest materials?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26125" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-28T21:12:07.857" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T21:12:07.857" Title="How do we handle questions for systems under volatile playtest?" Tags="|discussion|playtesting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8323" CreationDate="2018-08-28T13:54:48.040" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is OK to ask questions about games under playtest; we facilitated tons for the D&amp;amp;D Next Playtest as you remember. Answers will be a bit volatile, so sometimes answers will go outdated and new ones will arrive — that's to be accepted with the territory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Just don't break your NDAs if you're under any. Some playtests take place under NDA which probably means nobody can meaningfully ask or answer anything about that playtest. We don't have any questions about the Fate Core playtest for this reason.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;That particular question&lt;/em&gt; wanted a comprehensive edition comparison, which seems like too much to ask during an unsettled playtest. I'd say we should hold off on edition comparison questions for games under playtest, but that's only my subjective judgement at the moment: the community may disagree and so might my fellow diamond moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should be using a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag for playtest materials. Once the full game is out we can use a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag instead, and people can ask about the finalised version there without potentially getting cruft from the playtest filling the tag. We discussed the idea of doing something like that for the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6554/1204&quot;&gt;Revisiting whether D&amp;amp;D Next needs its own separate tag&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3530/1204&quot;&gt;Can we rename [dnd-next] to [dnd-next-playtest] before it&amp;#39;s released?&lt;/a&gt;) and only afterwards realised the utility of having a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag, and I think we should be doing that from the start this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-08-28T14:42:06.093" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T14:42:06.093" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8325" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-28T15:49:38.107" Score="6" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130599/do-the-map-scales-suggested-in-the-dmg-tie-into-any-rules&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; came up as another attempt by the user to get their map scale question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were already two Meta Qs about it that didn't have much engagement from OP:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8304/how-to-ask-about-map-scales&quot;&gt;How to ask about Map Scales&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8308/will-this-question-about-mapping-not-get-put-on-hold-as-too-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Will this question about mapping not get put on hold as opinion-based&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP posted the latest question last night that I (and others) felt was in need of closure until it was better defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a comment thread which attempted to reignite the discussion and get OPs feedback to help them define their problem so we could have better answers, but a mod came in and broke up the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All comments were deleted (not moved to chat, but deleted) and two new comments were put in countering the arguments from those deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this the best way to handle closure votes that mods don't agree with? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-28T16:24:07.727" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T22:06:57.153" Title="How should we handle disagreements on question closure within comments?" Tags="|discussion|comments|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8325" CreationDate="2018-08-28T16:14:56.453" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something the mod team has observed is that there seems to be a lot of sensitivity among the community to detecting hints of designer-reasons in questions. Possibly more detection than is really there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that context, my perception is that that’s what happened here. I can’t speak for the acting mod there, but I personally see some over-detection of designer-reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mods, we sometimes step in to override what we see as a clear error. For closes or reopens, we do that where we can with confidence say that an override is correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also use mod actions sometimes to nudge the community as a whole entity away from spiralling into vicious cycles. Establishing a community-wide precedent where any hint of designer-reasons makes a question close-worthy is beyond the consensus established on meta, and is the sort of thing likely to feed on itself and/or change how closes in general are handled, so I see nudging away from &lt;em&gt;hints&lt;/em&gt; becoming the working precedent as useful intervention. (For context, the consensus, at least as I recognise it, is that questions with a core problem that is “why is this designed this way?” is what was made off topic.) A nudge at community scale can look like a hammer at the scale of one post or one comment trail, but hammers are a normal tool in the mod toolbox too that we use judiciously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I can’t speak for the acting mod, but I can say that as mods we do step in to take corrective measures when something appears to be going wrong, so this example (wiping an argument and then making a statement, possibly with a close/open action) isn’t unusual in that regard and at question scale. I can say also say that at the community scale we’re not keen on overdoing designer-reasons close votes, and it looks to me that this is an example of going beyond what meta has established, and that’s part of the environment of this event.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-28T17:33:13.310" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T17:33:13.310" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8327" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-28T16:57:16.047" Score="3" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a methodology that's employed when determining if a comment thread should be deleted or simply moved to chat to allow discussion to continue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, that creates an environment where expectations aren't understood and frustration can arise by users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that there should be at least some criteria that mods use and users understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;An example&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a specific example: there was a comment thread &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130599/do-the-map-scales-suggested-in-the-dmg-tie-into-any-rules&quot;&gt;on this question&lt;/a&gt; where I was trying to engage the querent in clarifying their need in order to better develop their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T17:15:03.483" Title="What is the criteria in deciding when to delete comments or move them to a chat?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8327" CreationDate="2018-08-28T17:11:57.923" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;There isn't a set criteria. It's a subjective case-by-case judgement. Primary considerations include whether we imagine the participants might want to continue at all, and whether &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; as diamond moderators would want to allow the discussion to continue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, sometimes what one person sees as a discussion, diamond moderators might instead see as an argument waiting to happen, an argument &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; happening, or people taking someone to task unnecessarily: some of the people involved might feel they want to continue, but we as diamond moderators might see problems in allowing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bear in mind the primary responsibility of diamond moderators is ensuring the site runs smoothly for the community. In the course of that duty we look after our members and content quality bars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to know why a comment trail was deleted it's best to ask about the specific case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T17:11:57.923" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8325" CreationDate="2018-08-28T22:06:57.153" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The amount of discussion sprawl for a single question was in my opinion excessive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were 2 questions each with comment threads (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130493/what-map-scales-have-you-found-useful&quot;&gt;What map scales have you found useful?&lt;/a&gt; (closed), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130599/do-the-map-scales-suggested-in-the-dmg-tie-into-any-rules&quot;&gt;Do the map scales suggested in the DMG tie into any rules?&lt;/a&gt; (with 10 deleted comments)) and then 2 meta questions also with discussion (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8304/how-to-ask-about-map-scales&quot;&gt;How to ask about map scales?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8308/will-this-question-about-mapping-not-get-put-on-hold-as-too-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Will this question about mapping not get put on hold as too opinion-based?&lt;/a&gt;). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, instead of continuing comment discussion, I re-linked the latest meta question and deleted the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they choose not to engage in meta (and you don't really know they're not, they posted the meta and can read your replies, they don't have to turn it into a discussion), then you vote your conscience, you don't sprawl the discussion further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related to the specific area of concern for the original question, the community is in my opinion being excessively overzealous about identifying questions as designer-reasons questions. Someone explicitly asking for designer reasons is a designer-reasons question. Or just bellyaching about &quot;Why did they do it this way I loved descending AC!?!&quot;.  But it's entirely reasonable to explore, in a complex ruleset, why something might be the way it is. This is not a problem with the question, it's a problem with answers. If there is not an answer within the ruleset, then don't answer, and it's not a designer-reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't just about that question, it's been happening a good bit lately and the mod team in general isn't very happy about it.  And it's not just about overzealous identification of questions as designer-reasons. There's been a weird uptick in a particularly legalistic approach to community closure and activity lately which fails to recognize the organic nature of the community. We do kinda want to allow as much content on the site as we can that's not problematic.  There's not always a &quot;hard rule&quot; and we expect people to use their judgement. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We certainly do, which is why there's not always some black-letter law underlying our actions and guidance to the community.  This is an example of that kind of time. As @sevensideddie points out well in his answer, &quot;it depends.&quot; Sometimes deleting comments, sometimes moving to chat, sometimes posting on meta, sometimes doing nothing is the right thing to do. In this case, the combination of discussion sprawl, on a topic that seems to need some guidance in general in the community, resulted in a specific set of actions (comment deletion and comment guidance to a) use meta and b) lay off the over-diagnosing of designer-reasons).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A similar situation in the future might indeed generate different actions. That is a feature, not a bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T22:06:57.153" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8273" CreationDate="2018-08-28T22:15:52.733" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is effectively asked and answered already in  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6507/is-there-an-established-way-to-handle-a-games-designer-on-the-site&quot;&gt;Is there an established way to handle a game's designer on the site?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7342/to-what-extent-does-a-well-known-representative-from-an-rpg-company-who-represen&quot;&gt;To what extent does a well known representative from an RPG company who represents their product need to provide evidence of this in their answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we don't ask for &quot;proof&quot;, because the proof doesn't make them automatically right anyway (see linked questions for further discussion). Their answers should stand and fall by our usual site quality standards.  Ideally if they're the designer they should be able to Back It Up! with real play experience, yes? (Which also, we don't require proof of... &quot;You say you used that house rule, but do you have video of it!?!&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-08-28T22:15:52.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8331" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8332" CreationDate="2018-08-29T14:13:11.650" Score="5" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to identify the account in question right now, but I have noticed one particular account who continually makes posts using &quot;we&quot;, rather than &quot;I&quot;. There are more subtle contextual clues that indicate the account may not be a single individual, but rather a group of people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a violation of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public&quot;&gt;Public Network Terms of Service&lt;/a&gt;, specifically the first bullet point of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public#obligations&quot;&gt;item 5&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;To access some of the public Network features you will need to &lt;strong&gt;register for an account as an individual&lt;/strong&gt; and consent to these Public Network Terms. If you do not consent to these Public Network Terms, Stack Overflow reserves the right to refuse, suspend or terminate your access to the public Network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who is responsible for resolving or enforcing this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22138" LastActivityDate="2018-08-29T16:20:43.640" Title="Who handles an apparent violation of the Stack-wide Terms of Service?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8331" CreationDate="2018-08-29T14:25:40.817" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Mods and SE staff.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators who suspect TOS violations will escalate as necessary to Stack Exchange staff and/or the user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;One user can still post &lt;em&gt;representing&lt;/em&gt; a group&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While maintaining a &amp;quot;group account&amp;quot; that many people access and make use of is a violation of ToS, there's nothing preventing a play-group from having one member with an RPGSE account who asks questions &lt;em&gt;on behalf of&lt;/em&gt; the group. For instance: if I'm the only member of my table who has an account and player X has a problem with Y, it's perfectly fine for me to post a question about Y that my fellow player X has trouble with. And in that case I might talk a lot about how &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; have trouble or have tried to deal with X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So what should you do?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go ahead and flag things like this if you see them and they raise your hackles. (It's good to know when something's rubbing a &amp;quot;real user&amp;quot; the wrong way, and not just catching our eyes!) A custom mod-flag to say &amp;quot;I've seen this username talking ~as a group~ a lot and am worried it's a group account&amp;quot; is really helpful, since we are only eight eyes and don't see all the patterns that are out there. We'll take it from there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(But you may not get much of a response. (a) you may not even see the flag as &amp;quot;resolved&amp;quot; for a while--that doesn't mean we haven't &lt;em&gt;seen&lt;/em&gt; it or aren't taking action; leaving a flag open is often how we keep something on the front burner for our group-coordination. And (b) if there is a violation we almost certainly shouldn't be sharing details of how it was handled with other users. And by extension (to my thinking) we shouldn't go out of our way to communicate &amp;quot;no violation here!&amp;quot; in some cases and thus confirm by omission violations in other cases.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-08-29T16:20:43.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8333" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-08-29T17:34:25.810" Score="1" ViewCount="215" Body="&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/130660/3548&quot;&gt;my question with respect to spell requirements&lt;/a&gt; got locked and one of our moderators decided to throw this gem of a line in there:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot; not asking honestly about the practical situation it’s about. &quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First: The question has been open for one day and generated some confusion, largely in part because it was spawned off of a debate over the interpretation of Wish. This is entirely irrelevant to the question I asked, and I don't appreciate being called dishonest either directly or indirectly when I'm simply looking to clarify what are general rules clearly described in the book (as cited in my answer to my own question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second: That I would have potentially or even likely used the answer to support a different argument is entirely irrelevant. The question was asked and the answer provided did apply to all spells equally and generally across the board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So Third: Why did you intervene in something simply because there was a minor disagreement over the clarity of the question? I specified using an example of something simple, and was willing to go further to demonstrate how it would apply to any and all spells, not just Wish specifically. And rather than letting the community respond to the clarifications it asked for, you locked the question completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Locking this question that's less than 24 hours old simply because there's disagreement on it is absurd. Is that not the point of questions? To generate answers that sometimes conflict due to interpretations? Are comments not meant to help clarify the answers provided when there may be conflicts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may have noticed I didn't readily accept my own answer, leaving it open for other answers that may demonstrate a different interpretation that, and I can't stress this enough, were required to cite the rules as part of the question I asked. That none of the other answers did this is the only reason I summarily rejected the interpretations provided. It was a stipulation of the question that answers be sourced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the record, I will argue adamantly when I have a supported answer and cite the rules to support the interpretation. If your counter is, &quot;You're wrong,&quot; with nothing else to back it, I will summarily dismiss your counter. That which is asserted without evidence is dismissed without evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23110" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2018-08-29T17:43:24.743" LastActivityDate="2018-08-29T18:05:57.147" Title="How to handle accusations of dishonesty with respect to answers that cause disagreement in interpretations?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|moderators|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8333" CreationDate="2018-08-29T18:05:57.147" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Replace “honestly” with “openly”. The question is hiding the practical situation it’s about, and that’s a problem of content that can be described by a variety of words. The motives aren’t really important and I am sorry my choice of words give the impression that motive was an issue. That was careless on my part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s locked for the reasons described in the lock banner and in the comments. Time it’s been on the site isn't a factor in content dispute locks. What tends to draw a content dispute lock are things like a shifting question, edit warring, and/or disputes over its content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-08-29T18:05:57.147" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8335" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8336" CreationDate="2018-08-31T17:34:22.290" Score="7" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/130841/43484&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; currently reads: &quot;Exhaustion after falling unconscious?&quot; In substance, the question is asking about potential balance issues arising from a putative exhaustion-related house rule in a dnd-5e game. However, the title is ambiguous for want of a verb; it could just as easily be read as if asking whether the rules-as-written &lt;em&gt;already contain&lt;/em&gt; such a rule. It also occurred to me that a more explicit title might be easier for users to find via search. So, I thought I might suggest an edit for clarity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am cognizant of the Stack's general respect for users as authors and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;admonishment not to make &quot;trivial edits.&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I right that the referenced question is an at-least-potentially proper candidate for an edit? How should I be calibrating my metrics for what's &quot;trivial&quot;? Is this a circumstance where one should simply suggest the edit and trust the site's democratized mechanisms to sort out whether the edit is desirable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I'm being unnecessarily tentative here, but having only just received editing privileges, I want to make sure I know what using them responsibly looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:37:02.607" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:37:02.607" Title="Would this be an appropriate use of the power to suggest an edit to a question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8335" CreationDate="2018-08-31T17:39:16.053" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Titles are important because they’re the “elevator pitch” for clicking on the question. A bad title can mean someone who could answer never even &lt;em&gt;reads&lt;/em&gt; the question. It can mean a searcher with the same problem never looks at it. Making titles immediately understandable and better reflect the question is a good use of even small changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What tends to be trivial in titles is little wiggles to grammar or word order that don’t actually add information or clarify the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your suggestion is good — it’s currently a bad title and needs more info, and adding a verb is a massive info addition that tells us more what the point if the question is. It’s not trivial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I find the line between trivial title edits and substantive ones isn’t the size of the edit, it’s whether core information about what the question actually is was added or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For a personal angle, that title is one I recognise… but I never clicked it. With your title changes I would have.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-08-31T17:44:40.877" LastActivityDate="2018-08-31T17:44:40.877" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8337" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-03T09:14:31.543" Score="8" ViewCount="65" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to get notified when a question you have answered gets edited? Edits sometimes change the wording or meaning of the main question and a previously posted answer can seem badly worded or incorrect. Eg. if &quot;Can i do X&quot; is edited into &quot;Am I forbidden to do X&quot;, an answer that highlighted &quot;No&quot; will be misleading, even if the reasoning below that is correct and clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have something like this? If not, could we?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Not sure if I should post this here or on some more general meta, help of that kind is also appreciated.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33200" LastActivityDate="2018-09-03T09:56:28.270" Title="Notification of edits on questions you answered" Tags="|feature-request|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8337" CreationDate="2018-09-03T09:56:28.270" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't have an automated way for this to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally someone making such an edit (or spotting that such an edit has been made) would leave a comment on your answer suggesting it needs an update, or update it themselves if it's easy enough to do so and they feel so inclined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your specific example (an answer leading with simply “Yes” or “No”) is a learning scenario though: those types of answers break pretty easily with question edits. I recommend also summarising what is true such as by saying “No, (thing) is the case” or “No, you can't (thing)” or “Yes, you can do (thing)”; it's a more resilient response to changes in question phrasing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-09-03T09:56:28.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8339" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8313" CreationDate="2018-09-04T06:55:13.073" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I downvote duplicate answers if they don't add enough new material.  A lot of interesting questions get bogged down by like 50 copies of what's basically just the same answer over and over, and often the 'base' answer in such cases isn't even right (in which case I downvote all of it, but I totally understand not doing that if you don't have the rep to spare).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, while I generally disapprove of duplicate answers, sometimes an answer that is more or less the same as an existing answer really is better enough with enough extra stuff done that it makes sense to be an answer rather than an edit, in which case I upvote the best answer and leave the similar, older answer untouched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; case, both of y'all use '365 castings' instead of 'one year's worth of castings' which is both weird and wrong, but the rest of your answers are more-or-less correct, and the question's a 5e vote mess anyways so I figured I'd just leave the whole thing alone.  But in &lt;em&gt;general&lt;/em&gt; if I agreed with your answers I would not downvote an older answer as a duplicate of a newer one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also I'm just one random user, but I thought my example might be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-09-04T06:55:13.073" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8335" CreationDate="2018-09-04T07:19:04.740" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are some safe question edits to make, in case it helps:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the title is not a question, it's always good to edit it to be a question.&lt;/strong&gt;  People like making vague unhelpful titles that describe part of the background to their problem rather than their actual problem out of fear an actual title would be too long.  It's pretty much never too long. &quot;Does altering FATE's dice system to produce equally-distributed results unfairly benefit mages in my homebrew magic system?&quot; is a much better title than &quot;Changing FATE dice&quot;, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the title does not describe the body text, it's always good to edit it to match the body text&lt;/strong&gt;, unless the question is already so unclear it needs to be closed.  Titles and text need to match, for obvious reasons, and only when there's a genuine concern the author may have meant something completely different should the tiny bit of text in the title outweigh the much more important text in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If a question was recently posted or has recently become 'active', all non-negative edits are fair game&lt;/strong&gt;, if you're high enough rep to bypass the review queue.  The drawback to trivial edits is that it inappropriately messes with site question sorting, and also people maybe have to approve the edit in a review queue.  If neither of those are true, feel free to make even tiny-improvement edits, like punctuation/spelling/grammar/formatting/etc, even if the full body of changes would not normally be something you'd be okay bumping a question for; the question won't be bumped much anyways.  It's still important to avoid harmful and/or bigoted editing, like changing colour to color or sympathise to sympathize or 3.000 to 3,000 (for example).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-04T07:24:36.633" LastActivityDate="2018-09-04T07:24:36.633" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8341" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-04T21:37:40.760" Score="5" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130924/party-betrayal-in-an-evil-campaign&quot;&gt;Party betrayal in an evil campaign&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;was put on hold as too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, this one wasn't:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130939/how-can-i-handle-players-who-want-to-browse-shops-at-random&quot;&gt;How can I handle players who want to browse shops at random?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In both cases, they both boil down to asking for suggestions as to how to handle something in-game.  In both cases, it seems like likely answers are, well, consider trying a, b, and c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the difference?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps stating the difference would help us advise the betrayer more effectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-05T05:25:12.603" LastActivityDate="2018-09-05T05:25:12.603" Title="One question was put on hold as too broad, another wasn't. What's the difference?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8341" CreationDate="2018-09-04T22:21:08.890" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;One is targeted at DM techniques.  The other is targeted at possible RP actions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question A (Shops) is about homebrew DM techniques. DM techniques, even for things that don't exist, can be opinions reinforced with experience or examples of similar materials from the in-game rules.  It has a foundation to work off of, and few are refutable.  Most answers can be applicable to most settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question B (BBEG) revolves around PVP. Player vs. Player interactions are things that are rarely used in tables, and doesn't have much mention in any of the books available to players.  On top of this, the offender to the party is described as being an RP-specific player, and the ones he's targeting are less so and focus on stealing/combat.  There are plenty of things that can be suggested, but many of them are things that simply won't work for several situations without excessive explanation from the questioner or the questioner's DM.  Even with experience from people who have been in a similar circumstance, the events would be very specific and likely non-applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If 100 random answers were given to both Question A and Question B, Question A would have a lot to choose from, but a few would be filtered out due to an odd setting or DM's rulings. Question B would have a lot that would be wasted due to the fact that the answerers don't know what's applicable to the setting, players, or DM's decisions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the main concern.  We don't need to know all the variables for Question A for answers to be applicable, but we do for Question B. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45619" LastActivityDate="2018-09-04T22:21:08.890" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8341" CreationDate="2018-09-05T03:26:51.840" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;One was explicitly asking for ideas for stuff to do, and the entire world of possibilities are valid answers. What might work is unknowable, as the situation and what ideas might work to fool the other players depends on the local group, making the voting system untenable. Experienced-based answers aren't demonstrably useful, nor would any answers be clearly useful to future readers. The question has too many possible valid answers, which is what “too broad” is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other was looking for how to handle a more-or-less common conundrum when GMing, which only has workable solutions as valid answers. The situation's details are going to be common across the majority of play groups, possibly all of them, and doesn't depend on the local group's details. Many GMs will be in identical situations, and the answers will be useful to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second does have the issue that people can and have thrown in ideas off the top of their heads, but “people are answering with untested ideas” is a different problem from “the question is entirely just asking for ideas to consider”, and dealing with those problems is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-05T03:36:59.497" LastActivityDate="2018-09-05T03:36:59.497" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8344" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-05T14:59:09.007" Score="14" ViewCount="567" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have guidance about instructing that we do not allow and will revert any edit that attempts to guess the system of the question and edit it into the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. We also have related guidance for how to handle a specific case where the answer was a system agnostic answer to question whose system was unclear &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8318/is-it-against-policy-or-bad-practice-to-attempt-system-agnostic-answers-to-quest&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we have no corresponding guidance for what to do when an &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; which guesses the system gets placed on a question (usually moments before the question gets closed as being unclear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The issue&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see such answers as an issue for a couple of reasons at least. For one, having an answer to a question can be a disincentive for OP to update the question to meet community guidelines. There has been at least one case where an answer has been accepted by OP without them bothering to update the question to include the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another is that answering when the system is unknown can create confusion for the asker as well as future readers and a guess, no matter how sure a guess, is never guaranteed to be correct. I have seen a question that looked very much like a 5e question turn out to be a custom system where the DM was combining 5e, 4e and Pathfinder rules which means that any answer would have been useless that had guessed before. I've also seen questions where OP was confused about the system and using the wrong resources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, to me, guessing serves only to create confusion and disincentivize the proper use of our systems here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Past actions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the last several instances that I've seen, the answer has gotten deleted either by a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/131168/28591&quot;&gt;diamond mod&lt;/a&gt; or by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130571/can-you-choose-not-have-spells/130574#130574&quot;&gt;the community&lt;/a&gt;. This is sometimes combined with heavy downvoting. I can't recall specific examples right now, but I know in the past some answers have simply been downvoted and left undeleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the consensus from the entire community about how these answers should be handled?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-11T20:57:04.183" Title="What to do when an answer guesses the system of a question rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2022-11-26T22:27:52.837" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8345" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8344" CreationDate="2018-09-05T16:56:58.907" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Vote down and comment, and let the community deal with it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me your question is a token of a broader type of problem. I would think we should, in general, discourage any answer that guesses at the meaning of a question. If the question so wants for clarity that one's answer must take the form &quot;Well, if you mean X, then Y, or if you mean A, then B, or...&quot; potentially ad nauseam, that's a bad question. By discouraging guess answers, we encourage better questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to discourage guess answers, I think the answer is already baked into the Stack's voting system, as reflected in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8320/43484&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to one of the meta questions you linked to. If the community as a whole sees a guess answer as not valuable, it will get voted down into the negatives and should be deleted by the community. Moreover, downvotes should at least help to communicate to the answerer that they ought to know better. Comments to the querent requesting clarification, and also to the answerer to hold off for said clarification, would likewise help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There shouldn't be a need for a diamond mod to take action in these cases. Policing this sort of answer-quality issue is exactly what voting is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastActivityDate="2018-09-05T16:56:58.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8346" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-07T08:11:37.683" Score="14" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently I posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131210/is-it-possible-to-possess-a-non-humanoid-creature-with-a-combination-of-true-pol&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and as a result received two contradictary answers, but since game rules are a slightly ambigious on this particular topic, arguments for each of the answers are partially true (at least to the degree where the answer could not be discarded right away as a wrong one).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users looking for an answer usually (from my experience showing RPG.SE to several friends of mine) look only at the accepted answer, not bothering themselves to scroll down further to check any other answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not to mention that accepted answer mark marks an answer as the most &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; (in RAW context).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What can/should I do in this current situation?&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Possible solutions:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Accept an answer with most upvotes;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Accept an answer I &lt;em&gt;myself&lt;/em&gt; consider correct;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do not accept any answer;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Accept an answer with most upvotes, accumulate enough reputation to reward another answer with bounty;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40039" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2018-09-07T10:10:04.853" LastActivityDate="2018-09-07T14:42:41.503" Title="Which answer should I accept if the rules are ambiguous on the matter?" Tags="|discussion|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8347" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8346" CreationDate="2018-09-07T08:58:44.747" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;For now, neither&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is completely okay not to accept any answer if you feel the issue is not clear. You are under no obligation to reward the highest voted answer either. The two systems have different purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Try them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Accept&quot; is also there to indicate what has actually &lt;em&gt;worked&lt;/em&gt; for the querent. If you try the answers out and see that one solves your problem, accept that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33200" LastActivityDate="2018-09-07T08:58:44.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8346" CreationDate="2018-09-07T14:42:41.503" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question generates two highly upvoted answers, that themselves are mutually exclusive with each other (i.e. &quot;yes, this is possible&quot; vs &quot;no, this is not possible&quot;), then the safest conclusion you can draw is to assert that the decision really boils down to DM decision making. D&amp;amp;D, especially 5e (the system you posted that question for) relies strongly on the DM decision making process for resolving rule conflicts, and that's inherent to the system. Sometimes, there's not going to be an answer that definitively proves or disproves a given idea/combo/whatever. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, &quot;Accepting&quot; an answer is about asserting that that answer is most helpful &lt;em&gt;to you&lt;/em&gt; for resolving the issue. If one of the answers resolves the issue for you, you can consider accepting it. Other times, it's fine to simply let it be, with the understanding that there really just isn't one defacto-correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2018-09-07T14:42:41.503" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8349" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-07T15:54:38.293" Score="2" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if we should have a small dialog box which is opened when you wish to downvote a question or answer, I feel that if people put in the reasoning for the downvote the community will have a better idea on what is considered a 'Good' Answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example I provided this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131239/when-is-passive-investigation-used/131240#131240&quot;&gt;an answer to this&lt;/a&gt; which was just down voted from a +1 to a 0. Now from reading my answer compared to the other answer that has been posted, there are some differences but I feel the meat of both questions is valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I am left wondering why my answer was downvoted. If I had constructive criticism I could use that to help structure my next answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32434" LastEditorUserId="32434" LastEditDate="2018-09-07T16:03:56.730" LastActivityDate="2018-09-07T16:03:56.730" Title="Should we give a reason why we are downvoting an answer" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ClosedDate="2018-09-07T16:08:44.083" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8350" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8351" CreationDate="2018-09-09T01:37:31.000" Score="2" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125617/is-it-possible-to-loophole-your-way-into-getting-a-permanent-guardian-of-faith&quot;&gt;this question,&lt;/a&gt; I was downvoted a lot. As far as I am aware, I did not do anything wrong. Can someone please explain to me why I was downvoted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44595" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-09T02:11:58.930" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T21:51:46.783" Title="Why was I downvoted?" Tags="|support|specific-question|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8351" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8350" CreationDate="2018-09-09T02:14:35.230" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would assume all the downvotes are for people agitated that you seem to be deliberately trying to reinterpret English, logic, and/or math to rules lawyer an advantage. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve downvoted it for the same reason.  The question is not helpful content for the site.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did you “do something wrong?”  Other answerers say &quot;no&quot; (IMO just because they don’t want to get drawn into an argument about it); I’m going to differ on this and say “yes.”  You're not breaking any site rule, site members are just expressing their unhappiness with the usefulness of the content. Even our pretty RAW-friendly crowd thinks poorly of your question and its frame it seems. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an opportunity to introspect and understand that your approach will garner the same kind of hostile reception when you try it in a game. RPGs aren’t a word game of twisting rules till they give you what you want.  Your gaming will be happier if you take the feedback from these downvoters to improve your approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-09-11T21:51:46.783" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T21:51:46.783" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8352" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8350" CreationDate="2018-09-09T02:27:41.137" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You didn't do anything &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;. Voting isn't about that.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our help page on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/why-vote&quot;&gt;why voting is important&lt;/a&gt; explains the purpose of voting well. The parts I want to highlight that are more relevant to votes on questions (as opposed to on answers):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Voting is central to our model of providing quality questions and answers; it is how …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...good content rises to the top&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  […]&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  ...users who consistently provide useful content accrue reputation and are granted more privileges on the site  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Voting up a question or answer signals to the rest of the community that a post is interesting, well-researched, and useful, while &lt;strong&gt;voting down a post signals the opposite: that the post contains wrong information, is poorly researched, or fails to communicate information&lt;/strong&gt;. The more that people vote on a post, the more certain future visitors can be of the quality of information contained within that post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of voting is to rank the site's most useful content toward the top and the least-useful content toward the bottom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As a side effect, voting encourages people to post high-quality content more and low-quality content less, by attaching reputation gain and loss to each. This nudges the site towards generating more high-quality questions on average.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Voting is about usefulness to others&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary purpose of voting — actually, the primary purpose of the whole site — is to generate and rate questions and solutions by their usefulness to future people with similar problems. For questions, this means that votes reflect how likely it is to be a problem that anyone else has in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question can have high usefulness to future readers for a variety of reasons: it is a common problem, it's an important problem, it's a problem that many people don't know the answer to, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The flip side is that a question have have low usefulness for future readers: it isn't a common problem, it's not an important problem, it's a problem that many people feel has an obvious answer already, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Your question, seen through what the voting system is for&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the measure of what our voting system &lt;strong&gt;means&lt;/strong&gt;, the site system has assigned your question a low score of likely usefulness to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's impossible to know the exact reasons why your question was given a low score of future usefulness, but once you know that's what many negative votes measure, you have a guide to figuring out what it might be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps your question was seen as unimportant, or of usefulness to few people. Maybe it had an error that made the answer obvious to voters. Whatever the reason, the site has decided that it's not the first thing that visitors need to find when they're searching the site, and it's been given a score that suits that evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-09-09T02:27:41.137" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8353" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8350" CreationDate="2018-09-09T22:18:19.687" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's why I downvoted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congruence of several factors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The goal of the question was trying to find a loophole or exploit the rules (but there was no actual problem here that needed solving)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The loophole was not even plausible or realistic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question was not useful content to others&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is a clear attempt at trying to use a very very strained English reading to try to create a loophole that is clearly against the intent of the reading. It clearly goes against what the actual rules say in English as well as mathematical logic. In short, the question is basically a non-starter and isn't going to be of use to anyone (nobody is going to have issues with this loophole because none exists).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't mean you did anything wrong (as in you didn't violate any site policies or anything), but it is our job as voters to make sure the best, most useful content gets voted to the top and the rest settles towards the bottom. That way other users of the site can see the content that is most useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a method of improvement it is worth noting that this site works best when you start from an actual problem that has occured at the table and ask a question about that. Theorycrafting in many ways is a poor fit here and is hit or miss with how well it is received or able to be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-09-10T13:39:45.493" LastActivityDate="2018-09-10T13:39:45.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8344" CreationDate="2018-09-10T14:30:51.603" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't answer questions that need a system but do not specify one&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guessing the system leads to confusion in several ways. Since many users that have this issue are new there is the issue that in addition to not knowing how the site works and having their question put on hold they have no idea why their question has only one (or a few) answers that are highly downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, the asker doesn't even know what system they are asking about or they are using the wrong materials and give the impression they are using one edition but are using others. We've even had a case where the asker was playing a homebrew system that was a combination of 5e, 4e, and Pathfinder. For all these cases, guessing the system in an answer is going to result in an answer that could be useless to OP. However, since they could be confused from the get-go it may also give them an explicitly wrong answer under the guise of being an expert answer to their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, it is often a waste of effort to answer these questions anyways since OP seems to be very likely to not come back and ever check on/update the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, this is about training OP in the proper way to use this site. If they get an answer that may seem useful to them (even if it might not be) they may have no incentive to update their question to meet site guidelines. This could leave us with orphaned questions with useless answers and a confused and un-helped OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wait for OP to clarify and then answer and we should have none of these issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Downvote &amp;amp; Delete (and comment)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply downvoting is not enough in this case. It leaves a confusing and potentially wrong answer up which might not even answer the question at all. Being a new user, they might not understand or care about what downvoting means on this site and accept the answer as the best answer they are going to get regardless. We should work to avoid this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting the answers makes sense because it removes all the confusion for the asker and forces them to address the issue with their question without the distraction of potentially incorrect answers to muddy everything up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When an answer like this is seen, the best thing to do would be to downvote immediately and then those users with enough rep to delete should vote to do so as well. A comment should be left explaining our policy and encouraging self-deletion, though we should not wait for the user to do it themselves.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-11T18:55:48.637" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8350" CreationDate="2018-09-10T19:47:06.347" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Failure to do basic research often attracts down votes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mouse over the down vote button and read the text there: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;this question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not&#xA;  useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8350/why-was-i-downvoted/8351#8351&quot;&gt;@mxyzplk has addressed the &quot;not useful&quot; piece of that.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the key lessons I have learned in the SO/SE world is that before asking a question, one must demonstrate having put some effort into researching the problem at hand.  That's a powerful community norm.  Evidence that such effort was not expended will attract down votes on most SE sites, regardless of topic.  (I participate with some frequency in four other SE sites ... ) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;creature&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; hostile to you that moves to a space within 10 feet of&#xA;  the guardian for the first time on a turn must succeed on a Dexterity&#xA;  saving throw.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your step 4 calls on the guardian to attack &lt;em&gt;an object&lt;/em&gt;.  An &lt;strong&gt;object&lt;/strong&gt; is not a &lt;strong&gt;creature&lt;/strong&gt; in D&amp;amp;D 5e. Those two nouns have some fairly specific meanings as game terms.  (A sword is not a creature (unless it is &lt;em&gt;animated sword&lt;/em&gt; (a monster that is a &lt;em&gt;construct&lt;/em&gt;); and a goblin is not an object (unless it is a goblin's corpse, apparently (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57406/22566&quot;&gt;we have a Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; about using a dead goblin as an improvised weapon, which is mentioned in the PHB).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You need to have milk to make cheese&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one is going to try and derive an exploit, one must first invest enough effort into reading the rules very carefully, and then arrive at the oddball loopholes that actually exist.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7218/22566&quot;&gt;There are some pretty good examples of that process here&lt;/a&gt;.  Good cheese &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; appreciated here.  What you offered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114163/22566&quot;&gt;wasn't even the milk from an ivory goat&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put differently, there is no loophole to begin with. (Beyond Miniman's answer regarding usage ...) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You didn't explain why you didn't truncate the fourth instance of damage (that got you to your theoretical 70) such that the guardian had dealt its full 60 before vanishing &amp;lt;--  which is in the spell's text.  If you had explained that better, you might have had a shot at some cheese.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The guardian vanishes when it has dealt a total of 60 damage.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most common ruling I'd expect to see at table would be something like this:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Having done 50 damage already, when the guardian would be about to do&#xA;20 HP on the next successful hit (a failed Dex save by a creature) it&#xA;would instead only do 10 HP.   Why?  The way the spell is written, it&#xA;is limited to 60 as the most damage it can do for a given instance of&#xA;that spell, per a plain English reading of the text.&lt;/em&gt;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So why didn't I write an answer to the question?  Miniman had already addressed the other flaw in your logic train, and I didn't see any need to pile on as the down votes were piling up.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-11T04:55:08.993" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T04:55:08.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8356" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8358" CreationDate="2018-09-11T07:30:53.110" Score="5" ViewCount="687" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since even before asking my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/131441/35259&quot;&gt;What human ethnicities exist in other settings besides the Forgotten Realms?&lt;/a&gt;, I've wanted to ask a question about how the ethnicities in the question relate to real-life ethnicities. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, Shou humans, judging by their physical description and sample names from the PHB, are obviously based on the Chinese, and I'm pretty sure there'll be lore references from the Forgotten Realms out there somewhere that describe a similar culture to real life historical China to strengthen that assertion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I want to know what all the other human ethnicities from the PHB &quot;map to&quot;, and some are not as obvious to me as the Shou. Before I ask such a question, I want to make sure that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not a bad question or an off-topic question (i.e. not enough to do with RPGs);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not a &quot;too broad&quot; question (since I want to ask about at least 9, potentially 19 if I decide to include those from SCAG as well, human ethnicities);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not a &quot;primarily opinion based&quot; question (with answerers just saying &quot;well, I think this one is these people and that one is those people&quot;, etc, based on just the brief PHB descriptions of the human ethnicities alone; in others words, what I've said above regarding Shou = Chinese with no backup info);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should also mention that I'm chiefly interesting in 5e material, but since I'm asking about a setting rather than rules, published material from previous editions would be fine as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would this be a good question for RPG.SE? Should I ask it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2018-09-11T12:34:07.230" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T19:42:28.750" Title="Would a question about &quot;D&amp;D to real life&quot; human ethnicities be a good/on-topic question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8356" CreationDate="2018-09-11T14:57:57.513" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think it's too subjective.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some googling reveals a great deal of disagreement in forum threads on the topic of real-world analogues of Realms nations or cultures. This doesn't bode well for a similar question on the topic of ethnic groups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not something you're going to find detailed in a canonical book. The Forgotten Realms sourcebooks of old tend to take an immersive narrative approach like a novel, rather than break the fourth wall and say something like &amp;quot;Cormyr is basically fantasy England&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many Realms nations and peoples take inspiration from a real-world culture, but to say that a certain people of the Realms are the counterpart to e.g. the Celts or the Romans might be an arbitrary observation. There's not necessarily a direct 1:1 correlation. Your own opinion is as valid as anyone else's on this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Individual novel or sourcebook authors might have their own individual opinions of what culture inspires what. According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FantasyCounterpartCulture&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;TV Tropes&lt;/a&gt;, R.A. Salvatore based the drow culture of Menzoberranzan on the Italian mafia, but other writers may not share that idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closest you could get is to find quotes from Ed Greenwood or another, who might have described his inspiration directly on one forum or another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-11T19:42:28.750" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8359" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8360" CreationDate="2018-09-11T21:11:39.557" Score="16" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;There have been several questions recently that have churned up confusion with regards to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; and Critical Role 3PP content. Most recently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131523/blood-hunter-weapon-bond-question&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. Specifically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131523/blood-hunter-weapon-bond-question#comment327295_131523&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should Blood Hunter questions have the &quot;Homebrew&quot; tag? Or is it treated differently because it's from Critical Role?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has also caused conversations and confusion in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/46685316#46685316&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should Critical Role 3PP content such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/blood-hunter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Blood Hunter&lt;/a&gt; class be tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; when it comes up in a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T04:28:50.270" Title="Should questions about Critical Role 3rd party material be tagged Homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8360" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8359" CreationDate="2018-09-11T21:11:39.557" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, this tag is about helping people homebrew their own content.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, let us look at the current guidance offered by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag description:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about &lt;strong&gt;homebrewing new rules content&lt;/strong&gt; for an existing system, this tag should be used when locally-created, non-published content is at the heart of the question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions about &lt;strong&gt;creating new rules&lt;/strong&gt; material&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is supposed to be used on questions whose core focus is on actually &lt;strong&gt;developing&lt;/strong&gt; homebrew. That means helping people to develop new content. As it is written now, its purpose is not to mark questions whose content comes from non-official sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, tags are for categorizing the &lt;em&gt;core focus of the content&lt;/em&gt; of a question, not what book or URL that content happened to have originated from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only that, but marking such questions with this tag also goes against the tag guidance in another way since it says it is explicitly for&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;when &lt;strong&gt;locally-created&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;non-published&lt;/strong&gt; content is at the heart of the&#xA;  question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blood Hunter is published 3rd party content. It is published on &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/blood-hunter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DnDBeyond&lt;/a&gt; and it is even published on &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dmsguild.com/product/170777/Blood-Hunter-Class&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DM'sGuild&lt;/a&gt;. Thus, it does not qualify as homebrew-related for our tagging system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7758/is-the-dmsguild-considered-homebrew-and-if-so-should-we-always-use-the-homebrew?s=2|25.4711&quot;&gt;Is the DMsGuild considered Homebrew and if so, should we always use the homebrew tag in parallel?&lt;/a&gt; also came to the same conclusion with DM'sGuild material in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, unless a question is about developing homebrewing content around or with this content, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag is not appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We could create a new tag for Critical Role content&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8359/should-questions-about-critical-role-3rd-party-material-be-tagged-homebrew#comment26743_8360&quot;&gt;as suggested by @Oblivious Sage&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if it is necessary, but since people keep trying to tag Critical Role material with something I think it might be worthwhile to create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-role&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-role&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-role&lt;/a&gt; to be a tag that can fill that role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8359/should-questions-about-critical-role-3rd-party-material-be-tagged-homebrew/8360#comment26745_8360&quot;&gt;As @doppelgreener points out&lt;/a&gt;, we have a standing policy of tagging 3rd party publishers so this would fit that as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether or not a tag is created, though, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; is not appropriate to use for questions about Critical Role content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-12T02:20:53.337" LastActivityDate="2018-09-12T02:20:53.337" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2018-09-13T07:38:22.603" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I must say some comment removing is over-zealous.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A while ago I had a question, about pathfinder, which I'm very new at. Being a GM when you never played a RPG can be challenging. A comment came on that, and I answered it asking for more information, and half an hour later both of these comments (and perhaps an answer I never could have known if it were given) were deleted. The question was less than 24 hours long at that moment in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the answer isn't clear, but might look that way to people more familiar with the subject material. Comments about this got deleted. Since there's no recourse or restoration for those comments, there's nothing you can do about it and it feels inhibiting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;This is a bad thing&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that with new questions, mods should restrain themselves a lot more. Sure, if you look it over a week after posting and the comments are three days old, move them to chat or delete them - but not half an hour after being posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes you NEED a tangent to clarify and answer or question. You cannot always edit the answer/question right away, because at that moment it's not clear to anyone what the correct edit is.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, please do not remove comments as eager on active questions. Unless it's clear abusive, keep them around for like 24 hours as a minimum. Don't put them into chat right away either - unless it's really growing at chatbox speed. Chat is an extra click away, and already makes it feel as if that conversation cannot be had - it's basically deleted-light.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note: it was on my other account - my personal instead of with work email. Question was: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130992/brawler-fighting-against-undead&quot;&gt;Brawler fighting against Undead&lt;/a&gt;, for those interested.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48073" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-13T23:55:47.757" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8362" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8367" CreationDate="2018-09-14T17:58:58.827" Score="-5" ViewCount="277" Body="&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a question about my Role-playing Games Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130887/what-is-5es-damage-dice-progression&quot;&gt;What is 5e&amp;#39;s Damage Dice Progression?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am removing the Question for a lack of valid input in an attempt to clean up spam and trolling. Delete it, as it refuses to allow me to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48108" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-22T02:39:50.663" LastActivityDate="2018-09-22T02:39:50.663" Title="Delete this post for me" Tags="|support|specific-question|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8363" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8362" CreationDate="2018-09-14T18:23:16.407" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't usually like to vote to delete content that could be helpful to other users. The reason you can't delete the question yourself is because of the answers to the question. Clearly, enough users thought it was helpful enough to answer (and upvote those answers) so in order for it to be deleted, a number of the site's trusted users or a mod would have to intervene.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the site is certainly designed for direct questions and answers for users, it is also useful as a database of information for people to access. The question you asked is one that may come up for a number of people and as such is a very useful question (I upvoted it for that reason). You also had accepted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/130889/41726&quot;&gt;one of the answers&lt;/a&gt;, which I agree is a good summary of how damage dice works for monsters, but as the answer states, what you are searching for in a &quot;comprehensive list&quot; does not exist:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There isn't a progression for PCs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there was a more comprehensive table, one of the 5th edition experts would have included it in an answer. Instead you were given one answer with all of the official tables (the only one I know of is the monster size table) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/130890/41726&quot;&gt;another useful answer&lt;/a&gt; with some commonalities for weapon damages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you re-asked the question for more information, the only real answer that could be given is &quot;there isn't anything else, look back at the other question&quot; which is why we marked it as a duplicate. When other users would have arrived at the &quot;comprehensive list question&quot;, they would have seen that all the information the 5e experts on this site has was already cataloged in the previous post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think that the question could use more answers, hang around the site some, ask some good questions, maybe even post some answers, and when you have enough &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation&quot;&gt;reputation&lt;/a&gt; you can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/set-bounties&quot;&gt;add a bounty&lt;/a&gt; to your question in the hopes that someone else finds it to add another answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-09-14T18:34:40.780" LastActivityDate="2018-09-14T18:34:40.780" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8364" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8362" CreationDate="2018-09-14T19:14:46.473" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;Potential X-Y Problem&lt;/a&gt; and setting expectations&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may be looking at an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;X-Y problem&lt;/a&gt;, but I'm not sure that's the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Understanding &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you are looking for this list may be a better way for the site to focus on helping you write a question that's useful for yourself AND for others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking for a developing specific item&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a specific item you're trying to stat, I'd suggest starting with asking how to stat that. It may be easier than you're making it out to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking for a list compilation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I can also see the case where you're just wanting a compilation of lists. That is a valid question, but it may receive downvotes as showing poor effort. The stack generally doesn't respond well to &amp;quot;do my work for me&amp;quot;, even if you have tried incredibly hard to do it first. Please don't take the downvotes personally if they do come, the goal is to get you answer that useful for you and hopefully others. If you get downvotes and you get an answer that helps, that's still a win.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-14T19:39:00.563" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8362" CreationDate="2018-09-14T19:28:04.650" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We do not delete questions on request&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you submit material to the site you grant the site an &lt;a href=&quot;https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;irrevocable license to use the material, forever&lt;/a&gt;. We do not remove material on request, and especially not when others have put work into submitting their own material as answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question currently does not meet our rules for being deleted, and so it will remain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Editing is not optional&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This license also grants others (i.e., us) permission to edit your material to follow out content rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is designed from the ground up to be edited. As the help page &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;“Why can people edit my posts? How does editing work?”&lt;/a&gt; says (emphasis mine),&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Editing is important for keeping questions and answers clear, relevant, and up-to-date. &lt;strong&gt;If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do not ever want your questions edited, don’t post them on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;You may request to have your identity removed from the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The license also guarantees you the right to disavow any relationship to the material we have a license to use. You may request your account be dissociation from a post, without any need to justify it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For detailed instructions about account dissociation, please see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/96732/how-do-i-remove-my-name-from-a-post-in-accordance-with-cc-by-sa-3-0&quot;&gt;How do I remove my name from a post, in accordance with CC BY-SA 3.0?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Reposting a new question is fine&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were asked to post your other question in its own question post. Doing that is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Reposting the same question is a bad idea&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reposting the same question to avoid content rules and editing will result in the reposted question being closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Repeated reposting can result in account privileges being temporarily suspended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-09-14T19:28:04.650" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8366" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-15T23:16:07.443" Score="27" ViewCount="242" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I brought up in the comments of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/131757/33569&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, it would be great if it were possible to somehow have a specified tag always be listed first on a post, or if certain special tags (in RPG.SE's case, system tags) always appeared first when applied to any post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SevenSidedDie pointed out in a comment there, adding any tag to a post that's more popular than the system tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;demotes the system from the first tag spot, thus removing it from the page title and some Google searches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is obviously not ideal, hence my suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please add a checkbox to the Tag Info page for moderators to mark a tag as &quot;special&quot;, so that it is always sorted to be first on a post.&lt;/strong&gt; (I imagine such a feature would be useful network-wide, but especially on RPG.SE.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would work like the four special tags on meta: all special tags are sorted by popularity first, then all normal tags are sorted by popularity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="62291" LastEditDate="2021-02-19T20:40:37.077" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T20:42:29.817" Title="Make it possible for certain tags (like game tags) to always appear first" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8362" CreationDate="2018-09-16T13:21:30.183" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I deleted the question in... question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, I didn’t even see this meta before I did it, I was just responding to multiple flags on the Q and mod message discussion.  But the question(s) were a mess of many iterations of edit by many people, hostile discussion and argument, ending in the OP’s suspension. There was little there of value to anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the other answers are correct in that we are under no obligation to delete content just because the OP wants us to, I feel that often on this site we go way too far trying to “save” some question that has clearly become cancerous way beyond a valuable use of our time.  When it’s causing continued problems, we need to stop “picking at the scab.”  The community should delete the question, if it's really bad the mods should suspend/mod message anyone that needs it, and then we should all move on to spending our effort on the hundreds of other constructive questions from users respecting the site and wanting our help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We like good questions and we like good users.  We should try to provide guidance to improve ones not so good yet.  But when that help is resisted and it’s not going to be a good investment, it is time for us to clean the slate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If my fellow mods disagree we can undelete it, but that just brings back argument and wasted work for content that is not helping the OP and not really helping anyone else much either, can’t be meaningfully refined, never get an accepted answer, etc., and I think it would be imprudent. If someone has a good on topic question on this subject I would much rather them post it in the future instead of being referred to a previous bag of burning hair as a &quot;duplicate.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-09-16T15:46:49.523" LastActivityDate="2018-09-16T15:46:49.523" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8368" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-16T20:54:24.340" Score="2" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can we merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranged-attacks-in-close-combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranged-attacks-in-close-combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranged-attacks-in-close-combat&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranged-attacks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranged-attacks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranged-attacks&lt;/a&gt; ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this moment we only have one question for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-16T22:26:35.037" LastActivityDate="2018-09-16T22:26:35.037" Title="Merge [ranged-attacks-in-close-combat] with [ranged-attacks]" Tags="|discussion|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8369" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8370" CreationDate="2018-09-16T20:59:25.070" Score="9" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I was writing my question, I tried to find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disadvantage&lt;/a&gt; which does not exist, but then remembered that I might should use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disadvantage is part of advantage/disadvantage mechanic of 5e and both seems similar, although different enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need to create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disadvantage&lt;/a&gt; and synonymize it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage&lt;/a&gt;, in case future askers might stumble into it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T16:00:33.440" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T16:00:33.440" Title="Do we need a [disadvantage] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8369" CreationDate="2018-09-16T22:38:09.617" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Advantage/disadvantage is a single mechanic, so I think it should have one master tag. When &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage&lt;/a&gt; was made our tag name character limit was too small for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage-and-disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage-and-disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage-and-disadvantage&lt;/a&gt; (26, 1 too many).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that we have more characters to use, we should just rename it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage-and-disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage-and-disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage-and-disadvantage&lt;/a&gt;. That would be findable by typing &lt;code&gt;disad&lt;/code&gt;..., so we might not need a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disadvantage&lt;/a&gt; tag, but because the new tag would be long, it would probably help to have it as a synonym for those who don't notice “…-and-disadvantage” trailing off the end. That way we'd have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage&lt;/a&gt; &amp;rarr; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage-and-disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage-and-disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage-and-disadvantage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disadvantage&lt;/a&gt; ↗︎&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also, if we find that we need to use either of the shorter ones for another game that has completely different things called “advantages” and “disadvantages”, like GURPS does for its chargen pieces, we have the option of breaking the synonyms at that later date.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-17T04:19:14.310" LastActivityDate="2018-09-17T04:19:14.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8371" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8374" CreationDate="2018-09-17T06:42:23.523" Score="6" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131805/does-an-invisible-enemy-within-5-feet-of-you-still-impose-disadvantage-on-ranged&quot;&gt;Does an invisible enemy within 5 feet of you still impose disadvantage on ranged attacks?&lt;/a&gt; seems to make people misunderstand the actual question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My goal is to clear misunderstanding and make it less opinion-based, so I'm hoping for input what part of the question is unclear and/or too opinion based, and how to fix it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm thinking to put a tl;dr section at the end of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In short, the essence of the question is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;An invisible enemy is next to me&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I'm unaware of it and it doesn't make any attempt to make itself known&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I'm drawing my bow to attack a distant enemy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do I roll with disadvantage?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or put this line somewhere in the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think this (my interpretation of rules) is stupid. Is my interpretation of RAW right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if either makes it any clearer or hurts it even more, so please give me some advice, please.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T14:42:16.780" Title="How to improve the 'invisible nearby enemy' question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8372" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8373" CreationDate="2018-09-17T13:50:35.657" Score="7" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had recently seen and answered a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126057/would-uv-rounds-and-silver-nitrate-rounds-be-effective-on-vampires-werewolves&quot;&gt;Silver Nitrate and werewolves/UV light and Vampires&lt;/a&gt; in &lt;em&gt;Werewolf the Apocalypse&lt;/em&gt;/&lt;em&gt;Vampire the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt;. I answered accordingly, but someone did answer using &lt;em&gt;Werewolf the Forsaken&lt;/em&gt;/&lt;em&gt;Vampire the Requiem&lt;/em&gt;. The rules difference couldn't be bigger unless you'd quote from the rules from &lt;em&gt;The Werewolves of Millers Hollow&lt;/em&gt;. WoD and CoD1.0/CoD2.0 are in all regards totally different games with different backgrounds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I had around the same time asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102726/what-is-the-benefit-kitsune-have-over-other-fera-when-learning-gifts-not-on-thei&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; about the &lt;em&gt;Werewolf 20th Anniversary Edition&lt;/em&gt; ruling on one topic, and yesterday someone answered with the correct ruling for &lt;em&gt;revised&lt;/em&gt;. Yes, it is a correct answer for revised, but that was not what was asked for (W20 is the edition in question) and so is not only out of scope but what was written in the answer also was noted &lt;strong&gt;and quoted&lt;/strong&gt; from the book in the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: What to do with an answer that, despite the game/edition been given in the question&amp;amp;tags, totally misses the point by quoting/referencing the wrong game/edition?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-01T10:35:50.353" LastActivityDate="2023-02-01T10:35:50.353" Title="How to deal with answers based on the wrong system/edition?" Tags="|discussion|answers|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8372" CreationDate="2018-09-17T14:57:03.410" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should respond to these answers the same way we do to any other answer that is wrong or to any other &quot;answer&quot; post that doesn't actually answer the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Since the answer is wrong, it should be downvoted for being unhelpful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Since the answer also doesn't answer the question that was asked (it instead answers a parallel universe version of the question), it should be flagged for deletion. &lt;em&gt;Note: To avoid confusion, the mod team prefers that you flag as &quot;in need of moderator intervention&quot; and explain that the answer is for the wrong system instead of just flagging as &quot;not an answer.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's up to the author of the non-answer to fix their mistake, if they so choose, by editing the answer to rework it into compliance with the question or by deleting it, but neither action is compulsory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-09-17T17:54:52.843" LastActivityDate="2018-09-17T17:54:52.843" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8371" CreationDate="2018-09-17T15:46:14.783" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The beginning of your question, up to and including the rules excerpt, is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see two problems with your question in its current version (as of right now), and they start right after the rules excerpt. I recommend three steps to fix your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The following text is unnecessary. You're basically writing a partial answer to your own question. It should be removed entirely. Giving your interpretation is not helpful because either it's right or it's wrong... and in either case an answer will have to address that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There is no explicit explanation why it is more difficult. I can only think of two ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Earlier editions of DnD, if I remember correctly, require a spellcaster to make a concentration check if there is an enemy within 5 ft of them. I take this to mean that seeing an enemy nearby somehow causes you to be wary and disturb your aim.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The enemy within range somehow tries to disturb your aim when you are about to make the attack. This can be a slap on your crossbow when you are about to release the bolt, or something else.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Having &quot;lesser&quot; invisibility (that gets dispelled if you attack or cast a spell) means that both shouldn't matter:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The ranged attacker doesn't see the enemy, and thus does not get their concentration disturbed more than when there is no enemy within 5 ft.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The enemy cannot slap the crossbow or physically tamper it to disturb the aim, because they will risk breaking their invisibility.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The title of the question and the final paragraph are not equivalent. The title is very clear (effectively &quot;do I have disadvantage in this situation?&quot;), but the final paragraph muddies that by asking if you're right in your suspicion (effectively &quot;am I right to suspect that I don't have disadvantage in this situation?&quot;). So the answer to your final paragraph is exactly opposite of the answer to the question in the title for those who think you do have disadvantage and not opposite for those who don't-- that's really confusing. In addition, whether the attacker loses invisibility or not is an entirely different question. So the final paragraph should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Based on that reasoning, am I right to conclude that having a nearby invisible enemy will not impose disadvantage on my ranged attack against another visible enemy that is not in melee range, or they will lose the invisibility when they do impose the disadvantage?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;After removing that stuff, include what you've just suggested in your meta post above (paraphrased here due to the change in context). This will clearly explain what you are asking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Based on the rules cited above, consider the following situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;An invisible enemy is next to me.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I'm unaware of it and it doesn't make any attempt to make itself known.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;I'm drawing my bow to attack a distant enemy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In this situation, do I roll with disadvantage?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With those changes, it's extremely clear and to the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This frees an answer author to add whatever context and interpretation they feel necessary to address your actual problem (whether they think the answer is &quot;yes you have disadvantage&quot; or &quot;no you don't have disadvantage&quot;) without having to sift through context and interpretation that you thought was necessary that they very well might not agree was necessary or accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll get better answers with these changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-17T22:56:18.587" LastActivityDate="2018-09-17T22:56:18.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8375" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-17T16:07:54.770" Score="3" ViewCount="46" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not entirely sure how to phrase this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I originally created this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/131886/31402&quot;&gt;Is Power Word Kill&amp;#39;s save DC from the Orcus&amp;#39; lair a typo?&lt;/a&gt;, which stems from a typo found in MToF.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It was indicated that it was a duplicate of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89222/31402&quot;&gt;What ability is the save DC of Orcus&amp;#39;s “voice” Lair action, in Out of the Abyss?&lt;/a&gt;, which is the same issue but from a different book; so I didn't think it fulfilled the criteria of a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The duplicate vote was retracted and the question re-opened, but another duplicate was identified and I concur it is a dupe of that one since it refers to MToF: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123380/31402&quot;&gt;How should a save DC given for a spell that doesn&amp;#39;t have one be interpreted?&lt;/a&gt;, but this is marked as a duplicate of question 2 (not sure I would agree).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I cannot link to the third question as a duplicate because it does not have any answers. Is it possible to bypass this, I'm reticent to link to question 2 as the means to that point stems from a different book and although the issue is the same, I'd like to demonstrate that the issue is more widespread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to mark question 1 as a duplicate of question 3. Is it possible to do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-17T16:34:52.007" LastActivityDate="2018-09-17T17:50:33.013" Title="Marking duplicates in a chain?" Tags="|support|duplicates|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8375" CreationDate="2018-09-17T16:25:10.463" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just point it to question 2 if you feel it's a valid duplicate, or leave it open if it's not a duplicate of that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like you said, it doesn't have any answers. We cannot make duplicates pointing to questions that do not have answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not &lt;em&gt;try&lt;/em&gt; to make chain duplicates. They're a sign of organisation failure: “your answer is over here” should lead immediately to the answer, not to “actually it's over there instead”. That we cannot close #1 as a dupe of #3 is a safety guard, not a problem to work around. For that reason although there might be some super fiddly workarounds, we shouldn't be going out of our way to use them anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-17T17:50:33.013" LastActivityDate="2018-09-17T17:50:33.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8377" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8387" CreationDate="2018-09-18T13:52:17.593" Score="3" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is somewhat related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6939/should-questions-be-closed-because-there-are-speculative-answers&quot;&gt;this question on question closure due to speculative answers&lt;/a&gt;, but it goes a bit further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen a couple of questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131883/how-should-i-deal-with-a-fellow-players-sudden-decision-that-affects-my-charact&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131764/a-player-left-the-group-at-a-moments-notice-and-i-am-at-a-loss-for-what-to-do&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; that are clearly stackworthy, but generate a lot of unsupported opinion-based answers that generate upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This suggests that we may need to look at ways to help educate the community on how to answer these types appropriately because what we're doing now doesn't seem to resolve the issue moving forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there things that can be done or is this just an ongoing issue without a good solution besides closure of question in the hopes that the community can self-correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I don't want to do is look at borderline questions and say to myself &quot;This is probably okay, but I know the answers won't be, so I'm going to VTC&quot; It seems unfair that questions that &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be good questions here end up not being so because the community isn't answering them from the correct lens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2018-09-20T18:42:00.153" LastActivityDate="2018-09-21T01:18:06.710" Title="What can we do to help promote supported opinion-based answers rather than closing a good question due to bad answers?" Tags="|discussion|answers|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8377" CreationDate="2018-09-18T14:02:15.907" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;My suggestion is to look at these questions very strictly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question passes the bar to allow a well-founded subjective answer, leave it open. Otherwise, lock and key. &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;This is a question of if there is good/bad subjective on the topic.&lt;/a&gt; Just make sure it passed, maybe there is something that could be improved!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If an answer does not pass the bar to explain HOW or WHY this suggestion is done, it is the &lt;strong&gt;answer's&lt;/strong&gt; fault. Downvote and comment, maybe even flag the offending &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt;, not close the question. We have had cases where mods put the &quot;place references in here or we go to delete this!&quot; boxes on answers. I got one myself once. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22back%20it%20up%22&quot;&gt;BACK IT UP!&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;YES, that means, ask the person to fix them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the answers are unredeemable, (flag) &amp;amp; BURN them. [as I was told recenty: use custom flag reason and explain!]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2018-09-18T14:22:04.540" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T14:22:04.540" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8371" CreationDate="2018-09-18T14:42:16.780" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think you should describe the problem situation itself. You should only ask &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;practical, answerable questions&lt;/a&gt; based on actual problems that you face. What did you ask was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does an invisible enemy within 5 feet of you still impose disadvantage on ranged attacks&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the thing is, an invisible enemy does not impose disadvantage by itself. The game rules work only because there are DM and players who follow these rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are you the DM who don't know how to adjudicate this situation? Or are you a player, who is unhappy with their DM's decisions? What the game situation was?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is hard to answer this as a hypothetical question about an abstract situation. It boils down to the rule intent, so only the designers could answer this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T14:42:16.780" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8377" CreationDate="2018-09-18T14:50:59.150" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This is an informational post. It’s not a solution. It’s important information that we’ll need to keep in mind to tackle this.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mods don’t like having to police answers. It’s a lot of thankless work that starts arguments in comments and brush fires on Meta. But worse, it doesn’t work. People just keep posting opinions (then arguing that should be allowed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason we close questions that draw mostly speculative answers is because &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we think a question &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; like it should be fine, but its answers are tending to be almost entirely based on opinions, then we were wrong that it’s fine based on its looks. Rather than try to hold back the tide by policing answers, we just put up a dam and call it a day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any solution that wants to avoid closing will have to not ask mods to fight losing battles with the tide, and just make it so that we don’t need to solve a flood of speculation with the tool SE provides for it. In other words, it has to solve the problem at the root so that the close reason doesn’t apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community education to do that would be great. However, there are always new answerers, so I’m dubious that education by itself can be a lasting solution as our membership turns over. Education is the solution we tried for these kinds of things in the past (designer reasons, game rec), and it’s never worked for very long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn’t to say that we shouldn’t look for a solution. I would love to see one. But we’ve been here before and it’s important to understand what kinds of solutions haven’t succeeded in the past, and that mods deleting things isn’t a silver bullet. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-18T15:36:22.057" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T15:36:22.057" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3224" CreationDate="2018-09-18T15:22:02.163" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;While there are a lot of good points, I want to bring up ONE thing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Keep Game Terms as they appear in the books!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of games out there. Some are in AE, some BE, some CanE, some in Aussie slang. And a lot appear first as PDFs these days. People can easily quote from these, and what is more relevant, &lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt; in them. The Adobe search, however, is dumb: If you use spelling &amp;quot;Glamor&amp;quot; when searching in a book using &amp;quot;Glamour&amp;quot; for this ability, you get no hits. When searching for &amp;quot;maneouvre&amp;quot; when the D&amp;amp;D 5E uses &amp;quot;maneuver&amp;quot;, you don't find the paragraphs. When searching for &amp;quot;Magic&amp;quot; in Ars Magica you are lucky as they use the term &amp;quot;Magick&amp;quot;, of which magic is a substring...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T21:13:48.763" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8382" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-18T16:31:27.070" Score="2" ViewCount="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131700/what-happens-when-2-readied-actions-trigger-at-the-same-time&quot;&gt;What happens when 2 readied actions trigger at the same time?&lt;/a&gt; the more recent question has been marked as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68925/how-are-simultaneously-triggered-readied-actions-resolved&quot;&gt;How are simultaneously-triggered Readied actions resolved?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think the older question (the current dupe target) is flawed in a few ways that might make switching the duplicates to be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The premise of the question is flawed in that it need not use Readied actions at all to accomplish the goal. This makes it not a great candidate for a question about the topic and allows the true answer to the question to avoid answering the overall question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;None of the answers cite text as evidence (despite the top answer being highly rated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I have an answer on the closed question, but that has no bearing on why I think the newer question is better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could put a bounty on the current dupe target to improve the answers, but nothing can be done about the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could be argued that since the one question deals with attacks and the other with spells that they could be not duplicates at all, but I think they are close enough that they might best be still marked as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T14:19:17.703" Title="Should we reverse the duplication of these questions about simultaneous readied actions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8383" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-18T17:02:44.710" Score="2" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131928/is-there-an-easy-way-to-validate-a-high-level-sorcerers-spell-list&quot;&gt;validating a Sorcerer's Spell List&lt;/a&gt;, I observed that any rule/table that could be applied to Sorcerers could also (with some numerical adjustment) be applied to other classes that use the same &quot;Learn a new spell at each level, swap an older spell each level&quot; system for learning spells. This includes, in 5th edition, Bards, Warlocks, Eldritch Knights (the Fighter Subclass), Arcane Tricksters (the Rogue Subclass), and Artificers (the Unearthed Arcana class), as well as any Homebrew classes that obey the same basic behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So right now, I'm in the process of generating tables similar to the table that Axoren provided for Sorcerers, but adjusted to handle other classes instead, like Bards (who learn more spells), Warlocks (who never &quot;learn&quot; spells above 5th level), etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm uncertain about is how I should post these tables. I had some ideas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post each table as a separate answer to the original question, providing some extra context for each regarding each class&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post each table in a massive answer to the original question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create new questions for each class, linking back to the original question for context, and posting the tables as self-answers for each class&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new question for all classes, post the tables as self answers to that question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new question for all classes, post the tables in one big self answer to that question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you all feel is the most appropriate way to post these tables? Is there a different method I haven't even thought of?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T20:38:47.580" Title="How should I post additional tables for this question about Known Spells?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8383" CreationDate="2018-09-18T17:07:07.043" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;My personal Gut Instinct is that #1 is the best, because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It keeps all the information in one article&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It allows the other tables to be voted on relative to Axoren's (very well written) original answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a couple downsides, though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As written, the question is about Sorcerers, with only token lip-service paid to those other classes. I may need to rewrite the question to emphasize those other classes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If I post 5 additional self-answers, it might be seen as Karma-farming&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T17:07:07.043" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8383" CreationDate="2018-09-18T17:13:35.140" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Post it somewhere else with a link to it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is certainly a valuable tool to develop but I don't think it fits in the Q&amp;amp;A format. I suppose the best option you mentioned is to ask a new question for all classes and self answer. Something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Q: Are there more tables like the one in this answer for other classes?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  A: [the other tables]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've had similar questions asking for a general case before, but that could still be a little unwieldy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it were me, I would post the whole collection of tables to an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/41726&quot;&gt;RPG forum&lt;/a&gt; and provide a link to the forum in the answer as a reference for the Sorcerer table. This way it doesn't clog up an answer with so many tables. If you wanted to do this within the StackExchange network, you may be able to have a chat room set up to house the tables (probably a question for a moderator).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T17:13:35.140" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8383" CreationDate="2018-09-18T17:14:44.683" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;#3 works best&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People like tools, and this is a good tool for those needing to verify the accuracy of a character sheet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keeping each class as it's own question makes it easy to find what someone is looking for (they'd likely be looking to validate a class list), so making it easy to find is the priority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's a lot of questions and self-answers, but in this case I think it makes the most sense in terms of searchability and usefulness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you're asking is &lt;strong&gt;How do I validate the spell selections for [x class]?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T17:14:44.683" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8387" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8377" CreationDate="2018-09-18T17:17:32.240" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What can we do?  Two things.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Up vote answers that pass muster (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22back%20it%20up%22&quot;&gt;Back it up!&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Down vote (and / or flag for deletion) those answers that do not pass muster.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tools for that are already in hand.  Rewarding the desired behavior seems to me to be as important as sending a signal on undesired behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Optional: Engage with users who offer up low quality material&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have the time and inclination, do so, with the hope of educating or informing the user of desired behavior, or how an answer can be improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131883/how-should-i-deal-with-a-fellow-players-sudden-decision-that-affects-my-charact&quot;&gt;About that question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't find it to be a good question because it was poorly written.  I do find the situation interesting in terms of someone trying to figure out how to do something as a player at a table.  I get the idea that the asker is in a bit of an X-Y problem in terms of the problem statement, but that may be me casting too critical of an eye on how the question was presented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T17:22:54.950" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8388" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-18T18:56:20.543" Score="-9" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;I haven't been on this website for a while but i could say i've been here for about a year and i noticed the picture of the Dragon fighting some people. I've been looking at it for a year and it kinda feels not RPG to me (maybe i'm wrong).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MhYtF.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MhYtF.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think changing it would be cool and new because this one looks really old and kind of weird. Could some dice or pen or even knights be added or is this the logo of the website?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Even i cold make it, it's not that hard. Even a black-and-white type for the Meta could be easy to make. Or is this one staying?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34109" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-18T20:11:41.010" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T14:09:25.707" Title="Can the main theme picture of the site be changed?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|design|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8389" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8388" CreationDate="2018-09-18T20:37:02.807" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;While the image features a juxtaposition of fantasy (the dragon) and sci-fi (the people shooting it with a laser), nothing about that makes me think &quot;not RPG&quot;. It certainly isn't a scene that would commonly occur in the most popular RPG series, Dungeons and Dragons, and I would be that the in the majority of RPGs that juxtaposition is unusual for one reason or another, but the site isn't about any single RPG. Instead, both fantasy and sci-fi RPGs are valid here, as well as others, and having a mix is appropriate for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I can only really guess at what feels &quot;not RPG&quot; about it to you. As for myself, the banner looks like several images taken straight out of various RPG source books and composited together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T20:37:02.807" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8390" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8383" CreationDate="2018-09-18T20:38:47.580" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use option #3, for the reasons explained in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8386/32426&quot;&gt;NautArch's answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't do them all at once (like within the same day or two) or you risk the following problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If people see what look like samey question titles, they are more likely to skip over them. Fewer people looking at your questions means fewer upvotes, and due to the amount of work you're putting in I'd like to see you get rep for it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If there's a flaw in your technique or presentation, it will be easier to revise the first few questions with improvements before posting new questions with those improvements in mind (for example, to clarify commonly misunderstood wording or table formatting in your early questions before using that consistently from then on). If instead you post them all at once and subsequently find an issue, you will have to go back and fix it for &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of them.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, trickle them out over the course of a few weeks. I think you'll get more rep and fewer hassles doing it that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T20:38:47.580" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8391" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-18T21:14:33.783" Score="16" ViewCount="1162" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE&lt;/strong&gt; - We've pushed this live for everyone now. Thanks to those who took the time to give feedback. Please do know, being live doesn't mean we can't address further changes for you! Write an answer if you find anything that needs addressing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of implementing the new unified themes across the network, we're gradually rolling out updated site themes for each site. As of today, we have enabled your updated site theme for testing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can't see it right now, that's by design! This is a very early test implementation of your design and we need your help finding issues with it before we make it live for everyone permanently. So, keep in mind, there will be things that need fixing! We'll address those things as we can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you'd like to review it, here's how:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do I enable it?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/preferences&quot;&gt;Click here&lt;/a&gt; and check the &quot;Beta test new themes&quot; option. This will turn on the new theme for all sites that have one in testing, including this one. &lt;em&gt;Here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/314542/opt-in-to-beta-testing-new-themes&quot;&gt;more info&lt;/a&gt; on how to opt in.&lt;/em&gt; You can uncheck the box to revert to the older theme until the site is live for everyone. Note, while turning it on is immediate, it will take a few minutes to revert to the old view - &lt;em&gt;but it will go through!&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What type of feedback do we need?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;On this post: Bugs related to this site's design elements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please help us look for issues/bugs related to the theme design and how we have mapped the old theme to the new. This needs to be done within the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/307862/ch-ch-ch-changes-left-nav-responsive-design-themes&quot;&gt;limits of the new unified theme&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This could include colors of sections of the design or text, problems with JavaScript add-ons (if applicable), the logo or top banner appearance or other artwork.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also feel free to ask questions about the new layout if you're unsure how to navigate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;On Meta Stack Exchange: General concerns about left nav or theming&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some things that are definitely changing everywhere and can't really be adjusted on a per-site basis. A few of them include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Top banner is shorter in height, so some artwork has to be adjusted along with some logos.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Left Navigation is active everywhere (but can be collapsed into a menu by visiting your site preferences - &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/311237/284336&quot;&gt;instructions here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Responsive layout is active, which lets the site adjust as browser widths change - no side scrolling (some pages haven't been updated, yet, though). For now, if you prefer the scrolling, you can disable this by clicking the &quot;disable responsiveness&quot; link in the footer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many site elements including tags and voting arrows are standardized across the network.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;For Serif sites only&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; - This site uses a Serif font but common elements across the network (headers, sidebars, buttons, tags, queues, etc) are now sans everywhere.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Link underlining is active. In an effort to make links more visible, they are now being underlined.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have concerns or issues regarding the left nav or the overall approach we are taking to theming, then &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/310908/live-left-nav-new-theming-and-responsiveness&quot;&gt;this Meta Stack Exchange post&lt;/a&gt; is the right place for feedback. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I mentioned earlier, there are some unique design elements like voting arrows and tags that are being standardized in this process. Keeping these custom elements makes our ability to maintain the sites too complex and, while we're very sad to see them go, we're in a difficult position of needing to make the site designs work together so that we can continue to address feature requests and bugs that will make your Q&amp;amp;A experience better. This is addressed in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/314799/why-we-initiated-the-latest-round-of-design-changes-and-the-role-of-meta&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange post&lt;/a&gt; if you want more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What new themes?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're like, &quot;What the heck are you talking about?&quot;, then you should read the Meta Stack Exchange post entitled &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/312365/rollout-of-new-network-site-themes&quot;&gt;Rollout of new network site themes&lt;/a&gt; (and maybe the posts it links to for the full background). To follow along with the rollout of these new themes, go &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/314979/rollout-of-responsive-design-site-themes-tracking-post&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Thanks so much for your constructive feedback!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Oh, Who am I?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't know me, I'm one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/99338/who-are-the-community-team-and-what-do-they-do?s=1%7C141.4591&quot;&gt;Community Managers&lt;/a&gt; here at Stack Exchange. I'm here to listen to your input and convey it to our Design team for responses and fixes to bugs. I'll do my best to respond to your concerns and explain whether changes we've made are bugs that can be changed or if they're by design and why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44424" LastEditorUserId="44424" LastEditDate="2018-10-05T22:22:57.167" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T01:26:33.727" Title="Role-playing Games's updated site theme is live!" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="26" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-18T23:29:44.407" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;After looking at some earlier previews for other sites on Meta, I was fearing the new site theme, but it's actually very reasonable given what I understand about the parameters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Placing the top banner in the right half of the top bar, slightly scaled and slightly cropped, looks like a reasonable compromise for now, but there are three things that show that that image was not designed for the spot:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Previously, the scene was framing the header text, but now there is a lot of undue emphasis on the leftmost cyberdude sitting in the middle of the top bar.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Trying to find a balance between making things too tiny to recognize or cropping them off means that the sleek cyber design of the middle cyberdude's gun, intended to highlight the contrast to the fantasy elements, did not make the cut.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The overall dark banner with a few bright highlights puts undue weight on the two-thirds mark (or so) of the otherwise very bright screen. This is not a place to highlight, because it is the content-free area (the separation between main body and right sidebar), and for questions there is even a good chunk of negative space between a question title (if it is short) and the “Ask Question” button just below the banner.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compared with the banner just above it, the “Ask Question” button looks slightly too bright and red/saturated in my eyes. This is obviously co-dependent: In case you re-visit the banner, that may change how I perceive that button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5843" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T23:29:44.407" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-18T23:39:13.497" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The transition between the main center pane and the darker header and sidebars is visually jarring, and looks like someone copy+pasted a white box on top of something else.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The old theme uses a dark-colored top bar, stylized 'watercolor' fading at the edges of the header art, and a subtle gradient in the background image of the main &quot;questions&quot; pane to produce a smooth, attractive look and feel for the site, where the center pane seems like a coherent part of the whole page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vIVNH.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vIVNH.png&quot; alt=&quot;old theme, with attractive gradients&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new theme, because it is missing the top bar and doesn't include the background image gradient for the center pane, looks jarringly like the center pane is out of place, or is part of a different image that has been incorrectly pasted on top of something else:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbJeG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbJeG.png&quot; alt=&quot;new theme, with unattractive hard edges&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure what exactly the correct solution is here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the center pane be darker?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can the center pane have a gradient, where it's darker at the top, like the old background image?  I know custom background images are no longer a thing, but maybe straightforward gradients are possible?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would it be less jarring if the sidebars were more similar in tone to the center pane?  Or maybe it would be better if they were &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; close, to make it look more like an intentional boundary and less like a messed-up image?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can some kind of &quot;framing&quot; be added to the center pane, like the old dark-brown top bar, to make the &quot;this is an intentional boundary&quot; parts of the image clearer?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a designer, so there may be another, better solution I haven't thought of here (I, personally, would endorse variants 5a and 5b from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8391/role-playing-gamess-updated-site-theme-is-ready-for-testing/8397#8397&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt;), but as-is, the edges of the center pane are an eyesore to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt;  A new brown top bar has been added since this answer was posted.  I think it's an improvement!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2018-10-04T17:02:16.003" LastActivityDate="2018-10-04T17:02:16.003" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8388" CreationDate="2018-09-18T23:48:37.390" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The top image is staying&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we can see with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8391&quot;&gt;the new beta site theme&lt;/a&gt; preview, we're keeping it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Xafpd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Xafpd.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of the RPG.se front page, showing the top art still prominent.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top image is an original artwork by artist &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.satedcanvas.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dean Spencer&lt;/a&gt;, commissioned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/design-for-rpg-se&quot;&gt;specifically for RPG.se&lt;/a&gt; at the cost of real dollars. We've had it ever since we had a site design at all: six years. SE won't be buying new art for RPG.se every year (and probably never).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T23:48:37.390" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-18T23:49:59.517" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's...pretty good!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8391/role-playing-gamess-updated-site-theme-is-ready-for-testing/8393#8393&quot;&gt;specific complaint&lt;/a&gt; notwithstanding, I'm actually pleasantly surprised by this theme.  After seeing the debacles on a couple of the other sites that previously had heavily-customized, high maintenance themes, I feared the worst, but I think this strikes a decent balance between StackExchange's need for unification, and the stuff I liked about the old theme.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm especially pleased that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The header art is still there in some form&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &quot;graph paper&quot; background is still around&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &quot;in color&quot; vs. &quot;black and white&quot; distinction between the main site and meta was kept&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tables &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94919/superior-unarmed-strike-or-knowledge-devotion/94922#94922&quot;&gt;don't appear to have been mangled too badly&lt;/a&gt; (still want to check this further; that's hardly the most intensive example of a table on the site)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm posting this as a separate answer from my one piece of actual criticism, so that people can vote agreement/disagreement on them separately.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-09-18T23:49:59.517" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T02:51:47.367" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The blank area between the RPG logo and the old sci-fi/dragon picture bothered me (probably more than is reasonable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did some tweaking for comparison, and here's a quick shot of the background dragon image centered. I prefer this to the original, but note that changing your browser width will change the placement here. An absolute position could be used, but it's more than I care to fiddle with for a simple example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BJgZj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BJgZj.png&quot; alt=&quot;Background image centered&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This second image is the same centered tweak as the first, but I narrowed my browser window. The way the text overlaps the character is awkward, and reinforces my desire for an absolute position rather than relative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rsUKS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rsUKS.png&quot; alt=&quot;Background image centered with narrow browser&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The third image is a slightly narrower browser. This is the point at which a few odd things happen. First, the meta bar on the right gets flowed to the bottom of the page. Second, my rep count and badge counts have disappeared. Comments tell me this was a deliberate choice, so I've opted to keep it here for comparison.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lo9wg.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lo9wg.png&quot; alt=&quot;Background image centered with even narrower browser&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2018-09-19T03:21:18.577" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T03:21:18.577" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T05:44:36.787" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I did some editing in my own browser to see what some variants would look like. Crossed out ones aren't feasible under the new layout.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;1. Header image flipped horizontally&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KoHXG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KoHXG.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;s&gt;2. Header image allowed to fill space&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Technical implementation: in this variant the image is added as an image element instead of a background, and fills space until it touches the logo (which has &lt;code&gt;flex-shrink: 0&lt;/code&gt;). The image winds up as 96.9px tall.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CuHJK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CuHJK.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;s&gt;3. Header image allowed to fill space &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; flipped&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/H5hve.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/H5hve.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;4. Top brown bar&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an attempt to fix &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8393/1204&quot;&gt;the issue A_S00 pointed out&lt;/a&gt;. Presented without/with the header image flipped horizontally (as in variant 1).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;#content&lt;/code&gt; element loses the side borders and gets a new top border matching the footer color:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;#content {&#xA;  border: none;&#xA;  border-top: 4px solid #5e2b1a;&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Things look weird and bad if we keep the side borders because of how browsers handle borders.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4a:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TVSJA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TVSJA.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4b:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lzAhh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lzAhh.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;s&gt;5. Top brown bar with header image filling space&lt;/s&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Combining variant 4 with variants 2 and 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;5a:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TCaEa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TCaEa.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;5b:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ThWXa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ThWXa.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-20T09:14:16.127" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T13:34:00.610" Score="23" Body="&lt;h1&gt;For me, 25% less space for the question list and questions themselves&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am actually one of the users who actually &lt;em&gt;uses&lt;/em&gt; the site in a narrow window: you know, the folks for whom the old design “looked bad” and should be benefiting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The space devoted to &lt;em&gt;the actual question and answers&lt;/em&gt; is now absurdly tight. It’s very uncomfortable, and detracts significantly from my user experience. And this is &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;after&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; turning off the useless waste-of-space that is the left navbar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some images, taken with my window at its usual width:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Old theme&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d7bkO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d7bkO.png&quot; alt=&quot;Front page with old theme&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;.summary&lt;/code&gt; div, where the question title and tags are found, measures 530px here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fTpYV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fTpYV.png&quot; alt=&quot;Question page with old theme&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;.post-text&lt;/code&gt; div, where the question text is found, measures 667px here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Beta theme&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p5B2S.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p5B2S.png&quot; alt=&quot;Front page with beta theme&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;.summary&lt;/code&gt; div now measures a paltry 396px: a reduction in space of over 25%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0qINC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0qINC.png&quot; alt=&quot;Question page with beta theme&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;.post-text&lt;/code&gt; div now measures 506px across: a reduction in space of also nearly 25%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Where is the space going?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The loss, of course, comes from the fact that the page itself is shrunk to my screen, and that space is taken away from these regions of the screen. Where before I could happily leave the right navigation half off the screen, now it is required to be fully displayed on my screen. It’s 300px wide with 24px on both the left and right of it, for a total of 348px (on both pages). That is well over a third of my screen real estate, and let me tell you, none of that information is worth a third of my screen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which itself leads to an obvious solution: at a small enough width, the right navbar should be losing width. A fixed 348px block on the right is just seriously problematic. Losing 25% of my space over the far-less-important stuff over there does not improve my experience. It actually substantially worsens my experience, and makes me think that SE &lt;em&gt;doesn’t actually understand what the priorities here are&lt;/em&gt;. Which has been my concern with this entire fiasco from the beginning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T13:34:00.610" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T13:37:28.367" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The “Top Questions” header looks out of place&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KBg1p.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KBg1p.png&quot; alt=&quot;Beta theme front page with “Top Questions” in a hand-drawn red circle&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site logo and the question titles are in serif fonts, and this is in a sans-serif font. It’s not the only thing on the page that is (the various buttons, tags, and labels are as well), but it’s the only &lt;em&gt;large&lt;/em&gt; thing that’s in a sans-serif font. The other sans-serifs are used in smaller fonts sizes and look fine. This looks out of place, and does not go with the rest of the design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T13:37:28.367" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8401" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T13:40:48.263" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Top bar looks weirdly blank&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xjjWE.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xjjWE.png&quot; alt=&quot;Beta theme with top bar highlighted with red hand-drawn arrows&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just looks strange, switching from one off-white paper-y color to a different one, and from a grid with images on it to a blank space, and it’s just &lt;em&gt;so large&lt;/em&gt; with &lt;em&gt;so little in it&lt;/em&gt; that it looks very strange. And this is at drastically reduced widths; at larger widths it looks even weirder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some kind of divider between the header and this top navbar is necessary, I think. The existing brown header, of course, would be ideal, but if that’s non-viable there still really ought to be &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T13:40:48.263" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8388" CreationDate="2018-09-19T14:09:25.707" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I like it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8394/4563&quot;&gt;good reasons it’s not likely to change&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8389/4563&quot;&gt;good reasons why it actually does befit RPG SE&lt;/a&gt;, but ultimately, I think the most important thing for me is, &lt;em&gt;I like it.&lt;/em&gt; And I think a lot of other people do too. RPG SE is often touted as one of the best designs on the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like that it’s a little weird, a little different from what you might expect. That makes it feel unique, &lt;em&gt;ours&lt;/em&gt;. And I like that it isn’t just swords and sorcery—after all, the RPG landscape is bigger than just swords and sorcery, &lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt;, and it’s both good to acknowledge that and also, it’s good to maybe give a little hint to those who might not be aware of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T14:09:25.707" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8382" CreationDate="2018-09-19T14:19:17.703" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I don’t think either should be a duplicate of the other&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The older question should, I think, be edited so the title is more specific to the specific case asked about, because that specific case is what was actually answered, and then we have two distinct question: one about a specific case where someone &lt;em&gt;thought&lt;/em&gt; they needed to know how to handle simultaneous readied actions, but actually didn’t, and one that just directly asks about simultaneous readied actions. In other words, the first question ended up being treated as an X-Y problem, and since the problem &lt;em&gt;actually wasn’t&lt;/em&gt; X, it isn’t really a dupe of a question about X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T14:19:17.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T15:10:44.927" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;On mobile (specifically mobile Safari for me), the review queues have buttons with white text over a pale gradient, giving too little contrast and making them slow to read accurately:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xeiv7.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xeiv7.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Mobile version&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Since those pages aren’t responsive yet, they’re extra hard to read on small screen devices.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On desktop the button is solid and darker, so it's okay:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Eoebn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Eoebn.png&quot; alt=&quot;Desktop version&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Meta versions are fine as the desktop version doesn't have a gradient, and on mobile the gradient is subtle and dark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-19T15:25:20.330" LastActivityDate="2018-09-19T15:25:20.330" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-19T21:12:09.603" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Meta theme is sans-serif&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original Meta theme is serif, like the Main site theme. Though the beta theme for Main is serif, the beta theme for Meta is sans-serif.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="44424" LastEditDate="2018-10-04T04:11:49.410" LastActivityDate="2018-10-04T04:11:49.410" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-20T04:32:58.630" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We fixed something that wasn't broken.  Yay?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No disrespect intended to the folks who were tasked with this change -- time and effort appreciated -- but the site worked just fine before this.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Value added?  None.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-09-20T04:32:58.630" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-20T12:54:42.007" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bug&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/accessibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;accessibility&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Poor visibility of answers being accepted in search results&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently answers in search results &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#use-of-color&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;break a base-level accessibility guideline&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Success Criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color:&lt;/strong&gt; Color is not used as the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is a &lt;em&gt;level A&lt;/em&gt; success criterion. Level A represents the lowest baseline that all sites should aim to meet.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only way to tell an answer is accepted is by a slight color change. It's also &lt;a href=&quot;https://contrast-ratio.com/#%236a737c-on-%2345A163&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a very low-contrast color change&lt;/a&gt; so users with poor vision (or mild color blindness) are going to have trouble seeing the difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The contrast algorithm employed here checks color contrast from a color blindness perspective, mainly by looking at luminosity difference. A score of 3+ is OK and a score of 4.5+ is good. It's mainly targeted at checking text color against a background. Here though it shows that from a poor color vision POV these two shades are extremely difficult to pick apart.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A comparison to demonstrate the difficulty&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the search results for &lt;code&gt;is:question&lt;/code&gt;. Which of these questions have an accepted answer? How many? How much effort does it take to determine the answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nCrv1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nCrv1.png&quot; alt=&quot;some questions in search results&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Below is a search for &lt;code&gt;is:answer&lt;/code&gt;. Same quiz again: which answers are accepted answers? How many of them? How much effort does that take?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tCS6v.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tCS6v.png&quot; alt=&quot;some answers in search results&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably this second one took a bit more time and effort and, unlike the first quiz, some careful looking and squinting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What should change?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions (the first quiz) get a high-contrast inverted box to show whether they have accepted answers or not. The high contrast difference in the boxes make it easy to spot the difference, even if your vision is poor or you're color blind. &lt;strong&gt;Questions are good and fine.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers (the second quiz) are not so good.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eXw9U.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/eXw9U.png&quot; alt=&quot;two answers in search results.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the answers in this screenshot is accepted, the other is not. Accepted-ness is only indicated by that small color change in the score. Answers should instead get a clear non-color visual indicator of acceptedness: a full box if they're accepted, or an outline as Catija mentioned in comments, or something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12094/15502&quot;&gt;Scifi.se noticed the same issue&lt;/a&gt; and requested the same fix. I think it's a good one, and that this same fix should be rolled out to other sites with the new layout.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-20T13:02:55.717" LastActivityDate="2018-09-20T13:02:55.717" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8408" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-20T19:11:42.613" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The beta theme on mobile is a &lt;em&gt;vast&lt;/em&gt; improvement.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until I saw a comment by SevenSidedDie on another answer, I didn't realize the beta theme was usable on mobile, since the old mobile mode theme continued to load in my mobile browser despite opting in to the beta test.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The solution (which I haven't seen anyone mention and wish was a bit more clearly publicized) is to go to the footer on mobile and click on Full Site so that it switches to the desktop mode theme, which (if you opt in to the beta test) is actually the unified beta theme with the responsive layout.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a &lt;em&gt;huge usability improvement&lt;/em&gt; for me, since I do a lot of my browsing on mobile, and the old mobile mode theme lacked a lot of features of the normal desktop theme, including the ability to flag posts and comments. It used to be that if I wanted to flag something I had to go through the hassle of switching to the desktop mode, flagging using a really really tiny link, then switching back to the mobile mode... or else I had to travel all the way from my couch/bed/kitchen to my laptop. Now that the mobile and desktop modes are unified to the same responsive theme, this really improves the experience for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, I find the appearance and layout changes from the old desktop theme to the beta theme somewhere between &quot;benign&quot; and &quot;a mild improvement.&quot; Notwithstanding a few minor annoyances that others have already posted about and which will probably be improved soon, I don't see what all the push-back is about (don't try to explain the push-back to me-- I'm capable of reading the other answers and comments). It's cleaner and, with the unification of the desktop and mobile themes, it's a usability improvement for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will not be opting out of the beta test, and I look forward to the theme being officially implemented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-09-20T19:11:42.613" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8377" CreationDate="2018-09-20T19:53:55.240" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It IS the question, not the answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on mxyzplk's comments under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8377/what-can-we-do-to-help-promote-supported-opinion-based-answers-rather-than-closi/8380#8380&quot;&gt;SevenSideDie's informational post&lt;/a&gt;, it seems like that there isn't much we can do with regard to guiding the community towards answering borderline questions appropriately beyond the upvote/downvote system we currently have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, we must focus on the question itself and will need to close what was thought to be a good question due to the answers it generates and try to work with the author to rewrite it in a manner that would generate better answers or leave it as Primarily Opinion-Based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Not the optimal choice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this doesn't really fix the issue of closing good questions (or what was thought to be a good question) due to bad answers, it does seem like the only option we've got.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-21T01:18:06.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8411" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-21T11:45:14.327" Score="12" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-planned&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-planned&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-planned&lt;/a&gt; - As of writing, this color isn't configurable per-site but most of the sites with non-white backgrounds for their content areas have the same concern. We'll be looking into making this a different color in the short term but &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; using color to set it apart isn't a great choice, so we'll be looking at alternate options for making these questions stand out when we start working on accessibility concerns. ~Catija&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Are highlighted questions highlighted &lt;em&gt;enough&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By “highlighted questions”, I mean those that are on the shaded background due to being a watched tag, as below (the &lt;em&gt;Traveller&lt;/em&gt; question). I find the highlighting to be barely visible, and think that perhaps a couple of shades darker might be better. Alternatively, a thin dark brown border top and bottom might be OK with the present shading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DtEos.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DtEos.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33000" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-02T22:15:56.377" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-21T16:21:08.820" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it was noted that not all pages have been updated for responsiveness, but this one that could use work (all screenshots on mobile):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beta Preferences&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QI3eZ.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QI3eZ.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Beta Preferences&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;vs&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Profile (email prefs looks similar)&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AI48v.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AI48v.png&quot; alt=&quot;Profile&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31465" LastActivityDate="2018-09-21T16:21:08.820" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8413" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8369" CreationDate="2018-09-22T02:42:12.570" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8369/do-we-need-a-disadvantage-tag/8370#8370&quot;&gt;@SevenSidedDie raises a very good point&lt;/a&gt;, but here is a shorter alternative to the long tag he suggested: &lt;code&gt;(dis)advantage&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This style is frequently used by writers and is prolific in legal documents referencing multiple genders as &lt;code&gt;(s)he&lt;/code&gt; so that they don't need to write &lt;code&gt;he and/or she&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not sure how the Tag Search would handle searching &lt;code&gt;disad&lt;/code&gt; but it should appear for both &lt;code&gt;dis&lt;/code&gt; as well as &lt;code&gt;advan&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48108" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-22T03:54:10.477" LastActivityDate="2018-09-22T03:54:10.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8414" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8415" CreationDate="2018-09-22T04:24:44.300" Score="13" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag seems to be created by an error. I've fixed the only question that use this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wworld-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wworld-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wworld-building&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-building&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-building&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-building&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's destroy this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-09-22T04:49:45.210" Title="Destroy [wworld-building]" Tags="|discussion|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8414" CreationDate="2018-09-22T04:49:45.210" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;You've already done it!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags not associated with any question are automatically destroyed at 03:00 UTC every day.&#xA;  (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/19754/244929&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By removing the tag from all questions, you've lined it up for unceremonious burnination. Congratulations!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2018-09-22T04:49:45.210" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8416" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-23T03:53:13.980" Score="3" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;As per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;, editors should not guess the missing system tag (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;) without asking the question maker, in case they are wrong. This is reasonable, as it's hard to be 100% sure (e.g. Pathfinder is easily mistaken for D&amp;amp;D 3.5).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in this question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132241/can-you-use-darts-as-improvised-light-melee-weapons-to-trigger-two-weapon-figh&quot;&gt;Can you use darts as improvised &quot;light melee weapons&quot; to trigger Two-Weapon Fighting?&lt;/a&gt;, the system is determinable with 100% certainty. The user quotes the Two-Weapon Fighting rules on page 195 of the Player's Handbook, which are identical verbatim to the Two-Weapon Fighting rules on page 195 of the D&amp;amp;D 5th edition Player's Handbook. In this case, it's 100% certain that the player is asking about D&amp;amp;D 5th edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In those cases where the system is 100% certain, is it reasonable for an editor to add the correct system tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-23T06:26:50.860" LastActivityDate="2018-09-23T06:26:50.860" Title="Is it reasonable to add missing system tags when the system is certain?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2018-09-23T04:22:33.700" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8417" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-09-23T16:41:59.357" Score="31" ViewCount="1636" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a policy that says &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6869/1204&quot;&gt;we never guess the game system someone's playing&lt;/a&gt; when we need to know it but it's not clearly stated in the question. Conditions for our site have changed since it was formed (sometime well before 2017) and it's come into question a few times recently by newer members. Now is a good time to take another look at this policy and discuss whether we want to continue with it, modify it, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Current enforcement of this policy is uncompromising almost all the time: don't guess when it's inconclusive even if you feel 110% sure based on multiple signs; let the person clarify because it teaches them how to use our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What had us decide on this policy originally?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what we saw from the site's start in late 2010 up until ~2015 this policy made a lot of sense. If someone was unclear about their game they might be playing AD&amp;amp;D 2e or D&amp;amp;D 3.5e or Pathfinder or D&amp;amp;D 4e or D&amp;amp;D 5e (still brand new and not widely played). It was hard to know for sure (and we could rarely tell 3.5e or PF apart anyway) and fairly frequently something even weirder was going on like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They're playing a D&amp;amp;D 3.5e/Pathfinder hybrid, but they're asking us about a mechanic like Polymorph that works differently in both editions, in which case we'd have follow-up questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They're quoting to us D&amp;amp;D 4e or AD&amp;amp;D material but their group plays D&amp;amp;D 3.5e. They just saw a book with “Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons” on the cover in the game store's second hand shelf and they're super confused about why it doesn't mesh with their group's other rulebooks or character sheets.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their group plays a heavily homebrewed custom blend of AD&amp;amp;D 1e and Pathfinder or whatever. Chances are we'd leave this closed: “we can't help you here, you work it out.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guesses were unreliable, and when we were wrong we were &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; wrong. If we'd reopened based on our wrong guess and were receiving answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/1204&quot;&gt;we'd then have a huge mess to clean up&lt;/a&gt; and several annoyed users. If we were 110% sure we were still often wrong. Guessing was just a huge headache every time and never worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Nowadays this is all much less true&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've seen a convergence on D&amp;amp;D 5e in questions the site receives in the past couple of years. If someone's not clear about their game it's usually D&amp;amp;D 5e. If we have any basis to guess they're playing D&amp;amp;D 5e we're usually right. If they're not playing D&amp;amp;D 5e they're already aware of the importance of being clear about the edition they're playing, so they've specified it. These weird hybrid mix-and-match scenarios rarely come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that these aren't wild guesses being made: they're not “this person mentioned wizards, it's probably D&amp;amp;D 5e”, but instead educated guesses or inferences made based on the content of the question we do have. Taking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132241&quot;&gt;the most recent example&lt;/a&gt; cited &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8416/1204&quot;&gt;just earlier today&lt;/a&gt;, our users' guesses were based on an exact quote and page number from the PHB lining up with the D&amp;amp;D 5e PHB—and those inferences were correct. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main pragmatic reason remaining to enforce this policy is because it requires people to learn how to use the site before they can get answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen dissatisfaction with this rule from many members, especially those whose activity was mostly within the past couple of years, and I'm not surprised based on our recent track record.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What do we want to do from here on out?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here's the crux of this meta question. We haven't ever seriously re-assessed this policy within the new conditions the site faces, we've just re-affirmed it based on it having already been the policy up until then and working OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like us to examine this policy as a community, consider our options and the pros and cons, and work out what we'd like to do from here on. That could be a modification or it could be continuing with the policy exactly as-is, modifying it to be OK with some level of inferences—whatever we choose is valid, but I'd like us to choose it because it's what looks like it should work well for us now in our current circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given a fresh look: what do we want the policy here to be? How should we approach the idea of guessing the game system someone's using when it's unclear? If we're OK with some level of inference, what would that be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-24T04:44:07.613" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T12:33:28.370" Title="Revisiting our &quot;never guess the game system&quot; policy" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="9" ClosedDate="2021-08-17T14:39:40.770" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-23T17:08:59.957" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not appropriate to edit based on a guess.  Make the OP clarify the question themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why?  Because we're also trying to train new users on how to use the site.  And worst case, you bait people into bad answers when you guess wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP never bothers to come back to clarify their question - then what good are answers going to do them anyway?  Patience can be hard, but it is rewarding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone else guesses at the tag, revert or flag it and explain why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-09-23T17:08:59.957" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-23T17:44:46.467" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a college instructor. I teach hundreds of students across multiple courses a semester in the same major. When I receive an email from a student asking what will be on an upcoming quiz or what they missed in the last lecture or what the assigned textbook is or whatever without stating the course they're asking about, I reply by asking for the course, even if there is enough context for me to hazard a guess or even if I could look them up in my roster to try to figure it out for certain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? Because it's a waste of my time whether I guess wrong or hassle with my rosters, and if I guess wrong I might confuse them with an answer that doesn't apply to them. Because they need to possess enough theory of mind to understand that not everybody knows what they're thinking if they can't express themselves clearly. Because I don't want them to embarrass themselves in the future when they're equally presumptuous or ambiguous with another instructor who isn't as patient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People coming to RPG.SE to ask questions need to put in the research effort (the determining factor for upvotes and downvotes according to the voting buttons) necessary to express themselves clearly or else be taught how to do so with minimal interruption in the site's process. It's not being pedantic to expect people to know what game they are asking about and tell us clearly if they want our help. Waiting for the querent to do their own work to clarify saves time and effort for all parties.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guessing results in bantering and rollbacks in extreme cases and a failure to employ a teachable moment in &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; cases. Guessing does nothing to help train new members of high quality. For those one-off querents who are unlikely to return anyway and maybe don't know much about the ecumenical gaming community they are a part of, it also robs them of a chance to broaden their gaming horizons and to learn a greater appreciation for the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The policy should not be changed.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-09-23T20:03:48.743" LastActivityDate="2018-09-23T20:03:48.743" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-09-24T13:23:10.983" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bug&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Headings are a bit closer closer to the line above than the line below. See:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed egestas sem nec lorem ullamcorper, ut suscipit ligula rhoncus. Fusce eu orci a tellus dictum efficitur gravida vitae diam. Proin eu eros eleifend, sollicitudin metus nec, cursus nibh. Duis mattis tempus posuere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;Heading level 1&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In ultrices dignissim dui eget pulvinar. Sed eu dui non lacus consequat semper. Sed congue ante pulvinar purus elementum, eget tempor neque pretium. Vivamus pharetra fermentum bibendum. Ut in posuere dui, vitae scelerisque mauris. Suspendisse eget condimentum turpis. Nunc fringilla leo et justo posuere, a lobortis lacus tempus. Integer a augue est.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Heading level 2&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Integer iaculis est vitae neque efficitur, sit amet pharetra lorem aliquet. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec pharetra orci sit amet leo vestibulum, sit amet pharetra neque euismod. Donec non ipsum ut sapien sollicitudin suscipit pharetra at nisl.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Heading level 3&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Vivamus ullamcorper ligula eget lacus volutpat hendrerit. Ut dignissim augue sit amet gravida eleifend. Proin ullamcorper, ex a blandit accumsan, leo nisi tincidunt augue, sollicitudin ullamcorper eros nunc sagittis lectus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is effectively a regression &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3669/1204&quot;&gt;of a bug from a few years ago&lt;/a&gt; but with a different cause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This time the cause is the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;paragraphs and headings both have a margin-bottom of 1em&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;neither has a margin-top&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1em is relative to font size&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;headings have a bigger font size, therefore have a larger pixel value for 1em&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;this means the gap below the heading is larger than any gap above it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way to fix it would be to add the following to the LESS:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;h1,&#xA;h2,&#xA;h3 {&#xA;  &amp;amp;:not(:first-child) {&#xA;    margin-top: 1em;&#xA;  }&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means any heading that isn't the very first line in a post (or in a quote) gets a margin added above it equal to the heading's 1em. When two margins overlap, browsers render the larger of the two, so this amounts to headings having an equal 1em gap above and below them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-09-24T13:35:18.380" LastActivityDate="2018-09-24T13:35:18.380" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-24T14:14:43.700" Score="27" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should not guess the system, for all the reasons others have stated. However, we should make it clearer to new askers that mentioning the exact system is going to be a requirement for having their question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some kind of reminder or notification or prompt should appear on the &quot;Ask A Question&quot; page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41256" LastActivityDate="2018-09-24T14:14:43.700" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-24T14:44:08.460" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should allow some leeway when a question is extremely obviously related to a specific system, especially (if not only) when new users are involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that the majority of the time it's not appropriate to guess at the system, and we should avoid doing it and request clarification from the querent. However, it is sometimes the case that a question is so obviously based on a specific system that we can be overwhelmingly sure what the system is, but we refuse to connect the dots. It has been the case that a question can literally have quotes from and page references to a game manual which is easily enough for any expert (which we are meant to be) to identify the system it refers to, but we sit back as if we don't know what it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is important to train new users in how to use the site. However, in such cases adding the tag and leaving a comment to that effect is still a way of teaching the user how we're meant to do things, and indeed even teaches them a second important lesson about how Stack Exchange works - that other people can and will edit your questions or answers to improve them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is possible in some circumstances that even these overwhelmingly likely inferences will turn out to be wrong, because the querent is actually playing some homebrew hybrid system, or bought the wrong book. But are these cases - especially now, as dopplegreener describes, that the D&amp;amp;D landscape has stabilised on 5e - really so likely that we must be so risk-averse? At present, this seems like an overreaction to avoid an extremely small risk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of all, I feel that it is simply a more welcoming experience for new users when we are able to properly parse what they've written and make the inference to clarify their question for them rather than closing it until they fix it to this standard. I know putting questions on hold is not a bad thing, but that's always going to be unwelcoming to someone who's brand new to stacks, so where we can avoid doing so by assuming a very minor risk, I think that's a worthwhile risk to take. Where appropriate this also means these kinds of questions probably get answered much more quickly, which I expect helps with new user engagement and retention - if they come back a day later to find their question is closed, that's a quite different kettle of fish to coming back and finding some people have helpfully tried to answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;begrudgingly written with a grim sense of obligation knowing that I'm one of the individuals that prompted this meta in the first place but also that my opinion is unlikely to get much traction.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2018-09-24T15:01:26.450" LastActivityDate="2018-09-24T15:01:26.450" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8423" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-24T17:12:51.183" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We shouldn’t guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the things mentioned against putting these questions on hold is that these are new users. I want to challenge the assumption that being a new user is reason for us to be reluctant to hold a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If a new user is put off by their first question being put on hold, they’re going to have a bad time at RPG SE.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoiding holds on questions by new users is not “being friendly”. It’s setting them up for failure. We should never flinch from holding a new user’s question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a new user can’t deal with a temporary hold, they can’t deal with the site at all. They will be a poor fit for the site, a source of conflict, and a drain on the energy and patience of the experts who give the site value to new users who &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; fit the site. It’s a failure all around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Handling a new user with kid gloves to try to hide a basic part of site functionality from them in case it makes them unhappy only tries to keep users who wouldn’t actually want to be here if they knew. Users who can take a hold gracefully don’t need to have holding hidden from them, so hold or no hold is the same for the users we will keep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoiding putting new users’ questions on hold damages the site and drains its resources, for no benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn’t guess the system, even when we’re sure (we can be wrong about that too), and should put the question on hold. Not only does it teach new users how to hold the site, but it gives them an early chance to decide whether this site is for them or not. They deserve to know that sooner rather than later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Holds exist as part of the site’s self-learning system for new users. It’s semi-automated to help people learn to use the site using their own energy, saving the energy of our experts for the important work of writing and improving our answers. Wanting to replace holds with our experts teaching people how to use the site — when they might not even become a regular — gets the site system exactly backward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-09-24T17:40:55.197" LastActivityDate="2018-09-24T17:40:55.197" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8424" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-26T21:40:17.650" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Given the practical constraints of this universe, we shouldn't guess.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't actually think it's inherently wrong to guess - much as I don't think it's inherently morally wrong to volunteer to work for free, for example (as all of us are doing here, really.) But when drafting site policy, we have to include a utilitarian perspective and consider all the consequences. As others have suggested, it would be extremely difficult to create a reasonable guideline for &quot;how sure&quot; one has to be before guessing is acceptable - leading to arguments and confusion, all of which would be more trouble than it's worth. As with working for free, this is a this-is-why-we-can't-have-nice-things scenario - sure, it would be nice to say &quot;that's obviously a mechanic that only exists in $system, so I'll answer for $system&quot; sometimes, and I've certainly been tempted more than once, but in practice the value of being able to do so pales in comparison to the costs in time and complexity of trying to set up and enforce a policy that allows it while retaining members and members' goodwill and patience. We all want to jump in right away, but honestly, most RPG-related questions can wait 24 hours to go through the process with no harm done, so there's no real reason to change the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2018-09-26T21:40:17.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-26T21:54:52.653" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Bonus: Being strict actually helps the querent.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, when someone asks a question, we want to answer their immediate question, and that's definitely the core site goal. But if you look at it a little more broadly, we want to help users solve their problems and improve in general, which is one reason we allow frame challenges. Part of that process, then, is teaching fundamental question-asking etiquette. If you have an issue with your phone or car, the first thing any technician will ask is &quot;What model is it?&quot;, and rightly so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same thing applies to game systems - some people forgot to mention it, but others may not actually know, and in either case, it's important for anyone trying to gain more knowledge about their $object to first and foremost know what it's called and be able to readily convey that information to experts. It's not the main point of RPG.SE, but if one thing someone takes away from interacting with us is &quot;not only are there other editions, but there are whole RPGs that aren't DND 5e, and they're common enough that you shouldn't assume without more info,&quot; I consider that a good day's work. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2018-09-26T21:54:52.653" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8426" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-27T10:11:59.377" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the other answers saying that we shouldn't change our policy on this but have a slightly different slant on why:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Our current policy is very clear, easy for new users to understand (even if they disagree with it) and relatively simple (if not always painless) to enforce.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Any alternative to this policy, however well intentioned (and perhaps both sensible and justifiable in the abstract), will be much less clear, more contentious and harder to enforce.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Presuming that we don't declare guessing at systems to be acceptable in every circumstance (something that no one is advocating) any change to the current policy would mean attempting here on meta to draw a line somewhere as to when guessing was and was not acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The drawing of this line, however clearly stated it was here in meta, would in practice almost certainly lead to (potentially protracted and unhelpful) disagreements on the main site and require heavier moderator intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we say that 'we'll only guess a system when we're 100% certain that we're right' there will still be rare occasions when the most experienced users turn out to have been wrong, despite all of the cues. The much bigger issue however, is that, if we legitimise guessing in any form,  less experienced users will also be empowered to guess when they are '100% certain' and they may not be as well equipped to make such an assessment. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're already in a position where new users occasionally guess systems inappropriately - but currently the response 'Sorry, we never guess systems here', while potentially annoying, is pretty clear. Saying instead 'Sorry, we do sometimes guess systems here but you should not have done so in this instance' is going to be much trickier to enforce in a way that people find to be consistent, fair and reasonable (and don't take personally).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A categorical ban on guessing systems is obviously impersonal. Allowing some guesses and not others is always going to feel more personal to some users (whether or not it actually is). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2018-10-04T13:58:33.740" LastActivityDate="2018-10-04T13:58:33.740" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8427" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-09-27T18:18:21.270" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The policy doesn't need to change; the site's infrastructure itself does&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl:dr&lt;/strong&gt; Instead of &amp;quot;soft-requiring&amp;quot; System/Edition tags via closing questions that don't have them, the site should change to &amp;quot;hard-requiring&amp;quot; them to be able to post questions in the first place. (This is different from requiring at least one tag.) The fact that it's required doesn't change, but the headache the first system causes is reduced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why Closing is detrimental to the site&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing Questions outright carries a punitive implication that simply doesn't give us a good rep. Despite whether new users &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; view it this way or whether they should just &amp;quot;toughen up&amp;quot;, that is &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; it comes across. Nothing we do will change that because closing a question is inherently a snub.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another thing is that &lt;strong&gt;we aren't &amp;quot;Experts&amp;quot; in the same way that a StackOverflow user is an Expert.&lt;/strong&gt; In the &lt;em&gt;vast&lt;/em&gt; majority of cases, we are not critical to the performance of someone's job, and a misinterpretation of the rules won't get lots of people fired. We're playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we close new questions &lt;em&gt;commonly&lt;/em&gt;, it reinforces the stereotype of us as a Nerd-Clique, which is something we should be trying to avoid for the sake of the site's health.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Some users have brought forth concerns of Burnout, or of preventing mistakes, not repairing them&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with these concerns, though I don't think that they should trump or be trumped-by issues of our image. I think that the current way our site works makes it difficult to appeal both to new users and to experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the side of New Users, it is &lt;em&gt;frustrating&lt;/em&gt; to get your question closed, &lt;strong&gt;especially&lt;/strong&gt; if that new user is a new RPG player who might be unfamiliar with the breadth of how many RPGs actually exist, or how much context is important to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the side of expert answerers, it is both frustrating when we constantly have to ask for more info (both because of an incredibly strict rule and because of a lack of information) before being able to answer a question, especially if it is a question we want to answer because we can definitely determine what a user is discussing (as in, having pages from that RPG-edition's core book), and it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; cause burnout.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Both of the concerns here are valid.&lt;/strong&gt; And, something to note: Neither is less-valid than the other, because both pools are equally important to site health:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the experts leave, then the knowledge pool of this site falls apart. Some users will still create quality answers, but many of the top privilege-holders will go away.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the new users die, we'll just stop seeing as many questions. Experts will leave because the site will seem dead and we will see issues of stagnation and eventual death.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Instead of &amp;quot;Optimizing&amp;quot; for one of these two critical groups, we should change the site&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing we could do would be to make System/Edition tags (or the System Agnostic tag) required in a question. This would have several benefits:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Avoiding having to &amp;quot;Optimize&amp;quot; for anyone by &lt;em&gt;requiring&lt;/em&gt; that users performing tasks as-basic as adding tags for system and edition. This saves a lot of headache for &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; involved because it just takes a step that &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be mandatory to submitting a question in the first place and makes it mandatory.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It introduces new users to tags, and shows them how the tag system works. Many forums don't have tags, or they aren't that important, which is one reason why new users may not be familiar with them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It helps manage &amp;quot;Shopping Questions&amp;quot;, namely, the kind which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79/are-there-any-good-tabletop-rpgs-for-young-beginning-players&quot;&gt;ask us to recommend RPGs&lt;/a&gt;. By not having a System/Edition tag (which would be required to post a question), it is more difficult to post these kinds of questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this isn't merely &amp;quot;requiring tags,&amp;quot; but it requires &amp;quot;System-Edition&amp;quot; tags. The color of these tags could be changed, say, from beige to green, to indicate their required status, and to differentiate the &amp;quot;Dungeons_and_Dragons&amp;quot; tag (which is not a System/Edition tag and is commonly misused) from the &amp;quot;dnd_[X]e&amp;quot; tag (where X is the edition number), which is a common source of tag confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25068" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-09-27T18:18:21.270" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8428" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8429" CreationDate="2018-09-29T16:20:20.970" Score="2" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132627/what-spells-can-be-used-to-thaw-or-melt-ice&quot;&gt;What spells can be used to thaw or melt ice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question has some comments asking for clarification that I haven't addressed, but they magically vanished just as I tried to reply to them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think all of them are chatty or unnecessary, but why they got removed?&#xA;Can I have some of them unaddressed clarification-comment go back?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't remember which ones and what they are asking for, unfortunately)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-29T18:36:01.433" LastActivityDate="2018-09-29T18:36:01.433" Title="Missing comments on &quot;thawing ice&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8428" CreationDate="2018-09-29T16:58:22.400" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I undeleted a couple comments for you to edit clarifications into your question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-09-29T16:58:22.400" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8430" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8433" CreationDate="2018-09-30T05:19:23.103" Score="4" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflicts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflicts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflicts&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to be getting used for a number of different questions. It primarily seems to be used to refer to situations in Fate/Fate Core, but is also tagged on a few questions about Polaris, Mouse Guard, Dogs in the Vineyard, and some other systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the tag also seems to be getting used on some questions to refer to conflicts outside of a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's meant to refer to a specific in-game mechanic in certain RPGs, it's possible it fills a niche that isn't already covered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;party&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-vs-player&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-vs-player&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-vs-player&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/betrayal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;betrayal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;betrayal&lt;/a&gt;, and similar tags. That said, it seems like it might refer to either different mechanics in the various systems (which might warrant separate tags), or more generally to all sorts of in-character conflict (...which seems quite broad).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The use of the tag for out-of-game conflict seems more questionable, as there seems to be much more potential overlap with tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social-contract&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social-contract&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social-contract&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, etc. (Of course, none of these is totally identical to the scope of &quot;any out-of-game conflict&quot;, which also seems quite broad.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usage guidance for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflicts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflicts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflicts&lt;/a&gt; suggests that it's the former:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In-game conflicts can be social, physical, or any other realm of conflict. In some game systems, conflicts are the smallest unit of mechanical resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't clearly state that the tag is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; to be used for in-game conflict, though perhaps that's meant to be assumed by its failure to mention out-of-game conflict. If it is meant to refer to only in-game conflict, perhaps the usage guidance should be made more explicit so the tag isn't added to irrelevant questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conflicts&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conflicts&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conflicts&lt;/a&gt; tag be used? Does it have a clear scope distinct from that of other tags?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2018-09-30T17:06:33.103" Title="What is the [conflicts] tag meant for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8430" CreationDate="2018-09-30T08:03:22.947" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can think of no valid reason, save for a game mechanic that has this name, to use this tag on its own. Since that is our stance on &quot;is that a valid tag&quot;, I think the mechanics should be separated out and put into a safe harbor (or 3), the rest goes to be burninated. Or to quote the Spaß Marines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Burn, Purge, Kill&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-09-30T17:06:33.103" LastActivityDate="2018-09-30T17:06:33.103" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8432" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8434" CreationDate="2018-09-30T09:10:14.787" Score="11" ViewCount="344" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had asked a totally valid question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132639/the-b%c3%aate-and-lgbt-questions&quot;&gt;The B&amp;#234;te and LGBT-Questions&lt;/a&gt;, and after a short explanation why this was asked without an edition (because there is soo little on the topic) and a comment that was totally off-topic (and disturbing) I noticed a comment that &lt;strong&gt;3&lt;/strong&gt; of our diamonds had to look into the question already and pointing out that comments are for clarification only. I know that the topic does not sit right with some people, but this sounds like people flagged it for some reason or another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear: that is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; a political question, I &lt;strong&gt;never&lt;/strong&gt; asked people to take a position on the topic. All I ask for is help finding the explicit and implicit information on this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it still made me wonder: What motivated our diamonds to place that comment?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(note: If there are deleted answers, I can't see them yet)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T13:08:25.743" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T13:08:25.743" Title="What happened to get this mod notice placed on my question about the Bête?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|comments|moderation|post-notice|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8430" CreationDate="2018-09-30T11:03:46.683" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Conflicts are a scene mechanic. The tag was created for use in Fate questions, and has also been adopted for a couple of other games are which have a Conflict mechanic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't speak to Mouse Guard, but in DitV and Fate the Conflict system is about resolving people coming to blows over something. Distinctly, in Fate, the mechanic is abstract: this isn't about physical combat. It can also be a verbal spat, a court case, or other scene types. This makes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt; not appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should clarify the tag wiki and prune where it's being used incorrectly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-09-30T11:03:46.683" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8434" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8432" CreationDate="2018-09-30T12:53:34.357" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not a huge amount has actually happened beyond the weird comments you flagged. There was not a huge explosion you missed. But there's current weirdness, and the topic may get controversial, so it looks like a case of applying a version of &lt;a href=&quot;https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2047/id-like-to-introduce-you-to-our-new-friend-the-controversial-topic-post-notic&quot;&gt;the controversial post notice&lt;/a&gt;. Basically we see more trouble potentially brewing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not on you though or the question—it's a fair question to ask. Interpersonal.SE has found LGBT posts can draw some controversy at the best of times, and this one digs straight into LGBT controversy (how do various groups feel about LGBT groups?) so it's probably a good idea to just safely and proactively have a notice there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-09-30T12:53:34.357" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-10-01T14:42:20.113" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No change as we're about to do this again&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As stated in the original post, there were several reasons beyond just learning the site's policies and manner of operations. Among those were that upon site inception, there were plenty of opportunities for system confusion among the most popular games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, Pathfinder is progressing on their newest version and the opportunities for that confusion is about to happen again. Although that system doesn't seem to have ramped up yet, at some point it will and the chances of having confusing questions that could be original PF, new PF, or 5e will be abundant. Earlier today, someone was asking about a 'turrasque' (sic). Presumably they meant tarrasque, but it would be risky for me to assume that since there could be some game out there with a turrasque that wants to toe the line on copyright infringement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And over time, the chance for confusion will be reduced as we sort out terminology and the like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I expect over the long-term (which is the purpose of SE), these system confusion chances will ebb and flow and people searching for questions will benefit much more by consistent system clarity in all questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let it ride.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-10-01T14:42:20.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-02T13:33:36.980" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;strong&gt;Role-Playing Games&lt;/strong&gt; title image looks blurry because of the boarder, almost as if the image was badly scaled up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GyNSD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GyNSD.png&quot; alt=&quot;screen shot&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just blow up the image 300% and see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2018-10-03T11:58:14.457" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T11:58:14.457" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8437" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-02T21:59:12.353" Score="8" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;New visitors to the site are routinely linked to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Tour&lt;/a&gt;, which introduces certain banned topics: Questions which are off-topic, primarily opinion-based, have too many possible answers, or would require an exceptionally long answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's reasonable to expect new users to follow these guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, new users sometimes find their questions closed or downvoted for violating a rule not explicitly described in the tour, especially posting certain topics: Questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;rule intent&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8298/should-questions-touching-upon-designer-reasons-be-off-topic&quot;&gt;designer reasons&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic&quot;&gt;alignment questions&lt;/a&gt; (though &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=%5balignment%5d%20closed%3ano&quot;&gt;not always&lt;/a&gt;), and product recommendation questions, to name a few.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another common mistake is failing to add a system tag, something which isn't specified in the Ask a Question screen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a list somewhere of all the rules a user is required to follow when posting questions, especially a complete list of question types which are likely to be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, could one be made and presented to new users along with the Tour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="40971" LastEditDate="2018-10-03T20:40:15.473" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T20:40:15.473" Title="Is there a list of site rules which can be linked to new users?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8438" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-10-03T00:23:46.470" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Don't guess, &lt;em&gt;but&lt;/em&gt;: overzealous closing when the system is obvious is harmful to the user experience.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with the prevailing opinion that &quot;never &lt;em&gt;guess&lt;/em&gt; the game system&quot; means &quot;never add the missing tag where the game system is &lt;strong&gt;unambiguously clear&lt;/strong&gt; from the text.&quot; If it's clear, it's not guessing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In two particular cases, absurd arguments were invoked to justify removing an obvious tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123829/are-0-level-spell-scars-free&quot;&gt;Are 0-Level Spell Scars Free?&lt;/a&gt;, the question was tagged only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt; (a Pathfinder-specific class), and described the Spell Scars ability working precisely as in Pathfinder. My tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; was reverted just in case the user meant M.A.G.U.S, a Hungarian-only RPG from the 90s. The user later clarified that they indeed meant Pathfinder.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132241/can-you-use-darts-as-improvised-light-melee-weapons-to-trigger-two-weapon-figh/132273&quot;&gt;Can you use darts as improvised “light melee weapons” to trigger Two-Weapon Fighting?&lt;/a&gt;, the user quoted rules from pages 147 and 195 of the Player's Handbook, which matched the same rules on the same pages of the D&amp;amp;D 5th edition Player's Handbook word-for-word. My tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; was reverted in case the user was playing some unknown hybrid of D&amp;amp;D 5e and D&amp;amp;D 3.5. The user clater clarified that they indeed meant D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current system of handling questions like these causes several issues that run counter to the site's purpose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Without a system tag, the question is usually put on hold:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This impedes giving the user a fast reply, which Jeff Atwood &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2008/10/06/solving-the-fastest-gun-in-the-west-problem/&quot;&gt;once described as&lt;/a&gt; &quot;the entire goal of a question and answer site in the first place&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users who can provide an answer answer, and who may even be halfway done writing a correct and excellent answer, must wait (sometimes days) for the question to be edited and a reopen vote to be completed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The new user may accrue downvotes for failing to follow a site policy that wasn't fairly mentioned either on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;Ask a Question&lt;/a&gt; page or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Tour&lt;/a&gt;:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This provides a hostile environment to new contributors, who we are nowadays reminded to be nice to, and who have complained in the past that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5814/the-sites-availability-to-newcomers-seems-startlingly-low&quot;&gt;site policy is unfriendly to newcomers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvotes tend to stick even after the question is corrected. A good question is thus rated poorly, which impedes the site's purpose as a repository of questions and answers rated by quality.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Understandably, we can't guess at a system where there isn't enough information in the question. For example, suppose someone asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have a tiefling fighter with scale mail armor. How can I improve my Armor Class?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This could be any D&amp;amp;D edition after AD&amp;amp;D 2e, &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; another RPG like Pathfinder which uses the SRD, so we can't guess the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cases of accidentally mix-and-matching content from different editions still sometimes happens due to online sources; e.g. someone is playing D&amp;amp;D 3.5 but the first Google hit is a 5th edition's D&amp;amp;D Beyond, or playing 5e but the first hit is the D20 SRD. This happened &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115930/is-the-saving-throw-bonus-when-carrying-a-night-hag-s-heartstone-optional-or-req/115931&quot;&gt;earlier this year&lt;/a&gt;, but the user did tag in this case, and the erroneous nature of the mixed system was obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In such a question, I believe that a frame challenge of &quot;You appear to be mixing two incompatible systems&quot; is a reasonable answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is &lt;em&gt;intentionally&lt;/em&gt; mix-and-matching systems, they're likely to be very aware of this, and are likely to mention the systems in the question. It's difficult to answer such a question at all without knowing which rules they use from which systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not aware of any question (in the last year, at least) where the asker intentionally played a mixed system and didn't mention it until asked. Most mixing is done between largely compatible systems like 3.0/3.5 or 3.5/Pathfinder, and in those cases it's usually not possible to unambiguously deduce the system. You don't normally see e.g. a Pathfinder/D&amp;amp;D 5e mix because the two are so different that they wouldn't work correctly together without effectively homebrewing your own system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, a mixed game player is aware of the rarity of their combination as well as the existence of multiple games or multiple editions of their game, and the need to state it up front. The most common error is a new player who &lt;em&gt;don't know&lt;/em&gt; that what they're playing is e.g. D&amp;amp;D 5th edition, or forgets that there are other RPGs than D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only issue I see is where the answerer or tag editor is overconfident in their ability to recognise RPGs. Someone who has only played 5e may see &quot;dragonborn&quot; and assume it's talking about 5th edition, unaware that this race could refer to 4th edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, and I'm aware that this is a late answer which opposes the popular opinion, but if an editor can be &lt;em&gt;sure&lt;/em&gt; which system the question is talking about, it's reasonable for them to add the tag, as readily as they would correct a typo where it's clear what word the author meant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T00:23:46.470" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8439" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-03T00:26:47.177" Score="7" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/132858/41726&quot;&gt;This recent question&lt;/a&gt; was held as Too Broad, but it just as narrow in scope as many of the other good homebrew questions are. It provided one homebrew creation and asked for an evaluation. We've left many questions just like this open:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127765/41726&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew terran race balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123160/41726&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew whip blade balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73015/41726&quot;&gt;Is this &quot;Master of Masks&quot; homebrew Bard archetype balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105443/41726&quot;&gt;Is this Eldritch Crystal Familiar overpowered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What makes this question different? Is it purely the length of the homebrew. I would argue that a person making the decision not to answer a question because of the work required is fine. However, if it was closed just because it's long that doesn't seem to be the purpose of that site function. There are other users willing to put in the work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Did I miss a more obvious and justified close reason&lt;/strong&gt;? (there are no comments explaining why it was closed)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-10-03T14:54:31.100" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T14:54:31.100" Title="Why was this homebrew question held as Too Broad?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8439" CreationDate="2018-10-03T00:36:29.590" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question asks for a rebalancing not for an evaluation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific wording is what matters here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How should this homebrewed class be made into something that will not unbalance the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... has an infinite number of solutions. If it instead just said &quot;what parts of this class will unbalance the game?&quot; it would be fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T00:36:29.590" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8437" CreationDate="2018-10-03T02:05:56.710" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;“Comprehensive” is a scary word&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions are, and must be, judged on a case-by-case basis. Sure, certain topics are off-topic entirely, but whether or not a question falls into such a topic can still be a matter of some judgment. For example, after &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; was determined to be off-topic, there was a rash of somewhat-over-zealous question closures of things that asked anything that vaguely wondered “why?” something was the way it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when you say “comprehensive,” that worries me because it sounds like it’s supposed to be, ya know, comprehensive. Which is to say, exhaustive. Which is to say, things &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; on that list are OK. Which we cannot do. We will never be able to come up with a truly comprehensive list, and we &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; retain the flexibility to close a question we hadn’t previously considered but are now looking at seeing that it’s causing problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, I’m generally all for being up-front with people; I’d love to warn people before they start that their &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; question or their &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; question isn’t going to work here. But I’m very leery of calling it “comprehensive.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T02:05:56.710" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8442" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8443" CreationDate="2018-10-03T12:59:21.833" Score="9" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was in the middle of writing an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/132902/32426&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; when it was held for being a duplicate. (This meta is not about the duplicate status, just that it was and still is held as of this meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the question was held, the SE interface refused to let me post the answer I was already composing. Yet several minutes after the question was held &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/132903/32426&quot;&gt;somebody else's answer&lt;/a&gt; appeared. I've checked the time stamps: that answer appeared about 20 minutes after the question was held.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm curious why/how this happened. I understand that sometimes the site is permissive/flexible regarding in-progress content (like editing a comment after the time limit has passed), but why was I forbidden to post an answer within seconds after the question was held even though another user was allowed to post an answer many minutes later?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-04T02:27:24.103" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T01:11:57.583" Title="Why did this question allow one answer after hold but not mine?" Tags="|support|specific-question|answers|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8443" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8442" CreationDate="2018-10-03T13:08:52.393" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's generally a question of client- vs. server-side restriction of the post during that period between closure and your page's refresh. But I'm not much of a computer guy, so you should definitely read &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/91922/311001&quot;&gt;the real explanation on meta.SE&lt;/a&gt; for better information =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T13:08:52.393" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-03T18:43:41.770" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I viewed my profile after getting a new badge, the congratulatory message box &quot;underlapped&quot; the links for the tabs below (see image).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This behavior doesn't happen when I'm simply tracking a badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/h1QsV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/h1QsV.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-10-03T18:43:41.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-04T03:57:32.837" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Far too much waste of horizontal space.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is there a column dedicated to Home, Questions, Tags, Users, Unanswered? Why are votes, answers, views aligned horizontally? This is more than a third of the page wasted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2018-10-04T03:57:32.837" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8442" CreationDate="2018-10-05T01:11:57.583" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm the answerer on that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am using the android app for Stackexchange, and was writing the answer before it got closed. I'm always slower to finish an answer in the app than in desktop site, so it took a while, then it got submitted after the question got on-hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recall there's a post somewhere explaining there is a window of accepting answers, but in desktop website there is a mechanism that disable submit button if the question got on-hold while you writing your answer. This is not the case with the android app, so you can still submit your answer even after the question got on-hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T01:11:57.583" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8417" CreationDate="2018-10-05T12:33:28.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that any policy that forces us to default our guesses to a specific system will have the unfortunate effect of this place seeming even less welcome to questions that are not D&amp;amp;D 5e - many of which are already having trouble finding answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keep the policy as-is&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T12:33:28.370" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8448" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8449" CreationDate="2018-10-05T14:58:54.133" Score="9" ViewCount="200" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question in question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130290/is-it-true-that-that-more-taint-absorbing-items-less-protection-against-taint&quot;&gt;Is it true that that &amp;quot;more taint-absorbing items = less protection against taint&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A moderate rep user created a tag that, as far as I can tell, accurately describes the content of their question.  A high rep user then deleted said tag.  This seems problematic to me, because it seems-- in the absence of any reason for or against said tags existence-- to contravene our typical folksonomic tagging practices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should said tag have been removed?  Would it be okay for me, disagreeing with said removal, to add it back?  Would that have been okay without a meta?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T15:51:09.503" Title="Why was the 'taint' tag deleted from this question?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8449" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8448" CreationDate="2018-10-05T15:51:09.503" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Seems Legit to add it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taint appears to be a mechanic that does have special properties. We've got other tags based on mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't see any issue why this shouldn't get it's own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T15:51:09.503" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8450" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-05T18:09:16.437" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sure things can be improved further, but I think this is definitely an improvement from the old theme. Good work. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23007" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T18:09:16.437" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-05T22:12:42.110" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Why are we wasting 2 inches of screen space with an empty left sidebar?  The site is about Q&amp;amp;A, use the space for the content please.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-10-05T22:12:42.110" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8452" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-06T01:08:51.413" Score="2" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133079/as-a-dm-how-can-i-best-design-a-combat-encounter-in-a-stealth-mission-for-a-fig&quot;&gt;As a DM, how can I best design a combat encounter in a stealth mission for a fighter?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to restrict the question to only deals the problem from DM side, and right now I don't know what can be added to limit the scope of the question. (and honestly I'm quite confused what's too broad from it)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can be improved for this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2018-10-06T06:17:21.270" Title="How to make this &quot;design combat encounter for a fighter in stealth mission&quot; less broad?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-06T02:30:02.350" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's too bright and it hurts my eyes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With no change in settings ( use this on a laptop and on a desktop; not a mobile user) the roll out is visually unappealing and too bright in comparison to the one we changed from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a different forum where I am a moderator, we had a recent new interface that took quite some time to deploy.  It was obviously aimed at mobile users; the reaction was largely negative, with a few mobile users piping up with appreciation for how their experience was improved. (Granted, some stuff on the back end was cleaned up, but a further inadvertent result was the turning off some of our mod tools; that does not apply to my user experience here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the message you are sending: we cater to the mobile user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that is your intended message, I suppose that's good news for you to know that it is clear from your actions.  It is also good news for a portion of your user base.  If it wasn't your intended message, then you now have feedback on that score in terms of what your actions say to a user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with my other answer, my feedback is clear and direct: zero value added (to the user experience) with this change.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8451/22566&quot;&gt;mxy already covered my other observation, regarding wasted screen space&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-06T02:30:02.350" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8452" CreationDate="2018-10-06T06:08:53.557" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You don't need to. As I commented on the question, there are hundreds of similar questions on the site, and there is absolutely no reason for yours to have been closed. It currently sits with 4 reopen votes, and I would expect it to get the last one it needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem you're asking about is sufficiently tightly scoped, and about a specific, answerable issue you're having at the table. It also has a system tag, which only narrows its scope further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its worth noting that at least one of the close votes was 'primarily opinion based', which doesn't make sense either. There has been a trend on the site recently to close questions requiring good subjective answers based on experience with this flag, which is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If some members of the community think your question is too broad or primarily opinion based then its evidence of a problem with the way close votes are being applied rather than an issue with your particular question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-10-06T06:17:21.270" LastActivityDate="2018-10-06T06:17:21.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8455" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8456" CreationDate="2018-10-07T14:51:28.320" Score="6" ViewCount="326" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has come up several times in the last couple days that people have told posters not to add or to remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;  to/from their answers because it would force answerers to only use RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example (from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133074/can-a-polymorphed-ape-climb-a-tree&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Person A:&lt;/strong&gt; Might I suggest adding the 'rules-as-written' tag, just to make it clear that you are looking for an exact-words reading of the rules based answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Person B:&lt;/strong&gt; Might I suggest not adding that [RAW] tag unless you have&#xA;some specific, explained reason for wanting a RAW answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133135/can-simulacrum-make-a-living-duplicate-of-a-dead-creature-by-raw&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you point out, the RAW is in conflict with itself. Thus we cannot give a RAW compliant answer. You should remove the [RAW] tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But my reading of the tag description does not read that way at all:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that are about the logical interactions of a game's rules under a strictly literal reading. Not for questions about normal clarifications of the written rules. Answering rules questions with house-rules and opinions will already be restricted by our site's rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, does using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; actually restrict answers to using a strictly RAW interpretation? Can you not answer with a well-sourced Rules as Intended answer for example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I am aware this was a matter of quite a bit of drama on this site historically. My intent is not to dredge this up, but it is clear that there is confusion about the matter and I was not able to find a clear and definitive answer by digging through all the old posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-30T05:30:52.900" Title="Does using the Rules as Written tag restrict answers to only using RAW?" Tags="|discussion|tags|answers|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8455" CreationDate="2018-10-07T15:14:34.320" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The tag itself means nothing.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag means and does nothing. It is just a tag. It exists solely to categorise and describe the question based on content already found in the question itself. It introduces no magical rules or restrictions and no new information, and implies nothing whatsoever not already found in the question text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of this is true for all tags. &lt;strong&gt;Game system tags are &lt;em&gt;the one and only&lt;/em&gt; exception&lt;/strong&gt; where we might introduce altogether new information in tags alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means if the question does not appear to be laying down any requirements for rules-as-written or legalistic interpretations, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; should not be tagged on the question. If the question is clearly requesting RAW (or otherwise requesting strict legalistic rules interpretation) it should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;. Add or remove the tag as necessary so as to meet these guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These things were not always the case for the rules as written tag: it used to introduce magical rules all on its own by the mere fact of being present, but that did not work very well for us, and we walked that back to this current state (the default state) 2½ years ago in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6148/120&quot;&gt;A low-intervention approach [rules-as-written]: back to tagging basics&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Focus on the question content, not on the tag. Tag to describe and categorise based on the question content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If someone's asking for RAW information, that doesn't mean &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; RAW is allowed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's be clear: if someone's asking about how the RAW works, they are seeking that information and answers should be telling them how the RAW works. Answers not telling them that are &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; unhelpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is perfectly OK to talk about RAW, but then also talk about other stuff. It is fairly normal for a RAW answer to explain the RAW itself... then also explain problems with it, introduce Good Subjective expertise to advise how to better handle the situation, or so on. This is common, normal, and good practice when relevant and helpful. We're fine with doing this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Declining to answer with the RAW and instead answering another way is also an option. It's a form of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6842/1204&quot;&gt;frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;. Much like any frame challenge this is risky. The answer might be helpful, but it might not and instead get strongly downvoted. Proceed at your own risk.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Focus on the querent's problem and their situation and provide a helpful response that helps them figure out their problem. Their problem involves wanting to understand RAW, so respect that in your answer and help them find that understanding (or don't at your own risk). This is no different from what we'd do with any other kind of question in any other tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On the situations you cited&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person A: Might I suggest adding the 'rules-as-written' tag, just to make it clear that you are looking for an exact-words reading of the rules based answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person B: Might I suggest not adding that [RAW] tag unless you have some specific, explained reason for wanting a RAW answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person A is correct to suggest the RAW tag be added, but for the wrong reasons. The question is already clearly requesting RAW. This alone means we should tag it with RAW. That it draws attention to this question being about RAW is a side benefit but isn't the reason to tag in and of itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person B is incorrect to request the tag not be added: we don't need someone to explain their reasoning before a tag gets applied. It's valid to ask for reasoning, but as far as tagging is concerned, we don't care whether or what reasoning is present. The tag fits, so add it. Go ahead and leave a comment requesting clarification about their reasoning if you feel it's material to the question, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you point out, the RAW is in conflict with itself. Thus we cannot give a RAW compliant answer. You should remove the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This line of reasoning is invalid and I've removed this comment. The querent is asking for rules as written information. Also, as stated, the tag doesn't mean anything, so fussing about the tag is pointless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the RAW is invalid, answer with that and show that. It's not unusual for RAW to look a bit like nonsense once we scrutinise it legalistically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Most important takeaway:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; is just a tag, nothing else. Focus on the question content. Tag according to question content. Don't focus on the tag this much. It does nothing other than be a tag. It has no rules attached. We wouldn't fuss about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; like this, we shouldn't fuss about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-writen&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-writen&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-writen&lt;/a&gt; any moreso.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-07T17:14:32.343" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8457" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8458" CreationDate="2018-10-09T03:52:33.170" Score="5" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133068/what-is-an-avatar-of-a-god/133192#133192&quot;&gt;Valley Lad's answer&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133068/what-is-an-avatar-of-a-god&quot;&gt;&quot;What is an Avatar of a God?&quot; question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this answer acceptable? It doesn't seem to give any RAW, RAI or RAF interpretation, doesn't give any examples of actual statted avatars and doesn't refer to any of its sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was considering commenting but didn't really know how to word a comment in such a situation. I was considering flagging it but I don't know if it deserves flagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This may be a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1176/what-to-do-with-bad-answer&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40654" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-09T06:20:58.563" LastActivityDate="2018-10-09T22:57:57.260" Title="What to do about unsupported answers" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8457" CreationDate="2018-10-09T11:36:30.740" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Commenting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment hover text reads: &lt;strong&gt;Use comments to ask for more information or suggest improvements. Avoid comments like &amp;quot;+1&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;thanks&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer seems well reasoned, but doesn't cite sources. It would be improved if it did, so as to be more in line with Stack guidelines etc. etc., so just say that in a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer could be improved by citing relevant passages in the 5e source books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case, the user is also new, so several users around here like to add a welcome message, and be a bit more verbose about the 'why' here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hello and welcome to RPG.SE! When you get a minute, please take the [tour] to learn a bit more about the features on this site. This answer could be improved by citing relevant passages in the 5e source books so that future readers can verify the information and find other ancillary information of interest. Happy gaming!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For another similar comment, look at the other answer to that question. Notably, it implies several details about the history of deities in the various editions, but it also doesn't cite sources. So another user posted this comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be possible to get a couple references for some of this information? Particularly p3: it sounds like you are referring to a specific case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Flagging&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the flag list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spam&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rude/abusive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not an answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderator Intervention ( &lt;em&gt;A problem not listed above that requires action by a moderator. Be specific and detailed!&lt;/em&gt; )&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would not flag here because the post isn't selling anything, is polite, is an answer, and doesn't require moderator powers to resolve something. The problem can be solved with some helpful direction in comments in combination with the edit button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Voting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting is always up to the voter. Depending on how salvageable the answer seems, you could upvote and comment a more expanded version of &amp;quot;+1, but needs references&amp;quot;, downvote &amp;quot;-1, source references contradict this answer&amp;quot;, or opt not to vote and just leave the helpful comment. Any way you choose, you can change your vote after the answer is edited, so it's not like this is a permanent and binding decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, I would certainly not downvote for three reasons. First, the answer seems substantially correct as far as I am aware. Second, I am deliberately soft on new users because they tend to take downvotes personally. Third, I typically only choose to downvote when I am certain something is substantially and factually wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-09T22:57:57.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1129" CreationDate="2018-10-09T19:21:04.720" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've recently revised the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Be Nice policy&lt;/a&gt;, so I felt it warranted to provide an updated answer to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is relevance to perhaps edit out the use of the word 'cretin' based on the evidence provided by virtue of it possibly being a violation of the No Bigotry policy. As a general rule, if it might be mis-perceived, it should probably be edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the querent's rep, however, there is an expectation for them to provide a recommended alternate. I'm unfamiliar with the full exchange and what comments were deleted, so this may've occurred.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can say that as a presumably reasonable person, the word 'cretin' is not an offensive term to me, but if it were, I'm not sure how what to edit it so that it retains the querent's original intent. If you've an idea, I recommend performing the edit and confirming with the querent that it matches their intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-10-09T19:21:04.720" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-10T15:57:06.483" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Unresponsive scrolling&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may be the only one, but since the update I have notice many times when viewing a question that I can only scroll a little bit at a time. For instance, Flinging my scroll wheel on my mouse produces the same result as slowly scrolling it one tick. This was not previously the case and I haven't experienced this on other SE sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;NOTE:&lt;/em&gt; I don't experience this behavior when viewing the question lists, only from the question pages themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;System:&lt;/strong&gt;  Windows 10&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Browser:&lt;/strong&gt; Internet Explorer 11&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not noticed this happening on Google Chrome, but I rarely use Chrome when browsing this site. I will use it more often and report back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;EDIT:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been using Chrome exclusively since this answer (Oct. 10 - Oct. 29). I have not seen the issue at all using Chrome. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48639" LastEditorUserId="48639" LastEditDate="2018-10-29T22:59:32.793" LastActivityDate="2018-10-29T22:59:32.793" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8462" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-10T16:57:22.717" Score="6" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are many old / obscure / indie RPG systems, not available off the shelf, not easy to find. Or easy to find as a pirated version. Would asking how to get a legal access to specific system be on topic here? I suspect not, but I thought I'll ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-11T03:17:50.867" LastActivityDate="2018-10-11T14:46:43.030" Title="Would question about legally obtaining access to system X be on topic?" Tags="|support|on-topic|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8463" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8462" CreationDate="2018-10-10T17:06:53.773" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, it's a shopping question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, that would definitely fall under &lt;strong&gt;Shopping Questions&lt;/strong&gt; which are currently off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you can definitely hop into &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; and there you might find someone who knows where to find those RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-10T18:09:07.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8462" CreationDate="2018-10-10T18:22:31.860" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;That would be a shopping question (a recommendation for suppliers of games, rather than for which game) and/or list question, making it off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would probably also be a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2782/where-can-i-buy-original-edition-and-out-of-print-roleplaying-books-and-accessor&quot;&gt;Where can I buy original edition and out-of-print roleplaying books and accessories?&lt;/a&gt;, which was indeed closed as a list question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-10-11T14:46:43.030" LastActivityDate="2018-10-11T14:46:43.030" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8462" CreationDate="2018-10-10T18:40:34.230" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, for a variety of reasons&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't consider it a shopping question. Shopping questions are a common nickname for recommendation questions (read more in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;this meta post here&lt;/a&gt;) and since you already know which system you want to play, it isn't that anymore. However, it does suffer from the same problems and then some:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There's no best answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For many systems, there's a clear single place to get it legally --- usually it's the author's site. But sometimes, that isn't the case and you have to start ranking between shops that stock the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given two answers which link to different shops, which is better? The cheaper one? The one that has a history of delivering quickly? The one that gifts their profits to fight climate change? Ranking answers would be opinion-based, not to mention another problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Time-proofing is impossible&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Shops go down or stop stocking the particular game you want. Answers would have to account for this, but it's unfeasible and we generally want to avoid questions that force the answers to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's an unbounded list question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With an unbounded number of answers whenever someone finds a new shop, it's definitely an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6442/what-are-list-questions&quot;&gt;unbounded list question&lt;/a&gt; and therefore off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It can be hard to know what's legal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider a system that's hard enough to find legally that asking the Stack is a better strategy than googling. Such a system might not have a homesite or other clear trail left online. Suppose someone posts a download link to it --- how should the users of the Stack know whether the link is legal or illegal? Shops aren't exempt either --- I would maybe trust larger RPG retailers not to risk their reputation peddling pirated content, but there's no simple way to draw the line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-11T03:18:27.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8466" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8467" CreationDate="2018-10-11T07:27:50.170" Score="9" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;The usage guidance for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/breath&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;breath&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;breath&lt;/a&gt; tag currently says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions related to to the act of breathing or holding your breath.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, any time I see the tag, it takes me a second (or takes me hovering over the tag to see the usage guidance) to remember what it's meant to be used for. The name seems more evocative of breath weapons than the act of breathing itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I'm suggesting the tag be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/breathing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;breathing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;breathing&lt;/a&gt;. It seems more logical a name for a tag meant to refer to the act of breathing (or not breathing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do others agree with my suggestion? Am I just a weirdo? (Maybe both?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After about two weeks with +10/0 votes on renaming and no contrary position expressed, I've gone ahead and renamed. Thanks for noticing and posting! -n60&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-10-22T16:57:07.780" LastActivityDate="2018-10-22T16:57:07.780" Title="Should the [breath] tag be renamed to [breathing]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rename-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8467" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8466" CreationDate="2018-10-11T09:59:02.600" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, it should be renamed.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without checking, and given the context of RPGs, I would definitely think &quot;breath weapons!&quot; before thinking &quot;breathing&quot; on reading a &quot;breath&quot; tag. Using &quot;breathing&quot; instead effectively removes any ambiguity without compromising the meaning or readability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-11T18:27:17.917" LastActivityDate="2018-10-11T18:27:17.917" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8468" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-12T01:49:56.537" Score="12" ViewCount="448" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over on meta.SE (the meta that discusses Stack-wide practices and policies) there's a request that people think about and discuss how the election process works: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/316051/311001&quot;&gt;Help me opine about a new election system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm dropping this &quot;question&quot; here really just as a pointer: many of you I know are interested in Stack-wide policies and might like to read the discussion or chime in. Many of you may never have realized there's a broader meta than this one, and this could be an interesting entry-point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're curious how any proposals discussed there might impact how things run here, it's probably worth reading through a backlog of metas here on the topic of &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2018-11-07T04:44:21.940" LastActivityDate="2019-09-03T07:01:40.473" Title="Stack-wide Request for Comments on elections" Tags="|discussion|moderation|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2019-09-03T11:40:45.413" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8469" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-12T16:40:53.887" Score="8" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;My reply was in answer to this question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133514/how-to-make-players-settle-differences-ic&quot;&gt;'How to make players settle differences IC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I posted my answer, got a comment from SevenSidedDie, replied to it, then he replied and deleted my answer in one swift move.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the whole thing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I believe there was a few other discussions around this site about settling differences between players and the answer is usually quite simple: talk then act.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Especially since you're in the early stages of your game, it's a problem that you can nip in the bud by having a calm and frank OOC talk taking place with the whole group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Get everyone together and discuss the issue at hand to try and find a solution. And don't forget to chime in as a GM as well, by stating what kind of campaign you're going to run and what you would like to see as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Roleplaying is a group effort involving the GM as well, and everyone must find a common ground so that everyone, including the GM is having fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As with most things: 'Communication is key.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie's comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This could be improved by how this can be accomplished while following the GM’s rules and Principles that Dungeon World requires GMs to follow. In particular, this advice collided with the “Address the characters, not players” Principle; it’s not impossible to talk OOC without breaking this rule, but an answer should discuss how to accomplish that and what repercussions it will have on the GM’s rules later. It may also be worth discussing how to accomplish this using the existing GM mechanics, before it’s a problem that needs a chat OOC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer to his comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have no knowledge of Dungeon World or it's rules and principle. The question is pretty game-agnostic, and answers that are as game-agnostic would be useful to many people, while answers based solely on the tools provided by the DW might not be as useful for people unfamiliar with this particular game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;His last comment before his deleted my answer a few seconds later:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Actually, DW works very differently from most RPGs and it has explicit rules about how the things in the question are supposed to be handled, so the question is deceptive: it’s not at all system agnostic when they’re playing DW. As a pro tip: don’t answer questions about games unless you are familiar with the game. Being useful for others but off topic for the game in question does not provide value to future readers; it’s misleasing to DW readers, and we already have system agnostic questions about this topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Checking the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;relevant article&lt;/a&gt; in the Help Center didn't help at all. And the accepted answer doesn't mention the DW techniques as well, indicating that the author of the question wasn't specifically asking about what tools DW has to find a solution, but general techniques to help him deal with the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, from my point of view, it makes little sense that my answer was deleted, and it feels like, based on SevenSidedDie's last comment and his comment on the accepted answer, that my answer was deleted solely because I have no knowledge of Dungeon World and that the only reason the accepted answer wasn't deleted is because it has been accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48417" LastEditorUserId="48417" LastEditDate="2018-10-12T18:58:28.253" LastActivityDate="2018-10-12T18:58:28.253" Title="Why was my answer deleted?" Tags="|discussion|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8469" CreationDate="2018-10-12T17:11:44.913" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Being […] off topic for the game [is] misleasing to DW readers, and we already have system agnostic questions about this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a really bad idea to answer questions about games without any knowledge of the game. Even deciding that the game is irrelevant requires being an expert in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We often have the problem that people feel entitled to answer questions about games they're ignorant of, because they assume that the game doesn't matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And other users ignorant of the game vote those answers up. This is a terrible outcome for everyone involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To players of those games who are experts, this makes RPG.se look like a terrible resource for any game that isn't mainstream. We already have the unavoidable situation where the site is dominated by questions about mainstream games — we can't afford to make what little non-mainstream Q&amp;amp;A we have be obviously bad to experts of those games, or to naïvely “help” novice players of those games with bad advice: &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_blind_leading_the_blind&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the blind leading the blind&lt;/a&gt; is the opposite of the purpose of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't force people to vote a particular way. But we can remove answers that are obviously off topic for the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our answer-writers are expected to provide expert help. You cannot know if you're providing expert help if you don't even know the game being played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The accepted answer hasn't been deleted because the author is getting the same chance to improve the post you were offered, and they haven't declined yet.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-10-12T17:11:44.913" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8471" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-12T17:30:46.473" Score="11" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133516/34716&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; uses the well-known phrase &quot;game zero&quot;, except it uses a numeric '0' (Game 0).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had to read the line several times, before realizing what was being said. Then I even tried to edit the post to &quot;fix&quot; the o into a zero, before realizing what had happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we do something about this? Zeros are fairly ubiquitous in our hobby, so I expect this to come up a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-12T17:37:46.390" LastActivityDate="2018-10-12T17:37:46.390" Title="Can we do something about font ambiguity of 0 (zero) vs o (lower case 'O')?" Tags="|bug|design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8472" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8468" CreationDate="2018-10-15T00:03:35.930" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The use of negative voting in SE elections is not a good feature.  That the SE community embraces it is a sign of a flaw in &lt;em&gt;SE community attitudes towards people&lt;/em&gt;.  That needs to be fixed, but I honestly doubt that the entrenched attitude will change. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-10-15T20:42:48.160" LastActivityDate="2018-10-15T20:42:48.160" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8473" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-15T02:26:25.390" Score="4" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;p&gt;Around the site there are many things that are abbreviated examples are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D/d&amp;amp;d/DnD all mean Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;LTH meaning the dnd 5e spell &lt;em&gt;Leomund's tiny hut&lt;/em&gt; in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133596/leomunds-tiny-hut-and-familiars&quot;&gt;This question about the interactions of familiars and &lt;em&gt;Leomund's tiny hut&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these ok to use? The first example is one that is used everywhere and I therefor assume it is but the second one isn't (to my knowledge) used by the Dev team of dnd 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply put what abbreviations are ok?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40654" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-10-17T21:01:25.283" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T21:01:25.283" Title="Are abbreviations ok in reference to D&amp;D?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8474" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8473" CreationDate="2018-10-15T02:45:40.893" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;For common abbreviations, like &quot;D&amp;amp;D&quot;, everyone knows what you're talking about. However other, lesser known ones can lead to confusion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you can take it from context, but the best option is to lead with the full phrase, followed by the abbreviation, to clarify. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Leomund's Tiny Hut (LTH) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way it is clear what you're referring to. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for knowing what requires the abbreviation - common phrases like D&amp;amp;D, AC, DC, CR are usually fine, as they are common abbreviations that everyone use. However things like spells or abilities are a bit more &quot;niche&quot;. Therefore abbreviating those are more of a cop-out, rather than having to type the whole phrase everytime. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-15T02:54:02.500" LastActivityDate="2018-10-15T02:54:02.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8475" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8473" CreationDate="2018-10-15T02:48:51.433" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Two principles spring to mind: &lt;em&gt;clarity&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;discoverability&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Clarity&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First off, in writing a post you're trying to communicate to an audience. Or to audiences. As a question writer your audience is &amp;quot;the universe of people who might see this and give me a helpful answer.&amp;quot; As an answer writer your audience is &amp;quot;the querent.&amp;quot; But it's also often &amp;quot;the long tail of visitors and readers who will ever see this post.&amp;quot; (See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244534/311001&quot;&gt;We're working on a new stat...&lt;/a&gt; esp. at &amp;quot;You've got to get this to get us.&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What abbreviations to use, then? Well, it depends on your audience. If you're writing a question and want to use commonly-used abbreviations in your game, go for it. Remember that you may end up limiting those who feel drawn to answer the question the more you use jargon: that may be a desired outcome, depending on your use-case, or it might be a detriment. Your call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're writing an answer I'd say it's completely reasonable to use any abbreviations used in the question. Not only is the querent familiar with them, but it's fair to assume that future readers of your answer have also read the question. (And if not I'm less worried about their opinion.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Discoverability&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of making this the greatest repository of RPG-related Q&amp;amp;A the world's ever seen is making sure it gets seen! To that end discoverability is important for posts, too. I have a hard time imagining, for instance, the abbreviation LTH (used exclusively) helping a post get seen by someone searching the site or the internet for &lt;em&gt;Leomund's tiny hut.&lt;/em&gt; If the hut's going to be mentioned thirty times feel free to abbreviate it twenty-nine of those times. But write it out the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D/DnD/&amp;amp;c., on the other hand, are explicitly part of how our site organizes itself: look at our tags, after all! Abbreviations like AC, HP, DnD,... being ubiquitous through posts and site mechanics makes these pretty safe for discoverability. Your SP may not be another's SP, though, so that one's worth spelling out once or twice. THHGTTGTTRPG? Your guess is as good as mine =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-15T02:48:51.433" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8473" CreationDate="2018-10-15T02:52:00.800" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being an abbreviation isn’t relevant: the measure we care about is whether the words used make the post &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;clear&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. It’s especially important in questions: clarity is so major a measure that not enough clarity is a standard hold reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“D&amp;amp;D” is clear. No-one will argue that it’s too obscure for our audience. No problem there.*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“LTH” doesn’t strike me as clear. I wouldn’t guess it was “Leomund’s Tiny Hut”, and even if I did, I wouldn’t be sure enough to assume I was guessing right, since it’s not used by a majority of our audience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in general, just consider whether most RPG.se readers will know what an abbreviation means without having to google it. If most wouldn’t know it, it needs to be spelled out fully. (If it’s a long phrase that’s repeated often in the post, best writing practices are to spell it out in full the first time the abbreviation appears, like “Leomund’s Tiny Hut (LTH)”, so that later the abbreviation can be read unambiguously.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, I see no problem with the way the linked question is written. It’s uses the full name first, and since the post is short it’s clear what “LTH” means when it appears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* Aside, none of “DnD”, “dnd”, “Dnd”, “D&amp;amp;d”, or “d&amp;amp;d” follow the rules for how abbreviations are formed in English. If I’m improving a post for other reasons, I will fix those to the correct “D&amp;amp;D” just like any other spelling and grammar fixes the post needs. (“D’n’D” is also a correct English formation, but &lt;em&gt;nobody&lt;/em&gt; uses that for Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons.) The only reason our tag isn’t &lt;code&gt;D&amp;amp;D-5e&lt;/code&gt; is because &lt;em&gt;&amp;amp;&lt;/em&gt; and capitals are forbidden in tag names for technical reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-10-15T02:58:21.647" LastActivityDate="2018-10-15T02:58:21.647" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8477" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-16T06:53:53.223" Score="6" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question was closed as off-topic, and it was suggested that Board &amp;amp; Card Games would be a better location. Okay; that works just as well. So I went to flag to request migration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was on mobile, so I opened up Chrome, opened the question, and tried to flag it. Except...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NFhbz.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NFhbz.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;fully mobile web&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question has been put on-hold since you loaded the page - please refresh and try your action again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ooo...kay?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I decided to hit the &quot;request desktop site&quot; button and try like that. But... no dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VGrWP.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VGrWP.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;request desktop site&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Same error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had reloaded the page, several times - so this error isn't very accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can flag it from my laptop, though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/da7ca.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/da7ca.png&quot; alt=&quot;flag as in need of mod attention&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would seem to be a bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33315" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-16T21:03:44.610" LastActivityDate="2018-10-16T21:03:44.610" Title="Getting a &quot;This question has been put on-hold since you loaded the page&quot; popup when trying to flag my (closed) question on mobile" Tags="|bug|closed-questions|flagging|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-17T17:59:33.760" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The new format introduces font ambiguity of 0 (zero) vs o (lower case 'O')?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(I think it's desktop only)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8471/can-we-do-something-about-font-ambiguity-of-0-zero-vs-o-lower-case-o&quot;&gt;Can we do something about font ambiguity of 0 (zero) vs o (lower case &amp;#39;O&amp;#39;)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T17:59:33.760" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8480" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-17T18:30:11.863" Score="4" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/133824/28591&quot;&gt;&quot;Were Grungs created for 5e or did they exist before this edition?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; has been closed as a duplicate of a question that was closed as unclear. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that leaves us now with a question that cannot be answered in either place. What should be done in this case to allow the question to have a valid place to live on this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T00:26:27.200" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T00:26:27.200" Title="How should we sort out this question that was closed as a duplicate of another closed question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8481" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8485" CreationDate="2018-10-17T18:43:13.423" Score="6" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes questions get closed as duplicates of questions that are already closed. Is this something we should be doing? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose (as I understand it) of duplicate closure is to make sure that a discussion of a certain topic has one place to live on the site and is not divided or duplicated in multiple places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, closing a question as a duplicate of another question is simply shutting down the question entirely and does not allow any options to actually engage in the question without one or the other being reopened. This seems to not match the purpose of duplicate closure to me. Obviously if the question has close-worthy issues then they should be closed accordingly, but closing a question as a duplicate of a question that was closed for issues the new one doesn't have does not seem right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we ever duplicate a question to another closed question?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Please answer for cases where the new question has a closable issue and one where it doesn't (duplication aside).&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/133824/28591&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; for an example of this happening (I ask about this question specifically in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8480/how-should-we-sort-out-this-question-that-was-closed-as-a-duplicate-of-another-c&quot;&gt;How should we sort out this question that was closed as a duplicate of another closed question?&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T00:28:10.337" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T22:00:48.397" Title="Should we ever close a question as a duplicate of another closed question?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8482" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8480" CreationDate="2018-10-17T19:08:14.087" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both should be closed as unclear if they're unclear.  Pointing to a duplicate just adds a level of indirection to the actual reason for closing the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing as unclear also offers the poster the option to reword the question to solve the actual problem (clarity).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T19:08:14.087" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8483" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8481" CreationDate="2018-10-17T19:10:54.210" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;tl;dr do not close as duplicate when older post was closed for a reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If Duplicate Question Has Same Problems as Original&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then close for the same reason that the duplicate was closed for instead of marking as duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E.g. Original question closed as opinion based and new question has same problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing for the same reason as the duplicate does seem better in that it offers the new poster a fresh stab at solving the issue for which the older post was close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If Duplicate Does NOT Have Same Problem as Original Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then do &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; mark as duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E.g. Original question was closed for being opinion-based, and new question is not opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the questions are not duplicates.  The new one is a sufficiently cleaned-up restatement of the first as to not have problems.  Therefore, it's not sufficiently similar to be a duplicate.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would expect a duplicate question to have the same problems as the original.  If this is not the case, it's a substantially better question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If Duplicate Question is Same as an Older Post That Did Not Have Problems.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then mark as duplicate. Marking as duplicate is useful and directs the reader or poster to the discussion and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="38434" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T19:57:18.427" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T19:57:18.427" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8480" CreationDate="2018-10-17T19:12:53.157" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Fix the duplicate target&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we make the duplicate target a valid question. It seems to have been originally closed because there were two separate questions in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Were [Grung] created for 5e specifically?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;If there are any [Grung] deities listed for them, could you include them in the answer?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the second question, the duplicate target is perfect. The second question has also been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/133829/41726&quot;&gt;re-asked&lt;/a&gt; by the same user who asked the question we're discussing in an attempt to distinguish between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we &lt;strong&gt;remove the second question&lt;/strong&gt; (the one about deities) from the old Q&amp;amp;A, everything should be golden. Then we could just port over the answers that addressed the second question (or direct the users who answered both to separate their answers to cover both locations).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-10-17T19:27:43.387" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T19:27:43.387" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8481" CreationDate="2018-10-17T20:57:20.597" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No to either case&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may just be a personal opinion, but I concur with your assessment that closing a question as a duplicate and linking back to another question shuts down the discussion without providing a means of practical recourse for the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Question With Closure Reasons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a question that has reasons for closure should be closed for those stated reasons. This gives the querent guidance on how to improve their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Good Question (but maybe duplicate?)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a question that's fine on it's own, I don't think we should be marking it a duplicate if the linked question is closed. Presumably, the linked question was closed for a good reason and presumably those reasons are not applicable to the question at hand. If those two things are  true, then the questions aren't actually duplicates and it was inappropriate to link them anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Querent Boons and Responsibilities&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general issue with closure for duplicate is that it presumes the linked question solves the querent's problem. Many times that's true, sometimes not so much in which case some editing can help it become it's own question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there's a key element to questions on SE that should be noted: querents more or less own their questions. They put in the work to make a good question and that question essentially becomes their responsibility henceforth. Meaning, they get to decide what answer solved their problem and they decide on the phrasing of their question and are absolutely justified in rolling back edits that conflict with their intent. It's not an insignificant thing. If we close a question as a duplicate and link to a closed question, we shut down the means to discuss this any further as the person whom has control of that question may or may not choose to pursue the issue sufficiently to get their question re-opened. And that effectively kills the question/answer portion of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When one first starts on SE, it can be hard to ask a good question, the unspoken reward for that effort is that the querent owns that question. Duplicate links back to that question aren't bad when they're indicative that another person wondered the same thing. The duplicate link draws attention to both the new question and old one and perhaps earns the original querent a few more upvotes as thanks for helping more people by asking a good question in the first place. Linking back to a closed question breaks this sort of karmic cycle as it rewards attention to someone who presumably hasn't done sufficient work to construct an answerable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-10-17T20:57:20.597" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8486" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-18T00:54:06.623" Score="5" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems like a pretty straightforward suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/astral&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;astral&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;astral&lt;/a&gt; tag is currently used on just 5 questions, four of them about D&amp;amp;D 5e and one about 3.5e. In addition, all 5 questions are specifically about the Astral Plane. (There are quite a few other questions about the Astral Plane that don't have the tag; most of them do have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/planes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;planes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;planes&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/astral&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;astral&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;astral&lt;/a&gt; tag be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/astral-plane&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;astral-plane&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;astral-plane&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-28T04:51:21.880" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T22:09:48.957" Title="Should the [astral] tag be renamed to [astral-plane]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|rename-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8487" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8489" CreationDate="2018-10-18T14:06:48.970" Score="4" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I've been trying to ignore the dnd-5e tag, but on the homepage - and really on any question search page - it just grays out the questions rather than leaving them out entirely. Considering the sheer volume of these questions, it hardly makes the ignore useful at all. Is there a way to actually just not see these questions on the front page or in searches?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29282" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T14:27:59.470" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T14:28:53.100" Title="Is there a way to hide &quot;ignored&quot; tags completely?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8487" CreationDate="2018-10-18T14:27:40.923" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, you can eliminate ignored tags from listings (including searches) entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, edit your ignored tags. You'll find the “ignored tags” menu in the right sidebar on mainsite if you're on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;the question list&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;the front page&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YpB1w.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YpB1w.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ensure [dnd-5e] is on the list, then choose &lt;strong&gt;Hide questions in your ignored tags&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xJSXx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xJSXx.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's it. They will now no longer show up in search, the front page, the question list, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T14:28:53.100" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T14:28:53.100" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8490" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8481" CreationDate="2018-10-18T20:01:10.797" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Closing a question as a duplicate of another closed question is fine when appropriate. The system enables it for a reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like most aspects of moderation and curation, it's a matter of subjective case-by-case judgement. It's not something we should try to say nobody should ever do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider: we can only close as dupes of questions that already have answers. Also, if this newer question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a dupe, that means it's probably the same question and will have the same problems and will get closed one way or another. What's more helpful: say “sorry, we can't answer this”, or say “sorry, we can't answer this, but here's that one time we &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; have some answers, so check that one out”? Closing as a dupe fulfills the second role. So does closing for the same reason as the other question, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; linking to it in a comment though—use your judgement about which would work best case by case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent can still work with us to get the question reopened either way, and the dupe closure prompts them to consider editing this question to show how it's different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please answer for cases where the new question has a closable issue and one where it doesn't (duplication aside).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the new question doesn't have a closeable issue, then it's surely not going to be an actual duplicate of a question that was also closed. Or that means something was wrong with the closure of the older question. Or that means we've had two questions about the same topic, but the old wasn't viable and the new one is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that kind of situation comes up, raise it on meta please. The second case would warrant re-evaluation, the third would probably mean we should close the older, closed question as duplicate of this newer question. Diamond moderators can do that easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the new question &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; have a closeable question, close either as a dupe or for that specific reason: use your judgement as to what's most appropriate for this specific scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-18T22:00:48.397" LastActivityDate="2018-10-18T22:00:48.397" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8486" CreationDate="2018-10-19T13:44:46.493" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Sure&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since they're all about the Astral Plane, it makes sense to me that the tag should be more specific to that. I don't know what &amp;quot;Astral&amp;quot; might mean outside of that context, but as it stands, if that ever did become relevant to a different context, it might then need to be split into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/astral&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;astral&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;astral&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/astral-plane&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;astral-plane&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;astral-plane&lt;/a&gt;, so might as well do that now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I remember a similar question about renaming tags, and a diamond mod (doppelgreener/spooker, I think) mentioned that if they do it, they won't bump up all the questions. On the other hand, it's only a few questions, so it probably wouldn't matter if a non-mod user updated it...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T14:45:58.880" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8492" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-19T14:12:38.180" Score="9" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a question about my Role-playing Games Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133986/how-to-find-a-tabletop-rpg-group-open-to-newbies&quot;&gt;How to find a tabletop RPG group open to newbies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is similar to this one : &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players&quot;&gt;Where can I find other RPG players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I tried to use the various online resources given by the answers, with no success. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be ok to ask for resources that could help finding a group in a specific country ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note : It's possible that there are no such groups where I live, in this case there would be nothing to add to the original question's answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49365" LastEditorUserId="49365" LastEditDate="2018-10-19T14:54:04.873" LastActivityDate="2018-10-20T02:25:51.067" Title="How to ask a country-specific version of a more general question?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|specific-question|new-users|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8492" CreationDate="2018-10-19T14:45:43.513" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd be open to us offering region-specific advice: we're becoming a large enough community that we could have enough members for that to be viable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However rather than using my diamond to reopen the question unilaterally, I'm going to leave it to the community vote the question open if they're interested in that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T14:45:43.513" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-19T14:54:09.610" Score="-2" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;What color are creatures in the Forgotten Realms?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;How old do humanoids become on Faerun?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Is being left-handed in the Forgotten Realms seen as weird?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these questions should rightfully be closed as 'too broad', considering the Forgotten Realms are vast. There is no way to list the color of every creature, the age of every type of humanoid and let's not even get started on creatures with more than two hands for the last question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet this question remains open: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133911/how-common-is-homosexuality-in-the-forgotten-realms&quot;&gt;How common is homosexuality in the Forgotten Realms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is, quite frankly, far too broad. It depends not only on the country (a human from Chult likely has a different view on it than somebody from the Sword Coast), but it depends even more on the species. Surface elves are very accepting of the practice, while orcs put such a strong value on men having sons that it seems likely that homosexuality would be a sign of weakness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133915/10921&quot;&gt;top rated answer&lt;/a&gt;, while being great advice for general table-top policies to make certain everybody is comfortable at the table, doesn't even really address the actual question, instead quoting a few lines form the player's handbook that aren't Forgotten Realms specific. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer would be perfectly answereable if it was more narrow in scope. The original poster is asking about a gay human wizard, visiting a large sized city. In most cases for the Forgotten Realms, this'd likely be something on the Sword Coast; Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &quot;How is homosexuality considered in metropolitan cities in the Sword Coast?&quot; is a great, answerable question. &quot;How do all the different cultures and species in the entirety of the Forgotten Realms consider homosexuality?&quot; is not going to be answerable comprehensively without writing a 90 page manual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet for some reason, this question remains open. Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10921" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-10-19T15:34:29.803" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T20:57:41.647" Title="Are we more lax on questions if they deal with sensitive subjects?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8494" CreationDate="2018-10-19T15:56:35.457" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;At time of writing, the question on homosexuality in the Forgotten Realms has four close votes for being too broad after being online for 22 hours. At this rate the question will probably have been closed by the time you read this. I wouldn't call that too lax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a general problem that the highest rated answer tends to stay the highest rated, even when a later answer is better. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8103/40971&quot;&gt;Can/should we do something about early answers getting the lion's share of votes?&lt;/a&gt; which concedes that this is considered a feature and will not change. Full disclosure: both that meta question and the well-researched current second-highest rated answer to the question on homosexuality in the Realms are mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrary to the close votes, I think it's a valid question. There's very little canonical information on homosexuality in the Forgotten Realms, due to social standards in the US discouraging books from including gay characters in print for many decades, and even in 5th edition it's generally left up to individual DMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like &quot;How common is homosexuality in Baldur's Gate?&quot; may well return no answer, while the original question can certainly be answered well and in detail&amp;mdash;I did so myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a tendency to require changes to questions to be more specific than the asker wanted, to avoid a somewhat vaguely-defined standard of &quot;too broad&quot;. There's a concern there that the resulting answer may not give the asker sufficiently useful information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="40971" LastEditDate="2018-10-19T16:10:06.337" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T16:10:06.337" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8494" CreationDate="2018-10-19T16:14:57.477" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title might not give this impression, but the body of the question makes it clear that the OP intended to query for practical advice for the campaign they are participating in, and that asking about Forgotten Realms as a whole was a vehicle for getting that advice. I might be inclined to argue that they have an XY-problem, in a manner of speaking: what they wanted was &quot;how should we handle Homosexuality in our campaign&quot;, and asked the question &quot;how is Homosexuality handled in all of Forgotten Realms&quot;, presuming that the latter would sufficiently answer the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reason for thinking this is that they specifically stated that they chose to make their Player Character gay, but that both they and their DM weren't sure how much of an impact that should have on play (which means the advice they needed was practical). The title says &quot;in the Forgotten Realms&quot;, but in their actual question, they say &quot;in the default 5e setting&quot; (meaning they were implicitly using FR as a standin for the 5e setting, and not making an attempt to distinguish between them). They're looking for practical, applicable advice for this edition of the game, and for their campaign as a matter of consideration. Explaining the lore of the setting as a whole is certainly one way of answering that question, but I don't think it's necessary or the exclusively correct way to answer that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my answer, which you're obliquely referencing, I decided to focus on what the Player's Handbook says, because it's the one 5e sourcebook that nearly all players will have access to, and thus represents the only common ground most campaigns will have in 5th edition (as is the case for many campaigns for prior editions). Practical advice on how a 5e campaign should be run can be presumed to spring from that document.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also add that the OP specifically commented on my answer that it was helpful to them, which suggests to me that my answer targeted the root of what they were trying to consider, even if the question itself didn't necessarily express that need in the form this site expects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also want to pose a frame challenge: The question (and the answers) attracted a large number of downvotes and close requests, both before and after the attempt to change the title. It's pretty clear that users of this site were NOT being lax on it, as a lot of other &quot;skirting the lines of being too broad&quot; questions don't see that kind of negative attention. It is actually much more clear that as a whole, there was a much larger contingent of users reacting negatively to this post than you would otherwise expect from such a question (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to take a guess why that might be...). So claiming that it's being kept up because we're being lax towards it is a claim I strongly dispute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T16:14:57.477" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8497" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8494" CreationDate="2018-10-19T17:36:54.550" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Those are by and large false analogies as questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asked at a high level are not per se &quot;too broad.&quot; If you asked about the racial demographics or religious demographics of the Forgotten Realms, there are clear preexisting summaries of that information, often in one-pagers in Realms products. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How common are dragons in the Forgotten Realms?&quot;&#xA;&quot;Can a kobold PC get along OK in human-civilized areas in the Realms?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are questions I'd expect on this site and that should be answered pretty readily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's what this question is like.  I get that some people lack the ability to summarize - then they shouldn't answer questions like this. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of one-page summaries of sexuality demographics and/or response to it for the real world, it's easy enough to envision one for the Realms.  Noting variation is good, but answers on this site don't have to be trivially simple and globally applicable. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-10-19T17:42:10.740" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T17:42:10.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8498" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8499" CreationDate="2018-10-19T18:12:26.973" Score="11" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our site generally has a fairly strict policy for deleting answers that don't really answer the question, eg. advice not backed up by system expertise (see eg. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8469/why-was-my-answer-deleted&quot;&gt;this Meta&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7753/are-we-comfortable-with-our-current-position-on-deleting-general-answers-to-syst&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;). I flagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133952/11660&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; as Not an Answer because it doesn't really answer the question, and my flag was declined. (update: seems that it was eventually deleted)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks: &quot;Is my homebrew balanced?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer's parts, relevant to the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is okay...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(two chapters discussing the names of class features)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;With some fixes, this could shape up to be a great class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No part of that answer makes any attempt at reasoning for or against the homebrew class's balance. It just says &quot;That's ok&quot;. That's Not an Answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why was my flag declined? If answers to other questions are NaA for not showing their work, do we really want to keep unreasoned answers around in homebrew evaluation questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2018-10-21T10:07:43.087" LastActivityDate="2018-10-21T10:07:43.087" Title="Why was my NaA flag declined?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8498" CreationDate="2018-10-19T19:31:34.757" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I declined the flag. In hindsight I ought to have not done so and instead left it to community review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were two things on my mind. First, I'd been thinking about homebrew review questions all day because of some conversations in chat, and I was probably internally thinking “this is a review therefore a sincere answer, even if it may be a bad answer.” That was not correct of me: it is still a pointed “is this balanced?” question and naming is tangential.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, there's value in bad answers: they're informative to people seeking an answer that this is not the one, and they teach people which kinds of answers should not be left. So in the scope of reading it as a valid answer I considered it enough it was already downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have raised a new NAA flag on that post to get it back into the NAA review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T19:31:34.757" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8494" CreationDate="2018-10-19T20:57:41.647" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I challenge the premise of your question. The question you are highlighting simply isn't too broad. There are many, many overview-type questions on the site that we have never had a problem answering before, and there's no need for this one to be a problem. Just because a question requires a broad overview rather than a laser-focused specific answer, that does not make it too broad. If we start closing questions like this as a matter of course it will greatly reduce the utility of the site as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There appears to be a general move by a number of site users to apply close criteria for questions increasingly harshly, and I think this is an example of that. As a general trend I believe it is damaging to the site and makes it far less useful as a resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-10-19T20:57:41.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8501" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8502" CreationDate="2018-10-20T00:04:45.903" Score="6" ViewCount="211" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the last few days I've noticed a new user has posted ~5 questions; most are of poor quality, showing little to no research. Some of the questions have been flagged as too broad or unclear, but not all. This user is a new DM, and it seems that the user is trying to have his campaign written by forum but is spreading it across multiple posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have a policy on how to handle this, or should we simply downvote each question until the user learns how to use the site correctly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-20T00:26:54.397" LastActivityDate="2018-11-02T03:08:23.410" Title="What to do about a new user repeatedly posting poor questions?" Tags="|discussion|new-users|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8501" CreationDate="2018-10-20T02:12:16.430" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Treat each post on its own merit; if you see a pattern of behavior go ahead and send up a custom flag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts should be voted/commented upon regardless of author. We're all human, of course, but to the extent that we're aware that we may harbor a bias against an author (borne of experience), we should double-check ourselves that we're voting the post, not the user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, there are times that a user is doing... ~things~, none of which seem, individually, to merit action but which, when taken as a whole, bother you. In that case go ahead and raise a flag for moderator attention, please. One of our charges is to keep an eye out for &amp;quot;consistent, low-quality contributions over time.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have some tools to help with that, we raise flags ourselves just to keep our eye on someone, but it's a tough job, it's a subjective job, and it requires sustained effort. Luckily, that's exactly the sort of problem that an educated and well-intentioned crowd can help a lot with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;in need of moderator intervention (be specific)&amp;quot; flag reason is great for this: raise a flag on any post by the author and explain the &lt;em&gt;pattern&lt;/em&gt; you're seeing. You probably won't see any response from us&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;, but please know that we appreciate the help!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - If we end up taking no action it's strange and hard to go back and find the initial flagger to explain; if we do take mod action it's not really appropriate to do so.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-20T13:21:19.037" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8492" CreationDate="2018-10-20T02:25:51.067" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am afraid that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1232/where-can-i-find-other-rpg-players?rq=1&quot;&gt;Where can I find other RPG players?&lt;/a&gt; is really as far as we can go.  Asking for more specific items is basically a shopping question, and suffers from all the same reasons that those are off topic here - suggestions will be outdated quickly, no real way to establish a best answer, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-10-20T02:25:51.067" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8504" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8505" CreationDate="2018-10-22T08:06:37.287" Score="2" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am working on a monstrosity of an answer, reviewing the various splats of Werewolf the Apocalypse &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133398/30306&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All worked well till I tried to add something about the Nuwisha.... at which point this little message appeared in red under the window, which also was framed red now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Body is limited to 30000 characters; you entered 30357.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And... I am just about 6 and a half splats (got to reread Kitsune) out from finishing this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should I do?! 30k characters is nowhere near enough to work out AND provide the quotes, but the quotes are to the most part essential as this is a matter of &lt;em&gt;proving&lt;/em&gt; the points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I estimate at this moment that I'd need about... maybe 4k characters to fill in the blanks (Corax, Gurahl, Ratkin, Mokolé, Ananasi, Nagah, Beast Courts) and then possibly another 4k to get through the player's guides. So, about a third of another answer's space...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the immediate moment, I resorted to adding further research to a separated answer, to get below the 30k threshold and still share the results, but it tastes &#xA;funny... then changed mind and deleted the extra answer to work in a commentable &lt;a href=&quot;https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BNmNhS84AG3BubLOwGnQkFQNXkpyW8u5f0gcWdibqyc/edit?usp=sharing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;google-doc&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T23:03:29.437" LastActivityDate="2023-02-05T23:03:29.437" Title="I ran out of characters for my Answer... what to do?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8504" CreationDate="2018-10-22T08:35:05.377" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Be more concise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of your quote blocks are quite large. You have the option of paraphrasing your source or providing inline quotes: &lt;em&gt;‘The garou say that “candy canes are bad”’&lt;/em&gt; — as opposed to a much larger quote to the same effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You only get 30,000 characters, so use them wisely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've got some conciseness edits I could make in an hour or two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-10-22T08:35:05.377" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8506" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-22T10:33:31.820" Score="2" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my recent question about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134122/is-this-runecaster-feat-balanced/134127?noredirect=1#comment335243_134127&quot;&gt;homebrew feat i have made&lt;/a&gt; an answer was added which said quite simply that it was &quot;very overpowered&quot; without giving any way to improve the content. Is this answer acceptable and if not what is required for an answer to a homebrew question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Q is similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5600/stricter-guidance-on-homebrew-answers-with-no-demonstrated-evidence-of-use&quot;&gt;Stricter guidance on homebrew answers with no demonstrated evidence of use&lt;/a&gt; but is different in that this one is a homebrew question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40654" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-22T11:10:07.433" LastActivityDate="2018-10-22T13:55:29.740" Title="Is it OK to answer a question about balance without suggesting any improvement?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8506" CreationDate="2018-10-22T11:09:08.587" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an acceptable answer, as in we would not remove it as Not An Answer. Whether it's &lt;em&gt;helpful&lt;/em&gt; to you or not is another matter entirely and is something for votes to sort out (this answer is helpful / unhelpful).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew review questions are just normal questions. Your question asks only “Is this homebrew balanced?”. That answer responds on whether or not it's balanced and is therefore a valid answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question does not request advice on how to make it balanced. This means providing such advice is optional, and answers doing so are going above and beyond what you've requested. Answer authors should aspire to do this if/when there is advice they can provide since, if the advice is good, it will make the answer more useful and earn them more upvotes. But it's not required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are no invisible rules about how to answer this kind of question any more than any other question, nor should there be—invisible rules worked out &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; badly for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, and the weight of unstated requirements made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions a trap waiting to ensnare the unwary. So we have the default rules for how Q&amp;amp;A works: ask what you want to find out, and answers respond to what you asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8171/1204&quot;&gt;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/1204&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-22T13:55:29.740" LastActivityDate="2018-10-22T13:55:29.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8508" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-22T13:00:55.983" Score="2" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question was put on hold for being off topic. More specifically because I supposedly ask about the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not true at all and even edited it in for more clarification:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Whats the difference between a Cantrip and a normal spell &lt;strong&gt;in the&#xA;  normal tabletop game lorewise&lt;/strong&gt; and how powerful are they in comparison?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133973/how-do-cantrips-work-exactly-and-what-are-they&quot;&gt;How do Cantrips work exactly and what are they?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The video game was just mentioned at the beginning of the question and nothing more so what is the problem here? Also i reworded it before it was put on hold, so several people voted even after the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49339" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-23T05:24:39.953" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T22:19:56.777" Title="Why was my question about Cantrips put on hold?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8509" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8511" CreationDate="2018-10-23T07:39:19.837" Score="8" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please note that this isn't one of the many questions on this site asking &quot;why was my question closed&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just wondering whether it's right to mark a question that is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134122/is-this-runecaster-feat-balanced&quot;&gt;earlier iteration, such as my first question on my runecaster feat,&lt;/a&gt; as a dupe of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134181/is-this-runecaster-feat-balanced-2&quot;&gt;later iteration, such as the second iteration of my question on my runecaster feat&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Note that iteration questions have been defined as ok &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;in this question&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40654" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-23T23:00:23.007" LastActivityDate="2018-10-25T13:59:38.150" Title="For iterated homebrew questions, should earlier iterations be marked as duplicates of later iterations?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|closing-questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8510" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8509" CreationDate="2018-10-23T09:04:11.330" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Marking prior versions of an iterative question as duplicates of the next version seems reasonable, albeit potentially confusingly worded&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;(note: given a greater understanding of how the site works re: duplicates and time to reflect, I don't personally support this position)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a reasonable thing to do, though I appreciate that the wording used by the duplicate marking system isn't entirely appropriate in this context. By marking your earlier iteration of the homebrew for review as a duplicate of your next iteration, it clearly links your previous iteration to the new one and closes the older question as it is now obsolete - you would presumably always be wanting feedback on the latest version of your homebrew rather than the old versions, so this makes sure people who stumble on the old questions are pointed to the new one instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2018-10-23T15:26:24.903" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T15:26:24.903" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8509" CreationDate="2018-10-23T09:59:45.833" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should probably not be closing as duplicate this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've checked with a Code Review moderator about how they handle this. (Code review is currently my measuring stick for what makes successful iterative review.) They specifically &lt;em&gt;do not&lt;/em&gt; close version 1 as a duplicate of version 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They do require version 2 to link back to version 1, which puts version 2 in the links sidebar of version 1. Sometimes a user will also edit version 1 to point forward to version 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They don't close as duplicate for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Duplicates silently redirect users to the duplicate target, at least for anonymous visitors (which are ≥90% of our site traffic).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They're not actually the same questions, they don't have the same content and responses.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Point 1 there is the main concern. It sounds like it's helpful but it actually presents a problem. The pragmatic usefulness of a homebrew review question comes in two ways:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We help the user improve their homebrew.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We also build up a knowledge base of reference on better understanding how to craft successful homebrew through an accumulation of analysis, deconstruction, and feedback. Speaking as a homebrewer for a different non-TTRPG game, it's this accumulation of analysis that helps me learn how to build better homebrew content because I can learn from what other content did right or wrong.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Duplicates disrupt #2: if users get silently redirected away from earlier versions (without even know it's happened) it shuts away feedback and makes it harder to see and access. Someone clicking a link to version 1 (with tons of useful feedback) gets forwarded on silently to version 2 (which is much improved, but has very little feedback) and doesn't get to see the version 1 that lead to those improvements in version 2. As a user unfamiliar with our site they don't even know how to get back to version 1, and don't even know they were forwarded away from it and that there is a version 1 to reach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means the knowledge base we'd be otherwise building up is mostly inaccessible and hidden away. That's a problem we create by closing as duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-10-23T11:36:49.120" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T11:36:49.120" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8509" CreationDate="2018-10-23T15:28:49.393" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I was the user who had originally marked them as duplicates. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was attempting to prevent new answers to outdated questions by directing users to the newest version of the homebrew. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8511/41726&quot;&gt;Doppel's answer&lt;/a&gt; clued me in to a mechanic of the duplicate reason I was unaware of. If marking questions like that essentially hides them from some users, I concur that it is a poor use of that mechanism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have since revoked my closure of the old versions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2018-10-25T13:59:38.150" LastActivityDate="2018-10-25T13:59:38.150" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8514" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-23T21:32:02.190" Score="6" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;Meta is the part of the site where we figure out what's going on with the other, &amp;quot;main&amp;quot; part of the site. From an individual question's closure to electing a new moderator to figuring out how to help homebrewers ask about their creations, a lot goes on here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Roughly 0.3% of mainsite users come here and access meta. While I think we've got great discussion discussion here and thank so many of you for chiming in on topics varying from minute to strongly-felt, I'd love to see even more people &lt;em&gt;aware of&lt;/em&gt; meta, its role, its content, and the policies on it that govern our day-to-day work on mainsite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can bring more attention to a meta post by making it &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; which places it in the community sidebar. Only an elected moderator can add this tag, but we're interested in finding metas we should draw more attention to by featuring them. This would be a rotating scheme where we feature 1-2 metas periodically to draw more attention to them and help people learn about how our site works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Which metas should we feature this way?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need your assistance working out which metas we should draw attention to periodically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's a meta you think should be featured below add it as a new answer here. One meta per answer. Please include a short pitch as to why you think this meta is a good way to draw a stackizen to meta for the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a voter reviewing submissions by others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vote up if you think this would be a good meta to rotate through the &amp;quot;featured&amp;quot; sidebar.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ignore ones you don't want to see.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Save downvotes for when you think a post would actually be &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; for a mainsite user's first interaction with meta. (And please comment explaining your downvote.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no magic number right now, we're making this up as we go along.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Format and content of this post shamelessly cribbed from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3041/23970&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat: vote for your feeds!&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T15:56:45.053" Title="Which metas should we draw more attention to by featuring?" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8514" CreationDate="2018-10-23T21:34:00.030" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for RPGSE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have an FAQ! It's full of questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;! It links to a couple-dozen excellent metas that cover a lot of situations users ask questions about!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T21:34:00.030" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8516" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8514" CreationDate="2018-10-23T21:36:05.317" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7925/23970&quot;&gt;How is the community doing? [2018]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Annually we post a meta asking broadly for feedback on the site and suggestions for improvement; here is the most recent of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T21:36:05.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-10-23T22:09:48.470" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Extra-wide MathJax tables aren't constrained.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/134223/32426&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; for an example. The width of the table extends into the right sidebar. Here's a screenshot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2gUYc.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2gUYc.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T22:09:48.470" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8508" CreationDate="2018-10-23T22:19:56.777" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As V2Blast noted in the comments, your question has since been reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But to answer the actual question anyway: this is essentially &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-bydesign&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-bydesign&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-bydesign&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way the system works is that when there are multiple close votes cast for multiple reason, only the most-voted-upon-reason is displayed. Since it takes 5 votes to close a question (unless done-so by a diamond mod), if 3 of those votes are 'off-topic' and 2 are 'unclear' then the message/reason displayed on the close banner would be the 'off-topic' one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example: before your edit that clarified you were asking about the TTRPG rules, not the video game, there were 4 Votes to Close (VtC) as off-topic. After that edit one of those off-topic votes was retracted, leaving 3 off-topic VtC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know what the last 2 votes were but whether they were 'unclear' or 'too broad' or what-have-you, since there were still 3 'off-topic' votes, they system would still close the question as off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a bit of an unfortunate and sometimes annoying side effect because vote reasons can't be changed once cast and can't be cast again once retracted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastActivityDate="2018-10-23T22:19:56.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8521" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-25T19:43:36.900" Score="15" ViewCount="402" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some recent controversy surrounding a decision involving Hot Network Questions has become a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/316934/revisiting-the-hot-network-questions-feature-what-are-our-shared-goals-for-ha?cb=1&quot;&gt;big featured question on MSE.&lt;/a&gt; This seems like it's eventually going to work towards a &quot;better&quot; version of Hot Network Questions, but what exactly is &quot;better&quot; is a bit up in the air. I thought that we could organize our own goals for Hot Network Questions here, before contributing our thoughts to the question on MSE. What would we like to get out of Hot Network Questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-21T14:44:14.553" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T14:44:14.553" Title="What are RPG.SE's goals for Hot Network Questions?" Tags="|discussion|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8522" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8523" CreationDate="2018-10-26T17:06:35.413" Score="7" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/134227/14848&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; to &quot;I think my DM is consistently faking dice rolls for saves against a specific spell; how do I call my DM out?&quot; is a great answer to an interpersonal question.  Unfortunately, presumably because sexism, it has garnered a lot of bad comments and consequently got locked. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I remember correctly, when a post is locked you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; just lock the comments part and leave the voting part untouched, but that's not the default option (and not what happened in this case).  I want to upvote the answer, so I am hoping the post could be unlocked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also might make sense to unlock the editing part of it, but I don't know for sure about that because the sorts of people who leave abusive comments in response to feminism may well just start edit warring with it and then we'd have to lock that again anyways and remember not to lock voting at that time and that'd be tedious.  I also don't have any specific edits in mind, I just think the first section would be better with an example of how to start such a conversation or more detailed advice on what to do (rather than what &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to do) with that, and it's the sort of thinking where I'm like &quot;maybe I'll leave a comment&quot; only it's locked so now it's &quot;maybe I'd edit that if I could&quot; but honestly probably not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we unlock voting? Can/should we unlock editing, too, without unlocking voting?  Is there a reason we should do neither?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-10-26T17:30:21.897" Title="Can we get voting unlocked on this post please?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|locked-posts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8522" CreationDate="2018-10-26T17:30:21.897" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure thing. Sorry about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What locking does and doesn't do to a post is actually poorly documented, and because mod abilities are different it's not easily testable by us either. The lock reasons do have some “magic” effects that are based on the selected lock reason — for example, the Historical reason on a question locks down the whole page, while other lock reasons don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I always thought the “comments” reason for a lock left the voting and editing and other functions alone, but it looks like it doesn't? I'm pretty sure I've been through this headache with the comment lock before… The comment lock reason is basically useless, then, I guess, but I keep assuming it &lt;em&gt;couldn't&lt;/em&gt; be useless and forgetting that it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, the lock has been removed, since locking voting too is not desirable system behaviour. Hopefully the mod comment under the post is enough to ward off any more appeals to remove the part about considering women's experiences because it &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; make some men feel wrongly accused of being inconsiderate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-10-26T17:30:21.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8514" CreationDate="2018-10-26T18:08:26.113" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8521/23196&quot;&gt;What are RPG.SE's goals for Hot Network Questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Topical, relevant, and it seems like no-one cares about it here. If anyone &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; care, they should be given the incentive to voice their opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2018-10-26T18:08:26.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8521" CreationDate="2018-10-26T23:43:58.577" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Find some way to reduce bad answers on popular questions from users coming in from the HNQ&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a common thing we run into here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User asks a perfectly fine question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question gets a bunch of upvotes/views, causing it to show up on the HNQ.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of people from across the SE network see it on the sidebar.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They come and answer the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They don't know rpg.se norms, aren't RPG experts, or whatever, so a lot of the answers are bad.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Bad stuff happens:  The question has to be locked, a bunch of extra moderation work gets created to deal with the bad answers, they get upset about the moderation and start meta drama, whatevs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6755/my-question-got-too-popular-what-should-i-do-now&quot;&gt;Example&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a pretty crappy experience for everyone involved, but especially for the asker, who didn't do anything wrong besides ask an interesting question, and now has to watch it turn into a warzone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be nice if whatever changes get made to HNQ do something to address this issue.  I'm not sure what the right solution is (Auto-protect HNQ questions?  New review queue?  Kill the association bonus?), but as far as &lt;em&gt;goals&lt;/em&gt; go, improving this situation is one of mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2018-10-26T23:43:58.577" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8526" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8528" CreationDate="2018-10-27T18:23:14.567" Score="2" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134431/how-to-summon-risk-free-with-gate&quot;&gt;How to summon risk free with Gate&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post has received negative press, but had not been flagged as anything specific. I don't want to break any of the rules of the site, yet want my question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may be running into the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY Problem&lt;/a&gt;, but I don't think so, since the question &lt;em&gt;really is&lt;/em&gt; how to solve problems garnered by a solution, as opposed to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the issue with the linked post and how can I fix it to be a better question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45430" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-10-27T18:37:52.320" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T08:24:31.130" Title="What is wrong with this post?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8526" CreationDate="2018-10-27T20:26:47.347" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A post can be stackable and yet receive many downvotes, just as the opposite can happen&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question or answer is flagged when it does not fit the stack format, i.e., the question presents some of the flagable problems - Too Broad, Off-topic, Unclear, Opinion-based. Your question presents none of these problems, thus it's not flagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, votes/scores are completely orthogonal to that and present how useful and well made a post is, according to the reader and, with enough votes, according to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously a post that is bad for the format usually will receive downvotes as well, as it is seen as not useful, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/134449/43856&quot;&gt;How can I improve Views and likes for my gaming&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, about your question, although I did not downvote, I only didn't because I don't like to downvote questions - actually, if you go through my stats, I don't like to downvote, period. A few reasons I would downvote if I was more trigger happy with the down arrow:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It presents a seemingly unrealistic problem/scenario which is likely to be seen as &quot;not useful&quot; - for me it is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's unclear what is the actual problem you want to solve. You want to summon the creature just because you can, or are you summoning it for another reason? If it's for another reason, it is indeed a case of XY Problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It leaves us to imagine &quot;what other issues might arrive&quot;, and since the scenario is, as I mentioned earlier, probably unrealistic and not useful, people don't have experience with it to actually know which problems might arrive.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even if they did, &quot;What issues might arrive?&quot; is usually a worse question than &quot;I tried this and I had this problem, how can I solve it?&quot;, in your case, &quot;I tried to summon a creature with Gate and this, this and this happened and my wizard got killed. How should I fix it?&quot; - i.e., hypothetical questions are worse than questions based on an actual problem you faced.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably there are more issues with the question, to be honest, but these are enough for most trigger happy people downvote a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2018-10-27T20:26:47.347" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8528" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8526" CreationDate="2018-10-27T21:42:16.377" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t know that there’s anything wrong with it to be fixed. It only has a few votes so far: two down and three up. It has no hold votes, and seems to be a viable question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it’s just the nature of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It’s long, and some people will just skip long questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It asks those who do read it to dive deep in the weeds of rules interactions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That just means it has a smaller potential audience, and lowers the bar for those who do click the title to vote it “not useful” to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-10-27T21:42:16.377" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8529" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8486" CreationDate="2018-10-28T15:30:02.433" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially in infrequently used tags, more general is better.  &amp;quot;Well my question isn't quite about the astral &lt;em&gt;plane&lt;/em&gt; it's about...&amp;quot; is the immediate issue from the next question about astral phenomena. And then we have a fistful of astral tags all running the risk of deletion because they don't have enough use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is fit for use right now.  &amp;quot;I have a question about astral projection, or astral travel, or monsters on the astral plane, or whatever... I start typing in astral... Oh look there it is, great.&amp;quot;  If you are searching for info on the astral plane, and you go to tag:astral, you're not exactly overwhelmed with 100s of superfluous questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our tagging is not a logical taxonomy.  It is an emergent folksonomy, where it modifies to fit real needs and real numbers of questions, not a sense of logical rigor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are no problems with the existing tag, and none cited in the question, therefore no action should be taken. (By problem, I mean things that are affecting its usefulness in practice for questioners or answerers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T22:09:48.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8521" CreationDate="2018-10-28T15:52:46.447" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;HNQ should go.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally like HNQ, and go to other sites to look at interesting questions.  However, as an adult with a firm grasp of my faculties, I don't contribute answers to sites I'm wildly unqualified to answer on. Sadly, that is not the general approach of Internet users in general.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All SE sites are pretty specific to something.  Ubuntu users, RPG players, people knowledgable in Jewish law. Answers from people that lack that context are, by definition, bad answers and corrupt the target question and site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was managed for a while OK, but as the Internet gets generally worse, and as SE sites that require no specific domain knowledge (e.g. IPS) appear, general Internet Buzzfeed-and-comment-section norms intrude on an otherwise civilized site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We pretty much have to go protect every RPG question that hits HNQ because of the volume of comments and answers from people that don't know jack crap about RPGs.  Which defeats the point of HNQ, as it prevents the new from participating. And it wastes moderator time. Lose-lose-lose scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it was a nice thing to have, but it's becoming more harmful than helpful. It either needs to go entirely, or have significant additional restrictions placed around it (you link through it to that site, you're read only for a while?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T15:52:46.447" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8514" CreationDate="2018-10-28T15:56:45.053" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;None of them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; and that's what's needed. Old metas, unlike old main site questions, are often just old and it's OK to open a new question instead of chiming in somewhere in the years-old soup of some previous one. Replaying them serves what purpose? And it distracts from actual timely new metas being featured.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing this is a) additional work, b) open to people gaming the system when some factional war breaks out, c) adds no value.  Don't do it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-10-28T15:56:45.053" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8532" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-10-29T22:46:14.930" Score="6" ViewCount="240" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not trying to ruffle feathers, I am genuinely curious.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually when subjective answers are provided, a comment is posted to remind answerers of the &quot;Good Subjective&quot; rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions, however, don't seem to get similar treatment, especially when they relate to discrimination or targeted behavior at the table (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134212/i-think-my-dm-is-consistently-faking-dice-rolls-for-saves-against-a-specific-spe/134233#134233&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51721/dealing-with-difficult-male-players-when-youre-a-new-female-player/51744#51744&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a reason that answers without tested results are treated differently in these types of questions than in others?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48639" LastActivityDate="2018-10-29T23:24:18.297" Title="Are &quot;how to handle sexism/racism/other-ism at the table&quot; questions exceptions to the &quot;Good Subjective&quot; rules?" Tags="|discussion|answers|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8532" CreationDate="2018-10-29T23:24:18.297" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;These questions are still subject to Good Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically all questions and answers are either Objective or Subjective or a mix of both. And all Subjective stuff is expected to be Good Subjective, or else it's... you know... not good. All of that is true all the time for all questions and answers no matter what comments have or haven't been posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments get left when people either feel like leaving a reminder in advance (sometimes treated as noise and removed), or when there's been enough trouble and Bad Subjective answers already that a community member (usually a diamond moderator) feels the need to leave a reminder to help people stay in line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the comment there is just a reminder of what's already true, the absence of any such comment doesn't mean the expectations go away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider that &quot;No tresspassing&quot; signs get put down where people seem like they might tresspass and need a firm reminder to not. But the absence of such a sign doesn't mean it's OK to tresspass, and tresspass laws are still a thing that apply even if there isn't a sign about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-10-29T23:24:18.297" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8534" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-10-31T13:29:32.293" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a very mild baked brie: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134677/can-you-awaken-a-sentinel-raven-raven-queen-patron&quot;&gt;Can you Awaken a Raven Queen-patron warlock&amp;#39;s sentinel raven?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's got a nice blend of poor or incomplete/not fully baked wording from Unearthed Arcana that allows a class feature to be more powerful than likely intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This cheese may not have fully melted when served.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:56:42.750" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:56:42.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8535" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-02T01:15:03.567" Score="9" ViewCount="348" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would be useful (in my eyes) to users of the site to be able to find roughly how long a published adventure for a given RPG will take, for time estimation / planning in real life. This varies widely by play group, so I can't find a way for accurately determining it apart from a survey-type question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was suggested as a comment on my linked question (which I then deleted) that I instead ask how to estimate the time, but I believe that's going to have widely varying answers as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the question &quot;How long will published adventure X take?&quot; an appropriate/on-topic question for RPG.SE?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly: Is the question &quot;How can you determine the amount of sessions a published module will take?&quot; too broad for the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I initially asked the following question, then deleted it myself: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134786/how-long-is-waterdeep-dragon-heist&quot;&gt;How long is Waterdeep Dragon Heist?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I realize there is going to be quite a range,&#xA;  depending on how played / your group, but How many sessions do you&#xA;  typically get out of Waterdeep Dragon Heist?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;To anyone that wants to close this as due to being different for&#xA;  different groups, (Because I do, and I'm writing the question...)&#xA;  consider, How can you determine the amount of sessions a published&#xA;  module will take, without surveying a community that have run through&#xA;  it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Oblivious Sage left the following comment on the question, which prompted me to delete the question and ask this meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The first half of this is a survey, which we don't generally allow. The second half looks like an answerable question, though (if you leave off the bit about surveying the community).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36316" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-02T01:30:15.733" LastActivityDate="2018-11-12T12:04:48.183" Title="Is &quot;How long does published adventure X take?&quot; an appropriate question on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|specific-question|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8535" CreationDate="2018-11-02T01:57:44.483" Score="16" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How long did X take you&quot; is clearly not a good Stack-question. Because every answer is equally valid, so there's no way that voting helps, there's no &quot;good&quot; or &quot;bad&quot; answer, &amp;amp;c. (I'm aware that's not the question you asked, I'm just trying to think through the gradations, here.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How long &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; X take&quot; is not obviously bad in the way the above would be. And while a survey of a hundred groups who've run something is appealing as a possible answer (and I know of FB GM groups where spreadsheets of such things are compiled), I, personally, can't get my head around the fact that you're the GM, there are about a thousand levers you can push/pull, and so the best answer's probably &quot;however long you want it to.&quot; Which doesn't seem very useful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How do I figure how long X should take&quot; is facially better, but I feel like there are so many playstyle variables in there that I would expect a lot of comments asking for various clarifications.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't really an answer, I guess--just the ramblings of one GM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say: if you posted &quot;how do I sit down, read through a published adventure, and chart out length I should plan for [given I'd like no more than 50% of my time to be combat, my players love social scenes and seem to be uninterested in exploration, and are loot-completionists...]?&quot; I'd upvote it. And hope to see some really good, expertise-based answers come in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-11-02T01:57:44.483" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8537" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8501" CreationDate="2018-11-02T03:08:23.410" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site code will take care of this automatically, if the user does not improve.  The exact mechanisms are secret, but if a user gets enough Bad Post Points of a type then the site won't let them post any more stuff of that type until the score goes up from editing or like a month passes so deletion Bad Points go away or something like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Helping them before then is obviously better, though.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-11-02T03:08:23.410" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8535" CreationDate="2018-11-02T03:51:07.203" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be an appropriate question, &lt;strong&gt;if you ask it &lt;strike&gt;right&lt;/strike&gt; in a stack appropriate manner&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; of the time it's likely only going to be a survey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you stated in the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How can you determine the amount of sessions a published module will take, &lt;strong&gt;without surveying a community&lt;/strong&gt; that have run through it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's your problem. Stack Exchange isn't built for surveying the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also state:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I realize there is going to be quite a range, depending on how played / your group...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is exactly correct. How long it's going to take will vary from group to group, making each answer equally valid with no single, &quot;best&quot;, correct answer and thus not appropriate on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we do have a similar question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/109638/14878&quot;&gt;How many sessions should Rise of Tiamat take?&lt;/a&gt;) which has been well received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference here though is that it's not &lt;em&gt;necessarily&lt;/em&gt; trying to survey the community. The OP has &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; done the research and is asking whether they are correct in their estimations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there are potentially ways to ask such a question which makes it on-topic for Stack Exchange but you just have to find that fine line where it isn't a survey question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastActivityDate="2018-11-02T03:51:07.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8540" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-04T16:18:43.280" Score="22" ViewCount="319" Body="&lt;p&gt;Masterplan's website has been compromised and is now directing to malicious sites. It looks like the domain expired in 2017 and has been picked up by some people with poor intentions, as tends to happen. It wouldn't be the first time they let the domain lapse but this time it might be gone for good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until such time it's restored (if ever), please do not link to the Masterplan domain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This affects all sites in the &lt;code&gt;habitualindolence.net&lt;/code&gt; domain. &lt;strong&gt;Please don't visit that URL&lt;/strong&gt;; it's there only for your advisory. An archived version of the site is available on the Wayback Machine: &lt;a href=&quot;http://web.archive.org/web/20160720091339/http://masterplan.habitualindolence.net:80/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Masterplan @ June 2016&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following posts have had Masterplan links removed, which may be restored after the domain is safe again:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25387/are-masterplan-projects-equivalent-to-adventures-or-campaigns/25397#25397&quot;&gt;Are Masterplan projects equivalent to adventures or campaigns?&lt;/a&gt; ^&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4488/what-tools-are-available-to-create-custom-dungeon-maps/5591#5591&quot;&gt;What tools are available to create custom dungeon maps?&lt;/a&gt; *&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34816/tree-based-tool-to-create-dialog/34817#34817&quot;&gt;Tree based tool to create dialog&lt;/a&gt; **&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7951/is-there-a-masterplan-like-tool-for-3-5&quot;&gt;Is there a Masterplan-like tool for 3.5?&lt;/a&gt; ^&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7062/are-there-any-tools-for-creating-a-campaign-from-scratch/7065#7065&quot;&gt;Are there any tools for creating a campaign from scratch?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15402/are-there-good-tools-for-managing-custom-homebrew-classes/15404#15404&quot;&gt;Are there good tools for managing custom (homebrew) classes?&lt;/a&gt; *&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14736/mapping-software-for-dual-monitors/14740#14740&quot;&gt;Mapping software for dual monitors&lt;/a&gt; *&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* Post also deleted, as it was solely a tool recommendation of Masterplan. If the tool's gone there's nothing to point people to.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;** A section of the post pointing to Masterplan has been deleted.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;^ Pointing to the Web Archive page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-05T11:18:45.883" LastActivityDate="2018-11-06T13:01:11.760" Title="Masterplan's website has been compromised; please don't link to it" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8521" CreationDate="2018-11-05T18:11:51.420" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;HNQ should promote our best content&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands now, HNQ–both here and on other sites I've observed–tends to feature the perverse, controversial, eye-catching, or bizarre questions of the site. This results in those questions getting &amp;quot;opinion-swamped&amp;quot; by the masses, with everyone trying to insert their own voice into an already saturated answer space. This has the outcome of bringing even more attention to the topic, but also making the question a disaster for both the querent and moderation. Having to sift through dozens of crappy answers to find which ones not only follow the sites rules, but provide value without rehashing another answer is a difficult task, and not really what anyone wants to use the Stack for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the alternative–and a way to make cross-site featured content valuable–is to instead feature our very best content. Good questions that require a given level of expertise to answer should inherently help combat answer spam while showcasing the value and expertise of our community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I don't know what that might look like in implementation. Perhaps there's a moderator or community approval that's required to mark a question viable for HNQ (or its replacement), and then a modified version of the current algorithm selects which to showcase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31634" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-05T18:11:51.420" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8542" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8544" CreationDate="2018-11-06T11:05:04.023" Score="8" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt;. It seems to be overloaded and doesn't actually say or do much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I can tell, it gets used in the following situations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“I am asking about a (non-default) setting”, e.g.: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/130644/1204&quot;&gt;How common is faction membership in Planescape?&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/130485/1204&quot;&gt;Which Golarion features are important to Curse of the Crimson Throne?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However the same questions have tags for the actual campaign setting being asked about: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/planescape&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;planescape&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;planescape&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/golarion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;golarion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;golarion&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt; tag isn't doing much for us there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“I am asking about some lore details of the game's default setting”, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/92808/1204&quot;&gt;What is the default date of Fireborn?&lt;/a&gt; or (initially, before I removed it) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/134631/1204&quot;&gt;How large are the Shards?&lt;/a&gt;. This doesn't seem to do anything meaningful in these situations; we can use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; instead for “I'm looking for information about the world” &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; we can also use just the game's tag alone when we're asking about its setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“I am asking about a mechanic from an expansion setting”, e.g.: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112542/1204&quot;&gt;Do Edges and Rippertech stack?&lt;/a&gt;, but the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt; tag alone here doesn't seem particularly meaningful either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Six publishing questions that are in some way about settings:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/publishing+campaign-settings&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/publishing+campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think instead we should be using:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lore tag when it's about in-world lore&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A tag for the specific setting or expansion or mechanic, as and when it seems appropriate based on our judgement&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Optionally just the game tag itself when we're asking about its setting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Publishing questions can still be tagged as publishing or IP&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-settings&lt;/a&gt; gets burninated&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm missing something and we should keep it, please do speak your mind in response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-03-10T17:56:54.717" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T17:56:54.717" Title="I think we should burninate [campaign-settings]" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8540" CreationDate="2018-11-06T12:54:03.010" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4488/what-tools-are-available-to-create-custom-dungeon-maps/5591?noredirect=1#comment337897_5591&quot;&gt;What tools are available to create custom dungeon maps?&lt;/a&gt; Has a second answer that links to masterplan that should be deleted&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="428" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-06T13:01:11.760" LastActivityDate="2018-11-06T13:01:11.760" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8544" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8542" CreationDate="2018-11-06T13:07:46.870" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should stay.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For one, I fail to see any problem mentioned.  Messing with tags should be restricted to when there is a problem affecting their use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For another, it helps signal the question is &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the setting.  Many people tag their general questions with the setting they’re in out of completeness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, “lore” is a super non obvious tag and not something I’d come up with when asking my first Greyhawk question or whatever.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fourth, as a devotee of campaign settings and not caring much about rules lawyering, it is a tag that tells me “you are probably going to be interested in this question.” I personally consider myself a &quot;campaign setting expert&quot; as I enjoy and have delved into the history and lore of Greyhawk, FR, Golarion, Eberron, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fifth, many smaller settings have less recognizable setting names and we don’t get many questions on them leading to disappearing tags for settings other than D&amp;amp;D settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s like every single other roll up tag.  ‘Spells’ instead of just each individual spell.  ‘Monsters.’  ‘Npcs.’  The tag conveys taxonomic value whether a D&amp;amp;D spell and an arms magica spell have anything to do with each other or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-11-06T15:44:35.057" LastActivityDate="2018-11-06T15:44:35.057" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8545" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-09T17:15:46.493" Score="2" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;The answer provided by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50094/42386&quot;&gt;this poster&lt;/a&gt;, dated from 2014 (and last edited in 2015) is based on evidence provided by citing Jeremy Crawford and Mike Mearls that was then interpreted to say that what the OP was trying to do was not possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue is that in 2016, directly addressing exactly the subject that OP was dealing with, Crawford issued a ruling that directly contradicted the rulings that this answer had inferred from context clues. As a result, the top result that shows up in Google searches for this topic, and thus the result that represents this site's opinion on the subject, directly contradicts the official ruling and the rules that players are expected to follow. In essence, that answer is providing false information to players who find it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the appropriate way to handle this? I don't want to punish the person who wrote that answer: they answered it as best as they could given the information that was available at the time, it's not their fault that newer information contradicted them. But conversely, the top result for this query for our site is providing false information. That seems like something that should be fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-11-10T15:27:12.197" LastActivityDate="2018-11-10T15:27:12.197" Title="How to handle questions where the most Upvoted/Accepted Answer has been rendered incorrect by newer information?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2018-11-09T17:52:17.547" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8545" CreationDate="2018-11-09T17:26:02.953" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Post a new answer or upvote another one that has the correct information&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of the influx of new content/rulings, answers can often change in what is the best/most correct answer. That is fine. SE has systems set up for this: post a new answer with the correct information. When you do so the question will be kicked up in the queue for review and new eyes will see it and vote on your post accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also start a bounty to get more eyes on the post. With a custom bounty message you could even indicate that the top answer seems to be inconsistent with new rulings and people can vote accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, commenting to the selected answer will probably not yield any effects since they haven't been active for 4 years, but leaving a comment for the querent (who was active very recently) saying that new information has emerged might get them to relook at the answers. Also posting an answer should also notify them about action on their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The point of voting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not to be a jerk, but the point of voting is not to reward/punish posters but to sort content such that the best content flows up to the top and the worst content gets sent to the bottom. The poster's feelings or the amount of control they have over the correctness of their answer should not, in my opinion, be a huge factor in voting. There are many good faith answers posted to this site that are entirely incorrect and it is the job of the voting system (and by extension us, the voters) to sort those answers out. Vote on the content, not the poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case, the user has not been active for 4 years. It seems unlikely that a few downvotes are going to weigh heavily on their mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-09T18:05:34.750" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6071" CreationDate="2018-11-09T18:33:14.653" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Here are the options available to you if you disagree with the top voted and/or accepted answer:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your options #1 and #2 are acceptable but other answers have covered why #3-6 are not. Instead I will cover the range of options you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have within the SE system to deal with cases like these. In general, they can be used in any combination.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comment on the top/accepted/incorrect answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaving a comment for the person who wrote the answer that is now outdated gives them a chance to review the facts and determine whether they want to change their answer accordingly or not. If changes can be made to the answer to accommodate the new information they can integrate that info into their answer and the answer should now be (more) correct. If the new information would reverse their answer then they might agree to delete it. In the rare case that an author realizes that their accepted answer is incorrect they can request a mod to delete it by flagging it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the author is no longer active, this has a low chance of working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Upvote better answers and/or downvote incorrect ones&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously the standard way to indicate an answer's quality is to vote, one way or the other. Obviously you have only one vote but you can try to attract more...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Draw attention to the post to attract other voters&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are several ways you can attract eyes onto the post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Start a &lt;strong&gt;bounty&lt;/strong&gt; (including a custom message with the bounty pointing people to flaws in the answer may help inform voting)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Point people to it in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;chat&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; (you can even explain your issues with it there and people may look into it and vote according to their whims)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Point people to it here on &lt;strong&gt;Meta.se&lt;/strong&gt; (if there is a meta-worthy issue to address)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post your own &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt; (see below) which bumps the question&#xA;into the queue of active questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Post your own answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are no correct answers to upvote, write your own! This also has a couple of non-obvious advantages: it bumps the question in the active queue (and maybe even in the Late Answers queue) which means it might get more eyes, and it notifies the author of the question of the new answer which might get them to look at the answers again as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comment on the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially when the issue is with an accepted answer, leaving a polite comment to the author of the question may let them know that you believe there is new information that may change which answer they want to accept. Of course they are free to not act on it at all if they do not want to for whatever reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Be patient&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the Stack moves slowly, so don't expect that your actions will necessarily have immediate results. But the idea is that, over time, the correct answer will win out, so just do what you can and then leave the rest to the system. An important idea on Stack is that no one person determines what is correct or incorrect, instead depending on the wisdom of crowds. It is just that sometimes crowds take a while to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-10T02:00:34.683" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8535" CreationDate="2018-11-10T22:25:21.317" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think these should be okay&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My initial response to this was similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8535/is-how-long-does-published-adventure-x-take-an-appropriate-question-on-rpg-se/8536#8536&quot;&gt;nitsua60's&lt;/a&gt;: that playstyle, skill level, and group figure into this too much for a useful answer to be given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After some thinking, though, I think that's wrong.  Board games similarly have a wide variety of time commitments, both between games and between different groups playing with the same game (or even just different formats of the same game). Nonetheless, board games usually come labeled with a time estimate, and that estimate is useful to people in determining how long the game will actually take.  For example, if you know that your group likes to play games slowly and also that it takes you twice as long to play a new game versus one that you know, you could walk down the aisle at your FLGS, see Agricola, decide you are interested in it, and know that you should set aside about two hours of time since the box says &amp;quot;~30&amp;quot; minutes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly, people are making 'good subjective' expert evaluations of this, because time estimates on boxes are ubiquitous among board games from all publishers, at least in my area, and there's no law about it or anything.  People have to decide what number to put on the box, and other people decide what that number means to them, and everyone gets useful information.  This works because if your group is slow at one game, you're probably slow at all of them and if you're fast vice versa.  It seems to me like the same is likely to be true of RPGs and so some sort of way of dealing with this would both make sense and be possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There aren't, however, numbers currently printed on boxed modules giving time estimates, however, so there's that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-11T01:55:13.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8535" CreationDate="2018-11-12T12:04:48.183" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;About RL time: NO&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are asking about sessions, as each group is different:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I play a campaign since over a year with about 35 to 40 sessions in, and we just about finished half of it. Other groups did manage to squash the same campaign in the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some groups play 10-hour sessions, others meet for 3 hours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this question is highly &lt;strong&gt;opinion based&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;About In-World time: Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some adventures have a set in world length. My best examples come from The Dark Eye:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the Year of the Griffon in The Dark Eye takes a little over one in-game year, depending on the players. Some things (like when the enemies attack) are pinned to earliest/latest dates or rough timeframes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Phileasson Saga takes less than 80 weeks and has a canonical start and end date.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Year of Fire takes about 11 in-game months with a canonical start and end date.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example: Pathfinder's Kingmaker campaign starts late winter/early spring 4710 and is supposed to run quite long: &lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kv3j?When-does-the-Kingmaker-adventure-path-take&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;some estimates say&lt;/a&gt;, that the second part of the campaign is between 3 to 4 years after the start of it, due to the &amp;quot;Kingdom size &amp;gt; 50&amp;quot; requirement and the rules set to expanding the Kingdom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-12T12:04:48.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6867" CreationDate="2018-11-14T13:43:45.457" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It should be fine, if you're certain&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, this is an old stackexchange FAQ and unlikely to get any real attention, but to me, this rule seems needlessly punishing on new users, especially when the edit tool is perfectly capable of allowing users to help new users and then placing a comment to inform them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, take &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135523/barblock-build-do-temporary-hit-points-benifit-from-resistances&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed because of the lack of a system tag, even though it is obviously a question about fifth edition. Armor of Agathys is a Warlock spell in one, and exactly one, gaming system. In addition, their other question was also tagged 5e, so we know they're a fifth edition player. I added the 5e tag to help the new user and informed them in the comment, which would have allowed them to go &amp;quot;oh right, I forgot&amp;quot; and remember to do it themselves in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, the change was rolled back and the question was forced closed because they themselves didn't add the tag. This isn't a big deal in itself, we have closed questions all the time, but this feels needlessly petty. The idea that the original poster won't learn to use system tags correctly if somebody else helps them when they forget it once is ridiculous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Yeah, we could help you, but we won't&amp;quot; seems patronizing to me, and it results in perfectly answerable questions being closed. Other stackexchanges don't use this logic, because a good question with a missing tag is still a good question, and it can help other people even if the original poster never comes back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10921" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-14T13:43:45.457" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8551" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-15T09:58:43.143" Score="5" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135535/what-level-would-this-homebrew-comatose-spell-be&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on what level a homebrew spell/item would be in D&amp;amp;D 5e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a follow up question on how to balance it better and add/remove some of the features that make it so powerful. Before I go to the effort of writing the question up I wanted to check that it is on-topic for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the structure of the question I would be asking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The current spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An overview of the accepted answer from my previous question that summarises the current issues&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My desired spell level equivalent, or &quot;fit&quot; into my campaign requirements&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My attempt at rebalancing this spell to meet the criteria of 3&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;with the final question being, &quot;Have I balanced this correctly?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any meta posts/discussions that I can't find on asking better balance questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39608" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-15T17:22:22.777" LastActivityDate="2018-11-15T17:22:22.777" Title="Would this structure of my homebrew question be acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8551" CreationDate="2018-11-15T10:39:57.897" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lead with the new, improved version of the spell. Steps 1 and 2 are not really all that necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Structure it like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Link back to the previous iteration, i.e. the previous question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The updated version of the spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tell us what you're trying to do, such as telling us that desired spell level equivalent&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Describe briefly what you've changed in response to feedback&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask what you want to know: have you balanced it well?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can see the previous version of the spell &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; what the feedback was by following the link back, which means we just need to know what you have now and what you're trying to do. If there's things you want to highlight about what you've changed, it doesn't hurt to tell us briefly about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previous meta posts are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt; — basics for all homebrew reviews&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8171/how-should-i-ask-about-my-dd-5e-homebrew-being-balanced&quot;&gt;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&lt;/a&gt; — additional specifics for D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-11-15T10:39:57.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8551" CreationDate="2018-11-15T14:48:30.500" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Homebrew balance is for review, not for development&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8552/23024&quot;&gt;Doppelgreener's&lt;/a&gt; answer covers the &lt;strong&gt;how&lt;/strong&gt;, I think it's important to note that the review here should be your near final step. While we do have a process in place for iteration, it's not really what the site is best at doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we are good at doing is analyzing the work you've done to find things you might not have. That means you need to put in a fair amount of early work in developing the idea, possibly doing some playtests with it, and have a clear idea of the mechanics &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; coming to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This allows you to potentially discover issues and get a better understanding of the mechanics of your homebrew and provide a much more thought out question/mechanic for us to review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-15T14:48:30.500" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8555" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8556" CreationDate="2018-11-15T22:03:07.793" Score="7" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have quite a few questions about running a large party (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124/43856&quot;&gt;How do I run a game for a larger group?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/70667/43856&quot;&gt;Balancing undead encounters against large party with a cleric&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/10574/43856&quot;&gt;How do I scale an encounter to a larger party?&lt;/a&gt;), which cause both balance problems in most D&amp;amp;D and similar game systems (due to action economy and other factors) and pace problems, due to too many players taking turns and thus having longer waiting times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have some questions on the other side of the spectrum - small parties usually lead to other kind of balance problem: There aren't enough characters to fill everything a party is &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; supposed to handle, which leads to uses of DMPCs (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/48441/43856&quot;&gt;Should I use a GMPC to help a small party?&lt;/a&gt;), nightwatch problems for resting (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/92652/43856&quot;&gt;How do long rests work for small parties?&lt;/a&gt;), etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, we recently had a question which involves having a small party (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135639/43856&quot;&gt;Is this wolf DMPC overpowered or underpowered?&lt;/a&gt;), and I wanted to link possible alternative solutions for the asker. It would be really helpful if we had a [small-party] tag, for example. I think both tags (big or small party) are quite descriptive about the kind of problem we will be facing, help a lot with finding similar problems and generally fulfill the purpose of a good tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we has them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2018-11-16T01:45:07.493" Title="Tags for big party and small parties?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8555" CreationDate="2018-11-16T01:45:07.493" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;My general preference is that &quot;rules&quot; get in the way of site management by privileged Stackizens as little as possible. To this end we typically describe tagging as an emergent folksonomy and pretty rarely step in to say &quot;no, let's not tag that way&quot; &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; some problem emerges. (Though &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7520/23970&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;'s such a discussion, arguing in the end against tagging individual spells.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You had the thought that (too-)small parties and (too-)large parties generally present qualitatively-different problems and answers, and I think you're right. And unlike the spell example, it's easy to imagine that a search term like &quot;two players&quot; or &quot;too many players&quot; would miss a lot of similarly-situated posts, and a poor &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5937/23970&quot;&gt;browser&lt;/a&gt; would be out of luck.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;go ahead and tag away: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/large-party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;large-party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;large-party&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/small-party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;small-party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;small-party&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-scaling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-scaling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-scaling&lt;/a&gt; on those questions that deal with a &lt;em&gt;variable&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;unknown&lt;/em&gt; number of players, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/124568/23970&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/999/23970&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;(moderators) &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; synonymize &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-scaling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-scaling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-scaling&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;code&gt;*-party&lt;/code&gt; tags in either direction&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2018-11-16T01:45:07.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8557" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8558" CreationDate="2018-11-17T15:01:54.037" Score="5" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135758/does-the-dueling-fighting-style-add-2-to-every-damage-die-you-roll&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; that have easily findable, non-ambiguous answers. What makes them interesting is being asked on someone else's behalf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this were the whole question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does the Dueling fighting style add 2 to every damage die you roll?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would just vote down, and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it is asked on someone else's behalf. I do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; want to discourage the asker with a downvote, doubting the premise of the question is what made them ask here. In my opinion they deserve an upvote, bringing some misconception to light and giving us an opportunity to disperse it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So should I downvote the bad question, or upvote the good &lt;em&gt;asker&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not the worst question of this type, just the last one I found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-17T21:02:53.463" LastActivityDate="2018-11-17T21:02:53.463" Title="How to vote on bad questions asked on someone else's behalf?" Tags="|discussion|questions|voting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8557" CreationDate="2018-11-17T15:32:19.830" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;When someone asks a question they're taking on ownership of it. Functionally it's their question. Consider an extreme case: someone's got dozens of genuinely bad questions. This isn't great for our site. If they say &quot;asking for a friend&quot; on each of them, that doesn't make them less bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However I think this particular question's fine and I've upvoted it. It's easy for &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; to find an unambiguous, clear answer in the books&amp;mdash;but &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; are a D&amp;amp;D 5e expert at this point, having been around it for five years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D is a difficult game for people to learn. When I started it was intimidating: it's made of several big books with passages tucked away in all sorts of places, and I usually didn't know where to find what I wanted to know (or that I even could find it in the books), and I didn't always know how to parse or understand the answers. I found that the more I understood D&amp;amp;D as a whole, the more I understood each part of it, meaning it took a long time before I could really start making sense out of any of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case it's the kind of question where a newbie wouldn't know how to locate the answer. They also probably wouldn't even know how to parse the passages being quoted correctly without some guidance for us. So it's a good kind of newbie question&amp;mdash;it's only people who are already experts who would be expected to know how to find these answers already. (Heck, as a non-5e-expert myself, I'm sure I wouldn't be quite sure which way I'm supposed to interpret that damage rolls passage without Hellsaint explaining.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-11-17T15:32:19.830" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8557" CreationDate="2018-11-17T19:12:24.287" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Vote on the question as it’s written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are better and worse ways to write a question on someone else’s behalf. If they write it in such a way that you think it deserves a downvote, then that is your judgement of the &lt;strong&gt;question&lt;/strong&gt;. That’s always the right reason to vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Others may have different judgements of course, so you might see people voting on “bad” questions differently. That’s all intended effects of the voting system. It’s also why you can feel safe voting how you like: your vote gets averaged with everyone else’s anyway. This lets us each vote our conscience.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone writes a “bad” question on someone else’s behalf, but in a way that is good, you’ll notice the difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-11-17T19:12:24.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8560" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-18T21:12:43.837" Score="5" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72091/43856&quot;&gt;Is it possible to double your proficiency bonus twice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135832/43856&quot;&gt;Do features that allow you to add twice your proficiency bonus, under some other name, stack with Expertise?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/67530/43856&quot;&gt;I Roll To Seduce The Dragon! (or, Do doublings of proficiency bonus stack?)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three questions have the same answer and ask (essentially) the same thing: does expertise stack with some other feature that also doubles proficiency? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But they &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; use different examples/features for that. The oldest one (the dragon one) uses Dragon Ancestry, another one uses Favored Terrain from Ranger and the most recent one uses the Stonecunning from Dwarves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While, in the core, they are the same question, they could as well be three different questions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Does Favored Terrain stack with Expertise?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Does Dragon Ancestry stack with Expertise?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Does Stonecunning stack with Expertise?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;bonus: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/87593/43856&quot;&gt;Do Bard and Rogue expertise stack?&lt;/a&gt; - &quot;Does Expertise stack with Expertise?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While obviously redundant (again, same answer, independent of the feature that is (not) stacking with expertise), they could be considered... Different? And if they &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; duplicates, which one should be the &quot;original&quot; which all others are linked to?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-20T05:35:14.220" LastActivityDate="2018-11-20T05:35:14.220" Title="Are these &quot;is it possible to double your proficiency twice&quot; questions duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8560" CreationDate="2018-11-18T22:05:19.583" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Imagine an (admittedly extreme) situation where we have a generic 'what do I do if I disagree with something that happens at the table' question, with the answer 'talk to your GM'. Now, there are some users who believe that any question that can be answered with a variant on 'talk to your GM' should be marked as a duplicate. However, there is such a wide variety of possible questions that could have this answer that doing so would be plain wrong as it stops you providing a specific answer to the specific problem the question is asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I know I've deliberately chosen an exaggerated example here, but I believe it demonstrates why we need to be extremely careful. The problem with marking such questions as duplicates is that we lose the ability to provide specific detail in answers that is in response to the different circumstances/examples given in each of the questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this reason, my personal view is that unless answers &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; questions are close to exactly the same, they shouldn't be marked as duplicates at all. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of generic answers with question variants linked to them as duplicates that make it impossible to provide specific details to help each question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastEditorUserId="2253" LastEditDate="2018-11-18T22:11:48.763" LastActivityDate="2018-11-18T22:11:48.763" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8560" CreationDate="2018-11-19T15:25:51.077" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;They are all duplicates&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way we treat duplicates currently is outlined in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl&quot;&gt;this Meta&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close Question A as a duplicate of Question B when &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of these are the case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered &lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question B has an &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple&#xA;of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only&#xA;sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met&#xA;this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Depending on what question is considered to be the duplicate (see below for my recommendation), this set of questions easily meets all three bullets of the above criteria for closing as duplicate. Specifically, the answer to each of these questions is a quote of the same simple rule that applies to all such cases. Thus, they do meet our criteria for duplicate closure and there is no compelling reason to leave them separate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conceptually, each one of them is asking about some feature or features and how it stacks with Expertise. We know the answer to this and it is a general rule that covers all such cases. As such, there is nothing about any feature that could give us a different answer besides referencing this rule. And indeed all the answers simply reference this rule. Thus, they are duplicates because their core issue is the same and the only thing that is different is the minor details which don't affect the answers at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The most general one is probably the best dupe target (duplicates should be reversed)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135832/do-features-that-allow-you-to-add-twice-your-proficiency-bonus-under-some-other&quot;&gt;Do features that allow you to add twice your proficiency bonus, under some other name, stack with Expertise?&lt;/a&gt; is probably the best Q&amp;amp;A to dupe the others to (full disclosure I do have my answer on this one). This is  because it is the only one to ask about the  concept &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt; and not about specific features. It gives an example in the text but the question itself applies to all features that might stack with expertise. As such it is an umbrella that could cover all the other questions. This aligns with the first bullet point of the previous quote easily making all of the other questions a subset of this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, a simple one line edit to any of the other questions would give the same effect (though at the cost of slightly changing the querent's intent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Future Q&amp;amp;As will be judged on their own merit&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because all of the current Q&amp;amp;As that you listed should be duped together does not mean that all future questions will be. There could be a feature that does not apply to this rule or a new rule or feature could come out which changes things. Either way, we need to apply expertise when judging closures to understand what the actual core of a question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-20T05:02:55.187" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8521" CreationDate="2018-11-19T15:54:03.240" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've only skimmed the MetaSE post answers, so this suggestion might already be on there, but I think some automated scripts and an alteration to the Protected post status could substantially help on this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a post qualifies for HNQ status, the system automatically protects the question. So instead of a mod having to find that there's an issue with the post, the Community bot simply tosses the Protected Question status on it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Right now, Protected Questions only restrict your ability to answer, we should expand that to include your ability to vote on it. The association bonus isn't counted for the purposes of permitting answers, but it is counted to permit votes. In order to prevent answers that simply sound good from rising to the top, restrict vote counting to only include users whom have earned 15 status on the site. In this way, 100 other stack users from other sites can show up, look at the interesting question and back and forth, but they can't necessarily alter the votes unless the community considers them to have a worthwhile opinion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I like HotNQ. I find it serves two purposes extremely well. First it helps me find interesting questions and I like interesting things. Second, it introduces me to other stacks that I didn't know existed; sometimes I find that I've some expertise to offer to those stacks and choose to become a member, other times, I just get to skim through the finer points of what boots are best for hiking thus answering a question I never knew I wanted the answer to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-11-19T15:54:03.240" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-11-20T17:29:13.580" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Spaulding the Troll said &amp;quot;I'd rather eat cheese than stirge&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But Judge Smails said&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;You'll eat stirge and like it, Spaulding!&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135845/22566&quot;&gt;Quadratic Wizard has shown how the troll-stirge mutual dining ecosystem works&lt;/a&gt;.  Not the fast food joint I want to visit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stirges have, so far, said nothing.  They are too busy eating and breeding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-20T17:29:13.580" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8565" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8567" CreationDate="2018-11-20T21:48:31.297" Score="5" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I have asked this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135926/is-it-possible-to-increase-the-ac-of-a-mirror-image-duplicate&quot;&gt;question here&lt;/a&gt;. It currently has two answers, but none of them is  complete (in my opinion). The first lacks the citation of cover as AC bonus, and the second answer last paragraph is wrong, as people have pointed out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the suggestions of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1141/47052&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; of this question, I would pick the second answer because I was looking for bonuses beyond increasing DEX. But it would still be an incomplete answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should I edit one of the answers to make it complete or comment on the answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47052" LastEditorUserId="47052" LastEditDate="2018-11-22T10:43:39.597" LastActivityDate="2019-09-30T12:00:32.153" Title="What to do when the answers complement each other?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8565" CreationDate="2018-11-21T00:46:41.050" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Comment on each answer, explaining what each lacks.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then let the authors improve their answer, or not.  That is the kind of thing comments are for.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, there’s no need to accept either until you feel that the question is well and fully answered.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2018-11-21T12:00:22.543" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T12:00:22.543" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8565" CreationDate="2018-11-21T13:42:13.187" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Write your own answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's still only hours or even a few days after asking the question, I'd definitely suggest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8566/35259&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast's answer&lt;/a&gt; about encouraging one of the answerers to update their answer. However, there's only so much control you have over them (this isn't about pestering them, after all), and changing their answer substantially isn't really what edits are for...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So write your own. Reference their answers via links (like I did with KorvinStarmast's answer above) to give credit where you take from their answers, and tie them together with your own wording that makes sense to you; effectively &lt;strong&gt;your answer's purpose is to explain to others why you think these other two answers form a &amp;quot;complete&amp;quot; answer when combined&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See if there's any criticism against your answer in the next day or so, and if it seems to have been well received, then you can accept your own as the &amp;quot;complete&amp;quot; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-30T12:00:32.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8568" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8570" CreationDate="2018-11-21T16:06:15.837" Score="26" ViewCount="758" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What's this?&lt;/strong&gt; The Hot Network Questions (HNQ) list is that list of random questions from random sites you'll see in the bottom of the sidebar on most site pages. It displays questions that have attracted significant attention measured by an abstract “hotness” score based on how rapidly the question's vote count is accelerating. Since HNQ brings more attention and more votes, it frequently creates a self-perpetuating cycle where hot questions either fall off quickly or stay for days at a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/316934/revisiting-the-hot-network-questions-feature-what-are-our-shared-goals-for-ha?cb=1&quot;&gt;Recent discussions on the network&lt;/a&gt; have been re-evaluating the Hot Network Questions feature, including what it does well and all the ways it doesn't work very well. Stack Overflow, Inc., the company that runs the Stack Exchange network, is evaluating ways to modify the feature or retire it to replace it with something else. There are positive things the HNQ theoretically accomplishes but also major problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of these discussions many communities &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8521/what-are-rpg-ses-goals-for-hot-network-questions&quot;&gt;including our own&lt;/a&gt; have been re-assessing their relationship to the feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've reached out to find out if us &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8530/1204&quot;&gt;opting out&lt;/a&gt; of the HNQ feature is among our options. It looks like it is an option &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; the community is on board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Do we as a community want RPG Stack Exchange to opt out of the Hot Network Questions feature?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is what opting out of the HNQ would look like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;RPG Stack Exchange questions will no longer show up in the Hot Network Questions list.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Hot Network Questions list will continue to show up on our site, presenting questions from other sites that are opted in.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At some point in the future, after the HNQ feature is revised or replaced, we will have the opportunity to assess whether we want to opt back in to the new system or remain opted out. (Honestly I can't promise it will unfold exactly like that—it might wind up that whenever the new thing is released, everyone automatically gets opted in again—but the point is we can probably evaluate whether we want to be in or out of that thing as well.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If for some reason being opted out of the HNQ is really not working for us, we can opt back in. This wouldn't happen without community buy-in, just like this change.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;According to site analytics, HNQ accounts for &amp;le;5% of overall site visits, so we do not anticipate an overall significant drop in site visits.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;HNQ is largely responsible for those questions that get answers scoring 100+ in less than a week, so that will probably stop happening. This is a minority of our questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been requests for feature changes to the HNQ system such as letting diamond moderators remove questions from HNQ, waiting periods and alerts before questions hit HNQ, etc. If these are implemented they'll be part of the new redesigned system we can opt back in to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the process of what we'll do here in this thread:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We'll discuss here whether we want to opt out as a community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After 2 weeks (December 5th), if there is strong community support for opting out and not strong objection, the diamond moderator team will ask the CMs to opt this site out as described above. They will action that request.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; strong support, we will not opt out, and nothing will change from as they are now.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No action will be taken before 2 weeks have elapsed (i.e. before December 5th) so as to allow for enough time for discussion and voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please show whether you are in support or against opting out with answering and/or voting like normal. I'm going to be posting my own answer representing my own position, and I'm going to leave it to others to provide their own positions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-05T10:25:32.503" LastActivityDate="2018-12-05T10:25:32.503" Title="Does RPG Stack Exchange want to opt out from Hot Network Questions?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-21T16:06:15.837" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, we should opt out.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe HNQ does little to benefit our site overall, and regularly does significant harm to some of our questions and our site processes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over on the MSE discussion, Monica Cellio has higlighted that &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/316937/152515&quot;&gt;the HNQ feature optimises for controversy, not quality&lt;/a&gt;. I'll quote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sensationalist questions draw lots of rapid response, which feeds the HNQ algorithm, and then once it's on HNQ it gets even more rapid response, which keeps it there (and also distorts Q&amp;amp;A on that site).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From anecdotal experience, HNQ entries seem to fall into one of two categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Interesting mechanical questions. The first group mostly falls off after a few hours and doesn't get much traction and voting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Subjective social questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's this second group where the optimisation for quality hits us &lt;em&gt;and hurts us.&lt;/em&gt; Difficult, controversial good subjective social questions need to be handled with care. They need our careful community evaluation, our expert answerers, and a crowd of highly knowledgeable, experienced RPG players to vote on what their experience and gut tells them will and won't work or be a good idea. They also need diligent community voting and curation to enforce that Good Subjective principles are being followed, including downvoting those that don't follow them. There also needs to be a possibility that latecoming answers will be able to compete with first-comers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8103/1204&quot;&gt;overcoming the fastest gun problem&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, once these questions hit HNQ, all of that goes out the window. We as a community become completely unable to provide any of that. It's been my consistent experience that such questions instead get a sudden influx of dozens of voters with plausibly &lt;em&gt;no experience whatsoever&lt;/em&gt; in RPGs. They upvote answers in exponential proportion to whatever the scores already were, including if it's poor advice, amplifying the fastest gun and drowning out competing underdogs completely. This tide of upvotes overwhelms the community's ability to downvote answers not following Good Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does an enormous disservice to everyone. It means people asking these questions don't get answers as judged by a community of knowledgeable experts with an avid interest in RPG gameplay. It means we are unable to enforce our community mechanisms of quality control properly: the community's capacity to downvote poor advice or answers that don't conform to Good Subjective is lower than HNQ capacity to upvote, and the nuclear option of deleting a post is something diamond moderators rarely do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I really want us to be able to handle social questions without HNQ.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opting out means that when a social question comes along, we won't get tides of upvotes. We'll get much more space to enforce our quality mechanisms, question posts, actually have meaningful downvoting, be able to provide more careful consideration and upvote late answers to outscore questions that came hours or a day earlier, like we do with mostly everything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to be able to provide that same experience with social questions that we provide for everything else, but HNQ throws that out of whack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HNQ is bad for us, let's opt out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-21T20:41:47.317" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T20:41:47.317" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-21T17:18:38.643" Score="72" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let's not opt out&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The motivation for wanting out is perfectly valid, but I think the benefits of HNQ to tabletop players outweigh the problems that HNQ attracts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The bad side first&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm speaking of a trend here, not a universal rule: HNQ questions don't tend to be particularly good. The selection emphasizes scandal over substance, clickbait over clarity. We don't want the users to maximize those, but that's what HNQ rewards. Answers drawn in from outside the network also tend to be bad in quality because of a variety of reasons experienced users usually know to avoid --- such as promoting toxic behavior in tables or assuming that every RPG system either is or works like &lt;em&gt;Dungeons and Dragons&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it was only about the short-term well-being of our site and nothing else, I would vote to drop out of HNQ. However, I think there's a case to keep it for the visibility, because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Our visibility helps the hobby as a whole&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had had a longstanding interest in tabletop RPGs through my youth and early adulthood, but never knew the slightest bit of how to play or who to play with. The idea of actually learning to play tabletop RPGs lied dormant in my mind, but emerged to me in 2013, when I was actively using Stackexchange --- where I saw lots of interesting RPG questions in the sidebar. Those questions led me to our site, which I hadn't known even existed before that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I started reading RPG.stackexchange back then and the site gave me significant help in learning to play. It is a significant contributor to the fact that I am an active player of RPGs today. I don't believe I'm the only one who came into gaming through our community. I believe many people still find our hobby through our site. HNQ may account for only a small portion of page hits, but that's not relevant --- the important bit is how many &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; people find out about our site through HNQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition to helping people to start playing, RPG.stackexchange presents by and large a real, healthy culture of gaming. That is often not the case with other first contacts to tabletop RPGs --- video games based on RPGs, pop culture depictions of tabletop games and memes often present and reinforce a rigidly antagonistic relationship between the game/GM and the players, and omit things that are usually considered to be absolutely vital for a good RPG game like active dialogue between the players and the GM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I cannot deny that HNQ does cause us problems, but by attracting new people to our site it helps spread the joy of both playing tabletop games and playing them in a friendly fun manner. I think the problems of HNQ are nothing but a nuisance compared to the benefit of attracting new people in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T17:18:38.643" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8571" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-21T18:20:11.753" Score="28" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should stay in HNQ.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The arguments against HNQ: untrained users voting out of line with established community norms, new users submitting low-quality answers (especially GS/BS problems), comment argument, and then the inevitable backlash that we moderators sometimes face when new users bump up against this stack's notoriously-tight reading of some otherwise-looser Stackisms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a few-year active user and two-year moderator, I'll say I don't see those as serious problems. It seems to me that the structures in place handle them pretty well. You-all are good about downvoting and commenting on poor contributions, you sometimes protect questions, and you're pretty good about flagging things to our attention when it seems like more intervention's needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument for HNQ: it gets more eyeballs on the site. That's it. And I think that's important. Any community survives based on some mixture of retaining existing members and gaining new ones. Sure, plenty of people may come for an HNQ and never come back. But some will. And might become daily users. And eventually stand for election. And write this meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T18:20:11.753" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8572" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-21T21:54:21.173" Score="2" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; currently has no excerpt. This tag is currently used mostly to talk about the Bloodline Arcana in Pathfinder, but it is used in at least &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88988/what-are-the-details-on-the-bonsam&quot;&gt;one other question about Vampire the Dark Ages&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this tag be used and should it be specifically for Bloodline Arcana?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33161" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T15:14:10.217" Title="What should the [bloodline] tag be used for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8573" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-21T22:32:01.657" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I like it being there.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone who often frequents Stack Overflow for work purposes, I enjoy seeing the occasional interesting thing coming up in HNQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often, as a tabletop player myself, the ones that usually interest me are the mechanical questions. I've learnt quite a lot about edge-cases in D&amp;amp;D, for example, just recently, where something that is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135990/how-can-my-wizard-cast-levitate-invisibility-and-magic-weapon-and-have-them-all&quot;&gt;usually impossible can be worked around with the right equipment&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8569/12140&quot;&gt;really interesting&lt;/a&gt; events have been put forth by other answers. Before I scrolled down that far I was simply thinking &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;but why would you do that?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; but if the things mentioned in that ticket are a common reality, then I totally get it. It's a real shame - but I get it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'd be really nice if RPG could opt out - &lt;strong&gt;but individuals could opt back in&lt;/strong&gt;. That way most of the riff-raff without a specific interest in RPG aren't encouraged to leave their opinionated and untested ideas, but it doesn't impact those with a specific interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-21T22:32:01.657" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8391" CreationDate="2018-11-22T01:26:33.727" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The new header is styled to linebreak even in the middle of words. It probably shouldn't be.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a4zuM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/a4zuM.png&quot; alt=&quot;Title with linebreak&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However it happened it was styled with a class, &quot;wb-break-all&quot;, that caused this behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D06FW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/D06FW.png&quot; alt=&quot;HTML inspection and CSS&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T01:26:33.727" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8575" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8576" CreationDate="2018-11-22T13:07:02.083" Score="8" ViewCount="135" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the title says: I've noticed over the past month or so that a lot of new users tend to accept questions after only a couple of hours. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that it isn't mandatory for users to wait 24h to accept answers (like it is with accepting self-answers, I think it's 48h for those), and I have accepted answers myself before 24h is up (although I tend to wait the 24h these days), but generally everyone here considers it to be best practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, I just checked the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; and found that it doesn't say anything about that, it simply says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The person who asked can mark one answer as &quot;accepted&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Would it be a good idea to update the tour to suggest that it's best to wait 24h?&lt;/strong&gt; Note that I do not think it should become mandatory, just that it might be a good idea for this best practice to become more visible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NB: This was written with the assumption that everyone was on board with the 24h thing. See accepted answer and my comment below it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2018-11-22T16:37:20.857" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T16:37:20.857" Title="I've noticed that new users tend to accept questions within only a few hours; should we update the tour?" Tags="|feature-request|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8575" CreationDate="2018-11-22T14:46:15.520" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can't actually edit that part of the tour just for this site, so this is a Stack Exchange dev thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, also, no. The tour shouldn't be updated to say that. This isn't necessarily a “generally accepted best practice” to wait a while before accepting an answer — it's something some vocal people think should happen. Not everyone agrees that should happen and many never ask for people to do this. Some people think it's a bad idea to encourage people to wait (I'm in that group) and some don't care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my own part I don't think it's fair to represent it as “generally everyone here considers it to be best practice”. Fair to say you support it personally, but that generalisation is [citation needed], and I don't think the stats on the sizes of those groups are available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-22T14:51:48.063" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T14:51:48.063" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8572" CreationDate="2018-11-22T15:14:10.217" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; is a bad tag in itself, as it can be too variable, thus it should be fixed, getting good excerpts that fit what they should be used for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfinder &amp;amp; D&amp;amp;D sorcerers have bloodlines that are flavors of magic akin to magic schools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vampire the Masquerade has bloodlines that are pretty much &quot;sub-clans&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ninja RPG has bloodlines, that are clans/schools.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Vampire the Requiem has Bloodlines, that are equally clan-like but different from Masquerade clans.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T15:14:10.217" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8578" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8583" CreationDate="2018-11-22T16:42:03.503" Score="10" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed a contradiction in the wording. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Accepting &lt;strong&gt;doesn't mean it's the best answer&lt;/strong&gt;, it just means that it worked for the person who asked.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the hover text for accepted answers (i.e. hover on the green tick graphic) says this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question owner accepted this as the &lt;strong&gt;best answer&lt;/strong&gt; &amp;lt; time &gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So is the accepted answer the &quot;best answer&quot; or isn't it? These two descriptions really ought to be consistent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-11-22T17:39:10.383" LastActivityDate="2018-11-23T13:02:18.193" Title="Contradiction with accepted answer descriptions" Tags="|bug|accepted-answer|tour|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8578" CreationDate="2018-11-22T17:40:59.000" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is the answer the OP considers the best, that helps them the most with their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That does not mean it is the objectively best one.  Feel free and vote for the answer(s) you like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the accepted answer is at the OP’s sole discretion and it can’t be “appealed.”  We get flags with people saying “they accepted answer X but I think it’s wrong!”  Irrelevant/don’t care.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T17:40:59.000" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8580" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8578" CreationDate="2018-11-22T18:22:05.660" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps we should modify the hover text to read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question owner accepted this as the best answer for them &amp;lt; time &gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question owner accepted this as the answer that worked for them &amp;lt; time &gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This assumes we can modify such things, and I don't actually know if we can or not&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T18:22:05.660" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-22T22:21:01.727" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;I received though other channels the following from a high-rep active-most-days member; they'd rather not post under their identity for personal reason, and rep-requirements make sock-posting on meta cumbersome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We shouldn't opt out.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've thought for a long time that HNQ was damaging to the site. I've always been on the other side of this argument. We get bad answers, upvotes on bad answers, and so on. But then I read nitsua60's and kvirii's answers, and it got me thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See, I found this site through HNQ, too. And I found it during a difficult time in my life, and it helped me through some tough years. The community here has helped me in ways I find difficult to express. I've made friends here, I've learned a lot, and I've gotten a nice sense of accomplishment out of my use of the site. Not only that, this site has made me a better gamer. If I'm being honest, it would be fair to say that it's made me a better person. I look back at some of my earlier interactions with this community and shudder at just how callow I was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a great community here, and it's natural to want to protect it. I know I want to protect it exactly &lt;strong&gt;because&lt;/strong&gt; it's great. The problem is, protecting it by taking away one of the main ways people find it is selfish. Yes, we get a lot of transient vote-and-forget visitors from HNQ. But we get community members too, and we owe it to them to be easy to find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-22T22:21:01.727" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8582" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-23T00:53:20.823" Score="8" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135825/what-are-the-advantages-disadvantages-of-sharing-personal-dream-sequences-with-t&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; was asked: &quot;Should I share personal dream sequences with the party as a DM?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly as a &quot;should I&quot; question it was inherently opinion based and was closed. However I think the topic and concept could get some excellent answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I edited the question to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135825/what-are-the-advantages-disadvantages-of-sharing-personal-dream-sequences-with-t&quot;&gt;&quot;What are the advantages/disadvantages of sharing personal dream sequences with the party?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; in an attempt to make it less opinion-based and get it reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there anything else I can do without action from the asker to get this opened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I have good personal experience on the topic and feel I could post a high quality answer to that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-24T00:10:11.450" LastActivityDate="2018-11-24T00:10:11.450" Title="How to get this question re-opened?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2019-08-17T14:33:04.603" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8583" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8578" CreationDate="2018-11-23T13:02:18.193" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We can't do anything about it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8578/contradiction-with-accepted-answer-descriptions#comment27521_8580&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's comment&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8580/35259&quot;&gt;GreySage's answer&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can’t [modify the hover text], as we can’t edit any other automated text on the site except one small part of the help center.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8576/35259&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt; to a different question about the tour:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't actually edit that part of the tour just for this site, so this is a Stack Exchange dev thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-23T13:02:18.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8584" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8585" CreationDate="2018-11-24T19:51:36.307" Score="13" ViewCount="195" Body="&lt;p&gt;Granted, I'm new to the RPG section, but I'm a long-time member of Stack Exchange. Don't want to cause a fuss, just want to understand the ground rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a little surprised that my opening post was edited by a mod. I've seen posts moved or held for a request to edit, but never a direct edit of my words. (and, frankly, it's a judgement call, not an error or falsehood.) That is unusual in my experience here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136138/what-does-1-forward-mean&quot;&gt;What does &amp;quot;+1 forward&amp;quot; mean?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;('long-winded' was altered to 'short-hand')&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My use of terms may not be the preferred terminology, but is that cause for altering it without my knowledge or permission? That's literally putting words in my mouth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Granted, in retrospect, I might have changed it myself - if my attention were drawn to it, but do I now have to periodically revisit all my posts to see if someone has changed what I said to something not what I said?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Also, not sure if I need to post &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question here publicly, or if there is a place for asking about edits in the 'edits' section.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50247" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-11-24T22:59:51.833" LastActivityDate="2018-11-30T03:08:43.270" Title="Moderator edits of user posts" Tags="|discussion|editing|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8584" CreationDate="2018-11-24T20:03:26.750" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Edits happen frequently at RPG.SE without the necessity of asking permission or notifying the author. These edits should happen if clarity can be improved. In fact, &lt;strong&gt;the edit you're citing wasn't by a moderator (moderators have a diamond next to their username to identify them), just a regular concerned user&lt;/strong&gt;. All users with edit permissions can engage in this communal improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular example, it's fairly clear what you meant, but &quot;a long-winded way of saying&quot; is (ironically) a wordier, less effective, more idiomatic, and possibly disparaging way of saying &quot;a shorthand for saying.&quot; Your question will now be easier to read by non-native English speakers, more succinct, and free of possibly negative connotations that you probably didn't intend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the event that such an edit really does wreck your intent, you can rollback the edit or edit again, leaving an appropriate revision message to explain why you did so so that it doesn't happen again. However, don't expect your posts to be treated as if they are inviolable. Edits for improvement will happen on occasion, even in ways that you don't consider to be improvements. If it's that important to you then, yes, you'll have to revisit every post you make in perpetuity to see if they've been edited, in which case you won't enjoy RPG.SE's culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular example, it looks like you prefer the word &quot;obscure&quot; retroactively. So, by all means, go edit that in. It's really, really unlikely somebody's going to get into an edit war with you on your own post, since that violates the intent of RPG.SE's conventions for communally improving content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, this is the system at RPG.SE working as intended: the edit called to your attention the fact that your wording could use improvement. Whether you stick with the improvement another user left or go with your own improvement, either way the post will have been improved. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2018-11-24T20:08:59.270" LastActivityDate="2018-11-24T20:08:59.270" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8586" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8587" CreationDate="2018-11-25T20:14:03.707" Score="18" ViewCount="331" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had had this happen to me several times. I had chosen one citation style that I generally did apply in all my old answers since some date, which goes like &lt;sup&gt;Book &amp;lt;(edition)&amp;gt; &amp;lt;(year)&amp;gt; p.##&lt;/sup&gt;. Year and edition are optional, if needed to differentiate books of the same name or if the year is needed for a 'first mentioned'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I had to do partial rollbacks due to people messing up my citation style, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/136205/revisions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and some two times last year. In all these cases I did a (partial) rollback to my style.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe it is very rude to fudge with citation styles that should be clear enough, as it usually doesn't provide any of the valid reasons for editing: either fixing spelling or adding extra structure to make it more readable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;for later readers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did swap to a different style - superscript numeral + key in the bottom since this was posed, but the general question is untouched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T23:03:19.057" LastActivityDate="2023-02-05T23:03:19.057" Title="Are you allowed to change citation style?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8587" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8586" CreationDate="2018-11-25T23:50:03.927" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Allowed to change...&amp;quot; is evidently &amp;quot;yes,&amp;quot; since that user has edit privileges. But I'll answer what I think is the implied question &amp;quot;was this a good edit&amp;quot; or maybe &amp;quot;was I right to roll back&amp;quot; or even &amp;quot;what should I do ~about~ this user's edits?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Was this a good edit?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think so. The differences in citation presentation are minimal, and we've no universally-preferred citation style anyway. (See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7669/23970&quot;&gt;Stance on using D&amp;amp;D Beyond for references?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6157/23970&quot;&gt;Please consider using book references that will be understood internationally&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6367/23970&quot;&gt;Is there a style guide for posts?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Was I right to roll back the edit?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were fine to roll back: edits should be substantial and actually improve posts. I do think it's good that in addition to rolling back you raised this meta. Not only do you get your confirmation but future learning editors have this example worked for their edification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should I do about edits I don't like?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just recently learned that you can @-mention an editor in comments on a post--even if they've not commented. So there's a nice low-impact route to start with. Many of our most-active editors are also active chatizens, so they're often pingable in [chat], too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is often making edits you object to or seems not receptive to feedback feel free to flag for mod-attention and possible intervention. In that case a handful of examples and a brief description will be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-11-25T23:50:03.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8588" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8589" CreationDate="2018-11-27T13:17:08.257" Score="8" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68400/10642&quot;&gt;What Is The Difference, If Any, Between &amp;quot;Permanent&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;Until Dispelled&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/136235/10642&quot;&gt;Can a permanent teleportation circle be dispelled?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers to first one says it can't be dispelled, answers to second one says it can. Questions are close to being duplicates. If I'll try to ask which one is right, I'll essentially post a 3rd duplicate, and it is not useful to keep answers based on one set of sources in one place, and answers based on another set in another place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how would I go about looking for some kind of consensus? Or at least showing that there is no consensus, in a way visible to readers of both questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="10642" LastEditDate="2018-11-27T13:24:03.530" LastActivityDate="2018-11-27T13:34:57.273" Title="How to sort out situation where two questions ask about essentially the same thing, yet answers are opposite?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8588" CreationDate="2018-11-27T13:34:57.273" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;You vote to close as duplicate. When you do that, we can merge the questions from the duplicate to the other.  Then, normal site mechanisms will help determine who the community thinks is right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-11-27T13:34:57.273" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8590" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-27T18:37:53.037" Score="3" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a concern: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Opinions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Moon Druids are considered too powerful at low levels.  Often times,&#xA;  Moon Druids have no need to spend any spell slots to accomplish their&#xA;  goals, and don't need any other features from being a&#xA;  Druid to play their character.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In essence, being a Moon Druid effectively makes being a base-class&#xA;  Druid obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I believe that Druids, like other classes, should utilize roughly all&#xA;  of their resources by the time they get refreshed, which includes&#xA;  Spell Slots by the end of the day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that there may not be experience with homebrews addressing this exact scenario, but some of this can be backed by some numbers analysis, experience with Moon Druids being able to ignore utilizing spell slots (or not), and gauging when other classes run out of resources (to come up with a budget of when the Druid should run out).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, how do I ask how big of a balance concern the existing rules are in 5E for this specific issue (5E Moon Druids and their balance vs. other classes), and how do I request a fix that addresses this concern?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45619" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-13T23:34:36.637" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T23:34:36.637" Title="What does this question, regarding the balance of 5E Moon Druids, need to fit on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8590" CreationDate="2018-11-27T19:31:38.500" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Do it in two parts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In one question, explain the problem you're seeing with the moon druid. Ask if you're understanding how it works correctly, and ask if this is a major problem like you understand it to be. You can/should say you're concerned this makes the base druid obsolete and ask if that seems more or less accurate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers will corroborate or correct your (mis?)understanding. They will clarify what needs clarification, and explain or confirm what's going on. They will also convey how much of a problem this is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The voting community will then sort some of the answers to the top. Those top answers represent what the voting community here believes is the actual scope and scale of the problem (including, possibly, no problem at all).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, a few days later once the dust has settled, we'll understand what the actual problem is. &lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; we can ask how to resolve it. Thus the second question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In a second question, summarise the problem as validated by the community. Link back to the original question from step 1. Ask people how to resolve the balance issue. Prompt them to cite experience on how the fix has worked in practice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to ask this exactly depends on what the balance issue is. If it's &quot;the moon druid has free unlimited resources&quot;, ask how to constrain their resources in line with the original druid. If they're just superior in every way to the original druid, ask how to bring them back in line with the original druid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The prompt for experience is a gentle reminder to follow our good subjective citations: people can &lt;em&gt;guess&lt;/em&gt; at fixes from their seats all they want, but we're looking for fixes that verifiably work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now I don't think we have meta guidance on how we handle asking for this kind of fix, so if you're not sure how you'd word this request, just focus on step 1 for now and come back to meta for assistance when it's time for step 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-11-27T19:31:38.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8593" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-11-29T16:16:26.340" Score="2" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;Title kind of says it all. There was a question I recall a from a few days ago that I'd commented on, but I can't seem to find it so it was likely deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify from a similar question, the question was not my own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to view this question at all or is it completely gone?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2018-11-29T16:25:26.847" Title="Are deleted questions visible?" Tags="|support|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8593" CreationDate="2018-11-29T16:25:26.847" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Deleted questions are visible to those &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;with over 10k rep&lt;/a&gt; but only if you have a direct link to it. They do not show up in listings and are not searchable because of the sensitivity of deleted content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I checked your history: of the comments you've made in the past 2 weeks, none of them were made on a question that is now deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-11-29T16:25:26.847" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8595" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8584" CreationDate="2018-11-30T00:53:39.750" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a post you created receives an edit (of at least ten characters text or two characters code) from another user, this edit will be notified to your inbox, just as if a user has commented or replied to you in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need to go back through all your posts and check for this. If it was edited, you get notified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Examples to follow&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39844" LastEditorUserId="39844" LastEditDate="2018-11-30T03:08:43.270" LastActivityDate="2018-11-30T03:08:43.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8568" CreationDate="2018-11-30T20:00:37.343" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I Think HNQ Should Remain&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reasons that echo other answers:  I think the pros outweigh the cons &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pro:  It's good advertising for this stack inside the overall stack ecology.  It is, in fact, how I found the site.  (You are free to consider that a con, but I don't....)  Although it's only prompted me to become and remain active on this stack, it's led to me taking a larger interest in several others and when my free time expands, I expect to be active in others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I scoffed at the site itself when HNQs first brought it to my attention.  But after seeing several good questions, with good answers-- and finally one which I thought I could answer well-- that my mind was changed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pro:  To a lesser degree, it may introduce people to the hobby.  (I've been gaming for over 30 years, so this one isn't personal to me.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Con:  Occasionally we get trollish dogpiles. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But-- and this is key-- nothing the community and the mod teams have been unable to deal with.  If I had metric evidence that this was becoming worse, in a way or at a rate that threatened to overwhelm the site, this would loom larger in my mind.  But I don't, so it doesn't.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My considered opinion is that publicity is a double-edged blade, but that the community does a good job of sharpening the dulling the right edges. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A Modest Proposal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's all I had, I would vote accordingly but silently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, would it be useful/possible to auto-tag questions which become HNQs (either at that moment or after they leave that status) so that readers see that they were, in fact, HNQs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Indeed-- are they already?  I took a quick glance at an active HNQ and they seem not to be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea is that if some subset of HNQs are troll-attractors, it might be useful to make people aware of this when they read through after the fact, and let that inform their responses.  I am ambivalent about this idea-- I can probably be persuaded it's a good idea, a bad idea, or just a useless idea-- but I put in the public light for consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2018-11-30T20:00:37.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8597" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-12-03T20:07:41.170" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Inceptum ad Absurdum&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/136698/22566&quot;&gt;How high can a PC's initiative bonus get?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@T.J.L. has offered a way to get ridiculous boosts to initiative &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/136698/22566&quot;&gt;in this answer&lt;/a&gt;. Being able to get a +53 + 1d10 to a d20 roll for initiative means &quot;I Go First&quot; is finally assured. (No, that doesn't make the character a spot light hog, why do you ask?)   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Such a character can always be first, but he may begin to have some problems in his love life ...&lt;/sub&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:59:41.423" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:59:41.423" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8598" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2018-12-03T23:47:56.200" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/136726/23064&quot;&gt;How high can a PC's initiative bonus get?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like David Coffron's idea on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/136726/23064&quot;&gt;how to use a sphinx to bypass a time gate&lt;/a&gt; that would enable one to get an unlimited ability score in a relatively short amount of time deserves its own place in the Hall of Cheese.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23064" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:00:10.310" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:00:10.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8599" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8650" CreationDate="2018-12-05T05:47:09.040" Score="11" ViewCount="318" Body="&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8588/how-to-sort-out-situation-where-two-questions-ask-about-essentially-the-same-thi&quot;&gt;this meta question&lt;/a&gt;, where two questions covering similar topics got merged:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68400/what-is-the-difference-if-any-between-permanent-and-until-dispelled&quot;&gt;What Is The Difference, If Any, Between &quot;Permanent&quot;, and &quot;Until&#xA;Dispelled&quot;?&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136235/can-a-permanent-teleportation-circle-be-dispelled&quot;&gt;Can a permanent teleportation circle be&#xA;dispelled?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the merge was in error, as the Permanent vs Until Dispelled question does not apply to the Teleportation Circle question, since the duration of Teleportation Circle is not Permanent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify the issue with merging these questions: Suppose that the answer to the Circle question is &quot;Yes, because permanent means until dispelled and permanent in the name means it's a duration of permanent.&quot; This answer makes sense under the Circle question, but not the Difference question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other side, the stance I take: &quot;No, because it's not a Permanent duration spell, and only the spell itself (which lasts one round) can be dismissed.&quot; This answer makes even less sense under the question it got merged into. (As a side note, Sage Advice: &lt;em&gt;Can you use dispel magic on the creations of a spell like animate dead or affect those creations with antimagic field?&lt;/em&gt; seems to agree, or at least hint at RAI agreeing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we un-merge these questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43772" LastEditorUserId="22115" LastEditDate="2018-12-18T17:30:32.080" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T17:30:32.080" Title="Non-duplicate questions, with opposite correct answers, merged" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8599" CreationDate="2018-12-05T17:19:28.807" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Q&amp;amp;As should be unmerged&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to attempt to not go too deep into the specific talk of the mechanics here, but these posts are definitely different enough that they should be different posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main reason is that there is a bunch of &lt;em&gt;teleportation circle&lt;/em&gt; specific discussion that is unique from the general argument of what it means to be permanent. For example, there are some that interpret the spell as creating a nonmagical entity which remains after the spell goes away and which is permanent. And there are those that would disagree with that. However, the discussion cannot happen on the general Permanent vs Until Dispelled post because it is completely irrelevant there. This is one example, but really only one is needed. A question and its answers need to be practically identical to be a good fit for merging and these definitely are not. And the aforementioned discussion is not tangential to solving the question either; it is essential and merging with the general eliminates the possibility of talking about it completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you aren't convinced, take a loot at &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47910535#47910535&quot;&gt;this chat&lt;/a&gt; and read through that. It gives a very good presentation of both sides to this argument and which have no place in the new merge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty obvious also when you look at the answers that were merged into it because the ones trying to bring up this point look ridiculously out of place and seem not to answer the question at all (because they aren't, they are answering a different question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the same reasons, I also think they should not even be duped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They should be unmerged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-06T03:41:46.503" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8601" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8602" CreationDate="2018-12-06T07:43:57.617" Score="4" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have disabled the side bay by checking the &quot;Hide left navigation&quot; button in my settings. However, when I do this the [Questions] [Tags] [Users] [Unanswered] navigation buttons are missing from where I would expect them to be (around the red circle below) along the top (although the [Ask Question] button is present). Because of this, getting to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;All Questions&lt;/a&gt; seems to require typing in the URL as there is no obvious link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EKwaj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EKwaj.png&quot; alt=&quot;Snapshot&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not have this problem on other SE sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this a Ux bug?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If useful:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am using Firefox (v63) on different machines, and with different operating systems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am using uBlock Origin, but am not blocking any elements on this page, and the behavior persists when I turn uBlock Origin off.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am using NoScript to block quantserve, and scorecardresearch, but behavior persists when I disable NoScript.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17589" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-06T11:37:18.060" LastActivityDate="2018-12-06T13:41:31.807" Title="Interface problem with disabled side bar?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|design|site-design|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8602" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8601" CreationDate="2018-12-06T11:36:45.800" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not a bug. The navigation is not supposed to show up where you've highlighted; nothing makes it show up there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look in the top left you will find a hamburger menu beside the Stack Exchange logo. Click that. That is where you will find the navigation menu now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The hamburger menu appears on phones and narrow windows &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; when you have chosen to hide left navigation. The “hide left navigation” option does not make navigation options appear along the top where you've highlighted, it makes them appear only in the hamburger menu.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-06T13:41:31.807" LastActivityDate="2018-12-06T13:41:31.807" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8586" CreationDate="2018-12-06T14:11:09.440" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general citation style is a matter of personal preference that ought to be respected by editors. We don't edit to supplant personal preferences of the original author because otherwise we'd see infinite edit warring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, legibility can trump personal preferences, and I think that's relevant here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every citation style I know either cites the source naturally in the text—“According to Clarke (2004)”—or has a simple number either bracketed (1) or superscripted&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; or both&lt;sup&gt;[3]&lt;/sup&gt;. Now, we're not beholden to APA, Harvard, or any other citation style, but the point is none of them are using long strings of superscripted text without brackets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this is personal, but taking an example from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41174/what-are-the-planes-of-dd-4e-where-did-they-come-from-and-how-are-they-connec&quot;&gt;one of my own posts&lt;/a&gt;, I think this is more legible with brackets around the citations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Later, the Gods would take notice of this experiment. They visited the Mortal World and stabilised it, separating it into seas and land masses, and sprinkling it with life, making it what we know now.&lt;sup&gt;[MOP 70]&lt;/sup&gt; The Primordials eventually discovered this, found their work of art desecrated with Astral life and stability, and wished to return it to the chaotic thing it was before.&lt;sup&gt;[MOP 70]&lt;/sup&gt; Thus the Dawn War was fought between the Gods and Primordials over the fate of the World.&lt;sup&gt;[MOP 70]&lt;/sup&gt; The Gods won, and the Primordials who survived the conflict were imprisoned or scattered far throughout the Elemental Chaos.&lt;sup&gt;[TPB 65]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... than without:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Later, the Gods would take notice of this experiment. They visited the Mortal World and stabilised it, separating it into seas and land masses, and sprinkling it with life, making it what we know now.&lt;sup&gt;MOP 70&lt;/sup&gt; The Primordials eventually discovered this, found their work of art desecrated with Astral life and stability, and wished to return it to the chaotic thing it was before.&lt;sup&gt;MOP 70&lt;/sup&gt; Thus the Dawn War was fought between the Gods and Primordials over the fate of the World.&lt;sup&gt;MOP 70&lt;/sup&gt; The Gods won, and the Primordials who survived the conflict were imprisoned or scattered far throughout the Elemental Chaos.&lt;sup&gt;TPB 65&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply because the brackets provide a clear visual break from surrounding text that helps me skip over them if I want to just focus on the text and not its citatinos.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not about to say your citation style is wrong. It was not necessarily correct to replace it, although I can see where the editor was coming from in doing so. However, please consider that using brackets or parentheses around your citations is, I think, going to markedly improve the legibility of your posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-12-06T14:11:09.440" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8604" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8269" CreationDate="2018-12-07T10:24:38.090" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can edit answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the tidbit is really a tidbit which clarifies or amplifies an existing answer, a respectful edit that adds it may be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2018-12-07T10:24:38.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8605" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2018-12-07T16:01:29.260" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2018-12-07T16:01:29.260" LastActivityDate="2018-12-07T16:01:29.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8606" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2018-12-07T16:01:29.260" Score="0" Body="For questions about the Winter Bash (or holiday hats) to celebrate the end of the year." OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2018-12-09T08:42:58.127" LastActivityDate="2018-12-09T08:42:58.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8607" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-10T04:11:17.487" Score="7" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is an old post that has received &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is an attempt to revisit the policy: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8417/revisiting-our-never-guess-the-game-system-policy&quot;&gt;Revisiting our &amp;quot;never guess the game system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt; which is newer. The answer is still unchanged &quot;no&quot;, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that it is a more recent discussion, should we VTC the &lt;strong&gt;old&lt;/strong&gt; question as duplicate and point it to the newer one (and move the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; status), or point the &lt;strong&gt;new&lt;/strong&gt; one to old question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-10T04:58:26.167" LastActivityDate="2018-12-10T05:47:03.233" Title="How to show the most recent community consensus in meta?" Tags="|discussion|policy|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8607" CreationDate="2018-12-10T05:47:03.233" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;They’re not really duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just looking at the two question posts, the “revisit” is a terrible candidate for the Q part of “FAQ”: it’s long and detailed and not asking the direct question the FAQ should be about. It’s really more a meta-meta discussion opener than a FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since there’s no change in stance, and there’s no improvement offered by the later discussion, the original FAQ is still the best reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there had been a change, rather than making a debate meta into a new FAQ, better would be to write a new FAQ as a new question post and answer it succinctly. If our stance changes in the future, that would make a much more readable FAQ replacement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meantime, it’s worth having the FAQ linked to the later discussion. A comment should be enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2018-12-10T05:47:03.233" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8609" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-10T16:33:51.437" Score="3" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137093/can-a-wizard-sorcerer-cast-twinned-simulacrum&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; on whether a Sorcerer can twin cast Simulacrum, the querent had originally included the following line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Usually a Sorcerer does not have access to the Simulacrum spell, but he could use Wish to cast it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before any further edits, answers were submitted but none considered the case of Wish or how it might interact. They all focused on Simulacrum targeting requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was then edited to reflect more clearly that &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; was involved. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After that, the querent returned and edited the question to explicitly include  multiclass and wish options. Then another editor came later and fully removed the &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this type of situation, is it better to leave the question as-is with the assumption that &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; is what's necessary in order for a Sorcerer to Twin spell it to be responded to or clarified/corrected in answers or should we change the question to fit the answers that have come in after? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or should there be a different way of approaching this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edits and timing under question are from both the querent as well as other stackizens and looking for direction on how to approach for both querents and editors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-12-11T13:24:17.887" LastActivityDate="2018-12-11T13:24:17.887" Title="Should we have edited a question to clarify the case to be considered after answers have been submitted?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8610" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8609" CreationDate="2018-12-10T17:06:28.720" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obviously since I was the one doing most of the editing I thought that the edit was in the best interest at the time. And, in retrospect, I still do. Regardless I'll put my thoughts here with the hope that it helps somewhat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally if there is a faulty assumption in the question or something that can be expanded on, the question usually should remain open and the answers should address it. However, left as it was originally, it would have been closed as a dupe of another question (asking about metamagic with wish) because it doesn't matter how you get there, the metamagic/wish interaction is fully covered by an older question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it was clear that OP's question was not actually about metamagic and wish but metamagic and simulacrum. When OP edited the question to involve both the MC option and &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, I edited to remove the &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; part since that had been asked elsewhere and would be a duplicate. This allowed the author's intent to be emphasized and without a potential duplicate closure and OP later &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137093/can-a-wizard-sorcerer-cast-twinned-simulacrum#comment345449_137093&quot;&gt;clarified&lt;/a&gt; the edit did indeed conform to their intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of the final major change there were three answers on the question. Only one of the three mentioned anything about wish and thus only that one answer was affected by the change. It so happened that the other two questions were already answering the core question without realizing that wish would be a major factor. To be clear, the question was not edited &quot;to fit the answers that have come in after&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After the change the one affected answer quickly modified their answer to be in line with the new wording and, as a result, we now have three valid answers on an open question. The other option would have been a closed question with two answers that did not answer the question so it seems the edit was a distinct improvement at minimal cost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr I think it was the correct choice because it made the question focus on OP's actual intent instead of side issues, it kept the question from being closed, and the only cost was that one answer had to do an edit which was quickly done.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As always though I am open to critiques and suggestions for improvement and I may well have missed/overlooked something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2018-12-10T21:30:21.317" LastActivityDate="2018-12-10T21:30:21.317" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8611" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-10T17:46:21.350" Score="8" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just for example, these questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8369/do-we-need-a-disadvantage-tag&quot;&gt;Do we need a [disadvantage] tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8599/non-duplicate-questions-with-opposite-correct-answers-merged&quot;&gt;Non-duplicate questions, with opposite correct answers, merged&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Disclaimer: one was my meta question, and the other one is about my question)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...seem to have community consensus, and requires action, either from the community or the moderator team. They are, however, yet to be executed (the action, I mean).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How to gently nudge and remind the community (or moderator) that we need to take the agreed-upon action?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm thinking about doing a minor edit to bump the question back to page 1, but it doesn't seem appropriate. I'm also thinking to custom-flag the question, but that only works for the second type (moderator action needed) post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the appropriate method to accomplish this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-11T13:16:21.420" LastActivityDate="2018-12-11T13:16:21.420" Title="What is the appropriate way to bring community attention to unacted-on meta consensus?" Tags="|support|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8612" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2018-12-11T04:35:19.130" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2018-12-11T04:35:19.130" LastActivityDate="2018-12-11T04:35:19.130" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8613" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2018-12-11T04:35:19.130" Score="0" Body="For questions and discussions about RPG.SE policy, or policy on the meta site itself." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T07:28:36.037" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T07:28:36.037" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8611" CreationDate="2018-12-11T11:31:34.723" Score="6" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Usually a meta is pretty effective, whether it needs community attention or diamond moderator attention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flag the thing if it needs diamond moderator attention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it's something regular members can do, you may want to just go ahead and do the thing yourself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Poke people in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of that first one: in 2014, well before I was a moderator, the WoD community on the site agreed to restructure their tagging. Nothing then happened for a couple of weeks and significant agreement had gathered around one particular option so I poked things into action with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5001/start-retagging-the-wod-questions-aka-editors-the-retaggening&quot;&gt;Start retagging the WoD questions! (aka &amp;quot;Editors: the Retaggening&amp;quot;)&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be sure that decent time has occurred: metas get settled over the course of days, like a week minimum. We also usually wait until a course of action has at least double-figure votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it requires some significant moderator action (e.g. unmerging) the diamond moderator team will assess it to make sure it's actually a good idea first, which can take time as well. I have marked both those questions &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-review&lt;/a&gt; to indicate we are now doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-12-11T11:31:34.723" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8615" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-12T02:34:37.623" Score="3" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the past few years, RPG.SE has celebrated surviving the chaos of Hatmas by posting photo albums to the meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The photo albums are here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8617/the-large-hatron-collider-woolly-hatastrophe-2018-winterbash-photo-album&quot;&gt;The Large Hatron Collider Woolly Hatastrophe 2018: Winterbash Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7622/the-hatmas-interdimensional-breach-2017-photo-album&quot;&gt;The Hatmas Interdimensional Breach 2017 Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6640/hatocalypse-2016-survivors-photo-album&quot;&gt;Hatocalypse 2016 Survivors' Photo Album&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5964/the-winterbash-2015-hatmas-photo-album-maybe-embarrassing-yearbook/&quot;&gt;The Winterbash 2015 Hatmas “Photo” Album (&amp;amp; maybe embarrassing yearbook)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition to common sense rules like &quot;have fun&quot; and &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;be nice&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, do we have any specific rules for making these photo albums?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does each photo need to include?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do the photos need to be generated as screenshots?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can image editors be used to alter the hat's appearance?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can a user's photos include hats that the user hasn't earned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2018-12-12T19:22:17.437" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T19:22:17.437" Title="What are the rules for Hatmas photo albums?" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|hats|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8615" CreationDate="2018-12-12T10:39:23.180" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There aren't any specific rules; this is not such a rigorously developed thing as to have them. I do think you might be overthinking it a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2014 we had some super cool hats but then they vanished and I lost a couple of screenshots I took. In 2015 I just opened a thread so we could preserve some memories (as screenshots) and laid down some suggestions to keep it orderly, and to make it fun to participate in and not a competition or an exercise of public judgement. I left an answer and to my delight others joined in as well. I've done the same every year since.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally I started it to be about the hats you've worn and seen that you liked. I dunno what you'd add that &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; a screenshot, there is no must/mustn't include, there are no rules about the scenarios you've asked and I'd prefer there not be any; policing things would compromise the nature of this as a fun exercise. If you're excited enough about any hats (locked or unlocked) you'd like to do some editing you have my blessing; nobody's going to win anything and there's nothing at stake so if you want to see your avatar in a hat you don't have yet and show how great it might look there's no harm done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-12T14:10:34.533" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T14:10:34.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8617" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-12T11:43:38.737" Score="11" ViewCount="421" Body="&lt;p&gt;The physicists have done it again! They know no limits in meddling with the fabric of reality, and now the large hatron collider has exploded and there's hats and wool everywhere. How irresponsible!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, let's take some photos and do some knitting while we're here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every Hatmas, we wear and see fun and dapper combinations of hats: the hats go away at the end of the Hatmas season, but we can still preserve some memories and pictures of the fabulous hattery we've seen. To that end:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's have a fun and/or slightly embarrassing yearbook.&lt;/strong&gt; Post the great hats and hatments you've seen. Show off the ones &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; made for yourself which you think are fantastic or fabulous or the greatest. If you spy an excellent thing in the wild, I guess you can stick that here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This year also has a wool theme (head to &lt;a href=&quot;https://winterbash2018.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the Winterbash 2018 page&lt;/a&gt; and hit “Start Knitting”!), and your woolly works of woven art are more than welcome here too. (There is also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/319846/152515&quot;&gt;a Winter Bash 2018 Knitting gallery on Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend one answer per person (or a small number), and revise it to make additions. Keep it silly, keep it fun, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice&quot;&gt;be nice&lt;/a&gt;. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do I take a screenshot?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &lt;strong&gt;Lightshot&lt;/strong&gt; extension &lt;a href=&quot;https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/lightshot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Firefox&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lightshot-screenshot-tool/mbniclmhobmnbdlbpiphghaielnnpgdp?hl=en&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Chrome&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Windows 7 and above:&lt;/strong&gt; Use the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt; (hit start, type its name). Otherwise take a screenshot of your browser with &lt;kbd&gt;alt&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, crop it in MS Paint, and save it as a PNG (not GIF or JPEG).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mac:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;cmd ⌘&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;4&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click and drag to outline the region you want to screenshot. The screenshot will be saved to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On Linux:&lt;/strong&gt; Gnome/Ubuntu: press &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click-and-drag over the region you want to screenshot and save the screenshot somewhere. If the shortcut doesn't work, either set it up in System Settings/Keyboard/shortcuts/screenshots or use a tool like &lt;a href=&quot;http://apt.ubuntu.com/p/shutter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shutter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-12T16:46:53.517" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T22:11:39.007" Title="The Large Hatron Collider Woolly Hatastrophe 2018: Winterbash Photo Album" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8618" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8630" CreationDate="2018-12-12T14:16:18.893" Score="23" ViewCount="534" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are those here who encourage users not to accept answers before waiting at least 24 hours. Most of the time it is presented as something that &quot;we&quot; recommend or encourage. Some even refer to it as our policy. Yet I can find no record of any such consensus (in fact I have found record only of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8575/ive-noticed-that-new-users-tend-to-accept-questions-within-only-a-few-hours-sh&quot;&gt;dissent&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is this the current policy of RPG.se?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If not, is it good practice or an informal recommendation?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we be encouraging users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T04:10:05.447" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T16:01:18.950" Title="Should we encourage users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer?" Tags="|discussion|policy|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T15:01:36.410" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No hats yet, but I'm &lt;a href=&quot;https://winterbash2018.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;knitting&lt;/a&gt; to stay warm....&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tDL9Us.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tDL9Us.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T12:52:29.397" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8620" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T15:05:38.113" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Knitting with hooves is hard!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tuure.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tuure.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T15:05:38.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8618" CreationDate="2018-12-12T15:08:04.197" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes.  Encouraging users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer is good.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It is not policy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least it's not anywhere that is easy to find nor readily apparent when posting a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It is a good informal recommendation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for answers from other time zones as people are active at different times in the day.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for better researched or well thought out answers to be posted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for comments and clarifications to be received and acted upon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lessens the incentive to publish a quick answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T09:33:36.123" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T09:33:36.123" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8618" CreationDate="2018-12-12T15:11:19.503" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It depends on the Question and on the Answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think this would be good as a hard and fast rule but I think it might be good as a recommendation on certain types of questions. The best way I can break that down is &quot;hard&quot; questions/answers and &quot;soft&quot; questions/answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And attempting to give examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We had a question recently that was &quot;Does an attack roll need to tie the AC or be above the AC to hit&quot; (paraphrased). I would call this a &quot;hard&quot; question. The answer is going to be a rule citation, with page number and maybe a bit of explanatory commentary. Beyond that, it's difficult to improve the answer. So I think waiting 24 hours in this case is just more likely to cause the asker to forget to accept any answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A soft question is one where there may not be one exactly true answer, or it requires extensive research to gather all the info, or it can be answered in multiple different ways. I think balance questions and lore questions are often like this. If we are asked to evaluate how balanced a feat is, we often compare to other feats and multiple answers may approach from multiple angles. Waiting for a few choices and accepting the clearest one that addresses the askers concerns is good in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41256" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T15:11:19.503" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T17:24:58.783" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Junimo!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TPD6K.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TPD6K.png&quot; alt=&quot;bring me upvotes!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'd submitted this over on the main meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y5yGB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y5yGB.png&quot; alt=&quot;D&amp;amp;D_logo&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="34716" LastEditDate="2018-12-12T18:30:01.040" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T18:30:01.040" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8618" CreationDate="2018-12-12T17:37:17.643" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, we shouldn't encourage people to wait before accepting.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have a policy at the moment, and I don't think we need one, but I also don't think we should be encouraging people to wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The case &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; encouraging people to wait is generally &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8618/should-we-encourage-users-to-wait-24-hours-before-accepting-an-answer/8621#8621&quot;&gt;what Grosscol pointed out&lt;/a&gt;: an assertion that it leaves time for more answers to arrive. There is also an assertion that an accepted checkmark discourages people from following up with other, better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I don't think this position is helpful. It doesn't solve any problems and it makes problems we do have worse. It even makes problems &lt;em&gt;that it is trying to fix&lt;/em&gt; worse!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's walk through some of those problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the goals here is we want people to post all the awesome answers, right? The fact of the matter is people can post answers anytime, even after an accepted answer gets posted. If someone has an answer they can post that is better than the accepted answer or all the other answers, we want them to post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea behind this “don't accept yet!” is that someone might be discouraged by the accept mark already being handed out. But, screw that. The accept mark can be changed by the querent. I want a culture where people think “I can do better than these answers” and &lt;em&gt;post anyway&lt;/em&gt;, and we benefit. I think this whole “but don't accept, because you might discourage these answers!” feeds into an idea that questions with an accepted answer are “done” and not an open invitation to continue competing with better answers, which means... encouraging people to wait creates a culture where people &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; provide all the awesome answers they could. It is antithetical to a culture that sees the accept mark as an ongoing challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another goal is we want the querent to sample several things before they go with a course of action, right? Well, see, if they stick around, they can do that. If they &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; stick around, well, a different problem we have is that people might be only here for a while and never wind up accepting an answer before they leave — we are &lt;em&gt;enlarging&lt;/em&gt; that problem by telling these short stayers “no, &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; give us your accept signal! Don't tell us this thing was actually a good solution to your problem!”. Really though, we &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; that signal, and it's not uncommon that people lament it not being given out. If the person isn't merely a short stayer and sticks around for longer, they can go ahead and change their accepted answer to newer answers arriving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me tally things up in a list. Does encouraging people to wait 24 hours...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;... improve getting all the awesome answers?&lt;/strong&gt; No, because it is part and parcel with a culture where accepted answers make a question be “done” and not worth bothering to answer anymore. Instead, I want a culture where questions are never “done”, where far better answers are still welcome and a viable challenge for the accepted answer mark, where the accepted answer can still change — but the idea of having to wait is predicated on the idea that this can't happen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;... give us better signalling?&lt;/strong&gt; No, because we're just telling short-stayers not to tell us an answer is perfectly good. Long-stayers can change the checkmark, leaving it to wait isn't necessary for that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'd rather see is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the accept mark can be changed anytime, we don't fuss over it being given out early. The OP can also change it later, including the next day or the next week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This requires no action on our part, other than simply not asking them to wait to accept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Rebuttal to Grosscol&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to respond to some points directly that Grosscol said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Asking them to wait:]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for answers from other time zones as people are active at different times in the day.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for better researched or well thought out answers to be posted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allows time for comments and clarifications to be received and acted upon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They have time to do this anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Asking them to wait:]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lessens the incentive to publish a quick answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, asking people to wait &lt;strong&gt;increases the incentive&lt;/strong&gt; to publish a quick answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the actual incentive to publish a quick answer (&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/fastest-gun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fastest-gun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fastest-gun&lt;/a&gt;) is based on post score: the first posted answer gets the most votes and the most visibility, and generally the sooner you arrive the better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If no answer is accepted (as asking them to wait would basically do) then this remains in full  effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, accepting an answer early on helps address the fastest gun. If the top-voted answer is accepted, still no effect. If a different answer is accepted early, we give more visibility to a lesser-voted answer, rewarding a later-arriving answer with visibility and votes. That's good!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, asking them to wait 24 answers is part of a viewpoint that answers after one gets accepted don't matter. The viewpoint that we must wait 24 hours, therefore, sees answering within the first 24 hours as &lt;em&gt;critical&lt;/em&gt; because otherwise you might as well not bother.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrary, the viewpoint where we can answer anytime to compete for the accepted answer mark is a viewpoint that is happy to see answers arrive a whole week or month later. People are still encouraged to reply early because of the fastest gun, but it is still OK to take time and answer later because answers after the first 24 hours (and after the accept mark gets handed down) still count and are still in the running to be the “best” answer (as chosen by the checkmark).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T02:20:28.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T21:04:21.390" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/l6uWN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Sharing means Gimme!&quot;&gt; I just couldn't resist a little break for this one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/b6DfO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/b6DfO.png&quot; alt=&quot;the Hand,... the Foot,... the Apendage? is here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this here is the goofholder without a hat&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4ls7V.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4ls7V.png&quot; alt=&quot;Enough with the puns yet? Behold the goofholder&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/f0ekp.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/f0ekp.png&quot; alt=&quot;trying out for the NFL I guess?&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and here we have a be-hatted beholder&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8233" LastEditorUserId="8233" LastEditDate="2018-12-19T09:12:23.907" LastActivityDate="2018-12-19T09:12:23.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8626" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8637" CreationDate="2018-12-12T22:13:32.097" Score="13" ViewCount="293" Body="&lt;p&gt;Until recently, I feel like I have very rarely seen the deletion of answers that aren't clearly spam by other site users, but that seems to have changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have noticed an increase of 'bad' answer deletion and I'm not sure that's the correct use of the tool, but I wanted to bring it up for discussion since it does seem to be used more frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we delete what we perceive are bad answers? Typically, these are posted by either new or relatively new users (but I've seen it with some more with more rep) and immediately draw downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers aren't spam or obnoxious, they're just not good. Keeping them isn't helpful, but I&amp;quot;m not sure that removing is the right thing to do (but understand that it could be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Examples&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/137146/23024&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; was one example that I saw recently. I will try and add some more, but the answer itself isn't good because it's &amp;quot;bad subjective&amp;quot;. But rather than giving them a chance to change it, or just purely downvoting, it was deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-21T17:42:13.020" Title="Deleting of &quot;bad&quot; answers by Stackizens seems to be increasing" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T22:27:29.157" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Retro Fan: Originals&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2015 I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5965/4398&quot;&gt;put doctors in the Fourth Doctor's hat and scarf&lt;/a&gt;. In 2016, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6644/4398&quot;&gt;famously awful fathers got to wear Darth Vader's mask&lt;/a&gt;. In 2017 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7624/4398&quot;&gt;detectives wore Sherlock Holmes's hat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This year I'll be putting the Retro Fan glasses on original versions of characters with multiple iterations. Hover over an image to see the character's name and origin; click to see them unhatted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/axK7z.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Quj0Bt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Edward Bear, the original Winnie-the-Pooh&quot; title=&quot;Edward Bear, the original Winnie-the-Pooh&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vALXz.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IuC7Rt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Ged, AKA Sparrowhawk, from the first edition over of 'A Wizard of Earthsea'&quot; title=&quot;Ged, AKA Sparrowhawk, from the first edition over of 'A Wizard of Earthsea'&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1n4tW.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qYOXrt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Godzilla, from a poster for the 1954 film&quot; title=&quot;Godzilla, from a poster for the 1954 film&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jcoqc.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XHB4at.png&quot; alt=&quot;Jaime Reyes, Marvel Comics (pre-New-52)&quot; title=&quot;Jaime Reyes, DC Comics (pre-New-52)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NUqp4.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0L1YOt.png&quot; alt=&quot;Kermit the Frog (Smithsonian display)&quot; title=&quot;Kermit the Frog (Smithsonian display)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-17T20:48:53.417" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8626" CreationDate="2018-12-12T22:33:41.183" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;https://stackoverflow.com/help/deleted-answers&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why and how are some answers deleted? Answers that do not&#xA;fundamentally answer the question may be removed. This includes&#xA;answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;commentary on the question or other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asking another, different question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“thanks!” or “me too!” responses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;exact duplicates of other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;barely more than a link to an external site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;not even a partial answer to the actual question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you wish to improve an existing&#xA;answer, click the edit link beneath it. For more guidance, see How to&#xA;Answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers can be deleted at any time by their authors, unless the answer&#xA;has been accepted by the question asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers can also be deleted by the community. Moderators can delete&#xA;any answer, and trusted community members can vote to delete answers&#xA;scoring -1 or lower (3 votes will result in deletion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, any answer that accumulates enough offensive or spam&#xA;flags will be automatically deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that in many cases, including those above, and especially when answers have been negatively voted, that deletion is appropriate. &amp;quot;Spam&amp;quot; is not the only deletion reason.  Spam, abuse, and nonsense aren't even listed in the above because that goes without saying.  These other forms of &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; make a question eligible for deletion.  And it's not just these - there are a wide variety of ways in which people put words into an answer-box that are not close to an on-topic answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;strong&gt;wrong&lt;/strong&gt; answer, however, is not delete-worthy. In fact, we have a custom mod flag rebuttal reason that says &amp;quot;flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer&amp;quot;. We should leave wrong answers so that the community and user learns that &amp;quot;we don't think that answer is the right one to this question&amp;quot;.  That's valuable information. &amp;quot;No, the community does not agree that you can double-stack that bonus&amp;quot; or whatnot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we don't need to have true trash on the site for people to learn not to litter; they'll learn when it's deleted. Therefore, any of the reasons above, or others that make an answer not what we consider a legitimate answer to a question, are legitimate deletion reasons and can and should be used by community members to delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't seen much in the way of inappropriate deletion; I think that in general over the history of the site it's taken a while for the community members to get comfortable with the tools they have and exercise them instead of reaching out to mods; I am happy for the site users to be doing the vast majority of the closes and deletions and whatnot as they get the rep.  From the mod POV, I have not seen much in the way of &amp;quot;I shouldn't have been deleted&amp;quot; flags, and the ones I have seen have been wrong (got one today from a comment-not-answer, in fact).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T07:25:16.083" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8629" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8631" CreationDate="2018-12-12T22:34:51.970" Score="6" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;If someone has edited another person's question in a way that, although perhaps beneficial overall, also introduces grammatical, spelling, or other errors, is it considered appropriate form to edit the question to fix those errors?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if so, what is the appropriate course of action when the change to fix those errors is below the minimum threshold for an edit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42535" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T23:03:56.893" Title="Question editing rules and etiquette" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8618" CreationDate="2018-12-12T22:45:26.567" Score="28" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes. Encouraging users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer is good.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Problems For Answerers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not primarily concerned about the effect on answerers, though I think those exist (fastest gun syndrome, discouraging answers after the accept).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Problems For Askers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is about teaching users - especially new users, who are pretty much the ones that do this - that the first answer isn't necessarily the best and they should stick around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because remember, we're mostly talking about noobs here.  If SSD accepts an answer immediately, no one's going to sweat him about it, they would figure &quot;OK obviously this question was one that needed a slam-dunk answer and he got it let's move on.&quot; The situation we're talking about is a brand new user who is excited, knows nothing about the site, happens across us, posts a question, and the second they get an answer they accept it - and, most likely (as in provably the most common case in the site analytics data), scuttle off never to be seen again. &quot;Deep engagement&quot; is by far the exception not the rule, a huge percentage of our site users have 10 or less rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users are unclear on the concept.  They aren't sure if it's one person who answered them or the community.  They don't know if that person who answered knows what they're talking about or not.  They got an answer and they're off!  They feel lucky, many internet sites you post a question to and don't get an answer ever or for weeks. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what we probably want to do with these folks is say &quot;Hey - you may want to wait a day because you'll probably get multiple good answers and you probably need to think about them.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it's technically true &quot;well they can always accept a different answer&quot; - that's a statement for experienced site users.  Noobs don't know that they can, they may not even return after that first frenzy of clicks. Heck, frankly a new user who figured out to accept an answer is above the median in terms of being on the ball. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Problem For Later Readers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then also, you have the problem of answers with a bad/fast answer accepted but much better answers below.  Sure they get upvotes, and you can bounty them, and blah blah blah.  But again, that's experienced user inside baseball stuff.  The next excited new 5e player is going to see a search result in Google, click through, see the thing with the green check, and scamper off themselves.  Having poorer answers as the accepted answer does degrade the site's content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;TL;DR&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You need to keep in mind the lightly engaged nature of real Internet users and encouraging folks to slow down a sec to think about the answers they're getting and engage a little more with the site is 100% net positive. I can't think of any down side except we have to spend effort writing comments saying &quot;hey consider not accepting immediately&quot;, which is minor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T16:01:18.950" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T16:01:18.950" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8629" CreationDate="2018-12-12T23:03:56.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, please fix those errors. It's appropriate form to fix errors in posts regardless of how they got there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be mindful that sometimes spelling differences are regional English variations (e.g. USA's color vs Australia's colour), see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3224/1204&quot;&gt;Standardization of English, etc.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the edit is below the threshold you've got some options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hunt around to see if there's something else that can be improved in the same edit. There's &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; something.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave a comment: “@user12345 There is a typo in 'Figter' but I can't suggest an edit.” You can ping people who edited the post even if they don't show up in the ping autocomplete. (I promise.) Up to you whether you ping the OP or the person who edited it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Drop into &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; and ask someone for assistance to make the edit for you.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for your effort and keen eye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-12-12T23:03:56.893" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8632" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-12T23:12:08.853" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;My first hat, and it's a green one!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bHbTY.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Stay Fresh!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bHbTY.png&quot; alt=&quot;Queen Chrysalis in a green bamboo box hat&quot; title=&quot;Stay Fresh!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, wait... I saw someone wearing it upside down before... could it be..!?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ypg2b.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;SURPRISE!&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ypg2b.png&quot; alt=&quot;Queen Chrysalis&amp;#39;s head sticking out of the box like a jack-in-the-box&quot; title=&quot;SURPRISE!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Time to switch back to an oldie but a goodie for some of the holidays; if anyone's going to wear Retro Fan it's gotta be Space Ghost:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2kLKZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;These are almost as good as Zorak&amp;#39;s.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2kLKZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Space Ghost in retro fan glasses (shutter shades)&quot; title=&quot;These are almost as good as Zorak&amp;#39;s.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jw379.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;KEEP PEACE AND ORDER, CITIZENS&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jw379.png&quot; alt=&quot;Space Ghost in a robotcop helmet&quot; title=&quot;KEEP PEACE AND ORDER, CITIZENS&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-14T10:57:34.093" LastActivityDate="2018-12-14T10:57:34.093" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8633" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8626" CreationDate="2018-12-13T00:04:32.843" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the delete reasons is 'very low quality'.  There is a big difference between 'very low quality' and 'wrong', but it is a distinction that can be easy to obviate in emotionally charged situations (like when someone disagrees with you and you're bad at being disagreed with).  Nonetheless, I do not see a frequent abuse of this deletion reason, at least in my personal experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your linked answer, for example, is a less-than-three sentence forum-like-blurb.  I think it well-qualifies for deletion by dint of quality, and I would have voted for such deletion had I seen it before it was deleted.  While downvoted wrong answers can add value to the site (e.g. especially in situations like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50464/14848&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; ), downvoted very low quality answers don't, because they are just noise.  The linked answer doesn't try to support its claims with experience, or to explain its claims, or even to assert its suggested course of action over any other particular course.  It's just &quot;Eh, maybe this???&quot; which doesn't warrant space on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, deleting an answer &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; in any way prevent users from improving it.  A deleted answer can be edited by the post's author and then once edited undeleted by a flagged mod.  It mostly happens, in my experience, when a diamond mod freaks out over a negative judgement in a post they interpret to be unkind or too-close-to-being-unkind to people who associate with the negatively judged thing, but theoretically any answer that's deleted could be edited and then salvaged.  It's just that outside of that edge case we're pretty good about deleting only unsalvageable answers.  So there isn't really a problem if the querent comes back and edits their post to be no longer deleteworthy, just they very probably won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: I am definitely more delete-happy with low-quality answers than average for the site, not sure by how much.  So my perspective is somewhat off in that direction from the majority.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T00:04:32.843" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8634" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-13T04:03:55.093" Score="15" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/137299/revisions&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was recently edited to add italics to a link to a spell. This edit was done after the question was already closed due to being a duplicate, and therefore put the question into the 'vote for reopen' queue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we be editing closed questions in order to make styling updates if the edit doesn't also include an attempt to fix the question? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35955" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-13T22:50:47.577" LastActivityDate="2021-09-17T23:41:12.413" Title="Should closed questions be edited without fixing the question?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8635" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-13T04:52:22.757" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Have you ever wondered what happens when you dunk your headgear into your coffee?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uwNDs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uwNDs.png&quot; alt=&quot;Retro Fan&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sy9de.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sy9de.png&quot; alt=&quot;Still Fresh&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WzHWs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WzHWs.png&quot; alt=&quot;Team Player&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DGEUb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DGEUb.png&quot; alt=&quot;Top Bar&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xBEyv.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xBEyv.png&quot; alt=&quot;Identification Division&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AjaKD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AjaKD.png&quot; alt=&quot;Red Baron&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3IZTa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3IZTa.png&quot; alt=&quot;Scarf Ace&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2018-12-14T09:00:21.320" LastActivityDate="2018-12-14T09:00:21.320" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-13T11:23:34.980" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since Trogdor is lazy and didn't repost herethe image I left from him in chat, I suppose I have to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/opQej.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/opQej.png&quot; alt=&quot;Beholder&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50686" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T11:23:34.980" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8626" CreationDate="2018-12-13T14:33:22.337" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is good news&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderation is a goal of the SE system.  You are seeing the community in action, which means that those with enough rep to exercise those controls care enough about site quality to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a cause to toss confetti, not to be worried.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case where you feel that the community modding has gone overboard, raise a mod flag and get a ruling.  (@mxyzplk goes into more detail &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8628/22566&quot;&gt;in his answer&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Should we delete what we perceive are &lt;em&gt;bad answers&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes.  That's why those tools are there for those with the rep to use them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer simply has errors, engaging via comments and pointing out the errors will often get the answerer to (1) improve the answer or (2) delete it themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-13T14:33:22.337" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8639" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-14T01:13:04.673" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Gearing up for winter: it's snowing here in Chapel Hill, folks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/f1KsD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/f1KsD.png&quot; alt=&quot;Gearing up for the winter weather&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because I started with D&amp;amp;D 5e doesn't mean I can't be an old-school retro fan! (I use &lt;code&gt;vim&lt;/code&gt; for just about everything, how much more retro can you get...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/U9LDe.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/U9LDe.png&quot; alt=&quot;I can&amp;#39;t see through these retro glasses&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My players navigating the extreme wilderness...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Rolls a 1&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You hear the sounds of bones crunching and, as you approach, catch sight of an owlbear ravaging some goblin and merchant corpses, with a damaged caravan nearby. What do you do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BuQBm.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BuQBm.png&quot; alt=&quot;Exploring unknown territory&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31465" LastEditorUserId="31465" LastEditDate="2018-12-17T23:57:41.897" LastActivityDate="2018-12-17T23:57:41.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8640" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-14T16:48:18.613" Score="4" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a question about my Role-playing Games Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137395/how-do-i-test-my-own-game-online&quot;&gt;How do I test my own game online&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&#xA;I have edited my question now. But why did my question get put on hold, even though someone else asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59808/how-do-i-find-playtesters&quot;&gt;a question that was related to it&lt;/a&gt; (not the same, but related) that wasn't closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, my question was the same type of idea as another question, but a little different. It was put on hold for now. Here’s what I did before: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/137395/2&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/137395/2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50708" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-22T02:30:30.873" LastActivityDate="2018-12-22T02:30:30.873" Title="My question was put on hold, even though I saw someone else ask something similar without it being closed" Tags="|support|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8640" CreationDate="2018-12-14T17:38:26.547" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions here don't get put on hold only because they're off topic.  Best as I can tell, you are asking an on topic question.  They can however be put on hold for a variety of other reasons - being too broad, it being unclear what you're asking, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've put your question back on hold myself because to me, and from the comments it seems like to other site members, we're not sure what you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note how the similar question you link is somewhere around 20x larger than your question.  That's because they take the time to explain what specifically they're trying to do.  (That question also went through some close votes, actually - it initially was very short and just said &quot;where do I find playtesters&quot; and so it started to have the same issue you are having.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'd like to help you, but to get good answers you should put a little more into the question. What specifically are you trying to accomplish, what is your situation, and so on.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, in this case, if your question is really &quot;I have a dice mechanic and I want to test out its probability,&quot; then there will be one kind of answer.  If it's &quot;I have a full RPG rulesystem and I want people to play it online,&quot; then it has another kind of answer.  We don't want to guess what your situation is, we'd like you to explain it so we can make good answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just repeating &quot;I want to test online&quot; doesn't make any of us understand what it is you are asking.  Take a minute and explain to us what specifically you're envisioning; what part of the game, what kind of test, what you think a result looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-12-14T17:38:26.547" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8642" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-17T21:20:16.467" Score="15" ViewCount="309" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry, I'm new to SE so don't hate me if this is a painfully newb question. I love RPG's but dislike D&amp;amp;D.  This Stack is called role-playing games, but from what I can tell it is 95 % D&amp;amp;D.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a better Stack for my ilk?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user50781" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-18T11:30:19.637" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T13:51:49.760" Title="Only D&amp;D on this Stack?" Tags="|support|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8643" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8642" CreationDate="2018-12-17T21:25:24.390" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The quantity of questions here reflect the relative popularity of various RPGs in the hobby. However there are knowledgeable people for many different RPG including the Dungeon Fantasy RPG and GURPS like myself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Steve Jackson Games the publisher of the Dungeon Fantasy RPGs has &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.sjgames.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;an active forum&lt;/a&gt; and fan community. But again you will get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot;&gt;answers to GURPS&lt;/a&gt; and Dungeon Fantasy questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="93" OwnerDisplayName="RS Conley" LastActivityDate="2018-12-17T21:25:24.390" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8644" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8642" CreationDate="2018-12-17T21:33:33.470" Score="30" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Your percentages are off, but you can ignore the [*dnd*] and [pathfinder] tags.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/interesting-topics&quot;&gt;This link&lt;/a&gt; tells you how to ignore a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find about 17,500 tags for D&amp;amp;D (and over 10K for the current edition) and roughly 5750 for Pathfinder&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of 30,000 tags, not quite 95%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also use the search to look for tags for only games that interest you, such as the [GURPS] tag.  I just did a quick tag search for GURPS &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot;&gt;and came up with this&lt;/a&gt;.  (I also note that World of Darkness has 334 tagged questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Ask Away!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ask a question about whatever role playing game you wish: we have experts on a great variety of games to include Fate, Savage Worlds, GURPS, Vampire the Masquerade, Traveller, Roll for Shoes, Pendragon, Feng Shui, Seventh Age, Dungeon World, Starfinder, and many others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the other gaming stacks handle role playing games as well as this one, though for computer games, there is Arqade which covers the computer based RPG scene that isn't Table Top RPG's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bottom Line&lt;/strong&gt;: no, there's isn't a better stack for what you are looking for if the topic is TTRPG's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" OwnerDisplayName="KorvinStarmast" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T13:51:49.760" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8645" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8642" CreationDate="2018-12-18T00:08:07.727" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are on the best Stack for RPGs. We are the only Stack that deals with tabletop RPGs and while we do get a lot of questions on D&amp;amp;D we have expertise in a great many different systems. Either way, there are really no other options as far as Stacks go. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8642/only-dd-on-this-stack/8644#8644&quot;&gt;As @KorvinStarmast says&lt;/a&gt;, you can easily block D&amp;amp;D tags so you won't ever see those questions if you don't want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-18T01:52:50.287" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T01:52:50.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8642" CreationDate="2018-12-18T00:25:35.020" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;RPG SE is a general RPG site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG SE is not a D&amp;amp;D-only site. Check out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;topic guidance page&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for expert Q&amp;amp;A by and for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games. If you play or run Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun, World of Darkness, FATE, or any of the thousands of other pen-and-paper RPGs (including LARPs), and need answers to your questions (or would like to answer questions about these games), this is the place for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags?tab=popular&quot;&gt;Popular tags&lt;/a&gt; include non-D&amp;amp;D systems like FATE, World of Darkness, Dungeon World, and Savage Worlds. If you're browsing or filtering by tag, you may also want to look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag to see questions that don't directly tie into a specific game's playstyle and mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my knowledge, the site's most dedicated users generally have experience with multiple systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There sure are a lot of D&amp;amp;D questions here&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're not wrong about this. We talk about this issue from time to time on Meta, to try to make sure the site remains a useful place for non-D&amp;amp;D questions and answers. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7278/dungeons-and-dragons-is-dominating-the-site-in-terms-of-page-views/7293#7293&quot;&gt;Here is one such recent discussion&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, both these things are known to be true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D is a huge part of the hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D generates a lot of questions that fit the site's Q&amp;amp;A (not discussion) format pretty well, and a lot of new players' questions will be expressed in D&amp;amp;D-specific terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means a general-RPG site with RPG SE's structure and footprint is likely to always have a ton of D&amp;amp;D-specific content. For the most part, we've accepted this as something to build on rather than worry about; thoughtful efforts to improve the site's experience for non-D&amp;amp;D players are always welcome, though!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't play D&amp;amp;D.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T00:25:35.020" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8647" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8656" CreationDate="2018-12-18T08:21:57.323" Score="7" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the description of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; tag tries to hint at that but it's a bit vague. I'm a long time fan of the series, so to me &quot;World of Darkness&quot; tends to encompass all its incarnations, hence it needs a qualifier - &quot;old&quot; (oWoD) and &quot;new&quot; (nWoD).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been a bit out of the loop but I know of more recent developments - White Wolf started re-publishing some of the oWoD books and also putting out new ones. WW officially dubbed the line &quot;classic&quot; World of Darkness (cWoD) to avoid the moniker &quot;old&quot; as it was clear to existing fans but not to potential new ones. At a similar time, nWoD got its 2nd edition and was also rebranded as &quot;Chronicles of Darkness&quot; for...a lot of reasons. One of them being to differentiate it from the new books coming out as cWoD, as it could be confusing to see both at the same time, when they weren't actually about the same thing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, all in all, it turns out that there are the following terms: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;old World of Darkness (oWoD) - widely accepted fan made name to refer to the collection games published from the beginning of the 90s for about a decade. Officially only referred to as the World of Darkness. It spans multiple game lines and three editions worth of them. The editions are mostly compatible in a lot of respects, so they are rarely differentiated between.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;classic World of Darkness (cWoD) - a synonym for oWoD but comes from an official source - the developer White Wolf. It was introduced years after the game line ended, when WW also started publishing new materials for those game lines.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;new World of Darkness (nWoD) - widely accepted fan made name for a collection of games that started being published in 2004 by White Wolf and superseded oWoD which was over (at the time). Officially, the name is World of Darkness.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;new World of Darkness 2nd Edition (nWoD 2e) - an overhaul of both the mechanics, the cosmology, and focus of nWoD by Onyx Path Publishing, instead of White Wolf.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chronicles of Darkness - a &lt;em&gt;sort of&lt;/em&gt; official nickname for the second edition. Best to just keep it simple like that. It also became the official name for the nWoD 2nd Edition forwards. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At one point Onyx Path mentioned it could be &quot;backported&quot; to refer to the first edition of nWoD. I don't actually know if that was officially done (as in, complete re-branding), or was it just sort of accepted as convention but it's important to note that nWoD was &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; Chronicles of Darkness back when it began, it's a new term.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;World of Darkness - no qualifier. Could be used to refer to &lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; of the oWoD or nWoD lines - official sources would just call that the current running series. It could also be used as a collective for &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; oWoD and nWoD, usually when talking about shared aspects. To add to that, there is a third official game called &lt;em&gt;Monte Cook's World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;. That can occasionally be lumped under the general WoD label but usually it isn't, since it's mostly different in mechanics, setting and scope.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Then there are unofficial game lines like &lt;em&gt;Genius: the Transgression&lt;/em&gt; (using the nWoD ruleset and universe) and &lt;em&gt;Alternate World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; (aWoD - using a very similar ruleset and universe to both oWoD and nWoD). Unofficial sources are also sometimes collected under WoD because they are similar enough in style, even if unofficial.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Storytell&lt;strong&gt;er&lt;/strong&gt; System - the official name for the oWoD ruleset. Could be used as a(nother) synonym for oWoD but it's rare, it usually means rule alone, while oWoD also includes in-game fluff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Storytell&lt;strong&gt;ing&lt;/strong&gt; System - the official name for the nWoD ruleset. Because naming both collections of game lines &quot;World of Darkness&quot; wasn't confusing enough, White Wolf had to make the ruleset names almost the same.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a bit of a background to show just how muddy the whole thing is with re-using names for different things, non-official (but widely accepted), and then official names and name changes, including backwards rebranding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this website, the relevant tags seem to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;. So, while it does simplify the terminology a bit and makes sense &lt;em&gt;when examined as a whole&lt;/em&gt;, it's not exactly clear when looking at the WoD tag individually. I posted an oWoD related question and I literally had to go through all three tags to even figure out which one to use because the WoD only hints at being oWoD related: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;An urban-fantasy/horror game setting created by White Wolf Publishing, best known for its flagship game, Vampire: the Masquerade. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the entirely of the description. If you look at the terms above - &quot;World of Darkness&quot; has been known to refer to both oWoD and the collection of oWoD and nWoD - in both cases, &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt; can be described as the flagship game. Perhaps to somebody with less background, it would be less confusing but, depending on what that background is (e.g., they've only seen nWoD) it could even be more confusing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the synonyms helps to clarify things but if that's the requirement to find what the tag is, then that description fails at it purpose of &lt;em&gt;describing&lt;/em&gt; the tag clearly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose the tag be clarified more that it refers to the old/classic World of Darkness game lines. I'm not sure what the best wording would be but here is the description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The Chronicles of Darkness (1e) games: a series of urban fantasy and horror games released by White Wolf starting in 2004 and later by Onyx Path. Games using the God-Machine Rules Update (aka the Second Edition rules) should use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag instead. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems very reasonable and clear. The description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; can be modeled to be like it - adding &quot;for the games that started in 1991&quot; and possibly mentioning &quot;see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; for newer game lines&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-18T10:47:26.420" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T19:02:09.520" Title="We should clarify that the [world-of-darkness] tag is only for the &quot;old&quot;/&quot;classic&quot; line" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8648" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8651" CreationDate="2018-12-18T12:03:28.160" Score="27" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; page presents a sample of the kinds of Q&amp;amp;A we might see on this site. Moderators can pick what shows up there from a very limited list of questions, with a preview of how it will show up on the tour page. Answers are limited to just one paragraph, or cropped to their first paragraph or something apparently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a complaint to make about that: &lt;em&gt;every single question sample available to choose is a terrible example of how our site works.&lt;/em&gt; And when I say every single one, I mean I went through all of them. Every example I can pick is just two one-paragraph answers, or even one-line answers, each of them with no citation or reasoning evident. They are examples of what &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to do and completely misrepresent the quality bar this site expects (which is relatively high).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is very normal for brand new (1-rep) users to come to the site and leave a spree of one-paragraph or even one-line answers, each of them with no citation or reasoning evident. This happens at least once a week. If the tour is made to show people how our site works then by all means it is succeeding at teaching them, but it is teaching them wrong. It is &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqaCEPwWGtc&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;like how the masters trained Wimp Lo&lt;/a&gt;: “we have purposely trained him wrong as a joke.” Later: “My answer has the least citations and sentences, making me the victor!”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today I went through that list again hoping to find maybe &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; sample that would actually convey we require citations, and found one, but lo and behold, the tour actually adjusts the view to present the answer &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; citations as the one that gets accepted, which is incredibly poor teaching:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QaerI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QaerI.png&quot; alt=&quot;“according to this cited text, here&amp;#39;s a conclusion” gets downvoted. an uncited paragraph gets upvoted above it.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Left: “Good answers are voted up and rise to the top.” Right: an example of the opposite actually happening. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13943/favored-class-bonus-at-1st-level&quot;&gt;You can find that question here&lt;/a&gt;; note that the bottom answer in this example by RoryN is actually at +33/-0 and accepted, while the apparently upvoted-and-accepted answer is at +3/-1. Why on earth is the tour pushing the worst answer to the top?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the current example in the tour, so head there to see that yourself if you want to see it in action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Teaching by example is great and all, but the examples should be any good. They are not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, we should be able to choose:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;samples that present longer answers of more than one paragraph&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;which two answers get presented&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;which one gets upvoted and accepted, as a demonstration that an answer like &lt;em&gt;this one&lt;/em&gt; is better than the other one and more likely to be upvoted and accepted&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we can't choose answers, then the tour page should at least pile the upvotes and accepted mark on the answer that is in reality the high-scored accepted answer. (Omit questions where the high-scored and accepted answer are different answers for simplicity's sake.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="8821" LastEditDate="2018-12-18T20:19:54.707" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T20:19:54.707" Title="Stack Devs: Please let us show longer answers in the Tour page" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tour|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8648" CreationDate="2018-12-18T15:08:22.603" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;After some investigation it turns out there is one question I can choose that actually works well for the tour: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92374/are-hags-fey-or-fiends&quot;&gt;Are Hags Fey or Fiends?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this question chosen the tour will present the stronger of the two answers at the top, one with a clear citation and quote. Hopefully this makes for a positive influence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still not totally happy with that tour page—we prefer longer answers, not short—but at least we have OK material for the tour right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T15:08:22.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8650" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8599" CreationDate="2018-12-18T17:20:09.553" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've sent in a request that staff unmerge these, as it can't be done by diamond moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T17:20:09.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8648" CreationDate="2018-12-18T18:01:41.840" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The difficulty with the Tour is that it is trying to do two contrary things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Show the sort of posts communities are looking for and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fit in a relatively small vertical space.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you've mentioned, we prefer long answers and not short ones. This is especially true on sites where one liner code examples don't exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I've expanded the restriction to allow longer posts, so you might be able to find one that's appropriate for your needs. But I'd like to caution that picking longer examples comes at a cost. Longer questions and answers distract from the main point of the page: the mechanics of the site. If a user spends too much brain power one the example posts, they won't learn what the Tour is trying to teach. (Though this does make me wonder what would happen if we did some &lt;a href=&quot;https://jericson.github.io/2016/06/30/usability_tests.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;usability testing&lt;/a&gt; with new users.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another approach that I've tried is to manufacture a tour-worthy question. Over on Biblical Hermeneutics, I wrote &lt;a href=&quot;https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/4046/68&quot;&gt;this question and one of the answers&lt;/a&gt;. Then I took a sock puppet and wrote another answer. I made sure that each of those posts was short, but also (I think) examples of what we want in terms of content. Those posts were the example in the tour for a while. (Currently it fails one of the checks, however. The Hermeneutics tour now uses the generic unicorn question. If I have time, I might see if I can correct whatever the problem is.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, it really is fine to use the generic examples. They are so clearly constructed for the purpose of teaching nobody would mistake them for good examples of content. But live questions might be taken that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastActivityDate="2018-12-18T18:01:41.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8652" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8654" CreationDate="2018-12-18T23:48:38.277" Score="12" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just as it says on the tin:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137608/why-is-grasp-of-hadar-limited-to-once-per-turn-but-repelling-blast-is-not#comment347024_137608&quot;&gt;This comment was left in response to a question closing&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The &quot;Don't Ask&quot; section of the Help Center doesn't explicitly state&#xA;  that design intent questions are off limits (only that open-ended&#xA;  &quot;hypothetical&quot; are not allowed). Should questions like this not be&#xA;  more explicitly called out as not to be asked on that list?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's a fair question, and recommend that we add designer intent questions to that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;list of &quot;Don't Ask About&quot; part of the Tour.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Can we?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Should we?   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-22T02:26:37.340" LastActivityDate="2018-12-22T02:26:37.340" Title="Should we add 'designers intent' questions to the &quot;don't ask&quot; questions list on the tour?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|designer-reasons|help-center|tour|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-19T00:57:22.363" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kr54D.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kr54D.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Caps for sale, fifty cents per cap.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2018-12-19T00:57:22.363" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8652" CreationDate="2018-12-19T01:15:27.167" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we should. There's a few reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're still in a mess with designer reasons: lots of people are over-sensitive to determining a question is designer reasons, but really the only thing that wasn't working is “explain to me their thought process behind why they did that.” The mod team has had to reopen a lot of questions incorrectly caught under a designer reasons crosshair. I'd rather this be carefully filtered after posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, designer reasons only demonstrably failed for D&amp;amp;D and similar. There's some history for designer reasons questions working fine for Fate, but those work specifically because the authors write in enormous volumes and detail about their thought processes and philosophies, often within the pages of the very same books, or within their personal blogs. Other games are yet unknown on that front. D&amp;amp;D doesn't tend to have anything like this happening except on very rare occasions. This has made me disinclined to make blanket statements about designer reasons never being on topic for any system or question, just treating things as they come.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, we don't list everything we do/don't accept in the tour. It isn't exhaustive, it just hits the most common/important things. We have multiple different help pages and topics covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions to avoid asking&lt;/a&gt; and the meta. We ought to handle things case by case and let people know what's off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-19T02:01:01.610" LastActivityDate="2018-12-19T02:01:01.610" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8655" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2018-12-19T15:06:03.230" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Waffles anyone?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zLrso.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zLrso.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2018-12-19T15:06:03.230" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8656" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8647" CreationDate="2018-12-19T19:45:01.187" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It used to be that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; the umbrella tag for all editions/lines/etc., as well as representing the setting(s) called “The World of Darkness” across editions, as you say. We nailed down the taxonomy of WoD tags in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/clean-up-tagging-for-world-of-darkness-related-questions&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt; and implemented it with a call-to-arms in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5001/start-retagging-the-wod-questions-aka-editors-the-retaggening&quot;&gt;Start retagging the WoD questions! (aka &amp;quot;Editors: the Retaggening&amp;quot;)&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, WoD taxonomy is slippery and frustrating, and refuses to sit still. When Paradox bought White Wolf and announced that they were rebooting the oWoD and calling it “World of Darkness”, there was a push here to make our tags line up with official usage. (Again; we've been through this… three or four times I think?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta discussion on that change was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5951&quot;&gt;Changing [new-world-of-darkness-2e] to [chronicles-of-darkness]&lt;/a&gt;. Following that, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; was merged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, but the description text was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/4319/revisions#rev35c7ed71-778f-4314-bdbc-a3a3cb559285&quot;&gt;only partly updated&lt;/a&gt; (revision #24; oh hey, by me—whoops).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In hindsight, it might have been better to stick to our guns and refuse to collapse those tags together, especially since WoD may be going through &lt;em&gt;another&lt;/em&gt; revision and possible name contortion, if Paradox's decision to dissolve WW over its scandals means they're planning to farm out the line again. But it seemed like a good idea at the time and, eh, it works well enough.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, our current taxonomy is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; is the tag for both oWoD/cWoD and the Paradox/WW “WoD” edition, so &lt;strong&gt;yes, the tag's description should reflect that&lt;/strong&gt;. I'll see if I can dig the old tag description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; out of the data explorer (tag merges result in “orphan” description entries that aren't visible on the site, but are still in the database), as a place to start an update for the introduction paragraphs of the tag description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-12-20T19:02:09.520" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T19:02:09.520" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8657" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-19T21:42:57.833" Score="11" ViewCount="358" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question comes out of a discussion of the following question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8652/should-we-add-designers-intent-questions-to-the-dont-ask-questions-list-on&quot;&gt;Should we add 'designers intent' questions to the “don't ask” questions list on the tour?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Dopplgreener's answer he states&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;'...designer reasons only demonstrably failed for D&amp;amp;D and similar. There's some history for designer reasons questions working fine for Fate, but those work specifically because the authors write in enormous volumes and detail about their thought processes and philosophies, often within the pages of the very same books, or within their personal blogs. Other games are yet unknown on that front.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is the case, why is there a blanket ban on designer-reasons questions? Is it simply a matter of the amount of time it took moderators to sort out questions that were asked?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2253" LastActivityDate="2018-12-28T06:18:50.870" Title="Why is there a blanket ban on designer intent questions when the issue is only with a subset of rpg systems?" Tags="|discussion|questions|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8658" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8657" CreationDate="2018-12-19T22:03:53.967" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was speaking personally there and I'll speak personally here too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other games just didn't get looked at. I don't know whether it was on anyone's mind to see whether the practice was viable in other game systems. Almost all the discourse was focused on things happening in D&amp;amp;D designer reasons questions, citing D&amp;amp;D designer reasons questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are 63 questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons+-dnd-5e+-pathfinder+-dungeons-and-dragons+-dnd-4e+-dnd-3.5e&quot;&gt;only six outside D&amp;amp;D tags&lt;/a&gt;. (And two of those are about Planescape and Starfinder respectively, so four if we also skip those.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile there's been a handful of questions about &quot;why are things this way&quot; I've come across in Fate that received successful answers from one of the many places the designers talk about why they do the things they do, which as I mentioned they do at length all the time: in their blogs, in public discussion groups, in the text of Fate Core or various other editions, or in the Fate System Toolkit which is entirely about the philosophy and changing things. D&amp;amp;D doesn't really do that, its designers aren't readily available for asking, an awful lot of decisions get made because that's how things were in an earlier edition, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we get to apply our judgement and common sense to applying the rules, I've just chosen not to act on any of those questions in other games where things worked out OK, and I don't think there's any evidence or reason they need to be shut down there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not speaking for the entire moderation team here, just myself. But I saw some games handling this perfectly fine and not experience any demonstrable failure, so I voiced this as a point against adding the ban to the tour&amp;mdash;I don't want to make that statement that would deprive other games of the opportunity to explore this where it's not failing, and see whether it'll be fine for them or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's nothing to do with diamond moderator workload. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/1204&quot;&gt;Ordinary community members&lt;/a&gt; were advocating for the ban and voted for it, that's all it took to become a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-19T22:27:15.877" LastActivityDate="2018-12-19T22:27:15.877" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8659" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8657" CreationDate="2018-12-19T22:28:06.290" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’d be fine tightening the off-topic ban to where the problem reared its head: D&amp;amp;D and its relatives (e.g. Pathfinder, Starfinder, D20 Modern…). This wouldn’t create any real burden or substantial practical change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a point of order, I think we should always be more concerned about the percentage of questions that cause problems (and their “velocity” of problem spread) than whether it’s “just one game.” The site is dominated by D&amp;amp;D, so it’s fair to make policies to protect the site from widespread problems that just so happen to arise from one game that accounts for an overwhelming percentage of daily posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s just an aside though, not an argument for maintaining a blanket ban. In this case I think it works to tighten the ban to D&amp;amp;D &amp;amp;co. I just don’t think we should believe there’s a new standard to scope policy by game &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; always globally — policy should always fit the needs involved rather than blind precedent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-12-20T01:59:51.407" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T01:59:51.407" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8660" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8657" CreationDate="2018-12-20T03:10:12.110" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The ban should stand for all games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, we don't need to make the rules more complex around here.  &quot;You can't talk about X only for D&amp;amp;D&quot; is both complex and will be (rightly) seen as pretty discriminatory against players of that game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, we don't have a good sample set of designer-reasons questions outside D&amp;amp;D but we have no reason to believe they suffer less from this problem.  While there are a handful of games where there's lots of explicit designer commentary, in 2018 there's a metric ton of D&amp;amp;D designer commentary as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not that it's impossible to answer a designer-reasons question with citations for whatever game, or to not answer it.  It's that experience has shown us that people don't.  As with game-rec questions, I'd love a world in which people would &quot;act right&quot; and answer them constructively - but they don't.  And they don't with designer-reasons.  They just can't resist answering with their own opinions, then the community rightfully downvotes and VtC's and votes to delete and edits, and then all those people get their nose out of joint, and then there's conflict.  Which is why the community said &quot;these aren't worth the hassle, let's stop it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Scoping that down to just D&amp;amp;D, while I understand the noble sentiment, is wrong-headed; the same problems will appear at the same rate and making rules &quot;just against this for D&amp;amp;D&quot; is something we have not ever done and absolutely do not ever want to do on this stack. We don't want to open the Pandora's box of &quot;well, you can't discuss RAW or shopping or reasons or whatever just for THESE games...&quot;  I would resist this with a great degree of vigor and believe that sober reflection on the likely long term ramifications will allow you to come to the same conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In response to the charge that this is speculation, let's look at the few existing non-D&amp;amp;D/PF designer reasons questions.  There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98630/why-is-a-sniper-rifle-wealth-4-in-open-legend-rpg&quot;&gt;Why is a sniper rifle wealth 4 in open legend rpg?&lt;/a&gt; which gets answered by a developer tweet, which is good.  There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103852/why-dont-we-find-out-what-the-frost-shepherds-are&quot;&gt;Why don&amp;#39;t we find out what the Frost Shepherds are?&lt;/a&gt; which gets answered by emailing the designer but also had to have an answer deleted as speculation.  Then there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97975/what-reason-have-the-designers-said-for-why-they-spelled-r%C3%B6tschreck-with-an-um&quot;&gt;What reason have the designers said for why they spelled &amp;quot;R&amp;#246;tschreck&amp;quot; with an Umlaut?&lt;/a&gt; where community and mods had to delete &lt;em&gt;8 answers&lt;/em&gt; and close the question, and there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86947/why-did-the-designers-move-vengeance-of-samiel-valeren-to-level-6-in-v20&quot;&gt;Why did the designers move Vengeance of Samiel (Valeren •••••) to level 6 in V20 Dark Ages?&lt;/a&gt; where the accepted answer begs the question and when in a comment someone says &quot;but why&quot; they reply &quot;ask the developers.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a smaller sample set but it seems just as diseased as the large D&amp;amp;D sample sets. In conjunction with the difficulty of enforcing a selective ban, I see nothing but wishful thinking in favor of this change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2018-12-21T04:08:03.487" LastActivityDate="2018-12-21T04:08:03.487" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8661" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8663" CreationDate="2018-12-20T15:46:53.040" Score="1" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two points in the following topic left me a bit confused and I'd like a clarification:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5001/start-retagging-the-wod-questions-aka-editors-the-retaggening&quot;&gt;Start retagging the WoD questions! (aka &amp;quot;Editors: the Retaggening&amp;quot;)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;First, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. Apply this to any questions which are about the World of Darkness line of games and settings in general. This tag may get used, it may not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, to me, implies that any &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; question should also be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;. But there is this passage&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do not use this tag for questions asking about a specific World of Darkness edition. It's redundant in those cases. Save your limited 5 tags for something else; you will already be using at least 2 of them on an edition and game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does that mean that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; does not require &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; or is it more like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt; does not require it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T18:14:26.010" Title="Question on the tagging policy on World of Darkness questions" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8661" CreationDate="2018-12-20T17:53:13.667" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe you are misinterpreting the purpose of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; tag. I am not familiar with the game(s), but if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; is a strict subset of world of darkness, then the correct tagging behavior is &lt;em&gt;almost never&lt;/em&gt; use both tags on a single question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the first block quote states &quot;questions which are about the World of Darkness line of games and settings in general&quot;. This does not mean &quot;Any question which is about any game or setting in the World of Darkness line&quot;, but rather &quot;Any question which &lt;em&gt;cannot be narrowed to a single game or setting&lt;/em&gt;&quot;. For comparison, look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag; even though dnd-5e is a subset of the overall Dungeons and Dragons line, it has &lt;em&gt;far more&lt;/em&gt; questions because most questions are about a specific edition. Indeed, if you look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons+dnd-5e&quot;&gt;questions with both tags&lt;/a&gt; you will find an even smaller number, and many of them were simply closed before the tags could be corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The primary reason to include both the general tag (i.e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;) and the more specific tag (i.e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;) would be if you're asking a question that also involves another World of Darkness game that you're comparing to Vampire. Even in that situation I still would rather list only the relevant games without tagging world-of-darkness as a whole, except if the tag limit would be reached in which case I would switch to world-of-darkness alone without any of the specific game tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T17:53:13.667" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8661" CreationDate="2018-12-20T18:07:45.970" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;That tagging proposal was written in 2014. World of Darkness tagging was updated again in 2015, making that 2014 tagging schema out of date as a reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the 2014 proposal (which I wrote) the idea was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; as a whole-of-series tag, which in turn contains&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, the schema was to tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/old-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;old-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;old-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; at the time. Tagging series plus edition isn't something we do for D&amp;amp;D questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7461/1204&quot;&gt;but that's a D&amp;amp;D-specific tagging policy&lt;/a&gt; that doesn't extend to any other games, where we will frequently tag with both the series and the edition to aid discoverability according to what makes sense at the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then in 2015, Onyx Path did some rebranding: &lt;em&gt;Old World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; was rebranded to &lt;em&gt;Classic World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;New World of Darkness 2e&lt;/em&gt; became &lt;em&gt;Chronicles of Darkness.&lt;/em&gt; During 2015 we needed to update tagging to reflect this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5951/1204&quot;&gt;Changing [new-world-of-darkness-2e] to [chronicles-of-darkness]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe Jadasc's proposal was adopted, so now there's:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for Old/Classic World of Darkness&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; for what was previously New World of Darkness 2e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and no series tag at all.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; So now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; is a game tag you use when asking about the Old/Classic edition, and that second quote in the question saying “Do not use this tag for questions asking about a specific World of Darkness edition” no longer applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means if you're asking about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;, which is also an Old/Classic World of Darkness game, you now tag it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1: Not having a series tag is weird to me, but I'm not a World of Darkness player and maybe it makes perfect sense to those who do play it, and the taxonomy is for them not me.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2018-12-20T18:14:26.010" LastActivityDate="2018-12-20T18:14:26.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8666" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8668" CreationDate="2018-12-23T00:40:50.757" Score="12" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112439/43484&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asked something I myself would like to know. Unfortunately, it was closed for purely administrative reasons -- viz., because (per a diamond mod's comment) the querent was a suspended user posting via a sockpuppet account -- before receiving any answers. A look through the Help files and a search on meta haven't revealed anything suggesting the question can't simply be reposted... but no one has reposted it. And confusingly, Stack has it categorized as closed for being off-topic. Am I missing something? Can I just repost the question myself?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-23T05:33:35.547" LastActivityDate="2018-12-23T14:32:48.433" Title="An otherwise-valid question was closed because it was posted by a suspended user; is there any reason I can't repost a similar question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8666" CreationDate="2018-12-23T00:59:12.310" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Go ahead; we'll probably delete the original after you do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-12-23T00:59:12.310" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8666" CreationDate="2018-12-23T01:25:31.300" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Go ahead! But please make sure not to just cut-and-paste, and that you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have this problem yourself (so that you are able to meaningfully answer any comments to clarify the question). Ask your own question in your own words, and all will be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2018-12-23T14:32:48.433" LastActivityDate="2018-12-23T14:32:48.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8669" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-27T12:29:42.457" Score="23" ViewCount="539" Body="&lt;p&gt;Back when I joined RPGSE, I of course noticed how big the D&amp;amp;D demographic is here. And at first I thought, 'Hey, I can just Ignore all the AD&amp;amp;D tags and Watch tags of my games and everyone has fun without negatively impacting the other'. However, then I noticed that there are effects whose source is the D&amp;amp;D5 demographic, but which actually or potentially affect other demographics, to a large extent due to the way RPGSE is set up as a single 'pond' in which everyone swims. Examples of effects that I can clearly remember recently:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pushes to table policies which are inspired by the D&amp;amp;D5 experience, but are meant to influence the whole site, including demographics which are not D&amp;amp;D5 (e.g. assuming/guessing a system when one is not specified, shutting down questions about reasons/reasoning behind a given design choice of a system etc.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Newcomers getting the impression that this SE is dedicated to a single family of systems, and thus being more inclined to seek answers elsewhere (in a way this effect can be self-perpetuating even when nobody does anything wrong).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Differences in relative-per-tag reputation vs. absolute reputation, meaning that the top 10 members who are active in a 'big' tag will quickly attain moderator privileges, while even the top member of a 'small' tag who answers every new question will still take a long, long while to unlock significant privileges. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People answering questions not by describing the way things are/done/etc., but by describing how they aren't this-or-that-D&amp;amp;D-expectation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'm inclined to believe that there are other similar effects which I either forgot or didn't notice yet; feel free to add to the list.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I must say that from what I've seen, the community mostly reacted favourably to the objections of small-fandom members when objections were brought up. And yet it looks like an unconscious 'pressure' that still exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the above observations, my question is how can the quality of SE life of small-fandom members be protected from being accidentally diminished by broad generalisations of politics? How can newbie misunderstandings like the one above be avoided (especially since they can only be corrected personally after a newbie &lt;em&gt;creates an account&lt;/em&gt;, which may not happen at all for someone who makes the wrong conclusion early)? How can the relative-vs-absolute reputation discrepancy be accounted for - can RPGSE be 'federalised' or something like that? What other things could be done for these concerns?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-27T18:58:45.370" LastActivityDate="2019-01-21T20:08:22.020" Title="How to improve/maintain the quality-of-life of small fandoms in the face of a dominant big fandom on an open Stack Exchange?" Tags="|discussion|policy|reputation|new-users|community|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8670" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8669" CreationDate="2018-12-27T16:58:33.703" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The best thing you can do is be the change you want to see&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Encourage the people who you interact with on RPG.SE to play those other games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In those cases where your encouragement is successful, the chances are that people new to a given game will have questions, and they already know where to ask for good answers to them.  There is at least one high rep user here who does just that.  (Drop by RPG.SE chat on any given day and see BESW's latest offerings).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_pitch&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Elevator pitch&lt;/a&gt; as a tool to sow the seeds of success&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a great opportunity for you to refine or craft an elevator pitch aimed at an on line audience.  Pick two or three games that you want to spread the word about (dare I say &lt;em&gt;evangelize?&lt;/em&gt;) that you love to play.  Refine your pitch.  Spread the good word.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some answers on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/2937/22566&quot;&gt;how to focus an elevator pitch for an RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Aside:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You want to federalize RPG.SE?  Hmm, seems an unproductive line of attack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;this isn't politics SE, and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that's compatible with the SE model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be interested to see other responses to that thought in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-27T17:15:08.260" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8671" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-27T17:42:39.170" Score="4" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was spurred by an edit to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/17196/avoiding-plot-pitfalls-in-star-trek-rpg&quot;&gt;How can I avoid plot pitfalls that are common to the Star Trek franchise?&lt;/a&gt; which consisted solely in adding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-fasa&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-fasa&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-fasa&lt;/a&gt; tag. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I see why this tag was added, the OP said in a comment in one of the answers that they are using FASA's rules, the question in itself is completely system-agnostic, and would apply to every version of the Star Trek RPG (Decipher, LUG and the new Star Trek Adventures that was released last year).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that leaving the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-fasa&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-fasa&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-fasa&lt;/a&gt; tag alone has a potential to be misleading, but I'm not sure whether we should add all the system tags, currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-decipher&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-decipher&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-decipher&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-adventures&lt;/a&gt;, or remove the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-fasa&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-fasa&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-fasa&lt;/a&gt; and keep only the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does the community think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: In my opinion, the potential duplicate isn't really about the same problem. The duplicate was about someone needing advice on how to design pirate adventure in D&amp;amp;D4 and wondering if they should broaden their question since you can have pirate adventures in other games. Here, the question is about problems that are very specific to the Star Trek universe (I don't know many other games with transporters, for example), but not tied to a specific system since those problems can crop up in any version of the Star Trek RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48417" LastEditorUserId="48417" LastEditDate="2018-12-28T12:46:47.930" LastActivityDate="2018-12-29T05:00:19.953" Title="For general 'universe' questions, should we keep a generic 'universe' tag or tag all the various systems available for the game?" Tags="|discussion|tags|editing|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2019-01-02T11:40:50.387" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8671" CreationDate="2018-12-27T18:43:31.180" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sometimes the rules are there to help.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Knowing the system, and even the version, is important to properly answer questions that might seem system-agnostic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's suppose the Modiphius Star Trek system had a sidebar talking about ways to work around or with the common plot spackles of the show, like transporter abuse or warp drive tinkering, using mechanics specific to the Modiphius 2d20 engine. Even if those exist, how useful are they to someone playing FASA Star Trek, without additional work on someone's part to bridge the gap?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, if that guidance exists somewhere in the body of rules and discussion for FASA Star Trek, it's not too helpful for someone to just say &quot;nothing helpful from Modiphius on it, here's my house rules&quot; because that can easily be read as: there's nothing helpful out there, full stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So on this question, the two tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/star-trek-fasa&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;star-trek-fasa&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;star-trek-fasa&lt;/a&gt; are both useful - the problem is fairly universal to plotting in Star Trek, so it's open to anybody with expertise in a Star Trek RPG. But if the problem is solved in another Star Trek system, then people who know that will also know they need to express it in terms useful to someone playing FASA Star Trek.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2018-12-29T05:00:19.953" LastActivityDate="2018-12-29T05:00:19.953" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8669" CreationDate="2018-12-27T22:56:04.773" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Be the small-games advocate on-stack you want to see on-stack&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; overwhelmingly represented on the site, but I don't believe it's a result of any artificial mechanism to monopolize the stack for D&amp;amp;D. It's more a combination of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the actual larger audience for D&amp;amp;D - if you look at a general-audience convention like GenCon, D&amp;amp;D&amp;amp;Pathfinder outnumbers the next most popular system 10 to 1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a disproportionate frequency of questions about D&amp;amp;D by the average D&amp;amp;D player; among other reasons, D&amp;amp;D is a mass-market RPG and more D&amp;amp;D players are first-time players who have no community to turn to for answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;be a voice in discussions on meta, otherwise people with &quot;the average experience&quot; will predominantly weight D&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if you refer players of your preferred systems to the site, mention how they can filter by tags and ignore D&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if answering a question from your preferred systems, or heck, even seeing a D&amp;amp;D question, sparks an idea for a Q&amp;amp;A combo in your preferred system, jump on that sucker&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if people are taking their D&amp;amp;D experience and being Dunning-Kruger experts in a question about your preferred systems, downvote them and comment about how it doesn't look like their answer is about the system in the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;if a fairly new user (like, hand-wave new) tries to answer a question about your preferred system like it's a D&amp;amp;D question, do the usual &quot;welcome to the site take the tour&quot; bit and also mention that this site discusses a lot of systems, not just D&amp;amp;D, and you can tell by the system tags what system a question is about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone who's worked the score for a year and would still be in four digits if not for the occasional D&amp;amp;D byblow, I can't really speak to concerns there, other than to say that I came in expecting a marathon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2019-01-07T02:55:17.700" LastActivityDate="2019-01-07T02:55:17.700" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8674" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8657" CreationDate="2018-12-28T06:18:50.870" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The blanket ban should apply to all systems because [designer-reasons] is equally unhelpful to all systems.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The extra moderation effort on designer reasons is a good reason to ban them on it's own, but the tag in general isn't useful to the site, and encourages question-asking behaviour that is specifically called out in the Help Center as bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't feel that there's any practical use in asking about the designer's intent directly in a question. Our overall goal here is to help solve people's RPG problems, and outside of &quot;I'm curious about the reasons for this&quot;, there's no problem statement that requires designer reasons to answer. What the designers thought about a rule isn't really relevant to solving a problem, how to solve the problem is. Like it says in the Help Center, curiosity isn't a problem that we solve here. Also, as we established in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3526/do-authors-overrule-users&quot;&gt;meta question about how to handle designer quotes&lt;/a&gt;, authoritative sources on their own are just sources, and not answers in themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To illustrate this, I'm going to grab a couple well-rated [designer-reasons] questions at random from the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44893/why-is-there-a-saving-throw-for-each-ability-score&quot;&gt;Why is there a saving throw for each ability score?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is asking about how the Str, Cha, and Int ability score saving throws can be used in 5e. Quotes from the designers are relevant to the &lt;em&gt;solution&lt;/em&gt;, since they can explain future plans for the edition, but the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; isn't inherently about the designer reasoning. When asking the question, an equally-valid answer could have been &quot;Oh, on such-and-such a page, this is all explained&quot;, without ever referring to the designer's reasoning. Since tags are not intended to restrict answers, applying the designer-reasons tag here didn't add anything to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100392/have-the-developers-of-dd-5e-explained-why-they-made-opportunity-attacks-work-t&quot;&gt;Have the developers of D&amp;amp;D 5e explained why they made Opportunity Attacks work the way they do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question explains a few issues that the querent sees with OAs in 5e, but really only asks about why the designers chose to implement them that way. This doesn't propose a problem to be solved, it just posits a complaint and asks people to explain why things are the way they are. As it says in the Help Center, “I’m curious if other people feel like I do.” is explicitly off-topic. If the querent flipped this around and proposed a 3.5-like homebrew instead, with a question on how that would affect 5e in general, that could be on-topic for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've looked through a number of other questions in this tag, and the pattern I've described here continues for all the ones that I've seen. There's the core of a solvable problem, but asking about the designer's reasoning doesn't actually help solve the problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not helpful to the site to have questions that ask us to solve the non-problem of curiosity, rather than asking us to help the actual problem of the game not working the way that people would like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2018-12-28T06:18:50.870" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8675" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2018-12-29T21:09:55.427" Score="5" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;As some people have noted, there are not a lot of published examples of round-by-round combat worked out in the CoD system for many splats.  I would like to post a question along the lines of &quot;what is a good example of how combat works in Demon: The Descent&quot; and then work out an example (no doubt with many helpful corrections from the SE).  Similar questions might be posted for other CoD splats or even other gaming systems.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this isn't (AFAIK) a standard sort of question on RPG.se.  Is it kosher?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44125" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2018-12-29T21:33:10.027" LastActivityDate="2018-12-31T20:11:23.613" Title="Is it appropriate to post a question to illustrate the Chronicles of Darkness combat system?" Tags="|discussion|questions|self-answering|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8675" CreationDate="2018-12-29T21:44:58.010" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It'd likely be too broad, as currently worded&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not familiar with the CoD combat system in particular. However, a question asking generically &amp;quot;How does combat work?&amp;quot; seems too broad, as there can be many different aspects to combat. (Compare this to, say, a question about how a particular spell, magic item, or class feature works in one system.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it could be asked in a form that's suitable to the RPG.SE format if you phrase it more specifically, rather than asking about all combat as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-29T21:44:58.010" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8675" CreationDate="2018-12-29T22:07:38.027" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, sorta.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with V2 that the way you pose it in your post here--&amp;quot;what's a good example of combat&amp;quot;--would be broad and unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it sounds like you've experienced difficulty sorting out combat in D:tD. Or you've helped others sort out that sort of difficulty. So leverage that experience: think of a scenario or combination of elements that gave someone trouble and then pose &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question: &amp;quot;How, step by step, will combat play out when Alice brings her sonic pliers to a quantum spanner fight between Bob and Charlie?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then in the question-post (a) clearly state that this is a real(ish) scenario you/someone had trouble with, (b) what about it gives/gave trouble, (c) this is the way you explain things to players to not only answer the specific question but also to illustrate the underlying principles, and (d) drop a link to this meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That sort of approach has worked for me--&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/92490/23970&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; is a similar sort of example--and I wish you luck with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2018-12-29T22:18:25.090" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8669" CreationDate="2018-12-31T16:21:09.963" Score="11" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask questions about non-D&amp;amp;D games you're interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer questions about non-D&amp;amp;D games you're interested in &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Contribute answers without &quot;D&amp;amp;D bias&quot; to more general questions as well, noting that different games have different approaches (I do this)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no value, and SE central won't support I'm sure, 20-question fragment SEs for low volume games. And even if they did, D&amp;amp;D players would show up there too because the chance someone playing another game is also steeped in D&amp;amp;D is high. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that we're still the best place for focused Q&amp;amp;A on non-D&amp;amp;D games; I ask and answer questions on them myself and I tend to get good answers. Since that's the goal of the site, I find that well enough - we're not a &quot;fandom&quot; really, there's a bit of community formation here but that's not the goal of the site. High quality Q&amp;amp;A is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2018-12-31T16:21:09.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8679" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8675" CreationDate="2018-12-31T20:11:23.613" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the words of Mick Jones of Big Audio Dynamite, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPrPNpzLHIk&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Break it on down — bless you&lt;/a&gt;.&quot; It's so much easier to address these kinds of things when you've got discrete questions at the decision points than in one long work. Your answerers will thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2018-12-31T20:11:23.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8680" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-01T02:52:44.453" Score="13" ViewCount="394" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's New Year's Day in &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulu_Time&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange land&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A distinguishing characteristic of these sites is how they are moderated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;-- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there certainly are &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/a&gt; here, a significant amount of the &lt;em&gt;moderation&lt;/em&gt; is done by ordinary people, using the privileges&#xA;they've earned by virtue of their contributions to the site. Each of you contributes a little bit of time and effort, and together you accomplish much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we enter a new year, let's pause and reflect, taking a moment to appreciate the work that we do here together.&#xA;To that end, here is how the moderation done here on Role-playing Games breaks down by activity over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;                 Action                  Moderators Community¹&#xA;---------------------------------------- ---------- ----------&#xA;Users suspended²                                 23         14&#xA;Users destroyed                                 606          0&#xA;Users deleted                                    17          0&#xA;Users contacted                                  43          0&#xA;User suspensions lifted early                     3          0&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Suggested Edit queue           122      3,047&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Reopen Vote queue               45      3,454&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Low Quality Posts queue         18      2,400&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Late Answer queue                8      1,091&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: First Post queue                33      3,486&#xA;Tasks reviewed³: Close Votes queue               83      5,473&#xA;Tags merged                                      26          0&#xA;Tag synonyms proposed                            24          1&#xA;Tag synonyms created                             26          0&#xA;Revisions redacted                                6          0&#xA;Questions unprotected                            17          1&#xA;Questions reopened                              437        376&#xA;Questions protected                              46        139&#xA;Questions migrated                               10          1&#xA;Questions merged                                  4          0&#xA;Questions flagged⁴                               50      3,582&#xA;Questions closed                                880      1,562&#xA;Question flags handled⁴                         521      3,111&#xA;Posts unlocked                                   19         24&#xA;Posts undeleted                                  53        215&#xA;Posts locked                                     75        645&#xA;Posts deleted⁵                                  681      2,624&#xA;Posts bumped                                      0        108&#xA;Escalations to the CM team                       11          0&#xA;Comments undeleted                              407          0&#xA;Comments flagged                                459      6,627&#xA;Comments deleted⁶                            22,698      9,142&#xA;Comment flags handled                         5,990      1,096&#xA;Bounties canceled                                 7          0&#xA;Answers flagged                                 146      2,652&#xA;Answer flags handled                          1,576      1,222&#xA;All comments on a post moved to chat            567          0&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 3 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 3, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing you all a happy new year...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T17:11:37.103" Title="2018: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8680" CreationDate="2019-01-01T21:00:51.510" Score="9" Body="&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;                 Action                  Moderators Community¹&#xA;---------------------------------------- ---------- ----------&#xA;Comments flagged                                459      6,627&#xA;Comments deleted⁶                            22,698      9,142&#xA;Comment flags handled                         5,990      1,096&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess the diamond mods aren't joking when they say that comment management is a lot of what they do day-to-day. Though the number of community deletions is a  good reminder that we normal users can delete comments through flags and by removing our own when they are no longer needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comparison with other stacks&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because I was curious, I generated a comparison between the comment moderation activity of RPG.se and 3 other stacks that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8680/2018-a-year-in-moderation/8681#comment27784_8680&quot;&gt;@nitsua60 identified&lt;/a&gt; (in a casual unscientific way) as being similar to RPG.se just to see how we stack up. Hopefully the comparison might help give context and meaning to the numbers above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the statistics were taken from each relevant stack's '2018: A Year in Moderation' posts with the exception of one number. Since the total number of comments was not listed in the statistics I had to find it. I made &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/dba/query/958203/number-of-comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this SEDE query&lt;/a&gt; to find the number of comments posted in 2018 that were not deleted. Adding that to the number of deleted comments gave me the total number of comments for the year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|lllll}&#xA;                       &amp;amp; \text{RPG}    &amp;amp; \text{Personal finance} &amp;amp; \text{Database admin} &amp;amp; \text{Worldbuilding} \\&#xA;\text{Not deleted}                 &amp;amp; 41,311 &amp;amp; 26,062           &amp;amp; 41,220         &amp;amp; 90,920        \\&#xA;\text{Deleted}                     &amp;amp; 31,840 &amp;amp; 5,603            &amp;amp; 17,907         &amp;amp; 16,200        \\&#xA;\text{Total Comments}              &amp;amp; 73,151 &amp;amp; 31,665           &amp;amp; 59,127         &amp;amp; 107,120       \\&#xA;\text{%deleted total}             &amp;amp; 44\%   &amp;amp; 18\%             &amp;amp; 30\%           &amp;amp; 15\%          \\&#xA;                        &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;                  &amp;amp;                &amp;amp;               \\&#xA;\text{Deleted mod}                 &amp;amp; 22,698 &amp;amp; 3,690            &amp;amp; 11,349         &amp;amp; 11,302        \\&#xA;\text{Deleted member}              &amp;amp; 9,142  &amp;amp; 1,913            &amp;amp; 6,558          &amp;amp; 4,898         \\            &#xA;\text{%deleted mod}               &amp;amp; 71\%   &amp;amp; 66\%             &amp;amp; 63\%           &amp;amp; 70\%          \\&#xA;\text{%deleted community}         &amp;amp; 29\%   &amp;amp; 34\%             &amp;amp; 37\%           &amp;amp; 30\%          \\&#xA;                        &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;                  &amp;amp;                &amp;amp;               \\&#xA;\text{Flagged mod}                 &amp;amp; 459    &amp;amp; 1,183            &amp;amp; 101            &amp;amp; 136           \\&#xA;\text{Flagged community}           &amp;amp; 6,627  &amp;amp; 1,323            &amp;amp; 3,737          &amp;amp; 2,065         \\&#xA;\text{Total comments flagged}      &amp;amp; 7,086  &amp;amp; 2,506            &amp;amp; 3,838          &amp;amp; 2,201         \\&#xA;\text{% mod flags}                &amp;amp; 6\%    &amp;amp; 47\%             &amp;amp; 3\%            &amp;amp; 6\%           \\&#xA;\text{% community flags}          &amp;amp; 94\%   &amp;amp; 53\%             &amp;amp; 97\%           &amp;amp; 94\%          \\&#xA;                        &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;                  &amp;amp;                &amp;amp;               \\&#xA;\text{Flag handled mod}            &amp;amp; 5,990  &amp;amp; 1,183            &amp;amp; 2,428          &amp;amp; 1,605         \\&#xA;\text{Flag handled comm}           &amp;amp; 1,096  &amp;amp; 428              &amp;amp; 1,410          &amp;amp; 596           \\&#xA;\text{Total comment flags handled} &amp;amp; 7,086  &amp;amp; 1,611            &amp;amp; 3,838          &amp;amp; 2,201         \\&#xA;\text{% flags handled mod}        &amp;amp; 85\%   &amp;amp; 73\%             &amp;amp; 63\%           &amp;amp; 73\%          \\&#xA;\text{% flags handled community}  &amp;amp; 15\%   &amp;amp; 27\%             &amp;amp; 37\%           &amp;amp; 27\%         &#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T20:09:03.560" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8682" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-02T14:50:39.023" Score="14" ViewCount="273" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/138010/23970&quot;&gt;Is it possible to remove the attunement property of a magical item?&lt;/a&gt; was originally posted in an idea-generating form that wasn't really a good fit. (See, for instance, &quot;short version&quot; in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/138010/revisions&quot;&gt;revision 5&lt;/a&gt; of the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the question was on hold SevenSidedDie edited it down to a form that fit the Stack pretty well and asked OP if this question suited them: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I’ve cut this down to the kind of question RPG.se accepts, to demonstrate what the site is focused on: it doesn’t ask for ideas or suggestions, just facts. Before proceeding further: Is this version of the question something you’re interested in having answered? – SevenSidedDie♦ Dec 27 '18 at 14:38&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before hearing back from OP reopen votes started rolling in, and I posted the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;it certainly does look openable, but I (for one) am holding my reopen vote until we hear from OP whether this is a question they're interested in. (SSD's comment.) – nitsua60♦ Dec 28 '18 at 4:54&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which received five up votes. And there the post sat for a week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like today the post garnered a fifth up vote, got an answer, and two close-votes all in a couple of hours. So I closed it and ask you all this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should this post be closed or open? Should we have the question open in a Stackable state, but not knowing whether it's OP's actual question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-03T04:37:38.707" LastActivityDate="2019-01-10T20:04:46.580" Title="Should this question be reopened (when we don't know if it's OP's actual question)?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8682" CreationDate="2019-01-02T15:02:48.257" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Question as currently written is answerable and should be open.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SevenSidedDie made changes to the question.  The question after editing fits the stack and is answerable.  If there are objections to the edit, then it should be rolled back and discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Should edits to the question be used as proposed changes?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think so.  The edits to the question can be rolled back, but that does not make them proposed changes.  They're the actual changes until rolled back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is it the original question of the OP?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No.  It's the interpretation of the editor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastActivityDate="2019-01-02T15:02:48.257" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8682" CreationDate="2019-01-02T15:03:31.177" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation: leave it closed until the OP responds&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I prefer to approach this kind of situation with the idea that a person is involved, not simply a question.  If the person isn't interested enough to engage or respond, then the question need not attract further effort from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Devil's Advocate: if one other person finds it useful, re open&#xA;This approach looks at this SE as a long term resource(a library of&#xA;questions with good answers).  With this view point, if some other&#xA;people find it useful, we further that goal of the stack by reopening&#xA;and answering a valid (edited) question.  (Colin &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8683/22566&quot;&gt;addresses this in&#xA;his answer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the two approaches, though this one has merit, I recommend &amp;quot;leave it closed until OP responds&amp;quot; because I'd rather see folks that ask questions engage with the rest of the participants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bottom Line&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's worth their time to come back and engage, then it's worth our time to reopen.  Not before.   Someone who engages and participates can re-ask / carry the water if the topic is worthy enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-10T20:04:46.580" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8685" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8682" CreationDate="2019-01-02T18:17:07.887" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Leave it closed until the OP comes back&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've thought about this from a lot of potential stack-philosophy angles, but I keep coming back to what I think is a very compelling practical reason not to reopen this question without confirmation from OP: it has potential to make a mess and no significant benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider what would happen if, after editing the question into essentially a new question, OP comes back a couple days later to a bunch of answers, and then they comment to tell us that they completely disagree with the change and that it is not the question that they intended to ask. We then have two options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Revert the question to reflect the original intent, even if it results in the question's reclosure.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep the question around as-is and have no support from OP for the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither option is good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;#1 would invalidate any answers to the edited question by changing it back to the old question which is something we try to avoid explicitly here. That is a complete mess and requires comments, edits, and possible deletions of answers and nobody wants to deal with that. Also, a bunch of wasted time and effort has gone into answering a question only to have it changed (back) and closed again.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;#2 would result in essentially removing the ownership of the question to the editors and thus removing the original driving force and source of information from the Q&amp;amp;A process. Taking a question and having an editor completely change it then reopen it means that OP's problem is no longer (guaranteed) to be represented by the current question. That means that if there are any further questions or suggestions for improvement or inclarities, OP will likely not be able to help clarify them. And, honestly, even if they can provide the information, what motivation would they have for doing so given that the comments on &amp;quot;their&amp;quot; question no longer has any bearing on the actual problem they wanted to solve? None. So in the end you create a question divorced from the person and the problem that inspired it. And we know from experience that the best Q&amp;amp;As come from questions that have an actual problem experienced by an actual person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On the other hand, waiting for OP to clarify has none of the above issues and results in a clear and unambiguous result and a better stronger question (and thus likely better answers as well). The only cost is a bit of patience.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What if OP never comes back?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they never come back, the Q&amp;amp;A isn't going to help them anyways and some of the same issues from #2 above crop up again. But the biggest issue is that there is never any guarantee that OP won't come back. I've seen posters come back after weeks, even months of inactivity to comment/edit on a closed question of theirs. And, of course, the longer they are gone, the more hassle it will be if they want changes reverted back. There is no point at which we can read the future and say &amp;quot;OP is not coming back&amp;quot; to a degree of certainty that we should be making decisions based off of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What if I really want to ask and/or answer the edited version of the question?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the issue at hand is something that you want an answer to and comes from a problem you also have, ask it yourself! You are welcome to ask a modified version of the closed question that fits the Stack format and fixes the issues present in the original. Then you can support and clarify it and you can even answer it yourself if you have a good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't have the issue and the question was a really good one, someone will likely come along and ask it in the future. If it doesn't get asked again then it just isn't something people find that useful and nothing is really lost by not having it in our database.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In the end, the Stack is much better served by just being patient and waiting to confirm that edits that transform a question into a new one still represent what the poster is trying to say. Doing otherwise results in messes, sticky questions, and very little benefit.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - I'd even argue that pursuing this option goes against a core philosophy of the Stack system which is that answers are more valuable than questions.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;While there is a tension between having “enough” questions and a bunch of amazing, highly skilled answerers twiddling their thumbs waiting around for something to do, in the long run we’d much rather err on the side of having interesting and on-topic questions for these folks to sink their teeth into.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;We feel that the world is awash in questions, but not answers. Answers&#xA;are the real unit of work in any Q&amp;amp;A; system. Therefore, the only&#xA;logical thing to do is to maximize the happiness and enjoyment of&#xA;answerers. If this means aggressively downvoting or closing unworthy&#xA;and uninteresting questions, so be it. Without a community of people&#xA;willing to answer questions, it really doesn’t matter if there are&#xA;questions at all, does it?&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;By valuing a question we don't even know anybody is asking over answers and answerers we are subverting the value that the Stack system attempts to place on the answers and answerers.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-02T19:18:37.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8680" CreationDate="2019-01-02T19:44:53.573" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm curious about this &quot;Users destroyed&quot; action, which is apparently a daily occurrence for mods even though I've never heard of it. Is there an explanation for it somewhere?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2019-01-02T19:44:53.573" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8687" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8680" CreationDate="2019-01-03T02:50:27.817" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in the fact that &quot;comments moved to chat&quot; for the community is 0 - I know I've gotten into a back-and-forth that got long enough that I was automatically prompted to move comments to chat (and did so). I suppose that may have been more than a year ago, but surely it's happened to someone else since? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T02:50:27.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8688" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-03T05:55:25.240" Score="7" ViewCount="292" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have asked several questions which contain side questions. For example, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138348/can-pact-of-the-chain-warlocks-familiars-particularly-imps-and-sprites-attune&quot;&gt;a question regarding familiars using magic items&lt;/a&gt;, I asked&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What would be the best magic item(s) to give an imp (for maximum chaos)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;as part of my original question, and was rebuffed for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every time I've included similar things people have told me I can't do that. And I imagine that it would be very enjoyable for someone to read though the magic items and imagine the sort of crazy things imps could do with them. I think it would make answering the question entertaining.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that this site is a rules site. But I want to include goofy side things that aren't essential to the question, because that should make the questions more fun to answer and the answers more entertaining to read. And I really don't see any reason to not include them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So please explain the reasoning behind this rule. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48698" OwnerDisplayName="Josiah Riggan" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:00:57.930" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:00:57.930" Title="Why doesn't this site allow opinion-based side questions?" Tags="|support|questions|on-topic|policy|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8688" CreationDate="2019-01-03T07:30:56.567" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not just rules&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to get that misconception out of the way first: this isn’t a rules site. We handle many types of questions, so long as they can, in theory, have a “best” answer. We allow answers based on &lt;strong&gt;facts&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; based on &lt;strong&gt;experience&lt;/strong&gt; with a working solution. Or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That lets us handle a much wider variety of questions than just rules questions. Check out our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt; tag sometime for an example of one type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;One question per post is non-negotiable&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We only do one question per post. That’s required so that the topic of each page is &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; topic. This is required so that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;our database is well organized and searchable&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;no questions are hidden from searching and sorting inside other questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answers are all competing to answer the same question (instead of some answering one part and some answering a differing thing)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answers are all on the same topic, so they can be compared “apples to apples” and scored on an even playing field&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There’s also a benefit for the asker: your one question gets the full attention of everyone on that page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The alpha and omega of any site rule or feature is how it supports the creation of a well-sorted database of clear questions, each with a well-sorted list of competing solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one question per post rule is a key site rule supporting our database project. It’s why we have quality answers to provide, which is why you and others come here at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The site provides multiple posts instead&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site welcomes multiple questions though: we are encouraged to make multiple posts when we have multiple questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So instead of jamming multiple discrete questions into one post, we get to post them as multiple separate question posts. Each question gets its own votes, and the full attention of any answerers who are reading it, without distractions from “bonus” questions or fun side things. The end results are better for the asker, and make for a more orderly, easier to read site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, each separate question post must be on-topic for the site; on the plus side, posting them separately makes it much clearer, faster, which questions are on topic and which off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We hate fun&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, not really, but we’re on a mission here. We’re &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; enjoying asking and answering questions, and wouldn’t be here if we didn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding different ideas of “fun” than that just interferes with the mission that is the point of using the site, and which we’re already enjoying just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason you get quality answers here is because we’re focused on providing &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;No chaos, thanks&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding “fun” side pieces to questions just invites people to go off in different directions instead of focusing on the topic of the question. We don’t want that, and have rules to prevent it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to have discussions that involve that sort of fun, that’s fine! It’s a good kind of fun. &lt;strong&gt;Just not here&lt;/strong&gt;, please: it’s not what the site was created to do, so we’re going to stop people who try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are already &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;literal &lt;em&gt;piles&lt;/em&gt; of RPG sites for fun discussions&lt;/a&gt;. Use one of those instead when you want a fun chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T16:12:52.060" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8690" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8688" CreationDate="2019-01-03T08:03:32.443" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I saw your original post. It seemed easy enough, but there were a couple of problems as a question for this format of question/answer site, which has such a heavy focus on creating a big history of answered questions for people to search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The one-question-one-answer format means that if someone has a question like &quot;can imps attune?&quot;, they can easily find the question and the top answer TO THAT QUESTION. If there's a question and a side question like &quot;best familiar to attune with belt of dwarvenkind?&quot;, the top answer might be the best answer to the Imp attunement, and a bad answer to belt of dwarvenkind.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This site seems more focused on explaining mechanics, getting advice for basic game mechanics, and answering technical questions. Brainstorming insane combinations of familiars and items is a fun topic, but it's better suited for forums or among friends.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51136" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T08:03:32.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8526" CreationDate="2019-01-03T08:24:31.130" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question was a long chain of logic around summons, glyphs of warding, and seemed driven by a desire to use a loophole to get around the risks that serve as balancing nerfs for summoners. It's a question truly worthy of wizards, who use intelligence to do crazy things they're not usually supposed to be able to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the downvotes are mostly because you were asking people to check your work, rather than asking for clarification around a mechanic. In essence, you were asking &quot;Is this how glyph of warding works?&quot; and &quot;Is this how planar binding works?&quot; and &quot;Is this how private sanctum works?&quot; and &quot;Is this how magic circle works?&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51136" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T08:24:31.130" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8692" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8680" CreationDate="2019-01-03T19:03:32.070" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Question and Answer moderation: Some more unscientific comparison between stacks&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some more comparisons, this time focused on question and answer moderation. The stacks were picked unscientifically but hopefully the comparisons might add some context to the numbers. All numbers come from the respective &amp;quot;2018: a year in moderation&amp;quot; posts except for the total question, answers, and posts numbers which came from &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/worldbuilding/query/958294/number-of-posts&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; SEDE scripts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|ccccccc}&#xA;\textbf{RPG}                    &amp;amp; \textbf{Mod}   &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Community} &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Total}  &amp;amp; \textbf{Total %} \\&#xA;\text{Total questions}        &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 6,279  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Questions flagged}     &amp;amp; 50    &amp;amp; 1\%  &amp;amp; 3,582     &amp;amp; 99\% &amp;amp; 3,632  &amp;amp; 58\%     \\&#xA;\text{Questions closed}       &amp;amp; 880   &amp;amp; 36\% &amp;amp; 1,562     &amp;amp; 64\% &amp;amp; 2,442  &amp;amp; 39\%     \\&#xA;\text{Question flags handled} &amp;amp; 521   &amp;amp; 14\% &amp;amp; 3,111     &amp;amp; 86\% &amp;amp; 3,632  &amp;amp; 58\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total posts}            &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 20,525 &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Posts unlocked}         &amp;amp; 19    &amp;amp; 44\% &amp;amp; 24        &amp;amp; 56\% &amp;amp; 43     &amp;amp; 0\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts undeleted}        &amp;amp; 53    &amp;amp; 20\% &amp;amp; 215       &amp;amp; 80\% &amp;amp; 268    &amp;amp; 1\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts locked}           &amp;amp; 75    &amp;amp; 10\% &amp;amp; 645       &amp;amp; 90\% &amp;amp; 720    &amp;amp; 4\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts deleted}         &amp;amp; 681   &amp;amp; 21\% &amp;amp; 2,624     &amp;amp; 79\% &amp;amp; 3,305  &amp;amp; 16\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total answers}          &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 14,246 &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Answers flagged}        &amp;amp; 146   &amp;amp; 1\%  &amp;amp; 2,652     &amp;amp; 19\% &amp;amp; 2,798  &amp;amp; 20\%     \\&#xA;\text{Answer flags handled}   &amp;amp; 1,576 &amp;amp; 11\% &amp;amp; 1,222     &amp;amp; 9\%  &amp;amp; 2,798  &amp;amp; 20\%     \\&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|ccccccc}&#xA;\textbf{Personal Finance}      &amp;amp; \textbf{Mod}   &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Community} &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Total}  &amp;amp; \textbf{Total %} \\&#xA;\text{Total questions}        &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 3917   &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Questions flagged}     &amp;amp; 7     &amp;amp; 1\%  &amp;amp; 1,384     &amp;amp; 99\% &amp;amp; 1,391  &amp;amp; 36\%     \\&#xA;\text{Questions closed}       &amp;amp; 658   &amp;amp; 51\% &amp;amp; 639       &amp;amp; 49\% &amp;amp; 1,297  &amp;amp; 33\%     \\&#xA;\text{Question flags handled} &amp;amp; 459   &amp;amp; 33\% &amp;amp; 932       &amp;amp; 67\% &amp;amp; 1,391  &amp;amp; 36\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total posts}            &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 11188  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Posts unlocked}         &amp;amp; 4     &amp;amp; 21\% &amp;amp; 15        &amp;amp; 79\% &amp;amp; 19     &amp;amp; 0\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts undeleted}        &amp;amp; 32    &amp;amp; 35\% &amp;amp; 59        &amp;amp; 65\% &amp;amp; 91     &amp;amp; 1\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts locked}           &amp;amp; 12    &amp;amp; 4\%  &amp;amp; 305       &amp;amp; 96\% &amp;amp; 317    &amp;amp; 3\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts deleted}         &amp;amp; 786   &amp;amp; 30\% &amp;amp; 1,819     &amp;amp; 70\% &amp;amp; 2,605  &amp;amp; 23\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total answers}          &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 7271   &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Answers flagged}        &amp;amp; 30    &amp;amp; 0\%  &amp;amp; 2,851     &amp;amp; 20\% &amp;amp; 2,881  &amp;amp; 40\%     \\&#xA;\text{Answer flags handled}   &amp;amp; 1,658 &amp;amp; 12\% &amp;amp; 1,223     &amp;amp; 9\%  &amp;amp; 2,881  &amp;amp; 40\%     \\&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|ccccccc}&#xA;\textbf{Database admin}         &amp;amp; \textbf{Mod}   &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Community} &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Total}  &amp;amp; \textbf{Total %} \\&#xA;\text{Total questions}        &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 11541  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Questions flagged}     &amp;amp; 56    &amp;amp; 5\%  &amp;amp; 1,160     &amp;amp; 95\% &amp;amp; 1,216  &amp;amp; 11\%     \\&#xA;\text{Questions closed}       &amp;amp; 518   &amp;amp; 16\% &amp;amp; 2,821     &amp;amp; 84\% &amp;amp; 3,339  &amp;amp; 29\%     \\&#xA;\text{Question flags handled} &amp;amp; 445   &amp;amp; 37\% &amp;amp; 771       &amp;amp; 63\% &amp;amp; 1,216  &amp;amp; 11\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total posts}            &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 25264  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Posts unlocked}         &amp;amp; 4     &amp;amp; 9\%  &amp;amp; 40        &amp;amp; 91\% &amp;amp; 44     &amp;amp; 0\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts undeleted}        &amp;amp; 50    &amp;amp; 17\% &amp;amp; 246       &amp;amp; 83\% &amp;amp; 296    &amp;amp; 1\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts locked}           &amp;amp; 18    &amp;amp; 5\%  &amp;amp; 351       &amp;amp; 95\% &amp;amp; 369    &amp;amp; 1\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts deleted}         &amp;amp; 1,364 &amp;amp; 21\% &amp;amp; 5,016     &amp;amp; 79\% &amp;amp; 6,380  &amp;amp; 25\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total answers}          &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 13723  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Answers flagged}        &amp;amp; 63    &amp;amp; 0\%  &amp;amp; 2,656     &amp;amp; 19\% &amp;amp; 2,719  &amp;amp; 20\%     \\&#xA;\text{Answer flags handled}   &amp;amp; 2,242 &amp;amp; 16\% &amp;amp; 477       &amp;amp; 3\%  &amp;amp; 2,719  &amp;amp; 20\%     \\&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|ccccccc}&#xA;\textbf{Worldbuilding}          &amp;amp; \textbf{Mod}   &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Community} &amp;amp; \textbf{%}   &amp;amp; \textbf{Total}  &amp;amp; \textbf{Total %} \\&#xA;\text{Total questions}        &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 5100   &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Questions flagged}     &amp;amp; 31    &amp;amp; 1\%  &amp;amp; 2,063     &amp;amp; 99\% &amp;amp; 2,094  &amp;amp; 41\%     \\&#xA;\text{Questions closed}       &amp;amp; 579   &amp;amp; 23\% &amp;amp; 1,932     &amp;amp; 77\% &amp;amp; 2,511  &amp;amp; 49\%     \\&#xA;\text{Question flags handled} &amp;amp; 1,031 &amp;amp; 49\% &amp;amp; 1,063     &amp;amp; 51\% &amp;amp; 2,094  &amp;amp; 41\%     \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total posts}            &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 30214  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Posts unlocked}         &amp;amp; 2     &amp;amp; 18\% &amp;amp; 9         &amp;amp; 82\% &amp;amp; 11     &amp;amp; 0\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts undeleted}        &amp;amp; 29    &amp;amp; 21\% &amp;amp; 109       &amp;amp; 79\% &amp;amp; 138    &amp;amp; 0\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts locked}           &amp;amp; 3     &amp;amp; 2\%  &amp;amp; 184       &amp;amp; 98\% &amp;amp; 187    &amp;amp; 1\%      \\&#xA;\text{Posts deleted}         &amp;amp; 552   &amp;amp; 22\% &amp;amp; 1,955     &amp;amp; 78\% &amp;amp; 2,507  &amp;amp; 8\%      \\&#xA;                       &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;        &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Total answers}          &amp;amp;       &amp;amp;      &amp;amp;           &amp;amp;      &amp;amp; 25114  &amp;amp;          \\&#xA;\text{Answers flagged}        &amp;amp; 317   &amp;amp; 2\%  &amp;amp; 2,915     &amp;amp; 20\% &amp;amp; 3,232  &amp;amp; 13\%     \\&#xA;\text{Answer flags handled}   &amp;amp; 1,257 &amp;amp; 9\%  &amp;amp; 1,975     &amp;amp; 14\% &amp;amp; 3,232  &amp;amp; 13\%    &#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T17:11:37.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8617" CreationDate="2019-01-03T22:11:39.007" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I forgot to post it during Winterbash, but Community had a hat too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jsqlE.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jsqlE.png&quot; alt=&quot;Community bot user in a Robocop helmet&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-01-03T22:11:39.007" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8694" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8695" CreationDate="2019-01-03T23:34:27.517" Score="2" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136946/was-the-monster-lore-compendium-ever-updated-after-april-6th-2008&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; is currently hosting an edit war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It was originally posted as a D&amp;amp;D 3.5 question, but with an assertion that the Monster Lore Compendium would be added to the d20pfsrd website. This was odd, because d20pfsrd is a Pathfinder resource, not a 3.5 one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The querent then edited in a Web Archive link to the source of that claim.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;nijineko, seeing the mention on d20pfsrd, edited to retag the question as Pathfinder, presumably assuming it had originally been mis-tagged.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;John Grabanski then edited it again, reverting the tag to 3.5 and changing the SRD mention to link to d20srd, the 3.5 version.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can view these changes in the question's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/136946/revisions&quot;&gt;edit history&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the real story is more complicated than either of those versions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20100625000347/http://community.wizards.com:80/go/thread/view/75882/19546370/Monster_Lore_Compendium?pg=1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Monster Lore Compendium&lt;/a&gt; is a D&amp;amp;D 3.5 resource, so it's probably correct for the question to be tagged as such.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;However, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20100625000407/http://community.wizards.com:80/go/thread/view/75882/19546370/Monster_Lore_Compendium?pg=63&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;linked by the querent&lt;/a&gt;, there really is a claim in that thread that the content would be integrated into &quot;a 3.x project at www.d20pfsrd.com&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't know why people would have been planning to host 3.5 content on a PF site, or if the project ever went anywhere, but that info would be a good start to finding an answer to the querent's original question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's hash out what the question should look like, so as to avoid further edit wars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do we want this question to look?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should it have the 3.5 tag, the PF tag, or both?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2019-01-03T23:47:17.767" LastActivityDate="2019-01-04T00:09:02.013" Title="How should we fix the Monster Lore Compendium question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8694" CreationDate="2019-01-04T00:09:02.013" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Facts as I understand it are: it's a D&amp;amp;D 3.5e resource, the claims were it would get migrated to d20pfsrd. We should reflect that accurately on both counts. Tagging as just [dnd-3.5e] but not [pathfinder] is accurate. Even if someone mentions d20pfsrd, that doesn't make it a Pathfinder question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People were surprised and confused and thought there were mistakes here (either the wrong game or the wrong website), so let's switch it back and acknowledge that yes, that's weird, but not a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've updated that paragraph to say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have read that it was going to be added to the d20pfsrd (yes, d20pfsrd, even though this is a 3.5e resource), though I don't think that ever happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-01-04T00:09:02.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8696" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-04T16:56:51.137" Score="40" ViewCount="2460" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a Stack Exchange site, answers on RPG.SE are expected to be cited and backed up, but what the expectations are exactly can be hard to find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the expectations for Objective answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the expectations for Subjective answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/q/7064&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-04T15:31:56.093" LastActivityDate="2020-06-04T15:31:56.093" Title="What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?" Tags="|support|faq|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8697" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8696" CreationDate="2019-01-04T16:56:51.137" Score="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is a rigorous Q&amp;amp;A community with a mission to build up a reliable knowledge base for future readers. It's sort of like Wikipedia in that regard. To accomplish this mission we need our answers to be clearly backed up so visitors can verify our answers for themselves. Without any citation we are just random people on the internet and our words are worth only so much without any supporting evidence, regardless of what our reputation or standing is inside the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You do not need to cite every sentence, but citation of various statements and positions may be expected and requested by your fellow community members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Objective vs. Subjective&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions are asking for objective or mostly objective answers; others are asking more subjectively for people's experience doing things like running games. Depending on these, your answer will need objective and/or subjective backup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all subjective questions are a fit for the site. Remember, the help center says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What kind of questions should I not ask here?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avoid asking questions that are subjective, argumentative, or require extended discussion. This is not a discussion board, this is a place for questions that can be answered!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means questions that are just debates, discussions, or opinions get closed. However we are not just “RPG Rules Stack Exchange”: there is a lot of value in being able to ask and answer questions that involve more of an element of judgement in them—as long as we can do so constructively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, we have expectations about answers and statements in those answers requiring proof to be constructive, “hard” proof for objective elements and documented experience for subjective elements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective answers:&lt;/strong&gt; These state matter of fact reality that can be verified independently of any person's perspective. Examples include claims about how the rules work, dice statistics, and what a developer has said.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Subjective answers:&lt;/strong&gt; These state subjective reality based on personal perspective, stances, judgement, and experience. Examples include advising the best course of action in making a ruling, navigating a social situation, or best practices for gameplay.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Useful answers will &lt;strong&gt;always&lt;/strong&gt; be one or both of these categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What are the citation expectations for Objective answers?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are pretty much just like Wikipedia: cite your sources. If you are bringing up the game rules, cite the rule with a book and page number or a link to an online representation, and possibly a brief quote, to demonstrate that the rules are what you say they are. If you are suggesting a developer said something in a tweet, link and quote the tweet. If you're citing mathematics, it's best to reproduce your work or cite your sources. If you suggest that something in the game is intended to work or be interpreted in a certain way, cite where a developer or design document said that. Use a citation style of your preference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not every claim you make will need citation. Many things we might say are common sense or common knowledge and nobody will request a citation for them. For many things, however, nobody should have to take our word for it that what's being said is true; we need to show it is. If someone requests citation it's probably needed—revise your post to add that citation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Citing your sources has the added benefit that newer players can go back to the source you provided and learn more about that area of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Not OK: “I'd rule it like this” for mechanics questions with no citation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People ask about mechanics because they're trying to better understand the game and how it works. Anyone can make a ruling, but that includes the person who asked the question, so we're not looking for this content. You should answer with how the game affirmatively handles the situation based on its text and cite the game's text to back up your statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What are the citation expectations for Subjective answers?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are answers drawing on experience to suggest solutions to social problems, best practices, GM and player techniques, etc. Our foundational rule is that these answers must follow the &lt;em&gt;Back It Up!&lt;/em&gt; principle found in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back It Up! means that your answers must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means when you provide a subjective solution you believe will resolve the situation, we expect that you cite analogous experience of how it has worked out in actual practice — your own experience or someone else's. Describing how it worked out is more preferable to describing how &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; it worked out: “these things happened, the players felt this way about it” is preferable to “it worked well”, but either is preferable to no citation of it actually being tried at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The experience does not have to be of the exact same situation, although that would be ideal. Experience of similar or analogous situations is also relevant and helpful, at least to the extent they are similar/analogous enough to be relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Not OK: “Try this” with no cited experience of how it works&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any of us can say “here's what I'd do” based on no actual experience, or come up with something on the spot as an off-the-cuff idea, but our site is not looking for this content. We want to collect tried-and-tested solutions with well-understood outcomes. We don't want your opinion; we want your &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;.  If you do not have experiences you can bring to the table in that particular case, &lt;em&gt;do not answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. Answers not doing so may be downvoted and/or deleted. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/1204&quot;&gt;Untested homebrew is to be avoided.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean that you should avoid indicating where personal preference comes into an answer! An answer explaining &amp;quot;I do this because X, but I've seen others do this other thing because Y, and both work&amp;quot; can provide an excellent overview of a wide yet deceptively narrow topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, answering “How do I handle this issue” with a recommendation to do this, that, and the other without any experience doing it yourself, or having seen it done, or having anything other than “it sounds good in my head” to believe it would help the querent, makes our site worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To apply the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective's&lt;/a&gt; guidance on questions to answers as well, a good subjective answer should tend to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Explain “why” and “how”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be longer, not shorter&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Share experiences over opinions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Back up opinion with facts and references, including specific experiences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-24T19:14:08.200" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-01-04T16:57:24.057" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8698" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-06T10:03:22.137" Score="28" ViewCount="312" Body="&lt;p&gt;As most of our established users have learned, we have a strict tagging policy requiring the asker to specify the game system when asking a question in most cases. In games with substantial changes between editions, most notably &lt;em&gt;Dungeons and Dragons&lt;/em&gt;, we also require the user to specify the edition. Questions that fail to include a system tag will get closed as unclear (unless there is a good case for the question being truly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The problem&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the aforementioned policy is good, many of our questions that'd seem to concern &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; are closed because the asker doesn't specify the system and fails to do so despite requests. The fifth edition is well-known for attracting new players into the game, which can result in people not even knowing what an &quot;edition&quot; is in this context. The fifth edition is also reputed for not being very up-front about being &quot;fifth edition&quot; instead of &quot;just D&amp;amp;D&quot;: see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122247/do-the-dd-5e-source-books-specify-which-edition-they-are&quot;&gt;Do the D&amp;amp;D 5e source books specify which edition they are?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it briefly, I think the &quot;which edition are you playing?&quot; question, while necessary, is a hard one to many players but can be made easier. See my self-answer for my recommendation on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-06T19:17:56.047" LastActivityDate="2019-01-06T19:17:56.047" Title="You can help new users identify their D&amp;D edition!" Tags="|discussion|tags|new-users|game-systems|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8698" CreationDate="2019-01-06T10:03:22.137" Score="25" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommended course of action&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Turns out we have a relatively low-traffic question asking exactly this: see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135571/how-do-i-know-which-edition-of-dungeons-and-dragons-dd-the-books-im-looking&quot;&gt;How do I know which edition of Dungeons and Dragons (D&amp;amp;D) the books I&amp;#39;m looking at are for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it lacks an answer with images! If someone with legal access to DnD books of various editions (especially the latest ones) or images to those would provide one (or edit the existing answer to include images), it would make using that question much easier for future newcomers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, since we have such a question, I wanted to spread it around in hopes people would link it to new users who might need help identifying their DnD edition. Kindly do so and see if it helps!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2019-01-06T10:03:22.137" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8700" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-07T00:48:24.400" Score="11" ViewCount="287" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently gave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/138566/48759&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to a question asking on how the Sleep spell works. The OP was confused about one part of it. As a counter example I wrote a homebrew spell that did work the way the OP thought the RAW spell did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My intent was that it would show why the RAW spell &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; work this way. I was immediately downvoted and given the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question&quot;&gt;homebrew must be tried and tested&lt;/a&gt; response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with that advice if I was suggesting using my homebrew version instead of the RAW sleep. In this circumstance are homebrew counter-examples an acceptable answer or should I just avoid using homebrew unless the OP asks for it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2019-01-07T02:11:58.600" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T10:12:56.257" Title="Is &quot;No, this is what that would look like&quot; an acceptable answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8700" CreationDate="2019-01-07T02:06:58.530" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's not an ideal answer, in my opinion&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than citing any 5e design guidelines (e.g. the DMG's guidance on &amp;quot;Creating a Spell&amp;quot;) in explaining why the &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell doesn't work the way OP thinks, your answer simply asserts that if it did work the way OP thinks, it would be something like the homebrew spell you made up as an example. It doesn't cite any relevant rules; it simply asserts that certain things are true (though you do briefly explain your chain of logic).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, you explain your &lt;em&gt;own&lt;/em&gt; design philosophy in creating a different sort of &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell, but nothing in your answer provides evidence that this is why the current &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell doesn't work that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, your own answer basically states that this &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a homebrew suggestion as a solution to OP's problem (i.e. a sort of frame challenge: &amp;quot;It doesn't work that way, but here's how it could&amp;quot;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this is a cool idea and this is what you would need to do if you wanted it to work that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(...Even though the sentence immediately afterwards claims it's not a suggestion. You're basically saying, &amp;quot;Here's how you could make it work. But wait, I'm not suggesting you make it work this way.&amp;quot; It's sort of self-contradictory and unclear.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if you're suggesting homebrew as a solution to the problem, then it does need to be supported by evidence and/or experience, per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Good Subjective&amp;quot; guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, not simply by &amp;quot;spitballing&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In short, actually designing a homebrew spell is unnecessary to answering the question; it would be sufficient to simply point out any flaws with the OP's misconception of the &lt;em&gt;sleep&lt;/em&gt; spell, and cite the 5e design principles/rules violated by their misunderstood version of the spell.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;A related discussion on meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6683/how-should-i-provide-examples-of-experience-as-support-for-my-answer&quot;&gt;How should I provide examples of experience as support for my answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T01:28:18.110" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8702" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11397" CreationDate="2019-01-07T04:30:24.750" Score="37" ViewCount="274" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, this is kind of an &quot;asking about a problem I don't have&quot; feature, but I wanted to float it out there. As an answerer of unfrequented systems, I've noticed that many questions follow what's come to be expected practice around here - that you tag the system your question is about and you don't have to worry about putting its name anywhere in the title or question body, because everyone will read and recognize the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Except we're a site with a d20 logo and a firebreathing dragon, and not only is D&amp;amp;D the sum total of RPGs to a lot of people, it's houseruled extensively and often enough that I think it's got its own corollary to Poe's Law, in that there is no possible described state of events which hasn't been crowbarred into somebody's D&amp;amp;D game somewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't help that a lot of RPGs have names which might just refer to a game element or procedure of play: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fiasco&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fiasco&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fiasco&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monster-of-the-week&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monster-of-the-week&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monster-of-the-week&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeon-world&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/microscope&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;microscope&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;microscope&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kingdom&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kingdom&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kingdom&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/follow&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;follow&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;follow&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to give tags that are meant to indicate a game system a different color, such that people can see them and think &quot;oh, this tag is there to mean something important and not for organization purposes&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="68612" LastEditDate="2021-02-19T22:03:12.630" LastActivityDate="2021-02-22T11:16:25.737" Title="Can we color system tags to emphasize that they're different and &quot;more meaningful&quot;?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8703" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8700" CreationDate="2019-01-07T16:11:51.563" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have very few rules on what is an appropriate or inappropriate approach to answering questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a deliberate design choice (as in, it’s been built into the site for us, not a matter of community preferences): answer writers are free to experiment and try to answer in the &lt;strong&gt;best&lt;/strong&gt; way they think they can, so that we have a chance of attracting the best possible answer to any given question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, it’s perfectly fine to answer the way you did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it make for a good, clear, well-supported, non-confusing, useful answer? That’s up to voters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; Answers are free to try to solve the problem however seems best; voters are free to vote on the results however they think best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-01-07T23:56:04.880" LastActivityDate="2019-01-07T23:56:04.880" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8700" CreationDate="2019-01-08T01:31:52.267" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no technical rule against answering a question in this way, and I wouldn't say it requires &quot;tried and tested&quot; homebrew.  So it is a licit answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, this is a bad way to answer. You can reword any spell in many different ways, and I would have a hard time finding such an answer helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, your answer does in no way make it clear that you're not suggesting your spell as untested homebrew as an answer (&quot;improved version of sleep&quot; instead of &quot;a comparison point&quot;), and if I had come across it before now I probably would have actioned it myself as untested homebrew.  So if you really intend it just as a comparison point, that's not coming across.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-08T10:12:56.257" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T10:12:56.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8705" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-08T14:44:18.963" Score="12" ViewCount="270" Body="&lt;p&gt;Both of them has a common theme, &quot;how can I get the most of these characters, given these boundary conditions&quot;, but the treatment is very different:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138229/how-can-i-optimize-this-max-languages-build-s-combat-ability&quot;&gt;How can I optimize this “max-languages” build’s combat ability?&lt;/a&gt;  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Both the question and the answer received more than 10 upvotes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138113/if-i-multiclass-my-unarmed-monk-into-rogue-which-archetype-is-best-suited-for-u&quot;&gt;If I multiclass my unarmed monk into rogue, which archetype is best suited for unarmed combat?&lt;/a&gt; &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question was closed, with 8 upvotes split between the question and two answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions provide a frame to work in, like classes, levels and races.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Neither asks for an easily comparable metric, like DPR.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;The closed one was from a beginner, the other from a valued veteran&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Both answers lack any calculations (because the questions were not about DPR, and other things are hard to calculate), so can be deemed opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like answering this type of question very much, &lt;strong&gt;I would like to know how to guide the querents to an unclosed question&lt;/strong&gt;. Without getting too specific on details&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) I &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; hope this is not the main reason for the different treatment.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;2) &quot;Best ranged weapon using Bard archetype&quot; is a helpful question for many people, while &quot;Best ranged weapon using Bard archetype for a 7th level full Dragonborn pary&quot; is probably just for one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-08T17:45:23.717" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T03:56:14.563" Title="Why are 2, very similar optimization questions treated so differently?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8706" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8705" CreationDate="2019-01-08T15:48:08.607" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The Monk question originally straight-up asked for opinions and that is what 4/5 votes to close were for. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Do you guys think its worth it? Should I just go straight Monk since I don't get Sneak Attack, and plan on getting Mobility anyway? Would it be better to just go with Swashbuckler and skip the Mobility feat?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That was 100% valid. The Max-languages question had no such issue. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only way the questions are similar are that they are optimization questions. One was a well-formed question, the other wasn't and was correctly closed. Simple as that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Side note: You can never have too many details in an optimization question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did want to address something you said though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I would like to know how to guide the querents to an unclosed question. Without getting too specific on details2. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2) &quot;Best ranged weapon using Bard archetype&quot; is a helpful question for many people, while &quot;Best ranged weapon using Bard archetype for a 7th level full Dragonborn pary&quot; is probably just for one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way to help an optimization question to be better is to encourage OP to post as much information related to their goals and circumstances as they can provide. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8123/how-do-i-ask-a-good-character-build-optimization-question-for-dd-5e?r=SearchResults&amp;amp;s=3|25.6833&quot;&gt;This meta&lt;/a&gt; is a good starting point at least.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, our goal is to solve the problem of the person asking the question. If that means that we need details such that it narrows the question to being only useful to that person, that is the best thing to do. Better to have a Q&amp;amp;A that solves OP's problem fully and completely but really is specific only to them then one which is broadly applicable but does not help them at all. We shouldn't try to keep questions broadly applicable if it hurts the question (nor should we unnecessarily and artificially make a question more specific).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optimization questions are really tricky and require a lot of information to do correctly. In general, every detail that we can get helps us immensely because of the vast number of options available for builds. I've never seen one get &quot;too specific&quot; and I have no idea what that would even look like. I've seen many, many optimization questions that aren't specific enough (some of them are far from it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also worth noting that no matter how many details the question contains, answers are free to answer as broadly as they would like as long as they directly answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, &lt;strong&gt;we should never shy away from having a question get &quot;too specific&quot; in pursuit of getting OP the best answer to their problem&lt;/strong&gt; and I don't think that such a thing is even possible insofar as it would ever become an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-01-08T19:30:45.107" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T19:30:45.107" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8707" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8705" CreationDate="2019-01-08T16:13:39.817" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;They’re only superficially similar&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two questions are only really similar is asking for build advice in their current versions. They’re different in ways the Stack cares about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The one that was closed needed editing and was closed for good reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The scope of what askers (and &lt;strong&gt;voters&lt;/strong&gt;) are being asked to consider is dissimilar&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if the closed question is suitable for the site now, it just hadn’t been long enough to get reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It was correctly closed as Primarily Opinion-based&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/138113/1&quot;&gt;original question&lt;/a&gt; literally asked for opinions and was correctly closed as such. One of the five votes was for it being unclear, and comments asked for clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other question was well-asked from the beginning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The scope of the closed question is a drag on its reopen chances&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following is an analysis of the psychology of the reader (i.e., potential voters and potential answer-writers), not precise analysis of scope complexity. Few readers will do more than a rough intuitive estimate of how complex the scope is — which as we’ll see, is the point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So now it’s having a bit of a hard time getting reopened due to, it seems to me, its larger area of possibilities for potential answer-writers to grapple with before coming up with a good answer, or even considering whether to answer. It’s asking for which archetype to pick for an unknown future up to 20th, which is 18 levels + feats or ASIs that answer-writers have to at least briefly account for for &lt;em&gt;each&lt;/em&gt; archetype option (else someone is going to come along in comments and say “no, they shouldn’t pick Elephant Mesmerist, it’s a terrible choice because at level 17 it can only hypnotize two elephants, when Trapeez Artist can befriend three by 12th”), with optimised interactions with two other unknown-future PCs. The answers aren’t even being asked for a full build, just the best archetype, but they still need to think about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A full analysis might be necessary to answer the question, or it might not. It’s not required for an answer to be on-topic, but it might be needed for a “best” answer. And the thief could potentially multiclass at any level, exploding the possible full-level builds answer writers might consider before recommending just an archetype.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn’t make it necessarily too broad — a lot of those possibilities are useless branches that can quickly be pruned — but analysis paralysis is real and this question asks for answer-writers to take on a lot of it before even deciding whether to answer. &lt;strong&gt;And same for voters deciding whether to reopen.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linguist question by comparison is cut-and-dried: it is a given set of 19 levels with a wildcard 20th level. Its still a lot of work, but the scope is well-defined and not a matter of reader (or voter) judgement. &lt;strong&gt;Deciding whether it’s well-scoped is easy for voters.&lt;/strong&gt; It had way, way fewer future unknowns for readers to analyse before deciding “I can answer this” or “this should stay open”. Its easy to judge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And all that is stuff that answer writers &lt;em&gt;probably&lt;/em&gt; don’t need to put in their answers, but &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; need to work out to make their answer best. It’s a lot of up-front work even before starting to write. Or voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point, again, is not whether I think it should be open or closed. (Especially since you didn’t ask that; you asked why they’ve been treated differently.) The point is that analysis paralysis appears to be slowing its reopen votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;There’s no one-size-fits-all help you can give&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every optimisation question is different. Useful advice depends on the unique circumstances — not just for what it’s trying to do, but as a question here on a Q&amp;amp;A site. Similar questions may be very different Stack-wise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To help a held or closed charop question with advice, pay attention to the circumstances of its closing. Look at the edit history and comments. Leave a comment asking what’s wrong, if nobody has said. Bring it to meta asking what’s wrong with it and how it can be fixed, and assume good faith, rather than assume it has been closed wrongly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After all, closing is normal here and even when it should be reopened, it’s just normal process in a vote-based system, not a flaw.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T17:55:07.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8708" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-08T22:05:11.100" Score="6" ViewCount="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;Moderators can edit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;the on-topic help page&lt;/a&gt;. (It's the only help page we can edit.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, that page shows up as sans-serif:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V25Nb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V25Nb.png&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of the page in sans-serif font&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However when editing the post preview uses our standard serif formatting we see on posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zj3yk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zj3yk.png&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of the post preview using serif font&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My expectation is the font would be sans-serif in the preview if it's sans-serif on the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This in particular gives some misleading impressions about what the heading formatting's going to look like. Left: nice and bold. Right: not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Chtw2.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Chtw2.png&quot; alt=&quot;serif heading, as compared to...&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aOHfb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aOHfb.png&quot; alt=&quot;sans-serif heading&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-08T22:11:00.737" LastActivityDate="2019-01-08T22:11:00.737" Title="On-topic help page edit preview is inaccurate on our serif-font site" Tags="|bug|design|help-center|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8709" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8682" CreationDate="2019-01-09T03:36:33.983" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Open the question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While others make good points, it's entirely possible OP will not come back. If the question, as edited, is a good fit to the Q&amp;amp;A style of the site then it adds something positive to the site. Should OP eventually comes back, feels the question fails to match what they intended, they are free to edit it (if no answers have come in) or they may ask a new one. Closing the question adds nothing to this site whereas opening it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="20861" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-01-10T18:36:09.430" LastActivityDate="2019-01-10T18:36:09.430" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8710" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8669" CreationDate="2019-01-09T16:53:06.493" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Lobby to restore game recommendation questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, that is something that you can do.  No, it won't be easy.  Change never is.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How to improve/maintain the quality-of-life of small fandoms in the&#xA;  face of a dominant big fandom on an open Stack Exchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game recommendation questions had a difficult time, and eventually died.  One of the Great Features of Game Rec Questions when we still had them was how often non-main stream, or even just non-D&amp;amp;D, games would crop up in an answer.  This would lead me to look up those games and see if there was one I was interested in.  The ripple effect of that could lead to more questions from more users of more other games.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have noticed a significant reduction of exposure to other games since that final decision was made (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747/22566&quot;&gt;the meta on that explained why&lt;/a&gt;).  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8669/how-to-improve-maintain-the-quality-of-life-of-small-fandoms-in-the-face-of-a-do#comment27804_8669&quot;&gt;I am not the only one who noticed.&lt;/a&gt;  If you can convince the community that restoring game recommendation questions is a sound policy, then greater exposure to other games will follow.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yeah, it's a long shot, and &lt;em&gt;we've always been at war with Eastasia&lt;/em&gt;.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-01-20T03:51:03.663" LastActivityDate="2019-01-20T03:51:03.663" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8711" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8705" CreationDate="2019-01-14T03:56:14.563" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just as a bit of food for thought, you say,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The closed one was from a beginner, the other from a valued veteran&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1) I really hope this is not the main reason for the different treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and I think, &lt;em&gt;to an extent&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;from a certain point of view&lt;/em&gt;, it’s a major reason, though certainly not the sole reason, or the main one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what I mean is, there is an element of voters looking for cues that a question will or won’t work, and one of those cues is whether or not an experienced user thinks it’s going to. So because it was my question, implicitly, I was vouching for it, and that seems to matter—I have seen similar effects when I have stood up for others’ questions that were garnering close votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I think that’s fairly reasonable in a lot of cases. Certainly, &lt;em&gt;no one&lt;/em&gt; around here is taking my opinion as gospel writ, nor should they be, but it matters when a veteran user champions a question, and I think that’s fair. It is &lt;em&gt;difficult&lt;/em&gt; to adjudge whether or not certain questions are going to be problematic or not. Having someone whose judgment you trust and who stands up and say “I think this will be fine” can be a powerful reason to hesitate on clicking that Close button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s also not as though I didn’t get push-back; at least one user questioned whether it was valid to have an optimization question without a distinct, measurable quantity to optimize. But I was able to address that point, and I was able to lend my expertise with this site to my claim that it would be fine. If pressed, I could have cited other questions that were similar and had worked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, though, I’ve had questions closed. I have had questions I argued against closing closed. I’ve even decided I was wrong and gone back to vote to close something I’d argued in favor of. I’m not perfect. In this case, it hinged on the fact that the answer space was tightly limited—with race, background, a feat, and 19 out of 20 levels predetermined, there was a really limited answer-space here. Also, fundamentally, I think this site is far better at “optimization” requests that are more conceptual—“how do I leverage and build upon what I have?” “how do I emulate this approach or tactic?” and so on, than it is at literal “how do I have the most &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt; at level &lt;em&gt;y&lt;/em&gt;?” Those kinds of questions tend to be handled better by discussion forums—which can do a dedicated iterative process, improving upon the best results, to try to really establish the “best” possibility. Stack Exchange is good at reporting and documenting those results, but not so much at determining them independently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T03:56:14.563" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8712" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-14T11:11:24.680" Score="8" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted this question a few weeks ago:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/135180/do-monks-have-a-gempukku-ceremony&quot;&gt;Do monks have a gempukku ceremony?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, the second quote in this question seems to answer the question. If you look at the edit history, you can see that I didn't actually posted this quote, it was added during an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This quote is very relevant to this question of course, but I thought it would be better to put it in an answer, because as it is, it looks like my question makes no sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I revert this edit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49685" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-14T13:21:33.390" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T13:21:33.390" Title="My question was edited and now it looks like that the answer is in the question" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8713" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8712" CreationDate="2019-01-14T11:32:05.710" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Feel free to undo the edit if you feel that it changes your question too much. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't say that it make it looks like your question makes no sense, but it adds to the confusion: the first quote says that the monks of Dragon Clan have no gempukku, the second that they do not bother with it, which is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that's your question, if you don't like the edit, feel free to revert it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can do that by clicking on the last 'Edited [Date]' mention under your post, then click on the rollback link on the various edits to your question. For a question that has been edited several times, you can choose which version you want to go back to, which also gives you the possibility to rollback everything and go back to the original post of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GWDv3.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GWDv3.png&quot; alt=&quot;Edited Link&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IacWb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IacWb.png&quot; alt=&quot;Rollback&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48417" LastEditorUserId="48417" LastEditDate="2019-01-14T12:50:07.277" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T12:50:07.277" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8714" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-14T14:48:05.397" Score="8" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/139044/41726&quot;&gt;recent question asking about a homebrew/3rd-party class&lt;/a&gt; has been asked, and neither the 3rd-party or homebrew tags fit (based on their tag descriptions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels weird to me not to have a tag, as it reads like something I just haven't heard of, rather than something separate from the base game. Do we have a solution for this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-01-14T15:32:28.837" LastActivityDate="2019-09-03T23:19:17.947" Title="How to tag 3rd-party/homebrew content that is published?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8715" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8714" CreationDate="2019-01-14T15:18:04.130" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have no tag for content that asks about published 3rd party content and we don't need one&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't see the problem that you are. We don't tag every question based on where in the rules it is found or what adventure it is found in (though we do have some adventure-specific tags I see these as exceptions and not something to try to emulate). Tags are for indicating the content of the question, not its source (with a few exceptions, system tags being one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3rd party content is just content that WotC has not published. That, to me is not a useful distinction that needs to be made. As long as the author has clearly stated where the content came from in the question, then the question is answerable and no further tagging seems to be needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, we had a tag for 3rd party content in the past and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8239/should-we-burninate-3rd-party&quot;&gt;it was eliminated&lt;/a&gt;. Of course that doesn't have to be the final word on the issue, I just don't see the addition of a 3rd-party tag adding anything to our ability to link questions with expert answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do people consider themselves to be experts in 3rd party published content to the extent that they would browse that tag? Would people browsing the site find the tag useful for finding information about an issue they have? Does it improve searchability at all? To me, the answers to all those questions is &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; and thus I don't see a tag as value added here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If the information is needed, put it in the question body&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a reader/editor thought there was sufficient cause for confusion about whether the content was published by WotC or not, they could always put the information about that in the question body itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the question you indicate in your question has been edited to say &amp;quot;Protean Scribe (from Mythical Classes by LPJ Design)&amp;quot; which should be a strong and clear signal that this is a 3rd party source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T15:48:38.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8716" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8714" CreationDate="2019-01-14T16:02:19.017" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no tag for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't have a third party tag. As Rubiksmoose points out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8239/should-we-burninate-3rd-party&quot;&gt;it was burninated&lt;/a&gt; — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7169/should-we-get-rid-of-3pp&quot;&gt;twice&lt;/a&gt;. Some notable publishers (like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dreamscarred-press&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dreamscarred-press&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dreamscarred-press&lt;/a&gt;) might have dedicated tags about their material, but this is rare. This content is neither of these things so it has no particular tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mention in comments you were surprised to see it mentioned because it was content you weren't aware of, but that's not necessarily a problem, and it's not something our tags will resolve if it is. I think editing the body to mention the publisher was a fine way to get the disclosure you're after.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some things to consider:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To someone who only owns one book, any mention of new material in a WotC-published book might sound new and surprising, but we're not tagging each book.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To a lot of players, third-party or homebrew content isn't something that needs to be delineated far away from the first-party content. It's all just content, some of which they haven't seen/used yet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Homebrew content that is published” is just content. Depending on where, how, by who, and how official the stamp on it looks, people sorta-arbitrarily categorise it into first-party, third-party, or homebrew, mainly for reasons attached to stigma around the quality average for each category.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This last point lead to a lot of debates when Critical Role's Blood Hunter came out apparently matching all three categories, despite them being theoretically mutually exclusive. Thankfully our tagging infrastructure kinda just sidesteps this epistemological debate though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-01-14T16:02:19.017" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8717" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8727" CreationDate="2019-01-16T20:00:55.647" Score="11" ViewCount="329" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50424/can-a-multiclass-wizard-copy-any-wizard-spell-they-find-into-their-spellbook&quot;&gt;Can a multiclass Wizard copy any Wizard spell they find into their spellbook?&lt;/a&gt; is a dupe target for a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/linked/50424?page=1&amp;amp;sort=hot&quot;&gt;decent number&lt;/a&gt; of questions. However, I question whether some of them are actually duplicates. The gist of most of them seem to be that any type of question asking about learning or casting spells as a multiclassed spellcaster gets duped to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My problem is that several of the dupes are asking different questions. The wizard class has a very specific method of learning spells (copying into their spellbook) that no other class has a parallel to. I argue that any of the questions not asking about wizards, for example, are already out for that reason alone. The inclusion of a spellbook changes the question and complicates the answer needlessly when trying to suss out the actual answer for any other class combination. Look at the answers for the question above. They are full of fuss and debate over the requirements for copying and for preparing, a debate that has no relevance for any other class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I posit that people searching for one of the duped questions and getting redirected to this one may be pretty confused at how the answers relate to their classes that don't have any spellbook at all and that there are better clearer ways to arrange these dupes to provide the best answers. More importantly, perhaps, to our procedures here is that the inclusion of a wizard and copying spells seems to make the questions different even though the answers remain pretty much the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I do not want, nor do I think we should have a question for every different multiclass combination and level combination. That is not what I am saying. I simply think that multiclassed wizard questions should be isolated into their own  group and something else should be done with the rest of the classes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the questions I think are not dupes (and reasons):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No wizard classes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117610/sorcerer-multiclass-learning-spells&quot;&gt;Sorcerer Multiclass learning spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106653/when-multi-classing-paladin-with-sorcerer-could-i-prepare-paladin-spells-at-my&quot;&gt;When Multi-classing Paladin with Sorcerer, could I Prepare Paladin Spells at my Sorcerer Spell Level (5th level spells max)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has to do with casting from another person's spellbook:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111852/can-a-sorcerer-wizard-prepare-spells-from-another-persons-spellbook&quot;&gt;Can a Sorcerer/Wizard prepare spells from another person&amp;#39;s spellbook?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly think that possibly more of these questions would be better off not duped as well, but I can always ask about those later after these (IMO clearer) examples are talked about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should these question's duplications be redone?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-01-17T13:40:18.490" LastActivityDate="2019-07-03T07:25:10.347" Title="Multiclassing mayhem: should all these questions be duplicates of this question about wizards' spellbooks?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8717" CreationDate="2019-01-16T20:34:10.847" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This sort of question should be marked duplicate, but they should point at a different question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question currently being used as a duplicate target for those questions is &lt;em&gt;strictly&lt;/em&gt; not about the same thing; it is explicitly asking about &amp;quot;copying spells into a spellbook&amp;quot; and not the natural spell progression, while several of the duplicates don't mention wizards at all and thus are about natural spell progression and not spellbooks. The answers to each would likely share a quote from the PHB, but they will differ in other ways especially since the spellbook answer has an even stronger piece of evidence due to errata.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it doesn't make sense for every combination of classes to have a separate question either. Warlocks are potentially worth a special question because Pact Magic is special, Wizards can have at least one special question because they have an extra mechanism to learn spells with its own rules (even if in this case those special rules give the same result), but the other instances of multiclassing and learning spells function the same way and use the same rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117610/37154&quot;&gt;Sorcerer Multiclass&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106653/37154&quot;&gt;Paladin Multiclass&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100336/37154&quot;&gt;Druid Multiclass&lt;/a&gt; should not be marked as duplicates to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50424/37154&quot;&gt;Wizard's Spellbook&lt;/a&gt;. A different question should be chosen as the duplicate target, possibly one of those three being the target for the other two. I personally find the answer on the Paladin question to be the clearest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/111852/37154&quot;&gt;Sorcerer/Wizard&lt;/a&gt; question, I think the better duplicate topic is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106734/37154&quot;&gt;Using an acquired spellbook&lt;/a&gt;, though it's hard to tell for sure because the proposed action is prohibited in multiple ways. However, the other possible duplicate targets seem to focus more on &amp;quot;knowing&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;copying&amp;quot; the spells, and the relevance of that isn't apparent until you learn that &amp;quot;borrowing&amp;quot; a spellbook doesn't work that way in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-16T20:34:10.847" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8719" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8720" CreationDate="2019-01-16T23:49:09.130" Score="11" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;In some questions, it appears people ask a question to get other people to tell them they are correct, or are heavily biased in favour of answers that say that their idea works. For instance, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97011/illusory-reality-and-phantasmal-force-can-i-make-things-only-i-can-see-real/97018#97018&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; follows this pattern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The process (to my imagination) goes like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Guy&lt;/strong&gt;: Wow it would be cool if this existed! But I am not sure if it is in accordance with the rules! I will check on Stack!&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;50 people&lt;/strong&gt;: This does not work.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;Other guy&lt;/strong&gt;: Yeah, this works.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;Guy&lt;/strong&gt;: I will make the other guy's answer right (because I want this to be true).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This rewards incorrect answers, such as the -2 accepted answer in the example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the correct way to deal with this? Should I ignore it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50605" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-17T00:15:16.220" LastActivityDate="2019-01-19T23:50:54.617" Title="How to deal with OPs accepting answers they want to be right instead of ones that are right?" Tags="|discussion|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8719" CreationDate="2019-01-17T00:11:15.897" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately for the hapless souls who offer that &quot;yeah this works&quot; answer when it's wrong, the usual resolution communities use is to downvote that accepted (but wrong) answer more heavily than it would usually see until it's very, very obviously wrong and that readers should keep scrolling, and because it's accepted they can't delete it. Other answers get upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't control the checkmark though and only remove answers that have major quality issues beyond simply being wrong, so querents are free to accept whatever answer they want. We just have our votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's common on these kinds of questions that the querent will also get into prolonged argument in the comments of every single answer to their question that doesn't give them the answer they want, arguing why their original stance is valid and the answer is wrong. If you see that happening please flag it and the diamond moderators will clean up and tell them to cut it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-17T00:18:48.043" LastActivityDate="2019-01-17T00:18:48.043" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8719" CreationDate="2019-01-17T17:11:22.147" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, you should ignore it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this stack in particular, since it is about a gaming hobby and not about a medical question or computer codes that might end up in a public train, accepting that whomever asks the question likes a particular answer better than other answers is just fine.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The votes will tell the rest of the story.  And that's fine too, the stack working as it is supposed to.  There are even badges for having X more votes than the accepted answer, such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/49/populist&quot;&gt;populist badge&lt;/a&gt;.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Highest scoring answer that outscored an accepted answer with score of&#xA;  more than 10 by more than 2x. This badge can be awarded multiple&#xA;  times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not worth worrying about.  Also, if something is flat out wrong you are likely to see a comment, with a lot of up votes on the comment, under either the question or the answer that was selected.  That will be of help to future users.  What isn't important is whether or not &lt;a href=&quot;http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;someone is wrong on the internet&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-01-17T17:17:15.340" LastActivityDate="2019-01-17T17:17:15.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8722" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8723" CreationDate="2019-01-17T22:26:36.610" Score="7" ViewCount="80" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-reaction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-reaction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-reaction&lt;/a&gt; tag currently has no tag info, but there are seven D&amp;amp;D 4e questions with the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reactions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reactions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reactions&lt;/a&gt; is currently used on 92 questions, all but one of which are apparently for D&amp;amp;D 5e. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99553/do-reactions-resolve-before-or-after-the-action-they-are-reacting-to&quot;&gt;The only other one is about &lt;em&gt;Mutants &amp;amp; Masterminds&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/a&gt; I recently found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139301/can-reaction-powers-by-default-be-disabled-as-a-free-action&quot;&gt;another M&amp;amp;M question&lt;/a&gt; it might apply to, which is what made me discover this issue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag info for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reactions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reactions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reactions&lt;/a&gt; tag says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about reactions - an action taken by an entity in response to a trigger happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-reaction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-reaction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-reaction&lt;/a&gt; has no tag info, I can't tell whether it falls under the same category as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reactions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reactions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reactions&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do these two tags describe essentially the same type of thing? If so, should they be synonymized?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-18T04:16:14.937" LastActivityDate="2019-01-18T04:16:14.937" Title="Does the [immediate-reaction] tag describe something substantially different from the [reactions] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8722" CreationDate="2019-01-17T23:08:35.493" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are not the same thing and should not be synonymised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reaction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reaction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reaction&lt;/a&gt; is an action economy element of D&amp;amp;D 5e beside your action, move, and minor action. You spend it to do something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-reaction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-reaction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-reaction&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-interrupt&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-interrupt&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-interrupt&lt;/a&gt; are timings on when a power occurs. They are not an action economy element and do not interact with D&amp;amp;D 4e's standard action, move action, and minor action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have added tag wikis to these two D&amp;amp;D 4e tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-17T23:09:33.787" LastActivityDate="2019-01-17T23:09:33.787" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8724" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8725" CreationDate="2019-01-18T14:14:15.180" Score="6" ViewCount="338" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139296/which-is-more-powerful-an-arcanist-or-an-exploiter-wizard?noredirect=1#comment352218_139296&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt;  about comparing the Arcanist with an Exploiter Wizard. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It got closed quickly, then reopened, now it's getting closed again. Before a full close-reopen war starts, I'd like to discuss the possible problems related to this question here on Meta. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask everyone who sees any problems with the question to state them so they can be fixed as quickly as possible: I'd like to actually play my character on Sunday. :) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-19T03:25:10.443" LastActivityDate="2019-01-19T03:25:10.443" Title="What can be done with my question about Exploiter Wizards and Arcanists to save it?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8724" CreationDate="2019-01-18T14:38:53.950" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a really straightforward question: the two classes are nigh-identical, so you really only need to compare a few details, the faster progression of the wizard vs. the arcanist’s greater spontaneity being the big one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither has any particular impact on “what you want to do with it,” and therefore the questions asking for those details—normally crucial to questions like this—are wrong-headed in this case. It makes me wonder if perhaps the question is being treated generically by people who are not familiar with the material, rather than experts who &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be weighing in here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve voted to reopen, personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-01-18T14:38:53.950" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8726" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8724" CreationDate="2019-01-18T17:05:59.707" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Narrow down your focus and explain your objective&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the two classes are similar, they play differently. It is unclear what you consider to be &quot;more powerful&quot; and that could conflict with my (or the next person's) view of what is &quot;more powerful&quot;. While one may be more powerful in one aspect of the game, the other may be more powerful in another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could start by describing what are your goals with that character, or how you think that this choice would impact your gameplay, or how that would interact with the group.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands, we cannot possibly answer that question without injecting our own opinion into it (compare your question to this other: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6229/is-this-question-too-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Is this question too opinion-based&lt;/a&gt;). While I could easily answer that question, because I would have to rely on my opinion about the rules, it may not be exactly the kind of answer you were looking for, and thus we need clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you asked us &quot;what is an optimal choice for a controller spellcaster&quot; or &quot;what class gives the highest spell DCs&quot; or &quot;what class has the highest damage potential&quot;, those would all be fine and not based on opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21153" LastActivityDate="2019-01-18T17:05:59.707" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8717" CreationDate="2019-01-19T03:23:51.400" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Make a new general question and answer it - then mark those other questions as a duplicate of that instead&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8718/33569&quot;&gt;As Kamil Drakari said in their answer&lt;/a&gt;, most of the questions marked as a duplicate of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50424/can-a-multiclass-wizard-copy-any-wizard-spell-they-find-into-their-spellbook&quot;&gt;wizard spellbook question&lt;/a&gt; are not exactly a duplicate of the wizard one, but they are very related to one another. I agree with Kamil that the aspect of the wizard question involving copying spells into their spellbook makes it slightly different from most of those marked as a duplicate of it (though the &amp;quot;Assuming I can do that, can I cast such a spell&amp;quot; part covers the same ground).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the best solution would probably be to ask a general question about what spell level multiclassed spellcasters can learn or prepare spells at, and then provide an answer that covers that general rule. Then it can serve as the destination of the various duplicates of that question for specific builds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Update (July 2019)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've gone ahead and posted the question, as I suggested: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151000/if-i-multiclass-into-2-or-more-spellcasting-classes-how-do-i-determine-my-known&quot;&gt;If I multiclass into 2 or more spellcasting classes, how do I determine my known/prepared spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also went ahead and updated some of the old questions that had been incorrectly marked as a duplicate of the wizard question to point to my new question instead - though I didn't go searching for any others (if at least to avoid flooding the front page all at once).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-03T07:25:10.347" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8719" CreationDate="2019-01-19T23:44:40.877" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What they are doing is well within the scope set out by the guidelines / rules.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Check out the tour&lt;/a&gt; if you haven't already and nip down to the section on answering:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HYi4a.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HYi4a.png&quot; alt=&quot;Accepting doesn't mean it's the best answer&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accepting doesn't mean it's the best answer, it just means that it&#xA;worked for the person who asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also see this on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/accepted-answer&quot;&gt;the page specifically about accepting answers&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DD44d.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DD44d.png&quot; alt=&quot;Accepting doesn't mean it's the best answer&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It simply means that the author received an answer that worked for&#xA;them personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you can see it again in the tooltip when you go to mark an answer as accepted*:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(*If you want you could even try it on this answer... careful though, you might happen to accidently click it whilst you do, and &lt;em&gt;no-one&lt;/em&gt; wants that to happen...)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nZabZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nZabZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Accept because it solved your problem or was most helpful&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Click to accept this answer because it solved your problem or was the&#xA;most helpful in finding your solution (click again to undo)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What is the correct way to deal with this? Should I ignore it?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't say you should ignore it, but you shouldn't let it cause you to write off a question / answer pair automatically either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider it when deciding upon how to cast your vote and see if it being helpful to the OP is enough to influence your decision, then vote as you see fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49360" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-19T23:50:54.617" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8729" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-20T16:34:17.950" Score="7" ViewCount="195" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should spell names be capitalized and/or italicized? I've seen examples of both:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An example of capitalizing a spell name (command -&gt; Command) — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136035/&quot;&gt;How does the Staff of the Python work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An example of the opposite editing (Arcane Lock -&gt; arcane lock) — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47020/&quot;&gt;What mundane means can overcome Arcane Lock?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the preferable format of a spell name, or a game term in general?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2019-01-24T02:50:54.467" Title="How should we format spell names?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8729" CreationDate="2019-01-20T16:40:40.240" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Spell names should use reasonable conventions if not doing so would impede clarity.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the example of D&amp;amp;D 5e, spell names are always &lt;em&gt;lowercase italics&lt;/em&gt; when included in the text (like &lt;em&gt;mage hand&lt;/em&gt;) and sometimes Uppercase Normal when appearing in lists or tables (like Mage Hand). Either is appropriate, though &lt;em&gt;lowercase italics&lt;/em&gt; is more frequently used. There should be no reason to edit another user's post to change between either format, since it's a matter of style that can be justified either way from the source material and doesn't get in the way of clarity and comprehension. The only issue is if the post uses a style that prevents comprehension, such as code formatting (like &lt;code&gt;mage hand&lt;/code&gt;) or no styling at all (like simply mage hand), and even then only if the context would be lost (it's fairly clear what mage hand is, but not necessarily what light is). In these cases, it's not that the styling is unacceptable or badwrongformat; it's that the lack of styling impedes legibility and comprehension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To generalize, since D&amp;amp;D 5e is not the only roleplaying game, style conventions should be tailored to the expertise of the users who will be writing and reading the posts for their game of choice; an expert within such a system would know whether the formatting in use in such a post helps or harms clarity. In other words, an expert within a particular game system should ensure that spell names are being formatted according to reasonable conventions that players of that game would comprehend. If there is no standardized style or if a post simply makes no effort to disambiguate spell names and this scenario leads to confusion, either italics or capitalization (both acceptable forms of title/name-emphasis in English) should be edited to distinguish the spell name from normal text. If there is no existing problem with the clarity, however, there's nothing to fix, even if the spell names are otherwise not formatted in the most conventional way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, it's not that there's one right way to format spell names, in general or per game. It's that there's a wrong way to do it, which is to not clarify these names at all in any meaningful way, and any alternative to that which preserves the legibility of the post is fine and preferred. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8731/32426&quot;&gt;the answer by SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt; for more information on the clarity motivation and SE policy enforcing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-01-24T02:50:54.467" LastActivityDate="2019-01-24T02:50:54.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8729" CreationDate="2019-01-20T17:45:13.120" Score="21" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We do not enforce &lt;em&gt;style&lt;/em&gt;, only &lt;em&gt;clarity&lt;/em&gt;, as a matter of basic SE principles&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll quote myself from our proposed FAQ, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/is-there-a-style-guide-for-posts&quot;&gt;Is there a style guide for posts?&lt;/a&gt;, with new emphasis:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;… [spell names, &amp;amp;c] &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; be changed through editing, &lt;strong&gt;because both are correct and switching the style doesn't make a post even a little bit easier to read.&lt;/strong&gt; This is similar to AmE and BrE spellings: it's not appropriate to edit someone's spelling of “realise” to “realize” or vice versa, since &lt;strong&gt;it wasn't wrong in the first place&lt;/strong&gt;. As a rule of thumb, we try to be consistent with the original author's spells and spelling conventions when doing an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't edit for style taste here for two big, important reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It doesn't make posts even a little bit easier to read.&lt;/strong&gt; This is a hardcoded reason to reject edit suggestions, which we should all remember from our time before getting full edit privileges, and be occasionally reminded of when we review the suggested edit queue. The suggested edit process teaches us how to be good editors, and how it taught us to edit is supposed to be remembered even when we're not forced anymore by the site to follow it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It damages the experience of newer users for zero gain to the site.&lt;/strong&gt; We have a number of metas from new users — the small percentage confident enough to speak up — posting here to ask why their style choices were rejected by higher-rep editors. They naturally assume that we know something they don't and ask what they did wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These metas are responded to with reassurances that they did nothing wrong — that it was actually the higher-rep editor who did something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't annoy, anger, confuse, or frighten our new users for no good reason. There's enough arcane knowledge about how to use the site that they're supposed to absorb organically by using it and observing how others use it, please don't hinder their learning by making changes to their posts that are only noise, not teaching.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Therefore: Edit spell styling only when it objectively improves the post&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Changing style to match an arbitrary standard which officially doesn't exist here is harm, not improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If spells in a post are all lower case with no styling, &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; that makes it hard to read the post, then go ahead and style them using whichever arbitrary style convention is most suitable in context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone wants to write “&lt;em&gt;magic missile&lt;/em&gt;” in a D&amp;amp;D 3e post, that's fine. If they write “Magic Missile” in an AD&amp;amp;D post, that's fine too. If they want to write “&lt;strong&gt;magic missile&lt;/strong&gt;” that's also fine. Etcetera in various combinations. If they want to write plain “magic missile” that can also be fine, depending on the context (often in titles it's not unclear at all), but sometimes isn't (you'll know it when you see it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Post Scriptum: Clarity's needs can go both ways&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes formatting will actually make a post worse to read, not better. I remember a post that &lt;strong&gt;Formatted&lt;/strong&gt; every instance of a game term, in a post heavy with them, so that it looked like a leopard that had rolled in salt and pepper. It was quite hard to read. Some of those were unnecessary for clarity, and the post's clarity and ease of reading were substantially improved by removing some of the formatting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The guiding principle is always clarity: is this edit improving the ability for others to understand and agree on what these words mean, so that voting and other site things can proceed accurately and smoothly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-20T19:32:36.480" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8669" CreationDate="2019-01-21T18:00:33.380" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What &lt;em&gt;We&lt;/em&gt; can do&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issues you bring up are valid and concerning. I find it interesting that most of the answers to it are focused on what you, the OP, can do rather than what this community can do together or what can change systemically. You have posted that you and other players of non-D&amp;amp;D systems feel trivialized and less influential, and what answers have you gotten? &lt;em&gt;That you should be more influential!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question and the answers you've received are a microcosm of some of the issues you bring up, i.e. the site is by default D&amp;amp;D material and all other systems' users must make a disproportionate effort just to partake in &lt;em&gt;normal&lt;/em&gt; activity on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So what &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; we do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Create a [not-D&amp;amp;D] tag. This is easy. Somebody please do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Everybody: when you see questions about non-D&amp;amp;D systems click on them and upvote them. Unless it is clearly a poorly worded question there's no reason not to upvote it. Give rep to the Non-D&amp;amp;D users just for being here and adding diversity to this stack. We need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Everybody: Read the answers to these same non-D&amp;amp;D questions and upvote deserving answers.  If the question is well worded and has good citations anyone should be able to determine its validity and upvote it, regardless of expertise.  If you can't make an informed upvote, don't upvote at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Everybody: When asking questions that are not specific to D&amp;amp;D (they may be about dice rolling, role playing, GMing, player issues, group dynamics, etc) keep unnecessary D&amp;amp;D references and tags out of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Explanations:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The [not-D&amp;amp;D] tag will both make the intention of the site clear: we allow, welcome and facilitate questions about non-D&amp;amp;D material; and it will make the sorting of non-D&amp;amp;D material easy for those who choose to follow the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even just 20 regular users taking the effort to tag non-D&amp;amp;D material can have an impact on the tag-relative reputation concern brought up in the question and help even out the rep that is awarded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Same as 2&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making an effort to leave out D&amp;amp;D references and tags when they are not relevant makes for a more inclusive question and answer experience. In other words, just because your issue came up while playing D&amp;amp;D don't assume it's exclusive to D&amp;amp;D. And going a step further, really consider how it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; relevant to all rpg systems. This is not simply an act of &amp;quot;good-will&amp;quot; towards minority rpg systems, it may actually provide you with better answers and greater variety of perspectives which you may not have initially considered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-21T20:08:22.020" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8733" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8759" CreationDate="2019-01-21T20:11:18.480" Score="7" ViewCount="200" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suppose I'm reading a question.  It's interesting, I want to help, and I can immediately think of one or two insights that would be useful in constructing or improving a good answer to that question.  Unfortunately, for some reason (say, there are system-specific aspects for a system that I personally don't understand well enough) I am utterly incapable of writing a complete answer myself.  What am I &lt;em&gt;supposed&lt;/em&gt; to do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt; suggests that &quot;put it in comments&quot; isn't the right answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I could put it into an answer, but that answer would be fundamentally incomplete.  The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt; seems to indicate that incomplete answers are inherently unacceptable, and so that isn't the right answer either.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Waiting until someone else answers and then commenting on their answer to tell them to put in my thoughts seems awkward at best, and inefficient in a number of ways - possibly rude.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Waiting until someone else answers and then editing it into their answer without discussing it with them seems worse than that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Having a policy of shrugging, moving on, and hoping someone else comes up with the same idea is unfortunate in its own way.  We &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to capture useful insights.  That's a big part of what Stack is all about.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really care about points one way or the other.  Having someone else incorporate my insights into a comprehensive answer while I get no points would be &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt;.  I don't even mind putting something out there that might get downvotes.  I just don't want to have to drop them on the floor uselessly, and I'd like to be a good citizen in all this.  I'm not currently seeing how I'm supposed to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastEditorUserId="33792" LastEditDate="2019-01-21T22:01:55.950" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T04:56:21.170" Title="I have a partial answer or useful response to a question, but I cannot create a full answer out of it. What should I do?" Tags="|discussion|answers|comments|answers-in-comments|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2019-02-03T15:45:58.173" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8733" CreationDate="2019-01-21T21:37:58.857" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Normally, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;you would make it a minimally complete answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But if we take the question at face value and you literally cannot expand it to a minimally complete answer…&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is only one place to put answers, which is in an Answer Post. If one feels that their answer would get a poor reception there, regardless of the reason, that's still the only place to put it. Not wanting downvotes isn't a reason to post it as a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, someone who wishes to post something that isn't allowed in a comment, but they don't want to post it enough to risk exposure to downvotes, logically has only one option: to not post it at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Shrugging, moving on, and hoping someone else comes up with the same idea is unfortunate in its own way. We want to capture useful insights. That's a big part of what Stack is all about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, but it's the least-harm scenario, therefore it's the preferred outcome. It also overstates the value of these insights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look at it this way: &lt;strong&gt;if the &lt;em&gt;author&lt;/em&gt; doesn't even think their insights are good enough to risk losing fake internet points, they're not worth anyone else's time either.&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, better to hope someone else comes along, who actually believes in their post enough to stand behind it, so that they can post the insights instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bottom line, one can always take their chances and put it in an Answer Post — maybe it's enough that it won't get the downvotes one is worried about. Choosing not to do that is also fine. Comments aren't there to save posters from this decision; they're not a get-out-of-downvotes free card.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-01-22T15:47:25.157" LastActivityDate="2019-01-22T15:47:25.157" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8733" CreationDate="2019-01-21T21:38:02.423" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's up to you&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Knowingly putting up an incomplete answer &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; net downvotes. But if you think that the information is good for the querent and/or answerers, then you can accept the downvotes and feel good about contributing in the way you want to contribute.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-21T21:38:02.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8733" CreationDate="2019-01-21T22:50:42.443" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You put in the additional work so that you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; create a full answer out of it!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mention that you &amp;quot;...can &lt;strong&gt;immediately&lt;/strong&gt; think of one or two insights that would be useful in constructing or improving a good answer...&amp;quot; and that is awesome, it indicates to me that you are knowledgeable about the subject and hence likely know where to find more information about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So go to that place, find the additional information that you think your answer is lacking and add it in!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is less tangible details, like experience with a given gaming system, you could always try hitting up the Chat with your plan for an answer to see if others with more specific experience think it is a workable one or you could even acknowledge it in your answer along the lines of &amp;quot;I haven't used this solution myself yet however based on XYZ I believe it would work.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not that internet points matter to you, but if they did, or if you just want to get your answer to OP quickly to help them, you could post your initial points &lt;em&gt;whilst&lt;/em&gt; you go research the rest. Acknowledge where the answer is lacking and go back and fill in the details when you have them. But make sure to fill them in soon!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49360" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-21T22:50:42.443" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8737" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-23T11:50:24.447" Score="13" ViewCount="496" Body="&lt;p&gt;2019 is here! And with the new year, as usual, comes a new iteration of &lt;strong&gt;Community Promotion Ads&lt;/strong&gt;! Let’s refresh these for the coming year :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the site's twitter account&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/8737&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T08:41:43.553" Title="Community Promotion Ads — 2019" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2020-03-05T10:55:54.337" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-23T11:50:57.463" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/stackrpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QvIdY.png&quot; alt=&quot;RPG.SE Twitter&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2019-01-23T11:50:57.463" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8739" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-23T11:52:46.197" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ftzzy.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-01-23T11:52:46.197" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-23T11:53:55.963" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-01-06T08:41:43.553" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T08:41:43.553" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8741" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8793" CreationDate="2019-01-24T03:21:58.917" Score="1" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just took the 2019 Developer Survey for Stack Overflow, and I was thinking it would be cool to get similar information for the RPG.se community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some potential questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What RPGs have you played within the last 12 months?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What RPG are you planning to play within 12 months?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What RPG do you currently play the most?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Which of these reflects your opinion on meta-gaming?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Which of these reflects your playstyle (optimiser, roleplayer, etc.)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How often do you play as the GM/Facilitator/etc..?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What originally attracted you to RPG.SE?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if this has been discussed before or what it would take to achieve, but I would be interested to see the results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-02-04T23:45:08.043" LastActivityDate="2019-02-04T23:45:08.043" Title="Can we get an annual survey?" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|annual-survey|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8742" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-25T02:59:19.330" Score="9" ViewCount="194" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is based on my experience with bounties I've placed on two separate questions in the past couple weeks, spending a total of 400 rep. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After placing each bounty the questions were moved to a tab on the &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; page titled &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Featured&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.  However the tab is actually a secondary tab which takes more effort for a user to get to, and when viewed on a phone or other small device the &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Featured&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; tab is not even visible. You can access featured questions on a phone but it is not at all convenient, and the questions are certainly not visible if you don't know where to look. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Granted, within the &lt;em&gt;Featured&lt;/em&gt; tab features questions are the only questions that show up, but no one sees them unless they click on that tab. That's not what featured means. Some synonyms for the word &lt;em&gt;Featured&lt;/em&gt; from Google:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;give prominence to, focus attention on, call attention to, spotlight&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Featured means front and center, most important, not &quot;go click over there if you really want to bother seeing these.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;Why are questions that are considered &lt;em&gt;featured&lt;/em&gt; actually harder to access than the general question list?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wouldn't it be more aligned with the intent of a bounty to occasionally, maybe once or twice a day, bump &lt;em&gt;Featured&lt;/em&gt; questions to the top of the general questions list?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="41813" LastEditDate="2019-01-25T03:17:34.583" LastActivityDate="2019-02-04T20:22:39.920" Title="Why are featured questions not actually featured?" Tags="|discussion|questions|reputation|bounty|site-design|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8743" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-25T08:34:55.693" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.mipui.net/app&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SpDkN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Mipui - a free collaborative map editor&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="36595" LastEditDate="2019-01-26T21:06:43.057" LastActivityDate="2019-01-26T21:06:43.057" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-01-25T08:45:05.097" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8744" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-25T08:35:41.307" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://roll20.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/suFRL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Roll20 Virtual Tabletops&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T08:35:41.307" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-01-25T08:44:57.067" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-25T08:36:26.693" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvLbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool Virtual Tabletop&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T08:36:26.693" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-01-25T08:45:12.103" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8746" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8749" CreationDate="2019-01-25T13:02:14.213" Score="7" ViewCount="372" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the Site Mods has an issue with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/139836/28591&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I asked about a specific spell.  They have stated that it is not right to quote the whole spell due to &quot;fair use&quot;.  I disagree and feel that keeping the spell as a whole is better for people who are researching the spell and might have questions about it in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any legal reason not to put the full spell given the definition of &quot;fair use&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quote Per Google &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.google.com/search?q=fair%20use&amp;amp;oq=fair%20use&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;fair use&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  noun&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  noun: fair use; plural noun: fair uses  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;(in US copyright&#xA;  law) the doctrine that brief excerpts of copyright material may, under&#xA;  certain circumstances, be quoted verbatim for purposes such as&#xA;  criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research, without the need&#xA;  for permission from or payment to the copyright holder. &quot;whether or&#xA;  not six seconds of the song in a user-generated video constitutes fair&#xA;  use is something for a court to decide&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33441" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2019-01-25T14:02:04.030" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T15:01:03.843" Title="Is there any reason why quoting a D&amp;D 5e spell in its entirety would not qualify as &quot;fair use&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|copyright|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8746" CreationDate="2019-01-25T14:25:25.407" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Up front: I am not a lawyer; my knowledge comes solely from reading about this topic in for-a-lay-audience sources. The following is my understanding, and in any event I think a reasonable way to handle things here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fair Use protects certain forms of copyright infringement, for particular purposes. One of those is educational, which this site can reasonably lay a claim to providing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But Fair Use covers only using as much of the copyrighted material as you need in order to accomplish whatever protected goal you are seeking. So it is only Fair Use if your use of the material is necessary to accomplish your protected goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the only real way to test any particular claim of Fair Use is to get sued, go to court, and argue the use before a judge. There are a number of criteria that have to be weighed and considered, for example the length of your quotation vs. the length of the publication quoted from, the importance of every aspect of the quotation to your stated goals, and so on. Some of this is heavily subjective and comes down a lot to how well the respective lawyers argue their cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in general, we should generally strive to keep quotations to a minimum for their goal. On the other hand, Fair Use &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; protected, and for a reason—we should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; harm any question or answer for the sake of being over-stringent about this. If you have a real reason to quote the entire spell, then the entire spell should stay. Ultimately, a single spell is a very small portion of a given publication, which would make it easier to defend in court if it came to that, but obviously it won’t. Really blatant cases of copyright infringement that exceed any Fair Use rationale would have long since violated our own site guidelines on scope and question or answer length—such a massive quote suggests that the question is well past Too Broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only real concern I would have for copyright infringement—linking to infringing sites, which &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; reproduce all or nearly-all of publications—is already handled by another Meta discussion, and is not allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T14:25:25.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8748" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8746" CreationDate="2019-01-25T14:41:35.393" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am not a lawyer, but I have been dealing with Fair Use and its local variations in the media a few times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are correct that there is no fundamental reason a full spell definition couldn't be Fair Use. RPG.stackexchange doesn't have a policy in place that full stat blocks, spell descriptions or such should be necessarily removed from the site. However, Fair Use is not just about the amount of copyrighted content used, but its purpose: analysis, parody, criticism, among others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it briefly, the amount and nature of the copyrighted content used needs be justified by the purpose. If you intend to write a long treatise on DnD 5e mechanics, you can wind up quoting far more rules than a single spell block and can still reasonably claim Fair Use. Users can and should make judgment calls when encountering copyrighted work to decide whether they're looking at Fair Use or not. There is no clear objective test we could apply --- ultimately, it's up to the courts to decide, and that's a way we don't like to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question you're referring to considers a single two-word definition in a single bullet of a longer spell's description. It's not egregious, but still way more copyrighted material the question needs to make sense. Since the question doesn't need all that copyrighted material, the right of Fair Use becomes rather tenuous. Given that, I think removing it was a smart thing to do and I would uphold the decision to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the spell's full definition is freely available from the copyright holder anyway, so the issue is not that serious. However, in the future, refrain from pasting excerpts of copyrighted material that go significantly beyond the scope of the question unless the license of the work permits it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T14:41:35.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8749" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8746" CreationDate="2019-01-25T14:55:11.097" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just FYI, a normal user was the one who revised your post using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;their edit privilege&lt;/a&gt;. “Site mods” usually refers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the diamond moderators&lt;/a&gt;, none of which have revised your post prior to this meta. Each of the diamond moderators will always have a diamond (♦) appear after their names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On Fair Use in this situation&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Stanford University has an excellent overview of Fair Use here&lt;/a&gt;. The most relevant pages are &lt;a href=&quot;https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;What Is Fair Use?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors&lt;/a&gt;. As KRyan mentions, mainly we have to be quoting the work for a legitimate purpose and not quote more than really necessary so as to avoid depriving the copyright owner of potential income.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the entire spell is being provided publicly for free in D&amp;amp;D Beyond, we're not doing any harm to the original product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be different if that spell was behind the D&amp;amp;D Beyond paywall: we would very strongly require you not to reproduce the whole thing, and we would expect people must own the book or pass the D&amp;amp;D Beyond paywall to fully understand the spell. In this scenario the only reason to reproduce the spell in full would be to remove the need for people to buy the book, which is an exact scenario of depriving the copyright owner of potential income.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But there's other reasons to edit the post&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's something else to consider: what's the signal-to-noise ratio of your post? It's pretty high on the side of noise, mainly because you are reproducing six paragraphs of a spell when only two of them matter. (That means just about half the full vertical height of the post is entirely skippable for the purpose of the question!) Your post will be more legible if it doesn't include a lot of additional unnecessary text. Others can look it up if they need to know additional stuff—you did give them a link to the full spell definition right there in the post. For the same reason we wouldn't quote an entire chapter of a novel if we only needed to ask about one line of dialog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this basis, not on the basis of fair use, I've edited your post to slim it down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-25T15:01:03.843" LastActivityDate="2019-01-25T15:01:03.843" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8750" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on meta about renaming tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8751" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" Score="0" Body="For questions on meta about renaming tags." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T00:42:44.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8752" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8753" CreationDate="2019-01-27T00:43:01.530" Score="6" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pretty straightforward stuff. We generally use the &lt;code&gt;-[#]e&lt;/code&gt; tag suffix to denote different editions (presumably because that's how those editions of those games are commonly abbreviated) - and the tags for the previous three editions of &lt;em&gt;Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay&lt;/em&gt; follow this trend: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-1e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-2e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-3e&lt;/a&gt;. (There's also a general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp&lt;/a&gt; tag, but that's not relevant here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-4&lt;/a&gt; tag was created a little over a month ago; I'm guessing the person who created it wasn't aware of the convention for edition tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-4&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-4&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-4&lt;/a&gt; tag be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wfrp-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wfrp-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wfrp-4e&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T16:03:31.613" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T16:04:23.077" Title="Should the [wfrp-4] tag be renamed to [wfrp-4e]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|game-systems|rename-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8753" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8752" CreationDate="2019-01-27T01:06:52.343" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this specific case, yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't really care about a RPG.SE convention for edition tags.  We care about what players of that game use and find natural and would be searching on and so on.  So if WFRP players tended to refer to it as &quot;WFRP 4&quot; that would be the appropriate tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&amp;amp;q=wfrp%204,wfrp%204e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;cursory Google Trends&lt;/a&gt; and other google check, WFRP 4e is a much more common terminology in that community of play.  So yes, we should change this tag so that it's more aligned with what those folks say and search on organically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore I've added [wfrp-4e] as a primary tag, added [warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-4e] as a synonym per existing work, and switched the 2 extant questions over to use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T16:04:23.077" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T16:04:23.077" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8754" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-27T16:00:56.007" Score="10" ViewCount="212" Body="&lt;p&gt;Every year Stack Overflow corporate does a big survey of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;main site&lt;/a&gt; users. This year's survey can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2019/01/23/our-2019-developer-survey-is-open-to-coders-everywhere/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. We also have a meta question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8741/3548&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; asking whether our stack can get a similar survey. While there are no actual answers to that question yet, I suspect the answer will be no, since a survey for the RPG stack won't provide nearly the same value to SO corporate that the SO survey does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't mean we can't have a survey, though! It's not hard to make a survey for free on Survey Monkey, Google Forms, or other similar websites. The real question is whether the community really &lt;strong&gt;wants&lt;/strong&gt; to do that, which is what this meta question exists to determine. If we seem to have consensus in favor of making a survey, we can use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8763/3548&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; to hammer out exactly what we would want to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify, I created this question so that we have a place to discuss whether we should have a survey since the other question is unlikely to go anywhere. If I decide to argue in favor of a survey, I'll make an answer on this question laying out the case in favor of one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Addenda: Making a survey is fairly easy once it's been decided what questions should be on it; I don't mind doing it myself if nobody else steps up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T00:52:16.183" LastActivityDate="2019-02-18T06:43:18.437" Title="Does the RPG Stack want to create its own annual survey?" Tags="|discussion|annual-survey|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8755" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8756" CreationDate="2019-01-27T22:13:16.827" Score="3" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keywords&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keywords&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keywords&lt;/a&gt; tag. It's applied to 11 questions; all but (the most recent) one of them have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; tag as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, the tag has no tag info/wiki. Does it refer to a particular thing in D&amp;amp;D 4e specifically? I'm guessing it does, and I'm guessing that is what differentiates it from the general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keywords&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keywords&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keywords&lt;/a&gt; tag meant to be used for, and how is it distinct from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T23:00:57.503" Title="What is the [keywords] tag meant to be used for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8755" CreationDate="2019-01-27T22:30:54.783" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Now nine; I retagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5469/where-can-i-learn-the-meanings-of-rpg-terminology&quot;&gt;Where can I learn the meanings of RPG terminology?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139972/what-is-fighting&quot;&gt;What is fighting?&lt;/a&gt; to not use this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like the tag got started in D&amp;amp;D 4e. Keywords in that game are a specific element of power definitions: Arcane, Implement, Fire, Weapon, Healing, Primal, etc are keywords. Keywords can reference a myriad of things: power source, damage type, power category, whether you need to use a weapon/implement to use it, etc. They're a significant element of character building because a lot of things care about specific keywords. If you have an Arcane build, you'd focus on picking up Arcane powers and on finding feats and items which apply the Arcane keyword to otherwise non-Arcane powers. For example see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/8647/1204&quot;&gt;Is there a way to add the &amp;quot;primal&amp;quot; keyword to a power?&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/32167/1204&quot;&gt;How can I add psychic damage to wizard powers?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have added a tag definition:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;for questions about managing the keywords of D&amp;amp;D 4e powers&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a very specific definition for a very general concept, but it reflects usage right now. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-27T23:00:57.503" LastActivityDate="2019-01-27T23:00:57.503" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8757" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-27T23:32:10.287" Score="6" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the following question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139909/does-common-law-apply-to-nobles/&quot;&gt;Does Common Law apply to Nobles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP asks about applying a certain section of medieval law to the Warhammer Fantasy setting. I understood this to be a question about applying real-world medieval law, as otherwise there would be no need to specify: &quot;Does this apply in the Warhammer Fantasy setting?&quot;, as the question is already tagged &quot;wfrp-2e&quot;, &quot;warhammer&quot;, and &quot;wrfp&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As their question contained some fundamental misunderstandings of medieval law, based on examples I was aware of, and as those examples addressed half the question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/139932&quot;&gt;I gave those examples as a partial answer&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ rep only) so that the question might be improved, and partly answered. I specifically noted that the answer was a partial one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This partial answer was then deleted as &quot;not an answer&quot;. In my understanding, this would only be valid if the OP was only addressing WFRP, not medieval law and WFRP, as is my understanding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A search on how to appeal a StackExchange deletion lead me to StackExchange Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48293" OwnerDisplayName="Narf the Mouse" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-28T00:33:40.247" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T00:42:59.270" Title="Partial answer deleted as not an answer re: Medieval law and a tabletop role-playing game" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8758" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8757" CreationDate="2019-01-28T00:26:00.213" Score="16" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The answer was deleted because it didn't answer the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question on RPG.SE asks about a particular TTRPG system, it's expected that the answer be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7755/32840&quot;&gt;relevant to that system&lt;/a&gt;. Without knowledge of the system in question, the answer's content is likely uninformed or irrelevant, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8469/why-was-my-answer-deleted/8470#8470&quot;&gt;typically gets deleted&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although the question's title &amp;quot;Does Common Law apply to Nobles?&amp;quot; is not system-specific, the body and tags of the question are clearly asking about the Warhammer Fantasy setting. So when the question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this apply in the Warhammer Fantasy setting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;then a valid answer should contain some explanation based on the Warhammer Fantasy setting. The deleted answer did not do that. Specifically it said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I cannot address the case of WFRP, as I do not own any the books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a case I recall the generalities about, in England or Scotland&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't give a definite answer here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer's content was about real-world medieval European laws, and was not relevant to the TTRPG system in question, so it was considered off-topic and thus deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, if you want to provide &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;good, fact-based answers&lt;/a&gt; for TTRPG questions, it's best to answer only if you have sufficient knowledge of the system in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T00:42:59.270" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8733" CreationDate="2019-01-28T04:56:21.170" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with existing answers saying either to get a complete answer together, or walk away; that is generally what your options are. To be more general, basically, a partial answer can’t &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; be put &lt;em&gt;anywhere&lt;/em&gt;—there is always more work to be done to get things in a state where that information can be posted. Here are a couple more ways you can work to make a partial answer into something acceptable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Another option: suggest that the question be edited and narrowed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially if there aren’t any answers to the question yet, the scope of the question can be changed. And the fact that no one has managed to come up with a complete answer, and you have come up with something you think is valuable but &lt;em&gt;also isn’t a complete answer&lt;/em&gt;, suggests that maybe the question is asking for too much, and a narrower question (the one you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; answer) would be more appropriate. You can suggest that to the querent and see where that gets you. Narrower questions tend to get answered sooner and better, so it’s a win–win.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Yet another option: your own Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question you’re looking at can’t or won’t be narrowed—due to existing answers or due to querent intransigence—you might be able to ask and answer the narrower question yourself. Obviously, the question has to be useful on its own, and not a duplicate of the original question—you aren’t getting out of any of the usual rules here—but in some circumstances this &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be a successful approach to this dilemma.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T04:56:21.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8760" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-28T11:10:45.497" Score="17" ViewCount="417" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen it repeatedly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6368/50419&quot;&gt;Officially Declared that 'we' do not enforce styles&lt;/a&gt;, and do not do trivial changes that have zero effect on clarity. And yet in practice, over the course of my stay here, I have repeatedly seen both my and other people's questions edited in exactly this 'not done' manner. (On a related note, sometimes it's not quite the same thing as a style edit, but a 'fixing' of an 'error' without checking whether there is an error in the first place.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples (details altered to protect the accused while the jury is out):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;'Fixing' the style from one style guide's to another's, such as with commas, quotes, capitalisation, pronoun usage, spelling choices, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Making rewrites based on whether one follows a person-first style or don't-hide-the-adjective style ('fixing' the post to differ from the authorial style).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Changing 'clip' to 'magazine' (or vice versa) while not being an expert on weapons, thus not knowing that the two are different things and that either may or may not be correct depending on intended meaning, &lt;em&gt;and not checking the definitions before doing such a 'fix'&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Systematically changing others' title styles to that of a Question Title &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5561/50419&quot;&gt;even though officially it is permitted to post any clear titles even if they're not phrased as a question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been unsure how to react to that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that just ignoring it and saying 'this is no big deal' will mean that the 'policy' has no power at all, as the people who ignore the policy will get the last word. I.e. in practice styles will be softly enforced by the most persistent editors who ignore the policy. It's also easy to get an incorrect impression of what policy &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; if high-rep and diamond users are consistently spotted performing actions that are the opposite of policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it's my question, obviously I can keep reverting the edit, though it's frustrating that there's no way to revert only &lt;em&gt;parts&lt;/em&gt; of an edit and keep the useful changes, or at least to revert a specific edit when several have been made. Though even that has the downsides of (a) needing to constantly watch for Style Warriors and (b) de facto becoming a participant in an Edit War, even if one on home turf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it's someone else's question, participating in an edit war on someone else's behalf seems even less appropriate. But doing nothing also means the poor newbie is likely to get an impression of Doing Things Wrong and trying to conform to the style warriors' preferences in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried bringing up the edit's necessity or lack thereof in comments, only to have it brushed off, left as-is, &lt;em&gt;and then&lt;/em&gt; seeing the same sorts of style edits happen again but with other posts of other people. So in practice it seems commenting does nothing to prevent such edits. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should personal style preference enforcement be reported somehow? (I don't recall spotting an edit report button.) Or should something else be done?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="50419" LastEditDate="2019-06-14T12:40:48.083" LastActivityDate="2019-06-14T12:40:48.083" Title="'We do not enforce style' - how to react to discrepancies between policy and reality?" Tags="|discussion|editing|policy|moderation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8761" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8760" CreationDate="2019-01-28T11:55:35.507" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;This policy isn't just lip service and does have power. Our fellow community members should be enforcing it, and the diamond moderators can and will enforce it as well, as we have done in the past. However we all can only act on what we see happening and we can't notice everything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see one-off edits that change style in a way you're not comfortable with, please roll back or revise accordingly to restore your style preferences. If you are seeing repeated patterns—and it sounds like you are—please do raise attention to it: either mention it here on meta or raise a moderator attention flag on the post explaining the situation. In either case, indicate which revisions were of concern to you such as by mentioning either the revision number (“revision 3”) or the nature of the edit (“someome removed all my headings”) or the editor (“doppelgreener's revision”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the pattern is about a specific user's behaviour patterns, please err on using a flag. The diamond team will investigate discreetly. You may raise one flag on each post, or less flags than that and include links to posts, whatever you're comfortable with that gets across the necessary information. If there's a lot, raise just one flag and let us know you want to talk with us about this and we can open a private moderator-only communication channel to let you communicate to us what's going on. If the pattern you're noticing is on other peoples' posts as well you may flag and report those just the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're experiencing a pattern of being brushed off from users (or one particular user) please flag that too—we all should be listening to peoples' concerns and adjusting our behaviour, not brushing them off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When it's my question, obviously I can keep reverting the edit, though it's frustrating that there's no way to revert only parts of an edit and keep the useful changes, or at least to revert a specific edit when several have been made. Though even that has the downsides of (a) needing to constantly watch for Style Warriors and (b) de facto becoming a participant in an Edit War, even if one on home turf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are experiencing an edit war or continuously having to revert changes, please raise a moderator attention flag. If necessary we'll be telling someone to knock it off. Original authors of a post always win edit wars &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; the edit genuinely improves clarity, in which case the improvement of clarity wins. Some things we might call style changes also improve clarity (e.g. we prefer people use headings appropriately) but we keep them because they improve clarity, not because we prefer one style over another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-28T12:44:38.323" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T12:44:38.323" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8760" CreationDate="2019-01-28T18:08:28.160" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;So on the one hand, we don't enforce style and don't really approve of mass edits making small changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, you should also ask yourself what this hurts.  Sure, sometimes someone does it wrong.  But I know that I personally don't bother much with whether I use a header level instead of bold text, or italicize a magic item name even though that's pretty standard.  If someone edits my post to do those things, what skin off my nose is it? I get a notification saying &quot;someone edited your stuff&quot;, I look at it, if they didn't jack it up I move along. If someone out there really, really cares about my incorrect use of a semicolon, why would I object to the change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll push back against people making chronic and trivial changes (it bumps questions pointlessly, mainly) but I think you need to get more into the spirit of the shared content here.  Someone making an edit doesn't mean you were &lt;strong&gt;wrong&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;must always do different in the future.&lt;/strong&gt;   That's an expectation &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; are putting on it that is harmful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, incorrect edits are a different thing.  Those, revert, complain about in comment, bring to us if there's a pattern. I feel like you're conflating two issues though - wrong edits and just plain small grammar edits.  The first is bad, the second is just irritating if too numerous, a whole different scope of problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T14:12:38.807" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T14:12:38.807" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8763" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-28T22:49:21.690" Score="5" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8741/48759&quot;&gt;getting an annual survey&lt;/a&gt; similar to the official developer survey. The current consensus to this is &quot;unlikely&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following that Oblivous Sage asked if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8754/48759&quot;&gt;we wanted to make our own&lt;/a&gt;. To which the current assumption is &quot;yes but what would we ask? and who would make it?&quot;. I will leave that question to deal with who is actually going to create the survey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is to serve as a gathering post for the questions we want to ask. Highly voted responses should reflect what the community is actually curious about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2019-02-09T00:48:18.720" Title="What questions should an annual RPG survey ask?" Tags="|discussion|annual-survey|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-01-28T22:58:33.023" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Questions related to systems and what people are playing&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs have you played within the last 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sourced from top 10 system tags for brevity, more options should be included in actual survey&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeons and Dragons 3/3.5 Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Savage Worlds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fate&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chronicles of Darkness 1st Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Shadowrun 5th Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other (Specify)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs have you run/GMed within the last 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs are you planning to play within 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs are you planning to run/GM within 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs do you want to play within 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs do you want to run/GM within 12 months (select all that apply)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What RPGs do you currently play the most (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you were to start a new game which RPG are you most likely to play (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you were to start a new game which RPG are you most likely to run/GM (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-31T01:01:53.113" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8765" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-01-28T23:24:13.273" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Questions about the site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What originally attracted you to RPG.SE (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rules question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Homebrew&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hot network questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other (specify)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How often do you visit RPG.SE (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Daily&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2-3 times a week&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Weekly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2-3 times a month&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Monthly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Less than once a month&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How often do you participate in RPG.SE, i.e. post a question, answer, vote or comment (select one)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As above&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Which other Stack Exchange sites do you use regularly (select up to three)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Suggestions for more options welcome&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Worldbuilding&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Arqade&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Writing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Interpersonal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other (specify)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-31T00:30:55.963" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-01-28T23:31:17.183" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Questions on demographics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should copy the official developer survey for these questions as they are difficult to get the wording to be inclusive. Results from 2018 survey can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#demographics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Age&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gender&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Race&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Education&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sexual Orientation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Location&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Important to note, this survey is completely anonymous. Questions like this are to ensure we are serving all member of our community equally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-28T23:31:17.183" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8767" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8768" CreationDate="2019-01-29T08:36:19.477" Score="7" ViewCount="322" Body="&lt;p&gt;As someone who asks a lot of mechanic-related questions, I often get edits where links are added to D&amp;amp;D Beyond. I would love to do this myself but I am not a fan of D&amp;amp;D Beyond and thus have not purchased anything on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there ways to link to the related articles without owning them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45589" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T10:21:09.300" LastActivityDate="2022-10-24T17:08:35.397" Title="How to link D&amp;D Beyond without owning the related resources?" Tags="|support|dnd-5e|tools|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8768" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8767" CreationDate="2019-01-29T10:48:46.983" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;A minor note: you can access D&amp;amp;D Beyond content without owning it if you're in a campaign on D&amp;amp;D Beyond with someone that owns that content, has a Master Tier &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/store/subscribe&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;subscription&lt;/a&gt;, and has &lt;a href=&quot;https://dndbeyond-support.wizards.com/hc/en-us/articles/7747210355604&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;content sharing enabled for that campaign&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I assume that's not what you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For individual items, monsters, and spells, just find them in the respective listing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Magic items&lt;/a&gt;, mundane &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/equipment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; each have their own individual listings on D&amp;amp;D Beyond. You can view these overall listings even without owning the specific content that appears in those listings - including the name, source, and some basic information shown in the corresponding columns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only viewing the full details of the item/spell/monster requires owning the corresponding content (or having it shared with you), and only for non-SRD content that hasn't been released for free (content from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.dnd.wizards.com/EE-Players-Companion_0_0.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;EEPC&lt;/a&gt; or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/CoS_Character_Options.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Haunted One background&lt;/a&gt;, for instance, can be freely accessed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Even without being able to access the full description, though, if you know the thing you want to link to is relevant, you can simply right-click on the item in the list to copy the URL of the linked entry.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For anything else (or the above), use the D&amp;amp;D Beyond search&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/search&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D Beyond search&lt;/a&gt; function to find basically anything else that's on D&amp;amp;D Beyond. The search results will show you a small preview of the relevant text, and each result will point to one of the above listings or to the relevant section heading for D&amp;amp;D Beyond Compendium content. By default, it searches all D&amp;amp;D Beyond content, but you can filter it to just character options, compendium content, spells, items, monsters, forum results, or any combination thereof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see these previews even without owning the corresponding content, but again, you won't be able to see the full thing without owning/having access to it. You can follow the same process as above to get the links; simply right click on the header by the relevant result, and copy the URL.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can follow the above processes to find the relevant links regardless of whether you own the corresponding content, though you'll need to own it or have access to it to actually view those full details - so if you can't actually access it on D&amp;amp;D Beyond, you should know what you're looking for beforehand (e.g. from the physical book) so that you know you're getting the right link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can even follow this process regardless of whether you're logged in to D&amp;amp;D Beyond. All of the above (minus viewing full details of non-free content) can be done while logged out, as I've just tested in an incognito browser window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;PS:&lt;/strong&gt; Make sure to include page numbers for (non-free) content where you can, in addition to D&amp;amp;D Beyond links. That way, those who own the source can verify the information, no matter how they own it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7669/stance-on-using-dd-beyond-for-references&quot;&gt;See this conversation on meta for more information.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-10-24T17:08:35.397" LastActivityDate="2022-10-24T17:08:35.397" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8769" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8771" CreationDate="2019-01-29T13:43:23.930" Score="12" ViewCount="173" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've had this issue come up multiple times during my time here: a new user comes in full of enthusiasm and things to contribute but their posts are riddled with grammar/punctuation errors and the format is all over the place. I am comfortable with guiding a user through best practices formatting-wise since there is a bit of an art to doing it effectively on the stack specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I have always been hesitant to act to overtly encourage a user to improve their grammar. I know there are many reasons a person might have poor grammar. They could be young and still learning, they could never have learned, or they could even be new to the language entirely (and trust me, I sympathise with anybody trying to learn English as a second language). It is entirely possible that a user might even be unaware that their grammar is poor/hard to understand. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, often the user's grammar is clearly affecting what may be good content in a way that makes it very hard to tell what they are saying (and acquiring downvotes as a result). When this happens repeatedly, I feel that maybe a nudge to tell them that they should pay closer attention to their grammar to improve their answers, but I'm never sure how or if I should do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Correcting the grammar/punctuation is one way of course, but after many answers it gets to be tiring and sometimes it is even unclear what is being said and thus there is no easy way to clean it up. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I worry about this? Is this just something that users are expected to &quot;get&quot; just from being around and getting downvotes? Is there an effective way to do this that minimizes the risk of insult? Should I not even try?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T16:16:20.267" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T16:16:20.267" Title="How can I encourage a user to improve their grammar without being rude?" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8770" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8769" CreationDate="2019-01-29T14:17:42.813" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I like to update the post to my liking and then comment. &quot;I have made some/moderate/major changes to your post. Please look over my changes and confirm that the question still captures your intent and feelings.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a stolen methodology, to be sure. I've seen this on dozens of posts, and likely one of my earlier questions as well. I don't find it insulting, while still modeling what is expected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(and besides, a little silent judging on my side of the monitor never hurt anyone)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="34716" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T16:05:49.247" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T16:05:49.247" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8769" CreationDate="2019-01-29T14:34:39.487" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just edit their answer/question and in the &lt;strong&gt;Edit Summary&lt;/strong&gt; write &quot;Fixed grammar. Improved syntax.&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a native English speaker and I had noted that in &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding SE&lt;/a&gt; a lot of people edited my questions/answers in order to fix my grammar. I didn't like the fact that I had so many errors and that other people wasted time editing my posts so I tried to improve my grammar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I pay more attention to it and I have found a perfect Chrome extension called &lt;a href=&quot;https://app.grammarly.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Grammarly&lt;/a&gt;. The app is &quot;freemium&quot;, but the free part is enough to solve the majority of normal mistakes. Even more, you can choose between American, British, Australian or Canadian English (and the premium part can choose between formal/informal/friends/work, and fix &quot;advanced issues&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the way, Grammarly fixed four errors in this post!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42158" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T15:29:51.260" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T15:29:51.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8769" CreationDate="2019-01-29T15:15:02.443" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Words are hard, especially when multiple are used in combination. Everyone wants to be understood and everyone's trying their best to express themselves well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means they probably don't need reminders or encouragement to try to use good grammar: they're already trying. They're just not as proficient with the language as you are right now. That's OK. They might simply struggle with grammar, or with writing specifically, or they might be ESL, or any number of other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To remind them “hey, try to use good grammar” is unnecessary and would probably be condescending. They're already trying. They're doing their best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just edit to improve their grammar where you can see how improvements can be made if you feel compelled to do so. Where you are unsure and something is unclear, just ask for clarification or suggest an improvement, e.g. “I'm not sure what you mean in that third sentence, could you rephrase?”. Leave it at that. They'll pick things up and your editing may help them learn writing rules they might have been unclear on beforehand. (I've received comments to that effect before.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T15:52:37.797" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T15:52:37.797" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8773" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8774" CreationDate="2019-01-29T16:52:20.740" Score="1" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140083/played-convinced-sorcerer-warlock-can-make-infinite-spell-slots-with-short-rest&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; just came up and I had marked it as a duplicate. However, the comment thread has brought it to a point that I'm not sure it still is or how to handle it or similar questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's clear that the question is 100% contained in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78918/does-this-character-concept-involving-never-taking-a-long-rest-and-converting-sp&quot;&gt;currently linked duplicate&lt;/a&gt;, but the answers also don't satisfy the current querent about the specific concern of generating more than the existing spell slots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we clarify the new question to only be about the specific concern and link the older question as relevant, or is this more about getting a better answer to the older?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-01-29T16:56:39.117" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T16:58:56.130" Title="If a question is a subset of a current question, is it a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2019-01-29T16:56:55.343" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8773" CreationDate="2019-01-29T16:58:56.130" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Make it a general question about Flexible Casting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you remove the reference to the &quot;coffelock&quot; build, this question is in no way a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T16:58:56.130" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8775" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8760" CreationDate="2019-01-29T22:15:55.117" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Regarding:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;'Fixing' the style from one style guide's to another's, such as with commas, quotes, capitalisation, pronoun usage, spelling choices, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is difficult to take a definitive position on this statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes those things are a matter of style, but sometimes there are clearly correct/incorrect usages&lt;/strong&gt;. It is never correct to refer to NASA as &quot;Nasa&quot;. On the other hand, capitalizing the sentence following a colon is entirely optional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes style dovetails into clarity;&lt;/strong&gt; e.g., some sentences become ambiguous without an Oxford comma. Maine had a lawsuit about overtime pay a few years ago because of this, which made grammar a million-dollar issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43289" LastActivityDate="2019-01-29T22:15:55.117" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8754" CreationDate="2019-01-30T00:41:39.727" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, we should make a survey&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An annual survey will give us an extra tool to see how we are tracking as a community. We will gain demographic and location information that can inform how to look at inclusiveness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a large community with a decent cross-section of the RPG space we will be able to identify trends and shifts in the industry. Potentially we will find areas of the community that we aren't serving well and can work to improve that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are more reasons we should do it, and some of them will depends on the questions we ask. But I believe if we put effort into choosing good questions, then promote it on the main site to get high participation, we will get results that are interesting and useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-30T21:49:52.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8754" CreationDate="2019-01-30T00:44:02.703" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, a survey is useless&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A survey won't achieve anything useful and there is no point going to the effort of making one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-01-30T00:44:02.703" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8778" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-01-30T16:57:08.433" Score="5" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I commented on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/140087/30830&quot;&gt;an answer to How should I deal with a player who wants to dictate loot distribution?&lt;/a&gt;, asking the answerer for clarification (and implicitly suggesting an improvement at the same time).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few more responses were posted after mine, including a direct reply to mine. As I was typing up a second comment (which I've since deleted, as it makes no sense now), the additional responses, including my request for clarification from the author, were all deleted. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment to OP was not addressed by them via reply or edit to the answer (and likely not even seen by OP, given that only survived for such a short time), so it certainly didn't fall under the 'obsolete/no longer needed' reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? The comment box description says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Use comments to ask for more information or suggest improvements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what my comment was doing, to the best of my knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30830" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-01-30T17:10:40.357" LastActivityDate="2019-02-12T15:51:51.457" Title="Why was my comment requesting clarification on an answer deleted?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8778" CreationDate="2019-01-30T17:32:11.393" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We delete comments that start arguments. When a comment can be read both ways — as a fair question, or as rhetorical fighting words — we delete because those &lt;em&gt;regularly&lt;/em&gt; end up as fights instead of improvement to the post, no matter what was intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even when (we don’t get to it and) the author handles the charged comment smoothly and it results in improvement, these kinds of wordings significantly degrade community experience. Nobody wants to deal with aggressive comments on their posts, that sucks. Which is why it’s a chore passed up to moderators instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Commentors who want their objections taken seriously by the author need to be conscious of that dynamic and stay far away from wordings that seem aggressive, dismissive, condescending, etc. — all the many obvious to subtle ways of offending the listener that we humans have devised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a practical matter, a comment has usually already failed its purpose of improving a post if it’s worded such that the author is less likely to listen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your comment was a firestarter, whatever your intentions for it were. It was an easy case to decide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-02-12T15:51:51.457" LastActivityDate="2019-02-12T15:51:51.457" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8778" CreationDate="2019-01-30T17:33:57.567" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Intentions aside, the comment does not actually read as a request for clarification. Here's the comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So you don't think Vanessa's behavior is at all wrong or problematic (since you didn't mention it at all here), and the blame lies &lt;em&gt;100%&lt;/em&gt; with the OP? Or, for that matter, with the DM? – TylerH 2 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't actually requesting the author clarify their post, and it isn't requesting an improvement to the post. The measure of a good request for clarification or suggestion for improvement is that it is &lt;strong&gt;actionable.&lt;/strong&gt; As in, I can tell if it has/hasn't been acted on, or there is something in there inviting me to do something which I can either do or decline to do. It's not enough for such a request to be &lt;em&gt;implied,&lt;/em&gt; it must be &lt;em&gt;actually said.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks based on your other deleted comment like you wanted the author to comment on Vanessa's part in this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That wasn't how it came across. Regardless of your intentions, the way this comes across is criticising the author through accusation &lt;a href=&quot;https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;of something they didn't say&lt;/a&gt;. Comments &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;aren't for nonconstructive criticism&lt;/a&gt;. Further, this kind of discourse generally comes across as a verbal attack, regardless of what we might have actually meant by it. This is the kind of comment that can and did start an argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following comment would've been a clear, reasonable, actionable suggestion for improvement which would not as likely have been deleted (until of course it was actioned or declined); it's paraphrased based on your thoughts expressed in your most recent self-deleted comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I feel adding some commentary on Vanessa's part in this is appropriate too. Even if the OP did something wrong, it's also clear Vanessa was doing something wrong, and other answers are commenting on this as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-01-30T20:32:11.513" LastActivityDate="2019-01-30T20:32:11.513" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8781" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8778" CreationDate="2019-01-30T18:38:15.220" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Actually besides the merit of your comment - once comments have been moved to chat, you are expected to use chat.  There is no “move later comments to chat” option, so they get deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once a comment thread has gotten heavy enough to go to chat, additional comments not in that chat will be deleted without warning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-01-30T18:38:15.220" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-01-31T03:13:44.213" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tDgbg.png&quot; alt=&quot;Writing.SE&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51904" LastActivityDate="2019-01-31T03:13:44.213" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8783" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8784" CreationDate="2019-01-31T06:16:34.783" Score="19" ViewCount="465" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I know this site isn't a wiki site and probably not a good place to come for knowledge, but I don't know of any good wiki sites for gray area 5e (D&amp;amp;D 5th ed.) stuff and Google Search brings up this site constantly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've spent hours trying to dig through books to find answers and I often come here to try and find answers but occasionally no one has asked them yet. Or when some knowledgeable veteran has the right answer, it is in the comments sections without source. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I then dig through pdf versions of books to find the source for the answer in the comments. Then I post the answer with references because if I spent that much time looking up the citation I don't want to have to do it again nor should others when enhancing their knowledge. Sadly moments later and inevitably others down vote my referenced and quoted answers despite the comment and I started from having numerous up votes as an unofficial answer without reference. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes I know there can be formatting improvements which day by day I am still trying to learn after having gone through the &quot;welcome&quot; pages. I do appreciate the few good ones like SevenSidedDie who do explain to me ways to improve (although I haven't figured out how to message him on here yet to say it explicitly). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is frustrating as the satisfaction I get from finding the answer is off-set by others non-constructively criticizing the work I've done to help others like myself learn something we didn't previously know. Has anyone else ever experienced this or felt this way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm the newcomer here so can someone please leave helpful comments as to why this is? I'm sure this too will be down-voted shortly, even though I really want to know if formatting is more important than content for initial up or down votes. I've given up hope of having useful and cited information ever get up votes initially, but am hoping to hold onto motivation to keep learning the formatting style preferred on this site as I know there are a few gurus of 5e knowledge here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. No existing tags for &quot;formatting&quot;, &quot;Community&quot;, etc. that I can find. Is meta talk allowed about 5e (and other games) but not this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51686" OwnerDisplayName="Mark Maryott" LastEditorUserId="30218" LastEditDate="2019-01-31T06:48:52.137" LastActivityDate="2022-04-14T15:18:36.173" Title="Is formatting more important than content on StackExchange answers for initial votes?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|formatting|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8784" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8783" CreationDate="2019-01-31T14:19:20.880" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, of course upvotes are at anyone's discretion, they can upvote because they like your clever use of headers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you are making a false dichotomy between &quot;format&quot; and &quot;content.&quot; If someone posts a question or answer that is not readable, then it's not good content, regardless of the research the poster put into it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at your Qs and As.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95302/do-arrows-from-the-swift-quiver-spell-bypass-resistances-immunity-to-non-magical/140245#140245&quot;&gt;Do arrows from the Swift Quiver spell bypass resistances/immunity to non-magical weapons?&lt;/a&gt; - started out by being &quot;related information&quot; but not answering the question.  We require answers to be answers here, a common mistake of new folks more used to forums, but has nothing to do with format. Your capping of Magical Weapon was corrected, but that wasn't the big problem.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53627/can-a-beast-master-ranger-armor-their-animal-companion-with-barding/140147#140147&quot;&gt;Can a Beast Master ranger armor their animal companion with barding?&lt;/a&gt; - no downvotes or issues here, but again, you are not focusing on answering the question, you're mainly delivering another &quot;but here's something else to keep in mind&quot; like the one above.  It does give a cursory answer to the question but nothing that would drive people to a question from 2014 with an accepted answer to shower you with upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80845/do-nondetection-and-invisibility-protect-you-from-true-seeing/139695#139695&quot;&gt;Do Nondetection and Invisibility protect you from True Seeing?&lt;/a&gt; - coherence isn't formatting. You went through many revisions here - after a couple, that does begin to exhaust voters and they're unlikely to come back to reverse their downvote on the grounds that maybe edit #10 finally worked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139785/is-there-any-way-to-get-melee-to-hit-bonuses-as-high-as-ranged-to-hit-bonuses/139833#139833&quot;&gt;Is there any way to get melee to-hit bonuses as high as ranged to-hit bonuses?&lt;/a&gt; - your answer doesn't really even answer your own question, except for an unsupported &quot;no&quot; followed by links and references to something that doesn't answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've come across a core value of the site - we expect answers to answer the question.  If they are &quot;but did you think of this,&quot; &quot;related information&quot;, etc., they can often save themselves from outright deletion for cause by adding a pro forma &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no&quot; to answer the question, but if the answer doesn't actually back up its answer to the question asked, it will not be well received by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now let's look at your questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140264/so-the-two-attacks-as-bonus-action-from-swift-quiver-cant-bypass-any-sort-of-re&quot;&gt;So the two attacks as bonus action from Swift Quiver can&amp;#39;t bypass any sort of resistances?&lt;/a&gt; - a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140260/is-formatting-more-important-than-content-on-stackexchange-answers-for-initial-v&quot;&gt;Is formatting more important than content on StackExchange answers for initial votes?&lt;/a&gt; - this question, migrated here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139785/is-there-any-way-to-get-melee-to-hit-bonuses-as-high-as-ranged-to-hit-bonuses&quot;&gt;Is there any way to get melee to-hit bonuses as high as ranged to-hit bonuses?&lt;/a&gt; - had a number of factual problems and actually wobbled back and forth on the question it was actually asking.  It also got a big format edit from V2Blast, but that's not really relevant to how it was received. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in conclusion - format has nothing to do with any of this.  In some cases, clearly expressing yourself is, but mostly, you're at the core not answering the question that is posed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore I think it's in very poor taste to refer to the comments you've gotten as non-constructive criticism, in general the comments have been very on target and you've edited your Q&amp;amp;As to fit and thanked people for that criticism. I've read all the comments, deleted and not, and don't see anything nonconstructive in them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-01-31T14:19:20.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8783" CreationDate="2019-01-31T17:27:26.227" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8784/32840&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt;, which addresses the feedback to the questions and answers you've posted so far on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, RPG.SE can be confusing to newer users, so it may help to address some potential questions going forward. I've compiled these based on the content of your question here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. What kind of site is Roleplaying Games StackExchange (RPG.SE)?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The StackExchange network is for question-and-answer style posts. One user asks a question, and other users attempt to answer it. The network is divided into &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64599/why-so-many-different-sites&quot;&gt;different sites&lt;/a&gt; based on topic, and RPG.SE is for question-and-answer posts about tabletop roleplaying games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;forum&lt;/a&gt;, because the posts are not meant for extended discussion or non-answers. The site doesn't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1274/can-i-send-private-messages-to-users&quot;&gt;private messaging&lt;/a&gt;, although we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat room&lt;/a&gt; for follow-up discussions and conversations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE isn't a wiki either, because it's not meant as a comprehensive reference for any particular tabletop system. However, by having many many questions and answers available, this site &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; meant to build a knowledge base that anyone can use to look up questions they may have about tabletop RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. How to interpret feedback on a post?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a user posts a question or answer, the other site users have liberty to upvote or downvote. In theory, upvotes and downvotes express community feedback on the quality of a post, whether that means the post is well-researched or well-written. However, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572&quot;&gt;downvote can mean anything&lt;/a&gt; from &quot;I think this answer is badly written&quot; to &quot;I think this response doesn't answer the question&quot; to &quot;I just enjoy downvoting&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if a post receives many downvotes and some comments as to why, it may help to read the feedback and learn from it. Since this is a Q&amp;amp;A site and not a forum, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8269&quot;&gt;responses that don't answer the question&lt;/a&gt; are often poorly received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users may also vote to close a question (or put it on hold) if the problem can't be answered according to site standards. Unlike downvotes, this doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of a question, but rather that the question is too broad or unclear or off-topic to be answered on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. Is it okay to post a new answer to an old question that has an answer?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1344/is-it-acceptable-to-resurrect-old-threads-with-new-answers&quot;&gt;outdated answers&lt;/a&gt;, often when the question asks about a specific system that changed since the answer was accepted. For example, when errata or an expansion book is published, the question may potentially have a new answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conversely, if the accepted answer sufficiently addresses the question, and a newer response would not provide a better answer, then a newer answer may be unnecessary. Such answers may seem redundant and typically receive negative feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4. Should answers contain quotes of relevant rules?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Absolutely! Since questions often ask about system rules interactions, it is expected that answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696&quot;&gt;cite the relevant rules&lt;/a&gt; appropriately. Typically, answers that don't &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/167259/how-widespread-is-the-back-it-up-principle&quot;&gt;back up&lt;/a&gt; their claims are poorly received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due to the nature of licenses and intellectual property in tabletop RPG publications, our citation policy gets fuzzy if too much licensed material is quoted. We don't want RPG.SE to become an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6882/whats-our-stance-on-piracy&quot;&gt;unlicensed source of published rules&lt;/a&gt;, so copypasting large blocks of text from the rules may be frowned upon. Generally it's recommended that answers either paraphrase source material, or quote the minimum parts of relevant source material that they need to support any claims in the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastActivityDate="2019-01-31T17:27:26.227" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8783" CreationDate="2019-01-31T20:48:05.420" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sometimes a good comment is a bad answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, to answer your stated question: both content and formatting are things which can add to (or subtract from) the quality of a post. They are both things that will help an answer be correct, clear, and convincing: if an answer is all three, it is more likely to be well received (in the form of upvotes). It isn't really possible to claim that between formatting and content one is &amp;quot;more important&amp;quot; than another, because a complete failure of either will make the other irrelevant (if people can't understand you it doesn't matter that you're right, and if you're wrong and unconvincing it doesn't matter that you're clear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, you mentioned something in your question that could be causing you problems. You mentioned that (bold added):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;others down vote my referenced and quoted answers &lt;strong&gt;despite the comment&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;I started from having numerous up votes as an unofficial answer&lt;/strong&gt; without reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sounds like you started with a well received &lt;em&gt;comment&lt;/em&gt; (which is what I assume you meant by &amp;quot;unofficial answer&amp;quot;), but when you created an answer based on that comment the answer was poorly received. I can understand how that would be confusing: the information is completely the same, why would it be well received once and poorly received another time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that &lt;strong&gt;comments and answers have fundamentally different purposes on this site&lt;/strong&gt;. As has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5164/definition-of-a-valid-comment&quot;&gt;stated elsewhere&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5164/definition-of-a-valid-comment/5165#5165&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton&lt;/a&gt;: Comments are for a brief request for clarification or improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5164/definition-of-a-valid-comment/5166#5166&quot;&gt;Miniman&lt;/a&gt;: Comments are for providing feedback ... which allows questioners or answerers to improve their question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments on a question might be pointing out a minor mistake (which doesn't make the question invalid, but should be changed for clarity or accuracy), and a comment on an answer might be suggesting that a small detail be added to make the answer more complete. These could be excellent comments, doing exactly what comments should do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However if you created an answer which did these things, it might be poorly received. &lt;strong&gt;An answer needs to be correct, clear, and convincing, but it also has to be an answer&lt;/strong&gt;. If you convincingly, clearly, and correctly support a point which doesn't answer the original question, you may be downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same way that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;answers should not be given in comments&lt;/a&gt;, comments (even good and well received ones) can make bad (and poorly received) answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30218" LastEditorUserId="30218" LastEditDate="2022-04-14T15:18:36.173" LastActivityDate="2022-04-14T15:18:36.173" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8787" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-01T02:05:43.780" Score="31" ViewCount="2104" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2019 &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;sage advice compendium&lt;/a&gt; has released, and it includes a change to what is considered &quot;official rulings.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previously, Jeremy Crawford had the capacity to make official rulings over twitter. This is no longer the case. As stated in the updated compendium:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in&#xA;  the Sage Advice Compendium by the game’s lead rules designer, Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford on Twitter).&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;The public statements of the D&amp;amp;D team, or anyone else&#xA;  at Wizards of the Coast, are not official rulings; they are&#xA;  advice&lt;/strong&gt;. Jeremy Crawford’s tweets are often a preview of rulings that will appear here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Commonly Jeremy's tweets were used in answers as official support when no other material was available. I myself reference him frequently when his input was relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that being said, how should we handle answers which are now supported by unofficial material due to this change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32395" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-01T02:14:52.390" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T17:11:38.987" Title="How should we handle answers that use Jeremy Crawford's now unofficial tweets?" Tags="|discussion|answers|dnd-5e|citations|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8787" CreationDate="2019-02-01T02:34:33.443" Score="34" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Nothing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the tweets we often reference to, Crawford, Mike Mearls, etc. are used to &lt;em&gt;support&lt;/em&gt; our answer. Usually it goes in a way like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A designer has clarified how this certain situation should be handled&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A designer has clarified how a thing should work, and my answer is built upon the consequence of the clarification&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A designer has clarified how a certain situation should be handled, and since this is similar situation, then the handling should be the same&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even the part of Sage Advice you've quoted says that they are official &lt;strong&gt;rulings&lt;/strong&gt;, not rules. That means you can make your own ruling, but theirs already clarified how they should be/designed to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This changes nothing on our side, but now some who read an answer backed by tweets might value them less, or not. If an answer relies solely on designer tweet, personally I still consider the tweet as a good barometer of how things should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2019-02-01T02:34:33.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8789" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8787" CreationDate="2019-02-01T02:46:50.227" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's fine for answers to use them as support, but generally answers shouldn't rely on Crawford tweets alone&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Jeremy Crawford explained the change in &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1090691956802371584&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a tweet on January 30, 2019&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It looks like the Invoke Tweet of Jeremy Crawford feature has been nerfed. Official rulings are now found in the Compendium only, with this account merely providing a &amp;quot;preview&amp;quot; of possible future ones.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes, I decided I don't want people feeling they need to dig through my tweets for official answers.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if they aren't &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; rulings, Crawford's tweets still often suggest design intent and clarify ambiguities. They can provide useful support for a good answer to a question, as long as the answer doesn't rely solely on the tweet and nothing else. Often, Crawford's tweets merely reiterate what the rules already state, so the answer can elaborate on the tweets by directly citing the relevant rules and explaining how they provide the answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rulings are all interpretations of the rules. Whether or not Wizards of the Coast or Crawford himself considers a ruling &amp;quot;official&amp;quot;, they can potentially be used to support a good answer to a rules question - but people shouldn't feel obligated to include them. If someone answers a rules question in a way that's contradicted by a Crawford tweet or even a Sage Advice Compendium answer, that's fine, but you should ideally address their existence and explain why you think they're wrong (or why you think they're not the best way to resolve the situation, or whatever). The best arguments for something often anticipate and address counterarguments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What should we do about any answers that &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; rely on tweets alone?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This problem has pretty much the same solutions as with any other answer that's not as good as it could be: downvote it, post a comment suggesting how it can be improved, post a competing answer, and/or (as Medix2 suggested in a comment) put up a bounty to attract better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-21T17:11:38.987" LastActivityDate="2020-09-21T17:11:38.987" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8787" CreationDate="2019-02-01T16:17:18.970" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Nothing should be done&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers can use whatever sources or means of support they think is best for their answer. Voters then decide how good the answer is based off of everything in the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Crawford's tweets being demoted from &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; really has no bearing on the ability for someone to cite them. They were never binding rules to begin with and now they are explicitly so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, good answering practices should always be observed same as we always have. Answers should be well-supported and well-explained. An answer that contains only a tweet without any other kind of discussion or support is (and always has been) generally a poor one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-04T16:48:28.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8791" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-02-01T22:16:03.027" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Suggested Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Did playing RPGs improve your friendships and relationships?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are a social activity, and a lot of games have a learning element to them (whether intended or unintended).  Likewise, if by interacting socially in this kind of game environment one's friendships and relationships were improved, I think that would be interesting to learn (or to what extent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Did playing RPGs hurt or help your GPA, grades, or other measurable school performance marks?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(College/High School audience mostly)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Did playing RPGs influence your relationships at work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There's &lt;a href=&quot;https://workplace.stackexchange.com/q/84746/64595&quot;&gt;a Q&amp;amp;A over at workplace&lt;/a&gt; that suggests that such a thing can happen ...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-08T04:34:12.637" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8742" CreationDate="2019-02-04T20:22:39.920" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, realize that this is fundamentally the wrong place for this discussion–this is a network-wide feature, and RPG will not be getting special behavior. In fact, RPG—along with nearly the entire network—will almost-certainly be stuck with whatever behavior works best for Stack Overflow, because that is, by a massive margin, the most popular, active, and revenue-generating site on the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, as to your points:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions with bounties still appear in the regular question list, with the bounty indicated with a fairly stand-out blue icon. For example, at the time of writing we have these on the front page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R3fbl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/R3fbl.png&quot; alt=&quot;Questions page at time of writing showing questions with bounties&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Starting the bounty also bumps them to the top of the list. They can drop off from there without activity; at the time of writing, the two featured questions are both below the fold, but they are still on the front page. But for at least a time they are on the top of the list, with special highlighting, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the Featured tab will list only them, and that tab indicates how many there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8740/4563&quot;&gt;community ad that advertises the Featured tab&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in conclusion, your premise that bounties actually make questions &lt;em&gt;harder&lt;/em&gt; to find is simply false (they are &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; as easy to find as they were before, since they still appear in the same place), as is the claim that they are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; “featured” per the quoted definition (they are bumped, get a special indicator, get a special page dedicated only to them, and that page has its own community ad).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could they be &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; “featured”? Yes, sure they could. Is that desirable? Seems a bit beyond the scope of this question, but I would argue “no,” personally, at least for the forms of greater “featuring” that come to mind. Clearly, making them “sticky” is far too much; particularly on Stack Overflow you’d fill the entire front page with them (314 Featured questions at the time of writing). Should bounties automatically bump questions regularly, as you suggest? No—any kind of substantive activity on the question or its answers will bump them. If the question is Featured, but still not seeing any activity? Then bumping it more is unlikely to work—the activity just isn’t going to happen. The answer doesn’t exist, or at least, no one has it, or maybe it’s just too much effort even for the bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, bounties are, quite intentionally, a limited tool. Ideally, you shouldn’t need them—your question should draw expert interest by being interesting and worthwhile to answer. After all, that is why we are here, because we &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; answering these kinds of questions. Bounties have their place, but that place is pretty niche.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-02-04T20:22:39.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8793" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8741" CreationDate="2019-02-04T23:44:51.533" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Manager Catija dropped by mod chat and said basically they wouldn't be doing that but we could do an informal one ourselves, with an additional caution to use a very anonymous one and to perhaps stick to site topics and not things that will stir controversy like demographics.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-02-04T23:44:51.533" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8794" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-08T04:18:48.257" Score="0" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked this question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140580/what-is-dd-lore-establishing-evil-good-dark-light&quot;&gt;What is D&amp;amp;D lore establishing Evil/Good = Dark/Light?&lt;/a&gt;) to gain some knowledge about D&amp;amp;D lore, mythology, arcana, tales, stories etc.within published D&amp;amp;D literature that  provide context for the relationship between light and good, and also between dark and evil. I believe I have addressed the concerns stated in the reasons for the hold and in the comments.  Those concerns were:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;question not clear&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;added support for my claim that there are many instances of dark=evil or light=good in the 5e rulebooks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have references from each of the 3 rulebooks for both dark=evil and for good=light. Currently I have added dark=evil from the PHB and DMG. I have the references from MM prepared and am compiling references for light=good from all three as well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not worried about downvotes, I'm more concerned with getting answers to what seems like an SE valid question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140580/what-is-dd-lore-establishing-evil-good-dark-light/140606#140606&quot;&gt;One respondent, Miles Bedinger, has already supplied a suitable answer&lt;/a&gt; which is exactly what I was looking for. I would like either for this answer to be reopened so that others may see it and up/downvote the question or answers and so that any information missing from the current answer can be expanded on by another user. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is currently not suitable for RPG SE, please explain why so I can clarify it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can the D&amp;amp;D lore question about evil/good and light/dark be reopened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-08T04:47:18.660" LastActivityDate="2019-02-10T06:37:21.940" Title="How can the D&amp;D lore question about evil/good and light/dark be reopened?" Tags="|support|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8795" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8794" CreationDate="2019-02-08T04:45:33.480" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It cannot, it is too broad.  Questions here are designed to have a best answer, not lists or brainstorms.  ‘Random lore about dark being bad’ is an unbounded list.  Sorry, wanting to just learn more about a subject is laudable but does not fit our Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-02-08T04:45:33.480" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-02-08T09:08:20.793" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;More suggestions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why do you play RPGs? (select all that apply)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure how to put this into a survey format; fill in the blank seems like a bad option.    Maybe like 'fun/personal improvement/professional/other(specify)'?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How often do you engage with RPG-related material?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several times a day/ once a day/ several times a week/ once a week/ a couple of times a month/ infrequently&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How often do you play RPGs?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never/yearly/monthly/biweekly/weekly/more than once a week&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How often do you GM RPGs?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never/yearly/monthly/biweekly/weekly/more than once a week&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-08T09:08:20.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8754" CreationDate="2019-02-08T09:17:45.253" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We can't answer this without ♦ mod support&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;♦ mods get access to site statistics we don't get access to.  A survey could be useful for looking for unexpected demographic gaps (provided we have some sort of way in which to find those gaps).  If that information is stuff our ♦ mods already have, though, then the survey would largely be wasted work because we could instead just, like, ask nicely or something.  Even if it's information we do want and don't have, a survey would work best if it's data could be synthesized with our preexisting site analytics, and I'm not sure how to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-08T09:17:45.253" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8798" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8763" CreationDate="2019-02-08T09:50:00.540" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Suggested Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions regarding the way people play&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(following the dark wanderer's suggestion)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For how long have you been playing RPGs?&lt;/strong&gt; General experience argument.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When did you first play an RPG?&lt;/strong&gt; Also help with demographics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How did you discover RPGs?&lt;/strong&gt; Through Friend/Family/Event/Internet/Other&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Which RPG do you have the most experience with?&lt;/strong&gt; On which games is our community the most able to help, and on which are we lacking?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions regarding the way people use the stack&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What tag do you come for here the most?&lt;/strong&gt; i.e. what do you require help with?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why do you visit rpg.stackExchange&lt;/strong&gt; Fun &amp;amp; relax / Learn new things / Help other / Find answers to question. Why people visit the stack?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Did rpg.stackExchange improve your game experience as a player?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Did rpg.stackExchange improve your game experience as a GM?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22210" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-09T00:48:18.720" LastActivityDate="2019-02-09T00:48:18.720" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8799" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8800" CreationDate="2019-02-08T20:05:31.837" Score="5" ViewCount="91" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140674&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105549&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; yet my flag was declined. The question has now been marked as a duplicate of that question, so why was my flag declined?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-09T00:48:33.340" LastActivityDate="2019-02-09T00:48:33.340" Title="Why was my duplicate flag declined?" Tags="|support|specific-question|duplicates|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8799" CreationDate="2019-02-08T22:44:33.413" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I took a look at the timeline of the post to see what happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was declined automatically when the review queue vote result ended up as “Leave Open” (by 3 to 1). Your flag recommended it for duplication, but the reviewers disagreed. That ended the recommendation with a “decline.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later a user with a gold badge closed it as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though the outcome seems weird, it’s not really that odd when opinions are divided. Getting to the right end result can sometimes take a few iterations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(One declined flag isn’t a black mark on your account either, so don’t worry too much about that.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-02-08T22:44:33.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8801" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8794" CreationDate="2019-02-10T06:37:21.940" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A brief explanation:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a brief explanation of why I'm asking the question about available lore in D&amp;amp;D related to the origins of good/evil being associated with dark/light.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two other GMs and I are creating three separate epic adventure campaigns that will run concurrently. Each campaign will have three core players starting at levels ranging from 15-17 (20 before the end). There will also be several committed drop-in players who will play in short stretches with PCs ranging from levels 4-15. In addition there will probably be random players dropping in for single days with any level up to 15.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three campaign &amp;quot;teams&amp;quot; will eventually meet up over a three day weekend marathon session in which all the nine core PCs (and possibly one or two other PCs) will be united in-game and each GM will take the helm for one full day of gaming, while the other two GM's provide support (and prepare snacks and dinner). This final 3 day marathon session will be the culmination of the three teams' adventures and will establish much of the foundation of the D&amp;amp;D world in which the three of us GM's will run our future campaigns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What the world will end up looking like:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not something I can answer fully at this point as some of what the world will look like will be determined by the choices the PCs make in their adventures.  There are infinite possibilities.  However everything is on the table, and the overarching story lines of the three GMs will subvert some concepts and events in the D&amp;amp;D multiverse that are generally considered fixed.  For example one of the GMs is currently considering a campaign that takes their team of PCs on an epic journey through time, space and a considerable amount of planar travel and reestablishes the relationship between Dragons and Giants, essentially recreating that history into one where dragons and giants unite to defend the planes against encroaching demon lords and possibly other planar beings. As you can imagine this will upend many assumptions currently in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The overarching story line of the campaign I will GM will result in the subversion of the established connections between good and light, and between evil and darkness.  In the world that comes after the events in this campaign evil will tend to associate with light and good will tend to associate with darkness. Demons will live in planes of light. Angels will live in darkness.  The Underdark will be the home of caring elves with forests of mycelium and brilliant underground mushroom gardens.  The sun will be seen as the harbinger of death. Night will be a haven of safety from the evil that lurks in the day. These are just a few examples of the impact this adventure will have on the worlds and planes of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many details to establish for this world which we are tentatively calling &amp;quot;Endworld,&amp;quot; but hopefully this gives you a taste of what it will be like and how different it will be from the current generally established worlds of D&amp;amp;D.  In Endworld the changes we establish will affect all time, all planes and all worlds of existence.  In short it will encompass the whole of the D&amp;amp;D multiverse because the campaigns themselves will encompass the whole of the D&amp;amp;D multiverse.  The shifts we create in this epic three-part campaign will be something we can apply to any world, any plane, any pantheon, throughout all history in the D&amp;amp;D multiverse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example if we were to pick up the original Ravenloft module from 1983 we would be able to convert it to Endworld, just as we would be able to convert the most recent Forgotten Realms adventure campaign. Likewise many of the planes will see vast changes, most notably the Nine Hells will be bathed in light with castles of gleaming crystal.  All of the D&amp;amp;D multiverse, from its very beginnings to this day will be open to use in Endworld.  Of course non-5e material will need other converting as well, but we've done this in the past on our own or by purchasing conversions online.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why I need various lore from any and all points in the D&amp;amp;D multiverse:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order for this extensive campaign to be successful I will have to design an adventure that weaves through many worlds, planes, and times. The associations of dark/evil and light/good cannot be reversed if I don't know where they began.  Which narratives established this duality, which gods cause them to endure, which ongoing cosmic struggles epitomize the duality and in a way aide them in persisting?  In short I need to know as much lore as I can from throughout all D&amp;amp;D settings concerning the establishment of dark being associated with evil and light being associated with good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Where to go from here:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that this establishes clearly what the information is that I am seeking and why I asked this question.  I understand that I asked the question without providing enough background information and I take responsibility for that miscommunication.  In light of some of the objections which have arisen I have some solutions that I hope will suitably address the missteps that I have made and provide a question that meets the expectations of this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will provide background info and state clearly what my goal is.&lt;/strong&gt;  Thanks to @SevenSidedDie introducing me to the XY problem, I recognize that I posted an almost perfect example of what &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to do when trying to avoid the XY problem. My original post addressed what I believed was the solution to a problem and I never posted what the problem actually was that I was trying to solve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will break up my question into smaller more manageable questions.&lt;/strong&gt; I see that asking a question with a broad range of possible answers the way my original question did is not appropriate for this site.  @ObliviousSage and others have made very good points about the breadth of my question being to vast.  I respect that position and will instead ask a series of specific questions that focus on individual worlds within D&amp;amp;D or on individual planes or pantheons.  This will narrow the focus of possible answers and will, I hope, make these questions suitable for RPG SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will clarify what it is I'm seeking.&lt;/strong&gt; Instead of posing a general question like I did in my original post, referencing &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D lore&amp;quot; I will ask more pointed questions that have specific answers.  For example, &lt;em&gt;Which gods in the Forgotten Realms are involved in mythology concerning the duality of light and dark and good and evil?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will avoid broad opinion-based statements.&lt;/strong&gt; In my original post I think my statement that dark/light and good/evil are tiring was irrelevant and unnecessary to the question as a whole.  In this case I think my personal opinion got in the way of asking a question.  I will leave that and similar statements out of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I will be as clear as I can be with my wording.&lt;/strong&gt; I think some of my original wording was not very clear and may have created some miscommunication on my part.  I will strive to be very clear in how I phrase the relevant info and question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks,&#xA;I hope this addresses the concerns that came up with the original question.  This approach will mean that I will be posting several distinct but similar questions.  In order not to clutter the question time-line with a bunch of these questions I will space them out over several weeks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-10T06:37:21.940" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8802" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-14T15:02:46.157" Score="12" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;trivial edits&lt;/a&gt; (and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6368/50419&quot;&gt;style wars/most style edits&lt;/a&gt;) are inappropriate on RPGSE. But the question arises, how trivial is trivial? For example, I recently saw &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/9722/2&quot;&gt;this edit&lt;/a&gt; on an old question: one genuine typo fixed, parenthetical paragraph replaced with a regular one, and a contraction was replaced by the full form. This is just an example; there are others, of varying 'sizes'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this considered a big enough improvement in clarity to warrant an edit? Or is it inappropriate? Furthermore, if it's inappropriate, should it be reverted to prevent 'fait accompli' phenomena/tactics?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="50419" LastEditDate="2019-02-15T17:18:01.527" LastActivityDate="2019-02-15T17:18:01.527" Title="How Trivial an Edit is Too Trivial to Make?" Tags="|discussion|editing|policy|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8802" CreationDate="2019-02-14T15:08:15.083" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Nothing that needs fixing is too trivial to fix.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For examples of minor edits, V2Blast has a long track record of correcting all sorts of minutiae from formatting to hyphenation.  While each individually may be very minor, it has made for a much more consistent reading experience on this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the policy should read, &quot;Making small edits for the sake of making edits is discouraged.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="38434" LastEditDate="2019-02-14T15:15:58.467" LastActivityDate="2019-02-14T15:15:58.467" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8804" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8802" CreationDate="2019-02-14T16:40:51.803" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&quot;Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged&quot; but it's always helpful &quot;to make the post significantly better when you edit&quot;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the particular example you've cited, it seems clear to me that all the changes were improvements to comprehending the problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Typos are errors. Fixing the typo fixed the legibility.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mixing contractions and possessives with &lt;em&gt;'s&lt;/em&gt; makes parsing visually difficult. Using the &lt;em&gt;'s&lt;/em&gt; only where necessary (the possessive) simplifies parsing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Parenthesizing the majority of a post's content violates the purpose of parenthetical expressions and confuses the intent of the content. Removing them avoids making the entire post look like an aside.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know your question isn't about this particular example, per se, but examine that example and my bullet points above in light of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;site policy&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged - try to make the post significantly better when you edit, correcting all problems that you observe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an edit makes the post significantly better by correcting observed problems, it is by definition not a tiny, trivial edit. The number of symbols changed isn't what's significant; whether the post is better after the change is the deciding factor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's consider a hypothetical example where an edit occurred to the same example post, but instead of the three changes above, the following three changes were made:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Putting a comma after &quot;If someone dies.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Changing &quot;easy to consider&quot; to &quot;straightforward to treat.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Removing the quotation marks around the &quot;physical person&quot; and &quot;meta-person object&quot; phrases.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the total amount of content changed is actually more than what was changed in the real example case, yet the meaning wouldn't be more clear to a reader than it was before, so it wouldn't have been a significant improvement. That's what a tiny, trivial edit would look like, and site policy on those is pretty clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt;: So, how trivial is too trivial? By definition, if it's a significant improvement, it's not trivial and should be encouraged. If it's not a significant improvement, it's trivial and should be discouraged (or rolled back as necessary).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2019-02-14T16:40:51.803" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8805" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8802" CreationDate="2019-02-14T17:03:13.310" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A trivial edit is one which doesn't enhance readability even a little&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A common example is choice between multiple comprehensible &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6367/37154&quot;&gt;styles&lt;/a&gt;; for example, to my knowledge, the &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; style used in D&amp;amp;D 5E for spell names is &lt;em&gt;italics without title case&lt;/em&gt;, but I've seen (and used) the opposite Title Case Without Italics as well. Either of those styles is equally comprehensible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The linked edit is basically fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the things explicitly listed as a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; reason to edit is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The corrected typo obviously counts. The change to eliminate the parenthetical paragraph doesn't fit one of the example categories, but I think it is slightly beneficial. The change of &amp;quot;What's&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;What is&amp;quot; would be trivial on its own, but I wouldn't rollback an edit just because part of it is trivial. I think that change was most likely tacked on to the edit in order to satisfy the minimum characters changed requirement. Speaking of which...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The 6-character requirement applies across StackExchange and is unlikely to change&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if it were the case that RPG.SE wanted to permit smaller edits, I don't think it would be possible without convincing the entire network. You can read more about the requirement &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/140288/405142&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, fixing a typo is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; trivial even if the change is too short to be proposed, and making a lot of trivial edits to meet the minimum character requirement does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; keep the edit from being trivial, but the requirement remains nonetheless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-14T17:03:13.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8807" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8808" CreationDate="2019-02-16T05:13:15.830" Score="21" ViewCount="385" Body="&lt;p&gt;I left an admittedly rude comment on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/141168/32426&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; earlier today (requires privilege to see deleted post). I chose quite poor wording and offended the answer poster. While drafting an apology comment, the poster then deleted their answer (at 4:20 UTC). Since SE isn't like a forum and I didn't really have another way to deliver an apology, I felt bad but I had to move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I noticed I received a spree of 9 rapid-fire down-votes (between 4:27 UTC and 4:30 UTC) on a bunch of my questions and answers over the past couple weeks, including at least &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/141099/32426&quot;&gt;one answer&lt;/a&gt; that is objectively factual and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/140990/32426&quot;&gt;one answer&lt;/a&gt; that involved a lot of research effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd prefer if these two events are unrelated and that the timing is coincidental... but I doubt it when separated by only 7 minutes. It's infeasible that all 9 of those down-votes were cast in the span of 3 minutes by 9 different users on questions and answers posted on different days. I don't know whether it was retaliatory or not, and the reputation loss isn't substantial, but I'm concerned about the cause and possible repercussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do I do (or what does somebody do) about this? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2019-02-16T17:01:26.023" Title="What to do about possible retaliatory down-voting spree?" Tags="|discussion|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8807" CreationDate="2019-02-16T10:42:43.660" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recognise you've read and checked &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/126829/what-is-serial-voting-and-how-does-it-affect-me&quot;&gt;What is serial voting and how does it affect me?&lt;/a&gt; as linked in comments, but I'll leave this here for a general answer as well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Every night around 03:00 UTC, a voting fraud detection script is run that looks for patterns such as these. It basically looks for users who have voted on another user's posts many times. The threshold number is fairly low within a given amount of time (the exact mechanics are kept secret). When the system detects this pattern, all of the votes cast from that user to the user affected are reversed, and a &quot;voting corrected&quot; event is added to the affected user's reputation history to indicate what has occurred.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In about 17 hours that script will run, check for serial downvotes, and reverse any it finds. If one user has downvoted you a ton, the script will almost certainly reverse them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you believe you're a victim of serial downvoting and more than 24 hours later there's no record in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=reputation&quot;&gt;your reputation history&lt;/a&gt; of the votes having been reversed, please raise a flag (on anything, such as one of your own posts that was downvoted) and let us know and we can reach out to have it investigated and (if there really was serial voting) corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. If I'm ever in a situation where I want to reach out to somebody but their post was deleted, I might do so by leaving a comment on something else they've posted, if possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-16T17:01:26.023" LastActivityDate="2019-02-16T17:01:26.023" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8809" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-16T22:20:35.640" Score="4" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/141244/23445&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; (which I've deleted) to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/141193/23445&quot;&gt;What happens when you cast Fog Cloud behind a wall?&lt;/a&gt;, but this isn't the only case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question originally asked about Create Bonfire, not Fog Cloud - however, the details of the Create Bonfire spell gave a much simpler solution to the more theoretical rules question the asker had in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that the question has been changed, my answer is not useful. Normally, I'd edit my answer to address the new question, but I don't have anything to add that isn't already stated in both of the answers currently rated above it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I deleted my answer since it was now no more useful than a comment, but that feels abit strange. Was that the right thing to do in this case?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-18T12:07:04.827" LastActivityDate="2019-02-18T12:07:04.827" Title="Should I delete an answer that becomes irrelevant after the question is edited?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|editing|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2019-02-16T22:34:02.460" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8754" CreationDate="2019-02-18T06:43:18.437" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mods have advised against asking demographic information and advised that the community managers have also advised against this.  Inasmuch as a survey might be useful, it is exactly a tool for gathering demographic information. Therefore we ought not do a survey, as all useful information we'd be gathering would be demographic in nature (what % of users are D&amp;amp;D users, what % of users are primarily GMing, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-18T06:43:18.437" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8811" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8812" CreationDate="2019-02-19T01:10:42.887" Score="15" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently crossed the rep threshold to gain the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/trusted-user&quot;&gt;trusted user&lt;/a&gt; privilege. The FAQ is very clear about the deleting and editing privileges... but not the undeleting privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When should I vote to undelete an answer?&lt;/strong&gt; What is the guidance on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I just saw what I believe to be a correct answer to a question by a fairly new user (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/141334/32426&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, for those who can view deleted answers). It looks to me like the only reason the author deleted it was that it had one downvote and there was some contention in the comments. Then I noticed I can now vote to undelete it. Well...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Firstly, I don't know if that immediately causes something to happen or if there's a particular number of people who need to vote for anything to happen, so I'm afraid to touch it! &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Secondly, I don't know if I should vote to undelete the answer on the grounds that it's a perfectly correct answer that needed a little air to breathe and a few edits and shouldn't have been deleted at all or whether the author's decision is sovereign.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question isn't about this particular example, but it brought it to my attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know what the point of this privilege is and how I should be &quot;trusted&quot; to use it! Can you please advise? I did not find anything on SE site-wide meta, but my apologies if this is an easy thing to find and I managed to overlook it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-19T09:03:40.550" LastActivityDate="2019-02-19T10:31:29.570" Title="When should I vote to undelete an answer?" Tags="|support|deleted-answers|privileges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8811" CreationDate="2019-02-19T07:44:33.847" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s kind of like how the privilege to unhold/reopen works: “should this be on hold? I don’t think it should be; I’m voting to reopen.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The undelete privilege is the same: vote to undelete when you don’t think it should be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It takes the same number of votes from non-author, non-mod users to undelete as it takes to delete: &lt;strong&gt;3&lt;/strong&gt;. So you’re free to cast your vote and leave the other two to others’ judgement. It’s not all on you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-02-19T10:31:29.570" LastActivityDate="2019-02-19T10:31:29.570" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8813" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8814" CreationDate="2019-02-20T14:50:55.540" Score="5" ViewCount="54" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I click on the review queue button, it shows &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are no review queues available to you&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I previously had access and I am wondering if this is just saying that there are no queues that need to be reviewed or if it's a bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41081" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-20T15:16:28.033" LastActivityDate="2019-02-20T15:16:28.033" Title="No access to review queues?" Tags="|support|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8813" CreationDate="2019-02-20T15:15:16.820" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it may be caused by having used up all your up/down votes for the day—you've cast 40. See here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/305411/152515&quot;&gt;Review queues seem to have disappeared&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it's not exactly a bug, but it certainly isn't an ideal user experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have enough reputation for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/access-review-queues&quot;&gt;Access Review Queues privilege&lt;/a&gt; (500+) which means you should be able to see the Late Answers and First Posts review queue otherwise. You are also not review banned &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/293479/152515&quot;&gt;which caused this issue for someone else&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-02-20T15:15:16.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8815" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8816" CreationDate="2019-02-20T21:02:16.740" Score="12" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I'm new to the voting system and had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8807/what-to-do-about-possible-retaliatory-down-voting-spree&quot;&gt;bit of a gaffe&lt;/a&gt; trying to zen after a bad comment found me on a bad day. Long story short, I down-voted good answers with the intent to undo the down-votes as a method of letting go of any ill feelings towards the user, only to find that votes got locked after a few minutes. Fortunately, the issue was resolved and the down-votes were undone, and (hopefully) there's no hard feelings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if they hadn't, what if I were to edit the answer with &quot;MilesBedinger is an idiot and is undoing an unearned downvote&quot;, undo the downvote, and then delete my added sentence?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this possible, and more to the point, is it acceptable? Or is it just breaking one rule to fix another gaffe?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51136" LastActivityDate="2019-02-22T04:07:14.157" Title="Editing an answer to change a mistaken vote" Tags="|discussion|editing|down-votes|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8815" CreationDate="2019-02-20T21:47:22.437" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll examine that from the lens of something that will actually happen: just generally making downvotes we might later wish we hadn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time, just live with it; if the answer's any good it'll have plenty of other upvotes to negate the impact of your single one. Single downvotes on anything are like white noise from the universe and aren't really worth much fuss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits should be done only if there's actual editing to be done, and not made solely so we can change our votes. Instead of that edit summary, just find a worthwhile way to improve the post. There will probably be something. If you're feeling guilty consider that work your penance. &lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; you can change your vote. If there's genuinely nothing you could do then it's probably a pretty good answer; see previous paragraph.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-02-20T21:47:22.437" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8817" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-21T05:45:36.800" Score="10" ViewCount="245" Body="&lt;p&gt;For example in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141486/are-there-rules-for-falling-in-water-vs-diving-vs-just-jumping-in-for-various&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about damage when falling/diving into water in 5e, where it seems utterly clear there is no RAW, is there a way to query for an acceptable way of handling this that is neither a &quot;shopping question&quot; nor an &quot;opinion-based&quot; question?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested &lt;em&gt;not just for this falling-in-water example&lt;/em&gt; but for all questions in general that are like this -- is there a template that works for the stack? A couple of possibilities I have been considering:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Propose a specific way of handling it and ask &quot;Is this balanced?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Construe it as a &quot;gm-techniques&quot; question of how to run a game most prudently when things like this come up in the campaign scenario.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is there a better way (any way) to ask the question that will not collapse into opining/shopping?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I am not talking about rare &quot;edge cases&quot; (things that will almost never happen) -- I take it, for example, that jumping or diving or falling in water is common enough in adventuring that it is a reasonable expectation of players that their GM have ready-to-hand a clear and consistent manner of dealing with it.  It is precisely the relative commonness of the thing that makes me inclined to think there should be some way to make the question appropriate to the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48996" LastActivityDate="2019-02-23T06:56:07.550" Title="Is there a non-opinion-based way to ask a question about handling common situations not touched on by RAW?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8818" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8817" CreationDate="2019-02-21T05:54:08.100" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;In theory, just ask &quot;how do I handle this&quot;. This is exactly the kind of question that our policy of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective is supposed to take care of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice, just ask &quot;how do I handle this&quot;. But don't be surprised if you get a glut of &quot;here's what I would do&quot; answers that gets the question closed as opinion-based. (Especially if you're unfortunate enough to end up on HNQ.) If that happens, it's often not really the fault of the question, just a lack of self-control on the part of the answerers that sadly ends with the question being closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2019-02-21T05:54:08.100" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8817" CreationDate="2019-02-21T13:45:36.570" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Focus on the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt;, not the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;How do I assign damage when someone falls 30' into water,&amp;quot; as you note, sometimes doesn't end up working out so well in practice. Miniman's answer pointing out that GS/BS should be shoring up the quality of the answers a question gets is perfectly correct, of course. And it still doesn't always work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I contend that you &lt;em&gt;tend&lt;/em&gt; to get much better answers when focusing on a &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; you had rather than a &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; you have. For example&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I assigned 3d6 damage when someone fell 30' onto water, but...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(a) it left us feeling unheroic when we talked about it at end-of-session&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(b) it felt like too much damage based on my experience cliff-diving&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(c) I have a hard time remembering these sorts of snap-rulings I make at the table&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(d) it led to ten minutes of arguments and physics calculations that I'm sure we screwed up and derailed the session (not that I railroad!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(e) ...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notice that each of the above would likely lead you to different, &lt;em&gt;experience-based&lt;/em&gt; answers coming in. And that's, in my opinion, where this stack can really shine. There are a lot of people here who've run thousands of hours of games and probably have experienced your problem. If you tell them what it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-21T13:45:36.570" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8820" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8815" CreationDate="2019-02-22T04:07:14.157" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If&lt;/em&gt; you were going to do this, yes you'd make a trivial edit, undo your vote, and then edit it back to its original state.  Probably best to make it just whitespace, not with your name in it, though.  You could make the changelog message something like &quot;trivial edit so I can fix a mis-cast vote&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The edit history for the post would then say something like &quot;Miles Bedinger: edit removed during grace period&quot;.  (source: I've seen that on Stack Overflow a couple times.  I don't know the motivation of the editor, but it probably wasn't this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that would still bump the question to the front page (and the top of the recently-active list for tags people are watching), so &lt;strong&gt;don't do that unless you can come up with some minor improvement to make with an actual edit&lt;/strong&gt;.  Could be formatting, a typo, or adding a link to a source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And of course don't plan to do this again in the future.  But sure as a least-bad option for fixing mistakes, doing that on some nice answers that you want to upvote instead could possibly be ok.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15436" LastActivityDate="2019-02-22T04:07:14.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8821" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8817" CreationDate="2019-02-22T20:32:05.263" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Quickly downvote answers lacking experience, and leave a comment repudiating their disclaimed ignorance, if any&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8818/14848&quot;&gt;Miniman points out&lt;/a&gt;, the problems that lead to these questions being closed are not usually so much an issue with the questions themselves but with the very low-quality off-the-cuff answers they often attract.  The best thing you can do to keep a question like this open as a querent is to fend off those sorts of low-quality answers.  How you frame the question is an important part of that, and you can get a lot of mileage out of a short section explaining the general requirements you are looking for in an answer (e.g. has been tested before in practice).  That said, you are still very likely, especially for popular tags, to get a lot of bad answers, and there's more you can do.  Actively warding off bad answers from your question even &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;posting it is an important part of getting questions you care about answered well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the querent, you get a notification whenever someone answers one of your questions, which allows you the opportunity (if you are not particularly unlucky or asking about 5th edition D&amp;amp;D) to respond to an answer before anyone else can.  Especially for D&amp;amp;D questions of any edition, ignorant drive-by voting is a huge factor in a post's score.  Answers that are currently rated 0 or higher will be upvoted regardless of their merits, more intensely the higher-rated they currently are.  Answers that are rated -2 or lower, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; if there is an upvoted comment deconstructing the problems with the answer, would draw drive-by down votes but there's a rep barrier so instead they just don't draw drive-by upvotes and sink negative at a more moderate pace via drive-by voting from established community members (who should know better, but hey) if it's 5th edition or a couple of big tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, you need to be that initial downvote and critical comment.  It doesn't always work, but in my experience with FATE and 3.X questions you are &lt;em&gt;much&lt;/em&gt; more likely to stave off the torrent of insulting bad answers if you liberally provide immediate negative feedback than if you don't. Frequently these sorts of answers will start with 'I've never played X, but' or 'I've never had this happen, but'.  Those are good things to object to in a comment.  If an answer is more of the 'do X [citation needed]' kind, then a comment saying 'Have you tested this?  How did it work in practice?' can be good.  If you have the expertise, you can add &amp;quot;How did you deal with [X,Y,Z obvious practical problems with untested homebrew solution]?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ironically, if you can get your question &lt;em&gt;off&lt;/em&gt; the front page, it's likely the only people answering it will be qualified and the answers you get, though they may take a very long time, will be much better on average.  You'll still get a lot of expert attention as long as the question is 'unanswered'-- i.e. it has no answers rated higher than 0-- but you will miss out on that if even one of the bad answers can retain a rating of +1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, edge cases where people are unlikely to have experience are equally fine in theory, though it will be harder to get good answers in practice.  The real problem is that our community hates a vacuum and seems to feel a need to post &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; even if it's not very good if a question doesn't have any answers yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-23T06:56:07.550" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8822" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-26T22:16:42.267" Score="8" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142032/42386&quot;&gt;Which Armor Class values should be used as Controls when making Damage Calculations?&lt;/a&gt; in an attempt to try to reify the Armor Class values I use when making DPR calculations for this stack. It was closed for being too opinion based, and I'd like to know what an answerable version of this question would be. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My assumption is that the experience of stack users who've played a lot more campaigns than I have (which isn't a lot, FYI) might shed some light on which AC values are more commonly used by DMs and (possibly especially) published campaigns; information which wouldn't necessarily be gleaned from simply reading each statblock in the Monster Manual. But at the same time, I think there's ways to discern between bad answers to this question and good answers, and if not, then what should be done with the question to get to that point?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T22:16:21.983" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T22:16:21.983" Title="Workshopping my question about Armor Class ranges" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8822" CreationDate="2019-02-26T22:39:03.277" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ask about the statistical distribution of AC values. Even a change as simple as &quot;what is the average AC of monsters at each CR&quot; will eliminate answers that draw a conclusion without putting in the work you care about. As it is, you're likely to get answers along the lines of &quot;AC 16 at CR 8 cos that's what the DMG says&quot; or even &quot;I've DMed a lot and I feel like it's 12&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, you probably shouldn't ask the actual question &quot;what is the average AC of monsters at each CR&quot;, because it's liable to be closed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95624/15469&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2019-02-26T22:39:03.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8242" CreationDate="2019-02-27T09:51:26.027" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, and Changes Should Not Be Made Behind the Community's Back&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, while I'm surprised by which one is which in the definitions of the tags, the distinction between the (planned) sequence series of events, and the combined planned-and-unplanned emergent arcs produced collectively by the GM and players, is a useful one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, the prior community discussions leaned towards leaving the tag alone (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5094/do-we-need-both-plot-and-story&quot;&gt;at 9 vs. 6&lt;/a&gt; as of 2019-02-27) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2908/50419&quot;&gt;the story tag not being a problem&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8263/50419&quot;&gt;proposition of erasing one of the tags has a net zero vote&lt;/a&gt; (again, as of 2019-02-27). So I'm surprised that the merger was performed despite the community vote leaning in the opposite direction, and that the bump only happened &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;. In fact it seems like when such a change is made, there is no way to try to reverse it through Actual Usage (which seems to normally be one of the principles of shaping the way tags become structured).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T09:51:26.027" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8826" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8827" CreationDate="2019-02-27T10:04:06.470" Score="4" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed something odd going on. Two questions I found interesting on the front page list new modification (incidentally both by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/30985/abraham-ray&quot;&gt;Abraham Ray&lt;/a&gt;). So of course I wanted to read what was edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q9Tne.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/q9Tne.png&quot; alt=&quot;Listed modifications&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clicking the links, they lead me to the main pages of each question. So OK, that implies the modifications are in the OP. But when I look at the modification logs, neither &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/141899/revisions&quot;&gt;of&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/140725/revisions&quot;&gt;them&lt;/a&gt; has any modifications by Abraham Ray, not even reverted ones!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's going on with the logs? It looks like a bug (incorrect display of what is the last modification), but maybe it's something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-02-27T16:37:38.190" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T16:37:38.190" Title="Why Are Modification Logs Misleading?" Tags="|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8827" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8826" CreationDate="2019-02-27T10:21:48.700" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This user has a now deleted answer in both questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found those same questions in the list of active questions, and clicking on the &quot;modified x hours ago&quot; on each of them did bring me directly to these now deleted answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;need 10k reputation to view deleted posts&lt;/a&gt; that is probably why you were simply directed to the main post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/70024/when-an-answer-is-deleted-change-person-listed-as-last-modifier&quot;&gt;request on the main meta&lt;/a&gt; to change this behavior and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/75828/last-activity-on-question-shows-modified-by-user-who-did-not-ask-or-answer?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;same question&lt;/a&gt; also asked on the main meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-02-27T10:25:43.647" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T10:25:43.647" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8828" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8822" CreationDate="2019-02-27T14:51:43.910" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I had commented on this question asking for clarification on why CR is involved at all. If you're asking about a baseline AC, I do not see why CR is part of this. If you focus just on that baseline AC request, I don't see any issue why this can't be reopened (but do see a potential issue with opinion-based answers, but that's something to deal with if and when it happens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T14:51:43.910" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8829" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-27T15:40:35.633" Score="5" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142096/how-can-i-get-my-players-to-come-to-the-game-session-after-agreeing-to-a-date&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; is asking about an issue that seems like it is pretty clear of system mechanics. However, it started as being tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and it is clear that is the game being played. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I removed the 5e tag originally because I saw nothing that the system can contribute, but then I did think of a couple instances where the system might have an impact and where answerers would be helped by having 5e knowledge. For example, 5e doesn't really have any way to deal with players dropping out in an easy way so solutions along those lines would be helped taking the system into consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, I am of the opinion that adding system tags does not hurt because it only adds context, but some have argued the other way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even more confusing is looking back through similar older questions I have found ones labeled with a system and some labeled as agnostic. What is the better choice here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-02-28T00:11:30.737" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T03:07:30.967" Title="Should this question about player attendance be system agnostic?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8829" CreationDate="2019-02-27T15:46:30.347" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the reasons to reject a suggested tag edit is when it adds tags that don’t describe the problem itself. The guidance the reject reason gives, paraphrased: tags should reflect what the question is &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt;, not just what it &lt;em&gt;contains&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my eye, that is a group management problem, and what game they’re playing is useful context to have in the body, but it’s not &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 5th Edition, so I don’t think it should have the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It shouldn’t have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag. I don’t see any need for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag either. It should just have tags describing it as about attendance and group dynamics. (I don’t think it deserves the overused &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt; either, but that’s a whole other complex discussion.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Speaking only as an experienced user, not dictating anything site-critical as a mod. I could be wrong after all. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-02-27T15:52:04.687" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T15:52:04.687" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8829" CreationDate="2019-02-27T15:47:41.363" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should just have no system tag and no system-agnostic tag. It's just a social question, and system-agnostic is functionally meaningless enough to be tag tax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T15:47:41.363" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8829" CreationDate="2019-02-27T16:04:49.013" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Acceptable But Not Mandatory&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The [system-agnostic] tag is meant when 'You want solutions to the question that are not directly tied to a game's mechanics'; in this case, it is a useful signal to indicate that one doesn't want answers along the lines of 'Oh, let the players miss the XP from missed sessions and have them regret it!' or the like. But one can also not add it if one also accepts mechanics-specific solutions. Thus, in this case, &lt;strong&gt;let the author decide depending on the marker or lack thereof needed&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T16:04:49.013" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8833" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-02-27T16:40:18.753" Score="20" ViewCount="1086" Body="&lt;p&gt;Coming off my discussion about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8829/should-this-question-about-player-attendance-be-system-agnostic&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; I have realized that I have no idea how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag is supposed to be used correctly. Or, I thought I did but that not everyone agrees. Or maybe nobody ever agreed in the first place and I'm just catching on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been a hot meta topic before and I have read the relevant old metas, but&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They are very old (the most recent being in 2013)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/do-we-need-the-system-agnostic-tag?rq=1&quot;&gt;Do we need the System-Agnostic Tag?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2794/is-system-agnostic-a-meta-tag?rq=1&quot;&gt;Is [system-agnostic] a meta tag?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3024/does-the-system-agnostic-tag-conflict-with-system-specific-tags&quot;&gt;Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They seem to rely on some old and/or false assumptions (eg &amp;quot;because we, in effect require a system tag...&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stack has changed a lot since 2013 and I think a modern answer would be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They don't actually give me an idea of how the tag is actually&#xA;supposed to be used in a way that adds value. Some contradict each other (which, to be fair, is to be expected of developing new metas but it doesn't help me understand any better) or are vague to the point of not being terribly helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag usage can and does change over time. And this one seems especially volatile if the last link is  to be taken as fact given that it lists a bunch of different ways and reasons for the tag to be used (none/few of which seem to be captured in the current tag wiki). Has the folksonomy of this tag changed in the following 6+ years?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One matter of specific confusion is when to use the tag versus when to leave a question with no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and no system tag. Another is if it can be used in conjunction with a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can somebody give me a simple, clear idea how I am supposed to, in 2019, use this tag? Or does it not even have a use anymore?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to the FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T17:03:48.560" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T17:03:48.560" Title="How is the [system-agnostic] tag supposed to be used?" Tags="|discussion|faq|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8833" CreationDate="2019-02-27T18:27:23.373" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave it to the original author.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the tag has been added to the question by the original author, removing it is more trouble than it's worth. The author probably has specific &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3054/77&quot;&gt;reasons for including it&lt;/a&gt;, and the benefit to removing it is largely academic. There's never been enough consensus towards eliminating it to justify a fight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the opposite side, adding the tag consistently means adding it to a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of questions. Anything without a system tag is probably going to get it. Some questions &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt; a system tag should also probably get it. Again, there hasn't been enough consensus to push through such a large-scale edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-02-27T23:40:33.117" LastActivityDate="2019-02-27T23:40:33.117" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8836" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8833" CreationDate="2019-02-28T03:05:08.973" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;System-Agnostic: The System Tag Meaning &amp;quot;Not System-Specific&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag is for questions where the asker is looking for answers that are not tied deeply to a specific game system's rules, usually for portability. It is asking in a context that is &amp;quot;agnostic&amp;quot; to the &amp;quot;system&amp;quot; being used.  This is extremely straightforward; don't overthink it. It is just a system tag that says &amp;quot;not one specific system.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I am asking from a general RPG standpoint, not from within the frame&#xA;of a single system.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted in those previous metas, people here love to urge someone to add system tags in nearly every scenario. &amp;quot;But what GAME SYSTEM are you using when you have demotivated players?!?&amp;quot;  And that's fair; game systems vary widely and in this case, if someone is just playing, for example, D&amp;amp;D 5e, and they ask about demotivated players in a pure D&amp;amp;D 5e context, you might cite XP awards and Inspiration and advice from the DMG and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, some people (like me, which is why I am an advocate for the tag), play many, many different RPGs and we have some issues that we want solutions for that are more general. If I have demotivated players, I might want more broadly applicable techniques that will help regardless of the game we're playing that week. &lt;strong&gt;As a site, we support those kinds of players and that need.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might have the &amp;quot;same question&amp;quot; asked with a system tag and with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag and have them get different and good answers, just as you might ask the same question with two different system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because it is a specific declaration of the querent's intended scope of the question, then &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8833/how-is-the-system-agnostic-tag-supposed-to-be-used/8835#8835&quot;&gt;as @AceCalhoon points out&lt;/a&gt;, you should tend to leave it alone. You can ask the querent about their intent to clarify, but under no circumstances should you be trawling through old questions and changing either their system tag or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag unprovoked. That implies that you know better about what the querent needs than they do. Maybe, just maybe, someone is wrong about what system they're asking about (or asking about system-agnostic), but it's probably better an &amp;quot;ask them to clarify themselves&amp;quot; situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;FAQ&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Does this site require a system tag?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Theoretically, no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in practice, this site does effectively require a system tag, one is on a huge percentage of questions and when it's omitted the question gets closed and/or a system is asked for a vast majority of the time. The chance you can ask a question without a system and not get hassled for a system is less than 1%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: So, does every question without a system tag need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know, does it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people are willing for someone to ask a techniques or social question and not badger the querent into a system tag, then it's not needed on every question.  But if people are asking for system clarity, and especially if they're closing the question because there isn't one, then it is a legitimate option (as is a system tag) to set a scope explicitly.  If someone up front wants to declare &amp;quot;I know what I'm asking for and it's for system-agnostic&amp;quot;, they can use the tag.  We should respect that scope choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic?sort=newest&amp;amp;pageSize=50&quot;&gt;most recent system-agnostic questions&lt;/a&gt;, and look at the highly voted open ones, many have people pressing them for a system in the comments and the querent wants to say &amp;quot;stop it, I don't want this specific to a given system.&amp;quot; (See these questions, for example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139805/how-to-roleplay-an-intimidation-oriented-character-without-being-a-net-negative&quot;&gt;How to Roleplay an Intimidation-Oriented Character Without Being a Net Negative for the Party&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125388/how-can-i-show-not-tell-my-players-that-they-are-the-bad-guys&quot;&gt;How can I show-not-tell my players that they are The Bad Guys?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120048/how-do-i-make-quests-rewarding-for-my-player&quot;&gt;How do I make quests rewarding for my player?&lt;/a&gt;, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Can you use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and a system tag on the same question?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That would be very uncommon, but could be legitimate based on the question. &amp;quot;How do I bring the competitive feeling that Amber Diceless Roleplay has into an arbitrary other RPG?&amp;quot; could have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/amber-diceless&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;amber-diceless&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;amber-diceless&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tags.  If both are being used, the question should probably be explaining itself really well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3024/does-the-system-agnostic-tag-conflict-with-system-specific-tags&quot;&gt;Does the [system-agnostic] tag conflict with system specific tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: But is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag really needed?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic?sort=votes&quot;&gt;We've had 468 questions using the tag.&lt;/a&gt; It is the 21st most popular tag on all of RPG.SE. So yes. Many posters find it useful, so there's a pretty high bar to just wave hands at it to do away with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The highest-voted question on the site is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/8002/how-do-i-get-my-pcs-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins&quot;&gt;How do I get my PCs to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;, where the tag was specifically used to try to get people to not obsess about D&amp;amp;D-specific answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see it's a mix of player/GM techniques, problem player/GM issues, gaming style issues, campaign and adventure design questions, and so on.  Which one could ask for a specific system, but for those who have a wider scope of RPGs, you want to ask it across them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: But isn't this a &amp;quot;tag tax?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All system tags are a tag tax, if you want to define it in that way.  They set the scope of the question in a way that makes answers meaningful.  If I give a FATE answer to a D&amp;amp;D question, it doesn't help the querent, and that's what we're here for.  If I give a FATE mechanics question to a problem someone wants to solve across game systems, it is similarly unhelpful.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is a system tag like any system tag, like &amp;quot;agnostic&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;atheist&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;non-denominational Christian&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;mainline Protestant&amp;quot; is a valid answer to &amp;quot;what religion is this question about?&amp;quot; In any event, these are useful scopes for questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: But isn't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; a meta tag?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No.  See this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2794/is-system-agnostic-a-meta-tag&quot;&gt;Is [system-agnostic] a meta tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Should I use a system tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;, or no tag on my question?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are playing a given system and you want answers for that system, add a system tag.  Don't artificially widen it &amp;quot;because more people would find it helpful,&amp;quot; the site works best when you ask about your specific problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are deliberately asking for cross-system techniques, put &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; on it to shortcut people having to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking a problem player question or something generic, you don't have to use either kind of tag, but you will likely be pressed to add a system tag – and you can then decide to add a system tag or a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag to answer people and head off the close votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are playing a freeform game, where there is a &amp;quot;system&amp;quot; but it's not one of the listed systems, you can use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/freeform&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;freeform&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;freeform&lt;/a&gt; tag instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/should-i-use-a-narrow-system-tag-or-use-a-broader-tag&quot;&gt;Should I use a narrow system tag, or use a broader tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Can I just assume that a question without a system tag is system-agnostic?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, because &amp;quot;bad question&amp;quot; is another option.  See this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8318/is-it-against-policy-or-bad-practice-to-attempt-system-agnostic-answers-to-quest&quot;&gt;Is it against policy or bad practice to attempt system agnostic answers to questions whose system has not been specified?&lt;/a&gt; – in that case, the answer was &amp;quot;you definitely should not have in this case.&amp;quot; Alternatively, it may just be that the querent has failed to specify what game system they are playing; we have guidance for approaching such questions here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11722/what-should-i-do-when-a-question-does-not-specify-the-game-system-being-used&quot;&gt;What should I do when a question does not specify the game system being used?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Can I use system-specific examples when answering a system-agnostic question?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course. Keep in mind that if your answer is too dependent on one system, especially if that technique isn't easily portable out of the system, it may not be judged to be super helpful by the OP/community, but illustrating your points with specific systems is helpful.  The querent will probably illustrate their question with examples from specific games/sessions too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Q: Should I keep bothering someone who has declared their question system-agnostic to pick a system?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, you should not; it's rude. If you think they are new and don't understand tags or something, you can give them a quick &amp;quot;Hey, if you are really just looking for an answer inside system X, then you might get better and more relevant answers if you pick that system&amp;quot;, but then you should respect their choice.  &lt;strong&gt;No one has to pick a specific system if that's not what they want to ask, and you should not try to make them do so.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T16:57:42.483" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:57:42.483" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8829" CreationDate="2019-02-28T03:07:30.967" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, it should not be.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent is playing D&amp;amp;D 5e and they are asking in a D&amp;amp;D 5e context.  Therefore changing the tag is inappropriate and I have reverted it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a question about players not showing up that you personally want an answer to that can work regardless of game system, you are welcome to ask it.  But that is not the problem the OP thinks they have and it's not the question they are asking, so leave it alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T03:07:30.967" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8833" CreationDate="2019-02-28T20:13:06.387" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The tag facilitates finding questions/answers that aren't tied to a system.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where the mods or the OP did not intend the question to be system dependent.  It makes finding these easier instead of trying to search for question that are lacking &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For the individual question, it's not particularly meaningful.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question devoid of system tags would have similar meaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As a querent, use it to indicate that the question is intended to be system agnostic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can help with answers or comments pick out if there are implicit assumptions in the question that it tie to a systems or set of systems.  Additionally, it indicates that examples in answers should either be themselves agnostic or state &quot;for example, in [system X] ...&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="38434" LastEditDate="2019-02-28T20:29:27.740" LastActivityDate="2019-02-28T20:29:27.740" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8839" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-04T03:26:56.823" Score="7" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142320/23970&quot;&gt;A player has asked the DM to ignore the lore to enable his character concept. What are the pros and cons if the DM does so?&lt;/a&gt; has gone through two close-reopen cycles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first seems pretty straightforward: originally the post had a strong survey quality to it; it was closed, commented upon, pared down, and reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the second closure--for being primarily opinion-based--has prompted more discussion than comments seem to really work for. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/90536&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is the full comment record.) So I ask users to discuss here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the lore-modification question too opinion-based?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T15:26:21.683" Title="Is this question too opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8840" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8839" CreationDate="2019-03-04T04:04:19.790" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I'd like to rant, briefly.  I spent twenty minutes typing up an answer to the original question, and then the question was radically edited and my answer was deleted.  I wish you guys would quit doing that.  As an answerer it's a really bad experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T04:04:19.790" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8839" CreationDate="2019-03-04T04:50:28.103" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The original question is too opinion-based, but can be remedied&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I mean &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/142320/1&quot;&gt;the first version&lt;/a&gt; of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was asking for experience, which the answerer must provide, and how it turns out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The missing part is &quot;measure&quot; which ranks the best answer, and that only has been partially provided by &quot;not remove player from the group&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a matter of Good Subjective, Bad Subjective. The problem is pretty obvious, and I'm sure the experts here can answer it from experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to add that the current revision asks for very different question that the original question. I would propose that the question is rolled back to revision 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T04:50:28.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8842" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-04T10:04:54.083" Score="16" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am a fledgling game master running a Pathfinder group. With only D&amp;amp;D 4e experience as a player, I sometimes struggle to grasp all the details of Pathfinder rules. RPG.stackexchange was and is tremendously helpful to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I would really like to give back to the community. I find it a bit hard to answer questions, because I am myself still struggling with understanding the finer details of the Pathfinder rules. Also, I find that when I try to answer a question, often someone else has given a good answer that does not really leave room to add (which is a good thing!), and I don't want to add redundancy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What other ways are there to help improve rpg.stackexchange for everybody involved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29132" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-04T13:49:57.377" LastActivityDate="2019-03-08T21:50:55.027" Title="How can I give back to the rpg.stackexchange community besides answering questions?" Tags="|discussion|community|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8842" CreationDate="2019-03-04T13:19:15.240" Score="20" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are things you don't understand, create a question, there are almost certainly others with similar queries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You add to the pool of knowledge, and are even rewarded yourself with some nice Rep!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41055" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T13:50:10.213" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8842" CreationDate="2019-03-04T13:21:35.350" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can edit posts and ask questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are uncomfortable answering questions of the systems you know, then you can edit older questions/answers. Remember to follow the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;editing guidelines&lt;/a&gt;. Older questions usually feature problems with tags, if you are looking for a start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Important note: since you haven't hit the 2k reputation mark, your editions will go the review queue and require approval.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, remember: making questions also &quot;gives back&quot; to this community. To create and promote research and information is what the Stack Exchange sites are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47052" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-03-04T14:55:20.447" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T14:55:20.447" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8845" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8842" CreationDate="2019-03-04T13:40:50.250" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Spread the good answers to other places on the web&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can provide links to useful questions and answers to other places on the internet.  That spreads the usefulness of the stack's output, and it helps the stack attract more visitors.  You'll also get a few badges as time goes on and more people click the links you offer.  For example, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/56/publicist&quot;&gt;Publicist&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/55/booster&quot;&gt;Booster&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/54/announcer&quot;&gt;Announcer&lt;/a&gt; badges may crop up in your award pile, depending on how many people follow the link.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use the share feature for the linked question or answer, and it will give you credit.  :)    For example, if I click on 'share' for Kuerten's nice answer, this becomes the address: &lt;code&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8844/22566&lt;/code&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything up to 8844 is the answer link; the 22566 tells the system that I provided the link to share with others (it's my user ID).   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-04T16:37:36.913" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T16:37:36.913" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8839" CreationDate="2019-03-04T15:26:21.683" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;First question was definitely Opinion-based at the lead, but the body was not.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There a few issues in this question that need to be addressed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's a second hand question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The person with the issue isn't posting. It's someone else. This can create a translation error for the problem as we don't have a first hand account of either side of what's actually happening. That makes it hard to answer in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The lead question requests ideas on how to handle&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is definitely POB, but the body is much clearer in their question of asking for Good Subjective experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An easy fix for this is to update the lead to reflect what's really being asked in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This resolves the question from being POB, but we'll need to watch the answers to make sure they stay Good Subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This may also be an issue of worldbuilding&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly generalizing this question about is worldbuilding something the DM does alone in a box or with their players is something to consider. I have a feeling this section belongs in an answer as a frame challenge, but if OP is here, then I'd like to hear their thoughts on if this was the core of their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Another concern&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I think we also need to be careful on adjusting questions to fit the stack that change what the person may be asking. Yes, we can make a lot of questions &amp;quot;fit&amp;quot;, but I think it's more important to identify what the core question is, see if it's stackable, offer different questions if it's not - but just shoehorning a question into stackable doesn't necessarily solve the original question's problems even if it allows us to answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T15:26:21.683" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8833" CreationDate="2019-03-04T21:04:41.050" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been struggling with this one for a couple of years, personally, now. So I'm going to give it a go. (This answer, like mxy's, doesn't stand as a &amp;quot;mod-team answer&amp;quot;--it's just the answer of a high-rep user who cares.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is supposed to be used like any other tag.&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are supposed to describe the question that is asked.&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; Corollary: tags should not be used to describe the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; sought. This, I think, is a pothole that we hit every once in a while.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider, for instance, the following hypothetical question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I show-not-tell my table-mates that a character is a bad guy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, I believe, would rightfully and quickly meet the comment &amp;quot;what game are you playing?&amp;quot; In my experience:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;90% of the time the querent says &amp;quot;oh, it's foo&amp;quot; and either they or someone else edit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/foo&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;foo&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;foo&lt;/a&gt; onto the tag list. Problem clearly stated&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;, answers can flow in that flow from expertise solving &lt;em&gt;the problem the querent's having&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;8% of the time the querent says &amp;quot;I want to know the answer independent of system&amp;quot; and someone edits &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; onto it. But arguments start, it goes through POB/unclear close-reopen cycles, and noses are bent out of shape.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And a magical 2% of the time the querent responds &amp;quot;I'm running into this in 4e and in Dungeon World and in a Great Ork Gods hack we use and in Microscope and in Fate. Believe it or not, this group uses all these systems to play in the same world/narrative, depending on the session.&amp;quot; (Or something else that actually describes how a &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; is arising across many systems.) There's a system-agnostic question, to be sure:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I show-not-tell my table-mates that a character is a bad guy? We have a game going where for tactical combats we use 4e, for other adventuring play we use DW, we've banged on Great Ork Gods to occasionally have a session where we're playing the principal antagonists &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; a session where we're playing the world's seven major deities influencing world-spanning factions, and sometimes we break out Microscope to do some collaborative world- and history-building. Next session we're supposed to use Bubblegumshoe as part of our Great Game narrative thread! No matter which of these systems, I consistently fail to make my bad guys bad--what do I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now answerers can come in and decide whether to write a &amp;quot;true&amp;quot; sys-ag answer, or one that leverages experience with one of the named systems, or one that explains how they've discovered the answer really is different in the various systems. And voters, importantly, have the information they need to vote answers up and down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The way forward...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel naive saying this, but I suspect that if we patiently and kindly lean on querents to describe their actual problem--like we do virtually everywhere else--we'll see clearly which questions are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and which are trying to dictate answer forms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The former will get tagged and answered, the latter still need to work on a clear problem statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - there's a little twist here: we tend to treat system tags differently, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sys-ag&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sys-ag&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sys-ag&lt;/a&gt; kinda acts like a &amp;quot;real&amp;quot; system's tag. But I think it's maybe an unfortunate shortcut that we even treat system tags that way; I'm starting to think the habit we have of not necessarily mentioning system in a post and leaving it to the tag has this among other, unfortunate side effects.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-04T21:04:41.050" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8833" CreationDate="2019-03-04T22:06:02.423" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag should be generally discouraged&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My experience with the use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag on this site is that the vast majority of its uses are inappropriate; and the scenarios where its uses are &lt;em&gt;ostensibly&lt;/em&gt; appropriate would almost certainly be better handled by a different [possibly nonexistent] tag, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-system&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/modded-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;modded-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;modded-system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are the scenarios I see it used most frequently:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I'm looking for an answer that works for /any system/, not just 'X'.&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On some level, I understand the innate curiosity of a question like this, but there are a couple recurring problems with posts like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It might be &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; to formulate a satisfying answer without knowing the system being played, but the question will get much better, higher quality answers by knowing the system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP might be presuming that some issue they're facing is universally applicable to any game system; or that the answers to this issue will be/ought to be inherently applicable to any game system.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem in the former case is that most rules sets offer some degree of advice to handle things like Rules Disputes, adjudicating strange edge-case scenarios, etc., and omitting the system associated with the issue means that answerers cannot reference said solutions. And in the latter case, it's often just a wrong assumption: many things that players/DMs assume are universal rules/guidelines simply aren't:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Q: &lt;em&gt;System Agnostic—How to handle Players that conceal information from each other?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Well, that depends: are you playing a game where players are never allowed to conceal information from each other, or aren't you? Are you playing a game that &lt;strong&gt;encourages&lt;/strong&gt; players to conceal information or does the game not care?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some games are happy to allow players to conceal information from each other! Others are not. An answer to this question would have to span the breadth of game systems and the varying permutations of scenarios where information is allowed or not allowed to be concealed, and it'll either lead to answers that are too broad/generic to have real applicability, or answers that make the same mistake of assuming too much about what things are &amp;quot;universal&amp;quot; or not, and provide advice that simply will not work for some systems, including potentially the system the OP is actually playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I'm playing a hybrid of Pathfinder and 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D, and I need to know how to adjudicate Two-Weapon Fighting&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of question at least represents the scenario where no specific system-tag adequately covers the use-case of the OP, but it's also very obvious that the correct tag[s] to use are the tag[s] associated with each game system they're using, i.e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;. Tagging this question with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; would be highly misleading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;We used D&amp;amp;D5e as a base, but built a completely new ruleset that only borrows vague concepts from 5e and is functionally an entirely new thing, how should we handle Bonus Actions?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again; Any one system tag, even potentially the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag would be inappropriate for a question like this: whatever the system borrows from 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D, the system they're using is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even so, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is inappropriate: the system they're using clearly matters, even if it's a system that we don't (yet!) track. Using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag implies that the answers given to this question could be applied to any other system, and that's clearly incorrect: the issues they're dealing with are self-evidently particular to the homebrew game they're trying to engineer, and the game system they based it on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So when is it appropriate to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can think of two kinds of questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I've tried playing D&amp;amp;D3.5, D&amp;amp;D5e, Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, Trail of Cthulhu, Powered by the Apocalypse, and GURPS, and in every single game, it feels like my choices don't really matter. Am I playing TTRPGs wrong?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On some level, a question like this will be &lt;em&gt;informed by&lt;/em&gt; the various systems being called out, but it is indeed clear that the issues the player is facing are independent of the specific system they're playing in. Indeed; focusing on any one of these (somewhat) diverse game systems as a case-study for why the OP feels the way they do would probably end up distracting from their actual issue, which probably exists outside the diegesis of their game world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;One of our players is making creepy and demeaning comments towards our [female] DM, how can we get him to stop?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again: The problem in this question clearly exists outside the scope of any one system, and instead is an interpersonal issue, relevant to the stack by virtue of the unique experience that TTRPG players have in dealing with poor behavior at the table. If this question were instead forced to be tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, it might attract answers like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Have the DM start causing bad luck to happen to his character, causing them to lose stats or magic items, or forcing his character to do things he doesn't like!&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could just trust the stack to clean bad quality answers like the above, but I would argue it's better to simply dissuade those kinds of answers in the first place. This isn't to say that such a question should obviously &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; (or that any such use of a tag should be removed), but that it is at least an appropriate scenario for use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, there are two criterion that make a question suitable for use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag, that I think should both be (to varying degrees) true to justify its use:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Solving the problem posed by the OP in the most complete manner possible can be done with absolutely no knowledge of the underlying game system the OP is playing in, AND&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Knowing the game system the OP is playing in is more likely to distract from their issue, or pose a Red Herring for finding solutions to their problem (i.e. answers are likely to try to pose diegetic solutions to things which have extra-diegetic causes)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My experience with this stack, however, suggests that the vast majority of questions posed here that get tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; simply do not meet either of these criterion. &lt;strong&gt;Some do, which is why I do not advocate eliminating the tag entirely&lt;/strong&gt;: there's clearly situations where its use is warranted and should be encouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as a general principle, if someone comes to the stack with a question that is only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; by virtue of a lack of specificity in their problem statement, we're better off drilling down on what that root issue is, rather than just deeming the lack of specifics as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; by default.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T05:34:03.103" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8849" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8852" CreationDate="2019-03-05T05:02:13.020" Score="16" ViewCount="342" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two questions in quick succession, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142480/do-hexblade-warlocks-choose-their-spells-from-the-hexblade-spell-list-or-the-war&quot;&gt;Do Hexblade warlocks choose their spells from the Hexblade spell list or the warlock spell list?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142481/what-s-the-right-calculation-for-the-homunculus-s-hit-points-for-the-2019-ua-alc&quot;&gt;What’s the right calculation for the Homunculus’s hit points for the 2019 UA Alchemist Artificer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Were both posted without a system tag. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;Guessing on a system is a no go&lt;/a&gt;, but something caught my eye about the Hexblade question. It was edited, adding in the tag, with the justification (paraphrasing, comment deleted) &quot;given the question has 5.0 in the title, I don't think dnd-5e is guessing&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I edited the second question, adding the tag dnd-5e. I concluded as such because of the combination of&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;UA Alchemist 2019&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The quote given, matching the exact text from the Unearthed Arcana &quot;Revised Artificer&quot;, posted in 2019&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The unearthed-arcana tag&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With all 3 of these in unison, I didn't think the system was a guess either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What makes the second instance a guess when the first was not? Or were both guesses, or were both not?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45430" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T05:28:17.840" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T23:39:43.410" Title="What qualifies as guessing on a system?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8850" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-05T05:17:09.970" Score="14" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there a generally accepted procedure for crediting info that someone suggests in the comments of my answer. Should I write something like &quot;@coolrpg points out...&quot; and then the info that user CoolRPG suggested I add in their comment. Or is crediting another user not expected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T09:10:00.143" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T17:53:52.907" Title="What is expected/customary procedure for crediting info from comments?" Tags="|discussion|answers|comments|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8851" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8850" CreationDate="2019-03-05T05:27:01.167" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's no formal (or informal) policy, but it's usually nice to do&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the header mentions, there's no real policy around this. When someone suggests a change in the comments, the answerer sometimes edits their answer per the suggestion. Some people credit the user who suggested the change; some people don't. I don't think there's really any policy or even custom/expectation one way or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's generally a nice thing to do when the answerer credits the commenter that suggested the change, but I don't think anyone takes offense if they're not credited. After all, if the idea's substantial enough that they felt they deserved credit for it, the commenter could have left their own answer suggesting as much. For minor changes, it's rarely important enough to give special notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do it if you want... Or don't. It's fine either way, in my perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T05:27:01.167" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8849" CreationDate="2019-03-05T05:44:55.690" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Both examples are guessing and should not have been done&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though both had legitimate reasons for being exceptions to the general rule it sets a precedent that we probably don't want and gains us very little. In both cases waiting an additional 10 minutes would have been enough for OP to clarify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The UA Alchemist Question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I commented after my rollback, UA could mean something completely different in a different system. Alchemist and 2019 are only useful to confirm a belief not determine the system to begin with. Between the three you could be 95-98% confident but that still leaves room for error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The 5.0 Hexblade Question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DND 5e is not the only 5th edition of an rpg. Guessing a system based on a 5.0 in the question title is not a good idea. Though likely to be right based on hexblade and additional information this isn't something we should do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said above, not guessing only costs us time. We can wait for the OP to respond and then give quality answers. If they never reply then there's nothing lost, since they wouldn't have seen the answers anyway and it's better for the question to be closed and eventually deleted as abandoned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we guess the system other users may weigh in with answers based on that guess. In the 2% of cases that you made a mistake these answerers have wasted their time. You have also wasted the time of the mods who have to clean up the post once the OP does return and edit in the correct system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is always better to close a question and wait for clarification then to edit or answer an unclear question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T08:14:37.797" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8853" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-05T13:41:06.167" Score="8" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen a trend recently that when questions that are seen as opinion-based (or any number of other questionably stackable formats), the community tries to rewrite the question to something we can answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While that is commendable, it feels like we may be making an error because by making the question 'stackable', we may be changing what the person is actually asking about. This allows the community to answer, but it doesn't necessarily give an answer relevant to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we be approaching these types of questions as a community - and how can we guide the community to follow this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What started this?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8839/is-this-question-too-opinion-based&quot;&gt;recent meta&lt;/a&gt; about this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142320/23970&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. While there may be other examples, what I'm trying to focus on is the urge to say &amp;quot;Oh, just ask it this way&amp;quot; rather than drilling down to figure out what they are really trying to ask instead of changing the question to 'fit' our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many times, experienced users see the language used in a question and offer/suggest/edit a change that removes that language so it fits. This can happen before question closure or after - but the problem remains that we instead of working with someone to figure out what they want, we just move straight to change the language to something that fits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:57:19.893" Title="How should we handle editing questions that are seemingly opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|editing|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8854" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8853" CreationDate="2019-03-05T13:41:06.167" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's more important to actually work with querent to determine what their question is and if it's actually a good fit for our format.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although the process might be slower, it feels like we should be trying to dial in what issue the querent has and then figure out a way, with them, to make the question into a stackable format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Providing the right 'language' for asking something may change what they are actually asking. I understand that there is a strong desire to answer questions (and to help people!), but I feel like the desire to answer is overriding the need to answer what someone is actually asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may take longer, but we should try and work with the querent to determine what they actually need. If we can answer that need, we can reformat the question to fit. If we can't, then we shouldn't try and force the question through with a change of language - we should direct them to another site where their question can be answered in the right format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We are not here to answer questions. We are here to answer &lt;em&gt;people.&lt;/em&gt; This means making sure questions are clear so that we are providing the person with the answer they are trying to find.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But how do we get the community to follow this?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is something I don't know, other than using comments to try and help the querent understand what they are trying to ask instead of recommendations on language changes that 'fit' our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:57:19.893" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8853" CreationDate="2019-03-05T14:19:17.717" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Focus on what the querent wants to ask, even if it means we can't answer it here&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we edit an open question we should always be improving the question that OP asked, but we should not be changing the core of the question. Not, at least without explicit confirmation from OP that the changes are agreeable to them. This means that sometimes there is nothing we can do to &amp;quot;fix&amp;quot; a question in the case that it is clearly POB and OP either does not want to change it or doesn't respond. And that is fine. If someone else has the issue, they can ask it in a way that they think will not be POB.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Close POB questions first and then work with OP if there might be a way to change it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question has issues that affect its ability to be answered well, one of the first things we should do is work on getting the question closed so the issues can be worked on. If a question is clearly POB, this should be our first step always.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone sees a way to change the question such that it shifts the question a significant amount from what OP was originally asking there are two way to go about this and both involve working with OP before reopening the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Work with OP in the comments to change the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see a way that a POB question can be salvaged and it involves a potentially significant shift in the focus of the question, pitch the change to OP in the comments and wait for them to respond. If they agree, then someone can make that edit and vote to reopen. If they decline (or don't respond), then we just leave the POB question closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The downside to this method is that pitching changes to OP in the comments can be very difficult especially if there is help piling going on and the OP could be overwhelmed and/or confused about what is going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. With the question closed, make the edit you propose and then leave a comment explaining it and asking OP for approval&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another way I've seen this done is to make an edit to a closed question and then ask in a comment if OP agrees with the significant shift in the question. If they agree, reopen the question. If they don't or don't respond, the question should remain closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should never be editing an open question to change it significantly from what OP is asking without their consent.&lt;/strong&gt; If we did this method to an open question (or open the question without waiting for OP's consent) then answers will start rolling in before OP has a chance to even comment on the edit. This is not something that should happen and ends up potentially not being good for answerers (if changes to the question have to be made later eg) or OP (if changes to the question are not to their liking).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The downsides here are that editing a closed question into a good-looking question often does result in getting the question reopened through the review queue or people passing by that may not realize what work is being done. If you see this happening, I think flagging the question for mod attention would be appropriate.  A mod can unilaterally close the question again until we get a response from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, at any point OP declines the changes or if they never respond we should leave the POB question closed. If someone else has the same issue that they think they can ask in a way that is not POB, they can freely  do so. However, questions should always ask what the OP intends them to ask, even if it means the question cannot be answered here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T14:50:24.013" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8856" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8849" CreationDate="2019-03-05T14:24:49.393" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If the querent hasn't stated it themselves, it's guessing.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In every case, it is up to the asker of the question to either state what system or add the tag themselves. Anything else will be guessing on our part. It's a pretty easy metric to look for, but does always require the asker to provide it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T14:24:49.393" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8857" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8862" CreationDate="2019-03-05T16:16:36.723" Score="11" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;This particular monster gets a tag, but does that mean every monster gets one? And then do we need to worry about editions/RPGs having different uses? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When do we allow system wide monster/spell/ability tags and do we not? What's the decision making process here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seems like we shouldn't have tags for these things, especially system-wide tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With regard to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mimic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mimic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mimic&lt;/a&gt;, there are only 4 tagged questions, and two are from today. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we burninate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mimic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mimic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mimic&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;this related meta on specific spell tags&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T17:40:20.480" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:45:04.653" Title="Burninate Mimic tag? Do specific monsters need specific tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8857" CreationDate="2019-03-05T16:56:56.217" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should get the same treatment as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tiny-hut&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tiny-hut&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tiny-hut&lt;/a&gt; (which now redirects to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;) and just redirect to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe the process is called &quot;synonym&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="34716" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T17:06:44.043" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T17:06:44.043" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8860" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8857" CreationDate="2019-03-05T17:03:10.917" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't burn because of slippery slopes, burn because it is not useful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;This particular [X] gets a tag, but does that mean every [X] gets one?&amp;quot; is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; is not (IMHO) a valid reason to burn a tag alone. We do, in fact have other specific monster tags (eg &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dragons&lt;/a&gt; with 142 questions) and I think it is fine to have them if they are add something useful to the tagging system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because we allow one out of a category to be created does not mean we &lt;strong&gt;have&lt;/strong&gt; to allow the creation of new ones. Each tag should be judged on its individual merit. If it is useful, keep it. If it isn't get rid of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, we have tags covering several specific spells (eg &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt;), but that doesn't mean there is any need for, nor would we allow someone to create a tag for random spells without good reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Burn or synonym mimic to monster&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it was trying to be created today, I wouldn't be in favor of allowing it. but since it already exists I really don't see an issue emerging from it. (To be clear, I also don't see any huge issues emerging from burning it). Though it isn't causing an issue, it also isn't useful. It also doesn't seem to add anything over simply searching for the word mimic. In the end, it is a useless tag and it should be burned (or synonymed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monster&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T18:45:04.653" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8861" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8857" CreationDate="2019-03-05T17:40:08.017" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Burn it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt;, we do not need specific tags for specific monsters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T17:40:08.017" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8857" CreationDate="2019-03-05T17:46:42.690" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's useful, and usefulness is the alpha and omega of whether a tag should exist. Yes, we have other tags that are more specific than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;, but that doesn't logically mean that &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; specific monsters deserve tags. We need to be more choosy than that to serve site &lt;strong&gt;usefulness&lt;/strong&gt; of tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dragons&lt;/a&gt;, but we don't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blue-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blue-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blue-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and wouldn't consider that useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt;, but the problems of wishes in general, not just &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;-spell-within-a-specific-game, are general interest enough to deserve a tag. It describes a common type of problem: handling the extreme power of wishes within roleplaying games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/undead&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;undead&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;undead&lt;/a&gt;, but that's a big category of things that often have questions about them. We might even consider at some point having &lt;s&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zombies&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;zombies&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;zombies&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;/s&gt;* &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampires&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampires&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampires&lt;/a&gt;&amp;dagger; considering how central they each are to their respective RPG subgenres and how common questions about the latter come up here, but I don't ever see us thinking that having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/musk-zombie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;musk-zombie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;musk-zombie&lt;/a&gt; is useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;, but we don't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancer&lt;/a&gt;. The right tag there is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/necromancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;necromancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;necromancy&lt;/a&gt; — the activity itself is where we see questions come up. The actual D&amp;amp;D subclass is not usually a focus enough by itself to transcend &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; and doesn't need its own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We don't need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mimic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mimic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mimic&lt;/a&gt;, and won't ever need it. It should be synonymed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* Correction: We already do have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zombies&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;zombies&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;zombies&lt;/a&gt;. Huh, how about that. It seems underused… Then again, the zombie RPG subgenre has always been a weird combination of popular yet niche.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&amp;dagger; The only reason I haven't taken the initiative to create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampires&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampires&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampires&lt;/a&gt; already — and I've been tempted many times — is imagining it suddenly showing up as a thoughtless tag tax on every single question about the various &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Adjective&lt;/em&gt; RPGs. Then I back away from the tag edit box cautiously.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-03-05T17:56:15.747" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T17:56:15.747" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8850" CreationDate="2019-03-05T17:53:52.907" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked an &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3430/8610&quot;&gt;similar question&lt;/a&gt; nearly 5 years ago, shortly after I joined the site, and, since then, I've adopted a couple of behaviors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As comments are &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; ephemeral &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; nearly the only form of constructive criticism an answer or question can receive, when a comment has a decisive impact on an answer or question, I'll credit the comment's writer with a link to that user's profile. That's &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; to acknowledge the comment writer &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; to provide the reader with some kind of indication of the comment writer's site credentials. The comment may disappear, but the profile's largely forever.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;However, what I want to do more often and forget to do all the darn time is credit a user who makes a valuable comment on one of my questions or answers in the question or answer's &lt;strong&gt;Edit Summary&lt;/strong&gt;. I assume folks who really care about a question or answer do occasionally check in what way a question or answer changed over time, and crediting a user &lt;em&gt;there&lt;/em&gt; seems to me the least obtrusive yet longest-lasting way to credit a user. (Later edits to a question or answer can remove the credit I've given other users in that question or answer; nothing, so far as I'm aware, changes an Edit Summary.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;By the way, so you know, if another question or answer informs my question or answer, I credit and link to that other question or answer, like near the end of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/97906/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. My questions and answers that do this are often &lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; built on a foundation established by those other questions &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; would look like they were swiping material from those other questions or answers were I &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to credit the other questions or answers. (By the way, there's nothing &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; with the &lt;em&gt;uncredited&lt;/em&gt; swiping of material to inform your own questions or answers, but it makes me &lt;em&gt;feel better&lt;/em&gt; when I acknowledge another question or answer as having informed my own.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these are &lt;em&gt;expected&lt;/em&gt; behaviors, though. These are all solely for me to make me feel better (and they do and they might make you feel better, too). I mean, if a user doesn't credit a similar answer—even if I wrote it—, I don't immediately think &lt;em&gt;Thief!&lt;/em&gt; or anything. Nothing says that anyone must acknowledge comments or other questions or answers. Doing so anyway is all on you—do what makes you feel good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; The &lt;code&gt;@username&lt;/code&gt; doesn't ping the user when put in questions or answers; just use &lt;code&gt;username&lt;/code&gt; instead.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-03-05T17:53:52.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8864" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-07T06:53:33.887" Score="10" ViewCount="330" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142547/15211&quot;&gt;How to roleplay my character&amp;#39;s ethics according to the DM when I don&amp;#39;t understand those ethics?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know what to add.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't see by any means how it's opinion-based. I am asking for ways to get around a specific problem and how to best roleplay it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, even the answers themselves show how little of an opinion is asked for. Right now, there are maybe 3-4 good answers, where only one of the dozen answers answers my question. There are a lot of answers that just contain opinions - but I didn't even ask for that at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T07:38:28.080" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T18:58:24.167" Title="Why was this post about roleplaying my character's ethics closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8865" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8864" CreationDate="2019-03-07T08:32:00.123" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't speak for everyone who voted, but I voted to close for exactly the reasons you've given here: Most of the answers are just opinions. That's not necessarily the fault of the question, of course. It may well just be because you were unlucky enough to get into the Hot Network Questions list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T08:32:00.123" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8866" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8864" CreationDate="2019-03-07T12:06:12.983" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I believe it shouldn't be closed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/142559/10642&quot;&gt;Currently highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; is objective*, and I don't really see the question to invite subjective answers. Not when question is read in full. The only &quot;fault&quot; of this question was to become popular and attract people too much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* Based on the very first sentence of the rules as seen &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/01/PFRPG_SRD.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; - does not quote it directly, but hey, it is the first sentence of the rules, so expectation that people interested in the game knows it is very reasonable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="10642" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T13:56:35.677" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T13:56:35.677" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8867" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-07T13:39:30.773" Score="-2" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;For transparency: the answer in question that did not receive the bounty is mine. &#xA;The two answers in question are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59863/can-a-single-dose-of-poison-applied-to-an-edged-weapon-be-used-multiple-times/142198#142198&quot;&gt;The poison remains...&lt;/a&gt; which is the chosen answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59863/can-a-single-dose-of-poison-applied-to-an-edged-weapon-be-used-multiple-times/142316#142316&quot;&gt;What is &lt;em&gt;Regular Poison&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59863/can-a-single-dose-of-poison-applied-to-an-edged-weapon-be-used-multiple-times&quot;&gt;Can a single dose of poison applied to an edged weapon be used multiple times?&lt;/a&gt;, had a bounty placed on it with the specific stated intent of gathering an updated answer that took errata concerning poisons into account. The errata was issued to the DMG after the question was originally asked and answered. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple noteworthy points about this question are that it refers to &quot;regular poison&quot; which is not a term used in the PHB or DMG and the user who placed the bounty was not the OP (and thus had no available info concerning what the term &quot;regular poison&quot; was intended to mean). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chosen answer, while commendable, does not address the full scope of the question/errata, nor does it accurately address if the errata is relevant to the answer in all situations, nor does it address what &quot;regular poison&quot; actually is.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, the user who posted the answer that was awarded the bounty commented on the other answer (mine) stating&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Well researched and better than my answer. I've up voted yours and would down vote my own if I could ... I would think this should be made the official answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They also suggested an edit which I felt I added. I understand the issuer of the bounty alone makes decisions concerning the awarding of the bounty, but I think it's telling that the user with the selected answer preferred another answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer, while long, addressed the ambiguity of the term &quot;regular poison&quot; and also addressed how/if the errata would affect the ruling based on what this term was intended to mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'm not interested in receiving the rep points of the bounty, but I am very curious why these answers were judged this way.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can anyone shed some light on why this bounty was awarded this way?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T17:23:48.827" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T21:38:29.383" Title="Why was this bounty awarded this way?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|bounty|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8864" CreationDate="2019-03-07T14:22:42.503" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The question is fine, it's the answers that are the problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a tough thing to make the call for because the problem doesn't lie in the question itself. We handle these types of questions, and even encourage them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we don't do is allow bad subjective answers where this becomes just another forum of unsupported by experience opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a good question draws lots of bad answers, we tend to shut it down. While this isn't to the benefit of the asker, it is to the benefit of the site to keep us on mission here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's frustrating - I get that. But even when you specifically state what you're looking for it doesn't stop people from ignoring it. And that's where we are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closure was/(is?) the fault of those answering - not the fault of who asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T14:22:42.503" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8867" CreationDate="2019-03-07T14:32:21.383" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It was up to the Bounty creator&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they didn't choose an answer, then it defaults to the highest voted. If they did, then that was their choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are times when selected bounties and answers are just what the bounty creator(or asker in some cases) wanted to read - but we have to trust that others looking can see beyond those cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't ask people to justify their choices in selected answers, and we shouldn't do it with bounties, either. We may not like all decisions, but it's the individual's decision to make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T16:09:02.837" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8870" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8873" CreationDate="2019-03-07T20:36:29.543" Score="4" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before you ask, yes, I have read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;this topic&lt;/a&gt; from the help center.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that out of the way, I would like to ask how to make &lt;em&gt;exemplary&lt;/em&gt; answers, that gets everybody to want to upvote your answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a trend that answers tend to be up-voted a lot more, or around equal to the questions, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/37103/what-is-my-guy-syndrome-and-how-do-i-handle-it&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/4317/how-does-a-player-correct-a-gm-mistake-without-being-a-rules-lawyer-or-pushover&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. However, I have noticed that my &lt;em&gt;median&lt;/em&gt; question votes (24.5 votes, as of right now) is higher than my highest voted answer (19 votes, as of right now).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find this a little bit confusing, as answers tend to gain higher votes than my questions, as I said previously, despite me having more than 3 times more answers than questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, how does one give an exemplary answer worthy of many upvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I highly discourage people going to my questions and answers and upvoting them, as the nature of this question is about how to answer things well, not to ask for upvotes (and would feel very guilty if this question attracted attention to my posts).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50605" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T21:27:23.230" LastActivityDate="2019-03-08T15:47:15.177" Title="How can I answer a question really well?" Tags="|discussion|answers|voting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8870" CreationDate="2019-03-07T21:05:04.447" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A few general trends that I've noticed in several years of answering/lurking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Back up your answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Give sources for claims you make, quote rules text (with book/page number next to it), cite your own experience. Make sure other people know that what you are telling them is correct, or at least give them a way to verify it on their own.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be correct:&lt;/strong&gt; In theory, we should be voting more correct answers above less correct ones; this is the whole point of the voting process. Note that this doesn't &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; work (sometimes an unpopular interpretation is objectively the correct one, but it doesn't make it less unpopular).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be nice:&lt;/strong&gt; Even within the realm of the official Be Nice policy, more polite, courteous, and friendly answers tend to be better received than not.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Be funny:&lt;/strong&gt; Use jokes, relevant images, etc. to get people to like your answer not just for it's factual content, but because it made them briefly happier.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use good formatting:&lt;/strong&gt; Use headers and sub-headers to organize the information in your answer. Make it clear what the overall answer is to the question posted (the tl;dr, if you will). Use good grammar, proper spelling, etc., although most(?) people in the network understand that English isn't everyone's first language and lots of people are willing to give small helpful edits to smooth out both formatting and grammar. Still, every bit helps when you are trying to make a good impression.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Write more:&lt;/strong&gt; If you can express the same information in 6 paragraphs or in 2 paragraphs, go with the 6 paragraph version, provided you have actual content in those paragraphs. (I personally disagree with this trend, but it is an observable phenomenon that longer posts get more upvotes in general.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answer social problem questions:&lt;/strong&gt; Social questions (including anything to do with My Guy Syndrome) get &lt;em&gt;tons&lt;/em&gt; of attention, and any non-terrible answer will get lots of upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Post your answer quickly:&lt;/strong&gt; First-to-post answers get upvotes almost by default, and then the highest voted answer tends to attract more upvotes than others (given answer quality is comparable).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should also understand that the gamification (giving rep, tracking upvotes, badges, etc.) of the stack network is just to increase participation and has no inherent worth on its own, so I advise you to not stress over getting more upvotes and just contribute where you can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23196" LastEditorUserId="23196" LastEditDate="2019-03-07T22:29:39.850" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T22:29:39.850" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8867" CreationDate="2019-03-07T21:38:29.383" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was specifically awarded that way.  I placed and awarded the bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to preface this by saying I am not interested at all in debating any points about your (or any) answer, and am tempted to answer here simply by saying &quot;because bounties may be awarded at the offerer's discretion with any or no justification&quot; to avoid a round of &quot;but but my answer...&quot;  So I'm going to answer why I awarded the bounty the way I did in this case but am not going to engage in any debate about it, it's not subject to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, I prefer answers that are concise. Answers that are super long and range into all kinds of related topics are in my opinion suboptimal answers.  Especially if some of the ranging is due to an unclear question that should probably be clarified in the first place. This question should basically merit a &quot;yes and here's the cite&quot; or a &quot;no and here's the cite,&quot; so I preferred the direct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, in this specific case, I believe your answer makes an overly legalistic differentiation between &quot;basic poison&quot; and &quot;injury poison&quot; that a plain-text reading of the rules, which is the kind of reading the 5e designers have indicated is how to parse their rules, does not warrant. I get your line of argument, I read it, I understand it, and I disagree with it. Basic poison is a poison that hurts you when it injures you, therefore it falls under the new injury poison rule even if they didn't add that clause in for every individual poison listing (that's kinda the point of having the general rules, so you don't duplicate the same text everywhere).  It also does not stand to reason a basic poison would be more powerful (not ending when it procs) than all the other poisons now affected by the ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So that's why I bountied the other answer.  Again, I am not interested in any debate on the merits of any of these, as it's my 200 rep to give as I please; I will not engage with any rehashing of the 5e-specific points of this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-07T21:38:29.383" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8870" CreationDate="2019-03-07T22:44:09.037" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Be patient, read lots of questions, and play/run a lot.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's pretty easy to write answers that get 20 or 30 upvotes: answer D&amp;amp;D questions about rules correctly, succinctly, and first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you want to know about &lt;em&gt;exemplary&lt;/em&gt; answers. The rule for those is even easier: &lt;strong&gt;be &lt;em&gt;expert&lt;/em&gt; in the topic you're writing about.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question you come across is one in which you have true expertise--wisdom born of experience--then you'll already know whether a short or a long answer is better, whether personal anecdotes or data-mining will provide better evidence, whether to challenge the assumptions in the question or take them as given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is: those don't come along very often. (For comparison: I've answered ~440 times these last 3.5 years, and I'd point to a half-dozen of those as ones I'm really proud of.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a (roughly) set number of questions coming in per day. The first-order ways to increase the odds of creating an exemplary answer are to expose yourself to more questions (read a lot of them) and to broaden your expertise (play/run a lot). So you've got to be patient. It's not every week, every month, or even every year that you're going to get a question teed up for you to write a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/40/great-answer&quot;&gt;great answer&lt;/a&gt;. I mean, there's something like 77K answers on site right now, and 143 of them got that badge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second-order: answer lots of questions. It'll help you develop your style and instincts, get a sense for where your expertise lies, and you'll likely get lots of useful feedback in the process. And take &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8871/23970&quot;&gt;GreySage's advice&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-08T15:47:15.177" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8874" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8875" CreationDate="2019-03-08T16:29:13.440" Score="20" ViewCount="300" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are one-line answers merely bad answers (presumably meant to be down-voted or commented upon to suggest improvement) or are they actively against the rules for posted answers (beyond salvation and presumably meant to be deleted)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I often see answers that include a &quot;mic drop&quot;-style assertion of a sentence or so in length followed by a block of text quoted from some game rules, without any commentary explaining why the quote justifies the assertion or solves the querent's problem. I'm not interested in naming names or listing examples, but I think these sorts of answers can be identified quite easily. I see them across multiple game system tags. Obviously, they're not literally one line, because the quote constitutes added text and there's usually even a citation, but the so-called expert advice part of the post is negligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a teacher, they really catch my eye (read: piss me off) because they do a poor job of actually educating the querent.I generally down-vote and/or suggest improvements for these sorts of answers, but I'm unsure on any guidance about whether they should be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a consensus or clear policy on this matter?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-03-09T03:51:38.993" LastActivityDate="2019-03-10T02:14:55.760" Title="Are one-line &quot;mic drop&quot; answers merely frowned upon or actually prohibited?" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8875" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8874" CreationDate="2019-03-08T17:59:51.567" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m going to make a distinction between one-line answers and “mic-drop” answers. I think there are different “rules” involved in each.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;One-line answers are emergently discouraged but not against the rules: Exercise personal and collective judgement&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I know they’re not actively against a &lt;em&gt;rule&lt;/em&gt;, but a lot of the site is more about &lt;em&gt;process&lt;/em&gt; than rules. That is to say, there are things deliberately en/discouraged by how our processes work, and a hard (and brittle) rule doesn’t exist because it’s unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Low-quality answers are one of those areas. We don’t really want them. But there’s no rule against them, because no rule could be written that would work for all cases it would need to, so we have processes that are more robust and nuanced instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, it’s theoretically possible for a one-line or one-line-plus-cite answer to be good quality. It’s unlikely, but over the course of many years the unlikely tends to come up in occasion. A rule would get in the way of getting that good answer. We’d also get people attempting to rules-lawyer such a rule, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But they’re still discouraged, so we have processes that encourage users to consider whether a given answer is low-quality enough to need action. And we have a variety of actions available (comments, editing, voting, VLQ flags, delete votes, workshopping on meta or chat, moderator-added notices, leaving as an example what not to answer, etc.), so that we can respond to a post’s individual needs for improvement or action. Sometimes a quick downvote is enough; on the far other end of the spectrum, sometimes nothing short of deletion is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;“Mic-drop” is another layer: Answers belittling the asker or question break Be Nice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Mic-drop” answers aren’t quite 1:1 equivalent to one-line answers. At least, not the way I’ve used the term. It’s a term the mod team has used in our own discussions to mean a short answer that is written with… something… that shows disrespect to the asker. They’re often short, but not always a single line (with or without cite).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many ways an answer can be a “mic drop”, but the unifying element is that it conveys disdain for the question’s existence. Whether intended or not, since effect of writing is what matters and what we collectively judge with all the site’s systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Mic-drop” answers are a subtle way to violate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt; without it being blatant. They can fly under the radar, but they’re still going to hit their intended targets: askers and readers who are vulnerable to being made to feel stupid for having the question involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren’t here to make people feel stupid, and it would actively work against the site’s mission, so we have rules against that, and answers that are written so that they convey that it’s stupid to have a question &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; against those rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If one feels like a question is stupid, it’s probably a good idea to avoid answering it. Even with the best of intentions it can leak through the writing — and when in a bad mood, it can be hard to not put it in there on purpose. Someone else will do a better job without accidentally “scoring points” on some unsuspecting stranger.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, though “mic-drop” describes short, mean answers, an answer doesn’t need to be &lt;em&gt;short&lt;/em&gt; to be mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All mean answers are against the rules, even if they’re not short enough to be mean &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they feel like the writer just performed a mic drop to declare intellectual victory over the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-08T20:15:47.853" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8874" CreationDate="2019-03-08T18:32:00.350" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There isn't a rule prohibiting someone from writing them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(that I can find)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As SSD said in their answer, we don't have rules for every harmful or negative thing that can happen on the site. The site does provide us with tools and processes that are used to combat negative actions/behaviors/results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Such answers are often Low Quality answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Very few questions can be answered with a simple quote and no explanatory text. Even the questions that &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be answered this way would be better with a longer explanation instead. I'm not saying that answers have to be long or that longer is better, but we are trying to solve a problem. A static quote almost never explicitly, directly, and concretely solves a problem and thus a good high quality answer will have at least a line or two of explanatory text showing how the quote supports their thesis and how the thesis solves their problem. Answers that don't do this are partial answers at best and insulting/rude non-answers at worst.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Throwing a quote and a one-liner as an answer, most often, isn't helping a querent in a way that befits an expert — it is throwing the book at them and asking them to solve it themselves. A quality answer connects the dots and offers a complete solution to a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Take action against such answers when you see them&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We as a community are responsible for upholding the quality of the content on this site. That includes acting when we see something wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously I would recommend commenting on such answers with specific suggestions for improvement and downvoting if you see fit. We should not be upvoting these types of answers even if they are &amp;quot;correct&amp;quot;. Another useful tool is flagging them as Very Low Quality if you feel that they are particularly irredeemable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-10T02:14:55.760" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8842" CreationDate="2019-03-08T21:50:55.027" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Disable adblock on SE&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They don't sell ad space to malicious content providers and it helps them pay the bills. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9671" LastActivityDate="2019-03-08T21:50:55.027" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8864" CreationDate="2019-03-09T17:36:29.957" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A possible contributor to the high noise level: HNQ+Alignment&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8568/22566&quot;&gt;meta here about the problem of Hot Network Questions&lt;/a&gt; that I hope you'll take a look at to understand how the situation seems to have taken on a life of its own.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other problem that cropped up which you noted in your last edit, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;removed the alignment sentence as it was not relevant to the question&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  and apparently generated a lot of opinion based answers that not was&#xA;  being asked for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;was that your GM had raised the alignment issue with you in the course of your interaction.  A number of people glommed onto that element, with the predictable result that their answers ran into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5357/22566&quot;&gt;the problem that a lot of alignment issues raise&lt;/a&gt; in this format.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that removing that necessarily helps us understand the&#xA;situation, as it looked to me that the alignment consideration&#xA;between the two of you was an integral part of your at table&#xA;disagreement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have now discovered how prickly the alignment issue can be in questions covering some game systems.  I ran into something similar when I first started participating here.  That meta  helped me get a better feel for where alignment does and doesn't fit on this particular site.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me share with you how I experienced your question, as I dropped by during the day, since the situation you raised isn't an uncommon one -- a mismatch of assumptions between player and GM.   I was interested to see what the answers would be.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The votes to close should have come sooner, &lt;em&gt;mea culpa&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the answers came rolling in, I noted a number of low quality answers from low-to-no rep users, and I thought to protect the question.  It had not been open long enough for that action to be taken, so I made a comment (since deleted) that I thought this needed protection and posted a flag.  A mod dropped in (@SevenSidedDie) and replied to my comment with something like &quot;this early in the question's life, if you see a problem a vote to close is the better choice, flag for protection wasn't the right way to go about this.&quot;  In other words, &lt;em&gt;I'd have served your question better by getting another close vote in sooner, not later&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The point in closing a question, sculpting it, and the opening it again (with caveats on GS/BS as eventually arrived) is to reduce the kind of churn that a question attracts and &lt;em&gt;that is often amplified by the HNQ effect&lt;/em&gt;.      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bit later the question did get protected, and then I noticed another comment from @SevenSidedDie that the question was on the HNQ list.  I am not sure how long after it was closed the first time, but it isn't uncommon for the HNQ phenomenon to add to the churn, or multiply it, and increase the noise level.  Those who voted to close it the first time &lt;em&gt;were correctly protecting the question in that manner&lt;/em&gt;.   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to help a few of the answers with edits, and in one case helping an answerer with a citation (from the PFSRD), so that their answer wasn't just unsupported &quot;this is how alignment should work&quot; ... but that didn't and couldn't solve the core problem.  Most of the answers didn't meet GS/BS standards, and that eventually drives us to the root issue, which is that ... &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;SE sites are designed to have a better signal-to-noise ratio than anywhere else&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a Question attracts that much noise, it generally needs to be closed as a form of damage control.  That's part of why it needed to be closed: too much noise.  As NautArch pointed out, that's more the fault of the answerers than of the question.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-09T18:58:24.167" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T18:58:24.167" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8879" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8881" CreationDate="2019-03-09T19:39:00.560" Score="6" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;Hello fellow grammarians, &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm fairly new the board, so forgive me if this has already been covered but...do we have a preferred style? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question specifically regards the &quot;RAW&quot; (rules as written) acronym?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, the style tends towards &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; using the article &quot;the&quot; in front of  acronyms because they are stand-alone words, generally treated as nouns, i.e.: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;RAW dictates that we roll a d20 for initiative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The RAW dictates that we roll a d20 for initiative. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The article &quot;the&quot; can be placed in front of an acronym if it is being used as an adjective. i.e. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The RAW acronym is standard use on rpg.stackexchange.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My reason for asking is because StackExchange likes to encourage users to edit each other's posts. I'd like to first know what style to follow so that posts that I edit will appear uniform in style. Do we have a style guide? Should we establish one?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52714" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:33:13.313" LastActivityDate="2019-12-28T21:33:13.313" Title="Grammar: Do we say &quot;The RAW&quot; or simply &quot;RAW&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8880" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8879" CreationDate="2019-03-09T19:46:55.870" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't have much of a style guide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either of these are correct and valid. It is up to the author's personal preferences which they use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we should respect the author's personal preferences when editing, and since this does not do anything to improve clarity or correctness, we should avoid editing one form into the other in another person's post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T19:46:55.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8879" CreationDate="2019-03-09T19:48:34.193" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/is-there-a-style-guide-for-posts&quot;&gt;We don’t have a style guide&lt;/a&gt;, just a general encouragement that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;the community improves posts&lt;/a&gt;. This looks like a matter of taste that can’t be improved meaningfully by switching it, so it doesn’t fall under that general principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So long as a detail like this doesn’t impair understanding or accessibility, posts can be written according to the author’s tastes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T19:48:34.193" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8849" CreationDate="2019-03-09T23:39:43.410" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Guessing the system is bad, but adding a system tag is not always guessing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recognize that I'm challenging the consensus here, but in my opinion, if the question contains enough information to uniquely identify the system, adding the system tag to it is not out of line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen people say &amp;quot;don't guess the system&amp;quot; to someone adding a system tag to a question when the asker quoted the rulebook, with a page-number citation. That is ridiculous. I could confidently say that there is only one RPG where that exact quote appears on that exact page of the rulebook. Pretending that we don't know what system people are talking about because they didn't put it in a  &lt;strong&gt;tag&lt;/strong&gt; serves no one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add a system tag if:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question has enough information to uniquely identify the system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are confident enough in your own breadth of RPG knowledge to be sure that the question isn't about a system you've never heard of.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are confident that the reason the system tag is missing is because the asker forgot it or didn't realize it was necessary.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-09T23:39:43.410" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8883" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-10T07:38:56.487" Score="5" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've read some posts here on RPG Meta about comment deletion and it seems the overarching goals are to reduce clutter, diminish distracting information on the site, and maintain the focus of SE as strictly Q&amp;amp;A.  This strategy is applied to both helpful comments (&quot;You should add...&quot;) and to conversational comments (&quot;this is so cool&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears from this policy that SE is not interested in providing a view into process.  Questions and answers are regularly developed in a collaborative environment with plenty of back and forth between users in the comment section. However the historical value of this process is not appreciated in the tenets of SE. SE sees these comments as a disposable byproduct of its main function - a clear Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, however, SE &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; provide a view into question and answer edit history. Presumably, this is to provide transparency to the user about how a question or answer was edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why does SE value transparency and the historical significance of edits, but does not value transparency and historical significance when it comes to comments?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think visual clutter is a solid response here, because comments can easily be hidden, as they already are when there are more than ten or so of them, and as edit histories already are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-10T07:59:59.477" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T00:22:36.567" Title="Why are Comments deleted but Edit History is retained?" Tags="|discussion|comments|editing|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8884" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-10T07:44:59.460" Score="3" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have, on a couple occasions noticed either (1) a spoiler box being used incorrectly - that is, it didn't actually hide all the info that was spoiler info. And (2) a spoiler box being used when the information included in the spoiler did not add any pertinent information to the statement the respondent was making.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the first occasion I dropped the respondent a comment and they fixed it promptly.  On the second occasion I down-voted the answer and left a comment that I down-voted due to what I thought was an unnecessary spoiler.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an expectation that if a spoiler is used it should be pertinent to the answer, and also are there any guidelines on using spoilers? And lastly when a spoiler box is used is the respondent encouraged (by pop up box or some other method) to consider the implications of including a spoiler?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastActivityDate="2019-03-10T07:44:59.460" Title="What are expectations/policy around spoilers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|policy|etiquette|spoilers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8885" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8883" CreationDate="2019-03-10T11:51:53.400" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Users being able to see deleted comments has been discussed a few times on the main Meta Stack Exchange, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/279122/152515&quot;&gt;Allow users to see deleted comments on their own posts&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-declined&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-declined&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/182155/152515&quot;&gt;Why moderators can see deleted comments while the owner cannot?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/182091/152515&quot;&gt;Could 30k+ users be allowed to see deleted comments, please?&lt;/a&gt; (highly polarised votes, no status)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You see the revision history because you need that ability in order to moderate posts as a community member. Like you said, it's there so that you can see if recent edits are appropriate, so that you can see what a post was like before someone vandalised it, and other reasons like that. It also holds people accountable for their edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for comment moderation the only thing people need to be able to see is what comments are still present—then flag it if it shouldn't be present. Diamond moderators can see deleted comments only because the kinds of moderation we do sometimes necessitate that, but since non-diamond users aren't doing that kind of moderation, they don't need to see those comments. (In fact &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/85442/152515&quot;&gt;even diamond moderators couldn't see comments&lt;/a&gt; for the first ~3 years of Stack Exchange's history.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, at least half of the deleted comments you'd see on any given site are going to be abusive or just heated arguments. They're gone and there's a good reason they're gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange isn't providing these features so you can learn about process, they're there for moderation, so learning about process isn't a reason to show you deleted comments. Meta sites (like here), help documents, and interaction with the community are how you learn about process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-03-11T13:45:21.153" LastActivityDate="2019-03-11T13:45:21.153" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8886" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8894" CreationDate="2019-03-10T13:09:57.293" Score="4" ViewCount="831" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46631/how-bad-is-sunlight-sensitivity-of-drow-etc-especially-for-casters&quot;&gt;How bad is Sunlight Sensitivity (of Drow, etc.), especially for casters?&lt;/a&gt; has two questions on it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How bad is Sunlight Sensitivity, especially for casters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to mitigate it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, it seems like it should've been closed as too broad (two questions in one post), but arguably the second question is actually tied to the first: if it is really bad, how to mitigate it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reading the answers, there is only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/55257/40999&quot;&gt;one answer&lt;/a&gt; that actually address the main question. The rest of them only address the secondary question, how to mitigate the effects of Sunlight Sensitivity. I speculate that the secondary question is easier to answer, so people gives partial answer and ignore the first part entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle the question now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;VTC it as &quot;too broad&quot;? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit out the main question, and ask for how to mitigate the Sunlight Sensitivity?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Other?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-10T18:39:34.207" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T23:58:28.633" Title="How should we handle this question, most of the answers to which only address the minor/secondary question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8887" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-10T13:13:59.157" Score="4" ViewCount="535" Body="&lt;p&gt;Related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8886/how-should-we-handle-this-question-which-answers-only-address-the-minor-seconda&quot;&gt;How should we handle this question, most of the answers to which only address the minor/secondary question?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That question addresses how we handle &lt;strong&gt;questions&lt;/strong&gt; that have multiple parts, where most answers only address the secondary question. Now I want to ask how the community feels about &lt;strong&gt;answers&lt;/strong&gt; that only answer part of the question, but ignoring the other, main, question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should such answers be flagged as Not An Answer? Should we downvote them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three proposed duplicates&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8733/i-have-a-partial-answer-or-useful-response-to-a-question-but-i-cannot-create-a&quot;&gt;I have a partial answer or useful response to a question, but I cannot create a full answer out of it. What should I do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8269/i-have-some-information-to-add-to-help-someone-solve-their-issue-do-i-answer-or&quot;&gt;I have some information to add to help someone solve their issue, do I answer or comment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;are approaching the issue as the answerer. This question is about how we, as the community, should handle these partial answers. The answers have been posted, but how do we should handle these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do we allow people to post partial answers? If the answer is no, how do we handle already-posted partial answers?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-10T19:49:57.410" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T23:53:37.017" Title="How should we handle answers that only address a minor part of the question, but not the main question?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8888" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8886" CreationDate="2019-03-11T00:16:20.693" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There is no &quot;we&quot;; there is only you and I&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This community is egalitarian and non-hierarchical - your opinion needs no validation from me or anyone else. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think it's too broad, VTC. If you think the answers are bad, vote them down and/or leave a comment. If you think a question or answer can be improved with an edit, make the edit. You have this power - use it as Spider-Man would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for this particular question - the OP has answered their own headline question in the body of the question (&quot;pretty bad&quot;). &quot;How bad is this really?&quot; is possibly primarily opinion-based and maybe should be removed - but not by any omnicognizant &quot;we&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T23:58:28.633" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T23:58:28.633" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8887" CreationDate="2019-03-11T00:21:47.740" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The answer stands or falls by its quality&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a whole spectrum running between &quot;doesn't answer the question at all&quot; and &quot;answers the question comprehensively in all conceivable and inconceivable situations now and forevermore&quot;. If you're holding out for the latter you'll be waiting a long time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The voting mechanism exists to separate the wheat from the chaff - comprehensiveness is one of the criteria in a highly personalised and personal voting system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a person is consistently posting poor quality answers as perceived by the majority of the community (possibly because it violates community norms) they will either learn what constitutes a high quality answer or stop posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T23:53:37.017" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T23:53:37.017" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8890" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8893" CreationDate="2019-03-11T04:35:59.097" Score="2" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grab&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grab&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grab&lt;/a&gt; tag existed recently because I saw it added to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142853/troxs-grabbing-appendages&quot;&gt;a Pathfinder question&lt;/a&gt;. It seems very similar in scope to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; tag info/wiki says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about grappling — wrestling, or engaging in unarmed, nonlethal combat where the goal is often to incapacitate, restrain, or pin rather than kill one's opponent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Roleplaying games often have intricate, confusing grapple rules — this tag endeavors to gather rules and rulings concerning this commonplace yet disproportionately complex activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grab&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grab&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grab&lt;/a&gt; tag info/wiki (recently added, after I pointed it out in chat) says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Grabbing something means taking hold of it so it only moves where you want it to, more or less. The concept appears in many RPGs under various names; grappling, seizing, wrestling, grasping, etc. Most rules for it involve grabbing something capable of moving under its own power and restricting its movement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically in 4th edition D&amp;amp;D, the &lt;em&gt;grab&lt;/em&gt; condition can be applied as the result of an attack, either from the basic &lt;em&gt;grab&lt;/em&gt; power or from player or monster powers that represent a grappling fighting style. A &lt;em&gt;grabbed&lt;/em&gt; creature cannot move on its own, but can attempt a skill check (athletics vs. fortitude or acrobatics vs. reflex) to escape on its turn, or be moved around as an opposed action by the creature grabbing it, which must also dedicate a hand to maintaining the grab. Grabs can be broken from outside by rendering the grabber unable to take actions, such as by stunning it, or by using forced movement powers to push, pull, slide, or teleport either creature involved in the grab such that the grabber can no longer reach what it was grabbing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more general usage involving holding creatures or grappling them, use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These seem very similar, except that &amp;quot;grab&amp;quot; apparently refers to a different/special thing in D&amp;amp;D 4e (and maybe Pathfinder, judging from the questions tagged with it). Since I'm not familiar with previous editions, I'm not sure if they actually refer to different fundamental concepts (rather than being the same concept with a different name).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grab&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grab&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grab&lt;/a&gt; tags be synonymized?&lt;/strong&gt; If so, which should be the target tag that the other is merged into? If not, why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T20:22:26.073" Title="Should the [grab] tag be merged with the [grapple] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8891" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8887" CreationDate="2019-03-11T05:29:36.390" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps the question is at fault (rather than the answer), and it should be made more specific instead of having multiple parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="751" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T00:41:32.510" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T00:41:32.510" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8890" CreationDate="2019-03-11T05:44:07.583" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The only reason to not merge them is specifically for the 4e clarification. That said however, the blurb says (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;the grab condition can be applied as the result of an attack, either from the basic grab power or from player or monster powers &lt;strong&gt;that represent a grappling fighting style&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This (to me) implies that grab and grapple are synonymous. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, after doing a little bit of research on the tags, there is quite a bit of variation between the amount of questions tagged alongside &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grab+dnd-4e&quot;&gt;11 out of 18 &quot;grab&quot; questions tagged alongside &quot;dnd-4e&quot;&lt;/a&gt;*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple+dnd-4e&quot;&gt;3 out of 271 &quot;grapple&quot; questions tagged alongside &quot;dnd-4e&quot;&lt;/a&gt;*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This implies to me that those playing 4e &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; the &quot;grab&quot; tag, potentially for the reason they don't recognise the term &quot;grapple&quot;. For those of us that have played other systems, &quot;grapple&quot; would be the more generic term, but for those playing 4e, &quot;grab&quot; would be the only term they could potentially know. And following that logic, other systems could also use the &quot;grab&quot; phrase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anything, the tags should co-exist, but maybe just reference one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* At time of posting&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="12193" LastEditDate="2019-03-11T05:54:45.637" LastActivityDate="2019-03-11T05:54:45.637" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8890" CreationDate="2019-03-11T06:05:44.723" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, since we don’t need both. We don’t actually care that some systems implement wrestling with various specific named actions and we don’t need tags for them. We tag for topics, to gather together questions on the same topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t need tags for grabs, nor for pins, piledrivers, headlocks, or submission holds. Those aren’t separate topics that need their questions separated. Those are all elements under the topic of wrestling or grappling, and fall under the topic that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; denotes. We don’t need all kinds of questions about different words for wrestling or wrestling moves spread out among multiple tags and not collected together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grab&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grab&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grab&lt;/a&gt; should be made a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt;. Askers who know “grab” from their system can still use it, and the site will automatically recognise that as meaning their question fits into our bucket for questions about grappling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-03-11T15:01:23.527" LastActivityDate="2019-03-11T15:01:23.527" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8886" CreationDate="2019-03-11T17:42:34.690" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have edited the question to focus on mitigation where one option is &quot;no mitigation is required.&quot;  I understand this looks like two different questions on the page but at it's heart it is &quot;how do I balance this&quot;, where options include &quot;it's balanced already&quot; and &quot;change it this way.&quot;  I am confident enough this does not change the question's meaning I've just gone ahead and done it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general it is best to engage with the actual question asker than ask (especially unlinked!) meta questions about it. (I've linked the metas to the question in comments now to drive engagement.) Everyone has comment and edit-suggestion privileges, and you say you are aware we don't like multi-part questions, so in general if you're unsure how to proceed, talk to the OP &quot;Hey is there a single question here...&quot;.  If you have more confidence, suggest an edit, vtc, and so on. Normally I'd expect escalation to meta if engagement on the question failed, but there has been no attempt at engagement on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how to handle questions like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comment saying &quot;multi part questions often go off track because people just answer one part, is there a way we can answer just one key question for you or split it into 2 questions?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As you gain insight via interaction with the OP and/or other community members, vtc, submit edits, etc. as seems appropriate - these activities by their nature get more eyes on it (they push the question into the close and review queues so other community members engage)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If that seems to not be settling down, bring it here or, if there's something bad wrong, flag it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-11T17:42:34.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8887" CreationDate="2019-03-11T20:31:34.277" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not getting into &quot;should&quot; but rather &quot;this is what I've seen work&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Responses to answers that are incomplete include:   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;leave a comment to inspire the answerer to improve the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;down vote&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;both a and b&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In selected cases, add what's missing if you know the answer and can&#xA;support it.  This helps that answer, though not all users will want&#xA;to exercise that option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each is effective to varying degrees depending on the details of the situation.    &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have had done for me, and have done also for others, all four of those choices.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not convinced that some new policy, nor some sagacious rule, can and will encompass all cases and thus do not feel that there is anything new, or specific, to do.  The tools we have should get us where we need to go.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also concur with @ZanLynx when he points out that a root cause of some bad answers is that the question is bad in the first place and needs work.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Heh, update: I just left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;such a comment for an answer that is sparse on detail&lt;/a&gt;, we'll see if the answerer rises to the occasion.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T13:59:51.457" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T13:59:51.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8883" CreationDate="2019-03-12T00:22:36.567" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answers are content, comments are noise (in the long run)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Granted, in the process of getting a question or answer the comments are (in the ideal case) helpful &lt;em&gt;in improving the content&lt;/em&gt;.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the content is brought up to scratch, the comments should (in theory) go to the four winds so that all that is left is content.  High quality content, low noise level, is a core value of the SE model.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;So why is the edit history kept?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we can see how the content was improved, and what was removed/edited out.  Learning by seeing how others solved a problem can be of value.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T00:22:36.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8897" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8903" CreationDate="2019-03-12T07:51:11.923" Score="7" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I am still unsatisfied with the responses I got for the way this post got moderated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142547/15211&quot;&gt;How to roleplay my character&amp;#39;s ethics according to the DM when I don&amp;#39;t understand those ethics?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After I had been discussing the reason for its first close here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8864/15211&quot;&gt;Why was this post about roleplaying my character&amp;#39;s ethics closed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I figured that, a) &quot;ethics&quot; is a keyword that usually makes users assume, it is being talked about alignments. And b) That questions about alignment tend to generate a lot of opinion based responses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that my OP coincidentally even mentioned a quote of the GM referring to my alignment just made it worse as I realized later. So before/shortly after the post got reopened again, I removed the alignment part, as it was just background info and not related to what my question was about. But I found to leave the ethics part in it, as I clearly was talking about my own ethics, in contrast to my characters ethical knowledge (not their ethics as dictated by alignment). 9 hours after the post got reopened, it got closed again by mxyzplk. Stating that the content of the answers are only giving opinions. That's true. But to be fair, within the 9 hours after my edit, where it was open again there was no additional answer given, despite it had been for a few hours again as well in the HNQ. So I asked in a comment mxyzplk, for clarification, where all I got as response to after a few days was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I’m sorry, I see no answer here that tries to Back It Up, so I have nothing to say I didn’t say already, I believe this question is lost in opinion land irretrievably. – mxyzplk&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So given that I am not happy with that response I have to ask here again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why it was closed a second time, given that it was closed the first time for the opinion based answers it generated, which are bad quality for this sites format, despite after it having been reopened no more opinion based answers had been made?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does it mean, despite the OP being on-topic, the existign answers either have to be deleted (what they won't do by the given amount of rep generated through it) or they have to edit their answers from an post that is &quot;Not answering what OP asks for and instead write out an opinion about the background story OP mentioned.&quot; to an &quot;Good Subjective answer?&quot; What won't happen either since there are 12 answers to a core question that is quite hard to answer. So 12 random people from the internet, won't all be able to provide such a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So even if I assume here mxyzplk's action of closing that post again, just for the sake of &quot;Having opinion based answers&quot;, despite not &quot;Generating opinion based answers&quot; anymore, was correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there remains one question for me, this metapost is supposed to be about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I haven't received any useful answer to my question yet, and still am looking for a solution,&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;would the above described scenario conclude that this is a topic, that by our polices would be forever forbidden to be asked on this site again?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I see this sites policies, closing a post is supposed to give the OP time to improve their question, so it is better quality/on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that my post was already on-topic, there is not much more I can do, since I was told its the answers it received which ignored my core question, having made it get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So since I still look for an answer, I would like to ask the question again, this time avoid giving too much background info making users tempted to state their opinion. But that would by our policies very clearly be a 100% duplicate post. So getting linked to the doomed post, and still leaving me without a solution to my question. I was also considering, just editing my post into a clearly Off-topic request for opinions. So it actually reflects more a questions the answers it received would be fitting to, and hence wouldn't be a duplicate anymore. But I am not sure if that would be inline with the soul of this format. Plus I am not sure if this would violate the point with changing the scope of a question when there are already answers given. I mean in this case I would change the scope in a way that actually the answers now at least would answer the question. But making an on-topic question, off-topic, just so its inline with the answers it received feels not right to me either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what are my options to get answers to my core question? Or is this a special edge case, where in fact there is no way, to ask this on-topic question here ever again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T14:04:10.273" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T19:54:39.633" Title="Are questions that are On-Topic but generated a lot of opinion based answers doomed to never be solved?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8898" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-12T12:40:04.710" Score="16" ViewCount="258" Body="&lt;p&gt;As it has been announced on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/325060/updating-the-hot-network-questions-list-now-with-a-bit-more-network-and-a-litt&quot;&gt;main meta&lt;/a&gt;, diamond moderators now have the ability to remove questions from the Hot Network Questions List.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the policy on what to remove seems to be on a per-site basis, the same post also recommends the creation of a meta discussion with guidelines for both moderators and general users on when a question should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this intent in mind, what criteria should be used for removing a question from the Hot Network Questions? When, if at all, should users be flagging questions for moderator attention for this removal?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previous related topics include our discussions on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8568/does-rpg-stack-exchange-want-to-opt-out-from-hot-network-questions&quot;&gt;whether to opt out from HNQ&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8521/what-are-rpg-ses-goals-for-hot-network-questions&quot;&gt;our goals for HNQ&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T14:21:06.783" LastActivityDate="2021-09-18T00:13:26.713" Title="When should a question be removed from the Hot Network Questions List?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8898" CreationDate="2019-03-12T13:02:57.540" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;When HNQ Harms the Interests of the Asker&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HNQ can give the asker extra visibility, but it can also result in answers that are missing some of the expectations specific to this sub-stack. It is a difficult question when the benefits exceed the drawbacks and vice versa. It's certainly not a welcoming experience when a person's visibility is denied due to a few bad apples. Still, being denied HNQ visibility is generally less bad than being denied &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; future answer due to question closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, I see two cases when HNQ should be disabled:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When a question is nearing the closing threshold (or passed it) through no fault of the asker, but rather due to HNQ-derived answers. In this case, disconnecting the question from the hot network and keeping it open or reopening it is a better alternative. This bullet point is not meant to endorse 'punishing' an asker for bad answerers, but is a recognition of the unfortunate reality we live in where such closure common risk/event.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When the &lt;em&gt;asker&lt;/em&gt; believes that the HNQ status is a net negative influence on the answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="50419" LastEditDate="2021-09-14T12:09:03.853" LastActivityDate="2021-09-14T12:09:03.853" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8901" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-12T18:18:19.973" Score="19" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suppose that while browsing through old questions, I find that the top answer, while almost certainly correct at the time it was posted, is now incorrect. I add a new answer with the current, correct information. Should the old answer be downvoted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48191" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-12T20:14:31.670" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T16:39:28.923" Title="Is it appropriate to downvote an answer that may have been good at the time it was posted, but is now incorrect?" Tags="|discussion|answers|down-votes|etiquette|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8901" CreationDate="2019-03-12T18:26:07.670" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Definitely&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as it's appropriate to change the accepted answer to your question that was once correct, it is appropriate to downvote a once-good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;However&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before I do this, I would first comment to why the answer is no longer correct, perhaps with an errata link or some other damning source so that they may be able to edit the answer themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T18:26:07.670" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8897" CreationDate="2019-03-12T19:54:39.633" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The bigger question can't be answered well because there is no good answer. To paraphrase that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142547/8610&quot;&gt;big question&lt;/a&gt; from the original:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If I end up again in a situation where everyone else at the table agrees that the actions I want my character to take violate what everyone else knows to be the campaign's idea of common sense, how can I resolve the situation happily while &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; maintaining my player agency &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; obeying what others have told me is my character's understanding of common sense?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I've revised this to remove any mention of ethics—a term you might've noticed is a bit loaded 'round these parts; I hope that's okay.) To paraphrase this further, everyone else at the table says that your PC's common sense tells your PC to do &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt;, but you think that it makes &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; sense for your PC to do &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt;, and you want to know how to reach a compromise that sees you still in control of your character but that doesn't make you seem like a jerk or a pushover and also doesn't make your PC seem like a crazy person or a nincompoop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The dilemma that big question raises can't be resolved in the abstract.&lt;/strong&gt; For a general situation like this, having your PC take the action anyway puts you in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37103/8610&quot;&gt;&quot;My Guy&quot; Syndrome&lt;/a&gt; territory. And having your PC &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; take the action means your agency's removed because you're having the PC refrain from that action &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; you've been told that's not how folks in the campaign act even though your PC clearly &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; act that way… &lt;em&gt;because you wanted him to!&lt;/em&gt; It's no-win with no middle ground.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only an ugly bout of lawyering the GM's understanding of his own campaign's version of common sense can resolve these sorts of situations, and each of those situations will be unique because nobody knows when the GM is going to play next the my-campaign's-common-sense-isn't-real-world-common-sense card.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, if the GM is &lt;em&gt;constantly&lt;/em&gt; confronting the players with these kinds of dilemmas—for example, the GM routinely says, &quot;Your PC knows that this [insane thing] is what folks in this world normally do; are you sure you want your PC to do that [other campaign-abnormal-yet-much-more-real-world-sane thing] anyway?&quot;—, then maybe by providing several anecdotes readers will discern a pattern that can lead them to determine &lt;em&gt;how you should think&lt;/em&gt; in that GM's campaign. Then you could fix your mindset to the campaign and not worry about &lt;em&gt;real-world&lt;/em&gt; common sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there was only &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; example… &lt;em&gt;and it was brilliant!&lt;/em&gt; Seriously, had I written an answer, I, too,—even as an experienced user—would've focused on that anecdote (maybe saying something like &lt;em&gt;Have your PC motion for the gnolls to surrender, and, if they don't, your PC attacks; the gnolls were given a chance&lt;/em&gt;). It's an &lt;em&gt;incredibly attractive&lt;/em&gt; anecdote that encourages others to help solve that &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; problem. It's not that nobody &lt;em&gt;wants&lt;/em&gt; to solve the general problem but that folks just simply can't &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; that the charming anecdote also lends itself so readily to solving. So folks just solve the anecdote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; ask a question &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; this again.&lt;/strong&gt; However, I urge waiting until this is a bigger problem. That's not to discount your feelings! While I know you'd like to know what to do &lt;em&gt;next time&lt;/em&gt; this happens, there may never be a next time. I recommend gathering a few of these anecdotes &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; including those anecdotes—in a much shorter form—and posing the big question again but differently. Maybe it'll end up looking like this: &quot;The GM says common sense in his world is different from common sense in the real world and, because of that, encourages me to change my PC's actions. How can I continue to play my PC the way I want while conforming to the GM's world's kooky notions of common sense?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I hope, when you do pose that new question, that you get answers that are better than, &quot;You can't,&quot; or, &quot;Tell the GM to play NPCs like he wants and that you'll play your PC how you want.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-03-12T19:54:39.633" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8904" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-13T15:00:41.857" Score="4" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the last few days to weeks, I've come across multiple cases where someone commented on an answer with e.g. a clarification request, change proposal or other type of attempt to improve an answer. Subsequently, the answer's author or someone else replied, leading to a 3-4 comment conversation. Longer conversations, which are probably best moved to chat, are therefore not relevant to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, after the changes were implemented, one of the participants deleted their comments, but the other participant(s) didn't, leading to a fragmented, broken conversation that makes little to no sense to other readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A specific example would be a conversation between me and NautArch on an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/142988/38495&quot;&gt;answer of mine&lt;/a&gt;. He eventually deleted his comments, but I haven't done that so far*. As a result, readers can somewhat deduce the topic of our conversation, but it's certainly suboptimal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* I would have done so by now, seeing how the remaining comments are more confusing than helpful, if not for this question.**&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;** They are now deleted.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hence, what I'm asking is which course of action is more desirable: deleting a comment conversation for the purpose of tidiness, or keeping it for the purpose of documentation.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: this question is not about whether or not to keep conversations that already got fragmented - keeping half of a conversation is, in my opinion, clearly pointless. This is more about why the comments got fragmented in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note 2: this probably also applies 1:1 to questions, but I've experienced the issue mainly with answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="38495" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T08:52:50.900" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T08:52:50.900" Title="Should resolved comment conversations that revolve around improving an answer be kept or deleted?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8904" CreationDate="2019-03-13T15:18:27.923" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We delete them for tidiness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;the comment privileges&lt;/a&gt;, comments are “temporary post-it notes”. They don't get archived long-term and are not intended as a form of documentation. They can and will go away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exceptions are few, and are mostly “Related:” link comments, or otherwise heavily upvoted comments that aren't of the actionable variety.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When comments are actioned please flag them as No Longer Needed, or delete them if they're your own comments. When an entire conversation has been actioned, please flag it for removal (or whatever parts of it are left): the easiest way to do this is just to flag the most recent comment of the bunch for moderator attention saying something like “comments up to this point have been acted on and be deleted”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T15:18:27.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8904" CreationDate="2019-03-13T15:20:15.153" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Please delete your obsolete comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments were added as a site feature to enable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;temporary&lt;/a&gt; communication with the post author, for exactly that kind of use. Emphasis on temporary:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are temporary &amp;quot;Post-It&amp;quot; notes left on a question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The temporary nature is deliberate, which is why people can delete their parts of the conversation: continuity of discussions and records-keeping is not a goal of the comment feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go ahead and delete obsolete comments that no longer apply to the post, and aren’t any long part of an ongoing discussion about managing/improving the post. Any comments that actively make it harder for people to find comments that &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; still relevant should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Please&lt;/em&gt; delete them. :) It’ll save a mod spending time to do it to bring down the noise level of the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T16:05:04.323" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8907" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-13T16:20:56.157" Score="3" ViewCount="385" Body="&lt;p&gt;I seem to have been pulled in an edit war (or at least skirmish) on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142983/what-are-the-game-mechanical-advantages-of-high-impulse-low-thrust-drives-in-the&quot;&gt;my question&lt;/a&gt;, and would like to understand the basic principles which may or may not be broken by it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is interested in a strictly literal reading of the rules, and evaluation of the consequences thereof (specifically, the whether one build includes advantages over another under a literal reading of game mechanics related to them, which seems to produce a result contrary to rules as intended). My question includes a paragraph that states as much, a bit concisely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to understand the benefits of these drives in the rules as written, without resorting to rulings, hacks, fiat or the like. (If the rules are faulty, applying changes will be the next phase of tackling this issue.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to very closely match the principles of when a certain tag should be used:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Questions which]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are investigating, as a priority, literal interpretations of the rules, even if they lead to absurd situations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are not usefully answered solely by homebrew or house rules, or speculation of intent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;when their [rules'] written form is interpreted as strictly as possible, without reference to explanations or considerations outside of the rules texts&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, I've been shown another &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6178/50419&quot;&gt;highly supported answer&lt;/a&gt; on when to use it, and it includes characterisations such as these (not quoting the whole answer, obviously):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are the only authoritative source of information. Authorial intent is not significant to a RAW study, nor is the experience of an individual in using the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The rules are a shared objective experience. As each reader learns to recognise and account for her own observational biases, their understandings of the rules will become increasingly alike.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Justification is irrelevant. RAW is a tool for describing what the rules say. Its users may try to explain why the rules say certain things but this is not the goal or purpose of RAW.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Value judgements are irrelevant. RAW describes the rules, but offers no comment on their quality.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These all seem in line with the way what my question is like, what I'm asking etc. Obviously my note on the matter isn't as long and elaborate and omnienumerative as a metadiscussion. But it's still that sort of question - one not asking about rulings, not asking about interpreting things based on authorial intent, not seeking bending mechanics to the narrative. Because it's a question that seeks out the literal reading of the rules and the effects thereof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yet it gets edited to remove that specification, even though (the irony) that is contrary to my authorial intent and I have said as much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus I have to ask: &lt;strong&gt;if all those are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; criteria for a question being rules-literalist, then &lt;em&gt;what are&lt;/em&gt; the criteria thereof?&lt;/strong&gt; Asking around in chat so far only gave either vague answers, or answers that turned rules literalists into a caricature. If all those criteria are inaccurate, then perhaps the people who often use the RAW tag should edit their wiki? If they're not inaccurate, well, I'd like a confirmation from the experts of the tag. &lt;strong&gt;I would like to understand the general criteria and thus become able to apply them correctly to classify both this question and any subsequent ones (since apparently tag wiki criteria were deemed subordinate to other criteria).&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related tangent: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8914/are-tag-criteria-prescriptive-or-descriptive&quot;&gt;Are Tag Criteria Descriptive or Prescriptive?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T20:03:25.390" Title="What Exactly Are the Classification Criteria for the [rules-as-written] Tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8908" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8901" CreationDate="2019-03-13T16:39:28.923" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Maybe!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You&lt;/em&gt; can vote however you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, saying that &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; the site's users &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; also cast &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; votes a certain way in certain situations is an overreach. Users aren't &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; under any &lt;em&gt;obligation&lt;/em&gt; to vote one way or another or even to vote at all. If new information has rendered an answer incorrect, it's up to each user to determine if that answer now deserves further action. A mandate or policy or even a perceived consensus that certain classes of answers &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be downvoted all the time no matter what violates users' voting independence, something the site greatly values and respects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, if &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; downvote an answer, that's on &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;, and you should be acting here according to your own will—&lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; is appropriate. If there's a desire to see users downvote an answer, that can be encouraged, but I suggest that be done with the tools the site already provides—put a bounty the question, add appropriate comments, and cast votes according to conscience—rather than, for instance, a comment on the obsolete answer that says &lt;em&gt;This answer is incorrect in light of rules changes; for why it's been downvoted see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8901/8610&quot;&gt;this Meta question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt; It's better for voters to downvote and leave &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; comment than to have voters downvote and in comments hide behind a bureaucratic shield that absolves them of the responsibility for their votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T16:39:28.923" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8907" CreationDate="2019-03-13T17:35:01.137" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The bolded part of your question is &quot;What are the game-mechanical benefits of [game feature]?&quot; The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag doesn't apply because your question doesn't seem to be about how the rules are written; it's fundamentally about analysis of how game systems interact in the absence of an explicit statement in the rules. You're asking for expert analysis of what appears to be a concept omitted from the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's flip this around and assume the question &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; about the rules as written, so you add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag and await answers that do nothing more than cite literal rules. Then either someone would answer with an explicit quote from the rules (unlikely given that you're asking the question to begin with) or the correct answer to the question would be &quot;the rules don't explain the game-mechanical benefit&quot; (which isn't very helpful and wouldn't actually answer the bolded question). So the assumption would be wrong. (Unless those are in fact the sorts of answers you're looking for, but in that case you have an XY problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not an expert in Fate Core, but in my RPG.SE experience your question does not merit the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag because you've either underestimated or misrepresented the intent of your own question. You seem to think that because you have the phrase &quot;in the rules as written&quot; in your final paragraph then that makes the question inviolably about the rules as written. I think the problem is that the final paragraph doesn't appear to match the bolded crux of your question. You're soliciting rules-as-written answers when you're actually requesting expert analysis informed by the official rules. Those aren't the same thing, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag is not equivalent to &quot;without homebrew&quot; or &quot;official rules only please.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastEditorUserId="32426" LastEditDate="2019-03-13T17:45:25.543" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T17:45:25.543" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8907" CreationDate="2019-03-13T18:37:27.520" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recent usage—that's not adequately reflected in the tag description of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag—has seen the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; become appropriate &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; for questions that state clearly and unambiguously that the rules as they are on page or screen appear to lead &lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; to an obvious and seemingly unsolvable contradiction &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; to outright absurdity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, this is a summary of what I was told by another user who removed that tag when last I tagged a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, and that user's position was supported by a moderator. To be extra clear, I haven't since used the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;, and, further, I apologize that I can't find that question among those I've asked. (How can a user search his questions by who edited his questions?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In sum, as your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142983/8610&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; puts forth neither textual contradiction nor textual absurdity, it's just a rules question, and there's no tag for that because the site's pretty much &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; rules question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; The tag&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;has undergone a host of changes since the site's inception. A vast number of Meta questions swirl around it. And, in the interest of full disclosure, this user, despite his &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/rules-as-written/topusers&quot;&gt;silver badge&lt;/a&gt; for the tag&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;has opted not to engage in further discussions about the tag. That effort, he's found, is better spent elsewhere.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T18:37:27.520" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8904" CreationDate="2019-03-13T21:17:44.840" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Delete - tidying up is good!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the deleter in question, I generally approach comments (which I often use) as a means of communication for Q&amp;amp;A improvement. Once it's been determined that a change will or won't be made, I generally delete my part to help keep it all clean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posting a comment asking for the other party(ies) to do so as well seems counterproductive (it's posting another comment), but I can see how my abrupt deletion can be surprising.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do see the other half of a conversation gone, it's probably best to delete along with it. The comments are not part of the answer in any way and can be mod-removed at any time. Leaving them dangling as full conversations or partial doesn't help the answer in any way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless it's a funny joke. Then it's all good to leave behind if it's getting votes. Keeping things light at times is important, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T21:17:44.840" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8904" CreationDate="2019-03-13T22:33:57.290" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Deleted - once their helpful effect has been applied&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8896/22566&quot;&gt;here, questions and answers are content, comments are noise (in the long run)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The longer term goal of the SE model of web sites is to have a library of expert answers to good, well scoped, well presented questions.  The comments are a tool to enable that, but they are not content in and of themselves.  I had to have that understanding beaten into me when I first joined in with SE sites, so please learn from my example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at the larger objectives of what provides value at an SE site, as opposed to anywhere else on the internet, it's the high quality and low signal-to- noise ratio of the sites.  That's the objective.  It's also why I bother to visit and participate.  If that core value wasn't there, there's a whole internet full of sites that can offer me lots of noise with my signal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use the comments as a tool to make the core content, questions and answers, better.  Then clean up afterwards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-13T22:39:31.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8907" CreationDate="2019-03-14T02:39:56.143" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation: change your view of questions, edits, and ownership&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seemed to me that the tag itself is a collateral issue.  There are so many metas already in place on that one tag - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; - that I don't see much value in duplicating that effort.  I think there's something else going on with this meta question that I'd like to address.  (So that makes this a little bit of a frame challenge).  I further recommend that you put in the tag, here in meta, in a search, and review all of the meta posts already covering that tag.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot;&gt;Yeah, all of them&lt;/a&gt;.  I've done that.  Not all of it is pleasant reading.  It's been a topic of some interest, and some heated interaction, for some years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Believe it or not, for all of the gamification and rep/point scoring on SE sites, we really are a &lt;em&gt;collaborative effort&lt;/em&gt; style site.  It's an unconventional way of going about things, to be sure, and it takes getting used to, but that's what makes it work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What war?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you described as an edit war&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; is the site working as it is supposed to with a small problem that arises for any of us, potentially: either being too close to an issue, or not being as clear as we think we are being.  As I mentioned earlier in chat, but what I probably need to add here, is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It took me a while to learn on SE sites that once I posted a&#xA;question, due to the editing norms on SE sites, I no longer owned it.&#xA;It had become a kind of community property.  When I began to see the edits and revisions as &amp;quot;let me help you make this question better for the community's&#xA;sake,&amp;quot; and I took a look at them through the lens of &amp;quot;did that make the question clearer or better?&amp;quot; I got less worried about edit wars, and in fact did not view an attempt attempt to &lt;em&gt;revise or improve&lt;/em&gt; a question or answer was an edit war or other hostile act&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the Beatles' Ringo Starr might have sung it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;My rep gets high with a little help from my friends&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Communication filters work both ways.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, despite our best efforts, we aren't as clear as we think we are being.  The tone we bring to our engagement with others during such times can turn out well or not so well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most edits I don't worry about, though sometimes I roll them back because it doesn't feel right or the edit was from someone who had not grokked my point (at times due to me not being clear enough).  That's why those tools are there.   &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/142602/revisions&quot;&gt;I'll offer this edit stream as an example&lt;/a&gt;.  What I can't do is replicate the entire comment stream that accompanied it.  There was quite a bit of back and forth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;continuous improvement process&amp;quot; at work in an unconventional manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When it clicked for me&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really noticed, or I guess I first bought into, how this process worked when I first began contributing at Christianity.SE.  Nice folks like athanasiusofalex, Nathaniel, Caleb, Matt Gutting, LeeWoofendon and a couple of others &lt;em&gt;worked with me&lt;/em&gt; to put both questions and answers into better shape.  That experience helped to inform my understanding of how the same process was intended to work here, albeit for different subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;For completeness, the SO/SE definition: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/03/04/the-great-edit-wars/&quot;&gt;Edit warring is the confrontational use of edits to win a content dispute.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Now, if I could just take the same view of comments, I'd get cranky less often ...  work in progress there&lt;/sub&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T20:03:25.390" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8914" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-14T07:01:38.990" Score="4" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Which of the following is true: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag criteria are prescriptive; one reads the criteria of a tag and checks whether they apply to the question; tag criteria change through meta discussions and/or wiki edits.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tag criteria are descriptive; one watches how authors use tags, and edits the wiki to match actual usage; tag criteria change when enough authors used a given tag differently than before. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the talk of folksonomy seems to support the descriptive option, but prescriptive interventions I've witnessed seem to support the prescriptive option. If the truth is somewhere in-between, then where?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T11:27:54.297" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T11:27:54.297" Title="Are Tag Criteria Prescriptive or Descriptive?" Tags="|support|tags|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8914" CreationDate="2019-03-14T07:36:59.253" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s both and neither.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, tags and their usage guidance are not first-class citizens among the elements of the site. They’re subservient to the task they have, which is to usefully collect together questions on a given topic. &lt;strong&gt;Topic&lt;/strong&gt; drives tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What topics get asked about is emergent, and tags follow that descriptively.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not all tags that emerge are accurately or usefully reflecting a topic, so our tags are sometimes winnowed, adjusted, or defined based on a prescription for what would be most useful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How people use tags, descriptively, is the raw material input to the tagging system. What we eventually observe about which are useful ends up with discussions about how we should use the tags best, which becomes prescriptive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is also iterative.&lt;/strong&gt; When a tag is well established, and has a prescribed usage and topic, it can still evince some rough edges. Sometimes this indicates that there’s something wrong, and discussion observes how it’s &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; being used rather than how usage was prescribed, and perhaps a new prescription is in order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all this, the topic a tag serves is primary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an example, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6634/how-should-we-tag-questions-about-making-magic-items&quot;&gt;used to have&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item-creation&lt;/a&gt;. A prescribed usage was easy and established early, but that wasn’t enough to make it a well-behaved tag. It was getting used inconsistently, and also getting used redundantly with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;. We decided that it, despite descriptively covering a topic and emerging naturally, and having a trivial prescriptive use, was not actually needed. We settled on prescribing usage of the pair &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/crafting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;crafting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;crafting&lt;/a&gt; in its stead, rather than honour the emergence of a dedicated tag. It accurately and precisely served a topic, but wasn’t being used well, and we didn’t need it, so it was eliminated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the principle for tagging is: a tag should be usefully representing a topic, easy to naturally choose by the uninitiated, easy to use correctly for the initiated, and not cause problems. Tags are a mix of descriptive and prescriptive usage, whichever best serves, at a given stage of a tag’s life, to make it practically useful to the community and future readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And ironically, all &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; is just a description itself. Ultimately, tags serve at the community’s pleasure, by whatever process we decide to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T09:24:21.480" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T09:24:21.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8916" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-14T09:51:57.870" Score="2" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143086/11129&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; references &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/&lt;/a&gt;, which is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7742/is-dd-beyond-an-official-rules-source&quot;&gt;official WoTC website&lt;/a&gt;. The problem we face with this content is that it is not accessible without a twitch account (afaik).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d0y00.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d0y00.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This defeat a huge part of this stack exchange. We could avoid this website but since it is seen as official, we would lost a lot of content. A solution could be to enforce to include the meaningful content into the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the policy about link targeting locked content?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quite related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/300916/i-estimate-10-of-the-links-posted-here-are-dead-how-do-we-deal-with-them&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/300916/i-estimate-10-of-the-links-posted-here-are-dead-how-do-we-deal-with-them&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11129" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-14T10:20:01.333" LastActivityDate="2019-03-14T10:20:01.333" Title="What is the policy about link targeting locked content?" Tags="|discussion|citations|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2019-03-14T10:01:31.143" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8917" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-03-14T13:09:16.053" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions relating to post notices, banners that appear below a question or answer and explain its locked status, request citations, or similar. Post notices can only be applied or removed by diamond moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T11:45:25.457" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T11:45:25.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8918" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-03-14T13:09:16.053" Score="0" Body="For questions relating to post notices, banners that appear below a question or answer and explain its locked status, request citations, or similar. Post notices can only be applied or removed by diamond moderators." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T11:45:25.457" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T11:45:25.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8919" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-15T12:37:47.383" Score="4" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;On Worldbuilding we have Reality Check tag. Someone can put his idea or small creation in the question, and ask if it is consistent, accurate, easy to understand etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way to ask such question on RPG? I made a &quot;cheat sheet&quot; of Pathfinder rules my group has hard time remembering and would like to ask if it's reasonably accurate, but I don't see questions like that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T13:36:50.480" Title="Is there something like Worldbuilding's reality check tag here?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8919" CreationDate="2019-03-15T13:36:50.480" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think we have a tag for that, it'd probably just be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the question itself: We can evaluate whether it's accurate and consistent with the rules (if that's what you meant by consistent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest not asking us if it's easy to understand. Ease of understanding is a personal matter for which there is not one best or correct answer; it's effectively opinion based. That part would risk the question being closed as a survey, if someone like me didn't just outright edit it out. You could still ask about that part on a forum though: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/1204&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T13:36:50.480" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8921" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-15T14:00:38.793" Score="3" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143148/41726&quot;&gt;Can unconscious characters be unwilling?&lt;/a&gt; recieved a bit of debate on its status as a duplicate of a couple different questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/80393/41726&quot;&gt;Can unconscious characters be willing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62794/41726&quot;&gt;Can you make an unwilling creature willing? In other words, what defines “willing”?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This debate eventually led to most voters allowing the non-duplicate to stand, but then another user came in ex post facto and closed the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question a duplicate of either of the other questions mentioned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-15T14:49:53.473" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T14:49:53.473" Title="Is this question a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8921" CreationDate="2019-03-15T14:00:38.793" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me start by addressing all the arguments I've seen suggesting it is a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unwilling vs Willing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most common argument I've seen is that unwilling is the opposite of willing. While this is sometimes the case, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/143154/41726&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose's answer&lt;/a&gt; shows that there are at least two ways to interpret &quot;unwilling&quot;, only one of which treats them as a true dichotomy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &quot;opposed; offering resistance; stubborn or obstinate; refractory&quot; definition of &quot;unwilling&quot;, &lt;em&gt;indifferent&lt;/em&gt; would be a satisfatory &quot;middle ground&quot;, as someone who is not opposed, but not &quot;ready, eager, or prepared&quot; to do something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Even if it was a dichotomy, the other questions have no hope of covering mine for all situations&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, the current duplicate target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62794/41726&quot;&gt;Can you make unwilling creatures willing? In other words what defines willing?&lt;/a&gt; is utterly disconnected from my question. Defining &quot;willing&quot; in no way tells me whether unconsciousness affects willingness or unwillingness. Unconsciousness &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; be an answer to the question &quot;how do you make unwilling creatures willing&quot; (in a game sense, I'm not making a statement about consent), but they are definitely not the same question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/80393/41726&quot;&gt;Can unconscious creatures be willing?&lt;/a&gt; is an easier sell, but there is still a problem. &lt;strong&gt;If&lt;/strong&gt; they are dichotomous&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, &quot;Is X willing?&quot; would be a duplicate of &quot;Is X unwilling?&quot; since &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; answer to one would answer the other. However, that says nothing to the questions at hand. The qualifications for an unconscious creature towards willingness or unwillingness may be different, &lt;em&gt;especially&lt;/em&gt; in a game of exceptions like 5th edition D&amp;amp;D. Unconsciousness (the game term) could easily say something about willingness while saying nothing about unwillingness. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is illustrated well by @Sdjz's comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm not sure this is a duplicate because after reading the other question I can get 2 answers for this one 1: &quot;An unconscious character can't make the decision to be willing so an unconscious character can't make the decision to be unwilling either&quot;. or 2: &quot;An unconscious character can't be willing so that must mean that it is always unwilling&quot;. By the definition of a duplicate the answer should be obvious&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Marking it as a duplicate is ambiguous no matter how you answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1: I've already addressed they aren't necessarily, so what follows is just for demonstration purposes&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Analogy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an analogy to illustrate my point. Take the questions...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can a legless person be standing&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;and&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Can a legless person be prone&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with my questions, standing and prone are not truly dichotomous, as prone could be understood to be &quot;not standing&quot; or &quot;lying down&quot; (which offers some middle ground). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, answering one question does not necessarily even begin to address the other. The qualifier &quot;legless&quot; affects standing-ness and prone-ness differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In conclusion, they are not duplicates&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the questions are neither dichotomous, nor would either potential duplicate target be equivalent given the context as a 5e question, the question should be reopened as a non-duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T14:00:38.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8921" CreationDate="2019-03-15T14:08:06.473" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;They aren't the same question and none of them provide an answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can unconscious creatures be unwilling? Is willing the opposite of unwilling? What is the definition of unwilling? The other questions  don't ask any of these questions explicitly. They also don't answer the question unless you &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;assume&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; a dichotomy between the terms. That assumption is the core and focus of this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if there was a simple dichotomy, it would be the job of an answer to show that since it is not obvious from reading the other answers. Thus, this fails on all accounts to be a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Full disclosure: I have an answer on this question, but it is content of the answer (in part) that convinced me that this is not a duplicate (which was my original thought).&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T14:44:07.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8924" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8921" CreationDate="2019-03-15T14:21:13.897" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is a duplicate because both your question and the second link are asking &quot;What is the definition of 'willing'?&quot;. Just because you frame the question asking about the negative does not mean the question is not a duplicate.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;Can you make unwilling creatures willing? In other words what defines willing?&quot; is a duplicate of your question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both your question and that second hinge on what the definition of willing is. The meaning of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/un-&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the prefix un&lt;/a&gt; is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(added to adjectives, participles, and their derivatives) denoting the absence of a quality or state; not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1.1 The reverse of (usually with an implication of approval or disapproval, or with another special connotation)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(added to nouns) a lack of.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Usage&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The prefixes un- and non- both mean ‘not’, but there is often a distinction in terms of emphasis. un- tends to be stronger and less neutral than non-: consider the differences between unacademic and non-academic, for example (his language was refreshingly unacademic; a non-academic life suits him)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the definition of unwilling is directly derived from the definition of willing. It means precisely &quot;not willing&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/willing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;definition of willing&lt;/a&gt; is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ready, eager, or prepared to do something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;1.1 Given or done readily.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By contrast the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/unwilling&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;definition of unwilling&lt;/a&gt; is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Not ready, eager, or prepared to do something.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see they are precise opposites in definition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dichotomy you reference is probably more appropriately applied to &quot;non-willing&quot; as opposed to &quot;unwilling&quot; (which carries with it a stronger negation).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it another way, do you consider the questions &quot;What does 'seen' mean?&quot; and &quot;What does 'unseen' mean?&quot; to be the same question for the purposes of the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="36850" LastEditDate="2019-03-15T14:36:10.463" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T14:36:10.463" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8925" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-15T15:41:11.440" Score="12" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that added HNQs to the chat feed will be useful information to have now that there is an official way to determine and indicate this with the recent HNQ update.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will raise awareness of questions as they hit HNQ and alert members of the community that are in the chat to help watch out for any signs that issues are arising and potentially help to mitigate (vote, flag, etc.) any issues that arise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the most helpful way to implement it would be the same way that Oracle is in that the HNQs are posted One-box style in the chat feed as they hit HNQ status (as opposed to putting them in the upper left hand corner feeds).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some clever &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/323710/382836&quot;&gt;people on Big Meta&lt;/a&gt; have already come up with HNQ feeds for every stack and I think using that is probably a good option. That post links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/89485/hot-network-questions?tab=feeds&quot;&gt;a page&lt;/a&gt; listing all of the feeds and ours is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://lackadaisical-appeal.glitch.me/hnq/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;HNQ rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt; posted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-820/rpg&quot;&gt;RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this sound useful to anyone else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This suggestion has been posted to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8935/28591&quot;&gt;feed suggestion thread&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-03-18T17:22:21.897" LastActivityDate="2019-03-20T15:30:59.597" Title="Can we add the feed of RPG.se Hot Network Questions to the chat feed?" Tags="|discussion|chat|feed|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8926" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-15T17:40:19.177" Score="4" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;The basis of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;Frame Challenge&lt;/a&gt; is that a question might be more answerable if portions of it were different. You see this a lot with questions that may be &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY problems&lt;/a&gt;, among other things. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've noticed a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143215/a-spell-that-lets-you-travel-to-another-setting-which-level-would-it-be&quot;&gt;trend&lt;/a&gt; that Frame Challenges are relegated to answers of their own, and have even been removed from comments because they are considered answers, not commentary. This makes no sense to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By it's nature, a Frame Challenge exists to &lt;em&gt;improve the question&lt;/em&gt;. It seems to me that there are two ways to form a Frame Challenge; one that is also an answer (ie &quot;If you look at the actual problem, you'll see that this would work better&quot;) but the other does not inherently have an answer in it (ie &quot;It seems like you want to correct something but there &lt;em&gt;may be&lt;/em&gt; a better way than you've suggested, if we knew what it was&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This issue has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;come up before in a roundabout way&lt;/a&gt;, but the accepted answer there's &lt;em&gt;first line&lt;/em&gt; seems to be ignored at this point. I'm seeking to formalize a response to Frame Challenges as comments, when they do not actually answer the question, if they do not provide an answer to the altered question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-03-18T13:32:30.140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T13:32:30.140" Title="Is a &quot;Frame Challenge&quot; really only valid as an answer or can it be a comment as well?" Tags="|discussion|comments|answers-in-comments|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8926" CreationDate="2019-03-15T17:54:07.513" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Frame challenges are generally about solving problems which is not the job of a comment&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to say that frame challenges can &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; be part of a valid comment, but the form of a frame challenge isn't generally  something that is useful for a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A frame challenge is where an author answers a question in a wholly different way the querent never asked for, or potentially expressly forbade, but in a way the author feels will &lt;strong&gt;actually solve the problem&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A frame challenge is all about solving the problem in a different way than the author intended. But in the end, they are about solving the problem, which is not something that a comment should be doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comments must work towards improving or clarifying the post&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As pointed out in the Help Center text for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;commenting privilege&lt;/a&gt;: if your comment is not making clear suggestion for improving the post or asking clear questions seeking clarification, it generally does not belong as a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment you in particular link to (now deleted) responded to a question asking &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143215/a-spell-that-lets-you-travel-to-another-setting-which-level-would-it-be&quot;&gt;A spell that let's you travel to another setting. Which level would it be?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; with (paraphrasing since I don't have the comment text &lt;em&gt;[mods feel free to edit the actual text in]&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Frame challenge: use the planar travel spell instead.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not working towards improving the question, it is suggesting a method for solving the issue — instead of homebrewing your spell, just use one that already exists and has an established spell level already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the intent there was to somehow improve the post, it was failing to communicate that and regardless of intent, was interpreted (by me and at least one other person) as attempting to answer the question. So if you are attempting to make a valid comment containing a frame challenge, you must make it clear how you are trying to improve or clarify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Suggesting changes to questions isn't really a FC, but it is allowed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;It seems like you want to correct something but there may be a better way than you've suggested, if we knew what it was&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;does not fit what I would view as a traditional frame challenge, but does in fact appear to be attempting to clarify or improve the post. Therefore it is likely fine (though without context and more details it is impossible to say for sure).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I can't think of every possible circumstance, so it might be possible for an answer to contain a frame challenge in some way and still be a valid use of a comment. But on the other hand, this whole thing about categorizing a comment as a frame challenge or not is a red herring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The bottom line is, comments won't get deleted for frame challenging alone as long as it is a clear attempt to improve or clarify the post.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T20:30:20.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8928" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-15T17:56:05.733" Score="5" ViewCount="58" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently discovered that I have gotten a reply to one of my comments. However, the question that I commented on is deleted, so I can no longer see any of the comments on the question (including the reply to my comment).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I see the reply to my comment?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="46957" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-16T01:18:17.117" LastActivityDate="2019-03-16T01:18:17.117" Title="How can I see a reply to my comment on a deleted question?" Tags="|support|comments|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8928" CreationDate="2019-03-15T18:13:30.477" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is no regular way to do that, sorry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you have 10k reputation you'll be able to see deleted posts and this won't be an issue, but before then you won't be able to see replies like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, poking into your comment history, the comment you were notified about was bringing to your attention our policy of not answering in comments: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;. Naturally we ask you abide by that policy. There's no serious harm here though and you're not in trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-15T20:21:08.263" LastActivityDate="2019-03-15T20:21:08.263" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8926" CreationDate="2019-03-15T20:04:21.450" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;You’re using “frame challenge” to mean something different than what normally gets called a “frame challenge” here. Let’s get our terms on the same page first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual meaning of “frame challenge” is just a shorthand for “an answer that first challenges the accuracy of how the question has framed the problem, then answers the question by reframing the problem more usefully first.” That’s what our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/321&quot;&gt;FAQ about challenging the frame of questions&lt;/a&gt; is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you’re meaning is “you have a problem with how your question is posed and you should fix it like so.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s fine in a comment. That’s just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;the normal intended use of comments&lt;/a&gt;, and doesn’t need to be (further) formalised as allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally, the division between comments and answers is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are you providing information that helps their role playing games problem?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;, that goes only in an answer post. This is the kind of thing called a “frame challenge” here, and yes, they go only in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are you providing suggestions for improving the way the question is asked?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;, that goes only in a comment. This is the kind of thing you’re talking about, and is fine to put in a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer to &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; questions is &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;, then it probably shouldn’t be posted anywhere on a question page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note too that it’s possible to mix these two things in one post. That should be avoided, because it results in downvoted answers and deleted comments, even if they contain other legitimate material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="40999" LastEditDate="2019-03-17T17:04:04.157" LastActivityDate="2019-03-17T17:04:04.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8925" CreationDate="2019-03-16T01:17:12.157" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It'd be good to test out.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems simple enough to implement, based on your description. The only potential problem I foresee is that it might get too &amp;quot;noisy&amp;quot;, if too many questions hit HNQ within a short period of time and thus clog up the chat with repeated messages about it, but there are some limits already implemented for Hot Network Questions, as goodguy5 and doppelgreener point out in comments on your question itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we know the maximum number of times this could occur in a day? I know that we can only have 5 at once and they last 72 hours, so there's a functional limit. – goodguy5&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HNQ gets updated every 15 minutes. Questions can rotate off and be replaced by a new different HNQ 15 minutes later. We would remove the feed if it gets too noisy in chat. (That means 72 hours is the maximum possible time spent in HNQ, 15 minutes is the minimum.) – doppelgreener&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given those caveats, I think it's fine to test this out and see how it is. At worst, it'll be disabled if it bothers people or causes problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-16T01:17:12.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8932" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8933" CreationDate="2019-03-16T23:33:16.160" Score="5" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ever since I have been on the site (which is not very long at all) I have always wondered if it is okay to edit someone else's question after it has been closed if you think that you have the general idea (or can just edit the question to where it makes sense).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason why I ask is because I have seen several questions I thought were good, but they were closed as they were deemed either too opinion based or off topic or not very specific. Most of the time, if this were to be allowed, I would be actively editing some of the new users posts when they do not make much sense or need help. I have looked around on this site, but it seems no one has posed the question nor put forth an answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I am looking for is: &lt;strong&gt;Is it okay to edit someone's post when it has been closed?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52446" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-17T00:40:04.660" LastActivityDate="2019-03-17T00:40:04.660" Title="It is wrong to edit someone else's question if it has been closed?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8932" CreationDate="2019-03-16T23:46:26.603" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;While it's &quot;OK,&quot; you want to do it with caution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt; for a related discussion.  Guessing, even educated guessing, runs the risk of changing the question into something it isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, while it's closed is the best time to do this - that gives the poster time to correct before answers come in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, if you are inexperienced or unsure, inquire with comments of the OP.  You can submit edits if you're sure and if the OP is engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP isn't doing anything themselves, it's possible it's just a drive-by posting where they are never going to come back so an answer won't help them - this is the Internet after all. That's why we tend to not let people edit in system tags even if &quot;they're sure&quot; - unless the editor is familiar with all editions of D&amp;amp;D and related, they can be wrong, and if the OP isn't invested enough to figure out what game they're playing then we don't really want to spend time on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best time to edit is if:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is closed&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP is engaged but is having difficulty&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You have already tried comments&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are sure about what's up (and are experienced enough in that area to have expertise that reasonably makes you sure).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't be upset if your edit is declined or reverted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-16T23:46:26.603" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8935" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="3041" CreationDate="2019-03-18T14:26:15.290" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to quote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8925/4398&quot;&gt;this suggestion&lt;/a&gt; so all the feed can be found in one place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that added HNQs to the chat feed will be useful information to have now that there is an official way to determine and indicate this with the recent HNQ update.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will raise awareness of questions as they hit HNQ and alert members of the community that are in the chat to help watch out for any signs that issues are arising and potentially help to mitigate (vote, flag, etc.) any issues that arise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the most helpful way to implement it would be the same way that Oracle is in that the HNQs are posted One-box style in the chat feed as they hit HNQ status (as opposed to putting them in the upper left hand corner feeds).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some clever &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/323710/382836&quot;&gt;people on Big Meta&lt;/a&gt; have already come up with HNQ feeds for every stack and I think using that is probably a good option. That post links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/89485/hot-network-questions?tab=feeds&quot;&gt;a page&lt;/a&gt; listing all of the feeds and ours is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://lackadaisical-appeal.glitch.me/hnq/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;HNQ rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt; posted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-820/rpg&quot;&gt;RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this sound useful to anyone else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T14:26:15.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8936" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8941" CreationDate="2019-03-18T15:14:44.303" Score="14" ViewCount="369" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not talking about opinion-based questions, but the flipside of when a question &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; generate good subjective answers, but doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question does have several parts that are tied together:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What criteria is there for determining an answer is opinion-based bad subjective?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do we do with those answers when the community upvotes them?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we have a harder line for those types of answers in order to stay within our good subjective requirements?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Will this help keep those types of questions open or will it drive away users?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that we have a very broad and unclear process in that context. I can't figure out when we decide to close and when we don't. It's clear when an answer isn't supported by good subjective, but it doesn't stop the community from upvoting the good idea generation (or bad), and there are times when questions are closed and others when they are not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Cases where questions remained open even with a large number of bad subjective opinion-based answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142090/what-is-the-purpose-of-easy-combat-scenarios-that-dont-need-resource-expenditur&quot;&gt;What is the purpose of easy combat scenarios that don&amp;#39;t need resource expenditure?&lt;/a&gt; - I asked this one and didn't put in the caveat about good subjective. Many answers did come in with experience, but many did not and this question stayed open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104631/how-to-design-and-run-cinematic-combats-that-move-between-zones&quot;&gt;How to design and run cinematic combats that move between zones?&lt;/a&gt; - ANother example where some are experienced by answers and others are not. But many many are not, and this was allowed to stay open and is effectively idea generation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142484/are-there-any-magical-contraceptive-birth-control-options-available&quot;&gt;Are there any magical contraceptive birth control options available?&lt;/a&gt; - Another case where the vast majority of answers aren't experience-based. Question is remains open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A Meta about when a question was closed due to a large number of bad subjective opinion-based answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8897/are-questions-that-are-on-topic-but-generated-a-lot-of-opinion-based-answers-doo&quot;&gt;This meta&lt;/a&gt; covers the other side of this where we say we want to close questions when this occurs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It very much seems like we don't have a  process of determining when to close when not to close. I get that we don't want opinion-based answers without experience, but we do seem to allow them a lot which suggest that we do kinda want it (which is fine!) - but it leaves a weird taste in my mouth not knowing when to act and when not to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Non-experience based idea generation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the problem is that many people like the &lt;em&gt;ideas&lt;/em&gt; that get generated, even without experience to back them up (they can still be good ideas.) But if we, as a site, are saying that we don't want those answer then we need to decide if that's really true or not and draw a hard line. Currently, the line seems very weak and...opinion-based on when/if we will do something when those answers come up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The case for the hard line&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we are serious about not wanting bad subjective answers, we need to have a harder line and start flagging those answers for removal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the extreme case of saving the community from itself. If the community upvotes bad subjective answers, then the cycle will always repeat. The only way to end the cycle and promote good subjective is to show that bad subjective isn't something we will tolerate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The case for a softer line&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with the hard line is it's not very nice in appearance and we may lose members because of it. That worries me, because the community does seem to like those answers and I'm not sure what the ultimate effect may be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-06-23T18:07:24.893" LastActivityDate="2023-06-23T18:07:24.893" Title="When do we close a question for drawing opinion-based answers and how can we try to get ahead of such closures?" Tags="|discussion|answers|close-reasons|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8936" CreationDate="2019-03-18T16:40:03.947" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Questions getting closed because of runaway opinion-based answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things have changed &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; recently, such that hopefully this won't happen often anymore. To talk about that, I first need to talk about &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; this happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically: it's mostly HNQ's fault. Lots of our social and more challenging subjective questions hit HNQ. Sometimes when that happens we just start getting a deluge of crap answers, and see all the answers (including the bad ones) getting too many upvotes and no correction. The people posting these crap answers have been here before, so they have a bit of rep and don't get stopped by Protected status, &lt;em&gt;but&lt;/em&gt; they're not familiar with our customs including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/1204&quot;&gt;our citation expectations&lt;/a&gt;. HNQ visitors frequently aren't experts on RPGs and don't know our customs, and can't downvote, so they just upvote everything &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;that looks plausibly good&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this doesn't &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; happen as a result of HNQ, but almost all the time this happens it's because of HNQ and I can't remember a time it didn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When that happens that is a bad situation. If the community doesn't or can't stop the cavalcade of crap, sometimes the community or diamond moderators get fed up and close the question. Closing was our only tool for addressing this situation so we used it, much to the disservice of the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of recent updates to the Hot Network Questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/325060/152515&quot;&gt;Updating the Hot Network Questions List - now with a bit more network and a little less &amp;quot;hotness&amp;quot;!&lt;/a&gt;) this shouldn't actually really be a thing anymore because &lt;strong&gt;moderators can now remove questions from HNQ&lt;/strong&gt;. Removal is permanent, the question will never return to HNQ after that. There's a question about when we should do so (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8898/1204&quot;&gt;When should a question be removed from the Hot Network Questions List?&lt;/a&gt;) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8899/1204&quot;&gt;the only current answer&lt;/a&gt; says we should remove a question from HNQ “when HNQ harms the interests of the asker”. That's this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So nowadays, when a question's getting runaway crap answers, instead of closing it, moderators should remove it from the HNQ to stop the tide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few days ago we booted our first question off the HNQ: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143033/1204&quot;&gt;How can I discourage/prevent PCs from using door choke-points?&lt;/a&gt;. It's a good example of exactly all of this happening and without this change it was heading for being closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Identifying &amp;amp; managing bad answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What criteria is there for determining an answer is opinion-based bad subjective?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good Subjective is defined in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;the blog post Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; and re-explained in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/1204&quot;&gt;our Subjective citation expectations&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad Subjective is all the subjective stuff that isn't Good Subjective. It's when you provide absolutely no experience to back up how your solution works in actual practice. It's also when you break these guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To apply the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective's&lt;/a&gt; guidance on questions to answers as well, a good subjective answer should tend to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Explain “why” and “how”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be longer, not shorter&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Share experiences over opinions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Back up opinion with facts and references, including specific experiences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most common kinds of bad subjective answer are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Soapboxing “here's what I think about this situation” in violation of that numbered list.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Saying “here, try this” without citing any experience of how that works out in practice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Here's how I'd rule this if I were DMing” which frequently both lacks explanation of why that's the right ruling &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; lacks citation of any experience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do we do with those answers when the community upvotes them?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvote them. They frequently get almost entirely ignored in terms of votes, maybe collect 1 or 2 upvotes. The community is okay at policing these sometimes, but frequently just doesn't police them at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Request they cite experience to meet &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/1204&quot;&gt;our citation expectations&lt;/a&gt;. Link those citation guidelines to the author in a comment. And downvote them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we have a harder line for those types of answers in order to stay within our good subjective requirements?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're already outside our good subjective requirements. Y'all could stand to downvote them more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When they're in HNQ the tide of upvotes is hard to keep at bay, but downvotes from the community can help a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Will this help keep those types of questions open or will it drive away users?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as these bad answers get managed properly by the community requesting improvement and downvoting poor quality answers, it won't escalate to that — plus we can now boot questions off HNQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-18T16:49:29.240" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8925" CreationDate="2019-03-18T18:35:53.620" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having had this feature turned on for a few hours, I have some feedback on how I've experienced the feature so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It might be better to populate these in the feed in the top-left corner instead.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posted directly in chat, it reminds me a little too much of the way that Twitter, Facebook, etc. will inline advertisements into their feeds, and while this is &lt;em&gt;obviously&lt;/em&gt; not the same thing, I think it makes the chat messages a little too noisy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These posts should have a clear prefix&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;: HNQ entries are now posted by a dedicated feed bot named &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-988/hot-rpg-questions&quot;&gt;Hot RPG Questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how we feel about the previous suggestion, there's a few other changes I would make as well just to improve the quality of these posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it stays in the actual chat, the User-Bot should have a different icon (maybe a different Bot-account?) that clearly signals that it's tracking Hot Network Questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It should have a prefix, like &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;HNQ&lt;/strong&gt;: Why does my DM keep adding pounds of dead fish to my character's inventory?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it stays in the actual chat, it should probably prefer a message somewhat similar to what the SmokeDetector bot does, where it populates with a short message. Something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why does my DM keep adding pounds of dead fish to my character's inventory?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; has been added to the Hot Network Questions list!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like knowing when questions show up in the list; I just think some aspects of its presentation should be tweaked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-19T11:20:19.137" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8939" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8940" CreationDate="2019-03-18T19:01:15.707" Score="13" ViewCount="244" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is unclear to me when someone needs to provide playtesting for homebrew suggestions and when they don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143375/how-to-balance-a-monster-modification-zombie/143382#143382&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, MattDM provides a really good answer for the first half, suggests in-book tools for making adjustment, but then at the end makes a homebrew suggestion that wasn't tested by them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, they specifically state (emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, another approach would be to beef up that feature — perhaps make the save DC just &quot;damage taken&quot; rather than &quot;5 + damage taken&quot;. But this is a less predictable than the raw HP approach, &lt;strong&gt;so I don't suggest it without some playtesting and tweaking.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, they called themselves out that their idea is untested and likely needs work. This alone seems to imply it needs testing and would fall under our bad subjective policy for suggesting untested homebrew and is idea generation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I also could easily be too critical of a good answer and I'm trying to understand where we draw the line. By understanding when we require more, it will help in evaluating future answers and build a stronger repository of useful information for stackizens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-19T20:47:12.437" LastActivityDate="2021-07-22T23:21:00.177" Title="When do homebrew suggestions need to be playtested by an answerer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|homebrew|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8940" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8939" CreationDate="2019-03-19T01:30:00.557" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;As always, it's a continuum. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone produces an entire piece of content from whole cloth - e.g. a new character class, feat, spell, monster - we really think they should playtest that before claiming it will do what they think it will.  Real game designers know all too well that the thing they write down off top of their head may or may not meet its design intent in real play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, on the other end of the continuum is exercise of the existing rules.  &quot;I want my monster to be able to heal quickly but without the weird can't die thing that regeneration gives you!&quot;  &quot;Well, use the feral template, it gives fast healing.&quot; That's a simple application of existing work that pure reason is enough to support. You don't need to playtest that (though if you have, I'll more readily upvote you). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there's items in the middle.  The question you link to was, in addition to a bunch of strongly supported items, proposing a slight modification of an existing mechanic for that monster. I put a &quot;citation needed&quot; post notice and the poster added citations, so I removed it and called it good and upvoted it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more basic and common sense a change is - &quot;add more hit points to increase monster suitability&quot; - the less ad hoc proof of that you need. Once you get into the middle of the continuum, you may get a better balance of upvotes to downvotes if you show experience with something that is more of a stretch.  If you are just spewing out a new character class with no testing and claiming it creates a better play experience than an existing one, you are completely talking out of your ear and should be downvoted and citation-noticed and may be deleted as &quot;not an answer&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-19T01:30:00.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8936" CreationDate="2019-03-19T01:53:08.387" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We should take a hard line on unsupported answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't like questions drawing large numbers of unsupported answers having to be closed either.  But last time we tried the alternate path of deleting unsupported answers, that generated a lot more blowback, so here we are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;solid guidance on citation needs for the site&lt;/a&gt; now, so I would suggest the community comment linking that guidance, downvote the unsupported answer, and if that does not avail, vote to delete unsupported answers.  This will save these questions and ideally teach people how to answer in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But individual cases differ&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the questions you link have stayed open because they have at least some experience-based answers, because closing questions is a last resort we usually use when basically none, or none of the high voted, answers are GS/BS supported - it's &amp;quot;just an opinion-fest&amp;quot; in other words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But some things don't require huge amounts of support (see your other recent question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8939/when-do-homebrew-suggestions-need-to-be-playtested-by-an-answerer&quot;&gt;When do homebrew suggestions need to be playtested by an answerer?&lt;/a&gt; for a similar situation).  If someone posits &amp;quot;Well, you could let &lt;em&gt;divination&lt;/em&gt; serve as a birth control method to ask if conception is likely&amp;quot; - do they really need personal experience doing that?  No, I don't think so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Having said that, the birth control question is certainly on the line&#xA;given it's drawing increasingly ridiculous idea generation answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The&#xA;mobile combat question, the top 2 answers say &amp;quot;per my experience&amp;quot; but&#xA;don't really go into that experience, leading me to not upvote either of them&#xA;but not downvote either.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &amp;quot;easy combat scenarios&amp;quot; one is falling&#xA;into the usual problem many designer-reasons questions did - there's&#xA;one or two experience based answers but they're mostly&#xA;unsubstantiated. But then again some answers may not need extensive citation?  &amp;quot;Sandbox&#xA;playstyles rely on a random assortment of foes above and below your&#xA;level.&amp;quot;  Yep. This isn't Wikipedia, we don't need every sentence&#xA;footnoted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We as mods don't have time to trawl every question on the site, so we rely on you all to downvote, constructively comment, flag poor answers, edit to improve, and so on to keep things healthy. Not every opinion-fest comes to our attention, we need y'all for that (and ideally to handle it without mod intervention). If it gets out of control, vote to close the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, if answers are successfully curated by the community to meet citation criteria, and there's good work on making questions more Good Subjective, then we usually don't need to close questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The proof is in the pudding however - a question may seem to be worded objectively but if the answers are an unremitting march of nonsense then it's not achieving our bar of good Q&amp;amp;A. I have questions I've asked on the site where I had to add an extra rider to the question demanding GS/BS answers to pull it over the line. Hot Network Questions can bring in more driveby answers.  But be calm, use the tools we have to promote good content and improve poor content, and usually that can head off closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2021-07-08T20:16:46.773" LastActivityDate="2021-07-08T20:16:46.773" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8942" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8925" CreationDate="2019-03-19T03:41:26.160" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This feed just showed me my own question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion this feed has already proven useful. I didn't know my question was on HNQ until it showed up in the feed. Super useful and nice to know. I don't know of another way to be notified as quickly about the question hitting the HNQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-19T03:41:26.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8943" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8944" CreationDate="2019-03-20T00:14:44.917" Score="6" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;Specifically, I was trying to understand abilities like a mule's &quot;beast of burden&quot; and a goliath's &quot;powerful build trait&quot; which both state that the carrying capacity is measured as a &quot;large creature&quot;. After doing some research for the answer by flipping pages and using a PDF's search function, I believe I came up with the answer, but am unsure if I understood correctly. To add to it, my history of asking questions without needing edits, negative scores and being put on hold leaves me a little nervous asking...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So before I post it, I would like to ask here if it's worth asking there, here or where can I check my info...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: My main focus is understanding how much weight a mule can carry, though I was confused about their ability.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Where should I post a question to verify its information?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52781" LastActivityDate="2019-03-20T00:38:11.187" Title="Should I post a question to which I have an answer?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8944" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8943" CreationDate="2019-03-20T00:38:11.187" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You have two options&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two way to ask a question like this. Which you choose probably depends on the specific question and how confident you are in your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Is my reading of this rule correct?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post the question with a title relative to the rule in question. Explain why you were confused and the conclusion you came to. Then ask as the main question &amp;quot;Did I interpret this correctly?&amp;quot; Answers will either affirm your view or show you why it is incorrect. Either way you end up with the correct ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Post a question and self answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Post the question as if you hadn't done the research. Focus on the points that confused you initially and ask for clarification on them. Make this post a good question in its own right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then answer that question to the best of your ability in an answer post. Use the research you have done and back up your assumptions. If you are correct you will get upvoted and get a badge for 'self learning'. If not you may get a few downvotes, but other will answer the question correctly and get upvoted in turn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-20T00:38:11.187" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8925" CreationDate="2019-03-20T00:49:18.693" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;More spam in chat? Please don't&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll say &quot;thank, but no thanks.&quot;  We have had enough spam in chat already before this new addition. I realize that tastes vary on this matter, in terms of 'how many feeds / auto posts are the right amount?'   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, chat is where we talk to each other. Spam is not needed, and I block the Oracle since I find it to be spam.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is, the feed notation in the upper left corner suffices.  We need no further spam in chat.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-20T15:30:59.597" LastActivityDate="2019-03-20T15:30:59.597" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8946" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8947" CreationDate="2019-03-21T01:16:40.210" Score="32" ViewCount="1969" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8907/what-exactly-are-the-classification-criteria-for-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;recently seen some issues&lt;/a&gt; around site users being unclear on how to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag and some unpleasantness broke out on the topic. Sadly, this has been happening for more than six years on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;History of the RAW Tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's all the meta questions debating the RAW tag and its meaning, use, and validity, stretching back to 2012: &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;. It makes for interesting reading, especially as many participants, including mods past present and future, change their minds about the tag over time.  It also makes for discouraging reading, because in that time you will see a lot of extraordinarily bitter and vitriolic arguments on the subject that newer site members will probably find somewhat shocking. We do not tolerate that kind of discourse any more on the site, and moderate Not Nice activity more strictly on main and Meta nowadays, so you see less of that in recent years, but it still flares up. (If you weren't watching the last RAW question you may have missed the flareup, as it was all deleted, but believe me it was there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;About this time in 2016 we resolved to &quot;do RAW better&quot; again, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6155/140&quot;&gt;I expressed the sentiment that we were just kicking the ball down the road and the confusion and hostility would continue to affect the site&lt;/a&gt;. Unfortunately I was correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That time, just as every time we've done this before, we hadn't solved anything.  The tag is still confusing and hard to apply.  We got rid of the [tag: rules] tag because most questions here about rules. We don't need a tag to say &quot;tell me about the rules.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag is used by people to mean three disjoint things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I know this is crazy, don't tell me that; I want a legalistic loophole type exploit of the rules&quot; (for example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138521/what-methods-exist-to-get-infinite-or-extremely-high-caster-level&quot;&gt;What methods exist to get infinite or extremely high caster level?&lt;/a&gt;) or &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I kinda don't want anyone's opinion; I want what the rules say&quot; (for example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139907/raw-can-you-use-the-sharpshooter-and-great-weapon-master-feats-to-make-an-impro&quot;&gt;RAW, can you use the Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master feats to make an improvised weapon attack with a longbow?&lt;/a&gt;, what we have Good Subjective, Bad Subjective for), or &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;This is a question about the rules&quot; (for example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138482/does-arcane-eye-transmit-information-if-the-caster-moves-to-a-different-plane&quot;&gt;Does Arcane Eye transmit information if the caster moves to a different plane?&lt;/a&gt;, which it's not necessary for).  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Metas, tag wikis, and resolute gazes towards the horizon have not fixed this problem for nearly 7 years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every time the question comes up (posted by different people each time) you can see that it is the cause of an explosion of bad feeling on the site, you can clearly see the escalation of conflict in each set of posts as time goes on. That's the core problem that needs fixing. We haven't been solving the problem, we've been saying stuff that sounds good and kicking it down the road, allowing it to snowball to where now it is nuclear to even discuss. So the question is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should we do about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag given its history here?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Diamond Mod Warning: Everyone is discussing this topic in good faith trying to do the right thing for the site.  Any ad hominem attacks, any Not Nice behavior, any &quot;this community sucks&quot; or other unpleasantness will be immediately moderated to our site standards up to and including suspension. I wish I didn't have to add this warning, but anyone who reads any of those past posts will see why it needs to be added. If you have facts or points, bring them, baggage and animosity are not welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless there's some major shift in consensus, this meta will be considered resolved on 5th April.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T21:59:09.577" LastActivityDate="2019-04-18T21:59:09.577" Title="Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|rules-as-written|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="46" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-21T01:16:40.210" Score="28" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We Need To Bring This To A Conclusion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did not have a specific solution to propose during the last RAW debate and I said &quot;sure, let's give it another try.&quot; But this has failed. The tag is still confusing and we have no super clear theory on how to use it correctly, so it causes edit wars, and has become a lightning rod for hostility and bad feelings when it comes up all the way to present day because of baggage around the years of waffling on its use. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We should delete and blacklist the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag now.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Its value is questionable and the harm it has done to this site and community is huge, possibly the largest of any site schism over the entire life of RPG.SE.  It's not worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;RAW Is Fine To Ask About&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RAW playstyle is welcome here, just like other playstyles - very few of which we have tags for, I will note. The discussion about tags and how to apply tags is completely separate from playstyle accommodation or &quot;badwrongfun&quot; and shouldn't be viewed as an attack on it. (We burninated the [gm] tag too, and not because of a player-led pogrom against gamemasters everywhere. It's an ambiguous, bad, overapplied tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People are welcome to play in a RAW-centric way, ask questions where they want the RAW examined, and so on.  But it's not appropriate as a tag, for various &quot;what makes a tag on any SE site&quot; reasons (it's a meta tag, it tries to describe the answers not the problem, it's confusing, and so on).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People should ask questions and note whatever restrictions they want.  &quot;RAW only.&quot; &quot;Official WotC products only.&quot;  &quot;Third party is OK, or stuff from 3.0/3.5e/Pathfinder, I'll mix them.&quot; &quot;Houserules are OK but remember they have to be tested to be good answers on this site.&quot; &quot;I don't trust the 3.5e FAQ.&quot;  &quot;I don't trust Jeremy Crawford's tweets whether they're in Sage Advice or not.&quot; Whatever your deal is, that's fine, use your words and put it in your question. We don't have tags for those combinations and that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Other Solutions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the &lt;strong&gt;26th meta post&lt;/strong&gt; on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.” - Maybe Albert Einstein, Maybe Apocryphal, True Either Way&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have tried everything anyone could think of to keep this tag, several times.  We keep repeating the same cycle, saying 'well if the community... we'll do low intervention... tags should describe questions not answers... In these previous questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; we've gone through several rounds over the years of declaring &quot;tags should describe questions not answers&quot; and &quot;don't use it as a meta tag&quot; and &quot;tags shouldn't have special rules&quot;, all of which I agree with per se.  I wish they worked.  In other cases they've worked. But we've said them all before and tried them all before on this topic. They haven't worked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag brings harm to our community. Unless someone has a truly new idea we all think might work, not &quot;let's try those things we tried before, but really hard this time and I'm a new user so I think for sure it should work because it's a bright new day&quot;, the tag should go.  We'll all rest easier for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to hash over all the ins and outs of every debate we've had, and why is RAW a playstyle, and what makes a meta tag - you can read all that in the linked questions if you want. Bottom line is we've tried for more than 6 years to make it not confusing and failed, and make it not cause site fights resulting in damaged relationships and grudges and suspensions, and failed. It's time to stop trying and remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-03-30T14:06:54.583" LastActivityDate="2019-03-30T14:06:54.583" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8948" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-21T12:41:22.257" Score="3" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking at the tour, I realized (after reading a comment), that our Tour doesn't include best practices and requirements for how to answer a question that includes citations or good subjective/bad subjective information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of that, new users may really get put off by seeing downvotes from those types of answers that don't have that criteria because they never learned that they needed to have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a good idea to include that information in the tour - which may reduce bad subjective or unsupported answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-03-21T12:50:47.367" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T14:49:10.263" Title="Should we add the citation requirements to our Tour?" Tags="|discussion|tour|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8948" CreationDate="2019-03-21T13:01:02.217" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Diamond moderators can edit three parts of the tour:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The summary of what the site is about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The sample question the tour uses.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The “Ask about...” and “Don't ask about...” lists.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our citation guidelines don't fit into any of these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a lot of information our tour doesn't include; it's just a quick overview of how Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A functions for people who are coming from forums or so on. It isn't meant to go into depth on community norms and expectations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T13:01:02.217" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-21T13:21:42.933" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A modest proposal: link &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/104170/22566&quot;&gt;this Answer&lt;/a&gt; to the FAQ or [help]&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the best treatments of what that &lt;em&gt;RPG-centric topic&lt;/em&gt; covers that I've read, in terms of how to understand that term and apply it.  I am of the opinion that the term holds different connotations for different people, and that the latest question that re-raised this issue &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8913/22566&quot;&gt;wasn't even about that tag in the first place&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That term is a part of our hobby; a thorough treatment of that aspect of the hobby ought to be a part of the library of expert answers that this stack curates.  There is a core value in the SE/SO basic model that seeks a &quot;searchable library of expert questions with expert answers.&quot;  IMO we need to capture something expert for that part of the hobby, whether our hunger for perfect taggery results in the tag remaining or being eaten and disposed of through our digestive processes in this meta.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not convinced that &lt;em&gt;the tag itself&lt;/em&gt; is the problem; as you've (mxy) been with this site since its beginning, your grasp of the &lt;em&gt;community&lt;/em&gt; conflict well eclipses mine, as does doppel's experience in the conflict that this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag food fight has created over the course of this site's existence.   Whether we are throwing out the baby with the bath water won't become evident until after such a decision is reached.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Sorry Jack, that's the best I can do at the moment.&lt;/sub&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-04-10T18:48:59.427" LastActivityDate="2019-04-10T18:48:59.427" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8951" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-21T13:38:42.353" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes.  Retire the tag.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags have two jobs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Provide at a glance categorical information about a question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Provide a handle for use with filters.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Rules-as-Written tag seems to fail on the first count as it's meaning is interpreted differently by different users, so it's not a clean cut category.  It's unlikely that it's a useful category to filter on for the same reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T13:38:42.353" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8952" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-21T14:39:41.760" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with retiring the [rules-as-written] tag. Rules as written questions and answers on the site are fine &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;and we as a community affirm they will always be welcome&lt;/a&gt;, but the tag sucks at its own job and it's always been an unclear &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;meta-tag&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On why it sucks at covering its own topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a broad range of questions people have about rules. There's also a broad range of questions that fit under &lt;em&gt;rules as written&lt;/em&gt; (the term, not the tag). Since many rules questions can just be handled using the rules as written, they wind up overlapping a lot, like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bardM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bardM.png&quot; alt=&quot;a venn diagram of &amp;quot;questions about rules&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;questions about rules as written (the topic, not the tag)&amp;quot; showing significant overlap&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back at the start many (not all) questions about RAW would be tagged [rules-as-written]. We didn't agree on what that &lt;em&gt;meant&lt;/em&gt; so we were always having arguments about it. To make matters worse a lot of people saw ordinary rules questions getting tagged [rules-as-written] — they saw the overlapping area — and decided that was the tag to use for any rules question. Or they just picked it because it said “rules” in it. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4949/1204&quot;&gt;We don't have a tag for [rules]&lt;/a&gt; since it's 90% of what our site covers and unnecessary; the same way Stack Overflow doesn't have a [software] or [programming] tag.) Either way &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7313/1204&quot;&gt;we'd wind up removing the tag from over half the posts that originally had it&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This version of the tag wasn't working.&lt;/strong&gt; Over time the community decided that wasn't OK having so much disagreement and seeing it removed so often. We were also sure that if it kept being used for rules questions in general, it would have to be blacklisted just like [rules] was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We decided the [rules-as-written] tag had to apply to only the questions that &lt;em&gt;were rules as written&lt;/em&gt; but &lt;em&gt;were not ordinary rules questions.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zDrPk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zDrPk.png&quot; alt=&quot;the rules-as-written tag: a thin sliver of the original topic&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This version of the tag also doesn't work that well.&lt;/strong&gt; This makes the tag not cover its own actual topic. We get into arguments over whether a question is &lt;em&gt;super-literal&lt;/em&gt; enough to fit in this sliver. This interpretation of the RAW tag sucks, but the old version wasn't working at all. So it just winds up being a crap tag we argue over, and nobody's happy with the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Much later, we also at least settled on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;back to tagging basics&lt;/a&gt; which was super helpful for our processes. It resolved some of our problems and also, I think, put others into clearer relief.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides: since lots of ordinary rules questions technically fit into the umbrella of rules as written by virtue of just being answerable with the rules themselves, but were never tagged [rules-as-written] because we tag for question content and not for answers, the tag was never useful for finding all rules as written questions and answers. It just found some of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On why it's a bad tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt; tells us that meta-tags are tags which describe something other than the content of the question. There are two additional primary indicators:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can you tell you’re using a meta-tag? It’s easier than you might think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the tag can’t work as the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; tag on a question, it’s probably a meta-tag.&lt;/strong&gt; Every tag you use should be able to work, more or less, as the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; tag on a question. Meta-tags, like [beginner], [subjective], and [best-practices], are useless by themselves — they tell you nothing at all about the content of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a meta-tag.&lt;/strong&gt; In a cruel, ironic twist, the meaning of the tag [subjective] itself … is actually subjective. Ditto for [best-practices] and [beginner]. Best practices to whom? Beginner by what criteria? These tags are impossible to define by anything remotely resembling an objective metric. In comparison, the the meaning of tags like [java], [c#], and [javascript] are crystal clear to all but the nuttiest of nutbags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's test those measures:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The RAW tag doesn't really describe the content of the question.&lt;/strong&gt; Really it's a tag describing the type of answer a question wants, which is a meta-tag behaviour.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We wanted to find a way to make the tag work so we went in a roundabout way saying “well, if the question requests rules-as-written answers, we're describing the content of the question, right?” But let's face it: we're describing the question wanting a type of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the extent [rules-as-written] describes the actual content of the question (“I'm asking about the rules”) that's just [rules]. Constraints on what answers are allowed to do has always defined the [rules-as-written] tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we had an [answers-must-be-yellow] tag that'd be a meta-tag, and that would be no less true if we said “well we're just describing the question text itself saying that answers must be yellow”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It can work as the only tag on a question &lt;em&gt;beside a system tag,&lt;/em&gt; which makes it pass the only-tag test for RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5307/1204&quot;&gt;Is the Only-Tag Test for meta-tag-ness broken here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It definitely means different things to different people.&lt;/strong&gt; You probably saw that coming. Every time we've discussed how to use the tag, or even what RAW means, we've had many responses, all of them slightly different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because when it comes to the topic &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the tag, RAW isn't well-defined like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4MjGK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4MjGK.png&quot; alt=&quot;peoples' different understandings of rules as written almost perfectly align&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's more like this, where many peoples' approximations of the topic &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the tag mostly match most other peoples' approximations but there's still a lot of differences:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6MKUE.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6MKUE.png&quot; alt=&quot;many different understandings only somewhat overlapping, with “rules as written” over the top&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag or topic doesn't have to be 100% well defined, and some fuzziness is fine, but the magnitude of differences in our interpretations of RAW are far beyond what we see for any other tag on the site. (And that's even taking system-agnostic into account!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those differences between individual interpretations are what we wind up in conflict over, and why I think most of us are just sorta confused when it comes to how and when the tag applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta tag testing doesn't require all three tests to pass; any one test is enough to indicate that it's probably a meta-tag. This is a meta-tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Rules as Written is still fully welcome, it just doesn't need the [rules-as-written] tag.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag sucks at covering its topic and is a bad type of tag. It's not useful to RAW people for searching and the tag's usage has only become more and more distant from its original topic over time as we sought to differentiate it from [rules].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't mean the topic will go anywhere. Rules as written as a topic and playstyle are welcome at RPG.SE, but like many other playstyles and topic, it doesn't need a tag to be welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, people can/should just describe their constraints as they currently do. Those constraints might be “no Unearthed Arcana”, “not interested in personal interpretations”, “just core books, no adventure material please”, or many other things or a combination thereof. We'll respect those constraints like we always do, and we don't need to find some unified definition of “rules as written” to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. I've said elsewhere and should say here too: I'm very interested in the opportunity of exploring the tag space in RAW's absence for a while. In its absence we can explore what actual tagging needs we might have for questions in the general vicinity of RAW, and find new tags we want or need that we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; agree on. If we badly needed a rules-as-written tag specifically then its absence will inform us of that, and we can see what we can do in its stead. If that means one day going back to a useful rules-as-written tag that we can actually agree on without arguing all the time, that could be good, but spending time without this tag will help us figure that out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T13:13:06.113" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8948" CreationDate="2019-03-21T14:49:10.263" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a new and eager to participate community member, &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;i agree&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;. &#xA;The system right now is deferring the task of teaching &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3204/22566&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and other simple concepts to us new members to a reactive rather than proactive process. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure we can do better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system right now forces retroactive editing and therefor discourages newcomers, in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53186" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T14:49:10.263" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-21T15:40:58.910" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;TL;DR: Wipe the Slate Clean, but Don't Salt the Earth&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hello, I'm the china shop elephant who took part in putting the recent resurfacing of this mess into motion. I would like to post my answer from the perspective of a newcomer who comes to the site and tries to use its tools for some kind of benefit, and encounters some obstacles and troubles related to one of the tags (the one under discussion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Problems&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Esoteric Definition&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming here a bit over 100 days ago, I thought I'm well acquainted with the broad meaning of 'rules as written' as used in RPG circles (GURPS, Exalted, WoD et al.). Sure, it's not a meaning with the sharpest of lines. But one that people &lt;em&gt;mostly&lt;/em&gt; understand, and &lt;em&gt;still find useful&lt;/em&gt; much like 'vegetable' (an common example of a word with no coherent definition) or 'science fiction' (a less common example but more suitable for this stack), and people on other sites can usually say 'Oh, this question is about RAW'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the local definition of the term (when used as a tag) seems to be not that, but rather &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zDrPk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the shape of the piece of a cookie remaining after most of it has been bitten off, following a shape of the teeth not memorised by any newcomer&lt;/a&gt; (Venn diagram courtesy of @doppelgreener).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. Unreasonable Expectation of Edge Sharpness&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, no two people will agree precisely on the definition. Again, that's 'vegetables'/'science fiction' problem mentioned above, yet &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/science-fiction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;science-fiction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;science-fiction&lt;/a&gt; is a tag we have on this stack. So it's not like we can't allow tags with fuzzy definitions/edges on principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But definitions with fuzzy edges get hit hardest when there is a majority opinion but not a consensus about the its meaning, yet the &lt;em&gt;enforcement&lt;/em&gt; is done as if there is one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. Read the Metas Like it Would Help&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I got pointed to a bunch of metas to get a clear idea of when to use it. I did &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; get a clear picture. In fact a major point of contention - the 'bitten cookie' of the exclusion-of-non-absurd-questions, was not as emphasised in the metas (as far as I could make it out of them) as in the discussions about whether the RAW tag fits on a given question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4. Baggage&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of the restrictions about its use seems to be based not even on the 'now', but on the grudges dating back to . . . Beta? It might be as far back as Beta, I'm too new to know for sure! And there are definitely some things that are hiding within deleted posts (not visible to newbies at all) or in the logs of chats (some deleted, some just hard to find if you don't know about them, and likely even then). This can of course trip newcomers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;My Thoughts on Solutions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wipe the Byzantine definition. Either design a tag definition that would approximate the general hobby understanding of when some question is about RAW, or &lt;strong&gt;wipe the definition clean&lt;/strong&gt; and let it emerge anew, shaped by the new people and not by old grudges.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't be so strict with definitions. Don't start edit wars over the drawing a sharp line around the 'vegetables'/'science fiction'. When two edits collide, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/03/04/the-great-edit-wars/&quot;&gt;restore respect for the author&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After wiping the slate, write a FAQ answer which &lt;em&gt;clearly and concisely&lt;/em&gt; explains it, and &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; base itself on a long series of legacy links.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mark the old discussions as obsolete in order to reduce confusion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why I'd Keep the Tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's useful for use with SE tag-related tools. Narrowing down searches, setting up watches and filters etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's useful for attracting rules experts of a certain type to the questions that are about certain aspects of game mechanics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A large part of the community feels a need to such categorisation of question contents, and those who &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; feel such a need lose nothing by letting those who do have such a need have the tag for it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S.: I suspect that banning the tag would likely result in a 'vacuum' related to point 3, and would encourage the creation of a new term covering a similar topic (likely with less baggage; e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/letter-of-the-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;letter-of-the-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;letter-of-the-rules&lt;/a&gt;, as distinct from the spirit of the rules), but the new term would not come naturally and thus be 'unfriendly' to newcomers. While I think my proposal winning is unlikely, I worry that the burning will go further and lead to elimination of tags which serve to fill the void.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T16:31:39.977" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8955" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8958" CreationDate="2019-03-21T22:19:39.850" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;An off-topic question requesting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143672/48759&quot;&gt;Where to get feedback on homebrews&lt;/a&gt; was just asked. I left this comment below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to rpg.se! Take the [tour] and visit the [help center] to learn how things work around here. This question will likely get closed as a shopping question, which are off-topic here. We have a [list of forums on meta]. You might also be interested in [How can I ask a good homebrew review question] for getting reviews here on the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I was writing it, it felt more like an answer. However I don't think we should be answering off-topic questions. What is the correct approach here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also posted it as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/143673/48759&quot;&gt;community wiki answer&lt;/a&gt;. I wondering if this is the best way to handle it. I didn't want to earn rep from answering an off-topic question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T23:46:02.943" Title="Should my comment on this question be an answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8957" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8955" CreationDate="2019-03-21T22:33:49.493" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was always going to be a weird situation, because the close vote reason contained the answer to the question anyway. That being the case, all you did was provide that same information in a friendlier format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T22:33:49.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8955" CreationDate="2019-03-21T23:46:02.943" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, that's fine as a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're not posting an answer to their question. You're directing them to some resources which will help resolve their question. It's like those Related: links we leave in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, also, we leave a little bit more leniency to comments on questions that are doomed. Like in theory, still don't answer in comments, but in practice, our sympathy toward someone who has a valid question we can't handle because it's patently off topic means it's going to be a &lt;em&gt;little&lt;/em&gt; more okay to give them pointers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-03-21T23:46:02.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-22T00:55:15.453" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The tag isn't useful and should be deleted.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag isn't useful because you can't be an expert in the broad concept of rules as written, so it provides no categorization benefits (sorting, filtering, searching, or so on).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;help page on tagging&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's easy to see that you can be an expert or not in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt; or the like through knowledge and practice of that particular game's rules. For example, I know I can help with most &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; problems, but even though I'm very familiar with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt; I know I'm too rusty to help in a meaningful way. This helps me (or any other stacker) identify which questions to help with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also be an expert or not in a particular concept such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grapple&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;grapple&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;grapple&lt;/a&gt; in connection with a particular game. For example, I know to avoid any questions about &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; because it bores me (enough that I ignore and hide the tag), I know to avoid most question about grappling unless there aren't any good answers, and I know I should be able to answer a question about a rogue's features fairly quickly. These tags help identify which questions I (or any other stacker) should help with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you can't actually be an expert in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt;. In contrast to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rogue&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rogue&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rogue&lt;/a&gt;, for example, where you need exceptional experience about a particular subset of the game that others who are general experts with the game might not have, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; does not describe a subset of the game. To be an expert in the rules as they are written is to be an expert in the rules themselves, which is already encompassed by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/13th-age&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;13th-age&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;13th-age&lt;/a&gt; or the like. There doesn't appear to be any reason to seek out or avoid the tag when assessing where to help, because the tag doesn't actually indicate any particular expertise you need to have to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it another way, there's no particular talent required of an expert to answer a question about rules as written that isn't already required for any other question for the same game. Being an expert in the rules as written would be functionally equivalent to knowing the game rules and also knowing how to parse English (or whatever language the rules are written in), which is not a helpful distinction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, since the only way to be an expert in the rules as written (or rules as fun, or rules as intended, or rules as cool, or the like) is to be an expert in the rules and rule interactions of the game in general, all of these examples would be functionally equivalent to just being an expert in the rules period, and there's plenty of consensus that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; is unhelpful, which is why it doesn't exist anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; does not serve the purpose of attracting experts or helping to group a meaningful category of problems requiring a particular kind of expertise. Thus it should be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32426" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T00:55:15.453" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8960" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-22T09:31:22.287" Score="10" ViewCount="367" Body="&lt;p&gt;A rule has been changed, and an answer that was correct became wrong. The recommended course of action is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6079/9552&quot;&gt;downvote&lt;/a&gt; and wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, downvoting is not possible if you upvoted earlier, because your vote is locked&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know it is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8816/9552&quot;&gt;discouraged&lt;/a&gt; to change an answer just to make &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; vote change possible.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;But in this case adding an extra space somewhere would help correct a limitation of the technical implementation of SE. Without this no one can change their votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1) unless the errata comes out less than 5 minutes after your upvote&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-22T23:19:31.757" LastActivityDate="2019-04-01T20:30:20.877" Title="Is it OK to edit an outdated answer to facilitate a vote change?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|voting|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8961" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-22T15:02:31.473" Score="3" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143652/in-this-scenario-how-do-i-determine-whether-the-enemies-are-surprised#&quot;&gt;In this scenario, how do I determine whether the enemies are surprised?&lt;/a&gt; was originally a series of related by (arguably) separate questions linked to a common example scenario. The question was closed as too broad presumably because voters felt the question needed to be broken up. The question was then edited to be a general question which (arguably, though &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143652/in-this-scenario-how-do-i-determine-whether-the-enemies-are-surprised#comment366424_143652&quot;&gt;I had reservations&lt;/a&gt;) contained all the specific questions that OP wanted just wrapped up in a very general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I commented that the post should not be reopened unless OP approved the drastic edit to their question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP indicated that they wanted to break up their question into separate questions instead of one big general one. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Perhaps a good candidate to split off is the question (Q1) for other&#xA;  rule sources, other than PHB 189. Also, Q2 and Q3 can be stand alone&#xA;  questions. – svenema &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143652/in-this-scenario-how-do-i-determine-whether-the-enemies-are-surprised#comment366440_143652&quot;&gt;18 hours ago&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite this, the question was reopened and answers came in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now OP wants to know how they can ask their question they way they wanted to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question is no longer on hold. I would prefer to repackage as a&#xA;  few more precise and stand alone questions. What do I do? Should I&#xA;  keep or delete this question, because there are already some answers?&#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143652/in-this-scenario-how-do-i-determine-whether-the-enemies-are-surprised#comment366532_143652&quot;&gt;4 hours ago&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the answers the answer has gathered thus far have not addressed the questions that OP originally had specifically laid out. Thus, the current iteration of the question is not getting the answers to the questions that OP is trying to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this proceed forward so as to give OP the chance to ask their question in a way that they want and that fits the stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-03-22T19:17:50.510" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T19:33:03.570" Title="How should we handle this question which was edited and reopened in a way that OP did not approve?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8962" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8961" CreationDate="2019-03-22T15:06:10.973" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Close the question and let OP reask the question piecemeal&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's still asking too many questions, just with less detail now&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question started as a series of specific linked questions and the community closed it because it was too much for one Q&amp;amp;A. Nothing has really changed about the question except that all the individual questions are now hidden by a broader, more generic question with a directive for answers to figure out all the specific questions and also to answer them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers will include consideration of stealth, passive perception, whether or not a creature can be surprised at all, the differences between group vs individual stealth, and anything else I may have missed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, in turn, has made it very difficult for anwerers to focus on the correct specific aspects of the scenario that OP was asking about. Essentially, the question is still asking more than one question, just in a very disguised way and that is showing itself in the quality of the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Close it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of the validity of the current answers or status of the question, the edit made to the question changed the question such that OP is not able to get the answers they want and it thus should not have been reopened. While it is open, any of the actual questions OP wanted to ask are effectively duplicates of this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Close it and allow OP to ask the question in individual pieces which OP thinks (and I agree) will give them better, more focused answers than what they are getting with the current answers (which don't answer even all of the original sub-questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T19:33:03.570" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8963" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8961" CreationDate="2019-03-22T16:18:59.580" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Add Do Not Open notice to top of question and Request Mod closure in the cases of major edit review&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the edit author, I'll take responsibility for what I did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was kind of all over the place and seemed needlessly complicated, but I felt I had a good handle on what they were trying to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Throughout my process, I did comment to OP, but they were not actively responding in a timely manner which the community took as approval. In fact, OP did respond post-edit, but did not react to the edits or do anything to roll it back. While that isn't approval, the community may have taken it as tacit acceptance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even though both Rubiksmoose and myself left comments not to reopen, the community did reopen. Unfortunately, OP did not respond until many many hours later stating that they'd like to just repackage as single separate questions. That isn't their fault, but it does raise an issue of how do we handle edits when OP isn't responding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if we need to close the question, but honestly the answers aren't great so I'd be fine with closure and letting OP ask their questions piecemeal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I think more, a possible solution would be to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add bolded notice to top of question stated not to open prior to OP approval of removal of notice&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flag for Mod close until OP responds&lt;/strong&gt;. It's putting more work on the mods, but we may have to as this shows a risk in trusting the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Number 1 is the key here: Maybe not everyone reads the comments, but everyone reads the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T17:32:46.097" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8960" CreationDate="2019-03-22T18:52:02.673" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, it’s not okay&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That would be abusing your edit privileges to help change votes to what you think they should be. That’s not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;what your edit privileges are for&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;You need to stop obsessing about this&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have asked several questions over the years about whether you can bend the rules of the site to make it reflect your personal idea of what is correct:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3305/is-there-a-way-to-remove-wrong-answers&quot;&gt;Is there a way to remove wrong answers?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(2014)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3393/edit-vs-own-answer&quot;&gt;Edit vs own answer&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(2014)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6071/when-rules-change-but-votes-dont-how-to-handle-it&quot;&gt;When rules change but votes don&amp;#39;t, how to handle it?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(2016)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8019/how-can-i-reward-a-good-answer-without-driving-more-attention-to-the-bad-one&quot;&gt;How can I reward a good answer without driving more attention to the bad one?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(2018)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And now this question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The common theme is that you think an answer is wrong and you’re asking how to make the votes go the way you want them to, or outright asking permission to bypass the site’s normal mechanics to enforce your opinion directly. They’re all basically the same question, but with a different proposed method of subverting the rules. Together these questions are 56% of your meta questions to date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is still no. &lt;strong&gt;An answer being wrong is not an emergency that justifies suspending the rules.&lt;/strong&gt; Knock it off, and stop being this guy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.xkcd.com/386/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9QqkU.png&quot; alt=&quot;“Duty Calls” comic by Randal Munroe.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just let the site’s long-term mechanisms do their job without impatient short-term interference. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6071/when-rules-change-but-votes-dont-how-to-handle-it#comment20005_6089&quot;&gt;These mechanisms work&lt;/a&gt;, and we don’t need shortcuts. Just like the answer was in 2016.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-23T01:55:34.083" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8965" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8960" CreationDate="2019-03-22T20:01:26.730" Score="-8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is a necessary workaround&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers can change from correct to wrong. The natural response of a voter would be to change his vote, but the current rules are unable to deal with this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not the fault of the voter, but the system. A minor edit that does not change the answer visibly corrects this shortcoming. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastActivityDate="2019-03-22T20:01:26.730" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8966" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8967" CreationDate="2019-03-23T12:24:25.600" Score="4" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I saw a &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; question (or rather, question spanning both &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DFRPG&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;), and decided to add the latter tag to it, started typing dungeon-fantasy-roleplaying..., didn't see an autocomplete, realised it's too long, added &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dfrpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dfrpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dfrpg&lt;/a&gt; instead because that's how the community seems to usually refer to it anyway, added a wiki explaining what it is and pointing out that it differs from &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS Dungeon Fantasy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; (and had it approved).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I noticed that there have been other DFRPG questions, with a confusing tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&lt;/a&gt;. And now that I know it exists, I think it should be replaced, but was unsure whether to just do it, or bring it up on meta. I asked for advice and was directed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why It's a Misleading Tag:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; it mashes together two titles - &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS Dungeon Fantasy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, which are already easy to confuse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS Dungeon Fantasy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; line is a series of products meant to be used together with &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS 4th Edition&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, requiring the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Basic Set&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and strongly suggesting having &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Magic&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;. Functionally it's an &lt;em&gt;expansion&lt;/em&gt;, a series of supplements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; is a standalone boxed set (also available in PDF) that is fully self-contained, and whose rules differ from the main-line &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; rule-set (e.g. slams) and have been otherwise streamlined. Officially that is termed &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Powered by GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there is a large level of compatibility between main-line &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DFRPG&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, it's still considered 'unsafe' to just assume that a mechanic is the same between the two. In fact, on the official forum, &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DFRPG&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; resides on a separate subforum (not a subset of the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; subforum).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note: so far only two questions are using the old tag, though there may be more DFRPG questions around already - I only made a quick search. This is why I considered just doing the replacement without bringing it up.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the above reasoning for keeping the distinction clear, I would like to completely replace the older tag (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg&lt;/a&gt;), and/or leave a wiki warning elaborating that the two are similar but distinct, and asking to use either of the appropriate tags. &lt;strong&gt;Should I just do it, or should I not (and why), or is there an alternative procedures that should be followed?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-23T21:58:25.050" Title="The problem with the [gurps-dungeon-fantasy-rpg] tag wording" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8966" CreationDate="2019-03-23T12:49:05.543" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Clearly at least a couple other people found the other wording more meaningful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t see how “dfrpg” is &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; ambiguous and in fact I’m pretty sure there was a dragon flight rpg at some point... avoid unnecessary abbreviations.  ‘Rpg’ is a safe well understood way to save a lot of characters but in a world full of “d” RPGs probably chill at that point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I worry you are fixing a theoretical and not a real problem here.  Has anyone actually confused the two?  In the two extant questions?  Doesn’t seem so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could see talking about removing the gurps- from the tag so it’s dungeon-fantasy-rpg, which would be more correct and not nearly as ambiguous, but IMO tag meddling should be saved for a real problem.  If you had paused after typing “dungeon-fantasy” the existing tag would have popped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are an emergent folksonomy by design and intervention in them should be minimized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-03-23T12:49:05.543" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8968" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8960" CreationDate="2019-03-23T18:28:03.537" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's no issue that needs to be solved here&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You seem to be saying (explicitly and implicitly) that there is an issue here that needs to be fixed. But I fail to see what it is and what negative effects it is causing. Before you start talking about solutions, you really need to establish that there is a problem that needs to be solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What issue does locked-in votes cause? From my perspective, it doesn't really cause any. The answer got those votes legitimately and voters gave them to the answer knowing that they would be locked in. Edits unlock voting in part so that a significant change in the answer itself (either making it more up-vote worthy or down-vote worthy) can allow you to change your vote accordingly. If something external to the question changes, then usually a significant update can be made to (presumably) improve it and that will unlock the votes. If no such change can be made, then the votes should stay the way they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see an issue, then I suggest you start a conversation about the problem on Meta first before proposing system-breaking solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Editing is for improving the post&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit privileges are for improving the post. Full stop. If your edit is not improving the post, then you shouldn't be making it. Edits are not for playing god over when people should and should not be able to change votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said above, there is no issue here, and, even if there were, the correct solution to a problem with the system is to work towards fixing the issue - not to misuse an unrelated part of the system to create your own solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-23T18:44:42.403" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8960" CreationDate="2019-03-24T18:52:03.087" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am very much annoyed at the very idea of doing this, not because the editing, but because it's breaching a more fundamental rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is to the question. The question is from a time when the rules were different. Adding a comment that the rules have changed is a good idea. Editing in the note may be good or bad. Downvoting the answer because the rules changed out from under it is not appropriate at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22420" LastActivityDate="2019-03-24T18:52:03.087" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8970" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8971" CreationDate="2019-03-25T15:22:08.553" Score="8" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;On my laptop, the menu with close votes, etc. is at the top right of the page, next to the notification and rep +/- icons. However, on my phone, only the notification and rep +/- icons appear. I can't find the open/close queues anywhere. Is there another way to access the open/close queues?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-25T23:11:05.963" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T22:40:21.870" Title="How can I access the close/reopen/first-time-answer/low-quality queues on my phone?" Tags="|discussion|review|user-interface|mobile|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8970" CreationDate="2019-03-25T16:35:02.640" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You might be using the &quot;mobile&quot; version on your phone&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mobile version of the site does not include all the buttons in the top menu:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PA68n.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PA68n.png&quot; alt=&quot;mobile version&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately the &quot;full version&quot; of the site is responsive and perfectly usable on a phone and includes several additional options (including the review queues):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LZgmf.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LZgmf.png&quot; alt=&quot;full site&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To change to the full version you need to scroll all the way down to the footer and click on &quot;full site&quot; (meta and main site are separate so you may need to do this for each):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NYGdH.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NYGdH.png&quot; alt=&quot;full site option&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may also need to &quot;enable responsiveness&quot;, also in the footer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MmtG5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MmtG5.png&quot; alt=&quot;enable responsiveness, underneath help, chat, contact, and mobile&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-03-26T22:40:21.870" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T22:40:21.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8972" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-03-25T23:02:37.110" Score="3" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the general consensus for accepting an answer when there are multiple, near identical answers posted at the same time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not my question, but the question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143898/can-a-bard-use-an-arcane-focus&quot;&gt;Can a Bard use an arcane focus?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;&#xA;has 2 answers that are near identical (and in my opinion both correct) and were posted within minutes of each other, which I would say are within typing time so aren't copies of each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I, of course, upvoted both, but the question asker will end up accepting one or the other. That means one will miss out on being an accepted answer, which people value highly, and which people searching for answers to the same question will see as correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I was just wondering if there is a general best practice on RPG.SE for accepting one answer over another. I have no particular reason for asking; I just thought it was an interesting situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39264" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-03-25T23:14:21.593" LastActivityDate="2019-03-25T23:14:21.593" Title="When there are multiple near-identical correct answers, which answer should be accepted?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2019-03-26T08:20:29.483" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-03-26T13:17:57.207" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;What would Marie Kondo say about [RAW]? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it sparks healthy, fun, interesting discussion, great! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it sparks a flame war, cut it out. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My 2c. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28008" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T13:17:57.207" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1140" CreationDate="2019-03-26T15:01:38.560" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Reward one (or both) of the answers with a bounty&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you choose to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/bounty&quot;&gt;start a bounty&lt;/a&gt; you can select:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reward an existing answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can reward 50 - 400 of your own rep to another user with an exceptional answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can even give a bounty to both answers, but be careful because the second bounty must be twice the amount of the first bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-26T15:01:38.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8975" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8994" CreationDate="2019-03-27T12:45:47.230" Score="-4" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144020/if-i-use-twinned-spell-to-target-two-creatures-with-an-attack-do-the-attacks-oc&quot;&gt;As discovered by @Xirema&lt;/a&gt;, we have a significant number of questions about the Twinned Spell metamagic. More specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=twinned%20spell%20is%3Aquestion%20%5Bdnd-5e%5D&quot;&gt;searching for 5e questions about &quot;twinned spell&quot;&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;code&gt;[dnd-5e] is:question twinned spell&lt;/code&gt;) yields 50 results, while we only have 75 metamagic questions for 5e altogether (although not all twinned spell questions are even tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize that there are arguments against adding the tag; more specifically, I don't think there is a precedent for a tag as &quot;low-level&quot; as this tag would be. While we do have tags for certain class features already (such as for Wildshape, Eldritch Invocations, Sneak Attack or Metamagic), I haven't found a tag for another &quot;sub-feature&quot; like Twinned Spell is (as in, an option of a class feature).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, since the Metamagic class feature offers so many different new options (not just twinning spells) that are otherwise unique in 5e, I think it's worth splitting the tag up. As far as I know, no other class feature in 5e offers that many hugely different possibilities. Fighting style or a Battle Master's Maneuvers offer various options as well, but they're mostly mechanic and don't offer anything game-changing. Eldritch invocations, on the other hand, have a bigger impact on how you can approach problems or combine them with other features, but there are so many of them that creating tags for specific ones is not viable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the following metamagic options can have a huge impact on the game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Twinned Spell: for less experienced or entirely new users, it's often difficult to tell whether or not a certain spell is valid for Twinned Spell, which is by itself an extremely powerful feature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Subtle Spell: Relevant for silenced areas, Counterspell, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Extended Spell: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-concentration=2&amp;amp;sort=-spell-duration&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Several spells have a duration of 8 hours&lt;/a&gt;, so that they last pretty much the entire adventuring day - but not beyond a long rest, so you can't cast them, take a long rest, and then have them active AND full spell slots. Examples include Mage Armor, Foresight, Aid, etc. Doubling the duration obviously breaks this design principle.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, these options - while being made available through the same class feature - are distinct enough to warrant having their own tags. Especially considering that there would be roughly 30-50 questions tagged with Twinned Spell alone, and that we have many tags with far less questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, since creating metamagic-option-specific tags creates the issue of what to do with the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; tag, I think we should define the tags as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;: For questions that are about Metamagic in general, i.e. if you substituted any mention of e.g. Twinned Spell with another Metamagic option, the question would still work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; and other option-specific tags: For questions specifically about Twinned Spell, i.e. if you substituted any mention of Twinned Spell with another Metamagic option, the questions wouldn't make any sense.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, the tags would be mutually exclusive. I'm not entirely positive users would recognize this distinction, even if it were directly in the tag wiki summary, so maybe we should just use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; in addition to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;. I don't think we can remove the generic Metamagic tag, since not all metamagic questions are about a specific option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, distinguishing the tags in this way also makes tags for the other metamagic options necessary. I haven't searched for those in detail, but from what I can gather by counting the number of results when searching for &lt;code&gt;[dnd-5e] is:question &quot;metamagic option here&quot;&lt;/code&gt;, most questions about metamagic options are about twinning spells, followed by subtle spell in second place and quickened or empowered spells in 3rd and 4th place. The other options are in the single digits, question-count-wise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Anyways, my question boils down to: Do we think that such a tag is a useful addition?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming we do, I have identified a bunch of questions that would need to be edited to take the tag. Below is a list of questions that should get the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; and/or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; tags. The lists assume that the twinned-spell tag would be used in conjunction with the metamagic tag, since that's what I had in mind when I created them, but I've sinced figured out that it might be a good idea for the tags to be mutually exclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Needs &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt;, and has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132994/can-the-spell-enemies-abound-be-twinned&quot;&gt;Can the spell Enemies Abound be twinned?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64379/can-i-make-independent-spell-effect-choices-for-a-twinned-spell&quot;&gt;Can I make independent spell-effect choices for a Twinned spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129108/can-you-use-twinned-spell-on-fireball-and-target-the-same-creature-with-both-att&quot;&gt;Can you use Twinned Spell on Fireball and target the same creature with both attacks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141716/can-a-persistent-spell-cast-using-the-sorcerers-metamagic-twinned-spell-affect&quot;&gt;Can a persistent spell cast using the Sorcerer&amp;#39;s Metamagic Twinned Spell affect both spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132921/can-hex-be-twinned&quot;&gt;Can Hex be Twinned?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68371/can-a-twinned-hex-be-targeted-at-or-moved-onto-a-single-creature&quot;&gt;Can a Twinned Hex be targeted at or moved onto a single creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142079/when-do-i-have-to-declare-that-i-want-to-twin-my-spell&quot;&gt;When do I have to declare that I want to twin my spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47862/how-many-sorcery-points-does-twin-spell-use-when-copying-a-spell-cast-with-a-hig&quot;&gt;How many sorcery points does twin spell use when copying a spell cast with a higher level slot?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91906/can-a-sorcerer-twin-telekinesis-eyebite-and-bigbys-hand&quot;&gt;Can a Sorcerer Twin Telekinesis, Eyebite, and Bigby&amp;#39;s Hand?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64224/what-happens-if-you-twin-spell-a-spell-that-requires-concentration&quot;&gt;What happens if you Twin Spell a spell that requires concentration?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94884/can-you-twin-counterspell-in-response-to-a-counterspell-counter-chain&quot;&gt;Can you twin Counterspell in response to a Counterspell counter chain?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Needs &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt;, doesn't have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123133/sorcerer-does-twinned-spell-allow-you-to-cast-2-concentration-spells&quot;&gt;Sorcerer: does Twinned spell allow you to cast 2 concentration spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47475/can-you-deal-damage-to-two-targets-each-round-using-twinned-spell-and-witch-bol&quot;&gt;Can you deal damage to two targets each round, using Twinned Spell and Witch Bolt?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132909/casting-a-smite-then-twinned-spell-on-a-booming-blade&quot;&gt;Casting a Smite, then Twinned Spell on a Booming Blade?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62566/can-eldritch-blast-be-twinned&quot;&gt;Can Eldritch Blast be Twinned?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57846/can-you-choose-to-cast-a-lower-level-version-of-a-cantrip&quot;&gt;Can you choose to cast a lower level version of a cantrip?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115644/does-a-ring-of-spell-turning-work-on-spells-upcast-to-target-an-additional-creat&quot;&gt;Does a Ring of Spell Turning work on spells upcast to target an additional creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74071/does-the-tempest-domains-destructive-wrath-maximize-ongoing-damage-from-a-twinn&quot;&gt;Does the Tempest domain&amp;#39;s Destructive Wrath maximize ongoing damage from a twinned Witch Bolt?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is about Metamagic and potentially needs the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; tag (or a metamagic-option-specific tag), but is not specifically about Twinned Spell or already has the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59968/does-twinned-spell-work-on-hellish-rebuke&quot;&gt;Does Twinned Spell work on Hellish Rebuke?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53714/does-a-sorcerers-metamagic-work-for-non-sorcerer-spells&quot;&gt;Does a sorcerer&amp;#39;s metamagic work for non-sorcerer spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131271/are-there-any-major-balance-issues-with-sorcerers-having-access-to-these-non-sor&quot;&gt;Are there any major balance issues with Sorcerers having access to these non-sorcerer spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134959/does-replacing-metamagic-with-a-delayed-arcane-tradition-have-glaring-balance-is&quot;&gt;Does replacing Metamagic with a delayed Arcane Tradition have glaring balance issues?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84780/how-can-i-deal-with-the-inability-to-speak-caused-by-the-pink-bubbles-wild-magic&quot;&gt;How can I deal with the inability to speak caused by the pink bubbles Wild Magic surge effect?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131666/does-using-a-spell-scroll-always-include-a-verbal-component&quot;&gt;Does using a Spell Scroll always include a verbal component?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137795/how-many-damage-rolls-do-you-make-for-the-prismatic-spray-spell&quot;&gt;How many damage rolls do you make for the Prismatic Spray spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106929/subtle-spell-and-saving-throws&quot;&gt;Subtle spell and saving throws&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113823/how-much-of-an-arcana-difficulty-check-would-be-necessary-to-recognize-a-silent&quot;&gt;How much of an arcana difficulty check would be necessary to recognize a silent, still spell being cast?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48988/how-to-calculate-the-expected-damage-increase-from-empowered-spell&quot;&gt;How to calculate the expected damage increase from Empowered Spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has the maximum of 5 tags already; should we replace an existing tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137093/can-a-multiclassed-wizard-sorcerer-use-the-twinned-spell-metamagic-option-on-sim&quot;&gt;Can a multiclassed Wizard/Sorcerer use the Twinned Spell metamagic option on Simulacrum?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134573/how-does-the-twinned-spell-metamagic-option-interact-with-the-draconic-bloodline&quot;&gt;How does the Twinned Spell metamagic option interact with the Draconic Bloodline sorcerer&amp;#39;s Elemental Affinity feature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111117/can-a-sorcerer-paladin-use-twinned-spell-with-find-steed-to-affect-more-than-two&quot;&gt;Can a Sorcerer/Paladin use Twinned Spell with Find Steed to affect more than two targets?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/48935/how-many-attack-damage-rolls-does-a-sorcerer-make-when-using-the-twinned-spell-m&quot;&gt;How many attack/damage rolls does a sorcerer make when using the Twinned Spell metamagic option?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131003/can-twinned-spell-be-used-on-plane-shift-when-its-used-to-banish-an-unwilling-c&quot;&gt;Can Twinned Spell be used on Plane Shift when it&amp;#39;s used to banish an unwilling creature to another plane?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128672/does-the-grave-cleric-circle-of-mortality-feature-cause-a-twinned-healing-spell&quot;&gt;Does the grave cleric Circle of Mortality feature cause a twinned healing spell to heal the maximum amount to a second target who is not at 0 HP?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101465/which-yields-higher-average-damage-an-empowered-or-twinned-chaos-bolt&quot;&gt;Which yields higher average damage, an Empowered or Twinned Chaos Bolt?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142042/what-happens-when-i-twin-life-transference&quot;&gt;What happens when I Twin Life Transference?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137149/can-a-sorcerer-twin-a-spell-to-hit-a-creature-with-two-heads-with-both-attacks&quot;&gt;Can a Sorcerer twin a spell to hit a creature with two heads with both attacks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-04-03T14:30:01.997" LastActivityDate="2019-04-03T14:30:01.997" Title="Should we introduce tags for specific Metamagic options (such as Twinned Spell), and what happens to the [metamagic] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8975" CreationDate="2019-03-27T14:58:27.783" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; seems to be not a useful tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; for D&amp;amp;D5e only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; makes up a vast majority of the metamagic tag. But that isn't an issue, we don't need a tag for every single feature or subfeature. A simple search of &amp;quot;twinned spell &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-pf-edition-of-choice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-pf-edition-of-choice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-pf-edition-of-choice&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; will immediately bring up a list of twinned spell questions for answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There appear to be no issues with questions not being found by alternate wordings either. Searching for &amp;quot;[metamagic] twinned spell is:question&amp;quot; gets the same as for &amp;quot;twin&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;twinning&amp;quot; (in this case 31 questions). Though &amp;quot;[metamagic] &amp;quot;twinned spell&amp;quot; is:question&amp;quot; results in 7 fewer questions being found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no need to have a tag to help find this material, just like we don't need to add a tag for the vast majority of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8857/burninate-mimic-tag-do-specific-monsters-need-specific-tags@PixelMaster&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; that people ask about (though we do have a few of those as well).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also don't think that twinned spell is &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; commonly asked about in the grand scheme of things. As a point of comparison, we have other confusing features in the game that are oft asked about and don't get their own tags. The Arcane Archer subclass has 50 questions. The 5e feat Spell Sniper feat has been in 39 questions. Another 5e feat, War Caster, has been in 84 questions. None of these should get their own tag, and I don't think that something with fewer questions and more issues (see below) should either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The topic is easy to find in a search, completely encapsulated by another tag, and thus I just don't see how it is a useful addition as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may not have been damning for me if it weren't for the issues also raised by the creation of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Creating the tag causes issues with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you have noticed, creating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; causes problems with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;. Essentially, as currently written in each tag description, every question about Twinned Spell should get both tags. Since every question about twinned spells is also inherently about metamagic this essentially makes the tag an extra tag that &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; be added on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrast this with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt;. In 5e, metamagic is a sorcerer ability. Despite that, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; can stand in a question apart from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt;. In fact, there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bmetamagic%5D%20-%5Bsorcerer%5D%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;119 questions&lt;/a&gt; that do this (and this is despite the my observation that class tags are overapplied).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;There aren't any viable solutions to this that I can see&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The solution you propose of making them mutually exclusive would actually cause more issues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The mutually exclusive definition is unintuitive and will lead to many questions having to be retagged and possible edit wars over whether the tag is appropriate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The unintuitive nature of the new definition would also make it hard&#xA;for new users to search for questions about general or specific&#xA;metamagic abilities since they would be likely unaware that they&#xA;needed to use specific tags only. (thanks @SevenSidedDie)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; would only work in the general sense of a non-specific metamagic then it leaves the tag with almost no questions in it and no other way to tag the questions about specific metamagic abilities (which it seems people really want to do) unless we...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a tag for each other metamagic option as well which we definitely shouldn't do.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, if you don't do #4 (which we absolutely shouldn't), then you end up with questions about quicken or silent or any other specific metamagic question besides twinned that end up having no tag at all about their metamagic-ness. This seems to be a distinct step backwards in tagging coverage and quality to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is another solution to the issue of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; overlap, I'm not seeing it. &lt;strong&gt;The best solution, as I see it, is to not create the problem (tag) in the first place.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe I'm just throwing the baby out with the bathwater here, but it seems like the tag adds little to no value &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; it causes issues that need to be resolved (but seemingly can't be) and it just doesn't seem to be worth it to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - Note when you look beyond the D&amp;amp;D5e-centric view of the tag, the problem gets even worse. Pathfinder has an enormous amount of metamagic options and thus #4 is even more completely unfeasible and unnecessary (and I don't think anybody would or is proposing it) when taking PF and 3.5 into consideration.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-27T20:09:19.723" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8977" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8975" CreationDate="2019-03-27T18:08:25.863" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The case for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; tag is that the Twinned Spell Metamagic is unique among Metamagics for its complexity and the questions it raises&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The complexity of this particular Metamagic is a lot greater than the complexity of the other Metamagics in 5th edition D&amp;amp;D. Just for comparison:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Subtle Spell: removes Verbal and Somatic Components&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Careful Spell: allows some creatures to automatically pass their saving throws&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Distant Spell: doubles the range, or +30' for touch range&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Empowered Spell: reroll the damage dice, may be comboed with other Metamagics&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Extended Spell: doubles the duration&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Heightened Spell: confers Disadvantage on Saving Throws&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Quickened Spell: cast an Action spell as a Bonus Action&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Twinned Spell: Cast a copy of the spell&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;But only if the spell cannot target more than one creature at its current level&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And the cost scales with the level of the spell slot used to cast the spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And also the nature of what a spell &quot;target&quot; is is nebulous and difficult to pin down, and the game's lead designers have been contradictory over what constitutes a &quot;target&quot;, meaning different spells often have unexpected interactions with this particular Metamagic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;AND ALSO the spell must not have a range of &quot;self&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly, there's an outlier in this group in terms of how much &quot;and/but/however/therefore&quot;'s need to be handled when adjudicating the feature in play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Twinned Spell&lt;/em&gt; Metamagic has seen extensive debates both on this stack and elsewhere in a way that the other Metamagics simply do not&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closest I've ever seen for the other Metamagics have been &lt;em&gt;Quickened&lt;/em&gt; (because the 5th Edition Bonus Action spellcasting rules are weird) and &lt;em&gt;Subtle&lt;/em&gt; (because removing Verbal/Somatic components has logical narrative implications), and even then, neither of these Metamagics produce nearly as many questions, nor do they produce questions that dig so thoroughly into the minutiae of their self.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, a question like &quot;Can I quicken out &lt;em&gt;Haste&lt;/em&gt; so that I may also cast &lt;em&gt;Erupting Earth&lt;/em&gt; on the same turn?&quot; is functionally equivalent to &quot;Can I cast &lt;em&gt;Misty Step&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Magic Missiles&lt;/em&gt; on the same turn?&quot; The fact that one deals with a particular Metamagic is immaterial; both are, fundamentally, about the Bonus Action spellcasting rules. Similarly, two questions like &quot;Can I subtle-cast &lt;em&gt;Cause Fear&lt;/em&gt; to avoid being noticed?&quot; and &quot;Can I cast &lt;em&gt;Hypnotic Pattern&lt;/em&gt; (a spell that has no Verbal Component) to avoid being noticed?&quot; both tap into questions about how to adjudicate the ability of enemy creatures to identify the source of a cast spell, and the incidental details of how the &lt;em&gt;Subtle Spell&lt;/em&gt; metamagic works is &lt;em&gt;important&lt;/em&gt; (because you need to know that it suppresses both Verbal and Somatic components) but not &lt;em&gt;Fundamental&lt;/em&gt; (because the basic question could be applied to any spell that lacks either a Verbal or Somatic component).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Conversely, questions about &lt;em&gt;Twinned Spell&lt;/em&gt; have to deal with the very specific details of how &lt;em&gt;Twinned Spell&lt;/em&gt; works. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We sometimes get questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64224/42386&quot;&gt;What happens if you Twin Spell a spell that requires concentration?&lt;/a&gt;, an issue that does not come up for other features or other Metamagics because no other [officially published] feature allows a character to sustain the equivalent of two Concentration spells at the same time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We sometimes get questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62566/42386&quot;&gt;Can Eldritch Blast be Twinned?&lt;/a&gt;, an issue that comes up because no other feature has the highly restrictive &quot;must be incapable of targeting more than one creature&quot; language.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;See also questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/132921/42386&quot;&gt;Can Hex be Twinned?&lt;/a&gt;, which pop up because the semantics of a spells' &quot;targets&quot; is finicky&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Conclusion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; is &lt;em&gt;weird&lt;/em&gt; enough that it deserves its own tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Twinned Spell&lt;/em&gt; feature represents an outlier among Metamagics, both by volume of questions and by the semantics of its behavior, and should receive its own tag for these reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I agree with the proposed usage of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; in conjunction with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the specific metamagic being used is immaterial, then the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; is good enough. If the specific metamagic has notable consequences on how the question resolves (i.e. the question would be very different if &lt;em&gt;Subtle Spell&lt;/em&gt; were being invoked instead of &lt;em&gt;Twinned Spell&lt;/em&gt;), then it should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm generally agnostic on whether other Metamagic features deserve tags of their own. As I made the case above, I don't think the other features reach the same level of complexity or edge-case-ruling that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/twinned-spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;twinned-spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;twinned-spell&lt;/a&gt; reaches, but I do agree that in some cases it could be beneficial to call out those effects in particular.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="42386" LastEditDate="2019-03-27T18:39:12.530" LastActivityDate="2019-03-27T18:39:12.530" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8978" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8979" CreationDate="2019-03-27T23:13:08.033" Score="9" ViewCount="432" Body="&lt;p&gt;An extension of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277/pathfinder-sources-prd-vs-d20pfsrd&quot;&gt;this other meta question&lt;/a&gt;;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Paizo has taken down their own PRD and &lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sg93?Big-PathfinderStarfinder-Reference-Document-News&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;officially licensed&lt;/a&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://aonprd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Archives of Nethys&lt;/a&gt; page as their reference document. Archives of Nethys provides a community driven resource for all Pathfinder (and Starfinder) content, including setting-specific rule content. It isn't necessarily the easiest to navigate, but it does have the most, current, information and reliable links now that it is no longer an unlicensed source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this make it our official reference as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:32:29.807" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:32:29.807" Title="Should questions about Pathfinder now link to Archives of Nethys over d20pfsrd?" Tags="|discussion|answers|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8978" CreationDate="2019-03-27T23:42:01.323" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per that previously linked question, we do not have an “official” source.  Use what you prefer as a question or answer author or editor.  Nethys, d20pfsrd, something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, as the links are not broken, you should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; go on a pogrom of editing a thousand preexisting questions to change the links. Use new ones going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-03-28T11:57:30.443" LastActivityDate="2019-03-28T11:57:30.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8981" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="8982" CreationDate="2019-03-28T19:24:39.660" Score="3" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144101/how-do-spells-that-require-an-ability-check-vs-the-casters-spell-save-dc-work&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; the querent made an error in the spellcasting ability used. It was unclear whether or not it was intentional, but an answer addressed it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can/Should we edit the question to 'fix' the mistake that's been addressed in an answer after the querent confirmed it was a typo?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-03-28T19:41:49.433" LastActivityDate="2019-03-30T06:30:02.647" Title="Should Questions be edited to fix a mistake after it's been addressed in an answer?" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8981" CreationDate="2019-03-28T19:27:12.933" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It seems to make no sense to to do that...at this point&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Long ago, the requirement of &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4765/22566&quot;&gt;experts asking expert questions&lt;/a&gt;&quot; faded into the background as it was not a good fit for this stack.  Querents come from a wide variety of levels of understanding.  If part of the answer is to correct an error in the question, once that's done I see no value in retconning the question.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making corrections to the question's premise in the body of an answer is a use of &lt;em&gt;answerer expertise&lt;/em&gt; - and it is something that I see happening a lot.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/61203/how-difficult-is-it-to-simply-disable-disengage-the-mcas-on-boeing-737-max-8-9/61204#61204&quot;&gt;did something similar at Aviation.SE&lt;/a&gt;: whomever was asking the question didn't know what they didn't know.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-03-28T19:35:22.820" LastActivityDate="2019-03-28T19:35:22.820" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-03-29T13:17:31.230" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Dragon Chef Cheese&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/75916/22566&quot;&gt;Can a red dragon be boiled to death?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether one simply steams the red dragon, or makes red dragon soup, this question captures the spirit of this cheese collection, though for dipping thin sliced shrieker is recommended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:57:52.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8981" CreationDate="2019-03-30T04:36:39.037" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should fix the typo&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent thinks that an error in their question is a typo, then by definition that error is irrelevant to the meaning of the question and makes the question less clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should remove the typo from the question so that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anyone who reads the question in the future will benefit from the extra clarity, if ever so slightly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anyone who answers the question in the future won't waste their time addressing a typo.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, the typo should have been noticed through comments, instead it was noticed through a tangent in an answer. However, the utility of that tangent is no less transient than any other comment: now that we recognize the typo for what it is, that tangent no longer serves a purpose. Because the tangent no longer servers a purpose, the answer would be better without it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the typo happens to be a genuine question in the eyes of someone other than the querent, then that person should ask that question in a separate Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42865" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-03-30T06:30:02.647" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8987" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-04-01T12:22:49.260" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Rename the tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we not just rename the tag? Something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/literal-rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;literal-rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;literal-rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; or something (nothing too long, obviously), so that it's clear from the name that it's not to be used as others might have misused it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most common misunderstanding I've seen around this tag are when users add the tag to questions that mention wanting RAW answers, whereas my understanding of the tag is that it's for literal interpretations and rules loopholes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that distinction is right there in the tag's name, surely this will reduce the ambiguity of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;If this has already been tried in the past or something, then that's my only suggestion, so I guess there's nothing for it but to get rid of it otherwise...&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-01T12:22:49.260" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8960" CreationDate="2019-04-01T20:30:20.877" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;What I typically do in this scenario is post a comment to that effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing so draws the answerer's attention, usually bumps the question to the top of the pile (and can then draw upvotes to my comment, thus keeping it on top), and lets future readers see there's a potential issue with the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, SE isn't a great choice for people whom just want to skim answers. If they just read the header and none of the subsequent body or comments, then they probably only have half an answer and that's on them. No way to control how everyone's going to consume the media.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2019-04-01T20:30:20.877" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8989" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-04-02T18:36:58.407" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Hiding from a Nosy Deity while eating cheese&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/144401/22566&quot;&gt;What is the highest total result one can get for a skill check?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;David Coffron has shown how a much spied upon Hobgoblin can get away from the never ending gaze of the fiery eyes of Maglubiyet, and eat his cheese in privacy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:57:37.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8992" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-03T11:12:18.750" Score="3" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144259/where-can-i-find-a-complete-index-of-all-adnd-2e-monster-entries-compiled-on-to&quot;&gt;My question&lt;/a&gt; was wrongly put on hold as shopping. It is a &lt;strong&gt;finding online resources&lt;/strong&gt; question and, as far as I can tell, seems to be no different than other questions that weren't closed. It's not asking for what's &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; or any kind of &lt;em&gt;recommendations&lt;/em&gt; and from my perspective its not too broad. I tried to find what constitutes a shopping question and from what I found I can't see how my question qualifies as one. I tried editing it to clarify that it was not for recommendations, but that doesn't seem to have helped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how do I get my question reopened when I can't see anything wrong with it in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53461" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-03T22:13:36.873" LastActivityDate="2019-04-03T22:13:36.873" Title="My question was marked as shopping when it isn't. How do I get it reopened?" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8992" CreationDate="2019-04-03T11:20:59.580" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;When your question was closed it had the following content:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if this is on topic, but as far as I'm aware Lomion, the online Monstrous Index of all 2e monsters, qualifies as an online resource and at present it is down. Are there any alternative online resources to the site that have all the ADnD 2e monsters?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This looks a lot like a tool recommendation question: “list some sites for me.” &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5883/1204&quot;&gt;Those are off topic&lt;/a&gt; and a subcategory of shopping question. Insisting it is not a resource recommendation question isn't going to make it suddenly be not one; if it is one then it is one, and the community judged it was one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been significantly revised, and I've given it a bit more revision, mainly to remove the claims about what question it is/isn't and remove that “give me some alternatives” question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Lomion.de, the online Monstrous Index of all 2e monsters, is currently down. In leiu of it being missing: Where can I find a complete online index of all ADnD 2e monster entries compiled on one site that is still up and functional at this point in time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be functionally enough a request to get a particular problem solved to make it not quite a resource recommendation. I'll let the community judge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-04-03T11:20:59.580" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8994" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8975" CreationDate="2019-04-03T14:28:41.693" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In accordance with the consensus on this meta being fairly well settled in the negative (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8976/1204&quot;&gt;against the tag&lt;/a&gt; is at +15/-0, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8977/1204&quot;&gt;for the tag&lt;/a&gt; is at +0/-7) the tag has been burninated from the six questions it was on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144020/if-i-use-twinned-spell-to-target-two-creatures-with-an-attack-do-the-attacks-oc&quot;&gt;If I use Twinned Spell to target two creatures with an attack, do the attacks occur simultaneously?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96021/can-you-use-twinned-spell-on-the-same-target&quot;&gt;Can you use twinned spell on the same target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/64470/when-casting-a-spell-using-twinned-spell-does-it-use-one-or-two-spell-slots&quot;&gt;When casting a spell using Twinned Spell does it use one or two spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/61998/can-twinned-spell-affect-chain-lightning&quot;&gt;Can Twinned Spell affect Chain Lightning?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59968/does-twinned-spell-work-on-hellish-rebuke&quot;&gt;Does Twinned Spell work on Hellish Rebuke?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53600/does-the-twinned-spell-metamagic-option-work-with-the-magic-missile-spell&quot;&gt;Does the Twinned Spell metamagic option work with the Magic Missile spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those that were missing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/metamagic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;metamagic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;metamagic&lt;/a&gt; tag have had it added in place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was done via a diamond moderator tag merge so the burnination won't show up in edit histories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-04-03T14:28:41.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8995" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-04-05T14:54:41.017" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't rush to judgment&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of its importance, I think discussion on this topic should continue beyond the current April 5 deadline to at least April 26. So far as I'm aware—and the moderators can correct me if I'm wrong—, the April 5 deadline hasn't been, for example, imposed by an outside force but was, instead, decided on by the site's moderators. I'd like them to reconsider it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the question states, this issue has plagued the site for years—very nearly since its inception—, yet this question was posed March 21, 2019, and due to be resolved April 5, 2019. Settling an issue in under a month that has &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; been adequately settled I suspect will lead to animosity and mistrust, especially from users who don't or can't visit the site or participate in site business during this question's comparatively small window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The optics on this question are &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; bad&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag's most ardent and vocal proponent—who has, prior to this one, participated in every Meta discussion about this tag over the years—was suspended because of comments made on a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; question yet &lt;em&gt;about this very topic.&lt;/em&gt; That user's suspension occurred &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; this question was posed and that user's suspension ends &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; this question is due to be resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, let me be clear: I trust the moderators. I don't think they've a hidden agenda. I don't think they're out to get anyone. Nonetheless, were I to feel so strongly about a long-standing issue to say something offensive with regard to the issue and a moderator so that I got suspended then watched as the moderators resolved that long-standing issue &lt;em&gt;while I was suspended&lt;/em&gt;, my feelings—of trust, of the moderators' lack of a hidden agenda, of them not being out to get anyone—might change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In comments on this question I was told that suspended users shouldn't be considered when site business needs to be taken care of and that the users present now should be able to settle any issues without, for example, waiting for any user's suspension to end. I accept that. I'd &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; to think that a lone user's voice on topic that the user is passionate about &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; important—suspended or not, the user possessing 100,000-plus reputation or but 1 reputation—, but—honestly!—I can accept that it's not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I &lt;em&gt;am&lt;/em&gt; struggling with, though, is the &lt;em&gt;appearance&lt;/em&gt; that this question's comparatively rapid posing and resolving gives to other users who feel strongly about a site issue—and the impression it gives to those users who think that, one day, they &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; feel strongly about an issue on &lt;em&gt;RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/em&gt;. Those users may get the impression from this question's quick resolution that if they feel strongly about an issue a moderator will suspend them then use their suspension period to resolve the issue without their voice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid accidentally giving that impression, I urged greater transparency for this question, and I got a little. The original question provided no deadline; it's there now—added less than a week before the deadline—because I asked for it. In comments I asked that the question include a justification for that deadline; a moderator offered a justification, but the question—so far—doesn't include it. I recommended that the question's &lt;em&gt;title&lt;/em&gt; include the deadline in hopes that the deadline's presence in the title combined with the question's Featured on Meta status would draw more attention to the question; that didn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is—as can be seen by the discussion here and the overwhelming amount of previous discussion—a fairly significant site issue, and I don't think this question has been adequately presented to avoid giving the wrong impression. Even were this question modified &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt;—the day of the proposed deadline—, I think that the question would be insufficiently transparent: Not enough folks would be aware of the changes to the question on the day of its deadline for resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I don't think the moderators are wrong to &lt;em&gt;pose&lt;/em&gt; this question. I also don't think the moderators are wrong to want to &lt;em&gt;resolve&lt;/em&gt; this question. However, I do think the moderators picked a particularly inauspicious time to pose it and an even more inauspicious deadline for its resolution. I urge the moderators to extend the April 5 deadline so that users now don't feel their voices have gone unheard and that users &lt;em&gt;later&lt;/em&gt; won't think their voices &lt;em&gt;will go&lt;/em&gt; unheard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T14:54:41.017" CommentCount="38" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8996" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-05T15:17:30.553" Score="10" ViewCount="661" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is well known that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6882/whats-our-stance-on-piracy&quot;&gt;we do not condone piracy&lt;/a&gt; and usually the way to handle links to pirated sources is to replace them with corresponding legal ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question asked today, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144631/is-the-fencer-subclass-from-gigers-homebrew&quot;&gt;Is the fencer subclass from &amp;#39;Giger&amp;#39;s&amp;#39; homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;, links to &lt;a href=&quot;http://gdnd.wikidot.com/fightersubclass:fencer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this fencer homebrew page&lt;/a&gt;. The homebrew is perfectly fine, but I think the site contains pirated non-SRD material for D&amp;amp;D 5e. There is no alternate location where the same fencer homebrew has been posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-05T20:30:12.853" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T20:30:12.853" Title="How should this question about content in a site that includes piracy be handled?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|copyright|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8996" CreationDate="2019-04-05T15:24:08.917" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Copy pasta: Creative Commons License allows for redistribution of content.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the content could be copied wholesale as it's CC-BY-SA.  That wouldn't direct traffic to the pirate site, and would preserve the content being inquired about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Attribution&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the creator has not supplied their name, so we wouldn't even have to include an attribution.  Just clearly labelling it CC-BY-SA and a link to the license&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update:  Found the author of the page.   &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/anniegrimmsdottre&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AnnieGrimmsdottre&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://creativecommons.org/faq/#attribution&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://creativecommons.org/faq/#attribution&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I properly attribute material offered under a Creative Commons license?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All CC licenses require users to attribute the creator of licensed material, unless the creator has waived that requirement, &lt;strong&gt;not supplied a name&lt;/strong&gt;, or asked that her name be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Example attribution:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Author: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/anniegrimmsdottre&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;AnnieGrimmsdottre&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;License: &lt;a href=&quot;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;CC-BY-SA-3.0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T16:10:03.650" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8996" CreationDate="2019-04-05T15:46:58.887" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No link, but a Note about our policy about piracy/illegitimate sources&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this specific case the fact that there are no legitimate source does effectively answer the question, and therefore a link to the content itself in not necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T15:46:58.887" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="8999" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8996" CreationDate="2019-04-05T16:01:32.387" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should allow the link &lt;em&gt;to the homebrew specifically,&lt;/em&gt; but not the link to the site's homepage currently in the question because it's not necessary. We should also quote or describe some of the homebrew to identify it when the page inevitably goes dead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a weird conclusion but I base this conclusion on a few factors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's get the most fundamental issue out of the way: do we accept the question? It isn't doing anything wrong itself, it's just asking about a piece of homebrew, so yes we should. That leaves the matter of how to clearly identify and reference the homebrew involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To identify it, we need to describe it or quote it. I believe our standard we'd expect from any new question would be to quote part of the homebrew and direct us to it, otherwise we'd close it as unclear, so we should follow that same standard here. Either way that means directing people back to the source, which is that page on that site that contains pirated materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, our policy about linking to dndtools.eu and similar sites was about proliferating references to piracy sites. It especially came up in the context of people linking to non-SRD materials (because they couldn't find it on SRD sites or on D&amp;amp;D Beyond) which represented an ethical and pragmatic problem: the ethical problem was we're effectively condoning piracy by hosting those references, the pragmatic problem was the site would inevitably become a 404 due to DMCA notices or other takedown actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's examine our situation against those two issues if we link back to the homebrew:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The ethical issue: Here we aren't facilitating piracy. We might send a tiny bit of attention to the host site by linking to it, but the more we try to avoid naming it &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the more attention we'd also draw to it&lt;/a&gt; by our conspicuous reticence to reference the source properly. Would anyone know it even had pirated content if we didn't make a point of banging on about it? The more we say about why we're not referencing it, the more we're saying “hey, here's a great piracy source”.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The pragmatic issue: it's going to 404 one day, so we should still describe the homebrew content so it can be at least somewhat identified. (It may get closed one day after the link dies.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves us with: describe (possibly partly quote) the homebrew and direct back to it like we would expect with any homebrew request, but do nothing more than that. Avoid drawing attention back to the site itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usage of the site as a reference should otherwise be handled like normal: don't do that, and don't link to its non-SRD pirated content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-04-05T16:04:55.770" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T16:04:55.770" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8996" CreationDate="2019-04-05T16:25:52.723" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Link to a recreation on a site that doesn't violate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/subclasses/149055-fencer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;reproduced the entire subclass word-for-word on D&amp;amp;D Beyond&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As D&amp;amp;D Beyond does not violate any OGL licenses like the source site does, linking here provides access to the information without needing to link to a site that violates a separate site policy. I suggest a sentence posted in a way like what follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...I came across a website called Giger's 5e D&amp;amp;D. In it there is a subclass called Fencer which I have fully reproduced &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/subclasses/149055-fencer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;on D&amp;amp;D Beyond&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastActivityDate="2019-04-05T16:25:52.723" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9001" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8946" CreationDate="2019-04-05T21:56:13.897" Score="6" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The rules-as-written tag is used by people to mean three disjoint&#xA;  things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;I know this is crazy, don't tell me that; I want a legalistic loophole type exploit of the rules&quot; (for example, What methods exist&#xA;  to get infinite or extremely high caster level?) or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;I kinda don't want anyone's opinion; I want what the rules say&quot; (for example, RAW, can you use the Sharpshooter and Great Weapon&#xA;  Master feats to make an improvised weapon attack with a longbow?, what&#xA;  we have Good Subjective, Bad Subjective for), or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&quot;This is a question about the rules&quot; (for example, Does Arcane Eye transmit information if the caster moves to a different plane?, which&#xA;  it's not necessary for).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At Stack Overflow where I'm the most active at, this is grounds for &lt;strong&gt;deleting the tag because it's ambiguous&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;disambiguating it&lt;/strong&gt; i.e. &lt;strong&gt;replacing it with more specific tags in questions&lt;/strong&gt; if any are needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 1st item falls under something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rule-abuse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rule-abuse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rule-abuse&lt;/a&gt; (judging by the comments, a separate discussion is in order on what kinds of rule-lawyering questions are on topic and what the exact tag name(s) should be).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 2nd item could use something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/just-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;just-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;just-rules&lt;/a&gt;. But I doubt that such a question formulation is on topic because in pen-and-pencil RPGs, a constructive interpretation is an integral part of the rules. Because, you know, words' meanings are intrinsically imprecise and unlike e.g. CRPGs, there is no hard-and-fast reference implementation to check unclear cases against. In this case, it's the same as the next item.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The 3rd item, as the OP said, does not warrant any tag at all because it's the primary topic of the entire site. It's implied by default from the sheer fact that the question has been asked on this site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40268" LastEditorUserId="40268" LastEditDate="2019-04-08T14:09:48.047" LastActivityDate="2019-04-08T14:09:48.047" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9002" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-07T00:18:12.670" Score="15" ViewCount="343" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lately, I've been heavy into studying items in the PHB and XGE to try and understand them RAW. I'm not trying to make excuses, but being on the healing end of a long medical leave, I wanted to get back into D&amp;amp;D and return with a better understanding than when I left in hopes to improve the overall experience for the table. To add to this, I must confess having a bit of reading comprehension problems, that lead to many misunderstandings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my search, I've found this site as a reliable source to find answers to somewhat obscure or misunderstood concepts within the information given from Wizards of the Coast, and have noticed how much clearer my understanding on even unrelatable subjects within the books have been with every question I've asked or found asked. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, and this is where the backstory ends, I've noticed that many of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/52781/victor-b?tab=questions&quot;&gt;my questions&lt;/a&gt; about the limitations regarding RAW descriptions have resulted in my question being downvoted. Respecting the community, I've taken this into high consideration and have read the posts &quot;how to ask questions&quot; and increased my double checking in hopes to avoid this. Unfortunately, I'm still coming short.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I have a few ideas on why, such as my questions are off-brand to the site or my method of asking might seem strange, but I realize that trying to problem solve this on my own is breeding little results and so I'm asking the question here to gain a better understanding from the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are my questions that off-brand to the site? if so where should I go?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there something I am missing in my questions or the reason for the site?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are my questions just that childish?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any help is welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52781" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-07T04:17:42.430" LastActivityDate="2019-04-07T04:17:42.430" Title="Why are my questions being downvoted?" Tags="|discussion|questions|down-votes|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9002" CreationDate="2019-04-07T02:07:47.397" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've pulled up each of the questions you've posted that have gotten negative scores overall [at the time that I'm writing this post]. Those are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143170/42386&quot;&gt;Can you enchant player characters&amp;#39; prosthetics permanently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143478/42386&quot;&gt;What type of pike/spear is listed as it&amp;#39;s own thing in the PHB?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143795/42386&quot;&gt;Are Draconic Bloodline traits inherited or cultured and develloped?&lt;/a&gt; [sic]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144699/42386&quot;&gt;Can you create poisons/effects with a Herbalism Kit proficiency?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142861/42386&quot;&gt;What differences are there between spells and creating magical items?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these are, in my personal opinion, terrible or even necessarily bad questions. However, all of them seem to have the same problem: it is very difficult to figure out what practical value the questions are meant to serve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The precise reasons vary (and I'll iterate over each of them specifically so we don't need to generalize), but the essence of the problem is that Stack Exchange fancies itself not just to be a &quot;help desk&quot;, so to speak, but also a repository of knowledge and findings. That's why (especially on the RPG.SE Stack) we put a lot of emphasis on editing outdated/obsolete questions in light of new information, or closing questions that we're not sure will have value beyond &quot;am I reading the rules correctly&quot;. There have been multiple occasions (recently!) where we've gone back and downvoted highly upvoted/Accepted answers, either because there's something we think that was missed the first time around, or because new information is available that changes the accuracy of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes on a question are, to varying degrees, extensions of that policy: if users suspect that a question might not be useful, regardless of whether they strictly believe the question is &quot;off topic&quot; for the site, downvotes are often the expression of that opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Can you enchant player characters' prosthetics permanently?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the answer to this question demonstrates, there's really not much more to this question than &quot;none of the books say you can do this; ask your DM&quot;. There's [at least] two versions of valuable questions that will merit a response of &quot;ask your DM&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Rules-As-Written are vague, confusing, or unclear, and &quot;ask your DM&quot; is the shorthand for the well-written explanation the answer gives to justify why the rules don't explicitly instruct you one way or the other how they should operate.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is trying to hash out a specific build or idea, and the solution to their issue depends on some kind of DM fiat or non-Rules-based solution that nonetheless solves a real problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question doesn't really fit into either category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;What type of pike/spear is listed as it's own thing in the PHB?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question saw quite a lot of editing, from reviewing the edit history. So in this particular case, it seems like the question probably got downvoted based on its original content, and didn't get reappraised because even after it got to a point where it theoretically represented your actual question, it then got closed for being unclear. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's still not clear what the practical purpose of this question is, and if it's still pressing to you, I recommend you either open a Meta post for it or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;ask in chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Are Draconic Bloodline traits inherited or cultured and develloped?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue here is relatively straightforward: it asks &quot;is it possible to gain class features without levels in that class?&quot;, and the answer is &quot;No, you have to gain levels in that class&quot;. There's some essence of the question that's also about narrative justification, but there's just not much to be gained from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Can you create poisons/effects with a Herbalism Kit proficiency?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has the same problem: it asks &quot;can an item be used to do something that nothing in the game says it can do?&quot; Related to the first question: sure, &quot;Ask your DM&quot; is technically a valid answer to the question, it's not based on vagaries in the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, a better version of this question might have looked like this instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;What ways are there to create Poisons?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That version of the question isn't necessarily perfect (I suspect it might get closed for being &quot;too broad&quot; by trigger-happy users) but it's at least a lot closer to being of practical use for other users: I imagine there are lots of campaigns where having access to the ability to produce poisons would be quite beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One last note on this question: another reason it might have been downvoted was due to lack of research. The Player's Handbook specifies &lt;em&gt;Poisoner's Kit&lt;/em&gt; as one of the tools available for purchase in a normal campaign (pg. 154), and the Dungeon Master's Guide has rules for crafting poisons (pg. 258). Asking this kind of question, irrespective of the details (i.e. using an Herbalism Kit), and not explaining why the rules provided in those two books are insufficient for your needs is probably going to seem poorly researched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;What differences are there between spells and creating magical items?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a lot like the first question. The only thing I'll add here that wasn't mentioned before is that 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D removed a lot of stuff that created Permanent effects in the world. The &lt;em&gt;Permanency&lt;/em&gt; spell from earlier editions is the obvious absence in this edition, but there's lots of other effects where either the ability to make something permanent has been removed; or the ability to make something permanent is extremely particular to the kind of spell being used—like, for example, using the spell &lt;em&gt;Teleportation Circle&lt;/em&gt; to create a permanent circle that allows arrival at it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, questions of the effect &quot;how can I make X permanent in 5th Edition&quot; tend to raise eyebrows, because &quot;making X permanent&quot; is conspicuously something 5th Edition discouraged in a lot of spaces. So that could be an explanation for the downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How to improve these questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The biggest thing for submitting a good question to this stack is asking yourself &quot;what am I trying to do?&quot; and focusing on that. Focus on the actual problem you're having, instead of hypothetical problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For most of your questions, I'm not sure they could have been salvaged. Again; they're not necessarily bad questions—for example, I could imagine the Dragonic Bloodline question being well received on a more forum-like site—but they don't have practical uses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm going to recommend instead, if you have questions where the goals are more esoteric or impractical, that you forgo submitting them as questions to the stack and instead just pop in chat and ask them. I promise that those kinds of questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/definitive-proof-that-celestial-warlocks-use-divine-magic&quot;&gt;are more on-topic than some discussions we have there...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2019-04-07T02:07:47.397" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9002" CreationDate="2019-04-07T02:45:20.007" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll put my hand up as having downvoted a fair number of your questions, and generally not for the reasons provided by the other answer you've gotten to this question. While I can't speak for everyone, of course, I suspect I'm not the only person who downvoted for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's start with your most recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144699/42386&quot;&gt;Can you create poisons/effects with a Herbalism Kit proficiency?&lt;/a&gt;. If you had asked that question, &quot;can I create poisons with my herbalism kit proficiency&quot;, I wouldn't have downvoted it. That's not what happened, though. You gave an argument for why you think you should be able to create poisons, and then asked people to agree with you. I didn't downvote because I think this is a bad/useless/whatever question, I downvoted because I disagree with your argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I'm not saying you can't/shouldn't ask your questions this way. However, when you give an argument in a question, you're making yourself liable to be downvoted by anyone who disagrees with that argument. And you seem to ask a lot of your questions in this format. There is, potentially, a separate issue to be discussed about why people disagree with your arguments, but I don't think this is a good place for that. I suggest you pop into &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;RPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt; if you want to talk about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, if you wanted to avoid getting downvotes on your questions, I'd recommend asking the question purely as a question, then presenting your argument for a particular answer as an answer. You may well get downvotes on the answer, of course, but at least you'll know where they're coming from - people disagreeing with that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastEditorUserId="15469" LastEditDate="2019-04-07T02:53:56.330" LastActivityDate="2019-04-07T02:53:56.330" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9005" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9012" CreationDate="2019-04-08T12:36:03.253" Score="11" ViewCount="212" Body="&lt;p&gt;I flagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144782/42959&quot;&gt;What passive scores exist?&lt;/a&gt; as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/50313/42959&quot;&gt;How can Investigation be used passively? (as with the Observant feat)&lt;/a&gt; based on the titles. However it was pointed out that the primary question of the new Q&amp;amp;A was only a second question of the older one, and was only partially addressed by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50318/42959&quot;&gt;the answer&lt;/a&gt; on the old Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's the right way to handle this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some non-exhaustive possible options might be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just keep the new Q&amp;amp;A closed as a duplicate.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This seems unsatisfying to me since the user's question has not fully been addressed by the old Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the old Q&amp;amp;A to remove the second question (this would also likely necessitate changing the question title and removing the part of the single answer that relates to the second question) and reopen the new Q&amp;amp;A.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I think this seems like fairly heavy-handed editing, particularly to the answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep the new Q&amp;amp;A closed as duplicate, and try to solicit fuller answers on the original Q&amp;amp;A for the second question on it (e.g. via bounty).&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This feels unsatisfying because the old Q&amp;amp;A already has an accepted answer, and thus would require a user to put a bounty on it. Not to mention that it's then very explicitly making the old Q&amp;amp;A two separate questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42959" LastEditorUserId="42959" LastEditDate="2020-07-03T21:55:00.803" LastActivityDate="2020-07-03T21:55:00.803" Title="Partially answered second question in old question causing dupe flagging in new question" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9005" CreationDate="2019-04-09T13:15:29.073" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've voted for the new question as duplicate. After reevaluation of the old question, I now realize that the old question's main question asks a different thing than the title, so it's not a duplicate. I've now voted to reopen the new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The old question has a good answer for the main question. The secondary question, &quot;what other skills could be used this way?&quot;, was only answered partially. I feel that removing the secondary question will be the most logical approach. &lt;strong&gt;It trims the unnecessary question that will lead to the closing of the question&lt;/strong&gt;, should it be left as is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument against this approach will be the edit might deviate from the author's intent. However I think this approach benefits the community more, and if the author's disagree with the edit, it can be rolled back. However, doing so will lead to its closure as 'too broad'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also don't see how it harms the answer. The answer does not fully address the second question, and removing the secondary question does not make any part of the answer useless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, your second option should be used:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Open the new question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the title to reflect the main question on the old question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove the secondary question on the old question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="40999" LastEditDate="2019-04-09T13:18:42.383" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T13:18:42.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9007" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9005" CreationDate="2019-04-09T13:33:17.493" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's currently a duplicate. Provide a full answer to the original.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the old question fully contains what the new question is asking, then the new question is a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sounds like we have incomplete answers on the original question. The best way to fix this is to provide a complete answer to the original, not to remove part of the original question because the answers didn't address it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original querent asked about this and it's unfair to remove part of their question because the answers to theirs didn't provide completely answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is the original too broad?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently three close votes on it as &lt;strong&gt;too broad&lt;/strong&gt;. It may be so, but we need the querent to decide which question they are most interested in: the general question of which skills can be passive or the specific case they mentioned in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's the former, it's a dupe. If it's the latter, then we can remove the general question and leave the new one open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So let's find out!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have left a comment on the original question asking OP if they'd like to remove their general query. Hopefully the owner of the question can take ownership.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T16:22:50.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9008" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-09T14:30:44.273" Score="6" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for data documenting visits per day, questions, answers and votes per day and any other related data that might be available. Both current and historical. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels like usage has gone down over the last couple months and I'm curious if that is an historical pattern for this time of year, or if something else is going on, or if I'm wrong and it just feels that way for no reason. Also, sometimes I just like looking at data. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:45:14.807" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:45:14.807" Title="Is there available usage data for RPG SE?" Tags="|discussion|site-statistics|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9008" CreationDate="2019-04-09T14:47:51.717" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some of that data you will be able to access &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/site-analytics&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; once you have obtained the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/site-analytics&quot;&gt;site analytics&lt;/a&gt; privilege at 25k reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Three graphs show a timeline of posts, votes, and traffic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, users with that privilege are not allowed to divulge specific raw data publically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this is a restricted privilege, we'd prefer you not share the raw data.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if there is some sort of analysis you want a general conclusion from that should usually be ok. Just hunt down your preferred 25k+ user and ask away!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we do hope you will share your analysis of the data with other users on meta. For instance, mature Stack Exchange sites tend to get the majority of their traffic from search engines (and particularly Google). Sharing the current percentage of traffic from search might shed some light on your site's particular strengths or weaknesses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Stack Exchange Data Explorer (SEDE)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might find some raw data you can sink your teeth into with the Stack Exchange Data Explorer (SEDE). Specifically &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/833155/site-activity-no-votes&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this query&lt;/a&gt; seems like a good place for you to start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Data&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener already posted Q&amp;amp;A stats, but it is worth also looking at traffic:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mEV6p.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mEV6p.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that these are weekly averages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We only have data from 2018 onwards (which is why it appears to go to 0 at the beginning), but it looks like traffic right now is coming off of a peak, but is still higher than any time last year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T16:42:51.787" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9008" CreationDate="2019-04-09T14:50:29.870" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/site-analytics&quot;&gt;Users get access to site analytics at 25k reputation&lt;/a&gt;. Diamond moderators have more comprehensive analytics. We're asked to limit how we share the data.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's a graph though: it represents the monthly quantity of posts with a 3 month average (i.e. the amount shown for a given month is averaged out using the neighbouring months).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've removed the Y axis which would show absolute count, but it's still an indicator of proportions. The Y axis doesn't start at zero.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oiusT.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oiusT.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can see that in 2016 and 2017 there was a September-October-November dip, then things began to climb again in December and January with activity peaking mid-year. The 2018 pattern was pretty different, but currently in 2019 we're still experiencing the first-quarter climb rather than a decline. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-04-09T14:57:04.753" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T14:57:04.753" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9011" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9005" CreationDate="2019-04-09T15:52:30.067" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The questions aren't really duplicates now because the other does not answer this one&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener's excellent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/28591&quot;&gt;meta answer&lt;/a&gt; on how we determine duplicates here at RPG.se gives three conditions that all must be true to be a dupe. However, currently this question fails the second condition:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks the question that the newer question is also asking, but there is not only a lack of an obvious answer, there is no answer to it at all. Thus, according to our policies they are not currently dupes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What do we do?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; place new answers on the old question to make them answer the complete question as asked in the older question (and again in the newer one). However, the question already has an accepted answer by OP and has not been active in a while. By accepting the answer, OP has signaled that the part of the question which was not answered was not a core issue for them. And indeed it is even clear from the way they wrote it that the &amp;quot;other skills&amp;quot; part of the question was ancillary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would even argue that the additional question makes it confusing and maybe even too broad of a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Edit the older question so that they are not duplicates&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP doesn't seem to care about the last part of their question given their acceptance of the current answer. The current answer doesn't even try to touch on it. And the question is likely too broad or confusing with the second part in it. Thus, the easy solution here is to edit the last line out and to edit the title to focus on how passive investigation is used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No answers would need to be edited and then full focus could be given to the topic of other passive scores in the newer question which could then be reopened as it is not a duplicate (not that it ever technically was). This gives this controversial topic a room to breathe and be debated on its own apart from the baggage of the first part of the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T16:01:18.900" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9012" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9005" CreationDate="2019-04-09T16:45:52.007" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Edit that dirty so-and-so's question to unduplicate the new question.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hello, it's me, the author of that older question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with Vylix that this solution is the most beneficial to the site, and I wouldn't mind an edit to focus my question around Investigation, as that was the impetus for asking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question (that I now see isn't as clear as it could be), is &quot;How can each skill be used passively?&quot;  Which seems pretty broad when I put it like that.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Narrowing it down to Investigation leaves that more general question open to be answered, which conveniently happened in the other question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15426" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T16:45:52.007" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9013" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-09T19:02:21.937" Score="101" ViewCount="1131" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am retiring as a moderator this week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made this decision with my heart a few months ago, made it with my head and let my fellow moderators know a few weeks ago, and now that the paperwork is sorted out, I'm letting the rest of the community know. The decision reaches back farther though, and I think has been percolating in my head for at least the past year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of you may have noticed me fading to the back more and more. I think I can trace this back to when I first started fading out of chat, which… was a good while back. Part of this long fade out has been the pull of other things outside the site, and some of that has been the site just not needing my &lt;em&gt;personal&lt;/em&gt; moderation contributions as much as I felt it did when I first started, and some has just been the lens of moderation taking me too much away from the parts of the site that drew me here in the first place. The community has grown substantially since 2015. Though engaging less with the site has been a bit sad, seeing how much the community has matured and taken up tasks I used to think only I cared about has been a joy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.se has been a regular part of my life since 2010, and for the last four years as a moderator it has been a daily part of my life. The gravity of the moderator's diamond has been a privilege and a weight during all those days, and I'm ready for a change of pace.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I miss little things like being able to &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; vote to close or reopen a question, without it being the Big Deciding Vote. I'm looking forward to being able to engage with edits or comments on a marginal post, without weighing whether I should use bigger mod tools — or wondering if by making an appearance but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; using bigger tools, other community members will see that as a signal. I'm looking forward to participating as just one input into the machine rather than as a mechanic with a heavy override wrench. I'm looking forward to the privilege of not needing to carefully weigh &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;hope&lt;/em&gt; to be less active than I've been, but for good reasons: because I am running face-to-face games more, reading more of my too-large games collection, or taking more walks. I &lt;em&gt;hope&lt;/em&gt; as well to stay active here, but maybe in a less daily way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know the site is in good hands. We have a good moderation team in our three other mods. And I can't have asked for a better community. You have always and continue to make me proud to be a member. Ultimately, the quality of the community here is what made it easiest to set down the responsibility of the diamond: the site doesn't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; me, because it has all of you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you all. It's been an honour and a privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-04-09T19:28:49.993" LastActivityDate="2021-05-16T10:54:40.737" Title="A thank-you to you all" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9014" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-09T20:50:00.230" Score="39" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Thanks for all your hard work!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've always appreciated your presence and the good work of you and all the other diamond mods of RPG.SE! You've definitely made the stack a better place, and RPG.SE's moderation is one of the reasons it's my favorite site on StackExchange. I hope your in-person games and other &amp;quot;off-screen&amp;quot; activities go well, but hopefully you'll still stick around and pop into chat from time to time!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T20:50:00.230" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9015" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-09T20:53:51.153" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a steady user on the site the last few years, I just want to say that I really appreciate everything you've done for and contributed to this site. Even though you may not have been visibly super active during my time, your presence and expertise were still distinctly felt and appreciated. Enjoy your normal userhood and I hope to see you around :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T20:53:51.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-09T23:08:11.620" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;You've been a great contributor to the site and a great fellow mod. It's been an honor to work alongside you. Thanks for all the work you've put in, and enjoy your future on and off the site!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-09T23:08:11.620" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-10T01:33:05.527" Score="27" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Thankyou for everything you've done!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may not have been around for as long as some others and didn't see you when you were most active, but I firmly believe I have felt your influence on the site. Reading old meta-posts, your high voted posts and your communications with users as a mod, I am constantly impressed at your thoughtfulness and communication. You have set a standard for the site and for moderation that has made the community better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe RPG.SE's standard of moderation is better than any other site on the network, and you have played a huge part in making it this way. You helped create a community I am proud to be a part of. I hope you are proud of everything you achieved here. Good luck and enjoy your free time for gaming!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-10T01:33:05.527" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-10T04:31:48.043" Score="23" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks, things won't be the same without the prime die&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation of this site is outstanding and one of the main reasons I choose to participate here.  In the short time I've been active on this site I've come to appreciate your mod-ness and sensibilities.  Wishing you all the best in your more relaxed participation here and all that you pursue and enjoy IRL.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;High seven for doing so much to help make this site what it is!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/48jvi.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/48jvi.gif&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41813" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-10T04:31:48.043" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9019" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-04-10T15:22:01.033" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thank you for the greatest of gifts to give: your time&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We each have a certain amount of time to spend each waking day on all of the things that life puts in front of us.  For the last four years, you have (at $0 dollars per billable hour, as it were) given a great deal of your time, effort, wit, wisdom, and judgment.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of this was offered, &lt;em&gt;gratis&lt;/em&gt;, for the benefit of other people so that they might have more fun in this hobby, and get more from this site.  That's a great gift, and is deeply appreciated.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a personal note, I appreciate your course corrections when I first began to participate on the site, so that I could &quot;grok&quot; how this SE thing works.  Yours was the most helpful early voice for me.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh1ZEwl5GJ4&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Changing of the Guard&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-04-10T20:45:50.503" LastActivityDate="2019-04-10T20:45:50.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9020" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-11T07:45:15.790" Score="4" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been noticing questions and answers regarding homebrew content offer a lot of insight in understanding and designing features for the games I play (as GM and PC), like this recent one: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144855/42805&quot;&gt;How might this homebrew undead hybrid character type unbalance combat compared to non-undead creatures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading and incorporating feedback from the community, I'd like to share the result of the interaction. I'm thinking of two cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Case 1.&lt;/strong&gt; Further tweaking of the content, as if it is a second round of iteration. This would be work-in-progress.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Case 2.&lt;/strong&gt; Possibly inspiring (or getting inspired by) other people with similar questions and/or ideas. This would be a final result of the homebrew content. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How to follow-up with updated versions of homebrew content?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's use the linked question as an example: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do I edit the question to include the updated content (like a next version, under the original version)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do I ask an entirely new question with the updated content?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do I use another feature of this platform (of which I'm yet unaware)? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or is this platform actually not suited for such feedback cycles and iterative design? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally an answer to my question covers both cases and shows me relevant policies (or etiquette) when dealing with iterative design of homebrew content on this platform. I'm not interested in opinions on the matter. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42805" OwnerDisplayName="Vadruk" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-04-11T08:43:22.623" LastActivityDate="2019-04-11T08:43:22.623" Title="How to follow-up with updated versions of homebrew content?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2019-04-11T08:42:06.763" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-04-18T03:38:52.223" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;This one leaps out as being gouda 'nough for this list&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/145339/48759&quot;&gt;What is the longest distance a player character can jump in one leap?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Couldn't choose any one answer as the whole post is a churning vat of cheesy goodness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2019-04-18T03:38:52.223" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9022" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-18T12:48:03.520" Score="6" ViewCount="556" Body="&lt;p&gt;A not dissimilar question is asked here:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84894/feat-classification-ranking&quot;&gt;Feat classification/ranking&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The PHB only has 42 feats. A main problem with the above question is the volume of feats in 3.x.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would a 5e version be on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should one just ask about specific feats and their goodness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or perhaps lumping them into categories? &quot;Which 5e feats are bad or very situational?&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of an individual question (not asked, that I know of) would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the Weapon Master feat (5e) good?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then all of the feats could be compiled into a signpost?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T20:19:29.063" LastActivityDate="2019-04-24T18:12:24.063" Title="Would a 5e feat tier list be on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9022" CreationDate="2019-04-18T16:09:14.963" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This would be very vulnerable to being opinion-based.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are certainly feats that some of us consider S-tier (or whatever ranking you'd like to make the highest), like Lucky.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, even with Lucky, and especially with the feats in the middle tiers, the question becomes &amp;quot;what is the criteria that you judge these feats on&amp;quot;, because otherwise, my game of political intrigue and negotiation is going to value Skilled much higher than it's going to value Weapon Master, and Billy Bob Joe's hack-and-slash game is likely going to value Weapon Master above Skilled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for a tier list, therefore, or even a section of the tier list (&amp;quot;Which 5e feats are bad or very situational?&amp;quot; = &amp;quot;what feats are D or F tier&amp;quot;), is going to depend on what the criteria on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You can make this &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based by giving clear criteria.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, what I think would be a good question in this sense is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;For fighters, what is a tier list of feats to make you better in combat?&amp;quot; (This list is drastically different for wizards, for example, and even has differences from barbarian)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What is a tier list of feats for my low-combat game that focuses on exploration?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45430" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-18T16:09:14.963" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9024" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-18T23:20:47.100" Score="2" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I posted a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145410/is-this-supernatural-warlock-patron-balanced&quot;&gt;homebrew Warlock otherworldly patron&lt;/a&gt; and got 3 downvotes, 173 views, and 1 answer. Meanwhile, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145397/is-this-homebrew-lady-of-pain-warlock-patron-balanced&quot;&gt;another homebrew Warlock otherworldly patron&lt;/a&gt; got 2k views, 14 upvotes, and one good answer. How does this happen?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I viewed the other question and I saw mine to be superior, providing commentary and reasons for each feature. The other did not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49349" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-18T23:30:55.323" LastActivityDate="2019-04-19T01:39:28.833" Title="Why are my homebrew posts being downvoted and ignored while another user at the exact same time has many upvotes and thousands of views?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|homebrew|down-votes|up-votes|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9024" CreationDate="2019-04-19T01:00:00.620" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Views are easy: the other question hit the &quot;Hot Network Questions&quot; list 21 hours ago. Yours has not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvotes are a little tougher: even we elected mods cannot see &lt;em&gt;who&lt;/em&gt; downvoted your post, nor when the downvotes came in (so as to time them against the comments the post received). But the commenters left some obvious reasons they &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; have downvoted your post. So there's some guidance there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One other thing jumps out from the comments: the one you left at 14:57:53Z is rather dismissive, if not plain rude, toward commenters who are presumptively trying in good faith to help you. Again, I can't know if anyone downvoted you in response to that, but I suggest you try and find a way to be nicer to people trying to help you. I wouldn't be surprised if you've generated some animus there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The patrons themselves provide the last obvious difference between the two posts. The other post is based off of a well-known and established part of D&amp;amp;D lore, the Lady of Pain. (And as some comments make clear, the enduring lack of 5e's support for Planescape/Sigil/Lady of Pain material has some stackizens particularly enjoying that post.) Yours, by comparison, is tied to an &quot;great lord over the chaotic Undead&quot; that readers didn't get much direction from--and some of them told you so. It's not too hard to imagine that &quot;people like the Lady of Pain more than your undead lord&quot; accounts for some of the difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-04-19T01:00:00.620" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9026" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9024" CreationDate="2019-04-19T01:39:28.833" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not to put too fine a point on it, the other post you reference looks a lot more like a warlock patron than yours does. As several comments pointed out, offering 3 choices of feature at most levels isn't normal, and it's additional complexity on one of the most complex classes, arguably the most complex. It also makes it a much more difficult question for anyone to answer - the amount of content for answerers to review and address is considerably more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2019-04-19T01:39:28.833" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-04-19T17:59:52.297" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This cheese is Swiss Cheese, because it makes things full of holes.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I made it myself!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144076/is-this-spell-item-interaction-as-infinite-and-potentially-deadly-as-i-think-i&quot;&gt;Is this spell/item interaction as infinite (and potentially deadly) as I think it is?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-19T17:59:52.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9028" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions discussing tags and their usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" LastActivityDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9029" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" Score="0" Body="For questions discussing tags and their usage." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" LastActivityDate="2019-04-20T19:08:17.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9030" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about adding certain tags as synonyms of other tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" LastActivityDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9031" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" Score="0" Body="For questions about adding certain tags as synonyms of other tags." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" LastActivityDate="2019-04-20T19:08:44.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9032" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9033" CreationDate="2019-04-20T19:20:31.067" Score="14" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;Right now, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intelligent-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intelligent-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intelligent-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; tag exists, with the tag info:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about intelligent or sentient magic items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In D&amp;amp;D 5e, at least, these are referred to in the DMG (p. 214) as &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/sentient-magic-items-artifacts&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;sentient magic items&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, though the two terms are very similar and refer to the same type of magic item, typing in &quot;sentient&quot; when attempting to add a tag to a question yields no results. Even typing &quot;magic&quot; doesn't show this tag in the list (it's not one of the top 6 tags with &quot;magic&quot; in the name). Only once you start typing the second word in &quot;magic-items&quot; does &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intelligent-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intelligent-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intelligent-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; show up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a relatively uncommon tag, so it's hard to have enough reputation in the tag to suggest synonyms - but I suspect at least some of the reason it's not used even on questions where it's appropriate is because it's hard to discover. I just searched RPG.SE for the term &quot;sentient&quot; and added the tag to several questions that didn't have it; I suspect there may be more but stopped after the first page or two. (I added it to a few more thanks to Hey I Can Chan's link in a comment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I'm suggesting we add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sentient-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sentient-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sentient-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intelligent-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intelligent-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intelligent-magic-items&lt;/a&gt;. Do you all agree that adding this synonym would be a good idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-04-29T14:57:21.080" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T14:04:20.907" Title="Should we add [sentient-magic-items] as a synonym of the [intelligent-magic-items] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9032" CreationDate="2019-04-21T22:01:05.623" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think adding the synonym would be a good idea&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am coming from a D&amp;amp;D 5e perspective here, where the term &amp;quot;sentient magic item&amp;quot; is favoured, but as such as user, I was unaware that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intelligent-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intelligent-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intelligent-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; tag even existed until seeing this meta post today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, I have asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/128127/35259&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/128029/35259&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; that concern sentient magic items and have now updated them with this tag. Had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sentient-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sentient-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sentient-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; tag existed when I asked these questions, I would have much more likely noticed and used it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'd say, to make the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intelligent-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intelligent-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intelligent-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; tag more 5e-friendly, adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sentient-magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sentient-magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sentient-magic-items&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym would be a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T14:04:20.907" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9034" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9022" CreationDate="2019-04-24T14:22:58.050" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;For feat evaluation, go one feat at a time: tier list not On Topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question sets up a &quot;tier&quot; system as being too broad.  Hard to scope.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Which feats are good?&lt;/em&gt; &lt;em&gt;Which feats are bad?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Well, good or bad &lt;em&gt;for what&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Without identifying what a feat choice is for, or what its purpose is, scope suffers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also ask: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Should one just ask about specific feats and their goodness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes.&lt;/strong&gt;  That kind of question can retain scope and stackableness; as I review the various of 230 questions&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/feats&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feats&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feats&lt;/a&gt;, a lot of them do just that.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Feat comparisons (eg: Lucky versus Keen Mind) can probably be scoped.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A feat comparison or feat choice question, of which IIRC we have a few already, can be kept within scope if the question has criteria or a build that is linked to that choice/decision.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question asking for &quot;best feats to fit a build&quot; we have plenty of. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/55034/22566&quot;&gt;Example is here&lt;/a&gt;).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;sub&gt;As of today, Apr-24-2019, we have 424 hits on D&amp;amp;D 5e and feats tags, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bdnd-5e%5D%20%5Bfeats%5D%20is%3A%20question&quot;&gt;with 230 questions total&lt;/a&gt;.  The kinds of questions are detailed enough in that, for the most part, they stay limited in scope.  (of the 230, we have ten duplicates, four closed).&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-04-24T18:12:24.063" LastActivityDate="2019-04-24T18:12:24.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9035" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-25T13:30:27.033" Score="9" ViewCount="245" Body="&lt;p&gt;related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7991/carrying-misconcepts-from-previous-editions-is-this-question-fine&quot;&gt;Carrying misconcepts from previous editions - is this Question fine?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've all seen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does Brunchin and Braggin - Third Edition require me to start the game with a full stomach?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a vacuum, that question doesn't make any sense, and is a bad &quot;didn't you read the rules?!&quot; question.&#xA;... Buuuuuut, if you recall that B&amp;amp;B 2e required all players to begin the game after having just eaten, then you can see the confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we treat cases of Edition Baggage, and should there be some sort of denotation? Perhaps a tag? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-baggage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-baggage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-baggage&lt;/a&gt; or something similar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-04-25T19:20:22.640" LastActivityDate="2019-05-05T16:56:07.703" Title="Should we have a way to denote questions that are caused by &quot;edition baggage&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9036" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9035" CreationDate="2019-04-25T14:08:02.643" Score="22" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Edit the information explicitly into the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to stop short of weighing in on whether a tag would be helpful or appropriate here, but this is definitely information that should be explicitly in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, a question like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm new to 5e from 2e. Does [insert feature] allow/work like/etc. [whatever].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A 2e expert or OP can edit into:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm new to 5e from 2e. In 2e [feature] worked like [this]. I have looked through the 5e rules and it doesn't seem to be the same. Am I missing something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter gives much better context for the source of the confusion and signals to voters and answerers that there may be more going on than a simple case of not reading the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course all this assumes that this actually is the issue and that should be confirmed with OP before making any such changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-25T14:13:51.063" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9037" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9035" CreationDate="2019-04-25T19:41:18.860" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, a tag for this is not good.  It's a meta tag that does not stand alone. Assumptions of any sort should be stated in the question, there's 1000 different assumptions someone can make and a tagging taxonomy around them is not useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-25T19:41:18.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9038" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9039" CreationDate="2019-04-25T23:02:37.297" Score="1" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have thought of no less than &lt;em&gt;three&lt;/em&gt; Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 5th edition  spell hacks.&#xA;Is there anywhere on the site I can post these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53925" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-25T23:15:07.677" LastActivityDate="2019-04-26T15:34:43.543" Title="Where to post hacks?" Tags="|support|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9038" CreationDate="2019-04-25T23:04:17.553" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, sorry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a Q&amp;amp;A site, we don't have a blog or other places to post work or statements.  May I suggest one of the forum sites, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;, or a blog.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-25T23:04:17.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9038" CreationDate="2019-04-26T14:20:11.157" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;While this isn't a place to post them for discussion, you can post a question to verify that your &quot;hack&quot;, or interpretation, is correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2019-04-26T14:20:11.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9038" CreationDate="2019-04-26T15:34:43.543" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, in the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adhere to the Q&amp;amp;A format. Post a question that poses a problem that your hack solves, then post an answer yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; X spell seems too weak. Is there a scenario where this spell could be useful?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, &lt;em&gt;[explanation]...&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually StackExchange &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot;&gt;encourage sharing your expertise in this way&lt;/a&gt;. You can even gain reputation quicker by doing that! (good question+good answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, though, that your question should still follow &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/asking&quot;&gt;the rules&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2019-04-26T15:34:43.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8344" CreationDate="2019-04-28T07:10:16.247" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm entirely new here, but considering that I have seen this particular thread by way of a question that was apparent enough what was being asked through context of the question itself I may have at least an outsider's perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with what happened in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147029/how-exactly-does-combat-work&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; (note, accepted answer now also deleted), if OP selects a particular answer as correct that also specifically states or iterates what system is being referred to, then clearly OP was inquiring as to that particular system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been here less than 6 hours already at time of posting and have noticed that mods (or whomever) are more than willing to edit titles of posts if they feel it could contribute to overall clarification of intent of question, and don't see a reason as to why rather than putting a question on hold just before or just after an answer and having everyone downvote until deletion is accepted as more reasonable than editing the title to properly reflect what is expected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get that one-off OPs that won't come back or won't even bother clicking accept on an answer can be troublesome, but if the effort is already being put in by the mods to edit posts then why not let ones that have already been asked and accepted as answered live on for future reference so the question may not need be asked again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55110" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-04-29T13:05:02.563" LastActivityDate="2019-04-29T13:05:02.563" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9044" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8344" CreationDate="2019-04-29T14:01:00.973" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it appears to be a clear and useful answer, upvote it, &lt;em&gt;even if the system guess ultimately turns out to be incorrect&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such an answer can still be useful to those who use the guessed system, regardless of whether it is useful to the OP or not.  Other posts on this meta site have made it clear that, in the collective mind of the RPG stack, the primary purpose of the stack is to produce answers will be useful in the future, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to merely answer the question which was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether you are the OP or a future reader, a blank space containing no answers is &lt;em&gt;less useful&lt;/em&gt; than an incomplete or otherwise imperfect answer, so long as the imperfect answer is not directly misleading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3941" LastActivityDate="2019-04-29T14:01:00.973" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9045" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-29T14:12:19.873" Score="3" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tags: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/negative-energy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;negative-energy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;negative-energy&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/positive-energy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;positive-energy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;positive-energy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm really bothered by those two, they are only used in a few questions and usually either come together or only one of them is being used even if the question is asking about both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think they help those questions, but maybe a tag [energy-types] would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only that, but we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/channel-energy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;channel-energy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;channel-energy&lt;/a&gt; tag to make things more ambiguous (undead, healing, channel energy, positive energy, negative energy, undead, cleric).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21153" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-04-29T14:17:03.123" LastActivityDate="2019-04-29T22:28:30.263" Title="Should the [negative-energy] and [positive-energy] tags exist?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6631" CreationDate="2019-04-29T21:32:26.283" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Now that I've served as an elected mod and seen the tools...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Flag them all.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is all about moderators' workflow, so I'm going to get a little into the weeds, here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you cast a flag (on anything) it increments an easy-to-see counter on our topbar, the same way you used to see a count on a red background indicating items in the Review Queues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clicking into the posts-flagged counter brings us to the &amp;quot;moderator dashboard.&amp;quot; When it's a comment that's been flagged we're shown the post's title (which links to the post), then a line of meta-info about the comment&amp;amp;flag, then the text of the comment itself and links to delete the comment or dismiss the flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you flag just one with a custom message saying &amp;quot;this whole convo can go, it's in the post now&amp;quot; or whatever, the workflow is to click on the post title-link, scroll around to figure out which post (question or one of answers) owns the flagged comment, then take a look at it and its successors and (99 out of 100) delete them. And then click back to the dashboard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you flag every one as NLN, now what we see in the dashboard is a post title-link and then a bunch of comments underneath, usually reading something like &amp;quot;did you mean that the &lt;em&gt;bar&lt;/em&gt; should get a foo?/No, thanks for catching that--shoudld be a baz./No problem--looks good now!&amp;quot; Here we can see all of them in context and it's obvious (usually the post author has said &amp;quot;thanks!&amp;quot; or the like.) Click the &amp;quot;delete&amp;quot; link next to each one and they just &amp;gt;plop&amp;lt; off the page and all your flags are validated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, flagging them all puts the whole conversation &lt;em&gt;immediately&lt;/em&gt; visible in the dashboard, and makes the whole process faster. Collectively we delete about a thousand comments a month, so if you can easily save us a couple of minutes each day in that process, I know I appreciate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plus, you'll get to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/78/marshal&quot;&gt;Marshal&lt;/a&gt; that much quicker =)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-29T23:38:24.940" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9045" CreationDate="2019-04-29T22:28:30.263" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because users have found them useful and have used them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are no worse or more picky than the hundred weird picky little D&amp;amp;D tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging on RPG.SE is an emergent folksonomy, and we do not interfere with it unless there’s an actual problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-29T22:28:30.263" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9048" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-30T15:04:19.257" Score="20" ViewCount="1686" Body="&lt;p&gt;We, the elected moderators, wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels like things are going on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We did this in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6895/how-is-the-community-doing-2017&quot;&gt;2017&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7925/how-is-the-community-doing-2018&quot;&gt;2018&lt;/a&gt; and it was very helpful. So again we'd like to share our thoughts and also get yours on what is going well and what we could improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How this specific Q&amp;amp;A is run so that we get good value out of it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;One clear premise per answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things we think still need improvement. Please share your thoughts as well! Make sure and note whether you think the thing is an improvement, a problem, or some mix of the two (one person might see the same change as bad that you see as good, or vice versa)...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post one kind of thing per answer, so that when people upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not it's more clearly actionable - if you write an essay about 4 different things, it's not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with and thus it becomes unactionable. You can of course contribute multiple answers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote the answers based on your agreement with whether you see that thing happening and concur with the answer's premise that it's good or it's a problem. (In other words, if someone says &quot;We get too many new users and I hate them,&quot; you would upvote if you agree, and downvote if either you don't think we get too many new users or if you don't hate them.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;No long comment threads&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with an answer, post your own answer, don't argue in comments. If you post more than one comment on an answer, you should consider if that is useful at all. We're interested in overall community sentiment as shown by votes, not so much that one person is so irritated they post 10 comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these questions are unable to be clearly vetted and voted on so they will tend to go undone.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, Be Nice applies to meta as well as the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. Focus on actions rather than characterizing people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So here we go - our thoughts on things that are going well or need improvement. Feel free and add on!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-04-30T15:28:21.393" LastActivityDate="2019-05-24T07:45:17.173" Title="How is the community doing? [2019]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2021-04-08T22:54:43.980" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T15:17:54.140" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Meta is healthy and productive&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a steady growing stream of meta questions and answers that are well participated in by the community and are not degenerating into fights. This shows me that the community has settled in and understands how to use meta to make decisions and explain site policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-30T15:17:54.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9050" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T15:26:59.197" Score="30" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The community is continuing to perform most of the site moderation activity&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a trend continuing from last year, the community is performing the majority of close/edits, is flagging plenty of comments, and in general is making the mods do less; I know my site workload continues to slowly shift downward, which is great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8680/2018-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2018: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-04-30T15:33:35.467" LastActivityDate="2019-04-30T15:33:35.467" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T15:40:12.323" Score="30" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Homebrew review questions still aren't great&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like there are more of them, and they are generally following the new guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, IMO they are not a great part of the site.  We get multiple revisions of the same thing clearly with no playtesting (in between or initially, by the poster or the answerers, see also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8939/when-do-homebrew-suggestions-need-to-be-playtested-by-an-answerer&quot;&gt;When do homebrew suggestions need to be playtested by an answerer?&lt;/a&gt;).  They're a tough fit for the site Q&amp;amp;A format in general.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should probably have a new meta on how to improve these or what we want to do with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-04-30T15:40:12.323" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9052" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T15:43:25.957" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We dealt with a very RAW issue as a community&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my point of view, the conversation around the current resolution to the longstanding issue of the rules-as-written tag went down with significantly less drama than it had in the past as well as a broad show of support for the proposal to remove — the top two answers got +38/-9 and +27/-5 respectively which are impressive numbers for meta on any issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how one feels about the solution we arrived at  I think that the process itself showed a strong feeling of community maturity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't the solution many of us wanted to resort to, but I think the community recognized a need and did something about it in a largely positive and constructive way. All the diamond mods did a good job in the presentation of the issue and in interfacing directly with people in a way that preempted and discouraged any nastiness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously it is early days in the post-RAW-tag era, but I think the process of actually handling the issue went much better than past attempts and left me at least with a positive view of the community and our ability to come together to tackle big issues maturely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-04-30T18:49:21.653" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T16:03:09.497" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Answers in comments may not be reduced, but are handled quickly by the community&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if we are getting &lt;em&gt;less&lt;/em&gt; comments in the answers&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; (as I had hoped in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7930/28591&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to last year's community check-in), but I think we are dealing with them much quicker and with much less squabbling then in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my experience, they are generally left by newer users and are generally swept up by community flags and/or mods before any issues could be caused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We may even be over-flagging &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50042310#50042310&quot;&gt;some types&lt;/a&gt; of comments as answers when they shouldn't be and this might have to be addressed at some point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall though, I think we are much improved over last year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - An informal survey of my personal flags might indicate a slight increase over last year at the same time, but that can be due to many factors (traffic, how actively I'm flagging, etc.). There's still no easy way to figure out a quantifiable way to measure the issue that I've heard or been able to come up with unfortunately.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-01T02:27:23.713" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9055" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-04-30T17:03:13.803" Score="4" ViewCount="387" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147180/in-dd-how-do-you-find-attack-bonus-for-weapons/147182?noredirect=1#comment375705_147182&quot;&gt;In D&amp;amp;D, how do you find attack bonus for weapons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, clearly not a 100 score answer -- I don't own the books (certainly wouldn't have them with me at work even if I did).  Is it a clear no-no, then, to provide an answer to a question from a new user without the level of rules-lawyer precision required for some subject matter?  Or should I simply avoid answering any D&amp;amp;D 5e question if I can't give page and paragraph and paste in quotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In general, your attack bonus will be any applicable proficiency bonus&#xA;  based on the type of weapon, plus the appropriate attribute bonus&#xA;  (commonly ST for melee weapons and DX for ranged weapons, though this&#xA;  may be changed for certain special cases).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If you have a Feat that provides a bonus (say, the Rogue's &quot;backstab&quot;&#xA;  or whatever they'll calling it now) that would then be added when&#xA;  circumstances permit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, if you were attacking with a mace, you'd get +2 for proficiency&#xA;  (both Fighter and Cleric have proficiency that would cover this&#xA;  weapon); if your ST is 17, that would give another +3, and if you had&#xA;  some (perhaps clerical?) Feat that gives a bonus when using a&#xA;  bludgeoning weapon, you'd then add that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I might also point out that, contrary to comments on the original answer, the information about proficiency is, at most, incomplete, not incorrect (3rd level fighter and cleric, the classes in the original version of the question, do get a +2 proficiency).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-04-30T20:20:05.063" LastActivityDate="2019-05-10T20:32:33.667" Title="What warranted multiple downvotes and a delete vote here?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|down-votes|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9055" CreationDate="2019-04-30T17:38:11.057" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will detail my reason for downvoting. I cannot speak for anyone else, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/650/41726&quot;&gt;downvotes do not and should not &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; an explanation&lt;/a&gt; (although explanations on how to improve a post are always helpful, and I make an effort to explain my downvotes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Feats vs class features&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You appear to be conflating the term &quot;feat&quot; and the term &quot;class feature&quot;, which can already be confusing to new players. There are no official &quot;feats&quot; that are class-specific, so you probably mean &quot;feature&quot; when you refer to &quot;Backstab&quot; or &quot;something clerical&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Backstab&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Backstab itself is not the name of any rogue class feature. The feature I believe you are referring to is Sneak Attack, which says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Beginning at 1st level, you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using the wrong term further adds to the confusion that we try to avoid imposing on new players in answers. Furthermore, &lt;strong&gt;Sneak Attack doesn't affect attack rolls in any way making it not connected to the question at all.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Proficiency Bonuses&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You state that you add 2 for proficiency, but this is not always the case. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/step-by-step-characters#CharacterAdvancement&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Character Advancement table&lt;/a&gt; shows how proficiency bonus scales as you level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Context&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, while it is not required, a good answer should be supported by textual evidence or experience (depending on the question). Since you don't have the books, this evidence could come from the Basic Rules, which are a free document accessible &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;on the Wizards of the Coast website&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Overall&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My downvote is a combination of concern regarding confusing a potentially new player with inaccurate terminology and confusing wording, as well as the lack of quotes or page references for the game rules you cite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41726" LastEditorUserId="41726" LastEditDate="2019-05-10T20:32:33.667" LastActivityDate="2019-05-10T20:32:33.667" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9058" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9055" CreationDate="2019-04-30T17:39:22.207" Score="31" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It was unclear and  mostly wrong and showed a lack of expertise&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that all of this, more or less, was brought up as suggestions for improvement in the comments under your answer (by multiple people including myself). In general, if you are wondering why you are getting downvoted and there are comments pointing out flaws in your answer, they are often related and addressing them is generally to your benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I specifically left my comment, waited a bit to see if you had fixed it, and then downvoted it. My reasons are elaborated below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It wasn't clear&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You talk about a lot of stuff in your answer, a small part of which was correct but all of which was not clear. The context of this question was a new user who clearly has no idea how to play the game so extra clarity is necessary for a great answer. You don't define or reference any of your terms or tell OP how to find or use them (eg proficiency bonus, attack bonus (which isn't an actual term in 5e)).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also didn't explain how +2 proficiency bonus was gotten to our how that works. This might have helped because the +2 is not correct at all for the level character OP was asking about. You answer also implied to a new eye that it was perhaps static, which is incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not defining or explaining the terms makes it more confusing than helpful and  this was one of the reasons I downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Some of it was unnecessary info (if not straight out wrong)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a Feat that provides a bonus (say, the Rogue's &amp;quot;backstab&amp;quot; or whatever they'll calling it now)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no such feat in 5e this also displays a distinct lack of expertise. If you don't know &amp;quot;whatever they are calling it these days&amp;quot; perhaps you should leave it out of your answer? Or wait to find the correct name before answering. You may also be confusing the term &amp;quot;feat&amp;quot; with &amp;quot;class feature&amp;quot;, two things which are very different and which should not be confused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming you were actually talking about Sneak Attack, that information does not affect attack rolls at all and was thus completely irrelevant to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;if you had some (perhaps clerical?) Feat that gives a bonus when using a bludgeoning weapon&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, no such feat exists. Not even a clerical class feature actually (though there are a smattering of class features which do something similar, none that I know of do anything with bludgeoning damage).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Displaying wrong and/or incomplete information displays a lack of expertise and thus confidence in your answer and can be a reason to find it less useful (and thus downvote). Especially when you are dealing with new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You have to Back it Up&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have an extensive post on what is required for answers as far as evidence goes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. I won't be reiterating what is there (feel free to peruse it at your leisure and ask if there is any specific part of it you find confusing), but I will pull out a couple points relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All answers must be backed up. This benefits OP because it shows them that your information is correct and where they can find that information to verify (as well as any additional context and definition those citations might add to your answer). And this benefits you too. If you had backed up your answer and cited things you might have realized that the feats you were talking about don't exist and that your proficiency bonus was wrong for example. It happens to me all the time and luckily most of those errors are filtered out by me consulting the text before posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We all make mistakes (and improve our answers to address them)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every one of us had made mistakes, small or large, in our answers and gotten down voted for it. But votes aren't permanent. Look in your comments for things to improve upon and edit your answer to fix the errors and correct the inclarities. Often, a change sufficient to correct a downvoter's issue will cause them to come back and change their vote or just for more upvotes to come your way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A good answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good answer is one that is clear, factually correct, focused, and well-supported. Answers like that tend to get upvotes, while answers that are unclear, factually incorrect, unfocused, and unsupported tend to get downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-02T23:15:46.843" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9055" CreationDate="2019-04-30T17:42:36.300" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the downvotes, this answer (sorry to put it this way) displays a lack of expertise in a few places:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The proficiency bonus for the character posed (6th-level) would be +3, not +2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Proficiency increases by level, as the first comment points you toward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It posits the existence of a feat that adds to attack bonus, when no such one exists.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experienced 5e players have likely noticed that straight bonuses to attacks are exceedingly rare. (Archery fighting style, &lt;em&gt;bless&lt;/em&gt;, magical &lt;em&gt;+X&lt;/em&gt; weapons/wands, and an &lt;em&gt;ioun stone of mastery&lt;/em&gt;, off the top of my head.) Contrapositively, the mention of a possible feat to increase one's attack bonus immediately stands out as not coming from 5e expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, the downvotes could reasonably come from providing more misinformation to the OP than correct (the STR/DEX bit).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure about the delete-vote; nothing immediately jumps out to me as delete-worthy, personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-04-30T17:42:36.300" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9060" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-04-30T22:44:30.160" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A brief look at the numbers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The elected mods have access to some &quot;under the hood&quot; analytics, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9008/23970&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt; had me thinking that we could be a little more proactive about sharing some top-line observations. So here are a few things that jump out at me, feel free to comment if there are other things that you think would be instructive to collate year after year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Visitors and active users (post, edit, vote, flag, &amp;amp;c.) trend up a little bit. For exactness, I'm comparing the April '17-April '18 numbers vs. the April '18-April '19 numbers: users who visited &gt;=1 dy/wk, users who visited &gt;=5 dy/wk, users who acted &gt;=1 dy/wk, users who acted &gt;=5 dy/wk.  They're all up somewhere from a few to ten percent, by eyeball.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Page views are up double year over year and rising quickly so far in 2019. During the last 16 months (when they started tracking this for us) we see pretty regular month-over-month growth, excepting December (which craters every year). But January/February/March this year saw a &lt;em&gt;big&lt;/em&gt; surge in those numbers--like 50% higher than the couple of preceding months. The numbers are coming back down recently, so it's not easy to determine whether that's a &quot;real&quot; growth in visibility and we're in the middle of a little dip, or if it was just a bulge and we're reverting to a more-stable mean now.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-05-01T02:24:18.873" LastActivityDate="2019-05-01T02:24:18.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9061" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9062" CreationDate="2019-05-01T06:13:38.840" Score="6" ViewCount="90" Body="&lt;p&gt;For instance, let's say I want to ask the question &quot;I want to make an Anima: Beyond Fantasy die in the Rolisteam dice roller, how do I do that?&quot;.  (As it happens, I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; want to ask this question, since making an Anima: Beyond Fantasy die is nontrivial (explosions, for one, require specific behavior that I could not immediately figure out how to implement).)  Is asking this question on-topic for this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastActivityDate="2019-05-14T08:33:56.430" Title="Is asking about making specific dice in specific dice-rolling utilities on topic?" Tags="|support|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9061" CreationDate="2019-05-01T06:24:26.703" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, questions about using RPG tools to simulate dice rolls for existing RPGs is certainly on-topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about dice as they relate to RPGs are generally on-topic, as long as they're not some sort of open-ended request for help designing a game. Questions about RPG tools, as long as they are clear and properly scoped, are also welcome on RPG.SE. So narrowing this down, asking about using a specific RPG tool to simulate dice used in a specific RPG is definitely fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, your example for using a dice roller tool to simulate a particular sort of die roll used in &lt;em&gt;Anima: Beyond Fantasy&lt;/em&gt; seems very much on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-14T08:33:56.430" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9063" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-02T13:15:54.580" Score="16" ViewCount="364" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since WoTC have officially stated that Jeremy Crawford's twitter posts are no longer official and that published sage advice is still just guidance, I've seen a couple of recent questions pop up utilizing those tweets as assumptions and asking for including their use. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem isn't in the citing of a ruling (whether it be by someone from WoTC or someone's DM), but in asking to apply a ruling from one mechanic and the question is asking how to apply it to another mechanic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that ask directly how a specific ruling applies to that specific mechanic I think are fine. We have the constraints we need to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem I'm concerned about here is when a question asks to utilize a ruling in one area and asks how to apply it to something else not covered in that ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a different way we should look at/treat these questions? Are they opinion-based because we don't have knowledge as to why JC/a DM ruled that way and therefore can't apply to other areas?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147302/what-truth-detecting-magic-excluding-zone-of-truth-does-a-ring-of-mind-shieldi&quot;&gt;What truth-detecting magic (excluding Zone of Truth) does a Ring of Mind Shielding protect against?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147237/if-you-subscribe-to-jcs-ruling-are-enemies-attacked-by-a-conjured-creature-con&quot;&gt;If you subscribe to JC's ruling, are enemies attacked by a conjured creature considered “targets” of the conjuration spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-05-03T13:56:04.010" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T13:12:06.033" Title="How to handle &quot;assuming this Jeremy Crawford ruling on [X] to be true, how do I apply that ruling to [Y]&quot;-related questions?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9055" CreationDate="2019-05-02T13:36:31.600" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I'll own the delete vote&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I voted to delete because of the misinformation in the post. I felt that because OP seemed like a new player, the answer that currently included misleading information was potentially not just not helping, but doing harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern was that by having it, OP may have utilized the incorrect factual information to their detriment and I felt it was better to remove the answer rather than have it up and mislead OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also want to state that when ZeissIkon requested to be told  the reasons for the downvotes in their comments, I answered in comments as well - and those reasons are what have been listed here by others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-02T15:05:07.703" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9065" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-03T00:52:21.373" Score="14" ViewCount="443" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta is about the mainsite question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147207/23970&quot;&gt;How I can I roll a number of non-digital dice to get a random number between 1 and 150?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It was closed by five users, &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;then reopened by five other users. (Many of these first ten users are very high-rep and -experience users--you can see them all in the revision history.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Then it was closed by an elected moderator with comment-reference to not really being about RPGs, but just a pure math/dice question. I tend to agree, and left the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is one of those cases (it seems to me) where &quot;we have expertise in this&quot; runs up against &quot;real questions have real answers.&quot; If someone's running an RPG and they want a good way to generate 1-150 at the table we'll answer that question. Because the answers to clarifying questions like &quot;how much math are your players comfortable with?&quot; and &quot;can the die be different colors?&quot; and &quot;how quick does this need to be?&quot; and &quot;does this happen once a session or every couple of minutes?&quot; all of which could impact answers and votes, have answers in the real case and don't here. – nitsua60♦&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Five more users reopened it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I've gone ahead and locked it and opened this meta: we have two close-reopen cycles with plenty of rep/experience on either &quot;side&quot; of the disagreement. We also have an existing meta--&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1028/23970--that&quot;&gt;Are general statistics or dice questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; seems (to me) to clearly point in the &quot;close&quot; direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's hash it out here, then apply the result mainsite: Should this question be open or closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some other related metas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7324/23970&quot;&gt;Is giving the benefit of the doubt to dice/stats questions that don&amp;#39;t mention RPGs resulting in site scope creep?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7709/23970&quot;&gt;Are questions learning about loaded dice and creating and detecting them on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-05-03T10:04:50.173" LastActivityDate="2019-05-05T21:08:36.327" Title="Should this dice question be open or closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9063" CreationDate="2019-05-03T01:00:34.333" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You provide the questioner with a genuine answer. You may choose to inform them that those are not official rules, merely rulings made by an expert. You use your best judgement to determine the tags used.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Jeremy Crawford is by this decision treated as any other normal person, Their guidance, reasoning, and advice should be as rigorously treated as any other person's input.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;He is an expert, but no authority. Experts tend to give good advice, but we may also judge to rebut it based on good reasoning, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2018/10/25/expertise/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this introduction to expertise&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of his rulings are his interpretations of rules he may or may not apply these rulings at his table, via &lt;strong&gt;extrapolation derived&lt;/strong&gt; rules &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; house rules (and may or may not be recommended) by Jeremy Crawford who is a community expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two layers to this: first, the rulings made by JC, and second, the material that is derived from those rulings independently by questioners who use those rulings as the basis of their questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;House-rules is for new or modified rules, so any material that handles these rulings as official material (as new rules instead of rulings in the form of mere guidance, because they are not official) and is derivative of these rulings will necessarily be a house rule or homebrew material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, you can make a question about these rulings which are questions about rulings, those are not questions of house rules or homebrew, though they may or may not inspire either. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can deduce that any question based on house rules should be treated as such. If (those house rules) are used as rules, then the extrapolated material of the questioner is homebrew because it creates a sub-system of house rules, and it becomes a question about homebrew material see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5845/what-distinction-is-being-drawn-between-house-rules-and-homebrew&quot;&gt;What distinction is being drawn between house-rules and homebrew?&lt;/a&gt; For handling homebrew material we have this thread &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is still the issue of quality assurance raised in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9048/how-is-the-community-doing-2019?cb=1&quot;&gt;Homebrew review questions still aren't great&#xA;&lt;/a&gt; in this state of the community thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-05-09T13:12:06.033" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T13:12:06.033" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9063" CreationDate="2019-05-03T06:27:41.387" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should do nothing.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unclear rules often have multiple valid interpretations. These interpretation are not &quot;house rules&quot; (modifications to the rules) per say, but valid rules in their own rights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming that one of these rule interpretations is correct, then asking the logical conclusions of this assumption, makes for a perfectly valid question that  is on-topic for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The alternative is to ask the question without making the assumption explicit. This results in answers that are useless to the poster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53673" LastActivityDate="2019-05-03T06:27:41.387" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9063" CreationDate="2019-05-03T13:30:47.127" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It depends on the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions directly related to the ruling&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions that reference a ruling, whether it be by a DM or by someone from WoTC,and have a question directly associated can very likely be answered. We are given a constraint, the ruling, and we can answer if the question is directly related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Questions asking to apply that ruling to another area&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one does not seem like something we can answer. Unless the ruling is explicit enough to apply to other areas, we can't know how to extrapolate a ruling on one mechanic and apply it to another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that we don't have the basis for &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they ruled that way and therefore don't know the reasoning and how it might apply to other mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only time we could do this is if the ruling clearly provides the reasoning so that we can apply it to something different. If it's just a one-off &amp;quot;it works/doesn't work&amp;quot;, then we are limited to the specific mechanic without a methodology to apply it elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For these, we unfortunately should &lt;strong&gt;Close as Primarily Opinion-Based&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The two examples&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the Ring of Mind Shielding/Zone of Truth question we have a specific ruling that the Ring doesn't apply to the spell. We don't know why it doesn't apply, so it makes it difficult to try and determine how the ring would interact with other spells. In this case, I don't think it's answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question about Conjured creatures and targets, again we have a ruling about two specific spells and no explanation of why they ruled that way. It is not possible to generalize that ruling to other areas because we don't know why they ruled that way in the first place and therefore no way to apply that ruling to something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-03T14:03:41.710" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9065" CreationDate="2019-05-03T14:49:30.680" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We are not Dice.SE. It should be closed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(according to how our current site is scoped)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's what the tour has to say about the purpose and mission of this site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG Stack Exchange is a question and answer site &lt;strong&gt;for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games&lt;/strong&gt;. We cater to hundreds of tabletop RPGs including D&amp;amp;D, Fate, GURPS, World of Darkness, and more. RPG Stack Exchange is built and run by you as part of the Stack Exchange network of Q&amp;amp;A sites. With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to &lt;strong&gt;every question about role-playing games&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, we have defined ourselves as a site laser-focused on one narrow slice of Q&amp;amp;A content: stuff inherently about RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question explicitly is not about RPGs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is &lt;strong&gt;not actually related to RPGs&lt;/strong&gt; but is more of a real-world dice rolling scenario I'm looking for help with, from dice rolling experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm currently memorizing the Book of Psalms, which is divided into 150&#xA;chapters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for an analog, elegant way of quizzing myself, by rolling&#xA;some number of dice (or whatever means, really, just nothing digital)&#xA;to get a random (equally likely) number from 1 to 150.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is about dice and statistics for the purpose of memorizing psalms. This is a lovely and commendable question, but this site isn't built to field questions requiring only general expertise in dice just like we also don't field questions about graphic design not related to RPGs, social problems not occurring in an RPG context, and pure math/statistics problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question again explicitly had nothing to do with RPGs. We are not dice.SE. We wouldn't handle questions about Liar's Dice, identifying what version of Monopoly a set of dice came from, or Statistics 101 homework problems about dice probability. Nor should we be accepting question about solving everyday problems with dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Changing the scope could allow these types of questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, dice questions explicitly not about RPGs don't have to always be off-topic here, but by our current definition they are. If we want them to be something that is allowed and encouraged here, we are going to have to have a discussion about widening the scope of the site to allow them and come up with a proper definition of what is allowed and what isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No matter what the scope of the site is, it should be widely understood and agreed upon such that we can manage the site content to remain focused on that scope. Doing so allows us to keep our noise level very low and to maintain a high level of interesting and relevant content for our target audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The lack of a migration target has no effect on what is considered on-topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is good to remember that even if a question may not fit on any other Stack, it does not mean we have to default to expanding our core focus to &amp;quot;adopt&amp;quot; them. The presence or lack thereof of a migration target does not at all factor into what we consider on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not every question has a Stack that has the focus and expertise to answer it. And that is inherently a characteristic that comes from how the focused Q&amp;amp;A sites of Stack Exchange are built.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-05T21:08:36.327" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9065" CreationDate="2019-05-03T19:54:46.290" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Open. Polyhedral dice are within the purview of roleplaying games.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Polyhedral dice are a piece of equipment integral to tabletop roleplaying games. The primary use of those dice is for tabletop roleplaying dice, with only a minority of alternative uses such as board games inspired by tabletop RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE is the primary site where you would expect to find experts on polyhedral dice. I would not expect Math Stack Exchange to know that there are 15-sided dice, or custom 3D printed dice, or to know about the practice of rolling percentile dice and how they are read, or to have practical experience of the pitfalls of rolling and reading very large dice. All of this expertise was critical in giving good answers to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This particular question involves an unorthodox use of RPG tools and systems, but it's still about RPG tools and systems, and a good answer to the question relies on an understanding of those things which no other Stack Exchange can provide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2019-05-03T19:54:46.290" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9074" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9132" CreationDate="2019-05-03T22:07:54.567" Score="8" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;I ask this question because I have asked questions lately that play on the spell&lt;em&gt;casting&lt;/em&gt; mechanics of &lt;em&gt;Anima: Beyond Fantasy&lt;/em&gt; lately, that nonetheless have almost nothing to do with a particular spell or spells in the space of possible answers, e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147407/what-ways-are-there-to-increase-ones-spellcasting-attribute-for-spellcasting-pu&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a question about getting a spellcasting attribute as high as possible clearly &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; about spellcasting, and I can't just not tag that, especially since there are particular points in the rules where &quot;I'm using this attribute for spellcasting&quot; &lt;em&gt;matters&lt;/em&gt; - except it then is tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, I'd like to suggest we break the synonym between &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;.  It's not the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-05-20T08:37:53.080" LastActivityDate="2019-05-20T18:55:57.977" Title="Should the synonym between [spellcasting] and [spells] be broken?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9074" CreationDate="2019-05-04T01:30:32.560" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m not a fan of having them synonymised, for pretty much the reasons you give.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some games where spellcasting = spells (D&amp;amp;D being the big one), but that’s not true for other games, so having them be synonyms always struck me as a bit D&amp;amp;D-centric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there’s room for questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt; (the activity and process in rules and/or fiction) separate from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; (specific formalised bundles of effects).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be a distinction that’s not clear to a majority whose games of choice don’t make that distinction though, so it could be friction-y for the community to manage them as separate tags in practice. I think it’s worth a try though, to see if maybe that concern isn’t a real problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-05-04T01:30:32.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9076" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9077" CreationDate="2019-05-04T03:35:14.200" Score="11" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new user left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/147423/40335&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36319/can-heighten-spell-benefit-a-reserve-feat&quot;&gt;Can Heighten Spell benefit a [Reserve] feat?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Legal and working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found this question (and answer) when looking through the review queue, and there was already the standard &quot;Don't give a one line answer&quot; boilerplate on the given answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was about to comment saying &quot;hey, welcome, can you elaborate on this answer?&quot; when I realized that with questions that boil down to &quot;here's a situation, am I understanding the rules/etc correctly?&quot; all the answers are going to boil down to either &quot;no, and here's where you went wrong&quot; - which is fine - and &quot;yeah, you got it right&quot;... But in the latter case, how &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; you elaborate on that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we back up affirmative answers to &quot;Am I understanding this correctly&quot;-style questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40335" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-04T04:42:11.007" LastActivityDate="2019-05-04T04:55:14.940" Title="How do we back up affirmative answers to &quot;Am I understanding this correctly&quot;-style questions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9076" CreationDate="2019-05-04T04:46:10.387" Score="22" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Support &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they are correct&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Add the full rule context and explain the rule to the best of your ability. Usually these kind of questions come from a misunderstanding or lack of comprehension of the rules. You should try to clear up their confusion as well as directly answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If possible draw parallels to other rules from the system that use the same mechanic, or contrast with one that works differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use &lt;em&gt;emphasis&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;strong&gt;bold&lt;/strong&gt; on the specific parts of the rules that mean it works the way it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is somewhat subjective. Remember to follow the guidelines of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. Support your answer with experience of how you have applied this ruling at the table and how it worked out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A one-line unsupported answer is not useful to anyone. Anybody can just say &amp;quot;yeah that works&amp;quot;. SE answers need to &lt;em&gt;prove&lt;/em&gt; that it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-04T04:55:14.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9078" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9035" CreationDate="2019-05-05T10:20:18.800" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think usually a person asking such question won't be knowing that the confusion was caused by this issue, and so won't be adding this tag when creating the question. I think this very much reduces its usefulness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21861" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-05T16:56:07.703" LastActivityDate="2019-05-05T16:56:07.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9065" CreationDate="2019-05-05T17:58:50.637" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question is off-topic, for the same reason many &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-settings&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;historical-settings&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;historical-settings&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/campaign-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;campaign-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;campaign-development&lt;/a&gt; questions are off topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Way back in the antediluvian days of 2012, we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;discussed an issue&lt;/a&gt; we were having centered around questions that only vaguely brushed against RPGs by saying that they were asked for campaign research. I suggest that you read the question and top answer, but to summarize: A question is on topic if and only if it is best answered by RPG experts specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While many RPG players spend time figuring out how to make dice do interesting things, the specifics of this question do not require any knowledge about RPGs to answer. This question doesn't require knowledge about how dice mechanics work in play, how players react to different dice mechanics, the threshold at which a mechanic is too complicated to use in play, or any of the other RPG-specific metrics by which we could judge answer quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question was something like &quot;my players have to roll on a table of 150 options several times a session, what can I do to make that work in play&quot;, there would be no question of topicality. This question is not about RPGs at all, and so should be off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NB: It's irrelevant whether or not there is a better Stack for this question than ours. Topicality has never been, isn't, and should never be determined by whether or not the querent has a better to place to ask, either on a different Stack or outside the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2019-05-05T17:58:50.637" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-05-05T21:38:31.127" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Hot Network Question algorithm seems to be bad at picking out hot RPG questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently it seems to me that way too many of our questions make HNQ status (even if only for a little bit). Questions that are clear from a human glance have no lasting &amp;quot;hotness&amp;quot; to them and are definitely not worth showing off to other stacks about. Of course they also do sweep up a real hot one every now and then. To be clear, I'm not arguing that HNQs as a concept are a poor fit for the site or even that the current implementation is causing harm, but it does seem like the algorithm is a bad at getting hotness right on RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've crunched some numbers which show an inordinate number of our questions making HNQ:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;March 2019&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1LySg.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1LySg.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/elsim.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/elsim.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems highly unlikely that 44-50% of all of our questions are truly &amp;quot;hot&amp;quot; and we often note in chat about individual cases where it made no sense to us that it was being labeled as such. It seems the algorithm is too sensitive here at least (I'm unsure if this is just something we experience here at RPG.se or if this is also seen on other stacks).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also seen this viewpoint echoed by several people on Chat (especially since the introduction of the HNQ bot in chat).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize that this is not something that we can change here, but seeing that I get the impression that SO is looking to maybe continue to make tweaks to the HNQ system, I thought it might be worth mentioning here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-06T20:45:43.273" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8737" CreationDate="2019-05-06T07:29:58.940" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7313/40609&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1HvQb.png&quot; alt=&quot;Worldbuilding.SE Swag&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43046" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-06T20:50:23.077" LastActivityDate="2019-05-06T20:50:23.077" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9082" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9088" CreationDate="2019-05-07T03:40:59.410" Score="18" ViewCount="398" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9065/should-this-dice-question-be-open-or-closed&quot;&gt;another meta thread&lt;/a&gt;, there is a conversation about a particular &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147207/3195&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; regarding dice-rolling outside of an RPG context. I suggest you read that thread first, but to boil it down to the basic points: RPG.SE is probably the best place we know of to get an answer for that sort of question, but outside of an RPG context such a question is probably off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One point that I haven't seen any significant disagreement on (and which I agree with myself) is that if a person wants to roll some dice and get a number with a particular statistical distribution with a minimum of fuss, there's probably no better place on the internet to ask about it than here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, &lt;strong&gt;should we explicitly expand our site's scope to include questions that are about rolling dice, regardless of an RPG context?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good Yes answer should probably include information and guidance on how to determine if a particular Dice question is a good question. A good No answer should show why expanding our site's scope this way would be harmful to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is generally unconcerned with the outcome of the linked meta question. Whether all dice questions are &lt;em&gt;implicitly&lt;/em&gt; part of our purview or not doesn't change whether or not they should be included &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-25T13:54:40.890" LastActivityDate="2023-11-25T13:54:40.890" Title="Should questions about dice in general be on-topic? [2019]" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9083" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-07T04:33:24.173" Score="-1" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147481&quot;&gt;How can wizards gain more spells per day?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was closed as too broad, and I disagree with that flag. The question is quite narrow in terms of scope, nor would any answer that limits itself to the system have to be too broad. In fact, here's a list of all the things that work (AFAIK):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rings of Wizardry &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Robe of Runes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Amulet of Spell Cunning&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Amulet of Spell Mastery&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pearls of Power&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Echoing Spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Thassilonian Specialist&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Higher ability scores&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now the question itself is poorly written, and it would make sense if it had been closed as unclear or just downvoted to oblivion for being poorly written, however being closed as too broad is definitely not applicable as far as I can tell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="47188" LastEditDate="2019-05-07T12:15:40.623" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T18:42:02.713" Title="Why was this question closed as too broad?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9082" CreationDate="2019-05-07T15:15:24.727" Score="10" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;One point that I haven't seen any significant disagreement on (and which I agree with myself) is that if a person wants to roll some dice and get a number with a particular statistical distribution with a minimum of fuss, there's probably no better place on the internet to ask about it than here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am indifferent to whether or not RPG.SE wishes to expand its scope to cover dice questions. However, rolling dice to achieve a particular distribution is squarely within the domain of statistics. Questions about rolling dice are 100% on-topic at stats.SE.  We only ask that the question be well-framed so that it is answerable. When a user on RPG.SE asks about the rules of D&amp;amp;D, you require users to specify which edition of the rules to use as a reference; likewise, stats.SE needs to know what rules the question-asker is imposing on answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of a question which is on-topic at stats.SE is &quot;How can I use fair D&amp;amp;D dice to make a uniform distribution on 1, 2, 3, ..., 150?&quot; (and then explain in the body that D&amp;amp;D dice typically have d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20 and a decile die). Someone could even further specify that (1) they don't want to roll more dice than necessary and (2) they don't want to do any math except addition and the operation that maps a d6 to a d3 or similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11332" LastEditorUserId="11332" LastEditDate="2019-05-07T16:06:34.507" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T16:06:34.507" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9083" CreationDate="2019-05-07T18:05:35.187" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you think that a question that was put on hold shouldn't have been put on hold,—if your reputation allows—vote to reopen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, my comment suggested revising the question so that some binds were included because I personally found the idea of compiling, evaluating, and summarizing &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; the ways a wizard could cast one or more extra spells per day overwhelming. (Also, I did &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; vote to put the question on hold; I thought that a still more industrious and adventuresome user than I might &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; find the prospect as overwhelming as I did!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I admit that the list in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9083/8610&quot;&gt;the question&lt;/a&gt; is a good start, including as it does even one way—&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/arcane-schools/paizo-arcane-schools/classic-arcane-schools/sin-magic-specialist/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;sin magic&lt;/a&gt; (né Thassilonian specialist)—that's included in the build in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/56755/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; that I'm pretty sure that the question (albeit obliquely) references.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I suspect that, while it's a good start, once even more archetypes are examined, spells like &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/m/mnemonic-enhancer/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; are included, templates that increase Intelligence scores are enumerated, original magic items are created in the answer using the printed guidelines, and everything else figured out that could &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; lead to the wizard casting &lt;em&gt;just one&lt;/em&gt; more spell per day, the list will be much, much longer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would've kept my trap shut had the asker posed the question &lt;em&gt;How can the build described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/56755/8610&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; cast more spells per day?&lt;/em&gt; or even phrased the question as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/8610&quot;&gt;good&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1639/8610&quot;&gt;optimization question&lt;/a&gt;, but, as it stands, I commented because, while I wanted to help the asker, when I was working out my possible answer in my head, I had no idea where to begin or—more importantly—where to stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="8610" LastEditDate="2019-05-07T18:42:02.713" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T18:42:02.713" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9086" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9087" CreationDate="2019-05-07T20:49:04.277" Score="10" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109764/how-many-times-do-you-roll-damage-for-magic-missile&quot;&gt;How many times do you roll damage for Magic Missile?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; was bumped to the top of the home page today, and a note underneath the question on the home page states that it was modified today by mattdm. But the change logs of the question and both answers do not indicate any edits today. So what was changed exactly?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48191" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T21:27:36.327" Title="How was this question bumped to the top of the home page?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9086" CreationDate="2019-05-07T21:18:14.167" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;There’s &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/147580/321&quot;&gt;a deleted answer&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ rep only) that someone else posted four hours ago, and which was deleted three hours ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;mattdm made an edit to two hours ago to fix problems with the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is confusing until you get the 10k privilege to see deleted answers, but it’s not really avoidable: when it was first bumped it was visible, and needed the bump to highlight the new activity, which needed attention and got it deleted. The delete made the source of the first and second bumps invisible, and there’s no “unbump” feature. This is by design, since 10k users still need activity on deleted posts highlighted, in order to do oversight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, since the edit was made to try to fix the problems that got the post deleted, it particularly needs the visibility to users who have undelete vote privileges, so they can judge if those votes should be cast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-05-07T21:27:36.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T21:27:36.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9082" CreationDate="2019-05-07T22:27:10.787" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, we should not.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We think we're the best people to answer all kinds of questions, because on the Internet I am always the smartest person in the room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, our site is about role-playing games. That's its appropriate scope.  That makes us tangentially good about a lot of things. Dice!  Desktop publishing!  Fiction! Weaponry! But we have to draw the line somewhere.  We're not board and card games.  We're not arbitrary historical questions.  We're not genre fiction questions.  We are good at all these things, but this is a site for RPG players and we owe it to them to stay focused on RPGs. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;General dice stats are not our exclusive domain and, whether or not some other stack answers those question well, they are not on topic and should not be unless specifically in a RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-05-07T22:27:10.787" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9089" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9090" CreationDate="2019-05-08T20:42:47.573" Score="5" ViewCount="115" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I ran into a question about the interaction of two damage modifiers that you can put on a technique.  The problem is, I don't know how to tag the entire Ki system, and I don't want to go inventing tags whole cloth if, for example, [spellcasting] will do from a mechanical standpoint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I tag Ki Technique questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T09:42:59.443" Title="How should I tag Ki Techniques in Anima: Beyond Fantasy?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9090" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9089" CreationDate="2019-05-09T09:42:59.443" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest keep things simple and tag them by what the game calls them. If the game calls them Ki Techniques, tag them [ki-techniques]. This would also be the words that Anima players are looking for, I imagine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If later we discover that's causing problems we can revise or merge the tag as necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T09:42:59.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9091" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9092" CreationDate="2019-05-09T13:30:54.850" Score="7" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;While answering questions I frequently receive comments, a fraction of these are helpful and offer advice that I incorporate into my answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do I up-vote these comments and then flag them for deletion as the advice is now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3426/how-can-the-policy-regarding-discussions-in-comments-be-improved&quot;&gt;live&lt;/a&gt; in the answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, do I wait for my comment to get flagged after it has served its purpose and is no longer needed or should I delete it?&#xA;I'm frequently encouraged to clear up my comments after they served their purpose (which I then do so I can't link to these cases).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I actively hurting my chances at earning the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6999/does-deleting-comments-impede-people-from-earning-the-pundit-badge&quot;&gt;Pundit-badge&lt;/a&gt; and should I, therefore, refrain from deleting my comments if they were upvoted but are no longer needed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-05-09T14:26:44.333" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T17:03:43.730" Title="What is the user policy for up-voting on comments, incorporating the advice of the comment, and then flagging the comment as no longer needed?" Tags="|discussion|comments|etiquette|badges|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9091" CreationDate="2019-05-09T14:23:54.040" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Once comments are actioned they should be removed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;Comments are temporary &quot;Post-It&quot; notes&lt;/a&gt; and we don't keep them around longer than we need them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a comment requesting clarification or suggesting improvement has been actioned, flag it as No Longer Needed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you left the comment and it's been actioned, delete it yourself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no need to upvote the comment. The main time to upvote a comment in these cases was &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; the comment got actioned, to signal you think that the clarification/improvement request is a good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Requests for clarification and suggestions for improvement can also be declined:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you're the post author and don't want to action that comment, flag it as NLN.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the author is someone else and they've visibly declined to action that comment, flag it for attention and mention the author's declined to do this, as well as flagging that author's comment where applicable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We keep comments that are still relevant, e.g. they are part of a small back-and-forth that is fresh from a few minutes ago, or if they're non-actionable and are either upvoted or have lasting value (e.g. they contain minor moderation or meta information), or if they haven't been actioned yet and the author hasn't seen or acknowledged them yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might impede your Pundit progress, but I don't think you should be actively chasing for Pundit: it's a reward that might happen or might not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-05-09T17:03:43.730" LastActivityDate="2019-05-09T17:03:43.730" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9093" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-10T03:09:26.493" Score="14" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my brief experience with this site, I have encountered problems with asking for balance on homebrew items. Every single time I have posted a homebrew question, it is downvoted, regardless of content. Just recently, I posted a homebrew, and, within 5 minutes, I had 1 downvote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really do not understand &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; this happens. It seems to me that the negative attitude towards homebrew content on this site (which is apparently controversial) is leading to these downvotes, which, in turn, leads to more downvotes or at the very least less views and good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1398/are-critique-my-home-brewed-content-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Homebrew questions are on-topic&lt;/a&gt;, and they are useful to the homebrewer in question. It seems inherently wrong that they should be downvoted almost immediately because of somebody that just doesn't think that these questions should be asked. If anything, those people should just leave these questions alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, assuming the downvoter has a specific problem with anything actually in the homebrew content that is to be critiqued, they should be critiquing it. If they do not, they are essentially stating that they think something is unbalanced or broken in the content, but refuse to specify what it is they do not think should be there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I view things, people that do not even leave a comment on homebrew balance questions are just hating on my content, making me, well, frustrated. As I said before, downvotes lead to less views, which leads to less constructive answers and more &quot;hate downvoting&quot; of homebrew content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally think that this is an abuse of downvoting solely in homebrew questions, and the downvoting definition backs me up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Voting up a question or answer signals to the rest of the community that a post is interesting, well-researched, and useful, while voting down a post signals the opposite: &lt;strong&gt;that the post contains wrong information, is poorly researched, or fails to communicate information.&lt;/strong&gt; The more that people vote on a post, the more certain future visitors can be of the quality of information contained within that post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I automatically assume that they think I did not already compare this to existing content? That I did not do enough work? Or perhaps they think that my work &lt;em&gt;contains wrong information&lt;/em&gt;, even though homebrew is about creating new options?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that these people don't really have to leave a comment on normal posts, but I would like to know why they downvote these homebrew questions almost immediately and do not leave an answer or comment, even when the question explicitly asked for written critique.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49349" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T01:51:27.847" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T01:51:27.847" Title="Why do my questions about homebrew content get downvoted?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|homebrew|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9094" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9109" CreationDate="2019-05-10T08:38:59.423" Score="10" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;This post originates from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147706/52137&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but is not about handling that question. I will summarize the transpired events for context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is about a specific rule and at its core about whether that rule allows for a ridiculous scenario. It used an example which appeared to &quot;break&quot; that rule.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That original example had a flaw not related to that rule. In my answer I addressed that flaw and posed a different example which would work, before addressing the core issue.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once OP saw that issue they changed their example to mine. This invalidated and necessitated revision to a lot of my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I am now happy with the state of the question and my answer and am not seeking to revert the changes made, however what our policy on acceptable changes to questions became apparent as unclear/unstated to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6324/52137&quot;&gt;this discussion&lt;/a&gt; was brought up, which states that answers should be edited to adapt to changes in questions. However this seems to differ to what I have experienced seeing. This particularly happens with homebrew questions, with a querent updating their material on the back of an answer. In this case policy has been to revert the changes and have querent post the new version as a new question as per our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/52137&quot;&gt;homebrew policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some previous metas relating to this (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1625/52137&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3001/52137&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; among others), however these, at least in part, address that the question were or should have been closed while edits happen to it. In these cases consensus seems to be that answers should adapt or be deleted as they were arguably posted too early. &#xA;For the question spurring this post no closure happened, nor were necessary. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand complete changes to questions are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6519/52137&quot;&gt;not acceptable&lt;/a&gt;. Such changes should be posted as a new question instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a similar vein to the spurring question a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8981/52137&quot;&gt;recent discussion&lt;/a&gt; decided a error correction should not be made to a question after an answer had addressed the mistake. This was asked by editors and when OP made those changes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/144101/revisions&quot;&gt;it was reverted&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The matter I would like answered is then, what kind of changes to a question is acceptable to make after an answer has been posted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T17:31:53.943" LastActivityDate="2020-04-07T17:31:53.943" Title="What kind of edits are acceptable to a question after an answer has been posted?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|editing|question-scope|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9093" CreationDate="2019-05-10T13:14:52.883" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Often times, it's lack of effort&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While not everyone has necessarily read the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;meta on how to ask homebrew&lt;/a&gt;, we nearly always link to that in the comments for the initial posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone doesn't adjust their question based on our recommendations, I'll generally downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for iterations, the same very much applies. Those guidelines should still be followed, but most importantly I generally expect the homebrewer to take some time to think about the recommended changes and how to apply them. If a new variation pops up quickly, I think it is being rushed - especially if it hasn't been playtested yet. Theoretical issues are one thing, but once you start to get feedback there should be a play test as per Step 3 of the meta on how to ask a good homebrew review question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In your specific case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147752/is-this-druid-homebrew-circle-of-chaos-3-0-balanced&quot;&gt;iteration 3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, as I've put in as a comment, you had a previous iteration that has already been judged as ready to playtest. But you don't show that you have or, if you did, what the results of that playtest were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The iterations are also coming pretty quick, which suggests that you haven't spent a lot of time thinking about the effects of those changes might bring. That's why I've downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I'm not hate-downvoting, but I do want to improve how these questions are asked&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I do downvote, it is because of the above. It's not that I dislike homebrew questions, but I do feel that we need to have a good standard here that separates us from forums. With the meta we have on how to ask, we should hold the questions to that standard. It'll provide better initial homebrew homework and better iterations - and it will hopefully teach people how to approach creating homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quickly puttting together something without serious thought, or without really thinking about the implications of any change requests, or without playtesting reduces the quality of the homebrew and of our process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Don't get too upset about downvotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I definitely understand wanting to know the &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; behind a downvote. But you really won't always get it. And in general, you'll get more upvotes than down - and the system rewards those upvotes much more than you're penalized for the down. While this feels more impactful when you're lower rep, I recommend trying to be more focused on resolving your issue/improving your homebrew then the votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T01:48:02.210" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9096" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9120" CreationDate="2019-05-10T15:19:56.567" Score="14" ViewCount="653" Body="&lt;p&gt;For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1398/3548&quot;&gt;the past seven years&lt;/a&gt;, homebrew review questions (that is, questions of the form, &quot;Is this homebrew balanced?&quot;) have been on-topic and thus allowed. As brought up in the latest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9051/3548&quot;&gt;&quot;How is the community doing?&quot; meta&lt;/a&gt;, however, they're becoming more common and arguably more problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are we happy with the homebrew review questions we're getting now? If not, what do we want to do about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our existing guidance on asking these questions can be found here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/3548&quot;&gt;&quot;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2019-05-10T15:57:36.943" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T17:11:16.650" Title="Are we satisfied with the state of homebrew review questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9097" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-10T16:48:18.627" Score="5" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, this question of mine was closed as too broad: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145442/avatars-of-nature&quot;&gt;Avatars of Nature&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can understand the impulse given the amount of information I provided, however I intentionally tried to mirror this question as it was not closed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133452/is-this-homebrew-dryad-sapling-race-including-its-subraces-balanced-compared-t&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Dryad Sapling race (including its subraces) balanced compared to the official published races? (version 2)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once closed, I tried to solicit for corrections but have received no clarification, so I am asking here. What about my question makes it fall under too broad rules while the other one does not? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52398" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-05-10T19:38:24.773" LastActivityDate="2019-05-10T19:38:24.773" Title="What defines too Broad as it applies to these two questions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9097" CreationDate="2019-05-10T17:31:11.057" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first thing I'll say is that your post is for 3.5 edition, whereas the other post is for 5th edition. Now, we don't have a policy, formal or informal, that says &quot;homebrew posts are under tighter scrutiny for 3.5e than for 5e&quot; (or anything similar). But it is worth considering that the scope of a question can vary by edition, where questions that have relatively simple/obvious answers may not be so simple or obvious in other editions, even if the &lt;em&gt;essential question&lt;/em&gt; is the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bigger thing, at least from my vantage point, is that your question does ultimately bump up against the acceptable limits of how expansive we allow questions to get. One major limiting factor in the Dryad question was the fact that most of the different options were sub-races, not races, meaning&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many core elements of each sub-race were identical (as part of the root entity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Most of the features provided uniquely to each Sub-race were relatively simple, constituting different Ability Score Increases, Weapon proficiencies, and Language proficiencies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, as you can see in the answer that I provided to the question, it was possible to evaluate the broad power level of each sub-race without needing to dedicate multiple paragraphs each time I moved to talking about a different sub-race. Instead, I could look at one of them specifically and use it to broadly evaluate all of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's true that there's a thematic similarity between each of the races you've described in your post, but there are a lot of very stark contrasts in capabilities and features between each of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I want to make clear, speaking from a Homebrew perspective: &lt;strong&gt;This is not a bad thing.&lt;/strong&gt; You're inventing a lot of interesting mechanics (or combining preexisting mechanics) and that will make for interesting homebrew races that players might want to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, because of how significantly different these races are from each other, it's not really appropriate to ask a single question trying to address all of them. A better approach would almost certainly be to split these up into individual questions and link them to each other (either through comments or by linking them in the post itself) so that readers can find the context for each race.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Worth noting is that there's no express prohibition on posting many [legitimate] questions all at once, but it's unlikely each race will get the attention it deserves if you do that (and some will probably accumulate downvotes if it seems like you're &quot;spamming&quot; the 3.5e feed). So my recommendation is to, over the course of a few weeks, post each race in its own post, one at a time, give it a day or two to accumulate votes/answers, then post the next one. That way, each option can get the attention it deserves and you won't be perceived as spamming the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2019-05-10T17:31:11.057" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-10T19:47:00.050" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Honestly, No.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9095/23024&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; to another meta question covers the vast majority of my concerns in that many homebrew questions feel like they've been posted before they are ready to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just like you don't hand a paper around to be edited before you've done several rounds yourself, the same goes for homebrew questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not here to write the homebrew for you. We are definitely here to check for balance, but we really should only be doing that if people put in their due diligence before posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This goes for both initial posts on content as well as iterations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But this doesn't mean we shouldn't have them...yet&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, I feel we need to be better at downvoting content that seems not fully baked. I don't think we can put it on hold any more we can put a low-value question on hold. People can ask questions that don't have research effort and people can post homebrew that doesn't show enough effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I do feel we need to be clearer via downvotes in what our expectations are. We can support that with the meta posts we have about how to ask for homebrew, but ultimately, homebrew is a part of many RPGs and people can and should be able to ask about it - regardless of how much effort they have put in initially.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do need to keep an eye on this, though. If the community feels that we're getting more low quality homebrew balance questions than high quality, then we may need have this conversation again - but until then we should try our best to improve the homebrew questions by both showing folks positive reinforcement through what a good question is, what good iterations are, and also providing negative reinforcement for when they don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In summary, put some effort in and show it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means having questions that are formatted correctly, use common game terms, have been tested as thoroughly as possible before posting, and after taking in feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-10T19:47:00.050" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-10T20:59:35.863" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Homebrew review questions should probably be off-topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; before it, homebrew review is a type of question that &lt;em&gt;in theory&lt;/em&gt; seems like something we would like to have on the site, but &lt;em&gt;in practice&lt;/em&gt; tends to produce a lot of bad questions and/or bad answers. This problem results from a number of factors that make homebrew review a poor fit for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, homebrewing is (if done properly) an iterative process, coming up with a design and then testing it and getting feedback, making improvements, more testing/feedback, more improvements, and so on. &lt;strong&gt;The Stack Exchange system was not designed with this iterative process in mind.&lt;/strong&gt; Askers either edit their question when they iterate (a big no-no, since it negates the existing answers), or they post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147598/3548&quot;&gt;multiple&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147680/3548&quot;&gt;iterations&lt;/a&gt; of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147752/3548&quot;&gt;same question&lt;/a&gt;. That's technically allowed, but it feeds into the second issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Homebrew review isn't useful in the long tail.&lt;/strong&gt; The goal of the Stack Exchange system is not just to answer people's questions, but to create a searchable archive of questions and answers, so that later people with that &lt;em&gt;same problem&lt;/em&gt; can discover the question, already asked, and use the answers, already provided. Homebrew review does not lend itself to this because it is almost never useful to anyone other than the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, &lt;strong&gt;a lot of homebrew is just too big for this site.&lt;/strong&gt; Sometimes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147780/3548&quot;&gt;complex homebrew&lt;/a&gt; can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147801/3548&quot;&gt;be&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147802/3548&quot;&gt;split&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147803/3548&quot;&gt;into&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147804/3548&quot;&gt;a&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147805/3548&quot;&gt;multitude&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147806/3548&quot;&gt;of&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147807/3548&quot;&gt;similar&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147808/3548&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt;; this at least results in answerable questions, even if it spams the front page (something that is technically allowed but that many of us find obnoxious, especially for closely-related questions). But we've also seen askers trying to post entire classes/archetypes for review, which can end up being simultaneously too broad to handle in one question, but too inter-connected to handle in multiple questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; try to tighten up the rules around these questions and try to enforce them more. However, that approach has not historically worked for other problematic tags, largely because &lt;strong&gt;these questions tend to be asked by new users who don't know the rules&lt;/strong&gt;. It won't matter what special rules we have for this tag, or any other specific tag, because there tends to be very little intersection between the set &amp;quot;users who ask questions with problematic tags&amp;quot; and the set &amp;quot;users who read the rules&amp;quot;. We'll just end up having this same discussion again in a few months or years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion, homebrew review is yet another tag that was worth a shot, and generated some good questions and answers in its day, but ultimately just doesn't work well on the Stack Exchange and would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/3548&quot;&gt;better suited to a forum&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-12T05:35:02.327" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9101" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-11T12:48:33.127" Score="-7" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/56738&quot;&gt;this rejection of a suggested edit&lt;/a&gt;, in this case, the suggested edit was rejected by the person who initially wrote the answer, a person who is doubtlessly biased.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not that rejection was appropriate is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; part of my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the policy that users should employ towards accepting/rejecting suggested edits on their answer/question that is part of the Suggested Edits review queue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further: is it reasonable to propose a feature request that removes the possibility of the bias that is introduced by being able to moderate suggested edits to your answers/questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:27:54.213" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T20:25:04.190" Title="Is it okay to reject suggested edits on your answer/question that is part of the Suggested Edits review queue?" Tags="|discussion|editing|review|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9101" CreationDate="2019-05-11T14:01:03.810" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have rejected edits to my own questions and answers that sought to vandalize them or pervert their meaning. Likewise, I have seen edits to my questions and answers approved by others that vandalized and perverted my questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a user posts a question or answer, the user &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be allowed to retain some control over the edits that are made to it because the user is most familiar with the question or answer's intent. The user is in the best position to head off attempts to change the user's own question or answer's intent by rejecting what the user views as inappropriate edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I get where you're coming from—it's unusual to have users &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; generate content &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; be part of the editorial process!—, but that's how it's done 'round these parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T14:01:03.810" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9082" CreationDate="2019-05-11T18:13:29.643" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It should be on topic.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGs and RPG tools should be on topic.  Dice are RPG tools.  Therefore, they should be on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will admit that this is not, perhaps, as well-spoken as the other answers here, but it's certainly my opinion on the subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:13:29.643" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9104" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about suggested edits and the suggested edit review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before users have gained enough reputation to get the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;&quot;Edit questions and answers&quot; privilege&lt;/a&gt;, they can only suggest edits. Once they have gotten this privilege, they can make edits immediately instead of suggesting them, and can also review others' suggested edits (see also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;review&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9105" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" Score="0" Body="For questions about suggested edits and the suggested edit review queue." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:31:25.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9106" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9107" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" Score="0" Body="For questions about the reputation system on StackExchange." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T18:39:57.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9108" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9101" CreationDate="2019-05-11T20:19:53.093" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s entirely appropriate for the author of a post to have review power over suggested changes. It’s words being put into their mouth: they should be able to approve or disapprove the change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Removing authors from the review process would be useless and bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Useless, because authors can always edit their posts. Even if they were prevented from reviewing suggestions on their own posts, they could just directly edit it back after.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that was somehow prevented, it would be bad for the site. It would make it possible to force people to say things they don’t want to say. Right now, each of our reputations are based on &lt;em&gt;our own&lt;/em&gt; words; changing that would make our reputations based on what others forced our posts to say against our will. People would quickly abandon a site that made them responsible for things others forced them to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-05-11T20:25:04.190" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T20:25:04.190" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9094" CreationDate="2019-05-11T20:44:08.260" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;This doesn’t have a firm, rules-based answer. I think it &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt; have one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question I ask is: Did this edit improve the question, or did it change the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer to &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; can be yes, notably. Most of the time one will be no and the other yes, which I think tells us whether an edit is a problem to undo or a good thing to move forward with. When the answer is yes to both, the balance of which is more true than the other tells us whether the edit is overall good or a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the extremes, some questions &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be completely changed, even if they’ve already received answers; other questions &lt;em&gt;shouldn’t&lt;/em&gt; be changed, even if the change is minor. It depends on what the page needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s a matter of judgement and will depend very much on the exact question and the editing situation surrounding it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-05-11T20:44:08.260" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-12T16:52:41.223" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Homebrew statistics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I took a crack at hacking together a couple SEDE queries to pull some data that might be helpful (as suggested by @nitsua60). Below is a graph detailing the number of homebrew questions asked and closed on this site per month since the beginning of the site. The grey line represents the percentage of the questions closed that month. Note that data is not equalized for traffic.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/InCXW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/InCXW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most obvious conclusion we are getting increasing quantities of homebrew questions in non-relative terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would highly appreciate people checking my SEDE queries and methodologies, because I really am just hacking it together and could easily have made a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see my Excel spreadsheet &lt;a href=&quot;https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KLp1b8YTMULFBBdZpNQDyBXSQWVhyivUMpO7eUYIVz8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; Google Doc version &lt;a href=&quot;https://drive.google.com/open?id=1tMriepvFETy5vEKnY59WMQ8espLlsKLk&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the two SEDE queries I modified:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For open questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1048568/question-count-or-score-growth-over-time-by-tag-comparison&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For closed questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1048525/question-count-or-score-growth-over-time-by-tag-comparison&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T17:11:16.650" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9111" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-13T01:10:29.037" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I would be disappointed to see them go&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may be somewhat biased as I am one of the more active users on the homebrew tag since I joined the site. However, I do not agree that homebrew question in general are an issue on this site. Moreover, I think that banning them, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9096/are-we-satisfied-with-the-state-of-homebrew-review-questions?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1#comment29297_9100&quot;&gt;suggested by Oblivious Sage&lt;/a&gt; would only be a net-loss to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, homebrew questions aren't usually very popular. Experienced askers and answerers know this, and don't get a lot of rep for these question. I know that my homebrew answers often take a lot of work for not a lot of reward, but I am ok with that and am willing to put the work in anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50122282#50122282&quot;&gt;posted some of it in chat&lt;/a&gt; but here are some of the reasons I think homebrew review questions are valuable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We answer them well because of our strict requirements on supporting your answer. Homebrew reviews on other sites are rarely supported and give a lot of &amp;quot;here's how I would do this instead&amp;quot; type advice which isn't as useful.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are a valuable topic for increasing participation. They are popular with new users and help grow our user base.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Personally I also enjoy asking/answering them. I think it is a unique way to learn about game mechanics and the design consideration for homebrew.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any question that would provide the same information without a specific homebrew example would be too broad and get closed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9099/48759&quot;&gt;NautArch's answer&lt;/a&gt; describe why a lot of homebrew questions are bad is excellent. He said that most homebrew lacks sufficient research or tested before posting. I believe this makes the question a candidate for downvotes and we should use them. It does not make them off-topic. Similar to any other question we should work with askers to advise them &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; we consider it a poor question and how they can improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Rapid iteration is a problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a site rather than question level, I can see the issue with rapid iteration. It spams the question feed with multiple questions from the same user. Downvoting all of them could get reversed as targeted voting. It prevents each individual question from getting enough attention (often homebrew questions only get 1 answer). Generally it also means that each iteration is smaller than it should have been, if they had waited longer for more feedback they could have avoided several generations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we vote to close iterations posted within 3 days of the previous as a duplicate of the first. While closed we encourage the user to reflect on the feedback of the previous version, test their new version and edit in their findings. Once three days has passed are there is sufficient distinction between the questions we can reopen the new one for answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T03:16:56.127" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9112" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-13T13:42:12.397" Score="14" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm all for cleaning up questions, making them more readable, and even providing citations to rules references - but I think we need to have a better policy for how to handle editing many, and generally older, questions subsequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How many old questions should be edited in a short time frame?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-13T20:54:50.303" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T10:58:26.453" Title="What are the guidelines for editing many questions in a short period of time?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9113" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9119" CreationDate="2019-05-13T13:56:47.023" Score="5" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;While I understand we've had guidelines on Meta to discuss how a user should handle their own citations, I think we should visit how and when we should edit Questions and Answers regarding citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If adding citations to someone else's post as an edit, do we need to add to questions, answers, or both?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If adding citations to someone else's post, should we source the physical books, online resources, or both?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If just adding citations, is it better to &quot;teach a man to fish&quot; and comment about adding source rather than assuming where they are sourcing their information? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ultimately, do we even need to add citations to names of mechanics or just to quotations? Do either/or always require? When is it or isn't it useful to update based on that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the approach for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7669&quot;&gt;citing one's own answers&lt;/a&gt; is different than citing someone else's. The primary thought on this is that we don't actually know the source someone else references - we do know it when we do it ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-13T20:57:50.490" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T20:57:50.490" Title="How should we handle adding citations to older questions and answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|editing|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9114" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9113" CreationDate="2019-05-13T14:14:48.593" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;1. There is no requirement as to how extensive edits must be (and rightly so)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have very few requirements that editors &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; adhere to. If you are editing and you only want to improve the question, you are allowed and encouraged to do so. Just like you are allowed and encouraged to make an improving edit to a post that doesn't solve all of the issues that post might have. There's no reason that an editor would have to add links and citations to answers if they do the question or vice-versa. Of course, it is always better if you make all the improvements that you can see on a post while you are there, but in no way should we be making it a hard rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Make improvements to a post if you can and to the limit of your ability and energy. As long as an edit makes a significant improvement to the material it is a good edit.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. Either reference is fine, both are better&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either paper or online reference is fine (and certainly better than none), but having both is the best option if you can manage it. This applies equally to writing as to editing an answer. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7669&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; for a more in-depth discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. &amp;quot;Assuming&amp;quot; the source is something we already do and is fine in cases where it clearly isn't the issue&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Assuming&amp;quot; the source is fine as long as you are certain that the source doesn't matter (eg is not the source of their confusion). After all, if the question is referencing a certain thing people are naturally going to assume it comes from a standard source even in the absence of an explicit citation. Adding a source in that case does not hurt anything &lt;em&gt;as long as you are certain that it is not a factor&lt;/em&gt;. As always, editors must use their best judgement with their edits, and harmful edits can be reverted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as commenting goes: if you feel like the user is constantly under-citing their questions or answers in a way that severely negatively affects their content, make an edit &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; leave a comment telling them that you would recommend improving that aspect of their post-making in the future. However, leaving comments just because a question didn't link to DnDB on a spell that they quoted the relevant parts on and just didn't cite the page # (or URL) is likely at least overkill if not overly aggressive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have the power to edit to improve posts for a reason, and if the way a user is making their posts is not negatively affecting their posts, there is no need for them to correct anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4. Links to every name in a post is not necessary at all, but also not harmful&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, we don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to do anything here. The site will certainly not burn to the ground for the lack of a hyperlinked spell name and we already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8165/should-we-be-adding-dndbeyond-links-to-old-posts&quot;&gt;a Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; talking about the value of adding such things. If the edit makes the post better, it is a good and acceptable edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a link to a feature name can certainly be at least a slight improvement and is generally not harmful (again in cases where the source of the content from OP is wrong or inaccurate is about the only time where this is the case). This is a case where we likely can't have a solid rule about when is good or bad to add this, and should be left up to the judgement of the editors. The vast majority of the time, the edits are at least benign, so making rules about when they can be made seems completely unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the time the only issue is when these kinds of edits are made in rapid succession, but that issue is being handled in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9112/what-are-the-guidelines-for-editing-many-questions-in-a-short-period-of-time&quot;&gt;a separate Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T18:06:33.953" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9115" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9112" CreationDate="2019-05-13T14:26:29.443" Score="-10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My stance towards the topic&lt;/strong&gt;: Humans have time when they have time. If they want to use that to further the goal of improving questions/answers, then that is desirable.&#xA;If users only want to see the newest questions/answers, they can click on the filters or perform the searches that enable this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They may &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8802/how-trivial-an-edit-is-too-trivial-to-make&quot;&gt;edit&lt;/a&gt; as many answers as they want to edit in the time that is available to them. If you are worried about visibility, you can use the features of filtering that the site provides by design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To further expand on this, they may not have time at a later date when you the person in the review queue has time. Now you aren't doing anything with your time to improve answers/questions and they didn't do anything with their time to improve answers/questions. The opportunity is lost, the cost is spent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a community we a striving to provide the best questions/answers that we can provide in order to build a library of detailed answers to every question about role-playing games, including those that are 5 years old.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An edit to an old answer is not less valuable than an edit to a new answer, and less workload for people with moderator privileges and moderators and visibility for new post should not stand in the way of building a library of detailed answers to &lt;strong&gt;every&lt;/strong&gt; question about role-playing games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As a more personal perspective&lt;/strong&gt;: When I was reasonably approached to stop flooding the page I did so,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please slow down on the edits. Currently more than half the front&#xA;  page is being bumped by them, which is overshadowing newer content and&#xA;  other actions in need of review. Pace yourself. Aim to limit yourself&#xA;  to, say, a dozen edits on the front page at any one time at most.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and deleted all edits that I had prepared, and closed the tabs that were relevant to those edits. I saved the information as&quot; the moderation team is not interested in users editing lots of different entries/post in a row. There is &lt;strong&gt;no value generated&lt;/strong&gt; in doing so.&quot; So I will not do so in the future. I also learned that you should approach someone in the comments of whatever they are editing currently to notify them if they happen to be on an editing spree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the comments I was approached to keep it &lt;em&gt;to about 12 edits&lt;/em&gt; on the activity page, so I will do that in the future, any edits that surpass &lt;em&gt;about 12&lt;/em&gt; edits on the activity page &lt;strong&gt;don't create value&lt;/strong&gt;, they are a hassle - &lt;strong&gt;unwanted&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So assuming that I was approached in the correct place by a moderator, I asked them for guidance on where to find policies, and asked which problems my behaviour had caused - regarding site interactions that I was unaware of, so I could avoid them in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After my inquiry that included me saying that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1073/what-are-the-polite-limits-of-editing-others-posts-for-formatting/1074#1074&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; was the only relevant meta post that I could find, another moderator told me, in the comments, that the comments aren't the correct place for such things - adding that &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Ask on meta if you have questions; for this comment thread it’s&#xA;  probably enough that a mod done told ya, don’t you think?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm uncertain as to why a moderator thinks it is reasonable to dig up a resolved issue in condescending language. As someone used to getting condescending answers I almost could read the &lt;strong&gt;little Missy&lt;/strong&gt; after the &lt;em&gt;&quot;done told ya, don’t you think?&quot;&lt;/em&gt; Why would you escalate a deescalated situation? Generally, that policy of approach and informing users who mass edit seems to work as intended and stops the unwanted mass-editing of entries that are not already on the activity page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Now there is this thread&lt;/strong&gt;, and there is an interesting feedback loop that happens when users are told to keep their bumping to an amount that doesn't flood the activity page. Posts with activity - that is mostly new posts - are endorsed to be edited more than old posts as they don't create additional bumping - because of their situation they already create bumps by answers, clarification, and active engagement - so 20 interactions don't create 20 new entries on the activity page - there is only one being bumped frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you have time on your hand and want to improve answers, you better limit yourself to a few old posts and primarily engage with the new material, or you are doing something &lt;strong&gt;unwanted&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So this is what I gather&lt;/strong&gt;, the &lt;strong&gt;enforced&lt;/strong&gt; guidelines are (simplified): You should engage with the new material and limit yourself when you want to edit old answers/questions, frequently editing new answers/questions is more valuable to this site than frequently editing old answers/questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is interesting because our existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8802/how-trivial-an-edit-is-too-trivial-to-make&quot;&gt;meta establishes what is considered a trivial edit&lt;/a&gt;. As you can read my stance on the topic is very different from how this topic is handled here, value is placed on editing new answers instead of editing every answer, primarily, to not clutter the user tool of the activity page on which users place great value as an observing tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2019-05-30T10:58:26.453" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T10:58:26.453" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9116" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9112" CreationDate="2019-05-13T14:51:01.420" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think current processes — including questions on meta like this! — handle it already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is more a matter of site culture than policy, and adding a policy into that mix would add substantial friction for little gain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Community norms should handle most flooding&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t strictly need a new policy because we already have a community principle of editing etiquette to not flood the front page, and usually that community principle is enough for people to listen and not flood the front page. It’s not formalised anywhere: Most members who are interested in editing know it, and it gets taught to newcomers as needed, or they learn it by seeing it come up in conversation. Maybe it comes to meta because a comment isn’t enough to have them grasp the principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it’s just part of community norms, and for most people will be learned without trouble. “Don’t break the front page.” Most people are responsive to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When norms don’t handle it, it’s often a bigger problem that needs intervention&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the existence and practice of this principle by others isn’t enough — if someone is asked not to flood the front page but rejects the request or gets belligerent — then the &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; normal processes we have are already sufficient. What happens when someone disrupts the site naïvely and won’t stop, or gets belligerent when asked to cooperate with others? It becomes a problem behaviour issue: They get asked to be less obdurate or argumentative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And when that doesn’t work, problem behaviour process kicks in. Mods can remind to behave and not flood the front page with the weight of a diamond. And, if a polite request from a mod doesn’t work, mods can hand out suspensions. In the case of a newcomer who can only suggest edits, banning them from the edit suggestion feature is also a mod power that can be used until they learn how to edit responsibly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Since existing process handles it, a policy would just be additional burden&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new policy would only hinder the majority of cooperative users needlessly, all to help the few uncooperative users avoid learning to &lt;em&gt;just be cooperative&lt;/em&gt;. We already have soft and hard answers for persistently uncooperative users. For those who can become cooperative, teaching our community norms and standard as we always have is enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T17:53:10.557" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9112" CreationDate="2019-05-13T16:28:46.387" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We shouldn't flood the front page with minor edits&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Recently Active page is the default view of the site's questions and has a very important function: to highlight recent activity that is of importance to site users and moderators. It highlights new answers, edits, and deletions of posts, all of which the community actively keeps track of to keep things in order around the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Filling the page with minor edits hampers this use of this important tool. It pushes potentially more pressing current items to the bottom of a pile of minor edits that don't really need further note.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is not to say that those edits have no inherent value. Every edit that significantly improves a post is a good edit, but, as they say, there is such thing as too much of a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simple solution to this is to be polite and respectful of the way other users use the site. If you have massive amounts of updates to do to a bunch of questions, dose them out in smaller batches so that it doesn't interrupt other users. This happens frequently when things need retagging (eg in the case of burning a tag) or when users are making small updates to many older questions at a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In the end, balance is key. Minor edits to older questions are often much lower priority than edits and activity on new questions or answers that need attention and we don't want one use of the site to inhibit the other.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is especially true of the aforementioned cases of common minor edits: tags and links. Tweaking tags and adding links adds &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; amount of value, but not as much as, say, editing a new answer from incomprehensible into a valuable contribution, or helping a new user who posted an incorrect edit learn to use the site better. Not all activity on the site generates the same value and we have to be aware of this as we go about doing our best to make this site the best it can be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, when I do such things I try to keep my impact to less than 8 minor recent edits on the Recently Active page at a time. This is slightly more than half of the number of default items shown per page on the desktop site (15). And I tend to trickle the edits out in batches as the other ones drop off and when traffic/activity is low.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T16:44:54.637" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9112" CreationDate="2019-05-13T16:30:59.910" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have previous advice on how to handle editing on RPG.SE in &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/456/how-should-i-approach-editing&quot;&gt;How should I approach editing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1073/what-are-the-polite-limits-of-editing-others-posts-for-formatting&quot;&gt;What are the polite limits of editing others&amp;#39; posts for formatting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those still apply.  Editing posts, even old posts, is OK.  However, the more trivial those edits - and that includes grammar and adding links - the more one should take it easy.  Don't flood the newest questions and put a bunch of edits in the queue and otherwise take up space and time on the site that would be better spent with newer content. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, huge sweeps to link every 5e term are not helpful or appropriate. We don't need everything linked - that adds questionable value and will just require re-editing the next time WotC changes their systems - and should not go do big disruptive mass edits for these non-substantive edits.  They're fine changes to make while making substantive edits.  They're fine changes to make when something's live and churning anyway.  They are fine changes - in moderation - on the long tail of old content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get that some editors may not get &quot;why&quot; this bothers folks.  However, from the flags and responses here and elsewhere, obviously it does, so that should be enough for someone looking to be courteous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-05-13T18:45:31.627" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T18:45:31.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9113" CreationDate="2019-05-13T18:55:51.090" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Add Links To Things You Are Actually Citing&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Referencing (PHB p.123) or linking to a SRD or whatever for content in your answer is good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Adding Links To Everything Referenced Is Of Questionable Value&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every single spell etc. mentioned in a question or answer don't need links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's ask, why add links?  There's one good and two not so good reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's hard to find content (but still legally available).  A weird third party Pathfinder class, especially one named the same as another one - a link is very valuable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's just, you know, for quick reference. I would think those that are D&amp;amp;D players know where to go read Magic Missile. It doesn't hurt anything to have it but it also doesn't add a lot, especially if it's not a link to a specific hard to find piece of content but just normal thing X in a big alphabetical list of things already.  &quot;Here's where the illusion/shadow subschool rules are&quot; is good, &quot;Magic Missile&quot; is not so good.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I am not familiar with this game or content but I would like to just read the info the OP already has and issue my opinion, which is not really expert advice. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They Will Probably Become Out Of Date Eventually&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's get real, this is mostly a question about D&amp;amp;D and derivatives.  And WotC changes their computer systems fairly frequently and invalidate old links. We are not an automatically updating wiki; keep in mind every reference added that doesn't actually help someone will probably add even more work in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not to mention then there's fights over the &quot;right place&quot; to link from.  In Pathfinder there's the PRD and PFSRD, there's dndtools.eu and other semi-pirate sites... This doesn't mean don't do it, but when doing it realize it's not a friction-free activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, you would use judgement and determine whether extensive linking is really adding value to a question or not, given the costs (effort, eventual change) of the link.  You could go nuts and link every single game term like a big ol' index, or you could never link anything.  The appropriate approach is in the middle and best done via judgement developed by feedback over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-05-13T18:59:48.383" LastActivityDate="2019-05-13T18:59:48.383" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9120" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-14T14:59:35.643" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should probably improve the meta guidance we give to users for homebrew review requests. I done messed up in creating it the first time around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See, I asked a generic guidance topic (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/1204&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;) and then two weeks later asked a more specific guidance topic just for D&amp;amp;D 5e (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8171/1204&quot;&gt;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&lt;/a&gt;). However D&amp;amp;D 5e currently represents just about all of our homebrew review content, so while that seemed like a good idea at the time, the end result was I just wound up splitting our guidance for D&amp;amp;D 5e homebrew review questions across two different metas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; the right course of action here would be for me to post a Community Wiki answer to that second question which combines the guidance from the first meta with HellSaint's answer from the second. This would give us just one spot we point people to that has all the guidance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That Community Wiki post might be revised further beyond just being a combination of those two posts. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9111/1204&quot;&gt;linksassin's answer on this meta&lt;/a&gt; brings up the idea of enforcing a minimum wait time between iterations in its last section: if someone posts version 1, then within a set number of days (e.g. 3 days) posts version 2, we close version 2 as a duplicate of version 1. If we do go with that being a thing, we'd further revise this post to give people a straightforward heads-up that we'll do that, and we ought to link that post to new homebrew review requests to bring that to their attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-05-14T14:59:35.643" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9121" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-14T23:58:34.943" Score="-9" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've written the basic mechanics for a new role-playing game, and I wanted to crowd-source the details, like writing specific spells, creatures, items, etc. Do you think SE would be a good place for something like this: i.e., an official SE RPG?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system uses opposed rolls, where you roll your boxing skill to hit me and I roll my dodging ability to avoid the hit, and I was calling the difference between the totals the &quot;overroll&quot;, so I thought &lt;strong&gt;Stack Overroll&lt;/strong&gt; might be a good fit. However, I'm not sure if the SE question/answer format is robust enough. It would also need some way to say &quot;Yes, this has enough up-votes and is now canon&quot;. It would also need moderators with some ability to tamp down on power creep. I would love it to have a self-imposed movie-like rating system so kids could filter for G or PG ratings. And, of course, if younger people are interested there would need to be a nigh-draconian anti-troll/sexist/jerk policy. There might also need to be a way to occasionally print the currently-cannon rules and sell them at a bookstore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe there's a great business case for SE: people would be on the site for several hours during a game, looking up spells or monsters. I also believe the good folks on SE would love a creative-but-rule-driven outlet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Edit&lt;/strong&gt;:&#xA;The goal is not to turn SE &lt;em&gt;into&lt;/em&gt; a game engine, but to use it to write a tabletop, pen &amp;amp; paper game system. And not necessarily within SE:RPG, but a new area, tweaked for this creation format, as opposed to just Q&amp;amp;A. The linked question below is...horrifying. There would be a page with the basic rules, and the community can add additional content, with community input. SE:Overroll would be an online resource to look up &quot;canon&quot; spells, creatures, etc., while you're playing the game at home around a table with your friends. A crowd-sourced, free, pen &amp;amp; paper &amp;amp; laptop role-playing game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I started with AD&amp;amp;D in my college days, and when I look at it now I'm very concerned that it has become too complicated for young players to pick up. I want a system with easy basic rules, but that is highly extensible. I came up with a system of mini-classes, like Pyromancy and Swordsmanship, and you start with two, adding more occasionally as you gain levels. Each mini-class (&quot;skillset&quot;) is easy to run, and you only add more after you've become comfortable with the existing ones. You gain 1XP whenever you use that skillset, and 2XP if you fail the roll. Clean &amp;amp; simple, with minimal in-game record-keeping.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11025" LastEditorUserId="11025" LastEditDate="2019-05-15T15:14:48.133" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T19:47:50.180" Title="Stack Overroll: the Stack Exchange RPG?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9074" CreationDate="2019-05-15T00:14:58.793" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should break the synonym&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147991/48759&quot;&gt;How does the Variant: Spell Points system from the DMG affect game balance?&lt;/a&gt; was clearly an example were the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; was inappropriate. Nothing in my question is related to a spell or its effects. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt; would have been the correct tag but we can't use it because it is a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I  can't imagine this is the only such case where this has happened. After breaking them I believe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; will still be the more common tag, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt; has its own use that deserves a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally both tags are distinct from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic&lt;/a&gt; as a concept. All three tags should exist separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-16T09:27:56.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9123" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-15T06:35:03.037" Score="14" ViewCount="523" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/148042/48759&quot;&gt;best answer&lt;/a&gt; on my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147991/48759&quot;&gt;recent question&lt;/a&gt; was deleted by its owner. It raises many of the issues that were the reason I asked the question and doesn't appear to have any major issues to be a cause for deletion. I tried &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50291932#50291932&quot;&gt;asking about it in chat&lt;/a&gt; but didn't get a solution. The user isn't active there and I can't ping them there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried flagging the post with a custom flag asking a mod what to do. They declined the flag and said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You could @ them in a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However since the answer is deleted, I can't @ them there. Is it really appropriate to find another one of their posts to tag them for something unrelated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, I don't know what the correct way to handle this situation is. I would like to be able to upvote or discuss the answer with the user but can do neither while it is deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9123/the-best-answer-to-my-question-was-deleted-by-its-owner-what-do-i-do#comment29423_9123&quot;&gt;Carcer has pointed out an error&lt;/a&gt; with their answer in the comments of this post. This could possibly be the reason for deletion. However I think this meta question still stands. What is the correct approach in this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2019-05-15T10:54:50.387" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T07:48:12.747" Title="The best answer to my question was deleted by its owner; what do I do?" Tags="|discussion|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9123" CreationDate="2019-05-15T11:59:58.253" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;If assuming they did it for a good reason is off the table, you could @ them on your question, it’s still in context, and ask “@whoever I was liking that answer why delete?”  It may not ping them but it's still likely they're viewing the question since they have participated in it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No you shouldn’t go find another of their random posts but that’s not required.  Just like anything (why'd you downvote, why'd you do anything else) we don't like to insist on explanation or facilitate demanding explanation lest it turn into cyberstalking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-05-15T17:50:15.610" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T17:50:15.610" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9121" CreationDate="2019-05-15T12:05:12.203" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While that might be fun, RPG.SE is not the place for it.  We are here for high signal to noise help with RPGs; this is both out of scope and does not fit our format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T12:05:12.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9096" CreationDate="2019-05-15T15:49:33.330" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Also, no&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to posit an answer that's more or less a combination of what was posted above coupled with recommendations following my own experiences associated with attempting to answer these kinds of questions over the past year:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Demonstrate your familiarity with the system&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our comments, suggestions, answers, etc. fall upon deaf ears if the querent cannot be bothered to learn the system they are proposing to homebrew well enough to ask a question that is coherent to other users of that system. For example, in 5e, if you aren't familiar with what Actions, Reactions, and Bonus Actions are then you should probably hold off on trying to homebrew an entirely new class until you get that figured out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question, as written, should demonstrate knowledge of the system that you're working in. Treat the game's terminology the way you'd want it treated were it to be read by any other user of the system; certain systems the criteria is very well-defined, others, less so. Regardless, if 90% of people playing that system interpret your question in differing ways that's a clear sign that the querent has not posted a useful and answerable question and should be downvoted/closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Let it breathe&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So many times do I see someone post a homebrew that's going to require more than 10 minutes to knock out an answer for. I don't have time for it right now so I move on. Within a couple days, there's several answers that address multiple different issues; one is deemed accepted; and then there's a second draft issued as a subsequent question. Half the time, the question has also since been closed (probably because each answer seemed to focus on a different issue and thus the question was unclear).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many times, the answers that did get in do not address some underlying issues and as a result, those issues carry forward into the next iteration. Furthermore, it complicates review of the second draft because you now need to refute the changes that were made since they didn't consider the underlying issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I think we need to establish some sort of timeline for iterations as well as asking new iteration questions when an existing question is on hold. I think 1 week is reasonable for new iterations, but others are likely to disagree. I also don't think you should be permitted to post a new iteration if the original question was closed; edit that question so that it can be re-opened and new answers can be provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tell us why&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So many homebrew questions are posted without any sort of stated goal. This goes back to my first point, if I don't know what problem with the system (perceived or otherwise) you're trying to fix with this homebrew it's very hard to provide useful comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tell us your process&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying that you cannot create new mechanics with homebrew, but if you elect to you need to fully explain the process by which you created those mechanics. Want to create power points in a 5e system, explain what logic you're using to balance that (perhaps the DMG's alternate rules on spell points).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're electing to create something out of whole cloth, I hope you can demonstrate some results of the playtesting you've done. Because if MacGuffin summonings are based on the phase of the moon in the Realm of Thanus, I can all but guarantee you that nobody else out there has done this already, so we are going to be more reviewing your playtest results and helping you identify ways to improve playtesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Comments plus Downvote/Delete answers on poor questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may be the most unpopular suggestion since it targets respondents instead of querents, but we get a lot of answers to poorly phrased homebrew questions that are assuming a lot of unstated details. This disincentivizes subsequent and perhaps more thoughtful answers, but it also puts the querent in a weird spot with regards to editing their question to be more thorough. We don't want edits that invalidate existing answers, but if the question was poorly phrased, then it needs to be corrected before useful answers can be posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments, downvotes and delete votes are the tools we have available and should be using them on answers that may be premature. I believe diamond mods also have the means to denote deficiencies in an answer and should be using them in these scenarios; flags should be considered to help draw diamond mods to those premature answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T15:49:33.330" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9121" CreationDate="2019-05-15T17:00:29.330" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's no place on the site that would work for this&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is not to turn SE into a game engine, but to use it to write a tabletop, pen &amp;amp; paper game system. And not necessarily within SE:RPG, &lt;strong&gt;but a new area, tweaked for this creation format, as opposed to just Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is nobody here on this site has any power whatsoever to create such an area on this site. Even if there was a huge amount of interest in this idea, a proposal to those who do have the power to access and modify the site's code would certainly not fall on receptive ears. Making code changes costs money and spending money on things outside the site's actual scope is just not going to fly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sounds like a fun idea, it really does, but I don't see any way it will work here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-15T19:47:50.180" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9123" CreationDate="2019-05-16T06:30:59.157" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can vote to undelete&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleted answers can be undeleted with enough undelete votes.  Of course, the author could just delete it again, but probably they'd engage in dialogue first if you left a comment.  The 'undelete' button is where the delete button would be, but on deleted posts instead. It takes 3 votes to undelete something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-16T06:30:59.157" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9082" CreationDate="2019-05-16T12:13:07.087" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Asking questions about dice should be on topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because there are other stacks that may also fit a topic does not mean asking about that topic should be off-topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, questions about problem players and GMs are inherently interpersonal issues, and there is a stack for that. Should we relegate all those types of topics to the interpersonal stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many role-playing games use dice as the mechanism for arbitrating the outcome of actions. Asking how you might adjust or change those mechanics will alter the game and should be squarely on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, the question asking if 1d30 would be an appropriate substitute for the advantage mechanic in D&amp;amp;D 5e of rolling 2d20 and taking the highest should be on topic here. Changing the dice in that way fundamentally alters how the game works, and introduces some additional questions that need to be addressed in order to not completely break the game mechanics (to the point of being unplayable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have many users here who study and use statistics at a deep level and are qualified to answer dice based statistics questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you were to ask about a dice distribution in the absence of a game, sure that question could be addressed on the stats SE, but it could equally be addressed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you ask about a dice distribution in relation to a specific game, that question would likely be offtopic for the Stats.SE (due to it being about the interaction between the dice and the game rules). Having that question here makes it easier for someone looking to make a similar change in the future understand the ramifications for their game of doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Do there exist edge cases that should be closed?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure there do, but we shouldn't use that as a justification for saying &amp;quot;dice related questions are off-topic here unless you come up with some justification as to why it's RPG related in your question&amp;quot;. We should tackle those questions on a case by case basis (as we are with the linked question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People ask these questions here because RPGs use dice, and as such dice is a &lt;em&gt;Lingua Franca&lt;/em&gt; here, and you are likely to get people who will answer with that knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-16T12:27:41.347" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9123" CreationDate="2019-05-20T13:06:25.490" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;At worst, you could repost their answer as your own (with credit)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't help if you have less than 10k rep, but in this case that's not a problem. If the user doesn't undelete their answer and doesn't respond to attempts to communicate (or they do and won't budge on their decision to delete the answer), you could copy-paste their answer as your own and give them credit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the user then does undelete their answer, you can then delete yours and upvote/accept/whatever theirs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could even make it a community wiki answer if you don't want to gain &amp;quot;unfair credit&amp;quot; (i.e. rep) for their answer...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T07:48:12.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9132" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9074" CreationDate="2019-05-20T18:55:57.977" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tag Edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this synonym break has been completed, I've taken a crack at editing the tag for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions relating to the process of casting spells within a game.&#xA;  Including, but not limited to: spell casting mechanics, improving&#xA;  likelihood of success when casting a spell, interrupting spell&#xA;  casting, and mechanics surrounding spellcasting attributes (when&#xA;  applicable by system).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I concur with the others that treating these two tags as synonymous probably originates from a D&amp;amp;D centric mindset, which is not appropriate. However, I think the tag has broad applicability that can extend to include questions relating to D&amp;amp;D, so I've attempted to reflect that within the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2019-05-20T18:55:57.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9133" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-20T20:01:16.457" Score="15" ViewCount="578" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9154/22114&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Role-Playing Games is scheduled for an election &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4&quot;&gt;next week, May 27th&lt;/a&gt;. In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&amp;amp;A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how it'll work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Until the nomination phase, (so, until May 27th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post &lt;em&gt;one question per answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of &lt;code&gt;[text](link)&lt;/code&gt;, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at currently.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select &lt;strong&gt;up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community&lt;/strong&gt; provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, typically containing 10 questions in total.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2019-06-12T02:17:24.483" LastActivityDate="2019-06-12T02:17:24.483" Title="2019 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9134" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-20T20:01:16.457" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&amp;amp;A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, what do moderators do? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2019-05-20T20:01:16.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9135" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-21T09:16:14.447" Score="8" ViewCount="203" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm sure this sort of question gets asked a lot, but I've just tried to answer a question and I'm banned? apparently my previous answers where not well received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, I've only ever answered 1 question last November, and although not upvoted it wasn't downvoted either, it's just sitting on 0 rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've mostly been idling to be honest but now I can't contribute, and &quot;fixing my answers&quot; as per the suggestion won't help. Is this account just irreversibly ruined for me on this stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45442" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-21T22:04:04.717" LastActivityDate="2019-05-24T04:58:24.473" Title="No longer accepting answers from this account" Tags="|support|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9135" CreationDate="2019-05-21T09:33:00.627" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your account is not irreversibly ruined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have four answers in total on this site. Three of them were downvoted and removed, two by you and one by others, though you may not recall removing those two. You can view two of them in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/recently-deleted-answers/45442&quot;&gt;your recent deleted answers list&lt;/a&gt; (this link will work only for you and diamond moderators) and the third one is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135596&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you are only blocked from answering. You are still able to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;ask questions&lt;/a&gt;. Asking good questions will help you earn your way out of your answer ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer ban is automated and we cannot do anything to lift it ourselves; only you can. The answer ban takes place because your contributions aren't being accepted well and is a suggestion you need to wait and learn how things work first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am under the impression that when you try to answer and hit the blocked message, you're given a link to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86997/what-can-i-do-when-getting-we-are-no-longer-accepting-questions-answers-from-th&quot;&gt;What can I do when getting &amp;quot;We are no longer accepting questions/answers from this account&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; on main meta. If not, there is the link now: I suggest reading through it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T09:33:00.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9137" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-05-21T16:15:09.517" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This isn't just cheese, it's an ever-increasing collection of cheese&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148416/can-a-ring-of-spell-storing-and-access-to-find-spells-produce-an-endless-menager&quot;&gt;Can a ring of spell storing and access to Find spells produce an endless menagerie?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cheese...it's multiplyin'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T16:36:06.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-21T16:52:34.580" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-05-22T13:22:53.910" LastActivityDate="2019-05-22T13:22:53.910" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-21T17:09:57.863" Score="17" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5470/23970&quot;&gt;Wibbs' excellent question from the 2015 collection&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T17:09:57.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-21T17:11:06.500" Score="20" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5490/23970&quot;&gt;KRyan's excellent question from the 2015 collection&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T17:11:06.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-21T17:13:19.637" Score="17" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6907/23970&quot;&gt;KRyan's excellent question from the 2017 collection&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T17:13:19.637" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-21T17:14:51.340" Score="7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a&#xA;  moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there&#xA;  anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be&#xA;  elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stealing doppelgreener's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/posts/6919/revisions&quot;&gt;excellent question&lt;/a&gt; from 2017.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2019-05-21T17:14:51.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9135" CreationDate="2019-05-22T13:21:49.910" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Writing answers that are backed up&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've got just one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135017/23024&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; that's still live with a +4/-1 rating. That's good - but please see the comment that I left on that answer. Based on the one deleted answer I could see on Doppel's post, that seems to be a major issue for why you're being downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;back up&lt;/a&gt; your answer with either table play experience or by citing official rules, that will go a long way towards improving peoples responses and votes. Linking to unofficial sites, especially without much surrounding support, is generally poorly received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-24T04:58:24.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-22T15:06:56.607" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-05-23T00:44:36.460" LastActivityDate="2019-05-23T00:44:36.460" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-23T01:24:26.307" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8277/81002&quot;&gt;Stolen&lt;/a&gt; from the 2014 Arqade mod election questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastActivityDate="2019-05-23T01:24:26.307" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9133" CreationDate="2019-05-24T04:53:33.233" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Inspired by other sites where mods have a very different participation rate on meta to here. Wording could probably be improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2019-05-24T04:53:33.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9048" CreationDate="2019-05-24T07:45:17.173" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We lack a consensus regarding system-agnostic questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I shall start by noting that this is by no means a major issue, since the volume of system-agnostic questions has been fairly low in the previous months, but let me dig up a bit of discussion from earlier this year anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;System-agnostic questions (and the related &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/system-agnostic/info&quot;&gt;tag&lt;/a&gt;) have been subject to some controversy in chat. Basically, many prominent community members (myself included) tend to view purportedly system-agnostic questions with an inherent suspicion; it has a history of being misused in various ways (usually boiling down to the assumption that all RPGs are either DnD or &quot;close enough&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, during 2019 the topic has been discussed several times in chat and there are certainly dissenting opinions. I do feel that perhaps, over the years, we might have overcorrected on the acceptable types of system-agnostic questions resulting in a possibly too strict culture. Discussing for a new community consensus is appropriate --- the topic was last discussed in depth in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8833/how-is-the-system-agnostic-tag-supposed-to-be-used/8847&quot;&gt;this Meta from last February&lt;/a&gt;, but has had relatively little traffic and discussion, and the top answer's suggestions have not, in my experience, been comprehensively adopted by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we need a new discussion with the intent of defining better guidelines on how to draw the boundary of answerability for system-agnostic questions, and what kinds of answers do we find acceptable (in particular, I would really want to avoid system-agnostic questions getting clearly DnD-minded answers by default). However, the main reason to have this discussion is simply to get back on the same page as a community, even if to reaffirm any existing practices if nothing should change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2019-05-24T07:45:17.173" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9148" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-26T12:54:14.087" Score="14" ViewCount="388" Body="&lt;p&gt;There seemed to be a strong consensus in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9096/3548&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; that we're not happy with how homebrew review is working on the site right now, and that the way forward is to get some additional rules around it to try to cut down on the most common types of problems these questions have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What sorts of rules/recommendations do we want for homebrew review questions, if any?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is for &lt;em&gt;discussing&lt;/em&gt; potential rules/guidance; once we hammer things out here we can make a new post that clearly lays them out for ease of understanding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please post each suggested rule/guideline as a separate answer; well-received suggestions will be included in the final &quot;official&quot; post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2019-05-27T03:26:24.813" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T10:07:07.417" Title="What rules/guidance do we want to give for homebrew review questions, if any?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9149" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-26T13:16:26.500" Score="22" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;The vast majority of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; questions we get are asking us to review their homebrew, either directly (&quot;Is this balanced?&quot;) or indirectly (&quot;What LA should this race have?&quot; or &quot;How much should this magic item cost?&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we also get a nontrivial number of questions about homebrew that are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; asking us to review it. Here are some examples from the past 3 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100166/3548&quot;&gt;How can I add an alternate racial trait to a race in PCGen?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147622/3548&quot;&gt;What are the mechanical balance issues with a playable race with more than two hands?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/148270/3548&quot;&gt;What variables do I have to take into consideration when I homebrew armour?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/85132/3548&quot;&gt;What benefit would races with extra hands have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104743/3548&quot;&gt;How are spells made permanent in 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/145301/3548&quot;&gt;Does a Snake Sword user get an AoO for an opponent moving from one threatened square to another within range?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144438/3548&quot;&gt;How would I state a creature to be immune to everything but the Magic Missile spell? (just for fun)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144039/3548&quot;&gt;Is it still a binomial distribution when rolling dice with different probabilities that must be met to count as a success?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143972/3548&quot;&gt;What are the ramifications of creating a homebrew world without an Astral Plane?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106707/3548&quot;&gt;Modifying Gumshoe One-2-One difficulties for non-horror campaigns&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/141938/3548&quot;&gt;How do I prevent a homebrew Grappling Hook feature from trivializing Tomb of Annihilation?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that a lot of these seem to fall into two categories: &quot;What are the things I should know about X before I think about messing with it via homebrew?&quot; or &quot;We're using homebrew Y, how can/should we handle situation Z involving it?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we split/rename the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag into some larger number of tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2019-06-17T15:29:28.713" Title="Do we want a [homebrew-review] tag separate from the [homebrew] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9149" CreationDate="2019-05-26T17:32:04.440" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yeah, let’s do it. These are distinct categories that have separate reader and expert audiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since review has emerged as a distinct question topic it should have its own tag, especially if it’s flooding the existing tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-05-26T17:32:04.440" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9151" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9148" CreationDate="2019-05-27T01:34:31.477" Score="21" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Vote to Close rapid iteration as duplicates&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9111/48759&quot;&gt;I suggested this in the other thread&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9120/48759&quot;&gt;there was some support for it&lt;/a&gt;. Really this is just an enforcement method for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8122/48759&quot;&gt;our current guidelines&lt;/a&gt;. So here is a formal suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Leave at least 72 hours between iterations.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew is an iterative process and the correct method for this is to post new questions for each iteration. Posting new iterations too quickly has a number of issues including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gathering insufficient feedback from the previous version.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Flooding the question feed&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very similar versions with insufficient testing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To prevent these and other issue we will enforce this by &lt;strong&gt;closing any iterations, posted within 72 hours of the first, as duplicates&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-27T01:34:31.477" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9148" CreationDate="2019-05-27T11:07:31.820" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Enforce linking to previous and followup iterations&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To understand the development it is mandatory to link to a previous iteration - and to make sure that one is on the most recent version, the next iterations also need to be linked. Offending questions shall be &lt;strong&gt;edited to comply&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-27T11:07:31.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9148" CreationDate="2019-05-27T16:34:19.613" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Encourage context and purpose&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;An explicit explanation of what the homebrew is trying to achieve, and why the already existing resources are inadequate in achieving said goals.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of the questions I see are simply here's X, is it balanced? As a community, all we can do is say yes or no to best of our ability. Putting context on homebrew enables the community to leverage more of their expertise. Many &quot;issues&quot; that users are trying to solve via homebrew can be resolved via alternative suggestions that the community can provide, but only if the context is given. Plus, requesting that users justify why official resources are inadequate may spur the critical thinking in some users to find their answer before they post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Here's my Frogperson homebrew, is it balanced versus officially released races?&quot; &quot;Yes/no/maybe.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I want a character that comes from a swamp and has a swim speed. Here's my Frogperson homebrew, is it balanced versus officially released races?&quot; &quot;Yes/no/maybe. Have you also considered the Lizardfolk race?&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;I want a character that comes from a swamp and has a swim speed. &#xA;The closest thing available is the Lizardfolk, but I want my character to be an amphibian. Here's my Frogperson homebrew, is it balanced versus officially released races?&quot; &quot;Yes/no/maybe. Have you considered reskinning the Lizardfolk as a Frogperson? Change scales to protective slime covering, and bite to a tongue attack&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34366" LastEditorUserId="34366" LastEditDate="2019-05-28T04:51:19.927" LastActivityDate="2019-05-28T04:51:19.927" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9154" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-27T19:02:17.180" Score="19" ViewCount="931" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&amp;amp;A thread for the candidates. Questions collected &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9133/22114&quot;&gt;from an earlier thread&lt;/a&gt; have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us — which means we selected all of the questions submitted by the community, and didn't need to get our backups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/4f2be0a7-0037-4f8d-ba43-d67fc17ee26f/view-source&quot;&gt;copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes&lt;/a&gt;.Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck to all of the candidates!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9159/&quot;&gt;V2Blast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9160/&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9161/&quot;&gt;JohnP&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9163/&quot;&gt;Linksassin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9173/140&quot;&gt;Sandra&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-12T02:17:11.737" Title="2019 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Questionnaire" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9155" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-27T20:03:30.687" Score="7" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2019 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastActivityDate="2019-05-27T20:03:30.687" Title="2019 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|moderators|election|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-05-27T20:03:30.687" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9156" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9162" CreationDate="2019-05-27T22:21:31.433" Score="16" ViewCount="422" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed a few days ago that our election was aiming to fill 2 moderator positions instead of just the one position that was vacated by SevenSidedDie (as I expected). Is there a reason behind that decision that the mod team would like to/is able to/is comfortable with sharing with the community as a whole?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason I ask is not out of idle curiosity, but because I think it often says something about the state of the community and of how the moderators are feeling which I think could be valuable to disclose to the community as a whole. And, in the past, these conversations have been held &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6963/do-we-want-three-moderators-or-four/&quot;&gt;publicly on Meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, my intent is not to pry. For example, if it had something to do with the personal circumstances of a mod I certainly wouldn't want this to be pressure to reveal that. But if there's something of value to the community, I'd personally be interested to hear it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-05-27T23:33:57.483" LastActivityDate="2019-05-29T00:38:47.293" Title="What is the reason we are moving to having 5 diamond moderators?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|election|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9157" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9148" CreationDate="2019-05-27T23:57:13.793" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Very few to no special rules&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am a fan of adding one particular rule (I'll get back to that) but adding on a lot of new rules unique to this one type of question is not going to make homebrew reviews succeed. In fact it's probably the best way to ensure they fail, and the more rules we add the faster the failure process will go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When game recs were on shaky ground right near the start we tried to add new rules to help them work well. The problem was nobody really knew those rules until they broke them, so really all the new rules did was mean people were breaking even more rules (that didn't exist before) all the time and made game recs look worse. Those who did know the rules didn't want to follow them, giving us a this-is-why-we-can't-have-nice-things kind of situation. More severe application of the rules didn't make things better, either. The rest is history: game recs are banned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should accept that people are going to mostly act the way they're already acting. Additional rules will see newbies crash into them and more experienced users refuse what they'll see as weird arbitrary constraints. This will make people see a higher rate of failure with the tag (because things aren't meeting the new rules) and unhappier with homebrew review questions on the site. It happened with game recs, it's not going to happen differently for this case: in a year or two people will be voting to ban the topic specifically citing how often Q&amp;amp;A doesn't follow the simple rules laid out for homebrew review (that are special and unique only to it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should focus on guidance that funnels them in a good direction but accepts what we're currently getting as still OK. I'm a fan of prompting people to ask more than just &quot;is this balanced?&quot; but we have to accept that kind of question as well. We can focus on diversifying from there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to op-ed a bit in terms of why I support one of the rules that's been proposed, even though I don't want us to go overboard, because I'm hoping it's going to help clarify part of my thought process here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a fan of adding the 72-hour duplicate closure because that actually isn't a hard roadblock (despite involving a question getting closed): usually this happens because someone's incorporated feedback from only one answer. We'd be telling them hey, slow down, take the time to receive more feedback. We don't waste much of their time -- they've improved their homebrew, they're just showing us the result of that. Meanwhile the original question may still get get more feedback to help them polish it further. We improve the overall health of homebrew reviews by removing that situation where you've just come back after a day ready to write a review and they've already posted a second version and you have to start from square one, and where every version has barely any commentary (let alone contrasting reviews available). 72 hours isn't even that long, we're just catching the worst cases, and when that 72 hours is over it's likely they'll have an even further developed version for us to address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for this thing ease of enforcement here is simple, we're not wasting anyone's time (and removing some time-wasting factors), we're mostly accepting how people already do things -- we're just telling them to take it a bit slower and wait another day or two, however long it is, before iterating again. I don't see this causing failure or reducing overall health of this question category (where health is also &quot;people are less happy with having it on the site&quot;) and we should keep an eye on things to see what effect it does have on homebrew review health.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-05-28T10:05:53.887" LastActivityDate="2019-05-28T10:05:53.887" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9156" CreationDate="2019-05-28T03:29:23.520" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Unofficial Answer: We probably merit 5 moderators based on the size of the stack.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our stack gets about &lt;strong&gt;18 questions/day&lt;/strong&gt; and about &lt;strong&gt;73k visits/day&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/sites#questionsperday&quot;&gt;other stacks&lt;/a&gt; for comparison:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/&quot;&gt;Super User&lt;/a&gt;: 217 questions/day, 711k visits/day =&amp;gt; 9 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://ell.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;English Language Learners&lt;/a&gt;: 56 questions/day, 141k visits/day =&amp;gt; 5 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://dba.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Database Administrators&lt;/a&gt;: 36 questions/day, 156k visits/day =&amp;gt; 4 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://diy.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Home Improvement&lt;/a&gt;: 27 questions/day, 102k visits/day =&amp;gt; 3 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy&lt;/a&gt;: 24 questions/day, 90k visits/day =&amp;gt; 5 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt;: 18 questions/day, 218k visits/day =&amp;gt; 5 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://webapps.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Web Applications&lt;/a&gt;: 17 questions/day, 73k visits/day =&amp;gt; 5 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://movies.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Movies &amp;amp; TV&lt;/a&gt;: 13 questions/day, 79k visits/day =&amp;gt; 3 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://workplace.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;The Workplace&lt;/a&gt;: 13 questions/day, 39k visits/day =&amp;gt; 5 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding&lt;/a&gt;: 11 questions/day, 16k visits/day =&amp;gt; 7(!) moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://cooking.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Seasoned Advice&lt;/a&gt;: 4.9 questions/day, 87k visits/day =&amp;gt; 4 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Skeptics&lt;/a&gt;: 1.9 questions/day, 7.5k visits/day =&amp;gt; 4 moderators&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Magic links to other stacks work in comments but not in answers. My sadness knows no bounds.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These metrics probably play at least &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; role in how the Stack Exchange staff decides to assign moderator slots to stacks. There are likely other metrics that are not publicly available, such as flags/day or new users/month, that also factor into whatever system they use to make these decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-28T03:34:56.380" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9154" CreationDate="2019-05-28T12:09:07.540" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;V2Blast — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4#post-148812&quot;&gt;nomination link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've done it before, and I believe I'm good at it... But more than that, I want to help ensure that RPG.SE remains a high-quality resource for asking and answering questions, and serve as a valuable resource to those in the hobby, whether they've spent years (even decades!) playing RPGs or are just starting out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've participated in many communities for D&amp;amp;D and other RPGs, but RPG.SE keeps me coming back. The community, including the diamond mod team, does an excellent job of &amp;quot;moderating itself&amp;quot; - the users are able to work with the mods to make the site both an excellent resource and a friendly community. I'd like to help it continue to improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, I have no major problems with current moderation policy. By and large, the diamond mods handle things with a light touch, specially intervening only where necessary. Any major changes to existing policy are usually discussed in meta, and only implemented after such discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I have an issue, it is merely one of communication. Occasionally, there have been instances where I have thought a diamond mod has come off somewhat brusquely - presumably due to repeat interactions with or complaints about a particular user. Such conversations might fare better with a gentler tone, even if it is not always reciprocated. I've found in my time as moderator elsewhere that occasionally even disruptive users will apologize and behave constructively once they have cooled off, as long as you continue to treat them fairly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I've only rarely seen such disagreements on RPG.SE, so those cases are really more of an exception rather than the rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in my answer to the previous question, communication is key. In this case, it's important to discuss the issue both with the user, and with the moderator in question. I would try to first elicit the relevant details from the user (or group of users), as they are the one(s) making the complaint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How I validated the complaint is largely dependent on what the complaint is. If it's about a specific comment or chain of comments, it would be fairly simple to just look at the comment(s) myself. If it's something broader or more nebulous, such as a general perception of bias against a playstyle or point of view, this becomes much more tricky; as such, it'd help if the user were able to point out specific instances of this perceived unfairness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once this information is solicited or gathered, it would help to discuss the issue with the other moderators as well. Ultimately, the moderation team is a team, after all. If the complaint of unfairness is about an individual moderator's actions, we can discuss it as a group and consider whether the complaint is justified, and how to proceed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the complaint is about the mod team as a whole, we'd still need to discuss it, of course - but in such cases, we might need to do a little more introspection on whether there is any subconscious bias - and perhaps more importantly, we need to consider how we can communicate to the user(s) that we are handling (or will handle) the situation fairly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A perception of unfairness or bias is still a problem; the more widespread the perception, the bigger the problem. It's all about facing that issue head-on, and making sure everyone's on the same page - both the diamond mod team and the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consensus, by nature, requires widespread agreement. As the diamond mods are members of the community as well, most of the time, the diamond mods are likely to agree with that consensus. Of course, there will be cases where I or another diamond mod disagree with the majority. In such cases, I will endeavor to understand their point of view - and I will try to explain my own. Hopefully, if we understand each other better, we will be able to find a solution that addresses most people's concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the community fails to reach consensus on an issue, it means there's no clear conclusion that can be drawn on the matter, for whatever reason. Often, this signifies that each side is not understanding the other's perspective; if that's the case, there needs to be better good-faith discussion to reconcile differing perspectives. Being a diamond mod won't eliminate the need for conversation here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, lack of consensus can also just mean that the community recognizes a problem, but isn't sure how to solve it. (Consider long-running debates over the use or intended use of certain tags, or over the appropriateness of certain types of questions on the site.) In these cases, it's worth trying out different solutions in order to allow a diversity of opinion on the site - but sometimes nothing works. Not every type of question is a good fit for the site's format, and that's okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As discussed in earlier responses, the RPG.SE community does a great job of moderating itself - so mods rarely have to intervene directly, especially in ways that high-rep users can't. I think the key difference is that diamond moderators can act single-handedly, e.g. opening or closing questions with their 1 vote alone instead of needing to wait for 4 others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this way, I suspect I would be more careful in casting such votes (than I already am), essentially needing to meet a higher threshold of confidence before I take such an action. On the other hand, it would also mean I could more quickly close overly broad or unclear questions before they attract low-quality answers, and help guide the asker to improve their question so it can be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other important distinction between diamond mods and other high-rep users is that the diamond icon accompanies their username on every action they take on the site. To an extent, they represent the mod team no matter what they do. Obviously, this means that diamond mods should ensure that they always uphold the principles of the stack, and watch how they communicate with other users - but I believe I already do this, so it wouldn't be much of a change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By and large, moderators are both caretakers of and curators of the community. As a result, I think mods serve an important role in guiding discussions and addressing important issues. That said, I don't think their opinion is necessarily more important than anyone else's. They should participate in discussions on policy and other matters, feeling free to make their own thoughts known, just as any other user does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the word &amp;quot;communication&amp;quot; might have started to lose meaning at this point for readers of this answer, given how many times I've said it, but I think that answers the first question pretty clearly. It's very important! Users won't always agree with mods (and vice versa), but I think a healthy community must have a good working relationship between mods and other users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think diamond mods get any special tools for communicating with the community at large, but it is definitely more important, once they become mods, for them to have a finger on the pulse of the community. This includes all the standard methods of communication on the site - primarily meta and chat. It's not just about talking, but about listening. You need to consider what users have to say, whether it's justified, and what you can do to alleviate any concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've done this sort of thing often enough that I'm not exactly worried - but I don't want to let the community down. Mostly, I'm not exactly familiar with any diamond-mod-only tools I haven't used before (though, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/75192/335251&quot;&gt;for the most part, they seem like extensions of existing high-rep privileges&lt;/a&gt;) - but that's not really something non-mods can help with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose the main thing non-mods can do to help new mods is to assume good faith, communicate honestly but politely, and be willing to work with them rather than against them. (I considered writing &amp;quot;us&amp;quot; instead of &amp;quot;them&amp;quot;, but it felt a little presumptuous...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's important to help the user understand the site's rules/policies, so that they can continue to provide great answers without adding toxicity or cluttering comments. Extended on-topic discussions can be moved to chat; we can also remind users that comments are for asking for clarification and suggesting improvements to the answer, not for simply disagreeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, sometimes there may be conduct that is simply unacceptable. No matter how many valuable contributions someone provides to the community, it doesn't make them exempt from the rules - and making exceptions for toxic behavior will only lead to more of it. In these cases, it's important to put a stop to such things, and clearly explain to the user why that conduct is not allowed here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would talk to them and the other mods. It's important to first understand why they did what they did (this may or may not be obvious from their comment on the question, but it's always good to get more details and hear their explanation in their own words). I might end up agreeing with their logic, in which case the problem solves itself and the mod action stands as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, I would then present my perspective to them and explain my own point of view. If they agreed with me, then the mod team could act as a united front; if possible, the initial mod could reverse their own action and explain that the change in decision was made after discussing it with the mod team, or another mod could do it on their behalf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, whatever action ends up being taken needs to be agreed upon as a team. It's generally more valuable to come to a consensus on an issue than repeatedly and publicly disagree with one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-28T12:09:07.540" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9154" CreationDate="2019-05-28T14:00:34.437" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Rubiksmoose — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4?tab=nomination#post-148806&quot;&gt;nomination link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simple reason is that I want to help — I love to help. Dealing with the bad stuff to help this community is honestly its own reward for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And someone needs to do the job. For a community to function properly, there has to be someone who takes care of the issues and people that are preventing things from running properly. I think that I am able to do that well, and I am certainly willing to if the community sees fit to give me the chance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, I agree with most of the moderation on this site. However, I think there is always room for improvement and I'd never say that I'm 100% satisfied with the way things are because of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one broad complaint I have is that sometimes I think some moderation comes across as too brusque and stern, mechanical and impersonal. This has a lot of factors including the SE system itself, but I'd like to put a friendlier face on it with my moderation approach, especially as it pertains to new users (more of whom I'd like to see become regular active members of the community). However, this won't affect the cases of misbehavior on the site where sternness and serious action are proper and necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these would put any strain between me and the current moderation team. Though in the future if at least one of the moderators and I would disagree about something, we'd work through it just as any community member would: through reasoned discourse, listening and understanding the other person's views, and compromising as necessary for the good of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously there's not going to be any straightforward flowchart for how any possible interaction could go down, but the broad strokes of how I would approach it are as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Listen and investigate&lt;/strong&gt;: The first step I'd take would be the same first step that I'd take with any kind of concern or disagreement: listen. Listen to all the details they have and understand where it is they are coming from and what may be the root cause of the complaint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the complaint seems invalid&lt;/strong&gt;, and seems like it would be easily explained in a way that wouldn't be hard for the user to accept, I'd tell them what I was seeing and try to teach them about why what occurred &lt;em&gt;seemed&lt;/em&gt; like unfair treatment but actually was consistent with how this site always works. If the user still feels like they were treated unfairly, I'd encourage them to go to Meta with the information they have told me and allow the community as a whole to publicly weigh in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the complaint seems valid&lt;/strong&gt;, I'd likely proceed to talk to the moderator in question, find out their side of the story, and if the complaint continues to seem valid, present them with how I see things and what I've found. Hopefully the mod in question will recognize their error and make amends or amends can be made in other ways. If not, and the infraction was serious enough, the rest of the mods and/or the CM team could be brought in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe the mod's role is to enforce community guidelines when those exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Before a consensus&lt;/strong&gt; is made, I'll do as any normal community member would and try to understand the position of the other answers and offer a better viable alternative in my own answer (or support another who aligns with it) if I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the community comes to a &lt;strong&gt;consensus I disagree with&lt;/strong&gt;, my job as a mod is to learn, understand, and enact that decision unless it conflicts with SE rules and philosophies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's &lt;strong&gt;no clear consensus&lt;/strong&gt; from the community, I'll do as each community member already does and use my best judgement for what actions are best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ascribe to the idea that mods on SE are there to be human debuggers. In other words, they are there to pick up the slack where the system fails. Thus, hard moderator action should be rare and selectively applied because we do a good job of self-moderation most of the time. Mods also do some of the work cleaning up detritus (read: comment  cleanup). Essentially, mods are there to help the community help itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thinking back I've cast lots of close votes, many of which were easy unequivocal things that needed to be closed. but each time I learned more about the site and how to effectively manage it. If a mod had instead gotten there and closed them before me, I wouldn't have been able to reach the level of experience and confidence such as I have now. As a moderator I want to act in such a way to give users this same opportunity and experience, to create and foster experience and expertise in the community as opposed to simply imposing my own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that moderators can single-handedly vote to open or close something means that I will using those tools more carefully (and likely sparingly) than I am now (just like I adjusted after getting the gold tag dupehammer). I'll also have to learn when to use the other tools, like locking posts, as I go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tend to flag things quite a bit as a normal user, that mode would have to shift to dealing with flags instead of creating them. I'd also have to figure out a comfortable threshold for how I deal with flaggable things I notice &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; the community flags them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than that, I expect to keep answering and editing mostly as I do now, but paying extra attention to the fact that the diamond next to my name means that more eyes will be on me and make that much more effort to represent things well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think moderators are basically normal users (with access to extra information) when it comes to how their opinions should be weighted on Meta discussions. They are still part of the community. I don't think the mods need to purposely hold back in order to hear the community, in general. If it becomes clear that mod opinions on Meta posts are drowning out (or stifling) minority opinions, we should certainly address that, but it doesn't seem to have been an issue in my time here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it is very important for mods to keep their ear to the ground to hear what the community thinks and keep an eye out for coming trouble. In this way, you might be able to catch issues before they get bad instead of only hearing about it on Meta when things boil over. Seeing as the mods represent the community's will, it is doubly important to be aware of any shifts in opinion on those matters particularly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to listen there's no one good answer except maybe &amp;quot;listen to the community where they are&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Chat&lt;/strong&gt; is the place I'm most likely to hear the most from community members because I spend a lot of time there and we do a lot of talking. However, only a tiny fraction&#xA;of RPG.se users ever visit chat and even fewer speak there. It can be a good sounding ground if you&#xA;take into consideration the limitations of your audience.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mainsite&lt;/strong&gt; offers a surprising amount of information I think. I'd look for friction points in policies usually breaking out in the form of comment chains (which we eventually have to clean up anyways). I'd especially look for friction points from new users. Finding where people are getting confused or frustrated tells me that something might be able to be improved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meta&lt;/strong&gt;, obviously, is the centralized location for opinions. A small fraction of mainsite users come here, but more than chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm excited about the potential new role and I'm confident that I can do it in a way that will make the community better. However, I know that I will always be learning here and that I will make mistakes. My biggest fear is that I'll act in a way that bothers or upsets the community but nobody tells me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please, if you have any feedback about my behavior or anything else, contact me. I promise I'll be happy you did and use it to improve. (This goes for me as a normal user as well by the way, but it would weigh even more heavily on my mind as a mod.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user is breaking site rules and causing chaos, moderator action is needed. This would start with comments or chat messages telling them what the community expectations are and how they are disrupting things. If the bad behavior and flags continue, then the responses will escalate using mod tools that I don't really know much about now (suspensions etc.). It doesn't matter how much good content you provide, all users must adhere to our community standards. The site can handle one fewer expert answerer if it absolutely has to come to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likely, most cases shouldn't come to any hard action. I'd start by talking and understanding and teaching. After that, it depends on what they do with that information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Talk to them, if possible&lt;/strong&gt;: Either by comment or mod chat (if appropriate), I'd ping them to ask them to explain why they closed it. I'd think that listening and understanding will clear up a substantial number of cases because I've often found that different users can have very different, but valid takes on a post. And everyone makes mistakes of course. The key is to listen and learn from their perspective so that you can be better at it next time, even if you think they are in the wrong. If it's simple and either they or I agree that the other was in the right, we'd adjust the course of action together. If we don't agree...&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use best judgement&lt;/strong&gt; what happens in the case of a disagreement is going to be extremely case-dependent. This also applies if I would be unable to reach a mod to find out their reasons. Many factors can influence this decision including time pressure to open or close, how sure I am that the decision should be reversed, how the rest of the community feels about the issue, etc. Whenever possible, I'd give the mod the benefit of the doubt that they saw something I didn't and let their decision stand. I think that focusing on being a team is going to be more valuable than any one action's reversal could be. Only in the case of aligning of several factors would I see it as worth it to undo it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-03T15:13:25.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9154" CreationDate="2019-05-28T15:09:52.390" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;JohnP — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4#post-148830&quot;&gt;nomination link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have long been a fan of &amp;quot;giving back&amp;quot;, and paying back the people that came before me to enable me to do the things I do. When I first started on Stack Exchange, the moderators on the various sites helped me learn the ropes, what was acceptable and what was not, and helped me grow as a user. This is my chance to give that back on another site on the SE network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was suggested in chat that I can be a little more forthcoming on one detail. I currently moderate on three beta sites on the network, Medical Sciences (Where I also helped guide the site through a scope change from Health), Fitness, and Martial Arts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one of the best stacks on the network imho, simply because the community has agreed on a set of standards, enforced them fairly and ecumenically, and the moderation team simply helps enforce those standards. The challenge for me in the early days would be to learn the nuances of the scope that I am unaware of, and seek help when and where needed. This means working closely with the remaining moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the biggest challenges is that the moderation team will have two new users, which is a large portion of the team. It will be very important for whoever gets elected to be in close communication with the more experienced moderators to not go stomping all over the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are sensitive items. There is a need to understand what the user(s) are feeling, and why they are feeling that way, and then compare that against the actions the moderator took and how that compares to the previous standards that have been set by the community. The next step is to communicate with the fellow moderator to find out why they took the actions they did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is a simple reason, and we can point to similar actions taken in the past, then it can hopefully be resolved with a quick chat, or discussion on meta. If this isn't the case, or the parties can't agree on what was correct, then it might necessitate asking one of the SE Community Moderators to step in and mediate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whatever the situation, constant contact is key. As this is not a real time resolution, communicating the process and where you are in it will help prevent the feelings from festering, and building a &amp;quot;oh, they just want it to go away&amp;quot; attitude. Both of these will be contrary to actually finding a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one of the key points to being a moderator, is being able to administer policies even if you don't agree with them. I have participated in these discussions both on the &amp;quot;for&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;against&amp;quot; side of the debate (Especially on Medical Science, which started out as Health and changed scope). The main point to always remember is that moderation is not enforcing &lt;em&gt;your own standards&lt;/em&gt; but rather enforcing the &lt;em&gt;community standards&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I feel strongly that a policy is in error or needs to be changed/tweaked/added, that is exactly what meta was made for. The question gets raised on meta, the community participates in the determination, and then policy gets set and enforced. If I don't agree with that decision, that's where I have to put on my big person pants and simply do it, as that is what the community has indicated it wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where there is no consensus, then it becomes a matter of picking an option and moving forward with that as the standard. If it becomes apparent that the option picked is not working as people had hoped/anticipated, then you revisit and go with option B (or C, etc). Moderation is not set in stone, it is a living breathing entity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only difference in a moderator position is that they have the option to unilaterally close/delete a question. (Which in the case of gold tag badge holders is also an option). This should be reserved for questions that are obviously off topic, or actively working to harm the site (malicious links, spam, etc). I don't expect a lot of changes to the way I currently interact on the site if I were to get moderator status.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators should be active on meta, as that is where community consensus on policy should be determined. And as policy is not always set in stone, the response is both. The moderators should be familiar with policy questions being discussed by the community, and in some edge or new cases, raise the question themselves for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's very important. Moderation is not done in a vacuum. This means knowing not only what your fellow moderators are feeling, but what the community is feeling as well. For me, this means being more active in the main chat room, as well as being active on meta and reviewing old meta postings to see how policy has been shaped previously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have moderated in several discussion forums online over the years, as well as being a current moderator on other SE sites currently. My biggest worry about being an RPG moderator is learning the full scope of on and off topic. I don't want to tromp all over the site, but at the same time I don't want to be fearful to act. It's a balancing act, and balance takes time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently excellent resources available through moderation tools, fellow moderators and high rep users. All of these together should be consulted before taking unilateral actions that might not be obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly feel that this is one of the biggest challenges to &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;ANY&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; SE site. Someone that has valuable contributions, but feels that the minor rules are not really applicable. In this case, fairness and not letting personal bias influence actions are absolutely paramount. Pointing to established policy, discussions with the user on how their actions are contrary to policy and the health of the site are the main starting points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, it may be that the contributions of the person eventually get outweighed by the negativity that they bring. In that case, it may be time for the user to step away from the site for a bit, either voluntarily or not. Nobody is above site policy, no matter how much they have contributed to the site and/or the policy themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Talk to the moderator, and find out why. It may be that there is a standard I was unaware of, history that isn't apparent, or another valid reason. It may be that the other moderator read it wrong. In any case, it is a team discussion, so that the team can present a united front. If it is a disagreement that doesn't produce a viable resolution between the two of you, then you involve the other moderators. As stated above, none of this is done in a vacuum. Moderators do not shout down from on high, they are merely more equal pigs in the community, charged with the ultimate enforcement of the community decided standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-28T18:39:21.960" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9156" CreationDate="2019-05-29T00:38:47.293" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's nothing particularly magical about the number 5. A long-serving mod retired recently and we three thought that a deeper bench of experienced moderators would be good to have in the community, as other mods may choose to retire with little notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-doppelgreener, nitsua60, and mxyzplk&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-05-29T00:38:47.293" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9154" CreationDate="2019-05-29T02:33:01.187" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Linksassin - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4#post-148881&quot;&gt;Nomination Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there is not a clear intrinsic reward for being a moderator, I believe that it can be a valuable personal experience. Being part of this community has been a constant learning and self-improvement experience for me. I can only see moderation as another step on that journey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want this job because I thrive on responsibility. In my professional life I am a better team member overall when given a leadership role. In gaming I became a better player when I took up the GM mantle. I think my contributions to this community have been good, but if given the chance to moderate, they could be great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like 98% of this sites policy and believe most of the things I don't like are because I don't understand them well enough. The more time I spend reading up on the history of site policy through old meta posts the more I appreciate the way it works today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing I would like to see change is the removal of topics because they &lt;em&gt;don't fit the model&lt;/em&gt;. I believe that topics should be banned by community consensus that they are actively causing harm, rather than just being not that great. I don't disagree with the topics that have been banned and don't wish to reopen any of them. I simply believe that going forward we should give less weight to the &amp;quot;fit&amp;quot; of a topic and more to its overall effect on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will be able to work with the current moderators on this as I will abide by community consensus. This is just my single viewpoint as a user, if others disagree then it would be my role as a moderator to enact the decisions of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with most things in life, jumping to conclusions only ever causes harm. If this situation ever were to occur I would like to learn as much about what happened as possible. I would investigate for past behaviour on both sides to determine if this is a pattern/trend or an isolated case. Then I would communicate with the user(s) to establish an unbiased list of their grievances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the complaints are valid, I would then approach the moderator in question and ask for their version of events before making judgement. Engaging in discussion with the moderator, I would present the users issues in a unbiased way and listen to their response. I would then determine the correct course of action, then enact it and communicate it clearly with all parties if appropriate to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the complaints are invalid, I would seek to explain the reasoning behind the moderators actions in terms the user(s) can understand. I would try to work toward a mutual understanding of how the user(s) actions appeared despite their intentions, and why the moderators response was appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A moderators role is to enforce site policy as decided by SE and the community not to drive a personal agenda. My actions in the moderation role must be completely impartial despite my personal viewpoint. In deciding on policy I would have no more voice than any other user, unless the topic conflicts with SE policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the community struggles to reach a consensus on a topic I would attempt to find a compromise solution which encompasses all viewpoints. I recognise this will be difficult and at times impossible, but I will do my best. If required I will open discussion between the moderation team to determine our course of action. If the community cannot reach an agreement than no one moderator should be acting alone to resolve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site? What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The diamond alongside your name adds significant weight and responsibility to your actions compared to a 10k or 20k user. Knowing that your voice may drown out others moderators need to be more conservative and thoughtful in their actions. Flippant remarks from high reputation users can be dismissed where they could not when a diamond is attached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I will be more reserved with my close votes knowing that my actions are binding. I will also need to spend more time considering posts that I would previously have flagged. Flagging means &amp;quot;this might be an issue&amp;quot; while as a moderator I would need to carefully consider if it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; an issue or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe moderators should be very active in meta sites. They have a dual role there, both as prominent users and as moderators. As a user they should be weighing in on policy discussions and other issues, however their voice should be only as a user here. As a moderator it is important that they are aware of the active discussions in meta and ensure all user voices are being heard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I actually submitted this question and I did so because on other SE sites I visit there are moderators who have not made a meta post unless directly addressed for months or years. I don't believe that a moderator that is not active in the meta is capable of doing their job correctly. Or they are showing that they do not have enough passion for the site to be a moderator anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question relates a lot to the one above. I believe it is very important to remain aware of the community sentiment and current issues. If a moderator is not aware of the issues how can they effectively moderate them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator I would keep in touch with the community be remaining active in meta and chat. As well as continuing as a high contribution user on the main site. Posts such as our &amp;quot;How is the Community doing?&amp;quot; meta are vital to maintaining a healthy site. As a moderator I would be open to any user approaching me with issues and I hope that users would be willing to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly I am concerned about making a mistake that I cannot recover from. I will do everything I can to avoid it but I am only human. If I loose the respect of the community then I have failed as a moderator. To prevent this from happening I will begin slowly and take a conservative approach to moderation until I learn the ropes. I will be open to learning from other moderators and any material provided by SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am looking forward to the challenge of the opportunity. Stack exchange has helped me grow as a person and I can see the benefits in my life outside of here. I hope that moderation can help me to continue that growth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community standards need to be enforced equally regardless of user. No one users contribution can be so great that we lower our standards for them. Doing so would only open the door to a lower quality site overall, one that I don't think I would want to be a part of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An experience users with many quality answers should be able to learn from our policy metas. I would approach them an remind them of our standards, if they continue to fall below it I would enforce site policy the same way I would for a user who never posts anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question relates a lot to #3 and much of want I said there stands. Jumping to conclusions is not a good idea. Additional a mod-v-mod close/open war is the last thing the site needs. I would open communication with the moderator and try to understand their reasoning. If after explanation I still disagree I would involve a third mod or open a meta to gather additional opinions. Acting single handedly would undermine the other moderator and potential undo important actions without the full context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T01:08:48.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9164" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-05-30T14:30:46.690" Score="19" ViewCount="528" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has happened many times, but I'm going to focus on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148911/what-should-i-do-about-a-religious-player-who-refuses-to-accept-the-existence-of&quot;&gt;the most recent question&lt;/a&gt; where answers have flooded in that aren't backed up but are highly upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we do, in fact, want people to support their answers, then it feels like we need to do something more active when this happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands, we are punishing the querent by closing their question because the answers aren't abiding by our policies. The problem is, those answers are still being positively reinforced by upvotes and rep generation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The unsupported answer isn't being negatively reinforced, it's being rewarded. And if we really do want people to follow this policy, then it feels like we should do something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if an answer is highly upvoted, should unsupported answers be removed? Or have their rep removed? My concern is that by leaving them up, we are not only positively reinforcing that type of answer for whomever submitted it, but it's also acting as an acceptable guidepost for those reading it and it can perpetuate that activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not asking this lightly. I'm sure I've done this myself in the past (although I'm trying to only answer with cited experience now for good subjective questions), but it seems like that if we do want to curb this and the community won't do it through votes, something larger may need to be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-05-30T19:20:08.853" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T22:23:41.077" Title="A Modest Proposal for answers that aren't backed up" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|citations|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="29" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T14:51:25.880" Score="-11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Let them stand&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If upvotes can be considered proxies for &quot;I like this answer&quot;, &quot;I found this answer useful&quot;, or &quot;I agree this is corrected&quot;, then removing the answers would be removing well liked, useful, or correct answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T14:51:25.880" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T15:01:05.383" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should treat these answers the same as those for a fact-based rules questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the rule is &quot;include citation&quot; then the answer should at least include some degree of &quot;I have relevant experience because X&quot; or &quot;I've tried Y before and it did/didn't work.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trick becomes how much &quot;citation&quot; in this case is adequate.&#xA;As far as removal or manipulation, the rules should still apply the same here as for fact-based posts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps we should flag the post as &quot;citation needed&quot; and let the poster fix their post. If it still hasn't been corrected after a certain period of time then it should be removed &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50702" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-05-30T15:22:33.360" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T15:22:33.360" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9167" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T16:18:49.490" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Some Suggestions for Users&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have strong opinions on how, if at all, things should be changed on the Moderation side of things, so I'm not going to opine on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, I'm going to make some suggestions for what we, as engaged members of the community, can do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;More Aggressive Downvoting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't necessarily speak for other users, but speaking for myself, I'm often hesitant to issue downvotes to answers that violate the Good Subjective policy if it seems like they've been written in Good Faith. I don't like issuing downvotes unless the answer seems obviously incorrect or poorly thought out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a couple reasons, though, why I think this instinct—being reluctant to issue downvotes to such answers—is a bad instinct:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pile-On Effects&lt;/strong&gt;: Like it or not, a lot of highly voted answers (both positively and negatively) seem to accrue a lot of those votes from a sense of &amp;quot;supporting the consensus&amp;quot;, where users will see that a lot of other users have voted a particular way on a specific answer and vote similarly to reinforce the trend. If an answer picks up a few upvotes before users begin to proactively vote to support the Good Subjective policy, the run-away effect of users promoting the consensus is probably already too powerful to overcome.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Signal to Noise&lt;/strong&gt;: A downvote or two issued when an answer is still at a low score tends to engender far more substantial response from the poster than when the answer is up at a high positive score. In addition to trying to mitigate the aforementioned Pile-On Effects, delaying the downvotes means changing the score delta from &lt;code&gt;+18&lt;/code&gt; to &lt;code&gt;+98&lt;/code&gt;, which means the user is far less likely to take seriously the idea that there may be a critical issue with their answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For these reasons, I'm planning on being more aggressive with downvoting answers to such questions that don't clearly demonstrate that their response is coming from a position of experience with the issue the user is facing—and I would advise other users who approach these questions from a similar perspective to me to do the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Proactive prompts for Users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever I see a question that registers as clearly needing experience-driven answers, I try to show up in the comments and remind other users about the need to focus on such answers. As I did for the question linked by NautArch—after several answers had already come in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestion here is that we should all be making sure to &amp;quot;make sure the obvious doesn't go unstated&amp;quot;, as can sometimes be the case: if an answer is in clear need of expertise-citation, let's be proactive in pointing that out so that people who are tempted to provide answers are already aware as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;sup&gt;I said that I didn't have suggestions for changes to Moderation, but if I &lt;strong&gt;did&lt;/strong&gt; have such a suggestion, I would probably be arguing that what would be really valuable would be a way to tag, formally or informally, a question to show a prompt whenever a user attempted to provide an answer. This prompt would affirmatively declare the expectation that answers to the question try to focus on experience, not just on Armchair &amp;quot;Here's what I would do!&amp;quot; responses. But like I said, I don't have such suggestions, so I won't mention that.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also suggest that we leave such a comment if we see only one additional other comment saying the same thing. A single comment can seem like the whim of an individual user, but if multiple users say the same thing, especially in a short span of time, it can call much more direct attention to the community consensus in a way that the Comment-Upvote number might not. This is mostly a play-it-by-ear suggestion: if the question is already an hour old and already has a comment saying as such, it's probably not necessary, but if, as is often the case, you're halfway through composing that comment and see someone else post it, go ahead and finish + post it anyways, to help reinforce the consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T16:18:49.490" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T16:32:04.547" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand, I really do. I wish popularity contests didn’t break out occasionally and stir up trouble, and I wish voters would leave them to die down faster after a close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By and large, the activity &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; drop off though. And it doesn’t really encourage asking that kind of question on purpose. Answering it might be encouraged a bit, but those who don’t practice the skill of backing up their answers are simply letting others surpass them as writers of quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But most importantly, the cure is worse for the community than the disease.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Policing answers is awful, dirty work for mods, and often is worse for the site than some undeserved rep. On balance, it’s better to just let voters be a little irresponsible sometimes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having done this duty before, it sucks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The situation: A popular question, with lots of activity, and many answers that people like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To police that, mods have to do a close read of word counts in the tens of thousands, plus comments and possibly revision histories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For each post, make a difficult judgement as fairly as possible on whether posts are meeting the GS/BS standard. Then decide what to do:  nothing, cite-banner, comment only, banner + comment, delete, or deleted + comment. Then if a comment is involved, compose a quality comment that could lead to a positive outcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All while considering that passions and personalities are in play. And the more the page has exploded, the greater that factor is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Then&lt;/em&gt; get ready to deal with the backlash that’s inevitable when popular posts get moderated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Among the backlash too is always a small but numerically significant fraction of active users who experience this so badly that it’s reason to resent the mods involved, and that’s long-term pain for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire process is exhausting and a minefield.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing all that is rough and draining at the best of times: when doing it to try avoiding closing a question as obviously drawing primarily unsupported opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doing all that &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; a question gets a Primarily Opinion-based close is just as dirty and has much smaller benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Even popular closed questions aren’t huge rep generators&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a lot of answers and have answered a few in my time that in hindsight I should have not (because it was destined to be closed) or that I disagreed with the close. And they’re not really big rep generators after the initial activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closed questions just don’t get the attention and activity of the same question that’s open. It bumps far less, inviting fewer voters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;On balance, close then ignore is better for the site and community&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some undeserved rep is a small price to pay to avoid the drain of community goodwill and moderator energy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T16:38:20.707" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T17:29:39.790" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What you can do to save subjective questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all - I think most people here understand our Good Subjective requirements, why we have them, and why they're good.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt; for more on that, I'm not going to debate &quot;whether that's right&quot; (it is, for the record), this is about what to do when it's not followed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Vote, comment, vote to delete an answer, vote to close the question, edit&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote them down immediately and comment why, linking the meta guidance as necessary.  That should indicate to the poster and other voters what the problem is.  Downvotes can be changed to upvotes after an edit, comments can be removed.  If that doesn't work, then (rep allowing) vote to delete answers without backup as &quot;not an answer.&quot; Deletions aren't permanent either, they can add backup and flag for undeletion. Learning, however, is forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vote to put the question on hold so it can have some edits to make it draw better answers.  Usually the OP or someone else editing the question can help when people are just spouting off opinions by adding a &quot;I want specific experience on how you've handled this&quot; or similar, it should go without saying but obviously it's not going without saying.  To be honest sometimes this is &quot;the question's fault&quot; in that it's stated as looking for idea generation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But when the question becomes more trouble than it's worth...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It gets closed and multiple mods will vote to close it if necessary.  Every question isn't sacred, and when it requires huge amounts of curation, it needs to go. The example question linked is at 11 flags, 5 reviews, 26 deleted comments, I have put 7 citation-needed post notices on it, 3 answers are deleted, and to be honest I'm done with it.  We have many, many posts and users and if something goes that far off the tracks it's not worth the time of the mods or community trying to make it work any more, as SSD points out in his excellent answer.  There's no objective &quot;right&quot; or &quot;wrong&quot; here, it's whether it's just causing too much disruption.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every bad question we leave around means people will ask more bad questions.  Every answer someone just spouts of an opinion that isn't challenged means they'll do it again.  The only way to handle this is the community handling it - by the time a question like this gets to the mods, it's down to some blunt choices. If the community hasn't managed to get it in hand, we'll do some warnings and closes to be nice but eventually it may have to just get locked as &quot;not a good on topic question for the site.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-05-30T22:23:41.077" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T22:23:41.077" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9164" CreationDate="2019-05-30T21:13:09.867" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave the questions open.&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closure process is broken. It's just especially noticeable here. In theory, the process works by closing bad questions, so that they can be improved, so they can get good answers. In reality, bad questions get answered badly, then closed, then never updated because they already have whatever textual diarrhea squeaked through before closure. Worse, anyone who shot from the hip quick enough can then edit their answer, essentially giving the worst answerers a unique license to answer closed questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not trying to pick on @korvinstarmast or say that &lt;em&gt;his&lt;/em&gt; answer is bad, but you can see how he displayed this exact behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, despite the design intent, we have a system implementation which privileges and rewards bad answers. Furthermore, that they get answers (even bad ones) appears to dis-incentivize querents from fixing their questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If closed questions hid all answers (or even hid them from users below some rep threshold), I think this system would work as designed. As far as I understand, that would take an actual change in site behavior, which I see as out of scope. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, I suggest that we stop making the problem worse. Leaving bad questions open will continue inviting bad answers, but at least it would allow good answers too. We will inevitably get bad answers, let's at least stop foreclosing good ones. Leaving questions open will let good answers drive out the bad ones. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if we don't want to just ignore bad questions, let's at least close them &lt;strong&gt;before&lt;/strong&gt; there are any answers; once those bad-subjectives slither in, it's too late. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that all of this applies no matter how you define &quot;good&quot; or &quot;bad&quot; answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2019-05-30T21:13:09.867" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9171" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-05-31T15:28:54.527" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104249/how-does-find-familiar-work-with-a-ring-of-spell-storing&quot;&gt;How does Find Familiar work with a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's store some sentient cheese spirits for someone who doesn't work on a dairy farm.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Perhaps leaving it in the cheese storing freezer would work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44595" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:03:06.333" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:03:06.333" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9154" CreationDate="2019-05-31T22:26:19.233" Score="8" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&#xA;  What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I usually answer questions over at Story-Games.com and they're closing down so I thought I'd try another site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What is your view on current moderation policy on this site? Is there anything in particular you disagree with? If so, why? How would you reconcile this with needing to work with existing moderators?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is known for being strict, and a lot of people don't like that, but I do. If you want change to a more slack or lax policy I'm not the right pick.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you respond to learning that a user, or group of users, feels unfairly treated by another moderator? What steps would you take to learn their complaints, validate them, and what would you do with them if you felt they were valid or invalid, respectively?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Emotional validation is great♥&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I felt the complaints were legit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to know what the expected procedure is. Maybe the other mods could show the new mods the ropes on how we can undo calls or however it works? This is something that might come up quite a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I felt the complaints were not legit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd try to explain it in a different way but then drop it. You can't win them all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How will you, as a moderator, react to community consensus that you disagree with? How will you, as a moderator, handle issues on which the community has failed to reach consensus, particularly when you personally favor one particular side in the debate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ouch, this is always difficult and demotivating. At school I was elected representative of the linguistics department and I had to rep positions where I strongly disagreed. That was harsh. That's how elective democracy works, you &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to do it that way, but if the community consensus is consistently going against your own values, that, of course, makes you want to quit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how does the role of moderator differ from the role of a 10k or 20k rep user on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry, I don't understand the technical details of how this sites work well enough to answer that question properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What changes to the way that you interact on this site do you expect to have to make when filling this new role?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess I'll become more patient; more like a mom than a sister... if that makes sense?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In your opinion, how active should moderators be on meta sites? Should moderators take a pro-active approach to meta issues or be guided by the community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators are community members too, and if they happen to have an active, even pro-active personality, they can engage in the meta issues. &lt;em&gt;As community members&lt;/em&gt;, and not in their moderator role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How important do you think it is for moderators to be aware of and keep in touch with the feelings of the community with respect to moderation issues?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  If you view it as important, what kinds of ways do you intend to use to try to keep in touch with how the community is feeling?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's kind of difficult, isn't it? There are things you feel would be important if they were possible, but if they're not possible...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's hypocritical for a moderator to pretend that they understand the community; it is vital for a moderator to &lt;em&gt;try&lt;/em&gt; to understand the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to translate that to a concrete &amp;amp; actionable plan: just read, listen, try to separate anecdata from larger trends, try to separate the difference between the loudest opinions and the, uh, right or most representative opinions. A classroom where someone loudly shouts &quot;Naw stfu there's no bullying here&quot; isn't being serviced by the teacher going &quot;oh, ok, thanks&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users are generally really good at seeing problems but not as good at seeing solutions, isn't that a good old adage? Via Mark Rosewater but I'm not sure he coined it originally, he might've.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can tell from these answers, if I'm the pick there's gonna be kind of a steep learning curve. I'm kinda clueless on how a lot of this works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally generally value flags higher than answers. If a user is being cruel to other users or to readers, that's a bigger factor in my evaluation of them than the amount and quality of their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, there's a value bias there and that's why values and personality---as much as we strive for a neutral point of view---is part of this too. If someone would be like, uh, racist or w/e I'd be more inclined to take a harsh view on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guessing from my experience with other interviews that the expected &quot;right&quot; answer here is to side with your fellow mod &amp;amp; keep it closed. But that doesn't sit super well with me. I'm curious to learn what the consensus policy is around issues like that because my instinct is to reopen it (if that's possible, technically).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or if it's not possible, technically, and the question instead is about how to metamoderate your fellow mod and bring it up to them, that's kind of an easier q, isn't it? Just explain to them why you didn't want the question closed and that's all you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do, isn't it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7770" LastEditorUserId="7770" LastEditDate="2019-06-05T05:57:23.273" LastActivityDate="2019-06-05T05:57:23.273" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-06-03T15:00:59.767" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a casual, mostly lurker, user, I read a lot of your answers. I am glad you take the time to get back your life and I hope to see you around whenever you want to. Moderating and contributing is a heavy stressful work for a silent crowd. Thank you for everything you did for this community. May your critical successes memorable and your fumbles comical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11129" LastActivityDate="2019-06-03T15:00:59.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-06-06T10:04:15.820" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149354/what-is-the-maximum-number-of-net-attacks-that-one-can-make-in-a-round&quot;&gt;What is the maximum number of net attacks that one can make in a round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you have too many nets at your disposal and want them all to hold your creamy cheese, how many do you need?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28410" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:59:17.383" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:59:17.383" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9176" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-06T16:00:55.290" Score="9" ViewCount="244" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149332/how-to-fairly-determine-evil-actions&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; has been closed, reopened, closed again, and is now on track to be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see some issues with the question and it has gone through at least one major revision which doesn't seem to have helped much. However, I think there are some good stackable issues in there, and I'd like to see if anybody has an idea that I'm not seeing for improving the question such that it is able to remain open and get quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the first answer to the question is any indication, we are at least looking at a question where it is unclear what exactly it is asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What, if anything, can be done to pull this question out of this cycle?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-06T20:55:47.677" LastActivityDate="2019-06-06T20:55:47.677" Title="Can we save this question about an house rule against evil actions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9176" CreationDate="2019-06-06T16:39:25.703" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;People seem to be getting &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; hung up on the terms &quot;Evil&quot; and &quot;house rule,&quot; neither of which are really relevant to the question. It probably doesn't help matters that the question had the [alignment] tag for a while.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should remove references to house rules (this is more a social contract thing). And consider changing evil to &quot;jerks,&quot; &quot;maniacs,&quot; &quot;psychopaths,&quot; or some other term that doesn't intersect the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People also are getting hung up on the part at the end where the asker outlines what they did, and asks if they reacted appropriately... Which gets into a whole 'nother ball of wax. It's probably best to minimize that section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question ultimately isn't much different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/11748/how-do-i-stop-my-pcs-from-acting-like-insomniac-monkeys-on-crack?rq=1&quot;&gt;How do I stop my PCs from acting like insomniac monkeys on crack?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;. They both outline the same problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have asked my players not to do (some vaguely defined thing).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;My players have done said (vaguely defined thing).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What do I do?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specifics are different enough that the answers don't apply, but the overall framework is the same. Answers to this question probably fall into some combination of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Define the behavior you don't want more clearly (&quot;Evil&quot; is a vague term).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use the Same Page Tool to find a group that's right for you.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept that some people only want to play town-burning murder hobos. Either embrace it or move on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77" LastActivityDate="2019-06-06T16:39:25.703" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9176" CreationDate="2019-06-06T17:06:13.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a proposed revision - The problem is with the basic last question, not sure how to phrase it to not get a lot of &amp;quot;Well, only the players can tell you that&amp;quot; type of responses:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been DM'ing for a few years, and due to my upbringing I prefer to run games that don't really allow for what I consider to be evil acts in game. For me, that means using basic common sense and not doing things a law abiding citizen wouldn't do in real life, so no murder, torture, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I haven't had to enforce this rule very often, there have been times when I've gotten into arguments over what actually constitutes 'evil', and the argument is generally that D&amp;amp;D is a game, and that I am trying to enforce my own value system on the game/players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the scenario that caused the problem. I created a town in a kingdowm that had increasingly oppressive and binding laws, until the populace got fed up and deposed the ruler. One of the laws that wasn't repealed, however, was the law against selling alcohol. My intention was for the party to solve this problem through using charisma checks in discussion with townspeople to vote to drop the law, thus enabling them to open a tavern as a business for passive money in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The players essentially ignored this and turned into murder hobos, and ended up burning down a different village to get their alcohol. I asked them several times if they were sure, and then started a different encounter planned for later in the game early. I was trying to get them to correct their actions to reflect the house rule on evil, but that backfired and they ended up quitting on the game completely, and I have not heard anything from the group since then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was very disheartening for me, and I'm not really sure if I had done something wrong in how I approach the game. Where did this go so badly they felt their only recourse was to quit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any/all suggestions welcome on phrasing the last bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-06T17:06:13.697" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-06-06T19:51:25.060" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/149433/44723&quot;&gt;A million-to-one chance to succeed an attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one big joke that tastes a bit like Lancre Blue, and gets into the melty flavour that happens just one in a million times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:58:57.127" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:58:57.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9180" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9181" CreationDate="2019-06-07T07:58:42.920" Score="20" ViewCount="236" Body="&lt;p&gt;When reading an answer to a recent question, I felt that the &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; of the question was good, but the &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt; (and commentary) of the question seemed negative, verging on personal criticism. I didn't want to flag the answer, because it makes some good points, and because I thought it fell on the right side of the line between good and bad intentions. But I also worried (especially as a new user) that making an edit simply for tone would be inappropriate, or risk falling outside the editing guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;How to Edit&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;► &lt;strong&gt;clarify meaning without changing it&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;► &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; respect the original author&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where would an edit which simply seeks to remove a tone which comes across as unfairly negative and critically &lt;em&gt;ad hominem&lt;/em&gt; of the question's author, without actually improving the substantial content of the question in any way, fall within our guidelines?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For full context as requested by comments and answers below, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/149441/1&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; was the original text of the answer which led to me ask this question. I did decide to submit an edit, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/149441/revisions&quot;&gt;was accepted&lt;/a&gt;. I was hoping for discussion or advice about the general case of borderline examples of this type. Thanks for the input on improving this question everyone.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49758" LastEditorUserId="49758" LastEditDate="2019-06-07T15:46:09.610" LastActivityDate="2019-06-07T23:37:42.037" Title="Is it appropriate to edit an answer just for tone?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9181" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9180" CreationDate="2019-06-07T09:48:05.753" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DISCLAIMER&lt;/strong&gt;: as you may guess by looking at my profile history, I can't really be considered an experienced user of &lt;em&gt;this specific&lt;/em&gt; site in the network. Nevertheless, I have been an user on the network for quite a long time now and have seen this topic come up many other times on various of its topic-specific sites, so please accept my answer as something more generic and not centered around just Role-playing Games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, you have found some content on the network. You read it, and reading it makes you feel bad. For some reason, the tone in the post doesn't feel right: maybe there is a bad joke that some could find offensive, maybe an answer look far too condescending on the asker, maybe it is something different but the final outcome does not change... that content simply doesn't feel &lt;em&gt;nice&lt;/em&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...but the post also provides some useful info, so you fear that removing it would mean losing good content too. At this point, you don't know what to do... the best option seem to be editing out the &quot;bad&quot; part of the post, re-writing it to remove whatever felt out of place, but you also fear this could be impolite to the original poster - after all you are changing their &quot;words&quot; and original intentions to something &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; think is more fitting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I fear I can't really give you a gold-bullet clear cut answer on what to do in those cases, but I hope to be at least able to give you some suggestions on how to start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all... &lt;strong&gt;Don't be afraid - your intentions are good&lt;/strong&gt;.&#xA;You aren't thinking about changing the content of a post to misrepresent the original intentions of its author - you are just trying to improve an existing post so that no one will feel bad or put-down by reading it. There is no evil in this.&#xA;If you really still feel dubious about this, consider that the &lt;strong&gt;network&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt; states this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;Unacceptable Behavior&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No subtle put-downs or unfriendly language.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Even if you don’t intend it, this can have a negative impact on others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No name-calling or personal attacks.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Focus on the content, not the person. This includes terms that feel personal even when they're applied to content (e.g. “lazy”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No bigotry.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. When in doubt, just don’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No harassment.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  This includes, but isn’t limited to: bullying, intimidation, vulgar language, direct or indirect threats, sexually suggestive remarks, patterns of inappropriate social contact, and sustained disruptions of discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had to cut some of the actual text for sake of brevity (refer to the above link for the full version) but I think the general meaning should be clear. We should strive for this to &lt;strong&gt;be a welcoming place for everyone&lt;/strong&gt; and there is no &quot;site culture&quot; that can override this (luckily, &quot;site culture&quot; - as in &quot;our site tolerates this - we are grown up!&quot; - doesn't seem to be a problem I have really seen on RPG - as I said before you guys still feel like one of the best communities I have found on this network).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said... it may be hard to judge at times. Maybe you think you may be a little oversensitive (I know this felling very well, back on Meta I was considered very oversensitive on some topics by far), maybe you wonder if you have misinterpreted the post, maybe there is something else you don't know... &quot;maybe&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well... let me tell you a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You are not alone in this.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When in doubt... just ask. You have many ways to do so. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you can raise a custom moderator flag: tell the mods you feel this post could be improved and let them handle the problem from there. This can be good at times - first, they probably are more experienced than the average user when it comes to moderating stuff (hey, they &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; moderators, after all). Second, if moderation will be really needed often corrective actions performed by mods are more easily accepted by the user than the same action being performed by some &quot;generic internet person&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;for simpler task, it may just be worth double checking your thoughts with somebody else. In this regard, &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat is a good place to ask for advice&lt;/a&gt;. &quot;When in doubt, ask our local guru BESW&quot; they say.... Jokes aside, never underestimate the power of asking for advice (unless you are a candy colored ponies and have to fill a 21' episode with a friendship problem that would never have existed if you just talked from the start).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way as I have said before, just ask and I am sure you will find someone willing to help you to dispel your doubts and hopefully work together for choosing the best course of actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a last suggestion, when asking please always keep in mind what should be your first objective: you aren't trying to &quot;demonize&quot; anyone - so try to avoid what could be seen as name-calling, superfluous &quot;bad advertising&quot; of an user or just seeds for drama and flames. What I mean is that you should focus on the fact that there is some not-nice content on the site - not on the fact that &quot;user X&quot; posted some not-nice content on the site. It is true that sometimes moderators will have to focus on a specific user when deciding corrective actions (as you may understand, it does matter in a way if said user is just having a bad day or is a user which already had a history of multiple suspensions for offending other users), but focusing on &quot;who&quot; did post the bad content isn't probably something that you should do when asking for advice (or when you aren't even sure that it's bad content in the first place).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50686" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-06-07T23:37:42.037" LastActivityDate="2019-06-07T23:37:42.037" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9180" CreationDate="2019-06-07T13:29:19.827" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, editing for tone is acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are a new user however, ask others in comments, chat, and/or meta to make sure you're doing the right thing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For your specific example case, I think you did the exact right thing.  The answer wasn't quite &quot;Be Nice!&quot; flaggable, but it was a little on the antagonistic side, and softening posts like that makes for both a better experience and also teaches people what kind of discourse we prefer here.  Submitting an edit and having it approved makes it collaborative as well. Exactly what we want to see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes an author will want their original and may revert; that's OK.  But activity around it at least brings it to everyone's attention. Much mod activity is around direct violations of Be Nice but we do also work with people that seem to be skirting the line a lot, understanding that people have bad times in their lives or get into states where they're frustrated with the site. But having the community be the first line of defense there is better, so that someone already having a hard time doesn't feel like &quot;a mod is picking on him;&quot; feedback of &quot;maybe you could say it this way&quot; from a variety of other site members is more meaningful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-07T20:29:09.587" LastActivityDate="2019-06-07T20:29:09.587" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9183" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-08T01:04:48.020" Score="7" ViewCount="250" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have begun working on a homebrew class for D&amp;amp;D 5e and I plan to ask a critique question on rpg.se once I'm finished.  I figured it would be better to ask this meta question now than at the end of the process, so I can use any advice given here to take notes as I write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I show the features from a &lt;em&gt;several-page-long&lt;/em&gt; class document?  Can I display them &lt;strong&gt;off-site&lt;/strong&gt; on a &lt;strong&gt;google doc&lt;/strong&gt; or must I display the features and tables on &lt;strong&gt;RPG.se&lt;/strong&gt;?  When describing the reasoning and play test results for any particular feature, should I do so on se or the google doc/recommended alternative?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, should I leave out all info &lt;strong&gt;not related to the features&lt;/strong&gt; such as lore and the quick build to lessen the reading? I'm assuming anything not completely feature related is only import on a per-question basis, but is their any information/lore that isn't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43317" LastEditorUserId="43317" LastEditDate="2019-06-12T22:59:36.967" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T16:20:32.943" Title="How do I present homebrew material in a critique question?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9184" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-10T16:00:55.873" Score="20" ViewCount="243" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have something that I am confused or concerned about concerning how this site works. Where can I get help?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-10T22:05:46.950" LastActivityDate="2019-06-11T15:06:37.460" Title="I'm confused about how this site works; where can I go for help?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9184" CreationDate="2019-06-10T16:00:55.873" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Firstly, if you are a new user, welcome to the site! We are a community of people that want to help you and get you an answer. Unfortunately, the site has a bit of a learning curve to it. But many of us have already been through that and are here to help you get through it too. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are here and confused about anything at all, here are some of the options available to get help:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Take the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — taking the tour will give you a quick rundown of how this site works. It covers most of the most basic questions and it only takes a minute to scroll through. Plus you get a badge for doing it!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Search our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — This is a good place to come for questions about policies or mechanics about the site for things which the tour may have only briefly touched on. Search using some of the terms that are confusing you and see if anything helpful pops up.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Post your question to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — Meta is where we deal with questions about how this site works and resolve confusion and issues. Searching for your issue there is a good first step and your issue may have already been asked and answered! If not, simply post a question there and the community will be able to answer you or point you to an appropriate answer. Don't be shy about posting questions or concerns here, that is what it is for and we'd honestly be happy to help you out. If you are ever interested in browsing Meta, start with our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; which has answers to many of the most common issues you might run into.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ask in our friendly &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat room&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — Once you have 20 reputation, you will be able to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat&quot;&gt;post messages in chats&lt;/a&gt;. In the chatroom you will find people talking about a wide variety of topics. People almost always more than willing to help out someone with a concern or confusion. Just note that there are times when chat is not that active, in which case it might be a while before you get a response. However, if chat is busy, then you'll likely get an answer pretty quickly or pointed towards it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ask in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — If you are confused by something that somebody said, either in a comment or in their post (question or answer), you can try asking about it in a comment. Note that you have to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;50 rep to comment anywhere&lt;/a&gt;, but you can always comment under your own posts. To tag a particular user put &quot;@[username]&quot; in your comment. Tagging will notify the user, but only if the user has commented on that post already or has edited it (maximum of 1 tag per comment).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just remember, we are here to help so please don't hesitate to use any or all of the resources above if you have any confusion or concerns or suggestions for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-06-11T15:06:37.460" LastActivityDate="2019-06-11T15:06:37.460" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9186" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-11T20:01:08.127" Score="25" ViewCount="725" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4&quot;&gt;fourth moderator election&lt;/a&gt; has come to a close, the votes have been tallied and the two new moderators are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/33569/v2blast&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/33569.png&quot; alt=&quot;V2Blast&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28591/rubiksmoose&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/28591.png&quot; alt=&quot;Rubiksmoose&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They'll be joining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the existing crew&lt;/a&gt; shortly&amp;mdash;please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, please join me in thanking SevenSidedDie and mxyzplk who will be stepping down as moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/results/5153296585064448/0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;view a summary report online&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastActivityDate="2019-06-12T12:56:30.983" Title="2019 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9186" CreationDate="2019-06-11T21:27:15.603" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ah, so mxy &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; stepping down. I suspected that was in the cards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Grats Rubiksmoose and V2Blast. We are in good hands.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. Thanks, mxyzplk, for your long service at this stack ...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... and for volunteering your time in the efforts of achieving the goal of a good site with a good SNR.  More on that later.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9013/22566&quot;&gt;We already have a thank you thread for Seven&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Noteworthy stat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;4,650 voters were eligible, 1,538 visited the site during the&#xA;election, 843 visited the election page, and 494 voted&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;10.62 per cent cared enough to vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As @Carcer kindly pointed out, given those still active, about 32% voted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-12T10:46:55.017" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9186" CreationDate="2019-06-11T21:52:58.853" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Thanks, mxyzplk, for serving as a mod!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may never have remembered how to spell your username without looking it up, but I did appreciate the hard work put into the site by you, SevenSidedDie, nitsua60, and doppelgreener. Hope you stick around the site and keep making it a better place! Half the mod team being changed feels like a big deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that note:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Congrats to Rubiksmoose, and thanks to everyone who voted!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate everyone who voted - no matter who you voted for. I know Rubiksmoose will do a great job. I've got a lot of stuff to read through, but I hope to keep RPG.SE at least as good as how I found it. Thanks for your confidence in the two of us!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-11T21:52:58.853" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9189" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-11T22:13:17.253" Score="40" ViewCount="539" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9186/22566&quot;&gt;Jon Ericson let slip that mxy will be handing in the diamond badge now that the election is over&lt;/a&gt;.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, this is the RPG.SE first post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/275/22566&quot;&gt;by mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the first &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/322/22566&quot;&gt;meta post I could find&lt;/a&gt;: (But apparently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/80/should-questions-be-for-trivial-definitions&quot;&gt;there is an earlier one&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/52/22566&quot;&gt;The Pro Tem mod nomination&lt;/a&gt;. August of 2010. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first four Pro Tem mods &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/369/22566&quot;&gt;were announced Sept 7, 2010&lt;/a&gt;: &#xA;Mxyzplk, RS Conley, C Ross, Bryant (and it seems Pat Ludwig and Ace Calhoun).  . &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Thank you&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a lot of time, a lot of flags, and a lot of &quot;how do we do this better?&quot; discussions on meta, for a pay scale of 0 dollars per hour. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tips cap&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-06-14T18:34:11.680" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T07:11:47.617" Title="Thank you, mxyzplk: appreciation thread for long time mod" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9189" CreationDate="2019-06-11T23:09:46.363" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;Copied over from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9188/33569&quot;&gt;the other thread&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Thanks, mxyzplk, for serving as a mod!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may never have remembered how to spell your username without looking it up, but I did appreciate the hard work put into the site by you, SevenSidedDie, nitsua60, and doppelgreener (you 4 have been the RPG.SE mods since I joined the site). Half the mod team being changed feels like a big deal. Hope you stick around the site and keep making it a better place!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-11T23:09:46.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9186" CreationDate="2019-06-12T12:56:30.983" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Congrats to you both!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to say to Rubiksmoose that I voted for you as my 3rd choice not because I thought you a poor choice, but because part of me wanted to keep you a regular user that asked good meta-questions and made good comments without the diamond attached to your name. It was a weird catch-22 for me. I sincerely hope you continue providing excellent comments and find ways to do so in a manner that doesn't seem mandatory despite the diamond, I know other mods have sometimes struggled with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;V2, I hope you continue your extensive edits to improve links throughout the stack to connect things with official sources wherever possible. It's very appreciated, though, perhaps never mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, neither of these statements comprise your full contributions, just the most notable things for myself personally. Congratulations again and thank you for contributions both past, present and future!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2019-06-12T12:56:30.983" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9192" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-13T02:58:47.377" Score="19" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;These days I come to the site in the morning and I usually see 10, 15, even 25 posts in the mod-queue with flags waiting to be handled. When I started (two+ years ago) it was usually more like 2 or 3 posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wondered aloud how much of an uptick there'd been in flagging recently, and SE staff were kind enough to rip off a quick visualization:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pYOKh.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pYOKh.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;timeline of flags thrown on RPG.SE&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;[click for larger image]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's count of flags per month on the vertical axis, month on the horizontal, and a legend of the stacked lines below. Even without clicking in you can see that flags are up quite a bit recently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The huge spike toward the end is because of a spam wave we had at the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I don't think there's anything &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; here.&lt;/strong&gt; But this uptick in flagging does lead to a commensurate increase in moderation &lt;em&gt;activity&lt;/em&gt;, and most of that activity occurs in a behind-the-scenes way that you-all can't really see or know about. (Except inasmuch as it affects your posts or flags.) So I wanted to get it out there publicly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some unordered observations of my own:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;First, note that the number which caught my attention is actually &lt;em&gt;posts with active flags&lt;/em&gt;, not just flags. So while commenters are almost certainly right that some increase in absolute number of flags (as graphed above) would be due to people flagging whole threads, there's also just more &lt;em&gt;posts&lt;/em&gt; receiving flags.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Off the top of my head I'd say ~90% of the flags I see are valid/helpful. So this is (in my opinion) good work the community's doing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We know &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9060/23970&quot;&gt;the userbase is growing&lt;/a&gt;, basically any way you measure it. &lt;em&gt;Some&lt;/em&gt; of this increase in flagging is to be expected, then.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This increase, though, does seem to outpace userbase growth. We've something like tripled our flag-rate in the last year or two, whereas users and posts are up on the order of 10% year over year.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That thick reddish bar that's ~half of the flags from 2013-mid2017, then disappears... remember they renamed some of the comment flagging options? Those red ones are &quot;obsolete&quot;; the teal bar at the very top these days is &quot;no longer needed.&quot; &lt;em&gt;I.e.&lt;/em&gt; they're the same flag: comments that can be cleaned up having served their purpose.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The flag I most often decline is Not An Answer, generally because someone's flagging a &lt;em&gt;poor&lt;/em&gt; answer as &lt;em&gt;not an&lt;/em&gt; answer. My understanding (derived from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370/311001&quot;&gt;this meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; and from my early declined NAA flags being explained to me by mxy/SSD) is that NAA is used for posts that don't attempt to address the question: gibberish, new questions, riffs on a theme raised elsewhere, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The other flag I decline a lot is when some comments are flagged No Longer Needed (NLN) but they've only been around for ten or fifteen minutes. Sometimes even those are obviously trashable. But when there's good commentary that appears to be helping posters and readers I'm loath to trash it too quickly. After a few days of inactivity, definitely. After a few hours, often not.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2019-06-16T21:06:10.050" LastActivityDate="2019-06-16T21:06:10.050" Title="Increased flagging activity (report)" Tags="|discussion|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9192" CreationDate="2019-06-13T08:53:17.183" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say there are many reasons but the most likely is purely a numbers game. This looks like non-linear growth with step changes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The non-linear nature I would put down to number of users reviewing * number of questions * number answers, all of which should be steadily increasing on a healthy SE site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would put the steps down to singular events, such as: a user who has a passion for flagging joining the site, or a post on flagging highlighting it to more users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with your main point there does not seem to be anything wrong here. I am also going to ask the very helpful SE staff if they can run me one of these off for Homebrew forum; you have piqued my interest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15584" LastActivityDate="2019-06-13T08:53:17.183" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9194" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-14T09:20:27.953" Score="5" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;All comments &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2677/44723&quot;&gt;should be temporary&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I regularly browse questions which are years old and have a substantial amount of comments that ask for clarification of the question which has not been provided by the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are comments that ask for clarification not temporary&lt;/strong&gt; until they are resolved, even if they have not been resolved for (e.g.) 9 years?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, how temporary are comments that ask for clarification of a post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-06-14T15:40:31.180" LastActivityDate="2019-06-15T15:08:20.670" Title="How temporary are comments that ask for clarification of a post?" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9195" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9194" CreationDate="2019-06-14T11:10:52.493" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Comments should be deleted (or flagged for deletion) only when they are no longer relevant.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no specific timeline for that. Here are a few examples of applying that principle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the comment asked for clarification and it was given, then it should be removed. If it asks for clarification and the issue still exists, it should not. Sometimes there is disagreement in the community on what is or is not unclear. In these cases, the number of votes on various comments can help suss out the community's opinion on relevance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some comments can be relevant indefinitely. For example, consider your own three comments on this question, which all follow the common &quot;Related: &quot; format. It's possible the links will die, and thus should be removed, but there is no definite time they will age out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some comments are abusive or rude. These are never relevant to the associated question or answer, so they should be flagged for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28580" LastEditorUserId="28580" LastEditDate="2019-06-14T22:03:40.147" LastActivityDate="2019-06-14T22:03:40.147" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9196" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9189" CreationDate="2019-06-14T18:26:28.883" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks y’all!  Sorry, I had planned a bit more overlap with the new mods and then to do an announcement, but looks like I’m sans diamond already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve been a mod on RPG.SE for more than 8 years, and have seen the site from beta to present day. It’s been a wild ride at times, and at other times pretty calm as everyone focuses on the point of the site, Q&amp;amp;A to learn how to play and run RPGs better.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve been into RPGs since 1982 with Star Frontiers and then D&amp;amp;D. Besides a brief break in college and a year or two thereafter, I’ve been playing and running games, through the game explosion in the late 1990s, through basic/1e through every edition to 5e and Pathfinder, and through the indie game explosion this decade. I still game weekly. RPGs have spurred me to research history, make long time friend groups, and prepared me to be a better manager and parent. It’s one of the best hobbies there is!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve also gone through a lot of RPG communities, from Usenet newsgroups in the early days to forum sites living and dead.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I love RPG.SE because it’s far and away the highest signal to noise source with the most mutually respectful conduct of any online gaming community I’ve been a part of. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Curating that was a challenge for each generation of mods, and we made mistakes over time.  But we learned from those mistakes, and have tried to empower the community with doing the vast majority of “mod” work, build consensus on Meta, and be adamant about what acceptable conduct consists of. We also learned not to “fight the format”, and not try to use the stack for things that don’t fit the usual Q&amp;amp;A rules. As a result we have a healthy and growing stack with many experts in about everything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We still have issues - Good Subjective waxes and wanes, but recently the community’s been stepping up there too. So I figured it was best to step away while things were going well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Diamonds are forever, so diamond mods can always return by contacting SE central; maybe I will one day.  But 8 years is a pretty long stretch and a break is welcome.  I have confidence not just in the mods but the community that is making this a great and unique place for gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Special thanks to all my fellow mods over the years and best wishes to our two new ones. I will make sure to occasionally rustle your jimmies to keep you on your game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-15T16:30:24.270" LastActivityDate="2019-06-15T16:30:24.270" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9194" CreationDate="2019-06-14T18:41:15.183" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Comments should be deleted (or flagged for deletion) only when they are no longer relevant.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once requests for clarification or correction are addressed by the post author, by incorporating or rejecting them, those comments often become obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, comments are a multi-axis thing.  Upvotes count.  If there is a comment with a needed clarification or correction, it may stay indefinitely especially if upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example “But the DMG says X which directly contradicts your answer &amp;lt;20 upvotes&gt;”.  That stays basically forever, and a flag would be declined (at least by me when I was modding). Or a request for clarification on a super unclear answer that’s getting downvoted - the answer may not be bad enough or get deleted, but then the comment still has value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fuzzy line here is that an author may see a critique and reject it but give no visible sign thereof.  Ideally the author would drop a comment or flag that comment as obsolete themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So judgement is applied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is the comment jibber-jabber or a justified improvement or request for clarification?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it upvoted?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there another answer making that point/should that comment be an answer?  Sometimes there’s something else at work- like sometimes someone will put the same disagreeing comment on every single answer.  That's obnoxious so they’ll go.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are for improving a question or answer.  If they holistically still seem to have a role to play in that improvement, especially if others agree (via upvotes), they stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, remember not everyone is on the site every hour of every day.  You should absolutely not be flagging useful comments for removal within the initial activity period of a question (usually a couple days to a week, depending).  If the post author does, or if the comment has been incorporated, then it's fine, but we don’t want comments with suggestions flagged for removal in less than 24 hours by a third party.  These flags should be declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-15T15:08:20.670" LastActivityDate="2019-06-15T15:08:20.670" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9198" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9199" CreationDate="2019-06-16T06:24:19.323" Score="6" ViewCount="323" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150013/is-this-alternate-draconic-ancestry-trait-that-grants-flight-a-balanced-replac&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; should &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; be locked, given the edit war or whatever we want to call that (I assume there must be edit history I can't see because otherwise the OP's obscene posts seem totally out of the blue with literally nothing having happened to trigger them), but I don't think the moderator 'Content Dispute' notice is appropriate because it's not so much a genuine content dispute as spam.  The moderator notice, for reference, says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This post has been locked while disputes about its content are being resolved. For more info visit meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;with a link on &quot;visit meta&quot; to the meta home page (this link may be configurable, that's the target in this specific case).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it seems to me like the only reason to lock this post is that we have someone committing gross violations of the 'Be Nice' policy.  But we have a different, better, tool for that use case: temporary suspensions/bans.  Indeed, it appears the user in question has already been subjected to a temporary ban while I was writing this question, but the post is still locked.  It seems like locking the post, given a ban has already been issued, is redundant and unnecessary. What's the purpose of the continued lock in this case? (I don't mean to imply that there can't be one-- maybe it is important that a user not get an answer to that question while banned because that half-circumvents the punishment of the ban or something, or some other thing I haven't thought of.  In any case, the question is not rhetorical-- I genuinely want to know what the mod thought process on this here thingy is/was)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-17T05:43:56.553" LastActivityDate="2019-06-17T05:43:56.553" Title="Why is this question about 5e dragonborn homebrew locked as a content dispute?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|locked-posts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9198" CreationDate="2019-06-16T15:57:12.070" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The post is unlocked now. (It would have automatically unlocked in another 20 minutes anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I locked it (for an hour - the lowest option) as a first/second step in handling a quickly developing situation - the user was repeatedly vandalizing their own post to insult the RPG.SE community, as they were apparently online at the time. (I'm as confused as you are about what sparked it.) I wanted to stop them doing that first, so I initially locked the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then they edited the insults back in a second time after I reverted the self-vandalization a first time, just before I managed to lock the post - so I had to unlock the post, revert it again, and lock it again. I was hoping to be able to ask the other mods how to handle the situation, but I was the only one online at the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the abusive behavior was continuing, I needed a moment to get ahead of them so locked the post (which is quick and easy to do in our UI) while I caught my breath and found the button to suspend the user. Then, as noted above, I unlocked the post once the situation had been handled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us know if you have any other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-06-16T15:57:12.070" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9200" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9204" CreationDate="2019-06-17T12:07:42.113" Score="13" ViewCount="270" Body="&lt;p&gt;I seem to remember seeing a meta or just other people commenting that there's no need to &amp;quot;sign&amp;quot; a question, such as if I, as a new user, had asked a new question saying:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hi RPG.SE,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something something something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks in advance!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NathanS&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The NathanS is redundant (and so is the &amp;quot;greeting&amp;quot; too) because we can already see it's from me next to the tags below the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what about &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Thanks in advance&amp;quot; or similar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently I edited &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150073/35259&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, removing the &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; on the end, but then I put it back after a minute or so (hence it's not in the edit history*) since it might be seen as robbing the user of their politeness or something (and after &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9198/35259&quot;&gt;a recent incident&lt;/a&gt; with a new user over editing, I'd rather not annoy anyone through unnecessarily editing or editing that could be seen as antagonistic).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have a policy already for such a thing? If not, what do we think of &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; at the end of a question as a community? (And is there already a policy or meta question or something that describes the &amp;quot;signing&amp;quot; thing I mentioned at the top of this post?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*&lt;sub&gt;Note that the &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; has now been removed by Sdjz, which confirms I'm not the only one under the impression that we don't need &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; at the end of questions, but I'm still curious as to what our policy or collective opinion is about this.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T03:58:13.443" Title="What's our policy on editing &quot;Thanks&quot; from new questions?" Tags="|discussion|editing|new-users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9149" CreationDate="2019-06-17T15:29:28.713" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No additional tag needed&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's all homebrew. Making it, developing it, using it, revising it, etc. It's all &amp;quot;made up&amp;quot; rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, a separation of creation vs impact is unnecessary and there will just be a bunch of tag-bleed between the two anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-17T15:29:28.713" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9202" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9203" CreationDate="2019-06-17T23:47:54.473" Score="6" ViewCount="191" Body="&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I'm not &lt;em&gt;complaining&lt;/em&gt; about this question being protected.  But I'm not sure what &lt;em&gt;prompted&lt;/em&gt; this question to be protected, given that as far as I know only &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; answer got into the stuff in the linked comment (and said answer was subsequently deleted)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149086/is-there-a-canonical-behavior-for-the-behavior-of-an-object-that-would-have-its?noredirect=1#comment386180_149086&quot;&gt;Is there a canonical behavior for the behavior of an object that would have its weight/mass reduced below 0?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-18T00:43:09.650" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T00:43:09.650" Title="Why was this question protected?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|moderation|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9202" CreationDate="2019-06-18T00:09:02.540" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are actually 4 deleted answers to that question (which takes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;10K rep to see&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2 of those answers are from brand new users, 1 is from a new user that has the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/07/08/cross-site-account-associations/&quot;&gt;associated bonus rep&lt;/a&gt;, and 1 is from a fairly new, low rep user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the 4 answers submitted answer the question asking about &lt;em&gt;canonical&lt;/em&gt; behaviour from Anima Beyond Fantasy sources and instead try to use real-world physics as a basis (something that doesn't generally apply to fantasy settings) or other off-topic-for-the-question reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/protect-questions&quot;&gt;protected&lt;/a&gt; the question to simply prevent &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; off-topic/non-answer answers from new users swarming in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T00:09:02.540" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9200" CreationDate="2019-06-18T03:52:53.930" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Remove &amp;quot;thanks&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;thank you&amp;quot; from posts&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the major strengths of SO/SE is a very high signal to noise ratio, meaning that pages here are laser focused on good quality questions and answers only. The system inherently does not value anything that is not supportive of asking a good question or giving a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This includes things like greetings and &amp;quot;thank you&amp;quot;s. Things like that might make things seem nicer or more conversational, but they don't help make a question clearer or make an answer better. Thus they should get removed as with any other noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is outlined specifically for greeting and such in the Help Center under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/behavior&quot;&gt;Expected Behavior&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do not use signature, taglines, or greetings.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every post you make is already “signed” with your standard user card,&#xA;which links directly back to your user page. If you use an additional&#xA;signature or tagline, it will be removed to reduce noise in the&#xA;questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, to quote &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2950/should-hi-thanks-taglines-and-salutations-be-removed-from-posts&quot;&gt;this Meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt;, some of the ways these things add noise are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It will leave even less room in the question preview so that we have more difficulty gauging what a question consists of by reading the preview.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It takes time to read and parse through those questions when I am trying to spend my time more efficiently reading through the actual&#xA;question and figuring out how to appropriately answer it. If I have to&#xA;start reading all the little side comments and snarky humor inserted&#xA;in there it detracts from the overall message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If this is supposed to be a website which is servicing more than just the primary author, we need to think about how we construct&#xA;messages so that they appear more clearly to those searching on google&#xA;for questions that match their own. If I am looking for a solution for&#xA;question X, I want to find someone who had the same problem, not their&#xA;short autobiography and formalities before getting to that actual&#xA;question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T03:58:13.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9205" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-18T05:07:47.747" Score="11" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=food+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;212 questions about food&lt;/a&gt; within the context of rpgs, but no tag to connect them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150114/48759&quot;&gt;question was just asked&lt;/a&gt; where the definition of food and drink will be important to the answers. I was looking for tags for the question and couldn't come up with anything better than the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag. I haven't been able to find anything that indicates we used to have this tag and removed it, or that we declined to create it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we create a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/food-and-drink&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;food-and-drink&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;food-and-drink&lt;/a&gt; tag for questions about food and drink within rpgs?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/food-and-drink&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;food-and-drink&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;food-and-drink&lt;/a&gt; tag has now been created.&lt;/strong&gt; We are slowly re-tagging all the old questions. You are welcome to help with this effort but please remember not to flood the front page with multiple edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-21T19:56:32.027" LastActivityDate="2019-06-21T19:56:32.027" Title="Should we have a [food-and-drink] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9205" CreationDate="2019-06-18T05:56:39.627" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, we should.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47847135#47847135&quot;&gt;I actually asked about this in chat back in December&lt;/a&gt; to help me refine my suggestion before posting it to meta (but ended up forgetting to actually post on meta):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would you guys think about having a [food] or [eating] tag? Maybe [food-and-drink]? There seem to be a lot of related questions about that, but I'm not sure what would be a good tag to capture those questions about eating food and drinking water (without including stuff like potions; not sure where alcohol - or other drinks - would fall in the categorization).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47847255#47847255&quot;&gt;I explained my reasoning&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, I've felt for a while that there are a significant chunk of questions about how much characters need to eat/drink, how often they need to do so, what they can eat/drink, etc. It seems like a useful categorization...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47847369#47847369&quot;&gt;Glazius helped me refine my thoughts&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, to the extent that tags can be useful for searching where plaintext is not, a food-and-drink tag would make it easy to look up previous questions about food and drink if you don't remember the exact wording of them and don't, say, always talk about the same gimmicky foods and beverages whenever you answer a food and drink question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47847448#47847448&quot;&gt;nitsua60 replied&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yeah, this is one where I think the &amp;quot;just browsing&amp;quot; rationale holds up pretty well. I don't want to have to search &amp;quot;starvation&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;food requirement&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;foraging&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;hungry&amp;quot; and... if I'm poking around that part of the ruleset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, there are many questions about the topic but under a number of different terms, and having a single tag to classify them under would help for browsability so that people don't have to search a bunch of different terms to find questions about the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/47847212#47847212&quot;&gt;doppelgreener did point something out&lt;/a&gt; in response to that conversation that we should be aware of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;fyi this is also something people would ask about as a social thing: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57971/how-to-handle-plates-and-drinks-on-the-game-table&quot;&gt;How to handle plates and drinks on the game table?&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117623/how-do-i-get-my-players-to-clean-up-their-mess-after-the-game&quot;&gt;How do I get my players to clean up their mess after the game?&lt;/a&gt;. Not a dealbreaker for such a tag but something to be aware of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's an easily solvable problem, however. If the tag is meant to focus on questions about food/drink in-game (rather than out of game), that can be clearly delineated in the tag info/wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: My quotes of others in this conversation shouldn't necessarily be taken as meaning that they still/currently support this idea - the quoted users can speak for themselves and/or vote on answers accordingly to indicate how they feel about the idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T05:58:35.033" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9207" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-18T10:01:32.413" Score="16" ViewCount="232" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the moment I have almost 3000 reputation (and even one of the golden badge things). So rpg.stackexchange seems to think that I can handle all kinds of roleplay questions and decide about their quality, as I’m almost at the point where I can cast votes to close and reopen stuff. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is that a good idea? I only come here to ask questions, not answer them. (When I think about it, I’m pretty selfish). At the moment, I’ve asked 45 questions, but answered not a single one. Should users like me be allowed to make decision about other people’s questions, even if we (usually) don’t contribute to them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe some privileges should require an appropriate amount of answers (or other accomplishments), instead of just reputation, as I don’t see me (or users like me) in the position to handle other people’s questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40660" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-18T10:02:31.660" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T17:50:20.677" Title="Should there be more requirements for some privileges than just reputation?" Tags="|discussion|review|privileges|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9208" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9220" CreationDate="2019-06-18T15:13:54.230" Score="-2" ViewCount="230" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96749/my-dm-insists-on-rolling-a-single-save-for-groups-affected-by-aoe-save-spells-h/96764#comment225425_96764&quot;&gt;My DM insists on rolling a single save for groups affected by AoE save spells. How does this affect my odds of successfully affecting the enemy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why has this &quot;no longer needed&quot; flag been declined?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;2 I think this answer cuts to the heart of the matter quite clearly.&#xA;  Well explained. – stevenjackson121 Mar 20 '17 at 22:43&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am familiar with &lt;strong&gt;the&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/17364/how-does-comment-voting-and-flagging-work/17365#17365&quot;&gt;comment flagging meta&lt;/a&gt;, including up-vote thresholds, and have read &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2228/when-should-comments-be-deleted/2235#2235&quot;&gt;When should comments be deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-18T21:29:06.237" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T22:08:59.073" Title="Why has this NLN comment flag been declined?" Tags="|support|specific-question|comments|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9209" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9207" CreationDate="2019-06-18T18:58:52.107" Score="33" Body="&lt;p&gt;First, this is a fairly non-productive place to ask this question: privileges are handled network-wide, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; is the better place to ask it. There doesn’t &lt;em&gt;appear&lt;/em&gt; to be any previous discussions of an idea like this, but you should probably do a more thorough search than the quick look-see I did if you want to raise it there. (Then again, worst that happens if you start it and it already exists is that it gets closed as a duplicate.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, for the most part, privileges are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a reward. They aren’t given to you because you’ve worked so hard on things or contributed so much to the site that you’ve earned them or something. For the most part, the point of reputation thresholds on privileges is to &lt;em&gt;ensure you understand the site well enough by the time you get them that you’ll use them properly.&lt;/em&gt; Having 3,000 implies you are probably &lt;em&gt;pretty familiar&lt;/em&gt; with how the site works. That means you probably have a pretty good sense of how to use your privileges—including when you should not do so, because a particular case is outside your expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, there is no privilege that allows you to break the site. There is nothing you can do that cannot be undone. And the particular privilege you’ve just received—close and reopen votes—requires four other people to agree with you before they actually do anything. Things you have a gold badge you can close or reopen unilaterally, but &lt;em&gt;you have a gold badge in those subjects&lt;/em&gt;, you almost-certainly have a pretty good idea what is or isn’t a workable question in those subjects. Gold badges are not easy to get. And asking good, thought-provoking questions—the kinds that get a lot of upvotes—indicates that you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt;, in fact, know those subjects pretty well. And again, if you are wrong, it’s not the end of the world—you can undo it yourself, or five other people (or one other person with a gold or diamond badge) can overrule you and fix it. The amount of harm you could possibly do with this privilege is, in fact, so low as to be almost negligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the fact that you were concerned about whether or not your own behavior here has merited these privileges suggests that you are a conscientious, considerate user, which means it’s probably a safe bet that you’ll only cast votes to close questions when &lt;em&gt;you’re pretty sure you know what you’re doing&lt;/em&gt;. For example, you may not know whether something in a system you don’t know is sufficiently narrow to be reasonably answered, but you’ll be able to tell when something is lacking a system tag entirely and therefore needs closing as unclear. It seems pretty likely that you’ll recognize the first situation and not cast a vote, and recognize the second situation and cast your vote—both of which are exactly what you &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site isn’t asking you to magically know what to do with every question on it. It’s only asking for you input in the situations where you feel you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know what to do with one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2019-06-18T19:07:16.677" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T19:07:16.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9205" CreationDate="2019-06-18T20:04:36.017" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The creation of this tag seems like it would be very useful for linking so many similar questions together. However, whilst I support the creation of this tag, we need to nail down what the tag would cover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We know that IRL food is off-topic, but, to play the devil’s advocate, would potions fall under the “drink” portion of the tag? What about the consumption of typically non-edible substances or materials? What about the consumption of living creatures? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/150135/53100&quot;&gt;My answer to the question you linked&lt;/a&gt; would suggest d&amp;amp;d 5e does not consider creatures to be food as they are not objects. Do non-physical substances or energies which provide nutrition count as food?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As user V2Blast said in their answer, the tag will need a clearly defined description/wiki to explain it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, we need to ensure we understand the scope of a potential re-tagging. As you rightly pointed out, there are currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=food%20is%3Aq&quot;&gt;212 questions about food&lt;/a&gt;. However, there are also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Drink%20is%3Aq%20-food&quot;&gt;195 questions about “drink”&lt;/a&gt;, excluding food (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Drink%20is%3Aq%20-food%20-potion&quot;&gt;111 if we also exclude “potion”)&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Eat%20is%3Aq%20-food%20-drink%20-potion&quot;&gt;126 questions about “eat”&lt;/a&gt;, excluding food, drink and potion and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Swallow%20is%3Aq%20-food%20-drink%20-potion%20-eat&quot;&gt;60 questions about “swallow”&lt;/a&gt;, excluding food, drink, eat and potion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve searched for other synonyms as well (again excluding the terms “food” and “drink” to avoid duplicates) such as sustenance, nutrients, nutrition, provisions and goodberry but all these produce single digit or low double-digit numbers, a negligible amount. Other terms such as consume or sustain are too broad to narrow down to only questions about food and drink.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leaves us with a total of 593 questions which may need to be re-tagged, just under 280% of 212, the number of questions you estimated in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not been around long enough to know if a re-tagging process would be so extensive. Indeed, 593 may be a trivial number compared to previous re-taggings, though I would not know as I have no frame of reference. My point though is that the number of questions which may need to be re-tagged is significantly higher than what you may have thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also helps to demonstrate why such a tag is needed, there are around 600 different questions about food and drink but there is nothing to link them all together. There are probably more hidden behind overly obscure or overly broad synonyms, rendering them almost impossible to search for. A tag to collect them all in one place could help massively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53100" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-18T20:04:36.017" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9211" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8359" CreationDate="2019-06-19T04:28:50.270" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's 2019 now and we appear to have picked up a [critical-role-show] tag somewhere along the line - I've (submitted an edit that) tagged this question with that tag.  I'd like to suggest we synonym [critical-role] to [critical-role-show] while we're at it, though I suppose it would autocomplete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25822" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T04:28:50.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9212" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-19T14:45:24.397" Score="4" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've got two homebrew questions going currently, for a magic artifact level item in Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149347/pathfinder-warbow-concept-review&quot;&gt;Original question&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149650/pathfinder-warbow-concept-review-redux&quot;&gt;Followup question&lt;/a&gt; [On Hold]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really like the modifications done by @william porter in his answer, so I would like clarification on what steps should be taken. The options as I see them are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit the question as requested in the comments, nominate for reopening and accept the answer&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept the answer as is&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave the question on hold, and post the &quot;final&quot; iteration as a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit the question, nominate for reopening, and still post the final iteration as a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess what I'm asking is if we are posting new questions for each iteration of a review, do we indicate the final version by accepting an answer? How do we indicate the end of the process?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-19T20:05:34.257" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T20:12:39.283" Title="Homebrew review procedure clarification" Tags="|support|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9208" CreationDate="2019-06-19T15:52:12.847" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The guidelines on comment removal aren't black and white&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't answer why that specific comment flag was declined (only the Mod who declined can do so), but I can say that the 'rules' around comment removal are somewhat fluid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't a strict line that gets crossed when non-offending comments get removed. I've often flagged comments I thought should go for various reasons and had them decline. And I just move on. It's a comment and it's not that big of a deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If it's not really causing a problem, it's not a problem&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, comments are ephemeral. While cleaning up is a good thing, it's also not an absolute necessity. Unless the comment is doing a big no-no (being rude/spam), then it's not a huge deal. Even what constitutes an 'answer in comments' can be loose. There have been times where I've flagged for that and had it declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a loose line. Unless you really think that there's a big problem with a comment, then just let it go if the flag gets declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T15:52:12.847" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9183" CreationDate="2019-06-19T16:20:32.943" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;All information Relevant to the Question Should be on Stack Exchange.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Information necessary for the question, such as the actual details of the class, should be in the post and not a linked document, for a couple reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You may delete the linked document at some point in the future, this would make the question be unable to be understood by future Stackizens.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You may want to change the information in the document based on the answers given. This would go against our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/&quot;&gt;Homebrew-Review&lt;/a&gt; policy, as it would cause the answers to be out of context when read in the future.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that all information pertinent to answering the question should be viewable in the question, so that if someone in 20 years were to come across the question, it and the answers would make sense in the context of the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linking to documents for other information, such as a sample build, that would not be pertinent to the question would be acceptable as links or in a list of additional resources provided in the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T16:20:32.943" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9215" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9216" CreationDate="2019-06-19T16:59:36.170" Score="5" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150224/what-are-all-the-published-objects-that-require-the-use-an-object-action?noredirect=1#comment386896_150224&quot;&gt;What are all the published objects that require the Use an Object action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me marking this as a duplicate is akin to marking &quot;What are the ingredients and their ratios in Coca Cola?&quot; with duplicate because there has been another question asking &quot;Whats in Coca Cola?&quot; with an answer &quot;Water&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you guys think, is this a duplicate and why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56205" LastEditorUserId="48793" LastEditDate="2019-06-19T18:57:16.377" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T18:59:31.457" Title="Why is this question a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9215" CreationDate="2019-06-19T17:42:08.153" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It was a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your examples prove the point as well. Both questions are asking &amp;quot;What is in coca cola&amp;quot;? The question may have the answer 'water', and so it's asked again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But asking the same question again because you don't like the current answer doesn't make it not a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a duplicate because it's the same question - it's just that you want to get a better answer to the question. Putting a bounty on the earlier question is the way to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Question updated to ask for a list of actionable objects&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is now a defined list question. It's doable, but beware that it may attract downvotes because folks don't always love to be asked to do the heavy lifting work anyone could do themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T18:01:23.517" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9217" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9207" CreationDate="2019-06-19T17:44:12.827" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You are not required to use all community privileges&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE does not pay you, nor any of us who participate and who fulfill a variety of the &quot;community mod&quot; functions.  You are thus under no burden to do that which you feel not qualified to do.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are not comfortable with some of the community mod tools, or feel  unqualified to review or answer certain questions or answers, &lt;em&gt;then don't&lt;/em&gt;.  Where you feel more comfortable, I encourage you to join in the community mod effort.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A personal example or two:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I often choose &quot;Skip&quot; option for Pathfinder or Fate questions in the review queue, as I do not feel qualified to review some of the hold/close points.  I have review queue privileges on 5 different SEs.  While I &lt;em&gt;am&lt;/em&gt; active in commnity modding, some things I do not touch as I feel that I am not competent to do so.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, I edit a lot since I am very comfortable editing poorly written prose and sprucing it up.  Had to do that for years in a few of my jobs, so &lt;em&gt;edit I can and edit I will&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Contribute where you feel that you add value.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rest of us will fill in the gaps.  :)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-06-19T17:50:20.677" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T17:50:20.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9215" CreationDate="2019-06-19T18:00:43.067" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question is not a duplicate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To stick to a similar analogy:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49825/what-does-use-an-object-cover&quot;&gt;What does Use an Object cover?&lt;/a&gt; asks for how you can identify a product and your question asks for a list of all products that can be identified that way. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72270/what-items-can-a-thief-use-as-a-bonus-action-with-his-fast-hands&quot;&gt;What items can a Thief use as a bonus action with his Fast Hands?&lt;/a&gt; asks if their list is correctly identified. Neither body asks for a list, even if the header makes it seem that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before your update to the question, your question asked not only for a product list but also how each of the products on the list functions (I would have voted that as too broad), and up to revision 11 how you can identify them (I would assume that this was the source of marking it as a duplicate, which was correct at that time) - after revision 11 not how you can identify them and never if they are correctly identified. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It was a duplicate until &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/150224/11&quot;&gt;Revision 11&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2019-06-19T18:59:31.457" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T18:59:31.457" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9212" CreationDate="2019-06-19T20:12:39.283" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As the person who primarily pushed to close the question, I really wish that had happened before there were anyone answered. Since it didn’t, this situation becomes more awkward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also say that, &lt;em&gt;generally speaking&lt;/em&gt;, it’s not great for iterations to happen so quickly. It is better to get more input, and incorporate all of it as you see fit, before moving on to another iteration. Anyone who might have offered a different perspective on this iteration is now kind of “shut out” of the process. Which is partially my fault for putting it on hold, but honestly I still think that was the right call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also still think it should be clarified, opened up, and you should wait and see what else others might have to say about things. At this stage, only clarifying the points I raised, i.e. not invalidating the existing answer, would be crucial. I would say it would be best &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to post another iteration at this stage, but to give the existing iteration more time to collect answers—and to give you time to consider those answers and incorporate those parts of them you are interested in into the next iteration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This will take more time. I understand that you’re happy about the answer you have and want to incorporate that and get going on another iteration. I don’t think that rush is great, either for your process or for the site as a whole. It makes it awkward for anyone to provide an alternative viewpoint to the existing answer. But ultimately, I don’t feel as though I can and/or should “stop you” from doing so. You’re always welcome to ask new questions, and there’s no obligation to fix up questions that have been closed. I wouldn’t want to change that here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you do go ahead and do that, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; be clearer about the next iteration. Do not rely on people being familiar with the previous ones (as this one seemed to be, by only defining some but not all of the abilities). Use standard phrasing for things—you have gotten plenty of advice in both iterations about which things are worded awkwardly, unclearly, and/or non-standard-ly, and not all of that advice was followed in the second iteration. Things certainly read as though a lot of what you have in mind for this item is &lt;em&gt;staying&lt;/em&gt; in your mind, not making it to the statblock, and that makes it hard to even critique. I’d certainly planned on taking some time in my own answer to your second iteration to try to exhaustively point these kinds of issues out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T20:12:39.283" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9208" CreationDate="2019-06-19T21:30:29.767" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In general, comments expressing appreciation/praise for an answer don't &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to be cleaned up in the way that the following types of comments do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asking clarifying questions (that have been answered)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;suggesting improvements to the answer (and having those suggestions&#xA;either accepted or rejected by the answerer)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;disagreeing with the answerer (and having the answerer continue to&#xA;disagree)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;extended conversations in comments (these usually end up getting&#xA;moved to chat)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As quoted in this question, the comment also had a few upvotes, which generally makes us less likely to remove the comment if there's no immediate, compelling reason to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When flagging comments for cleanup, it's better to focus on the types of comments I've laid out above. Comments praising the answer or a particular part of it may not exactly add much in your view, but they don't really add any significant harm either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of comment cleanup is generally to get rid of comments that have served their purpose already, or to get rid of extended chains of comments that tend to distract from the answers themselves. In my view, while we &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; delete these sorts of single comments that just praise the answer, it doesn't generally add much benefit to do so - and that's what I hoped to signal by declining the flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, the comment in question was flagged again (likely as a result of this meta), so another mod went ahead and deleted it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-19T22:08:59.073" LastActivityDate="2019-06-19T22:08:59.073" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9221" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-22T00:54:08.887" Score="6" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/150359/revisions&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was missing the dnd-5e tag but is asking a question in the context of an Adventurers League game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know we have a policy against guessing game editions but, in this case, no guess was necessary. DDAL &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/playevents/organized-play&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;runs 5th edition rules exclusively&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I added the tag but the edit was rolled back by a moderator. May I get clarification on why adding the tag was deemed unacceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-22T00:58:59.953" LastActivityDate="2019-06-22T00:58:59.953" Title="Is it acceptable to append the &quot;dnd-5e&quot; tag to questions that lack it but are about Adventurers League?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|policy|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2019-06-22T02:03:04.303" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9222" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-06-22T04:26:33.193" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Watermelons and cheese are a strange combination.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question I came across while adding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/food-and-drink&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;food-and-drink&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;food-and-drink&lt;/a&gt; tag to some older questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78430/can-goodberry-be-used-to-summon-watermelons&quot;&gt;Can Goodberry be used to summon watermelons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-22T04:26:33.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9223" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-25T04:53:20.483" Score="9" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/150485/48759&quot;&gt;answered a question&lt;/a&gt; where the best support I could find is in a diagram presented in the beginners rules. I attempted to translate the diagram to the best of my ability but it isn't as clear as I would like, particularly when the actual diagram is so nice. I would have liked to include a screenshot of the original diagram instead but I don't know if that is in breach of fair-use since the diagram includes artwork.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Searching meta with some help from MikeQ in chat I found some related questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3287/48759&quot;&gt;Copying Potentially Copyrighted Images&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/185934/412432&quot;&gt;Policy on uploading copyright protected images to Imgur&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7695/48759&quot;&gt;Illustrations in questions and answers—legit or not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These mostly deal with images in general however and don't discuss using them as rule support for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can I include a screenshot of a diagram from a rulebook in my answer?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T12:48:08.613" Title="Can I include a screenshot of a diagram to support my answer?" Tags="|discussion|policy|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9224" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9226" CreationDate="2019-06-25T14:19:48.013" Score="2" ViewCount="234" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, the my default answer display order was changed from &quot;highest vote first&quot; to &quot;latest edit first&quot; (probably due to misclick on my part).  I had not been aware that that was even possible, and spent a number of days thinking that it had been a site-wide policy change.  During that time, I noticed a certain behavior that seemed intended to exploit the &quot;active&quot; answer ordering.  (I'm not calling out specific cases because I really don't want to turn this into a toxic politics thing.  It would not help.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, having posted an answer of reasonable size, the author was returning to the post to make trivial edits (adding or tweaking a word or two) every time anyone else added a new answer or made an edit, thus ensuring that they were always the first answer on the list.  I find this mildly unpleasant aesthetically, but mostly it seems like a behavior that we are encouraging (indeed, it exists only because it is encouraged), and should not be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seemed like it might be worth discussing.  Is there anything that could reasonably be done about this?  &lt;em&gt;Should&lt;/em&gt; anything be done about this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-25T23:29:36.330" LastActivityDate="2019-06-27T21:14:43.647" Title="On &quot;active&quot; answer ordering and micro-edits" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9224" CreationDate="2019-06-26T03:44:26.757" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't see the issue here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have stated that your issue is with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the author was returning to the post to make trivial edits (adding or tweaking a word or two) every time anyone else added a new answer or made an edit&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion this is the least reputation gaming way to make edits. Making an edit after someone else has already bumped the question won't change the view order for most people. The majority of user sort their answers by votes according to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://strawpoll.com/xx15bhaf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;straw poll&lt;/a&gt; from &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50810924#50810924&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, and which is the default option as explained &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/290694/412432&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. Editing immediately after someone else also won't bump the question unnecessarily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I often make typos or minor errors in my posts that I don't notice and the time but later notice when responding to a comment or similar. Sometimes I bother to change them and fix my mistakes, sometimes I leave them because the question is older and there is no point bumping it. If someone then bumps those older questions anyway I will see it on the homepage and make the edits then. We have a general practice of being more forgiving with minor-edits on questions that are already on the homepage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Making unprompted micro-edits would be worse&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you notice that someone if micro-editing their answer every day or so to keep it on the homepage, that would be a problem. To me this is the only practical way to game the reputation system. By regularly editing a post you can keep it on the homepage, gaining more views and therefore more votes. I actively avoid doing this for trivial edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see someone doing this the correct response is to raise a custom flag and explain the situation. The moderators will look into it and take appropriate action. I don't pretend to know what the solution is but I trust our mods to look after it. Note; I have never noticed or suspected someone of doing this in my time on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-26T05:32:40.263" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9228" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9229" CreationDate="2019-06-26T15:20:49.133" Score="11" ViewCount="409" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If anyone has other approaches to subjective support, please provide an answer on the duplicate questions linked above.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is clear that we require answers to be backed up here- whether they are subjective or objective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Objective support is fairly clear, but what about subjective? Does stating &amp;quot;I've had X years of playing&amp;quot; qualify?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you need to not only say that, but also provide examples of what you're recommending and how it worked (backed up by experience?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What other ways are there that qualify as a support for a subjective answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T13:43:45.617" Title="How do we appropriately back up a subjective answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|subjective-questions|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2019-06-28T12:23:54.800" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9228" CreationDate="2019-06-26T21:35:14.810" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;This answer won't discuss the policy or why we do it, that's well covered elsewhere.  It will take the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective policy as gospel and explain how to give Good Subjective answers and Back It Up! specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answering Subjective Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The blog post &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; is the gold&#xA;  standard for understanding how to make good on topic answers to&#xA;  subjective questions. The heart of it is using the Back It Up!&#xA;  principle, which states that you should only answer based on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Here, &quot;happened to you personally&quot; means real play experience. We&#xA;  understand that some people believe that given their wide experience&#xA;  in games they think they can tell someone the right technique or&#xA;  system or solution to use for their particular need even though they&#xA;  haven't done it themselves - but when everyone does that, it leads to&#xA;  opinion-laden chaos.  &lt;strong&gt;&quot;Good Subjective&quot; is constructive and is based&#xA;  on experience and expertise.  &quot;Bad Subjective&quot; is speculative and is&#xA;  based on conjecture and opinion.&lt;/strong&gt;  Speculative answers will be&#xA;  downvoted, commented on (&quot;Back It Up!&quot;), and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h1&gt;What are the citation expectations for Subjective answers?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;These are answers drawing on experience to suggest solutions to social&#xA;  problems, best practices, GM and player techniques, etc. Our&#xA;  foundational rule is that these answers must follow the &lt;em&gt;Back It Up!&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;  principle found in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Back It Up! means that your answers must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;    &#xA;    &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;    &lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;    &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This means when you provide a subjective solution you believe will&#xA;  resolve the situation, we expect that you cite analogous experience of&#xA;  how it has worked out in actual practice — your own experience or&#xA;  someone else's. Describing how it worked out is more preferable to&#xA;  describing how &lt;em&gt;well&lt;/em&gt; it worked out: “these things happened, the&#xA;  players felt this way about it” is preferable to “it worked well”, but&#xA;  either is preferable to no citation of it actually being tried at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The experience does not have to be of the exact same situation,&#xA;  although that would be ideal. Experience of similar or analogous&#xA;  situations is also relevant and helpful, at least to the extent they&#xA;  are similar/analogous enough to be relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Not OK: “Try this” with no cited experience of how it works&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any of us can say “here's what I'd do” based on no actual experience,&#xA;  or come up with something on the spot as an off-the-cuff idea, but our&#xA;  site is not looking for this content. We want to collect&#xA;  tried-and-tested solutions with well-understood outcomes. We don't&#xA;  want your opinion; we want your &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;.  If you do not have&#xA;  experiences you can bring to the table in that particular case, &lt;em&gt;do&#xA;  not answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. Answers not doing so may be downvoted and/or&#xA;  deleted. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/1204&quot;&gt;Untested homebrew is to be&#xA;  avoided.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean that you should avoid indicating where personal&#xA;  preference comes into an answer! An answer explaining &quot;I do this&#xA;  because X, but I've seen others do this other thing because Y, and&#xA;  both work&quot; can provide an excellent overview of a wide yet deceptively&#xA;  narrow topic. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, answering “How do I handle this issue” with a&#xA;  recommendation to do this, that, and the other without any experience&#xA;  doing it yourself, or having seen it done, or having anything other&#xA;  than “it sounds good in my head” to believe it would help the querent,&#xA;  makes our site worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;To apply the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective's&lt;/a&gt; guidance on&#xA;  questions to answers as well, a good subjective answer should tend to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Explain “why” and “how”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Be longer, not shorter&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Have a constructive, fair, and impartial tone&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Share experiences over opinions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Back up opinion with facts and references, including specific experiences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;FAQ&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: So do I have to back up my answers to subjective questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: Yes. You should expect your answer to be downvoted, commented, and/or deleted if not (or generate a question close if others are similarly undisciplined).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: Do I have to have personally done that exact thing?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: No, your two options are experience or citing a reference.  That could be a book, it could be &quot;Matt Mercer did it in a session in this video and here's what happened...&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related experience is fine, just clarify what it is.  &quot;Well, I did this in Call of Cthulhu 5th ed, you're playing 7th but it should apply&quot; gives someone useful information to understand the applicability of your answer to their situation - certainly much more than a bare assertion of &quot;Do this.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: Is &quot;I've played that game for years&quot; enough of a citation?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: Not for most questions. Most good questions are specific, and &quot;I've played that game for years&quot; doesn't mean you have an actual good answer to something if you didn't do that during those years. &quot;Here's how I'd throw someone out of my group&quot; - if you've played for 20 years but never thrown anyone out of your group - is not helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: But isn't this &quot;proof by anecdote&quot; and isn't that terrible?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A: Click the link to read &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;.  It has two lovely diagrams showing how knowledge is a continuum, and some things have purely objective answers and others don't.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TPOL1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TPOL1.png&quot; alt=&quot;The Continuum of Knowledge&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to tap the expertise that lies beyond the pure opinion but short of &quot;multiple peer reviewed studies prove it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because in RPGs - there aren't many of those, and this would be &quot;read the rulebook to me Stack Exchange.&quot;  That's not our desired scope, nor is it the scope SEs in general are limited to (again, as that article details). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q: So if someone cites their experience it means they're automatically right and I should turn off everything else I know about how to behave on RPG.SE?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. &lt;em&gt;Adding personal experience doesn't guarantee an answer is a good answer.&lt;/em&gt; But having that additional detail lets others make that judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example Question - &quot;How do I eject a gaming group member from my group?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer 1 - &quot;Throw their stuff outside and lock them out.&quot;  - Delete, not backed up.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer 2 - &quot;I've GMed a lot of games and I'd just throw their stuff outside and lock them out.&quot;  - Delete, not backed up. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer 3 - &quot;Once we just threw someone's stuff outside and locked them out. They didn't come back so I guess it worked.&quot; - Backed up, terrible answer, downvote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answer 4 - &quot;My gaming groups have ejected people several times, here's how the different approaches worked in those cases.  One group just threw someone's stuff outside and locked them out; they didn't come back but it broke some friendships and there was lots of dramatic texting afterwards, I wouldn't recommend doing it&quot; - Winner winner chicken dinner. Backed up, sound answer otherwise, upvote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See the difference?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-27T15:39:47.233" LastActivityDate="2019-06-27T15:39:47.233" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9230" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9232" CreationDate="2019-06-27T10:22:03.530" Score="7" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm currently playing a campaign of the game &quot;Wasteland : Terres Gâchées&quot;, a french RPG, and I was wondering how could I help people (mostly french, as there is for now no English version) know it, as even in France it is really unknown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had the idea of posting a Question about system identification, then answer it myself, given potential readers some information about that system, and maybe make them want to try it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So, is it good to use the self-answer Q&amp;amp;A this way?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, is there a way, in Stack RPG, to help this system being discovered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51851" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T03:05:36.180" Title="Is it good to use a Q&amp;A to help other users discover a system?" Tags="|discussion|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9230" CreationDate="2019-06-27T10:43:29.890" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is even encouraged to do so. However, I would be careful not be seen as spam: write lots of questions/answers to help SEO and that rubbish. We do not do promotion here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;English is the language of the stack, so you would have to write it in that. C'est comme ça, on a pas le choix… ☺&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastActivityDate="2019-06-27T10:43:29.890" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9230" CreationDate="2019-06-27T11:40:25.503" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can ask real, relatively specific questions (and answer them)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quoting from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3730/33569&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton's answer to &amp;quot;I want to write a Q&amp;amp;A: how do I go about doing that?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Find real, specific, questions and answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're not a blog nor a monograph publishing service. When pondering self-answering questions (which we encourage) remember that the questions should be real questions that stem from problems you've seen or are having.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, the purpose of the post should not be &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; to advertise the RPG system. It also needs to be an actual meaningful question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, the method you suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had the idea of posting a Question about system identification, then answer it myself, given potential readers some information about that system, and maybe make them want to try it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...seems a bit iffy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, it sounds like you're proposing asking a system-ID question and then answering with some fluff about the system, rather than asking a genuine question about an issue you've faced within/regarding the system itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're lacking clarity on a rule within that RPG (or you were confused, but figured it out yourself), ask that as a question - and self-answer it if you think you know the answer. If you have a problem you've faced while GMing the system and need help finding an effective solution, ask away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3142/33569&quot;&gt;wax eagle puts it in this answer to &amp;quot;What should I consider before posting a question and answer it myself&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just be sure you put some work into the question itself. My biggest knock on this kind of thing is that people will often half ass the question so they can post the answer. Both should be of quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't have a real question/issue to ask about, the quality of your question will usually suffer for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-27T11:40:25.503" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9224" CreationDate="2019-06-27T21:14:43.647" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I do this&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever a question I've answered is bumped, I reread my answer.  When I do that, sometimes I notice stylistic issues in my answer or comments I hadn't ever gotten round to responding to or stuff other answers are consistently getting wrong and no one is talking about or whatever. I don't mind correcting these kinds of issues on older answers of mine either-- the age of a question or answer &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; matter with respect to how it's treated, in my opinion-- but I know that other people don't like reviving old posts for some reason, so I think it's better to do it after a post is already bumped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-06-27T21:14:43.647" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9234" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9230" CreationDate="2019-06-28T03:05:36.180" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No, do not use a self-answered game-id question for this&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't do game recommendations any more, and trying to &quot;sneak in&quot; game-rec questions as game-identification will just end up causing trouble (game-id's being treated as poor man's game-recs has already been on mod radar for shadiness). This is inappropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you can do is ask questions about the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can even ask questions about it and self-answer - ideally questions that aren't junk, because it may get people to flag them as spam if they are clearly just trying to get the game's name out there.  Good questions, questions you have had and learned the answer to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T03:05:36.180" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9235" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-28T08:41:54.807" Score="14" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked this question on RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150637/2944&quot;&gt;Appropriate Obstacles for a &amp;quot;Find and Question&amp;quot; scene&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've got the answer I wanted, but I'm intrigued by why this question would be considered unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There might be better ways to write it, but it seems like it would be clear enough &lt;em&gt;to people who understand the mechanics of Dusk City Outlaws&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm probably going to ask more questions on here about the system in future, and want to make sure my questions are of the appropriate quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2944" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-28T09:37:45.883" LastActivityDate="2019-06-29T01:22:20.907" Title="Why would this question about obstacles in Dusk City Outlaws be considered unclear?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9236" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9235" CreationDate="2019-06-28T09:15:34.690" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;For a definitive answer, we would need comment from someone who voted to close it. I do not consider it unclear, and given how long it has remained open (it still has only four close votes after 17 hours and going through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/close/58179&quot;&gt;close vote review queue&lt;/a&gt;) it seems likely that most of our users don't. If it gets the fifth close vote, it's not likely to remain closed for long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It happens from time to time that people mistakenly approach questions from a very particular perspective that might not be applicable to the system in question. Eg. I've had similar issues when I've asked about Stories (a mechanic in 7th Sea) --- people sometimes don't realize it's a mechanical concept with a particular meaning, much like I believe &quot;obstacle&quot; and &quot;scene&quot; are in the case of your question. With such misunderstandings, the question might seem open-ended enough to warrant a close vote even if it's actually not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only other reason I could plausibly think to put your question on hold is for being too broad --- you're technically asking two questions, but they might be closely enough related to be narrow enough for our standards. But all in all you shouldn't let a few probably mistaken close votes bother you --- keep on asking!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2019-06-28T11:17:14.910" LastActivityDate="2019-06-28T11:17:14.910" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9237" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-06-28T17:21:22.607" Score="8" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I was wondering if there are any guidelines on how to interact with game devs who join this site, beyond the normal rules and guidelines of SE - this question being prompted by Dave Brookshaw, the developer of a number of Onyx Path games (including Mage the Awakening), seeming to have registered an account specifically to write an Answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150369/has-there-been-any-previous-mentions-of-these-lesser-ministries-before&quot;&gt;one of my Questions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure he's stated before that he's disinclined to write errata or FAQ documents for the Mage without being paid to do so by Onyx Path; are there any guidelines for how to go about interacting with him (or any other game devs from other companies) who might join this site? I'm going to guess that bombarding him with Questions might be interpreted as a breach of netiquette; on the other hand, he might not have much incentive to stick around if no questions in his particular area are asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have any other StackExchange sites like Arqade (the video game SE) dealt with similar situations before? I think some IT companies have used StackExchange as a customer support channel, but I'm not certain if that'd directly analogous to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-06-28T19:39:01.230" LastActivityDate="2019-06-30T20:52:39.787" Title="Are there any guidelines on how to interact with game devs on this site?" Tags="|discussion|game-designers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9235" CreationDate="2019-06-29T01:22:20.907" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's because it's difficult to tell rules concepts from natural language.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;legwork scene&quot;, &quot;drama scene&quot;, &quot;obstacle&quot;, &quot;challenge&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have the book myself, and don't know which of these phrases refer to concepts in the rules with special game meaning and which phrases are being used as regular ol' words to describe a situation, but I'm aware that they are sometimes used as game terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone who doesn't read them as game terms can interpret this question as idea generation - you don't know how to set up your game's plot, so you're asking people to toss out plot ideas, but you haven't provided any criteria to evaluate them by. That's an unclear question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd suggest using some sort of distinguishing mark, such as &lt;strong&gt;bold&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;italics&lt;/em&gt;, or Initial Caps, to set words you use to name rules concepts of a game apart from words you use to explain your problem. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2019-06-29T01:22:20.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9237" CreationDate="2019-06-30T06:04:09.427" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't ask unrelated or &quot;follow-up&quot; questions in comments, that's not cool.  Feel free to ask a bajillion follow-up or unrelated questions as &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;, though, that's totally fine.  It's unlikely, however, you will get Word of God answers to all of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2019-06-30T06:04:09.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9237" CreationDate="2019-06-30T12:17:16.170" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, and they are contained in the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/game-designers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-designers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-designers&lt;/a&gt; tag that has been placed on this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-06-30T20:52:39.787" LastActivityDate="2019-06-30T20:52:39.787" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9241" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-01T15:45:18.773" Score="9" ViewCount="269" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150867/how-common-is-the-gm-for-hire&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; came up recently and it's primary focus is to provide market research information to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm unclear if this is similar to problem player/interpersonal crossover, but some of this question seems very much out of our scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a high level, I think the question is currently too broad. The three questions listed are different enough that each should have it's own. But looking at them more carefully, the first one seems outside of our scope as it entirely lives within the world of market data. The only interaction it has with RPGs is the overall topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 2nd and 3rd questions are more on topic, but it's unclear how it can be answered meaningfully to be useful data for the querent(or others finding the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not entirely sure all of the contents of that question are within our domain here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In which countries is it more usual and how common is it in those countries?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one seems very broad and opinion-based. How are 'usual' and 'common' defined? How does one answer this with objective data that would be useful? This seems more like a general market research business inquiry then something we can, should, can answer well here (unless we have more definitions to narrow the scope of an answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2nd question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the usual length of a gaming session with a hired GM?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is answerable, but I'm also not sure about how useful it is. Depending on the potential data set, having a few respondents isn't a good indicator for an overall average time spent to determine business viability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;3rd question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the average cost for this type of service?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can also be answered by users here who have utilized these services. But again, it's a limited dataset that may be not all that useful in business planning purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Or are none of the above the question and OP is just asking where to find this data?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In which case, this is a question about &lt;em&gt;how to do market research&lt;/em&gt;. Folks may be able to answer more specifically here given the association with the end-user for this type of service.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are questions about general market research on topic?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-02T02:19:58.783" Title="Are market research questions on topic here?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9242" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9241" CreationDate="2019-07-01T16:33:24.557" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, questions about RPGs and the RPG industry are on-topic here&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even though the vast majority of our questions deal with issues that  can be answered by GMs and players, our site serves the entire RPG industry which includes more roles than just &amp;quot;GM&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;player&amp;quot; (eg publisher, writer, etc.) and we have historically considered such questions on-topic here. You can see that in tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/publishing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;publishing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;publishing&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/intellectual-property&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;intellectual-property&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;intellectual-property&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/games-industry&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;games-industry&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;games-industry&lt;/a&gt;. We don't get many questions about them, but we do accept them when properly scoped to RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Market research inquiry&amp;quot; isn't really a topic, it's an end goal and that doesn't really matter if the actual content being asked about is about RPGs and meets our other conditions for being on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Yes, this specific question is also on topic (though could be improved and is probably currently impossible to answer)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right off the bat, I think OP might be better served to split off the second two questions into a separate post because I suspect that they will be easier to answer than the first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In which countries [is GM-for hire] more usual and how common is it in those countries?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is clearly asking about an RPG topic exclusively about the RPG industry. Being able to find, parse, and contextualise this data will take understanding of the RPG industry which means it benefits greatly from expertise that the RPG community has.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is likely that this data will be hard to come by in the amounts and specificity that is being requested, but the availability and ease (or lack thereof) of answering does not affect how on-topic something is. Just because the data doesn't exist doesn't mean someone can't ask about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your concerns about how &amp;quot;usual&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;common&amp;quot; should be defined and measured are something that should be worked out with OP and might make the question inclear, but not off-topic. As for broadness, it does seem to ask for a lot of data. Perhaps limiting it geographically could help get answers more easily, but even data from every RPG-selling country could be formatted to fit within the confines of our answer field and thus it doesn't seem Broad enough to me to warrant closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the usual length of a gaming session with a hired GM?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the average cost for this type of service?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Seem like on-topic questions for the same reasons as above. Probably a bit more answerable because the pool of people with access to a portion of this kind of data is larger. On the other hand, it still will be incredibly hard to find comprehensive data internationally for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How useful the answer is to OP is really up to OP. If a (potential) answerer thinks that it is useless to OP they can always simply not answer. Or, they can provide the information and then contextualise why they think it won't help OP. Or, even better, you can try to work with OP to fine-tune the scope of the question such that they do get useful answers. Either way, whether or not the end data will be useful to OP isn't really a core concern for determining if the topic itself is on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-01T16:39:20.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9241" CreationDate="2019-07-01T16:37:47.780" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think market research is on topic (with some qualifiers I’ll touch on below), but I don’t think this question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; market research and I don’t think it’s on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should look at two tests for whether this is on topic, and I think both need to be met for a question to pass.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question has to be &lt;strong&gt;about&lt;/strong&gt; something within our topic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question has to be reasonably expected to have &lt;strong&gt;relevant experts/experience&lt;/strong&gt; within our theoretical membership.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like a market research question, but I don’t think it is. When we think of “market research” in the industry, none of the normal kinds exist: large population surveys, focus testing, and that kind of thing doesn’t exist. “Market research” in the RPG industry is things like “I’m an independent game designer; how do I learn about design trends / how do I decide who my audience is / is Kickstarter a good idea”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, nobody with industry has the access or money for access to large datasets, and nobody within industry is compiling them. It’s not part of the RPG industry’s activities, so doesn’t fall under our inclusion of the RPG publishing in our topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When businesses don’t do these large kinds of surveys, we don’t call it “market research”, it’s just plain &lt;em&gt;research&lt;/em&gt;. Science.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’re not scientists. Nobody within our topic area engages in this kind of large-scale data collection, analysis, and distillation. Nobody within our topic scope sciences the RPG population.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Basic research science is outside our topic.&lt;/strong&gt; People doing this kind of research work are scientists, who are not in our scope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The industry, and the activities of designing and publishing games, are both on topic. Actual market research questions that real game designers have experience with are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this is both outside what people do in the RPG industry (test 1), and because those who &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; do the sorts of market research specific to RPGs &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; do the kind of research the question is about, our theoretical membership can’t be expected to have relevant experience (test 2).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And although GMs for hire are obviously theoretical members doing something within the topic of RPGs, individual GMs for hire existing doesn’t mean they are doing large-scale, full time science research about themselves.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I think market research is on topic — as market research is actually done in our industry. I don’t think this question is market research, isn’t on a topic we can have experience in, and isn’t part of our industry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-07-02T02:19:58.783" LastActivityDate="2019-07-02T02:19:58.783" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9244" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-02T12:03:22.963" Score="5" ViewCount="597" Body="&lt;p&gt;I answered &lt;em&gt;from personal experience&lt;/em&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150939/how-can-i-effectively-map-a-multi-level-dungeon#150943&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Got two downvotes in ten minutes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been seeing this a lot recently -- seemingly anything with a 5e tag, but that's nearly all the questions I've seen over the past few months that I think I can answer.  I can understand it when it's rules related, but the question linked above really should have &quot;system-agnostic&quot; instead of 5e; there's nothing in it related to any kind of game rules (other than a system played with a grid of some kind).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see from my rep, I've had good answers in the past.  Have I just forgotten how to answer, have the standards changed (other than the strong increase in &quot;be nice&quot; which I don't believe I've violated), have I got multiple serial downvoters, or is something else happening?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-07-02T12:41:50.300" LastActivityDate="2019-07-10T02:11:07.477" Title="Am I getting serial downvotes, or are my answers suddenly this bad?" Tags="|discussion|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9244" CreationDate="2019-07-02T12:58:12.220" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Recency Bias?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at your most recent answers, you have very few downvotes with the exception of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149416/how-can-i-justify-not-giving-my-villain-the-wish-spell/149417#149417&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if you're looking at different data, but the most recent answers doesn't seem to support your concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having said that, a lot of your answers do seem to be without a lot of support for either objective or subjective answers. That may contribute to the downvotes and would be an immediate improvement to your answers if you can start backing them up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reviewing your recently deleted answers from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9244/am-i-getting-serial-downvotes-or-are-my-answers-suddenly-this-bad#comment30108_9244&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;, my paragraph above still stands highlighting the problem of lack of support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Improve, don't remove&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having reviewed your deleted answers and your recent still alive answers, I think the core problem is that you don't &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer&quot;&gt;back them up with support&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may want to consider adding the support detail to answers rather than just deleting them. You may not get the rep back, but remember you get more rep for upvotes than you lose with downvotes. And this can also help you improve your answer writing for when you first submit answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-02T14:50:48.650" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9223" CreationDate="2019-07-03T15:07:57.477" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;About Fair Use, as I understand matters&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not a lawyer, and I am certainly not &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; lawyer. This represents my understanding of the issue, not specific legal advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Fair Use doctrine, which is a concept in US intellectual property law but other nations have broadly-similar ideas in their laws, allows for “nonprofit educational purposes” as a fair use, and answers on Stack Exchange might reasonably qualify for that. Merely being a type of fair use does not automatically make a given instance of copyright infringement OK; the doctrine has four parts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the nature of the copyrighted work;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;17 U.S. Code § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deciding whether or not something qualifies for Fair Use is a subjective process, that can basically only be performed by a judge, in a courtroom, when a suit is brought and Fair Use is brought up as a defense. None of these things is a firm “this is OK, that is not,” they are considerations that the law has directed judges to look at when thinking about potential Fair Use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the context of our site, we can look at these four considerations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our purpose is educational, and since Stack Exchange does not (currently) serve ads on this site (aside from the ones we make ourselves and that Stack Exchange receives no money for), profit is not really involved. Again, since there isn’t a firm line here, there being some tangential profit or potential future profit is not necessarily damning; newspapers can include quotations for reviews, which helps them sell newspapers (which make money because of the ads in them), and that is an explicit example of fair use.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The nature of the copyrighted works we deal with don’t do us any particular favors here; that’s primarily about limiting copyright protections from protecting data that isn’t really the author’s to protect. The rules text and/or diagrams, the art included in the books, and so on, are all very much the property of their respective owners. But again, these aren’t criteria for Fair Use, they are things to consider.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;and 4. The last two are important on this site, though: how much of the work are you quoting, and how is that going to affect the value of the work? Where the first point is basically always in our favor, at least for legitimate answers, and the second is basically not, the majority of the time, meeting the last two is where we can say that one use is OK and another is not. The crucial test here is that your use is not fair if it replaces the original work: if there is no reason to buy the product or otherwise consume the work after seeing your use of it, you are violating the copyright holder’s rights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, the court would likely look favorably on usages that limit themselves to just what they need to make their larger point (educational, in our case), and that don’t unduly affect the value of the original work in the process. Quoting some-but-not-all of the rules for a class, even quoting an entire spell’s or feat’s rules, including one of many of the images in a book, so long as they are justified by improving the educational value of the answer, these things are unlikely to be seen as violating copyright because the book still has so much more left in it of value—you aren’t threatening the original work with these kinds of things.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, however, Fair Use is a subjective thing. As I said, it only really gets pinned down if you get sued and make the case in front of a judge; until then you just have your rationale, and the copyright holder may have a different one. Neither is definitively “right” or “wrong” until it gets tested in court. As a matter of practice, copyright infringements are dealt with by the copyright holder sending a cease &amp;amp; desist letter, and then, if that is ignored, possibly a lawsuit. The C&amp;amp;D always starts matters because it is &lt;em&gt;vastly&lt;/em&gt; less expensive than a lawsuit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;As far as meta policy is concerned&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real question here is how we should view potential copyright infringement/fair use cases as a matter of policy on this site. Realistically, the risk we face is a C&amp;amp;D forcing us to remove the infringing material, forcing an answer to be reworked to go without it—obviously, we are/Stack Exchange is not going to ignore a C&amp;amp;D if we get one, it’s just not worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which has been the guiding principle for how this site handles copyright for a long time: we don’t link to pirating sites primarily for this reason. Sure, many of us also have philosophical objections to piracy, but the real point for this site is that infringing sites frequently get C&amp;amp;D’d out of existence, leading to link rot and bad answers. &lt;strong&gt;That&lt;/strong&gt; is the primary thing to avoid as far as this site is concerned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So any particular use case has to be considered in light of how likely is it to suffer due to a C&amp;amp;D causing a bad answer. That means we need to keep points 3. and 4. in mind when considering a potential use. That means that, if something is over the line, it’s a bad answer because of the risk of damage from a C&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if that’s our policy, the risk of an actual lawsuit is just about negligible. C&amp;amp;D’s happen first and happen more often/more easily; if we are trying to avoid those, we’re all-but-certain to avoid lawsuits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Not as legal advice, but applying the proposed policy to the proposed use&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say that using a single diagram from a book is well within the policy guidelines I have proposed. I consider the risk of a C&amp;amp;D for such a use to be quite low. I would feel comfortable with a such a use in one of my own answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2019-07-07T12:48:08.613" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T12:48:08.613" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9247" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-04T23:11:46.093" Score="0" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;Inspired by the recent questions about overly strict implications of “spells do only what they say they do”:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151091/40335&quot;&gt;How can food created by a spell be destroyed?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151061/40335&quot;&gt;How can magical vines conjured by a spell be destroyed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my understanding it’s okay and even encouraged if a querent wants to limit the scope of their question. But when this limitation precludes every possible answer, how should we proceed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example: “how does this spell work in [edge case outside RAW]? I know the DM can just rule one way or the other, I’m not interested in that, I want a RAW answer I can take to any table.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40335" LastEditorUserId="40335" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T00:30:15.137" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T00:30:15.137" Title="When a question limits the scope of answers, but that limit eliminates everything, how should we handle it?" Tags="|discussion|questions|policy|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ClosedDate="2019-07-05T05:47:29.620" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9244" CreationDate="2019-07-05T04:10:12.043" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The GS/BS &lt;em&gt;norms&lt;/em&gt; have changed of late&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answers are not &quot;suddenly, this bad.&quot;  You have been a quality contributor for a good long while. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been watching this thing that you mention for the past six  months.  My general trigger is comments, as well as discussions on meta, though I occasionally see discussions on this in chat.  No, I am not going  to link to about 500+ comments to support this answer. (And to make that demand nearly impossible, most of them are now opaque to me due to being gone and me not being a diamond mod).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without getting into an academic discussion of formal norms and informal norms, this site operates with a variety of informal norms.  What you are seeing is that an informal norm about what constitutes 'back it up' has moved its center of mass based on the user group on this site that cares enough to speak up ... speaking up.  Informal norms in a group will often change when the membership of a group changes.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The trend I am seeing is a demand on the answer writer to be more detailed&#xA;in their citation of relevant at table experience.  In other words, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9244/am-i-getting-serial-downvotes-or-are-my-answers-suddenly-this-bad#comment30115_9245&quot;&gt;the point you make in this comment&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, bottom line, if I can't spend an hour on a long, hyper-detailed&#xA;  answer, I'm better not answering at all. Point taken.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is answered: yes.  That seems to be becoming the new norm.  (But it's not a policy).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've had another&#xA;meta recently about GS/BS where we raised the question, collectively&#xA;on meta, on whether GS/BS still fits the site.  There also seems to&#xA;have arisen &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer#comment30044_9228&quot;&gt;a disagreement on what constitutes support of the&#xA;subjective kind&lt;/a&gt;.  Related metas are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;also here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The squeaky wheel gets the most attention.  Human behavior, 101.  Whether this is a good change, a bad one, or somewhere in between is beyond this format's tools to judge.  It is what it is. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Related note&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A while back we ran into a collective disagreement, or lack of clarity, on what &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7353/22566&quot;&gt;primarily opinion based&lt;/a&gt; close reasons are&quot; for those using the review queue to vote to close or reopen a question where POB was the major selection in the question triage process.  As one might expect, the opinions on what constitutes &quot;opinion based&quot; varied. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T22:48:21.433" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T22:48:21.433" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9013" CreationDate="2019-07-05T06:32:24.433" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whew! The other answers are really good and have said so much, but I would like to show my appreciation as well. Damn....you will be missed as a Mod! What is it, 7.2 million people reached! If only this number included a fraction of all those your moderation has helped. Though even if we had that number in total, it wouldn't properly represent all of your hard work!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47190" LastEditorUserId="47190" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T07:22:31.167" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T07:22:31.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9189" CreationDate="2019-07-05T07:11:47.617" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The amount of great work you have done for this site is truly EPIC level (With a helluva lot better rules!;-)! You're one of the main reasons rpg.stackexchange is the top RPG Q&amp;amp;A site! You put the diamond in diamond moderator (Okay that was lame, but it's true :-). I hope that all that you have done for this site touches your heart with satisfaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47190" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T07:11:47.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9251" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-05T08:16:37.767" Score="5" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151023/modelling-reciprocal-economies&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. In its initial form, it was very quickly evaluated to be too broad. Fair enough. I tried to narrow it down to a question about fixing/improving the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; stopgap solution I'm currently using, based on a suggestion of a commentator. But it seems like I didn't do a good enough job of it, judging by lack votes going in the other direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I added more detail about how I handle the mechanics of the matter in question, and about what I'm finding unsatisfactory about the results, and removed things that seemed most likely to be considered tangential. &lt;strong&gt;What else should I add, change, or remove about the question to give it a decent chance of being reopened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T09:14:43.663" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T06:50:40.920" Title="How to Improve/Fix This Question About Modelling Reciprocal Economies?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9251" CreationDate="2019-07-05T15:42:50.387" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s currently long enough to dissuade reopen voters from re-reading a niche question written about foreign (non-RPG domain) technical concepts. It’s also written at a much higher grade level than necessary, making it much more likely to exceed the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/literacy.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;recreational reading grade level&lt;/a&gt; of your desired audience (reopen voters with only passing interest in a niche question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would help is making it much more digestible. It doesn’t need an extensive explanation of what “reciprocal economies” means, it needs a short and clear description that voters can evaluate quickly, and trusts answerers to not need it explained in detail. Ideally, explaining it should be dispensed with in a single sentence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It could also benefit from signposting: short, easily digested text that sets the reader up to anticipate and absorb later, less digestible text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’d rewrite the whole first section as something like this, with no header (my commentary in bold-italic parentheses):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I’m unsatisfied with how things like barter economies are usually handled in RPGs, and have come up with a homebrew mechanic that I’m trying to improve. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Problem statement. Signposts the entire body.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Few RPGs give a way to handle “reciprocal economies” during play. Gift economies, barter economies, and reputation economies are usually boiled down to something tracked with points that end up making it work at the table little different from gold coins or dollars. Rubbing salt in the wound, they’re often overengineered for what little they do. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Both explains what “reciprocal economies” means, the distinction with market economies (without invoking the technical term), and explains how existing RPG mechanics fail you. Accessible language used.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My homebrew is simpler while already delivering that same “only slightly different than a cash economy” that more complex mechanics offer. It works well enough in the two campaigns I’m using, but I want to improve it so it feels less like just another kind of market economy. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Bookends introduction by returning the reader’s focus to what the point is: a homebrew, and improving how it models reciprocal economies differently from market economies. The term “market economy” is added here at the end where experts will see it, without derailing readers early.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I’m using this in Eclipse Phase and a far-future GURPs campaign. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Brief, necessary context for later.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Continue with existing text from “My Current Working Solution…”)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the later text could also be written in a more accessible style, but once the reader has got through the introduction, they’re more likely (if interested in answering) to read further, or (if considering a reopen vote) to have got a sufficient feel for the post to decide if they should vote now or read further to decide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-07-05T15:49:51.987" LastActivityDate="2019-07-05T15:49:51.987" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9251" CreationDate="2019-07-06T18:39:10.297" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks like a great question to me.  I don't think it needs improving.  Also I have an answer if it ever gets reopened, but you probably won't like it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think ultimately if you want to improve it, you need to make it palatable to drive-by voters as well as those actually qualified to answer your question.  When people encounter a question they don't understand, they will downvote and VTC regardless of the merits of the question.  In your particular case, the background economic knowledge required to parse the question is a good thing, because economics, like politics, is something that's gonna draw a lot of gut-reaction low-quality unsupported answers with lots of upvotes from like-minded folk-- &lt;strong&gt;don't explain what market and reciprocal economies are in your question&lt;/strong&gt;. Having to Google that will forestall a lot of bad answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is, nonetheless, really long.  Each of the sections present seems pretty important, but there might be a way to merge some of your bullet points together into a short thing that's less accurate to what you're currently doing but gets the information across faster.  Some of these shortcuts have to do with ways of understanding things that are more answer-like so I'm not sure how to help you with that but ideally if you could  avoid repeating themes across sections in your question that would make the question less clear but shorter and thus more likely to be not-close-voted and/or reopen-voted.  I don't think the trade off is worth it because I think your question will eventually crawl across the reopen line anyways, but you may disagree about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-07T06:50:40.920" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T06:50:40.920" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9254" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-07T12:36:39.550" Score="10" ViewCount="307" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I have a series of questions that are unrelated to one another, how much time should I let pass before asking the next/each question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are several options that I could take. For example, I could ask all of them after I typed them, which would flood the activity page with, in this case, six questions that I have regarding rules of spells from the new book Acquisitions Incorporated for D&amp;amp;D-5e within a span of about 20 minutes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-10T22:17:31.630" LastActivityDate="2020-03-12T09:24:52.680" Title="When I have a series of questions that are unrelated to one another, how much time should I let pass before asking the next/each question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9255" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9254" CreationDate="2019-07-07T12:53:20.443" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Let questions pass rather than time.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My general rule of thumb is that no one asker should make up 50% (or more) of the ten most recent questions. In practice, this means pop out as many as 4 questions however fast you can type them. Once those are out in the wild, though, you should wait however long it takes for other users to ask some of their questions, ideally 1.5x the number of questions you asked, before asking more questions. In practice this can mean a wait time of anywhere from 10 minutes to most of a day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This keeps the front page from being dominated by a single user, which can both irritate people and flood other new questions off the front page before they've gotten sufficient attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T12:53:20.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9256" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9258" CreationDate="2019-07-07T15:09:25.743" Score="10" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a question is marked as a duplicate or is closed, should I delete it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't know if I can clarify that any more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53925" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-07T15:32:24.727" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T15:32:24.727" Title="If a question is marked as a duplicate or is closed, should I delete it?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|duplicates|etiquette|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9256" CreationDate="2019-07-07T15:29:43.773" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should not delete questions closed as a duplicate.  Those serve as signposts to the primary question and can help those thinking of the question in a different way discover it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could delete questions closed for other reasons - but why?   If the system wanted them deleted for being closed, they’d get deleted once on hold turns to closed. Note that the system may even stop you from deleting them if they have upvoted answers.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T15:29:43.773" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9256" CreationDate="2019-07-07T15:30:53.047" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nope, leave it in place. Someone could search with phrasing more similar to what you used than the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;SE Meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/187043/if-your-question-is-closed-as-a-duplicate-should-you-delete-it&quot;&gt;If your question is closed as a duplicate, should you delete it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;SE Meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/32311/do-not-delete-good-duplicates&quot;&gt;Do not delete good duplicates!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35172" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T15:30:53.047" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9254" CreationDate="2019-07-07T18:26:50.777" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you feel your questions are good, &lt;strong&gt;right away.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is part of the culture in Stackexchange that I appreciate: the quality of the post matters.  Who posts it? Not so much. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6507/is-there-an-established-way-to-handle-a-games-designer-on-the-site&quot;&gt;Even the game designer can make an account and post here,&lt;/a&gt; but we will have no way to prove the credibility of the post and thus will have to judge by the quality of the post itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no consensus here.  Oblivious Sage's answer is a good self-guideline, but there's nothing wrong with posting several questions right away. Just make sure each question is &lt;strong&gt;good&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Properly defined&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Well formatted&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I rarely write a post less than 5 minutes, so at least I have a 5-minutes gap between posts, and sometimes 15 minutes. Plenty time for anyone to post a question or answer in between. In those times, I do my checklist on those three things, and once more before I hit the post button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-07-07T22:10:44.030" LastActivityDate="2019-07-07T22:10:44.030" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9244" CreationDate="2019-07-08T17:59:32.560" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The site has become stricter about unsupported answers, and your answers are largely unsupported.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note all this is not to criticize you, but to explain what's going on so you can adapt to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing your recent deleted and undeleted answers, the vast majority are simply stated as &quot;Do this/this is the answer-fact.&quot;  Use name cards. Leave your GM. Eliminate Wish from access by mortals.  Sell six bullets for a copper.  Use a session 0. Your AC is 18.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in very few of these cases (deleted or undeleted, upvoted or downvoted) are the answers backed up per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, even worse, in some cases it's clear you definitely don't have that experience, like the session 0 recommendation when someone asked you &quot;have you done this&quot; you replied &quot;no, and I can't even put myself in the shoes of an inexperienced GM since it's been 20 years since I was one.&quot; Then what grounds do you have to recommend it? Hearsay? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is all a warning sign of Bad Subjective answers - ones you thought up but are not grounded in either the rules (flatfooted in 5e, nonexistent rogue feats in 5e) or in experience.  We don't like answers that &quot;sound good&quot; but may not actually be a good idea; that runs the risk of actually hurting the person asking questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fix here is to only answer questions you have experience with (game system wise or situation wise), and explain how it's worked for you.  This doesn't have to be &quot;pages and pages&quot; but should have another couple sentences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example, your most highly upvoted recent answer, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147295/how-can-i-get-people-to-remember-my-characters-gender/147299#147299&quot;&gt;How can I get people to remember my character&amp;#39;s gender?&lt;/a&gt;.  It probably should have downvotes, and it probably doesn't because enough people have seen this/it's worked for them that they are just mentally editing in the experience rather than looking for it in the answer.  I mean, it's a good technique, it's one I have used and agree with - but the answer itself doesn't help someone know whether this is just a crazy idea that's in reality a terrible practice that hasn't worked for people. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you haven't used name cards, then this answer should be deleted. No one should be &quot;making up&quot; answers on this site, we don't do brainstorming/idea generation here, that's what forums are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have, it doesn't take much to add a couple sentences of times you've done this or seen it done and how it helped. &quot;I went to a convention recently and everyone made index card name tents with name, profession, and a gender symbol and it helped everyone keep it straight even coming into a new set of PCs cold.&quot; &amp;lt;- would be my personal example, in this case at Chupacabracon playing Call of Cthulhu.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get how it's a little confusing, because some of your unsupported answers are getting upvotes and so there's not a clear correlation between your upvoted/remaining versus downvoted/deleted answers in terms of backing up. But all answers need some kind of backup besides &quot;I said so.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-07-10T02:11:07.477" LastActivityDate="2019-07-10T02:11:07.477" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9254" CreationDate="2019-07-10T02:28:38.727" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Letting more time pass can be helpful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a site perspective there is nothing wrong with posting multiple related questions together. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9255/48759&quot;&gt;Oblivious Sage's guidelines&lt;/a&gt; are a good reference point for the etiquette of doing so to avoid frustrating other users, but that certainly isn't a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there is another factor to consider in posting related questions. How truly related your questions are will impact how useful this advice is. The more related the more relevant it will be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are asking a related question then the answers and advice given on the early questions may impact how you ask about the later ones. This applies to both what you are asking and how you ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider the case where you want to ask about a group of spells from the same source. Likely you would use a similar question format and structure. Potentially something in this format is unclear or confusing. If you ask all of the questions in a quick-fire manner you will then need to go and edit each one individually. It also creates more work for reviewers and commenters trying to help you. Alternatively, if you had only posted one question and waited before asking the next that revision process would already be complete and the second version of the question may not need as much work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also think about overlapping answers to your questions. It is entirely possible that an excellent answer to your first question may also answer, or partly answer your second question. That may impact how (or even if) you ask the second one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't take this as a policy or advice against asking multiple questions. Instead when you want to ask multiple just take a second to think if the answer and comments on one of them could impact how you approach the second one. If so it may be worth waiting some time before asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-10T02:28:38.727" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9262" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9263" CreationDate="2019-07-10T03:21:30.227" Score="6" ViewCount="269" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151464/what-challenges-arise-from-playing-a-chaotic-evil-character-in-a-heroic-party&quot;&gt;What challenges arise from playing a Chaotic Evil character in a heroic party?&lt;/a&gt; which has been voted to be closed 4 times as of this writing for being primarily opinion based. However, the question was written specifically to ask for experience-based answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reviewing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic/5358#5358&quot;&gt;Are questions about alignment on topic?&lt;/a&gt;, it does appear to follow all guidelines for alignment-based questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I miss something in the guidelines, or is this question truly primarily opinion-based, when taken as a whole?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nearly all of the reasons for the votes were quickly answered by pointing to sections of the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40451" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-07-10T11:23:23.053" LastActivityDate="2019-07-11T10:49:43.840" Title="Is this question about a chaotic evil character in a heroic party too opinion-based, or is it experience-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9262" CreationDate="2019-07-10T15:20:32.427" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is too broad. From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What types of questions should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question you've asked is the second kind of question. It is not actually a question with a single best solution or answer available, but instead it is a prompt for a discussion, or a survey of peoples' thoughts. It is a good prompt and might lead to quite a great discussion! It just produces a question that is not very viable in Stack Exchange's Q&amp;amp;A format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This warning also applies:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite ______?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is almost certain that this question would attract an endless list of answers, all equally valid, by people listing one or more challenges basically forever. Very few would be better or more correct than any other, because they are all people listing challenges, which is what was asked for. This is what makes it a survey.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It makes matters a bit worse that you are trying to collect all possible challenges in all possible reasonable interpretations of “chaotic evil” in all possible games that provide anything like that kind of thing, but even if you scoped it down to just one game and edition (e.g. D&amp;amp;D 5e) it would still remain a survey and would be closed as too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead I recommend asking this question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;on one of these forums we'd recommend&lt;/a&gt; and come to us when you have a specific game with specific problems with a specific chaotic evil character (or player who wants to play one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-11T10:49:43.840" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-07-11T10:01:49.013" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The virtuous necromancer only uses the highest quality milk for this ethically produced state of the art cheese with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/151229/44723&quot;&gt;special filling&lt;/a&gt; encased through rigorous technique and perfect sealing, if a farmer doesn't meet the quality standards they are still 100% recyclable! Such a contribution to the circle of life and, mhm, the squishy crunch, exalting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2019-07-11T10:09:30.337" LastActivityDate="2019-07-11T10:09:30.337" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9265" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9269" CreationDate="2019-07-12T22:00:47.887" Score="8" ViewCount="411" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; tag has no tag info/wiki, but the tag currently appears on 8 questions. 6 of them are about Pathfinder (all but 1 of those are about the Psychic class, as far as I can tell), and 2 are about D&amp;amp;D 5e. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124423/souls-and-psychic-damage-hp-in-a-magic-jar&quot;&gt;One of those last two&lt;/a&gt; is about psychic damage; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151625/is-there-an-official-supplement-about-psychics-or-are-they-only-mentioned-in-ua&quot;&gt;other more recent question&lt;/a&gt; is apparently asking about psychics &quot;like ones described in the expanded psychic handbook (D&amp;amp;D 3.5)&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seem to be two other related existing tags, though neither are totally identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; tag info says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about psionics, a pseudo-scientific term referring to unnatural mental powers, including telekinesis, psychometry and telepathy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concept of psionics seems similar to the abilities used by the Psychic class in Pathfinder, but it seems like the Psion also exists as a separate class with its own abilities so I'm assuming it's different from psionics somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mystic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mystic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mystic&lt;/a&gt; tag info says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The mystic, also known as the psion, is a class in Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons that is able to harness innate psionic abilities. These abilities are often distinct from and less common than traditional spellcasting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, the concept seems similar to that of the psychic, but I'm assuming there's some important distinctions. If so, it makes sense that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; should be its own separate tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What exactly should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; tag be used for?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it distinct from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mystic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mystic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mystic&lt;/a&gt;? Assuming the tag should remain, should it just cover the Psychic class from Pathfinder (and classes in similar RPGs of the same name) - if not, what kind of questions should it be used for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-13T07:58:24.623" LastActivityDate="2019-08-17T15:56:00.907" Title="What is the [psychic] tag meant for, and how distinct is it from [psionics] and [mystic]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9266" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9265" CreationDate="2019-07-13T16:41:25.430" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; tag is not being used for a specific class.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, it seems to have been used for the psychic system of magic in pathfinder. Which means it should probably be renamed into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt;. Of the 8 questions, only 3 have to specifically do with the psychic class (1 of which is a duplicate created by an impatient asker of one of the other questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Additionally, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt; are different.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Pathfinder, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/psionics-unleashed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Psionics&lt;/a&gt; refers to the third party set of alternative rules that is an updated version of Psionics from 3.5 for Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/occult-adventures/psychic-magic/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Psychic-Magic&lt;/a&gt; refers to another kind of magic, akin to arcane and divine magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;On the subject of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; tag should not be synonymized with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; (OA) is a bad tag on it's own since as a source book tag it suffers from being simultaneously too broad while being too narrow. It's too broad since it has to cover the breadth of material introduced in the book (spells, feats, new magic system, rituals, classes, archetypes, etc), and it's too narrow because it restricts the questions to only ones about content from that book. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means questions, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99653&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97877&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; which are related to material from OA, but not actually about OA content, will be made. Similarly, it means tags about material introduced in OA, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kineticist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kineticist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kineticist&lt;/a&gt;, will be made, because they are narrow enough, yet broad enough, to be useful as a tag, thus making the OA tag redundant on those questions. Similarly, question like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151620&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; don't fall under the OA tag, because despite being about a class that was released in OA, they do not deal with material from OA.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, we shouldn't need a tag for a source book, instead questions about content in a source book should have tags related to the content they are asking about (eg. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kineticist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kineticist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kineticist&lt;/a&gt;). Sometimes this could even be the same as the name of the source book (eg. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mythic-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mythic-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mythic-adventures&lt;/a&gt;). However, just like we don't need a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/core-rulebook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;core-rulebook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;core-rulebook&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-handbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-handbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-handbook&lt;/a&gt; tag, we don't need a tag for each source book. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What should we do.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Turn &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt;, and update the tag wiki accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The tag excerpt for it should be something  like &quot;For questions about the Psychic magic ruleset used in Pathfinder. For questions about mental powers, or Psionics see the Psionics tag.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The wiki post should be something like &quot;A Pathfinder ruleset introduced with the book Occult Adventures released in July 2015, the Psychic Magic rules provide an another form of magic designed to used alongside Arcane and Divine Magic.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Burninate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag, it's not useful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mystic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mystic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mystic&lt;/a&gt; the way they are, no need for changes.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="47188" LastEditDate="2019-07-15T15:30:51.663" LastActivityDate="2019-07-15T15:30:51.663" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9267" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-15T05:31:03.730" Score="13" ViewCount="460" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering, because I see this happening especially often on this Stack site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most recently I made the poster of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/151490/15211&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; aware that by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/legal-faq.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;License&lt;/a&gt; Blizzard is granting for their materials, you are not allowed to sublicense their material. And since posting something on the SE network the user agreeing to publish it under CC-BY-SA 3.0 and confirming having the right to do so is an act of sublicensing, that this possibly might be an copyright infringement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, the source he got this modified arts of the Hearthstone cards from gives no copyright or license information at all, so there is no obvious evidence, that the author of the linked tool, has any additional grants from Blizzard to give others permission to sublicense or even was granted to alter original works of Blizzard, what Blizzard by the linked FAQ's is directly referring to as not being granted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made the answerer aware of it and they said they gonna change it. So far so well. They didn't yet, but that's not my business anymore. I made them aware that they possibly might be infringing copyright by sublicensing something they might not be allowed to and by publishing altered artwork of Blizzard that might have been altered without permission.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what made me wonder was, my comments had been moved to chat. So I am asking now:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Aren't comments the way to address possible copyright infringement? And if they aren't, what is the way to address it? Or is it preferred to not be addressed at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15211" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-16T04:16:14.883" LastActivityDate="2019-07-17T04:01:01.523" Title="What's the proper way to address possible copyright infringement in posts?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9267" CreationDate="2019-07-15T12:56:42.830" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not necessary for us to police copyright law to this degree. In this instance you're even policing Blizzard's copyright harder than Blizzard itself does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments were removed and not acted on by moderators because the concern you were bringing up is actually something we'd prefer not be worried about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Let's talk briefly about fansites and card generators&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every trading card game has card generator fansites nowadays. I know we're talking about a Hearthstone one, but let me talk about &lt;em&gt;Magic: the Gathering&lt;/em&gt; for a moment because it's got both a longer history and a bigger custom card community. MTG has at least three extremely well known custom card generators: &lt;em&gt;MTG Cardsmith, Magic Set Editor,&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;MTG.Design&lt;/em&gt;. One of those has existed for eight years at this point. These tools are part of a lively custom card creator community. Wizards of the Coast has never acted to shut these down because they embrace the custom card creator communities as a vitally important part of the game's social health, and because nobody is actually using them to damage Wizards's profitability off their intellectual property. In fact, custom card creators wind up being free marketing and increase community engagement with their game, leading to better profit. For the same reasons, Blizzard is never going to shut down Hearthcards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wizards &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; acted to shut down sites in the past that damage their IP or profitability by allowing people to make easily-printable card proxies on a large scale. One such recent site took a list of cards and generated dozens of pages of printable images so you could print your deck at home for free. These sites don't do that, haven't been shut down, and will never do that because the site owners know better. Hearthstone can't really be pirated this way, but the principle is the same and Hearthcards isn't a mass proxy site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general games have a fansite policy. They enforce it loosely, allowing fan communities to use even unlicensed intellectual property as long as they're doing it in capacity as a fansite. For example, MTG sites aren't technically permitted to use the game's mana symbols, but loads of the largest MTG sites do it anyway and you're not going to find Wizards sending out a cease &amp;amp; desist about it. Intellectual property law is an imperfect system and this is one of those areas where companies like Wizards and Blizzard choose not to enforce them and prefer to just quietly allow fans to do their thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The use of the fansite is integral to the answer and its usage is fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our primary official reason to not link to pirate sites on here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2773/1204&quot;&gt;because the links are guaranteed to go dead&lt;/a&gt; (sooner than links might otherwise) and we don't want guaranteed link rot on our site. There's other good pragmatic concerns too, for example we want to maintain a good-faith relationship with publishers and we don't want our site to become a hive of scum and villainy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The custom card generator probably won't go dead though, at least not sooner than any other site might. It's not going to damage our relationship with any third party. It's not going to turn our site into a hive of scum and villainy either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer also does no harm. The legal concerns are &lt;em&gt;literally&lt;/em&gt; Blizzard's business and Blizzard is fine with it; this is the opposite of a problem to them. These are obviously Hearthstone cards and nobody's doing anything to damage Blizzard's IP or its sales. Nobody's being exploitative here or doing any damage to anybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing that the answer is doing with the card generator recommendation and images is providing people a cool way to solve a problem in their games. It's a good answer, it makes a good recommendation, and it stands to improve the quality of peoples' games at no cost to anyone. Worrying about the state of copyright here stands to do the community a disservice for no reason and no benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything is OK. We should leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'd ask that you highlight when an RPG piracy reference site is being used, but this specific case doesn't warrant action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-07-15T13:53:09.643" LastActivityDate="2019-07-15T13:53:09.643" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9265" CreationDate="2019-07-15T13:16:31.367" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;History lesson:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D includes supplemental material detailing “psionics,” a form of supernatural power distinct from “magic.” Something along these lines appears &lt;em&gt;somewhere&lt;/em&gt; in each numbered edition of D&amp;amp;D. Instead of Vancian spell slots, psionics uses a point-based system. Narratively, it is a much more “internal” form of power, projected from a mind into reality, which is backed up in various D&amp;amp;D campaign settings (e.g. manifesters in the Forgotten Realms project their own personal “mini-Weave” rather than use Mystra’s or Shar’s as spellcasters do). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Notably, “psychic” is often used as an adjective that is synonymous to “psionic,” as for example in the “psychic warrior” class that uses psionics to augment martial prowess.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e releases most of the content from the &lt;em&gt;Expanded Psionics Handbook&lt;/em&gt; under the Open Game License, and includes it in its System Reference Document. Being open-game content, psionics is thus opened up for third-party publications, e.g. &lt;em&gt;Hyperconscious&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pathfinder is also based on the open-game content of D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, but Paizo repeatedly states they are uninterested in psionics. Dreamscarred Press, whose founders had contributed to &lt;em&gt;Hyperconscious&lt;/em&gt; and who had continued to produce psionics material for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, switch to Pathfinder relatively early on, producing psionics material for that system in the absence of anything official.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Paizo releases &lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt;, which includes “psychic magic.” This was &lt;em&gt;magic&lt;/em&gt;, not psionics, and there is a fair amount of internal consistency about that, &lt;strong&gt;however&lt;/strong&gt;, the choice to name it “psychic magic,” rather than, say, “occult magic,” and the use of many psionic powers’ names for the psychic spells, produces a massive amount of completely-unwarranted confusion. Dreamscarred Press loses an enormous amount of business almost overnight, and spends a great deal of page-space across an entire line of publications trying to sort out and clarify the differences between the two. (Disclaimer: I contributed to DSP’s efforts to clarify the two.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt; also includes a class called the “psychic,” just to add another layer of confusion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e releases the mystic, &lt;em&gt;Unearthed Arcana&lt;/em&gt; content that showcases how 5e might do psionics. It is again a point-based system, and again says “mystics shun the world to turn their eyes inward” and use “inner, psychic strength.” As &lt;em&gt;Unearthed Arcana&lt;/em&gt; material, it is not “official” and psionics in 5e might end up very differently from the mystic as presented.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pathfinder 2e is released, and the sort of magic previously referred to as “psychic magic” is now “occult magic.” The bard is a core occult-magic class, instead of an arcane class as in D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder 1e.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which basically explains the confusion we have in our tags: because &lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt; chose to confuse things and muddy the waters, it is very easy to misunderstand and misuse these tags. Perhaps worse, until recently we have been using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; for most of the psychic Pathfinder material, either alongside &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; or instead of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt;. In fact, questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; are actually referring to the &lt;em&gt;class&lt;/em&gt; psychic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that the folksonomy is looking for four tags here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something to refer to the psionics found widely in D&amp;amp;D and elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something to refer to the psychic magic of &lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt; and the occult magic of Pathfinder 2e.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something to refer to the psychic class from &lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt;, and again possibly elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Something to refer to the mystic class from 5e &lt;em&gt;Unearthed Arcana&lt;/em&gt;, and possibly elsewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both psychic and mystic run afoul of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8050/4563&quot;&gt;the same problems I raised for the Pathfinder magus&lt;/a&gt;, but worse since as a tag it’s not even clear that they are being used as classes, or even as nouns rather than adjectives. But as in that case, the only solution available seems to be to throw up our hands and bite the bullet on it. “Psychic” additionally runs into people mixing it up with “psionics,” since outside of &lt;em&gt;Occult Adventures&lt;/em&gt; and the post-&lt;em&gt;OA&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder material, the two words are synonymous—as seen in the 5e mystic’s introduction quoted earlier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, Paizo has done us no favors here, and that’s reflected in the current confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So then, proposals:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; is created and added to questions asking about the psychic magic of Pathfinder 1e and the occult magic of Pathfinder 2e. Having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; be the main tag may help reduce the likelihood that someone referring to psionics will use it, and in any event since Pathfinder 2e uses “occult magic” this seems likely to be the official name going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt; is created and synonymized with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt;. This eliminates some of the discoverability problem that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; had, since someone typing in “psychic” will see it, possibly making Pathfinder 1e players more likely to correctly get &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; on their questions even though that system doesn’t use that term.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; is removed from relevant questions in favor of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt;. The ultimate fate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-adventures&lt;/a&gt; may become the subject of a separate meta question if anything more seems to be necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; is renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt;. I don’t like this, but it seems to me that it’s the only way to clarify to readers that are unfamiliar with the Pathfinder situation that it refers to a class. This tag is removed from any mystic questions and replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt;. This tag is removed from any Pathfinder psychic/occult-magic questions not involving the psychic class, and replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; is kept the way it is. Compared to psychic/occult magic, it has a longer history, a wider use outside of a single system (including non-D&amp;amp;D systems), and in any event, there isn’t a useful qualifier for it the way there is for “psychic magic” that clarifies the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mystic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mystic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mystic&lt;/a&gt; is kept the way it is. It could become &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mystic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mystic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mystic-class&lt;/a&gt;, but I’d prefer to wait until it actually becomes a problem the way &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; have before doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2019-08-17T15:56:00.907" LastActivityDate="2019-08-17T15:56:00.907" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9267" CreationDate="2019-07-17T01:34:06.120" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Option 1: It's your copyright&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/company/contact&quot;&gt;Contact&lt;/a&gt; Stack Exchange. Except the link about notifying copyright infringement goes to the terms of service which don't tell you how to do it. So I would contact their &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/legal/contact&quot;&gt;legal team&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Option 2: It's not your copyright&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are a law enforcement officer specifically charged with seeking out and prosecuting copyright infringement: do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you aren't, leave it to the copyright owner to look after their own property. If you like, you can let them know of the alleged infringement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Fair Use/Dealing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost all uses of copyright material on Stack Exchange sites are likely to be fair use/dealing in any event.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Sub-licencing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, if the post is infringing it can't be sub-licenced. However, the onus is always on a person who wants to use potentially copyrighted material that they have a clean licence all the way back to the copyright holder. You cannot rely on the fact that Stack Exchange releases data under a licence because you cannot confirm that the original post to Stack Exchange was legitimate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's just the way copyright works, I'm afraid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-17T02:20:37.333" LastActivityDate="2019-07-17T02:20:37.333" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9267" CreationDate="2019-07-17T03:11:59.100" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;'Moved to Chat' isn't bad.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it sounds like you are confusing 'my comments were deleted or moved' with 'my comments were deemed unuseful'.  Those aren't the same thing.  Your comment, presuming it was basically what you said it was in your question, while fundamentally wrong (as doppelgreener explains in more detail), was the right way to deal with it.  Then the comments got moved (not sure why they weren't just deleted-- were there a lot of them and an ongoing discussion or something?), because nobody needs your old comments and the posted had clearly already read them.  That doesn't mean your comments weren't good to post, it means your comments didn't need to be taking up space on the answer page anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-17T04:01:01.523" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9273" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-17T20:43:22.523" Score="-10" ViewCount="360" Body="&lt;p&gt;I find that my opinions are being unfairly targeted by high ranking members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we keep the quality of the answers if diverse or taboo opinions are targeted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/151973/28591&quot;&gt;How can I help our ranger feel special about her beast companion?&lt;/a&gt;: Player asks for help about what to do, his wife is playing a Ranger Beast Master and is jealous about the DM making the adventure objective to return a lost flying cat (when she’s the Beast Master and has a Panther).&#xA;Most of the answers were a variety of meta game discussions / concessions with the DM. Whereas I suggest the players tie up the flying cat. My answer is downvoted and I receive a passive aggressive comment that my answer is unsupported. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/151676/28591&quot;&gt;What should I do about a religious player who refuses to accept the existence of multiple gods in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ rep users only): I answered a question where  I expressed a view to a question requiring subjective answers that a religious players personal views about monotheism are not relevant to D&amp;amp;D. I provided a creative allegory to support my answer. The answer was deleted, I presume by a moderator or from high ranking members flagging it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-07-29T13:05:38.223" LastActivityDate="2019-07-29T14:01:03.430" Title="How to address undue criticism that targets diverse answers?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|comments|policy|moderation|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9273" CreationDate="2019-07-17T21:07:05.693" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;I cannot see the second, however judging from the response I believe it is probably along the same lines as the first. The comment you refer to is not passive aggressive, it is a statement of policy, nothing more. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Subjective answers are intended to be backed up by experience, as in &quot;I had this situation, this is how I handled it or it was handled in our group, and this is how it turned out.&quot; You can see the policy in multiple answers on meta, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer&quot;&gt;How do we appropriately back up a subjective answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastEditorUserId="3958" LastEditDate="2019-07-17T21:19:27.210" LastActivityDate="2019-07-17T21:19:27.210" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9275" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9273" CreationDate="2019-07-17T22:48:40.083" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Other answers do a good job of addressing what the user was trying to convey with their comment on your answer #1 and what you can do to improve that answer to address that critique and to meet the current community standards of this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me then comment about your answer #2 and why it was removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's make one thing perfectly clear up front: it was not because you said something that was &amp;quot;taboo&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;diverse&amp;quot;. The reason your answer got removed was because it was insulting and rude towards religious people. Our site has rules and standards one of which is that we require community members to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Be Nice&lt;/a&gt;. The specific parts that apply specifically to your answer are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No subtle put-downs or unfriendly language.&lt;/strong&gt; Even if you don’t intend it, this can have a negative impact on others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;No bigotry.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people&#xA;based on race, gender, sexual orientation, &lt;strong&gt;or religion&lt;/strong&gt; — and those are&#xA;just a few examples. When in doubt, just don’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason we have this policy is that this site aims to be a place where people of many backgrounds and viewpoints can come to share their expertise in a reasonable and polite way. Insults and rudeness have no place on our site and do not count as a &amp;quot;diverse&amp;quot; viewpoint that is valued here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you refer to as a &amp;quot;creative allegory&amp;quot; was read by many in the community as a direct mockery of religious belief likely to insult and alienate people that hold those beliefs. I read it the same way. When this critique was brought up in the comments you not only declined to change it, but doubled down on being rude. It is worth noting that you could have easily made your point in another, less insulting way.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; You chose not to. Repeatedly. Thus, we (being multiple members of this community) removed it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl; dr This community does not tolerate rude, unwelcoming, and bigoted behavior. Answers displaying this have no place here and will be removed.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - You can, in fact, &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; change it. If you edit the answer to follow site policy and flag it for mod attention, we can take a look and see if it warrants undeletion and we'd be happy to see you make such a change.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-29T14:01:03.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9273" CreationDate="2019-07-17T22:51:07.367" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your answers were not being downvoted because they were taboo or too diverse.  Answers are going to be downvoted (and in extreme cases, removed) whether they are diverse or not, when they are poor quality, as they were here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;First: Beast Companions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151944/how-can-i-help-our-ranger-feel-special-about-her-beast-companion/151973#151973&quot;&gt;The first&lt;/a&gt; was downvoted, with near certainty, because it failed the &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions/9227&quot;&gt;Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;&quot; test.  Those links point to the overall Stack policy on subjective questions, and the RPG Meta which hashes out our approach with it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The gist of the policy is that some questions are subjective in nature, but this does not open them up for just free-form brainstorming of untested ideas.  This policy is currently getting a lot of attention and policing from users, for reasons beyond the scope of this answer.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That this is the reason for the downvotes may or may not be obvious, since I think you're a recently joined user:  There are currently no mentions in the comments to the question, or to your answer, so if you are not familiar with that policy I'm sure it was quite baffling.  But that is almost certainly what it is.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note, after you review the policy, whether you agree with it or disagree with it, &lt;em&gt;this question&lt;/em&gt; is not the place or method to challenge it.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note also that this answer is of sufficiently low quality just by vote counts that it may ended up removed anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Second: Religiously Inflexible Players&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148911/what-should-i-do-about-a-religious-player-who-refuses-to-accept-the-existence-of/151676#151676&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; (I'm linking to the question, not the answer, since the answer is deleted) was not removed for Good Subjective, Bad Subjective reasons-- I can see the revision history and it started out describing an actual example of your answer in play. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, when asked to follow up on that with details on how it worked, you updated with what I assume was a sarcastic satire of the player's beliefs, which I will not describe here, but was at the least disrespectful to your player and anyone with adjacent beliefs, and arguably abusive.  (And since the answer ended up deleted as abusive by more than just mod action, the argument is strong.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really, honestly need a written down rule that you broke, see this &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/conduct&quot;&gt;site-wide code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;, specifically, &quot;No subtle put downs.&quot;  (Although the put down wasn't that subtle.)  I would also consider this, from the same page, alienation based on religion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not consider &quot;Don't engage in put downs, and don't be abusive&quot; to be a matter of taboo.  It is a matter of site policy reinforcing civil behavior amongst (ironically) diverse populations of users. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I note in passing that this question spawned quite a few answers that were later deleted:  Four of them were deleted by their owners after being challenged for additional evidence, one by votes after being challenged for additional evidence, one as spam, and one (yours) by vote for being abusive.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Objectively speaking, you are not being singled out, here, at all.  Certainly not on the basis of your diversity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2019-07-17T22:51:07.367" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9277" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-18T12:35:09.667" Score="11" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1911/4398&quot;&gt;&quot;Do role-playing games have to be fun?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; was a nice question in the early days of the site, very typical of early-beta-site questions generally. Then it went quiet for five years until a (totally reasonable) tag edit brought it back to the surface today and I got a chance to look again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking over the many responses, I get the feeling that this question just doesn't really fit our current sense of Stackability as it applies to RPG.SE. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should it be closed, or given a historical lock?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-19T04:20:33.440" LastActivityDate="2019-07-19T04:20:33.440" Title="Should &quot;Do role-playing games have to be fun?&quot; be closed?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|closing-questions|locked-posts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9277" CreationDate="2019-07-18T12:35:09.667" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;TL;DR: This is a nice question and has useful answers but it's an unbounded list/poll question with clarity issues. It should get a historical lock because it's still a useful reference despite not being a great fit for the Stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's this question about, anyway?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a conflict between the title question and the body question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a question in the title (do RPGs have to be fun?), and a distinctly different question in the body (how do RPGs reward players?) which doesn't even include the idea of games &quot;needing&quot; to be fun. It mentions 'fun' as a potential quality of rewards--yet the preamble talks about 'fun' and 'satisfaction' but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; 'rewards,' so there's a logical leap being made which I'm not sure I follow. (I suspect the querent had something specific in mind they were trying to bring readers to Socratically; I see that a lot in early beta-site questions, but it's not really a thing the Stack supports beyond early betas.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title question might be answerable within the Stack but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6570/4398&quot;&gt;&quot;answers should answer the question — that is to say, the body, not the title&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and the body question is quite distinct from the title!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I look at the body question, I see a little phrase that always raises a red flag for Stackability: &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What are some?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Literally the querent's just asking for incomplete lists of examples of rewards people get for playing RPGs, and a little commentary on the role of fun in those lists. It's not even limited to system or anything like that which might make the list bounded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many closely related questions which are imminently Stackable: clarification of the term &quot;fun&quot; in design theory (difficult to answer since &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/ladylakira/status/1145698938223153153&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG design is folk art&lt;/a&gt; but there's schema for it); how particular kinds of rewards create fun or other motives (this would be bounded); how did &quot;fun&quot; become a watchword in the design dialog (answers would be clearly rankable by accuracy); etc. And of course if the querent is struggling with something in their own design work, describing the specific problem would alleviate the matter dramatically. None of these questions were asked, but a lot of the better answers seem to be answering them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As written this is an unbounded list/poll question that doesn't match title to body content.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What kind of answers is it getting?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the answers (a good way to gauge a question's success &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;within the Stack Exchange paradigm&lt;/a&gt;!), I see a lot of awesomely experience-based answers, but they are all a little... off. Most of them are equally right, equally useful answers to the body-text question but they don't seem to actually be addressing its topic head-on, focused more on 'fun' and less on 'rewards.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I look at the answers as responses to the title-text question they make more sense! But they're trying valiantly to answer a question that's smashed into a pithy title without much regard for the body text. That's a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of the way it's asked, &lt;strong&gt;every answer&lt;/strong&gt; that provides an example of a reward is an &lt;strong&gt;equally valid&lt;/strong&gt; response to the body-text question. On its own that's a problem of Stackability because that suggests it's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;&quot;chatty, open-ended question&quot; where &quot;every answer is equally valid&quot;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But voting clearly shows the groupmind doesn't think they're all equally useful! Perhaps this is because it seems like most of the answers are focused on the title-text question instead? At any rate, I see strong indicators that we've run into a problem with the Stack's sorting algorithms here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So what should we do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's room in the Stack for game theory questions, but we've learned from hard experience that on the Stack Exchange, being &quot;on topic&quot; is usually shorthand for &quot;fits the formula&quot; rather than anything about the actual subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At any rate, there's clear problems with the question's clarity and something needs to give. If it were a new question I'd ask the querent to re-phrase it to be clearer. But even if the querent returned to do so, we generally don't dramatically edit questions after so many answers have been given--we encourage new questions to be asked instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;strong&gt;let's give it a historical lock!&lt;/strong&gt; It's a useful question, with useful answers, it's just not matching up with our current understanding of the Stack structure as a provider of rankable solutions to actual problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if we want to continue giving answers related to these topics, we can ask new, better scoped questions about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2019-07-18T12:35:09.667" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9279" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9273" CreationDate="2019-07-18T15:19:42.640" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Please don't view this as a case of &amp;quot;targeting&amp;quot; - because it isn't&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of our long time members with substantial rep (&amp;gt; 11k rep) raised a similar question recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9244/am-i-getting-serial-downvotes-or-are-my-answers-suddenly-this-bad&quot;&gt;in this meta question&lt;/a&gt;.  The response there may help you see how we are experiencing an increased activity in community moderation specifically on questions that are classified as &amp;quot;good subjective/bad subjective.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I noted in my answer there, community norms are changing a little.  A good many users (myself included!) have seen the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More comments asking them to 'back it up with experience' (or to improve that element of their answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More down votes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;More closed / deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've noticed this as I've reviewed questions and answers across the site over the past few months, and as I attract more comments under my answers that ask me to better support the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Where is this coming from?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you read the links offered in the answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9244/am-i-getting-serial-downvotes-or-are-my-answers-suddenly-this-bad&quot;&gt;to that meta question&lt;/a&gt;, and if you review activity in the meta questions / answers about &amp;quot;good subjective / bad subjective&amp;quot; for the past couple of months, you will find that the community at large - which boils down to the few dozen folks who tend to be active in community moderation since they have the rep and inclination to do so - has reviewed the policy on GS/BS and have become more active in supporting and enforcing that policy.  You can also read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9274/22566&quot;&gt;the links in JohnP's answer&lt;/a&gt; in this meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Analogy&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's been going on with GS/BS is like the cops finally pulling a few more people over, and writing more tickets, for going 5-10 miles over the speed limit some months.  The policy {the speed limit} was already there, it's just getting enforced more frequently than it was a few months back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Nobody is gunning for you.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I worked with you a little bit on the religious player question. IIRC my last remark was something like &amp;quot;are you pulling our leg?&amp;quot; but my last comment was deleted so I can't say for sure what I typed there.  I will say that when you added the narrative about David, etc, it was difficult for me to parse the distinction between real and unreal, between player and character.  While so puzzled, Real Life called so I was not able to engage with you further.  Others read the same thing I did and noted a tone that (as Rubiksmoose and SevenSidedDie both pointed out) didn't fit SE policy from the Code of Conduct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you'll take this in stride as a learning opportunity, rather than as something else.  You've made a variety of helpful inputs in the past, and I hope you'll make helpful inputs in the future.  I've had a variety of badly received answers, but I still keep on trucking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-18T21:49:05.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9273" CreationDate="2019-07-18T18:32:03.040" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Diverse answers are not being targeted&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even though every other answer here covers this as well, as one of the 'high-rep users' who has downvoted those answers and voted to delete the religious one I wanted to respond directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to clearly state that I am not targeting you or your answers. However, I do downvote answers that I don't think are supported. We do have a policy here on what constitutes support and while I've taken a harder line on policing that policy, it is one that I also agree with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'm not just agreeing with it in theory, but also in my practice when I wrote my own answers. It isn't something I've always done, but it's something that I've learned the importance of over my time here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do have answers on this site that would be considered idea generation. But my goal now is to actually try my ideas out and then go back and update the answer. Any future answers I write I now hold myself to the site policy. I support them with what I've seen or done. I think it improves the idea because it takes out of the realm of theoretical and applies a real world example of how it went. It doesn't mean that your table will respond identically (and it probably won't), but it does let me talk about how it actually went and helps me identify potential pitfalls to the idea. This is why it's important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I want high quality answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, that means answers need to be supported. If it's objective support that is a bit easier, but even then there are interpretations of rules I may not agree with. But that is what the voting system is for. You can downvote/upvote with what you agree based on your own views. Yes, the policies are here to help guide us in our voting, but ultimately we vote as we'd like to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the two answers you link above, you present two low quality answers. Neither are supported objective or subjectively. They are purely idea generation. Whether they are good or bad ideas doesn't matter to me. I want to see them supported and I trust that people will be honest in how they support answers. Yes, they could 'make up' subjective support, but it is my hope that people active on the site won't do that and I'm going to trust that they won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not only that, but the community has attempted to engage you in helping add support to your answers and those attempts have been met with snark and accusations. We really want to help you improve your answers so that we can improve the site as a whole. The better the answers are, the better the site is. It's a pretty simple system. But when you reject the help and look at it as attacks and respond accordingly, then it's not going to end up well- and we all lose when that happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even in the currently live answer on the Tressym, users have tried to help guide you in your answer and we're met with a comment where you think we're trying to be nefarious. I understand you are frustrated, but constantly responding on the defensive instead of working on improving your answers isn't going to help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I very much hope that you are able to get past this frustration and use this as a learning experience to help you in writing higher quality answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-18T19:26:43.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9281" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bug report is considered bydesign if, after review of the detailed erroneous behavior, &#xA;it is determined that the behavior is desirable to keep in place rather than fix. This &#xA;is independent of whether or not the behavior was formerly known to the site developers &#xA;prior to the time of the report - the important thing is that the behavior will not be &#xA;altered because its current behavior is preferred.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag should only be used on questions reporting what is purported as erroneous behavior &#xA;and suggests them being fixed / reversed. For when a question that is requesting a new &#xA;feature that addresses a behavior that the asker believes to be erroneous, &#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-declined&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-declined&lt;/a&gt; should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by moderators and site developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" LastActivityDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9282" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the reported behavior is intentional and not subject to change." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" LastActivityDate="2019-07-19T04:30:35.100" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9283" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9284" CreationDate="2019-07-21T22:41:08.887" Score="21" ViewCount="383" Body="&lt;p&gt;I play Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (aka 1e) and have for quite some time. Mostly I've been the DM. I've started to ask questions here about the rules to help better understand the game as it was written. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I ask a question, I tag it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt;. The tag description says it refers to 1e. This &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/845/terminology-does-add-adnd-tag-specifically-refer-to-add-1st-edition&quot;&gt;clarification was called out in a meta post - adnd &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; 1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most times when I ask a question, someone comes along and asks in the comments: &quot;What version of dungeons and dragons are you playing?&quot; or &quot;Are you &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; playing the 197x version&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't expect this to go away, but it's annoying and I'd love to have a canned response I can give the commenters. What's the appropriate response for someone who tries to disbelieve my tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27510" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-21T23:04:51.180" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T21:50:55.793" Title="Appropriate response to questioning which version of D&amp;D I'm asking about" Tags="|discussion|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9283" CreationDate="2019-07-21T23:44:33.393" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A short confirming &amp;quot;yes, I play 1e&amp;quot;, understanding what they are doing.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to highlight some of the things people&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; coming to your questions are seeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A relatively low rep user (don't worry about it, we've all been that at some point)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Asking fairly short to one-liner questions about concepts that aren't specially tied to one system&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem? People, especially new users, tag things incorrectly all the time. No system tags, just the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag, so we need to take it with a pinch of salt and if it looks like it could be a mis-tag, we ask for clarification/confirmation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; tag in particular adds to this, because there are several editions which could all be referred to as AD&amp;amp;D and so tagged such by someone who doesn't know. The fact that you know and use them correctly is great, but it doesn't change how it looks to others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, when someone asks, answer them understanding that they are trying to help you get the answers you want and not answers for a different system. Remember to be polite and clear so something like &amp;quot;Yes, I play and ask about 1e&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I'm guessing the reason you've put up the discussion here is that it keeps happening. The first few times it was fine, you're taking part in a niche part of the hobby (I'm basing this on the frequency of questions coming in, which apart from you isn't a whole lot for 1e) so it's fine, but it wears thin and tiring quickly. So, what can you do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The broadest tip: give people confirmation inherent to the question. Show your research (&amp;quot; I looked through &lt;em&gt;whatever applicable source book&lt;/em&gt;, but couldn't find anything&amp;quot;, etc.), show your context (&amp;quot;I know it works like this in X system, but&amp;quot;), or tie questions to system mechanics (This probably isn't applicable to all your questions, but it might be worth keeping in mind).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now this might not work, if the commenters don't know enough about your edition to confirm based on this, but asking a higher quality question (research effort etc.) might make people more inclined to think you know how to use the tags. But, if you want to make sure: &amp;quot;cheat&amp;quot;, include the system in the question, such &amp;quot;How does X work in 1e?&amp;quot;. You've done this for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152166/52137&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but that solution feels... inelegant, maybe?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1: These people (also we/commenters/etc.) ended up coming up a lot; it intends to refer to those users who look through questions for this that need/should/could be corrected/improved. If you've been active enough, you might recognize some usernames that recur in comments and edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-21T23:44:33.393" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9283" CreationDate="2019-07-22T04:35:01.083" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Put your canned response in the body&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any lasting clarification should be put in the body of the question, because comments are ephemeral. They can be gone at any time, so it is most logical to put it on the body. Imagine if you put the clarification on a comment, then someday it is gone, then another user ask the same question again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By putting the clarification on the body, you are helping yourself and the community; by keeping the question clean from already addressed comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T04:35:01.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9286" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-22T12:26:48.507" Score="9" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, a new user just posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152193/warlock-eldritch-blast-beam-from-single-free-hand&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; that had the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; tag, without any other tags. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; tag is defined as such, on its page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions pertaining to the D&amp;amp;D warlock class, in editions where it exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I attempted to add the appropriate parent tag to the question (namely, either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, since the text of the question refers to class features that are only present in the DnD 5e version of the class), but it keeps getting reverted by other users. I can't delete the tag, either, because it's the only tag that the question has, and a question with no tags isn't allowed by the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question obviously can't be left in its current state, but my attempts at fixing it are getting instantly reverted by other users, quoting other meta discussions about guessing systems for questions that don't have a system tagged - but this one does have a system tagged, just indirectly. How are we supposed to handle this, so that the question is properly tagged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-22T17:45:02.727" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T17:45:02.727" Title="How to handle sub-tags that lack appropriate parent tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9286" CreationDate="2019-07-22T12:38:01.813" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We wait until OP confirms the system&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't know whether or not OP knows that the tag they did add included information about a system and there are multiple other Metas about not guessing or assuming system until OP confirms specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/4563&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8849/4563&quot;&gt;What qualifies as guessing on a system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8417/4563&quot;&gt;Revisiting our &amp;quot;never guess the game system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Explicit statement of system by OP is required&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our policy here is to wait for OP to confirm system explicitly and not make assumptions based on tagging or language in the question. Please do not add system tags without OP stating which system it is that they are asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Non-system tags shouldn't have system info in them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags are also flat. There are no parent/children. System tags are a bit different because they provide some very specific direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way around this (great idea BESW!) is to remove system info from these other tags. Many systems may utilize similar terms and those tags shouldn't be specific to a system. This will also remove the confusion of 'thinking' someone has stated a system when they may not have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T13:05:55.207" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9283" CreationDate="2019-07-22T14:25:29.447" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking as someone who very recently got confused by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; tag on one of your posts and didn't realize that wasn't the same as the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag until &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; I'd already made a fool of myself in the comments, I think the fault &lt;strike&gt;is solely on me and my inability to do five seconds of research and check the tag's wiki to find out that it doesn't mean what I think it means&lt;/strike&gt; lies with the fact that the tag &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; like a generic D&amp;amp;D tag and is easy to mistake as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if the users of this site are amenable to it, I'd like to propose reconsidering making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1.0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1.0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1.0&lt;/a&gt; the primary tags for this edition, to make it clearer that those editions are what are being discussed, and that the use of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; is not just a misuse of the tagging system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Proposal here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9298/42386&quot;&gt;Should we Rename the [adnd] tag to [adnd-1e]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="42386" LastEditDate="2019-07-23T21:50:55.793" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T21:50:55.793" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9289" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9283" CreationDate="2019-07-22T14:58:20.483" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Make a clear statement in the text of the question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;AD&amp;amp;D 1e is the system we are playing.&quot;  For the moment, unless we make a tag change, that simple one liner will suffice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I think we are being inconsistent with our tagging logic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Way back when this site was establishing some best practices, mxyzplk made an observation about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/845/22566&quot;&gt;AD&amp;amp;D tags during a tagging discussion&lt;/a&gt;.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/845/terminology-does-add-adnd-tag-specifically-refer-to-add-1st-edition#comment1817_863&quot;&gt;There already are separate tags, [adnd] and [adnd-2e]&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I observe that for other D&amp;amp;D systems we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;.  We have an OSRIC tag as well.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we offered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; to identify 2d edition AD&amp;amp;D, perhaps we should replace the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; tag for 1e with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; to be consistent in our methodology.  I make this suggestion because not that many participants on our site seem to display detailed understanding of the tagging system.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Counterpoint: is a new tag name really necessary?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;If any of us mouses over the tag&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, the info is right there:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Advanced Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons (a.k.a. &quot;AD&amp;amp;D&quot;, &quot;first edition&quot;, &quot;1e&quot;) was written by Gary Gygax and released in three volumes between 1977 and 1979.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How often do people mouse over the tag, I wonder?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-07-22T16:40:01.143" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T16:40:01.143" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9290" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9292" CreationDate="2019-07-22T16:51:58.693" Score="0" ViewCount="269" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel that some of our users have taken the change in norms with subjective questions too far. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152214/how-can-i-deal-with-someone-that-wants-to-kill-something-that-isnt-supposed-to#comment393952_152218&quot;&gt;This comment is the last straw&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Any actual experience with allowing players to vote what can or cannot&#xA;  be killed? – {Mołot 22 mins ago} &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It reflects a complete misunderstanding of the answer, and it misrepresents the text of the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152214/22566&quot;&gt;in terms of addressing the actual problem&lt;/a&gt;.  A GM and all of the other players see the game one way, and one player is trying to do something different that the other players do not agree with.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem in the question header, about &quot;killing the unkillable,&quot; isn't the issue that needs to be solved.  We have X-Y problem questions arise with some frequency.  The problem is (1) getting the other player to stop being disruptive and (2) the GM's frustration with the same.  As I see it, a GM needing to learn how to say No and to stick to their decision (and to apply basic small group consensus building) is what's at stake.  And that snarky comment gets added under the answer that addresses the X-Y problem.   I just discovered that the answer was accepted by the person asking the question - this lends support to my point that the text of the question lays out the problem, not the title. I now discover, a day later, that the querent changed their mind and chose another answer.         &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At some point, before deciding to throw that &quot;Do you have expereience with {X}?&quot; line out, I ask anyone pondering such a comment to think first, read the whole question, sum up the whole problem, and then look at the solution being offered to the problem.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not convinced that all of our users are going through that process before raising that objection in the past few months.  (Though some certainly are).    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-07-24T10:28:06.143" LastActivityDate="2019-07-24T10:28:06.143" Title="Is focus on a question's title rather than the text acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9291" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9294" CreationDate="2019-07-22T16:53:51.893" Score="12" ViewCount="439" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152201/please-review-my-drunken-master-concept/152205#152205&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; came up and during a &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/96486/discussion-between-user1747281-and-nautarch&quot;&gt;discussion&lt;/a&gt;, it came up that it wasn't &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; 5e that was being played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game itself is &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.black-book-editions.fr/catalogue.php?id=365&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Heroes and Dragons&lt;/a&gt; with more specific rules found &lt;a href=&quot;https://heros-et-dragons.fr&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. Fundamentally, it seems based off of D&amp;amp;D 5e's SRD (translated into French), but has been expanded and is it's own thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm fairly certain that because it's based on the 5e SRD this is legal and fine, but I want to verify that as well as determine which system the question should be tagged with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It currently is tagged with 5e as that is the 'core' system, but it's not the system itself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I'm asking is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Should we tag to 5e because that's what OP is asking us to use in determining homebrew balance? Or should we tag to the actual game?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can we tag/link to this as a legal game?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-07-22T18:36:12.030" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T18:36:12.030" Title="Is Heroes and Dragons the same thing as D&amp;D 5e in terms of system tagging?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|game-systems|heroes-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9292" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9290" CreationDate="2019-07-22T17:01:36.877" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I get the frustration, but I'm not reading snark in that comment&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The push for better subjective support definitely can ruffle feathers, but I'm not reading snark in that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, that section of your answer is a proposal for a specific course of action. And it's a course of action with potential consequences beyond resolving the situation. By creating an open vote like this, you may be alienating that player. You may end up alienating the DM. Adding support that talks about you having done this at a table and how it went really would be helpful, because there are potential pitfalls that could be addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I agree it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; have been worded better, your answer would be improved to include support for that idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Snark shouldn't beget snark&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other issue here is your comment in return. You add a line at the end which could easily be construed by another party as snark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Was that comment really necessary, or is this becoming a reflex?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the response may actually escalate the situation rather then deescalate. A better option may have been to point out what you were saying and how it wasn't a proposed course of action that needed support. This in turn would have been an opportunity to fine tune your answer so that others didn't see it as an idea without support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having said that, this is a very tricky situation due to site norms and where we are at this moment wanting more support for subjective responses. Parties on both sides are getting frustrated and we need to be more open to each other and what we can do to help make the site better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T18:11:14.403" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9286" CreationDate="2019-07-22T17:40:29.020" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are no subtags. Any tag wiki that says or suggests a tag is, is wrong and should be edited to eliminate that suggestion. If that is not possible, it is a strong indication that there is probably something wrong somewhere. One of the primary tests for a tag’s quality is that it something that can be used as the sole tag on a question. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;, where dependence is literally the first listed signifier of a problematic code tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; that was wrong; it never should have claimed that it was specific to “the” D&amp;amp;D class (more on the scare quotes here in a bit). There are a number of class tags with this problem, some of which have been cleaned up as they got noticed/as they were desired for use in another system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On our site, because of the way system tags work, a number of tags probably can’t stand alone without a system tag—because you can’t ask about warlocks without knowing what a “warlock” is and that’s going to be system-dependent. This is a problem, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8050/4563&quot;&gt;as far as I can tell, an unavoidable one&lt;/a&gt;. But while tags relating to such details are necessarily going to have to be paired with &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; system tag, it should never be precisely &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; system tag that it gets paired with—that is, it should not be a “subtag” of any one system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, use of an alleged “subtag” is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; an excuse for guessing a system tag—since there are no subtags to begin with. There are &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; excuses for guessing a system tag. You simply should never, ever do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, since it came up in the discussion, please read the tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;. The question that was asked was not answerable as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; question. Honestly, considering the changes in the descriptions of what is referred to by the term “warlock” across the editions of D&amp;amp;D, it’s hard to imagine that combination of tags &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; being viable for a question, aside from a question literally asking for a history of that term’s usage in D&amp;amp;D and how the warlocks from each edition differ from one another. Hence my use of scare quotes earlier when referring to “‘the’ D&amp;amp;D class,” since there is no such thing as the one and only D&amp;amp;D warlock class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T17:40:29.020" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9291" CreationDate="2019-07-22T17:49:15.773" Score="31" Body="&lt;p&gt;It’s a “fork” of D&amp;amp;D 5e: based on similar fundamentals, but having split from the main branch of 5e development and thereafter developed independently of 5e. In a sense, it is not all that different from Pathfinder’s relationship to 3.5e (though, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133429/4563&quot;&gt;the history in Pathfinder’s case is a little more involved&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A fork is its own thing, whatever its relationship is to the original base. It should be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heroes-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heroes-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heroes-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;. I note that, like D&amp;amp;D itself, Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons uses the ampersand rather than the word “and,” which might be more accurately rendered as &lt;code&gt;-n-&lt;/code&gt; in our tagging system since ampersands are not allowed in that context for technical reasons, but since we use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-n-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-n-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-n-dragons&lt;/a&gt; it’s probably better to spell it out here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the long and short of it is that someone who knows D&amp;amp;D 5e but has never played Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons shouldn’t be answering Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons questions—you don’t have the expertise necessary to know if your answer is still accurate in Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons, which may have changed things relative to D&amp;amp;D 5e. It may be possible to mix Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons content with D&amp;amp;D 5e content—much as many players do with Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 3.5e content—in which case a combination of the two tags can be used, but as in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; case, a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/heroes-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;heroes-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;heroes-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; question should only be answered by those who have experience with both systems, and ideally with playing the two together—experience with one or the other should be considered insufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-07-22T17:49:15.773" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9295" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-07-22T19:55:59.827" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Heroes &amp;amp; Dragons (Héros &amp;amp; Dragons, in French) is a French RPG originally derived from a translated version of the open licensed rules to Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 5th edition. It is published by Black Book Editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50702" LastEditorUserId="50702" LastEditDate="2019-07-23T08:54:39.847" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T08:54:39.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9296" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-07-22T19:55:59.827" Score="0" Body="For issues connected to Heroes &amp; Dragons on the main site." OwnerUserId="50702" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2019-07-23T12:32:55.837" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T12:32:55.837" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9290" CreationDate="2019-07-23T07:16:33.823" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You’ve assumed that the comment is due to the commentor not reading or understanding the question nor your answer’s point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the related question is 'should we be making comments without bothering to put any effort into the reading the question and the answer' ... but that's just my opinion. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9290/is-focus-on-a-questions-title-rather-than-the-text-acceptable/9297#comment30359_9290&quot;&gt;[1]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s not what I see happening. I see you two honestly disagreeing on what parts of an answer need support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have plenty of experience in dealing with small group dynamics, thank you. Try reading this part of the question, again: &lt;em&gt;I tell them no and the rest of the group tells them it is impossible as well&lt;/em&gt; Whether or not a thing can be killed is not the problem that needs to be solved. See X-Y Problem, there are metas about it in plentitude. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152214/how-can-i-deal-with-someone-that-wants-to-kill-something-that-isnt-supposed-to#comment394039_152218&quot;&gt;[2]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You’re saying that only the part of an answer that deals with the real problem needs to be supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But… that’s just not true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;em&gt;All&lt;/em&gt; suggestions need support&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is suggesting doing something, we want it to be supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put another way: &lt;strong&gt;we don’t want unsupported suggestions&lt;/strong&gt;. That’s the whole point of GS/BS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowhere in the texts, principle, or practice of Back It Up and GS/BS do they say only suggestions meant as the main point need to be supported. Any course of action needs to be supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your answer suggests two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have a vote, which will likely just be done to make a point.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put your foot down and insist.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both are things the answer is suggesting the reader should do. Only (2) is given any support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If (1) is so important to the real problem that it belongs in the answer, then it needs to be supported. If it’s &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; important enough to support with evidence that it’s a good and useful action, then the answer shouldn’t be suggesting anyone do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s entirely reasonable to wonder if doing (1) in that specific way might perhaps impact the effectiveness of (2), or perhaps have side effects the answer is not sharing. It’s reasonable to ask for more information on that issue, to see how and whether that &lt;em&gt;whole, combined approach&lt;/em&gt; has worked in experience, and what pitfalls the reader might beware in order to achieve success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They’re not separable suggestions, when the answer itself ties them together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s why all suggested courses of action in an answer are expected to be supported. Showing that all the suggestions in an answer actually work when used as described is the point of providing support. Not supporting a suggestion described in an answer will naturally attract requests to support it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s just a fact that missing support will draw comments. It’s not something unusual. Nor is it something to take umbrage at. It’s something to accept as inherent to choosing not to support the advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T07:42:55.067" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9298" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9299" CreationDate="2019-07-23T21:48:53.153" Score="26" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;Relevant recent Meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9283/42386&quot;&gt;Appropriate response to questioning which version of D&amp;amp;D I'm asking about&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user for that meta is describing a difficulty they're facing on this site where use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; tag is netting wrongful comments and close votes to the effect of &quot;please specify which system you're using&quot; despite the fact that, by the intended use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; tag, it is meant to refer to a very specific version of Dungeons and Dragons, and is not an umbrella tag for all D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, given that we already use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, which makes the edition being used quite explicit, I would like to argue that leaving &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; as-is is going to continue inviting these kinds of wrongful responses to users who create questions for that edition, because the tag's name seems ambiguous and &quot;at-a-glance&quot; does not indicate that it's intended for Advanced Dungeons and Dragons' First Edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;Disclaimer: I am definitely one of the people who got tripped up by this kind of mistake, and wrongfully left a comment + close vote on at least one such question. Yes, I am Boo Boo the Fool. Yes, I retracted my comment + close vote once I realized my error.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as a result, I would like to propose that we do the following to try to end this issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; the proper, official tag for Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 1st Edition questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; an umbrella term intended to describe AD&amp;amp;D editions 1 or 2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Switch the descriptions in the tag wiki to reflect this new use&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Switch the historical use of these tags in existing questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the rest of the community agree with this change? If not, what are good reasons that we should prefer to keep the tags the way they currently are?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-01T19:44:43.050" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T19:44:43.050" Title="Should we rename the [adnd] tag to [adnd-1e]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rename-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9298" CreationDate="2019-07-23T22:03:26.113" Score="38" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don’t make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; another umbrella tag—we don’t need another. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; handles that situation just fine, just like it does for questions across WotC-era D&amp;amp;D editions. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of clamoring for that distinction. Moreover, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; already exists as a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt;, and breaking that synonym relationship will just cause more headaches.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, all we need to do is switch &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; to be the “main” tag, and leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; as its synonym—which I agree is a good change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-07-23T22:03:26.113" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9300" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-24T00:30:04.563" Score="9" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;Simply put, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag is for edition-agnostic questions about Dungeons and Dragons. By default, should questions about the worlds and/or lore of Dungeons and Dragons in general without specifying a particular world include the worlds and lore of Magic: the Gathering?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this question because over the last few years, Wizards of the Coast has been releasing a series of pseudo-official PDF documents titled &lt;em&gt;Plane Shift&lt;/em&gt; that focus on playing Dungeons and Dragons 5e in those worlds, and they recently released a hardcover supplement named &lt;em&gt;The Guildmaster’s Guide to Ravnica&lt;/em&gt;, which was a book about playing Dungeons and Dragons 5e on Ravnica.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, whether we should consider the worlds of MtG as a part of the worlds of DnD seems ambiguous to me. If so, it also raises the question of if questions on the lore or worlds of MtG specifically are on-topic for this StackExchange site, or if the tabletop games site has jurisdiction over them (they obviously have jurisdiction over questions about the game itself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-07-24T00:36:29.043" LastActivityDate="2019-07-29T02:33:24.350" Title="Should questions with the dungeons-and-dragons tag include the worlds of Magic the Gathering?" Tags="|discussion|tags|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9300" CreationDate="2019-07-24T01:01:47.583" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; lore in D&amp;amp;D questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone asks about D&amp;amp;D lore with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag, and someone answers with &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; lore that accurately answers the question, more power to them, I think. I think if it were me asking the question, there is a good chance that such an answer wouldn’t be the one I accept—but I probably would upvote. Obviously, it would be a better answer still if they connected the &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; lore to other D&amp;amp;D lore, or referenced D&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; products, but I don’t think either is absolutely necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions about &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; lore&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that we do not have any questions of this sort yet, and we should do nothing until we do. Still, some thoughts on how to handle it if such questions get asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone wants to ask about &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; lore, they should use an appropriate tag—probably &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-the-gathering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-the-gathering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-the-gathering&lt;/a&gt; to emphasize we’re talking about it within the context of D&amp;amp;D. (&lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; does refer to its setting as “the multiverse,” but that name is far too generic to use for this purpose.) Such questions could probably also be asked at &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Board &amp;amp; Card Games&lt;/a&gt;, but it’s OK for a question to be on-topic at two different Stack Exchange sites—being on-topic there doesn’t automatically make it off-topic here. Of course, questions about the actual cards and rules of &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; are and always will be off-topic here and should be migrated to Board &amp;amp; Card Games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t think it would be necessary to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-the-gathering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-the-gathering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-the-gathering&lt;/a&gt; for questions about &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; lore; that combination should probably be reserved for questions dealing with how &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt;’s planes are embedded in D&amp;amp;D’s multiverse, campaigns traveling between &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; planes and traditional D&amp;amp;D planes, and so on. On the other hand, we do tend to use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron&lt;/a&gt; et al. for other D&amp;amp;D settings, so maybe we should.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions about individual &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; planes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-the-gathering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-the-gathering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-the-gathering&lt;/a&gt; then becomes, if someone wants to ask about the lore of any particular &lt;em&gt;Magic&lt;/em&gt; plane, like Ravnica or Zendikar, that would imply they should use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-the-gathering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-the-gathering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-the-gathering&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; which is super problematic when there are only 5 tags allowed on a question. Tags should not be “nested” like that. I would be inclined to say they really ought to just use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; for that—but again, that’s inconsistent with how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron&lt;/a&gt; and the like are used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, it’s beyond the scope of this discussion, but I’d actually push for eliminating “redundant” uses of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; with D&amp;amp;D setting tags. Probably deserves its own question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until then, though, since we have no &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-the-gathering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-the-gathering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-the-gathering&lt;/a&gt; and no real need for it, using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-24T01:31:51.173" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9300" CreationDate="2019-07-24T01:08:37.307" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If it is relevant&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lets, go through the relevant tags and their intended use:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; is for the set of systems of D&amp;amp;D, it does not itself describe a setting, but there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; questions which spans both multiple systems and often multiple settings and so this tag is applicable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Any setting can have its own tag, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/forgotten-realms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;forgotten-realms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;forgotten-realms&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron&lt;/a&gt;. These setting tags don't have to be exclusive to one family of systems either, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/interface-zero&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;interface-zero&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;interface-zero&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; which exists for Savage Worlds, Pathfinder, and Fate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, questions about MtG worlds would have their own tag (AFAIK only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; exists at the moment), and may have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag if it is relevant to multiple editions of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether lore from MtG is applicable to questions about D&amp;amp;D is going to have to be up to askers, and possibly more so answerers, similarly to how it is up to them to mix lore between editions and settings (or care at all, but if they take part in questions its probably safe to say they do).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1: Chosen because I interacted with a question on it today and no other reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-24T01:16:41.007" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9303" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9300" CreationDate="2019-07-24T03:16:10.667" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, Ravnica Is Not Part Of The Default D&amp;amp;D World Lore&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think everyone else is getting what your question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're saying that some people ask lore questions they just tag with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; because there are certain commonalities between the assumed D&amp;amp;D default settings over time that makes &quot;How do bugbears reproduce&quot; or &quot;Why do Asmodeus and Belial hate each other&quot; answerable largely with information from any edition. So does the &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt; milieu count as part of that since it's a published D&amp;amp;D setting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is no. The reason this kind of &quot;generic D&amp;amp;D lore&quot; question is valid at all is because of the commonality of that core assumed D&amp;amp;D setting that is a milieu unto itself. It's a bit of a weird thing - Dragon magazine articles about &quot;the ecology of this&quot; or &quot;race that&quot; often didn't bother to be beholden to Greyhawk or the Realms or anything, they were presented as &quot;you know - that's how it works in D&amp;amp;D.&quot; When game worlds gain stronger character that takes them away from that &quot;Tolkien-lite&quot; Gygaxian-heritage format, however, then questions crossing edition/setting don't make sense at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the case for the M:tG setting.  It's a very distinct setting based on a rich IP of its own. How elves work there is not highly relevant to how &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D elves have worked across editions - they're not going to worship Corellon Larethian, etc. This is the case for other settings too; Eberron and Dark Sun were deliberately created to be non-core settings that don't share that base lore assumption. Asking a generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/halfling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;halfling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;halfling&lt;/a&gt; question about what halflings like to eat that gets answered &quot;Well, they're cannibals of course&quot; (because they are in Dark Sun's world of Athas) is pointless. That's not what anyone is asking. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being able to ask lore question about base D&amp;amp;D is a somewhat unique exception to lore being about campaign worlds and rules being about rulesets (of course many non-D&amp;amp;D games just publish one set of rules tied to one campaign world...) because of the odd &quot;default D&amp;amp;D world&quot; that emerged early in the game and has been continually embraced. Distinct campaign worlds that deliberately set up their own lore in opposition to &quot;core D&amp;amp;D&quot; lore are not useful answers for &quot;core D&amp;amp;D&quot; lore questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But It's An RPG Campaign Setting So Ask About It&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it's a published RPG campaign setting, so feel free and ask about it specifically here.  Some questions might better be asked on &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;B&amp;amp;CG&lt;/a&gt; to get an answer, especially if you're looking for lore from the card game not the RPG, but eh. Use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; just like you'd use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron&lt;/a&gt; or whatever. Game system isn't really that helpful of a tag in that case but you might use it to keep people who don't understand that it's a D&amp;amp;D setting from bugging you about &quot;take that to B&amp;amp;CG!!!&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2019-07-29T02:33:24.350" LastActivityDate="2019-07-29T02:33:24.350" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9304" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-07-26T11:21:44.713" Score="23" ViewCount="386" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;list of forums&lt;/a&gt; gets used in comments quite frequently, including by yours truly --- however, while I like describing it as &quot;our curated list of forums&quot;, many of the answers there haven't been updated in ages. This means that statements pertaining to various features like activity, moderation culture and so on may be outdated. Upvotes implicitly recommending online communities can likewise also be based on old information and might not accurately reflect our community's current assessment of those communities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the old forum list is starting to show its age, I think we should &quot;reboot&quot; it --- deprecate it, and start a new one from a clean slate. Information that is known by an active user to be still valid from the old forum list can of course be salvaged to the new one. Not having old votes as historical baggage and the requirement to actually revisit any statements made about the forums would make me feel more honest about referring to the list as a &quot;curated&quot; one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Addressing comments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;nitsua60 asked in the comments about the alternative of simply curating our current forum list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not knowing quite where you're coming from makes me wonder about the utility of this approach as opposed to, say, featuring the post and asking people to take the summer to make a concerted community push to update, comment, evaluate, reconsider votes, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there are several advantages to deprecating and replacing the forum post over repairing it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People seldom revisit their votes when an answer (or the subject of the answer) changes. Votes are therefore not a reliable assessment of the quality of the answers (or the forums they concern). Essentially the votes say nothing apart from &quot;someone thinks this answer was good at some point of time&quot;, which is still worth something for a post that has existed for a week and whose subject matter is unlikely to have undergone a drastic change, much less so for posts that have existed for years. Starting voting from scratch in a new post would handle this automatically without the need of extra effort from the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The community effort to revisit voting and content is hard to enforce and requires extra oversight and bookkeeping to ensure all answers are indeed reviewed. By my suggestion, no particular oversight is needed. New and salvaged answers both go through the normal quality checks, without having to assign someone the ungrateful task of vetting existing posts and trying to contact people who could verify their content. Content no one can verify will be pruned emergently, exactly as it should be.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Periodic new questions is how we handle our own site's &quot;How is the community doing?&quot; reviews and community ad choices. It has worked well for both cases. Those posts concern a similar subject matter and have similar difficulties to the forum list --- they have to stay in flux because the communities concerned are always in flux. A permanent Q&amp;amp;A with enforced curation wouldn't add anything there either, except difficulty.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is only one non-trivial disadvantage I can think of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some people'll have to update their pre-made comments.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, old comments pointing people to the forum list post will of course point to the deprecated post, but we can perhaps add a signpost link to the most up to date forum thread as needed and close it as a duplicate of the new post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Summa summarum, I believe trying to keep the current forum list up to date and reliable requires lots of effort and still produces a worse outcome than just periodically starting over from scratch. Let's deprecate it and start anew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-07T01:44:24.587" LastActivityDate="2019-08-07T01:44:24.587" Title="Proposal to reboot our forum list" Tags="|discussion|meta|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9305" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9298" CreationDate="2019-07-27T01:09:49.363" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Does the umbrella tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; materially help any question? Sure, it has a tag description clarifying that it means 1e, if someone bothers to look, but how common is that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems far more straightforward to convert &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; and obliterate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd&lt;/a&gt;, discarding the synonym. Questions that honestly concern both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-1e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adnd-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adnd-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adnd-2e&lt;/a&gt; (but not the all-encompassing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;) can be tagged with both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a bonus, this also brings symmetry to our D&amp;amp;D tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="307" LastActivityDate="2019-07-27T01:09:49.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9304" CreationDate="2019-07-27T12:17:07.213" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Update the current list&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problem is that the list needs  new input, then those who have new information ought to post it.  Also, those who have new sites and recommended forums/reddits ought to post them there.  It has served as a decent kind of FAQ and is worth leaving as a touch point.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How? Put that Q in Hot Meta Posts.  Leave it there for a month or two.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a diamond mod can manually insert a meta question onto Hot Meta Posts, as they can  now do at SO, then do that to attract attention to that question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My two cents. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-07-27T14:45:12.843" LastActivityDate="2019-07-27T14:45:12.843" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9304" CreationDate="2019-07-27T13:14:43.897" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Deprecate the forum list and start a new one&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Arguments for this course of action are presented in the question, I won't repeat them here. Here are the concrete steps I would take:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new forum list post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Insert a deprecation notice in the old forum list and close it as a duplicate of the new one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Repopulate with new answers as well as answers from the old one that are verifiably true&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Repeat periodically (eg. once per year) to maintain a reasonable level of freshness in recommendations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2019-07-27T13:36:16.370" LastActivityDate="2019-07-27T13:36:16.370" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9304" CreationDate="2019-07-27T13:34:32.937" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Delete all answers from the old one and start again.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Any answers that are deleted can be flagged for undeletion by their poster. This lets dead answers stay dead, while any that are still relevant can come back to life.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;New answers are able to be posted on the old post still.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-27T13:34:32.937" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9304" CreationDate="2019-07-27T17:04:45.520" Score="22" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Curate, update, and consolidate existing list into one article&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I always intended for that list was to consolidate all of what it had collected into a single large post with a more natural ordering. The votes were always intended more as a peer check that a given site mattered, was worth including, and was well described.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel the votes have outlived their usefulness though, yes, and combining them all into one single CW post would solve the votes’ staleness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once it’s a Community Wiki, the descriptions can be updated. The vast majority will be unchanged — forum cultures and activity for the major ones generally doesn’t change that fast at all. That leaves the smaller ones that need checking, and those are less important to keep super accurate. But as a CW, we can iteratively improve the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For usability, too, a single post would be better. We can group it by major general sites, then specific topic sites, then niche sites. It would be easier to read a well-organised list, and wouldn’t take much on our part to organise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That would also keep existing links to our list accurate, and not add a duplicate notice that will only get in the way of new people unfamiliar with our site—its main audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should &lt;strong&gt;combine them all into one post, delete the individual posts, and update the descriptions as necessary at our leisure&lt;/strong&gt;, in that order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-07-28T02:58:48.373" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9310" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9316" CreationDate="2019-07-31T13:43:26.400" Score="10" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152676/4563&quot;&gt;What's the best build for a mounted archer/caster?&lt;/a&gt; was closed as Primarily Opinion-Based. It is not. It is something on which experts can vet the quality of a given suggestion and vote accordingly; it is not purely about preference. There are good ways, and bad ways, to accomplish this concept. And, as an expert in the system in question, there are limited enough good ways to do it that Too Broad also does not apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/8610&quot;&gt;This meta question directly addresses, and approves of, questions of this sort.&lt;/a&gt; We have numerous successful examples of questions of this form answered well here. Two of the reopen votes (per comments) come from users with substantial experience answering such questions (well, if I do say so myself). Some of the original close votes were put on the question prior to a system tag being added, which was completely correct but not clear or visible once five votes had been accrued. It’s impossible (for me, anyway) to tell when votes came in relative to the system tag being added, but at least 3 were (since the final close reason was Primarily Opinion-Based, not Unclear as a lack of system tag would indicate), and only one of those who voted to close the question has experience with this sort of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this question is to draw attention to this question and spur the reopen votes it deserves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-07-31T18:01:01.410" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T15:36:53.183" Title="Mounted archer/caster question should be reopened" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9312" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-01T07:47:05.003" Score="35" ViewCount="1165" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This post is now outdated. See the revisit instead: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit: ‘5e’ as sufficient system statement&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a community we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8417/40921&quot;&gt;a long established policy&lt;/a&gt; of not guessing game systems. In cases where the  game system is unclear we require question askers to clarify, before answering their questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8426/40921&quot;&gt;This is a policy that I support&lt;/a&gt;, and is more generally well supported among longer-term site users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in recent weeks (and possibly before that), one particular aspect of the enforcement of this policy has led to disagreement between a number of very experienced site users - including those who are normally staunch proponents of our 'never guess the system' policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Specifically, there have been a number of instances where a new user has identified their game system as '5e', in the body or title of their question and not added a system tag.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of examples can be found here (check the edit histories - some explanatory comments have been deleted):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152760/40921&quot;&gt;Can I use a bonus action to ready an action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152057/40921&quot;&gt;How many opportunity attacks can you make per turn before becoming exhausted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(These questions are both from the last fortnight, any other examples are welcomed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been two competing responses from experienced site users to these sorts of posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5th edition is commonly referred to by its players as simply '5e' - it was your clear intention here to name that specific system, I will add the appropriate system tag for you and we can get your question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are hundreds of RPGs in the world and many of them may have a fifth edition. Please be more explicit, are you playing the fifth edition of D&amp;amp;D? Until you clarify the system your question should be closed to avoid the possibility of it accumulating wrong answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In an attempt to resolve this community disagreement, and avoid future edit rollbacks, what should our response be to these kind of questions, going forward?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should '5e' be considered a clear enough statement of system, such that it doesn't require further clarification under our 'never guess the game system' policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, I tried in this question to not position myself on either side of the debate - let me know if you think I failed in that respect and I'll try and adjust accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-12T04:40:59.743" LastActivityDate="2020-11-12T04:40:59.743" Title="Is '5e' a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9313" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-01T08:16:33.733" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;For context: I've ended up coming around on this subject in the time since posting this answer, as indicated in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/33569&quot;&gt;the mods' answer to Re-revisiting the “don't guess the system” policy&lt;/a&gt;, but I'm leaving this answer as-is so as not to invalidate others' votes and references to my answer. My current stance is more lenient than this; I think it's reasonable to use clear evidence that the question is about D&amp;amp;D (e.g. quotes/page numbers/references to something uniquely tied to D&amp;amp;D) in combination with a reference to &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; to interpret that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My original answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;No; multiple systems have a 5th edition.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are multiple games with a 5th edition, besides &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hackmaster-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hackmaster-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hackmaster-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr5&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent doesn't explicitly mention that they're playing D&amp;amp;D in addition to mentioning 5e, we'd be guessing to assume that &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; means &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot;. We can definitely &lt;em&gt;surmise&lt;/em&gt; that it's D&amp;amp;D 5e, and we might even be right most of the time, but we can't know for sure that we're right - so it's a guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Guessing causes problems&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8426/33569&quot;&gt;your own linked answer to the previous meta on guessing the system&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our current policy is very clear, easy for new users to understand (even if they disagree with it) and relatively simple (if not always painless) to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any alternative to this policy, however well intentioned (and perhaps both sensible and justifiable in the abstract), will be much less clear, more contentious and harder to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we say that 'we'll only guess a system when we're 100% certain that we're right' there will still be rare occasions when the most experienced users turn out to have been wrong, despite all of the cues. The much bigger issue however, is that, if we legitimise guessing in any form, less experienced users will also be empowered to guess when they are '100% certain' and they may not be as well equipped to make such an assessment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're already in a position where new users occasionally guess systems inappropriately - but currently the response 'Sorry, we never guess systems here', while potentially annoying, is pretty clear. Saying instead 'Sorry, we do sometimes guess systems here but you should not have done so in this instance' is going to be much trickier to enforce in a way that people find to be consistent, fair and reasonable (and don't take personally).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T18:37:23.900" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T18:37:23.900" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-01T13:27:17.203" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Get clarification first / promote better engagement with new users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the advantages of asking the question &quot;What game/system/edition are you playing?&quot; and &lt;em&gt;waiting to get that answer&lt;/em&gt; is that we treat whomever asks the question as a person (which IMO is important for the new user experience) and engage with them in discourse in the process of helping them write a good question.     While our help center has 'how to write a good question' guidance, it is apparent that this is not resorted to very often by new users.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This early engagement supports a point that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9312/is-5e-a-clear-enough-statement-of-game-system-by-a-question-asker/9314#comment30465_9313&quot;&gt;@Carcer makes in  his comment under V2's answer&lt;/a&gt;; it allows us to coach/teach new users on how to best use the site.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A much more compelling argument about being extremely strict about&#xA;  policy here is that this is about teaching the querent how to use the&#xA;  site properly. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;5e with contextual clues: that's a bit less clear&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the example question where the comment stream ran a bit off the rails, I was able to see the same in-question contextual clues that @thedarkwanderer did (above and beyond the word 5e).  Both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9317/22566&quot;&gt;@doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9324/22566&quot;&gt;@SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt; have written answers that are reasonable that include this consideration.   But if we are asking about agreeing on a policy, then I have to agree with the larger &lt;em&gt;policy&lt;/em&gt; point that both @Rubiksmoose(in chat) and @V2blast(in the above answer) have made.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We serve our site's functioning better by engaging with the new users to clarify system rather than guessing.  One benefit is: we don't confuse answerers.  Another benefit: we engage with new users directly and help &quot;bring them on board&quot; the site as better users by coaching/teaching.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How we engage&lt;/strong&gt;, and the tone we use in our comments and various &quot;help piles&quot; will inform how welcoming, or not, our response is received.     &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bottom Line: No, other games have 5e so 5e in the text doesn't suffice&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt; &lt;sub&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9313/22566&quot;&gt;V2Blast points out in his answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-08-02T14:53:31.497" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T14:53:31.497" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-01T13:40:00.037" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes. Pragmatically, the system known in wide circles as 5e is D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is correct that there are many different systems that have a fifth edition.&#xA;However, D&amp;amp;D is the most widely known TTRPG and in recent times has gained wide exposure through the netflix series &lt;em&gt;stranger things&lt;/em&gt; as well as youtube/twitch streaming (&lt;em&gt;critical role&lt;/em&gt; and many others). This has led to a large influx from people new to the hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Accepting the common/colloquial use of 5e for D&amp;amp;D 5e is a good way to improve newbie friendliness for rpg.se&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2896" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T13:40:00.037" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9316" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9310" CreationDate="2019-08-01T15:36:53.183" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks to the community working together ...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... it's open again. Teamwork for the win!  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is provided &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9310/mounted-archer-caster-question-should-be-reopened#comment30459_9311&quot;&gt;as requested here&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T15:36:53.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-01T16:26:14.820" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think we should be OK interpreting “5e” as “D&amp;amp;D 5e” when the question is also talking about D&amp;amp;D-isms. (If they're talking about things that don't sound like D&amp;amp;D 5e, like talking about hackers, we should not guess.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; other games with a 5e, but their players tend to be acutely aware they're not the only RPG and not the only 5th edition RPG, so they'll say what their game is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D players are the ones who have an observed tendency to forget or not know that other games exist, or get asked about on this site, or have a fifth edition. This means if someone says just “5e” and they're talking about monks or fighters or warlocks, they'll reliably be talking about D&amp;amp;D 5e. I honestly can't think of a time this hasn't been true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our super strict “don't guess the system” guidelines were created during a time when guessing was almost always wrong, and we had a disaster once a week or so: high frequency × lots of trouble = tons of trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, almost zero × lots of trouble = almost no trouble, maybe once in a blue moon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; guess though: tell them “Hey, we're sure you mean D&amp;amp;D 5e here, so we've edited that onto the question. If you didn't mean that please let us know and we'll adjust.” When we're wrong we do damage control: we revise the question, remove the answers, ask someone to create a new D&amp;amp;D 5e-specific question to house them, and people repost their answers over there, and the original question continues on with its correct game. I expect this won't happen even once a year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T08:12:59.933" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T08:12:59.933" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9319" CreationDate="2019-08-01T19:42:15.513" Score="13" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;Pretty straightforward question. Pathfinder's 2nd edition has just been released, and correspondingly there is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag (as well as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag for the playtest version(s) of the 2nd edition).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; has traditionally been used for the 1st edition, namely because there was no 2nd edition when the tag was made. However, now that Pathfinder 2nd edition has been released, the term &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; could refer to either the first edition alone &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the category that covers both editions of Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we rename the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; for clarity (and consistency with other such tags)?&lt;/strong&gt; The former would then become a synonym of the latter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:29:16.337" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:29:16.337" Title="Should the [pathfinder] tag be renamed to [pathfinder-1e] (with the former as a synonym)?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rename-request|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9318" CreationDate="2019-08-01T19:54:16.323" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, we should.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid confusion on the part of both question askers and question answerers. The use of edition tags has generally been very helpful for this site.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T19:54:16.323" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9318" CreationDate="2019-08-01T19:57:46.147" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, with a caveat:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We should use a similar system to how we organize the D&amp;amp;D tags.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We would need to rename the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt;, as proposed, but create a new, generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; tag for questions about the topic of Pathfinder that do not necessarily pertain to a particular edition, exactly how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag is used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately this will look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; will be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; to ensure that old-edition questions are properly captured/tagged&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A new generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; will be created and used for non-edition-specific questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; will be used for edition-specific questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-playtest&lt;/a&gt; should remain as-is, for the relevant material&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50702" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-01T20:03:27.270" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9321" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For meta questions primarily about RPG systems (e.g. system tags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9322" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" Score="0" Body="For meta questions primarily about RPG systems (e.g. system tags)." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T04:11:07.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9318" CreationDate="2019-08-02T04:37:23.853" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, rename it! But we don’t want the edition-less synonym confusing things.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; should be renamed but &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; leaving it as a synonym. We should just not have a Pathfinder tag without an edition marker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that keeping a synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;→&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; would do is give us a bunch of new 2e questions accidentally tagged 1e as well, which we would have to clean up every time, possibly with closes involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having only &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; to choose from will empower new askers to tag accurately from the start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also don’t need to keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; as a pan-edition tag for a game with only two editions. Even if we did need it, we’d still see it mostly misapplied, more often than correctly used. Without needing it anyway, we should just avoid that headache and not keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; around for any use. (We can re-examine that in ten years when/if PF3e happens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T04:37:23.853" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-02T04:55:34.437" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Not by itself… but maybe when it’s clear&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see a lot of good reasons to make new askers engage more, and to use it as a teachable moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But practically? I think there are some questions where as a community we spend too much energy on this detail, for little or no gain. If there’s an opportunity to just get things done without causing problems, that’s worth considering. We only need to spend energy on actual problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t think “5e” &lt;em&gt;by itself&lt;/em&gt; is ever enough. But “5e” along with unambiguous question details about D&amp;amp;D 5e mechanics: that’s vanishingly unlikely to be anything else. I don’t think we’ve ever had such a question turn out to be anything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By all means, if they don’t even bother to mention a game at all, let them clarify. After all, we do want people to realise that they should identify their question’s basic topic from the start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if a question asks about “5e” warlocks casting eldritch blasts or a beastmaster using bonus actions in “5e”, I think they already have. We know what game it is. Maybe we should just mark it [dnd-5e] and let the wheels roll that little bit more smoothly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If ever we get a question where that’s wrong, we can stop it again. But I don’t think we will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T04:55:34.437" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9325" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-02T05:09:22.837" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, doing so causes actual harm to our site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First I will state the obvious reasons that have been mostly stated by others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Multiple systems have a 5th edition&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D is not the only game to have reached a 5th edition. It isn't even the only game that is currently on 5th edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Guessing wrong is worse than waiting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, in 99% of cases we may be right. But the 1 in 100 that we get wrong would cause more issue in total than simply asking a clarifying question. As I said in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8852/48759&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, it costs us nothing to wait for OP to clarify. If they don't come back then they weren't going to use the answers anyway, no net loss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Not guessing helps new users learn the system&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By not guessing and prompting the OP to include the system tag, we teach the requirements for a good question on this site. This helps to prevent them from having this issue again in the future and in turn they can help teach it to others, helping to maintain our high standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A strict policy is easier to comprehend&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you have said in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8426/48759&quot;&gt;your own excellent post&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our current policy is very clear, easy for new users to understand (even if they disagree with it) and relatively simple (if not always painless) to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any alternative to this policy, however well intentioned (and perhaps both sensible and justifiable in the abstract), will be much less clear, more contentious and harder to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now for a view that isn't included in the other answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Allowing this promotes the D&amp;amp;D-centric view of this site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are rpg.se, not dnd.se and we want to remain that way. We have a history of D&amp;amp;D dominating our site. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7278/48759&quot;&gt;Dungeons and Dragons is dominating the site in terms of page views&lt;/a&gt; for just one example. It is likely that our high proportion of D&amp;amp;D content is what leads to missing system tags on D&amp;amp;D 5e questions in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users come to the site and see tags for various D&amp;amp;D editions and some other tags they don't know. Then mention 5e in their question assuming that is enough because, as far as they know, this site is only about D&amp;amp;D. By not assuming 5e = D&amp;amp;D 5e we might just be telling them for the first time that there are game system's besides D&amp;amp;D. That is an opportunity for new users to learn and expand their horizons that might otherwise be lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, on the occasions we are wrong we are harming the quality of life of smaller rpgs on this site. There is an excellent meta question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8669/48759&quot;&gt;How to improve/maintain the quality-of-life of small fandoms in the face of a dominant big fandom on an open Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;) that addresses this issue. I think it is important to keep that issue in mind when discussing policies like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion; no, 5e is not enough to add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag, and it should never be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-03T06:42:42.903" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-02T22:39:04.723" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Context is everything. While in the strictest sense, many games have &quot;5th editions&quot;, D&amp;amp;D is the only game my entire gaming community calls &quot;Fifth ed&quot; verbatim to distinguish it as a self contained system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question uses D&amp;amp;D language &quot;In 5e, how many hp does a 10th level drow paladin need?&quot; then I don't see it as a terrible sin. Shadowrun has a 5e and champions has a 5th edition, but I've only seen people address editions in those games while at those specific tables and games discussing editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think of it like the &quot;Ma Deuce&quot; in the Army. The M2 is synonymous with a .50 BMG machinegun, even though many other things are designated M2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems most appropriate then, that the &quot;default&quot; RPG for &quot;5e&quot; is D&amp;amp;D, while other RPGs are their title + edition where necessary. Clearly, if you are asking about guns, you need to add 5e D&amp;amp;D when discussing things like black powder or time travel, otherwise we might expect you to be talking about some mystery modern or scifi RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So adding a label next to the 5e explicitly defines it as NOT D&amp;amp;D.&#xA;5e Shadowrun, for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36812" LastActivityDate="2019-08-02T22:39:04.723" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9327" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9328" CreationDate="2019-08-04T14:06:19.800" Score="12" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed this comment &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/123843/22566&quot;&gt;under an answer&lt;/a&gt; where I issued a &quot;greeting to a new user&quot; comment. What I wrote was: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to RPG.SE. Please take the [tour] and visit the [help] to seen&#xA;  how a Q&amp;amp;A site differs from an internet discussion forum. Wikis are&#xA;  sometimes good sources, and sometimes not. Please provide a link to&#xA;  the one(s) that you are referring to as resources for this answer. –&#xA;  KorvinStarmast Jun 4 '18 at 16:15&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been doing that &quot;RPG.SE&quot; short hand in imitation of some of the comments I read when I first began to participate.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152913/how-does-setting-ships-on-fire-affect-combat#comment396606_152913&quot;&gt;There is another such greeting  here&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user made the following point under my comment: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;rpg.se is a Swedish domain, taken by a private citizen. Please&#xA;  abbreviate &quot;rpg stack exchange&quot; in another way. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110407/what-happened-in-maztica-to-make-tabaxi-emigrate#comment355794_123843&quot;&gt;CapnZapp Feb 4 at&#xA;  20:25&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a fair point.  The appendage &lt;code&gt;.se&lt;/code&gt; for sites in Sweden is a standard.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommendation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make RPGSE a standard abbreviation in written prose (such as the above kind of usage) for our site so that we don't generate confusion, and since that is a common style of using initial capitaliations as a way to refer to &lt;strong&gt;R&lt;/strong&gt;ole &lt;strong&gt;P&lt;/strong&gt;laying &lt;strong&gt;G&lt;/strong&gt;ames &lt;strong&gt;S&lt;/strong&gt;tack &lt;strong&gt;E&lt;/strong&gt;xchange.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of this common usage include NFL for the National Football League, USMC for United States Marines Corps, RN for Royal Navy, RCMP for Royal Canadian Mounted Police, IBM for International Business Machines, SO for Stack Overflow, etc)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Would this run afoul of any of our network guidelines or norms?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pursuant @Someone_Evil's comment, does this even need to be&#xA;addressed?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-08-04T23:22:12.057" LastActivityDate="2019-08-08T20:13:37.823" Title="Should we have a standard abbreviation for RPGSE?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9327" CreationDate="2019-08-04T20:34:27.740" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don't need to avoid calling this place “RPG.SE”. It's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As anyone understands, acronyms can mean multiple things. Here, RPG.SE means RPG[.stackexchange], and it's normal vernacular.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all nine years of the site's operation I don't recall someone expressing being confused thinking they were being welcomed to a different site at the rpg.se web domain. That still hasn't happened today; the person who left that comment is fully knowledgeable about our website and should know what we mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Language is ambiguous and people can figure it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Safe to say the frustration, difficulty, and strife involved in telling people not to use an extremely standardised Stack Exchange acronym form will not be worth the zero confusion we've ever experienced with that acronym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the bigger (or titular) question: we don't really need to pick a single standard name and it's not like people would stick to it if we did. This is a matter of personal preference and whatever way you pick to reference and acronym-ify the site name is fine and valid. For example any of these are fine: “RPG.SE”, “RPGSE”, “RPG Stack Exchange”, “Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange”, the &lt;code&gt;[rpg.se]&lt;/code&gt; magic comment link that auto-expands to a link labelled “Role-Playing Games”, among multiple others I haven't listed, and your personal preference is fine too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-08-08T20:13:37.823" LastActivityDate="2019-08-08T20:13:37.823" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9329" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9330" CreationDate="2019-08-06T08:28:13.620" Score="6" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can I answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153076/10642&quot;&gt;What is the price of a printing press?&lt;/a&gt; given that I know what the price is, but I also know it is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; an open content and adding price would pretty much reveal all there is to know about a printing press? Especially with all the details of what about printing press can get costly, it would require pretty much full &quot;flavor&quot; text as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="10642" LastEditDate="2019-08-06T08:51:09.110" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T15:29:27.437" Title="Answer that requires posting non-open content - allowed?" Tags="|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9329" CreationDate="2019-08-06T08:51:00.460" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question shows no research effort and should be downvoted.  Beyond that, it may be better to answer with 'the answer is on page 20 of the Adventurer's Armory' than the 250 gp specific price, but &lt;em&gt;answering&lt;/em&gt; is definitely okay.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, I think you're wrong that the specific content in question is not 'open content'-- the Adventurer's Armory &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt; is not, of course, but the printing press is listed &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.aonprd.com/EquipmentMiscDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Printing%20press%20(1-page)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://legacy.aonprd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; seems to make that release official. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T08:51:00.460" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9331" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9312" CreationDate="2019-08-06T09:39:04.220" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;'5e' unambiguously refers to &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; (2014), as long as it's clear that's intended as a name&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many systems that have a 5th edition.  Sometimes new querents asking a question badly phrase their question like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hi i was wondering if trolls can cast spells thx. [Edit]5th edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not clear.  5th edition may be being used to describe what edition of the system is being played, rather than naming the system itself.  For example, it's possible the above question is being asked about Shadowrun rather than D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other times, new querents might ask a question like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We just started playing 5e and I wanted to have the party fight a troll that casts spells.  Can trolls do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is still not great, but it's no longer unclear what game they are playing.  5e here is used as a name, and right now there is only one game called '5e'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;D&amp;amp;D-centrism is bad, and 5e centrism is worse! But this isn't the way to solve it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site's 5e centrism is out-of-hand, and a problem.  For example, we recently had a new user get repeatedly harassed for asking &lt;em&gt;properly tagged&lt;/em&gt; AD&amp;amp;D questions because somebody decided that frequent tag misuse is a good enough excuse to take questions in bad faith (for the record, it's not and that's offensive).  Coming up with good solutions to our 5e-centrism problem would be a good thing to do.  This is not that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Passive-aggressively singling out 5e players for obtuse facetious BS as a barrier to site entry is not cool.  It's Not Nice, which is a serious problem that should bear consideration, and it's not actually productive because we rely on common-sense judgements for pretty much the rest of our site's functionality so it basically reverse-trains new users into thinking about what our site policy can and can't do the exact wrong way.  It's just mean-spirited, ineffective moderation and we should stop doing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not to say our 'don't guess' policy needs to go away.  We just need to do a better job of treating every system's community as justly as we can when adjudicating this policy-- we don't treat &lt;em&gt;any other system&lt;/em&gt; the way we do 5e with this.  For example, one of my favorite systems is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tao-games.com/polaris/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris&lt;/a&gt;.  I've never had a question closed as unclear which system I was playing when asking about that, even though there is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.polaris-rpg.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this other system&lt;/a&gt; which is literally named the same thing and which does not yet have a separate tag.  If we treated my Polaris questions like we do 5e questions they would all have been closed until I specified &lt;em&gt;not only&lt;/em&gt; that I was playing Polaris but also that game's &lt;em&gt;ISBN&lt;/em&gt;.  That's absurd.  No expert on either system would ever confuse any of my questions for a question about the other system.  Not 'probably wouldn't', wouldn't, hard stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a ask a question that's &lt;em&gt;obviously&lt;/em&gt; about Shadowrun and don't include an edition or system tag I don't get a patronizing formula-comment asking what system I'm playing &lt;em&gt;and what edition&lt;/em&gt; as if that question made sense without already knowing I'm playing one of the very few systems where 'edition' is the right term and matters, I get the question closed as unclear and &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; person asking &amp;quot;Is this Shadowrun?  Also what edition-- the Matrix rules vary a lot&amp;quot; or, if it's clear what edition, &amp;quot;Is this SR4?&amp;quot;.  That's what I should get on 5e questions; a closed question and an &lt;em&gt;honest&lt;/em&gt; comment that tells me I need to confirm that I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 5e.  If it's &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; unclear, it's totally fine to ask.  But pretending like you don't know when you totally do know is just being a jerk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth noting that the downsides of our bad behavior here are particularly intense for 5e.  Wizards made the very-bad decision when releasing the game to hide the edition as much as possible in order to accomplish business objectives by misleading people.  This has, predictably, lead to lots of new players who have no idea what edition they are playing and no idea how to find out because that is &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; non-trivial for the newest edition especially if an online community of experts is acting like it should be obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I think the best thing we can do here is to treat 5e like any other system for this policy as much as possible.  We should avoid guessing system tags in edits, but not in comments.  We should accept commonly-used colloquialisms/abbreviations like 'SR5' or 'D&amp;amp;D 3.5' or '5e' or 'LotFP' or 'Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 5th Edition' as names as long as they are clear and unambiguous and widely accepted.  We should post honest comments that simultaneously respect the intelligence we assume of our querents because we give people the benefit of the doubt while also acknowledging their inexperience with the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T17:00:00.160" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9332" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9333" CreationDate="2019-08-06T15:10:12.677" Score="7" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;We apparently have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-points&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-points&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-points&lt;/a&gt; tag. Is this tag providing us some benefit that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; tag does not? Do we want to keep it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T16:09:04.620" Title="Do we really need a [skill-points] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9333" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9332" CreationDate="2019-08-06T15:10:12.677" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;[Skill-Points] is not a useful tag.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any question about skill &lt;em&gt;points&lt;/em&gt; is ultimately a question about &lt;em&gt;skills&lt;/em&gt;. We have a perfectly good &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; tag; that's what we should be using. Having multiple tags that essentially cover the exact same topic makes it harder for users to use the tag system to favorite tags they're experts in, to ignore tags they're not interested in, and to search for questions. We &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-systems&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-systems&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-systems&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-check&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; for this exact reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-points&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-points&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-points&lt;/a&gt; a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt;; I have initiated the voting for that process &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/skills/synonyms&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T16:09:04.620" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9329" CreationDate="2019-08-06T15:29:27.437" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Paizo isn’t selling the printing press’s description as a separate product; it is sold as a part of &lt;em&gt;Adventurer’s Armory&lt;/em&gt;. US Fair Use doctrine recognizes educational purposes as potentially being acceptable copyright infringement, so long as the usage is not going to unduly affect the work from which it is taken. How much of that work is used, and how integral that part is to the whole, is a strong consideration for a usage to be legal. Other countries have similar provisions in their laws. Without actually going to court, no potential Fair Use rationale is guaranteed to be upheld, but (and I am not a lawyer) this particular usage seems to fall well within guidelines for acceptable use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, since this site makes a good-faith effort to respect copyright law, punitive fines are exceedingly unlikely. Likewise, since the printing press is a minor part of &lt;em&gt;Adventurer’s Armory&lt;/em&gt;, actual damages would be difficult for Paizo to prove. As such, even in the case of a court action against the site, the remedy would almost-certainly be to remove the usage from the site and that’s it—and since things would never get that far, as Paizo would, in the hypothetical scenario where they objected, start with a cease &amp;amp; desist that this site would promptly respect and take down the content ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site does not police copyrights. Let me say that again, because it has come up a lot in the past few weeks: &lt;strong&gt;This site does not police copyrights.&lt;/strong&gt; We make a good-faith effort to respect copyrights, but ultimately finding infringements of copyrights and doing something about them is the responsibility of the copyright holder. We do this primarily because content removed from answers via C&amp;amp;D makes for bad answers, in much the same way link rot does (and, in the case of linking to infringing websites, the two issues are actually the same). Secondarily, we do it out of respect for and in welcoming of authors and publishers. At no point, however, does “enforcement of any particular country’s copyright law” become a site policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So judge questions and answers that way: “is this likely to get us a C&amp;amp;D and cause a mess?” In this case, the answer is a stunning “No.” Not least because the printing press &lt;em&gt;actually is&lt;/em&gt; open-game content, establishing that Paizo is not overly concerned about its copyrights to this content. (Though note that this site does not actually license anything under the Open Game License, which would require us to host a copy of that license with a fairly-massive boilerplate declaration of all the open-game content referenced herein, which doesn’t exist on this site and frankly &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt;.) Basically, if someone is asking for so much information that they could skip buying the book altogether—in particular if they are asking for actual copies of the book including its artwork and other non-open content—then that would be a reason to close a question. Short of that, though, it really isn’t a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if you personally object, you can always just reference the publication in which the information can be found, forcing the user to have access to a copy in order to look it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-08-06T15:29:27.437" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9335" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5449" CreationDate="2019-08-06T18:44:42.350" Score="36" Body="&lt;p&gt;General RPG discussion forums&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;Roleplaying Games SE's main chat room&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not actually a forum, but can sometimes be useful for questions that need quick back-and-forth discussion to sort out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Populated by the same experts as the main RPG.SE site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The same community standards of behaviour hold in chat as on main&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions in chat aren't restricted to the kinds of &amp;quot;stackable&amp;quot; questions we allow on the main site; for instance, users are welcome to ask idea-generation and game/tool-recommendation questions in chat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The chat population is lower and the number of people who see your issue depends on the time of day&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Speaking in chat requires that you have already earned &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat&quot;&gt;20 reputation&lt;/a&gt; from upvotes on other questions and answers you've posted, making it slightly inaccessible for first-time users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Giant in the Playground&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A massive community based around Rich Burlew’s D&amp;amp;D-inspired comic, &lt;em&gt;Order of the Stick&lt;/em&gt;. Has forums dedicated to discussing &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?59-D-amp-D-3e-3-5e-d20&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3e/3.5/d20 (including Pathfinder)&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?58-D-amp-D-4e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?63-D-amp-D-5e-Next&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;, as well as &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?60-Older-D-amp-D-AD-amp-D-and-Other-Systems&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;other RPGs&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?15-Homebrew-Design&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. There are also &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?3-Play-by-Post-Games&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;several forums for &lt;em&gt;playing&lt;/em&gt; games&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Large community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Very&lt;/em&gt; strong 3.5/Pathfinder expertise, strong 5e expertise&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One of the best places to find quality D&amp;amp;D homebrew, or find critique for your own&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The non-D&amp;amp;D RPG section is quiet, and the 4e section isn’t much more lively&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/announcement.php?a=1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;rules&lt;/a&gt; are “strict” – which in practice means that the moderators have absolute authority, with no transparency or (meaningful) appeal process.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Roleplaying Games Subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A piece of reddit devoted to tabletop roleplaying games and LARP. They have an excellent &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/beginnersguide&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;“New to RPGs?” introduction page&lt;/a&gt; and are welcoming of novices and experts alike. Not D&amp;amp;D-centric. See their &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/faq#toc_0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt; for community rules and a run-down on what they do and don't cover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;High traffic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussion and questions about all kinds of RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;High traffic means that if your post doesn't attract attention immediately, it can quickly fall off the front page&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's reddit, so you can run into diverse “interesting” personalities, despite the subreddit's strong rules requiring civility and avoiding argument, and like all communities there are inherent biases in it and some related subreddits&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPGnet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the oldest general-purpose RPG forums. It has a dedicated &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/forumdisplay.php?89-RPG-Spotlight-Dungeons-amp-Dragons-Fantasy-D20&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;subforum for D&amp;amp;D and other d20-based games&lt;/a&gt;, a &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/forumdisplay.php?3-Tabletop-Roleplaying-Open&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;general tabletop subforum&lt;/a&gt; for RPG discussion free of distractions from the 800 lbs. gorilla that is D&amp;amp;D, and a &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.rpg.net/forumdisplay.php?70-RPG-Spotlight-Live-Action-Roleplaying&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;LARP discussion subforum&lt;/a&gt;. It now has a dedicated subforum for &lt;a href=&quot;https://forum.rpg.net/forumdisplay.php?171-Let-me-tell-you-about-my-character&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;character build/charop reviews and feedback&lt;/a&gt; for any game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Large community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Diverse expertise, including D&amp;amp;D-centric and expertise that's aware of the much wider world of RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Decent moderation designed to keep antagonism under control, which succeeds more or less at times&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Diverse views on roleplaying styles and philosophies means you have to deal with people who might not share views relevant to what you want to discuss&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Easy to trip over the moderation rules. It's strongly advised to &lt;a href=&quot;https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/rpg-net-rules-guidelines-revised-10-28-2018.835825/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;read them&lt;/a&gt; first, or be ready to take slaps on the wrist with grace and aplomb.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/forum.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ENWorld&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forums with a slant towards latest-greatest D&amp;amp;D, but with decent coverage of other games as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Usually has breaking coverage of D&amp;amp;D topics, even more so than WotC's own forums (and WotC forum functionality is notoriously bad in every incarnation)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not as... Weird as rpg.net. Kind of a halfway point between the Wizards forums and RPG.net in a lot of ways.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are trying very hard to sell their products to the community, expect ads and &amp;quot;announcements&amp;quot; and whatnot trying to market to what they know is a large user community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.therpgsite.com/forum.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The RPGSite&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mostly focused on old-school OSR gaming. Also known as &amp;quot;the place people banned from RPG.net and ENWorld go to.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Experienced grognard discussions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Will take anyone, so people who are likely to get banned from civilized forums due to their behavior could be sent here instead&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No holds barred insult fests are the default mode d'emploi&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Higher than usual percentage of psychos&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Niche topic or community forums&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cartographersguild.com/content.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Cartographers' Guild&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A site for discussing map-making projects and techniques, for all skill levels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A lot of very talented cartographers, pro and amateur&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many tutorials&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Specific to map-making discussions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not RPG-specific, so you can't assume RPG-centric knowledge when seeking help there&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dragonsfoot Forums&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forums generally dedicated to 2nd edition and older D&amp;amp;D, and the various retroclones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Excellent advice for those running an old school game&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Comprehensive knowledge of old rules and modules&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Collected large Gary Gygax Q&amp;amp;A threads&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is focused on older styles of play, so won't be of much help to those playing games that aren't D&amp;amp;D (and 2nd Edition or older D&amp;amp;D at that)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.feartheboot.com/forum/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fear the Boot Forums&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official forums for the Fear the Boot RPG Podcast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This community covers a broad spectrum of games and game styles&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The community is active and friendly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are helpful and responsive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are not going anywhere soon.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Neutral&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The community discusses a wide variety of tabletop games (war games and board games), as well as a variety of geek topics.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The community is not the biggest on the net&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It is a forum for a podcast; if you do not listen to the podcast, some of the culture of the community may be lost on you (But it's not TOO bad.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside, the podcast itself offers a good deal of advice, some of which has been turned into decent answers on main.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.facebook.com/groups/dmsandgms/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dungeon Masters &amp;amp; Storytellers Group on Facebook&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The group is has an informal feel, presenting the opportunity to ask just about any question, from looking for help to sharing random stories about your games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The group is closed and admins review your social profile to determine if you are truly interested in RPGs and DMing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Community is friendly&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Group presents a wealth of experience and varied ideas&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Because the group is largely informal there is obviously not as much structure as other forums but there are rules and regulations to offset this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You need a Facebook account in order to join.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Forums focused on specific games and companies&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://minmaxforum.com/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Min/Max Boards a.k.a. Brilliant Gameologists&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A very niche community, catering almost exclusively to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and especially for those who play it with at least something of an optimization bent. That said, as that game ages, the community broadens and tries new things. Also hosts extensive homebrew sections with a ton of material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very casual community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Best current source of optimization—particularly theoretical optimization—for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Enormous amount of quality homebrew; lots of features for homebrewers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Could go either way&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderation is fairly light, and posters are expected to be thick-skinned&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Small, somewhat tight-knit community&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Extremely niche focus&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Historically, the forum has had serious problems with stability&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Updated URL points to&lt;/em&gt; Minmaxforum.com &lt;em&gt;despite being called&lt;/em&gt; Min/Max Boards &lt;em&gt;on the page; same management, same content. Announcement of changeover on the Giant in the Playground] forums &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?528794-MinMaxBoards-are-Back!&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and on its own forums &lt;a href=&quot;http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=17978&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Paizo Publishing Messageboards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official forums for Paizo publishing, including the &lt;a href=&quot;http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;official Pathfinder RPG message boards&lt;/a&gt;. This is your best source for questions or discussions related to Pathfinder RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users are responsive and knowledgeable&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Lots&lt;/em&gt; of previous discussion - you might be able to answer your question without ever posting a thread&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Paizo developers are active in the community and can respond to threads that might not have a RAW response, but need some authority on the topic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfinder/Paizo game specific&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://discord.gg/pathfinder&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Official Pathfinder Discord&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official Discord server for all editions of Pathfinder. While not actually a forum, it provides a good place for back and forth discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users are responsive and knowledgeable&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of active users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of community resources on it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Conversations can move fast, causing responses to get buried if you are not paying attention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/dnd/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DND subreddit&lt;/a&gt; and/or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DNDNext subreddit&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of them are communities on reddit devoted to Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons (the latter specifically to D&amp;amp;D 5e). They have similar pros and cons for the purposes of this discussion, so I've grouped them together in a single answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;/r/DND has a wiki with several different guides, FAQs, and links to useful resources. /r/DNDNext also has these, though it's a smaller community and the corresponding wiki pages tend to be shorter. Both are welcoming of novices and experts alike. See their respective sidebars for a list of each community's rules, and what they do and don't cover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Relatively high traffic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussion and questions from various perspectives about D&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Both subreddits have weekly threads devoted to asking and answering questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;High traffic means that if you make a post outside the question thread and it doesn't attract attention immediately, it can quickly fall off the front page (especially on /r/DND)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?472893-4E-Character-Optimization-WOTC-rescue-Handbook-Guide&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wizards of the Coast's D&amp;amp;D Rescued Handbook Guide @ Enworld&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Enworld created a lifeboat forum to quickly evacuate all of the WOTC forum content that would be deleted. It has since been cleaned up and merged into their main Forum for Charop with posts for each handbook titled appropriately and prefixed with the 4e edition tag.  The link in the header is to a forum post with a list of the guides deemed worthy and curated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very large and very active player base&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Lots of character optimization help and pre-built class and race guides for whichever edition you are playing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Also covers all sorts of story, table, and player issues through various sub-forums to help you with whatever your problem, question, or random musing might be.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All 4e, All the time! Does not include editions prior to 3rd edition.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is a lot going on and if you aren't up on the terms or abbreviations being used things can be hard to follow in some of the guides.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.theonyxpath.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Onyx Path Forums&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Onyx Path now publish most of the Intellectual property formerly published by White Wolf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Great for World of Darkness (all editions), Scion, Exalted and other games they publish.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Official forum: The forums get the information like releases first. They are the place to report errors in prerelease content etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has fairly regular (though not ubiquitous) responses from the Authors of the games themselves. Particularly, &lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.theonyxpath.com/member/2-rose-bailey/about&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Rose Bailey&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They do not have a section at all for roleplaying games not of their making. Though this would fall under the Off-topic subforum they have, I don't see to many posts there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Depending on system/subsystem, not the most active place on the net for those systems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=12&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Steve Jackson Games Roleplaying forums&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are good thoughtful forums, especially for anyone wanting to discuss anything and get detailed feedback and suggestions (or read years of discussion/idea/stuff history) for &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GURPS&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Community enthusiastic about helping out newbies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can almost always find a member of a community who will be able and willing to translate real-life experience in a given area of expertise into a roleplaying context.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can go either way, depending on preferences&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Moderation can be seen as strict and/or opaque, but generally enforces civility and constructive discussion well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; subset of the forum tends to be more active than most other RPG discussions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not as populous as some other servers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some front-page discussions may be too 'heavy' for a newcomer, and it may take some effort to sort out the discussions in order to focus those one is looking for / interested in.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Apocalypse World Forums&lt;/a&gt;, aka &amp;quot;Barf Forth Apocalyptica&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the official forum for this game and its engine. There's also a &lt;a href=&quot;http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php#c7&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;powered by the apocalypse&lt;/em&gt; area&lt;/a&gt; providing dedicated subforums for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Headspace&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Monster of the Week&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Monsterhearts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Murderous Ghosts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sagas of the Icelanders&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Sprawl&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Uncharted Worlds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Urban Shadows&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It appears well mannered and reasonably active — not teeming with life, but has &lt;em&gt;enough&lt;/em&gt; life to get responses.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cautions&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mature themes&lt;/strong&gt; like sex will come up in discussion here sometimes, because Apocalypse World and some of the other PbtA games deal with those themes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.peginc.com/forum/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Pinnacle Entertainment Group (Savage Worlds) Forums&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official forums for the company behind Savage Worlds and a large number of it's official settings such as Deadlands, Evernight and Rippers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very friendly and supportive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expertise in homebrewing anything and&#xA;everything Savage Worlds&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Willing to help design settings from scratch&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A good place to turn to if you are trying to homebrew a setting for&#xA;Savage Worlds but haven't got very far, meaning your questions would&#xA;be too broad for this site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Savage Worlds specific&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Mongoose Publishing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The official forum for Traveller, Paranoia, Legend and other games by Mongoose Publishing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pros&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Friendly user base&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Offers support for games which may be hard to find other forums for.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hosted/supported by the game publisher&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Cons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;May be considered &amp;quot;low traffic&amp;quot; (almost assuredly)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This list is a concatenation of the original crowdsourced submissions, after discussion at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9304/proposal-to-reboot-our-forum-list.&quot;&gt;Proposal to reboot our forum list&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-04-05T15:38:57.750" LastActivityDate="2021-04-05T15:38:57.750" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-08-06T18:44:42.350" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9336" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9339" CreationDate="2019-08-08T11:13:49.270" Score="13" ViewCount="267" Body="&lt;p&gt;I stumbled upon &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57124/35259&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; today, which has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/57125/35259&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. It's upvoted (currently sitting at +18/-2) and accepted, but is very short and has a standard banner message across it that I've seen elsewhere on other answers (usually badly received answers) saying:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also a (highly upvoted) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57124/does-the-true-polymorph-spell-form-a-creature-with-equipment#comment395848_57125&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; by KorvinStarmast that summarises my concerns about this answer quite nicely:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;While I don't disagree with this answer, it could use a little more support/reasoning in terms of what spells do, and what constitutes a stat block. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to come across as picking on a specific user (since I'm sure many answers to older questions may well have similar problems), but in this case, the answerer in question was once a mod and a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of the older questions about 5e (including back when it was called &quot;D&amp;amp;D Next&quot;) have been answered by this user with minimal or no support from rules citations, etc (although not many of those answers are as short as the one I linked to). I'm not going to track down a bunch of examples, I believe they will be easy enough to find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, I understand that when many of these older answers were written, upvoted and accepted, the standards we have in place now likely didn't exist back then, or at least were not enforced as they are these days, so it is unfair to accuse them of not following standards that didn't exist at the time. On the other hand, their content still represents this site, and new users will still see such older answers and believe that this is good enough, when nowadays our standards have moved on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is that these answers come across as opinions, even though I'm sure many of them are completely correct. However, if new users come along, see one of these old questions, post their own opinionated answer without citations, etc, then have it downvoted and told to include citations and not to answer with opinions, it might come across as unfair if they see that a highly upvoted and often accepted answer has apparently been praised for the same reasons they are being &quot;told off&quot; or &quot;punished&quot; with downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something we need to be concerned with? If so, what should we do about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote the answers we don't think are well supported (I'm not sure I care for this, because downvote-bombing a bunch of answers seems like picking on older users for giving answers that don't conform to standards that I'm guessing didn't exist at the time; there's also nothing we can do about such answers being accepted by users who no longer frequent this site)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit these old answers to include citations that support the answerer's point, assuming that there are rules that support their answers (this seems more in keeping with the &quot;wiki&quot; feel that the Stack Exchange site is supposed to have over a forum, and that way the &quot;accepted&quot; answers are still presenting the &quot;best&quot; solution as well as setting a good example of what makes a &quot;good&quot; answer on this site; obviously we should try not to change the actual content of the answer, just add support for the points they were making)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else...?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-08-08T11:47:00.087" LastActivityDate="2019-08-09T22:55:10.840" Title="Do we need to do anything about old, upvoted, accepted answers that are not up to scratch with our standards today?" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9336" CreationDate="2019-08-08T12:35:52.553" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation: leave it alone unless it's plain wrong&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which I guess is &quot;3.  Something else...&quot;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made the comment last week as I had the same reaction that you did: I'd like to see a bit more meat on the bone.  I am pretty sure we won't see Waxy back for a while (which makes me very sad) but I'd like to put that answer into some context.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was a challenge for some people, as play testers and players got used to D&amp;amp;DNext/5e, to recalibrate their expectations about the DM's ruling being an intended feature of this edition, and that players and DM's did not have to chase down a rule for every little detail.  Answers like WaxEagle's were a breath of fresh air (for some of us).  The long and short of it is; make a ruling, there isn't a rule for that.  If you look at the answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62330/22566&quot;&gt;to one of my early questions&lt;/a&gt; you'll see that point made as part of an answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Strictly speaking, there is no clear interpretation. All three cases&#xA;  are justifiable. Also note that 5e discourages literal &quot;rules as&#xA;  written&quot; meanings. As the designers have repeatedly said: &quot;rulings,&#xA;  not rules.&quot; The rules were explicitly not written to be scrutinized as&#xA;  a lawyer scrutinizes the law, so we should not be surprised when the&#xA;  end result of &quot;it's ambiguous&quot; is what we find. (@BaconBits)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That philosophical approach, and the advocacy of it, has waxed and waned on and off among our contributors in the past 5 years.  (OK, I just noted that pun.  I'm leaving it there).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless the answer is flat out wrong, I see no point in taking any action.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7353/22566&quot;&gt;The DM needs to make a ruling&quot; is &lt;em&gt;Not&lt;/em&gt; an opinion based answer for D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9339/22566&quot;&gt;do as Pierre suggests in his answer: place a bounty on it if you'd like to see it improved&lt;/a&gt;, or see an improved answer.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-08-08T14:06:29.023" LastActivityDate="2019-08-08T14:06:29.023" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9336" CreationDate="2019-08-08T12:58:45.670" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Write a better answer!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you feel that answers to old questions aren't satisfactory, then add a new answer. If want to downvote, you of course can, but I tend to err on the side of 'not editing others work massively'. Others are perfectly fine with that and both methods seem acceptable here (and if it isn't, usually OP reverts.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of non-active users, I'd personally be even more wary to make big additions (even in support) of their answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with all questions, if you can write a better answer, do so!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;Dupes&amp;quot; to these older questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the question is &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate. It doesn't matter that the answer may not be satisfactory to you. Duplicate questions are duplicates - but it does provide an opportunity to add a better answer (or put a bounty!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-08T12:58:45.670" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9339" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9336" CreationDate="2019-08-08T13:00:01.130" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you &lt;strong&gt;want&lt;/strong&gt; to do something about it,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Post another answer or place a bounty&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously if you have a better answer than what's already there, post it. If you don't, then a &lt;strong&gt;bounty&lt;/strong&gt; is the tool for the job: it'll give the question new visibility and convey the fact that you think the question is poorly answered. It may even attract new and better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45757" LastActivityDate="2019-08-08T13:00:01.130" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9340" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9341" CreationDate="2019-08-09T07:44:09.163" Score="17" ViewCount="183" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm currently writing a question for the main RPG stack site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, I start writing the title first, then the question.  But while I was writing my question, another question added to the first, making the question two. I don't think these need to be separated to be answered separately, so please consider that keeping these two little questions is fine here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is, now the title only concerns my first question, and I can't manage to find a suitable title for the whole question. Everything I came with might be too unclear, broad or misleading.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should I do when I can't manage to find a clear and good title for a question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to avoid posting a question with a bad title and just waiting for someone to edit it.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;On the other hand, I'd really appreciate finding an answer to my question, so I'd like to post it, the sooner the better. I guess that if I had to find a title, it would take a long time, or I may even never think of a good one.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the best solution here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51851" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T12:40:02.157" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T12:40:02.157" Title="What to do if I can't manage to find a suitable and accurate title for my question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9340" CreationDate="2019-08-09T07:48:34.087" Score="23" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Put the best title you can think of and wait for someone to edit it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know you said you don't want to do exactly that, but it's how the stack format works. Many (if not most) questions get their titles edited and that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title doesn't matter much anyway once people have clicked on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45757" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-09T07:48:34.087" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9340" CreationDate="2019-08-09T16:18:03.570" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Use the best title you can think of&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since this is a collaboratively maintained site, someone will give it a better, accurate, descriptive title if the title you came up with isn’t enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;However, your title struggle might be trying to tell you something…&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I have noticed in my experience that having a hard time finding a title that covers two connected questions is a red flag that is worth paying attention to. If you have two connected questions in a post, and that specifically makes it hard to title, then &lt;strong&gt;it might not count as one question&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you’re struggling to find a title that isn’t too broad, unclear, or misleading, that suggests that these two little questions aren’t one topic. When this happens, consider splitting it into two questions. Instead of connecting them with one question post, connect them by using links to each other in two separate question posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s worth remembering that being “little” doesn’t have anything to do with whether they can be combined in one question. The only thing is whether they are really one question or two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-09T16:18:03.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9336" CreationDate="2019-08-09T22:55:10.840" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;That answer is fine&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A short answer isn't always a bad answer.  The answer supports itself by pointing out that in 5e equipment is part of a creature's statistics (as defined in the MM), which is true and sufficient to answer the question.  They &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; have quoted that MM section (but it would make the answer worse-- look at that text wall answer at the bottom of the page now. Plus it's kind of insulting to treat readers like they don't know how to look up basic information in a book), and they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have left out the speculative bit at the end, probably, but overall the answer is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When adjudicating question length to see if something is too short, I do the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the answer answer the question, instead of just presenting the facts needed to answer the question; Does it actually draw its conclusions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the answer support its conclusions?  Is that support correct and well-known or built up from things that are?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are obscure things cited well?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does it answer the &lt;em&gt;whole&lt;/em&gt; question, or just part of it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes to all, then I think it's fine.  Notably, I try to actively suppress my urge to complain that an answer doesn't have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Extra related stuff, even if it seems important to me to mention, especially stuff related to playstyle or norms&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Support for stuff that's reasonable to assume an expert on the topic should know, unless it's germane to the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Detailed discussions of edge cases on very low-level, basic questions, though I might edit in some 'usually's if I think they are needed and the playstyle of the querent isn't super hostile to me as a person.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's important to remember that brevity is a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; thing, as long as it doesn't come at the cost of quality.  Essays are fine, but not every answer needs to be an essay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-09T22:55:10.840" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9344" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9347" CreationDate="2019-08-12T22:38:29.593" Score="38" ViewCount="609" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally a question gets asked that is approximately of the form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have this problem, what should I do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have this problem, should I do X?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are then closed as opinion based, reworded into something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What are the advantages/disadvantages of doing X?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;before being reopened.&#xA;Which seems to me like a lot of effort (a full round of closure votes, an edit, and reopen votes) to get a question that is effectively asking the same way, using more words and less clear language. Seemingly just to get rid of the word &quot;should&quot;, like it is a red flag for opinion based answers. This praxis has been met with some grumbling from members of chat, and I think it is time we take this discussion properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only historic example I have been able to retrieve is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8582/52137&quot;&gt;this (unanswered) meta  question&lt;/a&gt;. (I'm sure others with better memory/search mojo than me can find others.) I was now prompted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153414/52137&quot;&gt;this more recent question&lt;/a&gt;, but I know this has happened to more questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, does using the word &quot;should&quot; in a question make it inherently opinion based and so is effectively taboo to use in a question? Or can we take &quot;should&quot; to mean &quot;what are the advantages/disadvantages of&quot; and so answer questions without going through the close cycle to homogenise it with other questions? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-13T06:12:08.143" LastActivityDate="2019-08-14T19:35:54.367" Title="We should talk about the word &quot;should&quot;" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9345" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9346" CreationDate="2019-08-13T02:06:16.513" Score="14" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153433/if-wish-is-used-to-duplicate-a-spell-effect-is-the-spell-effect-treated-as-if-it&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; (deleted, viewable by 10k+ rep only) is deleted within minutes after a VTC as duplicate to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/50258/can-you-use-wish-to-duplicate-a-spell-at-a-higher-level&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is called.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TCYXh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TCYXh.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is indeed a duplicate to the suggested question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that duplicates are actually valuable to us as a signpost to the referenced question, with different wording, we have established that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9256/if-a-question-is-marked-as-a-duplicate-or-is-closed-should-i-delete-it&quot;&gt;we should not delete a question after it is closed for being a duplicate.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, if the question is &lt;em&gt;already deleted&lt;/em&gt;, should we undelete the question to preserve the signpost, or let it be deleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-13T06:14:06.140" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T06:14:06.140" Title="Is undeleting a potential duplicate acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9346" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9345" CreationDate="2019-08-13T05:17:01.717" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should not actively delete duplicates.  But we also should err on the side of respecting a poster’s wishes.  I do not think it would be remotely appropriate to undelete a self-deleted question without a much more compelling reason than “well dupe signpost...”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they had left it we should not delete it, but as they have deleted it we should not undelete it.  Interference requires a compelling reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2019-08-13T05:37:04.613" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T05:37:04.613" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9347" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9344" CreationDate="2019-08-13T05:27:00.477" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;The problem is not with the word “should” per se, but it is a warning sign of an opinion based question, and it does tend to encourage people to answer with opinions and not facts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“What should I do” is often found along with a complete lack of criteria for an answer.  “I could play a bard or a ranger, what should I do?”  These questions are put on hold for the OP to explain what their criteria might be for a best answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“What are the advantages/disadvantages” is the minimum possible copout to use to get a question reopened.  It’s saying “I still am not thinking clearly about this problem at all, so I want to make the question objectively answerable but not in a way focused on helping me, just general info-dump discovery.”  Which, if that’s where you’re at, I guess it’s OK. And it’s a lot better to have an answer comparing and contrasting bard/ranger benefits than answers saying “ranger is better because bards are losesauce huh huh.” &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it’s a lot better for the poster to use the opportunity to figure out what exactly they are really asking and define better criteria, e.g. &quot;Is a bard or a ranger a better battlefield control spellcaster?&quot; or &quot;Is a bard underpowered combat-wise compared to a ranger?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also OK to just leave the question closed, if what they are really asking is “I just want validation that it’s OK to play a bard” (as, to be honest, some of these querents are really asking). This is a place where we should be guiding the OP to refine their question not refining it for them, as changing their question into a different question just to get it reopened helps no one. If someone really is asking for an opinion, their question should stay closed, not modified into something they're not asking so we can answer it for internet points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, we as answerers &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; mentally transform a “should I” question into a more rigorous form.  But many will not (opinion based answers are still a plague upon this site) and the additional conflict, mod activity, downvotes, whining about downvotes, etc. around questions getting a bunch of pure-opinion answers is a worse outcome that just having clear standards in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And once you’ve had a question closed because it’s asking for opinions, ideally you &lt;strong&gt;learn&lt;/strong&gt;, and then when you ask more questions you think more about how to ask them in a way that’s not asking for opinions. So sure, their first question may be closed then opened, but that’s not a waste of effort if it influences later behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-14T19:35:54.367" LastActivityDate="2019-08-14T19:35:54.367" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9348" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-13T19:25:24.177" Score="10" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.enworld.org/forum/external.php?do=rss&amp;amp;type=newcontent&amp;amp;sectionid=1&amp;amp;days=120&amp;amp;count=10&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News&lt;/a&gt; feed has been spamming chat with lots of posts including old ones, and we're not sure what is going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mniiL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mniiL.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the time being I have removed it from the chat feed to prevent it from being a nuisance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anybody have any idea what is going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-08-13T19:45:00.870" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T19:45:00.870" Title="Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News feed misbehaving in Chat" Tags="|support|chat|feed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9348" CreationDate="2019-08-13T19:44:52.853" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;The disclaimer at the top of ENWorlds' site suggests it may be due to their upgrade. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be worth raising a bug on their meta as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T19:44:52.853" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9350" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9351" CreationDate="2019-08-13T20:54:27.857" Score="5" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153477/do-forgotten-realms-paladins-have-to-follow-a-deity&quot;&gt;Do Forgotten Realms paladins have to follow a deity?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;references this other question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51805/are-paladins-required-to-follow-a-god&quot;&gt;Are paladins required to follow a god?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;asking what seems to be the same question. Why is it not a duplicate? The implication seems to be that unofficial &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/04/24/does-a-paladin-need-to-serve-a-god-deity/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;tweets&lt;/a&gt; can override an official source (the PHB), and thus that the newer question is somehow not answered by the previous question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I would vote to close, but I do not appear to have that option.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48249" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-13T21:50:19.053" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T21:50:19.053" Title="Why is this question not a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9351" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9350" CreationDate="2019-08-13T21:38:11.840" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I have stated - I am looking for published source material for the Forgotten Realms in 5e that would support the unofficial assertion of a designer that FR paladins (as opposed to run of the mill 5e paladins) do in fact have to have a deity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is not a duplicate as it is looking for information about the Forgotten Realms setting in 5e, not the already answered question about 5e generically. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastActivityDate="2019-08-13T21:38:11.840" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9352" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-08-15T20:50:15.673" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about ads shown on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If discussing ways of promoting RPG.SE itself, use the&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/site-promotion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;site-promotion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;site-promotion&lt;/a&gt; tag instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For questions primarily about spam, unsolicited advertising content&#xA;posted as questions or answers - usually automated, and posted with&#xA;no regard for relevance - use the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/spam&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spam&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spam&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the question is instead about genuine self-promotional content on&#xA;RPG.SE - generally that which is relevant and posted by human users -&#xA;use the the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/self-promotion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;self-promotion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;self-promotion&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T21:02:53.220" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T21:02:53.220" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9353" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-08-15T20:50:15.673" Score="0" Body="For questions about ads shown on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site. (If discussing ways of promoting RPG.SE itself, use the [site-promotion] tag instead.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:50:15.673" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:50:15.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9354" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily about self-promotional content on RPG.SE, generally that which is relevant and posted by human users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If the question is instead discussing unsolicited advertising content posted as questions or answers - usually automated, and posted with no regard for relevance - use the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/spam&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spam&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spam&lt;/a&gt; tag. For actual advertisements displayed on RPG.SE, use the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/advertising&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advertising&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advertising&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9355" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily about self-promotional content on RPG.SE, generally that which is relevant and posted by human users. (If the question is instead discussing unsolicited advertising content posted as questions or answers - usually automated, and posted with no regard for relevance - use the [spam] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T20:58:37.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9356" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily about spam, unsolicited advertising content posted as questions or answers - usually automated, and posted with no regard for relevance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If the question is instead about genuine self-promotional content on RPG.SE - generally that which is relevant and posted by human users - use the the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/self-promotion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;self-promotion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;self-promotion&lt;/a&gt; tag. For actual advertisements displayed on RPG.SE, use the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/advertising&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advertising&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advertising&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9357" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily about spam, unsolicited advertising content posted as questions or answers - usually automated, and posted with no regard for relevance. (If the question is instead about genuine self-promotional content on RPG.SE - generally that which is relevant and posted by human users - use the the [self-promotion] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" LastActivityDate="2019-08-15T21:03:06.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9358" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-16T07:07:59.900" Score="-11" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;Something that I’ve noticed happening over and over again is a new user showing up with a homebrew piece of game content (e.g. a race, class, feat, et cetera), and then posting a Question to the effect of “Is my thing balanced” which almost always has an Answer of “No, it isn’t.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s to the point where I’m considering posting a Question of my own that’s a generic version of the question with a self-Answer of “No, it probably isn’t’” with an explanation of why that’s likely the case (professional game designers do it for a living and have more experience, their designs often include hidden assumptions about how things are structured, they sometimes utilise community feedback cycles to test things, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That way whenever one of these questions get asked, we can just link to the general case in the Comments. I think that they’re called a Community Wiki entry?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastActivityDate="2019-08-16T08:13:28.097" Title="Should I make a generic “Is my homebrew game content balanced?” Question with an Answer of “Probably not, No”?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9359" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9358" CreationDate="2019-08-16T08:13:28.097" Score="25" Body="&lt;h1&gt;That's Unfriendly and Unhelpful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We come here to solve problems. We give answers to questions that include explanations or backing. When a homebrewer asks a review question, it is implicit that 'is it balanced' should not be answered by a mere 'yes/no', but also have the &lt;em&gt;reasoning&lt;/em&gt; for why something is or isn't OK. A generic answer by definition doesn't provide that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such a pre-emptive answer also happens to shut down people's attempts to seek a solution for their problems, even though the seeking is on-topic for the site. That's rather adversarial and shouldn't be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, you say that 'likely no' stems from amateurs lacking the experience and resources required to achieving 'perfect' balance, but (a) by shutting down such question you are denying homebrewers such community feedback cycles and experience-gaining opportunities and (b) balance is a matter of degree, and such questions are likely to at least help the homebrewer &lt;em&gt;increase&lt;/em&gt; the degree of balance if answered in detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-16T08:13:28.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9360" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-17T07:15:24.417" Score="11" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not long ago, it has been pointed out to me that while RPG theory about different archetypes of players is relatively well-known, people are generally less aware of what sorts of GMs are out there. So I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153563/categorisation-of-gm-types&quot;&gt;posted a question&lt;/a&gt;, which, in retrospect, was too shoppy. I brought it up in chat and was offered some advice on how to improve it, so I made an edit. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not very confident in the edit being sufficient, and have also been given the advice to start a workshopping meta on the matter. So this is the meta in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to start acquainting myself with the differences in styles/archetypes/etc. of GMing. I'm not sure how to begin. For learning about the styles/types/etc. of playing, I've found &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Robin's Laws of Good GMing&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; to be a helpful guide that made me see distinctions between &lt;em&gt;players&lt;/em&gt; that have previously been conflated by me, and the new insights have been useful. For the same insight into GMing, I don't know how to start; I am hoping to see focused, constructive, coherent expert advice rather than directionless sharing of anecdotes that cannot be analysed, so I think the RPG stack was a good place to look for such knowledge. &lt;strong&gt;How &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; I approach my search for such knowledge?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Necessary Disclaimer&lt;/strong&gt;: Obviously all categorisations of fuzzy phenomena are approximations, and I know they're imperfect and that GMs don't neatly fit into one to the exclusion of every other (just as in the case with players). I'm not disputing those limitations, but I found the similar categorisation of players useful despite those limitation. So hopefully it's possible to acknowledge those limitations and move on to the useful part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T22:16:07.570" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T22:16:07.570" Title="Question Workshop: GM Types" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9360" CreationDate="2019-08-18T04:27:33.843" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is unlikely to be turned into a question that fits RPG.SE’s format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are either asking for people’s existing works on GM categorization, which is list/shopping, or you are asking people to categorize GM types, which is too broad/opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are not a good “explore a topic” site. We are a Q&amp;amp;A site.  Learning is necessarily focused here.  Sorry, you probably should try a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-08-18T04:27:33.843" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9362" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9363" CreationDate="2019-08-22T07:28:59.187" Score="10" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;I already saw some of my questions being tweeted on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/StackRPG/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RPG Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; Twitter account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At first, I though Q&amp;amp;A were put on Twitter when someone, like a moderator, find it good and interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I started to read other's question's edit, I also saw these &quot;tweeted notification&quot; and sometimes give a look at the tweeter to find good Q&amp;amp;A to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only recently I noticed that Q&amp;amp;A are posted every 3 hours, so it's obviously a bot doing it (I guess the mods are busy enough to not have to use Buffer and other tools that let you schedule tweets).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a software developer, I'm pretty curious about &lt;strong&gt;how the bot chooses which Q&amp;amp;A is going to be tweeted&lt;/strong&gt;, what's the algorithm behind it (maybe it's just the most viewed last 3 hours and that's all).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does anyone know?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51851" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2019-08-22T12:01:12.027" LastActivityDate="2019-08-22T12:01:12.027" Title="How does the bot choose Q&amp;A to publish on Twitter?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9363" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9362" CreationDate="2019-08-22T09:41:23.007" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks To &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/33569/v2blast&quot;&gt;@V2Blast ♦&lt;/a&gt; comment, I found an answer to my question in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/183407/how-does-the-twitter-bot-work&quot;&gt;this MSE Q&amp;amp;A about the twitter bot&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/183410/464583&quot;&gt;the accepted answer&lt;/a&gt;, it is told based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/94593/464583&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; (link-ception) that the twitter bot use an algorithm to determine which Q&amp;amp;A is &quot;hot&quot; (don't know if it is the same as the one used to determine &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/questions?tab=hot&quot;&gt;Hot Network Questions&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This algorithm calculation is based on views in a short time period (and maybe other points).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, there are some restrictions that may prevent a &quot;hot&quot; Q&amp;amp;A to be tweeted :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The score of the Question has to be more or equal to 1&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Question must not have any close vote (probably same for flag&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Q&amp;amp;A can be tweeted even if there's a close vote (again, maybe same for flag) on the Question if there is a bounty for this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess there might be more restrictions, but that is all I managed to find.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; : &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/135201/nick-craver&quot;&gt;@Nick Craver ♦&lt;/a&gt; announced this limit has been set from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/94593/464583&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; : In &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/115899/464583&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/135201/nick-craver&quot;&gt;@Nick Craver ♦&lt;/a&gt; announces that Question with close vote will not be tweeted anymore. It is asked in comment for the flag case, but he didn't reply to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt; : In &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/115899/464583&quot;&gt;this same answer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/135201/nick-craver&quot;&gt;@Nick Craver ♦&lt;/a&gt; indicate that Question with bounty have survived enough time to get a bounty, so even a close vote might not be a problem here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51851" LastActivityDate="2019-08-22T09:41:23.007" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9364" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9365" CreationDate="2019-08-22T15:46:50.687" Score="5" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am currently having difficulty drafting an appropriate question for the following scneario:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a player that wants to swap out the spellcasting ability for Warlocks in D&amp;amp;D 5e from Cha to Int. I am not looking for an opinion or ruling on whether that should be allowed, but rather looking for a list of things that would be affected by such a change. Also beneficial in an answer would be potential benefits or negatives of implementing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the community rules on asking about homebrew mechanics?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/942/how-to-deal-with-feedback-questions-about-house-rules&quot;&gt;this very similar question&lt;/a&gt;, it seems that questions limited to a single mechanic are permitted, but would do better by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2912/are-homebrew-evaluation-questions-ok&quot;&gt;being one part of a multi-part question&lt;/a&gt;. Evaluations of full concepts, classes, races, etc are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7952/are-is-this-balanced-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;slightly more complicated to keep on topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the recommended way to phrase such questions? (feel free to use my case above as an example, or another case you have encountered)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should they be phrased as seeking advice? Would that not result in primarily opinion based answers when talking about homebrew? Should they be phrased asking for pros and cons or similar, and leave the decision-making/opinion out of both answer and question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can you recommend a good way to phrase my question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45796" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-22T21:43:44.320" Title="How to ask about changes resulting from homebrew elements or house rules?" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9364" CreationDate="2019-08-22T18:02:50.927" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In this case, focus on power and changes in use of Ability Checks&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you are changing a core class attribute, the issues that you'll want expert advice on would be the ripple effects of this change on the class's power level and at-table play outcomes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since simply changing the spell casting ability will be less likely to make any difference on spell save DC's - +3 Int versus +3 Cha is transparent - the impact on ability checks and skills is probably where you want to direct this.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Caveat: if the Warlock chooses Hexblade, there are some &quot; + Charisma bonus &quot; features that may arise unless you also change those + adjustments to Int.  So you may want to poll the &quot;and what are the little details that will bite/change how this class operates?&quot;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd recommend a separate question on &quot;what does this do to warlock multi classing potential abuse&quot; if that issue arises: i.e, your player chooses to multiclass.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-22T21:43:44.320" LastActivityDate="2019-08-22T21:43:44.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9366" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-23T12:09:00.663" Score="3" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;A recently added tag was created with the UK English spelling &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/flavour&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;flavour&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;flavour&lt;/a&gt;. Many US English speakers may have trouble finding or be hesitant to use this tag. Is it possible to create a tag that refers to this one with the alternate spelling?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/flavour/info&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/flavour/info&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30184" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-23T20:49:23.860" LastActivityDate="2019-08-23T20:49:23.860" Title="Is it possible to create a tag referral?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9366" CreationDate="2019-08-23T12:22:27.370" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Tag Synonyms&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I propose or vote on tag synonyms?&#xA;Users with this privilege and a total answer score (total upvotes minus total downvotes) of 5 or more on the tag, can suggest tag synonyms. Users with a total answer score of 5 or more on the tag, can vote for tag synonyms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're a thing and they can be created by higher-rep users, and they do what you want. Now that you pointed out the tag and its synonym, this can be done by somebody with the appropriate score in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-23T12:22:27.370" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-08-26T20:26:02.410" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is exploding cheese.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100984/can-i-really-craft-an-arrow-of-total-destruction-by-raw&quot;&gt;Can I really craft an Arrow of Total Destruction by RAW?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is very dangerous cheese and probably not very high quality but I can't tell because it self-destructed and sent me to the Astral Plane before I got a very good taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53925" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:57:12.957" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:57:12.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9369" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-27T23:43:29.100" Score="10" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone kindly pointed out that the link in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/79721/28034&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to an Angry DM post goes to what looks very much like a malicious domain squatter. Looks like he's moved to &lt;code&gt;theangrygm.com&lt;/code&gt;. (There's more changes beyond the domain, e.g. article URLs have dropped the date references.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can try to track down the post I was linking to, but it seems to me this is something we should/could be systematic about, since I know there are quite a few such links scattered around the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-29T08:06:39.303" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T08:06:39.303" Title="Angry DM/GM site change - link updates?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9369" CreationDate="2019-08-28T00:38:18.013" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can find all links on the site currently pointing to &lt;code&gt;angrydm.com&lt;/code&gt; (the old website now used by a malicious domain squatter) by typing &lt;code&gt;url:&quot;angrydm.com&quot;&lt;/code&gt; into the search bar. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=url%3A%22angrydm.com%22&quot;&gt;Here's the list.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know that there's an easy way to fix these links (the links on the new site don't follow the exact same format) - or to intentionally break them to avoid leading people to a sketchy site. As far as I can tell, the only recourse is to manually fix all 41 answers and questions that include such links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people want to go ahead and update these links (you can generally find the new destination of the article by just googling &quot;Angry GM&quot; and then the article title), feel free to take the initiative! Just try to space it out a bit so as not to flood the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note: All such links are now updated to their current location or to an archived version of the original page.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-29T08:06:31.833" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T08:06:31.833" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9372" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9373" CreationDate="2019-08-28T16:46:19.140" Score="18" ViewCount="257" Body="&lt;p&gt;Shortly put I had a mechanics question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/infinity-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;infinity-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;infinity-rpg&lt;/a&gt;  regarding the stealth system that was not immediately clear. I figured out the solution eventually within the book, but thought it might make a good question and answer on the site for anyone else using the system since there are not a lot of public resources for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We did a lot of this kind of thing for the 5e release leadup for D&amp;amp;D 5e and I've certainly posted questions and then a week later come back and self-answered. Just checking to see if it was okay to explicitly do so in this case from the beginning. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-28T19:24:06.157" LastActivityDate="2019-08-28T19:24:06.157" Title="Are self-answer questions still allowed?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9372" CreationDate="2019-08-28T16:54:22.857" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Absolutely! There hasn't been a change in policy and we still do it (some of us more than others:) )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2019-08-28T16:54:22.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9374" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9372" CreationDate="2019-08-28T17:55:25.603" Score="23" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Self Answers to questions are good&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Across Stack Exchange, there's always been a stigma against self-answered questions due to the perception that this is intended to function as a kind of Reputation Farming. I don't agree with that perception, both from a theoretical perspective, and from the practical perspective of observing that Self-Answered questions often do worse, in terms of overall Reputation issued, than other questions (because of the stigma). So that is an open issue in the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the official stance of the network, and of this site specifically, is that &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/07/01/its-ok-to-ask-and-answer-your-own-questions/&quot;&gt;it is okay, and even encouraged, to try to provide answers to your own questions&lt;/a&gt;, and I believe that is the correct stance to take. The purpose of sites like this is to try to help people find answers to questions they might have, and if people provide self-answers to their own questions, it only means that future visitors who encounter the same problem will have a resource to look to to resolve their problem. That's a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say, from personal experience, to observe a few important recommendations; though these aren't rules, and you're not obligated (formally or informally) to follow them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Self-Answered posts usually accrue a few downvotes in their first appearance. If the post (and answer!) are good, these will usually get balanced out quickly. So don't get defensive; this is just the existing stigma against these questions, and you can't really fight that, other than by making the merit of your post as obvious as possible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Try to focus on making the question + answer as good-looking as possible. Since you know that whatever answer you're providing is a solution to the problem you're facing, you have an opportunity to tailor them both to make sure the problem is well defined and the answer is a comprehensive response to it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again: not rules, just suggestions based on my experience providing answers to my own questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-28T19:18:34.400" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9375" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-08-28T22:00:22.950" Score="14" ViewCount="248" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are quite a few questions asking to review homebrew. The best way to ask such questions is covered in this meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in how I should write out my answer: What I need to include, how to compare it to existing material, and how to offer suggestions to improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55495" OwnerDisplayName="Michael Gallagher" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-28T22:53:48.793" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T05:39:02.603" Title="How to properly review a homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|answers|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9375" CreationDate="2019-08-29T01:38:58.050" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: Examples in this answer are drawn from reviewing D&amp;amp;D 5e homebrew content. This is the most common use case and one that most users will understand, however most of this advice equally applies to other systems.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. Break it down into features&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing an entire class, subclass or race and be difficult to do all at once. The variety of features and the way they are distributed make it impossible to provide a single correct answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A class may be overpowered because of a feature it receives at 11th level, but be otherwise under-powered up to this level. Attempting to simply assess this class as a whole would leave an inaccurate impression of the overall power of the class and how it will play out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. Compare to the closest existing official content&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find the best way to review homebrew is to find the nearest equivalents from official content and compare them feature by feature. It is usually a good idea to draw from at least two examples in your analysis. Compare the relative strengths and situational usefulness of the features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples of how to choose comparisons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A variant subclass; this is particularly easy as you can compare it to the other subclasses for that class.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A spontaneous full-caster; look at the bard and sorcerer for comparisons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A martial class with some spells; you would compare it to the ranger and paladin.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A subclass adding spells to an otherwise mundane class you should compare it to the arcane trickster rogue and eldritch knight fighter subclasses.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A spell; find other spells with similar effect as well as spell of the same level.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An item; try to find items with equivalent properties or rarity. This is simpler in systems with more robust item creation rules like &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;3. Look for consistency with existing content&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing to watch out for is homebrew that breaks away from the existing design patterns for a game. Examples of things to look for in D&amp;amp;D 5e reviews:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Subclasses giving benefits at the wrong levels&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Features granting static bonuses instead of advantage or proficiency&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anything that can break bounded accuracy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Healing that doesn't require expending a limited resource&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also want to look for the &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt; of feature that is granted. Do all other subclasses grant an out-of-combat situational buff at 6th level? Then this homebrew should too. Watch for homebrews that are too focused on a single use case (usually combat), particularly ones that focus more than the existing content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;4. Provide a summary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With your analysis broken up by feature, it can be hard to determine what your overall verdict is. So like the essays you wrote in high-school, you want to add a conclusion with a summary of your review. Here is an example from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/147685/48759&quot;&gt;one of my answers&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This class overall is likely underpowered. Particularly in the early levels where is lacks offensive spells and slot recovery abilities. Once the 14th level ability kicks in, it is probably ok in balance terms but could use some work on thematics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;5. Check if their homebrew achieves their goal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The typical reason for someone to homebrew is that the user has some particular concept or theme in mind that the current content doesn't quite hit. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8122/48759&quot;&gt;They should give this information in the question&lt;/a&gt;, but if they haven't, feel free to ask for it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone is going for a necromancer theme but their spell choices don't align with that, it is a good idea to let them know that their homebrew might not quite achieve what they were hoping. An example from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/147685/48759&quot;&gt;one of my answers&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say your intent is to add to the offensive capabilities of the class, but only the spells available at 9th level actually deal damage. The rest are control/healing/buff spells. I don't think this quite hits the theme you were going for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;6. Provide suggestions but don't homebrew for them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Homebrew this for me&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; questions are off-topic here, for good reasons. Reviewing bad homebrew with an answer that is just a better version is fundamentally the same thing. So you should avoid rewriting their whole homebrew to a better version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, provide suggestions for which features need modifications and what those potential modifications should be. Examples of the type of advice that is useful:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Replace this 1st level spell with a 2nd level one, some good options are...&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Increase the damage of this ability in line with X&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Consider replacing this with Y feature from Z&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;7. Encourage playtesting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day no amount of theoretical analysis will be as good as proper playtesting. If their homebrew isn't just fundamentally broken and doesn't have major problems with balance or style, you should advise them to try playtesting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-08-29T05:39:02.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9377" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9378" CreationDate="2019-08-31T22:14:57.127" Score="6" ViewCount="72" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been looking for a while and I can't find the FAQ, would someone be kind enough to link it to me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55495" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-08-31T22:30:23.713" LastActivityDate="2019-09-03T00:07:35.070" Title="Where's the FAQ? I can't seem to find it" Tags="|support|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9377" CreationDate="2019-08-31T22:24:52.437" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; is our local (meta.rpg.se) FAQ. (It's basically an organized list of all the meta questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's the rpg.se Help Center: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&lt;/a&gt;. It can be found in the speech-bubble dropdown menu at top right of the site, or in the site footer. Note that that's pretty-much boilerplate help text, common to all SE sites. All good to know, though!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to drop a comment if these don't cover what you're looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-09-03T00:07:35.070" LastActivityDate="2019-09-03T00:07:35.070" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8714" CreationDate="2019-09-03T12:26:43.083" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We can and should tag 3pp material as a content; Homebrew is not necessary.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many cases (Pathfinder's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/path-of-war&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Path of War&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/variant-magic-rules/spheres-of-power/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Spheres of Power&lt;/a&gt; are just two examples in my wheelhouse) where a 3rd party &lt;em&gt;drastically&lt;/em&gt; changes the content of its source. The change is often so great that it changes &lt;strong&gt;who is qualified to answer the question&lt;/strong&gt;. While some material might just be a new spell that neatly fits the mold, far more common are additional class/job/etc roles which can drastically affect game balance and, more importantly, the number of people who have actually interacted with the content to provide accurate answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3rd-party-product&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3rd-party-product&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3rd-party-product&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tags don't need to exist, but individual publisher tags &lt;em&gt;need to&lt;/em&gt; for the same reason we have game system tags. They change the answer base and let answerers know where to look for the content, for reference purposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-03T23:19:17.947" LastActivityDate="2019-09-03T23:19:17.947" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9380" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9381" CreationDate="2019-09-04T13:14:40.880" Score="8" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, let's say I ask a question about some actual issue. And I get answers, and maybe already accept one of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the situation gets resolved whatever way in reality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I tell what happened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the question and add extra section telling what happened.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add an answer telling what happened.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add it as a comment, under the Q or the accepted A.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't bother, this is strictly a QA site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Add answer&quot; is obvious choice if the resolution is clearly an answer too, but let's say the resolution does not bring in anything not already covered in existing answers, in this case. Let's say this resolution would be just &quot;interesting to know&quot; kind of extra content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11358" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-09-04T14:21:37.303" LastActivityDate="2019-09-04T14:21:37.303" Title="How to share what actually happened, after what I asked about is resolved?" Tags="|discussion|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2019-09-04T18:55:34.387" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9380" CreationDate="2019-09-04T13:52:31.720" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Edit an update onto the end of your question to let viewers know how it went&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases like these I think it's acceptable to add edit an addendum onto your original question that describes which approach you used and how it went, if it's based on suggestions you received as answers rather than an independent solution you could post as an answer itself. Comments are also acceptable, but by nature less permanent and subject to a more restrictive character limit, if you wanted to provide any detail. You should make sure you keep the after-the-fact update a distinctly separate section from the original question though, so as not to make for confusing reading later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However you do it, the information on what you ended up doing and how that went is useful for anyone with a similar problem who finds the question later, and of course it always nice for answerers to know when they've helped!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastActivityDate="2019-09-04T13:52:31.720" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9382" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9392" CreationDate="2019-09-05T13:59:00.467" Score="15" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've gotten a couple of questions recently that do seem to be okay within our framework, but there's enough softness here that I wanted to bring it up in meta as to whether or not they really do fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154689/how-to-flavor-my-narration-of-a-fight-in-a-creatively-plausible-way-without-affe&quot;&gt;How to flavor my narration of a fight in a creatively plausible way without affecting mechanics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154657/how-can-i-describe-hit-point-damage-without-talking-about-wounds&quot;&gt;How can I describe hit point damage without talking about wounds?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions still require our Good Subjective support - and ask for it (which is awesome!), but both questions also seem like they are still primarily opinion-based because everyone &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; narrate differently and this ends up more like a discussion about different ways of doing something and is more suitable for a forum or chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The big difference seems to be that most of our narration questions are about specific instances, but these are more general takes and may even be X-Y problems rather than narration problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-09-05T15:50:02.213" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T18:54:22.553" Title="Should these questions about how to narrate be on topic here or off?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9383" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9382" CreationDate="2019-09-06T00:26:12.037" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;At face value, they are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Primarily Opinion Based&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't ask about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Brainstorming requests&lt;/strong&gt; (“give me some cool ideas”)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions with too many possible answers&lt;/strong&gt; or that would require a novel-length answer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as you point out, they may be X-Y problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first is phrased as a narration problem, but at its heart, it's about players wanting to do things in the mechanics that D&amp;amp;D doesn't support - most of the answers have identified and addressed this (yay us!). My first instinct with this question is that the answer would start with &amp;quot;Play a different game...&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is a narration problem, but it's focused specifically on what the RAW hit point mechanic looks like in 'fiction'. How to narrate that is probably too broad but, what the rules mean isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They're fine.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T16:32:04.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-09-06T01:45:34.743" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Cheesum Absurdum&lt;/em&gt;, Armor Class Edition&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under the premise that the cheese we sell in this cheese shop is based on a reduction to the absurd of RAW, we find that the absurd question of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/150748/22566&quot;&gt;&quot;what is the lowest possible armor class&quot;&lt;/a&gt; can be successfully answered because, well, Who Wants To Live Forever?  In a world without cheese, nobody.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Hit me, Bael-bee, one more time.&lt;/em&gt;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T01:45:34.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9385" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9387" CreationDate="2019-09-06T13:13:53.000" Score="4" ViewCount="51" Body="&lt;p&gt;I learned from a meta post by HeyICanChan once that you can type [tour] in a comment and SE will convert that into a link to the tour page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a similar way to link to the help center? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's common practice these days to link both in &quot;greetings&quot; comments to new users, but I have to copy the full URL link and insert that into the comment (using the [text] (URL) notation), which takes up space and isn't as quick as [tour].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-06T18:21:26.277" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T18:21:26.277" Title="Is there a quick way to link to the help center?" Tags="|support|hyperlinks|help-center|magic-links|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9385" CreationDate="2019-09-06T13:15:06.413" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nevermind, I just figured it out. It's [help], which is converted into the text &quot;help center&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-09-06T13:39:50.493" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T13:39:50.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9387" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9385" CreationDate="2019-09-06T13:43:58.923" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#comment-formatting&quot;&gt;comment formatting&lt;/a&gt; section of the editing help pages lists all the available shortcut links you can use in comments, including &lt;code&gt;[help]&lt;/code&gt; for the help center. As of posting that is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[meta]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the current site's Meta; link text is the site name&#xA;  (e.g. &quot;Super User Meta&quot;). Does nothing if the site doesn't have (or&#xA;  already is) a Meta site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[main]&lt;/code&gt; – like [meta], just the other way around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[edit]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the edit page for the post the comment is on, i.e.&#xA;  /posts/{id}/edit. Link text is &quot;edit&quot; (capitalization is respected).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[tag:tagname]&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;[meta-tag:tagname]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the given tag's page.&#xA;  Link text is the name of the tag.meta-tag only works on meta sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[help]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[help/on-topic]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[help/dont-ask]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[help/behavior]&lt;/code&gt; and&#xA;  &lt;code&gt;[meta-help]&lt;/code&gt; – link to frequently visited pages of the help center.&#xA;  Link text is &quot;help center&quot; (capitalization is respected). All links&#xA;  point to the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the Tour page. Link text is &quot;tour&quot; (capitalization is&#xA;  respected).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[so]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[pt.so]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[su]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[sf]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[metase]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[a51]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[se]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the given&#xA;  site. Link text is the site name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the current site's chat site, the link text being&#xA;  &quot;{site name} Chat&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[ask]&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;[answer]&lt;/code&gt; – link to the How to Ask or How to Answer page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;[something.se]&lt;/code&gt; – link to something.stackexchange.com, if that site&#xA;  exists. Link text is the site name. Use &lt;code&gt;[ubuntu.se]&lt;/code&gt; for Ask Ubuntu.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;as remembered from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6553/28402&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T13:43:58.923" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9388" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about &quot;magic links&quot;, bracketed text in comments and chat that is automatically converted to relevant links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For example, &lt;code&gt;[chat]&lt;/code&gt; links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://chat.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a full list of magic links that can be used, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/92060/add-data-se-style-magic-links-to-comments/94000#94000&quot;&gt;this answer on Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt;. Also see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-links&quot;&gt;[magic-links] tag on Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9389" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" Score="0" Body="For questions about &quot;magic links&quot;, bracketed text in comments and chat that is automatically converted to relevant links." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" LastActivityDate="2019-09-06T19:24:48.973" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9390" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9391" CreationDate="2019-09-07T06:11:32.847" Score="6" ViewCount="47" Body="&lt;p&gt;This isn't the first time I see this happening. An answer has a line of comments that is getting long, gets moved to chat to avoid clutter. Sometimes later the chat gets locked and new comments appear related to the old ones, requiring the chat to understand the context. Sometimes they don't. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, at times I run into comments that say that comments were &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140418/what-is-and-what-isnt-borgstromancy#comment355831_140419&quot;&gt;moved to chat&lt;/a&gt;, but when I follow the hyperlink, it &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/89263/discussion-on-answer-by-alex-p-what-is-and-what-isnt-borgstromancy&quot;&gt;leads to a dead page&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does it only happen if rules are broken by participants to such a degree that &lt;em&gt;none&lt;/em&gt; of the comments are salvageable? Or does it also happen for other reasons? If yes, what reasons and are any of them unique to RPGSE?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it does happen for reasons not having to do with un-salvageable breaches of rules, what can be done to prevent or reduce such occurrences, so as to mitigate the problems of lost context and of information related to an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T07:26:22.913" Title="Broken Chat Links" Tags="|support|comments|chat|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9390" CreationDate="2019-09-07T07:26:22.913" Score="12" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Rooms will exist indefinitely, so long as there is at least one person actively talking in the room. A room is considered worth retaining if it has more than 15 messages by at least 2 users. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/faq#retention&quot;&gt;/faq#retention&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chat you linked accumulated thirteen messages from five users on 5 February and then got deleted 8 days later on 13 Feb. Users with sufficient reputation have a privilege which lets them see deleted rooms anyway; that's how I know the message count and deletion date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is arguably a hole in our documentation retention... but no bigger than deleted answers which are also rep-locked, so I think it's working as intended. It's also yet another reason not to trust information of long-term importance exclusively to comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T07:26:22.913" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9382" CreationDate="2019-09-07T18:54:22.553" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They are on topic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All &quot;techniques&quot; questions can be achieved in different ways.  The requirement on this site is not that there be Only One Objectively Correct Answer To A Question.  The requirement is that Good Subjective can be used to answer it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These specific questions aside, in general asking things like &quot;how do I narrate hit point damage without talking about wounds&quot; are perfect for this site and a welcome respite from the legal rules wrangling part of the hobby that is completely uninteresting to some gamers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-09-07T18:54:22.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9393" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9394" CreationDate="2019-09-08T13:52:16.603" Score="14" ViewCount="212" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108029/when-did-karsuss-folly-become-a-canon-part-of-the-fr-lore&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; that I asked about two years ago. It got two answers, one of which was my own. The other was also helpful (and got an upvote from me). Since then I have been occasionally researching the topic from time to time and have recently discovered some critical piece of lore. I edited my self-answer with this extra information and I believe in its current state it objectively answers the question in a factual manner. (I believe it is almost impossible to improve on the answer any longer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is now fully satisfactory, and I would honestly accept it had it been written by someone else. Yet I feel uncomfortable accepting my own answer. Is there a way to pass the right to accept answers to another user or a group of users?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, is it considered bad etiquette to accept your self-answer? Is there a way to handle this delicately (beyond leaving the question with no accepted answer)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T19:23:32.193" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T19:23:32.193" Title="Is there a way to let someone else decide which answer to accept? How should accepting self-answers be handled?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9394" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9393" CreationDate="2019-09-08T15:36:08.953" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;This sounds like an ideal case for accepting your own answer. Go ahead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To answer your questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a way to pass the right to accept answers to another user or a group of users?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not. You retain sole agency over the accepted answer. Not even diamond moderators can change or set an accepted answer on your behalf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, is it considered bad etiquette to accept your self-answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not. Doing so is totally OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FYI: When a querent accepts an answer they wrote themselves, the answer isn't pinned to the top like usual. Instead it's just sorted in regular vote order. This means your self-accepted answer wouldn't appear on top anyway unless the community thought it was good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is there a way to handle this delicately (beyond leaving the question with no accepted answer)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't need delicate handling; it's fine. It's not a delicate thing. You did well, and past-you would have accepted that answer. You can accept it now. The only kind of handling it really needs is to act in good faith about it, which you're doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm concerned you'd be worried where you sit regarding good faith or bad faith usage of the checkmark, so let me illustrate what bad faith means here with a  specific behaviour pattern we see from time to time: bad-faith visitors sometimes come by to ask questions fishing for a &lt;em&gt;very specific&lt;/em&gt; (but wrong) answer: they want to win an argument or have their way in a game or something like that, and they want us to back up their side, but that's not our business. Our business is correct/good answers and they get upset at us when we provide those and they're not the stance they want to hear. They'll argue with anyone and everyone for days about it, insisting every answer is wrong and should be “fixed” to represent the querent's desired stance. Sometimes, after days of arguing with us inevitably fails, they'll leave their own answer with the stance they wanted and accept it, and because it's wrong &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; they're being a jerk they'll subsequently get downvoted to oblivion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that's a yardstick for bad-faith behaviour with using the self-accept button, you're nowhere near it. You just have a good answer, you've neutrally assessed it's pretty good, and you've done legwork to get it into that shape. Feel free to accept it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T16:35:34.590" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T16:35:34.590" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9395" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the markdown system used to format questions and answers on Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/formatting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;formatting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;formatting&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9396" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" Score="0" Body="For questions about the markdown system used to format questions and answers on Stack Exchange. (See also: the [formatting] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:36:43.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9397" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about answering your own questions, and best practices surrounding self-answering questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9398" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" Score="0" Body="For questions about answering your own questions, and best practices surrounding self-answering questions." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:38:48.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9399" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily about accepting answers, and best practices around accepting answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9400" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily about accepting answers, and best practices around accepting answers." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:40:34.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9401" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily about citations in answers, and general policies and guidance regarding such citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9402" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily about citations in answers, and general policies and guidance regarding such citations." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:44:05.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9403" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily involving either the Stack Exchange chat system in general or specific chat rooms for the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat&quot;&gt;the help center page for the &quot;talk in chat&quot; privilege&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9404" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily involving either the Stack Exchange chat system in general or specific chat rooms for the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:46:34.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9405" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about hyperlinks appearing on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site, whether in questions, answers, comments, or chat. (For links to specific parts of the site itself, a more specific tag may be more appropriate to use instead.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9406" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" Score="0" Body="For questions about hyperlinks appearing on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site, whether in questions, answers, comments, or chat. (For links to specific parts of the site itself, a more specific tag may be more appropriate to use instead.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:49:05.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9407" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the site's Help Center (and its subpages) accessible from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9408" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" Score="0" Body="For questions about the site's Help Center (and its subpages) accessible from https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:50:26.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9409" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:52:46.583" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For meta questions specifically about &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; 5th edition. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns D&amp;amp;D 5e as a whole, not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the mainsite tag, see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:46:29.760" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:46:29.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9410" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:52:46.583" Score="0" Body="For meta questions specifically about Dungeons &amp; Dragons 5th edition. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns D&amp;D 5e as a whole, not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about D&amp;D 5e. (See also: the [dungeons-and-dragons] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:46:29.760" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:46:29.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9411" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on Meta that ask about homebrewed rules content for an existing system, particularly regarding best practices for asking, answering, and sharing such content on the main Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the relevant mainsite tags, see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9412" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" Score="0" Body="For questions on Meta that ask about homebrewed rules content for an existing system, particularly regarding best practices for asking, answering, and sharing such content on the main Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T22:58:13.943" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9413" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily asking about downvotes, best practices on when they should or should not be used, and how to handle being downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/up-votes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;up-votes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;up-votes&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9414" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily asking about downvotes, best practices on when they should or should not be used, and how to handle being downvoted. (See also: the [up-votes] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:00:35.493" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9415" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily asking about upvotes, and best practices on when they should or should not be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/down-votes&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;down-votes&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;down-votes&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9416" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" Score="0" Body="For questions primarily asking about upvotes, and best practices on when they should or should not be used. (See also: the [down-votes] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:02:36.387" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9417" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For all questions that are primarily about questions - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9418" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" Score="0" Body="For all questions that are primarily about questions - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:03:17.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9419" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about tag wikis. This covers both the tag wiki excerpt (or usage guidance), and the full tag wiki that potentially describes it in more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the overall &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/tags&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tags&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tags&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more details about tag wikis, see&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;this FAQ on Meta Stack Exchange: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/214337/what-is-a-tag-wiki-how-do-i-write-a-good-one&quot;&gt;What is a tag wiki? How do I write&#xA;a good one?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/03/24/redesigned-tags-page/&quot;&gt;this Stack Overflow blog post that provides guidance on writing tag&#xA;wiki excerpts&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9420" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" Score="0" Body="For questions about tag wikis. This covers both the tag wiki excerpt (or usage guidance), and the full tag wiki that potentially describes it in more detail. (See also: the overall [tags] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:12:45.500" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9421" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on Meta about playtesting and how to handle mainsite questions involving playtesting or playtest content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9422" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" Score="0" Body="For questions on Meta about playtesting and how to handle mainsite questions involving playtesting or playtest content." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:14:17.513" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9423" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on Meta about duplicate questions, when a question should be closed as a duplicate of another, and how to handle questions closed as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9424" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" Score="0" Body="For questions on Meta about duplicate questions, when a question should be closed as a duplicate of another, and how to handle questions closed as duplicates." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:16:07.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9425" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:18:08.980" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the feeds that appear in the chat rooms of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/chat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:45:36.797" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:45:36.797" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9426" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-08T23:18:08.980" Score="0" Body="For questions about the feeds that appear in the chat rooms of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site. (See also: the [chat] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-08T23:45:36.797" LastActivityDate="2019-09-08T23:45:36.797" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9427" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-09T14:12:43.467" Score="4" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;(not sure if bug or not)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently had a 30 minute suspension. You can still be replied to while suspended, which pops up a little orange bubble-counter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under normal use, you can press escape while in the chat box to clear all of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While suspended, there is no chat box, and thus escape doesn't do anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I'd like escape to clear those chat notifications while suspended&lt;br&gt;&#xA;1.a. is it supposed to do that already?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T23:39:03.940" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T23:39:03.940" Title="Escape key doesn't clear direct reply bubble while suspended" Tags="|feature-request|bug|chat|notifications|account-suspension|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9428" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9431" CreationDate="2019-09-09T15:18:11.287" Score="14" ViewCount="324" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, today this question was asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154969/can-the-warforged-integrated-weapon-trait-be-disarmed&quot;&gt;Can the Warforged Integrated Weapon Trait be Disarmed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears to be about some 3rd party homebrew content from &lt;a href=&quot;https://dndguide.com/races/Warforged&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dndguide.com&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed as unclear, then reopened, NautArch answered with basically &quot;we can't answer that because it's 3rd party and only that 3rd party can answer it&quot; (which is a perfectly valid answer, my issue isn't with the answer; in fact, it's probably the only answer this question &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; have bar the author of the 3rd party content joining RPG.SE and answering), and... then the OP deletes the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Currently it's sitting on 1 undelete vote - should it be undeleted?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;respect the OP's intentions to delete their own question (meaning we should leave it deleted); or &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it's a valid question and it's now belongs to RPG.SE, so if we want it, we can undelete it despite OP's wishes to have it deleted (meaning we should undelete it)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure I like the 2nd option (or maybe that's just because of the way I worded it), but the undelete vote makes me question that...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T15:30:57.363" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T16:05:46.983" Title="What to do about undeleting this deleted question (10K only)?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9430" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9428" CreationDate="2019-09-09T15:36:08.957" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Undelete it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please see this &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/51265/should-we-permit-undeleting-questions-against-the-author-s-will&quot;&gt;relevant meta question&lt;/a&gt;, which indicate that content once posted nominally belongs to the site, and that high rep users can vote to undelete much as they can vote to delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T15:36:08.957" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9428" CreationDate="2019-09-09T16:05:46.983" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In this case, the question should be undeleted&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I cast the undelete vote mentioned on the question (before seeing this meta post). My reasoning was following the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/what-to-do-instead-of-deleting-question&quot;&gt;help section on deleting questions&lt;/a&gt;, namely the following part:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If your question has good answers, though, it's not fair to have those answers removed along with your question: other users put effort into helping you and even if you no longer want the answers, somebody else might. This is why the system prevents you from deleting answered questions most of the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question in this case actually got a good answer (in my opinion, I would upvote if I could) but the asker deleted the question before upvotes on the answer were possible: a mere 1 minute after the answer was posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is a decent enough on-topic question that actually got a good answer and is useful to have on the site as other people that come across that same 3rd party resource might have the same question. The question was also sitting on a positive score (admittedly a mere +2/-1) so presumably two other people found the question useful. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really see a valid reason for deletion in this case, the question is not &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/59054/404165&quot;&gt;completely useless to the site&lt;/a&gt; so considering the presence of a good answer I think this question should not have been deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T16:05:46.983" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9432" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9433" CreationDate="2019-09-09T16:44:52.700" Score="3" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, today this question was asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154969/can-the-warforged-integrated-weapon-trait-be-disarmed&quot;&gt;Can the Warforged Integrated Weapon Trait be Disarmed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is currently deleted (and therefore you need 10K rep to see it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just edited the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag onto it, because it is about homebrew content from &lt;a href=&quot;https://dndguide.com/races/Warforged&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dndguide.com&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was fully expecting some kind of message to pop up and tell me that I'm not allowed to edit deleted questions, like if I were to try to up/downvote it, but it didn't the edit went through, as far as I can tell (I have since removed the tag, as I was informed that it wasn't as relevant-a-tag as I first thought).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of the nature of the edit itself, should I be able to edit tags on deleted questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T16:55:42.717" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T17:08:02.473" Title="Am I supposed to be able to add tags to a deleted question?" Tags="|bug|tags|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9432" CreationDate="2019-09-09T17:08:02.473" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You can edit deleted posts other than your self-deleted questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can find this clarified in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/179769/404165&quot;&gt;general meta post&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No one can edit a locked post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The author of a deleted post can edit it unless it is a self-deleted question or locked as noted in #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Folks with full editing rights can edit any deleted post except those restricted by #1 or #2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are in case number 3 here, having over 10k rep and not being the author of the question you can edit everything about the question (not just tags)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note the restriction to editing self-deleted questions is to avoid the abuse described &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/296102/404165&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T17:08:02.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9434" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the notification mechanisms on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site and in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9435" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" Score="0" Body="For questions about the notification mechanisms on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site and in chat." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" LastActivityDate="2019-09-09T23:33:19.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9436" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9437" CreationDate="2019-09-10T10:03:54.060" Score="7" ViewCount="189" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers can be flagged as &quot;not an answer&quot;, the description for which says the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question. It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question, or deleted altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often, if I raise this kind of flag, I find that it is disputed or declined. The latest example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/62258/35259&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, which to me is clearly either a comment or maybe even another question, but doesn't really come close to what I would consider an answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why was my flag declined on this (not an) answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Extra reading for general use of the flag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185073/how-do-i-properly-use-the-not-an-answer-flag&quot;&gt;How do I properly use the &amp;quot;Not an Answer&amp;quot; flag?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/167624/can-we-have-an-unambiguous-official-ruling-on-what-the-not-an-answer-flag-is&quot;&gt;Can we have an unambiguous, official ruling on what the &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; flag is for?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/95581/the-limits-to-a-very-low-quality-answer/167641#167641&quot;&gt;The limits to a Very Low Quality answer&lt;/a&gt; (about the &quot;Very Low Quality&quot; flag rather than the &quot;Not An Answer&quot; flag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2019-09-10T10:58:09.360" LastActivityDate="2019-09-10T11:22:17.833" Title="Why was my &quot;not an answer&quot; flag declined on this answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9436" CreationDate="2019-09-10T11:13:18.883" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I declined that flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may be low quality, but it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a sincere attempt to answer the question, which makes the not-an-answer flag not apply to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider: “What was that noise?” “Could it have been a wolf?” — this reply is an answer, not a request for clarification or a separate question, even if it may have a question mark on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has an insufficient explanation post notice applied which will hopefully prompt the user to explain in a bit more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-09-10T11:22:17.833" LastActivityDate="2019-09-10T11:22:17.833" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9438" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-10T14:44:08.237" Score="10" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the question I want to post, but I'm concerned it may still get flagged as opinion-based. Is it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm building a brand new tabletop RPG and want to do away with some of the standards you find in an RPG, one of which being that only the &quot;mage&quot; class can use &quot;mage&quot; abilities. I'd like any class to &lt;em&gt;potentially&lt;/em&gt; be able to use any ability. Right now, here are some of the factors involved with granting access to spells/abilities:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is a Lux/Umbra (light/dark) alignment chart for each character on a scale of 1-10. This is the primary factor to determine if you can access a spell. Does your alignment meet the requirements? Players can change this alignment during level-up.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each spell/ability falls under various categories (I'm calling them &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&quot;callings&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; instead of classes, because I want players to be able to change their calling more easily than one can normally change their class) to help with organization, but this may be included in mechanics later on, I haven't decided yet.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each calling grants a +2 bonus to a stat, and a -2 bust to another stat to help entice people to choose a calling that aligns with their play style and character choices. (Ex. One calling gives a +2 Strength, -2 Dexterity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If I'm not limiting ability access by calling, is my boon/bust mechanic enough incentive to encourage players to choose one?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize this may sound opinion based, but I'm trying to compare how classes work in more traditional RPGs, and trying to rework it without breaking it all together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ex. I'm looking for a rule that will allow a Ranger (who can either have a lot of great abilities, or get completely overlooked) to think outside the traditional box and learn spells/archery/fighting abilities to make them a more interesting and compelling character to play.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="57726" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-11T06:25:32.137" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T00:41:02.757" Title="Is this too opinion based to post?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9439" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9438" CreationDate="2019-09-10T14:57:28.263" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if it's Opinion-Based or simply unclear without knowing the system in entirety. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My hunch is that we're not the place for developing a RPG from scratch. There are way too many moving parts that all need to fit together and without the big picture, we can't answer the minutiae. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But either way, I don't think this question or this stage of your development is a good fit for the stack. You do have enough rep to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, where you may get some feedback throughout your process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2019-09-10T14:57:28.263" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9438" CreationDate="2019-09-10T14:59:23.790" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes this would be too opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are basically polling us to weigh-in on balance/player incentive for a system that we have no idea what its rules-set is and cannot make a decided good subjective/bad subjective answer to. I have no idea if +2 is a meaningful bonus in your system or inconsequential. This type of post is probably better suited to an RPG forum where you can elicit an ongoing conversation about the mechanics of the system. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2019-09-10T19:16:57.077" LastActivityDate="2019-09-10T19:16:57.077" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9438" CreationDate="2019-09-10T15:01:23.023" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it's both too broad and opinion-based. In short:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don't know the mechanics of this homebrew game system. Terms like &quot;class&quot; and &quot;dexterity&quot; and &quot;character&quot; could mean different things in the contexts of different games. Numbers like +2 and -2 don't mean much either, because you haven't explained their relevance in the game. So there's not enough information for site users to make a reasoned response. Hence, too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question asks to speculate about player incentives. Every player has their own playstyle and priorities and incentives. Hence, opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side note, there are plenty of TTRPG systems where a player's character progression is not limited to a single pre-packaged track.  I would recommend further research into these other systems. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also advise against the &lt;em&gt;&quot;it's like D&amp;amp;D except...&quot;&lt;/em&gt; approach, since it tends toward reinventing-the-wheel sort of design failings, often due to a mismatch between one system's mechanics and the other's design principles. You'll have more success building your game from the bottom up, instead of trying to deconstruct an existing game system. (credit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9438/is-this-too-opinion-based-to-post/9441#comment30830_9441&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2019-09-11T23:20:44.777" LastActivityDate="2019-09-11T23:20:44.777" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9442" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9444" CreationDate="2019-09-12T10:18:12.300" Score="9" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tone&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tone&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tone&lt;/a&gt; tag that currently only has 3 questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like it doesn't really add much on top of the tags that those questions already use. It isn't a very frequently used tag and I don't see it particularly helpful with regards to searching for &quot;tone&quot; related questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we get rid of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-03-10T17:57:23.940" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T17:57:23.940" Title="Is there much point in having a [tone] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9443" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-12T15:35:13.173" Score="4" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/156106/why-is-this-weapon-searching-for-a-new-owner&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; that while the OP used the spoiler tags in the body of the text the question excerpt that appears on the Stack All Questions page includes text from the spoiler. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to avoid this/guidance for question writers to start their question with enough non-spoiler text to negate this effect?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47383" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-13T09:28:41.460" LastActivityDate="2019-09-13T09:28:41.460" Title="Hiding spoiler tagged text in question excerpts" Tags="|discussion|bug|status-norepro|spoilers|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2019-09-13T09:29:03.370" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9442" CreationDate="2019-09-12T18:03:38.263" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, the tag isn't preeminently super useful or high traffic, no that doesn't mean we should get rid of it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somebody with a good amount of rep thought the tag fit their question better than existing tags enough to warrant creation.  That's a feature available to all users with over 1.5K reputation, because the network's system is to encourage users to create lots of tags and there is almost no cost to having additional tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Getting rid of tags&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; takes &lt;em&gt;community manager&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. one step higher than our site moderators) action and generally requires a meta or series of metas on the topic.  We only do that when a tag is a problem.  Not only is this tag not a problem, but it seems that no one, yourself included, had any reason of or suspicion that the tag is or was causing any problems.  Given that, not only do the reasons to get rid of the tag not outweigh the reasons to not do so, but even if there wasn't a significant downside to going through tag deletion in general we still would have no reason to do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Actually, we can also get rid of tags by deleting it off of every tagged question.  The system then deletes the tag during the next clean up cycle.  That's not generally feasible for larger tags that are being actively used, but we have done this before to get rid of smaller tags.  This &lt;em&gt;does not&lt;/em&gt; prevent the tag from being created again (that requires blacklisting it).  We also don't do this unless there's a problem and it's not really to be invoked in cases escalating to community management wouldn't be appropriate, in my opinion.  If the system gives somebody the ability to make tags and they think a tag creation is appropriate, we should let them run with that.  It's not a big deal to have an extra tag unless there's something else going on (like they're trying to create a 'rules' or 'rpgs' tag or something vulgar, etc)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-12T18:37:06.957" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9445" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9447" CreationDate="2019-09-12T23:57:32.187" Score="10" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;I play a summoning focused druid in my 3.5e campaign and handling multiple summons and math on the fly with all the augments got tiresome - I couldn't find a helpful sheet for animal/creature templates, so I decided to try to make one (.NET, C#). It's a work in progress, but I want to share the source code when/if it's workable and/or &quot;finished.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, rpg friends, is there a dedicated place for this? Where do I look when I want to do some looking, and/or where do I throw my links/sheets when I want to share the love? If I see there's a preference among the community for prefer sheets instead of source code, I'd shift my work towards getting it into a sheets format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Screenshot for the idea of the program/progress&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/osWkG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/osWkG.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="57898" OwnerDisplayName="Nifusion" LastActivityDate="2019-09-13T15:32:54.697" Title="Is there a dedicated place within RPG SE for users to post source codes or helpful spreadsheets that they made/use to share the love to other users?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9445" CreationDate="2019-09-13T00:19:47.307" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The best approach is probably to do a self-answered Q&amp;amp;A along the lines of “how do I managed all my summons?” and then answer with “use this app I wrote,” with the actual code probably hosted on GitHub or wherever unless it’s rather shorter than I imagine it would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A meta post collection of useful tools users here have made could maybe be done, though I don’t know how many others there are. Considering the breadth of RPG materials out there, though, it might be somewhat unwieldy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" OwnerDisplayName="KRyan" LastActivityDate="2019-09-13T00:19:47.307" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9445" CreationDate="2019-09-13T00:57:26.553" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, there is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free and put them in a blog and link it in your profile.  And mention it in chat.  And link a specific item into an answer if it is part of a good answer (make sure and disclose it’s yours).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-09-13T00:57:26.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9448" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9445" CreationDate="2019-09-13T15:32:54.697" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not believe it belongs on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead I would consult our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449&quot;&gt;list of forums&lt;/a&gt; and share it in one of them, this also has the benefit of more people being likely to see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastActivityDate="2019-09-13T15:32:54.697" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9449" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9452" CreationDate="2019-09-16T14:31:16.070" Score="7" ViewCount="439" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like to ask the following question about what the &quot;standard&quot;/&quot;expected&quot; way to do something in D&amp;amp;D 5e is, but I feel that it'd likely be deemed opinion-based or unclear with regard to the meaning of &quot;expected.&quot;  Is the question acceptable for the main site, and, if not, how can I modify it so that it is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h2&gt;What is the expected way to acquire costly material components?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If a spell's material components include any items with an indicated cost (such as the pearl worth at least 100 gp needed for &lt;em&gt;identify&lt;/em&gt;), those items cannot be satisfied via a component pouch or spellcasting focus but must specifically exist in the caster's inventory.  This raises the question: Where are characters expected to find such items?  The DMG does not seem to address this (and if it does, that would likely be an answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are two basic options: either cities have stores where you can buy these components at exactly the right prices, or else players can find costly components in treasure piles.  The first option is boring, and the second option isn't supported by the treasure rules in the DMG.  Said treasure rules only acknowledge treasure that is made up of coins, gemstones, art objects, and magic items (DMG p.133).  Some spells do need gemstones, though, and while &lt;em&gt;identify&lt;/em&gt;'s pearl can be found in a treasure pile, that doesn't work for all such spells:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some gemstones are listed in the tables at insufficient price; e.g., &lt;em&gt;awaken&lt;/em&gt; requires an agate worth at least 1,000 gp, but all three types of agates in the treasure table are only valued at 10 gp each.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some spells require gem dust, but there's no mortar &amp;amp; pestle listed in the adventuring gear that could be used to grind down a gem to dust — and even then, there are price issues; &lt;em&gt;continual flame&lt;/em&gt; requires ruby dust worth 50 gp, while a ruby is worth 5000 gp; does grinding down a single ruby give you enough dust for 100 castings?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some spells require gems that aren't even in the treasure tables, like &lt;em&gt;create undead&lt;/em&gt; needing a black onyx stone worth 150 gp.  (There's an &quot;onyx&quot; listed, though, and while its description states it can be black, it's still only worth 50 gp).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Plus, there are still all the other spells whose costly components don't resemble any DMG-listed treasure, such as the incense and sacrificial offering together worth 25 gp needed for &lt;em&gt;divination&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;While flipping through the DMG to write this question, I encountered a third option: crafting.  Page 46 says, regarding the forked, metal rod worth at least 250 gp required for &lt;em&gt;plane shift&lt;/em&gt;: &quot;Crafting the fork is expensive (at least 250 gp), but even the act of researching the correct specifications can lead to adventure.&quot;  Putting aside the need for research that is specific to this spell, this answers some questions but raises more: Can all costly components be crafted?  How long does the crafting take?  Are skill checks, tools, or proficiencies needed?  Does the character need a formula for crafting as is needed for magic items?  Is the money spent on anything specific from a special store, or does the player just subtract it from the number of gp on their character sheet even if they're currently in a dungeon nowhere near civilization?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Or do we just go with the really boring fourth option: The first time you cast a given spell with a costly component (and every time after that if the component is consumed), do you just subtract the cost from your gp and call it a day?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[dnd-5e] [spell-components]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2502" LastActivityDate="2019-09-16T20:18:03.627" Title="Is this question about the expected way to acquire costly components too opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9450" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9449" CreationDate="2019-09-16T14:47:02.097" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Personally, I think it's fine.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your wording and verbiage isn't quite how I would do it, but that's a subjective matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meat of your question seems reasonable and I would try to answer it. 5e leaves a lot of the &amp;quot;fluffier&amp;quot; (more story based) elements of the game up to interpretation, which leaves room for questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's why we're all here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-16T14:47:02.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8230" CreationDate="2019-09-16T18:55:02.353" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Update: Done!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/msv63.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/msv63.png&quot; alt=&quot;The &amp;#39;players&amp;#39; tag is not allowed. Questions involving players are naturally welcome on the site, but you should include a tag that describes your specific issue instead. Some suitable tags may include: group-dynamics, player-communication, social, or problem-players. (If asking about characters instead, consider using a tag like party or character-creation as appropriate.)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Background&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This looks like &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/239189/how-should-we-make-tag-blacklist-requests/239192#239192&quot;&gt;a good candidate for blacklisting&lt;/a&gt;. It's the sort of tag a person might reasonably assume was useful, but doesn't really add anything to question. At &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot;&gt;102 questions&lt;/a&gt;, removing the tag is right on the edge of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/239191/1438&quot;&gt;being reasonable to do manually&lt;/a&gt;. Looking at the discussion here, I think I can safely eliminate the tag from most of the questions because they already have a more useful tag such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamic&lt;/a&gt;. But I'd like someone to look at questions that might need another tag. By my estimate, these questions could use another look:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players+-problem-players+-new-players+-finding-other-players+-absent-players+-parting-ways-with-players+-player-communication+-player-vs-player+-player-agency+-player-characters+-player-techniques+-group-dynamics+-social+-gm-techniques&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;[players] -[*-players] -[player-*] -[group-dynamics] -[social] -[gm-techniques]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't know enough about this topic to make a call on this, but would it be helpful to also exclude questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;? Maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; too, but that seems more a stretch.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that query gets down to 0, I'd be happy to just burninate the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for blacklisting, I need a blurb about why the tag isn't a good fit on the site. For instance, the [rules-as-written] tag has an error that reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Rules-as-written questions are however entirely welcome on this site and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;we embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt;. Please simply tag with the game and edition you're asking about. For more information see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8946/time-to-retire-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A blurb for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;players&lt;/a&gt; doesn't need to be complicated, but it should be clear what askers should do instead. Once we settle on copy and the tag is gone from all questions, let me know and I'll blacklist it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8821" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2019-09-20T18:12:09.363" LastActivityDate="2019-09-20T18:12:09.363" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9452" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9449" CreationDate="2019-09-16T20:18:03.627" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It would probably be &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; if you focus on what the books and/or other specific sources have to say, since otherwise this question may be seen as inviting speculation and thus closed (or it might, in actual fact, start attracting speculative answers and &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; closed). A question like that is unquestionably allowed here, even if the real answer is “they don’t,” since you aren’t (and can’t be) required to know the answer to your question before you ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don’t worry overmuch about the likelihood that the books have nothing useful to offer—users here tend to try to fill in for such shortcomings without being invited to anyway. By focusing on what books and/or other authoritative sources say, you improve the likelihood that any actual statements in the books or other sources get reported accurately and not buried under chaff. Perhaps more importantly, you also force answers that want to “fill in” to demonstrate that they are actually experts on the subject by showing that the approved sources don’t cover things, warding off the purely speculative “well I imagine that I would...” kind of answers that we frown upon, or even the better but still problematic “I have no idea what the official rules are, this is what I’ve always done” sort of answer. And your question is also less likely to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I probably wouldn’t vote to close it as is unless problematic answers started to appear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-09-16T20:18:03.627" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9438" CreationDate="2019-09-17T00:41:02.757" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not too broad, but it might not get good answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're essentially asking &quot;can point-buy RPGs work?&quot; in combination with &quot;how strong is this incentive?&quot; The first answer is trivially 'yes', and the second is going to garner all kinds of ignorant opinions (because the answer depends heavily on how you structure the rest of your system).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would refrain from asking, at least in that form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T00:41:02.757" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9454" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9455" CreationDate="2019-09-17T12:50:08.423" Score="7" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/156377/4563&quot;&gt;This question about a drow wizard who received the Wild Talent feat&lt;/a&gt; was closed as Too Broad. It should not have been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/4563&quot;&gt;this meta discussion&lt;/a&gt;, questions like this are supported here, and we have dozens of successful examples. This questions lays out exactly what levels the character already has, as well as the sources available. It’s a general question with a fair amount of detail. “Too Broad” isn't even close. A good answer can easily discuss the usage of the Wild Talent feat and the pros and cons of trying to multiclass into a psionic class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is possible that this question garnered more close votes than it otherwise would have due to the relatively poor grammar and spelling in the original iteration of the question. I would suggest to any such close-voters that they might, instead, do some simple copy-editing rather than closing down the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-17T18:02:45.100" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T18:02:45.100" Title="Drow wizard with Wild Talent question" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9455" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9454" CreationDate="2019-09-17T14:27:20.700" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question's been reopened now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T14:27:20.700" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9456" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9457" CreationDate="2019-09-17T15:14:26.157" Score="12" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;The title of my question probably isn't great, but I can't think of the wording to describe my question; what I'm referring to is when I see things like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Blah blah ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Blah blah?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's usually question marks I see this with, but sometimes I see the same with colons or ellipses, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Blah : blah&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Blah: blah&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, is this a nationality thing or something, like how in the UK/America we might type &quot;haha&quot; to represent laughter, whereas in certain latino countries (I'm not sure which; this is based on an old co-worker of mine) they would type &quot;jaja&quot;? Or is this actually just me incorrectly believing that what I want to edit it to is &quot;right&quot; and the other way is &quot;wrong&quot;? If so, that might inform my real question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should I edit these spaces out when I see them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously these aren't important edits and I should probably only do so where there are other things to edit in such a post. But if I'm already editing something, and I see this, am I right to &quot;correct&quot; it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2019-09-17T15:45:35.423" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T20:29:24.257" Title="Should I edit out spaces between certain punctuation?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9456" CreationDate="2019-09-17T20:29:24.257" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a thing with some languages that aren’t English. Most languages have their own punctuation rules to follow. (French, for one example, mandates a non-breaking space before most punctuation other than periods and commas; for another, Polish mandates a comma in places that English forbids a comma.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;English has its own rules for punctuation. And unfortunately, it’s very hard to type a non-breaking space, so people don’t. Our mobile readers (including me) often see these kinds of spaced question marks and colons split onto a separate line from what they’re punctuating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since we’re writing in English, we should treat non-English punctuation rules as minor things to improve on, at the level of readability and polish, the same way we would remove German Capitals on every Noun, or replace «guillemets» with “quotation marks”. That is, we should leave it be unless it’s worth editing for major readability issues, and/or during a more substantial edit, and/or when a new post is already being actively edited and it wouldn’t be disruptive to contribute a just-polishing edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-09-17T20:29:24.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9458" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-24T02:33:23.523" Score="7" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a number of questions asking about whether some homebrew material is or isn't balanced.  Some questions are tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;, others are tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to the meta discussion &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9149/do-we-want-a-homebrew-review-tag-separate-from-the-homebrew-tag&quot;&gt;&quot;Do we want a [homebrew-review] tag separate from the [homebrew] tag?&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, this is intentional, and the tags should be distinct and used exclusively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it seems that the tags are often used interchangeably, ultimately asking the same types of question.  For comparison, see the following search results:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aquestion+%5Bhomebrew%5D+balance&quot;&gt;Questions tagged as [homebrew] with the word &quot;balance&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aquestion+%5Bhomebrew-review%5D+balance&quot;&gt;Questions tagged as [homebrew-review] with the word &quot;balance&quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Substituting &quot;balance&quot; with words like &quot;review&quot; or &quot;feedback&quot; yields similar findings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a pressing problem, although it's a complication when searching for prior homebrew questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; should instead be tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;, should we edit the question to change its tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastActivityDate="2019-09-25T13:08:46.533" Title="Should homebrew review questions tagged as [homebrew] be re-tagged as [homebrew-review] instead?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9458" CreationDate="2019-09-24T04:35:17.127" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, we should edit the tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was some initial &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9149/do-we-want-a-homebrew-review-tag-separate-from-the-homebrew-tag#comment29549_9150&quot;&gt;discussion about simply renaming&lt;/a&gt; the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; and retagging the smaller subset of tag, but it seems that that isn't going to happen now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes we should start retagging the old questions with the wrong tag. However we should do so slowly. There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew+-homebrew-review&quot;&gt;over 600 questions&lt;/a&gt; with the tag and we don't want to flood the frontpage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do note that the presense (or lack) of the term &amp;quot;balance&amp;quot; from a question does not put it in one category or another. It is a likely indicator of a review question but not a hard and fast rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-24T04:35:17.127" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9458" CreationDate="2019-09-24T20:25:20.297" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, go ahead and edit them as they come up (or edit the backlog slowly)&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9149/do-we-want-a-homebrew-review-tag-separate-from-the-homebrew-tag#comment29549_9150&quot;&gt;previously said&lt;/a&gt; that we would rename &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; and then retag all the appropriate questions back to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We had several reasons to sit on this and wait. One was that at least some of the mods had concerns about how the tags were currently defined. I certainly did. I combed through the list multiple times and each time ended up with a big pile of questions that were ambiguous as to which tag should be applied. So we waited a bit to see how the tag definitions worked out for the current stack before taking any action. For the questions we commonly get here they seem to be working well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other issue we had reservations about was that retagging all the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; questions to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; created a situation where the questions &lt;em&gt;had&lt;/em&gt; to be manually fixed and preferably sooner rather than later (because, in my mind at least, having regular homebrewing questions under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; is more wrong and confusing than having review questions under the general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And for those reasons and others (one certainly being that it wasn't super pressing as an issue), we haven't moved forward as we originally planned to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Best way forward: retag manually&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9459/28591&quot;&gt;linksassin&lt;/a&gt; in that we should just retag the questions from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; manually. There's a bunch of them, so it'll take a while but since it isn't a huge issue to have review questions temporarily under the general tag, there's no reason to rush it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, our usual guidelines apply here when it comes to making minor edits to old posts. Don't flood the recently active page with a bunch of tag edits. Do them in small batches over time. If one of the questions resurfaces naturally obviously, make edits as you normally would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-25T13:08:46.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9461" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-25T14:51:54.343" Score="7" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't want go get into a gold badge open/close war, so thought I'd just bring it up here :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/156767/what-system-can-i-use-for-a-small-scale-battle&quot;&gt;What systems can I use for a small scale battle?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question itself does seem to be a duplicate of these: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115258/is-there-a-proper-way-to-handle-large-combat-engagements-with-party-members-invo&quot;&gt;Is there a proper way to handle large combat engagements with party members involved?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145578/how-can-i-model-the-mechanics-of-an-army-battlefield-scene&quot;&gt;How can I model mechancis of an army battlefield scene?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In comments, it seems that OP is unhappy with the answers, but that's not a reason to re-open. It's a reason to put a bounty asking for better answers on the duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this be closed as a duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-09-25T15:01:46.243" LastActivityDate="2019-09-25T15:47:10.293" Title="Is this question on mass combat a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9461" CreationDate="2019-09-25T15:32:53.433" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Option 1: It's currently a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those questions are about the exact same topic: running larger battle scenes around a party where the battle is involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the asker of the new question doesn't find the answers contained sufficient, then the recourse isn't to ask the same question again, but to put a bounty up asking for more attention/better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the OP clarified the problems in the answers to the potential duplicates, that still doesn't mean it's a new question. It's that they have a concern or issues with the answers to the same question on how to run this type of scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can then workshop the question to not being a duplicate either here in meta or on [chat].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Option 2: Close as Unclear&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Same need to workshop here, but bypasses the concerns around being a duplicate. I'm still not clear how it's not, but this may be the more comfortable route.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-25T15:47:10.293" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9463" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9461" CreationDate="2019-09-25T15:38:29.380" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Their question should be reworked into something that isn't a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since their question is essentially the same as the other two questions, but their answers all talk about UA: Mass Combat, which the OP has claimed isn't suitable for this case, their question should be reworked into something that is not a duplicate of the other two questions (i.e. and therefore the answers about UA: Mass Combat do not apply), but still something that is helpful to the OP's original scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meantime, if the question is not yet currently sufficiently refined enough to not be considered a duplicate, it should perhaps be closed (maybe as something else like &amp;quot;unclear&amp;quot; or something?) until it can be reworked into something more satisfying for everybody. Closing it as duplicate still implies that it's the same question, which is at the very least clearly against the OP's intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-09-25T15:41:37.000" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9464" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9465" CreationDate="2019-09-25T21:21:54.570" Score="9" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/156522/45088&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; about spells that are on the ranger spell list and not on the druid one had some contention early on, but its voting has settled down now. Some were saying that it was easily researchable, while others were saying it was not and therefore valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this bounded list question acceptable in the Role-playing games stack exchange? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45088" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2019-09-26T01:41:36.060" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T17:20:14.513" Title="Is a question asking about a specific list on topic or not?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9464" CreationDate="2019-09-25T23:46:12.613" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Bounded list questions are currently on-topic&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that doesn't necessarily make them 'good' questions. But 'good' is also a very subjective thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some, these may be akin to &amp;quot;read the book to me&amp;quot; as there is no expert analysis needed, just time spent to parse and list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Folks can think &amp;quot;Hey, I like this, it's useful&amp;quot; and give it a +1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others may think &amp;quot;Hey, this person is just asking us to do the work for them&amp;quot; and give it a -1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one is right or wrong. It has nothing to do with how simple or how difficult the task is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key is just in whether or not it's a bounded list (and even that is a bit subjective), but ultimately you can ask bounded list questions here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bigger concern is that those lists may become out of date upon the publication of new materials that could add to it. And that's where it's frustrating because few of those answerers return and or/know to update their answer. And then you've got incorrect answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How to create the necessary bounds&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They key in making this on-topic is in defining your bounds sufficiently that it is not an endless list. That means asking for answers to contain all the options and specifying what options are available and what aren't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keeping it loose on either send will lead to unbounded or partial answers that have no differentiation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But answers should be complete&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with bounded lists is that it is easy to just give a couple of examples and call it an answer. I do not agree with that. If you are going to answer a list question, the list should be complete. Otherwise would represent an incomplete answer and it becomes impossible to differentiate between multiple partial answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T17:20:14.513" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T17:20:14.513" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9466" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-26T14:35:32.720" Score="9" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this question:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/156818/should-i-allow-a-pcs-spells-to-affect-a-very-large-vehicle&quot;&gt;Should I allow a PC&amp;#39;s spells to affect a very large space vehicle?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;They ask about balance and how it relates to some mechanics from the 5th Edition D&amp;amp;D mod (addon?) &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/190188/Ultramodern5-5th-Edition&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Ultramodern 5e&lt;/a&gt;, and actually includes additional rules from &lt;a href=&quot;https://espergenesis.alligatoralleyentertainment.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Esper Genesis&lt;/a&gt; (a 3rd party source for space combat).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this all properly contained under the 5e tag for the question, or should we also include other tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ultramodern-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ultramodern-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ultramodern-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/esper-genesis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;esper-genesis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;esper-genesis&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or maybe even just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e-3rdparty&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e-3rdparty&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e-3rdparty&lt;/a&gt; (exact verbiage up for debate) to cover everything?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-27T00:39:04.860" LastActivityDate="2019-09-27T00:39:04.860" Title="Should we have tags for Ultramodern 5e and Esper Genesis?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9468" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9466" CreationDate="2019-09-26T19:21:19.343" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sure, add the tags. Tags are free and useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we have three questions about Ultramodern, that’s two more than are needed to justify that tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We have plenty of tags that started out their existence on just one question, and never gained more than a handful. There’s no harm in creating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/esper-genesis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;esper-genesis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;esper-genesis&lt;/a&gt;, and it might or might not grow, like any new tag.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-09-26T19:21:19.343" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9469" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-26T23:18:41.557" Score="9" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question recently had the &quot;firearms&quot; tag added to it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119958/whats-the-expected-benefit-of-the-second-pistol&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the expected benefit of the second pistol?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't object, but now it shows up as the first tag, and the title (in the window and, IIRC, in digests) is &quot;Firearms - What's the expected benefit of the second pistol?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a lot less useful than having one the system tags in front, given that it's a &lt;em&gt;highly&lt;/em&gt; system-specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried reordering the tags but the system seems to automatically put the biggest tag first. Is there a fix for this besides &quot;ask 50 more S&amp;amp;V questions&quot; or &quot;remove the least useful tag?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-27T00:40:47.637" LastActivityDate="2019-09-27T13:46:28.190" Title="Tags eclipsing system tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9469" CreationDate="2019-09-27T09:44:14.757" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a possible workaround which is including the tag in the title. Looking at this &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/72692/which-tag-is-added-to-the-page-title&quot;&gt;main meta post&lt;/a&gt;, it seems that one of the two most popular tags is used in the page title. If one of them is part of the question title, the other one is used in the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried editing the question to title to &quot;What's the benefit of using two &lt;strong&gt;firearms&lt;/strong&gt;?&quot; and indeed the displayed page title was changed to &quot;&quot;blades in the dark - What's the benefit of using two firearms?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally this isn't a perfect solution but at least in this particular question it seems good enough (assuming this question title or a similar one with the word &quot;firearms&quot; is ok) and something useful to keep in mind&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2019-09-27T10:02:02.230" LastActivityDate="2019-09-27T10:02:02.230" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9469" CreationDate="2019-09-27T12:24:32.910" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Don't try to manage the tag featured in the page title, or which tag comes first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't manage those very well and they will usually be a bit wrong or weird. Finagling the tags to try to make sure the right one will show up where you want it will in all likelihood wind up making the question itself worse somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just apply the tags, let the system do its thing and if it picks the wrong tag to emphasise, let it be and move on to other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In an ideal world we'd be able to pick a primary tag or pin system tags to the start, but we can't, and we shouldn't try to do workarounds on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-09-27T13:46:28.190" LastActivityDate="2019-09-27T13:46:28.190" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9472" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-29T03:35:02.757" Score="4" ViewCount="106" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are currently 9 questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/patron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;patron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;patron&lt;/a&gt; and all of them are also tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt;. Do we really need a separate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/patron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;patron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;patron&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-09-29T04:05:20.677" LastActivityDate="2019-10-29T05:01:57.070" Title="Should the [patron] tag be merged with the [warlock] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9472" CreationDate="2019-09-29T03:41:48.043" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we need a [patron] tag for questions that aren't about warlocks (for instance, wealthy patrons of adventuring parties), so no, we shouldn't merge the two, we should remove [patron] from the existing warlock questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastActivityDate="2019-09-29T03:41:48.043" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9474" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-09-29T03:46:24.230" Score="6" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have accidentally misspelled &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pronunciation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pronunciation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pronunciation&lt;/a&gt; and thus created a meaningless &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pronounciation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pronounciation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pronounciation&lt;/a&gt; tag. I do not know how to (and probably do not have the privileges to) delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apologies to the moderators for increasing their load. :-(&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-10-07T09:25:11.060" LastActivityDate="2019-10-07T09:25:11.060" Title="Please delete the misspelled [pronounciation] tag" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9475" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-01T06:21:00.607" Score="7" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/61534&quot;&gt;improved an edit&lt;/a&gt; from the suggested edits queue and I am trying to work out if I did the right thing. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157020/48759&quot;&gt;original question&lt;/a&gt; is by a new user with 1 reputation. It was closed by Rubiksmoose for lacking a system/edition. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/157020/2&quot;&gt;The edit&lt;/a&gt; added a lot of good information and clarified the question, however it was done by another new user with 1 reputation. (Now 3 by the approved edit).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me it seems clear that the edit was made by the OP and they have accidentally made multiple accounts. (I left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157020/sneak-attack-on-whirlwind-attack#comment408986_157020&quot;&gt;a comment&lt;/a&gt; to let them know). My reasoning is that the edit clearly contains information that is was impossible to know without being the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know by approved/improving the edit I was in a grey area but I choose to do it in the name of newby friendliness since it wouldn't be easy to explain to them &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; the edits were rejected without causing frustration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am also concerns that I may have inadvertently approved the high-jacking of a user's first question and causing the negative first impression that was the very thing I was trying to avoid. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should I have done here?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-02T12:27:33.233" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T12:27:33.233" Title="How to handle this new user accidentally making multiple accounts and suggesting edits to their own question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|new-users|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9475" CreationDate="2019-10-01T06:35:57.567" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've rolled back the suggested edit, as it's not clear whether the suggested edit was by the same user that made the original post. While you might be right that it is the same user, you yourself have realized it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be a different user &quot;hijacking&quot; the post inadvertently in an overzealous attempt to improve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because it's not obvious whether it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; the same user, it should essentially be considered &quot;guessing&quot; until the querent can confirm one way or another. If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59362/skillcheckrpg&quot;&gt;skillcheckrpg&lt;/a&gt; is indeed the accidentally-created second account of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59350/mitch&quot;&gt;Mitch&lt;/a&gt;, we can wait until the accounts are merged and then get clarification from the author (skillcheckrpg doesn't have the reputation to comment on questions by other users).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-10-01T06:35:57.567" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9477" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-01T14:07:08.583" Score="16" ViewCount="1029" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of the tools that diamond moderators have at their disposal is the post notice. We have several different types of post notice for example, this one, for posts that require additional citations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These appear below a post and call to action that it needs improvement. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9481/1204&quot;&gt;You can see this post for an example.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, we  currently don't have a post notice that handles the topic of subjective support well according to our principles of &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;. Those principles are also covered in these related metas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, we are forced to use other notices, such as the one above, to handle flags on problematic answers with regards to subjective support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our main goal for this notice is that it helps to inform people about our requirement that all posts are to be backed up and gives them information on how best to achieve that specifically for subjective content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that in mind, the moderators have gotten together and put together a proposal which I have put below in the answers. Please vote on it as you deem fit and comment with any suggestions. Additionally, if you have a better proposal (or some sort of other major point to make), feel free to offer it up as your own answer as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-10-09T13:40:29.457" LastActivityDate="2022-03-27T14:35:54.820" Title="Please give your feedback on a new &quot;Subjective Citation Needed&quot; post notice" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|post-notice|good-subjective|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9478" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2019-10-01T14:07:08.583" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Moderator proposal:&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All answers must be supported by citing evidence or experience. Please review &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;our citation expectations for subjective answers&lt;/a&gt;, as well as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;our guidance for asking and answering subjective questions&lt;/a&gt;. When recommending a course of action, you should cite experience (either your own, or someone else's) of how your recommended solution has worked out in actual practice so that users can judge whether it's an appropriate solution for their situation. Answers that recommend &amp;quot;try this&amp;quot; without any citation may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-01T14:07:08.583" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2019-10-01T14:54:25.750" Score="32" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I do not like the assumption that answers are not drawing on experience.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My experience with being pestered about explicitly certifying that my answer is drawn from my own experience is that I don't like it.  That practice has mostly put me off answering questions.  Additionally, it has not led to positive interactions with mods or other users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Evidence of discord from being prodded exists in comments.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's difficult to find previous cases (even from my own answers) of apparent discontent with answerers being prodded about this subject since it is usually in comments that get deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One example I could find of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/149328/revisions&quot;&gt;a case&lt;/a&gt; where someone else was put off got recorded in the revisions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some examples of good answers that don't explicitly certify personal experience&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good answer without attesting personal experience:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141031/gm-considerations-for-a-human-barbarian-toddler-pc/141032#141032&quot;&gt;GM Considerations for a Human Barbarian Toddler PC&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is essentially, &quot;here's something to try and stuff to watch out for&quot;, but does not include that the answerer has done something similar or experienced something similar.  It's a great answer without personal experience support explicitly stated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good answer without attesting personal experience citing questions that have good answers that do not attest personal experience&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137643/can-the-dungeon-master-have-a-player-character/137646#137646&quot;&gt;Can the dungeon master have a player character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best part of this answer is that the answerer &lt;strong&gt;has not&lt;/strong&gt; personally tried it, and wouldn't attempt it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For perspective, I've been running games for over 25 years, and I do not feel confident that I could pull off a DMPC successfully, even with all that experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is neither something that happened to them personally, and the references are to questions with answers that also do not refer to direct personal experience.  They're great answers even though they don't satisfy the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective answer criteria&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I find the post notice particularly unappealing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9481/38434&quot;&gt;Answer with example post notice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments requesting certifying personal experience with the threat of, &quot;okay but your answer might get deleted...&quot; to be sufficient to put me off answering questions as it is.  The post label, to me, appears to be a sticker implying &quot;this answer is bull****&quot;.  I do not expect it will contribute significantly to better answers, but I do expect it will not be well received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="38434" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T16:09:44.220" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T16:09:44.220" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2019-10-01T17:31:31.333" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Too Many Words for a post notice: be concise&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's do some liposuction on the proposed post notice:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers should be supported using evidence and/or experience.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;citation expectations for subjective answers&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;guidance for subjective answers&lt;/a&gt;. Please cite experience (your own or someone else's) to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer/9229#9229&quot;&gt;show how your solution worked&lt;/a&gt; out in practice. This lets users judge whether it fits their situation or not.  Answers that recommend &quot;try this&quot; without support may be removed.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may still be too many words, but you are trying to pack a lot into a post notice.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Here's a tighter version.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(thank you, @thedarkwanderer and @doppelgreener)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;supported&lt;/a&gt;. Please cite experience (your own or someone else's) to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9229/22566&quot;&gt;show how your solution worked out&lt;/a&gt; in practice.  This lets users judge whether it fits their situation or not.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;Answers without support&lt;/a&gt; may be removed.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that links can be embedded in these notes.  Here's a slightly tighter version; thank you @daze413. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;supported&lt;/a&gt; - you can use your experience or&#xA;  someone else's to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9229/22566&quot;&gt;show how your solution worked&lt;/a&gt; in practice. &#xA;  This helps users judge whether it fits their situation or not. &#xA;  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;Answers without support&lt;/a&gt; may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-10-20T22:07:20.897" LastActivityDate="2019-10-20T22:07:20.897" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9481" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2019-10-02T09:43:53.643" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;↑ Just to demonstrate: I have marked this post with our current “citation needed” post notice. It currently covers &lt;em&gt;objective&lt;/em&gt; citations perfectly well. The post notice we're asking about will be a sibling to this one, and will be applied by a moderator when a post strongly needs &lt;em&gt;subjective&lt;/em&gt; citation added (for example: “here, try this to fix your social issues, I've never seen it used but I'm sure it will work” when there's no credibility).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Historical note:&lt;/strong&gt; The text of this post notice has changed since this post was originally made. You can find the original text of the post notice at the time this post was made quoted in the question above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-03-27T14:35:54.820" LastActivityDate="2022-03-27T14:35:54.820" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9482" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about subjective questions on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange (either in general, or about specific questions) and about how to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9483" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" Score="0" Body="For questions about subjective questions on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange (either in general, or about specific questions) and about how to answer them." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T11:34:08.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9484" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-02T13:54:03.613" Score="7" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/156550/8610&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; about how to use the Sense Motive skill is marked as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/62166/8610&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, 5th Edition&lt;/em&gt; about how to use the Insight skill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While these systems may seem similar enough and the advice offered by the answers  may be of interest to the &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; question's asker, &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; remains its own rule set.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the site suffers if questions about &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; game system are considered duplicates of questions about &lt;em&gt;entirely different&lt;/em&gt; game systems. Also, I think a user's question about a system deserves to be addressed uniquely by experts in that system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can this question be reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; I suspect that a reason for closing the question as a duplicate may've been the assumption that there was no&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;answer to the question therefore redirecting the asker—and all subsequent readers of that question—to that&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D 5e &lt;em&gt;question was seen as a favor, a way of giving the asker at least some advice on how to handle this unsolvable problem. However, if the problem&lt;/em&gt; is &lt;em&gt;unsolvable in&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;then the asker deserves to know that, and an answer should say as much… then that answer could direct the asker to that&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D 5e &lt;em&gt;question and, perhaps, other questions on the site, too.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Full Disclosure:&lt;/strong&gt; I think that&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;question has a separate&lt;/em&gt; Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;answer, but that answer involves the asker's table to undergo a paradigm shift that the group may find disrupts their current playstyle.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T19:41:22.170" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T19:41:22.170" Title="Can this question about the Sense Motive skill be reopened?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7669" CreationDate="2019-10-02T17:53:07.093" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;How would you like it if you asked &amp;quot;Can I mount my electrical outlet upside down?&amp;quot;  And my answer was&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, &lt;strong&gt;if and only if you comply with NEC 216.15 Note 3&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(nothing further)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then you're like &amp;quot;WTH, why should I have to spend $125 on a copy of the Electrical Code?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we say &amp;quot;Because it's an essential resource for anyone doing electrical work.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you say &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I am changing a fracking outlet.&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You'd be right&lt;/strong&gt;.  Just because someone wants to flip an outlet, doesn't mean they want to design sitewide wiring for a refinery, which is what NEC is mainly for.  It's perfectly easy to write answers they don't need the book to understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Inclusivity is the biggest reason&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are the meta-messages we would send.  &amp;quot;This is a closed club.  &lt;em&gt;Pay the club dues, OR GET OUT&lt;/em&gt;.&amp;quot;  There are bona-fide reasons why some people shouldn't do DIY home repairs, but &amp;quot;possession of a secret decoder ring&amp;quot; is not one of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even when ThreePhaseEel and I are having arcane discussions about the fine points of Rapid Shutdown (render-safe for solar panels so firemen don't get shocked, see how I told you what it was instead of excluding you?), we still use our Fair Use rights to quote the relevant snippets for all to see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we have the option of making our forum very hostile to folks just entering home repair, or keep people out of the deep insider conversations we are having...  and we make a point not to.  And nobody told us to do that.  Why?  Hmm, I suppose because our core drive is to share our passion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;...Although there's also a big problem with obsolescence&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's an SE-wide policy, and it's for two reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, obviously, is &lt;strong&gt;link rot&lt;/strong&gt;.  We too can link the official NEC site, however &lt;strong&gt;the site can change their layout anytime they want&lt;/strong&gt;. And my experience is that webmasters reorganize content at least as often as they change platforms, and only about 5% of them support old links after a reorganization. So there you go, d20 lol.  The problem is, if you don't roll a natural 20, &lt;strong&gt;every link on the stack breaks at once&lt;/strong&gt;. It becomes totally impracticable to hand-edit every one, and nobody ever bothers to write an automator. Which you'd have to run everytime, and that's often not even possible even if you do build it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, &lt;strong&gt;the rules change&lt;/strong&gt;.  You're going &amp;quot;There is no NEC 216!&amp;quot;  &lt;em&gt;Yeah, whoopsadaisy, they removed that rule. Nevvermind!&lt;/em&gt; And as you certainly know, in D&amp;amp;D, the rules change &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation: Quote &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; cite&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certainly, quote the essential snippets of text.  This is allowed under the &lt;em&gt;Fair Use&lt;/em&gt; doctrine of copyright law, in fact, it's an open-and-shut case.  When you quote a section, definitely attribute it, of course, with a reference to the content (version # and findable reference point ideal, e.g. &amp;quot;NEC 310.15&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;5E MM under displacer beast&amp;quot;; URL to dndbeyond secondary).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="29852" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-03T14:59:36.773" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9486" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is for support and discussion of votes to reopen and related privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For discussions of our canonical and custom close reasons, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/close-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;close-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;close-reasons&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For posts raising meta discussions about specific closed questions,&#xA;or about the concept of a closed question in general, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For questions and discussions about the closing process itself, see&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/closing-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closing-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closing-questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For discussion of votes to close, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vote-to-close&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vote-to-close&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vote-to-close&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9487" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" Score="0" Body="This tag is for support and discussion of votes to reopen and related privileges." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" LastActivityDate="2019-10-02T19:41:12.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9488" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-03T02:51:29.083" Score="11" ViewCount="375" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=wish%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a &lt;strong&gt;lot&lt;/strong&gt; of questions&lt;/a&gt; about the spell Wish across various D&amp;amp;D editions, largely of the form, &quot;I thought of X, can the Wish spell do that?&quot; or &quot;One of my players cast Wish and asked for X, can it do that? What should happen?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we would benefit from either a single cross-edition canonical question, or one canonical question per edition, that new instances of these questions can be closed as duplicates of. This could then have a solid community wiki response covering both what Wish &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do (anything) as well as what the DM should probably &lt;em&gt;allow&lt;/em&gt; the Wish spell to do (nothing too crazy).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does the community feel about this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:27:00.957" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:27:00.957" Title="Should we have a canonical &quot;Can the Wish spell do X?&quot; question? [2019]" Tags="|discussion|questions|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9489" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9488" CreationDate="2019-10-03T03:10:50.477" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;For me: No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think its pointless because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;OPs are unlikely to find it - there is no way that this &quot;canonical&quot; question could stand out in a search from all the myriad of non-canonical ones.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;it seems inherently too broad since the list of things Wish can do is boundless&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;it can't have a canonical answer and so is primarily opinion based&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For you: You do you&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to ask it, ask it: questions are free.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2019-10-03T03:10:50.477" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9490" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9491" CreationDate="2019-10-04T17:38:28.793" Score="8" ViewCount="191" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wendy's has released an RPG called &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.feastoflegends.com/images/Feast_Of_Legends.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Feast of Legends&lt;/a&gt;. It's a hilarious and incredibly good parody of D&amp;amp;D but it's also a legitimate RPG in its own right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we have a tag for it or just enjoy the joke and move on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-09T06:06:45.353" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T06:06:45.353" Title="Should we have a tag for Wendy's Feast of Legends RPG?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9490" CreationDate="2019-10-04T17:51:31.197" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;If someone asks a question about it, we can have a tag about it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have tags for other jokey systems (or at least one, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-the-dragoning&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-the-dragoning&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-the-dragoning&lt;/a&gt;), but tags can't exist (for more than a day) without at least one question with that tag. So if someone asks a question about Feast of Legends, then the tag can be created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-04T19:32:27.000" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9492" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9493" CreationDate="2019-10-07T09:38:46.540" Score="5" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157399/35259&quot;&gt;Has there been a Kraken patron for the Warlock class in Unearthed Arcana?&lt;/a&gt;, the answer to which was that this Kraken warlock patron wasn't UA, but was rather part of Mike Mearls' Happy Fun Hour (HFH). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I like to keep up to date with the new UA class archetypes that come out, and after what I believe was the first class archetype to come out of HFH, the Order Domain, was then reproduced in a UA article (then released officially in GGtR, but that's besides the point here), I then stopped paying attention to HFH, assuming any new archetypes would similarly appear in UA (since videos are more awkward to watch at work when I only have so long at lunch, and glancing over a pdf is much quicker and easier).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly I was mistaken in this. I'm now wondering what other class archetypes have been created in HRH that I am not aware of. I want to ask a question like &lt;strong&gt;&quot;What are all the class archetypes Mike Mearls has made in HFH?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; (which I'm guessing might be a list question, and one that will require updating if/when he creates more; unless HFH eventually stopped running, then maybe this problem would be mitigated), or perhaps &lt;strong&gt;&quot;Is there a (legal) website somewhere that keeps track of new class archtypes created in HFH?&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; (which is probably a shopping question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an on-topic variation of this question, or is RPG.SE simply not the place to ask such a thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-07T19:42:27.500" LastActivityDate="2019-10-07T19:42:27.500" Title="Should I ask a question about listing content from Mike Mearls' Happy Fun Hour?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9492" CreationDate="2019-10-07T09:53:53.463" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Your first question is probably fine&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9465/48759&quot;&gt;Bounded List questions are on-topic&lt;/a&gt; and this question would by definition be bounded. It's probably not a great question and I don't know how popular it would be with vote (I expect at least a few downvotes) but it shouldn't get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The version of the question that asks for a website is definitely a shopping question and would be closed. If such a site exists it should come up in an answer to the first version of the question. Ask about the problem, not your solution to the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you have done a good job of making this a clear and answerable question based on this meta. So long as you go with the first version of the question I don't foresee any major issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-07T09:53:53.463" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9494" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-07T15:41:42.230" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that we tend to add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; tag (for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions, anyway) to any question that also has the tag of a specific adventure, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/out-of-the-abyss&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;out-of-the-abyss&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;out-of-the-abyss&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tomb-of-annihilation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tomb-of-annihilation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tomb-of-annihilation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just made such an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/157414/revisions&quot;&gt;edit&lt;/a&gt; to add this tag to a question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/out-of-the-abyss&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;out-of-the-abyss&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;out-of-the-abyss&lt;/a&gt;, and then wondered what value me doing that actually added to the question. I think it was the right thing to do, but I couldn't tell you why besides &quot;that's what I've seen on other questions&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; a meta-tag, or am I just not using it right, or is there more value to such tagging/edits such as mine that I'm not seeing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-07T19:44:50.897" LastActivityDate="2019-10-07T19:44:50.897" Title="Is [published-adventures] a meta-tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9494" CreationDate="2019-10-07T16:17:46.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; is not only used on questions with tags for the specific adventure; see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/72549/23970&quot;&gt;Where is Sturnheim?&lt;/a&gt;, for example. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One example, though, isn't much of an argument, so let's take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bpublished-adventures%5D+-%5Bdnd-5e%5D+is%3Aq+closed%3Ano&quot;&gt;160+ other open questions about published adventures outside of D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;. (D&amp;amp;D 5e being the place where we've most-commonly seen individual adventures' tags.) Given that many questions, I think the correct frame to approach the tag is not &quot;do we need it?&quot; but rather &quot;is it doing harm?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;harms of a meta tag&lt;/a&gt; include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;acting as a &quot;tag-tax,&quot; crowding out other, useful tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;communicating &quot;secret information&quot; that wouldn't be obvious to newcomers, causing friction with established users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;placing restrictions on an &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt;, rather than describing the content of the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see any of those happening here, personally. I took a quick look at the list linked above, and very few (maybe a dozen) of them even have 5 tags on them. We haven't seen metas trying to clarify what is &lt;em&gt;meant&lt;/em&gt; by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt;. And we (or I, at least) haven't been having to clean up lots of back-and-forth comment chains where the tag is causing friction between questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Though I'd be glad to learn if I'm wrong, so that we can do something about it. Speak up if you see evidence contrary to what I'm describing!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2019-10-07T16:17:46.893" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9496" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-10-08T06:12:39.953" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Cheese and fast food go perfectly together.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the answer isn't really &amp;quot;cheesy&amp;quot;, the premise of the question - about Wendy's promotional &lt;em&gt;Feast of Legends&lt;/em&gt; RPG - certainly is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157433/how-can-i-discourage-gluttony-while-still-granting-buffs&quot;&gt;How can I discourage gluttony while still granting buffs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Wendy's Feast of Legends, characters gain bonuses for foods eaten by their players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The game explicitly mentions that buffs stack and there are a total 6 different food items (briefly: burger, chicken, frosty, drink, fries, salad).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A particularly health-reckless power-gamer could gorge themselves on in order to gain limitless bonuses. Of course the intersection between power gamers and players of Wendy's Feast of Legends should be fairly small, but even so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some might call this idea... dangerously cheesy. (Wrong brand, I know!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-08T06:12:39.953" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9497" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-08T11:56:15.383" Score="13" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/157484/40101&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I made an answer and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/36850/illustro&quot;&gt;@illustro&lt;/a&gt; also provided an answer which includes information that I feel would improve my answer (I made a similar point in my answer, but his answer provided validation to that point).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't want to 'steal his thunder' by appropriating the important part of his answer, but am wondering what the correct approach to this is?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-08T19:42:48.180" LastActivityDate="2019-10-08T22:43:57.963" Title="Should I update my answer with information from someone else's answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9498" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9497" CreationDate="2019-10-08T12:33:22.547" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Improvement is better.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really think that the information that @illustro pointed you to would improve your answer, definitely incorporate it. We want to create the best resource possible for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244534/311001&quot;&gt;millions who will come after the original querent&lt;/a&gt;, and we know eyeballs drop off exponentially as they travel down the page. So, by all means: get the best info into your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=user%3A23970+is%3Aa+thanks&quot;&gt;cases like this&lt;/a&gt; I've made explicit reference to the answer that helped me improve mine, along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's my thinking. Here's my explanation. @illustro points out in [their answer] (link) that &amp;quot;much better evidence here!&amp;quot; (Thanks, illustro! And you, Dear Reader, should definitely upvote their answer if you liked mine. I did!) Continuing my answer....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-08T13:06:14.733" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9497" CreationDate="2019-10-08T22:43:57.963" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, most complete answer &gt; less complete answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone else's answer highlighted something you forgot to mention or expanded on a point your own answer made its perfectly fine to also incorporate that information in an edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only unacceptable way to do this is to simply carbon copy another answer entirely. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2019-10-08T22:43:57.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9500" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-09T13:39:59.237" Score="17" ViewCount="684" Body="&lt;p&gt;The idea of Good Subjective questions and answers is core to how Stack Exchange works and is essentially what allows RPG.se to exist. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; that sets the broad outline for how that idea manifests itself and generally how we moderate it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Answering Subjective Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blog post &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; is the gold&#xA;standard for understanding how to make good on topic answers to&#xA;subjective questions. The heart of it is using the Back It Up!&#xA;principle, which states that you should only answer based on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you &lt;strong&gt;personally&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something you can &lt;strong&gt;back up&lt;/strong&gt; with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, &amp;quot;happened to you personally&amp;quot; means real play experience. We&#xA;understand that some people believe that given their wide experience&#xA;in games they think they can tell someone the right technique or&#xA;system or solution to use for their particular need even though they&#xA;haven't done it themselves - but when everyone does that, it leads to&#xA;opinion-laden chaos.  &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Good Subjective&amp;quot; is constructive and is based&#xA;on experience and expertise.  &amp;quot;Bad Subjective&amp;quot; is speculative and is&#xA;based on conjecture and opinion.&lt;/strong&gt;  Speculative answers will be&#xA;downvoted, commented on (&amp;quot;Back It Up!&amp;quot;), and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, however, we have noticed more and more friction about how moderation around subjective answers is handled. Users, both old and new are noticing changing norms on the site in how the GSBS principles are being moderated or enforced by the community or diamond moderators, and some disagreements surrounding this enforcement have arisen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that we are in the process of getting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9477/please-give-your-feedback-on-a-new-subjective-citation-needed-post-notice&quot;&gt;a new post notice&lt;/a&gt; that we can specifically use for subjective answers, and given some of you raised objection over this issue there, we figured now would be a good time to hear from the community and see if any kind of course correction in how we are handling such posts is needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we want to hear from you: how are we doing here and how can we do better? If there are course corrections for the community and/or diamond moderators to make, what are they?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-18T13:35:35.343" Title="Request for feedback on Good Subjective moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|good-subjective|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-09T14:19:41.337" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should promote our requirements for Good Subjective support&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I very much understand that this is a hot-button issue, but I am also a strong believer in why we should be backing up subjective responses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I do understand that many folks here have a lot of experience that they can bring to an answer, there remains a difference between generating ideas from experience and providing supported answers to help guide someone with an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, I have submitted answers that aren't supported and were well received. But as I spent more time on the site, I came to understand the purpose of why we should still support our ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that while we can come up with good ideas from our experience, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and be able to provide better direction to folks asking questions. Even when I was in consulting and I worked at a place where there was a lot of institutional knowledge and experience, we were still required to back up our recommendations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the same thing here. If we're going to suggest a course of action, we should be able to speak to it beyond the idea. Providing feedback on how the recommendation had went for us (or how we've seen it used) bridges the gap between an idea suggestion and an idea recommendation. I don't want to give unsupported recommendations because I think it's less valuable. It's much more valuable to provide both a recommendation and information on how it went. THis helps identify potential pitfalls as well as just the idea, which I believe improves the quality of our answers and our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But mostly, stackexchange does have direction on supporting good subjective. I guess we can opt not to enforce or encourage it, but there's excellent reasons for doing so and I don't see this as something we should just ignore and pretend doesn't exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So how do we back things up?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those who do not agree with the recommendations on supporting good subjective as discussed in previous metas, what is the recommendation for how to support?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am all for looking at something fresh, but the complaints I seem to read are that they don't agree with the current good subjective supports. I have yet to see a recommendation on other support options and would very much like to see that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's not all about personal experience&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Personal experience&lt;/strong&gt; as a form of good subjective support is one piece of it. But nowhere discussed has it been the only - but that is what a lot of folks see it as. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9229/23024&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; covers very well that various forms of good subjective support that have been discussed and personal experience is one of those, but not the only one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Focusing solely on that and assuming it's the requirement or gold standard for good subjective is doing how we can look at good subjective support as a whole a disservice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T18:36:20.400" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-09T15:30:36.203" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Good subjective bad subjective is sufficient for a good answer, but not necessary.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I find getting prodded on the issue unpleasant&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As detailed in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9479/38434&quot;&gt;previous answer&lt;/a&gt; about this issue.  At least a few others find it unpleasant as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some examples of good answers that don't explicitly certify personal experience&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good answer without attesting personal experience:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141031/gm-considerations-for-a-human-barbarian-toddler-pc/141032#141032&quot;&gt;GM Considerations for a Human Barbarian Toddler PC&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is essentially, &quot;here's something to try and stuff to watch out for&quot;, but does not include that the answerer has done something similar or experienced something similar.  It's a great answer without personal experience support explicitly stated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good answer without attesting personal experience citing questions that have good answers that do not attest personal experience&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137643/can-the-dungeon-master-have-a-player-character/137646#137646&quot;&gt;Can the dungeon master have a player character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best part of this answer is that the answerer &lt;strong&gt;has not&lt;/strong&gt; personally tried it, and wouldn't attempt it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For perspective, I've been running games for over 25 years, and I do not feel confident that I could pull off a DMPC successfully, even with all that experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is neither something that happened to them personally, and the references are to questions with answers that also do not refer to direct personal experience.  They're great answers even though they don't satisfy the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good subjective answer criteria&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Some other good answers that do not meet the good subjective bad subjective criteria.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141938/how-do-i-prevent-a-homebrew-grappling-hook-feature-from-trivializing-tomb-of-ann/141946#141946&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; advice on a homebrew hook-shot equipment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/140731/38434&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; about avoiding playing a character that you don't like.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135957/38434&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; on giving non-accusatory feedback to a DM.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I find the post notice particularly unappealing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9481/38434&quot;&gt;Answer with example post notice&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comments requesting certifying personal experience with the threat of, &quot;okay but your answer might get deleted...&quot; to be sufficient to put me off answering questions as it is.  The post label, to me, appears to be a sticker implying &quot;this answer is bull****&quot;.  I do not expect it will contribute significantly to better answers, but I do expect it will not be well received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Misapplied Post Notice&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using a post notice is likely to result in it being misapplied or remaining after the body of the question not longer has the issue. At the time of writing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143335/how-can-my-new-character-avoid-being-a-role-playing-handicap-to-the-party/143340#143340&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; has a gsbs post notice, yet states clearly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;...it's a problem that's, by my experience on similar issues, much better solved by discussion than by invoking in-universe means for punishment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The post notice was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Moderate moderately&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The good subjective bad subjective guide is &lt;em&gt;a way&lt;/em&gt; to craft a good answer.  It is not &lt;em&gt;the only way&lt;/em&gt;.  Do not moderate as if it was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38434" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T13:11:25.223" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T13:11:25.223" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-09T17:27:51.780" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't 'enforce it' but do recommend it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really like it when I see a question end with a link to the good subjective / bad subjective post (indeed I find links to 'how to stackexchange good' content are brilliant), and have seen some really good answers which have clearly benefited from that advice. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Equally I have seen answers which don't cite any evidence, but show a clear understanding of the problem and are answered more from life experience than anything else (And I think that is fine).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would suggest 'this answer could be improved by following this advice: link' rather than any veiled 'do what we say or your post may be deleted' threat, and let the voting system deal with the answers as they stand (as is the solution for other quality issues).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I would NOT like to see is any action that leads to lower quality answers, and would willingly sacrifice all the good but not cited answers in exchange if it came to that. I wasn't around when the 'rule' was first agreed, so I don't know how bad things were or how effective it has been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I added a suggested moderator notice on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9504/40101&quot;&gt;other thread&lt;/a&gt; to cover this option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="40101" LastEditDate="2019-10-09T18:18:14.667" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T18:18:14.667" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2019-10-09T17:33:40.403" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;An advisory rather than a warning&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This answer could be improved if you were able to cite experience (your own or someone else's) to help users judge whether it fits their situation or not. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer/9229#9229&quot;&gt;This post&lt;/a&gt; provides excellent advice on how to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-09T19:09:12.780" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T19:09:12.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-09T18:03:02.427" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;The purpose of GS/BS is to enable meaningful voting behaviors. That’s it: to make sure that the Stack Exchange system actually works, actually filters out noise and highlights strong signals. Can an expert judge the quality of this answer and how well it will likely help those who have the question? Or is impossible to judge because it’s just an expression of preference (which might suggest something wrong with the question, but is a bad answer in any event), or because it’s baseless speculation, or because it’s armchair hypotheticals? Then downvote, request for more back-up to the claims made, and sure, put a post notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the friction isn’t from such answers. The friction comes from people getting pedantic about &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; people enable meaningful voting. It’s unnecessary, and more than sometimes, it’s rude. If an answer thoroughly details how to handle a situation, it is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; truly necessary to end it with “and yes, I have done this myself.” Answers that come from experience and expertise are generally &lt;em&gt;pretty easy to distinguish&lt;/em&gt; from answers that don’t. Ultimately, take a step back and just ask yourself, does an answer convince you that it’s coming from a place of knowledge and that this recommendation is a strong and useful solution? If so, upvote, if no, downvote, and if you have some confusion—you can downvote for being confused by an answer, answers should be clear—ask for clarification. Make suggestions, offer constructive criticism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But don’t waste everyone’s time with “This all seems like great advice that really would help in this situation, but &lt;em&gt;you have to explicitly say you’ve actually done this&lt;/em&gt;.” That isn’t improving the site. And yes, that sentiment is &lt;strong&gt;precisely&lt;/strong&gt; the kind of thing I feel like I am seeing more and more often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-10-09T18:03:02.427" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9506" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9513" CreationDate="2019-10-09T23:31:06.633" Score="10" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a question for moderators as I'm not sure how else to ask this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There have been the following posts recently: &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9477&quot;&gt;Please give your feedback on a new “Subjective Citation Needed” post notice&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9500&quot;&gt;Request for feedback on Good Subjective moderation&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; and some of the things mentioned there seem to clash with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696&quot;&gt;the policy on citing in an answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first linked question and its answers the following comments were made by moderators&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW we would be only attaching this post notice &lt;strong&gt;where additional citation is needed&lt;/strong&gt;, like someone making a subjective suggestion with poor credibility [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] This post notice is &lt;strong&gt;specifically for the kind of subjective answers that would be improved by citing evidence or experience&lt;/strong&gt;, but fail to do so [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However the question from that same post states (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our main goal for this notice is that it helps to inform people about our &lt;strong&gt;requirement that &lt;em&gt;all posts&lt;/em&gt; are to be backed up&lt;/strong&gt; and gives them information on how best to achieve that specifically for subjective content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The section &amp;quot;What are the citation expectations for Subjective answers?&amp;quot; from the question &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; states (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means when you provide a subjective solution you believe will resolve the situation, &lt;strong&gt;we expect that you cite analogous experience&lt;/strong&gt; of how it has worked out in actual practice — your own experience or someone else's [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally another comment by a moderator states (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something I've been thinking I missed in the citation expectations meta is that it should be clear from reading it the user has experience, &lt;strong&gt;and sometimes, that's evident without explicit citation of &amp;quot;here's how this has worked out in practice.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; It's hard to sift truth from truthiness sometimes but &lt;strong&gt;we've historically considered this scenario okay.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to showcase a disconnect between what is &lt;em&gt;theoretically&lt;/em&gt; accepted as evidence and what is &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; accepted as evidence. Another example is answers that say &amp;quot;Talk to your GM&amp;quot;. It (I sincerely hope) is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; necessary to say &amp;quot;Talk to your GM, trust me, I've talked to a GM before&amp;quot;. That said, I am unsure when exactly it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; recommended that answers be backed up because the comments and policy statements above clash (or at least I see them as clashing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe guidelines on the post notice's intended use-cases would be helpful in allowing others (including myself) to form a proper opinion of it. When would the Good Subjective post notice be used? When/How is a question deemed needing of citation/experience or likely to be improved by citation/experience?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T16:38:03.880" Title="Confusion regarding the &quot;Good Subjective&quot; post notice and the policy on backing up answers" Tags="|discussion|subjective-questions|citations|post-notice|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-09T23:54:41.270" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have been thinking about this issue for a long time, because it has irritated me for a long time.  But I have not been aggressive about it (by my definition of aggressive, anyway-- your mileages may vary) because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I do understand the desire, and agree in large part agree with the need, to prevent the site from degenerating into a freeform brainstorming environment, but also,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I do not yet have a comprehensive or a workable suggestion, let alone a suggestion I think is both, and &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't like being the crazed iconoclast, burning things down without having something put to in their place. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the subject has come up, because, at the time of this writing, the top &quot;constructive&quot; answer and the top &quot;frame challenging&quot; answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9477/18269&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; are currently tied.  And that, only because the frame challenge has a lot of downvotes on it, too.  So with that said, let me at least try to articulate the nature of my irritation, in the hopes it sparks some good ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The Anecdote Tax&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that there is no formal requirement for experience to be in the form of anecdotes, and I know that there is no policy that experience MUST BE cited in the form of an anecdote.  That said, that's the way it can come across in the aggregate.  I don't think this can be in much dispute as a simple fact, since there is at least one case of self-deletion of a good (in my opinion) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/156354/18269&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; due to the perceived need to share enough details to constitute an anecdote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I understand that comments in that thread (now moved to chat) were not necessarily meant to say &quot;Details and anecdote, or nothing!&quot; but a neutral read of that thread tells me that nevertheless that is the overall impression that answerer got.  That is why I made the comment I did (that GSBS answers do not require specific details or anecdotes) because I thought it would be detrimental for the site to see the answer deleted.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8697/18269&quot;&gt;Guidelines/Community Wiki&lt;/a&gt; Are Unclear&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two relevant quotes from the same source:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not every claim you make will need citation. Many things we might say&#xA;  are common sense or common knowledge and nobody will request a&#xA;  citation for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And later:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This means when you provide a subjective solution you believe will&#xA;  resolve the situation, we expect that you cite analogous experience of&#xA;  how it has worked out in actual practice — your own experience or&#xA;  someone else's.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That both does (or nearly does) mandate detailed anecdotes, and also brushes aside the need to do so.  I cut off the first quote for effect, so let me quote the whole thing here, with what I believe to be a serious problem highlighted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Not every claim you make will need citation. Many things we might say&#xA;  are common sense or common knowledge and nobody will request a&#xA;  citation for them. For many things, however, nobody should have to&#xA;  take our word for it that what's being said is true; we need to show&#xA;  it is. &lt;strong&gt;If someone requests citation it's probably needed—revise your&#xA;  post to add that citation.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bolded text is what is trying to reconcile these two completely contradictory approaches, and I think it is fundamentally flawed.  I see no reason to automatically assume that every request for citation is a good and necessary request.  All it takes is one user who makes it his mission to ask for detail and citation on every perceived GSBS question and/or answer to collapse this Solomonic attempt to have the best of both worlds into the worst of one world.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;An Improper Focus On Noise Vs Signal, And On Mechanics-Like Policies&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose, I've gleaned from past reading here in meta, is to put a preponderance of effort (seemingly, all of it) on filtering noise-- noisy questions, noisy answers, noisy comments-- from signal.  (System working as intended!)  And the tendency that I have seen is a desire for perfect policies.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to suggest, without a chapter-length MathJAX-augmented dissertation, that the former is wrong-headed, when taken to extremes and that we are nearing the extremes now; and that the latter is futile.  We'll end up with less valuable signal-- enough less to be detrimental to the site.  I cite as evidence the situation above.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A Proposal, If I must&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe we can be a little slower on the trigger in insisting on detailed anecdotal references.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T00:46:56.587" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T00:46:56.587" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9488" CreationDate="2019-10-10T02:23:16.980" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t really care one way or the other, but for what it’s worth, my impression is that canonical answers to be used as dupe targets &lt;em&gt;never seem to work.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T02:23:16.980" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9510" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-10T08:04:45.160" Score="5" ViewCount="44" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157583/longbows-and-extra-attacks-for-5th-level-fighters&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; has a common problem where a new user is unfamiliar with the requirement to tag questions with the correct rules system (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;). The question was put on hold, but with the generic &quot;unclear what you're asking&quot; message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This resulted in the user adding a comment with additional information to clarify the specific problem, but the hold message did not address the real issue, which was the missing system tag. Another user gave the traditional welcome message comment and included the system-request, but the asker evidently did not notice the exhortation to tag the correct system (I suspect these sometimes get lost in the generic welcome message text, which is why I prefer to ask directly).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it technically possible on RPG.SE to use a custom hold message for the user case of &quot;please tag your system&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="40971" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T09:07:05.150" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T09:07:05.150" Title="Can we add a &quot;please tag your system&quot; on-hold message?" Tags="|feature-request|tags|close-reasons|game-systems|new-users|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2019-10-10T08:45:57.030" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7333" CreationDate="2019-10-10T09:46:09.977" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Coming back to this issue, &lt;strong&gt;I believe we need a custom on-hold message for questions with a missing system tag.&lt;/strong&gt; Two years later, it's one of our most common issues and perhaps the most common single reason why new questions are closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9510/can-we-add-a-please-tag-your-system-on-hold-message&quot;&gt;Can we add a &amp;quot;please tag your system&amp;quot; on-hold message?&lt;/a&gt;, a new user unfamiliar with the system tagging rules asked a question without stating their rules system, and it was put on hold. However, the user was given a generic on-hold message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How to Ask&lt;/a&gt; page for help clarifying this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user saw the on-hold message responded by giving more information, but didn't tag the system. Nothing in the prominent on-hold message or the How to Ask page asked the player which system they were using, and site rules forbid inferring it. A helpful user did give the generic welcome message and included a request for system tag, but this went unnoticed by the user, perhaps due a tendency to bury tag requests within a generic welcome message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have separate custom messages for closing off-topic questions about board/card games and video games, but I rarely see anyone make this mistake nowadays. In these situations, as I understand it, we could instead just move the question to the relevant RPG.SE site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Considerably more common is new RPG players, unfamiliar with the tag requirements, asking questions (usually about the latest edition of D&amp;amp;D) only to receive discouraging close votes and downvotes. We should communicate the site's needs as quickly and effectively as possible to help these new users get their question re-opened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T09:46:09.977" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9148" CreationDate="2019-10-10T10:07:07.417" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Please use consistent rules&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should encourage askers to use rules language in their homebrew material that is consistent with the language used by the core system. Questions with homebrew which is &quot;improperly&quot; written tend to (rightly IMO.) get closed as unclear. To help against unclear questions we should have a point to the tune of (thanks @Powerdork):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The intent of your material is often better conveyed when you follow the style guidelines and use the correct system terms of the game in question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T10:07:07.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9513" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9506" CreationDate="2019-10-10T11:41:25.353" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speaking for the citation expectations meta I wrote, something seems to have gotten lost in communication. That's on me, I should've made it clearer. Specifically in the second paragraph I say this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You do not need to cite every sentence, but citation of various statements and positions may be expected and requested by your fellow community members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By this I meant to defer to human judgement of when the practices in that meta needed to be followed. I didn't intend the post to establish comprehensive policy for every post ever. I expected it to be an explanation assistant conveying some of our practices: &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; someone will request you back up your post better, and &lt;em&gt;if they do,&lt;/em&gt; they can link that meta to help explain what's missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were going to be plenty of posts to which these exact citation expectations didn't apply because they already seemed very adequately backed up, so nobody would request the post follow those citation rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, y'know, looking at it with fresh eyes, I can totally see why it being non-comprehensive is a problem. D'oh. I need to revise it to acknowledge there's spaces where that exact subjective guidance isn't needed, and that the best way to determine if subjective advice is sufficiently backed up is, itself, subjective to human judgement, not whether an exact procedure and set of requirements has been fulfilled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our primary target is historically stuff like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5153/1204&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt; (TLDR: not if you just made it up on the spot without testing it does anything useful), or someone wandering into a social question advising to fix the problem with abusive behaviour, and stuff like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also expect the truthfulness and expertise of answers to be verifiable: none of us should expect to be taken purely at our word. Sometimes that means it needs citation, sometimes it's obvious just from reading the thing that you've &lt;em&gt;done&lt;/em&gt; the thing (usually because you're able to get into the &lt;em&gt;grit&lt;/em&gt; of the situation in a way only someone with experience can do), and that needs to be accounted for. Hence my intention that human judgement would come into whether a post needed to follow those guidelines or not: if nobody would ask such a post for citation, it probably doesn't need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-10-10T11:52:48.223" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T11:52:48.223" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9515" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-10T16:55:24.820" Score="1" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;There have been quite a few questions on Good Subjective answers and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696&quot;&gt;their policy&lt;/a&gt;, and I would like this one to avoid discussing what moderators are or aren't doing to enforce the &lt;em&gt;current&lt;/em&gt; policy. Instead I have found myself questioning said policy and wonder what changes (if any) should be made to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I'm out of place opening a question like this and should leave this to the moderators, if that is the case I will have no arguments against this question being removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I already asked the question &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9506&quot;&gt;Confusion regarding the “Good Subjective” post notice and the policy on backing up answers&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; which was answered and said answer contains the following quotes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I meant to defer to human judgement of when the practices in that meta needed to [...] be followed [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] There were going to be plenty of posts to which these exact citation expectations didn't apply because they already seemed very adequately backed up, so nobody would request the post follow those citation rules [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] There's spaces where [...] the best way to determine if subjective advice is sufficiently backed up is, itself, subjective to human judgement, not whether an exact procedure and set of requirements has been fulfilled [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] sometimes it's obvious just from reading the thing that you've done the thing (usually because you're able to get into the grit of the situation in a way only someone with experience can do), and that needs to be accounted for. Hence my intention that human judgement would come into whether a post needed to follow those guidelines or not [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These show that there are levels of human judgement and subjectivity in determining whether a subjective answer is or is not &amp;quot;good&amp;quot;. I believe this calls for a change to the policy to better show this. I believe my question linked above shows disconnect between when people &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; the policy/post-notice will be enforced and when it &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; will be. A good way to fix this, would be to update the policy in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the policy need to be updated? If it should be, how so?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, in the comments of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9501/36521&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to the question &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9500&quot;&gt;Request for feedback on Good Subjective moderation&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;, the following was stated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can you vote? Can you understand the answer’s suggestions and judge whether they are helpful or not? Then it’s backed up. It’s that simple. That’s all it ever needs to be [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t need a meta discussion about how to back things up. We don’t need a list of ways to do it. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I (clearly) disagree with that (as I'm opening a meta discussion about how to back things up), and have provided my own answer to that point. I cannot provide a fair argument for the above quotes, but any answer in support of them would similarly be a suggested course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-14T07:51:56.470" Title="Revisiting citation expectations of good subjective answers" Tags="|discussion|policy|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9516" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9515" CreationDate="2019-10-10T16:55:24.820" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Explicitly state that what qualifies as &quot;backed up&quot; is subjective (up to human judgement), and provide examples of ways to back up an answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do believe that explicitly stating that &quot;evidence&quot; and what counts as &quot;backed up&quot; is subjective would help. This removes power from the sentence &quot;You need to back up your answer!&quot; because whether or not that is true would &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; rely on human judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how the expectations of a Good Subjective answer might be being implemented/enforced &lt;em&gt;right now&lt;/em&gt;, I do believe examples of &quot;possible ways one might back up an answer&quot; would be helpful. It provides a more tangible list and a way to better see if an answer meets the guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am an individual who has great difficulty in understanding how others might interpret my writing, and my worries about whether my subjective answers are &quot;backed up&quot; (whatever that may mean) have lead me to primarily avoid answering subjectively. I do not do especially well with the vague notion of &quot;needing to be backed up&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A list of examples or possible ways to provide evidence/support/experience, would provide go-tos for showing &quot;Good Subjective&quot; so long as the examples aren't set apart as the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; ways to have a good subjective answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The policy here states that subjective answers &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be backed up, but it's unclear to me &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; one can do/show this and something akin to a list of examples would help me immensely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T16:55:24.820" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9517" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-10T18:56:04.790" Score="9" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been low-key following all the stuff with the new CoC and figured, fine I'll give my pronouns or whatever. Go to make the change and keep getting stopped because apparently my profile picture is an 'invalid image type'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did jpegs suddenly become forbidden? This has been my pic since forever and I'd prefer to not change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT1: I just made a revision to the About Me section for my profile on Parenting.SE and had it save correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I then returned to RPG.SE and attempted to update the About Me section and had this same error occur.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue appears to be related, in some manner, to RPG.SE. I do not know if this issue is indicative of some sort of glitch with the coding for RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="31402" LastEditDate="2021-02-22T22:00:48.200" LastActivityDate="2021-02-22T22:00:48.200" Title="Can't edit my profile" Tags="|support|bug|status-norepro|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9518" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9520" CreationDate="2019-10-10T20:07:25.500" Score="2" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have 23 questions with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-development&lt;/a&gt; tag. The tag has no description and by looking over the questions I'm not getting a good idea of how the tag links them. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-development&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-development&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-development&lt;/a&gt; cover which the related tags do not:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-creation&lt;/a&gt; for &quot;realizing a character concept within the rules of an RPG&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-advancement&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-advancement&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-advancement&lt;/a&gt; about progression within a system &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is some use/meaning of this tag which I'm not seeing, can we get a description for it? Otherwise, should we re-tag the questions and burninate or synonymize this one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2019-10-11T13:15:10.660" Title="What is the [character-development] tag for?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9519" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9521" CreationDate="2019-10-10T20:14:52.490" Score="16" ViewCount="344" Body="&lt;p&gt;This topic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7335/should-rpg-se-enforce-a-specific-standard-for-handling-gender-pronouns&quot;&gt;has been broached before&lt;/a&gt; but, in light of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334900/official-faq-on-gender-pronouns-and-code-of-conduct-changes?cb=1&quot;&gt;recent changes&lt;/a&gt; to the Stack Exchange's Code of Conduct on the matter, I'm wondering if there's a conflict that needs to be addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our policy, based on the selected answer to the question in the first link, seems to be that we do not care about pronoun genders, there are larger considerations to focus on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that 'he/him', 'they/their', and 'she/her' pronouns are correct, and none of them are incorrect. Good answers simply maintain continuity [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The CoC has been updated with the following directives:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1.“Use stated pronouns (when known).”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2.“Prefer gender-neutral language when uncertain&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the RPG.SE policy conflict with the general SE Code of Conduct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How closely do we need to police this update, if at all (and instead rely on users to self-police)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this have any impact on the fact that many system sourcebooks &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131761/why-are-feminine-pronouns-used-for-gms-in-rule-books&quot;&gt;default to using feminine pronouns&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T23:45:09.757" Title="Does our standing policy on pronoun gender conflict with the SE's recent changes to the Code of Conduct?" Tags="|discussion|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9518" CreationDate="2019-10-10T22:08:56.067" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Character development is a narrative term: it's literally developing someone's character further. That means learning more about them through expressing new things, or their character changing their ideas or behaviours, among other things. It's not mechanical, so it's not covered by those tags, although it may have mechanical ramifications sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One famous pop culture example of character development was when Neo decided to turn around and fight Agent Smith. Wow! He wouldn't have done that earlier. Suddenly his character has developed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes this is also called character growth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15486/how-to-transform-a-tragic-hero-into-a-villain&quot;&gt;How to transform a tragic hero into a villain?&lt;/a&gt; is an exemplary question of this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can read more about character development here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/2974/what-does-character-development-actually-mean&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;What does Character development actually mean?&lt;/em&gt; on Writing Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-10-11T13:15:10.660" LastActivityDate="2019-10-11T13:15:10.660" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9519" CreationDate="2019-10-10T23:35:17.233" Score="23" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, it does not.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334900/official-faq-on-gender-pronouns-and-code-of-conduct-changes?cb=1#comment1098713_334921&quot;&gt;a clarifying comment by CesarM&lt;/a&gt; (the user maintaining the FAQ) he states (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We recommend that you use gender-neutral they if you don't know the&#xA;person's pronouns. That's a recommendation, not a CoC violation.&#xA;However, &lt;strong&gt;if you use &amp;quot;he&amp;quot; as default and someone asks you to refer to&#xA;them by something else, please start referring to them by that going&#xA;forward&lt;/strong&gt;. It's okay if you make an honest mistake because you forgot,&#xA;but try&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is in exact alignment with what is stated in our policy that you linked to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unless otherwise stated, all questions are gender agnostic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally think that nobody should be harassed, or be in the red for &lt;strong&gt;guessing&lt;/strong&gt; wrong on how someone wants to be called,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the gender isn't stated or given by the author's own words, it is recommended to try and stay neutral but it isn't a CoC violation to continue to use your prefered writing pronoun.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it is given, use what they've used.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If it wasn't given, but is then subsequently clarified, use that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49360" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-10T23:45:09.757" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9522" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9532" CreationDate="2019-10-11T05:17:24.197" Score="14" ViewCount="221" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychology&lt;/a&gt; tag on a few questions (it's up to 11, at the time of this posting). It has no tag info/wiki, so it's not obvious what exactly it's meant to be used for. The questions basically seem to be divided into two broad categories, with a few questions that don't fit neatly in either category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first category includes questions about out-of-game psychology, i.e. the &quot;psychology behind gaming&quot;. Such questions include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/937/roleplaying-and-psychology&quot;&gt;Roleplaying and psychology&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157366/is-there-any-evidence-for-or-against-the-use-of-consent-forms-in-game&quot;&gt;Is there any evidence for or against the use of consent forms in game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90102/how-can-i-take-a-powerful-plot-item-away-from-players-without-frustrating-them&quot;&gt;How can I take a powerful plot item away from players without frustrating them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90063/is-there-any-known-limit-for-how-many-dice-rpg-players-are-comfortable-adding-up&quot;&gt;Is there any known limit for how many dice RPG players are comfortable adding up?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other main category of questions seems to ask about the in-game &quot;psychology&quot; of a character themselves. Such questions include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128201/how-would-a-telepath-be-able-to-tell-that-theyre-not-going-crazy&quot;&gt;How would a Telepath be able to tell that they&amp;#39;re not going crazy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139880/how-to-roleplay-a-sapient-but-only-borderline-self-aware-character&quot;&gt;How to Roleplay a Sapient But Only Borderline Self-Aware Character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, there are one or two questions where it's simply unclear to me why exactly this tag's on the question, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5738/role-playing-within-role-playing&quot;&gt;Role-playing within role-playing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, it doesn't seem to me that there's a clear focus of what exactly the tag is about or meant to be used for. I assume this is the reason that the tag is added to such totally different questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychology&lt;/a&gt; tag meant to be used for?&lt;/strong&gt; Can we add a tag wiki/info to clarify what kinds of questions should have the tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-19T18:53:19.483" LastActivityDate="2019-12-19T18:53:19.483" Title="What is the [psychology] tag for?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9523" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9541" CreationDate="2019-10-11T13:46:00.390" Score="9" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just happened across &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9741/are-there-any-serious-smartphone-apps-for-handling-combat-in-a-larp-situation&quot;&gt;this old question&lt;/a&gt;.  It's short enough that I might as well quote it in its entirety:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Are there any serious smartphone apps for handling combat in a LARP situation?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen several apps that aren't seriously meant to be used - are there any ones which are meant to be used, and have actually been used by players?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, that's pretty vague.  As in, I can't really think of anything more deserving of a &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; close vote than that.*  At the same time, it's also arguably a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7413/what-actually-is-a-shopping-question&quot;&gt;shopping question&lt;/a&gt;, not to mention unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question also has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/10721&quot;&gt;one answer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; which, despite the broadness of the question, &lt;em&gt;doesn't even actually answer it&lt;/em&gt;.  All it does is recommend a dice roller app and a wiki, which the answerer's group uses for character stat tracking, but &amp;quot;they do not use them for LARP combat&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, in its current form, I feel that the question is not making the Internet a better place.  Basically, it's distracting click bait that contains no useful information on the topic it claims to be about.  To become useful, it would need to first be clarified and substantially revised by its author, and then be properly answered in its new and improved form.  Or we could just delete it and let someone ask a better question about the use of smartphone apps in (certain types of) LARP combat if they want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, we could do any of those things if the question wasn't locked.  But it is.  So I can't edit it, I can't comment on it, I can't downvote it and I couldn't answer it even if I wanted to.  And I can't even flag it for moderator attention and suggest deletion, because &amp;quot;Historical Significance&amp;quot; locking prevents that too.  Hence this meta post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what exactly is supposed to be historically significant about this particular broken window?  All I can see is that it's old and has a surprising number of upvotes, presumably because people weren't so clear on what constitutes a good and answerable question here back in 2011.  But is that really a good reason to keep it around, and not even allow it to be improved in any way?  Or should we just get rid of it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;*) Besides the issues raised in the comments, it doesn't really help that there are so many different ways of simulating combat and modeling injuries in LARPs — from live foam weapon combat with one-hit kill/injury to D&amp;amp;D-like hit point mechanics to rock-paper-scissors to laser tag / nerf guns to &amp;quot;shooter decides if shot hits, target decides injury&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;no serious combat, fisticuffs are OK if both players agree&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;no fighting, period&amp;quot; — and that the OP hasn't specified in any way what background they're coming from or what kind of systems they're interested in, other than that they should be &amp;quot;seriously meant to be used&amp;quot; and not &amp;quot;relatives of RPS&amp;quot;.  And they can't edit the question to clarify it even if they wanted to, because it's locked.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;) There's another deleted answer, but it's even worse.  And deleted.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T17:26:17.080" Title="Does this question about smartphone apps for LARP combat really need a historical lock?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|larp|locked-posts|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9523" CreationDate="2019-10-11T18:35:22.840" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tool questions are no longer on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per this question, tool questions were deemed to be off-topic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are tool recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such a question about LARP Apps no longer would be a valid question to ask on the site, hence the historical lock. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I agree it should be deleted.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that the question as-is should probably be removed since it has no helpful information and we would not longer allow such a question to be asked on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastActivityDate="2019-10-11T18:35:22.840" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9523" CreationDate="2019-10-12T04:01:15.670" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It can probably go.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After recommendation requests were (re)made off-topic, it was standard operating procedure to close and lock them when they were bumped or otherwise discovered in the course of using the site. We didn’t want old off-topic posts showing up on the front page every time someone corrected a typo, but we also didn’t want to actively go hunt them down. We just waited for the ones that attracted attention to reveal themselves, and made sure that was the last time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historical lock is sometimes used more for the &lt;em&gt;lock&lt;/em&gt; part than the &lt;em&gt;historical&lt;/em&gt; part. Of the lock types, it’s the most “durable” one, in that it’s permanent by default, locks all parts of the page, and it explains that it’s a product of a different era of the site. Also it’s the lock reason closest to being correct; the other lock reasons aren’t accurate at all for these old questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Locking as a default also had the advantage that they stayed visible at all, unlike deleted questions, which is good insurance against mods making these close-and-locks in error.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all of them really have real “historical significance” though, you’re right!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One like this that gets careful consideration certainly deserves a more custom solution than the default close-and-lock. While a custom treatment might mean unlocking and reopening for some, others like this might instead deserve a proper delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in short, a historical lock doesn’t necessarily mean something &lt;em&gt;earned&lt;/em&gt; preservation. If it’s a shopping question, it just means it wasn’t hastily and invisibly deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-12T04:01:15.670" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9526" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9527" CreationDate="2019-10-14T02:04:45.903" Score="7" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/89/40999&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; has two broken links. The answer itself will be fine since it already recite the summary of the link content, but what should be done with the link?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Leave it alone? Comment that they are broken? Remove the hyperlink?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2019-10-14T02:22:12.267" Title="How to deal with a broken link?" Tags="|discussion|answers|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9526" CreationDate="2019-10-14T02:22:12.267" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a few options:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Find a working current version of the linked page&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Find an archived version of the originally linked page (e.g. on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://archive.org/web/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wayback Machine&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you can't fix the link yourself, or if you don't have time, leave a comment to let the answerer and others know so that someone else can fix it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this particular case, I've found an archived version of the linked page and edited the answer to use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-10-14T02:22:12.267" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9528" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-14T14:10:06.530" Score="4" ViewCount="216" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9515/revisiting-citation-expectations-of-good-subjective-answers&quot;&gt;Medix2's&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9506/confusion-regarding-the-good-subjective-post-notice-and-the-policy-on-backing&quot;&gt;Medix2's other question&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9228/how-do-we-appropriately-back-up-a-subjective-answer/&quot;&gt;my earlier one&lt;/a&gt;, there is a big disconnect between the historical guidance for supporting subjective answers and what the community likes/expects/wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My original question about how to back up was specifically for addressing this. I felt that there was a clear expectation on how to back up subjective answers based on earlier questions but noticed community pushback on it. When &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9229/23024&quot;&gt;Mxy answered&lt;/a&gt; with a largely reproduced answer (but also supplemented with additional very helpful guidance) and then it was closed as a duplicate of the earlier metas on how to back up subjective, it seemed clear that community did agree this had been asked and answered previously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But with the recent slew of questions and responses about backing up subjective, it seems like it is not clear at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure which questions need to be reopened (if any), or really how to approach dealing with it. But it does seems like there is vocal percentage of the community who believes that the guidance to date is incomplete with regard to assessing subjective support. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also seems like there hasn't been a clear direction given in how to address assessing support in that case. I don't think &quot;it seems like they know what they're talking about&quot; is sufficient. But I do want to understand other ways of assessing if they are available. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we clarify this? How should we be approaching this? What questions should be new vs needing new answers to old questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-10-14T15:15:29.057" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T12:59:09.180" Title="How to revisit citation expectations for subjective questions" Tags="|discussion|answers|subjective-questions|good-subjective|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9529" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9528" CreationDate="2019-10-14T15:14:31.177" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Proposed changes to good subjective guidelines:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Explicitly state that what qualifies as &quot;backed up&quot; is subjective (up to human judgement)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do believe that explicitly stating that &quot;evidence&quot; and what counts as &quot;backed up&quot; is subjective would help. This removes power from the sentence &quot;You need to back up your answer!&quot; because whether or not that is true would &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; rely on human judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Provide a list of examples of how one &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; support their answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how the expectations of a Good Subjective answer might be being implemented/enforced &lt;em&gt;right now&lt;/em&gt;, I do believe examples of &quot;possible ways one might back up an answer&quot; would be helpful. It provides a more tangible list and a way to better see if an answer meets the guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am an individual who has great difficulty in understanding how others might interpret my writing, and my worries about whether my subjective answers are &quot;backed up&quot; (whatever that may mean) have lead me to primarily avoid answering subjectively. I do not do especially well with the vague notion of &quot;needing to be backed up&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A list of examples or possible ways to provide evidence/support/experience, would provide go-tos for showing &quot;Good Subjective&quot; so long as the examples aren't set apart as the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; ways to have a good subjective answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta question on backing up subjective answers states that they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be backed up, but it's unclear to me &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; one can do/show this and something akin to a list of examples would help me immensely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How would this impact already existing answers?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It absolutely shouldn't; I believe any new guidelines for what counts as &quot;good subjective answers&quot; shouldn't make previously supported answers no longer supported (this would be a lot of hassle/work and also seem rather unfair). Guidelines would show methods of providing support, but any answer that was previously supported should still be considered supported.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Small sidenote: My feelings on change in general&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When concerns arise regarding current policy/rules/guidelines, I feel it would better to open a new question marking the old one as a duplicate (perhaps copying over answers as well). This allows the collection of votes on the change to be from &lt;em&gt;active members&lt;/em&gt;, those who will (presumably) exist under/after the change. It also avoids oddities where one answer starts with a disproportionately large number of votes, especially from no longer active members, simply because the answer has existed longer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus I believe that the already existing question on citation expectations should be closed as a duplicate of some new question and a new answer be provided there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this last part is more my own take on things and I was asked to include it here, my main point is the prior sections, and if the current guidelines were simply edited to include examples I would be perfectly alright with that as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2019-10-17T12:59:09.180" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T12:59:09.180" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9530" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9528" CreationDate="2019-10-15T03:39:39.037" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Can we stop already?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We literally do not need to discuss this. We do not need examples, we certainly don’t need an exhaustive list, we don’t even need &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt;. The GS/BS guidelines are exactly that, &lt;em&gt;guidelines&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;they work well&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;We don’t have any large problem with answers that are insufficiently backed up.&lt;/strong&gt; If we have any problem, it’s with people beating the citation question to death.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there’s nothing to discuss: things are fine. If you personally sincerely feel that an answer might be doubted and does not give readers enough evidence by which to judge their veracity, go ahead and say so. We’d all appreciate it if you didn’t get nit-picky about it, but as the GS/BS guidelines say, if someone says an answer could use more backing up, it probably could. If it’s really just going overboard, the comment can be flagged as no longer necessary—an irritation, but a minor one. Dragging things over to meta, making a big discussion about it, fretting over whether or not something technically counts as evidence, that’s a more serious irritation, but also easily ignored (cf. the fact that I have avoided participating in these discussions as much as I possibly could).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So seriously, please, can this be the end of it? If your question is “should we have policy XYZ with respect to backing things up, and write it up all pretty and add it to the FAQ and incessantly point users to it?” the answer is no, the answer should always be no, and we should be able to just skip the discussion altogether because we should all agree on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-15T03:39:39.037" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9522" CreationDate="2019-10-15T08:38:02.000" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;As can be seen from the sample questions, this is a tag applied to where psychological expertise is relevant, and/or where psychology is a topic of discussion. Such expertise and topic of course may be applied both to discussions of characters (in-game level) and of players and the GM (at-table level).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is similar to how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt; applies to the subject of passage of time both in-game and at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm adding this to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychology&lt;/a&gt; wiki, hoping to get it approved:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions concerned with the psychology of characters (in the game world) or players and GMs (at the table).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions concerned with the psychology or relying on psychological expertise. This covers issues of both:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;in-game psychology of characters, such as properly developing the inner world of a character, making in-character decisions internally correctly and not just superficially plausible-looking, understanding how a character with given characteristics would behave in a given situation, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;at-table psychology of players and GMs, such as whether some kinds of events would produce undesired psychological effects, use of tabletop role-playing games in mainstream psychology, understanding of motivation behind certain player or GM actions, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions using this tag are expected to contain enough detail to make it clear whether in-game or at-table psychology is being asked about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-15T08:38:02.000" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9522" CreationDate="2019-10-15T11:20:01.093" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychology&lt;/a&gt; tag is honestly probably not that useful to us and should be burninated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It originated with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/937/roleplaying-and-psychology&quot;&gt;a question actually asking about the practice of psychological therapy&lt;/a&gt;. That question was based on some significant misinformation. Arguably it's actually completely off topic: answering it takes knowledge about the practice of psychological therapy, not knowledge about tabletop RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second-up (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5738/role-playing-within-role-playing&quot;&gt;Role-playing within role-playing&lt;/a&gt;) I've just now closed as too broad. It's not a specific answerable question, it's a sweeping discussion starter that belongs on a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that ... these are just questions about the interactive effects of game design and social options. Those things necessarily always involve how people will receive and respond to things, but we don't need the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychology&lt;/a&gt; tag for that. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've opted to burninate the psychology tag. At the time of doing so it was on the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90063/is-there-any-known-limit-for-how-many-dice-rpg-players-are-comfortable-adding-up&quot;&gt;Is there any known limit for how many dice RPG players are comfortable adding up?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90102/how-can-i-take-a-powerful-plot-item-away-from-players-without-frustrating-them&quot;&gt;How can I take a powerful plot item away from players without frustrating them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22879/spoilt-for-choice-helping-traditional-system-players-adapt-to-narrative-control&quot;&gt;Spoilt for choice: helping traditional-system players adapt to narrative-control games&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14755/how-can-a-gm-calm-down-the-group-when-theyre-chatty&quot;&gt;How can a GM calm down the group when they&amp;#39;re chatty?&lt;/a&gt; [merged into another question that doesn't have the tag]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158880/character-sanity-struggle-to-remain-sane-by-rationalization&quot;&gt;Character sanity: struggle to remain sane by rationalization&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/937/what-does-using-roleplaying-as-a-form-of-psychological-evaluation-entail&quot;&gt;What does using roleplaying as a form of psychological evaluation entail?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157366/do-consent-forms-genuinely-contribute-to-safer-playing-environments-in-practice&quot;&gt;Do consent forms genuinely contribute to safer playing environments in practice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157617/psychotic-villain-vs-will-save-witch-hexes&quot;&gt;Psychotic Villain vs will save witch hexes?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1911/do-role-playing-games-have-to-be-fun&quot;&gt;Do role-playing games have to be fun?&lt;/a&gt; [closed] [locked]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139880/how-to-roleplay-a-sapient-but-only-borderline-self-aware-character&quot;&gt;How to Roleplay a Sapient But Only Borderline Self-Aware Character?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128201/how-would-a-telepath-be-able-to-tell-that-theyre-not-going-crazy&quot;&gt;How would a Telepath be able to tell that they&amp;#39;re not going crazy?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5738/role-playing-within-role-playing&quot;&gt;Role-playing within role-playing&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-19T18:49:46.430" LastActivityDate="2019-12-19T18:49:46.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9528" CreationDate="2019-10-15T15:44:25.063" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Back to Stack Basics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Guidelines have already been provided.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9229/22566&quot;&gt;We have a thorough explanation of those already&lt;/a&gt;, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;the original SO/SE guidelines&lt;/a&gt; have been good enough &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/50/22566&quot;&gt;since this site was initiated&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Encourage authors to &amp;quot;back it up&amp;quot; in a comment where there is a lack of support; include links to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; two &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;guidelines&lt;/a&gt; that already covered the &amp;quot;how to&amp;quot; for this SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is never a bad idea.  Some authors will upgrade their answers, some will not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Let the votes work. If the author won't back it up, don't pester the author, vote as you deem appropriate.  &lt;em&gt;Better answers will tend to get more votes&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Let the votes work.  On a Stack Exchange, the votes are supposed to stack answers from best to least-best by number of votes.  This latest crusade versus GS/BS &lt;em&gt;looks to me&lt;/em&gt; like an attempt to indirectly micromanage votes before the fact.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3461/22566&quot;&gt;The voters who are moved to vote will vote&lt;/a&gt;, which is the stack working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If now and again a not great answer moves up the stack, (1) don't worry about it (2) flag it.  Other stacks run into this now and again. (There was a famous example on SO that I read a few years back where a wrong answer had something like 200 votes.  It happens, but it's rare).  Let the votes do the stacking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use flags&lt;/strong&gt;.  They are a tool.  For an answer that is just plain bad or utterly unsupported, &lt;em&gt;flag it for mod attention&lt;/em&gt; so that it gets into the review queue as &amp;quot;very low quality.&amp;quot;  We have plenty of folks who work the review queues; our community mod efforts are generally effective.  As an added bonus, flags get moderator eyes on potentially problematic posts.  For those &lt;em&gt;rare exceptions&lt;/em&gt;, there are our four mods who are supposed to be &lt;em&gt;exception handlers&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There isn't an easy button, but there is a suite of tools.  Let's use &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of the tools.  We don't need additional policy, we already have guidelines. (SO guidelines summarized at the end)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Don't Chase Exceptions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chasing exceptions is what Deming called &amp;quot;tampering&amp;quot; and is a great way to make &lt;em&gt;bad policy&lt;/em&gt; and bad &amp;quot;corrections&amp;quot; to a given process.  I learned this the hard way in a number of real life organizational change efforts.   I have been on the receiving end of this, and on the policy writing end of this.  It stinks no matter what end of the stick you are holding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Guidelines &amp;gt; policy in this case&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was added thanks to a brief discussion with Rubiksmoose in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have found that with &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; people now and again use it as a bludgeon on other people (for one reason or another).  This is across the board in groups large and small.  Organizational Behavior 101. I made comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7772/22566&quot;&gt;the effects of bad policy here&lt;/a&gt;. (Humorously, we eventually figured out that it wasn't even policy but that some users perceived that it was).  Guidelines are not hard and fast rules.  In a community (SO) built from an industry that is rule bound - computer code is a set of commands that can only have one meaning - the default idea that &amp;quot;we need another rule&amp;quot; to fix that is a reflex that often gets in the way of productive discourse, may create a new problem, and may not even solve a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a people site, not a code site.  There's been a move over the past year and a half among the SE/SO Powers That Be to be more attuned to people. (Yeah, it's been a ride down the Colorado River rapids, not a serene Danube cruise).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Thanks for the dissertation, Korvin: what can I do?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E&lt;em&gt;ncourage fellow users &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;to write good answers&lt;/a&gt;, and vote (or don't vote) based on the quality of the answer.&lt;/em&gt;  When I first arrived here, encouraging posters like NeilSlater and HeyICanChan made me feel welcome, as did SevenSidedDie.  Others did not.  The difference?  An encouraging tone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Guidelines for Great Subjective Questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions inspire answers that explain “why” and&#xA;“how”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions tend to have long, not short, answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions have a constructive, fair, and impartial&#xA;tone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions invite sharing experiences over opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions insist that opinion be backed up with&#xA;facts and references...And good subjective questions make this clear from the outset: back it up!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great subjective questions are more than just mindless social fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T14:00:32.680" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9534" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-15T20:36:53.960" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Back to Stack Basics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;GSBS guidelines: we have those already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Encourage &amp;quot;back it up&amp;quot; with a link to those guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is never a bad idea.  Some authors will upgrade their answers, some will not.  The post notice that is in work should also help in raising awareness of the better ways to answer GS/BS questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Let the votes work. If the author won't back it up, don't pester the author about it.  Whomever left the comment has reminded the author of a &amp;quot;best practice&amp;quot; and that suffices.  Better answers will tend to get more votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Let the votes work.  On a Stack Exchange, the votes are supposed to stack answers from best to least-best by number of votes.  This latest crusade versus GS/BS &lt;em&gt;looks to me&lt;/em&gt; like an attempt to indirectly micromanage votes, and voters,  before the fact.  Let the voters vote. Leaving the initial &amp;quot;please support this answer&amp;quot; comment visible will help voters, IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If now and again a not great answer moves up the stack, that's not a problem.  Other stacks run into this now and again. (There was a famous example on SO that I read a few years back where a wrong answer had like 200 votes.  It happens, but it's rare).  Let the votes do the stacking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use flags.&lt;/strong&gt;  They are a tool.  For an answer that is just plain bad or utterly unsupported, flag it for mod attention so that it gets into the review queue as &amp;quot;low quality&amp;quot; or whatever.  We have plenty of folks who get into the review queue (me included).  Our community mod are generally effective.  So, alert that community mod effort with a flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There isn't an easy button&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, but there is a suite of tools.  Let's use them all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This latest effort of &amp;quot;give me another rule&amp;quot; &lt;em&gt;looks to me&lt;/em&gt; like another vain quest for an Easy Button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Don't Chase Exceptions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chasing exceptions is what Deming called &amp;quot;tampering&amp;quot; and is a great way to make &lt;em&gt;bad policy&lt;/em&gt; and bad &amp;quot;corrections&amp;quot; to a given process.  I learned this the hard way in a number of real life organizational change efforts.   I have been on the receiving end of this, and on the policy writing end of this.  It stinks no matter what end of the stick you are holding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is a revision of a previous answer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a productive discussion with NautArch in chat this morning, it occurs to me that this answer applies here as well &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9533/22566&quot;&gt;as its original location&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T14:33:18.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9535" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9536" CreationDate="2019-10-16T02:06:20.493" Score="3" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;DBeyond is the official online source for D&amp;amp;D 5e. If not more people, then at least a significant portion of people, have access D&amp;amp;DBeyond rather than the PHB. When quoting rules excepts can we quote from D&amp;amp;DBeyond or do we need to find the equivalent in the PHB?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask because I posted a question quoting D&amp;amp;DBeyond, my comment was edited to include the PHB quote, and when I asked why this edit was done I was told that rules come from the PHB and my comment was deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T02:16:55.627" Title="Are we allowed to quote from D&amp;DBeyond?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2019-10-16T02:26:06.697" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9535" CreationDate="2019-10-16T02:16:55.627" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The ideal is to have both a Beyond link and a book page number—but ultimately, as long as you actually include the relevant content in your answer (quotation or paraphrase), it’s fine to indicate where that came from however you like. Other users may edit in other ways of finding it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if someone makes up a rule that isn’t actually where they say it is, that answer will get comments and downvotes, so readers will know. So if instead an answer gets upvotes and no one comments that the quoted text is missing in the sources, we can be pretty sure it’s there even if we don’t have access to the same source.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T02:16:55.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9537" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-16T14:24:58.620" Score="4" ViewCount="54" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a question I've had spark up a bit following the successful Kickstarter for GM-Binder's next big updates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; posts be allowed to link to off-site homebrew sources to review?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Specifically, places like Reddit, GM-Binder, Imgur, and other image or homebrew hosting sites that homebrew publishers use. This could make it easier for the user making the post, but more difficult in the future as it creates dependencies on other sites, going against any goals of archival.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I right to assume the current format for posts of this kind is to type out the homebrewed &lt;em&gt;class, subclass, race, spell, variant, rule, etc.&lt;/em&gt; in full, in a readable for SE style? Is this better for the site than links to content off-site? My concern is that if users want to ask about a large compilation of work, the only method of doing so via &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; would be multiple posts in series for each seperate piece of content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42257" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-16T18:07:06.813" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T18:13:35.067" Title="Are [homebrew-review] posts allowed to link to off-site sources?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2019-10-17T06:40:53.713" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9537" CreationDate="2019-10-16T14:33:56.077" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can as a citation, but the relevant content must be included in the post&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those sites may drop the content and we've got a link rot issue. It also presents a bar of entry to answer the question that someone has to go offsite. Additionally, if the content on those third party site changes, then the question has changed which could invalidate answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's preferable to restate the content and cite it's source to give credit. That citation can be an outside link, but the relevant content should be included in the post here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T18:13:35.067" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9539" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9537" CreationDate="2019-10-16T14:39:11.710" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The key thing for any links in any SE content is that the question or answer must still be sensible and useful even if the link goes dead. So if you are asking about the thing in the link, then that’s a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are, instead, asking about something that builds off of another resource, which you link to, that doesn’t have to be fully reproduced—answerers are supposed to have some expertise with the material in question anyway, so even if the link goes dead the people doing the answering should be familiar with it. This works well if it’s a bigger production that people are aware of, but even with something smaller it might be a reasonable trade-off for the sake of not infringing on anyone’s copyright, keeping the question to a practicable size (both for the author and the reader), and focusing on your actual content to review. Some basics like “the classes in this product have whatsits that work kind of like spells except...” would be a good compromise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, bear in mind, that there is another concern beyond simple rule-following: you want an answer. The easier you make the question to answer, the more likely you are to get one. Clicking on a link to somewhere else can be a turn-off for a prospective answerer; you might have better luck if you reproduce more of the material in the question itself. Likewise, copying and pasting is often part of reviewing the material, so putting it in actual, selectable text rather than, say, a screenshot embedded in the question, improves the likelihood that you’ll get answers. Homebrew-review questions also seem to attract downvotes pretty easily, while attracting fewer positive readers (some people just dislike them as a rule, I think, while other people are fine with them but also not particularly interested in trying to actually perform the review and so don’t click on the question): the more you seem to be engaging with the SE format and community, the more you seem to be putting your money where your mouth is, so to speak, by putting in the effort, the less that will happen. That’s important, too, because downvoted questions often get less attention, and thus are less likely to see an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T14:39:11.710" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9540" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9543" CreationDate="2019-10-16T16:10:01.257" Score="12" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;Last week, the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157391/4462&quot;&gt;When did 5 foot squares become standard in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; was marked as duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21684/4462&quot;&gt;When did the 5-foot square/hex become the standard unit of measurement in Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The now-closed question managed to attract a few good answers, and maybe even better than the ones from the 8-year-old question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we merge these questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4462" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-25T20:33:17.310" LastActivityDate="2019-10-25T20:33:17.310" Title="Should these questions about the history of the 5-foot square in D&amp;D be merged?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9523" CreationDate="2019-10-16T17:26:17.080" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The mod team is on board with the arguments people have made here for deleting the question. We've also verified the question is in fact taking up a priority SEO spot despite the app being defunct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has been deleted now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-10-16T17:26:17.080" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9542" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9544" CreationDate="2019-10-17T13:32:24.420" Score="10" ViewCount="277" Body="&lt;p&gt;We once again have a perfectly reasonable question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157893/4563&quot;&gt;Is there a complete list of good-aligned gods of hunting?&lt;/a&gt;, that has been closed. It should not have been. This time there is the claim that it is a “shopping” question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should close problematic questions. This isn’t one. It already has two answers that seem, if I say so myself as the author of one of them, pretty solid. We have many examples of questions &lt;em&gt;like&lt;/em&gt; this one that have been quite successful as well. In actual fact, requests for thorough lists and other resources have long been the &lt;em&gt;recommended&lt;/em&gt; way to approach the kind of problem the querent has here, instead of asking for any one example—which &lt;strong&gt;would&lt;/strong&gt; be a shopping question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, if I can editorialize a little... It seems to me that the community, or a segment of it, has become extremely trigger-happy with their close votes and should desist, because it’s really annoying to bring it to meta every time. We should concern ourselves less with enforcing the letter of the law and more with its spirit—one of the close votes came from a user who literally expressed sadness at “having to” vote to close it. We don’t! We, who have the close-vote privilege, are experienced users entrusted with the right and responsibility to judge questions and whether they are likely to cause problems. Please, we should exercise that capacity critically and intentionally, not robotically “following the rules.” The rules were never written to be used that way in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange system is very intentionally decentralized. There isn’t really supposed to be any one person or small group of people “in charge.” Moderators are “exception handlers,” not rulers or even leaders—as established members of the community, they may be leaders, but the diamond doesn’t automatically make them so, and their leadership is based purely on their experience and ability to explain the advantages and disadvantages of a particular stance—not any vested authority. The authority and responsibility for maintaining the site falls instead on every single user, with that responsibility gradually building up as we gain reputation. We do a disservice to the site if we abandon our personal responsibility and judgment in favor of fixed “policies” suggested by other users—they aren’t special. If they’ve received support, that’s good and well and you should consider that heavily, you should understand what they suggest and why they suggest it and why that has received support, and consider those points in your own decision making. But the key word is &lt;em&gt;consider&lt;/em&gt;. In &lt;em&gt;your decision making&lt;/em&gt;. No one here is going to come up with a perfect one-size-fits-all policy that covers all eventualities including those that haven’t come up yet. We have a responsibility to make a choice—yes, a subjective, personal, &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; choice—with each case. Does this match the pattern the policy was written to protect against? Is it likely to cause the problems we’ve discussed? Or is this case, for whatever reason, different?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And some of those who voted to close the question will argue that no, it isn’t different, and fine; I disagree so I’ll take it to meta. But since at least one user seemed to feel “required” to close the question despite their own opinion, and that’s not how this system is supposed to work at all. And for those who want to over-emphasize the role of meta in communal decision-making, I would point out that each time I bring a question over here, &lt;em&gt;it seems as though the community agrees with me&lt;/em&gt; and re-opens it. Food for thought, maybe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T20:22:17.720" Title="It’s that time again—Good hunter deity question closed, shouldn’t be" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9540" CreationDate="2019-10-17T14:28:53.067" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This seems like a great case for merging. The questions are identical. The answers are high quality and will make sense when put together in the same spot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team's discussed it internally and we agree a merge is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're going to hold off for a few days in case there's something we missed that means we shouldn't merge these. Merging's difficult to unwind so we need to be careful and conservative in its use, which here means taking time to make sure it's the right choice and there's no problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T14:28:53.067" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9544" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9542" CreationDate="2019-10-17T18:12:21.047" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157893/what-is-the-complete-list-of-good-aligned-gods-of-hunting#comment412277_157893&quot;&gt;reopened after an edit&lt;/a&gt;.  Hopefully, that closes out this meta.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T18:12:21.047" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9542" CreationDate="2019-10-17T20:22:17.720" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;OK, to address what I think was going on with that question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it had been framed as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9465/22566&quot;&gt;a bounded list question&lt;/a&gt;, it would likely have been OK.  The problem with the question (initially, IMO) is that it wasn't well framed but that is no surprise. New user.  Closing a question while we dig into &quot;what kind of question is this?&quot; is often a good idea.  Engaging with the asker positively can have beneficial outcomes once the scope is ironed out.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were two things that struck me, but I was a bit late to the table for that meal so I may have missed a few details.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No evidence of prior research, and an initial presentation of a 'do my homework for me' flavored question - usually at any SE site such questions attract down votes and close votes.    &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a lore question, which is what I thought it was, the &quot;I want 5e only lore&quot; or &quot;I want lore from any edition&quot; was not clear, and it took a while to tease out.  In the end I think that is what the original desire was, but that is a guess by me.    &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing it while it was getting cleaned up / clarified was a correct move, IMO.  We do that with all kinds of questions.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bounded list questions are not shopping questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In hindsight, if one of us who saw the question in its raw form recognized that it was a potential '&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9465/22566&quot;&gt;bounded list question&lt;/a&gt;', then mentioning that in a comment and linking to that meta about how we are mostly OK with bounded list questions, we collectively might have headed off some of the disagreements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My two cents.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2019-10-17T20:22:17.720" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9546" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9547" CreationDate="2019-10-17T23:11:09.977" Score="-2" ViewCount="330" Body="&lt;p&gt;(I ask this as someone who mainly asks dnd5e questions, as such I am using terms like DM, RAI in the official D&amp;amp;D capacity)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever I ask a question I get a lot of replies in the vein of &quot;at my table...&quot;, &quot;when I dm...&quot;, &quot;in games that I've played...&quot;, &quot;a common houserule is...&quot;, &quot;most dms...&quot;, few replies directly referencing the rule, and often none actually quoting the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that the majority of the questions on this site are about giving opinions, but sometimes I am interested in what the rules say instead. I feel very bad telling people that while their well thought out answer is interesting it isn't what I'm looking for. I think other people feel like they are being disrespected and their extensive experience is being dismissed. It would be great to be able to manager poster's expectations so they know, before making a long post, that I may not be looking for that kind of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I usually try to add &quot;I am asking about RAW/RAI&quot; but that isn't enough, answers with neither RAW/RAI justification nor quotes come to the top. Should I be writing &quot;In RAW does XYZ&quot; in the title?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the same token but slightly different, often people jump straight to DM fiat as an answer, sometimes giving very lengthy recommendations about how a DM can fiat the situation. The DM can overrule everything, it's a given that in dnd the DM can do anything, I don't want to hear that a DM can modify the rules. Meanwhile after a dozen such replies at the bottom, downvoted, is a succinct reply quoting the rules directly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there really are no rules, that's fine. If you first explore the rules then talk about how you play/modify them, that's fine too. That is all welcome and interesting information for &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the question is answered. What I don't like is immediately throwing out the rules without even saying what they actually are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;In RAW, without DM fiat, does XYZ&quot; is getting a little clunky. I would love some advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, the kinds of answers I am looking for are: &quot;In this section the rules say [quote], and in this section they say [quote], therefore XYZ. This is also supported by [quote]&quot; &#xA;I am not looking for answers like: &quot;most DMs play it like this XYZ&quot; or &quot;XYZ (with no justification)&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps a better question would be: Should the default answer for dnd5e questions be &quot;RAW/RAI&quot;, &quot;the dm decides&quot;, or &quot;in my opinion&quot;, and when is it appropriate to move to non-default answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put forward my own opinion: RAW/RAI should be first (with quotes from the rules), then DM decides (with quotes from the rules/dmg), then opinions (perhaps supported by experience).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT: An example is this thread: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157794/when-attacking-while-hidden-what-does-it-mean-to-give-away-your-location/157970#157970&quot;&gt;By RAW: when attacking while hidden, what does it mean to &amp;quot;give away your location&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;The top answers do not quote the rules. Frustratingly I tried to ask them to support their answers with rules, but a mod deleted the comments and told me to post a reply, and I did so with as many rule quotes as I could but it just gets downvote bombed without anyone commenting. As such the top answers are, while interesting, entirely useless to me since they are not supported by the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EDIT2: I came across a great example of the problem in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157779/by-raw-does-a-creature-know-that-it-is-hidden&quot;&gt;this thread&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;The first few answers assumed that there are no rules and went straight to houserule. One user even said that they thought the question should be closed as &quot;opinion based&quot;. However the accepted answer is supposed by a direct quote from the rules explicitly outlining how to handle the situation. I would consider the other answers to be not only offtopic, but dangerous to anyone who comes to SE with the same question. Unfortunately despite being explicit that I wanted RAW people still upvoted these dangerous houserules that were presented as RAW.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A user coming to the site looking for RAW will see the top answer to a question  with houserules and may not investigate enough to realise they are not actual rules.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2019-10-19T08:46:39.753" LastActivityDate="2019-10-19T08:46:39.753" Title="The correct way to ask about RAW/RAI" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9546" CreationDate="2019-10-18T07:59:30.193" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yep, just make it very clear that you are asking a strictly rules-focused question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a culture that encourages answer-writers to approach solving a question’s problem with the answer &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; think works best, and you’re getting a lot of those. To prevent them, write the question in such a way that it’s obvious those answers are &lt;strong&gt;off topic&lt;/strong&gt; for your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s not enough to indicate how you’d prefer it be answered, due to that culture. To get answers to focus on rules first and only, make only those topical to the question. That also will realign votes around the &lt;em&gt;on-topic&lt;/em&gt; answer that is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often the best way is in the first paragraph. “I’m trying to understand the rules of &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; as written, before DM judgement gets involved…” and similar things work. It makes the question &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; something that doesn’t include DM fiat or the results of applying Rule Zero.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title is good too, but doesn’t always make a good title. When it does, certainly flag a RAW focus in the title. But atill always weave it directly into the body text too, so it’s inseparable from the question, so the reader can’t accidebtally overlook it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting that core aspect of the question first also helps prevent people from forming an off topic answer after only reading part way through the question. Best practice is to read the whole question first, but &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; is an ideal not everyone manages every day. You want to work with their assumption: nothing critical to the question is placed like an afterthought. Unless the question itself is at the end, a detail like “RAW only” is best put up front.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have significant experts in the RAW hermeneutic tradition, and you want to get their attention early. You &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; want to flag the experts who specialise in &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; interpretation approaches early on that this just isn’t their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say “RAW” here, but the same goes double for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7528/please-avoid-using-the-rai-acronym-or-use-it-carefully-be-clear-in-context&quot;&gt;“RAI” since it has two different, incompatible meanings: Intended versus Interpreted&lt;/a&gt;. Be really clear which you’re asking about: when you think “RAI”, instead just write it out long form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s probably best to keep RAW and RAI separate too: one question about both, asking what is “RAW/RAI” on a topic, is likely to run into problems. The three are distinct enough that both in one post is more likely to be put on hold as too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-18T14:23:03.533" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T14:23:03.533" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9546" CreationDate="2019-10-18T08:13:00.250" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Why you can't&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you frame your question as only asking for a RAW reading of the rules, you'll get the same answers, only some of them will be written as &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Frame challenge : instead of RAW you should [&lt;em&gt;insert other ruling here&lt;/em&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;instead of &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Instead of RAW you should [&lt;em&gt;insert other ruling here&lt;/em&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Why you shouldn't&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In many cases a strict RAW reading of the rules can lead to a nonsensical ruling, and the best way to move forward is to ignore the rules and do as you like. If you managed to only get RAW answers, you'd risk missing out on some good advice from experienced GMs that could make your game better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just ask your question as is and let the stack do the work. Good answers will go up and bad answers down based on their quality, not based on their RAWness, and you might end up pleasantly surprised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45757" LastEditorUserId="45757" LastEditDate="2019-10-18T08:20:15.597" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T08:20:15.597" CommentCount="31" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7528" CreationDate="2019-10-18T13:44:21.490" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Perhaps &quot;Rules As Interpreted&quot; needs to be discouraged or never written as an abbreviation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's a synonym for RAW. When explaining how a rule is written, what you are explaining is how you interpret the rule. There is no difference between &quot;Rules As Written&quot; and &quot;Rules As Interpreted.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Very few people have ever heard &quot;Rules As Interpreted&quot;, few even seem to use it. On rpg.stackexchange searching &quot;Rules As Intended&quot; gives 238 questions, &quot;Rules As Interpreted&quot; gives 27 results. &quot;RAI&quot; is used 784 times, 94 times in dnd-3.5e, 15 in dnd-4e, 516 in dnd-5e, 3 times in dnd - making up more than 80% of RAI usage. We can conclude that the vast majority of usage of RAI means &quot;Rules As Intended&quot;. Even discussing &quot;Rules As Interpeted&quot; only serves to confuse people because of the similarity to &quot;Rules As Intended&quot;. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Rules As Intended&quot; is official WotC terminology. There are more than 25,000 questions about dnd. Maybe the the popularity of the franchise and its dominance on this board should lend some favour to not confusing askers with terminology that only really exists here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Rather than telling people not to use RAI, it would be less hostile to new users to let them continue to use common terminology on the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2020-01-28T05:56:45.717" LastActivityDate="2020-01-28T05:56:45.717" CommentCount="26" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9550" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9551" CreationDate="2019-10-18T15:48:57.017" Score="3" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are three related questions that link to each other and have similar answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130331&quot;&gt;How does Ancestral Protectors&amp;#39; resistance work against multiple damage types?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130311&quot;&gt;Does a rogue&amp;#39;s Uncanny Dodge halve each type of damage individually or the total?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108173&quot;&gt;Multiple Damage Resistance&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They each (effectively) ask how damage resistance should be applied when something deals multiple damage types. &lt;strong&gt;Should these questions be marked as duplicates?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Some things to consider in choosing a potential duplicate: the third question in the oldest, its answer has the most upvotes; the second has the most views; the first and second were actually asked on the same day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-18T23:58:22.253" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T23:58:22.253" Title="Are these questions about resistances duplicates of each other?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9550" CreationDate="2019-10-18T16:32:50.320" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While they ultimately end up being best answered by explaining damage resistance by type they are all distinct questions asking about distinct instances in the case of the first 2 and in general in the case of the latter. As such none are duplicates of each other. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="3529" LastEditDate="2019-10-18T16:52:57.120" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T16:52:57.120" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9553" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9554" CreationDate="2019-10-18T18:43:59.953" Score="1" ViewCount="54" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently there exists the following question: &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129130&quot;&gt;What does &amp;#39;ally&amp;#39; mean, as a game term?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; and &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157995&quot;&gt;Does a familiar count as an ally?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; was marked as a duplicate. Meanwhile there also exist the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121378&quot;&gt;Is a Sentient Weapon considered an ally for the purposes of Pack Tactics?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129082&quot;&gt;Can charmed foes be considered &amp;quot;allies&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121359&quot;&gt;Is a mount considered an &amp;quot;ally&amp;quot; for the purpose of Pack Tactics?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120915&quot;&gt;Is a creature counted as its own ally?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these are marked as duplicate of the first question I mentioned. Should the question about the familiar not be marked as a duplicate? Or perhaps some of the other questions should be marked as duplicate instead? &lt;strong&gt;What questions here, if any, are duplicates?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-18T23:58:43.333" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T23:58:43.333" Title="What questions about allies here, if any, are duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9554" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9553" CreationDate="2019-10-18T23:56:05.697" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t think any of those four are duplicates of the more general question. Each of them deals with something specific that can reasonably be expected to complicate the situation so that the answer is non-obvious and merits dedicated expert attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sentient weapons being allies implies weird interactions with anything (like Pack Tactics) that cares about adjacency&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mounts counting for Pack Tactics has similar odd interactions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Charmed is a special circumstance that seems like an ally in some ways and an enemy in others&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being an ally with yourself in non-obvious and may have odd implications&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each has something that makes a generic question about what “ally” means insufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(By contrast, is your familiar an ally is not a more complicated question: being a familiar introduces nothing unusual that needs to be addressed specifically in a separate, specific question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-10-18T23:56:05.697" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9555" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-19T03:17:47.727" Score="-2" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;Are they rules, recommendations, convenient places to hold discussions? How are they to be used? What expectations are there when you link someone to a meta thread? Are meta top answers a suggestion on how the site should run? What is the expected lifecycle of meta threads and their effect on the mainsite?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &lt;strong&gt;example&lt;/strong&gt;, take the first FAQ on writing answers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5153/is-homebrew-an-acceptable-answer-to-a-question&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt; in the first answer by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/760/brian-ballsun-stanton&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If, after well articulated research, you can reasonably suggest there's something missing for what's being sought in the originating system, and the querent doesn't explicitly forbid homebrew, you can answer with a &quot;Your system doesn't support your request, but here is some homebrew I wrote, and here's how it played out in a game I ran.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose you see a question where the top answer does not display 'well articulated research' and does not 'reasonably suggest something is missing from the system'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly a lot of people thought that was a good answer. Does this mean that the meta is obsolete, or does this mean that the answerer and everyone who upvoted the answer need to review the FAQ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the best way to deal with this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T00:54:16.437" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T01:07:11.153" Title="How are the meta FAQ supposed to be used?" Tags="|discussion|policy|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6533" CreationDate="2019-10-19T03:34:07.227" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answering questions can be a collaborative process&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Banning users from working together or sharing information leads to lower quality answers. Information is good and useful and can be used to build a high quality answer, but that isn't possible if there is no way to communicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As much as it would be great to think that each answer is totally independent and there is no iterative process, that isn't true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can be difficult to formulate an entire answer in 1 go. You need to read bits and pieces here and there, some from the core rules, jump through feat/class/skill descriptions, trawl faqs and erratas, look at designer tweets, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sourcing all of these pieces of the puzzle can be difficult. Posting a partial answer would be helpful for other users to incorporate into a final complete answer. Otherwise there is a situation where a number of users each know most of the answer, but no one has a complete answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your choices are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post a partial answer and accept that the punishment for sharing what you know is to be downvoted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wait for someone else to post a partial answer, then comment presenting what you do know.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wait for someone else to post a partial answer, then incorporate their post into what you know and post your answer, downvoting theirs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the thread alone, eventually someone will conduct enough research to present a complete answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, post the partial answer as a comment so that other answerers build on it. Once an answer is made then the comments can be flagged as redundant. I believe this is the cleanest and most effective solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;On the main site you can comment partial answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The arguments presented by Mxyzplk don't really hold up to any amount of scrutiny.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It bypasses question closes. They're closed for a reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nothing is bypassed, partial answers are not answers. Comments are allowed for a reason, comments can lead to reopening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It provides an answer that can't be marked as an answer for future people's knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can always make an answer, copy paste the comment, and credit the user&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It contributes to long comment debates as you can comment on an answer, but it's unclear what you're commenting on in a comment thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By this logic all comments are bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It is &quot;cheating&quot; by locking your answer to the top. Answers with higher votes/accepted answers should go to the top to indicate their quality. Bypassing that by sticking your answer in a comment on the question is unacceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Votes indicate popularity, not quality, and comments are not answers. Comments cannot earn rep and are ephemeral. There is no competition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It bypasses all our quality control mechanisms: we can't downvote your &quot;answer&quot;, edit it, or comment on it to request clarification or improvements. Answers also bump a question to the top so that people will scrutinize the answer; comments don't do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are not answers in the first place. Every day I see people reply for comments asking for clarification or making suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It gets in the way of people who are busy using comments correctly to improve the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While SE's designer obviously has a lot of problems, you shouldn't actively make the site worse just to work within that problematic design. Barring multiple discussions in one comment thread is bad for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2020-05-27T01:12:49.493" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T01:12:49.493" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9557" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-20T22:54:28.587" Score="3" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;You see an answer, it has some problems. It makes incorrect assertions, it makes assumptions, it isn't logical, it doesn't have quotes, there are some other issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can you communicate problems with an answer without implying that you are disagreeing with the poster?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't make sense to me to say &quot;I agree with your answer but it is not logical.&quot; It feels a lot more natural to say &quot;I disagree with your answer because it is not logical.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T14:38:11.897" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T14:38:11.897" Title="How to correctly suggest changes to a post?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9555" CreationDate="2019-10-21T00:14:06.767" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta site is for many things, including (but not limited to) the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking about content on our main site, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; (RPG.SE)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Discussing policies for using the main site, such as how to (and how not to) ask, edit, tag, and answer questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Polling feedback from the site moderators and active users&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking about using the meta site itself (like this exact question does)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Asking for silly pictures of holiday hats&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While RPG.SE has somewhat strict expectations for formatting and structuring main site questions, meta site questions tend to be looser. Many of the meta site questions are framed more like a discussion or proposal, and less like a direct Q&amp;amp;A. Our help center page &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;&quot;What's Meta?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; has a more complete explanation of how this meta site works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes policies (which are crafted here on the meta site) grow old. Perhaps they were established by a prior core group of active users with a different expectations, and have become obsolete with newer users. Or perhaps they were proposed with certain goals, but did not work as expected. However, they usually aren't crafted with a specific lifetime or expiration date. Policies are assumed to hold indefinitely, until later changed by the site users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta site policies are agreements for how to use the main site, and are proposed, discussed, and modified by site users. Sometimes policies are enforceable, such as via actions or edits by moderators or privileged users. Other policies are just agreements on practices and standards, which can be cited when gauging whether a question or answer is valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that upvote and downvote patterns are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; enforceable by meta policies. Upvotes and downvotes result from the individual judgments of many users. They do not necessarily reflect the standards established by meta site policies.  Users are allowed to downvote answers that comply with meta policies, or upvote answers that don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a policy isn't working, or users repeatedly ignore it, or if it's causing unexpected side effects, then the protocol is to post about it here on the meta site. The post could ask why users aren't following it, or propose an alternative, or otherwise bring attention to the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T01:07:11.153" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T01:07:11.153" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9557" CreationDate="2019-10-21T00:39:51.423" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You have a few options&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The stack has two main methods for communicating suggestions for improvement; commenting and editing. When and how to use these tools is a skill that improves with practice but I'll try to give you a quick overview. You also have the option of posting your own answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Commenting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are the main method for providing feedback on a post (other than voting). It is worth reading the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comment everywhere privilege information&lt;/a&gt; for official guidance on what they are and how to use them. Also check out my answer on &lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/42644/33442&quot;&gt;How to write a stack exchange comment?&lt;/a&gt; for some general advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll give some specific examples of comments you can use for the situation in your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When an answer is mostly good but mis-quotes a rule or misses a key fact, you can comment something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Most of this answer is good, but you might have overlooked X...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Then go on to explain more details if required. If possible link to a source to support your point.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When an answer is correct but the structure is making their main point difficult to find:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You might want to highlight your point about Y. I think it's great and important to the answer but is currently being lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can also suggest re-ordering their answer or adding a clearer title.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you know an answer is correct but it is lacking support:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I believe this answer is correct, but it could benefit from adding additional support. Can you edit in some rules or citations to support Z?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you know the source they need you might like to link to it (or edit it in yourself).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A similar case is when the answer &lt;em&gt;might be&lt;/em&gt; correct but you can't tell because it is lacking support:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Can you please provide some support for this answer? Why does X work that way? Editing in some rules or other citation would be beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can also flag these posts for moderators to add the &quot;citation needed&quot; banner if it is particularly problematic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer has lots of problems but makes some good points and you feel like you could fix it but don't feel comfortable making that large an edit, you can ask for permission:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think this is a good answer that could be improved with a few changes. Do you mind if a make a major edit to focus this on your best points?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alternatively you could make the edit and then ask them to rollback if they disagree.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is often best if you are dealing with a new user and think it may be difficult to communicate exactly what is wrong with the post in a way they will understand.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I usually use this after one or two other comments have failed to get the point across.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When an answer has an incorrect assumption that leads to an incorrect conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Answer says &quot;X, Y, Z therefore A&quot; but Y is incorrect. Leave a comment like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I think you've got Y wrong (here's the link to why) which makes the answer B, not A. Please take a look again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The upvotes on your comment will likely indicate if you are correct. If you see a comment with more votes than the answer it is on, that's often a sign that something is/was missing from the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP edits their post to address your concerns, or if they make a logical argument as a refusal to do so, it can be a good idea to then remove your comments if they are no longer relevant. This helps clean up the site and make it easier for everyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Editing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;editing&lt;/a&gt; of posts is a key part of our model. Anyone is capable of suggesting edits to posts. However you don't want to completely re-write someone's post, particularly if you are correcting something you believe is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing for formatting and grammar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are always encouraged to edit for formatting and grammar. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We encourage the use of proper headers &lt;code&gt;#&lt;/code&gt; over bold for accessibility reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fix spelling and typos, except for regional spelling differences (don't change s to z if used consistently in a post).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit game terms to match style from source books. Using consistent style makes it easier for people familar with the system to understand. For example check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133462/48759&quot;&gt;V2Blast's excellent 5e style guide&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing for logical consistency:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you believe you can improve a post editing is encouraged.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Try to preserve the original intent, don't completely change their point to be correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the whole post, don't fix one part and leave errors or typos in another.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make it a cohesive post, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454/48759&quot;&gt;don't signal edits&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave a comment explaining why you made your changes and asking them to rollback if they disagree. Alternatively use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9557/how-to-correctly-suggest-changes-to-a-post/9559?noredirect=1#comment31368_9559&quot;&gt;Nitsua60's excellent suggestion&lt;/a&gt;:&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Go ahead and make the (possibly quite large) edit that you think makes the most easily-followed version of the argument being presented. Then immediately roll back your own edit and leave a comment saying &quot;I think your answer's good but hard to follow. I went ahead and gave it a rewrite which you can find as version N-1. If you think that is better go ahead and roll back to that version, and I'm glad to have helped you make your answer better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Write your own answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If situations where answers make good points you think are important but are otherwise poor answers, it might be worth extracting those points into your own answer. When adding an answer to the question keep a few things in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Write a complete answer, you need to address the entire question an be a complete answer without requiring readers to read the other answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Give credit if you feel it is due but don't feel like you have to. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you think someone made a great point and should get credit for it, include a link to their post in your answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This isn't a rule and you are free not to do it, but some people do consider it polite.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add something new.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are simply restating what is already there then you need to make sure it is a significantly better presented answer. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you can, add some additional information or context as well as improved structure.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T07:41:24.300" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T07:41:24.300" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9560" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2019-10-21T05:53:23.107" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Hiding legitimate concerns with an answer gives readers a false sense of security.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hiding and deleting comments whenever there is more than a few makes it seem like an answer is more reliable than it may be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example anyone reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/130560/59609&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; will be immediately aware that are unanswered questions and debate surrounding it. The reader will beware and perhaps check out some of comments to find out what problems exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the comments were moved to chat, or worse removed entirely, then a reader would probably not be aware of any problems. Although an experienced user may decide to go read the chat, I doubt the average user would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unresolved issues should be left on the comment until they are resolved by being explained or merged into the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T06:57:16.013" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T06:57:16.013" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9561" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-10-21T07:26:36.050" Score="-1" ViewCount="222" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a second question that has arisen from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9557/how-to-correctly-suggest-changes-to-a-post&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt;; &lt;strong&gt;how can I suggest that a comment may have problems without violating the &quot;no discussion&quot; rule?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By &quot;no discussion&quot; rule, I see this a lot &quot;Comments are not for extended discussion&quot; after comments have been deleted or moved to chat, so I guess there is a rule somewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example: Answer: &quot;A, B, therefore C&quot; Comment 1: &quot;Good answer, very good, but I think Y isn't correct, it should be D, therefore E&quot;. What I want to say: &quot;Good comment 1, very good, but I think D isn't correct, it should be F therefore G&quot; or &quot;it D is actually not correct because of H so B is actually right&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why I want to say this: The original poster may not know this. Someone reading the answer might not know this. It doesn't make sense to me that someone criticizing an answer is themselves immune to criticism&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-10-21T17:15:13.357" LastActivityDate="2019-10-24T01:47:30.437" Title="How can I suggest that a comment may have problems without violating the &quot;no discussion&quot; rule?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9561" CreationDate="2019-10-21T08:05:20.963" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Short discussions that are working to improve a post aren't a problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clarifications can be further clarified (or corrected) in comments as long as it is directly working towards that. If it diviates from that goal (such as discussing a related topic, consequences of a result in the answer) those comments shouldn't be posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the discussion becomes overly long it may have been moved to chat to &lt;em&gt;clean up the main thread&lt;/em&gt; (ie. not have lots of &amp;quot;noise&amp;quot; between one answer and another). This can only be done by diamonds and autogenerates&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; the comment with &amp;quot;Comments are not for extended discussion, this conversation has been moved to chat&amp;quot;. As with most autogenerated things, it doesn't always cover the situation perfectly, but it's close enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do correct the correcter/suggester, please also clean up after yourselves. Once any mistakes have been acknowledged; delete your comments, suggest the other(s) do the same and/or flag them as &amp;quot;no longer needed&amp;quot;. This also goes if you get corrected. I would suggest something like: &amp;quot;You're right, thanks. Comment(s) removed, suggest you do the same&amp;quot;. Salt and pepper to taste.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1: I believe. Any diamonds who would like to confirm or correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-21T08:05:20.963" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9561" CreationDate="2019-10-21T17:46:20.620" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Comments aren't a changelog&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments can be a helpful mechanic for suggesting additions or having a short dialog over improving an answer or question, but the comments themselves are only of value/utility insofar as they work towards that goal. Even comments that are attempting to improve the quality of an answer or question are themselves not something you should expect to exist forever. They can be cleared out for a variety of reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The long and the short of it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is something helpful in a comment, &lt;em&gt;then incorporate it into your question/answer&lt;/em&gt;. You should not expect the comments to be preserved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-24T01:47:30.437" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9500" CreationDate="2019-10-22T18:58:40.953" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answers should not always require backing.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the GSBS article, it highlights the purpose behind the guideline was a board where every question was subjective and every answer was subjective (in regards to parenting). It nowhere mentions that each and every post must adhere to this rule, let alone every answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sentence from the GSBS article sums up the most important idea for me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;they’re attempting to mold and shape their inherently subjective Q&amp;amp;A&#xA;into something constructive, informative and helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three specific criteria are the measures by which the writer proposes an answer would be considered &amp;quot;good&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a subjective answer is constructive to discussion, then it assists in building up a meaningful answer or route on how to get there.  An answer that opens itself up to a discussion on how to employ a specific strategy, how to hook it into a story, or how to modify the answer to be applicable to the asker's specific situation is exactly what I envision from an RPG Q&amp;amp;A board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a subjective answer is informative to the general reader, then it contributes overall knowledge to someone interested enough to read both the question and the answer.  General education is never a bad thing, especially for people learning a system but too shy to ask questions or otherwise contribute on the boards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a subjective answer is helpful to answer the question, then it stands by its own merits that it is useful to the question asker, which to me seems the most important.  An objective answer that doesn't answer the question is akin to a useless answer, and an objective answer that doesn't address the subjective implications of a specific course of action misses the gaming aspect of this board.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This SE deals with creative interpersonal interactions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a hard science where the &amp;quot;best practice&amp;quot; is something codified by time and experience.  Using our imagination and proposing things we haven't done before is sometimes the best answer.  Proposals such as this inherently draw on our experience and mastery of the content, and we can apply completely different scenarios we've encountered in the past to the one at hand through inductive reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Backing personal experience is not needed.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't have to exposit our gaming resumes when we answer a question subjectively that is backed by it.  It wastes space and it isn't verifiable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first issue is that espousing personal experience is an unnecessary use of space.  If you ask me a question, I can tell you I've ran into the same problem every week for the last 20 years and this is how I always resolve it or I can cut to the answer, but in the end, the answer to the question is the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This raises a second issue of verifiability.  There is no professional organization that tracks a player's history and can support the claim of if they have personal experience.  As with any credential someone places on their resume, if it can't be verified, you may as well not include it.  No one who questions the audacity of my answer is going to be reaching out to my gaming group for references.  They'll just downvote and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="58991" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-18T13:35:35.343" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9566" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9571" CreationDate="2019-10-25T17:02:08.647" Score="15" ViewCount="790" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/158372/35259&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was asked by a new user today. The terminology is clearly referring to D&amp;amp;D 5e, and they even link a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/99310/35259&quot;&gt;related 5e Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I still proceeded to ask the user that we cannot answer the question without knowing the system, and the question was closed as unclear (as we usually do with questions without system tags) as outlined &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/35259&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (also see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8849/35259&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, it's &lt;em&gt;really obviously D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/em&gt;, and there's clearly no possible alternative. On the other hand, I can see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6869/35259&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's point&lt;/a&gt; about teaching new users how the site works, and that doing it for them allows them to remain ignorant of the importance of tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, &lt;strong&gt;at what point is it acceptable, if at all, to assume the system based on overwhelming evidence without it being considered a guess&lt;/strong&gt; (and likely rolled back)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to single anyone out, but I do remember doppelgreener adding a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag to an untagged D&amp;amp;D 5e question once, based on overwhelmingly obvious evidence, but no explicit confirmation from the OP. This implies that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a sensible cut-off point where it's silly to make them say the words &quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&quot;, when it's obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is that cut-off point? Or if that's too broad or unanswerable for any reason, is &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; question over that cut-off point (due to linking to D&amp;amp;D 5e Q&amp;amp;A)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T04:06:04.567" Title="When is it OK to assume the system without it being considered a guess?" Tags="|discussion|tags|new-users|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9566" CreationDate="2019-10-25T17:45:32.177" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Nothing is gained by editing in a system tag; Nothing is lost by putting a question on hold&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Closing the question prevents answerers from wasting time when the guess &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; wrong&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a system was guessed incorrectly the answers people make would end up being useless and unhelpful, thus wasting their time. If the question &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; edited, then time would be wasted by those creating &lt;em&gt;non-applicable&lt;/em&gt; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Closing the question &lt;strong&gt;does not&lt;/strong&gt; prevent answerers from drafting answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that when a question is closed and I &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; assume the system is 5e-dnd I write up my own answer either in notepad or some other file.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case 1. an answerer wastes their time because of a guess made by &lt;em&gt;a different person&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In case 2. an answerer is &lt;em&gt;potentially&lt;/em&gt; wasting their time because of a guess &lt;em&gt;they themself made&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is better to let people choose to waste their time than to cause them to waste their time due to an incorrect edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the asker never edits in the edition then they never would've seen the answers anyhow.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the questions sits there after being closed and a system tag is never added in by the asker, then the asker would never have seen those answers regardless. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A question being closed &lt;strong&gt;does not&lt;/strong&gt; prevent it from getting answered on SE&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one is... Murkier. But if a question has been closed due to not having a system tag for long enough then one could ask a &lt;em&gt;new question&lt;/em&gt; similar to the first, but including a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This gets complicated because it opens up the question of &quot;How long do I have to wait after a question is closed before I can ask it myself?&quot; Which I feel might deserve its own Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Two incredibly small potential issues:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Say a question receives an answer &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; it is closed &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the OP never returns &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; it gets delted due to inactivity or similar.  That answer is now lost (except to 10k+ rep users). In this sort of case I'd suggest somebody open a version of the question with the assumed system tag &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; it is deleted (assuming this happens). And if that is not possible then In this &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;extremely specific&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; scenario I would suggest the original answerer request a moderator to retrieve their answer to the previously closed and then deleted question if they so wished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also must mention the fact that there are users who may see that their questions was put on hold and simply never look at it again. Askers where the question being put on hold prevents them from editing in the system tag for one reason or another. It is unfortunate that what I've described above prevents those questions from being answered in a timely manner. I don't know what I could recommend in this situation to the asker as there is no way to contact them thereafter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would hope that the two scenarios above are so incredibly rare that having a policy cover them would cause more harm (by also allowing for errors in adding an edition tag) than it would fix. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Which of the following is better:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A question is closed, the user returns and edits in the appropriate tag, answers are then added.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is edited incorrectly, incorrect answers are added, the new user now has to awkwardly inform these well-thought out answers that they are not helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I at least would rather &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; waste people's time, and having to inform people their hard work was unhelpful is a near definition of wasting somebody's time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are some quotes from various other meta questions that I feel help make my point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Imagine a new user who posts in the morning and checks back after work. Someone edited it to say [dnd-5e] and asked if that was right, no hold placed. It’s open, so people answer. Now the user comes back and responds. “Correct”: same as with asking &amp;amp; holding. “Wrong”: &lt;strong&gt;now there are a bunch of answers for the wrong problem.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's not that &quot;edit first, then warn&quot; isn't a teachable moment. It's that it's 1) not efficient (rather than everybody putting in minimal effort by immediately closing without argument, somebody has to go through the hassle of &lt;strong&gt;conclusively arguing for which system is&lt;/strong&gt; right and then doing the tag and then also warning the user about the policy and about how they overlooked the policy this time while not confusing them about the policy) and 2) encourages an attitude of &lt;strong&gt;&quot;if I do something wrong then they'll fix it for me&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; rather than &quot;I need to make sure I follow the rules.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[regarding teaching] When I clarify their problem for them and then tell them that I clarified it, &lt;strong&gt;they never improve in the future&lt;/strong&gt;; when I refuse to help until they clarify their problem, &lt;strong&gt;they improve and I rarely have to do it again for them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It's not appropriate to edit based on a guess [...] Why? Because &lt;strong&gt;we're also trying to train new users on how to use the site.&lt;/strong&gt; And worst case, you bait people into bad answers when you guess wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Our current policy is very clear, easy for new users to understand (even if they disagree with it) and relatively simple (if not always painless) to enforce [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Any alternative&lt;/strong&gt; to this policy, however well intentioned (and perhaps both sensible and justifiable in the abstract), &lt;strong&gt;will be much less clear, more contentious and harder to enforce.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of that said the following quote is something I &lt;strong&gt;strongly&lt;/strong&gt; agree with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We should make it clearer to new askers that mentioning the exact system is going to be a requirement for having their question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[different quote] We tell new users to take the tour, yet the tour doesn't mention the current policy about explicit system specification. This should be changed, or else we're going to keep running into this problem with newer users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this were to be upheld (which I think it should be) a significantly helpful change would be to suggest that one of the tags an asker uses be a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is discussion of this in the question &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7681&quot;&gt;Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; but it doesn't seem that anything has happened with since being asked nearly a year and 10 months ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2019-10-25T21:52:51.777" LastActivityDate="2019-10-25T21:52:51.777" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9568" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9566" CreationDate="2019-10-25T20:32:42.147" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The asker of a question has no ownership of it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to argue that &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; fixing the question is unreasonable. This goes back to the very nature of Stackexchange: It is a place for &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; not for &lt;em&gt;askers&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;answerers&lt;/em&gt;. The asker of a question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the ultimate determiner for other factors like spelling, grammar and formatting of their question (the same goes for answers, albeit to a lesser extent as questions are more important and there's less worry about things like duplication when it comes to answers); These are all things that can easily be fixed by a diligent editor. In cases where it is obvious, the same is true for the correct tagging of a question. While it is certainly true that &lt;em&gt;guessing&lt;/em&gt; a system from incomplete information is counterproductive, as answers will be different for different systems, in &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; cases there is absolutely no guessing involved in determining which system a question is referring to; Ask yourself how often you genuinely have to check the tag list to distinguish questions of fairly similar (on a high level) systems like Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D 5e, let alone completely dissimilar and unique ones. There is obviously care that needs to be taken (for example, for many generic D&amp;amp;D questions it may be unclear whether or not the question is referring to a specific system, and if yes to which) and in this case an editor shouldn't make a judgement, but any attempt to mechanise this judgement into one extreme or the other will lead to absurd results like the current accepted practice of &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; editing in the correct tags yields.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It is exceedingly unkind to both askers and answerers to put a question on hold due to easily fixable omissions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have two groups of contributers who are going to be most affected by such a rule - new users, who'll simply not know the exact format their question should be in to be acceptable and who'd be much better served by simply being shown what an acceptable submission looks like rather than going through repeated stages of revisions until it is being fixed. Some might argue that this process has some effect of training new users in how to use this site correctly. I'd argue it is not really our place to play pedagogue, and anyone who's sticking around long enough for it to be even worth considering &quot;training&quot; them will pick up on the rules and norms of this community on their own over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, we have experienced users who will through queries by new users be exposed to some question they think may be worth clearing up, or perhaps it is even a matter they themselves haven't considered and would welcome being answered, only to be blocked from answering it on an easily fixable technicality in the question that they're not allowed to fix &lt;em&gt;for no good reason&lt;/em&gt;. Worse still, now that someone &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; asked the question in the incorrect format they can't really ask it themselves in the correct format anymore because that'd create duplicates, which is at best frowned upon and normally not allowed at all &lt;em&gt;for very good reasons&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My conclusion and recommendation for policy therefore is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It is unreasonable to block a question based on technicalities that can be fixed by an editor. Not only should an editor be allowed to fix problems with a question if they are capable of it, they should be be encouraged to do so.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only really practical alternative to this is that I can see would be to prevent new users from creating questions that aren't tagged with a system, or otherwise make it very hard for them to do so by accident if you still want to allow new users to create system agnostic questions. A mere notification will not achieve this, and I'd personally recommend against this because the ability to fix incomplete questions already exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26879" LastEditorUserId="26879" LastEditDate="2019-10-25T20:51:00.860" LastActivityDate="2019-10-25T20:51:00.860" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9566" CreationDate="2019-10-25T21:52:29.960" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;To throw my own answer out there, I'd say that we should revise our definition of system guessing. Whilst there may be plenty of ambiguity between, say, a Pathfinder question and a D&amp;amp;D question, or between different editions of D&amp;amp;D, and that we should still generally ask for clarification from the OP as we've been doing as per our established policy, I feel that there are certain scenarios whereby we can definitively deduce, not guess, the system, and thus should not be considered system guessing, not subject to the same judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will point out that my answer is solely from a D&amp;amp;D perspective, since D&amp;amp;D 5e is the only game I really know about. But then, editions of D&amp;amp;D is also where we most commonly see this problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When the OP has linked to another Q&amp;amp;A with a system that matches our suspicions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's get the obvious one out of the way, the one that applies most directly to the question that I raised this meta question about. The OP made reference to another question, which was about D&amp;amp;D 5e and was tagged as such. It stands to reason that if the OP thought it relevant enough to link, there's a good chance they're asking about the same game, especially since they'd have recognised the rules being discussed in the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not proof, because there's a chance that the OP is so unaware of the fact that there are other editions of D&amp;amp;D, and so unfamiliar with the rules of the edition that they are playing, that they could mistakenly think that a Q&amp;amp;A about a different edition is relevant to their question when it isn't, but I'd say the chances of that are so small that it's worth assuming it would never happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;They reference exact text, maybe even with page numbers that match up with text&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the provide a quote, and the wording of the quote matches exactly with the corresponding text of the game/edition that we suspect, then I'd say that's good enough to say with certainty that we know what game they're talking about. I think it would be highly unlikely for two games, even two editions of the same game, to use the exact same text for a specific rule (although this is based on D&amp;amp;D, I must admit), so if we can confirm the exact quote, that should be good enough to say that we know the game/edition the OP is talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have seen in the past, not only an exact quote, but with a page number that matched up with the page number of the quote that matched up with the OP's quote, and yet, because they didn't explicitly say &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot; anywhere, was closed as unclear (one such example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/142480/revisions&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, not with page numbers exactly, but a year of publication of the UA article in question, see version 1 of the edit history). Obviously this is ridiculous to claim that it's unclear when quotes &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; page numbers match up, so this is another case where we can safely say we know the game/edition without it being considered a guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;There may be other criteria, but those are the two that stand out to me currently&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are likely other ways that we can &lt;em&gt;safely&lt;/em&gt; deduce the game/edition from the content, but at the same time, we don't want to read into things too much because we think we recognise something. For me to list other ways of deducing a system alongside the two things I mention above, they would need to give me as much confidence and certainty as the things I list above such that I don't feel like I'm just guessing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We shouldn't get ahead of ourselves and guess whilst hiding behind the excuse of &amp;quot;but it's obvious&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noticed today a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/141000/35259&quot;&gt;Pathfinder question&lt;/a&gt; had been asked about an Oath of Vengeance paladin. It was tagged as a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; question, but had it not have been, I might have thought &amp;quot;Oath of Vengeance? That's clearly D&amp;amp;D 5e because only D&amp;amp;D 5e has that exact subclass, right?&amp;quot;, so we do still need to be careful and check our assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making reference to spells and class features and other rules that we may recognise as being specific to D&amp;amp;D, or even a specific version of D&amp;amp;D, should not be considered enough to guess the system unless we know for a fact (as in, do our due diligence to actually research it before making an assumption) that it really is exclusive to the game/edition we suspect. &lt;strong&gt;Doing otherwise &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; guessing&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A final note about teaching the user&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been fairly sold on the &amp;quot;making the user tell us their game/edition teaches them about the site and the importance of tagging&amp;quot; argument for a while now, but I have been swayed on that position by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9568/35259&quot;&gt;Cubic's answer&lt;/a&gt; (I'll quote the relevant parts here):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] new users, who'll simply not know the exact format their question should be in to be acceptable and &lt;strong&gt;who'd be much better served by simply being shown what an acceptable submission looks like rather than going through repeated stages of revisions until it is being fixed&lt;/strong&gt;. Some might argue that this process has some effect of training new users in how to use this site correctly. I'd argue it is not really our place to play pedagogue, and &lt;strong&gt;anyone who's sticking around long enough for it to be even worth considering &amp;quot;training&amp;quot; them will pick up on the rules and norms of this community on their own over time.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sold on this argument. A user may come and ask one question, maybe not even ever come back to look at it (or forget how to log in again, so even if they did &amp;quot;look&amp;quot; at it again, they can't interact with it again), and therefore will not care if their question is tagged properly and don't have the interest in learning how our tagging system works because they're not planning on sticking around and becoming part of our community. Those that &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; interesting in sticking around, they will likely pick it up as they integrate themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might still be worth leaving a comment after adding such a system tag (again, only if we're truly sure, see above) telling the user that they really should be adding system tags themselves, in which case either they won't care because they'll never come back, or they will care and will learn to do so in their next question (or maybe after a few more reminders if they pick up more slowly than that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some might argue that a question asked by a user who does a hit-and-run question without ever coming back has no value, but since others may come by with a similar question in the future, I'd say that such questions &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; still have value if we can determine what system the OP was asking about and make it explicit in the tags for the benefit of future users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Summary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, overall I agree with putting questions on hold and getting the OP to confirm the system if there is any ambiguity. In cases like this, however, where it is a certainty but is not explicitly mentioned by the OP, I think it makes no sense to follow this protocol and we should instead lead by example, adding the appropriate tag  and informing the new user that they should do the same in future, assuming they want a future here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-05T13:09:23.240" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9570" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9572" CreationDate="2019-10-26T05:09:02.100" Score="4" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently this question was bountied:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130537&quot;&gt;What part of a multi-type damage roll is reduced by a non-type-specific effect?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And earlier today I found this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69509&quot;&gt;How does a Battle Master&amp;#39;s Parry work with multiple damage types?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the first question is more general, asking about effects that reduce damage without specifying type and only uses Cutting Words as a go-to example. The second question is specifically about the Battle Master Fighter's Parry Maneuver, a feature which involves damage reduction and doesn't specify damage type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the Parry question a duplicate of the (much newer) general question? What (if anything) should be done regarding these two questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-26T09:26:20.120" LastActivityDate="2019-10-28T00:43:42.377" Title="Are these questions about damage reduction when multiple damage types are involved duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9571" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9566" CreationDate="2019-10-27T15:46:20.817" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;When there is additional evidence of the system being used already in the question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As these two answers from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9317/22566&quot;&gt;experienced&lt;/a&gt;, and even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9324/22566&quot;&gt;venerable&lt;/a&gt;, RPGSE members point out, where there is additional contextual information available it's not a foul to add a tag if you recognize a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's when it's OK:  when there are other pointers that an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4765/22566&quot;&gt;expert&lt;/a&gt; will recognize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When it isn't OK ...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... is when there is very little to go on other than a mention of a class or race or spell or question or monster or magic item or tech tree or space ship - with no other &lt;em&gt;contextual clues&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Where &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4765/22566&quot;&gt;expert&lt;/a&gt; understanding of a rule set ...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... is in the hands of the answer writer, and they are able to spot sufficient contextual clues which identify the system, and point to adding the tag, let's get off of their backs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Editorial Opinion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the Q&amp;amp;A where I linked to doppel's and Seven's answers, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9314/22566&quot;&gt;I still encourage all of us to engage with new users to help them become more informed users of the site&lt;/a&gt;, allowing the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4765/22566&quot;&gt;expertise base&lt;/a&gt; of the site &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4765/22566&quot;&gt;experts&lt;/a&gt; to come to the fore is a feature of any SE site.  Part of the reason I wrote that answer was to put forward a PoV to see how popular it is.  I don't necessarily believe that it is the best answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Another observation from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9331/22566&quot;&gt;an experienced user&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's not to say our 'don't guess' policy needs to go away. We just need to do a better job of treating every system's community as justly as we can when adjudicating this policy-- we don't treat any other system the way we do 5e with this.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;{snip}&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If a ask a question that's obviously about Shadowrun and don't include an edition or system tag I don't get a patronizing formula-comment asking what system I'm playing and what edition as if that question made sense without already knowing I'm playing one of the very few systems where 'edition' is the right term and matters, I get the question closed as unclear and one person asking &amp;quot;Is this Shadowrun?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T04:06:04.567" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9570" CreationDate="2019-10-28T00:43:42.377" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10841/how-should-duplicate-questions-be-handled&quot;&gt;How should duplicate questions be handled?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When are two questions considered duplicates?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to Joel Spolsky, we should &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/01/05/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/&quot;&gt;only close real duplicates&lt;/a&gt;, and according to Jeff Atwood, there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/04/29/handling-duplicate-questions/&quot;&gt;three kinds of duplicates&lt;/a&gt;: cut-and-pastes, accidental duplicates, and borderline duplicates (requiring judgement as applied by the community).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions may be duplicates if they have the same (potential) answers. This includes not only word-for-word duplicates, but also the same idea expressed in different words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about the same aspect of the same concept, but with different examples, may or may not be considered duplicates. It depends how easy it is to figure out one example from the other. If it's only a matter of changing some numerical values or some variable names, they're duplicates. If understanding why the questions are at all related requires a detailed explanation, the questions aren't duplicates, merely related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/01/05/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/&quot;&gt;The Wikipedia of Long Tail Programming Questions&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you’re going to close a user’s question as a duplicate, it has to be a real duplicate.&lt;/strong&gt; For example, if a user asks, “What does the IP address 128.0.1.1/24 mean?” it’s OK to close that as a duplicate of a more general question like “What do IP addresses of the form a.b.c.d/e mean?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69509/how-does-a-battle-masters-parry-work-with-multiple-damage-types&quot;&gt;How does a Battle Master&amp;#39;s Parry work with multiple damage types?&lt;/a&gt; a strict subset of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130537/what-part-of-a-multi-type-damage-roll-is-reduced-by-a-non-type-specific-effect&quot;&gt;What part of a multi-type damage roll is reduced by a non-type-specific effect?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my mind, yes it is and should be closed as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-28T00:43:42.377" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9573" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9575" CreationDate="2019-10-28T15:56:21.507" Score="3" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;There currently exist both of the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120421&quot;&gt;Can I cast a Warlock spell with another (higher) spell slot from a different multiclass?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59288&quot;&gt;What level are spells cast at if a warlock multiclasses as another caster?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And there are two questions which are marked as duplicates of &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; of these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122922&quot;&gt;If I multiclass as a warlock and another class, and I get spell slots from that other class, do they count as my highest-level slot or not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138849&quot;&gt;Can a multiclassed warlock cast warlock spells on a lower level spellslot from their other class?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are also four questions which are marked as duplicates &lt;em&gt;only of the second one&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139732&quot;&gt;Warlock and Sorcerer Multiclass Casting With An Enhanced Effect&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123524&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e Warlock Multiclass - Casting Warlock Spells Using Other Class Spell Slots&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134924&quot;&gt;Warlocks using spell slots with multiclassing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/61712&quot;&gt;Paladin/Warlock sharing spell slots&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is just a request that the four directly above be marked as duplicates  of both questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2019-10-29T19:32:01.463" LastActivityDate="2019-10-29T19:32:01.463" Title="Request that these questions about Warlock spell slots and multiclassing gain a second duplicate" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9574" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9591" CreationDate="2019-10-29T16:24:26.537" Score="10" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I came across this old question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7681/can-our-tag-prompt-nudge-toward-including-system&quot;&gt;Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?&lt;/a&gt; which I think is really great.  It looks like nobody is taking action, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the process for editing a tag-prompt?  What page does one go to?  Can anyone do it?  Just a diamond mod?  Do we have to ask the developers for help?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-10-29T20:56:25.163" LastActivityDate="2019-11-13T14:37:28.103" Title="What is the process for editing the tag prompt?" Tags="|support|tags|questions|game-systems|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9573" CreationDate="2019-10-29T19:31:38.907" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree, and I've added &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120421&quot;&gt;Can I cast a Warlock spell with another (higher) spell slot from a different multiclass?&lt;/a&gt; as a dupe target to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139732&quot;&gt;Warlock and Sorcerer Multiclass Casting With An Enhanced Effect&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123524&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e Warlock Multiclass - Casting Warlock Spells Using Other Class Spell Slots&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134924&quot;&gt;Warlocks using spell slots with multiclassing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/61712&quot;&gt;Paladin/Warlock sharing spell slots&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2019-10-29T19:31:38.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9576" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9577" CreationDate="2019-10-30T04:34:49.437" Score="4" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lately I have been making small edits to posts to include quotes, references to the books, and links to online resources when a question does not include them. Some good examples of this are these two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158582/would-webs-catch-fire-if-fire-bolt-is-used-on-a-creature-inside-of-them&quot;&gt;Would webs catch fire if Fire Bolt is used on a creature inside of them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158599/how-do-the-stunned-and-unconscious-conditions-from-an-illithids-mind-blast-inte&quot;&gt;How do the stunned and unconscious conditions from an Illithid's Mind Blast interact?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first question I added a small quote directly relating to the effect of the spell the question was about, however also reworded the question slightly to make it more readable with this quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the second question, I simply added a reference to the book material, and a link. Is a small edit like this okay? Or does it not add anything to the question as it already had a quote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I am concerned about is keeping the integrity of the original post, while also allowing future visitors the ability to find what it is they are referencing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been looking through a few posts on here regarding this, however most of them simply tackle one aspect each of my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7669/stance-on-using-dd-beyond-for-references&quot;&gt;Stance on using D&amp;amp;D Beyond for references?&lt;/a&gt; Talks about links vs book references&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6157/please-consider-using-book-references-that-will-be-understood-internationally&quot;&gt;Please consider using book references that will be understood internationally&lt;/a&gt; Talks about the difficulties of finding book references in other languages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should posts be reworded to include quotes relating to the post, even if the post needs a slight rewrite to do so?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we only include references to the books and online resources if the original post does not include a quote?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to try and avoid making insignificant edits to posts if only to add a reference, and keep the integrity of the original post instead of rewriting it to include a quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53298" LastActivityDate="2019-10-30T05:59:57.743" Title="What is the best practice for editing in references?" Tags="|discussion|editing|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9576" CreationDate="2019-10-30T05:31:01.433" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Edits that improve the post are encouraged&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general answer, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;official guidance on editing&lt;/a&gt; says the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When should I edit posts?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To fix grammar and spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So not only are your edits allowed, they are encouraged so long as they are substantial and leave the post better than you found it. By substantial, we mean that you should fix the entire post if you can. Don't edit a poor post to add links but leave a series of typos and formatting issues behind. If you edit a post, make it the best post you can without changing the intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Should posts be reworded to include quotes relating to the post, even if the post needs a slight rewrite to do so?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes. If you think have a relevant quote will help make the post clearer then you can add quotes. When doing so, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; reword the post so that the quote makes sense; to not do so would make the post worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When adding quotes, remember fair use policy and don't over-quote irrelevant text. Some related metas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6043/48759&quot;&gt;Can non-open-license rules be discussed, or not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8746/48759&quot;&gt;Is there any reason why quoting a D&amp;amp;D 5e spell in its entirety would not qualify as &amp;quot;fair use&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Should we only include references to the books and online resources if the original post does not include a quote?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quotes should be referenced so that others can verify their authenticity. If they have included a quote without referencing and you can add the relevant reference you are encouraged to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best situation is when a post both quotes and cites the relevant rule, ideally referencing both the online and physical resources. This lowers the barrier for entry to our site and makes information accessible for the broadest group of users. If you can edit posts to have this, you are welcome to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a question mis-quotes a rule or paraphrases it incorrectly. In these cases, this error is actually the true source of their question. It is better to not edit the official version into the question, as it makes the question less useful for the OP. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6845/48759&quot;&gt;Should we correct rules references in questions?&lt;/a&gt; for more information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Focus on already active posts&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are welcome to edit any post on the site so this is more of an etiquette point. If you want to add references and quotes to questions, focus most of your efforts on the active posts already on the homepage. This is where your edits will be the most valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While dragging up old posts to edit can help you get some badges, it is less useful for the site in general. People aren't looking at those questions; why does it matter if they are missing a reference? Editing these posts places them on the front page listing of active posts and distracts from the new content being created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a similar note, try to limit the rate at which you make these edits. Try not to do more than 5-8 at a time to prevent your edits from flooding the homepage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-10-30T05:59:57.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9578" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9582" CreationDate="2019-11-01T11:43:49.593" Score="9" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have just bought a new RPG called Polaris so I looked up the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris&lt;/a&gt; tag on the site to see if there were any questions about it. All of the results appear to be for another game called Polaris which is very different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact there appears to be three Polaris RPGs, which RPG Geek disambiguates as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpgfamily/17710/polaris-french-rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris (French RPG)&lt;/a&gt; — originally published in 1997, with the third edition published in 2008.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/601/polaris-english-rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris (English RPG)&lt;/a&gt; — published 2004 by Sean Dobes; official site apparently defunct&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpgsystem/22146/polaris&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris&lt;/a&gt; — a game system taking its name from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/602/polaris-chivalric-tragedy-utmost-north&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Polaris: Chivalric Tragedy at Utmost North&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, the game that launched it. The other games in this system appear to not use the word Polaris in their title: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/33474/starlit-kingdom&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Starlit Kingdom&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/22138/thou-art-warrior&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Thou Art But A Warrior&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Polaris tag's description currently corresponds to this last entry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we tag these games so that we can tell which is which?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37312" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-01T14:10:24.307" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T21:23:18.440" Title="How can we tag the different Polaris games?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9579" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9583" CreationDate="2019-11-02T11:40:16.747" Score="6" ViewCount="188" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I was involved with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157639/sleep-spell-too-powerful&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; (now deleted, 10k only) where the original user, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59565/jason&quot;&gt;Jason&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, made a second account, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59566/jason&quot;&gt;Jason&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, and tried to edit &quot;their&quot; question. It was pretty obvious that it was the same user, but technically there was no way to be sure, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/61758&quot;&gt;I rejected the edit&lt;/a&gt;. However, the user made a few attempts at editing the question, and it was eventually accepted through the review queue anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today, a similar situation appears to be happening with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158808/warding-bond-curse-effects&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; where the original user, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59996/soundfx&quot;&gt;SoundFX&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, appears to have made a second account, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/60004/soundfx&quot;&gt;SoundFX&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, and is attempting to edit &quot;their&quot; question. This time, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/62329&quot;&gt;I've accepted their edit request&lt;/a&gt;, since it's pretty obvious that it's the same user, and in the previous situation with &quot;Jason&quot;, their edit seemed to eventually get through anyway, so it seemed pointless to reject their edit if other users would let it through anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In situations like these where new users make a second account by accident, is there anything else we can do besides just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158808/warding-bond-curse-effects#comment415416_158808&quot;&gt;throw out a comment&lt;/a&gt; including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/merging-accounts&quot;&gt;this guide on merging accounts&lt;/a&gt;? And should we accept or reject these edits (when it's pretty obvious that it's the same user), since consensus seems to be divided on this matter?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-02T12:30:00.063" LastActivityDate="2019-11-03T05:10:25.587" Title="What to do when a new user creates a second account to edit &quot;their&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|new-users|suggested-edits|user-accounts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9580" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on meta about game recommendation questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NOTE&lt;/strong&gt;: Game recommendation questions are no longer allowed on RPG.SE. For more details, see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9581" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" Score="0" Body="For questions on meta about game recommendation questions. (NOTE: Game recommendation questions are no longer allowed on RPG.SE.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T12:29:44.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9582" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9578" CreationDate="2019-11-02T21:23:18.440" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would suggest that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris&lt;/a&gt; is renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris-chivalric-tragedy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris-chivalric-tragedy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris-chivalric-tragedy&lt;/a&gt;, as inclusion of part of the game's subtitle is enough to make it definitively unique and this only affects 9 questions as of this posting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the French &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpgfamily/17710/polaris-french-rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris RPG&lt;/a&gt; can have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris-rpg&lt;/a&gt;. The game apparently has three editions with pretty significant changes between 2nd and 3rd (wait a minute...) so potentially warrants &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris-3e&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polaris-rpg-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polaris-rpg-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polaris-rpg-3e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the 2004 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/601/polaris-english-rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Polaris&lt;/a&gt; can be safely ignored for the Time Being since we don't have any questions about it and given its obscurity/defunctness we're pretty unlikely to have any in the future.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastActivityDate="2019-11-02T21:23:18.440" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9583" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9579" CreationDate="2019-11-03T05:10:25.587" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We don't need to do anything else.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; but we have no reason to so we don't want to.  There's no problem here, so there's no need to try and figure out a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should happen, if the edit is one that's okay for an OP to make but not a regular user (which is a very small set of possible edits), is that the edit, since it appears to be from the same user, is approved and the user is instructed to merge their accounts &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the reviewer neither approves nor rejects the edit and first leaves a comment @-ing the editor to confirm they are the same person.  If they have the same username or said &amp;quot;I'm the OP&amp;quot; in the edit notes or something like that, that's good reason to think they are the same user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what currently is done, and what you are currently doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;N.B. that the possibility that a user is impersonating another user is not really something to discuss.  We are supposed to assume good faith here, except when it is &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; obvious that actions are being taken in bad faith.  If someone is pretending to be someone else, we thus let them get away with it unless it is extremely obvious-- until the original user complains.  This has never happened on our site as far as I am aware, but I'm sure we'll figure it out when it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-03T05:10:25.587" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9584" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9585" CreationDate="2019-11-04T23:28:28.453" Score="15" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9269/4563&quot;&gt;this discussion&lt;/a&gt;, I’ve cleaned up most of the confusion with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt;. The only step discussed that I haven’t done is synonymizing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; with the new &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt;, as I do not have the requisite score of 5 to suggest a synonym.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have recommended &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt;. Those who have the necessary score (5) in that tag should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/occult-magic/synonyms&quot;&gt;vote for the synonym&lt;/a&gt;, per the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, I created &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spiritualist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spiritualist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spiritualist&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occultist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occultist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occultist&lt;/a&gt; for the relevant classes. I’m not 100% sure those are for the best, but they are classes and other classes have tags (including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kineticist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kineticist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kineticist&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt; itself). They need entries and they may need applying to other questions about those classes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, having gone through this process, I now think having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; on questions about the kineticist or the psychic or whatever is probably a mistake—it doesn’t really need to be there in most of the cases that it is. There are definitely legitimate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; questions, such as those about occult rituals or psychic duels, and those questions could also interact with some of the occult classes in a way that justifies both tags, but putting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; on every question about the kineticist just because the kineticist is an occult-magic class seems wrong. Since having the tag there makes it easier to find, though, I have left it for the time being.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, discussion about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt; synonyms, the new &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spiritualist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spiritualist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spiritualist&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occultist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occultist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occultist&lt;/a&gt; tags, and whether &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; should be removed from questions about occult classes that don’t otherwise interact with special occult-magic issues like rituals or duels. Can anyone make those synonyms? Do we like the new class tags? How do we feel about this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2019-11-06T04:40:21.043" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T17:27:57.453" Title="Psychic tag clean-up" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9585" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9584" CreationDate="2019-11-06T10:13:18.957" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Nice work!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for taking that effort on yourself; there was certainly quite a lot to be done there. All the changes you were able to make yourself seem good - though as you point out, &lt;strong&gt;quite a few of these new tags need tag wikis/info&lt;/strong&gt;. Someone familiar with the concepts they're about should try and add some info about what each tag is about/to be used for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've gone ahead and synonymized &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; - per the case you presented in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9269/33569&quot;&gt;your answer to my previous meta&lt;/a&gt;, Paizo seems to be using them to refer to the same concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not sure &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; needs to be synonymized with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt;, or that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; needs to exist as a tag at all... With the clear naming of the tag as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt;, anyone who types &quot;psychic&quot; into the tag field will automatically be suggested to use either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; (since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt; is now a synonym of it). As such, adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym of the class tag seems unnecessary. That's just my personal assessment, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding your assessment here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I now think having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; on questions about the kineticist or the psychic or whatever is probably a mistake—it doesn’t really need to be there in most of the cases that it is. There are definitely legitimate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; questions, such as those about occult rituals or psychic duels, and those questions could also interact with some of the occult classes in a way that justifies both tags, but putting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; on every question about the kineticist just because the kineticist is an occult-magic class seems wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am generally inclined to agree with you here. It seems sort of like including a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizards-of-the-coast&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizards-of-the-coast&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizards-of-the-coast&lt;/a&gt; tag on every D&amp;amp;D question (though that's not a perfect analogy) - it's describing the source/category of the content being asked about, rather than describing the question itself. Again, though, that's just a personal assessment, specifically from someone who's not too familiar with &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anyone has objections, questions, or concerns, feel free to bring them up here or leave your own answer as appropriate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-11-06T10:13:18.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9586" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6498" CreationDate="2019-11-08T11:26:00.110" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The fix&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fake headers are easily fixed. When you want to make a header, there are three ways to create one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Click the &lt;strong&gt;Heading&lt;/strong&gt; editor button:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Do3Qo.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Do3Qo.png&quot; alt=&quot;A screenshot of the editor toolbar. The Heading button is a stack of five horizontal lines that alternate between short and wide lines, the first two black and the last three grey, visually representing a paragraph with a heavier header on top. The button is picked out with a red freehand circle around it.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Select the heading text and type &lt;kbd&gt;ctrl&lt;/kbd&gt;&lt;kbd&gt;h&lt;/kbd&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#headers&quot;&gt;Manually type the Markdown code for a header&lt;/a&gt;, which is either an underline made from dashes or equal signs, or one to three hash marks in front of or surrounding it (“or”, because the trailing ones are optional).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exact symbol used defines the logical level (and visual size) of the resulting heading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;  # Level 1 heading #&#xA;&#xA;  ## Level 2 heading ##&#xA;&#xA;  ### Level 3 heading ###&#xA;&#xA;  #### Level 4 heading ####&#xA;&#xA;  ##### Level 5 heading #####&#xA;&#xA;  ###### Level 6 heading ######&#xA;&#xA;  ### No hashes at the end is also OK for any heading level&#xA;&#xA;  Level 1 heading&#xA;  ===============&#xA;&#xA;  Level 2 heading&#xA;  ---------------&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Which produces:&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Level 1 heading&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Level 2 heading&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Level 3 heading&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Level 4 heading&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;h5&gt;Level 5 heading&lt;/h5&gt;&#xA;&lt;h6&gt;Level 6 heading&lt;/h6&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No hashes at the end is also OK for any heading level&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Level 1 heading&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Level 2 heading&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have existing fake headings, the easiest fix is to edit the post and replace the &lt;code&gt;**&lt;/code&gt; around the fake headings with &lt;code&gt;##&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It's not just for human accessibility&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't just a matter of accessibility to visually-impaired humans either, it's a matter of accessibility to computers in general. The more we use correct formatting, the more the meaning and structure of the contents is reflected in the HTML of the post. This makes for more useful material for future uses that we might not yet have imagined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And in the meantime, making our site less annoying to use for visually-impaired members, by avoiding easily-avoided formatting errors, is worthwhile all by itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What about bolding the leading sentence, thesis statement, or question summary?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's fine! That's not a header, that's just a sentence being emphasised due to its importance in the answer, question, or paragraph. That's what our bold formatting is for. In fact, marking it as bold will &lt;em&gt;correctly&lt;/em&gt; indicate that it's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; supposed to be understood as a section header, improving meaning and accessibility. Using section heading formatting is only recommended for things that are actually section headings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="16262" LastEditDate="2021-07-30T01:49:34.077" LastActivityDate="2021-07-30T01:49:34.077" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2019-11-08T11:26:00.110" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9587" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9588" CreationDate="2019-11-11T18:21:06.743" Score="5" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;This user&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UfIbL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UfIbL.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;looks like a deleted user, but unlike most (all?) users, they retain their username - usually a deleted user become &lt;em&gt;user123456&lt;/em&gt; or something random number.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a bug? What happened to the user?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-12T03:13:50.667" LastActivityDate="2019-11-12T03:13:50.667" Title="Why does this old user have an unclickable profile, yet retain the profile name by their posts?" Tags="|support|users|user-accounts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9587" CreationDate="2019-11-11T18:27:41.530" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note the date. There was a time way back that user names were not anonymized on deletion. That looks to have been added sometime post this user being deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relevant stack meta &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/295805/why-is-this-non-anonymous-username-on-this-non-migrated-question-greyed-out-and/295806#295806&quot;&gt;Why is this non-anonymous username on this non-migrated question greyed out and not a link?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3958" LastActivityDate="2019-11-11T18:27:41.530" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9589" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-11T21:16:02.307" Score="5" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just came across this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/87689/52137&quot;&gt;What determines whether a magic item requires attunement?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which reminded me of a question I answered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153370/52137&quot;&gt;How can I decide if my homebrew item should require attunement?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;which  appears to clearly be duplicates. I believe newer questions should normally be closed as duplicates of older ones, ideally before answers come in. However, that did not happen this time and the newer question has more upvotes and the answer to the new as more upvotes than either of the older ones and is (in my probably biased opinion) better. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the older be closed as a dupe of the newer? And/or should they be merged, and if so which way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T05:39:50.957" Title="What should we do about these two duplicate questions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9590" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9592" CreationDate="2019-11-12T16:14:21.907" Score="10" ViewCount="180" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been answering a few Cypher system questions recently and I keep encountering cases where the issue being discussed has a justification within the revised version of the core rulebook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my answers I've been clearly describing how in the revised versions of the rules x can be explained by y as they are nominally backwards compatible. And I'm encountering comments from the interlocutor, for example from the querent on this answer of mine: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159411/action-per-target-to-initiate-vs-edge/159413?noredirect=1#comment417843_159413&quot;&gt;Action per target to initiate VS Edge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In my book, it's only a Third-Tier Speaker ability. And even if you have just one intellect Edge, it's at least better to use the action again and again than using Effort. And it's the same with all the abilities who use Effort to add targets but when you need to use one round per additionnal target. When you have something like this and appropriate Edge, Effort is useless. – ShubbNiggu 2 hours ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This mustn't be a unique problem to the Cypher system though. There are several iterations of the burning wheel Gold core books which incorporate rule changes clarifications and other errata.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's disingenuous to describe these revised works as new editions akin to D&amp;amp;D edition differences and create tags for minor iterations splitting the knowledge-base. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I explain in my answers that the answer may not be present in an outdated core rule book? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I right in using the most up to date versions of the rules to form my answers when a version is not specified? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not should I present the updates from the freshest version, for the sake of completeness?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41592" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-15T01:02:53.013" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T01:02:53.013" Title="Answering questions across Revised editions" Tags="|discussion|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9591" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9574" CreationDate="2019-11-13T14:37:28.103" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We won’t be changing anything right now&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system restrictions around changing this field means that we have no realistic options for changing the tag recommendation text in a way that meets our goals. Our most practical option is to lock one of the tags to [dnd-5e], our primary suspect, but we will be unable to measure whether that has any practical benefit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, given the lack of good options, right now we won’t be changing anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We can’t change much except maybe making a tag suggestion static&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is our current tag prompt when asking a new question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jVOn5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jVOn5.png&quot; alt=&quot;an input field labelled “tags” with the text “e.g. (actions lore published-adventures)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It follows this format, with each tag randomly determined:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;e.g (tag1 tag2 tag3)&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to two SE staff members, Catija and Shog9, changing the prompt can be done with developer assistance. However our options for making this change are very limited:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can’t change anything outside of the parenthesis&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can make some/all of the tags determinate/static instead of randomly generated&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can have a combination of static text and tags (static or random)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No viable options for changing the text&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Syntactically, that doesn’t really leave us any way to clearly indicate that users are expected to include a system tag if it is needed for their question and that there are a variety of systems to choose from. And that was the major goal of the change. So, there’s nothing we can do here to accomplish that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, the only thing we might find helpful to do would be to lock in one or two of our most troublesome system tags and hope that it helps people see to use them. However...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We need data for this change, and there’s no way to get it currently&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before considering any change, we need to find a way to measure the current issues surrounding missing-system-tag questions so that the effects of the change can be measured and so that they can be reverted if the change is not working. However, we’ve not yet found any way to make these measurements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is important because pinning a system comes at a cost of other tags that might have been displayed and a more philosophical cost of perhaps appearing to favor those systems as site-wide focuses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Without a data source to measure success/failure and with no clear options for changing the text to accomplish the goals, we have decided the best course of action is to make no changes right now.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anyone has any suggestions for measuring this issue (or for some solution we may have missed), please don’t hesitate to send it our way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-13T14:37:28.103" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9590" CreationDate="2019-11-14T16:04:35.357" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not all revised editions are considered useful errata to previous editions. Sometimes information from a newer edition will be helpful to illuminate how something is originally supposed to work, but other times new information is a change rather than a clarification of the earlier edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general rule of thumb, check with the asker if answers based on later editions are relevant to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Absent asker interaction, best to not assume: if it’s not certain that the new edition’s version of a rule or material is a &lt;em&gt;clarification&lt;/em&gt;, assume that it’s a &lt;em&gt;change&lt;/em&gt; and not necessarily helpful for players of the earlier edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-11-14T16:04:35.357" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9593" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9594" CreationDate="2019-11-14T16:19:53.800" Score="6" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is coming out of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/120239/52137&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; asking for a check on the CR calculation of a pair of homebrew monsters and the subsequent encounter with them. I retagged it from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;, but was met with some disagreement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bulk of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions are of the kind &quot;is this (sub)class/race/feat/etc balanced?&quot;. However, there are a number of others which are &quot;is the CR/price/rarity of my monster/magic item/etc. correct?&quot;. From my point of view these are also a kind of review of magic items and requires the same expertise, ie. evaluating the power of a presented piece of content within the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are (or should) questions asking for (a check on) CR calculations of homebrew monsters (or equivalents) be tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(If not this should perhaps be reflected is the already quite long tag description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related reading:&#xA; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9149/52137&quot;&gt;Do we want a [homebrew-review] tag separate from the [homebrew] tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-11-14T16:27:06.673" LastActivityDate="2019-11-14T18:00:47.350" Title="Are CR calculation of homebrew monsters questions homebrew-review questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9593" CreationDate="2019-11-14T16:57:37.583" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, questions about CR calculations should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions; asking &lt;em&gt;whether something is balanced&lt;/em&gt; is sufficiently similar to asking &lt;em&gt;when something would be balanced&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot;&gt;current description of the homebrew-review tag&lt;/a&gt; is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions about evaluating &lt;strong&gt;the viability of new rules&lt;/strong&gt; content homebrewed for an existing system. This tag should be used when locally-created, non-published content is at the heart of the question. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that questions asking &quot;what should be the CR of X monster&quot; &lt;strong&gt;aren't about the &lt;em&gt;viability&lt;/em&gt; of a new rule&lt;/strong&gt;, they are asking for a determination of &lt;strong&gt;where to place something on the CR scale&lt;/strong&gt;. Most of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions include some form of the word &quot;balance&quot; (basically a synonym of viability) but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bhomebrew-review%5D+is%3Aquestion+-%22balance%22+-%22balanced%22+closed%3Ano+duplicate%3Ano&quot;&gt;here is a list&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions that do not contain &quot;balance/balanced&quot;, and are neither closed nor duplicates. There are only 44 of these out of the 177 total &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions which are neither closed nor duplicates. Here are some examples from the list put into some categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;About spell level:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97097&quot;&gt;What level should my fun spell be?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149186&quot;&gt;How powerful is a &amp;quot;Breathe Air&amp;quot; spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;About item rarity:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151707&quot;&gt;Is the rarity of this homebrew Haunted Staff appropriate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136233&quot;&gt;What is the rarity of my homebrew shortbow?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143266&quot;&gt;What rarity should this homebrew Cloak of the Giant Guard item be?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121512&quot;&gt;Is the rarity of this homebrew item appropriate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143230&quot;&gt;What is the rarity of this homebrew magic staff, &amp;quot;Blackthorn&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150570&quot;&gt;What rarity should this homebrew scimitar fused to a wand of the war mage be?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;About item pricing:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132167&quot;&gt;Pricing a homebrew magical item allowing the use of a random spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147671&quot;&gt;How much gold is this DM-created Mask of Three Faces magic item worth?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67908&quot;&gt;Is this custom Sniper Crossbow magic item correctly priced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/111562&quot;&gt;How much should this homebrew ioun stone cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88677&quot;&gt;Is this Cloak of Unearthly Grace pricing fair?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;About monster CR:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67190&quot;&gt;What is the Challenge Rating of this custom “Volcanic Dragon”?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/60324&quot;&gt;Is my CR correct for this Elementalphant monster?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158684&quot;&gt;What is a proper CR for this homebrewed bloodborne-esque NPC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136742&quot;&gt;What would be the challenge rating for this homebrew &amp;quot;Obelan Enforcer&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Other:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77547&quot;&gt;How Many Sorcery Points Should This Homebrew Metamagic Cost?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is pretty clear that many of these questions &lt;strong&gt;aren't about the &lt;em&gt;viability&lt;/em&gt; of homebrew content&lt;/strong&gt;, but instead are about &lt;strong&gt;where to place homebrew content on a particular scale&lt;/strong&gt; such as CR, pricing, rarity, and spell level. Seeing as how these are 18/177 or about 10% of the question variety found under this tag, it is no insignificant number.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though this is only the precedence thus far I do believe that &lt;strong&gt;&quot;Where do I put this?&quot; questions should be tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The skill sets required to answer such questions are sufficiently similar to those required to answer other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this to be the case because they are often &lt;strong&gt;very similar to&lt;/strong&gt; or even &lt;strong&gt;already a common part of&lt;/strong&gt; the more obviously &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; questions. For example, say a question is asking whether a spell is balanced, and it has a given level. &lt;strong&gt;A good answer does not simply say whether something is balanced or not&lt;/strong&gt;, but will &lt;strong&gt;explain why and suggest ways to balance the spell&lt;/strong&gt;, including changing the originally proposed level. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somebody who provides good answers to questions about &lt;strong&gt;if something is balanced&lt;/strong&gt; can also provide good answers to questions about &lt;strong&gt;when something &lt;em&gt;would be&lt;/em&gt; balanced.*&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The two type of questions ask effectively the same things&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usual &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; answer is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This content is/isn't balanced, here are the reasons (and thus also suggestions for fixing it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And with these sorts of &quot;Where do I put my homebrew content on scale X?&quot; questions, an answer goes as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This content is balanced &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; you put it &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt; (basically, if you apply this fix)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that asking whether something is balanced is near-identical to asking when something would be balanced and so the tag is correctly used on both sorts of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though the tag description doesn't particularly suggest questions of the form &quot;Where on this scale should I put this homebrew material?&quot; are on-topic for the tag, I believe such questions &lt;em&gt;correctly have this tag&lt;/em&gt;. The skill sets required are sufficiently similar to warrant doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said I'm unfortunately not sure how to update the tag description given that it has only 19 free characters left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2019-11-14T18:00:47.350" LastActivityDate="2019-11-14T18:00:47.350" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9595" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9254" CreationDate="2019-11-14T23:49:44.530" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;This started out as a comment on one of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159514/35259&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159518/35259&quot;&gt;five&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159521/35259&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159522/35259&quot;&gt;about&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159523/35259&quot;&gt;water&lt;/a&gt;, but I thought (since the comment had a few upvotes on in after a few hours of being there) it ought to be added here as an answer (although it's somewhat of a fragment of an answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;An argument for...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP of the aforementioned questions about water suggested that asking the questions all at once and getting it over with all in one go minimises the effect of the flooding of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certainly in this case, there were only five questions, and I think this argument stands up in this case, whereas if someone had twice as many, this argument might not scale up to that quantity of related questions (although if someone has that many questions about one topic, that may be indicative of a greater issue...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;An argument against...&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me personally, asking many closely related questions in one go creates the problem that I get bored going through them all, meaning I'm less likely to read each subsequent question properly as opposed to just skim-reading, and less likely to post or vote because I'm getting bored with the subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If others feel this way as well, then asking all the questions at once may encourage users to skip them (or some/most of them) resulting in most of them not being read, and since they were all asked at once, they will all swiftly drop off the &amp;quot;new questions&amp;quot; page together, resulting in most of them being largely ignored. If you want these questions to actually get some attention, it would be better to ask them with reasonable time gaps, since asking them all together might not end up being too different to not asking them at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-12T09:24:52.680" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9589" CreationDate="2019-11-15T05:39:50.957" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The 'better' question should not be closed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;'Better', of course, being a bit subjective but including which question most clearly spells out the problem, which has attracted the 'better' answer(s) etc. Older is better than newer if everything else is equal(ish).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T05:39:50.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9597" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9584" CreationDate="2019-11-15T17:22:56.833" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thank you for taking the time. To help out, I've taken a first round crack at providing some tag guidance on the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-class&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; and by synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psychic-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psychic-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psychic-magic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spiritualist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spiritualist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spiritualist&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occultist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occultist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occultist&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These edits were based on your discussions within this question and your cited answer; I'm not an expert on either PF or psionics so I'd appreciate a double check. I did deviate from the manner which you tagged things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kineticist&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kineticist&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;kineticist&lt;/a&gt; to simply be as broad as possible instead of citing specific system. I'm not sure if a Call of Cthulu game has something like a spiritualist or occultist class in it, so I didn't want to exclude other games by mentioning specifics in the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am concerned that my tag guidance on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/occult-magic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;occult-magic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;occult-magic&lt;/a&gt; is going to create an issue with regards to the introduction of the term in PF2e. I've only skimmed the rules for PF2e, but I'm concerned there may be legitimate broad questions relating to magic types in PF2e that may feel the tag's guidance excludes their system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="31402" LastEditDate="2019-11-15T17:27:57.453" LastActivityDate="2019-11-15T17:27:57.453" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9598" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9599" CreationDate="2019-11-15T21:13:38.010" Score="13" ViewCount="225" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, there were several questions posted in quick succession regarding the &lt;em&gt;shape water&lt;/em&gt; spell in 5e. Shortly after that, a new tag was created for the spell - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shape-water&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shape-water&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shape-water&lt;/a&gt; - and added to the questions. Subsequently, the tag was added to older questions as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the previous &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;meta on tagging individual spells&lt;/a&gt; and the decision NOT to do it, should we burninate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or is there a good reason that this spell is different and needs it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-03-10T17:58:26.490" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T18:22:17.840" Title="Should we burninate the [shape-water] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9598" CreationDate="2019-11-15T21:54:30.803" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tag isn't necessary, but don't need to burninate at this point.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing special about &lt;em&gt;shape water&lt;/em&gt; which merits one, so we shouldn't have one for the reasons already given in that meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we can save our precious diamond mods the effort and just make it a synonym. This is already done for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tensers-floating-disk&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tensers-floating-disk&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tensers-floating-disk&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tiny-hut&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tiny-hut&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tiny-hut&lt;/a&gt; so we can just do it with this one too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2022-03-10T18:22:17.840" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T18:22:17.840" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9600" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9604" CreationDate="2019-11-19T16:34:25.843" Score="3" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;The other day I found out that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt; tag exists. And upon looking further, it currently exists only on 14 questions (now 17, with 2 having been added to questions by other users), some of which also have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt; tag, some of which do not. One thing I found particularly interesting is that there are exactly two questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt; that are marked as duplicates, and it just so happens that &lt;em&gt;none&lt;/em&gt; of their marked duplicates (there are four) also have this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151554&quot;&gt;Is the spell combo Booming Blade into a quickened Thunderwave legal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Duplicates:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49532&quot;&gt;Casting multiple spells in a single round&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47421&quot;&gt;Does order matter when casting a cantrip with a casting time of a bonus action and another spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133767&quot;&gt;Which uses of Bonus-Action spellcasting are legal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153628&quot;&gt;Is it possible to take multiple bonus actions in a single turn?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Duplicate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113862&quot;&gt;How to get more Bonus Actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Their current (as of writing) tag descriptions are provided below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions involving the rules that apply to taking a certain action in a specified system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;For questions centering around the &quot;action economy&quot;, a meta-game term for the inherent limits on the number of things a character can do in a single turn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In turn-based games, action economy might involve taking extra actions because of a feature, using less time to perform some action, taking actions for all of your summoned monsters, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm simply unsure &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; this tag is meant to be used and how it's been being used also doesn't make great sense to me. How exactly do the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt; tags differ and how should they be used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2019-12-27T01:05:16.090" LastActivityDate="2019-12-27T01:05:16.090" Title="Should something be done to/about the [action-economy] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9601" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9600" CreationDate="2019-11-19T16:53:46.143" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Synonymize it away&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Action economy isn't a distinct topic from actions in general, so doesn't need to exist on its own and should so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt; just be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-19T16:53:46.143" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9602" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-19T19:02:49.007" Score="3" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159756/how-can-i-use-a-somatic-component-while-holding-a-weapon-in-2-hands/159757#159757&quot;&gt;This question and answer about Pathfinder 2&lt;/a&gt; generated a lot more upvotes than I expected.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I guess because it accidentally highlights a big difference between Pathfinder 1 and 2, namely in 2 you do not need any free hands to cast a spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now I am wondering if I should change the question to something more generic, like &lt;em&gt;&quot;Do you need an empty hand to cast spells?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Right now it is quite hard to find, being about a specific spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2019-11-19T19:56:22.387" LastActivityDate="2019-11-20T15:49:49.770" Title="Should I change this question to something more generic?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9602" CreationDate="2019-11-19T22:12:37.417" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question's fine - but your proposal doesn't change what you're asking.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title of your question - &amp;quot;How can I use a somatic component while holding a weapon in 2 hands?&amp;quot; - makes it clear that it's a general question. The specific spell is what prompted the question, since it both has a somatic component and acknowledges the possibility of using the weapon with two hands, but the body of the post continues by asking the more general questions &amp;quot;How can I use a somatic component while holding a weapon in 2 hands?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Is it possible with any spell?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone has essentially the same question in the future, it can be closed as a duplicate of that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also worth noting that you shouldn't edit a question in such a way that it ends up invalidating existing answers. In this case, though, I don't think your proposed change of title from &amp;quot;How can I use a somatic component while holding a weapon in 2 hands?&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;Do you need an empty hand to cast spells?&amp;quot; meaningfully changes the topic you're asking about. Titles are just summaries of questions - so if you could edit the title without editing the body and still have it be clear what you're asking, you're probably not fundamentally changing the underlying question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, it probably wouldn't be out of line to edit your question in this way... But it's also not strictly necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-19T22:12:37.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9604" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9600" CreationDate="2019-11-19T23:31:23.387" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The tag is underused&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm never a fan of removing/synonymizing tags simply because we don't think they are useful. &lt;em&gt;Someone&lt;/em&gt; found that tag useful or it wouldn't exist. It's existence isn't doing any harm so we should leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=action+economy+-%5Baction-economy%5D+is%3Aq+-%5Bactions%5D&quot;&gt;search&lt;/a&gt; for questions that mention action economy but have neither the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt; or the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt; tags and found 70 questions. From a quick scrolls through the previews I would guess that at least half of them would benefit from having the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Action economy is a broader concern than what is covered by the actions tag. Actions are concerned with &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;can I do X with Y action?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; whereas action economy is concerned with &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;what is the consequence of allowing X as a Y action?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;. In D&amp;amp;D terminology, one is primarily concerns with &lt;strong&gt;actions and turns&lt;/strong&gt;, the other with &lt;strong&gt;rounds and encounters&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on this I think the tag should remain and should be used more often to link these types of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-19T23:31:23.387" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9605" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9600" CreationDate="2019-11-20T15:45:10.530" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Burninate it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per our help center:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are tags, and how should I use them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Action economy” accomplishes none of the listed purposes: it does not connect experts with questions, it does not sort questions into a well-defined category, and it is not useful for finding interesting questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-20T15:45:10.530" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9602" CreationDate="2019-11-20T15:49:49.770" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you think the general question is valuable, ask the general question separately. It will (probably) get closed as a duplicate, which leaves a pointer to the existing answer (as you want), but lets the normal site mechanisms answer it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2019-11-20T15:49:49.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9607" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9608" CreationDate="2019-11-21T14:07:11.650" Score="1" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I noticed that we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pixie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pixie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pixie&lt;/a&gt; tag, relating to the D&amp;amp;D creature (mostly about 4e, although there's one 5e question too).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know we shouldn't create &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;a separate tag for each spell&lt;/a&gt;, as recently highlighted in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9598/should-we-burninate-the-shape-water-tag&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, and there was also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8857/burninate-mimic-tag-do-specific-monsters-need-specific-tags&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; a while back on mimics having their own tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The decision for that last one was to synonymise it with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; tag (although I'm not sure if this was ever actually done).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we do the same with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pixie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pixie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pixie&lt;/a&gt;, or should we simply burninate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pixie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pixie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pixie&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-21T14:51:49.560" LastActivityDate="2019-11-21T14:51:49.560" Title="Should the [pixie] tag be synonymised with the [monsters] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-declined|tags|burninate-request|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9607" CreationDate="2019-11-21T14:35:23.120" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pixie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pixie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pixie&lt;/a&gt; tag is fine as-is. No action needs to be taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do have race tags: see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/elf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;elf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;elf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dwarf&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dwarf&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dwarf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tiefling&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tiefling&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tiefling&lt;/a&gt;, etc. It's fine to also have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pixie&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pixie&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pixie&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should not be a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monster&lt;/a&gt; because it is not a monster. It may be ascribed a mechanical treatment of monster-ness in some game releases, but we need to look at this more from a generic point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note the issue about spell tags is unique to spells themselves and does not inherently set a precedent for any other category of thing. Spells have multiple coinciding qualities that make them uniquely problematic to assign tags to. (Some notable spells like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt; are an exception.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-11-21T14:43:59.750" LastActivityDate="2019-11-21T14:43:59.750" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9609" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-21T19:53:08.720" Score="60" ViewCount="393" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, with the recent changes on Rep, I got bumped over the few points I was missing to get access to moderator tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that, came the possibility of seeing deleted stuff, and with that possibility, came curiosity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After poking around the site for a bit, checking for what does the stuff that gets deleted looks like, I came to appreciate the work of the mods/high rep uses quite a bit more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, guys, gals, and everyone else - thanks a bunch for keeping the signal-to-noise ratio awesomely high.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You guys (and gals, and everyone else) rock.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="11162" LastEditDate="2019-11-21T19:59:48.020" LastActivityDate="2021-01-06T18:10:27.837" Title="A little bit of Thank You to the undervalued janitors of the site" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9610" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-22T04:44:28.767" Score="8" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;The three following questions currently exist (ordered from newest to oldest):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159983&quot;&gt;If I Ready an action, can I then use my reaction for something else?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150533&quot;&gt;Reaction while holding a readied action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123481&quot;&gt;Can you forgo your readied action to take an opportunity attack instead?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are all extremely similar, and in fact, the second question is currently marked as a duplicate of the third. However, at least to me, it is quite clear that the first question is a duplicate of the second. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the first question has one well-received answer, while the second question currently has no answers whatsoever, and the third has one very well-received answer. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should be done about these three questions?&lt;/strong&gt; Should the second question have its duplicate target changed to the first question? Should the first question be marked as a duplicate of the third? Something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think my biggest confusion in from the logical inconsistency. If question 1 is a duplicate of question 2, and question 2 is a duplicate of question 3, isn't question 1 a duplicate of question 3? Which part of this is incorrect?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-27T20:45:26.803" LastActivityDate="2019-12-27T20:45:26.803" Title="Should something be done about the current duplicate statuses of these related questions on readied actions?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9610" CreationDate="2019-11-22T05:02:14.090" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Close #3 as a duplicate of #1, and fix the dupe target of #2&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like #1 and #2 are identical to each other, and one of them should indeed be marked as a duplicate of the other (as you note).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the two questions are not quite the same as #3, which is a more specific subset of the other two; whereas #1 and #2 present the general question of taking &lt;em&gt;any reaction&lt;/em&gt; instead of the readied action, #3 specifically asks about taking an &lt;em&gt;opportunity attack&lt;/em&gt; instead of the readied action. (#2 does use opportunity attacks as an &lt;em&gt;example&lt;/em&gt;, but it is not the primary question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since #3 is a subset of #1 and #2, we should look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/33569&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer to the relevant meta, &amp;quot;If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close Question A as a duplicate of Question B only when &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of the following is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered &lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question B has an &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, it seems like #3 should be closed as a dupe of #1 (despite #1 being newer), since #3 is fully and obviously a subset of #1; opportunity attacks are just one type of reaction, and there's no compelling reason to cover them separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(#2 is not the preferred dupe target since, as it was already incorrectly closed as a duplicate of #3, it has no answers. As mentioned above, #2's primary question covers the general case that #1 does, but uses the primary question in #3 merely as an example.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-22T05:02:14.090" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9612" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9651" CreationDate="2019-11-23T04:11:07.837" Score="12" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Background&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dmsguild.com/product/247882/Wayfinders-Guide-to-Eberron-5e&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; was originally released on July 23, 2018. Keith Baker's foreword on p. 4 stated (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Bear in mind: this book presents my current vision of Eberron. This is the world I run at my own table and the way that I’ve converted its ideas to fifth edition. The game mechanics are usable in your campaign, but at this time they aren’t officially part of the game and aren’t permitted in D&amp;amp;D Adventurers League events. &lt;strong&gt;These mechanics will evolve based on player feedback. This is a living document, and as these concepts are refined, this book will also be updated for free—so you will be kept up to date with any changes that are made to it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of the release of &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/rpg-products/eberron&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Eberron: Rising from the Last War&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; on Tuesday, November 19, the final versions of the races, artificer class and subclasses, dragonmarks, equipment and magic items, etc. were published in that book. Many of those things had also appeared in the &lt;em&gt;Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron&lt;/em&gt;; as of the same date, the &lt;em&gt;Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron&lt;/em&gt; has also been updated with the final versions of that content (as well as the artificer class, with only the Alchemist subclass).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;4 Categories of Questions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After WGtE initially came out, there were a number of questions asking about the content in it - specifically, the versions of those things as they appeared in the initial release of that book. Most of that content (but not all) also went through the Unearthed Arcana playtest process - and not all of the questions about content that went through UA were marked as such by including the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as of the release of RftLW, much of the content those questions are about has changed to varying degrees:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some of the content being asked about &lt;strong&gt;did go through the UA process&lt;/strong&gt;,&#xA;but &lt;strong&gt;changed in a minor way&lt;/strong&gt; that doesn't substantially affect the&#xA;question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143396/does-the-warforged-resilience-racial-trait-apply-to-saving-throws-against-poison&quot;&gt;Does the Warforged Resilience racial trait apply to saving throws against poison damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(The name of the trait was changed to &quot;Constructed Resilience&quot;, but&#xA;the quoted text is unchanged.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139413/can-a-changeling-shapeshifted-into-a-mind-flayer-read-deep-speech&quot;&gt;Can a Changeling shapeshifted into a mind flayer read Deep Speech?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(The name of the relevant changeling trait was changed to &quot;Shapechanger&quot;, but the relevant portion of it was unchanged.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132355/can-changelings-change-shape-to-look-identical-to-a-specific-person&quot;&gt;Can changelings change shape to look identical to a specific person?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(Besides the trait being renamed, the wording of the trait changed slightly, but not in a way that invalidates the question or answers.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some content being asked about &lt;strong&gt;did go through the UA process&lt;/strong&gt;, and&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; change in some substantial way&lt;/strong&gt; in the final version of that&#xA;content (potentially invalidating the question entirely).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/149644/can-a-warforged-suffer-from-magical-exhaustion&quot;&gt;Can a Warforged suffer from magical exhaustion?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(The relevant line about exhaustion was entirely removed in the&#xA;final version of the racial trait, which was also renamed.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131728/is-a-warforged-considered-to-be-wearing-armor&quot;&gt;Is a Warforged considered to be wearing armor?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(The Integrated Protection trait was totally changed.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/156098/can-a-warforged-druid-use-composite-plating&quot;&gt;Can a warforged druid use composite plating?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(Same as above; the trait was changed to remove the thing being&#xA;asked about.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some content &lt;strong&gt;didn't go through the UA playtest process&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;strong&gt;changed&#xA;in a minor way&lt;/strong&gt; (since its appearance in WGtE) that doesn't&#xA;substantially affect the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/141645/does-the-double-bladed-scimitars-special-attack-let-you-use-your-ability-modifi&quot;&gt;Does the double-bladed scimitar&amp;#39;s special attack let you use your ability modifier for the damage of the attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(The wording of its Special property is slightly different, and the&#xA;Revenant Blade feat no longer adds a damage die to the double-bladed&#xA;scimitar's bonus action attack, but the underlying question remains.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some content &lt;strong&gt;didn't go through the UA playtest process&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;change in some substantial way&lt;/strong&gt; in the final version of that content&#xA;(potentially invalidating the question entirely).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I can't find any examples of this, this category is purely&#xA;hypothetical - but it would be nice to cover the possibility in&#xA;case it exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This case would be theoretically possible if it covered one of the&#xA;lore sections of WGtE, or one of the mechanical sections of WGtE&#xA;that weren't playtested in UA (such as the clawfoot raptor, which&#xA;did have some changes but didn't get any questions asked about it).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How should we handle these 4 types of questions going forward?&lt;/strong&gt; Do they need to be handled differently based on category?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My previous approach:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After RftLW was announced but before it was released, I did retag some of the questions about WGtE content that appeared in UA - particularly about warforged, which I knew were going to change - with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag (and edited the question to clarify that they were referring to the versions that appeared in UA: Eberron Races) in anticipation of the impending changes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139073/does-the-warforged-envoys-integrated-tool-feature-give-you-a-free-tool&quot;&gt;Does the Warforged Envoy&amp;#39;s Integrated Tool feature give you a free tool?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159028/does-a-ua-envoy-warforged-have-to-choose-a-specific-vehicle&quot;&gt;Does a UA envoy warforged have to choose a specific vehicle?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159090/if-a-ua-warforged-envoys-integrated-vehicle-is-damaged-does-it-regain-hit-poin&quot;&gt;If a UA warforged envoy&amp;#39;s integrated vehicle is damaged, does it regain hit points when its warforged host takes a long rest?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not sure if we should continue to take the same approach for other questions of this type in categories 1 and 2 - and more significantly, that approach isn't feasible for handling questions in categories 3 and 4.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should questions in categories 1 and 2 be retagged? What should we do about categories 3 and 4? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Outliers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my search, I did find a few other questions that I wasn't sure how to categorize:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130452/how-you-calculate-a-warforged-barbarians-ac&quot;&gt;How you calculate a warforged barbarian&amp;#39;s AC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132345/what-are-the-consequences-for-a-warforged-that-does-not-spend-6-hours-in-its-ina&quot;&gt;What are the consequences for a Warforged that does not spend 6 hours in its inactive state?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145466/how-does-a-spellshard-spellbook-work&quot;&gt;How does a spellshard spellbook work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, each question itself seemed based on the UA (i.e. original WGTE) version of the content being asked about; the final version of that content did change in RftLW and the updated WGtE in a way that didn't necessarily invalidate the whole question but did potentially change the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, I left a comment informing the user that the content in question had changed, and asked if they were interested in the UA version alone or whether they were interested in an answer based on the revised version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(That said, my assessment of these questions might be off, and it might warrant its own separate meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, there are also questions about content that appeared in the original version of WGtE - whether or not they appeared in UA - but didn't change at all... But those aren't really a concern here, since they can be left as-is without any real issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-29T20:37:48.190" LastActivityDate="2019-12-27T03:47:53.503" Title="What should be done about questions about the original versions of &quot;Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron&quot; content, now that it has been updated?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9613" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9612" CreationDate="2019-11-24T23:24:16.807" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Create a new tag specifically for this content&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this topic has generated enough content to deserve its own tag. Honestly, I'm not certain why a tag for WGtE wasn't created in the first place. If there was a good reason for it I might revise my opinion, but for now they should get a new tag, possibly more than one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags that we should consider:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wayfinders-guide-to-eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wayfinders-guide-to-eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wayfinders-guide-to-eberron&lt;/a&gt; - All questions related to any version of WGtE should have this tag to make them distinct from RftLW. Downside is the lack of version clarity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron-5e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron-5e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron-5e-playtest&lt;/a&gt; - Or similar tag with &amp;quot;playtest&amp;quot; in it. Similar to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; tag this makes it clear this content is related to the pre-release versions of this eberron content.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-24T23:24:16.807" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7687" CreationDate="2019-11-25T04:22:24.973" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;most effective&lt;/em&gt; solution is to &lt;strong&gt;have the main page and existing question pages model the correct behavior visibly and clearly, by making system tags a more prominent part of UI&lt;/strong&gt;. Users should see that the site &lt;em&gt;expects&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;cares about&lt;/em&gt; system tags long before they're hovering over the &quot;post&quot; button on a new question, without having to read guiding comments or &quot;how to post&quot; documentation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is also a rather &lt;em&gt;practical&lt;/em&gt; solution in terms of overall effort vs. effectiveness and long-term payoff, except that &lt;em&gt;volunteer staff without Stack-Exchange developer access can't implement it&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The core problem is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The site's normal UI doesn't make it obvious that system tags are important.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just look at them. They're:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Tiny.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Below the question text.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stuck together with other tags like &quot;magic weapons&quot; or &quot;gm techniques.&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not just hard to notice system tags, it's also hard to intuit that they matter *because it's not clear that veteran users will look at the tiny text at the bottom of your post as the first step in answering it.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's confusing UI even compared to everyone just manually shoving tags into titles (like &quot;[D&amp;amp;D 4e] I get confused tracking initiative&quot;) on a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's because the main motivation for doing it this way is &quot;we're using an existing Stack Overflow template&quot; rather than any kind of purpose-driven design on our parts. If we were designing the site from scratch, the system tags &lt;em&gt;wouldn't look like regular tiny little tags&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Indeed, it's possible we're unintentionally sabotaging ourselves a bit by relying on system tags so much we often leave the system out of the question text – a new user may well come to the site, spend half an hour reading several questions off the main page, and &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; come away with no idea that questions are meant to be carefully and explicitly siloed by system when they try to write their first one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I think you're going to keep running into the same problem over and over again, with frustrating half-measure solutions, until that can be fixed somehow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Badgering SE stuff for a technical fix is annoying, and it may take a while, but I'm going to humbly suggest it's probably a necessary part of any solution that really cuts to the heart of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2019-11-25T04:22:24.973" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9615" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9612" CreationDate="2019-11-25T07:46:56.873" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Nothing, unless the questions might seem unclear&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the new material makes attribution of references unclear, editing in dates or links to the referenced material can avoid confusion.  If it doesn't make any references unclear, there's no reason to do anything about this; questions about the UA versions of the content or old WGtE versions of the content aren't inherently any worse than the most recent versions and there's nothing particularly special about that content that would, in my opinion, warrant any special treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-25T07:46:56.873" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9600" CreationDate="2019-11-26T15:10:12.633" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;While action-economy is a subset of actions, it is a very specific subset that, at least in D&amp;amp;D, has a really important role in how the game is played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Action-economy is about how to do more things in a round than the game would mandate. It is about why we don't pit big, lonely monsters against a party of 6. It is about balancing a game, it is about strategies and tactics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actions in general is more often about what one can do with one action, or what kind of action it is to perform a certain act in the game. It is about the rules of the game, it is about mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, those two environments feel really different to me. &lt;strong&gt;Let's keep them both.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastActivityDate="2019-11-26T15:10:12.633" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9617" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-26T19:43:59.917" Score="-4" ViewCount="263" Body="&lt;p&gt;Another question closed unnecessarily, another question we need to drag into meta to save it. This time we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/160250/4563&quot;&gt;Can you compare and contrast a Battle Smith Artificer vs a Paladin with a single dip in Hexblade?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Too broad” isn’t applicable; we have exactly two set-ups to consider, a 20th-level battle smith vs. a 1st-level hexblade/19th-level paladin. Race, ASIs, and paladin oath are variable, but only a few choices there are going to substantially impact the comparison. We have successfully handled &lt;strong&gt;far broader&lt;/strong&gt; questions than this.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A label of “primarily opinion-based” here is completely antithetical to the site’s mission. The expertise we offer—the ability of our users to recognize what is significant and what is not—is &lt;strong&gt;one of the primary values that the Stack offers&lt;/strong&gt;. To pretend all of that is purely a matter of preference and not something that experts can offer specific insight on is simply inaccurate, and were it taken as a precedent, would do substantial harm to the Stack’s ability to help querents.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A couple of precedents, found with a quick search:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95323/4563&quot;&gt;Does a multiclass Sorcerer/Wizard have something that a single-class Sorcerer or Wizard doesn’t have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152493/4563&quot;&gt;What are the advantages a Champion fighter has over a Berserker barbarian?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need for the querent to restrict things to some particular level; a good answer can go over how things change at various levels. There is no need for the querent to restrict things to some particular goal; a good answer can give an overview of what each is good at and what the relative value of those specialties is. There is no need for a dozen questions on the comparison, for different levels and with different goals in mind—a good overview is precisely what is requested and an entirely appropriate thing to seek here. The querent’s own answer is already a solid start to a real answer, though an expert should be able to improve upon it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-11-27T07:39:45.390" LastActivityDate="2019-11-27T07:39:45.390" Title="Around and around we go. Hexadin vs. battle smith question closing" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9617" CreationDate="2019-11-26T20:36:26.110" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;The requests for clarification in the comments (now the chat) are entirely reasonable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is this really a request to bake these two builds off at level 20, or is this a build that will be &quot;grown through&quot; over the course of a character's life (in which case lower level weaknesses should be taken into account), and is there any guarantee it'll reach level 20?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What is the goal of the build - Nova damage? Battlefield control? Support? Healing?  &quot;Compare X vs Y&quot; makes no sense without at least a basic statement of goal. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Encourage the OP to engage with those questions and edit the answer into their question so it can be reopened. They started to answer one in the chat/comments before frankly being disincentivized from improving their question by the scuffle over whether their question should be improved or not. If you help them improve their question it would be open again quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2019-11-26T20:36:26.110" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9620" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-28T13:32:26.203" Score="26" ViewCount="666" Body="&lt;p&gt;We had a moderator election in June 2019. Before the election, it was announced that the total moderator count would be five. We have usually had four moderators, and with one resignation prior to the 2019 elections, we had three. The earlier count was established as four in this meta in April 2017: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6963/do-we-want-three-moderators-or-four&quot;&gt;Do we want three moderators, or four?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(before the 2017 election the count was two, three having been elected with one resignation)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was personally happy to hear we were moving to five moderators. Our site's traffic has grown, we have had some rotation in active user base, snap resignations and &lt;em&gt;forces majeures&lt;/em&gt; happen, and with luck we would've gotten good candidates from a variety of timezones to have less blind spots in moderation. There wasn't any debate this time: this meta post in May 2019 featured two opinions in favor of five, none in favor of any other outcome: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9156/what-is-the-reason-we-are-moving-to-having-5-diamond-moderators&quot;&gt;What is the reason we are moving to having 5 diamond moderators?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Came the election results. In the same post where the winners of the community moderators were announced, another mod announced their retirement, leaving us at four moderators immediately: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9186/2019-community-moderator-election-results&quot;&gt;2019 Community Moderator Election Results&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I respect mxy's right to keep the news of their upcoming resignation among moderators and/or site staff, who I presume knew of the resignation in advance. But I am disappointed in the way this was handled in the community election process. There was no discussion on the moderator team size like there was in 2017 --- it seems to me that four was already decided upon, and five was chosen only to address the coming resignation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, when the three moderators at the time &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9162/11660&quot;&gt;opined&lt;/a&gt; in favor of five, advocating for a larger team because other moderators may leave with little notice, I believe at least some of them (as well as the site's Community Manager) knew the site would be served by four, not five moderators, instantly or soon after the election. I believe there are no hidden agendas beyond respecting mxy's right to keep their upcoming resignation private for the time, and certainly no malice. But I feel it is not up to the usual standards of honest communication between the community and the administration to do something like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am aware calling a snap election to get a fifth community moderator posthaste wouldn't probably be the right answer, but I think we should aim for five or possibly more moderators in the future, for better coverage and for more redundancy. But whether four, five, six, sixty mods, it should be based on open and honest discussion within the community focusing on the team size we actually want --- in my case, five and possibly more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastEditorUserId="11660" LastEditDate="2019-11-29T07:54:22.543" LastActivityDate="2019-12-01T22:43:38.200" Title="I actually wanted five moderators" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9620" CreationDate="2019-11-28T15:48:02.073" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m not a mod anymore but I can speak to the 2017 election and discussion and the lead-up to the latest election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange generally consults with and defers to the moderator team about how many moderators there should be. It’s more about what the team feels the need for than anything else. The process is pretty much that a CM drops by the mod chat and asks how many election spots it should have and then sets it up. It’s pragmatic and not really much of a discussion. Mods poke a CM about an election, a CM shows up and asks how many and sets expectations about SE’s ability to schedule it in, then goes off and does it. Resignation timing—for actual removal of the diamond and any announcement—is discussed if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 2017 discussion was more about the team having some uncertainty with breaking with the original number 3. Asking the community for help making &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; decision gave us more to think about. Even after that discussion we were leaning to staying at 3, until at the last minute a couple of us thought that having more would make it easier for mods to take breaks. So at the last minute, we asked for two spots in the election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the 2017 discussion was less a community mandate and more helping is think through our answer to SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe it should be more a community discussion and decision, but SE doesn’t expect it to be, and CMs treat it very much as up to the mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t know how the current mod team feels about the number. I can say that expecting a discussion to be a regular part of mod elections would be unusual. It could be made part of the community culture here, but if the mods don’t want their number to be the subject of referenda, I don’t think SE will impose more moderator slots than the team wants.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE and the CMs generally trust that moderators know best whether they need more or fewer mods. Having been a mod, I know that it gives a kind of perspective on the site that is unavailable otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess the bottom line, aside from providing some background, is this: if the community wants more mods, it would have to get the mod team to &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; more mods, not just establish that the community wants more, since the team is who SE leave it up to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2019-11-28T15:48:02.073" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9622" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-11-29T14:53:34.610" Score="6" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Character optimisation is not normally my thing. Is the following character optimisation question appropriate for main-site? Are my goals specific enough? If not, how could I improve it?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;One of my player's PCs is a level 6 multiclassed &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Revised Ranger&lt;/a&gt; - Beast Conclave 5 / Warlock Fiendish Patron 1. They are a Variant Human with the Shield Master feat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;They started off as a strength based, primarily melee fighting Ranger with (above averagely strong for their party) stats (rolled 4d6 drop 1, + Racials + level 4 ASI) as follows:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  18 STR, 16 DEX, 14 CON, 10 INT, 16 WIS, 13 CHA&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;They then multiclassed, taking a level of Warlock for RP reasons at the last level up (level 6) (their character had literally made a pact wth a fiend in the preceding game narrative). This was their choice, not mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Some more relevant details:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a melee Ranger they have the Dueling fighting style and 17 AC (studded leather +3 Dex, +2 shield).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Their poor Charisma (+1) lends itself to Warlock spell picks that aren't reliant on a sucessful spell attack roll or enemies saving against a DC. They can of course simply use their Warlock slots to cast Ranger spells with their (rather better) Wisdom.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;As a Revised Ranger - Beast Conclave they don't have access to Extra Attack (though their best companion deals a decent amount of damage). Consequently Green Flame Blade has become their go to melee attack. Unfortunately this has poor synergy with Shield Bash which requires the Attack action to be taken (as opposed to the Cast a Spell action).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The lower hit dice of a Warlock is not an issue. They have rolled max health at every level up, so at level six they have 70 health (all these rolls have been made in my presence - I would say that they're pretty lucky, if they didn't roll atrociously the rest of the time).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At first glance there seems little synergy between the Wisdom based Spellcasting of the Ranger and the Charisma based Pact Magic of the Warlock. Even before multi-classing, as a Strength based melee focussed Ranger many would already consider their build to have been sub-optimal. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My table don't play an especially min-maxy game but I don't want to let this player fall massively behind the curve compared to the single-classed characters if I can help it. While the character is entirely theirs, and they are free to level up however they wish in my game, in practice they've delegated the mechanical management of their character outside of sessions to me, the DM. That includes most of the process of levelling up - though I always run it passed them for their approval (many of my other players are more engaged, and enjoy levelling their own characters, this player does not). With all that in mind I'm not certain how best to advise them to level up in the future. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should they cut their losses on this single level dip into Warlock now and continue investing heavily in Ranger from this point? Or, is there greater rewards to be had by taking more Warlock levela, with invocations and Thirsting Blade just a couple of levels away?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Parameters&lt;/strong&gt;: my goal here is to optimise their development for damage dealing (ideally still as a melee based combatant). Should the next levels they take be I &#xA;  Warlock, or should I revert to Revised Ranger? This campaign is likely to run until around level 12-15. Multi-classing further into a third class is not option. Complexity of play is not an issue, they are a competent player and have a good level of system familiarity, they're just a little lazy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2019-11-29T21:47:16.263" LastActivityDate="2019-11-29T21:47:16.263" Title="Is this character optimisation question I have 'stackable'?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9623" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9622" CreationDate="2019-11-29T15:45:12.283" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This should be stackable with enough parameters&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can clearly communicate what the player's goals are with their character, developing an option for optimized damage based on those parameters should be doable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would definitely highlight that simpler is better for this character as part of the process and make that one of the requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we know that they are currently level 6, you can provide their current stats and build decisions, and provide what they like and want to do more of (including how they approach combat generally), I think we can come up with optimized &lt;strong&gt;damage dealing&lt;/strong&gt; builds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as part of the parameters, you're going to have to clarify what you mean by 'damage dealing'. Is it continuous non-resource damage? Nova Damage? Something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You did talk about they seem to lean more towards the RP aspect. You should quantify and explain that if you can so that the proposed builds can also support that aspect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may also help to understand the party as a whole and what folks have done to do a comparison of builds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-11-29T18:35:56.427" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9624" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9848" CreationDate="2019-11-29T17:57:48.343" Score="5" ViewCount="380" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently the following question exists&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151000&quot;&gt;If I multiclass into 2 or more spellcasting classes, how do I determine my known/prepared spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the following questions are currently marked as duplicates of the above one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68604&quot;&gt;Can you cast a 9th level spell if your multiclass spell slots have 9th level spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/91430&quot;&gt;At level up, can a sorcerer learn spells of a level granted by slots he has from any class?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100336&quot;&gt;Can multiclass druids prepare &amp;amp; cast Druid spells of any level that they have a spell slot for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106653&quot;&gt;When Multi-classing Paladin with Sorcerer, could I Prepare Paladin Spells at my Sorcerer Spell Level (5th level spells max)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117610&quot;&gt;Sorcerer Multiclass learning spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123333&quot;&gt;When multiclassing a Cleric/Wizard, can I prepare wizard spells from the cleric list that the wiz could learn but didn&amp;#39;t?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/134848&quot;&gt;Land Druid/Cleric Multiclass interaction with spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142715&quot;&gt;How does learning spells work when leveling a multiclass character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150960&quot;&gt;How many spells does my Bard 6/Wizard 1 know?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/158818&quot;&gt;Arcane Trickster(9)/Wizard(2) Multiclass Unlocked Spell Levels&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/102008&quot;&gt;Arcane Trickster Multiclass - Spell Preparation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150759&quot;&gt;Does my multiclassed Eldritch Knight fighter/War wizard now have to prepare his spells as an Eldritch Knight?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59158&quot;&gt;Cantrips for each multi-class class?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/56531&quot;&gt;5e multi-classing with a wizard level 1 and a druid level 1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/147297&quot;&gt;As a Bard multi-classing into Warlock, what spells do I get?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then there are the following questions about spell &lt;em&gt;slots&lt;/em&gt; which the very first question &lt;strong&gt;does not cover&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84814&quot;&gt;How do spell slots and preparation work when multi-classing between cleric and bard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115117&quot;&gt;Excessively multiclassed character - how many spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106905&quot;&gt;How many spell slots does a multiclassed Cleric (4 levels)/Fighter (Eldritch Knight) (1 level) have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136860&quot;&gt;For multiclassed warlock/clerics, do your spell slots from the two classes stack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124622&quot;&gt;What spell slots should I have with Paladin 7 / Sorcerer 7?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145196&quot;&gt;How many spell slots should a Fighter 11/Ranger 9 have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144594&quot;&gt;How many spell slots should my level 1 wizard/level 1 fighter have?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/160162&quot;&gt;How are spell slots for an Eldritch Knight fighter 3/Arcane Trickster rogue 3 determined?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should something be done regarding all these questions about spell slots for multi-classed spellcasters? Perhaps a general question should be made to address spell &lt;em&gt;slots&lt;/em&gt; like the one that addresses spells known/prepared?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are even some other related questions about spell slots but are distinct from &quot;How many spell slots do I have?&quot; in one way or another. Thus these may be different enough that anything that happens to the previously mentioned questions wouldn't apply to these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123731&quot;&gt;Multiclass Spellcaster: Do the involved classes share the same pool of spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45750&quot;&gt;Multiclass Warlock/Sorcerer: How do spell slots recover?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/137303&quot;&gt;What are the effects of Pact Magic and Spellcasting being stacked on the same character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-03-31T20:41:20.017" LastActivityDate="2020-04-01T05:16:30.680" Title="What, if anything, should we do about these D&amp;D 5e multiclass spellcasting questions about spell slots?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9620" CreationDate="2019-12-01T22:24:37.423" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've read your concerns and we've been discussing how to respond internally. TL;DR:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yeah, the situation was messy, but it was messier than that. We're sorry you weren't fully informed; we didn't see a way to fully inform the community about what was going on. I'll explain below.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't have plans to expand to a fifth moderator slot currently. The workload isn't there for it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The specifics of our plans at the time&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want y'all having to speculate about what was going on, so let me fill in on some stuff. We couldn't make this public at the time and I've checked with Mxyzplk for permission to make it public now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9162/1204&quot;&gt;this answer about moving to five diamond moderators&lt;/a&gt;, we were in fact expecting to have five diamond moderators for a sustained period. Mxyzplk had plans to resign and put his diamond away, but they weren't actually going to be immediate. He was planning to resign some time much later, such as after the new moderators were trained and confident in their positions as moderators (which takes a long time). Mxyzplk would announce he was resigning whenever he felt ready, and that was entirely up to him to handle how he chose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That his diamond was put away immediately after the election was the result of a miscommunication with staff about timing. I don't feel it's my place to talk about this part so I won't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given we had no concrete plans to announce regarding his sometime-resignation, we had opted instead to just assume in our response that we would have five moderators for quite some time. We had also indicated there was room for someone to resign. That was about as much as we felt was appropriate given how we thought it would go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Regarding team size&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, on mod team size. SSD describes that managing the moderator team size is the prerogative of the moderator team itself. That's accurate, and honestly it would not function well otherwise. We adjust the team size based on whether the current workload fits the capacity of the current moderator team. Too much work means we need more mods; too little work leads to too many chefs in the kitchen. The community doesn't know our internal workload so it isn't in a position to be able to judge what size the moderator team needs to be. (It's definitely in a position to judge and raise issue if there's problems, and we'll address them, such as by calling elections if our problems are caused by too much workload.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderator elections aren't about size, they're about the mods that get added to fill the slots the moderator team has asked for. Moderator team sizes can be in flux—we don't negotiate a size then aim to continuously meet that size, we just request more moderators when we know we'll need more moderators to manage the workload. People resign from time to time, and elections get called, and not always together or with equivalent numbers coming and going.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand the reasons you've laid out. We're also aware of the many snap resignations occurring around the network. However, the mod team considers the current size to be a good size, and we don't intend to adjust it to five right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-01T22:43:38.200" LastActivityDate="2019-12-01T22:43:38.200" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9626" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9627" CreationDate="2019-12-04T00:24:42.070" Score="9" ViewCount="468" Body="&lt;p&gt;I apologize in advance for breaking protocol. I'm just looking to get an official okay on rewriting and publishing Red Orca's answer in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139831/is-there-a-proper-way-to-categorize-magic-items-as-minor-or-major-magic-items?answertab=oldest#tab-top&quot;&gt;thread&lt;/a&gt; in an upcoming book about Magic Items. I looked for alternative ways to contact them but fell short. It's an incredible answer and I'd love to make it more widely known to people out there looking to categorize their own items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They can reach out over reddit to u/griff-mac or Discord to griffmac#9421, if that's more appropriate. Thanks in advance, and again, I hope I'm not breaking rules too egregiously.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cheers!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60572" OwnerDisplayName="Griffin Macaulay" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-07T23:11:24.683" LastActivityDate="2019-12-07T23:11:24.683" Title="Trying to contact a user for permission to print an answer in a book" Tags="|support|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9627" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9626" CreationDate="2019-12-04T00:39:04.187" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The fast way&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/licensing&quot;&gt;Content on RPG.se is already licensed for reuse.&lt;/a&gt; You can immediately reuse anything on RPG.se so long as you follow &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/licensing&quot;&gt;the license conditions&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If after reading that you’re not sure how to integrate a piece of Creative Commons content into a larger work, consult &lt;a href=&quot;https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;CreativeCommons.org&lt;/a&gt; and, if necessary (read: is recommended), your lawyer or your publisher’s lawyer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The direct way&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The license here doesn’t eliminate the author’s original copyright, of course. Getting a license directly from the author is possible and then it has nothing to do with the CC license that content here is published under.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t have a messaging system though, so there’s no on-site way to contact someone. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/47185/red-orca&quot;&gt;Red Orca&lt;/a&gt; doesn’t have any contact info on their user profile, but they were last active within the last day, so if they see this, they might reach out here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2019-12-06T21:07:38.167" LastActivityDate="2019-12-06T21:07:38.167" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9628" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-12-06T15:55:42.133" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2019-12-06T15:55:42.133" LastActivityDate="2019-12-06T15:55:42.133" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9629" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-12-06T15:55:42.133" Score="0" Body="For questions about the Winter Bash (or holiday hats) to celebrate the end of the year." OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2019-12-07T08:47:21.777" LastActivityDate="2019-12-07T08:47:21.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7687" CreationDate="2019-12-10T09:25:54.590" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Not all questions are system based nor do specific question need answering within a system's framework. Therefore, forcing a system tag would not be a good solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am unsure if we can add a &lt;code&gt;[system-tag]&lt;/code&gt; macro in comments that would suggest adding such. Edit: apparently, this is not possible, see comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could use a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3519/we-could-use-some-more-pro-forma-comments&quot;&gt;pro forma comment&lt;/a&gt;. It could read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question does not appear to have a system tag. It might be worth adding one or explicitly stating that you are looking for a system agnostic answer by adding the &lt;code&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/code&gt; tag. Thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2019-12-10T09:52:57.663" LastActivityDate="2019-12-10T09:52:57.663" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9631" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9634" CreationDate="2019-12-11T20:59:47.067" Score="7" ViewCount="441" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently saw a question tagged about World of Darkness/Mage the Ascension and commented on answer that they didn't provide any citational support from the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They did add some in, but then I started looking at other questions with these systems and it seems like very few answers have rules support for them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Solutions are proposed and accepted, but nothing is actually supported by citing rules from the game. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not familiar with these systems, so I'm unsure if there is a reason why these answers are so different from other system answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is an issue, and these answers do need the same type of support we require for other systems(but if they don't, I'd really like to know why), what should we do to help improve the existing and future answers for these systems?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161136/what-spheres-would-a-mage-need-to-provide-an-endless-supply-of-blood-to-a-vampir&quot;&gt;What spheres would a mage need to provide an unlimited supply of&#xA;blood to a vampire?&lt;/a&gt; (This was the originating question where an&#xA;answerer did end up supplying more support.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159222/what-could-prevent-a-vampire-from-learning-magic-related-disciplines&quot;&gt;What could prevent a vampire from learning magic-related&#xA;disciplines?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102676/how-to-make-a-vampire-fire-proof&quot;&gt;How to make a vampire fireproof?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125563/how-can-a-mage-implement-a-hammerspace&quot;&gt;How can a mage implement a hammerspace?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145572/any-spells-that-would-allow-a-mage-to-breathe-while-buried-alive&quot;&gt;Any spells that would allow a mage to breathe while buried&#xA;alive?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A larger question here may be (and maybe this needs to be asked separately) if our objective question citation requirements are system-dependent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2019-12-12T17:04:54.990" LastActivityDate="2019-12-19T17:41:36.927" Title="Are the citation requirements for objective questions not applicable to systems like World of Darkness/Mage the Ascension?" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9632" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9631" CreationDate="2019-12-12T12:43:32.093" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mage: The Ascension&lt;/strong&gt;’s freeform improvisational magick system allows for the creation of a variety of effects using the building blocks of the nine Spheres. A request for aid in creating a specific effect can be answered by describing which of those spheres, singly or in combination, can achieve that end. Sometimes, there's more than one potential solution, and other parameters — like the need to be subtle, or cast quickly — can come into play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, there's often not a specific page citation that can be called out for a given effect. In these cases, it’s sufficient to call out the level of a sphere that can be applied and reference it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, note that there's no SRD for the World of Darkness games, so excessive quoting tends to be frowned upon. Better to cite the book and let the querent work it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2019-12-12T12:43:32.093" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9633" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9631" CreationDate="2019-12-12T18:28:24.823" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Because non-D&amp;amp;D players aren't generally non-experts&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange network is generally designed from expert Q&amp;amp;A.  This means I don't need to explain the basics of the stuff I'm asking about to you, or explain where it's from if that's obvious.  I can just ask my question using whatever jargon is appropriate and wait until someone with the appropriate expertise answers.  On our site, this is still how non-D&amp;amp;D questions work.  If I talk about the combat resolution system for Dogs in the Vineyard, I don't need to say stuff like &amp;quot;Okay, so, you roll dice equal to your two attributes for the combat mode and then you...&amp;quot;: I can assume you have or will RtFM and if you haven't and won't, that's your problem, not mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, for questions, if I ask a good question, I only have about a 70% chance of people with 0 experience getting mad because I didn't give them the links they want to make an easy extremely-low-quality answer.  This chance is low enough that the downvotes and close votes are, at least for me, worth the offputtingness that hopefully discourages answers from people who have only ever played the latest edition of D&amp;amp;D and don't have particularly great reading comprehension skills from grabbing a pdf of the rulebook off the internet and either throwing out whatever their first guess is after ~10 minutes of work or posting a stock 'ask the DM' answer with 0 system-specific investment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two things are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; true for our 5e D&amp;amp;D community.  There's also a subcommunity that likes editing to link everything in 5e answers to D&amp;amp;D beyond stuff, which looks like but is not usually supportive citations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, our 3.5/pathfinder has a sufficient group of highly-active really good users that you usually get a good answer to your question eventually (though it may be buried beneath highly-upvoted or accepted nice-sounding absolute garbage), and part of how that subcommunity works involves writing like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/160653/14848&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;.  That looks like a wall of citations (which is not a complaint!), but it is actually mostly not that.  The only real substantive citation in that (totally fine) answer is the link to the errata for the DMG supporting the claim that there isn't any.  The two &amp;quot;see here&amp;quot;s contain an appropriate joke emphasizing the community's eternal struggle with D&amp;amp;D's love of reusing words and a q.v. onto another tangentially related topic the author had previously treated in some detail.  The rest of the &amp;quot;citations&amp;quot; aren't support for the answer-- they are assistance to the uninitiated in looking up basic information in the books.  Like, the answer tells you the &lt;em&gt;ring of protection&lt;/em&gt; is on page 232 of the DMG, which it spells out in full.  That's because you might not know what 'DMG' means, and you might-- even though you are currently reading a question about the &lt;em&gt;ring of protection&lt;/em&gt; and it's a totally normal core magic item in the core magic item section of the DMG-- not know where to find the published statblock for the &lt;em&gt;ring of protection&lt;/em&gt;.  We write that way &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; because it supports the content of the answer but, at least for myself, because 1) it forestalls some complaints by people who haven't read the material 2) it gets more upvotes 3) it looks/sounds cool 4) it is more helpful for educating and helping the audience than not doing that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no requirement to attach non-supportive citations to your answers. As far as I'm aware, no other subcommunity on this site does that, though 5e is superficially similar and I'd write similarly for SR4 if I were answering similar questions nowadays. There is a requirement to Back Up your answers, and the current top answers on all the questions you link do that.  They just don't hand-hold you to every page and book (note also that most non-D&amp;amp;D systems only &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; one book) on every topic mentioned.  They expect you can look it up yourself if you want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Props to @KRyan and @HeyICanChan for developing our unofficial 3.x writing style.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this answer is kind of rant-y currently.  I'm not sure how to make it less rant-y.  Any edits helping with that would be appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-12T18:28:24.823" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9634" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9631" CreationDate="2019-12-12T19:49:52.793" Score="18" Body="&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; isn't D&amp;amp;D, and citations may not always be feasible.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to make clear at the outset that I do agree with you, and where proper citations and rule references are possible they should be included. I try to do this where possible when answering &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; questions, but it isn't always possible or especially desirable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few features peculiar to &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; that I think affect how reasonable a citation is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; is huge and distinctly organized&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of products released under the &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; label, and they're pretty scattered in what they cover. The &amp;quot;basic&amp;quot; rules are not strongly comparable across all of these. They're all d10 games, but as each subfranchise under &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; tries to evoke &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt;'s themes for totally different types of supernatural creatures mechanics often aren't very portable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, the way that werewolves are detailed in &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt; books is very different from how they are detailed in &lt;em&gt;Werewolf: the Apocalypse&lt;/em&gt; books, to the extent that they're not exactly describing the same thing. In &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt;, werewolves are described by vague applications of abilities unique to &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt; rather than the &amp;quot;proper&amp;quot; rules that are used in &lt;em&gt;W:tA&lt;/em&gt;. The mechanics that govern vampires are totally different from those that govern werewolves, so these awkward translations are really the best that can be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The upshot of this is that there is often little ambiguity in which books are meant for most questions. If you have a question about &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt;, the answer is almost certainly in the &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt; core rulebook. Some more precise questions (say, about a specific clan in &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt;) will draw from the splatbook for that clan, and there are rarely alternatives to choose from. In cases where there legitimately are multiple possibilities it seems to me that people generally do offer citations (examples include updated books disagreeing with previous versions within an edition, or rules which may plausibly be spread across multiple books).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is some confusion that arises from poorly named editions of the games (old WoD vs. new WoD, Theater of the Mind vs. 2nd Edition vs. Revised vs. V20 vs. Chronicles vs. V5), but typically tags on the question are specific enough to head it off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Meta-madness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A big part of the &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; games is the metaplot-- the &amp;quot;true&amp;quot; story of what's going on behind the scenes. Many questions that aren't about specific mechanics touch on this in some way, and the answers (to the extent that any exist) are spread across every conceivable product in ways subtle and explicit. The metaplot is, famously, not consistently described, meaning that generally citations are not definitive in answering the question. This was, allegedly, by design, to foster creativity in specific Storytellers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice, it's simply unclear what is canonically true and what isn't. As RPG.SE isn't a forum it's not a good place to discuss which citations should prevail over others, or what abandoned plot points are still in force (I'm looking at you, &lt;em&gt;Secrets of the Black Hand&lt;/em&gt; Vicissitude parasites!). Some of the sourcebooks that provide (commonly accepted to be) canonical answers don't even have rules in them-- there are &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; novellas and comics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The result of this is that it's extremely difficult to discern the truth of an answer from trolling the books, and the effort of doing so is immense. Providing citations is great for indicating the thought behind a position, but aren't definitive in the way that they generally are for D&amp;amp;D. It's a bit like trying to describe the specific properties of Miska, across all editions of D&amp;amp;D at once, for a huge proportion of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. As an aside...&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of canonically true information &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; exist in the books, but in a particularly casual style. Most of the books include multiple, long narrative sections full of detail and with annotation-style comments (also providing game-relevant information) tacked on. In many cases this would be hard to cite-- it's an observation by an in-universe character reading or recounting the narrative section and commenting on it. The annotation doesn't include enough context to be a citation on its own, and citing the context can often result in a &lt;em&gt;massive&lt;/em&gt; block of quoted text from which it is hard to extract the salient information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4. &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; is a mess&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean no disrespect. &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt; was the first tabletop game I ever played or ran, and I think highly of &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; in many ways. But it's simply full of inconsistencies and other problems which make scope awkward in approaching questions. I mentioned above the difference in how werewolves are represented in their own product vs. in other books under the &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; franchise. If a querent comes here asking a question about werewolves, it's not totally clear which would be the authoritative answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent only has the &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt; core rulebook, would they be able to use an answer drawing from &lt;em&gt;W:tA&lt;/em&gt;? Or might their problem be that the awkwardly-translated werewolf information in &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt; is too shallow and one-dimensional to use in the way they want? Should answerers expect the querent to buy and use the &lt;em&gt;W:tA&lt;/em&gt; core rulebook? The &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; products aren't unified in the way that D&amp;amp;D books are, and without requiring askers to list all specific products whose contents might be valid it becomes hard for answerers to even identify the correct set of rules from which to offer an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The White Wolf wiki is particularly bad about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;5. &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; questions are often broad and poorly specified with respect to cite-able information&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of your example questions (the one about learning magical Disciplines) had an answer from me which contained no citations. The reason I didn't cite anything there was because answering the question in a comprehensive way with citations would require &lt;em&gt;dozens&lt;/em&gt; of citations. There are more than a few magical Disciplines in &lt;em&gt;V:tM&lt;/em&gt;, and they have varying amounts of things in common with each other (it's not at all like comparing an arcane spellcaster to a divine spellcaster, for example).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I won't say that it was necessarily &lt;em&gt;appropriate&lt;/em&gt; to not add citations, but to hunt down and add each one for each style of magic that had an answer would take ages. My answer (though not popular) &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; correct, even though it doesn't cite the nameless annotator in &lt;em&gt;Blood Magic: Secrets of Thaumaturgy&lt;/em&gt; expressing (multiple times) that unapproved individuals learning Thaumaturgy are to be executed by the Tremere clan across a narrative section written by another unnamed character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;6. SE factors&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all know about the odd incentives that the SE format can introduce. It's a simple truth that &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; questions are fairly niche and rare here, meaning that there are relatively few users ready to assess how reasonable a citation is. And there is a particularly short timeframe to post an answer and collect whatever few upvotes are ever going to be available for a given &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; question, turbocharging the drive to get an answer in right away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And since adding &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; citations is difficult, time consuming, not definitive, and often (apparently) of little value to querents, it doesn't surprise me that answerers often determine that fully-cited answers aren't necessary for some questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;tl;dr:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really do think that there are reasons that providing citations is more difficult and less useful for &lt;em&gt;WoD&lt;/em&gt; questions than for many, perhaps most, other game systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are still many questions for which citations are definitely appropriate and helpful, and those &lt;em&gt;should include citations&lt;/em&gt;. For others, demanding citations in all answers will only make answers worse (or prevent answers from being posted in the first place). I don't know how to gauge where the line between those question types is, or how to respond to an answer lacking citations when they should be present (short of posting my own answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-12T21:58:11.673" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9635" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9631" CreationDate="2019-12-12T20:00:10.073" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I will fully concede to not having familiarity with most of these systems, and there is therefore an outside chance that my unfamiliarity has led me to miss some critical assumption or knowledge about the system that would render me to miss the obvious ways these answers are supporting themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I don't get the sense [most of] these answers properly justify themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at each example to see why (excepting the first one Naut cited, because that one did receive citing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/159232/42386&quot;&gt;What could prevent a vampire from learning magic-related disciplines?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is probably the least egregious of the examples provided, since the original question is ultimately asking for an answer that proves a negative... which tends to lead to uncited answers (you can't cite text that doesn't exist).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it would benefit from at least citing examples of lore that prove the precedent that vampires might be averse to learning magic-related disciplines, if only because the original question didn't cite any such precedent earlier. This is relevant because there might not be any such precedent in the first place; and if so, that might make for a relevant frame challenge to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102676/how-to-make-a-vampire-fire-proof&quot;&gt;How to make a vampire fireproof?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this answer has two problems. Firstly, it's subject to link rot. This is technically true any time that you place a hyperlink in an answer (or anywhere, really), but in this context, the link is only to a fan-created wiki page, and these sites are generally unreliable. So if that page ever goes down, the answer will become unsubstantiated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second problem is that the answer fails to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/627/42386&quot;&gt;Back it Up&lt;/a&gt; with respect to how it applies this dance. It offhandedly mentions that at the answerer's table, they permit the extra point to Courage to also give immunity to Rotschreck as a houserule, but doesn't adequately explain why they use this houserule at their table or what the impact has been on their play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/125564/42386&quot;&gt;How can a mage implement a hammerspace?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be honest, although the answer has its own issues, the question seems to pretty directly fail our research requirements. In D&amp;amp;D5e, it would be generally unacceptable to ask a question like &amp;quot;how could I build a good Gish character?&amp;quot; because the question becomes too open-ended; we instead prefer questions like &amp;quot;Is this Sorcerer14/Cleric6 character with [x, y, z] going to allow me to be effective in melee combat?&amp;quot; because it gives specific, concrete goals that the OP is trying to achieve, which we are trying to evaluate the merits of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like I said: I'm not familiar with Mage: The Ascension. What I might not know is that there's a specific ability, &amp;quot;Create Hammerspace&amp;quot;, that does exactly what the OP wants, and they're just unaware of it. But based on both the answers it got, and the framing of the question itself, it appears to instead be an overly-open-ended question in the form &amp;quot;what would you suggest to solve this problem?&amp;quot; which leads to the Too Broad/Overly Opinion-based kinds of questions that are generally unsuitable on this stack. So I don't know that that question should have remained open in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even accepting that it did remain open (and assuming there were good reasons I'm simply unaware of for it to remain open), the answerer should cite the specific rules that allow the spheres they're using to behave in the way that they're claiming they behave. The descriptions for these effects aren't usually a single sentence in the source material, and it shouldn't be incumbent on the reader to have to dig through the material being referenced to prove that the person providing the answer knows what they're talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145572/any-spells-that-would-allow-a-mage-to-breathe-while-buried-alive&quot;&gt;Any spells that would allow a mage to breathe while buried alive?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This appears to be little different to the second answer we looked at, except that this appears to be a much simpler case. As a result, it wouldn't have required much evidence to cite either of the spell spheres referenced, and maybe quote the specific sections that justify their behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really see a need to have drastically different expectations of rules citations for different game systems. I respect that in many of these cases trying to track down the specific rules could be difficult or time-consuming, but given these kinds of questions tend to get a lot less attention in general, I don't think it's unreasonable to spend a little extra time making sure the citations are correct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, being able to back up a claim in an answer, whether by citing a specific rule, or by descriptively providing direct experience, is still an extremely valuable tool towards proving the applicability and validity of an answer, and I don't really see that this differs just because you're not playing Dungeons and Dragons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in general, if the expections on answer citation are being insufficiently enforced for these systems (which certainly seems to be the case, given the evidence I've looked at), I think we should strongly consider more proactively referencing these expectations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-12T21:31:59.427" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9636" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2019-12-12T20:47:18.960" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;In-laws like cheese, right?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161208/whats-the-greatest-number-of-hands-i-can-have-to-annoy-my-mother-in-law-with&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the greatest number of hands I can have to annoy my mother-in-law with?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is the most important question of our time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-12T20:47:18.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9631" CreationDate="2019-12-12T21:03:26.587" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4765/is-this-site-for-experts-or-not&quot;&gt;Is this a site for experts, or not?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To open, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9631/are-the-citation-requirements-for-objective-questions-not-applicable-to-systems#comment31716_9632&quot;&gt;I will quote @thedarkwanderer aka @Pleasestopbeingevil&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This entire site is premised upon &quot;someone who already knows how it works [knows] if the answer is correct&quot;.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RPG landscape is very broad with rules light games, rules heavy games, and loads of variations in between. There are even 200-words-or-less RPGs in the population of games that may trigger questions here.  (For example, there are &lt;em&gt;roll for shoes&lt;/em&gt; questions).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even with a system that is &quot;rules-medium-toward-rules-heavy&quot; like D&amp;amp;D's various editions, ambiguity arises in the material that is published.  For any system, not just Mage the Ascension / World of Darkness, that may not be as rules heavy, one could expect more cases where an expert (as defined by the meta in the title) needs to rely on knowing the game from actual play to arrive at an answer to a given problem.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I personally, as a reader for many questions, like to see rules citations, I am not in a position to know how useful or necessary a citation is for a given problem unless I am very familiar with the game and its play at the table.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Am I an expert or not?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does one do when one comes across a question or answer that doesn't seem to meet &quot;back it up!&quot; standards? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you are familiar with or expert with this game, comment and prompt the answerer to improve the answer.       &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you are not familiar with nor expert with this game, then leave that commenting and prompting &lt;em&gt;for someone who is&lt;/em&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In either case, expert or not, when it seems soft on support leave one comment that the answer needs more support.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of questions and answers that I leave alone because I am neither familiar with nor expert in a system.  And that's as it should be.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we non-experts leave comments asking for more support if the answer is unclear or seems incomplete?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Yes!&lt;/strong&gt;  (but &lt;em&gt;don't get into an argument in comments&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;br&gt;&#xA;To achieve a favorable Signal-To-Noise-Ratio, feedback on answers and questions that come from readers of all expertise levels can be helpful in improving any question or any answer.  I like to ask myself: &quot;if it is unclear to me, might it be unclear to most readers?&quot;    &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;In any case, vote your conscience&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is not helpful, or is unclear, a down vote can be cast.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2019-12-19T17:41:36.927" LastActivityDate="2019-12-19T17:41:36.927" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9639" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="513" CreationDate="2019-12-13T01:09:56.793" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it is a question that comes up in a relatively rules savvy group, then there is a good chance that other people will have the same questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do a quick search, and the question is not here, then posting it is more than appropriate, even if you provide a partial answer in the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is more than just as question and answer site. It is a repository of information. It is kind of the de facto goto for answering pretty much any question a person doesn't find the answer to on Wikipedia. The more good, solid, questions that we have and the more good solid answers that we have for those questions, the more useful the site is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35629" LastActivityDate="2019-12-13T01:09:56.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9640" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9641" CreationDate="2019-12-16T03:56:52.217" Score="3" ViewCount="48" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is there any way to set aside certain posts that I read here by, maybe, bookmarking or flagging them, so that I can find those posts later, to refer to them easily or to keep track of and see their contents later?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, I've been discussing something with some RL (real life) friends and I asked about the subject here. While reading answers that I received about it, I found myself browsing through related posts. Later, I was talking with my RL friends about the material in those related posts - and they wanted to see them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would have been nice if I had had those posts bookmarked or something so that I could've found them quickly when my friends asked to see them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59879" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-16T04:45:59.263" LastActivityDate="2019-12-16T15:03:53.270" Title="Is bookmarking posts possible so I can find them easily later?" Tags="|support|questions|bookmarks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9640" CreationDate="2019-12-16T04:33:05.123" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can &quot;favorite&quot; (star) any &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;, mainsite or meta, by clicking on the star below the downvote arrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you have favorited a post a few things will happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it will enter the list that lives in your profile--&gt;activity--&gt;favorites, thus creating an easily-accessed list of &quot;bookmarked&quot; questions;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the visible count under the (now golden-colored) star under the question's score will increment by 1;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the question's owner may earn a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges&quot;&gt;badge&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See more at the main meta.SE FAQ entry on favorited questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/53585&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's an &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; you really want to easily come back to, there's no in-site functionality that will help there. Either favorite the question and hopefully you'll remember (upon scrolling) which answer tickled your fancy, or maybe you're better served by your browser's bookmarking capabilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Flagging them would also create a trail you could find. However, the trail's hard&lt;em&gt;er&lt;/em&gt; for you to find, you'd be making more work for moderators, and you'd rack up a whole lotta declined flags which'll drive down your trustworthiness as perceived by the software. Go ahead and stick to the favorites.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-16T15:03:53.270" LastActivityDate="2019-12-16T15:03:53.270" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9642" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9643" CreationDate="2019-12-16T10:32:04.123" Score="4" ViewCount="1331" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6336/35259&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;, it is shown that we can use MathJax to create tables (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6337/35259&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; in particular). However, as I attempt to use it, I find myself unable to add the text formatting I wish to use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are my attempts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{c|l}&#xA;\text{**I want this to be bold**}&amp;amp; \text{*I want this to be italics*} \\&#xA;\hline&#xA;\text{***I want this to be bold italics***} &amp;amp; \text{_I want this to be italics too_} \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, it doesn't quite obey the markdown formatting like I expect it to. MathJax must have it's own way of specifying it; either that, or it simply isn't possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible to have simple text formatting (i.e. &lt;strong&gt;bold&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;italics&lt;/em&gt;, etc) for the text (i.e. the &quot;Some Text&quot; within this &lt;code&gt;\text{Some Text}&lt;/code&gt;)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T12:29:06.217" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T12:29:06.217" Title="How can we use bold/italics inside MathJax tables?" Tags="|support|formatting|mathjax|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9643" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9642" CreationDate="2019-12-16T11:05:32.680" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;By looking at this &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5020/662809&quot;&gt;related meta&lt;/a&gt; from Math SE, I found these formatting options which I think may be what you want. You can use &lt;code&gt;\textit&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;\textbf&lt;/code&gt; for italicised and bolded text. For mathematical symbols only, you can use &lt;code&gt;\mathbf&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;\mathit&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{c|l}&#xA;\textbf{I want this to be bold}&amp;amp; \textit{I want this to be italics} \\&#xA;\hline&#xA;\pmb{\textit{I want this to be bold italics}} &amp;amp; \textit{I want this to be italics too} \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This produces this result:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$&#xA;\begin{array}{c|l}&#xA;\textbf{I want this to be bold}&amp;amp; \textit{I want this to be italics} \\&#xA;\hline&#xA;\pmb{\textit{I want this to be bold italics}} &amp;amp; \textit{I want this to be italics too} \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-18T09:14:11.940" LastActivityDate="2019-12-18T09:14:11.940" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9645" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-12-20T00:05:57.980" Score="2" ViewCount="318" Body="&lt;p&gt;I tried to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/161631&quot;&gt;ask a question&lt;/a&gt;, but it was closed as opinion based. The version of the question at time of writing is given here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tiers as defined here &lt;a href=&quot;https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Tier_System&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Tier_System&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are the new Bard class options Tier 1? New class options: college of glamour, college of swords&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for a detailed analysis of the new bard colleges (and bard base class features) compared to the capabilities of all other classes and class options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An easy way to answer would be to show a single thing the bard can't do that another class, class option can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for mechanical analysis of features. Mainly the result of features. Such as healing word having nearly identical results as the fighters second wind. It takes the same resources (something the fighter and bard can only do a few times a day)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tier system can be applied to any game system. For instance a queen is clearly a tier two piece in chess because it can do almost everything other pieces can do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My goals with this question are to get a sense of what I should expect of the new Bard Colleges (Glamour and Swords) over the course of a level 1-20 campaign and how they compare to the other classes. I'm willing to remove mentioning of the Tier system as it seems to offend a lot of people. I really don't want one character intentionally or not intentionally showing up other character on a regular basis, which I've seen from a few builds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past in 5E I've seen the Battle Master Fighter outdone at almost every turn by a Bladesinger Wizard unintentionally. It was built in such a way to have an AC of 24 when necessary and could dish out as much damage as the Fighter round by round in the official adventures (It used a combination of haste and two weapon fighting).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen PHB Bards nearly do this to casters (but in general all my caster players have held back for the sake of non-casters, so it was hard to tell).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mainly want to know if I need to keep an eye on these class options.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I frame this for it to work on the stack? What do I need to provide, add, or clarify for it to be answerable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10419" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T22:16:03.390" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T22:16:03.390" Title="Question Workshop: Are the new Bard Class Options Tier 1" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9645" CreationDate="2019-12-20T03:23:32.720" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The question is either Too Broad or Opinion-based&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first step in getting a question reopened is to identify what is wrong with it in the first place. You have received some comments to that effect, but it appears not all of them were as clear as they could be. Therefore, I will try to lay out the issues some users have with the question in its current form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Tier list doesn't suit 5e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You post is built on the premise that 5e classes can be sorted into a neat tier list as they were in previous editions. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95405/48759&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; explains, 5e does not fit a tier list very well due to being inherently better balanced than previous editions. While you are technically correct that the tier system can be used in any game system, by being a relatively balanced system the tier list for 5e would be just a list of all the class in the same tier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe almost all the issues with this post stem from this single cause, but there are still some others worth mentioning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comparing all class abilities is too broad&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often optimisation questions get closed for lacking a criteria to optimise for. This is a similar problem. Currently you are asking for a general analysis of entire subclasses against every other class in the game. If there was a community ranking already, this would be fine; as there is not, this makes this single question unfortunately too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is too broad to be answerable on every possible criteria, we are forced to choose the criteria that we personally find most important. This is an opinion-based assessment, which likely led to the question getting closed as such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You make an inaccurate example&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your question you compare Second Wind to &lt;em&gt;Healing Word&lt;/em&gt;. Several users have comments to explain that while on the surface these features are similar (they are healing abilities), when doing this kind of analysis they are actually extremely different in terms of action-economy, opportunity-cost and availability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples should be used to clarify a question. By having a contentious example, you unfortunately have the opposite effect, making the question less clear and adding an additional source of confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How to fix it&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you can now understand what led to your question being closed in the first place, so let's work on fixing it to get it reopened. I don't believe it is a bad question, so it shouldn't take too much work. Here are some things you might like to try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Establish a base understanding&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linking the tier list was a good start. The next step would be to provide good examples of how you interpret it for 5e. Users don't need to agree with the ranking system to answer the question; we just need to understand how you interpret it. Particularly focus on where you rank the other bard subclasses on this list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once everyone is on the same page, we can answer questions even if we don't agree with the premise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Restrict the criteria&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Narrow the scope of the question by focusing on specific criteria. Lay some ground rules for comparison. For instance, you mentioned that the DMG has recommendations for the number of encounters and rests per day. Explicitly stating that answers should assume these are adhered to makes comparison simpler.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another good restriction would be ruling out magic items and feats to only focus on the class features. Also ruling out multiclassing interactions makes analysis much simpler.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, specify the level of optimisation we should be comparing against. Do we assume that all classes are maximally optimised? Giving a clear reference frame helps us write answers that will be useful to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Use clearer examples&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone questions your example as unclear, it is often a good idea to swap it to a different one or remove it entirely. The last thing you want to do is distract from your core question with comment discussions around the validity of your example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Other notes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has always been my personal policy on SE to assume good faith from other users. Comments are short and not a great way to communicate; often they appear rude or uncaring even when we don't mean to be. When a question gets closed, try to listen to the commenters that explain the reasons, and ask for clarification if you don't understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you still don't agree, bring it here to meta, and do so in a calm non-confrontational manner. Mostly of us are human and we make mistakes. Explaining your side of disagreement is a clear manner is more likely to get results you want than stating that the other side is simply wrong without supporting evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck. As I said, I think this is a good, valid question - but one that has some issues. Work with other users rather than against them, and it should get reopened and hopefully see some great answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-20T04:12:43.483" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9647" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9645" CreationDate="2019-12-20T18:42:10.183" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Narrow your scope&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there's a way to get to the heart of your question in a very stackable manner: simply asking if the subclasses are more powerful than the existing bard subclasses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The measuring stick&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, your premise is that the new bard classes are significantly better than any other class. However, you don't actually need to do a comparison against all other classes to see if that's true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can begin by comparing against the existing Bard subclasses. If the new subclasses aren't significantly superior, then that theory is disproved. If they are, then we can move on to a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But by starting with a simple comparison of power between the subclasses in question against the existing ones, we have a very narrow scope and one that we've looked at previously on the stack (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140937/what-is-the-evidence-if-any-that-the-ranger-beast-master-archetype-is-comparat&quot;&gt;beastmaster ranger&lt;/a&gt; for example.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would turn the question into a very narrow comparison that may result in the answer you were looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-20T19:23:56.507" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9648" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9649" CreationDate="2019-12-23T22:18:52.430" Score="7" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;Specifics are not important for so general a question, but I was responding to a comment from another user under one of my answers and realized that I didn't know. This user seemed upset with my answer and so while I wanted to provide some context for my reasoning I certainly did not want to bother them with additional comment notifications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you ping a user in a comment, post it, and then later edit that comment, does it ping the user a second time when the edited comment is submitted?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-24T01:16:27.003" LastActivityDate="2019-12-24T01:16:27.003" Title="Does Editing a Comment with a Ping in it Re-Ping the Mentioned User?" Tags="|support|comments|notifications|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9648" CreationDate="2019-12-23T23:54:20.063" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It will not re-ping&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From our experiment in the comments on this question, and from my own experience of using the site; editing comments will not refresh the notification from a mention. If a user is active enough to follow the notification within the 5 minute window for comment edits, they are presumably active enough to also catch any edits without the need for a new notification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a side note, the edit to the comment will not even show up unless the comments are reloaded, such as when posting your own comment, loading new ones, or refreshing the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-23T23:54:20.063" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9650" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9661" CreationDate="2019-12-26T20:52:06.173" Score="8" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta question was prompted by the following 3 questions on mainsite (mainly the first two):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69488/do-multiple-sources-of-temporary-hit-points-combine-or-do-you-only-get-one-set&quot;&gt;Do multiple sources of Temporary Hit Points combine or do you only get one set?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55751/how-does-armor-of-agathys-interact-with-getting-temporary-hit-points&quot;&gt;How does Armor of Agathys interact with getting temporary hit points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65587/dark-ones-blessing-and-armor-of-agathys-synergy&quot;&gt;Dark One&amp;#39;s Blessing and Armor of Agathys Synergy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, #1 and #3 are both closed as duplicates of #2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, question #1 seems to ask more about the general case, and simply uses &lt;em&gt;armor of Agathys&lt;/em&gt; and False Life as examples of that general question. In contrast, question #2 specifically asks about &lt;em&gt;armor of Agathys&lt;/em&gt; (including in the title), and about what happens to the effect of &lt;em&gt;armor of Agathys&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. if you're hit with a melee attack, the other creature takes damage) if the character gains another source of temporary hit points as well. Question #3 seems fairly similar to #2, in that it asks about the effect of &lt;em&gt;armor of Agathys&lt;/em&gt; if another source of temp HP is gained.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My initial thought was to wonder if #1 and #2 should be merged (into #1). If they were truly duplicates of one another, then #1 asks about the general case whereas #2 is more specific, so it would make more sense to have the dupe target be the general one. I was thinking that the answers to the #1 and #2 also both address the general case, since there is a general rule. Under this interpretation, #1 would remain the final version, #2 would be merged into it (its answers copied over). I'm unsure if #3 would then be left as a duplicate of the remaining question (#1).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, upon rereading, a different interpretation occurred to me:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Perhaps question #2 isn't quite a duplicate of #1. #2 specifically asks whether the damaging effect of &lt;em&gt;armor of Agathys&lt;/em&gt; if you get temp HP from another source, whereas #1 simply asks if they stack (#2 seems like it potentially already assumes they don't stack). If this interpretation is correct, then it seems like question #1 should simply be reopened. Question #3 also assumes they don't stack and would stay a dupe of #2, since question #3 is a specific subset of #2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not positive which interpretation is correct. Thus, I decided to ask here on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should be done about these three questions about temp HP?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should #1 and #2 be merged into #1, which would cause its answers to&#xA;be copied over? (If so, would #3 be left as a dupe of the remaining&#xA;question?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should question #1 simply be reopened, leaving the other two&#xA;questions as-is? (This is what I'm leaning towards after some&#xA;thought.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should all the questions be left as-is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2019-12-30T17:51:11.310" Title="How should these questions about temporary hit points/Armor of Agathys (that are currently marked as duplicates) be handled?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9612" CreationDate="2019-12-27T03:47:53.503" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;For categories #1 and #2: add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is pretty straightforward - it's what I was already doing, as described in the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After RftLW was announced but before it was released, I did retag some of the questions about WGtE content that appeared in UA - particularly about warforged, which I knew were going to change - with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag (and edited the question to clarify that they were referring to the versions that appeared in UA: Eberron Races) in anticipation of the impending changes [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This works for categories #1 and #2 because it went through the Unearthed Arcana playtest process, so the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag makes sense to include.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For categories #3 and #4, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag wouldn't be appropriate. Part of what I was asking was whether a different tag should be used (or a new tag created); the answer I settled on is that no tag is really necessary. As mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9612/what-should-be-done-about-questions-about-the-original-versions-of-wayfinders#comment31619_9613&quot;&gt;my comment&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9613/33569&quot;&gt;linksassin's answer&lt;/a&gt;, I feel making a new tag for WGtE in particular (or Eberron playtest content for 5e in general) would be inappropriate, as it would functionally be a &amp;quot;meta tag&amp;quot; describing the book the content in question is from, rather than describing the question/issue itself, and it would probably not get used for future questions anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For all 4 categories: edit the question to clarify which version it's about.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I mentioned in a comment on the question (and have reiterated above), a tagging solution doesn't work for categories #3 and #4, so a different approach is needed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My proposed solution might be to just edit the body of those posts to clarify which version is being asked about&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This solution works for all 4 categories equally, and is probably the most straightforward. The tag system has its limits in terms of what it's intended for and what it's useful for; it doesn't really cover situations where some rules and other content is modified slightly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9615/33569&quot;&gt;other answer to this meta&lt;/a&gt; touches on this solution, though it doesn't really expand on it much:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the new material makes attribution of references unclear, editing in dates or links to the referenced material can avoid confusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the issue is not just about references in the sense of citations in answers; it's about both questions and answers based on different versions of the content from that book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, the changes in question are sometimes more substantial than a mere errata (in D&amp;amp;D 5e, at least, &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/sage-advice-june2015&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;errata is reserved for correcting errors, not redesigning the game&lt;/a&gt;), but less substantial than a brand-new edition that actually changes the rules. There's a sort of precedent for handling such situations in this way in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/clean-up-tagging-for-world-of-darkness-related-questions&quot;&gt;World of Darkness tag cleanup&lt;/a&gt;; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5864/should-we-add-v20-m20-etc-tags-for-white-wolf-games&quot;&gt;20th-anniversary editions mostly ended up not getting their own tags&lt;/a&gt; (save for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-20th-anniversary&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-20th-anniversary&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-20th-anniversary&lt;/a&gt;) because the rules changes were not seen as distinct enough to warrant a separate tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same is true in this case, even more so than for the WoD games (where it was marketed as a new edition but closer to errata with minor redesigns). &lt;em&gt;Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron&lt;/em&gt;'s release process was basically equivalent to buying an &amp;quot;early access&amp;quot; video game; customers got access to the playtest version early with the promise of a revised final product later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, a &amp;quot;minor redesign&amp;quot; of one set of content within the same edition doesn't really need its own tag just to indicate a different sort of playtest process than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt;; the questions just need to be edited to make clear which version of the content they refer to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;For outliers: just ask the querent which version they're asking about.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, each question itself seemed based on the UA (i.e. original WGTE) version of the content being asked about; the final version of that content did change in RftLW and the updated WGtE in a way that didn't necessarily invalidate the whole question but did potentially change the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, I left a comment informing the user that the content in question had changed, and asked if they were interested in the UA version alone or whether they were interested in an answer based on the revised version.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, if the question &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; make sense for either version but the answer may have totally changed, just ask the OP if they're interested in answers based on the revised version. If they are, leave the question as-is; if not, edit the question to clarify which version of the content (e.g. warforged) is being asked about, adding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag if relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In these cases, the questions are not invalidated by the revised version, so there's no harm in leaving the question as-is anyway, except maybe giving the OP an answer they're not interested in. For instance, sometimes the original wording of the WGtE content being asked about was vague - hence the question - and the revised wording is clear; it could still be helpful to point out that the text now answers this question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2019-12-27T03:47:53.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9652" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9653" CreationDate="2019-12-28T14:06:53.013" Score="3" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question is about a possible feature this site might have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that I've lost track of what I was doing on Stack Exchange this morning because I've been dealing with students, work, and family while also going through questions here. It's the second time this kind of thing has happened. I guess it's a bad work situation right now because of the holidays. Noisy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, because of all the multi-tasking, I misplaced a piece of information here that's a little important to me. It's not the end of the world, but I really wish I could find it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be really handy if Stack Exchange maintains a history of which questions I've looked since I last logged in and if that history is easily accessible to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone know if it does maintain a list like that which I can access the next time something like this happens? Or maybe even this time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the way, I can't merely back up my browser, because my multitasking involved my browser. It's complicated, but the important thing, I'm hoping, is that I didn't log out of Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've just been doing too many things this morning and haven't been able to keep it all straight. So I'm wondering if Stack Exchange knows which questions I've looked at since logging in?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone know?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59879" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:37:11.043" LastActivityDate="2019-12-29T14:40:33.267" Title="Is there a way to find a history of the questions I've viewed on Stack Exchange?" Tags="|support|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9653" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9652" CreationDate="2019-12-28T16:00:20.360" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange does not keep a browsable history of the pages you've visited. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/30500/152515&quot;&gt;Here's a declined feature request for exactly that.&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=topactivity&quot;&gt;The Activity page of your profile&lt;/a&gt; does store some other histories which might help:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=activity&amp;amp;sort=all&quot;&gt;Your &lt;em&gt;all actions&lt;/em&gt; tab&lt;/a&gt; will list posts, comments, edits, and other actions you've taken recently.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=votes&quot;&gt;Your &lt;em&gt;votes&lt;/em&gt; tab&lt;/a&gt; will list all votes you've cast on questions and answers recently. Maybe you upvoted or downvoted something on the same page as that information. If you have the privilege for casting close, reopen, or delete votes, they'll be here too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=responses&quot;&gt;Your &lt;em&gt;responses&lt;/em&gt; tab&lt;/a&gt; will list all comments on this site you've gotten recently that pinged you. This is also visible in your inbox up in the top right. Did anyone ping you on that page?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In the upper right of your Activity section is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flag-summary/current&quot;&gt;your flag history&lt;/a&gt;. This is all flags you have cast on questions, answers, and comments. If you have cast a flag in the vicinity of that post, you'll see it here.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise you'll just have to open your browser history and type &lt;code&gt;rpg&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;stackexchange&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/code&gt; into your history search to filter it down to this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Most information on the Activity page of your profile is publicly visible, some is private. Your votes tab is completely private to only you; not even diamond moderators can see it. Your flags and responses are also private but diamond moderators can see them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2019-12-29T14:40:33.267" LastActivityDate="2019-12-29T14:40:33.267" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9654" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about Stack Exchange or Stack Exchange functionality itself, either on RPG.SE (or its meta) in particular or the network at large.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" LastActivityDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9655" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" Score="0" Body="For questions about Stack Exchange or Stack Exchange functionality itself, either on RPG.SE (or its meta) in particular or the network at large." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" LastActivityDate="2019-12-28T21:47:42.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9656" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the beta phase of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. RPG.SE entered the beta phase in August 2010, and graduated from beta in 2012.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" LastActivityDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9657" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" Score="0" Body="For questions about the beta phase of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. RPG.SE entered the beta phase in August 2010, and graduated from beta in 2012." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" LastActivityDate="2019-12-28T21:51:02.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9658" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9650" CreationDate="2019-12-30T00:45:31.793" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it should be left as-is. The answer to #2 is correct for #1 and for #3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15720" LastActivityDate="2019-12-30T00:45:31.793" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9659" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2019-12-30T07:33:37.450" Score="2" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162026/in-dd-5e-is-it-at-all-possible-to-create-half-subclasses&quot;&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 5e, is it at all possible to create half-subclasses?&lt;/a&gt; is closed as Too Broad.  It's not.  It's also not unclear or opinion-based.  It could benefit from better wording, especially in the title, but that's not enough that it should be closed right now.  Can we reopen it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T10:38:03.940" Title="This question shouldn't be closed/looking for reopen voters" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9660" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9659" CreationDate="2019-12-30T14:47:55.180" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I'm not sure&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is simply asking &lt;strong&gt;Can I homebrew this&lt;/strong&gt;, then yeah, it's answerable and should be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's asking &lt;strong&gt;Can I homebrew this and remain balanced&lt;/strong&gt;, that's also possibly answerable by someone who has done it, but it also seems to potentially be a shopping question at that point as it's also potentially &lt;strong&gt;Has someone done this and can show it to me&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's asking &lt;strong&gt;How do I do this&lt;/strong&gt;, then that isn't answerable because we don't do &amp;quot;Homebrew this for me&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think OP needs to clarify what they're looking for so we can determine whether or not to reopen. Of course, I may be wrong on my assessment of the above, but that's my gut reaction and why I originally closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Reopened after clarification from OP&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP confirmed &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/53071005#53071005&quot;&gt;in main chat&lt;/a&gt; that it is the simple question first listed above. They want to know if it's possible to do it and we can answer that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T10:38:03.940" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9650" CreationDate="2019-12-30T17:26:53.247" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say reopen #1 and leave #2 and #3 as is. I believe you were correct with your interpretation as mentioned in the &quot;rereading&quot; paragraph. However #3 is attempting to clarify if the damage from AoA is only valid with the THP granted by AoA or if it works with any THP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49621" LastEditorUserId="49621" LastEditDate="2019-12-30T17:51:11.310" LastActivityDate="2019-12-30T17:51:11.310" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9662" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-01T02:56:46.760" Score="12" ViewCount="384" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's New Year's Day in &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulu_Time&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange land&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A distinguishing characteristic of these sites is how they are moderated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  -- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there certainly are &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/a&gt; here, a significant amount of the &lt;em&gt;moderation&lt;/em&gt; is done by ordinary people, using the privileges &#xA;they've earned by virtue of their contributions to the site. Each of you contributes a little bit of time and effort, and together you accomplish much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we enter a new year, let's pause and reflect, taking a moment to appreciate the work that we do here together. &#xA;And what could be more festive than a big pile of numbers? &#xA;So here is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Role-playing Games over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;                  Action                  Moderators Community¹&#xA;----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------&#xA;Users suspended²                                  14         25&#xA;Users destroyed³                                 165          0&#xA;Users deleted                                      1          0&#xA;Users contacted                                   29          0&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue             66      2,253&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue                13      3,261&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue          13      2,376&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue                 9      1,095&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue                 23      3,401&#xA;Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue                34      5,486&#xA;Tags merged                                       24          0&#xA;Tag synonyms proposed                             86          9&#xA;Tag synonyms created                              64          2&#xA;Revisions redacted                                 1          0&#xA;Questions unprotected                             27          4&#xA;Questions reopened                               234        449&#xA;Questions protected                               41        182&#xA;Questions migrated                                 6          5&#xA;Questions merged                                   5          0&#xA;Questions flagged⁵                                 8        935&#xA;Questions closed                                 469      1,607&#xA;Question flags handled⁵                          396        546&#xA;Posts unlocked                                     6         14&#xA;Posts undeleted                                   52        260&#xA;Posts locked                                      37        202&#xA;Posts deleted⁶                                   509      2,460&#xA;Posts bumped                                       0        100&#xA;Escalations to the Community Manager team         11          0&#xA;Comments undeleted                               655          0&#xA;Comments flagged                                 177      7,534&#xA;Comments deleted⁷                             20,276     12,204&#xA;Comment flags handled                          6,312      1,399&#xA;Bounties canceled                                  1          0&#xA;Answers flagged                                  102      2,921&#xA;Answer flags handled                           1,335      1,688&#xA;All comments on a post moved to chat             477          0&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &quot;Community&quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ A &quot;destroyed&quot; user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88994/what-is-the-difference-between-a-deleted-user-and-a-destroyed-user&quot;&gt;Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Further reading:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? I posted a similar report here last year: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8680/2018-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2018: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/search?q=title%3A%222019%3A+a+year+in+moderation%22&quot;&gt;this report on other sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or peruse &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/341507/2019-a-year-in-closing&quot;&gt;detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing you all a happy new year...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1645" LastEditorUserId="1645" LastEditDate="2020-01-03T02:26:36.670" LastActivityDate="2020-01-07T04:24:02.333" Title="2019: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9662" CreationDate="2020-01-01T21:36:33.790" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;2018 vs 2019 comparison for RPG.se&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NXGFN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NXGFN.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TJcPB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TJcPB.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GJN0H.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GJN0H.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7022/52137&quot;&gt;2017 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8680/8610&quot;&gt;2018 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEDE Queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions-answers-and-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Total number of questions, answers per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1173867/total-number-of-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Comments per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://sese.evbpc.com/Sites/Detail?SiteId=d597f1ea-6dff-e511-80c0-00155d918203&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fun site with more SE site statistics&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-07T04:24:02.333" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9664" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-01T23:29:56.897" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions and discussions about, or specifically using, statistics about the activity on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-01-02T19:03:31.293" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T19:03:31.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9665" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-01T23:29:56.897" Score="0" Body="For questions and discussions about, or specifically using, statistics about the activity on the site." OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-01-02T19:03:33.453" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T19:03:33.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9666" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-02T15:26:12.400" Score="3" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162164/what-cr-dragon-companions-would-make-the-damage-output-of-my-ranger-archetype-ba&quot;&gt;What CR dragon companions would make the damage output of my ranger archetype balanced?&lt;/a&gt; seems like it may not be a good question for the stack in it's current form. But it also seem like it may.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, it seems to create a reasonable bound and a request to help fill it. But the bounds aren't explicitly laid out: equivalent damage to a Tier X Gloom Stalker and what that actually means. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it also seems like it's asking for help in developing a section of a homebrew class - and homebrewing for people isn't what we do here (or have done here, but maybe we can?) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question seems to very much sit on the fence as to whether or not it's something that's fits our stack questions and I thought it would be worthwhile to talk about it on Meta to see if it is, or what can be done if it isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is this question stackable as-is, can it be updated if it's not, or is it inherently off-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-01-02T15:38:01.433" LastActivityDate="2020-01-02T15:38:01.433" Title="Is this question on helping to pick the CR of an animal companion in a homebrew class stackable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9667" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-03T15:01:50.063" Score="5" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162217/which-of-these-builds-is-best-optimized-for-damage&quot;&gt;Which of these builds is best optimized for damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am wondering about the amount max average damage each of my suggested builds could put out each turn. This seems like a math question, I am confused to why it is too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also why is this question not too broad: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161325/optimizing-a-dual-wielding-ronin-blademaster&quot;&gt;Optimizing a dual-wielding ronin blademaster&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60993" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-03T20:03:17.017" LastActivityDate="2020-01-03T20:07:36.003" Title="Why is this question about which build is optimized for damage too broad?" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9668" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9667" CreationDate="2020-01-03T19:57:17.887" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think your question is too broad it is because you're asking too many things at once, and haven't defined it in a way to have a singular meaningful, useful answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're asking what the optimized damage for three different builds are.  On top of that, you're asking for average DPR as well as maximum single turn damage (which I assume you mean this by single-use).  That's six answers with unique calculations bundled into a single question.  Seven if you are still asking 'which of these is the highest number', but that's moot once you have the data in front of you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This also presents a problem since you want it Adventurers League compatible.  In my experience, AL rewards magic items intermittently and restricts access to many magic items, and giving you an optimized build assuming free access to all items isn't going to be a realistic scenario for your character's progression through AL.  Many builds rely on specific combinations of magic items to either offset weaknesses or amplify strengths.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This differs from the question you linked because that question gives very clear constraints, and a solid character concept that we can build around.  &quot;Dual-wielding martial ronin&quot; is much more specific conceptually and thematically than what you provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="58991" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-03T20:02:42.363" LastActivityDate="2020-01-03T20:02:42.363" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9669" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9667" CreationDate="2020-01-03T19:59:14.137" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's worth noting that, when your question was closed, it was lacking a lot of detail. &quot;Why was it closed&quot; is not the same as &quot;can it be reopened&quot;. I can't say for certain why your question &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; closed, as I was not one of the users that voted to close it. The listed close reason usually isn't too informative, so I'll recommend not focusing too much on the &quot;too broad&quot; part.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can, however, offer a few observations that have kept me from voting to re-open the question as currently written, even with the substantial edits that have already been added:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's not clear to me that there is a whole lot of question in it. There are three builds, with all class levels and most class specializations already chosen. It's not totally clear to me which variables still exist within each build. If there are few to no choices to make, then calculating maximum and average per-turn damage is a pretty straightforward computation, more suitable for a calculator than RPG.SE. That's not fatal to a question, but it strongly suggests that as part of your basic research effort (an expectation on all questions) you would present your own calculations for each.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It asks a somewhat oddly structured question. Optimization questions usually state a goal and some starting constraints, along the lines of &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I'm creating a character that will have X levels in Rogue, choosing the Arcane Trickster specialization, and Two Weapon Fighting (Fighter or Ranger). With those constraints in mind, how can I build a character optimized for damage at level 20? I'm interested in both the highest single-attack damage and also the highest average reliable damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast, this question includes three nearly complete builds (with respect to dealing damage), asks an optimization question for each of them implicitly, and then asks for a straightforward comparison of each of those. Additionally, because each of the builds has the same &quot;base&quot;, it's unclear to me why they need to be considered at all. As above, a question asking about an optimized damage build with 15 levels of Rogue, taking the Arcane Trickster specialization, and Two Weapon Fighting (from Fighter or Ranger) seems like it would answer your question. Imposing the three builds seems to me like it distracts from what you are hoping to learn.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question includes vague considerations that I don't understand in the context of writing an answer. The second build listed seeks &quot;more versatility&quot;. If this is a damage optimization question, answerers will have trouble incorporating and understanding other factors unless you define some kind of hierarchy illustrating what tradeoffs you care about most. Similarly, from how the builds are written out I'm not clear on how those Attribute points were assigned, if there are ASIs available from advancing class levels, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in summary, the question is a little bit unclear about what constraints exist, what options exist, and what specific information you're seeking but don't already have. This is then tripled, for reasons which also seem a bit fuzzy. Those aren't necessarily enough to cause it to be closed, were it a fresh question, but that's not the situation we're in. These are reasons why I'm a bit hesitant to vote to reopen it myself, though other users may feel differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if another question &quot;should have been&quot; closed as too broad, that doesn't mean anything with regard to your question. If they should both have been closed, the correct response would be to close the other one, not to open your own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other question contains a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of detail about what the OP wants to achieve, in terms of both flavor and mechanics. It also lays out which class levels are required for the optimized build, and which are open for change. It includes priorities, and therefore tradeoffs, and a lot of detail about how the character is intended to be played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also worth noting that that question was not &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; much better received than yours:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They have roughly similar numbers of views&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They have received the same number of votes overall, though yours has&#xA;one more downvote&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The state of your question &lt;em&gt;when it was closed&lt;/em&gt; was very, very&#xA;different from the other linked question's initial state. Your&#xA;question now is better than its first draft, but the initial close&#xA;reason will remain until it is reopened. &quot;Initially too broad, now improved but not re-openable for a different reason&quot; is not something that SE conveys to users very well&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2020-01-03T20:07:36.003" LastActivityDate="2020-01-03T20:07:36.003" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9670" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-06T07:11:29.317" Score="-19" ViewCount="503" Body="&lt;h2&gt;RAW, RAI, and RAF muddy the water&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As users who talk a lot about the mechanics of games, we often lose sight of the rest of the community. Terms like RAW, RAI, and RAF can be confusing for many users, not just newbies. To a certain extent they imply these are all equally valid answers, and even among knowledgeable members it can be hard to establish that the rules are more correct than random twitter posts, which are more important than your personal rulings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On top of the inherent confusion, there are a certain number of users here that dislike D&amp;amp;D, dislike 5e even more, but most of all they dislike RAW. Plus there are some people who try to reuse existing acronyms, causing further problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Imagine the difficulty for new players when they see answers like &quot;by RAW yes, by RAI no (with a link to twitter), by RAF kill the tarasque with a gnarly kickflip my dude.&quot; When they try to gain clarification they receive elitist replies claiming that RAW is just &quot;one of many valid playstyles&quot;, differing opinions of what RAI stands for and what it means, and dozens of other equally cool RAF suggestions (with a footnote that &quot;RAF isn't houserules!&quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is noise that doesn't need to be there. The answer was &quot;yes&quot;, that's all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Like it or not, RAW is the default&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this site does not exist to parrot rules back to askers, people generally want to know the rules. When someone asks a question about the rules, they are probably looking for an answer from the rules. They are looking for objective clarify and concrete answers. This is exactly the kind of answers that SE is equip to provide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most people are very capable of making up a justification for their opinion, and they are almost as good at searching twitter for a post supporting it. They don't need RAI and RAF answers, and even if they did, those are almost always primarily opinion based. They can exist on SE, but only in the margins around factual answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question asks &quot;can I attack 5 times in 1 turn?&quot; you should understand the question as &quot;&lt;em&gt;do the rules say&lt;/em&gt; I can attack 5 times in 1 turn?&quot; not &quot;&lt;em&gt;how can I make houserules&lt;/em&gt; so I can attack 5 times in 1 turn?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unless it is actually relevant to the question, these terms should be avoided.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;Yes&quot; is preferred over &quot;By RAW, yes&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;No&quot; is preferred over &quot;By RAW, no&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&quot;JC on twitter says yes&quot; is preferred over &quot;By RAI, yes&quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If someone asks about RAW, RAI, or houserules then by all means talk about them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By default answer with RAW, but if someone is asking about something else, then feel free to talk about it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2020-01-07T21:55:26.443" Title="Discourage the use of terms like RAW, RAI, and RAF" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="38" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9670" CreationDate="2020-01-06T19:47:13.770" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Censorship: not a good idea&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The terms that you wish to discourage have currency and a utility beyond this limited audience (RPGSE users); any attempt to curtail their use on this site is needlessly restrictive to all of the users who have an understanding, be it identical to yours or different, for all of those terms.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Policy proposal: rejected&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I read your post, you aren't so much asking a question as recommending a policy.  That is one thing that we do on meta, bat about policy ideas.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your proposal to actively discourage the use of commonly used terms is badly thought out, unsupported, and needlessly restrictive to all of the the users of RPGSE, with no value added.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where clarification is needed, people can engage within one another. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&quot;RAW is the default&quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unsupported assertion.  How you can claim to know how tens of thousands of game tables approach RPGs remains a mystery.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-01-06T20:19:35.987" LastActivityDate="2020-01-06T20:19:35.987" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9670" CreationDate="2020-01-07T21:55:26.443" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I take the following exceptions to the above policy proposal:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of elitism (i)&lt;/strong&gt;:  I have not seen any recent answers that struck me as elitist in any meaningful sense-- I haven't seen anyone berated or harassed or told they're playing the game wrong by looking for a RAW answer.  Granted, I don't (and I suspect few of us do) read all the posts, so perhaps I've missed something.  But rather than spinning hypotheticals, your argument would acquire some force if you could point to enough actual examples to demonstrate that this is a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of elitism (ii)&lt;/strong&gt;:  I do not consider the mere mention of styles other than RAW, or contextualizing RAW among those styles as elitist.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of 5e-haters&lt;/strong&gt;:  Who exactly?  Well, no, don't name names, that's gross, but at least tell me how you are identifying these haters.  And more to the point, so what?  We all have games we like and hate, but I see no rabid cabal of anti-5e crusaders, and I see no harmful effects on the quality of answers.  If you do, that's why you have down-votes.  Use them.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of RAW-haters&lt;/strong&gt;:  Again, how are you identifying these people?  There are people who campaigned strongly (and in my opinion, wrongly, but that was a hill not worth dying on-- I used my down-votes, and everyone else used their up-votes) against the RAW &lt;strong&gt;tag&lt;/strong&gt;, but my understanding of that issue is that it sprung from different concerns-- meta concerns, actually-- than dislike for the actual topic.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of default usage&lt;/strong&gt;:  I'm with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9671/18269&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast&lt;/a&gt; on this point.  I do not understand on what basis you make this claim.  It is certainly not on my behalf.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Claims of confusion to new users/gamers&lt;/strong&gt;:  I really take exception to this one, as it seems insulting not only to the people doing what you don't want them to do, but also insulting to the people on whose behalf you claim to be speaking.  I am outright astonished by the idea that someone could be genuinely confused by discussions of RAW, RAI, RAF, house rules, or any adjacent topic, as long as they do not devolve too far into short-hand slang and jargon.  These are not foreign concepts and they're not unique to this forum:  I've seen them referenced by Jeremy Crawford, I've seen them in multiple other forums, and I've even seen them applied to games like Pathfinder rather than 5e.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, if this were the problem you claim it to be, I would expect to see strong evidence of it in vote tallies and (admittedly, and sadly, transient) comment threads.  Are you seeing a lot of down-voting of questions that do not privilege RAW as default answers?  Are you seeing a lot of questions that don't have satisfactory or accepted answers, compared to other questions?  Are you seeing a lot of comments complaining?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are you down-voting your conscience in these cases, too?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2020-01-07T21:55:26.443" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9673" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on meta about answers on RPG.SE that largely duplicate the content (in substance, if not literally) of other existing answers on the same questions, ultimately saying the same thing possibly in a slightly different way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For issues involving duplicate questions or answers on them, use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/duplicates&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;duplicates&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;duplicates&lt;/a&gt; tag instead.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" LastActivityDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9674" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" Score="0" Body="For questions on meta about answers on RPG.SE that largely duplicate the content (in substance, if not literally) of other existing answers on the same questions, ultimately saying the same thing possibly in a slightly different way. (For issues involving duplicate questions or answers on them, use the [duplicates] tag instead.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" LastActivityDate="2020-01-08T05:41:37.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9675" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9676" CreationDate="2020-01-08T05:42:35.033" Score="6" ViewCount="280" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a number of D&amp;amp;D 5e questions specifically asking about what weapons can be used when making multiple attacks using the Extra Attack feature, the Two-Weapon Fighting rule, or both:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/65361/33569&quot;&gt;Can you attack with more than one weapon when using Extra&#xA;Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/129803/33569&quot;&gt;Can you attack with different weapons using Extra Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/129905/33569&quot;&gt;Can I use the same weapon for a normal attack and Two-Weapon&#xA;Fighting in the same turn?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/79589/33569&quot;&gt;Dual Wielding and Extra Attacks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(There may be other questions like this that I've missed; if so, feel free to point them out, and I may edit them into the list if they seem sufficiently similar.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, there's a lot of overlap between some of them. Extra Attack is obviously different from Two-Weapon Fighting, but as you can see, there is some overlap in their focus; #1 and #2 ask just about Extra Attack and #3 asks just about TWF, but #4 asks about both. Currently, none of them are marked as duplicates of one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should be done about these questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should some of them be marked as duplicates of one another?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are some of them (e.g. #1 and #2) sufficiently identical that they&#xA;could/should be merged - and if so, which should be merged into the&#xA;other?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are they all substantially different, warranting no change (except&#xA;maybe an edit to clarify the distinction)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-11T02:17:36.620" LastActivityDate="2020-06-11T02:17:36.620" Title="How should we deal with these multiple related questions about weapons used for Extra Attack/Two-Weapon Fighting?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9675" CreationDate="2020-01-09T18:33:31.077" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Questions 1 and 2 are identical&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 1, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65361&quot;&gt;Can you attack with more than one weapon when using Extra Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;When one uses the Extra Attack class feature, must it be done with only one weapon?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 2, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129803&quot;&gt;Can you attack with different weapons using Extra Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Assuming I am holding two different weapons, [...] can I attack once with each? [when using Extra Attack]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no meaningful difference between these questions, though the &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; talk about some different things, in fact, the questions which &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; mention Two-Weapon Fighting has answers that do, and the question which &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; mention TWF has answers that don't. In fact, I believe the second questions should not have the Two-Weapon Fighting tag because it is not part of the question at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means the questions should either be merged or marked as duplicates. The first question is older and so it would be kept open. That said, the second question has more recent quotes (from the Sage Advice Compendium) so merging the questions would be my suggestion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Question 3 is sufficiently different from questions 1 and 2&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 3, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129905&quot;&gt;Can I use the same weapon for a normal attack and Two-Weapon Fighting in the same turn?&lt;/a&gt; asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I am allowed to use different weapons for an Attack action if I have the Extra Attack class feature. Let's assume I did just that, attacking once each with a hand-axe and once with a shortsword. Am I allowed to afterwards perform a Two Weapon Fighting bonus attack with one of these weapons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't actually think the question's title matches the body, though it does work, something more like &quot;Can I use Two-Weapon Fighting after attacking with both weapons I am holding&quot; may work better. This questions is different because it is actually about TWF, unlike the other two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Question 4 is two questions, so it can't be closed (or at least not closed well), regardless it needs a better title&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 4, &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79589&quot;&gt;Dual Wielding and Extra Attacks&lt;/a&gt;&quot; asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] Do the rules ever explicitly stipulate that the two attacks from Extra Attack MUST come from the same weapon in this situation? [...] &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However it &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; asks a separate question. Basically 'which of the following is true&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the bonus attack must be made with the opposite hand of the first attack when the action was taken&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;the bonus attack must be made with the opposite hand of the last attack before the bonus action&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;since both weapons have been used to attack does the player then have the option of which weapon to use?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that this question is actually asking two different questions. The &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; question is a duplicate of questions 1 and 2, but the &lt;em&gt;second&lt;/em&gt; question is a duplicate of question 3. However, question 3 is older and so question 4 should remain open with question 3 closed as a duplicate. However it's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate because question 4 &lt;em&gt;isn't one question&lt;/em&gt; and that's most of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally the title of question 4, &quot;Dual Wielding and Extra Attacks&quot;, explains almost nothing of what the question is actually asking. Ultimately I just think question 4 is a bad question (since it's two questions) and so it isn't fitting into a duplicate/close system very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;An aside: the answers to questions 3 and 4 are &lt;em&gt;slightly&lt;/em&gt; incomplete&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions 3 and 4 don't actually ask about &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; the TWF bonus action attack can occur; however, both seem to assume (at least as I read them) that it &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; come last. This is a occasionally important factor in the Two-Weapon Fighting + Extra Attack combo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you wanted to use TWF &lt;em&gt;in-between&lt;/em&gt; the two attacks of your Attack action then it would have to use the weapon you did not use with your first attack. The bonus action attack can only be made using either weapon if both weapons have &lt;em&gt;already been used&lt;/em&gt;, this is not something the current answers address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is already a question discussing this ordering issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162435&quot;&gt;Order of attacks when using Two Weapon Fighting and Extra Attack&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This explicitly asks &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; the TWF bonus action attack can occur which I believe this is occasionally important and something that the answers to questions 3 and 4 do not address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-01-10T04:16:41.913" LastActivityDate="2020-01-10T04:16:41.913" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9677" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-10T07:34:53.717" Score="1" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162516&quot;&gt;Does PC-tailored homebrew require special considerations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first draft was written poorly and I fully understand why it was closed so fast. Now I believe I addressed all the issues raised in the comments. Is there a way to salvage the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still adamant on it being a general &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; question; a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;-style version of the question would receive too specific answers for my liking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-10T07:57:36.850" LastActivityDate="2020-01-10T08:35:01.640" Title="How else can I improve this question about PC-tailored homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9678" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9677" CreationDate="2020-01-10T08:35:01.640" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your questions could do with more focus&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a hard question to answer. Generally homebrew is most balanced when it is most similar to existing content. There are certainly a lot of situational and niche content which is balanced. With regards to complexity, there are some complex class features, most tend to be 1 or 2 sentences but there are some with as many as 5 sentences. Homebrew already adds complexity since it is new too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your title and 3 questions asked within are all difficult and broad:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does PC-tailored homebrew require special considerations?&lt;/strong&gt; This is a hard question to answer objectively. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is making a functionality (replacement class feature, new feat, a spell) with complex requirements a bad design?&lt;/strong&gt; Bad in what way? You probably shouldn't make something more complex than the most complex feature, but why not, there's nothing wrong with it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What about feature synergising with other optional ones?&lt;/strong&gt; What are you asking? General thoughts?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How to ensure an option filling very specific gap is balanced across different play-styles?&lt;/strong&gt; Which play styles are you talking about? There are play styles where balance doesn't even exist, let alone adherence to rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is very broad, and I'm not sure how you will measure a good answer. For example if you ask &quot;are complex requirements bad design?&quot; how can I answer? What does &quot;bad&quot; mean? How complex are we talking? Even if you answer those, how can we discern a good answer from a bad answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that you are asking about balance, and making niche features still useful for different playstyles. Beyond that, there are a lot of very broad and vague questions that are so hard to answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you should consider your goal and ask a more direct question, I think your goal is something like: &quot;I want to make content that is niche, but still useful and balanced.&quot; As for the question, I'm not sure exactly, it seems to be &quot;how do I do that?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2020-01-10T08:35:01.640" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9679" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-10T13:34:47.730" Score="9" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 5e character building or optimization is a substantial part of the game for a decent part of the player base. Often, there are several ways to achieve a certain goal, for example, I want to ask a question along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How can I raise my AC without wearing armor?&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my decent knowledge of the rules, I expect a list of less than ten features, which are either part of a class, race, spell, item, or class-less feat. To me that seems not too broad, but I have had negative reactions to similar questions (which had similarly concise answers) in the past. I could imagine creating a community-wiki answer, so that if new material gets published and a new feature would have to be included, anyone could add it in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25757" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-12T05:18:56.083" LastActivityDate="2020-01-12T05:18:56.083" Title="Are questions that ask for a list of &quot;similar&quot; D&amp;D 5e features on topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9679" CreationDate="2020-01-10T14:09:02.707" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Probably&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, it's going to come down to wording and whether the community feels like the querent spent more than 2 minutes thinking about the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anecdotally, I feel like some questions get negative reactions because they're written like an anxious child: &amp;quot;hey guys, I had an idea and was wondering what all of the ways to be good with a sword were because I'm trying to make a sword swinger that's also a wizard! THANKS!&amp;quot; or some such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Compared to &amp;quot;Looking through the PHB, I notice that some races, such as Elves, get longsword proficiency. I know that the various martial classes also get such proficiency and you can take the Weapon Master feat. What are all of the ways to be proficient in Longswords?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-10T14:09:02.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9681" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9679" CreationDate="2020-01-10T15:51:38.630" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is on topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, whether the community will think your question is good or not (which will be reflected in the votes) is highly dependent on how you present the question. Good formatting, wording, and clarity play a big role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there is 'research effort'. Back then Stackoverflow was originally built to be an experts site, so the system was designed to curate high quality questions and high quality answers, as expected from experts. If you can't be bothered to research a bit about what you're asking about, or you are just throwing your homework on us, that's a downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think research effort is a very useful clarification tool where you're lost and what exactly your problem is - and how to solve that. A good list question will clearly define the constraints (for example, source books) and optionally, why you need this list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2020-01-10T15:51:38.630" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9682" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-10T18:28:57.633" Score="11" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; tag exists on three questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162616&quot;&gt;How Should Speed and Range Affect Hit Probability?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/156130&quot;&gt;Non-Cinematic DR of Advanced Body Armour&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152907&quot;&gt;Using the slide recoil of a semi-auto pistol as a weapon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last question (the oldest at 5 months old) has the following two comments below it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the new &amp;quot;reality-check&amp;quot; tag you just created for?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &amp;quot;reality check&amp;quot; is (or at least used to be) one of the core principles of GURPS -- used to check whether a rule or ruling made sense. Perhaps they're irrelevant with the emphasis on &amp;quot;cinematic&amp;quot; play in recent editions, add-ons, and &amp;quot;powered by GURPS&amp;quot; publications. To me, the question appears to be as much about &amp;quot;would this even work&amp;quot; as it is about &amp;quot;how can I model this in-game.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag description was made 9 hours ago, and it states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions relating to how closely a given mechanic (or, rarely, some part of lore) approximates the outcomes expected in reality (or of what reality would be with adjustments that are part of the premise), and/or how such approximation be improved, as distinct from concerns of balance and of emulation of genres of fiction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm honestly just unsure what (if anything) should be done about this tag, I haven't seen other similar tags and I'm a bit confused as to where the description came from. I'm unsure whether the tag should stick around or not; though perhaps it's just a lesser-used tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm especially confused given that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; tag exists; its description states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions relating primarily to simulation in RPGs, the aim to approximate situations, creatures, or actions in a realistic-seeming manner, as a primary focus or virtue of an RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Simulation&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;simulationist&lt;/strong&gt;, or &lt;strong&gt;simulationism&lt;/strong&gt; refers to games or play styles that focus on rules that produce consequences that approximate observed reality. Rules of the game generally result in events or consequences that could occur in observed reality, or reality given some modification, like magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulationism is often contrasted with &lt;strong&gt;narrativism&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;gamism&lt;/strong&gt;. There are three significant RPG theory models that deal with the relationship between and application of these terms: the &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpgmuseum.wikia.com/wiki/Threefold_Model&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Threefold Model&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpgmuseum.wikia.com/wiki/GNS_Theory&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GNS Theory&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpgmuseum.wikia.com/wiki/The_Big_Model&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Big Model&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T02:21:16.867" Title="What is the [reality-check] tag? Should something be done about it?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9682" CreationDate="2020-01-12T11:46:36.747" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; are the best kind of distinct: only technically distinct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulation stipulates that it is a game play style (or rather, for questions about such a style) where the desired outcome is the logical outcome given a set of rules (of reality, not of the game), with the real world only being &lt;em&gt;a possible&lt;/em&gt; set of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reality-Check, as defined in the tag wiki, is just simulation with the rules (of reality) set to the real world exclusively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given those are the only differences I can see between the two... Burninate reality-check, possibly alias it to simulation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12408" LastActivityDate="2020-01-12T11:46:36.747" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9682" CreationDate="2020-01-12T12:37:16.240" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; are actually somewhat different concepts, and the tag description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; needs improving. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; tends to be interpreted in the context of simulationism/narrativism/gamism. GURPS was not designed or revised within that kind of model, and doesn't fit it very well. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulationism is an semi-abstract philosophy about how a game should be run. GURPS' reputation for simulating reality is exaggerated; the numbers have always been assessed with an eye to dramatic tension, rather than simulation (source: Sean Punch, line editor for GURPS for more than two decades). What it strives for is emotional impact via an &lt;em&gt;impression&lt;/em&gt; of plausibility. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; was coined as a GURPS term-of-art for actually and physically trying some action in the real world to see if it worked. That's one way to make something seem plausible, by showing that it actually works. It has become somewhat more metaphorical, as GURPS has grown to include settings and genres where that's impossible, but it's still about a specific action, rather than a philosophy of how to run a game. Making this tag an alias of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulation&lt;/a&gt; would tend to conceal this distinction. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know the conventions for revising tag descriptions that are under discussion, but I'd change it to something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions relating to how closely a game's rules' modelling of a particular action or activity approximates the outcomes expected in reality, and/or how such approximation be improved, as distinct from concerns of balance and of emulation of genres of fiction. Originates in the early &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;GURPS&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; practice of actually trying things to see how they worked; has become metaphorical for dealing with things that are impossible or impractical in reality. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30080" LastEditorUserId="30080" LastEditDate="2020-01-14T02:21:16.867" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T02:21:16.867" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9685" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9689" CreationDate="2020-01-14T02:58:47.777" Score="17" ViewCount="379" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I find myself describing to a few friends why I really like the StackExchange network (recent corporate events notwithstanding). One of my reasons was that many sites on the network have experts in their field as regular users. For instance NASA engineers on space.SE or Microsoft employees on SO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It got me wondering though, have there ever been any employees of Wizards of the Coast active here on RPG.SE? Particularly ones that had authored content and would appear on the inside cover. I would also accept major 3rd party sources as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16395" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-14T04:51:27.380" LastActivityDate="2020-01-20T18:16:39.460" Title="Have any D&amp;D content authors ever been active on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|dungeons-and-dragons|game-designers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9685" CreationDate="2020-01-14T05:05:28.377" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;We've definitely had TRPG creators participating in the site, including &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28881/rabalias&quot;&gt;a co-creator of Lovecraftesque&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/8888/fred-hicks&quot;&gt;Fred Hicks&lt;/a&gt;. I've been told we used to have some WotC contributors participating here, but most of them were not publicly associating their SE accounts with their professional names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And since claims to being a games creator on this site aren't verifiable unless the creator confirms it on some other platform which HAS been verified, it doesn't really matter much in the long run anyway. Good answers are good answers. It's been my experience that often the creator is less qualified to give advice on how to play a game they wrote, than the people who play it are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T05:05:28.377" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9687" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; tag is no longer allowed on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange mainsite. This tag on Role-Playing Games Meta is primarily used to categorize historical discussions about the former mainsite tag. For more information see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8946/time-to-retire-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules-as-written questions are, however, entirely welcome on RPG.SE, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;we embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt;. Please simply tag mainsite questions with the game and edition you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9688" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" Score="0" Body="THE CORRESPONDING MAINSITE TAG HAS BEEN BLACKLISTED. (Click “Learn more…” or “info” for details.) This tag exists only for historical reasons. This tag on Role-Playing Games Meta is primarily used to categorize historical discussions about the former [rules-as-written] mainsite tag." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T07:38:42.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9689" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9685" CreationDate="2020-01-14T17:23:10.920" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’ve worked for Dreamscarred Press, and my name’s on the cover of at least &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/210631/Psionics-Augmented-Empaths&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;one book they published&lt;/a&gt;. Various other members of DSP have also been active here, including its founders. Dunno if DSP still counts as a “major” third-party publisher, but there was a point in time when they were often regarded as “the one exception” by people who disliked third-party d20 content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’ve definitely had a few other publishers post here, though as far as I know DSP folks are the only ones to really be active here for any period of time, and at present I am the only one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-01-14T17:23:10.920" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9690" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9692" CreationDate="2020-01-14T23:22:22.537" Score="5" ViewCount="200" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm unsure how to link to an Unearthed Arcana. The article itself simply gives a download for a pdf. There are direct links to the pdf, but all the links download the pdf. Should I link to the article or should I link to the pdf with a warning that it will download? Are there any other options I'm missing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are the links in question. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/class-feature-variants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;First link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-ClassFeatures.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55495" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-01-15T13:13:19.587" LastActivityDate="2020-01-15T15:24:36.613" Title="How to link to an Unearthed Arcana?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9691" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9690" CreationDate="2020-01-14T23:38:03.180" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I would link to both the website and the pdf (and say which link is which)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This helps with a few things, such as the possibility of a browser/computer/location blocking one link and not the other. And it also lets others see not only that the pdf exists but also where exactly it came from. Unfortunately this does mean you usually wouldn't put the link on the actual text or name of the UA article since you'd need to specify whether it's the website or the pdf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Bard's Magical Inspiration feature states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a creature has a Bardic Inspiration die from you and casts a spell, the creature can roll that die and add the number rolled to one damage or healing roll of the spell. The Bardic Inspiration die is then lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;- Class Feature Variants Unearthed Arcana (page 3) [&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/class-feature-variants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;link to site&lt;/a&gt;] [&lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-ClassFeatures.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;link to pdf&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Class Feature Variants Unearthed Arcana includes the Magical Inspiration feature for Bards which states (&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/class-feature-variants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;link to site&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-ClassFeatures.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;link to pdf&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a creature has a Bardic Inspiration die from you and casts a spell, the creature can roll that die and add the number rolled to one damage or healing roll of the spell. The Bardic Inspiration die is then lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could also do something like this, though it's slightly less clear/explicit I do think this is the best method, and is the one I'll likely be using:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/class-feature-variants&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Class Feature Variants Unearthed Arcana&lt;/a&gt; states: (&lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-ClassFeatures.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;pdf direct link&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a creature has a Bardic Inspiration die from you and casts a spell, the creature can roll that die and add the number rolled to one damage or healing roll of the spell. The Bardic Inspiration die is then lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-15T15:24:36.613" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9692" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9690" CreationDate="2020-01-15T02:02:27.027" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Just link to the PDF. A website link provides no additional context, clarity, details, and won't remove the need to download the PDF (if prompted) if users choose to do so.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As was briefly discussed in (now deleted) comments, it seems like it might just be something on your end at the moment that is causing the PDFs to be downloaded instead of opening in the browser. Either way, is this actually a problem? It's not like we're providing links to viruses or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Up until now, users have pretty much always linked directly to the PDF, if they choose to include a link to the material they're referencing. Just check out the various other questions tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see no reason to change this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linking to the website won't change the need to download the PDF (if prompted) and doesn't provide any additional, vital information that users need to know. Hopefully you've provided a relevant quote from the document to give context and if people want to verify that that quote is correct or if there's any additional information needed in the document then they'll have to open the PDF anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-15T02:08:06.833" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9685" CreationDate="2020-01-16T05:34:51.880" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/72/extsr&quot;&gt;ExTSR&lt;/a&gt; was Frank Mentzer (who was the key / lead developer of BECMI D&amp;amp;D).  Both he and mxyzplk were pretty abrasive and neither was very good at tolerating the other's playstyle's presence on the site, which eventually lead to Mentzer's ragequitting the site: though the account hasn't been deleted it was last used in March 2014.  Before that he was &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; active and the account is still top 10% on rep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-01-20T18:16:39.460" LastActivityDate="2020-01-20T18:16:39.460" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9694" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9685" CreationDate="2020-01-16T13:39:13.930" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2877/raddu&quot;&gt;Raddu&lt;/a&gt; is Robert Adducci, one-time DDAL Community Manager (his profile is a bit out of date). His name first appeared as part of the admin team the &quot;inside cover&quot; of a DDAL module with DDEX01-01 and last appeared on DDAL07-08, plus some credits as primary author mixed in there, too. He's also credited in &lt;em&gt;Lost Laboratory of Kwalish&lt;/em&gt; and probably other things I don't have readily available to check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22138" LastActivityDate="2020-01-16T13:39:13.930" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9695" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1174" CreationDate="2020-01-17T04:17:46.057" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You, Dear Reader, are deleting many of the comments!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last few years SE staff have provided us with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22year+in+moderation%22+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;Year in Moderation&lt;/a&gt; summary statistics. (Recall that &amp;quot;moderation&amp;quot; includes both elected moderators' activities and the use of moderation privileges and tools by high-rep users.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From these we see that roughly one-third of all comment-deletions are at the hand of &amp;quot;regular&amp;quot; users, the other two thirds coming from elected moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two things I think are worth noting there:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Note that when you delete a &lt;em&gt;post&lt;/em&gt; of yours all of the comments below are also deleted, so that shows in the &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot; count of deleted comments. Depending on your perspective, you may feel like that overcounts deletions. Or maybe not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Having served as an elected moderator, I can testify that almost all of our comment-deletions come from us responding to a flag on a post. Frankly, we're not going around looking for comments to delete. But we get a dozen or more posts flagged a day, and the majority are for comment cleanup. So even the comments &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt;'re deleting, you're the ones aiming that diamond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-17T04:17:46.057" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9696" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9704" CreationDate="2020-01-18T01:55:07.253" Score="8" ViewCount="277" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following two similar questions already exist:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113364&quot;&gt;How do I know if an ability is magical?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99335&quot;&gt;How to decide if an effect is magical for Magic Resistance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those two have duplicate targets including the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145313&quot;&gt;Is the war cleric&amp;#39;s divine strike considered non-magical damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119825&quot;&gt;Does an Antimagic Field spell block class features?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99316&quot;&gt;Does Magic Resistance work against Turn Undead?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the following (currently open) questions exist as well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88603&quot;&gt;Does Improved Divine Smite work in an Antimagic Field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131563&quot;&gt;Can a warlock use Eldritch Smite in an antimagic field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134615&quot;&gt;Can an Aasimar grow their wings in an Antimagic Field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128779&quot;&gt;Does the Shapechanger trait work in an Antimagic Field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157134&quot;&gt;Is the gaze effect of a medusa blocked by an antimagic field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88569&quot;&gt;Are a Paladin&amp;#39;s auras considered magical for the purpose of Anti-Magic Field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162776&quot;&gt;Is the Channel Divinity feature negated in an antimagic field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157190&quot;&gt;Would an anti-magic zone affect a dragon&amp;#39;s breath weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should any (or all) of these questions be marked as duplicates? Should there be some sort of canonical question for this sort of thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I ask this because many of the answers to the above questions amount to reiterating the Sage Advice Compendium's method of determining whether something counts as magic and applying that to the specific ability in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-01-18T18:24:04.000" LastActivityDate="2020-01-24T23:21:50.013" Title="Should questions asking &quot;Does X work in an anti-magic field?&quot; be marked as duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9697" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9699" CreationDate="2020-01-18T22:16:07.643" Score="11" ViewCount="242" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask something like the following question, but am unsure of its framing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do you track/incorporate errata in relation to printed rulebooks without having to memorize, or constantly check against, the errata?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I bought myself a shiny new rulebook for a relatively new system and, of course, there's already a full document of errata!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to make this easier for myself, I sat down with a pen and sticky notes to mark places in the book that have been errata'd. I found that the pen  tended to smudge, and don't want to wait for each individual sticky note to dry as I make my way through the document.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a good way to point to errata within a rulebook, without risk of damage? I'm essentially looking for methods that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Incorporate short errata directly into the book&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Summarize longer errata to incorporate directly into the book&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mark places where the errata document needs to be referenced&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do so in a legible, or easily intelligible, manner&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do all of this with minimal damage to the book itself and not diminish the books longevity. (Smudging, page wear, stickers that begin to peel, &amp;amp;c.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;Ask a Question&lt;/a&gt; page told me after I typed in my proposed title that this question may be too subjective, so I decided to come here to Meta first. I feel I can't get it less subjective, or less like a material recommendation (as recommendations are off-topic), but do feel like this would be valuable information. &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it okay to ask as-is?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it matters, I thought to include these tags: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/errata&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;errata&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;errata&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't found any related questions, and can't find anything like it with a google search. Perhaps my google-fu is failing me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9625" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-20T15:55:02.290" Title="I want to ask about methods of incorporating errata into a rulebook, but I'm not sure of its subjectivity" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9698" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9696" CreationDate="2020-01-19T18:14:05.740" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they all ask the same, they are the same and thus dupes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-01-19T18:14:05.740" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9697" CreationDate="2020-01-19T20:01:47.310" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question seems reasonably confined to be answerable&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the following automated message appears when asking a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The question you're asking appears subjective and is likely to be closed&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that this is automated, and isn't going to know everything best (though neither will people). At least for me, I have found that the automated message often does a poor job of actually knowing when a question would be too subjective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To showcase this, note that the message appear with your original question title: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How do you track/incorporate errata in relation to printed rulebooks without having to memorize, or constantly check against, the errata?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you change the word &quot;you&quot; into &quot;I&quot; the automated message goes away. Clearly, it's not doing a superb job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that your question is reasonably scoped: it can be answered well by others who have actually dealt with the same issue as you. It is bordering on idea-generation, but you aren't asking for ideas; you're asking for methods people have tried that have actually worked (or at least this is what RPG.SE would expect in a good-subjective answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may be a large number of ways to account for errata or incorporate it into a rulebook beyond just checking it &lt;em&gt;every single time&lt;/em&gt; and those who have already used such methods could provide acceptable answers your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-01-20T15:55:02.290" LastActivityDate="2020-01-20T15:55:02.290" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9700" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-22T17:01:50.093" Score="10" ViewCount="356" Body="&lt;p&gt;Was this question closed because it was about realism/verisimiltude? Or some other reason(s)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/163423/is-it-possible-to-wield-a-greatsword&quot;&gt;Is it possible to wield a &amp;#39;greatsword&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not that it's a great question, or isn't easily answerable by searching the web for the many articles and videos that discuss the general subject. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's marked closed as &quot;off-topic&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A comment from one of the people voting to close said in part, &quot;It's about being &quot;realistic&quot; where a lot of systems just do not care about realism.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are realism questions really off-topic here? It doesn't seem like it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's actually a pretty common question, it seems to me, on other RPG sites, especially those for games that ARE somewhat interested in realism/verisimilitude. TFT, GURPS, Harnmaster, Ars Magica, Mythras, Runequest, Aftermath, Traveller, yes, even some D&amp;amp;D players, have at least some interest in what a greatsword is supposed to be, how big and heavy and practical it would be, what a realistic one would look like and how it'd be used, and not only whether various fantasy images could be practical weapons, but which historical swords were practical versus parade swords, which were developed in which period and why, etc etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15993" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-01-22T17:41:02.837" LastActivityDate="2020-01-26T23:52:15.563" Title="Was this question closed because it was about realism/verisimiltude?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9700" CreationDate="2020-01-22T17:54:19.423" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is what we call a real-world research question. This is mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;our on-topic help article&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;Generic real-world topics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, may be off topic if they are not RPG-centric (or better belong on another Stack Exchange site, such as History). A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;    &lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Can a [real life] human realistically wield and attack effectively using this kind of sword?” is a question that isn't RPG-centric and doesn't require any RPG expertise to answer. Although it may be a topic of interest to RPG players it's simply not within our domain to handle and answer this question. It's a question for people like HEMA experts, martial arts experts, or so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We decided to rule these off topic in 2012 with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic, part two?&lt;/a&gt;. We were being asked a lot of questions that were only tangentially related to RPGs but ultimately had nothing whatsoever to do with our subject matter expertise. We were fielding questions about medieval boat speeds, historic exchange rates, depression-era trade, real-world animals, and so on. But we're not a site for expertise in those topics—nobody here was an expert in those questions, nobody knew what the right answer was, and nobody knew how to judge the right answer, &lt;em&gt;except&lt;/em&gt; if it was due to some coincidental expertise completely unrelated to anything in our site's subject matter. It wasn't an ideal situation, and we're not the people to ask this stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, if the question was instead “Can a human in &lt;em&gt;this specific RPG&lt;/em&gt; realistically wield and attack effectively with this kind of sword?” we could begin answering. That question would be about the RPG's mechanics and would get specific, detailed answers drawing on actual RPG expertise, with the substance of the answer even varying significantly depending on the RPG you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-01-23T10:51:52.080" LastActivityDate="2020-01-23T10:51:52.080" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9703" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-23T21:23:08.513" Score="9" ViewCount="190" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shooting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shooting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shooting&lt;/a&gt; tag currently has no tag wiki/excerpt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not entirely clear to me what the specific purpose of this tag is that's not covered by existing tags. It seems weirdly specific, and yet vague. Based just on its current use, it seems like it's referring to ranged attacks made with firearms (though &quot;shooting&quot; on its own could potentially refer to attacks with bows and the like as well).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, the tag appears on 2 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun-sr5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun-sr5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun-sr5&lt;/a&gt; questions, 3 questions with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deadlands-reloaded&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;deadlands-reloaded&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;deadlands-reloaded&lt;/a&gt; tags, and 1 question tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/savage-worlds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;savage-worlds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;savage-worlds&lt;/a&gt; (with no further specification). Upon further examination, the 4 Savage Worlds questions were all asked by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3867/texter&quot;&gt;same user&lt;/a&gt;, who seems to have created the tag by virtue of simply adding it to their questions. They haven't been on the site since February 2019 - so it's not like I can just ask them what the tag's meant for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that the tag's only been used for Savage Worlds and Shadowrun questions doesn't inherently tell me anything about what the tag's about, other than that this one user made the tag (it's totally unclear whether it's a system-specific concept or not), and that 2 querents asking about Shadowrun SR5 just happened to assume based on the name that the tag fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The scope of the tag seems to be entirely covered by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranged-attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranged-attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranged-attack&lt;/a&gt; tag to me, perhaps in conjunction with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/firearms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;firearms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;firearms&lt;/a&gt; tag where relevant. It's not like we have a tag for &quot;swinging a sword&quot; or something, so it seems strange to have a tag that just refers to a particular kind of ranged attack. This is just an assumption, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shooting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shooting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shooting&lt;/a&gt; tag be deleted, or synonymized with one of the above tags?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Alternatively, if the tag shouldn't be removed, when should it be used/what should it be used for?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(Tag wiki/excerpt suggestions are welcome, if suggesting the tag be kept - this would help clarify the focus of the tag and help differentiate it from the existing tags mentioned above.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-27T19:53:57.807" LastActivityDate="2020-02-01T07:06:25.927" Title="Should the [shooting] tag be burninated (or synonymized with another tag)?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9704" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9696" CreationDate="2020-01-24T23:21:50.013" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Close them as duplicates of the first linked question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, almost all of those last set of questions seem like different subsets of a question asking &quot;What abilities work in an antimagic field?&quot; However, that question itself seems to be a duplicate of the very first question you linked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113364/how-do-i-know-if-an-ability-is-magical&quot;&gt;How do I know if an ability is magical?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The very purpose of that first question is to determine what is considered &quot;magical&quot;, whether for the purpose of an &lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt; spell or similar effect, or for the purpose of determining what counts as &quot;nonmagical damage&quot; for &lt;em&gt;armor of invulnerability&lt;/em&gt; and similar effects. Thus, most questions about whether something works in &lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt; will be duplicates of this question, to the extent that they're essentially asking whether that thing is considered &quot;magical&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, the second question you linked - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99335/how-to-decide-if-an-effect-is-magical-for-magic-resistance&quot;&gt;How to decide if an effect is magical for Magic Resistance?&lt;/a&gt; - is also a duplicate of the first question. Its entire purpose is to ask how to determine whether an effect is magical, specifically for the purpose of the Magic Resistance trait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl&quot;&gt;If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?&lt;/a&gt; meta FAQ:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We close Question A as a duplicate of Question B only when &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of the following is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered &lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Question B has an &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The idea here is it's the same question with an obvious answer. Someone redirected from Question A to B can see obviously why they were redirected and find a satisfactory answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In almost all of these cases, the &quot;Is X magical?&quot; is obviously covered as a subset of &quot;How do I know if an ability is magical?&quot;. The game has a general way to define what's magical, so virtually any question asking whether a specific effect is magical is covered by the general question. The general question also has an answer that cites the mechanism for determining whether an ability is magical, so the second criteria is met.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, &lt;strong&gt;questions that are simply asking specific versions of &quot;Is X magical?&quot; should be closed as a duplicate of the general question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But there are a few exceptions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last criterion quoted above, of course, is mainly where the exceptions I mentioned become relevant. For instance, the querent may have a specific reason to question whether an effect is magical even if it seems to meet the criteria quoted in the answer to the general question. The main example that comes to mind is one not linked in your post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76005/does-ki-count-as-magic-for-the-purpose-of-an-antimagic-field-or-is-it-only-fluf&quot;&gt;Does ki count as magic for the purpose of an antimagic field, or is it only fluff?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, the reason is that the &quot;fluff&quot;/&quot;flavor&quot; text in the general description of the class clearly references ki as magical - but the Ki class feature never calls it magical, and a later class feature explicitly makes the character's unarmed strikes magical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In these cases, &lt;strong&gt;the question should clearly address why the linked question doesn't already cover theirs&lt;/strong&gt;. (This is already how we usually handle questions that seem like duplicates but where OP thinks their specific question might be an exception to the rule.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, there may be cases where &lt;em&gt;part&lt;/em&gt; of the question might just be &quot;is X magical?&quot;, but there may be another aspect to it. For instance, there are two aspects to the following question, which can be handled differently: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131563/can-a-warlock-use-eldritch-smite-in-an-antimagic-field&quot;&gt;Can a warlock use Eldritch Smite in an antimagic field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first part of the question obviously asks whether Eldritch Smite is a &quot;magical effect&quot; that is suppressed by &lt;em&gt;antimagic field&lt;/em&gt;, which is indeed a duplicate of the general question above. However, the other part of this question asks &lt;em&gt;what happens&lt;/em&gt; when Eldritch Smite is suppressed, specifically with regard to the spell slot being expended or not. That question is currently distinct from the general case, because it's asking something different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases where a question contains multiple parts or &quot;sub-questions&quot;, only one of which is a duplicate of an existing question, the solution is often simple: &lt;strong&gt;edit the duplicate question out of the post, and refocus the post to ask the question that remains&lt;/strong&gt;. This avoids unnecessary repetition, and allows answerers to focus on the real issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the last set of questions linked in your post, there currently seems to be just one question that should probably not be closed as a duplicate: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162776/is-the-channel-divinity-feature-negated-in-an-antimagic-field&quot;&gt;Is the Channel Divinity feature negated in an antimagic field?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason this post is an exception is that OP's real confusion seems to have been revealed in their comment on the answer: &quot;spells and magical effects [...] created by [a] deity&quot; aren't suppressed, and Channel Divinity &quot;channel[s] divine energy directly from your deity, using that energy to fuel magical effects.&quot; Since this is the source of their confusion, I've recommended they edit that into the question. It essentially turns it into an entirely different issue, asking not whether CD is magical but rather whether it counts as &quot;created by a deity&quot; - which is not a duplicate of the first question linked in your post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2020-01-24T23:21:50.013" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9705" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9700" CreationDate="2020-01-26T23:52:15.563" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think another reason that realism questions should be off-topic, in addition to those stated by doppelgreener, is that allowing realism questions will leave us open to many unanswerable questions.  Imagine a realism question comes up in a system like GURPS.  GURPS has a strong focus on realism.  The question is about a specific rule that seems to be unrealistic.  Is it unrealistic because the developers made a mistake, or because it was a conscious choice to protect playability or balance?  Nobody here, that I'm aware of, is a mind reader.  This question could easily be unresolvable.  Now imagine the same situation in D&amp;amp;D.  D&amp;amp;D generally doesn't care about realism.  If a question comes up about a rule, arguing from a realism angle, in D&amp;amp;D, we can just consult the rulebook and decide how it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Allowing realism questions would be like having two clocks.  If they don't agree, how do you decide which, if either, is correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49722" LastActivityDate="2020-01-26T23:52:15.563" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9706" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9703" CreationDate="2020-01-27T10:58:18.507" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe we should do nothing with it and leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Merging it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/firearms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;firearms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;firearms&lt;/a&gt; seems inappropriate. In Fate, when you're using a bow or a slingshot or darts you're also Shooting but you're definitely not using firearms. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranged-combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranged-combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranged-combat&lt;/a&gt; wouldn't necessarily apply either; just because you're Shooting doesn't mean you're in combat with anyone. I suspect similar stuff is going on for the games already using the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These tags have overlap but not such that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shooting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shooting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shooting&lt;/a&gt; is inherently a synonym of either. There's also no specific problem occurring with the tag that calls for us to change things. Let's leave it be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If/when this does actually cause any kind of problem for Savage Worlds or Shadowrun folks, they can bring up “hey why are we using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shooting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shooting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shooting&lt;/a&gt; when we could be using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranged-combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranged-combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranged-combat&lt;/a&gt;?” or whatever on meta if they'd like to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-01T07:06:25.927" LastActivityDate="2020-02-01T07:06:25.927" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9707" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-01-28T08:33:07.940" Score="52" ViewCount="815" Body="&lt;p&gt;Due to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/342950/227017&quot;&gt;this farewell&lt;/a&gt; and associated persistent abusive behaviour from SE, I will no longer participate in any sites until such a time as SE becomes less abusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My thanks go to all users of this (and other) sites, all the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reading some of the comments, I am deeply touched that so many of you valued my input. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Many thanks indeed.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2100" LastEditorUserId="2100" LastEditDate="2020-02-03T09:10:10.773" LastActivityDate="2020-02-03T09:10:10.773" Title="So long and thanks for all the fish" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9708" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2020-01-30T06:36:30.447" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/163861/can-a-17th-level-sorcerer-kill-all-demons-with-simulacrum-and-wish/163883#163883&quot;&gt;Can a 17th level sorcerer kill all demons with Simulacrum and Wish?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Camembert might be a bit too runny, but at least it's served with Cantor dusting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When trying to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/163883&quot;&gt;perform genocide on an infinity&lt;/a&gt;, it's always important to remember the cardinality classes, as otherwise ones fine cheese-serving might get interrupted by an infinity of angry demons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56128" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T20:03:22.963" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T20:03:22.963" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9709" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:42:57.510" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on Meta specifically about the use of comments to post answers, including speculative or partial answers, and about best practices and how to handle such comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/comments&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;comments&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;comments&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/answers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;answers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;answers&lt;/a&gt; tags.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:13:59.227" LastActivityDate="2021-11-08T22:13:59.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9710" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:42:57.510" Score="0" Body="For questions on Meta specifically about the use of comments to post answers, including speculative or partial answers, and about best practices and how to handle such comments. (See also: the [comments] and [answers] tags.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:13:59.227" LastActivityDate="2021-11-08T22:13:59.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9711" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about deleted questions, especially on the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange mainsite (but potentially on Meta as well). This covers both general policies/practices surrounding deleted questions and issues relating to specific deleted questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9712" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" Score="0" Body="For questions about deleted questions, especially on the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange mainsite (but potentially on Meta as well). This covers both general policies/practices surrounding deleted questions and issues relating to specific deleted questions." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T21:45:38.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9713" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about deleted answers, especially on the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange mainsite (but potentially on Meta as well). This covers both general policies/practices surrounding deleted answers and issues relating to specific deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9714" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" Score="0" Body="For questions about deleted answers, especially on the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange mainsite (but potentially on Meta as well). This covers both general policies/practices surrounding deleted answers and issues relating to specific deleted answers." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T21:45:51.610" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9715" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about making edits on mainsite or Meta: how to do it, when to do it, best practices, policies, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9716" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" Score="0" Body="For questions about making edits on mainsite or Meta: how to do it, when to do it, best practices, policies, etc." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" LastActivityDate="2020-01-30T22:28:18.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9717" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-05T02:57:17.300" Score="15" ViewCount="538" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I post an answer I immediately get downvotes. This always puzzled me as there never seems to be a reason for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried posting a comment asking if downvoters could please leave a comment so I can correct any problems. I received a lot of comments which is great, and fixed some problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I also received a comment linking to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/647/can-we-require-comments-on-downvotes&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt;, saying that it is not good to ask for comments. However that meta is about requiring people to make comments as a matter of policy, not one user simply asking another. The reasons given don't really make sense in this context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in general is it ok to ask for comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-05T03:03:11.087" LastActivityDate="2020-02-16T22:58:56.183" Title="Is it ok to ask for comments on downvotes?" Tags="|discussion|comments|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9718" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9717" CreationDate="2020-02-05T03:25:52.080" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's always ok to ask, but there's no guarantee you'll get a response.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for this is because downvotes already have their own reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This question/answer does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And unfortunately, everyone interprets things differently. Some people may see your question as not useful because you could simply do a bit of google searching to come up with your own answer, you just haven't looked in the right places, and therefore posting a question about it, to that user, it appears that your question is not useful or shows little research effort. To others, they may misinterpret your question, or not understand what you're asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Asking for help to improve your post is always welcome.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, you may get a comment pointing out some of the faults in your post. A detail that could be added, like an excerpt or a specific situation to define your question. Maybe simply formatting the question or rewording things a bit could help. If you don't get these comments, do feel free to ask for assistance. If we can help you improve, then that means we can help improve the quality of the site; which is something everyone strives for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6572/why-is-an-answer-being-downvoted-without-any-comments&quot;&gt;V2Blast has commented&lt;/a&gt;, there are posts that can help you improve the faults in your own questions and answers, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;Tour&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;Help Center&lt;/a&gt; can also help you to improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But remember, we are not responsible for maintaining or improving your posts - if you contribute to the effort to improve, we can assist, but you are responsible for making the effort to contribute to this site; not us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2020-02-05T03:25:52.080" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9719" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9717" CreationDate="2020-02-05T03:47:53.787" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;At face value yes, but looking deeper...maybe not&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you review both the meta you link on required comments as well as the FAQ V2blast linked to in the comments of the question, you'll note that there are very good reasons as to why we don't necessarily want to encourage comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which seems hypocritical in some ways because we always want to improve our answers so that they are both better received by the community as well as potentially more relevant to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, we vote as we want to vote. And if users want to provide explanation, they are free to do so in the manner recommended - and many will do so, and do so without being asked. For those that don't want to give a comment with their vote, they shouldn't feel like they need to because someone left a comment requesting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People understand that if they give feedback, the answer can be improved. And many are vocal and not shy to say something. But if they don't want to, that's totally fine as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking for feedback just isn't necessary. And if feedback is given, I'd also generally recommend either using it in your answer or asking for it to be deleted as not necessary. Debating in the comments about it may not be fruitful and returns us back to why encouraging comments can be problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Looking beyond rep&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Getting downvotes is still a bummer, though. We want to know &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; so that we can try to fix it and turn that negative rep into sweet positive rep. Rather than asking for feedback, I'd recommend reviewing the positively reviewed answers against yours to see where they diverge. Sometimes it's things you can fix. Maybe it's in your use of support, tone, language, or something unrelated you notice. And you can then apply that to either your current answer or your next one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But sometimes it's also just pure disagreement. If you believe in your answer, then you're not going to fix that. Diversity of opinions makes us strong, and just because you got some downvotes, maybe you got upvotes, too. And those upvotes are both worth more and tell you there are some like-minded folks, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And finally, there's always the possibility that you can change your mind. I've definitely written answers and later realized my approach, logic, or reasoning wasn't the best and end up agreeing with someone else that my answer was problematic - even when I was really confident in my initial approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-05T19:54:29.043" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9720" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-05T09:17:52.390" Score="37" ViewCount="544" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/64320/14848&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; currently suggests swimming while wearing a full suit of metal armor would be a reasonable thing to do &lt;em&gt;in real life&lt;/em&gt;.  In actuality, jumping into water with a full suit of metal armor on may well end in your death.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While most people are, I hope, educated enough to realize that the physics proposed in that answer is just completely wrong and/or reasonable enough to realize that extra weight you can't easily remove + deep water = very bad idea, I'm not confident that everyone is, and so the fact this proposes deadly real-life activity as if it were not deadly concerns me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this something we should do something about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-05T10:41:47.477" LastActivityDate="2020-02-05T10:41:47.477" Title="I think this answer might be harmful" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9720" CreationDate="2020-02-05T10:21:30.080" Score="40" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have removed this answer. “Advises actual real life harm” is a pretty good identifying criteria for answers that are a bad idea to have on our site—though in this case it's more like “advice that if taken seriously will lead to someone dying”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you noted (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.scubaboard.com/community/threads/how-much-weight-can-you-swim-up.467812/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;and cited&lt;/a&gt;  in your comment on the answer) people expecting to swim around in a 60-pound suit of metal armor will most definitely drown instead, since even 20 pounds is a challenge for fit swimmers with fins. The line of reasoning leading to the answer's conclusions is faulty as other comments also pointed out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally we'd just remove the harmful part of the answer if possible. In this case once we did that there would be barely any answer left and it'd be delete-worthy anyway, so in this case I've just opted to delete the whole thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-05T10:35:45.577" LastActivityDate="2020-02-05T10:35:45.577" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9722" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9717" CreationDate="2020-02-05T19:15:15.040" Score="29" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It doesn't hurt to ask ...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many users on many SE site do ask for feedback to help understand what caused a negative reaction to a given answer or question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;... but don't be upset by a lack of follow up&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE encourages &quot;down vote and move on&quot; as a way to prevent comments wars ... which sometimes happen.  So if you do ask, and don't get the feedback you are looking for, then let it go and see if you can spot what may have elicited the down vote.   Or just press on. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you do get a reply as to &quot;why&quot;, then avoid the impulse to argue.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Miniman tried to coach me on this when I was new to the site.  It took a while for me to embrace what he was getting at, but over time what I found works best is that if a &quot;Hey, what's wrong with this?&quot; comment gets a reply, and one disagrees with that reply, it is best to resist the urge to argue about it.  That can be hard to do, but resisting that urge is the better plan.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why is that?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we ask for that feedback, and we get it, and then we start an argument with whomever fed back to us, it &lt;em&gt;disincentivizes that person, and observers, from responding to a similar inquiry about a down vote in the future&lt;/em&gt;.  Arguments in comments are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; value added.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I had to learn that the hard way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Novak offers this experiential point in a comment that is IMO good guidance:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;It's also probably best done sparingly: I ask when I get a downvote (or a bunch) that really baffle or confuse me, but if I asked on every downvote I'd come across as... I'm not sure what, exactly, but nothing good.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A community history point on this kind of interaction&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was discussing this with @doppelgreener, who has a much longer experience with this site and with SE than I do. A norm developed over time on a lot of SE sites to prefer to not ask &quot;why the down votes?&quot; under one's answer/question.  While it was never expressly forbidden, it does tend to lead to arguments. Arguments in comments add to noise, not signal, on an SE site so &lt;em&gt;argument prevention&lt;/em&gt; is desirable.  To paraphrase what doppel told me:   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The goal of that guidance is to &lt;em&gt;minimise the number of all-out arguments the site has&lt;/em&gt;.  Requesting feedback on why your answer is being downvoted is not a bad thing, by itself, but it has a very good chance of generating an argument (maybe 50% as a finger-in-air estimate).  So be sensitive to that before one so asks.    &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-02-06T14:59:25.713" LastActivityDate="2020-02-06T14:59:25.713" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9723" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-07T16:22:08.610" Score="2" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the comments on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164381/how-can-i-drop-hints-that-a-seemingly-innocuous-gnome-village-is-secretly-evil&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I noticed a discussion, and on visiting chat I saw someone already talking about it. Here are the relevant comments from the question's comment section:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;One more thing, the dnd-4e tag may be misleading unless you think that 4e, in particular, may provide some important tools for this that other editions don't. I only mention this because I deliberately mute the dnd-4e tag to avoid content that I'm not familiar with. The generic dungeons-and-dragons may be better, but this is the OP's choice. – Aventinus&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;@Aventinus Tags exist to describe the content of the question, and nothing more or less than that. The querent is playing D&amp;amp;D 4e and the tag reflects that. There's nothing misleading about it. Tags aren't meant to communicate meaning beyond reflecting the content of the question, so adding the generic tag wouldn't be appropriate. Whether the solutions would be 4e-specific is neither here nor there in terms of what the tags should say; in addition answers should be answering the question, not the tags, whatever the tags happened to say. – doppelgreener&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to the help page, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;the purpose of tags&lt;/a&gt; isn't to describe the &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; of the question (the question's content already does that), it's to help answerers find questions that they can answer by describing the &lt;em&gt;topic&lt;/em&gt; of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But here we have people who may otherwise be able to answer having difficulty finding the question because it has been tagged with something that is unlikely to have any bearing on the answer, besides providing a little context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging based on content raises questions, should that question be tagged with forgotten realms, gnomes, worldbuilding, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the purpose of tags on this site? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How should tags be used on this site? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it more useful to have tags describe the content of the question rather than the topic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-08T11:42:14.643" LastActivityDate="2020-02-13T16:31:58.830" Title="What tags should questions get?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9724" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9723" CreationDate="2020-02-07T17:36:38.497" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The purpose of tags is to connect people with questions and answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;help page&lt;/a&gt; on tagging (which IIRC is identical network-wide):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question.&#xA;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be&#xA;able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined&#xA;categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if the topic of gnomes is key to your question, we'd add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gnome&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gnome&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gnome&lt;/a&gt; tag to it. If your question happens to be about a gnome character, but the gnome-iness of the character has no bearing on the question, then the tag would be superfluous and we'd generally remove it. Adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gnome&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gnome&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gnome&lt;/a&gt; is a way to allow people who are searching for questions or answers about gnomes to more easily find them. Note that this tag makes more sense than a simple search term specifically since a search for &amp;quot;gnome&amp;quot; would bring up every time it is even mentioned, whereas the tag will focus only on questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; gnomes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;System tags are tags that indicate what game you're playing. While they don't &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; fit into the category of describing the &amp;quot;topic&amp;quot; of the question, they do assist with connecting experts to questions, which is the main purpose of a tag. If you tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; it makes this question much easier to find and search for by 5e experts. This is very similar to the way coding language tags work on Stack Overflow and game tags work on BCG.se (by my understanding).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that not every question needs a system tag, though, and there's some grey area around when it should or should not be included if the system isn't &lt;em&gt;essential&lt;/em&gt; to the question. Mainly because, sometimes it is hard to tell &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; the system is essential or not. Given the nature of the topics, no rule can be created to cover all the cases so the edge cases must be worked out and decided by the community as they come up. This appears as if it may have been one of those cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In the end, generally, we should add a tag if it helps to connect that question with more answerers/browsers. This is consistent with the the stated guidelines for tag use network-wide.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-13T16:31:58.830" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9725" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-07T18:25:53.463" Score="21" ViewCount="629" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that people are in charge of their voting, and we generally avoid legislating voting in any way as it is fundamentally unenforceable.  Nevertheless, the use of downvotes to explicitly discriminate against rpg communities the voter dislikes concerns me, particularly since such explicitly action all-but-certainly comes alongside silent action.  Recently, the following comment was posted on a theoretical optimization question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I downvoted because I don't see what the practical problem is here. This looks like a theoretical optimization problem that doesn't involve actual play, and that's enough for a &quot;not useful&quot; downvote from me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comment was upvoted twice.  I think it's self-evident that this is directly contrary to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;Can we affirm that RPG.SE embraces a plurality of playstyles?&lt;/a&gt; and constitutes &quot;harassment, bigotry, or abuse&quot;.  If the action of downvoting on this basis were expressed in a comment, it would be flaggable as such.  Thus, it seems to me, we have a problem if people are doing this sort of thing regularly.  It's important, of course, that voting remains independent and not subject to any sort of review process or whatever. But it's also important that we not use votes to push playstyles-- or other groups we don't like!-- off the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-07T18:59:52.577" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T06:23:32.543" Title="What should we do about people downvoting to try and push subcommunities they don't like off this site?" Tags="|discussion|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9726" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9725" CreationDate="2020-02-07T21:09:07.653" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't speak for the downvoter, but I think I might have some insight into their thought process. I'm a big fan of optimization questions in general, but over time I've become more and more disillusioned with a specific type of question - the one that chooses a number (usually damage) and asks answerers to make that number as high as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crab question isn't one of those questions, and I didn't downvote it. But I certainly understand that for some people, some categories of questions can become an automatic downvote, not because of playstyle prejudices, but because of their experience with questions of that kind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, that's not what they said in their comment, and it's obviously possible I'm reading way too much into this. But it can be very difficult to express the sentiment that &quot;these types of questions just don't &lt;em&gt;work&lt;/em&gt;&quot; when the only real justification you have for it is your prior experiences. Saying &quot;not useful&quot; is a much easier and more accessible way to explain a downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15469" LastActivityDate="2020-02-07T21:09:07.653" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9725" CreationDate="2020-02-08T04:11:46.933" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Nothing&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;affirm RPG.SE embraces all playstyles&lt;/a&gt;, there's no way to force everyone to always vote according to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the comment could be flagged as unkind and deleted, but that doesn't do away with the downvote, nor should it. And that really won't have any good effect - they'll just downvote without a comment in the future, and the comment actually serves for people who &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; think theoretical CharOp is bad to realize some of the downvotes may be just for that reason not because there's a problem with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a public site on the Internet. People will vote up and down for any reason they want. We publish our site norms and then let it roll. After that, it's just a practice of you being content with that - a modestly thick skin is required to successfully engage anywhere on the Internet, and while this place is friendlier than pretty much any other social media, toughening up is the difference between &quot;downvoted and sad&quot; and &quot;downvoted and content&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I don't like a topic, I just leave it alone and don't go into it. I recommend the same for others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-10T19:27:36.907" LastActivityDate="2020-02-10T19:27:36.907" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9725" CreationDate="2020-02-08T20:00:55.307" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What should &quot;we&quot; do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, who is we? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of approaches to dealing with questions or comments that one finds to be a bad fit.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Refrain from commenting when one down votes.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Sometimes, &lt;em&gt;down vote and press on&lt;/em&gt; is the best way to approach a question that one does not find useful, or is ill-formed.  If one wishes to &lt;em&gt;help the question asking&lt;/em&gt; user improve their question, a comment will often be helpful because the intention behind the comment is helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Go to the next question&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;If a question is coherently written, but one disagrees with the premise, doing what @mxyzplk points to having done is a good course of action: ignore it and press one.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Nominate the question (and answers) for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7218/22566&quot;&gt;a Cheese award&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;We have a post that highlights &lt;em&gt;optimizatum absurdum&lt;/em&gt; on this meta.  Some TO questions fit right in there.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wring our hands at a comment we don't care for&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;That's an option, if that's where we get good feelings from using this site&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Report negative and unhelpful comments using the flag system&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;That's probably the most important take away, and the most important answer to your question.  &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Flag it!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;    &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Leave a comment under the negative comment that this kind of comment is out of line.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;One can do that, but it may invite an argument in comments, which we prefer &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; to encourage.  Which brings us to:  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Leaving a comment, after flagging it, inviting that user to a chat&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;The purpose of that chat is to talk to that user and explain how that negativity  is not good for this site.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;This is an experience-based part of this answer, right here:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I have found that engaging with a user, on a variety of SEs, often gets one's point across very well.  We can have an open and honest dialogue, rather than a one way &quot;I condemn you!&quot; exchange.  The &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt; we adopt during such a discussion makes or breaks it.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We can do a lot of things.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've been around long enough to know what all of the tools are. So here's my bottom line answer:  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Use the tools that we have.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You provided a part of the answer yourself, in the text of your question:  we can always &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;link to the playstyles meta in a comment to remind people of how we roll around here.&lt;/a&gt;   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-08T22:16:02.637" LastActivityDate="2020-02-08T22:16:02.637" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9729" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9730" CreationDate="2020-02-10T11:43:26.267" Score="8" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;I really like the theme of desktop site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wk5zI.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Desktop&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The mobile site, on the other hand. Well, it is clean, and exceptionally generic shade of blue and gray:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8BiIa.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Mobile&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be possible to, perhaps, just fix the color theme of mobile site to match the desktop version? Maybe even some font changes? That shouldn't be more than a few lines changed in CSS, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At least I find the difference jarring enough to make this meta post, and I might not be the only one who would enjoy a bit more personality :-D&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11358" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-18T18:03:24.617" LastActivityDate="2020-02-18T18:03:24.617" Title="Theme of mobile site needs a bit of polish" Tags="|feature-request|status-declined|site-design|mobile|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9730" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9729" CreationDate="2020-02-10T12:28:04.760" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The mobile version of the site won't be improved&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the main meta, there was a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/343179/404165&quot;&gt;post&lt;/a&gt; by a staff member stating that there are plans to abandon the mobile version of the site in the future:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We are actively working on the responsive design that works on both desktop and mobile, based on screen size. Once that is finished and perfected, mobile web will be slated for complete removal. While we still fix vital bugs for mobile web, you shouldn't expect any new features to be built for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Try the Desktop version of the site instead&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I already have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8971/33707&quot;&gt;another answer&lt;/a&gt; detailing how to switch to the responsive desktop version on a mobile browser that you can check by selecting the &quot;full site&quot; option. This version has the same overall theme as the desktop site (after all it is the desktop site, just responsive to fit a smaller screen). I recommend giving it a try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This version is not without its issues but given the above quote on the direction that the stack is taking, reporting any problems with the full site version when viewed on a smaller screen seems more likely to have an effect as this is the version that is being worked on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2020-02-18T15:23:21.747" LastActivityDate="2020-02-18T15:23:21.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9729" CreationDate="2020-02-10T14:52:21.300" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The “mobile” version of the website—the blue-and-white version that doesn't have our site theme—is not getting updated. It's deprecated and it's slated for completed removal (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/343179/152515&quot;&gt;staff post here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is because the main site itself—the themed version—is now mobile friendly. If it isn't already showing up that way you need to enable this behaviour:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make sure you're on the desktop version of the site. If necessary, leave the blue-and-white mobile version by hitting the “full site” link in the footer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Scroll down to the footer again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Find the “Enable Responsiveness” link in the first section of the footer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Hit that and wait for the page to reload.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main site should then look like this on your phone. &lt;em&gt;This&lt;/em&gt; is the current mobile view of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/F3Lks.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/F3Lks.png&quot; alt=&quot;responsive main site in mobile view&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-18T13:54:35.940" LastActivityDate="2020-02-18T13:54:35.940" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9732" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9738" CreationDate="2020-02-10T18:29:28.207" Score="-10" ViewCount="307" Body="&lt;p&gt;A common issue I've seen on stackexchange in general, and which appears to have happened &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164540/what-is-the-stronger-elven-magus-build-dex-based-or-str-based&quot;&gt;here on rpg.se&lt;/a&gt;, is a question is closed because the moderators imagined they knew what the answer would be and then closed the thread. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a handful of potential answers to the question &quot;Which magus build is stronger, dex-based or strength-based?&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Strength-based build will be stronger for reasons X.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Dexterity-based build will be stronger for reason Y. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At levels XYZ strength will be stronger, at levels ABC dex will be stronger.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The two builds optimized properly are of roughly the same strength, each with their own pros and cons, and it will depend on the specifics of the campaign and party to make a firm determination. Here are a list of pros and cons. &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer were 1 or 2 (or possibly 3), the question should not be closed. &#xA;This is easy to illustrate: which Fighter build is stronger - a Strength-based build or a Wisdom-based build?  The answer is clearly &quot;Strength&quot;.  If I had asked that question, I would've gotten a straight forward answer and the question would have been a success. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears that the moderators have determined that the answer is #4, and closed the question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The nature of the two questions are identical. The only difference is that one has a very clear answer while the &lt;strong&gt;moderators believe&lt;/strong&gt; the other does not. This isn't due to the question being vague, but rather due to the &lt;strong&gt;moderators believing that the answer is 'it depends' without ever subjecting that answer to the voting process&lt;/strong&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems wrong-headed to me. I think the question is answerable as written and I suspect the answer will be something to the effect of #4 above &quot;Roughly balanced in terms of strength, so it comes down to priorities, specifics, and preferences.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that is the answer, then it's the sort of answer that someone can provide, listing the general pros and cons of the two different ideas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then maybe someone else can come along and say &quot;Actually, no. I have played this class extensively and I can say definitively that the best build is dex-based for reasons X, Y, and Z&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then both answers would be subject to the voting process and there will be knowledge added to the community. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What happened here, instead, was that the moderators made a determination about what they believed the answer to be, and then closed the thread based on what they believed the answer would be.  That doesn't seem appropriate to me.  This is an answerable question that is not opinion based; we should let someone answer it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23007" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-02-10T19:08:30.390" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T21:20:46.440" Title="Closing a question based on the Moderators' belief about what the answer will be" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9733" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9732" CreationDate="2020-02-10T18:35:26.957" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was closed by community votes not moderators.  It is also not for the reason you are imputing to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optimization questions require a clear goal to address - &quot;mechanically stronger&quot; isn't a thing. Check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1639/are-character-build-or-optimization-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are character build or optimization questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt; for how to ask an optimization question that's not too vague. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there may be some very basic cases in which the question proposes a dichotomy where one option is worse in every conceivable way, that is very unusual.  In this case, a DEX magus versus a STR magus - a magus by its nature has various things it does.  DEX makes them better at ray spells and such (and higher AC, and skills...).  STR makes them better at whacking things.  Depending on your goals, archetypes, etc. Even in fighters, some want high AC and to tank and others want to be like a barbarian and just throw damage.  Which is &quot;better?&quot; Depends on what you're looking for.  Pirate swashbuckler magus? Answer might be different than &quot;tank melee magus.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than play infinite guessing games, we prefer to put a question on hold, clarify that OP's goals, then reopen so that answers can be helpful and on topic. That is unlikely to change.  Instead, consider adding the modest amount of appropriate criteria to your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2020-02-10T23:09:29.157" LastActivityDate="2020-02-10T23:09:29.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9734" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-10T19:52:16.530" Score="4" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am reporting this spammer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/61952/tonyzega&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/61952/tonyzega&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;Their about me is just spam for their product. Please do delete the user, and do not support that company that it is spamming for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user61954" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-10T20:05:41.353" LastActivityDate="2020-02-10T20:05:41.353" Title="Spam user report" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|spam|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9735" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9725" CreationDate="2020-02-10T19:59:56.880" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I personally dislike theoretical optimization questions, but I don't downvote them. I kinda think it'd be better for the site to focus on questions related to &lt;em&gt;playing&lt;/em&gt; RPGs, and agree with the sentiment of that comment that there is no such thing as &quot;theoretical optimization RPG playstyle&quot;. Then again, I don't think there's a better site for this kind of puzzles. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the core of the problem is, some people downvote, because they are annoyed by mixing of the two different concepts: optimizing a character for &lt;em&gt;playing&lt;/em&gt;, and find the best solution for a character optimization &lt;em&gt;puzzle&lt;/em&gt; with given constraints and single goal. To compare, it's like putting code golf questions to SO, and while I wasn't here when those got &lt;a href=&quot;https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;their own site&lt;/a&gt;, I bet there was similar concerns and downvotes at SO before that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, personal preferences aside, &lt;strong&gt;as a solution, I propose a new kind of &quot;puzzle&quot; or &quot;challenge&quot; tag to make it clear that this kind of question is legitimate&lt;/strong&gt; (not sure what would be a good exact tag name here). That should reduce drive-by-downvotes. Then we might even get other kinds of puzzles too, like map or trap design puzzles (because if one kind of puzzle is ok, then why not other kinds). I suppose there's room here for puzzles, and they might add more than detract from this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some tag ideas: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization-challenge&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization-puzzle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization-puzzle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization-puzzle&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thought-experiment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;thought-experiment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;thought-experiment&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11358" LastEditorUserId="11358" LastEditDate="2020-02-11T06:23:32.543" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T06:23:32.543" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9736" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9725" CreationDate="2020-02-10T21:24:11.017" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Vote the other way, if you care.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll be honest, I was surprised to see that comment since I didn't remember writing it, and then even more surprised to learn that it wasn't mine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So. There are boundaries that we as a community have set in order to keep the space clean and usable. The SE model gives most of us access to tools for policing those boundaries, such as close/reopen votes, flagging spam and harassment, and electing moderators. When I'm using those tools, I'm acting on behalf of the community, and I am obligated to set aside my biases and act from that perspective as best I can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;em&gt;as a community&lt;/em&gt; we embrace a diversity of playstyles. It would not be appropriate to vote to close that question as off topic, because the community has said that optimization questions are within bounds.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;em&gt;I, as an individual participant&lt;/em&gt;, am &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; required to embrace all possible playstyles. I don't have to write questions or answers about games I don't play. I upvote posts that I think promote good roleplaying experiences. And I downvote those that promote toxic and dysfunctional behavior. Who says what's toxic and dysfunctional? I do, because it's my vote. If you think I'm wrong, then you get a vote, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting is a quality judgment based on experience with the subject matter. We are a practical community, and quality ultimately comes down to &quot;If I do this at the table, will everyone have fun?&quot; And that's a question for people who have played and know what is and isn't fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Just like it's not appropriate to flag a comment as unkind because you knew someone had a negative opinion of your question, and asked what it was, and they told you the truth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-10T22:16:18.067" LastActivityDate="2020-02-10T22:16:18.067" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9732" CreationDate="2020-02-10T23:10:56.893" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Issues with the linked question:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I see it, the problem with the linked question is that it's not clear what would make a &lt;em&gt;good or bad&lt;/em&gt; answer to the question, nor what would make one answer &lt;em&gt;better or worse&lt;/em&gt; than another. The criteria for making those determinations aren't defined in the question. That responses are &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; is irrelevant, and a standard like &quot;internally consistent&quot; isn't a high bar to clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not that different from asking a question about what Rogue build is best, but failing to state which game or edition the question relates to. Answerers can certainly offer an answer from some arbitrarily chosen game and edition, but it's not clear why that would be better than the question itself indicating that information and getting a more focused answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An optimized build for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e might be totally different than for 5e, and so &lt;em&gt;each could be equally correct&lt;/em&gt; for its assumptions, without any way for one to be a better answer for the question than another. If the question is about which optimized Rogue build is best across &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D editions, answerers will need some common set of criteria to compare to arrive at an answer. &lt;strong&gt;A question should make clear what it is asking.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SE is not great for discussions. Chat is an option, though.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you seem to be suggesting here is that each answerer write an answer that is specifically &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; providing a direct answer to the question, but instead makes an &lt;em&gt;argument&lt;/em&gt; for why their working definition of &quot;stronger&quot; is the correct one, and then that their strategy correctly optimizes for that definition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a fine discussion to have! But that's just the thing-- it's a &lt;em&gt;discussion&lt;/em&gt;, not an answer that clearly resolves a specific question. The SE format handles discussions poorly. There just isn't enough opportunity for responding back and forth to resolve the ambiguity which the question, at this point, is explicitly &lt;em&gt;refusing&lt;/em&gt; to define. That can make questions less useful to future visitors. It can also attract lower-quality answers, which we prefer to avoid where possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Really big, expansive questions can be problematic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an adequately argued, complete answer to the question requires several pages of description, along with exceptions and conditional cases, it may be too broad to fit the SE format. If there are a dozen scenarios which might affect how &quot;strongest&quot; is defined, it might be better to have a dozen questions each covering one of those so that each answer can have a chance at being clear and concise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking that answerers address every possible explanation of &quot;strongest&quot; or &quot;optimized&quot; fits into the &quot;really big, expansive&quot; category for me (and apparently for other users as well). And that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; what this question demands, as each answerer would need to justify their asserted definition as the right one even before laying out their proposed strategies for optimizing for that definition. That's a lot of work, both for answerers to write and for future visitors to read, and fits poorly with the Q&amp;amp;A framework of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The sum of two good, independent questions isn't necessarily a good question.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;What is the build that offers the highest consistent DPR for a magus, one based on Str or one based on Dex?&lt;/em&gt; is a more focused question. &lt;em&gt;What is the build that avoids or negates the highest average damage for a magus, one based on Str or Dex?&lt;/em&gt; is also a more focused question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if they are simply combined, some problems might arise. If there is a tradeoff to be made between higher DPR and greater damage evasion or negation, which of those should be preferred? If we're trying to optimize for both at once, that's not clear. If you know how you want that tradeoff to be evaluated, you can explain it in the question. If you're not sure, then yet another good question might be &lt;em&gt;Which is more valuable to a magus: higher DPR or greater damage evasion/negation?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see much benefit in forcing that sort of information to be undefined assumptions in an answer versus the focus of a specific question. Again, that might be a great starting point for a discussion, but this isn't a discussion forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Optimization questions in particular suffer when insufficiently defined.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of factors which might affect what an optimized result is. Optimization itself tends to make use of very precise information, and so can be sensitive to changes in underlying assumptions. It may matter if a campaign takes place mostly underwater, or on another plane of existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Decisions you make about how your character develops might change whether or not a given strategy will work, which could be hard to appreciate without taking those developments into consideration. Are you intending to tank damage for your party? That sort of decision matters a lot, and there are many possibilities that an answerer would need to consider to answer in the general case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your character's access to certain items or equipment, or the types of enemies they encounter, might render entire strategies suboptimal or irrelevant even if they might be optimal in circumstances you &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; dealing with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even this meta question seems to define what you're looking for more clearly than the actual question: a framework for evaluating which approach is better, and which you can apply to any specific game situation. Such an answer does not seem, to me, to be an &lt;em&gt;optimization&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, as you state, the answer you're expecting is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;Roughly balanced in terms of strength, so it comes down to priorities, specifics, and preferences.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand why it would not be acceptable to include some of the priorities, specifics, and preferences you might have in mind in the question itself. That sort of information would define the question in a way that allows for more focused, directly comparable answers. If character tier is the standard you want to use, the question could be changed to be something like &lt;em&gt;What is the highest tier that can be reached by a magus based on Str versus Dex?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, alternatively, if &quot;it's based on priorities, specifics, and preferences&quot; is the kind of answer you want a better question might be something along the lines of &lt;em&gt;Under what conditions would a Str-based magus outperform a Dex-based magus for measures A, B, and C?&lt;/em&gt;. That might run into trouble due to being opinion-based (how can answerers directly compare preferences?), but at least the dimensions of the question would be better defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2020-02-11T19:38:51.340" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T19:38:51.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9732" CreationDate="2020-02-11T17:53:13.227" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;The points everyone else has made are good, but I'll add one more:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experts closing questions because they are familiar with what the answer would be and/or what it would involve to make an excellent stack-appropriate answer, is generally good and expected as long as the close reasons are valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, experts looked at your question, determined that in order to give an actual answer that they would need more details, and then voted to close while we waited for those details. That's how we expect the system to work and we consider that to be good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, experts in this case decided that &quot;Your answer depends on lots of variables that you haven't given us&quot; wasn't a satisfying or useful answer to give and that we should be aiming to provide actual answers (which require more information). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE's Q&amp;amp;A format excels at giving specific answers to real, specific, well-defined problems. Questions that aren't that do better at other places.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-02-11T21:20:46.440" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T21:20:46.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9739" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-11T19:50:03.063" Score="4" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164627&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, the querent didn't originally attach a system, and someone answered before the question was closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I downvoted the answer because we didn't have the appropriate information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything is well now with the question and I want to upvote it, but I can't until the question is edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should be the solution to this problem? (and should this be a main meta question?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34716" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-11T20:13:36.163" LastActivityDate="2020-02-11T20:13:36.163" Title="Should we be able to retract answer downvotes after a question is reopened?" Tags="|feature-request|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2020-02-12T23:04:02.297" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2020-02-11T19:52:41.777" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Cry havoc!  And let slip the Mugs of War!&quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/164228/22566&quot;&gt;How dangerous can I make my tankard?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We discover that Someone_Evil, in cahoots with David Coffron, is designing &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fatal_Glass_of_Beer_(1933_film)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a fatal glass of beer&lt;/a&gt;, or rather, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/164228/22566&quot;&gt;a killer tankard&lt;/a&gt; by using one of the spells from Xanathar's Guide to Everything, some items, and a whole lot of setting up.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can call the solution &lt;em&gt;The Lethal &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.cheese.com/bierkase/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bierkase&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; - it was created by reaching into the entirety of the cheese shop's inventory(Cheese Shop = DMG, PHB, XGtE and The Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This charop wasn't looking for a tank: it was looking for a tankard, and it got one ... that costs just a few Gold Pieces less than an F-35B. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-12T19:58:24.900" LastActivityDate="2020-02-12T19:58:24.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9742" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9717" CreationDate="2020-02-13T13:40:55.447" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Usually it's not bad, but it isn't helping.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reasons for why were given to you in abundance in other answers here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's wrong then?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have looked up your answers sorted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59609/pwi?tab=answers&amp;amp;sort=votes&quot;&gt;by ranking&lt;/a&gt;. All in all, you have some very highly appraised answers (and questions) but also some very poorly regarded ones. I count 46 answers with negative scores of -1 to -8. One of the two -8 is an accepted self answer - which means that the stack disagrees with your reasoning heavily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reviewing several of these low regarded answers (the worse half), it appears to me, that the reasons you might get downvotes often fall into one of these categories, always featuring one example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some answers were arguing against the limits of the premise.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159521/when-running-animated-water-as-a-creature-how-can-i-get-stats-quickly/159537#159537&quot;&gt;review question&lt;/a&gt;, where you need to objectively reason why you rule this or that way, your only argument is &quot;I feel&quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some answers were tangential to the actual question.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159706/how-can-a-bard-persuade-a-lot-of-npcs-to-join-their-harem/159737#159737&quot;&gt;Cheesy Pickup lines&lt;/a&gt; are not advice how to mechanically deal with charming people.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some answers were very convoluted and extremely hard to read, let alone understand.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130537/what-part-of-a-multi-type-damage-roll-is-reduced-by-a-non-type-specific-effect/158020#158020&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; it was explicitly told you that your answer is hard to understand by others.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some answers are just incorrect.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158954/what-happens-if-a-2nd-level-spell-appears-in-or-is-added-to-a-characters-spel/158992#158992&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; you say it's an exception when a day earlier an error was acknowledged by the publisher and subsequently fixed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some answers were written in a rather hostile tone towards other answers or OP.&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72041/can-a-lore-bards-cutting-words-feature-cancel-a-critical-hit/160016#160016&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; you argue against the errata of a spell that was erratically errataed and then fixed by subsequent overriding errata. By the way, those errata happened 4 and 3 years before your answer, making this also something for bucket 4.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2020-02-16T22:58:56.183" LastActivityDate="2020-02-16T22:58:56.183" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9743" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-13T16:49:52.113" Score="24" ViewCount="544" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Mage Furnishings (p. 300).&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A roll of 73 produces a sextant, not a sexton.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Sexton&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jfScT.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jfScT.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Sexton&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Sextant&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ORpUg.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ORpUg.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Picture of sextant&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55495" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-13T18:36:47.190" LastActivityDate="2020-02-27T12:02:09.147" Title="Hidden gem in DMG errata" Tags="|discussion|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9744" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9745" CreationDate="2020-02-14T23:22:08.993" Score="15" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new here, but I am already addicted to reading and answering questions.  I am predominantly on my phone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I beef up my posts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently learned about using &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; at the start of a line to create the yellow-box blockquote effect. Are there any other simple tips and tricks to help make my posts look that much more professional?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="61984" OwnerDisplayName="Wartowel" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-15T09:29:22.250" LastActivityDate="2020-02-15T09:29:22.250" Title="Posting &quot;shortcuts&quot; to make my posts look more professional?" Tags="|support|formatting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9745" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9744" CreationDate="2020-02-14T23:36:26.403" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It sounds like you should look at the help pages about using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/editing-help&quot;&gt;markdown syntax&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/formatting&quot;&gt;general formatting guidance&lt;/a&gt; - these pages will explain and provide examples of the formatting syntax used on stack exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6368/28402&quot;&gt;this excellent answer by SSD&lt;/a&gt;, which, although not an official style guide (as we don't enforce any specific styling), is nevertheless a good set of conventions to keep in mind when formatting questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2020-02-14T23:50:13.770" LastActivityDate="2020-02-14T23:50:13.770" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9744" CreationDate="2020-02-14T23:47:49.330" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;In addition to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9745/52137&quot;&gt;help pages linked by Carcer&lt;/a&gt;, if you find any piece of formatting you like the look of (and want to understand how has been done) you can click the &lt;code&gt;edit&lt;/code&gt; button beneath the post to view the specific markdown (be sure not to submit an edit if you only mean to look at its source code).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have a few posts on meta regarding formatting: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6367/52137&quot;&gt;Is there a style guide for posts?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454/52137&quot;&gt;Don't signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6498/52137&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1483/52137&quot;&gt;Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And the rest of the questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/formatting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;formatting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;formatting&lt;/a&gt; on meta. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;(And if you do get into equations etc., you may have use of math.se's &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5020&quot;&gt;tutorial on MathJax&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a final note, you can always jump into &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; if have a quick question about how do a piece of formatting, about the site, or just to, well.. chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-02-14T23:47:49.330" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9747" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before posting your own question, please consult these questions to see if there is already an answer that solves your problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See here for an index of frequently asked questions:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" LastActivityDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9748" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" Score="0" Body="These questions are the most frequently asked and answered questions on Meta. See here for an index of frequently asked questions: https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" LastActivityDate="2020-02-15T09:11:07.297" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9749" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9750" CreationDate="2020-02-17T19:55:14.847" Score="10" ViewCount="260" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm looking in particular at the close/edit history of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164954/how-can-a-wandering-destitute-gurps-dfrpg-cleric-cast-high-cost-spells&quot;&gt;How can a wandering, destitute GURPS DFRPG Cleric cast high cost spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question was asking explicitly if there was a statement from the game designers on the particular topic.  It wasn't &quot;why did they do this&quot; or &quot;what were they thinking&quot; or anything like that.  It was &quot;is there a statement on the matter?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike the more general designer intent questions, which are subject to some pretty bad subjective pitfalls, a question about the existence or nonexistence of statements seems (to me) to be pretty straightforward, and subject to objective discernment.  Should they really be banned with the same brush?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2020-02-18T11:24:04.740" LastActivityDate="2020-02-24T05:32:13.343" Title="&quot;Designer intent&quot; vs asking specifically about the existence of statements from the designers" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9749" CreationDate="2020-02-17T21:29:34.193" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's kind of the same thing really. Think about it, if you ask this...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; Did the designers make a statement about why they did X?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... then is this really an answer you'd be satisfied with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine you'd want them to say &lt;em&gt;what the statement is,&lt;/em&gt; right? So if the question is only answered by quoting the designers, it's not &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; “Did they make a statement?” but instead “What did the designers say about why they did X?”—and that's our designer reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back when we were working through designer reasons questions for D&amp;amp;D, we tried a lot of things, and that included formulating the question as “What did the designers say about why they did X?” and even with amendments of “Only actual quotes by the designer are acceptable answers to this question.” It still gave us the same problems we saw as in every other formulation, which is that we wound up with a lot of answers saying “this is what I think the intent was, based on reverse-engineering the end product and not based on any designer stating their intent” and getting deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since you're dealing with this issue in the scope of GURPS: personally, I'm not supportive of the fact that designer reasons not working out for D&amp;amp;D meant banning them for every other game too. (I've talked about that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8654/1204&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8657/#comment27731_8660&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9700/#comment32066_9705&quot;&gt;most recently here&lt;/a&gt;.) That's something we could look at, but if we do we'd still need to acknowledge that the above formulation is still functionally a designer reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-18T12:37:14.810" LastActivityDate="2020-02-18T12:37:14.810" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9751" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-20T14:37:36.977" Score="12" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;The theme I have in mind specifically that causes my question is that I want to ask for item ideas I can drop into a DnD 5e campaign that are easter-egg items for star wars, but nothing as blatant as, say, a lightsaber.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know on other Stack Exchange sites, &quot;Idea Generation&quot; type questions are not allowed in any sort of manner. Is that true here as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44557" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-21T03:41:11.667" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T03:41:11.667" Title="Can I ask for item ideas focused around a specific theme?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9751" CreationDate="2020-02-20T15:15:09.253" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's true here aswell&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with Idea Generation questions is that they don't work with the Stack Exchange &lt;em&gt;format&lt;/em&gt; (Q&amp;amp;A with good answers being upvoted), because there is no way to tell what a good answer is. Or seen another way, the response a idea generation querent wants is not a single, clear answer, but a (infinite) spread of suggestions they can frolic in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want such a spread of responses with little to no vote-biasing etc. traditional forums are really good for that, so it is better for everyone to use that format for those kind of queries. We maintain a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/52137&quot;&gt;curated list here&lt;/a&gt; and if you want suggestions from some of the same thinking organs as are kicking around here, you can try &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;our chat&lt;/a&gt; (which doesn't have the same topic and question restrictions as main, but we do require you to Be Nice).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-20T15:19:10.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9753" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9751" CreationDate="2020-02-20T20:24:55.017" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;RPGSE chat is an option for idea generation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have enough rep to ask for a brain storm in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/?tab=site&amp;amp;host=rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;RPGSE chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat&quot;&gt;With 20 rep or more, one can participate in a site's chat room&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;That's a good place to pick brains, but who is there at a given time will vary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-20T20:24:55.017" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9754" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-21T04:25:57.623" Score="14" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just posted my first question using a tag that has a tag-warning in a while. Saw this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yhMYG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/yhMYG.png&quot; alt=&quot;screenshot of a question being posed, with very little contrast between tag-warning and background&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know much about accessibility, but I'll bet that's a pretty low contrast ratio by any measure. I didn't even notice it come up, and only because I ADD-style tabbed over to chat for a sec and then came back did my eye go &quot;wait a minute, the spacing on this page looks a little strange&quot; and I finally noticed there was text there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assume, though I don't know, that this may be an artifact of our particular theme and color palette: a network-wide font choice playing badly with our localized background. Can this go into a queue for whenever someone's doing design tidying?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-02-21T16:15:57.433" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T16:15:57.433" Title="Can we look at the contrast on tag warnings?" Tags="|bug|user-interface|accessibility|tag-warnings|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9755" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on meta about the user interface, either of Stack Exchange as a whole or on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9756" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" Score="0" Body="For questions on meta about the user interface, either of Stack Exchange as a whole or on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange specifically." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T04:44:14.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9757" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9754" CreationDate="2020-02-21T13:23:56.113" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're right, there's an accessibility issue with these colors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The colors are &lt;code&gt;#9f8010&lt;/code&gt; for text and &lt;code&gt;#fffdf7&lt;/code&gt; for background. That gives us &lt;a href=&quot;https://contrast-ratio.com/#%239f8010-on-%23fffdf7&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a contrast ratio of &lt;strong&gt;3.7&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#contrast-minimum&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;WCAG 2.1 contrast ratio guideline&lt;/a&gt; says that text at this size needs to have a ratio of at least &lt;strong&gt;4.5&lt;/strong&gt;. A ratio of &lt;strong&gt;3.7&lt;/strong&gt; is mostly okay for those of us with good eyesight, but people with poor vision will have a bit of trouble reading the warnings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A slightly deeper bronze color of &lt;code&gt;#7b6101&lt;/code&gt; (for example) would accomplish &lt;a href=&quot;https://contrast-ratio.com/#%237b6101-on-%23fffdf7&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a contrast ratio of &lt;strong&gt;5.81&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, would still look warning-y, and would be a bit easier to read for the rest of us:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jrJ1J.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jrJ1J.png&quot; alt=&quot;the same tag warning as in the question but with slightly darker text&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-02-21T13:23:56.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9758" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-23T02:02:41.077" Score="3" ViewCount="982" Body="&lt;p&gt;It was put to me by moderators that my question did not pose an actual problem, and when I did pose a problem statement, it was characterized as &amp;quot;doesn't seem like a real problem&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;disingenuous&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165241/can-i-recover-a-single-arrow&quot;&gt;Can I recover a single arrow?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When attempts to close the question for being a duplicate were unsuccessful, people attempted to close it for being off-topic, they successfully closed the question characterizing it as not having an &amp;quot;actual problem&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is a &amp;quot;real problem&amp;quot; required for a question?&#xA;And what qualifies as an &amp;quot;actual problem&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-11-22T01:10:02.440" LastActivityDate="2022-11-22T01:10:02.440" Title="What qualifies as an &quot;actual problem&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9758" CreationDate="2020-02-23T02:13:30.807" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The linked question answers the question directly, which is “No.”. Duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Should the rule be different” is opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“What is the designer intent” is off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“I want other people to see this rule is silly” is not a question. The fact that you’ve asked basically the same question three times on the site indicates that may be your goal.  It’s not an appropriate goal for RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore there is no angle from which this question can remain open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A possible real question that meets your need is a request for or review of a house rule allowing for recovery of a single arrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also note that “someone said I should ask that as a separate question” is usually a polite way of saying “you are now asking a question not the same as your original questions, and we only do one question per post, so post it separately.”  It doesn’t mean “go ask this question you don’t really have or care about.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key idea behind this site is for gamers to spend their valuable spare time helping other gamers have better games out of the goodness of their heart.  That’s where the “actual problem” terminology often comes from.  Questions that are not a real challenge you have with your game - a theoretical or thought problem, “I am just curious,” and so on are often poorly received and get downvoted, because you are essentially asking people to spend that time not really helping a fellow gamer with a real problem.  “Someone said I should ask this even though it’s not my question” is not a good use of the site under that rubric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5758/why-was-my-question-closed-as-too-broad-unclear-or-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?&lt;/a&gt; for more on good questions and what having a problem means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2020-02-24T13:45:33.030" LastActivityDate="2020-02-24T13:45:33.030" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9758" CreationDate="2020-02-23T03:01:18.953" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is an actual problem:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;I have players who shoot expensive arrows (worth 100gp!), so when my&#xA;  players use their expensive ammunition sparingly, exactly once per&#xA;  encounter, they are unhappy that they can't recover them due to the&#xA;  rounding down rule. [&lt;strong&gt;cite relevant parts&lt;/strong&gt;] I think that RAW is&#xA;  silly and unrealistic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Does it break the balance of the game if I give them a 50% (example&#xA;  chance) to let them recover their one unbreakable magical arrow?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This is trying to compel them with the power of reason because they &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; don't get that you have stated a problem:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The problem I am trying to solve; there may not be enough awareness in&#xA;  the D&amp;amp;D community&lt;/strong&gt; that a player firing a single arrow may not be able&#xA;  to recover that arrow. &lt;strong&gt;Having an answer that clarifies this aspect of&#xA;  the rules will help alleviate lack of awareness for those who were not&#xA;  cognizant of this peculiar aspect of the rules.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Players may contend that it is unfair they are not able to recover an&#xA;  expensive magical arrow. Especially if it were a single killing blow&#xA;  to a sole opponent. It maybe intuitive to them &lt;strong&gt;by logical reasoning&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;  that they should be able to find and remove a magical Unbreakable&#xA;  Arrow from the body of an opponent killed by it &lt;strong&gt;but a moment prior.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Humans (in real life) develop a conception of&lt;/strong&gt; object permanence&#xA;  (understanding that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be&#xA;  seen, heard, touched, smelled or sensed in any way) in infancy. &lt;strong&gt;A D&amp;amp;D&#xA;  player that is human may&lt;/strong&gt; assume that an arrow in the game is a permanent object in&#xA;  the same way they would assume an arrow is permanent outside of the&#xA;  game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Players reading this public post could foresee this issue and avert&#xA;  the consequences.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have highlighted by bolding all of the things that doesn't make this an actual problem but an attempt at coercing someone by thy power of reason to &lt;em&gt;just get it&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Paraphrasing Robert Nozick (&lt;em&gt;Philosophical Explanations&lt;/em&gt;, p. 4):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wouldn't it be better if your argument left the person no possible answer at all, reducing them to impotent silence? Even then, if they close your question, perhaps you need arguments so powerful they set up reverberations in the brain: if the person refuses to accept the conclusion, they die. How's that for a powerful argument?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference here lies in a few things, but the most important is framing. The first question (the one that I re-stated at the top of this post) states the issue and the desired outcome and asks for a check of that conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second question veils an issue that you have with the rules as a community problem and offers a particular answer as part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T04:46:26.460" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T04:46:26.460" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9762" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9758" CreationDate="2020-02-23T05:09:31.207" Score="21" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'm Not Defining 'Actual Problems'&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is really no percentage for anyone to try to rigorously and exhaustively define what are and are not &quot;real questions&quot; trying to solve &quot;actual problems.&quot;  Some social phenomena resist simple definitions, and in those cases we rely on the members of the community to vote and comment their consciences. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from that, I do not patrol the stack looking for questions that don't seem like &quot;actual problems.&quot;  (I don't patrol the stack &lt;em&gt;looking&lt;/em&gt; for &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; to downvote or shut down; I merely vote when something strikes me as wrong enough to voice an opinion about.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But Here Is Why This One Provoked That Response&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That question doesn't exist in a vacuum. That question is one in a series of no fewer than five (5) questions on the same topic in the last few days-- three (3) asked by you, I believe; and two (2) much older ones with recent answers by you. That's odd right there.  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two of those questions (the multi-colored dart/arrow questions) are very clearly contrived, rather than arising from actual play.  I don't think the only valid questions are ones arising from real play.  But very contrived questions are an indication that something weird is happening. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Another of those questions was not obviously contrived, but it also didn't seem to be something you faced as a player (in which case, &quot;Talk to your GM,&quot;) or faced as a GM (in which case, &quot;Make a ruling and be consistent.&quot;)  It's not strictly necessary to know that in order to answer, but it does help, and at the end of a line of other weird questions, it would have helped a lot.  Then you clinched my suspicion with the &quot;community awareness&quot; justification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All together, it looks like you're fishing for something.  What, exactly, I don't know-- some particular answer, some stance by the stack driven by something other than a normal question-and-answer response, I don't know.  But that will absolutely trip my &quot;What the is &lt;em&gt;actual problem?&lt;/em&gt;&quot; question.   &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'll tell you frankly, since it is more appropriate to do so in Meta than the main stack, that my comment was not meant as an invitation to lawyer down and try to define the undefinable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather, it was intended to make you stop, think, and re-evaluate your whole line of questioning, which has, if my survey is correct, already cost you something like 50 aggregate downvotes.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it went to Meta, I had hoped it would do so under the aegis of improving the question, not trying to understand the non-existent legalities of &quot;actual problems.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T05:28:05.227" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T05:28:05.227" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9763" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-23T09:50:44.233" Score="8" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;Earlier today I was accessing SE on my iPhone X via the app, and when I tried to access RPG Meta, the app told me I wasn't joined on the site (!?) and asked if I wanted to join.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It did this every time I opened a question to view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't do this with the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is anyone else experiencing this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40335" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T10:24:52.093" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T10:24:52.093" Title="Mobile site repeatedly asks me to join" Tags="|bug|mobile|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9764" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the overall Stack Exchange mobile interface, as well as issues related to the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange interface on mobile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9765" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" Score="0" Body="For questions about the overall Stack Exchange mobile interface, as well as issues related to the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange interface on mobile." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" LastActivityDate="2020-02-23T10:24:41.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9767" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9758" CreationDate="2020-02-24T14:03:45.080" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is not really about what is or isn't an “actual problem”. Focusing on that would be a red herring. Instead, you ran headlong into one of the quality alarms that the community consciousness shares, and the community responded by hitting the brakes (downvoting and closing). I'm going to talk about that alarm here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Brief aside: the &lt;em&gt;degree&lt;/em&gt; of response you got is unusual and I can understand being upset about it. We can't do much to change it—moderators can't reverse votes for example. I guess the best takeaway is how/why this happened. I'm going to talk about that here  too.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, so, the alarm you ran into. To discuss that, we first have to establish what RPG Stack Exchange is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What's RPG Stack Exchange for?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is best summarised in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;our questions to avoid asking help page&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site functions at its absolute best when you are experiencing an actual problem in a real situation. That might be a mechanical problem that came up at the table, a social problem that came up in your group, a rules problem that came up while designing a character or planning an encounter, a quantification problem coming out of an optimization exercise, or a handful of other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The platonic ideal of a question is that the querent describes to us &lt;em&gt;the actual situation that's really happening&lt;/em&gt;, they make it clear what specific part is the problem they're having, and they ask us how to resolve it. The querent is seeking a truthful answer, even if it wasn't what they expected or necessarily wanted to hear. If we ask for additional information or clarification the querent is able to provide answers—real actual situations have substance to them that makes this possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not every question has to meet this platonic ideal (most don't). As long as we're somewhere approximately close to it our site will work well. The further we move away from that platonic ideal, the more trouble we begin to have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I mention optimisation questions above, so I should be clear about something. When someone's investigating &lt;em&gt;theoretical character optimisation&lt;/em&gt; in a question, “theoretical” is in the name, but it's still a real situation someone's dealing with and a real problem they're actually having. This means we can still get good answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What quality alarm did you run into?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your questions met a certain pattern: you asked multiple highly specific, theoretical, and sorta-contrived questions around a specific mechanic in a short time period. When we see this pattern it tells us that something weird is happening and that we are probably very far from that platonic ideal, and that we need to hit the brakes and find out what is going on here. This is because we have seen this pattern come up a lot of times and that has been the case every time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most benign thing we see when this pattern comes up is that someone &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; an actual problem they're facing, but they're not describing it to us. They have found potential solutions and ask about those instead of their actual problem, or they ask us contrived questions which they hope will help them find their solution. (Since none of our answers solve their actual problem they will naturally have multiple additional questions rotating around the exact same thing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what we describe as &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;the XY problem&lt;/a&gt;, and so we hit the brakes. We ask them: “hey, whoa, obviously there's &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; going on here, but instead of asking us about &lt;em&gt;that thing,&lt;/em&gt; you're asking us about all these &lt;em&gt;other&lt;/em&gt; things. Please instead describe to us about the &lt;em&gt;actual thing&lt;/em&gt; you're dealing with and ask us how to to solve that.” Then they do that, and a lot of people save a lot of time and energy by tackling the problem at its root.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At its worst, we find out the querent isn't looking for a truthful answer. Instead they have a specific answer they want so that they can twist their GM's arm into letting them make an OP build (or something like that) and they're trying to make us give them the answer they want. Our site is in the business of collecting truthful answers so we consider this a bad-faith usage of the site. These querents tend to give us a lot of grief and trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe you were doing anything along the lines of this bad faith example. I'm describing it to make it clear that when we see the pattern I described, things can be &lt;em&gt;very wrong&lt;/em&gt;—hence us hitting the brakes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What's this mean for your situation?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically the take-away here is to focus on asking about problems you are actually having for yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You explain that you were asking benignly on behalf of the community in general. It may be surprising, but we don't necessarily want the site used this way. We want such questions to be asked by people &lt;em&gt;actually experiencing that problem&lt;/em&gt;. When you're asking without having the problem yourself, it's not a real situation so you're not really able to provide the clarity we might want. You wind up asking a lower-quality question this way than someone actually experiencing the problem might ask, and that might actually do a disservice to the people having that problem: now the only version of that question is not actually the best quality one that could be had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you were in fact experiencing this problem, then rather than contriving some situations (“I have three differently-colored arrows”) we would've wanted you to ask the &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; situation you were dealing with, which probably would've been something like “I have two magical arrows and one dipped in poison. My GM and I don't agree on how I get to handle recovering them. I think this thing happens, but she says this other thing happens. What actually happens?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you personally just want to better understand how ammo recovery works, ask on your own behalf, not someone else's. “I'm confused about how arrow recovery would work in this situation. I think this thing would happen, but I'm not sure. What happens?” This means ask about an actual situation you'd actually expect to see happen to you one day, and avoid contrived scenarios nobody including you will ever really bump into (like red, blue, and yellow arrows).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally community members also feel they're here to make a difference for actual people. They want their time spent on problems people are actually having, and resent having their time spent on nonexistent problems nobody is actually experiencing. We had a user who asked a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of questions like that—“I'm not having this problem, I don't even play this game, but someone else might have this problem one day”—and we consistently had so much trouble with their content that eventually they got an automated question ban imposed by the site. (Automatic question bans are triggered by someone having many questions that are consistently low-quality, closed, and/or deleted. Diamond moderators can neither apply nor overturn these bans.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to summarise... surprisingly, asking selfishly (more or less) only about your own problems you're actually having turns out to be the best way to help the broader RPG community and also yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The reception you got&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're understandably upset and I'm sorry about that. From your perspective, I understand you were checking all the boxes, doing everything right, asking perfectly decent questions. You ran into some community practices you were not aware of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My best understanding is the scale of the feedback you've gotten in response (i.e. downvotes) is down to three multiplicative effects:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You ran into our quality alarm, which naturally triggers downvotes and closure.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It wasn't a real problem, and people didn't like that, leading to more downvotes in disapproval.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You asked on meta, which makes The Meta Effect(tm) happen: whatever was going to happen now happens more, faster, and sooner.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sucks to be on the receiving end of and I'm sorry you're experiencing it. We can't do much about it—votes can't be reversed or cleared for example. The cat is out of the box and we can't put it back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best outcome here is probably to cut your losses on these questions and leave them behind as a learning experience. The community here does forgive relatively easily when they see learning demonstrated. We understand that everyone has a bad day from time to time. We also understand that people sometimes run into bad problems. The Stack Exchange network always has things for all of us to learn, and sometimes we don't learn about these things until we run face-first into them. Most of us have had that happen with one thing or another, just some of us have our run-in worse than others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-03-02T14:34:49.000" LastActivityDate="2020-03-02T14:34:49.000" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9768" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9770" CreationDate="2020-02-24T23:11:55.587" Score="12" ViewCount="639" Body="&lt;p&gt;For the resolution see bottom of post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do I stop a &quot;more senior&quot; user, that seems to dislike my logic, from harassing every answer I give on StackExchange-RPG?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm starting to feel very pushed away by certain user(s), who seem to enjoy claiming 'I can't follow your logic&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Insinuating I'm &quot;stupid&quot; &amp;amp; trying to push me away from explaining my logic with thinly veiled &quot;pokes&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an effective way to have it dealt with other than burning this account and making a new &quot;fake-user&quot; to escape them?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the issues are interpretations of RAW in DnD(5e)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Added after I realized I had misunderstood&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think I mistook polite debate due to my personally passive nature. I would like to openly apologize for my over-reaction and opening this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To anyone experiencing a similar issue, directly mention how a comment made you feel IS the correct 1st step, which I failed to take....dont be a me, allow the other party the option to explain&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62031" OwnerDisplayName="Jeffrey Witty" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-02-27T00:26:30.390" LastActivityDate="2020-02-27T00:26:30.390" Title="How do I stop a &quot;more senior&quot; user, that seems to dislike my logic, from harassing every answer I give on StackExchange-RPG" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9769" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9768" CreationDate="2020-02-24T23:55:47.190" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You grow a thicker skin and you grind through it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's what I did.  Well, I already have a thick skin and I am a stubborn SoB.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I first got to RPGSE (2015) I had no experience with Stack Exchange and Stack Overload stuff; I found that the responses to normal communication were rather bizarre.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;I had not quite grokked how SE is its own little animal, how it has a particular character due to it using a model of communication that was built for and by code writing people to help code writing people.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is what's going on here; learning new jargon, new norms, and a new style of communication. (Similarly, when you first get into the military, you learn a whole new way to communicate).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With a little patience, and some teeth grinding, and a few people speaking to me as a normal human being would, I got over the hump.  And I have had a good experience overall.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are not being stalked.  People are trying to help you improve questions and answers, though sometimes that isn't obvious.  I find that I have this problem now and again, and I think that's due to having been in the system for a while: now and again, a new user takes what I think is constructive critique as a personal attack.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we have to work together to get over it.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Hang in there.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPGSE is a good site with good people, but its norms take some getting used to.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And Welcome! Glad to have you on board!  8^D  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T00:08:57.137" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T00:08:57.137" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9770" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9768" CreationDate="2020-02-24T23:58:15.260" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think it's me and I'm sorry&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a fine line between helping and not being helpful and I clearly have crossed that with you. My intent was to help provide assistance in improving your answer before downvoting because you are new. But somewhere I crossed a line for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no bad blood, at least on my side and I can avoid commenting on your answers in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-24T23:58:15.260" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9768" CreationDate="2020-02-25T00:15:05.347" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There are a bunch of things you can do, and you seem to be working your way up the chain.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(N.B. I haven't gone and dug through your comments/answers to try and ferret out who it is or what the interactions have looked like, as you explicitly are asking to keep it a little bit general. So here's a generalized answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are lots of things to do, so I'm presenting them in order of response-time as I estimate them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Public/visible approaches:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. Comment back with an open mind.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a &lt;em&gt;rare&lt;/em&gt; person on this site who isn't thoughtful, well-meaning, and trying to help as best they understand how to. And even in those cases we bump up against each other. If a more-senior user's interactions with you feel unfriendly or harrassing, let them know. (And Be Nice while doing so.) Comments like &amp;quot;hey, I know you're probably just trying to help, but I'm feeling chased around and berated. Can you slow down?&amp;quot; will go a long way with nearly 100% of our users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Pop in to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/rpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;Roleplaying Games General Chat&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are experienced site users there basically 24/7. It's always reasonable to pop in there and say &amp;quot;hey, I'm getting some comments that bug me, can someone sanity-check me?&amp;quot; Again: it's a place full of helpful people, and these ones practice helping RPGSE users more than most.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is chat, so there's an immediacy and conversational aspect to it that may be useful. However, there is a transience that may not be what you're looking for. And, of course, you're just getting one or two users' opinions. (Though keep an eye out for usernames in italics--room owners--or in blue--moderators. They've been singled out as particularly experienced and/or responsible.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. Open a meta post.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like you've done here. Meta has the benefit of more eyeballs. It's a slower medium, so you get more fleshed-out responses. However, you may get commensurately more requesting of information about your situation. (As you did here.) Again: it's people trying to be the most helpful, all speaking from our own experiences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Private approaches:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4. Flag a comment or post.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flagging anything on site&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt; enters it into a queue that the elected moderators check in on regularly. (Flag handling times around here average around an hour or two.) It's helpful if more than one comment/post is implicated--if there's a pattern--for you to choose &amp;quot;custom reason&amp;quot; and use the text field to tell us what you can. Help us do some spelunking, and we'll be right there with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;5. Ping (@USERNAME) an elected moderator in chat and ask for a private conversation.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The list of the site's elected moderators can always be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. If you ping one of us in chat and request it, we have the ability to create a new chatroom that's private and add you to the room's access list. You can ping someone by writing &lt;code&gt;@username&lt;/code&gt; in chat using their username, so to ping me you'd write &lt;code&gt;@nitsua60&lt;/code&gt;. (Note that &amp;quot;private&amp;quot; means only visible to moderators and those on the access list &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; to SE staff. And &amp;quot;moderators&amp;quot; there means any moderator across the network. So it's not &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; private, but it's pretty out-of-the-way.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;6. Contact SE Staff.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every page on the network has a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/contact&quot;&gt;Contact&lt;/a&gt; link in its footer, and there are Community Managers (employees ate SE) who see that stream of messages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - Well, &lt;em&gt;almost&lt;/em&gt; anything. There are some places where a number of flags can produce system-automated actions, like deleting a comment. The intricacies of this are partially documented on meta.SE and partially kept secret for efficacy. Interested readers should go on a quest to meta.SE for this knowledge. If the crone advises you to bypass the bastion of the gargoyle queen, ignore that advice. The Merchant of Bula is a stalwart ally, though quick to anger. A rival user my seek the same information. Beware wolves in sheep's clothing, that's disgusting.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; I'm sorry it's been a rough day. From what I see here you're handling things how we'd expect, and in the time I've been writing this post I see that the (presumptive) user you're talking about has apologized for not coming across how they'd intended. I hope the answers here--varied in scope and approach!--help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T00:34:31.750" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9768" CreationDate="2020-02-25T00:23:00.290" Score="19" Body="&lt;h3&gt;RPG.SE has particular idosyncrasies which users are expected to adhere to in order to receive a positive response to their answers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over time, every online community tends to develop a set of social expectations. Veterans adhere to them easily and even enforce them, but new users don't know the unwritten rules, and often clash with the veterans until they manage to internalize the rules. This can lead to communities becoming insular and occasionally harsh to new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your case, I don't believe they're picking on you specifically, but rather that the manner in which you answer questions has not acquired the same tone and style that the answers of veterans have. The set of critical users tends to be small, because RPG.SE has relatively few users compared to other Stack Exchange sites, even with the D&amp;amp;D 5e boom.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange sites do warn users to be especially tolerant when replying to a new user, but the new user status wears off relatively quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, looking at your five recently downvoted answers, I suspect you are making the following faux pas:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Too much bold/italic text. Bold is useful, and I use it myself, but you appear to use it more than is the norm on this particular site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions about rules tend to require rules-based citations, either quotes or page references, which back up the answer. Opinions are not highly valued.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Answering questions that already accepted a correct answer some time ago. This is usually considered unnecessary. Late answers also tend to get few upvotes in general.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Posting comments as answers. On RPG.SE, the answer box is for answering the question, not replying to existing answers. This differs from a forum, where discussion is expected.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T00:23:00.290" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9773" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9768" CreationDate="2020-02-25T00:31:48.507" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think there are a couple things going on here&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tone can be hard to read (and easy to misread)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the first is simply the fact that tone can be very difficult to convey through internet text messages. If a reader sees your answer and is confused by something, s/he might leave a comment to that effect and think it sounds like an &amp;quot;oh, by the way, I'm having trouble parsing exactly what you're saying here, can you help set me straight?&amp;quot; But then another person reads the comment and it sounds like &amp;quot;Hey, your question makes no sense. It's terrible.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the same wording but, for whatever reason, its tone reads differently to different people. It's unfortunate, but it does happen. So I think it's healthy to try and approach what's written on this site keeping the next point in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This is a community of passionate people.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're passionate about the topic (in this case tabletop RPGs) and we're passionate about learning and teaching. Passion is definitely one of those things that can be misconstrued as &amp;quot;aggressive.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone on this site is here because we want to help other people. To do that, we have a very specific format that is unlike a conventional web forum...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Don't forget the Stack Exchange's format&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a clear format that we like questions and answers to adhere to. The goal of this site is to provide answers and clarity not just for the first person to ask a question but for anyone else who comes along with that same (or similar enough) question to help &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt; out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way we do this is to shape questions and answers such that the context for the question is clear (you've run into some of that with the comments on this question, for example) and the evidence to support the answers is grounded in facts and evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Some questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;blur the lines on this a little&lt;/a&gt;, but the goal is always to provide concrete answers and solutions even to things like nebulous social/etiquette questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing that helped me in my journey on this site was to shift my thinking: I'm asking a question of providing an answer, but it's not really &amp;quot;my&amp;quot; question or answer. Someone can come along and edit it at any point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if somebody is leaving comments that they think your answer isn't quite holding to this paradigm, then understand it's not personal and they're only trying to ensure that the content of this site is the best that it can be for everybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, that can sometimes come across as a bit elitist, especially if the person leaving the comment is simply making a quick remark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I can see, looking through your various answers, is that it's not the same person leaving the comments that I think you're reacting to but different people. So, my advice is to try and view the comments that you're seeing as attacks in a new light: an opportunity to engage with the community and to help craft questions/answers that will be factual and informative for others to use as a resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Try to view comments that point out things they're seeing issues with not as attacks but as a team member (an editor) trying to help you produce a better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, as I've learned many times, it's possible to just be flat out wrong (or even &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; wrong, given a different yet valid interpretation of things). It's okay. We've all been there, we'll all (I'm sure) be there again :-P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9769/48793&quot;&gt;Korvin points out&lt;/a&gt;, having a little thick skin can sometimes be beneficial (but then, this is the internet, so that's just good life advice).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, as Medix points out in a comment, if you have a lot of answers on recent questions, your activity &amp;quot;rises&amp;quot; to the top of the active questions and so you're just statistically more likely to draw more comments. It's not people dog piling on you, you're just &amp;quot;trending,&amp;quot; as it were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope your recent frustrations haven't put you off too much and it is really good that you took the effort to open dialogue about the issues. It's always great to see new and passionate people enter the community!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T00:31:48.507" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9774" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9775" CreationDate="2020-02-25T09:36:28.757" Score="15" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;A curious thought came to me while browsing the Stack today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A suspended user has their reputation locked at 1 and doesn't gain or lose any rep &lt;em&gt;while&lt;/em&gt; suspended. I.e. regardless of how many votes—up or down—are cast on the user's questions or answers, their rep doesn't change from 1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what about after the suspension ends?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do all the votes get added up and the user gains or loses the total amount of rep they would have done if they weren't suspended or does the suspension block any rep from being gained during that period?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I checked the rpg Stack meta and couldn't seem to find an answer nor is their anything about it in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-03-01T16:19:26.217" LastActivityDate="2020-03-01T16:19:26.217" Title="Does a suspended user still gain or lose rep for votes cast on their Q&amp;As while they are suspended, after the suspension ends?" Tags="|discussion|reputation|account-suspension|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9775" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9774" CreationDate="2020-02-25T09:36:28.757" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since account suspensions aren't a Role-playing-Games-Stack-Exchange exclusive feature the answer can be found on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/125268&quot;&gt;this Meta Stack Exchange question&lt;/a&gt;, along with a full explanation of what a suspension means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote the relevant section to answer this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;h3&gt;At the end of the suspension period&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The effects of a suspension are reversed by an hourly scheduled task. Therefore, once the suspension ends, it may take up to one hour for the effects to wear off; keep that in mind before filing a bug. Once that happens:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Earned reputation points (rep) are reinstated. This may be different from the rep value at the start of the suspension because your posts may have been upvoted, downvoted or deleted during the suspension period, and some of your votes may have been invalidated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suspension banner on a user's account page also kind of contains the answer in a bit less detail by linking to the Stack Overflow blog post &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/04/06/a-day-in-the-penalty-box/&quot;&gt;A Day in the Penalty Box&lt;/a&gt;&quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;At the end of this timed suspension period, your reputation will be recalculated, and your account will resume as normal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="14878" LastEditDate="2020-02-28T11:15:22.227" LastActivityDate="2020-02-28T11:15:22.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9776" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-02-25T13:32:51.220" Score="16" ViewCount="254" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165377/how-do-baldurs-gate-and-baldurs-gate-2s-rolling-for-stats-actually-get-gene&quot;&gt;How do Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2's “rolling” for stats actually get generated?&lt;/a&gt; was closed as being off-topic because &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Questions about playing video games and developing video games are off-topic here, but may be on-topic on Arqade and the Game Development Stack Exchange, respectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels like it was closed reflexively because CRPGS were mentioned in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is about neither. Both of these games are (ostensibly) based on AD&amp;amp;D 2e rules and implement those AD&amp;amp;D rules into the game. My question is about the specific implementation of generating those statistics, and whether or not that stat generation method is actually an implementation of AD&amp;amp;D 2e rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason behind the question is that I am interested in developing a similar stats generation system for D&amp;amp;D 5e tabletop games I run, but wanted to get a baseline for the &quot;canonicity&quot; of this generation system in relation to AD&amp;amp;D 2e rules first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the very close link to AD&amp;amp;D 2e, and the expertise in AD&amp;amp;D 2e on this stack I would have expected this question to be on-topic for this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As @Carcer mentions in the comments&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We also have questions about how to program a popular dice-simulation web application which honestly are of similarly dubious required-expertise relative to the stack's subject matter, but nonetheless are accepted as relevant because of the close relationship to what we do care about. Which is to say that just because a question involves math, or programming, or a videogame, it isn't automatically off-topic for rpg.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, does the mere mention, or link to a computer/video game/programming topic automatically &quot;poison the chalice&quot; so to speak?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:17:45.510" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:17:45.510" Title="Are all questions that are even tangentially related to Computer-Based RPGs or computer games off topic for this stack?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|video-games|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9776" CreationDate="2020-02-25T19:28:38.990" Score="29" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You have two questions, one of which is on topic here and one of which is on topic for Arqade.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;How does Baldur's Gate generate stats&quot; is a video game question that should be asked on Arqade.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you have an answer for that,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Is this stat generation method Baldur's Gate used really from one of the AD&amp;amp;D versions?&quot; is on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As discussed in other Meta questions, things like roleplaying techniques that you might use in online RPGs or whatnot can be on topic here, but anything relating to the actual operation of a computer game should be on the computer game Stack. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T19:28:38.990" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9778" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions on Meta involving issues related to video games, especially those discussing whether a specific question or type of question is on-topic on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9779" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" Score="0" Body="For questions on Meta involving issues related to video games, especially those discussing whether a specific question or type of question is on-topic on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:11:19.253" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9780" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the moderation of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. This includes such actions taken both by the elected diamond moderators of the site and by regular users who have earned enough reputation to gain relevant moderation privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderators&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;moderators&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;moderators&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9781" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" Score="0" Body="For questions about the moderation of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. This includes such actions taken both by the elected diamond moderators of the site and by regular users who have earned enough reputation to gain relevant moderation privileges. (See also: the [moderators] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:30:06.567" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9782" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the moderators of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. The term primarily refers to the elected moderators of the site (also referred to as &quot;diamond&quot; mods, based on the diamond icon that appears next to their usernames to distinguish them as such); it is sometimes also used to refer to regular users who have earned enough reputation to gain relevant moderation privileges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/moderation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;moderation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;moderation&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9783" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" Score="0" Body="For questions about the moderators of the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange. The term primarily refers to the elected moderators of the site (also referred to as &quot;diamond&quot; mods, based on the diamond icon that appears next to their usernames to distinguish them as such); it is sometimes also used to refer to regular users who have earned enough reputation to gain relevant moderation privileges. (See also: the [moderation] tag.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" LastActivityDate="2020-02-25T22:33:26.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9784" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9786" CreationDate="2020-02-27T11:56:16.163" Score="7" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was planning on asking the following question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Does each warlock pact type from 4e have an equivalent in 5e?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know little of 4e, but am familiar with 5e. I know there are various types of pact in 4e and was interested to know what their equivalents would be in 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the little I know of 4e, I can at least make the following mapping:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Infernal pact -&amp;gt; The Fiend patron&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fey pact -&amp;gt; The Archfey patron&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Star pact -&amp;gt; The Great Old One patron&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What other 4e pacts are there, and do they &amp;quot;map&amp;quot; to anything in 5e? For example, I've heard of a &amp;quot;Dark pact&amp;quot;, but I cannot imagine what that would be without a 5e equivalent to compare against. Note that by equivalent, I mean thematically; I'm not interested in comparing the gameplay mechanics of 4e/5e warlocks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am concerned that trying to determine what these equivalents are (especially given the last sentence of my proposed question) may descend into opinion based answers, such as &amp;quot;well, &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; think the Dark pact from 4e is sorta like the Undying patron from 5e&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;No, the Dark pact is more like the Great Old One patron...&amp;quot;, etc. I'd rather this be more objective than that, but how objective can one be about thematic equivalents?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question primarily opinion-based? If so, is there a way to put further restraints on it so that it isn't just opinion-based (but is still going to give me what I'm after), or it is just inherently too opinion-based for SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-02-29T21:43:27.260" Title="Would asking for a comparison of 4e warlock pacts with 5e warlock patrons be primarily opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9743" CreationDate="2020-02-27T12:02:09.147" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexton_(artillery)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;wikipedia&lt;/a&gt;, this is also called a Sexton. And it might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zda8O.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zda8O.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexton_(artillery)&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55742" LastActivityDate="2020-02-27T12:02:09.147" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9786" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9784" CreationDate="2020-02-28T14:24:10.610" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me it is quite simple:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Are there objective criteria to say answer is good or bad?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Can we determine that some answers are better or more correct than other answers?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If not, then the question is primarily opinion-based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your specific case, we don't know how would you judge answers. We don't know what your goal is, so we can't assume you will judge answers by how well they help you solve the underlying problem. And for most problems I can imagine off the top of my head, such a table is not needed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Converting a PC? You only need to convert one, and the converted&#xA;character does not even have to have the same class.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Converting an NPC? They do not use actual classes anyway.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Converting lore pieces? Why would they need conversion? Warlocks of&#xA;old could've been different.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-02-29T21:43:27.260" LastActivityDate="2020-02-29T21:43:27.260" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9787" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9788" CreationDate="2020-02-28T21:23:05.147" Score="2" ViewCount="55" Body="&lt;p&gt;It turned out that there are multiple 1st-level abilities that make their user invisible, and that's why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165276/30214&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; has 3 answers as of now, all of them showing a way to get invisibility at level 1. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that more of them can potentially appear in the future. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question hence be closed as a list question because of all the answers being equally correct? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastActivityDate="2020-02-28T22:22:47.133" Title="Is this question about invisibility a list question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|list-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9787" CreationDate="2020-02-28T21:47:28.007" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, it's not a list question, because it does not ask for a list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks what is the earliest level where invisibility is possible.  It asks for a minimum quantity, which can be measured and explained.  There may be multiple explanations (because there are multiple methods for invisibility) but it only needs one for a sufficient answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it asked for all possible methods for gaining invisibility, then that would be a list question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2020-02-28T22:22:47.133" LastActivityDate="2020-02-28T22:22:47.133" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9789" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-02T15:48:39.023" Score="10" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;Elder Scrolls Online has a bustling online community of roleplayers. I found myself recently playing the game that way for quite a bit, and I've found a great amount of joy getting together with my guildmates and doing stuff while in-character - be it dodging bosses in dungeons or just sitting around in a tavern in Daggerfall. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So far, I've playing with a rather &quot;generic fantasy&quot; character. It worked fine so far, but this last weekend I decided to take the dive and make a proper, more lore-abiding character with proper hooks and ties to that setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had already fired up Word and began typing out the background for my Breton Sorcerer when I came to realization that I actually know very little of that lore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first impulse was to come here and ask a couple of lore-related questions in the Elder Scrolls setting, but I'm not sure if this is the proper place to ask those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On one hand, ESO is an online videogame. It isn't a traditional tabletop RPG by any means. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it has a vast roleplaying community, a very dense lore, and even an unofficial adaptation for a &lt;a href=&quot;https://uestrpg.wixsite.com/home/downloads&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;true tabletop game&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lore questions about Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, and other settings appear to be on-topic. We have a few of those around the site already. A few of them follow below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38295/is-giving-a-kobold-a-weapon-considered-a-marriage-proposal&quot;&gt;Is giving a kobold a weapon considered a marriage proposal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151874/do-dragons-smell-of-lilacs&quot;&gt;Do dragons smell of lilacs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152189/what-do-unicorns-want&quot;&gt;What do Unicorns want?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133869/whose-portrait-is-printed-on-the-waterdhavian-gold-coin&quot;&gt;Whose portrait is printed on the Waterdhavian gold coin?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133911/how-common-is-homosexuality-in-the-forgotten-realms&quot;&gt;How common is homosexuality in the Forgotten Realms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, say, by analogy - Would a question about how common is homosexuality in Tamriel during the ESO timeline, or what is the marriage protocol of the Altmer, for example - while in the scope of either writing a character or a campaign for a RPG on that setting- on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seems to be a consensus that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6173/are-questions-about-roleplaying-within-a-video-game-context-on-topic/6175#6175&quot;&gt;any form of roleplaying is on-topic&lt;/a&gt;, whatever the platform may be. That said, I feel there is a difference between, say - player relationships, which certainly is always on topic, and lore, that may or may not be depending on the context. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll wait a few days before going ahead in any direction or dumping the idea to see what the community has to say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="321" LastEditDate="2020-03-04T16:55:18.783" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T19:26:59.380" Title="Are questions about Elder Scrolls lore on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|video-games|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9789" CreationDate="2020-03-02T16:23:39.857" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I don't think so&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the game is fantasy related, it is not a tabletop role playing game or a freeform roleplaying game. I don't think we can become a repository of all fantasy-related lore and asking these questions on the arqade or another stack would both be more relevant to their stack and give you access to more users who have deeper and direct knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There may be those of us who do have the knowledge here, but questions about pure videogames don't really belong here, whether they are about lore or game mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-02T16:40:58.563" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9791" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-02T23:27:08.850" Score="14" ViewCount="387" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed what I consider a trend to include whether or not character choices (Classes, Subclasses, Feats, Qualities, etc) are a &quot;good&quot; choice either in comments or frequently as part of an answer. Sometimes the comment/Answer goes into more detail while other times it is simply labeled a bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/160428/28326&quot;&gt;I'm not immune to the phenomenon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/165681/28326&quot;&gt;The most recent example I've seen&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/45438/28326&quot;&gt;This one gives arbitrary guidance&lt;/a&gt; under &quot;How significant is the attack...&quot; (Not judging the quality of advice, just linking as an example)  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that this often violates the site's principles of objective answering and occasionally even threatens &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;embracing the plurality of gaming styles&lt;/a&gt;. I've occasionally brought it up with other members as comments on the posts and I've had mixed results of being accused argumentative (sometimes accurately) and other times resulted in a change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My area of expertise is Paizo's Pathfinder 1e and 2e, so I can't be sure this extends into other areas of gaming, but I know I've seen it in D&amp;amp;D 3e/3.5 Questions and I believe I've seen it about spell choices in D&amp;amp;D 5e, although I can't remember to cite a specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Has it been established, or can we establish, what qualifies acceptable assertions about GM/player choices in questions about how the potential choice functions?  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it always acceptable to criticize an ability choice?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;IE the poster &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/125869/28326&quot;&gt;discounts the value of the choice&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165136/28326&quot;&gt;related choices&lt;/a&gt; (comments)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Only when it's written poorly?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;IE when the choice &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30146/28326&quot;&gt;doesn't function as written&lt;/a&gt; or is written so poorly &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105559/28326&quot;&gt;it's difficult to parse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When it's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/132862/28326&quot;&gt;numerically weaker&lt;/a&gt; than other choices?&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;IE situations they could just pick Y instead of X to get +3 instead of +2&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;For clarification, I'm not concerned about Questions that ask about how a choice compares to similar choices; I'm only looking at situations where it wasn't part of the expected answer.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-03-03T15:50:12.273" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T00:11:29.830" Title="Is it acceptable to include your opinion of the quality of character choices in an answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|moderation|good-subjective|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9791" CreationDate="2020-03-03T00:52:43.163" Score="23" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but care needs to be taken in how it is presented&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good answers frequently include contextual information above and beyond what is directly asked by the question, including analysis about the relative merits and value of rules and options in question. The additional information helps the querent make fully informed choices about what they're doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3e&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; especially are game systems which are notorious for being poorly balanced and flush with trap options which simply make a character worse than they should be, and because those systems were very popular and have been around for a long time, we have many experts who have discovered these things the hard way. It'd be kind of cruel not to warn a player about that if they appear to be naively considering taking those options. It's then entirely up to that player whether or not they still take those choices - they're in the best place to know how well-optimised their particular table needs characters to be, and whether or not being mechanically sub-par will impact their enjoyment - but that decision will at least be a somewhat more informed one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the other direction, I don't think we see it happen as often, but it also seems reasonable to warn querents when they're considering options which might be mechanically very powerful but are, in practice, not much fun to play. That's an even more subjective detail than the mechanical balance is, but when the opinion is well-informed by experience/expertise, it still adds value to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect what you're mostly finding to be an issue is the &lt;em&gt;presentation&lt;/em&gt; of these analyses in answers/comments, since it is easy to accidentally come across as condescending, or as insinuating that the querent is foolish or stupid for considering these options, especially for some of our users who have a naturally more curt/brusque writing style. Unfortunately, one user's straightforward matter-of-fact explanation is often another user's unnecessarily harsh critique. I'm not really sure what the best way to deal with that is, but I'm pretty confident the problem is not really in the content but the delivery.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastActivityDate="2020-03-03T00:52:43.163" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9793" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9794" CreationDate="2020-03-03T16:55:49.550" Score="7" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was reading &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140623/can-i-let-my-players-play-any-official-class-race-in-published-adventures&quot;&gt;this Question&lt;/a&gt;, and notice there are ton of acronyms in it. As someone not super familiar with every released book for 5E, it made the question hard to read and I had to google a few of them to figure out what they all mean. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was gonna edit in the full titles of the books, but I checked the question's revision history and noticed it was originally that way, but someone &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/140623/3&quot;&gt;edited it to acronyms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can understand abbreviations/acronyms being the default for the super common things like the PHB, DMG, and MM, but should abbreviations/acronyms be the go to for less common books like the one listed in the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19600" LastEditorUserId="19600" LastEditDate="2020-03-03T17:34:02.737" LastActivityDate="2020-03-04T19:58:36.490" Title="Are abbreviations/acronyms preferred?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9793" CreationDate="2020-03-03T17:26:25.273" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Approachability is preferred. Posts should not be unnecessarily difficult to read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That means super common abbreviations like “PHB” are fine and nobody has to spell them out. More obscure acronyms can make the post harder to read and understand though—we should spell those out or define them the first time we use them. This isn't site-specific policy so much as just good, effective written communication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site is for beginners, enthusiasts, and experts. We want our advice to be legible and approachable to folks at various levels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll point out that the editor of that revision you saw was the original author of the post, so it's not like someone else came along to enforce acronyms! I've put back the spelled-out version of several of those book titles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-03-03T17:26:25.273" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9795" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-03T19:57:30.097" Score="13" ViewCount="475" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/344513/311001&quot;&gt;The new ask page is now live on the network!&lt;/a&gt; is the post on main meta (meta.stackexchange.com) describing the thought process behind and the new features of the Ask A Question redesign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Check it out and leave any feedback on the MSE post linked above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For convenience, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;here's a link to the new Ask a Question page on mainsite&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;on this Meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-03-03T20:21:49.387" LastActivityDate="2020-03-04T03:43:54.100" Title="There's a new Ask a Question page!" Tags="|discussion|questions|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9796" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-03T23:00:00.813" Score="9" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new user has posed this homebrew review question, which has gone through a ton of edits and is seemingly in a rollback war between users:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165719/how-would-a-major-buffing-ability-effect-challenge-rating&quot;&gt;How would a major buffing ability effect challenge rating?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is currently 1 answer to this question and it's premise stems substantially upon flawed information (hit points and full impacts of the Sporeshrooms being on the field) that was provided by the querent in an early revision, sort of codified by another user in a later revision, and contradicted several times by the original user as they workshop through the question. As a quasi-expert, I think it may have been appropriate to have inquired in greater detail about the information before posting an answer, however, that didn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have asked several additional comments requesting the user to clarify the question. Personally, I feel these questions needed to be answered before any answer can be provided, but that's neither here nor there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, the querent seeks to implement edits to address my comments and keeps getting rolled back to a version that preserves the validity of the existing answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, they have attempted to open a new question to incorporate the revisions, but have been blocked there as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165788/31402&quot;&gt;How would a major buff ability effect challenge rating (stat block modified)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we deal with this? I'm not sure our standard practices are appropriate nor fair here to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-04T04:08:07.523" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T19:36:28.170" Title="How do we help this new user formulate a question about their homebrew Toadstool that can be properly answered?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9796" CreationDate="2020-03-03T23:42:18.830" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think your description is mistaken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP wrote that his sporecaps had 5hp, and received an answer which was predicated on this information. OP then changed his sporecaps to have 30hp and posted a comment on the answer asking: &quot;Did i fix it? What is the CR now?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've written about this answer: &quot;it's premise stems substantially upon flawed information&quot;, suggesting you think the answerer did not fully understand the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answerer did fully understand the question. What is happening here is that OP modified the question in response to receiving an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP's question should be reverted to the form that received the answer. OP should be allowed to ask a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also sort of think that OP's edit rights should be revoked to prevent them from edit-warring. I recognize that's not likely to happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2020-03-03T23:42:18.830" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9798" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9796" CreationDate="2020-03-03T23:43:59.503" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Go to Chat&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was thinking about this on the drive home and I think this question needs to go to chat to be fully workshopped. The OP is making responsive edits to the question because they're trying to address concerns as they're raised as opposed to thinking about the creature in a comprehensive manner when they post the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Typically we would direct them to GitP or another forum for that kind of workshopping, but I think we also do the same thing in chat rooms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question should be rolled back to the revision that does not invalidate the existing question. The second question should remain closed as needing additional information; it can be re-opened once everything gets sorted in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I expect the question may shift away from the impact of the specific feature on CR and towards figuring out an appropriate CR for the creature as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="31402" LastEditDate="2020-03-04T00:50:54.463" LastActivityDate="2020-03-04T00:50:54.463" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9795" CreationDate="2020-03-04T03:43:54.100" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have made a suggestion on how they ought to improve the first screen that a new user sees.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/344541/380710&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt;, if any of you want to add anything.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like us to do that here as well.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2020-03-04T03:43:54.100" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9800" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9789" CreationDate="2020-03-04T13:47:17.233" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;While a general question about the lore might be off-topic, there are questions about off-topic lore that are none-the-less on topic for this stack. For example: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;In an [otherwise off-topic lore] context, I want to create a character&#xA;  backstory that has the potential to accomplish [stated goals that most&#xA;  frequently arise in tabletop RPG-specific contexts, e.g. cause low&#xA;  party/player conflict with other similarly well-developed characters that&#xA;  would normally be expected to be at odds]. How best can I accomplish this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or if you were a GM running (for example) an Elder Scrolls D&amp;amp;D game, you might ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;How can I best fit [otherwise off-topic lore] to work best in my&#xA;  (tabletop RPG) context?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is worth thinking carefully and clearly about what exact question you want answered; different stacks may be better suited to answering subtly different questions, or contexts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23223" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-05T19:26:59.380" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T19:26:59.380" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9801" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9793" CreationDate="2020-03-04T19:58:36.490" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I feel strongly enough about this, that I think Carcer's comment above should be its own answer:  The preferred method for all but the very most common of acronyms and initials should be to spell out the first usage, parenthesize immediately after, then use the short form afterward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That way, you only need to spell out Self Contained Under Water Breathing Apparatus (SCUBA) once, and ever after you can just say &quot;SCUBA.&quot;  It's also just basic standard practice in many disciplines. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2020-03-04T19:58:36.490" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9802" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-05T10:55:36.487" Score="8" ViewCount="299" Body="&lt;p&gt;2020 has come! But… oops, where did the time go? It’s already March! Belated as it is, it’s time for a refresh of &lt;strong&gt;Community Promotion Ads&lt;/strong&gt;!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;useful resources for both the GM and the player&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;utilities for running meets online&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;cool roleplaying events or conferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;anything else your community would genuinely be interested in&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads every year?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers should be in the exact form of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;   [1]: http://image-url&#xA;   [2]: http://clickthrough-url &#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question must always be tagged with the magic &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-ads&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-ads&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-ads&lt;/a&gt; tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF or PNG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Score Threshold&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;strong&gt;minimum score threshold&lt;/strong&gt; an answer must meet (currently &lt;strong&gt;6&lt;/strong&gt;) before it will be shown on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/9802&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2020-03-09T19:12:59.783" Title="Community Promotion Ads — 2020" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2021-06-17T10:04:04.203" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9802" CreationDate="2020-03-05T11:05:08.517" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ftzzy.png&quot; alt=&quot;Great RPGs have great worlds!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T11:05:08.517" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9804" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9802" CreationDate="2020-03-05T11:07:00.863" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/?tab=featured&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://stack-exchange-dynamic-ads.herokuapp.com/rpg.stackexchange.com/bounty.png&quot; alt=&quot;See all questions with active bounties&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T11:07:00.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9805" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-05T15:05:30.197" Score="42" ViewCount="3473" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Note: As of September 3rd, 2021, this policy has been removed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/28591&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this policy is no longer in effect. New guidance pending.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes people ask us questions about game mechanics without explicitly telling us what game system or edition they’re playing. At the time of writing, our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/23970&quot;&gt;current policy is to never assume the RPG system or edition of a question&lt;/a&gt;, even in cases where there is no doubt what system the querent is asking about. We require the OP to &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; tell us in the question, a comment, or a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’ve noticed that, recently, this policy seems to be causing conflict and strife for what seems to be little gain. We see this in the comments section under numerous questions and many metas where this policy comes into relevance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this policy more trouble than it is worth? Is it time to retire this strict policy? If so, what would be the policy going forward for managing questions where the system is unclear?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previously:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8417/revisiting-our-never-guess-the-game-system-policy&quot;&gt;Revisiting our &amp;quot;never guess the game system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team's been thinking about this for a while, and proposes a way forward in an answer below... But don’t be shy about posting a competing answer if you're seeing things we're not. We're relying on your experience and judgment, too!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After 3 months, the community's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/28591&quot;&gt;highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; is sitting at +54/-22 and advocates for not changing the policy according to the moderators' proposal, which ranks below it in score at +47/-22. As the community failed to achieve a consensus to change the status quo, we will continue to enforce the policy as we have in the past. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9988/52137&quot;&gt;Separate refinements made&lt;/a&gt; notwithstanding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2022-01-13T23:26:55.750" LastActivityDate="2022-01-13T23:26:55.750" Title="Re-revisiting the &quot;don't guess the system&quot; policy" Tags="|discussion|tags|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="30" ClosedDate="2021-08-16T22:58:34.670" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9806" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-05T15:05:30.197" Score="45" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Revert the policy, and treat these edits like any other&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team believes it’s time to revert this policy and restore the way we handle system information to the default way we handle every kind of post and tag edit: exercise good judgement, and edit when you’re fairly sure. In other words: The new policy is to have no specific policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being fairly sure tends to mean that the question otherwise has fairly clear and unambiguous information indicating what game and edition is—but that’s not a new guideline; it’s what we see people already doing as they calculate how to respond in comments. (For instance, “I’m playing 5e” all on its own is not clear and unambiguous—many games have a 5e—but “I’m playing an Aarakocra Swarmkeeper Ranger in 5e” probably is adequately clear, and “I’m playing &lt;em&gt;Rise of Tiamat&lt;/em&gt;” is definitely very clear.) We’ll talk more about this stuff later on in this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been covered in much more detail in the post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8417/revisiting-our-never-guess-the-game-system-policy&quot;&gt;Revisiting our “never guess the game system” policy&lt;/a&gt;, but to summarise: In the early days of this site, we needed this policy because the site had many questions from multiple very similar systems and had a problem with people answering based on the incorrect system and requiring things to be cleaned up by moderators afterwards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply put, we don’t have this issue anymore. In 2019, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aq+%5Bdnd-5e%5D+created%3A2019&quot;&gt;4139&lt;/a&gt; out of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=is%3Aq++created%3A2019&quot;&gt;6311&lt;/a&gt; questions on this site (65.6%) were for D&amp;amp;D 5e. And while we haven’t been able to devise a way to track this issue numerically, in our experience, the vast majority of recent untagged system questions have either later been clarified to be 5e or showed signs of being 5e, but were never clarified. We have observed only a handful of 3.5e/Pathfinder questions where the system was not already specified correctly. And users of non-D&amp;amp;D-adjacent systems seem to continue to have no issues with tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the community firmly supported the policy early on when it was necessary (in 2014ish),  and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;still supported the policy not too long ago&lt;/a&gt;, we have fairly recently seen that the community may instead be supportive of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9566/when-is-it-ok-to-assume-the-system-without-it-being-considered-a-guess/9571#9571&quot;&gt;reverting the policy in favour of more practical judgement&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What we are proposing&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new policy we’re proposing is simply: &lt;strong&gt;no specific policy for game- and edition-related edits&lt;/strong&gt;. We want people to exercise sound judgement in reflecting on the information we have present in a question when a game and edition is needed but not &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; specified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we need to know the game and/or edition, it’s missing, and we cannot be reasonably sure what’s being referenced, close it as unclear and leave a comment requesting the information we need. This is just as in any other case where there’s information missing from the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it’s missing but we can be reasonably sure based on one or more pieces of information we have available in the question (see later in this post for examples), then simply update the question to add the game/edition tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, the only evidence deemed acceptable was explicit declaration by the OP. We see people regularly noticing evidence that already makes it obvious what the game is—exact quotes from books with exact page numbers, description of multiple game-specific features, and so on—but ignoring it because our policy says they must. Well, that policy being reverted means you can start paying attention to those things again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As always, don't answer questions about a specific game system when the system/edition is not abundantly clear. If there is no reasonable doubt that the question could only possibly refer to one game system, then edit the corresponding tag into the question first. If you aren’t that confident, then our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8354/28591&quot;&gt;previous guidance&lt;/a&gt; still applies: withhold your answer and wait for clarification.&#xA;Also, if you add in a tag, please leave a comment for the OP asking for confirmation and explain why to help them to learn to add the tag themselves going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why we are proposing this change&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of this site is to facilitate the asking and answering of questions. We shouldn’t be throwing away useful questions that are already reasonably clear solely because they don’t follow the letter of some policy.&#xA;Our experience is that questions closed in accordance with the existing policy repeatedly &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; already reasonably clear. Users are frequently champing at the bit to answer, are outright asking “This is D&amp;amp;D 5e, right?” in comments, and some get impatient and frustrated that they’re having to ignore what are truly obvious signals of what the game and edition are just because the author hasn’t said so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, there are constant battles in comments and on Meta about this issue, including at least 4 major Meta posts within the last few months. This is too much time and effort being spent to maintain a policy that doesn’t substantially benefit us in our current environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Examples of system-specific evidence to take into consideration&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question quotes exact text from a D&amp;amp;D 5e book and gives a page number and book reference that lines up exactly with D&amp;amp;D 5e, the chances that they aren’t playing D&amp;amp;D 5e are acceptably small. Same if a question asks a question full of D&amp;amp;D 5e terminology and then says it is for “5e”. Are there other games with a 5th edition? Yes, but the chances of someone playing one of those &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; that system using D&amp;amp;D 5e terminology &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; that question appearing on this site are basically 0.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Look for some combination of the following. This is not a checklist, nor is there a minimum number of points that must be met, but the more the better:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Exact quotes from game materials that correspond exactly to only one system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multiple pieces of terminology that are only used in one system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;References to titles of modules, book, and/or adventures that only happen in one system&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Partial references to a system (e.g. “5e”)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, keep an eye out for terms and things that don’t fit, which might suggest that the OP is confused or playing some odd combination of systems. This could make otherwise clear information unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-07T22:19:15.173" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9796" CreationDate="2020-03-05T17:29:39.780" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think that these questions are fundamentally mis-specified, and are not properly stackable. This should never have been &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a serious mismatch between what the question is seeking, and the context in which it is sought. No amount of editing can fix that without fundamentally changing the question, which edits generally aren't supposed to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;main&amp;quot; question regarding how specific buffs would affect challenge rating is pretty easy to answer, as CR calculations leave little room for guesswork. To be maximally stackable, this question could be applied to an &lt;em&gt;existing&lt;/em&gt; entry in the &lt;em&gt;Monster Manual&lt;/em&gt;. That entry could be granted the potential buff, and then people could describe how that buff would impact CR. Easy! Well, perhaps not &lt;em&gt;easy&lt;/em&gt;, but clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The greater problem is that this question is simultaneously a homebrew review question. Questions about the specific features of this homebrew creation simply don't mesh with what the posted question purports to be: an examination of how a specific buff should affect CR.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As people try to balance those incongruent aims, we end up with clarifications to the text of the question that have no relevance to the &amp;quot;canonical&amp;quot; question being posed. It's fundamentally difficult to define how feature Y would impact creature X when X itself is so malleable. We also have issues of people making incontrovertible fixes, like correcting typos, while also introducing other, less clear changes, and then having edits rolled back, re-introducing elements which are unarguably errors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The fix: Ask two questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question should be split. One question about a standard &lt;em&gt;MM&lt;/em&gt; entry with this special homebrew buff added. We'll all have a stable, agreed-upon starting point and so would be able to analyze and discuss what sort of relationship this summon-buffing should have with CR.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A second question about this homebrewed Toadstool monster would allow for the standard homebrew review approach to work. Indeed, the homebrew review might even be &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; answerable with the summon-buffing mechanic better defined in a linked question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;tl;dr: Both of these questions should be deleted, and replaced with at least two questions properly formulated for this stack.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T19:36:28.170" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9808" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9802" CreationDate="2020-03-05T18:26:48.987" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kz3jL.png&quot; alt=&quot;Explore New Worlds&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62415" LastActivityDate="2020-03-05T18:26:48.987" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9809" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-06T14:15:49.523" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I think it is a terrible idea to revert the policy&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree, strongly, with the assertion that questions are so often “reasonably clear.” I feel that I have &lt;em&gt;often&lt;/em&gt; assumptions made that are incorrect. I also flatly deny—as objective fact—the claim that there is “no harm” in answering such questions. Mistaken assumptions create an unholy mess for no good reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Reverting the policy is an optimization for sand&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the core foundations of Stack Exchange is “&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;optimize for pearls, not sand.&lt;/a&gt;” That means that effort is focused on ensuring that the best questions get the most attention, that the best answers get the most attention, and the people capable of providing the best answers spend as much time as possible on writing those best answers to the best questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, questions from users who don’t come back, who don’t read comments, have almost no value. To undo this policy is, to my mind, optimizing for help vampires. We don’t have many of them, but this policy is part of why. And we do have some.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The closed status is super-important here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast to one popular comment here, in reality, it is &lt;em&gt;closing&lt;/em&gt; questions that has no real harm. Yes, we want to help, we want to answer questions—but there’s not really a shortage of questions to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we need the system to be clear before a question can be answered.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; No if’s, and’s, or but’s. That’s just a fact. Every user on this website needs to know that. Every question that needs a system but doesn’t have one is a problem, a danger. In that state, it is ripe for wasted time, hurt feelings, and huge arguments. It is an excellent way to cause our best contributors to spend more time on our worst contributions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So we close them—&lt;em&gt;perfect!&lt;/em&gt; Now there’s no risk of those things happening. And with an engaged user, the closing doesn’t have to be long—in my experience, re-opening after a system tag is edited in happens &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; quickly on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing questions protects the site and protects its users—both those who asked the question and those who would answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The educational opportunity that the policy provides is real&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As discussed, we really absolutely do need a clear system before any answers can be written, and every user needs to understand that. And &lt;em&gt;they do, very quickly, learn that&lt;/em&gt;. Because of this policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Off the top of my head, I can only really think of one serious help vampire that we have on this site. I wouldn’t trust that user to so much as give their own question a quick once-over to make sure they haven’t left anything out or broken their links—to say nothing of actually tagging their question correctly—but that user does actually manage to use system tags correctly. Because that user knows that a missing system tag will actually get their question closed. The other myriad errors they can’t be bothered to fix, on the other hand, will usually be fixed for them by the community, and in any event will rarely inhibit their getting an answer, so they don’t bother.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I am not suggesting that the community stop editing questions generally to get them into shape. This is literally one user, you don’t shape policy around one problem user. But it illustrates the power of this policy for educational purposes, and also goes on to show why it’s so important for system tags, and not other tags or other kinds of edits—because system tags are that critical, and cause that much of a problem in their absence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every edit could instead be a question closure followed by making the user edit things themselves; that would teach them something. The lessons so learned would not, in most cases, be worth doing that, though, so no one (least of all me) is suggesting that. But &lt;em&gt;system tags are in fact unique in their importance,&lt;/em&gt; and therefore a case in which that educational value is uniquely high.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Stack Exchange system isn’t helping&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The precise examples given all over the place, on an &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; basis, I would not particularly mind admitting that they can be safely edited to include a system tag even without the querent’s interaction. But &lt;em&gt;there is simply no mechanism to restrict things to only those kinds of questions&lt;/em&gt;. You suggest eliminating the policy—having no policy. That isn’t only going to apply to the kinds of questions you have listed—it simply isn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, we would want every edit introducing a system tag (by someone other than the OP) to get attention—we would want oversight on whether or not that edit was valid. It would be great if we could make that always a suggested edit, say, or something people could vote on like closing the question is—but we cannot. That’s a pretty serious problem—because it’s very, very likely that edits are going to be missed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hell, for that matter, it’s not even hard to imagine the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OP&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; missing it—because there’s no way to enforce that users have to comment on the question about editing in the tag, and a new user might not notice the tag or recognize its signifcance. If the game they are playing is related to—but distinct from—the game the question was incorrectly tagged with, and they’re a new player of the game as well as a new user of our site, they may not recognize that answers are off, either—after all, if they knew the answer to the question, they wouldn’t have asked it.&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then we are misleading users. Pretty clearly not in anyone’s best interests, least of all ours. It’s a fairly lengthy sequence of steps—I wouldn’t expect this kind of thing to happen immediately or often—but each step along the way is pretty plausible to me, which means the whole chain itself doesn’t strike me as outside the realm of possibility. And I’d very much prefer it were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would likely feel very different about the scenario if we could enforce oversight, enforce notification to the OP about what’s happened and what its significance is, or even better, actually limit things to certain kinds of questions, but we can’t. Stack Exchange provides no mechanism for us to do so; unless the right people happen to catch that the edit happened, it’s all too likely that we won’t even know of a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only solution to this that I see is the current policy—at least that means that &lt;em&gt;everyone on the site knows&lt;/em&gt; system-tag edits aren’t allowed. &lt;em&gt;Everyone on the site knows&lt;/em&gt; that if they see a system tag edited in by someone who isn’t the OP, that’s not OK. Without the policy, they won’t know that anymore. They won’t know if that was an acceptable edit or not. They’ll have to find the same evidence that whoever made the edit used, or look for a comment explaining it, or otherwise &lt;em&gt;dig deeper&lt;/em&gt;. And they may not be qualified to do so. That’s a serious problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You are seriously downplaying the risks and dangers here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see a whole lot of “preparing for the best” going on, and a whole lot of what really seems like head-in-the-sand-ism about what the worst is going to be like. This is not going to be as neat or clean as it seems that some people expect. As just discussed, &lt;em&gt;we can’t restrict things to such cases, nor can we guarantee oversight to do so manually&lt;/em&gt;. Which means there &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; eventually going to be serious problems, and worse, serious problems that are allowed to stand long enough to become big fights. But the argumentation in favor of removing the policy doesn’t seem to recognize that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reverting the “don't guess the system” policy should not mean “guess the system at will”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;except that’s exactly what it will mean&lt;/em&gt;—to some users. We absolutely have users who are simply vastly over-confident in their own judgment. We see users label things as “obvious” beyond any rational justification &lt;em&gt;all the time&lt;/em&gt;. In fact, here, and really more broadly in most human discourse, “obvious” is often used as a crutch to obfuscate that the speaker doesn’t really have evidence to support their position (or can’t articulate it, but I think it’s reasonable to assume we want people to be sure enough to be able to articulate it). “Obvious” &lt;em&gt;isn’t&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example I mentioned in comments was something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The weapons table in the &lt;em&gt;Player’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt; includes the unarmed strike...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone familiar with D&amp;amp;D 5e might well recognize this—the issue of unarmed strikes and whether or not they are weapons and what the significance of that is are all pretty sources of confusion in that system. It might be obvious to such a user that this is a D&amp;amp;D 5e question. Except D&amp;amp;D 3.5e also has a product named &lt;em&gt;Player’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt;, and it also includes a weapon table, and that weapon table also includes the unarmed strike. And the two systems handle unarmed strikes very differently (thanks to some errata in D&amp;amp;D 5e), so any answers resulting from this question are going to be very different in each system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Certainly, not every product is titled &lt;em&gt;“Player’s Handbook,”&lt;/em&gt; which gets re-used constantly. I am not aware of any system other than D&amp;amp;D 5e that has a product titled &lt;em&gt;Xanathar’s Guide to Everything&lt;/em&gt;. But I’m not &lt;strong&gt;certain&lt;/strong&gt; of that—for all I know, this Xanathar character has his roots in 2e or something, and this title reflects a 2e book I’ve never heard of. I don’t know. And without that kind of encyclopedic knowledge, it is difficult to leverage such evidence—and easy to misuse it, if you are wrong about how unique something is. More importantly, not only does whoever performs the edit have to know it, so does everyone who provides oversight—a tall order!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The long and short of it is that we &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; going to have blind guesses, followed by arguments that “no it really is obvious, I can just tell.” That &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; going to happen, sooner or later. And when it does, it’s all-too-likely that someone’s going to see the question with the tag, not question it or check the edit history—why would they?—, and write an answer. And then if it turns out to be wrong—let’s be honest with ourselves, &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; it turns out to be wrong, because sooner or later there &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; be such a question where whatever was “obviously” so wasn’t—then there is going to be a lot of wasted time, a lot of hurt feelings. &lt;em&gt;That’s not good for anybody.&lt;/em&gt; It doesn’t help the querent, it doesn’t certainly doesn’t help the answerer, and it doesn’t help the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’ll have optimized for sand, and gotten grime instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The arguments are going to be worse, not better&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the stated reasons to revert the policy is to reduce arguing about the policy. That completely ignores the fact that arguments about system-less questions are going to get &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt; without the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simple fact of the matter is that the strict, hard-and-fast policy does &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; so well as it kills arguments. There is no room for debate—you don’t guess, period. If someone wants to argue about it, they have to argue about the policy as a whole, not the particular case. It eliminates wasting time getting into the weeds on a particular question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the policy, we are going to instead of arguing about what is or isn’t obvious. Edit wars where people insert tags they consider “obvious” and others revert them, so on and so forth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Serious danger of becoming even more “D&amp;amp;D 5e Stack Exchange”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Rubiksmoose points out, 65% of our questions were about D&amp;amp;D 5e. &lt;em&gt;That isn’t a good thing.&lt;/em&gt; There probably isn’t anything we can do about it, but it’s definitely worrisome—the number of D&amp;amp;D 5e questions is great, but the too-low number of non-5e questions is something of a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reverting this policy in light of that is only more worrisome. People incorrectly assume D&amp;amp;D 5e all the time—even when questions &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; tagged with something else. How unwelcoming would it be to have your question about another system turned into a D&amp;amp;D 5e question, and then for there to be a big fight when it gets changed back? How much is that going to cement the idea that we only handle D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the extreme, we can even imagine us ending up with D&amp;amp;D 5e questions that were never meant to be D&amp;amp;D 5e questions. That’s only going to make matters worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;A potential alternative—that I doubt anyone wants&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack Exchange system &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; have a solution to the problems we have here, where we could ensure oversight and consensus before allowing answers to a question. Namely, we could allow system tags to be edited in without the OP’s input after a Meta discussion agrees that the situation is “safe” to edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But does anyone want that? Going and creating a Meta discussion, waiting for consensus, that takes time. To be fair, there’s strong reason to wait 24 hours, to give people in all timezones a chance to contribute. In that time, hopefully, the OP would return and edit their question anyway, rendering the whole Meta discussion moot. And if they don’t, that really makes the effort put into salvaging the question pretty dubious. And it still won’t help anyone “champing at the bit,” since they’re still gonna have to wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I’m not sure it’s worthwhile to even bother mentioning such an exception to the policy—would anyone even bother using it if it was an option? Is it worth anyone’s time to do so, even if they’re willing? Is it worth anyone else’s time to contribute to the consensus? I don’t think so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Unless it’s a question that doesn’t have anything to do with a particular system but those are not the subject of this discussion.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Assuming it’s not a self-answered Q&amp;amp;A, which is probably a fair assumption for a new user—and even if it were, in that case there’d be an answer, and the user would presumably have enough familiarity with the system to say other answers are off.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-30T02:08:32.297" LastActivityDate="2020-07-30T02:08:32.297" CommentCount="73" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9810" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9791" CreationDate="2020-03-06T14:35:05.527" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;For what it’s worth, in many cases, I consider it unacceptable to leave such information unstated. Tone, keeping tangents to a minimum, and so on are certainly all considerations, and serve as back-pressure to encourage limits on how much of it appears, but there are many times where I feel that &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; must be said. In extreme cases, I would even downvote an otherwise-excellent answer that failed to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that is all because the value we offer is &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being able to wiggle through quasi-legalistic rules language is often not the most important thing, even when that’s what we’re asked to do. It takes some expertise to do it, certainly, but it doesn’t require &lt;em&gt;that much&lt;/em&gt; expertise most of the time. The real value of our expertise is perspective. Knowing the breadth and depth of the system and being able to put things in context. Failing to provide that context when it’s relevant can be—in extreme cases, I’m not talking about most answers as I tend to do with my own—a disservice to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-03-07T00:47:21.970" LastActivityDate="2020-03-07T00:47:21.970" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9811" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9812" CreationDate="2020-03-06T18:43:39.527" Score="4" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of our users has asked a question about the PHB+1 rule in Adventurers League(AL), but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165890/22566&quot;&gt;is specifically asking about some ambiguity regarding season 9 sources&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The title looks like it fits &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/110848/22566&quot;&gt;another AL PHB +1 question begun previously&lt;/a&gt; but that Q&amp;amp;A has not been updated as the new seasons emerge.  (I just bountied it after a chat with NautArch)      &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user is asking about &quot;why is this a dupe when &lt;strong&gt;the answer to my question isn't there&lt;/strong&gt;&quot; - which is true.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that with best of intentions this may have been an incorrect dupe closure since the answer is not up to date based on the content of the question.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like a ruling on this.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-03-06T19:12:07.503" LastActivityDate="2020-03-06T19:40:11.863" Title="A dupe target with an incomplete answer: is this dupe designation mistaken?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9811" CreationDate="2020-03-06T19:40:11.863" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;They're different, but perhaps only subtly so&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Full disclosure, I know the answer to the closed question and fully intend to answer it should it get reopened.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The (current) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/110848/52137&quot;&gt;target&lt;/a&gt; is essentially asking: From only knowing the name, what is the &amp;quot;PHB+1&amp;quot; rule. The answer to such a question is expected to be where to find the rule, and &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; how it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The (current) dupe is asking about the nature of a &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; part of that rule. It already knows where to find it and how the rule generally works. As such it is similar to other questions we have (non-exhaustive list) which are asking about specific problems with the &amp;quot;PHB+1&amp;quot; rule:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116152/52137&quot;&gt;Do the AL PHB+1 restrictions work on the character&amp;#39;s archetype?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157450/52137&quot;&gt;During Adventurers League character creation, are the listed variant options always available even if the associated book is not chosen as my PHB+1?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the general answer could give a clarification so as to answer the specific problem, that would&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;expand the scope and length of the answer substantially,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;clutter the answer with detail that isn't of relevance to many other readers,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bury the answer to the specific question in the general one, making it equally hard for someone with the specific problem to find that answer as it is to figure it out themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;and there is no end to the possible misunderstandings one could have with the rule, multiplying the above rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, keeping it closed as a dupe isn't benefiting either question (or its answers), as such it shouldn't be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-06T19:40:11.863" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9813" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9791" CreationDate="2020-03-07T15:55:29.603" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I am completely against opinions in answers unless opinions were &lt;em&gt;specifically and explicitly solicited&lt;/em&gt;...&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...by the question, the clarifying comments by the author, or the text accompanying the question; &lt;strong&gt;in which specific cases, I'm totally fine with it&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When not specifically solicited, I feel that it detracts from the quality of the answer, is not factual, is not objective, is manipulative, and skews the site answers towards the emotional, and not in a beneficial way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recall several times across the stacks seeing a wrong answer selected because it was emotionally satisfying, or a factual answer bombed with downvotes due to unpopularity even though it was technically accurate, answers with a unique perspective bombed with downvotes because it was not mainstream, and I also recall seeing answers upvoted with large numbers, but a small vote answer was ultimately selected because it was more technically correct, and the other opinionated answers, while much more popular, were thereby less accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does highlight these unfortunate fact that &quot;the right answers are NOT at the top&quot; to paraphrase a quote. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I usually (but not always) downvote such answers as being inferior in quality as opinions detract from the value of the information, usually manage to come across as manipulative, dismissive, and spend more time proving their point than actually answering the question... and they frequently fail to consider the complete historical context of the game or component in question (this last is especially relevant to Dungeons and Dragons). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be fair, there are a rare few I don't downvote, because I found the opinion interesting, or it opened my eyes to a new view or angle, or it was humorous. So that is a thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, presenting facts about opinions is different, I feel. Noting that certain communities, especially subject matter experts, have found that certain combinations of rules result in given possible end results, or that a given point or rules combo is highly contested along with a brief, factual description of the debate &lt;strong&gt;without the opinion of the poster of the answer&lt;/strong&gt; IS valuable information that allows the reader to make informed decisions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I am adding examples as I find them going forward. )&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Supporting comment by another poster: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned in the comment by Interstellar Probe to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166075/30200&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt;, and I paraphrase, &quot;separating fact from belief is extremely difficult when researching a topic...&quot; and this is true of this (and every stack) where high reputation individuals' opinions are often mistaken for facts. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is another example, by KRyan, no less, who strongly disagreed with my answer in the comments: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166543/30200&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166543/30200&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time this answer was posted, it contained literally no reference to the actual D&amp;amp;D rules regarding diagonal movement, instead offering nothing but opinions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is that even considered a valid answer, when it doesn't even reference the rulebooks, or the existing rules on diagonal movement? This sort of answer is very non helpful, and detracts from the value of this site, in my opinion. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note this reference is not a slam on KRyan personally, who is very knowledgable, but a slam on both that specific answer as it was posted at the time I edited this question, and on the concept of opinionated answers in general. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I offer somewhat ironic thanks to KRyan for providing me with an example to support my answer here. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the intent of preserving an example, and in compliance with the site (don't link, quote the info) concept, here is a copy of the answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;As is common in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e, I am referring to “squares” when I really mean “cubes.” Just take “square” as game jargon, which it is in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Anyway, so the “5-ft., 10-ft.” is an approximation of having diagonals cost &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$1.5\times\$&lt;/span&gt; the distance, which itself is an approximation of having them cost &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sqrt{2}\times \approx 1.414\times\$&lt;/span&gt; (Pythagorean theorem says a right angle with &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$a\$&lt;/span&gt; for the legs will have a hypotenuse of &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sqrt{2}\times a\$&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A “double diagonal” will be the hypotenuse of a right angle with legs of &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$a\$&lt;/span&gt; and &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sqrt{2}\times a\$&lt;/span&gt;, so the hypotenuse will be &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sqrt{3}\times a\$&lt;/span&gt;, so we need an approximation of &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sqrt{3}\times \approx 1.732\times\$&lt;/span&gt;. If we round that to &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$1.75\times\$&lt;/span&gt;, we need “5-ft., 10-ft., 10-ft., 10-ft.” (so moving four squares costs 35 ft. of movement—&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$1.75\times\$&lt;/span&gt; the 20 ft. it would usually take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Obviously, “5-ft., 10-ft., 10-ft., 10-ft.” is a pain, and also it’s much more questionable to start with 5 ft. on the first square than it was for the “5-ft., 10-ft.” scheme. It’s also less clear how to combine it with “single diagonal” movement in the same turn—you probably shouldn’t be able to go 5 ft. for a double diagonal square and then move on a single diagonal for another 5 ft.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The most accurate way to resolve this is to imagine the “5-ft., 10-ft.” rule as actually being “7.5-ft.” every time—then it’s really “7.5 feet (rounded to 5 feet), 15 feet (rounded to 15 feet, so 10 feet beyond the first).” For the double-diagonals, we’re looking at 8.75-ft, which is still rounded down to 5 feet the first time, and then 17.5 feet (rounded to 15 feet total distance), 26.25 feet (25 feet), 35 feet (35 feet).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Maybe easier to see in tabular form. Here, &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$d\$&lt;/span&gt; is the actual, unrounded distance, &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\lfloor d \rfloor\$&lt;/span&gt; for the rounded distance, and &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\Delta \lfloor d \rfloor\$&lt;/span&gt; for the cost of the latest step. Each step should cost what’s listed as &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\Delta \lfloor d \rfloor\$&lt;/span&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{c|c|c}&#xA;\textbf{Straight Line} &amp;amp; \textbf{Single Diagonal} &amp;amp; \textbf{Double Diagonal} \\&#xA;{&#xA;\begin{array}{c c c}&#xA;d &amp;amp; \lfloor d \rfloor &amp;amp; \Delta \lfloor d \rfloor \\ \hline&#xA;\phantom{0}5 &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 &amp;amp; 5 \\&#xA;          10 &amp;amp;           10 &amp;amp; 5 \\&#xA;          15 &amp;amp;           15 &amp;amp; 5 \\&#xA;          20 &amp;amp;           20 &amp;amp; 5 \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;}&#xA;&amp;amp;&#xA;{&#xA;\begin{array}{c c c}&#xA;d &amp;amp; \lfloor d \rfloor &amp;amp; \Delta \lfloor d \rfloor \\ \hline&#xA;\phantom{0}7.5           &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 \\&#xA;          15\phantom{.0} &amp;amp;           15 &amp;amp;           10 \\&#xA;          22.5           &amp;amp;           20 &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 \\&#xA;          30\phantom{.0} &amp;amp;           30 &amp;amp;           10 \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;}&#xA;&amp;amp;&#xA;{&#xA;\begin{array}{c c c}&#xA;d &amp;amp; \lfloor d \rfloor &amp;amp; \Delta \lfloor d \rfloor \\ \hline&#xA;\phantom{0}8.75           &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 &amp;amp; \phantom{0}5 \\&#xA;          17.5\phantom{0} &amp;amp;           15 &amp;amp;           10 \\&#xA;          26.25           &amp;amp;           25 &amp;amp;           10 \\&#xA;          35\phantom{.00} &amp;amp;           35 &amp;amp;           10 \\&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;}&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Combining single and double diagonals then becomes possible by leveraging those fractions—7.5-ft. + 8.75-ft. is 16.25 feet, so the second step when moving single-diagonal then double-diagonal is going to cost 10-ft, but the 1.25 feet “extra” is less than the 2.5 feet “extra” from two double-diagonal moves. By tracking that extra you can keep track of how far a character has actually moved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;And if you actually bother with this mess, I salute you, because this is insane. Unfortunately, yeah, this is the reality of 3D movement in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e. I strongly recommend a gentleman’s agreement to just keep things grounded, or houserule in some form of abstract flight—&lt;a href=&quot;http://forum.faxcelestis.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&amp;amp;t=520&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here’s mine&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This final comment, &quot;... this is the reality of 3D movement in D&amp;amp;D 3.5&quot; appears to be a statement of fact. This might cause a reader to consider this opinion to be a fact, and in fact, the rules of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30200" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2020-03-20T13:34:39.950" LastActivityDate="2020-03-20T13:34:39.950" CommentCount="33" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-07T16:50:57.137" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9314/22566&quot;&gt;I wrote an answer about this a while back&lt;/a&gt;, here's a shorter version&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Get clarification first / promote better engagement with new users&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the advantages of asking the question &quot;What game/system/edition are you playing?&quot; &lt;em&gt;and waiting to get that answer&lt;/em&gt; is that we treat whomever asks the question as a person (which IMO is important for the new user experience) and engage with them in discourse in the process of helping them write a good question.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This early engagement supports a point that @Carcer made in a comment under one of @V2Blast's answer, with the point that doing this allows us to coach/teach new users &lt;em&gt;on how to best use the site&lt;/em&gt;.  We want effort put into questions, and we want questions to be clear and well scoped.  Right?   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A much more compelling argument about being extremely strict about policy here is that this is about teaching the querent how to use the site properly.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Benefits of not changing course:  &#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't confuse those who can or will offer an answer.   &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We engage with new users directly and help &quot;bring them on board&quot; the site as better users by coaching and teaching them.  &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;How we engage&lt;/em&gt;, and the &lt;em&gt;tone&lt;/em&gt; we use in our comments (and various &quot;help piles&quot;) will determine how welcoming, or not, our response is received as being.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearing up any ambiguity in a question is part of the site working as intended.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Style counts.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I encourage a warm prose style, and tone, for engaging with new users.    &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is offered as an alternate view to the idea that changing policy is even necessary.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(For @doppelgreener; and I was so very tempted to title this 'don't fix what isn't broken' but I have chosen to try a more engaging style this time around. ;-)  )  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Full Disclosure&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also wrote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9571/22566&quot;&gt;this answer on the same topic&lt;/a&gt; a while back, which roughly aligns with the current proposal; I can see both sides of this coin.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-03-07T17:54:08.090" LastActivityDate="2020-03-07T17:54:08.090" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9815" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-07T22:00:05.787" Score="22" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's precisely because a system tag can sometimes be assumed that it never should be.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back-shelf RPG guy here for a perspective. Here's a couple of questions that put a certain impression on me. One's about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138560/my-druid-wants-to-transform-into-a-blink-dog-how-do-i-rule-this&quot;&gt;a druid who wants to turn into a blink dog&lt;/a&gt;. One's about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161718/is-there-any-way-to-mitigate-crits/161800#161800&quot;&gt;mitigating the effects of critical hits&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of them's about D&amp;amp;D - the first one is admittedly kind of cheating, because it was inspired by a recurring theme I saw in D&amp;amp;D questions and I thought it would help to share my perspective about a similar thing that happened in Dungeon World. The second one's about Genesys. Both of them were properly system tagged, and both of them have two deleted answers that gave a curt but correct answer to the question as though it was about D&amp;amp;D 5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't speak for any of those four answerers. I don't know what they were thinking about how the site operated or how questions worked. All I know is that since they were downvoted and their answers deleted, none of them have put questions or answers on the site, and I feel guilty about accidentally tricking two of them, one of whom joined the site to give an answer, into eating downvotes and deletes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we require a system tag for questions that are about system rules rather than the social activity of playing an RPG, then we can at least say to people who are answering a question &amp;quot;one of these tags will be the game's system; please don't answer the question if you don't know the system&amp;quot;. If we require the querent to add a system tag rather than some helpful editor with the best intentions -- well, I mean, that's here already, and if it wasn't, would I have had to strip a dnd-5e tag from my question with even more &amp;quot;I only play games you've never heard of&amp;quot; swagger?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just worry that if we let it be assumed that questions are about dnd-5e and that be how the site works, then people &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; going to assume questions are about dnd-5e even more than they already are right now, and people who want to ask questions about other systems are going to have to, well, either proactively confront that assumption or lash out with downvotes and reversions after the fact, and neither of those options seems like a friendly thing to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-07T22:00:05.787" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-07T22:49:19.773" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The endless arguments across Meta show that there are problems no matter what policy is used. These problems are caused because questions that should have system tags do not have them.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can maintain the policy and people will go against it when they add a screamingly obvious system tag and are told not to do so, resulting in irritation and upset for users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can change the policy and people will go against it when system tags are incorrectly edited in, resulting in irritation and upset for users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I could support further why each possible policy results in issues but if the countless Metas and this post are not evidence enough I really don't know what could be)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Reduce the number of questions that should have system tags but don't&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think something being ignored is the fact that &lt;strong&gt;a policy is only needed if there are questions which should have system tags and yet the tags are missing.&lt;/strong&gt; This is why I believe that what we should &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; be doing, instead of arguing circles about a policy and whether we should re-re-re-re-revisit said policy, is to better convey the importance of a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We should make it clearer to new askers that mentioning the exact system is going to be a requirement for having their question answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;We tell new users to take the tour, yet the tour doesn't mention the current policy about explicit system specification. This should be changed, or else we're going to keep running into this problem with newer users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is already some discussion of this: &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7681&quot;&gt;Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, but unfortunately, for the past while, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9591&quot;&gt;we could not do anything about the situation&lt;/a&gt;. But given &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344513&quot;&gt;the recent change to the Ask A Question page&lt;/a&gt;, I believe this is an avenue once again worth pursuing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I would propose is some sort of change to the Ask A Question page so that users are more directly aware of the importance of system tags, or are nudged, in some way, to include a system tag, if it is applicable to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, and I cannot stress this enough, &lt;em&gt;not every question needs a system tag;&lt;/em&gt; there are plenty of questions throughout the stack that are on player dynamics, gm-techniques, and other social (or at least non-mechanical) matters and these &lt;em&gt;should not be required to have a system tag.&lt;/em&gt; If the Ask A Question page emphasized system tags is should be sure to note that such tags are helpful &lt;em&gt;if (and only if) the question is directly about or deeply rooted in a certain TTRPG.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2020-03-08T09:19:35.893" LastActivityDate="2020-03-08T09:19:35.893" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9817" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9802" CreationDate="2020-03-08T17:30:49.880" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://writing.codidact.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Kp10z.png&quot; alt=&quot;Learn to write for RPG at Writers Q&amp;amp;A!&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51904" LastEditorUserId="51904" LastEditDate="2020-03-09T19:12:59.783" LastActivityDate="2020-03-09T19:12:59.783" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9818" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-10T08:40:06.617" Score="3" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166105/sources-for-benchmarks-of-prices&quot;&gt;this question about sources for price benchmarks for typical items/services&lt;/a&gt; closed as off-topic. I would like to request either one of two actions, or an explanation of the logic behind what seems to me to be an inconsistent treatment of between similar questions. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The inconsistency I see is that questions other campaign settings which happen to be bigger franchises with multiple games and non-game materials are considered OK. E.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/forgotten-realms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;forgotten-realms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;forgotten-realms&lt;/a&gt; gets used for lore questions about FR, even though FR comes with multiple games (AD&amp;amp;D2, 3, 4...) and non-game works (novels etc.), and people asking questions don't tie themselves to a specific game set within the setting; similarly, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traveller&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traveller&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traveller&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/56532/i-desire-a-tool-with-which-to-map-the-void&quot;&gt;this question about a mapping tool&lt;/a&gt; that's not tied to a specific game set within it, but has stayed open and received answers. Yet apparently I did a faux pas by asking a lore question about Star Wars. What fundamental difference am I missing about my question? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is no difference, then I'd also like to request that my question be reopenen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question is definitely off-topic and non-openable, then I would request a migration as hinted at by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166105/sources-for-benchmarks-of-prices#comment441840_166105&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166105/sources-for-benchmarks-of-prices#comment441843_166105&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; upvoted comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50419" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-10T08:50:40.473" LastActivityDate="2020-03-10T11:15:15.103" Title="Star Wars Lore: a Request for Explanation, and Either Migration or Reopening" Tags="|support|specific-question|on-topic|migration|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9818" CreationDate="2020-03-10T11:10:43.620" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've reopened the question and left the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Reopened. This is a question about a genuine tabletop RPG setting. If folks can ask about the Forgotten Realms in the scope of RPG play (but no specific RPG), they can do the same about The Galaxy Far, Far Away. RPG players will give a better, different, or more specific answer about TGFFA issues because they will be context-aware as to this information's functional purpose, as opposed to it merely being trivia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm concerned the question may have some other scope issues, but it may not. I'll leave that to others to work out. For this issue though, it is on topic to ask about TGFFA lore here in the scope of RPG gameplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-10T11:15:15.103" LastActivityDate="2020-03-10T11:15:15.103" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9820" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9821" CreationDate="2020-03-10T17:07:22.033" Score="5" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/targeting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;targeting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;targeting&lt;/a&gt; can be a very general tag, because basically nearly every spell/attack etc. involves a target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we only be applying &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/targeting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;targeting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;targeting&lt;/a&gt; when the querent specifically mentions targeting? Or is it applicable for whenever an answer can use it? Or when an answer does use it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples of recent questions where it was added that prompted this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115360/can-destroy-water-completely-dehydrate-a-person&quot;&gt;Can destroy water completely dehydrate a&#xA;person?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165891/are-there-any-spells-that-can-damage-a-creature-in-another-creatures-stomach&quot;&gt;Are there any spells that can damage a creature in another&#xA;creature's&#xA;stomach?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above may very well need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/targeting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;targeting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;targeting&lt;/a&gt;, but especially the first one seemed to be more about the overall effect and resolution and not a question about targeting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-10T21:45:15.867" LastActivityDate="2020-03-10T21:45:15.867" Title="When should we apply the [targeting] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9821" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9820" CreationDate="2020-03-10T18:10:10.020" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;help page&lt;/a&gt; on tagging:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question.&#xA;  Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be&#xA;  able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined&#xA;  categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every tag, this one being no exception, should be used when whatever topic is being described by that tag is &lt;em&gt;core&lt;/em&gt; to the question being asked. This is because the purpose of a tag is to make questions having to do with that topic easier to find by experts and other seekers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we start adding tags when they are only tangentially related, then that tag becomes noisier and less useful to someone using that tag to find things about, for example, targeting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9723/what-tags-should-questions-get/9724#9724&quot;&gt;this other answer&lt;/a&gt; I wrote that touches on a similar question, with a bit more emphasis on how it relates to system tags specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically relating to these two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165891/are-there-any-spells-that-can-damage-a-creature-in-another-creatures-stomach&quot;&gt;Are there any spells that can damage a creature in another creatures stomach?&lt;/a&gt;, by my reading, could very well be phrased as &quot;Are there any spells that can target a creature in another creature's stomach?&quot;. The querent is asking about spells damaging creatures specifically with the concern that targeting them will be difficult and even cites the targeting rules for it. So it seems an appropriate description of the topic of that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115360/can-destroy-water-completely-dehydrate-a-person&quot;&gt;Can destroy water completely dehydrate a person?&lt;/a&gt; I would not have added the tag here, personally. This question is asking about a specific effect can be achieved by casting it on a human. It's not asking whether that person is targetable or not and doesn't seem to concern itself with targeting in any way. It can probably be safely removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-03-10T18:50:15.597" LastActivityDate="2020-03-10T18:50:15.597" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9822" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11230" CreationDate="2020-03-11T11:56:19.170" Score="15" ViewCount="690" Body="&lt;p&gt;The stack exchange network recently got a new question page (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9795/52137&quot;&gt;our meta post&lt;/a&gt; which links to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/344513/681403&quot;&gt;MSE post&lt;/a&gt;). With it comes an expansion of customization for the individual site (which needs to be implemented by a Community Manager, who will do that following a meta on the site). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions being posted without specifying the system in question is a long standing issue, and how to address them once posted has been much discussed. Most recently in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/52137&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; which included &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9816/52137&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; suggesting to preempt the posting by adding guidance to the new ask page. (I don't believe this will solve that issue, but should reduce the number of cases). So now it is time for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What guidance, changes, additions, and/or warnings do we want to add to the new ask a question page, to help new users specify what system they are asking about?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The list of customizable fields is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/344513/681403&quot;&gt;summarized by JNat in the MSE post&lt;/a&gt; under the &quot;What's per-site customizable, and what's the procedure to get it live?&quot; heading. Perhaps of particular interest to this discussion is the welcome modal, the draft your question sidebar and the how to tag popup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="2973" LastEditDate="2020-09-25T22:22:18.157" LastActivityDate="2020-09-25T22:22:18.157" Title="New ask page: How do we want to use it to help new users specify their system?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|game-systems|user-interface|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9822" CreationDate="2020-03-12T09:46:19.590" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wish it were possible to have mandatory tags, like in meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In meta, you &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; specify one of the dark tags (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/discussion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;discussion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;discussion&lt;/a&gt;) to be able to post it at all, unlike the lighter &amp;quot;normal tags&amp;quot; (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/user-interface&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;user-interface&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;user-interface&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we could have all system tags (I guess we'd need to include tags that are used in place of specific system tags in some cases, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;, as well as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; for when a system tag really doesn't apply) marked as dark mandatory tags, that would be great, but I doubt such a thing is possible on the main site (or at least, isn't something we can customise, and requesting such a feature would likely prove to be a waste of our time, because it won't happen).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related declined old meta from Arqade on &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1651&quot;&gt;making a set of tags special&lt;/a&gt; (thanks @Someone_Evil).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an alternative suggestion, I know there are warnings that appear when you have a certain tag selected (e.g. the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9754/35259&quot;&gt;this warning&lt;/a&gt;). Is it possible to have such a warning when &lt;em&gt;no&lt;/em&gt; tags are selected, or when a subset of tags are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; present?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That way, although it would be somewhat overkill, we could have a rule such that a warning is shown &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; you have a system tag (this does mean it would need to be updated every time someone created a new tag for a system, but on the other hand, it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; just a warning, meaning a question can still be posted without &amp;quot;obeying&amp;quot; this &amp;quot;rule&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, such a warning &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; (occasionally) make a new user stop before using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag, but if they just don't pick anything, no warnings appear, so no need to stop and consider. So long as they slap any old tag in there, they can post. If there's a &amp;quot;negative rule&amp;quot; in place, at least the warning is there straight away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344513/the-new-ask-page-is-now-live-on-the-network#comment1155256_344513&quot;&gt;it looks like this isn't possible either&lt;/a&gt;, judging by the response @Someone_Evil got from @JNat♦:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a bit unclear what the limits of &amp;quot;regex based&amp;quot; tag warnings are. Of specific interest: would it be possible to show a specific warning if the question isn't tagged with one of a set of tags (or include phrases in the body)? (I'm thinking of system tags for RPG.SE, which are often missing from new askers.) – Someone_Evil Mar 8 at 1:00&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Guidance like the example you're suggesting, @Someone_Evil, should go in the &amp;quot;how to tag&amp;quot; dialogue, shown in screenshots 2 and 3. Checking for the absence of tags isn't, as far as I'm aware, something we do anywhere (other than Meta sites). – JNat♦ yesterday&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I've got nothing. I don't think we can ever solve this problem with the current Ask A Question screen and the customisation limitations we have. New users will always just not read the various notices we put there and will post whatever they want without tagging it properly, because they won't know (unless they read all the various help boxes that are within our customisation) that we require them to specify a system tag (for questions where one is relevant, e.g. rules clarification questions, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T10:51:04.467" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T10:51:04.467" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9824" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9825" CreationDate="2020-03-12T11:23:12.457" Score="2" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's now four on the top page:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166055/when-did-artificers-make-their-first-appearance-in-dd-and-how-do-they-differ-b&quot;&gt;Artificers&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166176/when-did-druids-make-their-first-appearance-in-dd-and-how-do-they-differ-betwe&quot;&gt;Druids&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166263/when-did-rangers-make-their-first-appearance-in-dd-and-how-do-they-differ-betw&quot;&gt;Rangers&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166051/when-did-warlocks-make-their-first-appearance-in-dd-and-how-do-they-differ-betw&quot;&gt;Warlocks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first line of the help page states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no problem to solve here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're fun research questions that engage the community, but can we throttle them to one a week?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="58991" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-12T18:01:18.143" LastActivityDate="2020-03-12T18:01:18.143" Title="Can we slow down with the &quot;when did X appear and how did they differ between editions&quot; style questions?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9825" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9824" CreationDate="2020-03-12T13:06:22.340" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I see no reason to&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are interesting! In fact, I just awarded a bounty to aaron9eee for starting them up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have always had and allowed questions about lore, history of Subject X across editions, etc. This is no way different and I personally find them interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't like them, downvote if it makes sense for you. Otherwise, just ignore them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spacing them out a day apart I think is more than reasonable. It gives time for other questions to feed into the active queue and for new questions to come in on top in the new queue. But I don't see a reason to space it out further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-12T13:06:22.340" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9826" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions and issues relating to badges, earning them, and the privileges associated with gold tag badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9827" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" Score="0" Body="For questions and issues relating to badges, earning them, and the privileges associated with gold tag badges." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:12:05.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9828" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about privileges on Stack Exchange and how they work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges&quot;&gt;See this help page for a list of privileges and their corresponding reputation thresholds.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9829" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" Score="0" Body="For questions about privileges on Stack Exchange and how they work. See this help page for a list of privileges and their corresponding reputation thresholds: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T04:14:32.430" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9830" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-13T17:07:07.233" Score="18" ViewCount="364" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's fairly well known that homebrew is a rather... contentious topic on this stack. From what I've noticed during my short time here, it looks like homebrew questions get a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9093/why-do-my-questions-about-homebrew-content-get-downvoted&quot;&gt;significantly higher number of downvotes&lt;/a&gt; compared to other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I understand &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; people generally dislike homebrew content, I do wonder whether some of the &quot;homebrew-hate&quot; goes beyond the guidelines described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8122/56975&quot;&gt;this meta post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I can gather, it seems that homebrew is typically downvoted due to a lack of effort of lack of research. However, I often see homebrew questions, that, while being &lt;em&gt;poorly balanced&lt;/em&gt;, nonetheless demonstrate a clear enough effort that they don't deserve a downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most recent example is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166329/is-this-way-of-the-unmastered-monk-subclass-overpowered-if-so-by-how-much&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Demonstrates a high level understanding of how Monks are balanced around budgeting Ki points.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has a strong thematic&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has a stated goal (wanting to &quot;feel like Yojimbo&quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, as demonstrated by the answers, the question is guilty of unbalanced numbers and is somewhat ignorant of the general style of 5e features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But these are precisely the kinds of problems that homebrew-review should try to fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;should poorly balanced homebrew be considered low-effort or unresearched&lt;/strong&gt;, and are they deserving of negative response they always seem to get? I fail to see how this stack can educate new homebrewers if each of their questions are met with derision and scorn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll admit that I have a soft-spot for these kind of posts as I remember my first steps into homebrewing being rife with exactly the same kind of problems, and I wonder whether I would have continued if I had been met with the same response as they.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56975" LastEditorUserId="56975" LastEditDate="2020-03-16T16:26:46.643" LastActivityDate="2020-03-20T04:22:40.063" Title="Is poorly balanced homebrew considered &quot;low-effort&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9830" CreationDate="2020-03-13T17:34:38.157" Score="18" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Homebrew review is a &quot;show your work&quot; type problem.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew content creation does not necessarily require a master's understanding of the underlying system.  While experienced designers to produce better results, we should not discourage those with limited experience or foresight from trying to create new things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew review is important because designing good homebrew content is hard for solo authors. Designers may overlook their own biases, or there may be flaws that aren't apparent but could emerge in gameplay.  An eager author could spend honest effort and research, possibly learning the system and trying different approaches; yet if the final product is unbalanced or bad, then it's difficult for a reviewer to see how they reached that point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When someone asks for a homebrew review, it's critically important that they &lt;strong&gt;show their work&lt;/strong&gt;. What did they intend to make? What's the basis or justification behind their design decisions? Why is some feature implemented one way and not another?  Have they tested it or compared it against existing material?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other StackExchange sites apply similar standards for code review questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the final result is poorly balanced, but the author has provided explanation for why and how they reached that point, then it's a sign of effort.  The proof of work also lets the reviewers understand the model and provide better feedback on how to improve it, such as suggesting better ways to achieve the original design goals, or challenging why certain elements don't work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Showing the work can also provide evidence of a lack of effort. Consider the cases of homebrew content that copy-and-pastes mechanics from other parts of the system (such as a homebrew D&amp;amp;D class that gains features from existing classes). Such work is lazy, but if the author explains their methodology, then at least the reviewers can respond to the author's design choices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of the homebrew review questions on this site (and on other sites) don't provide proof of work. It often seems like someone has a sudden &quot;cool idea&quot;, then haphazardly arranges some rules text, and presents it to strangers as a complete product.  There's no evidence of the motive, process, or metric by which they created it.  Such reviews are along the lines of a &quot;do the thinking for me&quot; question, seemingly lazy and low effort, and the community responds accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2020-03-13T18:16:06.137" LastActivityDate="2020-03-13T18:16:06.137" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9830" CreationDate="2020-03-14T17:46:15.583" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Poorly balanced isn't low effort, but there can be other signs that imply that it is&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all make mistakes, and homebrewing is a really good opportunity for making mistakes. So coming up with and working through an idea is likely not going to result in an immediate success. Which means that a poorly balanced homebrew isn't indicative of low effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The other signs&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when a poorly balanced homebrew is asked and it also has some of the following issues, odds are good that I'll be downvoting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lots of misspellings/bad grammar.&lt;/strong&gt; There is a minimum of effort I like to see in homebrew review request. Especially one that should have gone through several revisions by the querent before posting to us. If they haven't made it clear with minimal errors (again, no one is perfect), then they're already showing that they haven't put that much effort into this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clear mechanics that are way above and beyond the standard.&lt;/strong&gt; This one is harder, as it may be okay as some other official things can seem overpowered when taken out of context. But it also should be somewhat simple for someone to do their own analyses first which should at least highlight potential issues for them (see next bullet.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Missing self-analysis&lt;/strong&gt; For me, this is another big one. I fully expect folks to have done their own analysis first and identified areas that they have concern about. If they haven't done that and they are just asking for everyone's opinion, it very much feels like they're presenting a first or early draft.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, what I &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to see (but rarely do) is a clear explanation of what the goal was, their own analysis and highlighting of problem areas, and a well written draft that shows that the querent has put in their own effort first before coming to us for review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-14T21:41:01.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9833" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9830" CreationDate="2020-03-16T01:26:02.183" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Are you looking for a solution in search of a problem?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say &quot;homebrew questions get a significantly higher number of downvotes compared to other questions&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Except they &lt;strong&gt;don't&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1210928/downvotes-by-tag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;query&lt;/a&gt; shows the number of questions, the number of downvoted questions, the downvote rate, the mean, median and maximum scores by tag for every tag with more than 50 questions (there are 287 such tags) ranked by the downvote rate. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; rank 263, 285 and 254 with 33.4%, 46.8% and 31.8% of these tagged questions attracting downvotes respectively. So they definitely attract more downvotes than most questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They also attract slightly fewer upvotes but more than 98% of these categories do get at least one upvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it's not a lot more. The median number of downvotes is ... 0 - as it is for every tag except &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;. The means are 0.56, 1.16 and 0.70 compared to an overall mean for all tags of 0.41. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On average these tags are attracting about 1 more downvote than the average tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the inherently more speculative nature of these questions, I don't think its a big problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2020-03-20T04:22:40.063" LastActivityDate="2020-03-20T04:22:40.063" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9834" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-16T07:47:36.037" Score="9" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just noticed today that the quote box is not orange, but grey instead. And it's less noticeable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ekTkI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ekTkI.png&quot; alt=&quot;New blockquote&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems dull. At these times we need to color our world with hope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can we get back the old orange blockquote? And with more opaque background.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-16T08:25:57.643" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T08:25:57.643" Title="Can we get back the orange quote formatting?" Tags="|feature-request|formatting|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9830" CreationDate="2020-03-16T16:19:40.980" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;MikeQ brings up a good point that &quot;do the thinking for me questions&quot; should be avoided. I agree with this sentiment, however I think that we should carefully consider whether a question actually fits this description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An inexperienced homebrew designer might simply lack the knowledge to see certain issues with their designs, and while it may be true that they can remediate this by spending hours on research, I don't think that there should be an expectation of master-level homebrew design for every question asked here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless I'm sorely mistaken, RPG stack should be open to people of all levels experience, and it's important to help raise up inexperienced designers instead of grinding them into the ground.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56975" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T16:19:40.980" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9836" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-16T17:21:58.107" Score="3" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a follow-up to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9830/is-poorly-balanced-homebrew-considered-low-effort?noredirect=1#comment32771_9830&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. I'd highly recommend giving it a read before proceeding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm posting this as a new question because DaleM brought up a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9833/56975&quot;&gt;good point&lt;/a&gt; that, in dramatic fashion, left my question in shambles: it turns out that homebrew questions receiving &quot;significantly more downvotes&quot; is an overstatement. No getting around that. I tried to rephrase the question and it ended up looking really rant-y, so I've attempted to rephrase the question in a way that captures the original intent while (hopefully) leading to an effective outcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no denying that homebrew questions on this stack are problematic. We've all seen our fair share of messy homebrew, and I want to make it very clear that I don't want to encourage those kinds of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, Dale M's analysis shows that homebrew-hate is hardly the largest problem that this stack faces. But over the past few months I've seen enough posts from hurt users and a large enough volume of meta questions on the topic that makes it clear that there's &lt;em&gt;room for improvement&lt;/em&gt;, regardless of whether this is &quot;the biggest problem&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I've seen, RPG stack is somewhat over-exuberant in its response to homebrew questions, even those that fit the guidelines established &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8122/56975&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. The basic problem here is that the seemingly default response to poorly-balanced homebrew, regardless of whether the question is adherent to official guidelines, is to blow it away downvotes and scorn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;should there be additional guidelines for poorly balanced homebrew&lt;/strong&gt;? Based on the discussion in the previous question, I feel that there's need for additional guidance to accomplish one of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Establish or expand requirements for homebrew questions, such that the quality of the questions is improved.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or, while this may be somewhat idealistic, encourage a less acidic response to homebrew questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm adding my stance in the answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56975" LastEditorUserId="56975" LastEditDate="2020-03-16T18:30:59.043" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T18:30:59.043" Title="Should there be additional guidelines for poorly-balanced homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9836" CreationDate="2020-03-16T17:36:50.660" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There should be additional guidelines in the community wiki answer for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8122/56975&quot;&gt;asking homebrew-review questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the previous question, MikeQ brought up an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9831/56975&quot;&gt;excellent point&lt;/a&gt; that &lt;strong&gt;the best homebrew questions show their work&lt;/strong&gt;. As such, I think that the community wiki answer for writing good homebrew-review questions should be amended to include a requirement for self-analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would vastly improve the quality of questions for two reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The homebrew designer would have to analyze their own work, which naturally would produce better-balanced homebrew, as the poster would be forced to consider their work from multiple angles.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It would provide reviewers more information on the designer's intent, such that their responses would be better-informed and therefore naturally less vitriolic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56975" LastActivityDate="2020-03-16T17:36:50.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9838" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-18T03:10:02.603" Score="5" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;We often see situations where answers incorporate parts of other answers trying to create complete answers. Here is an extreme example where 2 answers each contain half of the information, and both thank the other answer for the other half: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166418/what-is-the-lowest-cr-creature-that-has-legendary-actions&quot;&gt;What is the lowest CR creature that has Legendary Actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I think it is a good thing that both users were able to submit a contribution, and the overall answers are both stronger for it. In my experience collaboration almost always yields better answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I don't think it's desirable to encourage duplicate answers, and with the focus on this site on &quot;complete answers&quot; and SE's focus on rep gathering, I don't see a clear way to improve the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases like these, which of the following is best practice?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the essentially duplicate answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Merge one into another&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Split them into 2 partial answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some other suggestion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-18T04:41:03.907" LastActivityDate="2020-03-18T16:30:26.950" Title="What is the best way to deal with duplicate answers which reference each other?" Tags="|discussion|answers|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9839" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9838" CreationDate="2020-03-18T16:30:26.950" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Do nothing&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see a reason to intervene or do anything in these cases. If folks want to do this or feel a need, that's fine. Others can downvote or upvote or not vote accordingly based on which answer they like or if they feel another answer doesn't add anything to the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's kind of how the system works, and I'm not sure why there is a need to try and come up with something new or different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-18T16:30:26.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9840" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-19T08:35:57.197" Score="2" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wanted to ask a question that goes against something that some (many? a lot? most?) DMs believe. I thought it would be best to be clear and thorough in explaining why I came to the conclusion I did, then asked the question as &quot;is there something wrong with this?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is the question in question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166563/when-spotting-a-hiding-creature-is-hearing-useful&quot;&gt;When spotting a hiding creature, is hearing useful?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several users pointed out that it might be better to change the question to reflect the title, and cut out 95% of the post and make it an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However to me this has several problems. I am interested only in answers that address the points, however if my question is posted as an answer, there is unlikely to be any discussion of the points on the question. The answer is likely to be downvoted until hidden. Other answers are unlikely to actually address the points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this question be dealt with? I want to know if there is a problem with this logic, I am not interested in a generic copy paste of the rules that doesn't solve anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-19T08:57:18.273" LastActivityDate="2020-03-19T09:37:35.603" Title="How should I handle my question about whether hearing is useful in spotting a hiding creature?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9841" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9840" CreationDate="2020-03-19T09:02:23.883" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Separate argument from explanation.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question contains two things: one is a completely valid question with explaining how this became to be an issue, the second is an answer to the question that builds an argumentative structure that answers the issue. You should separate the argument from the explanation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference is in the intent: an argument attempts to settle whether or not some claim is true, and an explanation attempts to provide understanding of the event.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your conclusions that follow your descriptions, you are using an argumentative structure that tries to convince the reader. This argumentative structure belongs to an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make this more actionable let us look at when your explanation starts to become an argument, this is the first instance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This clearly divides the mechanics:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;You can't hide if you can be clearly seen&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;You have to stay quiet, or you give away your position &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of explaining how you came to understand the issue, you start to make assertions that mean to convince the reader that your way of understanding the issue is correct. You are starting to build an answer with an argument that begs the question. At the end of your argumentative structure, you are asking a question that already assumes that its premises are true (detecting a hiding creature is a purely visual perception check, so you can't detect a hiding creature with hearing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;once again matching up with &lt;strong&gt;our expectation&lt;/strong&gt; that hiding means you&#xA;  aren't making sound. &lt;br&gt;(emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this structure you are hoping to influence the answers to your question. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8610&quot;&gt;Hey I Can Chan&#xA;&lt;/a&gt; points out in their &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9840/how-should-i-handle-my-question-about-whether-hearing-is-useful-in-spotting-a-hi/9841?noredirect=1#comment32808_9840&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Why the resistance to asking something like &lt;em&gt;It seems that the rules&#xA;  technically allow a creature to a remain hidden while making noise,&#xA;  its noise not revealing its location. Do the rules directly address&#xA;  the role of hearing in the stealth process?&lt;/em&gt; and seeing what others&#xA;  say first?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2020-03-19T09:37:35.603" LastActivityDate="2020-03-19T09:37:35.603" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9842" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-19T09:09:24.027" Score="3" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on the most highly upvoted answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/35259&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;, it's pretty clear that this policy is here to stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the things I hate about how the policy works in practice is closing the question as &quot;unclear&quot; (I know they've changed the wording for half the close reasons, but I still think in terms of the old wording), even when the question is blindingly obvious. In cases where the question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; clear, but simply lacks a tag (or other explicit mention of the system) it feels like lying to the user. If there's a whole quote from the D&amp;amp;D 5e DMG, for example, with page numbers and everything, then it is not unclear in the least; it is only for the sake of the policy (and all the reasoning behind that) that it is being closed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether it is &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; to close it is for the other post linked above; I'm just stating facts. In the example above, &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;it is not unclear&lt;/em&gt;, but under our policy, &lt;em&gt;it must be closed anyway&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not arguing for whether it should be closed or not; it must be closed, and that's just how it is, but let's not pretend it's unclear &lt;em&gt;when it isn't&lt;/em&gt;. Let's not pretend it's not obvious &lt;em&gt;when it is&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence I propose, if it is possible, for us to &lt;strong&gt;have a new close reason&lt;/strong&gt;, and when a question comes in that doesn't have a system tag (but needs one), then, unless it's &lt;em&gt;actually unclear&lt;/em&gt; for other reasons, &lt;strong&gt;it should instead be closed as this new reason.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, if we're going to do this, let's do it properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't just a rant (I know I am coming across as a bit ranty; I can't hide that I'm not happy about the policy decision); I also believe it will help the user to understand why their question was closed. Being closed as &quot;unclear&quot;, or whatever the new warning says, doesn't really tell them anything, especially if their question is actually very well presented and clear besides the lack of a tag/explicit system mention. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, they might have a bunch of comments saying &quot;You need to tell us this and that&quot;, but having a formal close reason:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;more effectively communicates to the user why their question has been closed without even needing to read the comments;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;makes it seem more &quot;official&quot; rather than just being picked on by users (for new users who may interpret it that way), and;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;we can include in the close reason warning a link to some meta question or help page (if we're allowed to edit the help centre at all) explaining what they need to do (which might also help prevent the user from simply saying &quot;5e&quot; in a comment or edit, which still isn't good enough, whereas a close reason with links explaining what is needed might be taken more seriously.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think having its own close reason would make this policy work better, if we must have it at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this possible, and if so, is there any reason why this would actually be a bad idea?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-03-19T09:20:09.177" LastActivityDate="2020-03-19T09:20:09.177" Title="Can we get a new question close reason for this new policy?" Tags="|feature-request|tags|policy|game-systems|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ClosedDate="2020-03-19T09:20:49.003" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-03-20T07:53:40.190" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Consider how policies like these are perceived to new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's confusing. This isn't how other SE sites work, this isn't how tags are supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Claiming that mentioning &quot;Adventurer's League&quot; and &quot;Sage Advice&quot; isn't enough to determine the system is hostile, their first experience with the community brushes on sealioning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We seem robotic and cold. Pasting some copypasta isn't a great way to engage anyone, ever. Even if you are very warm &quot;I know it seems 99.99% obvious but can you confirm you are talking about 5e?&quot; comes across as soulless when you finish with &quot;our policy requires explicit confirmation and a tag&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It gives the (perhaps correct) impression that this community only barely tolerates D&amp;amp;D. Having a multitude of policies that are aimed at making life more difficult, or not better, for D&amp;amp;D questions gives the distinct impression that they just aren't welcome here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It makes us seem clueless and incompetent. How can users trust the word of a community which doesn't even know what AL or Sage Advice is?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Most users don't read meta, out of those that do read it many don't seem very interested. Even if a question isn't tagged, it will probably get answers. How is a new user supposed to take it when one clueless person is asking them if AL is D&amp;amp;D 5e while another is giving them an answer?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's convoluted, now new users need to go learn a handful of policies.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It makes it seem like the community is afraid of being wrong. There is a huge anti-disagreement vibe here. It's ok to want people to get along, but going to such an extent that you won't guess even when it seems extremely likely doesn't feel safe.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Revert to the basic site mechanics&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags were never meant to be used this way, they exist to help experts find questions they can answer. If the question is unclear, comments exist to ask clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking someone &quot;what system are you talking about?&quot; is simpler, faster, cleaner, easier, friendlier, and more understandable. Treating people like humans is all that is needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately the problem of people answering questions that are not clear is a non-issue, and it is unpreventable due to the way SE is set up to encourage it happening. The best we can do is not dump extra baggage on top.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2020-03-20T07:53:40.190" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9844" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-03-22T18:10:31.613" Score="13" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;With the current events we're all dealing with, we have a lot of folks transitioning from face-to-face gaming to virtual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Playing virtually is not new to our community nor is it new to many many people, but these questions about how to do so seem like they may not be appropriate for our platform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But maybe they are! Either way, I think we need to figure out if these questions are really on-topic for us here. I know we all want to help, and many of us have great experience here, but ultimately, how someone sets up their [virtual] table and what tools work for them seem inherently opinion-based or that these are shopping requests (even they they kinda aren't.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem I see is that many of the questions are very generic and broad. Effectively variations of &quot;How do I play a role-playing game online.&quot; Which is akin to &quot;How do I play a role-playing game in real life?&quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or, it's asking about which tools to use or are best, which are more like &quot;shopping&quot; or opinion-based. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the need right now is big and should we be treating these questions without our usual rigor? I mostly don't want questions getting shut down because of the way we do things I'd we can actually help. But these do seem off-topic in a normal situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-03-23T01:54:41.117" LastActivityDate="2020-03-23T17:59:47.317" Title="How should we handle questions about transitioning to virtual tabletop during COVID-19?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9845" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9844" CreationDate="2020-03-23T16:51:53.677" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I dropped it as a comment, and then in chat, but really it should be an answer. Be warned: I'm suggesting we do a little bit of work, at the same time as I'm overloaded with some wfh/homeschooling things and don't know that I'll actually be able to help out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Post a &amp;quot;I need help quickly transitioning to online because of CoViD19/pandemic restrictions. Where do I go?&amp;quot; meta Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a local example, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/23970&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;. It's probably the single meta post I link most often, and is our single most-viewed meta question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a network example, in academia.se's &lt;a href=&quot;https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4680/120443&quot;&gt;I need help adapting my academic workflow to the COVID-19/coronavirus crisis – where do I start?&lt;/a&gt;. ← That's been &lt;strong&gt;super&lt;/strong&gt; helpful to me, a teacher, quickly having to convert my spring classes to remote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we follow the academia model, it seems to me like we could make one answer a bunch of mainsite links to highly-voted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;online-roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;online-roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; questions, perhaps going from broad/general → more-specific issues, preferably with a bit of annotation as to how each was helpful to someone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another answer would be links to offsite resources, preferably with similar flow and annotations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And a third should (I think) probably be &amp;quot;you might just need to talk it out and hear what others are doing&amp;quot; to validate/affirm people's worry about doing this, and to point them to forums and [chat].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's ^^ probably not the only way to do it, just the first way that occurred to me. I'm throwing it out there to seed the ground, as it were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Why&lt;/em&gt; do this?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;full&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; of people who want to help other gamers. And the handful of overbroad/unfocused &amp;quot;I'm going online, what do I do?&amp;quot; questions we've gotten recently are likely the advance notice of a large wave coming. Right now I think it's right that we've closed those questions. &lt;strong&gt;And&lt;/strong&gt; I would love it if, when closing questions like that, it were easy to also drop a comment-link that said &amp;quot;we can't really handle this as is for $reasons, but [here]'s a collection of a couple-dozen things we think could help. Happy gaming!&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Many people are looking to their normal gaming groups for a sense of normalcy in a turbulent time. Let's help them alleviate any anxiety associated with that. Others are &lt;strong&gt;coming&lt;/strong&gt; to the hobby now; let's make that transition as easy as possible.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-23T17:59:47.317" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9846" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9847" CreationDate="2020-03-27T15:11:12.447" Score="8" ViewCount="229" Body="&lt;p&gt;A while ago, I asked “It is reasonable to ask a question that you don’t actually need answer to?” &#xA;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7531/is-it-reasonable-to-ask-a-question-that-you-dont-actually-need-an-answer-to&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) and the response was negative: no, you shouldn’t ask a question unless you have it as a real issue personally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that case... what is the community’s perspective on the practice of ‘answering your own question’? Is it ever helpful? Is there ever a circumstance where we should do it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39946" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-27T07:49:25.707" LastActivityDate="2020-11-27T07:49:25.707" Title="Answering own questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9846" CreationDate="2020-03-27T15:37:01.203" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answering your own question when you've found the answer is fine, and even encouraged: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/13/self-learner&quot;&gt;there's even a badge for it!&lt;/a&gt; The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/ask&quot;&gt;Ask Question&lt;/a&gt; page has an “Answer your own question” checkbox available for a reason. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally it's received very well in the following situations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You have asked a question about an actual problem you're dealing with. Soon after asking it, or perhaps even a long time later (hours, weeks, months), you've conducted more research and discovered the answer—perhaps an existing (but unsatisfactory) answer pointed you in the right direction. You come back to share the solution and your findings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A great example of this happening is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64292/1204&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the best magic item for punching monsters in their stupid faces?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You ran into an actual problem, and before even answering it here, you figured out the answer. The problem is nontrivial (it's not e.g. a straightforward book lookup),  and you think other people will reasonably run into this same problem in practice and would benefit from what you learned. You come here to write a question about your problem and you also write an answer with the solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A great example of this case is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135547/1204&quot;&gt;Does the tower shield&amp;#39;s table entry trump the text?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever you write your self-answer, make sure you're still providing a complete, thorough answer, appropriately cited. Pretend the person that asked the question is someone completely different to yourself, for example, and you're writing it for them. In reality you're writing it for the numerous internet denizens who need your expert guidance. (Never ever write “btw everyone I figured it out, it's this” with no citation; that will not go well.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you ask a question to self-aswer (per that second bullet point), write the question how you would if you didn't already know the answer. Explain your confusion and difficulty. Channel what you were thinking a few minutes or a few days ago when this problem was initially coming up, before you solved it for yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accept your own answer whenever you're ready. (With the caveat that the system won't let you accept your own answer within 24 hours of a question.) Be open to the idea someone will in fact have a better, more correct answer than your own—strongly consider accepting that one if it arrives and answers your question to your satisfaction. Be open to the idea you might have made mistakes! Be warned: people downvote incorrect answers, and incorrect &lt;em&gt;accepted&lt;/em&gt; answers more severely, and incorrect accepted &lt;em&gt;self-answers&lt;/em&gt; yet more severely still.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still avoid creating a self-Q&amp;amp;A trivial issues you've never really needed an answer to. “How much does a longsword cost?” is a trivially resolvable question in D&amp;amp;D and would get downvoted no matter who asked it, doubly so if you posted it as a self-Q&amp;amp;A.  “How can I safely pick up Baal's Longsword of the Everflame without combusting?” might be a really good question if anyone at all asked it if the solution isn't obvious, and it will still be a good question if you ask and self-answer it, and it may be very interesting to read how that works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further reading on this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/self-answering&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;self-answering&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;self-answering&lt;/a&gt; tag here on meta.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3141/what-should-i-consider-before-posting-a-question-and-answer-it-myself&quot;&gt;What should I consider before posting a question and answer it myself&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9372/are-self-answer-questions-still-allowed&quot;&gt;Are self-answer questions still allowed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-03-28T12:33:23.653" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9848" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9624" CreationDate="2020-04-01T05:16:30.680" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Make a generalized question with a canonical answer, then link all new questions of this type to it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that this is typically what's done about these sorts of things, and evidently small variations of this question keep getting asked regarding different class/level combinations - so I'd suggest to make a single generalized version of this question like &amp;quot;How do spellcasting slots work with a multiclassed character in DnD 5e&amp;quot; and self-answer it with a canonical answer discussing how multiclassing spell slots work for a character in DnD 5e. That way, we can close any new questions of this type as duplicates while leaving the old ones alone unless someone bumps them to the front page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-01T05:16:30.680" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9850" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9805" CreationDate="2020-04-03T12:35:20.353" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What the policy says&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I have gathered, the main point of this policy is to not edit a question to give it a system tag when the system is not 100% clear from the context. This is merely a specification of the generally accepted fact that editors should try to enhance a post without changing its message. Apparently, with no source I can find, people started applying the sentence &quot;Don't guess the system!&quot; to answers as well (even though that was not hinted at in the original meta question or any of its answers). So at this point, my best guess on what policy we are talking about is &quot;Every question should state what system it refers to and if there are questions that do not do that, they should be commented on, asking for clarification, rather than being answered or edited assuming a system.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The reasons for this policy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other answers have elaborated many good reasons for this policy and I don't intend to echo their arguments. I do want, however, to highlight the principles that, in my opinion, form the basis of most of this argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of any policy should be to encourage the desired behavior, encourage (self) improvement and optimize the experience for the people that create the greatest benefit for the community without hurting the ones that honestly try but are still learning or struggling to do so. Obviously guessing and editing will at best make exemplary contributors spend their time to get lazy contributors' questions answered. At worst it baits people into answering with the wrong system in mind. Guessing at an answer will again lead to satisfying answers to poorly asked questions, discouraging the improvement of the question and the self-improvement of the questioner. Guessing systems wrong in answers will again give answers that do not match the intended question and will create a mess especially if people guess different systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being more active on StackOverflow and Manga-SE, I can assure you that RPG-SE is a really fortunate community with high-quality questions - presumably thanks to this policy and similar ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The back and forth about politeness&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different answers have assumed different things to be offensive or polite against new contributors. Is it rude to edit the question to include the 99.9% obvious system, overriding the author's agency? Or is it worse to copy-paste a message requesting clarification? I don't know and I don't care. People on the internet will get offended one way or the other. As long as people follow Netiquette, it really is the community's ruling how to handle situations and politeness has always been what the majority of relevant people thought it to be. If RPG-SE decides to have a policy, I consider following it to be polite and not following it to be rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Don't revert the policy, reinforce it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I mentioned, RPG-SE is blessed with a very high rate of questions with decent quality. This is in part thanks to the fact that, unlike StackOverflow, RPG-SE does not face the challenge of people trying to get their homework solved for them - but there are other problems and other SE-communities do not share that problem either. RPG-SE is a tidy place and this policy helps to keep it that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of the 50 most recently active questions right now, all but one have either a specific system tagged or the &quot;system-agnostic&quot;-tag and the one question without system tag is closed and unlikely to be re-opened. Given that this policy is this successful in ensuring a high rate of questions following basic quality, I don't see a reason to revert it. Since it would be bad practice to name the system in the question but not adding the tag and even worse to not mention the System at all, I think that ideally, every single question should have a system tagged and that this should find its way into the general rules of RPG-SE. Add it to the &quot;how to ask&quot; page, add a new flag type &quot;requires system&quot; or even enforce a system tag (including &quot;system-agnostic&quot;, &quot;multiple&quot;, or similar ones) before even allowing a question to be asked, if implementing that is within reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="56141" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-04-06T07:05:04.470" LastActivityDate="2020-04-06T07:05:04.470" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9851" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9852" CreationDate="2020-04-07T16:51:16.267" Score="6" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the question — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/167248/&quot;&gt;How would combat work without opportunity attacks?&lt;/a&gt; It virtually asks &quot;why games need opportunity attacks and what happens if we remove them&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was asked in context of D&amp;amp;D 5e, thus attracted answers and comments about OA-based game features in 5e (like Sentinel feat, etc), which would become less effective or completely useless without OAs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But these answers are obvious — there are OA mechanics in game, also there are features based on these mechanics, so if we remove OAs these features becomes meaningless. I actually wanted to ask another thing — why OAs are there in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I've edited the question in order to make it more system-agnostic. Downvotes and VTCs appeared, presumably because it is a question about designers' intent now, therefore off-topic. But I don't think the reason for OAs is a particular designer's intent. OAs are ubiquitous, so I guess there must be an objective reason for them to exist in TRPGs and wargames.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the main problem with this question and how can I fix it to attract more high-quality answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T19:14:07.997" LastActivityDate="2020-04-08T13:19:44.733" Title="Should I narrow down this particular question about combat without opportunity attacks, or leave it as broad as it is?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|game-systems|question-scope|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9851" CreationDate="2020-04-07T17:16:30.857" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your edit to make it system-agnostic &lt;em&gt;substantially&lt;/em&gt; changes the scope of the question. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6519/1204&quot;&gt;When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?&lt;/a&gt; says this should be a new question, not an edit. Accordingly I've rolled that question back to revision 16, the version that was about D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Originally you ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;It seems the game developers consider this particular trigger as the most important one. To my knowledge, many wargames uses the similar rule. So what happens if we remove it? Why do we need it, in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Implicitly this question is &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; about D&amp;amp;D 5e. You are &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; asking why D&amp;amp;D 5e specifically needs opportunity attacks and what happens if we remove them &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; from D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You removed the last sentence and replaced it with this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What games need it and why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides being a completely different question with completely different answers, this has gone from being about one game to being about hundreds of them. While the first question needed a deep dive into D&amp;amp;D 5e expertise specifically and very little else, this now asks people to dive into an entire large body of our hobby. Remember we've got thousands of games, and no small share of them are tactical combat games derived directly from Chainmail and D&amp;amp;D if not cloning one of those games outright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Not to mention that “list all the games that [in your assessment] need opportunity attacks and explain why” is not a request our site can handle.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-04-08T13:19:44.733" LastActivityDate="2020-04-08T13:19:44.733" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9853" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-04-07T17:33:05.387" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the matter of question scope (e.g. whether a question is too broad or too narrow), particularly when the scope of a question changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T23:54:05.407" LastActivityDate="2020-04-07T23:54:05.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9854" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-04-07T17:33:05.387" Score="0" Body="For questions about the matter of question scope (e.g. whether a question is too broad or too narrow), particularly when the scope of a question changes." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-04-07T23:54:05.407" LastActivityDate="2020-04-07T23:54:05.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9822" CreationDate="2020-04-08T09:27:34.887" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let's at least throw the basic &amp;quot;Make sure to specify your system&amp;quot; on there&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are three spots on the new ask page which I think can benefit from telling (new) users to specify their system (and I think we'd rather have it up once too many).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, as new users will see it, in the welcome modal (italicized here are the bits we can't change, which I've included for context):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You’re ready to ask your first question and the community is here to help! To get you the best answers, we’ve provided some guidance:&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a thousand RPGs out there, and we cater to all of them. Therefore, it is important that you clearly state which system and edition you are asking about, if appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Before you post, search the site to make sure your question hasn’t been answered.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, in the &amp;quot;Draft your question&amp;quot; sidebar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community is here to help you with questions about role-playing games. Make sure to specify which game (name and edition) you are asking about, provide details, and share research with your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as tags are our favourite way for systems to be specified, in the &amp;quot;How to tag&amp;quot; guidance (which pops up when you click on the question mark), this – or a version thereof – should be the first bullet point, in addition to the default three:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make sure you include the system tag for the game system you are asking about (if appropriate and if the tag exists)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-02T08:28:06.540" LastActivityDate="2020-09-02T08:28:06.540" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2020-04-22T18:35:07.660" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Biggest Wheel of Temporary Cheeae&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/112247/22566&quot;&gt;This question is about getting the most Temp HP possible&lt;/a&gt;; it includes some absurd answers about tiny creatures and Tarrasques, as well as some answers that are achievable via normal means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-22T18:35:07.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9858" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9859" CreationDate="2020-04-25T18:22:13.863" Score="14" ViewCount="241" Body="&lt;p&gt;Frequently new users will have statements in their posts like &quot;I'm new here&quot;, &quot;Rookie DM here&quot;, &quot;This might be a stupid question&quot;, etc. Like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/168134/38502&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;. Is it ok to edit out these statements? I'm worried that it may come off as rude to users that are unfamiliar with SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38502" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-04-25T21:11:44.543" LastActivityDate="2020-04-25T22:02:06.047" Title="Is it OK to edit out &quot;I'm new here...&quot; statements from a question?" Tags="|discussion|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9858" CreationDate="2020-04-25T21:11:34.067" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't remove important context&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether someone is, by own admission, a new player or gm is important context for a question. Specifically, it helps answerers frame their advice to the kind of querent that is asking. Don't make edits which removes, hides, or obscures this context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To identify things which are better of removed, try if it retracts from the question. There's no hard line or test to see if something retracts, so it'll be down to a case by case judgement. Stating that you are new to the site specifically is virtually never needed as this is already handled by the new contributor frame around the user mark (which stays for a week following your first post). One of the big things we are editing/polishing posts for are future readers, and you being a new poster here isn't relevant to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using your case as a case study:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;I'm a very new DM&amp;quot; statement at the start is useful. It should stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The rest of that disclaimer isn't necessary, so could be pruned. However, it flows from the way the querent has decided to state they are a new DM and, as it is a seperate paragraph (and italicised), it is easily skippable. Thus it doesn't really noticeably retract from the question and there's no pressing need to remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Having thanks at the end is also something we generally prefer not having as it distracts from the actual question, but as there's only two words at the end dedicated to it, it isn't enough to warrant an edit just for that. There wouldn't be anything wrong with removing it if you &lt;em&gt;were already making edits to the question&lt;/em&gt; (and it doesn't break the flow of the text).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-25T22:02:06.047" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9860" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9862" CreationDate="2020-04-27T17:51:51.340" Score="4" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen this problem many times on this site, but the most recent question, which also incentivized me to write this meta post, is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168188/do-effects-that-activate-on-a-critical-hit-still-activate-when-the-hit-is-agains&quot;&gt;Do effects that activate on a critical hit still activate when the hit is against an opponent wearing adamantine armor?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;It might actually be one of the more valid questions of this kind, but the basic issue is still there in my opinion: someone poses a question that has a simple and straightforward answer, which requires quoting no more than 2-3 non-hidden, straightforward paragraphs to answer. That being said, I have to admit I may have asked such questions myself in the past, but that doesn't make the issue any less relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question referenced above it's basically: a) here's adamantine armor, which turns crits into normal hits, and b) here's a feature that activates on crits. Does the feature still get triggered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question already includes a quote of the feature b (in this case Great Weapon Master), and the answer basically only adds a quote of the description of adamantine armor, wrapped in an elaborate explanation of the straightforward interpretation. I don't mean to criticize the answer here, there's not really any room for improvement imho.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What bugs me is that this question is answerable by looking at 2 (!) paragraphs in the source books, one for the feat (which OP already quoted) and one for the armor, which I expect OP to have read through if he or she is asking a question about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle this type of question? Since there don't seem to be any close votes, other people don't appear to have noticed a problem with it. Personally, I'm not sure whether it should be closed, and if so, with which closing reason - the existing ones don't really fit, except for &quot;a community-specific reason&quot;, which doesn't seem to have been defined yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason why I think such questions should be closed is that they show either barely any research effort (which is not the case here, OP referenced another question about adamantine armor that doesn't answer this question) or they're sort of a &quot;the books say X, but DO THEY REALLY???&quot; question, where the OP already knows the answer but is hoping for a different one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T22:36:59.417" Title="How should we handle questions with a straightforward answer that only requires basic research?" Tags="|discussion|questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9861" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9860" CreationDate="2020-04-27T18:05:59.177" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Nothing...or downvote them.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People can ask pretty much whatever they want. If it's off-topic or any other standard concern, we can close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But these questions aren't off-topic. They are just poorly researched to start with. And for me, that's generally a downvote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If others like them, or are ambivalent, they can upvote or not vote as they see fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think there is anything more that we can or should do. Vote as your heart/mind directs you, answer if you feel like it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-27T18:05:59.177" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9860" CreationDate="2020-04-27T18:11:10.320" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Vote, answer, or move on.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some days I've seen a question like that and downvoted for &amp;quot;lack of effort.&amp;quot; Some days I jump right in and derive some joy from helping someone sort out a crease in the game's rules. And some days I just don't have the interest in engaging with one more notch-above-basic-understanding (5e, especially) question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do try to keep in mind how &lt;em&gt;spectacularly&lt;/em&gt; bad D&amp;amp;D (in particular, given this case) is at explaining/teaching itself. So over the years I've developed the following classification scheme:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0. All the rules needed to answer this question are on one page of a corebook.&lt;/strong&gt; Often this gets a downvote from me. But often it doesn't: given the organization of D&amp;amp;D--this edition saw EnWorld create &lt;em&gt;its own index&lt;/em&gt;, the PHB index is so bad--I can often muster up some sympathy for even this level of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. All the rules needed to answer this question are on one page of something other than a corebook.&lt;/strong&gt; I don't think I've ever downvoted something like this--all you need s a fellow player doing something in-session that you didn't understand, or your GM telling you that the NPC's a ghostwise halfling and it's very understandable for a querent to end up with a &amp;quot;what-the-what, now?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. The rules needed to answer this question draw from more than one page of any products.&lt;/strong&gt; For me, we're well past downvote-territory, here. There are so many products that not only is it hard to find the right rules to apply, but it takes real expertise to &lt;em&gt;know that there aren't any other rules that you have to worry about interacting!&lt;/em&gt; In my mind, &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; question drawing from more than one page is perfectly deserving of good regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somebody go and write a Mentzer redbox for 5e, already?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-28T02:40:03.770" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9863" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9860" CreationDate="2020-04-27T18:14:51.090" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Closure isn't the appropriate response here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You correctly point out that no close reason really fits, and the reason for that is because there's no real issue with that question as the community or SE has defined it thus far that would necessitate closure as the best response for this type of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason we close questions here is generally, because we can't provide a good and accurate answer that plays nicely within the SE system or if doing so is causing some harm to the community. This can include specifics like not being about RPGs (off topic) or being too opinion-based to fit the SE system. The  community also defines the scope of the site, so another, closely-related, reason would be that the community has, for whatever reason, determined that they do not want to answer such questions. Usually that ties back to the first point in that the questions deemed out-of-scope were causing issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue of being &amp;quot;straightforward&amp;quot; isn't really an issue that warrants closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Straightforward is in the eye of the beholder&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would oppose any kind of movement towards making &amp;quot;simple&amp;quot; questions off-topic for many reasons, not least among them is that we would never be able to agree on what &amp;quot;simple&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;straight-forward&amp;quot; means. (I also personally think there is nothing wrong with such questions, at least not wrong enough to disallow them from the site entirely).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you see as a straightforward question, clearly OP is not seeing the same way (else they would not have put forth the effort to navigate to the site, compose a question, and post it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/782&quot;&gt;Should a question be judged on its level of &amp;quot;expertise&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; touches a bit on this, but in essence, to a beginner, very little is straightforward. And experts may see nuances in even simple-seeming questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What to do? Downvote and move on.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So you've identified a question that seems to be not useful to you. Since closure isn't an option, you're left with voting. And, in fact, this is the tool that is designed to deal with this exact issue as indicated by the downvoting tool tip:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question doesn't show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-04-28T14:10:40.507" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9864" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;This tag is used by staff when sharing concepts in the Discovery phase relating to product or configuration changes. In most cases a direction and/or goal has been established, and there has likely been some amount of time invested into discovery work and research. The post is being presented to the Community for feedback to be taken into consideration. Where possible, the post includes specific questions to help guide Community feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" LastActivityDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9865" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the post shares product or configuration change concepts during the Discovery phase. Open to receiving feedback from the Community preceding implementation." OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" LastActivityDate="2020-04-28T08:51:03.790" Title="product-discovery" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9866" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9860" CreationDate="2020-04-30T23:27:27.423" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The is no such thing as a straightforward answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hypothetical questions with clear, straightforward answers don't get asked because the OP can see the clear, straightforward answer. If an OP has taken the time to write the question then they are asking because the answer is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; clear and straightforward &lt;em&gt;to them!&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Hanlon's razor&lt;/a&gt; applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the answerer's task to lead the poor misguided OP to the clear and straightforward answer and share in their &lt;a href=&quot;https://biblehub.com/john/9-25.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;John 9:25&lt;/a&gt; epiphany - &quot;I was blind but now I see.&quot; Praise be to Stack Exchange!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are all sorts of reasons why people cannot see what is clear and straightforward to you. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You're wrong. A wise person never overlooks the possibility that they might be totally wrong.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP has poor comprehension skills. While clearly all RPGs are written only by the best and most erudite authors ... oh wait, I think I might be falling into the No. 1 reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP has English as a second language.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The OP is suffering from cognitive dissonance - what they read and understand is at odds with the way they think the world can be. Remember, belief cannot move mountains but it can convince people that the mountains moved even when they didn't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-04-30T23:27:27.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9867" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-01T20:54:53.783" Score="2" ViewCount="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168339/does-activating-a-scroll-require-satisfying-the-spells-verbal-and-somatic-compo/168341#168341&quot;&gt;Does activating a scroll require satisfying the spell&amp;#39;s verbal and somatic components?&lt;/a&gt; frames the question in the Title such that &quot;Yes&quot; would mean the exact opposite regarding the question in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it better for clarity to respond &quot;Yes&quot; to the title question or &quot;No&quot; to the question in the description?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6568/should-we-be-answering-the-question-or-the-question-posed-in-the-description&quot;&gt;Should we be answering the question, or the question posed in the description?&lt;/a&gt; is relevant but directed towards general vs specific questions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user60913" LastActivityDate="2020-05-01T21:31:46.627" Title="Should answers be framed in response to the Title or the description?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ClosedDate="2020-05-01T22:01:29.410" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9867" CreationDate="2020-05-01T21:31:46.627" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Firstly, the most important part of any question and answer is the body. So the body of the question should give the problem, and the body of the answer should give a clear answer to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, good titles are useful. They establish a frame, making the body easier to understand (because you know where it is going, or what the key is). The problem is that the question comes with two different frames for the same question. I see two major ways to solve this (non-exhaustive and non-exclusive):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Use non-Yes/No titles. Give the key factual statement as your title/lead in instead. It accomplishes the same result of establishing a frame for your answer, without risking ambiguity from depending on the question's frame. Eg. &quot;Scrolls require V/S components&quot;, &quot;The Wizard is prevented from activating the scroll&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fix the question. Posts on SE are editable, and as long as you are only changeing the Yes/No-frame of the question and not the underlying one, there is no problem. There's no hard rule for which one best or authoritative. Use the one that is the best summary, flows the best and/or is replied to by existing answers (so you're not forcing them to change). If you're unsure which would be best, post a comment suggesting to unify the title and body so they're more in line. That's what comments are for.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-05-01T21:31:46.627" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9869" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9791" CreationDate="2020-05-03T02:41:42.540" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If &quot;Opinion-Based&quot; is a valid reason for closing a question, then that is also a valid reason for likewise treating any opinion-based answers the exact same way. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30200" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-05-04T00:11:29.830" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T00:11:29.830" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9870" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-03T17:59:39.823" Score="3" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168371/does-a-creature-targeted-by-the-charm-person-spell-know-it-was-charmed-if-it-s&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; was recently asked about whether a target of charm who made their save would know that a spell was cast on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had found the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114701/when-does-a-target-know-its-under-the-effects-of-a-charm-enchantment-spell&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; which includes that case of the new question in the body, but not necessarily in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Are there differences if a target fails or succeeds on a save roll?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers don't address that case, but it was in the question and does seem to be what the newer question is asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we remove that part of the question in the older one and leave the new question open or mark as a dupe and possibly bounty the old one to get it fully answered?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-05-04T13:50:25.430" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T13:50:25.430" Title="What should we do with these two questions on knowing if Charm is cast on someone when spell fails?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9870" CreationDate="2020-05-03T18:23:59.843" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;They are not duplicates because the recent question is about a wording interpretation problem for a specific spell&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The older question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 5th Edition which spells, like Suggestion, are not noticeable, and which are noticeable by the target and/or nearby onlookers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there differences if a target fails or succeeds on a save roll? [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The recent question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Charm Person spell description says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is an ambiguity here — does this happen only if the target failed on the saving throw, or the result of the saving throw is irrelevant?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] According to the rules, it still &amp;quot;knows it was charmed&amp;quot;. Does this happen if the target succeed on the saving throw?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, the spell ends, so the target should &amp;quot;know it was charmed&amp;quot;. On the other hand, one might argue the spell never took effect, so literally nothing happens when the saving throw is succeeded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order for the old question to cover the new one it would have to be asking answers to go through every single charming/persuading spell in the books and explain exactly which ones are noticeable, which ones are not, what happens on a successful save, and what happens on a failed save. This is the level of detail that the newer question is asking about since it is asking about the specific word choice in &lt;em&gt;charm person&lt;/em&gt; in particular, not general things about these sorts of spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the older question were asking for such a listing then, at least to me, it would be too broad. Thus, I assume that the older question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; asking for a detailed list of every charming/persuading spell in the game and explanations of what happens on successful/failed saves and thus it does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; match the level of specificity that the newer question asks about and thus it is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-03T18:29:23.710" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5058" CreationDate="2020-05-04T17:35:16.477" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;You ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are questions with title opposite to text ok?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;No, they are not OK&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the person asking the question can't put the effort into getting what's in the question and what's in the title to match, then close the question as &amp;quot;unclear&amp;quot; until they clarify and they match.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's not make this harder on question answerers than it needs to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T23:17:31.970" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9873" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:15:15.287" Score="10" ViewCount="371" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9926/2020-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG is scheduled for an election &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;next week, May 11th, 2020&lt;/a&gt;. In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&amp;amp;A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's how it'll work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Until the nomination phase, (so, until May 11th, 2020 at 20:00:00 UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post &lt;em&gt;one question per answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of &lt;code&gt;[text](link)&lt;/code&gt;, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into currently.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select &lt;strong&gt;up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community&lt;/strong&gt; provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, typically containing 10 questions in total.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53705" LastEditorUserId="53705" LastEditDate="2020-05-11T23:56:52.827" LastActivityDate="2020-05-12T00:48:29.560" Title="2020 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:15:15.287" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&amp;amp;A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8). &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, what do moderators do? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep? &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53705" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T21:15:15.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9875" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:51:11.397" Score="60" ViewCount="1024" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thank you all for this opportunity.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TL;DR:&lt;/strong&gt; so long, and thanks for all the flags.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will soon be stepping down as a moderator on RPGSE. (Effective shortly after the conclusion of the 2020 election.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been my honor and privilege to serve as moderator for the past three years. And I'd like to thank you &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt;--the site's users--for allowing me this opportunity; for trusting me with the tools of moderation; for pointing me toward concerns you had with comments, posts, users, and practices; for questioning me when you thought I'd acted badly; and for providing me with thousands of good examples through your comments, your posts, your edits, your chat messages, and your votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/24/bryant?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Bryant&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/45/c-ross?tab=profile&quot;&gt;C.Ross&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/140/mxyzplk-se-stop-being-evil?tab=profile&quot;&gt;mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/93/rs-conley?tab=profile&quot;&gt;RSConley&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/460/pat-ludwig?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Pat Ludwig&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/77/acecalhoon?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Ace Calhoon&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/760/brian-ballsun-stanton?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Brian Ballsun-Stanton&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1084/wax-eagle?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Wax Eagle&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/321/sevensideddie?tab=profile&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie&lt;/a&gt;: through the years you-all nurtured and guided this site into one of the internet's finest sources of information about RPGs, and into one of the Network's finest examples of many practices working very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/28591/rubiksmoose?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/33569/v2blast&quot;&gt;V2Blast&lt;/a&gt;: I've always believed that even if I moderated well, I wasn't the only person who could do so, and watching you step forward has confirmed my faith in the stackizenry to continuously surface people of discretion, compassion, and dedication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;the chatizenry&lt;/a&gt;, especially &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/4398/besw?tab=profile&quot;&gt;BESW&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/22566/korvinstarmast?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Korvin&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/15469/miniman?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Miniman&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/16044/shalvenay?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Shalvenay&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/8233/trogdor?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Trogdor&lt;/a&gt;: through the years you've been my near-daily companions. You've kept me distracted from annoying work-tasks, you've educated me on all the chat-topics (including sometimes-games and apparently-birds), you've kept me company in tough times, and you've listened to me blow off steam. You even tolerated &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5968/23970&quot;&gt;my perm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And above all: thank you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1204/doppelgreener&quot;&gt;doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt;. (I know you're uncomfortable with praise, so I'll keep it short.) Occasional users have certainly benefited from your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Editors&amp;amp;filter=all&quot;&gt;copious editing&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1204/doppelgreener?tab=activity&amp;amp;sort=comments&quot;&gt;gracious commentary&lt;/a&gt; Regular users are well aware of the quality thinking and wordsmithing you put into even the most trivial-seeming of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1204/doppelgreener?tab=answers&amp;amp;sort=votes&quot;&gt;meta answers&lt;/a&gt;. But well over 99% of stackizens will never know--until now!--your vast competence with the (overly-wrought) tools of moderation at our disposal; your faithful representation of users' interests to SE staff; your courage to argue against other (site and network) moderators &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; your seeking to find the right in another's arguments; and your firm, kind, and principled treatment of even the most vexing users. I've learned too much from you over the years to properly thank you in words--I don't word nearly as good as you--so I hope you'll let me take you to dinner next time I'm in your neck of the woods. (When I promise I'll carve out more than just half an hour!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why run in the first place?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've gotten this far I'm going to abuse your patience and tell the True story of why I ran for moderator. (All the things I said when running were true. I believe this story to be the True reason, though I'm not sure when I realized it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A year or so into my time on the site I was just starting to get comfortable. I'd shaken off the painful stings of my first few bad questions, I'd answered a lot of straightforward 5e questions, I'd broken the ice in chat with Miniman, my mainsite rival. And I'd started leaving occasional, helpful comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One day I left a &amp;quot;I've edited to add some paragraph breaks and make your question a little more readable, feel free to roll back &lt;em&gt;blah blah&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; comment on a new user's post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;FUUUUUUUUUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!&amp;quot; came the comment back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I sat, startled, hands shaking, I saw three things happen quickly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;You don't get to treat anyone that way. Goodbye.&amp;quot; -SevenSidedDie&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The username disappear, replaced by userNNNNN.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post get deleted right under me.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SSD was a stranger to me at the time, but hoo-boy did I feel &lt;em&gt;supported&lt;/em&gt; by him.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Years later the opportunity came to step forward and, perhaps, support others in similarly-vulnerable spots. I only hope, looking back, that I've lived up to that ^^ standard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Then why resign?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No particular reason. Things are good in RPG-land, I feel confident I could continue doing good in the role, and I feel the support of my fellow moderators and of the staff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do, however, believe in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/984/311001&quot;&gt;term limits for moderators&lt;/a&gt;. I believe there are plenty of other stackizens who could &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; serve the site as well--if not better--as moderator. I believe in giving more users the chance to do so. I believe in broadening the set of perspectives that go into moderating the site. I believe in stepping away before burning out, and I believe in the constancy of change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there is only one moderator upon whom I can &lt;em&gt;enforce&lt;/em&gt; a term limit: me. So now, at the end of three years, I retire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(By site rules I can simply ask SE for the diamond back at any time. But I won't do that. You can hold me to it: if ever the opportunity and desire line up for me to step forward again, I'll run anew. Sheep's honor.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Happy gaming, and be kind to each other, friends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[Update, Nov 2021: I should have explained &lt;strong&gt;why&lt;/strong&gt; I don't believe in asking for reinstatement. It's sorta the same reason that I do believe in term limits. The site changes over time: its userbase, its best practices, its needs. The voters of yesteryear get to determine moderators for &lt;strong&gt;a&lt;/strong&gt; time. But I don't think they should get to determine moderators for &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; time. To ask for reinstatement is, in my mind, to say &amp;quot;a while back voters thought I was a good choice, and that's probably good enough now.&amp;quot; Frankly, that doesn't strike me as wise.]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2021-11-02T21:22:02.010" LastActivityDate="2021-11-02T21:22:02.010" Title="to every thing there is a season" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9876" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:55:40.550" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly well to create high-quality Q&amp;amp;A and/or healthy community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T21:55:40.550" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:56:11.650" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly poorly, possibly hampering high-quality Q&amp;amp;A or harming community?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T21:56:11.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9878" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-04T21:58:55.380" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;What's your view on whether and how moderators represent sites to the broader SE community and to the company?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderators&quot;&gt;recent discussions of moderation/moderatorship on MSE&lt;/a&gt;, perhaps starting at the most recent: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/347104/311001&quot;&gt;Introducing the Moderator Council - and its first, pro-tempore, representatives&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-05T21:22:30.897" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T21:22:30.897" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-04T22:00:14.103" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;So long, and thanks for all the fish!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll miss your mentorship! I would not have totally known what I was doing as a mod without being able to look up to you and doppelgreener and learning from your collective knowledge and experiences. I've already thrown enough praise at you in the mod room, so I'll try to avoid being too long-winded here. You were a great mod, and I hope you stick around as a valued community member. &amp;lt;3&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;EDIT: Dangit, I just saw you already made the same reference in your tl;dr... :P&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T22:00:14.103" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9880" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9860" CreationDate="2020-05-04T22:36:59.417" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;As others have said; Answer, Down vote, or Ignore&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe some of this emotion is based on other &quot;stacks&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the developer-related stackoverflow-side of things you see these types of questions all the time. The, &quot;Do my homework for me,&quot; and the &quot;Help me do this thing with no details&quot; style questions. But in those cases, it's very easy to ask, &quot;What have you tried before asking the question?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whereas with RPGs, that is not so clear cut. Most questions are &quot;How does this work?&quot; which would indicate a lack of understanding, not a lack of research. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's one that astounded me: &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157842/38834&quot;&gt;By RAW: Do players roll their own die?&lt;/a&gt;&quot; It wasn't for lack or research, in fact, it was looking at too many sources that confused the questioner. As I stated in my answer, it is spelled out on the very first page of the SRD and PHB. The question itself got closed for &quot;lack of clarity&quot; as the questioner kinda rambled trying to get sense of it all. But I don't think that was really the issue. There is a very clear-cut answer to the core question. But people were going, &quot;Are you serious?&quot; and shut it down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there are going to be questions on here that on the surface seem ridiculous to people that have been around long enough. But if they can be answered, and don't break the rules, then try to answer it. Or just walk away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38834" LastActivityDate="2020-05-04T22:36:59.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-04T23:20:28.203" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;How strongly do you support the SE objective of having a high signal-to-noise ratio?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the few things that makes SO and SE sites better than the rest of the internet has been the focus on maintaining a high signal-to-noise ratio.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Explain how important that is to you, and how it influences your perception on the role of a diamond mod.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-05-05T17:39:06.573" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T17:39:06.573" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9882" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-05T01:34:44.093" Score="17" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Thankyou&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we need lots of words to express an idea, sometimes we only need one. Thankyou. For everything you've done for the site, for me and for sheepkind everywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can attest that you have lived up to the goal you set yourself. You've been a moderator ever since I joined the site and from the first time I understood what a moderator was I have felt supported and comforted by the excellent work you have done. You have set a consistently high bar for the rest of us to live up to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So again, thankyou. I hope this isn't goodbye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T01:34:44.093" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9883" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-05T13:19:48.987" Score="-2" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168511/what-dnd-5e-build-with-minimum-number-of-combined-levels-over-all-classes-is-n&quot;&gt;What DnD 5e build (with minimum number of combined levels over all classes) is needed to summon all summonable monsters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not believe my question needs any changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is totally answerable if you consider the question as given and not try to make say something it doesn't like what class do want, do you want use all summoning spells, summon all monster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a possible solution using DnD Core only.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Given Summoning is kind of vaguely defined in D&amp;amp;D 5e- I just considered it as creating any monster in the monster manual&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Druid 20 Cleric 9 &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Giving you Conjure Animals which allows 1/4,1/2,1,2 Challenge Rating beasts.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Conjure Celestial using 9th level spell slot which allows 5th CR Celestial&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Conjure Elemental&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Conjure Fey&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Create Undead which using a 9th level allows ghouls, ghasts, wrights, mummies.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Animate Dead which gives skeletons and zombies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can my question be reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9516" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-05T21:26:43.737" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T21:26:43.737" Title="Can my question about what D&amp;D 5e build can summon all summonable monsters with the fewest possible levels be reopened?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9883" CreationDate="2020-05-05T14:27:27.413" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You need to Edit the question to address the concerns&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question(s) have a great number of comments which are asking for clarifications which are necessary for the question to be clearly enough understood to be answerable. You need to edit the question so make it answerable. Specifically, we need to understand what it is to be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Starting from your own meta question, taking some unaddressed comments, etc.:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;From your meta question's suggested answer: &amp;quot;Summoning is kind of vaguely defined in D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot;. This means you need to &lt;em&gt;more clearly indicate what you mean&lt;/em&gt; and what you are trying to accomplish. Set bounds and you may want to use examples. (Conjure animals summons beasts, &lt;em&gt;create undead&lt;/em&gt; is considered summoning undead, &lt;em&gt;faithful hound&lt;/em&gt; is not because it isn't a stat block from MM, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;From a comment: &amp;quot;By &amp;quot;Summ[on]ing School&amp;quot; do you mean the School of Conjuration?&amp;quot; This may not be vital to the question, but it muddies the position you are coming from. As a reader I might think there's homebrew muddled in, or something else that isn't clear to me. That makes it harder to know what an answer is supposed to look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;From the main site question: &amp;quot;has to choose between demons and animals at level 4.&amp;quot; What does this refer to? It is unfamiliar to me (and I'm sure other readers) so naming the class feature in question can be a great help in clarifying what you are saying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T14:46:39.723" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9885" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9883" CreationDate="2020-05-05T14:28:50.370" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Experienced site users--importantly, ones with the privilege to cast close- and reopen-votes--think this question isn't currently in a good stat for the Stack. And I'm not sure I see anything here that's really designed to sway their opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; the question you're posing might find its best reception if viewed through the frame of a &amp;quot;theoretical character optimization&amp;quot; problem. And we've got &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/23970&quot;&gt;some guidance on how to do those well&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest taking a look there, taking a look at some of the highly-voted charop questions on the main site, then taking a look at your own question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Alternatively...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;you could &lt;a href=&quot;https://slate.com/culture/2013/10/kill-your-darlings-writing-advice-what-writer-really-said-to-murder-your-babies.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;kill your darling&lt;/a&gt; and start fresh.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now this meta post reads like &amp;quot;this is my question, even if it's a round peg and you're a square hole, how can we bang it in?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may be easier and more satisfying to take a moment and reset everything: edit &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; post to say&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to see how a 5e character can summon the most things. How do I ask &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; question on mainsite to get good answers? (I think blah-blah does a lot, but here's why I think someone's going to do better, and I'm hoping to discover some amazing cheese that one of you comes up with.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T14:54:14.203" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9886" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9883" CreationDate="2020-05-05T19:21:43.203" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Unclear questions can be reopened once the unclear parts are clarified.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question has been asked twice (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168511/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168154/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;), and both times been closed because it &amp;quot;needs details or clarity&amp;quot;.  The community feedback has been mostly unanimous in saying that the question is unclear.  There are enough users here who don't understand your question, such that it had to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It can &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; be reopened once you clarify whatever issues are unclear to the site users. Those users are the ones who are expected to write answers.  If you don't clarify the confusing parts, then it would remain unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually it's expected that querents edit their own question so it can be reopened. Alternatively, you can instead leave clarifications in comments (or here in this meta question) and other site users can edit the question for you.  And once it's edited to be clearer, then it can be reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on what you've said so far, here is an example of what your question could be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to build a character with every spell that summons creatures, without using &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; or magic items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This includes all conjuration spells that summon creatures, and all necromancy spells that make undead creatures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They don't need to summon everything simultaneously, so if a wizard had these spells in their spellbook, then it would qualify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Every summoned creature needs to have a stat block, so this does not include spells like &lt;em&gt;Faithful Hound&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;No Unearthed Arcana.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What character (class levels, background, etc) do I need to do this?  I want to achieve this with the fewest total levels, with multiclassing if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that similar to what you are asking?  If not, please clarify what you are trying to ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T19:47:30.377" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9887" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-05T20:33:01.163" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Wool miss you!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You (and doppelgreener of course) made me feel instantly at home as a moderator and never shied away from helping and mentoring me and helping to pass on you considerable experience. Your patience, eloquence, intelligence, humility, and humor constantly inspired me to be a better moderator even just from observing them. I will certainly miss seeing your brand of these in the mod room, but I've been assured that I will continue to see it around the site so I'll try not to be too sad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for everything. :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-05T20:33:01.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9888" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-06T00:45:04.780" Score="6" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently raised a flag for a question deletion and repost. In my flag I suggested the repost be deleted and the original reopened. My reasoning was that when I raised the flag the repost had exactly one comment, pointing out the it was a repost. While the original had 7 with users trying to help get the question reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I checked my flag later I saw that it had been declined, confused I looked into the details. Between me flagging the post and the flag being handled 8 comments and a meta post had been attached to the reposted question. So the declined flag made sense as the repost now had more value to remain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not disputing the flag, I completely agree with how it was handled given the context at time of handling. What I'm wondering about is the disparity between the state of something when it is flagged and when it is reviewed. I'm not sure what tools moderators have to see the context of when the flag was raised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally I think I'd like to see a flag reason of &quot;no longer relevant&quot; or something similar for situations like this. The flag was helpful when it was raised but by the time it is handled the context has changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have other users encountered this? Or do I see more of it from being in a different timezone? Is there something we can do about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T02:32:52.230" Title="Context for flags changing between being raised and handled" Tags="|discussion|moderation|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9888" CreationDate="2020-05-06T02:32:52.230" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;o/&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I was the mod who handled that flag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time we look at the flag--and there are a couple different UIs where that can happen, I was in the overlay in case another mod is wondering--we can see right there when the flag was raised. I easily could have looked back at the post's timeline to suss out what condition it was in when the flag was raised, though I'll confess I didn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of that, upon reflection, is probably the route to which I got there. I first saw the meta post, which directed me to the mainsite repost (which had some pretty useful-looking commentary), which directed me to the deleted post (which also had some useful commentary). So in my mind it was most useful to let the deleted one lie and the repost, which was being handled well through comments and meta by regular users, live.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a way on the mod-end to accept a flag but basically do nothing with it. And IIRC there's a way to do that while also providing custom feedback to the flagger. The UI is so badly designed and I'm so thick that I have more-often-than-not managed to botch that workflow. Which ends up looking like &amp;quot;I want to validate their instinct &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; give some feedback explaining why I didn't do what they suggest. CRAP! I just accepted the flag and executed the thing they suggested, but that's not right. Let me go undo that, and put the post right.&amp;quot; So now you, the helpful user, end up with a &amp;quot;helpful&amp;quot; flag in the record, but it looks like we've completely ignored you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I didn't want anything to happen to the post &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; I wanted to tell you what my thinking was, the &amp;quot;decline...&amp;quot; option in the UIwas the safest way to achieve that. So I declined, leaving you that explanatory note, and the post to live on as is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree with you that a &amp;quot;no longer relevant&amp;quot; flag--basically, a &amp;quot;neutral&amp;quot; one--might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Actually, no. On second thought, I disagree with us. I would have liked to mark that flag &amp;quot;helpful&amp;quot; because it was! It got a moderator's eyes on a post that was--even when I got there--in need of some attention. Really, SE just needs to make the flagging UI better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T02:32:52.230" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-06T16:12:32.370" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks for that precious gift you gave to us all: your time.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that you have a few rooms full of students to mentor, and three of your own to raise, that you were able to fit in some time to help make this little corner of the internet better is deeply appreciated.  From where I sat your term as mod appeared to be a labor of love. (Also smart to step down before burnout becomes a risk).  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's an old expression regarding a wolf in sheep's clothing, but I think we've found something else during your term as mod: a ki-rin in sheep's clothing.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fly safe.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T16:12:32.370" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9891" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9892" CreationDate="2020-05-06T17:15:26.910" Score="10" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't ask very many questions on the role play exchange but in my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168584/what-counts-as-a-disease&quot;&gt;last question&lt;/a&gt; I was asked, in the comments, if this question was from a player perspective or DM perspective. I found that to be interesting since it does change the way my question is interpreted. If it is from the DM perspective I am probably just looking for rules clarification before I do something. If it is players perspective they might be asking if their DM ran the rules correctly which would require more context for others to answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that the Player vs DM perspective can change the meaning of a question should a DM and Player tag exist to indicate from what perspective the question is being asked? If not what is the best practice for this, should I make one of the first few sentences of a question contain &quot;from a DM/Player perspective&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just want to be clear I am not complaining about the person who asked me for that information. I think the user asking for this had a very good reason to ask for that information and I was surprised it never occurred to me to include it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45801" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-07T02:24:43.240" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T02:24:43.240" Title="Should questions be asked from a DM or Player perspective explicitly?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9891" CreationDate="2020-05-06T17:25:24.873" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;This doesn't need to be mandated always, and no this is not what tags are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes whether you're a GM or a player does matter to the question: it might change how we advise you approach the situation, and it may define your options. In these cases we handle it the way you've seen: if we need to know and the querent hasn't already made it clear, we ask them, and we put the question on hold if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes being the GM or player doesn't matter at all. For example, &quot;how much does a longsword cost?&quot; or &quot;how fast can a dwarf sprint, really?&quot; has the same answer no matter who's asking. In these situations we won't ask and you probably won't even specify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no specific pro-forma way the question needs to specify player-ness vs GM-ness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This information &lt;em&gt;should not&lt;/em&gt; be signalled in the tags. Tags are for describing the content of the question, not for adding new information not already found in the question itself. Tags defining the game system are the &lt;em&gt;sole exception&lt;/em&gt; to this rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3189/should-the-gm-tag-be-burninated&quot;&gt;we did once have a GM tag, but it's been burninated&lt;/a&gt; on account of being super ambiguous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T17:25:24.873" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-06T17:49:14.013" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the past, there have been quite a lot of discussions about “over-moderation” on RPG, and recently we have seen a significant reduction in the moderation teams’ attempts to “push” the site in particular directions or to avoid problems that the moderators perceived but felt the community as a whole wasn’t seeing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you feel that this has been an improvement or a loss for the site? To what extent do you feel that you as a moderator would have a special role or responsibility when it comes to policy discussions? Under what circumstances might you override community opinion on a policy topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T17:49:14.013" CommentCount="23" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-06T20:18:52.637" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks for your service&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the next-to-last mod that I had the pleasure of serving with, thanks for helping make RPG.SE a better place and investing your tie and emotional energy into it.  I don't come around too much any more but it's great to see the stack is still high quality content and low on shenanigans, which makes it both new and old user friendlier than the rest of the Internet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2020-05-06T20:18:52.637" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-07T00:26:39.927" Score="5" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was one of the generic questions provided by Cesar M, and I feel like it's actually quite important. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, look what cute new contributor we got there^^ (see the picture below)&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LvCrk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LvCrk.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T00:26:39.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-07T13:46:34.370" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks for being there&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were a huge help to me when I started using the site, and I had to stop coming here regularly due to Life Stuff around the time you got elected, but more than once it's been comforting to reflect on the fact that the site was in good hands with you at the helm (or, perhaps more accurately, swabbing the decks.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, I'm sure our other mods and our new mod(s) will (continue to) do a great job as well!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28034" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T13:46:34.370" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9897" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-07T16:56:43.327" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Kidnapped from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9145/23970&quot;&gt;2019 question collection&lt;/a&gt;, which had rightfully stolen it from &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8277/197005&quot;&gt;Arqade's 2014 collection&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T16:56:43.327" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-07T16:58:30.653" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener's, from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6919/23970&quot;&gt;2017 collection&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T16:58:30.653" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-07T16:59:48.107" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new user's questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DuckTapeAl's, from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5484/23970&quot;&gt;2015 collection&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-05-07T16:59:48.107" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9900" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:21:57.923" Score="11" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Chat? Feeds?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE sites have associated chat rooms. This site's main one is &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11/&quot;&gt;TRPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt;. Check it out!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE chat supports &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-an-rss-feed-4684568&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;RSS feeds&lt;/a&gt;, which shows up as little ticker pop-ups from time to time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the last seven years &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3041/4398&quot;&gt;this meta post&lt;/a&gt; has been the place to decide what goes in our ticker feed (click &lt;a href=&quot;http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/11?tab=feeds&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; for current feed list), but it's getting cluttered with outdated material and the years-old voting no longer reflects the modern chat's constituency. So I'm starting over with this post!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Vote for feeds!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pretty straightforward procedure, really. Each &quot;answer&quot; post is suggesting one feed to add to the chat ticker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click on the links to see what content the feeds will be posting to the site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Vote up feeds you personally want to see.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just ignore the ones you don't want to see.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Save downvotes for when you think something is actively detrimental rather than just irrelevant to your interests. (Please consider leaving an explanatory comment if you do this.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If you don't ever plan to participate in the TRPG General Chat, please think about whether your vote is useful.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is meant to be a less-formal variant of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2723/community-promotion-ads-2013&quot;&gt;community ads procedure&lt;/a&gt;. Note that moderators/room owners will have to go in and make the changes by hand. There is no magic vote number for a feed to automagically get into the ticker (I reserve the right to veto feeds with bigotry, for example) but feeds run by rpg.se chat-users are likely to get in faster and with fewer votes: we want to encourage each others' projects!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Suggest feeds!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think there's a feed that should show up in general chat, add it as a new answer here, with one feed per answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Feed suggestions should be pitches telling us why we'd like the feed in our ticker,&lt;/strong&gt; providing useful information like general focus, update frequency (feeds which update many times a day are not popular with the chat), and representative examples of posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please include a link to both the feed's readable page &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; RSS page, if they're different; your feed is less likely to get voted for if you only link to the RSS code page, and less likely to get put in the ticker if the room owners have to go digging through the site for the RSS link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;08 May 2020: I've pruned the existing feed list back significantly (mostly chopping dead wood and feeds whose content has become less acceptable over time) and I'm pulling the remaining feeds' pitches over from the old thread. If they don't get votes I'm probably gonna remove them too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:56:10.567" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T04:49:28.187" Title="TRPG General Chat: vote for your feeds! (2e: Electric Bugaloobear)" Tags="|discussion|chat|feed|" AnswerCount="13" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9901" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:21:57.923" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;New RPG.SE Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?tab=Newest&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions?tab=Newest&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/feeds&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/feeds&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Populates the ticker with the newest questions being asked on our own Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:43:43.317" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:43:43.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:23:30.937" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Fantastic Maps (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fantasticmaps.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.fantasticmaps.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fantasticmaps.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://www.fantasticmaps.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fantastic Maps is a down-to-earth blog about mapmaking, with a strong fantasy bent. It talks about the mechanics, philosophies, and practices of making fictional maps. Posting is extremely infrequent, but when they post the content is consistently engaging and useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:43:07.853" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:43:07.853" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:25:32.037" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;James Mendez Hodes (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://jamesmendezhodes.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://jamesmendezhodes.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://jamesmendezhodes.com/?format=rss&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://jamesmendezhodes.com/?format=rss&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blog of James Mendez Hodes is a rich resource of information and guidance on making and playing games audaciously while being safe, informed, and considerate. He posts a usually-lengthy entry every couple of months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:43:22.743" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:43:22.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9904" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:29:22.873" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Beyond the Bundle&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://beyondthebundle.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://beyondthebundle.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://beyondthebundle.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://beyondthebundle.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Bundle of Holding is a tabletop RPG version of the videogame Humble Bundle: it promotes small-business RPGs by offering cheap bundle rates for high-quality indie games, and donating proceeds to charities of the creators' choice. Beyond the Bundle is their blog. Mostly posts when bundles change, no more than once a week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:45:40.560" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:45:40.560" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T02:58:03.907" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;RPG.SE Hot Network Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/questions?tab=hot&quot;&gt;Hot Network Questions&lt;/a&gt;, but only the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions&quot;&gt;RPG.SE&lt;/a&gt; ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://lackadaisical-appeal.glitch.me/hnq/rpg.stackexchange.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://lackadaisical-appeal.glitch.me/hnq/rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does what it says on the tin. We often get between four and seven Hot Network Questions a day, sometimes a little more or less. This feed pushes those questions onto our ticker when they get hot. It's good to have a lot of eyes on questions with a significant amount of new-user traffic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:44:10.070" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:44:10.070" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9906" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9875" CreationDate="2020-05-08T07:48:07.287" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Has It Been Three Years?!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good grief, I forget to check meta for three days and a mod retires!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, I thank you for your time spent, and while I agree with and admire your principles on moderation, please know that you'll be missed in that role.  And thank you for all the time you've spent. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T07:48:07.287" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T08:39:24.150" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Ponderings on Games (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://ponderingsongames.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://ponderingsongames.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://ponderingsongames.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://ponderingsongames.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE user &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/1421/magician&quot;&gt;Magician&lt;/a&gt;'s blog, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3058/4398&quot;&gt;they described&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;My own blog, Ponderings on Games. Was primarily about D&amp;amp;D 4e, now moved on to other games. Low volume, vaguely game design perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts rarely and erratically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:47:22.027" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:47:22.027" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9908" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T08:41:36.087" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Ars Ludi/Lame Mage (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ars Ludi/Lame Mage was described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3177/4398&quot;&gt;the original feed curation thread&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Is an intelligent, well-written blog about RPGs by Microscope creator Ben Robbins. He writes about various experiments he tried, social issues with RPGs, and actual play from the games he's written.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts about twice a month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastEditorUserId="4398" LastEditDate="2020-05-08T08:47:04.070" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:47:04.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T08:53:37.613" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Siskoid's Blog of Geekery (blog; RPG tag only)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/search/label/RPGs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/search/label/RPGs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/RPGs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/RPGs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Originally described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3059/4398&quot;&gt;the previous feed meta&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Siskoid's Blog of Geekery has an enjoyable RPG tag. For example, in addition to more traditional RPG experience/commentary/review posts, he does the really quite cool &lt;a href=&quot;http://siskoid.blogspot.com/search/label/Seasons%20of%20DWAITAS&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Seasons of &lt;em&gt;Doctor Who: Adventures in Time and Space&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;: as part of his &quot;watching and reviewing all of &lt;em&gt;Doctor Who&lt;/em&gt; in order, he re-casts each season as an RPG campaign, providing character sheets and summaries of the fictional play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:53:37.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9910" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T08:57:27.687" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Walking Mind&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://walkingmind.evilhat.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3134/4398&quot;&gt;the original feed curation thread&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&quot;The Walking Mind is Rob Donoghue, co-founder of Evil Hat and erratic RPG writer.&quot; A fairly active blog. The author has recently concluded a very in-depth look at 13th Age and Numenera. Well-written, thought-out, and a game designer's perspective is a plus, at least for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:57:27.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T08:59:10.087" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Deeper in the Game: From Geekdom to Freedom (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://bankuei.wordpress.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3049/4398&quot;&gt;the original feed curation thread&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This blog is low-volume (I consider that a plus). It includes indie-games content, D&amp;amp;D content, theory and tools (like the &quot;Same Page Tool&quot; that we cite constantly in comments and chat), and content about social-justice issues in fiction and roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts rarely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T08:59:10.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T09:01:28.673" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sly Flourish (blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;http://slyflourish.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://slyflourish.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://slyflourish.com/index.xml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://slyflourish.com/index.xml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As described in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3135/4398&quot;&gt;the original feed curation thread&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Sly Flourish has started as a D&amp;amp;D 4e blog (hence the name, I'm guessing), but has since moved on to broader topics. Weekly posts, focuses on practical advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T09:01:28.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9913" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-08T15:07:53.857" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The Angry GM&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://theangrygm.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://theangrygm.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;https://theangrygm.com/feed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://theangrygm.com/feed/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As described from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://theangrygm.com/about/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;site&lt;/a&gt;, because I'm terrible at writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Angry GM provides RPG Advice with Attitude. Whether you call yourself a Dungeon Master, a Game Master, a Storyteller, a Keeper, Game Trustee, or Lord of the Game, and whatever your experience level, The Angry GM is pretty much the best damned resource for table-top role-playing game advice. As long as you don’t mind getting yelled at. See, The Angry GM doesn’t f$&amp;amp;% around. He’ll tell it like it is. And he doesn’t take a lot of crap. But whether you play D&amp;amp;D, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Dungeon World, OSR, or any other motherf$&amp;amp;%ing RPG ever, The Angry GM can help you run less worse games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-08T15:07:53.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-09T11:19:28.857" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our site has struggled in the past with moderators overriding community voices, which made this feel like a moderator-driven site more than a community-driven site. Suppose you had a course of action or policy you felt strongly the site should adopt, but you were not sure the community would be supportive: how would you handle it? How would you handle that situation if the community vocally, strongly objects?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T11:19:28.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9915" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-09T14:29:52.983" Score="53" ViewCount="1148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I’m stepping down from moderation soon and putting away my shiny diamond. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9875/to-every-thing-there-is-a-season&quot;&gt;Just like nitsua60&lt;/a&gt; I’ll be sticking around for a bit longer post-election, so this is not immediate. (Don’t worry, this isn’t some surge of mod resignations. We both planned this in advance, only I had some delays in getting my resignation together.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s been a great privilege to serve this community as a moderator. I’m proud of what the RPG.SE community has become over the past nine and a half years.&lt;sup&gt;(1)&lt;/sup&gt; We’re not perfect, and being a Stack Exchange Q&amp;amp;A sites puts some limits on what we can be, but our community puts in serious work to continuously be open, welcoming, and safe for all kinds of people&lt;sup&gt;(2)&lt;/sup&gt; both on mainsite and in chat. Given the myriad social issues we deal with and the amount of culture warring our collective hobby sees, I think that’s quite a significant achievement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the majority of my tenure it's also been a pleasure to be part of the network-wide moderator community. I’ve learned a lot from dozens of my moderation peers across the network—from their advice, from their mistakes, and most especially from my own mistakes—and brought all I could to benefit this site and shared as much as I could in turn. (Future moderators: all of us will make mistakes; the important part is learning from them and to not repeat them.) That said, my experience with the network moderation community is not all rosy, and the bad parts are why I'm stepping down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(1) Our site turns ten on August 19th this year!&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(2) Except for jerks.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The cause&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m opting to leave because of some older issues within the network moderation community that have had a lasting impact on me. This resignation’s been planned for nearly a year with my co-moderators. I burned out early last year and haven’t been able to operate for this site with the same capacity since, so I want to step aside to let other capable users take charge moderating the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the network moderator community is currently in a significant transition with regards to transgender individuals. I’m happy with where it’s going, but it got here via a lot of hurt. In 2019 and earlier, trans moderators would regularly have to deal with explicit transphobia and misgendering from their own moderator peers within moderator-exclusive spaces. Our support from other moderators was minimal and staff intervention and protection was nonexistent. &lt;a href=&quot;https://literature.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/resignation-notice&quot;&gt;Other trans moderators have written about this.&lt;/a&gt; (Such an experience is unthinkable here, and is shocking given even our at-the-time anti-bigotry clauses in the Code of Conduct should have unquestioningly prevented this.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That issue came to a head in January 2019: the network moderator community decided to vote on how to handle trans moderators’ pronouns and overwhelmingly voted for a policy that provided no protection from misgendering and transphobia, despite trans voices unanimously and vocally opposing that policy and conveying the hurt it would cause. It even stood to wind back what little progress we'd made. But our voices changed nothing, and the hurt was severe. Staff continued to not intervene. I felt profoundly betrayed by and disconnected from the moderator community and the company I’d given my time to: I had expected these people to all help protect us from abuse, not tacitly allow it! I stepped way back, as did other trans moderators. Some of us resigned, and I very nearly did the same then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More than a year later things have improved. Stack Exchange staff finally introduced explicit protection against misgendering into the Code of Conduct, and although I don’t like the circumstances around how those rules arrived, we have them and that’s valuable.&lt;sup&gt;(3)&lt;/sup&gt; We lost many good moderators last year, but we also saw some vocally transphobic ones leave. Senior staff have recently embarked on new projects to improve things for the LGBT community and I look forward with cautious optimism to see what comes out of that. Our moderator community is becoming more accepting and supportive, and I believe they’re beginning to understand the serious human cost of transphobia and misgendering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Some moderators have gone to serious effort to learn and have been generous in their listening to trans moderators such as myself, even if that also meant butting heads with me from time to time. I’m deeply thankful to all of you who have put in such an effort.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the hurt and disconnect have lingered for me, and I need to step away to let myself heal. I’ve been working hard behind the scenes to change things internally for the better so that no trans user of the network, moderator or otherwise, would have to experience what we went through again.&lt;sup&gt;(4)&lt;/sup&gt; The ball is now rolling in a way that doesn’t need me anymore, and there are other people who I'm happy to see are stepping in to take over pushing it further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(3) Despite the many issues that came up in proximity to the introduction of the pronoun rules, I'm thankful to Sara Chipps for actually making those rules happen. It was the first time we saw concrete action from staff to help us.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(4) As have others, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/336074/heather&quot;&gt;heather&lt;/a&gt; who drafted &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/334577/152515&quot;&gt;the Lavender open letter to Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Looking forwards toward a bright future&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite my issues with the broader moderator community, I have none with RPG.SE nor with my co-moderators. I talked above about how you all put in serious work to make this an inclusive and kind community, and that includes that y’all have already been genuinely friendly and accepting towards trans visitors and regulars for years and have been helpful with their problems without judgement or prejudice. I can’t express enough thanks for the support I’ve seen and experienced here from the community and from my co-moderators: thank you, thank you, thank you. All of you are a treasure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe you are in good hands with V2Blast and Rubiksmoose. Both of them are skilled, kind, patient, considerate, and so many things that I think are vital to being the best moderation can offer. I have been lucky to work with both of them, and nitsua60 and I have taught them everything we can. And, well, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;whoever joins the team next is up to all of you&lt;/a&gt;, but whoever they are they will be lucky to have V2Blast and Rubiksmoose beside them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my current co-moderators, V2Blast, Rubiksmoose, and nitsua60: You have stood up for me and provided indispensable support through the most difficult periods over the past year, and for that I cannot thank you enough. It’s been a pleasure moderating alongside you in this community and I’ve learned a lot in turn from all of you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To BESW, thank you so much for all you’ve done in guiding the mainsite and chat communities. Watching and learning from you and speaking with you have been formative in how I interact with difficult situations and I attribute a substantial part of my ability to moderate effectively to the things I learned from you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the chaotic amalgam that is the community again: thanks for being such good people. Moderating for you has rocked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With love,&lt;br&gt;&#xA;doppelgreener&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-05-26T20:59:18.857" LastActivityDate="2020-05-26T20:59:18.857" Title="In which a doppelgreener becomes somewhat less shiny" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9916" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-09T14:59:05.430" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You will have no doppelgänger&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I only actively participated in this site after you, to use your own words, &quot;burned out&quot;, and yet I've still seen you tackle numerous difficult situations with tact and kindness. You have made my experiences on this site markedly better and I'm sure countless others have experienced this as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Inevitably somebody will take your place but you cannot be replaced. Each and every person, let alone moderator, is unique and my unique interactions and experiences with you will be remembered fondly. Thank you for your time, effort, and everything else, it is appreciated more than you know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize now what I've written makes it sounds like you're leaving the site as a whole. I didn't mean to imply that and I do hope you will stick around and still be the wonderful member of the community that I've known you to be. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-05-09T20:46:46.117" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T20:46:46.117" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-09T18:16:00.857" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Extremely glad that you stepped up, and devastated that you're stepping down&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was genuinely pleased—excited, even—when you were elected moderator. Now I'm deeply saddened that your moderation experiences beyond the main site brought you in contact with jerks and led to such sorrow. I can't know what those experiences were like for you, but, if it's any consolation, even just the outline of how you were and still are being treated makes me angry enough to hit things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were one of the most active and encouraging voices when I started here, and I've always appreciated your advice, common sense, feedback, practicality, and writing suggestions. Please don't let not being a moderator make you a stranger here. The site would be less without you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry that there wasn't more joy in it, but thank you so much for an outstanding run as moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T18:16:00.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-09T22:03:56.793" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not easy being (doppel)green...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...But you did it with aplomb.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I spent way too long trying to think of a clever header for this one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you already know how I feel, but it's worth repeating anyway: I look up to you, both as a mod and as a person. You've provided invaluable guidance on a number of moderation-related matters, and I've sometimes referenced things you've said to guide my approach as a mod even outside of Stack Exchange. Even beyond that, you've done a great job of advocating for yourself, for the RPG.SE community, and for the LGBTQ+ community, and I hope the rest of us can (continue to) learn from your example in doing the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope you do stick around as a member of the RPG.SE community, and I hope Stack Exchange and the mod community takes the necessary steps to make that worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll close on a pair of quotes, because they feel fitting (I found them while trying to find a fitting header quote :P). The first is by &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Calder%C3%B3n_de_la_Barca&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Pedro Calderón de la Barca&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Green is the prime color of the world, and that from which its loveliness arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And on a lighter note, one from &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Ludwig Wittgenstein&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Never stay up on the barren heights of cleverness, but come down into the green valleys of silliness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep being lovely, and remember to be silly. &amp;lt;3&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T22:03:56.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-09T22:25:36.937" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Sad to see you go, but moving on to greener pastures&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I had to fit a &amp;quot;green&amp;quot; reference somewhere in the title right?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyways, I am extremely sad to see you go. Both you and nitsua60 inspired me to be a moderator in the first place because of your professional and calm demeanor and friendly way you handled issues on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You, specifically, have this uncanny way of finding a much better way of saying and wording something that others are struggling to say and you managed to talk about really complex and, at times, heated topics with class, clarity, and precision. I'd spend a long time thinking about something and you'd just... find the perfect way to say it that made things clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate so much the way you advised and mentored and worked with us &amp;quot;green&amp;quot; mods and brought us up to speed, but also treated us with respect and listened to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sad to see you go, but I have no doubt that this site is left a better place for you having been here. And I hope to see you around again, if circumstances allow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;lt;3&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T22:25:36.937" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9920" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-09T22:38:46.097" Score="41" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wBVi2.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wBVi2.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Two photos side by side. In the first photo tiny plush Kermit doll looks at an iPhone larger than it is, with an expression of sadness. In the second photo the Kermit doll has brought the iPhone in for a full-body hug.&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-09T22:38:46.097" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-10T03:07:23.930" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The grass is always greener on the doppel side&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I cannot greet this news with anything but disappointment, but you gotta do what your gut tells you is right.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks so much for your time spent on our behalf.  When you stood for election back in 2017  I knew you were a mortal lock for one of the mod spots when wax eagle stepped aside.  The community chose well, and you repaid the community's vote of confidence with quality work.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks again.   You're a class act.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-05-10T15:42:29.153" LastActivityDate="2020-05-10T15:42:29.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9922" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-10T14:29:34.180" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can say without equivocation that there is not, and has never been, anyone on this site I more wanted to see with a diamond. You have long been one of the coolest and calmest heads here, and in my estimation provided the greatest leadership this site has ever had. And it seems that, even given all of the great work you did for us (RPG) that made me sad to see this thread, you have gone to even greater lengths for all of us (SE) unheralded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am deeply saddened by our loss, and angered that much more at the bigots who have caused you pain. I hope you find healing with time and that a less responsibility-laden role at our site can be a part of that—though I understand if not. Selfishly, I hold out hope that someday you might wish to be moderator again. But to be less selfish, I more sincerely hope that the negativity that has affected you is in SE’s past, and that we won’t lose another great moderator to it. That, at least, is the legacy your efforts deserve, and have more than earned. For your work towards that goal despite the pain—of which I was &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; unaware—I salute you and thank you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-05-10T14:29:34.180" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9923" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-11T01:41:23.793" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Thank you for leaving things better than you found them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At first I meant this news with sadness, I will miss your influence on this site. But after reading your reasoning I am astounded you have stayed at long as you did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For what you went through you had every right to simply walk away, but you didn't. You stayed and fought so that no one else would ever have to experience what you did. If didn't have it already, that alone would have earned my utmost respect. Now that you see a positive future you can step away with a burden lifted, knowing you made a positive difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for what you've done, and thank you for your years of service. You have done a phenomenal job of maintaining the high standard of this site. Best wishes, and may this change bring the relief you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-11T10:01:12.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9924" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-11T10:28:23.253" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a new user I'm really reassured to see the way you address some things here. I'd caught some of the wider SE mood around pronouns, site policies and the response to communication around that, and there's a lot in there to put me on edge; seeing you talking about this from the moderator side does a lot to make me comfortable on this site, and trust that the mods will have my back if I do run into a problem. Thanks for sharing, and I hope the future treats you well!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60509" LastActivityDate="2020-05-11T10:28:23.253" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9925" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-11T20:04:20.577" Score="8" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2020 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-05-13T00:44:30.833" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T00:44:30.833" Title="2020 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" CommunityOwnedDate="2020-05-11T20:04:20.577" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9926" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-11T23:53:24.680" Score="11" ViewCount="564" Body="&lt;p&gt;In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&amp;amp;A thread for the candidates. Questions collected &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9873/2020-moderator-election-qa-question-collection&quot;&gt;from an earlier thread&lt;/a&gt; have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not every question was compiled - as noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/f5f8b122-6294-4577-8b50-4756142d4807/view-source&quot;&gt;copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes&lt;/a&gt;. Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck to all of the candidates!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9929/12193&quot;&gt;Ben&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9933/52137&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9937/48759&quot;&gt;Linksassin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly poorly, possibly hampering high-quality Q&amp;amp;A or harming community?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly well to create high-quality Q&amp;amp;A and/or healthy community?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What's your view on whether and how moderators represent sites to the broader SE community and to the company?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;em&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderators&quot;&gt;recent discussions of moderation/moderatorship on MSE&lt;/a&gt;, perhaps starting at the most recent: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/347104/311001&quot;&gt;Introducing the Moderator Council - and its first, pro-tempore, representatives&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our site has struggled in the past with moderators overriding community voices, which made this feel like a moderator-driven site more than a community-driven site.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Suppose you had a course of action or policy you felt strongly the site should adopt, but you were not sure the community would be supportive: how would you handle it? How would you handle that situation if the community vocally, strongly objects?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new users' questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53705" LastEditorUserId="53705" LastEditDate="2020-05-26T20:11:20.797" LastActivityDate="2020-06-25T21:00:41.717" Title="2020 Moderator Election Q&amp;A - Questionnaire" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9927" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9873" CreationDate="2020-05-12T00:48:29.560" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know this question is too late to be included, but it's important to me and hopefully some will answer it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often moderators are power users of the stack. Accepting moderator duties means doing less of the things you do daily. Many moderators don't feel like they have enough time to do their duties, but still use the stack like a normal user. That's fine, they are volunteers after all, however it does push moderator duties to the wayside. Are you willing to accept that you will have less time to spend asking/answering questions, editing posts, commenting, normal user stuff?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63321" LastActivityDate="2020-05-12T00:48:29.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9928" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-12T03:41:42.170" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I heard it, I was sad to know your diamond was coming to an end. It made this election feel bittersweet - as I told both you and nitsua (whose resignation I didn't write on so as not to spoil your post that I knew was coming): I'd be happy if the little while you both stuck around after the election was... 2 years? Maybe a bit more :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every one of the mods on RPG.SE has been nothing but helpful, welcoming, and open when I came into your chat room to do work, and I thank you all. It has been a pleasure peeking behind that screen and talking to you from work to game systems and designers I enjoy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It saddens me greatly to see you leaving because we(SE) failed you(LGBTQ Mods) for such a long time - and for my part in it, I apologize with all my heart. It was wrong, it was hard, and it was hurtful. I am sorry you felt you had no one to have your backs and to be supportive. I am sorry that you had to fight, alone, for yourselves - but I am deeply thankful that you did. We should've acted much sooner, in a much better, more thoughtful and respectful way than we did. We failed the network and the community, in more ways than one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, this post is about you, not us! And so let me say: It's people like you that move our cultures forward. Thank you for making this network a better place for us all, you've been a brave trailblazer - and we are all better for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I don't know enough about this site and this community to weigh in, I'd say the other users and mods here have spoken enough, bask in those compliments, take it in, and leave with that: you've been amazing, nothing short of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe this is goodbye, maybe it is see you soon, hopefully, the latter - but you don't owe anyone anything, you've gone way beyond the call of duty and will be fondly remembered one way or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53705" LastActivityDate="2020-05-12T03:41:42.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9926" CreationDate="2020-05-12T03:47:56.667" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/12193/ben&quot;&gt;Ben&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For flags, personally I would deal with them as any other flag. The only thing I see that need be considered is the validity of the flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for arguments; in comments or discussions, that would need to be handled differently. I am a firm believer in staying impartial - any one can be right or wrong. If the problem is resolved, the comments/discussion should be handled as per normal - removed if they do not add anything to the post(s), or tidied up/left if they do. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way that I believe problematic users should be handled is to treat them as people (because they are, just like the rest of us), and help them understand that this site is run by users, for the users. The best way that I have experienced this to be handled is just to talk to them - invite them to discuss their issues, and help them understand the best way to move forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would attempt to discuss it with them, to gain their understanding as to why they closed it, and then present my case, in order to gain and give a proper understanding as to what should be done. If I cannot discuss it with them for whatever reason, I would then ask others for their beliefs on the subject. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally always endeavor to make decisions based on logic, rather than based on my feelings or emotions. There will be situations where I may not agree with something, but if I believe that the decision is a good one or the right one, based on the logic of the decision making, then that's what I go with; and vice versa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;3. What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly poorly, possibly hampering high-quality Q&amp;amp;A or harming community?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only issue I currently see is time differences. The majority of the site users are based in Europe or the US, meaning that there is a large gap where the majority of the moderators and high-rep users are off-line, meaning that some big issues take time to be dealt with - flags, problem users, etc not being dealt with for long periods of time each day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, at this point the only solution I see is a moderator from the Asia-Pacific region being elected; pending that, some serious automated changes to the SE system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;4. What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly well to create high-quality Q&amp;amp;A and/or healthy community?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Promotion of the &quot;Be Nice&quot; policy, and support of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE has the advantage of not being &lt;em&gt;as big&lt;/em&gt; as some other sites, where it is less about the community and more about simply maintaining that quality; while being &lt;em&gt;big enough&lt;/em&gt; to have a community of people to talk to, and help focus on the users, and direct them on how they can improve - how to ask good questions and give good answers, help them understand the site functionality, and are always welcoming to new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;5. Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am inspired by those that have already taken on the job, and I have been a member of the SE community for many years now. After all these years, I have seen the work that the Moderators have done, and I want to give back to the community that I give such high regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an Australian, I can't say that I would be dealing with things to the same degree that all other mods do on a regular basis - I would be the &quot;Asia Pacific&quot;, to fill in the gap when other mods would/should otherwise be sleeping or spending time doing other jobs, but I do still feel that contribution would make a difference, and I do aim to contribute to the same level that all other mods do, and have done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;6. What's your view on whether and how moderators represent sites to the broader SE community and to the company?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I first joined the SE community, it was actually over on StackOverflow. After a while, I expanded to Arqade, the RPG.se, SF&amp;amp;F, and eventually more as the need arose. In truth, my personal interaction(s) with moderators were never all that significant. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a &quot;seasoned&quot; SE user, my view has been broadened a bit. The role of moderator has a demand defined by the user-base, and for some sites, that is simply more than can be handled. Additionally, the user base is a collective of individuals most of the time. So from both perspectives, it often comes across as &quot;one vs the many&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this way, the role of Moderator is never an easy one - on one hand, they have to uphold the quality of the site, and on the other, they have to be seen as &quot;helpful&quot; in doing so; which is never usually the case from the perspective of the &quot;many&quot;. The truth is, for the most part Mods are doing the best they can, as they are volunteers, and people too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;7. Our site has struggled in the past with moderators overriding community voices, which made this feel like a moderator-driven site more than a community-driven site. Suppose you had a course of action or policy you felt strongly the site should adopt, but you were not sure the community would be supportive: how would you handle it? How would you handle that situation if the community vocally, strongly objects?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have dealt with users wanting to change the system or suggest a new policy in the past, and as a community member I have contributed to point out what the pros and cons of the ideas. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the opposite perspective, it would be important to give the community the chance to voice their opinions. If that opinion is strongly against the idea, then that opinion has its own validity. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I have stated above, I endeavor to make my decisions based on the logic and facts of the situation, not based on how I feel. The community is the main contributor to the site, and therefore should be considered with its appropriate validity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;8. We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new users' questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I usually handle this is to welcome the user to the site, and give advice on the specifics of their question that could/should be improved. The addition of the &quot;new user&quot; tag has also greatly improved this - originally they were simply &quot;low-rep&quot; users and would get thrown in with other users that have not asked/answered many questions, have already asked/answered questions that were usually poor quality, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, some platforms (the mobile app, for example) still don't show this. So as a Mod, I would endeavor to remove any potentially negative comments that might enforce this negative interaction, and even aim to add my own comments. The Diamond does carry weight, and should not be abused - but this would be one of the few ways I would &quot;use&quot; the position to bring weight to encourage new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that everything I have said in the past will come under revision, which is fair. Things I say from here on out will also be scrutinized, but I simply see that as an opportunity to learn. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;10. Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a new mod, I have no experience beyond what I have seen on the site. I do have some anxiety that some decisions I make might not necessarily be the best ones, and I will likely make some mistakes. But I am a strong believer in the SE community, especially the RPG.SE community to help me learn, and improve over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="12193" LastEditDate="2020-05-15T00:29:16.237" LastActivityDate="2020-05-15T00:29:16.237" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9930" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-12T14:23:29.993" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'm Gonna Miss You :(&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to say that I'm saddened to see you go and thank you for your many insightful and shockingly thorough posts throughout the meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had no idea that you were trans. Normally, I'd say that being trans doesn't matter, but I think in this case it very much does because I had no idea that the issues being raised with last year's CoC were affecting you in such a direct manner. I thank you for weathering that storm to bring us to where we are today. I also thank you for coming out that you are trans and helping us to see once more that issues that don't affect us directly, often affect those who are right adjacent to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, your meta posts are often absurd in their thoroughness and I love it. I always get the impression that you must've spent several hours across multiple days writing them with extensive links, citations, and quotes. Although those posts were very long, I never felt like they were too long. And a great many times I've had my mind changed on a matter due to your extremely high quality posts. Although you're stepping down as a moderator, I sincerely hope you will continue to provide us the benefit of your insights in meta when you feel ready.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2020-05-12T14:23:29.993" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9931" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9938" CreationDate="2020-05-12T14:49:38.367" Score="6" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was writing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/168833/35259&quot;&gt;this question about what Mordenkainen's main school of magic would be&lt;/a&gt; when I encountered a problem with how it was rendering spoiler quotes. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I nest a blockquote (using the HTML &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tag) inside the spoiler quote, then any text after the nested blockquote is not hidden, even though it's still within the &quot;spoiler area&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll show the bug here too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&lt;blockquote&gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&lt;/blockquote&gt;This should be hidden but is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also noticed the same issue on Meta Stack Exchange (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/260905&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I just doing something wrong, or has something changed, or is this simply a bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-05-15T16:48:21.827" LastActivityDate="2020-05-15T17:29:33.340" Title="Is this a bug in the spoiler quote rendering?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|formatting|spoilers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9926" CreationDate="2020-05-12T15:33:51.293" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/52137/someone-evil&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first step would be to try to get a clear picture of why the arguments or flags arise, or why there is such a perception and check that there is actually something which needs to be addressed by a diamond moderator. Moderators are humans, and humans are good at seeing patterns where there are none. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I, and my fellow moderators, are convinced there is something there which needs action, I would first have a conversation with the user. This is to get their perspective on the matter so that we can work towards a solution which works for everyone. I'm not sure more can be said ahead of an actual such incident, as it'll be too buried in hypotheticals to be useful. Any such handling will be highly specific to the specific situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;2. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would have a conversation with them about why to see if there is an aspect they haven't seen, or more likely that I haven't seen. If we aren't able to come to a clean solution ourselves, I see no problem in trusting the wisdom of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will point out this is an option available to non-elected users as well. Current mods (and me too, should I be elected) are more than happy to explain any such action, and possibly even more happy should someone point out, and thus correct, a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;3. What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly poorly, possibly hampering high-quality Q&amp;amp;A or harming community?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two points of contention that spring to mind. The first is on (newer users) specifying the system in question; the guessing policy related to that is not something we need to rehash (at least not quite yet), but I do think we should do our best with other ways to mitigate the problem (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9822/52137&quot;&gt;shameless self-plug&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other is an eagerness to close questions as &lt;s&gt;primarily&lt;/s&gt; opinion based for a lot of questions that don't need to be closed. This ends up causing a lot of questions to be closed that could otherwise be really good contributions to the site, where expertise can really shine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;4. What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly well to create high-quality Q&amp;amp;A and/or healthy community?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we're generally quite good at talking things out, and taking that talking where it belongs. Be that chat, which often flourishes with site and non-site topics, meta for more extensive discussions, or in comment threads for things on specific posts. The general tone and style is friendly and fruitful, which is something we should treasure and continue to maintain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;5. Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile. What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the same reason I've spend time and energy on non-diamond moderation already: that I like what this site is and can be, recognise the effort that has must continue to be put in to make it that, and the willingness and wish to put that in. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;6. What's your view on whether and how moderators represent sites to the broader SE community and to the company?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators do, because they're by default the recognisable link from both sides. To the company, they are known users who they know to have recognition and deep familiarity with the community. And to the RPG.SE community, they are users the community know and trust who have a connection to the company. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the SE community in general, I don't think we know quite what that will look like going forward. Fortunately, we have Rubiksmoose on the Pro-tempore moderator council to figure that out for us. Whether I'm elected or not, I will do what I can (or they need) to help them with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;7. Our site has struggled in the past with moderators overriding community voices, which made this feel like a moderator-driven site more than a community-driven site. Suppose you had a course of action or policy you felt strongly the site should adopt, but you were not sure the community would be supportive: how would you handle it? How would you handle that situation if the community vocally, strongly objects?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My first line would be to discuss the problem with the community first. This, for a couple of reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'd want to make sure there is an actual problem present to be solved. At risk of repeating myself: humans are good at seeing patterns where there are none.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This also lets the community find and suggest solutions. No number of glyphs appended to my username will make me the smartest person on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we find it to be a real, tangible problem to which no other solutions we're accepted, I would offer my own (assuming it hadn't been raised by someone else), expecting it to have some shortcoming to be hammered out, but I have good faith we'd be able to do that. If there are strong objections, I would listen to the whys. The whys are the most informative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;8. We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new users' questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tone of comments. More specifically, giving an explanation of why the question type doesn't work, why the closure is so quick and that it is temporary/reversible, and what is needed to get it solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't exclusive to moderators, but we can lead with an example and support/acknowledge when others take this on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have made mistakes, but learned from them and corrected where possible. A diamond might (possibly should) make me ensure to voice uncertainty and room for disagreement more clearly, but I can't foresee it fundamentally changing how I engage on the site. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;10. Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know. Or rather, I'm most worried about the things that I haven't considered, or just wrongly compartmentalised thinking it'll be fine. For these, I'm sure and glad to have moderators (current and old) to ask, or talk things out with when the need arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That, and the first oopsie I make with the diamond mod tools, which I've heard... various things about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-13T05:19:23.390" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T05:19:23.390" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9934" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9915" CreationDate="2020-05-13T00:26:13.883" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks for everything&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You very much deserved being elected as a moderator and it was good serving alongside you.  Thanks for all the effort you put into making RPG.SE a better place. It's a pretty thankless job really and SE central does little to make it easier and it takes a personal toll. I somewhat regret how bull-headed I was to stick with it for as many years as I did.  I appreciate your service, first as a fellow mod and then as a site member!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes people complain about the rules on RPG.SE, but it's thanks to them that we never let discourse get anywhere near as ugly as some of these other places, I'm glad to hear it provided you a sanctuary from the other shenanigans. But vigilance has to be renewed - I'd like to urge current and future moderators to not put up with any skirting of anti-bigotry rules - go right to the escalating suspensions.  Don't let this place fall, as nearly every other social site has, to the gross incivility of the modern age.  Keep doppelgreener in mind as a sterling example to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-13T05:02:43.093" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T05:02:43.093" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9936" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9900" CreationDate="2020-05-13T04:49:28.187" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The RPG Pipeline (announcement blog)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://theindierpgpipeline.blogspot.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://theindierpgpipeline.blogspot.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;feed link: &lt;a href=&quot;http://feeds.feedburner.com/TheIndieRpgPipeline&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://feeds.feedburner.com/TheIndieRpgPipeline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts often, because RPG creators are hopping!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;The RPG Pipeline is a posting board to keep track of upcoming tabletop rpgs. When I see a new rpg released, going into crowdfunding or looking for playtesters, I post it here. I cover only games (not supplements or other add-ons) and only English language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4398" LastActivityDate="2020-05-13T04:49:28.187" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9926" CreationDate="2020-05-13T08:00:39.067" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Linksassin - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5#post-168864&quot;&gt;Nomination Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a single user is generating lots of flags from other users then there might be something bigger going on. I would look into the type of flags being raised and if they were valid. If I judge it necessary I would approach the user to get their side of the story, and if required enforce site standards through moderator tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No where in my consideration does the volume or value of the users other contribution enter my mind, other than that I might know a more active user better than a less active one. Users are accountable to site policy regardless of reputation. I have always endeavored to vote, flag and comment based on the merit of the content rather than the user. This is a practice I intend to continue as a moderator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn't have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If another moderator has already handled a situation, my first response would always be to contact them for an explanation of their actions. As I noted in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9888/48759&quot;&gt;my recent meta&lt;/a&gt; the context for a post can change dramatically between users seeing it. What was reasonable at one time might no longer be. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once I have established the chain of events I can decide on a course of action. If I find that I still disagree with the other moderators actions and they stand by their decision, I will attempt to involve the other moderators or potentially open a meta post on the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The worst possible outcome is an open disagreement between moderators, so I will keep my actions private until we reach an agreed course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly poorly, possibly hampering high-quality Q&amp;amp;A or harming community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find the quality of moderation on this site so strong that is difficult to identify any specific practices I would like to see changed. Occasionally I do find that the timezone difference for my region can cause an undesirable delay in flag handling and moderator actions. This is one of the reasons I chose to nominate for the role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What practices at RPGSE do you see working particularly well to create high-quality Q&amp;amp;A and/or healthy community?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the common practices at RPGSE, among my favourite is our open attitude to helping users solve their problem. Where it would be easy to dismiss under-developed questions, downvote and move on. Instead we look to help improve questions and get to the heart of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Done right this is what separates us from other forums. We have the expertise to help users find the solution to their problem, rather than just the answer to their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other great practice is how we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/48759&quot;&gt;embrace all playstyles&lt;/a&gt;. Your fun isn't wrong so long as no one is getting hurt, and I think our community generally does a great job of being inclusive of all types of players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Extrinsic reward has never been a major motivator for me. It is the enjoyment and fulfillment I get from completing the task itself. Just being part of this community has been a constant learning and growth opportunity for me. I see becoming a moderator as another step on that path.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought for a long time before deciding to nominate for this election. Last election I thought I wanted the role for what it could do for me. Now I realise that part of why I want it is to uphold the legacy of the moderators who made this community such a great place to be a part of. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site was the first online community where I felt comfortable. It gave me an outlet for things when I really needed it. Now I want a chance to give back and hopefully, if I'm lucky, provide that same experience for someone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;What's your view on whether and how moderators represent sites to the broader SE community and to the company?&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  &lt;em&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/moderators&quot;&gt;recent discussions of moderation/moderatorship on MSE&lt;/a&gt;, perhaps starting at the most recent: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/347104/311001&quot;&gt;Introducing the Moderator Council - and its first, pro-tempore, representatives&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recent events have made the role of a moderator as a representative of their community far more significant. I will admit to not being a fan of everything that happened, but I have hope that we have turned a corner and begun to take steps in the right direction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator I would have a greater voice on broader stack exchange issues and a greater responsibility to advocate for my community. I've seen great examples of this from moderators here and on other communities I've been part of, particularly Rubiksmoose as a member of the moderator council. I would do everything I can to learn from these examples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;7&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Our site has struggled in the past with moderators overriding community voices, which made this feel like a moderator-driven site more than a community-driven site.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  Suppose you had a course of action or policy you felt strongly the site should adopt, but you were not sure the community would be supportive: how would you handle it? How would you handle that situation if the community vocally, strongly objects?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a newer member on the site I don't remember the situations this question refers to, but I hope that we can avoid them occurring again. I firmly believe that the community is more important than any individual, that includes moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had something I thought the community should adopt I would present my case on meta same as any other user. Making it clear that it was coming from me as a user rather than a moderator. I wouldn't assume to make policy posts in my capacity as a moderator without consultation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the response to my policy be negative (hopefully unlikely) I would accept this as a community decision. The role is moderator, not dictator and I must abide by community consensus. Similarly while discussing the policy I would keep my moderation of comments and answer on the post impartial, if I couldn't do that I would refrain from moderating on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;8&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;We have a problem here, occasionally, when a new user will ask a question that doesn't quite fit our format, and thus gets put on hold very quickly. This often leads to the new user feeling unfairly targeted and leaving the stack soon after. As a mod, what would you do to help improve these new users' questions while still encouraging them to stay on the site?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I often see this as an issue when new users get insufficient information about why their questions are closed. Currently I try to prevent this by actively checking the first post queue whenever I am on the site. As a mod I would also have the ability to remove disparaging comments, single-handedly reopen questions instantly once the required changes have been made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another situation where I see this is, users having their question closed while they are offline, coming back the next day expecting answers and only having a closed question. As I am in a different timezone to the many users I regularly see questions that should be closed/reopened waiting for votes. With a moderator in our timezone we would be able to resolve the issues for these users more quickly and improve their quality of life on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise I would continue with the welcoming comments I already try to leave on the site for any new contributor I come across. Even if their question needs work I try to find at least one part of the post to give encouragement for, it is rare that an entire post is a write off. When changes are required, I try to be clear and specific, providing justification and examples where I can. I don't see moderator status changing this significantly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;9&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all have undead skeletons lurking in our cupboards. Are there things that I have said in the past that I wish I could have handled differently? Of course. However I have several times gone through my past posts and made edits/reparations where I can. I have used these mistakes as a learning experience and find that I have far fewer instances of them now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the addition of moderator status I recognize that not everything can be fixed by an edit. Therefore I would take extra care in what I say and how I say it, particularly in handling sensitive situations. I feel I am ready for additional responsibility that comes with the moderators diamond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ol start=&quot;10&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;  What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am most worried that I will overdo it with my commitment to the site. I have previously used RPGSE as an escape from real life and it took time to find the right balance. Right now I have the right combination so I hope I can serve the community without over committing myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best help for this, would be for our other moderators to continue to be the amazing people they are. By sharing the load and supporting our users and each other I feel confident I can be a valuable member of the team without burning out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-05-18T22:53:45.673" LastActivityDate="2020-05-18T22:53:45.673" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9931" CreationDate="2020-05-15T15:15:12.740" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;After seeing the related Q&amp;amp;A on Main Meta (thanks to Rubiksmoose for finding it): &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/347955&quot;&gt;Line after blockquote in spoiler not a spoiler?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have solved the problem I was having by adding a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tag after the nested quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, what I had before (what I used in this meta question) is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;This should be hidden but is not.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it works if it's changed to this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;This should be hidden but is not.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is another example of the above but with more line breaks and &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!&lt;/code&gt; to make it clearer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&#xA;&amp;gt;!&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;!This should be hidden but is not.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which should be replaced by this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&#xA;&amp;gt;!&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;!&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;This should be hidden but is not.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, if you include that extra &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;, it renders it correctly like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;This is a spoiler quote and is hidden.&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;This is a nested quote and is also hidden.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should be hidden but is not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-05-15T17:29:33.340" LastActivityDate="2020-05-15T17:29:33.340" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9939" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions about the &quot;bounty&quot; feature on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site, both about when/how to use bounties in general and about issues regarding specific bounties. Bounties are a way to get additional attention on a question by offering some of your own reputation as a reward for a great answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/bounty&quot;&gt;See this help page for more information on bounties.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also this FAQ on Meta Stack Exchange: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16065/how-does-the-bounty-system-work&quot;&gt;How does the bounty system work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" LastActivityDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9940" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" Score="0" Body="For questions about the &quot;bounty&quot; feature on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange site, both about when/how to use bounties in general and about issues regarding specific bounties. Bounties are a way to get additional attention on a question by offering some of your own reputation as a reward for a great answer." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" LastActivityDate="2020-05-18T01:05:57.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9941" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-18T04:28:45.657" Score="2" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;Two years ago, I asked a question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/122193/30214&quot;&gt;How do I get my players&amp;#39; LARP characters to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was about a problem that most Russian LARPers know about, a very practical problem. The answers were very helpful, and since then, I have also discovered some solutions myself. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, rereading the answers, I notice many of them look:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Non-mutually-exclusive&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Equally valid&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use them all in your LARP practice at the same time, and it will work (I noticed that most good LARP games used most or all of the tips). None is then worse or better than another. Hence, this question looks better suited for a forum, where it could collect answers eternally for the help of future LARP GMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, should it be closed and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/30214&quot;&gt;redirected to a forum or a forum-like space?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-18T06:33:53.463" LastActivityDate="2020-05-19T00:43:44.023" Title="Isn't my question about LARP opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9942" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-18T17:53:16.593" Score="6" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone originally asked about this in a comment on the question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169112/getting-artifacts-with-xp-and-crafting-artifacts-with-iotum-in-numenera&quot;&gt;Getting artifacts with XP and crafting artifacts with iotum in Numenera&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we have different tags for &lt;em&gt;Numenera&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt;/&lt;em&gt;Destiny&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Destiny&lt;/em&gt; are  two products which make substantial changes to the game &lt;em&gt;Numenera&lt;/em&gt;. Monte Cook Games has said these are not a new version, but the answer to questions may differ based on whether the querent is interested in the &quot;original&quot; &lt;em&gt;Numenera&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Discovery&lt;/em&gt;/&lt;em&gt;Destiny&lt;/em&gt; rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Destiny&lt;/em&gt; includes a new cypher crafting system and rules for running communities. This is a big change as it allows a sense of &quot;progress&quot; instead of slowly decaying world that the players have to endure.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Discovery&lt;/em&gt; includes a large number of changes to existing character features.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Monte Cook Games's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.montecookgames.com/numenera-discovery-and-destiny/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;own words&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt; is a revision of the original &lt;em&gt;Numenera&lt;/em&gt; corebook, which will soon be out of print. &lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt; improves the clarity of the game rules and dramatically increases the options available to players. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;But this isn’t a new edition. There have been no substantive changes to the way the game plays mechanically, or the way NPCs, creatures, cyphers, artifacts, and other items work. And the setting isn’t changing either. This means you can keep using your bestiaries, adventures, card decks, character portfolios, and books like Into the Night, Technology Compendium, and Jade Colossus, and we will not issue any “second editions” of our supplements. And you can use future supplements with the existing &lt;em&gt;Numenera&lt;/em&gt; corebook, if you choose to keep using it instead of &lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt;. You don’t even have to make any changes to your current character—although you’ll now have more options as your character advances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we have a separate tag for &lt;em&gt;Numenera Discovery&lt;/em&gt;/&lt;em&gt;Destiny&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16058" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-18T19:37:51.937" LastActivityDate="2020-05-26T15:41:26.290" Title="Do we need a separate tag for Numenera Discovery?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9941" CreationDate="2020-05-19T00:43:44.023" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can a question draw meaningful votes from experts, who can judge an answer and say “that’s a good idea” or “that’s a bad one”? Then it’s fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions are closed primarily because they prevent voting from working correctly, and do not allow the site’s mechanisms for generating a high signal-to-noise ratio (i.e. voting) to actually accomplish that goal (i.e. the votes just become a popularity contest, or just literally everything gets upvoted). The goal, in effect, is to ensure that &lt;em&gt;votes&lt;/em&gt; have a high signal-to-noise ratio, where the “signal” is “this is actually helpful” and the “noise” is anything else—random chance, personal preference, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since your question could easily draw ideas that are not good, and which experts can recognize as such, and also draw distinctly-superior approaches, the odds are pretty good that it isn’t &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based. Remember that word “primarily,” because it’s crucial—questions which are seeking the educated, expert opinion of those who have experienced and solved similar issues aren’t &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based, they’re &lt;strong&gt;precisely what the site is best at&lt;/strong&gt;. Questions that are &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based, on the other hand, are just matters of preference, and often, situations where anyone could throw their two cents in and be just as “right” as any “expert,” because it’s a question where expertise doesn’t come into play. Those are the questions we close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-05-19T00:43:44.023" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9944" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9946" CreationDate="2020-05-19T13:11:50.083" Score="4" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a post notice for answers in need of support, but I'm unclear as to how that post notice is placed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we see something that needs support, what is the process for noting that? Obviously a comment isn't a bad idea, but many times people don't want to comment because they don't want to engage in a conversation or for any other reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a process we should follow?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-29T00:35:53.523" LastActivityDate="2020-05-29T00:35:53.523" Title="How does the post notice for unsupported answers get put on?" Tags="|discussion|answers|flagging|citations|post-notice|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9945" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9944" CreationDate="2020-05-19T13:15:48.350" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's probably not a flag, but a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/186087/295232&quot;&gt;post notice&lt;/a&gt;. They can only be added (and removed) by &amp;diams; moderators. RPG has three 'standard' answer notices and a fourth RPG-specific one, as can be seen in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1240483/answer-notices&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Data Explorer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm a moderator on three other sites in the network and regularly apply answer notices when I see a low quality answer (often after it has been &lt;em&gt;flagged&lt;/em&gt; as Very Low Quality) of which I think it &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be able to be edited into a proper answer. I guess you could use a custom moderator flag asking to apply a post notice, but I haven't seen anybody do that so far and I'm not sure what the moderators here think about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastActivityDate="2020-05-19T13:15:48.350" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9946" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9944" CreationDate="2020-05-19T13:19:39.280" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's a post notice. Diamond moderators can add and remove it. There's no flag associated with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leave a comment requesting the clarification or support that's needed. If it's egregious then also raise a flag for moderator attention suggesting we add a post notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Egregious” here is key. We don't add them to just every single answer that needs additional citation; comments alone can handle that. We use these in cases where we want to step in and send a clear signal to somebody (the author and/or other users): for example, when someone's leaving an answer to a high-profile question making bold uncited claims. If that post notice is on the answer, it's likely either getting improved soon or deleted soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-05-19T13:19:39.280" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9942" CreationDate="2020-05-20T17:48:04.893" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Suggestion: add the tags.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My instincts are that adding a tag won't hurt; it appears from some modest looking into this topic is that adding those tags to a Numenera question where applicable, and making sure to make points on what sources are used &lt;em&gt;in the text of the question&lt;/em&gt;, will ensure that answerers will be able to identify what they need to answer.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, over time, the tags cause trouble or confusion we can burninate them.   &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside: since the core rules, as it were, are going out of print my guess is that Monte is being somewhat cagey here.  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-05-26T15:41:26.290" LastActivityDate="2020-05-26T15:41:26.290" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9948" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-21T01:50:25.683" Score="-2" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often we get questions such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169222/is-moving-between-separate-attacks-of-the-same-spell-unbalanced&quot;&gt;Is moving between separate attacks of the same spell unbalanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble I always face with these questions is &quot;unbalanced with respect to what?&quot;. All house rules and homebrew are inherently unbalanced because they introduce changes to the game. Whether they introduce new possibilities or remove old possibilities, every change modifies the balance of the game in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's more, the ways that game balance is modified is almost always widespread, highly nuanced, and difficult to discern. There is no clear way to create a finite and exhaustive list of how it interacts with game balance. These questions are incredibly open-ended. Even a simple change can lead to near-endless discussion and debate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if we did have a complete list of every interaction, there would be actually-endless debate over whether this makes the change overpowered or underpowered. There is never a clear way to weigh up something like &quot;+1 damage&quot; vs &quot;+5ft of movement&quot;, making discussion almost purely opinion. Discussions can even turn into complex statements about how a change &quot;is underpowered, except for these 2 situations where it is exploitable, but if you make this change then it's mainly overpowered, but only slightly etc&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no metric for &quot;how unbalanced is acceptable&quot;, so we can't even say &quot;we've answered this question to a satisfactory extent&quot;. This is exacerbated by the site's tendency to prefer &quot;one true answer&quot; over &quot;multiple helpful answers&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have to contend with this site's guideline that &quot;asking questions isn't for brainstorming or getting ideas&quot;. On other sites these kinds of questions may fly, but they seem to me to be a poor fit here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can we handle these questions in a way that is both helpful to askers, and maintain the site's high standard for answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-05-21T02:14:21.963" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T04:00:00.977" Title="How can we address questions about homebrew balance?" Tags="|discussion|answers|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9949" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-21T02:50:23.933" Score="-9" ViewCount="231" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently, the Back It Up! is a bit vague to me. The policy is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Your answers (to subjective questions) must be based on either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something that happened to you personally&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;Something you can back up with a reference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't clear to me to what extent something has to have happened to you personally, nor what kind of reference needs to be used. Sometimes it seems to me this policy is weaponized, used to disparage answers, or used as a form of gatekeeping. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is an example: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148911/what-should-i-do-about-a-religious-player-who-refuses-to-accept-the-existence-of&quot;&gt;What should I do about a religious player who refuses to accept the existence of multiple gods in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is highly subjective, but many people have had some kind of experience that may be relevant. This experience ranges from &quot;perfectly relevant - I am the OP&quot;, &quot;highly relevant - I have been in this exact situation&quot;, &quot;relevant - the situation and context were different, but I have some insight&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The top answer says &quot;I haven't encountered this explicit situation where a religious player is unwilling to adapt, but I've experienced plenty of other scenarios where people were resistant to the unknown, the unfamiliar, or something they believed was &quot;wrong&quot; for various reasons.&quot; and that's good enough for me. But what would the minimum look like? Having interacted with another human? Talking to someone about their dislikes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find the vagueness makes the policy easy to weaponize, especially against newer users who don't know better. Here is a comment on a now-deleted (for unrelated and extremely valid reasons, so I won't link it), please note that the original answer does not mention a balking religious player:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What was the outcome when you did this with your balking religious player? Did they adapt, or did they walk? Was it a smooth transition or was there some struggle? How did(n’t) it impact the group’s enjoyment of the first few sessions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly this is a far higher bar than we realistically need. The comment implies that this is needed for an answer to be valid. Ultimately the answer was deleted for unrelated reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/148936/59609&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is a much better answer. They go over some things that most humans have experience with: having an honest talk and compromise. However, they are told &quot;You've got some good ideas here, but they really do need to be backed up per our good subjective policy. While your ideas are good, we should not be upvoting answers that aren't backed up unless you can support them.&quot; To me this answer has the same level of experience as the top answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the flip side, especially with 5e questions, we have a problem of over-quoting. Since everything can easily be referenced, often simple questions are answered with a half dozen rules quotes. I don't think it's as harmful as this problem, so that's a discussion for another time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am finding it difficult to understand where the line lies with regard to what experience is considered relevant. How can the vagueness of the policy be addressed in a way that does not risk problems with new users?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T18:59:38.920" Title="To what extent should Back It Up! be enforced?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9949" CreationDate="2020-05-21T03:23:34.213" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt; is first and foremost.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That should go without saying; but sometimes users don't want to bother or put the time and effort into understanding the whole picture. As you mentioned, this is likely the primary reason why the answer you're referring to was deleted. Basically, their approach was &quot;Their values don't matter&quot;, taking the &quot;my way or the highway&quot; solution, which just is not acceptable here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&quot;Back it up!&quot; is dependent on the situation.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it may have been made clear through context; &quot;personal experience&quot; or a link depends on the type of question that's being asked. In this situation, &quot;personal experience&quot; is the more appropriate, though obviously if it did not happen to &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;, a blog or podcast, etc might have the evidence to support your question; so a link would work well. Generally in rule clarifications etc, a link is the more appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;That said, &quot;Backing it Up!&quot; is what makes the difference between a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer, and a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; answer.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, you've mentioned that some people do give good advice, but since they're just &quot;ideas&quot;, they haven't been tried and tested. That doesn't mean that they're bad answers though - it just means that while these ideas are good, the answer that has &lt;em&gt;evidence&lt;/em&gt; of its efficacy is better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;To quote Barbossa, the &quot;Back it Up!&quot; policy is more of a &lt;em&gt;guideline&lt;/em&gt;, than an actual rule&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Much like many other &quot;rules&quot; we have here. We aim for a 1:1 Question to answer ratio (purely to reduce noise, duplication, etc). That doesn't necessarily mean that more than one answer on a question is unacceptable. Votes don't determine the wright or wrong answer, or necessarily a good or bad question. A lot of the time these &quot;rules&quot;, like the questions they apply to, are subjective. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main thing you want to follow is the Code of Conduct - &lt;em&gt;Be Nice&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="12193" LastEditDate="2020-05-21T03:48:05.837" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T03:48:05.837" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9951" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9948" CreationDate="2020-05-21T03:36:21.553" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Some excellent guidelines on &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to answer a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; question already exist&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9375&quot;&gt;How to properly review a homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe these guidelines give excellent ways to tackle these seemingly incredibly subjective questions in more measurable and tangible ways. Many of the guidelines found there can also apply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One can compare a houserule to similar existing content; it's rather uncommon that a houserule introduces something completely unheard of prior to the houserule's introduction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One can look for how the houserule departs from the consistencies of pre-existing content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One can check whether or not a given houserule actually achieves the goal they wanted it to. That said, a houserule often doesn't have to be explicitly worded in whatever jargon and style the original system was and so it's not uncommon that a houserule explicitly states it's goals and that it just flatly accomplishes them, no rules-writing required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suggestions on changes to a houserule are also something welcome on this site though I'd recommend following some of the advice found in the following related Q/A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9791&quot;&gt;Is it acceptable to include your opinion of the quality of character choices in an answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, encouraging playtesting is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; a good idea because though one can theorize for infinite time, seeing the houserules play out in action are where we can see how imbalancing certain things really are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Addressing some of the specific questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unbalanced with respect to what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, if a houserule is being suggested it clearly must be changing &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt;, else the houserule would not exist. Therefore, when somebody asks whether a change is &quot;balanced&quot; they are not asking &quot;does this change change things?&quot; they are asking &quot;does this change &lt;em&gt;unreasonably&lt;/em&gt; change things?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line between a small change and a major change, a reasonable change and an unreasonable, imbalancing change is subjective, yes, but that does not mean it can't fit the site. We have hundreds of questions on social situations and things like gm-techniques and problem-players, there is clearly no single objective, best answer to any of these things. The same applies to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Addressing the nuance&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Houserules often have ramifications outside the scope of what the asker imagined, this is almost unavoidable. One of the benefits of a houserule is that a GM has the leeway to alter it at any time; answers don't have to address every nuanced change because a GM can address them as they come up in play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, an answer can certainly address changes they feel are particularly alarming, and which changes those are will come down to the subjective experience of the answerer and their own understanding/mastery of a system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Discussion is purely opinion&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Opinions are not a bad thing and are almost unavoidable. The thing we look for in an answer is that it backs up its claims, either by having the houserule in question (or a similar one), or by demonstrating a great understanding of the system. This is often done through comparison to other pre-existing features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, two people can disagree on whether something in particular is imbalancing, but people disagree on answers &lt;em&gt;all the time&lt;/em&gt;. The thing to do is back it up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The site's tendency to prefer &quot;one true answer&quot; over &quot;multiple helpful answers&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Don't Ask&lt;/a&gt;&quot; page states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite ______?” [...]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/accepted-answer&quot;&gt;Accepted Answer&lt;/a&gt;&quot; page states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;[...] Accepting an answer is not meant to be a definitive and final statement indicating that the question has now been answered perfectly. It simply means that the author received an answer that worked for them personally. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps I'm out of some sort of loop but I have not felt any sort of pressing need to have one answer per question, or to have ultimate perfect answers either. Two people can write different answers from different evidence and viewpoints, coming to the same &lt;em&gt;or different&lt;/em&gt; conclusions; that doesn't make one of the answers bad. The site has accepted answers but those are literally personal to the question asker and have no bearing on the quality of a given answer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-21T03:49:32.573" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T03:49:32.573" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9952" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9948" CreationDate="2020-05-21T04:00:00.977" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;With our words.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many homebrew review problems do an excellent job, in their texts, of describing what balance is being sought. Maybe it's spotlight-time, maybe it's combat effectiveness, maybe it's rewarding a particular style of play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question is well-posed like that ^^ it's easy for voters to read answers, filter them through their experience, and decide whether the answer deserves an upvote or downvote or comment or both or nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But some aren't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So people comment asking for a standard of review, and maybe they even vote to close as needing further details. (Sometimes the need for homebrew/aim sought by homebrewing is so vague or invisible that a simple &amp;quot;what problem are you trying to solve?&amp;quot; is the only comment that can be made!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every one of these questions is a beloved, unique child of its creator. (In more ways, perhaps, than the typical rules or table-dynamics question.) And they get treated that way by our users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T04:00:00.977" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9949" CreationDate="2020-05-21T08:30:16.090" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I Don't Think You'll Get Crystal Clear Arbitration Rules&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are, after all, talking about tabletop RPGs, where questions span the gamut from, &amp;quot;What happens by the rules in this situation?&amp;quot; to, &amp;quot;What's the best mechanical way to achieve X?&amp;quot; to, &amp;quot;I have this nasty conflict with my GM/a player, so why am I right and they're wrong?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these are amenable to easily interpreted answer-- rules are cited, answers are compared, and voting happens.  Others aren't because they are &amp;quot;Good Subjective&amp;quot; questions-- questions that are in some obvious way subjective, but which nevertheless other players and GMs may have some experience with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But note, when trying to sift out Good Subjective answers to Good Subjective Questions, the guidelines are going to be... subjective, based in community practice, guided by higher rep users and occasionally brought to a head in Meta.  But the Meta does not-- can not-- remove the subjectivity entirely, it usually just codifies it and gets people on the same page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's The Point?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...Of the Subjective Guidelines, I mean.  I didn't fully come around to the GS/BS mindset myself until I came to a conclusion (perhaps personal, perhaps more widely shared) about why the guidelines exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote and then expand on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9505/18269&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; I particularly liked in a similar discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of GS/BS is to enable meaningful voting behaviors. That’s it: to make sure that the Stack Exchange system actually works, actually filters out noise and highlights strong signals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the question end, this filters out questions so subjective that there is no meaningful criteria for casting votes on the answers.  On the answer end, especially for the querant who may not have expertise with the precise subject matter, the backing of experience will help them in the selection of their best answer.  Collectively, they prevent the stack sites from morphing into free-form discussion and brainstorming forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How Much Experience Is Enough?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is, as I alluded to before, subjective.  As far as I know, the most recent guidance on Subjective Answers is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8697/18269&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, with the relevant passage being:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means when you provide a subjective solution you believe will resolve the situation, we expect that you cite analogous experience of how it has worked out in actual practice — your own experience or someone else's. Describing how it worked out is more preferable to describing how well it worked out: “these things happened, the players felt this way about it” is preferable to “it worked well”, but either is preferable to no citation of it actually being tried at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The experience does not have to be of the exact same situation&lt;/strong&gt;, although that would be ideal. Experience of similar or analogous situations is also relevant and helpful, at least to the extent they are similar/analogous enough to be relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Emphasis mine.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not much more detail than that is given, so it is up to the community to determine that in practice:  Answerers decide when writing, querants decide when selecting an answer, and readers decide by casting votes (explained or not.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In more extreme cases (ideally but not always a note on a question that seems a little close to the edge and may start generating brainstorming) someone might leave a comment.  The usual endpoint of this process is that the question generating too many Bad Subjective answers gets closed either by vote or by mod.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more egregious cases, I suppose there are various options to delete an answer, but those are not the norm, and not really what we're talking about here, I hope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Does It Work?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think so.  This is anecdotal at best, of course, but once I understood the point of the guidelines, I found myself more than once (and still do!) thinking that I have an answer that I think is really good and want to share... but in the process of writing it up, I realize that the experience I have probably isn't close enough to warrant the advice I'm giving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so I close the answer and think about it overnight, and either reconstruct a better version, or stay silent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A Footnote&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I mentioned earlier, these issues do occasionally come to a head here in Meta; this is one such example.  But it's worth pointing out that several months &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the Question and Answers you're looking at, a diamond mod noticed rising friction on this topic in the community and took up the task of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9500/18269&quot;&gt;soliciting feedback&lt;/a&gt; on the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since then, I think the stack has reached about the right balance.  There is much less friction on this issue that I can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was, in fact, the motivation for my setting an arbitrary limit of three years in my comment-- sadly, I thought that realignment was farther into the past than it actually was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was also the basis for my observation that the guidelines had been used over-zealously in the past.  But I don't think I ever saw a case of turning them into a weapon against a disliked user, or as an intentional gateway mechanism to keep any person or people out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-21T08:30:16.090" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9955" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-25T10:53:27.713" Score="7" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;As we all know, D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder have lots of classes, and tons of subclasses, and the same is probably true for many other systems that I'm unfamiliar with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, I've recently noticed the usage of tags for subclasses, which raises some questions about their usage and usefulness for me; namely, there seems to be a lot of inconsistency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's look at a few tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/battle-master&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;battle-master&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;battle-master&lt;/a&gt;: explicitly described as a 5e-exclusive tag by the tag wiki, relevant only for the fighter subclass.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eldritch-knight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eldritch-knight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eldritch-knight&lt;/a&gt;: described as a D&amp;amp;D-tag in general, non-edition-exclusive (which makes sense, as it appears in multiple editions).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/assassin&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;assassin&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;assassin&lt;/a&gt;: very open-ended, the tag wiki might as well be a dictionary entry for assassins if it weren't for the term &quot;character class or type&quot;. Of course, people use (/abuse?) this tag for question about the 5e rogue subclass, while there are also questions about 3.5e, 4e, Pathfinder and D&amp;amp;D-semi-related (?) questions, for example about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/basic-fantasy-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;basic-fantasy-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;basic-fantasy-rpg&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thief&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;thief&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;thief&lt;/a&gt;: pretty much the same thing as the assassin tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/champion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;champion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;champion&lt;/a&gt;: at first glance, one could think this is about the fighter subclass present in 5e and potentially previous editions. Looking at the 3 questions posted with this tag, though, they're all about pathfinder-2e. Yet I'm sure that if the Champion subclass in 5e wasn't so simple (i.e. there are very few issues to ask about in the first place), it would have been used for 5e questions as well (unless maybe it did, and the tag got deleted automatically at some point because of low use; the pathfinder-2e questions are all relatively new).&lt;br&gt;&#xA;Either way, the tag will likely be used for 5e questions in the future, turning this into another fuzzy multi-system (sub)class tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure how to handle tags like those above (I probably missed a few). Some of them are 5e-exclusive by virtue of the tag wiki, even though other systems/editions use the same term for something as well. Some are D&amp;amp;D-specific (potentially including pathfinder), but not to be used for other systems that use the same term for something.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;And other ones are super-generic and about as useful as a &quot;sword-user&quot; tag would be. More precisely, I'm hoping nobody here has real-world knowledge of assassination beyond watching Léon: The Professional, so having e.g. a gold badge for the assassination tag would be absolutely meaningless, as it encompasses lots of different systems or contexts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this inconsistent handling of subclass tags a problem in the first place, or am I being too pedantic? If it is problematic, how should we tackle this issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="38495" LastEditDate="2020-05-25T21:10:19.280" LastActivityDate="2020-05-25T21:10:19.280" Title="How should tags for subclasses be used?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9956" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9955" CreationDate="2020-05-25T13:20:58.597" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There's no need to limit tags for non-system specific topics to specific topics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of tags for (sub)classes the actual topic they are tying together is a specific character archetype, which certain systems (generally D&amp;amp;D-likes) has as a named character option (ie. class or subclass). Most character archetypes can appear in any number of systems and thus the tag should reflect that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the archetype, or at least the archetype by that specific name, is only occurring in a single system and/or we only have questions about it for that one system, there's nothing wrong with the tag excerpt describing it as occurring in that one system. That's more accurate, and makes it easier for a reader to understand what the tag (currently) refers to. If the archetype spreads to other systems, we can update the tag description to reflect that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find a tag that is used across systems, or which should be, but it's tag description seems to limit it to a specific system, fix the tag description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-25T13:20:58.597" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9957" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-26T20:10:33.570" Score="24" ViewCount="347" Body="&lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;fifth moderator election&lt;/a&gt; has come to a close, the votes have been tallied and the two new moderators are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/52137/someone-evil&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/52137.png&quot; alt=&quot;Someone_Evil&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/48759/linksassin&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/48759.png&quot; alt=&quot;linksassin&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They'll be joining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the existing crew&lt;/a&gt; shortly&amp;mdash;please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, please join me in thanking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9875/to-every-thing-there-is-a-season&quot;&gt;nitsua60&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9915/in-which-a-doppelgreener-becomes-somewhat-less-shiny&quot;&gt;doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt;, who will be stepping down as moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/results/5340814077067264/0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;view a summary report online&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53705" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-06-17T01:44:57.977" LastActivityDate="2020-06-17T01:44:57.977" Title="2020 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9957" CreationDate="2020-05-26T21:11:47.560" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Congrats, and thanks to everyone who ran!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone_Evil and linksassin, I look forward to having you on the team. Ben, you were a great candidate too - don't be too discouraged by the results, and I hope you run again in future elections. You were all excellent candidates. I'm excited to see what you bring to the moderator team!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-26T21:11:47.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9959" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9957" CreationDate="2020-05-27T01:43:09.647" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We had no way to lose&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two good choices, and a third who'd have been good also.&lt;br&gt;&#xA;As I said in chat:&lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxmNdVC02Qg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;You Look Good in Blue&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Champagne all around.  Doppelgreener's buying. &lt;em&gt;evil grin&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#xA;(KS sneaks out the back of the tavern)  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T01:43:09.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9960" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9957" CreationDate="2020-05-27T02:17:12.110" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Thanks for the opportunity&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was a privilege to get to run in this election and an honor to be selected. I hope I can live up to the faith the community has placed in me, as well as the legacy of the terrific mods who have come before me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T02:17:12.110" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9961" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-27T14:55:21.427" Score="12" ViewCount="580" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a great &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index post&lt;/a&gt; here on the Role-Playing Games Meta Stack Exchange, but our current process for adding things to that list is a little lacking. Currently users add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; tag to their question, then at some point in the future once the post is mature a mod will add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-container&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag to it. This good in theory, but in practice has a few problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No one gets notified when the tag is added.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is no good place to discuss whether a question should be on the FAQ list or not&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Proposals remain as proposals for months until a mod gets around to it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'd like to trial a new solution. Introducing the FAQ proposal index:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How it works&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'll continue using the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; tag on FAQ candidates. In addition, post an answer to this meta with a link to the question to be added and an optional justification for why it should be added. User can then use votes to indicate if the question is a good candidate and comments to discuss if required changes are required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Highly voted questions indicate that the community has reached a consensus and the question should be added to our FAQ. What counts as &amp;quot;highly voted&amp;quot; is open for discussion, but for now, let's trial the following threshold: the post must have a score of at least +5, with at least a 2:1 upvote-to-downvote ratio.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a reasonable period to collect input (let's try one month), proposals will be actioned. If they have sufficient support, a mod will add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-container&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; tag and update the index accordingly. If not, we will remove the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; tag from the question. Either way, the answer post here will be deleted once acted upon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to propose &lt;strong&gt;removing&lt;/strong&gt; a question from the FAQ, please &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/ask?tags=discussion&quot;&gt;ask a new question on meta tagged discussion&lt;/a&gt; proposing the removal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T13:59:54.250" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:54:18.520" Title="FAQ Proposal Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange" Tags="|discussion|faq-proposal|faq-maintenance|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2020-05-27T15:11:55.937" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5559/should-question-titles-be-formatted-as-a-question&quot;&gt;Should question titles be formatted as a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has several answers that some good advice on how to create good titles for the questions on our site. It also hosts some discussion on some of the more nuanced parts of editing question titles that is valuable information. It makes a decent candidate for the FAQ list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-05-27T15:11:55.937" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9944" CreationDate="2020-05-27T18:55:03.570" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's how this works, based on my experience.  This is emergent behavior, not policy, and some of it is probably undesired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~20% chance) on answers with no-to-moderate citations on questions that are active and that a mod is personally interested in and where the answer is out of left field (this is part of why I think moderator system proficiency matters).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~1% chance) on the inevitable unsupported but upvoted 'popular opinion' answers to highly-active idea-generation questions that aren't being closed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~100% chance) on all other unsupported answers posted before the banners are put on things where a post notice was placed on an answer pursuant to section 2.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~60% chance) on all answers, regardless of support or lack thereof, where a post notice was placed because of number 2 and the post does not cite a respected published resource (e.g. answers citing personal experience or blog posts for a system where those aren't respected much or &quot;I talked to  at GenCon in 19XX and they said X&quot; or &quot;I am  and I say Y&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~50% chance) on flagrant opinion answers by high-rep users when those are contrary to the opinion of a mod or other high-rep user, which is practically all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice tends to go (~5% chance) on unsupported posts by users with 3K-7K rep. The chance rises significantly if a user doesn't change their behaviour after receiving a notice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice does not go on posts by new users unless the post has bad grammar &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; is wrong.  If a post has bad grammar &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; is wrong &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the user sticks around to defend it, it may (~25% chance) get the post notice.  That chance skyrockets if the bad, ungrammatical, unsupported post is not at a negative total vote score, but that's practically never (such posts are usually edited for grammar or downvoted into oblivion or both).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice (or maybe a similar one?) goes on (~70%) answers that recommend homebrew without indication that the homebrew has been tested at all on a question where a mod is participating and after the poster ignores comments suggesting they support their claims.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The post notice goes where chat summons it, but I know not the ways of chat.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-05-28T19:56:52.040" LastActivityDate="2020-05-28T19:56:52.040" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9970" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-05-30T08:31:34.337" Score="5" ViewCount="165" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/169539/8610&quot;&gt;&quot;In this situation, what are the best tactical uses for at-will major creation?&quot;&lt;/a&gt; seems complete except for perhaps needing more information about the environment in which the final confrontation will occur. A user experienced with the ins and outs of the &lt;em&gt;major creation&lt;/em&gt; spell (and, maybe, the creatures listed in the question) should be able to help the asker with appropriate strategies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I imagine determining a best answer is possible: a good answer recognizes both the power and limits of the spell then offers specific suggestions to deal with the PCs, their allies, and—perhaps—the primary antagonist's own ex-allies. And an answer that does that in an innovative and outside-the-box way—suitable for the antagonist's massive intelligence—would be exceptional.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question needs to offer more information, edit history will show that the asker is willing to provide that. Additional suggestions as to how to get this question reopened are welcome, of course.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; To be clear about where I stand, as a DM I've used the creature that the question asks about in a campaign, and the creature is enormously complicated. That the asker's struggling only with this one aspect of the creature and only in this situation seemed to me to make this question sufficiently narrow, especially after the user provided more information so as to make this essentially a monster &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1639/8610&quot;&gt;optimization question&lt;/a&gt;. However, after the asker's edit, I thought that readers might find some of that new information overwhelming, so in an attempt to get the question reopened, I edited it. Moments after I did, the question received a commentless downvote for which I now hold myself partially responsible. To be extra clear, I don't already have an answer prepared for this question, and now I'll probably avoid answering it on principle.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-30T08:48:39.553" LastActivityDate="2020-05-30T16:24:44.997" Title="Advice for getting this question about the overseer's major creation reopened" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9970" CreationDate="2020-05-30T16:03:38.260" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, I can't actually speak for the users who closed, but here's what it looks to me like has happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question was framed with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;What sorts of items might it create?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is a query best served by a flood of unsorted responses with ideas - i.e., better served by a traditional forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was then appended with a wall of additional information ending in:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;So, what specific items might the overseer create for the beholderkin that survive?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is moving in the right direction, but still has the same issue and the original question is still there. At this point as the question was edited it goes through a reopen review which leaves it closed. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then your edit comes in and reframes it to actually ask for what would be best for it (and not just what it can or could do). This makes it probably workable (I'll get back to that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, we haven't got that many users who are invested in 3.5, so a closed question getting an edit might not get the attention it needs to get reopened. Particularly if it is still borderline on opinion based so it'll need users to champion it and be willing to be proven wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what's the current concern? It is still very close to &quot;How do I optimally use this inherently open ended thing?&quot; which might attract sprawling idea generation. I'm saying the concern is that it might. It might also not, and if so it sounds like it would be a very good question to me. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, unless anyone voices concerns about something I've missed (if I have missed anything I would love to hear it), I think we should take the chance on the question in its current state. Put another way, I think it is borderline enough that we should try it by fire, and let the answers come in determine whether it is focused enough. If the answers that come in are too idea sprawl or show other issues, it will need to be closed. Let's hope that doesn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-05-30T16:24:44.997" LastActivityDate="2020-05-30T16:24:44.997" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9972" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9973" CreationDate="2020-06-01T07:51:55.693" Score="8" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169813/how-do-i-calculate-d20-success-probability-using-the-halfling-lucky-trait-with&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question, but my inline math didn't work until I put a backslash before the dollar signs &lt;code&gt;\$like so\$&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is the backslash required? That isn't the case on other sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/scWPv.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/scWPv.png&quot; alt=&quot;![Screenshot&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64042" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T12:31:09.167" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T12:31:09.167" Title="Why does inline math require \ before $?" Tags="|support|markdown|mathjax|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9972" CreationDate="2020-06-01T09:20:09.953" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, when MathJax is added to a site when it's mature and has a lot of posts already, Stack Exchange staff chooses to use &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt; delimiters instead of &lt;code&gt;$&lt;/code&gt;. This is to prevent things like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are a few decent options in the $10-$20 range.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;being displayed as&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are a few decent options in the &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$10-\$&lt;/span&gt;20 range.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a handful of other sites in the network where this the case: for a complete list, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/216607/295232&quot;&gt;Which Stack Exchange sites use MathJax?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastActivityDate="2020-06-01T09:20:09.953" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9972" CreationDate="2020-06-01T11:24:38.800" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because when we added MathJax to the site, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6335/1204&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange staff decided&lt;/a&gt; to use &lt;code&gt;\$&lt;/code&gt; as delimiters rather than &lt;code&gt;$&lt;/code&gt; because many posts would be impacted otherwise. They cite &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5896/mathjax-latex-equations-for-rpg-se-and-statistics-posts#comment16641_5899&quot;&gt;an analysis by one of our citizens&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;There are 349 posts that contain dollar signs, more than twice my estimate for posts that might benefit from MathJax (162). 137 of the 349 contain 2 dollar signs, if that matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;— Miniman Nov 12 '15 at 0:37&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5896/23970&quot;&gt;original post requesting MJ on RPG here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6336/23970&quot;&gt;the post announcing its going live here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I know this doesn't really add much to Glorfindel's answer&amp;mdash;really I just wanted to link both of those posts into this conversation, and my conscience wouldn't let me leave them in comments that really do answer the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-01T15:23:46.313" LastActivityDate="2020-06-01T15:23:46.313" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9976" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-04T09:37:25.140" Score="13" ViewCount="476" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/169939/35259&quot;&gt;Would Zorquan be a Unity domain patron?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said in a comment, given that the question includes &quot;2e Forgotten Realms&quot; (provided for background context for lore purposes) and &quot;we're playing a fairly by-the-book &lt;strong&gt;5e campaign.&lt;/strong&gt;&quot;, isn't this confirmation of D&amp;amp;D 5e? Can we not just add the [dnd-5e] tag ourselves in this case? Is the policy &lt;em&gt;really this strict&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than having comments under the question be the place to discuss this, I decided to open this meta so that we can decide here whether or not adding the tag in this case violates &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/35259&quot;&gt;the policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those who know my view on the policy would be able to guess that I want to add the tag, since I don't agree with the policy in the first place, but in this case, I think even those in favour of the policy might agree with me that in this case, there is zero ambiguity. Given that the extreme strictness of the policy makes no sense to me, I find it difficult to judge cases like this where it seems insane to me not to add the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we add the tag, or do we go ahead and close the question and force the user to add the tag, even though they've already stated 5e in the question and made other references to D&amp;amp;D? (Not to mention that they've also included the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag, the description of which mentions that it is a D&amp;amp;D 5e tag.) &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it really the case that system tags are strictly hands-off &lt;em&gt;unless you are the author of the question&lt;/em&gt;, with zero exceptions (diamond mods excluded)? (Note that I'm not asking for anyone to convince me that the policy is a good thing; that's what the other meta Q&amp;amp;A, linked earlier, is for. This is about clarifying the policy's use in practice, with respect to this specific question, linked at the top.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-06-04T10:18:31.927" LastActivityDate="2020-06-08T17:08:38.123" Title="Does adding the system tag to this question violate the &quot;never guess the system&quot; policy?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9976" CreationDate="2020-06-04T13:11:23.073" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is a violation of the policy, strictly speaking. There are many games that have five or more editions, so “2e” and “5e” could well be references to those systems—nothing in the question confirms that they are playing &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt; 5e. Officially, the Forgotten Realms is a setting only for Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, but that doesn’t stop anyone from using it for whatever system they prefer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The odds of it being anything but D&amp;amp;D 5e, however, are vanishingly small. Moreover, since it’s a lore question, and Forgotten Realms &lt;em&gt;lore&lt;/em&gt; always comes from Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons (even if you use it for another system), it doesn’t actually &lt;em&gt;matter&lt;/em&gt; if they actually are playing some other system. In theory, they could want lore from another edition of D&amp;amp;D to inform their play in the fifth edition of something else, but that’s getting preposterously unlikely. Particularly since I don’t believe any other edition of D&amp;amp;D has anything called the “Unity domain.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem here is less that we can’t be sure, and more that the policy is strict for reasons that go beyond &lt;em&gt;merely&lt;/em&gt; getting it right. There are also pedagogical and meta concerns raised in the most recent argumentation in favor of keeping the policy strict (disclosure: that was me). To wit, there is merit in having &lt;em&gt;everyone on the site&lt;/em&gt; know that we have to close questions without a game and system attached (when they’re about rules, of course, which this is at least a bit since it references the rules content of the Unity domain). The advantage of this consistency is that it teaches new users about our rules and needs, and it ensures we don’t risk ever getting things wrong. The big problem with loosening the policy stems from the simple fact that we have no way of guaranteeing appropriate oversight on these kinds of edits; the SE software has no notion of system tags or their being special, to highlight these kinds of changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; said, a possibility raised in that most recent pro-strict-ness meta post (again, disclosure, mine). Namely, a Meta discussion could be an appropriate way to ensure we have the oversight. In that post, this possibility was largely dismissed as not really being worth the time, but since we’re already here, we have had the meta discussion, and I don’t see any plausible scenario where &lt;em&gt;this particular edit&lt;/em&gt; could be a problem. The policy exists as it does because we don’t have the best vision on any &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; decisions made by individual users and that’s a problem, but this isn’t a decision by any individual user—this is a Meta discussion, where we can gather consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, my conclusion here is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The policy would not allow an individual poster to edit this question, but with Meta consensus, it seems near-perfectly safe and in keeping with the caution called for by the policy.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This cannot be generalized; we can discuss &lt;em&gt;this question&lt;/em&gt; but not any broader category of questions that are in some way “like” this one. A Meta consensus is necessary for this kind of edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2020-06-04T13:27:38.660" LastActivityDate="2020-06-04T13:27:38.660" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9980" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-05T06:56:51.093" Score="8" ViewCount="286" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;Deleted answers help page&lt;/a&gt; starts with the sentence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers that &lt;strong&gt;do not fundamentally answer the question&lt;/strong&gt; may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And goes on to give examples of non-answer answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet, deletion can also be performed when an answer does indeed answer the question, but it &lt;strong&gt;disagrees with the rpg.se site policies&lt;/strong&gt;. Currently, this is &lt;strong&gt;not explicitly stated&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to the help page, the only way that policy-infringement deletions can happen appears to be through the following rule:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers can also be deleted by the community. Moderators can delete any answer, and trusted community members can vote to delete answers scoring -1 or lower (3 votes will result in deletion).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if we follow up and read about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/trusted-user&quot;&gt;trusted community members&lt;/a&gt;, we find out that trusted members may vote to delete answers in the following cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;ul&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The answer is extremely low quality: There is little to no scope for improvement&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;li&gt;The answer doesn't attempt to answer the question; it may be a comment or a separate question altogether.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note again that the deletion due to infringement of rpg.se site policies is still not covered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please note that when I mention rpg.se site policy, I am not talking about stack exchange policies, but the rules set over the years by rpg.se community themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In summary, could we improve the deletion help page to make it clear that answers disagreeing with rpg.se site policies (the ones voted in by the community) can be deleted?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-05T08:23:56.973" LastActivityDate="2020-06-05T17:27:36.583" Title="Improvement on Deleted Answers Help Page - deletion due to rpg.se policies" Tags="|discussion|policy|help-center|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9980" CreationDate="2020-06-05T12:06:55.037" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think this slightly misunderstands why the answer was deleted.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And, for the record, I'm not sure I agree with the deletion. But that's prejudiced by my friction with the &amp;quot;never tag the system&amp;quot; practice that was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/23970&quot;&gt;recently re-upheld by the community&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Problem is, seems to me: your deletion is a bit of a bank-shot. It's not that RPGSE has a policy of deleting answers to questions lacking necessary system tags. It's that questions lacking necessary system tags &lt;em&gt;will be closed&lt;/em&gt;, and experienced-enough users realize this, recognize that part of the purpose of closure is preventing answers, and uphold &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; even before the post's been closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Put another way, prevailing wisdom is that a question without system tag--no matter the amount of information that might draw an expert like you to conclude that you know the system--is &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;unanswerable&lt;/strong&gt;. Thus an answer is invalid, full stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, I don't think it &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; deleted for violating some RPGSE policy, despite what the commenter said. (We don't have any policy stating that &lt;em&gt;answerers&lt;/em&gt; can't make whatever assumptions they want, after all!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-06-05T17:27:36.583" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9982" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9980" CreationDate="2020-06-05T13:17:59.543" Score="3" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;Answers that do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we do not know what the question &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt;, answers &lt;strong&gt;cannot possibly&lt;/strong&gt; answer it. Fundamentally, the question cannot be answered in such a state. &lt;strong&gt;Any&lt;/strong&gt; answer to such a question is subject to deletion per this rule. There doesn’t need to be another one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this question was unclear: it did not have system/edition information in it. In that state, it was unanswerable. We cannot answer questions about rules without knowing what rules are being used. I don’t think that statement needs defending; it’s nearly tautological.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of the above touches on site policy at all. Even in the absence of any site policy, I would vote to delete any answer on an unclear question, and any question that relies on rules but doesn’t have system/edition information is unclear. Not as a matter of policy, but as a matter of fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So even if site policy were different, I would still vote to delete your answer. If site policy were different, it would still be incorrect to answer the question in that state. The only change would be that if site policy were different, you might have edited the question—and &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; it could have been answered. But the edit should happen first. Answers should be written only for questions that are clear as they stand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site policy applies primarily to editing the question to include system/edition information, rather than answering, precisely because actually answering a question in an unclear state is already covered by far more fundamental and network-wide policy. The site policy is not an excuse for ignoring the general precept that questions must be clear before they can be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not believe that any changes to the deletion policy page are necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-06-05T13:17:59.543" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9984" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9976" CreationDate="2020-06-05T22:16:35.120" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know I am likely to be the minority voice here, but for the sake of future reference, I have decided to add this answer, so there is at least one counter argument. Let me start by saying that I respect the never-guess-the-system policy. However, I believe that policy cannot apply here, as there is nothing to guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NathanS did not mention the following pieces of information in his question above. The question of interest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Has already 5 tags, all of which are arguably more specific than dnd-5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Quotes paragraphs&lt;/strong&gt; from &lt;em&gt;Draconomicon&lt;/em&gt; and gives exact page numbers. [This is an AD&amp;amp;D 2e Forgotten Realms sourcebook.]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Gives a link to, and talks about a specific webpage whose title is 'AuldDragon's &lt;strong&gt;AD&amp;amp;D Blog&lt;/strong&gt;' and whose content is discussing AD&amp;amp;D 2e speciality priests of Zorquan.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Refers to the Unity domain from Unearthed Arcana.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when we read the entirety of the question, there is nothing to guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that the strict followers of the no-guess policy might still consider combining all these data to be a form of guessing. After all, the D&amp;amp;D and 5th edition phrases are not being uttered side by side. They may be (perhaps rightfully) worried that this example could open the gates for individuals incorrectly guessing in the future, self-confident that they are not really guessing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My feeling on this is that we are not modrons or androids or maruts. People come to SE to get expert advise. And as an 'expert', &quot;I understand the question when I read it&quot; (Jacobellis v. Ohio).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="38699" LastEditDate="2020-06-05T22:23:28.173" LastActivityDate="2020-06-05T22:23:28.173" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9985" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-06T18:49:47.383" Score="17" ViewCount="312" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I do something for the first time, I read the instructions. I spend time to understand the rules and try to follow them in good faith. Yet after having spent this effort, if I am later get told that there were other hidden catches, or some rules buried at a location where I could not reasonably have looked at, I get really upset. I know other people are just ok to jump in and make mistakes and don't mind getting corrected later. But for people like me, not having been told the rules in advance is an easy way to get put off. Besides it is a waste of time for me and those who end up forcing me to do a correction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this spirit, I would like to propose an improvement to the system-tagging requirement. Please have a look at the screenshot for asking a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3pFQB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3pFQB.png&quot; alt=&quot;ask-a-question-tag-info&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;While not tagging your question is likely to get your question closed, there is no warning about it.&lt;/strong&gt; Even when you click on the question mark to get help about &quot;How to tag&quot;, you don't get an explanation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To make matters worse, a responsible user might see the &quot;Helpful Links&quot; box on the right side of the page and decide to click on &quot;Find more information about how to ask a good question here&quot;. When they do, they are directed to the following page: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yet there is no mention of tags there either. &lt;strong&gt;There is not a single sentence stating the utmost importance of properly identifying the system your are interested in&lt;/strong&gt;, for questions that pertain to individual games. (Not just in tags, not anywhere.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We could argue that identifying the RPG is something that needs to be done by default and that it should be obvious. But apparently it isn't&lt;/strong&gt;, given the almost-religious conviction of a considerable number of experienced users about the never-guess-the-system policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could we please try to rectify this situation? Seeing the importance of tagging the system right away would significantly decrease this pitfall, and perhaps we won't need heavy handed solutions like the strict never-guess policy. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38699" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-07-12T17:41:47.290" LastActivityDate="2021-07-12T17:41:47.290" Title="Can the system tag policy be stated to askers in advance?" Tags="|feature-request|status-completed|questions|game-systems|user-interface|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9985" CreationDate="2020-06-06T20:46:26.313" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, I think our interface should advise users to include a system tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They don't always need one—many &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt; questions don't need a system tag—but we should have something hinting they should definitely be telling us what game and system they're using!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would accompany features such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Being able to define certain tags as system tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Coloring them differently: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8702&quot;&gt;Can we color system tags to emphasize that they&amp;#39;re different and &amp;quot;more meaningful&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Putting them first in the tag lineup: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8366&quot;&gt;Make it possible for certain tags (like game tags) to always appear first&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-06-06T20:46:26.313" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9987" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9985" CreationDate="2020-06-06T21:47:50.087" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You don't need to tag a question to definitively identify the game.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I hope nobody's playing tag police when someone adds a tag to a question where the original querent specified the system in the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe this text would be good in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;How To Ask&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; help page, under &amp;quot;Be Specific&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking a question about the specifics of a game's rules or lore, please include both the game &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;edition&lt;/em&gt;. You can do this by using a system tag to specify them, such as &lt;code&gt;[apocalypse-world-2e]&lt;/code&gt; or &lt;code&gt;[call-of-cthulhu-7e]&lt;/code&gt;, or saying which system you're using in the question, such as &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D 5th edition&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;the fourth edition of Shadowrun&amp;quot;. Or both!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vocabulary is often shared from edition to edition within games. Sometimes it's even shared between games! Without knowing the game and edition, we can't tell what would make a good answer to your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't know what edition of a system you're playing, look for questions about how to identify editions of a game system, or if there aren't any, ask one yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-06T19:34:57.273" LastActivityDate="2021-05-06T19:34:57.273" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9988" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9990" CreationDate="2020-06-08T16:31:39.830" Score="12" ViewCount="529" Body="&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this meta now refers to an outdated policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following questions were tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-beyond&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-beyond&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-beyond&lt;/a&gt;, and did not mention D&amp;amp;D 5e explicitly; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag was then added by somebody besides the OP, and the questions were not closed between being asked and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; being added:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/163270&quot;&gt;On D&amp;amp;D Beyond, how to create a shield that gives a ranged attack?&lt;/a&gt; (Asked: 01/20 04:27, tag added: 01/20 12:44)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/148732&quot;&gt;The Passive Wisdom (Perception) score of my character on D&amp;amp;D Beyond seems too high&lt;/a&gt; (Asked: 05/27 02:31, tag added: 05/27 02:55)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117618&quot;&gt;How to add only attack bonus to a homebrew magic weapon in D&amp;amp;D Beyond?&lt;/a&gt; (Asked: 03/17 05:59, tag added: 03/17 07:13)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170099&quot;&gt;Is it a bug or intended that Unarmored defense from barbarian and monk do not stack with each other?&lt;/a&gt; (Asked: 06/07 19:56, tag added: 06/07 20:02)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A diamond moderator (Rubiksmoose) confirmed in a comment that none of these had comments clarifying what system was being asked about. Were these edits done incorrectly then? Should they have been reverted like answers to the following suggest:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the examples above are all from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-beyond&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-beyond&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-beyond&lt;/a&gt; tag, but this question is asking also about questions that discuss D&amp;amp;D Beyond in their title, body, tags, comments, or elsewhere; tags were merely what I found I could actually &lt;em&gt;search&lt;/em&gt; for. So the general question is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it acceptable to edit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; into a question about D&amp;amp;D Beyond?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Meta status as of 12/11/2020&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9990/48759&quot;&gt;NathanS's answer&lt;/a&gt; stands at +24/-0 votes and is the accepted answer. All other answers are at +0/-5 or lower. NathanS's answer represents the community's agreed policy going forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-09-03T02:53:24.917" LastActivityDate="2021-09-03T02:53:24.917" Title="Is it acceptable to add the [dnd-5e] tag to questions about D&amp;D Beyond?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|editing|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9988" CreationDate="2020-06-08T19:32:15.773" Score="27" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-beyond&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-beyond&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-beyond&lt;/a&gt; tag (or otherwise describing D&amp;amp;DBeyond in the question) should be treated as equivalent to the OP stating &amp;quot;I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the simple reason that D&amp;amp;DBeyond is &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; about D&amp;amp;D 5e, and cannot possibly refer to any other game or edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not the same as &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot;, which can be thought of by some as ambiguous when there isn't enough context. It &lt;em&gt;can only&lt;/em&gt; refer to D&amp;amp;D 5e, and closing the question as unclear because we're trying to force (probably a new user) to play our policy game is lunacy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, especially for new users, a comment should explain why they need the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; on this and future questions, and to teach them that they should include game tags in all their (game specific) questions, but in this case, the tag should be added by someone else &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. instead of) closing the question, teaching by example, because closing the question at that point achieves nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-06-09T10:31:40.917" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9991" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="9994" CreationDate="2020-06-09T03:11:16.190" Score="16" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since we can't make a system tag look different, when possible we should probably expand system tags so they don't look like common game terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Masks: A New Generation&lt;/em&gt; is the complete text used in the trade dress of all books I could find for the RPG called &quot;Masks&quot; for short in its own text. Renaming the tag from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/masks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;masks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;masks&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/masks-a-new-generation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;masks-a-new-generation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;masks-a-new-generation&lt;/a&gt; will create a tag that more definitively looks like a book title without creating ambiguity about any existing products.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-13T00:33:17.850" LastActivityDate="2020-06-13T00:33:17.850" Title="Rename the [masks] tag to [masks-a-new-generation]" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rename-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9988" CreationDate="2020-06-11T03:28:26.567" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Why stop at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-beyond&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-beyond&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-beyond&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-adventurers-league&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-adventurers-league&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-adventurers-league&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-society&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e-character-builder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e-character-builder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e-character-builder&lt;/a&gt; (ok, admittedly this one is an obvious outlier)? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-encounters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-encounters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-encounters&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-insider&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-insider&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-insider&lt;/a&gt;? And the list goes on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all tags that can &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; be for one specific edition of an RPG. Would it be acceptable to add a system tag if it were missing from questions with any one of these tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What about tags with excerpts/wikis that specifically state that they're for a specific edition?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tome-of-battle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tome-of-battle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tome-of-battle&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;an expansion book for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e &amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lost-mine-of-phandelver&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lost-mine-of-phandelver&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lost-mine-of-phandelver&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;[an] adventure included in the D&amp;amp;D 5e Starter Set&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curse-of-strahd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse-of-strahd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;curse-of-strahd&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;a D&amp;amp;D 5e adventure&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/e6&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;e6&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;e6&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;a modified ruleset for D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unchained&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unchained&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unchained&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;the Pathfinder Unchained content series&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? And again the list goes on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;And there's slightly more ambiguous tag.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tomb-of-annihilation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tomb-of-annihilation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tomb-of-annihilation&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;run as part of Adventurer's League's season 7&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill-challenge&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill-challenge&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill-challenge&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;[a] mechanic in D&amp;amp;D 4e&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; but has been used for other editions?...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess the point I'm trying to make is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Where do we draw the line?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'm a strong believer in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/14878&quot;&gt;'don't guess the system'&lt;/a&gt; policy and as I describe in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8046/14878&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8045/14878&quot;&gt;What to do when encountering a non-system tag that describes a system?&lt;/a&gt; it's problematic to assume non-system tags that describe a system are indicative of a specific RPG system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In general it shouldn't be acceptable to add a system tag when a non-system tag appears to indicate the system and it pretty much comes back to the 'don't guess' policy. &lt;em&gt;However&lt;/em&gt;, if we decide that there are instances (like this) where it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; acceptable then we need to make it 100% clear what tags are acceptable to edit a system tag into, otherwise it will likely end up in a big mess.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-06-11T03:28:26.567" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9993" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9988" CreationDate="2020-06-12T00:59:24.300" Score="-6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;These questions mostly don't need the 5e tag at all&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP didn't choose to include it, it's really not necessary.  The questions are about that site, not about 5e in general (most of the time)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-06-12T00:59:24.300" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9994" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9991" CreationDate="2020-06-12T17:02:30.250" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The change has been made&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I left this for a few days to see if there were any arguments against it. There haven't been any, reasonable or otherwise so I didn't see the point in waiting any longer. I have now updated the tag. You can find the 11 effected questions under the new tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/masks-a-new-generation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;masks-a-new-generation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;masks-a-new-generation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2020-06-16T10:22:21.327" LastActivityDate="2020-06-12T17:02:30.250" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9996" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-16T17:46:25.967" Score="16" ViewCount="400" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just thought I’d let everyone know that &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/348746/were-switching-to-commonmark?cb=1&quot;&gt;the SE-network rolling migration to CommonMark&lt;/a&gt; has landed at RPG. You can see that link for more details, but for the most part you should expect no real changes—and only when writing/editing things from this point forward, everything from before now should fall in one of three categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It worked as it was and nothing changed or needed changing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The source needed slight tweaking to achieve the results they previously had, and these changes were automatically applied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The source needed more significant tweaking that could not be automatically applied, and so the question or answer will have its source left alone but continue to display a cached version of the result, so it still looks the same as before. Anyone editing it will need to adjust things, however, as the old source code won’t produce the result it used to (and by editing you are removing the cached version by definition).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case 3 scenarios are supposed to be rare; most everything should fall under 1 and 2. Nothing should fall outside these cases, which means nothing should have its outward appearance changed in the slightest. (Report any changes in the actual appearance of things as a bug.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;As such, there is no need to edit anything in response to this update. Every question and answer should look exactly as it did before, so no edit is necessary. The only exceptions would be if there was an outright bug that messed something up, so every edit in response to this should be accompanied by a bug report. Please do not spam the front page with unnecessary edits like removing no-longer-necessary comments.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The automatic changes in case 2 were a one-time thing, so going forward, you may need to adjust your editing somewhat. There aren’t a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of changes, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the biggest things that did change:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Headers without spaces&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a slight change in how headers work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;###Header&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;###Header&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This no longer works: there now &lt;strong&gt;must&lt;/strong&gt; be a space between the hashtags/pound signs and the text of the header, like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;### Header&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Header&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is the one I noticed that prompted this discussion; I don’t really like it but oh well. I’ll adjust.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Multiple box quotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How multiple quoted lines in a box quote is handled changed a bit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt; one&#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt; another&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The blank line between them now makes these two lines two separate quote boxes. Useful for when you want multiple quote boxes (since before you had to abuse an HTML comment, &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;!----&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;, to achieve this), but most of the time you’re probably going to want one box. To achieve that, you need a &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; on the blank line too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt; one&#xA;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt; another&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;another&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Continuing bullet points in lists&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Indentation requirements on extending bullet points in lists have gotten stricter, where before they were lenient but rather quirky.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;* these&#xA;&#xA; lines&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;these&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;lines&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This used to work, where the single-space indent on &lt;code&gt; lines&lt;/code&gt; would have it included in the same bullet point (but separate paragraph) as &lt;code&gt;* these&lt;/code&gt;. The actual number of spaces you needed and when the next level in was triggered were rather quirky. Now, you have to actually match your indentation on further lines to where the text started for the original bullet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;* these&#xA;&#xA;  lines&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;these&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;lines&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-07-10T03:39:32.703" LastActivityDate="2020-07-10T03:39:32.703" Title="We have CommonMark" Tags="|discussion|formatting|markdown|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9996" CreationDate="2020-06-16T21:45:33.620" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Good news, but please edit your old questions as we normally do.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm seeing a lot of edits come through that should probably be spaced out over time so that the active page isn't flooded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before you start editing, please review both how many have been done and how many you plan to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2020-06-16T21:45:33.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="9999" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-17T09:34:31.377" Score="1" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I asked this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170567/35259&quot;&gt;For a Pact of the Chain warlock, is choosing to have their familiar attack generally the worse option for the warlock&amp;#39;s action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I mention at the end of the question, I realised half way through writing it that it would likely have been an unbounded list question if I had kept it as it was, so before submitting it, I instead asked if my overall assumption was wrong, which I felt was a more stackable question. It seems to have been received well enough so far, and I'm still finding the answers helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I was wondering if the question I was originally going to ask would have been an off-topic unbounded list question after all, or whether there were some additional constraints I could have added to make it more bounded? In other words, I might ask another, more specific question in addition to the one asked (I won't change that one now, I'm happy with it as-is).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, I'm playing as a Pact of the Chain Archfey warlock, and because I love playing into themes, I will (ideally) never summon anything other than a fey Sprite. Given that I've made this choice, I want to know how to get some more use out of this Sprite in combat. I'm also not planning on multiclassing, so this will be a single-class warlock. Perhaps if I kept it to a specific range of levels (since I'm not so interested in Tier 3 and above)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would constraints like that be enough to make such a question on-topic? Or is the question that boils down to &amp;quot;what are all the ways I can get use out of my sprite in combat&amp;quot; too inherently unbounded and off-topic? Is there anything else I can do to make it on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-17T10:57:40.837" LastActivityDate="2020-06-17T10:57:40.837" Title="Would this question about when it's better for a Pact of the Chain warlock to have their familiar attack be an on-topic bounded list question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|dnd-5e|list-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7751" CreationDate="2020-06-17T17:24:05.470" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This has been &amp;quot;fixed&amp;quot; with the CommonMark update&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Below is how we can properly format such things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. [&lt;em&gt;Yuck!&lt;/em&gt; This is the problem!]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently just updating this list to work in CommonMark fixes the whitespace issue: we add &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; in-between quotes so they aren't separated, and we add some spaces for indentation so that the second bullet point is properly indented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Bot hasn't updated the original post, so the HTML from the old markdown generator is still “baked in”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The original&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Before&lt;/em&gt; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9996/we-have-commonmark&quot;&gt;CommonMark change&lt;/a&gt; (see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/348746/were-switching-to-commonmark&quot;&gt;announcement on MSE&lt;/a&gt;), here's what happens in a bulleted list that also has sub-bullets when a bullet's text continues &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; a sub-bullet (preserved here in an image, as editing the original post will give a different result):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sDe59.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sDe59.png&quot; alt=&quot;Example of bulleted list indentation error pre-update&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, there is no white space or gap between &amp;quot;commodo consequat&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Duis aute&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is how the post would have looked, had the bot updated it to CommonMark (found using the edit preview on the original post):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bQJNG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bQJNG.png&quot; alt=&quot;Example of bulleted list output post-update&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Bot &lt;em&gt;hasn't&lt;/em&gt; made this make this update. It would have changed the visual appearance and I suppose it was a complicated fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-18T14:59:26.860" LastActivityDate="2020-06-18T14:59:26.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10001" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10006" CreationDate="2020-06-18T16:30:08.117" Score="13" ViewCount="374" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question concerns &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/67323&quot;&gt;this edit to an answer I wrote&lt;/a&gt;, but it's actually a more general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the answer, I wrote about &amp;quot;dads&amp;quot; owning or having access to computers in the 1990s. Someone &amp;quot;corrected&amp;quot; it to &amp;quot;parents&amp;quot; with the comment &amp;quot;corrected to inclusive language&amp;quot;. Personally, I'd like to change it back, but I'd also like some feedback what you think, because my world view and experience in the 1990s was severely limited. Basically limited to everything one could reach on a bike and be back before family dinner. Maybe it was different outside that range and I would like my answer there to be a general answer that captures at least &amp;quot;the West&amp;quot; in the 90s, not just my little bubble of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that &lt;em&gt;today&lt;/em&gt; it would be absolutely appropriate to talk about &amp;quot;parents&amp;quot; of all sorts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, my text is about &amp;quot;back then&amp;quot;. And in my experience it wasn't &amp;quot;a parent's [computer]&amp;quot;, but exclusively &amp;quot;dad's&amp;quot;. I don't know a single &amp;quot;mom&amp;quot; being anywhere near computers or having access to computers at work. The girls sure had computers or access the same as the boys, but for the parent's generation, it was all males where I grew up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Was that your experience as well? Because the whole point is kinda&#xA;moot if enough of the other people here experienced computer access&#xA;to be evenly distributed across genders. Maybe my experience was an&#xA;outlier in that regard?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Assuming it actually wasn't evenly distributed (and I obviously&#xA;stereotype quite a lot in that post anyway) back then, is it okay to&#xA;remove the &amp;quot;inclusivity&amp;quot; when in fact it wasn't that inclusive in&#xA;reality?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-19T06:26:21.350" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T11:21:31.873" Title="Inclusive language use" Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10002" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-18T16:48:47.277" Score="9" ViewCount="263" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am aware of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/43856&quot;&gt;how to ask a homebrew review guidelines&lt;/a&gt;, however, I feel that a whole class review (specifically for D&amp;amp;D 5e here, but may apply to other systems and editions) is a problem by itself. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170542/43856&quot;&gt;We got one recently&lt;/a&gt;, and I even thought about posting mine up for review but I decided not to because I think it would not be a good question for this SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the problem I see is that a whole class is a lot. At worst, a martial class will have almost a feature per level, while spellcasting classes may be a little easier since there is already a fixed spell progression, but nonetheless, a whole class still would have a handful of features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I see two options right now, but both seem quite... bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post the whole class. This will be a huge question, which IMO is a problem since it might be just overwhelming and not interest many people to read and actually answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Split it in tier or features or some other way. The problem I see here is that the features should be analyzed together. Maybe we are giving a quite strong key feature to the class at 5th level because the features it will be getting from 6 to 8 are flavorish and underpowered (e.g. Favored Enemy or Terrain).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if the querent has a very good grasp on what it wants to balance (e.g., &amp;quot;this feature at 6th level&amp;quot;), it probably would still require a look in the entire class to understand the synergies and the overall power level, and it is still a huge effort for answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I would like to understand the community view on how a question about reviewing a whole class would be well done and nicely accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a note, I do understand that the answer might be &amp;quot;there is no way because it simply doesn't fit well here&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-19T06:11:49.017" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T12:37:13.503" Title="What is the best way to ask for a whole homebrew class review?" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10001" CreationDate="2020-06-18T16:49:44.677" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most of the answer uses the words &amp;quot;you&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;your&amp;quot; to describe the experience. The target audience for this answer is the general RPG.SE userbase, rather than just yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe your personal experience was limited to dads as the primary computer user, but that doesn't necessarily represent the entire Western world during that period.  There were certainly moms who used computers in the 1990s. Also, some people didn't have dads around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're trying to address a larger audience, then it makes logical sense to use the more inclusive language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A dad is a type of parent, so the edit doesn't harm the answer or change its meaning.  There is no need for a rollback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastActivityDate="2020-06-18T16:49:44.677" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10002" CreationDate="2020-06-18T17:41:52.110" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A whole class is probably workable&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We currently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review+class&quot;&gt;15 questions&lt;/a&gt; tagged with both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class&lt;/a&gt;, only 4 of which are closed (and none as Too Broad). There may well be some undertagging here though. That tells me that reviewing a class is possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I agree with you that a class is a large scope. We can handle the scoping of a question on a case by case basis though. Here are some of the main points (that I can think of) which the asker (and responders) should be aware of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of subclasses. Multiple subclasses might be good for a class with the intent of being shared, but it makes the reviewing process way harder. I'll heavily recommend asking with only one subclass. It should be possible to also ask for reviews of other subclasses against that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Modality and options. If the class has a lot of different options it can take at various points it makes the class harder to review. Whether that would make it 'Too Broad' or not we'll have to take on case by case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you're doing something very different to the published classes it'll be hard to review it. This might just end up being the answer you get though, that there's just no way to tell how good this is without a bunch of playtesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's a paradox with homebrew review questions, in that the better a job you have done in balancing the material, the more work is needed to give a good answer. Whether that's relevant before posting, or only if it should not get an answer quickly, I'll leave to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the middle two points made, I'd just like to muse that we'd probably have a hard time analyzing the D&amp;amp;D 5e Warlock if someone asked for a review (and it wasn't already published obviously). It simply does too many weird things compared to the framework and has too many little options which interact with that weird thing. Mostly this just highlights that a homebrew review isn't a replacement for playtesting the material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="53087" LastEditDate="2021-04-23T14:10:26.967" LastActivityDate="2021-04-23T14:10:26.967" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10005" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10002" CreationDate="2020-06-18T17:49:59.790" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Present the whole class but explain your own thoughts on it as well&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I'll be using &amp;quot;you&amp;quot; to mean &amp;quot;a general person&amp;quot; not specifically the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, if you are homebrewing an entire class here are three helpful questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/61973&quot;&gt;How can I check to make sure my homebrew class is balanced compared to pre-existing classes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22184&quot;&gt;What makes a character/creature/power/ability/etc. over-powered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When designing your class, you should be paying close attention to pre-existing classes and what role/niche your new one is filling that &lt;em&gt;wasn't previously filled&lt;/em&gt; and that cannot be solved by simply changing the fluff of an existing class (or subclass). This helps both yourself and potential answerers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you come up with an entire class hopefully you are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; thinking &amp;quot;I need some help, because what if every single one of these features is utterly broken and I simply cannot tell&amp;quot;. Instead you should &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; have ideas about which features might be problematic, what synergies exist, etc... (if you don't, that's potentially a problem where you are just chucking a class at us to analyze where you haven't actually done any work yourself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having ideas about what might be balanced or imbalanced lets you point those features out and also helps you to explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you think a given feature is problematic (or not problematic). This lets answers look primarily at the things you yourself want to have looked at and the entire class being available means answereres can still look at the &lt;em&gt;entire&lt;/em&gt; thing and its synergies with itself and others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question about balancing a homebrew class includes &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; the class exists, &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; it has the features it does (&lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; those features do what they do), and &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; you see&#xA;potential problems, it makes &lt;em&gt;understanding&lt;/em&gt; the class immensely easier for an answerer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This understanding means the answerer can see the creative process and assess the vitally important question of whether or not the &lt;em&gt;goals&lt;/em&gt; for the class are being met &lt;em&gt;as well as&lt;/em&gt; whether or not the class is balanced compared to the pre-existing ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It certainly sounds like a lot of work, reviewing an entire class, but if you first analyze it well yourself through comparisons to other classes and perhaps some back-of-the-napkin math or something, and explain where you're coming from with the whole thing, it becomes much easier for an answerer to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2020-06-18T17:49:59.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10001" CreationDate="2020-06-19T02:44:33.957" Score="19" Body="&lt;h1&gt;To me, those changes are fine both personally and stylistically&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Personally:&lt;/strong&gt; Nominally, my suburban south LA County, CA, family  got an &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_IIe&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Apple IIe&lt;/a&gt; shortly after its release in '83 when I was in middle school, but it was Mom who played &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zork&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Zork&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and other &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infocom&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Infocom&lt;/a&gt; games on it and, when necessary, did troubleshooting. Further, my parents owned and operated a small but successful enough real estate appraisal business from the late '60s until the early '00s. There, they clung to typewriters for as long as they could but switched to PCs in the early 90s. Both parents were competent PC users, but they were both incompetent PC troubleshooters. (By then, though, I was an adequate troubleshooter from running a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;BBS&lt;/a&gt;, so I'd do it if a technician were unavailable.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, while you didn't &amp;quot;know a single [i.e. lone] 'mom' being anywhere near computers or having access to computers at work,&amp;quot; the 90s saw both my mom and dad working on computers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stylistically:&lt;/strong&gt; I thought the answer was a blast to read before the edits. I'd upvoted it before I was halfway through. I do think the edits remove some of the causal intimacy of the original, but I also think that's a small price to pay to increase the answer's inclusiveness. Were this answer's audience narrower—were it being adapted to a college application, for example, or being considered for inclusion in a book of your best answers on &lt;em&gt;RPG SE&lt;/em&gt;—, I'd recommend changing it back because the original's voice is more strongly &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;, but as a widely viewed standalone answer answer on &lt;em&gt;RPG SE&lt;/em&gt;, the changes make sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8610" LastActivityDate="2020-06-19T02:44:33.957" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10007" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-19T09:34:40.100" Score="4" ViewCount="199" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question here concerns the following closed question about homebrewing a monster for D&amp;amp;D 5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/170524/help-in-adapting-a-monster-from-a-short-story-to-5e&quot;&gt;help in adapting a monster from a short story to 5E&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;My understanding of the reasons for closure&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seem that the question was originally not very clear, but the OP clarified what properties and what CR they are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second problem was that the question asked for general advice on homebrewing the monster which is inherently very broad. The relevant task includes multiple subtasks, each of which could be their own question: a) finding a starting point in published material, b) modifying a published monster or creating new stats borrowing from published monsters, and c) final balancing.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I edited the question to narrow it down to a).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why I think the question is valuable&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Homebrew of very specific content is prone to not being useful to many people. I think that the present case, even though specific, might be interesting to other people (myself included). This is because the monster asked about is from a story in the universe of the game. This is, IMHO very different from homebrewing a very specific monsters that a person has invented themselves or a monster from popular media unrelated to the specific game (in this case D&amp;amp;D).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, it seems that users from the site could give relevant answers to the question in its current form. I could, but so do others, apparently, as stated in the comment section of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third, it seems that the original complaints concerning the question are no longer valid. The OP edited it to provide relevant details to the question. I edited the question to narrow it down to the first relevant step, so that the OP could use potential answers to work on the task and potentially post a follow up question if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the options to try to get this question reopened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-06-21T16:41:34.597" LastActivityDate="2020-06-21T16:41:34.597" Title="Can this question about homebrewing potentially be reopened?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10008" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10007" CreationDate="2020-06-19T12:53:00.373" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I do not think so&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We typically don't allow &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6855/close-reason-for-homebrew-this-for-me-questions&quot;&gt;homebrew this for me&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we can review homebrew, we really don't support idea generation. And asking us to homebrew something is the equivalent of an idea generation. Those types of questions do much better in a forum or chat or somewhere else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2020-06-19T12:53:00.373" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10009" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10007" CreationDate="2020-06-19T18:23:27.270" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I don't think this is really a homebrewing question at this point&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we're talking about the most recent edit, which asks about what published monster best matches the one from the novel, then it's not really a homebrewing question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a monster ID question then the content could be a lot more focused-- we really need mechanical details and not fluff, and ideally some guidance about what details are most important to match. For example, the monster having &lt;em&gt;Disguise Self&lt;/em&gt; doesn't seem very important, since it could be added as a spell-like ability to any stat block without affecting CR.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other details seem fluffy and likely won't translate to an existing monster well at all:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than drain an single human dry, it seems to absorb a little bit of energy each from individuals in a large crowd&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sounds to me like a plot element-- this is how the creature survives and avoids detection as it feeds. If it's fluff, then it's not clear to me that this should have any mechanical representation at all; &lt;em&gt;Life Drain&lt;/em&gt; doesn't work that way. If it's not fluff, then we're stuck deciding between finding something as close as possible (such as &lt;em&gt;Life Drain&lt;/em&gt;), accepting that it might be possible that no published monster can have such a trait, or homebrew something with no particular criteria for doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr:&lt;/strong&gt; This may be a monster ID question, in which case it would benefit from additional edits which focus it in that direction. If this is the case, then the question is not ready to be reopened until such edits occur. It is not clear to me if this suits the intent of the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Homebrewing provides tons of options, and the question isn't specific enough for one to be clearly better than another.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's nice that the question has provided some details, including the target CR range. Unfortunately, these details are not enough to indicate what a &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; answer would be, or what would make one answer meeting the question's criteria better than another:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would suggest a CR of at least 10, possibly closer to 15.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a broad range. There are enormous differences between a CR 10 creature and a CR 15, and there are a huge number of traits which can be changed to nudge the CR up or down. How could a potential answerer decide what CR to use? If someone homebrews this monster to a target CR of 14, is that better than one that has a target CR of 15? How about 13?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If one monster might offer a decent template that covers 75% of what the asker wants, and another offers 90% but would need some stat adjustments to fall into the right CR range, which is better? If we're going to be open to adjusting at least some stats, how many are available to be changed before it's &amp;quot;too much mechanical rebalancing&amp;quot;? If we settle on some number of changeable stats (say, 2), how can we judge between adjusting CR by increasing AC or HP versus adding or removing a resistance when the CR outcome is the same?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the act of preforming what appear to be temple services, this being preformed magic that healed two people badly wounded and weakened by the attack of a vampire, though no specific divine spells as you would find in the Player's Handbook were mentioned by name.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Near the end of the story it also used a form of mind-influencing magic to ensure any humans in its 'flock' would not enter its temple quarters and possibly discover its true nature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the monster in question seems to 'feed' on the energy (yes, I know you're going to complain how vague that sounds but it's as specific as I know how to say it) of its human followers in the act of preforming temple services. Rather than drain an single human dry, it seems to absorb a little bit of energy each from individuals in a large crowd, also it appears capable of feeding on a living being's energy without having to reach out and physically touch its victim (again, as specific as I know how to say it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is essentially all fluff. That's fine, but if something has no game-mechanical purpose then it's not relevant to the homebrewing process being asked about. And it again introduces lots of possibilities that we can't really judge between. If it is important to the asker that these traits &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; get some mechanical representation, we don't have enough information about what the traits are supposed to do or how they're supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr:&lt;/strong&gt; As a homebrewing question, it is underspecified. There is too little detail and too few clear goals and constraints for the question to fit the SE format. Additionally, it requires a lot of work on answerers' parts to offer up complete solutions so that the asker can choose one that &amp;quot;feels right&amp;quot; to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Either way, I think that the question is currently closed appropriately. Of course it could be reopened if enough elements of it changed, but that's always true. The operative questions are if those changes still get to what the asker wants, and if those changes are actually applied to the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastActivityDate="2020-06-19T18:23:27.270" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10007" CreationDate="2020-06-19T18:44:41.827" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Perhaps the OP could reform the question into &amp;quot;what existing monsters are &lt;em&gt;most similar&lt;/em&gt; to this thing&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have a number of questions like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164918&quot;&gt;What options are there in 5E that are similar to Minions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123929&quot;&gt;Is there a kind of damage or effect similar to &amp;quot;Brilliant Energy&amp;quot; weapons from 3.5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/40808&quot;&gt;What race is most similar to a cat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65247&quot;&gt;Is there a class in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e similar to the 4e warden?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/118838&quot;&gt;Is there a 4e ritual or effect similar to Silence in 3.5 and 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/36947&quot;&gt;Is there any exisiting feature similar to this (poorly worded?) homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142629&quot;&gt;Is there any Divine Prestige Class similar to the Abjurant Champion (specifically its Martial Arcanist feature)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110952&quot;&gt;Does SoP have a magic item similar to ring of ki mastery/pearls of power/runestones of power for spell points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154175&quot;&gt;Is there a 4e magic item or ritual with effects similar to the Magic Jar spell of most other D&amp;amp;D versions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is currently a lot more of a &amp;quot;help &lt;em&gt;build&lt;/em&gt; this&amp;quot; than &amp;quot;point out similar things I could build &lt;em&gt;with&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;. There's a pretty large jump between having answers list creatures one &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; use and having the answers actually &lt;em&gt;use&lt;/em&gt; those creatures. This question seems to ask the latter and would, at least to me, do better and be more structured and less wildly open-ended if it asked the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind that such a request is easier the more details are given (or if there are very few details and merely a rough concept). I think the question actually gives quite a few good details as is, so I'm just saying this as something worth remembering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-06-19T18:49:42.423" LastActivityDate="2020-06-19T18:49:42.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10011" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions and issues relating to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" LastActivityDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10012" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" Score="0" Body="For questions and issues relating to the Stack Exchange Code of Conduct." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" LastActivityDate="2020-06-20T01:54:58.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10013" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For issues on Meta relating to conventions (usually those relating to tabletop role-playing games in particular).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" LastActivityDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10014" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" Score="0" Body="For issues on Meta relating to conventions (usually those relating to tabletop role-playing games in particular)." OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" LastActivityDate="2020-06-20T01:56:02.793" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10015" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10017" CreationDate="2020-06-23T04:39:34.577" Score="14" ViewCount="133" Body="&lt;p&gt;I may be missing something, but right now, other than by reading this meta, newcomers won't know they should be tagging their system. We have some suggestions on how to address it (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7681/43856&quot;&gt;Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?&lt;/a&gt; - which was sadly deferred because it seems changing it is hard due to how SE works), but as of now, I don't see anywhere (again: I may be missing it) stating how important it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, can we (easily) change the [tour] page? If we can, is there an appropriate place to include the importance of tagging (or at least stating) the system you are playing somewhere?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we can't, is there &lt;strong&gt;anywhere&lt;/strong&gt; we can easily, accessibly include this information? It keeps to be one of the main reasons I see questions being closed, and I feel we should be able to do better in introducing this concept to new people than having their questions closed, commenting this rule, hoping for their edit and then reopening it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-06-23T12:01:02.117" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T12:01:02.117" Title="Can/should we include the system tag requirement in our tour?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|game-systems|tour|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10016" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10001" CreationDate="2020-06-23T11:21:31.873" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;From a world view standpoint, I'd like to suggest that yes, yours was a little provincial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was an adult in the 1990s (born in 1959).  I got my first home computer in 1986, first DOS machine in 1987, installed Windows 3 (on that same machine) in 1990.  I was a member of a computer users' group (think &amp;quot;Meetup&amp;quot;) starting in 1986 as well.  More than a third of the users' group members were women -- including two deaf members, one of them with a bone disorder that confined her to a power wheelchair.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That to say, home computers (at least in the Seattle area) were far from a &amp;quot;Dad's&amp;quot; machine, even before 1990 -- but they were expensive enough that someone had to have a strong interest to spend the money (I paid $1000 for my first DOS machine, with 512k RAM, dual 360k floppy drives, CGA -- 16 colors, 4 at a time, and low res -- and no hard disk or built-in modem, in 1987, when the same money would buy a good used motorcycle or a reliable, if ugly used car).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you describe, the computers being &amp;quot;Dad's&amp;quot; machines, was a cultural bias (not &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; bias, but your culture's).  Women who hadn't been raised to believe they could or should have technical interests followed the lifestyle they were raised into (mostly), and men, raised to believe machines were their domain, developed the interest and technical knowledge to buy, set up, and operate a home computer in the days when &amp;quot;Plug n' Play&amp;quot; was the new thing that really didn't work most of the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a less rural setting, you might well have seen a different situation, with women owning and operating computers, not necessarily because the women were more technically oriented, but because they had a better concept of what the computer could &lt;em&gt;do for them&lt;/em&gt;.  The users' group I mentioned was one founded around the social interactions of modem use -- bulletin board systems and such (before broad Internet access), which was more attractive to the women of the '80s and '90s culture than the technical aspects (in most cases).  That is to say, those women, at that time, weren't mainly programmers or hardware hackers; they were social users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T11:21:31.873" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10015" CreationDate="2020-06-23T11:28:09.283" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;As you found in comments, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8949/1204&quot;&gt;there's only three places we can edit in the tour&lt;/a&gt;: the blurb at the start, the sample question, and the on-topic/off-topic lists. This doesn't fit into any of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll caveat this by bringing to attention that this isn't about tags per se, it's just about having system information. Expressing that in a title or the body is just as good. We can add the tag subsequently ourselves as long as they tell us the system they're using &lt;em&gt;somewhere&lt;/em&gt;. (This isn't even about how much information counts as guessing, I just mean saying “I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 5e” in the question title or body is just as good as having the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag on the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of making progress on this issue, we should be careful we don't over-focus on one part of it (tags) lest we lose sight of the forest for the one tree we're focusing on. For example, if we have features that guide people to state their system inside the question body instead, those would be extremely useful for helping us make progress on the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I say this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9986/1204&quot;&gt;slightly lamenting that I over-focused on tags&lt;/a&gt; recently as well. Despite the way that other question puts it, we don't have a system tag policy—we just have a “say what game you're playing” policy.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-06-23T11:43:29.447" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T11:43:29.447" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10018" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10020" CreationDate="2020-06-23T15:54:21.893" Score="11" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I recover from a hand injury, I attempted to use voice-to-text in RPG.SE chat. It did not work. It did work in the upper room. (Christianity.SE chat).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It did work in the title to the question, but it did not work in the body of the question at RPG.SE.  It also does work in the comments under the questions and answers. I am able to voice to text into the meta.se question box.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The feature I am using is windows key + H (Windows 10). This question was posted by doing voice to text into notepad, and then copying and pasting into the question box, and then editing a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a toggle that needs to be switched on at RPG.SE?&#xA;I posted a Q at meta.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/349865/380710&quot;&gt;How do I make voice to text work in SE chat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-23T23:54:42.937" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T23:54:42.937" Title="How do I make voice-to-text work in RPG.SE chat?" Tags="|support|chat|accessibility|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10020" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10018" CreationDate="2020-06-23T19:51:36.223" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is an odd Windows feature, it appears.  What I discovered, after experimenting on Meta.SE, Christianity.SE, and here is that sometimes, after hitting window + H, to enable voice to text, you have to toggle the little microphone icon on and off once or twice to get it to work in the SE chat or the SE question/answer box. Not sure if Apple stuff behave that way or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aTWDV.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aTWDV.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had to do that re-toggle twice simply to post this answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2020-06-23T19:51:36.223" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10021" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10022" CreationDate="2020-06-25T12:44:29.240" Score="11" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are multiple editions of the game &amp;quot;The Dark Eye&amp;quot; - 5 of them, to be exact. According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Eye#Game_history&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikipedia&lt;/a&gt;, 2 of them have (official) English translations, though TDE 4/4.1 had only a very small number of its books ever translated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem: We currently only have the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt;, encompassing (theoretically) all the editions. This leads to problems that can, for example, be seen in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/170987/18056&quot;&gt;this answer to the question &amp;quot;How many skill points should I give my players for winning an encounter?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. Theoretically, the answer is right - for TDE4/4.1 - but it is wrong for TDE5. And the question itself does not clarify which version the op is playing. (Well, we could guess, and it would probably be accurate, but we can not know for sure - and as per our policy, we should not guess)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently 36 questions with the tag. I would guess that most of them are for TDE5, but that is solely based on the assumptions that most German players of TDE simply use the official (German) game forums for questions and stuff like that. But I don't think we would be able to correctly tag the questions (I could tag my question about TDE, and Trish is also still around, but there are old questions in the tag that are not from me or Trish but from people who do not seem to be around any longer, so....)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do about this situation? I have to admit that I am not that active here any more (I'm more of a silent reader for the last year(s)), so I am not exactly sure what the right way forward would be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18056" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-06-25T23:53:38.893" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T20:04:46.570" Title="Should we separate the [the-dark-eye] tag into multiple tags for multiple versions of the game?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10021" CreationDate="2020-06-25T19:22:22.600" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This is just the fact-gathering and question sorting, not a statement for or against the question itself. It is for the reference of those that don't know the system.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, a correction: there are technically &lt;strong&gt;10&lt;/strong&gt; distinct editions, and I am using the German nomenclature here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 1&lt;/strong&gt; - 1984&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 2&lt;/strong&gt; - 1988&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 3&lt;/strong&gt; - 1992&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Myranor Box&lt;/strong&gt; (&lt;em&gt;DSA 3.5&lt;/em&gt;) - 2000 - somewhat of a proto-DSA-4 in many regards&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 4&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;boxes&lt;/em&gt; - 2001&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 4.1&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;books&lt;/em&gt; - 2006 - some dozen, at times large, rule changes. 4 and 4.1 characters and adventures are not slot-in replaceable and need to be re-calculated from the ground up!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Myranor Hardcover  AKA &lt;strong&gt;Myranor HC&lt;/strong&gt; - 2006 - The whole Myranor series uses at times large variations of the 4.1 rules, especially when it comes to magic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA 5&lt;/strong&gt; - 2015&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSA-LARP&lt;/strong&gt; - 2018 - Spinoff&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSK&lt;/strong&gt; - 2019 - &amp;quot;Die Schwarze Katze/The Black Cat&amp;quot; - simplified offshoot of DSA 5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of these, there are English variants of DSA 4, 4.1, Myranor Hardcovers, and DSA 5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Setting vs. System?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;DSA has 3 main settings with multiple publications:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Aventuria&lt;/strong&gt;, the &lt;em&gt;central&lt;/em&gt; continent of Dere. It is featured since DSA1 as the mainline place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tharun&lt;/strong&gt;, the hollow world &lt;em&gt;inside&lt;/em&gt; the of Dere. It was a staple of DSA1 and 2 for high-level play. There was a re-release of the setting in DSA 4/4.1 but also a declaration that there won't be further new adventures in this place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Myranor&lt;/strong&gt;, the &lt;em&gt;western&lt;/em&gt; continent of Dere. Its books are rather distinct from the Aventuria ones and it uses standalone rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There had been plans to make content for the &lt;em&gt;eastern&lt;/em&gt; continent &lt;strong&gt;Riesland&lt;/strong&gt; and it is not clear if there is or isn't the &lt;em&gt;southern&lt;/em&gt; continent &lt;strong&gt;Uthuria&lt;/strong&gt; but so far there is not a lot content on either of these two.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the settings are set up in a complex sphere system, where the 1st sphere is creation as it is, 2nd has pure elements, Dere is the 3rd Sphere with Tharun and other alternate worlds being &lt;em&gt;Globules&lt;/em&gt; on the same &lt;em&gt;height&lt;/em&gt;, 4th being the afterlife, 5th being the realm of gods, 6th the firmament and the 7th sphere the ice-cold demon-lands of &lt;em&gt;Niederhöllen&lt;/em&gt;. Between these spheres are inter-sphere realms. A fan-illustration with the German terms can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.deviantart.com/erlkoenig/art/Spaehrenkarte-DSA-796406083&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Question lineup&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;currently&lt;/a&gt; 36 questions about TDE as a whole. And most are distinctively &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; TDE5: there's 10 TDE5, 11(12) TDE4/4.1. 6 unknown edition, 7 group related ones, 5 setting related ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;DSA 5&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Retagging done!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109099/how-can-i-balance-high-impact-characters-with-simpler-characters&quot;&gt;How can I balance high-impact characters with &amp;quot;simpler&amp;quot; characters?&lt;/a&gt; (via comment)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157945/how-do-i-subtly-convey-that-the-pcs-reality-is-fake&quot;&gt;How do I subtly convey that the PCs’ reality is fake?&lt;/a&gt; (via comment)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96694/how-can-i-run-a-large-battle-in-the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;How can I run a large battle in The Dark Eye?&lt;/a&gt; (via comment)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70707/how-to-help-a-player-choosing-the-right-character-class&quot;&gt;How to help a player choosing the right character-class?&lt;/a&gt; (indicated in comment)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151152/how-many-skill-points-should-i-give-my-players-for-winning-an-encounter&quot;&gt;How many skill points should I give my players for winning an encounter?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93950/is-this-tiredness-effect-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this Tiredness Effect balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125132/cannot-find-wood-harness-reference&quot;&gt;Cannot find Wood Harness reference&lt;/a&gt; (via the book named, 4/4.1 used &amp;quot;Aventurisches Arsenal&amp;quot;, 3 &amp;quot;Kaiser Retho's Waffenkammer&amp;quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101800/where-to-find-the-level-1-focus-rules-for-hit-locations&quot;&gt;Where to Find the Level 1 Focus Rules for Hit Locations&lt;/a&gt; (while mentioning the Bestiary, which is a 4/4.1 book it's clearly aiming for the 5th edition from the Level Focus and PRO)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102173/how-to-handle-social-skills-in-combat&quot;&gt;How to handle social skills in combat?&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned!)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95166/how-to-deal-with-rumors&quot;&gt;How to deal with rumors&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;DSA 3 or 4.1&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;not retagged&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/89301/players-characters-dont-meet-the-fundamental-requirements-for-campaign&quot;&gt;Players Characters don&amp;#39;t meet the fundamental requirements for campaign&lt;/a&gt; - The campaign is clearly the Borbarad campaign (largest campaign ever) and that was published only for 3 and 4.1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;DSA 4 AND 4.1&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Retagged&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25413/what-are-the-main-differences-between-version-4-0-and-4-1-of-the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;What are the main differences between version 4.0 and 4.1 of The Dark Eye&lt;/a&gt; Version Dispute&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;DSA 4 or 4.1&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16508/which-systems-use-character-development-mechanics-similar-to-the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;Which systems use character development mechanics similar to The Dark Eye?&lt;/a&gt; (from the Level-less and 2012, more likely 4.1 which almost removed the last remnants of level but from one single rule (learning new skills))&lt;/del&gt; (closed and need not get a new tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;DSA 4.1&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;retagged&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63310/the-dark-eye-universe-maximum-plausible-value-of-abilities-for-new-character&quot;&gt;The Dark Eye Universe: maximum plausible value of abilities for new character&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63371/do-benefits-from-a-talent-on-a-given-spell-only-apply-during-character-creation&quot;&gt;Do benefits from a talent on a given spell only apply during character creation?&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned in comment)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/63249/what-counts-as-sunlight-for-the-albino-and-fear-of-light-weaknesses&quot;&gt;What counts as &amp;quot;sunlight&amp;quot; for the Albino and Fear of Light weaknesses?&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/73688/number-of-actions-to-access-equipment&quot;&gt;Number of actions to access equipment&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55690/when-do-i-announce-my-parry&quot;&gt;When do I announce my parry?&lt;/a&gt; (mentioned)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109417/how-to-give-the-players-more-felt-impact-on-the-battle-of-the-silkwiesen&quot;&gt;How to give the players more felt impact on the &amp;quot;Battle of the Silkwiesen&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; (4.1 is the Edition used, though the adventure itself was the DSA 4 re-release of a DSA 3 one...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unknown edition (possibly DSA 4, 4.1 or 5)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Via date this might be 5 as well as 4 or 4.1:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93879/introducing-players-to-the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;Introducing Players to The Dark Eye&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From Date I suspect this is a 4 or 4.1, but dungeon sprawling was mostly a 1 to early 3 thing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/34719/recommend-large-complex-logical-dungeons&lt;/del&gt; (locked and need not get a new tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edition agnostic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Player Group&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115415/how-to-stop-players-from-trying-to-gauge-success-of-meta-ideas-via-meta-question&quot;&gt;How to stop players from trying to gauge success of meta-ideas via meta questions?&lt;/a&gt; (though it's 4.1)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99122/make-npc-death-most-dramatic&quot;&gt;Make NPC death most dramatic&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109472/how-to-deal-with-a-player-that-interrupts-play&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player that interrupts play?&lt;/a&gt; (though it's 4.1)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123202/how-to-deal-with-a-player-teleporting-to-the-action&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player &amp;quot;teleporting&amp;quot; to the action?&lt;/a&gt; (though it's 4.1)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145254/how-can-i-convey-to-my-group-that-they-have-to-discipline-their-murderhobo&quot;&gt;How can I convey to my group that they have to discipline their murderhobo?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12844/dealing-with-leaving-players&quot;&gt;Dealing with leaving players&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138098/how-to-deal-with-players-who-take-up-most-of-the-time-by-doing-solo-actions&quot;&gt;How to deal with players who take up most of the time by doing solo actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Setting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12838/koschbasalt-blaubasalt-vs-magic-traps&quot;&gt;Koschbasalt / Blaubasalt vs. Magic Traps&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95827/how-can-the-nameless-one-interact-or-interfere-with-mortals&quot;&gt;(How) can the Nameless One interact or interfere with mortals?&lt;/a&gt; (answer based on 5)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123563/is-there-a-given-fixed-constellation-starting-point-for-various-astrological-bod&quot;&gt;Is there a given fixed constellation starting point for various astrological bodies to calculate their position from for any day?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152629/how-to-create-a-sci-fi-antagonist-in-fantasy-rpg&quot;&gt;How to create a Sci Fi antagonist in fantasy RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103591/what-is-the-life-expectancy-of-different-races&quot;&gt;What is the life expectancy of different Races?&lt;/a&gt; (though asked for DSA5)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Homebrew with unknown edition as base&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140463/how-can-i-communicate-to-my-players-that-i-like-them-to-roleplay-their-skills-m&quot;&gt;How can I communicate to my players, that I like them to roleplay their skills more?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139439/how-can-i-make-a-smart-character-act-smart-without-prohibiting-less-intelligent&quot;&gt;How can I make a smart character act smart without prohibiting less intelligent characters from participating as well?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152821/how-can-i-help-my-players-to-better-immerse-into-my-game-world&quot;&gt;How can I help my players to better immerse into my game world?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T20:04:46.570" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T20:04:46.570" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10021" CreationDate="2020-06-25T20:36:25.660" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I sorted through the questions to the best of my knowledge, I think a distinction is needed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye-4-4.1&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye-4-4.1&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye-4-4.1&lt;/a&gt; as a joint 4/4.1 it's rather hard to sieve the 4 from the 4.1, plus the unknown recommendation one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye-5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye-5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye-5&lt;/a&gt; for the 5&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt; for the unsortable and setting questions; possibly separate out the Player group ones where we know.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the switch goes through, I suggest to close for clarity-needed (edition needed):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157945/how-do-i-subtly-convey-that-the-pcs-reality-is-fake&lt;/del&gt; 5th&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109099/how-can-i-balance-high-impact-characters-with-simpler-characters&lt;/del&gt; 5th&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93879/introducing-players-to-the-dark-eye&quot;&gt;Introducing Players to The Dark Eye&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2020-07-09T14:55:32.453" LastActivityDate="2020-07-09T14:55:32.453" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10024" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-06-28T23:12:14.923" Score="16" ViewCount="385" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121103/how-to-create-a-villain-for-level-1-players/171154&quot;&gt;How to create a villain for level 1 players&lt;/a&gt;, there are many great answers, however they are all frame challenges. They don't help someone who needs to actually create a conventional villain for a level 1 party.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I added a bounty requesting non-frame challenge answers, but it was suggested that I ask a new question or post an answer myself. The former seems like it would just be closed as a duplicate; the latter would be great if I already had an answer, but I don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know frame challenges are a core part of the site, but there doesn't seem to be a mechanism for getting straight answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63321" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-07-02T17:23:43.793" LastActivityDate="2020-07-11T21:13:32.643" Title="Getting a straight answer from questions filled with frame challenges" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|bounty|frame-challenge|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10025" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10024" CreationDate="2020-06-29T16:40:05.970" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's all about the original question, the querent's goals, and the community's additions&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is really a tough question because the question was fairly clear in it's request:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wants a BBEG for level 1 players&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wants to know how to go about making one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers that came in were some frame challenges, but some also did directly answer the above question and need.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The bounty&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then your bounty came in, and you wanted additional material on:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How to create a conventional villain for a level 1 group&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which really is the same thing and already answered. You also included a specific idea (Vorka from We Be Goblins.) It's unclear to me that if you already have something specific in mind, why not create an answer around that yourself? You've got the goal and the tools to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it remains unclear what is missing from answers, or if you simply misread the answers and didn't realize your clarification wasn't answered. If you did see those and think something remains missing, then being clear as to exactly what's missing would also have been helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise, looking at the clarification to see if it really is a clarification or if it's a separate question you'd like answered that wasn't included in the original or in existing answers would suggest asking a new one would work better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Chicken or egg?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading several responses of yours in the comments, I think the disconnect here for many of us is that the original question really just focuses on the creature itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your bounty, however, is about the encounter with the BBEG. While BBEG encounters &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be different, and usually are, it is encounter design - not creature design. And while those are very much tied together, I've often found the need to change my future encounter plans after player narrative actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designing the BBEG is the first step. Figuring out how to make the encounter, with that specific BBEG, is a separate question and should be asked separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Considerations on how to alter BBEG and encounter for a level 1 player group is a concern, but I honestly don't feel that it's different from much other encounter design in terms of planning, considerations, and balance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;In general, it's always okay to ask for more!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as the request fully fits in with the content of the original question. If it does, then you are simply bountying for more directly relevant information or asking for something that is missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if the community leans on the frame challenge, one should likely listen to the community. It's always okay to ask, but don't be upset if you don't get it because you may be asking the community do  something that they already said they don't really agree with. The frame challenge exists for a reason!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T13:03:34.770" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T13:03:34.770" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10026" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10027" CreationDate="2020-06-30T14:58:14.123" Score="3" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/136/illuminator&quot;&gt;Illuminator&lt;/a&gt; gold badge description says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit and answer 500 questions (both actions within 12 hours, answer score &amp;gt; 0)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is editing the tags of a question enough for the purposes of qualifying for this badge, or does the edit need to actually be the title or body of the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-06-30T15:17:00.057" Title="Is editing tags enough to quality for the Illuminator badge?" Tags="|support|editing|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10026" CreationDate="2020-06-30T15:10:41.267" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Editing tags is not enough&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/68258/404165&quot;&gt;general meta on badge earning&lt;/a&gt;, you can find the Illuminator family of badges details which include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only body and title edits on the question count, tag-only edits do not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2020-06-30T15:17:00.057" LastActivityDate="2020-06-30T15:17:00.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10028" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-01T00:37:59.403" Score="7" ViewCount="248" Body="&lt;p&gt;We got a few questions that ask for the origin of a monster or name, usually, &amp;quot;why does it differ from the usual most common thing with the same name?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As examples&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/111271/43856&quot;&gt;Why is the D&amp;amp;D gorgon a metal bull?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36289/43856&quot;&gt;Why do we call the class &amp;quot;Barbarians&amp;quot; instead of &amp;quot;Berserks&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Berserkers&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24615/43856&quot;&gt;What inspired the D&amp;amp;D version of the Rakshasa?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular the 1st and 3rd are a lot like a &amp;quot;Why did the designers choose this name/design?&amp;quot; - and a conclusive answer can only be obtained by revivifying Gygax and asking him that, or finding some obscure interview where he explains that. Other than that, we can only speculate on similar mythological creatures or reference material. While the answers are well behaved in these questions, ultimately they seem to be quite similar to designer-reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, are these questions designer-reasons? If they are, should they be put on that historical thing that closes the question and tells readers it is off-topic, simply closed, or what?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-09T10:50:04.860" Title="Are these &quot;history-of-gaming&quot; questions designer-reasons?" Tags="|discussion|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10029" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10030" CreationDate="2020-07-01T07:38:06.260" Score="3" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's say I wanted to reply to someone's comment, but I forgot to add @user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I submit the comment, then realise, edit the comment, add @user, then confirm the edit, does the user receive a ping at that point, or is the ping only registered on originally submitting the comment?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related (but my question is specifically adding the @user, not editing a comment already containing @user; i.e. my question is not a &amp;quot;re-ping&amp;quot;, but a ping at all): &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9648/35259&quot;&gt;Does Editing a Comment with a Ping in it Re-Ping the Mentioned User?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T07:49:36.387" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T08:00:56.490" Title="Does editing in @User into a comment still ping that user?" Tags="|support|comments|notifications|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10030" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10029" CreationDate="2020-07-01T08:00:56.490" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, editing in a @mention pings the user&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a brief test in the comments of this question I can confirm that editing in an @mention does ping the user following the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T08:00:56.490" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10028" CreationDate="2020-07-01T13:58:58.560" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is awkward, because the policy exists &lt;strong&gt;solely&lt;/strong&gt; because designer-intent questions so regularly got poor answers. There isn’t any problem with the query per se, nor is it impossible or even improbable that RPG is a great place to handle answering them well. Designer-intent is topical, clear, focused, and answerable. It’s &lt;strong&gt;purely&lt;/strong&gt; that, in our experience, for all they &lt;strong&gt;could&lt;/strong&gt; be answered well, too often they were not. We were, frankly, reluctant to ban the topic. (Well, many of us were; honestly I wasn’t too terribly sad to see them go.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three questions do not exhibit that problem. Ultimately, all of those questions have answers that dig into actual sources and evidence, and do a good job of backing up their cases (even if direct, objective evidence has yet to be found for any of them). They are some &lt;strong&gt;great&lt;/strong&gt; answers, to rather popular questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my answer to the question here is, &lt;strong&gt;if&lt;/strong&gt; there is a problem here, we need to dig into what’s different about these questions, versus the others that were so poorly-handled. Deciding “oh well, those are great questions and answers, but too bad, can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs,” we are doing ourselves and our readers a gross disservice. Instead, we have to grapple with the idea that we might need a more nuanced policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have some speculation as to why these Q&amp;amp;As went better than designer-intent Q&amp;amp;As usually did. I think part of it is that digging into history is harder, leaving folks less likely to be over-sure of themselves and thus happy to speculate baselessly. I think a lot of it is also the work that each of the questions did up-front—if you can’t match and expand upon the research effort already in the question, you really have no business answering, and I think people intuitively respond to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I think a lot of it has to do with how the request is really for information on the historical context and precedents that existed when these choices were made. It’s clear that these aren’t just “what were they thinking?” but rather “what came before that prompted this choice?” There is no prompting for answerers to “imagine themselves in the role of the ones who made this choice,” which is exactly the sort of baseless speculation we have no use for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which does also perhaps suggest an easy way to edit these questions to remove any doubt on the score, by eliminating “why” from them and replacing it with explicitly “what precedents and context existed at the time?” Ultimately, though, I lean towards &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; doing that—it just doesn’t seem necessary, as we already got what we wanted, some great answers—but it is something we could consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I’m adamantly opposed to closing or worse locking these questions. They’re great; if anything is wrong, it’s we who should adjust.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T13:58:58.560" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10032" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-01T16:49:08.377" Score="5" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on this screenshot of the review queue history:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xZSCY.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/xZSCY.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;screenshot of review queue history&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't appear that review efforts performed outside of the queue contribute towards a player earning the applicable badge. I know that I had cast a VtC on the 'Player shows up inconsistently' question which I accessed by clicking on it from the front page. This action occurred before casting a Leave Open vote via the queue on a subsequent question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally tend to not like reviewing through the queue since it feels unnatural for me. Rather, I go through the front page, read through the questions, and then respond accordingly (i.e. comment, comment with VtC, provide an answer). A lot of times, I'll read a question and then start clicking on linked questions or hop over to similar questions as well and sometimes I'll perform review actions there as well (especially if it's recent). In addition, there are plenty of times where I'll read a question from the queue and before issuing a vote I'll want to get a better look at what's already been done/said as it relates to comments so I'll click the question (which takes me out of the review queue) so I can see everything and perform my review action from there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3367/31402&quot;&gt;similar question&lt;/a&gt; was asked about this some 6 years ago, but only 1 answer was provided and seemed uncertain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally, I wouldn't give worry too much about this, however, when moderator elections occur a major component of how we rate and rank potential candidates is dependent upon certain review badges that they've earned. The system in place now favors those that complete review actions through the review queue and disadvantages those who may prefer to perform those actions in a different manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it feasible for the badge progress tracker to track review actions performed by users outside of the review queue? Is there a particular reason why we would prefer the badge tracker to only count actions done through the queue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-01T17:07:50.363" LastActivityDate="2020-07-01T17:07:50.363" Title="Review actions performed outside of the Review Queue should contribute towards earning badges" Tags="|feature-request|badges|review|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10034" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-03T15:17:56.550" Score="8" ViewCount="366" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/171466/why-does-a-round-last-6-seconds&quot;&gt;Why does a round last 6 seconds?&lt;/a&gt; on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the best of my experience, this question is &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on-topic&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;specific&lt;/a&gt;, answerable, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;reasonably scoped&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, it was closed as opinion-based in less than 10 minutes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I disagree that it's opinion-based. Here are my arguments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There may be an authoritative answer by the original creator:&lt;/strong&gt; For example, if this rule was created by Gary Gygax (I assume it is), then maybe he has provided feedback (e.g., in an interview, book, etc.) as to why this number was chosen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There may be an authoritative answer by one of the games that have adopted it:&lt;/strong&gt; To my experience, the number 6 is very common (all the games I've played use it). Surely, someone (a creator, a publisher, etc.) must have addressed at some point it even remotely.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that the people who voted to close the answer as opinion-based, did so because they themselves did not know the answer, which beats the purpose of asking questions. In other words, their opinion that the question is opinion-based is not based on objective reasoning. This argument becomes more clear when considering that the question was closed so quickly, i.e., there wasn't time to find out whether there's an authoritative answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I wrong? Is this question indeed opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3092" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-07-19T10:55:33.300" LastActivityDate="2020-07-19T10:55:33.300" Title="Question closure: Why does a round last 6 seconds?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10034" CreationDate="2020-07-03T15:42:17.907" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;“Primarily opinion-based” is the wrong close reason, but the question should still be closed, in my opinion. Designer-intent questions have been ruled off-topic here, and that’s inevitably what this question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be salvageable if you reworked it to emphasize more the history as the thing you want to know—maybe asking about context, e.g. did D&amp;amp;D always use 6-second rounds? Did that come from &lt;em&gt;Chainmail&lt;/em&gt;? Were there other games that Gygax and Arneson&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; would be familiar with that used that? Did either of them write about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key thing is to convince the site as a whole that your question isn’t going to invite speculative answers—for instance, I could &lt;em&gt;guess&lt;/em&gt; that it was chosen to make 1 minute equal 10 rounds for easy math, but I have absolutely no evidence to back that up. That would make a terrible answer, and as the question currently stands, I’m about 95% sure if we opened it up that’s the kind of answer we’re going to get. Probably repeatedly, because we’re going to delete the answers saying that and then someone else is going to come along and guess the same thing. And we’ll attach warnings and so on to the question, and they’ll be ignored, and it’ll just be a mess until we close it again. This is exactly what happens with most designer-intent questions, and why we ruled them off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Assuming 6s was the original choice and that these two would have been the ones most likely responsible, which I don’t know is a fair assumption.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-07-07T19:42:04.333" LastActivityDate="2020-07-07T19:42:04.333" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10036" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-03T16:49:05.290" Score="8" ViewCount="132" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10034/43856&quot;&gt;meta question&lt;/a&gt;, we had a user bringing a fair point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have read the thread. But does a meta-discussion overshadow the official page I've cited? Isn't that illogical? How would a user know what's on-topic if they have to search the Meta site first?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the page mentioned (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&lt;/a&gt;) does not explicitly state that rule intent is on-topic, it also does not state otherwise. It is also not stated in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;questions to avoid&lt;/a&gt;. However, we have deemed them &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/43856&quot;&gt;off-topic&lt;/a&gt; for about two years already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we include the information on the Tour, or in some of the help pages?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: This has been discussed in this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8652/43856&quot;&gt;Should we add &amp;#39;designers intent&amp;#39; questions to the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t ask&amp;quot; questions list on the tour?&lt;/a&gt; - but two out of the three reasons given by doppel seem to be dated by now, so I wanted to revisit such idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-04T13:11:26.330" LastActivityDate="2020-07-04T13:11:26.330" Title="Revisit: Should we include rule intent/designer intent as off-topic in tour and help pages?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|designer-reasons|help-center|tour|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10037" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10036" CreationDate="2020-07-03T16:49:05.290" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Do it in a similar way of Game recs.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the section &amp;quot;Before you ask your question, though, consider the following:&amp;quot;, we have the following statement about game recommendation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're looking for a game mechanic or technique that does thing X, ask for how to do X, not for &amp;quot;games that have X&amp;quot;. Asking for a game, or a list of games, is a game recommendation question, which are off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A similar bullet could be included for designer intent/rule intent, based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968/43856&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt;. A draft suggestion of mine:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are trying to understand a rule, ask for how changing that rule in some way will impact the game, clearly stating what problem you want to solve by changing that rule or what problem that rule is causing you. Asking simply for the intent behind a rule is considered off-topic (link to the relevant meta).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-03T16:49:05.290" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10038" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10040" CreationDate="2020-07-03T17:33:32.063" Score="1" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10034/question-closure-why-does-a-round-last-6-seconds/10035&quot;&gt;A question that I asked on the main site was closed&lt;/a&gt;, despite following the rules as they are stated &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;on the page about what's on-topic&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I asked why, I was told that &lt;em&gt;Rule Intent&lt;/em&gt; questions are not permitted, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;this meta thread&lt;/a&gt; was cited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I asked why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;the page about what's on-topic&lt;/a&gt; has not been updated to reflect this decision, I was told that &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;[we do] not have easy control over the help page, so changing it, even after the community has agreed on something, is not trivial&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's perfectly reasonable to not permit questions on X topic. But I think it's weird/interesting that such an important page cannot be edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Who owns this page, and why is it difficult to gain access to edit it accordingly?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3092" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-05T06:22:51.803" LastActivityDate="2020-07-05T06:23:18.843" Title="Why is it difficult to edit the &quot;on-topic&quot; help page?" Tags="|support|editing|help-center|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10039" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-03T17:36:01.290" Score="7" ViewCount="192" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968&quot;&gt;The current policy on &amp;quot;designer-reasons&amp;quot; questions&lt;/a&gt; states that they are off-topic and are considered to be off-topic &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they often receive answers that make guesses and do not involve actual citation and quality evidence. This is also explained quite well in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10031&quot;&gt;KRyan's answer&lt;/a&gt; to the question &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10028&quot;&gt;Are these “history-of-gaming” questions designer-reasons?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly &amp;quot;designer-reasons&amp;quot; questions and &amp;quot;history-of-gaming&amp;quot; questions are &lt;em&gt;similar&lt;/em&gt;, if not directly related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, &amp;quot;history-of-gaming&amp;quot; questions are &lt;em&gt;on-topic&lt;/em&gt; and, under a number of questions asking about designer-intent, I have seen comments along the lines of, &amp;quot;if we convert this into a history-of-gaming question it will work for this site&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly &amp;quot;designer-reasons&amp;quot; questions and &amp;quot;history-of-gaming&amp;quot; questions are &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following are some &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions that are &lt;em&gt;currently&lt;/em&gt; closed (often only after the policy change I linked at the start, and many with &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of close and reopen votes across their life so far):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/21265&quot;&gt;Where does the stereotype that wizards can&amp;#39;t wear armor come from?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24646&quot;&gt;Why did D&amp;amp;D Paladins originally have a requirement to be Lawful Good?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41089&quot;&gt;What explanation do the D&amp;amp;D devs have for designing spontaneous casters to lose out on a spell level compared to prepared casters?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71282&quot;&gt;Why did the designers make it so chromatic dragons can&amp;#39;t shapechange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73179&quot;&gt;Have any of the designers of D&amp;amp;D explained why Strength increases Hit Chance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127355&quot;&gt;Are there examples of priests/clerics having water creation abilities that predate D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47801&quot;&gt;What ever happened to rolling for stats, encountering class trainers, etc?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these questions have highly-scoring, (though that doesn't mean much since the questions &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; on-topic) lengthy, and detailed answers with references to various quotes, documents, and facts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are also the following three questions which have no positively-scoring answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/68793&quot;&gt;How has the focus on roleplaying versus combat in D&amp;amp;D changed in the years since its inception?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/100807&quot;&gt;How and why has D&amp;amp;D changed its character generation across editions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153487&quot;&gt;Why do bards and druids get Heat metal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; for me is that the following questions (and others) are currently &lt;em&gt;open&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157115&quot;&gt;Why, from a lore perspective, are druids the only class who can cast the Flame Blade spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41929&quot;&gt;Where does the elven &amp;quot;trance&amp;quot; come from?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/162604&quot;&gt;Why is Armor Class called that way?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/29367&quot;&gt;How has D&amp;amp;D&amp;#39;s guidance to DMs on when to extrapolate from written rules and when to improvise changed over time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/64832&quot;&gt;What is the origin of Backgrounds in D&amp;amp;D 5?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/171332&quot;&gt;Why are Ghouls not proficient with their bite attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/169714&quot;&gt;Why are skeletons lawful evil while zombies are neutral evil?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/163760&quot;&gt;Why are the beholder deities chaotic evil?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157929&quot;&gt;Why do some classes start with fewer trained skills?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25101&quot;&gt;What Works Inspired Paranoia?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/70527&quot;&gt;Why do druids use scimitars?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/89399&quot;&gt;Is Morrowind based on a tabletop RPG?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of these questions have highly-scoring, lengthy, and detailed answers with references to various quotes, previous editions, documents, facts, and even &lt;em&gt;quotes from the designers.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it just that I'm allowed to ask about designer-intent so long as I can shape or contort my question into being about either history or lore to ask effectively the same question but with different wording?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wasn't here when &amp;quot;designer-intent&amp;quot; questions were made off-topic, but I know that they were made off-topic because of the type of answers they so commonly received. And yet, even those &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions with &lt;em&gt;excellent&lt;/em&gt; answers (listed earlier) are currently closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm honestly confused and the &lt;em&gt;reason&lt;/em&gt; I'm asking this is because when I see a questions like &amp;quot;Why is a round 6 seconds?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Why are Ghouls not proficient with their bite attack?&amp;quot; I am utterly lost as to whether or not these are on-topic or off-topic and thus completely unsure whether they should be closed or open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are questions like &amp;quot;Why is the D&amp;amp;D gorgon a metal bull?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Where does the stereotype that wizards can't wear armor come from?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Why did D&amp;amp;D Paladins originally have a requirement to be Lawful Good?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;What inspired the D&amp;amp;D version of the Rakshasa?&amp;quot; about designer intentions or the history of gaming?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I tell, and when should I cast my close vote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2020-07-03T21:04:37.280" Title="Confusion regarding the topicality of and differences between &quot;history-of-gaming&quot; and &quot;designer-reasons&quot; questions" Tags="|discussion|policy|closing-questions|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10040" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10038" CreationDate="2020-07-03T18:22:23.340" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It can only be edited by the elected &amp;quot;diamond&amp;quot; moderators&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of the help pages aren't editable at all (excepting CMs/devs), however the On Topic page is editable by diamond moderators. That means the community doesn't have means to edit, nor suggest edits, to that page leaving it entirely in the hands of diamonds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we would need to remember to do it and have a good way of weaving it in.&#xA;How to word something so it is clear, concise, and not off-putting nor too stilted is hard. And doing something that is a bit outside the normal pages and not time critical is easy to postpone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those two can compound a little, but small nudges help and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10036/52137&quot;&gt;meta discussion suggesting how to do a thing&lt;/a&gt; helps even more. (Especially if we're given a nudge once there's a good consensus).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-05T06:23:18.843" LastActivityDate="2020-07-05T06:23:18.843" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10038" CreationDate="2020-07-03T19:11:56.570" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Fun tidbit, we actually just discussed a very related issue in a meeting of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/347104/introducing-the-moderator-council-and-its-first-pro-tempore-representatives&quot;&gt;Pro-tem Moderator Council&lt;/a&gt;. Though the On Topic page is one of the few help pages dimaond moderators can edit (as explained well by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10040/28591&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil&lt;/a&gt;), the reason why the rest of the pages cannot be edited, in large part, is because unified wording allows SE Inc. to roll out wording updates to every site at the same time. Having modifiable pages obviously makes that impossible, or at least much more difficult if all 170+ sites modify their help pages differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, this is something we are discussing with the company. It may be that this could be something that is realistic to see changed in the future. However, I suspect it will always fall to diamond moderators to do that editing. As always though, the community should drive those changes using rpg.meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-03T19:26:24.020" LastActivityDate="2020-07-03T19:26:24.020" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10042" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10034" CreationDate="2020-07-03T20:01:05.447" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Why 6 seconds and not... 2571241 Planck time Units?&amp;quot; is in its inception a &lt;strong&gt;designer intent&lt;/strong&gt; question. Why did the designer choose this time length and not any other arbitrary measurement can only be answered by the designer. And because of that, it is a speculation for everybody else unless the game itself defines WHY it chooses that unit. Some games do specify why they choose something, most don't. So we can't answer for the designer, which is why designer intent is a banned type of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But can it be salvaged? YES!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if this was a question &amp;quot;Why do we have alternate turns in [insert game here]&amp;quot; it could be rephrased as &amp;quot;From where did the idea of taking turns come into Chainmail, which then was imported into D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot; and the answer would be &amp;quot;Turns are established in many boardgames dating back to even before chess and had been an integral part of the very first wargame, &lt;em&gt;Little Wars&lt;/em&gt; by HG Wells from 1913, which in turn was carried over to &lt;em&gt;Chainmail&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; or something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though, maybe a better example would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/110095/where-and-when-did-the-gm-is-always-right-get-codified-first&quot;&gt;Where and when did &amp;quot;the GM is always right&amp;quot; get codified first?&lt;/a&gt; - This one did start out in my head as &amp;quot;Why is there the saying 'The GM Is Always Right' [attached to D&amp;amp;D]?&amp;quot;, and then turned into a history of gaming question after some thinking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your case, I would alter your question to something similar: &amp;quot;When was the 6-second per combat turn introduced to D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot;, which might offer insight into why it was chosen by identifying the edition it first appeared in and then taking into account the circumstantial evidence - such as interviews with designers and other games we know those designers were involved with - and the history of those - and maybe even an outlook onto other editions if you phrase it as &amp;quot;How did the length of combat rounds evolve over the different editions of D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2020-07-05T06:49:33.653" LastActivityDate="2020-07-05T06:49:33.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10039" CreationDate="2020-07-03T21:04:37.280" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Up front, just for some perspective, I want to point out that &lt;em&gt;we don’t really have a problem here&lt;/em&gt;. Like, there isn’t a rash of ambiguously-history-or-intent questions that we need to deal with, there aren’t a bunch of history-of-gaming questions attracting the same kinds of problematic answers we saw with designer-intent, or a ton of solid history-of-gaming questions getting closed when they shouldn’t be. Judging the appropriateness of old questions on the basis of a newer policy is kind of a rather academic exercise, not a pressing need. The community seems to handle questions as they come in well and appropriately for the most part, and if it’s all a bit “I know it when I see it,” then so be it. That’s leveraging the expertise of our users, especially the long-time users who have seen a lot of questions and have a sense of when a question is going to be a problem and when it isn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, the current policy is effectively: vote to close it if you recognize the signs that this is going to draw speculative answers like a designer-intent question. Vote to reopen if you recognize a question closed as “designer-intent” is actually a solid history-of-gaming question that shouldn’t have been closed. Don’t vote at all if you can’t recognize which a question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;And this is fine.&lt;/strong&gt; The systems are working as intended and it isn’t causing any trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can of course discuss what the “signs” are; experienced users can try to articulate what it is that they’re picking up on when voting on these things. Particularly since the decision was a while ago and otherwise-experienced users might &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have experience with this, and that’s only going to get more common as the policy ages. I just want to maintain some perspective, and also set up expectations for this answer—I am not discussing any kind of policy here. I am talking about what kinds of rules of thumb I use, what I look for, and so on. Don’t treat this as “our policy,” because it isn’t. Our policy is what I said above: vote to close if you recognize a problem, vote to reopen if you recognize a solid question closed unnecessarily, don’t vote if you don’t know. That’s it, that’s all it is and all it ever should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Things to keep in mind&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The linked policy answer says “&lt;strong&gt;Questions about rule intent (RAI) are generally off topic,&lt;/strong&gt;” (&lt;strong&gt;emphasis&lt;/strong&gt; original). Note some really important qualifications on this statement: it applies to &lt;em&gt;rule&lt;/em&gt; intent, and it says &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; off-topic. (Yes, I realize that there is later a more-general sentence, but I don’t consider this contradictory.) Moderators (by which I mean all users who are operating in the moderation role and who have the relevant privileges, i.e. close votes) are still ultimately responsible for addressing each question on its own merits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Read all of the examples in the linked question’s answers: they go through a lot of stuff that is, and isn’t, problematic. This is how you build up your judgment and ability to recognize problems and non-problems. My answer is really just augmenting that list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Always keep in mind what we’re talking about here: problematic answers. What answers are problematic? Primarily with these sorts of questions, baseless speculation. Judge the question based on how much you expect people to respond to it with baseless speculation. We have &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; found explicit statements in the question demanding that answerers avoid that to be very effective, so that is often not good enough, but it’s certainly a often-necessary first step.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about the intent of &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt; are often particularly problematic, &lt;em&gt;because they are often not asking what the querent really wants to know.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7969/4563&quot;&gt;Please stop being evil’s answer&lt;/a&gt; addresses this specifically, for example, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968/4563&quot;&gt;mxyzplk’s&lt;/a&gt; certainly alludes to it as well. Sometimes the best way to address an XY situation is with a frame-challenge kind of answer, but other times it is best to close the question and clarify it. Questions about “RAI” very, very often fall in the latter category. Again, it remains the responsibility of individual moderators to exercise judgment with any particular question, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What we really want to see is a question that is clearly, on its face, deep enough that it won’t seem plausible for someone’s speculation to work. Questions that show substantial research effort are a great start, because answerers seem to intuitively catch on to the need to at the very least match what the question has already done. Short questions tend to be interpreted as simple questions, and simple questions tend to be interpreted as questions accepting simple answers. Doesn’t get much simpler than speculating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Part of the reason why history-of-gaming questions have been fine and designer-intent questions haven’t been is because history-of-gaming questions focus less on “what were they thinking?” and more on “what was the context at the time when they made this choice?” Again, “what were they thinking?” is a tough question, that masquerades as a simple one—that’s a huge problem, that’s really &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; problem. Look for questions to dig deeper, to “take off the mask” and emphasize the difficult question that is actually being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When looking at historical questions, &lt;em&gt;good answers prove we had a good question.&lt;/em&gt; This entire discussion is about the quality of answers and the tendency for certain otherwise-valid questions to attract bad answers. If the answers that a question gets are good, that means it &lt;strong&gt;wasn’t&lt;/strong&gt; the problematic kind of question. Rather than look at them in confusion, try to get a feel for why &lt;em&gt;those questions&lt;/em&gt; worked. There is nothing cut-and-dried available, but there are patterns and tendencies you can learn to recognize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-07-03T21:04:37.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2020-07-06T04:09:00.320" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8269/i-have-some-information-to-add-to-help-someone-solve-their-issue-do-i-answer-or&quot;&gt;I have some information to add to help someone solve their issue, do I answer or comment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is really more about partial answers and how to handle them. There is some valuable points and discussion but I don't know how useful it is for a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-02T23:44:17.857" LastActivityDate="2020-10-02T23:44:17.857" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10047" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2020-07-06T04:11:40.797" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6453/is-there-a-rule-or-guideline-stating-that-each-post-should-only-ask-a-single-que&quot;&gt;Is there a rule or guideline stating that each post should only ask a single question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good question about avoid asking multiple questions in a single post. However it has been somewhat mitigated through updates to the &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; close reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-02T23:44:12.470" LastActivityDate="2020-10-02T23:44:12.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10050" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10051" CreationDate="2020-07-06T11:41:18.910" Score="4" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;My answer to this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/171394/tarokka-effect-for-a-given-die-roll-and-critical-success-miss-is-this-balanced&quot;&gt;question about balancing combat powers&lt;/a&gt; has reframed it to be about being a new DM with new players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've said why it's a bad idea in general, I've given some advice, but not answered the question as written. Due to the value in the answer, especially for new DMs, should it be tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3819" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-06T19:35:56.207" LastActivityDate="2020-07-06T19:35:56.207" Title="Should a mechanic-specific question that becomes ultimately about GMing be retagged?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10050" CreationDate="2020-07-06T11:51:28.523" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag is only for questions about being a new GM&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to quote from the tagging usage on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/new-gm/info&quot;&gt;tag's wiki&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag when the problem is inherently about being new to GMing, not just when the problem is caused by or the result of being new to GMing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the problem is about some other aspect of running roleplaying games, and being new to GMing is why you don't know the answer, don't use new-gm. Instead, use a tag that describes the problem you're experiencing. In particular, questions about how a game works should have the tag for that game system, and don't need this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And of note here, we're talking about the question. Tags describe the question (which is not about being a new GM), not the answers (desired or obtained). The fact that the question got a frame challenge answer focusing on adding rules while a new GM does not relate to the question's tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-07-06T11:51:28.523" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10052" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10081" CreationDate="2020-07-06T18:19:41.337" Score="12" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;You might not be aware — because it is currently empty and you don't see an edit button — there's a space on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;the main help page&lt;/a&gt; which is editable for diamond moderators. It's the space between the search box and the list of articles. It seems to support full CommonMark, so formatting, links and even pictures (we probably don't want pictures). This is what it looks like at the moment (with the edit button included):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XXTZa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XXTZa.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And since this is one of places we guide new users towards for learning about the site, and it's one of the places we can customize, we should at least look at doing so. From the get go I can think of two considerations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It should probably be kept reasonably short, we don't want to drown out the rest of the help center nor be so long it won't be read.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It should probably include a link to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/52137&quot;&gt;FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt; which is actually part of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10036/revisit-should-we-include-rule-intent-designer-intent-as-off-topic-in-tour-and#comment34560_10037&quot;&gt;impetus&lt;/a&gt; for this discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure there may be other things which deserve consideration and/or mention, but I can't think of them, nor how it would be best formulated. So, how do we want to use this space?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-13T13:09:20.667" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T19:15:50.160" Title="So there's this space on the main help center page. Should we put something on it?" Tags="|discussion|help-center|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10053" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-07T03:44:52.230" Score="3" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a number of locked questions that are protected. This causes them to stay in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tools/protected-questions&quot;&gt;protected list&lt;/a&gt; indefinitely, hampering cleanup. Since there is no risk that low rep users are going to comment on locked questions, it would be helpful to unprotect them to clear them out of the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following protected questions are locked:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88705/is-this-homebrewed-double-whip-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this homebrewed Double Whip balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94262/why-is-mayo-in-the-alchemy-jug&quot;&gt;Why is mayo in the alchemy jug?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12534/vow-of-poverty-overpowered-or-underpowered&quot;&gt;Vow of Poverty, overpowered or underpowered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any cons to unprotecting these questions? Would it be beneficial to have a policy to unprotect locked questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-07-07T04:32:31.907" LastActivityDate="2020-07-07T04:37:49.860" Title="Should locked questions be unprotected?" Tags="|discussion|policy|locked-posts|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10054" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10053" CreationDate="2020-07-07T04:37:49.860" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;These questions should be unprotected going by the Privileges page&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/protect-questions&quot;&gt;Privileges&lt;/a&gt; page describes protected questions as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] Questions should be protected when they are attracting poor answers from new users that exceed the volume which can be moderated in a timely manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions should be unprotected when they are no longer attracting large amounts of traffic or would benefit from new answers. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The posts in question are locked, and thus are not accepting new answers nor comments. Thus these are no longer &amp;quot;attracting poor answers&amp;quot; and are not &amp;quot;attracting large amounts of traffic&amp;quot; (at least not meaningful traffic). In other words, the state of these questions matches the state of a question that should be unprotected. Thus, these posts should be unprotected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Is there a &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to unprotect these? (I don't see one)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think they &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to be unprotected, or rather, I don't see any urgency to do so nor any problems occurring &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they are protected. So while it would probably look nice on paper to not have eternally protected questions, I'm not sure they're doing any harm by being in their current state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A protected and locked question is not special or exceptional to the existing guidelines and policies&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think any sort of policy is needed as this scenario is quite rare (there are only three such questions) and the &amp;quot;solution&amp;quot; would be to simply apply the pre-existing guidelines. Basically, I would treat these posts like any other. They are locked and protected but those (at least to me) are independent states/events.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, it's possible I've overlooked something; it's possible that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a pressing reason to unprotect these (in which case we should unprotect them). It's also possible that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something fundamentally flawed about treating these questions as being independently protected and locked (in which case an answer addressing that nuance is required, and I would delete my own).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2020-07-07T04:37:49.860" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10055" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10059" CreationDate="2020-07-07T12:32:40.130" Score="15" ViewCount="414" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was recently involved in a series of back-and-forth edits to the tags of a question. In particular, the question lacked any explicit statement or tag designating the system, so it was closed in accordance with our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th/6869#6869&quot;&gt;don't guess the system policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user (not the querent) added a system tag without any confirmation from the querent about the system. I reverted the edit, the tag was added again, and again I reverted the edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've read through the tour, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;editing help page&lt;/a&gt;, and I didn't see anything concerning &amp;quot;edit wars&amp;quot;. What I did find is this, from the edit help page (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What happens if someone suggests a bad edit?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user without edit privileges proposes an edit that does not comply with the guidelines above, it is ordinarily rejected in the review process. &lt;em&gt;Even if a bad edit is applied to a post, other users will generally fix it. Users with sufficient reputation may elect to roll back the post to a previous version&lt;/em&gt; (by viewing the revision history of the post and selecting the version they would like to display).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my perspective, I felt I was reverting a &amp;quot;bad edit&amp;quot; (read: non-compliant) to maintain compliance with our policy. I was later accused of inciting an edit war (by the other editor).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this an appropriate course of action to take? How should I have handled this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't found a meta.rpg post concerning edit wars, so I think it would be helpful to establish some best practice for non-moderators for handling situations where a user is insistent on making poor or policy violating edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A thorough answer should address:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is an edit war?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When should users stop reverting bad edits to a question and let the moderators handle it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should this be handled differently for situations where the edits are clear policy violations (such as guessing system tags) vs. substantive edits to the question body?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;It should be noted that the &amp;quot;Don't Guess the System&amp;quot; policy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/62294&quot;&gt;is now obsolete&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T03:47:23.270" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:47:23.270" Title="What is an &quot;edit war&quot; and is it ever appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|faq|editing|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10056" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-07T17:28:25.220" Score="26" ViewCount="715" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[First off, there's no need to name the user, and I'm kinda-glad in this case that I think it'd be relatively hard for anyone but a mod to go back and figure out who. This isn't about the &lt;strong&gt;user&lt;/strong&gt;. I assume they're trying to make the site better like the rest of us, that they never thought to come check ahead of time on meta, and that they will continue being a productive member. Hell: I happen to agree that most questions should be unprotected. This post is about the manner of its doing, and wanting to set a signpost for future stackizens.]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A user last week unprotected 700 questions, leaving 4 protected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's about 99.4% of our protected questions, unprotected on one person's judgment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Almost everything about routine Stack-usage is transparent and builds in some redundancy/error-checking. Edit histories, bumping questions, queues. This is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-by-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-by-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-by-design&lt;/a&gt;. And this is important: communicating with each other in real-time is how a lot of Stack-education gets done. I remember during my first Hatmas deciding to go for an editing badge and being gently introduced to the term &amp;quot;flooding the frontpage.&amp;quot; Lesson learned! (Hi, SSD!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, though, is a corner-case where the users' actions were unreviewable and basically invisible. Unprotections appear in a question's timeline, but you'd need to know what question to look at first. And I'm not aware that there is a way to search for questions that &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; protected. Unprotections don't go into a queue or bump a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So a user stumbled into a thing they had the privileges to do, thought they should do to improve the site, and went ahead and made a project of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should they have?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="40921" LastEditDate="2020-07-07T21:39:46.293" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T05:32:18.860" Title="A site user recently unprotected virtually all of our protected questions. Is that okay?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10056" CreationDate="2020-07-07T17:28:25.220" Score="25" Body="&lt;h2&gt;One shouldn't undertake a large maintenance project alone, invisibly.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;[Reiterating: the user had the privileges to do so, and I assume no malice.]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;TL;DR: default to humility in judgment, and look for opportunities to better the site &lt;em&gt;and the community&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my mind there are two things at play here: a responsibility and an opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all have a &lt;strong&gt;responsibility&lt;/strong&gt; to use our privileges for the betterment of the site. And most of the time it's easy to do so. OP leaves a link in a comment, you edit it into the question seamlessly, and nobody suggests you should have opened a meta to discuss that. New user posts a question-as-answer, you flag and leave a nice comment, the site's better off. You notice a tag being used in a way that strikes you oddly and open a meta to discuss. (Notice, because you may have forgotten: each of the actions there are &lt;em&gt;privilege&lt;/em&gt;-actions!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But sometimes there are judgment calls: OP mentioned some things in comments that prompt you to edit their post pretty substantially. It seems like people are using tags in $system_you_know incorrectly and you go on a re-tagging spree. Your gold badge earns you a dupe-hammer, and it's not always super-clear whether to use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In many of these cases people are proactive about seeking second opinions. A comment to OP saying &amp;quot;I've made a pretty substantial edit, please check that I've encapsulated your meaning&amp;quot; not only pings OP, it implicitly invites &lt;em&gt;every follow-on reader&lt;/em&gt; to push back on the editor if it looks amiss to them. Meta discussions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/tags&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tags&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tags&lt;/a&gt; are common enough that &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/tags&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tags&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tags&lt;/a&gt; is our second most-used tag. And most weeks people come into chat to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/search?q=dupe&amp;amp;room=11&quot;&gt;ask about whether or not a close-as-duplicate vote is appropriate&lt;/a&gt; for their case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if none of those proactive steps is taken, each of the examples would &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/48578/311001&quot;&gt;bump&lt;/a&gt; the post, inviting inspection and review. The system is ensuring that actions we take are publicly-reviewable. (And in nearly every case I can remember, that review--if there's an objection--is handled graciously.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A large program of &amp;quot;invisible&amp;quot; unprotection bypasses those quality controls. It takes the judgment of one user and enacts it over the judgments of the dozens-if-not-hundreds of users who protected those questions and (any) who later saw the protected question and thought &amp;quot;yeah, that's right.&amp;quot;&lt;sup&gt;*&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have an &lt;strong&gt;opportunity&lt;/strong&gt; when using our privileges to better the site and ourselves. Leaving a comment about a large edit both forces you into introspection and it teaches newer users (by example) how to treat others' work. Opening a meta on a re-tagging project pulls in a variety of expertise, might engage otherwise-inactive users, and often spawns spin-off discussions. Asking someone in chat to sanity-check you both nets you the sanity check and reinforces the site-wide message that &amp;quot;we're all here working together.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* - story time: I once, in the mod-room, mentioned that I unprotect the majority of protected posts I come across. I was met with &amp;quot;why would you do that!?&amp;quot; I only mention it to say that I know there exist users who would respond to &amp;quot;I unprotected lots&amp;quot; with &amp;quot;why would you do that!?&amp;quot;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2020-07-07T17:28:25.220" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10058" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-07T18:02:28.703" Score="37" ViewCount="1276" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone recently and quietly unprotected about 700 mainsite questions. (Whether or not one &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; do that is under discussion &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10056/23970&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we re-protect those questions in advance of a broader meta discussion around what should be protected, what guidelines might be put forth for what makes sense to unprotect, &amp;amp;c. Effectively, reset the clock?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm aware that &amp;quot;we&amp;quot;, actually, can't really do this--there's no way to find them and it'd be an onerous task. I'm pretty sure mods would have to ping staff to get them to run some queries and other computer-stuff, so I'm putting this out on meta to gather votes as evidence that staff should do so.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T14:14:38.453" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T14:14:38.453" Title="Should we reprotect the 700 or so questions that were unprotected in the last few weeks?" Tags="|discussion|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10059" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10055" CreationDate="2020-07-07T18:18:26.550" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What is an edit war?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit Warring is when two (or more) users disagree about something (generally whether something should have a specific edit) and uses their privileges to do and undo that edit repeatedly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, one editor believes the question should include a particular paragraph, another thinks it should exclude that paragraph. They each repeatedly edit the question to add or remove the paragraph in question, or keep rolling it back to their preferred revision where it was already added/removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cWQla.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cWQla.png&quot; alt=&quot;A clip from Looney Tunes of Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck: Duck season! Rabbit season!&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Should you do it?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is users quarreling about something, without talking it out. This is not a productive way of going about things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should you do instead?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no hard rules for what to do when a user undoes one (or part one) of your edits. Use your judgement, but you probably shouldn't just redo the edit, without checking some things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First thing I'd check is the revision history. If there's other changes made at the same time, it's possible you were editing at the same and their's overrode yours accidentally. This has happened to me numerous times, and while it wouldn't usually lead to an edit war, it'll be probably be easier to suggest the change as a comment. And revisions also have a comment, which (if the user filled it out) could tell you &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they made the edit. Knowing that should help you:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leave a Comment. Comments are a good first tool once it's clear there is some disagreement. State constructively, clearly, and nicely why you think some edit should be made (or not made as appropriate). Remember that editors are pingable using @ even if they don't appear in the autocomplete. Link to standing meta's if appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a short comment exchange works, disagreements are resolved, things that needed to be pointed out were, clean up your comments (encourage the other to do too) and move on.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; If it doesn't, take it to meta. It doesn't usually matter which of you starts that. We're ok with a meta discussion about whether a specific question should have a specific edit, especially once it's clear some users disagree on it. Remember to focus on the &lt;em&gt;edit&lt;/em&gt;, not the users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So when do I flag?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a couple of automated flags build in the system for warring, but if you feel a moderator should at least take a look at something, flag it. If the edit in question is egregious enough you strongly feel it should be left off while you resolve it in comments/meta, we probably want to see it even if you can resolve it peacefully. The worst case for you flagging when you start seeing something like this happening is us dismissing a flag after the fact. (And if you clearly express a reasonable concern we're very likely to mark it as helpful, because it would be.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: No, there's no hard length for acceptable comment discussion. Single back and forth should usually be sufficient, and if it isn't and it feels like banging two rocks together, move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-09-08T20:26:57.660" LastActivityDate="2021-09-08T20:26:57.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10061" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10058" CreationDate="2020-07-08T16:20:22.027" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I recommend a complete reversal.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, a disclaimer: I’m actually of the opinion that we had too many protected posts, and that we--as a site--should be more proactive about unprotecting things after a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, for me this issue is &lt;strong&gt;less about the end-state than it is about the process,&lt;/strong&gt; and what we can learn from it. I believe we should be on the lookout for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10057/23970&quot;&gt;opportunities to build up the community&lt;/a&gt;: its coherence around principles, its sense of agency, its understanding of the state of the site. Blanket-unprotecting 700 questions and then query-driven reprotecting a hundred of them short-circuits all of that: no single site user develops any more understanding of what should and shouldn’t be protected; we feed back no wisdom to SE staff on whether autoprotection is currently working well or poorly; we don’t hash out any of the boundary areas and, in doing so, reveal guiding principles we can collectively embrace.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, hoo-boy, do we need to. Addressing the elephant in the room: &lt;strong&gt;our theory of protection, generally, is vastly under-developed on meta.&lt;/strong&gt; We currently have &lt;strong&gt;4&lt;/strong&gt; meta posts devoted to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/*protect*&quot;&gt;question protection&lt;/a&gt;. We have more posts about &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/site-promotion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;site-promotion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;site-promotion&lt;/a&gt; (psst: we don’t do any of that) and &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feeds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feeds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feeds&lt;/a&gt; to chat than we do about a feature that unlocks at fairly high rep and that locks the majority of users out of the site’s core activity: answering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can leave this batch largely unprotected, use a query to re-protect those that were protected by the community bot, and in doing so throw away literally every human’s judgment that went into that list. (Well, except the one human who decided to unprotect it all.) And we’d be right back at square 1: some posts will invariably get protected, few will ever go back to look at whether those posts should be unprotected, any who come to meta for guidance will find none but that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10057/23970&quot;&gt;they shouldn’t unprotect everything at once&lt;/a&gt;. We will have gotten a nice-and-small protected-list without learning from the curating of that list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or we can revert fully the recent unprotections. Ask the relevant meta questions: how do I know when to unprotect a post? These ten posts have no downvoted answers and I see no discussion of why they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be protected, can I unprotect them? The last downvoted/deleted answer on this handful of posts came in 4 years ago, shouldn’t they be unprotected? In some of those cases it’s going to clearly come down: “leave protected.” Others: “unprotect, and do it yesterday!” And some we’ll have to furrow our brows for and post competing answers &lt;em&gt;and we’ll learn something about those posts and about our preferences&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can do the actual work, as a community, that will guide future users. There’s no rush: we can take a year or so to give ourselves an education in what gets protected, whether we like how much or little that tool gets used, and how we can know whether a post should be unprotected. We don’t need to discuss &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; question. But in discussing &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; questions we’ll grow the site’s understanding of this tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2020-07-09T22:42:53.540" LastActivityDate="2020-07-09T22:42:53.540" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10058" CreationDate="2020-07-09T03:46:58.873" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, we shouldn't re-protect them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the mass unprotection was a rash move, the fact is that almost all protects are for time limited reasons - hot network questions, squabbles, and so on.  If even 5 of these 700 questions pop a problem and need to be re-protected I’d be shocked.  Just leave it alone and re-protect if and as needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-10T15:59:41.627" LastActivityDate="2020-07-10T15:59:41.627" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10028" CreationDate="2020-07-09T10:50:04.860" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;let's go step by step:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/24615/what-inspired-the-dd-version-of-the-rakshasa&quot;&gt;What inspired the D&amp;amp;D version of the Rakshasa?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is not what the designer thought or why he did it, it is what other influence might be identified for a specific trait. Such can be pinned down to the material that existed before the creation of such an item, so it is not per se a designer intent question but one of &lt;strong&gt;identifying source material&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/111271/43856&quot;&gt;Why is the D&amp;amp;D gorgon a metal bull?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once again, this is asking for research into what material the designers might have had available to describe the monster as it is. While framed as &amp;quot;why did the designers choose this&amp;quot;, it can be read as above as &amp;quot;can a source material be identified that has these traits for a monster&amp;quot; - which again is a &lt;strong&gt;source identification&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36289/43856&quot;&gt;Why do we call the class &amp;quot;Barbarians&amp;quot; instead of &amp;quot;Berserks&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Berserkers&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one again does not ask what a designer thought but more tries to identify when the terminology was used first and entered the RPG-culture (hint: 0th edition D&amp;amp;D &amp;amp; probably ) - and some answers go so far as to elaborate what might have inspired the Designer (hint: A certain Cimmerian coined the term in 1932!) and then an elaboration what the word Barbarian means (hint: it comes from the ancient greek Barbaroi, meaning non-hellenic-person aka non-greek. Romans were barbarians to the greek!) - nothing here asks for designer reasons but an &lt;strong&gt;analysis of the RPG-community and to the extent the origin of the words.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2020-07-09T10:50:04.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10058" CreationDate="2020-07-09T18:24:55.870" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Leave unprotected and gather data for 60 days, then decide.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This is not an endorsement of the actions taken by this user, they should have talked to the community before unprotecting virtually every question on this site. However, this is about doing the best thing for this community going forward now that we are here.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr We learn nothing by reprotecting all of the posts right now and we lose nothing by waiting to see if any of the posts have issues. Lets gather the data and be smart about it.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From everything I and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10062/28591&quot;&gt;other&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10058/should-we-reprotect-the-700-or-so-questions-that-were-unprotected-in-the-last-fe#comment34648_10062&quot;&gt;experienced users&lt;/a&gt; can tell, the vast majority of protected posts no longer need protecting like they did when they were first protected.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reprotecting all of them would require a decent amount of dev-time work and could leave as many as 600+ answers protected without any need (thus preventing new users from answering them).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Instead, I suggest we don't reprotect any of the posts for now and see if any problematic posts even come up during a 60 day test period.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And during the test period we can discuss what we want our guidelines for protection to be. And by the end, we'll have data to help back us up. And when the test period is over, we can decide which of all of the questions we want to be protected and submit that to the CMs if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way, we can actually learn something from this incident. It is impossible for us to learn which posts protection is actually benefiting when they are protected, since the very thing you'd need to see to judge success would be answers that are &lt;em&gt;prevented&lt;/em&gt; from being submitted. And that is obviously impossible to measure. Instead, let's let the problem posts show themselves to us over time and we can use that experience to help lead our discussion about how we want protection on this site to work going forward. (Keeping in mind that there is only confusing and vague advice given by SE about this — confused even more by the recent change to the wording of the protected feature.)&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;During the test period we can track and collect data on each of the unprotected questions. And then we can report back here and revisit the issue. I suspect that &amp;lt;10 of the posts will even get a single post and fewer that are problematic. If we have no posts during the time that are deemed to be in need of protection or harmed by the lack thereof, I'd propose we just make it permanent. And if there are issues, we can cancel the experiment at any time and reprotect the whole bunch.&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In the end, we lose nothing by waiting for &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; issues to surface and we have potentially a decent amount to gain.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10058/should-we-reprotect-the-700-or-so-questions-that-were-unprotected-in-the-last-fe#comment34648_10062&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast&lt;/a&gt; (admittedly only one user, but an experienced one):&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;OK, after 120 out of 720, there were 3 I'd recommend protecting so far&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;If that ratio holds true to the way the community also sees protection we'd end up with a total of 18 posts to protect out of 720.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2 - We also don't need to reprotect the questions in order to learn from the previously protected questions since we can refer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bl_mfKUMc02S4ln_sx8wnEbZo-DQZB4OqnhLoK9RFQE/edit?usp=sharing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this list&lt;/a&gt; and review them as a community at any time.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3 - If any problems do arise during the experiment, those posts will be dealt with according to the best practices we have. No experiment should result in the degredation of how the site operates. So if a spammy post starts getting hammered, for example, we'll protect it like we would normally.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-14T23:29:41.797" LastActivityDate="2020-07-14T23:29:41.797" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10065" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10066" CreationDate="2020-07-10T14:40:02.947" Score="4" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;I made some edits to tidy up a closed question, the sorts of edits that are commonplace around on RPG.SE, such as spelling mistakes, formatting, retagging, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I was told that I should not edit closed questions unless the edit is related to the reason it was closed (i.e. editing in information that the OP has clarified in comments).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that the purpose of this Q&amp;amp;A is as a reference to point others to when this happens; I haven't actually done this myself (at least, not recently) and am therefore not looking for an answer to a specific instance of this happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-07-10T15:25:19.660" Title="Why shouldn't I edit a question that has been closed?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|editing|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2020-07-10T14:51:00.580" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10066" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10065" CreationDate="2020-07-10T14:40:02.947" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Editing closed questions puts them back in the review queue, and if the edit was unrelated to the close reason, the question will be kept closed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, I will point out that I've done exactly the thing I ask about in the question, and it was V2Blast♦ who pointed out to me why I shouldn't do this. I've since abstained from doing this, but I've seen some users still do this; I just want to point out that I learned the hard way, and that's why I now know this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you edit a closed question, that triggers the question being put into the Reopen review queue. The intention behind this automatic behaviour is that, if a closed question is edited, the hope is that the edit is an attempt to rework the question into a &amp;quot;stackable&amp;quot; state. The reviews will consider the edit to see if it brings the question in line with the stack's expectations and votes to Reopon or Leave Closed accordingly (or make further edits, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if the edits were of a trivial nature (by which I mean, not specifically related to the reason the question was closed), then when it gets put into the Reopen review queue, the actual content and question(s) remains the same, just with better tags or corrected spelling. In other words, the question now being reviewed is essentially the same question that was originally closed, so the reviewers will just vote to Leave Closed, since nothing significant has been changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why is this a problem?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with this is that &amp;quot;everybody gets one&amp;quot;. Once the question has been through the Reopen review queue, that's it. It doesn't get another shot at it. If further edits are made later, it doesn't get put back into the Reopen review queue, so it will only be reopened if people happen to manually check back and take a look at the question, unrelated to the review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence trivial edits can actually potentially prevent the question from being reopened if the OP does later edit the question into shape, because the question has already gone through the Reopen review queue due to the trivial edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Hold off on trivial edits until the OP has edited their question with relevant improvements&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the question has been edited by the OP to include the information needed to consider reopening it (meaning, gets put into the Reopen review queue), then you can make more edits on top of that, because it would now be put into the review queue for the right reasons, and further &amp;quot;clean up&amp;quot; edits won't interrupt that process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-10T15:25:19.660" LastActivityDate="2020-07-10T15:25:19.660" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10067" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10058" CreationDate="2020-07-11T10:06:56.767" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, we should absolutely reprotect those questions. We didn't protect them for kicks, and having all of them become unprotected is actively harmful for us. Doing so takes no effort on our part; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10060/1204&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose already stated&lt;/a&gt; that “[Stack Exchange staff] have the ability to identify and reverse all the questions this user unprotected” so they're just waiting on our mods to say the word.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=54910808#54910808&quot;&gt;As BESW summed up in chat&lt;/a&gt;, questions tend to get protected for one of three reasons: (1) a question hits HNQ and attracts nonsense, (2) a question is controversial and needs a bit of brakes applied, and (3) a spam algorithm has identified that question as a target via keywords. And of those three, the last one is far and away the most frequent primary cause.  We already have users who periodically unprotect questions that were protected that no longer needed it, so the protection list we had was &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; frequent case-by-case culling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later edit: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10082/1204&quot;&gt;Rubiksmoose has crunched the numbers&lt;/a&gt;, and apparently spam-based protections don't establish the majority of our protection list just prior to the change (it's about a third?). There probably are many questions that can yet be unprotected, but I believe our prior protected list should be reinstated, rather than let a sweeping removal that never should have happened stay in place, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; we can assess what kinds of questions we want to clear out of it if any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see folks saying here that only a handful of questions will become a problem, and that's just factually plain wrong. For those unaware: we get spammed quite a bit. It's consistently about 3–4 times a week or a dozen times a month. Most of it comes from one source (spellcaster spammers) and our spam sources are very well understood: they search keywords, every now and then one of our questions (new or old) shows up matching those keywords, and they spam there if they can. They spam the same question repeatedly if able, coming back to it every few weeks for as long as it remains unprotected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means nearly every single question we have that has ever received spam (which is hundreds of questions) is &lt;em&gt;guaranteed&lt;/em&gt; to get spam again, as long as there's a text box the spammers can post to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the years, by protecting every question they post spam to as they come up, we've worked to minimise our surface area to spam. It's thanks to this defensive capital that our community's built up over the years that our site gets as little spam as it does. If you think spam isn't a big problem here, that's &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of this work we've done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This mass unprotection basically wipes that slate clean and resets the defensive capital we've built up to nil. It's like waking up one day and finding all the walls to the fortress have been disassembled overnight. Of course we should be putting them back up as soon as we can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're discussing this because it got opened up for debate, but would we blink if the moderators said “Yeah, wiping out that much stuff without checking with anyone isn't appropriate, so we reverted it”? I venture we probably would not. Would we have a debate if it was instead all the downvotes got wiped indiscriminately, or every single closed question got reopened regardless of why it was closed? Probably not, because we understand palpably the harm that represents. This represents harm too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Background: I've spent multiple years actively involved in &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2020/06/25/how-does-spam-protection-work-on-stack-exchange/&quot;&gt;Charcoal, the organisation that is SE's last line of defense against spam&lt;/a&gt;. I was active in events like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8680/2018-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;that spam wave that occurred in 2018&lt;/a&gt;, and was busy hammering down nearly &lt;em&gt;six hundred spam accounts&lt;/em&gt; over the course of that wave. I've seen spam like you wouldn't believe, dear readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-13T19:25:48.320" LastActivityDate="2020-07-13T19:25:48.320" CommentCount="40" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10068" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-11T16:01:34.260" Score="7" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/171772/47185&quot;&gt;Have the D&amp;amp;D 5E designers ever done an official commentary about why they have designed certain rules the way they did?&lt;/a&gt; was recently closed due to lack of focus (the close reason I chose) and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/47185&quot;&gt;designer reasoning being off-topic&lt;/a&gt;. I don't pretend to know the asker's intent, but I believe a similar question could be asked, while remaining on-topic. On to the example questions...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How has True Strike evolved from its first appearance in 5e to today?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cantrip &lt;em&gt;true strike&lt;/em&gt; is considered weak by well-respected build guides, such as Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e. I am curious how (or if) the cantrip changed from the earliest D&amp;amp;D Next playtest to today. I'm interested in any errata (silent or otherwise) as well as its addition/removal from (sub)class spell lists. Any changes to &lt;em&gt;true strike&lt;/em&gt; proposed in Unearthed Arcana would also be interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is more of a &lt;strong&gt;baseline&lt;/strong&gt; than a controversial question. I feel like this is pretty clearly &lt;strong&gt;on-topic&lt;/strong&gt;. It only covers the facts without mentioning developer commentary. Good answers may contain some developer commentary, but that's fine. It's a bit far from the original question, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Where can I find official commentary on the changes made during the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't participate in the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest, but I've heard that the developers released several versions, acquiring feedback between each one. Did the developers provide official responses to the feedback? By official responses, I mean articles, blog posts, and videos where a D&amp;amp;D designer is speaking in an official capacity about the feedback they've received during the playtest. Similarly, did the developers provide official responses regarding &lt;em&gt;changes&lt;/em&gt; they made in response to said feedback?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If such commentary exists, where can I find it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This feels a lot closer to the original question. I believe it's &lt;strong&gt;on-topic&lt;/strong&gt;, since it's asking where to find something that either exists or doesn't. &lt;strong&gt;It doesn't care about &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; the designer reasons are, just &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; they are.&lt;/strong&gt; It may need to be narrowed a bit if there are too many possible sources of official commentary. Answers may quote pieces of developer commentary to avoid hiding too much data behind links.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Where can I find official commentary on the spell True Strike?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I didn't participate in the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest, but I've heard that the developers released several versions, acquiring feedback between each one and providing official commentary. By official commentary, I mean articles, blog posts, or videos where a D&amp;amp;D designer is speaking in an official capacity about changes during the playtest. (I'm not really interested in Twitter commentary, unless it's clear that the tweets are made in an official capacity.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did any of this official commentary touch on the cantrip &lt;em&gt;true strike&lt;/em&gt;? If so, where can I find it? Similarly, is there any official commentary &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the playtest about &lt;em&gt;true strike&lt;/em&gt;? If so, where can I find it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some reason, this one feels like a &lt;strong&gt;gray area&lt;/strong&gt;. It's like asking about a specific event (the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest) feels fine, while asking in general terms, doesn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a follow-up: &lt;strong&gt;what if this third question didn't mention &lt;em&gt;true strike&lt;/em&gt; at all?&lt;/strong&gt; Such a question seems too broad, but that's mainly because I don't personally know of a single source that contains all official commentary. It seems incorrect to judge a question's scope based on presumed answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are the these similar questions on-topic? Are they also good questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47185" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T17:47:39.277" Title="Would these official commentary questions be on-topic (and good questions)?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|closed-questions|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10069" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8634" CreationDate="2020-07-11T16:32:10.797" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This answer was superseded by an update as outlined in the answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11753/28591&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note, this is the same as my answer to the duplicate question I asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10065/35259&quot;&gt;Why shouldn&amp;#39;t I edit a question that has been closed?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Editing closed questions puts them back in the review queue, and if the edit was unrelated to the close reason, the question will be kept closed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, I will point out that I've done exactly the thing I ask about in the question, and it was V2Blast♦ who pointed out to me why I shouldn't do this. I've since abstained from doing this, but I've seen some users still do this; I just want to point out that I learned the hard way, and that's why I now know this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you edit a closed question, that triggers the question being put into the Reopen review queue. The intention behind this automatic behaviour is that, if a closed question is edited, the hope is that the edit is an attempt to rework the question into a &amp;quot;stackable&amp;quot; state. The reviews will consider the edit to see if it brings the question in line with the stack's expectations and votes to Reopon or Leave Closed accordingly (or make further edits, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if the edits were of a trivial nature (by which I mean, not specifically related to the reason the question was closed), then when it gets put into the Reopen review queue, the actual content and question(s) remains the same, just with better tags or corrected spelling. In other words, the question now being reviewed is essentially the same question that was originally closed, so the reviewers will just vote to Leave Closed, since nothing significant has been changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why is this a problem?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with this is that &amp;quot;everybody gets one&amp;quot;. Once the question has been through the Reopen review queue, that's it. It doesn't get another shot at it. If further edits are made later, it doesn't get put back into the Reopen review queue, so it will only be reopened if people happen to manually check back and take a look at the question, unrelated to the review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence trivial edits can actually potentially prevent the question from being reopened if the OP does later edit the question into shape, because the question has already gone through the Reopen review queue due to the trivial edits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Hold off on trivial edits until the OP has edited their question with relevant improvements&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the question has been edited by the OP to include the information needed to consider reopening it (meaning, gets put into the Reopen review queue), then you can make more edits on top of that, because it would now be put into the review queue for the right reasons, and further &amp;quot;clean up&amp;quot; edits won't interrupt that process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-09-15T16:15:48.657" LastActivityDate="2021-09-15T16:15:48.657" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10070" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10071" CreationDate="2020-07-11T16:55:00.210" Score="3" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/136/illuminator&quot;&gt;Illuminator&lt;/a&gt; gold badge description says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edit and answer 500 questions (both actions within 12 hours, answer score &amp;gt; 0)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you post an answer and edit the question, but then the answer goes unvoted for a day, but then is upvoted the next day (i.e. well over 12 hours later), would it then qualify for the Illuminator badge because the edit and the answer were both within 12 hours of each other, or would it not qualify because the question score was not &amp;gt; 0 within those 12 hours?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-07-11T18:05:23.183" Title="Does the answer need to be upvoted within 12 hours to qualify for the Illiminator badge?" Tags="|support|badges|up-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10070" CreationDate="2020-07-11T17:23:56.820" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes; only the edit needs to be within 12 hours of the answer. The moment of the upvote (actually, the score being &amp;gt; 0) doesn't matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say that you answer something, and:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You edit the question 12 hours before or after answering it. This allows you to edit now, answer later — or answer now and edit later, when you have the time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your edit isn't rolled back, or outright rejected if it was a suggested edit&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is not closed for any reason, even simply being a duplicate&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your answer has a score of 1 or higher&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Source: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/239898/295232&quot;&gt;New three-tiered badge idea: Explainer →Refiner → Illuminator&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2020-07-11T18:05:23.183" LastActivityDate="2020-07-11T18:05:23.183" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10024" CreationDate="2020-07-11T17:27:10.023" Score="1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's really hard&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Getting a straight answer to a question that expresses a minority viewpoint can be extremely difficult on this site.  Here's what I do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accept you are going to lose ~50 rep on this question and it's going to be very downvoted.  If you are very low rep, you have to be careful to ration asking real questions with asking popular ones.  When I was low-rep the balance I found was to not ask more than one real question every 2-3 successfully popular ones, but the exact ratio will depend on how much you want answers from the site v.s. how much you want rep-growth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post the question during a low-activity period.  Most frame-challenge answers that don't actually answer the question at all are posted quickly with very little effort put in, and are pretty reactionary.  If your question can get off the front page, it's much more likely to get a good answer.  In my experience, question posting drops less than bad-answer-posting during off hours, so you can improve your odds somewhat that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Preempt frame challenges as much as possible in your question.  Make explicitly clear the positions that make the frame challenge incorrect and require answers to adopt them or be more flagrantly insulting.  Frame challenges that reach a sufficient level of insulting can usually get flag-deleted as not-an-answer or possibly even significantly downvoted.  For example, with the question you're asking about, you would say something like &amp;quot;For campaigns that are played entirely at level 1, how does one create a climactic, campaign-ending BBEG fight?&amp;quot;  You'll still get some ignoramus posting &amp;quot;maybe consider not ending it with a fight with the BBEG&amp;quot;, but you probably won't get more than two or three of those, and possibly none if you implement more strategies to discourage that sort of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Make your question long, with significant complex discussions of the issues at hand.  Most people posting low-quality answers without putting much thought into it think they are being helpful, because you are dumb and so their 5-second google search or immediate reactionary gut-feeling is sufficient to enlighten you.  If your question uses proper grammar, spelling, and syntax that helps a lot, of course, but one assumes you are already doing that.  Complex discussions-- as opposed to more reasonable concise research-showing-- discourage the idea that you are dumb even for people who post low-quality content without reading very much.  Also most of them will give up on your question as soon as they see it is page-length rather than paragraph-length, because reading takes effort, so that helps, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Stay online for a couple hours after your question is posted so you can &lt;em&gt;immediately&lt;/em&gt; post negative comments on answers that frame-challenge your question without answering it.  Point out that the answer doesn't address the question, and explain how what it is doing is bad and dismisses your kind of gaming as not valuable. Downvote it immediately.  Negative comments significantly discourage drive-by upvoting, and if you can get a bad answer to even just -1 it will incur drive-by downvoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If an answer is sufficiently insulting and a frame-challenge with no real answer, you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; flag it as 'not-an-answer' and it might get deleted.  Don't flag it as offensive, even though that's the actual problem with it, because the bar for that is astronomically higher, and 'not-an-answer' lets the moderators and the user in question both save face/ be nonconfrontational in their interaction.  Usually, though, in this circumstance, it works better to just wait and let the moderators or another user post a comment and delete it of their own accord-- the bar for deletions recommended by not-the-op seems to be lower especially for frame challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wait ~ a month. Usually, if you can keep your question unanswered for a week or so you will eventually get a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2020-07-11T21:13:32.643" LastActivityDate="2020-07-11T21:13:32.643" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10073" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10068" CreationDate="2020-07-11T20:52:11.097" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first question is for sure one that is well scoped.  It is possible to ask a question that is hard to answer.  Well, that's OK, we may need to be patient and see if anyone with that long of a memory has something to offer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/125305/22566&quot;&gt;I asked a question about what people learned from the module/adventure &amp;quot;Murder in Baldur's Gate&amp;quot; which was released during the play test&lt;/a&gt; and was supposed to be compatible with 3.x, 4, and 5e.  I had to wait a year for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question number 2: while this may get some negative feedback as a shopping type of question, the decision at WotC to drop their forums and to basically 'disappear' a variety of community dialogue on the new edition evokes this kind of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I am searching but I can't find it.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have product-identification questions that are in that style, so this one is probably OK.  But, it may also be perceived as a shopping  question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 3: not sure what to do with that one.  I think that some of the play test is covered by NDAs, and people may know the answers but do not want to violate the NDA.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that I disagree with the &amp;quot;{alleged} wisdom of the crowds&amp;quot; approach to how designer-reasons questions are treated here, I have nothing further to add &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot;-wise.  Beyond that, I left a comment under the referenced question about using youtube searches for Mike Mearls, and way back machine as a resource for a lot of stuff that disappeared from easy-to-Google stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nitsua60 very kindly, in chat, &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20131203143449/https://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130107&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;provided a link to a wayback post of Mike Mearls&lt;/a&gt;, which has links to a few other WoTC era posts. In it he discusses various design philosophy points.  You'll want to play around with wayback machine itself to get searches for detailed points on classes or features to find out if a particular topic has been addressed in that manner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T17:47:39.277" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T17:47:39.277" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10074" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10075" CreationDate="2020-07-12T11:57:50.650" Score="12" ViewCount="398" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There are strong reasons to prefer Markdown tables to MathJax discussed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11370/52137&quot;&gt;this meta&lt;/a&gt;, please take a look there before deciding to use MathJax tables on RPG.SE&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a more exhaustive tutorial please see &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5020&quot;&gt;Math.SE's Mathjax quick reference&lt;/a&gt; which covers many more things than this post does. This is trying to focus on the formatting which is typically needed here, which is a lot less than a maths site does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do I format good-looking equations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do I format good-looking tables?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-02-06T16:49:50.670" LastActivityDate="2023-02-06T16:49:50.670" Title="MathJax guide for RPG.SE: How to format pretty tables and equations?" Tags="|support|faq|formatting|mathjax|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10074" CreationDate="2020-07-12T11:57:50.650" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note that MathJax will make a page slower to load and can be jarring if there's a lot of inline equations (note that typeface and size is different). For superscript in normal text, say for footnotes, use &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; and html codes for special characters, such as &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;dagger;&lt;/code&gt; for † and &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;times;&lt;/code&gt; for ×.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Equations and Maths&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, a definition. MathJax lets us format things as &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\LaTeX\$&lt;/span&gt; &lt;em&gt;math-mode&lt;/em&gt;, which means maths looks good and text looks bad. (Different kerning and no spacing which makes it difficult to read.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can make in-line equations by enclosing in &lt;code&gt;\$..\$&lt;/code&gt; and on separate, centred lines by enclosing in &lt;code&gt;$$..$$&lt;/code&gt;. So, for example &lt;code&gt;\$1+2=3\$&lt;/code&gt; renders as &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$1+2=3\$&lt;/span&gt; while &lt;code&gt;$$1+2=3$$&lt;/code&gt; renders as &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$1+2=3$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Super and subscript is achieved via &lt;code&gt;^&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;_&lt;/code&gt; respectively. If these are to contain more than a single character, enclose them in &lt;code&gt;{..}&lt;/code&gt;. Example: &lt;code&gt;\$M_{x, b}^n = x_b + n^3\$&lt;/code&gt; gives &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$M_{x, b}^n = x_b + n^3\$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There a number functions for special characters and formatting. &lt;code&gt;\times&lt;/code&gt; gives &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\times\$&lt;/span&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\$\sum\$&lt;/code&gt; gives &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\sum\$&lt;/span&gt;, and similarly for greek letters &lt;code&gt;\$\alpha\$&lt;/code&gt; gives &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\alpha\$&lt;/span&gt; and common functions &lt;code&gt;\$\ln\$&lt;/code&gt; gives &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$\ln\$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fractions can be achieved using &lt;code&gt;\frac{}{}&lt;/code&gt;. When putting a fraction in parenthesis use &lt;code&gt;\left&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;\right&lt;/code&gt; on those to make then scale with the height of the fraction. Example with and without&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;$$ \frac{1}{20} + (\frac{1}{20})^2 + \left(\frac{1}{20}\right)^2 $$&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$&#xA;\frac{1}{20} + (\frac{1}{20})^2 + \left(\frac{1}{20}\right)^2&#xA;$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have long equations you can the &lt;code&gt;align&lt;/code&gt; environment to make it align over multiple lines. Use &lt;code&gt;\\&lt;/code&gt; to mark line breaks and &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;&lt;/code&gt; to define anchors, ie. points which are to be aligned on the vertical. (Note the spacing sometimes can go weird around the &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;&lt;/code&gt; which should be fixable by injecting some empty brackets &lt;code&gt;{}&lt;/code&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;\begin{align}&#xA;  P &amp;amp;=  1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + \frac{3}{7} \\&#xA;    &amp;amp;\approx  15.429 &#xA;\end{align}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{align}&#xA;  P &amp;amp;=  1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + \frac{3}{7} \\&#xA;    &amp;amp;\approx  15.429 &#xA;\end{align}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Markdown Tables&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In December 2020, we got support for markdown tables (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/356997/681403&quot;&gt;Announcement post on main meta&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cells are divided by &lt;code&gt;|&lt;/code&gt; and the mandatory header is delineated by the row of dashes (&lt;code&gt;--&lt;/code&gt;). Column alignment can be set by including colons in that row. Spacing and number of dashes is not critical (line breaks are), but can be useful to keep the markdown version readable. Markdown tables should support most of markdown and other formatting available. Below is an example table and the code producing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;A header&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;A split&lt;br&gt; header&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Last Header&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;First&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;row&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;cell entry&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Second&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;row&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;It is possible to include quite a lot of text in a cell, and it will wrap if needed.&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;| A header | A split&amp;lt;br&amp;gt; header | Last Header |&#xA;| :------- | :----------------: | ----------: |&#xA;| First    | row                | cell entry  |&#xA;| Second   | row                | It is possible to include quite a lot of text in a &#xA;cell, and it will wrap if needed.  |&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; breaks the header at that line, which is useful for headers that longer that the column content (such as for columns of numbers) which is especially useful to avoid overly wide tables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: markdown tables require an empty/blank line before the table to render correctly. The editing preview will show them as tables, but it will not do so once you submit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;MathJax Tables&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Markdown tables are generally preferable because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11370/52137&quot;&gt;they are handled much better by screen readers&lt;/a&gt;, however if need be MathJax tables are usable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to make tables with MathJax we make use of the &lt;code&gt;array&lt;/code&gt; environment. This has the side effect that it makes text look bad, unless we use the &lt;code&gt;\text&lt;/code&gt; command. This makes it render like text, but note that MarkDown does not work inside such commands. You can use &lt;code&gt;\textit&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;\textbf&lt;/code&gt; instead to make the text italicized or bold respectively.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use &lt;code&gt;\\&lt;/code&gt; to end rows, and &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;&lt;/code&gt; to separate cells. You need a column definer at the start (otherwise your first character will be eaten). It defines how your columns will be justified (&lt;code&gt;l&lt;/code&gt;eft, &lt;code&gt;c&lt;/code&gt;entered, or &lt;code&gt;r&lt;/code&gt;ight) and you can use &lt;code&gt;|&lt;/code&gt; to introduce vertical lines. Use &lt;code&gt;\hline&lt;/code&gt; after a line break to make a horizontal line. Consider using as few lines as necessary to make the table readable. Column justification defaults to centered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;\begin{array}{r|lc}&#xA;\textbf{Number} &amp;amp; \textbf{Left Justified Text} &amp;amp; N_{i+1} \\ \hline&#xA;  1 &amp;amp; Text in math mode           &amp;amp; 3\\ &#xA;  3 &amp;amp; \text{Text as normal text}  &amp;amp; 97 \\&#xA; 13 &amp;amp; \textit{Text in italics}    &amp;amp; - \\&#xA; 42 &amp;amp; \text{Text } \textbf{bolded} \text{ for effect}&#xA;\end{array}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{r|lc}&#xA;\textbf{Number} &amp;amp; \textbf{Left Justified Text} &amp;amp; N_{i+1} \\ \hline&#xA; 1 &amp;amp; Text in math mode &amp;amp; 3\\ &#xA; 3 &amp;amp; \text{Text as normal text} &amp;amp; 97 \\&#xA;13 &amp;amp; \textit{Text in italics} &amp;amp; - \\&#xA;42 &amp;amp; \text{Text } \textbf{bolded} \text{ for effect}&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of webapps which let you generate LaTeX tables using a more visual front end. You will need to change &lt;code&gt;tabular&lt;/code&gt; to &lt;code&gt;array&lt;/code&gt; and put in &lt;code&gt;\text&lt;/code&gt; functions as appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-29T00:12:18.887" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:12:18.887" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10076" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-12T14:09:10.387" Score="5" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have the following relevant Meta Q&amp;amp;A which covers the topicality of asking for commentary on &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; rules (they are currently considered off-topic):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However we now also have the following Mainsite question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/171772&quot;&gt;Where can I find official commentaries by the D&amp;amp;D 5e designers on why they designed certain rules the way they did?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is such a question workable or on-topic for this site? It would amount to listing things such as the Dragon Talk Podcast, Sage Advice Compendium, Twitter, YouTube, and perhaps also using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://archive.org/web/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;WayBack Machine&lt;/a&gt; to find things like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20140708123204/http://wizards.com/dnd/Archive.aspx?category=dragon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dragon Article Archives&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something I'm at least seeing is a similarity between such a question and the following Meta post which is effectively a resource list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449&quot;&gt;I&amp;#39;ve been told my question is better suited to a forum, but where should I go?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, there's a &lt;strong&gt;glaringly massive difference&lt;/strong&gt;; the above post is broad and applies to any question which fits better at a forum whereas the sort of post I'm asking about &lt;strong&gt;applies entirely and exclusively to the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/strong&gt;. This gives me worries about the site seeming &lt;em&gt;even more&lt;/em&gt; to be a D&amp;amp;D 5e site if we had such a Q&amp;amp;A catered specifically to this one game and not any others. Thus, I'm left wondering two things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this sort of question on-topic? Regardless, is this a question we even &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; (would allowing it cause harm)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-13T00:51:32.433" LastActivityDate="2020-07-13T05:13:05.853" Title="Is a question asking for a resource list of places to find developer commentary on the construction of D&amp;D 5e's rules on-topic and wanted?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|dnd-5e|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10077" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-12T15:07:56.487" Score="15" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;A long while back, when I was first starting to get confident about asking questions on this site, I had a question I wanted to ask. However, I searched, and the question I wanted to ask already existed for quite some time, but it was [closed] because the querent had not specified the system even though it was very obvious it was D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was a bit at a loss for what to do. Normally, one would just edit the question to fix the issues with it so it could be reopened. However, I was also aware of RPG SE's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;don't guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;, which meant that it's not such a simple matter of adding the [dnd-5e] tag. I considered re-asking the question, just with the proper system tag. However, then I'd be asking a duplicate question, which usually end up getting closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I finally considered bringing up this issue on the meta, but as I was an inexperienced and new user, I did not feel confident to do so at the time, so I ended up moving on and leaving the question behind. However, today is a different story. Although the original question has been both lost to time and memory, I still believe this is an issue enough that would warrant some discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, because I did not ask then, I ask now: &lt;strong&gt;what's the proper way to handle this sort of thing?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52473" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-13T00:52:13.403" LastActivityDate="2020-07-13T00:52:13.403" Title="What to do if seeking the answer to an existing question that's been closed because the system wasn't specified?" Tags="|discussion|questions|closed-questions|duplicates|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10078" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10077" CreationDate="2020-07-12T15:19:47.023" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Re-ask the question with the appropriate system tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The following is a summary of what, as far as I can tell, should be done under the current policies and is neither my endorsement nor lack of endorsement for those policies; debates of them are best left in the various Metas more specifically about them)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the current policy to never add a system tag without complete and explicit mention of the system being used, you correctly concluded that editing the old question was not the right thing to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From there it certainly does seem weird that what should be done is ask effectively the exact same question with one small change, but this is nevertheless the correct thing to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Know that such a &amp;quot;re-asking&amp;quot; would/should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be closed as a duplicate. The new question would be asking something fundamentally different. Imagine two question with the title &amp;quot;What does X spell do when used on Y thing?&amp;quot; but about two different systems. Each would be quite the different question and similarly, your new question &lt;em&gt;with an explicitly mentioned system&lt;/em&gt; would be quite different from one that had no system explicitly identified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-07-12T15:29:50.373" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T15:29:50.373" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10076" CreationDate="2020-07-12T16:06:39.950" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is off topic on rpg.se because recommendation/shopping questions are off topic -game-recs, but also tool and resource  and site recs.  See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic/5883#5883&quot;&gt;Are tool recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a list of forums on Meta because it’s off-topic for the main site as a rec question, but we felt having a “where to go when you get told to go to a forum” list was useful at a site meta level.  I do not think rules research for one game is similarly useful at a site administration level so would vote to close such a question on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2020-07-12T16:06:39.950" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10076" CreationDate="2020-07-13T05:13:05.853" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's trivially editable-- instead of asking &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; it should ask &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt;, the answer to which is probably 'go to such and such a site', but that's allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2020-07-13T05:13:05.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10052" CreationDate="2020-07-13T11:15:27.650" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should add links to important meta Q&amp;amp;As, either existing ones or new ones that we create specifically for the purpose of educating new users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is partly inspired by what &lt;a href=&quot;https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;Buddhism.SE has done&lt;/a&gt; (based on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10052/so-theres-this-space-on-the-main-help-center-page-should-we-put-something-on-i?cb=1#comment34571_10052&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/16201/andrew-t&quot;&gt;Andrew T.&lt;/a&gt;); we should add a list of meta Q&amp;amp;As about topics that we feel new users should be made aware of, but aren't currently covered by the tour or the help center. I'm undecided as to whether we want to link to existing Q&amp;amp;As that weren't written for that purpose, or whether we should write new Q&amp;amp;As write for new users as our intended audience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are my suggestions of what I think those topics should be (note that I'm going to assume that upvotes to my answer here represent that people think this &lt;em&gt;kind&lt;/em&gt; of thing is a good idea, even if you disagree with some of these suggestions; see the section at the end for more on this):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;The &amp;quot;don't guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have been struggling to find a way to signal to new users that this policy exists, and whilst we can't do so on the Ask a Question page, we can at least put it on the front page of our help center (even though this won't help them until after they've already asked their first question); I think this should go first in the list on our help page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;Closed&amp;quot; doesn't mean &amp;quot;banned forever&amp;quot;, but more like &amp;quot;work in progress&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Closed&amp;quot; can seem rather final to users who are more used to forums, so explaining to them that it's more like a &amp;quot;work in progress&amp;quot; state and that the community can reopen any closed question might help to make it feel less final, and therefore more likely to engage and work with us to get it into a more on-topic state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;We are an edit happy community&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To try to avoid situations &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9198/35259&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt;, it might be worth having something here to explain how here at RPG.SE, we tend to edit posts into shape, so new users who might be rather attached to &amp;quot;their&amp;quot; post should perhaps not take it personally; it's just what we do here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Answers in answers, comments in comments&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all of the other Stack Exchange sites are as strict as us on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6533/35259&quot;&gt;not answering in comments&lt;/a&gt;; SciFi.SE does it often and don't seem to view it as a bad thing. Not using answer posts for comments is also something that should be emphasised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Encouraging users not to accept straight away&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one might be a bit more controversial, and I don't think it matters too much, but based on the accepted answer to this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8618/should-we-encourage-users-to-wait-24-hours-before-accepting-an-answer&quot;&gt;Should we encourage users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer?&lt;/a&gt;, it might help to encourage deeper engagement rather than hit-and-run users who we never see again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454/35259&quot;&gt;Don't signal your edits&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If new users are more used to forums where it's comment to say &amp;quot;EDIT: Blah blah&amp;quot; instead of just making the edit, it might be good to point them in this direction to explain why that's not necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, I'm running out of ideas now, but this is the kind of thing I'm suggesting. I'm not sure if all of my suggestions above are that good or relevant, I've tried to order them according to how important I feel they are, so the first two I really think should be there, the middle ones probably ought to be there, but the later ones, I'm not so bothered about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How should we decide which topics get included?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to assume that upvotes to my answer here represent that people think this &lt;em&gt;kind&lt;/em&gt; of thing is a good idea, but as for exactly what topics should appear on this list, that could be handled via another meta Q&amp;amp;A, where each topic is its own answer. In other words, I'd submit each of the six suggestions I've made above as six separate answers, and the community can vote on them each accordingly. I assume others would submit additional answers to make additional suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, if the policy suggestion gets loads of upvotes, that'll be on the list, but if the one about waiting 24h before accepting gets downvoted or a mixed reception, maybe that one doesn't get put on the list. However, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4563/kryan&quot;&gt;KRyan&lt;/a&gt; points out in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10052/so-theres-this-space-on-the-main-help-center-page-should-we-put-something-on-i#comment34573_10052&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt;, this list shouldn't get too long (although we'd need to include &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; of stuff before we reach the level of how large Buddhism.SE's help page is), so if we have, I don't know, 20+ suggestions, we might need to only include to top 20 or something...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-16T09:00:43.940" LastActivityDate="2020-07-16T09:00:43.940" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10082" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-13T17:54:46.480" Score="11" ViewCount="371" Body="&lt;p&gt;Very soon we intend to start a discussion about how protection is used on this site going forward. To inform that discussion, I've tried to dig deep and find some data that could help guide this discussion. It got so lengthy that I decided that posting it as its own post was probably the best way to go to get the most eyes on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I am not a SEDE wizard. I have tried to verify the results for all the SEDE queries as best as I can, but it is entirely possible that somethings have slipped through. I'd appreciate any extra eyes on them at all and any suggestions for corrections or improvements. If you think additional queries would be helpful, drop a comment and I'll do my best to add them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that out of the way, here's more than you ever wanted to know about spam and protection on RPG.se. I hope it will be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to use the answers to point out anything interesting or to dig in deeper.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What is a protected question?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Luckily there is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/52764/what-is-a-protected-or-highly-active-question&quot;&gt;Meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; that goes into great detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote the essential part from it though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;all users must have earned 10 or more reputation &lt;strong&gt;on that specific site&lt;/strong&gt; to answer a protected question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other important thing to note is when questions are automatically protected by the community user:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The number of deleted answers from users with &amp;lt;10 rep, plus the&#xA;number of answers with helpful spam flags, is at least 3. (Note that&#xA;spam answers from new users are counted twice.)&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally, this means that three deleted answers from new users will    cause auto-protection, but if at least one of those&#xA;answers is spam,    only two answers will trigger it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Five answers from users with &amp;lt;10 rep were posted in the last 24 hours. [...]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system will never unprotect a question automatically, even if the&#xA;deleted answers are later undeleted or the spam flags are cleared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Spam&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over the history of the site (~10 years) we have had &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262344/questions-with-answers-flagged-as-spam&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;495 questions&lt;/a&gt; with at least one answer with a spam flag on it and &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262336/questions-flagged-as-spam&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;637 questions&lt;/a&gt; that have been marked as spam. That averages out to 113 posts that attract spam a year and 9 posts a month.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't really have any tools to prevent question spam, so if we just look at the answer spam (which we at least have some tools to prevent) &lt;strong&gt;the average is about 4 maybe-preventable spam posts a month.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at 2019, we had 127 questions with spam answers and 43 spam questions for an average of 14 spam posts per month (11 spam answers per month). (2020 is so far tracking a bit lower with about 11 total spam posts/month)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Spam protection&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of all these questions that have received spam&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; only &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262755/questions-protected-with-at-least-one-spam-flagged-answer-on-it&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;212&lt;/a&gt; have ever been protected (so 58% of posts which receive spam are never protected).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking of protection, over the history of the site we have had &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262282/questions-that-have-been-protected-at-some-point&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;943 questions&lt;/a&gt; ever be protected (out of ~40,300 currently undeleted questions, a bit over 2%). Given the previous data, this would mean that only 212/943 = 22% of protection activity involves spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of all the protected questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262279/questions-that-have-been-unprotected-at-some-point&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;149 questions, (15%)&lt;/a&gt; ever got unprotected (not counting the recent mass-unprotection event which will likely be reversed).&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Protection&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1260067&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;~50%&lt;/a&gt; of all non-automatic protections on this site have been carried out by 1 user and the top 3 users combined make up 71% (the third user hasn't even been active on the site for years).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262285/questions-protected-by-the-community-user&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;136 questions&lt;/a&gt; have been automatically protected in the past (14% of all protections). Of those, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262289/unprotected-questions-that-were-protected-automatically&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;25 posts&lt;/a&gt; have ever been unprotected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of all the 136 automatically protected questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262755/questions-protected-automatically-with-at-least-one-spam-flagged-answer-on-it&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;79 (or 58%)&lt;/a&gt; had at least one spam answer on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of the 943 questions that have ever been protected, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262661/questions-that-have-been-protected-at-some-point-with-at-least-one-deleted-answer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;834 have at least 1 deleted answer&lt;/a&gt; (88%).&#xA;Out of all the questions that got unprotected, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262671/questions-that-have-been-unprotected-at-some-point-with-at-least-1-deleted-answer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;130&lt;/a&gt; have at least 1 deleted answer. &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262673/questions-unprotected-with-at-least-one-spam-flagged-answer-on-it&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;31&lt;/a&gt; of the questions that got unprotected had at least one spam answer on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Feb. 28, 2019 (which is when the HNQ status &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/324643/382836&quot;&gt;started being tracked&lt;/a&gt;), &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262727/protected-hot-network-questions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;51 questions&lt;/a&gt; have hit HNQ and also been protected at some point. This represents ~2%  of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1228253/recent-hot-network-questions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;3052 HNQs&lt;/a&gt; we’ve had over that same period of time. &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262749/protected-hot-network-questions-by-the-community-user&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;12 of these protections&lt;/a&gt; were done automatically by the community user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 - These numbers include 2018 where we went through an enormous spam wave, so this number is actually lower if we remove that outlier. If we exclude 2018 from our averaging we’d get 153 spam questions and 381 spam questions over 9 years, so 60 posts a year and 5 a month.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2 - I’m not counting spam questions here because spam questions get deleted entirely, and are never protected. &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3 - Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10058/should-we-reprotect-the-700-or-so-questions-that-were-unprotected-in-the-last-fe&quot;&gt;Should we reprotect the 700 or so questions that were unprotected in the last few weeks?&lt;/a&gt;. For the full list of questions that were unprotected see this &lt;a href=&quot;https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bl_mfKUMc02S4ln_sx8wnEbZo-DQZB4OqnhLoK9RFQE/edit?usp=sharing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Google doc&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-10-07T20:21:06.333" LastActivityDate="2020-10-07T20:21:06.333" Title="How has RPG.se used protection? (crunching the numbers on spam and protection)" Tags="|discussion|protected-questions|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10082" CreationDate="2020-07-13T19:14:11.180" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Spam prevention doesn't seem to be the main use for protection (volume-wise)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the previous data, this would mean that only 212/943 = 22% of protection activity involves spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;58% of posts which receive spam are never protected&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tells me that spam has been not the main use of protection for us in the past. In fact, it seems like a very minor or at least inconsistent use for it. Since we've only ever had 79 automatically protected questions with spam on it, this also tells me that this 58% of unprotected spam doesn't seem to be attracting a huge volume of repeat offenders. (If there was more than one deleted spam post, it would get automatically protected).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is possible that we are just very good at picking out which spam posts will draw more spam and that could account for some of the low usage (and maybe even some of the 31 questions that got unprotected, even with spam on it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This doesn't mean that we shouldn't protect spammy posts of course, but we should be aware that at our current very low usage of protection for spam, we still only have around 4 spammy answers a month. A very manageable amount.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Going forward in our discussions, I think this means that I would recommend us not putting major focus on &lt;em&gt;increasing&lt;/em&gt; our coverage of spam questions since our current usage of this seems to be sufficient at keeping spam low.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unprotecting questions is rare (but it shouldn't be)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote doppelgreener's meta answer here,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=54910808#54910808&quot;&gt;As BESW summed up in chat&lt;/a&gt;, questions tend to get protected for one of three reasons: (1) a question hits HNQ and attracts nonsense, (2) a question is controversial and needs a bit of brakes applied, and (3) a spam algorithm has identified that question as a target via keywords.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming this is true (and both BESW and doppelgreener are certainly experienced enough users to have developed a feel for this), somewhere around 2/3 of our main uses of protection are explicitly temporary. HNQ only lasts 72 hours maximum and thus protection for this reason need not exceed that amount of time. Controversial questions are often the same, when the question becomes less active, the need for protection fades quickly away since the volume of posts slows to a trickle or stops completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of all the protected questions, 149 questions, (15%) ever got unprotected&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally this number should be higher following from the argument above. But that's not really entirely our fault. There is no timed or conditional modes for protection; it stays until it is sought out and removed by a user with enough rep to do so. Without any kind of notification or prompting to unprotect, it is unsurprising that it rarely gets done. Especially since the users that have the rep to do so are entirely unaffected by the protection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do need to remember that protection completely shuts out the potential for a new user to answer that question unless they receive an upvote somewhere else on the site first. We should be reducing the times this tool is used unnecessarily to reduce the barriers for new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Going forward, given the low rate of unprotection I think we should make a major point to try to figure out as a site how we can minimize questions getting and staying protected when they do not need to be.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Protections are carried out by only a handful of users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This whole discussion was kicked off by one user who unprotected 99% of our questions. However, it should be noted that ~ 50% of those protections were carried out by a single user as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;~50% of all non-automatic protections on this site have been carried out by &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1260067&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;1 user&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, there's nothing wrong with that user doing the protections. And there is a clear difference between the two cases because this user did these protections over the course of &lt;em&gt;years&lt;/em&gt; as opposed to the unprotections which were done over the course of a couple hours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I bring it up because I think it shows how little transparency there is around this whole mechanic. The vast majority of users never even interact with it at all (except an unknowable number of 1-rep users and spammers who get blocked from answering).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think this means that most of the community has not interacted with this tool and also likely doesn't have a full understanding how and when and when not to use. Setting up some community guidelines to further understand and align the community's use of this tool would therefore be beneficial.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-18T18:16:03.033" LastActivityDate="2020-07-18T18:16:03.033" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10058" CreationDate="2020-07-14T16:43:08.290" Score="25" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thought I'd add my PoV here - the mods kindly reached out to me about this when it first happened and I'd been talking with them about it. The ask on our end isn't as simple as Dopplegreener's answer makes it out to be. We'd have to build a dev route that doesn't currently exist to re-protect them, rather than undoing the protection. It's not a five-minute fix. It's doable but not a 5-minute change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;On Protection&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I was first a mod on IPS, there actually was a user who was just protecting things that had lots of answers - not spam, just... lots of answers, some of them low-effort or low quality. So that frames a lot of my thinking about protection. I, personally, find it to be overused and I find it being permanent is more likely detrimental to a community than beneficial. We, as users with reputation can make it off as an easy task to get past protection -&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just find a different question you can answer and get one upvote - that's it!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this ignores that many people find a post from searching their favorite search engine. Maybe they found the question and have a better solution but they can't answer because it's protected and they don't know the site yet to know how to find a new question to answer. Heck, they may assume that all questions are protected. They just want to answer that one question, and they can't. So, maybe it's idealistic but I want to remove barriers to participation as much as possible because it leaves more opportunity for new people to join a community. Yes, even if only a tiny fraction of questions are protected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is exacerbated when sites show up in the HNQ often and the only reason the protection is in place was to reduce activity from a short-term event. Once the HNQ spotlight has passed on, the protection becomes unneeded. Since we didn't track which posts were HNQ until January 2019, we can't compare whether that was a likely cause of protection here and the ability to kick questions off the HNQ list along with the duration on the list since that time likely means it's a reduced issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;On mass un-protection&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Y'all had an event. And... well... it didn't go the way it should have. Big things like major tag reworks or reviewing protected questions is something that &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be a community effort with buy-in from everyone who's interested. You should have a decision about how to act and then act on it. That's the way a community works together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That didn't happen in this case and that's unfortunate - an opportunity for community communication and collaboration didn't happen, instead, the community was put on the defensive due to a single user taking action. I hope the person who unprotected all of these questions learns from this experience and chooses to involve the community &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; making big changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Who uses protection?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Community user - which &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/52764/what-is-a-protected-or-highly-active-question&quot;&gt;acts when a post receives a lot of low quality answers or many answers from low-rep users&lt;/a&gt; - has only protected 136 questions (&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1260067&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;SEDE Query&lt;/a&gt;). Now, that doesn't mean that only those questions would have been protected, eventually. Some of them may have been manually protected by a user before they got to where Community would have acted. But the bulk of the protections, close to half of them, were protected by a single user. It'd be interesting to know what they use to decide when a question should be protected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a great &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection&quot;&gt;analysis&lt;/a&gt; of the data in another question already, so go read that for more details. In short, the Community user accounts for a sizeable but not the largest number and many questions that receive spam answers aren't protected. Some of the questions that were protected are likely from garnering many answers while a question is in the HNQ list&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's next?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My recommendation is to have your discussion about what makes a question qualify for protection and then use the queries you already have or ones you create to determine which of these questions should be re-protected, if any. Also figure out if you want to regularly review protected questions to see if they should be unprotected - as a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that this may be frustrating to y'all. Protection is an important tool and it is up to the community to decide when it should be used. So, have those discussions. If more than half of the questions that were unprotected don't need to be protected any more... then me getting a dev to protect them all again is actually more work unprotecting for y'all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, remember, coming to a community consensus on when a question should be protected or unprotected doesn't mean that the community needs to decide on each individual protection - you have the guides in place to inform people so that they can be trusted to make those decisions on their own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pick 15-25 or so of the unprotected questions as examples, have a discussion based on those to decide the signals to look for. Some examples you might consider:&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;deleted answers (how many?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;answers from low-rep users (how many?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;HNQ status&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;spam answers (how many?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Define when it &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; be used, too (important but often overlooked!).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Let your privileged curators review the remaining questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By telling people what to look for, they have clear things to signal risk of future spam or low-quality answers rather than relying on subjective things like &amp;quot;this looks like it's going to get a lot of junk answers, so I'm going to protect it&amp;quot;. If there's edge cases people come across, discuss them and adjust your guidelines. Be open to review from time to time... maybe even start a list of questions that should be protected but just temporarily, as a reminder to unprotect later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, this is work but it's good community work and y'all will come out of it with a better understanding of how protecting works and when it should and shouldn't be used. Having a dev re-protect the questions may actually make more work for you if your rules end up meaning only a small number of the 700 should actually be protected. If you do an analysis and think that most of the questions should be protected... then let me know and I can see what we can do. I recognize that only 15 k users can protect a question but it doesn't take a ton of added effort for someone who's reviewing a question to either protect it or drop a link into a chat room that y'all are using for this project.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44424" LastEditorUserId="44424" LastEditDate="2020-07-14T16:59:14.523" LastActivityDate="2020-07-14T16:59:14.523" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10085" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-15T17:39:26.800" Score="10" ViewCount="576" Body="&lt;p&gt;Straight-forward: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/171928/1&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; has caused an edit war and a close-reopen-close war. The argument for tagging and reopening is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The splat book only exists in DnD-5e, so it's not guessing – Pureferret&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can/should this question be tagged as dnd-5e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Important to mention something that Medix2 noticed: &lt;strong&gt;the original question does not include the full name of the book&lt;/strong&gt; (Explorer's Guide to Wildemount). It only says &amp;quot;Wildemount&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8849/43856&quot;&gt;What qualifies as guessing on a system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9566/43856&quot;&gt;When is it OK to assume the system without it being considered a guess?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9976/43856&quot;&gt;Does adding the system tag to this question violate the &amp;quot;never guess the system&amp;quot; policy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/43856&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And many more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Very important note&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have the policy, which you can read &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/43856&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;strong&gt;This question is about the specific question linked and, even if agreed that &lt;em&gt;that particular question&lt;/em&gt; can be re-opened, it should not, ever, be used as a precedent to open &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; other question without community consensus.&lt;/strong&gt; If you want to change the general policy, do it in the policy discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: the only reason I even opened this meta question was because the arguments, edit wars and vote close-open wars were getting out of hand in the main site and it felt like opening this question was the more appropriate place to discuss it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="43856" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T16:37:39.597" LastActivityDate="2020-07-30T09:32:52.613" Title="Should this question about &quot;the Wildemount Chronugy subclass ability chronal shift&quot; be tagged as D&amp;D 5e without OP specifying it?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10086" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10085" CreationDate="2020-07-15T18:19:18.890" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, in this case, there is enough contextual evidence that we can deduce the question is meant for D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original question mentioned several terms that strongly suggest the system in use:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wildemount, a setting in &lt;em&gt;Explorer's Guide to Wildemount&lt;/em&gt;, a book published for D&amp;amp;D 5e only.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Chronugy&amp;quot; wizard, likely a misspelling of the Chronurgy wizard, a character option introduced in the aforementioned book.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Chronal Shift, a class feature available to the aforementioned wizard.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Id Insinuation&lt;/em&gt;, a spell that appears in several editions of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Legendary Resistance, a mechanic in D&amp;amp;D 5e that relates to saving throws, which are mentioned in the same context in the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When these game terms are researched together, all results point to D&amp;amp;D 5e references, often in the form of forums and blog posts.  Nothing in the original question would suggest a system other than D&amp;amp;D 5e.  So either the user is asking about a system so obscure that nobody has expertise in it, or the system is obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-07-16T22:12:06.777" LastActivityDate="2020-07-16T22:12:06.777" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10087" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10085" CreationDate="2020-07-15T18:22:07.133" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There is enough evidence to conclude that this question asks about the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something to keep in mind: People agreeing with answers here does &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;NOT&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; mean the question should be immediately re-opened or kept closed. Some amount of time would need to pass before an actual consensus can be made, after which action could be taken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer is not saying that adding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag doesn't violate policy. Doing so &lt;em&gt;without consensus&lt;/em&gt; does violate the policy. This is trying to get at a consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Question As Originally Asked (all emphasis mine):&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;question about the &lt;strong&gt;Wildemount Chronugy subclass ability chronal shift&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was playing in a game with friends and I was playing as a &lt;strong&gt;level 8 Chronugy wizard&lt;/strong&gt;, after a creature downed one of us our &lt;strong&gt;bard&lt;/strong&gt; attempted to use &lt;strong&gt;id insinuation&lt;/strong&gt; and it used a &lt;strong&gt;legendary resistance&lt;/strong&gt;. my question was if I had used my &lt;strong&gt;chronal shift&lt;/strong&gt; ability which allows me to &lt;strong&gt;force a re roll on a saving throw.&lt;/strong&gt; my question is can I use my ability to force it to burn a resistance, and alternatively if I use it on a success and it fails can it choose to use a legendary resistance on the re roll.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally feel that it is OP if I can force it to &lt;strong&gt;burn two resists&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;but I also feel it is op if it can choose to resist my re roll power as it wastes my ability&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to know if anyone has a RAW answer and if not, what people think of the problem&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we know:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This game includes something that could be called a &amp;quot;Wildemount Chronugy subclass&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This &amp;quot;subclass&amp;quot; has an ability called &amp;quot;chronal shift&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This &amp;quot;chronugy subclass&amp;quot; somehow applies to &amp;quot;Wizards&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This &amp;quot;chronal shift&amp;quot; ability forces rerolls on something called a &amp;quot;saving throw&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This game includes &amp;quot;bards&amp;quot; who can use something called &amp;quot;id insinuation&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This games involves something called &amp;quot;legendary resistance&amp;quot; which somehow affects something called a &amp;quot;saving throw&amp;quot; and is a limited resource&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the above things exist in the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Wildemount&amp;quot; is a location/setting used in the &lt;em&gt;Explorer's Guide to Wildemonte&lt;/em&gt; books, which was only published for dnd-5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Chronugy&amp;quot; is quite likely a misspelling of the word Chronurgy which happens to be a subclass of Wizards found in &lt;em&gt;Explorer's Guide to Wildemount&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Chronal Shift&amp;quot; is a class feature of that same Wizard subclass and it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; involve the rerolling of saving throws.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Bards&amp;quot; exists basically everywhere so that's no use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Id Insinuation&amp;quot; is a spell that can be found in an Unearthed Arcana for the dnd-5e, though it can also be found many other places (like Pathfinder or older editions of DnD and elsewhere).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Legendary Resistance&amp;quot; is a mechanic in D&amp;amp;D 5e that relates to saving throws and are a limited resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible that the OP was using rules from multiple games and mixing them together without realizing? Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible that the OP is playing some game I have never even heard of that actually uses all of these terms (or similar ones)? Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it possible that the OP was asking about some other Wildemount thing and some Chronurgy subclass for a Wizard that that gets an ability called Chronal Shift which impacts something called a saving throw, all in a universe where Bards can use Id Insinuation and monsters can use a limited resource called Legendary Resistances that also impacts these saving throw things and &lt;em&gt;wasn't&lt;/em&gt; talking about the fifth edition of Dungeons and Dragons? Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are any of those likely? We can't truly know (we don't have all the data in the universe).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there evidence enough to conclude that this game is the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons? I say yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T16:29:51.760" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T16:29:51.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10085" CreationDate="2020-07-15T18:26:29.887" Score="-9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No, the original post lacks strong evidence that explicitly points to a particular system.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the original question does mention several terms that are strongly associated with D&amp;amp;D 5e, it does not provide evidence that we can use as per existing RPG.SE site policy. Specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original question mentions the Wildemount setting, but not the &lt;em&gt;Explorer's Guide to Wildemount&lt;/em&gt; book for D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original question mentions several game mechanics that appear in multiple editions of D&amp;amp;D, as well as other systems. For example, &lt;em&gt;Id Insinuation&lt;/em&gt; is also a spell in Pathfinder 1e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are no quotes or cited material from D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are no links to external posts about D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are no mentions of &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; or other system names.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hypothetically speaking, the asker could be using a system other than D&amp;amp;D 5e. Bards, wizards, levels, and saving throws appear in various game sytems.  For example, the asker could be playing Pathfinder 1e, with some homebrew and other third party material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while we could make a pretty good guess about the system being used, the original question lacks any one factor that undoubtedly points to D&amp;amp;D 5e.  If we proceed and tag it as D&amp;amp;D 5e, that would be a reversal of site policy about guessing the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2020-07-15T20:01:24.973" LastActivityDate="2020-07-15T20:01:24.973" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10089" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10146" CreationDate="2020-07-15T19:24:20.093" Score="10" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes valid questions come through that do not explicitly identify the attendant RPG system. Usually, the querent returns to clarify in a timely fashion. &lt;em&gt;But what if they don't?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How long should one wait before reposting the question with the appropriate tags?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea here is that we have a valid question as long as we &lt;em&gt;assume&lt;/em&gt; a particular system. Policy says we do not tag the question if it's not explicitly specified, but it does not say I cannot ask a corresponding question myself that specifies an appropriate system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems obvious that permitting &lt;em&gt;immediate&lt;/em&gt; reposting is a terrible idea. The &amp;quot;new user optics&amp;quot; of such a scenario seem pretty bad. A new user takes the time to craft a good question, leaves off a tag and fails to mention the system causing the question to be closed, and seconds later another user has reposted their question with the appropriate tags. What do they think when they come back? This seems totally wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There should surely be &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; length of good-faith cooling off time, but there's come a point, I think, where the community should be permitted to repost the question - the question should not remain in limbo because someone forgot a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was inspired by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/171928/can-chronal-shift-be-used-to-burn-legendary-resistances&quot;&gt;this mainsite question&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10085/should-this-question-be-tagged-as-dd5e-without-op-specifying-it&quot;&gt;this associated meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-15T20:46:19.067" LastActivityDate="2020-07-28T18:00:43.250" Title="How long should one wait before reposting a question that was closed per &quot;don't guess the system&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10090" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10085" CreationDate="2020-07-15T21:39:15.230" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There is enough evidence to say it's D&amp;amp;D 5e. We still shouldn't edit and reopen it without OP editing it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will refer to D&amp;amp;D 5e as only 5e for the remaining answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will borrow from KRyan's and mxyzplk's answers to other meta talks about this. &lt;strong&gt;Even if the chance that this is not 5e is 0.01%, it does not matter&lt;/strong&gt;. There are meta-reasons for following our current policy in a strict sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that &lt;strong&gt;our current policy only allows for editing/reopening if an explicit statement about the system is made&lt;/strong&gt;. If you disagree, you can change it by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/43856&quot;&gt;up and downvoting answers in this linked meta question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It reminds and teaches people that there are other RPG systems other than the one they are playing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us be honest. Our website is almost dnd5e.SE. Our policy reminds people that there are other systems around here. There are other systems/editions that have &amp;quot;player handbooks&amp;quot;, there are other systems that use d20s, there are other systems with concepts such as HP, AC and with classes such as Fighter and Sorcerer. While probably there isn't any other system with all of the things listed in this question together (Wildemount setting, legendary resistances...), the mentality that &amp;quot;other systems don't exist&amp;quot; is bad for an RPG community, and we shouldn't take for granted that the system we are playing is the only one. One very strong argument made by KRyan:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People incorrectly assume D&amp;amp;D 5e all the time — even when questions are tagged with something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want this to be any more reinforced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Side note: a setting can and is easily translated to other systems, if it wasn't for the &amp;quot;legendary resistances&amp;quot;, which AFAIK is very specific of 5e, I wouldn't even be sure about the edition. People have translated 3.5 books into 5e quite often, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It teaches people about our policy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Straight-forward: people seeing the question being closed will learn about the policy. If enough people learn about it and disagree with it, we may revisit the policy and change it. So far, every time we have revisited it, the majority of people have agreed that keeping the policy in its current state is the best idea. We should not, however, try to enforce a change at individual level (e.g., by tagging the question and reopening it without consulting the community, as in this meta question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It optimizes for pearls&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, this one may be a little too harsh, but as mentioned in one of KRyan's answers, I do not see value in an unclear question made by someone that doesn't care about coming back and making their question better. If the OP doesn't come back and doesn't edit the question with a &lt;em&gt;very simple change&lt;/em&gt;, why are we so worried about giving a proper answer to that question? OP may not even come back to read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the Q&amp;amp;A would help someone else, then this someone else may ask the question and properly define the system and be active to clarify any further doubts we have before answering. This is more likely to provide a good question to the site, with good answers, than a question where the OP didn't even come back to clarify the system they are playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, &lt;strong&gt;we should be enforcing questions and answers to be better, not simply accepting questions because we can deduce what they are asking&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We don't lose anything by waiting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, finally, I don't see any harm in waiting for the OP to come back. Do we really need this question answered by tomorrow? Do we really need to internet points (a.k.a. rep) we are going to get from an answer to this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only harm I have seen done is people not following the damn policy and starting edit and vote wars. That is more of a reason to simply follow the policy and wait.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-15T21:39:15.230" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10091" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10089" CreationDate="2020-07-15T22:32:41.670" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Until you are actually having the problem in that original question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Focus on questions about an &lt;strong&gt;actual problem&lt;/strong&gt; you have faced. Include details about what you have tried and exactly what you are trying to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is reinforced in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;help page&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions &lt;strong&gt;based on actual problems that you face&lt;/strong&gt;. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page. (emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my general experience, questions made &amp;quot;out of curiosity&amp;quot;, with the very specific exception of theoretical optimization questions, tend to not be great questions. As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9767/43856&quot;&gt;doppel explains very well&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want such questions to be asked by people actually experiencing that problem. When you're asking without having the problem yourself, it's not a real situation so you're not really able to provide the clarity we might want. You wind up asking a lower-quality question this way than someone actually experiencing the problem might ask, and that might actually do a disservice to the people having that problem: now the only version of that question is not actually the best quality one that could be had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whenever any other person (or you) is &lt;strong&gt;facing the same problem&lt;/strong&gt;, they &lt;strong&gt;should ask the question again&lt;/strong&gt;, with the proper system tag - doesn't matter if in the next hour or the next month. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10077/43856&quot;&gt;What to do if seeking the answer to an existing question that&amp;#39;s been closed because the system wasn&amp;#39;t specified?&lt;/a&gt; for reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-15T22:32:41.670" CommentCount="24" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10052" CreationDate="2020-07-16T23:29:57.927" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Things I think we should cover&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That you need to explicitly mention the game you are playing if you are asking about that game’s rules, setting, lore, and really anything at all that isn’t a purely social question. Mentioning the importance of tags here is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The process for working with questions, e.g. closing and/or editing. &lt;em&gt;Something&lt;/em&gt; to try to mitigate any bad feelings that might be unintentionally generated when we have to close a question, because when we have to close a question, &lt;em&gt;we have to close the question&lt;/em&gt;, but it has nothing to do with how much we want to welcome the querent. (If anyone can actually sucessfully express this, though, pitch your ideas to SE network-wide—this is a huge difficulty for every site and something SE Inc. has been actively flailing at.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That we can’t handle idea-generation. Give examples of the kinds of details we need, and then a link to our forum meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Things I don’t think deserve this large a highlight&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Don’t guess the system” policy—that’s a meta thing that isn’t relevant to the typical new poster—read, one who is there to ask their own question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Answers vs. comments—new users can’t even comment, and those from other Stacks are unlikely to even read this page. And again, it’s a meta thing that doesn’t make sense on this page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Delaying answer acceptance; honestly, I don’t even recommend this anymore. People are pretty much gonna answer if they’ve got an answer, the degree to which an accepted answer even matters isn’t much. It’s not worth the effort or confusion (“oh but don’t feel like you &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt; accept an answer, it’s just a suggestion...”)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit signaling; if people do it, we can easily edit it. It’s just not a big deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-07-16T23:29:57.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10093" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10095" CreationDate="2020-07-16T23:42:33.227" Score="7" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked the following question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/171985/how-do-you-determine-what-action-belongs-to-who-in-a-modernist-gm-based-game&quot;&gt;How do you determine what action belongs to who in a modernist GM-based game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I got an answer out of it and even some upvotes, and I don't really want or need anything more out of the question.  I was thinking about dropping a bounty on Novak's answer, because it has some really good ideas in it, even if it is a bit off base for the question itself - but I think it's probably more appropriate to ask another question that that answer is answering, and if this question's too broad, I'm not sure that's gonna work out great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I'm not super attached to or invested in the question anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has, however, gotten closed.  It's got a lot of upvotes, which is a bit surprising to me, and so makes me think that people are finding it useful - and so maybe I should put some work into the question to make it more openable.  The thing is, there's not really anything wrong with the question right now (I'm pretty sure it's not &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; too broad - it's just very abstract and some people struggle with abstract questions), and I think making the question more concrete would be impossible without changing it into a much less interesting question with a lot less value for future readers (which would also invalidate the many good answers I've gotten so far).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I try and get this question reopened?  If so, is there an easy way to edit it to be less VTC-attracting without making it a fundamentally different question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-17T09:03:07.217" LastActivityDate="2020-07-19T01:12:16.413" Title="I got several good answers and a best answer, so I'm good - but should I put work into getting my closed question reopened?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10094" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10093" CreationDate="2020-07-18T07:05:47.967" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Up to you&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, let us make something clear: your question is a somewhat strange question in how things happened. From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/171985/timeline&quot;&gt;timeline&lt;/a&gt;, the question was asked, received its answers in about 5 hours, had a (failed) attempt to close it within this same time window, &lt;strong&gt;got to HNQ&lt;/strong&gt;, and was closed about 18 hours later. That is, it wasn't clear that the question &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be closed to begin with, and as you mentioned, you got many answers in the meantime, including good answers. This is rare: usually people able to provide good answers tend to close questions before answering, so the answer can be given to an appropriate question. In this case, since it wasn't obvious the question should be closed (and even I am not sure it should be, tbh), many people went on and answered it without thinking it should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We (at least, I) usually ask people to not answer a question under VTC process, exactly so the querent has more reasons and motivation to edit the question into a better question before they get their answers, making the site better as a whole. So, it's completely understandable that, after getting the answer you wanted, you don't care about making the question better in order to get more (possibly even better?) answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, it is up to you: as you mentioned, you don't have much personal investment any more, so, if you want to spend your time to make the site better, go for it, otherwise, I believe we all can understand your situation :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few things to consider:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;About the upvotes, it's most likely due to the question hitting HNQ (HNQ stands for Hot Network Questions) for about 10 hours.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question already got very good answers as you said, so, it's unlikely that it gets any significant improvement over its current state even if reopened.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I wouldn't worry too much, personally. Sometimes good questions get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, is there an easy way to edit it to be less VTC-attracting without making it a fundamentally different question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably no, unless you ask about your specific problem (i.e., specifically about the stabbing example you gave, with a specific game system, and specific actions/reactions/interactions between the players).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-18T07:05:47.967" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10093" CreationDate="2020-07-19T00:04:56.820" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Pursue if the answers do not satisfy your question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You do point out that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In any case, I'm not super attached to or invested in the question&#xA;anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've answered your own question.  You have completed the SE process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where I'd recommend trying to get a question reopened is where you have a question, the few answers don't satisfy you, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; you haven't accepted one, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; you'd like a better answer than what was offered up.  In that case, keep on working or workshopping the question to get it into re-openable shape.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, your revised and improved question will have a better chance to attract more satisfying answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-19T01:12:16.413" LastActivityDate="2020-07-19T01:12:16.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10096" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10034" CreationDate="2020-07-19T04:22:41.180" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You are not wrong. In fact, you are right.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The purpose of this place on the internet is for people to ask questions and receive answers from experts, answers that are corroborated by research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the question I see no valid reason why it should be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you have articulated, a vote to close maybe a presupposition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have the answer to this question. Given the opportunity, I could answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="53875" LastEditDate="2020-07-19T04:58:43.050" LastActivityDate="2020-07-19T04:58:43.050" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10097" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-20T06:47:30.577" Score="-6" ViewCount="223" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The current policies are inadequate&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After previously working through the protected questions backlog, clearing out any questions that remain protected despite no longer needing to (as per site and stack policy), I discovered that the current policy is quite controversial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/52764/what-is-a-protected-or-highly-active-question/52765#52765&quot;&gt;SE protection policy&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do protect questions that are attracting &lt;strong&gt;a lot of&lt;/strong&gt; non-answers or very poor answers (spam, etc.) from new users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't protect questions just because they're linked to on Hot Network Questions or a high-traffic news site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do unprotect questions that aren't currently attracting a lot of attention and don’t have &lt;strong&gt;a long history&lt;/strong&gt; of unproductive answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our site deviates from these established conventions, instead, we have the following &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6865/when-should-i-not-protect-questions/6866#6866&quot;&gt;site policy&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only protect questions when they have &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;gone wrong.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Usually that's some lurid question that is bringing in loads of crap answers from new users seeing it in &amp;quot;hot network questions&amp;quot; or something and coming and dumping junk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other than that, don't protect, and we'll quickly unprotect questions that have protection for no clear compelling reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The current policies are ill-defined&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reasons for controversy seem to stem from difficulty in quantifying certain terms, these terms are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;a lot of&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;a long history&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;gone wrong&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;clear compelling reason&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I interpreted these to mean essentially &amp;quot;more than we can handle with normal processes&amp;quot;, be that a volume that is too large, or answers that are too damaging to allow to stay around before our deletion turnaround. To me, 0, 1 or even 2 deleted answers is not enough to constitute a lot of deleted answers, nor a long history, and certainly not a compelling reason. I fully accept that not everyone has this interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection#comment34787_10082&quot;&gt;Oblivious Sage&lt;/a&gt; said the following of their methods:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My own criteria for protecting questions is similar to the Community criteria, merely tighter. Where Community looks for 3 deleted answers from low-rep users, with spam counting double, my own threshold is essentially 2 deleted answers from low-rep users, with spam counting double (that is, I immediately protect a question once it gets a spam answer[...])&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6868/59609&quot;&gt;doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt; describes their method as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Myself, I just protect stuff that's accumulating one of our typical spam patterns (witch doctors, vampires, magic spells, etc) because the spammers historically revisit the same questions with special keywords repeatedly and ignore all the others. I also protect questions that are attracting a lot of bad attention, or highly popular questions which over several months or years have kept accumulating questions-in-answers from people who think this place works like a forum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even considering just 3 users, we have vastly different interpretations of the guidelines. Neither of them stated they would unprotected questions, in fact only 15% of all protected questions were ever unprotected. Clearly this ambiguity needs to be addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The state of protected questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection&quot;&gt;protection number-crunching thread&lt;/a&gt; Medix2 calculated the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using that data then (small ±1 errors may have happened): 242/834 (29.0%) have one deleted answer. 277/834 (33.2%) have two deleted answers. 167/834 (20.0%) have three deleted answers. 84/834 (10.1%) have four deleted answers. 35/834 (4.2%) have five deleted answers. 15/834 (1.8%) have six deleted answers. 13/834 (1.6%) have seven or more deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That leaves some 109 questions which had no deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, Oblivious Sage notes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be ideal if you could limit it to only deleted answers from low-rep users, but since that's apparently not an option this query will suffice. It's interesting to note that on most of the questions with a lot of deleted answers, the majority of the deleted answers come from non-low-rep (&amp;gt;100) users, and were deleted due to violating various policies (back up subjective answers with experience, don't advocate illegal activity or link to sites that engage in it, etc.), rather than anything that would get them auto-protected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at how long ago these answers had been protected:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1 had been protected in the last month, 33 had been protected less than 6 months ago, 94 had been protected less than a year ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;195 had been protected 1-2 years ago, 216 2-3 years ago, 87 3-4 years ago, the remaining 128 were 4+ years&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keeping this in mind, in my opinion, it isn't clear that we have ever had more than a handful of questions that warranted protection. I see very little evidence of a volume of spam that is so high that we can't handle it through normal means like downvoting, flags, and deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The way forward&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What kind of policy should the site adopt in the future? How and when should we protect questions, and how and when should we unprotect them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following questions may help with discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What is the purpose of protection on this site?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At what volume of spam should an answer be protected?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we pre-emptively protect answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we leave questions protected forever?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should questions be reassessed after some time?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we fully repurpose protection for other goals (protecting questions with spam keywords for example)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-07-20T11:01:09.443" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T16:55:59.147" Title="Establishing robust guidelines for protection/unprotection" Tags="|discussion|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2020-07-21T16:56:41.030" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10098" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10099" CreationDate="2020-07-20T07:17:40.163" Score="2" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are 3 questions that are currently locked. However before they were locked they were protected, causing them to show up in the protected question list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since users cannot answer locked questions, there is no need for them to be protected. It would be beneficial to unprotect them so they can be cleared from the list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94262/why-is-mayo-in-the-alchemy-jug&quot;&gt;Why is mayo in the alchemy jug?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88705/is-this-homebrewed-double-whip-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this homebrewed Double Whip balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12534/vow-of-poverty-overpowered-or-underpowered&quot;&gt;Vow of Poverty, overpowered or underpowered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may also be a good idea to, in the future, have a policy to unprotect questions when they are locked, since locks are not usually reversed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-07-20T11:09:39.893" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T11:09:39.893" Title="Can these 3 locked questions be unprotected?" Tags="|support|status-completed|protected-questions|locked-posts|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10098" CreationDate="2020-07-20T07:20:39.810" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've gone ahead and unprotected these 3 questions now; as you point out, there's no possible issue that can arise from unprotecting questions that have been permanently locked. (I think all types of post locks other than the comment-only lock do prevent anyone from posting an answer on the question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also agree that questions that are permanently locked, with no possibility of being unlocked, should be unprotected. Unfortunately, sometimes it can be tricky to know whether a post will remain locked permanently (e.g. during a developing situation). Other times, though, as in the case of historical locks (e.g. as a result of a change in policy causing a type of question to no longer be allowed on RPG.SE), there is indeed no benefit to keeping them protected, as they'll presumably never be unlocked - so there are no spammy/bad answers that we need to protect them from.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note, however, that the same may not be true of temporarily locked questions. Questions can be locked for shorter periods of time ranging from an hour to a week. In those cases, we should not immediately jump to unprotect the question. (On that note, there was a past incident in which I (as a moderator) could see the duration of a temporary lock but others mentioned that they couldn't see that the lock wasn't permanent - but &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/349406/335251&quot;&gt;that issue seems to have been fixed with the rollout of the &amp;quot;new&amp;quot; post notices&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-20T07:33:20.430" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T07:33:20.430" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10100" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-20T17:21:45.647" Score="8" ViewCount="281" Body="&lt;p&gt;Coming from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10052/52137&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about what to put on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;the main help center page&lt;/a&gt;, the suggestion is to have a (relatively short) list with important meta questions to help introduce new (and network) users to our site and our practices. This question is for determining which questions to put on, which may include writing new Q&amp;amp;As specifically for that purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some notes on how this should work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;One suggestion per answer. Make it clear what topic is covered and ideally how you'd see it worded on the list. If you are suggesting a new Q&amp;amp;A be created for the purpose, give a brief summary of what it should contain. Also give a brief reason for why it should be included.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote suggestions you think should be on, downvote on those you don't, and if there's unaired aspect point it out in the comments, but as there will be multiple answers I suggest we keep discussion lengths to a minimum.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We'll not give a hard score requirement for which questions are included or not, but will use our judgement. The same goes for ordering, but we'll likely want them order by importance as indicated by votes. (Basically, if there's something that just makes more sense to put earlier, or later we'll do that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If there are multiple suggestions on the same topic we'll default to the highest voted one, or combine the suggestions if appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The last item will be to our FAQ index, so no need to include that as a suggestion&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;On future process&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no current plan for a continuous process once this is completed, so once this has been acted upon, further refinements should be done using a separate &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feature-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt;. If it's sufficiently minor (say I make a spelling error somewhere), just point it out to me or another mod somewhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The suggestions which got sufficient support have now been added to the help center as their new Q&amp;amp;As.&lt;/strong&gt; If you have new suggestions (or think one of the below should get more attention), please post it as new feature request as described above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-01T22:58:49.407" LastActivityDate="2021-07-01T22:58:49.407" Title="Main help center page: Question collection and voting" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|help-center|" AnswerCount="11" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T17:43:13.133" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Our &amp;quot;Don't guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We revisit it often and I believe the most up-to-date meta question is this one:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/43856&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess we would have to update the page yearly as we revisit the policy, but nonetheless, it is a reason questions are often closed and discussions are often started, and even edit and close/reopen wars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a few meta questions that talk about &amp;quot;please indicate the system you are playing&amp;quot; and where to put such information, indicating our users want this information to be put somewhere, and a link to this Q&amp;amp;A should be sufficiently explanatory on &lt;strong&gt;why&lt;/strong&gt; it is important to indicate the system, implying you should put it when making a question, and, more important to me, &lt;strong&gt;could avoid the many arguments about the policy that show up in comments now and then, as well as the edit wars mentioned previously&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suggestion is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see a question closed due to lacking the system it is playing, and the question does not explicitly mention the system anywhere in its text or title, please do not add the tag, no matter how obvious you think the system is from the question. Check our policy for explanations at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/43856&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="43856" LastEditDate="2020-07-20T17:57:16.970" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T17:57:16.970" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10102" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T17:43:26.630" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;On specifying the game system&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might be one of the more crucial things for us to inform new users about. However, our current meta's aren't written with the asker in mind, so I propose we create a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/support&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;support&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;support&lt;/a&gt; question to cover that and how to do it (and have done so). Suggested wording on the help page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You need to specify which game system you are asking about. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10132/52137&quot;&gt;Why do I need to specify my game system and how do I best do it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer to that question would then cover the reasons why, eg. that they don't want to give a wrong answer, many games share terms so without it being explicitly stated it's hard to know, and that we have a policy to never guess the system (for these reasons). It would then explain how to do it, how to find tags, what to do when you can't find the tag, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-07-26T21:03:17.833" LastActivityDate="2020-07-26T21:03:17.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T17:53:49.863" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answer in comments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a problem that shows up quite often, especially when a question makes it to HNQ. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6533/43856&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When users don't have the time or complete necessary knowledge to provide an answer, they often provide &amp;quot;insights&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;guidelines&amp;quot; as partial answers in the comments to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, my second most used flag is, I think, &amp;quot;Answer in comments&amp;quot; (the most used being &amp;quot;No longer needed&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suggestion would be something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please refrain from answering in comments. The comment will be deleted shortly after. You can check &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt; for the reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T17:53:49.863" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T18:00:52.360" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&amp;quot;Closed&amp;quot; doesn't mean &amp;quot;banned forever&amp;quot;, but more like &amp;quot;work in progress&amp;quot;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Closed&amp;quot; can seem rather final to users who are more used to forums, so explaining to them that it's more like a &amp;quot;work in progress&amp;quot; state and that the community can reopen any closed question might help to make it feel less final, and therefore more likely to engage and work with us to get it into a more on-topic state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I propose we create a new meta Q&amp;amp;A that explains to new users what closed does and does not mean, why their question was closed, and what they can do to get it open again, if that's even necessary or desirable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T18:00:52.360" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T18:01:10.720" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Our &amp;quot;Don't guess the system&amp;quot; policy, but easier to maintain&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is similar to my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10101/43856&quot;&gt;other answer&lt;/a&gt;, but the suggestion is done in an easier way to maintain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you see a question closed due to not specifying the game system, but you think the game system can be added with the information provided in the question, see how to proceed at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea here is to make the text flexible to a changing policy, which may or may not get loosened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T18:01:10.720" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T18:05:01.890" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We are an edit happy community&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To try to avoid situations &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9198/35259&quot;&gt;like this one&lt;/a&gt;, it might be worth having something here to explain how here at RPG.SE, we tend to edit posts into shape, so new users who might be rather attached to &amp;quot;their&amp;quot; post should perhaps not take it personally; it's just what we do here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users who are not used to such an &amp;quot;edit happy&amp;quot; culture might benefit from something explaining this, and why it's useful or desirable here at RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A meta Q&amp;amp;A written for this purpose would likely want to include an explanation of what RPG.SE is all about, that it's not just about them getting their answer now (although editing their question into shape does help them get an answer now), but that editing their question &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; answer into a more readable state helps future users, since we want RPG.SE to be a repository of knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T07:54:00.620" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T07:54:00.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10107" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T18:08:09.970" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't signal your edits&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If new users are more used to forums where it's common to say &amp;quot;EDIT: Blah blah&amp;quot; instead of just making the edit, it might be good to point them in this direction to explain why that's not necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if it would literally just be a link to this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3454/35259&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Or whether we'd write a new one more aimed at new users, but although we can just edit their &amp;quot;EDIT: &amp;quot; out, it would be better if they could see something that explained why it's not necessary or desirable to do so here at RPG.SE, and why people keep editing it away when they do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T07:49:44.820" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T07:49:44.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10108" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T18:11:44.160" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Encouraging users not to accept straight away&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one might be a bit more controversial, and I don't think it matters too much, but based on the accepted answer to this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8618/should-we-encourage-users-to-wait-24-hours-before-accepting-an-answer&quot;&gt;Should we encourage users to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer?&lt;/a&gt;, it might help to encourage deeper engagement rather than hit-and-run users who we never see again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This should probably be rewritten as a new Q&amp;amp;A aimed at new users, rather than using that above linked Q&amp;amp;A, since that answer clearly isn't written for new users, it's written for us more experienced users. This is assuming we want to include this at all, because we don't want to imply that it's a rule that users &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to follow, and is just to encourage deeper engagement rather than imposing a rule on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T18:11:44.160" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10109" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10052" CreationDate="2020-07-20T19:15:50.160" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A quick reference for What is Meta?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10081/43856&quot;&gt;most upvoted and accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; tells us that we should link to meta. But for people not familiar with SE, they may not even understand what the meta is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The existence of this sub-site does not appear in our Tour nor in our Help front page. Users will only find out if they go digging in &amp;quot;Our model&amp;quot;, and find out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;What is meta?&lt;/a&gt; help page or if they actually read the privilege page, which also contains &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/participate-in-meta&quot;&gt;this page&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest that, before listing useful Q&amp;amp;A in meta, we may actually guide new users through this mechanism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are interested in learning about specifics of our site, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt; is useful. You can learn more about it in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta&quot;&gt;this help page&lt;/a&gt; and you can check our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq?tab=Votes&quot;&gt;frequently asked questions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy?tab=Votes&quot;&gt;policies&lt;/a&gt; there. A list of our most important Q&amp;amp;As is gathered below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T19:15:50.160" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10110" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-20T19:21:02.667" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Answers are for answers, not comments&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The flip side of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10103/35259&quot;&gt;answering in comments&lt;/a&gt;, it might be good to explain to new users why answers should answer the question and not be more like comments, addressing other answers or just providing some tangential point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see this a lot with new users, a lot of what comes through the Late Answers and Low Quality Posts review queues are of this nature, so having something explain why this isn't how RPG.SE works might be worth putting in place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we are to create a new meta Q&amp;amp;A for this subject, I would imagine that it would want to explain to new users the sorts of things we typically try to explain to them in comments beneath their &amp;quot;answers that are not answers&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how and why RPG.SE differs from a forum and is more like a Q&amp;amp;A site;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how comments in answers don't answer the question and therefore don't follow that Q&amp;amp;A pattern;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how the purpose of RPG.SE is to create a library of knowledge that comment-answers don't contribute to;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that using answers to ask new questions also breaks the Q&amp;amp;A model and that they should create a new &amp;quot;thread&amp;quot; for their question;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how &amp;quot;me too&amp;quot; comment-answers don't answer the question and also break the Q&amp;amp;A model;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;that answers that either add to other answers or even try to argue with other answers don't make sense if those answers are deleted for any reason, or if voting changes the order of the answers so their comment-answer (which was probably written with the assumption that the answers are in a static order like in forums) doesn't make sense;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;any other reasons I've missed as to why using answers to make comments is a bad idea.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be that we already have a page in the help center that already explains a lot of this, but the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;how to answer&lt;/a&gt; page doesn't really contain much of the above. Maybe it's in a different help page? In which case, this new Q&amp;amp;A might instead want to compile that information rather than having it hidden or scattered about in obscure places in the help center.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T07:52:18.130" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T07:52:18.130" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10111" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-20T22:33:22.090" Score="9" ViewCount="252" Body="&lt;p&gt;If a user asks the question of why some game element is the way it is, but the user is not &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; looking for designer reasons &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; there's a reasonable expectation of an in-materials answer as to why, is the question off-topic just because that expectation was incorrect?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This meta question is a general one inspired by the original state of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/172267/15614&quot;&gt;this main-site question&lt;/a&gt;- the user asked why orcs changed default alignments between D&amp;amp;D 2e and 5e. To me, this is something that potentially &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; have an in-book/in-lore explanation I'm unaware of and is a reasonable thing to ask here, but it was voted closed as off-topic under the assumption that it was a designer-reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This vote felt off to me in this case- the question &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; have an in-book answer. If it doesn't, I also don't feel like a hypothetical answer that states &amp;quot;This alignment change occurred between X edition and Y edition's DMG, but an explanation for the change is not provided within the latter's text. For further information, you'd need to seek out designer insights, which is outside the scope of this site&amp;quot; would be inappropriate, avoiding us having to delve into the designer insights themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15614" LastEditorUserId="15614" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T20:19:17.033" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T06:02:47.207" Title="Is a question that ends up only having 'designer reason' answers off-topic even if designer reasons aren't specifically what the asker is seeking out?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10112" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10111" CreationDate="2020-07-20T22:37:52.117" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;don't ask why&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a simple change, but simply asking for how the alignment of orcs have changed over the editions is probably fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking why it's changed seems pretty clearly to be a designer question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2020-07-20T22:37:52.117" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10113" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10111" CreationDate="2020-07-21T01:00:07.157" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Users are not required to know the answer to their question in order to ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a fundamental, doesn’t-even-need-to-be-stated, tenet of a Q&amp;amp;A site—any Q&amp;amp;A site. Questions cannot be closed based on what the answer is. Note that designer-reasons questions &lt;em&gt;aren’t&lt;/em&gt;—they are closed because of the kinds of bad-and-wrong answers they tend to draw. The actual answer—that is, an answer that can properly back up their claims—wouldn’t be a reason to close them. It’s all the other answers we tend to get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing such questions—to avoid “why?” to focus on history or context, or on the lore, or whatever—is fine and good, and probably worth doing. But especially with questions like this, we should avoid knee-jerk implementations of our policy. Don’t vote to close—just edit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’re an “edit-happy community;” there’s even a fairly popular push to define ourselves that way on one of our main help pages in another Meta discussion currently going on (I don’t think it’s the right place for it, but it is—and should be—true). So use it. Editing questions like this takes a bit of finesse—wouldn’t expect a new user to get it—but if you’re familiar with these sorts of questions, often it isn’t &lt;em&gt;hard&lt;/em&gt; to edit them into shape. We should do that more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(At least, for could-totally-be-legit questions like this; thinly-disguised rants about rules the OP doesn’t like can and should just be closed and ignored.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T01:00:07.157" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10114" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10115" CreationDate="2020-07-21T08:08:41.517" Score="8" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was based on a thought I had in reaction to this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10111/35259&quot;&gt;Is a question that ends up only having &amp;#39;designer reason&amp;#39; answers off-topic even if designer reasons aren&amp;#39;t specifically what the asker is seeking out?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I understand it, &lt;em&gt;asking&lt;/em&gt; for designer reasons in questions (which &lt;em&gt;forces&lt;/em&gt; answers to only answer with designer reasons) are what's off-topic, but there seems to be some confusion as to whether designer reasons are allowed &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; on this site, whereas I believe that if an answer wanted to include designer reasons, that's fine, so long as the question isn't limiting itself to &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Restated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;designer reason &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; are off-topic, because they force answers to only provide designer reasons as answers (and even then they should be on-topic in theory, but in practice we can't stop people from speculating);&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;but there's nothing stopping an answerer from providing an answer that uses or even entirely consists of designer reasons, so long as the question itself isn't restricting answers to provide only that.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have I understood this right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/23970&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="64093" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T12:07:03.353" LastActivityDate="2020-07-22T16:41:01.613" Title="Are answers that include designer reasons on-topic and allowed on this site?" Tags="|discussion|answers|on-topic|policy|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10115" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10114" CreationDate="2020-07-21T10:14:59.430" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's how this breaks down:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We do not, in point of fact, have a problem with answers talking about designer reasons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We do have a problem with answers making big claims without proportionate citation, and with misleading answers. This usually gets corrected by downvoting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about designer reasons were banned because, simply, we saw a ton of questions asking for designer reasons in D&amp;amp;D, and every single time we saw loads of answers that fit the second bullet point: people looked at D&amp;amp;D's rules, reverse-engineered some speculation about designer intent, and then presented their speculation as concrete fact. Thus we'd regularly wind up with multiple different answers, all doing this, all contradicting each other, not a single designer citation to be seen among them. Voters were not responding with downvotes, and moderators deleting things only made people angry. There was almost never an actual citation to be found (because D&amp;amp;D's designers rarely share the thought process behind a mechanic or piece of content) but folks could not abide the void; they &lt;em&gt;wanted&lt;/em&gt; to answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was a farcical breakdown of our system every time. We simply concluded that kind of question was not workable in our system and deemed them off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, however, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; off topic because of the design reasons themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To some extent, problems with answers can help identify problems with the question. Is a question drawing tons of purely opinion-based answers where good subjective is breaking down? That might help us notice it's an opinion-based question that needs to be closed and revised. (But maybe there's just a few low-quality answers we need to downvote and it's got nothing to do with the question itself.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However in the case someone asked a good question and got a good answer that also cites designer reasoning... that's just a success of the system. Mission accomplished. No problems here. Designer reasoning was not itself the problem before and it isn't a problem here. Although, do keep an eye out for whether they're doing the reverse-engineered speculation thing or actually citing the designers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It so happens that for some of our games that's relatively normal: design questions about adjusting Fate Core can often poke into the “why” of the current state of the game, for example, because the authors have just written &lt;em&gt;so much&lt;/em&gt; about their design processes and reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question gets multiple answers all seeking to speculate about designer reasoning with no citation, &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; we may look to see if we have a bit of a problem in the question itself and if it needs revision. (Or maybe there's just a few low-quality answers that need downvotes.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-22T16:41:01.613" LastActivityDate="2020-07-22T16:41:01.613" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10116" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-21T14:02:42.780" Score="21" ViewCount="828" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Goal for this discussion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10056/a-site-user-recently-unprotected-virtually-all-of-our-protected-questions-is-th&quot;&gt;recent event&lt;/a&gt;, it became clear that RPG.SE lacks sufficient guidance and community consensus on how the protection system should be used here. The moderation team has created this meta to facilitate a discussion that we hope will result in establishing what best practices we want to have around protecting, unprotecting, and leaving questions protected. Our hope is that this will result in a better community understanding of this tool, which will result in more consistent, beneficial application of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note again that we don’t &lt;em&gt;necessarily&lt;/em&gt; need hard rules or hard numbers here. Also, we don’t need to work out every single edge case here and now; with a good set of guidelines, we can address corner cases as they come up. &lt;strong&gt;The goal here is to construct guidelines that will allow the community to apply their wisdom to use this tool consistently and to the greatest benefit to the site.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Background for protection discussions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/52764/what-is-a-protected-or-highly-active-question&quot;&gt;Question protection&lt;/a&gt; is one of the tools provided by Stack Exchange to maintain the quality of questions on the network. Protecting questions is a privilege granted to users with 15k+ rep, and the links question on Meta Stack Exchange provides the following advice on how and when to use it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When should I protect or unprotect a question?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do protect questions that are attracting a lot of non-answers or very poor answers (spam, etc.) from new users.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't protect questions just because they're linked to on Hot Network Questions or a high-traffic news site.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do unprotect questions that aren't currently attracting a lot of attention and don’t have a long history of unproductive answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2014/04/08/changes-and-guidelines-for-the-protected-question-status/&quot;&gt;Changes and guidelines for the Protected Question status&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here at RPG.SE, we have historically used protected questions as a defense against spam and for questions which attract low-quality answers (for any of a number of reasons) by 1-rep users. Rubiksmoose gathered some detailed data as a background to this conversation. A summary of this information can be viewed in this meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection&quot;&gt;How has RPG.se used protection? (crunching the numbers on spam and protection)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Automated Community protection&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;community bot&lt;/a&gt; that will automatically protect questions that meet certain criteria. The criteria (as sourced from the same Meta.SE answer quoted above) is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The number of deleted answers from users with &amp;lt;10 rep, plus the&#xA;number of answers with helpful spam flags, is at least 3. (Note that&#xA;spam answers from new users are counted twice.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally, this means that three deleted answers from new users will&#xA;cause auto-protection, but if at least one of those answers is spam,&#xA;only two answers will trigger it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Five answers from users with &amp;lt;10 rep were posted in the last 24&#xA;hours. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The system will never unprotect a question automatically, even if the&#xA;deleted answers are later undeleted or the spam flags are cleared.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal for us is not to be human versions of this bot. Abiding by hard and fast rules based on the number of deleted posts and traffic patterns is something the bot is already very good at. We want this discussion to guide the community on how to handle the questions where these criteria fail to meet our needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Example discussion points&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some points a good answer might consider (but it is not required to do so):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When should protection be used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spam and low-quality answers are two already-in-place use cases.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do we best identify questions that have attracted spam answers&#xA;that could benefit from protection?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does it make a difference what the content of the spam is (e.g.&#xA;&amp;quot;spellcaster&amp;quot; spam, versus some actual human spamming a link to their&#xA;RPG on DMsGuild)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Under what conditions should we protect a question due to low-quality&#xA;deleted answers?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does HNQ (Hot Network Questions) status have any effect?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any other types of issues that protection should be used to&#xA;prevent?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When should protection &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any specific circumstances that we should define in which&#xA;it &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; beneficial to protect a question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a question has been protected in the past, should that have an&#xA;impact on whether or not it should be protected again?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under what conditions should we unprotect questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When should we unprotect questions that have been automatically&#xA;protected?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When should manually protected questions be reassessed?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would some kind of regularly scheduled community check-in be&#xA;beneficial? Or some sort of automated script?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(You may recognize a lot of these as suggestions left by Catija, one of the community managers working at Stack Exchange Inc., in one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10058/should-we-reprotect-the-700-or-so-questions-that-were-unprotected-in-the-last-fe&quot;&gt;discussions on the community's response to the unprotected-questions issue&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once we establish some initial guidelines, we can work through some examples from our &lt;a href=&quot;https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bl_mfKUMc02S4ln_sx8wnEbZo-DQZB4OqnhLoK9RFQE/view&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;list of recently unprotected questions&lt;/a&gt; and start getting things reprotected. Please refrain from taking any major actions to re-protect questions until some community guidance has been established.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related older meta from 2017: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6865/when-should-i-not-protect-questions&quot;&gt;When should I NOT protect questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-21T16:58:36.623" LastActivityDate="2020-08-02T06:12:42.947" Title="How should question protection be used on RPG.SE?" Tags="|discussion|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10117" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10116" CreationDate="2020-07-21T22:17:00.890" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Summarizing criteria that I find relevant&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things that are a +1 point in Protecting a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question already has an accepted answer, that is most likely up-to-date.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question already has a highly upvoted answer, that is most likely up-to-date.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question already has 2 or more deleted answers from low (&amp;lt;100) rep users (I'm using &amp;lt;100 instead of &amp;lt;10 because the user may have gotten some rep elsewhere and I find the behavior overall similar)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The deleted answers are comments, not answers, or answers that don't add anything new to what has already been discussed in other answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things that are a +1 point in Unprotecting or Not Protecting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question doesn't have any well accepted (either by community or by asker) answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question is about a not-so-popular game system, thus bringing more experts in that game system to our site would be beneficial.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question had a spike of activity for some reason and that spike is now gone. For example, you can check the timestamp in the low quality answers. If all of them are pretty much clustered together, it may have been such a spike. If it has 3 bad answers, each separated by 1 year, then bad answers are likely to keep coming if we unprotect.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For what is a well accepted answer: usually, answers have considerably more votes than questions (if anyone can help with the data here I'll edit, but I'm 99% certain this is true, and I will &lt;em&gt;guess&lt;/em&gt; by at least twice the votes), so, if the most upvoted answer doesn't have half the score of the question, I would say that question would benefit from new answers. But &lt;strong&gt;use your own judgement&lt;/strong&gt; on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We don't get too much spam/poor quality answers from 1 rep users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, let us start with stating my experience on it: we don't get much spam. Most of our questions don't have a deleted answer or worse, a spam answer. For that reason, &lt;strong&gt;protection should be using sparingly&lt;/strong&gt;. That said, let me give my 50 cents on some of the discussion topics you have suggested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do we best identify questions that have attracted spam answers that could benefit from protection?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the run, and in a &lt;strong&gt;reactive&lt;/strong&gt; way. I've recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46700/43856&quot;&gt;protected this question&lt;/a&gt; because it got a new, considerably low quality answer from a 1 rep user, and we had two deleted answers on it already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggested approach is simply: you are going through the review queue, you notice a bad answer from a new user, you take a look in the question. Does it already have other similar bad answers from new users? If it does, go on and protect it. There are more criteria which I will talk about later. Stay with me please. But the point is that &lt;strong&gt;this should be reactive&lt;/strong&gt;. Protecting before the question has had any kind of problem is, for me, a no-no. Doesn't matter how much it &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; like it is going to be a problem, the frequency of this problem is so low here that we can afford being reactive instead of preventive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does HNQ (Hot Network Questions) status have any effect?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an important question, and my answer is: I don't know. Most likely people coming from HNQ will have the 101 starting rep anyway, so I'm not sure it matters at all. HNQ seems to inflate votes, some not-too-useful comments, but personally I haven't experienced a huge problem with HNQ leading to a bunch of bad new answers. My current inclination is that no, it doesn't have any effect. If HNQ brings up a problem, we can see the symptoms of the problem, and protect based on the symptoms, making the fact that it is in HNQ is meaningless. Again: &lt;strong&gt;reactive&lt;/strong&gt; stance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any other types of issues that protection should be used to prevent?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is included in &amp;quot;low quality answers&amp;quot;, but I personally feel like the most common problem with 1 rep users are answers that are essentially comments. For me, questions that attract such comment-answers are the highest priority for protection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question has been protected in the past, should that have an impact on whether or not it should be protected again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. But the fact that the question probably already has 2+ deleted bad answers should, so there is a correlation here. But simply the fact that it has been protected in the past shouldn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any specific circumstances that we should define in which it isn't beneficial to protect a question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The scenarios I have described in my summary. If a question has no good answers yet, then we would certainly want a user that can answer that question answering it, no matter if they are new to the website. Similarly, if the question is for something not too popular, I think it is more beneficial to take care in protecting it, since we may actually bring an expert from a obscure system, and they may be the only expert we are getting any time soon. PS: I say that as a D&amp;amp;D5e-user. Don't take it personally, fellows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When should we unprotect questions that have been automatically protected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most likely never, unless we can identify that the automatic protection was linked to some extraordinary temporary event (idk, the question being posted in Kotaku or 9gag or another big communication vehicle) and such event has since then vanished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;About manually protected questions and/or scheduling check-ins, I have no formed opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-21T22:17:00.890" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10082" CreationDate="2020-07-21T22:26:09.060" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We have to unprotect things intelligently&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of the ~700 recently unprotected questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262673/questions-that-got-answered-after-being-unprotected-by-the-2020-unprotection-even&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5 have gotten answers&lt;/a&gt; in just 21 days. All 5 of those answers have since been deleted and/or are at -1 or lower. This works out very roughly to around 2 Very Low Quality (VLQ) answers per week for this group of posts. All of these posts would have been prevented by protection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not including those 5, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1265909/questions-that-got-answered-after-being-unprotected&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;54 questions&lt;/a&gt; have ever gotten an answer after being unprotected. This works out — again very roughly — to 0.1 answer per week for all of these. And I have no idea of the quality of these answers, (some of them could be quite good) or if protection would have even prevented them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if we assume all of the 54 answers are junk though, the rate at which VLQ answers have come in from the recently unprotected question is magnitudes higher.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This tells me that &lt;em&gt;selective&lt;/em&gt; unprotection, unsurprisingly, is the smart way to go about things here. Mass unprotection without consideration of post history will lead to more junk answers and more moderation needed by the community.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-07-24T21:25:35.233" LastActivityDate="2020-07-24T21:25:35.233" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10119" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10082" CreationDate="2020-07-22T02:44:49.527" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just wanted to extract a few replies from the comments above:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection#comment34852_10082&quot;&gt;Medix2's comment&lt;/a&gt; on the number of deleted answers per protected question (note: this is all-time, not just the 700 recently unprotected questions)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;11% had no deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;26% had 1 deleted answer&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;29% had 2 deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;18% had 3 deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;9% had 4 deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;4% had 5 deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1% had 6 or more deleted answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection#comment34897_10082&quot;&gt;my comment&lt;/a&gt; on how old protected questions were (note: this is only for the 700 recently unprotected questions):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;5% had been protected less than 6 months ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;9% had been protected 6 months to a year ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;28% had been protected 1-2 years ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;30% had been protected 2-3 years ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;12% had been protected 3-4 years ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;18% had been protected 4+ years ago&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10082/how-has-rpg-se-used-protection-crunching-the-numbers-on-spam-and-protection#comment35001_10118&quot;&gt;In the last 21 days&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1262673/questions-that-got-answered-after-being-unprotected-by-the-2020-unprotection-even&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5 recently unprotected questions (as calculated by Rubiksmoose)&lt;/a&gt; have received answers. The number of deleted answers from low-rep users that the question had before being unprotected is listed below, along with the total number of deleted answers, and the age of the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 deleted answer from a low rep user, 2 total deleted answers in 5 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;1 deleted answer from a low rep user, 2 total deleted answers in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;3 deleted answers from low rep users, 3 total deleted answers in 3 years*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;0 deleted answers from low rep users, 0 total deleted answers in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;2 deleted answers from low rep users, 2 total deleted answers in 6 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Note: The user who answered this question has over 100 rep, so protection would not have made a difference in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also note that so far none of the answers on the 5 unprotected questions that have received answers in the last 21 days, have been spam (2 were questions-in-answers, 3 were valid answers - it's worth pointing out that one is quite a lengthy and thought out answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update:&#xA;It has now been 4 weeks since the unprotection. 9 questions have been answered (including 3 by users with &amp;gt;10 rep):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117559/what-are-the-consequences-of-removing-the-potential-for-critical-hit-extra-damag&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had &amp;gt;400 rep (non-answer), 1 deleted answer from a low rep user, 1 previously deleted answer (by a spambot) in 2 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/62217/counterspelling-a-counterspell&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (low-quality answer), 2 previously deleted answers (deleted account low quality answer and by a +20k rep user) in 5 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67197/what-is-the-highest-possible-ac&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (legitimate answer), 3 previously deleted answers (deleted account comment-in-answer, 1 rep low-quality answer, +100k rep user) in 5 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57237/what-are-the-mechanics-of-using-a-dart-as-a-ranged-weapon&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had &amp;gt;3k rep (legitimate answer), 2 deleted answers (both low quality answers, 1 rep user and deleted user) in 5 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109764/how-many-times-do-you-roll-damage-for-magic-missile&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (comment/question in answer), 2 previously deleted answers (comment in answer by 1 rep user, +30k rep user) in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102811/functionally-how-does-power-word-kill-work&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (low quality answer), 2 deleted answers (both 1 rep questions-in-answers) in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98982/does-the-ua-invocation-improved-pact-weapon-work-with-elemental-weapon&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had &amp;gt;100 rep (legitimate answer), 3 deleted answers (1 deleted account, 2x 1 rep accounts, 2x low quality answers and 1 mistake that as deleted) in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98850/why-is-the-tarrasque-the-most-dreaded-creature&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (legitimate answer), no deleted answers in 3 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46700/can-you-multiclass-the-same-class-twice-for-different-class-features&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: recent answerer had 1 rep (low-quality answer), 2 deleted answers (low-quality answer by deleted user, spam by 1 rep user) in 6 years&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Total: 6/9 new answers were made by 1 rep users (that would have been prevented by protection). 0/6 of these were spam, 1/6 was a question in answers, 3/6 were low-quality answers, 2/3 were legitimate answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These numbers are so low that it's hard to gauge the effects. Approximately 0.9% of unprotected questions received an answer that they otherwise would not have. None of the questions received any spam (0% spam rate), all answers appear to have been made by legitimate, real users, trying to answer the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2020-07-28T06:15:53.237" LastActivityDate="2020-07-28T06:15:53.237" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10120" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10122" CreationDate="2020-07-22T16:14:02.780" Score="6" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently made &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/139157/3&quot;&gt;a substantial edit&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/139157/2788&quot;&gt;this answer to the Q&amp;amp;A &amp;quot;Which spells benefit from the Spell Sniper feat?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;, that would make a good dupe target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;help page on editing&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel the edit I made is in line with those, along with covering a mistake in the original post (i.e. there are exceptions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However previous Q&amp;amp;As on meta (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6230/editing-someone-elses-answer-vs-commenting&quot;&gt;Editing someone else's answer vs. commenting&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5726/when-editing-how-drastic-is-too-drastic&quot;&gt;When editing, how drastic is too drastic?&lt;/a&gt;) have been inconclusive, and disagree on whether to add a comment or make an edit. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6230/editing-someone-elses-answer-vs-commenting/6231#6231&quot;&gt;sole answer&lt;/a&gt; to the first Q&amp;amp;A says, in part:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Comment&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you think the answer is mostly good but you wish it would address an additional point&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5726/when-editing-how-drastic-is-too-drastic/5729#5729&quot;&gt;mxyzplk's answer&lt;/a&gt; to the second Q&amp;amp;A says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] edits shouldn't change the nature of the answer - if you're changing a yes to a no, that's bad [...] We edit to add info, to add clarification from comments so comments can be deleted, to copyedit... Whatever seems like it's improving the answer, while maintaining the point of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did my edit to cover edge cases go too far, based on the above?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-23T08:37:53.580" LastActivityDate="2020-07-23T08:39:38.550" Title="Was my edit to this answer on a Q&amp;A about Spell Sniper an edit too far?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10121" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10089" CreationDate="2020-07-22T21:46:17.637" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;At least 24 hours after the OP stops responding, and then only if you would ask it on your own behalf&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, you shouldn't repost the question unless you want to ask it on your own behalf.  If and when you do repost, you should be posting as yourself, rather than in lieu of the OP, and you should be able to fully justify the question based on that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you've gotten that far, though, I agree that there is a benefit to the community of trying to make the first few experiences of asking questions be positive ones... assuming the quality of the question can justify it.  If the question is intriguing enough that you want to ask it for yourself, and the only thing wrong with it is that the OP didn't think to include appropriate tags, then there is clearly some quality to the question.  I'd say give it 24-48 hours after the OP stops communicating.  People have large chunks in their day where they are not available to the computer for one reason or another, but it's reasonable that a user who actually cares about the answer to a question will check back in at least once over the course of a day.  Once that period has past, there's a decent chance that they're one of the many who just drops contact entirely, and you can go ahead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33792" LastActivityDate="2020-07-22T21:46:17.637" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10120" CreationDate="2020-07-23T02:03:17.930" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your edit did go too far&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the answer, from your point of view&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, is (partially) wrong, and you tried making it right. That is best done by &lt;strong&gt;submitting a new answer&lt;/strong&gt;, one that is right, and backing it up accordingly. If you think the answer is mostly right but there is one point you disagree with (i.e., you think it is a mistake), it's best left as a comment. If the original poster doesn't change it (either because they left the site or because they disagree), you can, again, submit a new answer, if you consider that the mistake is harmful enough that shouldn't go unaddressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing is for clarifying things &lt;em&gt;that are already in the answer&lt;/em&gt;. Your edit was something completely new to the answer, i.e.,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you think the answer is mostly good but you wish it would address an additional point&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; I'm not even sure it is, in fact, wrong. Spell Sniper doesn't require the attack roll to be part of casting the spell. On the other hand, there is the distinction between &lt;em&gt;requiring&lt;/em&gt; you to make the attack and &lt;em&gt;allowing&lt;/em&gt; you to make it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-23T08:39:38.550" LastActivityDate="2020-07-23T08:39:38.550" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10123" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10125" CreationDate="2020-07-23T11:59:59.857" Score="2" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/172375/how-can-i-consistently-deal-bludgeoning-damage-with-dex-wis-int-cha&quot;&gt;This question on bludgeoning damage with a different stat&lt;/a&gt; went through a couple rounds of community closure and reopening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then it was closed again, and then reopened by a single user (mod) rather than our 5 vote process or bringing it to meta for discussion as there was obvious community disagreement on the status.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It still feels to me that the bounds are unclear and even the answers remain incomplete as seen by comments suggesting more and if a single powerful user made a decision that overrides the normal process, it would be helpful to understand why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-07-23T20:09:01.133" LastActivityDate="2020-07-24T08:48:24.280" Title="Why was this question that has a lot of community disagreement reopened without community discussion?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10123" CreationDate="2020-07-23T12:35:53.493" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Because mods get a say too&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mods are allowed to be site participants like anyone else.  When that comes to close and reopen voting, that means via their rep and election they get the equivalent of 5 votes.  They don’t have to ask anyone’s permission to cast that vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I was a mod it was customary to cast your close or open as you saw fit.  Then if more site members vote the other way and close or reopen, ok, that’s the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a mod locks something or repeatedly overrides the community on a question, then feel free and open a meta question to talk about it.  But there is no reason to ask why ”a mod” opened or closed a question any more than any other user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to talk about the question and it’s merits ask about that, but this is framed in a much more ad hominem way than that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-24T08:48:24.280" LastActivityDate="2020-07-24T08:48:24.280" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10125" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10123" CreationDate="2020-07-23T12:48:21.870" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I opened that question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps in retrospect I jumped the gun but I'm not about to undo it. I came across the question from the review queues. Typically I skip close/reopen reviews, I just check them to see if there is something I need to weigh in on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I saw was a question that IMO is completely answerable. There were a lot of comments asking for things that, while useful, shouldn't have dictated if the question was closed or not. This is neither a list-question nor idea-generation as the comments seemed to imply. I cleaned up the out of date comments then reassess the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question already had 2 re-open votes at the time I came to it and, based on the quality of the question in the state I saw it, I deemed it was likely to get the other 3 at some point. Because it had been through a couple of round of open/close I thought that many of the users who were involved in the question might have already have used their votes. These factors combined to convince me that it was worth simply helping the process along and getting the question reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would you ask the same question if the post had 4 reopen votes before I got to it and I cast the last one? What about 3? Perhaps I should have left a comment but I can't think of what it would have been other than &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I think this question is answerable&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; which is  exactly what my reopen vote said anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2020-07-23T12:48:21.870" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10126" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-23T12:50:05.830" Score="2" ViewCount="272" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/172375/how-can-i-consistently-deal-bludgeoning-damage-with-dex-wis-int-cha&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; has gone through several rounds of open/close and it's unclear to me what the status to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had the first comment to the question asking for a better understanding of the bounds question: specifically asking bout:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What options have you already found in your own research? What sourcebooks are to be included? Are other UA options available?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It got 4 upvotes in agreement (unclear if folks disagreed, but that'd probably be the reopen votes), but it was also never answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do have general issues around list questions that I think we need to address outside of this one, but overall, this seems very unclear as to the bounds for answering that would be relevant to the querent. In addition to a lack of self-research done before hand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers have come in and they are disparate. Each providing an example or several. But there is no complete answer. This then leads to a question with undifferentiated answers because they are all correct, but all incomplete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we close the question to get the details?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-07-23T15:11:09.857" LastActivityDate="2020-07-24T08:51:55.993" Title="Should this question on bludgeoning damage attacks with other stat scores be closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10127" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10126" CreationDate="2020-07-23T13:00:50.677" Score="11" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I don't understand why you think this is a list question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP has a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They want to use the feats &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/UA2020_Feats.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Crusher&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/feats/elven-accuracy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Elven Accuracy&lt;/a&gt; at the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Crusher requires them to deal bludgeoning damage. Elven Accuracy requires them to use Dex, Wis, Int or Cha for the attack modifier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no immediately obvious way to deal bludgeoning damage while using one of those ability for the attack roll.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They have added some reasonable restrictions. If they were to provide all the restrictions the comments were asking for they would be able to answer the question themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because there are multiple possible answers doesn't make it a list question. The problem is clear and, as the given answer so far show, completely answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-24T08:51:55.993" LastActivityDate="2020-07-24T08:51:55.993" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10128" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10126" CreationDate="2020-07-23T16:44:04.977" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, it should be closed until details are included&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question currently doesn't have a clear indication of what sources are available for a relevant answer and what levels they are at and playing to to understand the implications and risks of multiclassing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be answered without that, the potential answers grow and we see that even in the current answers. There are multiple answers provided and comments coming into to each adding more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we can understand the bounds better, we can provide a clearer and relevant answer to the querent - which I thought was our goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2020-07-23T16:44:04.977" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10126" CreationDate="2020-07-23T21:45:16.210" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We have lots of similar questions that are not closed. No reason to close this one.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My answer is based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/172375/5&quot;&gt;this revision&lt;/a&gt;, which is the one that got discussion to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although there is no way to tell &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt;, the number of possible ways to do that is quite short. An answer including &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; ways is completely feasible, as was shown by the answers already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They stated they are using UA content, so UA is most likely fair play as well. They were clear that they were interested in basically anything - multiclassing, feats, w/e. They also gave pretty fair constraints, essentially wanting a resource-free option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current question is certainly better with the details, especially clarifying that UA is generally accepted. Previously the question was kind of bad, but not unclear enough to be closed, nor unbounded enough to be closed. Side note: I think saying that &amp;quot;published material&amp;quot; is overly redundant and unnecessary. Someone looking for homebrew/house-rule options are the exception and they should be the ones specifying that these are valid options. For me it's quite obvious that someone asking how to do X is asking how to do X using published content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other questions that ask for a list of possible ways to do something or a list of things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116672/43856&quot;&gt;How can I break concentration besides damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142626/43856&quot;&gt;How can a player character cause the stunned condition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/172261/43856&quot;&gt;In what ways can a druid&amp;#39;s Wild Shape be detected?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/171218/43856&quot;&gt;What ways exist to prevent Counterspell from being cast?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153873/43856&quot;&gt;In what ways can a Non-paladin access Paladin spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/77247/43856&quot;&gt;What are the playable D&amp;amp;D races in 5e, and where can I find them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/125278/43856&quot;&gt;What are the official, WotC-published classes and subclasses in 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;etc. Really, we have &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; questions that are simply &amp;quot;what are all the possible ways to do X?&amp;quot;, and most of them open, and many of them way less bounded than this one was originally. For example, the Paladin one has only the following bound: &amp;quot;(in the published materials of D&amp;amp;D 5e: rulebooks, UA, &lt;strong&gt;etc&lt;/strong&gt;)&amp;quot;, which isn't exactly a bound actually.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that some of them (especially the ones with Community Wiki answers) are way larger, always-changing lists, and we're completely fine with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43856" LastActivityDate="2020-07-23T21:45:16.210" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10130" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-07-26T12:13:09.130" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A feature request or bug report with this tag is neither declined nor destined for implementation/fix. When such a decision has been made, the tag will be changed accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are multiple factors that may leave a report under review. There could be consideration of whether the proposed feature or bugfix is feasible or useful. There could be investigations on the complexity of the necessary solution. There could be insufficient information in the feature or bug report as presented. Site developers may provide additional comments to request more information or to provide status updates as appropriate to the status of the review, until such time as the decision for approval or decline is made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by staff and ♦ moderators; the latter will only use this tag as part of the escalation process described here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/348642/295232&quot;&gt;What posts should be escalated to staff using [status-review], and how do I escalate them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Copied from: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/tags/status-review/info&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/tags/status-review/info&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2020-07-26T18:10:51.767" LastActivityDate="2020-07-26T18:10:51.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10131" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-07-26T12:13:09.130" Score="0" Body="Indicates that a change in functionality is currently under consideration, or needs further investigation." OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2020-07-26T18:11:01.743" LastActivityDate="2020-07-26T18:11:01.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10132" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10133" CreationDate="2020-07-26T20:58:39.690" Score="23" ViewCount="400" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I asked a question, but it was closed, with users asking what system&#xA;I was asking about. What do they mean, and why do I need to specify&#xA;this?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone said my question was missing a system tag. What do they mean?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there times when I don't need to specify the game system?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do I do if I don't know the name/edition of the game system?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-27T06:41:17.913" LastActivityDate="2022-08-21T10:14:32.700" Title="Why do I need to specify my game system, and how do I best do it?" Tags="|support|tags|game-systems|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10132" CreationDate="2020-07-26T20:58:39.690" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of different RPGs out there (and a lot of editions of a lot of RPGs), and a lot of them use the same keywords, names, and – in some cases – book titles. As such, guessing what game system a question is asking about can be quite difficult - or rather, guessing incorrectly can be too easy. And you, the asker, do not want answers that are for the wrong game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that you should specify what game system you are asking about by name – and edition, if there is more than one edition of that game system. You can do so either in the body of the question or by using the appropriate tag (see below). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1346/should-questions-include-system-setting-in-title-if-tagged-with-system-setting&quot;&gt;If you include the system name and/or edition in the title&lt;/a&gt;, it will likely be edited out of the title, and indicated in the body and/or tags instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that while we do allow the use of commonly accepted abbreviations for game systems (such as &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;PF&amp;quot;, or &amp;quot;L5R&amp;quot;), including using &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; as a common shorthand for the 5th edition of D&amp;amp;D if sufficiently clear&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;, please endeavor to make the system as clear as possible, erring on the side of including the full name and edition in the body of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we find that the system/edition is not sufficiently clear, we'll ask for clarifications in the comments, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;question might get closed&lt;/a&gt; until that detail is provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Are there times when I don't need to specify the game system?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If knowing the game system simply isn't necessary, such as for many questions about RPG-related social problems, or about the design of your own system or similar statistics questions, stating the system is not necessary, but can be still sometimes be useful. However, any question about a game's rules, content, or other facets of the game itself needs the game system to be clear so we know what the relevant rules, content, or other facets are. If your question explicitly needs non-system-specific answers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8833/52137&quot;&gt;consider whether the [system-agnostic] tag would be appropriate&lt;/a&gt;, and clarify its usage/your intent in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;System tags&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &amp;quot;system tag&amp;quot; is simply the tag that corresponds to a game system and gathers the questions asked about it. For most questions, the game system can be specified by including the system tag. This makes searching and filtering easier, and means that the body doesn't need to include an extra line specifying the game system where it doesn't flow naturally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply including the tag when asking, or editing it in when requested, solves the issue. Many tags use common abbreviations, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gurps&lt;/a&gt;, while others spell out the full name, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/masks-a-new-generation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;masks-a-new-generation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;masks-a-new-generation&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;You can view and search through our existing tags here&lt;/a&gt; (note: includes non-system tags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a notable exception here: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; for any question about a specific edition, but for questions about &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What if I can't find the system tag?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all game systems have tags here, because not all of them have had questions asked about them. Or maybe we've just given the tag an odd name, so you have trouble finding it. Either way, make sure to clearly state in the question body what game system you're asking about, and someone will create the tag and add it to your question shortly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What do I do if I don't know what system we're playing?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's ok; we'll still do our best to help you. Ask your fellow players, including your GM/DM if applicable. If you have at least 20 rep, you can also hop into &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;, and users there should be able to help you. Otherwise, you can describe the game to the best of your abilities to get it identified, such as the name of the books you're using, and perhaps their publishing date (which may help experienced users tell you what edition it belongs to). But be prepared for the question to be closed while we try to suss out what edition it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Shadowrun&lt;/em&gt; in particular, we have questions that may help you identify what edition your books are for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135571/52137&quot;&gt;How do I know which edition of Dungeons and Dragons (D&amp;amp;D) the books I&amp;#39;m looking at are for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/164886/52137&quot;&gt;Is there an easy way to know what edition a World of Darkness sourcebook is?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/172704/52137&quot;&gt;How do I identify the edition of a Shadowrun book?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: See this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281/52137&quot;&gt;Revisit: Is &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker to determine that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-08-21T10:14:32.700" LastActivityDate="2022-08-21T10:14:32.700" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10134" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-07-27T10:37:50.240" Score="5" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed (and have done so today, in fact) that when I flag certain comments as No Longer Needed, they are auto-deleted right there and then, rather than requiring a moderator to delete them manually.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the criteria for comments being auto-deleted in this way as a response to being flagged (specifically flagged as No Longer Needed)?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, it seems to only be on short comments below a certain character threshold (presumably because those are more likely to contain messages that are just &amp;quot;@Someone Thanks, fixed&amp;quot; or similar). Is it only if it's in response to a comment of mine (i.e. the &amp;quot;flagger&amp;quot; is the one who was being replied to)? If someone else flags such a message, even if the reply wasn't to them, does it still get auto-deleted? This is just me speculating on what the criteria might be; my main question is still the one in bold above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastActivityDate="2020-07-27T10:55:50.133" Title="What are the criteria for a comment being auto-deleted when you flag it as &quot;no longer needed&quot;?" Tags="|support|comments|flagging|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10134" CreationDate="2020-07-27T10:44:55.737" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/19757/404165&quot;&gt;this post on the main meta&lt;/a&gt;, it appears the criteria for auto deleting comments when a user flags them is the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments that are flagged by multiple users are deleted automatically. The number of flags needed is usually based on the comment's score. It currently takes &lt;code&gt;3 + (Score / 3)&lt;/code&gt; flags (rounded up) to delete a comment. Comments containing certain keywords can be deleted with a single flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From this, it appears that the specific flag used may not be relevant for this criteria since it just counts the number of flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the specific keywords that allow single flag deletion, it seems to be intentionally not public information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="33707" LastEditDate="2020-07-27T10:53:05.340" LastActivityDate="2020-07-27T10:53:05.340" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10136" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10134" CreationDate="2020-07-27T10:55:50.133" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The criteria you're looking for are not publicly documented, to prevent people from taking advantage of it (e.g. to obtain flag-related badges). Some possible candidates can be found in this Meta Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/238835/295232&quot;&gt;What is the SE version of Seven Dirty Words?&lt;/a&gt; For the example you mentioned, &amp;quot;@Someone Thanks, fixed&amp;quot;, I'm pretty sure the &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; triggers automatic deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for this list is that users are often using comments for things other than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;their intended purpose&lt;/a&gt;, like giving thanks or compliments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastActivityDate="2020-07-27T10:55:50.133" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10137" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="10145" CreationDate="2020-07-27T11:19:42.040" Score="3" ViewCount="454" Body="&lt;p&gt;To quote part of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809&quot;&gt;KRyan's most-upvoted answer about the current policy&lt;/a&gt; (that was added in a later edit):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] we could allow system tags to be edited in without the OP’s input after a Meta discussion agrees that the situation is “safe” to edit. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is also my understanding after reading another of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9979/35259&quot;&gt;KRyan's answers&lt;/a&gt; to a recent Q&amp;amp;A of mine; that once a question has been taken to meta, and the community has concluded that a question is clearly D&amp;amp;D 5e (it's always D&amp;amp;D 5e questions that get the policy's attention), it's then OK to add the tag without OP's confirmation. The &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; is guessing by yourself; deducing it within meta with community consensus is alright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10085/35259&quot;&gt;this recent meta question&lt;/a&gt; about a mainsite question that clearly 100% can only be D&amp;amp;D 5e, &lt;em&gt;there are many upvotes and downvotes on many of the answers&lt;/em&gt;, implying that the community (at least, those who voted on those answers) is &lt;em&gt;very split about this particular aspect of the policy&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question to the community is: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;is this part of the policy or isn't it?&lt;/em&gt; Is it OK to edit in the system tag without getting confirmation from the OP after it's gone through Meta and been agreed upon?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to be clear: this is not a question about whether this is a good idea or not, but clarification on whether this is part of the policy or not. Since we don't actually have a place where the exact details on the policy as it exists today are specified, I'm just trying to understand what the policy actually is, since there are conflicting opinions about it and no definitive source of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(I think it should be part of the policy, but then, I'm against the policy anyway, at least the part about not adding it in when it's obvious, but clearly those against the policy have been overruled, hence why I'm putting this out to the community and keeping my opinion out of this).&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35259" LastEditorUserId="35259" LastEditDate="2020-07-27T21:51:41.783" LastActivityDate="2020-11-12T03:44:52.530" Title="Does the community agree with the part of the &quot;never guess&quot; policy regarding asking meta first?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2020-07-28T15:03:15.680" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10137" CreationDate="2020-07-27T14:51:44.063" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;A resource list of previous, related posts&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;FAQ post and revisits:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8417&quot;&gt;Revisiting our &amp;quot;never guess the game system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279&quot;&gt;What is the “Don’t Guess the System” policy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;General Discussion:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9566&quot;&gt;When is it OK to assume the system without it being considered a guess?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8344&quot;&gt;What to do when an answer guesses the system of a question rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8045&quot;&gt;What to do when encountering a non-system tag that describes a system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9286&quot;&gt;How to handle sub-tags that lack appropriate parent tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9312&quot;&gt;Is &amp;#39;5e&amp;#39; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281&quot;&gt;Revisit: Is &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker to determine that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9988&quot;&gt;Is it acceptable to add the [dnd-5e] tag to questions about D&amp;amp;D Beyond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8318&quot;&gt;Is it against policy or bad practice to attempt system agnostic answers to questions whose system has not been specified?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10077&quot;&gt;What to do if seeking the answer to an existing question that&amp;#39;s been closed because the system wasn&amp;#39;t specified?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10089&quot;&gt;How long should one wait before reposting a question that was closed per &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/893&quot;&gt;Should we enforce clearer specification of system/version in titles/questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7267&quot;&gt;When does it make sense for a question title to specify the edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5836&quot;&gt;Is the poster the final arbitor of the content of their posts?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Question-Specific Discussion:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10085&quot;&gt;Should this question about &amp;quot;the Wildemount Chronugy subclass ability chronal shift&amp;quot; be tagged as D&amp;amp;D 5e without OP specifying it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8849&quot;&gt;What qualifies as guessing on a system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9976&quot;&gt;Does adding the system tag to this question violate the &amp;quot;never guess the system&amp;quot; policy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5015&quot;&gt;Closing questions instead of fixing really minor issues&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Design, New User Experience, and Teaching the Policy:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8607&quot;&gt;How to show the most recent community consensus in meta?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7333&quot;&gt;Could we have a separate close reason for missing system tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10015&quot;&gt;Can/should we include the system tag requirement in our tour?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8366&quot;&gt;Make it possible for certain tags (like game tags) to always appear first&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7681&quot;&gt;Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7687&quot;&gt;Is there a way to decrease the amount of questions submitted without a system tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9822&quot;&gt;New ask page: How do we want to use it to help new users specify their system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8702&quot;&gt;Can we color system tags to emphasize that they&amp;#39;re different and &amp;quot;more meaningful&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9985&quot;&gt;Can the system tag policy be stated to askers in advance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9980&quot;&gt;Improvement on Deleted Answers Help Page - deletion due to rpg.se policies&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10132&quot;&gt;Why do I need to specify my game system, and how do I best do it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1346&quot;&gt;Should questions include System/Setting in title if tagged with system/setting?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-11-12T03:44:52.530" LastActivityDate="2020-11-12T03:44:52.530" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10137" CreationDate="2020-07-27T18:57:09.450" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please let’s not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire point of that section of my answer was that isn’t worth &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;anyone’s&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; time or effort. It would be “an approach,” that would avoid the biggest problems with “just editing,” but &lt;em&gt;it still isn’t a good idea&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why? &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Because there is absolutely no value in doing so.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; The entire Stack Exchange model is about amplifying signal over noise. For readers, that means that they can find good answers to their questions quickly, and feel confident in those answers. But it also applies to querents, answerers, editors, and moderators: &lt;strong&gt;it means focusing our time, effort, and attention on the best content&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions where the user hasn’t given us enough information to proceed, and who never bother to come back to clarify, &lt;strong&gt;are by definition some of the worst content&lt;/strong&gt;. Let’s please, please, please not waste any more time, gnashing of teeth, or space on Meta discussing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-07-27T18:57:09.450" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10141" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-07-27T20:48:19.127" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;On our rules, policies and practices&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, this is more outside the box, but RPG.SE (and most stacks AFAIK) differ from forums in that rather than having a set list of rules to follow (or be sent into the shadow realm), we operate primarily on practices which leave a lot to user judgement. This is a hard thing to get to grips with, and usually is only really explained when you ask your first meta question trying to establish a firm rule about a certain thing (I know I did), and some of those go ugly (I'm glad mine didn't somehow).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is a good write-up on this anywhere on the network, no-one linked it to me as far as I can remember. Unless someone can find such a write-up I propose we create our own, and put it on the help center page. Proposed entry on that page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We operate much more on practices than firm rules. Try to work with and listen to experienced users as much as possible. See: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11176/52137&quot;&gt;What are the rules and polices of RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That question would cover the nature of rules and policies, and more importantly practices, why that works better, that we understand it's harder to pick up, and that we ask for patience and willingness to learn; if you're willing to learn, we are more than willing to explain to the best of our ability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also list, or attempt to list our &amp;quot;rules&amp;quot; and policies, which mostly boils down to (and I welcome additions of things I've forgotten) don't post spam (+disclose any affiliation), Be Nice (and the rest of CoC which doesn't include that phrase any more), don't link to piracy, don't answer in comments, and don't guess the game system in edits or answers. It should probably also include some kind of link our set of on-topic defining policies, as those are mostly hard defines rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-16T15:20:42.817" LastActivityDate="2020-08-16T15:20:42.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10142" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10137" CreationDate="2020-07-28T07:41:50.783" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The community currently has no consensus on the policy&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9976/does-adding-the-system-tag-to-this-question-violate-the-never-guess-the-system/9979#9979&quot;&gt;first thread&lt;/a&gt; you link the votes are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+9 upvotes, -4 downvotes in favor of &amp;quot;The policy would not allow an individual poster to edit this question, but with Meta consensus, it seems near-perfectly safe and in keeping with the caution called for by the policy.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+11/-3 in favor of &amp;quot;[the] policy cannot apply here, as there is nothing to guess.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+3/-1 in favor of &amp;quot;the querent clearly had in their original post that they were playing 5e. That is really all the information we need and the tag can safely be added.&amp;quot; (deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+3/-2 in favor of &amp;quot;'5e' is still in my opinion a clear and unambiguous statement of system.&amp;quot; (deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;http://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10085/should-this-question-about-the-wildemount-chronugy-subclass-ability-chronal-shi&quot;&gt;second thread&lt;/a&gt; the votes are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+14/-10 in favor of &amp;quot;there is enough contextual evidence that we can deduce the question is meant for D&amp;amp;D 5e.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+7/-7 in favor of &amp;quot;There is enough evidence to conclude that this question asks about the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;+6/-12 in favor of &amp;quot;No, the original post lacks strong evidence that explicitly points to a particular system.&amp;quot; (deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can clearly see that most people are generally against the idea of &amp;quot;never guess&amp;quot;, but there isn't even consensus as to what &amp;quot;never guess&amp;quot; means. Some people interpret &amp;quot;guess&amp;quot; to include logical deductions or analyzing evidence, other people do not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Upvotes are not nuanced enough to deduce if the community agrees with or disagrees with a certain aspect of the policy. It is perhaps worth noting that policies never have to be followed and in this case, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy/9809#9809&quot;&gt;the current highly split policy&lt;/a&gt; (+56/-24 vs +50/-23 at the time of writing) is not supported by a good portion of meta users is on even shakier ground.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-07-28T10:25:51.200" LastActivityDate="2020-07-28T10:25:51.200" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10116" CreationDate="2020-07-28T07:56:23.157" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Use the site-wide guidelines&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Protection was originally created to deal with high volume drive-by posting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Protection] is meant to be a reaction to persistent abuse from anonymous or unproven participants: when a page attracts a lot of noise or vandalism from outside the community, Protecting it reduces the amount of clean-up needed later on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On our site, this is a bit of a solution looking for a problem. We don't have a problem with drive-by posting. We do not see volumes of 1 rep posting so high that we can't handle them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When protection was introduced, an example screenshot was posted showing 10+ deleted answers by 1 rep users (most of which were 1 sentence long) on a post. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10119/59609&quot;&gt;An analysis of protected questions on the site&lt;/a&gt; showed that 99% of them had 5 or fewer deleted posts. The majority of them (66%) had 2 or fewer deleted posts. 11% of them had no deleted posts at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind the warning given by former CM Josh Heyer (Shog9) who posted the site-wide guidelines:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Judicious use of this feature is critical to allowing these sites to handle large amounts of external attention, but over-using it breaks the system: Stack Exchange sites depend on a constant influx of new blood, both to answer new questions and provide updated information on old ones. When in doubt, err on the side of letting new users prove themselves before locking them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do they apply to us?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site-wide guidelines are simple, but missing a little nuance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do protect&lt;/strong&gt; questions that are attracting a lot of non-answers or very poor answers (spam, etc.) from new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don’t protect&lt;/strong&gt; questions just because they’re linked to on a high-traffic news site like Reddit or Ars Technica. While there’s certainly some correlation between sudden spikes in popularity and associated non-answers, not all popular questions suffer from this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do unprotect&lt;/strong&gt; questions that aren’t currently attracting a lot of attention and don’t have a long history of unproductive answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What constitutes &amp;quot;a long history&amp;quot;? What constitutes &amp;quot;currently&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe the Protected queue system should inform out choices for these metrics. They currently list 2 important pieces of information: the number of answers in the past 30 days, and the number of deleted answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For convenience's sake, I think &amp;quot;currently&amp;quot; should mean &amp;quot;in the past 30 days&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;a long history&amp;quot; should mean &amp;quot;more than X deleted answers&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When determining the value of X we should consider the volume of drive-by posts our site members can handle. Currently, the queues sits at empty most of the time. In the past week, we have had 7 deleted low-quality posts. I think we have some room to set X a bit higher (10?) and see how it goes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind that we are not robots, so if you see a post get a lot of answers really quick, it's ok to act before it hits that threshold. Similarly, if a post has more than that number of deleted answers, but is really old, it's fine to unprotect it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2020-07-30T00:10:42.110" LastActivityDate="2020-07-30T00:10:42.110" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10144" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10137" CreationDate="2020-07-28T13:23:26.870" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If a question is unclear, close it until the querent engages and clarifies&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That was the MO when I stumbled across this site over 5 years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps our problem - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10139/22566&quot;&gt;as beautifuly illustrated by @Medix2's list of meta Q&amp;amp;As on this topic&lt;/a&gt; - is that we have, as a community, forgotten the KISS principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This SE didn't used to have any qualms about closing a question if it needed improvement or clarity.  It appears that the efforts being put into improving the new user experience (which I applaud in a general sense) may have swung the pendulum a bit too far in that the positive utility of &lt;em&gt;closure until clarity is achieved&lt;/em&gt; has been assigned (in the perceptions of some users) to 'ungood new user experiences' when it should not have been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps there is value it getting back to basics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a given question, if we must overthink it or if we must debate about it(this will happen from time to time), then Meta is the vehicle for that rather than comments under the question &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; the principles in such a discussion are available to discuss it in RPGSE chat.  That can sometimes provide a quick, real time resolution on &amp;quot;what do we do with this one?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You ask about policy: I offer the above as &amp;quot;best practice.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-07-28T14:15:48.477" LastActivityDate="2020-07-28T14:15:48.477" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10137" CreationDate="2020-07-28T14:27:42.553" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, the ability to ask questions about a topic on Meta is not part of any policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Meta posts will &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; be able to decide individual cases&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This didn't become a new part of the policy following KRyan's suggestion; it has &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; been part of the policy. Creating a meta post to propose something, reaching community consensus, and then acting on it is a fundamental part of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user feels strongly enough about an issue (a question without a system in this case) to create a meta post about it, then they are encouraged to do so. The community then acts on whatever consensus is reached in that meta post. This includes clarifying the system on a question without input from the OP, if that is what the community chooses to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Any policy that says otherwise is undermining the role of meta.&lt;/strong&gt; Meta is a place for discussion and reaching solutions based on community consensus. No policy should attempt to curtail or control what topics that discussion can be used for. The community is empowered to act upon &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; consensus reached in meta, regardless of how sweeping or drastic the change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it doesn’t matter what the consensus on KRyan’s answer is or isn’t; &lt;strong&gt;the community always has and will always have the ability to bring up issues like this on meta - and no answer/policy can take that away, consensus or no.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-07-29T07:43:12.757" LastActivityDate="2020-07-29T07:43:12.757" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10089" CreationDate="2020-07-28T18:00:43.250" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ask if you're interested&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back in the day, if we guessed a system &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, it was usually because the question was genuinely interesting in another system.  Then we'd repost the question we thought it was and the answers based on that system and the question for the OPs real system would also get answered and we'd end up with two (or, well, at least one) decent q&amp;amp;a's. Or, at least, that's how it went when things went best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, if you have a genuinely interesting question in mind in response to reading a putatively 'unclear' question, you shouldn't let the fact you think that's what the OP is asking already prevent you from asking it separately-- that would assume you can correctly guess the system.  Instead, assume that you may have not correctly guessed the system, and so your question isn't a dupe and doesn't prevent the OP's question from being re-opened, provided they actually secretly meant a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; game that just happens to match very closely all the indicators you were looking for to tell it was the game you were thinking of, possibly down to an abbreviated form of the name, publication year, book titles, and trademarked and copyrighted materials/branding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Asking &lt;em&gt;helps&lt;/em&gt; new users&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides making fake sense in our legal paradigm for system-tag-handling, this also makes actual sense.  While you seem to think that having their question asked by a different user will put people &lt;em&gt;off&lt;/em&gt; from this site, I can tell you from direct experience that it is actually the exact opposite situation.  Every time I have stepped in and re-asked a new user's question with a complete and substantial rewrite to the point that it would not be an acceptable edit, they have been quite grateful. New users don't care that much about rep, they care about getting their actual real-life problems solved, and re-asking their questions for them when they are overwhelmed by our site's frankly rediculous treatment of new users and the effort required to proceed is very large for them saves them a great deal of tribulation, teaches them how to use the site way better than just making them do it themselves all the time does (for all the 'they'll learn best by doing' out there, actually giving people examples and explaining how it's done and why is still a significant part of how we do it in schools for a reason), and gets them the answer they need right now in the simplest fashion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of this in practice is: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55712/14848&quot;&gt;How to make your players hate your villain, but not your game&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn't the user's &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; question, mind you, but it was pretty early in their learning process here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastActivityDate="2020-07-28T18:00:43.250" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10116" CreationDate="2020-07-30T16:05:47.277" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Don't protect questions for esoteric systems&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've got several rpgs on here with almost no participation.  I think I'm probably the only active user with extensive Polaris experience, for example.  There was another guy who played Anima for a bit, but also one of those anti-optimization people at the same time so that's kinda dead now.  I'm quite confident that &lt;em&gt;nobody&lt;/em&gt; on this site plays Ki Khanga (that includes you BESW, but props for trying :P ).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asked in these systems represent a huge opportunity for this site to slightly correct its awful and overwhelming 5e bias.  They also represent an area where people coming to the site randomly from Google are most often a &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; source of answers than we are-- we don't play these games, and the internet does because the internet does everything.  Protecting these questions does the most damage to the site that protection is capable of, because the new users prevented from answering are the new users whose one-time participation most helps the site, and furthermore whose long-term participation best contributes to the growth of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's an esoteric system is definitely a grey area, though.  I'd argue, for example, that OD&amp;amp;D counts, barely: although we have a bit of a healthy community here for that, it's very small.  Also The Dark Eye, Polaris, FATE but not Fate, &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; Dresden Files but that's a bit of a stretch, Phoenix Command, Amber Diceless, anything less common than these.  What seems clear to me doesn't count is D&amp;amp;D 3.x,4,5, Dungeon&amp;amp;Apocalypse World at the very least of the pbta games, Fate Core, stuff we regularly see on the front page and gets answered, like, immediately with at least two different active high-rep users. That's just my thoughts on it, though, I think we need to decide for ourselves when our userbase's lack of expertise is a good justification for higher mantainance on a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="14848" LastEditDate="2020-08-02T06:12:42.947" LastActivityDate="2020-08-02T06:12:42.947" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10148" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10116" CreationDate="2020-07-30T20:54:35.427" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have a high moderation capacity&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing to remember about the protection feature is that it is a preventative measure that aims to reduce the amount of (reactive) moderation that is necessary. We have a high capacity for moderation – and most of that consists of community members using their flags and privileges. There’s very rarely more than one or two items in a given review queue, and very often nothing. And to scope out post deletion: we get north of 200 answers and 100 questions a week, and delete about 25 answers and 6 questions over the same time period on average. Therefore, we should limit the use of protection to questions that have attracted answers that had to be removed in the past and that and that are overwhelmingly likely to draw answers that will have to be removed in the future, because we have the capacity to let some things slip through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Let’s talk about the answers from new users&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, I think that in order to take a look at this, we need to dissect the types of answers that come in to old questions from new users (or specifically, from accounts with &amp;lt;10 rep). These are gonna be broad-strokes categories, and yes, they include different categories of spam.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keyword spam.&lt;/strong&gt; This is much of the spam previously discussed. Spammers look for keywords which relate to their spam and post it in the answer box below. Keywords being in the other answers probably also attract them. Our more prominent keywords are “spellcasting”, “vampire”, “resurrection”, “death spell”. These are primarily trying to sell (scam, obviously) services offering something to the relevant keyword – say, turning you into a vampire so you can get revenge on your ex. No, I’m not kidding.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Network spam.&lt;/strong&gt; This is basically keyword spam that finds keywords on other sites on the network (mainly SO), but posts it here through the vagaries of website crawling. Basically, this is “tech-y” spam that gets posted to us. This mostly happens to HNQ questions, as they’re linked from other network sites.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Honest spam.&lt;/strong&gt; This is spam that is posted on a related topic by a genuine human creator, but often falls under “link-only answer” and “fails to disclose affiliation”. This is fairly low-volume.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Forum replies.&lt;/strong&gt; A fair chunk of answers posted by new users are forum-like replies, which very often need to be removed. We can probably throw other honest, but (given the site format) misplaced, attempts at communicating – such as new questions posted as answers, and “thank you”s – into this bag for the discussion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Actual novel/useful answers.&lt;/strong&gt; We do get new users answering old questions with genuine answers. These are great, but from subjective experience, not too common.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Useful comments as answers.&lt;/strong&gt; So that happens too. New users encounter a Q&amp;amp;A that is outdated (or has some other issue), and post an answer (because they can’t comment) pointing the thing out. I’ll argue that this happening is (usually) a good thing (because it gives us a chance to fix something), even if the process is awkward.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Screams from the void.&lt;/strong&gt; This category is mostly on here for completeness. We get some answers posted that just don’t make sense. Standouts from the top of my head are the word “Giraffe” and a long series of “V”s,&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; but there’s also a bunch that are just foul language, which is where my name for them originates. They don’t, as far as I can understand, follow any pattern.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How do we decide what warrants protection?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s the crux of the problem as I see it. Deciding to continuously protect something is a value judgement that we, the community, have to make. We can do stats for how big the problem is, but we have to decide how much value the chance for novel answers and useful comments has, against having to moderate the other categories. Deciding to protect a question (indefinitely) is essentially deciding that the likelihood and benefit of the two useful categories is not worth the likelihood and cost of having to deal with the others, on that specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So what do I think warrants continuous protection?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short: keyword spam and high proven likelihood of forum replies, or a high volume of honest spam or screams from the void over time, with a low likelihood of novel answers and useful comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Factors in favor of protection&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In more detail, if a question has received keyword spam in the past, it still has those keywords on it and it will be spammed again. This simply follows from the simplest assumption of how keyword spammers work. If it’s obvious why the question is pulling keyword spam, I don’t think we need to wait for two instances of keyword spam to be posted before protecting, and don’t think we should unprotect them just to wait for another spam answer to come in. If it’s not obvious, there’s minimal harm in letting the auto-protection kick in on the second. The less we have of this stuff, even in deleted form, the better. As analysis shows, this doesn’t actually affect that great a volume of questions anyway (some hundred of our 40k questions); it’ll be fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second category I think we should protect against is those questions shown historically to attract many forum-like replies and likely to continue to do so. And let me be clear: the “many” is kinda important here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions would most likely be those that are getting continuous views and are often fairly subjective (and thus have many people who want to voice their opinion).&#xA;Why? Because if we want to retain users, having their first interaction with the site be their answer getting deleted because they didn’t know what the site was like isn’t great. Actually, it sucks. If they’re forced to poke around the site, they have (IMO) a much better chance at picking up how the site works beforehand (say, by taking the tour or something).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is for some (possibly unknowable) reason drawing a lot of honest spam answers or screams from the void, we should consider protecting it. It is probably rare and strange enough that having a dedicated meta to discuss each such question is fine, in part because there may be other things we should do to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Factors against protection&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn’t protect a question if it is likely to benefit from novel answers and useful comments in the future. This is generally much harder to evaluate and to talk about in general. We’ll have to use our game and Q&amp;amp;A expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The easy categories here are questions like optimization, questions trying to compile all the game features that fit X criteria, and rules questions on ambiguous rules (as they may be updated by errata or receive relevant commentary). Also questions on smaller/rarer systems. If in doubt, lean towards not protecting these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Factors that shouldn’t count either way&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe it goes without saying, but I don’t think the remaining categories should be counted either way when evaluating indefinite protection. But I’d still like to make some comments about why, and this is relevant because these will be counted by the auto-protection algorithm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Network spam.&lt;/strong&gt; If there’s nothing on the question which seems to have beckoned the spam, protecting it is unlikely to prevent further spam. If a question is drawing a lot of spam of this type while on the Hot Network Questions list (HNQ), protect it while it is on HNQ, and unprotect it once it is off. Reminder: a question leaves the HNQ list if it is more than 3 days old. I don’t remember this happening with the new HNQ, but that’s how I think we should deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Honest spam.&lt;/strong&gt; These don’t warrant protection. They’re one-offs, topic relevant, and half the time could be turned into valid answers if the user put in the effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;One-off forum replies.&lt;/strong&gt; If the question just gets one or two forum-like non-answers, especially while new, there’s no need for protection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Screams from the void.&lt;/strong&gt; As these are both varied and weird, they don’t really say anything about the question needing protection. They don’t really say much about anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The exception is obviously if there are high volumes of any of these over time, as covered above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS: if anyone would like me to split my suggestion from the dissection above, so we can use that more neutrally, I’d be happy to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: Those are two different answers. I’m sure others have more examples, but I’ll ask you not to share them in the comments here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-07-30T21:11:25.950" LastActivityDate="2020-07-30T21:11:25.950" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="10149" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11150" CreationDate="2020-07-30T23:30:12.743" Score="6" ViewCount="296" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know this is common, but my google-fu is failing me (particularly since the relevant search field would mostly be in the comment section of deleted answers).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have some helpful example questions where users posted an answer assuming a question was for D&amp;amp;D 5e when it was already apparent (from system/edition tags) that it wasn't?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think Dungeon World gets a lot of this, but anything is fine.  It would be helpful for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10116/how-should-question-protection-be-used-on-rpg-se/10147?noredirect=1#comment35304_10147&quot;&gt;supporting my answer on the question &amp;quot;How should question protection be used on RPG.SE?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14848" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-01T23:17:23.870" LastActivityDate="2020-08-01T23:17:23.870" Title="Can I get some examples of users assuming a question is asking about D&amp;D 5e when it's explicitly tagged as being for another system/edition?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-systems|dnd-5e|protected-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10149" CreationDate="2020-07-31T01:26:12.010" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I linked a couple in one of my answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9815/19405&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; on one of the iterations of the &amp;quot;don't guess the system&amp;quot; question. One was a Dungeon World question people mistook for D&amp;amp;D 5E, another was a Genesys question people mistook for D&amp;amp;D 5E. People, plural.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They were both system-tagged at the time, as was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/172271/is-there-a-cost-for-donning-or-doffing-a-shield-and-armor-during-combat&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; question about changing armor during combat for 13th Age, which was mistaken for D&amp;amp;D 5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2020-07-31T01:26:12.010" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11152" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10149" CreationDate="2020-08-01T21:16:42.323" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A curious point of error can be the WoD/CoD mismatch, where players might assume the two share more rules than they do - and give advice based on the wrong system. Without pointing a finger, I have seen this at least twice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2020-08-01T21:16:42.323" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10056" CreationDate="2020-08-06T05:32:18.860" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tangentially - you can check for this type of edit (or any others)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1272799/last-10-unprotects&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is the 10 most recent Unprotect edits using:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;SELECT TOP 10 *&#xA;FROM PostHistory&#xA;WHERE PostHistoryTypeId = 15&#xA;ORDER BY CreationDate DESC&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1272799/post-history-types&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;PostHistoryTypes&lt;/a&gt; are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$\begin{array}{c|c}&#xA;\text{Id}&amp;amp;\text{Name}\\\hline&#xA;1&amp;amp;\text{Initial Title}\\\hline&#xA;2&amp;amp;\text{Initial Body}\\\hline&#xA;3&amp;amp;\text{Initial Tags}\\\hline&#xA;4&amp;amp;\text{Edit Title}\\\hline&#xA;5&amp;amp;\text{Edit Body}\\\hline&#xA;6&amp;amp;\text{Edit Tags}\\\hline&#xA;7&amp;amp;\text{Rollback Title}\\\hline&#xA;8&amp;amp;\text{Rollback Body}\\\hline&#xA;9&amp;amp;\text{Rollback Tags}\\\hline&#xA;10&amp;amp;\text{Post Closed}\\\hline&#xA;11&amp;amp;\text{Post Reopened}\\\hline&#xA;12&amp;amp;\text{Post Deleted}\\\hline&#xA;13&amp;amp;\text{Post Undeleted}\\\hline&#xA;14&amp;amp;\text{Post Locked}\\\hline&#xA;15&amp;amp;\text{Post Unlocked}\\\hline&#xA;16&amp;amp;\text{Community Owned}\\\hline&#xA;17&amp;amp;\text{Post Migrated}\\\hline&#xA;18&amp;amp;\text{Question Merged}\\\hline&#xA;19&amp;amp;\text{Question Protected}\\\hline&#xA;20&amp;amp;\text{Question Unprotected}\\\hline&#xA;22&amp;amp;\text{Question Unmerged}\\\hline&#xA;24&amp;amp;\text{Suggested Edit Applied}\\\hline&#xA;25&amp;amp;\text{Post Tweeted}\\\hline&#xA;31&amp;amp;\text{Discussion moved to chat}\\\hline&#xA;33&amp;amp;\text{Post Notice Added}\\\hline&#xA;34&amp;amp;\text{Post Notice Removed}\\\hline&#xA;35&amp;amp;\text{Post Migrated Away}\\\hline&#xA;36&amp;amp;\text{Post Migrated Here}\\\hline&#xA;37&amp;amp;\text{Post Merge Source}\\\hline&#xA;38&amp;amp;\text{Post Merge Destination}\\\hline&#xA;50&amp;amp;\text{CommunityBump}\\\hline&#xA;52&amp;amp;\text{SelectedHotNetworkQuestion}\\\hline&#xA;53&amp;amp;\text{RemovedHotNetworkQuestion}\\\hline&#xA;\end{array}$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T05:32:18.860" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10100" CreationDate="2020-08-06T05:50:16.123" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Expect Frame Challenges&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Too many metas to list: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=frame+challenge&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=frame+challenge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes people will answer by targeting what they see as the &lt;em&gt;problem&lt;/em&gt; behind your question rather than directly addressing the question you &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; ask. We call that a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;Frame Challenge&lt;/a&gt; and sometimes it can be better than a direct answer. Sometimes not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T05:50:16.123" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10111" CreationDate="2020-08-06T06:02:47.207" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;Why ...&amp;quot; doesn't necessarily mean &amp;quot;Why did the designers ...&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly I've spent too much time adjudicating legal disputes but I find the answer to &amp;quot;What happened?&amp;quot; is far more useful in determining the &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; than &amp;quot;What did X say was the reason that something happened?&amp;quot; X is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; an unreliable witness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a perfectly solid question that can be answered (as it has been) by a solidly researched and supported timeline of events from which inferences can be drawn. If that research turns up designer statements, so much the better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-08-06T06:02:47.207" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11156" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-07T09:16:46.817" Score="8" ViewCount="405" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143402/can-a-player-choose-to-fail-a-spells-ability-check-contest&quot;&gt;Can a player choose to fail a spell&amp;#39;s ability check contest?&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143402/can-a-player-choose-to-fail-a-spells-ability-check-contest/143415#143415&quot;&gt;a deleted answer&lt;/a&gt;. For users without 10k rep, here's a screenshot of the answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6BndT.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/6BndT.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;You are assuming (incorrectly) that the Strength check represents some sort if active opposition to the spell’s effect. The contest would still happen even if the creature was unable to actively resist e.g. If they were paralyzed or unconscious. The Strength check simply represents the not-movability (in physics, I’d say inertia but D&amp;amp;D is not a physics engine) of the creature. Strong creatures are harder to move because ... magic. The generally accepted way to read spell effects is that they do what they say - as Jeremy Crawford says &amp;quot;there are no hidden rules&amp;quot;. So, it says there is a contest therefore, there is a contest.&amp;quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the post score is very negative, I've noticed that there's no immediate problem that warrants the deletion of this answer. It is an answer, albeit many people do not agree with it - but that is not grounds for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why this answer was deemed worthy of deletion? And if it is not worthy, is it worthy to be undeleted?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-07T10:52:58.153" LastActivityDate="2020-08-11T03:17:47.107" Title="Why was this answer to the question &quot;Can a player choose to fail a spell's ability check contest?&quot; deleted?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11157" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11156" CreationDate="2020-08-08T16:18:46.470" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The SE guidelines point towards that answer having been deleted &lt;em&gt;incorrectly&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest reading the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/5221&quot;&gt;How does deleting work? What can cause a post to be deleted, and what does that actually mean? What are the criteria for deletion?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/264293&quot;&gt;Why shouldn&amp;#39;t I delete wrong answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/128741&quot;&gt;If a valid answer is downvoted, what&amp;#39;s the motivation not to delete it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/240427&quot;&gt;Why is an answer that is so bad it is shown faded out kept around? Why not delete it?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;The Stack Overflow Help Center section on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;deleted answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these promote &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; deleting answers solely because they have downvotes and promote deleting answers when they are not actually honest attempts at answers. To quote those links:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For answers, any post that is not an answer (should be a comment, doesn't answer the question, etc.) should be deleted. Answers that are wrong or that dispense poor advice should be downvoted, not deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A wrong answer, downvoted, also conveys information. It tells you, the visitor: don't do this. This answer is wrong, and if you are lucky the comments tell you why it is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed. This includes answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;commentary on the question or other answersasking another, different question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“thanks!” or “me too!” responses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;exact duplicates of other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;barely more than a link to an external site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;not even a partial answer to the actual question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;As far as I can find, RPG.SE does not have guidelines or policies that supercede the general Stack guidelines.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can compare RPG.SE to something like Skeptics where (according the their &lt;a href=&quot;https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1505&quot;&gt;Meta welcome&lt;/a&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] Questions must be about a notable claim [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] Answers need references [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have similar requirements that I have found. We &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have the following question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8811&quot;&gt;When should I vote to undelete an answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the answer there simply states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] vote to undelete when you don’t think it should be deleted. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think this is any sort of fundamental change to deletion and undeletion across the site, but I thought that answer was worth mentioning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The answer in question should be undeleted&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer in question is not spam or anything similar. It is an honest attempt at an answer to the question. As such, it has no reason to be deleted. For me, improper deletion is one of the strongest reasons to undelete something. Keeping it deleted would promote similar deletions which we, as far as I can find, do not want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, the post's own author may still choose to keep the answer deleted. If they do, I personally believe that that decision should be respected. But RPG.SE policies on undeleting posts deleted by their authors should be left to a different Meta entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally cannot say &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; this answer was deleted, because I did not vote to delete it. It was likely due to the lack of citations, and posts I linked to earlier say that bad answers that are still honest attempts at answers should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be deleted. To me, the general guidelines lead to the conclusion that the post in question was incorrectly deleted and for me an incorrect deletion should be undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The general SE guidelines have &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; pushback&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The previously linked posts are all in support of not deleting downvoted or flatly incorrect posts; meanwhile the following post also exists:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/120298&quot;&gt;Should horribly wrong answers be deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And an answer there states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, absolutely. That's why high rep users can vote to delete. That is also why there is a peer pressure badge, to encourage users to delete their own downvoted content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to identify harmful answers, but we do not necessarily want them to stick around. Even though their scores are negative, even though the content might be grayed out, people can still see them, ignore the warnings (or not even understand them) and use the content. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So not &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; agrees whether flatly incorrect answers are unhelpful or whether they should be deleted but the SE general guidelines state that they should not be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps worth mentioning, the Peer Pressure badge exists and is awarded when you:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Delete own post with score of -3 or lower&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't the same situation, since it's about the author deleting their own post but it could be construed as SE incentivizing deleting posts solely because they have downvotes, which would go against the general guideline. However, this badge also has &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=Peer+pressure+%5Bbadges%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;quite a few&lt;/a&gt; Meta posts about it including&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/341802&quot;&gt;Why are there badges that promote poor answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/107628&quot;&gt;Badges should reward positive behavior&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/231270&quot;&gt;Please get rid of the peer pressure badge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-08-08T17:31:09.640" LastActivityDate="2020-08-08T17:31:09.640" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11159" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11156" CreationDate="2020-08-08T17:55:04.577" Score="8" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is site practice to delete unsupported answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Admittedly it's never really documented/discussed on it's own, but mostly in the discussions around fun topics like game recommendations and designer intent requests. Specifically, when the questions type &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; needs supported answers, aren't getting them, and we need to talk about how to moderate them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it does also show up in other guidance: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/52137&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want your opinion; we want your &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;. If you do not have experiences you can bring to the table in that particular case, &lt;em&gt;do not answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. Answers not doing so may be downvoted and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It talks about experiences as citations because it's from the section on subjective questions, however I see no reason to distinguish the two on this other than what type of support the answer needs to bring.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But haven't we got a post notice for this?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, there's a post notice for needing citations, but post notices are a poor tool for moderating content. They are fixed wordings and only available to a very small subset of users. Comments are better at pointing out problems because they are customizable (by default you write out each one) and availible to many users. The post notice does also not exclude deletion, but explicitly warns about it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Want to improve this post?&lt;/strong&gt; Provide detailed answers to this question, including citations and an explanation of why your answer is correct. Answers without enough detail may be edited or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me try to explain why that post notice get used at all, if those answers should get deleted. Firstly, deletion might not be the correct thing. If the answer is probably salvageable, users should get a chance to edit it, or comment for the poster to do so. Also, diamond mod deletions are instant, and harder to revert (can't be undeleted by non-diamonds). There's also an important learning and healthiness aspect to community doing moderation and evaluations, so we often try to not immediately delete (nor close, etc.) borderline cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we prefer to let the low quality review process do its thing. We might flag the post (if it wasn't already), add a comment with out concern (again, if it's not already covered), and add the post notice for increased visibility of it (if we remember to/think it's worthwhile). Expecting the post notice to be used beyond this is putting an aspect of site moderation too much onto the diamond mods, I hope you want us to put our efforts into more useful things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So for the specific answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without support being added to it, I don't see it having any value. And it being deleted does not prevent the poster (nor 10ks I believe) from editing it. The user could then vote to undelete and/or flag for undeletion (if diamond deleted, as this one retroactively is, the flag is necessary). No such efforts have been made on this answer. I don't personally see the reason to undelete it, but I'd be happy for someone to change my view on the quality of an answer at a score of -6.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-11T03:17:47.107" LastActivityDate="2020-08-11T03:17:47.107" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11160" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-10T09:36:35.013" Score="11" ViewCount="326" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have stumbled upon this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174167/4173&quot;&gt;Site with absurdly powerful characters for D&amp;amp;D 3/3.5&lt;/a&gt;. It asks about a site that the querent has seen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question does not ask the users to suggest a game, not even a product. It looks more like a resource-identification question to me, but I just awoke and it's very hot here and my judgement could be clouded. I'd rather know what the community thinks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-10T10:41:37.267" LastActivityDate="2020-08-10T17:53:02.883" Title="Is this question about a site listing absurdly powerful D&amp;D 3e/3.5e characters really a recommendation question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11161" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11160" CreationDate="2020-08-10T16:35:00.853" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question is off-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both link-only answers and tool recommendation questions are off-topic. This question is asking for a tool (a website) and one can answer it with nothing more than a link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have some similar questions that are closed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144259&quot;&gt;Where can I find a complete index of all AD&amp;amp;D 2e monster entries compiled on to one site that is still up and functional at this point in time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/140332&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a good site for sorting spell on class lists&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76273&quot;&gt;Is there a list of Concentration Spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/96631&quot;&gt;Is there a full filterable list of spells by save?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117319&quot;&gt;Is there a list of Creature traits/abilities?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-08-10T16:46:53.820" LastActivityDate="2020-08-10T16:46:53.820" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11160" CreationDate="2020-08-10T16:46:13.653" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question is on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have plenty of similar questions that are open:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1023&quot;&gt;Comprehensive list of WOTC D&amp;amp;D 4.0 products?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/48009&quot;&gt;Where can I find a list of Monk Prestige Classes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170492&quot;&gt;Is there a comprehensive list of every monk bonus feat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/141128&quot;&gt;Is there a complete list of unusual skills?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142404&quot;&gt;Is there a list of famous heroic characters of D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152494&quot;&gt;Where can I find a list of all Domains available?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135453&quot;&gt;Is there a list of Faer&amp;#251;n equivalent of Christmas traditions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/58304&quot;&gt;List of all core Bard spells in an excel format&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/9033&quot;&gt;Is there a list of all player moves in Apocalypse World?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116637&quot;&gt;Does anyone know where I can find a list of wonderous items by caster level?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/6205&quot;&gt;Where can I find a complete list of every D&amp;amp;D book ever released before 3rd Edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144508&quot;&gt;Is there a list of monsters by plane of origin anywhere?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/11589&quot;&gt;Where can I find a list of sources for D&amp;amp;D 4E?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/83103&quot;&gt;Where can I find an exhaustive (and constantly updating) list of 5e reference and adventure books?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73478&quot;&gt;Where can I find a list of Magic Items by rarity?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/39599&quot;&gt;Is there a list of playable races with a fly speed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44496&quot;&gt;Is there a complete list detailing all Magical Beasts and Outsiders native to the Outer Planes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/10915&quot;&gt;What is the full list of monsters that can be summoned with the Summon Monster spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/70287&quot;&gt;Is there a list of companions that a Beast Master ranger has access to?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/57294&quot;&gt;How do I find a list of monsters meeting unusual criteria?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/117579&quot;&gt;Where can I find a current list of touch-range spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47863&quot;&gt;Is there a list of wizard spells by level by school?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55481&quot;&gt;Does there exist a complete list of D&amp;amp;D 3.X Wizards of the Coast Web site articles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/106020&quot;&gt;Where could an aspiring follower of Urgathoa (may she stay forever gluttonous) find a complete list of diseases?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/150582&quot;&gt;Does anyone know of a comprehensive list of the unused combinations of weapon properties in D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/31370&quot;&gt;Where can I get a list of 4th edition D&amp;amp;D acronyms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/7696&quot;&gt;Where can I find an extensive list of Wilderness Kids products?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/73991&quot;&gt;Is there a Potions list for Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12260&quot;&gt;Where can one find a list of Savage Worlds Explorer Edition publications?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/148287&quot;&gt;Is there a map of Silverymoon with every street named?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: questions being open does mean they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be open. This entire list could be the result of questions that should be &lt;em&gt;closed&lt;/em&gt; not being closed. If so, then all of these should be closed, including the question this Meta is about&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-08-10T17:23:31.823" LastActivityDate="2020-08-10T17:23:31.823" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11160" CreationDate="2020-08-10T17:53:02.883" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question does not have enough details; close it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the OP looking only and specifically for the site that they remember or will any similar site fit their bill? This is unclear, and as such, what makes a good answer is unclear and the question should be closed as needing more details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are asking for any possible site, I believe it would be off-topic as it is asking for a tool and answers would be link-only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they are asking for that particular site, I believe it would be a site-identification question. We allow game-identification, but I'm unsure what our stance is on site-identification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Meta can progress more once this detail is provided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2020-08-10T17:53:02.883" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11164" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11178" CreationDate="2020-08-10T21:34:10.090" Score="16" ViewCount="297" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current tag descriptions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-failure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-failure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-failure&lt;/a&gt; (20 questions):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about critical failures (sometimes called &amp;quot;critical fumbles&amp;quot;), a mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions which not only fail to meet their goal, but also hamper the doer of the action or their allies. Some examples of such mechanics include rolling natural 1s on some d20-based systems, or rolling a Despair in the Star Wars FFG system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fumbles&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fumbles&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fumbles&lt;/a&gt; (10 questions):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about &amp;quot;fumbles&amp;quot; (which some systems call &amp;quot;botches&amp;quot;), a term sometimes used to refer to especially bad dice rolls or results that result in an outcome worse than a normal failure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's an example, with two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2/is-a-fumble-on-a-natural-1-an-official-rule&quot;&gt;Is a fumble on a natural 1 an official rule?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174198/is-there-an-official-variant-rule-where-a-natural-1-ends-a-full-attack-action&quot;&gt;Is there an official variant rule where a natural 1 ends a full attack action?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions ask about the same outcome (rolling nat. 1 on an attack roll) in the same game system. One is tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-failure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-failure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-failure&lt;/a&gt;; the other one has the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fumbles&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fumbles&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fumbles&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do these tags mean the same? Should they be merged into a single tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they should be merged, which tag should remain as the primary one? And should the other tag be left as a synonym of the primary tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-28T18:57:40.710" LastActivityDate="2020-08-28T18:57:40.710" Title="Should we merge the [critical-failure] tag with the [fumbles] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11165" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11166" CreationDate="2020-08-12T21:50:38.860" Score="13" ViewCount="138" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My question just got closed! What does that mean?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do questions get closed?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do I need to do to get my question reopened?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is our specific one to expand on the guidance in the built in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;help center article&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:37:19.440" Title="What does it mean for a question to be closed?" Tags="|support|closed-questions|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11166" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11165" CreationDate="2020-08-12T21:50:38.860" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Closed means it is &lt;em&gt;temporarily&lt;/em&gt; blocked from being answered&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions get closed because community members think it shouldn’t be answered in its current state. See below for more on that process. Do note that closure is temporary, unlike what you might see on traditional forums. Once a question has been edited to be answerable, users (the same or others) will reopen it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How do I know what needs to be edited?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question being closed will make a post notice appear on the question, which gives the close reason. In addition, usually someone will give a comment pointing out what is wrong, and what needs to be addressed. Pay more heed to the comments, than the specifics of the notice. The close reasons are a limited set built into the site, while the comments are what users have chosen to advise for the specific reasons. Quite often we simply have to choose the closest, or most applicable reason, but the comments should clarify exactly what needs doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more general guidance for the more common close reasons, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5758/52137&quot;&gt;Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?&lt;/a&gt; from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/52137&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What do I do once it’s been fixed?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Primarily wait. It’ll take a bit of time for users to see the question and reopen it. If the fix is simple — such as specifying the system — that’s probably enough. If the fix is more involved or subtle — such as rescoping the question, or adjust it to better ask for expertise based answers — you could reply to the comment pointing this out (use @username to reply) asking them whether it’s fixed. Once the question is reopened, please remove your own and flag the outdated comments as “no longer needed”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How does the closure process work?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a question to be closed it needs 5 users with at least 3k rep to vote to close it. Users with less rep can flag a question recommending it to be closed. Either a flag or a close vote will put the question into a review queue for users with 3k to vote to close (or leave open). There are two exceptions to this. Community elected (‘diamond’) moderators can close a question with a single vote and users with a gold badge in a given tag can close questions with that tag as duplicates as other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reopening works the same way. 5 users with 3k rep can vote to reopen a question and other users can flag for it to be reopened. The exceptions with ‘diamond’ moderators and gold badge holders are the same. There is an additional point with the review queue, which is that the first edit to a closed question will also put it into a review queue. As such, try to use the first edit to fix the problem, rather than details in it (like minor spelling and grammar). See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8634/52137&quot;&gt;Should closed questions be edited without fixing the question?&lt;/a&gt; for more details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-02-17T16:37:19.440" LastActivityDate="2021-02-17T16:37:19.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11167" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-13T12:00:05.117" Score="13" ViewCount="930" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have already had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277/pathfinder-sources-prd-vs-d20pfsrd&quot;&gt;a similar discussion&lt;/a&gt; years ago, when the official SRD was Paizo's own PRD.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now things have changed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.aonprd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Archives of Nethys&lt;/a&gt; (henceforth AON) is a community-mantained, errata-including SRD just as &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;d20pfsrd.com&lt;/a&gt; (henceforth PFSRD)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question asking about preferences between AON and the PFSRD &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8978/should-questions-about-pathfinder-now-link-to-archives-of-nethys-over-d20pfsrd&quot;&gt;already exists&lt;/a&gt;, but it doesn't bring to the table an important factor that has become evident to me in the past week: the PFSRD is full of errors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So many errors, indeed, that people from the Pathfinder RPG Discord server&lt;/strong&gt; (which has a channel where you can bring AON errors to the AON crew and they fix them) &lt;strong&gt;came to consider RPG.SE an unreliable source&lt;/strong&gt;, partly because some of our answers include developer opinions from the Paizo forums without clearly labeling them as developer opinions (I don't think we can solve this part of the problem) and &lt;strong&gt;partly because many answers here rely on PFSRD errors.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I realize that those people are not the judges of how this site works, it still rings an alarm bell inside my head. I've been speaking to those people, they know what they're talking about. I believe them when they say that RPG.SE is a poor place for Pathfinder questions and I'd like this to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What can/should we do?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a list of the main pros and cons of the PFSRD compared to AON. Some are minor, but some worry me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pros of d20pfsrd&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;easier navigation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;pages with lot of content work well with the browser search&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has archetypes comparison tables&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;hosts 3rd party content&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I think that 3rd party content question and answers should still link to the PFSRD, but double checking is a both a must and a chore.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Cons of d20pfsrd&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;part of it is taken traight from the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e SRD, even when PF has made changes (copy-paste from previous SRDs that never got touched?).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sometimes, the manual reference is wrong.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;due to OGL issues, some feats, traits, archetypes and so on have been renamed, for example Wayang Spellhunter becoming Metamagic Master, leading to players taking the same trait or feat twice.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;due to OGL issues, options limited to a certain region or deity don't list the limitation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I have personally found a trait that does not exist in the referenced manual (after some research, it appears to be unlabeled 3rd party).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;same problem with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rods/metamagic-rods/metamagic-rod-still-spell/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Still Spell Metamagic Rod&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The combat page&lt;/a&gt; states that a tied up creature is bound, and therefore helpless, despite no such rule existing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;recently, the archetype pages have been made anew, but there are still links to the old pages around and sometimes the content is different (a friend making a PG stumbled upon this last week).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the grappled rules in the Combat section said that grappled creatures could not cast spells without somatic components, then an errata come out and this is no longer the case. Before the errata, PFSRD decided to copy that rule to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Gamemastering/conditions/#TOC-Grappled&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this page&lt;/a&gt;, most probably for ease of convenience. Now they fixed the Combat page according to the errata but they explicitly refuse to change the other page (I have been told that they argue that there never was an errata to the grappled condition, and of course there never was since the part about casting spells was not there to begin with), and several players got the rules wrong from the PFSRD.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;takes advice given in forums by developers and treats it as if it was official errata (for example Patrick Renie saying &amp;quot;we have come up with an errata for white-haired witch&amp;quot; turning Constrict, Trip and Pull to swift actions instead of free, but no such errata actually existing to our knowledge).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;mixes 3rd party content and 1st party content (for example, the alternate rules system is full of 3pp rulesets but also has the occult classes - this is correct, but it makes a lot of people think that occult classes are 3pp).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;automatically generated links bringing to unrelated pages (any mention of darkness linking to the same-name spell, the &amp;quot;regeneration&amp;quot; word in the ioun stone description letting player thinks that it works like the same-name spell and so on).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the curators of the site don't listen to feedback (not necessarily in a malicious way).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to thank Grand Druid Zollqir on the Pathfinder RPG Discord server for their list of PFSRD problems, most of which made it to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:25:58.700" LastActivityDate="2020-08-15T18:34:27.563" Title="Pathfinder sources: aonprd vs d20pfsrd" Tags="|discussion|citations|hyperlinks|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11168" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For meta questions specifically about the &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; role-playing game. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; as a whole (or editions thereof), not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the corresponding mainsite tags, see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-playtest&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-society&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-society&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-society&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-beginner-box&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-beginner-box&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-beginner-box&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag on Meta.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11169" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" Score="0" Body="For meta questions specifically about the Pathfinder role-playing game. This tag should ideally be used only when the question concerns Pathfinder as a whole (or editions thereof), not simply on any meta question related to a specific mainsite question about Pathfinder. (See also: the [dungeons-and-dragons] tag on Meta.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" LastActivityDate="2020-08-13T12:28:57.320" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11171" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11173" CreationDate="2020-08-13T21:04:19.513" Score="9" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm curious specifically about the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95846/what-is-the-order-in-which-published-dd-5e-adventures-should-be-played&quot;&gt;What is the order in which published D&amp;amp;D 5e adventures should be played?&lt;/a&gt;, which listed the published D&amp;amp;D 5e adventures available at the time the question was posted (which was March of 2017) and asked if there were relationships between the adventures and an order in which they should be played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now that a few years have passed, the list the OP wrote in their question is incomplete- to a current reader, a useful answer to the OP's question would need to refer to adventures not listed in the OP's question in order to be accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would the best practice be to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the original question alone, and avoid adding an answer that&#xA;refers to titles not listed in the OP's question (i.e. leave it alone)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the question text alone, but edit the question title to reflect&#xA;that it only encompasses a certain period of time (as V2Blast&#xA;suggests in the question comments)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the question as it was written, and answer with references to&#xA;adventures published after the OP's list was written in order to keep&#xA;the answers up-to-date?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the question with an up-to-date list of published adventures&#xA;(and expect others to do so periodically as new titles are released)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit the question and remove the problematic list, so the question is&#xA;no longer tied to a specific point in time?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have a Diamond moderator put a &amp;quot;Historical Lock&amp;quot; in place (thanks&#xA;@nitsua60)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40406" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-17T12:43:31.390" LastActivityDate="2020-08-17T14:48:13.217" Title="How should we handle this question that refers to information that's likely to change over time?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|specific-question|question-scope|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11172" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11171" CreationDate="2020-08-14T07:46:11.340" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would start by asking the OP to update his own question. In this particular case, it's my question, and having been alerted to this, I'll update it over the weekend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP gives no answer but his intent is clear (i.e., OP wrote something like &amp;quot;the current X&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;at the time of this writing, X&amp;quot;, then OP is covering all existing X at that time and is aware that X can change over time, signaling future readers of that), the question should be updated (in this case, either by removing the outdated list or adding the new adventures to it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New answers with updated information can be added over time if the accepted answer is now incomplete/incorrect. Again, pinging the answer's OP is a simple way of possibly solving the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the passage of time has made the question grossly incomplete or wrong, that even an edit would be insufficient or too extensive, the historical lock is the simplest solution. Doesn't take much work and doesn't override the OPs question/intention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS: if questions are found that this is likely to happen to, even before the question is outdated, OP should be alerted or the question edited to make it (if possible) robust to the passage of time (i'm sure there is a better expression, but I can't remember it...).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31589" LastActivityDate="2020-08-14T07:46:11.340" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11173" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11171" CreationDate="2020-08-14T10:58:51.150" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This particular question should be considered constrained to the list it offers up to early 2017. We should update its title to specify “up to March 2017” or “up to Tales of the Yawning Portal”. The question text should otherwise be left alone; the list of adventures makes its scope clear. Then, if we want an up-to-date list, it should be asked separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Changing this question from covering a short list up to early 2017 to covering all adventures for all time into 2020 and beyond is a major scope change that will almost certainly necessitate all the current answers being deleted. Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6519/1204&quot;&gt;When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?&lt;/a&gt;, that means this new scope should instead be asked as a new separate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not historical lock this question. Historical locks are for when a question is off topic or inappropriate for our site by our current guidelines, but the question is significant and we want to preserve its contents. That's not the situation here: the question is perfectly fine and on topic, it's just covering a point in the past. That's not what historical locks are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;General advice on this situation&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, if we're not sure, we should be inquiring with the OP as to their intent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is this question actually meant to be requesting comprehensive coverage of all D&amp;amp;D 5e adventures published ongoingly into the future?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or is it just meant to be a question covering a fixed point in time? These are the adventures the querent was concerned about at the time back in early 2017, they don't necessarily care about the whole future list forever.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both are fine. However, I'd remind the querent that our system works best when you are focused on solving the actual concrete problems you're facing yourself. Going broader to anticipate everyone's possible needs that the querent isn't actually facing isn't inherently better, and we often find breakdowns when an author tries to anticipate needs they don't actually have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the question is meant to be comprehensive coverage, and that doesn't significantly render all the answers obsolete, then we can use this question and update it to clarify. We should remove the list of adventure titles from the question. That's part of the answer's scope to define.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the question is meant to be comprehensive coverage but that will render all the answers wholly obsolete, then that's a major scope change and the question should be left as-is per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6519/1204&quot;&gt;When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?&lt;/a&gt;. We should treat it as though it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; just limited to a fixed point in time (see next bullet point). Then, whoever actually cares about the fully up-to-date list should ask a new question about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the querent isn't specifically seeking a fully up to date resource, we should leave it as-is. Specifying “up to March 2017” or “up to Tales of the Yawning Portal” in the title sounds fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd default to the last option if the OP wasn't here to ask. There's nothing in the question as written indicating it was asking for comprehensive coverage for all time, or anything inherently indicating a querent in 2017 will ongoingly care about adventures written all the way up to 2020 and beyond. If they don't care about that coverage, that's fine; there's nothing stopping someone else who &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; care about that from asking about it. Specifying a stopping point in the title will help make it clear that room is available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-08-17T14:48:13.217" LastActivityDate="2020-08-17T14:48:13.217" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11167" CreationDate="2020-08-15T16:15:13.320" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;If an answer is wrong, downvote it. If you have constructive advice for improving it, such as a link to correct information showing how it is wrong, comment with that. If the question lacks a correct answer, write your own. This is how the website works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don’t edit incorrect answers to correct them; that is not what editing is for. Do not edit answers that are correct to use a different resource you prefer to back up the claims in the answer; that is not what editing is for. We absolutely do not need the front page spammed with edits turning correct citations on one site to the same correct citation on another site. If an answer lacks any citation or evidence, then editing in any accurate source is acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both websites are, basically, pretty terrible on some fundamental web-design levels, but &lt;em&gt;they have the content&lt;/em&gt; and that’s crucial. d20pfsrd has some errors, has obnoxious ads, and loads slowly. The inconsistent reorganizing that has led to dead links is particularly just embarrassing. But it has everything and it’s generally well-organized, and it’s been around since the beginning. aonprd is an eyesore with poor readability, and a navigational nightmare. But it’s also got everything, and on top of that is officially endorsed and allowed to use the correct names for some things, and so on. I am not particularly convinced that the issues with one or the other makes either substantially preferable—the list of issues with d20pfsrd is not that large for the immense size of the undertaking they’re attempting, and the restrictions that they have. But that is a matter of opinion and preference—I’m not going to downvote an accurate answer using either resource, but if you want to, it’s your vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it is not a matter of policy. What policy could we even have? Banning links to d20pfsrd? That would be an absurd overreach; that isn’t how things work here. The only links we ban are those to sites engaging in copyright infringement, and frankly the main reason we do that is because of concerns about link rot. Neither d20pfsrd nor aonprd is likely to go away any time soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, much of the problem here is 100% on Paizo. Their own website was nearly useless, so another resource was needed. Complaints of answers relying on dev commentary rather than errata are comical, since that was long Paizo’s official position (and frankly I’m not sure it’s changed). Actual Pathfinder errata is rare and the FAQ is a mess. This site, and both d20pfsrd and aonprd, we’re basically trying to salvage that mess and correct their mistakes. Personally, I strongly doubt that Pathfinder’s success would have been possible without d20pfsrd—without it, the game would have been nearly unplayable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2020-08-15T18:34:27.563" LastActivityDate="2020-08-15T18:34:27.563" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11167" CreationDate="2020-08-15T16:52:21.627" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Use what you prefer in your own answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise mind your own business - there is no reason for people to be trying to force each other to use reference sources they prefer. RPG.SE will accept any legal links as support for answers. If you believe something actually incorrect is being used from one of those links, feel free and add a comment or your own answer with the correct information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lists of pros and cons are irrelevant, unless you are running an awards ceremony for “best Pathfinder online SRD” - it’s not something we can or should judge here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="140" LastEditDate="2020-08-15T16:59:42.653" LastActivityDate="2020-08-15T16:59:42.653" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11176" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11177" CreationDate="2020-08-16T15:17:25.367" Score="8" ViewCount="336" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a list of rules I need to follow here?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are the site policies I need to know about?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T20:14:04.277" Title="What are the rules and policies of RPG.SE?" Tags="|support|policy|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11177" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11176" CreationDate="2020-08-16T15:17:25.367" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;On Rules, Policies, and Practices&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike a number of traditional forums and other places, RPG.SE (and other stacks) don’t really operate on a set fixture of hard rules (we have some, see below), we primarily operate on best practices. These practices are hard to articulate in completeness into words, so you won’t find a nice set of Q&amp;amp;A describing all of them. When you encounter one of these, work with and ask experienced users (e.g. in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;), and do your best to learn and understand. If you’re willing to learn, you’ll find lots of users willing to teach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our practices are formed from the stack goals – to create a high quality repository of knowledge and expertise in Q&amp;amp;A form – as they apply to the kind of questions relevant to RPGs. Additionally, they are informed from years of previous cases and discussions, usually being taught to new contributors by good examples, gentle nudges, guideline write-ups on meta and the occasional meta discussion sussing something out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;But what are the rules anyway?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point at which we’re calling something a &amp;quot;rule&amp;quot; is mostly things which are built into the site and shared across all of Stack Exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Abide by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don’t post spam. Disclose any affiliation you have with things you&#xA;link to.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Be respectful, and avoid foul language.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Don’t answer in comments.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use answers for answers only.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules are simple and generally have little room for disagreement. That doesn't mean we don't use human judgement in enforcing them, nor that we are unwilling to talk it out (though we'll often prefer that is done in chat or on meta so as to not clutter the comments).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We also have what we call policies&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policies are clearly established ways of doing or handling something, generally as an extension of practice and goals when we feel the practice needs to be crystallized. This is only done when best practices and guidelines prove themselves not sufficient. A policy is enacted by community consensus on meta, following discussions. The same process is used to remove a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of these are about whether a question type is on-topic or not. These include: &lt;sup&gt;‡&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2773/52137&quot;&gt;Don’t link to pirated material.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9151/52137&quot;&gt;Wait 72 hours before iterating&lt;/a&gt; on a homebrew-review question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This list is probably not completely accurate, either because we’ve forgotten to update it, or that whether something is a “policy” is ambiguous. Work with the users, and suggest or update additions if something is missing.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Disallowed question types&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are certain types of questions that are obviously RPG-related, but that we’ve collectively decided are not allowed on RPG.SE due to the recurring problems they tend to cause:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; questions, and&#xA;by extension other kinds of recommendation questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;Questions asking for designer commentary and rule intent&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5357/are-questions-about-alignment-on-topic&quot;&gt;Certain kinds of questions about alignment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This list is probably not completely accurate, either because we’ve forgotten to update it, or that whether something is a “policy” is ambiguous. Work with the users, and suggest or edit in additions if something is missing)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This list is also part of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;, which also includes guidance for other question types.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: Yes, we know not every site on the network enforces this as strictly as RPG.SE does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;‡: As historical reference, we used to have a policy called Don't Guess the System. See: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/52137&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt;. It was perhaps most frequently discussed as a policy, you may often find it as such in older discussions etc., and is relevant to the term as it exists on RPG.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="25662" LastEditDate="2021-10-09T20:14:04.277" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T20:14:04.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11178" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11164" CreationDate="2020-08-17T13:39:06.663" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Either they should be merged, or their descriptions should be changed to be clearly distinct.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-failure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-failure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-failure&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions which &lt;em&gt;not only fail to meet their goal, but also hamper the doer of the action or their allies&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fumbles&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fumbles&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fumbles&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a term sometimes used to refer to especially bad dice rolls or results that result in an &lt;em&gt;outcome worse than a normal failure&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are very obviously saying the exact same thing. Both describe failure with consequences worse than a normal failure. We should merge them, or the community needs to work together to reach consensus on how they are distinct and edit one (or both) so that their descriptions are clearly distinct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-08-17T20:50:28.193" LastActivityDate="2020-08-17T20:50:28.193" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11164" CreationDate="2020-08-18T12:41:33.627" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, we should not merge them&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is why: connotation of the terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A critical failure encompasses a wide variety of things going horribly wrong during an RPG.  A fumble has a more limited application, in that it implies a certain lack of manual dexterity or ability to hang on to your lazer gun, you magic wand, your {implement or weapon of choice}, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The consequences of that fumble will vary with game system, but it may not be a &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;critical&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; failure in the narrative sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The critical failure's criticality is what makes it a different category of &amp;quot;Oh, no, what just happened?&amp;quot; Examples include ...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I tried to hack the code and I didn't just fail, I set off an&#xA;anomalous (bad) chain of events.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I tried to steer the battlewagon in the way of an oncoming assault&#xA;of enemies and I didn't just miss my mark for location and time, I&#xA;drove it over a cliff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I tried to thread the needle with an arrow and not only didn't&#xA;emulate William Tell, I ended up hitting the innocent bystander&#xA;right between the eyes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Path forward: don't merge, differentiate better&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's write better definitions / descriptions for the two terms within the tags to clarify.  For example, I think we can leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fumbles&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fumbles&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fumbles&lt;/a&gt; alone, and revise &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-failure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-failure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-failure&lt;/a&gt; to this, or something like it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions not only&#xA;fail to meet their goal, but also inflict on the character and / or&#xA;their allies, and even innocent bystanders, significant negative&#xA;outcomes - either mechanically, narratively or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-08-19T12:54:41.360" LastActivityDate="2020-08-19T12:54:41.360" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11180" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-19T01:37:30.760" Score="33" ViewCount="734" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE entered beta on August 19, 2010. The site has been around for a long time and seen a lot of people - some just passing through, others deciding to stay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we are a site inherently based around different types of story-telling, I thought this would be an appropriate activity to celebrate and reminisce on this site and community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tell us a story of something positive, fun, and/or meaningful that happened to you or that you saw on this site in the last 10 years (doesn't matter whether it's 1 sentence or one page, or whether it happened on day 1 or yesterday).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-19T06:01:20.080" LastActivityDate="2020-09-16T02:48:59.880" Title="RPG.SE is 10 years old today! Let's tell some stories!" Tags="|discussion|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-08-19T12:04:31.873" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;A certain user made some comments on my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/169954/62294&quot;&gt;very first answer&lt;/a&gt; that have stuck with me. Their comments helped shape my perspective of this stack. They're probably the reason I feel so strongly about what we're trying to do here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made my first answer, and this user started making comments about how my answer could be improved, how the language and argument could be made more clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;And not once did it feel like my answer was being criticized.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a certain gentleness and &amp;quot;let's build this thing together&amp;quot; attitude about their comments that made me want to engage here and learn how we do things here. I realized very quickly that rpg.se isn't about slinging knowledge and getting internet points - it's about making others feel the way I was made to feel through building this enormous database of knowledge about the games we all love.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those comments are long gone from the post, but they're still in my heart.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/36521/medix2&quot;&gt;Medix2&lt;/a&gt; for being who you are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-08-19T12:04:31.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11183" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-08-19T13:00:56.233" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't really remember why I joined.  I think it was to find an answer to an odd D&amp;amp;D question since I got back in to D&amp;amp;D, after a long lay off, in 2014.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result of this site, I got to play D&amp;amp;D 5e with a group of Chatizens (people who were discussing various stuff in chat) where we had one player in Guam (trogdor) two on the east coast (NautArch, nitsua60), me in Central time zone, and I can't recall where Shalvenay and MikeQ were (thinking Central time zone, but maybe West Coast maybe?)  V2 joined us for a few sessions as well before RL lowered the boom on that campaign (as happens to many campaigns).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that group, I then got to play, also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Honey Heist&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Golden Sky Stories&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Great Ork Gods&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;em&gt;Fellowship (A Dungeon World variant)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;And, a one-off D&amp;amp;D adventure with Shalvenay (it is somewhere in the archives of the Backroom chat room) as DM where my paladin tried to (and eventually did) recover a lost religious figurine and return it to the shaman of an orc tribe. Someday Malik Mabir will go adventuring again...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All without having to leave home.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few of us are about to get a 13th Age game started with a chatizen friend in Finland(the notorious bird / eagle watcher kviiri ).&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;We were remote gaming before COVID-19 made it more necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ooh, and I  just forgot: because I got to know those same folks and game with them, I ended up in a play test for an adventure that got published, and that I hope to run my group through later in the current campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-08-21T12:04:11.250" LastActivityDate="2020-08-21T12:04:11.250" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-08-20T13:51:10.077" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a lot of good memories from this site, none of them terribly exciting but it has definitely been the most meaningful online community I've ever been involved with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming to this site as someone who only played PF/D&amp;amp;D I'm happy to say that people here have exposed me to so many different things, from small one page (or even 1 word!) RPGs to Safety Tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen people designing characters, campaigns, and even entire RPG systems on the site and even seen some get published.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've even had the pleasure of playing at a virtual table with some of the people I've met here and it has always been a delight. (And I'd like to do more of this in the future!)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm happy that this place exists as a location that can bring such wonderful people together and keep them coming back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here's hoping for 10 more years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-08-20T14:18:59.690" LastActivityDate="2020-08-20T14:18:59.690" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-08-20T18:02:04.690" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I haven't been active on the site for the past... 5 years, or so? I've been reading the Main but haven't been coming into Meta or Chat anymore. But still, 10 years is a very impressive feat for one of the nicest, most consistently &lt;em&gt;thoughtful&lt;/em&gt; sites I've had the pleasure of seeing, where moderator and community action consistently felt like an exercise in &lt;em&gt;how to make things better&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of that was RPG.SE Chat, which was a great place to hang out and talk with friendly and helpful regulars, where I learned a lot and helped shape my understanding of my own preferences and motives as a roleplayer. And, no less importantly, where me and @BESW spent hours trying to create normal, decent, borderline-&lt;em&gt;playable&lt;/em&gt; characters for &lt;em&gt;deadEarth&lt;/em&gt;, one of the most mind-numbingly &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; RPG systems ever devised, where it's quite possible to have all your allotment of character die during character generation, leaving you plain out of luck.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Happily, our attempts at deadEarth Chargenning are immortalized, at least as long as SE keeps old chat room transcripts, at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/15558/2014/7/6&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;deadEarth: the Chargenning&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; room, for all to read and weep.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3043" LastActivityDate="2020-08-20T18:02:04.690" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11186" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11187" CreationDate="2020-08-23T15:53:14.093" Score="15" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question I am talking about is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174453/when-you-cast-flock-of-familiars-is-your-regular-familiars-telepathy-improved&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about the telepathic range of a familiar previously summoned by Find Familiar while a Flock of Familiars spell is active by the same caster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, the people or RPG.SE seemed to have found this question reasonably good - worty of upvotes - but I disagree, the question creates unclarity by asking two seperate questions within the question body, one of which is not even mentioned in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It asks (1) does the telepathic range of your Find Familiar increase to match that of the Flock of Familiars and (2) does using the senses of your Flock of Familiar cause you to be blind/deaf to your own senses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question 1 is the one I asked in the title and has remained unanswered. Question 2 was considered only in the body of the question and has been given a proper answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see a few possible ways to deal with this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Set a bounty;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Change the question body to match question 1 and ask question 2 seperately;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Change the question body and title to match question 2 and ask question 1 again;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Delete the original question and ask both question 1 and 2 a second time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Option 3 seems best to me although I would be changing my question to match the answer, would this be frowned upon or applauded?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What course of action do the people RPG.SE consider best in this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="65252" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-23T19:41:17.797" LastActivityDate="2020-08-23T19:46:50.037" Title="I asked a bad question, how should I fix that?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11186" CreationDate="2020-08-23T16:04:16.710" Score="16" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Option #3: Edit the current question to only ask about #2 and ask #1 as a new question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your two questions seem pretty independent of each other. Since you already have an answer to one of them and the other wasn't addressed at all (I can see why, IMO it wasn't super clear that it was intended to be a question by my reading). If it had been clear, I think people would have advised the questions been separated from the get-go I think (I certainly would have).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my advice would be to edit the current question to just be asking about the second question (&amp;quot;does using the senses of your Flock of Familiar cause you to be blind/deaf to your own senses?&amp;quot;) then ask the first question (&amp;quot;does the telepathic range of your Find Familiar increase to match that of the Flock of Familiars?&amp;quot;) as a new one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-08-23T19:46:50.037" LastActivityDate="2020-08-23T19:46:50.037" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11188" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-24T13:48:49.080" Score="0" ViewCount="286" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's been my experience over the past couple years that the RPG stack is becoming more about rules lawyering and less about how to have fun with the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's reached the stage where it seems impossible to write an answer without it being busted in comments and downvoted because it's always seen as being about rules.  I can't cite rules in my answer (short of memorizing the entire library, at least for the current 5e D&amp;amp;D) because I usually read and answer from work, and my employer's network blocks all access to gaming related sites (that they recognize -- I think Stack Exchange sites slide by because most of them are at least potentially &amp;quot;neutral&amp;quot; in that regard).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, this is quickly becoming &amp;quot;no longer fun&amp;quot; -- and when a game is no longer fun, the almost universal advice is to either find a way to make it fun, or quit playing.  I can't bring rule books to work -- and don't own most of them anyway (I'm a player, not a DM, so reasonably &lt;em&gt;should not&lt;/em&gt; keep the &lt;em&gt;DMG&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Monster Manual&lt;/em&gt;, etc. in reach anyway).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further to this, it's become almost impossible to ask any question related to reasonable play of the games that interest me without it being a duplicate -- so why should I treat RPG.SE as anything other than a reference site in the future?  What's the point?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastActivityDate="2020-08-26T19:35:45.503" Title="Convince me I shouldn't stop visiting RPG.SE" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11189" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11188" CreationDate="2020-08-24T16:59:04.670" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't intend to try to convince you to stay. That's your personal choice and I'm not going to tell you whether or not spending time on this site is is a wise use of your time because I am not you and there is no way I can know what is best for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say, however, that we value every member of this site though and you have made many high quality contributions, and we would be sad to see you leave.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being said, I'd like to address some of your points which will hopefully help you make your decision:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Separate fact from opinion in your answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's start with the example you state inspired this question. In a recent answer you said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the imp isn't technically under the player's control -- it's an NPC supplied by the Warlock's patron, &lt;strong&gt;and works to further the patron's goals&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Commentors requested that you provide a source for the bolded section because the way you phrased the statement implies that it is a fact (when in actual fact, the books don't say this; they do say that the familiar &amp;quot;always obeys your commands&amp;quot; though which largely contradicts your point). This is not a matter of rules citation, but of factual accuracy. As pointed out in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the second point is an interesting plot idea it is absolutely not reflective of the feature as written, please clearly separate between what's actually in the rules and what are your own ideas to flavour things up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I said as a thesis to one of my answers, &amp;quot;a dragons' diet consists solely of garden gnomes in 5e Forgotten Realms&amp;quot; it is right for people to call me out on that. It is possible that &lt;em&gt;in my games&lt;/em&gt; dragons only eat garden gnomes, but nothing in the texts give the basis for claiming this is a fact for everyone reading my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We want people who can bring useful experience to their answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An easy correction for your answer that would likely have assuaged at least some of the criticism would have been to edit your answer to say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the imp isn't technically under the player's control -- it's an NPC supplied by the Warlock's patron, and as a DM it is entirely reasonable based on [support] to rule that it works to further the patron's goals [and here's how it worked out when I tried it].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is much improved because it distinguishes what is factual and what are things you are bringing to the table. And we &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; people to bring personal stuff to their answers, but we need them to be clear about it and properly integrate it into their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to sum up, this isn't an example of &amp;quot;rules lawyering&amp;quot; this is a matter of voters rewarding accuracy in answers which is something that we expect and need voters to do. If you say something is a universal fact, you need to have something to back it up. Or, if it is not a universal fact at all, make sure that is clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you can't cite the rules, don't answer questions that require rules citation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't cite rules in my answer (short of memorizing the entire library, at least for the current 5e D&amp;amp;D) because I usually read and answer from work, and my employer's network blocks all access to gaming related sites&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've been told this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9260/28591&quot;&gt;before&lt;/a&gt;: but answers on this site must be backed up. This doesn't have to be with rules if the question is not about rules, but good answers must include some sort of support. &lt;strong&gt;This is core to the entire SE system&lt;/strong&gt; not just RPG.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't have access to the rules to sufficiently back up a rules answer, then your best option is to wait to answer these questions until you do have access or just don't answer them at all. That is what I and others do to get around this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say yourself that you have not memorized the rules, and, in fact, in previous answers you've stated things in your answer that are factually incorrect (potentially even including your statement about familiars) and had you had access to the rules and looked it up would have avoided a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact is though, a single person's access to rules during a certain time is not a compelling argument to change or ignore site guidelines for a worldwide community that operates around the clock.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Duplicates&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;it's become almost impossible to ask any question related to reasonable play of the games that interest me without it being a duplicate&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well if those things are incorrectly being marked as duplicate then that would be an issue and please point that out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming that these are correctly being marked though, this is how the site is intended to work. We've all been disappointed when we had a question we thought of only to have it closed as a dupe, but the reason we do it is so that we don't spend time and energy answering the same questions over and over again. Instead we can have one place where we put all of our answers and (theoretically) keep them high quality and up-to-date so that it remains useful for any people with that same question. And, as the site gets older, we expect to have covered many questions already especially since some types of interpersonal issues just never really change and are a common issue across groups, systems, and time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What's the point?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;so why should I treat RPG.SE as anything other than a reference site in the future? What's the point?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like I said at the top, that's up to you. Feel free to continue to contribute or not, use it as a reference or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you strongly believe that answers should not require support and that answers that state ambiguous facts should not be clear where they come from, then maybe this isn't the best place for you. However, you have many highly upvoted answers on this site and a very low number of deleted and/or negative scoring ones which indicates that overall the community has agreed that your contributions are valuable. I know it is easy to have the occasional friction point stick out more than the 80% of other events, but do try to consider those times as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, as always, if you see something about the site you don't like, feel free to work to gain support to change it and bring it to our attention here on Meta. We can't or won't change some things surely but we know there is always room for improvement and we do strive to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-08-25T19:05:53.303" LastActivityDate="2020-08-25T19:05:53.303" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11190" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-25T10:06:17.870" Score="12" ViewCount="179" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm putting together &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/q/13116/58193&quot;&gt;an effort on the Science Fiction &amp;amp; Fantasy Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; to give users guidance for when they should migrate&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; a question from SFF to a different site on the network.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange doesn't have too much overlap with SFF; however, we sometimes do get questions about various worlds from role-playing games. For example, we have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot;&gt;[dungeons-and-dragons]&lt;/a&gt; tag on SFF. This means there is potential for questions to be asked on SFF that would be a better fit for the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be helpful if the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange community could put together some guidance on when they would like content from SFF migrating over here. Things to think about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do you ever want migration to RPG.SE to be suggested?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What sorts of questions do you want migration suggested for?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any topics to avoid?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange community has an idea of what guidelines they have for migration, could you post an answer to the linked post with them? If not, let me know in the comments when it is ready and I can post it there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Here, &amp;quot;migration&amp;quot; refers to anything from formal migration to simply suggesting in a comment when to migrate content to a different site.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="65641" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-26T05:52:50.987" LastActivityDate="2020-08-26T05:54:37.770" Title="Guidelines for migration from the Science Fiction &amp; Fantasy Stack Exchange" Tags="|discussion|questions|migration|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11190" CreationDate="2020-08-25T13:10:55.913" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our usual practice (for questions put here first that we consider off-topic but think might fit somewhere else) is to usually avoid “automatic” migration to other sites. Instead, we just close them as off-topic and comment with a link to the other site to look into—with the explicit warning that it’s the querent’s responsibility to check that site’s rules and make sure their question fits there, too. We do this because it’s hard for us to remain up-to-date on the expectations and policies of each other site, and it seems unfair for us to shove our mess onto another site, particularly if it won’t fare any better there than it did here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After all, having a question closed is frustrating and disappointing, but having it constantly bounced around and re-closed is way worse. It’s like waiting on hold with customer service, only to be immediately transferred to another department where you’re put on hold again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, personally, I’m not like, opposed to automatic migrations or anything, or expecting other sites to treat us the same way. In my mind, we do it that way primarily because no one has wanted to put the effort you’re putting in now. So long as there is a reasonable amount of care to avoid bouncing stuff we’re just going to close, it’d be fine, in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the guidelines, well, huh. As usual for Stacks, our rules about topicality and question handling are, of course, spread around a dozen different Meta discussions. Things that do stick out,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don’t do recommendation/“shopping” questions. Someone asking for the best system to use to play in SF&amp;amp;F world X is not a question we can handle here—as a question, anyway. You could perhaps point people to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Role-Playing Games Chat&lt;/a&gt; for that kind of conversation, or to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/4563&quot;&gt;list of RPG discussion forums&lt;/a&gt; which may be better-suited to such a discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don’t do idea-generation. So even if someone’s got a system in mind, say, something like “I need some ideas for monsters to use in my D&amp;amp;D campaign” isn’t a question we’ll be able to answer. Again, the chat room or the forum link might be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don’t do “why did the authors/designers do things this way?” questions. They just always turn out poorly, with a lot of unsourced speculation and extra moderation headache. We &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; handle “history of gaming” questions, with the distinction being questions that are less “what were they thinking?” and more “what was the precedent/context in which this choice was made?” In any event, I suspect this kind of thing would rarely be asked on SF&amp;amp;F.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We do answer questions about the worlds/settings of RPGs, which I imagine is the kind of thing that would be most likely to get asked on SF&amp;amp;F—but SF&amp;amp;F handles those kinds of questions, too, as I understand things. Just because we would accept those questions doesn’t mean you have to migrate them—it’s normal for there to possibly be more than one Stack that could handle a question, and “being on-topic elsewhere” does not automatically mean “is off-topic here.” Still, if for whatever reason, SF&amp;amp;F felt they couldn’t handle such a question but it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be handled (i.e. you are the wrong people to answer it), that might be an acceptable thing to migrate here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We only do this, though, for questions that really have to do with the RPG world. There are plenty of RPGs set in Middle Earth, but questions about Tolkien’s work are largely better off on SF&amp;amp;F, and we would “migrate” such questions that way. But if, say, a particular Tolkien-licensing RPG made some unusual choice for its world that isn’t in Tolkien’s work, either a new invention or even a discrepancy, we might handle that. But usually we just handle settings that only or primarily exist for RPGs (e.g. Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Golarion, World of Darkness, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rest of our rules are the usual Stack Exchange rules, more or less, I would expect—questions have to be clear, with enough details to allow there to at least theoretically be a singular “best” answer, they can’t be too broad, they can’t just be a popularity contest or asking after people’s personal preferences, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-26T05:54:37.770" LastActivityDate="2020-08-26T05:54:37.770" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11192" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11188" CreationDate="2020-08-25T19:29:36.930" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Why you should stay: three reasons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Reason 1: I'll miss you.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have found you very easy to interact with on each occasion that we have interacted.  I think your approach on games and playing contributes to that, and I value your input.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Reason 2: Experience based answers are still useful&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've got a variety of at-table experiences that I am sure will be useful that we have not tapped into yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A third reason: we don't know what the future holds&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the campaigns and games that you play in the future will provide some insights or experiences that will be welcome, and we don't even know what those are yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure what I can say about dupes: I think, now that I've been around for a bit, that they are mostly a positive mark in a curious way: the dupe directs people to what they need even though the same question can be asked in a variety of ways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEs remind me a little bit about the inherent job insecurity in some engineering fields: you sometimes write up a solution that makes your job/task complete, and thus no longer needed. So you go and find new challenges.  I have a friend who invented a few very complicated rotor head parts on current helicopters.  And less than a year later, he was out of a job.  So he ended up working for the company I work for.  SE, as a &amp;quot;library&amp;quot; will eventually reach something like saturation. For a given SE, at that point all that will be needed is a dribble of new input to fill in cracks not already caulked in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-08-26T19:35:45.503" LastActivityDate="2020-08-26T19:35:45.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11193" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11194" CreationDate="2020-08-27T14:56:33.217" Score="10" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I posted on a thread, but users downvoted and replied saying it&#xA;wasn’t an answer. What do they mean?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What does it mean for an answer&#xA;to be too forum-like?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone told me not to comment in an answer.&#xA;What is that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What should answers be used for?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is an agglomeration of guidance often given to new users based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10110/52137&quot;&gt;this suggestion&lt;/a&gt;. Please also see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; for an initial introduction and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/answering&quot;&gt;help center on answering&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-08-27T17:18:55.210" LastActivityDate="2020-08-27T18:49:41.750" Title="Why are users saying my answer isn’t an answer?" Tags="|support|answers|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11194" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11193" CreationDate="2020-08-27T14:56:33.217" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;To understand why we require what we do of answers, there's an important aspect we need to clear first:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;RPG.SE is a Q&amp;amp;A site, not a traditional forum&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A traditional forum is a place for a conversation. RPG.SE, as a Q&amp;amp;A site, is specialized to creating a repository of questions which have received high quality, expertise based answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This influences much of the site's design, including what different parts of the site should be used for. For answers, this means answers should only be used for giving high-quality, expertise-based answers which solve (or attempt to solve) the problem faced in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Saying &amp;quot;thanks&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;me too&amp;quot; in an answer doesn't go towards that&#xA;goal. To show that an answer was helpful, press the upvote button on&#xA;it. If you are the asker of a question, you can also mark one answer&#xA;as accepted using the checkmark below the vote buttons. You can&#xA;change the accepted answer later if better answers come in.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;While we appreciate new questions, posting one as an answer doesn't&#xA;give a space for it to properly answered and doesn't let it be&#xA;cataloged so future readers can readily find it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On RPG.SE, we use comments for requesting clarifications, suggesting&#xA;improvements, and similar things which are part of the process.&#xA;Answers are not for these things; they're for answering the question.&#xA;If an answer contains comment-y sections, those parts may be edited&#xA;out, and if it only contains comment-y material. it may be deleted&#xA;altogether.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A part of the Q&amp;amp;A model is that answers are sorted by their votes.&#xA;This means a newer answer may be displayed above an older one if&#xA;votes change. In addition, answers may be deleted (say by their&#xA;authors). Therefore, answers should answer the whole question and&#xA;independently (i.e. without leaning on or replying to other answers).&#xA;The best such answer should be upvoted to the top.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more guidance on how to write good answers, see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;help center article on it&lt;/a&gt; and the following highlights from our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/52137&quot;&gt;FAQ&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3204/52137&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/52137&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5153/52137&quot;&gt;Is homebrew an acceptable answer to a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3326/52137&quot;&gt;Should I be requesting people answer the question independently?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318/52137&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6842/52137&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a frame challenge?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;† Diamond moderators have the option to convert an answer into a comment, but do so sparingly and generally not by request.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-27T18:49:41.750" LastActivityDate="2020-08-27T18:49:41.750" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11195" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11198" CreationDate="2020-08-27T19:24:16.620" Score="9" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes it takes time to write a (hopefully) good answer: you have to search for references, for the exact wording of rules on manuals, looking for the description of a particular magic item, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It happens to me that while I am writing my answer, someone else answers the question, coming up with very similar ideas and/or interpretation as mine and so on. I realize this only once my own answer is published: usually I decide to edit my own answer and cite the other ones, for sake of completeness, maybe commenting about them or adding other details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am wondering if this is good practice, or if is it better to leave my answer as it is without referring to other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-28T02:39:48.200" LastActivityDate="2020-08-28T16:34:41.827" Title="Is it okay/good practice to cite other answers just after publishing your own?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11196" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-08-28T07:35:59.417" Score="8" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174144/13529&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about the limitations of the Pathfinder spell &lt;em&gt;stone shape&lt;/em&gt;, which are not well-defined in the game system. I was looking for either an explicit rule that I missed, an evidence-based interpretation such as examples of other spells that could set a precedent, or a relevant citation from an authoritative source like the FAQ or a Paizo designer's tweet/forum post. I don't consider this to be a subjective question because such an answer could theoretically be found - however, it seems that one does not actually exist at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only current answer to my question is a reasonable interpretation of the spell, but it is still just one individual's interpretation. It contains no new information and the rationale is somewhat tenuous, as noted in the comments. Should I leave the question unanswered because there is still no conclusive answer or should I accept the existing answer as the best available interpretation until a better one comes along?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="13529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-29T10:37:26.320" LastActivityDate="2020-08-29T10:37:26.320" Title="Should I accept an opinion-based answer if an objective one doesn't appear to be forthcoming?" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11197" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11196" CreationDate="2020-08-28T08:50:00.827" Score="21" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Only accept answers that answer the question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;mark as answer&amp;quot; option is yours to do as you wish. Therefore you can choose to use it on any answer you choose. There is no right or wrong way to use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if you don't feel the current answer fully satisfies your question marking it as an answer makes it less likely that you will receive additional answers. This is the same reason you see recommendations not to mark an answer within 24 hours. While there is nothing to prevent you from moving your answer mark later there is some truth to the idea that having a marked answer makes new answers less likely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are unsatisfied with the available answers and want to draw more attention you can always start a bounty to get more eyes on the question while explaining what you find lacking the current answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2020-08-28T08:50:00.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11195" CreationDate="2020-08-28T16:34:41.827" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do; if another answer indicates something I hadn’t thought of, forgot, or otherwise didn’t include (or wasn’t planning to include) in my answer, that I think is valuable and worthwhile, I’ll link to their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ll also summarize the take-away from their answer, because in theory that answer could get deleted, and internal link rot is just as bad as external link rot. Of course, there is no risk of my answer being a link-only answer, since I’m not doing this when I don’t have more to add—if another answer already answers the question fully and completely, I upvote it, not write another redundant answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t do it when I feel that my answer (or the answer I was planning to write) already covered the material in their answer. Answers going over the same ideas in different language can have value, so it’s not a problem, but there’s less call for a link in that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-08-28T16:34:41.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-08-29T02:13:41.750" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Shoutout to &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; that makes the community here great&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I generally mean everyone and anyone. I spent countless hours when I should've been working just helping and being helped on RPG questions or hanging out in chat and listening to funny stories and live experiences of those in RPG.SE chat exposing me to a wide range of players and GMs. There is a friendliness, even in some of the more argumentative times I experienced on RPG.SE that make it worlds better than any other SE I've interacted with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I had to specifically pick one memory, it would be helping plan and partake in the huge D&amp;amp;D 5e questions drive contest we got going pre-release to make sure RPG.SE was &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; 5e help resource at launch. It was really cool to see everyone pull together and work together on a new version despite all of our disagreements and preferences on D&amp;amp;D diaspora.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically I want to thank BESW, Wax Eagle, SevenSidedDie, &amp;amp; doppelgreener (and more) for being good website friends and mentors on my RPG.SE journey to being a power user for a few years. I want to thank users like Mxyzplk and others I argued with and disagreed with strongly yet were themselves generally acting in the best interest of the site. Its been great to see things change and develop on Meta RPG.SE overtime whenever I check in and to everyone currently leading the community, keep doing what you're doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-08-29T20:12:31.553" LastActivityDate="2020-08-29T20:12:31.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11200" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11201" CreationDate="2020-08-31T02:53:39.587" Score="7" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am a user with more than 3K reputation and have the privilege to vote to close or open.  Looking at closed questions, I have some questions of my own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like most of the information on closed questions is found in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/close-questions&quot;&gt;privileges page&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;but the questions I have are not addressed there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have also read the help centre articles on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/reopen-questions&quot;&gt;reopen questions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions&quot;&gt;closed questions&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;but my questions are not addressed there either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;For some questions, I can see who closed the question, but for others I cannot.  It is a small sample size, but it appears that I can see the users who voted to close someone else's question, but I cannot see the users who voted to close my own question.  If this is correct, what am I supposed to do with the information available?  What is the purpose of knowing who closed someone else's question?  Conversely, what is the purpose of withholding from me who closed my question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In questions for which I can see who closed them, in the blue banner it says &amp;quot;(Viewable by the post author and users with the close/reopen votes privilege)&amp;quot;.  What, exactly, is viewable?  The question itself?  The fact that it was closed?  The banner?  Who closed the question?  (The last is not true in my experience)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In questions for which I cannot see who closed them (my own questions?), in the blue banner it says, &amp;quot;(Private feedback for you)&amp;quot;.  What exactly is the private feedback?  I do not see anything in the banner of my own question that I cannot also see in the banner of someone else's closed question - in fact, I see less.  So what is the &amp;quot;private&amp;quot; feedback?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2020-08-31T03:52:06.460" LastActivityDate="2020-08-31T05:57:59.293" Title="Clarification on the information in the closed question banner" Tags="|support|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11201" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11200" CreationDate="2020-08-31T05:57:59.293" Score="10" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The different banners are:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What a user &lt;strong&gt;without&lt;/strong&gt; close/reopen privilege sees on &lt;strong&gt;another&lt;/strong&gt; user's post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nVYKH.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nVYKH.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What a user &lt;strong&gt;without&lt;/strong&gt; close/reopen privilege sees on &lt;strong&gt;their own&lt;/strong&gt; post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know - I don't have any closed questions on any site where I don't have this privilege - anyone who does, please post a picture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What a user &lt;strong&gt;with&lt;/strong&gt; close/reopen privilege sees on &lt;strong&gt;another&lt;/strong&gt; user's post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ELmXL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ELmXL.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What a user &lt;strong&gt;with&lt;/strong&gt; close/reopen privilege sees on &lt;strong&gt;their own&lt;/strong&gt; post&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lt5PP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/lt5PP.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, yes, there are different banners and you are seeing the correct ones. As to why they are different, only the arcane programmers at SE know But as a guess - knowing who closed a question (and whether it was a single person with single vote close privilege or multiple users) is useful info BUT if it's your post AND you are the vindictive type then you might go on a revenge motivated downvoting spree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That particular banner is viewable because other people see different banners. It's also not completely accurate since the post author actually sees a different banner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;That particular banner is the private feedback - its not much feedback I grant you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-08-31T05:57:59.293" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11202" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11203" CreationDate="2020-09-01T16:25:19.173" Score="13" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Someone made an edit to my question/answer. Why did they do that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is part of an agglomeration of guidance given to new users made per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10106/52137&quot;&gt;this suggestion&lt;/a&gt;. Please also see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;privilege page on editing&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T03:44:36.043" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:44:36.043" Title="Why did another user edit my post?" Tags="|support|editing|help-center|faq-proposal|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11202" CreationDate="2020-09-01T16:25:19.173" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We are an edit-happy community&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of RPG.SE is creating a repository of questions that have received high quality, expertise-based answers. This influences much of the site’s design and community practices. For editing, this means other users&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; will make edits to improve posts, both to make the question clearer and easier to understand and get good answers, and to make answers clearer and easier to understand and help readers. This helps both you, the asker or answerer, but also countless other readers down the line who make use of the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The majority of these edits are simple things like fixing spelling, fixing grammatical mistakes, fixing broken list formatting and other formatting issues, and breaking up walls of text into paragraphs, which should all be fairly understandable. Fixing spelling and grammar makes it easier to read, but might accidentally change the meaning (in which case you should edit that to correct it; see below). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3224/standardization-of-english-etc&quot;&gt;You are allowed to use your preferred flavour of English&lt;/a&gt; (e.g. British or American), but well-meaning incorrect edits may occur as an artefact of an editor – or their spell-checker – not recognizing it. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a few other types of edits that happen that may or may not have obvious reasons. Do note that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/is-there-a-style-guide-for-posts&quot;&gt;we don’t have a strict style guide&lt;/a&gt;; these are general practices which help readability/general quality. Such common types of edits include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fixing &amp;quot;pseudoheaders&amp;quot; (bolded lines) into formatted headers to make&#xA;them stand out better and for the benefit of text assist software.&#xA;See this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Removing misused code formatting (called “preformatted text” in the&#xA;editor). See this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1483/is-there-a-functional-purpose-to-putting-things-in-code-text-here&quot;&gt;Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Formatting extended sections of quoted text as blockquote formatting&#xA;(by starting the line with &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;) and/or removing unnecessary&#xA;italicization of the section, which helps clearly outlining it as&#xA;quotation without affecting readability.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Using MathJax (which uses a subset of LateX syntax) to format&#xA;equations well, making them way easier to&#xA;read/parse. See this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10074/mathjax-guide-for-rpg-se-how-to-format-pretty-tables-and-equations&quot;&gt;MathJax guide for RPG.SE: How to format pretty tables and equations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Correcting markdown syntax for tables, lists, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Editing tags to better describe the core of the question and help&#xA;connect it with other questions and users with that expertise. In&#xA;particular, other users will often help fix tags, as it is part of&#xA;question curation, and the use and usefulness of tags (or the&#xA;existence of a relevant tag) can often be non-obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Editing clarifications into a question or answer from the comments.&#xA;Comments are temporary, and while they should be used for requesting&#xA;clarifications, those clarifications should be added to the question.&#xA;Especially if the clarifications are important to the question and/or&#xA;there are a lot of clutters, other users will incorporate&#xA;clarifications into the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Changing all-caps used for emphasis to italics or bold instead. Using&#xA;all-caps is often read as shouting, and there is usually not any&#xA;reason to shout in a question or answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Removing unnecessary edit notes and other meta-commentary. While it&#xA;may be considered good practice on other sites, we try to keep our&#xA;posts as clean as possible, and as such, certain excesses will often&#xA;be trimmed - in particular, saying “thanks” or including the word&#xA;“edit:” to signal the edit.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;See the Q&amp;amp;As&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9200/whats-our-policy-on-editing-thanks-from-new-questions&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s our policy on editing &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; from new questions?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;and&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3454/dont-signal-your-edits-in-text&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;respectively.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With all this said: &lt;strong&gt;please don’t rely on other users to edit your answer or question for you.&lt;/strong&gt; When another user makes an edit that you think improves your post, please take it as something you should be doing to your own posts going forward - though we all let some typpos slip through from time to time. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What should I do if the edit did something wrong?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If an edit introduces an error, changes intent, or is otherwise disagreeable, you can edit the question or answer to correct it/roll back the edit, and/or leave a comment asking the user who did the edit for clarification about it. Users who have edited a post are notified of @username mentions in the comments of the post, even if they don’t appear in the autocomplete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you revert an edit and then the edit is repeated, by the same user or someone else, please take a step back and try to get clarity on why the edit was made and thus whether it was correct. If necessary, you can seek guidance from &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt;, and/or raise a flag for moderator attention - especially if an edit war seems to be brewing. See this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10055/what-is-an-edit-war-and-is-it-ever-appropriate&quot;&gt;What is an &amp;quot;edit war&amp;quot; and is it ever appropriate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: Users with at least 2000 reputation may edit posts directly, while users with less than 2000 reputation may suggest edits that can then be approved or rejected by the post author and/or other users who have at least 2000 reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-12-08T00:20:02.690" LastActivityDate="2020-12-08T00:20:02.690" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11204" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11205" CreationDate="2020-09-02T18:16:13.630" Score="10" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174769/how-big-is-a-5000-gp-diamond&quot;&gt;How big is a 5,000gp diamond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133835/how-big-is-a-gemstone-in-the-dmg-gemstone-table&quot;&gt;How big is a gemstone in the dmg gemstone table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84530/how-big-is-a-50-gp-diamond&quot;&gt;How big is a 50 gp diamond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three very related questions are potentially a triplet of duplicates. Rather than an open-close cycle, it seems a good idea to discuss here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-09-03T18:01:27.203" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T13:00:30.747" Title="Are these three questions on gemstone size and value duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11205" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11204" CreationDate="2020-09-02T19:41:49.800" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The questions about the (value) gp diamonds are duplicates of the more general question about gemstones.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, let us examine the question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133835/how-big-is-a-gemstone-in-the-dmg-gemstone-table&quot;&gt;How big is a gemstone in the dmg gemstone table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is given:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there indeed a standard gemstone size in the DMG's treasure tables, and if yes, what is it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the most literal sense, this is just asking if the tables say anything about sizes, which they do not. But this question is given with significant context, including the conclusion that no, the tables do not include size. The querent goes into more detail:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not require a strictly RAW answer to this question.  There does not seem to be guidance on this issue within the official rules, but I can think of three possible ways of answering this question, in order of authority:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Inference from official adventure modules that contain a&#xA;description of a gemstone’s size and value.  To get at the pure&#xA;value of the gemstone as a material, such a reference should not be&#xA;to gemstones that are part of an art object&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Inference from real world gemstone value, applied to the RAW.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/84549/44303&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; SE answer to a similar question has some helpful guidance.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If nothing else, a secondary source with more usable gemstone&#xA;tables would be helpful.  This includes previous editions,&#xA;thoughtfully written homebrews, and third party publications.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All I want is a number that is &lt;em&gt;plausible&lt;/em&gt;, based on either real life or existing D&amp;amp;D materials.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is quite clear from this that the question being asked is decisively not &amp;quot;do the gemstone tables give sizes?&amp;quot;. Rather, it seems quite clear that the question being asked is something like: &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;What is a reasonable estimate for the size of the gemstones given at each price point in the DMG?&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next, we will examine the questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174769/how-big-is-a-5000-gp-diamond&quot;&gt;How big is a 5000 gp diamond?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84530/how-big-is-a-50-gp-diamond&quot;&gt;How big is a 50 gp diamond?&lt;/a&gt;, and see if they are actually asking the bolded question above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each question includes some context about spell components, and then asks nearly identical questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How big would a diamond worth 5000 gp be?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How small would a diamond be that is only worth 50 gp?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of these questions are substantively identical to the question &amp;quot;What is the size of a (value) gp diamond?&amp;quot; And since nobody is asking for &lt;em&gt;unreasonable&lt;/em&gt; answers, I claim that this is substantively identical to the question, &lt;strong&gt;What is a reasonable estimate for the size of a (value) gp diamond?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, to tie it all together, we observe that 50 gp and 5000 gp diamonds appear in the gemstone tables in the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt;, so they are each answered completely by the question, &lt;strong&gt;How big is a gemstone in the dmg gemstone table?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Duplicate Criteria&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/62294&quot;&gt;This faq question&lt;/a&gt; details how we should close questions as duplicates. There are three criteria, which we will examine in turn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First criterion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one seems to be satisfied, as I have demonstrated that the (value) gp questions are very obviously subsets of the general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second criterion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers to the general question make exactly the same arguments as the value specific questions - all three questions have essentially the same answers given.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Third criterion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assert that there is no strong compelling reason, especially given that the first two criteria are met. A dissenting answer &lt;strong&gt;must&lt;/strong&gt; give this reason, and it must be particularly compelling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;On timing and canonical quality.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meta guidelines for duplicates also has a statement about timing and which question to leave open:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We prefer closing newer questions a dupe of older unless there's a major quality benefit the other way around. Some examples of when there's such a quality benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The older one isn't answered (or has bad answers), and the new one has good answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The newer question is flat-out better written, easier to follow, and generally more useful for anyone interested in that line of inquiry. Answers to it are equal or better (&amp;quot;both have no answers&amp;quot; is equal).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This typically occurs when we establish &lt;strong&gt;a high-quality canonical question&lt;/strong&gt; to handle a subject straightforwardly that's previously been handled messily in various earlier questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question about the 50 gp diamond is the oldest of the lot, but the general question about gemstone values in the DMG is head-and-shoulders above the others in terms of quality. It gives detailed commentary on the querent's own investigation into the problem and outlines for us what makes a good answer to the question. Further, it is more general and has the potential to cover a wider range of future duplicates than the other questions. I will have an easier time convincing you that a question about 500 gp rubies is a duplicate of this general question about gemstones than I will to convince you that a question about 500 gp rubies is a duplicate of a question about 50 gp diamonds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I propose we close the two questions about diamonds as dupes of the question about gems found in the DMG.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-09-02T20:15:51.553" LastActivityDate="2020-09-02T20:15:51.553" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11206" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11207" CreationDate="2020-09-05T06:24:01.743" Score="4" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;If there is a question with multiple tags, of which I am ignoring one (should be faded) and watching another (should be made more visible), how will it be displayed for me?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What if I am hiding ignored tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-05T08:01:58.780" LastActivityDate="2022-01-28T19:52:06.733" Title="If a question has one tag that I've watched and another tag that I've ignored, how is it displayed?" Tags="|support|tags|questions|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11206" CreationDate="2020-09-05T20:43:06.753" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Current as of January 28, 2022&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QjJ8R.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QjJ8R.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Obsolete: January 27, 2022&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ElH2x.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ElH2x.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The peepee tag is back. Subject to change again, users are pushing back against this design as well (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375638/674198&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375639/674198&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Obsolete: January 26, 2022&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0QMr9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0QMr9.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has returned to the original version, with votes/answers/views being a bit different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Obsolete: January 25, 2022&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/u2YhG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/u2YhG.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one existed for less than a day, it was killed by &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375506/674198&quot;&gt;this feature request&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Obsolete&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this image I have the four possible states in this order: Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O41AQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O41AQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A post with a watched tag and an ingored tag gets greyed out by ignore and gets the highlighting for watched. This can be verified with no more than two clicks of the mouse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have ignored a tag and set to hide questions with that tag, then it seems the question does not appear at all, even if it is also tagged with a tag you are watching.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-28T19:52:06.733" LastActivityDate="2022-01-28T19:52:06.733" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11208" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11210" CreationDate="2020-09-08T13:26:54.930" Score="3" ViewCount="252" Body="&lt;p&gt;At time of writing, the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt; has only 27 questions. Searching &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22bonus+action%22+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;bonus action&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; (in quotes) yields 1119 results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any benefit to a retagging project here? Do we just try to use it more going forward? Do we even care?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-09-08T14:16:44.327" LastActivityDate="2020-09-20T22:48:04.607" Title="Why is [bonus-action] such an underused tag and should we do anything about it?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11209" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11208" CreationDate="2020-09-08T18:20:51.630" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks like a few of the questions that don't feature the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt; tag do have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt; tag. This makes sense to me since &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#BonusActions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;bonus actions are actions&lt;/a&gt;. This is reinforced on &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf#page=6&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;page 6 of the Sage Advice Compendium&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does using a bonus action break invisibility from a warlock’s One with Shadows invocation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking a bonus action breaks the invisibility of a warlock’s One with  Shadows. &lt;strong&gt;A bonus action is an action.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That brings the number of truly problematic questions to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22bonus+action%22+-%5Bbonus-action%5D+-%5Bactions%5D+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;923&lt;/a&gt;. It also makes me wonder if, perhaps, there's any merit to making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt; a synonym for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;actions&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if there's a way to filter by the tag count but a quick glance through the first page shows that only a small number of these have reached the five tag cap which would prevent the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt; tag from being appended. So most would be fixable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think one of the main benefits of the tags is that it allows users who are wanting to learn about a topic to focus their search results fairly easily. To that end, I think there it is worth adding the tag on when there's room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-09T04:50:39.963" LastActivityDate="2020-09-09T04:50:39.963" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11208" CreationDate="2020-09-09T18:10:18.683" Score="16" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No need to fix what's not broken&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bonus action questions and answers do not exist in a vacuum.  They are associated with a wide variety of things in D&amp;amp;D 5e across a wide variety of classes, skills, spells, feats, monsters, etc.  The key issue will be something that has bonus action, but it's the feature, the class, the monster, or the feat that is what matters.  It is those features (etc) that matter in terms of the 'optimization' and 'Does it work like I think it does?' questions.  With that in mind, the tag is fine as is.  We need not require anyone to use it, and, it's there if needed by the question's asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been on this site for about five years.  I fail to see any site problem that this tag has caused.  I have seen some problems that other tags have caused, so I'll close by saying: there isn't a problem to fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let it ride.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Coda&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not sure how to say this last thought, but here goes: I am not comfortable with the meta/community taking a stance of &amp;quot;we need to use this tag more&amp;quot; - not sure why I feel this way, but it just doesn't feel right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-09-09T19:50:16.460" LastActivityDate="2020-09-09T19:50:16.460" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11213" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-09-12T02:05:45.340" Score="7" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently answered the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175307/whats-the-difference-between-a-jelly-a-pudding-and-other-oozes/&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the difference between a jelly, a pudding, and other oozes?&lt;/a&gt; by saying that there is no answer to discover. However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175307/whats-the-difference-between-a-jelly-a-pudding-and-other-oozes/175311#175311&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; was deleted. That's fine in and of itself, but I'm curious as to why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only reason I could find in the comments was a claim that it doesn't answer the question. This puzzles me. I mean, I admit it's not the best answer I've ever written; it could do with some more sources to back it up, and I can imagine it being disappointing to someone hoping for a clearly-detailed taxonomy of puddings. But the question was &amp;quot;What's the difference between a jelly, an ooze, and a pudding,&amp;quot; and the answer was &amp;quot;there isn't any clearly defined taxonomy so the names are just arbitrary.&amp;quot; That &lt;em&gt;seemed&lt;/em&gt;  to answer to the question, to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was evidently wrong about that, but I don't understand how I was wrong. What have I misunderstood?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2699" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-12T03:38:56.773" LastActivityDate="2020-09-12T05:35:49.237" Title="Why was my answer to a question about the naming of oozes deemed &quot;not an answer&quot;?" Tags="|support|specific-question|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11213" CreationDate="2020-09-12T04:46:42.283" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Unsupported answers may be deleted&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had voted to delete because while your initial argument on there  not being an explanation was reasonable, the remaining part about what you suspect may be going on was completely unsupported conjecture. As likely as it may be, it was just a guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At times, that can be resolved by adding a Moderator provided notice to add support or the answer may be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other times, the community agrees that without support, it can be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, some community members agreed and others did not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-09-12T05:35:49.237" LastActivityDate="2020-09-12T05:35:49.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11215" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11216" CreationDate="2020-09-12T21:27:25.680" Score="10" ViewCount="157" Body="&lt;p&gt;This idea is somewhat borrowed from puzzling.se's &lt;a href=&quot;https://puzzling.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5276/the-riddle-sandbox&quot;&gt;Riddle Sandbox&lt;/a&gt; and math.se's &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4666/sandbox-for-drafts-of-long-complex-posts&quot;&gt;Draft Sandbox&lt;/a&gt; threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it be helpful or beneficial to have a thread on meta for posting question drafts as answers to receive help getting them stack shape before posting them on main?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, when I want to trial a question before posting, I can only briefly describe my question in chat and then get some brief thoughts from those present. I would love to be able to format my full question as an answer here on meta and allow the community to leave comments and make edits as we work together toward a good question for main.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there are also some potential benefits for newer users here - it gives us a reason, and them an incentive to visit meta. It could be an opportunity to point newer users toward a place they can workshop their questions into good shape for the main site. I know we already try to do this on main, but getting users familiar with meta is a good thing, and this could be a good opportunity for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T22:15:48.317" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T22:15:48.317" Title="Would it be helpful to have a Question Workshop thread?" Tags="|discussion|questions|meta|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11216" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11215" CreationDate="2020-09-12T22:26:49.380" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't think we workshop questions often enough to warrant a dedicated thread&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage to having a question workshop thread as I see it is if it is already done a lot and you need to condense it so as to not drown out other meta activity. We aren't exactly at risk of that happening at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And doing it without there being a major need won't accomplish much. Such a thread will probably do more harm than good if there aren't enough users engaging on it, and old meta threads simply don't get any significant attention. We aren't helping anyone if we direct their question to somewhere that will just gather dust.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand there is an option which you don't lay out in the question; you can workshop the question on meta. Ask a question on meta, state your problem, include a draft of the question, give your reason for thinking it might not work, and any other relevant details. This is often used as an escalation of the same process on main (generally because a comment thread has been shown to be insufficient). This isn't needed very often, for most questions comments are sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is there something we can do to help question workshopping?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, it seems we could do a better job teaching our users it exists. Let's teach our current tool better, before trying to introduce a new one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've rattled ideas on this in the back of my mind since the last time we had to teach someone about question workshopping, and I suggest two simple tools; a guidance Q&amp;amp;A and a tag. The Q&amp;amp;A would be something we could point users to as part of suggesting they open a meta to make a question workable. The tag would primarily help serve as examples for how to do it (which I remember from last time was surprisingly tricky to find) as &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/specific-question&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-question&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-question&lt;/a&gt; contains a lot of other stuff too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-09-12T23:44:41.930" LastActivityDate="2020-09-12T23:44:41.930" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11217" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11218" CreationDate="2020-09-13T06:47:10.220" Score="-4" ViewCount="235" Body="&lt;p&gt;Noting that &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; (LOW) comes with a &amp;quot;Rulebook&amp;quot; that is labeled not merely &amp;quot;Lords of Waterdeep / Rulebook&amp;quot; but rather says &amp;quot;Lords of Waterdeep / &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; / Rulebook&amp;quot; (emphasis mine), I wonder if therefore the contents of LOW could and should be employed to answer questions about 5e (or 4e) that arise sometimes on this stack, at least questions of the format, &amp;quot;Is X possible in 5e, and if so, by what means?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, I will use a hypothetical question about owl bears. It would be normal on this stack to ask (and answer) a question such as &amp;quot;Can adventurers domesticate owlbears?&amp;quot;.  If we were to deem Lords of Waterdeep irrelevant, we would answer by the usual WotC souces (core rulebooks and published modules, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what if we were to consider &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; a &amp;quot;governing&amp;quot; source for this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, then we would notice that there is a Quest Card in LOW titled &amp;quot;Domesticate Owlbears&amp;quot;, from which we can derive the following knowledge:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yes, it is possible for adventurers to domesticate owlbears.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Specifically it requires one cleric and two wizards to do so, though&#xA;it does not require any other adventurers beyond these.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The result will be that the owlbears are suitable to being used, for example,&#xA;by the City Guard of Waterdeep.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After the duration of the process, at least two owlbears would have been domesticated (given that it is plural, not singular).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Finally, since this task can be completed in roughly the same time as other random quests (which are all roughly speaking side quests, not module-size endeavors), it therefore must&#xA;not take a tremendously longer time than the average side quest takes&#xA;to complete.  Conversely, that it is a &amp;quot;quest-length&amp;quot; task in the&#xA;first place means it doesn't take just five minutes (it is not a lot&#xA;quicker than the typical side quest).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's quite a lot of things to be settled, but of course it would not settle what level the cleric and wizards needed to be, nor how many owlbears (if any beyond two) could be domesticated together, nor the precise length of time (other than being in the typical range of time that side quests take).  But it would help us quite a lot in answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is just one example, for purpose of illustration, and I am not particularly interested in owlbears here, just in the validity (or lack thereof) of this approach generally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some additional things I believe are relevant, but not immediately obvious how to interpret, are the facts around timing. &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; was released in 2012, the year that WotC was developing 5e.  &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; was issued an expansion in 2013, when WotC released the playtest packet for 5e. Does this mean Lords of Water deep is slightly &amp;quot;too early&amp;quot; to be considered, and that it should be relegated, if it applies to any table-top adjudications, to 4e only?  Or is still &amp;quot;part of canon&amp;quot; in a way that can make it binding for 5e?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given all the above, can we settle whether it is OK to cite LoW in answering D&amp;amp;D 5e/4e questions on this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48996" LastEditorUserId="48996" LastEditDate="2020-09-15T06:13:32.560" LastActivityDate="2020-09-15T06:13:32.560" Title="Is Lords of Waterdeep applicable to determining what is possible in the world of 5e (or 4e) on Rpg.se?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|citations|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="27" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11217" CreationDate="2020-09-13T07:33:36.647" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No. The board game's rules aren't part of any D&amp;amp;D edition's ruleset.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/board-games/lords-waterdeep&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is a board game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; is a strategy board game for 2-5 players. You&#xA;take on the role of one of the masked Lords of Waterdeep, secret&#xA;rulers of the city. Through your agents, you recruit adventurers to go&#xA;on quests on your behalf, earning rewards and increasing your&#xA;influence over the city.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Expand the city by purchasing new buildings that open up new actions&#xA;on the board, and hinder—or help—the other lords by playing Intrigue&#xA;cards to enact your carefully laid plans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the name suggests, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_of_Waterdeep&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; is set in Waterdeep, and thereby is based on the Forgotten Realms setting that was originally published as a campaign setting for &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that doesn't mean its rules are part of the D&amp;amp;D 4e or 5e ruleset, or the ruleset of any other D&amp;amp;D edition. The D&amp;amp;D 5e rules are those that appear in the official D&amp;amp;D 5e books, per this Q&amp;amp;A on RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84836/where-do-i-find-the-official-rules-for-dd-5e&quot;&gt;Where do I find the &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; rules for D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's playtest material that may end up being published in an official book, and there are optional rules that appear in the official books... But board games - even officially licensed ones - are not (and will presumably never be) a source of official rules or mechanics for the tabletop RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes rules/mechanics in one medium will correspond to similar ones in another, but they often won't line up at all; even when mechanics in one medium do have a parallel to mechanics in another medium, that doesn't mean anything with regard to whether &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; is actually part of the rules of D&amp;amp;D itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, that doesn't necessarily mean you're never allowed to mention the &lt;em&gt;Lords of Waterdeep&lt;/em&gt; board game in your answers. For instance, if the 5e rules are silent/ambiguous on an issue, it could hypothetically be relevant to mention that the board game does allow for a certain thing to be done. However, even then, that alone is not enough to support the claim that the same thing should be allowed in the tabletop RPG; you'd need to elaborate on that point and better support it. And regardless, you should keep in mind that it specifically isn't evidence that that thing &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; allowed in the tabletop RPG, because it's not part of the tabletop RPG's rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, for questions about lore, it may be relevant to mention that a certain thing is supported by the board game's lore, especially if it's unaddressed by the 4e/5e books - just as it might be appropriate to reference relevant lore from past editions of D&amp;amp;D if a topic is not addressed in the current edition's material. Once again, you'd just need to keep in mind that it's not a direct part of the D&amp;amp;D lore, and that there may be inconsistencies between the board game's lore and the tabletop RPG's lore. (I also have no idea &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt; the board game is set, or if it's even set at a particular point in time.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, you could mention something from the board game where relevant; it just needs to actually be relevant and support the point you're making - and you should keep in mind that something being true in the board game doesn't make it true in the tabletop RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2020-09-13T07:33:36.647" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-09-15T20:58:30.023" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;More chat memories than the main site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;worked with a group of people to make a mostly broken flying half-elf in 4e&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;starting a game in chat with some other members for a medieval knight chivalry game that didn't get to have session one&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1914" LastActivityDate="2020-09-15T20:58:30.023" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11180" CreationDate="2020-09-16T02:48:59.880" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I put this in chat a while ago, and never got around to posting it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve been around for about 2 months officially, but I lurked for a long time as an IP during what I called the “I’m not allowed to sign up for any social media at all until I turn about 3 million” stage of life (so up until a couple of months ago) (note: I am not actually 3 million yet).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In those two months, I have learned more about gaming than I had in 5 or 6 years of being a GM (I think), especially about dealing with problem players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks all of the people here for being wonderful and patient and not totally laughing at me every time I show up with a “long story but now I need a ruling on this” question or a question with a weird, complicated answer. I think this site has gotten me through a bunch of stuff both personal and (semi-)professional, and you guys make it such a nice little corner of the internet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new thing I want to add to this is that I have never had someone put me down for being/doing anything, even when it wasn’t the most optimal idea (rhino stampede shenanigans and FOOF shenanigans being the most recent). I’ve gotten plenty of “this is a bad idea” or “maybe change this” advice, but never has it been rude or mean-spirited. This is an amazing community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64361" LastActivityDate="2020-09-16T02:48:59.880" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11221" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11208" CreationDate="2020-09-18T04:36:14.177" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Lots of questions using the phrase “bonus action” without using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt; is, to me, &lt;em&gt;entirely expected and normal&lt;/em&gt;. After all, lots of things use bonus actions, which may well be mentioned in questions about those things (particularly if the rules specifying their use are quoted), without the question being &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; any bonus action or the rules for bonus actions or how bonus actions work or whatever. If a question is asking “this thing is a bonus action, does that mean I can use it at the same time as that other thing?” then yeah, it should probably have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt;. But if it’s “this thing says ‘as a bonus action, you can summon a thingamabob,’ how do thingamabobs work?” then it absolutely should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bonus-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bonus-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bonus-action&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;/em&gt;, I would guess that there are vastly more questions for the latter sort than there are of the former sort. Your numbers confirm that expectation. Seems like the tag is probably mostly used more-or-less correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2020-09-20T22:48:04.607" LastActivityDate="2020-09-20T22:48:04.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11222" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-09-21T20:28:10.113" Score="10" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;Several of my players also peruse this resource.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I ensure that questions I ask here regarding plot-specific campaign details don’t spoil things for those players?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39623" OwnerDisplayName="Richard C" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-22T08:00:51.013" LastActivityDate="2020-10-09T23:01:55.533" Title="How can I ask questions on RPG.SE about plot-specific details of my campaign without spoiling things for my players that use this site?" Tags="|discussion|questions|spoilers|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11222" CreationDate="2020-09-22T00:44:07.173" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;What I suggest, and which mirrors practice on the (possibly quite non-representative) slice of discussion fora I have participated in over the years is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clearly label sensitive information.&lt;/strong&gt;  In other fora, this often involves linking your username to some real world information-- I'm thinking of old timey mailing lists, or fora where people just sign with their real world e-mail addresses. This is clearly not the norm here, and while it does not violate any policy I know of to (say) put a website or an e-mail in your user profile, I am very carefully not suggesting this as a policy or requirement here.  I am simply noting it as an issue to work through with the actual policy suggestion being, &amp;quot;Do your best to provide enough information to help your players honor your request.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Use spoiler cuts to protect sensitive information.&lt;/strong&gt;  Spoiler cuts are similar in syntax to blockquotes, but with an extra ! symbol.  I will put an example of both below, so people can see what they look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; &amp;gt; This is blockquote syntax&#xA;&#xA; &amp;gt;! This is spoiler cut syntax&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answers should respect and honor spoiler requests,&lt;/strong&gt; and use spoiler cuts as necessary to preserve that.  Comments should be phrased carefully, as spoiler cuts do not work there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Understand that there is no guarantee.&lt;/strong&gt;  You pays your money, you takes your chances-- there is no way of actually preventing your players from reading anything on this site.  There is a real tension between the policy suggestion that you, in a sense, advertise your campaign in order to protect it, vs the insatiable curiosity and competitiveness of some players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example of something I would write in another forum (yes, I actually name my games) would be something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(example of blockquote)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is about &lt;em&gt;Star Wars:  500 Years Later&lt;/em&gt;, an Everway PBEM I am planning to run in the near future.  My players should please avoid this question and its answers.  Xerxes, this means you....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(example of spoiler cut)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; So anyway, I've re-mapped Everway's four-element model from Fire, Earth, Air, and Water to (mostly respectively) Body, Machine, Mind, and Spirit/Soul, but I'm having this problem....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I welcome comments on the first point especially, since I think it is the biggest issue we'll have, due to norms clash with other environments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-22T01:54:59.663" LastActivityDate="2020-09-22T01:54:59.663" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11224" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11222" CreationDate="2020-09-22T01:25:52.417" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Talk to your players&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tell them that you are asking these sorts of questions and ask them to avoid looking at those while enjoying the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, follow &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11222/how-can-i-ask-questions-on-rpg-se-about-plot-specific-details-of-my-campaign-wit/11223#11223&quot;&gt;@Novak’s advice&lt;/a&gt; in case the players trip over it without looking for it. As for point 1 of that answer, just tell them your username.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, if they want to spoil their dinner, you’re not their mother.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-23T09:17:29.127" LastActivityDate="2020-09-23T09:17:29.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11225" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11227" CreationDate="2020-09-22T13:41:51.860" Score="8" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;Using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=-%5Bpath-of-war%5D+path+of+war+is%3Aquestion+%5Bpathfinder%5D&quot;&gt;this search query&lt;/a&gt;, one can find slightly more than 30 questions that clearly mention Path of War, an alternative ruleset for Pathfinder published by Dreamscarred Press, but that are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; tagged as such. Due to this fact, it's not possible to find them if searching using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/path-of-war&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;path-of-war&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;path-of-war&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do about this situation? Should we leave those questions as they are, or should we add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/path-of-war&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;path-of-war&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;path-of-war&lt;/a&gt; to their tag list?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-23T09:10:50.083" LastActivityDate="2020-09-23T09:10:50.083" Title="We have about 30 questions mentioning Path of War that are not tagged as such. What should we do about them?" Tags="|discussion|tags|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11225" CreationDate="2020-09-22T14:04:15.587" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not an active member of RPG.SE, but in general operations like these are encouraged on Stack Exchange sites, but you should be careful not to flood the homepage with bumped old questions. If you do the retagging at a pace of, say, 4 questions a day, it doesn't cause too much noise and is still finished in a week or so. That also gives you the opportunity to check for other things to improve in the questions and their answers (grammar corrections, broken link checks) without it becoming too much effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastActivityDate="2020-09-22T14:04:15.587" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11227" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11225" CreationDate="2020-09-22T14:14:03.250" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Add the tag to questions which are &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; the ruleset&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding and/or correcting the tags of old questions is useful. The only caveat is to not flood the homepage with such edits. There's no hard rules for what constitutes flooding, but spaced out clusters of half-a-dozen should be safe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But a question mentioning &amp;quot;Path of War&amp;quot; doesn't always make it &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; Path of War. Specifically, a question about a character option from that book might mention it, but doesn't need the tag. There is in fact guidance for tag usage in the excerpt:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag on questions asking specifically about the overall supplement or issues specific to the ruleset, not simply on any question about specific character options from Path of War.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a quick glance (admittedly from someone not familiar with the system nor book), it looks like several of these are about the ruleset and do deserve the tag, but not all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-09-22T14:14:03.250" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11222" CreationDate="2020-09-22T23:01:23.223" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;It depends mainly on one question: If your players detect a potential spoiler, do you think they will stop reading? If yes, then &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11223/63221&quot;&gt;Novak's answer&lt;/a&gt; is the way to go. Maybe even tell your players your username. Definitely talk with the players about your worries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the contrary, if you think your players might spoil themselves after seeing &amp;quot;spoiler warning signs&amp;quot;, a different strategy is beneficial. I want to emphasize, that this paragraph does &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; assume maleficent players. Players might read a spoiler because they can't resist the temptation or might just forget about your warnings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, the suggested strategy is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Obscure your question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To obscure your question, you can change something (e.g. place of scenes), which is irrelevant to your plot. Even a simple change, such as a short statement like &amp;quot;I'm playing a campaign with 3 players for 2 years&amp;quot; where both numbers are wrong, can work as obscuring. But don't make changes that reduce the question quality;&#xA;as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11222/how-can-i-ask-questions-on-rpg-se-about-plot-specific-details-of-my-campaign-wit/11228#comment36743_11228&quot;&gt;pointed out by SirTechSpec&lt;/a&gt; details that are relevant to the question should be correct, and adding details that are irrelevant to the question but falsified might cause confusion about exactly what your problem is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, you can make sure to use a username that is unknown to your players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, if the question is about official book material, players anyway have the potential to spoil themselves, if they want to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, either be as open as possible or as secretive as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63221" LastEditorUserId="63221" LastEditDate="2020-10-09T23:01:55.533" LastActivityDate="2020-10-09T23:01:55.533" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11229" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-09-25T19:51:00.213" Score="6" ViewCount="220" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/175786/48793&quot;&gt;Are any of the kingdoms/realms of the Forgotten Realms based on real world civilisations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed for asking about Designer Intent, which is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've run into pages on the web where people have equated various civilizations/peoples in the Forgotten Realms to real world ones (extant or historical). I was curious to know if there is evidence of actual correlations. The problem is that it's hard to ask the question without running afoul of RPGSE site policies:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are any Forgotten Realms civilizations based on real-life civilizations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is essentially a question about designer intent, which is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do any of the Forgotten Realms civilizations represent real-life civilizations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would lead to answers that are opinion-based. Again, off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there evidence that any of the Forgotten Realms civilizations represent real-life civilizations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is probably the closest thing to a stackable answer but it arguably still falls within the scope of &amp;quot;designer intent.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, the introduction to Curse of Strahd is written by the designers of the original Curse of Strahd module (which is, admittedly, not within the Forgotten Realms but we just finished up the campaign so it's forefront in my mind to use as an example):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Laura and I launched into researching the mythology and folklore surrounding the vampire. We started with the vague, black-and-white image of Bela Lugosi in 1931, but found so much more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Bela Lugosi vampire was Dracula &amp;amp; Transylvania, who was in turn inspired by Vlad the Impaler of Wallachia* (Romania). So we see evidence that Barovia is possibly representative of mid 15th century Wallachia/Romania.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose, if the question is salvageable, I might need to expand to ask about fictional inspirations that fall between the D&amp;amp;D civilization and a possible original real-world state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there any possible way to rework the question so that it asks about these connections while avoiding falling into the scope of designer intent or individual opinion?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;* Hmm... Is this where the Barovian town of Vallaki got its name?&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-09T07:56:14.200" LastActivityDate="2020-10-09T07:56:14.200" Title="Can this question on real-world corollaries to Forgotten Realms civilizations be salvaged?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9822" CreationDate="2020-09-25T22:22:07.660" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've had to make a few adjustments due to how our customization options are actually implemented, but this is done and hopefully in a way that doesn't ruin y'all's intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The modal on the Ask Question page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Mwu5m.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Mwu5m.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sidebar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UtlCq.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UtlCq.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oCUfa.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oCUfa.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2973" LastActivityDate="2020-09-25T22:22:07.660" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11232" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11229" CreationDate="2020-09-26T14:35:11.273" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's salvageable, because it does express an actual concrete problem the author is actually facing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking at building a new character for an upcoming campaign and I think it would help me to role play better if I can contextualize it as a citizen of a real country or region [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, they have a character and they want to understand an analogous culture to that character's culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, what they're asking isn't about their actual problem, it's several steps removed from it. It's sort of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY problem&lt;/a&gt;-ish. They're not asking about their character's culture, they're asking about &lt;em&gt;every culture in the Forgotten Realms&lt;/em&gt;. It seems they're also trying to find out whether there's actual evidence the civilisation was specifically and deliberately based on another real-world counterpart? (I'm not sure.) Again, for the Forgotten Realms broadly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the question they've &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;actually asked&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; is simultaneously much bigger in scope than it actually needs to be in order to resolve their actual problem they're facing, and in fact, actively unhelpful to resolving it. Their question at current (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/175786/revisions&quot;&gt;revision 3&lt;/a&gt;) asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any evidence that there are real world corollaries (current or historical) for any of the civilizations or peoples of the Forgotten Realms?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone answers “Yes! Forgotten Realms civilisation X has a direct corollary in real-world civilisation Y”, that's a correct answer, but it's not remotely helpful to the querent's original problem if their character is not actually from X. (Note they just want to know if this is the case for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; civilisation, the way they worded it.) If we get bigger, more comprehensive answers, that's still a lot of unhelpful work if the character is from none of the cultures that wind up getting listed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should the querent do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's go back to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;first principles&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. [...] Your questions should be reasonably scoped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent should focus on the actual problem they're facing and ask just about that. Meaning they should do this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should tell us about &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;the one specific character&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; they're having trouble understanding.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should tell us the character's culture in the Forgotten Realms. What's their tribe, city, whatever?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They should ask us whether that's got a real-world corollary it's like that will help them understand how to roleplay a citizen of that culture.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following are &lt;strong&gt;things the querent should avoid:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The querent should not try to anticipate multiple potential future characters or cultures; they should focus on just the one.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The querent should not request direct designer evidence the authors deliberately and consciously based their work on that civilisation. Besides the fact it probably won't be forthcoming like most D&amp;amp;D authorship, it's entirely unrelated to actually solving their problem. They are seeking a corollary of a particular civilisation, and it can be that way even if the authors were accidentally and unconsciously deriving from one or more real-world civilisations. (The querent may request evidence it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a comparable corollary, and a good answer should demonstrate this even if they don't, but we don't need anything from the designers for this.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a guideline about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;generic real-world topics&lt;/a&gt; I think this is fine within, since a Forgotten Realms expert will give a better, different, and more complete answer than e.g. a historian or anthropologist, because they can exercise their understanding of the Forgotten Realms and give an applied answer for the purpose of roleplaying a character. “Your character's civilisation is sort of a mix of these two real-world civilisations, but one of them was kind of shallowly interpreted. Also, you'll want to lean into these specific features as they're heavily emphasized in the FR civilisation compared to their real-world counterparts,” etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent can also be told straightforwardly &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; if the culture they're referencing doesn't really have a good real-world analogue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-09-28T08:58:56.317" LastActivityDate="2020-09-28T08:58:56.317" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11233" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-09-26T19:49:12.437" Score="5" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175822/can-i-defer-levelling-up-after-reaching-the-xp-threshold/175826#175826&quot;&gt;PixelMaster's answer to this question about deferring level-ups&lt;/a&gt; went through a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/69170&quot;&gt;suggested edit&lt;/a&gt; review.  Other than adding a hyphen (changing 'no go' to 'no-go'), every single proposed edit replaced the original use of &amp;quot;his&amp;quot;, gendering an unknown DM, with the singular 'their'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two reviewers accepted the suggested edits; one rejected them, adding the comment &amp;quot;No improvement whatsoever. The use of the masculine pronoun in this case is perfectly acceptable English.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I try to use a nongendered term unless a gender is specified or relevant.  But if PixelMaster does not, I would favor preserving their (sic) original text rather than editing what I consider a stylistic choice, not a grammatical mistake.  Our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;editing policy&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When should I edit posts?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time you feel you can make the post better, and are inclined to do&#xA;so. Editing is encouraged!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some common reasons to edit are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is changing unnecessarily gendered terms to gender-neutral ones considered to be fixing a grammatical mistake?  Clarifying the meaning?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2020-09-26T21:47:13.130" LastActivityDate="2020-09-26T21:47:13.130" Title="Is changing a gendered term to a non-gendered term a grammatical improvement?" Tags="|discussion|language|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2020-09-26T22:06:49.797" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11234" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-09-30T05:19:08.013" Score="5" ViewCount="263" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/46528/33569&quot;&gt;Do the Hunter ranger&amp;#39;s Extra Attack, Whirlwind Attack, and/or Horde Breaker features work together?&lt;/a&gt; seems to be asking 2 entirely separate questions in a single post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One aspect of the post focuses on the interaction of the ranger's&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Extra Attack&lt;/strong&gt; feature with the &lt;strong&gt;Whirlwind Attack&lt;/strong&gt; option for the&#xA;Hunter ranger archetype's Multiattack feature (and more generally&#xA;with any of the Hunter ranger's &amp;quot;special attacks&amp;quot;).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;However, the post also seems to tack on an entirely separate question&#xA;about the interaction of the &lt;strong&gt;Horde Breaker&lt;/strong&gt; option for the&#xA;Hunter's Prey subclass feature with the &lt;strong&gt;Whirlwind Attack&lt;/strong&gt; option&#xA;for the Multiattack feature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see how these 2 questions are related to one another other than that they both happen to involve Whirlwind Attack, and more broadly that they're both related to the Hunter ranger. The questions themselves don't really have any overlap; the answer to one question doesn't rely at all on the answer to the other. It's entirely possible for an answer on the post to thoroughly address the first question without even touching on the second issue, or vice versa.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the linked question be split into two separate questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;(If so, I'm assuming the Horde Breaker + Whirlwind Attack question would be edited out of the current question, mostly because it seems to be tacked on to the end of the first question. It could then be asked separately if desired.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They're both potentially useful questions, but I don't see why they're being asked together in a single Q&amp;amp;A at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I originally made this observation - that the post seemed to be asking about 2 entirely different issues - in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46528/do-the-hunter-rangers-extra-attack-whirlwind-attack-and-or-horde-breaker-feat#comment315168_46528&quot;&gt;a comment on the question&lt;/a&gt; over 2 years ago. However, it seems nobody has responded to or addressed that issue since then. Due to that, and since both of the non-deleted answers also (very briefly) address the two disparate questions in the post, I figured it was worth asking here before single-handedly making such an edit myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T14:59:20.463" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T14:59:20.463" Title="Should this question - about Extra Attack + Hunter ranger's Whirlwind Attack, and separately about Whirlwind Attack + Horde Breaker - be split in two?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|question-scope|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11235" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-01T14:32:08.077" Score="7" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;In lieu of a seemingly inevitable open-close tug of war, I'd like to put this question forward for discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175963/which-magic-item-of-very-rare-or-lower-rarity-is-most-useful-to-protect-a-group&quot;&gt;Which magic item of very rare or lower rarity is most useful to protect a group of ordinary soldiers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since its initial closure for being opinion-based, it has not been significantly changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In its current state (revision 3), it contains 5 objective criteria for narrowing down the space of possible answers, 1 subjective criteria for narrowing down the space of possible answers, and 4 subjective criteria for judging the quality of an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question about equipping ordinary soldiers with magical equipment (primarily) opinion-based? If so, (how) can it be fixed and reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ambitious answers may consider the following FAQs:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5758/why-was-my-question-closed-as-too-broad-unclear-or-opinion-based&quot;&gt;Why was my question closed as too broad, unclear, or opinion-based?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;How do we ask and answer subjective questions?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8897/are-questions-that-are-on-topic-but-generated-a-lot-of-opinion-based-answers-doo&quot;&gt;Are questions that are On-Topic but generated a lot of opinion based answers doomed to never be solved?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8936&quot;&gt;When do we close a question for drawing opinion-based answers and how can we try to get ahead of such closures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-02T23:52:37.320" LastActivityDate="2020-10-02T23:52:37.320" Title="Is this question about equipping ordinary soldiers with magical equipment (primarily) opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11236" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11235" CreationDate="2020-10-01T15:04:05.077" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, it is not opinion-based&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is not primarily opinion-based, as the answers have shown.  It fits in with a limited / bounded list approach, and has solid criteria for good answers included.&#xA;And it's gotten at least one, if not two, good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175963/which-magic-item-of-very-rare-or-lower-rarity-is-most-useful-to-protect-a-group/175966#175966&quot;&gt;Erik's answer&lt;/a&gt; is particularly apt in that (1) he used a published source that not everyone (the asker included) might have and (2) showed how it would protect a group of troops as required in the question.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175963/which-magic-item-of-very-rare-or-lower-rarity-is-most-useful-to-protect-a-group/175967#175967&quot;&gt;The second most upvoted answer by Szega&lt;/a&gt; shows how some other items can meet some of the criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is OK, some of the answers less so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Recommendation&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Downvote the answers that aren't up to standards.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave the question open&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-02T23:47:52.787" LastActivityDate="2020-10-02T23:47:52.787" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11238" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11239" CreationDate="2020-10-09T19:21:30.280" Score="6" ViewCount="728" Body="&lt;p&gt;For reference, I'm old enough to have been a child in the casually, obliviously racist period in the United States -- many terms that are now considered &amp;quot;racist slurs&amp;quot; were in common usage, among otherwise decent adults as well as children, and to people of my generation they mean certain things that are largely independent of their racist label.  While I agree that we should no longer use these terms without thought, I believe there are situations in which one of them gets the thought across more effectively and with far fewer words than beating around the bush.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176286/whats-the-minimum-population-for-an-adventuring-center&quot;&gt;a recent question&lt;/a&gt; (now deleted, because it was apparently more of a Worldbuilding.SE question than about role playing), I said that my town has, among other threats that aren't there, no &amp;quot;injuns&amp;quot; -- with the term in quotes, just as here.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/176286/revisions&quot;&gt;The post was edited&lt;/a&gt; almost before I'd finished rechecking for typos, to &amp;quot;remove racist slur&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, to me, use of that term, &lt;em&gt;in quotes as I did&lt;/em&gt;, is a case of &lt;em&gt;referencing&lt;/em&gt; a specific past usage: the 1950s-1960s TV Western usage, as in &amp;quot;The only good injun is a dead injun.&amp;quot;  There was no indication in the question of an actual culture; what I was trying to say was that &lt;em&gt;there is no culture&lt;/em&gt; subject to that sort of prejudice -- without writing an entire paragraph to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is in part a linquistic distinction: I haven't referred to Native Americans as &amp;quot;Indians&amp;quot; in decades, nor used the term &amp;quot;injuns&amp;quot; to reference a race in somewhat longer.  None the less, I wouldn't go so far as to change &lt;em&gt;Tom Sawyer&lt;/em&gt; by editing the character name of Injun Joe -- and it doesn't seem quite right to call &lt;em&gt;referencing&lt;/em&gt; such a cultural artifact a &amp;quot;racist slur.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the question is, how should I go about including an old meaning, without having the entire idea deleted and potentially getting Code of Conduct strikes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-13T19:56:05.743" LastActivityDate="2020-10-13T19:56:05.743" Title="How do I reference a racially charged term without it getting deleted as a &quot;racist slur&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="11" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11239" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11238" CreationDate="2020-10-09T19:35:56.407" Score="40" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Just explain what you mean. Slurs like that are lazy and harmful.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've done a fine enough job explaining the idea you intended to communicate here in this question. Just give clear exposition on the idea without resorting to harmful words and phrases. It isn't hard to do this, as you have already demonstrated here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am of Native American descent, and to be transparent, I was the one who made the edit. Using the word &amp;quot;injun&amp;quot; to communicate the concept of a group of barbaric people who harass civilized people serves to perpetuate the idea that Native Americans are somehow less civilized than others and denigrates the important cultural traditions they maintain today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I read the post. It was a good world building question. If you've got the mind to organize everything else in that post, you've got the mind to do it without using derogatory phrases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/176286/revisions&quot;&gt;Context for 10k+ users.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-10-09T21:20:22.873" LastActivityDate="2020-10-09T21:20:22.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11240" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11241" CreationDate="2020-10-10T15:55:42.453" Score="8" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;While a positive reputation increase (received upvote, accepted answer, association bonus...) is immediately notified, why a negative score is not notified at all? If you receive some upvotes and some downvotes, then you have the notification with the sum of the increase. In case of only downvotes you do not have any notification, I note it just when I visit the Activity section in my profile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just to be clear, I am not against downvoting: I would like to known when someone did not like my question or answer, it could make me check if there is something wrong or something that should be clarified. In some case the downvoting comes with constructive comments and then you have the comment notification, but most cases do not fall in this scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could the &amp;quot;negative score&amp;quot; be a useful notification?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2023-11-15T02:56:06.640" LastActivityDate="2023-11-15T02:56:06.640" Title="Why there is no notification for getting a downvote?" Tags="|feature-request|status-bydesign|voting|down-votes|notifications|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11240" CreationDate="2020-10-10T16:02:48.103" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;This feature has been requested before on the network meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/208900/295232&quot;&gt;Display lost/negative reputation in topbar achievements&lt;/a&gt;. Despite the obvious support from the community (given the score), it was declined by staff members, who commented/answered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The live update feature is there to show you the &lt;strong&gt;good&lt;/strong&gt; stuff that happened to your account (rep gains, badges and notifications).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/208900/display-lost-negative-reputation-in-topbar-achievements#comment667264_208900&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's just too hard to see the number of people motivated to improve their posts outweighing the number of people who will be upset by every downvote or want to start an argument about each one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/240060/295232&quot;&gt;source&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2020-10-10T16:05:50.977" LastActivityDate="2020-10-10T16:05:50.977" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11242" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11244" CreationDate="2020-10-13T12:45:30.920" Score="5" ViewCount="150" Body="&lt;p&gt;This recent question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176339/what-happens-when-an-unconscious-creature-fails-their-saving-throw-against-a-ban&quot;&gt;What happens when an unconscious creature fails their saving throw against a Banshee&amp;#39;s Wail?&lt;/a&gt; seems to be a duplicate of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157678/can-an-unconscious-pc-hear-you&quot;&gt;Can an Unconscious PC hear you?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the entire answer for this is predicated on whether or not the siren can hear you, it seems like a clear duplicate. But the case for the specific mechanics of the siren isn't unreasonable to be a new question, but it also seems like it does boil down to the same thing of &amp;quot;can the target hear&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the first question linked above be closed as a duplicate of the second question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-13T19:43:03.233" LastActivityDate="2020-10-13T19:49:25.303" Title="Should this question on unconscious creatures and a banshee's Wail be closed as a duplicate of this other question on unconscious PCs and hearing?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11242" CreationDate="2020-10-13T13:08:33.713" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176339/what-happens-when-an-unconscious-creature-fails-their-saving-throw-against-a-ban&quot;&gt;What happens when an unconscious creature fails their saving through against a banshee?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157678/can-an-unconscious-pc-hear-you&quot;&gt;Can an unconscious PC hear you?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us examine these questions according to the three &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;Duplicate Criteria&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assert that we have a case of &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; coverage of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt; by &lt;strong&gt;B&lt;/strong&gt;. Let's review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; states in the question body &amp;quot;All other creatures within 30 feet of her that can hear her&amp;quot;, then goes on to ask if unconscious creatures are affected by the ability in question, that is, can unconscious creatures hear the banshee. &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; asks if unconscious creatures can hear. &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is very obviously a subcase of &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; is answered by quoting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An unconscious creature is incapacitated (see the condition), can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is answered by quoting:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An unconscious creature is incapacitated, can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is answered by repeating back something stated in the question body then giving back the &lt;em&gt;exact same&lt;/em&gt; answer as the answer given to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP stated in a comment, responding to allegations of duplicature:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand what that other question is about, this isn't a dupe of that. Actually, this question was just that I'd missed the &amp;quot;that can hear her&amp;quot; part of the Wail description, but now that's been pointed out to me, I understand the implications. I would have deleted this question once that had been pointed out to me but that's not fair on the answerer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OP has stated that &lt;em&gt;deletion&lt;/em&gt; would be preferable had the question not received a highly upvoted answer by a new user. This is a compelling reason not to delete the question entirely, and an equally compelling reason &lt;em&gt;to close the question&lt;/em&gt;. Mark it as a dupe and set the new contributor's answer as the only answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no compelling reason to leave the question open in light the first two points I've cited and OP's own admission that deletion would be preferable were it not for the contribution by a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Criteria 1 and 2 are the reasons I initially dupe-hammered the question, but the information revealed in OP's responding comment solidified Criterion 3 in my mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-10-13T17:19:32.607" LastActivityDate="2020-10-13T17:19:32.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11244" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11242" CreationDate="2020-10-13T15:35:01.453" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, it shouldn't be closed as a duplicate&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll give the arguments I gave elsewhere here too. Do note that I was the one to reopen the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crux of the question is that the targeted creatures need to hear the banshee, not whether an unconscious creature can hear. This is the problem which resolves the question's issue, but not what it is originally asking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the needed fact is included in a quote in the question, that is given no focus by the question; that understanding is not included in the question's analysis. The needed fact isn't obvious to a casual reader; it is buried in an oft not vital part of a quote. While it may be obvious to system experts who are aware of it (because of the answer given), it would not be obvious to someone who has the issue given in the question. Being pointed to the dupe does not explain the problem's solution without further work (figuring out why that is relevant).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is perhaps worth considering that the answer to this question is conceptually similar to a frame challenge. The question asks &amp;quot;What happens when X is applied to Y?&amp;quot; and the answer is that &amp;quot;X wouldn't be applied because Y can't Z&amp;quot;. The alleged dupe target asks &amp;quot;Can Y Z?&amp;quot;. That makes it a good question for an answer to link to, but not a dupe.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-13T19:49:25.303" LastActivityDate="2020-10-13T19:49:25.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11238" CreationDate="2020-10-13T15:40:50.460" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You don't use racial slurs&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11239/31402&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's answer&lt;/a&gt; is excellent and worth a checkmark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Racial and ethnic slurs have a singular purpose and that's to denigrate an entire group of people by painting them with a single brush. More often than not, these are negative. Even when they're not, they're intellectually lazy because again they are promoting the notion that it's ok to make broad assumptions about communities of people and cultures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, the reason they are slurs is because historically we've absolutely used these words to create a social structure that permits real harm to those communities. We don't work to undo that harm by deciding those words are ok again, especially when those communities are still suffering.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sticks and stones may break someone's bones, but words are what make breaking those bones legal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside, I support you asking the question at all as opposed to just stewing on things alone. In doing so, you've created the chance for yourself to hear others and begin to learn how to combat your own internalized biases which are inherent in all of us whether we like it or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2020-10-13T15:40:50.460" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11246" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-14T17:19:46.360" Score="-5" ViewCount="367" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11238/how-do-i-reference-a-racially-charged-term-without-it-getting-deleted-as-a-raci&quot;&gt;I've been informed&lt;/a&gt; that under no circumstances is it &lt;em&gt;ever&lt;/em&gt; permissible to use &amp;quot;racial slurs&amp;quot; other than to clarify what I'm asking about in questions about racial slurs, and ideally not then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't disagree with that point. I'll admit that in composing the (now deleted) question that inspired that meta question I didn't consider that a word that hasn't been commonly heard in nearly half a century could still be hurtful and insulting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However: we still accept use of words that carry a similar connotation in reference to a fantasy race.  Wizards of the Coast recently changed their game rules to recognize that assuming that a goblin, orc, kobold, etc. is inherently evil might be indirectly hurtful to those who have suffered racism for their real ancestry, or discrimination of other kinds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we have plans to similarly update, or will we still consider &amp;quot;orc&amp;quot; as racially evil or a generic enemy-without-reason to be an acceptable usage?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastEditorUserId="18233" LastEditDate="2020-10-14T18:40:57.713" LastActivityDate="2020-10-15T00:22:23.013" Title="Where do we draw the line for &quot;racially charged&quot; terms?" Tags="|discussion|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="18" ClosedDate="2020-10-20T04:03:44.423" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11246" CreationDate="2020-10-14T17:47:24.530" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The line is that we don't use derogatory terms&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless there is absolutely no other way to communicate the idea &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; it is absolutely essential to the post (and maybe not even then), just don't use derogatory terms to real life people/groups on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't apply this same reasoning to fantasy terms (unless they cause harm to real people in some other way) as there are no fantasy beings around to be harmed by them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="28591" LastEditDate="2020-10-14T18:16:29.727" LastActivityDate="2020-10-14T18:16:29.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11248" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11246" CreationDate="2020-10-15T00:22:23.013" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;When those &amp;quot;racially charged&amp;quot; terms implicate real humans&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we use the term &amp;quot;orc&amp;quot; to define the Tolkienesque fantasy race, that's fine. If we use the term &amp;quot;monkey&amp;quot; to refer to the real-world part of simiiformes that have tails, that's fine too. These terms are not offensive because a) orcs don't exist and b) monkeys aren't sentient (or, at least, not sentient enough to take offence at being called monkeys).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, both &lt;a href=&quot;http://nkjemisin.com/2013/02/from-the-mailbag-the-unbearable-baggage-of-orcing/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;orc&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-25/goodes-gutted-but-places-no-blame/4712772&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;monkey&lt;/a&gt; can and have been applied to groups of humans as a racial slur, that's &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-10-15T00:22:23.013" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11249" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-16T17:32:00.147" Score="3" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176450/62294&quot;&gt;Is there an alternative word to be used in place of Humanoid?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At time of writing this meta, the question is on the verge of being reopened without modification after its initial closure for being &amp;quot;opinion based&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is clear, but the scope is a concern. In particular, we see it stated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My campaign is DND 5e set in Eberron, but any term from any setting or TTRPG or otherwise would work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also at the time of writing this meta, the question has had three answers deleted from review, and 9 of the 11 remaining answers contain no citations to any source describing &amp;quot;any setting or TTRPG or otherwise&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question adequately scoped as is? If not, can it be modified to be so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-16T17:58:43.607" LastActivityDate="2020-10-21T18:01:19.787" Title="Is this question about alternatives to the word humanoid too broad or opinion-based, or is it well-scoped?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|closed-questions|question-scope|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11249" CreationDate="2020-10-16T17:47:04.860" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Well-scoped, but room for improvement&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the question is fairly clear, although more specifics are always helpful in narrowing down to potential answers that best fit the bill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, this seems a bit more like a general language question as-asked and not necessarily a RPG question. Narrowing the scope to asking about words that work within a specific setting would likely be helpful, but not necessarily required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bigger issue is that we're now generating answers that are undifferentiated and many not supported. When questions draw answers like that, we can either close as opinion-based to stop the flow, or see what we can do to tighten it up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a feeling that increasing scope may reduce or invalidate many answers, or even make the final answer null. Which isn't bad, but also isn't helpful to the querent. It also retains the issue of inappropriate answers with many upvotes that we're now stuck with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;But is this on topic?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a whole other question, but I'd like to address it here. If the question remains as it stands without a narrowing of scope to a setting, then really anything is on the table (as we're seeing in answers.) Such a question would be a potentially better fit for the Worldbuilding, English, or even Sci-Fi stack if they want what others have created in other industries.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if we want this to be an RPG question, it should be focused on a setting that is relevant to the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Improved! Now, a new problem.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent has clarified that they are only looking for TTRPG terms, but we've got quite a few answers that are no longer relevant. It is my belief that we should ask the answerers to remove those answers or change them to TTRPG terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-10-21T18:01:19.787" LastActivityDate="2020-10-21T18:01:19.787" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11251" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11249" CreationDate="2020-10-16T17:48:48.870" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think that the scope of the question is fine, and is adequately defined. If the asker is interested in any word used in any setting, that defines a standard against which answers can be assessed. It is in no way opinion based-- words mean what the asker wants, or they don't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What causes some trouble for the question is is whether or not it is on-topic for the stack. It might be a good worldbuilding question as-is, but to be the best fit for RPG.SE it should depend on knowledge of TTRPGs, which &amp;quot;any setting&amp;quot; doesn't really establish very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for citations in answers, I think that this is a case where they are less important than is often the case. If I added &lt;em&gt;A Fire Upon the Deep&lt;/em&gt; as a citation to my answer, it would have a citation for the word &lt;em&gt;sophont&lt;/em&gt; being used in a setting, but that would add nothing to the question or answer as currently defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Were the question to be edited to ask specifically for in-universe terms in Eberron (5e) only, then the citations become more valuable (to establish that they really are used in-universe). But that's a preference for the asker to determine and express.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastActivityDate="2020-10-16T17:48:48.870" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11252" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11249" CreationDate="2020-10-16T18:15:39.783" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question as written is appropriate for RPG.SE, and doesn't &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; any change. Although the question could be directed to other Stacks, it is acceptable given our current guidance. Currently it's unknown what exactly is motivating the question, which leads to differing perspectives on how to fix it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Full disclosure: I am one of the users who answered that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The scope is appropriate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current question is scoped appropriately. It isn't asking for all terms from all games, or even a set of terms with a given property. The querent's statement that information from any RPG or setting is a (loose) constraint, not a part of the scope of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Does it belong here?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;Our Help page&lt;/a&gt; explains:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about a general real-world topic such as history, geography&#xA;or economics, whilst relevant to RPGs, may be off topic if they are&#xA;not RPG-centric (or better belong on another Stack Exchange site, such&#xA;as History).  A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to&#xA;this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question could be on topic on &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;World-building&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://ell.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;ELL&lt;/a&gt;, or a number of other stacks. However, insofar as the querent is interested in advice that is specific to the RPG community and informed by our norms and needs, then it is appropriate to remain here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Improving the Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically we know what OP wants, but not why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the problem that the players are misinterpreting what is happening? Do they direct their characters into a den of bugbears expecting a human settlement? Is their current communication functional, but socially awkward? Are they concerned about the post-structuralist criticisms of defining personhood in relation to any particular group?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the querent were more specific about the practical problem they are running into, then we could provide better tailored advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16058" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-19T07:18:53.490" LastActivityDate="2020-10-19T07:18:53.490" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11253" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-22T16:17:43.300" Score="5" ViewCount="135" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate for closure: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176665/62294&quot;&gt;Can an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight with the Magic Initiate feat (picking the wizard list) use spell slots to cast the chosen 1st-level spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dupe Target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68451/can-you-cast-a-spell-learned-from-the-magic-initiate-feat-using-spell-slots?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Can you cast a spell learned from the Magic Initiate feat using spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question asking specifically about an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight a duplicate of the more general question which does not specify any class or subclass?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-10-22T16:24:37.500" LastActivityDate="2020-10-22T16:24:46.307" Title="Is this question about the Magic Initiate feat a duplicate that should be closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11253" CreationDate="2020-10-22T16:17:43.300" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is a duplicate that should be closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176665/62294&quot;&gt;Can an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight with the Magic Initiate feat (picking the wizard list) use spell slots to cast the chosen 1st-level spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68451/can-you-cast-a-spell-learned-from-the-magic-initiate-feat-using-spell-slots?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Can you cast a spell learned from the Magic Initiate feat using spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will examine these questions according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;three duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;, the general case, does not specify any class or subclass. Naturally, the scope of the question then includes all classes and subclasses, thereby covering &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; in its scope. One might object, &amp;quot;it isn't obvious that Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight are covered by &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;.&amp;quot; It's not obvious that &lt;em&gt;any particular&lt;/em&gt; class or subclass or subclass are covered by it because it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; obvious that the question concerns any and all classes and subclasses having spell slots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; has an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/176679/62294&quot;&gt;obvious answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;. Half of this answer is dedicated to dealing with the special case of &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; and is clearly sign posted with a header.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is now no reason to leave &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; open. When &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; was originally asked, &lt;strong&gt;Criterion 2&lt;/strong&gt; was not satisfied, but it has since been satisfied in the linked answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-10-22T16:24:46.307" LastActivityDate="2020-10-22T16:24:46.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11255" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-22T17:42:58.600" Score="10" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;Taking a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/176665/revisions&quot;&gt;revision history&lt;/a&gt; of the question, &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176665/can-an-arcane-trickster-or-eldritch-knight-with-the-magic-initiate-feat-picking/176678#176678&quot;&gt;Can an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight with the Magic Initiate feat (picking the wizard list) use spell slots to cast the chosen 1st-level spell?,&#xA;&lt;/a&gt; you will notice six gold-badge open/close actions. You might be tempted to say &amp;quot;looks kind of like an edit war, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10055/what-is-an-edit-war-and-is-it-ever-appropriate&quot;&gt;we have a meta for that already&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;, but there is &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; going on there, and I think it beneficial for the community to reflect on the situation and have a discussion about how this situation should be handled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will attempt to faithfully reproduce a complete timeline of all the relevant goings-on here. There are three questions involved, they will be labelled so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/68451/can-you-cast-a-spell-learned-from-the-magic-initiate-feat-using-spell-slots?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Can you cast a spell learned from the Magic Initiate feat using spell slots?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176665/can-an-arcane-trickster-or-eldritch-knight-with-the-magic-initiate-feat-picking/176678#176678&quot;&gt;Can an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight with the Magic Initiate feat (picking the wizard list) use spell slots to cast the chosen 1st-level spell?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B2&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176677/can-an-arcane-trickster-or-eldritch-knight-who-takes-the-magic-initiate?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Can an Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight who takes the Magic Initiate? [duplicate]&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have used the names of everyone who was involved in the community moderation of this situation, all of whom are over 20k rep. Nothing said here should be construed as anyone having done something with ill intent - I believe everyone named acted &lt;em&gt;in good faith&lt;/em&gt; with the best intentions to push everything toward a desirable resolution. If those users named wish their names to be redacted they may do so or leave a comment and I will do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Timeline&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; is asked. (10/21 3:54)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; is dupe hammered by Purple Monkey as a dupe of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (3:55)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The asker of &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; responds in an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/176667/62294&quot;&gt;answer to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; asking about the particular case of AT and EK. (4:23)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;User's answer was deleted. (5:13)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;V2Blast starts a bounty  for updated answers to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (5:23)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;V2Blast edits &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; explaining that the question is specifically concerned with AT and EK, which is something not addressed in any of the answers to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (5:29)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B2&lt;/strong&gt; is asked. (11:32)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov dupe hammers &lt;strong&gt;B2&lt;/strong&gt; as a duplicate of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (11:35)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov reopen hammers &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;. (11:55)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov answers &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;. (11:55)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov answers &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (12:13)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;NautArch and Thomas Markov edit &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt; to be asking specifically about the example given in the question. The motivation here was to more clearly differentiate &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt; from &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;.   (12:44)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;V2Blast rolls back Naut's and Thomas' edits to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (18:41)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;NautArch dupe hammers &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; as a dupe of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (19:11)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov copies his answer to &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; into his answer to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;. (19:14)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;GcL reopen hammers &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;. (19:22)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Naut, Thomas, and GcL  discuss the question briefly &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/55901977#55901977&quot;&gt;in chat&lt;/a&gt; and come to a concensus that it should be closed. (19:25)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;GcL dupe hammers &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;. (19:32)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/55902050#55902050&quot;&gt;Thomas rolls a natural 20&lt;/a&gt; to leave the question closed. (19:35)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener votes to reopen &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; and Darth Pseudonym sends it home with a reopen hammer. (21:15)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov opens a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11253/62294&quot;&gt;meta discussion&lt;/a&gt; over whether or not &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; should be closed as a dupe of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt; and answers in favor of closure. (10/22 16:17)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Where did we go wrong?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a lot going on here. &lt;em&gt;Too much&lt;/em&gt;. The trouble is that &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; seems to be well within the scope of &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;but none of the answers to &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;/strong&gt; shed clarity on the particulars of &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; (at the time &lt;strong&gt;B1&lt;/strong&gt; was asked).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GcL expressed their concerns rather poignantly in chat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would assume they find it frustrating to have questions closed as duplicates of something that doesn't answer their question, because I have found that frustrating. But they might not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does seem like it's a non-obvious and circuitous path to get to the resolution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ask question that isn't currently answered.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get closed as &amp;quot;answer already exists&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Go back and forth in edits.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Get question opened, answered, and closed again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A bounty, for which they didn't have the points themselves, added to other question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer to their question gets added to the other question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's a way OP could have gotten to the end state directly. The path seems like, &amp;quot;please cause error to get swat on the nose and service.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do we do when a question is asked that is obviously covered as a subset of an existing question, but the answers are insufficient for answering the special case?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should also consider here: what do we expect a &lt;em&gt;new user&lt;/em&gt; to do? How can we improve the new user experience here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-10-22T18:31:39.733" LastActivityDate="2020-10-27T06:23:01.697" Title="What do we do when a question is covered as a subset of another, but the answers are insufficient for answering the special case?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11255" CreationDate="2020-10-22T23:23:14.067" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If a question &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be answered by answers to another question it is likely a duplicate. If a question does not have satisfactory answers, bounty it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/bounty&quot;&gt;What is a bounty?&lt;/a&gt; page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] If you see a question that has not gotten a satisfactory answer, a bounty may help attract more attention and more answers. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question about how Arcane Tricksters / Eldritch Knights interact with the Magic Initiate feat is &lt;em&gt;obviously&lt;/em&gt; a subset (or subquestion) of asking how the Magic Initiate feat works &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, clearly one question is a subset of the other, but the question remains: &lt;em&gt;Should answers to the general case address this specific sub-case?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have absolutely no idea. However, it doesn't actually matter &lt;em&gt;in this particular case&lt;/em&gt; because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/176679&quot;&gt;that sub-question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; (now) answered&lt;/a&gt; by answers to the more general question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not answers to the general case &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; have covered the specific case of AT/EK is unclear, but at this point, that case &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; covered. I believe the best option would have been the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, determine whether or not answers to the general case &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; cover the more nuanced sub-case of AT/EK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they should, then the new question is a duplicate and the older question could receive a bounty for not having adequate answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they should not, then it is not a duplicate and can remain open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2020-10-22T23:23:14.067" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11255" CreationDate="2020-10-23T01:22:57.480" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think there are many different things going on, each adding adding events to the that time-line, making the discussions more confused and sprawling, and probably why we have two meta discussions for it. I'll briefly identify the different aspects and then try to go through them all in more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answers to the general question needed updating. These updates (specifically the 2018 PHB Errata additions) even make the specific question easier to answer (because more of the rules are defined).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The general question asks generally, using a generic example. The specific question uses an example which adds a small additional layer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Gold badge holders disagreed on whether to mark the question as a duplicate, without there being a clear cut discussion happening. (There's a few comments on the Q, and a conversation in chat).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's a new user asking the specific question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Updating the old Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The (good) answer has had a note on it regarding the 2018 errata for over a year, but nothing like more attention and bounty to get things updated. This is just our processes working as intended, but it makes it much easier to go &amp;quot;well the generic question should be updated&amp;quot;, because it should be updated anyway for other reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Specific question versus general&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is maybe where it gets interesting. Let's try to dissect the nature of these questions with each other. The general question asks how it works for any of the standard spell-casting classes (using the example of a wizard). The specific question adds a layer to that, in that there's a bit more to the spellcasting class — that the class is a Fighter/Rogue, but using the wizard spell list. Thus there's ambiguity between class, spellcasting class, and Magic Initiate class. This is small, but significant and warrants address on some level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But where to put that address is something we decide as curators. We can either cover it as a separate Q&amp;amp;A, or include it in the general one. And which one we choose will depend on factors such as significance of the layer, scope of the general Q&amp;amp;A, and possibly a little historical lag (we didn't discover it was a partial dupe in time, so it got a good answer and we might as well leave it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember that we thrive on questions and answers being &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt;. Shorter, more direct answers will more clearly and easily answer the question for (future) readers, so we want to at least minimize bloating general Q&amp;amp;As. This means finding the line at which a subquestion is better of a new question. Those lines aren't always clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Users disagreeing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a bit to unpack here too, but that doesn't mean anyone involved did anything wrong. Part of it is that many of the voters had 5e gold badges meaning closures and reopening happened much faster than normal, cutting some of the room in which the relevant discussions usually start.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then the discussions which did happen, occurred in chat. And that isn't wrong either, it's one of the things chat is good for, but it does mean there isn't made readily available for further voters to see and consider. Treating the round through chat as the normal initial process, a meta was opened the first reopening, which seems like fine timing considering how involved the initial process was. This is our processes working, just a one-off with more clatter than normal, but nothing problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;New user&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there's a new user asking the new question, and doesn't quite know the processes. Reposting a closed question, nor new question/clarification requests as answer are rare, and we can clean up and explain to our best ability, as was done. The best we can do to help new users is to explain what has happened to their post and what the need to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then it's new user coming in to the improve-old-question process, which normally requires reputation to start (for comments or bounties), so they aren't able to do it &amp;quot;correctly&amp;quot;. That always means another user needs to do it for them, so there'll be the mess of whatever post they used to start this, explaining how these processes work, and then hoping they'll stick around to reap the benefits. This isn't a great new-user experience, but is just part of the Stack Exchange new-user experience which is often not great, but it's probably best to leave the rest of that discussion for another meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Pulling the strings together&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nothing really out of the extraordinary happened here. Tiny little things compounding, giving a messy time-line, but not really anything to correct. I'll just reiterate some general, applicable encouragements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Identify duplicates and sub-questions, additional layers and aspects. And maybe try to remember what it's like without the system mastery which has earned you the gold badge. And I'll be first to recognize that that's &lt;em&gt;hard&lt;/em&gt;. And I didn't really identify the above dissection until I'd rattled it for a while and there was a meta discussion which needed answering. We need to talk it out sometimes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Be careful with unilateral votes on subtle matters. I don't want to discourage anyone from voting, but making your thoughts clear and starting the discussion is generally beneficial to parts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't be afraid to show the process. Double that for cases with subtleties, messy processes, and new users. Just clean up when it's done and settled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-10-23T01:22:57.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11234" CreationDate="2020-10-23T18:19:30.890" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Nothing for right now&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is currently over 6 years old and we haven't had an issue with either the question, the answers, or a new question creating an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of that, we should just let it be. If it becomes an issue, we can deal with it, but there are lots of older Q&amp;amp;As that are still around because things were different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No need to kick up old dust when there's so much new dust to deal with :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-10-23T19:29:03.127" LastActivityDate="2020-10-23T19:29:03.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11259" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-23T23:07:59.490" Score="0" ViewCount="297" Body="&lt;p&gt;the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176711/how-many-joules-does-strength-values-ten-through-twenty-estimate-to?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1received&quot;&gt;How many Joules does strength values ten through twenty estimate to?&lt;/a&gt; a lot of negative votes and was voted to be closed very quickly... and I don't understand why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What could be done to improve the question about Joules of energy required to lift in-game objects?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30200" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-10-24T08:59:41.183" LastActivityDate="2020-11-25T23:32:35.453" Title="What could be done to improve the question about Joules of energy required to lift in-game objects?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11259" CreationDate="2020-10-24T13:31:08.467" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What could be done is to ask at &lt;a href=&quot;https://physics.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Physics&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding&lt;/a&gt; SE&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That would improve the location of the question; however, you'd likely get downvoted at Physics there for lack of research, since it doesn't take much of an internet search to convert units to arrive at the equation set up and you then plug in the values. Someone at RPGSE was kind enough to do that for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the reasons that I offer you this answer is because Joules are not an in-game / in-universe unit.  My initial response to the question when I first saw it in the review queue was something like what NautArch noted in the comment below this answer: what I saw was a word problem from a high school physics class rather than an RPG-related question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the comment reply on its rejection at Physics.SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-11-02T13:04:26.977" LastActivityDate="2020-11-02T13:04:26.977" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11261" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11259" CreationDate="2020-10-24T21:40:27.063" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I strongly suspect that, of the several metrics influenced by Str, at least a pair (most probably overhead carrying capacity and dragging or lifting capacity) will lead to different results when compared to what a real-life person can do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apart from what Korvin said, you should really decide upon one metric that you want to compare.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also be aware that your player(s) might try to derive other game effects of Str from the values that you provide.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4173" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-10-29T18:54:47.423" LastActivityDate="2020-10-29T18:54:47.423" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11262" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11255" CreationDate="2020-10-27T06:23:01.697" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What do we do when a question is asked that is obviously covered as a subset of an existing question, but the answers are insufficient for answering the special case?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer it.  In terms of &lt;em&gt;acting as a knowledge base&lt;/em&gt;, having specific questioned subsets of broad questions answered separately vastly improves readability and searchability of the entire information set.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; flexibility in how broad a question will be, you will have questions at both ends of the spectrum.  If you push all possible answers to be collated under broader questions by deleting/marking as duplicate any more specific instances, you make a less searchable knowledge base that also requires more reading (of layered answers) to answer questions.  This is the worst of both worlds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In effect, by deleting more specific instances of broader questions you are deeply undermining the far more important rule of &lt;strong&gt;be specific&lt;/strong&gt;, while also lowering usability of the site in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2020-10-27T06:23:01.697" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11259" CreationDate="2020-10-27T20:51:17.740" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Basically Nothing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I downvoted for a number of reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;First,&lt;/strong&gt; all of the edits, therefore all of the phrasing and word choices, belong to the original poster.  And if the OP can ask the question in terms of joules, they can almost certainly plug in the &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$m \times g \times h\$&lt;/span&gt; formula that the single answer used.  This may be presumptuous on my part, but it did not strike me as a question trying to solve an actual problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Second,&lt;/strong&gt; the question is terribly posed.  Why?  Because the Strength stat is an abstraction, a dramatic simplification of a complex concept so that we can stop worrying about the fine details and get on with playing.  In the real world, arm strength, leg strength, grasping strength, are all different things.  In the game world, Attack bonuses, damage bonuses, lifting capacity, encumbrance are also different things.  While they may be correlated, they are not unified, and there is no master conversion plan.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only possible way this question can avoid being vague or opinion-based is to add enough specific details to point to a particular answer-- in this case, the &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$m \times g \times h\$&lt;/span&gt; formula-based answer, which is so specific that it even specifies the height of the character...!  This dramatically increased my &amp;quot;not an actual problem&amp;quot; sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Third,&lt;/strong&gt; the first words of the question body (of every revision) are &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D is not a science based or physics based game&amp;quot; before barreling on and asking for a science- or physics-based answer to a gaming question.  So it seems to me that the OP knew, or at least suspected from the start, that there would be pushback on the question.  That does not automatically invalidate the question, and would not alone have triggered my downvote, but it sure didn't help anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Fourth,&lt;/strong&gt; on the same day, the same poster asked another question (also immediately closed) which took this one as a springboard for something even more ill-posed-- trying to get a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176777/18269&quot;&gt;joules-based number for &amp;quot;1 dmg&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; (which I assume is meant to be 1 hp worth of damage.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All together, this just sets off alarm bell after alarm bell for me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's a question I'm certain the OP could have answered just based on the specificity of the question;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;yet it dramatically misunderstands the relation of the game rules to the real world;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;While acknowledging that it does exactly that;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And got almost immediately used by the same poster to launch an even more problematic question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not a salvageable question&lt;/strong&gt;.  Mainly because of the second point-- broad questions will be too vague to answer, while specific questions are somewhat misleading by relying on an improper reduction of a complex phenomenon (human &amp;quot;Strength&amp;quot;) to only one of its many facets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The downvotes and close votes were proper, in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-25T23:32:35.453" LastActivityDate="2020-11-25T23:32:35.453" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11264" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11265" CreationDate="2020-10-28T13:33:21.917" Score="10" ViewCount="368" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a bit of sticky question because it concerns the scenario where it's unclear if a site is a pirated site or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We clearly need to link to only non-pirated content, but when someone has a question about if a site is legal or not, what should we do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The concern is that if it's illegal, we now have a link to a pirated site. If it's legal we're all good, but that's the best case scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it okay to link on main? Is it better to link on Meta? Should we not link at all? Is there a different way to look at this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2020-11-05T19:13:16.517" LastActivityDate="2020-11-05T19:13:16.517" Title="How should we handle questions about site legality?" Tags="|discussion|questions|hyperlinks|legal-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11264" CreationDate="2020-10-29T00:02:05.937" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We can deal with the questions as they warrant, when they are asked.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To any question that's asked there are multiple facets and layers. One of the most important are &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; the question is asked. And without having actual examples of a given question frame, it's really hard (probably impossible) to give a solution to how to deal with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The closest example I can think of (where a pirate site has been integral to the question) the pirate site hosted official material mixed with homebrew. We can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8996/52137&quot;&gt;deal with that&lt;/a&gt; as that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the asker wants to be able to identify pirate content, they should probably ask for that, and we can decide whether using an explicit example is necessary. Or, they could ask the positive question of what is included in the SRD/Open licence or applicable equivalent for the system. Example from Pathfinder 1e: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/26826/52137&quot;&gt;What content can I reproduce from Pathfinder?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're asking because they want to know whether we're ok with links to it, they should ask on meta or chat. (Judging by the last paragraph of the triggering main site question, that would probably be the best approach there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're after some other concern I haven't thought of, we can handle that then. If need be have the meta discussion then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For now we aren't getting a flood of such questions. If we start doing, we can deal with it then. My suspicion is that the majority don't care outside of posts being made on our site (and others), and for such concerns chat or meta are probably better suited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I revised a fair chuck of this answer from focusing on how to ask the middle category of questions, to dealing with the actual problem. We don't need to solve that problem for them now, we can do that once they've asked the question (or they workshop it somewhere). There was only a single vote at that time, so none such to invalidate.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2020-10-29T20:23:48.477" LastActivityDate="2020-10-29T20:23:48.477" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11266" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-10-29T11:57:50.677" Score="2" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is the question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174570/62294&quot;&gt;Looking For Historically Accurate Ordinary Items Database For Dungeon-Stocking&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5883/62294&quot;&gt;Tool recommendation questions are off-topic on rpg.se&lt;/a&gt;. Is this question a tool recommendation question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-10-29T11:57:50.677" Title="Is this question about an Ordinary Items Database an off-topic tool recommendation question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11267" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11266" CreationDate="2020-10-29T11:57:50.677" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This question is off-topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question asks for a tool that serves a certain purpose, particularly, a database that lists common items found in various rooms at different points in history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. This is not an RPG question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That this question relates to RPGs at all is because its answer may be useful for worldbuilding (which there is a stack for already) and it may have appeared in the comments section of a Matt Colville video one time. This is evident by OP's description of where it may have come from:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The data may have come from the insurance industry; lists of personal property itemized just in case a future claim would need to be made against an insurance policy, renter's insurance, and the like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This database was not created for RPGs by RPG players, and so RPG expertise is likely not required or even useful for answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is probably better suited for History.se or Worldbuilding.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. &amp;quot;I've seen this before&amp;quot; does not make it not tool recommendation.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only difference between this and something that is explicitly a textbook tool recommendation is &amp;quot;I swear I saw it one time&amp;quot;. If we remove this from the post, the question becomes &amp;quot;I'm looking for a tool that does these things&amp;quot; - tool recommendation. The &amp;quot;I've seen this before&amp;quot; bit of the question just gives you a place to start looking for tools to recommend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This is tool recommendation thinly veiled as product identification.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-10-29T11:57:50.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11264" CreationDate="2020-10-29T14:08:09.730" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Such questions are, strictly speaking, XY problems&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question of a site’s “legality,” strictly speaking, is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;unanswerable: It only becomes known after a court ruling. And strictly, that ruling only applies to what the site was doing at the time it was sued, not to anything they’ve done since.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;useless: These matters almost never actually go to court, so the undecided question of “legality” &lt;em&gt;won’t&lt;/em&gt; ever truly be decided. Therefore it won’t affect anything, including the querent, the site, or the copyright holder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But people asking this question aren’t literally asking “what is the court ruling on this site’s use of this material?” which is, strictly speaking, what “is this site legal?” has to mean. What they want to know is if there is something &lt;em&gt;immoral&lt;/em&gt; and/or &lt;em&gt;dangerous&lt;/em&gt; about the site in question. They want to know if using it is damaging the publisher they want to support, or if the site is going to disappear on them, or if they can get in trouble for using it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;em&gt;those&lt;/em&gt; questions are things that &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; are best-suited to answer. We know the landscape, copyright holders, the things that are acceptable and unacceptable. We &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; answer those questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Teach a man to fish” is not an acceptable answer, in my opinion. Because the actual answer isn’t something we look up, or reading licenses, or whatever. It’s experience—knowing what kinds of things, historically, have been considered acceptable by the copyright holder, and which things have not. What they have said is acceptable. And so on. We can’t transfer that knowledge and experience in an answer. I don’t see any way to actually accomplish this in a useful way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, we should put a banner on it disclaiming legal authority and pointing out that “legality” barely even comes into it, and then answer the question. And if the question links to the site that’s being questioned—and this is a sincere, genuine question, not a “subtle” attempt to promote a piracy site or whatever—the link should be fine. Maybe if it turns out to be a piracy site, we edit the link out and just describe the site by title or whatever. But even if we leave the link in, the only real danger there is link rot—which, if the site dies, the entire question is completely historical anyway so it doesn’t really matter. Such a question is unlikely to cause any other troubles for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2020-10-29T14:08:09.730" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11269" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-05T04:10:38.690" Score="0" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;So I saw this question today: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177117&quot;&gt;Does Favored by the Gods work with counterspell rolls?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this is obviously a D&amp;amp;D 5e question because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In the question it says &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It also mentions specific game features/spell: &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Favored by the Gods&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Counterspell&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Power Word Kill&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I asked anyone what game this is, they would likely say: &amp;quot;5e, duh&amp;quot;. If I pushed them and said &amp;quot;yeah but 5e of what game?&amp;quot; they would tell me &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot;. I think that it's obvious to everyone, even though technically there's no tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another user commented that the question could be about 5e of Vampires or L5R and linked this meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8344&quot;&gt;What to do when an answer guesses the system of a question rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt; which says you can't answer questions without a tag. I don't believe D&amp;amp;D 5e was a guess however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was also directed to this post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9312&quot;&gt;Is &amp;#39;5e&amp;#39; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker?&lt;/a&gt; which is newer and actually about 5e, where the top answers say &amp;quot;yeah just answer it&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These two posts seem to have conflicted policies and I am unsure what I should do in this situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-06T01:58:11.293" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T15:10:09.590" Title="5e question that doesn't have a system tag" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|dnd-5e|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11269" CreationDate="2020-11-05T05:10:46.313" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Whether or not you intended it, your words came across as aggressive and hurtful&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I am &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; saying that others were not &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; aggressive in their word choice; what they said could come across rudely (text is &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; difficult &lt;strike&gt;sometimes&lt;/strike&gt; all the time). On top of that, this is, far and away, a hot-button issue on this Stack, and it has, at times, gotten difficult to discuss; I cannot imagine the background/history of this sort of thing has helped anybody to remain calm or seek out and assume best intentions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Unfortunately, you stepped on an invisible landmine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have discussed editing in system tags, and/or answers assuming system tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10139&quot;&gt;a lot&lt;/a&gt;, so much that &amp;quot;a lot&amp;quot; probably isn't giving a big enough picture of just how much it's been discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most recent major revisit of the topic is this from early March 2020:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That came to a definitive stance in late June of the same year, landing on the policy that to add a system tag (often confusingly and wrongly called &amp;quot;guessing&amp;quot;, when &lt;strong&gt;it does not actually mean guessing&lt;/strong&gt;) is &lt;em&gt;typically&lt;/em&gt; wrong. Of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10145&quot;&gt;Meta can always bring up individual cases&lt;/a&gt;, such as this one; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10085&quot;&gt;has done so before&lt;/a&gt;; in fact, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9976&quot;&gt;at least twice&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The confusing, perhaps contradicting, Meta answers have not been addressed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, during the time between June 2020 and September 2020, competing, incompatible answers to the following question flipped in terms of their order when sorted by score (in fact, there have been a few votes just in the past five days and I wouldn't be surprised if the answers flipped &lt;em&gt;again&lt;/em&gt;):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9312&quot;&gt;Is &amp;#39;5e&amp;#39; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What this change in the score actually means is, at least to me, unclear and has not been officially addressed in any capacity that I am aware of. I &lt;em&gt;completely agree&lt;/em&gt; that this leads to a very confusing (if not outright contradictory) set of answers to Meta questions about similar topics; it simply hasn't been addressed (yet).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9312#comment36905_9312&quot;&gt;a recent comment there&lt;/a&gt; from a Diamond Moderator:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note to all users: Recent votes on this meta have made our actual policy unclear. Current enforcement is that the OP must clarify the system and edition explicitly. This is clearly something we need to readdress and will do so soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably we also have the following question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8344&quot;&gt;What to do when an answer guesses the system of a question rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an older question (September 2018) but it is also extremely similar to the idea of adding a system tag. Instead of being about a user &lt;em&gt;adding&lt;/em&gt; a system tag, it is about them &lt;em&gt;assuming&lt;/em&gt; a system tag. Thus the re-revisit of the policy that I linked to at the start is, at least to me, similar enough that it can be considered a revisiting of this (at least to some extent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end, the ideas expressed there would be continued now; an answer that &lt;em&gt;assumes&lt;/em&gt; the system can be handled by the community, receiving downvotes and delete votes if they find that they are warranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, strictly speaking, an answer to a question that should have a system tag but does not have one is simply &lt;em&gt;not an answer&lt;/em&gt; to that question. Such answers would assume a system which the original question did not have, and thus they are not actually answering the question as it was asked but are instead answering an entirely different question. This is similar to the stance that you should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8318&quot;&gt;avoid agnostic answers to system-less questions that need system tags&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-11-10T15:10:09.590" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T15:10:09.590" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11271" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-05T21:43:58.253" Score="3" ViewCount="74" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question, the potential dupe target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174761/is-there-any-way-to-give-proper-disadvantage-on-saving-throws-against-spell-effe&quot;&gt;Is there any way to give proper disadvantage on saving throws against spell effects to a creature with Magic Resistance?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New question, answered in the body of my question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177134/can-magic-resistance-be-overcome&quot;&gt;Can magic resistance be overcome?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is concerned with actually giving a creature with spell resistance true disadvantage on saving throws against magical effects. In the question body, I explain the interaction between magical resistance and effects that impose disadvantage on saving throws against magical effects. &lt;em&gt;But this was not actually the question&lt;/em&gt;, it is only context for the actual question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new question is concerned with this interaction that I explained in the body of my question, and my answer to the new question is exactly what is explained at the beginning of my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question be closed as a duplicate of a question that answers it in the question body rather than in the answers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-06T01:30:18.390" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T00:51:45.123" Title="Should this question be closed as a duplicate if it is answered in the body of another question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11273" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11271" CreationDate="2020-11-06T01:26:51.993" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No; a question should not be closed as a duplicate of a different one that assumes the answer to the first question as a premise.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of Q&amp;amp;As related to one another on RPG.SE, where:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question #1 asks whether X is true (for instance), or what the&#xA;answer to Y is.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question #2 assumes/concludes (correctly or incorrectly) that X is&#xA;true/false, or that the answer to Y is Z; usually, it treats that&#xA;claim as fact (i.e. as a premise of the question).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The numbering here doesn't necessarily imply anything about the order in which the questions are asked; in your case, Question #2 already existed before Question #1 was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, I suspect this issue would be even clearer if Question #1 were asked first; it'd make no sense to close a question that asks &amp;quot;Is X true?&amp;quot; as a duplicate of a later question that asks, &amp;quot;Since X is true, can I do X2?&amp;quot;. In fact, that premise in Question #2 is often explicitly &lt;em&gt;based&lt;/em&gt; on the answer(s) to Question #1, and links back to the first Q&amp;amp;A as the source of that information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, the Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113324/33569&quot;&gt;What is the best damage you can do with a 9th level Magic Missile?&lt;/a&gt; states that the &lt;em&gt;magic missile&lt;/em&gt; involves a single roll that determines the damage of every dart of force from the spell; you wouldn't close the Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/109764/33569&quot;&gt;How many times do you roll damage for Magic Missile?&lt;/a&gt; as a duplicate of it. That's true regardless of the order in which the two questions were asked, but especially because the &amp;quot;best damage&amp;quot; question directly links to the &amp;quot;how many times do you roll damage&amp;quot; question as the source of its assertion that you only roll once for the spell's damage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In essence, &lt;strong&gt;Question #1 can never be a duplicate of another question that already assumes that what the answer to Question #1 is.&lt;/strong&gt; Question #2's claim as to the answer to Question #1 is may or may not be correct; if the premise of Question #2 is faulty, its answers should point that out - but regardless, the &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; are clearly not the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your case, your Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174761/33569&quot;&gt;Is there any way to give proper disadvantage on saving throws against spell effects to a creature with Magic Resistance?&lt;/a&gt; is Question #2 (per my explanation above), though it was asked first, and Somebody The Stranger's new Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177134/33569&quot;&gt;Can magic resistance be overcome?&lt;/a&gt; is Question #1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Somebody The Stranger's question asks &amp;quot;would effects that impose disadvantage on saving throws [...] nullify [the Magic Resistance monster trait by canceling its advantage]?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, your question already assumes that the answer to that is &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;, and instead asks if there's a way to actually give the target disadvantage:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suppose I wanted to weaken the Archmage's resistance to magic - I use&#xA;some effect that gives disadvantage on the saving throw for my spell.&#xA;Normally, this would balance out to a straight roll, as the rules for&#xA;advantage and disadvantage say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to set a baseline for a straight roll on saves against&#xA;magical effects, that the Archmage can never roll at disadvantage&#xA;against magical effects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is there a way to get around this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's clear that what you're asking is not what Somebody The Stranger is asking. You already understand the interaction of Magic Resistance with disadvantage, and are looking for a way to actually get around that to give them disadvantage (that's not canceled out by advantage) - but they're asking whether they're correctly understanding the interaction of Magic Resistance with disadvantage in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Their question is definitely not a duplicate of yours - though you could use the citation from that portion of your question as the basis of an answer to their question. (That said, the titles of the two Q&amp;amp;As could be edited to more clearly indicate what they're asking, so that it's clear that they're asking two different things.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Somebody The Stranger has since clarified that they were actually unaware of the &amp;quot;advantage and disadvantage cancel out&amp;quot; rule, so it's definitely different from your question. I've edited both questions' titles to more clearly distinguish what each is asking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Yours: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174761/33569&quot;&gt;Is there any way to actually impose disadvantage (not just cancel advantage) on saving throws against spells for a creature with Magic Resistance?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Theirs: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177134/33569&quot;&gt;Does an effect that imposes disadvantage on saving throws remove the advantage from a creature&amp;#39;s Magic Resistance trait?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-10T00:51:45.123" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T00:51:45.123" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11275" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11276" CreationDate="2020-11-10T04:33:41.960" Score="7" ViewCount="465" Body="&lt;p&gt;We used to have answers referencing JC's tweets as RAI/RAW, but now that they are no longer official since the release of the SA Compendium, what effect has that had on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.sageadvice.eu/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;www.sageadvice.eu&lt;/a&gt; page?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not exactly book-worming my way through the site, but I personally feel that the tweet ruling has sort of had a similar effect to how some people feel about dandwiki - i.e. &amp;quot;don't use it&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what effect has this had on the relationship between SA.eu and RPG.se?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For further clarification, my question is not &lt;em&gt;specifically&lt;/em&gt; about JC's tweets, on the SA.eu website - It is about the interaction between the two sites (SA.eu and RPG.se).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it was not exactly about how to handle anything on &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site, that's where I believe some of the confusion is, and also why I was unsure about asking in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-16T09:18:27.437" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T05:44:56.137" Title="How has the ruling of JC's tweets now being unofficial affected www.sageadvice.eu, in regards to RPG.se?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11275" CreationDate="2020-11-10T05:21:28.337" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Sage Advice is nothing but tweets&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I'm aware, Sage Advice (i.e. &lt;code&gt;sageadvice.eu&lt;/code&gt;) is just a person who collects tweets from various people who helped with DnD 5e and its rules (primarily Mike Mearls and Jeremy Crawford) and is not associated with WotC in any way. In fact, the name is even annoyingly confusable with the &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; official rules interpretation publication: Sage Advice Compendium.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;In general, I've seen people consider tweets to be worse than useless&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've generally noticed that people have gone from using Crawford's tweets to justify claims to avoiding even referencing them (perhaps because people will downvote posts &lt;em&gt;solely&lt;/em&gt; for using them).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen a lot of people say that the tweets only showcase Crawford's (or somebody else's) viewpoint at that specific point in time. In fact, Crawford has made tweets directly contradicting (or correcting) previous ones, which has not helped to increase their validity or helpfulness when it comes to answers here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've similarly seen people say that Crawford, despite being the lead rules designer, is just a single person whose opinion on interpreting the rules means as little / as much as anybody else's and so the tweets should not be used for evidence in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also seen newer users use Sage Advice and then seen others leave comments explaining that these are not official rules and should effectively be discarded from the answer. Given that some people &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; find the intent of the designer of the very rules we are trying to interpret to be important, I've also seen these comments not go particularly well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How have &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; changed?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Personally&lt;/em&gt;, I have stopped using tweets in my recent answers (there are a few exceptions) as I got tired of the comments people inevitably left. I have also been leaving comments under answers where Crawford has a tweet that might be considered helpful. These comments are often: &amp;quot;For whatever it's worth, Jeremy Crawford agrees in a tweet&amp;quot; (with a link to the tweet (not SA) and quoting the tweet itself) whereas before they would not have included a &amp;quot;For whatever it's worth&amp;quot; clause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-11-10T12:57:54.350" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T12:57:54.350" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11277" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11275" CreationDate="2020-11-10T13:32:18.863" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Readers decide if answers provide valuable information.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our goal is to help querents and future readers find solutions to their problems, and each person writing an answer is going to do that differently. When you write an answer, you decide what you think is the information valuable to solving the querent's problem, and the querent and future readers decide if the information you provide is valuable to solving the problem. That's how stackexchange is supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you think JC's or MM's tweets are valuable information, that's great. I have personally found them useful in some situations. They have settled disputes at my table before, and probably will in the future. Other times they have not helped at all, and have even made things worse - JC has been known to contradict himself from time to time, and one such contradiction led to more confusion for the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think including a JC tweet in your answer would be helpful to someone reading your answer, do so. But understand, official rules and rulings are generally considered &lt;em&gt;more valuable&lt;/em&gt; than unofficial ones. An answer that utilizes official material &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; a JC tweet will always be better received than answer that is just a tweet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-11-10T13:32:18.863" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11275" CreationDate="2020-11-11T04:47:47.857" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;Provide Context for Links&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Links to external resources are encouraged, but please add context around the link so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Context includes that these are tweets from designers but that they have no official status.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2020-11-11T04:47:47.857" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11279" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-12T01:58:19.260" Score="12" ViewCount="744" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Note: As of September 3rd, 2021, this policy has been removed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this policy is no longer in effect. New guidance pending.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a user posts a question, we usually need to know the game system and edition in order to adequately answer their question. Sometimes a user fails to sufficiently specify this in their question, either missing the explicit system, edition or both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a community, we have addressed topics related to this issue in over 30 meta posts (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10137/does-the-community-agree-with-the-part-of-the-never-guess-policy-regarding-ask/10139#10139&quot;&gt;full list&lt;/a&gt;) since it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6867/what-to-do-when-an-edit-guesses-the-system-being-used-rather-than-waiting-for-th&quot;&gt;originally asked about on meta&lt;/a&gt;. Over time, this policy has become controversial and complex with various nuanced interpretations, which makes it difficult to have productive discussions around it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderator team decided to create this post as a waypoint for the status quo of the current policy, clarifying our view of the current status to be used as the basis for discussions going forward. This post represents the moderator team’s understanding of the policy and therefore is how we will continue to enforce it when required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What this post is&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A new target for the FAQ entry on “guessing the system”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A canonical summary of the current state of the policy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A reference regarding this topic for users new and old&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A post to be edited/updated as or if the policy changes over time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What this post isn’t&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A place to discuss the policy or suggest changes to it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A place for lots of competing views of what the current policy says&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How to suggest changes to or request clarification on the policy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Changes, updates, and clarifications to this policy should be raised in separate meta posts. Such changes should not be proposed/discussed as answers/comments on this post; this Q&amp;amp;A is meant merely to describe the policy as it currently stands. Such changes should be incorporated into this Q&amp;amp;A only after they have already been discussed in a separate meta post and a consensus has been reached.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, for the sake of clarity...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the “Don’t Guess the System” policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-13T18:23:35.820" LastActivityDate="2022-01-13T18:23:35.820" Title="What is the “Don’t Guess the System” policy?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11279" CreationDate="2020-11-12T01:58:19.260" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The system (and edition, if relevant) must be &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; stated by the asker&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simplest expression of the current policy is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The question asker must &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; state the game system (and edition, for games with multiple editions) that they’re asking about.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all questions require a system to be specified in order to be clear. Some categories of questions, including system-agnostic questions, questions about game design and similar statistical topics, or some questions about social issues, are perfectly clear without specifying a system. However, if the question asks about game rules, content, or other facets of a game, we need the system to be clear so we know what the relevant game rules, content, or other facets are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more information on how and when to specify the system, see this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10132/why-do-i-need-to-specify-my-game-system-and-how-do-i-best-do-it&quot;&gt;Why do I need to specify my game system, and how do I best do it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What counts as &lt;em&gt;“explicitly”&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user asking the question can explicitly indicate the game system/edition by doing at least one of the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker adds the appropriate system tag for the game system and edition to their question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker states the game system and edition (if required) by name in the body (or title) of their post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker confirms the game system and edition (if required) in the comments of the post.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker links system specific rules, toolsets or content that uniquely identifies system and edition (if required). I.e. D&amp;amp;D Beyond or other similar tools for other systems. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9988/is-it-acceptable-to-add-the-dnd-5e-tag-to-questions-about-dd-beyond&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D Beyond Meta&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11573/can-we-generalize-our-policy-on-linking-system-specific-rules-toolsets-etc-as&quot;&gt;Generalising the Policy&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Exceptions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a question links or cites content that conflicts with other links/citations or the existing tags on the question. This should be considered unclear.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The term '5e' plus supporting contextual information is considered, by meta consensus, explicit declaration that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5th edition. As confirmed in this meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit: Is &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker to determine that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What to do if another user edits a question without the asker stating the system?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question fails to &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; identify the system (and edition if required), it should be closed until the asker clarifies. If instead another user edits the question without confirmation from the asker, this is considered a “guess”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits that guess the system should be reverted to prevent the question being preemptively reopened and to prevent answers addressing the incorrect system/edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-06-15T00:36:15.363" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T00:36:15.363" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11281" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11287" CreationDate="2020-11-12T02:00:40.793" Score="29" ViewCount="2400" Body="&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this meta now refers to an outdated policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a revisit of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9312/52137&quot;&gt;Is &amp;#39;5e&amp;#39; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker?&lt;/a&gt;, which has for a while been cited as part of the Never Guess the System policy, specifically to the end that simply including ‘5e’ is not sufficient information to determine that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, votes have trickled in over time, changing what the top-voted answer(s) to that Q&amp;amp;A are. There are two problems here, which require resolving:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The meta guidance/policy isn’t reflective of current praxis, including how that meta gets cited; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As one side would have much more motivation to go back to that meta and vote, it is hard to trust it as community consensus.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, as much as we might prefer not to have a discussion on this again, we need a revisit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The perceived outcomes to this meta are either to uphold our current praxis (of not accepting ‘5e’ as sufficient), or to confirm a change in community opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There’s a sidenote here about ‘closing’ meta discussions and locking in consensus to mitigate some of what has happened here. This is something we sometimes do, but there’s no set time after which that should happen, and thus very easy for that to slip. If there is such a meta discussion where it seems warranted – both consensus formed and useful to indicate such – we welcome a nudge to that end, either in chat or as a custom flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Post Status as of 14 December 2020&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Over a month after this meta was posted the top answer is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11287/48759&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's&lt;/a&gt; at +62/-9 and the second answer is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11291/48759&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast's&lt;/a&gt; at +25/-5. Given these two answers present very similar views and there are no competing answers with similar support we can consider this community consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Going forward '5e' should be considered sufficient statement of the system to be D&amp;amp;D 5e, provided there is also supporting context information.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-09-03T02:54:35.050" LastActivityDate="2021-09-03T02:54:35.050" Title="Revisit: Is &quot;5e&quot; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker to determine that the question is about D&amp;D 5e?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11281" CreationDate="2020-11-12T02:31:36.357" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Foreword: This post represents my view as a user not a moderator. It is largely a restatement of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9325/48759&quot;&gt;my view from the previous iteration of this meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Allowing '5e' as a statement of the system would be a detriment to our site&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A brief summary of the reasons I believe it is a bad idea to allow this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Multiple systems have a 5th edition&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D is not the only game to have reached a 5th edition. It isn't even the only game that is currently on 5th edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Guessing wrong is worse than waiting&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, in 99% of cases we may be right. But the 1 in 100 that we get wrong would cause more issue in total than simply asking a clarifying question. As I said in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8852/48759&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, it costs us nothing to wait for OP to clarify.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not guessing helps new users learn the system&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By not guessing and prompting the OP to include the system tag, we teach the requirements for a good question on this site. This helps to prevent them from having this issue again in the future and in turn they can help teach it to others, helping to maintain our high standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A strict policy is easier to comprehend&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8426/48759&quot;&gt;Tiggerous stated&lt;/a&gt; in a related meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our current policy is very clear, easy for new users to understand (even if they disagree with it) and relatively simple (if not always painless) to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any alternative to this policy, however well intentioned (and perhaps both sensible and justifiable in the abstract), will be much less clear, more contentious and harder to enforce.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Allowing this promotes the D&amp;amp;D-centric view of this site&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are rpg.se, not dnd.se and we want to remain that way. We have a history of D&amp;amp;D dominating our site. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7278/48759&quot;&gt;Dungeons and Dragons is dominating the site in terms of page views&lt;/a&gt; for just one example. It is likely that our high proportion of D&amp;amp;D content is what leads to missing system tags on D&amp;amp;D 5e questions in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, on the occasions we are wrong we are harming the quality of life of smaller rpgs on this site. There is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8669/48759&quot;&gt;excellent meta question&lt;/a&gt; that addresses this issue. I think it is important to keep that issue in mind when discussing policies like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not all users are equally well versed in RPGs&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New users come to the site and see tags for various D&amp;amp;D editions and some other tags they don't know. Then mention 5e in their question assuming that is enough because, as far as they know, this site is only about D&amp;amp;D. By not assuming 5e = D&amp;amp;D 5e we might just be telling them for the first time that there are game system's besides D&amp;amp;D. That is an opportunity for new users to learn and expand their horizons that might otherwise be lost.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have a problem where users assume questions are about D&amp;amp;D 5e when they are not. On a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176661/48759&quot;&gt;recent Pathfinder 1e question of mine&lt;/a&gt; a user posted a comment &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;oh thank you I actually missed that this question is not about dnd 5e. My bad&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;. I'm not trying to shame users, simply showing that it is a simple mistake to make. You see a question that has lots of terms you know and you assume it is the system you know, I've been guilty of it too. Allowing users to edit this assumption in without confirmation from OP would enable users who are only familiar with D&amp;amp;D 5e to derail questions about many systems that share keywords or other similarities to D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In conclusion; no, 5e is not enough to add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag, and it should never be.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2020-11-12T14:17:00.480" LastActivityDate="2020-11-12T14:17:00.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11283" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-12T02:36:38.200" Score="-7" ViewCount="529" Body="&lt;p&gt;The core question I'm looking to get an answer for is &amp;quot;What is a policy and how does it function?&amp;quot;. Specifically, how does something become policy, and who is responsible for maintaining or reviewing those policies?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a way to prompt answers to this core question, some sub-questions that might be addressed in answers are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there any kind of official guidelines that govern policies?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What determines if a policy is valid or not?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do votes interact with policies?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How are contentious policies handled?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is a majority needed to implement a policy, is consensus needed, or something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are moderators be allowed to overrule policies?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What happens if a user does not follow a policy?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do policies get less valid with age?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How long do policies last for?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How are contradictory or conflicting policies handled?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can a more specific policy overrule part of a less specific policy?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When are policies revisited?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does revisiting a policy invalidate the original?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How should users determine what a policy is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do policies need to be followed all the time, or just some times?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="36850" LastEditDate="2020-11-12T12:05:22.513" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T09:18:30.373" Title="What is the process for establishing and maintaining policies?" Tags="|discussion|policy|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11285" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11283" CreationDate="2020-11-12T04:51:45.077" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Answering the individual questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that these &amp;quot;answers&amp;quot; are informal and reflect what I have seen occur &lt;em&gt;in the past&lt;/em&gt; with these types of situations; they do not reflect what has always happened or will always happen, only what I would call the &amp;quot;typical&amp;quot; results:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there any kind of official guidelines that govern policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aside from the following Q&amp;amp;A I am not aware of any rigid (or loose) guidelines regarding policies; only what generally happens to happen:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11176&quot;&gt;What are the rules and policies of RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What determines if a policy is valid or not?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you use the word &amp;quot;valid&amp;quot;; just about anything can be a policy if it has (Meta) community consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do votes interact with policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Often, policies stem from questions &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; policies. That is, a question will ask how/whether something should be done and answers will give differing, well, answers to that question. The highest-scoring answer is likely to be considered the &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; answer, as it is the one with the most (Meta) community consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How are contentious policies handled?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policies can be revisited after they are made (I at least believe that they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be as otherwise it would be tradition for tradition's sake and current policies wouldn't reflect the current state of the site). That said, how &lt;em&gt;often&lt;/em&gt; policies can be revisited is not something I have seen answered anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that contending with a policy does not change the fact that &lt;em&gt;it is the policy&lt;/em&gt; and that it must be followed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is a majority needed to implement a policy, is consensus needed, or something else?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The highest-scoring answer to a question about a policy is the one that is the most agreed upon by the (Meta) community (or at least something similar to being the most agreed upon answer). Thus this is the answer that is, for lack of a better word, &amp;quot;promoted&amp;quot; into being a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are moderators be allowed to overrule policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, I'm not a moderator, but moderators &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; site users just like everybody else and they (as far as I'm aware) cannot assume any sort of dictatorial or &amp;quot;because I said so&amp;quot; sort of stance. They must follow policies just like regular site members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What happens if a user does not follow a policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, they would have the current policy explained to them and would learn from it moving forward by following the policy in the future. Whatever policy-defying action they took would almost certainly be undone but I certainly don't believe people should expect users (especially new users) to know the various policies of RPG.SE which are buried across numerous posts on an almost completely separate site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do policies get less valid with age?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe they get &amp;quot;less valid&amp;quot; but they certainly get less &lt;em&gt;reliable&lt;/em&gt; in the sense that &lt;em&gt;they reflect less the &lt;em&gt;current&lt;/em&gt; state of the site&lt;/em&gt;. If a policy stood for 50 years one would certainly hope that the reasons the policy was ever implemented were still around and if they weren't still around, one would certainly hope that the policy be revisited as the times had changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How long do policies last for?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not set time that I am aware of. Policies are changed by being revisited, so without a revisit I suppose they would last indefinitely (unless of course the policy &lt;em&gt;came&lt;/em&gt; with an expiration date, which I have never seen happen).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How are contradictory or conflicting policies handled?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These should not ever exist. If two policies contradict one another &lt;em&gt;this is a fundamental problem&lt;/em&gt; that should be pointed out and addressed quickly enough that the contradiction has little to no effect on the sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can a more specific policy overrule part of a less specific policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without a specific example this is probably unanswerable. However, as far as I'm aware, policies can do whatever they want (while avoiding contradictions); after all, it's just an agreed upon set of rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When are policies revisited?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know. There is probably an &lt;em&gt;entire&lt;/em&gt; separate Meta discussion buried in here that I don't want to hash out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does revisiting a policy invalidate the original?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers and votes and comments and time that users spent on the original question are still noteworthy, valuable, and available; so it isn't invalidated in that sense. However, yes, the &lt;em&gt;entire&lt;/em&gt; point of revisiting a policy is to either change or maintain the then-current policy (you could call this &amp;quot;invalidating&amp;quot; it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How should users determine what a policy is?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Generally&lt;/em&gt; if a question is asking about how something should be done or whether something should be done; the highest-scoring answer is going to be the current policy. That doesn't mean &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; Meta Q&amp;amp;A is about policies (we probably have very very few actually policies at all), and it is only the case &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt;. Recently, the moderators have gone and added little sections of text to the end of some policy questions describing what the current policy actually is in case it would/could otherwise be unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do policies need to be followed all the time, or just some times?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;entire&lt;/em&gt; point of a policy is that it is &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; followed by everybody. However, context, context, context: It matters and shapes our ideas around things because we &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; a policy can't be perfect and account for every possible future event, I mean, we can't even accurately imagine every possible future event so we have no chance of accounting for them all anyway. We just do our best here and we know situations and events can occur where a &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; gets... complicated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I at least do not &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; a rigidly-defined process&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, having a rigidly defined method of creating and establishing policies (such as through implementing a set time after which the highest-scoring answer is promoted into a policy) gives easy ways to track down errors, loopholes, and ways to abuse or cheat the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A quote that summaries much of how I feel about the &amp;quot;policies&amp;quot; here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] I wish the word &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; weren't getting slung around so much. Like it or not, we don't really have &lt;em&gt;policies&lt;/em&gt; nearly as much as we have &lt;em&gt;practices&lt;/em&gt;. There are very few things around here that anyone--editor, voter, moderator, employee--is going to say is so clear that &amp;quot;yes, this will be applied in &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; situations, no consideration given, no context needed.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren't a legal system, we aren't a rigidly defined system of checks and balances. We're people trying their best, and we &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that a rule can &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; have an exception. You simply &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; see the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2020-11-12T14:11:57.940" LastActivityDate="2020-11-12T14:11:57.940" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11283" CreationDate="2020-11-12T06:44:08.437" Score="-9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There is no agreement on many of these topics&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing that has struck me is that there is very little agreement on fundamental things like &amp;quot;what is a policy&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;what determines if a policy is valid&amp;quot;, or &amp;quot;how does revisiting a policy work&amp;quot;. I have received many different opinions, very close to 1 per person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that even of &amp;quot;meta&amp;quot; had 100% agreement (which it is nowhere near close to) that still leaves the vast majority of users that policies affect in anarchy. I think this is a substantial issue since policies affect these users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just writing here the answers I gather from other people as I go; I know there isn't much established knowledge on this topic, so everything is a bit random. I have heard many conflicting opinions on how things run, I'm noting them down here as that indicates further discussion is needed. Medix's post is great but it's still just 1 person's opinion - I have added their points to this post too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there any kind of official guidelines that govern policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, and the idea of &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; isn't exactly agreed upon either - some users have suggested alternate times for the concept to reduce confusion, eg &amp;quot;practice&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What determines if a policy is valid or not?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policies are valid so long as another policy hasn't invalidated them and they previously achieved &amp;quot;consensus&amp;quot; - I have heard several opinions as to what &amp;quot;consensus&amp;quot; means, I'll discuss them in the next point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Old policies are still valid, they just may have lost a bit of their context. Whether or not these hap-hazardous policies need to be followed is a point of debate in the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do votes interact with policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question is posted, and people post their suggested policies as answers; after a voting period, the highest-voted answer is &amp;quot;the policy&amp;quot;. There is no set &amp;quot;voting period&amp;quot;, so it's on a case-by-case basis. After that, voting may change, so the highest-voted answer may not be the actual policy, as it may have been voted up after that voting period ended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally it is held that the top answer is valid if it has some amount of margin, but that margin is hotly debated. Here are some opinions I have heard:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Simple majority is enough, even if it's only by 1 vote.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A substantial majority, 1 vote isn't enough, but a good lead of 5 or 10 votes is plenty (note that most policies only get around 20 votes at most, so this is a 25-50% lead).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unanimity, most of the meta community need to be in agreement, alternate answers should have far fewer votes (although no guidelines as to what this means exactly, it should be &amp;gt;50%).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind that often people suggest very similar policies, so the top 3 answers may have similar levels of votes, even the same number of votes. However if these are all basically the same policy, then that is good enough. In this case first answer is usually picked as the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this is not universally agreed on. Some users say that the top post is &amp;quot;the policy&amp;quot; regardless of the &amp;quot;voting period&amp;quot; - the history doesn't matter, only the current top answer does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How are contentious policies handled?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Newer policies overrule older policies, even if the older policy was more specific. If people disagree with the policy, they can post a thread to revisit it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are moderators be allowed to overrule policies?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. Sometimes it may appear that a moderator is overruling a policy because they are stating the opposite of the top post(s); but they are actually just restating the policy as it was at the end of the voting period. Mods aren't supposed to overrule policies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What happens if a user does not follow a policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like this issue is not well known, there are a lot of different opinions as to what happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nothing directly, but other users may downvote/vote to delete a user's posts if they are not following the policy. This can lead to the system automatically banning the user for a short time (called a suspension).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;An alternate theory is that the system won't ban you; it will just stop you from asking questions, and this only happens if your questions are getting downvoted - there's no penalty for not following policies with regard to answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some users have said that this is not correct, moderators can and do ban users directly for not following policies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, Moderators can also enforce their stance on policies by deleting comments/answers and applying greater penalties as they see fit - there aren't guides on this; it is up to the moderator's judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do policies get less valid with age?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, but they can be overruled, and since the votes on the answers can change that means the policy can look like it's saying the opposite of what it really says. They also become less reliable in that the site may have changed significantly since the policy's inception. If you follow the school of thought of &amp;quot;policies should be applied only if it makes sense in context&amp;quot;, then older policies probably apply less often.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This thinking doesn't exist in the &amp;quot;everyone must always follow policies&amp;quot; model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How are contradictory or conflicting policies handled?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The newer policy is the right one. When conflicting policies exist this can lead to one or both policies being revisited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One point to be clear about is that if a policy is revisited and the thread is either inconclusive or to retain the policy, that invalidates all policies that may otherwise have overruled it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example in 2015 policy A is made. Then in 2016 policy B is made which overrules A. In 2017 there is a thread to revisit policy A. If this re-visitation is inconclusive or to reaffirm policy A, then that would overrule policy B.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some users interpret inconclusive votes to mean that the policy is abolished.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can a more specific policy overrule part of a less specific policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Newer policies overrule older ones. Specific or general doesn't matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;When are policies revisited?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any user can start a re-visitation of a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does revisiting a policy invalidate the original?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two schools of thought:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Revisiting the policy invalidates the later regardless of the outcome&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Revisiting the policy only invalidates the later if the outcome is to overthrow it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Revisiting policies can lead to either reaffiriming the previous policy, introducing a new policy, abolishing the policy, or a moderators could deem it &amp;quot;too contentious&amp;quot; - this is at moderator discretion; as far as I know, there are no guidelines like &amp;quot;it needs 20% more votes to pass&amp;quot;, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How should users determine what a policy is?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no way for users to do this besides asking around and seeing what people say. However, recently some policies have been moved to Q&amp;amp;A posts, which overrule all policy discussion threads and correctly list the policy. Checking Q&amp;amp;A seems to be, at this time, the only reliable way to determine what a policy is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do policies need to be followed all the time, or just some times?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There seem to be 2 schools of thought on this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Policies should be followed in all situations, no consideration given, no context needed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Always follow policies all the time - but keep in mind the context is important; policies are not perfect and cannot predict every situation.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Policies are more like practices. How the policy fits the situation is more important than dogmatically following the policy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a pragmatic point of view, the downside of not following a policy is the downvotes and potential deletion. It is not unheard of for even a popular and high rep user to be banned due to this (although it is unclear if it was automatic or by mods).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site only considers fraudulent votes to be serial upvoting/downvoting, so voting based on policy is ok here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="59609" LastEditDate="2020-11-17T09:18:30.373" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T09:18:30.373" CommentCount="49" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11281" CreationDate="2020-11-12T13:33:54.077" Score="60" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Let experts make expert decisions.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the whole point of Stack Exchange. The entire model is people who know what they're talking about answering questions. People come here to ask questions because they expect someone here is equipped to solve their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11282/62294&quot;&gt;As linksassin admitted&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, in 99% of cases we may be right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then we should let our experts be right. 99% of the time, we are adequately equipped to solve the user's problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What is really our objective?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Solving the querent's problem&lt;/em&gt;. This should be our primary objective. Using the site and learning how to most clearly communicate questions should be a secondary, or even tertiary, objective of ours. By saying, &amp;quot;we cannot answer your question until you learn how to use tags, even though everyone knows what system you're playing&amp;quot;, we are putting problem solving in the back seat and setting site mechanics as our primary objective for new users. &lt;em&gt;We should never tell a new user that our problem with their lack of tags is more important than the problem they bring to the table.&lt;/em&gt; But that is exactly what we are doing when we know what they're talking about but artificially hold up the problem solving process because they didn't explicitly state what system they are playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We can teach asking better questions without artificially obstructing our primary objective.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can teach users how to use the site and ask better questions without putting problem solving on hold. &lt;em&gt;This should be obvious&lt;/em&gt;. When we know what a user is asking about, we can both answer their question &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; teach them about the site.  This is what comments are for. This keeps our objectives properly aligned. We focus an answering their question and secondarily engage them on how to ask better questions and use site mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Readers decide if answers provide valuable information.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the solution to the 1%. The 1% of times someone is wrong about their system guess will be sorted out by readers' votes. Even when it is so unclear in a question what system is being played, &lt;em&gt;answers can be made sufficiently clear to still be useful&lt;/em&gt;. If a question says &amp;quot;I'm playing 5e&amp;quot; and it could be D&amp;amp;D or Shadowrun, answers can easily enough state which game the answer pertains to. If OP never clarifies, both answers provide valuable information to future readers. If OP does come back to clarify, the answer for the wrong system will be downvoted or deleted. This is just the site functioning as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A necessary distinction.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I'm not advocating for a wild west editing policy. There is a clear distinction between &amp;quot;5e question with vague context&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;5e questions with uniquely D&amp;amp;D vocabulary&amp;quot;. But I'm not going to reinvent the wheel explaining it to you. I stand on the shoulders of giants, so to speak: Doppelgreener explained this perfectly in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9317/62294&quot;&gt;her response to the meta we are now revisiting&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should be OK interpreting “5e” as “D&amp;amp;D 5e” when the question is also talking about D&amp;amp;D-isms. (If they're talking about things that don't sound like D&amp;amp;D 5e, like talking about hackers, we should not guess.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; other games with a 5e, but their players tend to be acutely aware they're not the only RPG and not the only 5th edition RPG, so they'll say what their game is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D players are the ones who have an observed tendency to forget or not know that other games exist, or get asked about on this site, or have a fifth edition. This means if someone says just “5e” and they're talking about monks or fighters or warlocks, they'll reliably be talking about D&amp;amp;D 5e. I honestly can't think of a time this hasn't been true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our super strict “don't guess the system” guidelines were created during a time when guessing was almost always wrong, and we had a disaster once a week or so: high frequency × lots of trouble = tons of trouble.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, almost zero × lots of trouble = almost no trouble, maybe once in a blue moon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; guess though: tell them “Hey, we're sure you mean D&amp;amp;D 5e here, so we've edited that onto the question. If you didn't mean that please let us know and we'll adjust.” When we're wrong we do damage control: we revise the question, remove the answers, ask someone to create a new D&amp;amp;D 5e-specific question to house them, and people repost their answers over there, and the original question continues on with its correct game. I expect this won't happen even once a year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-07T13:34:03.660" LastActivityDate="2020-12-07T13:34:03.660" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11289" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-12T16:06:00.667" Score="13" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;My most recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177381/52137&quot;&gt;What is the difference between a spell with a range of &amp;quot;Self&amp;quot; and a spell with a range of &amp;quot;Self (XYZ)&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;, has been marked as a duplicate twice (it was closed as a dupe, then reopened, then reclosed again) of the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71791/do-spells-with-a-range-of-self-target-the-caster&quot;&gt;Do spells with a range of &amp;quot;Self&amp;quot; target the caster?&lt;/a&gt;. It is not, in my opinion, but would like to get some commentary on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked question is asking about whether or not spells with a range of &amp;quot;Self&amp;quot; target the caster. My question is both broader in scope, by asking about both &amp;quot;Self&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Self (XYZ)&amp;quot;, as well as not particularly caring about whether or not the caster is the actual target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The focus of my question really is &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;What is the difference between 'Self' and 'Self (XYZ)'?&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This is not the same thing as &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Does a spell with a range of 'Self' target the caster?&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;. Regardless of whether or not the caster is targeted by one or other definitions, I want to know the difference between these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-13T02:57:50.487" LastActivityDate="2020-11-13T04:23:51.130" Title="Is my question about the difference between spell ranges &quot;Self&quot; vs. &quot;Self (XYZ)&quot; really a duplicate of this question about &quot;Self&quot;-range spell targets?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11289" CreationDate="2020-11-12T16:27:24.260" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Not a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There must be a difference between self and self(range). This question is asking that difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is no difference, then that's an answer, but it's not the same as &amp;quot;Do spells with range of self target the caster&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That isn't what this  question is asking at all. It may end up containing a similar answer, but that's not a duplicate criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-11-13T04:23:51.130" LastActivityDate="2020-11-13T04:23:51.130" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11281" CreationDate="2020-11-12T18:10:41.517" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Per a previous answer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9571/22566&quot;&gt;only if 5e doesn't occur in a vacuum&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are sufficient contextual clues to determine &amp;quot;5e of what?&amp;quot; such that a player of the game and that edition can clearly recognize them - then &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; has communicated what it needs to (and adding the tag becomes helpful).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If 5e is referred to &lt;em&gt;and no contextual clues are available&lt;/em&gt; (as I discussed in the linked answer) this leaves the whole community guessing and we are better off closing, and then engaging with the user to clarify what game it is that they are asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this meta is an effort to make a policy based on the question and the title, it seems to me that the policy is based on an untruth: that the 5e is referred to (when it is D&amp;amp;D 5e that the person is asking about) when they don't also leave sufficient contextual clues for someone reasonably expert in the system to identify that.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;It isn't that simple.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Sometimes there are clues, sometimes there are not.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;There is more than the variable &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; in this equation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A rule, or an If/Then statement, isn't the end all and be all.  It isn't as simple as an on/off switch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question comes across to me as an assertion that because we have a divided bucket of opinions that somehow raising this (yet again) will finally get the consensus that has remained elusive. I am not sure that's correct.  We might just be picking at a scab.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How to think through this when you encounter such a question:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If there are sufficient contexual clues, it's not a problem, no need to close, 5e tells you enough add the tag if it is missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If there aren't sufficient contexual clues, close and get clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But Korvin, what are sufficient contextual clues?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have to ask that then you aren't expert enough (see again what I address in the linked answer) so it would be best to skip that question and leave it to someone who knows enough.   I sure skip a lot of PF questions in review queues, since I have no basis for making a call.  A few years back I asked some questions for clarity in comments in some game systems I am not familiar with, and realized eventually that I was better off just letting those who are good at that system add assistance, or not, and just leave it alone.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yeah, that's more effort, but it seems to me an effort worth making.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2020-11-25T16:51:47.057" LastActivityDate="2020-11-25T16:51:47.057" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11275" CreationDate="2020-11-17T05:44:56.137" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;RAW, RAI, RAF, house-rules/homebrew (Good Subjective), or JC/MM's twitter are all useful to different games and different tables. Regardless of any consensus on this site, people run games using a variety of sources and restrictions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if the question specifically asks for a certain kind of clarification, all of those are valid answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they do specify certain restraints (eg, &amp;quot;RAW only&amp;quot;), then even though the information is less useful to that particular user, it may still form a valid answer for other users and shouldn't be discarded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T05:44:56.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11294" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-17T08:56:20.173" Score="-1" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently there is an edit war with regards to the [dnd-5e] tag on this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177548/artificer-eldritch-cannon-protector-temp-hit-points-and-wildshape&quot;&gt;Artificer Eldritch Cannon Protector temp hit points and Wildshape&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is unambiguously about D&amp;amp;D 5e, but there doesn't seem to be agreement on how to handle it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to hear some opinions on what should be done on this particular question. I think eventually the OP will return to state the system, but it would be useful to discuss how to avoid future disagreements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59609" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2020-11-17T10:34:17.870" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T10:34:17.870" Title="Discussion on thread &quot;Artificer Eldritch Cannon Protector temp hit points and Wildshape&quot;" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11295" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11294" CreationDate="2020-11-17T10:02:56.633" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We should do nothing until the question is clarified.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two instances of edits by different users accompanied by two rollbacks of the same user don't make an edit war. By majority vote, our current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/44723&quot;&gt;policy&lt;/a&gt; is to apply a principle of best judgement. However, it is a narrow vote that has been swinging in both directions on different occasions (it initially had extremely favoured support in case of overturning the old policy, then later it had substantial support in keeping old policy, and currently it has narrow support (one vote) in favour of overturning old policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Engaging further takes energy that we can spend at a different place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T10:02:56.633" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11296" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11300" CreationDate="2020-11-17T13:04:14.923" Score="7" ViewCount="257" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today is the day of the &lt;em&gt;Tasha's Cauldron of Everything&lt;/em&gt; release. Answers &lt;em&gt;quoting&lt;/em&gt; its content starting showing up &lt;em&gt;yesterday&lt;/em&gt;. Since it is here now, obviously this question does not apply to &lt;em&gt;Tasha's&lt;/em&gt; anymore. But the principle still needs to be discussed so it can be put into practice in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we refrain from posting answers that rely on quotes from unreleased content?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some points to consider:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The community at large would not yet have access to unreleased content, so the typical community moderation cannot be done - quotes cannot be verified for accuracy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Being able to quote unreleased content is very suspicious. It seems likely such access is gained either through piracy (leaks) or the violation of an NDA, something we are vehemently opposed to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-17T19:18:22.713" LastActivityDate="2020-11-19T20:37:26.997" Title="Should we refrain from posting answers which rely on unreleased content?" Tags="|discussion|answers|citations|copyright|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11296" CreationDate="2020-11-17T14:07:05.583" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think the bigger issue is that we can't verify the accuracy of any quotes used.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We mostly can't verify whether quotes came from a leaked copy of the content, an early access copy with an NDA a la an MTG-style partial spoiler, or a legitimate copy obtained via legitimate means. We basically have to take whoevers word for it that they have obtained the information legitimately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, since we don't have access to legitimate copies of that product to verify any claims they might make, we can't verify if the answer is accurate, and that by itself is enough for me to lean towards not allowing answers that rely on unreleased content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes Wizards will release pictures of pages from books a few days or weeks before the full release as a kind of preview/teaser. I think any answers quoting text these publicly available teasers should be fine, as long as we can verify that they were released by a legitimate source, like if JC posts a page on twitter, or it's spoiled on wizards.com.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see an issue with people asking questions about it, as the only real negative is that they will have to wait until the official release date to get an answer that can be verified as correct, and we can just close the question until the official release date of the product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53087" LastEditorUserId="53087" LastEditDate="2020-11-17T14:15:55.227" LastActivityDate="2020-11-17T14:15:55.227" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11281" CreationDate="2020-11-17T23:37:36.170" Score="-8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Statistically, it's a clear enough statement, but to be fair, we should treat it as though it isn't.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't fair that people who ask questions about industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition can get useful answers to their questions without even having to name their system, while people who play anything else, even if they correctly name and tag their system, get non-useful answers from people who assume any question they recognize D&amp;amp;D 5E terms in must be about D&amp;amp;D 5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People playing other systems can encounter scenarios where they want to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/172271/is-there-a-cost-for-donning-or-doffing-a-shield-and-armor-during-combat&quot;&gt;put armor on in combat&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161718/is-there-any-way-to-mitigate-crits&quot;&gt;mitigate critical hits&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138560/my-druid-wants-to-transform-into-a-blink-dog-how-do-i-rule-this&quot;&gt;be a druid and turn into a blink dog&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yes, the answers that assume those questions are about D&amp;amp;D 5E get downvoted with a quickness, but that's also kind of a problem, in that often those answers will get deleted and low-rep users viewing the question don't see deleted answers. (Or answers hidden because of very low score? Is that a thing too?) So it's just an empty question that they think they know the answer to, and then the original question gets another unhelpful answer and the respondent gets another tranche of downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like a waste of time and opportunity to wait for some kind of explicit statement of &amp;quot;I am playing industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition&amp;quot; from the original poster, even if that's just adding it in as a tag to not break the conversational tone of the question, before a question is opened for answers. But I'm still in favor of doing it to &lt;strong&gt;establish the contrapositive&lt;/strong&gt;; that is, if there's a question that's open for answers, and neither the title nor question body nor tags mention industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition, people can be sure it's not a question about industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition even if they don't know the system that it actually is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because &lt;strong&gt;it also isn't fair&lt;/strong&gt; to present people without much experience outside industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition with a front page full of questions where they can tell that some are definitely about D&amp;amp;D 5E, and some just seem like they might be about D&amp;amp;D 5E and other people have assumed they are and answered, and some seem like they're about D&amp;amp;D 5E but nobody's answered, and the way they're supposed to tell which ones are okay to assume and which ones aren't is... a volatile list of acceptable substitutions on the meta?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't read somebody else's mind who writes an answer, any more than I can read somebody else's mind who writes a question, but of the five people to swing and miss at those other system questions, one has continued giving answers. Just a couple, and they had a gold badge already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Part of this unfairness is that we don't have a way to clearly specify the game system in a question. A proper noun could be any number of things in the big tent of industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition; a setting, a structured play environment, an unfamiliar game element. It's highly probable that a system tag for that proper noun exists, but does every system tag mention it's for a game system? There's no way otherwise to tell system tags from non-system tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The judgment of whether or not someone has specified a game system is left up to people who volunteer to flag and review. It's the best we can do for now, and I hope they have a good degree of awareness of what game systems are out there, but when they're making that decision I'd like to leave them a few clear guidelines rather than an arbitrarily-sized list of exceptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because, lastly, &lt;strong&gt;it's not fair to the future&lt;/strong&gt;. Industry-leading product Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition might not be industry-leading forever. As time stretches on, all human projects will dissolve and fail, and I'd rather maintain a clear identification policy than have to keep revisiting acceptable alternates for popular games as time goes on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2020-11-18T05:09:18.183" LastActivityDate="2020-11-18T05:09:18.183" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2020-11-18T04:58:46.673" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;When you try to make cheese, but end up with some kind of weird custard instead&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/82267/can-i-use-the-cap-of-water-breathing-or-the-cloak-of-the-manta-ray-to-survive-in&quot;&gt;Can I use the Cap of Water Breathing or the Cloak of the Manta Ray to survive inside a Bag of Holding?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastActivityDate="2020-11-18T04:58:46.673" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11300" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11296" CreationDate="2020-11-19T01:39:54.760" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Posts with unverifiable quotes are poor posts - not illegitimate ones&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should treat these types of poor answers the way we treat any on the poor answers - through voting; not through censorship.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many ways that advance copies containing confidential information can legitimately enter the public domain. A proof copy accidentally (and I mean legitimately accidentally; not &amp;quot;nudge, nudge, wink, wink&amp;quot; accidentally) left where someone not a party to the NDA can find it is no longer legally confidential information. Whether the finder chooses to disclose it is an ethical question; not a legal one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that we should apply &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor#:%7E:text=Hanlon%27s%20razor%20is%20a%20principle,unlikely%20explanations%20for%20human%20behavior.&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Hanlon's razor&lt;/a&gt;: &amp;quot;never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2020-11-19T20:37:26.997" LastActivityDate="2020-11-19T20:37:26.997" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11281" CreationDate="2020-11-21T09:10:46.433" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty much an outsider nowadays, so this is an outsiders perspective, with little to no regard to policy or how it &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The brand name &amp;quot;Cola&amp;quot; in my country is being used to describe any kind of drink that is brown, sugary and fizzling. If you order a &amp;quot;Cola&amp;quot; it is assumed you mean Coke. Once in a while a restaurant may not serve Coca-Cola and may give you a Pepsi instead. Most will ask &amp;quot;we only have Pepsi, is that okay&amp;quot;. Some will not ask and just bring Pepsi and a small fraction of people will be upset by this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what we are doing here is akin to me ordering a &amp;quot;Cola&amp;quot; and the waiter saying &amp;quot;I'm so sorry sir I cannot take that order, I will have to call my manager.&amp;quot; And then 20 minutes later the manager comes and says &amp;quot;I'm sorry sir, you were ambiguous, did you mean the soft drink that is produced by the Coca-Cola company that our menu lists as Coke? We take this very seriously here, please be precise, we cannot serve you a Coke if you are that sloppy in your order.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd be dumbfounded. I'd probably not even have waited for the manager, I mean come on, that's ridiculous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;90%+ of our front page is about DnD 5e, so asking a question about &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; that has no indication that is &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; DnD 5e should be understood. Sure, if it talks about spaceships or shotguns or has any hint that it's not DnD they are talking about, then absolutely, ask for clarification. But if it's a question about the armor class of a a paladin, insisting to clarify this because there is a hypothetical other system out there &lt;em&gt;somewhere&lt;/em&gt; that might apply too... that's like the manager in the Cola example. Way out of line for a normal person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2020-11-21T09:10:46.433" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11259" CreationDate="2020-11-25T19:18:25.007" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question is nonsense from the ground up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Joules” is not a measure of strength. Ever. It would be just as (in)correct to ask how many lumens, gallons, or parsecs each strength score equates to. It’s like asking “how heavy is blue?”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you fixed that (maybe asking about power [Watts] instead?) you might have a question that was answerable. I would still anticipate very careful crafting to avoid being opinion-based, but it might be doable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is though, the question is irredeemable nonsense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2020-11-25T19:18:25.007" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11303" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-11-30T17:22:11.053" Score="5" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following are all related or relatively similar questions about effects that deal damage without specifying a type being combined with effects that deal multiple types of damage at once:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103132&quot;&gt;Can I choose which damage type my Sneak Attack does if my weapon does multiple types?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178020&quot;&gt;When a ranged attack deals multiple damage types, can I choose what damage type my Sharpshooter bonus gives?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/127429&quot;&gt;Can a Barbarian choose which weapon die to add for his Brutal Critical?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/116731&quot;&gt;If the attack or spell that the goblin&amp;#39;s Fury of the Small trait is applied to deals multiple types of damage, what type is the extra damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/172777&quot;&gt;Can a Zealot Barbarian apply Radiant rage damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are any of these duplicates of each other? Worth noting, the second was recently closed as a duplicate of the first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-11-30T20:30:13.970" LastActivityDate="2020-11-30T21:09:51.170" Title="Are any of these questions about the type of additional damage in D&amp;D 5e duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11303" CreationDate="2020-11-30T21:09:51.170" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No; some of them might have the same answer, but the questions are about different specific features.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/33569&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt; to the linked Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7523/33569&quot;&gt;If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We close Question A as a duplicate of Question B only when &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; of&#xA;the following is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;obviously&lt;/strong&gt; as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can&#xA;tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question B has an &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; answer to Question A. Obvious here&#xA;means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a&#xA;couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer&#xA;which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as&#xA;obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A&#xA;alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are&#xA;met this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea here is it's the same question with an obvious answer.&#xA;Someone redirected from Question A to B can see obviously why they&#xA;were redirected and find a satisfactory answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of the questions you're asking about, they're about different specific features/cases. They might have the same answer, but they're not quite the same question. As such, they're not actually duplicates of one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is a general rule in D&amp;amp;D 5e that addresses all the specific variants of this issue, it might make sense to have a canonical Q&amp;amp;A that addresses that general case, and close the others as duplicates of it, as was done in the following case: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9624/33569&quot;&gt;What, if anything, should we do about these D&amp;amp;D 5e multiclass spellcasting questions about spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in this case, there is no such general rule. In fact, several of the Q&amp;amp;As you linked rely on the wording of the specific feature in question; some of them note that there is no such general rule on this matter (and thus have to rely on material from outside the rules to support resolving the issue a certain way). As such, even a canonical Q&amp;amp;A for the general case of &amp;quot;What damage type does extra damage do when it's not specified?&amp;quot; would probably not be a good fit here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2020-11-30T21:09:51.170" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11305" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-04T13:15:47.650" Score="3" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following questions about creatures attuning to/using magic items in D&amp;amp;D 5e are all somewhat similar, some involving specific features that may or may not actually impact the answer to their question. Are any of them duplicates?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101025&quot;&gt;Are there restrictions on who can attune to magical items with no prerequisite?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178163&quot;&gt;Can an animal cast spells via a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178162&quot;&gt;Can a tamed owl cast spells from Ring of spell storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/70692&quot;&gt;Can my familiar use a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159527&quot;&gt;Can a familiar use a magic item to cast a concentration spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177010&quot;&gt;Can a familiar from the Find Familiar spell use a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94199&quot;&gt;Can beasts benefit from magic items?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115569&quot;&gt;Can an animal attune to a magic item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/154499&quot;&gt;Can a pet cat attune to a magical item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/107328&quot;&gt;Can a familiar attune and wear or use a magic item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115560&quot;&gt;Can an Awakened creature attune to items?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/164207&quot;&gt;Can a Tiny Servant use a Wand of Magic Missiles?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, (ignoring recent questions) currently these 2 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177010&quot;&gt;Can a familiar from the Find Familiar spell use a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/154499&quot;&gt;Can a pet cat attune to a magical item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...are closed as duplicates of these 2 questions respectively:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/107328&quot;&gt;Can a familiar attune and wear or use a magic item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115569&quot;&gt;Can an animal attune to a magic item?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-12-07T00:56:21.190" LastActivityDate="2020-12-07T01:07:30.773" Title="Are any of these D&amp;D 5e questions about creatures attuning to and using magic items duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|questions|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11305" CreationDate="2020-12-04T19:34:24.310" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;It seems there are a lot of variations based on a central theme: &lt;strong&gt;What are the requirements to use magic items and who can use them?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Within that scope there are variations of magic items (We can ignore items with prerequisites as they are generally more self-evident of who can use them):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Non-attuned&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Attuned&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Ring of Spell Storing as a specific case; there may be more&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And entities:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Normal beasts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Awakened beasts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Familiars&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Spectral forces (Unseen Servant, Tiny Servant, etc)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Between all that there are a dozen or more combinations; but with minor redundancy. Each must be answered in some fashion, but they are interdependent of each other. People are asking the question(s) in one-to-one relations, many-to-one relations, and one-to-many relations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can a familiar (one) use a Ring of Spell Storing (one)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Can Awakened beasts (one) use magic items (many)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What normal creatures/beasts (many) can use attuned magic items (one)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With all that said, could we really have a single question that requires the answerer to explain the whole matrix of possibilities; many-to-many? They would have to justify every combination, every permutation. While possible, it's not likely. Unless they were allowed to build their logic based on other sub/duplicate questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem comes from this being a strictly Q&amp;amp;A medium. Good answers need to have valid references and solid reasoning; and when the source material doesn't present the fact plainly, we rely on other questions/answers to build up a logical conclusion. So there needs to be minor questions that appear as duplicates but are actually handling specific cross-categories to be building blocks to create a foundation for the ultimate matrix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to that end, I would target the one-to-one style questions and mark them as duplicates of the many-to-one/one-to-many questions. We can also safely mark duplicate those that are completely redundant; A familiar is a familiar, even if they are Pact of the Chain. An owl, a pig, a snake, and a fish have similar stats when considering attunement and only really differ in physiology which is a completely different subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I think there needs to be a certain amount of overlap, or perceived overlap, as each of the variations I mentioned carry unique constraints.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Specific dupe/reopen suggestions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've evaluated each of the RPG.SE questions you linked regarding which ones should stay open and which ones should be closed as duplicates of others (I reordered a few entries from your list to put them next to the questions they should be closed as a duplicate of):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101025&quot;&gt;Are there restrictions on who can attune to magical items with no prerequisite?&lt;/a&gt; (Keep open)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178163&quot;&gt;Can an animal cast spells via a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; generic, and asking a key permutation)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178162&quot;&gt;Can a tamed owl cast spells from Ring of spell storing?&lt;/a&gt; (too specific; would be handled above)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159527&quot;&gt;Can a familiar use a magic item to cast a concentration spell?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; concentration is a different wrinkle)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/70692&quot;&gt;Can my familiar use a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt; (this and the next are the same; close one as a duplicate of the other)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177010&quot;&gt;Can a familiar from the Find Familiar spell use a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt; (this and the above are the same; close one as a duplicate of the other)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/94199&quot;&gt;Can beasts benefit from magic items?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; generic, and asking a key permutation of 'use')&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115569&quot;&gt;Can an animal attune to a magic item?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; generic, and asking a key permutation of 'attune')&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/154499&quot;&gt;Can a pet cat attune to a magical item?&lt;/a&gt; (close as a duplicate of the above; same as any animal attuning)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/107328&quot;&gt;Can a familiar attune and wear or use a magic item?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; generic, and asking a key permutation)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/115560&quot;&gt;Can an Awakened creature attune to items?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open; generic, and asking a key permutation)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/164207&quot;&gt;Can a Tiny Servant use a Wand of Magic Missiles?&lt;/a&gt; (keep open for now; asking a key permutation but saying just a wand is too specific)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 2 pairs of questions at the bottom of your post have correctly been closed as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38834" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-12-07T01:07:30.773" LastActivityDate="2020-12-07T01:07:30.773" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11307" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-08T12:36:26.523" Score="3" ViewCount="168" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do we deal with clarification comments on questions from deleted users?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177616/44723&quot;&gt;How to avoid killing player characters due to a single (un)lucky roll?&lt;/a&gt; prompted this question, this is not about the specific question but to get a more general understanding about how we approach comments for clarification that no longer are answerable by this user's original account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2020-12-08T21:37:00.303" Title="How do we deal with clarification comments on questions from deleted users?" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11307" CreationDate="2020-12-08T16:04:41.890" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no one way to handle this. Clarification can mean so many different things, best handled by different action. As a general note, the cost to leaving valid clarification requests up is pretty minimal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key idea when handling questions (or answers for that matter) from deleted users, is the utility to future readers. This concern is always applicable, but when the post owner is still active, it's usually better to take it with them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, when encountering old clarifications (and the user is deleted/no longer active) ask yourself, would this make the post better? Good here means clear, focused, and useful. If the matter being clarified is minor, user/person specific, or tangential it can probably just go away. Consider flagging as NLN or using a custom flag giving that rationale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the the clarification request is more substantial (but not such that question was closed), consider fixing the question yourself. The bounds editing an &amp;quot;abandoned&amp;quot; post is a bit looser, but the goals here should be to make the question as much as possible ask for the answers it already has.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; There's no one way to handle this, consider consulting other users (eg. in chat) about the specific case, or just leaving it alone, it's probably fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†– we actually do fix questions to match their answers on occasion, though usually that's to help a new(er) users with a question that's too broad/unclear but which got a helpful answer before it got closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="48793" LastEditDate="2020-12-08T21:37:00.303" LastActivityDate="2020-12-08T21:37:00.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11309" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-11T03:02:32.477" Score="7" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;I answered the questions and suggestions, but I am apparently not allowed to post now. Please explain. I apologise if I overstepped somewhere. I'm new to this exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="67285" OwnerDisplayName="Vakkoo" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-12-11T07:41:58.893" LastActivityDate="2020-12-11T21:57:05.810" Title="Why am I banned from posting?" Tags="|support|answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11310" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11309" CreationDate="2020-12-11T04:10:00.653" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You probably triggered an automatic block&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86997/what-can-i-do-when-getting-we-are-no-longer-accepting-questions-answers-from-th&quot;&gt;What can I do when getting &amp;quot;We are no longer accepting questions/answers from this account&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Relevantly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An automatic filter is in place to ban questions or answers from IP addresses or accounts with a history of extremely poor posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid bypassing the filter, its internal rules are a secret, but it is partly based on downvotes cast by other members of the communities. If other members of the site consistently give your posts a low ranking, you should try to identify the reason(s) for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To help prevent you from encountering a ban, the system will give you a warning if you are on the road to a ban, and may temporarily prevent you from posting questions or answers for a few days. If, despite these warnings and rate limits, you continue to post too many poorly-received questions or answers, you will be altogether banned from posting more, and you will see the error message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-12-11T21:57:05.810" LastActivityDate="2020-12-11T21:57:05.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11309" CreationDate="2020-12-11T10:47:46.820" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The RPG stack can be a tough crowd. Ideally, there should be a clearly correct answer, based on source materials. 'If it happened at my table, I'd rule it like this' style answers often get downvoted not because they are bad in themselves but because everyone has an opinion and generally we are looking for something more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As Dale has explained, if your posts are poorly received, this will lead to suspensions, although the details of the algorithm are not public.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21353" LastActivityDate="2020-12-11T10:47:46.820" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11312" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-16T14:48:18.310" Score="4" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate for closure: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178458/is-the-echo-of-a-echo-knight-actually-a-creature&quot;&gt;Is the Echo of a Echo Knight actually a creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dupe Target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178207/does-an-echo-knight-fighters-echo-provoke-an-opportunity-attack-when-it-moves&quot;&gt;Does an Echo Knight fighter's echo provoke an opportunity attack when it moves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question asking if the Echo Knight's Echo is a creature or not a duplicate of the question asking about the Echo triggering opportunity attacks?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-12-17T10:03:25.803" Title="Is this question about the nature of an Echo Knight's Echo a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11313" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-16T15:15:56.283" Score="11" ViewCount="337" Body="&lt;p&gt;For many of us, role playing games provide an escape from the world, allowing us to be someone else in another universe, together with friends, new and old. As we near the end of 2020, let us celebrate this community we have built - a community founded upon helping others and making friends in other worlds, and in this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2020 has taught us that the time we have is precious, so run fast. Run fast toward those you love. Run fast toward new friends, new opportunities to love someone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;And jump for joy when you get there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every Hatmas, we wear and see fun and dapper combinations of hats: the hats go away at the end of the Hatmas season, but we can still preserve some memories and pictures of the fabulous hattery we've seen. To that end:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's have a fun and/or slightly embarrassing yearbook.&lt;/strong&gt; Post the great hats and hatments you've seen. Show off the ones &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; made for yourself which you think are fantastic or fabulous or the greatest. If you spy an excellent thing in the wild, I guess you can stick that here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend one answer per person (or a small number), and revise it to make additions. Keep it silly, keep it fun, and be kind. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do I take a screenshot?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &lt;strong&gt;Lightshot&lt;/strong&gt; extension &lt;a href=&quot;https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/lightshot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Firefox&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lightshot-screenshot-tool/mbniclmhobmnbdlbpiphghaielnnpgdp?hl=en&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Chrome&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Windows 10:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;win&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;shift&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;s&lt;/kbd&gt; for the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt;. In Windows 7, you'll have to search for that tool in the start menu. Otherwise take a screenshot of your browser with &lt;kbd&gt;alt&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, crop it in MS Paint, and save it as a PNG (not GIF or JPEG).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mac:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;cmd ⌘&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;4&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click and drag to outline the region you want to screenshot. The screenshot will be saved to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On Linux:&lt;/strong&gt; Gnome/Ubuntu: press &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click-and-drag over the region you want to screenshot and save the screenshot somewhere. If the shortcut doesn't work, either set it up in System Settings/Keyboard/shortcuts/screenshots or use a tool like &lt;a href=&quot;http://apt.ubuntu.com/p/shutter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shutter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2020-12-16T16:21:17.657" LastActivityDate="2020-12-29T17:20:18.993" Title="Run Fast and Jump for Joy: Winter Bash 2020 Photo Album" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11313" CreationDate="2020-12-16T15:57:53.417" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here's the start of my photo album page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WYb4Hm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;my avatar with a messy hair hat&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-16T15:58:37.353" LastActivityDate="2020-12-16T15:58:37.353" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11313" CreationDate="2020-12-16T16:38:43.930" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The many hats of Markov.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TbF9Om.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TbF9Om.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jzrhe.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jzrhe.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jDuh6m.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/jDuh6m.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/X8AhS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/X8AhS.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-18T17:06:57.820" LastActivityDate="2020-12-18T17:06:57.820" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11316" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11312" CreationDate="2020-12-16T16:51:22.390" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Closing it as a duplicate presumes a specific correct answer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument is that it's redundant to ask question 2 (is the echo a creature?) because the answer to question 1 (does it provoke opportunity attacks?) already entails that. This envisions the answer to question 1 as a syllogism:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A. Only a creature can provoke opportunity attacks.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;B. An echo is not a creature.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Therefore, C. An echo does not provoke opportunity attacks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If that answer properly establishes its premises, it will contain an answer to question 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;strong&gt;this is not the only possible answer&lt;/strong&gt;. In fact there are currently &lt;em&gt;three&lt;/em&gt; answers to question 1:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the accepted answer (&amp;quot;no&amp;quot;), which relies on that syllogism;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;an overwhelming upvoted answer (&amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;) that directly contradicts the accepted answer;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a moderately upvoted answer (&amp;quot;I don't know&amp;quot;) saying the language is ambiguous.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, assuming the validity of premise A, the &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; answer must &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; imply an answer to question 2--that the echo &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a creature. However, the argument actually made by the &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; answer is that &lt;em&gt;premise A is unreliable&lt;/em&gt; (and it goes on to answer question 1 by considering other factors).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closing question 2 as a duplicate therefore amounts to affirming premise A and rejecting the &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; answer to question 1, and probably the &amp;quot;I don't know&amp;quot; answer as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This is not what closing questions is for.&lt;/strong&gt; It's a janitorial tool for keeping the space clean and maintaining the quality of questions, not a device for declaring victory in arguments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2020-12-17T10:03:25.803" LastActivityDate="2020-12-17T10:03:25.803" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11313" CreationDate="2020-12-16T16:56:42.493" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm moving house, but starting next week I'm going to be drawing pictures for these avatars, mark my words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be safe!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/RkCb9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;social distancing (meta)&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/RkCb9.png&quot; alt=&quot;social distancing (meta)&quot; title=&quot;social distancing (meta)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2020-12-16T16:56:42.493" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11318" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11319" CreationDate="2020-12-16T23:10:35.447" Score="12" ViewCount="219" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently commented on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/178399/63221&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. I wanted to share how I think the answer can be improved, but I evidently did something wrong. Since there is no deletion notice, I have to ask here: What did I do wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Was my feedback too long? (4 comments in total)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did I offend/insult someone? If yes, I am truly sorry and it would be important to me to talk to the person.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178397/178578#comment481709_178399&quot;&gt;an outdated link&lt;/a&gt; to one of my comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63221" LastActivityDate="2020-12-16T23:33:57.250" Title="Why were my comments deleted?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11319" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11318" CreationDate="2020-12-16T23:33:57.250" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You did nothing wrong, but the answerer didn't want to make those changes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hi, I'm the mod who deleted those comments (and others) in response to NLN flags from the post owner. We generally take those as &amp;quot;I've decided not to implement these suggestions&amp;quot; (in the case of no edits) and delete the comments (suggestions which will not be acted upon are obsolete).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some cases we might post a comment saying suggestions have been rejected and removed, and encouraging users to use their votes, post an opposing/better answer, and/or just moving on, but that's also an effort and noise consideration. We generally expect users to understand that comments are temporary and to move on in response to rejected suggestions, and so would usually only post it in response to repeats. But don't worry, everyone has to be taught this at some point, and we teach/remind of this fairly frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2020-12-16T23:33:57.250" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11320" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11321" CreationDate="2020-12-18T18:15:58.427" Score="7" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;This isn't a huge issue, (and may be a duplicate, but I didn't see another like it), but on a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178652/does-something-count-as-dealing-damage-if-its-damage-is-reduced-to-zero&quot;&gt;recent question&lt;/a&gt; there was quite a bit of discussion on a pair of answers which was ultimately moved to chat. The discussion seemed to generate some heat and unhappiness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, more comments are being added to those same answers which cover the exact same ground as in the chat and offer nothing new, other than to demonstrate that one additional person supports one or the other answers. They are, essentially, stirring up the same arguments in a way that will clutter the page (rather than leaving it to the chat, where anyone that would like to continue engaging can do so).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I understand stack policy correctly, these comments are bound for deletion no matter what. But I'm not as clear on what I, as a non-mod user, should do. &lt;strong&gt;Is it worth flagging them for attention?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did flag a couple that seemed especially argumentative and unhelpful (my thought being that prompt attention might defuse further heated argument when that entire discussion has been run into the ground already), but I don't want to pester mods with flags that aren't necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, if flagging is appropriate, is the &amp;quot;no longer needed&amp;quot; flag better/more helpful than a &amp;quot;some other reason&amp;quot; flag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2020-12-18T18:21:00.233" LastActivityDate="2020-12-18T18:43:28.687" Title="Dealing with More Comments After Movements to Chat as a User" Tags="|discussion|comments|chat|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11321" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11320" CreationDate="2020-12-18T18:43:28.687" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is worth flagging them for attention, because mods don't view every question and answer every day, so it's how they would know that the comments haven't simmered down in this case. It's unfortunate that only mods can delete comments, but comment deletion is an important part of curating the site, so flag away (one per thread with a custom reason of &amp;quot;this whole comment thread is more arguing after being migrated to chat&amp;quot; is sufficient).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2020-12-18T18:43:28.687" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11322" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-21T22:49:42.497" Score="5" ViewCount="437" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178797&quot;&gt;This question on the history of the use of 'plate' terminology in D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt; has created some concern about what is being asked and if it's on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm still unclear as to what OP actually is asking about and therefore can't even make a judgement on topicality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A discussion to help clarify and then determine if it's in scope for the site should happen here rather than in comments or in a close-reopen war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying that it's either on topic or not, my goal here is to first understand what is being asked and then determine topicality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2020-12-22T21:38:58.917" Title="What is this question actually asking and is it on topic?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11323" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11322" CreationDate="2020-12-22T07:19:54.880" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There are different questions intermingled&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are at least four different questions asked throughout the post, having varying broadness and topicality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The broad issue of plate armor names in 5e and how they came about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question whether the term &lt;em&gt;half-plate&lt;/em&gt; is an invention of D&amp;amp;D, a modern invention (the term, not the thing) in general, or a real historical thing.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question whether the term &lt;em&gt;breastplate&lt;/em&gt; is used to mean the same thing as is does in the real world / if the D&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;breastplate&lt;/em&gt; is the same as real world one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comparison of plate armor names throughout the editions of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There are different issues with the different questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The fact that you can read at least four questions from the post - of vastly different scope, no less - means that there is a problem of clarity.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The first question indicated above is potentially too broad to answer. Additionally, asking how these names came about is (most likely) asking about designer intent which would make it off-topic. The exception to both of these would be if we consider question four to be the actual question, &lt;em&gt;i.e.&lt;/em&gt; &amp;quot;How did the 5e names come about &lt;em&gt;from&lt;/em&gt; the previous editions.&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions two to four look answerable individually, but putting them together into one question poses a problem of focus.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The actual issue and how to resolve it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP states in their question that the&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;question came to mind when [...] searching for historical examples of &amp;quot;half-plate&amp;quot; and found the term conspicuously missing from reliable sources&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This indicates that they are actually interested in the term &lt;em&gt;half-plate&lt;/em&gt;. They further state they have a similar concern with the term &lt;em&gt;breastplate&lt;/em&gt; except in my opinion (feel free to disagree) the concern is not similar at all because the origin and historic use of the term is evident and the question is whether or not the D&amp;amp;D variant is historically accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems then that (normally) the question should be narrowed down to one of the question here named two to four, probably number two. The other questions - if relevant to the querent - should be asked separately. In the meantime it seems to be reasonable to put the question on hold.&#xA;However, there is already an answer answering questions two &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; three, therefore those should potentially be left together. This, however is a separate issue beyond the scope of the present inquiry and one that has been - as far as I'm aware - discussed before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="64093" LastEditDate="2020-12-22T21:38:58.917" LastActivityDate="2020-12-22T21:38:58.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11322" CreationDate="2020-12-22T13:02:50.660" Score="-9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;As written, it is off topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking the origin of these terms as they relate to D&amp;amp;D is unavoidably a question of designer's intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can list all of the objective historical information about breast plates, but the moment we say, &amp;quot;And this is where Gygax/Crawford/Mearls/Perkins got their inspiration from&amp;quot;, we are making an assertion that these people intended to represent those particular historical facts in the world of D&amp;amp;D. Asking if the game's designers were influenced by some historical truth is a question of designer's intent, which is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The history of breast plates in general is also off topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we divorce the terminology from the game, and just ask, &amp;quot;what is the history of breast plates?&amp;quot;, we are no longer asking an RPG question, we're asking a history question, which is better asked at history.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What is on topic?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/178816/62294&quot;&gt;answered by Quadratic Wizard&lt;/a&gt; is on topic. Quadratic Wizard answers the question, &amp;quot;What is the development of these terms through the various editions of D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot; This is on topic. &lt;em&gt;But it is not what the question is asking&lt;/em&gt;. The question as written asks only about 5th Edition, and asks how the designers have related the 5th edition material to historical material - a question of designer intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question needs to be reworded so as to ask about the development of the terminology through editions, otherwise it is off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-22T13:13:03.737" LastActivityDate="2020-12-22T13:13:03.737" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11325" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-23T09:44:32.157" Score="-14" ViewCount="327" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I posted an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178602/how-to-answer-to-someone-saying-dd-is-stupid/178632?noredirect=1#comment482546_178632&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which has now been closed, and when I logged on today, I saw that my answer was, for some reason, deleted. Users with the required rep can see the language.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment left by was &amp;quot;This doesn't provide useful, practical guidance, but rather propagates an unhealthy attitude towards others (see V2's comment).&amp;quot; I strongly disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;V2Blast also left this comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue isn't necessarily that society sees these things as bad/reasons to look down on someone. Rather, the issue is that your answer is implying those things are bad/reasons for the querent to look down on someone. That is to say, you're not commenting on/criticizing society unfairly portraying them as such; you're essentially saying &amp;quot;don't care what they think now, because they might end up as a single mother or a janitor [which is a bad thing]&amp;quot;. I'd suggest editing your answer to avoid such an implication if that's not your intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that my answer contains very useful, practical guidance, and that it promotes a much more healthy attitude towards others than the OP's current, overly attached attitude, even if it's sort of cynical. I've edited my post to make my point about investment someone more apparent, so can my post please be undeleted?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2020-12-23T16:04:01.797" LastActivityDate="2020-12-23T16:04:01.797" Title="Please undelete my answer regarding the worthlessness of high school friendships" Tags="|discussion|moderation|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11325" CreationDate="2020-12-23T12:44:55.263" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your personal views seem to be at odds with the site's code of conduct&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site's code of conduct states&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. Use stated pronouns (when known). When in doubt, don't use language that might offend or alienate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While your views do not concern religion or any other of the domains specifically cited, the cited passage is clear on the fact that these are only examples and that the rules extend to opinions which people might reasonably find offensive for other reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And while I am not a single mother or a janitor, I do see that I might be offended by your views if I were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reaction to your answer shows that other people share my perspective - they even told you so and kindly asked you to review your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The basic idea of your answer seems helpful&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Saying that highschool friendships are usually temporary or that overreliance on others' opinions can be unhealthy seems to be useful advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we don't know who of the students from OP's school will become janitors later and saying that they shouldn't befriend those people if we did, is an opinion which is not endorsed on this site which the code of conduct clearly states.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note, that these two points can be regarded separately. I, for example, agree on the first one but strongly disagree on the second one. So, separating these two views and basing an answer on the first one would be helpful and probably cause much less disagreement, because it is in line with the fundamental principles of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastActivityDate="2020-12-23T12:44:55.263" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11325" CreationDate="2020-12-23T12:58:28.580" Score="7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Your answer and question violate the Stack Exchange Code of Conduct.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the introduction to the Code of Conduct says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether you’ve come to ask questions or to generously share what you know, join us in building a community where all people feel welcome and can participate, regardless of expertise or identity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We commit to enforcing and improving the Code of Conduct. It applies to everyone using Role-playing Games Stack Exchange and the Stack Exchange network, including our team, moderators, and anyone posting to Q&amp;amp;A sites or chat rooms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your description and opinion of single moms, janitors, and overweight persons runs contrary to the stated purpose of the Code of Conduct, that is, to make all people feel welcomed here on the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, the details:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. Use stated pronouns (when known). When in doubt, don't use language that might offend or alienate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Denigrating the worth of people is not only likely to offend or alienate them, it is intended to do just that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Undeleting your answer would be a violation of the Code of Conduct. Our hands are tied, sorry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Your attitude is disgusting.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way you describe people as only something to be used for a profit is absolutely vile. It is the very same attitude maintained by slave owners throughout history - that a persons worth is based only on what they can do for me. It isn't welcome here, and if you don't change it, neither are you (as explained in the Code of Conduct).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-12-23T12:58:28.580" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11328" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11330" CreationDate="2020-12-29T17:09:46.257" Score="4" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some time ago, I asked the following question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166185/what-is-the-relation-between-tabaxi-and-ordinary-cats&quot;&gt;What is the relation between Tabaxi and ordinary cats?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question in the body text was a bit more nuanced, though:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How closely are Tabaxi and ordinary cats related? Do they maybe have a special bond, or would they rather find each other a bit odd?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a perfectly fine answer to the title question, so I accepted it. However, it hardly provides any helpful information on the second part of the above quote. I had a brief exchange about that in the comments below this answer, and my last comment reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me like Tabaxi resemble cats far more than humans resemble apes. It might feel odd to look at a creature that is essentially a smaller copy of oneself with an underdevelopped intellect. Maybe, for this reason, Tabaxi don't like to be associated with ordinary cats? Or maybe they just make them feel uncomfortable? I'm really not sure what to expect, so I was hoping that some rule book or adventure module mentions any kind of interaction between Tabaxi and ordinary cats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this is much more precise than what I wrote in the opening post, and I think I only got to the point of really understanding my own question in the process of this brief discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, I am still interested in this kind of information, and I am kindly asking for advice on how to get it with the help of this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My thoughts about this so far:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could ask a new question specifically about rule books or adventure modules mentioning anything about the interaction between Tabaxi and ordinary cats. But I'd be afraid that it would be considered as a duplicate of my existing question. I'm also not sure if it would be on topic at all (as I think I've read that existence questions are always at least borderline).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could also un-accept the answer on the existing question and offer a bounty for giving a more detailed answer including the kind of information I am looking for. However, I feel that unaccepting an answer after so much time could be perceived as rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55742" LastActivityDate="2020-12-29T18:19:19.310" Title="Asking a potentially problematic follow-up question vs. unaccepting an answer" Tags="|support|on-topic|duplicates|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11313" CreationDate="2020-12-29T17:20:18.993" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Who needs hats:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7xjyy.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7xjyy.png&quot; alt=&quot;Fancy Mask (tm)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I rather have a &lt;em&gt;Fancy Mask (tm)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55159" LastActivityDate="2020-12-29T17:20:18.993" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11328" CreationDate="2020-12-29T18:19:19.310" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Unaccept the answer and offer the bounty.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't rude. It's the site functioning as intended - you've decided there is potential for better answers, so unaccepting the current answer &amp;quot;opens up&amp;quot; the question again, so to speak. On top of that, adding a bounty both encourages new answers and gives 1600hp, who is still an active user according to last seen, the opportunity to get those 15 points and more back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-12-29T18:19:19.310" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11331" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-30T14:45:33.990" Score="2" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate for closure: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179036/is-the-brass-brazier-required-for-find-familiar&quot;&gt;Is the brass brazier required for find familiar?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Candidate dupe target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94676/what-are-the-details-surrounding-the-brass-brazier-required-for-the-find-familia&quot;&gt;What are the details surrounding the brass brazier required for the Find Familiar spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question about whether or not the brazier is required a duplicate of the question asking about the nature of the brazier mentioned in &lt;em&gt;find familiar&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note, the candidate for closure has since been edited to definitely not be a duplicate. This discussion is now irrelevant.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-31T08:40:00.947" LastActivityDate="2020-12-31T08:40:00.947" Title="Is this question about Brass Braziers a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ClosedDate="2021-01-02T01:15:57.430" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11331" CreationDate="2020-12-30T14:45:33.990" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is not a duplicate and it should not be closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179036/is-the-brass-brazier-required-for-find-familiar&quot;&gt;Is the brass brazier required for find familiar?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94676/what-are-the-details-surrounding-the-brass-brazier-required-for-the-find-familia&quot;&gt;What are the details surrounding the brass brazier required for the Find Familiar spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will examine these questions according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;three duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; asks several questions about the nature of the brazier mentioned - its size, weight, cost, requirements for crafting, among other things. &lt;em&gt;But never asks if it is required for casting the spell.&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; asks exactly nothing about the nature of the brazier, only asking if it is required for casting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is no intersection to these questions&lt;/em&gt;. Criterion 1 is not satisfied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; has an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/134903/62294&quot;&gt;obvious answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;but it is a notably poor answer in that it only cites a tweet from lead rules designer Jeremy Crawford and makes no attempt to consult any official written rules&lt;/em&gt;. Further, none of the other answers to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; attempt to answer &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; has an answer to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is &lt;em&gt;entirely incidental&lt;/em&gt; as it was offered as a frame challenge to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;. Criterion 2 is satisfied, but not really.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a strong compelling reason to cover &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; separately from &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;They are entirely different questions. One asks about the nature of an item, the other asks if the item is required for spellcasting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answer on &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; that does happen to answer &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is notably poor; it fails to cite any official rules material for support, and is not an answer to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; in a technical sense, but is a challenge to the frame of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Closing as a dupe effectively censors one side of the argument.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;A brazier is required&amp;quot; is a valid answer to the new question, &lt;em&gt;but it is not a valid answer to the dupe target&lt;/em&gt;. If an answer was posted to the dupe target that said &amp;quot;A brass brazier is required&amp;quot;, it would (and should) be flagged and deleted for not answering the question. Closing &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; says, &amp;quot;no one is allowed to make this argument or take this position on this question&amp;quot;. This is effectively censorship.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2020-12-30T15:32:56.503" LastActivityDate="2020-12-30T15:32:56.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11333" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2020-12-30T14:58:09.327" Score="2" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178952/what-is-the-point-of-this-line-in-the-hide-of-the-feral-guardian&quot;&gt;What is the point of this line in the Hide of the Feral Guardian?&#xA;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's relatively short, I'll provide the entire question text here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Hide of the Feral Guardian, a legendary item from the Explorer's Guide to Wildemount, includes the following ability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you cast the polymorph spell using this armor, you can transform into a cave bear (use the polar bear&#xA;statistics).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why does it mention both bears, and not just turn the user into either a polar bear or cave bear through the polymorph spell? At first I thought it might be because of the book each creature was from, but they both have stat blocks in the monster manual, and neither are in the explorer's guide elsewhere as far as I can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, why does the magic item tell you to use one bear with the statistics of another bear when you polymorph, instead of just saying &amp;quot;When you cast the polymorph spell using this armor, you can transform into a cave bear&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;When you cast the polymorph spell using this armor, you can transform into a polar bear&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question a designer intent question, and therefore off-topic? If so, can it be salvaged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2020-12-30T17:34:47.520" Title="Is this question about Hide of the Feral Guardian off topic as a designer intent question, and if so, can it be salvaged?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11331" CreationDate="2020-12-30T15:01:22.707" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is a duplicate, and it should be closed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94676/what-are-the-details-surrounding-the-brass-brazier-required-for-the-find-familia&quot;&gt;Question 1&lt;/a&gt; is an XY problem.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the body of the question, the asker states that they want to be able to cast &lt;em&gt;Find Familiar&lt;/em&gt; while out adventuring. To this end, they wish to know how bulky a typical brass brazier (a component for the spell) would be to haul around.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem they present is how difficult is it to keep a brazier handy, but the real issue is that they wish to be able to re-cast the spell, and assume that a brass brazier is specifically required. The accepted answer already challenges this by stating that designer intent, per Jeremy Crawford, is that a brass brazier is not specifically required, only the herbs and incense (the other components of the spell) are required, and that anything can be used to burn the components in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179036/is-the-brass-brazier-required-for-find-familiar&quot;&gt;Question 2&lt;/a&gt; asks more directly about what the problem is.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In question 2, the original draft (before it was removed by someone else's edit) stated that the intent was specifically to be a duplicate of Question 1, and asks more directly &amp;quot;Do I need the brazier?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Criteria 1:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer of &amp;quot;A Brazier is not required&amp;quot; fulfils they &lt;em&gt;very first&lt;/em&gt; criteria as an obvious subset of the original question. &amp;quot;How hard is it to haul around this thing?&amp;quot; will naturally lead to the question &amp;quot;Do I &lt;em&gt;need&lt;/em&gt; to haul around this thing?&amp;quot; And as such, this is a duplicate. Regardless of whether the question of &amp;quot;Do I need this?&amp;quot; is a &amp;quot;Yes&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;No&amp;quot;, it's still a subset of figuring out the logistics of transporting it. The only difference is that if the answer is &amp;quot;No, I don't need this&amp;quot;, then you can stop right there, as the logistics of moving it are no longer relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53087" LastEditorUserId="53087" LastEditDate="2020-12-30T19:58:23.913" LastActivityDate="2020-12-30T19:58:23.913" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11335" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11331" CreationDate="2020-12-30T15:58:15.867" Score="2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is a duplicate and it should be closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note 1: I don't understand why you would reopen the question that I as the author closed. Until this meta discussion is sufficiently argued, closed is as a valid state as open and I think as the author I should have the say in this until the community decided otherwise. But I will not start a close open war... I'm fine with either result anyway, I just want people to find answers.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note 2: I copied the template from Thomas Markov answer, it is very nice, even if I don't agree with his conclusion&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179036/is-the-brass-brazier-required-for-find-familiar&quot;&gt;Is the brass brazier required for find familiar?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94676/what-are-the-details-surrounding-the-brass-brazier-required-for-the-find-familia&quot;&gt;What are the details surrounding the brass brazier required for the Find Familiar spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will examine these questions according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;three duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a glance one can see that both questions concern the same item in the same spell. That is already a strong connection. But &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; asks about the details concerning the brazier mentioned, however not specifically if it is required for casting the spell. &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; asks whether it is a required component for the casting. This seems different. However &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; only arises due to the details of the brazier, that it is used to burn the components, that it is big and heavy. Because if that was not the case, then this would be a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100523/does-a-material-component-cost-for-one-component-require-all-components-involved/100532&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, but it is a special case because a brazier is big and heavy and doesn't really fit in a component pouch in any imaginable sense. Also because it is used to burn the other components, it is hard to imagine replacing it with the spellcasting focus. And those details that create &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; are asked for in &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; which makes them subsets.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That the details of the brazier are required to answer &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is also shown in the current highest answer by @Thomas Markov, which mentions the oddly specific nature of this brazier:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is oddly specific language for something that isn't required. The rules-as-written ruling is abundantly clear here: the charcoal, incense, and herbs must be consumed by fire in a brass brazier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So Criterion 1 is definitely present, but I'm not sure if it is &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt; enough to close the question as a dupe based on this. So let's go on to Criterion 2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; has an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/134903/62294&quot;&gt;obvious answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;. It is only one answer, but that is enough to satisfy the criterion 2 as stated. It doesn't matter that this is a poor answer. If you wish to improve the answers to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; you are free to do so or even give your own better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: This is exactly what I did for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177749/can-a-character-with-darkvision-see-into-hunger-of-hadar&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which had poor answers by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59960/does-devils-sight-enable-one-to-see-into-hunger-of-hadar?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt;. In this case @Thomas Markov was arguing for closing my question based on the fact that the other question had answers for it. Which is kind of ironic, but not relevant.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore this also works the other direction, that &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; could be closed as a dupe of &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;. Any answers to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; that argue that the brazier is not required, would be valid answers for &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;, as suddenly the details of the brazier would be irrelevant for the spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Criterion 2 is satisfied, therefore Question A should be closed as a dupe.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also notably the &amp;quot;thurible&amp;quot; object mentioned multiple times in Question B would be a good explanation as to how one can be reasonably asked to have this &amp;quot;brass brazier&amp;quot;. Because as mentioned before, Question A comes up due to the nature of the brazier, that it is big and heavy. But if those details are removed, &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; becomes a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100523/does-a-material-component-cost-for-one-component-require-all-components-involved/100532&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a hard one. I see a reason to cover &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; separately from &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;. While they do concern the same object for the same spell, the lore answers in &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; are very interesting and have their own right to exist. When turned the other way around, I don't think that &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; adds much additional usefulness over &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;. Especially if one put a bounty on &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; that requires answers not backed up by Jeremy Crawford. This has been common practice around since his tweets are no longer official rulings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51849" LastEditorUserId="51849" LastEditDate="2020-12-30T16:12:46.667" LastActivityDate="2020-12-30T16:12:46.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11333" CreationDate="2020-12-30T16:40:34.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The initial question is &lt;strong&gt;definitely a designer intent question&lt;/strong&gt; - the OP wanted to know WHY the magic item was described as turning the user into one kind of bear, but directing them to use the stats of another bear.  Simply put, why questions are not allowed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This WHY question solicited a BECAUSE answer - because you need to reference one bear's stats to look up the other one, and possibly because one bear's stats and not the others are listed in the (free) &lt;em&gt;Basic Rules&lt;/em&gt;, while you would need a purchase of the &lt;em&gt;Monster Manual&lt;/em&gt; to access the other bear's stats.  This answer itself seems reasonable and documented, but it &lt;strong&gt;still presupposes designer intent&lt;/strong&gt; - it is the opinion of the poster that the designers did this to aid player access to the bears' stats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question &lt;strong&gt;can be salvaged&lt;/strong&gt;.  The OP has selected an answer, and now just needs to reformat the question so as to appear to solicit that answer.  Rather than ask a WHY question, the OP needs to ask a HOW question.  'How does saying the item transforms the user into one bear while using the stats of another aid player access to those stats'?  It is possible to format the question in such a way that it avoids designer intent by simply asking what the &lt;em&gt;effect&lt;/em&gt; of the decision was, without questioning the intent of the decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this reformulation of the question was only possible &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; the WHY question had been asked and the &lt;em&gt;BECAUSE&lt;/em&gt; answer had been posted.  The OP could not ask the 'right question' &lt;em&gt;until they knew what they were looking for&lt;/em&gt;.  The question &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be made to reflect site policy, but only after site policy has been breached in posting both the question and the answer.  Furthermore, in receiving the answer, the OP's question has morphed.  They say in comments &amp;quot;I believe this is the answer to my question...the purpose of the line is only to point you to where the cave bear variant stat block is listed - in the polar bear stat block.&amp;quot;  They began with the assumption that 'the designers did this for a reason, so what is the reason?' and could only ask the question that way.  Once they &lt;em&gt;found out&lt;/em&gt; the reason, (I believe) they were more interested in the functionality of the effect than the designer intent.  What they actually wanted, and accepted, was the &lt;em&gt;effect&lt;/em&gt; of the intent, but they lacked a way to ask about that &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Designer intent questions are not out of bounds because they are bad questions or because they don't have answers.  &lt;strong&gt;Designer intent questions are out of bounds because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;they tend to produce bad answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.  That didn't happen in this case - a designer intent question produced an answer that was reasonable, supported, and accepted by the questioner.  The fact that the question didn't produce numerous 'bad subjective' answers based on unsupported opinion, however, doesn't change the site policy.  More important, &lt;strong&gt;it doesn't change the reason for the site policy.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, the OP has received the answer they wanted to the question they &lt;em&gt;would have liked to have&lt;/em&gt; asked, and accepted the answer.  They don't have much incentive to change the question now so that its wording makes it acceptable to the site - if that is to happen, it will likely fall to a site caretaker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2020-12-30T17:34:47.520" LastActivityDate="2020-12-30T17:34:47.520" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11337" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-06T17:50:45.097" Score="6" ViewCount="297" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179273/62294&quot;&gt;Last post&lt;/a&gt; was deemed an advertisement by moderator. Not trying to place ads but see if anyone wants to play a new game we have. How can you do that without mentioning the name of the game? It is already published, just new and not as well known as DnD and other stuff you can mention. And just because it is OUR game, the mod sees it as self promotion. Should I log in as someone else and lie and say &amp;quot;Wow guys, I just learned of an awesome new game that isn't my own... let's play.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not trying to be cheeky here, and didn't want to say all this in public here, but really, 20 rep just to talk on general chat to ping moderator? Come on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="67794" OwnerDisplayName="SubrosaGames" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-01-06T18:03:22.330" LastActivityDate="2021-01-07T19:56:59.113" Title="Trying to ask the moderator a question but don't have 20 rep to ping in general Chat. How do I PM the moderator?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11339" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11337" CreationDate="2021-01-06T18:12:46.993" Score="30" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site doesn’t have any “private message” mechanism. This is very much by design. Luckily, site moderators are the one kinda-sorta exception: if you flag a post, one of your options is to send a message to a moderator. They can then initiate a private discussion with you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;That would &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be the recommended solution to &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; situation, however.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, you should learn a little bit more about who we are and what this site is about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t accept questions asking for interest in playing games here; that’s not what the site is about. We ban questions looking for groups, questions looking for GMs, and so on, too—in all cases, those just aren’t on-topic here. Questions can’t be open-ended like that, they have to be &lt;em&gt;actual questions&lt;/em&gt; that can at least theoretically have &lt;em&gt;actual answers&lt;/em&gt;. As in definitive, comprehensive, authoritative answers that can become a resource for future readers. Most of our site rules are geared towards encouraging these sorts of questions, and filtering out others which are better-handled on other sites. (By the way, we &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have recommendations for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/4563&quot;&gt;discussion forums&lt;/a&gt;, which may be more interested in hosting discussions of a new game with the game’s creators.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Links to your game are acceptable &lt;em&gt;if and when it is appropriate content for an otherwise-valid question&lt;/em&gt;. We also expect those who are related to a product to disclaim that affiliation, just so readers know what they’re getting. And if your &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; reason for being here, and only content you contribute, is about your game, you might also get the cold shoulder for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, when I first joined this site, I was at the time a writer and designer for Rule of Cool, working on their game Legend. Like you, I had similar interests in getting the word out about the game. But the way I handled this was to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1655/4563&quot;&gt;start a meta discussion on the appropriateness of that&lt;/a&gt;, which is where the site agreed that the best solution was, as I said, to only allow such posts if they are legitimate content we would otherwise allow, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; such affiliations are disclaimed. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1657/4563&quot;&gt;wax eagle’s excellent answer&lt;/a&gt;, which remains the community consensus to this day:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Provided that asking/answering questions about Legend is not your only reason for being involved here, and is not the only contribution you are making. I think this is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I would advise is that you disclose your connection to Legend, probably at least in your answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, if you're going to ask and self answer, please make sure the questions are actually good and not just vehicles for the answer you really want to write :).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're very happy to get coverage of small RPGs and as a contributer you qualify as an expert in Legend which is what we're here for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So please, join our merry band, take a look at other questions too, vote as you see fit, maybe answer a few. Self-answered Q&amp;amp;As are acceptable, but make sure they’re legitimately questions that real users might ask. In fact, the best way to handle it may be to point to your fans that this resource exists, and is a place where you’re answering questions—if they have actual questions for you, and you answer them, then those will make great answers and should be fairly well-received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Though don’t have your fans spam the site with every question they can think of just to give you an excuse to promote the game more—&lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; would be &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; poorly received.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-01-06T18:18:53.753" LastActivityDate="2021-01-06T18:18:53.753" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11337" CreationDate="2021-01-06T19:05:12.337" Score="13" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last post was deemed an advertisement by moderator. Not trying to place ads but see if anyone wants to play a new game we have. How can you do that without mentioning the name of the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You don't. Not here, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically, we are not a classifieds board. We aren't a forum; we're a Q&amp;amp;A site. This is not a place for posting ads for your games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are here to help people who have questions or problems relating to tabletop RPGs. To that extent, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/finding-other-players&quot;&gt;we have questions from people asking about &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to find other players&lt;/a&gt;. Note this is also not a place to say “join my game”. It's instead a place to guide people through the process of &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; they will find other games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to contact a moderator the appropriate way to do that might be to raise a custom flag on your own question requesting moderator attention and explain. Note though we don't have a direct message system like KRyan mentioned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-01-06T19:05:12.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11342" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11337" CreationDate="2021-01-07T19:56:59.113" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you have a personal interest in something you wish to promote on these sites the most appropriate thing to do is put that something in your user profile. Then participate in the site like anyone else would. Create the content the site needs and the site will send curious people to your user profile page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17876" LastActivityDate="2021-01-07T19:56:59.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11343" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11344" CreationDate="2021-01-08T19:39:40.790" Score="5" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am considering a revision to the D&amp;amp;D 5e mechanics of maintaining barbarian rage.  I consider this to be a small change to a &lt;em&gt;specific rule&lt;/em&gt; and thus fitting of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag, rather than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is reserved for larger changes to &lt;em&gt;rule systems&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, my point in posting the question would be to solicit review of the potential impacts and interactions with the rule change.  While there is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; tag for such questions, there does not appear to be a corresponding &amp;quot;house rules review&amp;quot; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which tag is more appropriate for my question and why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1219/differentiating-between-house-rules-homebrew-and-and-game-design&quot;&gt;Differentiating between house rules, homebrew, and game design&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5845/what-distinction-is-being-drawn-between-house-rules-and-homebrew&quot;&gt;What distinction is being drawn between house-rules and homebrew?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: The question has now been asked here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/197443/23547&quot;&gt;Would allowing barbarians to maintain rage as an action be unbalanced or permit shenanigans?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-04-05T12:10:01.000" LastActivityDate="2022-04-05T12:10:01.000" Title="Is this question better tagged house-rules or homebrew?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11344" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11343" CreationDate="2021-01-08T20:30:35.007" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/house-rules/info&quot;&gt;tag description&lt;/a&gt; states (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A rules set strives to be complete, but no set of rules covers every circumstance. Rules that are fan-driven and implemented unofficially are termed house rules. Contrast with optional-rules, which are officially created additional rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;House-Rules are for new or modified rules. Whether it's creating rules to cover situations that aren't handled by RAW or customizing existing rules (&amp;quot;we don't use the RAW grappling rules, because they're stupid&amp;quot;), house rules modify the framework of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;House rules can completely replace certain parts of the rules set, or merely add to the existing rules to make them more complex, complete, and/or well-rounded. Many times they are created in response to a need that the designers overlooked. But just as often, they are created to take the game in a direction fitting to a certain campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This tag should be used to discuss implementation, effects, and/or changes engendered by the use of house rules in the basic rules set.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GMs make table-specific rulings about how the rules work all the time; these aren't generally considered house rules unless they're codified and used consistently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;For questions about substantial new material&lt;/strong&gt; (e.g., whole classes, monsters, etc.) or new subsystems (e.g., adding detailed crafting or chase rules), &lt;strong&gt;use the homebrew tag instead.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have used the correct tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-01-09T09:59:19.487" LastActivityDate="2021-01-09T09:59:19.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11345" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-11T00:06:38.990" Score="9" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;So today I came across &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179442/can-booming-blade-be-cast-with-an-improvised-weapon-without-a-cost?noredirect=1#comment484603_179442&quot;&gt;a question about booming blade&lt;/a&gt;, which has been closed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103188/would-improvised-weapons-work-with-cantrips-like-green-flame-blade-and-booming-b&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are duplicates, but a rule change has potentially made the old answer obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bounty has been placed on the old question to get an updated answer. In this case we are lucky that the original question was asked by an active user, who is in a position to update the accepted answer accordingly (if they wish), but what if they weren't active (or don't care)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted answer would continue to be highly upvoted, marked as accepted and incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A passer by to the site won't necessarily understand how we treat accepted answers (and the general rule about looking at votes doesn't work well with older questions and newer answers), so we are directing people to what they will probably not notice as incorrect information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the correct action in this situation? We need to ensure that casual viewers, which I understand are by far the bulk of users here, can read a question and come away with the correct answer (at least that is what I assume is the point of the site!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-01-11T09:21:54.000" LastActivityDate="2021-01-16T22:31:55.767" Title="How do we deal with duplicate questions where a rule change has made an old answer obsolete?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|duplicates|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11346" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11345" CreationDate="2021-01-11T02:51:17.707" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Step 1: Bounty the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one of the purposes of the bounty system - to seek new answers to old questions for one reason or another. I will leave the bounty banner up for the full week, it points out the issue that needs addressing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the bounty period, I will award the bounty to the best, most up to date answer. This will mark it with a blue box showing 100 points for the rest of forever. Bountied answers always stood out to me more than accepted answers when I was a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 2: Edit the accepted answer, if necessary.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not suggesting we just update the accepted with new information. That is up to the answer author. But, we can improve the answer without adding new content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, we should update the answer to clearly state &lt;em&gt;the version&lt;/em&gt; of the source material it is addressing. If the author does not update their answer, we can edit the answer with a note stating that this answer reflects the source material as it was before it was errata’d. This will clear up any confusion about the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 2 applied.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/103192/62294&quot;&gt;accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; was not edited during the bounty period, so I have added a disclaimer in there header:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;em&gt;This answer addresses booming blade and green-flame blade as they were prior to the 2020 Errata of Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide and may no longer be applicable to the current official version of these spells&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a sign post to readers that the answer addresses an outdated version of the spells and preserves the authors intent. This way, &lt;em&gt;the answer is not obsolete&lt;/em&gt;: its value is maintained as many people will likely only ever encounter the pre-Errata versions of these spells in their printed copies of &lt;em&gt;Sword Coast Adventurer‘s Guide&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-01-16T22:31:55.767" LastActivityDate="2021-01-16T22:31:55.767" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11347" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-11T16:27:28.527" Score="21" ViewCount="520" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've now seen enough examples of &amp;quot;does it break anything&amp;quot; questions regarding &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt; 5e to ask about them in the general case. I don't think that they're bad questions, but I feel that they could be better and more stack-able if they were nudged into a different format. The typical form of the questions I'm referring to is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it break anything if I [proposed house rule]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that this formulation is undesirable for a few reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are extremely open-ended and largely undefined-- &amp;quot;anything&amp;quot; can cover classes being overshadowed to combats being trivialized to throwing the in-game economy out of whack, and it's not clear if something small (like de-valuing a pound of salt from its suggested trade price) becoming broken breaks &amp;quot;the game&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;By stepping outside of the published rules to allow something novel, the already-published rules have been broken along with whatever function they served. Whether or not this affects meaningful gameplay elements or fun is a separate issue&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Break&amp;quot; is a subjective word in this usage. For example, ignoring encumbrance changes a real, mechanical constraint of the rules system, but it's not clear if it &amp;quot;breaks&amp;quot; 5e. Many tables find the game more fun, and similarly challenging, without using encumbrance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt; 5e isn't exactly a highly-tuned, perfectly-functioning machine in the first place. We can estimate deviation from the balances imposed by the core rules, but there have been (and are) game-breaking strategies that are perfectly rules-legal already, and mechanics that don't really work that well in the first place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The open-endedness of such questions and vagueness of the criteria for judging answers encourages low-effort postings. How much thought and effort do we expect of a question like this?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Given the subjectivity and lack of specificity attached to the game (or certain game mechanics) becoming &amp;quot;broken&amp;quot;, questions in this format seem less stack-able to me than other formulations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that re-formulating these questions to something like &amp;quot;what are the mechanical impacts of changing rule [X] in manner [Y]?&amp;quot; in the general case, or encouraging more specificity in the questions (where appropriate) might make for better questions and answers overall.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than rolling the subjective piece into the core of the question, I think it would be better to ask for the mechanical effects and then allow readers to determine whether or not they find those changes game-breaking or otherwise undesirable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are &amp;quot;would it break anything&amp;quot; type questions appropriately specified and scoped for the stack, or should we encourage a different angle to improve them? Would it improve the stack much, or at all, to make that effort?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastActivityDate="2021-01-12T01:55:06.977" Title="&quot;Does It Break Anything&quot; Questions" Tags="|discussion|questions|dnd-5e|question-scope|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11347" CreationDate="2021-01-11T16:48:54.690" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think those questions need to be treated more like our homebrew-review questions. Just asking &amp;quot;Does this break anything&amp;quot; is a zero effort post. They are wanting to construct homebrew/house-rule, but haven't done any effort to see if there are issues - and no work has been shown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should hold these to the same standard and ask folks to come up with their homebrew/house-rule, evaluate it, show us the work and ask for feedback on areas they recognize may be problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just asking &amp;quot;is this broken&amp;quot; isn't really enough. I mean, I guess it is with just a downvote, but then this becomes a 'homebrew it for me' type exercise. I think it's better to close it and show them what needs to be done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those here who are looking for &amp;quot;what needs to be done&amp;quot;, please see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;this meta question on How to Ask a Good Homebrew Review Question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2021-01-11T16:54:34.247" LastActivityDate="2021-01-11T16:54:34.247" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11347" CreationDate="2021-01-12T01:55:06.977" Score="50" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, these questions are fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, actually, they are &lt;em&gt;more than fine&lt;/em&gt;—they are literally exactly the sort of thing that makes RPG SE have value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are supposed to be a community of &lt;em&gt;experts&lt;/em&gt; who can tackle &lt;em&gt;difficult questions&lt;/em&gt; with strong, authoritative answers that are backed up by considerable experience working on these sorts of questions. It’s totally legitimate to ask about how rule interactions work, or to seek assistance in dealing with social issues around the table, but ultimately these are often &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; the places where our unique experience can shine. Careful readings of the rules is largely a function of English Language &amp;amp; Usage; addressing social issues is the province of Interpersonal Skills. We can bring a particular context to these questions here, and answer them differently and arguably better than the sites dedicated to those things, but &lt;em&gt;these&lt;/em&gt; kinds of questions are the ones where we are &lt;em&gt;uniquely&lt;/em&gt; qualified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we don’t handle these kinds of questions, then I have strong questions about why we even bother to exist as a website. &lt;em&gt;This is what we are here for.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason for that is because these are questions that demand &lt;em&gt;expertise in&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;judgment of&lt;/em&gt; the content of the RPG in question. Because we are the ones who can tell querents what it is &lt;em&gt;that they don’t already know&lt;/em&gt;. Too often, however, attempts to “clarify” such questions become demands that the querent in fact already know their answer before starting. This is an absurd practice, and one that must stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To address your specific concerns,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are extremely open-ended and largely undefined-- &amp;quot;anything&amp;quot; can cover classes being overshadowed to combats being trivialized to throwing the in-game economy out of whack, and it's not clear if something small (like de-valuing a pound of salt from its suggested trade price) becoming broken breaks &amp;quot;the game&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, &lt;em&gt;that is the point.&lt;/em&gt; We are the ones who know the game, and can consider all the corner cases that someone without our expertise would miss. If someone knew all the corner cases already, &lt;em&gt;they wouldn’t need to ask the question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what expertise &lt;em&gt;means&lt;/em&gt;. We are the experts—we are the ones who should know the corner-cases. Querents are not necessarily experts, and are not expected to necessarily know all the corner-cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;By stepping outside of the published rules to allow something novel, the already-published rules have been broken along with whatever function they served. Whether or not this affects meaningful gameplay elements or fun is a separate issue&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve gotta be honest, this just comes across as pedantry to me. That is not a useful definition of broken, and we all know it isn’t the one intended by these questions. To go with that definition is, I think, to be willfully obtuse. It doesn’t help anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Break&amp;quot; is a subjective word in this usage. For example, ignoring encumbrance changes a real, mechanical constraint of the rules system, but it's not clear if it &amp;quot;breaks&amp;quot; 5e. Many tables find the game more fun, and similarly challenging, without using encumbrance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a pretty solid rule-of-thumb for that, actually: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22184/4563&quot;&gt;What makes a [game feature] over-powered?&lt;/a&gt;. It’s not a meta question, because the question is also relevant as a main-site concern, and it could maybe be more prominent, but the fact remains that &lt;em&gt;this is the definition just about everyone already intuitively uses&lt;/em&gt; so it’s rare that we actually have to define it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it’s &lt;em&gt;somewhat&lt;/em&gt; subjective, but it’s not &lt;em&gt;primarily&lt;/em&gt; opinion-based, which are the kinds of questions we avoid. A question of whether something is balanced or not is not a popularity contest. Experts can disagree about how likely something is to cause problems, but well backed-up answers should be very clear about where they are coming from and why they expect, or do not expect, problems from the material in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, again, these are “good subjective” questions—exactly the sort of questions this format was &lt;em&gt;designed for&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e isn't exactly a highly-tuned, perfectly-functioning machine in the first place. We can estimate deviation from the balances imposed by the core rules, but there have been (and are) game-breaking strategies that are perfectly rules-legal already, and mechanics that don't really work that well in the first place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, so? I mean, I primarily work on questions about D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder—if you think 5e’s balance is wobbly, I invite you to explore the absurdities of those systems. It just means that answers have to do somewhat more work in establishing what they’re talking about—in 3.5e parlance, we could easily say something is overpowered compared to, say, the fighter, but underpowered compared to, say, the wizard. Answering “is this balanced?” with “depends what you compare it against; it’s balanced against X, but stronger than Y and weaker than Z” is a &lt;em&gt;great answer&lt;/em&gt;–and one that should be upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone just saying “Yes” or “No” without backing that up should be downvoted. This isn’t any different from any other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The open-endedness of such questions and vagueness of the criteria for judging answers encourages low-effort postings. How much thought and effort do we expect of a question like this?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meh, who cares? We are not drowning in a deluge of these questions where this kind of concern is relevant. If you find a question obnoxious because it seems to you the querent put no effort in and that makes you not feel like spending your time helping, &lt;em&gt;then simply don’t&lt;/em&gt;. That’s what downvoting is for. Downvote and move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More seriously, though, I feel as though we are experiencing a bit of a surge in elitism that is always a kind of a thing to keep an eye on with any Stack Exchange site. In my experience, it tends to wax and wane a bit, and there’s no objective measure of it where we can say it’s at the appropriate level—the site &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; absolutely require a certain level of standards here, because ultimately experts have to feel like their time is valued if they’re going to stay, and not wasting time with low-effort questions is part of that. Optimizing for pearls rather than sand, as the famous Coding Horror blog post says.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in this case, while such questions are “low effort” in a sense, in that they aren’t very difficult to write, I wonder &lt;em&gt;what on earth&lt;/em&gt; should be expected of new players who are most apt to write such questions. “Go play in half a dozen campaigns to achieve the level of expertise required to know all the corner cases that this might affect, so that you can tell us to consider them [but at which point you already know the answer]”? Because that’s how it sounds to me. What reasonable level of effort &lt;em&gt;could be done&lt;/em&gt; to answer this kind of question? Any kind of narrowing or restricting the scope of the question that the querent might perform &lt;em&gt;only hurts the question&lt;/em&gt;, because they might inadvertently leave out something important that they should be informed of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, querents are supposed to ask questions that correspond to the problem they actually have. &lt;em&gt;Every one of these questions surely meets that requirement.&lt;/em&gt; Their problem is that they’re considering allowing this thing, but they don’t and can’t know what the all the knock-on ramifications of that are going to be. &lt;em&gt;So they ask that!&lt;/em&gt; Perfect, that’s what we want. If we force them to artificially narrow the scope, they risk not having their actual question answered—we just forced them to create an XY-problem question! &lt;em&gt;That isn’t what we want at all!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;6&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Given the subjectivity and lack of specificity attached to the game (or certain game mechanics) becoming &amp;quot;broken&amp;quot;, questions in this format seem less stack-able to me than other formulations&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given everything above, &lt;em&gt;I could not possibly disagree more strongly&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-01-12T01:55:06.977" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11351" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11352" CreationDate="2021-01-15T12:55:39.237" Score="5" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been part of the RPG SE community for a few months now I think, but I'm still learning the ropes and I consider myself new. This is my first time asking on meta and I apologize in advance if I made any mistakes while asking this question.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When browsing on mobile, I noticed a few questions are highlighted as yellow. What does this mean?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kHWCu.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kHWCu.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;example 1&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GOycp.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GOycp.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;example 2&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64749" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-01-17T06:47:54.430" LastActivityDate="2021-01-17T06:56:15.667" Title="What does it mean when a question is highlighted yellow?" Tags="|support|questions|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11352" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11351" CreationDate="2021-01-15T13:19:57.937" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the image below, I have examples of the four possible highlight states for a question in this order - Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O41AQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O41AQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;Examples of highlighting based on tag status: Watched and Ignored, Ignored, Default, Watched&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You probably have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag set to watched - or, as Someone_Evil's comment points out, you may have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; set to watched, which is why you haven't noticed it until now, as it is a fairly rare tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-01-17T06:56:15.667" LastActivityDate="2021-01-17T06:56:15.667" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11353" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-18T13:10:35.163" Score="7" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;The serial voting checker script has reversed legitimate downvotes on the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179674/is-this-homebrew-music-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-domains&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Music Domain balanced compared to the official domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179675/is-this-homebrew-chaos-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-subclasses&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Chaos domain balanced compared to the official subclasses?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179676/is-this-homebrew-far-realms-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-domains&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Far Realms domain balanced compared to the official domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179673/is-this-homebrew-chromatic-dragon-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-domai&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Chromatic Dragon domain balanced compared to the official domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179672/is-this-homebrew-dreamssleep-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-domains&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Dreams&amp;amp;Sleep domain balanced compared to the official domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179671/is-this-homebrew-hearth-domain-cleric-balanced-compared-to-the-other-domains&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Hearth Domain cleric balanced compared to the other domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179670/is-this-homebrew-sea-domain-cleric-balanced-compared-to-the-other-subclasses&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Sea Domain Cleric balanced compared to the other subclasses?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179677/is-this-homebrew-hunting-and-archery-domain-balanced-compared-to-the-official-do&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew hunting and archery domain balanced compared to the official domains?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions were all posted at the same time, and all had the same problems, that is, lacked details and information that we generally expect from homebrew review questions. Given they all lacked necessary details, these downvotes were legitimate, but were grabbed by the serial vote detector because it very obviously looks like targeted voting to a robot. See here for more details: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can this be undone? I know I can go and downvote them again, but that will just get reversed again as it will appear once again as serial voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-01-18T14:01:12.157" LastActivityDate="2021-01-18T15:18:39.767" Title="Serial voting script reversed legitimate downvotes" Tags="|support|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11354" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11353" CreationDate="2021-01-18T13:50:32.220" Score="7" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given they all lacked necessary details, these downvotes were legitimate, but were grabbed by the serial vote detector because it very obviously looks like targeted voting to a robot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me clarify: this has nothing to do with robots. Those votes were grabbed by the serial vote detector because they &lt;em&gt;were&lt;/em&gt; in fact serial votes. You voted a ton on the same person's posts in a small window of time, and the system considers that to be serial voting and to be inherently illegitimate. This has nothing to do with robots and everything to do with making sure one person does not unjustly target another person and mess with our systems. You didn't act with malicious intent, and each of those votes was individually legitimate, but the serial voting script doesn't know this and places no value judgement on vote legitimacy—it just looks at whether the votes are serial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can this be undone? I know I can go and downvote them again, but that will just get reversed again as it will appear once again as serial voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators can't reverse the serial voting script's actions. Those votes are simply undone and gone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just ... don't re-do all these downvotes again. It'll just be caught and rolled back as serial voting again, and nobody can prevent that. I don't suggest trying to find a way to do it anyway since circumventing our anti-abuse mechanisms is generally a bad idea and done at your peril. There are other people beside you who will also be voting and helping to take care of things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know those questions all share the same flaws, but they're all closed now. Downvotes on a couple of those posts is plenty. Some of those might still warrant downvotes on an individual basis, but you can't do that without it counting as serial voting again. The situation is being handled though and things will be fine even without them being downvoted. Now's the time to let The Process™ do its work, and focus on next steps for taking care of things: we're engaging already with the author to provide feedback and get more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; raise rate limiting questions, such that maybe even a 2k user shouldn't be able to ask eight questions in the span of twelve minutes, so that the community has time to deal with problems that might show up in the first two or three and would otherwise show up in the rest, but that's a separate topic to the voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-01-18T15:18:39.767" LastActivityDate="2021-01-18T15:18:39.767" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11355" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-19T17:23:50.823" Score="8" ViewCount="224" Body="&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we say goodbye to the old year and welcome the new one, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22year+in+moderation%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the past 12 months&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As most of you here are aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;-- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't eliminate the need for having &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;moderators&lt;/a&gt; altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as we welcome 2021, and in keeping with tradition, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pU1Al.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;exciting&lt;/em&gt; stats&lt;/a&gt;. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Role-playing Games over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Action&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Community¹&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users suspended²&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;23&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users destroyed³&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;116&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users contacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;User suspensions lifted early&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;103&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,710&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,794&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,809&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;863&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;49&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2,311&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;24&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,681&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tags merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms proposed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;61&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms created&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;70&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Revisions redacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions unprotected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;33&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;782&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions reopened&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;102&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;289&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions protected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;121&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions migrated&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions flagged⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;23&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;657&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions closed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;291&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,146&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Question flags handled⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;346&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;335&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts unlocked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;38&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;181&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts locked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;30&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;161&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts deleted⁶&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;474&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,919&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts bumped&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;95&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Escalations to the Community Manager team&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;362&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;59&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4,973&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments deleted⁷&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;16,275&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;7,217&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comment flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4,624&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;402&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Bounties canceled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answers flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;101&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,984&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answer flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;978&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,107&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;All comments on a post moved to chat&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;257&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ A &amp;quot;destroyed&amp;quot; user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88994/what-is-the-difference-between-a-deleted-user-and-a-destroyed-user&quot;&gt;Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Further reading:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? We posted a similar report here last year: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9662/2019-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2019: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/search?q=title%3A%222020%3A+a+year+in+moderation%22&quot;&gt;this report on other sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or peruse &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/359735/208518&quot;&gt;detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A big thank you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/users/620/shog9&quot;&gt;Shog9&lt;/a&gt; for writing the queries and script to facilitate fetching and posting this data to all the sites in the network, and to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/users/459488/brian-nickel&quot;&gt;Brian&lt;/a&gt; for the subsequent work making the whole thing more user friendly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing everyone a happy 2021!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-01-21T11:36:33.263" LastActivityDate="2021-01-22T13:45:15.983" Title="2020: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11356" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-19T23:05:58.853" Score="5" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have just asked a question relating to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179744/what-has-mordenkainen-done-to-maintain-the-balance&quot;&gt;Mordenkainen&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179750/40101&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; refers to a fan theory which I found really interesting. I would be very interested to see if there are any other similar theories, but I am pretty sure that asking for them would be opinion based or too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this is the right place to ask if anyone can help me find a stackable way to ask about these theories? I can go to the various forum sites if I have to, but prefer to try and avoid it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The related questions suggest rewording to a problem, but I am not actually sure how I can do that, so will explain what I am looking for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am doing research for a character background, he is a wizard, background of sage:researcher, and through his research has come up with a conspiracy theory that many large events throughout history have been manipulated by persons or groups unknown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original idea what that it could have been done for the personal gain of this group, but upon seeing Mordenkainens background I figured he was a good figure to have as the target of my theory, that my character was seeing the threads he was pulling but not knowing who was pulling them (he doesn't exist in my setting, so the DM would be free to put the blame on anyone, or make me wrong).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After seeing the fan theory it looks like part of what I am looking for is 'events that never happened', in the case of this particular answer a peace treaty that never happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that there will be other events that never happened, but since the significance of these events is unlikely to ever be compounded upon in lore I suspect it will all be theorising by fans.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could ask for the history of wars in a particular setting, including wars that brewed but didn't spill over into full scale wars; or peace treaties, including those that never got signed; but asking a specific question about each type of string relies on me knowing what type of strings have been pulled beforehand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="40101" LastEditDate="2021-01-20T08:54:25.520" LastActivityDate="2021-01-20T22:35:50.043" Title="How do I ask for fan theories?" Tags="|support|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11357" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11360" CreationDate="2021-01-20T14:34:49.423" Score="0" ViewCount="135" Body="&lt;p&gt;why does rpg.StackExchange return only posts for dnd5e when &lt;em&gt;explicitly&lt;/em&gt; Googling for dnd3.5e (see example query below)? the community for dnd3.5e is still quite large, offering them only dnd5e content seems needlessly pushing for the newer version. is this happening because of some defect in rpg.StackExchange? is it policy? or is Google to blame and not rpg.StackExchange?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example query &amp;quot;d&amp;amp;d 3.5 wildshape&amp;quot; in Google returns only results from rpg.StackExhange for dnd5e instead, even when limiting the search to site rpg.StackExchange, in top bar of StackOverflow returns no results whatsoever and says &amp;quot;search results for dd 3.5 wildshape&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12499" LastEditorUserId="12499" LastEditDate="2021-01-21T07:39:04.747" LastActivityDate="2021-01-21T07:39:04.747" Title="why does StackExchange return only posts for dnd5e when explicitly Googling for dnd3.5e?" Tags="|support|search|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11358" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11357" CreationDate="2021-01-20T14:38:30.640" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Google is in charge of Google search results. Stack Exchange just provides its content as a website and isn't in charge of what Google decides to provide to you. There's no agenda to boost any specific game or edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have you tried adding “D&amp;amp;D 3.5e” to your Google searches? If that returns D&amp;amp;D 5e results for you anyway, that's more on Google deciding those results are relevant to you for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're using our on-site search in the top bar above, add [dnd-3.5e] to your search terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-01-20T14:38:30.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11359" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11356" CreationDate="2021-01-20T22:35:50.043" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I'm not sure SE is a good place for this kind of information&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not because it's off topic or because it wouldn't be of interest to others in the future, but because it is difficult (in the SE format) to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Fully justify and explain what evidence exists that supports the&#xA;conclusions drawn, especially over other, rejected conclusions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Deal with critiques on specific elements of reasoning (especially&#xA;when the basis for that reasoning is not explicitly verifiable)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Assess which answers have the &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; theorizing to satisfy the&#xA;question (however &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; is defined by the querent)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Deal with new, official details which emerge, whether they confirm or obviate a&#xA;given theory&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Establish why a fan theory, of any quality, is better than just&#xA;writing your own story details which suit your needs into a given D&amp;amp;D&#xA;setting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Deal with DM decisions in a specific campaign at a specific table. A&#xA;player generally can't know how tightly a DM is following established&#xA;lore, nor how familiar they are with that lore in the first place&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Evaluate the quality and plausibility of a fan theory in the first&#xA;place (though this will vary a lot by specific theory)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;If you really want to get this sort of information through an RPG.SE question, you might have a good shot if you ask for specific elements which best support or refute the conclusion you need&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's well established here that asking about lore of a setting is valid, and leaning on expertise of users here is a good way to get specific bits of lore-related information. It's still difficult to get an SE-friendly form of question (at least as far as I can come up with options), but a question along the lines of&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What officially published evidence exists that supports or refutes the idea that Mordenkainen was behind the abduction of Prince Thrommel?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That seems stack-valid to me, though that's not worth a whole lot in itself. Less focused questions in a similar vein &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be OK:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My character is researching major events in Faerun history that might appear to have been manipulated by specific persons or groups. What published events might they read about that would suggest that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a feeling that there needs to be more detail on that one, to narrow the scope enough that the best answer isn't along the lines of &amp;quot;all of them&amp;quot;. But it at least tries to tap knowledge of the in-game canonical events and timelines, and so leverage user expertise on those subjects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ultimately fan theories tend to be houses of cards:&lt;/strong&gt; they rely on specific interpretations of events as their arguments for other interpretations of other specific events-- an unprovable conclusion depending heavily on other unprovable conclusions for support. I'm not sure that free-wheeling approach really fits SE's reference-style format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Take it to chat&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not the same as a question on the site, but you can tap a lot of the same expertise without any of the stack policy limitations in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr: The more you can structure questions as seeking official material which suits your specific criteria, the more likely you are to produce stack-legal questions that get information about fan theories.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastActivityDate="2021-01-20T22:35:50.043" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11360" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11357" CreationDate="2021-01-20T22:53:02.680" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tags we have here on RPG.SE, like &amp;quot;dnd-5e&amp;quot;, are poor for external SEO purposes and lead to the effect you see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We tried early in the site to engage with SE central on a fix in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/803/need-tag-abbreviation-expansion-synonyms-for-seo-purposes&quot;&gt;Need tag abbreviation expansion/synonyms for SEO purposes&lt;/a&gt; (and similar Q on meta.SE) but never got any interest/attention. Therefore our SEO remains poor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2021-01-20T22:53:02.680" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11355" CreationDate="2021-01-22T13:45:15.983" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;2019 vs 2020 comparison for RPG.se&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5F2R2.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5F2R2.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ltEgf.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ltEgf.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kva2R.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kva2R.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7022/52137&quot;&gt;2017 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8680/8610&quot;&gt;2018 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9662/2019-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2019 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEDE Queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions-answers-and-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Total number of questions, answers per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1173867/total-number-of-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Comments per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://sese.evbpc.com/Sites/Detail?SiteId=d597f1ea-6dff-e511-80c0-00155d918203&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fun site with more SE site statistics&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-01-22T13:45:15.983" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11362" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-22T17:46:07.900" Score="0" ViewCount="107" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106070/how-are-pluses-on-vanilla-weapons-and-armour-different-than-previous-editions&quot;&gt;How are pluses on vanilla weapons and armour different than previous editions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was originally posted over 3 years ago. At the time, the question read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why do pluses on vanilla weapons and armour cap at +3?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do pluses on vanilla weapons and armour cap at +3, as opposed to +5 in previous editions? Is there meant to be a different style of item-based progression in DND5E, or am I just missing something here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has two highly scored answers, currently at +63 and +31, answering the question as written above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On January 9th, the question was closed as off topic for asking for designer intent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On January 17th, the question was edited significantly to read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How are pluses on vanilla weapons and armour different than previous editions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How are pluses on vanilla weapons and armour different in 5e than in previous editions? I have noticed old editions are capped at +5 and 5e is capped at +3. What, if anything, would change if higher bonuses were available instead?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think there is any debating that &lt;em&gt;this is an entirely different question than it was previously&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this substantial revision have instead been a new post? Should we revert the revision and ask that OP post a new question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-01-22T22:39:45.957" Title="Should this revision to a 3 year old (formerly) designer reasons question be a new post instead?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11363" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11362" CreationDate="2021-01-22T18:17:48.703" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think it's not worth it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's probably most in keeping with the current approaches to questions on the stack, but (in this particular case) it seems like a solution which improves nothing beyond being conspicuously adherent to the currently dominant rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not really in question that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original post was asking for something off-topic to the stack (now, at least; I don't&#xA;recall the policy three years ago)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The edit changes the nature of the question somewhat&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question was edited in a manner that is not consistent with best&#xA;practices on the stack&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it doesn't seem to me that the top answers are not satisfactory answers to the question in its current form as well-- they sufficiently describe the bounded accuracy approach to 5e, and (some of) the mechanical consequences of that approach and consequences of abandoning it for older-style bonus ceilings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question's current form is appropriate for the stack, and the highly-upvoted answers still answer it adequately, I'm not sure what is gained by asking that the entire endeavor be repeated. It &lt;em&gt;feels&lt;/em&gt; to me like demanding that a duplicate question be posted, in service of preserving a question in a form that will necessarily be closed immediately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that closing questions has specific benefits to the stack in various situations, but I think that now (and in the recent past) we have experienced a shift towards more aggressive closures, sometimes on... shaky ground. &lt;strong&gt;We should not be &lt;em&gt;looking&lt;/em&gt; for reasons to close questions, but rather looking for improvements which &lt;em&gt;may be achieved&lt;/em&gt; through appropriate means, including closures.&lt;/strong&gt; I appreciate all of the work that community members do in curating the site, but I have been increasingly feeling an overall vibe that seems, to me, to lean towards the former.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in other users' opinions on whether or not reposting the current question (the one in a stack-allowable format) would be likely to draw &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; answers than it currently has, or, alternatively, if they feel the current answers have been invalidated by the edits. If so, I could probably be persuaded that this course of action is worthwhile. But otherwise this feels to me like demanding that a question say &amp;quot;half-dozen&amp;quot; instead of &amp;quot;six&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in summary, my answer suggests a counter-question: &lt;strong&gt;What will be improved by doing this, beyond alleviating a technical-but-inconsequential policy violation?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-01-22T18:24:19.293" LastActivityDate="2021-01-22T18:24:19.293" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11364" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11382" CreationDate="2021-01-22T20:44:09.207" Score="9" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;Today I had virtually no activity on the site (other than visiting) and to my surprise I somehow just earned all of my tag badges simultaneously. As far as I am aware I already had all these badges before, earned at the appropriate time but they are now showing up as earned today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see the effect &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/33707/sdjz?tab=activity&quot;&gt;in my activity&lt;/a&gt;. I also got the corresponding notifications:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XxOOL.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/XxOOL.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly don't think this has much of an impact other than the momentary confusion caused but I am still curious as to what happened, and whether this is worth reporting to the main meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33707" LastEditorUserId="5792" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T19:48:38.030" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T19:48:38.030" Title="Re-earned all my tag badges at once" Tags="|bug|status-completed|badges|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11365" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11362" CreationDate="2021-01-22T22:39:45.957" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I debate that this is an entirely different question than was asked previously.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any designer reasons that may have been cited for &amp;quot;why cap at +3&amp;quot; are valid responses for &amp;quot;what would change if the number was higher&amp;quot;, assuming the designer reason was an intent to further some game design and not &amp;quot;just because&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any response for &amp;quot;what would change if the number was higher&amp;quot; other than &amp;quot;IDK friend, go for it&amp;quot; is going to, implicitly or explicitly, outline the consequences of it being currently capped at +3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It just seems like the question was written to find out what happens when the number goes up but remove the idea of designer intent. I guess that's a little daylight between them, but if somebody has solid practical experience in what happens when number goes up, that's probably going to be useful to the original question, unless it was just asking after designer intent for funsies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2021-01-22T22:39:45.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11366" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11364" CreationDate="2021-01-23T13:15:14.903" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This seems to be a recurring event&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like whatever job is responsible for awarding (and unawarding) tag badges is acting up and reawarding badges to some users. Looking at the recent badges stream for both main and meta (main is presumably cut off due to other earned badges). No points for guessing how I noticed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/96FdS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/96FdS.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/23CVI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/23CVI.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/o8x8V.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;again&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ms6un.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;again on meta&lt;/a&gt;. I'll probably stop updating with new cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-01-24T15:45:10.233" LastActivityDate="2021-01-24T15:45:10.233" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11367" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-23T20:38:09.013" Score="1" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;Candidate for closure: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179908/62294&quot;&gt;Effect lasts until end of dead creature’s next turn&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dupe target: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65305/do-your-spells-end-when-you-die&quot;&gt;Do your spells end when you die?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question be closed as a duplicate of the proposed dupe target?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-01-24T00:02:33.747" Title="Is this question about spell effects persisting after death a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11367" CreationDate="2021-01-23T20:58:13.773" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Half of it is&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I closed it originally, and didn't see the responses until now. The crux here, I think, is – let's call it an oddity of grammar – where the question is actually two questions but doesn't look like it (and probably wouldn't need separation normally). Doing the full analysis:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is the spell ended when they die or does it continue until when their turn would have occurred?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looks like it's simply asking which of these is the correct outcome/way it works (A or B). We have a question (the current target) which answers not A, and so one would assume B to be the case. Except there's more to B (it's treading into undefined rules for one), so it at least warrants a separate answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two ways here, the natural route if the querent had responded would be for them to edit in that information and focus the question to the novel case (ie. edit it to ask how B works). We could do that for them, or we could have answers cover that point (say by linking to the current target) and then answer for how B works (or whether it has workings in the rule if need be).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest we go with the latter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-01-23T20:58:13.773" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11369" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11367" CreationDate="2021-01-24T00:02:33.747" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is not a duplicate, but it could use some improvements&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The core of the newer question is &amp;quot;If an effect lasts until a creature's &amp;quot;next turn&amp;quot;, but that creature dies before they get a next turn, when does the effect end?&amp;quot;. The older question does not contain an answer to this new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two parts of the new question that make it seem more like a duplicate, however I don't believe either of them actually cause it to be even a partial duplicate. These are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker chose a hypothetical where the &amp;quot;effect&amp;quot; is a spell and the &amp;quot;creature&amp;quot; is the caster of that spell. This situation has some overlap with the dupe target, but even then the dupe target doesn't contain an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The asker provided two possibilities for answers, and one of them is (probably) ruled out by the dupe target. That makes the other possibility seem like a trivial answer, but the correct answer could be something else entirely.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also see two ways to improve the question, though they should not be interpreted as the only possible ways to improve the question, nor are they necessarily exclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The original asker can update the question with more detail about the specific situation they had in mind, particularly the exact spell (Booming Blade is in there now, but it was not added by the asker). This could clarify that the more specific situation is indeed covered by an existing question, or more clearly show ways it is not covered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question could be rephrased to reduce the confusion without requiring additional information from the asker. For example, by breaking it into a more structured form with multiple sentences and possibly paragraphs, or by changing the end to something like &amp;quot;this prior question indicates that it won't end immediately from the caster's death, but would it become a permanent effect unless the caster is Raised to start taking turns again, or something else?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2021-01-24T00:02:33.747" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11370" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11371" CreationDate="2021-01-25T20:22:23.357" Score="23" ViewCount="408" Body="&lt;p&gt;Tables are really rough on screenreaders and other consumers of web accessibility features. Getting them right is an art, one I have practiced a bit professionally, though I remain a novice. The overwhelming majority of options available to web designers to improve accessibility with respect to tables are not available to us here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice, we have three options to produce a table: a codebox, MathJax, or the new Markdown table syntax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The codebox is clearly bad. Semantically, that will be understood as code, and screenreaders will attempt to make it intelligible as such. It can be nearly unusable, depending on the user’s settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The MathJax and Markdown options are less clear to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Internally, Markdown tables are actual tables, with &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;table&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tags. MathJax, on the other hand, uses a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;math&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; block, which includes an &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;mtable&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; that winds up being very similar to the &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;table&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; produced by Markdown. The &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;math&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; block is XML, and the spec for it is properly specified within the block with an &lt;code&gt;xmlns&lt;/code&gt; attribute. That means any tool that knows how to parse XML and their specs &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; know how to read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recently, one of my answers was converted from MathJax to Markdown with an edit reason claiming that Markdown is superior for accessibility. I rejected this change as not offering any improvement, because I like the look of MathJax better and as far as I know, Markdown &lt;em&gt;doesn’t&lt;/em&gt; offer any improvement in accessibility. MathJax goes to considerable efforts to “back” its rendered output with actual text (the aforementioned &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;math&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; block), to ensure that screenreaders can still understand it (and things like copy-and-paste still work). However, I am far from an expert on this subject, so I would appreciate it if anyone who &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; can shed some light on best practices here. When Markdown tables were first unveiled, I’d entertained thoughts of going through my MathJax tables and converting them, but generally found the result less visually appealing and so never bothered. If there is a substantially accessibility improvement, that might change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, here are two versions of the same table using Markdown and MathJax:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Character Level&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Weapon Level&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Weapon Effect&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1st – 2nd&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1st&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;“+0” adaptive war bow&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;3rd – 4th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2nd&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;+1 adaptive war bow&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5th – 6th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;3rd&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Activation ring &lt;em&gt;spell storing, minor&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7th – 8th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;4th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Enhance arrows&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9th – 10th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Minor displacement (as &lt;em&gt;blur&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11th – 12th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;+1 adaptive distance* war bow&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13th – 14th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Activation ring &lt;em&gt;spell storing&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15th – 16th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Plane shift&lt;/em&gt;,** 3/day&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17th – 18th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Imbue arrow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;19th – 20th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;10th&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Activation ring &lt;em&gt;spell storing, major&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\begin{array}{c c l}&#xA;\textbf{Character Level} &amp;amp; \textbf{Weapon Level} &amp;amp; \textbf{Weapon Effect} \\ \hline&#xA;1^\text{st}-2^\text{nd} &amp;amp; 1^\text{st} &amp;amp; \textit{“+0” adaptive war bow} \\&#xA;3^\text{rd}-4^\text{th} &amp;amp; 2^\text{nd} &amp;amp; \textit{+1 adaptive war bow} \\&#xA;5^\text{th}-6^\text{th} &amp;amp; 3^\text{rd} &amp;amp; \text{Activation ring }\textit{spell storing, minor} \\&#xA;7^\text{th}-8^\text{th} &amp;amp; 4^\text{th} &amp;amp; \text{Enhance arrows} \\&#xA;9^\text{th}-10^\text{th} &amp;amp; 5^\text{th} &amp;amp; \text{Minor displacement (as }\textit{blur}\text{)} \\&#xA;11^\text{th}-12^\text{th} &amp;amp; 6^\text{th} &amp;amp; \textit{+1 adaptive distance* war bow} \\&#xA;13^\text{th}-14^\text{th} &amp;amp; 7^\text{th} &amp;amp; \text{Activation ring }\textit{spell storing, regular} \\&#xA;15^\text{th}-16^\text{th} &amp;amp; 8^\text{th} &amp;amp; \textit{Plane shift}\text{,** 3/day} \\&#xA;17^\text{th}-18^\text{th} &amp;amp; 9^\text{th} &amp;amp; \text{Imbue arrow} \\&#xA;19^\text{th}-20^\text{th} &amp;amp; 10^\text{th} &amp;amp; \text{Activation ring }\textit{spell storing, major} \\&#xA;\end{array}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This particular table looks fine in Markdown, but some of my larger tables would require a certain amount of visual compromise to work in Markdown, as it doesn’t support as many formatting options. And others—&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122649/4563&quot;&gt;such as these&lt;/a&gt;—that mimic a grid, those can’t be handled by Markdown tables at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T00:28:40.260" LastActivityDate="2022-04-20T20:40:22.957" Title="Are Markdown tables superior to MathJax arrays for accessibility?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|accessibility|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11371" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11370" CreationDate="2021-01-25T20:49:43.747" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;Realized I could do some experimentation of my own here: at least with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.nvaccess.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Non-Visual Digital Access (NVDA)&lt;/a&gt; screen reader (which is free, and therefore quite popular as I understand things—it’s also what I use at work to test accessibility), Markdown tables are read quite nicely: when you reach a given cell, it tells you the header for the column of that cell, as well as what the value in that cell is. That allows you to keep track of what each piece of information is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With MathJax, on the other hand, it just reads “math” when you get to the table, and that’s it, moving on to the next paragraph after. Furthermore, though there are plugins that claim to support MathML, none of them work all that well for me—the best result was one that spat out the entire table at once, with zero ability to navigate inside it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being the case, at least for NVDA—which again, is pretty popular—Markdown not only has an accessibility advantage, but the difference is &lt;strong&gt;massive&lt;/strong&gt;. I’m used to accessibility results being fairly subtle, at least when an effort is made at all, but this is so blatant that even I can get it. I’ll certainly be reconsidering my use of MathJax tables in light of this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-01-25T22:45:52.770" LastActivityDate="2021-01-25T22:45:52.770" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11370" CreationDate="2021-01-25T21:10:07.443" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;iOS Safari reader view&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Markdown:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mMIXZl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mMIXZl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MathJax:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0gaMhl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0gaMhl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the iOS Safari, the MathJax table does not automatically scale with screen width(though you can scroll on it), but Markdown does. Markdown just looks better here (to me at least).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T15:58:55.740" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T15:58:55.740" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11373" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-25T21:48:04.230" Score="6" ViewCount="235" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note: I understand the reluctance to use a word like &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; here. But it appears to me to be a fact that, when any sort of in-the-moment dispute arises, there is an inevitable appeal to authority of a meta question. Even if we don't want to call things &amp;quot;policies&amp;quot;, pointing to a meta question's top-voted answer as the last word of a dispute is functionally identical to actually having and enforcing a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I don't want to get too hung up on the specific words. If another word which describes how things play out here is a better fit, I'd be happy to edit it into this question. If &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; is the most accurate one, that's information worth being aware of. Especially if that's not the way users would like the stack to operate. And it really does seem to me that when some users want to see A, and someone does B instead, it turns out that those users find A is policy-like &lt;em&gt;enough&lt;/em&gt; that B is formally unacceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This all might be better than edit wars and proxy disputes. But whatever the stack at large might prefer, if it looks like a policy, walks like a policy, and quacks like a policy, it's probably a policy (or a duck, but it's the policy part that is relevant here). I'm open to being better educated on how this all plays out here, but I feel that the issues I'm trying to describe exist identically whether we use the word &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; to describe them or not. And it's those issues which seem to me to be causing the problems that I am observing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've observed some disagreements in and around the stack lately regarding specific actions in specific circumstances. Some of those seem to have become heated and unpleasant for those involved. I don't think it would be helpful to this question to link to, or precisely describe, specific examples. But some explanations offered in many of those situations are very explicitly &amp;quot;this is stack policy, I'm just applying it&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Outside of a handful of specific rules, I'm not clear on how stack policy is defined. We discuss things on meta fairly often, but frequently questions and answers only draw the attention of a small number of members. Worse, the vote totals can change over time. I recall a specific case of trying to determine stack policy which was decided (as best as I can tell) by an answer gaining a plurality of votes in a certain window of time. But now, some time later, the balance of votes indicates the community favoring a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; approach than the one described in the previously top-voted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not saying I have a specific, superior suggestion for how to decide on policies. I am, however, unsure if we already have a standard which says that if 41 votes are cast for suggestion A, and 40 votes are cast for suggestion B, suggestion A becomes, officially, the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; permitted approach and that the 41st vote represents an absolute justification for A in all subsequent disputes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Do we have a set of criteria which define official stack policies, especially for questions discussed on meta? Is the balance of votes on any situation raised in meta the final word on that situation? Should we be periodically reviewing specific, key meta posts to see if community consensus has changed (automatically changing enforceable policy with it)?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T01:58:47.007" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T13:01:08.280" Title="What is the Nature of Stack Policy Decisions?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11374" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-25T22:50:12.610" Score="3" ViewCount="256" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current site policy is to not consider tweets from Jeremy Crawford (or other game designers) as main support for answers to D&amp;amp;D 5e questions, following the &lt;em&gt;Official Ruling&lt;/em&gt; section in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sage Advice Compendium&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11275/how-has-the-ruling-of-jcs-tweets-now-being-unofficial-affected-www-sageadvice-e&quot;&gt;How has the ruling of JC&amp;#39;s tweets now being unofficial affected www.sageadvice.eu, in regards to RPG.se?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the same policy be applied also for interviews and podcasts in answer to D&amp;amp;D 5e questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-02-02T16:12:25.370" LastActivityDate="2021-02-03T00:29:38.913" Title="Are interviews reliable sources for supporting an answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|dnd-5e|citations|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11375" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11374" CreationDate="2021-01-25T23:08:41.557" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I will echo my answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11277/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. It’s about tweets, but it applies to interviews.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Readers decide if answers provide valuable information.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our goal is to help querents and future readers find solutions to their problems, and each person writing an answer is going to do that differently. When you write an answer, you decide what you think is the information valuable to solving the querent's problem, and the querent and future readers decide if the information you provide is valuable to solving the problem. That's how stackexchange is supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you think JC's or MM's tweets are valuable information, that's great. I have personally found them useful in some situations. They have settled disputes at my table before, and probably will in the future. Other times they have not helped at all, and have even made things worse - JC has been known to contradict himself from time to time, and one such contradiction led to more confusion for the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think including a JC tweet in your answer would be helpful to someone reading your answer, do so. But understand, official rules and rulings are generally considered &lt;em&gt;more valuable&lt;/em&gt; than unofficial ones. An answer that utilizes official material &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; a JC tweet will always be better received than answer that is just a tweet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-01-25T23:08:41.557" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11373" CreationDate="2021-01-26T01:36:32.223" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Policy isn't a really useful term&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't get me wrong, I see the appeal and I certainly have used it myself (and will probably do again). It is a nice hard edge by which to act or judge actions and that makes it easier. It's also an easy explanation to give, and we do find ourselves explaining certain things over an over again, so especially for those we land on them being easy. I get that. But hard edges make it a blunt instrument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack (and all the Stacks) actually operate on a best practices. But those are really hard to write down and communicate and are best taught by talking over specific cases as they come up. That process happens in comments, meta, and chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So how does the process work?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As mentioned, most of the time we just talk about a singular case. Or to put another way, the default for our meta discussions is that it is talking out what's best to do in a specific case. That discussion will still be useful to link down the line when talking about similar cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we sometimes get problems that are recurring and end up not being handled well. That's when having a discussion to... create direction for our practices comes in. That direction can include an actual change in practice, such as making a question type off-topic, or just push a harder line on something, such as closing rapid iterations of homebrew reviews as dupes, or push a softer line on something, such as handling questions using phrases like &amp;quot;does it break anything&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;should&amp;quot;. But how those come about are also a matter of best practice, so there's no hard line for what they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ideally, and for most of, these directed practices then solve the problem and thus don't need to be re-examined. They either become integrated in our normal pool of praxis, or the problem goes away and the become forgotten. Then, there's the tiny few other cases and that's where the policy term comes in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because its only really useful, or specifying its nature, is only really useful once a meta which directed practice becomes contentious. So let's take a (newcomer's, hindsight) analysis of the elephant in the room; Don't Guess the System. It tried to solve two problems (or a split problem, but whatever): A number of users were playing similar or overlapping games, and at the same time questions were asked which didn't specify which system they were asking about. Answers coming in from the wrong system is still a problem, so let's not spend any time on the problems that arise from such answers not being obvious. The solution: require all questions to explicitly state their system.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; The cost is inconvenience for some number of questions which needs to go through extra steps (the fullness of these arguments can be found on the appropriate metas).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then time happened. And with it one of the problems went away, specifically users playing mixed or hard to distinguish systems and taking it as the default. Users posting questions without stating the system didn't though, and hasn't despite specific attempts to mitigate it. So the problems which surround it change, the cost seems to be the only effect, and it is coming up against the urge users have to help. And so it gets talked about, discretized from a directing meta to a Policy, revisited (twice, so far) and contentious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's probably simplifying it a lot, but my point is that it's just a process happening, and sort of a by-product. Or having to talk about something as a Policy is a by-product of other problems and certainly not a goal. You might particularly see the not-goalness rear its head when a meta discussion is started trying to create a policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, to try to answer the question itself, we try to do what's best for the stack. We look at what's sustainable, both specifically and in general. That means if the practice direction given by a meta is giving problems, it may need to be revisited. But constantly revisiting isn't useful either, and if the community is hard split on an issue, changing practice whenever votes tip past one another isn't sustainable either. &lt;sup&gt;‡&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: Whether accepting the tag alone as such a statement help fuel the issue is a discussion to have elsewhere, but probably not something we stand a chance to solve now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;‡: This is again in reference to the Don't Guess the System issue and to the &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; subpart. For the latter votes changed with time, and because the change side would be more motivated to cast votes after the fact, I made the call to open a revisit on it. While that has now also happened to the re-revisit of DGtS, but a further revisit hasn't happened. How to handle that kind of case probably warrant its own discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T12:10:54.167" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T12:10:54.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11377" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11373" CreationDate="2021-01-26T13:01:08.280" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Policies are rightly blunt to direct utility and support meta-discussion.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Policies are for in-the-moment decision making on the &lt;strong&gt;main-site&lt;/strong&gt;. We defer to the &lt;em&gt;law&lt;/em&gt; of policy to redirect the discussion to a place where we have a more open environment which is the meta-discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We defer to the authority of policy on main-site because we want to prevent escalation of the conflict. Policies are the tools that enable us to make a decisive incision to avert an escalation of a disagreement before it spirals out of order. They exemplify the line that we drew in the past, we discuss it in meta, but abide by it until it changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is stiff and rigid, but also pacifying. Policies work as an equaliser. A moderator has to adhere to the policy and is held accountable to the community decision - it is a check to their power and the tool that a 300 reputation user and a 150.000 reputation user can wield equally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A policy is a blunt weapon by design, and that is right. We work out the details later on meta, the fine tool - the peaceful adjudicator who lets us give things the proper care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T13:01:08.280" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11378" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11380" CreationDate="2021-01-26T15:30:35.930" Score="8" ViewCount="109" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've asked several homebrew-review questions in the past, and it's been pointed out to me that there are several guides on RPG.SE for these type of questions, I used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot; title=&quot;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8171/how-should-i-ask-about-my-dd-5e-homebrew-being-balanced&quot; title=&quot;How should I ask about my D&amp;amp;D 5e Homebrew being balanced?&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. However, my latest homebrew review question did not get any answer; the best it got is a more-than-a-comment non-answer. The question I am asking about is this one: &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179608/how-much-does-this-favored-foe-tweak-for-the-rangers-class-feature-from-tcoe-bu&quot;&gt;How much does this Favored Foe tweak for the Ranger's class feature from TCoE buffs the Rangers when compared to other martial classes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;. I would prefer that the scope of this meta question is to be a case study of this specific question, what are the problems and how can I improve it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is strange to me, because my homebrew review questions prior to this one gets more answers, even though they're not as good, according to the guides. Not to toot my own horn, but even a user in the question commented that it's rare to see such a well-stated homebrew review question. Maybe it's because that comment set up my expectations so I can't help but feel disappointed when I didn't get an answer (that's on me, I'm not blaming the commenter). Following the guides, here are the steps I took when asking this question:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Present your problems, not your solution&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I opened the question by giving my opinion on the new Favored Foe class feature, and my problems with it. I even added an alternative solution outside of my homebrew tweak that I had problems with too.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Present your efforts; state what you want to achieve and why you want a review&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After describing the homebrew I made, I explicitly stated what this aims to fix in four paragraphs, covering my current analysis on it, how the changes impact the class, but also that I'm afraid that altering a concentration-based mechanic will overpower the Ranger, which is why I want a review from people in RPG.SE who has more experience and expertise than I do.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going back to the question, &lt;strong&gt;why is my homebrew review question not getting answers, and how can I improve it?&lt;/strong&gt; Is it the length? Should I just bounty it? Is the title too long? Did I post it at a low-traffic time? Does that even matter that much? I want to know so that I can better improve my homebrew review questions in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64749" LastEditorUserId="64749" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T17:26:41.203" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T17:26:41.203" Title="Why is my homebrew review question not getting answers, and how can I improve them?" Tags="|support|specific-question|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11378" CreationDate="2021-01-26T16:34:51.343" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's impossible to know exactly why a question has gone unanswered&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, for a lot of questions it would be because we haven't many, or any, users with the system expertise to answer, but that shouldn't be the case here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My guess is that there's two, connected causes. The first is that it slipped through the net of attention. Falling of the front pages means it stops getting the eyes of potential answerers and then falls out of mind. This happens from time to time even on RPG.SE, bumping it on attention in some way (community user bump, edit, &lt;em&gt;bounty&lt;/em&gt;, mentioning it in chat or on meta I suppose) usually helps that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the second reason is that good homebrew is much harder to answer, or at least answer fully and with the support expected here. Or maybe put another way, the easy homebrew review questions are the ones where the problems (be they balance, mechanical, spotlight, whatever) are obvious. Once things are subtle it's hard to give an analytical answer that isn't just &amp;quot;Yeah, probably good. Go playtest it&amp;quot;. Of course, you're then looking at a good answer supporting itself with experience, but unless someone has tried something similar enough to be applicable, that would mean playtesting the optional rule, and ideally over the course of an entire campaign. That's a monumental ask (and would take a long time anyway). (It being hard to answer would also mean it slips of attention.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the specific of modifying the optional rule for Rangers, the original is still fairly new and so folks haven't digested how much it does to empower the class, and where it might be hampered or reigned in, and whether this would tip the balance too far. That takes time and campaigns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So coming back to opening, it may well be unanswered because none has the &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; expertise to answer it yet. So what could you do? Well, playtest it yourself and come back with the expertise and self-answer it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T16:34:51.343" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11378" CreationDate="2021-01-26T17:11:40.840" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Homebrew review questions are not the most popular type here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are 100% welcome and you should always feel free to post one. But they seem to draw the attention of fewer users who are interested in writing answers. No matter how well-written, it may simply take extra time before someone comes across the question and is in the mood to answer it. So take heart-- a delay may have nothing to do with the question itself. The flip side of that is that even if you can improve a homebrew review question, it may still take time to draw any answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I think that this particular question could be better organized&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It contains a lot of the information that makes for a solid homebrew review question, so well done on that front. But at the same time, it is long enough to be a block-of-text post. That's also okay, but those take more effort to read and tend to get less attention as a result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also lacks organizational structure(s) which would make it easier to read and reference. I personally like things like line breaks and descriptive section headings, but those are just examples (I'm not sure I would hold up my style here as a model for anyone). This question has headings, but they are not very descriptive of your specific items. That's often fine, but the lack of conciseness below the headings is problematic: I find it hard to extract the salient information from your &amp;quot;what this aims to fix&amp;quot; section, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, it includes information which, while relevant, doesn't add much to the question (in my view): the citations to a Reddit post are evidence that at least some other people feel as you do, but that adds nothing you would not have if you replaced it with a single line like &amp;quot;I want more incentive to take more levels in the Ranger class&amp;quot;. If, in your campaign, you are intending to take a level of Rogue, that's all well and good, but it's harder for me to see the significance of that in evaluating a homebrewed Ranger class feature. Are you intending builds that take this homebrewed feature to do the same, meaning that answerers should assume multiclassing (into Rogue, or anything else) when considering the feature itself?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An issue closely related to the above is that it's harder to extract relevant information from the question because of its length, conversational extra information and exposition, and the relative lack of clear organization highlighting the most relevant details. I found it difficult to sift information about your issue, proposed solution, and stated goals/concerns from the rest of the text. A question that is harder to grasp and takes more effort to properly answer is a question that will attract fewer answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Specific recommendations for this question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sections above are more general, but I will suggest a few items for this particular question. The overall thrust of these suggestions are to make the question more concise while also highlighting the most important and useful elements. These are my personal opinions on improvements, so please don't give them more weight than they deserve:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Consider changing the name of the homebrewed feature in some way so&#xA;that it isn't the same as an existing feature. I found this confusing&#xA;when tracking changes. Even something like &lt;em&gt;Improved Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;would help make it clear when we're discussing the original spell or&#xA;the proposed feature&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove irrelevant points, especially in the beginning. A feature you&#xA;find unsatisfactory, and intend to change, having a perceived synergy&#xA;with Feats Rangers may or may not take is not important to evaluating&#xA;the new version of the feature&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Cut the Reddit citations entirely. That you have a specific goal for&#xA;your homebrewed changes is enough reason to include that goal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove the changelog section &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; remove the quoted prose describing&#xA;the proposed feature. They are redundant and double the length of&#xA;that section&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The longer a question is, the more it tends to benefit from having&#xA;more sections, each relatively short and focused. The current&#xA;headings, and content beneath them, are not convenient for readers to&#xA;navigate. I consider this to be the highest-impact change you could&#xA;introduce to the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Providing a succinct summary of a section can be helpful, especially&#xA;if that section is long or contains lots of asides or conditional&#xA;cases. If you do offer a summary, it needs to actually summarize the&#xA;information it addresses: something like &lt;strong&gt;tl;dr: here is the&#xA;changelog&lt;/strong&gt; is a heading, not a summary-- it contains no information&#xA;itself, but indicates where information might be found&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Your general attitudes on the relevant topics are clear, but your&#xA;specific problems, goals, and methods are harder to tease out. As&#xA;best I can tell, it seems that your main goal in revising &lt;em&gt;Favored&#xA;Foe&lt;/em&gt; is to provide incentives to take more levels in Ranger, but&#xA;connections to that goal (or another) are hard to find in the&#xA;question itself&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How I might write this question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm hesitant to make sweeping edits to others' questions, especially if I'm not highly confident that I understand all the nuances. But as an example of how I might try to apply these suggestions, the question may look something like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Mid- and high-level Ranger play seems underwhelming, and the &lt;em&gt;Favored Foe&lt;/em&gt; feature from &lt;em&gt;TCoE&lt;/em&gt; seems to continue that&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Favored Foe&lt;/em&gt; seems generally worse than &lt;em&gt;Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt; to me: it doesn't offer much that &lt;em&gt;Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt; lacks until the level 20 feature &lt;em&gt;Foe Slayer&lt;/em&gt;. Most games don't reach that level, and even when they do Rangers will spend a lot more play time with &lt;em&gt;Favored Foe&lt;/em&gt; lacking that enhancement than they will with it. I'd like to revise the feature to make it more useful, and to encourage taking more levels in Ranger by providing more options for mid- and high-level play as a Ranger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is my proposed homebrew feature:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Improved Hunter's Mark&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature. Furthermore, Hunter's Mark is removed from your spell list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you hit a creature with an attack roll, you can call on your mystical bond with nature to mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 hour or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell). Until your concentration ends, you deal an extra 1d4 damage to the target whenever you hit it with an attack, and you have advantage on any Wisdom (Perception) or Wisdom (Survival) check you make to find it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use this feature to mark a favored enemy a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a short or long rest. This feature's extra damage increases when you reach certain levels in this class: to 1d6 at 6th level and to 1d8 at 14th level. Furthermore, once you have reached 11th level in this class, this feature no longer requires concentration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What I am trying to fix with this homebrewed feature&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Play is largely unchanged up to level 11, I think. It's a bit less versatile than the &lt;em&gt;PHB&lt;/em&gt; version of &lt;em&gt;Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt; since it can't be moved when a target reaches 0 hp, but frees up spell slots as it's now a uses-per-rest feature. It otherwise has a lot of the same tradeoffs as &lt;em&gt;Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From level 11 and beyond, I think that removing the Concentration piece of the feature allows for more variety by keeping the benefit of extra damage while also allowing free access to other spells, especially those that require Concentration. It also enhances subclass features gained at level 11. So in all it represents a significant increase in power for the Ranger, but I think that is suitable for entering a higher tier of play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My main worry is that removing the Concentration requirement is overpowered relative to other martial classes. I think it might be fine as it seems similar to the Paladin's &lt;em&gt;Improved Divine Smite&lt;/em&gt; feature, which is a direct damage buff and also becomes available at level 11.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Overall, does my proposed &lt;em&gt;Improved Hunter's Mark&lt;/em&gt; Ranger class feature make Rangers overpowered relative to other martial classes at level 11 or higher?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-01-26T17:24:11.530" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T17:24:11.530" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11381" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-26T19:25:17.723" Score="1" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;Just what it says on the tin -- I just received the &amp;quot;dnd-5e&amp;quot; tag badge, but I haven't answered a &amp;quot;dnd-5e&amp;quot; question in a couple months, because I started ignoring them to curtail temptation to answer when I don't have resources at work to make &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, when I've gotten tag badges (here and on other SE sites) they were always relevant to either recent answers or recent vote activity on slightly older answers.  How does this happen in my situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18233" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T19:25:17.723" Title="How did I get the dnd-5e tag badge when I'm ignoring all the dnd tags I can find?" Tags="|discussion|tags|badges|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ClosedDate="2021-01-26T20:38:04.783" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11382" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11364" CreationDate="2021-01-26T19:48:29.130" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This should be resolved. Lots more details on what happened and why are available &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/360040/164200&quot;&gt;on this answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="5792" LastActivityDate="2021-01-26T19:48:29.130" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11383" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-01-30T14:47:55.963" Score="3" ViewCount="157" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180163&quot;&gt;Do I understand how spell slots work for druids and sorcerers correctly?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above question was originally closed, and now has four reopen votes (though in the review queue it has three votes to be left closed). There are two rather different comments under it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each question here should be a single question, and an artefact here is that I think some of these questions are dupes of question already asked. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked questions together provide answers to all parts of this question, but I voted to reopen, because a general and directed answer to the issue of &amp;quot;am I understanding this correctly&amp;quot; is exactly what we should answer in a single place on this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, the &amp;quot;linked questions&amp;quot; this refers to are the following (probably):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44736&quot;&gt;Can a spell be prepared once and cast multiple times?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/167040&quot;&gt;How do I determine how many spell slots I have when multiclassing?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151000&quot;&gt;If I multiclass into 2 or more spellcasting classes, how do I determine my known/prepared spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103637&quot;&gt;I don&amp;#39;t get the spell slot system for D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;#39;s Warlocks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/44400&quot;&gt;How does wizard &amp;amp; cleric spell preparation and casting work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135599&quot;&gt;How long do a spellcaster&amp;#39;s prepared spells stay prepared?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/141970&quot;&gt;Can you have more spells known of a certain spell level than you have spell slots of that level?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/119076&quot;&gt;How does adding Spells Known and Spell Slots work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113925&quot;&gt;Do class spells take up spell slots?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going back to the comment though, these are, of course, rather different. I &lt;em&gt;personally&lt;/em&gt; feel the question should either be closed with various duplicate targets (one for each question it asks) &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; be closed as needing to be more focused (it asks multiple questions); however, I am just one person, and am not deadset on that being the only option here. What I don't want to do is to hammer-close the question and cause a close/reopen hammer war.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm asking this here: Should this question be open or closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-01-30T21:18:14.127" LastActivityDate="2021-01-31T02:35:43.283" Title="Should this question about spellcasting be open or closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11383" CreationDate="2021-01-31T02:35:43.283" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I suggest it’s better for everyone to just leave this open&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are all closely-related questions; while 1 question per Question is a guideline that we should adhere to strongly, there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; exceptions, and this can reasonably be called one of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, it is &lt;strong&gt;really hard&lt;/strong&gt; to close “do I understand this correctly?” questions as duplicates—and most of the time, we’re better off not bothering. That’s because two different unsure people rarely have exactly the same misunderstandings about the material in question. Usually we need to address their specific interpretation, which is very hard to duplicate. Furthermore, often the askers of these sorts of questions have a hard time understanding someone else’s uncertain interpretation—directing them to similar questions can just cause more confusion than it helps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder, we have a &lt;em&gt;ton&lt;/em&gt; of questions that amount to “did I calculate the price of this magic item right?” and we don’t close them as duplicates because it’s harder to explain how to extrapolate from one case to another than it is to just answer their specific question. Likewise here, where the pairing is druid and sorcerer, and I suspect this querent could very well be confused by very-similar questions about clerics and wizards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-01-31T02:35:43.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11374" CreationDate="2021-02-01T23:33:09.707" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;(Non-D&amp;amp;D answer since this question is no longer D&amp;amp;D5-tagged.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we've hit a point where &lt;strong&gt;different game systems have different standards and your answer should reflect that&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;E.g.,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Modern D&amp;amp;D has a lot of rules, written by multiple authors, which accumulate over time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are official channels for rules updates and clarifications, which also accumulate over time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The D&amp;amp;D rules interact with each other in complex ways.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The D&amp;amp;D community in online fora &amp;amp;c. has specific concepts like &amp;quot;rules as written,&amp;quot; which constitute guidelines for how a game text should be interpreted and also for how your analysis should be presented.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;AFAIK, they still do the thing where you can ask a paid customer service representative your game specific question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So D&amp;amp;D5 answers should be written with all this in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Non-D&amp;amp;D answers should be written with &lt;em&gt;the specific game's specific circumstances&lt;/em&gt; in mind:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How was this specific game text intended to be read and used?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How are this game's &amp;quot;canonical&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; clarifications normally communicated?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How &amp;quot;technical&amp;quot; is the terminology in the text?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this example doppelgreener offered in the comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a high-profile alternative example, the Fate community utilises developer commentary heavily to the point that our community's go-to third party &lt;a href=&quot;https://fate-srd.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Fate SRD&lt;/a&gt; incorporates a lot of it as sidebars—it's readily available, highly dependable, and super relevant guidance on how to best utilise the system's elements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;there's no one-size-fits-all &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; shortcut here, you need to know how a particular game and community operate&lt;/strong&gt;. (In WotC's case they do straight-up tell you what's &amp;quot;official,&amp;quot; as Purple Monkey pointed out in the comments.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="2570" LastEditDate="2021-02-03T00:29:38.913" LastActivityDate="2021-02-03T00:29:38.913" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11386" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-02-06T01:15:52.377" Score="8" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1155/can-a-valid-question-be-rescued-from-my-original&quot;&gt;rescue a question&lt;/a&gt; - may i do this with a 5e question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I put the first down &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/180236/how-many-humanoids-fit-in-a-10-square-during-combat-stress-and-non-stress-situa&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and it was annihilated due to a lack of popularity or something? Also, no answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I put down the second one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/180469/how-many-people-fit-into-a-10-foot-by-10-foot-space?noredirect=1#comment487826_180469&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; - which i feel was fairly well written. Role-player stackers said 'nope, you already tried - to the Abyss with you!' Okay then?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, i get that my questions are not popular - but i am trying to reform / mend ways / pay for sins. Also, at this point would really be thankful to have an answer (of some kind). I have invested a lot of time and effort to only be kicked in the face, thrown down a hole and laughed at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If i am not allowed to re-ask my question, please delete both if possible. It is useless to have questions without answers, it only makes us all look silly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for listening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40185" LastActivityDate="2021-02-06T13:44:46.223" Title="I would like to rescue one question out of my duplicate question - is this possible?" Tags="|support|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11387" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11386" CreationDate="2021-02-06T13:15:32.700" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your question was originally closed for “needs more focus”, and each of these steps are concrete ways you can focus your question on the actual problem you are trying to solve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 0: Interact with comments.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, close voters will leave a comment explaining why the question was closed. Your question is no exception. All of the steps I am about to offer were in one form or another explained and asked about in comments under your original question. Comments are the primary means we use for quickly workshopping a question into something the stack is equipped to handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 1: Narrow the scope to the game you are playing.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your question, you write (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What rules exist &lt;em&gt;in any edition&lt;/em&gt; to tabulate density of crowded groups in tight, pressing, forced or out-of-combat situations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many editions of D&amp;amp;D. Unless you are currently playing games of every edition of D&amp;amp;D, you don’t need to know the squeezing rules for every edition of D&amp;amp;D. You should narrow the scope of the question to focus on the particular edition you are playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 2: Narrow the scope to a particular at-table scenario.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your question you offer several different scenarios:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Seven goblins in a snowfall, backed up to a tiny bluff. Whilst huddling up to a tiny fire they are hit by bon-firing / cantripping that hits a large number of them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Whilst thirty-three zombies cluster-reach through a portcullis a large urn of oil (above) pours &amp;amp; splashes down and is set ablaze.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Three clumsy ogres slip-fall into a 10' cube-pit and seek to angrily push-throw one another out.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A blue dragon (lightning: 'long and narrow') breathing on the crush of two phalanx groups clashing - how many are shocked?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time, this is both too much, and too little information. &lt;em&gt;Narrow the focus to one of these scenarios, the one that either has, or is most likely to, come up in actual gameplay, and give us more details about that one&lt;/em&gt;. These are all very different scenarios that will likely require unique judgments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Step 3: Remove the requests for irrelevant answers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is Role Playing Games SE. We answer role playing questions with role playing experience. This means your question should be answered with two things: experience working with the written rules, or real at-table experience implementing house rules helpful to the situation. That’s it. Experience as a dance hall manager is entirely irrelevant. The only way such experience would be helpful in an answer would be something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s what the rules say, here’s how I have ruled it in this real situation from my gaming table, and this seems consistent with my experience as a night club bouncer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Real world experience can help to confirm or deny the intuition behind existing rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-02-06T13:44:46.223" LastActivityDate="2021-02-06T13:44:46.223" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11388" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-02-07T14:03:54.030" Score="2" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180529&quot;&gt;A now deleted question&lt;/a&gt; that I tried to ask today is reproduced below (I'm not going to use quotes because it would get messy):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So basically &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/180520&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] The War Caster feat says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a hostile creature's movement provokes an opportunity attack from you, &lt;strong&gt;you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature&lt;/strong&gt;, rather than making an opportunity attack. The spell must have a casting time of 1 action and must target only that creature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current text of Illusionist's Bracers says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While wearing the bracers, &lt;strong&gt;whenever you cast a cantrip, you can use a bonus action on the same turn&lt;/strong&gt; to cast that cantrip a second time. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] So read Illusionist's Bracers again, and it sure looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On a creature's turn, the creature provokes an opportunity attack from a war caster with Illusionist's Bracers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The war caster casts a cantrip at the creature as a reaction.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Illusionist's Bracers grants a bonus action to the war caster that can be used on that same turn.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The war caster casts the cantrip again with that bonus action, not on the war caster's turn. [...]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Really my question is simply whether or not this is correct. If something would let you take a bonus action when it is not your turn, can you take that bonus action?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm asking about whether a specific example of a way you &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be able to take a bonus action on somebody else's turn actually works. I've asked about specific answers or claims made in them before:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177205&quot;&gt;When the War Caster feat lets my Echo Knight fighter cast a spell instead of the Manifest Echo feature&amp;#39;s opportunity attack, where is it cast from?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153591&quot;&gt;Are getting hit and taking damage simultaneous events?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/167495&quot;&gt;Can you stand from prone if your speed is 5 and you have no movement remaining?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this type of question acceptable? Are they banned for asking about the accuracy of a specific other answer? Does simply removing the reference to that answer (as easily finable as it is) suddenly make the question acceptable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, if I were to ask this question, potentially without referencing the previous question and its answers &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;, would it be considered a duplicate or would it be considered to be asking about a specific enough scenario with nuance that it is not a duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-02-07T14:21:21.083" LastActivityDate="2021-02-10T21:43:17.920" Title="Is this question about a specific answer to a different question acceptable? Is it a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11389" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11390" CreationDate="2021-02-08T12:40:47.310" Score="2" ViewCount="49" Body="&lt;p&gt;A comment to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180539/27377&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; mentions &amp;quot;community wiki&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could always self answer and mark as a community wiki so people can just expand on it as more are found&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being a member for (almost) 5 years I've never used such a feature. How can I mark an answer as a community wiki and what effect does it cause?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A related question — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6524/&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki, Part III&lt;/a&gt; (but it assumes the reader already knows what a community wiki is, and it doesn't explain the technical part &amp;quot;how do I mark an answer for it&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-02-08T13:02:53.070" LastActivityDate="2021-02-08T13:02:53.070" Title="How can I mark an answer as a community wiki?" Tags="|support|community-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11390" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11389" CreationDate="2021-02-08T12:47:05.340" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;What community wiki posts are is explained in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit-community-wiki&quot;&gt;Help Center&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Wiki posts?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community wiki posts are more easily editable by all users, and do not confer any reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you edit your answer, there's a checkbox underneath:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y96wh.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y96wh.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll get a popup for confirmation, and the community wiki status is only applied after you submit the edit anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastActivityDate="2021-02-08T12:47:05.340" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11391" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11392" CreationDate="2021-02-08T13:12:00.300" Score="8" ViewCount="294" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a thing called &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/303156/5e-HARDCORE-MODE&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;5e: HARDCORE MODE&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; which is basically a set of house rules for the D&amp;amp;D 5th edition. I want to ask a couple of questions about this thing, but I hesitate how to tag these questions. There is no specific [5e-hardcore-mode] tag, and just [dnd-5e] is just wrong, because the question is not about 5e rules, it is about these particular house rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which tag is more preferable? Should I create a new one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-02-08T13:13:23.580" LastActivityDate="2021-02-08T14:45:43.600" Title="What tag should I use for a question about &quot;5e: HARDCORE MODE&quot;" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11392" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11391" CreationDate="2021-02-08T13:29:37.393" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;The important bit is to keep the information in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, if you are asking a question &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; a topic which we don't have a tag for, sure make one. A specific ruleset counts as such a topic as far as I see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag would then collect questions about that ruleset usefully. Having a tag that collects a narrow topic isn't a cost, and if it's too narrow it'll just get roomba'd (if it doesn't have a description).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for having a tag for a specific ruleset modification, it's not something that comes up often, but for prior art see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/e6&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;e6&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;e6&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-02-08T14:45:43.600" LastActivityDate="2021-02-08T14:45:43.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11388" CreationDate="2021-02-10T21:43:17.920" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is sorta not supposed to happen&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And saying that sounds weird, because it obviously has.&#xA;But let's work though how things supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question asks about the solution to problem X. Answer give the solution to X &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; why they're correct.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; As long as that is happening, any question asking whether a specific answer is correct would be a dupe because it's just asking about problem X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The more common exception would be relating to optimization challenges and similar. An answer will suggest using two (or more) rules/features to do Y to maximize X, and rather than just using comments and votes, it's moved to a new question asking whether those features do Y. There, the question is obviously different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what's up with this case, but this is different? Looking at it, I think there's a lot in that answer which doesn't need to be there. The question is &amp;quot;can one do X&amp;quot;. The answer you wanted to question through up a lot of features which set up the scenario, then argued that the rule doesn't say you can't do X, so there for you can. Such scenario setup (which might include an exception to general rules) are much better suited to questions than answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure what to do with the answer in question though. I personally think it's wrong, incorrectly applies Specific vs. General, and does a poor job of actually answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'll end on the general guidance: if you want more support in an answer for it to show that it is correct, use the comments. If you think it is wrong, vote accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;† &amp;quot;correct&amp;quot; may have slightly different meanings depending on the question, esp. subjective questions. Apply the concept as necessary. The problem might also not be the problem the question is framed towards, see XY-problems and frame challenges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-02-10T21:43:17.920" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11394" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-02-18T14:29:06.000" Score="6" ViewCount="156" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following question exists:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/71245&quot;&gt;What counts as an attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, the following &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; duplicates of it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/65415&quot;&gt;Do saving throw based spells that do damage count as attacks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144267&quot;&gt;Can a Ranger uncanny dodge a blizzard?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157340&quot;&gt;Does an savethrow-type attack cause critical damage for an unconscious creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142421&quot;&gt;Does lightning bolt trigger wrath of the storm?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also currently, the following are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; duplicates of it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/33923&quot;&gt;Is a spell with an attack roll &amp;quot;an attack&amp;quot; for the purpose of Sneak Attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/136766&quot;&gt;Does the Ancestral Guardian barbarian&amp;#39;s Ancestral Protectors feature grant resistance against spells such as fireball and toll the dead?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180932&quot;&gt;Can a rogue use the Steady Aim optional class feature with attack spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180666&quot;&gt;Does the Ranger&amp;#39;s Favoured Foe Ability from Tasha&amp;#39;s work with Cantrips?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114451&quot;&gt;Would a Rogue&amp;#39;s Uncanny Dodge feature halve the damage of a Magic Missile spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/110157&quot;&gt;Can a familiar from the Find Familiar spell use Dragon&amp;#39;s Breath?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170820&quot;&gt;Can the Hexblade warlock&amp;#39;s Armor of Hexes feature be used to cancel a ranged spell attack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If those open questions are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; duplicates, are the currently closed questions &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; not duplicates? If those closed questions &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; duplicates, are the currently open questions &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; duplicates? Which of these questions should and should not be marked as a duplicate of the general &amp;quot;What counts as an attack&amp;quot; question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-03-04T11:26:20.773" Title="Are any of these questions about attacks duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11394" CreationDate="2021-02-18T23:39:54.373" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10841/how-should-duplicate-questions-be-handled&quot;&gt;How should duplicate questions be handled?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When are two questions considered duplicates?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to Stack Exchange co-founder Joel Spolsky, we should &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/&quot;&gt;only close real duplicates&lt;/a&gt;, and according to co-founder Jeff Atwood, there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/04/handling-duplicate-questions/&quot;&gt;three kinds of duplicates&lt;/a&gt;: cut-and-pastes, accidental duplicates, and borderline duplicates (requiring judgement as applied by the community).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions may be duplicates if they have the &lt;strong&gt;same (potential) answers&lt;/strong&gt;. This includes not only word-for-word duplicates, but also the same idea expressed in different words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about the same aspect of the same concept, but with different examples, may or may not be considered duplicates. It depends how easy it is to figure out one example from the other. If it's only a matter of changing one small part of the question (e.g. in the case of coding sites, some numerical values or some variable names), they're duplicates. If understanding why the questions are at all related requires a detailed explanation, the questions aren't duplicates, merely related.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, using these criteria, a question is a duplicate if it is wholly answered by determining if something is or is not an attack. If the question includes issues about whether a feature applies to (some) attacks or not, or if it applies to things that aren't attacks then it is not a duplicate. For some of these, we are in borderline territory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Duplicates&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all variations on &amp;quot;Is X an attack?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/65415&quot;&gt;Do saving throw based spells that do damage count as attacks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144267&quot;&gt;Can a Ranger uncanny dodge a blizzard?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157340&quot;&gt;Does an savethrow-type attack cause critical damage for an unconscious creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/142421&quot;&gt;Does lightning bolt trigger wrath of the storm?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/136766&quot;&gt;Does the Ancestral Guardian barbarian&amp;#39;s Ancestral Protectors feature grant resistance against spells such as fireball and toll the dead?&lt;/a&gt; - This one could go the other way but I feel the bulk of the question is answered by &amp;quot;Is &lt;em&gt;Fireball&lt;/em&gt; an attack?&amp;quot; rather than &amp;quot;Does &lt;em&gt;Ancestral Protectors&lt;/em&gt; protect against non-attacks?&amp;quot; - the OP seems to understand that it doesn't.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114451&quot;&gt;Would a Rogue&amp;#39;s Uncanny Dodge feature halve the damage of a Magic Missile spell?&lt;/a&gt; - A similar borderline case but the OP seems to know that if it isn't an attack then &lt;em&gt;Uncanny Dodge&lt;/em&gt; doesn't apply.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Not duplicates&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/33923&quot;&gt;Is a spell with an attack roll &amp;quot;an attack&amp;quot; for the purpose of Sneak Attack?&lt;/a&gt; - Whether the &lt;em&gt;Ray of Frost&lt;/em&gt; is an attack (it is) is only part of the answer, the rest depends on if &lt;em&gt;Sneak Attack&lt;/em&gt; can be applied to that attack (it can't).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180932&quot;&gt;Can a rogue use the Steady Aim optional class feature with attack spells?&lt;/a&gt; - Not a duplicate, like the &lt;em&gt;Sneak Attack&lt;/em&gt; above, it requires an analysis of if &lt;em&gt;Steady Aim&lt;/em&gt; applies to the attack rather than if it is an attack.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180666&quot;&gt;Does the Ranger&amp;#39;s Favoured Foe Ability from Tasha&amp;#39;s work with Cantrips?&lt;/a&gt; - Not a duplicate. Same reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/110157&quot;&gt;Can a familiar from the Find Familiar spell use Dragon&amp;#39;s Breath?&lt;/a&gt; - Not a Duplicate. Same reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170820&quot;&gt;Can the Hexblade warlock&amp;#39;s Armor of Hexes feature be used to cancel a ranged spell attack?&lt;/a&gt; - Not a Duplicate. Same reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-03-04T11:26:20.773" LastActivityDate="2021-03-04T11:26:20.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8366" CreationDate="2021-02-19T20:42:29.817" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;You make a good point regarding Google ranking. I imagine that is frustrating when you're looking for a particular answer. Thanks for putting so much thought into this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on our &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2021/01/28/the-loop-community-public-platform-roadmap-q1-2021/&quot;&gt;current roadmap&lt;/a&gt;, this isn't work that we are planning to take on, as it doesn't coincide with functional areas that we plan to improve in the near future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62291" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T20:42:29.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8702" CreationDate="2021-02-19T22:03:00.027" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on our &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2021/01/28/the-loop-community-public-platform-roadmap-q1-2021/&quot;&gt;current roadmap&lt;/a&gt;, this isn't work that we will take on, as it doesn't coincide with functional areas that we plan to improve in the near future. We recognize that there's community support for this, but unfortunately, we can't prioritize it at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68612" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-02-22T11:16:25.737" LastActivityDate="2021-02-22T11:16:25.737" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11398" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6350" CreationDate="2021-02-19T22:10:17.480" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on our &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2021/01/28/the-loop-community-public-platform-roadmap-q1-2021/&quot;&gt;current roadmap&lt;/a&gt;, this isn't work that we will take on, as it doesn't coincide with functional areas that we plan to improve in the near future. We recognize that there's community support for this, but unfortunately, we can't prioritize it at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68612" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T22:10:17.480" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5373" CreationDate="2021-02-19T22:35:09.817" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Based on our &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2021/01/28/the-loop-community-public-platform-roadmap-q1-2021/&quot;&gt;current roadmap&lt;/a&gt;, this isn't work that we will take on, as it doesn't coincide with functional areas that we plan to improve in the near future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68611" LastActivityDate="2021-02-19T22:35:09.817" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11400" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9517" CreationDate="2021-02-22T22:00:31.433" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Steps followed on a work around attempt:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Choose to edit profile.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click 'Change Picture'&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click on 'Uploaded Picture', not 'Upload a new picture'. The current picture will automatically resize when you do this. In my case, it appears to stretch vertically.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click 'Save changes just for this community'.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This saved successfully and now my About Me section is updated.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just speculating, but it seems that at some point after I uploaded the original picture, the jpeg's dimensions got squished in some manner that maybe made it not comply with the profile picture requirements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if the squishing might've happened after a hat event or something but I don't think it's possible for a normal user to bypass the profile picture requirements. So I'm not sure what happened there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm unsure why the issue didn't occur on other sites on the network, but maybe gremlins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2021-02-22T22:00:31.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11401" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-02-25T13:27:52.690" Score="24" ViewCount="1116" Body="&lt;p&gt;More the start of a conversation than a real question. It's a wall of text, so I thank you in advance if you reach the end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So hear me out: I've lurked on this site for months, learning hidden rules, exploring audacious interpretations and studying new mechanics: the honeymoon is not over yet and I'm very grateful to the community. But I also have a bone to pick with ya all: under most questions I often find this mantra, repeated mindlessly as premise for any reasoning:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules do what they say and nothing more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I get the intent: don't interpret the text beyond its scope, or you'll end up unbalancing the game. Absolutely. But most of the times it's used to stop the conversation instead of providing a fruitful contribution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Case in point: in my first answer regarding the uses and limits of Mage hand, I said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[The spell's text] &lt;em&gt;mentions manipulate an object, open an unlocked door or container, stow or retrieve an item from an open container, or pour the contents out of a vial&lt;/em&gt;; is this all it can do? I don't think so, because it adds later that &lt;em&gt;the hand can't attack, activate magic items, or carry more than 10 pounds&lt;/em&gt;. The description remains generic on the things you can do, but is very strict on what you cannot. Could the Mage hand hold a light living creature, like a mouse? It's certainly not an object, but it wouldn't make sense to forbid it. As I interpret it, it's a phantasmal hand with very little strength (therefore no attacks or any effort beyond 10 pounds) and which can't complete complex tasks (therefore no activating magic objects): beyond that, the player's fantasy's the limit, and it should be rewarded [...].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I later realized that my example concerning a mouse was not as blatant as I thought, and in fact made for a different can of worms altogether. I can hear the rebuttals in the back: &amp;quot;The text says you can manipulate an object, so you can't &lt;em&gt;manipulate&lt;/em&gt; a mouse, your example is dumb and all that follows is voided&amp;quot;. I'm sure some agree with my non-existent, pesky alter ego, but let me add something. If you can't hold the mouse, &lt;em&gt;what happens when a player tries anyway&lt;/em&gt;? The manuals don't offer an easy solution, so perhaps you could simply:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have the cantrip stop and the hand disappear; or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have the living creature fall through the ghostly limb; or maybe&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have the hand become unresponsive for as long as it's interacting with incompatible &lt;em&gt;things&lt;/em&gt; (in this case, creatures).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sure you can come up with any number of different solutions, and at the moment your ruling may seem to harmonize the rule with the situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then again your mischievous mage player could exploit your ruling in any number of ways. Case by case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If any living creature interrupts the cantrip, couldn't another player simply highfive it and interrupt it at every turn? &amp;quot;AntiMage hand maneuver is a go, let's go clap the lil' bugger&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If living things fall through the hand (and in a world with constructs and undead, have fun deciding what is &lt;em&gt;living&lt;/em&gt;), could you also use it to scout for mimics? Actually, can the ghostly hand normally go through walls? How is the feeling of having the mage hand cross your body? Could the mage use the Mage hand to convince the king he is the ghost of his great grandfather, who eternally cursed his lineage by not adequately paying a party of adventurers for their services, and the spell can only be broken by emptying the royal treasuries onto the hand of the first &lt;em&gt;random&lt;/em&gt; party of adventurers that show up at his presence? (I know there are easier ways, but we are squeezing all possible uses out of a measly cantrip just to make a point, come on).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Could you use your otherwise useless adventuring gerbil Jeremiah as a reliable counter to stop &lt;strong&gt;very specifically worded&lt;/strong&gt; spells and magic items which can't possible operate with living creatures, displaying &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Error 403, forbidden&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; when interacting with any?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You see what I mean, any number of possible interpretations both in line with and beyond the text has an infinite number of unforeseen ramifications, and even though every DM can come up with a different answer, I think the only wrong answer would be &amp;quot;You can't do that at my table because rules don't give a definite answer, so change your action or lose the turn&amp;quot;. That's how everyone's morale wilts and how one disincetivizes any experimentation, to the detriment of the game as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beside, shouldn't we stop pretending the manuals were some kind of holy text providing every answer to every situation, a perfectly calibrated machine which was as frail as to crumble at the flimsiest of pokes? Let's be honest here. Many spells are situational at best, same as several subclasses (and I don't want to touch upon the OG ranger) and races (there's a special place in hell for human variants); many (if not most) feats are borderline useless, and several of the conjurable creatures from &lt;em&gt;find familiar&lt;/em&gt; are best left at the end of the PHB where they belong. The list could go on and on. And I'm not proclaiming that playing optimally is the only sensed way to (that discussion would need an other post twice as long), but for a player there's no worse feeling than being locked up in a useless choice and drag behind the rest of a more traditional party for the unforgivable sin of experimenting with existing mechanics. Shouldn't a DM touch up the weakest parts of the books to improve everyone's experience at the table? After all, the &lt;em&gt;first&lt;/em&gt; page of the contents of the DMG says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren't in charge. You're the DM, and you are in charge of the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Getting back on track, what I meant is: no amount of text could cover every possible mechanic and interaction in the game. As a real life law student (please be lenient in the comments), I can assure you, however you spell a rule, it will be always be open to abuses both in favor and against its subjects, which is why one of the often underestimated roles of a DM outside homewbrewing is to do &lt;em&gt;metaruling&lt;/em&gt;, that is to rule on rulings: when to strictly enforce a rule, when to extend its bounds and when to forgo it entirely &lt;strong&gt;precisely&lt;/strong&gt; for the sake of balance. That is why we need human judges to interpret and apply laws in real life (for as long as machines will become smart enough to take that role): whenever the text falls short, understanding why a rule exists and interpreting its intent in a fair way &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; the way to apply both Rules As Written and Rules as Intended. They are two sides of the same coin after all. Blind faith on the manuals simply can't solve every problem arising on the table, and even the most conservative interpretation must withstand possible future complications or be overruled when its blindsides have been exposed. No amount of tweets from the almighty JC (which I think are both a blessing and a bane since, again, the game is not perfect at all) can solve any situation in one optimal, definitive way. So let's stop pretending there is this authentic way to play D&amp;amp;D vanilla.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes one has to think outside the box to understand what the box was all about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you agree?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68706" OwnerDisplayName="OmniVictor" LastEditorUserId="14878" LastEditDate="2021-02-26T23:22:29.663" LastActivityDate="2022-03-26T20:42:34.167" Title="Shouldn't we move past repeating &quot;rules do what they say and nothing more?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11402" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2021-02-25T14:06:40.337" Score="22" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We use the Rules As Written because we &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When people say &amp;quot;Spells do only what they say they do and nothing more&amp;quot; or some similar phrase, they use it for a number of reasons. Though I'll drop the following links as you may find them helpful:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/107637&quot;&gt;What is the source of the &amp;quot;spells do only what they say they do&amp;quot; rules interpretation principle?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104165&quot;&gt;What RPG concepts does &amp;quot;rules as written&amp;quot; encompass?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers to these give some excellent origins/explanations/uses for both the &amp;quot;spell do only what they say they do&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Rules As Written&amp;quot; phrases. These two, I believe, summarize them best:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] We on the internet can only tell you that spells do what they say they do, because we are not DMing your game. We cannot change or expand upon the rules and say “this is part of what the spell does.” We do not have that authority; the DM of the game does, and we aren’t that. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] The purpose is to facilitate communication about the rules. Historically, rules-as-written approaches to understanding the rules became far more prominent with the rise of the Internet, and that is no coincidence. While RAW interpretations are prone to many, many flaws when it comes to actually playing the game, ideally RAW provides a foundational basis of the rules that everyone can at least agree on. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We use it &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; it establishes expectations and allows us to, at least for the most part, agree on how things &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; work, though perhaps not how they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The rules are not &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; the only thing we use&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We, as a group, share &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; the rules-text and there isn't anything else we can work with to adjudicate a ruling from those rules. The other things we have, which are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; shared, are our own personal experiences and knowledge with the game. People &lt;em&gt;regularly&lt;/em&gt; use their knowledge and experiences in writing answers (as they &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt;), to suggest houserules and explain how things have gone at their own tables. This helps to fill in the gaps when the rules-text is incomplete or just plain wonky. These experiences might not be shared between &lt;em&gt;all of us&lt;/em&gt;, like the rules-text is, but it is still valuable in answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How things &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; work is primarily opinion-based&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When wondering how something &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; work, this enters the territory of the GM, to make houserules, to make their own answers to the questions that the rules left unanswered. And while we can certainly provide our own experiences with these situations and how we have (or would) rule at &lt;em&gt;our own&lt;/em&gt; table, this does not speak to &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; table. &lt;strong&gt;That doesn't mean we &lt;em&gt;shouldn't&lt;/em&gt; explain how we would rule&lt;/strong&gt;, but it does mean that we would only be explaining &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; possible ruling, though a valuable one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;problem&amp;quot; is if a question simply asked &amp;quot;How should I houserule when a party member tries to use &lt;em&gt;mage hand&lt;/em&gt; on a rat?&amp;quot; This has answers all rooted in opinion, informed opinions, yes, but I certainly believe such a question would be closed on the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that said, I think you will find that there are plenty of &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; with &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;These are the Rules As Written, they are &lt;em&gt;awful&lt;/em&gt; and woefully incomplete so here's how I would rule at my own tables&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;. These &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; an answer, but they depart from the shared wording that we can both attempt to interpret. You are suggesting a houserule that is, in your &lt;em&gt;experience&lt;/em&gt;, a good one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is an example of such an answer, and this one is especially good as it mentions how different tables and different playstyles can come to wholly different conclusions even when the text &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; clear:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/176935&quot;&gt;Does the Spirit Guardians spell hurt friendly creatures if they were not visible at the time the spell was cast?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; the rules have flaws&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think you will also find that people do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; put the books onto some sort of Holy Mantle. In fact, I regularly have fun making fun of the rules and their unceasing problems both with friends and just in the TRPG chat room. The reason we use these flawed, broken, &lt;em&gt;human&lt;/em&gt; rules is because we really don't have anything else we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; use. They are the unifying factor that actually lets us communicate about the game and have a shared basis for constructing arguments and conclusions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The phrase in question, regardless, does not come across well&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is expanded much more upon in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11403&quot;&gt;Korvin's answer&lt;/a&gt;, so I would suggest reading that. But the way the phrase comes across and is often used is... &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt;. It can read as &amp;quot;This was so obvious&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;duh&amp;quot; or in any number of similar ways. Ideally, when this phrase is used, people would &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; explain the rules because &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt;, if somebody is asking about them, there is confusion to be found in them. How the rules are saying what they say should be explained in these cases and this often means the phrase could never have been used in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no need to come across as condescending, which this phrase can certainly come across as, and probably does with some regularity. Of course... there's also the rabbit hole of &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt; can be condescending&amp;quot; but I'll swiftly avoid that as it doesn't help anybody.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-02-25T16:07:50.117" LastActivityDate="2021-02-25T16:07:50.117" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2021-02-25T15:01:04.563" Score="32" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; should stop repeating that phrase&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;In part because it comes off as passive-aggressive&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;and nothing more&amp;quot; piece is the particular problem in that regard.  That's an unhelpful coda &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/107637/22566&quot;&gt;to the original points that were offered up by the game's developers as summarized in this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;.  Succinctly put...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;if a feature was meant to work that way, it would say so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;... is how Mr Crawford has often responded about particular spells, feats, and features in the game in answer to questions from players. Why has he had to do this? For a variety of reasons, but in part because people (myself included) have frequently brought other edition assumptions to this edition.  If players and DMs are used to a feature named &lt;em&gt;golem salsa dancing&lt;/em&gt; doing or meaning something, in particular when based on another edition, whether it works that way in this edition is a common inquiry.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What's the point of this throwaway line in the first place?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To bring attention to what is available to assess - that which is in the rules text, which ideally is followed by giving a useful answer for &lt;em&gt;how to apply this {thing} at the game table&lt;/em&gt;.  That's the key value proposition of RPGSE: how one applies &amp;quot;X&amp;quot; while playing a TTRPG is the core &lt;em&gt;problem to solve&lt;/em&gt; in the variety of cases where a situation, or an interaction of multiple rules, or an absence of clarity in rules, leaves the players (to include a GM or DM) at a loss as to how to proceed. I'll yet again offer up &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=42972950#42972950&quot;&gt;one of my favorite BESW quotes&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren't here on the Stack to read the rulebooks to people. We're here to help people &lt;em&gt;learn how to synthesize the mechanics&lt;/em&gt;, the non-mechanical text, the social context, our personal experience, the learning of the broader community, &lt;em&gt;to apply all that to a particular real-life problem someone's having and find a solution for it&lt;/em&gt;. (emphasis mine)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tone behind the throwaway phrase that you (and others) find objectionable doesn't live up to that value statement, and, that phrase isn't necessary to achieve the site's main goal in any case. (I do relaize that we do not promulgate a style guide here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It comes off (to me) as very rude to non-native English speakers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A variety of users come to SE sites with English as a second, third, or perhaps fourth language.  The tone set by the canned response contains a veiled insult (perhaps unintended) at their ability to parse rules presented in English.  Given that I, as a native speaker and a one-time writer and editor of technical manuals, am now and again puzzled by how the rules in D&amp;amp;D 5e are written and how they interact, I find that aspect of this blunt, preemptive throwaway utterly lacking in helping the querent (or any reader) in solving the problem - not to mention its condescending tone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Can &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; enforce a change?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Probably not, given how few people read meta. But I'd like an opportunity to have this meta remain open as a linkable nudge to someone who is adapting that tone in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;What's your suggested alternative, Korvin&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A three step process as part of an answer, which allows for a more engaging tone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's what the rules do say {cite/explain}&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Here's what you are asking about that the rule's don't cover {identify elements}&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expand the answer beyond that to cover gaps, refer to similar rules, show how to make it work at the table, or provide other elements and recommended rulings that make for a high quality answer &lt;em&gt;that solve the asker's problem&lt;/em&gt;.  This is a grand opportunity to share experience with a given rule or situation, which is one of the ways that we support an answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It achieves the same result without being rude.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-02-26T13:20:17.230" LastActivityDate="2021-02-26T13:20:17.230" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11404" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2021-02-25T16:17:04.363" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, we should, and often do&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Often&lt;/em&gt; being somewhat loosely defined. There are a few trends I've observed which tend to promote the unfortunate recitations of &amp;quot;rules do what they say and nothing more&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. The stack is currently in a phase which favors &lt;em&gt;ease and consistency of site curation&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both in terms of community (votes by users, and discussions on meta) and, perhaps more consequentially, the decisions of people doing community-mod tasks (like closing questions) that seems to be the dominant paradigm right now. This promotes clear-cut rules and common standards over more subjective approaches. You aren't going to run into much trouble, in terms of interacting with the community, by hewing to what (seems like) an objective rule. Including a nod to the &amp;quot;rules do what they say and nothing more&amp;quot; in your answer can save you a lot of heat and irritation even though that is not usually the basis of a great answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, this is not in and of itself a terrible thing, exactly. The community-mod activities are carried out by a relatively small number of users (and I am aware that I am not one of them who does a lot of it, so I'm not throwing shade at anyone who does). A harder-edged stance might encourage this type of answer, which has some drawbacks, but also helps to promote the stack as a straight-laced Q&amp;amp;A site. It's a tradeoff, and reaching a perfect balance forever is unlikely. But it seems to me that we are in a period in which the community overall, as represented by the people who do a lot of that curation, prefers answers in specific forms (even if they are less-great answers) over answers which are harder to parse and categorize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Explicitly rules-based answers are easier to write, more concise, and easier to defend&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Offering a citation and excerpt which clearly expresses a definitive answer to a question is pretty easy, if you're familiar enough with the relevant game system. And since everyone works from the same core rules an answer based entirely on those rules is applicable to everyone, at least in theory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More subjective answers (even the &lt;em&gt;good subjective&lt;/em&gt; answers which are so valuable to the stack) tend to be longer (they have to explain their context and be self-contained, as there often is no external reference for their content) and more conditional (you have to explain how and why you are departing from the published rules). They tend to be held accountable for any and all consequences for departing from the official rules, whether related to the question or not, and so the upside potential of such an answer (this fixes problem X!) is often less than the downside potential (this fixes problem X, but complicates situation Y.153, subsection 19, and completely ruins theoretical occurrence ZZ17i!). And even when you do cover those situations in the answer, that can't prevent someone from skimming it inattentively, downvoting, and leaving a nasty (even if permissible) comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That can be pretty unpleasant to deal with. Offering a citation from the core rulebook doesn't leave much open for debate. A specific, subjective ordering of priorities and preferences in pursuit of fun is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. Authority matters, whether you think it should or not&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Citing the rules cloaks an answerer in the authority of the rules. To argue against the baldest possible citation is not to argue with a &lt;em&gt;person&lt;/em&gt;, it's to argue against the game itself! An otherwise mediocrely-written answer, judged by its own content, will probably get a better reception if prefaced with something like &amp;quot;Matt Mercer does it this way&amp;quot;. A high rep user may (&lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt;) be less harshly judged by the community at large than Johnny 1-rep for a less-than-elegantly-written answer. This creates a kind of perverse incentive where newer users less familiar with the site and its conventions draw extra scrutiny for their answers unless they borrow authority from someplace else. And a strict reading of published rules and errata is an easy way to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4. There is a long tradition of debating legality of attempted actions in specific games&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I find that many questions which draw the answers described in the question are posed in that form: &amp;quot;can I catch an object with &lt;em&gt;Mage Hand&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot; is fundamentally a request for information about the rules. A &lt;em&gt;direct&lt;/em&gt; answer to that may well be &amp;quot;no, the rules don't allow for it&amp;quot;. Even if a better answer is more expansive, along the lines of &amp;quot;no, because of these consequences&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;yes, if you're OK with the following caveats&amp;quot;, a question with a rules-legal focus may omit information needed to focus those more expansive answers. You essentially never find &amp;quot;rules do only what they say and nothing more&amp;quot;-type answers on questions that ask &amp;quot;what are the impacts of allowing &lt;em&gt;Mage Hand&lt;/em&gt; to catch objects?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr: We shouldn't be leaning on this reasoning to write answers. But there are reasons why it is so prominent, and it will probably continue to be prominent while those reasons continue to be true.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know how much influence users who read Meta really have on all of these. Modeling better behavior may help at the margins but I doubt it will prompt a big shift. And the hard-edged, literalist approach to what rules do and do not say is both technically permissible and often the most appropriate response to what a question is asking, so it can't easily be forbidden or even strongly discouraged. Many questions even specifically seek that kind of answer, and they shouldn't be punished for wanting an answer in that mode. And many of the incentives people respond to will probably continue to favor these answers to some degree, regardless of other factors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My only real idea that seems useful is, whenever you see such an answer to a question which you think has room for broader answers, to &lt;strong&gt;write such an answer&lt;/strong&gt;. It may not prevent these answers from appearing when they can be problematic, but at least they won't be the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; thing that people see. These answers are at their worst when they're the only thing site visitors see, and that really is something that each of us has direct influence over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-02-25T16:24:51.717" LastActivityDate="2021-02-25T16:24:51.717" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2021-03-01T18:25:36.853" Score="24" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We need a great deal more acknowledgment of the fact that &lt;em&gt;it isn’t entirely true&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e dominates our questions these days—as the most recent and popular edition of the most famous and popular role-playing game, this is no great surprise. One of the more common formulations of this sentiment—“there are no hidden rules”—comes from Jeremy Crawford, a lead designer of 5e. And this, I think, is part of the trouble:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;People often come to this site because D&amp;amp;D 5e &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; have “hidden” rules.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;—or at the very least, it seems to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e, in contrast to other recent editions of D&amp;amp;D, is rather light on details. Enormous portions of the game are left up to the DM to decide on an &lt;em&gt;ad hoc&lt;/em&gt; basis, often with relatively little guidance from the rules text—which means both players and DMs are left with questions about what the ruling &lt;em&gt;should be&lt;/em&gt;. When there are details, they’re often vague or descriptive, and it’s not at all clear whether that description does or should have ramifications beyond those that are spelled out. Moreover, sometimes things left undetailed initially, in fact wind up receiving more detail later or elsewhere. This has advantages—it keeps initial presentations simple and makes things less daunting to get into—but it leads one to never feeling quite sure that you’ve read all there is to read on a subject. And all too often, even if you have, it still leaves you wondering “well, OK, then what &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; I do?” because often when you feel uncertain you’ve read everything, it’s because you &lt;em&gt;expect&lt;/em&gt; there to be more than there is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should absolutely be clear on what rules are or are not actually published. No answer should ever be ambiguous about what is an official rule and what is a personal ruling. But with 5e being what it is, we have to recognize that &lt;strong&gt;this often isn’t good enough to make a full, complete, and &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have to recognize that the need most querents here have isn’t “read the book to me,” it’s “read all the books, synthesize their disparate parts, and based upon that expertise, &lt;em&gt;help me&lt;/em&gt;, because I haven’t and can’t do that.” That’s what it means to be an expert in this field, and our expertise is why people care what we answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this applies both to answering questions, and to asking questions, and to refining questions that get asked: there &lt;strong&gt;must&lt;/strong&gt; be recognition of what querents’ needs are, and what the expertise we offer is, and that a “good question” is one that elicits “good answers,” and “good answers” are the ones with demonstrable expertise that help the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask the questions you actually want answered—try to be clear what the problem you need to solve is rather than homing in on a particular facet of the rules that you think might be the place where you might find a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;When clarifying questions, get at the actual need the querent has—make sure the question reflects what they need, not some checklist or personal idea of what a good question looks like. If what a querent needs isn’t something we can provide, then the question will be closed. If what the querent needs &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; something we can provide, our value as a site is &lt;em&gt;providing that&lt;/em&gt;, not anything else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And when answering questions, don’t just quote some koan about hidden rules or the lack thereof, and say the rules don’t say anything—they &lt;em&gt;often&lt;/em&gt; don’t say anything, and going beyond that is part of why we are here. If you are unable to go beyond that, and back it up, reconsider whether you should be answering the question at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And back this up with your votes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A perfectly-accurate, but perfectly-useless, answer to a question, &lt;em&gt;is a bad answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A detailed, thorough description of how a problem was handled is probably a good answer, even if it skims over the lack-of-rules that led to the rulings in question (inaccuracies, including about the provenance of a rule or ruling, may well mar an otherwise-excellent answer, though).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A question that clearly describes a problem and seeks assistance is quite-likely a good question. Always, always, always, the foremost criterion for a question is, “can we, experts at RPGs, provide good answers to this question?” If we can, then in almost all cases, that is a good question, and most certainly shouldn’t be closed. If we cannot, then it may still be a good question—or not—but either way we must close it. Meta discussions, policies, consensus, and so on, all fall secondary to this overriding concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions are allowed and encouraged to seek our expertise and judgment.&lt;/strong&gt; And “there are no hidden rules” isn’t expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2022-03-25T03:23:54.653" LastActivityDate="2022-03-25T03:23:54.653" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11406" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2021-03-02T19:11:38.527" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, because that statement encodes bad gameplay advice.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(So as not to type out &amp;quot;(Spells/Rules/'Things') do only what they say they do&amp;quot; more times than necessary, I'll refer to that statement as &amp;quot;the Deplorable Words&amp;quot;.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way the Deplorable Words get used here is to &lt;strong&gt;impose a &amp;quot;default to no&amp;quot; assumption on the rules&lt;/strong&gt;. Just taking the top linked questions to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/107637/what-is-the-source-of-the-spells-do-only-what-they-say-they-do-rules-interpret&quot;&gt;the one about the Deplorable Words&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/129271/44552&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Teleport&lt;/em&gt; can't inflict damage by teleporting an object into a creature.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/176832/44552&quot;&gt;The caster of &lt;em&gt;steel wind strike&lt;/em&gt; doesn't disappear from sight.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/121427/44552&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Prestidigitation&lt;/em&gt; can never provide any sort of benefit in combat no matter how it's used.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/96419/44552&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;True strike&lt;/em&gt; doesn't really tell you anything about the target's defenses.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/147480/44552&quot;&gt;A DM has the right to say &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; (but not to say &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;) to reflavoring a character's abilities.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135081/44552&quot;&gt;Nothing other than magic can override a spell's effects.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;And, finally, a counterexample: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/127331/44552&quot;&gt;The DM can decide whether Slow Fall applies to a creature a monk is carrying.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/123708/44552&quot;&gt;A readied &lt;em&gt;fire bolt&lt;/em&gt; can't function as a light source.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/135364/44552&quot;&gt;The caster of &lt;em&gt;detect good and evil&lt;/em&gt; can't tell whether what they're detecting is good or evil.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The theme is &amp;quot;can't, doesn't, never, doesn't, no, nothing, (counterexample), can't, can't&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To have a well-understood concrete case, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121130/what-are-the-properties-of-the-substance-created-by-the-spell-grease&quot;&gt;I'm going to take a classic example, the D&amp;amp;D &lt;em&gt;grease&lt;/em&gt; spell&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Slick grease covers the ground in a 10-foot square centered on a point within range and turns it into difficult terrain for the duration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the grease appears, each creature standing in its area must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or fall prone. A creature that enters the area or ends its turn there must also succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or fall prone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a tradition of treating the grease as flammable (sometimes unreasonably, hilariously flammable). However, the spell describes the grease only as &amp;quot;slick&amp;quot;. Its flammability is not addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if someone asks the question here &amp;quot;Can the grease from the &lt;em&gt;grease&lt;/em&gt; spell be set on fire?&amp;quot;, the &lt;em&gt;only correct rules-as-written answer&lt;/em&gt; is &amp;quot;The spell doesn't say.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;em&gt;more useful&lt;/em&gt; answer, by our standards, would start with the text of the spell and then consider table experience (&amp;quot;Every group I've played with has done this&amp;quot; / &amp;quot;We tried allowing that and here's how it got abused&amp;quot;) or deeper analysis of the mechanics (&amp;quot;Immobilizing multiple enemies and also setting them on fire is out of line for a first-level spell&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/121134/44552&quot;&gt;An unhelpful answer&lt;/a&gt;, though, would be one that starts and &lt;em&gt;ends&lt;/em&gt; with the text of the spell: &lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt;, it does literally nothing other than what it says, because [Deplorable Words].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This approach to the rules is nigh-useless for actual play, because most real RPG sessions are full of interactions that the rules didn't anticipate, and so reflexively defaulting to &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; means blocking most of player agency. After a couple decades of wrestling with this as a community, the expert consensus in running RPGs has settled mostly on &amp;quot;Try to find a way to say &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I don't care about &lt;em&gt;grease&lt;/em&gt;. &amp;quot;No&amp;quot; might well be the better answer in this case, based on gameplay impact or verisimilitude or other factors. However, it needs to be based on those factors, not just a refusal to think beyond the rules text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Think about the intent behind the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most &amp;quot;Can X happen?&amp;quot; questions are really asking, in a situation where it looks like X could happen, how a GM (or someone in a rules-interpreting position) &lt;em&gt;should rule&lt;/em&gt;. &amp;quot;If someone casts &lt;em&gt;grease&lt;/em&gt; and then tries to ignite it, &lt;em&gt;should I allow that?&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your answer to them is &amp;quot;No, because [Deplorable Words]&amp;quot;, then you're telling them that they ought to run their game on the basis of the default &amp;quot;no&amp;quot;. The rules don't cover this case; therefore you should go with the boring outcome where nothing happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;How should I rule?&amp;quot; question requires a lot more thought and contextual knowledge than &amp;quot;Do the rules say?&amp;quot; and may not be something we can answer in full. But if you want to use the rules as written as a &lt;em&gt;starting point&lt;/em&gt;, then it's important to clearly state where the rules end and the creative interpretation of the players begins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to learn to say &amp;quot;The rules don't say&amp;quot;, as distinct from &amp;quot;No.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But of course we're not actually doing that at the table.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe not, but consider how we're training people to think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer of &amp;quot;No, because [Deplorable Words]&amp;quot; gets a bunch of upvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;equally correct&lt;/em&gt; answer of &amp;quot;Yes, because why the hell not?&amp;quot; gets downvotes and comments to the effect of &amp;quot;But what about the Deplorable Words?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Have you tested this house rule?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've created a community culture here where defaulting to &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; is safe and defaulting to &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; gets challenged. This is a bad habit for roleplaying and we should stop modeling it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44552" LastEditorUserId="44552" LastEditDate="2021-03-03T04:16:15.167" LastActivityDate="2021-03-03T04:16:15.167" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11407" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11408" CreationDate="2021-03-04T04:32:19.380" Score="8" ViewCount="170" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/181506/43484&quot;&gt;Do external, non-innate methods exist in Faer&amp;#251;n circa 1489 DR to situationally alter the efficacy of spellcasting?&lt;/a&gt;, I attempted to ask about in-universe phenomena that affect spellcasting in a particular D&amp;amp;D setting. Admittedly, the question is complicated and was difficult to write with precision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of those in-universe phenomena might be magic items, which tend to be generic in D&amp;amp;D: they mostly appear as mechanical bits in setting-agnostic books (e.g., the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt;) and then are presumed to exist in a given setting unless some setting-specific product says otherwise. I was interested in magic items only to the extent they figure into the setting's lore, and not merely as generic bits of game mechanics. To signal that, I used the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was I right to do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; tag supposed to communicate, exactly? What &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; &amp;quot;lore&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Imagine a generic magic item, the &lt;em&gt;+1 spellwidget&lt;/em&gt;, published in a setting-agnostic book. If Joe NPC carries a &lt;em&gt;+1 spellwidget&lt;/em&gt; in a later Forgotten Realms adventure, does the &lt;em&gt;+1 spellwidget&lt;/em&gt; ipso facto become Forgotten Realms &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt;? Or maybe the &lt;em&gt;+1 spellwidget&lt;/em&gt; is part of Forgotten Realms &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; simply by force of presumption so long as no Forgotten Realms product says otherwise?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, is it correct to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; tag to focus the reader's attention on magic items, or aspects of a magic item, that engage the setting per se, rather than on the purely mechanical bits?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-03-04T11:20:17.963" LastActivityDate="2021-03-04T11:39:26.553" Title="How to use the [lore] tag correctly?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11408" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11407" CreationDate="2021-03-04T10:52:46.843" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;You were right to tag your question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt;, specifically on account of how it's a question about lore, but it was incorrect to expect the tag to signal new information to readers, or to use a tag to tell readers what to focus on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;Tags are a categorisation mechanism&lt;/a&gt; to help people find your question and to connect it with people who can answer it. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; tag has a short summary you'll see on its page: “For questions about a setting's in-world details or background.” If that sounds like your question, tag it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However: &lt;strong&gt;Tags are not for conveying new, additional information not already found in the question body.&lt;/strong&gt; This includes that they are not for providing encoded signals or hints to readers. You need to say what you need from answers in the body of the question itself, including explicitly stating your constraints and anything you specifically are or aren't interested in. This means if you're interested in the lore and not the mechanical bits, you need to say in your question “I'm interested in the lore and not the mechanical bits” (or a phrasing of your choice to that effect).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags come after you do that: once you've posted your question, people will add new tags that help categorise it or remove tags that don't seem to match anything in there. The question body itself is the source of truth; tags are &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; categorising it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;sole exception&lt;/em&gt; is that system tags are allowed to add new information by saying what game and edition you're working with: these are tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bubblegumshoe&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bubblegumshoe&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bubblegumshoe&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/exalted&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;exalted&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;exalted&lt;/a&gt;, etc. (If you add multiple system tags you'll probably need to clearly state what's going on there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6148/a-low-intervention-approach-rules-as-written-back-to-tagging-basics&quot;&gt;A low-intervention approach [rules-as-written]: back to tagging basics&lt;/a&gt; which explains these first principles, in the context of revisiting them for a past tag that we had difficulty with because we had somehow gotten into a practice of using it to signal things to readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-04T11:39:26.553" LastActivityDate="2021-03-04T11:39:26.553" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11409" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-10T05:48:54.603" Score="-9" ViewCount="319" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having read replies to simple questions on this site my immediate reaction was “What a bunch of stuck up losers.”. People genuinely asking for clarification on rulings who may have missed a line, or not understood something in the PHB are routinely being ridiculed for putting in the effort to learn. Are the majority of users on this site just insecure egotists trying to validate themselves by mocking others and flexing their “abundance of free time”?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(TCE p5)&#xA;Have Fun:&#xA;You don't need to know every rule to enjoy D&amp;amp;D, and each group has its own style—different ways it likes to tell stories and to use the rules. Embrace what your group enjoys most. In short, follow your bliss!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Examples&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions&quot;&gt;Example 1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/782/should-a-question-be-judged-on-its-level-of-expertise&quot;&gt;Example 2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4754/why-are-our-5e-questions-terrible/&quot;&gt;Example 3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68970" OwnerDisplayName="PTD" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-03-10T09:35:31.317" LastActivityDate="2021-03-10T14:19:42.667" Title="Why is the general community of this site so toxic?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11410" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11409" CreationDate="2021-03-10T07:25:00.507" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;The RPG community is not different from all other communities on SE in that regard: experts spend their time answering questions. However, they expect &lt;em&gt;research&lt;/em&gt; to be done prior to asking. So you can ask, but only after you &lt;em&gt;tried&lt;/em&gt; to answer the question through your own means. For example by looking through the rulebooks index or do a google search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two kinds questions: questions with enough research that are very interesting to experts. Maybe the information is conflicting. Maybe there is no information. Maybe the information is worded ambiguously and interpreted differently by different people with different agendas. On &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; site it's game rules, on other sites of the SE network it may be help files or government regulations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We love this kind of questions. We love to show our expertise and help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then there is the &amp;quot;noise&amp;quot;. Questions that had no prior research, where just blabbered into the internet chat box when the thought came into the mind of the asker. When someone asks &amp;quot;How do I hit the enemy&amp;quot; and when someone comments &amp;quot;did you read the chapter titled &amp;quot;How to hit the enemy&amp;quot; say &amp;quot;no, why?&amp;quot;. Those questions show no respect for the time and expertise of the answerer. So sometimes, the people answer in the same way: with no respect back. Is that the nice way? Certainly not. Is it understandable? It sure is to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to make it short: the expertise here is free of charge. If you don't like the underlying expectation of you doing work, too, then that is fine. It's like a sports club. We expect everybody to show up to training, no freebies. If you don't like that, no big deal, just don't participate. But don't expect to be on the team when you don't put in the work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; asked a &amp;quot;please browse the book for me&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102564/cyber-bioware-to-enhance-knowledge-skills&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt;  myself. I got a very nice answer. I was not ridiculed. However, I also described what I tried so far and what my (none) success with that was. &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How to ask a good question&lt;/a&gt; still applies, although it's a different site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You get what you put in. If you ask a good question, it's very likely you will get a good answer. If you ask a poor question, it is very likely you will get a poor reaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2021-03-10T07:25:00.507" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11411" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11409" CreationDate="2021-03-10T14:19:42.667" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't want to go out of my way to defend the tone on this site. I think we're generally doing an adequate job of maintaining a respectable atmosphere here, but people have made and always will make mistakes. There is always room for improvement and I respect your decision to bring that up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the examples you bring are poor at demonstrating a continuing tone problem. For starters, they are all Meta posts (posts about the site itself, rather than questions and answers about RPGs). Even in Meta we do require courtesy and politeness towards other people, including those who are not immediate parties in the discussion at hand; however, we have to accept a degree of  critique towards other peoples' posts in order to discuss potentially deleterious trends. (Notice that all of you examples concern &lt;em&gt;trends&lt;/em&gt;, not individual questions, and each but the first one have more than one example provided)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is not to say all critique is acceptable, and this is where I think you do have some point. I would certainly not be cool with making a list of &amp;quot;terrible&amp;quot; questions, though I must say I see where the author of said post was coming from. The post was authored in a time when the site was practically flooded with questions about the yet-unreleased DnD 5e, and the concern that it was more about people spinning over-excitedly in hype for the game rather than genuinely try to solve problems was an understandable one. That was a different time, of course, which brings us to the next point...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...all of these posts are old. Two from 2014, one from 2010. That's... ancient history, as far as this site is concerned. I won't hesitate to say that the community had a harsher tone back in those days, nor am I hesitant to say I'm glad it's changed. Several active site users, including moderators, were a fair bit more brusque in their communications than I would like. Nowadays, my feeling is the community as whole as well as the moderation staff holds themselves and each other to a much higher standard of courtesy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, incidents happen and will continue to happen, and that's where you (points at the camera) can help! Flag posts and comments that are rude, use the &amp;quot;needs moderator attention&amp;quot; reason and a custom message if you notice a pattern that might not be evident from a single message. Remember that posts do not have to be explicitly offensive to be flaggable: in addition to &amp;quot;plain&amp;quot; name calling, low-key things like egregious condescending tone or snarking can be flagged. Contact the moderators for a 1-on-1 discussion in chat if you need to discuss something that cannot be covered by flagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11660" LastActivityDate="2021-03-10T14:19:42.667" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11413" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-12T14:12:28.667" Score="25" ViewCount="529" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am seeing a trend that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/60386/22566&quot;&gt;is well illustrated by this question&lt;/a&gt;, where our reviewers seem to be forgetting about our meta discussion a while back about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9344/22566&quot;&gt;the word Should.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need to close that very useful question about what the best info is on a DM screen.  I am pretty sure that either the term &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; informed the reaction to it, or that an erroneous &amp;quot;that's a tool-rec question&amp;quot; assessment was made.  The use of a DM screen is a 40+ year old habit in our hobby, not just in D&amp;amp;D, and &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;the person's problem to solve&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; is &amp;quot;what is the best info to have there&amp;quot; and the accepted answer clarifies that nicely.  So do a few of the others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no reason to close that question.  None.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks to the help of NautArch and Doppelgreener, we can see that the closure votes come after &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/60386/timeline&quot;&gt;the newest deleted answer was posted.&lt;/a&gt;  ?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In an attempt to prevent further erroneous close votes, I felt obliged to remove the term &amp;quot;should&amp;quot; via an edit to forestall further wrongful review responses.  I am calling on all reviewers to take a little more care in their efforts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And, please, everyone, read and Review the Meta that @Someone_Evil posted about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9344/22566&quot;&gt;the word &lt;em&gt;Should&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; a while back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note on the question that got me to speak up:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Per the linked timeline, the question popped into the review queue thanks to a new answer &lt;em&gt;of unimpressive quality&lt;/em&gt; that has received at least one down vote.   That's not a bad response, but closing that particular question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a bad response.  &lt;em&gt;The arrival of a bad answer is not a good reason to close that question.&lt;/em&gt;  The question and the answers that have sat there for Over Five Years are good, on topic, and useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-03-13T21:18:43.967" LastActivityDate="2021-03-25T15:29:34.873" Title="Please stop wrongfully closing old, good Q&amp;As" Tags="|discussion|questions|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11414" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-12T15:02:12.943" Score="0" ViewCount="368" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Existing Guidance&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing guidance on meta and our post notice on main, it seems we put forward as a matter of substantive policy that answers must be backed up and supported, either objectively with proper citation to other relevant sources, or subjectively through a helpful description of your experience implementing your answer at the gaming table. Indeed, this is the guidance put forward on our canonical question on the issue, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt; :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People ask about mechanics because they're trying to better understand the game and how it works. Anyone can make a ruling, but that includes the person who asked the question, so we're not looking for this content. You should answer with how the game affirmatively handles the situation based on its text and cite the game's text to back up your statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any of us can say “here's what I'd do” based on no actual experience, or come up with something on the spot as an off-the-cuff idea, but our site is not looking for this content. We want to collect tried-and-tested solutions with well-understood outcomes. We don't want your opinion; we want your expertise. If you do not have experiences you can bring to the table in that particular case, do not answer the question. Answers not doing so may be downvoted and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this is guidance from meta, and the line between meta guidance and policy is often unclear (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11373/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11283/what-is-the-process-for-establishing-and-maintaining-policies&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;). That said, it seems to me that guidance is heading toward being policy when steps are taken to enforce it on main, such as our post notice, which reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Want to improve this post?&lt;/strong&gt; Provide detailed answers to this question, including citations and an explanation of why your answer is correct. Answers without enough detail may be edited or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta guidance and the post notice seem to be pretty clear about this: unsupported answers are subject to deletion. Obviously, we should leave comments and work to help OP improve their answer, but ultimately, it is OP's responsibility to provide the meaningful justification for their answer; and if the answer is deleted, they can always come back to it and edit it, then flag for undeletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Application&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, &lt;em&gt;are an answer and its author excused from this requirement if the answer is well received by the community?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/166199/62294&quot;&gt;What is the precedent for what happens to a warlock&amp;#39;s character levels if their patron dies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, the easy way out is &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;It's up to the DM&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;. What I'm &lt;strong&gt;actually&lt;/strong&gt; looking for is if there has ever been a precedent set for what happens when a character basically loses access to a class. For instance, 5e Oathbreaker Paladin shows what happens to a paladin that breaks their oath.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in finding any precedent set throughout the history of D&amp;amp;D that will help a DM decide how to handle this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The author sets a very clear expectation of what constitutes an answer to this question. This is an &lt;em&gt;objective&lt;/em&gt; question; OP is looking for relevant source material that addresses the situation in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this question, the most well received answer (by a significant margin, answer is at +83/-2, accepted and next highest answer is at +46/-4) fails to cite any of its claims. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166202/62294&quot;&gt;The answer&lt;/a&gt; reads, in full:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/warlock&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why would they think that killing the patron ends the pact? Sadly for your warlock, the obligation comes from the pact, not the patron. No doubt the dead patron has heirs and assignees who will explain this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s assuming that the pact hasn’t already been restructured into several CPOs (&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateralized_debt_obligation&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Collateralized Pact Obligations&lt;/a&gt;) and on-sold on the infernal markets which have recovered well since the Multiverse Financial Crisis a few years back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just an alternate thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer makes many claims that are directly relevant to OP's situation, but not a single one of them is backed up by any relevant lore source. Normally, &amp;quot;here's a neat idea&amp;quot; answers like this are quickly downvoted and swept under the rug through normal community moderation. But this didn't happen here. Based on the existing guidance found here on meta, it seemed that a comment would be appropriate, encouraging the author to provide citations. The comment was responded to by OP including a meaningless link to the Warlock class description. I flagged for mod attention, suggesting that a post notice be added. No post notice was added, and further flags were declined with this message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a piece of curation override the mod team will be doing. If you disagree with the answer, please use your normal tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My normal tools here would be flagging LQP, which cannot be done, flagging NAA, which was declined by a moderator, linking in chat suggesting downvotes so that the answer could eventually be delete voted, which I'm sure 82 downvotes is out of the question, and flagging for mod attention to handle this strange exception to typical voting patterns and site curation, which was declined by a moderator, asking me to use my normal tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only remaining tool is a meta discussion about if we really mean that unsupported answers are subject to deletion, or if totally unsupported answers get a free pass if they reach a critical mass where normal site curation tools cannot be applied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-16T18:11:56.710" LastActivityDate="2021-03-17T22:07:30.603" Title="Does a high score on an answer excuse the requirement to back up the answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|voting|citations|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11414" CreationDate="2021-03-12T17:20:39.227" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Deleting a well-received answer is an act that should be reserved for extreme abuse.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not because they are “excused,” but because those votes represent the “will of the people,” &lt;strong&gt;and no one here has the authority to overrule that.&lt;/strong&gt; In short, they aren’t excused—they are simply deemed acceptable by the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, “policy” here exists in the form of consensus. It’s not for the moderators to decide; it’s up to the community to decide. And when you have a highly-upvoted answer, &lt;em&gt;the community has indicated its consensus that the answer is a good one&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not the place of any one user—moderator or otherwise—to countermand that consensus. Honestly, it’s not even &lt;em&gt;Meta’s&lt;/em&gt; place to do so—the main site has vastly more participation than the meta site. 83 votes—up or down—is basically unheard of here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To conclude, being highly-upvoted doesn’t mean an answer is immune to our expectations—it means that, in the consensus opinion of the site, &lt;em&gt;it meets them&lt;/em&gt;. If you disagree, that’s fine—downvote, and/or start a bounty seeking better answers or pointing to a better one. You could even call attention to it in Chat, or in Meta if you absolutely must, to see if there are more who share your opinion and will also downvote. But &lt;strong&gt;those&lt;/strong&gt; are your options. It’s not your place—even if you have a diamond—to override the consensus of the community. And the consensus here seems to be that you are wrong, it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; meet our expectations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-03-12T17:20:39.227" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11416" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11414" CreationDate="2021-03-12T19:06:51.613" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should use the tools that we have.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We want to both respect the votes, that answers accumulate, of onlookers and community members but also the policy that our community establishes over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do this by raising a flag &amp;quot;In need of moderator intervention&amp;quot; and write down that the answer in question needs a banner that informs the reader that answers that aren't backed-up don't meet our standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators then will act accordingly in their role as janitors and add the banner:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Want to improve this post?&lt;/strong&gt; Add citations from reputable sources by&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/148913/edit&quot;&gt;editing the post&lt;/a&gt;. Posts with unsourced content may be edited or&#xA;deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-03-12T19:06:51.613" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11417" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-13T01:05:12.327" Score="11" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm designing a simple one-session RPG specifically to get beginners interested but with the opportunity for expansion. Can I get feedback for the basic version on the main site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a number of simple rules for setup, equipment and gameplay. I would like to set them out and ask for feedback about any flaws that I may have missed or any additions I need to make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can I ask for that feedback on the main site? If so, what are my tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="24068" LastActivityDate="2021-03-22T14:54:18.347" Title="I'm designing a simple one-session RPG specifically to get beginners interested. Can I get feedback on the main site?" Tags="|discussion|support|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11417" CreationDate="2021-03-13T01:55:06.170" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Mainsite isn't well suited to general feedback. We have a class of questions which are Reviews. Most of the guidance we have around it is geared at homebrew review,&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; as that is the question type we get the most and which mostly works on the site. What's needed for them to work, is clearly defined goals which expertise can discern whether is fulfilled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is where, I think, the type of feedback you're looking for comes in. There are probably good questions which can be constructed around the goals of your system, but it's gonna be virtually impossible to answer without experience with the system (or a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of expertise with similar systems). I'm not sure the effort (and likely unanswered question) will be worth it to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For general (less qualified) feedback, you want a space closer to traditional forums. We maintain a list of RPG forums &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/52137&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and we also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;our own general chat&lt;/a&gt;. Among other topics, sharing, chatting, and giving feedback on creations is certainly supported in there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/52137&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-03-22T14:54:18.347" LastActivityDate="2021-03-22T14:54:18.347" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11419" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11414" CreationDate="2021-03-16T16:52:51.517" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No, it doesn't eliminate standards&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll start with a direct answer to the question as asked: no, a high score doesn't remove the need to adhere to community standards. The particular answer linked is not a good one, and your assessment of it as a comment (which would also not meet community standards) seems correct to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most important issue with it is that it directly ignores the criteria laid out in the question. Had the question not asked specifically for precedent throughout all of published D&amp;amp;D, it might possibly have squeaked by some way or another. But it is clearly not providing what the querent requested and is not a frame challenge. Matters are complicated very slightly due to the querent approving of the post but that doesn't change any of the specifics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is probably worth noting that, while the answer is deficient in its lack of citations or explanations of rules, the answer isn't quite &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;-- its content agrees with the accepted answer in that nothing happens to the Warlock's class levels. This is a not-too-unusual occurrence of the frequently encountered case of the rules &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; containing specific information. You can't cite rules that don't exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also features a literalist interpretation of the Warlock class (it's defined by the &lt;em&gt;pact&lt;/em&gt;, not the entity the pact is made with). That could have been expressed more clearly and fully in that answer, but could be read as affirmative evidence explaining why there is no precedent for anything happening: because the pact endures, nothing happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't love the answer, but I don't think it's as fundamentally transgressive of site standards as is asserted here. That doesn't mean that deletion is off the table, only that it may not be absolutely required.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When you don't get the result you want after exhausting the available tools, you don't get the result you want&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If this is the least satisfying experience you ever have on RPG.SE, I envy you! Thinking that X should happen, according to how you interpret site policy and purpose, and X doesn't happen, that's very frustrating. I think that we've all been there at some point. But there is no closely held principle here that you (or any one of us) eventually end up precisely where you'd like to be in all matters. You've used most of the tools available, and once you've used all of them then the conclusion of those efforts is the conclusion even if you don't love that end state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You have not exhausted your normal tools&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This does not address the general case of &amp;quot;amusing&amp;quot; content being left up while not quite adhering to site standards. But, given that the answer to this question appears to be &amp;quot;nothing happens to the Warlock class levels&amp;quot;, you could edit the answer pretty easily to suit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no official mechanism regarding what happens to those class levels when the patron dies, and so there is no particular reason to think that they will be lost. I'm not aware of any instances where that loss occurs in game lore. The power gained from being a Warlock may not even be from the patron, exactly, but could be interpreted as being derived from the pact itself. That could outlast the patron, for example by [the rest of the answer as written].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a pretty hacky kludge, but I hope the idea comes across. As there does not seem to be a citation to use, a sentence to that effect transforms the rest of the answer into a more palatable one (with regard to adhering to standards, at least).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of the site, broadly, is to produce good and useful answers. Deletion is sometimes a part of that, but the best general impulse is probably towards improvement. Even if a user hates a particular answer, the right first tool to grab is not a sledgehammer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You have, or almost have, your answer anyways&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've gone through most of the normal processes, and have not seen the action you think is most appropriate. As above, I (like many users here) am familiar with that frustration. But it is, if not quite &lt;em&gt;over&lt;/em&gt;, nearly so. You've outlined the steps you took to try and cause deletion of the answer, and the answer was not deleted. The flags were declined, mods declined to curate to your preference, a campaign to rally users in chat to downvote the post into oblivion didn't pan out. Now there is this (and possibly another, forthcoming) meta discussion which seem like an extension of that campaign, though at the time I'm writing this the community does not seem to be solidly in agreement with you here. If these tools don't work to secure your preferred result, they don't work. There are reasons that users, even high-activity users doing a lot of community mod work, do not have a &amp;quot;delete this answer unilaterally&amp;quot; button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By all means, use the tools that are available. If you think that the mods are mistaken, you can open discussion (as was done here on meta), send a complaint to SE staff, run for mod yourself, and so on. You are entitled to the available tools, but not so much to your preferred outcome(s).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Rules for the sake of rules are not really what the site is about&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is not great, but I don't see that it does much to damage the site or the experience of people coming to use it. Obviously a large number of users thought that the answer was good enough to deserve upvotes, and community opinion is the core of SE overall. &amp;quot;I have net-ten upvotes on a meta question&amp;quot; is a poor basis to fundamentally override that. Further, there is not a strong consensus that pluralities of votes on meta create binding policies which require direct enforcement by everyone in all cases-- rather the opposite, in fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A nontrivial part of why community action is so quick on questions and answers that are deficient is to avoid this exact scenario: poor-quality content which becomes popular is a different animal than poor-quality content that virtually no one has seen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that it's generally good to promote and apply best practices on the stack because they improve the stack: better questions, easier-to-find questions, clear answers, citations supporting those answers, descriptions of experiences in practice-- all of these, in aggregate, tend to make the site &lt;em&gt;more useful&lt;/em&gt;. That's good! It's what we want, and helps make the site more useful &lt;strong&gt;overall&lt;/strong&gt;. But, really, the stack is virtually identical with this answer remaining up as it would be with the answer deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at old posts and taking the strongest possible action based on the appearance of technical violations of loosely-held preferences about standards as voted on by a tiny minority of stack users on meta is not the hinge on which the entire stack turns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr: We can and should enforce &amp;quot;back it up&amp;quot; standards for answers, and I believe that we are right to look poorly on &amp;quot;try this&amp;quot;- and &amp;quot;I imagine this to be true with no support&amp;quot;-type answers. Those are true even if this particular answer falls through the cracks: it's not great, but not necessarily, obviously a flagrant violation of a core site need. But this site is about &lt;em&gt;users&lt;/em&gt; more than &lt;em&gt;rules&lt;/em&gt;, and if there is not sufficient user support to commit to an action it may not happen. That seems to be where we are here.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Working to promote best practices in future posts is virtually always a better way to support the stack than trying to force the past into present compliance.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-03-17T22:07:30.603" LastActivityDate="2021-03-17T22:07:30.603" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11420" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11421" CreationDate="2021-03-17T01:13:47.640" Score="11" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a popular Meta discussion, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8121/4563&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt; The highly-rated, accepted answer has a number of very good ideas. Any question that follows all of that guidance is almost certain to be a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I have noticed an increasing number of comments that refer to this guidance for how to make the best possible homebrew-review question as, instead, a rule for how homebrew-review questions &lt;strong&gt;must&lt;/strong&gt; be asked. The comments seem to imply that any question that does not follow the proscribed format is, automatically, a bad question—and must be closed. The comments usually note that they are accompanying a vote to close—often conveyed with a sense of “sorry but I have to, rules are rules.” Almost never do these comments go into specific details of the question that require improvement or clarification; instead, they only offer a link to the Meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, close votes do not require a comment; we are &lt;em&gt;allowed&lt;/em&gt; to offer as much, or as little, rationale for a close vote as we want. However, it is altogether rarer that it is &lt;em&gt;desirable&lt;/em&gt; to close vote without explanation, as compared to downvotes. Several closure reasons include automatic explanatory comments. Generally speaking, if something is wrong with a question, the expectation is that the community will help the querent resolve it, with clear, specific, actionable advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being the case, are comments that just link to the Meta discussion, and imply that it proscribes a format that must be followed, the correct way to be reacting to homebrew-review questions, and an appropriate use of the Meta discussion? Is closing questions “mechanically,” based solely on whether or not the Meta is followed, regardless of whether or not the resulting question is clear and answerable, an appropriate use of that privilege? Does that Meta discussion, despite its title and apparent purpose in producing the best-possible homebrew-review questions, actually form a required &lt;em&gt;minimum&lt;/em&gt; for homebrew-review questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-03-17T03:07:43.723" LastActivityDate="2021-03-17T03:07:43.723" Title="Are we using the Homebrew Review discussion correctly?" Tags="|discussion|homebrew|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11421" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11420" CreationDate="2021-03-17T01:13:47.640" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, this behavior is not ideal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Meta discussion is for best practices. That is what it provides. It is &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; good, but not &lt;strong&gt;every&lt;/strong&gt; question needs to be the best ever. People are allowed to ask questions that are not up to that standard—you do not always need everything that discussion suggests in order to answer such questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is reasonable to suggest that a question can be improved; it is reasonable to offer the Meta as advice for doing so. Those are the appropriate uses for that Meta discussion. It is often true that a question may well receive better answers if it is improved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that isn’t mandatory, for homebrew-review questions or any other questions on this site. Querents are allowed to be satisfied with a question that is “good enough,” and we are allowed to provide answers that are “good enough.” It is neither imperative nor, frankly, desirable, to groom every question to perfection and make it the best it possibly can be. Very often “good enough” is a better use of everyone’s time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Whether or not you can answer a question authoritatively is the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; relevant requirement for a question.&lt;/strong&gt; Anything and everything else is secondary to that, and “follows some Meta advice to the letter” really isn’t even secondary. A question should not be closed just because you think that it could be better—maybe it could, but it doesn’t have to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, comments that indicate that a question is being closed solely because it didn’t follow the Meta—with absolutely no substance specific to the particular question—are not terribly constructive or helpful. They are not up to the usual expectations we have for good and helpful comments on questions that are being or have been closed. Typically, we expect those contending a question is unclear or needs details to &lt;em&gt;specify what they found unclear&lt;/em&gt;, or &lt;em&gt;specify what details they feel are missing&lt;/em&gt;. A link to a Meta is a poor way to do that—the Meta doesn’t know anything about the question. &lt;strong&gt;The Meta is not a checklist; not every question needs everything on it.&lt;/strong&gt; If you feel a question would be better if the querent looked at the Meta, say that—but don’t close the question just because it could be better. Close the question because it cannot be answered authoritatively in our system—and if you want to really help the querent get their question answered, tell them what &lt;em&gt;specific thing from their question&lt;/em&gt; you think is preventing the site from answering the question. It may very well be that a specific question needs some specific details suggested by the Meta. It is not the case that every question needs every detail suggested by the Meta. So if you want to help, tell querents what it is they need. And let them be satisfied with “good enough” if they so choose, so long as it is, in fact, “good enough” for this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Meta suggestions offer guidance on how to make your homebrew-review question the best question it can be. But by definition, that cannot be our requirement for such questions—not every question has to be the best question it could possibly be. There has to be room for good enough. There will not and cannot be hard and fast strict rules about what makes good enough—please don’t start another Meta discussion asking after those. That is not how the site works. Rather, if you have the close vote privilege,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is your responsibility to evaluate a specific question on its own merits, and vote to close if it &lt;em&gt;cannot&lt;/em&gt; be answered well and authoritatively.&lt;/strong&gt; It is your responsibility to judge this matter yourself, based on your experience and based on the specifics of the question. This responsibility cannot be offshored to any general-topic Meta discussion. If you are unsure, hold your vote—others will be by to look in on the question. Using the vote to close in any other fashion—whether it be to establish higher standards in excess of what is necessary for an answerable question, or to mechanically enforce consistency of Meta discussions and avoid the responsibility of making an individual judgment—is an abuse of the privilege. That’s not why it was given to you and not how you should use it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, just as a personal note, having developed a lot of homebrew and also developed material professionally, a lot of the suggestions in the linked Homebrew Review meta are rather unusual. Most places (whether homebrew or playtesting of for-publication material), you would usually just present the material as-is—as it would appear in a book, even if it isn’t destined for one—and &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; a “blind” review. Because part of what you’re looking to review is whether or not people can understand the material as they would see it if they saw it when you weren’t there to walk them through it. That’s certainly how I’ve done the vast majority of my own review—again, that includes doing so professionally, when my bosses wanted my opinion on whether or not to pursue something someone had submitted. The Meta still offers &lt;em&gt;good suggestions&lt;/em&gt;, because I think you can help you get more out of a review, especially when not developing for publication, and I think in some cases material may well be too unclear to answer and the Meta guidance can be a solid approach for rectifying that situation. But as global requirements they are decidedly odd. And they certainly cannot be considered actual requirements to making a review &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt;—I assure you, they are not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-03-17T03:04:30.090" LastActivityDate="2021-03-17T03:04:30.090" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11413" CreationDate="2021-03-22T13:34:05.667" Score="0" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The arrival of a bad answer is not a good reason to close that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn't necessarily a bad answer &lt;em&gt;itself&lt;/em&gt; that might cause folks to close-vote a question, especially if the question is old. More likely is that this is simply the first time some users are seeing those questions. The reason for closure in that case is simply that off-topic questions should be closed as off-topic, regardless of how old they are or whether they have answers or high scores.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closed questions don't disappear if they are positively scored or answered, so there's nothing to worry about in that regard. Closed questions also prevent people from posting new, bad answers (many new answers to old questions [NATO] are bad, because old questions worth answering usually already have [plenty of] good answers), so it seems like an ideal thing to do from that perspective, as well, if the question is off-topic anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In an attempt to prevent further erroneous close votes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's important to remember that others have the right to vote or not vote as they see fit. Framing this as &amp;quot;others are making mistakes, they should do what I think instead&amp;quot; is dangerous and ultimately not very constructive. Users &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; disagree with you on whether something ought to be closed... and they likely will be right, at least some of the time. That's why we have (for the most part) &lt;em&gt;consensus&lt;/em&gt; closure procedures. If you disagree that something should be closed, the proper course of action is to cast a reopen vote (or a Leave Open action in the CV queue).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, as you've said, you can review the question more closely for a way to edit it so that it's on-topic (or appears less like it's off-topic, at least) &lt;em&gt;without changing OP's question or meaning&lt;/em&gt;. But it's also not a voter's &lt;em&gt;responsibility&lt;/em&gt; to try and edit a question into shape when they come across it in the wild, or even in the CV Queue; it's the OP's job to make sure their question is on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making a meta post about a subject should be a last resort rather than a first, because that's what will result in the Meta Effect landing on said question. Even if one intentionally invokes said effect (and they never should... that's abuse), it's a dangerous gambit, because if the whims of Meta disagree with you, then you've just invited a lot more scrutiny and attention &lt;em&gt;in the opposite direction&lt;/em&gt; of what you were hoping for. Of course, RPG.SE's Meta Effect is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to a larger site, but it's still a thing to be cognizant of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30830" LastActivityDate="2021-03-22T13:34:05.667" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11423" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-24T13:40:14.670" Score="2" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;Whenever I use my privilege to use the tool page to look at the recent activity of the last thirty days, I see it filled with questions and answers with more than ten comments. When looking at an answer or question, we want all of the relevant information in that body. So my next inclination is to go through the comments of those answers and questions. Many of those comments are not relevant or are conversational or already resolved. I'm tired of this state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What can we do as a community to take flagging obsolete comments more seriously?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-03-26T23:25:19.177" LastActivityDate="2021-03-26T23:25:19.177" Title="What can we do as a community to take flagging obsolete comments more seriously?" Tags="|discussion|comments|flagging|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11424" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-25T12:38:37.743" Score="2" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have quite a few questions about spell effects and what happens when their target enters a state where they could not have been targeted by the spell in the first place:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103845&quot;&gt;Can Polymorph end spells that require the target to be humanoid?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/133379&quot;&gt;Is a spell suppressed or removed when the target temporarily becomes invalid?&lt;/a&gt; [1]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/182265&quot;&gt;Does the light from Branding Smite persist after the target dies?&lt;/a&gt; [7]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157644&quot;&gt;What happens if modifications are made to the base entity while it is under the effects of a suppressed True Polymorph?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/131210&quot;&gt;Is it possible to possess a non-humanoid creature with a combination of True Polymorph and Magic Jar?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/162649&quot;&gt;If a creature was flying via the Fly spell and dies, does it continue flying?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/158606&quot;&gt;Would the Animate Objects spell end an ongoing spell affecting the targeted object(s)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/133305&quot;&gt;Does a Huge Object that has already been Animated continue to be Animated if it is Enlarged to Gargantuan?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/169076&quot;&gt;Can a willing creature targeted by the Animal Shapes spell choose to return to their normal form before the spell as a whole ends?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180643&quot;&gt;What happens if polymorph ends while under disguise self?&lt;/a&gt; [2]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bracketed number indicates that the question has been closed as a duplicate of a question in this list. For example, question 2 has been closed as a duplicate of question 1. Note, I made all of these closures and they are, effectively, what brought me to ask this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, the very last question is closed as a duplicate of the second. Is this correct? Is that the &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; one that should be closed or are there others as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I left out a few related questions that are, to me, clearly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; duplicates despite asking about similar topics because they hinge directly and explicitly on a spell's specific wording. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/177601&quot;&gt;After Tiny Hut has been cast, does the dome disappear when a large creature appears in it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/169068&quot;&gt;If one of the platinum rings that serves as a component of the Warding Bond spell is removed and then replaced, do the effects of the spell resume?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T13:04:15.563" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T13:04:15.563" Title="Are any of these dnd-5e questions about spells and their target becoming invalid duplicates?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11413" CreationDate="2021-03-25T15:15:03.703" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Community curation appears to be working as intended.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There will always be disagreements about curation. We do our best to provide meaningful guidance here on meta for curation best practices, but there will still be disagreements. In the case of this question, &lt;em&gt;it is not obvious that this question is as black and white as you seem to think it is&lt;/em&gt;. In the questions six year history, &lt;em&gt;it has appeared in the close votes queue six times&lt;/em&gt; and accumulated 18 closure votes compared to 18 Leave Open reviews. Over time, it seems that reviewers have been pretty evenly divided over the state of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has remained open through every review, which seems consistent with our guidance on good subjective. So to me, it seems we don't actually have a problem here. The number of users who thought the question should be closed is not insignificant, so it seems inappropriate to simply dismiss their input. The correct response, which you implemented, is to ask yourself, &amp;quot;why does this question keep showing up in the close queue?&amp;quot; and then fix the inconsistency. This is, again, community curation working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a problem when problematic closure votes are consistently affirmed in the review queue, but that should still make us reflect on the guidance we have to see if our guidance is insufficient, obsolete, or actually just being ignored by a problematic few.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's only wrong if there is policy.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are the outspoken champion of &amp;quot;guidance, not policy&amp;quot;. In this situation, we have both. We have &lt;em&gt;policy&lt;/em&gt; that says tool rec questions are off topic, and we have &lt;em&gt;guidance&lt;/em&gt; that tells us what it looks like. If we assume good faith on the part of reviewers who voted to close, we must assume that they are faithfully trying to apply existing guidance on what a tool rec is. &lt;em&gt;This is not wrong&lt;/em&gt;. In fact, this is exactly what we are supposed to do - apply existing guidance as we understand it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I think you're on the right track here in pointing out the meta discussion about the word &amp;quot;should&amp;quot;, but instead of framing it as &amp;quot;you guys are wrong, go read this discussion that you probably missed&amp;quot;, we should instead be asking how we can improve our guidance on tool rec closures to properly integrate the relevant guidance from the Should meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-03-25T15:29:34.873" LastActivityDate="2021-03-25T15:29:34.873" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11426" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="6757" CreationDate="2021-03-25T18:06:44.903" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It may be okay to leave one of the answers up with a pile of downvotes.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/94914/62294&quot;&gt;This is what has happened&lt;/a&gt; on the linked question. A substantial negative score is a great sign post that says &amp;quot;this answer is wrong&amp;quot;, and in this case, the answer also has a helpful explanatory comment detailing why the answer is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this situation, it is probably just fine, &lt;em&gt;because the author is inactive&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last seen Nov 3 '17 at 23:37&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, an active user is free to delete their wrong posts if they want. But in this case, the community has to decide to delete the answer, and it seems to be serving its purpose of sign posting that the repeated wrong answer is wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-03-25T19:51:13.697" LastActivityDate="2021-03-25T19:51:13.697" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11427" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-25T23:33:48.923" Score="11" ViewCount="186" Body="&lt;p&gt;Currently the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keywords&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keywords&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keywords&lt;/a&gt; tag is restricted to questions about D&amp;amp;D 4e, but it seems like it could be expanded to address the usage of game-specific terminology in other games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag, but it refers to cross-game RPG terms rather than terms for a specific RPG:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about RPG-specific terminology and jargon. Use this tag for questions about terminology used across RPGs in general, rather than the in-game meaning of a special game term within a certain game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leaves a gap for questions that want to ask about game-specific terms outside of 4e. Based on the following questions, it appears that users have been applying the terminology tag incorrectly when they actually want the meaning of a term within a specific game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179629/60913&quot;&gt;Is “Willingly” an actual game term?&lt;/a&gt;: This question is&#xA;particular to D&amp;amp;D 5e because even if the word &amp;quot;willing&amp;quot; is used in&#xA;other RPGs the question is about the specific mechanical meaning in&#xA;5e.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/47254/60913&quot;&gt;What is the definition of &amp;quot;creature&amp;quot; and is it used consistently?&lt;/a&gt;: A similar issue. The&#xA;treatment of the word &amp;quot;creature&amp;quot; in 5e is not necessarily the same as&#xA;the treatment of word in other games.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179924/60913&quot;&gt;What is Fortitude?&lt;/a&gt;: The answer to this&#xA;question refers to the meaning of &amp;quot;fortitude&amp;quot; within 3.5e&#xA;specifically.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These can be compared to the cases where the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag is clearly appropriate, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37103/60913&quot;&gt;What is &amp;quot;my guy syndrome&amp;quot; and how do I handle it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105388/60913&quot;&gt;What is a session 0?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/690/60913&quot;&gt;What is &amp;#39;railroading&amp;#39;, and what are its pros and cons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;and even perhaps: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/135039/60913&quot;&gt;What is the source for defaulting to plain English readings of non-game terms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I see four possible ways to address the lack of a tag for game-specific terminology:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expand the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag to apply to game-specific terms.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Expand the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keywords&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keywords&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keywords&lt;/a&gt; tag to apply outside of 4e&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new tag to fill the need&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is no problem. Game-specific terminology is either too niche or too broad to deserve a tag.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first option seems bad to me because the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag already has wide usage that specifically aligns with its current definition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know whether the second option would be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should this be addressed, if at all?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user60913" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-04-02T14:55:01.743" LastActivityDate="2021-04-02T14:55:01.743" Title="There is currently no tag for questions about game-specific terminology. How should we address this, if at all?" Tags="|discussion|tags|terminology|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11427" CreationDate="2021-03-26T12:35:19.943" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, I see the issue you raise. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag says we shouldn't be asking about in-game terminology, and there's an available tag that appears to cover that territory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said though... I have &lt;em&gt;absolutely no idea&lt;/em&gt; why the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag description says this. The last sentence was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/6787/revisions&quot;&gt;added by @V2Blast relatively recently in March 2019&lt;/a&gt;, and I cannot find &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&amp;amp;q=terminology%20is%3aquestion&quot;&gt;any meta post&lt;/a&gt; or reason why we'd exclude this space from the tag. (For whatever it's worth, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9186/2019-community-moderator-election-results&quot;&gt;V2Blast was not yet a diamond moderator&lt;/a&gt; at the time of making this change either.) Maybe V2Blast may recall some incident or reason for making this exclusion in the tag description, but I am not aware of one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For D&amp;amp;D 4e specifically, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/keywords&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;keywords&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;keywords&lt;/a&gt; isn't being used arbitrarily; it's a specific well-defined game feature that even has its own section in the rules (D&amp;amp;D 4e Player's Handbook, page 55). It's a specific set of tags attached to powers that define things about their type and usage, so that other mechanics can interact with them. A D&amp;amp;D 4e player can point to something and say exactly whether or not it's a keyword and why. This also means the D&amp;amp;D 4e community can achieve consensus on this site in tagging its questions. I added the tag description in January 2019 in response to a meta question asking about its usage: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8755/1204&quot;&gt;What is the [keywords] tag meant to be used for?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But for games in general, I &lt;em&gt;would in fact&lt;/em&gt; say that “is this a game term?” and “what does this term used by the game mean?” &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; terminology questions.  If I showed someone in the real world &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179924/60913&quot;&gt;What is Fortitude?&lt;/a&gt; and said “this person is asking about terminology”, it's likely they would find that a completely reasonable thing to say. In fact we're already using it as such, and it intuitively matches—more than a quarter of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; tag's contents are questions about game terms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e has nine terminology questions under its belt asking about game terminology: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology+dnd-4e&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology+dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e has twelve terminology questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e+terminology&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e+terminology&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e has &lt;em&gt;thirty-three!:&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e+terminology&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e+terminology&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are also a handful of terminology questions each for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology+world-of-darkness&quot;&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology+adnd-2e&quot;&gt;AD&amp;amp;D 2e&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology+exalted&quot;&gt;Exalted&lt;/a&gt; among others.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag descriptions are meant to reflect and guide usage. We have used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt; to ask about game-specific terminology just fine and have in fact continued to do that despite the change to the tag description with no actual problems occurring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;strong&gt;option 1:&lt;/strong&gt; change the tag description. The March 2019 update to the tag description in the first place incorrectly narrowed it, so we should fix the error to reflect how we've been using the tag all along. This means that last sentence should be dropped from the tag description, and it should simply say “For questions about RPG-specific terminology and jargon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Not option 2 or 3:&lt;/strong&gt; I think the boundaries of “what is a game terminology question rather than a terminology question, and what isn't, and why?” get too fuzzy and will mess with our ability to achieve consensus on tagging. I would not expand [keywords] nor try to create a [game-terminology] tag. We already have an entirely suitable tag available that we have been using, it's just got an incorrect description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-28T13:14:14.007" LastActivityDate="2021-03-28T13:14:14.007" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11429" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11423" CreationDate="2021-03-26T15:11:45.157" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me start with: I get you. I really do. I also flagged a lot of obsolete comments (and still remove such). So, I'm with you that obsolete comments should be cleaned out. But, they're a fairly low priority. Site design already does a good chuck to minimize the noise from comments, so removing comments is more like polish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll try to offer some thoughts on the matter, hopefully in a useful order. Firstly, comments being removed is invisible. That means many might benefit from the resultant cleanliness, the absence is hard to consciously notice. And unlike most other moderation and curation (closures, edits, etc.) it being done isn't very noticeable to new users and its harder to pick up on the notion. (Because of how the Low Quality Posts queue works, the removal of answers is also much more visible.) That means teaching it (and encouraging it) to new users needs to be slightly more of a conscious effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I think it's also beneficial to split up the issue, as already alluded in the comment above. Because cleaning up comments on 'live' posts, and cleaning out old comments are slightly different beasts. Clearing out resolved exchanges on posts which are new/active is important for new comments on the same to get full attention etc. Usually these exchanges have a cutoff (the post being edited and a comment with &amp;quot;Thanks, fixed/addressed&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Does that edit address your concern?&amp;quot;) which would a good point at which to encourage clearing out the comments. Appending a &amp;quot;please flag as NLN when seen and clear out comments&amp;quot; to such a comment would be great addition there. Similarly encouraging to flag resolved comments would be a good add when encouraging a user to incorporate their clarifying comments into the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, there's the comments that are old and obsolete. And I'll offer a thought from my own experience of it, clearing out old comments requires a specific mindset. Not a difficult or obscure one, but you need to read them with the specific question &amp;quot;does this need to be here, or can it just go away?&amp;quot; question in mind, which is different from the normal reader mindset of &amp;quot;does this solve my problem?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;is this good additions?&amp;quot; in the case of curating users. I know I got used to the comment clearing mindset when retagging homebrew review questions and earning Marshall of flagging obsolete comments, but then I am shiny trinket motivated. I'm not sure there's really a good avenue for encouraging others to go through and flag old comments, unless they're looking for an additional (and fairly low key) way to contribute, or are looking for a way to earn Marshal or increase their flag quota (though I don't think anything other than comment hunting is gonna give you a problem with that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-03-26T15:11:45.157" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11430" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-03-30T13:24:19.437" Score="7" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;More often than not, our tag wiki excerpts start with “&lt;strong&gt;for questions about&lt;/strong&gt; topic so-and-so”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How did this “for questions about...” thing come about as such a common excerpt format? Why do we use incomplete sentences to introduce tags? I'm curious about the history of this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-31T12:42:24.277" LastActivityDate="2021-04-11T12:47:27.623" Title="How did it come about that so many of our tag excerpts start with &quot;for questions about...&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11430" CreationDate="2021-03-30T18:11:16.417" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't know if this is how it started, but it may have been partly my doing/continued by me...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of the tag wikis I have seen previously just described the &lt;em&gt;subject&lt;/em&gt; of the tag - that is, the thing the tag is named after (e.g. an RPG, or the concept of metagaming, or characters, etc.) - rather than detailing how the &lt;em&gt;tag&lt;/em&gt; is meant to be used (e.g. for questions &lt;em&gt;mainly&lt;/em&gt; about a certain topic, such as questions primarily relating to a certain RPG, or primarily relating to metagaming). And so I've edited at least some of those tag wikis/excerpts to emphasize the tag itself (rather than just, e.g., the RPG/class/concept/etc. that the tag is named after).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally, this alone doesn't solve the issue of tags being (sometimes) used incorrectly, and there's no need for them to be sentence fragments - it just happened to be how I ended up rewriting some of the tag wikis. (And I think I largely haven't edited the tag wikis &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; to make that change - it's usually that I'm already editing the tag wiki to try and improve it, so I also make that change while I'm there.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2021-03-30T18:11:16.417" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11432" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" LastActivityDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11433" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" Score="0" Body="used to something something" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" LastActivityDate="2021-03-31T10:30:09.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11434" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11430" CreationDate="2021-03-31T11:59:18.143" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a mix of factors here, some of them coincidence, some of them the effects of automated processes running on our sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look up tag descriptions on other sites you'll find lots of different formats people use, including this one and others: here's some links to tag pages on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;Meta Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://academia.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;Academia&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/tags&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://serverfault.com/tags&quot;&gt;Serverfault&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/tags&quot;&gt;Game Dev&lt;/a&gt;. Sometimes the tag wiki defines the topic in full because you'll probably have no idea what the topic is: technical sites do this a lot, and it helps to both introduce you &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; clearly disambiguate the tag. Sometimes you know exactly what the topic is, you just need to know when to use the tag: Academia sees no reason to tell you what a “citation” is, it's just telling you when the tag does and doesn't apply.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally when I'm adding a tag wiki for a new game system, I'll lean toward the former: “{Full name of game system} is a {brief summary} released by {developer} in {year}.” helps introduce and disambiguate. But I'll default to the latter if you probably already know what the word in the tag means in our context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also specific reasons this specific format shows up so much though, and that brings us to the magic of: automated sentence trimming bots! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Automated processes trim excess wording from the front of tag wiki excerpts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange values signal to noise, and tag descriptions don't have much space, so automated jobs &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; come along and annihilate excessive wording patterns at the start of tag descriptions. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/82702/152515&quot;&gt;Some of the patterns that were targeted as of 2011 are described here&lt;/a&gt;, and they still today include phrases like “This tag is ...” or “Use this tag ...” or “The tag-name-here tag is ...”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just for a test, I edited the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; tag description to this a few minutes ago, adding “this tag is for” at the start, plus “test” at the end so I knew when things had been updated properly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fA8Sx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fA8Sx.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;This tag is for questions about a setting's in-world details or background, test.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The string was immediately trimmed on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags?page=1&amp;amp;tab=popular&quot;&gt;our tags page&lt;/a&gt;, even though it still said the full text on the tag page:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fj3TI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/fj3TI.png&quot; alt=&quot;the same tag wiki, but starting with &amp;quot;for questions about ...&amp;quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A little while went by before anything else that happened, and then I noticed my tag revision was changed &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;in-place&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; to remove “this tag is ...” from the start of my revision entirely. Apparently this only happens for tags on the first page(s?) of our popular tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dSpY0.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dSpY0.png&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of the tag revision history with no evidence of my edit&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate that the automated task that trimmed the text also ensured the first letter was capitalised, and that it updated the edit summary. You might see what this robotic change left us with: the famous “for questions about” format. Other common sentence beginnings &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; leave us with this format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the reason we use incomplete sentences is ... there's limited space, and mindless automatons will come along and chop a tag description in half if need be and &lt;em&gt;create&lt;/em&gt; incomplete sentences to keep us using that space efficiently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Like follows like&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The final bit: when you're not sure what to do for a tag description, what do you do? Probably you'll visit the first page of tag wikis, look to them for an example, and follow their lead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; we have so many tags following formats like this, we'll see other tags following their lead unprompted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the automated system that &lt;em&gt;changes your revisions&lt;/em&gt; only works on the front few pages, the tag page will &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; trim out excess wording from the front, and the tag page is what you'll be looking at for a point of reference here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-04-11T12:47:27.623" LastActivityDate="2021-04-11T12:47:27.623" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11435" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-03T02:05:33.090" Score="6" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;Bounties exist to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16065/how-does-the-bounty-system-work/16067#16067&quot;&gt;motivate answerers, and help questions get the answers they deserve&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few weeks ago I received my first bounty, +50 for my answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138374/would-it-be-balanced-to-allow-the-darkvision-spell-to-target-multiple-creatures/181970#181970&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;.  It was a two year old question, but soon after I posted my answer, NautArch put a bounty on the question.  In the related banner, they said they specifically wanted to reward my answer, as it described my actual experience in implementing the suggestion.  The reason for their bounty was clear, and at the time, would serve as a motivation for myself and others to write similar answers to other questions.  (Now that the week has passed, I have collected the bounty but the banner is gone - it still motivates &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt;, but it is not clear how it would motivate others no longer able to see Nautarch's intention.  Regardless...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I received a +500 bounty for my answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179418/is-a-special-melee-attack-an-actual-game-term/179423#179423&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, an answer I wrote four months ago.  The bounty is from &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot;.  If there was a banner listing the reason for it in the week prior, I did not see it, and I don't know how to see it now.  +500 is huge - about 5% of my reputation total.  Apparently the answer was well received by something or someone, but I don't see that I can know who, or why.  I certainly appreciate the bounty, but am unclear on what it is supposed to motivate if I cannot know why I received it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That particular answer was accepted, but it is by no means my only accepted answer.  It received numerous upvotes, but it is not my most popular answer.  It &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; currently my most popular accepted answer, but absent any other indication, I would hesitate to think that that is what the bounty is &amp;quot;for&amp;quot;.  For example, it is also my shortest accepted answer - perhaps the anonymous moderator or automated program that goes by Community has a fondness for pith?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, &lt;strong&gt;what behavior is this Community-awarded bounty supposed to be motivating, and how would I know?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-04-03T14:05:16.163" LastActivityDate="2021-04-03T14:05:16.163" Title="What is a Community-awarded bounty supposed to motivate?" Tags="|discussion|support|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11435" CreationDate="2021-04-03T02:43:21.800" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The laudable behavior is unknowable.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the user who started the bounty has deleted their account without ever telling you why they awarded the bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the bounty exists and you got it. And the system needs some user of record to have awarded the bounty, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;Community&lt;/a&gt; gets the honor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19738/who-is-the-community-user&quot;&gt;Who is the Community user?&lt;/a&gt; (meta.SE) See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/123504/bounty-notices-are-attributed-to-no-one-when-the-owner-is-deleted&quot;&gt;Bounty notices are attributed to no one when the owner is deleted&lt;/a&gt; (old meta.SE)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2021-04-03T03:16:48.203" LastActivityDate="2021-04-03T03:16:48.203" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11437" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-05T17:09:02.387" Score="25" ViewCount="2051" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, no points for guessing why last year's slipped, but we'd like to get back to doing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We, the elected moderators, wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels things are going on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-check-in&quot;&gt;This community check-in has been done for the last three years&lt;/a&gt; (ignoring 2020), and it was very helpful. As such, we'd like to share our thoughts and also get your feedback on what is going well and what we could improve. The process is modeled heavily on previous years', but for everyone's benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How this specific Q&amp;amp;A is run so that we get good value out of it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;One clear premise per answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things we think still need improvement. Please share your thoughts as well! Make sure to note whether you think the thing you're writing about is an improvement, a problem, or some mix of the two (one person might see the same change as bad that you see as good, or vice versa)...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post only one kind of thing per answer, so that when people upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not, it's more clearly actionable. If you write an essay about 4 different things, it's not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with and thus it becomes difficult to act on that feedback. You can, of course, contribute multiple answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote the answers based on your agreement with whether you see that thing happening and whether you concur with the answer's premise (that it's good or it's a problem). (In other words, if someone says &amp;quot;We get too many new users and I hate them,&amp;quot; you would upvote if you agree, and downvote if either you don't think we get too many new users or if you don't hate them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No long comment threads&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with an answer, post your own answer; don't argue in comments. If you post more than one comment on an answer, you should consider whether having that discussion in a comment thread here is useful at all. We're interested in overall community sentiment as shown by votes, not so much that one person is so irritated they post 10 comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This post isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a particular problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these answers can not be clearly vetted and voted on, so they will tend to remain undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt;, which we’d still like to summarize as Be Nice, applies to meta as well as the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust that you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. Focus on actions, rather than characterizing people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we may have thoughts on things to bring up, in the interest of actually getting this started they're not gonna be here right away (read: we didn't want to delay this further in order to get those written). Hopefully others have noticed them too, and can beat us to it as well as bring up things we haven't picked up on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-04-18T23:16:59.603" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T14:35:19.257" Title="How is the community doing? [2021]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="19" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2022-05-03T12:12:27.017" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11438" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-06T05:46:20.857" Score="28" Body="&lt;h1&gt;We have become D&amp;amp;D (-ish) SE&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, of the 50 latest questions, only &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; are not about D&amp;amp;D or D&amp;amp;D clones (D&amp;amp;D 5e and 3.5e, PF 1e &amp;amp; 2e). That is &lt;strong&gt;96%&lt;/strong&gt; D&amp;amp;D&lt;em&gt;ish&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been that way in the past but I think we all hoped it would be a hype phase after launch. But it's &lt;em&gt;way&lt;/em&gt; past launch now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me that's sad because there are so many other systems out there and &lt;em&gt;reading questions about them&lt;/em&gt; is sometimes the way that I get interested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems the effect is maybe self-reinforcing. Good answers attract more questions of that kind. A Catch-22.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know how to solve it, but I see this kind of one-sided eco-system as a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="7665" LastEditDate="2021-04-06T06:56:09.023" LastActivityDate="2021-04-06T06:56:09.023" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11439" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-06T14:26:08.947" Score="5" ViewCount="98" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm new here, but I've already picked up that Standard Policy is to tag questions with the system that you're playing in, and that the vast majority of questions can be closed a &amp;quot;Lacking details&amp;quot; if the system isn't specified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag that would cover the overwhelming majority of what's left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would there be some way to teach SE that &amp;quot;these system tags are special, and all questions must have one&amp;quot;? Meta-SEs already have that for &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/bug&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bug&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bug&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/feature-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;feature-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;feature-request&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/discussion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;discussion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;discussion&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/support&quot; class=&quot;post-tag required-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;support&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;support&lt;/a&gt;. Can that system be re-purposed for this goal?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If necessary, we could add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/specific-obscure-rules-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-obscure-rules-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-obscure-rules-system&lt;/a&gt; tag, to cover the remaining tiny number of questions with no suitable tags - if such even exist.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52717" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-07T02:09:52.070" LastActivityDate="2021-04-07T02:11:07.597" Title="Get the SE system to enforce system tags" Tags="|feature-request|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2021-04-07T01:16:33.393" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-06T18:47:09.393" Score="24" Body="&lt;h1&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/48793&quot;&gt;Don't Guess the System&lt;/a&gt; policy is still an issue.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The don't guess policy discussion has gone to ground after resurfacing in spring of 2020 but I think it continues to be a divisive issue behind the scenes (how can a topic with that kind of answer, comment, and view load not be?) and opinion &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; be shifting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last major update to that meta, in April of 2020, stated that the highest rated answer indicated that the policy should not be reverted. Since that April update, an answer expressing the opposite opinion has moved into first place, though only barely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the &amp;quot;maintain the policy&amp;quot; crowd had more answers (4 to 2 by my count) and won the early voting on the issue in that latest question, it seems to me that a great many &amp;quot;change the policy&amp;quot; people simply decided it wasn't worth their while to write an answer, voted their opinion, and moved on. Or perhaps I'm projecting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of the fact that about 9 out of 10 questions on the RPGSE are about D&amp;amp;D and nearly 43% are about D&amp;amp;D's 5th edition specifically, I foresee this continuing to be an issue until such time 6th edition is released...and then we'll probably have the same discussion again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48793" LastEditorUserId="48793" LastEditDate="2021-04-06T21:40:36.147" LastActivityDate="2021-04-06T21:40:36.147" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-07T13:28:27.707" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Meta seems less active&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was my perception that activity levels on meta generally seemed to be down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; for producing the following graphs that add a bit of meat to my hypothesis:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NYeHq.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NYeHq.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PlP40.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PlP40.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;25k rep users can view meta site analytics &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/site-analytics&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are likely a number of different reasons for the reduction in meta activity, and they're not necessarily bad. This post is simply intended as a conversation starter (if anyone wants to pick it up).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This hypothesis is further substantiated by the ratio of views and visits between Main and Meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1GWtC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1GWtC.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Main-to-Meta ratio of views and visits seems to be steadily increasing. Traffic on main has started rebounding, but that rebound on Main is not reflected in Meta traffic. Main traffic growth is significantly outpacing Meta since the first of the year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-04-08T13:01:56.297" LastActivityDate="2021-04-08T13:01:56.297" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11442" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-07T13:30:37.087" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There might be a lack of trust within the community&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm worried about the community in that our pursuit for curatorial agreement is herding us into corners rather than bringing us together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each time an issue comes up regarding something that has multiple camps it seems that each camp is only interested in presenting their opinion. Much like elsewhere on the internet, the desire for bridging, compromise, and agreement is less important than being right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we have lots of views here about what is right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than trying to convince others that you are right (or telling other that they are wrong), why don't we start with the basic idea that the vast majority are here and acting in good faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are all trying to curate this stack to the best of our abilities with the beliefs we have to do so. Those beliefs are going to be different, but I think we need to realize that there is also a difference between perceived problems and actual problems. Our primary focus should be on actual problems: when an action by a user causes a real and clear issue that needs to be discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there isn't an actual problem, then maybe we should just let it slide. THe majority of actions here still require more than one user, so if a group of users believe something is helpful, and another disagrees - that's okay. The system is working as normal. If we start complaining about how others are performing their curatorial duties and try to change them because we believe they should be doing something else, then I think that creates divide on the stack where there doesn't need to be one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's creating multiple issues like the guessing of system, or question closures, etc. What one person believes is helpful another person believes is wrong. And again, that's okay! What one person does really shouldn't be an issue. And if lots of folks are doing it and we're not seeing harm, then it's likely okay (although lack of visible harm doesn't mean there isn't harm.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to get to a point where we can trust each other. And that if a group overrides another group, that is also okay. And we just need to let it go as the community making a decision that is different from our own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2021-04-07T13:30:37.087" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11443" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-07T15:49:09.867" Score="22" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Our community is continuing to struggle with the terms &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;guideline.&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have different community members with incongruent definitions of these terms, and these terms and their application is an ongoing source of conflict between these groups of people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-04-07T15:49:09.867" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11444" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-07T21:02:05.127" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What makes me grind my teeth: the received 'voice'&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is my observation that we are becoming too proscriptive in how we act on the site, and it's actively hurting how we interact with newer users. (thanks @illustro for that bit of word smithing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have watched the new user frustration aspect increase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is quite hard to quantify. We had a meta not long ago asking about the tone - which is &lt;em&gt;received&lt;/em&gt; tone - of responses to questions, closures, and such.  One of the nouns used had to be edited to keep the question open. That's but one example.  It's not the only meta or inquiry that has come up asking why this community has a high barrier to entry. That tone is directly related to this continuing community attitude problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;I need a rule for this&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11443/22566&quot;&gt;attitude&lt;/a&gt; has increased, both in how Q&amp;amp;A's are handled, and in &amp;quot;but we have a rule for that&amp;quot; discussions on meta. This isn't a new issue, it's a running sore.  Between various times in the chat, and meta posts, I've made sufficient input on this before.  You all will either accept my observations or you will not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those related community problems create frowning face over the past year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Actionable suggestions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As regards new users, remember that while good Q&amp;amp;A are the purpose of this site, the users matter.  Received tone can be tricky to guess, as you don't know who is on the other end of the web, but if you type your comment as though you are speaking to someone sitting across from you, the tone may be received more warmly.  It's worth the effort, and can also be applied to the attempt to emphasize rules / policy: &lt;em&gt;best practices&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;guidelines&lt;/em&gt; are how to frame it, in a community of volunteers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-04-20T13:27:57.203" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T13:27:57.203" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-08T01:05:00.157" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We continue to discuss meta posts in the main chat rooms.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A growing number of users prefer the environment of the main chat rooms to discuss meta to participating in the meta posts. Sometimes workshopped ideas arrive on meta, but a lot of the results of the discussions stays in the chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an observation of how things are, or as the format says: &amp;quot;observations we have.&amp;quot; It is neither an improvement or a problem, but remarkable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote the answers based on your agreement with whether&#xA;you see that thing happening and whether you concur with the answer's&#xA;premise&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-04-08T11:56:18.393" LastActivityDate="2021-04-08T11:56:18.393" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-08T12:22:46.037" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;There is lack of consensus on what should be done about old, off topic questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently 80+ open questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; (though if you go through them, some of them are on topic despite the tag). There is a diverse range of opinions on what should be done about them. I have seen it expressed that they should just be left alone until they are bumped to the front page, it has been suggested that closing them if you happen to come across them is appropriate, and it has been proposed that we go on a closure spree and knock the rest of them out. Each of these sentiments seems to have the support of multiple active community members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll keep this one as an observation unless someone specifically requests data. I obviously have my own thoughts on this, and have done some work to consolidate meta guidance on this topic, but I will reserve it for when or if this topic gets its own post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-04-08T12:22:46.037" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-08T12:24:06.957" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We continue to get into too many long arguments in the comment section.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Extended discussion, especially when opposing arguments, is better suited to a chat environment, and we should propose to move things to chat sooner than later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-04-08T12:24:06.957" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11448" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-08T14:46:00.647" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Bounties offered is trending upward.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a graph of the number of bounties per month for the last 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Qzv9x.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Qzv9x.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see this as a good thing. The bounty system is being used to target content that otherwise would not receive due attention and to reward good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-04-08T23:44:18.990" LastActivityDate="2021-04-08T23:44:18.990" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11449" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11457" CreationDate="2021-04-08T20:42:05.853" Score="2" ViewCount="225" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a question I asked a couple of months ago — &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179418/is-a-special-melee-attack-an-actual-game-term/183718#183718&quot;&gt;Is &amp;quot;a special melee attack&amp;quot; an actual game term?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most upvoted answers agreed that there was no game term &amp;quot;special melee attack&amp;quot;, and this phrase had its natural English meaning,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later on I came across &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1056958922878111744&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this JC's tweet&lt;/a&gt; that says exactly what &amp;quot;special attack&amp;quot; is supposed to mean:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;an attack can be special and not fall into either category: weapon or spell&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a hurry I shared the news with the community, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179418/&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; was downvoted without a single comment. I doubt the reason is that JC's tweets are no longer &amp;quot;word of god&amp;quot;, since the question wasn't about any kind of &amp;quot;official ruing&amp;quot;. The question was about a particular game term meaning, and clarifications from the game designer itself seems the most reliable source to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what is the answer's problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2021-05-07T10:08:57.667" LastActivityDate="2021-05-07T10:08:57.667" Title="What's wrong with this answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|self-answering|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11450" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-08T22:00:55.413" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Meta continues to increase in toxicity&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a follow-up to my other answer, but I'm watching other answers come in and the reactions within comments and it feels like I need to add this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are not treating each other well. We are treating Meta as a place to rant and try to push opinions onto others. It isn't healthy. And it is getting worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if it's toxicity from main interactions coming to meta or from meta to main.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But either way, the toxicity with which we deal with each other needs to be addressed somehow. We're all taking things personally rather than through the lens of are we trying to help people and are we succeeding (without making assumptions about what it takes to succeed.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2021-04-09T14:37:34.527" LastActivityDate="2021-04-09T14:37:34.527" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-09T13:24:24.113" Score="30" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We seem to be closing questions we wouldn’t have before, for reasons we wouldn’t have closed a question for before&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that a lot of questions that would, in the past, have been deemed fine—and would likely have received perfectly-fine answers—are getting closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, more often than in the past, I see comments claiming that votes to close have been cast due to minor violations of some policy or another, rather than substantive issues with the question that prevent it from being answered well within the site’s format. Often, when I see such questions, I see nothing in the question that prevents it from being answered, and such comments both don’t point me in the direction of something that I should consider, and also give me the impression that the closure was incorrect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if there are &lt;strong&gt;also&lt;/strong&gt; substantive issues with the question that mean it &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; be closed, such comments make it more difficult to review the question for serious issues and make it harder to moderate the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-04-09T14:39:46.957" LastActivityDate="2021-04-09T14:39:46.957" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11452" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-11T13:22:09.700" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not following D&amp;amp;D questions makes it difficult to be in the loop on site consensus&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The way I see it, the community mind is composed of conversations. Those conversations happen in chat, on meta, and in mainsite comments. It's through these conversations we collaboratively evolve an understanding of how to operate the site. Most of the evolving discussion occurs in mainsite comments. Big things get brought to meta, but the months of discussion and evolution prior to a meta about a topic occur on mainsite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of that discussion happens on D&amp;amp;D 5e questions. They're about 90% of our activity and contain at least 90% of the ongoing site conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand or have an interest in D&amp;amp;D 5e, so I don't follow its questions. I can't do much use there, and they don't have much value to me, so there's not much point in me visiting them. But 90% of our site conversation is happening there—and it's conversation I don't see!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back when I played D&amp;amp;D 4e and it was the latest version of D&amp;amp;D, this wasn't the case. I had a near-encyclopedic knowledge of nearly every site incident and the past and current community consensus on almost any topic. When we moved on toward D&amp;amp;D 5e, I noticed that knowledge declining. When I was a moderator I at least had my attention brought to almost anything significant going on, but I was still aware I wasn't as in the loop as my D&amp;amp;D-playing-and-answering peers. Now none of those things are going on for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, I don't get to see our site conversations evolve. I have almost no visibility into where our “don't guess the system” policy discussions are at, or into several issues I see brought up on this meta (e.g. lack of trust, the policy vs guidance discussion). I've only got the visibility I've caught from my activity in chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This matters because site curation decisions are nevertheless being made that affect me and the parts of the site I do pay attention to. When meta decisions are made, they are usually made affecting &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; kind of question from &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; game, but those meta decisions are predominantly informed by activity in D&amp;amp;D questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not playing D&amp;amp;D 5e myself, I have less influence over those curation decisions, and I'm less informed when site issues arrive at meta. I feel like participation in D&amp;amp;D 5e is an entry ticket without which I am disenfranchised from significant, meaningful engagement and influence in site curation policy, and from affecting the decisions that in turn affect every part of the site including the parts I participate in. I feel this means I and other non-D&amp;amp;D players are further removed from meaningful participation in the ongoing site conversation, leaving it more-than-90% dominated by that D&amp;amp;D 5e entry ticket.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-04-11T13:22:09.700" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-11T15:47:00.567" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;People are exclaiming that we are becoming D&amp;amp;D.se when D&amp;amp;D has been our main activity for many years.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an issue because it obscures the D&amp;amp;D focus as a recent development when we have had the D&amp;amp;D focus for many years. When we approach this issue, we want to do so from an honest standpoint. People are hasty to project a trend when the percentage change has been stable during the last three years. The recent slight increase could be due to several reasons, such as being stricter about tagging questions correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/v6T6t.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/v6T6t.png&quot; alt=&quot;This image, the image displayes four colums. first year, second total questions, third D&amp;amp;D related tags, fourth percentage. It has twelfe rows. First row: year: 2010 total: 948 D&amp;amp;D: 496, %: 52,32%. Second row: year: 2011 total: 1328 D&amp;amp;D: 726, %: 54,67%. Third row: year: 2012 total: 1653 D&amp;amp;D: 1006, %: 60,86%. Fourth row: year: 2013 total: 2224 D&amp;amp;D: 1376, %: 61,87%. Fifth row: year: 2014 total: 4217 D&amp;amp;D: 2973, %: 70,50%. Sixth row: year: 2015 total: 4358 D&amp;amp;D: 3360, %: 77,10%. Seventh row: year: 2016 total: 4500 D&amp;amp;D: 3648, %: 81,07%. Eighth row: year: 2017 total: 5665 D&amp;amp;D: 4812, %: 84,94%. Nineth row: year: 2018 total: 6257 D&amp;amp;D: 5537, %: 88,49%. Tenth row: year: 2019 total: 6248 D&amp;amp;D: 5507, %: 88,14%. Eleventh row: year: 2020 total: 4628 D&amp;amp;D: 4114, %: 88,89%. Twelfth row: year: 2021 total: 1029 D&amp;amp;D: 939, %: 91,25%.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This image created by a &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57567968#57567968&quot;&gt;query by Miniman on the seventh of April 2021&lt;/a&gt; displays the percentage of questions that use D&amp;amp;D tags and their related franchises, it includes all editions of D&amp;amp;D, Pathfinder, and Starfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should not be too hasty in attributing the recent percentage increase of questions with those tags as a surging trend when we do no understand the circumstances well enough. We have had this D&amp;amp;D focus for quite some time, and we should not view it as a recent development.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-04-11T16:19:11.717" LastActivityDate="2021-04-11T16:19:11.717" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-12T05:56:25.173" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;RPG.SE is enforcing the use of gender neutral pronouns (they/them) in Q&amp;amp;As despite a clear consensus position that all pronouns are neutral.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance on pronoun use in Q&amp;amp;As is quite clear, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7340/62294&quot;&gt;this highest scoring answer&lt;/a&gt; is sitting at +42/-5:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;All pronouns are neutral and should be enforced as such.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally think that nobody should be harassed, or be in the red for guessing wrong on how someone wants to be called, and this should extend to RPG.SE. no pronoun should have a negative connotation, whether being misused or otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Unless otherwise stated, all questions are gender agnostic.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that 'he/him', 'they/their', and 'she/her' pronouns are correct, and none of them are incorrect. Good answers simply maintain continuity, and don't switch to refer to the same people. The answer may decide to change pronouns if the answerer wishes, but there is no correct gender. An answer should never be wrong because the gender is 'incorrect', because no gender option is incorrect. If the OP puts in the post that this is a gender-issue, then correct pronouns should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7336/62294&quot;&gt;next highest scoring answer&lt;/a&gt; (+38/-4) echoes a similar sentiment. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7348/62294&quot;&gt;third highest scoring answer&lt;/a&gt; (+28/-1) echoes a similar sentiment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite this guidance, community curation frequently sees suggested edits consisting solely of  “corrected to inclusive pronouns” approved. And I don’t mean an edit that substantially improves the post while changing pronouns along the way; I mean suggested edits that change as little as a single pronoun and nothing else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By approving these suggested edits, RPG.SE is enforcing the use of gender neutral pronouns, &lt;em&gt;despite a clear position that all pronouns are gender neutral and should be enforced as such&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-04-12T19:32:41.817" LastActivityDate="2021-04-12T19:32:41.817" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11455" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-12T18:13:41.517" Score="13" ViewCount="189" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have community check-ins on Meta that represent a snapshot of the time they describe. These snapshots are useful when one contextualises what the metacommunity perceives as pressing incidents, remarkable developments, and concurrent issues of that period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing that stops users from voting after we close the most recent check-in when we open a new one - this distorts the votes and makes contextualising unnecessary difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we have a tool that preserves these snapshot and freezes them in time: Should we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/locked-posts&quot;&gt;lock&lt;/a&gt; questions with &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/community-check-in&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;community-check-in&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;community-check-in&lt;/a&gt; once we open a new one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-04-05T12:27:40.723" LastActivityDate="2022-04-05T12:27:40.723" Title="Should we lock community check-in posts on Meta once we open a new one?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|meta|locked-posts|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-12T20:51:20.690" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I feel like we need to do a better job formalizing our policies, whatever they may be.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a bit of an extension on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11443/31402&quot;&gt;Akixkisu's response&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11440/31402&quot;&gt;Rykara's response&lt;/a&gt;. But I noted this awhile ago on a comprehensive list prepared by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10139/31402&quot;&gt;Medix&lt;/a&gt;, which detailed all the times we discussed on the issue of guessing the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have all these discussions and side discussions and additional discussions and so on that I feel like at some point, we need to make a firm decision on the matter and codify it in a way that's traceable. My recommendation is closing a bunch of those old meta posts as duplicates and linking them some sort of overarching [POLICY] post or something. Heck, make it a tag or even a Moderator-Only tag if it needs extra protection.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quite frankly, I don't really care so much on the matter anymore. I just want to know what we're doing so I can advise people correctly or edit based on my gut correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, it feels like we're setting ourselves up for a 3.5 style failure wherein somebody cites a meta thread which says one thing is policy, they're countered by a meta thread which says a contrary stance is policy, then a third person points out that both of those threads are outdated and here's the real Player's Handbook which was drafted by wizards, is written in True Speech, and is thus devoid of all errors and vagaries!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes you just gotta make a decision and live with it to see if the fallout is as bad as you expect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2021-04-12T20:51:20.690" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11457" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11449" CreationDate="2021-04-12T21:20:18.927" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This answer is not useful because it's incorrect&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite the fact that &amp;quot;special attack&amp;quot; was a game term in previous versions, there is no such thing in 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The word &amp;quot;special&amp;quot; does have its natural English meaning, It means &amp;quot;out of the ordinary&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;JC says that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the grapple described on p. 195 of the PH is called a special melee attack, not a weapon/spell attack&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...implying that it is out of the ordinary melee attack, not a (convenient) weapon/spell attack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another example is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/178182/62294&quot;&gt;Sword Of Answering&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;this special attack ignores any damage immunity or resistance&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, &amp;quot;special attack&amp;quot; does not mean &amp;quot;neither weapon not spell&amp;quot;, it just means &amp;quot;an attack which is out of the ordinary&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2021-04-12T21:20:18.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11458" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11459" CreationDate="2021-04-13T10:23:40.370" Score="5" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently answered this RPG.SE question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/140411/63061m&quot;&gt;Who is pictured on the cover of Dragonlance Adventures?&lt;/a&gt; I quoted some parts of the novel as support for my answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if we are allowed to quote text from novels as we do for rules from manuals, or if we have to pay attention to copyright and/or other law aspects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suppose that once the reference is clear, there is no problem in quoting parts of such novels, but I would like to clearly understand what are the limits, if any, of this approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-16T20:08:39.293" LastActivityDate="2021-04-16T20:08:39.293" Title="Can we quote parts of novels in our questions and answers?" Tags="|support|citations|copyright|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11458" CreationDate="2021-04-13T13:36:22.790" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, it falls solidly into the “fair use” exception to copyright claims.  There is no difference between novels and game books as far as this goes.  Just do not quote excessively; quote enough to support the point only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2021-04-13T13:36:22.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11460" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11455" CreationDate="2021-04-13T21:26:44.217" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There’s another tool that you can use to determine what voting happened when: the timeline. (It’s that circular button under the downvote button.) For example, you can see that the answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/posts/7931/timeline?filter=WithVoteSummaries&quot;&gt;“It feels like comments have gotten more argumentative” from 2018&lt;/a&gt;  only got 1 (up)vote since 2018. (All the other checkin answers I checked show the same pattern: very little, if any, voting after the year ended.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This allows users to still have access to tools like editing and commenting which would otherwise be inaccessible with a lock.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2021-04-13T21:26:44.217" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11461" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-14T13:10:00.177" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;In a unique and untimely action, moderators influenced a discussion and a majority vote by making an &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; during a close voting period on one of, if not the, most contentious topics.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/44723&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the “don't guess the system” policy&lt;/a&gt; is the most recent discussion place in a long &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10139/44723&quot;&gt;list&lt;/a&gt; of meta-discussion on the topic. Two opposing answers received an unusually high amount of votes for meta as this is one of the most contentious topics. When the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/44723&quot;&gt;answer in favour of reverting our current policy&lt;/a&gt; eventually was ahead by one score, moderators proposed the second-highest scoring answer as the former status quo community consensus and future waypoint for discussion in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279/44723&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;. Since then, the lead of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/44723&quot;&gt;answer in favour of reverting our current policy&lt;/a&gt; extended and currently stands at a score of 33 (+57 -24) while the second-highest score is 27 (+58 -31) and represents the group that is in favour of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/44723&quot;&gt;keeping the old policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A few things about this are additionally remarkable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;After an unannounced, and to the onlooker arbitrary, voting period&#xA;of 3 months, the moderators decided to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/9805/6&quot;&gt;announce that the voting&#xA;failed to achieve a consensus and that the moderators thus would&#xA;enforce the old&#xA;policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;After the proclaimed voting period, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/44723&quot;&gt;keeping the old policy&#xA;answer&lt;/a&gt; was in the&#xA;lead at several points in time. At none of these opportune points in&#xA;time did the moderators decide to go ahead with the&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279/44723&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279/44723&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;claims that we should use it as a waypoint for discussion moving&#xA;forward that clarifies the moderators understanding and enforcement&#xA;of the policy. Instead of leaving it as a moderator statement on the&#xA;topic, they decided to make it into an &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt;. That&#xA;it is a proposal would mean that if the&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279/44723&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; is&#xA;successful, it would be a codified part of our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;, see  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/44723&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack&#xA;Exchange&lt;/a&gt; lists our&#xA;most dominant guidelines. If a meta post is part of our&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;, it gains or has a high degree of authority. To place&#xA;such a controversial policy in the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;, when the&#xA;concurrent discussion leans towards the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/44723&quot;&gt;answer in favour of&#xA;reverting our current&#xA;policy&lt;/a&gt; is an untimely&#xA;influence when it directly opposes the majority vote of a concurrent&#xA;community discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This usage of moderator authority is worrisome, even when it comes from a desire of helping us by clarifying moderator actions and enforcement. A mere statement that explains current moderator actions and enforcement that would have deliberately put forward that we currently lack a community consensus on this topic would have been good, but this untimely change was wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-10-25T14:35:19.257" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T14:35:19.257" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11462" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-20T11:24:15.093" Score="1" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ove the past number of years I've noticed an uptick in questions being closed for being &amp;quot;opinion based&amp;quot; and calls for questions to be closed for that reason. My understanding was that opinion based questions were on-topic for this stack (though they may fall foul of other rules which make them off-topic, for example: shopping questions).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, what makes a stackable opinion based question that is answerable on the stack? Can we quantify what the criteria are for this? Or maybe a slightly easier question, can we quantify the criteria that should result in an opinion based question being closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="36850" LastEditDate="2021-04-20T11:53:37.687" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T12:51:13.993" Title="Opinion based questions: on-topic and criteria for closing?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2021-04-20T19:08:58.340" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11463" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11464" CreationDate="2021-04-20T11:37:18.667" Score="5" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently proposed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/74128&quot;&gt;this suggested edit&lt;/a&gt; correcting a mistake in an answer to the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/23045/what-powers-do-elemental-mages-start-with&quot;&gt;What powers do Elemental Mages start with?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer originally stated (emphasis added):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This might not sound like much, but spells like &lt;strong&gt;Bolt&lt;/strong&gt;, Blast, Zephyr and Settle Storm are only available to a single type of elementalist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I replaced the spell Bolt, which is wrong, with the spell Healing, which is a correct possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suggested edit was unanimously rejected, and I think that might have been wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57687261#57687261&quot;&gt;I stated in chat&lt;/a&gt;, to double-check the edit suggestion one needs knowledge of the setting &amp;quot;50 Fathoms&amp;quot;, as the elemental assignment of spells is a 100% setting-specific rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did I overlook something, and the rejection was actually correct? If yes, why was it rejected?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For people finding this question in the future: As suggested, I removed the spell Bolt instead of replacing it and added an explanatory &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/23045/what-powers-do-elemental-mages-start-with/23056#comment497974_23056&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/23056/revisions&quot;&gt;The new edit&lt;/a&gt; was accepted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63221" LastEditorUserId="63221" LastEditDate="2021-04-26T11:54:46.067" LastActivityDate="2021-04-26T11:54:46.067" Title="Why was the edit suggestion correcting an error in this answer rejected?" Tags="|support|specific-question|editing|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11464" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11463" CreationDate="2021-04-20T11:44:19.660" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not one of the reviewers, but if I were given the review, I would have rejected it for precisely the reason you've listed for one of the edits you made:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I replaced the spell Bolt, which is wrong, with the spell Healing, which is a correct possibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact that it's a correct possibility, but not the definitively correct spell the answerer was referring to makes the edit wrong in my eyes. This type of correction is better suited as a comment, informing the answerer of their mistake and asking if they meant Healing (or some other spell) instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="36850" LastEditDate="2021-04-20T12:07:00.237" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T12:07:00.237" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11462" CreationDate="2021-04-20T12:51:13.993" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me start by trying to boil down the issue with (primarily) opinion based questions: The answers to such questions can't be properly evaluated on their &lt;em&gt;quality&lt;/em&gt;. That means (opposing) answers will be (up)voted for their &lt;em&gt;popularity&lt;/em&gt; instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have some means of identifying quality, most relevant here is being supported by experience based expertise (aka Good Subjective). Then, when evaluating a given question, there are two questions to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can there be a well founded and identifiable as good answer to this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it inviting answers which &lt;em&gt;aren't&lt;/em&gt; that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering that will come down to the curator's (ie. close votes) judgement. There are simply too many things that can be one way or the other to quantify it a lot better, at least as a way to cover for all questions.&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those two tester questions can be true and false independently, but should generally be edited so that 1. is obviously clear and 2. is false. If the needed edit is obvious, such as removing a &amp;quot;what are your ideas about this?&amp;quot; or some-such to remove 2., please just do that. Otherwise it'll need to be closed until those are clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And as a final note, sometimes we can't really tell what answers a question will get until they're in. Sometimes we might have concerns and give the question the benefit of the doubt and a trial by fire (maybe with a stern reminder about citing experience), or a question which looked fine will have answers which aren't. Either way, questions are sometimes closed based on their answers demonstrating them opinion based. Obviously that's a lot messier, and so there is a strong preference towards getting them fixed first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: You can still have question types where it becomes easier to identify good marks and issues, though adding specific rules is generally not gonna save a question type. See game rec.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T12:51:13.993" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11466" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-20T13:04:33.580" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What makes me happy as I visit RPGSE?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This was broken off from the other at the request of a few users)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I see a lot of community moderation activity with lots of different names.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;That's good.  While this sometimes can lead to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6925/23970&quot;&gt;help pile&lt;/a&gt; (thanks, @nitsua60)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've seen some new users arrive with good questions, and respond well to and get good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above observation is based on a year's worth of an active User's Experience, A User who likes this site and who, in the main, likes the people who come here and participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-04-20T13:25:00.110" LastActivityDate="2021-04-20T13:25:00.110" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11467" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-21T00:58:49.307" Score="11" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;On &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/183917/roll-xd6-keeping-highest-value-and-adding-1-for-each-duplicate-of-that-value/184036#184036&quot;&gt;this question,&lt;/a&gt;  a user provided an excellent mathematical derivation of a numerical question that had been asked and provide a plot of the results.  I thought that a different form of plot was a bit more instructive, and added it as another answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would it have been more appropriate to edit the first answer and append my plot to theirs?  OTOH, I wouldn't want them to be viewed as responsible for any errors I might have made in the plot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44125" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-22T07:38:16.713" LastActivityDate="2021-04-22T07:38:16.713" Title="What is the etiquette for adding supplemental information to a good answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|etiquette|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11468" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11467" CreationDate="2021-04-21T12:42:00.280" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Comments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Suggesting additional information to an answer is what comments are for. We accept their use for certain other things, but this is what they are primarily for. The hover text even reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use comments to ask for clarification or add more information. Avoid answering questions in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might have to do a bit of juggling to add a picture (upload in the answer box and copy the link to the comment), but that would be totally valid. Adding it as an edit is much more awkward, as it already has one graphical representation and your plot is made by a different method.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Or, to make it a full, separate answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you are using a separate method to the other two answers. And I am certainly a big fan of Monte Carlo as a method to analyze complicated dice rolls. It might not be necessary here, but is a useful tool to know about (and it often saves you dealing with all the messy probabilities). So you could expand your answer to be a full answer which explains the method you used. At the moment it is short of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A key reminder for whether something should be an answer or a comment to another answer, is whether that solves the problem independently of the other answers. And just a graph doesn't quite do that :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-04-21T12:59:35.210" LastActivityDate="2021-04-21T12:59:35.210" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11469" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-21T13:28:10.560" Score="8" ViewCount="122" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday, I got a notification informing me that I had received access to the Edit review queue. Today, I was notified that I had received access to the Reopen votes review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not to brag, but I've had over 20k rep for a long time, so I'm not sure why I'm being notified of privileges I've had for a long time. Can anyone clarify on why this is occurring?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-22T07:37:37.543" LastActivityDate="2021-04-22T18:01:19.333" Title="Why am I suddenly being notified of privileges?" Tags="|support|bug|user-interface|review|privileges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11470" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11469" CreationDate="2021-04-21T13:34:34.180" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;See here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/363485/new-onboarding-for-review-queues&quot;&gt;New onboarding for review queues&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are also showing a popover to users who earned access to review queues in the past, but have never done a review or haven't reviewed in the last 30 days. This popover is only appearing for the next 90 days. The goal is to engage users who may not have interacted with the queues since we made visual design changes and improved communication about suspensions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/363510/674198&quot;&gt;This answer&lt;/a&gt; highlights your issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The posting states,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are also showing a popover to users who earned access to review queues in the past, &lt;strong&gt;but have never done a review or haven't reviewed in the last 30 days&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am seeing the popover for queues where I have reviewed &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;within the past two days on the very same site&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; (specifically Stack Overflow).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At 13:41 on 4/22/21 &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-planned&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-planned&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-planned&lt;/a&gt; was added to the header of the answer by SE staff member &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/344828/kristinalustig&quot;&gt;kristinalustig♦&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-04-22T18:01:19.333" LastActivityDate="2021-04-22T18:01:19.333" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11437" CreationDate="2021-04-22T09:44:27.870" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There are too many first-time posts by members that do not get a Welcome message.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I have seen plenty of Welcome to SE messages in the comments of first-time posts, I have noticed that there are still quite a few that do not have one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see this as a collective &amp;quot;responsibility&amp;quot;. I would suggest it is important that we get this right as a community (especially the moderators and long-time or active members) - and that we keep getting it right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that in the long-term not providing a Welcome message damages the wealth of experience and knowledge that members could bring to the stack because it puts people off from contributing. This is anecdotal from friends who love RPGs and use RPG SE for answers, but got a very negative response when writing a firt post. Basically, they posted one answer and never bothered again. It's a shame.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I see a first time post being pulled apart,  criticised and voted down lots of times without so much as a simple &amp;quot;Hi&amp;quot; or Welcome message, it makes my skin crawl.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I view this as a problem that requires a collective on-going improvement&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may help to have a way of monitoring every so often how many first-time posts are getting a Welcome message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think in the long run it will pay off to encourage more active members and moderators to make sure a Welcome message is posted for all first posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36082" LastActivityDate="2021-04-22T09:44:27.870" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11472" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11473" CreationDate="2021-04-26T10:28:02.413" Score="5" ViewCount="136" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was in the process of drafting a minor frame challenge in a comment, and found myself thinking 'is this an appropriate use of comments?'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hit up the meta hoping to find some general guidance on how comments should be used, but I haven't been able to find anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the guidance around comments that I've received is framed negatively:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't use comments for extended discussion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't use comments for partial answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a simple, positive framing of what comments &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be used for, rather than what they should not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60918" LastActivityDate="2021-04-26T15:08:22.547" Title="What should comments be used for?" Tags="|discussion|comments|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11472" CreationDate="2021-04-26T10:33:22.133" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think I've found the answer to my own question in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;the Help center's guidance on comments&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;When should I comment?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should submit a comment if you want to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Request clarification from the author;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60918" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-04-26T13:55:37.983" LastActivityDate="2021-04-26T13:55:37.983" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11475" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-04-26T20:33:11.047" Score="3" ViewCount="271" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184413/&quot;&gt;Extra Attack &amp;amp; Eldritch Invocation Thirsting Blade&lt;/a&gt; was reopened after being closed as a dupe of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148507/&quot;&gt;Does this strict reading of the rules allow both Extra Attack and the Thirsting Blade warlock invocation to be used together?&lt;/a&gt;, despite asking about the same features and having a near exact same answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter question seems to have some additional details, but the new question is contained within and the important bits of the answers are the same. Should this question be a dupe, or what is that makes it different and a non-dupe despite having the same answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T22:06:23.033" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T22:06:23.033" Title="Should this Extra Attack + Thirsting Blade question be closed as a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|duplicate-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11475" CreationDate="2021-04-28T12:18:08.910" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is not a duplicate and should remain open.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184413/extra-attack-eldritch-invocation-thirsting-blade&quot;&gt;If I have the fighter&amp;#39;s Extra Attack feature and the warlock&amp;#39;s Thirsting Blade eldritch invocation, how many attacks can I make?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148507/does-this-strict-reading-of-the-rules-allow-both-extra-attack-and-the-thirsting&quot;&gt;Does this strict reading of the rules allow both Extra Attack and the Thirsting Blade warlock invocation to be used together?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will examine these questions according to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;these three duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; asks simply, &amp;quot;How many attacks do I have if I have Extra Attack and Thirsting Blade?&amp;quot; &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;, while very similar, is a substantively different question, which can be summarized as, &amp;quot;If I have Extra Attack and Thirsting Blade, do the Two-Weapon Fighting rules introduce a technicality that allows me to take advantage of both features?&amp;quot; &lt;em&gt;These are two different questions.&lt;/em&gt; One asks if Extra Attack and Thirsting Blade stack, one asks specifically about how the two interact with Two-Weapon Fighting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is it a subset situation? I think not. &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; (correctly) assumes that they normally do not stack and goes on to ask if a particular scenario presents a loop hole to this normal behavior. &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; is asking what the normal behavior is, so we don't have a subset situation. For an example of a &amp;quot;subset closure&amp;quot;, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176665/62294&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and its &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11253/62294&quot;&gt;associated meta discussion&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; has an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/148508/62294&quot;&gt;obvious answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;. The answer to each question is the same, despite the questions being different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are substantively different questions. It is not clear from &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; that it is being asked if Extra Attack and Thirsting Blade stack &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt;, as the focus of &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; is on their interaction with Two-Weapon Fighting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Criteria 2 is the only one that is met, we conclude that &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; should not be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T22:05:14.603" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T22:05:14.603" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11477" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="10002" CreationDate="2021-04-28T12:34:50.767" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;One of the best ways is to do some research first&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This article for &lt;a href=&quot;http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/modifying-classes&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e class modification&lt;/a&gt; is almost five years old.  It provides a conceptual framework around 'what each class is intended to be' and a few mechanical notes on class features.  It also provides two complete examples of how to modify an existing class.  And yet I see, time and again, homebrew review questions that don't follow that framework. (tip of the cap to the ones who do, however, there have been some very well done questions).  Two examples  of areas where one ought to tread cautiously are offered for all of the PHB classes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The monk’s Martial Arts feature was carefully worded to prevent    unintended combinations; this is why the feature does not treat unarmed strikes as a finesse weapon, since that could have unforeseen consequences in future material about finesse weapons that is appropriate for, say, a rapier or a dagger but not an unarmed strike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rogues rely chiefly on two features for both the class’s feel and its    strength in combat: Sneak Attack and Cunning Action. These are fundamental to the rogue, and Uncanny Dodge at 5th level is almost their equal in importance to the class. Leave these features as is, unless you have a powerful reason for changing anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The balance part is a bit tougher to estimate ahead of time, which is where asking for a homebrew review is helpful to any final form that a DM puts a custom class or sub class into play at their table. Play testing is recommended, but how to do that becomes very table centric.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As with anything in class design, be prepared to playtest your ideas and then make changes if things aren’t turning out the way you want them to. The first thing to do when creating a new class option is to figure out what that option’s unique aspect is, both in terms of the class’s underlying story and the option’s place in the campaign world. Figuring out the story behind the class option, and what kinds of characters you want to enable your players to create with it, is the most critical step in the process because it will serve as a guiding example for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T12:37:13.503" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T12:37:13.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11478" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11475" CreationDate="2021-04-28T14:39:34.283" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11475/should-this-extra-attack-thirsting-blade-question-be-closed-as-a-duplicate/11476#11476&quot;&gt;Thomas’s answer&lt;/a&gt; entirely, but I do want to expand on the third of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;doppelgreener’s suggested duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt; with respect to this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, I would argue, we &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; have a compelling reason for “covering Question A alone, separately from Question B.” (Question A here being the newer, basic question, and Question B being the original, highly technical question.) Even if Question B didn’t bring two-weapon fighting into things, the entire approach and audience for Question B is entirely different. Question A is a basic question for new players. Question B is a rules lawyer, who very well knows the basic rule, trying to find a loophole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions are valid, but directing people interested in the basic question to the highly-technical discussion of a possible loophole in the basic rule they seek isn’t appropriate or helpful. It’s very valuable to have the basic question answered, and then the question about the loophole would be an extension of that one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-04-28T22:00:33.267" LastActivityDate="2021-04-28T22:00:33.267" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11480" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-01T16:20:54.413" Score="12" ViewCount="271" Body="&lt;p&gt;I thought of this while reading the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11438/42375&quot;&gt;“this is DND-ish SE” answer&lt;/a&gt;. When the systems you play most have 0 and 11 questions, game tags aren’t a useful option to find questions interesting to you. How do you find questions that are helpful to read or for you to be able to answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As promising as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; tag sounds, there have only been less than 10 open questions asked with this tag in the last year or so. It’s just not an effective tag, especially for new questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Filters looked like promising as well but you can’t make a tag filter that only ignores tags. The alternative, making a filter that looks for every non-system tag that exists, is unmaintainable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even ignoring tags doesn’t work. &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P1Qvl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Ignoring DnD doesn’t create a useable question view.&lt;/a&gt; Questions that don’t require game/setting knowledge are filtered out because they happened to be tagged with a system tag. The remaining questions usually require knowledge of other systems you don’t play. (And because I’m likely going to play some DnD I would need to be continually switching out the list of ignored tags.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;At the cost of being hard to set up (you have to filter out DnD, Pathfinder, and then start ignoring other system tags which clutter the results), a search can almost work. Still, like before, there are questions that use a system tag when they don’t need a system answer that would be missed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Self-answering is a potential option but not everyone wants to do this.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-02T20:53:05.580" LastActivityDate="2021-05-04T17:08:47.180" Title="How can I find questions that don’t require system-/setting-specific knowledge to answer?" Tags="|discussion|questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11481" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11480" CreationDate="2021-05-03T17:26:04.243" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Search for tags that often describe system-agnostic problems.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some notable candidates that immediately come to mind are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/social&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;social&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;social&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;. In these three tags, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bsocial%5D+%5Bdnd-5e%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;29&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bproblem-players%5D+%5Bdnd-5e%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;127&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bproblem-gm%5D%5Bdnd-5e%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;41&lt;/a&gt; open question cotagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. Many of these questions will have system specific solutions, but there are often system agnostic solutions worth presenting as well. Your mileage may vary, just be sure that a system agnostic solution is appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To find more promising candidates, search &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; and see which tags often describe these system agnostic questions, and search for those tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Long Term: Use the system agnostic tag where appropriate.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've compiled a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bproblem-players%5D+-%5Bsystem-agnostic%5D+-%5Bdnd-5e%5D+-%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+-%5Bpathfinder-2e%5D+closed%3A0+-%5Bdnd-3.5e%5D+-%5Bstarfinder%5D+-%5Bgurps%5D+-%5Bdresden-fles%5D+-%5Bthe-dark-eye%5D+-%5Bfate-core%5D+-%5Bd20-modern%5D+-%5Bdungeons-and-dragons%5D+-%5Bdnd-4e%5D&quot;&gt;somewhat lengthy list of questions&lt;/a&gt; tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; that do not have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; or any system tag&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;. I'm not saying every question there needs the tag, but I'm sure it would be appropriate for some of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 I haven't elimated all of the system tags from this search yet, but I got most of them.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T17:50:48.927" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T17:50:48.927" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11482" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-03T18:40:55.637" Score="5" ViewCount="215" Body="&lt;p&gt;I notice that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; tag has been added again. My personal opinion is that it is unnecessary. Seeing as the user who has added it most recently rolled back my standard procedure removal edit, I want to try to get a consensus before going ahead and rolling back edits to the questions where they added it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; turns out to be useful, then it might apply to about 60 questions - how should we approach adding the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; to those questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T21:21:22.087" LastActivityDate="2021-05-05T14:35:20.060" Title="Is the [simulacrum] tag a necessary addition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11483" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-03T19:24:55.600" Score="4" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;Every time I post an answer to my question or someone makes a small suggestion I respond and then I say something along the lines of &amp;quot;Thanks&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Thank you&amp;quot;. This ends up in my answer/comment getting deleted. Why is this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="70815" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T21:21:58.477" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T21:21:58.477" Title="Why do my answers and comments keep getting shut down because I say &quot;thank you&quot;?" Tags="|support|answers|comments|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11485" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11482" CreationDate="2021-05-03T19:42:36.590" Score="0" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's not a good tag&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulacrum in 5e is an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt; spell that makes a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/construct&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;construct&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;construct&lt;/a&gt;. Both would work. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7520/52137&quot;&gt;A tag for a single spell is not good&lt;/a&gt; and it is general consensus &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; to do it: with some few exceptions, single spell tags are far too narrow to be useful. It currently is the only question with that tag, making it even less useful to find others. The other two tags cover the use, I don't see a reason to add a single spell tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even worse: simulacrum can be literally anything &lt;strong&gt;entirely different&lt;/strong&gt; from a list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpggeek.com/rpg/10013/simulacrum-rpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Simulacrum RPG&lt;/a&gt; basing on TSR-D&amp;amp;D&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/328240/Simulacrum-Umbra&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Simulacrum Umbra&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.nobleknight.com/Products/Simulacrum-Magazine&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;1998-2007 RPG magazine&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://podtail.com/en/podcast/simulacrum-a-numenera-actual-play/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Numenera Podcast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://whitewolf.fandom.com/wiki/Simulacrum_(DTD)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;has Simulacra (sg.Simulacrum)&lt;/a&gt; as part of the God Machine.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Promethean: The Created describes the characters as Simulacrum.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://fhtagn-rpg.de/simulacrum&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The software to generate FHTAGN Characters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Simulacra in their sense of 'figurine looking like A' are mentioned repeatedly in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ars-magica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ars-magica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ars-magica&lt;/a&gt;, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://arsmagica.fandom.com/wiki/Witchwood_of_the_Unseelie_Forest&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.artstation.com/artwork/3odW8m&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Splat&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.breakaway.pub/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Breakaway RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A Golem-type-creature in &lt;a href=&quot;https://aonsrd.com/TemplateGrafts.aspx?ItemName=Robot%20Simulacrum&amp;amp;Family=Planashar&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;starfinder&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;in the DragonAge RPG a Simulacrum is the protective system that a Necromancer Master gets.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the first two can be protected against by proper tagging, the other are going down to make finding an overarching concept that covers all (but the RPG and magazines) almost impossible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it should be a good tag, it needs to be &lt;strong&gt;non&lt;/strong&gt; centered on D&amp;amp;D one, and here's the crux: the only overarching concept that anything but the first 4 have in common is, that they use the word literally as &amp;quot;in the likeness off&amp;quot;, but coin it on artificial constructs or the means to make a character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T20:53:50.250" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T20:53:50.250" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11483" CreationDate="2021-05-03T19:46:28.040" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Answers must answer the question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers&quot;&gt;help center article on answer deletion&lt;/a&gt; (italics mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that &lt;strong&gt;do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed&lt;/strong&gt;. This includes answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;commentary on the question or other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asking another, different question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;“thanks!” or “me too!” responses&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;exact duplicates of other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;barely more than a link to an external site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;not even a partial answer to the actual question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For comments, see here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1174&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T19:46:28.040" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11487" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11482" CreationDate="2021-05-03T19:47:14.790" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Actually, I think this tag is fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason we don't have too many tags like this (and thus usually don't tag like it) is that we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7520/52137&quot;&gt;decided not to have tags for individual spells&lt;/a&gt;. You'll see one of the artefacts of that in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/spells/synonyms&quot;&gt;synonyms&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, certain systems will implement certain concepts as specific spells, and (for one reason or another) the name of the spell will be the same as the general concept. Star examples here are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/polymorph&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;polymorph&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;polymorph&lt;/a&gt;. Whether a given concept is worthy of a tag is something handle on a case by case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; passes muster. Specifically, the concept of a constructed (partial) copy or duplicate of a creature. And while 5e classes it as an illusion spell, it isn't really an illusion as makes sense outside the classifications of that game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a possible excerpt to help its usage:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about simulacra, illusory or constructed replica or duplica of other creatures etc. as they appear in various RPGs, such as with the spells of the same name in different editions of D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-05-03T21:38:21.850" LastActivityDate="2021-05-03T21:38:21.850" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11480" CreationDate="2021-05-03T20:59:13.243" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Most days, you can't, and you need to be okay with that.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't answer questions about D&amp;amp;D 5E mechanics at all. My top non-system tags are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;. The questions I've answered under these tags tend to have the following things true about them, even if they're tagged with a system I don't answer mechanics questions for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;they don't mention system-specific mechanics in their title&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;they tend to attract a lot of answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, seeing mechanics in the title requires you to know a system well enough to recognize its mechanical elements, like spells and character classes. And if you're contributing to a question that has a lot of answers already, you'll really need to make a standout answer in order to get any attention on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming up with a good self-answered Q&amp;amp;A might actually be the easiest option. At least if you're playing a system with very few questions about it, it's easy to make sure it's not a duplicate! As long as you keep it to like one a day, and the question is a full description of a tricky problem you or someone in your playgroup has actually encountered in running the system, you're probably solid. See this Meta Q&amp;amp;A for more guidance: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1655&quot;&gt;How legit is it to ask &amp;amp; answer some questions about my favorite RPG system (that I have contributed some small material to)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most days, I can't find a question on the site to answer. And I've learned to be okay with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Admittedly, this is because I rarely go history-diving anymore. The systems I do answer mechanics questions about have slightly better representation on-site, so when I history-dove, it was mostly for those rather than trying to get the whole history of, say, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/roleplaying&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;roleplaying&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;roleplaying&lt;/a&gt;. There are mechanics questions where somebody already got the answer right, and questions with lots of answers where I don't think I'll be able to provide a usefully distinct perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2021-05-04T17:08:47.180" LastActivityDate="2021-05-04T17:08:47.180" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11489" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-04T15:12:24.497" Score="-3" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;Most Tags generally are meant to be generic. That means that they should &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; be specific to any one game unless they need to be specific to a game. Such a game-specific tag is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aspects&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aspects&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aspects&lt;/a&gt; belonging to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; like sap belongs into trees. But it makes no sense to have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-dnd&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/armor-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;armor-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;armor-dnd&lt;/a&gt;, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/armor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;armor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;armor&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; and can look for them together with the appropriate game to get fitting questions. Those two are proper generic tags: they say just &amp;quot;this is for armor&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;attacking&amp;quot; pretty much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-slots&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-slots&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-slots&lt;/a&gt; is apparently supposed to be a generic tag, or so I was told. But its usage guide had a hard reference to D&amp;amp;D-esque games (D&amp;amp;D itself and Pathfinder) as &amp;quot;commonly found in X&amp;quot; and the tag-wiki still contains a similar reference. The first is bad, the second is ok, as the wiki should describe what is behind the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But generic is not how it is used: of all the questions that have that tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-slots+-pathfinder-1e+-pathfinder-2e+-pathfinder-society+-pathfinder-beginner-box+-pathfinder-2e-playtest+-dnd-5e+-dnd-3.5e+-dnd-4e+-dnd-adventurers-league+-dnd-3e+-dnd-beyond+-dnd-bx+-dnd-next-playtest+-dnd-4e-character-builder+-dnd-becmi+-dnd-encounters+-dnd-insider+-dnd-miniatures-game+-dnd-holmes-basic&quot;&gt;only 2 do not have either a [DnD*] or a [Pathfinder*] tag&lt;/a&gt; - one of which is Pathfinder in Space (Starfinder) and the other is an unspecified D&amp;amp;D-esque. So even as the tag was un-specified and generic, for most of its existence, it is used as a D&amp;amp;D-esque-only tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such tags that carry a reference to a specific game don't feel appropriate &lt;strong&gt;at all&lt;/strong&gt; on a non-D&amp;amp;D-esque game question. Questions that might need such a tag won't get that tag because the usage help says &amp;quot;This is a mechanic found for example in X&amp;quot;. That can (and &lt;strong&gt;will&lt;/strong&gt;) be read as &amp;quot;this is for the mechanic from X&amp;quot;. So if you ask about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; spell slots, the (old) usage guidelines make it feel inappropriate to use it at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, unless we actually DO have a tag for a specific game, we &lt;strong&gt;should not&lt;/strong&gt; have any game in the usage guidelines to make it feel appropriate in every system, right? So let's make the tagging system a little less centric on any specific game when the tag actually is meant to be generic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should strive to make generic tags really generic. Accordingly, we should remove any &lt;strong&gt;unnecessary&lt;/strong&gt; references to specific games from the &lt;strong&gt;usage guidelines&lt;/strong&gt; of proper generic tags where we find them, and usages such as &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;Found commonly in Games like X&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; should be discouraged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My point is: don't point to any system in the usage guideline of a tag that is generic, or it becomes not generic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-04T20:02:15.067" LastActivityDate="2021-05-05T18:57:47.717" Title="Generic Tags should be Generic" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11490" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-04T18:36:28.670" Score="9" ViewCount="276" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14311/62294&quot;&gt;Why do characters with a high prime requisite gain bonus XP?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question presents some information, then asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the reason for this rule? Did the game's designers ever explain it, either officially or anecdotally?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a &amp;quot;designer reasons&amp;quot; question that should be closed, since &amp;quot;designer reasons&amp;quot; questions are off topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-04T20:18:55.603" LastActivityDate="2021-05-06T09:17:11.907" Title="Is this question about experience points in earlier versions of D&amp;D off topic as a &quot;rule intent&quot; or &quot;designer reasons&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11490" CreationDate="2021-05-04T18:57:10.493" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, it's not off topic- it seems to fit &amp;quot;history of gaming&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll borrow from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14311/why-do-characters-with-a-high-prime-requisite-gain-bonus-xp#comment499214_14311&quot;&gt;a comment that @doppelgreener made&lt;/a&gt; under the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is first and foremost trying to understand why a rule exists. It is asking about the designers' own statements secondarily to that; their statements are tangential to the rule's function.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the kind of question where both experience and expertise can provide an answer. Granted, I don't think it fits into the &amp;quot;what problem are you trying to solve&amp;quot; category, but it certainly fits into our &amp;quot;History of Gaming&amp;quot; broad category as it establised a precedent for at least one other game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's face it: there's damned little expertise available (in particular after folks like RSConley, ExTSR and a few others who have been around that long stopped visiting) on this site, for how interrelated the OD&amp;amp;D, AD&amp;amp;D 1e, and BECMI rules are.  A veritable Gordian knot to try and unpack unless you were around first hand (at TSR, like ExTSR was) or second hand (as I and a lot of old fart were as we consumed the products as they came out).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thus offered an answer, though I believe the the 'history of gaming' tag may be the better choice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of what was published in OD&amp;amp;D was &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; explained.  Or, if it was, one had to soak it in as Dragon/Strat Review articles came out.  While some restrospective &amp;quot;here's why we did that&amp;quot; is available on places like dragonfoot forums, it's not comprehensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the later OD&amp;amp;D derived systems came out, particularly Gary's Magnum Opus, AD&amp;amp;D (1e), some stuff got a fuller explanation (usually in the DMG) on what was behind it.  And some never did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll add to may answer once I dig into a few other blogs among the D&amp;amp;D/RPG archeologists, but the evidence in the AD&amp;amp;D 1e PHB seems to me to explain what was going on when EGG put that terse bonus into the original book: which was tightly constrained by space, and which got ported into BECMI.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is in BECMI - cited in the question - could easily be explained by @ExTSR, who wrote it, but he stopped feeling welcome here a while back. (Separate topic, and water under the bridge if my last discussion with mxy on that topic is any indication).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-05-04T19:18:27.533" LastActivityDate="2021-05-04T19:18:27.533" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11492" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11490" CreationDate="2021-05-05T13:11:17.857" Score="0" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is a &lt;em&gt;textbook example&lt;/em&gt; of a designer reasons question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we look at the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/14311/revisions&quot;&gt;revisions to the post&lt;/a&gt; we can see that up until the most recent revision, the question &lt;strong&gt;explicitly asked for designer reasons&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did the game's designers ever explain it, either officially or anecdotally?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ThomasMarkov, with &lt;em&gt;zero&lt;/em&gt; input from the original author (who has not logged into this site in over 5 years), removed this line, and then started this meta question about whether the question under discussion is a designer reasons question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The complicated history of the D&amp;amp;D versions involved &lt;em&gt;has no bearing&lt;/em&gt; because the asker &lt;em&gt;explicitly asked for designer reasons&lt;/em&gt;. If the asker had explicitly asked for the history of this rule, or if there was any lore associated with it, then that would not be a designer reasons question. They didn't ask that, they asked why the designers made that rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2021-05-05T13:11:17.857" CommentCount="21" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11482" CreationDate="2021-05-05T14:35:20.060" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per our help,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question.&#xA;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be&#xA;able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined&#xA;categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are&#xA;interesting or relevant to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, questions about whether this tag matches some weak consensus from six years ago are red herrings: we need to ask if this tag will help connect experts to questions that play to their expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For most spells in D&amp;amp;D, the answer is &amp;quot;no.&amp;quot; No-one has peculiar expertise in Scorching Ray, becasue there's not much confusion or controversy there. Any questions someone has about Scorching Ray have an overwhelming tendency to really be questions about how spells work generally (e.g. &amp;quot;can I light a candle with it?&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A small handful of spells are just complicated, deeply situational, or both. The 3e Polymorph series of spells and every incarnation of Wish fit this description, and both come up very frequently. I can easily imagine someone following either of those tags, because they do require specific expertise and they do come up all the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulacrum is harder to imagine fitting that mold. However, that there are 60 questions which could reasonably be tagged with it suggests that it comes up often enough to be worth tagging, and that RevanantBacon is defending it as a tag suggests that he is interested in following it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, underall, Simulacrum sounds like it should be a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comes with a big caveat: I think it's worth looking hard at scope for these spells. Does the &amp;quot;simulacrum&amp;quot; expertise apply to all editions, or is it specific to the 5E spell? The same applies to other spells too: Wish is likely fairly universal (despite the different costs between editions), but Polymorph behaves fairly differently in 3e/5E.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2021-05-05T14:35:20.060" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11494" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11490" CreationDate="2021-05-05T17:24:39.397" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the question's fine and on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The person has a concrete problem they're focused on: they've identified a rule, and they don't understand the function of the rule such that it exists. They're asking us, the experts, to explain what this rule is here to do. And the experts have answered, outlining for us the practical problem that occurs in gameplay in the absence of this rule that its existence addresses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968/1204&quot;&gt;our FAQ for asking about designer intent&lt;/a&gt;, we're directed to a different way to ask questions about intent: “What impact will it have on the game if this rule is changed in this way?” Well, this question's functionally asking this: what impact would it have on the game if the rule was gone, and thus, why is it there? It worked well and received good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, the question &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; prompts for designer explanations. I believe this is an entirely secondary, tangential prompt as one potential angle for seeking an answer to their primary question, which remains: what's this rule here for? That follow-up question doesn't need to be there because it's not remotely core to the question and is getting it targeted for closure incorrectly, and it was in fact removed a short while after this meta question was opened (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57876593#57876593&quot;&gt;based on conversation in chat&lt;/a&gt;) but has since been put back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I don't get is why that secondary question is what we're looking at so intently. Earlier today we received another question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184746/how-do-you-teach-someone-else-how-to-play-dd&quot;&gt;How do you teach someone else how to play D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt;. It was asking how to introduce someone to D&amp;amp;D. It did so by asking what videos or so on we should show the player. This would get it closed for resource recommendation. We can tell &lt;em&gt;plainly&lt;/em&gt; however this is not the main thrust of the question or the person's problem—they just want to introduce someone to the game. So I updated the question to ask that part out loud:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to teach this person a basic grasp of the game, and let the rest of us fill in gaps as they come up. How can I teach them this? Are there any helpful resources, online guides, videos I ought to give this person for example?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question's open, doing well, and has received several good answers guiding this person on introducing a new player to the game. We &lt;em&gt;didn't&lt;/em&gt; close it as a resource recommendation, and still haven't, despite the fact it includes a request for resource recommendations, because we can tell it's a good clear on-topic question and the resource recommendation is entirely secondary. (I didn't make this edit to sneakily make a point, either, to be clear—I just made this edit because it's what the question needed, and now hours later while writing this answer noticed the parallel.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think in closing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14311/62294&quot;&gt;Why do characters with a high prime requisite gain bonus XP?&lt;/a&gt; as a designer reasons question we're doing ourselves a disservice. It's &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; worked well, and there's something for us to learn about how this question got structured such that it worked. There's no problem we're solving in closing it. I don't think closing it is following the spirit &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; the letter of the law in any fashion, it's just ... a perfectly fine question. Leave it open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-05-06T09:17:11.907" LastActivityDate="2021-05-06T09:17:11.907" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11489" CreationDate="2021-05-05T18:57:47.717" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think that the suggested approach is probably formally correct, but operationally not very impactful&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that, if we were building an SE-like site from the ground up, this might be a principle that would be pretty sensible to incorporate. For maximum searchability and flexibility of archived content it would be favorable to have tags be as generic as possible. In that sense, it wouldn't matter if D&amp;amp;D were totally unique in the TTRPG space in having a concept called (or described as) &lt;em&gt;spell slots&lt;/em&gt;. If someone wants to look for content about spell slots &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; D&amp;amp;D they can search two tags rather than one very specific tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But in practice I don't see much difference arising from properly generic tags outside of changing how people search for questions and answers. In my observation, vanishingly few users come to RPG.SE looking for cross-game information in the first place. My imagination isn't anywhere the final word, but I don't have much idea of what a user looking for content tagged [attack] might ultimately be seeking, or how they would use search results for systemless [attack]-tagged questions and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if it is better from an information-theoretical or database-architectural perspective to use more atomized tags, if virtually all searches apply a generic tag with a system tag then we haven't necessarily gained much in any dimension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tags are dynamic and (ideally) responsive to observed use-cases&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We regularly add and remove tags, generally in response to a perceived need based on some observed event. If we have an [attack-dnd] tag (which I would not support, incidentally), it would be because some collection of users felt that such a tag would make it easier to navigate stack content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The use-case I envision for more strictly generic tags would be more along the lines of &amp;quot;I want to find information on spell slots, but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; for D&amp;amp;D (or at least not only for D&amp;amp;D)&amp;quot;. In that situation I believe that a hypothetical compound tag, such as [dnd-spell-slots] would be divided. But it wouldn't matter, as a practical issue, until there was content that required that extra discrimination. I can't call to mind good examples which suggest that there is a practical benefit to be gained from atomizing tags right now (a single question about &lt;em&gt;Legend of the Five Rings&lt;/em&gt; spell slots would be enough to shift that, for example, but it only becomes an issue once such a question is posted).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;RPG.SE fits with specific questions more so than generic ones&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question about spell slots which is game-system agnostic strikes me as one likely to be pretty nebulous in a way that the SE format doesn't favor (at least on this stack). If you are interested in limiting use of magical skills while designing a game, then sure, a generic tag would be helpful. But would a generic &lt;em&gt;spell slot&lt;/em&gt; tag be helpful, or would we need a broader tag like [magic-limitation] (or something that sounds less stupid than that)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And even then, broad concepts might have system-specific applications that make questions spanning multiple games a bit hard to define. Games with combat tend to have some sort of health system and capacity to resist and survive damage from attacks, which we might call &amp;quot;defense&amp;quot; and tag accordingly. But what question would focus on [defense] in a way that would supersede the radical differences in combat mechanics between, say, D&amp;amp;D and the old &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; games?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may be a failure of my imagination again, as above, but I'm having trouble thinking of a question that would deal with something like spell slots generically but still be properly answerable (in the SE mode). If practical application of generic tags is that they must be accompanied by specific system tags then the distinction becomes pretty fine. Generic tags might still be better in that it makes tags easier to intuit (you don't need to know the abbreviation l5r to find the l5r-spell-slots tag, perhaps), but that doesn't seem like a huge advantage to me (as system tags appear to usually accompany the dense system-plus-concept tags). That said, if compound tags really are always accompanied by separate system tags then the compound tagging is superfluous anyhow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Game system terminology seems to me to be pro-jargon, generally&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG games seem, to me, to be developed and marketed in ways which emphasize the ways they are unique, especially in differentiation from powerhouse franchises like D&amp;amp;D. This tends to lead to diversity in game terms, but also in different mechanics defined by terms that overlap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not too familiar with &lt;em&gt;Legend of the Five Rings&lt;/em&gt;, but a quick search on spell slot mechanics suggests to me that the application of the spell slot idea is really different from D&amp;amp;D. They do have a common function in limiting how much magic can be performed within an arbitrary timeframe, but don't appear to use the phrase &lt;em&gt;spell slot&lt;/em&gt; in precisely similar ways. Even if I wanted to examine content about limiting magical abilities in a game, I'm not sure that a generic [spell-slot] tag would be the ideal way to do that; something still more generic might be better (to cover games with a similar idea but that don't use the exact phrase &amp;quot;spell slot&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Terms that are, themselves, more generic and therefore more likely to appear in multiple systems may still have strongly system-specific applications. As an example, D&amp;amp;D 5e's inspiration mechanic allows Advantage (another system-specific use of a very generic word), which is itself a specific mechanic around how D&amp;amp;D 5e uses a d20. If another game comes along, perhaps &lt;em&gt;Bungalows and Bad Guys&lt;/em&gt;, which also uses a mechanic called &amp;quot;inspiration&amp;quot;, is it reasonable to assume that there are usefully overlapping questions between the two just because they use the same common word? Are those two mechanics &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; similar than a game which copies the D&amp;amp;D 5e spell slot system exactly but calls them &amp;quot;spell ability tokens&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Aside from being formally better (which I do believe), I don't see much in the way of &lt;em&gt;practical&lt;/em&gt; advantages to enforcing generic tags stack-wide. The argument I really want to see in favor of this idea is a collection of questions (whether they currently exist on the site or not) about cross-system concepts where the use of generic tags would be useful.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastActivityDate="2021-05-05T18:57:47.717" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11496" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-11T19:40:11.293" Score="12" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have not found any information about this on the website, but if I missed something blatant, please tell me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have posted numerous homebrew features on this website , and I have used advice gotten from this site to balance most of them. If, one day, I publish the subclass, would I be required to give any or all of the following credits?:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To the website as a whole&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To the individual users that gave feedback&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just to the users whose feedback I used&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or would I not be required to give any credit?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user70687" LastEditorDisplayName="user70687" LastEditDate="2021-05-14T16:16:17.077" LastActivityDate="2021-05-14T16:16:17.077" Title="If I posted a homebrew feature on this site, and plan to publish it (after revising based on feedback), what credits am I required to give?" Tags="|support|copyright|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11498" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-13T00:52:14.330" Score="9" ViewCount="300" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the years one thing has become very clear here on RPG.SE: &lt;em&gt;we expect at least &lt;strong&gt;some&lt;/strong&gt; amount of research done by the querent before they ask a question here&lt;/em&gt;; Our Help Centre page on &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How do I ask a good question?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; states that you should &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search&quot;&gt;search&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;research&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;, the up and down vote button tooltips state that &amp;quot;this question does or does not show research effort&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem is that there's no clear guidance on what research we actually expect users to do and, in my opinion, the aforementioned Help Centre page is worded more toward suggesting that just searching the site is sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And thus this question arises: &lt;strong&gt;What are the research expectations of questions on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note:&lt;/em&gt; this question is intended to hopefully be a quick-link resource to provide guidance on best-practises when asking questions. It is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; intended to establish a &amp;quot;law hammer&amp;quot; policy, be about how to deal with poorly researched questions, or how we should &lt;em&gt;judge&lt;/em&gt; whether a question shows sufficient research effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related, mostly on how to handle lack-of-research-shown questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5270/14878&quot;&gt;What Do We Do With &amp;quot;Read The Book To Me&amp;quot; Questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9860/14878&quot;&gt;How should we handle questions with a straightforward answer that only requires basic research?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5743/14878&quot;&gt;Should the DMG be an assumed resource?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5554/14878&quot;&gt;Are basic questions frowned upon here? Should they be?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14878" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-05-13T01:05:54.090" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T18:27:53.520" Title="What are the research expectations of questions on RPG Stack Exchange?" Tags="|discussion|questions|research|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11499" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11498" CreationDate="2021-05-13T06:51:55.983" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I have no expectation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How do I ask a good question?&lt;/a&gt;, research &amp;quot;improve[s] your chances of getting an answer&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;helps everyone&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;saves us from reiterating obvious answers&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;helps you get a more specific and relevant answer&amp;quot;. I do agree, that the description of research should cast its net wider than just RPG SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A well-researched question is a &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; question - one likely to attract &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; answers, upvotes and all the joy and happiness that brings to the world. However, a poorly or non-researched question is not (necessarily) a &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; question. Similarly, a &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; question may or may not be the result of poor research - the research might be exemplary but the OP may just have drawn the wrong conclusion from it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I firmly believe that each of us with the power to vote and VTC has to draw their own conclusions on what the right level of research is. The &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; level of research is, to my mind, like &amp;quot;reasonable doubt&amp;quot; - a matter of individual judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm concerned that if there are stated criteria, even without the &amp;quot;law hammer&amp;quot; problems, then that will lead to questions with needless verbiage explaining the research they have done and why that didn't answer that question and how they looked again and I'm falling asleep just thinking about how boring that's going to make things and then I'll vote it down for wasting my time irrespective of the exemplary research because I'm not interested in reviewing an academic thesis and I think this sentence has now made its point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have meta posts (thankyou for the links) that illustrate specific problem areas and I think it should be left to those rather than trying to construct a one size fits nobody solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="6203" LastEditDate="2021-05-14T11:24:40.197" LastActivityDate="2021-05-14T11:24:40.197" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11498" CreationDate="2021-05-13T07:47:11.977" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I Hope For A Good Faith Effort, For Which There Is No Acid Test&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The headline really sums it up for me:  I hope the querents are making good faith efforts to answer their own questions before coming here, but there is nothing other than a personal gut check on my part to estimate if that good faith effort has been met.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why?  At the very least, we have a very high variation in expertise among our querents.  Some folks have been playing RPGs for a decade or more, have a problem that vexes them, and they might stumble across us as part of their own good faith research (which in that case might be &amp;quot;a Google search.&amp;quot;)  Others might be extremely new to the hobby and trying to figure out a complicated game like D&amp;amp;D 5e or Pathfinder 2e.  We also have wide variations in language skills, and wide variations in age and maturity.  So just on those bases the level of &amp;quot;good faith&amp;quot; is going to vary widely with the askers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also prefer strongly to err on the side of caution.  I don't post questions on this stack, but I do on others, and I know my level of &amp;quot;research effort&amp;quot; varies from question to question, depending on how urgently I need an answer, and what my own level of knowledge is.  In retrospect, I've asked some howlingly stupid questions in my time, but always in good faith-- sometimes when you're flailing, you &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; you're flailing.  But from outside my head, there's no real evidence of research because I was &lt;em&gt;just that confused.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I have sympathy for people asking questions that are &lt;em&gt;right there in the rulebook&lt;/em&gt; because they lack the expertise to get to the right section, or they gave up just five minutes too soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(And as a side note, I've asked some really broad and stupid questions because of my ignorance, and I've asked some really technically astute details-digging questions because I was a frustrated expert or advanced amateur.  I can't say I've noticed much of difference, as to which get more enthusiastic answers.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anything, I might even state my position just a little more weakly:  &lt;strong&gt;Don't ask questions in bad faith.&lt;/strong&gt;  Again, that's a subjective gut check, and they tend to reveal themselves after multiple questions:  Don't ask a string of questions trying to guide me to the answer you want.  Don't ask repeated questions about (say) how some spell works when they can all be answered by the rule book.  Don't ask repeated questions asking me to find some rule for you.  Don't ask me to read the book for you, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I firmly believe this cannot be articulated in a policy, or boiled down to a checklist, or distilled into pithy wisdom.  This is a matter of individual judgment, conscience, up/downvotes, and if necessary close-votes.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2021-05-13T07:47:11.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11498" CreationDate="2021-05-13T12:24:27.747" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What I, a unique individual, &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; look for&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These lists are incomplete, they are not a checklist, they are not necessary nor sufficient for me to call a question &amp;quot;well researched&amp;quot;. They are just things I tend to leave comments asking for further clarification or leave a downvote for lack of demonstrated research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like Novak said, we have a wide range of expertise from users and a wide range across numerous other variables like age and language mastery. Every question is a unique case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a social question, about table dynamics or problematic players or GMs or something similar:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have you asked other people how they feel about the situation?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What has been tried and discussed already regarding the situation?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How did that go?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you provide links to related questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a rules interaction or interpretation or confusion question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you quote the part of the rules that are confusing you?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they are confusing you?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you explain where/that you have already looked for more rules?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you provide links to related questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a history question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What have you already found out and researched?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you provide links to related questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a list-answered question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What have you already found so far?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Did you provide links to related questions?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-05-13T12:24:27.747" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11503" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11504" CreationDate="2021-05-13T13:55:14.407" Score="7" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suppose we have a new question that needs substantial body edits and some tags. If I do not intend to do the substantial body edits immediately, should I refrain from adding the needed tags?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-14T07:16:23.063" LastActivityDate="2021-05-16T03:53:24.513" Title="Should we refrain from tag-only edits to recent questions that also need substantial body edits?" Tags="|support|tags|questions|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11504" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11503" CreationDate="2021-05-13T14:09:38.683" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Nothing is &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; with just editing tags&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe you just doesn't have the time and/or energy to go through editing the entire body of the question and so you only edit the tags, which are, for me, a much less taxing edit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I honestly can't see anything &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; with such an action. The question was already recently active, so the bump won't do anything. The in-line tag edit function exists solely to make such edits easier to perform. And, it in no way prevents other users from actually editing the body of the question into a more acceptable form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'll point out that this applies to both new and old questions. In fact, if you stumble upon an old, open question that is in need of significant body edits, editing the tags and bumping the question is probably a good thing as it will increase visibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, should you update the tags of old questions that don't need significant body edits just to organize the site better for search functionality and the like? Probably don't do it to a million questions at once and flood the front page, one question edit won't do any harm, but this is also out of scope for the question asked here and we already have other Meta posts discussing more similar situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7502&quot;&gt;Is it irresponsible to bump numerous questions by adding tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9112&quot;&gt;What are the guidelines for editing many questions in a short period of time?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps of note, is that such edits do not progress any badges other than the Editor badge. Do with this information what you will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that if the question is &lt;em&gt;closed&lt;/em&gt; then there are other reasons why you probably &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to edit just the tags (or at least, there are reasons not to edit the body unless you are making significant changes). This is because editing the body will often put the question into the review queue, while editing the tags does not. So in these cases, avoid minor fixes to the body of the question, but tag edits will work just fine. Some questions/answers about this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/196078&quot;&gt;Shog9's answer (on MSE) listing the criteria for a question to automatically appear in the reopen queue&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10065&quot;&gt;Why shouldn&amp;#39;t I edit a question that has been closed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8634&quot;&gt;Should closed questions be edited without fixing the question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-16T03:53:24.513" LastActivityDate="2021-05-16T03:53:24.513" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11505" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11506" CreationDate="2021-05-14T12:06:16.970" Score="8" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently reviewed a suggested edit and this is what I saw:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QemvO.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QemvO.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; appears twice, once as though it were removed, and once as though it were added. Is this a bug? What does this mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-14T22:48:43.317" Title="On a suggested edit, what is indicated by a tag being both red and green?" Tags="|support|bug|tags|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11506" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11505" CreationDate="2021-05-14T12:20:28.723" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;That's not a suggested edit thing, that's a tag order thing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Main meta Q on this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/56216/681403&quot;&gt;Diff shows tag being added and removed in the same revision&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer to which explains:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tagging system automatically sorts tags based on how many times they're used. However, this is relatively new, so when a new edit is processed for an old post, the system sees the sort as a delete and re-insert because it is now in a new position.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the time since that question was last edited, we have gotten net more &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; questions than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; questions, so the former is now sorted first, unfortunately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-05-14T22:48:43.317" LastActivityDate="2021-05-14T22:48:43.317" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11507" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-15T14:47:02.337" Score="3" ViewCount="238" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt; tag which applies to all kinds of various things. Should we add a synonym of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; to it for the more than 60 questions about volume calculation?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Or would a separate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; tag be a good addition?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or are both options unhelpful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-15T21:41:39.570" LastActivityDate="2021-05-21T12:50:33.883" Title="Should we add [volume] as a synonym to the [3d-space] tag? Or would a separate [volume] tag be a good addition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11508" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11507" CreationDate="2021-05-15T15:17:52.557" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Just add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt; where applicable.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; was created recently and is presently on zero questions. We don’t need to create it and make it a synonym. Just use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt; already covers questions about volume calculations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions that primarily involve calculations, coordinates, and movement within the imagined 3-dimensional space of the game world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-05-15T15:27:56.933" LastActivityDate="2021-05-15T15:27:56.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11507" CreationDate="2021-05-15T16:28:47.083" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Add volume considerations to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weight&lt;/a&gt; tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of just making weight about weight, we can call it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weights-and-measures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weights-and-measures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weights-and-measures&lt;/a&gt; and let it handle those types of questions.  The idea of handling object weights fits nicely with handling their other physical properties and fits better than trying to shoe-horn 3d-space into handling volume.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize this is a very simple answer,but I think this would be a simple solution to this issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-05-21T12:50:33.883" LastActivityDate="2021-05-21T12:50:33.883" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11507" CreationDate="2021-05-16T16:46:33.997" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should restore the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag usage for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt; is about 3d-movement, organising 3d-space, navigation, and movement calculations or things in outer space until that concerned retagging effort initiated by Thomas Markov. With the one exception of calculating the hp of a spaceship.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no reason to use it for volume calculation when it comes to coins in chests, determining the volume of items, shapes and calculating how many items fit somewhere, e. g., in a portable hole. All these questions have nothing to do with 3d-space navigation, and nobody used the tag like that. Whether system-specific or not, volume calculation is an inherent part of many problems that more than 60 questions represent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether you get an &amp;quot;advantage&amp;quot; by attacking someone from the ceiling or calculating the number of coins of any system-specific currency require a different set of expertise. The volume tag ties together all of these questions about volume, while the 3d-space tag ties together all of those questions about 3d-space navigation, so the appropriate choice is to reverse Thomas Markov's actions that created the orphanage situation of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No other tag ties together volume calculation - not even the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weight&lt;/a&gt; tag that fills a different but similar niche. Nor does the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/area-of-effect&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;area-of-effect&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;area-of-effect&lt;/a&gt; tag, which asks primarily about effects that affect a large zone or have multiple targets, which occasionally includes volume calculation, fill that niche.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; was a well-defined tag, and we should not replace it by obscuring the use of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt; tag, which accumulated fewer than thirty questions over more than ten years and ties together a different specific niche.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-17T19:00:20.543" LastActivityDate="2021-05-17T19:00:20.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11512" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-17T16:02:53.407" Score="4" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is what my profile picture should look like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://sun9-29.userapi.com/impg/Jsf5ygYTv0G-0eA46p36sgPGst2EjzFtJSo0kg/AvkHiapLcL0.jpg?size=854x1280&amp;amp;quality=95&amp;amp;sign=732709e08ca53992fd37a4404b25b79b&amp;amp;type=album&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But resized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is what it looks like in my profile from my computer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WLTMz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WLTMz.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is what it looks like from my phone:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Fz7kt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Fz7kt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can notice the wrong proportions, although I don't know why they happen. I'd like to know if there is anything I can do on my side to avoid the bug, and for my photo to appear with normal proportions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30214" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-05-17T17:18:08.147" LastActivityDate="2021-05-18T19:47:33.993" Title="My profile picture is distorted" Tags="|bug|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11513" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11512" CreationDate="2021-05-17T16:42:09.473" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The site's UI assumes that all avatars are square and the profile page is no exception; on your profile, SE is using your full-size uploaded image, but it has height and width attributes set so that the browser renders it at 164x164 pixels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div class=&amp;quot;gravatar-wrapper-164&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;    &amp;lt;img src=&amp;quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wpgps.jpg?s=328&amp;amp;amp;g=1&amp;quot; alt=&amp;quot;&amp;quot; class=&amp;quot;bar-sm avatar-user&amp;quot; width=&amp;quot;164&amp;quot; height=&amp;quot;164&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't specifically know why SE is doing that rather than doing a proper crop/resize of your image. but I would hazard a guess that the intention is that in the full profile view, they want the best quality version of your avatar possible, so they just use the original image and have the browser render it to fit rather than resampling and potentially losing quality. Unfortunately they've done it in a very naive way - CSS rendering options that would preserve the aspect ratio correctly do exist, but for whatever reason SE is not using them here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At any rate, solving the problem is easy. Stack Exchange wants your avatar to be square, so just give them a square avatar to begin with - use the image editing tool of your choice to crop the photo to square dimensions and reupload it. This also has the advantage that, in cases where the site &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; actually crop and resize your image, you get to choose where the crop is centred, so it doesn't cut off the top of your head or anything like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28402" LastEditorUserId="28402" LastEditDate="2021-05-18T19:47:33.993" LastActivityDate="2021-05-18T19:47:33.993" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11514" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11516" CreationDate="2021-05-17T20:13:00.530" Score="14" ViewCount="266" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems like in name 'role-playing games SE' is as such, but by the numbers this is really D&amp;amp;D (and mostly 5E) SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen this happen before on other sites (Usenet even), where the most obviously-named outlet for a hobby is kind of about the most currently-profitable aspects of that hobby, and enthusiasts sometimes need to use a different one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;First: I don't want to bother y'all; should I just plain be on another SE?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Second: If not, is there anything like the ability to filter questions by relevant game?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71186" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-05-18T19:31:42.193" LastActivityDate="2021-05-19T09:52:50.857" Title="I just showed up here. Should I be somewhere else if I play other RPGs more than D&amp;D?" Tags="|support|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11514" CreationDate="2021-05-17T20:42:41.213" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You're welcome here no matter what tabletop RPGs you like to play*&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By volume alone we do have a pretty disproportionate amount of questions about D&amp;amp;D, but that reflects the player base and the cohesion of that game system more than any sort of policy here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We badly want content relating to other games.&lt;/strong&gt; It can be surprisingly hard to encourage. There are a handful of other game systems I've played, but most of them have hardly any questions for me to answer and I happen not to have any pressing questions about them. There is less than &lt;em&gt;one entire page&lt;/em&gt; of questions for &lt;em&gt;Stars Without Number&lt;/em&gt;, despite it being a decade old, based on the D&amp;amp;D d20 system, and having a revised edition released several years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Can you guess what RPG I just bought a bunch of books for?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Content can be filtered with game system tags, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, and similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you like non-D&amp;amp;D tabletop RPG games, &lt;em&gt;please&lt;/em&gt; consider sticking around!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* The asterisk indicates an issue with some explicitly, intentionally racist RPGs designed to introduce people to white supremacist ideologies which had a rash of questions here several years back. So there are &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; limits on what's allowed here, but it has nothing to do with D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-18T20:41:02.900" LastActivityDate="2021-05-18T20:41:02.900" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11516" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11514" CreationDate="2021-05-17T20:43:24.160" Score="21" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Our site is for all* tabletop role-playing games, not just D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is true that D&amp;amp;D 5e questions seem to dominate the questions on our mainsite (Role-Playing Games StackExchange) for the past few years. The game is popular and its rules contain many ambiguities, therefore there are many users asking many questions about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, our stack is for all* tabletop role-playing game systems. We also have questions that are not specific to any system, and deal with social issues and broader techniques.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;em&gt;(There are some exceptions, a few niche games that are considered too inappropriate to discuss and we don't want to give them publicity.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How to filter questions according to game system:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions can be sorted by tags, which are written in bracket notation. If you check the search bar on the mainsite, you should see some prompts for suggested tags. For example, searching &lt;code&gt;[fate]&lt;/code&gt; will search for questions related to the Fate system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can also exclude specific tags from a search, with a hyphen prefix. Entering &lt;code&gt;-[dnd-5e]&lt;/code&gt; will ignore all search results that are tagged as &lt;code&gt;[dnd-5e]&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, you can customize filters to ignore certain tags. On the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;main page&lt;/a&gt;, look for a box titled &amp;quot;Ignored Tags&amp;quot;. If you enter a list of tags here, then the mainsite will hide all questions with any of those tags.  You can also use wildcards to include a broad category of tags. For example, ignoring &lt;code&gt;[*dnd*]&lt;/code&gt; should hide most Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons questions from your display.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-18T20:45:37.667" LastActivityDate="2021-05-18T20:45:37.667" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11514" CreationDate="2021-05-17T20:52:30.743" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;99.9999% of all RPGs are ok here!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are only a handful of games that we won't ever cater to. Those games are games that most players will not mention by their name. Their themes are so dripping with racism, misogynism, anti-semitism, and other non-tasteful topics, that merely mentioning the &lt;strong&gt;names&lt;/strong&gt; of these games can upset players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just tag whatever game you ask about and if there is none, ask and we make one for you!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-05-17T20:52:30.743" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9488" CreationDate="2021-05-18T15:13:18.040" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I think this is a good candidate for having a canonical dupe target.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My approach here is going to be to review the evidence that motivates having a canonical question, then propose a question and answer to workshop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Exhibit A: Volume of essentially identical questions with essentially identical answers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have numerous questions about &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; that all follow the same basic formula:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; Can &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; do this thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, but the spell description says its entirely up to the DM how it works out, if at all. [And sometimes these answers include a list of ways the DM can twist the wording].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions follow this basic formula:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67512/what-happens-if-you-make-an-impossible-wish&quot;&gt;What happens if you make an impossible wish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120625/can-you-use-wish-to-allow-yourself-to-cast-wish-without-risks&quot;&gt;Can you use Wish to allow yourself to cast Wish without risks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98891/can-the-wish-spell-kill&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell kill?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157189/can-you-use-the-wish-spell-to-duplicate-a-9th-level-spell&quot;&gt;Can you use the Wish spell to duplicate a 9th-level spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158502/can-the-wish-spell-be-used-to-allow-someone-to-be-able-to-cast-all-of-their-spel&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell be used to allow someone to be able to cast all of their spells at will?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157184/how-are-wishes-for-things-of-similar-power-to-wishs-listed-effects-granted&quot;&gt;How are Wishes for things of similar power to Wish&amp;#39;s listed effects granted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158788/can-the-wish-spell-make-the-effects-of-an-attuned-magic-item-permanent&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell make the effects of an attuned magic item permanent?&lt;/a&gt; (closed as opinion based)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179984/62294&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell change my spell list?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165692/62294&quot;&gt;Can Wish revive a creature consumed by Lich imprisonment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144236/62294&quot;&gt;Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185201/62294&quot;&gt;Is this an ironclad wish?: &amp;quot;I wish for just my body to be young again but to keep all of my physical, mental and magical prowess&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that most of these questions would be obvious candidates for closure as duplicates of a canonical question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Exhibit B: Questions with this formula can attract bad answers/noise, and the good answers are essentially the same.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next I will annotate each of the Q&amp;amp;As above with the protection status, number of deleted answers, and the number of unsupported answers. Obviously, your mileage may vary on what counts as unsupported, so the number given will be based on my interpretation of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696/62294&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;support your answer&amp;quot; guidance&lt;/a&gt;. I will use &amp;quot;Unprotected&amp;quot; to denote a question was unprotected during the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10058/62294&quot;&gt;mass unprotection event of 2020&lt;/a&gt;. No mention of protection will indicate that the question has never been protected before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67512/what-happens-if-you-make-an-impossible-wish&quot;&gt;What happens if you make an impossible wish&lt;/a&gt; (1 deleted, 2 unsupported)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120625/can-you-use-wish-to-allow-yourself-to-cast-wish-without-risks&quot;&gt;Can you use Wish to allow yourself to cast Wish without risks?&lt;/a&gt; (Unprotected, Protected, 7 deleted, 1 unsupported)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98891/can-the-wish-spell-kill&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell kill?&lt;/a&gt; (Unprotected, 2 deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157189/can-you-use-the-wish-spell-to-duplicate-a-9th-level-spell&quot;&gt;Can you use the Wish spell to duplicate a 9th-level spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158502/can-the-wish-spell-be-used-to-allow-someone-to-be-able-to-cast-all-of-their-spel&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell be used to allow someone to be able to cast all of their spells at will?&lt;/a&gt; (Unprotected, Protected, 6 deleted)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157184/how-are-wishes-for-things-of-similar-power-to-wishs-listed-effects-granted&quot;&gt;How are Wishes for things of similar power to Wish&amp;#39;s listed effects granted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158788/can-the-wish-spell-make-the-effects-of-an-attuned-magic-item-permanent&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell make the effects of an attuned magic item permanent?&lt;/a&gt; (closed as opinion based)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179984/62294&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell change my spell list?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165692/62294&quot;&gt;Can Wish revive a creature consumed by Lich imprisonment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144236/62294&quot;&gt;Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish&lt;/a&gt; (closed as opinion based)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185201/62294&quot;&gt;Is this an ironclad wish?: &amp;quot;I wish for just my body to be young again but to keep all of my physical, mental and magical prowess&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From this list, we had four questions that were protected, then unprotected during the mass unprotection event, and two of them have since been re-protected. That said most of the noise came from two of the questions representing 13 of the 16 deleted answers from this list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there is some noise here, but if you look through the good answers to these questions, they all follow the basic pattern outlined in Exhibit A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, but the spell description says its entirely up to the DM how it works out, if at all. [And sometimes these answers include a list of ways the DM can twist the wording].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's my motivation for this proposal. Now I would like to propose and question and answer to serve as the canonical Q&amp;amp;A for this topic. This is not the final form, and should always be open for community input. I would like us to workshop this Q&amp;amp;A together, so that we get some community agreement on what a good canonical Q&amp;amp;A for &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Can the Wish spell be DM-proofed?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The spell &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; is notorious for having DMs twist wishes into undesirable outcomes. Aside from duplicating an 8th level or lower spell, and the listed examples, &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; also states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might be able to achieve something beyond the scope of the above examples. State your wish to the GM as precisely as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it even possible to word a wish so that the DM must, according to the rules, grant the wish as the caster intended?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The spell description gives the DM liberty to rule however they want, even up to ruling that the spell simply fails.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When making a wish for something outside the scope of the given examples, the spell description gives the DM total freedom to rule however they like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The GM has great latitude in ruling what occurs in such an instance; the greater the wish, the greater the likelihood that something goes wrong. This spell might simply fail, the effect you desire might only be partly achieved, or you might suffer some unforeseen consequence as a result of how you worded the wish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So even if you studied contract law and worded your wish in such a way to be technically free from any linguistic loop holes, the spell description gives the DM explicit liberty to simply say: &amp;quot;Your &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; fails.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Access to &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; should trigger a series of conversations between the players and the DM.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e is decisively not a &amp;quot;players vs. DM&amp;quot; game. Working together to create a fun and enjoyable social space is the player-DM relationship described in the game rules, as presented in the introduction to the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren’t in charge. You’re the DM, and you are in charge of the game. That said, your goal isn’t to slaughter the adventurers but to create a campaign world that revolves around their actions and decisions, and to keep your players coming back for more! If you’re lucky, the events of your campaign will echo in the memories of your players long after the final game session is concluded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The success of a D&amp;amp;D game hinges on your ability to entertain the other players at the game table. Whereas their role is to create characters (the protagonists of the campaign), breathe life into them, and help steer the campaign through their characters’ actions, your role is to keep the players (and yourself) interested and immersed in the world you’ve created, and to let their characters do awesome things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Knowing what your players enjoy most about the D&amp;amp;D game helps you create and run adventures that they will enjoy and remember. Once you know which of the following activities each player in your group enjoys the most, you can tailor adventures that satisfy your players’ preferences as much as possible, thus keeping them engaged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we often see with &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; is DMs twisting the wording of the wish into undesirable outcomes, and being aware of this possible, we see this endless cycle of linguistic one-upmanship where players try to word their wishes as precisely as possible and DMs try to find the loophole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Let's break the cycle&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have had great success with &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, both as a player and a DM, and this success depends on one thing: communication out of game between the player and the DM. As a player, when you get access to the &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; spell, it is time to have a conversation about how the table wants to handle the spell. As a DM, this is the first of many conversations I will have about the spell. When a player gets access to a &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, I like to talk about what my personal limitations are as a DM and my philosophy for its use. Much like Genie from &lt;em&gt;Aladdin&lt;/em&gt;, I like to establish three things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wishes should be worded as non-meta as possible, though I will be flexible about this, so let's talk about it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Wishes that make changes to the game rules are probably just not going to happen, but let's talk about it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you are cool with me twisting wishes, I'll twist them while trying to keep things fun, if you aren't cool with twisting wishes, I'll tell you beforehand if it will work as intended.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're going to talk a lot about &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; once it is available, and if you aren't into wishes being twisted, we're going to talk about it some more every time you cast it. At my tables, I have had great success with telling my players what the outcome of the wish will be before we set it in stone. Let's be real, &lt;em&gt;everyone wants to use wish to make something cool happen&lt;/em&gt;. And as a DM, I am 100% on board with making this happen. So when a player wants to cast &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, we workshop together what it's going to look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I use wish as an opportunity to let my players participate in world building&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After all, this is the entire premise of the spell:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;you can alter the very foundations of reality in accord with your desires.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than viewing &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; as a player vs. DM pedantry contest, view &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; as a tool for letting your players shape the world with the power of their voices. And as always, commmunication is key. Talk about these things, workshop these ideas together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, in the spirit of my philosophy of &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, let's workshop this Q&amp;amp;A into a useful canonical Q&amp;amp;A for questions of the form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; do this thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is worth mentioning that I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/185204/62294&quot;&gt;trialed the answer above on a main site question&lt;/a&gt; and it is now &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=%5bwish%5d%20is%3aanswer&quot;&gt;the highest scoring answer&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt; tag, and is currently tied for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=created%3a2021%20is%3aanswer&quot;&gt;highest scoring answer written in 2021.&lt;/a&gt; When this meta discussion was originally had, &lt;em&gt;there was no good candidate for a canonical question&lt;/em&gt;. This is no longer the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-02T13:43:30.947" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T13:43:30.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11514" CreationDate="2021-05-19T09:52:50.857" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You are welcome, but I don't want you to have false expectations.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are welcome here as long as you follow our established rules, such as not propagating questions about white supremacist propaganda TTRPGs, and you follow our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;code of conduct&lt;/a&gt;. You have many filtering tools at your disposal to filter via tags - see our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/interesting-topics&quot;&gt;guidance on finding topics you are interested in&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you also have to ask yourself if we can provide the signal to noise ratio that .se networks pride themselves on if any given site of fifty entries shows you about five questions. You will not be able to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11488/44723&quot;&gt;participate on some days&lt;/a&gt; nor &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11452/44723&quot;&gt;stay in the loop for site developments&lt;/a&gt; like someone who follows D&amp;amp;D, and D&amp;amp;D5e in particular. Many of our meta decisions reflect that we have been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11453/44723&quot;&gt;88% D&amp;amp;D and umbrella for several years&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while you are welcome, if you are not interested in the D&amp;amp;D umbrella, I don't want you to have false expectations. Some active people spend a lot of effort on answering non-D&amp;amp;D questions and will go out of their way even beyond the generous help that people offer on .se websites e. g.  because of their interest in sharing their joy about the hobby with you, but using rpg.se when you don't want to interact with the D&amp;amp;D umbrella requires more effort and leaves you less room for participation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-05-19T09:52:50.857" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11520" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-20T13:18:08.380" Score="8" ViewCount="243" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I am writing this, it has been 45 days since the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11437/how-is-the-community-doing-2021&quot;&gt;2021 Community Check-in&lt;/a&gt;. Many of the answers identify observed site trends, with scores indicating community agreement with those observations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what do we do now? I think many of the observations made warrant further exploration, but I'm not sure what that looks like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, &lt;em&gt;this is not the place to discuss those observations&lt;/em&gt;, rather a place to brainstorm what those discussions should look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-04-05T12:27:57.657" LastActivityDate="2022-04-05T12:27:57.657" Title="What's next for the issues raised in the community check in?" Tags="|discussion|meta|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11522" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11520" CreationDate="2021-05-20T13:40:46.923" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We proceed as usual.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no one way to go about the host of situations that we have identified in an actionable way. If somebody or a group of people take the task upon themselves to create an/ actionable item/s, it is on them. The community check-in is a snapshot, not a todo-list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some people have already started to act during the nomination phase, and we do so by utilising the usual site features. If you want to discuss a particular issue, then you can use the appropriate venues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any such discussion is a regular discussion. People involved may or may not reference the snapshot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T13:40:46.923" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11520" CreationDate="2021-05-20T14:05:22.987" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;To quote the check in itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a particular problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these answers can not be clearly vetted and voted on, so they will tend to remain undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A problem or trend that has some sort of actionable resolution should have a Meta opened to brainstorm possible solutions and have those proposals voted upon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the thing worth noting is just some trend, then perhaps a Meta long the lines of &amp;quot;What can we do about X trend?&amp;quot; Or &amp;quot;Is X trend a bad thing that we need to fix?&amp;quot; would work well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T14:05:22.987" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11520" CreationDate="2021-05-20T15:33:29.327" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I started writing a comment and then found it got too long.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll bow and take blame for it going somewhat unsaid and ambiguous, but I (subconsciously) assumed that most of the ongoing process is covered by a norms, but let's put some words on the specific details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no defined process specifically for the community check in. Normal users are able, allowed, and encouraged to raise discussions to try to solve issues, and the community check-in tries to help that mostly by getting things identified, but also tries to identify things which don't translate into full discussions. Either it's highlighting something positive, something that's just informative to keep in the back of our minds, or something intangible. But if anyone has a good idea for how to start a discussion regarding one of the things raised they should do so. The wording in the check-in post is trying to get those started rather than (too much) effort being misplaced in the respective comment threads.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And at least in my experience, getting things voiced so it can rattle in someone else's brain for them to start the discussion can be of great use. Maybe they have an idea, the frame or perspective to start the discussion or suggestion that will bear fruit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'd like to cover another point which spring to mind here regarding the use of &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; and moderation team. I'll fully acknowledge it being ambiguous, at least for this case it is intended to be inclusive, meaning &lt;em&gt;we the community&lt;/em&gt;. Moderators wear many hats, and the relevant here is Community Leader, but that hat is not exclusive to us. Taking part of meta, and especially starting (constructively and in my preference neutrally) discussions is wearing that hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T15:33:29.327" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11498" CreationDate="2021-05-20T19:56:56.067" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We should be tolerant of askers who lack research.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When asking questions on some other Stack Exchange sites, I've been criticized for not doing enough original research, or not providing that research in my question. I dislike this approach, and I think some tolerance should be given, especially to new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;New users usually aren't aware of the exact community expectations. It's unreasonable to expect that all users will know the specific standard of research expected of them. The new user experience has to be calibrated to account for that, to avoid providing an unwelcoming experience or raising a barrier to entry.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We might say &amp;quot;just Google it&amp;quot;, but answers on RPG.SE are often what people are Googling &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt;. We &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; the Google results.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Google results may include incorrect information: earlier editions of the game, homebrew content, and so on. Players also often do not have access to all the relevant sourcebooks. RPG.SE has experts who can better answer questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The purpose of RPG.SE is to answer questions, and to build a repository of answers to commonly asked questions. By answering simple questions, we provide an answer appearing in Google results for that search term, and thus be useful to more people.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As a roleplaying gamer, easily-answered questions are easy XP.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40971" LastEditorUserId="40971" LastEditDate="2021-05-24T18:27:53.520" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T18:27:53.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11526" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11498" CreationDate="2021-05-20T20:58:42.837" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Just enough&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Just enough to know what the real problem is.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions are like &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;How does X work?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; where X is described in detail in its own chapter of basic source book. We need to know what the OP processed on his own to know where he got stuck, or where he did mistakes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Just enough to know it is a real question, not a noise or set up for easy Rep.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, D&amp;amp;D 5e question &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;How can my ranger learn to cast spells?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; The answer is literally in every place that describes this class. Player's Guide, Basic Rules, D&amp;amp;D Beyond. It's just &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Level up!&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;. Stack Exchange always took pride in being a place for gems, not sand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Just enough to know you aren't just offloading tedious task on strangers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions literally requesting someone to go through all source books and compile a list, summary, conclusions. It's a huge task, sometimes in order of dozens hours. The least OP should do is to go thorough all the easily accessible sources themselves, leaving only hard and interesting parts to specialists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Just enough to avoid &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;I already knew that, but...&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not many things here are as infuriating as OP who sees your answer and comments that he already knows what you just posted, and it is an answer but, for one reason or another, it is not the answer he wanted. Waste of time for OP, for person who answered, for people reading answer and comments. Showing research conducted so far can prevent this, leading to getting useful answers faster.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="10642" LastEditDate="2021-05-20T22:49:41.073" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T22:49:41.073" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11520" CreationDate="2021-05-20T22:02:35.540" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you want to address a specific point from the check-in, you would open a Meta discussion on that specific point.  With an eye towards what would be different about your new Meta if one exists on the same topic already (and it almost inevitably does).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T22:02:35.540" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11528" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11507" CreationDate="2021-05-20T23:12:04.377" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Many games—OK, I’m specifically thinking of Wizards of the Coast era D&amp;amp;D and its spin-offs, but let’s be honest, that’s the overwhelming majority of games played, or at least asked about here—use “volume” in an extremely different sense from “3d space.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“Volume” is an often-arbitrary number assigned to objects and to the limits of containers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;“3d space” refers to how one measures positions, ranges, and areas on a battlegrid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both function under &lt;strong&gt;heavy&lt;/strong&gt; abstraction, and questions about them almost always have to do with that abstraction—if they didn’t, they’d arguably not be RPG questions in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Crucially, however, they operate under &lt;strong&gt;very different&lt;/strong&gt; abstractions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t know what to do with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt;. I’ve voted for NautArch’s suggestion to consider merging it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weight&lt;/a&gt;, since RPGs often use it in much the same way (and the abstractions there are certainly much closer to one another), but I don’t know that’s a &lt;strong&gt;great&lt;/strong&gt; answer. I suppose we could also just keep it, but that also feels off to me, just because it hasn’t been necessary up ’til now, and because it so often &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; heavily conflated with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weight&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weight&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weight&lt;/a&gt;. Recent D&amp;amp;D even explicitly adds “pounds” of “weight” to things when their volume (or even their shape) is “cumbersome,” except, of course, when it doesn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I do feel  very strongly that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/volume&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;volume&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;volume&lt;/a&gt; should &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; be synonymized with or replaced by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3d-space&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3d-space&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3d-space&lt;/a&gt;. In this field, the two are just not remotely related to one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-05-20T23:12:04.377" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11531" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-23T11:28:57.503" Score="4" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;Years ago I had to fight to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8586/are-you-allowed-to-change-citation-style&quot;&gt;preserve citation styles&lt;/a&gt; - especially fighting inline citation. Because I honestly believe Inline citation is &lt;em&gt;ugly&lt;/em&gt; and throws off my reading experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, Citations in the style I used then were generated by &lt;code&gt;Text&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;Source p.##&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; for&lt;br&gt; &lt;strong&gt;Text&lt;sup&gt;Source p.##&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That could result in problematic rendering on screen readers. For example, some just strip supertext formatting and render it &lt;br&gt;&lt;strong&gt;TextSource p.##&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At times I fixed that by adding a space before the supertext. Better... but not nice sill: I was told other users have problems reading more than a few characters of supertext.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/364683/can-we-please-get-a-reference-citeation-feature&quot;&gt;I have asked on Meta&lt;/a&gt; if the stack could offer us a method that makes formatting references easier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the meantime, I am working on manually formatting my citations using Supertext for just numerals and a list of sources in the end - which technically is where I had adapted my citation style from. The example would look like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Text &lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Source p.##&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there problems with the &lt;em&gt;new and improved&lt;/em&gt; citation style that botch accessibility?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a test, using Wikipedia style &lt;code&gt;[1]&lt;/code&gt; for the supertext can turn the source-number into a link, like seen with this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8586/are-you-allowed-to-change-citation-style&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1) doesn't do this so might be the better adjustment if needed, unless a link is &lt;em&gt;wanted&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-05-23T19:27:13.600" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T02:52:07.357" Title="Making Citations Accessible" Tags="|discussion|support|citations|accessibility|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11532" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-23T11:39:17.970" Score="4" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have seen mostly two definitions for a &amp;quot;viable character&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unlikely to die in the first few encounters&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not much weaker than the strongest possible character of similar build&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an accepted definition for this term on the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49393" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-24T18:22:28.467" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T18:22:28.467" Title="What is the definition of a &quot;viable character&quot;?" Tags="|support|terminology|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11533" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11532" CreationDate="2021-05-23T12:03:06.200" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Viable is dependent on &lt;em&gt;lots&lt;/em&gt; of factors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, a viable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; character, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye-4e&lt;/a&gt; character is something &lt;strong&gt;entirely&lt;/strong&gt; different from a viable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions of viability need to define what viable is for the group and game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it a game that requires only combat skills?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it a game that has considerable options for social interactions via skills or abilities?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it a game that demands non-combat skills or abilities (such as to survive)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is it a game that tries to put all characters on the same &lt;em&gt;power level&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that &lt;em&gt;game&lt;/em&gt; here is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; to be automatically put equal with the &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt;, but the two can overlap: a game of Werewolf could focus on inter-clan intrigue and mysticism, it could be eco-terrorism or it could be a courtroom drama with Werewolf-lawyers and -PIs fighting Pentax on the bench.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-05-23T17:51:20.347" LastActivityDate="2021-05-23T17:51:20.347" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11534" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11532" CreationDate="2021-05-23T12:04:16.070" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I do not know about any &lt;em&gt;accepted&lt;/em&gt; definition, but I would say both of those definitions are flawed, and a 3rd one is better&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Problems with &amp;quot;Unlikely to die&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some GMs are very lenient, I have seen a frontliner with a Constitution of 6 (DnD-5e, negative modifier) to be spared, even when it was very complicated for the GM&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even when the back row is subpar, usually the frontliners die, so the fact that &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; character does not die does not necessarily mean that it is any good&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Problems with &amp;quot;Significantly weaker than possible&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not all games are uniformly balanced, if you compare a Fighter and a Cleric to a different standard (because in that game Fighters are much stronger than Clerics or vice versa) you just make the imbalance worse&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Not to mention the difficulty of evaluating a Cleric-Fighter multiclass&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Are we better off if the player does not show up?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most modern combat oriented RPGs&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; have encounter design guidelines; if another character comes, add a monster of level X.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This is your measuring rod, your measuring rod. The character is &lt;em&gt;viable&lt;/em&gt; if it is stronger than the monster that it causes to appear. &lt;strong&gt;Otherwise the party is stronger (compared to the opposition) if the player stays at home.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the RPG is not combat oriented, most characters are viable anyway&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-24T18:19:32.780" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T18:19:32.780" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11535" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11543" CreationDate="2021-05-23T16:53:13.577" Score="7" ViewCount="323" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185443/what-class-multiclass-options-are-most-optimizable-for-damage-output-and-surviva&quot;&gt;What class has the most damage output per round at level 6?&lt;/a&gt;, asking about character optimization. Without additional context, the question was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;what are the most optimizable class/multiclass options in the early levels and later levels? Is the answer different for high and low level characters?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've since edited the question in response to comments. The general consensus seemed to be that it was too broad, rather than too opinion based. Here are my revisions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;what are the most optimizable class/multiclass options for both &lt;em&gt;damage output&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;survivability&lt;/em&gt; at levels 5-6?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;what are the most optimizable class/multiclass options for &lt;em&gt;damage output&lt;/em&gt; at levels 5-6?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;what are the most optimizable class/multiclass options for damage output per round in a single encounter against a small group of high HP enemies at levels 5-6, assuming the enemies have no damage resistances and the character has just finished a long rest (i.e., all abilities are available)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and finally:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the most optimizable class from the Players Handbook for damage output per round in a single encounter against a small group of high HP enemies at levels 5-6, assuming the enemies have no damage resistances and the character has just finished a long rest (i.e., all abilities are available), and has no buff effects from allies?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed with this message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can someone explain how this is opinion based? I'm not saying it was a great question, but to me, while it is overly broad (or at least was before I edited it), is is &lt;em&gt;inherently&lt;/em&gt; objective. Survivability and damage output are both well defined and quantifiable. So how is this opinion based? I'd like to stress that I'm not trying to say it shouldn't have been closed, but that I disagree with the &lt;em&gt;reason stated&lt;/em&gt; for closing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question was re-opened, and then re-closed, and then re-opened again. We'll see what happens in the future. Here is the final(?) version:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is  the most optimizable class from the &lt;em&gt;Players Handbook&lt;/em&gt; for &lt;strong&gt;damage output per round&lt;/strong&gt; in a single encounter, assuming the character:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;is fighting four &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/brown-bear&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Brown Bears&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has just finished a long rest&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has no magic items&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;uses the standard ability array or point buy,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has no buff effects from allies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and to narrow it down further:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;use only RAW content from the &lt;em&gt;Players Handbook&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the sake of clarity, let's define damage per round as the amount of damage a character can do averaged out between 5 &lt;em&gt;consecutive&lt;/em&gt; rounds (assume the character doesn't die). Damage from Area of Effect spells hit all four bears. For simplicity, leave out summoning or animating spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71240" LastEditorUserId="71240" LastEditDate="2021-05-25T02:28:11.017" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T22:42:32.933" Title="My question was closed for being opinion based. Now it's been reopened and closed again. Why?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11535" CreationDate="2021-05-23T17:22:11.547" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;A question generally is &lt;em&gt;opinion based&lt;/em&gt;, if there could be at least 2 answers that are vastly different in their results and neither is, objectively speaking, better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example the question &amp;quot;What's the best color for a wizard's robe&amp;quot; allows the &lt;strong&gt;whole&lt;/strong&gt; spectrum for answers, none is objectively the best. But &amp;quot;What is the color of wizard robes in the Dragonlance at the time of Tiamat's invasion?&amp;quot; is a clearly defined question that has one answer: The colors of the three moons, Black, White &amp;amp; Red.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, let's see where your question...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used to DM a group of players who liked to heavily optimize their characters (and the group as a whole) to take as little and deal as much damage as possible (seriously, these guys were crazy). It got to the point that I was routinely throwing encounters that would be considered &amp;quot;deadly&amp;quot; to for a group their level. Unfortunately some of the members of that group moved away at around 6th level, so I never got to see how it carried on to later levels.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of this explains your background and everything. That part is fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is: what are the most optimizable class/multiclass options for both damage output and survivability at levels 5-6? I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, here is the problem: you are asking to analyze &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; classes and class combinations &lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;. That sounds like the wrong closure reason prevailed (I believe I voted needs focus) because that's simply too broad at first blush. On second thought though, this also does match the opinion-based threshold: what is &lt;em&gt;most optimizable&lt;/em&gt; depends on opinions, especially &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; constitutes optimizable or best. A class could be the best at dishing out damage in a single attack, or could do the most healing, but which of the two is &lt;em&gt;objectively better&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How to improve?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First of all, we could focus on one of the two problems only. Like damage output. That puts much more focus on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next you should say which material is available. Basic rules? Core Rules? Any other book? Keep the allowable material list short.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then you could reduce the number of classes that is allowed to be &lt;em&gt;dipped into&lt;/em&gt;. For example &amp;quot;At maximum 2 classes may be used, the second class needs to be chosen at level 2&amp;quot;. That cuts the math down tremendously: With 12 classes, it would get us down to 29 and 31 combinations respectively. Still &lt;em&gt;a lot&lt;/em&gt; but it is in the realm of &lt;em&gt;doable&lt;/em&gt; instead of &lt;em&gt;There's so much to look at, and most is noise&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further confines could also help, for example, disallowing classes or combinations of some classes. A random example would be &amp;quot;No arcane-caster/divine-caster combos&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The basic rules have 12 classes, so at level 5 that is &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$12^5\$&lt;/span&gt; combinations that are &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt;, at level 6 it's &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$12^6\$&lt;/span&gt;. Those are mind-boggling 250k and 3 Million possible combinations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-05-23T18:03:35.977" LastActivityDate="2021-05-23T18:03:35.977" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11537" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11535" CreationDate="2021-05-23T17:22:11.577" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the time I write this answer, the question was closed eight hours ago, and your edit was less than half an hour ago. Edited questions don't automatically re-open, they are automatically made eligible to be re-opened after a certain number of votes, as this one now is. (If the edit was made within a certain window of time, as this one was.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that there's no guarantee that your question will be re-opened.  In my opinion it is still either &amp;quot;too broad&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;subjective&amp;quot; (categories which sometimes bleed into one another because of how we use the term &amp;quot;subjective&amp;quot;) to be answerable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2021-05-23T17:22:11.577" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11538" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11535" CreationDate="2021-05-24T16:40:05.507" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;For me, it needs more focus and more details.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do handle optimization questions. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optimization&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optimization&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optimization&lt;/a&gt;. When you look at the optimization questions dealing with optimizing character performance that have scored well, you will observe two formulae that work well for the stack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A mostly complete character build, where the stack is asked to optimize a few remaining build choices for a particularly outcome&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;An open ended question, where the stack is asked to create character build that optimizes one &lt;em&gt;well defined&lt;/em&gt; outcome.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is this second point that you need to try to emulate. Take for example this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67197/what-is-the-highest-possible-ac&quot;&gt;What is the highest possible AC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here, we are given few constraints, but the sought outcome is well defined - it needs no further details. The trouble with your question is that &lt;em&gt;the outcome is not yet well defined&lt;/em&gt;. In comments, several users point out a plethora of variables you should consider constraining:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Right now this question is very broad. Which class/multiclass is the best damage dealer/damage taker changes nearly every level, and would change depending on burst damage or longevity. I would recommend you narrow this down: pick a specific level, pick a specific combat style, pick a length of time they will need to deal/receive damage over, etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some of this depends on the group - you don't need to pour so many resources into your health and AC if you're surrounded by barbarians who are absorbing all the hits - you could be focusing a little more on damage. Are we to assume your character is on their own? (Just a warning, if you play like this it isn't the nicest play style for the group) –&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How many enemies can we assume an AoE includes? What are the enemy AC and saving throw bonuses? When you say we should use &amp;quot;damage output per round&amp;quot; how does this account for abilities that cannot be used every round? Or did you mean that we are trying to optimize damage output of one round? If so, do we have a round or several to set up effects like wall of fire, spiritual weapon, or haste? Should we assume all dice rolls are entirely random (we cannot assume we hit, or enemies fail their saves, or guarantee rolls on Wild Magic Surges? Damage dice roll their average value)?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Even as edited, I think this question is far too broad to be answerable. The number of possible combinations -- factoring in every class, spell, and magic item available, not to mention situational parameters -- is so staggeringly huge that it isn't realistically possible to offer a demonstrably &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; answer, which is what RPG.SE aims to do.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need a well defined understanding of what you mean by &amp;quot;damage output per round&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Single target, single round?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multi target, single round?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Single target, 3 or 5 round damage?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multi target, 3 or 5 round damage?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Defining exactly what you're looking for here will significantly reduce the number of options we have to consider when answering your question. For example, Monks are very good at sustained damage against a single target, but against a group of enemies, a caster with a sustainable area of effect spell will perform much better than a monk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, we need a well defined method of calculating damage. Because of the complex nature of damage calculations, we need at least these things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Number of enemies&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their ACs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Their saving throw bonuses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A method of adjudicating AoE spells/effects, e.g. a description of the enemies' relative positions on the battle field&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At time of writing, you have &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; of these things, but still not enough to make the problem well defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T16:40:05.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11539" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11532" CreationDate="2021-05-24T16:45:54.453" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You get to define your terms when you ask a question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't really matter what the stack-at-large thinks it means for a character build to be viable. Instead of using the word viable, just present a well defined problem to solve. &amp;quot;Is this character build viable&amp;quot; is not a well defined problem to solve, but it's fine as a question title, &lt;em&gt;as long as you explain what you mean in the question body&lt;/em&gt;. It doesn't matter what we think viable means, it matters that you tell us what it means to you so we can work toward that in our solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T16:45:54.453" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11540" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11541" CreationDate="2021-05-24T18:45:39.863" Score="3" ViewCount="53" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was trying to edit this question, as it contains spoilers: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185492/what-happens-in-curse-of-strahd-if-the-players-destroy-strahds-coffin-or-preven&quot;&gt;What happens in Curse of Strahd if the players destroy Strahd&amp;#39;s coffin or prevent him from returning to it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was just trying to hide the spoilers with &amp;gt;! at the beginning of each line, but I came across a problem when trying to edit a section of text that was previously in blockquotes. I've included images below showing what happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Here's what it looks like in the editor:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9VcIb.png&quot; alt=&quot;1&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;...And here's what it looks like in the preview:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ReafV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ReafV.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have any idea what's going on here?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;All the other times I used &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!&lt;/code&gt;, it worked just fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71240" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-05-24T20:27:04.763" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T20:27:04.763" Title="Spoiler quotes aren't rendering correctly" Tags="|bug|formatting|spoilers|stack-exchange|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11541" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11540" CreationDate="2021-05-24T18:58:42.043" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The linebreak before &amp;quot;If&amp;quot; breaks the spoiler markdown.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Curse of Strahd&lt;/em&gt; spoilers ahead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y94cG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y94cG.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fixed (by deleting the linebreak), it looks like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z7iHu.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z7iHu.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, we can fix it like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7IKwq.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/7IKwq.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With a double space at the end of the first two line in the spoiler block. This is the solution I went with, as this matches the rendering in the adventure's text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-05-24T20:26:34.980" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T20:26:34.980" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11542" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11540" CreationDate="2021-05-24T19:09:09.597" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The linebreak is indeed what broke the spoiler format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you wish to still format these with a new-line within, simply include two spaces after the first line and readd the &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!&lt;/code&gt; to the following line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!Spoilers followed by a double-space  &#xA;&amp;gt;!Following line after line-break&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spoilers followed by a double-space&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Following line after line-break&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14873" LastActivityDate="2021-05-24T19:09:09.597" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11543" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11535" CreationDate="2021-05-24T21:55:16.500" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This type of theorycrafting often gets an uneven reception here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My best advice is to not ask about multiclassing from all possible options, but that's not a guarantee that the question won't still be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My impression based on experience (read: I don't have hard evidence) is that there are relatively few users here who like to answer optimization questions, at least compared with the number of users who are likely to attempt answers to other questions. And answering them tends to involve a substantial amount of work, as it is necessary to compare all available options within the given constraints.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It follows from that that those constraints are very important. As mentioned in Trish's answer here, a single extra element can add a huge number of additional possibilities to compare. And people vary in which constraints they think are crucial to answering, prompting lots of requests for clarification which may be orthogonal to each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually this works itself out by answerers self-selecting: people who are interested in tackling an optimization question and feel there is enough information presented to do so will post answers. The problem comes from close votes. People can vote to close for any reason (no matter what the close vote explanation they list is). So you can easily get five people each voting to close due to five totally different reasons which are blurred together by the reasons presented in the VTC popup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To date, there isn't a great way to proactively avoid this.&lt;/strong&gt; You can specify as much detail as you like, but as long as there are at least five people that feel a question is lacking they can close it. And people seem to get a bit... territorial over close votes in optimization questions. Which can make it hard to shake a previous closure. We mostly keep voting wars contained, but the sort of swing you've noticed on this question happens from time to time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The earliest versions of this question really were underspecified and not feasibly answerable in the SE format (which isn't a huge deal; it happens!). Iteration is normal and desirable here. But now peoples' eyes are on the question and you will have to overcome the objections of, at least, all but four of those people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stick with it, and it's very likely that eventually the question will be open, at least for long enough to attract an answer or two. It's just rarely a smooth road.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I present here a few similar(ish) questions without further comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84567/how-might-a-dex-fighter-multiclass-to-maximize-ac-and-damage-per-round&quot;&gt;How might a dex Fighter multiclass to maximize AC and damage per round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132321/as-a-level-4-halfling-hexblade-pact-of-the-blade-warlock-what-are-my-options-fo&quot;&gt;As a level 4 halfling hexblade pact of the blade warlock, what are my options for high damage per round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79296/what-is-the-highest-damage-potential-multi-class-for-a-5th-level-character&quot;&gt;What is the highest damage potential (multi-class) for a 5th level character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77385/what-is-the-most-dpr-possible-at-level-1&quot;&gt;What is the most DPR possible at level 1?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/171911/what-is-the-highest-average-damage-that-a-level-10-character-can-deal-in-respons&quot;&gt;What is the highest average damage that a level 10 character can deal in response to being hit or damaged?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-25T22:42:32.933" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T22:42:32.933" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11544" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11549" CreationDate="2021-05-25T00:02:08.070" Score="3" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently posted this question about character optimization:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185443/what-class-has-the-most-damage-output-per-round-at-level-6&quot;&gt;What class has the most damage output per round at level 6?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made several revisions to it, and it received the required 5 votes to be re-opened, so clearly some part of the community felt that it was a perfectly valid question. Only a few hours after it was re-opened, it was closed again, and now has gained some reopen votes (I fully expect that it will be re-opened again in the next day or two).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do we handle controversial questions such as this one, where a significant portion of the community believes it should be opened and another portion thinks it should remain closed?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Obviously, a cycle of open-close-open-close is undesirable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that this is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a question asking about the viability of my post in particular. That already has a meta post on it here:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11535/my-question-was-closed-for-being-opinion-based-now-its-been-reopened-and-close&quot;&gt;My question was closed for being opinion based. Now it&amp;#39;s been reopened and closed again. Why?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather, this is a question regarding questions that have been closed and opened multiple times in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71240" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-25T04:28:57.807" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T12:57:02.453" Title="How do we handle questions that are repeatedly closed and reopened?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|closing-questions|vote-to-close|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11545" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11544" CreationDate="2021-05-25T01:33:44.963" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Whose vote is most valuable?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No one user’s vote is most valuable. Every user with access to close votes gets one vote, and no vote is more valuable than any other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a comment, you wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much better for questions to simply follow the close-edit-reopen cycle once, and at that point (once members have indicated the question is satisfactory to them) to simply let it play out as it will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This idea is inconsistent with the principle that every vote is of equal value. If 100 people think a question should be closed, and 5 think it should be reopened, why should it be that those 5 reopen votes have the final say, and the remaining 95 voters who think the question should be closed should abstain from voting?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Community moderation is working as intended.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone who has earned the privilege to vote can vote, and a cycle of close-open-close-open is indicative of a healthy and active system of community moderation. There are several other stacks that I read where question flags age out sitting in the review queue because nobody is doing moderation activities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T01:33:44.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11531" CreationDate="2021-05-25T02:52:07.357" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;The most accessible way to format citations that is, well, accessible to us, is probably to include them parenthetically (or with brackets or what have you). As you have found, whether you make them superscript or not makes no difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for footnotes, there is no way to make superscript numbers jump to the appropriate footnote and back as you would have on Wikipedia. We cannot create anchors in our text, which is what you would use to enable that kind of jumping—in short, the browser doesn’t recognize the footnote as a “thing” that you can jump to, and no URL will do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, parentheses or brackets or whatever don’t do a whole lot of good. Purely-visual formatting, like super- or sub- scripts, does less, as you have found. Manual footnotes done by including a superscript number in the text and including an ordered list at the end is even worse, because in the text it’s just going to read the number and then later on—potentially much later on—it’s going to introduce a list and the numbered items will be read. And there is zero we can do about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, even if we had complete control of the page’s markup, we still probably couldn’t do a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; job—the state of the art in this respect is fairly poor. HTML provides a &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;cite&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; tag which can be used to indicate that something is a citation, but doesn’t really provide anything to apply to the superscript number to say that it is an indicator that a given citation is relevant. But we would have that, and we could have links back and forth. So it would be better. But not great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only realistic solution here is for Stack Exchange to install some extension to their Markdown processor to handle footnotes and/or citations. My guess is that this request would not receive high priority—most Stack Exchange sites aren’t especially concerned with citation. But if you are interested in pursuing this, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;MSE&lt;/a&gt; would be the place to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T02:52:07.357" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11547" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11544" CreationDate="2021-05-25T03:44:01.830" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Voting Continues Until The Question Improves&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or until everyone with a strong opinion is locked out of the debate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In principle, these open-close wars can go on for a very long time, but probably not forever.  There are a few &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/privileges/close-questions#:%7E:text=To%20cast%20a%20close%20vote,and%20current%20counts%2C%20will%20appear.&quot;&gt;subtleties&lt;/a&gt; about the system that tend to quench the controversy over the mid- to long-haul, including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You only get one close and one re-open vote per question so you can't have stable cliques constantly closing and re-opening the same question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions can go through multiple close and reopen cycles, but each&#xA;individual user may cast at most one close and one reopen vote per&#xA;question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Close votes age out over time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Close votes age away harmlessly if the threshold is not reached after&#xA;a number of days. If the question has at least 100 views, close votes&#xA;will age away after 4 days; otherwise close votes will age away after&#xA;14 days. Each new close vote resets the timer, so all close votes must&#xA;be at least 4 or 14 days old respectively before aging occurs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T03:44:01.830" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11544" CreationDate="2021-05-25T09:31:08.920" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Just work on it - the number of close-votes is limited.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every user can only try to close or open a question once each, then can't re-vote to close or open the same question for quite some time. I know in some cases on 3D printing I can vote to close something twice if the old vote idled out and some months have passed. So... don't worry about re-voters. That's only up to diamonds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just work on the question till it stays open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Especially don't bounty it yourself.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting a bounty on a question prevents closure votes to be added. That is bad sportsmanship and I have seen users time-outed on other stacks for putting a bounty on a negatively regarded question that had accumulated 4 out of 5 close votes. That is gaming the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T09:31:08.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11549" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11544" CreationDate="2021-05-25T11:20:16.573" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;Repeated close and reopen rounds occur in a narrow range of circumstances.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the most common situations is that a question is simply contentious: several people think it ought to be closed for some reason or another, several other people think it ought to be open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The situation your question is in, however, is different: your question's had several iterations. Each iteration has had problems, so people have voted to close it. Then it gets edited, and the next iteration resolves some of those problems, and some voters have decided it's ready to reopen. Others think it still has problems, or has new problems, and still needs to be closed, so people have voted to close it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Close/reopen wars get won by exhaustion of votes. Eventually, the close/reopen tug-of-war settles on one side or another. You can only vote to close a question once, and the same goes for reopening, so each person has their say over subsequent rounds of closing/reopening and then everyone who can vote has done so and the question remains either closed or open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of a contentious question, we might host a meta to come to agreement on whether to keep the question closed or not, and that usually resolves things all on its own. In your situation, it's trickier—the question has gone through several different iterations. We &lt;em&gt;haven't&lt;/em&gt; really voted to close and reopen the same question multiple times; we've voted to close or reopen &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; questions each time, but all contained in the same post. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6519/when-a-question-changes-completely-should-it-be-a-new-question&quot;&gt;It probably should've been asked as a different question somewhere along the way&lt;/a&gt;, but the changes were so incremental each time it's hard to say when that should have been done. Sometimes this just happens, and it's not ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assuming your question is stabilised, we basically go back to that first paragraph I wrote: either your question has problems and gets closed, or doesn't and stays open, or it's contentious and we have to talk about it. There's already been two closures and two reopens, so that's ten votes used up—the community will weigh in with more if it's called for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, your question does have a bounty posted. Active bounties mean we &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; vote to close it. If the community decides it needs to be closed before the bounty runs out, a diamond moderator (provided they agree) would step in to refund the bounty. Really, at this point, your question is now going to be measured by its activity and whether we see serious trouble brewing in the answers coming in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-05-25T12:57:02.453" LastActivityDate="2021-05-25T12:57:02.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11550" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11551" CreationDate="2021-05-27T02:23:56.200" Score="3" ViewCount="42" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185580/how-much-should-arcane-lock-protect-manacles-from-damage&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; I had a parenthetical statement that was a little too long and would interrupt the flow of the question.  I decided to place it at the end, in a smaller font, using the subscript command as I see often see done here.  However, I also wanted to include within it a spoiler.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found that I could make it a spoiler,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; like this&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;or I could make it subscript&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt; like this &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that I could not have a spoiler within the subscript,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;&amp;gt;! like this &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really understand what blocktext is, but there are plenty of posts on meta about blocktext not working in spoiler, such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9931/is-this-a-bug-in-the-spoiler-quote-rendering&quot;&gt;Is this a bug in the spoiler quote rendering?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is my problem an example of this?&#xA;Is there a solution?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-05-27T02:53:06.843" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T10:41:33.483" Title="Is it possible to have spoiler text in subscript?" Tags="|support|spoilers|markdown|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11551" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11550" CreationDate="2021-05-27T02:37:10.487" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Re order the tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;sub&gt;subscript spoiler&lt;/sub&gt; | normal spoiler&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;! &amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;subscript spoiler&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; | normal spoiler&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line needs to start with &lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;!&lt;/code&gt;. You can put subscript &lt;em&gt;inside&lt;/em&gt; the spoiler, but you can't wrap the whole spoiler in subscript with &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;&amp;gt;! spoiler&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; like you were doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-05-27T10:41:33.483" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T10:41:33.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11552" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-27T13:58:48.893" Score="18" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/165/10642&quot;&gt;Are questions about LARPs on topic?&lt;/a&gt; LARP questions are OK here, as LARP is a subset of role-playing games. But the question I want to ask is more about DIY techniques than the very act of role playing. I would ask it on a DIY stack, but sadly &lt;a href=&quot;https://diy.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://diy.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; is now called Home Improvement and such questions would not be welcomed there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question I meant to add: &lt;em&gt;What are easy to apply latex alternatives on foam weapons?&lt;/em&gt; with description of what do I hold against using latex.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T14:09:44.450" Title="Are questions related to building LARP safe weapons on-topic here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|larp|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11553" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11552" CreationDate="2021-05-27T14:09:44.450" Score="26" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We have handled such DIY questions for live action roleplaying, and should continue to do so.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have several questions dealing with this topic, see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/props&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;props&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;props&lt;/a&gt; tag. Here are a few examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97024/how-do-i-safely-paint-a-latex-coated-larp-weapon&quot;&gt;How do I safely paint a latex-coated larp weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/77182/larp-cannon-with-actual-projectiles&quot;&gt;LARP Cannon with actual projectiles&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59581/is-expanding-foam-a-suitable-material-for-larp-weapon-construction&quot;&gt;Is expanding foam a suitable material for LARP weapon construction?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87185/are-polypropylene-training-weapons-safe-for-larp&quot;&gt;Are Polypropylene training weapons safe for LARP?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/12641/how-do-i-patch-up-my-weapon&quot;&gt;How do I patch up my weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And for good measure, here is one that would probably fit at travel.se:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139544/larp-weapons-on-a-plane-can-you-put-your-larp-sword-in-checked-baggage&quot;&gt;LARP Weapons on a Plane: Can you put your LARP sword in checked baggage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point is, these questions address a certain aspect of live action roleplaying that LARP experts are likely to have experience with. These experts will have better answers than generic DIY experts as LARP experts are more likely to have applied these DIY skills in the context you are asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T14:09:44.450" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11554" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-27T15:36:55.690" Score="-3" ViewCount="214" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a common problem (it seems) across social related SE (gaming, workplace, interpersonal etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The criteria for an answer require either an objective citation, or that the answer is based on a personal experience, which is described (along with what happened).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, very often some answers are called out for failure to provide this, others aren't. Its very inconsistent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two quick examples from rpg SE:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185468&quot;&gt;How to stop myself from interrupting the session to correct the DM&amp;#39;s mistakes?&lt;/a&gt; - top answer doesn't have any relevant criteria. Pure opinion and advice. No problem? Nobody objected.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185595&quot;&gt;Dealing with a Repeatedly Cheating Friend&lt;/a&gt; - top answer by axoren doesn't have any relevant criteria. Pure advice and opinion. No problem. No objection. But 2nd answer by GMJoe also pure advice and opinion, is commented as needing a personal reference. Objectively, &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; are identically lacking cites/personal references.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I feel that this requirement to be able to cite a comparable or illuminating experience is low value.  Many good answers just won't arise from some specific similar experience, where the same action was appropriate and comparable. Instead users' judgement is a good guide whether a suggested answer is a good fit for the problem.  I feel we may lose more good answers than filter/remove bad ones, with that criterion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So TL;DR two reasons for this question - that the criterion is inconsistently applied, and honestly, I don't think its that good a criterion in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18149" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-05-27T17:16:23.380" LastActivityDate="2021-05-28T21:24:23.150" Title="Uncomfortable about inconsistent application of criteria for valid answers" Tags="|discussion|citations|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11555" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-27T17:16:30.720" Score="2" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure I did a great job of explaining what, exactly, I'm looking for in my recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185609/are-there-any-gods-or-godlike-entities-in-dd-associated-with-fear&quot;&gt;Are there any gods or godlike entities in D&amp;amp;D associated primarily with fear?&lt;/a&gt; . I'm basing my parameters on a podcast I listen to that's heavily inspiring my campaign, and I'm not sure if it'd serve the question to refer to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, if anyone who is familiar with the podcast stumbles across the question, they'll know exactly what I'm looking for; on the other hand, I fear that the reference might drive away people who have useful expertise but assume they can't give me a good answer because they don't know what I'm referring to. (The same goes for anyone in the future who goes searching for fear-focused gods; I suspect it might make for a worse Q&amp;amp;A experience for them, as the answers (if they exist) may seem specifically tailored to this one reference.) The podcast itself is relatively popular, but not explicitly related to tabletop games in any way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the podcast, &lt;em&gt;The Magnus Archives&lt;/em&gt;, deals heavily with entities that are created by the power of fear, and feed off of the fears of living creatures-- the key thing, for my question, is that they didn't so much create those fears, but are responding to the primordial fears of living creatures: death, disease, predation, etc. Essentially, rather than being fueled by the power of belief, as is common in D&amp;amp;D, they are fueled by the power of fear, and seek &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; to further that fear. This is established as a primary plot point relatively early in the podcast, which has been fully finished for a bit now, so it's reasonable to assume that any listener would be familiar with this concept.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: Do I include the reference for the sake of potential clarity, or do I leave it out because it might be needlessly confusing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49671" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-05-27T20:26:36.053" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T23:16:49.407" Title="Is it bad form to cite non-RPG fandom content in your question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11555" CreationDate="2021-05-27T17:49:29.887" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;With this specific example, referencing the podcast probably isn't necessary or helpful&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the description (I'm not a listener to that podcast), it sounds like what is being described is a worldbuilding element-- a description of the cosmology and inherent operation of the in-game universe. And that description doesn't sound, to me, like it would mesh very well with the official D&amp;amp;D lore. That mismatch is problematic, because it's akin to asking if there is a specific type of orange in a cartload of apples.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to my reading, this should perhaps be two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How do deities in D&amp;amp;D work/Do any deities in D&amp;amp;D work this way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If (1), are there any specific deities with these properties?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of these would rely on the specific material in the podcast, meaning that the podcast is probably not a necessary reference. Further, I (personally) feel that podcasts and videos are really bad and irritating references unless you can give timestamps for specific references. I can read text at my own pace, but wading through media with a relatively fixed pace of consumption makes them extremely hard to refer back to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if the material is popular enough there may be enough broad familiarity that the requisite familiarity with individual episodes or releases is present for enough people to help. You could probably say &amp;quot;[X], as on &lt;em&gt;Critical Role&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot; and get what you're looking for with little fuss. I don't know of a good guideline for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But overall if an idea is well-defined enough to be useful in adding context to a question, I think that it should be possible to write a brief summary of the necessary elements of the idea to illustrate what you mean. Maybe with a reference to the podcast that inspired it, for those who might be familiar. But it's tricky, at best, to use a reference that is 100% external to the question or stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-05-27T23:07:15.100" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T23:07:15.100" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11557" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11554" CreationDate="2021-05-27T18:53:39.810" Score="2" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185468&quot;&gt;How to stop myself from interrupting the session to correct the DM&amp;#39;s mistakes?&lt;/a&gt; top answer includes references to personal experiences. Sure, it is not 100% identical situation, but it's backed up, at least somewhat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185595&quot;&gt;Dealing with a Repeatedly Cheating Friend&lt;/a&gt; top answer could use some references, but what author wrote is standard advice for people stuck in relationship with pathological liar, or more generally codependent. Personal experiences from such situations can be very personal, painful things. I have a bit of them. Enough to agree with the answer. I won't share. I won't ask anyone to share.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T18:53:39.810" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11555" CreationDate="2021-05-27T23:16:49.407" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Including more info is (generally) better than less&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's really any benefit to &lt;em&gt;omitting&lt;/em&gt; that information, since it is what prompted your question. If you are specifically looking for deities like the ones in that podcast that inspired your campaign, then it helps to at least mention that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it ends up being entirely irrelevant, it can always be edited out as needed, or trimmed if there's a lot of unnecessary detail about the podcast in your question, but I think the question would be improved by at least mentioning that information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Leaving that information out seems somewhat akin to asking a character-creation question about how to build [character X] from [show Y] in D&amp;amp;D/Fate/etc. without actually naming the character/show you're trying to emulate. Sure, you should specifically explain what aspects of the character are most important to you in the question, but it would just be unnecessarily confusing if you specifically avoided mentioning the character/show.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly, in your case, you should certainly explain what aspects of the deity/religion are most important to you (which you've kind of done already), but that doesn't mean you should avoid mentioning what inspired you if it's not a tabletop RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T23:16:49.407" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2021-05-27T23:52:32.363" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;To me this is a poor criterion, though well intended. We could do better by nuancing, creating explicit exceptions, or replacing it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've had a comparable answer deleted on another SE because, although I stated it stemmed from my own * general * experience over many years, it didn't stem from some, * single, identified, specific* experience that I could identify out of my past experiences, as a single reference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've then seen other answers - numerous - where no such reference was given, and nobody minded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That has put me off answering such questions a great deal, because the requirement often seems unreasonably demanded, and capricious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that the users who up and downvote answers are perfectly capable of deciding whether the answer has merit or fits their experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, the statement that a reference * must * be cited in * all * cases is redundant.  It inhibits good answers rather than helping filter them or ensure their quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;If exceptions are allowed, then I feel it should be restated as something other than a &amp;quot;rule&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;necessity&amp;quot; leading to removal if not complied with.  That's the SE reality.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've seen it stated in other discussions on this point, that high ranking answers that don't meet this criterion are still accepted because &amp;quot;the community speaks&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I've seen it stated that answers discussing traumatic issues don't need referencing because its probably private and maybe retraumatising to expect them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all, this suggests that the need for subjective answers to contain cites or personal experience, is not an absolute or necessity. So we should not express it as an absolute or necessity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At a minimum reword to state that &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;a subjective answer is best expressed by reference to personal experience. Not including some reference to your own personal experience, may lead to an answer being seen as lower quality.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That would be more honest, and representative, it guides the community how to view and assess such answers, but removes the automatic &amp;quot;it should lead to removal&amp;quot; with its unspoken arbitrary-seeming exceptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18149" LastActivityDate="2021-05-27T23:52:32.363" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11560" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11554" CreationDate="2021-05-28T21:24:23.150" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answers aren't useful if they just tell you what to do. They're useful if they help you understand what you're doing.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or: &lt;strong&gt;a supported answer is an answer you can put your weight on.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if an answer contains a block of rules text, it could still be removed for being unsupported. If nobody who reads the answer understands how to apply the rules text to the problem at hand and you can't or don't clarify it, then as far as everybody but you is concerned you've provided something completely irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A stack-worthy answer is one that says not just &amp;quot;what should I do&amp;quot; but &amp;quot;why will this help solve the problem I'm having&amp;quot;. Not everybody's got, like, degrees or done studies in human interaction to the same kind of defined extent that they can cite a rulebook, so for questions about the human-interaction part of play, thoughtfully analyzing a scenario where you did the thing can help fulfill the &amp;quot;why will this help solve the problem I'm having&amp;quot; expectation of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that's not the only way to fulfill that expectation. A good analysis of the problem can also provide that &amp;quot;why does it work&amp;quot; component to an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So maybe the criteria need to be simplified or bullet-pointed at the top: when we say that &lt;strong&gt;we want an answer to be supported&lt;/strong&gt;, what that means is not &lt;strong&gt;you must provide specific component X&lt;/strong&gt;, but &lt;strong&gt;in our judgement, you've said what to do, but we don't know why it would work&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2021-05-28T21:24:23.150" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11561" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2021-05-30T07:27:53.537" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I propose a different style for &lt;strong&gt;explicit citation needed questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you remember the Bête question? The one that moderators looked at 3 times in the first hours? Yes, I had put a note to it that demanded citations to books in the very beginning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2 answers were deleted by mods after I had pointed out the lack of the required citations in them. In one case, the whole thing was a mix of interpretation (which I had explicitly asked &lt;em&gt;not to do&lt;/em&gt;) and lacked citations. The answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/133056/timeline&quot;&gt;idled around for a month and a half before it was tagged as citation-needed and at once deleted.&lt;/a&gt; With a +3/-3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What to do?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggest having two variants of the back-it-up tag: the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;personal experience&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;hard backup&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; ones. Also, the hard backup one should possibly be worded harder - the requirement for hard backup is at times absolute and should be worded just as hard. There are good suggestions for the personal experience one up there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question requires citations.&lt;/strong&gt; Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-05-30T07:27:53.537" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11562" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-31T20:05:43.743" Score="6" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185714/do-these-items-stack&quot;&gt;Do these items stack?&lt;/a&gt; was closed and has comments requesting an edition and system be specified. However, the question appears to clearly indicate its game already: it cites a book (Tasha's Cauldron of Everything) that correlates with only one game, cites material from that book, and cites additional material from the same game. That game, no surprise, is D&amp;amp;D 5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not going to revise it with a diamond close vote in place, but — can we mark this as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and reopen it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-01T11:57:09.620" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T08:32:10.737" Title="Can we reopen this item stacking question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11563" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11562" CreationDate="2021-05-31T20:23:11.720" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two sides to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;System is indirectly indicated and we pretty much know, so there's no harm in adding the tag and reopening in regard to getting answers that fit.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It will show the OP that they can be sloppy, ignore the messages that are shown to new users (that says to stay a bit, read the comments and edit accordingly), and someone will tidy their mess anyway.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, the 2nd point is a reason enough to &lt;strong&gt;not reopen it yet&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-05-31T21:05:29.907" LastActivityDate="2021-05-31T21:05:29.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11564" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11562" CreationDate="2021-05-31T20:41:03.640" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The system is clear &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; we should add it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently got the Eldritch Maul tattoo from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and I also have the Insignia of Claws. These both add a +1 modifier to my unarmed attack would these stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any system with something that could called an &amp;quot;Eldritch Maul tattoo&amp;quot; that comes from something called &amp;quot;Tasha's Cauldron of Everything&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does that same system &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; involve something called the &amp;quot;Insignia of Claws&amp;quot;? And in this system &lt;em&gt;both&lt;/em&gt; of these things &amp;quot;add a +1 modifier to unarmed attacks&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is any system &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; that this could be besides D&amp;amp;D 5e, I will be utterly baffled and bewildered. The game system is clear, in this case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally see no reason not to tag this specific question with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag. I know, beyond a shadow of a shadow of a doubt, what system this is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-15T08:32:10.737" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T08:32:10.737" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11565" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-31T20:48:00.683" Score="15" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185716/razzle-dazzle-and-success-vs-blindness&quot;&gt;Razzle-Dazzle and success vs Blindness&lt;/a&gt; is asking about two Pathfinder 2e features, linking to the Pathfinder 2e reference document for both features (&lt;code&gt;2e.aonprd.com&lt;/code&gt;; the system is also highlighted at the top of the page). I added the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag since it was contextually clear what game the question was asking about, and then edit was rolled back. There are currently four close votes on this question with a comment requesting information about the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we apply the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag to this question and keep it open / reopen it if it's closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-01T11:58:06.740" LastActivityDate="2021-06-01T11:58:06.740" Title="Can we reapply the Pathfinder 2e tag to this Pathfinder 2e question?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|pathfinder|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11566" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11565" CreationDate="2021-05-31T20:57:29.197" Score="16" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The system is utterly clear &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; we should add it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;András has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/9552/andr%c3%a1s?tab=questions&amp;amp;sort=newest&quot;&gt;been asking PF2e questions lately&lt;/a&gt;, and this question even links to material from that system. This is extremely similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9988&quot;&gt;questions linking to D&amp;amp;D Beyond&lt;/a&gt;. The system is &lt;em&gt;undeniably&lt;/em&gt; clear and András &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; knows how the site works and just forgot to add the tag (I have done this myself as well in the past).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-05-31T20:57:29.197" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11567" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-05-31T21:38:05.037" Score="9" ViewCount="119" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a set of spells available only to the Vhaeraun clergy described in AD&amp;amp;D Demihuman Deities book. They look easily adaptable to D&amp;amp;D 5e and I want to do it and ask for a review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want them to be balanced with modern D&amp;amp;D spells, but I'd also want to keep them evenly spaced (they were at 2, 4, 6 and 7 level, as there was no 8 spell level for clerics back then). Thus, asking them together could be more efficient in that matter. But won't it be too much?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2021-05-31T21:40:51.167" Title="I'd like to adapt a set of spells from AD&amp;D to the 5th edition. Ask for review together or one by one?" Tags="|discussion|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11568" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11567" CreationDate="2021-05-31T21:40:51.167" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;You basically homebrew the spells anew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they follow a general progression (think: Revivify -&amp;gt; Resurrect -&amp;gt; True Resurrect) then one question seems appropriate. If they are totally independent (fireball &amp;amp; magic missile) make separate questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-05-31T21:40:51.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11569" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-01T00:26:26.917" Score="20" ViewCount="311" Body="&lt;p&gt;Community discussions about our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11280/62294&quot;&gt;“don’t guess the system” policy&lt;/a&gt; happen from time to time, and it has been my observation that these discussions can often get...what’s a good word for it...&lt;em&gt;intense&lt;/em&gt;? I have often seen these discussions either begin as, or devolve into, adversarial confrontations - of this I am no less guilty than anyone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m not asking anyone to dial down the intensity - we’re all passionate about rpg.se. But as you approach these discussions with fervor, let’s try our best to begin with one foundational assumption:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Everyone wants what is best for the site and is acting in good faith to see that realized.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s approach this issue (and all issues, really) from the assumption that everyone engaged is acting in good faith. No one has some secret, nefarious agenda to push, and no one wants to make the stack worse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just be nice and remember there’s a person behind the avatar that wants the stack to be the best it can be, just as you do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We’re building this together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-01T12:02:44.780" LastActivityDate="2021-06-01T12:02:44.780" Title="When discussing the “don’t guess the system” policy, let’s make a special effort to assume everyone is acting in good faith" Tags="|discussion|etiquette|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11562" CreationDate="2021-06-01T11:35:28.060" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, we shouldn't.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our &amp;quot;never guess the system&amp;quot; policy is clear. We never guess the system even when we are confident that we could do so. If you want to change that, then a specific meta question is not the right place. We have numerous discussion to which you can add.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent came back to edit the information, and that is our current approach to this, and this time it worked out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-06-01T11:35:28.060" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11571" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-03T14:28:35.413" Score="5" ViewCount="234" Body="&lt;p&gt;I can't seem to find a way to sort starred messages from &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;TRPG General Chat&lt;/a&gt;. I want to know what message has the most stars. So yeah, this is supposed to be a fun post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should include a link to the message and a quote block containing the message text, &lt;em&gt;and a screen shot showing the number of stars at time of posting&lt;/em&gt;, as the post could possibly contribute to additional stars.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most stars wins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-03T14:54:00.327" LastActivityDate="2021-08-05T13:28:49.793" Title="What is the most starred message in TRPG General Chat?" Tags="|discussion|chat|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11571" CreationDate="2021-06-03T16:54:48.137" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;By the power of &lt;strike&gt;Grayskull&lt;/strike&gt; manual scrolling!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=37119567#37119567&quot;&gt;This post&lt;/a&gt; seems to have the most stars with 20:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congratulations @doppelgreener and @nitsua60, and thank you to everyone who participated in the diamond election.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zg7hr.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zg7hr.png&quot; alt=&quot;first message with 20 stars&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=20635477#20635477&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt; comes in second place with &lt;strike&gt;18&lt;/strike&gt; 19:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;rpg.se should just have a big banner at the top that says &amp;quot;have you tried talking to the problem player?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2Wkbx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2Wkbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;second message with 19 stars&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of original posting, the above message had 18 stars:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NTnpV.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NTnpV.png&quot; alt=&quot;second message when it still had 18 stars&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50702" LastEditorUserId="50702" LastEditDate="2021-08-05T13:28:49.793" LastActivityDate="2021-08-05T13:28:49.793" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11573" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-05T05:33:17.830" Score="21" ViewCount="367" Body="&lt;p&gt;Following the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11658/48759&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt; this meta now refers to an outdated policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11565&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about reopening a question and tagging it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; on the grounds that the OP linked to the system-specific rule document. As much as I've been on the side of waiting for explicit mention of a system, I'll agree that this counts as such mention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9988&quot;&gt;this policy&lt;/a&gt; stating that questions about D&amp;amp;D Beyond are indisputably about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; because that's what D&amp;amp;D Beyond uses... but it's specific to that system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can (or should) we generalize this policy? Are there any problems with doing so that anyone can foresee?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of 15/06/2021 both answers to this question are positive toward this change with post scores of +20/-3 and +14 respectively. Therefore this change has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/11280/3&quot;&gt;added to the policy meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40335" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-09-03T02:55:13.070" LastActivityDate="2021-09-03T02:55:13.070" Title="Can we generalize our policy on linking system-specific rules, toolsets, etc. as clearly stating the system?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11573" CreationDate="2021-06-05T15:36:42.620" Score="21" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes we can, and we shouldn't even need to ask this meta in order to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11287/1204&quot;&gt;We already discussed&lt;/a&gt; that we should &amp;quot;let experts be experts&amp;quot;. Stack Exchange isn't meant to run on absolute objective rigid adherence to black-and-white law, we're meant to be the people synthesizing our available guidance into considered and careful subjective judgement. The don't guess the system policy quantifiably &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/1204&quot;&gt;does not even have popular support anymore&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As experts operating with considered judgement, we should be considering that when someone unambiguously indicates their system by indicating system-specific documentation while providing nothing to contradict such an indication, they have indicated their system sufficiently to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we shouldn't even be in a place where we need to be asking for this permission and having it confirmed—because we should be operating on a system of careful considered judgment which would indicate this is already the appropriate response based on discussions we've had to date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-05T17:03:28.140" LastActivityDate="2021-06-05T17:03:28.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11575" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11573" CreationDate="2021-06-07T12:29:09.157" Score="23" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Citing materials is a way for someone who doesn’t know there are different editions of the game to tell us what edition they’re using.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I got into Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons, I didn’t know there were editions. I went to my local game store and said “how do I get started with D&amp;amp;D?”, and the clerk said “Buy this” and handed me the &lt;em&gt;Player’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt;. I didn’t know there were proper editions of D&amp;amp;D. I just figured they had been making books since the 80s and you just used whatever you wanted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It wasn’t until I started reading this site that I learned that D&amp;amp;D had different editions. Before I started using the site, &lt;em&gt;I didn’t even know that D&amp;amp;D had editions to specify&lt;/em&gt;. But I could have included in a question for the site, “In the &lt;em&gt;Player’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt; it says [direct quote from the 5th Edition PHB]”. By including this quote, &lt;em&gt;I have specified the edition I’m using without even knowing it&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a common sense step toward improving the way new users relate to the policy we currently have. &lt;em&gt;Users who don’t even know that games have editions should find their inquiries unimpeded by our policy when they cite and quote materials that definitively identify the game system being used.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-07-06T19:07:18.693" LastActivityDate="2021-07-06T19:07:18.693" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11576" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-07T17:01:19.633" Score="10" ViewCount="198" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if a Water Elemental can freeze, so I read the stat block (twice), yet apparently I somehow missed (twice!) the part that partially answers my question. Hence, I asked the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/187915/can-a-water-elemental-freeze&quot;&gt;Can a Water Elemental freeze?&lt;/a&gt; and it could immediately be answered. In retrospect, this makes it a really bad question. What is more: Given the additional information, my actual question should have been &amp;quot;Does a Water Elemental freeze when kept below 0° C?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the appropriate way to go now?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Open a new question, specifying that I am looking for answers that go beyond the feature mentioned in the stat block.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit the existing question despite the existing answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Forget about it, since the questions are too similar and a more precise answer is unlikely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="55742" LastEditorUserId="14878" LastEditDate="2021-06-07T22:56:24.557" LastActivityDate="2021-06-08T14:09:50.847" Title="Is this a legitimate follow-up question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11577" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11576" CreationDate="2021-06-07T23:37:16.587" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;None of these.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Does a Water Elemental freeze when kept below 0°C?” is super inadvisable: Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons is not a physics or chemistry simulator, and you're almost always going to run into trouble when trying to treat it like one. Also, #2 would definitely not be okay—see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6519/when-a-question-changes-completely-should-it-be-a-new-question&quot;&gt;When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question?&lt;/a&gt; which suggests such a significant change to a new, different question should just be asked as a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It sounds like you have &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;an XY problem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have an actual scenario you're trying to resolve. It's got something to do with water elementals. It looks like you're either trying to overcome them and finding out your options, or you're trying to use them and you're dissatisfied with a ruling your DM made. In order to figure out this scenario, you're asking us very specific questions about water elementals' interactions with freezing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of that, you should just ask us directly about the actual problem you're dealing with. What's the actual concrete scenario that you bumped into? What's the actual concrete problem that came out of it that you're trying to address? Instead of asking us questions that might eventually help you solve that problem in that scenario, just tell us directly about that scenario, tell us your problem, and ask us to solve your problem. The entire thing. We're here to do that for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our experience with XY problems is there's always more questions to ask because you don't have the complete solution yet, and they always orbit a context we'd rather solve instead. A physics-in-D&amp;amp;D question is highly liable to get closed as unclear, with people asking you to just directly describe what you're trying to solve as above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-06-08T14:09:50.847" LastActivityDate="2021-06-08T14:09:50.847" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11578" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11579" CreationDate="2021-06-08T13:43:57.993" Score="6" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/187952/48073&quot;&gt;As a Sorcerer, can use I use a Page of Knowledge to use Spell Slots granted by my Charisma bonus, even if they&amp;#39;re higher level then otherwise?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was closed as being a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/36325/48073&quot;&gt;Can a spellcaster use spell slots above their normal limit if their ability scores allow bonus spells of that level?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I don't understand why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before I asked, I checked both google and rpg.stackexchange search, and I couldn't find an answer to the question. And when you ask a question you get a list of potential duplicates, and the other couldn't be found there - I checked them all and didn't find it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question was basically &amp;quot;Considering my character has A, B and C, can I do D?&amp;quot;, while the other question was &amp;quot;Considering my character has C, can I do E?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; were the same - &amp;quot;Because rule F, C doesn't work.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when asking a question, the answer is unknown. So how could I have know that they would have ended up as duplicates, and how can I avoid this in the future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48073" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-11T06:39:06.193" LastActivityDate="2021-06-11T06:39:06.193" Title="Why was this PF 1e question about a sorcerer using Page of Spell Knowledge with higher-level spells closed as a duplicate?" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11579" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11578" CreationDate="2021-06-08T14:14:38.483" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;On further thought, your question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a duplicate&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say I craft a Page of Limited Wish [...] Would this allow me to cast Limited Wish? I have a spell slot of the appropriate level (higher, even), and I have the page to make the spell &amp;quot;known&amp;quot; to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the supposed dupe asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can Xylitol cast 1st level spells using the bonus slots for his 2nd, 3rd, and 4th level spells? &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You ask about casting a spell you don't even know, by using a magic item and whether this is a way to use high-level spell slots. The other question asks about upcasting spells they &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know, without using a magic item, and whether this is a way to use high-level spell slots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions make the same incorrect assumption but are asking about different things. To look at it another way, if the assumption that you can have bonus spell slots that are above your usual level was &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt;, these questions would be, at least to some extent, different questions. Just because they made the same wrong assumption does not mean they ask the same thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say that even if these are not duplicates they are &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; similar questions. I believe my descriptions of them above show just how similar they are, but they are nonetheless, asking different things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;That said, duplicates are actually &lt;em&gt;helpful&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When question A is closed as a duplicate of question B, this increases the number of ways people can find the answer to question A/B. It means the Google and site searches have both been improved, sometimes dramatically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there is nothing wrong with posting a question that is marked as a duplicate, it just means you didn't find it, and I can tell you, none of us can find everything. In fact, I regularly upvote question that are closed as duplicates that were not alarmingly easy to find (like a near-exact title match) &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; the question is &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; a good question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In terms of actually finding a duplicate, they can be looked for in primarily three ways: An Internet search, the auto-generated suggested list, and, what I use the most, site search with tags and keywords. For example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+bonus-spells++is%3Aq+closed%3A0+slot&quot;&gt;this search&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+bonus+spell*+%5Bspell-slots%5D&quot;&gt;this search&lt;/a&gt;, (where the second works only because I &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; added the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-slots&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-slots&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-slots&lt;/a&gt; tag to that question). Site searching is difficult and imperfect, and sometimes your favorite internet browser just knows much better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2021-06-08T17:08:04.013" LastActivityDate="2021-06-08T17:08:04.013" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11580" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11581" CreationDate="2021-06-08T22:15:09.577" Score="6" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11569/when-discussing-the-don-t-guess-the-system-policy-let-s-make-a-special-effort&quot;&gt;In the spirit of good faith&lt;/a&gt;, here are my fears and weaknesses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People mistake system-specific questions for rarely-encountered systems as either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions about once every couple months. (Here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/172271/is-there-a-cost-for-donning-or-doffing-a-shield-and-armor-during-combat&quot;&gt;a question about putting armor on in combat&lt;/a&gt;. Here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161718/is-there-any-way-to-mitigate-crits&quot;&gt;a question about mitigating critical hits&lt;/a&gt;. Here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72484/can-a-paladin-use-lay-on-hands-on-himself&quot;&gt;a question about a paladin using Lay on Hands on himself&lt;/a&gt;. You'll need enough rep to view deleted answers, though.) While that doesn't sound like a big issue, those systems might only be asked about once a month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consensus is currently that we're allowing experts to be experts and add system tags they think are appropriate, rather than closing the question as unclear and waiting for the original asker to edit the tags. But even experts make mistakes. Somebody who mistakes a system is likely to mistake that it deserves a system tag. Especially in the case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, that tag is going to take it off my radar more or less entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not very likely that a suggested edit like that is going to make it out of queue, but 2,000-rep users have been mistaken in the past and they don't need to go through queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't want to look through every &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; question on the off-chance somebody edited it to add an inappropriate tag. Not only is it time-consuming but it's so unlikely compared to the total volume of questions that I'll probably be suffering from alarm fatigue and skip right over it when I check.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: &lt;strong&gt;is it possible to search recent edits for a specific operation, in this case adding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Just to pull it out of volatile comments, here's &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/revision/1419926/1745410/tag-edits-which-edit-in-a-certain-tag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the final SEDE query&lt;/a&gt; from earlier discussion, which shows the last date a tag was edited onto a question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2021-08-03T00:48:12.793" LastActivityDate="2021-08-03T00:48:12.793" Title="Is it possible to search for edits with a certain content, specifically adding a tag?" Tags="|support|tags|editing|search|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11581" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11580" CreationDate="2021-06-08T23:06:53.553" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;SEDE to the rescue&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is outside what you can do with directly site tools, however we have SEDE for those who know the secret tongue of databases. While my skills are limited, I did modify something similar into what &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/revision/1419879/1745359/tag-edits-which-edit-in-a-certain-tag&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;I think you want&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of note, it'll return all questions which have been edited to add the specified tag. It'll list them by ID, with higher ID being more recent questions. Most of these are going to be legitimate: edits by the querent, someone fixing their tag based on info in the post or comment, etc. It also doesn't include deleted questions, which is gonna include some number of cases where the tag was edited in, rolled back, and ultimately never clarified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-06-09T01:09:05.627" LastActivityDate="2021-06-09T01:09:05.627" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11582" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11584" CreationDate="2021-06-09T18:28:40.367" Score="-8" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are still &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bgame-recommendation%5D+closed%3A0+locked%3Ano&quot;&gt;QUITE some questions&lt;/a&gt; out there that are game recommendation questions and not closed or locked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might take months to go and close and lock them all by hand, especially since game recommendations were deemed unfit for the stack &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;5 years ago&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and still people dig them up regularly, at which point we have to take affirmative action of closing - and many old folks downvote those necromancer answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we have the mods go through and either close or lock that backlog?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE&lt;/strong&gt; The last items entered the closure queue as of a few minutes ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-06-19T22:25:13.793" LastActivityDate="2021-06-19T22:25:13.793" Title="Community Cleanup Duty: Game Recommendations" Tags="|support|questions|game-recommendation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11583" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11601" CreationDate="2021-06-09T19:42:10.063" Score="8" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have two watched tags and 85+ ignored tags.&#xA;As of checking the site today (06-09-21 PT), the process of highlighting watched tags and blurring ignored tags does not appear to be functioning the way it was previous to today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the top of my question display are the Newest / Active / Bountied / Unanswered / More tabs, and then just to the right of them the Filter widget.  The widget is orange-lit; I don't recall it looking like that before, but it may be something I did not notice until I started looking for explanations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not clear to me whether this is a bug, a change to the site (&lt;em&gt;eg.&lt;/em&gt;, new filter widget function), or my own personal settings that I have somehow changed without being aware.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="682" LastEditDate="2021-06-15T09:20:07.547" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T20:52:08.473" Title="Watched and ignored is not displaying for me" Tags="|support|bug|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11584" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11582" CreationDate="2021-06-09T19:42:26.990" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We are equipped to handle this through community moderation.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have pretty low volume review queues here. SSD wrote in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6232/please-do-not-flood-queues-with-old-posts-found-by-searching-without-first-clear/6233#6233&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewers can just take bites out of it, and bow out when decision fatigue rears its head. Pressing &lt;kbd&gt;Skip&lt;/kbd&gt; when at all unsure helps a lot in that regard, too. Others will pick it up and take care of a few more, until the whole queue has been reviewed. Crowdsourcing at work!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much preferable for the queue to balloon occasionally, and be handled by the normal crowdsourcing mechanisms it has for precisely such events, than for people to &lt;em&gt;refrain&lt;/em&gt; from flagging when they see something that deserves a flag. All that refraining results in is different people having to—redundantly—each stop and ponder how much flagging is “too much,” wasting user energy that would be better spent just about anywhere else on-site or off, just so that we can, inexplicably, prevent the flood-management measures designed into the system already from needing to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should be just fine to handle it without moderator assistance, and as I am writing this, things seem to be moving through the queue smoothly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/T4pwS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Image of the review queue.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's best to do it in small to medium sized batches.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/n5Xwr.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/n5Xwr.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you send in more questions than we have active reviewers with votes remaining, that's a problem. In hindsight, I should have saved some close votes just in case I needed to close something more pressing before my votes reset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-09T20:51:16.073" LastActivityDate="2021-06-09T20:51:16.073" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11585" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-10T17:03:00.007" Score="7" ViewCount="311" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/187999/how-can-i-limit-but-not-outright-ban-exotic-races&quot;&gt;this question about limiting exotic races&lt;/a&gt; has gone from closed, to opened after some helpful edits, to closed again (without seemingly significant edits). Even now, it has a re-open vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I simply ask: Should this question be closed, or open?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'm asking on meta, per the guidance in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11544/how-do-we-handle-questions-that-are-repeatedly-closed-and-reopened/11549#11549&quot;&gt;@doppelgreener's answer&lt;/a&gt; on this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11544/how-do-we-handle-questions-that-are-repeatedly-closed-and-reopened&quot;&gt;How do we handle questions that are repeatedly closed and reopened?&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-11T06:53:41.023" LastActivityDate="2021-06-14T10:05:22.963" Title="Should this question about player race selection be open or closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11586" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11585" CreationDate="2021-06-10T17:13:14.060" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;it's tricky...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As elaborated in some highly rated comments and my answer, a system would &lt;strong&gt;highly&lt;/strong&gt; help to make better answers. But it technically &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be answered, however only few answers actually follow the &lt;strong&gt;back it up&lt;/strong&gt; principle...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-06-10T17:13:14.060" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11587" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11585" CreationDate="2021-06-10T17:49:02.800" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-agnostic&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-agnostic&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-agnostic&lt;/a&gt; is an appropriate tag here. We do not need to know the system.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That certain systems have mechanics baked in for handling OP's problem is entirely irrelevant. If OP was playing one of those, they likely wouldn't be having this problem. And even if they are, &lt;em&gt;the problem is still widely applicable to systems that don't have such mechanics&lt;/em&gt;, and system agnostic solutions will still be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;OP doesn't have to justify their preferences to us before we can answer their question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were some comments bordering on badwrongfun being thrown about, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;and we shouldn't do that here&lt;/a&gt;. It is perfectly fine for someone to prefer a particular play experience at the table, and OP is looking for methods to help them navigate pre-game social interactions in order to achieve their preferred play experience. It does not matter why they want this particular outcome, they want it, and that is okay, and we should be well equipped to handle this question without having OP defend or even explain their preferences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This type of social interaction question is standard fare for this site. Leave it open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-10T18:02:29.153" LastActivityDate="2021-06-10T18:02:29.153" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11588" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11585" CreationDate="2021-06-10T18:32:30.923" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Leave it closed until the querent's goals are clearer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has been closed at least twice for being unclear. The question has undergone some minor edits but the fundamental confusion is still there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are currently 11 answers (and several now-deleted answers) that cover a variety of possible solutions. It is unclear why none of them suffice for what the querent has in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If their problem persists across systems, then adding a system tag won't help. Or maybe this is a system-specific problem, which could lead to more detailed answers. Until the querent clarifies their presenting problem, the matter of system tagging is irrelevant here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent needs to explain their preferences, not because their preferences are &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, but because they're unclear and confusing. Some of the question criteria seem to be arbitrary and contradictory (e.g. they want to ban certain options without banning those options). There are several obvious solutions, yet none of them are sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe there are additional factors that are specific to their game or their player group. Or maybe an obvious solution is sufficient (e.g. ban the options they don't want) but the querent is rejecting them for unspecified personal reasons. Unless the querent clarifies what they want to accomplish and why, then the site users won't be able to provide informed answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2021-06-10T18:40:35.690" LastActivityDate="2021-06-10T18:40:35.690" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11589" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11585" CreationDate="2021-06-10T19:58:28.847" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It could be reopened as soon as the system-agnostic tag is replaced&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;System-agnostic&amp;quot; could be a relevant tag if the OP was not already set on a specific system to play in a fantasy setting with limited access to exotic races, but it looks like this is not the case here: we need to know what the OP is playing to provide more specific advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastActivityDate="2021-06-10T19:58:28.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11590" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11585" CreationDate="2021-06-11T12:02:35.950" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;It should be closed with further details needed, because it's not a system-agnostic question. System matters for understanding the problem and understanding what solution to apply. Factors that the system influences include but are not limited to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What actual qualities do the “exotic” or “normal” races have that would have a player gravitate toward or away from them? In fact, what specifically makes them different at all? We need to consider this stuff if we're going to provide guidance on how to point players in a different direction.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What kinds of stories is the system interested in telling? How does the choice of race affect the story, or create or resolve problems?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What does the system offer in terms of incentivisation that the group can utilise? What concrete tools are available for shepherding players and how should they be used?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In fact, what's the player/GM relationship here, and is there even a GM at all? This changes the power dynamics when making requests of others at the table or when implementing changes—some games vest significant authority in the GM, some vest no special authority at all in them.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are factors that do not have a “neutral” or “agnostic” answer. Each system (or the lack of a system entirely, maybe it's freeform) has specific answers, where “nothing defined on this topic at all” is also a relevant answer for readers to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that in different systems, the answers vary a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In D&amp;amp;D, a group with highly varied races isn't a big issue and solves a lot of problems.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In a Warhammer game, it &lt;em&gt;creates&lt;/em&gt; problems for humans to adventure with non-humans.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In a World of Darkness game, the answer is digging into splat mixing vs not, and answers about splat mixing tend to be in the vicinity of “yeah, people try that, but it doesn't actually work too well. If you're going to do that, here's how.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In Dresden Files, it takes the story in a different direction. There's specific tools the game uses to address fey creatures (narrative permissions related to free will, different fate point allowances) and unique incentives to pick them. It's a significant consideration whether your characters can pass as human; this doesn't matter in D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In lieu of any specific information about the system, people are assuming D&amp;amp;D, assuming its constraints and situations apply, and they're name-dropping DMing and Pathfinder out of an assumption they're relevant. This is pretty fair—it's quite clear the question seems to be addressing D&amp;amp;D, but doesn't want to say so for some reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifying the system to us is helpful. It gives people knowledge of the tools they can work with, and that's important. Withholding such information and just pretending it's system-agnostic isn't doing anyone any favors. It leaves answerers armed with less knowledge for addressing the problem, and leaves them providing weaker solutions and guidance than they could otherwise speak about. Personally, it seems like a long line of sytem-agnostic-but-actually-D&amp;amp;D questions that assume that the tabletop RPG space is equivalent to D&amp;amp;D and therefore D&amp;amp;D questions can be system agnostic because it's all the same. (We saw this happen a lot during our early years on this site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP ought to tell us specifically what system or systems they're trying to solve this issue in, rather than beating around the bush. RPG.SE is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;solving practical questions based on actual problems that you face&lt;/a&gt;, not about generic problems that generically exist out there somewhere. The OP is having this practical problem in a specific system or set of systems, and should tell us what those are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-14T10:05:22.963" LastActivityDate="2021-06-14T10:05:22.963" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11591" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11592" CreationDate="2021-06-11T15:59:20.213" Score="11" ViewCount="243" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a curious case that resulted in bunch of questions that are tagged with one system, while the OP was confused about workings of a different system - and some of these tags were applied by OP himself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: That I am posting this as an outside observer, and even though the other people involved are active members of the community I have not contacted them. So I encourage them to participate and feel free to correct me if I am wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So our tale starts with this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184761/how-can-i-get-the-dm-to-stop-sending-giants-to-kill-us&quot;&gt;How can I get the DM to stop sending giants to kill us?&lt;/a&gt;. It was a well-received question by a first-time asker that was tagged simply &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;. The community members helpfully changed the tags to more descriptive &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, which were initially rolled back but afterwards accepted. (Note: &lt;s&gt;I haven't seen where OP states that it was indeed 5e.&lt;/s&gt; The OP stated the system was 5e in a now deleted comment.) OP took note of it and changed the tag to 5e in the other open question at the time and in future only used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And all was well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is until he asked this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184945/how-can-my-level-3-party-defeat-a-group-of-liches&quot;&gt;How can my level 3 party defeat a group of Liches?&lt;/a&gt; For anyone with any experience with 5e it was obvious, that something was very wrong with the situation. It looks like most of the community assumed that it was a problem GM or the system was heavily homebrewed, and it seems most took the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; tag (added by OP) as a fact. I (and I'm sure there were others) thought that OP was actually playing something other than D&amp;amp;D 5e, and out of curiosity, I mentally noted to check up later what system was he actually using.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A while later he asked this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185016/how-do-i-gain-magic-as-a-ranger&quot;&gt;How do I gain magic as a Ranger?&lt;/a&gt; - and, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/124172/discussion-on-question-by-devils-spawn-how-do-i-gain-magic-as-a-ranger&quot;&gt;comments/chat&lt;/a&gt;, all but confirmed that the &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt; that book he was using was not actually the D&amp;amp;D 5e &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt; (although he never stated what was the actual system that he was playing, and I am still intrigued).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So now there are questions that asked about situation in system A, but were tagged with the system B - some of which were well-received, no doubt because situations seemed intriguingly crazy, while others were poorly received because they made no sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also find it hard to see that there would be anyone to blame for this confusion. The initial edits were most likely done in good faith to improve the tags on the question. The OP probably didn't know he was playing something other than D&amp;amp;D 5e, and took the tagging suggestions to heart. If anything, most of the blame lies on the shoulders of OP's GM, who didn't convey what exactly was it that they were playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, as long there exists things like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scruffygrognard.com/documents/DD5classic.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this PDF&lt;/a&gt;* (whatever that is), it is completely reasonable that we will get people asking questions who not only do not know which &lt;em&gt;Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons&lt;/em&gt; edition they are playing but can also cite the exact text found in D&amp;amp;D 5e books while actually using another system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is therefore twofold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does anything need to be done to the existing questions? Technically the tagged system is not the one the questions were asked about, but it is a mess.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do we need some kind of community guidance to prevent such a confusion from occurring again?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;* I found it by using a Google search limited to PDF files on the overrun text mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy#comment32581_9809&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;. As it is a PHB, not DMG, I didn't manage to prove the original commenter completely wrong :)&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52504" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-12T04:47:23.697" LastActivityDate="2021-06-12T04:47:23.697" Title="An asker seems to have been misled about the system they were using. Should we do anything about it?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11592" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11591" CreationDate="2021-06-11T16:26:21.910" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The questions are old enough at this point that changing them invalidates their answers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions are from May 5th, 10th, and 11th. It is now an entire month later and these questions have meaningful answers that work under the assumption that these questions are &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; about the fifth edition of Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons. Thus these questions are actually now &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; that system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;New questions about the same topic in a different system can always be made&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP returns and knows what system they were actually playing, they can ask these same questions but about the actual system they were playing. The questions the OP ultimately asked (tagged with [dnd-5e]) are fundamentally different from questions tagged with a different system tag and so entirely new questions could always be asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, it doesn't seem like they have returned with the answer, and we don't even know for sure that they were actually playing a system that &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; dnd-5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't personally see this as a problem: the OP can, with limited effort, ask the same (but different) question about a different system. The wrong system may have been assumed, but it was not caught for quite a while and so, at this point, the answers, with their upvotes and views, stand on their own as answers to a question that &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; about that system (dnd-5e).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-06-11T16:48:40.430" LastActivityDate="2021-06-11T16:48:40.430" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11593" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11594" CreationDate="2021-06-11T19:19:06.227" Score="1" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-archer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-archer&lt;/a&gt; tag has a &lt;strong&gt;quite&lt;/strong&gt; wrong tag description at the time of this post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Arcane Archer is a fighter subclass in Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons 5th edition (published in Xanathar's Guide to everything), and has the ability to use a number of arcane shots in battle that augment the use of ranged weapons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, Arcane Archer predates D&amp;amp;D 5E by &lt;strong&gt;years&lt;/strong&gt;: it had been a prestige class back in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Arcane_archer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Neverwinter Nights&lt;/em&gt; games&lt;/a&gt; (which used the 3.5 SRD - &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/arcaneArcher.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;where it IS too&lt;/a&gt;) and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://aonprd.com/PrestigeClassesDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Arcane%20Archer&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; 1e prestige class from the core book&lt;/a&gt;, dating its inception back to about 3rd to 3.5th edition of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tidbit about &lt;em&gt;Xanathar's Guide&lt;/em&gt; as the first publication of the class is plain wrong; it is not only a subclass, but used to be an independent class in earlier editions... and atop that, the tag is not system-agnostic as it should be, because the term is &lt;em&gt;used&lt;/em&gt; across multiple RPG systems.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;However, the best I could do is make a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; game-centric tag, that focuses on the &lt;em&gt;old&lt;/em&gt; prestige class version. So I call for help. (Remember &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magus&lt;/a&gt;? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8044/magus-is-a-bad-tag-lets-fix-it&quot;&gt;That was a &lt;em&gt;mess&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; we sorted out together.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What formulation can fix the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-archer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-archer&lt;/a&gt; tag description best, and not be confused with the similar-but-distinct &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranger&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranger&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranger&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I understand them, the arcane archer is basically either a wizard/sorcerer that picked up archery or an archer (ranger, warrior) that picked up arcane magic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Note&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=arcane+archer+%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;14 questions mentioning the &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; Arcane Archer&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=arcane%20archer%20%5Bdnd-3.5%5D+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;9 questions mentioning the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e Arcane Archer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-12T04:19:20.300" LastActivityDate="2021-06-12T04:34:46.490" Title="Let's fix the [arcane-archer] tag!" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11594" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11593" CreationDate="2021-06-11T20:05:59.563" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;I went ahead and changed the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-archer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-archer&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/arcane-archer/info&quot;&gt;tag info&lt;/a&gt; to the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about Arcane Archers, a character archetype which combines magic or spells with archery or similar ranged weapons. See in particular the character option with the same name for several editions of D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And included some bullets with those specific character options in the wiki. If slightly more details are warranted, I welcome anyone with those to add them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This change should clarify that it's referring to the character archetype, while still pointing to the specific implementations we have questions about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I'll also welcome any correction, but I looked at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Arcane+Archer+%5Bdnd-4e%5D+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;the 4e questions&lt;/a&gt; and by the looks of those there's not a character option for it in that edition. Whether those questions deserve the tag I'll leave open for the moment.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And for what it's worth, the excerpt has already been revised to read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about Arcane Archers, a character archetype which uses specially enchanted ammunition (typically arrows). See in particular the character options with the same name for several editions of D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-12T04:34:46.490" LastActivityDate="2021-06-12T04:34:46.490" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11595" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-13T14:26:56.560" Score="9" ViewCount="458" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me start by trying to give a definition. We’re here talking about meta discussions which strongly guide or dictate behaviour, and in particular where there are opposing, incompatible options and – by nature of the problem we’re talking about here – disagreement about which to go with. For lack of a better term, let’s call them “policies”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We decide which option to go with based on vote consensus (the answer with the highest overall score once stabilised). However, it is still possible to vote on those posts, which would make it possible for the votes to change. Unless there exist old (and forgotten) examples, this has happened exactly twice – both in relation to “Don’t Guess the System”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of issues or concerns which exists around this, and which need to be addressed and/or resolved:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The “losing” side would be much more likely to be directed to that meta and vote. That may include any number of visiting users who do not take part in the curation and activity that the policy exists for. That makes the new scores unreliable for representing the community consensus, meaning it can't be taken as a new result without a full revisit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The resulting post stops working as an efficient signpost for the policy, as votes no longer reflect current praxis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We can’t have consensus continuously update according to which answer has the highest score at any given time. Neither having the policy flip-flop between solutions, nor expecting users to check every time they would take a relevant action, is a feasible solution. While there is no guarantee that would happen, I don’t think any of us would want to have such a lingering burden. Closure is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We don’t want to (by principle) automatically start a revisit, as it would rapidly exhaust at least one side of the argument, which isn’t workable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That last point in particular brings me back to the two cases we’ve had. First was the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9312/52137&quot;&gt;“5e”-specific clarification to DGtS&lt;/a&gt;. Once the change in votes became known (to me), I made the call to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281/52137&quot;&gt;revisit that discussion&lt;/a&gt;. Enough time, discussion, and other changes had happened since the original that it seemed warranted. And the reception to that was quite good, and the consensus startlingly strong, given how divisive the topic has generally been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the same changeover in votes happened to the most recent DGtS revisit, it was not revisited, opting instead for stability (in terms of acting policy). This was largely due to the relatively short period of time that had passed since that re-visit and a general feel that the community was tired of discussing it for the time being. I think that’s part of why &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; discussion is so late to be started. For it being late, I can only apologize.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, with the major problems put forth, let’s start working towards solutions. To that end, let’s keep this discussion to the process. That is, please don’t expend energy here discussing the DGtS policy itself, though the discussion will inevitably include as an example, and apply to, the DGtS policy. We work best with specific examples, but let’s leave DGtS as only an example and not the actual meat of the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With all that out of the way:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How do we want to handle “policy” meta discussions when the votes change later on?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-06-14T10:14:37.423" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T15:16:16.000" Title="We need to talk about late votes to “policy” metas" Tags="|discussion|policy|meta|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11596" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11595" CreationDate="2021-06-13T14:36:58.567" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Lock the policy question once the matter is mostly settled.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Locking a question prevents voting on the question and its answers, which would resolve this issue. Diamond mods can simply lock policy questions after voting has stabilized. If somebody really wants to make their voice heard on that issue after the question has been locked, they can put in the effort to ask a new question to re-open the matter for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We could use a variety of criteria to determine when to lock. A set amount of time after the question is created (1 week, 2 weeks)? A set amount of time after the last modification of the thread (question or answer)? A set amount of time after the last vote on any of the answers (seems ideal but hard to track)? After the question falls off the main page of meta? Some combination of the above?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2021-06-13T14:36:58.567" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11597" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11595" CreationDate="2021-06-13T16:46:19.410" Score="23" Body="&lt;p&gt;I believe changes to scores in policy metas should be observed as reflecting the ongoing, developing will of the community. Leaving these metas open and unlocked is useful for gauging that will, and I believe it's important for telling us when we need to take another look at something and have another discussion about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll get to a generalised proposal in the very last section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First though, I need to address those concerns that were shared in the bullet points in this meta question. We were asked not to discuss the “Don't guess the system” policy here, but it's materially relevant to those concerns, and to respond to them I &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to describe what's concretely happening in our community around that policy. So, I'm going to be talking about that stuff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The assertion about new scores being unreliable disenfranchises voters&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The “losing” side would be much more likely to be directed to that meta and vote. That may include any number of visiting users who do not take part in the curation and activity that the policy exists for. That makes the new scores unreliable for representing the community consensus, [meaning it can't be taken as a new result without a full revisit.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't agree with this as given, with the exception of the last bit I put in square brackets. To the bit in square bracketes: yes, I believe a full revisit is appropriate when this occurs; I'll get to that in my last section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But on the bit outside the square brackets—there is an enormous claim here that's unsubstantiated: that the “losing” side in specific is disproportionately affecting things, and that this makes the votes unreliable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Supposing that there's a “losing side magnet” of some kind and that any votes attracted by that magnet don't count is a big assumption to make. It's a significant claim that disenfranchises community voters from having their say, and needs to be backed up. The votes didn't just ... come out of nowhere. They came out of real people having their say on the policy, and alleging their votes don't count just because they disagree with the position we initially took out of that meta is not appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dear reader, if you share this concern, let me be clear I don't believe you'd necessarily make this claim in bad faith. I simply want to  express the severity of this assertion and its implications that you may not have considered. I think it's fairly reliable that you'd be acting in good faith, dear reader, so I believe you'll take into serious consideration what I'm saying here—that dismissing voters is a big deal and cannot be done based on speculation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The argument “oh, the data's not reliable, because {reason I decided here}” is readily available as a reason to disenfranchise any group, and we've seen it before, and it sucks. Back when Game Recommendations were banned, the collective community uproar was completely ignored by the diamond moderation team we had at the time. The diamond moderators ignored us specifically due to who we hitched our wagon to (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27488503#27488503&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/13848?m=27490161#27490161&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) despite the person to whom our wagon was hitched making &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6123/is-something-wrong-yes-pervasive-ad-hominem-and-judgmental-behaviors&quot;&gt;a reasonable, heavily supported complaint&lt;/a&gt;. Further, individuals like me who spoke up about our upset were ignored &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; we were upset—the mods &lt;a href=&quot;http://wiki.c2.com/?SetTheBozoBit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;flipped the bozo bit&lt;/a&gt; on us (which means: deciding in perpetuity that someone's wrong because of who they are, not what they said). As that complaint lays out in point 3, the mods operated then on a basis of “anyone who's upset about this is one of those five, oops I mean six, oh I guess it's seven, always-upset people”. The diamond moderators disenfranchising people directly lead to such harm that it took the community several years to recover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although I don't believe anyone here is coming from the same place, I am worried that this concern may &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; come from flipping the bozo bit on people voting against the policy—we need to avoid making the same mistake of deciding “oh, the community input can be ignored here because of reasons that are not substantiated” again on a different basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The fact is, the community is in charge of determining the course of how we operate on the site. The diamond moderators are not, vocal individuals are not. The voting meta community is. The voting meta community is making it very clear what they want. It's not appropriate for any group to say “oh, well, that other group doesn't count actually because reasons.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe instead it's significant that people are responding with discontent to the policy. This isn't an aberration—it's not like there's been any shortage of people expressing discontentment with our “don't guess the system” policy. By any measure at all (score, upvotes, or downvotes), popular support is now fully behind repealing the policy, and in fact the score is within 1-2 votes of being double the other policy's score:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/1204&quot;&gt;“Revert the policy, and treat these edits like any other”&lt;/a&gt; is at 44 points, +67 upvotes, -23 downvotes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/1204&quot;&gt;“I think it is a terrible idea to revert the policy”&lt;/a&gt; is at 23 points, +58 upvotes, -35 downvotes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's my personal speculation that this change in scores over time reflects the community trying and testing the statements in both and figuring out that it's not actually going to be all that bad if the policy was repealed. But overall, it doesn't matter what my speculation is. It matters that people are voting and have expressed their stance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, I don't believe we do have any evidence to substantiate that there's some kind of “losing side magnet” anyway. We haven't seen previous topics automatically attract votes in favour of the “losing” side &lt;em&gt;just because&lt;/em&gt; it lost. We've seen votes side in favor of general community consensus, which has, in general, been the “winning” side.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The state of the meta has been reflected just fine&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The resulting post stops working as an efficient signpost for the policy, as votes no longer reflect current praxis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt; this paragraph at the end, and in fact this is why we added it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After 3 months, the community's highest voted answer is sitting at +54/-22 and advocates for not changing the policy according to the moderators' proposal, which ranks below it in score at +47/-22. As the community failed to achieve a consensus to change the status quo, we will continue to enforce the policy as we have in the past. Separate refinements made notwithstanding.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was still on the diamond team when this meta was developing, and I remember us discussing doing this eventually to record how things unfolded &lt;em&gt;specifically because&lt;/em&gt; votes might change. (Rubiksmoose eventually added this paragraph a month after I left the team.) We discussed whether it would be more appropriate to add this paragraph or post a new meta, since both are reasonable options with precedent, and if my memory serves, we settled on adding this paragraph lest the new meta be seen as a place to re-contest the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We're not witnessing a flip-flop, we're witnessing a community trend over a year in the making&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can’t have consensus continuously update according to which answer has the highest score at any given time. Neither having the policy flip-flop between solutions, nor expecting users to check every time they would take a relevant action, is a feasible solution. While there is no guarantee that would happen, I don’t think any of us would want to have such a lingering burden. Closure is important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not what's happening though. The policy has not been flip-flopping. When votes on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt; were neck and neck and it was not clear which one would prevail, we held off on determining our course forward until it was very clear one was the prevailing answer we should go with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, there is a very clear and unambiguous sentiment that the community's will is changing. The trend has continued consistently. There is a noticeable gap. The scores are more unambiguous than when we decided what to go with in the first place. There is no flip-flopping like it's just going to happen every day—there's a clear answer emerging from the community, and it's different to last time, but it's still the answer emerging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Arguments about exhaustion don't hold water&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t want to (by principle) automatically start a revisit, as it would rapidly exhaust at least one side of the argument, which isn’t workable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe this to be a valid reason not to have a revisit. I don't think this is even true.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe it's an invalid claim to suggest that a side can be “exhausted”, as if the majority side can somehow get real tuckered out from having to write a meta justification every now and then, or as if all the words have run out and can't be re-used. If they're the majority, if they're right, if they have popular support, it'll be easy enough to explain why and get that support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we decided to go forward with asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8946/time-to-retire-the-rules-as-written-tag&quot;&gt;Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?&lt;/a&gt; even though one user was suspended and unable to participate, the moderator team's position was that we needed to be able to discuss this anyway, and if &lt;em&gt;not one other person&lt;/em&gt; could mount an argument in favor of keeping the tag, then what's that really indicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Coming from that—are we really suggesting that &lt;em&gt;an entire half of the active community&lt;/em&gt; might be unable to successfully mount a position on the policy, and that's reason enough to not revisit the topic? Or that if we revisited it and nobody mounted a certain position, it'd mean the whole discussion's invalidated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've seen only one individual make repeated serious claims about exhaustion. I'll leave them unnamed for their benefit, but specifically, their expressed claim has been that one side is trying to win by exhausting their opposition.† That's an allegation that an entire side is acting in bad faith, which I don't think is fair in the least. Worse yet, it's an implication that any change of support in subsequent assessments is just “exhaustion” of one side rather than a change in community will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(† I'd quote it, but again, I want the user to be able to remain anonymous. Diamond mods, if you think this is an unfair summary, please correct it or request that I do so. If I'm lying, may I be struck down for it—but I can link to this assertion being stated plainly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither side got exhausted in the last revisit. We just discussed things and saw where we were at. Neither side will be exhausted in the next revisit. It's been more than a year—I think this is completely reasonable to do one again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe arguments of exhaustion carry the indication that once we've had the discussion once, the community will is set in stone indefinitely and even if the majority are now disagreeing, we can't change anything. That's counterproductive to a meaningful community democracy—if consensus changes, we should be able to have that reflected in how we operate. Proponents of the status quo, if they have support, should have nothing to fear on things being revisited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Support for one side drying up is not an indication that the side is somehow exhausted &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; that the other has been on some campaign to exhaust them. Instead, it's just indication that support has dried up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So what do we do?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's actually useful for us to leave metas like this open and let people vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recording the state of votes:&lt;/strong&gt; We don't need to lock them to reflect where votes were at, since we already have options for this already:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can update the meta to specify how we decided on things. We did that in the last paragraph of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Re-revisiting the &amp;quot;don&amp;#39;t guess the system&amp;quot; policy&lt;/a&gt;: three months in, Rubiksmoose updated it to clearly say what the community will had settled on and what the votes were, making that information available even as votes changed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We can also post a follow-up meta confirming what's happened. This was done with game recommendations: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;we had a discussion&lt;/a&gt;, then ten days later &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;mods made a post clarifying the new situation&lt;/a&gt;. The title for that one says “revisited”, but that's a reference to the four-year-prior policy post, not a reference to revisiting the discussion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we leave the meta open, votes will continue to come in, and that's fine. A great deal of our metas are about us deciding how to do things (and I don't mean policy posts, I mean everyday discussions of “what do we do here?” at various scales) and those don't get locked either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If community sentiment remains in tune with that meta, well, I believe scores will continue to reflect that, as they have just about always. If community sentiment &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; change, that's something to pay attention to and something to cue that we should have another discussion on that matter to see where we're at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We don't need to be afraid of revisits happening constantly, or constant flip-flops.&lt;/strong&gt; Suppose we have a meta and decide something, and we're afraid of having a revisit after just one month—that would mean that the majority case lost support in just one month! We surely wouldn't even go with that case to begin with, or we've obviously discovered major opposition to it or that it doesn't work, and that's worth discussing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this concrete case, it took &lt;em&gt;an entire year&lt;/em&gt; for the “don't guess the system” policy to reach this point. Heck, it took about eight months for the two positions to achieve parity again (Akixkisu notes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11461/1204&quot;&gt;in this answer&lt;/a&gt; that the votes were about even, with “repeal” ahead by just a vote or two, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11279/what-is-the-don-t-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;in November 2020 when this meta was posted&lt;/a&gt;.) I believe we should not be afraid of re-assessing something after this long, especially not after the response changes so significantly, and I don't believe we have reason to be afraid it will happen more often than this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I think locking metas is the wrong call.&lt;/strong&gt; Those votes coming in after we decided which direction to go are useful to have. Let me ask you, if we're concerned of having revisits too often: how do we know when to have them, if we don't have a metric like this? Those votes tell us when it's time for a revisit or if no revisit is needed. We only had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;the March 2020 re-revisit&lt;/a&gt; because circumstances seemed to be diffrent from what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8417/revisiting-our-never-guess-the-game-system-policy&quot;&gt;the September 2018 revisit&lt;/a&gt; predicted—that we'd have tons of edition confusion again when Pathfinder 2e came out. We're only talking about this now &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; the previous majority answer has lost support by such a significant margin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A full revisit is probably preferable to just immediately changing policy.&lt;/strong&gt; A change in will being expressed by voters indicates it's time to have a new look at the topic. This &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; mean the now-popular stance should be immediately adopted, but it's possible instead we're ready for a third option, one that reflects more clearly where we're at now—and we can only find that out through discussion with each other. The possibility of discovering that suggests we should probably prefer having a new revisit discussion. &lt;em&gt;Maybe&lt;/em&gt; there will be situations in the future where we should just immediately change policy without a new discussion, but I don't think that's any current situation we're dealing with, and we'll know if and when that's needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to summarise:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave metas open after discussing them. Update the question or post a follow-up meta confirming the outcome at the time the community will seems clear.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a position on meta loses majority support, revisit them. The evidence we have at the moment suggests this takes a long time to happen, so we don't need to be concerned that this might happen constantly on any given issue.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Put aside “exhaustion” arguments. They don't have merit and are undemocratic. Sides don't get exhausted. People can be exhausted, but &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; can be exhausted—they can take a break and the rest of the community can still act.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Maintain that votes matter, and don't disenfranchise any group for any reason. Instead, take votes seriously and ensure the community has their say.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-14T11:49:45.650" LastActivityDate="2021-06-14T11:49:45.650" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11598" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-14T12:30:50.850" Score="8" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;The “asked/answered/edited X time ago” messages on the question list are always right-aligned. Today that right alignment seems to be missing, except for when they word wrap to the next line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It definitely doesn't seem deliberately like this; there's no space at all between the tags and attribution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yp9nj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yp9nj.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-06-18T14:15:32.177" LastActivityDate="2021-06-18T14:15:32.177" Title="The question list's &quot;actioned X time ago&quot; alignment is broken" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11599" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11595" CreationDate="2021-06-14T15:09:20.997" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think this is very much an important subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also think that trying to raise it at this point—when we have only one example of the problem, and it’s &lt;em&gt;this example&lt;/em&gt;, and that example &lt;em&gt;is very much currently unresolved&lt;/em&gt;—is simply not going to work. The arguments are not going to be appropriately separated from the specific example; the highest-rated existing answer certainly does not. And even if answers are, it’s highly unlikely that &lt;em&gt;votes&lt;/em&gt; are. You’ll just see people voting in favor of whatever action they’d like to see taken with respect to the Don’t Guess the System policy—that is, act now, or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, it might be better debated as a hypothetical, except hypotheticals are terrible for debates and is unlikely to be productive—just more productive, I think, than this is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea what to do the next time it comes up. I don’t, actually, even have confidence that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a good answer. But I don’t think the framing of the debate here is likely to yield particularly useful insights, and I don’t think we have a “good” alternative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But at the very least, I think we should probably revisit Don’t Guess the System, settle that (and it does seem likely to &lt;em&gt;get&lt;/em&gt; settled at this point), and &lt;em&gt;then&lt;/em&gt; have this debate. As things currently stand, I suspect many votes here are going to be stand-in votes about Don’t Guess the System, since there isn’t currently any (active, meaningful) place to put those votes and that is something that (I assume) is nearer and dearer to most users’ hearts, considering the controversy around that policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-06-14T15:34:04.377" LastActivityDate="2021-06-14T15:34:04.377" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11600" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11595" CreationDate="2021-06-15T15:16:16.000" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;On second thought... &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; this important?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don’t Guess the System is almost certainly due for a revisit regardless, and not only is it the only example of this that we have—it’s also just about the only conceivable controversy where this would even be a concern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We simply don’t &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; policies as described in the question for much of &lt;em&gt;anything&lt;/em&gt;—all of it is either&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;network-wide rules (Be Nice, don’t engage in activity that might get the site in legal trouble, e.g. piracy, don’t answer in comments),&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;what is on- or off-topic (which has rarely needed to be addressed repeatedly, and when it does everyone has seemed comfortable with “we’ll try this for a while and see how it goes”), or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;extremely non-controversial (i.e. don’t post iterations on homebrew-review questions more frequently than once every 72 hours, which is as far as I can tell our &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; site-specific policy outside topicality, and no one has ever pushed back on it as far as I know).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am struggling to find anything else—&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11176/4563&quot;&gt;the relevant Meta question&lt;/a&gt; doesn’t list anything else. The alignment discussion, &lt;em&gt;maybe?&lt;/em&gt; I’d argue that’s a topicality question, and really just a recognition of where alignment falls on Good Subjective/Bad Subjective, but it’s the only other thing I can think of. Maybe we could or should revisit tool-recommendation—seeing as that never got a proper Meta hearing in the first place, and site consensus on that was never actually determined—but that’s been that way for years and no one seems eager to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So all of these are very unlikely to change—are very unlikely to garner much &lt;em&gt;interest&lt;/em&gt; in a change. Many of them we &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt; change. Don’t Guess the System isn’t just the only concrete example we have, it’s also, as far as I can tell, the only &lt;em&gt;theoretical&lt;/em&gt; example we have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what are we even discussing here? If we’re only discussing Don’t Guess the System, we should just discuss that. If we’re discussing unimagined hypothetical future scenarios, we probably shouldn’t. It certainly doesn’t seem pressing or &lt;em&gt;important&lt;/em&gt; to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T15:16:16.000" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11601" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11583" CreationDate="2021-06-15T20:52:08.473" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/366345/335251&quot;&gt;Marc Gravell's answer to the linked post on MSE&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry about that. What happened here: the favorites/ignored feature is&#xA;implemented client-side; a UI tweak changed the DOM in a way that&#xA;broke the jQuery selector, meaning that it no longer found the tag&#xA;data. I've put a PR together that fixes this - we'll get it deployed&#xA;as soon as we can (after validation, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And per Marc's subsequent comments there, the bugfix has now been deployed. (Marc has also added the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; tag to this Q&amp;amp;A accordingly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2021-06-15T20:52:08.473" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11602" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-16T08:29:10.163" Score="5" ViewCount="500" Body="&lt;p&gt;As a community, we should discuss how to frame the upcoming revisit of the Don't Guess the System Policy. We need a transparent and fair vote, so we ought to establish voting rules that prevent influences that negatively impact the transparency of the voting process. We have to acknowledge our initial situation and the expression of the will of our community therein.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-17T01:59:12.970" LastActivityDate="2021-06-21T08:45:55.997" Title="How shall we frame our upcoming revisit of the Don't Guess the System Policy?" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|meta|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11603" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-16T08:29:10.163" Score="-12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;How we could do that:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should acknowledge that during the last year, we accumulated an overwhelming majority in favour of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/44723&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Revert the policy, and treat these edits like any other.&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; So we should treat it as our status quo in the regard of voting onus. Any Answer that advocates keeping the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9809/44723&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Don't Guess the System&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; policy should gain a demonstrable majority by a large margin after a voting period of three months. If the voting process is close at all, we should treat the long process that led to the overwhelming majority in favour of &amp;quot;Revert the policy, and treat these edits like any other.&amp;quot; as our policy, and we can only ask our moderators to enforce it as the will of our voting as a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the majority should change again during an enduring voting process, we shall revisit the policy as soon as possible, but at least one year after the last revisit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Initiating a revisit shall be a community process that stems from within a community of equals of equal power. So those of us who carry the elected moderator role shall not initiate a revisit. As moderators are otherwise also regular community members, they shall participate as any regular community member would in all other matters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our revisit shall start on the first of July 2021. This two-week span should give all of us ample time to draft answers that may gain momentum at the same pace.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shall assume that all discussion related stems from good faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T08:29:10.163" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11604" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-16T09:02:06.563" Score="0" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Just let the moderators handle it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone_Evil has already asked us about what the mods are unsure about (votes changing ex post facto). We don’t need the formality you proposed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11603/62294&quot;&gt;your answer&lt;/a&gt;. We elected them because we trust them to give guidance to the community when necessary, so let’s let them work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-16T15:22:26.667" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T15:22:26.667" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11605" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-16T13:48:52.660" Score="2" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm looking specifically for &lt;strong&gt;items&lt;/strong&gt; that can mitigate issues with light sensitivity. I asked here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/188204/10642&quot;&gt;Are there official items for mitigating light sensitivity?&lt;/a&gt; and it got closed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/55504/10642&quot;&gt;How can I get around the drow&amp;#39;s light sensitivity?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Problem is, older question does not focus on items. It does not focus on anything in particular at all and all but two answers (one short, one with heavily negative score) are even relevant to what I want to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, how I can obtain answer I want without being redirected to answers I'm specifically &lt;strong&gt;not interested in&lt;/strong&gt;, because they does not solve my roleplaying needs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't care about question with id 188204 being closed or open, or form me to be &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;wrong&amp;quot;. I only want to get Answers to the Question I really have. That's what this Q&amp;amp;A format is about, isn't it? So.... how?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-16T18:51:24.703" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T18:51:24.703" Title="How can I get answers about items serving a specific purpose, without my question being closed as duplicate of a Q&amp;A that doesn't care about items?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11606" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11605" CreationDate="2021-06-16T14:06:49.700" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It's a dupe, you want to Bounty&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both questions are asking how to mitigate sunlight sensitivity: that makes your question a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; to the older one do fully include an aspect you are interested in. You'd like to see more than just that, so in these situations where you are asking the same thing but not getting the type or quality of answer you want or need, then the proper thing to do is to place a bounty with the additional missing or extra information on the older question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Specifics vs general&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The older question gives a very general problem to solve: How can sunlight sensitivity be mitigated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question asks a specific question: what items mitigate sunlight sensitivity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are asking about a specific solution to a problem, rather than asking about generally how to solve the problem. Asking generally clearly encompasses the specific piece you have, but if that isn't really what you're asking, then clarifying what your exact problem is may help determine if the other question is a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2021-06-16T15:07:43.683" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T15:07:43.683" CommentCount="19" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11607" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-16T14:19:06.527" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Once a re-re-revisit is posted, lock it for a week.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This lets people draft up answers and prevents things like Fastest Gun In The West. It means that there will be an exact time at which the question will be unlocked and answers can then be posted at roughly the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People will probably have free time somewhere within a week to draft an answer, so people who have five or six full days of work over each week will still have a chance to create answers, but I have no good reason for it to be only &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; week and not seventeen weeks other than that at some unknowable, arbitrary point, it would be too many weeks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People have thought about this a lot so they probably already know much of what they would say and a week to get that all down on paper sounds good to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T14:19:06.527" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11608" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-16T14:21:14.943" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Wait an arbitrary (at least a month) amount of time until a clear winner emerges&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, having voting end after a day or two is nonsense. Some people, who &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; active community members and have seen DGtS and formed opinions on it as it applies to this site, are not active every single day, or even each week. I suggest &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; a month of time (which is how long, at a minimum, it takes for the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; tag to run out anyway), and if, after that, the scores amongst various answers are still very close, we should wait longer. People will, obviously, disagree about whether a score of 25 and a score of 23 means the 25-scoring question should be adopted site wide, but there would &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; be a lot of people disagreeing with that kind of change. Therefore, I suggest we wait until a clear difference exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not putting forward a precise definition in score or percentage for what counts as a clear difference between answers simply because I do not have one. This is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sorites Paradox&lt;/a&gt;; just as I do not precisely when a heap of sand becomes a pile of sand, I do not know when close scores reveal a clear winner. It is not an exact thing, and that's okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, this all has problems, and yes, there are ways to game and cheat the system, but I do not care about these. Why? Because I trust the people here not to do those things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-21T08:45:55.997" LastActivityDate="2021-06-21T08:45:55.997" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11609" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11605" CreationDate="2021-06-16T15:06:34.743" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The dupe target &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; care about items.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The dupe target asks, without restricting the scope to any one category of features:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any ways you have used to mitigate this flaw?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means the question is properly concerned with any game feature that solves the problem of Sunlight Sensitivity, and to quote the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and &lt;em&gt;magic items&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consequently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/143102/62294&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; provides a correct and complete response to your question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Waterdeep: Dragon Heist&lt;/em&gt; adventure (p. 191) has the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/knaves-eye-patch&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Knave’s Eye Patch&lt;/a&gt; magic item:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wondrous item, rare (requires attunement)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While wearing this eye patch, you gain these benefits:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You have advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have the Sunlight Sensitivity trait, you are unaffected by the trait.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You are immune to magic that allows other creatures to read your thoughts or determine whether you are lying. Creatures can communicate telepathically with you only if you allow it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This item would remove all Sunlight Sensitivity effects at the cost of an attunement slot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before your question was closed, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/188206/62294&quot;&gt;I did provide an answer&lt;/a&gt;, in which I have included the following justification for the uniqueness of the Knave's eye Patch, as well as included it in the relevant answer to the dupe target:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am quite confident that this is the only &lt;em&gt;official&lt;/em&gt; item with this effect.  It is the only item that comes up in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/search?q=sunlight%20sensitivity&amp;amp;f=equipment,magic-items&amp;amp;c=items&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;DND Beyond search for &amp;quot;sunlight sensitivity&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;, and based on some search engine sleuthing, discussions of similar items &lt;em&gt;prior&lt;/em&gt; to the release of &lt;em&gt;Dragon Heist&lt;/em&gt; revolved around homebrewing items to deal with this, while discussions after the release of &lt;em&gt;Dragon Heist&lt;/em&gt; never mention &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; items but this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given these things, I'm not seeing how your question is different, or that it hasn't been answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Our duplicate criteria.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance for closing duplicate questions can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. In particular there are three criteria that we use:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've explained above that the dupe target is actually concerned with items that can solve the problem. This means that your question is covered as an obvious subset of the target. Additionally, I have pointed to the answer that directly addresses your specific situation on the dupe target. Therefore, the first two criteria are satisfied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the third criterion, I'm not seeing a reason, so it is up to you to provide the reason your question should remain open, despite the first two criteria being satisfied.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-16T15:13:32.663" LastActivityDate="2021-06-16T15:13:32.663" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11610" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11613" CreationDate="2021-06-17T01:22:23.523" Score="6" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;The description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;House rules are small fan-created additions and replacements to core rules in a rules set, and this tag should be used when there are locally-created rules at the core of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optional-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optional-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optional-rules&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about optional rules in RPGs. In many RPGs, there is the concept of rules that are essential to the game, and optional but official rules that can be used if desired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/188226/62294&quot;&gt;Is it unbalanced to allow a player to move the tiefling&amp;#39;s +1 Int bonus to a different ability score?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question seems to be framed as asking about a house rule, and OP tagged it as such. But as you can see from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/188227/62294&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt;, the rule proposed in the question is exactly an officially published optional rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So which tag do we use: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optional-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optional-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optional-rules&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T10:48:25.500" Title="Which tag should we use when OP thinks they are asking about a house rule but it is actually an official optional rule?" Tags="|support|tags|specific-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11611" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11610" CreationDate="2021-06-17T10:00:22.853" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tags change based on information.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question.&#xA;Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be&#xA;able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined&#xA;categories.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The person who asks the question thinks that they are implementing a house rule, so they should use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag. The expert who knows better should replace the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/optional-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;optional-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;optional-rules&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we have here is taking in new information that changes the context. A tag doe not represent the items of interest mentioned in any given question - they are a means of connecting experts to questions that those experts can answer based on their expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-06-17T10:07:08.077" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T10:07:08.077" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11612" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-06-17T10:03:46.053" Score="8" ViewCount="574" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;September update:&lt;/strong&gt; Community Ads are now live network-wide. All ads with a score of 6 or higher, or with a score of 4 or higher &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; no downvotes will be displayed (except for any that have a note from the CM Team explaining why it wasn't selected). Go to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/364556/208518&quot;&gt;the main post on MSE&lt;/a&gt; for a list of the ads that are being displayed. And stay tuned for 2022's edition for the next opportunity to submit more ad proposals!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;AUGUST NOTE:&lt;/strong&gt; This post has now been locked and new submissions are not being accepted. Ad submissions are now undergoing review by the Community Team, and this question will be updated once the ads are live.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We're almost halfway through 2021, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/364556/208518&quot;&gt;in case you missed it&lt;/a&gt;, Community Promotion Ads are gonna be a bit different this time! &lt;strong&gt;TL;DR: submit and vote for ad proposals before August 2nd!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are Community Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, or on other sites in the network. They can show up in the right sidebar, or in banners in question pages. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be considered by &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/99341/208518&quot;&gt;the Community Management Team&lt;/a&gt; to be displayed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we have Community Ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. The goal of this initiative is for future visitors to find out about &lt;em&gt;the stuff your community deems important&lt;/em&gt;. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are &lt;em&gt;relevant to your own community's interests&lt;/em&gt;, both for those already in the community and those yet to join. You may want to promote external resources, or Meta guidance for newcomers, for instance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This initiative has an added goal of providing your community with &lt;em&gt;an opportunity to showcase exemplary questions from your main site, as well as frequently-linked-to guides from your Meta site&lt;/em&gt;. While the latter makes sense to be shown solely on this site, the former can be shown all across the network. These should avoid hot button topics, and instead focus more on evergreen questions that show what your community’s all about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why do we reset the ads?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. Historically, we've reset the ads every year — since this is the first run of a new format, we'll run the ads collected in this post through the end of 2021 and reassess the rotation cycle then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a previous exposure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Are there restrictions to the ads I can post?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All proposed ads need to abide by &lt;a href=&quot;/conduct&quot;&gt;our Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/advertising/guidelines&quot;&gt;Our ad creative guidelines&lt;/a&gt; also generally apply (note that the first 2 bullet points on the “Tracking” section do not apply, and a lot of the guidelines surrounding claims, comparisons, proof, etc., while still applicable, may not be particularly relevant). Finally, ads can not be promoting products nor soliciting programmer time or resources for: knowledge sharing or collaboration tools for technologists, or for sites where ad buyers are primarily targeting technologists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does it work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers you post to this question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Each answer must relate to a single ad submission.&lt;/strong&gt; Please do not post multiple ad submissions in the same answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;All answers must be in one of the below formats:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you have an image for the ad you want to display on this site (must be the case for ads to external sources):&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[![Image name. Example: &amp;quot;community_ad_name_300x250&amp;quot;][1]][2]&#xA;&#xA;  [1]: https://image-url&#xA;  [2]: https://clickthrough-url&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you want to create an ad for a question from your main or meta site, to be advertised on this or other sites in the network (staff will generate a frame for the ad with this site's theme, for brand consistency):&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;Question title  &#xA;Question URL&#xA;Ad size (right sidebar or banner ads)&#xA;Site(s) to be displayed in. Can be:&#xA;  - &amp;quot;self&amp;quot; for ads to be displayed on this site&#xA;  - &amp;quot;all&amp;quot; for ads to be displayed all over the network&#xA;  - a specific subset of sites&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please &lt;strong&gt;do not add anything else to the body of the post&lt;/strong&gt;. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Image requirements&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels for right sidebar ads or 728 x 90 pixels for banner ads. Images can be double that if high DPI.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Must be GIF, PNG, or JPG&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;No animated GIFs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Selection process&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This post will remain open for ad submissions and voting until August 2nd&lt;/strong&gt;. At that point, the question will be closed/locked, and no more ad submissions will be accepted. For ad submissions to be considered for selection by the Community Management Team, they must have &lt;strong&gt;a minimum score of 6 at the time the post was closed/locked for submissions.&lt;/strong&gt; Given this is the first run with this new format, we may adjust the score threshold to be a bit lower if we see ads struggling to get to it (especially if the ads are not getting downvotes) by the time submissions and voting are closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Reporting statistics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once this cycle is over, at the end of 2021, the Community Management Team will provide you with reporting statistics, as described in the &amp;quot;reporting&amp;quot; section of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/364556/208518&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Feel free to use the question's comment section to ask for any clarifications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-09-09T11:31:03.770" LastActivityDate="2021-09-09T11:31:03.770" Title="Community Ads for 2021" Tags="|discussion|community-ads|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11613" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11610" CreationDate="2021-06-17T10:15:43.123" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think we should leave it as a [house-rules] question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That might be surprising, because the ruling they made was also definitely an available official optional rule. But here's the thing: they didn't know that when coming up with their rule. In their universe, not apparently having read Tasha's yet (or at least that section of it), what they created was entirely a house rule unsupported by any material, and then they brought that house rule to us to verify it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More concretely, these are two very different questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Hey, I came up with this thing. Is this okay?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“The official rules say I can do this thing, and I did it. Is this okay?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And they have very different answers (in the same order):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“In fact you unknowingly used something that's already an official rule, so it's probably fine.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“Yes, you did that thing correctly.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both answers might conceivably have come with corrections as to how the rule works or how to use it well, but that correction would come very differently between the two (same order again):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“While we're at it, the rule also fully supports putting that point into Charisma, so you might want to allow that anyway.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“However, you messed up with the Charisma bit. The rule you were using &lt;em&gt;plainly states...&lt;/em&gt;”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last but not least, one of these questions is at high risk of being downvoted for being a trivial, not-that-great kind of question. The other is a great question and pretty much has no issues at all. I'll let you guess which is which.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, I think this means we should run with the original context with which they asked their question: they made a house rule, they're presenting that house rule they made up to us, it's a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; question. As part of evaluating their question, the answer is that hey, it's &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; an official optional rule—but that's the answer, not part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-17T10:48:25.500" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T10:48:25.500" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11614" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-17T10:23:19.653" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Read the FAQ on using RPG Stack Exchange!&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;300x250&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;self&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T10:23:19.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11615" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-17T10:39:08.413" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;300x250&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;self&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T10:39:08.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11616" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-17T17:26:58.277" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;300x250&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;self&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-06-17T17:26:58.277" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11617" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-18T02:59:08.233" Score="8" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How shall we frame our upcoming revisit...?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;With an eye toward the &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; stakes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Frankly, which way we end up going with DGtS isn't a huge matter for site health. Montagues argue that one way of handling it causes net good for the site while Capulets argue that's a net harm. If we change the practice those will swap. (I'm a Montague, by the way. Forrealz: it's a family name on my father's side.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the above are reasonable people who care about the quality of the site and its utility for visitors. I say this informed both by faith and experience. They're drawing conclusions from their experiences and from mainsite events that admit nuanced (even conflicting!) interpretations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pulling back the curtain a bit: I was an elected moderator for three years and can't think of a practice that generated as much discussion (in meta and in chat), and which generated as little &lt;em&gt;actual problems&lt;/em&gt; on mainsite. Some passionate arguments on meta, sure, but comment-sniping? Edit warring? Rage-quits and deletions and abusive language? Nope.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; stakes, then are the users involved.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It'd be really easy to come in heavy-handed and run a revisit in a way that ends up alienating some pretty-reputable Montagues or Capulets or creating a meta-mess that sours new users who come across it years from now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good process will:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;thoroughly and succinctly (good luck!) summarize the evolution of the issue, with plenty of meta links, so that users new(er) to the topic can get up to speed easily;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;allow enough time for thoughtful answers to come in, thoughtful engagement with those answers, and thoughtful response-answers to come in;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;lay out clear indicators of when action-/decision-points will be triggered--not so that people can game the system, but so that people are not &lt;em&gt;surprised&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;undercut&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;cut short&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you ask me--and nobody did--I think the current churn on meta is enough of a &amp;quot;heads up&amp;quot; that a revisit will come. No need to pre-announce it or anything.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take some time to compose a good post laying out what's asked here and summarizing the state of affairs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make it clear in that post that you'll be waiting at least a month, or a few weeks after the latest answer's come in (whichever's longer) before evaluating what the scores might indicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Make clear in the post that a signal of 3:1 in favor of change is considered strong, that a signal 3:2 in favor of change is not considered strong enough to change the practice, and that anything in the middle is going to cause mods distress so please don't let's land there. (Or whatever you think are good thresholds.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment frequently (every three or four days?) on the main post summarizing where things stand (&amp;quot;two new, good answers have come in this week--make sure to take a look and vote/comment, people&amp;quot; &amp;quot;no new posts this week but a bunch of voting, two Montague answers lead by small margins&amp;quot; &amp;quot;it's been two weeks since an answer's come in; if you are intending to write one but just haven't had the time please comment so&amp;quot; &amp;amp;c.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When it's been a few weeks since it's been active, feature the post and start the &amp;quot;clock&amp;quot; anew. Now, with some well fleshed-out answers and discussions, is a good time to get some new eyes, some new questions, into the mix. (Add a little preamble to the post, maybe, explaining that this has been done?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then, when &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; clock's run its course... pray to whoever you think is listening that it's a clear (enough) signal one way or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2021-06-18T02:59:08.233" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11618" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-18T16:47:58.907" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rptools.net/?page=maptool&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PvLbx.png&quot; alt=&quot;MapTool Virtual Tabletop&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2021-06-18T16:47:58.907" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2021-06-18T16:47:58.907" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11619" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-18T16:49:23.910" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.mipui.net/app&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SpDkN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Mipui, a free collaborative map editor&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-08-04T10:59:13.217" LastActivityDate="2021-08-04T10:59:13.217" CommentCount="2" CommunityOwnedDate="2021-06-18T16:49:23.910" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11620" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-18T17:04:09.543" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/0IHhK.png&quot; alt=&quot;Anydice: Dice Probability Calculator (&amp;quot;The possibilities are finite&amp;quot;)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2021-08-04T11:00:36.490" LastActivityDate="2021-08-04T11:00:36.490" CommentCount="1" CommunityOwnedDate="2021-06-18T17:04:09.543" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11621" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-19T19:26:48.500" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can I begin roleplaying if I'm visually impaired?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86707/can-i-begin-roleplaying-if-im-visually-impaired&quot;&gt;Can I begin roleplaying if I&amp;#39;m visually impaired?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;300x250&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;all&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-01T20:46:26.237" LastActivityDate="2021-07-01T20:46:26.237" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11622" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11602" CreationDate="2021-06-21T07:38:15.403" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note: This represents my idea as a user, not a mod. Don't take this as any kind of official stance or suggestion that this is something the mod team are planning to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Don't make it a re-visit&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly this will be a re-visit, this is ground we have discussed before and it is impossible to pretend that hasn't happened. However I would like to propose we create a new meta as if we were discussing a solution to problem for the first time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Problem With a Re-visit&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By treating this discussion as a re-visit it becomes somewhat of a false-dichotomy, to repeal the policy or continue with no (or minimal) changes. While in reality we have a near infinite array of options and can choose to implement any solution we choose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe this repeal/don't change option was reflected in the original results of the most recent revisit. Prior to become a mod, I voted against the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9806/48759&quot;&gt;moderator proposal to repeal&lt;/a&gt; at the time as it advocated for a complete reversal of the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I believe there is some ground to relax or modify the currently strict version, I am not in favour of a complete removal. If we make the next meta on the topic a re-re-revisit I fear that the same problem will force me to choose to keep the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How this might work&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderator team can workshop a question that describes the problem, identifies what has been tried and the pain points with the existing options. Comments on this and the other metas will help to identify what should be included here, as well as the opinions of users. Clearly this is impossible to get 100% perfect, however I believe the moderators are in the best position to make this post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In line with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11607/48759&quot;&gt;Medix2's answer to this meta&lt;/a&gt; we can then lock this post after posting for 1 week. Giving time for feedback to be incorporated into the main question and for users to draft their answers before voting begins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers to that post would take the form of 'policy' suggestions. A complete solution to the actual problem (questions that require system tags not having them), in a similar format to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11280/48759&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Don't guess the system&amp;quot;, policy clarification meta&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe a question in this format will allow us resolve this in a single meta rather than requiring one for discussion and another for implementation. Answers will have clear actions for users to understand. The standing policy going forward would have a single source rather than a series of posts as we have had in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How would voting work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11608/48759&quot;&gt;Medix2 suggests&lt;/a&gt; we need to wait at least a month for voting to stabilise and for all users to have a chance to have their say. As for thresholds for acceptance, I hope it will prove to be a non-issue. That one answer or pair of similar answer will emerge as the clear favourites amongst the community, similar to how the results of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11281/revisit-is-5e-a-clear-enough-statement-of-game-system-by-a-question-asker-to&quot;&gt;5e meta&lt;/a&gt; panned out. If it is close, I hope we are mature enough to discuss and find an appropriate solution, perhaps a compromise between the top few answers (providing they aren't directly opposed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it would be detrimental to agree to fixed thresholds ahead of time as it might lead to &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;We agreed to rules that say the result is X, but common sense says the result is actually more like Y&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; (unlikely but possible). Lets allow common sense and good judgement to prevail rather than overly prescriptive rules and formal voting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally I'd hate for any formal voting rules we made to become precedent for all meta discussions in the future. By not having rules there is no risk of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2021-06-21T07:38:15.403" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11623" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11631" CreationDate="2021-06-21T18:22:58.327" Score="6" ViewCount="158" Body="&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188386/what-can-i-do-to-make-a-kobold-encounter-interesting/188388&quot;&gt;What can I do to make a Kobold encounter interesting?&lt;/a&gt; there was a question of how to make an encounter more challenging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I noted the example of Tucker's kobolds, where you lead the people to monsters, use cover, set traps, and use explosives and such and so low level people can hurt PCs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naut noted this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does that work when the Kobold's aren't in their lair but assaulting another structure. Yes, showing your experience with how this would work for OP is necessary. Tuckers can be a good tool, but a good answer will show how using them in this way will work and what things to look out for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure exactly how to answer for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've certainly used traps, sent lots of monsters at PCs, used higher damage weapons for monsters, and had enemies use cover, but I'm not sure how I'm supposed to write this as a personal experience thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, am I meant to say. &amp;quot;Yes, once I was playing a campaign where the level 5 PCs had to invade a goblin castle, and I had them put traps in the sewer system which caused them to take damage and find it harder, and so they had less HP left to handle the goblins in the castle, who also had a captured monster to fight which meant there were more enemies, and more enemies means a higher CR rating.&amp;quot; Or such?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought it was fairly intuitive why that doing more damage or having more traps or having more monsters would be harder?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this apply to other questions? Like say this question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188285/what-is-a-500gp-ruby-useful-for/188288#188288&quot;&gt;ruby dust&lt;/a&gt; should I have added personal experience about how a player used continual flame in an encounter with rubies? What's the general rule about when to give personal experience and when not? I just gave the mathematics of what spells you could cast, just as above I just gave the sorts of mathematical ways you can make encounters harder.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="45740" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-25T14:35:09.530" LastActivityDate="2021-06-25T14:35:09.530" Title="How are you meant to provide personal experience on mostly mathematical questions?" Tags="|support|answers|citations|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11624" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11623" CreationDate="2021-06-21T18:49:20.013" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Encounter design is not even close to &amp;quot;mostly mathematical&amp;quot;.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, there is guidance in the &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt; that attempts to rationalize Challenge Rating and encounter design as numerical data, but anyone with experience working with that system can attest: it is &lt;em&gt;at best&lt;/em&gt; going to get you somewhere in the same zipcode as what you wanted, and at worst, land you on another planet. In my experience, the calculations are best used as a &lt;em&gt;starting point&lt;/em&gt; for applying past experience designing and running encounters. A new DM using the encounter building guidance, just going by the numbers, is going to find their encounters all over the place in terms of difficulty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Which is to say, experience is probably the only way to answer that question well.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you have a lot of experience running and designing encounters in that level range, you start to get an idea of how different encounter designs work out relative to different party compositions. When you get more specialized experience running a particular monster, you can understand how to make encounters involving it more difficult &lt;em&gt;tactically&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;statistically&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the kind of experience that would make a decent answer to that question would look something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've run kobolds before, here are the different ways I've done it. Using these particular tactics synergize well with the creature's statistics, so these tactics may make the fight more difficult for the party because reasons. Alternatively, using these other tactics, the best statistical adjustments for making the fight harder are these particular ones, for these particular reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyone can say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just raise AC/HP/Hit/Damage&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But someone with particular experience running kobolds can say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adjusting this one stat can greatly influence the fight difficulty while preserving the thematic elements of the fight. Combining this statistical increase with these particular tactics will make the fight &lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt; hard, pick one or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And these are just sketches of what a good answer might look like, I would expect far more detail than just filling in the basics of what I've suggested here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-06-21T19:50:55.670" LastActivityDate="2021-06-21T19:50:55.670" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11625" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11623" CreationDate="2021-06-21T20:56:20.347" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You don't &lt;em&gt;have to&lt;/em&gt; show personal experience. The idea is to show &lt;em&gt;support for why your answer is a solution to the OP's problem&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all questions are asked in the same mode, and not all types of answers are equally appropriate for all questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question like &amp;quot;how will it affect a combat if I add +2 AC to this monster against this particular party?&amp;quot; can probably be answered adequately with math: you can look at the probability distributions for attack rolls hitting the original AC and the modified AC and extrapolate that a combat will probably last X-Y rounds longer, subjecting the PCs to Z additional risk of hitpoint loss, or something along those lines. In this case the math may be enough support for an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A still better answer might fold in personal experience as well. Whether or not the math is included, something like &amp;quot;when the AC gets as high as +2 would grant this creature, my players usually switch from a fighter-focused, attack-based strategy with spellcaster support to a spellcaster-focused, save spell-based strategy with fighter support. This made combat shorter and easier, though the PCs used more of their limited resources for the day on spells.&amp;quot; In this case the personal experience is the support for the answer: it describes what happened when the +2 AC was attempted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of these are answers that I, personally, would accept as sufficiently supported (for this very contrived example, at least). They include advice as well as an explanation for why that advice is appropriate, applicable, and valuable. These features tend to make answers better and also make it possible to judge between different answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The linked question is not an ideal one&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The headline is asking for something subjective: what makes a combat &lt;em&gt;interesting&lt;/em&gt;. The body of the question is better, asking about making combats more challenging, but that is still not all that well-defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering such a question directly is very difficult in the SE mode, and that is almost certainly the reason the question was closed. The issue then becomes one in which support for an answer is difficult because the question itself is at odds with how the stack is intended to work. If a question isn't really answerable in the SE way then the most appropriate course of action is to adjust the question rather than to write looser answers. Even with that in mind there is considerable wiggle room on the matter, but if you choose to answer a more marginal question you'll have more openings for critiques.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The linked answer lacks much support of either type&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is neither math nor personal experience in it. It essentially says &amp;quot;you can add more things to combats to make them interesting. Here are some things: [...]&amp;quot;. Traps are mentioned, for example, but there is no description of what kinds of traps make combats more interesting, or in what way, or what circumstances traps work particularly well or poorly in, nothing about how to calibrate them, how the kobolds might lead the party towards the traps, or anything else. A later edit added in some information along these lines but is still pretty thin in my reading, but is better than the version of the answer that did not have that experience. The edited version provides &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; additional guidance beyond &amp;quot;do something&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A good answer to a good question is directly usable in some fashion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As above, the question is not ideal as currently written-- if the players in that game find traps boring and irritating then traps in combat is not a good solution to the problem, which is why &amp;quot;interesting&amp;quot; is not really an appropriate goal for an SE question. &amp;quot;Challenging&amp;quot; is better, but (continuing with the trap example) that doesn't provide enough information to choose a specific trap or calibrate one for an encounter. But even if it were, the linked answer doesn't clearly identify what makes its suggestions appropriately challenging in a way that solves the querent's problem. This is true even though they're good ideas-- they just lack the necessary details to be translated into a specific game in a way that precisely addresses the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;tl;dr: the best answers don't slavishly have support in exactly form X; they have support appropriate to the suggestions they make in service of answering the question as directly and fully as possible.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33127" LastEditorUserId="33127" LastEditDate="2021-06-21T23:04:24.110" LastActivityDate="2021-06-21T23:04:24.110" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11626" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-22T13:01:44.683" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Read the FAQ on using RPG Stack Exchange!&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;728x90&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;self&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-06-22T13:01:44.683" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11627" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11628" CreationDate="2021-06-22T13:06:23.487" Score="1" ViewCount="64" Body="&lt;p&gt;In this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188385/do-the-effects-of-spells-granted-by-items-require-concentration&quot;&gt;Do the effects of spells granted by items require concentration?&lt;/a&gt; I asked about items that grant named spell effects, not casting spells from items or items that give a spell-like effect without a spell involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked duplicate question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99199/do-magic-item-spells-require-concentration&quot;&gt;Do magic item spells require concentration?&lt;/a&gt; only answers items that directly cast spells from them, or grant a spell-like effect without casting a spell at all. It does not answer the question I proposed which is when an item gives a named spells effect without directly casting that spell. Neither this question, nor answer are related to what I asked and are not helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to change the linked answer to this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69926/do-potions-use-concentration-for-their-effects&quot;&gt;Do potions use concentration for their effects?&lt;/a&gt; which does address the question I asked, albeit it was only answered after I asked my question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="68194" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-22T20:46:27.880" LastActivityDate="2021-06-22T20:46:27.880" Title="Can the duplicate linked question be changed to a more appropriate answer?" Tags="|support|specific-question|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11628" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11627" CreationDate="2021-06-22T14:01:16.260" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I put the change through&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went ahead and just updated the duplicate list to include both questions as dupe targets. To me, they both seem like good candidates for being called a duplicate so I went ahead and just added the one you wanted to the list&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-06-22T14:01:16.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11629" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11630" CreationDate="2021-06-22T23:57:19.347" Score="2" ViewCount="66" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was thinking about asking one question, but to do so would require me to show my research so far, and that research would be best presented as a table of features, having similar features in same rows, and compared races / classes etc as columns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know this format was used on the main site already, but I can't find Q&amp;amp;A to copy it from. So, how do I do that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2021-06-23T00:02:50.930" Title="How to format a side-by-side comparison table?" Tags="|discussion|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2021-07-07T23:36:26.727" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11630" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11629" CreationDate="2021-06-23T00:02:50.930" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;See this MSE post for the table formatting/syntax and limitations: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/356997/335251&quot;&gt;New Feature: Table Support&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Syntax&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Okay, so how do you use tables? We've updated our &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/editing-help#tables&quot;&gt;formatting&#xA;help&lt;/a&gt; to give you&#xA;some guidance. But here's an overview for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A simple table looks like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;| A header | Another header |&#xA;| -------- | -------------- |&#xA;| First    | row            |&#xA;| Second   | row            |&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The result:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;A header&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Another header&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;First&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;row&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Second&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;row&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;The rules&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You always need a header row&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cells are separated by a &lt;em&gt;pipe&lt;/em&gt; (&lt;code&gt;|&lt;/code&gt;) symbol&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; include leading and trailing pipes but don't have to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A header row &lt;em&gt;has to be&lt;/em&gt; followed by a separator row with the same amount of cells, and you can't have spaces between separators (&lt;code&gt;-&lt;/code&gt; characters)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(that's the &lt;code&gt;|---|---|&lt;/code&gt; line)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The amount of space and &lt;code&gt;-&lt;/code&gt; characters in a cell don't have to line up (but it sure looks nice if it does)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can set the alignment of a table column by including a &lt;code&gt;:&lt;/code&gt; in the corresponding cell of the separator line. A &lt;code&gt;:&lt;/code&gt; on the left will make a column left-aligned (this is the default). A &lt;code&gt;:&lt;/code&gt; on the right will make it right-aligned. Both, left and right &lt;code&gt;:&lt;/code&gt;s will produce a center-aligned column.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;| left | center | right |&#xA;|:---- |:------:| -----:|&#xA;| One  | Two    | Three |&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;left&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;center&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;right&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;One&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Two&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Three&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Limitations&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Markdown tables come with a set of limitations. They don't support&#xA;everything you can do with HTML tables, and that's on purpose. Each&#xA;cell can only include &lt;strong&gt;inline content&lt;/strong&gt; (text, images, links, inline&#xA;code).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can't merge cells or rows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Block content like multiple paragraphs, lists, code blocks, sub-tables&#xA;and other complex stuff does not work. If you're trying to mix a&#xA;Markdown table with inline HTML, you might be up for a wild ride.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can't manually determine the width of a column. Your browser will&#xA;decide what's a good width for any given column based on the content&#xA;in your table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you need more details, I recommend taking a peek at the&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://github.github.com/gfm/#tables-extension-&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;GitHub-flavored Markdown specification for&#xA;tables&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2021-06-23T00:02:50.930" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11631" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11623" CreationDate="2021-06-23T08:12:44.967" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Tucker's Kobolds are not just math&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tucker's Kobolds live off one thing that is not math: Battle Tactics. They are the embodiment of &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Art of War&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; (Sun Tsu version) applied. They are the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Six_Stratagems&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;36 Strategems&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; in use. They use tactics that come up in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/8557/is-there-a-translation-of-the-%E9%9B%91%E5%85%B5%E7%89%A9%E8%AA%9E-zohyo-monogatari&quot;&gt;Zhoyo Monogatari&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_War&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;On War&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_Attacks&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Infantry Attacks&lt;/a&gt;. In short, they are &lt;strong&gt;Tactical Geniuses&lt;/strong&gt; and using them properly in the fashion that Mr. Tucker did to the crew of poor players back in the early days requires a skilled tactician. While each Kobold has little to no power on its own, the use of positioning, environment control, and mental drain turns them into a deadly foe. Strength in numbers is only an &lt;em&gt;assisting&lt;/em&gt; factor, not the only factor why they work. Most is &lt;em&gt;you just can't attack them&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A crucial part is, that they had time to prepare though. In attack, you don't have that, which makes Tucker's Kobolds fail to apply in that moment. And if executed badly, you get a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_wave_attack&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Human Wave Attack&lt;/a&gt;. You'd need to help us see how your proposal is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; that. And that means... you need to study tactics and maybe simulate some skirmishing by going back to the Roots and &lt;strong&gt;Wargame it out!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-06-23T08:12:44.967" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11633" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11634" CreationDate="2021-06-26T19:41:26.953" Score="22" ViewCount="590" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a follow up to our standing guidance on pronoun use in Q&amp;amp;As around the site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7335/should-rpg-se-enforce-a-specific-standard-for-handling-gender-pronouns&quot;&gt;Should RPG.SE enforce a specific standard for handling gender pronouns?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should RPG.SE enforce a specific language standard (here: with regard to gender) even when the original text is correct according to the rules of English grammar?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the community consensus answer is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;All pronouns are neutral and should be enforced as such.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally think that nobody should be harassed, or be in the red for guessing wrong on how someone wants to be called, and this should extend to RPG.SE. no pronoun should have a negative connotation, whether being misused or otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Unless otherwise stated, all questions are gender agnostic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that 'he/him', 'they/their', and 'she/her' pronouns are correct, and none of them are incorrect. Good answers simply maintain continuity, and don't switch to refer to the same people. The answer may decide to change pronouns if the answerer wishes, but there is no correct gender. An answer should never be wrong because the gender is 'incorrect', because no gender option is incorrect. If the OP puts in the post that this is a gender-issue, then correct pronouns should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Despite this guidance, we are still seeing questions and answers being edited to remove gendered pronouns &amp;quot;he/him&amp;quot;, replacing with &amp;quot;they/them&amp;quot;, and these edits are insubstantial. Usually, the only thing changed in the edit are the pronouns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This seems inconsistent with our existing guidance about pronoun usage and editing.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance concerning pronouns is quite clear that all pronouns are &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt; gender agnostic and correct, unless context tells us otherwise (e.g. a characters preferred pronouns are stated in a post), ergo these edits &lt;em&gt;are not correcting or improving anything&lt;/em&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;. Despite &amp;quot;No Improvement&amp;quot; being an option in the review queue, we are still seeing these edits pushed through in review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the 2021 Community Check-In, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11454/62294&quot;&gt;I put forward&lt;/a&gt; that by pushing these edits through, we &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; enforcing a standard upon these posts, despite our guidance clearly stating that we should not enforce any standard, and that post seems to have been well received (+18/-5 at time of writing). So consider this a follow up to a well supported community check in response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have clear guidance that we should not enforce the use of gender neutral pronouns, &lt;em&gt;but should we enforce the policy of non-enforcement?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be forthright about my own position and motivation, I don't much care either way about the pronoun issue itself, I just care about consistency between our written guidance here on meta, and what we see happening on main. If we need to change our written guidance a bit, that's fine with me, if we just need to enforce our written guidance better, that's fine too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; A user attempted to raise this very discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11233/is-changing-a-gendered-term-to-a-non-gendered-term-a-grammatical-improvement?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;Is changing a gendered term to a non-gendered term a grammatical improvement?&lt;/a&gt; It was closed as a duplicate of our main guidance about pronoun usage, which to me seems like a roundabout way of saying &amp;quot;No, it's not an improvement, don't do it per our existing guidance&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-06-29T12:25:35.290" LastActivityDate="2021-06-29T12:25:35.290" Title="Should RPG.SE enforce not enforcing a specific standard for handling gender pronouns?" Tags="|discussion|policy|etiquette|language|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11634" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11633" CreationDate="2021-06-26T22:10:25.913" Score="32" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, mostly&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Changing &amp;quot;him&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;her&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;them&amp;quot; without really strong reasons should be declined during review as &amp;quot;no improvement whatsoever&amp;quot;. If done by an user with editing rights, it should be rolled back and commented with the appropriate meta link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;but sometimes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes gender of the character or person in question is shown only later, on edits or comments. Or was genuinely missed by someone with lower English skills. If it's important for clarity to keep the same pronouns (i.e. to know who is who), then edit is OK. For example, if the question speaks of Alice and Bob, then it is OK to make sure that in the answer &amp;quot;him&amp;quot; is never used to refer to Alice&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;. In the case of a mentioned user's or character's gender being revealed some time later after the initial post, it is also okay to comment on an answer like so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hey, the question was just updated and it turns out this character is [he/she/they/whatever]; you may want to consider updating your answer accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even when the edit is OK, harassing, scolding, or talking down to the author of the post is most definitely &lt;strong&gt;not OK&lt;/strong&gt;, and should be flagged as &amp;quot;unfriendly or unkind&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Alice Cooper doesn't count here ;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-06-28T03:56:59.917" LastActivityDate="2021-06-28T03:56:59.917" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11637" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11633" CreationDate="2021-06-28T12:39:28.013" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What's our end goal in how pronoun usage should look on the site?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's helpful to start there and work our way back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can only speak for myself, but my personal preference is twofold:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When we're discussing a specific person or character whose pronouns are established, like someone the question has established (“there's this player in my group, I'll call her Bertha”), we use those pronouns. This is just clear communication, and also basic courtesy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Overall, to see a healthy mix of use of “he”, “she”, and “they”. Our hobby is dominated by male presence and women can have trouble finding a place in the hobby. Including this mix of pronouns is a tiny gesture, but it's one that adds a tiny little bit of signal that yes, women have a place in this hobby. Just seeing “he” and “they” does not send this affirmative signal the same way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This desire leads to me framing my occasional examples of theoretical characters by characterising them with “they” or “she”. (Folks might even like to use neopronouns in their examples if they're so inclined, but that's above and beyond my baseline desires for what I want to see from the site overall.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It means I would also not mind seeing theoretical characters edited over to “they” or “she” from time to time, but it's a minor improvement at best. If such edits are happening I would prefer to see a mix rather than &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; editing over to “they”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, lots of people being asked about in point 1 are going to be male because of the nature of the makeup of our hobby. I don't expect the use of he/she/they to be seen in equal proportion. It's just that &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; “he” wouldn't be great; &lt;em&gt;at least some&lt;/em&gt; “they” and “she” would be nice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Specific enforcement: might not be helpful&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think I'd want to see a policy &lt;em&gt;enforcing&lt;/em&gt; some specific standard usage of pronouns, beyond respecting those that were given for real individuals (bullet point 1). That much was already covered and agreed upon in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7335/should-rpg-se-enforce-a-specific-standard-for-handling-gender-pronouns&quot;&gt;Should RPG.SE enforce a specific standard for handling gender pronouns?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, enforcing that people &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; do anything to switch over pronouns means we're prohibiting ourselves from creating a little extra balance toward “they” and “she” where we could possibly create it. I think that shoots ourself in the foot a bit. (Not too gruesomely, maybe just with a paintball gun, but still.) It'd cut off an avenue of possible positive change to convey that people are included.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically: enforcement of some kind of “don't change pronouns” policy isn't helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Edits: definitely minor, could be a little more diverse&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like you've observed, there's been a number of these changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree they're minor and don't necessarily improve the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking personally, I think they'd be slightly more of an improvement if there was an overall pattern of moving towards “they” &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; “she”, but as-is I'm not all that satisfied with &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; moving to “they”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to see a pattern of overall inclusion in our usage of non-male genders, but general edits into “they” alone is not really where that's at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's some guidance we create out of this, I think it ought to be “hey, please don't just change pronouns to only ‘they’ all the time” and that overall the site would be nicer if we collectively made an effort to use “she” and “they“ prononus for people from time to time, but that's a request, not an enforced demand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-06-28T15:44:37.567" LastActivityDate="2021-06-28T15:44:37.567" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11638" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11612" CreationDate="2021-06-28T21:23:00.657" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Looking for absurd or ridiculous answers? Browse our fine cheese collection&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7218/52137&quot;&gt;Purveyors of fine cheese!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;728x90&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;self&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-06-28T21:23:00.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11639" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5270" CreationDate="2021-07-06T08:12:57.327" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As we pretty much agree there are various kinds of these questions. Let'S call them numerical:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't understand Rule X on [Topic]. How does it work?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I know there's a rule for [Topic] ([at Location]). What is it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I have no clue if there are rules on [Topic]. What are they?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I can't find the rule for [Topic]. Where is it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 1 is pretty much the bread and butter of the site. OP points to a rule, possibly quotes a part they don't understand, then asks how it works. Generally, these are ok but might fall for other problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 2 is kind of iffy in that it asks for the rules text and nothing more, possibly asking to publish a substantial amount of rules without any explanation. Most of these questions are not a good match to the stack. Because type 3 is in part this, and in part a type 4, let's look at 4 first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 4 on the other hand only asks for where a rule is but not what that rule is. Such things can stem from  the rule being hidden in a sidebar &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188330/what-family-does-the-kitsune-impersonator-belong-to&quot;&gt;(example)&lt;/a&gt;, in a different book and there is no pointer to that book &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/166020/what-school-are-the-kitsune-scouts&quot;&gt;(example)&lt;/a&gt; or from books straying from formatting established for the book series &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185045/rokugans-light-cavalry&quot;&gt;(example)&lt;/a&gt;. In some way or another, they are the estranged cousin of this question and don't actually ask for what the rules are. These questions are governed by the policy on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; as outlined &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6585/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Type 3 is, in my opinion, a hybrid of Type 4 and 1, making it a little tricky: in its core, it is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; on the one hand, and a request to give the rules on the other. The one part is fully OK, the other can become iffy. However, a good answer might summarize to what extent a rule covers [Topic] there. In case it is a   very tiny part of the rules, a full quote of that snippet might be acceptable, but usually it is better to refrain from adding more than actually necessary - which in that case would be the page location and a rough summary with pointers. An example that barely skirts that line to be a type 2 due to the actual rule being ripped to need to look up several places instead of plain rule is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/180255/what-are-the-rules-for-swimming-and-holding-your-breath/184686#184686&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-07-06T11:57:12.313" LastActivityDate="2021-07-06T11:57:12.313" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11640" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-07-07T14:12:06.830" Score="18" ViewCount="327" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions regarding lore of a given setting seem to be on-topic on the site, if the setting in question is related to a tabletop roleplaying game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38295/is-giving-a-kobold-a-weapon-considered-a-marriage-proposal&quot;&gt;Is giving a kobold a weapon considered a marriage proposal?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151874/do-dragons-smell-of-lilacs&quot;&gt;Do dragons smell of lilacs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152189/what-do-unicorns-want&quot;&gt;What do Unicorns want?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133869/whose-portrait-is-printed-on-the-waterdhavian-gold-coin&quot;&gt;Whose portrait is printed on the Waterdhavian gold coin?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133911/how-common-is-homosexuality-in-the-forgotten-realms&quot;&gt;How common is homosexuality in the Forgotten Realms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While Warhammer 40k is &lt;em&gt;mainly&lt;/em&gt; a Wargame, the franchise also has official tabletop RPG books. It's lore is rather deep and complex (and sometimes very convoluted!), so it isn't uncommon for discussions to arise in the shape of &amp;quot;how are psykers sacrificed to the Golden Throne&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;What is the average lifespan of an Adeptus Astartes?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a relatively new but bustling community of roleplayers in my area that is &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; into Warhammer 40k Wrath &amp;amp; Glory, and I intend to join one of their games soon. However, I'm a complete newbie regarding 40k lore, and I'll certainly find myself in a situation where I'll have to dig up some lore to check the viability of a character choice or a story plotline.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I ask -&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we tackle 40k Wrath &amp;amp; Glory's lore questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-07T22:22:54.247" LastActivityDate="2024-03-04T14:43:43.740" Title="Are questions about Warhammer 40k Lore on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11641" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11640" CreationDate="2021-07-07T14:18:23.397" Score="12" Body="&lt;h1 id=&quot;as-long-as-they-are-tied-to-the-rpg-2ytm&quot;&gt;As long as they are tied to the RPG&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Warhammer (both Fantasy and 40k) lore is a mess. Many things are spread out among the board/card games, novels, PC games, tabletop army books, and the RPGs. As long as the question asks about the &lt;strong&gt;RPG&lt;/strong&gt; aspect, it is on topic. This might or might not include bits from other than the RPG books as sources, but the question needs to solve an RPG-related question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a simple example, asking about the stance of Faction A to Faction B could be a valid &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt; question if described as solving an RPG question. But asking for what equipment Unit X has without showing the RPG-relation would be presumably Wargame-centric and off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is similar to Legend of the 5 rings, where there is an old CCG, an LCG, novels, and the RPGs. These share a world and lore, but not all things are elaborated everywhere similarly. At times cards or novel lore holds tiny bits that the RPG doesn't tell about, but which can inform a good answer that tries to solve an RPG-related issue. One example is the number of toes for dragons needed for a description of one, where the best answer is the card-art &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/184008/30306&quot;&gt;which has canon value in L5R&lt;/a&gt;. However, in such cases, it can help to establish a ranking in which order sources are deemed authoritative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-07-15T15:09:28.347" LastActivityDate="2021-07-15T15:09:28.347" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11642" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11640" CreationDate="2021-07-07T19:37:52.880" Score="32" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I’m gonna go ahead and just say “yes”&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Warhammer 40k is a campaign setting for an RPG. It’s also the setting for a bunch of other things, which means you could reasonably ask about it on SF&amp;amp;F or BCG or Arqade or probably a few other places within Stack Exchange. But the existence of other places where you could ask doesn’t mean you can’t ask here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And trying to decide—without necessarily knowing the answer—whether a particular question is going to be addressed in the RPG materials, the wargame materials, the novels, the video games, or whatever else, is a mess, and not worth our time. More importantly, it violates what I consider a pretty key principle of this site: you don’t have to know the answer to your question in order to decide if you’re allowed to ask it in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking about 40k here, as opposed to other places you might ask, means something—namely, that you are asking RPG experts for their answer. If that’s the perspective you want, this is the place to ask. If you want the perspective of wargamers, or video gamers, or whatever, ask in the respective places. But I don’t think there’s any cause for this site to start trying to police this in any fashion. If we started to get overwhelmed by 40k questions that almost always required non-RPG expertise to answer because the RPG materials just never cover the things being asked about, maybe we could or should. But right now, we definitely do not have that problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That being the case, I don’t really want to start establishing “rules” about it. I don’t think there is value in having every question establish some boilerplate hierarchy of how acceptable any given source is. I don’t think it’s necessary to specify that you are, in fact, interested in the question because of an RPG. And this does run up against policies we do have, like “just because you want to know because it’s relevant to your campaign doesn’t automatically make it on-topic here,” (so there is no merit in demanding querents specify that they are in fact playing the RPG), and “we don’t police accepted answers,” (so we cannot “object” to someone going with an answer that relies on non-RPG sources to address the question).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my answer here is simply “yes.” Ask 40k lore questions here. We’ll assume good faith and that you are, in fact, asking here because you want RPG experts’ expertise on the matter. If we get a few confused users whose questions were better off on another site but they asked here because they didn’t know better, oh well; I highly doubt this is really going to cause the site problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Obviously, rules questions about the war game or the mechanics of the video game don’t belong here. But those are easily distinguished without necessarily knowing the answer to the question, which is a key distinction in my mind.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2024-03-04T14:43:43.740" LastActivityDate="2024-03-04T14:43:43.740" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11643" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-07-08T08:27:45.387" Score="3" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I stumbled upon these two questions which made me think:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18233/&quot;&gt;What drives the plot for antiheroes?&lt;/a&gt; - is open and have several different answers with different ideas&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188636/&quot;&gt;How can I reasonably prevent Manual of Bodily Health abuse?&lt;/a&gt; - was closed as an &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my opinion the first one is more &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; than the latter. Are there any specific criteria we can rely on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My concern is not about these two particular questions. Any problem-solving question can be called an &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; question, since it asks for a proposed solution, not a fact. How can we ensure fair criteria for such questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-08T17:46:45.630" LastActivityDate="2021-07-08T17:46:45.630" Title="How can we distinguish &quot;idea generation&quot; questions from &quot;asking for a solution&quot; ones?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="13" ClosedDate="2021-07-08T20:13:34.083" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11645" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-07-08T19:25:14.530" Score="10" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;Concerning the question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188787/how-rare-is-this-artificer-magic-item-i-created&quot;&gt;How rare is this artificer magic item I created?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was closed as unclear. The author has revised, and their revisions include addressing concerns in comments (such as specifying in what way the item uses a healing kit). That revision was rolled back and the question remains closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect we're doing the author a disservice here in not making it clear what we actually expect from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What does this author need to specifically do in order to get their question reopened?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-07-08T20:14:45.243" Title="What does the author to this item rarity question need to actually do to get their question reopened?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11646" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11645" CreationDate="2021-07-08T19:42:37.507" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;In a comment, I stated explicitly what I wanted to see for my reopen vote.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wrote a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188787/how-rare-is-this-artificer-magic-item-i-created#comment508592_188787&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; right after rolling back the edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've rolled back the edit for now, as iterations of homebrew reviews should be posted as new questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9151/62294&quot;&gt;at least 72 hours&lt;/a&gt; after the first posting. The details I wanted to see for reopening were answers to NautArch's two comments &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188787/how-rare-is-this-artificer-magic-item-i-created#comment508567_188787&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188787/how-rare-is-this-artificer-magic-item-i-created#comment508566_188787&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two comments from NautArch were:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are other players getting homebrew items? If so, can you let us know what those are and what rarity was assigned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, I'm not quite sure I understand the question. Are you asking what the rarity of an item that does all three is, or three separate items? I'm pretty sure it's the former, right?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I rolled back the edit because the revisions were substantive changes to the content &lt;em&gt;in response to the posted answers&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9151/62294&quot;&gt;which we have a rule against&lt;/a&gt;. I then left a comment stating explicitly what I wanted to see out of the question before reopening. So I'm not sure this is accurate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect we're doing the author a disservice here in not making it clear what we actually expect from them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My comment was clear and asked explicitly for some concrete information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-07-08T20:14:45.243" LastActivityDate="2021-07-08T20:14:45.243" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11647" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-07-12T17:03:00.457" Score="6" ViewCount="391" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I am writing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188834/please-clarify-multiple-attacks-and-attack-advantage&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is sitting at 4 reopen votes. Normally, I would just let community moderation work things out (which will probably happen here), but reopen reviews from some users have caused me to question my own perspective on the question. To be clear, I do not mean to call anyone out, or even to say that voting to reopen is wrong. I want to put forward this discussion so that users on either side have a place to offer a more detailed perspective about the state of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is brief, so I will reproduce it in its entirety:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188834/please-clarify-multiple-attacks-and-attack-advantage&quot;&gt;Please clarify Multiple Attacks and attack Advantage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time you get advantage on target you roll 2 dice and keep the better roll the opposite for Disadvantage, I get that. How does this effect attacks if you have multiple attacks like from fighters/rangers/monks/warlocks (thirsting blade, eldritch blast), sorcerers (quicken, twin metamagic attack spells), etc? Is advantage only reserved for the initial attack and not any after that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advantage-and-disadvantage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;advantage-and-disadvantage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;advantage-and-disadvantage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I initially voted to close, leaving the comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s going to depend on the feature giving you advantage. Voting to close “needs details” - which advantage feature is confusing you?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasoning here is that the number of features and circumstances that give advantage are numerous, and they will work differently based on how they are worded. Therefore, we cannot actually answer OP's question at all, except to say &amp;quot;it depends on the feature or circumstance&amp;quot;, which doesn't actually equip OP to understand any individual feature or circumstance they may be using at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question okay to be open in its current state, or should we wait for clarification from the author about the particular feature and/or circumstance that they are using, so as to offer a more constructive answer that can be applied at the table?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-07-26T22:03:19.060" Title="Does this question about multiple attacks and advantage need more details?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11648" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11647" CreationDate="2021-07-12T18:00:15.527" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, it needs more details&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the kicker is that at any time a DM can rule that an attack or an ability check can have advantage, or disadvantage, regardless of what other mechanical bits are in play.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question style is quite common, and not just on this site: someone has a disagreement at the table, they want an answer that affirms their opinion, so they ask a non specific question without giving more detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of stuff also happens in real life, and it can get quite frustrating to deal with people who do that as a matter of habit.  They are playing a game of 'gotcha'.  You see attorneys sometimes do this when asking someone a question in court. (You of course see that a lot on TV and in movies, where it's staged narrative, but the last time I was on a jury I watched the assistant DA do it, and the witnesses (three of them) all walked into the same trap).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this case, getting more details will allow any answer to address the actual problem at hand, which is as of this writing unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2021-07-12T18:00:15.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11649" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11647" CreationDate="2021-07-12T21:47:45.983" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2 id=&quot;no-but-a-follow-up-question-would-need-more-details&quot;&gt;No, but a follow up question would need more details.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the question is pretty clear. As I read it, the question is&#xA;asking, how to determine for how many attack rolls on the attacker's&#xA;turn does an advantage exist. And there is no clear statement in the&#xA;rules telling this, so it seems quite fine question to me. –&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188834/please-clarify-multiple-attacks-and-attack-advantage#comment508810_188834&quot;&gt;WakiNadiVellir 12 hours ago&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comment sums it up: we can answer the question. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/188835/44723&quot;&gt;We did&lt;/a&gt;. It stands on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't know if there are even any concrete misunderstandings about particular mechanics at the table. We don't know if there is a disagreement at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188834/please-clarify-multiple-attacks-and-attack-advantage#comment508847_188834&quot;&gt;It is helpful to ask any guiding comments&lt;/a&gt; that inquire into these intuitively common issues, and we might see the querent address them affirmatively, which would create a new follow-up question that would deal with a specific disagreement or specific interaction about mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But merely because we have these reasonable assumptions that there could be a more concrete issue behind this, it doesn't necessarily follow that there has to be one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-07-12T22:04:51.113" LastActivityDate="2021-07-12T22:04:51.113" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11650" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11651" CreationDate="2021-07-14T10:55:04.030" Score="5" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I know you need at least 50 reputation to posts comments on SE. Is it true for commenting your own questions? I thought it was, until I saw a comment to a new user's question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ask us here in the comments (use @ to ping someone) if you need more guidance&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The user had 1 reputation — they presumably couldn't post comments, so now I'm not sure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="27377" LastEditDate="2021-07-14T11:04:50.933" LastActivityDate="2021-07-14T11:13:56.973" Title="Can a new user answer to comments under their own question?" Tags="|support|comments|new-users|privileges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11651" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11650" CreationDate="2021-07-14T11:13:56.973" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Users can always comment on their own questions and answers regardless of reputation, see the end note of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/214174/263383&quot;&gt;this meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="34206" LastActivityDate="2021-07-14T11:13:56.973" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11652" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11654" CreationDate="2021-07-17T01:48:55.467" Score="17" ViewCount="594" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/61840/48827&quot;&gt;How much is a Gold Piece really worth?&lt;/a&gt; has been recently closed as &amp;quot;opinion-based&amp;quot;. However, I'm not sure this assessment is accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is quantitative and objective. It is asking for a number which, in principle, can be determined (or at least estimated) using economic evidence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect it attracted close votes because the question attracted a wide variety of answers which approached the problem in many different ways. But I'd argue that this isn't the question's fault. Good answers (and voters) just need to be careful to recognise that the evidence has some ambiguity, or that some approximations are better or worse than others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question remain closed, or should it be re-opened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48827" LastActivityDate="2022-08-22T13:35:57.810" Title="Why is &quot;How much is a Gold Piece really worth?&quot; closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11654" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11652" CreationDate="2021-07-17T22:50:11.243" Score="27" Body="&lt;h2 id=&quot;of-course-it-should-be-re-opened-rhnm&quot;&gt;Of course it should be re-opened.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“This question cannot be answered as expected” is a &lt;em&gt;good answer&lt;/em&gt;. The particular rendition of that sort of answer here isn’t just a good answer, but a &lt;em&gt;great&lt;/em&gt; one. And most crucially, the fact that “this question cannot be answered as expected” is the &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; answer to the question does not, and never has, and never should, mean the question should be closed. The correct and valid state for some questions is open, but unanswered. Sometimes, as here, it is better still to answer explaining &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; that is the best result we can expect. And again, this case, the particular answer is a stellar example of that sort of thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking to the answers a question gets as a cause for closing it is &lt;strong&gt;dangerous&lt;/strong&gt;, and should be done only with extreme reluctance. Most of the time, it should involve a Meta discussion, and probably ruling something off-topic, as happened with designer-reasons when this sort of thing was found to be a problem. Quite frankly, the over-use, if not outright abuse, of that policy for closing questions has led me to strongly question whether it’s a good policy in the first place—I would prefer a few noisy, speculative questions over the bludgeon that policy is sometimes used as.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But here, that doesn’t apply. This isn’t a designer-reasons question. It turns out to be an impossible question to answer, but this is not a trivial conclusion. There is no reason to expect that anyone who has this question might already know that. So on its face—not knowing the answers to it—this seems like a valid question. That automatically makes any thought of closing it something that, in my opinion, demands extraordinary evidence of harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we haven’t got that here. We have an excellent answer, and appropriate voting. Those are strong signs that everything is working as expected. Someone asked a question which cannot be answered, and the top answer is a question that thoroughly lays out exactly why it cannot be answered—&lt;strong&gt;that is the system working as intended.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the comments and other answers on this Meta, my impression of those seeking the question’s closure is that they seek more details, tighter definitions of value. And to that I ask, &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;for what purpose?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; There is no definition of those terms that is going to suddenly change the answer—the existing answer lays out in painstaking detail why &lt;strong&gt;it does not matter&lt;/strong&gt; how you define those things, because you’ll still never be able to answer the question. That suggests, to me, that those voting to close the question are seeking considerable additional effort and detail &lt;strong&gt;that will have absolutely no meaningful effect on any answer to the question&lt;/strong&gt;—which is to say, completely wasted time and effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On that point, let me be clear:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;we-are-not-here-to-fetishize-detail-in-questions-l340&quot;&gt;We are not here to fetishize detail in questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of details in a question is to allow it to be answered well. Details that do not lead to better answers are not only unnecessary, but often &lt;em&gt;undesirable&lt;/em&gt;. Details that just make the question more complicated, but lead to no improvement in one’s ability to answer it, are degrading to the question and the site as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Details are required to answer questions—but the only details required are those that you actually need to answer the question. If you are voting to close a question due to lack of details, you should be able to articulate why that question &lt;strong&gt;cannot&lt;/strong&gt; be answered without them. And “you might get better answers” isn’t a valid reason (as long as you can still get “good enough” answers, you’re allowed to be satisfied with that—we aren’t here to demand that every querent dedicate themselves to achieving answer nirvana). “It would be easier to answer” &lt;strong&gt;definitely&lt;/strong&gt; isn’t a valid reason (unless you’re arguing you literally cannot fit the necessary discussion and evidence into the space of an SE answer, which I believe is limited to 30k characters—and yes, I’ve hit that more than once). The dividing line here is “can be answered” and “cannot be answered.” Any other concerns are moot after these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the answer to a question is “that can’t be answered.” Sometimes it is “it depends.” And those are both valid questions. Sometimes, to answer, you have to thoroughly lay out the entire situation and explain why there is no answer, or go through all of the factors upon which the answer depends. That’s fine—no, it’s &lt;em&gt;better than fine&lt;/em&gt;, it’s an excellent usage of the site, because it takes real expertise to be able to do something like that, and if this site has any purpose at all, it is to be a place where you can find that kind of expertise, which is otherwise extremely difficult to find on the Internet. This kind of thing is literally why we are here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The judgment call on what should be clarified through comments and edited into the question, and what should be addressed in a thorough answer, can be a difficult call. But I don’t think this question is. And I encourage this community to really consider what expertise means, and what this site is about, because if we aren’t open to questions that demand it, there isn’t much point in this site at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-07-17T22:50:11.243" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11655" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8939" CreationDate="2021-07-22T22:57:59.060" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h3 id=&quot;remember-that-the-standard-is-backing-it-up-8e8y&quot;&gt;Remember that the standard is &lt;em&gt;backing it up&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experience is &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; form of backing up answers—but not the only one. So is a book citation, but again not the only one. We don’t arbitrarily require that answers be backed up &lt;em&gt;in some certain way&lt;/em&gt;—we require them to simply &lt;em&gt;be&lt;/em&gt; backed up, one way or another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is, necessarily, a personal, subjective judgment call on the part of any given voter. But remember also that moderation tools—closing questions, deleting answers—are not the only option we have, or even necessarily the first one we should reach for. Downvotes are much more appropriate for indicating personal opinion of given question or answer. Moderating them should be reserved for truly egregious cases—generally speaking, moderation decisions should ideally be &lt;em&gt;uncontroversial&lt;/em&gt;.¹&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;deletionclosurethe-bar-is-intentionally-low-vore&quot;&gt;Deletion/closure—the bar is intentionally low&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So very often, the question for a downvote might be “do I personally find this answer convincing?” while for closing or deleting it might be “does this question/answer make an attempt to back up what they’re saying, convincingly or otherwise?” Just as we don’t delete wrong answers, or even largely-tangential answers, as Not An Answer—that being reserved for things that make zero attempt to interface with the question at all—we don’t delete answers with attempts at backing points up that we find unconvincing, whether that is because we don’t trust the source they reference, or because their sources only cover some of the points made, or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The standard for a question remaining on the site is, intentionally, low. They attempted to interface with the question in any fashion, they made any attempt to back up their points, there’s nothing rude or otherwise problematic in the answer? It stays. It might stay heavily-downvoted, but that’s up to the individual voters. Deletion is reserved really for those cases where no attempt is made at all.²&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;downvotethe-standard-is-intentionally-very-personal-9xt5&quot;&gt;Downvote—the standard is intentionally very personal&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, Meta doesn’t decide how you up- and downvote. You do. Literally no one on the site can check how you vote, and that’s on purpose—because no one &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be checking up on how you vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should upvote if you find something convincing, and downvote when you find something doubtful and insufficiently backed up to convince you, personally. But you shouldn’t—in my (strong) opinion—downvote “just because” there’s something un-backed-up, if you don’t actually doubt that those things are true. &lt;em&gt;Everything&lt;/em&gt; un-backed-up? Yeah, sure, I can see it, though remember to consider how material may be backed up. But some innocuous statements that don’t specifically get cited? Adding in citations of books or experience for every single statement does not necessarily make an answer better—and adding citations for every single thing across every single answer is not going to improve the site, but also simply never going to happen. Harping on it too much just drives would-be answerers away. If much of an answer is backed-up, and the answer has convinced you that it is coming from expertise, and they make some un-backed-up, but not terribly dubious, statements—I really don’t think you should be downvoting that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, as I said, your votes are personal. There is simply never going to be any kind of policy about how you’re supposed to use them, beyond outright abuses like serial voting vendettas (which are handled automatically by a network-wide algorithm, not by any of us here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;remember-also-that-voting-and-moderating-are-separate-2skk&quot;&gt;Remember also that voting and moderating are separate&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By talking about the relative “bars” for voting and moderation, and pointing to the higher bar for moderation, it suggests that the two are much the same—that moderation is just “downvoting but harder.” That is not the case. Very often, it is appropriate to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; downvote something that you think needs moderation—a downvote shouldn’t be thought of as automatic for every thing that needs to be closed, or even deleted. For instance, there are many, many questions where I think “great question! unfortunately, we can’t answer it,” and upvote but also vote to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I have seen comments suggesting that people “like” something, but due to some policy, they “must” downvote. That’s not how it’s supposed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think something might be in violation of some policy, flagging it or voting to close or whatever is appropriate—it allows more of the community to see it and make decisions about it. But if the community looks into it, and decides &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to moderate it, then you ought to accept that—downvoting as a way to try to impose your policy preference despite the community as a whole not agreeing isn’t really appropriate. Beyond being an inappropriate use of your privileges, to the extent people “like” something but “must” downvote, that couldn’t be farther from how votes are intended to be used!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;Obviously not every moderation action is or should be uncontroversial, nor is this principle necessarily the highest priority—moderating in the face of controversy is necessary, of course. But all that means is that sometimes there are more important ideals than the one that says we’d prefer moderation actions to be largely agreed upon by a large majority of the site. The purpose of this maxim is not to say that controversy should prevent moderation, so much as it is to say that when considering whether or not to moderate, stepping away from personal preferences and trying to match the expectations of the broader community is a responsibility we all take on.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sub&gt;There’s sometimes an argument made for deleting answers that are being subject to “bad voting,” that is, that have limited or poor backing up but still receive positive voting. As I discuss &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11415/4563&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, the problem with that is that positive votes on the material in question, effectively, means that the community has decided that it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; meet our requirements. That matters way more than any policy we have, so it’s hard to imagine any situation beyond outright abuse that would justify countermanding the community in that fashion.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-07-22T23:21:00.177" LastActivityDate="2021-07-22T23:21:00.177" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11656" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11657" CreationDate="2021-07-23T00:04:30.710" Score="2" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;A user has recently asked these two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/189181/what-is-included-with-a-characters-proficiencies-when-they-become-a-dhampir&quot;&gt;What is included with a character's proficiencies when they become a dhampir&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/189186/understanding-how-to-play-a-wizard&quot;&gt;Understanding how to play a wizard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In both questions, they articulate the rules of the game quite clearly, and then ask the stack to clarify that their understanding is correct. The wizard question, for example, ends with the query &amp;quot;Have I finally understood how to play a wizard?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This format doesn't really present a problem which invites a solution - it presents a solution which invites validation. Whilst these questions might contain useful information for new players, they don't feel suited to SE's &lt;strong&gt;question&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt; format. Should we generally close questions like this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9076/how-do-we-back-up-affirmative-answers-to-am-i-understanding-this-correctly-sty7&quot;&gt;How do we back up affirmative answers to &amp;quot;Am I understanding this correctly&amp;quot;-style questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="60918" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-07-23T00:41:57.860" LastActivityDate="2021-07-23T10:50:56.123" Title="Should we close questions where the asker is looking to double check their understanding of basic rules?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11657" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11656" CreationDate="2021-07-23T10:45:40.297" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;This category of question is on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange's Q&amp;amp;A &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; just take the form of question and answer. It also takes the form of &lt;strong&gt;problem and solution.&lt;/strong&gt; This principle is why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;our topicality help&lt;/a&gt; says “You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.” It's also the principle that allows &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;frame challenges&lt;/a&gt; to exist: they come from a place of solving the problem over answering the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means RPG.SE isn't &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; about people asking arbitrary questions and getting answers. It's about them expressing their problems to us, and us solving their problems as best as we can manage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those questions fit into this format pure and simple:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Problem:&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not confident I understand this thing correctly. I'd like to express my conception to you and have you verify it, or correct me if I've misunderstood.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Solution:&lt;/strong&gt; We address their level of understanding to confirm or deny whether it's accurate and help them understand, such as by making corrections or re-explaining stuff.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could think of this as variation on “How does this thing work? Here's my research,” but where their research has already gotten them ≥90% of the way toward understanding things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether the individual questions in this format are any good is a case by case matter, but the basic format of “confirm my understanding” is unequivocally on topic here, and we've been handling questions along these lines since forever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if we were to just examine this only in the lens of Q&amp;amp;A and not problem-and-solution, “is this solution valid?” is definitively a question that can be answered, and that it's about validating something is neither here nor there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-07-23T10:50:56.123" LastActivityDate="2021-07-23T10:50:56.123" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11658" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11669" CreationDate="2021-07-24T17:36:56.303" Score="33" ViewCount="2246" Body="&lt;p&gt;We occasionally get questions which don’t specify which game system they are about, and which are about specific aspects of that game. Because the context and answers depend and vary with the system, and multiple systems include content by the same name, this means the system needs to be clarified for that system. Current praxis and policy is that the clarification must be made by the asker (in title, body, tag, comment, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is first solidified &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/52137&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, upheld in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8417/52137&quot;&gt;2018&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9805/52137&quot;&gt;2020&lt;/a&gt;; the policy as currently understood is summarized in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11279/52137&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;. This policy has been referred to in a few different ways, but for simplicity’s sake, let’s call it the Don’t Guess the System (DGtS) policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, since the last revisit (in 2020) was active and was considered settled, ongoing votes on the answers changed the apparent consensus. (There’s discussion specific to that phenomenon &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11595/52137&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.) As a result, a revisit of the DGtS policy is warranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For everyone’s benefit, I’ll try to give a rundown of the other changes that have happened since the last revisit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9822/52137&quot;&gt;Guidance was added&lt;/a&gt; to the “Ask a Question” page, encouraging users to specify what game system they are asking about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Similarly we made additions to the help center, including a link to the Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10132/52137&quot;&gt;Why do I need to specify my game system, and how do I best do it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Several subparts to the policy have been refined:&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Questions that are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9988/52137&quot;&gt;about D&amp;amp;D Beyond can be taken as D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt; without asking the querent.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If there is supporting contextual information, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11281/52137&quot;&gt;5e can be taken as a shorthand for D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;And links to a system-/edition-specific toolset (reference pages, etc.) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11573/52137&quot;&gt;can also be taken as a statement of system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Following the discussion at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11602/52137&quot;&gt;How shall we frame our upcoming revisit of the Don&amp;#39;t Guess the System Policy?&lt;/a&gt;, this question will be closed for one week. This will prevent answers from being posted during that time, allowing all answers to be ready to post around the same time when the question is reopened. (While the answer to the linked Q&amp;amp;A says to lock the post, none of the lock options prevent posting answers without also preventing voting and commenting on the question. This seems like a better compromise.) We’ll give people 1 month after the question is reopened, then take a look at the votes on the answers here. If there’s a clear winner and voting appears to have stabilized, we’ll proceed with that course of action; otherwise, we will re-add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; tag and look to see if there are any other actions we need to take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;With all that out of the way, how should we proceed with regard to the DGtS policy?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we keep the overall policy as is?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should we replace the policy with less absolute guidance? If so, what should this be?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some kind of middle-ground approach, or something else not covered here?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Don’t feel constrained to the listed options; we’re trying to be inclusive of every possible approach.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Results as of September 3rd, 2021.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One month after opening this post to answers, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11669/48759&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's answer&lt;/a&gt; is the top answer at +62/-5. It advocates for &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Let experts make expert decisions&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;, removing the policy and creating new guidance for users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other two answers (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11676/48759&quot;&gt;Pyrotechnical&lt;/a&gt; +29/-6 and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11673/48759&quot;&gt;nvoigt&lt;/a&gt; +30/-11) also advocate for removing the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With no answers opposing the change and very positive votes in favour of the proposals this will form our policy (or lack thereof) moving forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Where to from here?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a number of posts that will require modifications, cleaning up or historical locks. The mod team have already started identifying these and will work to update them in accordance with this change. Give us time to make the changes, but if you feel we've missed something feel free to flag it with a custom message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community will need a new FAQ guidance question on how and when to make appropriate system edits. &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Equip our experts with some community crafted guidance&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; as Thomas Markov puts it. This should be a collaborative effort to create the best guidance possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The guidance Q&amp;amp;A has been posted and it is ready for your input: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11722/what-should-i-do-when-a-question-does-not-specify-the-game-system-being-used&quot;&gt;What should I do when a question does not specify the game system being used?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-09-08T17:13:52.703" LastActivityDate="2021-09-08T17:13:52.703" Title="Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy" Tags="|discussion|policy|game-systems|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11659" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-07-24T20:24:01.000" Score="5" ViewCount="205" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently approved a suggested edit that added an image description in the link for an inserted image; stating that it was for accessibility. I have never thought of this, and have not been adding such descriptions to my inserted images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are users who do not use a typical computer monitor seeing when I just leave the generic “enter image description here”? Should I make sure to add appropriate descriptions in the markdown when I insert an image?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-07-26T17:18:06.333" LastActivityDate="2021-07-27T20:56:21.783" Title="I never add image descriptions to my image-containing posts. Should I?" Tags="|support|accessibility|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11661" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11647" CreationDate="2021-07-25T13:59:39.063" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ok, I under stand you need some examples of situations where I had trouble understanding where the &amp;quot;Advantage (roll two d20's and keep the better result&amp;quot;) bonus applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note: the following examples does not take to account the &amp;quot;Help/Aid&amp;quot; action nor used with spells like True Strike as that specifically says &amp;quot;next/first attack&amp;quot; singular and not attacks)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ex1: Rogue Fighter with two attacks&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-R/F uses either Steady Aim or gain attack advantage with a flanking buddy (ally within 5 feet of an enemy) or ranged attacks. Is the initial attack or all attacks with the Fighter's Extra Attack Class Ability have advantage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ex2: Any spell that has multi attack rolls like Eldritch Blast or Scorching Ray&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-By Lv 17 you have 4 force bolts for Eldritch Blast. On any non True Strike/Help(Aid) occasions where you can get Advantage using this spell, is the attack roll advantage applied to the fist bolt or all of them? To more specific, what if you on either the surprise round or casting while hidden from your foe and using a multi attack roll spells such a Eldritch Blast or Scorching Ray is the &amp;quot;advantage&amp;quot; (roll two d20's and keep the better result) applied to the fist attack roll of the first bolt/ray or is the &amp;quot;advantage&amp;quot; (roll two d20's and keep the better result) applied to all of them as in each and every bolt/ray that requires an attack roll?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't think I can elaborate any further. D&amp;amp;D 5e is so very frustrating at times. Even at the attempt of simplification of a game of &amp;quot;let's pretend&amp;quot; is confusing as business/politics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="8085" LastEditorUserId="8085" LastEditDate="2021-07-25T15:16:50.953" LastActivityDate="2021-07-25T15:16:50.953" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11662" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11659" CreationDate="2021-07-26T08:26:12.137" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;When screen reader reads the page to visually impaired person, she will hear something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Image. Described as &amp;quot;enter image description here&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Details may vary, some readers can (could) be configured to also tell the size and is it color or bw images, but that's merely a bonus and not always in use as it wastes time (hearing is slower than seeing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, by all means you should add descriptions. If you don't have patience to describe images properly, you should write&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; something like&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Illustration of the issue as described in text above&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;so they know they aren't missing any crucial information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good practices for visually impaired people also include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Describe problem well enough your Q or A makes sense even without the image&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't rely on the color only&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Don't rely on minute details only&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make symbols really distinct (° and * are bad pair, O and + are good pair)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That way people that have visual issues but are not completely blind have a much higher chance to use site as a fully sighted person would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Some manuals advocate leaving description blank if image is totally not needed, but in my experience large images without description raised some questions from the test users from the Polish Association of the Blind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Source: Years ago I was one of the people responsible for making websites owned by the city hall of my capital city accessible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="10642" LastEditDate="2021-07-26T09:10:22.557" LastActivityDate="2021-07-26T09:10:22.557" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11663" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11647" CreationDate="2021-07-26T22:03:19.060" Score="-1" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Give a man a fish, and feed him for a day.&#xA;Teach a man to fish, and feed him for a lifetime.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a question where someone is asking us how to fish—and comments demanding that they pick a specific example are, in effect, forcing them to pick a fish themselves without any information about the various fish or what may or may not be relevantly different about them. &lt;strong&gt;This is doing a disservice to our readers.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;this-is-a-prime-candidate-for-explaining-in-an-answer-95ip&quot;&gt;This is a prime candidate for explaining in an Answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which is exactly what we see happening on that question. Cool—system working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s because the answer is &lt;strong&gt;it depends&lt;/strong&gt;. A good answer here should be clear about what the default is, examples of when things last for only one attack or for multiple attacks or even multiple turns, and so on. You’re dealing with a new player who has a basic misunderstanding about the rules—they aren’t going to be able to clarify because they don’t know what they don’t know. That’s what we’re here for. So if the answer to the question is “it depends,” then give that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, given the above, this is an answerable question—so it should be open. Period, end of discussion. Could you give a &lt;em&gt;better answer&lt;/em&gt; if you knew what source of advantage was involved? Yes, perhaps you could. Could you give a good answer &lt;em&gt;more easily&lt;/em&gt; if it you had that information? Certainly you could; writing a good “it depends” answer can be a lot of work. But we aren’t here to demand that everyone always must maximize the quality of every answer they are looking for, and we &lt;strong&gt;certainly&lt;/strong&gt; aren’t here to answer only easy questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of the site is that we have expertise. We can explain to people that their question actually touches upon a much larger scope than they might have thought. But the place to do that is in an answer. Asking them to narrow the scope is just going to cause greater confusion because they don’t know what needs to be narrowed down. And if you do get someone to just pick something to use as an example, and answer only about that example? &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;You very likely haven’t helped them, and may very well have misled them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; They were trying to learn the base case, the default, or at the very least how to tell one apart from the other. If they’re forced to pick a single example, and only learn about that example, they have learned very little about their actual problem—which is understanding how to read the rules and what things do or don’t signify. Worse, they may then think that the single example they chose (probably more-or-less at random) extrapolates much more widely than it actually does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;sub&gt;I am not, in any way, assuming bad faith on anyone’s part. I am sure everyone who voted to close it sincerely and genuinely thought it would improve the site and/or the results for this querent. But that doesn’t change my opinion that those votes were misguided, and that the result is actually harmful.&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-07-26T22:03:19.060" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11664" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11659" CreationDate="2021-07-27T20:03:54.370" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3 id=&quot;image-descriptions-help-visually-impaired-users-engage-with-your-content-mdz3&quot;&gt;Image descriptions help visually impaired users engage with your content&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's a good thing to do on its own merits and is well covered in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10642/mo%c5%82ot&quot;&gt;Molot&lt;/a&gt;'s answer. The effort it takes won't cost you much and could help someone else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&quot;if-thats-not-motivation-enough-adding-them-could-boost-your-metrics-yudj&quot;&gt;If that's not motivation enough, adding them could boost your metrics&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Visually impaired people aren't the only 'people' that will notice you've added image descriptions - Google (and other internet search engines) will too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Presuming that you've included an image that's pretty relevant to the question you're asking / answering it's pretty likely that any good description of the image might also include repetition of some of the keys words or phrases that relate to your question / answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Repetition of relevant key words / phrases is one of the key factors that search engines take into account when ranking their results. Repeating 'key words' in the page titles, slug, body copy and image descriptions are all ways to boost a page's chances of appearing higher up the list of relevant search results. The practice of deliberately trying to move a piece of content up a search engine's results list is called &amp;quot;Search Engine Optimization&amp;quot; or SEO and is a big deal in online marketing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bringing that back to the question in hand, there's a chance that adding image descriptions to your posts could, in the long-term, boost traffic to that page, getting more eyes on your post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question asker's get badges based on numbers of page views.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If new viewers become new users that's good for the whole community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If new users like your post and up-vote then that's good for your rep.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So, definitely add image descriptions for benefit of visually impaired users, but, if you're lucky, you may directly benefit from doing so too.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-27T20:56:21.783" LastActivityDate="2021-07-27T20:56:21.783" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11665" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11667" CreationDate="2021-07-30T04:50:00.883" Score="1" ViewCount="305" Body="&lt;p&gt;These 2 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178394/53875&quot;&gt;Do both superiority dice from Superior Technique and Martial Adept only increase die size when a character reaches 10th level Battlemaster?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/190371/33569&quot;&gt;Does ‘Superior Technique’ interact with ‘Combat Superiority’?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...are currently closed as duplicates of this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/104360/33569&quot;&gt;Does the Martial Adept superiority dice scale up alongside the Battle Master fighter&amp;#39;s superiority dice if you acquire the subclass after the feat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the Superior Technique fighting style (from &lt;em&gt;Tasha's Cauldron of Everything&lt;/em&gt; and the Martial Adept feat (from the &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt;) are different rules. They are written differently, and they are in different books, and they cover different concepts (one being a fighting style, the other being a feat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both game features involve superiority dice, but the questions posed seek clarity with specificity that relies on expert opinion, which should be able to differentiate the two different rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yet questions regarding these two completely different rules have been closed as duplicates. Why are these currently closed as duplicates, and why have they not been reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-30T05:36:07.197" LastActivityDate="2021-07-30T15:17:09.353" Title="Why are these D&amp;D 5e questions about &quot;superiority dice&quot; scaling for Superior Technique closed as duplicates of a question about Martial Adept?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11666" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11665" CreationDate="2021-07-30T05:10:52.350" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;These questions ask the same thing about features with the same wording that do the same thing.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of these quotes is copied from Superior Technique, and one is copied from Martial Adept, can you discern which is which?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You gain one superiority die, which is a d6 (this die is added to any superiority dice you have from another source). This die is used to fuel your maneuvers. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your expended superiority dice when you finish a short or long rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You gain one superiority die, which is a d6 (this die is added to any superiority dice you have from another source). This die is used to fuel your maneuvers. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your expended superiority dice when you finish a short or long rest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Superior Technique, &lt;em&gt;Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/g4c0O.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/g4c0O.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Martial Adept, &lt;em&gt;Player’s Handbook&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bepaX.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bepaX.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the linked questions are asking how the two above quotes interact with the level scaling from the Battle Master’s Combat Superiority feature. But since the above quotes are duplicates, the questions are duplicates - &lt;em&gt;they ask the exact same question about the exact same body of text.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Your question has a non-duplicate inside of it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/190371/33569&quot;&gt;Can the superiority die from ‘Superior Technique’ be used for newly learned combat maneuvers?&lt;/a&gt;, contains a non-duplicate inside of it, that is, if you take Superior Technique before taking Battle Master at 3rd level, can you use the Superior Technique die on maneuvers learned from Combat Superiority. This is not a dupe, and if you edit your question to ask about that and not the level scaling, we can reopen it. Some details about why you think it might not be the case would be helpful though, as Medix2 points out:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will say, &amp;quot;Can the superiority die from superior technique be used to perform the newly learned maneuvers?&amp;quot; is probably a new question, though I'm unsure why one would theorize that it might not be able to be used and it may be good to explain why you think that might be the case or what is confusing about the scenario&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-07-30T12:02:50.923" LastActivityDate="2021-07-30T12:02:50.923" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11667" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11665" CreationDate="2021-07-30T11:42:18.643" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It should be reopened.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you say, one is a question about a feat, and the other is a question about a class feature. These are two clearly distinct rules items, even if the wording is similar (or even identical), and as such, the two questions are distinct rather than duplicates. As such, the question should be reopened, simply because of that difference alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since questions should be closed if they meet all three of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;, and this question is not an obvious subset of the other question, since class abilities are not subsets of feats, it does not meet the criteria for closure as a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="39836" LastEditDate="2021-07-30T15:17:09.353" LastActivityDate="2021-07-30T15:17:09.353" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11669" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11658" CreationDate="2021-07-31T18:30:51.543" Score="62" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let experts make expert decisions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the essential premise of Stack Exchange. People come here because they expect experts to be equipped to solve their problem - and they are right. We have an active community of RPG experts engaging with questions to provide expert guidance for solving a broad range of RPG problems. Our experts do not need a rigid policy to govern their decision making.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;We should not artificially obstruct the problem solving process.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our primary focus and objective is to provide our expertise for solving the problems presented to us. Using the site and learning how to most clearly communicate questions should be a secondary, or even tertiary, objective of ours. By saying &amp;quot;we cannot answer your question until you learn how to use tags, even though everyone knows what system you're playing&amp;quot;, we are putting problem solving in the back seat and setting site mechanics as our primary objective for new users. &lt;em&gt;We should never tell a new user that our problem with their lack of tags or explicit forthrightness about the system is more important than the problem they bring to the table.&lt;/em&gt; But that is exactly what we are doing when we &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; what they are talking about but artificially hold up the problem solving process because they didn't explicitly state what system they are playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;We can teach users how best to ask questions without artificially obstructing our primary objective.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can teach users how to use the site and ask better questions without putting problem solving on hold. &lt;em&gt;This should be obvious.&lt;/em&gt; When we know what a user is asking about, based on our expertise, we can both answer their question and teach them about the site. That is part of what comments are for. This keeps our objectives properly aligned. We focus on answering their question and secondarily engage with them on how to ask better questions and use site mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;We are equipped to handle situations where the question really is unclear, or we incorrectly identify the system.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Site mechanics are already designed to handle these situations - we don't need a policy to prevent them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Community curation is equipped to manage unclear questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The present application of the &amp;quot;Don't Guess the System&amp;quot; policy is to close questions where the system is not clear. &lt;em&gt;This will continue to be standard praxis without the policy&lt;/em&gt;. This is what we should and will continue to do anyway. When a question is unclear, a system unidentified, our experts will recognize this and vote to close the question until we have sufficient clarity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Readers decide if answers provide valuable information.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The small portion of times someone is wrong about their system guess will be sorted out by readers' votes. Even when it is unclear in a question what system is being played, answers can be made sufficiently clear to still be useful. If a question says &amp;quot;I'm playing 5e&amp;quot; and it could be D&amp;amp;D or Shadowrun, answers can easily state which game the answer pertains to. If OP never clarifies, both answers provide valuable information to future readers, and community voting will reflect the value provided by these answers. To be clear, we should still close this totally hypothetical question that is equally likely to be two entirely different games for “needs details or clarity”, but if we do get answers before it is closed, we can salvage the usefulness of the answers by appropriately pointing out the answer’s attendant game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Community curation is equipped to handle obsolete answers.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, suppose we do get the system wrong. If OP does come back to clarify, the answer for the wrong system will be downvoted or deleted. This is just the site functioning as intended. When an answer is given, but the question's author clarifies that they are playing a different system, we simply flag that answer NAA, leave a comment to the effect of &amp;quot;OP has clarified which system they are using, so this answer does not answer the question being asked&amp;quot;, and remove the answer. This is just fine, and for the answer's author, this is just the cost of doing business with an unclear question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Policy exceptions have already eroded away some of the contentious applications of the existing policy.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most contentious use of the policy is in closing questions where the system is &lt;em&gt;abundantly obvious&lt;/em&gt;, but the name of the system isn't actually stated explicitly. We often see objections taking the form of &amp;quot;Well it's not a guess&amp;quot;. To remedy this less-than-intuitive application of the policy, the community has already carved out exceptions to the policy to make room for these common sense edits:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11573/can-we-generalize-our-policy-on-linking-system-specific-rules-toolsets-etc-as&quot;&gt;Can we generalize our policy on linking system-specific rules, toolsets, etc. as clearly stating the system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11281/revisit-is-5e-a-clear-enough-statement-of-game-system-by-a-question-asker-to&quot;&gt;Revisit: Is &amp;quot;5e&amp;quot; a clear enough statement of game system by a question asker to determine that the question is about D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9988/is-it-acceptable-to-add-the-dnd-5e-tag-to-questions-about-dd-beyond&quot;&gt;Is it acceptable to add the [dnd-5e] tag to questions about D&amp;amp;D Beyond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This first bullet in particular carves out a large exception space to the existing policy that was the source of the most discord in my experience. Closing questions with direct quotes and citations of system specific materials but without an explicit system statement in the question body was the most contentious application of the policy, but we've gotten rid of it already.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The space that remains for applying the policy &lt;em&gt;is mostly the same space where questions would be closed anyway without needing a policy&lt;/em&gt;. The policy remains in effect for those truly grey areas, and I have already explained that we are equipped to handle those with existing tools, without needing the policy to motivate us. I say “mostly the same space” because there is still some space for questions that are abundantly obvious, that just don’t fit into our exception spaces yet. But if community direction tells us anything, it is that if there is a way to codify such a question into an exception, we will and the community will support it. We don’t need a policy to motivate our curation anymore. Let’s let our experts make expert decisions about content and curation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Let’s further equip our experts with some community crafted guidance.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I haven’t made it clear yet, let me reemphasize: wild guesses and stabs in the dark should be avoided. The current state of the policy prevents this, but it does so with a heavy hand &lt;em&gt;by treating wild guesses and well informed decisions as the same thing&lt;/em&gt;, when the question’s context is underspecified. Understandably, this is the primary source of contention with the policy. So in the event of a removal of the policy, we can and should craft some guidance to nudge users in the right direction when approaching untagged or under-specified questions. Some of our exception metas can serve as a good starting point for that guidance, as these metas exist because they carve out exceptions to the current policy for situations where we can be exceedingly confident of the system being used. More guidance is needed, but this post isn’t the place to explore that in detail. Should this proposal succeed, we should work together to construct an FAQ-style meta Q&amp;amp;A with some guidance for handling underspecified questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be transparent, the problem I really want to solve here is the counterintuitive closure of questions where the system is obvious, but not explicit. To this end, I think the proposal outlined above will serve two purposes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It will eliminate counterintuitive question closures.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It will mostly preserve the favorable outcomes of having the policy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really believe that repealing the policy, establishing some concrete guidance, and letting the community handle question curation will yield a state of affairs not dissimilar to what we have now, but without counterintuitive closures. Under the policy, ambiguous questions get closed. Under this proposal to repeal the policy, &lt;em&gt;ambiguous questions will still get closed&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h6&gt;Acknowledgements&lt;/h6&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;I would like to thank KorvinStarmast and doppelgreener for their contributions and improvements to this answer.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-08-02T04:46:33.920" LastActivityDate="2021-08-02T04:46:33.920" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11670" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11672" CreationDate="2021-07-31T18:57:42.300" Score="2" ViewCount="78" Body="&lt;p&gt;On the right hand column of RPG.SE, there's a link to a meta question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11658/revisit-iii-don-t-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt;) with an &amp;quot;Upcoming events&amp;quot; header rather than the expected &amp;quot;Featured on Meta&amp;quot; as shown below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4F7bL.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/4F7bL.png&quot; alt=&quot;image of rpg.se with possible error&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similarly on meta:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9A6bW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9A6bW.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a bug of some kind?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64190" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-07-31T23:19:00.217" LastActivityDate="2021-07-31T23:19:00.217" Title="Why is there an RPG.SE Meta question listed as an upcoming event?" Tags="|bug|meta|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11671" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11670" CreationDate="2021-07-31T19:11:36.820" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Moderator Someone_Evil created the event so that the DGtS revisit would appear on the featured board while it was still a closed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11658/revisit-iii-don-t-guess-the-system-policy#comment39799_11658&quot;&gt;See this comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5dfjD.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5dfjD.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-07-31T19:11:36.820" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11672" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11670" CreationDate="2021-07-31T19:12:38.577" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It was a hack&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll find this covered in that question (and in the comments below), but to reiterate;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11602/52137&quot;&gt;decided&lt;/a&gt; that the Revisit should be locked for a week before allowing answers. The decision to &amp;quot;lock&amp;quot; was based on the assumption that the Wiki Answer lock only prevents answers, but on further investigation it also prevents votes and comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;So we decided to close it instead, which we thought only prevented answers, but it turns out it also prevents it being featured.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;As a hack around this limitation, I created a community event, which had the added boon of letting it show a time-down to when it would be reopened. Roughly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The event has now expired and since the question is reopened it should show up as a normal Featured once that box caches (which is once per 24 hours, IIRC).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-07-31T19:42:37.403" LastActivityDate="2021-07-31T19:42:37.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11673" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11658" CreationDate="2021-07-31T20:21:39.473" Score="20" Body="&lt;p&gt;I present exhibit A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/189343/do-kaladesh-dwarves-get-4-in-constitution&quot;&gt;Do Kaladesh Dwarves get +4 in Constitution?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The most recent example of how we make this site a worse place by having this rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was not unclear. It could be answered. And yet, we deleted the answer (don't know what actually happened, but our community acted in a way that in the end as a result we had a deleted answer). Why? Was it wrong? Misleading? Guesswork? No. Simply because we have &amp;quot;the rule&amp;quot;. Regardless of whether &amp;quot;the rule&amp;quot; makes sense here or not, it apparently has to be enforced.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are here to answer people's questions, not send them away because they made a mistake when filling out the right set of bureaucracy approved forms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can understand that people vote to close as unclear, &lt;em&gt;when it's actually unclear&lt;/em&gt;. I can understand people not answering when they don't really know if their answer will be correct. I appreciate people asking for clarification. But deleting a perfectly fine answer and closing the question, because of some rule we made up, is really horrible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone asks how hitting an Orc with their human fighter works, then yes, please, close it as unclear, because &lt;em&gt;it is&lt;/em&gt;. D&amp;amp;D, DSA, Earthdawn, Warhammer, 40K, Shadowrun, I could find tons of RPGs that would fit that description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But can anybody point me to at least &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; other RPG that has a Kaladesh dwarf subrace?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;One&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We alienated &lt;em&gt;two&lt;/em&gt; good people, just because we made up a rule and enforced it with no (or very few) exceptions. This nonsense has to stop. If someone has a question and someone else has an answer to it, I do not want to see people removing knowledge from this site in the name of &amp;quot;rules&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-08-03T04:05:04.363" LastActivityDate="2021-08-03T04:05:04.363" CommentCount="31" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11674" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-01T19:22:47.860" Score="8" ViewCount="200" Body="&lt;p&gt;We currently have 87 questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; of which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot;&gt;79 are cotagged&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus+-dnd-5e&quot;&gt;other 8&lt;/a&gt; being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 5e, the general category is spellcasting focus, with arcane focus being a specific type of spellcasting focus. But there are other types of spellcasting focuses that are not arcane: Druidic focuses, holy symbols, musical instruments, and artisan tools. All of these are spellcasting focuses for their respective classes, and are not arcane focuses. Arcane focus is the spellcasting focus specific to only 3 of the 9 spellcasting classes available.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So unless this change would upset something with the 8 pathfinder questions (it shouldn’t based on my understanding), I think we should change the name of the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we change the name of the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting-focus&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-08-09T13:17:24.250" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T13:17:24.250" Title="Should we change the tag [arcane-focus] to [spellcasting-focus]?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|rename-request|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11675" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11674" CreationDate="2021-08-02T14:31:10.197" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, we should rename it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are already using it this way, and we should merge it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/holy-symbol&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;holy-symbol&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;holy-symbol&lt;/a&gt;. Both will be useful synonyms.  Using &amp;quot;arcane focus&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;holy symbol&amp;quot; as synonyms keeps current searchability and functionality and expands it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-08-02T14:31:10.197" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11676" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11658" CreationDate="2021-08-02T19:53:47.553" Score="27" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation: Rescind the policy - Guessing the system is permissible, but you do so at-risk&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going forward, we will adopt a policy to allow experts to be experts, but in that vein, we will expect that they be correct. This recommendation puts the burden of guessing upon the respondent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Don't edit the question tags:&lt;/strong&gt; Do not edit tags into the question unless there are clear indicators on the querent's intent via comments, language in the question (including things like a link to D&amp;amp;D Beyond), stating the system in the title, etc. This is no different than prior.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;State your assumptions:&lt;/strong&gt; When guessing the system, it is important to indicate what your assumption is within your answer, so a header stating, &amp;quot;I'm assuming you're referencing 5th edition,&amp;quot; would be adequate before proceeding with your answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Accepted answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Assuming the querent accepts your answer, but does not edit the assumed system into their question, then it becomes appropriate to edit the original question's tags to match the assumption.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The at-risk element:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not anticipate that this will occur very often, but in the event that the assumed system is incorrect, the answer must be deleted REGARDLESS OF SCORE. This is necessary to prevent confusion for others who may find the question at a later date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer is considered wrong if the querent has edited in the system and it doesn't match the assumed system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deletion can occur via any of the following methods:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Deletion by the respondent is preferred, but not always viable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the score on the answer is negative, deletion can be handled by the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the score on the answer is positive, deletion must be handled by the moderators. Members of the community can assist by raising a the, &amp;quot;In need of moderator intervention,&amp;quot; flag option and citing that the assumed system was not correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, this proposal creates a slight increase in the moderator's workload, but I don't get the impression this will be more than a handful of additional tasks for them every year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The need for this has mostly passed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is somewhat speculative history, but if my understanding is correct, the original need for the DGtS policy stemmed from the release of 5th edition D&amp;amp;D, which continuously had answers to questions that didn't align with system edition. This was likely further complicated due to 5th edition's extended playtest period whereby it was attracting folks who were playing 4th edition and enjoyed the strong balance of that system coupled with folks coming from 3.5 edition who enjoyed the strong thematic elements of the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This situation was unique in gaming, because when 4th edition came out, a lot of folks used to 3.5 were adamant about not playing it describing it as being too much like an MMO. Conversely, 4th edition brought new folks to tabletop gaming in part because it was very similar in nature to the MMOs that they enjoyed playing. Now with 5th edition, coming out, these two groups are engaging with each other and may've been oblivious to the other's viewpoint prior to this point in time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, a question about Color Spray could have serious overlap with no less than 3 different systems and all are using similar terminology. Furthermore, because 5th edition was new, a lot of these questions were coming in very quickly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange has previously indicated that they wish to maintain a focus upon keeping things easy for the experts. To that end, there are baseline rules whereby a querent should indicate the research effort that they have already engaged in prior to seeking assistance. The underlying basis for this theory is that there are endless half-considered questions, but the number of experts whom will be willing and/or able to answer those questions is likely far smaller in number. Thus, it is prudent to cater to those experts because once they leave the site, that's when the stack dies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had thought that this might also happen with the release of Pathfinder 2e, which is why a few months back I was supportive of maintaining the policy, however, this premonition does not appear to have occurred. Given this doesn't seem to be repeating issue, I am inclined to rescind the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2021-08-02T19:53:47.553" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11677" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11674" CreationDate="2021-08-04T06:37:40.800" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag should be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting-focus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag seems to be narrowly scoped to focus (heh) on one particular type of spellcasting focus that exists in at least some versions of D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder. However, there doesn't seem to be a particular need for such a specific distinction between arcane focuses and other kinds of spellcasting focuses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag is already being used on several questions about other kinds of spellcasting focuses, or about spellcasting focuses in general (that are not specific to arcane focuses). For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/160231/33569&quot;&gt;What exactly are you getting when you buy an Emblem Holy Symbol?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159177/33569&quot;&gt;Druids, Focuses, Shields, and Spells involving a weapon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143968/33569&quot;&gt;If a character can use a +X magic weapon as a spellcasting focus, does it add the bonus to spell attacks or spell save DCs?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/138807/33569&quot;&gt;Can a Spell Focus or Component Pouch be used with a spell that has costless consumed components?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/131372/33569&quot;&gt;Can the Staff of the Woodlands be used as a druidic focus?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/128531/33569&quot;&gt;Does Wild Shape require a Druidic focus?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And many more. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag name and tag wiki currently focus solely on arcane focuses, even though the tag doesn't seem to be used that way in practice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition, as I mentioned in a comment on the question, I have definitely hesitated to tag/refrained from tagging questions about other sorts of spellcasting focuses with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag in the past, specifically because of the name. And judging from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22spellcasting%20focus%22%20-%5Barcane-focus%5D%20is%3Aq&quot;&gt;this list of questions that mention spellcasting focuses that don't have the tag&lt;/a&gt; (many of which are primarily about a spellcasting focus), I'm not the only one; quite a few existing questions would benefit from having a tag about spellcasting focuses in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag should be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting-focus&lt;/a&gt; to reflect how it's being used anyway. We should probably also leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcane-focus&lt;/a&gt; as a synonym of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting-focus&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting-focus&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting-focus&lt;/a&gt; tag, to make it easier to find and use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-08-05T02:17:23.890" LastActivityDate="2021-08-05T02:17:23.890" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11679" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-06T17:55:19.230" Score="4" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;I went through and looked for tags with no usage guidance/blank wiki excerpts having at least 10 questions on the site. Here they are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; 26 questions&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-actions&lt;/a&gt; 23 questions&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/move-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;move-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;move-action&lt;/a&gt; 23 questions&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt; 19 questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;del&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/inquisitor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;inquisitor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;inquisitor&lt;/a&gt; 16 questions&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/channel-energy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;channel-energy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;channel-energy&lt;/a&gt; 10 questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you volunteer to fix one or more of these, just leave an answer documenting your changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-08-07T07:37:59.010" LastActivityDate="2021-08-07T07:38:11.907" Title="Tags with at least 10 questions that need usage guidance" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11680" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11679" CreationDate="2021-08-06T18:42:27.527" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've added usage guidance for the following tags in that list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions related to special bloodlines (such as vampiric, draconic, etc) and gameplay or narrative features related to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/inquisitor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;inquisitor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;inquisitor&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about the Inquisitor, a Pathfinder 1e divine class.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(All 16 questions in this tag are also Pathfinder 1e questions; we can update if/when there's another kind of Inquisitor people begin asking about)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/move-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;move-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;move-action&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for questions about specifics of using move actions, in games where that's a component of the action economy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/immediate-actions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;immediate-actions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;immediate-actions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder family of games, the Immediate Action is an action that takes place nearly-instantaneously. In the context of D&amp;amp;D 4e, this is in reference to immediate interrupts and reactions, which are triggered actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In D&amp;amp;D 4e, the use of immediate actions is exclusively in the form of reactive, triggered moves. For example, opportunity attacks are an immediate interrupt; so is timely dodge. I don't know if that's also the case in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and Pathfinder 1e, but if so this description could be massively simplified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-08-07T07:38:11.907" LastActivityDate="2021-08-07T07:38:11.907" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11681" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11684" CreationDate="2021-08-06T19:15:40.623" Score="12" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; is a little problematic, as it is a concept in three quite large games and neither shares anything but the name:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-masquerade&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-masquerade&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-masquerade&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;a href=&quot;https://whitewolf.fandom.com/wiki/Bloodline_(VTM)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bloodlines&lt;/a&gt; as &amp;quot;sub-Clans&amp;quot;. For example, Kiasyd are considered generally a bloodline of the Toreador. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://whitewolf.fandom.com/wiki/Banu_Haqim&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Assamites&lt;/a&gt; even sport a whopping 5 Bloodlines, Castes + Antritribu.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Generally, bloodlines use alternative powers than their host clan&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline+-dnd-3.5e+-pathfinder-1e&quot;&gt;the Questions asked here&lt;/a&gt; seem to delve into the lore of how one branch or another was formed&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-the-requiem&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-the-requiem&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-the-requiem&lt;/a&gt; Has Bloodlines which are similar but distinct from VtM.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; where Bloodline is... &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; that somehow...&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline+dnd-3.5e&quot;&gt;in 3.5&lt;/a&gt; it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159051&quot;&gt;seems to cause level adjustment&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/167369&quot;&gt;grant spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline+sorcerer&quot;&gt;Sorcerer-boodlines&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline+bloodrager&quot;&gt;Bloodrager-Bloodlines&lt;/a&gt;, which ways how they are empowered.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should we do? There is little to no chance to get those things somehow can fit under one hat for an overarching definition, as called for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11679/tags-with-at-least-10-questions-that-need-usage-guidance?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; - So Is there some solution?!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-08-09T06:30:09.650" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T06:30:09.650" Title="The [bloodline] tag is being used for two completely different concepts in different RPGs" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11682" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11681" CreationDate="2021-08-06T19:15:40.623" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suggest to rebrand the two and burninate the pure &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; one for:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Pathfinder: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodrager&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodrager&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodrager&lt;/a&gt;, as appropriate&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer-bloodline&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodrager-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodrager-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodrager-bloodline&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;VTM: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vampire-bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;vampire-bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;vampire-bloodline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-08-06T21:05:04.317" LastActivityDate="2021-08-06T21:05:04.317" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11683" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11681" CreationDate="2021-08-06T20:40:26.060" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;A term appears in different systems, and that's okay.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is true that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; has completely different meanings in different systems. Why is that a problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a user wants to find a system-specific question about bloodlines, then their best option is to search for content with both the system tag and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; tag. Most questions have multiple tags, including a system tag, so this search should be relatively easy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, searching &lt;code&gt;[pathfinder-1e] and [bloodline]&lt;/code&gt; finds Pathfinder 1e questions about sorcerer &amp;amp; bloodrager bloodlines.&#xA;Or, searching &lt;code&gt;[vampire-*] and [bloodline]&lt;/code&gt; finds questions about vampire bloodlines in the &lt;em&gt;World of Darkness&lt;/em&gt; systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the presenting question is &amp;quot;how should we define the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bloodline&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bloodline&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bloodline&lt;/a&gt; tag&amp;quot;, then that should be proposed as an answer to the meta discussion &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11679/&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Tags with at least 10 questions that need usage guidance&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. It seems feasible to propose a definition that is flexible and independent of system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="32840" LastEditDate="2021-08-07T07:48:48.657" LastActivityDate="2021-08-07T07:48:48.657" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11684" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11681" CreationDate="2021-08-07T07:40:54.850" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't think there's special action needed here. The tag &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be given guidance just fine:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions related to special bloodlines (such as vampiric, draconic, etc) and gameplay or narrative features related to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't need to specify the exact per-system meaning in the tag guidance. We could elaborate on what it means in different systems in the tag wiki (sorta like in your question) but that won't cause problems either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there's some problem that warrants splitting it up into multiple tags, we can still do that, but the tag description in and of itself is not that problem. If we did that, let's be mindful a tag called [vampire-bloodline] would still probably get shared between multiple systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-08-07T08:00:58.303" LastActivityDate="2021-08-07T08:00:58.303" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11685" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-09T10:47:24.000" Score="3" ViewCount="84" Body="&lt;p&gt;New users often post uncomplete/chatty answers. Here's a typical comment to such an answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Welcome to the site! Please take the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tour&quot;&gt;tour&lt;/a&gt; when you get the chance. It's important to note that we're not a forum and we don't do discussion; if you post as an answer, you should directly answer the question that was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the tour doesn't have a distinctive guide for answering. It is focused on asking questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Ask questions, get answers, no distractions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ask about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't ask about...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we add criteria for an acceptable answer to the tour? Or should we just send new posters to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help&quot;&gt;the help center&lt;/a&gt; instead of the tour?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T11:59:42.820" Title="Should we add a definition of a good answer to the tour?" Tags="|feature-request|new-users|tour|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11686" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11685" CreationDate="2021-08-09T10:57:47.507" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;We can't modify the tour that way without developer intervention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only three parts of the tour are editable by diamond moderators:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The blurb at the top—we can change its text. That's the paragraph starting with “RPG Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for...”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The example question shown in the first section can be swapped for any other.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The on/off topic list can be edited. These are just bulleted lists like I'm writing now.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This information doesn't fit into any of those groups. The rest is baked in and can't be changed except by Stack Exchange developers specifically modifying the tour to enable us to make changes to that bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The example question at least demonstrates citation by example; it's part of why I configured it to that one specifically  during my time as a diamond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T10:57:47.507" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11687" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11685" CreationDate="2021-08-09T11:14:15.983" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The tour is only a &lt;em&gt;basic&lt;/em&gt; introduction to the site&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tour gives a basic, high level introduction to the site. And it's hard to give an actually useful definition of what a good answer is, especially that fits into a place like the tour. That fits better into the help center, and for any aspects which aren't covered by the (non-editable) articles there, meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At risk of suggesting others just copy me, I usually link to both the tour and the help center. For convenience, note that &lt;code&gt;[tour]&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;[help]&lt;/code&gt; are magic links to the tour and help center respectively. And if there are &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; issues in a post, describing those (and linking to a help article or meta on the topic) are more useful in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T11:14:15.983" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11688" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11685" CreationDate="2021-08-09T11:15:55.227" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;There is a help article dedicated to this, and we have our own guidance we can link.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer&quot;&gt;How do I write a good answer?&lt;/a&gt;. Link this article if you feel the need to leave more detailed guidance about writing good answers that is not covered in the tour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also have our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;citation expectation meta&lt;/a&gt; that is even better and more specific than the help article. I prefer to leave a link to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-08-09T11:59:42.820" LastActivityDate="2021-08-09T11:59:42.820" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11689" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11690" CreationDate="2021-08-11T09:03:14.720" Score="1" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;Apparently, the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt; is currently only used for some 19 questions about a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; feature. Which is confusing since there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aegis+-%5Baegis%5D+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;54 questions that use the word but not the tag&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see questions from Pathfinder 1e (often with Psionics), DnD 4 and DnD 5, and two cases of Ars-Magica. Some might fit the bill, most not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are there other cases of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt; that just lack the tag? &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11679/tags-with-at-least-10-questions-that-need-usage-guidance&quot;&gt;What might become the tag definition&lt;/a&gt; based on our tagging and re-tagging?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am by far not an expert in Pathfinder psionics, so I can't possibly try to come up with something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-02-01T14:49:24.077" LastActivityDate="2023-02-01T14:49:24.077" Title="Which questions with Aegis do lack the [Aegis] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11690" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11689" CreationDate="2021-08-11T13:26:04.433" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;It looks to be a couple of different things going on here. I'll start by trying to break it down by system. Keep in mind I'm not intimately familiar with most of these systems, so I'll try to leave it open, and I welcome any corrections and/or informed opinions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Pathfinder 1e&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is where the tag has current use, it seems to be a perfectly sensible tag for the concept it is within that system (to an outside observer), but there's a bunch of under tagged questions. I don't know how many or which of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aegis%20-%5Baegis%5D%20is%3aq%20%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D&quot;&gt;32 questions&lt;/a&gt; are actually &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; Aegises, but I'd rather leave that for someone who knows the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Skimming through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aegis%20-%5Baegis%5D%20is%3aq%20%5Bdnd-4e%5D&quot;&gt;16 questions&lt;/a&gt;, it seems to be included in the name for a bunch of Swordmage powers. If Aegis is the name for a distinct concept/mechanic that would probably warrant a tag, otherwise it doesn't need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aegis%20-%5Baegis%5D%20is%3aq%20%5Bdnd-5e%5D&quot;&gt;two questions&lt;/a&gt; are about a magic item from an adventure module which happens to have Aegis in its name. These aren't relevant to the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same goes for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70405/can-dwarven-fighters-or-any-non-casting-class-create-magic-weapons&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; in 3.5, it shows up in the search because of the name of a magic item. No need for the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ars Magica&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know what an Aegis is within the context of Ars Magica, but none of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=aegis%20-%5Baegis%5D%20is%3aq%20%5Bars-magica-5%5D&quot;&gt;three questions&lt;/a&gt; from Ars Magica 5 seems to be &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; Aegises. In one it's part of a name, and in the other two it's part of the requirements or concerns. Classic false positives when doing this kind of undertag-search.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Solution&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the basis of the questions we have, there is one relevant system and one maybe. Based on current tagging, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt; tag is only relevant to PF-1e and the tag description should be fine to reflect that. If the 4e questions should have this tag (and here we need a 4e Swordmage expert), it should get tagged as such and the description expanded to match that. Worse comes to worst, we could simply make it &amp;quot;about mechanics called Aegis is various systems.&amp;quot; That's fine to, it doesn't seem to be a widely used concept enough that cross-system meaning is of great importance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-08-11T13:26:04.433" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11691" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-11T15:23:57.333" Score="5" ViewCount="117" Body="&lt;p&gt;My recollection is that &amp;quot;last seen&amp;quot; information was prominently displayed on a user's profile page right after &amp;quot;member since&amp;quot; on the top line.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I look at profiles today, it is not there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been able to find it in &amp;quot;network profile&amp;quot; page, &amp;quot;accounts&amp;quot; tab.  The &amp;quot;accounts&amp;quot; tab appears to be the default display when selecting &amp;quot;view network profile&amp;quot; under &amp;quot;communities&amp;quot;.  However, some users do not have a &amp;quot;view network profile&amp;quot; link under &amp;quot;communities&amp;quot; - for them, I have to go to &amp;quot;network profile&amp;quot;, which opens to a default display of &amp;quot;top&amp;quot; tab and then &lt;em&gt;select&lt;/em&gt; the &amp;quot;accounts&amp;quot; tab.  This makes it rather more laborious to get to &amp;quot;last seen&amp;quot;, which used to be one click away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have recently hit 15K rep which has changed some of my displays, but I think this is unrelated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can someone confirm that this change was made recently?&#xA;Was a purpose stated for the change?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-08-20T16:34:15.087" LastActivityDate="2021-08-20T16:34:15.087" Title="Has user 'last seen' information been moved?" Tags="|support|user-interface|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11692" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11691" CreationDate="2021-08-11T15:34:33.920" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This was a recent privacy related change&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/368285/some-changes-to-the-profile-while-we-make-it-responsive&quot;&gt;Some changes to the profile while we make it responsive&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The work was done while they were making the profile more 'responsive', but was motivated by &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/368285/some-changes-to-the-profile-while-we-make-it-responsive/368289#comment1228272_368289&quot;&gt;privacy concerns&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've actually had quite a few complaints in the past that a &amp;quot;Last seen&amp;quot; indicator public visible is a creepy and intrusive thing to have on a user profile. So I imagine the disappointment will be very 50/50 here. ;) – &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/141525/animuson&quot;&gt;animuson&lt;/a&gt; Aug 5 at 22:42&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2021-08-11T15:34:33.920" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11693" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11689" CreationDate="2021-08-15T19:35:14.493" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t think this actually corrects anything Someone_Evil has already said, but since there was some uncertainty:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;“Aegis” isn’t any particular thing. The word almost-certainly shows up here and there, but it’s not something tag-worthy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Pathfinder 1e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Aegis is a psionic character class published by Dreamscarred Press, a third-party publisher (who, disclaimer if that’s relevant here, I’ve worked for). As a class, particularly one that has unique mechanics, it makes perfect sense to have a tag for it. Once upon a time, DSP considered possibly publishing work in D&amp;amp;D 5e, or Pathfinder 2e, and that might have eventually included the aegis, but as far as I know, DSP is pretty much defunct at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;D&amp;amp;D 4e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the core class features of the swordmage class is their “aegis,” and that’s where they choose which sort of swordmage they want to be—they have a choice of “aegis of assault,” “of shielding,” and “of ensnaring.” The aegis is a key part of what makes a swordmage a swordmage, and which one you have has pretty significant ramifications for how you do what you do. But &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/swordmage&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;swordmage&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;swordmage&lt;/a&gt; can and does easily cover questions about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like 3.5e, 5e doesn’t really have anything “special” for the word “aegis,” it’s just a word that gets used sometimes. Nothing that requires tagging.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Ars Magicka&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Completely unfamiliar with this, can’t add anything to what Someone_Evil said.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Opinion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt; refers pretty much solely to the Pathfinder 1e class; that’s the only place it’s used, and it seems like it’s the only place it &lt;em&gt;should be&lt;/em&gt; used. The Ars Magicka questions look like maybe they could have used the tag, but I lean towards deferring to the people who asked those questions (who surely know more about the system than I), and assuming those questions are fine without it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, the questions we should be concerned with missing the tag are those with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; and mention the aegis, but without &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/aegis&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;aegis&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;aegis&lt;/a&gt;. I.e., this search: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+aegis+-%5Baegis%5D&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;[pathfinder-1e] aegis -[aegis]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. Seems there are 60 questions in there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One issue, though: the aegis is a psionic class. That also implies that questions about the class should also have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt;—which is a little awkward. Because psionics are third-party in Pathfinder, we have used the tag to “section off” that content—which is probably helpful to a lot of readers; it is for me—but it turns the tag into something of a meta tag. We include it because we’re discussing DSP content from one of those books, whether or not we’re actually asking about the psionic mechanics, or even asking about psionic material in the first place. That implies we should also maybe take a look through &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D+aegis+-%5Bpsionics%5D&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;[pathfinder-1e] aegis -[psionics]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, which has 27 results, and add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt; to several of those. Or we should rethink how we use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/psionics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;psionics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;psionics&lt;/a&gt;, at least within &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; (in other systems where psionics is part of the official system, it doesn’t have the same problems).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, for both searches, we must still be careful about false positives. I see several of those questions in both searches where there is a mention that the character is an aegis, but that information is entirely tangential to the question, which has little to nothing to do with the aegis’s mechanics or even any psionic material at all, even when using the expansive definition often used in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-08-15T19:35:14.493" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11694" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-23T15:08:43.470" Score="10" ViewCount="128" Body="&lt;p&gt;A while back there was a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/344513/681403&quot;&gt;revamp of the ask page&lt;/a&gt; which introduced a lot more per site customization. Of relevance here is that we can have the page react to tags:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tag-related error messages and warnings&lt;/strong&gt;, regex-based (seen with custom error text in screenshot 4, with the default text on screenshot 5, and with a tag warning here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The warning and error messages described in the two bullet points above have a limit of 1000 characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We occasionally still get questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tool-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tool-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tool-recommendation&lt;/a&gt;. While the excerpts rather aggressively declare them off-topic, those are obviously not read often enough and the existence of the tag gives the impression the question type is on topic (because why else would we have the tag?).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have what looks to me like a nail and a suitable hammer, now to make sure we strike true; we need good text for the warning or error. Some considerations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making it an error will prevent the question from being posted with the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think we'll want to guide askers to fix the question &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt; or frame rather than just omitting the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm assuming the two tags are similar enough that the text will be either near identical, or we can just use the same one keying off &amp;quot;- recommendation&amp;quot;, thus covering them both as part of this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-08-23T16:17:03.023" LastActivityDate="2021-08-25T19:15:12.693" Title="Should we make the recommendation tags throw a warning or error?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|tags|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11695" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-23T16:28:03.347" Score="3" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/191011/what-are-some-easy-all-in-one-options-to-play-ttrpgs-online-with-only-phones&quot;&gt;What are some easy all-in-one options to play TTRPGs online with only phones?&lt;/a&gt; was closed (correctly, I think) as off-topic. By my understanding, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/roomba&quot;&gt;Roomba&lt;/a&gt; will clean it in ~9 days (depending on how many edits come) and then it is deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had not known that it was considered off-topic and had already written an answer. The answer is now deleted so it is not visible to most users, but the content doesn't matter. @Thomas Markov wrote a comment that I would be interested in discussing. So here is the comment copied for everyone to see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we not answer off topic questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm wondering what is the thought process behind this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How I see it there are two paths that question can take, and in either case, I cannot see any harm in having answered it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is altered in a way that it is no longer off-topic. In this specific case, that is very unlikely to happen, but it wouldn't be the first time a closed question was reopened. In this case, the answer may very well still be valid, and there is no harm in it being there. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/26565/editing-a-question-after-receiving-one-or-more-answers&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Ideally, edits to a question should not invalidate existing answers&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question is and will always be off-topic. In that case, it will (hopefully) be deleted, because such questions should not show up in search results, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/97870/do-closed-questions-show-up-in-search-engine-results?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;which closed ones still do&lt;/a&gt;. The answer to this question is deleted with the question and will not clutter the RPG.SE, nor will it be a bad example. One could argue I wasted some time writing the answer, but I don't mind. On the contrary, I'd be happy to know that I made the harsh welcome for this new contributor a bit better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the harm in answering off-topic questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: The links that I posted are not necessarily from this SE. I have not found any indications that the philosophy on RPG.SE should be fundamentally different, but if I'm wrong please point me to the relevant posts.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="51849" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-08-27T16:37:28.073" LastActivityDate="2021-08-27T16:37:28.073" Title="Answering off-topic questions" Tags="|discussion|answers|on-topic|closed-questions|deleted-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11696" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11695" CreationDate="2021-08-23T16:42:13.303" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You should not answer off-topic questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other Stackizens have written about this so I will quote from the top answers of each of the following MSE posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/133552&quot;&gt;Should I answer off-topic questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/200112&quot;&gt;Is it bad to answer off-topic questions, knowing they are off-topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/221937&quot;&gt;Is it bad form to flag a question AND answer it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/217712&quot;&gt;Should you answer a question you think should be deleted/closed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/194963&quot;&gt;Should one downvote answers to off-topic questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, answering questions that should get closed encourages bad behavior. [...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My criteria are consistent with the penalty for answering off topic questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You lose all reputation gained on questions that get deleted within 60 days, but you keep reputation gained on migrated questions (on the target site).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is bad to answer off-topic questions. What on earth is the point of defining them as off-topic if you're going to answer them anyway?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Think about what happens if, instead of scolding your dog for peeing on the rug, you reward them with a treat. They're going to keep peeing on the rug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't encourage our users to pee on our rug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply put, answering bad questions encourages users to ask more bad questions. It perpetuates a cycle of bad questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is a sure duplicate or cannot be salvaged, it's best if you didn't answer it, and instead educate the OP on why his question is about to be closed/deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember, our goal is quality, helping out other users is nice but it is a secondary goal. Flooding the site with answered duplicates doesn't help anyone, half-assed questions getting low quality answers (because you can't really answer a question the truly deserves being closed) doesn't help either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes. Answering obviously off-topic questions encourages people to ask them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From that last post there is also this, which I personally find to be a very compelling reason &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to answer off-topic questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are clean up scripts (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/92006&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; for the specifics) that will clean up closed questions with certain attributes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One set of the requirements for one of the scripts contains:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has no answers with a score &amp;gt; 0&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Downvoting answers of questions that really shouldn't be will help coax these questions to automatic deletion, lest they serve as bad examples for other people to ask similar questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please remember the bit of the downvote tooltip of &amp;quot;this is not useful&amp;quot; is still the guiding principle for what to downvote... but if it isn't useful, by all means, downvote it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering a closed question (and then getting a positive score) prevents the Roomba from doing its job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2021-08-23T16:42:13.303" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11697" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-23T23:01:44.800" Score="7" ViewCount="236" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/191032/44723&quot;&gt;What is Avatar Legends: The RPG, and how does one play it?&lt;/a&gt;. It was closed within 30 minutes with the reason &amp;quot;This question needs to be more focused.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we close it and questions like it? Such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179119/44723&quot;&gt;Is there a summary of Nobilis 3rd edition rules for new players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/26541/44723&quot;&gt;Learning Fate systems from a D20 background&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/12338/44723&quot;&gt;What makes Shadowrun 4e different? What are its defining tropes and features?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4716/44723&quot;&gt;What are the essential elements of Legend of the Five Rings?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-08-24T18:49:13.357" LastActivityDate="2021-08-25T02:13:43.070" Title="Are open-ended system-introduction questions off-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|game-systems|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11698" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11697" CreationDate="2021-08-23T23:41:42.370" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Questions should generally present a problem that isn’t solvable by just reading the rules.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question needs to make it clear why just reading the rules doesn’t solve your problem. This is essentially the first point of the help article on how to ask a good question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For your question, somehow demonstrating that you at least read the rules is the first step toward making your question a good question. Why don’t you know how to play after reading the rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, “needs details” and “needs focus” are really the same thing. Without clarifying why reading rules didn’t tell you how to play, we have nothing to focus on when answering. We can only guess at what sort of distillation or summary of the rules will actually cure your confusion. Or, you could just tell us up front what part of the rules are presenting trouble and we can actually address your problem. Your question &lt;em&gt;needs details&lt;/em&gt; to get it &lt;em&gt;more focused&lt;/em&gt; on what your actual problem is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This general guidance applies everywhere, but I’m not presently able to write and present a case for all of the individual Q&amp;amp;As you present in the question. I may come back to that later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-08-23T23:41:42.370" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11699" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11697" CreationDate="2021-08-23T23:53:37.470" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't think the flaw is strictly in the question &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't require questions to have a high mastery of a given system. And I think that extends to asking for an overview of how a system works. That should be something an expert can answer and help with, and I think it's something we can do really well. And I think you've found several – well three, I'm not counting the Nobilis Q&amp;amp;A – examples of it working. There may be aspects to each question which needs work, but I certainly don't want to call them off-topic. Maybe they risk being a bit broad, but we're better off working that out for each question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we do want questions to &lt;em&gt;show effort&lt;/em&gt;, which maybe becomes a trickier matter. Often that's just a downvote reason, but sometimes if there's not enough description of what you've tried and where you've stumbled, there's too many possible things and places you might have a problem for the question to be focused.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A short set of questions to ask yourself and include in the question&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Have you read the basic blurb of the game? What is it in there you don't understand?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What RPGs systems are you coming from, and what differences are you struggling with?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is the extant out of system information not clearly telling you whether it's something you'd want to pick up? If so, what have you read, what is it leaving out (and probably what do you generally look for)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may discover that the actual problem you end up having isn't quite the same as you're asking for here. That's ok. Maybe even very good. You would have managed to rescope it to the actual problem you're facing, which is what we want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: At a brief glance the other questions linked cover (at least one of these) better than yours does. Maybe not perfectly, but some of it is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a footnote-footnote, one thing we're trying to distinguish is &amp;quot;what is RPGs?&amp;quot; which we have a signpost for (at least for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/11033/52137&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;what is D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;). That's obviously not the problem you're facing, but the question doesn't show that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another aspect which you (as an asker) should strive to avoid is have the question not look like it's secretly promotion. I say that not because I think you're doing that, but a short, broad question that puts more space and effort on linking back to kickstater/storefront and some form of praise is a form of spam we see from time to time. I'm actually (pleasantly) half-surprised this didn't raise a flag to that effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-08-24T00:14:26.467" LastActivityDate="2021-08-24T00:14:26.467" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11700" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11697" CreationDate="2021-08-24T00:50:44.567" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's on-topic, but ...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/system-introduction&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;system-introduction&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;system-introduction&lt;/a&gt; is something that we cover here at RPG.SE, the question itself doesn't seem like the type to generate good quality content. If you look at the other questions that you linked, you can see that each of them explains why they need the system introduction and provide more context for answers to go off of. Currently, your question is simply answerable with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Avatar Legends is a Tabletop Roleplaying Game (TTRPG), and is played by following the rules within the rulebook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is not, by any means, a good answer, but it is one that feels rather on level with the amount of effort that went into the question. Instead, you should look at rephrasing the question into one that invites better answers and shows more effort on your part to understand the game, something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been looking over the Kickstarter for Avatar Legends and the quickstart they released, but I'm having trouble understanding how to play it. Can I get an explanation of its mechanics to get a better grasp of how to play it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-08-24T18:51:00.827" LastActivityDate="2021-08-24T18:51:00.827" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11701" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11695" CreationDate="2021-08-24T05:47:18.780" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You should not answer off-topic questions. However, ...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reasonable people can disagree about whether a particular question is on or off-topic. If you think it's on topic, you should answer it even if others disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2021-08-24T05:47:18.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11702" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11697" CreationDate="2021-08-25T02:13:43.070" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Your first sentence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of the financially incredibly successful Avatar Legends: The Roleplaying Game Kickstarter, Magpie Games released a Quickstart, available for free after sign-up in the mailing list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;made me feel like you were more interested in promoting a product than in getting an answer to a real question you had.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You added extra text to your question after it was closed, but that did not change my feeling -- it just made it feel like you were more interested in promoting a product than getting an answer to a real question, and &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; you'd written some extra sentences because you wanted your question reopened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm on this site because I want to help people with real questions, and it felt like you weren't asking a question in good faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see that Someone_Evil has posted that they disagree with my take, and they are happy that nobody has flagged the question as spam, so I suppose it's just as well that I didn't do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, anyway, that's why I downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastActivityDate="2021-08-25T02:13:43.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11704" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-26T14:24:31.100" Score="2" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over the last couple of weeks, my review queue has been mostly filled with close / reopen request for questions from 2011.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This feels like a waste of everyone's time. It is a waste of time for the person or persons going around flagging these decade-old questions; questions written when the rules of 'what is appropriate for the site' were very different. It is a waste of time for myself and every other reviewer to evaluate if these questions, that were asked and answered more than &lt;strong&gt;ten years&lt;/strong&gt; ago, should remain open. And it is a waste of time to discuss if they should be re-opened for new answers when they have been closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any way we can stop this kind of excessive curation of the archives?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clarification: I am not questioning if these threads should be closed. If they violate the rules of the stack then they should be closed. The issue I am observing is that it appears that &lt;em&gt;someone&lt;/em&gt; is trolling the Stack by going through inactive question archives and flagging for closures. &lt;br&gt;&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a way to stop such trolling?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42345" LastEditorUserId="42345" LastEditDate="2021-08-26T17:46:35.530" LastActivityDate="2021-08-26T22:40:24.643" Title="Necro-Closing Spam" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|etiquette|review|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11705" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11704" CreationDate="2021-08-26T14:36:54.060" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No one is trolling anyone.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a comment below this answer, doppelgreener wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I'm being quoted here, I will add that I have been repeatedly vocal that we should not be hunting down old questions to close that haven't been recently active. So while I agree voting to close them when we come across them isn't inherently an issue, actively seeking out ancient long-untouched questions to close is creating unnecessary busywork that I believe is an issue—which may be the driver of the complaint in this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I VTC a lot of questions, more than anyone else. But I also see a lot of questions, more than anyone else. I went back through the last week or so of questions in the close vote queue. A lot of them were stuck there by me, doing exactly as doppelgreener describes in that comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while I agree voting to close them when we come across them isn't inherently an issue&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I come across a question I think should be closed I vote to close it. I agree, trawling through pages of questions &lt;em&gt;seeking&lt;/em&gt; closure targets is a waste of time, and I can assure you I'm not wasting my time doing it. There are so many other things I waste my time doing on this site. I'm not going to submit a &amp;quot;proof you found these questions organically&amp;quot; here, because that would be an even bigger waste of time. As explained below, the review queues are functioning as intended, the volume is well within our ability to manage it even at its peak, and if you think a question should be closed, you should be able to make that decision without checking its timestamp.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Off topic questions should be closed, regardless of age. This is consistent with local and network meta guidance.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener writes in her answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5987/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;close voting has nothing to do with a question's age, score, or answers. If it's close-worthy by our current standards, we close it, that's it. Sometimes answers help us recognise a question is good &amp;amp; worth keeping open, or not, but that's about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk writes in their answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1173/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad question, old or not, CW or not, should be closed. But the close should be like any other close - we should be seeing if something can be salvaged out of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AceCalhoon writes in their answer  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1172/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do find an old post and want to do something about it, you have several tools at your disposal. Flagging it, with an explanation as to why it should be closed let's us know your thought. You can also vote to close yourself, although you'll probably need to do some work in meta and chat to get others to look at it within the window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener returns with more guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6234/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were game-recs and other old questions there, and I didn't dump them in from search. I'll get back to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find it so annoying to deal with, I encourage you to leave the review queue alone at those times. There's plenty of other people to cover for you. If you feel you're being hasty (as in, making poor reviews), please step back from the reviews and get a drink and do something more personally important to you. You avoiding review fatigue is important, the site getting good reviews is important, so it's a win/win if you step back when the review queue's fatiguing you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree there's no urgency in closing them. There is, however, importance in curating our site, and because our questions are timeless we can do that basically whenever. If we only leave curation 'til it's urgent, I can't imagine what condition our site would be in — it'd probably be a cesspool by then and you and I would be long gone. So, yeah, it's not urgent, but that doesn't matter or suggest we shouldn't be closing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6233/62294&quot;&gt;same question&lt;/a&gt;, SSD provides  more guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewers can just take bites out of it, and bow out when decision fatigue rears its head. Pressing &lt;kbd&gt;Skip&lt;/kbd&gt; when at all unsure helps a lot in that regard, too. Others will pick it up and take care of a few more, until the whole queue has been reviewed. Crowdsourcing at work!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much preferable for the queue to balloon occasionally, and be handled by the normal crowdsourcing mechanisms it has for precisely such events, than for people to &lt;em&gt;refrain&lt;/em&gt; from flagging when they see something that deserves a flag. All that refraining results in is different people having to—redundantly—each stop and ponder how much flagging is “too much,” wasting user energy that would be better spent just about anywhere else on-site or off, just so that we can, inexplicably, prevent the flood-management measures designed into the system already from needing to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearing each flood with meta (and then spinning off metas that seek to define what is and isn't a flood!) would be, for similar reasons, far more wasteful and inefficient than just using flags and the review queues as they are designed to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta.se guidance echoes this guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/194117/674198&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;View all question with today's standards. If the question fits as per current standards then leave it open; if it doesn't fit then vote/flag to close it. If we keep the questions which don't fit as per current standards, then people will ask why the questions are still open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sentiment of closing old, off topic questions is represented further in these questions from Meta.se:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/123455/674198&quot;&gt;Is flagging to close old questions best practice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/27007/674198&quot;&gt;How to get attention required to close old posts?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The testimony of both site-specific guidance and network meta guidance is overwhelmingly consistent: off topic questions should be closed without regard for age.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You write your question as if your are obliged to work the review queue.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's make something clear:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The review queue is an opt-in experience&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you look at the review queue, you are looking at the review queue because you intend to review things in the queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is entirely backwards to approach the review queue intending to review questions and then complain when there are questions there. And maybe you don't like that a question is there - &lt;em&gt;then skip the review per SSD's guidance&lt;/em&gt;, and you've wasted none of your precious time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-08-26T17:57:34.403" LastActivityDate="2021-08-26T17:57:34.403" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11706" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11725" CreationDate="2021-08-26T16:18:30.463" Score="3" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11612/community-ads-for-2021&quot;&gt;Community Ads for 2021&lt;/a&gt; was posted on June 17 and was initially &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt;. That featured tag was removed automatically on July 24th, and it was locked on August 2nd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no reason for it to be featured anymore—it's locked and there's nothing we can do with it. Nevertheless it's still showing up in our &lt;strong&gt;Featured on Meta&lt;/strong&gt; sidebar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/I6kMz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/I6kMz.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;Featured on Meta: Community Ads for 2021&amp;quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like this might be a bug, honestly. When I say there's no reason to be featured, I also can't imagine &lt;em&gt;on a technical level&lt;/em&gt; why it's still “featured on meta” either. There is some caching in the sidebar, but not &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; much. It's been a whole month since it was un-featured. It would be really weird for it to just ... stay there indefinitely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to be just our site, too. &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/15880/community-ads-for-2021&quot;&gt;Arqade&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8330/community-ads-for-2021&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding&lt;/a&gt; both had similar timelines on their community ads posts but it's not showing up in their featured sidebar anymore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could a Stack staff member please take a look at this and correct whatever's keeping it there? (And would one of our diamond mods be kind enough to give someone on staff a lil poke about this?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="65312" LastEditDate="2021-09-09T09:02:09.763" LastActivityDate="2021-09-09T09:03:06.333" Title="&quot;Community Ads for 2021&quot; is still featured on meta" Tags="|bug|status-completed|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11708" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11704" CreationDate="2021-08-26T18:36:21.093" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Closing off-topic questions is not trolling and I would avoid calling it such&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The people who are voting on questions through the queue are voting how they vote because they genuinely believe it is the right thing to do. Not just anybody can cast close votes; you need three &lt;em&gt;thousand&lt;/em&gt; reputation in order to do this, and that is no small number. These are people who have been on the site and are doing what they believe is the right thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People who are voting to close older questions could very easily have come across them naturally, in fact, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/comments/513933&quot;&gt;I recently wrote a comment linking to four older questions&lt;/a&gt; and each of these has linked and related question lists all their own. We should be careful with assumptions about how people are finding questions to add into the review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Leaving questions that should be closed open creates confusion for users&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking a quote from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/194117&quot;&gt;MSE&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] If we keep the questions which don't fit as per current standards, then people will ask why the questions are still open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And adding to that my own personal experience: When I started on this site (and still now) one thing I constantly did before asking a question was look for previous, similar questions either to link as being related or to ensure myself that my question was okay to ask. I distinctly remember one instance where I even linked to an old, open question as &lt;em&gt;proof&lt;/em&gt; that my question was, in fact, on-topic. I was then told that the old question was itself off-topic, resulting in confusion for myself as to why it was even open and had answers, high-scoring ones at that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-08-26T22:40:24.643" LastActivityDate="2021-08-26T22:40:24.643" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11709" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-26T19:36:15.660" Score="15" ViewCount="181" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've just discovered a comment from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;the Community bot&lt;/a&gt; under an answer that says the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/99z8f.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/99z8f.png&quot; alt=&quot;the comment, quoted below&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please add further details to expand on your answer, such as working code or documentation citations. – Community♦ 22 mins ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, the answer has some quality issues and could do with citations, but... this is not a programming site. We don't add “working code” to our answers and “documentation citations” is not exactly how I'd phrase a request to quote some rules and/or personal experience of what works in practice. This seems to be a Stack Overflow experiment that's spilled over here incorrectly or without the necessary changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't flag this comment for removal, either—I'm blocked from doing so by the system itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZHucf.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZHucf.png&quot; alt=&quot;screenshot of a flag dialog where I've attempted to flag the comment for removal with the reason “this isn't a programming site.” I am stopped from doing so by the system which shows a message, quoted below.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comment will be automatically removed by the system when the post is corrected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could these comments please be switched off here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76787/can-a-black-dragon-hatchling-be-raised-to-be-good-or-is-it-inherently-evil/191102#comment514243_191102&quot;&gt;Here's a link to the comment.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2022-10-08T16:09:43.663" LastActivityDate="2022-10-08T16:09:43.663" Title="Community♦ shouldn't be asking people to show &quot;working code&quot; on RPG.SE" Tags="|bug|status-completed|comments|community-bot|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11710" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Every Stack Exchange site has a user named &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;Community&lt;/a&gt; with ID -1. This is a system bot used to manage various site features and tie up loose ends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is for questions and issues concerning that bot and its activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" LastActivityDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11711" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" Score="0" Body="for questions about the Community bot, user -1." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" LastActivityDate="2021-08-26T20:35:06.833" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11713" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-30T19:13:55.390" Score="6" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-pop-culture&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-pop-culture&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-pop-culture&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions related to the pop culture surrounding RPGs. The pop culture may be famous events, real-life legends, well-known lore, or other pop culture items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag covers questions about the entire history of role-playing games: the history of game companies, trends within the hobby, developments of new kinds of mechanics, and gaming's place in culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These seem to be &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; similar, both in description and in content covered, and it begs the question: when does a pop culture phenomenon become a facet of gaming history?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-pop-culture&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-pop-culture&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-pop-culture&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;, should we improve the tag descriptions so they are more notably distinct, should we leave them as is, or something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-08-31T01:55:26.830" Title="Do we need the [rpg-pop-culture] tag when we have [history-of-gaming]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11714" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11713" CreationDate="2021-08-30T21:09:36.640" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There's a distinction to make between game development and game play/discussion.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; are about the early development of various games and play practices. I can see a desire to distinguish these from common elements in the conversation of gaming which were nonetheless never codified outside of discussion forums, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-pop-culture&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-pop-culture&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-pop-culture&lt;/a&gt; seems as good a bin for that as any.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is some overlap, of course; successive editions of, say, D&amp;amp;D, or even the development of D&amp;amp;D out of Chainmail, relied to some extent on the experiences people had during actual play of the relevant game. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; should probably cover those play experiences that shaped later game development as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Proposal&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In light of this, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki should be amended to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag covers questions about the historical development of role-playing games: the history of game companies, trends within the hobby, developments of new kinds of mechanics, and how gaming's place in culture affected these developments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about popular elements of gameplay or game discussion, consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-pop-culture&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-pop-culture&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-pop-culture&lt;/a&gt;. For identifying gaming products from history, also consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt;. For definitions of gaming terms and jargon, also consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rpg-pop-culture&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rpg-pop-culture&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rpg-pop-culture&lt;/a&gt; tag wiki should be amended to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag covers questions about the pop culture surrounding RPGs: famous events, real-life legends, well-known lore, or other items. If it's more famous as an element of gameplay or game discussion than it is for any appearance in a published rulebook, it's RPG pop culture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about the process of game development, including gameplay or game discussion that would go on to inform game development, consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt;. For definitions of gaming terms and jargon, also consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terminology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terminology&lt;/a&gt;.  For identifying gaming products from history, also consider &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/product-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;product-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;product-identification&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2021-08-31T01:55:26.830" LastActivityDate="2021-08-31T01:55:26.830" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11715" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-08-31T13:36:38.930" Score="26" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just saw this link in the “Featured on Meta” bar, and thought it would be appropriate for us to also have a place to congratulate @V2Blast on the new job!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/369260&quot;&gt;Please welcome Valued Associates: #958 - V2Blast &amp;amp; #959 - SpencerG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Congratulations!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2021-08-31T14:12:09.013" LastActivityDate="2021-08-31T14:12:09.013" Title="“Please welcome Valued Associates: #958 - V2Blast […]”—Congratulations!" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11716" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11717" CreationDate="2021-09-01T08:27:58.700" Score="-9" ViewCount="202" Body="&lt;p&gt;Statements such as “not an actual problem” have been posited as criticism of questions and closure justification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it true that every RPGSE question must pose an ‘actual problem’?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="53875" LastEditDate="2021-09-01T08:33:08.840" LastActivityDate="2021-09-01T10:23:28.457" Title="Do questions have to pose an ‘actual problem’?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ClosedDate="2021-09-01T10:27:45.950" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11717" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11716" CreationDate="2021-09-01T10:12:53.463" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a help centre document which indicates that &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; RPGSE questions should be ‘based on actual problems’.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;Questions help&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="53875" LastEditDate="2021-09-01T10:23:28.457" LastActivityDate="2021-09-01T10:23:28.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11718" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-09-02T08:41:11.417" Score="2" ViewCount="61" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've seen this comment at rpg.se a couple of times:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please add further details to expand on your answer, such as working code or documentation citations. – Community&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess a bot adds it. A suggestion to add &amp;quot;working code&amp;quot; is usually irrelevant in the context of TTRPG, unless we're talking about anydice or something like that. What factors cause the bot to add this line and how to avoid it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2021-09-02T08:41:11.417" Title="How to avoid automatic suggestions appearing in answer's comments?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" ClosedDate="2021-09-02T12:40:50.727" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11719" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11721" CreationDate="2021-09-07T11:26:43.510" Score="5" ViewCount="295" Body="&lt;p&gt;We are down to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;three rpg.se specific moderators&lt;/a&gt;. Is this a non-issue since V2Blast is still around as an &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369260/please-welcome-valued-associates-958-v2blast-959-spencerg&quot;&gt;Associate Community Manager for the Curator Support Team&lt;/a&gt; and available for moderation, or should we think about holding elections due to the gap?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-09-07T16:25:22.410" LastActivityDate="2021-09-07T17:15:22.207" Title="Should we think about elections?" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11720" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11719" CreationDate="2021-09-07T16:02:13.853" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Whoops, my answer is OBE&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like the diamond mod team has already engaged with the CM before this meta was posed, so this answer has been &lt;strong&gt;O&lt;/strong&gt;vercome &lt;strong&gt;B&lt;/strong&gt;y &lt;strong&gt;E&lt;/strong&gt;vents &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11721/22566&quot;&gt;now that @Rubiksmoose has responded&lt;/a&gt;, which means that my trust in their good sense and judgment was warranted. I love it when I'm right.  But I'll leave my answer up because the system is working as it's been designed to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Who's this &amp;quot;we,&amp;quot; Kimo Sabe?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the diamond mod team tells the CM that they need another diamond mod to take care of the work load, they'll ask the CM to call an election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there are particular mod issues that concern you, or any of us for that matter, or if you feel that our diamond mods, or a diamond mod, are not performing up to standards then you can contact the CM, or, you can contact the mod team directly and address it with them to see if your perceptions are shared by the whole diamond mod team and / or the CM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, where we sit determines (and informs what we see) - we may only have a part of the story.  In the case of how much work the diamond mods do in their roles on this SE, we (non diamond mods) for sure do &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; have the whole story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I offer a reprise of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9621/22566&quot;&gt;SevenSidedDie's nice meta post here&lt;/a&gt; as regards what happens when the need arises as seen by the diamond mods.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange generally consults with and defers to the moderator&#xA;team about how many moderators there should be. It’s more about what&#xA;the team feels the need for than anything else. The process is pretty&#xA;much that a CM drops by the mod chat and asks how many election spots&#xA;it should have and then sets it up. It’s pragmatic and not really much&#xA;of a discussion. Mods poke a CM about an election, a CM shows up and&#xA;asks how many and sets expectations about SE’s ability to schedule it&#xA;in, then goes off and does it. Resignation timing—for actual removal&#xA;of the diamond and any announcement—is discussed if necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Bottom Line: No&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; don't need to think about a mod election until the diamond mods decide that their ability to handle the work load, as unpaid volunteers, could use another hand and they contact the CM to set one up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'll make one further observation: I find the quality of moderation in the past two years (since the last election) to have been good.  The diamond mods do a fine job as exception handlers and being all around good stack members.  Beyond that, each of them has shown me that I can trust their judgment and good sense.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-09-07T17:15:22.207" LastActivityDate="2021-09-07T17:15:22.207" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11721" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11719" CreationDate="2021-09-07T17:04:30.413" Score="18" Body="&lt;h1&gt;An election is coming&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team had already (prior to this Meta at least) discussed this with the CM team and determined that the team would like an election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe an official announcement to that effect should be coming soon, with additional details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastActivityDate="2021-09-07T17:04:30.413" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11722" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11723" CreationDate="2021-09-08T17:09:40.087" Score="19" ViewCount="894" Body="&lt;p&gt;Occasionally, a user will post a question that includes neither a system tag nor an explicit statement of the system being played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Since we no longer have a policy of immediately closing such questions, what should I do with these questions when they show up? What are some things I can look for to help me make this decision?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A to serves as the successor to the now-obsolete Q&amp;amp;A &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6867/62294&quot;&gt;What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?&lt;/a&gt;, in light of the results of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11658/revisit-iii-don-t-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, we would close questions lacking a system tag or an explicit system statement according to the “Don’t Guess the System” policy. This is no longer the case, and the purpose of this Q&amp;amp;A is to provide some guidance to users for handling these underspecified questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And to be clear, the guidance contained herein is exactly and only this: &lt;em&gt;guidance&lt;/em&gt;. You will find no policies in this Q&amp;amp;A, so I expect to find none of you wielding the guidance found here as though it were a policy you can coerce your fellow users to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-11-22T20:42:04.480" LastActivityDate="2021-11-22T20:42:04.480" Title="What should I do when a question does not specify the game system being used?" Tags="|discussion|faq|tags|questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11723" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11722" CreationDate="2021-09-08T17:09:40.087" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;The “Don’t Guess the System” policy was repealed under the platform “Let experts make expert decisions”, and what we want to do here is put to paper some of the ways an expert can identify the system being used in an underspecified question, and give some guidance for steps to take when approaching such a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Always ask the querent to confirm anyway.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was our standard practice by way of policy before, but it should continue to be our standard practice, even if we are sure beyond any reasonable doubt of the system being described in the question. Even if the question meets the highest tier of evidence described below, we should still drop a line in the comment section:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m assuming this is [system-edition], since you mentioned [this and that], could you confirm that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This helps to remind the user that they still need to be specific about the game, and when they confirm, there is no longer room for anyone to question our expert judgment. And in rare circumstances, maybe we were wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tags: to add or not to add, that is the question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11676/62294&quot;&gt;Pyrotechnical’s proposal&lt;/a&gt;, we are given some basic guidance that I want to expand upon:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do not edit tags into the question unless there are clear indicators on the querent's intent via comments, language in the question (including things like a link to D&amp;amp;D Beyond), stating the system in the title, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is these “clear indicators on the querent’s intent” that need a bit of exposition. To this end, there are two tiers of “clear” evidence. The first tier will be those things that are generally just as reliable as an explicit statement of the system, and the second will be things that are somewhat less reliable, but still good enough that a system expert should be able to make a confident judgment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tier 1: Sourcebooks, quotes from sourcebooks, and system specific tools.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tier is occupied by things that we had already made policy exceptions for because the community agreed that these things should be just as reliable as an explicit statement. These exceptions were solidified in this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11573/can-we-generalize-our-policy-on-linking-system-specific-rules-toolsets-etc-as&quot;&gt;Can we generalize our policy on linking system-specific rules, toolsets, etc. as clearly stating the system?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In her response to that question, Doppelgreener wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As experts operating with considered judgement, we should be considering that when someone unambiguously indicates their system by indicating system-specific documentation while providing nothing to contradict such an indication, they have indicated their system sufficiently to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my response, I (Thomas Markov) wrote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Citing materials is a way for someone who doesn’t know there are different editions of the game to tell us what edition they’re using.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Referencing a sourcebook by name is one way this can happen. For example, if a question is prefaced with “In &lt;em&gt;Xanathar’s Guide to Everything&lt;/em&gt;...”, we know this is referring to D&amp;amp;D 5e material. However, we must be careful, as sometimes a book title may not uniquely identify a system or edition: Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons has twelve volumes with “Player’s Handbook” in the title, twelve iterations of “Monster Manual”, and nine &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master’s Guides&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mentioning a sourcebook is even more reliable when accompanied with quotes (the longer the better) and page numbers. “Playing D&amp;amp;D, how do critical hits in the PHB work?” doesn’t help me figure out which of the 12 D&amp;amp;D PHBs is being referred to; but if we instead have “Playing D&amp;amp;D, How do the critical hit rules on pg. 196 of the PHB work?”, now we can narrow it down to the 5th Edition PHB, which is the only PHB featuring critical hit rules on page 196. Alternatively, suppose I see a question like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do these rules work?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack's damage against the target. Roll all of the attack's damage dice twice and add them together. Then add any relevant modifiers as normal. To speed up play, you can roll all the damage dice at once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No system is mentioned, no sourcebook is mentioned, but a system expert would be able to identify the quoted passage as the critical hit rules from page 196 of the 5e PHB. We are looking for these mentions of and citations to source materials that unambiguously identify the game system &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; edition being played.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This first tier of evidence also has &lt;em&gt;system specific tools&lt;/em&gt;. This exception was first established in the wild with this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9988/is-it-acceptable-to-add-the-dnd-5e-tag-to-questions-about-dd-beyond&quot;&gt;Is it acceptable to add the [dnd-5e] tag to questions about D&amp;amp;D Beyond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case discussed there, D&amp;amp;D Beyond is a D&amp;amp;D 5e-exclusive tool set, so questions that mention D&amp;amp;D Beyond can be safely assumed to be about D&amp;amp;D 5e. And any other tool set that is associated with a single game system should be treated similarly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tier 2: Some combination of terminology, concepts, and mechanics that identify the system.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is where the guidance gets far less concrete, and where we have to rely on our experts to make decisions. What we are looking for here is some combination of terminology, concepts, and mechanics that, when considered together, uniquely identify one system. Unfortunately, there is not really much concrete guidance here. As always, the more details we have, the more sure we can be. Ideally, we would have multiple system specific game terms, such as the name of a feature, spell, or mechanic, bearing in mind that such names are often reused from edition to edition. However, sometimes a system expert will be able to correctly identify the system with a single piece of identifying information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, keep an eye out for terms and things that don’t fit, which might suggest that the OP is confused or playing some odd combination of systems. This could make otherwise clear information unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To reiterate the first section, always leave a comment briefly explaining the decision you made. As mentioned earlier, we still want to have OP confirm the system, and we need to make our reasoning available to other users. If I determine that a question is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, you shouldn't have to ping me to ask why; you should already see a comment from me saying something like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've added the [dnd-5e] tag since you mentioned bonus actions, &lt;em&gt;Tasha's otherworldy guise&lt;/em&gt;, and Wild Magic Sorcerers. Could you confirm this is correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Without these things, we’d prefer not to add a system tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without any of these elements that uniquely identify a single system in the question, we should not add a system tag. Questions like this generally fall into two categories: (1) the question is so underspecified no one really knows what the question is even about, and (2) it could be one of a small number of game systems. This first type of question isn't much of a concern for the guidance here, it will already be closed in short order for &amp;quot;needs details or clarity&amp;quot;, and is usually the type of question that would be closed for that reason even if it did specify a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But sometimes we get a question that is written in a way that a system expert can determine that it is consistent with two or more systems. To handle this case, Pyrotechnical continues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;State your assumptions&lt;/strong&gt;: When guessing the system, it is important to indicate what your assumption is within your answer, so a header stating, &amp;quot;I'm assuming you're referencing D&amp;amp;D 5th edition,&amp;quot; would be adequate before proceeding with your answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a question could feasibly concern any of two or more systems, instead of tagging the question, we should instead state the system in the answer. Ideally, this would be a brief explanation that the answer is only applicable to the one particular system. We would like to avoid having a user misunderstand this and think an answer for one system applies to a different system. Just be clear about what game your answer applies to. In addition to this, we can also include a system tag using markdown to go along with this brief explanation: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate-core&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate-core&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fate-core&lt;/a&gt; is had by using the syntax &lt;code&gt;[tag:fate-core]&lt;/code&gt;. So an answer which makes an assumption about the system in question might look like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e&lt;/a&gt; This answer applies to Pathfinder 2e only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Main Answer Header&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rest of answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Answer underspecified questions at your own risk.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two elements of risk to consider when answering an underspecified question. The first deals with making an assumption about the system that is later determined to be incorrect by the question's author. On this point, Pyrotechnical provides further guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not anticipate that this will occur very often, but in the event that the assumed system is incorrect, the answer must be deleted &lt;em&gt;regardless of score&lt;/em&gt;. This is necessary to prevent confusion for others who may find the question at a later date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An answer is considered wrong if the querent has edited in the system and it doesn't match the assumed system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deletion can occur via any of the following methods:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Deletion by the respondent is preferred, but not always viable.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the score on the answer is negative, deletion can be handled by the community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the score on the answer is positive, deletion must be handled by the moderators. Members of the community can assist by raising a the, &amp;quot;In need of moderator intervention,&amp;quot; flag option and citing that the assumed system was not correct.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, this proposal creates a slight increase in the moderator's workload, but I don't get the impression this will be more than a handful of additional tasks for them every year.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you take a shot at figuring out the system and post an answer, and your system assumption turns out to be incorrect, your answer will be deleted. I know I included a disclaimer that this post would not include any policies, but maybe it should say it does not create any &lt;em&gt;new&lt;/em&gt; policies. This is just the natural application of the general Stack Exchange policy that answers which do not answer the question are deleted. If a question turns out to be about D&amp;amp;D 3.5, and your answer assumes it is about D&amp;amp;D 5e, &lt;em&gt;your answer is not an answer to the question and should be deleted&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second risk element here deals with question closure. We are not going to police closure of underspecified questions. Recall the two categories mentioned previously - questions that could be about anything, and questions that could be about one of some number of systems. The difference between these two things is not always going to be particularly clear. One user may think they have a questions narrowed down to two systems, and one user may think the question should be closed for &amp;quot;needs details or clarity&amp;quot;. This second user is free to vote for closure on the question, and the community will work it out as we do with all questions that are put up for closure review. If you choose to answer such a question, you are assuming the risk that the question may end up closed before you finish writing your answer. This is the cost of doing business with underspecified questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Avoid edit wars and arguments in comments.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is guidance that applies all of the time, but it is worth inserting a reminder here. Edit wars are discussed in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10055/what-is-an-edit-war-and-is-it-ever-appropriate&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;, but the main take away from the answer there is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a short comment exchange works, disagreements are resolved, things that needed to be pointed out were, clean up your comments (encourage the other to do too) and move on.† If it doesn't, take it to meta. It doesn't usually matter which of you starts that. We're ok with a meta discussion about whether a specific question should have a specific edit, especially once it's clear some users disagree on it. Remember to focus on the edit, not the users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: No, there's no hard length for acceptable comment discussion. Single back and forth should usually be sufficient, and if it isn't and it feels like banging two rocks together, move on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is nothing wrong with trying to resolve disagreements in comments, but if things don't seem to be heading toward resolution pretty quickly, simply disengage and start a meta discussion. This is okay, we should be talking things out as a community to work together toward resolutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-11-22T20:39:21.447" LastActivityDate="2021-11-22T20:39:21.447" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11725" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11706" CreationDate="2021-09-09T09:03:06.333" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is now fixed. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/369611/51&quot;&gt;See here&lt;/a&gt; for more info and haiku.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="65312" LastActivityDate="2021-09-09T09:03:06.333" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11726" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-09-09T10:41:15.543" Score="27" ViewCount="1483" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Overflow has just been updated to no longer pin the accepted answer to the top of the answer list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now on Meta.SE, the staff are seeking our site-specific feedback on whether we'd want to do the same here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/369568/526695&quot;&gt;Unpinning the accepted answer from the top of the list of answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Would you like to have the accepted answer unpinned on your site?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can change the way the engine sorts answers in site settings. We would like to hear from you all if it is something you want to see on your site. (Please let me acknowledge in advance that we will not be able to run a test on each site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently we are planning to move forward with one of two scenarios, based on your feedback:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Unpin the accepted answer on all SE sites by default and pin it back on a few sites that ask us to do so.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Keep the accepted answer pinned on all SE sites by default and unpin it on a few sites that ask us to do so.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please let us know what you think will work best for your site! If you can discuss this question with your community it would be awesome. We are going to collect feedback before the end of September 19th.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is our stance on the subject?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Resuming status quo.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After mixed feedback on this change across many communities in the network, SE decided to keep the old default of pinning accepted answers. Sites may request unpinning accepted answers after discussions like this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369568/unpinning-the-accepted-answer-from-the-top-of-the-list-of-answers&quot;&gt;Unpinning the accepted answer from the top of the list of answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Seeing that some sites do not want to unpin the accepted answer, we decided to move forward with the status quo and not to change the default behaviour on existing sites. If you think unpinning the accepted answer on your site makes sense, please do the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will count our vote and update our verdict once we un-feature this question. This question will automatically lose its &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/featured&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;featured&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;featured&lt;/a&gt; tag on October 14th.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accordingly, should we end up with a 50/50 split, the status quo will remain the old status quo. We will have the option to restart this discussion in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we vote in favour of unpinning accepted answers, I understand that to be the formal ask for our moderators to add the &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-review&lt;/a&gt; tag to the question. The &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-review&lt;/a&gt; tag generates a ticket and lets CMs know that they need to adjust the site settings for our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;We are keeping accepted answers pinned.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We conclude our vote with a slight majority of votes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11728/44723&quot;&gt;in favour of unpinning accepted answers&lt;/a&gt;; the answer has 36 upvotes and 15 downvotes, bringing it to a score of 21. The minority vote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11750/44723&quot;&gt;in favour of pinning accepted answers&lt;/a&gt; ends at 31 upvotes and only 9 downvotes, scoring 22. In conclusion, we remain at a 50/50 score with no clear consensus. So we continue with the status quo, which is the old default of pinning accepted answers until we decide to revote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-18T20:24:33.673" LastActivityDate="2021-10-18T20:24:33.673" Title="What is our stance on &quot;Unpinning the accepted answer from the top of the list of answers&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="9" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11727" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-09T12:34:14.523" Score="13" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Unpinning answers from the top of the list devalues answers and disempowers querents.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it is, a querent's power to choose an answer has relatively little meaning. A selected answer moves to the top of the list, making it more visible -- even if it has fewer upvotes than all other answers. By accepting a less-upvoted answer, a querent can signal, &amp;quot;This answer might not be &lt;em&gt;popular&lt;/em&gt;, but it answered my question &lt;em&gt;more effectively&lt;/em&gt; than the others, and so I want it to be most visible.&amp;quot; From the querent's perspective, putting aside system-oriented events that take place once an answer is selected, that's basically it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unpinning accepted answers means the querent's choice of answer is all but meaningless. All other answers with more upvotes will float upward, meaning users will see them first. On the whole, users are likely to see the most-upvoted answer and take it as gospel, even if the querent accepted a different answer that more effectively answered the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the essence of my objection: SE is &lt;em&gt;not a popularity contest&lt;/em&gt;. We aren't Reddit. Visibility here isn't just about which answer happens to include the funniest turn of phrase or to espouse the view that most mollifies the masses. We're about which answer is &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt;. And we invest the querent with the unique privilege to decide what &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; means even if we disagree with it. If we take that privilege away, we might as well switch off the whole accepted-answer mechanism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for SO, I don't see a reason for RPG.SE to follow in their footsteps. There is, I suppose, a kind of sense in SO's choice to unpin: code has an &lt;em&gt;objective&lt;/em&gt; right-or-wrong-ness. It either works or it doesn't, and anyone who can replicate a piece of code in a given circumstance can see whether it works. In that sense, upvotes on SO might theoretically function as signals of &amp;quot;I agree that the code solution here demonstrably does what the querent needs it to do.&amp;quot; On RPG.SE, &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; of our questions might follow that analytical track, but most don't. We're different, and our systems should reflect that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastEditorUserId="43484" LastEditDate="2021-09-09T12:42:56.087" LastActivityDate="2021-09-09T12:42:56.087" CommentCount="36" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11728" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-09T13:38:45.953" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think this would be a neutral-to-positive change for us.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accepted answer exists to signal something specific: “this is the solution that I went with, that worked for me.” It originated on Stack Overflow because only one person is in the position to confirm that the code they were given compiled &amp;amp; fixed their issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG.SE also inherited that behaviour simply because we inherited the same Q&amp;amp;A code, regardless of whether that feature solves specific issues for us or not. We don't have code to compile; we have rules questions, social problems, etc. This meta gives us an opportunity to consider from a blank slate: which option actually makes sense in the scope of RPG Q&amp;amp;A?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On RPG.SE specifically, I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; the most helpful thing is to &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; pin the accepted solution, and just let the highest voted answer float to the top always.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like, sure, the querent chose this specific solution to solve their specific case. But the highest voted solution is the one the community hive mind is recommending, in general, for people experiencing this problem, in general. And that's what we should be presenting to site visitors as the first solution they see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Stack Overflow's arguments against pinning the first answer generally apply to us too.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/326095/254830&quot;&gt;Please unpin the accepted answer from the top&lt;/a&gt; (on Meta SO) made a case against several commonly provided reasons for pinning the accepted answer under the heading “The argument against unpinning”. They generally apply here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll mainly compare against rules &amp;amp; social questions, which are the biggest two categories we see on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[Reason to keep it pinned:] The accepted answer actually works for one person&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Counter-argument:] But the Stack Overflow answers are not ultimately there for that one person. They are there for the countless visitors who come later. Ninety-nine percent of the time that I upvote a non-accepted answer, I am also signifying that it solved my problem or at least helped me get one step closer to solving it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The counter-argument, which is in favour of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; pinning, applies here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For rules questions, the highest-scored answer will be whichever the community recommends as the most correct answer with the most effective explanation. Whatever the querent &lt;em&gt;accepted&lt;/em&gt; is usually not relevant to that—it might just be the explanation that worked for them, but if that's out of sync with the most upvoted answer, then clearly the most upvoted was a more suitable explanation for most readers. The most upvoted one is the one we'd recommend for most visitors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For social questions, the highest-scored answer will be one that we'd &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; recommend for &lt;em&gt;most people&lt;/em&gt; who might be experiencing the problem we're seeing. The querent will accept the solution that worked for them in their specific social dynamic, but there's no reason to pin that to the top above what we recommend as a generality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[Reason to keep it pinned:] The accepted answer is tested (*)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Counter-argument:] It is true that many people will upvote answers without testing them. However, if a highly voted answer contains a mistake, it will start collecting comments saying so. If that mistake is not corrected, other people start adding answers that are correct. The voting system starts moving those correct answers to the top. This seems fair to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The counter-argument, which is in favour of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; pinning, applies here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, all answers are expected to be backed up by citations of fact or experience—all of them should already be tested. Meanwhile, the highest voted is the one filtered through community knowledge and experience that gets vetted as effective. (In bad cases, as merely &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;an answer that seems to have truthiness&lt;/a&gt;, but that's when we'll start nagging someone to back their answer up.) The accepted answer status doesn't really add anything to this—we should always present what the community's vetting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe an answer found one specific approach solved their specific situation, but again, what we're upvoting is what we'd recommend generally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;[Reason to keep it pinned:] The accepted answer solves the actual problem described in the question (*)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Counter-argument:] Fine, but when I use Stack Overflow I don't care if my problem is exactly the same in every detail as the OP. Sometimes the OP uses a title that leads search engines and thousands of future visitors to expect a different answer than the one that solved the OP's problem (example). There is no need to keep those kind of answers on top anymore. If I want to find them I can scroll down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The counter-argument, which is in favour of &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; pinning, applies here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, we're recommending that the most upvoted answer will solve peoples' problems, an we can filter that through our own knowledge or experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm beginning to repeat myself already and I'm only three points in, so I'll move on from this section.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Summary: not pinning the accepted answer means we present the one the community recommends, and that's good&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pinning the accepted answer isn't a value-add. We don't have code to compile. It's valuable to indicate what worked for the querent personally, but anytime the accepted answer and the highest-voted answer are out of sync, it's almost certainly more worthwhile to present the community's overall recommended solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This way, readers are given, as a priority, the general case the community would recommend.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In cases the highest voted answer and accepted answer are different, The specific case that worked for the querent is not necessarily the most helpful to present to readers—it's just the specific case that worked for one person. We should prefer presenting the option the community generally preferred overall first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tangentially: Pinning a non-top answer is sometimes a valuable feature, but the accepted answer serves that purpose poorly&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the things the accepted answer does for us is resolve situations where the top answer is, somehow, actually not the most advisable one: maybe HNQ caused us trouble; maybe that answer's obsolete and a new or better one has arisen. There's value in being able to pin an answer that isn't the top-rated one. However, I'd raise the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Why do we provide the power to pin that answer to exclusively one user (where even the mods can't override it) on a site where the userbase curates everything? That one user might not even be here anymore.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Why do we conflate a “this is the answer you should look at” pin with the “this is the answer the OP went with” marker? Why should that user be expected to switch the marker with answers they didn't go with? Isn't this overloading the pin to do multiple jobs?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When this situation occurs, doesn't that mean the Stack should be rethinking the way it handles votes (especially in light of obsolescence)? Isn't this a prompt to the Stack to rethink how it handles the impact of HNQ, or Fastest Gun in the West, or other related voting problems?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think that in a world the accepted answer is no longer being pinned by default, we're either unaffected &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; better off in the majority of cases, and in the rest, the Stack should finally look to implementing a feature for pinning a recommended answer that's finally controlled by the community, not just by the post author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FWIW, since writing this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11750/1204&quot;&gt;I'm more in favour of keeping the pin&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; I'm not going to change this answer since it's representative of other peoples' stances, but it's not my stance presently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-09-24T10:59:29.827" LastActivityDate="2021-09-24T10:59:29.827" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11729" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-10T01:27:36.063" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Keep the checkmark pin. It stands for hope*.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*And maybe that's not where hope should be coming from, but it's all the hope I've got.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So there's this question. Four-five answers already in place. Top answer has the checkmark and a score of 20, 50, 100, something big. But I still think I've got something to add to it. There's an angle I'm thinking of that nobody's considered yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I answer and bump the question, are people even going to make it down to my 0-score answer to give it a fair shake? Maybe, maybe not. If I can get a couple of votes to move it up the page it gets a little more likely, but questions don't receive attention evenly over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, at least that's the model I have, maybe somebody can prove me wrong here, but the picture in my brain is that a question gets the most attention when it's new and answers get more attention the higher up they are on the page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting in a late answer is kind of hoping to hit the lottery there, honestly. I'm not going to get as much attention as a popular answer got when the question was new, but if I get the checkmark pin at least I'll be getting the most I could possibly get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realize we've never really tested the checkmark and the pin independently of each other. I can't say there'll definitely be some appreciable falloff if the checkmark stops pinning. I will, however, definitely feel much more hopeless if a late and useful answer never gets bumped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T01:27:36.063" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11730" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11731" CreationDate="2021-09-10T10:31:28.023" Score="0" ViewCount="71" Body="&lt;p&gt;in a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/191424/3&quot;&gt;recent answer&lt;/a&gt;, I used the following (simplified) code snippet:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[cleartext argumentation] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4, 6, 8&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&#xA;&#xA;&amp;gt; [Blockquote from source] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;6&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for some reason it parses into&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In later generations, the outspoken rule becomes that only at&#xA;character generation one can obtain rites with background or freebie&#xA;points, in 1st edition that is only implicit. &lt;sup&gt;4, 6, 8&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Subsequently [to character generation], however, rites can be learned only through roleplaying; they may not be purchased with&#xA;experience points. 6&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and the command console makes it evident, that the second set of superscripted text in the quoted area is seemingly ignored:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qLq41.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qLq41.png&quot; alt=&quot;photo of the command prompt that leads to the parsed text above&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a similar fashion, another section of superscripted text after the blockquote is likewise just normalized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, for some &lt;em&gt;odd&lt;/em&gt; reason, the very same snippet of code does work &lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt; on the meta... did I type some strange extra character in there that got lost in copying or something?!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;investigation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding another &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; to turn it into &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;6&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; does make the first 6 into superscripted text, but this does not work for the second instance of non-parsed superscript text - there &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;4, 6, 8&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; was needed to display as superscripted text.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently, just having the latter code bit &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; somehow fixes the first formatting issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, closing each portion of superscripted text does seems to &lt;em&gt;fix&lt;/em&gt; the issue. &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;6&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-09-13T23:55:05.120" LastActivityDate="2021-09-13T23:55:05.120" Title="Formatting Bug with superscripted text being ignored?" Tags="|support|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11731" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11730" CreationDate="2021-09-10T10:47:27.763" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm a doofus!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;a preceding line read&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;There is a roll and time spent with the teacher, that's it. &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2, 4, 6, 8&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course with no closed supertext, all kinds of errors are to be expected... The fix was therefore adding the needed &lt;code&gt;/&lt;/code&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;There is a roll and time spent with the teacher, that's it. &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;2, 4, 6, 8&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why it did not err out on the very next but only the one after that I fail to understand, but might be an interaction between the supertext and blockquote tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-09-10T10:50:04.543" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T10:50:04.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11732" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-10T15:30:20.753" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A reason to be against it: Visual Presentation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While usually the highest voted answer and the accepted answer have a high correlation, those cases where the accepted answer (which satisified the question) and a very highly voted answer differ widely in votes received is worth seeing &amp;quot;above the fold&amp;quot; (in the first few answers).  That contrast is noteworthy, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/76787/22566&quot;&gt;in the case I'll offer&lt;/a&gt; would have not been apparent: the top voted answer has over one hundred votes, the accepted answer over 30.  This isn't the only example, but it's one that I think illustrates what I am talking about clearly since there were two answers to the question that outscored the accepted one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears that Thomas Markov ran a few numbers and found that nine out of ten times, roughly, highest voted and accepted coincide.  Fine.  Nothing happens in those cases.  It's where it's not the case that some learning and some intriguing comparisons can be made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd rather not lose that visual contrast where it does occur between an accepted answer and the most highly voted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Recommendation&lt;/strong&gt;: keep pinning the accepted answer to the top, regardless of who has the most votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This 'initiative' adds no value to this site, but it would lose the value of that contrast in those cases where it now appears &amp;quot;above the fold&amp;quot; for that class of answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-10-04T21:28:09.590" LastActivityDate="2021-10-04T21:28:09.590" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11733" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-09-10T15:58:04.617" Score="12" ViewCount="277" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;Nine years ago we decided campaign research questions were off topic&lt;/a&gt;. The guidance given was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions asking about a general real-world topic such as history, geography or economics might more likely belong on another Stack Exchange site (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://history.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;) than here. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&#xA;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/191427/do-light-hammers-as-depicted-in-dd-being-throwable-have-any-historical-prec&quot;&gt;Do &amp;#39;light hammers&amp;#39;, as depicted in D&amp;amp;D, being throwable have any historical precedent?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks if the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e concept of throwing a light hammer corresponds to a historically accurate weapon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a campaign research question that should be closed as off-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-09-10T16:43:45.317" LastActivityDate="2021-09-19T09:51:24.017" Title="Is this question about throwing hammers off-topic as a &quot;campaign research&quot; question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11734" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-10T16:13:25.643" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yay math.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My purpose here is to provide some statistics to help you make a decision. I've got it started, if there are other metrics you want to see, leave a comment and I will run the numbers and update this post. I will not be making an actual recommendation, and I'm not going to leave a ton of comments with these stats.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Of 30,106 questions with accepted answers, 2,599 would be affected (8.6%).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For the affected questions, the answers have the following statistics:&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average accepted answer score: 10.2&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average best scoring answer score: 18.3&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Average difference: 8.1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Average higher scoring answer score: 17.2&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Average difference: 7&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Median accepted answer score: 7&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Median best scoring answer score: 12&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Median difference: 4&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Median higher scoring answer score: 12&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Median difference: 4&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The median time it took for a higher scoring answer to be posted after a question: 1 hour 38 minutes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The median time it took for an accepted answer to be posted after a question: 4 hours 50 minutes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The number of questions where the accepted answer was posted after all higher scoring answers: 1653 (63.6% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The number of questions where the accepted answer was posted before all higher scoring answers: 846 (32.6% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The number of questions where the accepted answer was posted in between higher scoring answers: 100 (3.8% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Of affected questions, only 31 have negative scoring accepted answers (1.2% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Of affected questions, only 39 have zero (0) scoring accepted answers (1.5% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Of affected questions, only 206 are closed (7.9% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Of those, only 26 were closed as dupicates (1.0% of affected, 12.6% of closed)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where a higher scoring answer outscored accepted by 10 or more: 629 (24.0% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where a higher scoring answer outscored accepted by 20 or more: 239 (9.2% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where a higher scoring answer outscored accepted by 50 or more: 43 (1.7% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where two (2) or more answers that outscored the accepted: 443 (17.0% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where three (3) or more answers that outscored the accepted: 116 (4.5% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Number of questions where five (5) or more answers that outscored the accepted: 12 (0.5% of affected)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Data sourced from &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1460275&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this query&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="47188" LastEditDate="2021-10-05T22:47:37.767" LastActivityDate="2021-10-05T22:47:37.767" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11735" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11738" CreationDate="2021-09-10T17:59:57.880" Score="5" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;The usage guidance for &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/closed-questions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;closed-questions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;closed-questions&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is for posts looking to raise meta discussions about &lt;em&gt;specific closed questions&lt;/em&gt;, as well as for questions about the concept of a closed question in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice, one of the ways we are using this tag is for meta discussion about whether a particular question should be closed. The tag description says it is for discussing &lt;em&gt;closed&lt;/em&gt; questions, but oftentimes the attendant main-site question is open when we start the meta discussion, and the results determine if the question remains open or gets closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we update the usage guidance to account for this? I found myself confused when trying to determine which tag to add to a meta discussion, since the question I was asking about was open, but the tag says it's for closed questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-18T00:02:49.160" LastActivityDate="2021-09-18T00:02:49.160" Title="Does the usage guidance for the [closed-questions] tag on this Meta need to be updated?" Tags="|discussion|tags|closed-questions|meta|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11737" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11733" CreationDate="2021-09-10T18:02:15.397" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would say yes, it is off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Adding a reference to D&amp;amp;D (or any other game system) to the question doesn't really change the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question could be asked as &amp;quot;Do thrown hammers, as weapons, have a historical precedent?&amp;quot; without changing the expected answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, the question could be asked on a different (non-History) stack exchange, again without changing the expected answers. For example: &amp;quot;Does the idea of Thor throwing Mjolnir have a basis in historical combat?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="49316" LastEditorUserId="49316" LastEditDate="2021-09-10T18:04:01.203" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T18:04:01.203" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11738" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11735" CreationDate="2021-09-10T18:27:36.140" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes. We should update it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We also use the tag to discuss the closure of questions in contentious cases or to double-check one's reason for a closure of a question that they think might need closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this would do the job:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This tag is for posts looking to raise meta discussions about specific&#xA;closed questions or the closure of a specific question, as well as for&#xA;questions about the concept of a closed question in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T18:27:36.140" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11739" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11741" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:01:42.117" Score="8" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question might be a &lt;em&gt;super&lt;/em&gt; dumb -- or if it isn't, I have to imagine I'm not the first person to raise it. But I can't find anything about via searching (perhaps because it's tough to come up with an effective string). So.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I tried to read Meta regularly. Recent Meta activity has had me bouncing back and forth between Meta and mainsite with extra frequency. In the several years I've been on RPG.SE, however, I haven't found any &lt;em&gt;simple&lt;/em&gt;, click-and-you're-there way to navigate from the mainsite homepage (&amp;quot;Top Questions&amp;quot;) to the Meta homepage in the desktop browser UI. The only way I've found to do it is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On mainsite, click the section/link for my user profile:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vbwbB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vbwbB.png&quot; alt=&quot;partial screenshot of mainsite user interface with highlight on the user profile section&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Click the &amp;quot;Profiles&amp;quot; button in the upper-right to get to a drop-down menu, and click &amp;quot;Meta user&amp;quot;:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rEa12.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/rEa12.png&quot; alt=&quot;partial screenshot of mainsite user interface with &amp;quot;profiles&amp;quot; drop-down menu showing a red arrow pointing to the Meta user link&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Now that I'm on Meta user profile page, I can click the &amp;quot;Questions&amp;quot; link at the left:&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/psRzG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/psRzG.png&quot; alt=&quot;partial screenshot of Meta user profile page with a red arrow pointing to the &amp;quot;Questions&amp;quot; link&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it just me, or does this seem like a weird set of steps for what ought to be a very direct path between the two most important pieces of mainsite and Meta? Why must I go through my &lt;em&gt;profile&lt;/em&gt; page to get to Meta &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt;? Or maybe there's some obvious one-click link somewhere that my eyeballs are simply refusing to see?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Yeah, I know, we're talking about four clicks as opposed to one. And yeah, I know, I can just bookmark the Meta questions page; indeed I have done. I'm trying to understand the intent behind this architecture.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="43484" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T19:07:09.140" Title="On a desktop browser, is there any way to navigate directly from the RPG.SE mainsite questions page to the Meta questions page?" Tags="|support|user-interface|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11740" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11739" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:06:24.803" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mFVBd.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mFVBd.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T19:06:24.803" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11741" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11739" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:07:09.140" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There's a button in the burger menu&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you click the stack-icon/burger menu in the very right of the topbar, the dropdown includes a link to the meta site for the site you're currently on. It also has a link to the help pages and to chat, and below that will be other sites you have a profile on, and a menu for searching among the remaining stacks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/B0tI3.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/B0tI3.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T19:07:09.140" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11742" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11733" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:31:21.187" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll just reiterate/rephrase what I already said in the comments below the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As written, the question does indeed ask about &amp;quot;historical precedence&amp;quot;. However, I don't think that's what OP is really asking; instead, he's curious how a realistically throwable (but still melee-capable) hammer would look like, especially in the context of past editions of D&amp;amp;D.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This is evident by the body of the question: he states that he has &amp;quot;been trying to find a 'realistic' or at least believable depiction of a light throwing hammer [as present in 5e]&amp;quot;. He then goes on to ask about issues he found with depictions of &amp;quot;throwing hammers&amp;quot; in a 3.5e sourcebook. Only in the last sentence is history mentioned again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Incidentally, it just so happens that people don't have an incentive to throw hammers around nowadays, considering bullets and other weapons are much more convenient for getting the job done (outside of sports, that is, but olympic hammer throwing involves throwing a ball on a chain, which isn't very hammerlike if you ask me).&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Therefore, unless somebody here happens to be throwing hammers as a hobby, historical evidence of the existence of such hammers is the easiest way to prove the viability of such hammers. This is why I think OP focused on asking for historical precedence - it's the most apparent way of judging the realism of medieval-ish weapons. At the same, however, OP thus limits answers to being based on historical evidence, which I don't think is the intention, but rather a consequence of accidentally narrowing the question too much based on his own assumptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, I don't think this question is, at its core, history-exclusive enough to warrant moving it to history SE (although it wouldn't be out of place there, either). Well, to be specific: as it is currently &lt;em&gt;phrased&lt;/em&gt;, it does make more sense over there, but in my opinion, we should make sure to gauge OP's intent instead of immediately yeeting him over to history SE - after all, we are supposed to be a community of experts, not a question proxy. If it turns out that OP really only wants to know about historical throwing hammers, then history SE is indeed a better fit.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Otherwise, to quote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;the cited meta&lt;/a&gt;: &amp;quot;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&amp;quot;. In this case, I think that is indeed the case. While a historian might be qualified to present suitable historic evidence, insight into past editions of D&amp;amp;D or experience with LARP (both of which are likely more prevalent here than on history SE) could also very much be the foundation of a good answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As it stands, the question should, in my opinion, be closed for a lack of focus. It's asking one thing in the title, while really asking something else in the body. Suggesting the inclusion of historic evidence is perfectly fine, but explicitly asking for historic evidence would indeed be a reason to move the question to history SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Considering that OP isn't exactly new here, I think it's reasonable to expect him to refine the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="38495" LastEditDate="2021-09-19T09:51:24.017" LastActivityDate="2021-09-19T09:51:24.017" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11743" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11744" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:43:35.750" Score="4" ViewCount="63" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was going to go into the SEDE (Stack Exchange Data Explorer) to try and compose a query related to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11726/what-is-our-stance-on-unpinning-the-accepted-answer-from-the-top-of-the-list-of&quot;&gt;the discussion about unpinning accepted answers&lt;/a&gt;, when I realized I couldn't figure out a way to navigate to SEDE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the past, I would typically nagivate there via a link I came across, but I didn't come across one today. I thought the burger menu would have a link, but I'm not seeing one; what am I missing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-12T03:07:19.883" LastActivityDate="2021-09-12T03:07:19.883" Title="How can I get to the SEDE (Stack Exchange Data Explorer) without having to search up a link?" Tags="|support|user-interface|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11744" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11743" CreationDate="2021-09-10T19:56:42.947" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Go to the bottom of the page, under &amp;quot;Stack Exchange Network&amp;quot;, click &amp;quot;Other&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mZGBF.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/mZGBF.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then click &amp;quot;Data&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tVYaF.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tVYaF.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-09-10T19:56:42.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11745" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-09-12T18:18:05.463" Score="12" ViewCount="228" Body="&lt;p&gt;I understand that I can simply ask that a discussion in comments be moved to chat, and then go to chat, but it looks like the automatic prompt does a lot more (room creation, tagging, title, inviting, etc), and while it triggers on its own after several comments, sometimes I'm relatively sure ahead of time that we'll get to the room prompt with how the discussion is going.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to make the prompt accessible sooner than normal?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40335" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:12:41.667" LastActivityDate="2022-09-28T11:07:22.347" Title="Is there a way I can make &quot;Let us continue this discussion in chat&quot; happen sooner?" Tags="|support|comments|chat|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11746" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11733" CreationDate="2021-09-13T01:21:31.543" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sometimes areas of Stack Exchanges will overlap and that is okay.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked question is a question about how to use history to &lt;strong&gt;depict&lt;/strong&gt; to players of an rpg the verisimilitude of throwing a hammer (an unwieldy looking object).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been trying to find a 'realistic' or at least believable depiction of a light throwing hammer, that would be the equivalent to the 'Light Hammer' in D&amp;amp;D 5E (which has the thrown property).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comes under the category of 'How Do I Make This Believable To Players'.  It's phrased oddly, but many questions on rpg.se are phrased oddly, poorly, or have incorrect assumptions underlying them.  Questions don't need to be perfect to be answerable (and there is value in answering imperfect questions so people with similarly imperfect queries can find them via searching).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A historian will likely know about hammer throwing or rock throwing or other blunt objects that could be hurled, a renaissance faire guy might be able to link to a video of someone throwing hammers or axes quite accurately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A skilled GM will know how  to 'depict it believably' and answer on that basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question can completely reasonably be asked in either location or both.  It's a poorly phrased question, but the subject matter is both 'history' and 'rpgs', it fits almost dead centre in the overlap between the two sites.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2021-09-13T01:21:31.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11747" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11745" CreationDate="2021-09-13T12:53:38.157" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Unfortunately, your options are limited.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can create a chat room individually, invite the other user there, and post that link in the comment section. Or you do an uninterrupted ababab comment chain, followed by a prompt for moving the discussion to chat - those are your reliable options. Either you invite them to a chatroom that you create, you ask a mod via a flag, or you go through three iterations of uninterrupted comment exchanges to reliably get there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleted comments in chains count for the three uninterrupted pairs of comments exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; and I did one rapid commenting test, it took us three completed pairs of comments, and the 7th comment would move the discussion to chat; both of us had the prompt after three completed pairs. After that, we tested together with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/52137/someone-evil&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil&lt;/a&gt; whether we could use an abc approach. Even after my fourth comment in the chain, we got no prompt. Then we changed to pairs again in the same comment thread, and the three pairs did the trick again, but only I received the prompt as the starter of that chain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So your best bet is to have an uninterrupted comment chain of three pairs. You might want to tell anybody else to abstain from interrupting your conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the most recent feature-request to change something about the status quo: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/363567/526695&quot;&gt;Can the chat message pop-up be inserted after 5 comment &amp;quot;back and forth&amp;quot; argument strategies?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7665/44723&quot;&gt;This discussion on our meta&lt;/a&gt; goes into why we don't have an autogenerate button for moving comments to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the most longstanding and voted-on feature request for an on-demand button: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/100967/526695&quot;&gt;Should &amp;quot;move-to-chat&amp;quot; be provided on demand (as a button perhaps)?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-09-13T14:27:46.877" LastActivityDate="2021-09-13T14:27:46.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11748" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11745" CreationDate="2021-09-13T14:19:20.443" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;A third commenter interrupting an exchange seems to prevent the prompt.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Akixkisu, Someone_Evil, and I took to vandalizing one of my answers, and we could not get the prompt until Someone_Evil stopped commenting and Akixkisu and I did a three-pair exchange (full comment thread is documented &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SdHDT.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After four cycles of (Ak, S_E, TM), still no prompt, then after the pairs from Akixkisu and I, Akixkisu got the prompt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So how can you get to the prompt quicker? If there are three people engaging in the discussion, ask one of them to stop commenting for a moment so you can get to the chat prompt, where they can then resume discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or just custom flag a comment asking a mod to migrate the thread. That will be favorable, as &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; the comments will be preserved rather than just the ones between the two users who triggered the user prompt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-09-28T11:07:22.347" LastActivityDate="2022-09-28T11:07:22.347" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11749" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11751" CreationDate="2021-09-13T20:51:28.730" Score="7" ViewCount="92" Body="&lt;p&gt;Visited link text on mainsite is broken—the text is showing up black instead of the usual visted color. For example, on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How to ask&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TzyJD.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/TzyJD.png&quot; alt=&quot;the link text in a paragraph is black&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is because apparently &lt;code&gt;--theme-primary-color-300&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;-800&lt;/code&gt; are not set, as reported by Firefox's inspector here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JiZ9p.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JiZ9p.png&quot; alt=&quot;a screenshot of the CSS&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(it's not very clear here, but I'm hovering over one of these undefined variables, and that &amp;quot;not set&amp;quot; text is part of a dialog telling me, well, that the variable's not set. The variables being grey indicates it's undefined.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="72256" LastEditDate="2021-09-14T19:54:14.300" LastActivityDate="2021-09-14T19:54:14.300" Title="The visited link color on our mainsite theme is missing because --theme-primary-color-300/800 are not set" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|hyperlinks|css|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11750" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-14T14:14:52.553" Score="23" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Pinning keeps the focus on the exact question—especially playstyle&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I commented on doppelgreener’s answer for unpinning with&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel neutral-to-positive about this answer,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and that’s true—it’s a good answer, laying out very reasonable points in favor of unpinning the accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the more I think about it, the more it just doesn’t sit right with me. While I feel pretty good about doppelgreener’s answer, I &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; feel very good about actually taking the step it proposes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are other answers that capture some decent reasons to be leery of the change—I quite like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11729/44723&quot;&gt;Glazius’s about hope&lt;/a&gt;, and agree with others’ answers about the idea that there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; value to giving the querent themselves a little bit of special privilege. And part of it is just how &lt;em&gt;few&lt;/em&gt; situations it’s actually going to change, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11734/44723&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov has determined&lt;/a&gt; for us. But I don’t feel that these things necessarily capture what I’m concerned about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It applies to very few cases, and does little harm either way&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems like a big change, that fundamentally affects how we regard querents, without actually improving the site very much. It applies to a small number of questions. That, I think, should give everyone some pause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The difference seems primarily philosophical, not practical. It’s not a question of what will make the best site for users, because neither choice is going to substantially affect users’ experiences. But it is a fairly large question of what we think of the people asking questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Everyone is the world’s foremost expert on their own opinion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I vehemently disagree with the whole idea of &amp;quot;querent power&amp;quot;. The querent most often isn't an expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This comment is more what I’m concerned about—it’s certainly true that the querent may well not be an expert in the subject matter, and that they may accept an answer “incorrectly”—there are definitely accepted answers that have irked me. But they &lt;strong&gt;are&lt;/strong&gt; an expert on &lt;em&gt;what it was they wanted&lt;/em&gt;—they are in fact the &lt;strong&gt;only&lt;/strong&gt; expert on that. This community has, I think, more than a little bit of an issue when it comes to &lt;em&gt;assuming we know better what people want&lt;/em&gt;—we don’t. I mean, look at this discussion, we have maybe 30 people paying attention to this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We must take the position that the world’s foremost expert on what X wants is X, themselves. To do otherwise—to determine that we, in fact, know better what it is they truly want—is the height of hubris. That’s a vice that this community has been guilty of from time to time, but at least people had the option of promoting the answer that actually engages with their question as they see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, I think we &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; show some small, minor deference to querents in this—but the green checkmark alone is insufficient even for that. Do you even &lt;em&gt;notice&lt;/em&gt; when the accepted answer is a self-answer and something after the first answer is accepted? I certainly don’t. That might as well not exist. Pinning an answer seems like an appropriate level, to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Plurality of playstyles, frame challenges, unpinned accepted answers—&lt;em&gt;pick 2&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Generally speaking, we prefer frame challenges to &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; answer the question straight. We do not &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; that they do so—and even when a frame challenge does, very often it’s a quick and simple answer that serves as much or more to illustrate the point of the challenge than it does to address the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is acceptable because the querent can always choose another answer—and that answer gets pinned to the top, making it “the” answer insofar as we have one. Getting the top slot is what answerers “compete” for, again insofar as it’s a competition. The incentive structure of the site is based around that slot far, far more than it is around reputation. If it weren’t so, no one would object to the pinning of accepted answers in the first place, I’d think.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3319/44723&quot;&gt;the frame challenge policy itself states&lt;/a&gt; that they are “risky.” In fact, this isn’t “just” a statement—it is &lt;strong&gt;a part of that policy&lt;/strong&gt;. The reason why frame challenges work the way they do—and are allowed in the form that they are—is &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; they are risky. This risk—that your answer won’t ever be considered for the top slot &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; of what it is—is crucial to the functioning of that policy. This is because frame challenges explicitly ignore parts of the question—that is, they decide to effectively answer a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as the querent can reject that—and say “this is actually the answer to my question”—then this works out fine. But if the querent cannot “reject” the frame challenge—that is, if the community can “overrule” them and push a frame challenge into the top slot, and say “no, &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; is the answer to your question,” we have a big problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As doppelgreener put it,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, since writing [the pro-unpinning answer] I'm more in favour of keeping the pin [...] keeping our focus on the querent before our peers is ... probably really important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because one of the most prominent (in the sense of noticeable; I don’t have numbers) cases of such a frame challenge is over concerns of playstyle. That is, we have frame challenges that say “well, if you just abandoned that playstyle, this wouldn’t be a problem anymore.” If the playstyle in question is unpopular, that answer can very easily out-score even a good, strong “straight” answer to the question. We have numerous examples like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the frame challenge convinces the querent, then fair enough. Sometimes querents don’t realize there even &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; other playstyles, or that the problems they’re facing are due to the playstyle they use but haven’t examined—sometimes a frame challenge like that can make someone realize the playstyle they’re using isn’t really suited to their interests. But if it doesn’t, then pushing a frame challenge to the top of the answers effectively invalidates their question. It says “the best answer to this question is to not ask this question.” &lt;strong&gt;That is a huge problem.&lt;/strong&gt; And if answers know that they can achieve that result even without the querent buying in—that is, if they know they’re answering for the community’s preferences even when those explicitly disregard the needs of the querent—then the querent doesn’t get to define what the question is, anymore. Because if “the answer” is explicitly &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; answering the exact question, but rather answering a different one, and we decide it is nonetheless “the answer,” then what we have decided is that the question is actually different from what the querent said.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent decides that, not the community. Like I said, if they are convinced by the frame challenge, fine. But there must be an opportunity for them to not. And the incentive structure of the site—the “prize” that orients answers—has to reflect that. And the checkmark isn’t nearly as good a prize as the top slot is, so if the top slot is up for grabs even without the checkmark, the incentive structure says ignore the checkmark and go for the top slot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What this all means is that we cannot support &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5174/44723&quot;&gt;a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt;, if questions about unpopular playstyles can be overruled by frame challenges pushing popular playstyles that don’t have the same problems. Pinning the accepted answer is one way to accomplish that—it leaves the ultimate determination of what it means to answer the question to the querent. But if we no longer pin the accepted answer, then we simply cannot have frame challenges any longer—at least not about playstyle, we can’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that, I think, is a death knell here—because we can’t enforce that. By definition, we are talking about popular frame challenges—downvotes aren’t going to cut it. We can all agree that we’re supposed to downvote such frame challenges, and it likely won’t matter. Meta doesn’t have remotely that much influence—main site has a whole lot of people voting who are never going to look here. That means a ton of unpopular work for diamond moderators to delete high-rated answers—which is something that really should never happen in the first place. But there’s no other mechanism available to prevent it. And even if we succeed, we’ll still be worse off—because we won’t have the opportunity to even try to suggest that maybe the querent might be better off considering other ways of looking at the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;We are &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; in the same position as Stack Overflow&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Overflow questions are near-purely objective. When the community disagrees with the querent, it almost-certainly does so because that answer is objectively, often measurably, superior to the answer the querent chose. Compilers and standards specifications create objective, unambiguous right and wrong answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the &lt;em&gt;vast majority&lt;/em&gt; of Stack Overflow interactions consist of someone coming from Google and copying-and-pasting the first thing they see. People go to Stack Overflow to get something working. There’s likely a time-pressure, and most likely, this isn’t &lt;em&gt;fun&lt;/em&gt; for them—they have a job to get done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is not our site. Our content is usually subjective—and differences of opinion exist. Most times, therefore, if the community disagrees with the querent, it’s over matters of opinion—not actual objective quality—because that’s largely what we deal with. Expert opinion is valuable and useful—if it weren’t, this site wouldn’t serve much purpose—but it’s not the same as &lt;em&gt;fact&lt;/em&gt;. On Stack Overflow, it’s very hard to imagine “the community” being substantially wrong about the correct answer to a question. Here, it’s fairly hard to imagine “right” or “wrong” even strictly applying &lt;em&gt;in the first place&lt;/em&gt;. As Thomas Markov puts it, &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; here is going to be 100% objective—we don’t have any analogue to “this answer doesn’t even compile.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And here, these are games. It’s a hobby. Most people are here, I think it’s safe to say, because they are interested in this subject. They enjoy reading about it. They’re much, much more likely to read more of what’s presented, rather than just going with the first thing they see. Especially when the second answer they come to has a higher number than the one before it. I think therefore that the harm of pinning a “wrong” answer—insofar as we even buy that there is such a thing—is vastly less here than it would be there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the fact that Stack Overflow did it doesn’t really mean very much here, I think. We’re in a different situation. It doesn’t mean that taking the same step is automatically &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt;, but it does mean that it’s &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; automatically &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt;. And I think there are some reasons here to hesitate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-10-11T11:34:45.023" LastActivityDate="2021-10-11T11:34:45.023" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11751" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11749" CreationDate="2021-09-14T19:54:03.093" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has been fixed and is now live across the network. Yesterday we rolled out a behind-the-scenes update to unify how many components across the network are themed. It looks like a slight typo made it into the code that sets visited and hovered link colors, causing them to revert to their default values instead of using the correct values from the site's theme. This has been corrected and steps have been taken to ensure that this typo didn't occur anywhere else in the product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72256" LastActivityDate="2021-09-14T19:54:03.093" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11752" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8898" CreationDate="2021-09-15T02:09:47.527" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;When the Question isn't a Good Representation of Our Site&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking as a mod who has removed a few of these types of question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a certain style of question that is likely to end up on the HNQ that shouldn't. These questions are usually &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/group-dynamics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;group-dynamics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;group-dynamics&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-gm&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; questions that come off as more of a rant than an actual question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions get a lot of interest with clickbaity titles and lots of drama. They also often drive lots of interaction through back-and-forth comments, votes, and answers, which increases the question's &amp;quot;Hotness&amp;quot; and gets it onto the HNQ. These questions also often touch on sensitive topics, further driving engagement, but not in a positive way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once on the HNQ, these questions tend to attract low-quality opinion-based answers from network users who just want to chime in on the drama rather than help refine the question or solve the querent's actual problem. These questions do not represent our site in a good light and are not the type of question we want drawing new users in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, when questions like this hit the HNQ, it is better to pre-emptively remove them before the low-quality interactions roll in. It improves our ability to refine the question and help the OP, and also prevents unwanted noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-18T00:13:26.713" LastActivityDate="2021-09-18T00:13:26.713" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11753" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="8634" CreationDate="2021-09-15T12:54:55.543" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Edit away!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/367231&quot;&gt;a recent change on July 7th to how the reopen review queue works&lt;/a&gt;. To briefly quote and summarize the change:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All users are still able to submit edits on closed questions. This new feature allows editors to determine whether they’re making a minor edit (i.e. grammar, spelling) or a significant edit. By submitting an edit for review, the editor agrees that their edit attempts to resolve the question’s close reason(s) and should be considered for reopening in the Reopen votes queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We understand that it may take multiple attempts to get your question just right. If a significant edit fails to reopen a question, users will now have an opportunity to continue to rework and edit their question and have it reviewed multiple times. Reviewers will not be able to see the same question twice in the Reopen votes queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first part explains that the new process of editing actually gives users a checkmark that allows them to state whether they believe their edit is significant &lt;em&gt;in a way that makes the question entering the review queue make sense&lt;/em&gt;. So now there is no reason not to edit closed questions because if you do not check the box, your edit can't send the question into the review queue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The latter part of the quote drives this home perhaps even further, as questions are no longer limited to entering the reopen queue only once (though the finer details of how this all works are still being monitored and may change).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-09-17T23:41:12.413" LastActivityDate="2021-09-17T23:41:12.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11754" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-15T13:22:58.233" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Unpinning makes sense for some questions and not others&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack-Exchange has three types of questions on the network:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ones with an objective answer that is correct, and a different answer may become more correct over time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ones with a combination of objective and subjective components to answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ones with almost entirely (but not completely) subjective components to answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All three of these types are answerable on stack because all three types allow for expert opinion to avoid &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; answers. It is possible for there not to be a correct answer to a problem while simultaneously having very definite &lt;em&gt;wrong&lt;/em&gt; answers. For example, &amp;quot;How would I solve world hunger in the world I am creating for my novel? (parameters are x)&amp;quot; would be a fine question for Worldbuilding.SE, it doesn't necessarily have one true &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; answer, it does, however have at least one very wrong answer &amp;quot;have [insert disaster] wipe out &lt;em&gt;everyone&lt;/em&gt; on your world&amp;quot;. Sure it solves the problem of world hunger, but leaves the querent without a world to build in. Expert opinion allows answers to avoid the wrong, and provide potential good solutions to the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not a site should use the unpinning feature or not depends on what mix of these three types of questions there are on that site. Sites that have more of types 2 &amp;amp; 3 should retain pinning, sites that have more of type 1 should remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What does pinning actually achieve?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pinning an answer gives the querent an active opinion on which answer solved their problem. Unpinning changes that opinion to being more passive (readers have to scroll past the first answer to get to an unpinned accepted answer, which is the use case this change is attempting to solve).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This decision seems to be based on the assumption that the querent is the least expert person in the discussion. Making this assumption in all cases is a dangerous road to go down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The experiment this change was based on, was run on the site which has a plethora of objectively answered questions (Stack Overflow). In that situation the querent will be the least expert person in the room.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone, on the other hand, asking &amp;quot;How should I handle situation x which is causing issues for reasons x &amp;amp; y&amp;quot; is not a situation where the querent is the least expert person in the discussion, it's a situation where they may be the most expert person on what constitutes the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moment you bring a subjective topic into a question is the same moment the fundamental assumption that the SO experiment was investigating shifts dramatically. For example, the querent cannot possibly put down all of the history and nuance of the interpersonal relationships (because space), however they are uniquely qualified to spot what is the best answer for their situation once presented (in that situation).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Example Site Classifications&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For sites where there is an objective answer to a question (Physics, Mathematics, Stack-Overflow, etc), the querents opinion doesn't matter as much on what is the best answer, as the best answer for the site is &amp;quot;what is the highest quality and most correct answer&amp;quot;, which is a criteria that can change over time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For sites where instead there is frequently going to be a subjective answer (RPG, Parenting, Politics, etc). Answers to these types of questions will (commonly) have two components, objective facts (eg game rules) and subjective opinion (how those game rules should be interpreted and applied). The querents opinion on what solved their problem &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; hold more weight for these questions as it is a prominent and visible signal of what solved the subjective part of their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a third set of questions which are totally subjective, those dealing with interpersonal relations. Given the focus of our site, we allow a subset of those (eg managing unruly players in my game, or x players behaviour is unfun). For these types of questions the &lt;em&gt;most correct&lt;/em&gt; answer is the one which solved the querents question the best, and this can only be indicated by pinning their accepted answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What should we do about unpinning/pinning on RPG.SE?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on how I've classified RPG.SE I would strongly favour retaining pinning of accepted answers here. We have a mix of all three types of questions, but our site favours, by a long way, type 2 &amp;amp; 3 over type 1 questions. This is primarily due to the nature of our subject matter, we deal with &lt;em&gt;social&lt;/em&gt; games with complex rules (by and large), and as a result of the social portion it's not possible to have objectively correct answers for all of our questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="36850" LastEditDate="2021-09-15T14:21:35.617" LastActivityDate="2021-09-15T14:21:35.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11755" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-15T17:21:41.527" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yay&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In most cases accepted answer is also a highly-upvoted one. For those cases, unpinning changes nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other cases, there are rules questions with quite a few answers telling &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; and one, accepted and with low-positive score telling &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;. Given that more people can upvote than downvote, and even people who can do both tend to upvote more often&lt;sup&gt;[citation needed]&lt;/sup&gt; the fact that answer has positive score is very weak indication of it being right. For such cases, unpinning changes it all, and for the better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastActivityDate="2021-09-15T17:21:41.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11756" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11726" CreationDate="2021-09-17T21:20:05.550" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I support this change, on RPG SE probably more than any other site I am on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a change that won't affect most of the site. First questions often go without an accepted answer, and second most of the accepted answers also have the most votes. Of the 25 most recently active questions with accepted answers, none of them do not have the most votes on the accepted answer. Of the 25 highest voted questions with accepted answers, four have a higher voted answer than the accepted answer, and 1 had a tie, so 8% of the questions I looked at would be affected. If there's a clear best and comprehensive answer it should end up the one the community AND the querent prefer, and these rough numbers bear that out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;RPGs are driven by the GM and players. This means that unlike harder SE sites like SO or Math, there is usually no &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;wrong&amp;quot; answer (I've always been in the &amp;quot;rules serve the story/GM not the other way around&amp;quot; camp), but a lot of &amp;quot;This is how I understand it to work and use it in my game&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;This is how I'd approach a situation like that.&amp;quot; For that reason the suggestions that work for the querent in a given question may not work for anyone else looking for a similar situation, but the ones more members of the community agree with more likely will apply to more groups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The querent's needs are already met. One of the arguments given for putting the accepted answer pinned to top is the argument for putting the querent's needs first. However since the querent is the one accepting the answer they liked best, their needs are already met at that point, and pinning the answer to top doesn't significantly improve their own usage of their chosen answer in any way. It makes it slightly easier to find and refer back to in the rare case where it wasn't the clear &amp;quot;best&amp;quot; answer to the community as a whole, but it isn't hard to scroll down until you see the checkmark you know will be there in that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The optimal solution I think is to treat the accepted answer as a tie breaker, but what worked best for one, shouldn't be automatically assumed to be best in general. Out of scope for this, since it would be an SE wide change, but possibly adding a &amp;quot;jump to accepted answer&amp;quot; link conditionally to pages where it's not the first answer might solve some concerns people have with unpinning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41618" LastEditorUserId="41618" LastEditDate="2021-09-20T14:30:26.237" LastActivityDate="2021-09-20T14:30:26.237" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11757" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11912" CreationDate="2021-09-22T19:56:14.750" Score="5" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;The aside that shows when looking at review queues when out of votes for the First Answers queue is blank.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2GLVT.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2GLVT.png&quot; alt=&quot;Queues screenshot&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41618" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-14T18:24:46.170" LastActivityDate="2022-01-14T18:24:46.170" Title="Missing aside text on first answer queue" Tags="|bug|status-completed|user-interface|review|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11758" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-06T00:57:31.927" Score="23" ViewCount="866" Body="&lt;p&gt;A new user recently left &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191951/48759&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/191881/48759&quot;&gt;How did towns mundanely protect themselves against Dragons or bring them to the ground?&lt;/a&gt;. The answer is currently deleted so is only visible to 10k users. However I would like to discuss what led to its deletion and whether it should actually remain deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Timeline&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The sequence of events till now is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A new user posts their answer to the question.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A few clarifying comments are left pointing out issues or oversights in the post but none worthy of deletion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Post is deleted by community review.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;User reposts answer as they don't know how else to handle it. (Note: new user)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Repost gets flagged for mod attention.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I delete the repost and undelete the original while trying to seek clarification on why it was deleted in the first place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/59295891#59295891&quot;&gt;posted in chat&lt;/a&gt; seeking understanding of why the post was deleted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some further comments were left explaining the issues with the answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer was deleted again. 2/3 deletion voters being the same users that deleted it in the first place.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer itself is too long to reproduce here entirely. It answers the question with mechanical analysis of a battle between an Adult Red Dragon and a fictional town. Most of the relevant issue is related to a table of numbers that appears unsupported. The section of the answer is shown below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The makeup of a town is highly variable, and there's no standard. But I'll talk about several common types of people in the towns. I'll spare you the math but I ran the odds vs an adult red dragon to see their hit chances with/without hiding, and how many hits it would take for them to kill a dragon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind, the goal is NOT to kill the dragon - if the dragon is taken to bloody (50%) or even 75% hp, it's going to have to seriously think twice about attacking the town.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also multiplied each &amp;quot;person count&amp;quot; by 10, because a town will have quite a few people, and I wanted to make sure it was obvious that we aren't talking about 1 knight fighting a dragon here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;People x10&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Weapon&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Stealth*&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Rounds to bloody**&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Commoner&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;sling&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;28%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Guard&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;short bow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;36%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Thug&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;heavy crossbow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;28%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Archer&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;longbow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;58%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Knight&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;heavy crossbow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;28%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Veteran&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;heavy crossbow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;36%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Stealth is the best odds to hide, assuming they can get advantage on stealth and impose disadvantage on the dragon's passive perception (e.g. by being both far away and hiding behind an object). Also remember to think about when the DM would rule that they simply cannot be detected by the dragon - e.g. breaking line of sight plus the sounds of battle are too much for the dragon to use hearing, plus they are too far for blindsight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;** The number of rounds it takes 10 people to reduce the dragon to 50% hp, if they can hide a proportion of rounds based on the Stealth column. The people need to be in range for this total number of rounds.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Discussion Points&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not believe this answer should be deleted. Yes, it needs to support how it generated the numbers in the table but that advise should be left as a comment not simply deleting the answer. The question asks how a town could defend itself against a dragon, this answer attempts to run the numbers to show that the battle isn't quite as one sided as it appears.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I fail to see how this qualifies for any of our deletion reasons. From the deleted answer help article:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that &lt;strong&gt;do not fundamentally answer the question&lt;/strong&gt; may be removed. This includes answers that are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;commentary on the question or other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;asking another, different question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;“thanks!” or “me too!” responses&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;exact duplicates of other answers&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;barely more than a link to an external site&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;not even a partial answer to the actual question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer clearly meets none of the condition above. Furthermore as a post by a new users we should be giving the benefit of the doubt and trying to workshop it into a better answer rather than deleting it and potentially driving a new user away.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does the community believe this answer deserves to be deleted? If so on what grounds?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to undelete the answer again and provide guidance for improvement; however, I understand that my opinion does not out-weigh that of the community. Therefore, I won't take any further actions until this meta has been resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Update&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer has since been un-deleted and significantly improved via edits. However this meta remains as a valid discussion of the events that lead to its deletion and whether that was the correct action to take.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-10-08T02:27:11.463" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T20:55:47.933" Title="Does this answer about towns protecting themselves against dragons really need to be deleted?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11759" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-06T01:21:28.197" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Undelete, add the post notice, and delete later if the post is not improved.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Want to improve this post?&lt;/strong&gt; Add citations from reputable sources by editing the post. Posts with unsourced content may be edited or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You left out a reason for deletion that we use on the stack. Unsupported answers may be deleted. But you are right, we were hasty in deletion, and we should have used the post notice first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The answer is wholly unsupported, so the post notice is warranted.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What methods are expected to be feasible in the combination of system (as of fifth edition) and setting (northern regions of Forgotten Realms), that towns employed to protect themselves against dragons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks explicitly for answers to be situated in two important contexts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;5th Edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The northern regions of the Forgotten Realms setting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, there is a reasonable expectation that answers be supported through reference to 5th Edition material in the Forgotten Realms setting. This is what the question asks for unambiguously. Does the answer do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;No.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer fails to provide mechanical support from 5th Edition rules for the claims made, and the answer makes no attempt to demonstrate that the claims made in the question are feasible in the Forgotten Realms setting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer needs to do two things to be properly supported:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Provide the details of the calculations made so they can be verified by the reader&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Demonstrate that the assumptions made in the answer are actually relevant to the Forgotten Realms setting&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because that’s what the question is asking for: methods that are “expected to be feasible in the combination of system (as of fifth edition) and setting (northern regions of Forgotten Realms)”. As the answer does not provide either of these things, it does not provide what the question asks for. This is what the post notice is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if the answer is not improved (in some generous time frame), it should be deleted until it is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-10-06T01:27:46.897" LastActivityDate="2021-10-06T01:27:46.897" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11760" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-06T12:02:49.613" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, it doesn't answer the question - not even as a frame challenge&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer itself is a good attempt at a theoretical question regarding how a populace could defend itself in an actual battle - but that isn't the question asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;N.B. I was the editor who worked with OP to update their question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the question originally was targeted more towards an actual in-game problem, after I submitted an answer it became clearer that a practical solution wasn't what OP was looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After discussing in chat, and a bit in comments, we settled on that OP was most interested in knowing how towns responded to dragons in lore. This could provide them a basis for a better understanding of how the historical lore could apply to their current situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I may have been incorrect in my understanding of their goals, but that was what I had in my mind when I edited the question to focus on that aspect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, the answer in question here doesn't address that need at all. A frame challenge in this instance isn't appropriate, because OP is looking for actual (fictional) events that exist in lore and theoretical mechanical situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent was also very specific in wanting information on ways to ground the dragon. Unfortunately, the theorycraft answer doesn't address that need at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because the answer doesn't address any of the stated needs in the question, it really isn't appropriate to keep it up as an answer. It simply isn't an answer to the question asked because it doesn't address the issues in the question and this follows the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185073&quot;&gt;general guidance on the use of the Not An Answer flag&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers that do not address the question asked, or are otherwise off topic of the issues presented in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From further down the page, one of the Not an Answer options is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;answers that attempt to answer another question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's exactly what this is. It's not answering the question of how have towns responded to and/or grounded dragons in FR lore, it's answering how &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; a town respond from a purely attack perspective. It's not a bad start to an answer, it's just an answer to a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2021-10-06T20:57:20.590" LastActivityDate="2021-10-06T20:57:20.590" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11761" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-06T15:53:34.883" Score="-4" Body="&lt;p&gt;To me, the answer fell into a pit that we usually close the question for: &lt;strong&gt;Idea generation&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might have tried to sail the good subjective bad subjective cliff if it had made proper references, but it did not even back up the basic ideas it prompted, making it pretty much an answer without any substance that proposed something that didn't even match up on a basic analysis of the situation. Nothing on the quoted table was backed up by even pointing to official stat blocks, making it impossible to even check the claims for verity!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, it read like a random &amp;quot;I just made this up on the fly&amp;quot; idea-answer, which are not only discouraged, but also have been deleted in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After the more recent edit is &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; back up its numbers, but the math given isn't good. Even with a cursory knowledge of the system, the numbers don't add up: The dragon doesn't get disadvantage on the perception rolls because the town is already burning (which is well lit conditions) and hiding takes up the action, thus the &amp;quot;28% chance for a commoner to hide&amp;quot; as well as the number of calculated turns are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-10-09T09:45:44.493" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T09:45:44.493" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11762" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-06T17:16:50.410" Score="2" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;I cannot see what I am typing right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/opyjI.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/opyjI.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bizarrely, after adding that image I have some “bad character” boxes:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IUAGy.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IUAGy.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is on Windows 10, Firefox 92.0.1&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comment boxes are fine. Other text areas on other sites are also fine. This behavior is new since yesterday. I have not updated my browser (or anything else) in the interim, to my knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2021-10-12T21:31:47.253" LastActivityDate="2021-10-12T21:31:47.253" Title="Question and Answer text areas remain blank even as the preview updates with what I typed (Win 10, Firefox 92.0.1) (fixed in FF 93.0?)" Tags="|bug|questions|answers|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11763" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11762" CreationDate="2021-10-06T17:18:05.797" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I checked my version of Firefox, I noticed that it offered to restart to update. After doing so (now 93.0), the bug appears to be gone. Still bizarre that it was only this site and no other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-10-06T17:18:05.797" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11764" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-06T18:33:58.240" Score="29" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Deletion is entirely inappropriate&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting answers has historically been, and should continue to be, reserved for truly egregious cases. When it says “Not an Answer,” that is very literal—it is for cases where the Answer in question is literally not an answer at all, to anything, but instead is another question, or some kind of commentary, or otherwise makes zero attempt to answer anything at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Misunderstanding the precise details of the question and answering based on that misunderstanding? That’s still an Answer. Maybe it’s not a good one, but the tool we have for dealing with answers that aren’t good is the downvote—not deletion. And for that matter, “answers that don’t respond with precisely the information requested” are an established and expected thing around here—frame challenges are valid and allowed, and often times are considered good answers. If you don’t think this particular case is, fine—but that’s a matter of your vote, not moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderation tools are intended to be used only in exceptional cases. They are for glaring, obvious problems that need to go away. Otherwise the intended functioning of the site is that the community consensus—as determined &lt;em&gt;through voting&lt;/em&gt;—determines something’s fate. Doesn’t answer the exact question as you see it? &lt;em&gt;Downvote.&lt;/em&gt; Isn’t a valid frame challenge in your opinion? &lt;em&gt;Downvote.&lt;/em&gt; Doesn’t convince you of its accuracy? &lt;em&gt;Downvote.&lt;/em&gt; Isn’t supported the way you would like to see it supported? &lt;em&gt;Downvote.&lt;/em&gt; Doesn’t hold to some policy? Unless that policy is Be Nice or rules against spam or piracy, &lt;em&gt;downvote&lt;/em&gt;. These are not concerns for which the moderation tools of this site are suited, and the overuse (if not outright abuse) of those tools has been an ongoing problem that needs to stop.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a wider community of users on this site than can be found on Chat, or on Meta. A consensus there, or here, doesn’t really mean very much at all—not compared to a consensus in main site voting. Therefore, unless there is a very good reason to do otherwise, we should in all circumstances favor solutions that allow main site voting to handle problems. This is something trivially handled by downvotes, and therefore it should be. To turn it into a matter of moderation-tool override is a significant (un-agreed-upon) divergence from historical practice, and in any event certainly not a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-10-06T18:33:58.240" CommentCount="34" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11765" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-08T10:27:26.963" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Thoughts quoted from Someone_Evil on a different post&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to quote the entirety of the following answer, even if it doesn't all strictly apply here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11159&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11159&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;It is site practice to delete unsupported answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Admittedly it's never really documented/discussed on it's own, but mostly in the discussions around fun topics like game recommendations and designer intent requests. Specifically, when the questions type &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; needs supported answers, aren't getting them, and we need to talk about how to moderate them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it does also show up in other guidance: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't want your opinion; we want your &lt;em&gt;expertise&lt;/em&gt;. If you do not have experiences you can bring to the table in that particular case, &lt;em&gt;do not answer the question&lt;/em&gt;. Answers not doing so may be downvoted and/or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(It talks about experiences as citations because it's from the section on subjective questions, however I see no reason to distinguish the two on this other than what type of support the answer needs to bring.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But haven't we got a post notice for this?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, there's a post notice for needing citations, but post notices are a poor tool for moderating content. They are fixed wordings and only available to a very small subset of users. Comments are better at pointing out problems because they are customizable (by default you write out each one) and availible to many users. The post notice does also not exclude deletion, but explicitly warns about it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Want to improve this post?&lt;/strong&gt; Provide detailed answers to this question, including citations and an explanation of why your answer is correct. Answers without enough detail may be edited or deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me try to explain why that post notice get used at all, if those answers should get deleted. Firstly, deletion might not be the correct thing. If the answer is probably salvageable, users should get a chance to edit it, or comment for the poster to do so. Also, diamond mod deletions are instant, and harder to revert (can't be undeleted by non-diamonds). There's also an important learning and healthiness aspect to community doing moderation and evaluations, so we often try to not immediately delete (nor close, etc.) borderline cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, we prefer to let the low quality review process do its thing. We might flag the post (if it wasn't already), add a comment with out concern (again, if it's not already covered), and add the post notice for increased visibility of it (if we remember to/think it's worthwhile). Expecting the post notice to be used beyond this is putting an aspect of site moderation too much onto the diamond mods, I hope you want us to put our efforts into more useful things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So for the specific answer&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without support being added to it, I don't see it having any value. And it being deleted does not prevent the poster (nor 10ks I believe) from editing it. The user could then vote to undelete and/or flag for undeletion (if diamond deleted, as this one retroactively is, the flag is necessary). No such efforts have been made on this answer. I don't personally see the reason to undelete it, but I'd be happy for someone to change my view on the quality of an answer at a score of -6.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;My own thoughts&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a distinct memory of the day I saw the answer I quoted above, because I also wrote an answer, one that I have now undeleted as of today:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11157&quot;&gt;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11157&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It draws on SE guidance and I felt confident in the idea that bad answers should be downvoted and not deleted. Then I received comments such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem wasn't the answer being wrong, it was lack of support. And those can be deleted as per the notice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that &lt;em&gt;made sense to me&lt;/em&gt;, especially given what the post notice actually says. Someone_Evil even wrote that entire answer about how answers lacking citation/support &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; deleted and so I rethought my stance. I looked into it and found that Skeptics does this same thing, as do other sites, and some sites even have tags that indicate answers &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; have actual citations/sources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is clear that people do not agree whether unsupported answers should actually be deleted or not, just look at the answers here, but currently, and for the past while, I have thought that they should be deleted. The answer, as it was originally posted, did &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; have support; it grabbed at numbers without backing up where any of those numbers were coming from and I voted to delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That all said, if we want a new Meta on what we want to do with unsupported answers, I welcome it. To that end, have some links to questions that I could find that have discussion about unsupported answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5583&quot;&gt;Two Answers - One Deleted - What&amp;#39;s the difference?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8936&quot;&gt;When do we close a question for drawing opinion-based answers and how can we try to get ahead of such closures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11156&quot;&gt;Why was this answer to the question &amp;quot;Can a player choose to fail a spell&amp;#39;s ability check contest?&amp;quot; deleted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11213&quot;&gt;Why was my answer to a question about the naming of oozes deemed &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2021-10-09T05:16:24.210" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T05:16:24.210" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11766" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11758" CreationDate="2021-10-09T20:55:47.933" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A perfect example of why &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11726/31402&quot;&gt;we shouldn't pin the highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; to the top&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hold still folks, because I've got opinions and have been waiting all week to have enough time to unload them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this specific instance, we have a querent who is asking a question about what happens in the Forgotten Realms (FR) for a town that gets attacked by a dragon. The querent specifically focuses upon how these towns might go about bringing a dragon to ground.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From reviewing the comments here and elsewhere, I've further understood that the querent really wants an answer that's focused upon FR specific elements. To be clear, I didn't get that impression from reading the question, and tags alone are not sufficient in my opinion (sometimes folks just like to throw tags around).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191894/31402&quot;&gt;most highly voted answer&lt;/a&gt; (71-0 at the time of writing) does not answer the question with the requested information, rather it is a bit of frame challenge answer. But with a score of 71 (at the time of this response), it's definitely what the RPG.SE community deems the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191991/31402&quot;&gt;second highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; (14-0 at the time of writing) provides some very specific 5e lore from a specific adventure module set in the FR, which details what happens when towns try to fight back against a dragon. This answer helps, but it doesn't actually answer the querent's question of how does a town ground a dragon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191917/31402&quot;&gt;third highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; (8-1 at the time of writing) provides some info from the FR wiki as well as 5e specific information. Additionally, the answer provides some details from the DMG to attempt to quantify the problem but even goes on to discuss a potential means by which to ground the dragon by using the low-level entangle spell.  Curiously, of all the answers provided thus far, this is the first to actually directly answer the querent's request for a grounding method.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191951/31402&quot;&gt;fourth highest voted answer&lt;/a&gt; and the subject of this thread's contention (9-6 at the time of writing) provides a detailed breakdown of the overarching 5e mechanics associated with the issue at hand to put forth an answer which posits that the effort of grounding a dragon may be more trivial for the game's definition of a Town than previously thought.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I find fascinating about this whole thing is that every answer provided, in some way or another, does NOT fully answer the question being asked. And for the record, I think this is fine, because I think that every answer is correct for a certain type of playstyle. Furthermore, I think that every respondent may've seen the question a little bit differently and that influenced the nature of their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a querent doesn't know enough to ask the exact right question and as a result, they are relying upon the opinion of experts to help guide them. If they already knew the information, they either wouldn't be asking or would maybe be doing a self-answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, the 'correct' answer to this question is going to be whatever helps the querent most. But the sum of all answers provides valuable insight to various different ways that people may read the question. Given we're not dealing with immutable things like the gravitational constant of the universe, this is a very valid spread of answers and none should be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2021-10-09T20:55:47.933" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11767" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-11T19:42:30.483" Score="14" ViewCount="593" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6#questionnaire&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is scheduled for an election &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;next week, 2021-10-18&lt;/a&gt;. In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&amp;amp;A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s how it’ll work:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Until the nomination phase, (so, until 2021-10-18 at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post &lt;em&gt;one question per answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of &lt;code&gt;[text](link)&lt;/code&gt;, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into currently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The following two questions are guaranteed to be included:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The community team may also include the following three questions if the community doesn’t supply enough questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In your opinion, what do moderators do?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select &lt;strong&gt;up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community&lt;/strong&gt; provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. We exclude any suggested questions that are negatively scored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We will post the final questionnaire on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;Election page&lt;/a&gt;. Candidates will have the option to fill out the questionnaire, and their answers will appear beneath their intro statements.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-19T01:11:33.810" LastActivityDate="2021-10-19T01:11:33.810" Title="2021 Moderator Election Q&amp;A – Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="12" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11768" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-12T14:52:30.363" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;One of our recurring stress points recently within the community has been over differences in how different community members interpret close and delete guidelines. As a diamond moderator, you'll be navigating this issue from a position of additional authority. How do you think you'd approach this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-15T01:08:40.907" LastActivityDate="2021-10-15T01:08:40.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11769" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-12T21:31:16.003" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Do you believe RPGSE needs best practices and guidelines, or policies?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please explain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Context: In the past four years, the defense of &amp;quot;It's policy!&amp;quot; has been harmful to the user experience on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2021-10-12T21:31:16.003" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11770" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-12T21:46:15.857" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A lot of attention recently has been brought to the general limitations of Meta as a reliable means of deciding, collecting, and disseminating our practices. Discussions are general, theoretical, and tend to focus on best-case or worst-case scenarios, and in any event receive relatively limited attention and can fall out-of-date quickly. These problems and more are widely known and commented upon, here and within the wider Stack Exchange network (including by Stack Exchange Inc., who even seriously considered removing Meta altogether).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given these realities, how comfortable you navigating the best ways to use what Meta &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do, and remain cognizant of what it &lt;em&gt;can’t&lt;/em&gt;? Do you feel comfortable with your knowledge and experience of how the main site operates in practice, particularly in those cases where historical practice is perhaps not well-captured by Meta? As moderator, will you defer to historical practice and “emergent consensus,” or will you strive to enforce whatever Meta says exactly as Meta says it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-10-12T21:46:15.857" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11771" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-12T23:24:41.887" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;In your view, what role should Meta have in guiding and governing site practice and community moderation? What do you see Meta doing well, and where do you see that it may be harmful?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-10-12T23:24:41.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11772" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-13T13:34:36.170" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;During moderation, you'll run into conflicts with community members over how to handle a situation. Unlike them, you'll have unlimited capacity to unilaterally close, reopen, delete, undelete, etc. In your view, what's the proper way to handle a situation like this as it escalates (though it hopefully doesn't)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-14T11:18:49.653" LastActivityDate="2021-10-14T11:18:49.653" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11773" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-13T13:36:16.313" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-10-13T13:36:16.313" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11774" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-13T13:38:24.797" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Becoming a new moderator can be daunting, but is also a big opportunity. What are you worried or fearful about in your transition to becoming a moderator, and is there anything you're looking forward to? Is there anything we can do to help support you in those areas should you be elected as a new moderator?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2021-10-13T13:38:24.797" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11775" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-13T15:56:18.650" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A user flags as spam or rude and abusive/votes to close/votes to delete/indicates in some other way they want your (or your friends) post to be closed or deleted. What do you do, and how do you respond?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64524" LastActivityDate="2021-10-13T15:56:18.650" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11776" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-14T01:05:25.690" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently we had a situation where one user was performing a series of actions that the community disagreed with; users regularly flagged these actions and complained to moderators to do something about it. However, based on the Code of Conduct, Help Center, and consultation with a CM, it was clear that the single user's actions were not the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a moderator, how would you handle a situation where you receive repeated requests from a large group of users to take action on something that doesn't require moderator intervention? Or worse, a situation where the action they are requesting is the wrong one (as it was in this case)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-15T01:13:24.533" LastActivityDate="2021-10-15T01:13:24.533" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11777" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-14T02:11:10.943" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Often moderators are power users of the stack. Accepting moderator duties means doing less of the things you do daily. Many moderators don't feel like they have enough time to do their duties and still use the stack like a normal user. That's fine - they are volunteers, after all; however, it does push moderator duties to the wayside. How do you feel about the fact that you will have less time to spend asking/answering questions, editing posts, commenting, normal user stuff?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-15T01:12:03.113" LastActivityDate="2021-10-15T01:12:03.113" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11778" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11779" CreationDate="2021-10-14T15:51:59.757" Score="6" ViewCount="213" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/82868/33569&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; deleted for a possible copyright violation, and I happen to disagree with that reasoning because of the function of the Stack (I don't care about the deletion, the answer isn't really an appropriate answer anyways so deleting it is appropriate for others reasons entirely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack exists as a free place for people to come get answers for their questions. The people who populate, moderate and supply the information on the Stack is us, the users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the Stack is an educational tool, and not a marketing tool for profit, in my opinion this has us protected under Fair Use with respect to using publicly available media. After all, we do this all the time when we reference the source material because the author gave everybody who can use that platform, for example: pinterest, reddit, imgur, etc; permission to see their material on that platform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in my opinion, referencing the artist and linking to the image on the platform they're signed up on already and thus providing it on, would fall under Fair Use specifically because we're Educational.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is: Do you agree, yes or no? And reasons either way please.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not a legal expert, so I would really like to hear some backing from the copyright claim side supporting why we can't use images that are publicly hosted. Everything I could find was basically stepping around profiting, which isn't what the Stack is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23110" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-15T01:05:54.900" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T19:22:13.547" Title="How are we defining Fair Use Images with respect to the function of the Stack?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|legal-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11779" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11778" CreationDate="2021-10-14T16:56:58.477" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don’t define Fair Use; a court does. Until something has actually gone to court, there are only the would-be plaintiff’s arguments why it doesn’t qualify, and the would-be defendant’s arguments why it does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Images aren’t “special” with respect to Fair Use—they are copyrighted material, which means the copyright holder can control their use by others, e.g. via a license. Fair Use, however, refers to a narrow set of cases where one can use unlicensed copyrighted material in certain ways for certain purposes. &lt;em&gt;What&lt;/em&gt; the copyrighted material is doesn’t matter, only that it is copyrighted and we don’t hold either the copyright or a license to use it. The same considerations governing all Fair Use govern the use of an image:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the nature of the copyrighted work;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;17 U.S. Code § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This applies for US law; other countries have, as I understand it, generally similar laws but details may vary.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are four things to consider, &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; four requirements—so just because we are educational doesn’t automatically mean everything we might do is Fair Use, but the fact that “the nature of the copyrighted work” here is undisputedly deserving of “strong” copyright protection doesn’t mean our use can’t be Fair Use, either. Ultimately, where to draw the line on a particular use is up to a judge, and we can only try to do our best to consider the same things the judge will.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I have stated elsewhere, in what seems to be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9246/4563&quot;&gt;accepted policy&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deciding whether or not something qualifies for Fair Use is a subjective process, that can basically only be performed by a judge, in a courtroom, when a suit is brought and Fair Use is brought up as a defense. None of these things is a firm “this is OK, that is not,” they are considerations that the law has directed judges to look at when thinking about potential Fair Use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the context of our site, we can look at these four considerations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Our purpose is educational, and since Stack Exchange does not (currently) serve ads on this site (aside from the ones we make ourselves and that Stack Exchange receives no money for), profit is not really involved. Again, since there isn’t a firm line here, there being some tangential profit or potential future profit is not necessarily damning; newspapers can include quotations for reviews, which helps them sell newspapers (which make money because of the ads in them), and that is an explicit example of fair use.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The nature of the copyrighted works we deal with don’t do us any particular favors here; that’s primarily about limiting copyright protections from protecting data that isn’t really the author’s to protect. The rules text and/or diagrams, the art included in the books, and so on, are all very much the property of their respective owners. But again, these aren’t criteria for Fair Use, they are things to consider.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;and 4. The last two are important on this site, though: how much of the work are you quoting, and how is that going to affect the value of the work? Where the first point is basically always in our favor, at least for legitimate answers, and the second is basically not, the majority of the time, meeting the last two is where we can say that one use is OK and another is not. The crucial test here is that your use is not fair if it replaces the original work: if there is no reason to buy the product or otherwise consume the work after seeing your use of it, you are violating the copyright holder’s rights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, the court would likely look favorably on usages that limit themselves to just what they need to make their larger point (educational, in our case), and that don’t unduly affect the value of the original work in the process. Quoting some-but-not-all of the rules for a class, even quoting an entire spell’s or feat’s rules, including one of many of the images in a book, so long as they are justified by improving the educational value of the answer, these things are unlikely to be seen as violating copyright because the book still has so much more left in it of value—you aren’t threatening the original work with these kinds of things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, however, Fair Use is a subjective thing. As I said, it only really gets pinned down if you get sued and make the case in front of a judge; until then you just have your rationale, and the copyright holder may have a different one. Neither is definitively “right” or “wrong” until it gets tested in court. As a matter of practice, copyright infringements are dealt with by the copyright holder sending a cease &amp;amp; desist letter, and then, if that is ignored, possibly a lawsuit. The C&amp;amp;D always starts matters because it is &lt;em&gt;vastly&lt;/em&gt; less expensive than a lawsuit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;As far as meta policy is concerned&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The real question here is how we should view potential copyright infringement/fair use cases as a matter of policy on this site. Realistically, the risk we face is a C&amp;amp;D forcing us to remove the infringing material, forcing an answer to be reworked to go without it—obviously, we are/Stack Exchange is not going to ignore a C&amp;amp;D if we get one, it’s just not worth it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which has been the guiding principle for how this site handles copyright for a long time: we don’t link to pirating sites primarily for this reason. Sure, many of us also have philosophical objections to piracy, but the real point for this site is that infringing sites frequently get C&amp;amp;D’d out of existence, leading to link rot and bad answers. &lt;strong&gt;That&lt;/strong&gt; is the primary thing to avoid as far as this site is concerned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So any particular use case has to be considered in light of how likely is it to suffer due to a C&amp;amp;D causing a bad answer. That means we need to keep points 3. and 4. in mind when considering a potential use. That means that, if something is over the line, it’s a bad answer because of the risk of damage from a C&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if that’s our policy, the risk of an actual lawsuit is just about negligible. C&amp;amp;D’s happen first and happen more often/more easily; if we are trying to avoid those, we’re all-but-certain to avoid lawsuits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, a single image from a book is probably fine. Exceptions are plausible if the image is somehow like the whole point of the book, but I can’t see that happening with RPG material. If the image was a separate product, that might not work so well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, linking to something is not a question of copyright. Copyright can’t stop anyone from linking to anything. As a matter of policy, we don’t link to places that don’t have the rights to host something, since it’s liable to get taken down and thus the link rots, but there is never a concern for us to be guilty of copyright infringement for merely linking to something—&lt;em&gt;even if&lt;/em&gt; that thing we’ve linked to is infringing upon copyright. The above is concerned solely with hosting and displaying contents ourselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, if we link to a site where an artist has chosen to host their own work, it is more than reasonable to assume that the artist has given that site a license to display the work. No one should ever be editing out such links under copyright concerns; that’s just a gross misunderstanding of how copyright works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-10-14T17:23:40.157" LastActivityDate="2021-10-14T17:23:40.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11780" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-16T09:11:38.853" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is your - personal - idea of ideal moderation and in what ways does it conflict with the Stackexchange's &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/05/18/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-10-16T09:11:38.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11781" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11782" CreationDate="2021-10-17T10:44:04.927" Score="10" ViewCount="191" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Drugs%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;Drugs&lt;/a&gt; are a staple of RPGs set in a dark future (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cyberpunk&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cyberpunk&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cyberpunk&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fallout&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fallout&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fallout&lt;/a&gt;) or dark world (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/call-of-cthulhu&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;call-of-cthulhu&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;call-of-cthulhu&lt;/a&gt;). Many of these games also have rules about the consumption and effects of such.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Pharmaceutically&lt;/em&gt; speaking, drugs is actually the word for many &lt;em&gt;compounds that act on the body&lt;/em&gt; and comes from the word for &lt;em&gt;dried (herbs)&lt;/em&gt;. So from that standpoint, it would be a non-issue to have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/drugs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;drugs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;drugs&lt;/a&gt; and ask about how a game handles Aspirin or other medicine under it. Maybe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/medicine-and-drugs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;medicine-and-drugs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;medicine-and-drugs&lt;/a&gt; to stress that it is about any kind of medical product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the &lt;em&gt;colloquial&lt;/em&gt; meaning of drugs is more often that of &lt;em&gt;recreational and/or illicit substances&lt;/em&gt;, a tiny subset of the pharmaceutical meaning of the word. This is also what might make a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/drugs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;drugs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;drugs&lt;/a&gt; problematic: the automatic connotation with illegality, though it fits the main use of the theme in many RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other games, often the more fantasy kind, drugs appear in the rules for poisons, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt; treats alcohol as a weak poison. This would suggest &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/drugs-and-poison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;drugs-and-poison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;drugs-and-poison&lt;/a&gt; a better term - but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/poison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;poison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;poison&lt;/a&gt; already exists!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Maybe I don't see other, better ways to name a tag that encompasses drugs and avoids to be connotated to illegality?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tag update&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Drugs%20is%3Aquestion%20-%5Bmedicine-and-drugs%5D&quot;&gt;These&lt;/a&gt; questions might or might not need the new tag. It might take a few weeks to mix them naturally into the flow of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-10-18T18:11:36.777" LastActivityDate="2021-10-24T16:09:04.663" Title="How to best name and describe a tag that handles drugs?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11782" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11781" CreationDate="2021-10-17T15:27:25.690" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag name [medicine-and-drugs] sounds fine and good. English doesn't have a good name for this joined concept that isn't loaded with implications one way or another. We're fine with [this-and-that] tag naming: see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/food-and-drink&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;food-and-drink&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;food-and-drink&lt;/a&gt; for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wouldn't worry about the poison aspect. Nearly every substance is fatally poisonous in sufficient quantities, &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;even including water&lt;/a&gt;. Medicine and drugs are about having the &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; quantity. So are food and drink for that matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going with [medicine-and-drugs] makes the purpose of the tag very clear in plain language with no surprises (like using “drugs” to describe aspirin) and also neatly encapsulates fact that several well-known substances can be considered either depending on how you use them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-17T16:15:35.487" LastActivityDate="2021-10-17T16:15:35.487" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11783" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11767" CreationDate="2021-10-17T21:09:39.270" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;What is the purpose of tags, and how should we curate them?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2021-10-17T21:09:39.270" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11784" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-18T03:43:38.820" Score="7" ViewCount="135" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have gold badges in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;. My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; gets used the most, however, just now I voted to close as duplicate a question with both tags, and the closure message listed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; as the gold tag badge I used:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/J6WLk.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/J6WLk.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there any rhyme or reason to how the system picks which tag to use when there are multiple available?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bonus question, can this interfere with someone trying to reopen the question with a different tag badge? Could someone with just the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; gold badge reopen this with a single vote?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-11-01T15:24:11.607" Title="When you have multiple gold tag badges, how does the system decide which to use when closing as duplicate, and does it matter?" Tags="|support|tags|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11785" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11784" CreationDate="2021-10-18T10:10:54.813" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It probably doesn’t matter.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Medix2 was able to reopen the question with their &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; badge:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yg5VP.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yg5VP.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it seems that as long as you have the gold badge for one of the tags, it doesn’t matter which tag badge is mentioned in the close message.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-10-18T10:10:54.813" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11786" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-18T20:00:02.240" Score="5" ViewCount="310" Body="&lt;p&gt;The 2021 Community Moderator Election is now underway!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Community moderator elections have three phases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Nomination phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Primary phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Election phase&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please visit the official election page at&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;for more detail, and to participate!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/election&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;election&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;election&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2021-11-02T20:58:30.963" LastActivityDate="2021-11-09T03:45:40.077" Title="2021 Community Moderator Election" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="6" CommunityOwnedDate="2021-10-18T20:00:02.240" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11787" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-19T14:04:51.443" Score="13" ViewCount="259" Body="&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange recently announced version labeling for answers, something they will initially work on implementing at Stack Overflow. The details are laid out in this Meta Stack Exchange post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/370640/version-labels-for-answers&quot;&gt;Version labels for answers&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/370649/674198&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; community wiki answer identifies RPG as a possible destination for implementing the feature, due to various RPGs having multiple editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to offer this meta post as a platform for brainstorming/discussing ways we might implement the feature here, as well as a place to express concerns about its implementation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of writing this post, the table entry for RPG reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Site&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;How labels might be used&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Possible Concerns&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Example labels&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;RPG&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;the edition or version of a game's core rules (the main tag would be the game, like dungeons-and-dragons),&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;The way different games express their versions varies widely.&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;kbd&gt;5th-edition&lt;/kbd&gt; &lt;kbd&gt;3.5-edition&lt;/kbd&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to bring the well received implementations and concerns generated here to the table and discussion there on Meta Stack Exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-19T15:00:38.987" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T22:03:03.313" Title="Version labels for answers: is this a tool we could use?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11788" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-19T16:02:35.347" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Disclaimer: Since I first posted my answer, there have been a few good answers and comments that have highlighted how the version labels may be useful. I feel that they have solid points, but I still stand by my views presented in here and have hopefully updated them to present my viewpoint better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I feel it'd be a neutral change at best, and is far more likely to be detrimental.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To understand how these would affect us, lets look at the most useful scenarios for it (as indicated by the table):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have questions without any edition tag on them, and people apply version labels to their answer in order to identify the associated edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems perfectly fine until you realize that the OP's question &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; coming from a specific edition, and &lt;em&gt;that edition may not even have an answer in the question they asked for themselves&lt;/em&gt;. Additionally, this also leads to high amounts of duplicates questions being added, as questions that already exist don't have answers for other editions and questioners need to wait for answers to the central question to be posted instead of asking a new one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we then argue that questions should have the edition on them already, and thus questions asked for another edition aren't duplicates, &lt;strong&gt;then why would we need to apply a version label for the edition?&lt;/strong&gt; All answers on that question &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; be for that specific edition in that case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not to mention how to handle things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blades-in-the-dark&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blades-in-the-dark&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blades-in-the-dark&lt;/a&gt;, which are based on a system, but are also their own system as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, something to remember is that a version label is not something required for an answer. If the answer is not based on a particular edition, or is general advice that's being given out, a version label shouldn't be applied to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, if a new user is posting a new answer for a question, and every answer so far has had a version label, how likely do you think it is that they'll feel pressured into adding a version label, &lt;em&gt;even though it may not be relevant or even apply&lt;/em&gt;? And if their answer gets sent to a review queue, is a reviewer likely to make the mistake of adding a label when one shouldn't be added?&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So at best, it's a neutral change with a lot of work behind it, and likely it makes for a worse user experience while increasing the learning curve for a new user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The ability of users to create versions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something else to note, is that the initial plan is only for versions to be rolled out to Gold Badge tag users and Moderators initially, before the requirements are slowly lowered. For systems like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia&lt;/a&gt; (an example used for where versions might be useful by another answer), they don't even have enough questions for anyone to qualify for a silver badge in the tag, let alone a gold badge, leaving the initial push of versions to heavily rely on moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the requirements may lower over time, the smaller systems that benefit the most from these version labels will have the hardest time creating them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Editions are not the TTRPG equivalent of Versions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That table is also misguided in thinking that the equivalent of versions for us are the various editions when they are not. Claiming that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; are merely different versions of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; is like claiming that C++ and Lua are merely different versions of C. While there are similarities between them, and they do have relations to each other, they're wildly different and should be treated like two different programming languages or the two different systems they are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;But Will, what's the TTRPG equivalent of versions then?&amp;quot; You ask. I'll tell you. It's books. Each and every book written for the same system is a version. It's a version that applies changes to the system or adds more content and capabilities to the original system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if we use version labels, they should be used for books. Not that we should use them anyways.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now for some RPGs, their editions can be equivalent for software versions, but the same point about books being versions still applies, it just happens to be the rulebooks of the various editions rather than other books written for the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11790/47188&quot;&gt;SilentAxe's idea&lt;/a&gt; of using versions for different settings in a system (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;) is a valid idea for their utilization as well (a very nice one, imo). However, this also lends more confusion about how versions should be created, as well as what constitutes a version or version range.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Notes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[1]: I don't see this as a rather large issue, as we generally have pretty good crowd around here and mistakes can be caught quickly, but it is one of the multitude of smaller issues that version labels will bring, and I can practically guarantee it happening at least once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="47188" LastEditDate="2021-10-20T18:31:59.177" LastActivityDate="2021-10-20T18:31:59.177" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11789" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-19T16:54:44.210" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It all depends on how we apply it, and at best, it is an unexciting feature.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11788/44723&quot;&gt;Willuwontu&lt;/a&gt; describes why it might be a bad idea to apply it to editions, but I think that is an incomplete picture about how we could use the feature except for books -which is a good idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a few systems in which errata frequently changes the outcome and sometimes even the progress about what material to consider when making a ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, we write answers that apply until errata introduction invalidates them, but they still might be helpful for users to highlight changes or reasonings. By adding a version note - if that is possible at a granular level - we can preserve outdated answers and mark them visually as thus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the case of D&amp;amp;D 5e, we also have the &amp;quot;Jeremy Crawford does official rulings on Twitter&amp;quot; and the &amp;quot;post-Jeremy Crawford does official rulings on Twitter&amp;quot; eras. By labelling accordingly, we can distinguish and preserve valuable old answers that are invalid for some but are valid for other play styles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I assume that version numbers will create an amount of work that is hardly worth applying them like this for many systems, but it might work out for D&amp;amp;D 5e - even then, arguable, not worth the effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-10-19T16:54:44.210" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11790" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-19T17:45:26.833" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This feature might be useful for some RPGs but not others&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main problem is that for some franchises such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder&lt;/a&gt;, each edition is a completely new game that is only loosely based on the previous one. As such, each question should be tagged with the specific edition, and there would be no need for version labels in answers. Additionally, new content and errata for these games tend to be released in a haphazard manner without specific version identifiers, which would make choosing and searching for the correct label difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And yet there are other systems where new editions contain only minor improvements and changes while mostly remaining the same. From experience, I know that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paranoia&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paranoia&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paranoia&lt;/a&gt; is one of the games where the specific edition is only relevant when citing specific rules, and no one would notice if the table were using a different edition. Similar examples (judging only by what other people say) are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7427/what-are-the-differences-between-the-various-editions-of-gurps&quot;&gt;GURPS&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/27036/what-are-the-changes-between-editions&quot;&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/a&gt;. For these games, adding version labels to answers could be useful and might prevent confusion when the correct/best answer differs between editions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It might be useful for questions about settings&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/forgotten-realms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;forgotten-realms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;forgotten-realms&lt;/a&gt;, each release of a new D&amp;amp;D edition is accompanied by major changes while maintaining previous events as at least partially canonical. In such cases, it would be useful if the answer were tagged with the era from which the answer takes its information. Then while the question might be generic in regards to the edition, labeling the answer would make it easier to understand why answers would be different and update them with the missing info.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The lack of a single universal approach might make it not worth the effort&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I have hopefully demonstrated, there are cases when this feature would be useful. But not all RPGs' questions would benefit from this feature. And deciding when it would be applicable and when it would not requires not only expert knowledge about the specific RPG series but also for the community to form a consensus about when and how to use these version labels. I am worried that the benefits that would be gained from implementing this feature would not be worth the effort people would have to spend to come to such a consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52504" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-19T22:56:22.990" LastActivityDate="2021-10-19T22:56:22.990" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11791" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-20T14:46:18.413" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not all questions under the same tag would benefit, but others would&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hadn't planned on answering, as the existing posts are all very reasonable and seem to make good judgements on the matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But then I came across this question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94726/how-to-improve-my-descriptions-of-the-health-status-of-monsters&quot;&gt;How to improve my descriptions of the health status of monsters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's got an edition tag of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, but the answers should be able to draw on experience from other editions (or even games?), only needing to supply a version label if they quote or explicitly use rules/information of that edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is is in contrast to a pure rules question, because ultimately what matters for the above question is the &lt;em&gt;style&lt;/em&gt; of game being played. The question could be easily written as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to improve my descriptions of the health status of monsters, in combat focused games?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we don't tag things based on game style (it's too fuzzy for tagging), but the title specifies then explains what experiences the answers should draw from. In that way even a combat heavy game of fate could supply an answers of sorts, if they can explain it in a way that can be understood by someone who plays D&amp;amp;D 5E. Hopefully flagging it up with a label means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;D&amp;amp;D Players are clued in early what experience this answer draws on, and then primes them to read the answer differently&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Allow players interested in that edition/game to benefit from this answer, even if the question is not obviously connected&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Labels would let you filtering out editions/versions you are not interested in (e.g. a Fate player may end up seeing the D&amp;amp;D question with only the Fate answer, or a D&amp;amp;D player might be able to ignore the Fate specific answer if they particularly didn't want to see it).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall I can see a strong case for it, but it necessarily requires rethinking and potentially breaking out existing paradigm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2021-10-20T14:46:18.413" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11792" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-21T15:21:26.300" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Usability of a version-tag system breaks down for games like the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The World of darkness has generally 5 editions. first, 2nd, revised, 20th anniversary and starting with Vampire, 5th.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The engine behind the World of Darkness, the Storyteller system, has undergone relatively minor changes in the first two editions, some more extensive tweaks for revised and then an overhaul and streamlining for the anniversary renditions. 5th edition on the other hand was pretty much a rebuild. So from an engine standpoint, versions might make sense...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But WoD also has an ongoing metaplot from 1st to the end of revised, then the 20th-anniversary re-envisioning of some of the metaplot and then the re-invention of itself for 5th edition. Here tags could be used based on the version or position in the Metaplot, such as Year of the Scarab or Year of the Hunter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And then there are the various splats: one might argue that each splat like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/werewolf-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;werewolf-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;werewolf-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; is a version of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, as it has variant rules specific for it. However, each of the Splats is a game of itself, due to many rules being &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; crossover to others...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some games might use tags for Metaplot-arcs&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I noticed the ability for Metaplot such as the WoD theme years, I actually suddenly thought of L5R. Which had a running metaplot from 1st to 4th edition and a reboot in 5th. The Metaplot arcs could be used for tags, in case a lore answer requires it, but usually, those arcs are only lore questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-10-21T16:24:52.570" LastActivityDate="2021-10-21T16:24:52.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11793" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-22T16:25:02.360" Score="17" ViewCount="483" Body="&lt;p&gt;RPG Meta is not a very active place. For our last big discussion (should accepted answers no longer be pinned to the top?), one pro- answer was posted almost immediately, and various con- answers trickled in over the course of weeks. Voting has, at this point, seen one of the last of those con- answers (disclaimer: mine, though it hardly matters for this example) slowly overtake the pro- answer’s lead over the course of more than a month.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The nomination phase of our moderation election takes one week. Meta doesn’t do anything in a week. Plenty of users check Meta less often than that, if voting patterns on featured discussions are anything to go on. I, myself, will have been on vacation for the entire time between the election announcement and the end of the nomination phase; I have had to interact with the nominations solely over my phone, and I am lucky I checked in at all because I had not planned to. And I am one of the most active users of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A week maybe makes sense at Stack Overflow. It doesn’t seem to make sense—at all—here. Meta isn’t terribly representative of the site at the best of times, making our elections necessarily fraught to begin with—this seems like an unnecessary body blow to the legitimacy of the entire process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-22T18:00:37.547" LastActivityDate="2021-10-23T22:27:57.090" Title="Does a week for Election nominations seem too short to anyone else?" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11794" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11793" CreationDate="2021-10-22T17:31:33.710" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, one week is stunningly short. I'd like to see the nomination period extended to 2+ weeks, and that includes in this present election we are having now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For many users the beginning of the election is the beginning of the process of considering whether you even &lt;em&gt;want&lt;/em&gt; to be a mod, a question that may not have crossed their minds. (At least, not in the couple of years since the last election. Stack Overflow might have yearly elections but we don't.) That's a decision process that takes several days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And many of our users won't even find out about the election until several days into the nomination phase. It's not like people need to check the site here every day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to see this process extended. Give people here more time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-22T18:00:18.520" LastActivityDate="2021-10-22T18:00:18.520" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11796" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11793" CreationDate="2021-10-22T18:16:58.143" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It feels strange to change an election process during said process&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree that a week is very short. If this question had been raised a month ago, I would be completely on board to adjust the current process. I also agree that future elections should have a longer nomination process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, the idea of changing an election process during said process makes me a bit uncomfortable. I can't necessarily put a finger on &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; (and I'm not completely opposed to doing so), but I feel like it should be handled with extreme care. Ideally, any changes should follow established precedent&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; and/or be approved by a significant portion of the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there isn't an established precedent, then now is probably too late to make such a change. &amp;quot;Meta doesn't do anything in a week&amp;quot; is an accurate statement. If we can't do nominations in a week, then we certainly can't change the nomination process in less than a week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I mainly want to avoid even the &lt;em&gt;appearance&lt;/em&gt; of changing a process that may not be going how some may prefer.&lt;/strong&gt; I am absolutely &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; saying that's what is happening, but if we aren't careful, it could &lt;em&gt;seem&lt;/em&gt; like that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; I'll admit that I'm not super familiar with how election processes get changed. If there's an established way to extend the nominations phase, then I'm all in favor of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47185" LastEditorUserId="47185" LastEditDate="2021-10-22T19:09:55.250" LastActivityDate="2021-10-22T19:09:55.250" CommentCount="22" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11797" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11793" CreationDate="2021-10-22T22:33:12.237" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes! But before we change anything, please remember that there are humans on the other side of these accounts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't an easy post to write because there are a lot of strong feelings in this election, but I feel just as strongly that everyone needs to remember that there are real people with real feelings on this stack - who are all here to have fun and play games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wanting the best for the stack is clearly in everyone's interest - especially those who are literally volunteering their time and emotional well-being to help moderate our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even those who either seem to have little history or those we simply disagree with. All of those people read the questionnaire, considered it, answered it, and put their thoughts out to us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are all invested here and a longer nomination period, including the initial week of question gathering, can and should be considered. Either for later elections or this one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But please don't forget that, at face value, doing so mid-election could be very discouraging to those who have already volunteered and have surpassed the number of nominees that we didn't have a problem with in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don't know what the right call is here, because I do agree more time is good, but I needed to get that off my chest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2021-10-23T03:56:09.223" LastActivityDate="2021-10-23T03:56:09.223" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11798" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11793" CreationDate="2021-10-23T22:27:57.090" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let us contextualise this election and accurately look at how much time we had to prepare for it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On September 7th, I asked, &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11719/44723&quot;&gt;Should we think about elections?&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; On the same day, our moderator confirmed the upcoming election. That was 1 1/2 months ago - 6 weeks of preparation time. Due to the kind comment of our staff, we even knew the exact starting days. That is six weeks of potential for thinking things through and coming up with questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For people who do not follow meta closely, that is still one week of coming up with questions and one week of nominations. Two weeks is plenty of time to form an idea about whether one wants to run or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall we had much more time than during the highly competitive 2017 election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;So what could we do better?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have an information gap between user pools that aren't following meta closely and those that are. Moderators know much earlier when an election will occur, and they are entitled and free to share that with the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems like it would be good to publicise elections earlier in their cycle. Before we go to the formal question gathering, we could even create an informal one, featured or as a community event, from which we can port things over to the formal one. I cannot say whether this will foster something like election fatigue that we see in real-world politics, but it seems like something that we can try.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-10-23T22:27:57.090" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11799" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11781" CreationDate="2021-10-24T16:09:04.663" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We shouldn't.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Drugs&amp;quot; as an area of real-world expertise is not an RPG topic, and so is inappropriate for this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Drugs&amp;quot; as a mechanical system does not generalize across different RPG systems, and so is inappropriate as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible that we could eventually need a &amp;quot;drugs&amp;quot; tag for questions about how to play while various players are high, but that doesn't seem to be useful at the moment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2021-10-24T16:09:04.663" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11800" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-25T11:00:06.523" Score="13" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;Dark mode was introduced to StackOverflow about a year ago (&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2020/03/30/introducing-dark-mode-for-stack-overflow/&quot;&gt;blog post&lt;/a&gt;), but as of now, it still isn't available on our site (or any other site as far as I know).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back then, it was stated that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For now, we have no plans to bring dark mode to the many sites across the Stack Exchange network. Many of the designs on our sites have been around long enough that converting them to dark mode would require redoing the artwork completely. We would prefer to avoid giving anyone across our network a substandard experience and we don’t want to change those elements without the input of these communities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/395949/dark-mode-beta-help-us-root-out-low-contrast-and-un-converted-bits&quot;&gt;corresponding meta question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, the focus of Dark Mode is on Stack Overflow and we’ll eventually bring it to MSO. While the retheming we did across the network two years ago makes updating our LESS easier, creating dark versions of all of our sites, particularly the custom-designed ones, is going to be a huge challenge we’re not able to contemplate at this time. The artwork on some of those sites simply can’t be made dark because we don’t have access to the original art files and, to be honest, some of the themes will always be better as-is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, I'm a huge fan of dark mode and I would love to see it on RPG SE. However, the issues mentioned in the blog post &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; present on this site. Compared to other sites, I think we have an average* amount of artwork (in fact, I can't think of anything other than the top banner, &amp;quot;Role-playing Games&amp;quot; text, and the &amp;quot;boxy&amp;quot; background on the front page). Of those, I'd expect the banner to be the most difficult to modify, but there's already a&#xA;black-and-white-version on meta, which could probably be turned into something dark-mode-compatible.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;The remaining page elements are mostly of uniform colour, and as such should be fairly easy to modify. Also, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8391/role-playing-gamess-updated-site-theme-is-live&quot;&gt;controversial as the change was&lt;/a&gt;, the introduction of the new network-wide unified themes does make the implementation of a dark mode easier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;*for example, worldbuilding has more artwork, while Board &amp;amp; Card Games has none at all&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the phrasing in the blog &amp;amp; meta posts, I don't expect SE itself to approach us with a dark mode design. Therefore, we would need to manually create at least a first draft that solves potential issues with our front page artwork and thereby proves the viability of a dark mode on this site. This, of course, still doesn't guarantee that Stack Exchange Inc. cares at all about implementing a dark mode provided by us users. However, as a consolation prize, we'd at least still have a community-designed dark theme that I'm sure could be applied individually with the appropriate browser extensions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Being somewhat experienced in web design, I'd be happy to tinker with CSS variables and the like myself, but I'm unsure what to do about the front page artwork. And either way, I don't want to create a makeshift dark mode just for myself - the goal is to end up with a (more or less) full-fledged dark mode &lt;em&gt;with support from the community&lt;/em&gt; that we would have an easy/easier time convincing SE to implement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, before I create a draft that at least styles the front page (excluding the artwork), I want to query your opinion.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Do you approve of the potential introduction of a dark mode and would you use it? Do you think we should aim to approach SE Inc. with a community-designed draft at all, or do you think aiming for a theme that can be applied individually with the help of (for example) browser extensions is more realistic? Do you perhaps already have a custom dark mode script because you have to think of &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHI8X4OXluQ&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Weeknd&lt;/a&gt; whenever you open RPG SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, any feedback from SE officials (especially on whether or not a community-supplied draft is helpful at all for them) is also welcome, although I personally wouldn't actively contact them without a usable first draft.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the fact that I managed to create a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11804/38495&quot;&gt;proof of concept&lt;/a&gt; (= it doesn't look great, but it proves that a dark mode is feasible), I consider the &amp;quot;realistically possible&amp;quot; aspect to be solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that still leaves the task of actually creating the respective style sheet and subsequently the task of attempting to get SE to implement a possibility for site-specific dark mode styling (as unlikely as getting them to do that is).&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Concerning the former issue: I'll probably create a stylesheet either way, but I would very much appreciate support from others, especially if you have web development or design experience (as I'm unsure which colors would be well-suited).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="38495" LastEditDate="2021-10-25T17:23:45.460" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T23:01:14.737" Title="Is a dark mode for this site realistically possible and desirable, and can we in any way support its introduction?" Tags="|discussion|feature-request|site-design|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11802" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11800" CreationDate="2021-10-25T12:42:16.310" Score="25" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, I want dark mode on RPG.SE&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really have anything else interesting to say, nor do I have any knowledge about what it takes to implement it. I'm leaving this answer to simply measure support for &amp;quot;Yes, I want dark mode&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T12:42:16.310" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11803" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11800" CreationDate="2021-10-25T15:33:48.580" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;RPG SE is almost-certainly one of those sites that “would require redoing the artwork completely”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our banner includes material that probably cannot be “automagically” converted to a darker background. It includes gradients that fade into the light site background, and which will probably not “just work” against a dark background. The gradients use transparency, so there might be &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; hope, but even fading to transparent usually requires designing with at least some sense of what you’re fading to—and light or dark is one of the most basic things you’d need to know. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11804/4563&quot;&gt;PixelMaster has a demonstration of what it might look like&lt;/a&gt;, and it doesn’t look &lt;em&gt;terrible&lt;/em&gt;, but there are some issues there and it seems likely to me that SE won’t go for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The artwork on some of those sites simply can’t be made dark because we don’t have access to the original art files&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this applies to us, I believe; I seem to recall having heard this before, specifically about our site. Any editing of the end file we see would likely look atrocious, so if “as is” doesn’t work for SE, they’re gonna be stuck. I believe the artist who created it no longer works for or with the company, as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They also probably want a consistent look and feel across both versions of the site, which means they want the same banner for both. If they cannot create a dark-mode version of the existing banner, that very likely means this would require a new banner altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And they aren’t doing new banners like this, as far as I know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So unless they substantially degraded the light-mode version of the site, they cannot provide a (consistent, good-looking) dark mode. It may be that they’re only willing to enable dark mode for us if we ditch the banner—in both dark and light mode.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I, for one, vehemently oppose losing our theme for the sake of dark mode&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t really care about dark mode one way or the other; I might use it if it’s there, but it’s not important to me. I certainly wouldn’t want to see the excellent theming of this site lost for the sake of dark mode. I would be fine with inconsistent theming for light and dark mode, but I suspect Stack Exchange would not, so this may be the choice we’re stuck with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The point is largely moot for now&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;creating dark versions of all of our sites, particularly the custom-designed ones, is going to be a huge challenge we’re not able to contemplate at this time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange isn’t offering to provide dark mode to anybody, not even the “easy” ones—and we’re one of the hard ones. We can’t realistically even decide what we, as a community, want, because we don’t even know what we’d be choosing between. If we got a true dark-mode version of what we currently have, I doubt anyone would have objections—but that may never be on offer. If there are some trade-offs involved, people have to know what they are before they can really vote on it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Unofficially, maybe it could work&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PixelMaster has suggested an “unofficial dark mode” created via user styles—that has some merit. Some other SE sites have things like that, e.g. SOUP (Stack Overflow Unofficial Patch) or the various Magic: The Gathering functionality for Board &amp;amp; Card Games. Code Golf even had an unofficial theme before they got their official one. Something like this may be plausible, but is unlikely to help much or in any way accelerate the launch of an official theme.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-10-25T21:17:54.270" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T21:17:54.270" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11804" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11800" CreationDate="2021-10-25T17:09:37.507" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Disclaimer since there seems to have been some confusion: yes, the proof of concept is fairly ugly. That doesn't matter, it's just a proof of concept - it doesn't have to look nice, just prove that the styling is possible. For a real theme, obviously, more effort than the 15-30 minutes of work I spent on the POC is required to get it done properly.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Proof of concept&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I decided to starting tinkering a little bit with the CSS. Turns out it's probably easier than I thought; with the exception of some elements (that I'd probably figure out if I spent more time debugging), most of the page can be restyled by changing just a few variables.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;My findings concerning artwork:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The header gradient is part of the image, aka it's preserved if you change the background (and the result looks good enough imho).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The background is composed of many small images. This image can't be directly styled via the browser, of course, but it can easily be modified with an image editing tool. For the proof of concept below, I simply inverted the colours to get a quick usable example, which took less than a minute (most of which was actually the GIMP startup time xD). Either way, if implemented by SE, hosting is trivial, and even if not, we could just upload the desired version to something like Imgur (although copyright has to be considered here).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The &amp;quot;Role-playing Games&amp;quot; header text is also an image, and while I didn't bother switching it out, it would probably only be marginally more complicated than adapting the background tile.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Figuring out viable dark mode colors is not trivial. Consider the colors used in the draft below temporary placeholders to showcase the possibilities.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In conclusion, I can only assume that the reason why SE doesn't want to introduce a dark mode network-wide is because&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;it would probably require site-specific theming, which is obviously a significant amount of initial work, and would likely multiply the required effort whenever the design changes in one way or another&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;some sites are likely REALLY difficult to style due to their artwork (which, as mentioned above, isn't the case for RPGSE in my opinion). It would, however, be difficult to justify styling just some sites while ignoring others with complicated artwork, and SE probably doesn't want to incentivize removing artwork in favor of dark mode support, as that would likely create drastic rifts in each site's community.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Either way, here's my draft/proof of concept:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AcR1d.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/AcR1d.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bright sidebar on the right is one of the tricky elements that I couldn't easily style (although I'm sure it can be styled somehow). I'm also aware that the text is mostly hard to read, but that's just because I was too lazy to edit every single detail. I'm certain that the text color can be changed as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38495" LastEditorUserId="38495" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T23:01:14.737" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T23:01:14.737" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11805" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-25T21:20:34.717" Score="5" ViewCount="116" Body="&lt;p&gt;This site's theme includes artwork of cyborgs firing lasers at a dragon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I could have sworn that it looked like it came from the RPG Rifts, but a quick Google image search for Rifts artwork isn't turning anything up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This leads me to wonder what, if any, game the artwork in this site's banner is from. Does anyone know?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" OwnerDisplayName="nick012000" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T03:05:31.377" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T03:05:31.377" Title="What RPG is this site's banner artwork from?" Tags="|discussion|design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2021-10-25T21:30:13.640" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11807" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11787" CreationDate="2021-10-25T22:03:03.313" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;All answers so far are &amp;quot;Meh&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;probably not&amp;quot;. I'm going to make a bit more definite statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;I think it's a bad idea.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For basically all systems, we got tags in place that work perfectly well as far as I can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The versioning tag could be useful on sites like SO, where the difference between Python 3.8.1 and 3.8.3 could be relevant for your corner case. Those differences are, however, in general extremely minor compared to the entire subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For RPG's, the differences are much, much more significant. I can write Python code for 3.8 with a tutorial for 3.0 or even 2.7, but I can't play [dnd-5e] with a rulebook from [dnd-3.5e].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag versioning might have an edge-case to differentiate pre- and post- errata, but I can't remember a question where that would warrant a difference like that - most people just follow the errata once aware.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do, however, think it would be confusing, especially for people not specifically informed. This uncertainty could mean they just omit a tag rather than risk a mistake, and I think we should avoid that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48073" LastActivityDate="2021-10-25T22:03:03.313" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11808" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-26T04:41:08.353" Score="8" ViewCount="110" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have several related questions concerning the &lt;em&gt;slow&lt;/em&gt; spell in D&amp;amp;D 5E.  Should I post each one separately, or group them in a single post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="61321" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:20:32.227" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T17:35:11.273" Title="If I have multiple questions about the same spell, should I make a separate post for each question, or group them into a single post?" Tags="|support|questions|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11809" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11808" CreationDate="2021-10-26T13:03:05.480" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;It depends on the questions you have about it. Your questions should focus on one specific problem you're having. That usually means one question per question, but can sometimes closely interrelated questions can be asked together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our Q&amp;amp;A system's default is one question per question. We work best when you ask a single, discrete question to which people can give a single well-polished answer. It means respondents can leverage their expertise on that specific issue to write a single, very clear answer they can be confident in. When you ask about multiple different things, respodnents have to provide multiple different answers at once, which gets messy: imagine you ask Question A and Question B together, and one respondent gets the answer to A wrong and B right, and the other gets B wrong and A right. We want to avoid this, so we want A and B to be asked separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We bend this rule in a specific circumstance: when those questions really don't make much sense being asked separately. They're interconnected because they're both part of solving the same problem you're having.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the rule of thumb I'd suggest you consider is: do these questions make any sense being asked separately? If yes, ask them separately. If they make no sense at all separately, ask them together. Focus on individual problems you're having with the thing you're asking about to help guide you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've got a lot of questions about the &lt;em&gt;slow&lt;/em&gt; spell, you'll probably wind up asking some separately and some together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some examples:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;“I want to know if [Spell] can stop a Fireball. I also want to know if it can summon a good book for me.”&lt;/em&gt; — Two really different problems; ask about them separately. They may be about the same spell, but they're not related at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;“Can [Spell] create a good defense for me? Can it create a wall or a shield or something?”&lt;/em&gt; — There's two question marks here, but they're interrelated. The second is kind of asking for elaboration on the first. You can/should ask these together, they don't make any sense being asked separately.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes the only way you can find out is to just ask, and have people who know more about the subject do community moderation: maybe you asked these questions separately but they should be asked together, and maybe you asked them together but they have to be split out. There's nothing altogether wrong with this happening (provided you're putting in the work to learn and try to do it right the first time), it's just the community doing its work, and we'll sort things out with you through it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T17:18:07.960" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T17:18:07.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11810" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2021-10-26T14:56:19.867" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a question post might have questions in it. This tag is for asking about those kinds of posts: whether and when such posts are acceptable, how to handle them, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also: &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/question-scope&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;question-scope&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;question-scope&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:22:03.880" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:22:03.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11811" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2021-10-26T14:56:19.867" Score="0" Body="Sometimes a question post might have multiple questions in it. This tag is for asking about those kinds of posts: whether and when such posts are acceptable, how to handle them, etc. See also [question-scope]" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T15:22:03.880" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T15:22:03.880" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11812" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11808" CreationDate="2021-10-26T16:33:33.143" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;My rule of thumb is, if I can &lt;strong&gt;make the question clearer&lt;/strong&gt; by rephrasing two or more queries &lt;strong&gt;into a single question&lt;/strong&gt;, then I should do that before posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I can't make it clearer by reducing it to one question, then I feel it would be clearer as two posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The alternative to splitting unclearly combined questions is &lt;em&gt;potentially&lt;/em&gt; multiple partial answers and/or partial duplication of other questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Take for instance, (from doppelgreener's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11809/2788&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; ):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can [Spell] create a good defense for me? Can it create a wall or a shield or something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This feels better phrased as :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can [Spell] create a good defense for me, such as a wall or a shield or something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Makes sense, as walls and shields are examples of defense. It's clear the &lt;em&gt;sort&lt;/em&gt; of defense we're talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the spell was maybe, &lt;em&gt;Intellect Fortress&lt;/em&gt;, then a different wording (e.g. &amp;quot;What kind of fortress does &lt;em&gt;Intellect Fortress&lt;/em&gt; make?&amp;quot;) is clearer. But I find a single focused question is often clearer than multiple (closely) related questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; answer will address all the points in the title/body of your post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to know if [Spell] can stop a Fireball, or summon a good book for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is not clear enough, on a purely surface reading. Why would the spell do one of those things? Stopping Fireballs and Summoning books are not related, or examples of something else mentioned in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note, however, if the [Spell] is called 'Summon Fireproof Novel' then the above phrasing might make sense, if you can clarify what 'good' means? Even then, I'd prefer phrasing it as &amp;quot;What can the book summoned by 'Summon Fireproof Book' do?&amp;quot; or similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, maybe you can't think of a good way to phrase your queries into a single (or multiple, but fewer than number of questions) post, I'd still have a go at reducing it to the minimum you can with the above rule of thumb, and we can hash out the details (whether a post needs an edit, and a separate question asked) after you post it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you can &lt;strong&gt;make the question clearer&lt;/strong&gt; by rephrasing two or more queries &lt;strong&gt;into a single question&lt;/strong&gt;, then I feel you should do that before posting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T17:35:11.273" LastActivityDate="2021-10-26T17:35:11.273" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11813" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-10-26T16:43:52.927" Score="10" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should this be one post or two posts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several questions about the Slow spell. For reference the relevant parts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An affected target’s speed is halved, it takes a -2 penalty to AC and Dexterity saving throws, and it can’t use reactions. On its turn, it can use either an action or a bonus action, not both. Regardless of the creature’s abilities or magic items, it can’t make more than one melee or ranged attack during its turn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the creature attempts to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 action, roll a d20. On an 11 or higher, the spell doesn’t take effect until the creature’s next turn, and the creature must use its action on that turn to complete the spell. If it can’t, the spell is wasted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A fighter is affected by Slow. Can they use Action Surge for two actions (attacks) in a turn?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Action Surge - Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A sorcerer affected by Slow cast a spell with the Quicken metamagic. Does it always take affect that turn?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quickened Spell - When you cast a spell that has a casting time of 1 action, you can spend 2 sorcery points to change the casting time to 1 bonus action for this casting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="61321" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-10-26T17:39:58.563" LastActivityDate="2021-10-27T11:23:06.830" Title="I have multiple questions about the Slow spell in D&amp;D 5e. Should this be one post, or two?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|multiple-questions-per-post|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11814" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11813" CreationDate="2021-10-26T16:50:06.530" Score="16" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Two separate questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are asking how the spell &lt;em&gt;slow&lt;/em&gt; interacts with two totally different features from different classes, that do different things, and I can't really see that there is any overlap in how those features work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;These are good questions&lt;/em&gt;, and I can't find any duplicates on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-10-27T11:23:06.830" LastActivityDate="2021-10-27T11:23:06.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11815" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11817" CreationDate="2021-10-29T13:30:21.753" Score="11" ViewCount="155" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have MathJax turned on for posts, but not comments. We do get some math-heavy posts from time to time, which is why we have MathJax in  posts, but we don't have it turned on for comments like they do over at Math.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would be nice to be able to include MathJax in comments for those posts where clarification questions would include formulas.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could it be abused? Technically, yes, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/135347/674198&quot;&gt;but similar abuse is possible in posts&lt;/a&gt;, and we don't see that happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-10-31T10:07:12.483" LastActivityDate="2021-10-31T10:07:12.483" Title="Should we turn on MathJax in comments?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|comments|mathjax|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11816" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11784" CreationDate="2021-10-29T17:49:21.960" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It is loosely based on which tag badge is first created&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/371399/560258&quot;&gt;animuson on meta&lt;/a&gt;, it is loosely based on which tag badge was created first. Since (AFAIK) the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag has been around much longer, it probably got a tag badge first, meaning that it is probably the reason that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; tag badge showed up when voting to close the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/290712/with-multiple-gold-tag-badges-what-determines-which-of-them-will-be-used-as-ham/371399#comment1239738_371399&quot;&gt;animuson clarified in a comment&lt;/a&gt; that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is not based on when the tags were created, but the tag badges&#xA;themselves. Those are not created until the first person is eligible&#xA;for the tag badge. Of note: the Badges table does not actually have a&#xA;CreationDate column, so it's not technically based on date at all but&#xA;just the order they were inserted into the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64524" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-01T15:24:11.607" LastActivityDate="2021-11-01T15:24:11.607" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11817" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11815" CreationDate="2021-10-30T10:43:48.720" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We already have this.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As pointed out by Ilmari Karonen, we already have this. I need to make sure none of my user scripts on my desktop interfere with it somehow, because I’m quite confident I tested it before asking this question, in order to avoid how silly I look right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-10-30T10:43:48.720" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11818" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-02T20:00:55.367" Score="27" ViewCount="446" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;Moderator election #6&lt;/a&gt; on Role-playing Games has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the new moderators are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/23970&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/23970.png&quot; alt=&quot;nitsua60&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/3548&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/flair/3548.png&quot; alt=&quot;Oblivious Sage&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They will be joining &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;the existing crew&lt;/a&gt; shortly — please thank them for volunteering and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.opavote.com/results/5712582737395712&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;view a summary report online&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-02T23:03:29.857" LastActivityDate="2021-11-02T23:03:29.857" Title="2021 Community Moderator Election Results" Tags="|discussion|election|moderators|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11819" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11818" CreationDate="2021-11-02T20:18:12.250" Score="31" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Congratulations to both of you!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking forward to being co-mods with you (for longer than the week we were last time Nits :p).&#xA;And welcome (back) to the world of weird, wonderful (and occationally scary) tools and features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Also thanks to everyone else who ran&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, a real election requires someone to not win, and I want to thank the four of you who threw your hat in. I hope you still found the endeavour worthwhile, and aren't too discouraged. There'll be elections in the future, and we'll need someone to run in those!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-11-02T20:18:12.250" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11820" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11818" CreationDate="2021-11-02T20:27:36.053" Score="30" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Our mod team is turning into quite the menagerie of creatures.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qVNdP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qVNdP.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(and one humanoid, linksassin)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Congrats nitsua60 and Oblivious Sage! I have no doubt you will both do a fine job.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-11-02T20:27:36.053" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11821" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11822" CreationDate="2021-11-04T05:33:58.427" Score="10" ViewCount="113" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been watching &lt;em&gt;Fantasy High&lt;/em&gt;, the series of 5e sessions filmed and posted on YouTube by alums of the website collegehumor.com. At a certain point, the DM has an NPC do something that uses a spell mechanic I can't identify. Would it be appropriate to post a question on main asking for help identifying it, along with a link to the video and an exact time stamp?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71277" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-04T19:48:34.900" LastActivityDate="2021-11-04T19:48:34.900" Title="Is this question about identifying a (5e) spell mechanic from the &quot;Fantasy High&quot; YouTube series appropriate for the main site?" Tags="|support|specific-question|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11822" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11821" CreationDate="2021-11-04T08:15:06.207" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;That seems like a perfectly reasonable &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; question. Linking to the source material is great, the only addition we'd want to see is that you also include a description in text in case the video goes away (we want the question to still be understandable in such a case) and for the benefit of those who can't watch the video.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-11-04T08:15:06.207" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11823" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11745" CreationDate="2021-11-08T21:41:11.453" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;A Community Manager, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/284336/catija&quot;&gt;Catija&lt;/a&gt;, explained how it works in these network posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10692&quot;&gt;Where's the auto-move-to-chat link?&lt;/a&gt; (CodeReview.SE)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/371688/674198&quot;&gt;How is the message 'Please avoid extended discussions in comments' triggered?&lt;/a&gt; (MSE)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quoting Catija's response from this second link:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had the opportunity to answer a similar question on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10691/wheres-the-auto-move-to-chat-link/10692#10692&quot;&gt;Code Review meta&lt;/a&gt; a while back and got one of the devs to look up how we do this - the rules are pretty simple:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The link appears when two people are having a conversation with each other. So, you need exactly two people who have written at least three comments each (four on meta sites) within a four hour period. If a third (or fourth) person joins the discussion - then it won't trigger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't mean that any additional person on the chat thread will prevent it, only in that period of six messages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So this would trigger it (if it all happened in four hours):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person 1, Person 2, P1, P1, P2, P2, P1&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this wouldn't:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person 1, Person 2, P1, P1, P2, Person 3, P2, P1&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Person 3 acts as a combo breaker and resets the count.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Conversation&amp;quot; may be a bit specific, now that I think about it - the system doesn't care whether the two people are talking to each other - they could be both giving guidance to the OP and not interacting with each other at all but still get the encouragement to move to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:11:55.687" LastActivityDate="2021-11-08T22:11:55.687" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11824" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For all questions that are primarily about comments - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" LastActivityDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11825" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" Score="0" Body="For all questions that are primarily about comments - both on mainsite and on Meta. (If a more relevant/appropriate tag exists, it may be used alongside or instead of this one.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" LastActivityDate="2021-11-08T22:13:19.160" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11827" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-09T20:32:48.953" Score="14" ViewCount="631" Body="&lt;p&gt;The current elections are over, but KRyan raised &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11793/44723&quot;&gt;the issue of &amp;quot;Does a week for Election nominations seem too short to anyone else?&amp;quot; here&lt;/a&gt; and got overwhelming support for it. The next elections will come eventually, and we should raise the issue on meta.se where we can make the request and maybe get it through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To do so, we should workshop a proper proposal, so what should we propose, and what is our reasoning for change - consider the onus is on us when we want to create change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the already rejected proposals such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/77043/could-the-election-period-be-extended-to-more-than-four-days/77068#77068&quot;&gt;Could the election period be extended to more than four days?&lt;/a&gt;, and how can we present the issue in a manner that others have not done yet?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2022-03-21T16:51:04.387" Title="Let us workshop a meta proposal with the goal to extend future election length" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11828" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-10T09:44:46.213" Score="5" ViewCount="481" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm currently flag-banned from flagging posts due to several declined flags on posts that I believe do not answer the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1282/44723&quot;&gt;What to do when a player loses or forgets their character sheet?&lt;/a&gt; emphasis mine:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sadly, most of the games I play in have monthly sessions at best.&#xA;Also, players travel from a somewhat greater distance to play. During&#xA;the month, many players misplace their character sheets or&#xA;accidentally leave them at home.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Depending on the game, it might be relatively easy to reconstruct the&#xA;sheet. I'm also trying to convince the players to scan or otherwise&#xA;digitize their sheets, and I want them to store them in an&#xA;Internet-accessible location such as Google Docs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even so, there's always that time when a player shows up ready to roll&#xA;but has no sheet. Without the sheet, the experience for everyone will&#xA;diminish. It's like putting a big old asterisk on the entire session.&#xA;&lt;strong&gt;I know what precautions to take to avoid it, but how to make it as&#xA;painless as possible when it does happen?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are these proper answers to the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/7955/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/7955/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I favor simpler systems because (among other reasons) my group has a&#xA;few players who invariably lose their character sheets. If the&#xA;system's simple enough (FATE, WR&amp;amp;M, that sort of thing), I can easily&#xA;keep my own records of their character's stats. If the system is more&#xA;complex, I prefer to keep the sheets myself. D&amp;amp;D3.5, though... we all&#xA;know it well enough that recreating a character sheet during play is&#xA;nothing. We've all done it at least once.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1314/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1314/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my group, we keep one copy on gDocs and the other with whomever is&#xA;DMing the game. That typically removes the lost sheet controversy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/6152/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/6152/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I used to always keep all PC sheets. Now I tend to make the players&#xA;keep their masters on my Wiki. It is not as pretty as physical sheets,&#xA;but with the wiki, they can always be updated and printed as needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1301/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1301/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless the character is specifically made to move between campaigns,&#xA;the character and its sheet are tied to a specific campaign and the GM&#xA;can justifiably insist on keeping the character sheet. This is&#xA;especially true when forgetting a character sheet can seriously impact&#xA;a session.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/6126/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/6126/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a DnD insider subscription and require all players to enter&#xA;their character in to the character builder. This way I can print off&#xA;a spare copy if it is ever needed. However, this does not take in to&#xA;account their inventory, however, it's usually good enough for us to&#xA;get by, or have someone else take control of an absent player's&#xA;character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1352/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1352/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All character sheets for my games are posted online. No chance of&#xA;losing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1325/44723&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/1325/44723&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My groups have the DM hold on to the character sheets, plus any notes&#xA;the players have made (loot, etc.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these answers talk about preventing the loss of character sheets, and none address what should happen at the table once the sheets are lost (except for the first that states that you should simply recreate the sheet from memory). None of them offers a frame challenge that addresses the problem, and none give any advice whatsoever about how to make the situation as painless as possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was declining these flags the correct action? Do these answers address the problem:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know what precautions to take to avoid it, but how to make it as painless as possible when it does happen?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-11T01:26:12.523" LastActivityDate="2021-11-13T15:01:35.120" Title="Did I incorrectly flag these posts?" Tags="|support|specific-question|answers|flagging|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11829" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11828" CreationDate="2021-11-10T10:22:09.020" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;what did the reviewers see?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The questions were not listed as &lt;em&gt;not an answer&lt;/em&gt; to me. They were asked &amp;quot;Review the following answer:&amp;quot; What to do when a player loses or forgets their character sheet? [answer], like here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tkRjW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tkRjW.png&quot; alt=&quot;a random of the answers from the review que&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers do answer the question &lt;em&gt;as displayed in the title&lt;/em&gt;, but not necessarily the full question in the question body. It is not always apparent that something is &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; from that view, even if it is available via the question button.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/185074/389668&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;An answer is &amp;quot;Not an Answer&amp;quot;, but the flag was declined or disputed!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, verify that the problem wasn't corrected after you raised the flag. If the author or someone else was able to edit the answer and fix the problem, then you did nothing wrong; the problem was simply not visible anymore at the time the flag was handled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If the problem is still visible, then consider that perhaps it isn't as obvious as you thought it was. When reviewing &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; flags, moderators aren't shown the question or comments in context without clicking further, which they probably won't do unless there's an obvious reason to look for additional context.&lt;/strong&gt; The same applies to flags handled in the review queues for privileged users&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;, which requires reviewers to scroll or click through to view the question or other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As suggested above, subtle problems can be more effectively handled by raising an &amp;quot;in need of moderator intervention&amp;quot; flag, which allows you to explain the problem in detail. If a &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; flag is declined or disputed and a serious problem is still evident, then escalate the issue to the moderator team with a detailed description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Disturbing sleeping dragons&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is 11 years 2 months old. That means it was a sleeping dragon, till someone flagged it. That puts it into the review queue automatically. That drew attention to it. Flags got denied and re-raised and - and while people started editing some of the answers flagged, mods also went on to try and weed out what was in there. At that point, it was not the users that resulted in the denied flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;10, 11 years back, the stack was different, more chatty, and was soon allowing campaign recommendations. Since then it matured and no longer does those things. Some of the people you flagged are gone for more than 10 years, one of them was a moderator a few years ago [sevensideddie]. In any case, it isn't in any way an urgent matter that needs to be reviewed &lt;em&gt;now&lt;/em&gt; and could have gone through a longer Meta before raising a bunch of flags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Clogging the line&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notwithstanding who raised the items to the review queue, flagging those old posts all at once raised (to me) the idea of trying to clean up for the sake of clean up - possibly clogging the pipeline with things that have no large urgency. People can only vote so often to delete or close in a day, and we might or might not see a surge of urgent cases popping up - and then those that do moderate are out of votes?! I have been there, I had clogged the line with close votes on missed game-recommendation questions, and was called out to please only toss in small numbers at a time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-11-11T10:19:35.887" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T10:19:35.887" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11830" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11828" CreationDate="2021-11-10T11:08:50.363" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have not been review banned, but I did flag a bunch of those and they all got declined. Looking at my accepted 'NAA' flags, I'm not sure if I'm seeing a consistent response to flags by reviewers (not moderators):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/174821&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: Is there a spell to make a PC stop talking while a spell caster delivers a monologue?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174821/is-there-a-spell-to-make-a-pc-stop-talking-while-a-spell-caster-delivers-a-monol/174941#174941&quot;&gt;A&lt;/a&gt;: Less conventional than the other options could be summon swarm (spiders). Every time a pc tries to speak, a spider crawls into their mouth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The deleted post 'looks' like an answer, but doesn't actually address the question directly (&amp;quot;is there a spell&amp;quot;) or make it clear that an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/174916/&quot;&gt;indirect solution is viable&lt;/a&gt; (i.e. one that achieve the core goal, without providing a spell.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/7500&quot;&gt;Q&lt;/a&gt;: Suggestions for decreasing metagaming and increasing player immersion?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/191045&quot;&gt;A&lt;/a&gt;: I don't care&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This looks a frame challenge (which could be a valid answer), but doesn't address a core goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back to the question where we've had NAA flags declined; I tried to be lenient (as in, give them the benefit of the doubt that they intended to answer and not just that the general advice &lt;em&gt;happened&lt;/em&gt; to cover the core question) and edit any post where they answered the question, but it was buried deeper down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But answers that looked like they could be comments and provided no value as an answer got flagged, such as one you highlighted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All character sheets for my games are posted online. No chance of losing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this useful &lt;em&gt;in general&lt;/em&gt;? Yes, so it's worth sharing. But it doesn't &lt;em&gt;answer&lt;/em&gt; the question, and it's not a good example for others to follow. StackExchange posts don't age off, and even though 'sleeping dragons' should be left to sleep, once one wakes up we should deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So should the answers be dealt with just by downvoting and moving on? Maybe, but we can do that with all posts we find unhelpful personally. I think this is more about this question being an exception, it's a skeleton in the closet of bad not-really-answers that don't need preserving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Flagging makes sense to me here, and I think they should be deleted for providing no value because they don't address the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at this post the same way my &lt;em&gt;accepted&lt;/em&gt; NAA flags were handled (albeit, accepted by reviewers not moderators), it might be clearer these should have been handled in a similar way:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: What to do when a player loses or forgets their character sheet?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A: All character sheets for my games are posted online. No chance of losing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks &lt;em&gt;when&lt;/em&gt;, so the issue has already come up. You can't sensibly answer that by essentially saying &amp;quot;Don't let it happen in the first place.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example outside of this site, if you came to your doctor with foot blisters, this would be an equally worthless exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: What do do when I have foot blisters?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A: Wearing better shoes would prevent foot blisters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nothing of value is lost by deleting those sort of answers, and tidying up the post is definitely worthwhile doing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11828/did-i-incorrectly-flag-these-posts/11830?noredirect=1#comment40644_11830&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil points out&lt;/a&gt;, my declined flags were handled by Moderators, but they had already been marked as 'Looks Ok' by the reviewers. I think I'm ok with still questioning those decisions, but I'm happy (and not surprised) our mods and reviewers are in sync.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2021-11-12T19:57:41.490" LastActivityDate="2021-11-12T19:57:41.490" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11831" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11828" CreationDate="2021-11-10T15:33:37.800" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Flagging NAA, recommending deletion, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; reviewing &amp;quot;Looks OK&amp;quot; are all appropriate actions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is obviously no evidence of anyone acting in bad faith here. Everyone is just trying to curate the site to the best of their ability, &lt;em&gt;and it is okay if we disagree on what that looks like&lt;/em&gt;. The whole point of community review is to get input from multiple users who have earned review privileges by contributing quality content to the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You flagged NAA because you felt that an answer did not provide any meaningful solution to the problem. This is what we are supposed to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some reviewers recommended deletion on some of the posts, either because they agreed they were NAAs or had other problems warranting deletion. This is what we are supposed to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Some users marked &amp;quot;Looks OK&amp;quot; because they felt the posts provided a sufficient response to the question and did not otherwise merit deletion. This is what we are supposed to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while we may disagree on which of these actions is the &amp;quot;most correct&amp;quot; action, I want to emphasize that &lt;em&gt;all of these actions are appropriate actions to take because it is okay if we disagree here&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Things were moving through the queue just fine and the community was handling the flags through review as we typically do. There was really nothing exceptional going on here. We have had queues balloon like this before, and the volume has never been more than our active reviewers could handle in a reasonable amount of time. By all accounts, things appear to have been working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;So getting flag banned for appropriate flags is...not great.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You were flag banned because a ♦ moderator manually declined your flags. I flagged several of those answers and two reviewers quickly reviewed them &amp;quot;Looks OK&amp;quot; (which again, is just fine), so mine were marked &amp;quot;disputed&amp;quot;. It looks like two other users got to a couple of your flags and recommended deletion (which again, is just fine). Had community review been allowed to carry on, we would have gotten more eyes on the posts, and at worst, your flags would have been marked &amp;quot;disputed&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, a ♦ moderator took over for the community review that was already working things out appropriately, and moderator actions here have unique consequences. Now one of our most active and helpful reviewers is flag banned for the next week for taking actions that were entirely appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I am sure the moderator actions were done in good faith. The system simply isn't designed to allow a moderator to decline the flag without the potential for consequences, which isn't the mods' fault, it's a design flaw. I think this is one where they should have waited for something to go awry in a process that appears to have been functioning as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-11-10T15:48:30.190" LastActivityDate="2021-11-10T15:48:30.190" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11832" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11827" CreationDate="2021-11-10T22:14:18.567" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t understand what the counter-argument is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without that, I have no idea what we have to debate, what we have to overcome. So far as I can tell, near-everybody on the site wanted it to be longer (even if not necessarily so much so that they wanted an extension in the middle of the election)—so why would this be a problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a technical issue, where this is something that’s the same for all sites and making it different on each site is a problem? Do we just need to show it’s worth that much effort? I’m somewhat doubtful this is the case, though, because people pointed out that other elections have gotten extensions, which was confirmed by staff who explained the criteria by which they decide to do that. So that’s not even per-site, that’s per-election at that point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some concern about the quality of moderation during the interim? Or the workload for the remaining moderators? That was something I’d considered at the time, but none of our moderators spoke up so it seemed to me it was OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some belief that a short election is better, as in, more representative of the site? I don’t see how this is plausible, really, but the linked discussion on SU maybe suggests there is something there? Frankly, I can’t even follow the case being made there, it made no sense to me, particularly seeing as it was talking about &lt;em&gt;voting&lt;/em&gt; not even about nominations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But without a sense of the reasons for &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; doing so, I don’t know how to make a convincing argument &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; doing so. To me, with the information I currently have, “because we want to” seems like it ought to be sufficient. We need to find out more before we can write a real proposal, which probably means talking to SE directly. I am not sure what the best process here is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2021-11-11T12:38:39.047" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T12:38:39.047" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11833" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-11T00:41:05.410" Score="17" ViewCount="409" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/192899/what-was-so-bad-about-bertrands-last-line-at-the-end-of-c3e3&quot;&gt;What was so bad about Bertrand&amp;#39;s last line at the end of C3E3?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spoiler Warning: the question does contain spoilers about Critical Role C3E3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question asks about the reactions given by two cast members to something another cast member said in character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-role-show&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;critical-role-show&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;critical-role-show&lt;/a&gt; tag states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For any questions about the show Critical Role, including plotting and show details; GM techniques demonstrated on the show; rules, rulings, house rules, and homebrew appearing on the show; and more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it seems our &lt;em&gt;default&lt;/em&gt; disposition toward questions about the Critical Role show is something of a “on topic until proven otherwise”, and relevant to this particular question, the tag description gives “plotting and show details” as some of the topics covered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, is this question on-topic as written? And if not, cannot it be revised to be on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T10:25:38.250" Title="Is this question about a cast reaction to an in-character utterance from Critical Role on topic?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11835" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11833" CreationDate="2021-11-11T03:10:34.737" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Live-play questions are on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The line between RPG-content and entertainment is unclear and constantly evolving. It's a new genre and unclear exactly what it is. Anything from from live-play, to performance-art, to entertainment show and a whole spectrum of things in-between. In future we may even have sub-genres for these shows. But all of that is irrelevant to whether this is an on-topic question for this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could these shows be on-topic at Sci-Fi &amp;amp; Fantasy? Yes, in fact they &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-role&quot;&gt;even have a tag for it&lt;/a&gt; with 3 questions. Does being on-topic elsewhere mean that it is off-topic here? No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;help-centre on-topic article&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would an RPG expert give me a better/different/more specific answer to this question than a Historian, Geographer, etc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, then feel free to ask it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case I believe the answer is &lt;strong&gt;yes&lt;/strong&gt;. An RPG expert is more likely to give a more complete/specific answer to a question about a live-play RPG than a Sci-Fi &amp;amp; Fantasy expert would.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about live-play shows are a combination of mechanics, lore, social dynamics and plot that is unique to the RPG genre. Answerers unfamiliar with RPGs may address only some of these aspects while missing key details in another. Thereby giving a weak or possibly entirely wrong answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Live-play RPG questions are fundamentally RPG questions and therefore should be on-topic at RPG.SE.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: This does not extend to questions about the cast, companies or other related but external elements that go into RPG live play, only the content that appears as part of the RPG show.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T03:10:34.737" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11836" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-11T09:44:13.017" Score="-6" ViewCount="250" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently we had a question that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/192791/30306&quot;&gt;uses&lt;/a&gt; a gif to describe what happens when a caster acts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The gif was made from an excerpt from Dragonball, and I don't see how it is fair use. In fact, none of the fair use factors but one is in the favor of the commenter:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not good: We don't satisfy &lt;em&gt;teaching&lt;/em&gt; if we don't discuss the &lt;em&gt;subject matter&lt;/em&gt; of the picture but merely use it illustratively! In fact, the case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://dockets.justia.com/docket/north-carolina/ncedce/5:2019cv00438/174568&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Masi v Mythical Entertainment&lt;/a&gt; was a &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt;* strong one, where the lawyer pursuing the case &lt;a href=&quot;https://casetext.com/case/masi-v-mythical-entmt-1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dropped the ball for non-prosecution&lt;/a&gt;. But you can take &lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/7oAmykML1S4&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;an actual lawyer's words&lt;/a&gt; on that case:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[describes things that could be discussed about the photograph.] They are talking about the &lt;em&gt;subject&lt;/em&gt; of the photograph [by a 3rd party], not a photo of the prison by the prison. &lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/7oAmykML1S4?t=161&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;[4:26]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The nature of the copyrighted wor&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anime is a work of fiction and art. Both are not facts, which is against the user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a factor that might swing in favor of the user: it s a small portion, but this is also a scene that was used as the heart of about 3 episodes, which cuts against the user... so neutral?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Luckily, it is not usurping the market for Dragonball, but making people interested in the whole content is not positive for the user, so... not so good either. However, this cuts &lt;em&gt;for&lt;/em&gt; the user, so a win here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, there is &lt;em&gt;possibly&lt;/em&gt; fair use here, even if possibly narrowly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I raised that problem with a flag, which was deemed helpful, but then nothing happened. So please Stack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should we formally disallow merely illustrative pictures for they can put us in very hot copyright waters or have some requirements as to their usage?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, should there be some kind of Guideline FAQ that elaborates on when or what we'd like to see accompanying an illustrative picture? Do we want to offer a bright line? Or offer&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-11-11T19:17:10.960" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T19:08:19.510" Title="GIFs, pictures and Copyright" Tags="|discussion|citations|copyright|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11837" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11833" CreationDate="2021-11-11T10:07:55.413" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question asks about what I can only describe as the &lt;em&gt;showmanship&lt;/em&gt; aspect of the production. No matter if it is scripted, directed, prompted, improvised or entirely free-formed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;showmanship&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;representation&lt;/em&gt; of the character/player on the screen is to some degree acting and the choice to keep it and not cut it away post-production. The only people that can inform about the &lt;strong&gt;reasons&lt;/strong&gt; a certain phrase is in there (and not hit the cutting room floor) are the production crew: the actors, the GM, the cutter. Not us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a result, the question is &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; close to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt;, which was previously &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8657/why-is-there-a-blanket-ban-on-designer-intent-questions-when-the-issue-is-only-w&quot;&gt;blanket banned&lt;/a&gt; because it invites baseless speculations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there possibly &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be ways to come to a reason why something is said the way it is, those will be most likely rooted in the dramaturgy of the show - which we are not the experts for. &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/critical-role&quot;&gt;Those experts for shows are SF&amp;amp;F.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-11-11T10:25:38.250" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T10:25:38.250" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11838" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11836" CreationDate="2021-11-11T12:36:14.623" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Going to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9268/4563&quot;&gt;echo doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt; here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not necessary for us to police copyright law to this degree. In this instance you're even policing Blizzard's copyright harder than Blizzard itself does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clips of TV shows, movies, and so on are &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;extremely&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; common on the internet. Seeing as it is effectively free advertising, copyright holders seem to be pretty okay with this! No one is going to argue that Stack Exchange is improperly abusing copyrighted material to create competition for Bird Studio/Shueisha (owner, per Google) or for Funimation (licensed distributor in much of the world, per Wikipedia) or whatever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, not for nothing, if someone did have a problem with this, their response would be a cease and desist letter, at which point we would... remove the image and the reference to it, exactly as you’re proposing. The potential harm here is extremely minimal. That does mean the value of the image here is also pretty minimal, but I for one think it is best to capture the querent’s own words and perceptions, which this image does.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn’t a big deal here, but my inclination is to leave it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T12:36:14.623" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11839" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11840" CreationDate="2021-11-11T17:36:22.380" Score="6" ViewCount="204" Body="&lt;p&gt;I wrote the following question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/192887/can-ride-be-used-to-push-a-mount-animal-companion&quot;&gt;Can Ride be used to Push a mount/animal companion?&lt;/a&gt; containing multiple questions. I was asked to separate them out, so I did. Once I separated out the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/192910/when-pushing-an-animal-how-long-will-it-perform-the-trick-it-doesnt-know/192912#192912&quot;&gt;When pushing an animal, how long will it perform the trick it doesn't know?&lt;/a&gt;, the separate question was answered. With that answer, I realized I did not need an answer to the original question. Since the original question is unanswered, is it OK for me to delete it? The answered question kind of makes the original question irrelevant for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="59003" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T19:09:26.197" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T19:09:26.197" Title="Delete an unanswered question if I no longer need the answer?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|deleted-questions|unanswered-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11840" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11839" CreationDate="2021-11-11T17:54:27.043" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don’t think anyone’s going to undelete your question if you delete it. Even if they did, it’s not like you’d be “in trouble” for it or anything. You could even, if you wanted nothing more to do with it but folks insisted on keeping it undeleted, ask to have the question dissociated from your account. But I really doubt this is going to come to that. Yes, it is “OK” for you to delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it’s also a perfectly reasonable question. Maybe you no longer feel like you need the answer, but it could still be useful to someone. And even if the demands on your Handle Animal checks are less than you thought, if there’s an answer that’s cheap enough you still might end up using it. So at least if it were me, I wouldn’t choose to delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you do, I don’t think anyone’s going to cry foul.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2021-11-11T17:54:27.043" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11842" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11836" CreationDate="2021-11-12T00:59:15.157" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Should we formally disallow merely illustrative pictures for they can&#xA;put us in very hot copyright waters or have some requirements as to&#xA;their usage?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we do not need yet another policy; not to apply going forward, not to have people chasing back through the archives looking for violations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No, we do not need a &amp;quot;bright line.&amp;quot;  If a bright line were possible, it would already be codified in law.  Instead, what we have are guidelines and tests and, when push really does come to shove, take-down notices and maybe lawsuits, precisely &lt;em&gt;because&lt;/em&gt; Fair Use is an area of somewhat fuzzy rules.  I have literally zero faith that our community of most non-lawyers is qualified to come up with correct, or even meaningful bright line policies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, I am &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; skeptical of the claim that our current practices can or will get us into &amp;quot;very hot copyright waters.&amp;quot;  The normal course of a real legal issue would be something like a copyright holder going through whatever SE's notice and takedown procedure is, and SE responding either by taking the image down (likely) or fighting it in court (unlikely.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, itself, barely even counts as &amp;quot;waters&amp;quot; much less &amp;quot;very hot waters.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But more, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9267/whats-the-proper-way-to-address-possible-copyright-infringement-in-posts/9268#comment30237_9268&quot;&gt;relatively recent past discussions&lt;/a&gt; indicate that this has very possibly never happened even once on RPG.SE (as opposed to SE-at-large.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's because this stack is not a hotbed of illicit copyright violations.  It just isn't.  I'm fine with removing egregious violations as they occur; I don't flag often, but I think the first flag I ever raised was a link to copies of every Dragon Magazine in existence.  That was a no-brainer, because it wasn't even a Fair Use issue, it was just a link to blatant piracy.  These issues that we're proposing to bright-line out of existence aren't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When and if we become a venue like YouTube, where copyright violations accumulate on a daily (perhaps even hourly, or minutely) basis perhaps we can revisit the issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until then, we're being asked if a bunch of unqualified hobbyists should try to create bright-line rules where scholarly experts have failed in the past, in order to avoid problems that we currently do not have in any great magnitude (possibly not in any magnitude at all), and which problems could easily be handled by SE's (not RPG.SE's) existing policies and lawyers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To which I answer:  No.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2021-11-12T00:59:15.157" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11843" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11828" CreationDate="2021-11-12T13:56:44.010" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, these were incorrectly flagged.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;em&gt;[Sorry this took a while: since this meta post raises the issue of whether we, elected moderators, are handling these similarly we took some time in our mod-chat to touch base and see whether we were harmonious in our NAA flag-handling. We are, and this post represents our current understanding and practice.]&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not an Answer (NAA) is a challengingly-named (one might even go so far as to say misleadingly-named) flagging reason. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/185073/311001&quot;&gt;This meta.SE post&lt;/a&gt; goes into much more detail; here we'll summarize and look at how it applies to the posts identified in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NAA &lt;strong&gt;is for&lt;/strong&gt; posts that are new questions (use the &amp;quot;Ask A Question&amp;quot; button), &amp;quot;thanks&amp;quot; comments (If you really need to say thanks, do it in a comment), attempts to talk to another user (chat or on-topic comments are for that), requests for clarification (comments are for that), necro-bumps (bounties are for that), &amp;amp;c. NAA covers posts that aren't rightly posts at all, in other words.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NAA &lt;strong&gt;is not for&lt;/strong&gt; bad answers; weak answers; unsupported answers; terse-to-the-point-of-annoyance answers; answers you think are horrible advice; answers based on a misreading of the post; answers that miss large parts of the question; answers based on thinking everything is the latest version of D&amp;amp;D, even. Because those are all &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;. Downvote to your heart's content, comment on how bad they are, vote to delete, even! But they're not NAA and we'd decline an NAA flag on every one of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The challenge, of course, is that NAA flags throw posts into the Very Low Quality queue. I'll say that in my (nitsua60's) experience: NAA-flagged posts on this site are almost &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; Very Low Quality, and always &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; Not An Answer. (Frequent VLQ reviewers: please reread that last sentence.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On to these posts: the original question presents a problem with people showing up without sheets, and asks specifically how to dial down the impact (pain, in OP's words) of a missing character sheet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 7955: states that playing in a simpler system makes losing sheets less likely, and that knowing the system well enough ensures &amp;quot;that recreating a character sheet during play is nothing.&amp;quot; It's on point, whether you agree or not, whether you think it's good advice or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 1314: states that gDocs solves the (underlying) problem of losing a sheet. It's a frame challenge or an XY solution, it's not explicitly stated as such, but it's definitely a user trying to relay experience with a similar problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 6152: ditto 1314&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 1301: not spelled out very much, but implicitly saying &amp;quot;the pain is too great, so put all your eggs in the 'don't lose character sheets' basket.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 6126: ditto 1301&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 1352: this one's terse enough to annoy me, I'll admit. But it's not &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; directed at the problem OP is having and is presumably this user's solution to the problem. It's just not NAA.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer 1325: ditto 1352&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, there is the matter of whether these flags should have been handled by the review queue, rather than a mod. Normally, the mods &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; leave NAA flags to the queue (or the reviewers handle the flag before a mod even sees it). However, there is a cooldown on how often an answer can be pushed to the VLQ queue by an NAA flag, and less than an hour before Akixkisu flagged those answers &lt;em&gt;another&lt;/em&gt; user flagged them and the review queue preserved them. This meant that Akixkisu's flags could &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be handled by the review queue, they had to be handled by a moderator (or gum up the moderator flag queue forever).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Some follow-on discussion in RPG General chat can be found here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/conversation/naa-flag-meta&quot;&gt;NAA flag meta bookmarked conversation&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2021-11-13T15:01:35.120" LastActivityDate="2021-11-13T15:01:35.120" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11844" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11827" CreationDate="2021-11-12T15:15:22.293" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;4-3-2-1 Proposal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per my Q&amp;amp;A with Slate, I was given the following &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11793/does-a-week-for-election-nominations-seem-too-short-to-anyone-else/11796?noredirect=1#comment40695_11796&quot;&gt;recommendation&lt;/a&gt; for how to proceed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My advice, I think, is gonna be: write it up how you'd want to see it. But, be clear about the intents at each step, and underlying reasons why you think it would help. At worst, if it's not technically achievable, or if we don't have a way to allocate time to it, having those intents &amp;amp; root causes documented will help guide us to figure out what elections may look like in the future. And if some kind of partial solution is achievable, that might work as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With this in mind, I'm proposing the following for each phase of the election process:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;0&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Election Questions - Proposed Duration: 4 weeks&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may come off as the most absurd duration, however, as a whole our community takes awhile to come to consensus on things. Furthermore, we have seen at least a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11726/what-is-our-stance-on-unpinning-the-accepted-answer-from-the-top-of-the-list-of&quot;&gt;few&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9805/re-revisiting-the-dont-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;times&lt;/a&gt; that meta Q&amp;amp;A has one answer that floats to the top almost immediately and then sinks back down after several weeks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per the site's overall analytics for the past few months, we see very large spikes in visits primarily on Fridays and Saturdays; and if I had to guess, that's probably game night for a lot of folks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bjZXM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bjZXM.png&quot; alt=&quot;6 month site visit analytics&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, we likely have a lot of folks whom might be learning about the election for the first time on Friday night and then have to get back to the table or something. If they're not visiting daily, the next time they will get a reminder might be next week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Giving these folks a few weeks to provide their input on questions might be very helpful for garnering a list of questions that are of interest to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are some folks who wish to make the point that the weekend spikes sync with new visits and those are correct. But that doesn't mean there aren't a significant number of regulars who visit the site during that time frame. Taking the time frame from September 30th through today (November 13th), we see the following increases in site visits over the preceding week's average &lt;em&gt;after&lt;/em&gt; removing the new visits:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 1st: +2,627&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 2nd: +5,981&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 8th: +1,688&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 9th: +4,461&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 15th: +1,853&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 16th: +5,136&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 22nd: +1,913&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 23rd: +5,013&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 29th: +327*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;October 30th: +298*&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;November 5th: +2,706&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;November 6th: +6,872&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;November 12th: +1,637&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;November 13th: +4,830&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*These values were as low as they were due to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/371236/planned-maintenance-scheduled-for-oct-30-31-2021-starting-at-1300-utc&quot;&gt;maintenance outage&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Nomination Phase - Proposed Duration: 3 weeks&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This most recent election had me contemplating on running myself, but a big hangup for me was having enough time for answering the questions. I suspect I'm not the only one in that position, either. Between a very busy work schedule, home life, and other obligations it is often difficult to find a few hours to read, think, and write up responses to questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may mean that I'm too busy to take on another obligation, or it may mean that I need more time to figure out how to fit this potential obligation into my life. Either way, time is necessary for this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Primary Phase - Proposed Duration: 2 weeks&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the best of my knowledge, we've only had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3?tab=election&quot;&gt;1 primary&lt;/a&gt;. However, with the increased time for the nomination phase the plausibility of a crowded field becomes more practical. I don't consider this to be a bad thing, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend the 2-week schedule simply because there's a lot of candidate responses to comb through at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Election Phase - Proposed Duration: 1 week (2 weeks if there's no Primary)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At this point, the community as a whole is effectively aware of the election and has had ample time to review the candidates' responses. Thus, this is proposed to remain the same 1 week duration as before. This allows those folks who pop in just on Friday night to quickly make their picks and then get back to roll bones against the goblin horde.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;most recent election (election 6)&lt;/a&gt; 7,510 were eligible. Of those, 1,320 visited during the election (17.5% of electorate). Of those, 719 visited the election page (9.57% of electorate). And of those, only 323 voted (4.30% of electorate). Based on folks showing some interest in the election and those whom cast a vote, there's a significant disparity of nearly 55%.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We may be able to close that disparity by giving those folks more time to provide their input. This may be doubly necessary if they're part of that group whom seem to visit most often on Fridays and Saturdays.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This phenomenon isn't unique to this election, rather it seems to be about par for most of them:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;Election 5&lt;/a&gt;: 23% visit site; 13% visit election; 6.3% voted (52.8% disparity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4&quot;&gt;Election 4&lt;/a&gt;: 33% visit site; 18% visit election; 10.6% voted (41.4% disparity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3?tab=nomination&quot;&gt;Election 3&lt;/a&gt;: 30% visit site; 26% visit election; 12.2% voted (52% disparity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/2&quot;&gt;Election 2&lt;/a&gt;: 40% visit site; 25% visit election; 17.9% voted (27.4% disparity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/1&quot;&gt;Election 1&lt;/a&gt;: 40% visit site; 22% visit election; 16.4% voted (26.8% disparity)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Disparity is defined as 1 minus number of people who visit the election page divided by the number of people who cast a vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If possible, I'd like to see this disparity number as close to 0% as practicable. I note that elections where we had the least amount of disparity were those early on and the candidate responses were pretty brief (maybe just a 2-3 paragraphs).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given the much more extensive responses we expect from candidates, affording voters more time to consider those responses can be helpful for garnering greater participation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Is this too long a period?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A concern has been expressed that a scheme like this would leave the site short of moderators for too long. On this site, at least, elections have rarely been run quickly to fill a perceived urgent need. Specifically:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/2&quot;&gt;Election 2&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;em&gt;unknown whether a time-pressure to elect SSD and WaxE was felt--perhaps mxyzplk could chime in?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/3?tab=nomination&quot;&gt;Election 3&lt;/a&gt;: Wax Eagle had been largely inactive for six months before the election; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6897/23970&quot;&gt;mxyzplk and SSD reported at the time&lt;/a&gt; that the site wasn't too much for them without WaxE (but that a broader representation of viewpoints was desirable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/4&quot;&gt;Election 4&lt;/a&gt;: SSD and mxyzplk had decided well in advance to step down and did so when SE was able to run an election. (source: nitsua60)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/5&quot;&gt;Election 5&lt;/a&gt;: doppelgreener and nitsua60 had decided well in advance to step down and did so when SE was able to run an election. (source: nitsua60 and doppelgreener &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11827/let-us-workshop-a-meta-proposal-with-the-goal-to-extend-future-election-length/11844#comment40777_11844&quot;&gt;in comment&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/election/6&quot;&gt;Election 6&lt;/a&gt;: V2 &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369260/please-welcome-valued-associates-958-v2blast-959-spencerg&quot;&gt;stolen by SE, Inc.&lt;/a&gt;; election was scheduled at SE's convenience and then-current mods relay no urgency to run any faster than that. (source: Someone_Evil &amp;amp; Oblivious Sage, in mod-room conversation of 15 Nov 2021)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2021-11-17T03:30:35.267" LastActivityDate="2021-11-17T03:30:35.267" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11845" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11827" CreationDate="2021-11-14T20:13:31.260" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Who moderates the site in the meantime?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some elections happen when everything is great on a site (such as graduation elections). But elections also happen because the current mod team is overwhelmed. It could be the workload increased. But it could also be that a moderator has left. (Under an exceptional circumstance there could be multiple leaving. Hopefully that won't happen again.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, an election takes about three weeks from the first public announcement. If we &lt;em&gt;more than triple that amount of time&lt;/em&gt;, what happens? And that doesn't include the time that it takes between when the moderators ask for an election to when the first official announcement happens. On &lt;a href=&quot;https://ell.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5571/41273&quot;&gt;ELL&lt;/a&gt;, moderators asked for an election in January and the election started in late October.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know why it took so long, which makes it hard to know what would work in practice. Is it possible to start the questionnaire well before the election could be scheduled? That would be effective, since any potential candidates know an election is coming and those who want to nominate can start writing their answers in advance, before the nominations even begin.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Though I didn't envision it happening this early as no moderator election is even planned (and the votes seem to indicate others also felt it was too early), there is now an unofficial thread for questions for the next election: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11848/42375&quot;&gt;Informal 7th Moderator Election Q&amp;amp;A – Question Collection&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How to get the jump on nominations anyway&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the assumption that the current system will not be changed, I have some advice from experience: Start answering early. You should be at least thinking of what you will write.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two guaranteed questions, as mentioned by the question collection post:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the other questions, it's a bit of a gamble. On RPG, there were 12 questions that were suggested for the 2021 election, but only a maximum of 8 could be used (chosen by upvotes). While you can't know exactly which ones will be chosen you can get a very good idea, especially as the nomination period draws nearer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On some sites, nobody asks any questions and they use three other generic questions. This is much easier because that's 5 questions total, and if nobody's posted anything and it's two days before nominations open, it's unlikely a huge influx of questions will happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Be warned that your questionnaire must be 12000 characters or less, by default including the quoted questions (but not including your nomination, which is 1200 characters for you to introduce yourself).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did this for my nomination for the 2022 English Language and Usage election. I followed the question collection post and began to think about how I would answer each new question as it came in. About two days before the election I put the two default questions and maybe 6 of the highest voted questions in a doc and began to write my answers. While I didn't finish writing before nominations opened, I was able to finish up on the second or third day (well in advance of the deadline) and post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-03-21T16:51:04.387" LastActivityDate="2022-03-21T16:51:04.387" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11846" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11827" CreationDate="2021-11-14T22:38:19.143" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should not extend the election period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What does it really help?  People that don't participate in Meta aren't going to participate given a couple more weeks.  The period right now is pretty long given the declaration of creating questions and all, anyone out for 2 weeks can still participate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Elections are usually because mods have left or the mods need more help. Making that process take 10 or more weeks is an unacceptably long time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see this proposal fixes anything to a larger degree than what it breaks.  The duration works for all of SE and we have no real justification for being an exception.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2021-11-16T11:01:07.550" LastActivityDate="2021-11-16T11:01:07.550" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11847" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="1219" CreationDate="2021-11-16T05:31:49.167" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Those are three different sheep:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt; are &lt;strong&gt;variant rules and worlds from the published ones&lt;/strong&gt;. Often, these are to fix (perceived) issues or alter gameplay. It can also cover changes to the world, that have a deep impact, e.g. stripping Magic from Shadowrun or introducing widespread guns to the Forgotten Realms.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt; is mainly trying to &lt;strong&gt;emulate official content&lt;/strong&gt;. E.g. statting a single monster, class or weapon. Commonly comes as a homebrew review, where we are presented the work.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt; is for &lt;strong&gt;dissecting or developing a mechanic&lt;/strong&gt; or comparing different mechanics against one another.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The aims of them are &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; different, so the tags should stay apart.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-11-16T21:39:34.363" LastActivityDate="2021-11-16T21:39:34.363" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11848" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-11-16T13:06:54.553" Score="-4" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The purpose of this thread is to collect election questions before the election occurs when our questions happen.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Q&amp;amp;A is an opportunity for community members to pose questions to the yet unknown candidates on the topic of moderation whenever these questions are relevant to a specific moderation encounter. Often these encounters don't happen during the formal Q&amp;amp;A, and as things will, once they are out of sight, they are out of mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We may gather these questions here voluntarily, and then when the formal question gathering starts, we may or may not port them over as we see suitable and applicable to that 7th election.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This informal Q&amp;amp;A is a place to voice questions and issues that you are running into currently that you want to preserve for the next formal elections Q&amp;amp;A, not a place of discussion and resolution - please take those elsewhere where they may apply or develop into resolution processes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-11-29T20:53:19.257" Title="Informal 7th Moderator Election Q&amp;A – Question Collection" Tags="|discussion|election|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="15" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11849" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11848" CreationDate="2021-11-28T23:29:25.830" Score="-6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Someone posted a partial answer to a question that asks to clarify a specific misconception within the question. You receive a flag - how do you act in this situation?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-11-28T23:29:25.830" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11851" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-04T15:59:19.907" Score="9" ViewCount="251" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, the D&amp;amp;D 5e adventure book/campaign setting &lt;em&gt;Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos&lt;/em&gt; is coming out December 7, and we're likely to be getting a few questions about it afterwards. It's a book about playing a D&amp;amp;D campaign as students at the magical university named Strixhaven, on the world of Arcavios, and which was also the setting of the Magic the Gathering set &lt;em&gt;Strixhaven&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should these questions be tagged?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The name of the book, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strixhaven-a-curriculum-of-chaos&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strixhaven-a-curriculum-of-chaos&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strixhaven-a-curriculum-of-chaos&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The name of the world, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcavios&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcavios&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;arcavios&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The name that seems to given to the product line in its branding,&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strixhaven&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strixhaven&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strixhaven&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some combination of these things, in case additional products set on&#xA;the world of Arcavios are released in the future, or to allow&#xA;distinctions between questions about the contents of the book (e.g.&#xA;feats, spells, monster stat-blocks, etc.) and questions about the&#xA;lore of the setting?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="39836" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-06T17:01:27.620" LastActivityDate="2021-12-07T13:26:25.303" Title="How to tag Strixhaven questions?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11852" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11851" CreationDate="2021-12-04T16:38:28.493" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;For now, tag them like we do questions about the other MtG D&amp;amp;D settings: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theros&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theros&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theros&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ravnica and Theros questions seem to be tagged appropriately, maybe those tags are underutilized, maybe they aren’t. There are plenty of questions about content from those setting books without the setting tags, but it seems those questions don’t actually have much to do about the setting itself. This seems like okay practice to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So tagging questions where the setting is in view with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strixhaven&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strixhaven&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strixhaven&lt;/a&gt; should be just fine, and is consistent with how we have handled the other MtG settings. We can reevaluate our tagging when additional content is released in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do want to go ahead and do the work to document in detail the current tagging practice for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theros&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theros&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theros&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt;, since I said “do it like we already do”, and because I imagine we will see similar patterns emerge with Strixhaven.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Theros&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We currently have five questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theros&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theros&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theros&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One is about comparing the Theros Satyr playable race to a Satyr race from a 3rd party setting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One is about aligning a warlock patron with the Theros Deities.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Three are about the Piety system introduce in &lt;em&gt;Mythic Odysseys of Theros&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This third bullet has a practical parallel in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; questions, more on that in a minute. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=theros+is%3Aquestion+-%5Btheros%5D&quot;&gt;eleven questions&lt;/a&gt; mentioning Theros that don't have the tag. Notably, five of them are about races included in &lt;em&gt;Mythic Odysseys&lt;/em&gt;, and three of them concern magic items published in &lt;em&gt;Mythic Odysseys&lt;/em&gt;. The lack of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theros&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theros&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theros&lt;/a&gt; tag here is appropriate: these questions deal with content from the book, but don't concern the setting in any meaningful way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Ravnica&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We currently have seven question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Two are setting questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One concerns the function of a couple of setting specific creatures. (This one would probably be fine without the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; tag)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Four concern the Guild system introduced in &lt;em&gt;Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This third bullet is the practical parallel to the Piety system of &lt;em&gt;Mythic Odysseys&lt;/em&gt;. Both of these books introduced significant mechanical structures for engaging with a character's backstory. &lt;em&gt;Strixhaven&lt;/em&gt; seems positioned to include a similar system with its modeling of the collegiate experience&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Through the book’s multiyear campaign, players begin as first-year students who study, socialize, and adventure their way to graduation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://dnd.wizards.com/products/strixhaven-curriculum-chaos&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;product page&lt;/a&gt; of &lt;em&gt;Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just as Theros and Ravnica questions about the setting specific mechanics (Piety and Guilds) are tagged with the setting tags, we will likely see similar practice develop naturally as questions are posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moving on, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=ravnica+-%5Bravnica%5D+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;41 questions&lt;/a&gt; mentioning Ravnica without the tag, and skimming over them, they all appear to not actually be about the setting or the Guild system, but concern or mention content from the book that isn't really about the setting itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, our tagging habits for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theros&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theros&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theros&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; seem consistent with one another even though we never talked about it, and so I imagine similar habits will arise naturally as we engage with the new Strixhaven content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; It did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-12-07T13:26:25.303" LastActivityDate="2021-12-07T13:26:25.303" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11853" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11851" CreationDate="2021-12-04T16:40:16.370" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;In analogy to the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/forgotten-realms&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;forgotten-realms&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;forgotten-realms&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ravnica&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ravnica&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ravnica&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eberron&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;eberron&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;eberron&lt;/a&gt; tags, we should use the branding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strixhaven&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strixhaven&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strixhaven&lt;/a&gt;, not the book name nor the World.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-06T16:59:56.280" LastActivityDate="2021-12-06T16:59:56.280" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11854" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11855" CreationDate="2021-12-05T08:57:05.560" Score="7" ViewCount="87" Body="&lt;p&gt;Long story short. Today I received a message that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148896/can-a-glamour-bard-maintain-concentration-on-another-spell-while-using-mantle-of&quot;&gt;a question I asked&lt;/a&gt;  two years and six months ago was closed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157214/can-you-concentrate-on-a-special-ability-while-also-concentrating-on-a-spell&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt; that was asked four months later. I had previously assumed that whichever question came second was closed however this incident has me confused. What is the criteria for determining which question stays open and which question is closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40305" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-12-05T11:36:18.967" LastActivityDate="2021-12-05T11:57:06.747" Title="Does closure of a question depend on whether it was asked earlier or if it provides a more general response?" Tags="|support|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11855" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11854" CreationDate="2021-12-05T11:57:06.747" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We sometimes close the question that was asked first.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others have suggested this be closed as a duplicate, but since I was the one that closed your question, I can provide a bit more insight. Our duplicate closure criteria are found here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl&quot;&gt;If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B?&lt;/a&gt; In this Q&amp;amp;A, Doppelgreener provides a brief discussion about timing:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On timing:&lt;/strong&gt; We prefer closing newer questions as a dupe of the older question unless there's a major quality benefit the other way around. Some examples of when there's such a quality benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The older one isn't answered (or has bad answers), and the new one has good answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The newer question is flat-out better written, easier to follow, and generally more useful for anyone interested in that line of inquiry. Answers to it are equal or better (&amp;quot;both have no answers&amp;quot; is equal).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This typically occurs when we establish &lt;strong&gt;a high-quality canonical question&lt;/strong&gt; to handle a subject straightforwardly that's previously been handled messily in various earlier questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I personally judged the more generally framed question to be the more generally useful one, and so I opted to close your question as the dupe, despite it being asked first. Both questions are well written, with well written answers, I just felt that the more general framing made for a better dupe target.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I did act unilaterally and don’t really have any skin in the game. If others think we should swap these around that’s fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-12-05T11:57:06.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11856" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-08T23:05:43.707" Score="6" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast offered a subscription service, years ago, called Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Insider (DDI), which offered utility much like the current D&amp;amp;D Beyond, in that it provided tools and content for playing the Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons game to anyone willing to pony up the cash.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The DDI service has ended, and questions on the site about topics like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1173/what-set-of-books-makes-a-complete-starter-set-for-4e&quot;&gt;what a good content base to start playing the game with can be&lt;/a&gt; have had answers making reference to it. The response to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/1180/revisions&quot;&gt;my editing the top answer&lt;/a&gt; has been &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/59822073#59822073&quot;&gt;nuanced&lt;/a&gt;, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/59828373#59828373&quot;&gt;negative&lt;/a&gt; (and I probably ought to have brought this to meta in the first place). What's to be done?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there an incentive to create new posts which are unlikely to become the new accepted answer (what passers-by see first when their searches bring them to the site)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is legacy content worth preserving outside of revision histories, in a situation where the game is still playable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why should helping new players take a back seat to holding a snapshot of the year 2015, when D&amp;amp;D Next was still fresh in everyone's minds?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I understand, it's discouraged to ask a new question that has the same spirit as an existing question, which is the question I would end up asking if I were given free rein: &amp;quot;What set of books makes a complete starter set for 4e?&amp;quot;.&#xA;Is there a way to use the StackExchange platform to handle game states that shift over the course of a decade or more, long after the original posters' interest has waned?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastActivityDate="2021-12-08T23:19:29.283" Title="How should dated references to Dungeons &amp; Dragons Insider be handled?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11857" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11856" CreationDate="2021-12-08T23:12:18.993" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Link rot happens. That's by the way one of the reasons why tool recommendations are banned - tools vanish from the internet at all times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we also shouldn't destroy the words of the OP. That means we don't remove stuff that is no longer available, we don't add new services. We may and should replace links with live ones or archive versions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But what about services that are gone the way of the Dodo? Well, if fixing the links is not possible, I would keep the original text as best as possible and add a date when it was true - and then add a late &amp;quot;&amp;lt;date&amp;gt; update: DDI is no longer available.&amp;quot; or similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; be handled with a comment indicating the service is gone, maybe indicating to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193504/when-did-the-dungeons-and-dragons-insider-exist&quot;&gt;When did the Dungeons and Dragons Insider exist?&lt;/a&gt; - should that find an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-12-08T23:19:29.283" LastActivityDate="2021-12-08T23:19:29.283" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11858" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11839" CreationDate="2021-12-09T22:41:52.263" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't delete it - answer it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You asked a question. That's good. You now know the answer. That's better. Armed with this knowledge, you now answer your original question so it is an ongoing benefit to others. That's best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2021-12-09T22:41:52.263" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11859" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11836" CreationDate="2021-12-09T22:46:09.077" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Is it your copyright?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, you can issue a DMCA take-down request to Stack Exchange. If it isn't, it's none of your business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Are you Stack Exchange?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If so, you are obliged to respond to DMCA requests but you have no obligation to otherwise police your site and can get yourself into hot water if you do. If it isn't, it's none of your business.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Copyright is a matter exclusively between the owner, the infringer, and the platform.&lt;/strong&gt; We aren't any of those people, so we should leave it alone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T19:08:19.510" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T19:08:19.510" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11860" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-12T10:52:35.233" Score="2" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;I keep seeing examples of one user unilaterally closing questions as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does one person have the power to do this when it should need 5 close votes? And what is the policy on doing so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193549/can-i-apply-the-undead-warlocks-grave-touched-feature-to-the-topaz-dragonborns&quot;&gt;Can I apply the Undead Warlock's Grave Touched feature to the Topaz Dragonborn's breath weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: This isn't about my opinion on if the question is a duplicate, but I think the site is actively worse when single people can and do impose their will, especially because now it needs 5 people to undo that action if the user doesn't change their mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-12-13T19:09:31.307" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T18:55:10.103" Title="How can one person close a question?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|closing-questions|privileges|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11861" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11860" CreationDate="2021-12-12T11:22:14.403" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two groups that can unilaterally close a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;Diamond moderators&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Users with a gold badge for a tag on the question can close it as a duplicate. (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/138/dnd-5e&quot;&gt;dnd-5e gold badge holders&lt;/a&gt;, in this case.) This is called &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231212/152515&quot;&gt;the dupe hammer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is absolutely intended and correct. The same people also can unilaterally &lt;em&gt;reopen&lt;/em&gt; questions, with wielders of the dupe hammer able to unilaterally reopen questions closed as duplicates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An odd quirk of the system: if a mod ceases to be a moderator, their diamond is removed - including on the questions they closed as part of their moderator time. As a result, questions that had been closed by a mod that ceases to be one might appear to have been unilaterally closed despite the user lacking a dupehammer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T18:55:10.103" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T18:55:10.103" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11862" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11860" CreationDate="2021-12-12T13:00:15.127" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;From meta.se: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/230865/increase-close-vote-weight-for-gold-tag-badge-holders&quot;&gt;Increase close vote weight for gold tag badge holders&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rules are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can instantly close &lt;em&gt;as a duplicate&lt;/em&gt; any question that was originally asked with a tag you have a gold badge for.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can instantly reopen any question &lt;em&gt;closed as a duplicate&lt;/em&gt; that was originally asked with a tag you have a gold badge for.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can only close or reopen a given question &lt;em&gt;once&lt;/em&gt; (this hasn't changed).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If you get in a fight with someone over whether a question should be closed, moderators will be notified and they'll &lt;s&gt;hit everyone with hammers&lt;/s&gt; lock everything down and tell you to go home.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Remember: duplicates are questions that &lt;em&gt;ask for a solution to fundamentally identical problems&lt;/em&gt; - many questions have similar or identical &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; but are not duplicates. By the same token, many questions are asked using &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; different wordings but seek to solve identical questions - closing these helps folks find their way to a solution even when they don't know what terms to search for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Enjoy your mighty hammer responsibly!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That post goes on to explain the motivation behind this feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-12-12T13:00:15.127" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11863" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11864" CreationDate="2021-12-14T13:41:00.837" Score="6" ViewCount="89" Body="&lt;p&gt;I drafted the following question for main:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've recently gotten back into D&amp;amp;D (the last time I played it was 2e), and I've been doing a lot of reading so I can be a better player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One idea I keep coming across is class stereotypes (the two I can think of at the moment are &amp;quot;horny bards&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;edgelord rogues&amp;quot;, but if there are others I'd love to know about them). Now, I've been in only two long-term campaigns and done a bunch of one-shots, so I don't have a lot of experience, but I have yet to run into characters who fit these stereotypes. (Technically, I've run into one horny bard, but the player in question makes ALL his characters horny, regardless of class, so it's hard to count that one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in learning more about these stereotypes. Are they backed up by people's actual experience? If not, where do the stereotypes come from, and why do they persist?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as I read over it, I started to worry that it was too broad/non-specific/subjective. Is this an appropriate question for main? If not, how can I make it better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71277" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T18:45:13.250" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T18:47:03.313" Title="How can I make this question about class stereotypes more specific?" Tags="|support|specific-question|questions|on-topic|appropriateness|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11864" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11863" CreationDate="2021-12-14T14:12:02.260" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Right now, that is &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; open ended&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My short description is that what you've written up is a reasonably good discussion/conversation start – the first post in a forum thread.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Digging slightly more closely, your primary question here is asking for a survey of experiences; that's not a good fit with the format. And since the motivation seems to be idle curiosity, I can offer no assistance in how to make it stackable. The easiest possibility would be to direct it to a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/52137&quot;&gt;forum&lt;/a&gt; instead (or our own &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;). Or if there is a more concrete problem you're facing, identifying that and focusing on it might work (assuming that problem is amendable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a possibly stackable question in here, though. Or actually, kinda, a set of stackable questions. The matter of where the stereotypes come from is much more tangible. But, each one would be better off as individual questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even saying that they are questions that &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be asked, I'll still offer a warning that they might be hard to answer properly. They strike me likely as either going unanswered for a long while (not a bad thing for the site per say, but obviously not as useful to the asker), or being closed if it's too much opinion and noise (or outlook thereof).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T18:47:03.313" LastActivityDate="2021-12-15T18:47:03.313" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11867" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-15T14:41:29.527" Score="8" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is that time of year again, Winter Bash is now in full swing. In past years, we have had some interesting Winter Bash themes, from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8617/the-large-hatron-collider-woolly-hatastrophe-2018-winterbash-photo-album&quot;&gt;Large Hatron Collider Woolly Hatastrophe&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11313/run-fast-and-jump-for-joy-winter-bash-2020-photo-album&quot;&gt;a happy unicorn running and jumping&lt;/a&gt;. This year the theme is... um... &lt;a href=&quot;https://winterbash2021.stackexchange.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;an explanation of how seasons work in the northern and southern hemispheres&lt;/a&gt;. Yes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So whether it is Winter or Summer where you are, take some time this year to do something for someone else, someone you wouldn't normally do something for. It's easy to give gifts to family and friends, to help mom and dad with making Christmas dinner, but what about that neighbor you don't like? What about for a stranger? Over the next few weeks, look for opportunities to make someone's world a better place. It can be big or small. You might just turn their Winter into Summer (or Summer into Winter, seasonal preferences may vary, or something. I had to tie it into the theming somehow, give me a break).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every Hatmas, we wear and see fun and dapper combinations of hats: the hats go away at the end of the Hatmas season, but we can still preserve some memories and pictures of the fabulous hattery we've seen. To that end:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's have a fun and/or slightly embarrassing yearbook.&lt;/strong&gt; Post the great hats and hatments you've seen. Show off the ones &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; made for yourself which you think are fantastic or fabulous or the greatest. If you spy an excellent thing in the wild, I guess you can stick that here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend one answer per person (or a small number), and revise it to make additions. Keep it silly, keep it fun, and be kind. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do I take a screenshot?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &lt;strong&gt;Lightshot&lt;/strong&gt; extension &lt;a href=&quot;https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/lightshot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Firefox&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lightshot-screenshot-tool/mbniclmhobmnbdlbpiphghaielnnpgdp?hl=en&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Chrome&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Windows 10:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;win&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;shift&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;s&lt;/kbd&gt; for the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt;. In Windows 7, you'll have to search for that tool in the start menu. Otherwise take a screenshot of your browser with &lt;kbd&gt;alt&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, crop it in MS Paint, and save it as a PNG (not GIF or JPEG).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mac:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;cmd ⌘&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;4&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click and drag to outline the region you want to screenshot. The screenshot will be saved to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On Linux:&lt;/strong&gt; Gnome/Ubuntu: press &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click-and-drag over the region you want to screenshot and save the screenshot somewhere. If the shortcut doesn't work, either set it up in System Settings/Keyboard/shortcuts/screenshots or use a tool like &lt;a href=&quot;http://apt.ubuntu.com/p/shutter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shutter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-15T18:44:49.313" LastActivityDate="2021-12-24T22:20:48.163" Title="Ambiguous Seasonal Theming: Winter Bash 2021 Photo Album" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11868" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11867" CreationDate="2021-12-15T14:56:56.567" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;You can't see them but I'm wearing flippers.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MRYjO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MRYjO.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After much disappointment that there is no rainbow puke hat this year, I’m pretty okay with this one:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YNK58.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YNK58.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2021-12-17T19:04:56.293" LastActivityDate="2021-12-17T19:04:56.293" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11869" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-18T10:28:01.497" Score="5" ViewCount="249" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bunch of questions on this site involve discussions around mental health (namely, I found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86317/how-can-i-role-play-schizophrenia&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;), so I've created the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mental-health&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mental-health&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mental-health&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a subject that needs to be handled with care (not something that always happens both at the table or in RPG books themselves), and part of my hope was having an explicit tag with good information would help us handle this topic well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we make a good tag wiki for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mental-health&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mental-health&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mental-health&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's probably a good tag to have, look at these results&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Schizophrenia+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;Schizophrenia&lt;/a&gt; - 4 results&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Depression+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;Depression&lt;/a&gt; - 9 results&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=Social+anxiety+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;Social Anxiety&lt;/a&gt; - 5 results&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm hoping that's still a good number, and regardless it's definitely something people can be experts on in a way that's relevant and helpful here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's also a lot of talk about using &lt;a href=&quot;https://ct.counseling.org/2021/02/online-role-playing-games-as-group-therapy-during-the-covid-19-pandemic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;roleplaying games for therapy&lt;/a&gt; and how it has &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.wayfarersleague.com/post/mental-health-and-gaming-how-roleplaying-and-gaming-helped-with-my-anxiety-and-depression&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;helped some people with their mental health&lt;/a&gt;. The sort of mechanics in question are also frequently the topic for discussion, such as in this &lt;a href=&quot;https://mythcreants.com/blog/podcasts/127-mental-health-systems-in-roleplaying-games/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mythcreants podcast&lt;/a&gt; and this &lt;a href=&quot;https://mythcreants.com/blog/seven-misconceptions-about-madness-and-psychosis/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;article&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-20T16:38:42.790" LastActivityDate="2022-01-03T17:58:20.563" Title="Can we provide a good tag wiki for [mental-health]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11870" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-18T15:19:58.373" Score="1" ViewCount="100" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes we think that a tag should not exist when we see an excerpt/wiki edit when someone tries to establish the tag for the first time. At the same time, should we reject such an edit when it clearly improves the tag excerpt/wiki, or should we temporarily accept it until we eliminate/discuss the tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-20T16:28:13.703" LastActivityDate="2021-12-20T16:29:27.363" Title="Should we reject tag wiki edits that improve a tag wiki for a newly created tag that we think shouldn't exist?" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11871" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11870" CreationDate="2021-12-18T15:59:18.593" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If you have a question about a specific tag, you should ask about it specifically.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, this question seems like it is pretty difficult, maybe impossible, to give a really good answer to that isn’t “depends on the tag”. So that’s why I’m going to offer: it depends on the tag and the context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The better approach is, I think, to just discuss concerns we have about individual tags and individual tag curation actions when we have them, rather than try to shoehorn several unique scenarios into a general discussion like this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-20T16:29:27.363" LastActivityDate="2021-12-20T16:29:27.363" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11872" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11870" CreationDate="2021-12-18T22:45:41.733" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, tag wiki edits shouldn't be rejected for this reason&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good tag wiki is one matter; whether the tag should exist or not is another. The matters simply don't relate. “I don't think this tag should exist” is just not a valid reason to reject an edit to its wiki. Review the tag wiki edit based on the edit's own merits. Assume the tag will stay &lt;em&gt;even if&lt;/em&gt; you think it should be gone and give us a good wiki to work with while it's here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you don't think a tag should exist, the appropriate course of action is to open a question on meta suggesting its removal. Having a good tag wiki helps us manage this process by helping us understand what the tag really is and isn't about, so you should be &lt;em&gt;approving&lt;/em&gt; good tag wiki edits even if you think the tag shouldn't exist. It also means if we actually decide to keep the tag it has a good wiki—you help the site run smoothly even if it's not entirely the way you'd have it work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Declining the edit because you think the tag should be gone, on the other hand, is disruptive. It's withholding the opportunity for the site to work just a little bit better, even if the tag is truly doomed and everyone will agree with you to remove it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also means that when it comes time to ask us to remove the tag you'll have withheld information from us: you set the tag up for failure and left us not fully informed. Someone may notice that people were attempting to make that tag work better and others were obstructing that effort. This will hurt the case for removal and sway people to keep it around for further improvement and testing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want the tag gone, you should be steel manning it: that's representing the best possible version of the thing you oppose (the opposite of the straw man). You can then show that even given the best case it should still be removed. That's not done by voluntarily making the tag function worse by withholding otherwise valid edits to its wiki.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2021-12-18T23:11:47.757" LastActivityDate="2021-12-18T23:11:47.757" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11873" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11869" CreationDate="2021-12-19T17:54:35.037" Score="-5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it's way to broad as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even only &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; aspect of the tag, in-game mental health, is about as useful as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/physical-health&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;physical-health&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;physical-health&lt;/a&gt; would be. Can there be an expert across systems that knows a lot about physical health in games? Same goes for mental health. This ranges from no mention at all, to &amp;quot;saving throw or you are feebleminded&amp;quot; to actual systems and tables of corruption and insanity. Seems far fetched that one would be expert in all. Would an expert use that tag to find questions they can answer? Seems equally far fetched.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Player's mental health is a very sensitive subject where nobody here should be an expert or give expert advice other than &amp;quot;seek professional help&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So mixing these two together, I don't see a good reason for the tag to exist. We don't need a tag for everything. That's what the body of a question is for. Anybody can ask those questions and get answers. Tags are for categorizing, so experts can find questions to answer and I don't think that &amp;quot;mental health&amp;quot; is a good category in that regard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2021-12-19T17:54:35.037" CommentCount="17" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11874" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11869" CreationDate="2021-12-19T22:19:17.913" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a feeling that we should look at two separate aspects that fall under the tag as described by ASR:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Portraying a mental health issue of a character, either how to do it in general or in a way that is respectful. e.g. &lt;strong&gt;playing a character that has a trait&lt;/strong&gt; named Schizophrenic/Depressive/Anxious/Compulsive/... or is clearly depicting such a mental health issue&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;working with a players mental health issue to enable participation. e.g. &lt;strong&gt;Playing with someone that is schizophrenic/depressive/anxious/has OCD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not yet sure if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mental-health&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mental-health&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mental-health&lt;/a&gt; is the best to bundle both, but the latter could mandate to add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/accessibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;accessibility&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly there are several crossovers into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/problem-players&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;problem-players&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;problem-players&lt;/a&gt; for both when &lt;em&gt;a player has a mental health issue&lt;/em&gt; that disrupts play, and a person playing &lt;em&gt;a character with a mental health issue&lt;/em&gt; disrupts play by the manner how they do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To show the differences and similarities an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I want to play a character that has the compulsion of gutting fish all the time. Is there a way to depict this compulsion disorder without being disruptive and disrespectful?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;My newest player is having a compulsion disorder and asks me again and again to clean the windows of any building I describe as being dirty. How can I help them not to try this thing over and over?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-12-20T10:14:07.463" LastActivityDate="2021-12-20T10:14:07.463" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11875" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-20T13:43:35.983" Score="2" ViewCount="131" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138119/is-my-interpretation-of-vampire-the-masquerade-5th-ed-combat-correct&quot;&gt;Is my interpretation of Vampire The Masquerade 5th ed combat correct?&lt;/a&gt; focuses on a single combat sequence — and the rulings related to it. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/138119/3&quot;&gt;This suggested edit&lt;/a&gt; by another user substantially restructures the question from a more experienced player's standpoint.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One other user and I thought it substantially improved the question and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/77879&quot;&gt;accepted the suggested edit&lt;/a&gt; (though differing in whether it should remain closed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Later, a different user rolled the edit back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Was this suggested edit appropriate? Or should it have been rejected?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-20T16:47:26.670" LastActivityDate="2022-01-01T15:53:56.687" Title="Is this suggested edit on a VtM 5e question about a combat sequence that ends after three turns appropriate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|suggested-edits|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11876" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-20T16:31:20.647" Score="4" ViewCount="111" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/194730/10642&quot;&gt;This answer to a question about which colors correspond to which colleges in the D&amp;amp;D 5e book &lt;em&gt;Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; includes numerous images of the 5 colored mana symbols from &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, on the mobile version of the site, there are some new lines that makes the answer really hard to read:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/690dZ.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/690dZl.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of linked answer in mobile view, showing each colored mana symbol image appearing on its own line&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10642" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2021-12-22T18:04:12.090" LastActivityDate="2021-12-22T18:04:12.090" Title="Images of Magic: The Gathering symbols make text render ugly on mobile site" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|formatting|mobile|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11877" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11876" CreationDate="2021-12-20T17:25:29.170" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You appear to be using the deprecated mobile view.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See this meta.se: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/367609/deprecating-our-mobile-views&quot;&gt;Deprecating our mobile views&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This creates a couple of issues. First, if you’re adding a feature to an existing part of the site, you have to build two separate front-ends—one for mobile, and the other for our desktop view. This introduces more opportunities for bugs, and has even introduced some security holes over the years. Our teams are full of busy humans, and it’s tough to execute, test, and deliver a single website, let alone separate ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, this creates an inconsistent experience for our user. The mobile views are generally more simple than the desktop views. Certain features have been left out of mobile over the years, others were shipped and unshipped. Others just never got built for mobile users. Over the years, the aesthetics between the two views have drifted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When using the deprecated mobile view, I get the same view you have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EwtFPl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/EwtFPl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I switch to the desktop version I get this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WTc5Rl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WTc5Rl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-12-20T17:25:29.170" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11878" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11879" CreationDate="2021-12-20T18:52:25.290" Score="14" ViewCount="391" Body="&lt;p&gt;In Pathfinder 2e, races have been replaced by ancestries. Functionally, though, ancestries and races perform the same role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When editing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/194711/list-of-racial-ability-bonuses&quot;&gt;this question about PF2e ancestry ability boosts&lt;/a&gt;, I ran into a bit of a conundrum. It is presently tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt;. However, someone searching for PF2e information (which this question is about) is more likely to use the term &amp;quot;ancestries&amp;quot;, and currently that tag doesn't exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create a new independent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestries&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Just use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestries&lt;/a&gt; a tag synonym to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Some other option I'm not considering?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2022-01-04T22:36:04.003" LastActivityDate="2022-01-04T22:36:04.003" Title="Should we have an [ancestry] tag?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11879" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11878" CreationDate="2021-12-20T19:03:35.240" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Make [ancestries] a tag synonym to [races]&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt; tag we currently define as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about races, a term used to delineate creatures encountered in a game world, often but not always sentient. Examples include humans, orcs, green dragons, kzinti, and griffins.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the real-world terms have different definitions, the game term  &amp;quot;ancestry&amp;quot; in Pathfinder 2nd edition serves the same function that &amp;quot;races&amp;quot; do in many other tabletop RPG systems. It also fits the definition that we currently have for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32840" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2021-12-26T17:21:19.547" LastActivityDate="2021-12-26T17:21:19.547" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11880" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11867" CreationDate="2021-12-20T20:38:58.080" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;A strange object entered my orbit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ncr7G.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ncr7G.png&quot; alt=&quot;A satellite orbits a plant.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, it keeps me company.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-12-20T20:38:58.080" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11881" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11867" CreationDate="2021-12-21T10:12:50.423" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I &lt;em&gt;think&lt;/em&gt; I found a secret hat...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KOQxb.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KOQxb.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Tiggerous's avatar is a still from the cover of Ultimate X-men #7 (2001) featuring Nightcrawler. It has been embellished with a thought bubble containing what appears to be a picture of a Christmas pudding crossed with a desert island.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40921" LastActivityDate="2021-12-21T10:12:50.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11883" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-21T17:48:16.220" Score="7" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about attack rolls, a randomized event (usually performed with dice) that determines whether one character can strike another character or entity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about attacks. An attack is an action that can be taken by a vast number of entities that either can cause damage, a debilitation of some sort, or both, though specific RPGs may define the term more specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt; should be covered already by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt;, so I don't see a use for having &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt; be its own thing. So I'm putting this forward for community discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2021-12-21T18:47:43.353" Title="Do we really need distinct tags for [attack] and [attack-roll]?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11884" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11883" CreationDate="2021-12-21T18:17:31.010" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Merge them&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no reason to have a specific roll tag. We once had at least twice decided to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7224/should-we-burninate-attack-and-damage?rq=1&quot;&gt;keep [attack] so now use it!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2021-12-21T18:17:31.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11885" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11883" CreationDate="2021-12-21T18:47:43.353" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let us keep them the way they are.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; include an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt;. Generally, we have a subset of specific questions explicitly about attack roll calculations or attack-roll interactions with other parts of respective game engines that are distinct enough from the broad category of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until someone demonstrates that the more specific &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt; causes confusion or other issues, there is no need to lose utility by merging a more specific distinct tag with a less specific one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-12-21T18:47:43.353" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11886" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-23T09:05:12.983" Score="1" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;I asked this question on RPG.SE: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/194724/how-does-hastes-action-interact-with-bladesingers-extra-attack-feature-and-gre&quot;&gt;How does the Haste spell&amp;#39;s extra action interact with the Bladesinger&amp;#39;s Extra Attack feature and with cantrips that do &amp;quot;one weapon attack only&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, other users closed my question as a duplicate of these 2 questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193066/if-the-haste-spell-is-cast-on-a-bladesinging-wizard-can-the-bladesinger-cast-th&quot;&gt;If the Haste spell is cast on a Bladesinging wizard, can the Bladesinger cast three cantrips in a turn using the Extra Attack feature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193075/how-does-the-bladesinging-wizards-extra-attack-feature-interact-with-the-additi&quot;&gt;How does the Bladesinging wizard&amp;#39;s Extra Attack feature interact with the additional Attack action from the Haste spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of these questions or their answers go over an all-important case: if the cantrip in fact &lt;strong&gt;does a weapon attack&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;em&gt;Green-Flame Blade&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Booming Blade&lt;/em&gt; are cantrips that do one weapon attack; their interaction is fundamentally different than all other cantrips, and warrants much attention and different answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The crux of the interaction is that Haste has a clause that requires &amp;quot;one weapon attack only&amp;quot; – which these cantrips seem to satisfy. Cantrips that seem to satisfy this clause present wildly different answers and discussion than cantrips that clearly don't. Does it matter how this gets satisfied? This is all very interesting discussion that is completely missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also RAI becomes important to consider here. I'm wondering about the actual intent of the designers behind that &amp;quot;weapon attack&amp;quot; clause. Was adding the word &amp;quot;weapon&amp;quot; just an oversight made in &lt;em&gt;haste&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="74188" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-06-27T20:40:44.057" LastActivityDate="2022-07-27T22:04:57.817" Title="Is this question about Haste, the Bladesinger wizard's Extra Attack, and cantrips that do &quot;one weapon attack only&quot; a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11887" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11886" CreationDate="2021-12-23T10:46:35.787" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, this isn't a duplicate&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a good question without any answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While one of the previous questions does ask half of the question, they don't cover the most important part of this question, and none of the answers there do so either. This is fundamentally different, and needs its own question and answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RAI on &amp;quot;(one weapon attack only)&amp;quot; should be addressed as well, and perhaps should be its own separate question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="74188" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2021-12-23T19:19:01.723" LastActivityDate="2021-12-23T19:19:01.723" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11888" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-23T18:09:21.343" Score="6" ViewCount="551" Body="&lt;p&gt;In June '21, Someone_Evil began a discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11595/we-need-to-talk-about-late-votes-to-policy-metas&quot;&gt;We need to talk about late votes to “policy” metas&lt;/a&gt;. As part of the summary of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11597/62294&quot;&gt;her overwhelmingly supported answer&lt;/a&gt;, doppelgreener includes this point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a position on meta loses majority support, revisit them. The evidence we have at the moment suggests this takes a long time to happen, so we don't need to be concerned that this might happen constantly on any given issue.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on this guidance, I believe it may be time to at least consider if we should revisit the rule intent meta from our FAQ: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7964/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In 2021, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968/62294&quot;&gt;the accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; that represents the current state of &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; has scored +3/-4, while the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8021/62294&quot;&gt;dissenting response&lt;/a&gt; has scored +7/-2, as I am writing this post. These votes have left the scores at +27-15 = 12 in favor of &amp;quot;rule intent questions are generally off topic&amp;quot; and +26-10 = 16 in favor of &amp;quot;rule intent questions are on topic&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, only two weeks prior to the posting of the rule intent discussion that is now part of our FAQ, this discussion took place: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7914/how-do-we-save-designer-reasoning-questions&quot;&gt;How do we save designer reasoning questions?&lt;/a&gt; The voting on this question tells an entirely different story. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7917/62294&quot;&gt;accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; here, featuring the bold header &amp;quot;Designer reasoning questions should be banned&amp;quot;, is sitting at a somewhat one-sided +44/-7, the next highest answer, which provides guidance on how to change designer reasons questions to be good questions, is sitting at a near-unanimous +32/-1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given this state of affairs, I put forward the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is it time to formally revisit the topicality of rule intent questions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: this is not the place to discuss whether or not rule intent questions should be on topic.&lt;/em&gt; The place for that is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11951/so-let-s-talk-about-rule-intent-and-question-closing&quot;&gt;So, let’s talk about rule intent and question closing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-22T17:07:41.710" LastActivityDate="2022-02-22T17:07:41.710" Title="Is it time to revisit rule intent questions?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|policy|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11889" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11888" CreationDate="2021-12-23T18:42:13.123" Score="-9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No, it should stay closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think there is any reason why &amp;quot;Rules as intended&amp;quot; has gotten any less reason to be closed because:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People have used Rules as Intended as an excuse to bend logic and argue anything &lt;strong&gt;they&lt;/strong&gt; interpreted into the rules to be as it was &amp;quot;intended by the designers&amp;quot; - including the exact opposite of what the rule says! This makes RAI pretty much &lt;strong&gt;Opinion Based&lt;/strong&gt; by default in absence of someone actually being the designer of a mechanic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In 99.99% of the cases, the users are not the designers and only those can say what is intended by the designers. There are only &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; few cases where designers actually do note something about why they made something how they made it. But open questions make people guess and at times present made up stuff as evidence. &lt;strong&gt;We have closed Designer Reasons&lt;/strong&gt; (among others) for this very reason with a very overwhelming majority - indeed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7914/how-do-we-save-designer-reasoning-questions&quot;&gt;nobody spoke up to try to save the tag&lt;/a&gt; when that went to the butcher.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Rules as Intended is nothing but a guise for Designer Reasons, the total ban of Designer Reasons includes RAI.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-12-24T07:17:37.637" LastActivityDate="2021-12-24T07:17:37.637" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11890" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11888" CreationDate="2021-12-23T21:04:32.673" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yeah, I think we're due a discussion about the state of rule intent and designer reasons questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I'll start with a minor disclaimer that this my personal opinion, not a formed stance by the mod team. In case that matters to anyone.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there two primary reasons for that. Firstly, the FAQ question has votes over time which imply a change of opinion. And even if the conclusion of a new discussion is to keep them banned, we'd need to fix what the FAQ points to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second is that we now have three and half years of experience with the policy and practice of rule intent being off topic. More specifically, some of the close voting seem to perhaps be an over-zealous application of the policy,&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; which suggest a discussion ending in returning to form and/or reshaping the policy is in order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &amp;quot;hot take&amp;quot; version of that might be that any question which includes the word &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; gets attempted closed as rule intent, and I think there's a very interesting discussion to have around that, which would roll into the broader discussion very well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I think there is a discussion around the topicality of rule intent and Designer Reasons, which would essentially include a revisit. If there are any additional sub-concerns or perspectives folks think should be raised in that (ie in the question body) I'd love to hear them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;† I'd possibly like some good examples of this (that are usable without it becoming a callout post). I might be able to do some digging on my own, but if others have them I'd welcome the help.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2021-12-23T21:04:32.673" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11891" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11888" CreationDate="2021-12-23T21:22:19.087" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Those numbers don't seem to justify revisiting the topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note that this is my personal opinion, not a mod consensus.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While doppel is 100% correct (as would be expected) that we should be willing to revisit decisions that have lost majority support, I think we should set a slightly higher threshold than &amp;quot;16 &amp;gt; 12&amp;quot;. One thing that is important to keep in mind when considering revisiting policies is that generally the only people voting in them after they leave the Meta front page is people who got linked to them when their question was closed. That is, &lt;strong&gt;only the anti-policy crowd has an incentive to seek out and vote in the old meta question&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially with the relatively small number of people that have voted on that meta (less than 40 users could account for all votes) we should be looking for a higher level of disagreement with the policy before we revisit it. If we had the pro-policy answer at about +15 and the anti-policy answer at about +30, &lt;strong&gt;that&lt;/strong&gt; would imply a significant change in community sentiment and provide a strong basis for reopening the topic for discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also worth remembering that &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; answer in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/3548&quot;&gt;temporally-adjacent meta&lt;/a&gt; was in support of the current policy, and the highest is at +44/-7, giving it more net support than the two answers in the &amp;quot;official&amp;quot; meta &lt;strong&gt;combined&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2021-12-23T21:22:19.087" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11892" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11867" CreationDate="2021-12-24T15:45:50.400" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Many hats of AncientSwordRage (aka pureferret)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VFgZ7.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VFgZ7.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;This user's avatar with a Deerstalker hat&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ioYjos.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ioYjos.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;This user's avatar with a soapbox for s hat&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y7xvGs.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/y7xvGs.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;This user's avatar with a&#xA;feather duster for a hat&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pnzQMs.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pnzQMs.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;This user's avatar with a hat that has a waterfall pour out from underneath it&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2021-12-24T22:20:48.163" LastActivityDate="2021-12-24T22:20:48.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11893" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11878" CreationDate="2021-12-25T10:36:39.137" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Ancestry has a confusion potential.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While Ancestry might be a less loaded term than races (and I would prefer something even less loaded), an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestry&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestry&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestry&lt;/a&gt; tag runs the problem of possibly being confused with things that would fall under an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestor&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestor&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestor&lt;/a&gt; tag - the latter for example being a specific type of merit in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/l5r&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;l5r&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;l5r&lt;/a&gt; or a type of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5&lt;/a&gt; feat - which has nothing to do with how Ancestry is used in Pathfinder-2e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This makes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt; an easier distinguishable tag and speaks &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/races/synonyms&quot;&gt;for enforcing a synonym.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2021-12-25T12:42:26.467" LastActivityDate="2021-12-25T12:42:26.467" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11894" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11878" CreationDate="2021-12-25T23:39:03.780" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Call a spade a spade.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a game system is deliberately using a non-dnd term, we should use that as the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's what somebody starting to play &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pf2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pf2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pf2e&lt;/a&gt; would expect, especially as the change was made deliberately mid-edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can update the usages of each tag to point you the right way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Otherwise we might as well tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/armour-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;armour-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;armour-class&lt;/a&gt; as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thac0&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;thac0&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;thac0&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon-proficiency&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon-proficiency&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon-proficiency&lt;/a&gt; as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/weapon-specialisation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;weapon-specialisation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;weapon-specialisation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would also portray some of the rare ancestries more accurately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2021-12-25T23:39:03.780" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11895" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11888" CreationDate="2021-12-27T22:12:44.987" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If nothing else, we need to clarify the rule to stop misuse&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are users who seem to want to over-use the ban on designer-intent questions to close an enormous swath of questions that we can, have, and should handle quite well. (For instance, some seem ready to close any and all questions that include the word “why”). I have several times considered opening a Meta discussion with the title “Designer-Intent Ban &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Considered_harmful&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;considered harmful&lt;/a&gt;,” because even though I don’t really care about the “true” designer-intent questions (where the only possible answer is from the author themselves), there are tons and tons of questions I &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; care about that people are (incorrectly) voting to close under this rule. Even if I could be persuaded that it would be best to close the questions we’ve had some problems with in the past, if that means throwing the baby out with the bathwater I want no part. Better to have the odd “noisy” designer-intent HNQ every now and then than to lose some of our best questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the very least, &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; needs to be fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-01-04T17:41:13.053" LastActivityDate="2022-01-04T17:41:13.053" CommentCount="18" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11896" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11869" CreationDate="2021-12-28T18:01:11.060" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a community wiki answer (open to edits from the community) with the proviso that this suggestion keeps the use of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mental-health&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mental-health&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mental-health&lt;/a&gt; for both characters and players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I haven't finished writing the 'Full Tag Wiki', but when done, it should contain a more detailed explanation of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;what questions should have this tag?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;some basic definitions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;brief introduction to the subject&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;important links for learning more&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one reasonably sized page&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using advice from the SO blog post &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/03/24/redesigned-tags-page/&quot;&gt;How to write excellent tag wikis&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tag Usage Guidance (440/500 characters)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Use this tag for questions about both the mental health of players, and the portrayal of mental health in games. This tag is not an excuse to dispense unqualified advice about mental health. Use with [accessibility] or [social] for questions about player mental health; use with [roleplay], a system tag, or another appropriate tag like [game-design] or [history-of-gaming] for in-game mental health.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Full tag wiki (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/214337/what-is-a-tag-wiki-how-do-i-write-a-good-one/214338#214338&quot;&gt;30k character limit&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both the mental health of players an the way they are portrayed in games are important to be able to discuss&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-03T17:58:20.563" LastActivityDate="2022-01-03T17:58:20.563" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2021-12-28T18:01:11.060" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11897" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2021-12-30T15:46:44.747" Score="8" ViewCount="124" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I am writing this, votes are being collected to synonym &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestry&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestry&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestry&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ancestries&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ancestries&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ancestries&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt;, in response to this meta discussion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11878/should-we-have-an-ancestry-tag&quot;&gt;Should we have an [ancestry] tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my two years or so active here, this is the first time I have seen this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FMlW0.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/FMlW0.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I found this by navigating to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/races/synonyms&quot;&gt;synonyms page for the [races] tag&lt;/a&gt;. If I had not been already aware of the discussion about these synonyms, I never would have known this vote was happening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How are you supposed to know about new tag synonym proposals without stumbling across them by chance (or already being aware that they might happen because of a meta discussion)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To highlight further the problem here, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/42375/laurel&quot;&gt;Laurel&lt;/a&gt; pointed me to another page I had never seen before: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms?tab=Newest&amp;amp;filter=Suggested&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms?tab=Newest&amp;amp;filter=Suggested&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/npcqK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/npcqK.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these synonym suggestions have been sitting in limbo since they were proposed, including one that is over two years old. So I guess I am sort of answering the question in the question here - &amp;quot;look at this page for synonym proposals&amp;quot;, but if that were a viable solution we wouldn't have synonym proposals from 2019 sitting in there. I think this is only showing the proposals I am eligible to vote for, so there may be more that I cannot see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-03T18:10:36.280" LastActivityDate="2022-01-03T18:10:36.280" Title="Is there any way to be notified of tag synonym proposals?" Tags="|support|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11898" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11897" CreationDate="2021-12-30T17:03:04.153" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was proposed some time ago on main meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/304152/175002&quot;&gt;Some kind of notification system for when tag synonyms are suggested&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we wanted to get it reviewed, I suggest we should get evidence together that it's needed network wide (i.e. not just here), post evidence as an answer on that post, and the flag it for review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2021-12-30T17:03:04.153" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11899" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11897" CreationDate="2021-12-30T19:39:38.433" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What is the rush?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Intricate tag navigation, remapping and synonyms is something that a tiny group of users does — suggestions end up there where the ten people who care about the feature eventually learn about it when there is some action that requires attention. When no action requires attention, then that is great - if a synonym sits there for four years, then there are good odds that it never required immediate action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2021-12-30T19:39:38.433" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11900" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11875" CreationDate="2022-01-01T15:53:56.687" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think it goes too far.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't disagree with Rose's edit reason at all:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've tried to simplify it down a bit while maintaining relevancy - all questions and examples are relevant to combat in a Vampire: the Masquerade setting and deserve an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this simplification needs to come from the OP, because the extent of re-wording borders on (in my opinion) 'putting words in the OPs mouth'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a balance between the OP getting what they want out of a question and making something for the community to benefit from as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I err on the side of the OP, and preserving their wording, letting them decide on the rewording. And if they &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; re-word it themselves it will be closer to their core issue and helps train users to ask more focused questions themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Teach a user to edit...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also feel like sticking to the old adage about teaching people to fish over giving free fish away (I mean, sometimes that's ok but it's the exception not the rule).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the question was answerable in it's previous state, and Rose's edit's were just polishing it then there's no harm. But if the OP won't be getting an (acceptably good) answer (closed or not), then jumping ahead and making the edit for them isn't that helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the OP wants to go and re-use Rose's wording, great it's still there in the revision history. At the same time they can pick one core issue (whether it's multiple questions or not), and move the rest to another answer even better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But for now, we can wait for it to be edited by the user. There's no time limit on when a question can be re-opened. Lets wait and see what happens.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2022-01-01T15:53:56.687" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11901" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-04T18:46:52.087" Score="9" ViewCount="263" Body="&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195049&quot;&gt;Our GM has us roll new initiative every round. Just how broad of a change is this?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above question was edited from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/195049/2&quot;&gt;this state&lt;/a&gt; to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/195049/3&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;. This can also be looked at on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/195049/revisions&quot;&gt;revisions page&lt;/a&gt;. I am wondering if this edit was an edit too far, that is, if it made a significant enough change to the question without the OP's say so that it should be undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-01-05T13:17:06.690" Title="Was this edit too substantial?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|editing|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11902" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11901" CreationDate="2022-01-04T18:46:52.087" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Yes, this was an edit too far&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original form of the question asked the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I was wondering what was the reasoning behind the choice of making a single initiative roll at the start of the fight, was it for the sake of simplicity or is there something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, what else do you think we should absolutely change to keep the game balanced?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current form of the question, however, asks this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But just how broad of a change is this? What else can we expect this house rule to change about the game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question went from asking about designer intentions and what other houserules should be implemented alongside the one in question to asking about what the ramifications of the houserule are. These are completely and fundamentally different questions, and so the edit was too significant and should be undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-01-04T18:46:52.087" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11903" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11901" CreationDate="2022-01-05T13:17:06.690" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sorry for causing so much trouble, i have accepted the edit as it is now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="74701" LastActivityDate="2022-01-05T13:17:06.690" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11904" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-07T21:47:25.180" Score="6" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rather than flinging my question onto main and discussing possible duplicature later, I am going to preemptively ask about it here first, in order to determine if I should ask my new question or bounty an old one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is my question (minor details subuject to change, per our usual editing processes):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When readying an action to cast a spell from a magic item, do you have to maintain concentration as though you were readying the Cast a Spell action?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Typically, when using the Ready action to cast a spell, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Ready&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Rules for the Ready action&quot;&gt;following rule&lt;/a&gt; applies (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs. To be readied, a spell must have a casting time of 1 action, and &lt;em&gt;holding onto the spell's magic requires concentration.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, suppose I have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/wand-of-polymorph&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;This wand has 7 charges. While holding it, you can use an action to expend 1 of its charges to cast the *polymorph* spell (save DC 15) from it.&quot;&gt;Wand of Polymorph&lt;/a&gt;. On my turn, I take the following course of action:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I take the Ready action to use the Wand of Polymorph on the Roc if it flies within 15 feet of me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I were just using the wand &lt;em&gt;on my turn&lt;/em&gt; to cast &lt;em&gt;polymorph&lt;/em&gt;, I would have to concentrate as usual, since the rules for &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/magic-items#Spells&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Subheading 'Spells'&quot;&gt;Activating an Item&lt;/a&gt; state:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some magic items allow the user to cast a spell from the item. The spell is cast at the lowest possible spell and caster level, doesn't expend any of the user's spell slots, and requires no components, unless the item's description says otherwise. The spell uses its normal casting time, range, and duration, and &lt;em&gt;the user of the item must concentrate if the spell requires concentration.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since the action I am readying is not the Cast a Spell action, it is the &amp;quot;activate the Wand of Polymorph&amp;quot; action, do I have to concentrate to &amp;quot;hold its energy&amp;quot; until I release the spell on the Roc?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/concentration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;concentration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;concentration&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/readied-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;readied-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;readied-action&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, this question is very similar to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/157196/62294&quot;&gt;another question&lt;/a&gt; that was asked in 2019; it is brief, so I will reproduce it here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How does readying an effect or spell granted by a magic item work?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can a player hold the effect or spell granted to them by an item, and if so, does the spell or effect follow the normal &amp;quot;Readying spell&amp;quot; rule where if the trigger never occurs, the effect or the spell, or the charges on the item are wasted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;IE: &amp;quot;I hold the effect of my Cape of the Mountebank (&lt;em&gt;dimension door&lt;/em&gt;) until the minotaur moves into melee with me.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The minotaur never moves into melee with said character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/readied-action&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;readied-action&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;readied-action&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question appears to ask generally &amp;quot;how does this work&amp;quot;, then asks about a very specific portion of the interaction, &amp;quot;if so, does the spell or effect follow the normal 'Readying spell' rule where if the trigger never occurs, the effect or the spell, or the charges on the item are wasted.&amp;quot; It does not, however, ask specifically about what I ask in my proposed question above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, it should be noted that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/157215/62294&quot;&gt;accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; does contain a brief statement that is an answer to my question, though it does not appear to explore it to any depth (likely due to the general nature of the question):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Readying the spell requires casting the spell, and holding it with your concentration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should I post my question as written above as a new question, or should I bounty the old question requesting further exploration of that specific point because my question would be closed as a duplicate, or something else?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-01-11T16:09:05.320" Title="Is this question about readying an action to cast a spell from a magic item a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11905" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11904" CreationDate="2022-01-07T22:52:05.120" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Your question is sufficiently different and more specific to stand on its own&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question asks explicitly about something (concentration when readying a magic item activation) that was, at best, an implicit part of the &lt;em&gt;title&lt;/em&gt; of the original and was completely missing from the body. I would also like to point out that only one of the three answers even tried to answer your question so even if it was intended by the OP, it struggled to get through to readers. As such, I would suggest a separate, more specific question for the case you are wondering about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-01-08T14:47:06.880" LastActivityDate="2022-01-08T14:47:06.880" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11907" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11904" CreationDate="2022-01-11T16:09:05.320" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;The statement you quote from my accepted answer is specific to that question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Readying the spell requires casting the spell, and holding it with&#xA;your concentration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can be read as&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[Satisfying the assumption made in the question that you are holding an effect or spell] requires [doing&#xA;something from a quoted section above], and [doing another thing from&#xA;the quoted section.]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, it is not meant to be a statement that stands on its own and so lacks exploration, but rather is a summary of the starting assumption and what follows from it, based on quoted passages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question doesn't require the assumption that I read from the body of the original question, and so therefore is a new question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="15991" LastActivityDate="2022-01-11T16:09:05.320" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11908" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11909" CreationDate="2022-01-12T01:16:22.243" Score="4" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;When saving an edit, I am asked if I want to abandon the edit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ceD5sl.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ceD5sl.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, if I choose cancel, the post disappears:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bqajll.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/bqajll.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It works on questions too:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p2T3lm.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/p2T3lm.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is on iOS Safari.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta.se report here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/375054/editing-a-post-leads-to-a-weird-behavior&quot;&gt;Editing a post leads to weird behavior&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-01-12T17:59:57.683" LastActivityDate="2022-01-12T17:59:57.683" Title="Bug when saving an edit: I made my post disappear" Tags="|bug|status-completed|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11909" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11908" CreationDate="2022-01-12T14:06:24.737" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all: thanks a lot to everybody for notifying us about this issue. We have been able to reproduce and fix the issue. Please do let us know (in a comment to this answer) if you're still encountering any issues with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="74822" LastActivityDate="2022-01-12T14:06:24.737" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11910" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-12T15:00:23.560" Score="10" ViewCount="206" Body="&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we say goodbye to the old year and welcome the new one, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22year+in+moderation%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the preceding calendar year&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As most of you here are aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;-- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't eliminate the need for having &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;moderators&lt;/a&gt; altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as we say goodbye to 2021, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KZntT.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;exciting&lt;/em&gt; stats&lt;/a&gt;. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Role-playing Games over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Action&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Community¹&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users suspended²&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users destroyed³&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;92&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users deleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users contacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;106&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,751&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,398&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2,148&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;706&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: First questions queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;175&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,294&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: First answers queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;294&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,279&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tags merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms proposed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms created&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;31&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Revisions redacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions unprotected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions reopened&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;31&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;259&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions protected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;172&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions migrated&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions flagged⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;649&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions closed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;113&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,022&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Question flags handled⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;265&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;369&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts unlocked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;30&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;164&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts locked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;145&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts deleted⁶&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;247&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,656&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts bumped&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;54&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Escalations to the Community Manager team&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;125&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,685&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments deleted⁷&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8,471&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4,458&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comment flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,341&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;361&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Bounties canceled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answers flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;53&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2,423&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answer flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;810&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,664&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;All comments on a post moved to chat&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;82&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ A &amp;quot;destroyed&amp;quot; user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88994/what-is-the-difference-between-a-deleted-user-and-a-destroyed-user&quot;&gt;Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Further reading:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? We posted a similar report here last year: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11355/2020-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2020: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/search?q=title%3A%222021%3A+a+year+in+moderation%22&quot;&gt;this report on other sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or peruse &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/374784/208518&quot;&gt;detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing everyone a happy 2022! ^_^&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2022-01-12T20:07:33.117" Title="2021: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11911" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11910" CreationDate="2022-01-12T16:05:52.237" Score="9" Body="&lt;h1&gt;2020 vs. 2021 Comparison for RPG.se&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WOSx7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WOSx7.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YJIVM.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YJIVM.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3dOw9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3dOw9.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7022/52137&quot;&gt;2017 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8680/8610&quot;&gt;2018 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9662/2019-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2019 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11355/2020-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2020 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEDE Queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions-answers-and-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Total number of questions, answers per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1173867/total-number-of-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Comments per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-12T20:07:33.117" LastActivityDate="2022-01-12T20:07:33.117" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11912" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11757" CreationDate="2022-01-13T20:51:12.163" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the report - this should be fixed in prod this afternoon&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meta Issue&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375127/209031&quot;&gt;Review queue &amp;quot;First questions&amp;quot; does not show any message when reaching the maximum number of daily votes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="74854" LastActivityDate="2022-01-13T20:51:12.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11913" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-14T23:46:41.810" Score="10" ViewCount="371" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question is in response to @nitsua60's comment on my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97594/what-options-do-i-have-for-changing-my-characters-sex#comment527678_97594&quot;&gt;old question&lt;/a&gt;. (I figure Meta is a better place for the discussion than comments on an old question)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Background for everyone else is that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; tag was added to the above question. At the time, the tag wiki for the tag was as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions related to in-game depictions of sexuality and any potential out-of-game issues related to those depictions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also: the romance tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After reading this, I did not agree that the tag applied, and eventually rolled the edit back.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasoning was well-summarized by Doppelgreener &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/60153315#60153315&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sexuality is about sexual attraction and sexual acts: the horizontal tango and people you'd want to do that thing with. Your actual physical sex is a separate topic, no relation. Someone saying &amp;quot;I was assigned male at birth&amp;quot; is not a sexual statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simply put, the question does not at its core involve:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Seduction&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sexual Attraction&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Sexual Preference&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The players&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is instead, in its most concise form:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;My character is male. Does 5e have any mechanical way to change that temporarily?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence, discussion -- what is the place and purpose of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; tag, and should it apply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147697/how-does-the-polymorph-spell-affect-procreation?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136543/what-happens-when-one-conceives-a-child-while-polymorphed-into-another-species&quot;&gt;like&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97594/what-options-do-i-have-for-changing-my-characters-sex#comment527678_97594&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2421" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-18T15:15:36.813" LastActivityDate="2022-01-18T15:15:36.813" Title="When is the [sexuality] tag an appropriate tag for a question?" Tags="|discussion|tags|questions|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11914" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11913" CreationDate="2022-01-15T06:50:07.223" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with Doppelgreener's definition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would propose the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; tag be used in questions about a character's:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sexual preferences&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sexual advances&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sexual rejections, or&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;sexual acts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;as well as out of game ramifications regarding the above scenarios.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about a character's gender identity, gender assignment, or genetic gender feels like it would be more of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gender&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gender&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gender&lt;/a&gt; question, though that tag feels like it is oddly defined and doesn't truly cover the topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Under these guidelines, the linked example question concerning changing sex is clearly not a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; tag question, though the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gender&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gender&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gender&lt;/a&gt; tag &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other two are a tougher call, though seem to be more centered on the effects/repercussions of the polymorph spell in their respective systems, rather than the sexual act itself. I would argue that the tag should not be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One thing that seems clear to me is that the definition of sexuality can mean several things, and clearly defining it for the purpose of the tag would be an improvement to the site. (Perhaps similar changes in several other tags, though that is a bit out of scope for this meta post.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-18T15:12:06.057" LastActivityDate="2022-01-18T15:12:06.057" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11915" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11913" CreationDate="2022-01-15T09:17:09.733" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I agree with Doppelgreener's definition. However, your question - as written - has two moving parts to it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other answers may get into detail about general cases. I'd like to address your specific question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97594/what-options-do-i-have-for-changing-my-characters-sex&quot;&gt;What options do I have for changing my character&amp;#39;s sex?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us look at the two moving parts of your &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97594/what-options-do-i-have-for-changing-my-characters-sex#comment527678_97594&quot;&gt;specific question&lt;/a&gt;. First, we have the seduction of the prince who requires the player character to be non-male to 'get on' with them, and then we have the second part - the pc also needs to be capable of childbearing for the duration of the pregnancy. Ideally, we have the third part - the pc wants to revert from his non-male sex to male sex. The group feels confident to handle the problem of parenting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] to seduce the prince and have a royal bastard (we have cohorts who will be responsible parents!) [...] we have one problem: Every single one of the PCs is male... which makes getting on with the [p]rince an impossibility. [...] My character is [...] willing to &amp;quot;bite the bullet&amp;quot; and handle the seduction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this first part, we have a prince with precise preferences for a non-male these are explicitly necessary for the whole mission of seducing the price to succeed. It would be impossible for a male to 'get on' with the prince. This predicament seems clearly in the realm of what our sexuality tag covers; these preferences are crucial to the problem - at the core of it and the whole acquisition of a reproductive system that works out for the pc stakes on this to work out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any spells that would allow him to swap his sex for the duration of the 9 months of pregnancy? Being able to swap back after the happy event would be ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This second part is not at all about sexuality — it is a mechanical question about accessing a tool to swap to a sex capable of childbearing for the 9 months duration of the pregnancy; in succession to revert the sex after labour.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps it is - that it is not your intention that your problem is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt;, but the question demonstrably is because you highlight the impossibility of getting on with the prince as a male. As a reader, this is about an in-game depiction of sexuality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fortunately, none of the answers focuses on the aspect of sexuality. So adjusting that first part of the question should not render any answers void.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-18T15:11:21.327" LastActivityDate="2022-01-18T15:11:21.327" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11916" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11913" CreationDate="2022-01-15T15:12:47.790" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let me preface this with my general opinion about edits: edits are meant to &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; a post. Who is the final arbiter of that? The person whose account name is under the post. Why? Because that person will get the positive and negative feedback involved with the post. How absurdly dystopian would it be, if we forced someone to have something stand in their name and then let people deem it useful or not useful when the one getting the votes didn't even agree with it? No. Apart from gross misconduct handled by moderators, the OP of the post has the final say what their post looks like. Anybody else can &lt;em&gt;suggest&lt;/em&gt;, post &lt;em&gt;their own&lt;/em&gt; version that looks like they want, or &lt;em&gt;downvote&lt;/em&gt; if they don't like the version the OP prefers. But they don't get to force their &amp;quot;improvement&amp;quot; onto the OP.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I'm a bit confused by this question. The original post talks about seducing a prince to bear their offspring. And it's not cyberpunk where that might work &lt;em&gt;in vitro&lt;/em&gt;. The words used mean very explicitly sticking one's &lt;em&gt;thing&lt;/em&gt; into another persons &lt;em&gt;thang&lt;/em&gt;. That is how babies are made. I'm not sure how that would &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; involve sexuality?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't about gender. Well, not in that sense. It's about sex. The act of making babies. Having sex. And how to best do that given a certain incompatible scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would agree that this tag is not correct if you had asked for other options. Maybe one of your cohorts could seduce the prince? Maybe you could abduct an existing bastard. Maybe there is a way with magic? But that was not your question. Your question was very explicitly how to enable your character to have sex with the intent to reproduce. To me, it would make absolute sense to tag that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="7665" LastEditDate="2022-01-16T06:48:17.670" LastActivityDate="2022-01-16T06:48:17.670" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11917" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11913" CreationDate="2022-01-15T17:08:40.153" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;FWIW, I also happened to notice &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97594/what-options-do-i-have-for-changing-my-characters-sex&quot;&gt;the question&lt;/a&gt; when it got bumped to the front page by the edit, and I also felt that the tag was kind of weird on the question, being at most tangentially relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, the question is asking for ways to make a biologically male PC capable of bearing a child.  All the stuff about seducing princes and whatnot is just background details that could be removed without fundamentally changing the question or invalidating any answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We don't normally tag questions based on just incidental background details.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I do think that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; would be an appropriate tag for &lt;em&gt;a question about in-game seduction&lt;/em&gt;, that's not really what this question is.&#xA;The OP isn't asking how to get their PC to have sex with the prince — they're assuming they can handle that part, at least once the other issues with their plan have been resolved.  They're asking how to get a baby out of it, given that their PC currently lacks the necessary reproductive anatomy for that.  And that's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a question about &amp;quot;in-game depictions of sexuality and any potential out-of-game issues related to those depictions.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in this case, I do feel that the removal of the tag was reasonable and its original addition at best only marginally justified.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ps. I also don't think the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sexuality&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sexuality&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sexuality&lt;/a&gt; tag is particularly appropriate for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147697/how-does-the-polymorph-spell-affect-procreation&quot;&gt;other&lt;/a&gt; two &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136543/what-happens-when-one-conceives-a-child-while-polymorphed-into-another-species&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; mentioned above, or for any other questions that are primarily about game mechanics related to pregnancy or reproductive biology, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a general rule of thumb for such questions, I'd suggest that if &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; the characters get pregnant does not particularly affect the possible answers, then the sexuality tag is probably not relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll leave it for others to determine whether or not we should have a separate tag for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pregnancy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pregnancy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pregnancy&lt;/a&gt; and/or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reproductive-biology&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reproductive-biology&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;reproductive-biology&lt;/a&gt;.  I do note that we seem to have more &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=pregnan*+is%3Aq&quot;&gt;questions mentioning pregnancy&lt;/a&gt; than I honestly expected, so perhaps a tag for them &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be reasonable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2620" LastEditorUserId="2620" LastEditDate="2022-01-15T17:30:03.947" LastActivityDate="2022-01-15T17:30:03.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11918" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2022-01-19T18:20:49.667" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The problem here is low-quality, opinion-based answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rules as written provides a consistent baseline for all players. Calling out that this is what the rules say, and pointing to the rules do what they say reference, creates a solid consistent answer that the overwhelming majority of players would be able to use at their tables (Though some GM's may reject those answers under rule 0). Thomas Markov has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/171207/62294&quot;&gt;a fantastically written response here that explores the idea of table expectations&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you can't point to a rule, or even a RAI reference like Jeremy Crawford's old tweets, then the answer is going to be hard to defend as anything other than  opinion-based. Other answers may have have conflicting results, and opinion-based answers will have a harder time being accepted at any given table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we actively discourage the idea of writing posts that follow idea of 'the rules only do what they say', I predict that we will see an increase in answers that are low quality and only contain opinion based answers. A better option would be encouraging people to do longer, multipart answers that include both a rules first section exploring what the rules actually say, perhaps a second section exploring rules as intended sources such as Jeremy's old tweets, then if needed a final rule zero section that explores how a GM could rule and &lt;em&gt;calls itself out&lt;/em&gt; as only one possibility that may not be accepted at all tables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="14793" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-19T20:44:49.263" LastActivityDate="2022-01-19T20:44:49.263" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11919" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2022-01-24T21:32:52.800" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I submit &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/195497/36850&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; for consideration as it allows you to make a block of cheese out of an unbounded number of Simulacra.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastActivityDate="2022-01-24T21:32:52.800" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11920" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11921" CreationDate="2022-01-25T09:04:08.610" Score="1" ViewCount="60" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are two questions. One is marked as &amp;quot;Watched&amp;quot; for me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dQwaP.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/dQwaP.png&quot; alt=&quot;&amp;quot;How to roleplay a vulgar character without using profanity?&amp;quot; is &amp;quot;Watched&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;How does Urban Shadows 2e differ from the original?&amp;quot; is not&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did read both questions and follow none of them, so it's not about reading or following.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What exactly does the &amp;quot;Watched&amp;quot; mark mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-28T19:44:42.573" LastActivityDate="2022-01-28T19:44:42.573" Title="What does the &quot;Watched&quot; label on questions mean?" Tags="|support|questions|user-interface|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11921" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11920" CreationDate="2022-01-25T09:35:36.170" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Note, as of January 26, 2022, the peepee colored watch tag has been removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It is the new iteration of the “watched tags” feature.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See this meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/375081/new-post-summary-designs-on-site-home-pages-and-greatest-hits-now-everywhere-el&quot;&gt;New post summary designs on site home pages and greatest hits now; everywhere else eventually&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Previously, questions with a watched tag were given a slightly darker background shade (see my answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11207/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; for reference), and now instead of that nice, subtle highlighting of watched questions, you get this ostentatious peepee colored tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can probably tell, the changes have not gone over well. Twelve hours ago that announcement at meta.se had a score of +50; as I am writing this it is around -150.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-26T13:09:41.240" LastActivityDate="2022-01-26T13:09:41.240" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11922" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-25T13:32:58.427" Score="6" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackapps.com/questions/9293/legacy-questions-bringing-back-the-old-questions-design&quot;&gt;Legacy Questions - Bringing back the old questions design&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange recently changed the UI of the main questions page, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/375081/674198&quot;&gt;and it was poorly received&lt;/a&gt; because it is terrible, or in the words of the legendary Shog9, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/375081/new-post-summary-designs-on-site-home-pages-and-greatest-hits-now-everywhere-el/375478#comment1250866_375478&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Good lord, what a flaming trainwreck&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. My &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375478/674198&quot;&gt;request to change it back&lt;/a&gt; seems to be doing well, maybe SE will listen. In the mean time, a user named &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/users/14251221/spectric&quot;&gt;Spectric&lt;/a&gt; has put together a user script to restore some of the previous functionality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Without the script, the new view looks like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kTo1x.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kTo1x.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And turning on the script, we have:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PTm79.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PTm79.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Installing the script requires a browser app, I personally use &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tampermonkey.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Tampermonkey&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-26T18:26:19.097" LastActivityDate="2022-01-26T18:26:19.097" Title="Legacy Questions: a script to restore functionality to the questions list" Tags="|support|user-interface|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11924" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-26T06:03:29.390" Score="1" ViewCount="83" Body="&lt;p&gt;How would you handle a disabilities tag for questions on blindness/deafness? I mean that eventually someone is going to want to create it anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30985" LastActivityDate="2022-01-26T10:58:02.687" Title="Disabilities tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11925" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11924" CreationDate="2022-01-26T07:14:12.567" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Conditions are not Disabilities&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/disabilities&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;disabilities&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;disabilities&lt;/a&gt; tag were to be created it would need clear usage guidance. Conditions and effects such as those applied by the &lt;em&gt;blindness/deafness&lt;/em&gt; spell in D&amp;amp;D 5e should not be considered disabilities. We should also be clear whether it is referring characters or players with disabilities.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However my belief is that we should not be creating tags pre-emptively. If questions arise where this or a similar tag would be beneficial then it can be created. We shouldn't try to predefine use-cases that don't exist. It is possible that the use-case for this tag exists, in which case we should look at the list of questions it should apply to and define it based on that list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-26T09:42:16.610" LastActivityDate="2022-01-26T09:42:16.610" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11926" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11924" CreationDate="2022-01-26T09:47:24.337" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Use existing tags.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We already have a tag for blindness, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blind&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;blind&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;blind&lt;/a&gt;, and have historically used the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hearing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;hearing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;hearing&lt;/a&gt; for questions about in-game deafness.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For out-of-game issues relating to these things, use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/accessibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;accessibility&lt;/a&gt;. Existing tags have you covered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-26T10:58:02.687" LastActivityDate="2022-01-26T10:58:02.687" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11927" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11929" CreationDate="2022-01-27T16:03:54.697" Score="10" ViewCount="205" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195547/is-this-ship-resurrection-spell-balanced-for-4th-level&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt;, from a relatively inexperienced user, asked &amp;quot;Would you use this (homebrew) spell?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov rightly identified this as opinion-based and bad-subjective, explained that the question type was not one we used, linked to stack policy on questions to be avoided, suggested that the question could successfully be reformatted as 'is this spell balanced at this level', linked to a list of homebrew balance questions, and linked to a meta question describing that format.  All in all wonderful community support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I wonder if we should also suggest a different direction.  Perhaps when the OP wrote 'would you use', they meant, 'Is this a useful addition to the spells available, does it fill an unmet need or niche?'  &lt;strong&gt;Even if they didn't mean that&lt;/strong&gt;, that seems to me to be an objective question that invites a comparative review of the functionality existing spells and perhaps a good-subjective discussion on challenges, problems, and solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if someone suggested a homebrew spell that offered one day-long protection from the elements and asked whether it fulfilled a hole in the meta, answers might include that there are spells that protect one from elemental damage in combat, but not over an adventuring day, and there are actually design reasons for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this the type of question that the stack should support?&#xA;If so, how and when should we encourage posters to ask these types of questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-01-28T19:47:28.480" LastActivityDate="2022-01-28T19:47:28.480" Title="Is 'does this spell fill a niche' a stackable question?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11929" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11927" CreationDate="2022-01-27T22:29:04.307" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think that turning it into a balance question is probably the right approach&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How does one discuss the balance of something? One of the best ways is by looking at the available approaches to solving the problem &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; that something. It’s not the only consideration—particularly if there simply &lt;em&gt;isn’t&lt;/em&gt; an existing solution for the problem—but a good answer should at least get into it, even if it’s just to say that there isn’t any great existing comparison. And if an answer gets into it, boom, we’ve also answered the question of how it fits into a niche.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Likewise, if the spell does something that just didn’t really need doing, that affects its balance. A spell that produces a perfectly-woven basket but can only be cast underwater, even if there’s no other way to accomplish such a thing, isn’t a powerful spell; being “better than everything else” at underwater basketweaving doesn’t matter because no one cares about that. Which is to say, “underwater basketweaving” &lt;strong&gt;isn’t&lt;/strong&gt; a niche that the game incentivizes players to care much, if at all, about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So a good answer to a good balance question should cover these kinds of questions for a homebrewer, and potentially other things besides. Going with a balance question is probably the best approach.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This isn’t really quite an “XY” situation, though&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent probably really does want to know about potential niches, or have doubts about the homebrew finding one, and that’s a valid concern to have. It’s just an awkward thing to ask after, and not really how this site works. So in a sense, we are substituting a related question that gets at what they’re interested in, much as we would with an XY problem, but not because Y was a potential solution the querent naively thought would resolve X, but because Y is a part of X, and X is something we can actually address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-01-28T00:48:34.043" LastActivityDate="2022-01-28T00:48:34.043" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11930" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-01-30T17:11:09.600" Score="8" ViewCount="285" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195592&quot;&gt;How was the &amp;quot;target&amp;quot; of a spell chosen for the Roll20 Information Block?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That question was recently asked and has comments and various votes about whether it should be open or closed. Is it on-topic? To quote the current form of the question in full:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The PHB specifies that there are two parts in a spell description, the block of information and the spell's effect:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each spell description in chapter 11 begins with a block of information, including the spell’s name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell’s effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The block of information contains the seven headings listed above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D Beyond spell blocks of information retain the seven PHB headings but add two more; attack / save and damage / effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Roll20 Compendium blocks of information retain the seven PHB headings but add two more; &lt;strong&gt;target&lt;/strong&gt; and classes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the PHB, a spell's target may be listed in the spell's effect, but then again it may not, which can lead to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152115&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; about what the target of a spell actually is.  For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/152199&quot;&gt;many spells&lt;/a&gt; it simply is not clear what the target is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, the explicit listing of the target in the Compendium entries &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be a valuable source of  clarifying information, if they were official, which I doubt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What was the process of selecting the target of a spell for the Compendium write-up?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Was it confined entirely to the Roll20 team, in which case the target listed there is clearly not RAW?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Did the WotC Design team offer guidance and suggestion as to the target listings, in which case a listed target might have the status of RAI?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The actual questions asked are those last three. Are they on-topic for this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-01-31T13:25:06.013" Title="Is asking about the design process of roll20 on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11931" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11930" CreationDate="2022-01-30T18:21:04.827" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Only very few people are involved in the design process of a database. In that, it is very much akin to the design of a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who can tell us why a game (or in this case: a derivative database) is how it is? Only those that made it can. In some &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; rare cases, there is design commentary that explains those decisions, but in general, the community can't know such things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the very few cases where such commentary exists is the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.maidrpg.com/resources/MaidRPG_Nun_Approved.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Maid-RPG Nun-Approved File&lt;/a&gt;, which is the translator commentary on all the little and big changes, which not only sheds light on the intended tone and ideas of the game. Without such a file, we have to guess or need to be one of those people that have been part of the process - or fail at the Good/Bad Subjective and citation expectations!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, this question is asking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; - and thus Off-topic due to the moderation effort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-01-30T18:33:27.007" LastActivityDate="2022-01-30T18:33:27.007" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11932" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11930" CreationDate="2022-01-30T22:13:47.837" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is on topic.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What was the process of selecting the target of a spell for the Compendium write-up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Someone in our general sphere knows this, and no other stack supersedes us in that query. That the people who'd know the answer are likely to leave your question unanswered doesn't matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You are also gleaming at designer intent, which, if it would be the focus of the question, would make it off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did the WotC Design team offer guidance and suggestion as to the target listings, in which case a listed target might have the status of RAI?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But your question itself doesn't invite speculation (that you might do on your own based on the result), &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/44723&quot;&gt;our reasoning about rule intent&lt;/a&gt; generally doesn't apply because the first part is the core of the question. That the querent wants to also use the result for speculation or to conclude about intent is irrelevant. The question is about the historical fact of collaboration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might still attract many unfounded and speculative answers regardless of your careful wording — if that happens, we still might close it - as that is site practice. We shouldn't close your question before that might happen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2022-01-31T08:47:16.007" LastActivityDate="2022-01-31T08:47:16.007" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11933" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11930" CreationDate="2022-01-30T22:46:39.933" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is a design intent question, which is off topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Roll20 designed a web based compendium of Wizards’ print material. As a part of this design, Roll20 made an interpretive choice by adding a “target” section to the spell descriptions. The question asks about the process behind these spell interpretations that Roll20 included as a part of their compendium design - why or how did they choose one interpretation or another? The question then asks if this design choice is related to Wizards’ own intent for the rules. This is the classic formulation of designer rule intent questions that we routinely close as off topic - “Why did X designer make Y decision about rule Z?” - which we do because the signal-to-noise ratio on those questions is so low that allowing them has historically had negative value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-01-31T13:25:06.013" LastActivityDate="2022-01-31T13:25:06.013" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11934" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11930" CreationDate="2022-01-31T00:17:16.507" Score="1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;With the recent edit, this is now a question of historical fact and it is on-topic&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Did the WotC Design team offer guidance and suggestion as to the target listings?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is asking whether or not WotC and Roll20 &lt;em&gt;collaborated&lt;/em&gt;. This is a question of historical record and no part of it is about the intentions of WotC or Roll20.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One could argue the question still has an intent related bit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What was the process of selecting the target of a spell for the Compendium write-up?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this sentence is immediately followed up with an explanation of what is specifically being asked:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here I do not mean what was the intent behind it, but simply was the decision confined entirely to the Roll20 team, in which case the target listed there is clearly not RAW?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So even &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; the process question is a problem (personally, I dont think it is), that's &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; what's being asked for. The only thing being asked is about whether or not Roll20 and WotC collaborated. The potentially troublesome bit, in all honesty, could simply be removed and nothing about what's being asked would change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-01-31T11:42:01.210" LastActivityDate="2022-01-31T11:42:01.210" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11935" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-02-01T18:40:44.477" Score="11" ViewCount="264" Body="&lt;p&gt;On meta, a new information-gathering project about weighted voting for trusted users started that I think might affect us considerably later down the line: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/375797/526695&quot;&gt;Should trusted close/reopen voters and reviewers have their votes weighted more than others&amp;#39;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For your convenience, I quote the entire discussion prompt and invite you to discuss it here in particular regarding rpg.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[the following was posted by Catija, a Community Manager employed by Stack Exchange]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Q3 2021 I &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/370373/three-vote-close-reopen-test-results&quot;&gt;finalized my&#xA;research&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;around three vote close/reopen and I was pretty happy with the&#xA;outcomes - as were the sites that got to test it out. While the&#xA;benefit to each site was different, the most important thing was that&#xA;there were no negative impacts of that test and all of the sites&#xA;wanted to keep the reduced numbers of votes to close. We will be&#xA;continuing to make this change on other sites that have requested it&#xA;in the near future, so if you're waiting for a 3-vote close/reopen&#xA;test, it'll be coming soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the things that came up during that process was a question&#xA;about expanding the gold badge close/reopen privileges to other users&#xA;as an addition or alternative to three vote close/reopen. We've&#xA;discussed it internally and want to do some research before deciding&#xA;whether to ask the Public Platform team to build a new feature to&#xA;allow this - unlike 3-vote close, there's nothing already built that&#xA;will allow a change of this sort.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is the second part of that research - I asked a version&#xA;of this question to the Moderators in November 2021 and am following&#xA;up here to see what others think, too. Based on their initial&#xA;feedback, they were concerned about a few things and it didn't seem&#xA;there was a huge amount of interest in this path forward, at least as&#xA;proposed below. I've adjusted the description below to answer&#xA;questions the moderators had and concerns they expressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What is the goal?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First things first - &lt;strong&gt;this project is purely information gathering&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;as mentioned in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2021/09/19/the-loop-our-community-department-roadmap-for-q4-2021/&quot;&gt;Q4 roadmap&lt;/a&gt;. We're trying to see whether it's&#xA;something that would be worth building at some point in the future and&#xA;we have no specific timeline related to actually building it. We'll be&#xA;gathering data and community sentiment before deciding whether to move&#xA;forward. Additionally, this wouldn't be shipped network-wide if we did&#xA;build it. Like 3-vote close/reopen, it'd be up to the site to opt-in.&#xA;That out of the way, let's look at the goal of the feature...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As my research showed, there's a need across the network to make&#xA;curation tasks easier to complete and require fewer people to&#xA;participate. Three vote close/reopen is &lt;em&gt;a&lt;/em&gt; way to do that and it's&#xA;also a very even-handed one - essentially, everyone with the privilege&#xA;to vote to close/reopen gets the same decision weight when it comes to&#xA;participating in reviewing and voting to close and reopen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, this is fine but it means that we're not necessarily&#xA;recognizing the specialized knowledge and experience of people who are&#xA;very involved in the curation process, and I would say that&#xA;recognition is deserved!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, in the end, the goal is: &lt;strong&gt;Make it easier for engaged curators to&#xA;close and reopen questions more quickly, for any reason&lt;/strong&gt;.&#xA;Additionally, we hope that people who are working to curate the site&#xA;will feel like their efforts are more valued and that there are fewer&#xA;close/reopen review tasks needing their attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we can't really hope to make reviewing fun, we can hope to make&#xA;it feel less futile.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Why are we investigating weighting close votes as a solution?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Up to this point, weighting votes has been limited to the gold badge&#xA;&amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/230865/increase-close-vote-weight-for-gold-tag-badge-holders/231212#231212&quot;&gt;duplicate hammer&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; - which, as its name implies, only has any&#xA;power over duplicate closures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are other things about the gold badge hammer that may not be a&#xA;good fit for this usage:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's only particularly useful on sites that are huge (like SO) or have some very deep interest and expertise in specific tags (like SFF)&#xA;since getting a gold tag badge is a very high bar to set.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Having a gold tag badge doesn't necessarily mean you know when to close/reopen posts - that said, having this only relate to duplicates&#xA;minimizes that risk.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It only relates to duplicates.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's unilateral. This is a pro and a con - for duplicates it's likely good but for other close reasons, it may not be as sensible.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, when we initially rolled out this feature, half of &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/231212/284336&quot;&gt;the&#xA;answer announcing it&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;says that we'd consider it for other uses in the future - and that was&#xA;in 2014! Seems like it's about time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond this, we think this is a good potential solution for the goal&#xA;we're trying to achieve. While it's not something we can start&#xA;implementing tomorrow, since we'd have to get it built into the site,&#xA;we do have some data and personal experience that we can look at from&#xA;duplicate closures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What are the initial feature ideas for this?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've got some ideas floating around in my head of what I think might&#xA;make a good feature set to ask for here and that's based on my&#xA;personal experience and my thoughts about the duplicate hammer. I'm&#xA;open to being convinced that I'm wrong about any of these points! I'll&#xA;put them here in a numbered list with my thoughts so that y'all can&#xA;call them out by number in your answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Increase the close/reopen vote weight to 2&lt;/strong&gt; for users who meet certain criteria - I think that making these unilateral has the risk&#xA;of making it a bit too easy to close or reopen questions without a lot&#xA;of oversight.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I could also go the route of making it a weight of 2 on sites with 3-vote close/reopen and 3 on sites with 5-vote close/reopen.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Unlocked by voting to close/reopen (including reviews) &lt;em&gt;n&lt;/em&gt; times +&lt;/strong&gt; - Since reopening is less common, this would get imbalanced if we relied on each action individually. We don't necessarily want to rely&#xA;on reviewer badges only as they're not very common. Review stats:&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Steward badges (1k reviews) - only 88 sites have at least one person with the badge and only 42 have ≥10 †.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reviewer badges (250 reviews) - 132 sites with at least 1 and 81 with ≥10 †.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Requires maintaining &lt;em&gt;n%&lt;/em&gt; of close/reopen votes &amp;amp; reviews deemed &amp;quot;valid&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; - Whether someone's reviews were actually &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; and whether&#xA;someone should be able to robo-review and still get this privilege is&#xA;a concern to me. I don't think they should.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&amp;quot;Good&amp;quot; defined by being validated by other community members (e.g. was the post closed/reopened?) We'd put some work into finding a&#xA;reasonable way to define &amp;quot;good&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alternative option: &lt;strong&gt;Only weight votes cast in review&lt;/strong&gt; - We could make it so the privilege is only awarded for reviewing and would only&#xA;weight votes cast in close/reopen reviews.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Applies to all close reasons&lt;/strong&gt; - There's really no reason to restrict this to any specific close reason over the other. Except for&#xA;duplicates, we don't necessarily want to incentivize people opting for&#xA;one reason over the others.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This &lt;em&gt;would not&lt;/em&gt; replace the gold badge hammer - so, no loss of privilege for those users when it comes to duplicate closures.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Those are the broad-stroke points. There are clearly minutiae, such as&#xA;determining which close reason &amp;quot;wins&amp;quot; to poke at but those things seem&#xA;like secondary bits that we can work out once we answer the big&#xA;question - &amp;quot;Is this idea worth pursuing?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;† - These badge counts are queue agnostic, so it's likely an&#xA;overcount if someone has a Steward or Reviewer badge in LQP instead of&#xA;Close or Reopen.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What do I need from y'all?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Poke at my ideas, question them. Point out things that I've missed or&#xA;where I'm looking at things wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is this concept (even ignoring the specific rules I've outlined above) good/bad/silly?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would this be something you think the sites you use would gain value from?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there something different that you think will address the goals we've mentioned?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't feel like you have to answer any or all of these questions,&#xA;they're here as ideas for what sort of feedback I'm looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-02-01T19:51:36.420" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:35:59.413" Title="How do we feel about &quot;Should trusted close/reopen voters and reviewers have their votes weighted more than others'?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|vote-to-close|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11937" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11935" CreationDate="2022-02-02T00:49:00.293" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is a feature for sites that struggle to get close (or reopen) votes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;RPG SE is not that site. In fact this site seems to have one of the strongest moderation cultures across the entire network. Questions get closed very fast, especially if they are clearly off topic. There's not a problem with speed here that needs to be solved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Like other recent per site features (3 vote close and unpinning the accepted answer), it doesn't make sense for all Stack Exchange sites to have it. That's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(In fact I don't believe 3 vote closure ever had a meta discussion here. It didn't need to, because it's not necessary for this site either.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should evaluate weighted close votes in the context of other SE sites that you use, where it often takes longer to close questions unless a moderator votes. On some sites, votes even expire because too few people close/reopen vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the bottom line is that RPG SE probably won't use this feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2022-02-02T00:49:00.293" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11938" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11935" CreationDate="2022-02-02T15:50:06.533" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Currently, it's not needed here&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On this site, there are several dozen people that vote to close at all times of the day. I have rarely seen a question staying in the Vote-To-Close state for more than a few hours before it was either closed, or kept open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not 3D-Printing SE, where about 6 people cast closure votes at all, and 3 of those are mods. We don't need to make moderation faster in our current state.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T16:32:56.330" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:32:56.330" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11939" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11935" CreationDate="2022-02-02T19:31:10.590" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;At this time, I don't feel like the stakes are high enough to warrant a robust analysis of the data, since SE isn't forcing this upon us; so I will leave a few thoughts based on my experience as one of the most active participants in site curation (though I'm sure my experience would be supported by the data if my SQL-Fu were anything special).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I very much agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11937/62294&quot;&gt;Laurel&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11938/62294&quot;&gt;Trish&lt;/a&gt; that this is definitely not a change we need at this time. When it is abundantly clear that a question ought to be closed, it is closed quickly, &lt;em&gt;even without the involvement of the moderators&lt;/em&gt;. Based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11910/62294&quot;&gt;JNat's annual analysis&lt;/a&gt;, around 10% (113/1135) of question closures in 2021 had the final vote cast by a moderator. To put that into perspective, I want to compare to another stack I read frequently: &lt;a href=&quot;https://fitness.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/870/2021-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;Fitness.SE&lt;/a&gt;. In 2021, 93% (199/214) of closures had a moderator as the last vote. Fitness would benefit from a system like the one proposed &lt;em&gt;because they are already relying on users with weighted votes to handle closures&lt;/em&gt;. We are not. Our moderators could go completely AFK and the only people that would notice would be the ones who flag comments. Our question closure and reopen activities are moving along just fine without help from the users that already have weighted votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, sometimes it does take a while for question to get closed. It's never when closure is the obvious choice. It is when there is room for us to disagree. Like most stacks, we have policies and guidance unique to our corner of the network, and different users interpret these things differently. So sometimes, we have a question  that skirts the line of one of our stack-specific policies, or may be off-topic for one of SE's vanilla reasons if you read it a certain way. Just check out the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/specific-question&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;specific-question&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;specific-question&lt;/a&gt; tag here on meta: many of these question were asked here because a close-review cycle happened, another one has begun, and comments were insufficient to resolve the disagreement quickly. This is when it can take a while for closure to be resolved - either we go through multiple cycles and then discuss on meta, or enough people aren't sure either way and it does take a little while for enough people to form an opinion and flip the vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, because we already have a thriving and active culture of curation and moderation, &lt;em&gt;I think it is really important that everyone have the same vote weight&lt;/em&gt; (dupehammers notwithstanding). There is no evidence that any of our reviewers are acting in bad faith, and we don't have enough volume for &amp;quot;robo-reviewing&amp;quot; to be a thing. If you've participated enough to earn close vote privileges, my 90000 rep doesn't make my close vote any more valuable than yours – as long as we're all just trying our best to faithfully apply the guidance and policies we have (which there is no evidence that anyone is doing anything less than that), we should all have the same vote weight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T16:35:59.413" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:35:59.413" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11940" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-02-03T20:24:20.937" Score="2" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, my most recent Question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195530/are-rounds-just-for-combat-or-should-we-be-using-them-at-other-times-in-the-gam&quot;&gt;Are rounds just for combat, or should we be using them at other times in the game?&lt;/a&gt; was closed, with the following reason &amp;quot;Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.&amp;quot;, however the community feedback for this in the close notification was &amp;quot;Original close reason(s) were not resolved&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original close reason was a unilateral close by @ThomasMarkov thinking it was a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195515/36850&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, which it wasn't and isn't in my view. I'm asking a much more general question than that specific one, trying to address a class of related problem I want to adjudicate consistently within my game. Just because there are narrower questions, focusing on a specific element of a broader topic, doesn't make a question about the broader topic a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can't really see what is particularly unclear about the question as formulated now either, as I've gotten 4 answers (one of which is a self-answer admittedly).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, without getting specific feedback about what is unclear in the question I think it should be reopened, or I should be provided specific feedback on what &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; is unclear about my question, because at least 3 other people have found it clear enough to write good and cognisent answers that address the problem I am trying to solve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-28T18:40:12.463" LastActivityDate="2022-02-28T19:09:53.143" Title="My D&amp;D 5e question about whether rounds are just for combat was closed, and I'm confused - a case for reopening" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11941" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11940" CreationDate="2022-02-03T21:38:02.093" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is a good question with several good answers.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I had originally closed the question as a duplicate of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104763/are-there-any-official-rules-for-or-even-suggestion-of-using-initiative-order-ou&quot;&gt;Are there any official rules for or even suggestion of using initiative order outside of combat?&lt;/a&gt; The questions are very similar, but illustro points out the substantial distinction in the last paragraph of their question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I accept that any time you need to use initiative in the game (chases or combat for example) you need to measure time in rounds, measuring time in rounds does not necessarily require a strict initiative order. For example, solving a complex puzzle with per round effects that repeat on a loop, and demonstrating that loop in rounds, but allowing your players to determine the order of their actions dynamically in each round, without going turn by turn, even allowing for two players actually doing two things at the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me this is essentially the same question, &lt;em&gt;but about situations where the granular initiative rules are not necessary, but measuring fast-paced, time-dependent events is&lt;/em&gt;. Illustro asks for guidance from the rules and/or experience for applying the six-second round structure outside of combat, without the use of a strict initiative order, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/195531/62294&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;and then provides a stellar self-answer providing exactly that&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closure for &amp;quot;needs details&amp;quot; generally applies to questions that need additional details before a good answer can be provided. This is obviously not the case - the question was open long enough to receive three additional high-quality answers. Darth Pseudonym, Non-Human Person, and Austin Hemmelgarn did not need any more details or clarity to provide good responses in addition to the one illustro offered when posting the question. When a question is up for closure review for &lt;em&gt;needs more focus&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;opinion based&lt;/em&gt;, or &lt;em&gt;needs details&lt;/em&gt;, and it has already received answers, we should ask ourselves &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;are the answers the question did receive emblematic of the problem we're closing the question for?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;. We certainly did not see that this time, and at the time of this revision (four weeks after initial review), the questions has not received any more answers, which is further evidence the question was well scoped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I saw several comments asking for a specific situation to rule on - requiring that at this point would in some ways invalidate all the existing high quality answers that haven't addressed whatever we try to shoehorn into the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Reopen.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-28T19:09:53.143" LastActivityDate="2022-02-28T19:09:53.143" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11942" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11940" CreationDate="2022-02-03T22:28:35.013" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your question follows a typical pattern that makes reviewers cautious.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It all starts with vonBoomslang's question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195515/44723&quot;&gt;Can you determine the order of &amp;quot;at the end of a short rest&amp;quot; effects?&lt;/a&gt;, where you leave &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/195528/44723&quot;&gt;your answer&lt;/a&gt; that conflicts with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/195516/44723&quot;&gt;this other answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question is about a general case, but indisputably tied to this subset of the question, and your self-answer will appear like an isolated response to that initial question where your answer only had a small response.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To reviewers, it will appear as if you are unhappy with that outcome and use your specific question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195530/44723&quot;&gt;Are rounds just for combat, or should we be using them at other times in the game?&lt;/a&gt; to settle that argument after losing it elsewhere, and that is generally an undesired type of dispute — so the eyes on your question will be even more carefully looking to see whether you are addressing an actual problem or whether it is subterfuge to convince people to believe a different argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You received several messages inquiring about the practical situation where your question applies, and some of your formulation is ambiguous or very clearly tied to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195515/44723&quot;&gt;the earlier question&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hope that addresses some of the &amp;quot;why&amp;quot;. As for whether your question should be open or closed, &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/60265713#60265713&quot;&gt;I commented on your question&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure that &amp;quot;Are rounds just for combat, or should we be using&#xA;them at other times in the game?&amp;quot; is the best approach to phrasing a&#xA;general [case], but the general case about when to use time ordering is&#xA;one that most GMs face eventually when there are weird interactions&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think that you need to rephrase, but that is because I'm aware of the context and read and evaluated the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/133533/discussion-between-illustro-and-t-sar&quot;&gt;comment-thread below your answer&lt;/a&gt; – where, among more discussion, I think these comments encapsulate a second part of what makes your question problematic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You, the querent, didn't specify a specific problem you are having.&#xA;You specified a generic class of problems that aren't necessarily that&#xA;closely related&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I'm concerned, we should reopen your question. But this criticism is valid, and closely tied to the observation that maybe your specific problem could be the rejection of your solution to a different question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-08T16:44:59.827" LastActivityDate="2022-02-08T16:44:59.827" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11943" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11940" CreationDate="2022-02-04T17:57:16.217" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Muddled Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was one of the close votes, and I voted to close after the discussion in comments (which is now moved to chat) because the whole things seems muddled.  I don't understand how the question you are asking in the title:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Are rounds just for combat, or should we be using them at other times in the game?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;would help you solve the problem you say you are having:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of particular interest to me, and what spawned the idea for this question as well as the problem it's looking to solve, is the idea of resolving simultaneous effects during longer activities. So for example, a short rest is measured in an hour, a long rest is measured in 8 hours spans of time. Both of these have defined start and end points, and in particular the game specifies a lot of things happen at the end of [insert rest here]. These things happen at the same time and need to have an order resolved for the game to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither possible answer, yes or no, helps you with that problem.  A &lt;em&gt;Yes&lt;/em&gt; (i.e., rounds are just for combat) answer just seems to shut your problem down, with no help.  A &lt;em&gt;No&lt;/em&gt; answer at least starts to lead somewhere if you read the question broadly enough (i.e., rounds are not just for combat, and here is how using rounds for short or long rests helps you...)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I support reading questions broadly in most cases.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But not here.  Because the muddled question also muddles the answers making it difficult to decide whether they're good or bad.  They are all (at the time of this writing) &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; in the sense that they answer the yes-no question.  They are also fairly trivial in that regard, but they're still good.  But they're also &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; because they don't solve the problem you're trying to address... and most of them say as much. Actually, all of them except your own self-answer say as much.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So it becomes a bit of a fishing trip where you end up getting a yes/no answer that doesn't in any way address your stated issue with simultaneity, but also end up generating disjointed lists of situations where non-combat rounds might be useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This strikes me as just an all-around badly phrased question that's trying to do way too much, accomplishes very little, and has extremely questionable criteria for up-voting or accepting answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-02-04T17:57:16.217" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11944" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-02-17T18:47:53.310" Score="3" ViewCount="56" Body="&lt;p&gt;What I have repeatedly experienced in my short time on this Q&amp;amp;A site is that I pose a question, and &lt;strong&gt;receive serveral answers, each of them contributing&lt;/strong&gt; some perspective of value, but &lt;strong&gt;none fully answering&lt;/strong&gt; the question to my satisfaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From all the comments, discussion and answers, I eventually end up forming a conclusion that satisfies me overall. It appears useful to take the best parts from all the various answers, comments, and side room discussions, synthesize them, and post the final conclusion as an answer and accept it, for the benefit of the other users. However, I am not sure if that is seen as appropriate:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(1) Even though the site scripts actively encourage self-answering, my impression from my little experience is that self-answers tend to be downvoted°. If that is indeed so, self-answering defeats the purpose of distilling and sharing. I could pin it with an acceptance checkmark anyways, but it feels counter to the spirit of the approval process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(2) More importantly, it feels like poaching of off others work and undermining their opportunity for being credited for it. I could maybe address this by including refrences and citing the original answers to give credit to the original responses, but it still detracts from their opportunity to receive approval and votes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a way to post synthesized answers that is generally accepted? Or should I just not do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;P.S.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the two or three people interested in a question and posting answers work together through discussions about the questionm, exploring the subject matter in depth, they could craft a great, shared answer they all agree on. If the objective of the site is to generate the best, most useful answer, that would be a win. However, there is no mechanism for sharing answers, so in the end, the only way to do this is if one of them posts an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;° It is of course possible that it just so happend that the self-answers I gave were more opinonated or of lower quality by chance. And there may be bias due to my small sample size of ~50 answers and only 4 self-answers. But the four self-answers are all near the bottom of approval with an average 0 votes, while the median is more around 3 votes, and the mean around 6; I'm not a statistician but it feels like this is beyond what one would expect under the hypothesis that the distribution is random&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-02-17T18:47:53.310" Title="Is it OK to synthesise answers into a new answer?" Tags="|discussion|policy|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="11" ClosedDate="2022-02-17T19:35:40.907" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11945" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-02-18T15:49:34.820" Score="10" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;Can I ask this question without it getting closed? If it will get closed, is there some way to ask the question WITHOUT getting it closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How to speed up combat by helping players to visualize the scene?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We play D&amp;amp;D 5e over Discord, using voice and chat channels, and use D&amp;amp;D Beyond for character sheets and most die-rolling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It generally works great, but sometimes combats lag, reasons for which the GM and I have discussed privately.  There are numerous factors, some of which may be discussed with the group as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One issue, though, is that players clearly have problems visualizing the combat, with who is where, and frequently ask questions about the general scene.  (&amp;quot;How far away did you say they were?&amp;quot;)  Some of that is probably unavoidable, but perhaps there are ways to help players visualize things that will help speed up combat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We specifically don't want to get super-tactical.  We've tried using Roll20 to host combat maps and icons, and things slow down even more, as we get very fiddly with measurements and such, plus it requires more prep than the GM wants to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A possible solution might be some sort of shared electronic whiteboard that would allow the GM quickly draw diagrams, perhaps of the general battlefield.  Back when we played in person sometimes sketching on a physical whiteboard was a quick way to communicate without descending into grid-based measurement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That might not be the only solution, so I want to keep the question open-ended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is, have you had this problem and how did you solve it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/combat&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;combat&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;combat&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gm-techniques&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gm-techniques&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gm-techniques&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/theatre-of-the-mind&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;theatre-of-the-mind&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;theatre-of-the-mind&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-02-18T19:32:49.687" LastActivityDate="2022-02-21T19:55:04.307" Title="Is this question about visualizing combat Stackable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11946" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11947" CreationDate="2022-02-20T18:48:10.410" Score="6" ViewCount="419" Body="&lt;p&gt;WotC announced that a &amp;quot;new evolution&amp;quot; of D&amp;amp;D will be coming in 2024. Is it too soon to pose and answer questions about it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For instance, an answerable question might be, &amp;quot;What did we learn in 2021 about the next version of D&amp;amp;D?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But maybe it's too soon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-22T22:33:11.897" LastActivityDate="2023-11-01T23:39:13.977" Title="WotC announced that a &quot;new evolution&quot; of D&amp;D will be coming in 2024. Is it too soon to pose and answer questions about it?" Tags="|discussion|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11947" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11946" CreationDate="2022-02-20T19:55:30.193" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;My suggestion would be to stick to first principles:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Stick to asking about actual concrete problems you're having that can have real, practical solutions or answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do your research first and show it. Don't ask questions trivially answered by that research. (Do ask and self-answer questions that required lots of complex research.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back when the D&amp;amp;D 5e playtest came out, and then when the new edition was properly released, we had a consistent quality problem with questions about it; see: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4754/1204&quot;&gt;Why Are Our 5e Questions Terrible?&lt;/a&gt;. The main obstacle we faced was &lt;em&gt;question seeding:&lt;/em&gt; people were asking trivial low-research or low-quality questions just because they weren't already asked, because it was basically a gold rush for reputation points. Lots of stuff got closed, lots of people got told off for posting trivial self-answered questions that didn't represent a real problem anyone would have had, and the community at the time was just generally pretty fed up with all the junk filling up the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question seeding happens as a result of our Q&amp;amp;A site design working &lt;em&gt;too&lt;/em&gt; well. Points are nice! We want points. Our monkey brain wants the shinies and the acknowledgement and the serotonin. The gamification leverages that desire way too effectively in this circumstance and has people doing obviously low-quality stuff they wouldn't do otherwise if points weren't motivating them to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My advice would be aim to not repeat that mistake. Stick to first principles and avoid the monkey brain siren call to push the button a bunch for points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think it's too soon, then it might be the case that you know there's nothing to really answer, or that all we know is trivially found via google search, and it's low quality stuff we shouldn't be asking yet. But if there's a real concrete problem that you're asking for reasons beside monkey brain wants points, go ahead and ask.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-02-25T16:31:34.033" LastActivityDate="2022-02-25T16:31:34.033" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11948" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11946" CreationDate="2022-02-20T20:06:07.293" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is not a news site.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This site is a repository of lasting knowledge, a collection of useful questions with useful answers. In general, news about an upcoming game is a different type of information than the information we are looking to host. Such information has very limited longitudinal utility. As the next iteration of D&amp;amp;D is still in development, &lt;em&gt;information they reveal today can expire as early as tomorrow&lt;/em&gt;. It is only really relevant the moment it is released, and subject to change &lt;em&gt;without notice&lt;/em&gt;. If you want news about Wizard of the Coast, they have a website for that, and there are any other number of media outlets dedicated to documenting such announcements. This just isn’t that site, and that’s okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just stick to what we know works: expert problem solving. If you’ve got a problem related to D&amp;amp;D 2024 that requires D&amp;amp;D expertise to solve, it may be on topic and it may not be, today’s date doesn’t determine that, but wondering about the recent news is not that kind of problem. It doesn’t take an expert to navigate to the Wizards of the Coast website, to search D&amp;amp;D on Kotaku, or to browse any of the sundry D&amp;amp;D subreddits for news.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-01T23:39:13.977" LastActivityDate="2023-11-01T23:39:13.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11949" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11946" CreationDate="2022-02-20T22:06:52.250" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't Judge The Topic, Judge The Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even I will admit that some topics, e.g., alignment, are likely to produce bad questions which themselves generate bad answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But overall, we should be judging questions on their own merits, not on the merits of whatever (possibly ill-defined or overlapping) categories they belong to.  And generally, we should be using the downvote option rather than the vote-to-close option when possible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, that's even more important, because the status of whatever is coming in 2024 will be in flux (up to and including scrapping it or changing the release date to 2025 or later) – in rapid flux, by the standards of this stack.  By the end of the calendar year, the status of the project will have undoubtedly changed quite a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do you have a question you want to ask?  You have almost 20k points; you should have a pretty good feel for good questions, bad questions, and borderline questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think you have a good, answerable question, then ask it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a borderline question, shop &lt;em&gt;the question itself here&lt;/em&gt;, not the whole category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-22T22:15:59.247" LastActivityDate="2022-02-22T22:15:59.247" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11950" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11945" CreationDate="2022-02-21T15:05:13.453" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We have handled numerous questions of this type before, and this is a good example of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt; question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I am writing this, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pacing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pacing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pacing&lt;/a&gt; tag has fifty questions in it. Reading through some of those, your question is a actually  a good representative of this type of question. First, you present a concrete problem that I'm sure most of us can relate to:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;combats lag&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then, you have done the necessary retrospection to identify what the root cause is likely to be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One issue, though, is that players clearly have problems visualizing the combat, with who is where, and frequently ask questions about the general scene. (&amp;quot;How far away did you say they were?&amp;quot;) Some of that is probably unavoidable, but perhaps there are ways to help players visualize things that will help speed up combat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You provide numerous helpful details, including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Medium (Discord voice and text chat, DND Beyond character sheets)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Play-style (&amp;quot;We specifically don't want to get super-tactical.&amp;quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A potential solution you have considered&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these things together make for a great question. You have a concrete problem, you have made helpful observations about what is causing that problem, and you have thought about how you might solve it, but you have avoided the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;XY-Problem&lt;/a&gt; by describing your concrete problem rather than asking &amp;quot;what's a good online white board&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, to be a bit cheeky, you obviously &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; ask this question without it getting closed, evidenced by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/196193/62294&quot;&gt;the question being not closed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-21T19:55:04.307" LastActivityDate="2022-02-21T19:55:04.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11951" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11953" CreationDate="2022-02-21T21:20:16.023" Score="23" ViewCount="1402" Body="&lt;p&gt;Admittedly a bit slower that we’d have preferred (our bad), this is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11888/52137&quot;&gt;continuance of rule intent discussion&lt;/a&gt;. (See why I’m avoiding saying revisit below).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a brief summary, questions asking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/52137&quot;&gt;designer intent were banned&lt;/a&gt; for seemingly inevitably leading to speculative answers. As that discussion was framed towards how to save the question group, a separate canonical post was made (and later added to FAQ). It was originally posted declaration style and accrued 17 votes before being split into more proper Q&amp;amp;A style. With time an opposing answer was posted which accrued slightly higher score than the accepted answer (29/-11 vs 30/-16). And the original question where the decision was intended to be had higher scores (44/-11 for accepted answer, no real opposing answer) but was closed (pointing to the canon Q&amp;amp;A). So votes have ended up a bit of a mess, pointing to the need to revisit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is another point which needs to be brought up at the same time, which leads me to not call it just a revisit. The question type was originally deemed off topic in response to a specific problem, which was that explicitly asking for designers reasons for specific rules lead to rampant speculation (required increased moderation). However, with time it seems sometimes any possibility that designer reasons could be relevant caused closure or at least close votes. And there’s a bit of a thing with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10028/52137&quot;&gt;History of Gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a highlight, it seemed sometimes the mere use of the word “why” would be enough to garner close votes. Why thus getting read as “why was this designed this way” as opposed to “what does this achieve within the system”. This suggests we need a bit of back to basics together, and agreement on how to read and evaluate questions for this particular concern. And this back to basics is useful as part of (or preceding) the revisit because we need clarity in what we’re considering the topicality of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ll note that we don’t have a specific closure reason for designer reasons. This leads to questions either being closed as “opinion based” or “off-topic” with a custom reason (usually whichever got cast first). A consequence of this is that asker feedback is either conflicting or highly dependent on comments explaining things well. A custom close reason might be a good reason to explain the off topic reason better to both askers and close voters. Whether to ask for an additional slot or to rework some of our existing reasons is probably best left for its own discussion, as might well the full scope of the wording, but I’d like to offer it to answers here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Outcomes for this discussion&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the aim of clarity, I’d like to give guidance towards the intended scope of discussion. This is not intended as extra rules for the discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We’re&lt;sup&gt;†&lt;/sup&gt; open to the possibility of unbanning designer reasons.&lt;/strong&gt; Such an answer should include the guidance for such questions and answers so they can be answered and curated properly. See the previous discussions for the issues that do come with the question type.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We’re open to refocusing the actual practice to the actual issue.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;This would be keeping the question type off-topic, but hopefully reducing the collateral. An answer should more clearly identify the problematic question type, and give good guidance for how to navigate around this.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Since the current state of the FAQ is a bit messy, it would be good for answers to give at least an outline for what the new FAQ should cover. (The existing “how can I ask instead meta is quite good for this/may be a good starting point/include)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We’re open to expanding the scope of designer reasons.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Such an answer should clearly identify the problems for which the expanded scope is needed, which questions need to be made off topic and an outline for ongoing guidance.&#xA;Though, I’m mostly including this for completeness, I have very little expectation that it is the prevailing opinion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;†: This is the moderators speaking as moderators on behalf of the community. As much as possible we'd like for this to be read as the community or the discussion being open for these possibilities and that this discussion not being an exercise in convincing the moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-02-21T21:56:54.527" LastActivityDate="2022-03-22T17:43:00.870" Title="So, let’s talk about rule intent and question closing" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|policy|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11952" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-02-22T08:17:00.157" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;For me, a question asking for a game &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; holds little value.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does not play into the strengths of our community. A good answer is nothing more than a block quote from some source, the only experience necessary to produce such answer is the knowledge of where to find it. It is absolute, no voting should theoretically be necessary. Either the one person said what they thought at the point in time, or they didn't. It also does not seem to be a practical question for an existing problem a person has. Stack Exchange was made to answer practical questions that an actual person needs an answer to. &amp;quot;What was the designer thinking&amp;quot; is not such a question. It's just idle curiosity. We all have it, but that doesn't mean it has a place on SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, &amp;quot;why is that rule this way and what would happen if I changed it&amp;quot; in my eyes makes an excellent question. Assuming that is actually a question the person has because they have a problem with the original rule, then we have everything that SE is made to do: we have a real world problem of a real person that can be answered by subject matter experts using their experience. Maybe people did that and can share their findings. Or maybe there is a theoretical construct in the rules that makes if obviously unbalanced without even trying, just by playing through an example situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, I am in favor of leaving game designer reasons out, because the question is just a resource request, not a request for experience from experts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am also in favor of allowing to ask &amp;quot;why&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;what would happen if I changed it&amp;quot;, because that is the exact opposite: a request for experience of other users that have already done so and can report back their findings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2022-02-22T08:17:00.157" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11953" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-02-22T14:56:30.620" Score="26" Body="&lt;h3&gt;On this one, I think it actually should be up to ♦ mods&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, having a ♦ doesn’t allow the elected moderators to dictate site policy; it never has, and it never should. I, for one, am still very salty about the times when a ♦ &lt;em&gt;has&lt;/em&gt; overridden the community, and I don’t think I’m alone in that: community consensus is crucial to the site. If the rules were changed so that elected moderators dictated policy, I’d probably leave.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But this is a special case.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, designer-intent questions are on-topic, answerable, back-up-able, and at least occasionally of interest. Moreover—as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12010/4563&quot;&gt;I’ve discussed in more detail in another answer&lt;/a&gt;—the ban on designer-intent questions has been overinterpreted by some users as a ban on a much broader swath of questions, leading to arguments and bad feelings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The only reason we banned designer-intent questions in the first place was ♦ moderator overload.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That was it, the ♦ moderators at the time brought up a rash of designer-intent questions that hit HNQ, and lead to a ton of speculative answers getting upvoted, no matter how hard the question tried to emphasize that answers had to be backed up. It led to the ♦ having to delete high-rated answers, which is never a good thing, and a lot of the questions got closed anyway just because they were attracting too many problems, no matter how good the question itself was. This situation also caused bad feelings and arguments. The ♦ moderators didn’t want to be put in the middle of it, and the community agreed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if the current ♦ moderators are amenable to allowing designer-intent questions, then I think we should unban them. If the current ♦ mods want to go into the backlog and history and determine that the situation isn’t one they want to re-open, I still accept that: designer-intent questions aren’t crucially important, and those that are useful can often be edited into acceptable questions even with the ban in place. (This &lt;strong&gt;doesn’t happen&lt;/strong&gt; far too often, but that’s a separate concern.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would say, though, that the community is vastly more moderation-focused than it was at the time, and also, the ban on designer-intent questions has had far more negative outcomes than I, for one, expected when I voted for it the first time. Also, ♦ moderators can now remove a question from HNQ—that was a feature that wasn’t available to ♦ moderators when the ban was put in place. If the ♦ moderators are OK with it, I definitely think we should unban them, and I don’t think we need any special policies around them—I think it would be appropriate to just treat them as we treat any other question, as long as ♦ moderators are up for that. If not, well, like I’ve been saying, I have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12010/4563&quot;&gt;another answer&lt;/a&gt; about that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-03-22T17:43:00.870" LastActivityDate="2022-03-22T17:43:00.870" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11954" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-02-22T21:29:24.243" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What Is Needed Is Both A Clarification Of Guidelines....&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think any of the three paths laid out in the Question above are reasonable and I don't really have a preference between them.  They all seem to lead to roughly the same place, and require roughly the same type of deliberation and refinement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For lack of a better term, I'll borrow from existing terminology and refer to it as the good-designer-intent/bad-designer-intent question dichotomy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To indulge in tautology for a moment, good designer intent questions are ones this stack can generally answer, while bad designer intent questions are ones we can't.  To back off from that tautology, good designer intent questions are ones that fall within the realm of the expertise of the community.  I don't think we'll ever get a sharp, bright-line answer (more on that below) but based on past experience and past discussions here, I think the following are at least a starting point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A rant disguised as a question ('This rule sucks! What was Gygax thinking?') is a bad designer intent question.  It's arguably not even a question, even though it ends in a question mark.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A designer intent question that is, or can reasonably be construed as a game balance question, or a question of mechanical interactions or unintended side effects, or a homebrew rules question (&amp;quot;Why does this rule exist?  What happens if it goes away?&amp;quot;) is probably/often going to be a good designer intent question. I don't take part in them often, but I suspect that the guidelines for homebrew rules questions might be a good place to look for guidelines insights.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A question of designer intent that hinges on lore (&amp;quot;Why did the designers make elves so powerful and settle Dwarves only on these terrible plots of land?&amp;quot;) are going to be at least as dicey as similar questions on the lore itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A question of actual design intent-- a question that strongly expects a personalized answer in the form of &amp;quot;This person or persons at this company enacted this rule definitively for this purpose,&amp;quot; is very likely to be a bad designer intent question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should note, here, the my confidence in these four points is not absolute, nor am I intentionally trying to limit consideration to these four categories-- this is what I have after thinking about this overnight.  Further, I am pretty confident in my approach to the first two points; less so on the third and fourth:  It is not impossible that answers exist in the form of interviews, podcasts, design documents, errata; it is not impossible that answers could be had, if the designers are still active and accessible, as is sometimes the case.  (And for all of these reasons, I think that knowing where to find information &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a form of expertise.)  But it is &lt;strong&gt;definitely&lt;/strong&gt; not impossible that there will be nothing but vacuum to draw on, outside the published texts themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, I also care much more about the first two points than the last two points.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;...And A Cultural Shift&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I don't think a simple clarification of policy/guidelines is going to fix this problem.  Looking back through the historical discussions on this specific issue, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7917/18269&quot;&gt;this sentiment&lt;/a&gt; pops up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can't seem to leave unanswerable questions unanswered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Well, that may have been true then, and may be true now (although four years is an eternity in net-culture years.)  But the corollary seems to be &amp;quot;&lt;em&gt;We can't seem to stop turning policies or guidelines into straight-jackets.&lt;/em&gt;&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is, arguably, a systemic flaw in the stack system at large which can't fully be addressed here:  As a community grows, the five votes necessary to close becomes a smaller and smaller fraction of the community at large.  That is a double-edged sword, in that a growing community will see growth in the number of bad questions being posed, but also in that increasingly smaller fractions of activist vote-to-closers can really gum up the works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;And this is definitely something that we do here.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because it's not happening out of malice or bad faith doesn't mean it doesn't happen-- we founder on these rocks regularly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question itself acknowledges 'why' as a trigger word.  The previous round of discussion had two answers recognizing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11890/18269&quot;&gt;that trigger&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11895/18269&quot;&gt;general overuse&lt;/a&gt; of the policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And this phenomenon is not limited to this issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've gone around this tree with good-subjective/bad-subjective questions, where for a time we were turning the policy into an anecdote tax and every question that could remotely be considered subjective would gather comments insisting on the personal experience criterion, with ever-increasing narrowness and specificity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we've seen it show up in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11758/18269&quot;&gt;supported/unsupported questions&lt;/a&gt;, where some stances were taken that were so inflexible that they generated the following highly upvoted comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11758/does-this-answer-about-towns-protecting-themselves-against-dragons-really-need-t#comment40376_11764&quot;&gt;...The issue here&lt;/a&gt; is that you are interpreting a best-practice guide for &amp;quot;How to cite a good answer&amp;quot; as &amp;quot;How to enforce good answers&amp;quot; which was never the intent of that guidance. Perhaps it is time for a new guidance meta 'When should answers be deleted?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11758/does-this-answer-about-towns-protecting-themselves-against-dragons-really-need-t#comment40392_11764&quot;&gt;...after reading through all this&lt;/a&gt;, I cannot tell if (1) you are voting to delete because you want to, and you believe the references you cite give you permission, or (2) you believe the references you cite require or obligate you to vote to delete, or (3) some other case I have not considered. Can you clarify your mindset on this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not trying to single anyone out or accuse anyone of bad faith, especially for things that took place almost half a year ago.  To the contrary, my point is that this issue comes up time after time after time.  It is not an issue with a single policy, or a single user.  It is a community-generated issue.  I'll say that again, louder:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is a community-generated issue.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And unless the community starts thinking differently about policies and guidelines, we will end up here having another discussion that looks exactly like this in six months, nine months, twelve months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be about this issue, if we don't &amp;quot;fix it&amp;quot; well enough.  But if we do, it is my firm conviction based on years of lurking, participating in the main stack, and participating in meta, that we will as a community transfer our collective obsession with policy enforcement to some other policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let me make the following points on that topic:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We are experts, and I do not believe for a minute that the best use of anyone's expertise (diamond mods possibly excepted) is in turning policies and guidelines into finer and finer filters to apply to questions or answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We are experts, and while experts make use of policies and guidelines to inform our responses, we do not need-- and it is counter-productive to seek-- policies that are mechanically precise and cover all situations without the need for critical thought and interpretation.  That is, in fact, the very opposite of expertise itself!  Clarification of policy is all well and good, and we could probably use a little here.  But unless we change the way the community at large thinks about policies and guidelines, we will be right back here in a few months.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So I implore the community:  Please, start thinking of your expertise as a way to generate good answers, and not as a way to just apply the VTC to another question or answer.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2022-02-22T21:51:49.863" LastActivityDate="2022-02-22T21:51:49.863" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11955" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11946" CreationDate="2022-02-24T17:32:54.083" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would like to add a point of view that is not explicitly about the next DnD but applies to all products equally:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should only entertain questions about products that are &lt;em&gt;publicly available&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we do not all have the same access to products, because maybe it's not available in the respective country, or not translated into the respective language or maybe just because it's &lt;em&gt;expensive&lt;/em&gt;, we should at least have &lt;em&gt;theoretical&lt;/em&gt; access. Asking &amp;quot;the public&amp;quot; questions about material not available to the general public because of artificial restrictions by the publisher is pointless. If one is a member of a private club and has exclusive privileges, they should keep their question to their private club. That obviously is how it is meant to be going.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should answer questions when everybody on the site has the option of getting access to the materials. So for example I would be fine with questions about the first public playtest material. Or the first release. But our site was not made to handle private Q&amp;amp;A. How would we upvote or downvote something, if we are artificially kept from knowing whether it's useful or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-02-24T22:46:13.537" LastActivityDate="2022-02-24T22:46:13.537" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11956" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-02-26T21:32:28.460" Score="5" ViewCount="244" Body="&lt;p&gt;How do I ask this question about house-rules for the &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; spell in D&amp;amp;D 5e without it being closed as opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a perfect example of a question I believe that our community has valuable, expert answers to, and yet after 6 years and 20,000 xp, I don't know how to ask it without it getting closed as opinion-based.  I want &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good-subjective answers&lt;/a&gt;, not just speculation, but answers based on experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any guidance would be appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As noted in the many questions with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; tag, the &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; spell is possibly game-breaking and certainly subject to interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At our table, we are implementing the set of house rules below. Have you used house rules similar or different to these, and have the rules improved the play of the &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; spell?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am looking for &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;good-subjective&lt;/a&gt; answers, based on actual experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In General&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The simulacrum is an illusory magical construct. It lacks free will and does not have a soul. While it looks like the original, it is not the original, and lacking free will and a soul, it does not in generally behave like the original. Without instruction, it will do nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some game features, for instance, &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; and Divine Intervention, need to be carefully adjudicated lest game-breaking shenanigans ensue. Such features, when used by the simulacrum, may affect the original or the creator, as adjudicated on a case-by-case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifics:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can use magic items&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Subject to restrictions, as the original can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can attune magic items&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Attuning costs willing relinquishment of attunement slots of either the creator or the original.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can copy spells&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If its original can, but only the original's spells, using the PHB rules for making a copy of your own spells.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can cast rituals&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If the original could cast the ritual when the simulacrum was created, then the simulacrum can, using a copy of the spell in the original's notation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can gain temporary hit points&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Although it may require adjudication on an individual basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cannot be healed, only repaired&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Although it may require adjudication on an individual basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Can regain hit points on short or long rests&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Using its own hit dice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Casting &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; costs who it should cost&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Cannot be used to circumvent the &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; limitations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Casting &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; doesn't work&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A simulacrum casting &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; does not work, one way or another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does not need to eat, drink, or breathe&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;It's an illusion and a construct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-02-28T18:22:13.930" LastActivityDate="2022-03-07T17:30:02.063" Title="How do I ask this question about house-rules for the Simulacrum spell in D&amp;D 5e without it being closed as opinion-based?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|subjective-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11957" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11956" CreationDate="2022-02-26T21:55:54.240" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Play test your rules and then ask about what they didn’t fix.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As written, the question mirrors one of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;“questions to avoid asking”&lt;/a&gt; from the help center:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is exactly what you’ve done - you’ve provided a set of rules and asked what else others have used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the question, I think what you’re really looking for is something like “will these rules make &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; not broken?”, but I’m not sure that question is a good fit either. As you have observed, &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; gets weird with &lt;em&gt;an exceptionally high number of other features&lt;/em&gt;, as evidenced by the numerous questions of the form “how does &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; interact with this rule?”. The problem with asking “do these rules fix &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt;?” is that you’re really asking to find problems that have historically been posted as site questions by people actually struggling with those interactions. The question would likely just become a list of “here’s another thing that’s unclear”, and maybe we get some experience-based ruling on those interactions, but what do we do with an answer that provides a legitimate ambiguity and an unsupported “try this” solution?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, that may be getting a bit rambly, let me jump to what I think you should do:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Play test your rules and then ask about problems that your rules didn’t solve&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You’ve done a fantastic job of reading through problems others have with simulacrum and deciding on solutions to implement in play. So give your rules a shot, you addressed most of the common concerns I’m aware of. Then, when you do encounter something that you need help with, ask about that thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, &lt;em&gt;this is not the necessarily the only way to reframe your question to be stackable&lt;/em&gt;. There may be other ways, this is just what I think would make a really good question out of the work you’ve done so far: take the research you’ve already done and apply it at the table, and see what other &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; related bugbears you uncover.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is one of the suggestions given in our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;homebrew review question guidance&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. Try playtesting, and share the results if you have.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's possible, do some theoretical playtesting of your material yourself to see how it works out in practice. For example, if you're brewing a D&amp;amp;D monster, you can run a short battle using your player characters to see how they might fare against it. This might give you some immediate things to do before you even ask us, but it might also give you some concerns to bring up as you ask us about the material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, playtesting your house rules/rulings for &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; is not as simple as running a couple of encounters on paper to tweak a monster stat block - but you’ve already done a good bit of research into the more obvious and common problems associated with the spell. Maybe pouring through rules trying to find ambiguous interactions can yield some things to chew on, but taking your rules off the white board and into the field will likely show you things we would never come up with otherwise. So if you aren’t playing in a tier 3 game where &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; is an option right now, I suppose I haven’t offered you much to do right now. But if you are, you’ve got a chance to do something that I wish more of our homebrew review questions would (could?) do - provide experiential feedback back up front.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-02-27T01:38:23.313" LastActivityDate="2022-02-27T01:38:23.313" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11958" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11956" CreationDate="2022-02-27T00:21:02.947" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if I'd vote to close, but it's a close call (and I am generally reluctant to close questions on technicalities.)  But doing one of the two following will, I think, &lt;strong&gt;greatly&lt;/strong&gt; strengthen your question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tell Us What's Not Working&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've actually implemented and played under the guidelines you've posted (and the game has gone long enough for this to be a going concern) tell us what is and is not working.  Tell us in more detail, as specifically as you reasonably can, what you think is broken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Tell Us What You Fear Won't Work&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you haven't implemented these rules (and the grammar makes it tough to tell, but I think you have not) then at least tell us what you fear is going to be an issue.  If this is based on experience in other games, great.  If this is based on reading questions and answers here or in other forums, that's fine, too, in my opinion.  Even if it's nothing more than reading the rules and thinking, &amp;quot;Jeez, if I do X and my players do Y, what the heck happens then?!&amp;quot; that would be fine, in my opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with the notion that you should or must playtest the guidelines you posted before asking a question about them.  This stack does not generally have that requirement, for a number of reasons.  Certainly you can if you wish, but under the reasonable assumption that you are asking because you have doubts about your approach, I find it entirely reasonable to ask for guidance before an anticipated difficulty arises.  To imply otherwise, even accidentally, runs the very real risk of chilling the entire topic of discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But we have to know what thing or things are going wrong, or that you think are going to wrong, and why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Give us a target to aim for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2022-02-27T01:21:43.727" LastActivityDate="2022-02-27T01:21:43.727" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11960" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-01T03:38:27.590" Score="1" ViewCount="140" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the 5e part of this site there's a heavy emphasis on rules quotes. What is the clearest way to quote rules?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 1 (link then quote)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 2 (quote then link)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 2b (quote then link with superscript)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 3 (quote with link inside)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 3b (quote with link inside with superscript)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 4 (link first with chapter/section/subsection)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Basic Rules, Chapter 2 Races: Halfling: Kind and Curious&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option 4 (quote first then link with chapter/section/subsection)&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Halflings are an affable and cheerful people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#KindandCurious&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Basic Rules, Chapter 2 Races: Halfling: Kind and Curious&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Option ???&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Something else; open to suggestions how to clearly show the provenance of the quote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user73918" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-02T19:44:13.957" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T19:44:13.957" Title="What is the clearest way to format links to D&amp;D Beyond alongside quoted rules?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|citations|formatting|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11961" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11960" CreationDate="2022-03-01T04:09:32.133" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What I do&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's say I want to quote the Actions in Combat section of the PHB, I will do this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we can see from the &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#ActionsinCombat&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Actions in Combat&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; section (&lt;em&gt;PHB&lt;/em&gt;, page 182):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quote goes here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why I do it&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The quote is introduced and makes sense in the context of the answer. The reader does not have to wonder whether or what you are quoting.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The link itself is clear and sticks out with coloring, quotation marks, and capitalization. It also is not in the clunky and difficult-to-read (especially difficult for screen readers) https:// format.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The only thing being put in blockquotes are actual quotes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The physical reference can be provided near the link itself.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-03-02T01:12:56.480" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T01:12:56.480" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11962" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11960" CreationDate="2022-03-01T05:16:45.623" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Options 1-3 miss the point.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each of those options fails to direct a reader how to find the rule quoted &lt;em&gt;apart from&lt;/em&gt; following your link. If I've got the PHB in front of me, there's nothing in those &amp;quot;citations&amp;quot; that tells me how to find the cited text. If D&amp;amp;D Beyond reorganizes, there's no pointers as to how I'd find that text at a new address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Plenty of us are still playing RPGs that are decades old. (I'm running a game for my son and his friends right now in a system written before &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; was born!) D&amp;amp;D Beyond is convenient, but I'm not sanguine on the likelihood of its links being stable for 30 more years. So we should &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; be citing &amp;quot;chapter and verse&amp;quot; on rules-quotes, if not page numbers. (See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7669/23970&quot;&gt;Stance on using D&amp;amp;D Beyond for references?&lt;/a&gt;, esp. its second answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Option 4 is alright, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11961/23970&quot;&gt;Exempt-Medic's answer&lt;/a&gt; improves it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Go upvote that one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2022-03-01T05:16:45.623" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11963" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2022-03-02T12:57:23.277" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not needed if spell names are specific enough, but does it hurt?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think for something like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt; it is actually useful, as that is a common English language word that can show up in a lot of posts and makes it harder to find those posts related to the wish spell.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For something with a specific name like &amp;quot;glyph of warding&amp;quot; you can probably rely on the search function and is:question to find those posts that are related to the spell. Same goes for &amp;quot;simulacrum&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The advantage of non-tagging is also that tagging needs to be maintained, and new posters very likely miss rarely used tags. So this taxonomy will never be comprehensive.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know if a policy here needs to be very simple, or if it is OK to have some nuance. If it needs to be super simple, than probably all spell-name tags would have to go, including the useful ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, does it hurt to have those tags? As long as someone is willing to add them, I do not see them being a problem either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As per request I see these problems pointed out by other posts here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They take up common English word space&lt;/strong&gt;: I think that is a feature, not a bug. It helps me to find posts about the wish spell, rather than posts where someone wishes to do something.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They take up tag slots&lt;/strong&gt;: In updating 40 posts this morning, there was exactly one that had all five slots filled. That seems not to be any issue in practice. (Some of the people here with the requsite mining skills can probalby provide a quantitative answer on what share of posts has all 5 tags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;They reinforce popular systems&lt;/strong&gt; by having them squat on tags for things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/invisibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;invisibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;invisibility&lt;/a&gt;, which could be applicable to super hero powers and such, not just D&amp;amp;D spells. This has a bit of substance. But this would not be any issue with tags for spell names that are clearly from D&amp;amp;D pedigree like &amp;quot;tiny hut&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;glyph of warding&amp;quot;. Those will not be squatting on anybodies turf.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I in general feel it is easy to be tempted to establish rules and regulations in a well-meaning attempt to improve things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a community maintained site. There may be wisdom in letting the community maintain things as they like, instead of regaling them with well-meaning rules. In my experience, that can easily feel exclusive, and while I understand the need for &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; rules, I would suggest to keep it to those areas that really cause problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(That I updated like a bazillion posts this morning - well, 40 - has more to do with my stupidiy about how to do it than it being an issue of spell tags, that could have happened with any kind of tag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-03-02T13:19:12.300" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T13:19:12.300" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11964" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-03-02T17:19:54.887" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Who of us is the designers of the games we play?!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are only &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; few in the community that actually design the games they play. BESW might be the only prolific one. Everyone else can only be guessing and clutching for clues on what the designer really wanted. As such, the biggest problem becomes apparent:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Designer Reasons attracts unsubstantiated answers&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless the designers have said &amp;quot;Yea, I thought about this or that when designing X&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;I wanted to make a game that does this&amp;quot;, there is no way to know. However, people just can't stop from attempting to answer questions... and then inject their own interpretation. Of course, it must have been Mr. G's cat that inspired him to make cats the most deadly creature for a commoner, right?! &lt;strong&gt;WRONG!&lt;/strong&gt; That's just wishful thinking!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are a StackExchange, we need to adhere to citation rules of &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; sort so we can claim that we are expert answers and unsubstantiated answers are &lt;strong&gt;BAD&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a tiny bit of gold in the Designer Reasons, but too much rubble!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Bad answers clog the Queue&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If people write bad answers, especially ones that seem to resonate with people, then people need to flag those to get the dreaded &amp;quot;add citation&amp;quot; box.  Which in turn means we load the mods. If they have to fight through tons of answers on DR questions and sift if that is unsubstantiated stuff told the writer from a friend who got it from his cousin who once had a dinner date with the girlfriend of the reporter that had a 2 minute phone interview of the designer... Then that is workload that is totally not needed when there is already enough work from people being rowdy or unkind in comments or just cleaning up after our comment streaks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T17:19:54.887" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11965" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-02T18:43:50.837" Score="8" ViewCount="265" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is a general discussion if we want spell tags or not over here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7520/should-we-be-tagging-individual-spells&quot;&gt;Should we be tagging individual spells?&lt;/a&gt;, that concluded spell specific tags should be avoided in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Simulacrum&lt;/em&gt; are existing spell specific tags for which an exception was made.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is specifically about Glyph of Warding. At time of writing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/glyph-of-warding&quot;&gt;40 questions are tagged&lt;/a&gt; by me as I missed that decision and there are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=-%5Bglyph-of-warding%5D+%22glyph+of+warding%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;68 more&lt;/a&gt; without the tag mentioning the spell (it is likely not all of them would need the tag if we move forward with it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should there be an exception for Glyph of Warding or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-03T11:17:41.203" LastActivityDate="2022-03-12T02:52:29.407" Title="Should the Glyph of Warding questions get a spell-specific tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11966" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7520" CreationDate="2022-03-02T19:56:41.860" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Spell tags make more sense than the generic terms&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you look at the list of top users for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; and ask them to answer a question like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/194732/how-does-pocket-dimension-work&quot;&gt;How does ‘Pocket Dimension’ work?&lt;/a&gt; or even ask if they want it appearing in a watched feed, then the response would likely be &amp;quot;of course! Oh wait, what?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of course, more systems use spells than D&amp;amp;D!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now let's look at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/glyph-of-warding&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;glyph-of-warding&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;glyph-of-warding&lt;/a&gt; (a more common tag than &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tiny-hut&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tiny-hut&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tiny-hut&lt;/a&gt;... Ok we have some overlap with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-1e&lt;/a&gt; but if there is confusion we can create two new tags to divide them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even &lt;a href=&quot;https://itch.io&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://itch.io&lt;/a&gt; doesn't have a game that overlaps with one of the spell specific tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Separately, if the reason we don't want to have spell tags is for fear of being too D&amp;amp;D-centric, I have some bad news for you. The blanket ban would effect the non-D&amp;amp;D systems too. If somebody felt the need to make &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pocket-dimension&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pocket-dimension&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pocket-dimension&lt;/a&gt; we should let them, and if there's an issue we can rename/split into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pocket-dimension-mta&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pocket-dimension-mta&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pocket-dimension-mta&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pocket-dimension-dnd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pocket-dimension-dnd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pocket-dimension-dnd&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also can't watch, ignore or subscribe via RSS easily without tags. It's a core part of interacting with question topics! Don't take that away!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2022-03-02T19:56:41.860" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11967" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11965" CreationDate="2022-03-02T21:09:41.820" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Glyph is like the other spells that have this exception&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Glyph is a build-around spell&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Glyph of Warding is in the same class of spells as &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;simulacrum&lt;/em&gt;: these are spells that can create complex, persistent effects. They are build-around-magic, tools that create loopholes in what normally would be possible to do with spells. They are spells people try to break. No single category captures these spells as a tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of this, they cause a high amounts of rules questions related to a broad spectrum of issues. For glyph of warding, there are questions about what can trigger the glyph, what the glyph can know (for example the nearly unique ability to detect alignment), how and if a glyph can or cannot be moved, what it can be inscribed upon. It does not help that glyph also had errata that used to make it work slightly differently in older printings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But more than anything there are lots of unusual interactions with the spells stored inside it, which spells can be put into glyph to begin with and how glyph works on their targets, areas, and effects.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the reasons I saw in related discussions for keeping spell tags open were:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Does it do weird?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Antimagic field&lt;/strong&gt;: &amp;quot;antimagic is a large weird subject with lots of weirdness connected to it, so I feel the tag's worthwhile&amp;quot; was the core of the accepted, single answer. Glyph has a lot of weirdness connected to it in affecting other spells with strange effects due to the absence of the caster and known targets, too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Is it complex enough to have expertise?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Simulacrum&lt;/strong&gt;: &amp;quot;A small handful of spells are just complicated, deeply situational, or both. The 3e Polymorph series of spells and every incarnation of Wish fit this description, and both come up very frequently. I can easily imagine someone following either of those tags, because they do require specific expertise and they do come up all the time.&amp;quot; I think this easily can be said for glyph, too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-03-08T22:27:06.917" LastActivityDate="2022-03-08T22:27:06.917" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11968" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-03T15:57:25.960" Score="8" ViewCount="478" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'd like us to revisit the discussion had here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9488/should-we-have-a-canonical-can-the-wish-spell-do-x-question&quot;&gt;Should we have a canonical &amp;quot;Can the Wish spell do X?&amp;quot; question?&lt;/a&gt; This is not a duplicate because I think a change of landscape, so to speak, warrants a revisit, and I am seeking input about what to do about that if we decide not to close any questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, let me reintroduce the types of questions we're talking about here. We have numerous questions about the D&amp;amp;D 5e spell &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; that all follow the same basic formula:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Q:&lt;/strong&gt; Can &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; do this thing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A:&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, but the spell description says its entirely up to the DM how it works out, if at all. [And sometimes these answers include a list of ways the DM can twist the wording].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions follow this basic formula:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67512/what-happens-if-you-make-an-impossible-wish&quot;&gt;What happens if you make an impossible wish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120625/can-you-use-wish-to-allow-yourself-to-cast-wish-without-risks&quot;&gt;Can you use Wish to allow yourself to cast Wish without risks?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/98891/can-the-wish-spell-kill&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell kill?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157189/can-you-use-the-wish-spell-to-duplicate-a-9th-level-spell&quot;&gt;Can you use the Wish spell to duplicate a 9th-level spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158502/can-the-wish-spell-be-used-to-allow-someone-to-be-able-to-cast-all-of-their-spel&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell be used to allow someone to be able to cast all of their spells at will?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157184/how-are-wishes-for-things-of-similar-power-to-wishs-listed-effects-granted&quot;&gt;How are Wishes for things of similar power to Wish&amp;#39;s listed effects granted?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158788/can-the-wish-spell-make-the-effects-of-an-attuned-magic-item-permanent&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell make the effects of an attuned magic item permanent?&lt;/a&gt; (closed as opinion based)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179984/62294&quot;&gt;Can the Wish spell change my spell list?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/165692/62294&quot;&gt;Can Wish revive a creature consumed by Lich imprisonment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/144236/62294&quot;&gt;Players Circumventing the limitations of Wish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185201/62294&quot;&gt;Is this an ironclad wish?: &amp;quot;I wish for just my body to be young again but to keep all of my physical, mental and magical prowess&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these questions have attracted a fair bit of noise, and the good answers are invariably meditations on the answer formula I described above: &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Yes, but the spell description says its entirely up to the DM how it works out, if at all. [And sometimes these answers include a list of ways the DM can twist the wording].&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; At the time of the original discussion, even the best answers to choose from generally followed this formula, and no one answer stood out as being a good candidate for a canonical answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to suggest that this is no longer the case. On May 17th, 2021, another one of these questions was asked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185201/is-this-an-ironclad-wish-i-wish-for-just-my-body-to-be-young-again-but-to-kee&quot;&gt;Is this an ironclad wish?: &amp;quot;I wish for just my body to be young again but to keep all of my physical, mental and magical prowess&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. I wrote &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/185204/62294&quot;&gt;an answer&lt;/a&gt; that would go on to be the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=%5bwish%5d%20is%3aanswer&quot;&gt;highest scoring answer&lt;/a&gt; in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt; tag and is currently the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=created%3a2021%20is%3aanswer&quot;&gt;highest scoring answer of 2021&lt;/a&gt;. My answer there deviates from the typical formula by providing concrete guidance for working &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; into the campaign as a cooperative worldbuilding effort rather than playing into the &amp;quot;player vs. DM&amp;quot; dynamic that these questions usually dance around. I don't mean to toot my own horn too much here, but I really think that, in general, &lt;em&gt;this is the answer everyone with this type of question should be reading&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I would like to seek input on the idea of closing some of these questions as duplicates of the one with my answer. Of course, some of them likely have some distinguishing nuance about them that merits leaving them open, but I think a fair few of them really are just variations on the common theme described above, and of course, it would be up for discussion and review &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; of these questions would be well served by this, and which would not. I did make this proposal on the original meta discussion on this topic, but that was as an answer, and it did not attract any discussion at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, is this a good candidate for a canonical question for this question type?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that out of the way, this question is a bit of a two-part question. As I mentioned before, my answer is broadly applicable to most, if not all, questions of this type, but not only applicable, &lt;em&gt;the best&lt;/em&gt; answer to most, if not all, questions of this type. This leaves me with a question begging for an answer: &lt;em&gt;if we opt not to close any of these as duplicates, is there a reason I shouldn't post my answer to more of these questions?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would likely have the effect of generating a bit of rep points and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/44/necromancer&quot;&gt;Necromancer badges&lt;/a&gt;, but the real reason for doing this is that I think people who find these questions should be pointed to the best available guidance. If we aren't closing anything as duplicates, just posting the answer where appropriate seems to make more sense than leaving a comment to the effect of &amp;quot;There is a good answer to your question over on this other question&amp;quot;. It seems to me one of the utilities of duplicate closure is so that we &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; do this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if you are in favor of not duping any of these, why shouldn't I farm Necromancer badges by posting my answer to these questions where it applies? Hypothetically, if I were to do this, I would space them out considerably, weeks or more, I'm certainly not asking &amp;quot;why shouldn't I post my answer ten times in one day?&amp;quot;. I know why I shouldn't do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:27:27.153" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:27:27.153" Title="A Canonical Wish Question [2022]: Why Shouldn't I Make a Necromancer Farm?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|duplicates|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="1" FavoriteCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11969" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-03T20:44:40.997" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yeah, why shouldn't you?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's a great answer, it's a great answer. The other questions are not all the same question; they ask for different things, so they are not duplicates, even if the best answer may be the same answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just be careful not to post 40 answers in a single day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;OK, let's add a bit of more seriousness:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are boatloads of questions on this site that in the end all boil down the same Canonical Answer: &lt;em&gt;5e is rules light, and the DM is expected to fill the gaps with rulings. What your are asking is not covered conclusively in the rules. Ask you DM.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I am saying here is a bit tongue-in-cheek but why not create a well written meta-answer citing the DMG with this explanation, and close down a quarter of the questions? The logic is the same, just taken to a more extreme conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly and even more somber:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel that even if we all think the answer you came up with is very good (I do), it is just one answer among many. What gives us the right to effectively invalidate the other answers that have been given, and declare this the one true answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The proposed answer has 107 votes. Unless I am miscounting, there is a total of 3,313 votes on the 223 other positive answers to the various &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; questions. Do these all count less? Even if we are not closing all those questions, does all the thought and effort and nuance that their authors put into them to answer the specific color of wish question not count either?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels quite creepy to me that a handful of people voting on meta would go and decide they know better what everyone needs than the users themselves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the answer is as good as you propose, what would be wrong about adding it to those questions where it fits, and letting the readers decide if they want to upvote it or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you say, you'll likely get a boatload more reputation and tags, but isn't that a nice thing? I don't see where that hurts, whereas closing these existing questions and associated answers seems to do a lot more harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-04T17:21:22.710" LastActivityDate="2022-03-04T17:21:22.710" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11970" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-04T03:16:35.723" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We’ve historically had just about zero luck with “canonical” questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just saying, they’re rarely satisfying to querents, and often get missed by moderators and answerers. Often querents just fail to engage with the canonical question—because the kinds of basic things that justify canonical questions are often asked by people very unfamiliar with the domain. If you do not address their specific misunderstandings—and, often, idiosyncratic terminology—you’ll lose them. They don’t understand things well enough to understand how the canonical question applies to theirs. You’ll often wind up trying to answer their question in comments by explaining how the canonical answer applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s been my experience, and what I’ve observed, anyway. I’ve got nothing against canonical questions, and sure, &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; seems like a good candidate for one. I just don’t expect it to work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-03-04T03:16:35.723" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11971" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-04T06:24:04.113" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The highest scoring answer of a category is not what people search for.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Experts can take a general rule and apply it to a specific situation.  That is one of the major definitions of an expert.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Laymen can't&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lack of understanding of the processes of applying a general rule  to a specific situation - when, how, where, and what - are all consequences of a lack of experience and expertise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack exchange is website that provides answers to questions from people with experience in a situation and sifts those answers to provide the best ones at the top of the list of answers.  Generic answers to generic questions does not make use of the searchability of a digital archive and it does not make use of the gathering of a variety of questions by a variety of questioners to better represent the &lt;em&gt;types&lt;/em&gt; of queries people will naturally have and allow them to find &lt;em&gt;an&lt;/em&gt; answer to the situation they are facing instead of not knowing the 'correct' term and thus not finding &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; answer at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to provide canonical answers to categories of questions, then you want to write a guide.  Not a stack exchange.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Collapsing sets of questions into single questions with broad-as-possible (and, having read your answer, rather vague) answers will remove &lt;strong&gt;significant&lt;/strong&gt; utility for anyone with lower levels of expertise, which is especially worrying as &lt;em&gt;those are the people who are the intended beneficiaries of the process&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2022-03-04T06:24:04.113" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11972" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-04T09:14:47.790" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, you shouldn't farm necromancy badges...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd up vote those answers every time, and it would end up as a mess when we realised what was happening. It's backwards that you'd have to do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this is more evidence to the fact that...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;...we should be closing them as duplicates.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only time you shouldn't post them, is if your proposed canonical dupe doesn't match the question, but you've already stated you wouldn't have closed them as dupes in that case either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2022-03-09T17:58:48.423" LastActivityDate="2022-03-09T17:58:48.423" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11973" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-04T18:53:38.470" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You should, as always, act in good faith&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of the other answers here make reference to the specifics of the questions and answers Thomas Markov cites.  My response is entirely forward-looking and should be taken as a guide to future behavior, applicable to anyone in a similar situation.  Nothing should be inferred about what has or has not already been done, as I trust that Thomas Markov knows those details far better than I.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think all the other &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; questions are duplicates of the one you answered, you should use the means available to you to suggest them as duplicates of the one your high-rated answer is on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think one of the other questions is even more canonical than the one you answered, you should post your answer to that question, and suggest all the other &lt;em&gt;wish&lt;/em&gt; questions as duplicates of it, including the one you originally answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For any questions that are ultimately not determined to be duplicates, you should post your answer if you feel it is a good answer to the question.  Copy-pasting it would not show due deference to either the question or the other answers.  You should take the time to modify your answer in each case to specifically address the nuances of each particular question.  As a late-arriving answer, you should also respect the other answers already there, by recognizing those that are particularly insightful, and explaining why those that have high positive counts but are wrong, are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Copy-pasting your answer to multiple questions in a short amount of time would not help the community much, because it would not provide the best answer you could to each of those questions.  It would also be unlikely to generate you much reputation when you flood the queue with similar questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Copy-pasting your answer to multiple questions but deliberately spreading it out over time would maximize your reputation harvest, and would benefit the community in the sense of not flooding the first page, but would still not help the community by providing your best work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Taking the time to re-edit your answer and address the nuances of each question in turn would be the best contribution to the community &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; result in the maximal reputation gain.  That would be a win-win.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2022-04-28T15:11:06.203" LastActivityDate="2022-04-28T15:11:06.203" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11974" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11968" CreationDate="2022-03-04T19:09:30.447" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I Don't Think Anything Has Changed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to say up front that I have no quarrel or qualm with your answer.  I think it's a fine answer which deserves its upvotes, and is similar to how I would handle the situation myself. I hadn't seen it before, but I just upvoted it myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But my understanding of canonical answers or canonical duplicate-target questions is that they work best (when, indeed, they work at all, which is rarely!) when attached to questions that are fairly simple and mechanical in nature, such as these that were brought up in previous discussion:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105781/18269&quot;&gt;Attack-action vs attack&lt;/a&gt;:  But note that even for a simple question there are three answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151000/18269&quot;&gt;Multiclass Spell Prep&lt;/a&gt;:  More clearcut with only one answer, and also very mechanical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But this question is much less mechanical because of the explicit dependence of the results on the will of the GM.  And, crucially, your proposed-canonical answer is also much less mechanical.  So much so that I would classify it under &amp;quot;GM-ing and group interaction advice.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's good advice.  It's advice that I agree with.  But what seems to have changed is, you have a well-received answer that you believe is good enough to achieve canonical status.  Where my heartburn comes into play is that I don't think &amp;quot;GM-ing and group interaction advice,&amp;quot; questions or answers should be elevated to canonical status.  That is a little too close to the stack itself having a canonical opinion or endorsement of something in this category, and that's generally not the business I think we should be in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, on scanning your list of similar-looking questions, how many of them are asked from the player perspective vs the GM perspective is debatable.  Not all of them specify or are clearly written from one perspective or the other.  For players worried about the limits of weasel wording their wishes, this is good advice but not necessarily practicable if their GMs are not interested in having that conversation.   On the other hand, GMs asking about the limits of wishes can put this into practice at their own tables but may also (I'd go so far as presume 'probably are') interested in game balance advice about whatever specific scenario they're asking about. I do not regard many of them, if any, as duplicates, even though they are similar.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This is still, in my opinion, a poor target for a canonical question.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-03-04T19:09:30.447" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11975" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11976" CreationDate="2022-03-04T21:52:55.567" Score="10" ViewCount="295" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found myself browsing through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; tag, and I think it needs a lot of help. I'm not sure it can be saved, but I'll outline the problems I'm seeing and maybe the community can come up with some good solutions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tag Description Overlap&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, we've got some tag overlap based on tag descriptions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily about characters. A character is being controlled in the game either by a player (player character) or the gamemaster (non-player character).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NPC (non-player characters) refers to any character in an RPG whose decisions and actions are handled by the game master (or a designated assistant) rather than by a player.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about strictly, or primarily, adversarial characters controlled by the game master, use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;. Or for the main adversarial character(s) see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt; For questions about characters controlled by the game master, but who acts alongside the player characters see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gmpc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gmpc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gmpc&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions relating to characters controlled by players rather than by a game master.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of these three, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; has by far the best guidance. It defines its scope, and has guidance for when to use an alternative tag instead. On the other hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt; have nearly identical descriptions, except that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; says it can also be about NPCs. I think we would prefer questions about NPCs to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; tag. Upon reviewing how the other tags are being used, it seems the rarely used (7 questions) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt; tag is being used identically to one of the ways we are using the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; tag. I say &amp;quot;one of the ways&amp;quot; because &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; is getting applied to a lot of stuff, which brings me to the second problem...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Tag Overuse&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; has more or less lost all its meaning because it has been applied to all sort of questions, really any time a player's character is mentioned, you might find the tag, even if the questions has nothing to do with the concept or idea of a character. For example, consider this question:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101451/can-one-pc-throw-another&quot;&gt;Can one PC throw another?&lt;/a&gt;. This question is about the mechanics of throwing a person. &lt;em&gt;It's a question about the mechanics of something a character does, not a question about characters.&lt;/em&gt; To give a rough estimate, it looks like around 28 out of the 80 open questions with the tag follow this pattern.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bcharacter-creation%5D%5Bcharacter%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;17 out of 80&lt;/a&gt; open questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; are cotagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-creation&lt;/a&gt;. It is not clear to me that any of these 17 questions are different from the other 1,310 questions in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-creation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-creation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character-creation&lt;/a&gt; tag that aren't cotagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; (as well as some questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; that were about character creation that didn't have the tag for it). Some of them might be, but the purpose of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; is pretty unclear to me at this point, so I don't know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Next, most of the remaining questions that don't fit into the two bins above are specifically about player characters and how the players relate to their characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One more thing, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bcharacter%5D+closed%3A1&quot;&gt;45 out of 125&lt;/a&gt; questions with the tag have been closed, only 7 as duplicates. I'm not sure what to do with that, but it seems like an unusually high proportion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that said, &lt;em&gt;I don't really have any idea what this tag is for&lt;/em&gt;, and unless someone has some good ideas for fixing it, retagging with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; where appropriate and then burninating it might not be a bad idea.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Update March 10, 2022&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Based on the unanimous voting pattern on my answer below, I have begun removing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; from the mechanical questions that weren't about the concept of player characters (see the answer for a list). Once I've finished, I'll notify the moderators to have them merge &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt;. Keeping the pace at a modest five per day, I should be finished in less than a week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-03-29T20:59:16.073" LastActivityDate="2022-03-29T20:59:16.073" Title="The [character] tag is in serious need of help, else it may need to be burninated" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11976" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11975" CreationDate="2022-03-07T14:11:55.140" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I recommend some retagging and then BURNINATION&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought about this for a couple days, and I've decided to recommend burninating the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt; tag. I think that between the tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/villain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;villain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;villain&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gmpc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gmpc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gmpc&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sidekick&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sidekick&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sidekick&lt;/a&gt; we can cover all of the questions that are actually about some kind of character, and I cannot conceive of a question about the concept of a &amp;quot;character&amp;quot; that isn't covered by one of our tags that qualifies the concept in some way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, it will require some retagging before we burninate. Scrolling through that question list, it looks like a lot of these questions are good candidates for the underused &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt; tag. I recommend retagging these questions with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt; and then burninating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt;, which will remove it from all the questions that didn't need a character tag to begin with. Depending on how much daily retagging volume we're okay with, retagging would take 1-2 weeks. I can volunteer to handle this myself, and if there are any questions about what I'm doing, we should be able to resolve them in comments or chat, as usual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will maintain a list here of the questions from which I have removed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;character&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/196505/62294&quot;&gt;Do special abilities and wonderous items with similar effects cumulate?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/196046/62294&quot;&gt;How to get the most out of my Fey Step teleporting&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/74380/62294&quot;&gt;How far away is the Gnome&amp;#39;s &amp;quot;Clockwork Toy&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Music Box&amp;quot; audible?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/190354/62294&quot;&gt;Is there any way to become a swarm of bats as a PC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178814/62294&quot;&gt;How much information is conveyed when a spell is identified?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/137511/62294&quot;&gt;Is there a spell that can stop a ship?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/15486/62294&quot;&gt;How to transform a tragic hero into a villain?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/101451/62294&quot;&gt;Can one PC throw another?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/3756/62294&quot;&gt;What are typical defense statistics for a Defender at different tiers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/6295/62294&quot;&gt;Creating a new character vs taking over an inactive previous character&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95123/62294&quot;&gt;What weapons, poisons, or other items help reduce enemy Will saves?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/24401/62294&quot;&gt;How can the DM boost a low-HP character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/9943/62294&quot;&gt;How should I build my Oracle character?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/4256/62294&quot;&gt;Is there a minimum Intelligence score for the thief?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/34097/62294&quot;&gt;Is Wild Magic a Prerequisite for a Chaos Sorcerer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/96931/62294&quot;&gt;Qinggong Monk Lvl 20 Build&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/45708/62294&quot;&gt;Do drow elf wizards need to sleep&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/153221/62294&quot;&gt;Half-rock- half-forest-gnome&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/25428/62294&quot;&gt;Would this Technomancer concept be plausible?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/20036/62294&quot;&gt;How does a character become magical in the Dresden Files?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103079/62294&quot;&gt;Can a player&amp;#39;s character become a Devil?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/74479/62294&quot;&gt;On Roll20, is it possible to fill in character sheets without being in a game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/38318/62294&quot;&gt;How can an evil cleric hide his alignment?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/31407/62294&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a Solid Way to Strike up a Conversation With a LE Devil outsider without the Gate Spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-17T14:26:08.447" LastActivityDate="2022-03-17T14:26:08.447" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11977" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11956" CreationDate="2022-03-07T17:30:02.063" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Rephrase your question to include a few more details, and be very specific with your rule explanations&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Firstly&lt;/strong&gt;, it isn't clear what the actual problem you are trying to solve is. Yes we know Simulacrum is problematic, but we don't know which problems you care about and are looking to solve. You need to make that clear. What each problem is, and what issues it causes for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Secondly&lt;/strong&gt;, you need to tell us why you chose the rules you chose, and what problems you expect them to fix. You need to be clear here, because saying things like 'will be judged case by case' doesn't let us help you, because we don't know how you are expecting to judge. If for example you think items less powerful than .. whatever .. are probably ok then you can say so, or maybe you won't allow spellcasting items, or items that recover charges or similar features etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Thirdly&lt;/strong&gt;, you need to tell us what your expectations are after the rules are implemented, are you trying to balance simulacrum in line with any other 7th level spell for example? (IE: I want players to think it on the same level as finger of death and have to make a genuine choice when selecting spells).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Lastly&lt;/strong&gt;, you should sum up with your worries and the type of advice you are looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Section 1&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Simulacrum is broken.. blah blah ... and I am particularly worried about the following aspects&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Issue 1 .. whatever .. and leads to .. whatever ..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Issue 2 .. whatever .. and leads to .. whatever ..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Section 2&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have come up with the following house rules to try and mitigate those issues&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rule 1 .. whatever .. and is intended to .. whatever ..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rule 2 ..whatever .. and is intended to .. whatever ..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Section 3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The aim of these rules is to affect the spell in the ... following ways ... which will bring it inline with the following expectations ... whatever they may be ..&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Section 4&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am worried that simulacrum will be severely nerfed in combat and end up being mostly a utility spell which will prevent people from wanting to use it ... or worried that this still doesn't go far enough because in comparison to .. this same level spell .. simulacrum is still a no-brainer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is aimed at people who have tried house rules to fix issues with Simulacrum, and may have experience with one or more of these rules. Please use good subjective / bad subjective to provide answers based on your own experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I think this should be a great question, and one that the community would be very well placed to answer. This is a well known broken spell, and using our collective experience to help fix it would be very useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also do not believe that playtesting at this point is necessary, or even really recommended. To my expectations coming to the experts with well thought out ideas is always a good idea before spending (and maybe wasting) time with practical experimentation. Move onto playtesting once enough advice has been given that the rule-set might actually work, and maybe with guidance on what to keep an eye on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastActivityDate="2022-03-07T17:30:02.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11978" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11980" CreationDate="2022-03-09T08:29:39.887" Score="5" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;Some tags use the singular, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt;, others use the plural, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I never can remember which has which, and when you manually type a tag in the search box, and end up using the wrong pluralization form, you get zero results. It is pretty annoying and does not feel like good UI design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify, I am not asking about the tags to attach to a post. I am asking about the search function, like here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P2q10.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P2q10.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no autocompletion for this, as you can see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it seems you can just define synonyms for all these tags to solve the problem, for example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-features&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-features&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-features&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt;. Am I missing something or would that solve the issue?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if it would solve the search issue, is there any downside for doing this? Would it be OK if I created such synonyms?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-03-18T12:27:49.477" LastActivityDate="2022-03-19T13:55:26.707" Title="Should we make plural (or singular) synonyms for all common tags?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|search|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11979" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11978" CreationDate="2022-03-09T10:52:04.947" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Little need when tagging&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you start to type &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-i&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-i&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-i&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; when adding a tag to a quesion, the list of tags that contain this part appears. It tells you, that this is properly tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only when the alternate spelling is sufficiently different it even becomes apparent to the user in this case - like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cwod&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cwod&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cwod&lt;/a&gt; is a synonym for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;convenient for search&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Only when searching it becomes convenient to have alternate spellings. Make &lt;strong&gt;1&lt;/strong&gt; Tag of the alternative spelling, suggest it as a synonym and bring it to approval voting. that's enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-03-09T14:11:36.420" LastActivityDate="2022-03-09T14:11:36.420" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11980" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11978" CreationDate="2022-03-09T11:23:50.667" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Tag Away! (But wait a bit first)&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to preface this with the fact that I do &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; know any of the finer, under-the-hood details of how tag synonyms works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I know no downsides of creating synonyms and have myself been prompted several times that a plural tag (such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attacks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attacks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attacks&lt;/a&gt;) is too close to an existing tag for me to post a question. In fact, I see &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; benefits of making synonyms:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There will be less prompts to retag questions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Things like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attacks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attacks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attacks&lt;/a&gt; will actually work (Note, there's no suggested fills when making those)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;People won't have to remember which tags arbitrarily use which number (singular/plural)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will point out that when I &lt;em&gt;try&lt;/em&gt; to suggest the &amp;quot;attacks&amp;quot; tag as a synonym of the &amp;quot;attack&amp;quot; tag I am given this popup:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Failed to propose synonym:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The suggested tag must exist in the system before suggesting it as a synonym!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile, when I try to add the &amp;quot;attacks&amp;quot; tag to a question I get &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; popup:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag [attacks] is too similar to [attack]. If you think this new tag should be allowed, discuss it on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Presumably&lt;/em&gt; then, this sort of synonym-making effort would actually require moderator action. At the very least, some of these tags simply cannot be made right now (nor should any of them be made &lt;em&gt;right&lt;/em&gt; now anyway).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; At the very least we would want to let this Meta exist for a while, especially since other people will certainly know more about the potential downsides of tag synonyms than myself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-03-09T14:27:12.703" LastActivityDate="2022-03-09T14:27:12.703" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11981" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11978" CreationDate="2022-03-10T00:31:23.860" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No Need&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wild cards work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Searching on [magic-ite*] and [class-featu*] return the expected tags.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Searching on [dnd*] returns the longer boolean expression for all the various tags starting with 'dnd'.  All fourteen of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all cases, the returned tags are sent through the search engine, and you get the set of questions so tagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T00:31:23.860" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11982" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11985" CreationDate="2022-03-10T18:16:47.137" Score="8" ViewCount="352" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question here is about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196696/what-popular-culture-easter-eggs-exist-in-published-adventures&quot;&gt;What popular culture Easter Eggs exist in published adventures?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a lot of discussion in the comments already, with the overall gist that the question is not hopeless and might be tweaked to be reopened. My impression from the discussion there&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could be somewhat &lt;em&gt;off-topic&lt;/em&gt; as it is not the typical question for here, however this Stack Exchange is likely the best one to be able to answer it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question has similarities to a &lt;em&gt;list question&lt;/em&gt;, but not in a bad way and there are many other successful similar questions, so this would not be a reason to close it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question could be considered &lt;em&gt;opinion-based&lt;/em&gt;, if the proof about the pop culture reference is not conclusive / authoritative&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question &lt;em&gt;needs details or clarity&lt;/em&gt;, because it might be difficult to define what counts as pop culture vs. general fantasy literature background that inspired role playing games&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The question &lt;em&gt;needs more focus&lt;/em&gt;, with too many modules published and therefore potential Easter Eggs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;None of these reasons seems to be unequivocal based on the discussion. I personally would love to learn about more such cool Easter Eggs hidden in the published modules, and this is something that likely can be done best by a community, as one person may be able to make a connection where another would not, and prove it and share it. All together we may be able to find most of them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One concern I hear is that the question will be flooded with meaningless or redundant answers, or it will take time of the moderators as people argue about if something is a valid Easter Egg or not. However, while the question remained open, nobody did venture even a single Easter Egg (granted ... that did not take too long before it was closed down). Does anyone even know of another Easter Egg similar to the example given?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What would be the most important thing(s) to fix, and how could you see it being tweaked? For example, a very simple approach would be to limit the question to a single adventure module, like Dragon Heist. How many Easter Eggs can there be in a single module? If the rest was acceptable I could then easily replicate this question separately for each module. Would this be a possible solution, or do you have other recommendations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2024-02-22T08:21:29.613" LastActivityDate="2024-02-22T08:21:29.613" Title="How can I better formulate this question about Easter Eggs in 5e adventures to make it stackable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|close-reasons|list-questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11983" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11982" CreationDate="2022-03-10T22:02:28.140" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question invites speculation.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My biggest concern about the question is less that it solicits a list answer or multiple unrelated answers, and more about the type of answer that it asks for. To your credit, you provide a compelling example of an Easter egg:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote class=&quot;spoiler&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; In &lt;em&gt;Dragon Heist&lt;/em&gt;, the flamboyant Illuskan captain &lt;strong&gt;Zardoz Zord&lt;/strong&gt; is a hidden refrence to &lt;strong&gt;Sean Connery&lt;/strong&gt;. The name of the character is a reference to the cult sci-fi-fantasy movie &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070948/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Zardoz&lt;/a&gt; starring Connery in red lingerie, and Zardoz's submarine is called the &lt;em&gt;Scarlet Marplenoth&lt;/em&gt;, a reference to Connery's submarine Red October in the movie &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099810/?ref_=fn_al_tt_4&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Hunt for Red October&lt;/a&gt; (scarlet is a shade of red, and Marplenoth is the month matching October in the Forgotten Realm's &lt;a href=&quot;https://d20.pub/resources/forgotten-realms-calendar-of-harptos/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Calendar of Harptos&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I don't think we can expect every answer to provide such compelling examples unless you can find a way to articulate clearly what it is about your example that makes it a good example, so that we can then apply that standard to other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this (closed) question about a possible Easter egg from &lt;em&gt;Curse of Strahd&lt;/em&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151935/is-this-statue-in-curse-of-strahd-an-easter-egg&quot;&gt;Is this statue in Curse of Strahd an easter egg?&lt;/a&gt; The question describes an object found during the adventure and attempts to use some context clues to make a connection to Vecna. The accepted answer cites a cryptic tweet from Chris Perkins as possible but tenuous confirmation of the questions suspicions, but ultimately, the answer rightly concludes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;the adventure does not actually ever specify so it really is just speculation (or left for DMs to decide)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/188686/62294&quot;&gt;second answer&lt;/a&gt; to this question highlights what I worry your question is inviting. It provides a detailed, seemingly well thought out explanation of what the statue of a faceless god may be referring to, but in the end, it is entirely speculative. &lt;em&gt;There is simply no way of knowing for sure what, if anything, the statue is referring to&lt;/em&gt;, except possibly that the author has taken to making their intent known.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trouble here is that &lt;em&gt;your question, even when applied to one adventure, is far more broad than this one about the statue&lt;/em&gt;. The statue question focuses on a single object. Your question asks us to search not just entire adventures, but every adventure ever published. Anything and everything &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be an Easter egg, as long as you can search far and wide enough for coincidental associations, and there really is no good way of confirming if the association is intentional, or entirely coincidental.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my experience, this is often the point of including Easter eggs. Sure, sometimes you get things that are too good to be merely coincidence, but oftentimes, authors insert Easter eggs in ways that are much more subtle, for precisely the purpose of causing the reader or viewer to speculate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, I don't think this is a good question for us to workout the calculus of how we feel about list answers, because I don't think it is the number or scope of potential answers that is really the problem. It is the type of answers that it asks for: answers that cannot be reliably verified through objective citation or meaningful experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2024-02-18T12:33:58.337" LastActivityDate="2024-02-18T12:33:58.337" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11984" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11982" CreationDate="2022-03-10T23:57:22.267" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Questions about Easter eggs fall too closely to the bad side of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; to be stackable.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The one necessary feature of an Easter egg is that it was placed deliberately by its creator. As such, the only person who knows whether something is an Easter egg is its original creator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Easter eggs don't have to be obvious, even when you know the secret. Some things stretch credibility when explained any other way, but some are more subtle. Trying to assemble an exhaustive list of Easter eggs for any product would almost always bring people pushing subtle Easter eggs backed by their own speculation, which would need the word of the original creator to confirm or deny one way or the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2022-03-10T23:57:22.267" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11985" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11982" CreationDate="2022-03-11T12:29:35.580" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think one issue is &lt;em&gt;definition&lt;/em&gt;, what is an &amp;quot;Easter egg&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One dictionary describes an Easter egg (in this sense) as &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Easter%20egg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;a hidden feature in a commercially released product (such as software or a DVD)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's &lt;strong&gt;hugely&lt;/strong&gt; broad, and it's not clear to me that the Zardoz is an Easter egg, as much as it a &lt;a href=&quot;https://interestingliterature.com/2020/05/what-is-literary-allusion-introduction-definition-examples/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;literary allusion&lt;/a&gt;.  And both of them are close to &lt;a href=&quot;https://tvtropes.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;tropes&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://lostpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Pop_culture_references&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;pop references&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, somehow enumerating these things isn't about playing the games, it's a sort of literary analysis.  You could change the references Zardoz is (alleged to be) based off of, and it wouldn't particularly change the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, there's a question of scale.  A question or two about pop references isn't really going to change the nature of rpg.se.  Churning through all the modules of 5e (and then presumably every other game) to produce reams and reams of questions and answers about pop references seems to me to shift the focus of rpg.se in a way that makes it less useful and interesting.  There are lots and lots of sites and blogs dedicated to fan analysis of published content, there's only one rpg.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in the end, your question seems fundamentally too-broad and off-topic to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2022-03-11T13:08:49.890" LastActivityDate="2022-03-11T13:08:49.890" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11986" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11965" CreationDate="2022-03-11T15:33:59.620" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think it's a Trap&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A piece of tagging theory which isn't invoked very often, and which is hard to apply directly to things, is that we're (generally) tagging for concepts as opposed specific in-game content pieces. It's just that very often D&amp;amp;D's name for things is the &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; name for the concept. Or that a different game system's name becomes a name for the thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishes and Simulacra are things onto themselves to a greater extent than which &lt;em&gt;glyph of warding&lt;/em&gt; really is (I'll get back to that). And related to spells and our tags, it's just that D&amp;amp;D (and by our extension most of our questions) implement those concepts as spells. D&amp;amp;D implements quite a lot of stuff as spells. I will admit this is close, and worth a full consideration, but I'm landing on not quite.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to bring you along with the journey I went on. I started out being for the tag, for pretty much the arguments laid out. However, applying the above notion to 5e's &lt;em&gt;symbol&lt;/em&gt; spell should also fall under the same tag as it's doing basically the same thing. And that's where the tag name fell apart for me. While no one is gonna bat an eye at a question about &lt;em&gt;limited wish&lt;/em&gt; is tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wish&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wish&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wish&lt;/a&gt;, tagging a question about &lt;em&gt;symbol&lt;/em&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/glyph-of-warding&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;glyph-of-warding&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;glyph-of-warding&lt;/a&gt; seems wrong. Much too artificial.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But is there a better name? Well, the short description for the effect would be spell trap, which would make a fine tag bar two things. Firstly, we don't like inventing our own terminology. The second is that we already have that covered. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traps&lt;/a&gt; as a combo should cover that perfectly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'm aware that &lt;em&gt;glyph of warding&lt;/em&gt; has some uses which aren't strictly as a trap (how much of that is for actual play and how much is theory-crafting I can't say). If the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/traps&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;traps&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;traps&lt;/a&gt; tag is wholly inapplicable, leave it off.  Tag the question with what it is &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt;. If it's purely about the spellcasting process, tag it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellcasting&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellcasting&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellcasting&lt;/a&gt;; if about creating a permanent effect, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/permanency&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;permanency&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;permanency&lt;/a&gt;. But often I'd think a question about using a trap for something other than its original purpose is still about traps, magical or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-12T02:52:29.407" LastActivityDate="2022-03-12T02:52:29.407" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11987" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-11T18:18:13.547" Score="2" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196727/what-is-a-game-jam&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;Game Jam&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt; asks an interesting question, but maybe is a question asking information more suited to Wikipedia (&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_jam&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;Game jam&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;), which excels at taking a thing, and telling you what it is, with lots of references and detail.  Encyclopedic entries don't seem to be what rpg.se is about.  Am I missing something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not literally &amp;quot;what is&amp;quot; in the question I'm asking about.  For instance, rpg.se has questions such as:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105486/what-is-metal-armor?r=SearchResults&amp;amp;s=12%7C33.0136&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;What is metal armor?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2964/what-is-hindering-terrain?r=SearchResults&amp;amp;s=20%7C32.5927&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;What is hindering terrain?&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly those are questions where the answer is specific to RPGs and maybe a specific RPG.  It's clear to me that a good answer here to those questions are different than a good article on Wikipedia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If &amp;quot;What is a &amp;quot;Game Jam&amp;quot;&amp;quot; is suitable for rpg.se, does that mean &amp;quot;What is D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Who is Gary Gygax?&amp;quot; good questions for rpg.se?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This meta question got instantly downvoted, and instant downvotes always make me feel like I'm approaching a question the wrong way, maybe I'm not asking the question correctly.  It was prompted by the game jam question, because I didn't want to close vote without understanding the issue, but it's really about where's the line between rpg.se and other sources?  To me, the game jam question seems better suited to other sources, but I'm happy to understand others' points of view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-12T02:55:08.040" LastActivityDate="2022-03-12T02:55:08.040" Title="Is RPG.SE a good fit for encyclopedic-like questions and answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11988" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11987" CreationDate="2022-03-11T19:00:32.810" Score="10" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Encyclopedic answers are &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; our jam.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the early days of the site, Stack Overflow used this diagram to define itself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CFYWx.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/CFYWx.png&quot; alt=&quot;venn diagram of reddit, wiki, blog, forum&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This diagram was &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/web/20100727065136/http://stackoverflow.com/about&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;featured in the early network's About page&lt;/a&gt;, and mentioned in blog posts &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/01/24/adventures-in-delclusionism/&quot;&gt;in 2009&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2012/05/22/encyclopedia-stack-exchange/&quot;&gt;in 2012&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2014/04/22/putting-the-community-back-in-wiki/&quot;&gt;and in 2014&lt;/a&gt;. It was used prominently to indicate that we function more or less like &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; of these things: we are the overlap of all those functions. As the 2014 post puts it:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That’s the visual elevator pitch for Stack Exchange. We were the little dot in the middle, a potent mix of useful traits from other tools, a wiry mutt full of hybrid vigor. The purpose of this blend was to allow and encourage the construction of a library of solutions, by providing communities with the tools they needed to share their experiences and challenges with others who might struggle with the same issues.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The diagram illustrated where we &lt;s&gt;stole&lt;/s&gt; drew inspiration for the design of those tools, and their influence occasionally shows up in the results. Sometimes, a question will end up more like a wiki, other times more like a blog, other times more like a discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/tour&quot;&gt;The Stack Overflow tour&lt;/a&gt; says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed, high-quality answers to every question about programming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the first introduction of the flagship Q&amp;amp;A platform, so I'm assuming it's &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; official and controlled and vetted by Stack Overflow corporate as an accurate mission statement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire purpose of our existence is to build up a Q&amp;amp;A-driven knowledge base for future reference for all comers. It's why we have citation standards, score answers to elevate the best ones to prominence, and have accepted answers to show what best solved the problem for the person to ask about it. Encyclopedic answers are &lt;em&gt;absolutely&lt;/em&gt; what we're about and here for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many things covered here can also be covered by an appropriately scoped Wikipedia article, but that's because we have that overlap with Wikipedia's mission to also build up a knowledge base. The fact we have overlap in function is deliberate and intended, not accidental or something we want to avoid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But just as Wikipedia also does some things we do, we can do things Wikipedia can't do. Not everything we do is encyclopedic, and not everything we do that's encyclopedic would also belong on Wikipedia.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question's great, answers to it will be great, and fielding it is exactly what we're here to do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-03-11T19:14:39.017" LastActivityDate="2022-03-11T19:14:39.017" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11989" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-12T07:59:53.977" Score="4" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have seen multiple discussions here about if this or that tag should be removed as it has outlived its utility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that the objective of tags is to help attract expertise to a certain question area. It is not clear to me what the downside is for having any given tag. I think there is no phyiscal limitation in an electronic medium as there is in a print or physical medium, and with ranking and filtering, the cost of having a long tail of special interest items is effectively zero.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the first part of my question is, what are the benefits of culling tags &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;? The second part is, if there are real benefits, what are the criteria used to decide if a tag should be removed or not?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I apologize if there is already a post on it -- I could not find it searching for reason + burninate, or reason + remove + tag).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T07:37:05.797" Title="What are reasons to remove (or &quot;burninate&quot;) a tag?" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11990" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11989" CreationDate="2022-03-12T08:30:31.193" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not useful&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have in the past removed tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/jungle&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;jungle&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; that were covered better and entirely by a combination of other tags - in the case of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8280/do-we-need-a-jungle-tag&quot;&gt;jungle&lt;/a&gt; it was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terrain&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;terrain&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;terrain&lt;/a&gt; and some more.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's attracting bad tagging&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8293/is-wall-a-good-tag&quot;&gt;That's what at some point threatened the tag&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall&lt;/a&gt; - it was attracting many questions and answers on it were not actually about the wall-spells but the physical walls and such. Instead of outright burning the tag, its contents were culled. Would it have been the other way around and been about physical structures, it might have undergone burnination or re-definition!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's misinterpretable&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We once had a tag named &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure&lt;/a&gt;. It was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6522/tag-burninate-suggestion-adventure&quot;&gt;burned&lt;/a&gt; because people couldn't decide if it was for writing such or published ones or making stuff up on the fly or any combination thereof.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's duplicative&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have had tags that were totally duplicative and in a Venn diagram would have 95%+ overlap. For example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-design&lt;/a&gt; got axed and merged into &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adventure-writing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;adventure-writing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;adventure-writing&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4848/do-we-need-the-adventure-writing-tag&quot;&gt;as discussed here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It's something one can't be an expert in&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once we had a tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3rd-party&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3rd-party&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3rd-party&lt;/a&gt; to demark content for a game not by the main publisher. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8239/30306&quot;&gt;It faced the Inquisition&lt;/a&gt;, just like its previous heresy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/3pp&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;3pp&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;3pp&lt;/a&gt; which was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7169/should-we-get-rid-of-3pp&quot;&gt;exterminated&lt;/a&gt;. Why? Well, you can be an expert in publishing, or in the products of one publisher (we currently have only very few publisher tags - there seem to be about 3), but you can not be an expert in &amp;quot;3rd party publishers&amp;quot;. Maaaaaybe you could be one in being a publisher of 3rd party content, but that would make your question fully taggable with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/publishing&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;publishing&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;publishing&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;legal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;legal&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It encompasses too many things... and gets split off&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some cases, a tag needs to burn (in part) because it became clunky and then got split. In general, this happens only on &lt;em&gt;old&lt;/em&gt; tags that accumulated many many questions. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9149/do-we-want-a-homebrew-review-tag-separate-from-the-homebrew-tag&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; is why we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew&lt;/a&gt;. While we have &lt;em&gt;kept&lt;/em&gt; homebrew, we could have also made two different tags and totally got rid of the previous one - like was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6294/30306&quot;&gt;discussed&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;time&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;time&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-03-15T07:37:05.797" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T07:37:05.797" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11991" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11978" CreationDate="2022-03-12T10:48:03.833" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A list of synonyms that might need handling under this&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attacks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attacks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attacks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bard&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bards&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;bards&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;bards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-feature&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-feature&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-feature&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/class-features&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;class-features&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;class-features&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cleric&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;cleric&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;cleric&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/clerics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;clerics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;clerics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighter&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighter&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighter&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fighters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fighters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;fighters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusion&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illusions&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;illusions&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;illusions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-item&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-item&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-item&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/magic-items&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;magic-items&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;magic-items&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monk&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monk&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monk&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npc&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npc&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npc&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/npcs&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;npcs&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;npcs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paladin&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paladin&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paladin&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/paladins&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;paladins&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;paladins&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-character&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-character&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-character&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/player-characters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;player-characters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;player-characters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/race&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;race&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;race&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;races&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ranger&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ranger&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ranger&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rangers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rangers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rangers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skill&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skill&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skill&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerer&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sorcerers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;sorcerers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;sorcerers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlock&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlock&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlock&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/warlocks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;warlocks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;warlocks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; / &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizards&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizards&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please expand as you see fit, STACK!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-03-19T13:55:26.707" LastActivityDate="2022-03-19T13:55:26.707" CommentCount="0" CommunityOwnedDate="2022-03-12T10:48:03.833" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11992" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11989" CreationDate="2022-03-12T14:32:38.640" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It crowds out more valuable tags.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11990/3548&quot;&gt;Trish's answer&lt;/a&gt; covers a lot of factors that could cause a tag to fail to provide &lt;em&gt;positive&lt;/em&gt; value to the site, there is one way that tags can actually provide &lt;em&gt;negative&lt;/em&gt; value to the site (that is, actually be harmful rather than simply irrelevant).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two limitations on tag &amp;quot;slots&amp;quot;. First, a question can only have a total of 5 tags. If a tag that provides little or no positive value (as described in Trish's answer) gets chosen over some other tag that &lt;em&gt;would have&lt;/em&gt; helped an expert find and answer that question, then that tag &lt;strong&gt;harmed the question&lt;/strong&gt;, and by extension, harmed the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other limitation on tag slots is that the tag on the question with the most weight (that is, the tag that has been used in the most questions) gets bolted onto the question title for the purposes of search engine crawlers. If a lower value tag ends up in this position over a higher value tag, it can make it harder for people searching Google/Bing/whatever to find that question, and by extension to find our site. Again, this harms the question's ability to get answers and the site's ability to help people.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, the search engine tag slot may be playing a role in our diminishing number of questions about less-common systems and increasing focus on D&amp;amp;D 5e. Consider these four questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/179781/3548&quot;&gt;1&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/138151/3548&quot;&gt;2&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/143305/3548&quot;&gt;3&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159744/3548&quot;&gt;4&lt;/a&gt;. In each case, when viewing the question you can see the highest weighted tag before the question title, and in each case it's something generic rather than the name of the game system, which would actually help people find the question:&#xA;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GVX6D.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;image showing tab titles for previously-linked questions&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An important aspect of this is that because the search engine slot is held by the tag that appears on the most questions, as a tag gets used more and more its potential to harm the site by claiming this slot goes up. It's easy to look at a tag that's only on 6 questions and say, &amp;quot;Eh, we'll leave it be for now and see how it gets used.&amp;quot; A tag that's on 1000+ questions need to be providing a lot more value to justify its existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2022-03-12T14:32:38.640" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11993" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="11998" CreationDate="2022-03-13T08:41:08.487" Score="0" ViewCount="147" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a lot of answers, it would be helpful to explain why things are working as they are.  For example that 5e is designed to leave much more to DM adjuction &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.enworld.org/threads/mearls-on-d-ds-design-premises-goals.665731/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;than earlier versions&lt;/a&gt;, because trying to cover all cases by the rules leads to rules bloat and makes the game hard to play. The games designers have gone on record about what is driving several design decisions in interviews and posts like that one linked. Would it be OK to ask a question about the published design principles for the game? If we had a solid answer to this question, we could then easily point to it in other answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question could be&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What are major design goals for D&amp;amp;D 5e?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e differes from its direct predecessors, D&amp;amp;D 3.5e and D&amp;amp;D 4e in several ways, for example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;it puts a lot more emphasis on the DM in adjucating rules, and on keeping the core rules relatively small.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;it aims to use &lt;strong&gt;bounded accuracy&lt;/strong&gt; to limit the scale of bonus progressions to a more narrow band&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;it aims to speed up play and limit admisitrateive overhead by limiting the number of effects player charactes can have at the same time with rules like &lt;em&gt;concentration&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;attunement&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What where the major design goals for 5e, as published in commentary by the game's designers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-03-13T11:37:17.077" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T16:26:58.233" Title="Can I ask a question on published designer intent?" Tags="|support|specific-question|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11994" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12000" CreationDate="2022-03-13T08:54:15.297" Score="3" ViewCount="175" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the time of this posting there are 1,406 posts (374 questions) about &amp;quot;spellbook&amp;quot; on RPG.SE. This is an area, along with copying of spells, that is a common source of questions at least for D&amp;amp;D 5e, where it might make sense to have a flag to attract expertise, and it also is a general concept that could be useful across many different RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there a strong reason to not add a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbook&lt;/a&gt; tag?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;(Also, since I made that mistake before, I would not go and add this in large swathes, only when I come across spellbook questions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I asked a question for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11989/what-are-reasons-to-remove-or-burninate-a-tag&quot;&gt;when tags would be harmful&lt;/a&gt;, and so far got:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;not useful&lt;/strong&gt; (instead use a more general term like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt;) – could apply here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;misleading&lt;/strong&gt; (e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wall&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wall&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wall&lt;/a&gt; being added to non-wall spells) – very unlikely here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;misinterpretable&lt;/strong&gt; – very unlikely here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;duplication&lt;/strong&gt;, nearly fully intersecting an existing tag - this could apply with the current &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbooks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbooks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbooks&lt;/a&gt; synonym pointing to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt; tag. Maybe it should be a synonym? Synonyms do show up the general term when typed into the search box.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;can't be expert in&lt;/strong&gt; - does not seem to apply here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;displaces better tags&lt;/strong&gt;, as there are only 5 slots&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last point seems to address my underlying question about long tail and real estate. For tagging a given post about spellbooks, both to attract expertise and to help with search, it would seem better to have more specific tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbook&lt;/a&gt; than generic tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt;. It is not possible to be an expert for &amp;quot;equipment&amp;quot; in the same way it is possible to be an expert for &amp;quot;spellbooks&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the linked question, the argument is that tags that get used a lot get listed first, and then get used even more, and tend to displace other tags such as system identifiers for less common systems. If this is the case, then generic tags like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt; are more harmful, as they generically apply to many more posts than more narrowly focused, specialized tags.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;(For example, even if we tagged each of the 374 posts, this would put a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbook&lt;/a&gt; tag at rank 61, while &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt; is at rank 31).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only issue is if people add tags on all levels of abstraction, i.e. both &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbook&lt;/a&gt;. Would this then be an indication that apart from a few high-level concept tags, we should not have any more specific tags at all?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;After all, if I search for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gamma-world-1e-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gamma-world-1e-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;gamma-world-1e-2e&lt;/a&gt;, which has only two uses, I still would find posts with the tag, even if they are listed dead last.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-18T01:38:48.937" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T01:38:48.937" Title="Can I add a [spellbook] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11995" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-14T02:13:02.347" Score="2" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196638/as-a-dm-how-can-i-address-players-frustration-with-in-game-decision-making&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; was asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I read it, it seemed to be a general one, and most of the advice was system agnostic, so I removed the [pathfinder-2e] tag and added the [system-agnostic] tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, then I noticed some answers actually did include PF2E-specific solutions, and one person edited their answer to add a &amp;quot;Note: This question was originally about Pathfinder...&amp;quot; disclaimer. This indicated to me that I had disrupted an equilibrium, which (in stable ecosystems) is generally harmful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sub-question: If the opposite solution was better - editing the question to specify edition, but possibly causing people who don't care about PF to quickly parse the question as less useful - should implicit context be made explicit in edits?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44781" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-14T23:45:47.007" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T07:55:55.620" Title="Should I have removed the [pathfinder-2e] tag from this question?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11996" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11995" CreationDate="2022-03-14T04:51:27.017" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I wouldn't have.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag text is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions that are &lt;strong&gt;explicitly&lt;/strong&gt; not restricted to any one particular system or rules, where the &lt;strong&gt;asker wants&lt;/strong&gt; solutions to the question that are not directly tied to a game's mechanics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Emphasis mine.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Prior to your tag edit, the question was not &amp;quot;&lt;strong&gt;explicitly&lt;/strong&gt; not restricted&amp;quot; (if you'll pardon the double negative) &amp;quot;to any one particular system.&amp;quot;  It might have been implicitly not restricted (especially if the pf 2e tag had not been there) but it wasn't explicit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And while there are many valid situations to edit a tag on someone else's question, doing so where the tag description itself defers to the asker intent does not seem to be one of those.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2022-03-14T05:01:59.993" LastActivityDate="2022-03-14T05:01:59.993" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11997" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11995" CreationDate="2022-03-15T07:55:55.620" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Slight balance to keep system&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, &lt;strong&gt;many&lt;/strong&gt; questions about player agency, problem players or GMs, and social contract are only minimally impacted by the actual game played, as long as the &lt;em&gt;type&lt;/em&gt; of game matches. While the answer for Pathfinder might not differ too much from Dungeons and Dragons 3.5, as both can be classic dungeon crawlers. Likewise, an answer about Masks can be based on a profound knowledge of how to handle situations in other Apocalypse World settings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt; the game played can make the answer much better and have a huge impact on how to solve the question. There are nuances of playstyle and powers/equipment that inform answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let me take one (very simplistic) example and just swap the game:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are stuck at a closed door and have nobody with lockpicks and skills, no heavy tools and can't hire someone else. How could we get out of this pickle and get in?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If this was tagged with any classic dungeon crawler, the answers might list things like the disintegrate spell, knock/open lock.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If this was Shadowrun, you might get answers to jus buy the tools at the next Fixer, especially explosives (grenades) or an automatic lockpick. Other options are to hijack a car and ram the wall because the walls are always weaker than the doors (duh!).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In Exalted it would be just a chance to show off and kick in the door.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In MAID the answer could be as simple as &amp;quot;get the key from master by spending favor&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In a game of Rats, however, the answer could be &amp;quot;this is not the right way, come back again later!&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T07:55:55.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11998" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11993" CreationDate="2022-03-15T16:26:58.233" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Right now, no&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; is currently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7964/4563&quot;&gt;banned&lt;/a&gt;. Note that this was a decision made after a period of problem with these questions—even though we &lt;strong&gt;always&lt;/strong&gt; required them to be backed up with published developer statements. So asking for that still falls under the ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That ban, however, is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11951/4563&quot;&gt;currently being debated&lt;/a&gt;, with strong support for either weakening or removing the ban.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-03-15T16:26:58.233" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="11999" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-03-16T00:33:53.687" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Let us not only talk about rule intent, but about question closing too!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have not resolved the original reasons for closure. Why exactly should we act as if this wasn't a Stack Exchange format?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using this site comes with a steep and obscure learning curve, and whether we wordsmith and slightly-to-moderately improve the accessibility of specific reasoning doesn't change that fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A participant has to be willing to go through that sieve. They have to make their peace with the sieving process and the included limitations of what the stack does and does not cater to, compromise with it, or leave.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We should equip querents with suggestions so that they may rephrase their question. We shouldn't do that for them unless that teaches them adequately — participation always comes with collateral damage. We are willing to sacrifice, and nobody here has made a persuasive case on why we ought to treat this particular collateral damage differently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question doesn't meet the eligibility criteria, the querent should rework it or take it elsewhere — such as our chat or the myriad places on the internet where different criteria are at work. We do not need to &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;polish sand&lt;/a&gt; or highlight the odd allure of noise — we ought not to do either that is what we accept as a guiding principle of the Stack Exchange format.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd rather not see volunteers break their backs to accommodate solicitants, or for eager volunteers to pounce and transform questions so that they fit the mould while overconfidently guessing at the intent of the querent. This is a matter of mutual respect, and sometimes that means telling someone that their question is better suited to a different place (where what we consider &amp;quot;sand&amp;quot; here may sparkle).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let us keep doing well what we do well, and let us fail and compromise and accept collateral damage where we have a proven track record that we don't do them well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-17T22:34:17.963" LastActivityDate="2022-03-17T22:34:17.963" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12000" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11994" CreationDate="2022-03-16T21:33:53.997" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I see it as a reasonable tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not really sure what else there is to say; the requirements for tags aren’t exactly stiff. I could see it being useful, and I can’t see it being problematic: that alone is like 90% of the way to justifying the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for whether it’d be different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/equipment&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;equipment&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;equipment&lt;/a&gt;, I’d say yes. D&amp;amp;D wizards use equipment other than spellbooks—and non-D&amp;amp;D wizards might not use spellbooks at all. Plus both D&amp;amp;D and the wide, wide world of non-D&amp;amp;D has things other than wizards that use spellbooks. For example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbooks&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbooks&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbooks&lt;/a&gt; could easily be about an archivist or a wu jen, and not a wizard. But really, a question about a spellbook (at least in that system) is almost-always going to be equally-valid for all three: that means a question about spellbooks in that system really is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spellbook&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spellbook&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spellbook&lt;/a&gt; much more than it is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/wizard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;wizard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;wizard&lt;/a&gt; even if it does happen to be a wizard in a particular case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-03-16T21:33:53.997" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12001" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12004" CreationDate="2022-03-18T04:33:59.793" Score="0" ViewCount="121" Body="&lt;p&gt;Answers are supposed to provide references, or at least arguments supporting their view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, with some low quality posts like the one below, the issue is that someone just provides some statement as a one-liner, with no supporting evidence. When reviewing such questions, there is not really an option to let them know how they should improve their answer, there are only these options&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Leave it open&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Edit it yourself (which in such cases essentially means writing and researching your own answer)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Providing one of the close reasons listed below, of which none matches&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we add an answer option to provide information to them how to better answer questions to avoid this in future?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HVNYJ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/HVNYJ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-03-18T05:53:33.840" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T14:20:58.200" Title="Can we have an Opinion deletion reason?" Tags="|feature-request|answers|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12002" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-18T11:07:55.020" Score="-2" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;When putting answer here, often you get responses, sometimes not or only after a longer time frame. In general there is a lot less traffic on meta than on the main site, and responses can be slow in trickling in and being voted upon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At what point, are the answers considered to be final, or at least unequivocal enough that you can move to action?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;It likely cannot be the querant accepting one answer they like. The idea as I understand is that the answers collect the feedback of the community on what should by consensus happen&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does there need to be a tag assigned by a moderator that classifies a question as resolved?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Is it sufficient if there is a single answer with any number of upvotes?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;How long after an answer is available and most upvoted would it be recommended to wait before accepting it or acting on it, in case no moderater desision is required? The main site apparently has a policy to wait at least for a day, after the answer has posted. What is it here with lower traffic - a week?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;What does it mean if nobody replies? Do people not care, and you can just do what you want? How long do you have to wait for replies?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I apologize if there is a FAQ for this, I was not able to find it. If there is a close/pointer answer would be perfectly fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-22T01:01:05.693" LastActivityDate="2022-03-22T01:01:05.693" Title="What is the time/protocol for enacting a meta decision?" Tags="|support|moderation|voting|meta|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12003" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12002" CreationDate="2022-03-18T12:10:51.727" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There's no hard line on this&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether a meta discussion is mature enough to have achieved consensus is a judgement call. And a big part of that judgement call is gonna be the scope of the proposed thing. The second is how timely the question is, eg. a question about handling a specific mainsite question would usually be resolved quicker than a retagging matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We'd generally expect voting to be reasonably settled. What exactly that means isn't fixed, but a single answer having sat at a score of 8 for a few days would usually be a solid indication. Me throwing out numbers here is trying to outline a scale, by no means a replacement for judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's something of a cutoff at two weeks (question age), which is when the question gets taken of the community bulletin. If consensus isn't clear at that point (or there's no answers), it may need more attention. Bring it up with the mods, and we'll see if it's worth featuring.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking of featuring, for major discussion we usually wait for a month for the simple reason that's the time before it's automatically unfeatured and thus a natural cutoff point. We (the mods) then make a judgement call on whether consensus is established.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want a second opinion for judgement calls relating to this (as we don't have a great need for recursive meta discussions on this) there's nothing wrong with asking for one in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt;. Especially if handling the discussion outcome needs a moderator (eg. tag merging/renaming) raise a flag instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T12:10:51.727" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12004" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12001" CreationDate="2022-03-18T14:14:11.307" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Those are optional automatic comments. You’re welcome to leave your own, manual comment, and then mark “No comment necessary.” We are not in any way restricted to those, and there aren’t really official “deletion reasons” the way there are close reasons. I’m not even sure we can add to that list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But bad answers don’t automatically merit deletion. Your example is egregious—I wouldn’t tell anyone they’re wrong to delete it—but honestly, even as bad as it is, it’s still &lt;em&gt;borderline&lt;/em&gt; for deletion. I wouldn’t delete it. A downvote is the more appropriate, intended response here—that’s why none of the automatic comments match. And an answer even slightly better than that—even if still fundamentally a bad, unsupported answer—shouldn't be deleted, it should be (and would be) downvoted to oblivion. Note that people can get rep back by deleting their own heavily-downvoted answers—this is a feature. It becomes a teaching moment and it allows someone to stick to their guns if they really want to (without giving anyone else the impression that it is a good answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And if they do attract some upvotes, maybe they’re on to something. Some portion of the community is responding to what they wrote, despite the glaring problems. I mean, someone who reads through the answers, is unconvinced by all the well-argued answers, but find one that speaks to them, that matches their gut response to the question, voting for that answer? We can’t really say they’re “voting wrong” there, as much as we don’t want to promote unsupported answers. (In part because we can &lt;em&gt;never&lt;/em&gt; say &lt;em&gt;anyone&lt;/em&gt; is “voting wrong,” but again, feature not a bug.) That merits consideration. It may be that the appropriate thing to do is to downvote, since the answer really still is bad, but also think about how to actually back up what they’re saying, if it’s a question you have an interest in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-03-18T14:20:58.200" LastActivityDate="2022-03-18T14:20:58.200" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12005" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-19T16:02:38.620" Score="4" ViewCount="172" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is this question stackable, and if not, can it be rehabilitated?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In our current game, the PCs are getting pwned by a couple of bad guys.  We ended last session in the middle of combat and will pick up next session.  This combat in particular is not going our way and perhaps different strategies are called for.  We are struggling with what is a suitable amount of between-session discussion, since the characters are literally frozen in time in mid-combat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;At your table, what approaches have worked for strategizing ongoing combat?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-22T00:59:25.360" LastActivityDate="2022-03-27T13:02:37.033" Title="Is this question about between-session discussion stackable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12006" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12005" CreationDate="2022-03-19T16:14:26.833" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;What’s the problem here? What outcome are you trying to work toward?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can’t tell that there is a problem to solve here or a goal to aim for, so it seems like more of a discussion survey. Do you see something wrong with talking about the game in between sessions? Is there some favorable or unfavorable outcome you anticipate if the players do one thing or another? “What approaches have worked” isn’t a question we can answer with the little information you’ve given us about your goals. Worked for what? Worked for the party overcoming the challenge? Worked for the party not thinking of a way to cheese the ongoing encounter? Worked for keeping the players interested and excited for more next game?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, it’s just an open ended survey with no clear objective. As written, I would VTC for “needs details”, but if you can tell us some more about what outcome you’re trying to achieve, and maybe why you think just letting the players talk if they want would be detrimental to that outcome, I think there is a good question here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-19T16:43:18.787" LastActivityDate="2022-03-19T16:43:18.787" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12007" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For discussions workshopping questions intended for the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" LastActivityDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12008" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" Score="0" Body="For discussions workshopping questions intended for the main site. " OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" LastActivityDate="2022-03-21T13:29:37.510" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12009" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-21T15:28:39.110" Score="22" ViewCount="309" Body="&lt;p&gt;While browsing the site, I noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; has reached 100,000 reputation points on RPG.SE:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MolMz.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MolMz.png&quot; alt=&quot;100.000 reputation points&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With 79 questions and 1,182 answers, he can be very frequently seen around the site helping out where he can. I hope we continue to have you around, continuing to share your knowledge with the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="41674" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2022-03-22T13:34:49.950" LastActivityDate="2022-03-30T18:08:33.240" Title="Congratulations for reaching 100k reputation points, Thomas Markov!" Tags="|discussion|reputation|just-for-fun|users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12010" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11951" CreationDate="2022-03-22T17:41:32.467" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No need for a special policy, and good reasons to avoid one&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t think it’s worthwhile to debate &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; particular special policy for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original reasons for the ban on these questions is basically gone. Without those, there isn’t a compelling reason to &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; any special policy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The original, very simple, blanket ban on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; has been misunderstood and misconstrued a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt;, suggesting that we can’t even define well what we’re talking about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Any refinement of the policy would be more nuanced, and thus harder to articulate and easier to misunderstand.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, there is simultaneously no need for a special policy, and a high likelihood of causing problems. Combining “little chance of doing good” with “high chance of doing harm” yields pretty guaranteed “more harm than good.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The original purpose of banning &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; is gone&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11953/4563&quot;&gt;primary answer&lt;/a&gt; suggests that the ♦ moderators should be the ultimate arbiters of how true this is, but for myself, it certainly seems true to me:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The ♦ moderators have expressed openness to re-allowing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The community moderation is much stronger than it was, leaving less on ♦ moderators.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;HNQ only applies for a few days instead of a week or more.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;♦ moderators have an option to remove a question from HNQ that they didn’t have before.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of this suggests that speculative answers are unlikely to get problematically upvoted by visitors coming via HNQ. That was the whole reason why we ever even discussed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; in the first place. If that had never been true, it probably would never have even come up. Now that it’s no longer true, things should revert to that default.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The existing blanket ban already gets misunderstood.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Already, with the blanket, “everything looks like a nail” policy, we have enormous disagreements about &lt;em&gt;which questions we’re even talking about&lt;/em&gt;. There have been &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10028/4563&quot;&gt;serious debates&lt;/a&gt; as to whether &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; was, or should be, silently included in the ban, because some portions of the community don’t see a distinction between that and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt;. Even with the Meta consensus firmly on the side of seeing a distinction, and espousing the continued topicality of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/history-of-gaming&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;history-of-gaming&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;history-of-gaming&lt;/a&gt; questions, we routinely see comments and close votes that seem, to me as someone who was there for the initial problems that led to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; ban, patently absurd on their face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t have a good solution to this. No, I’ll go beyond that—I don’t think there &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; a good solution to this. I wrote the answers to a lot of the Meta discussions about whether things should be closed per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; ban, but it hasn’t helped, and quite frankly I never claimed to be able to offer any hard-and-fast definition. This policy has &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; been “I’ll know it when I see it” and that’s not really great for, ya know, policy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It would take an enormous amount of work to try to debate a meaningful hard-line definition, and I’m all-but-certain that effort would be wasted because it would most likely end in failure to come up with one. Per the above, that level of effort isn’t warranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;A more-nuanced policy would be even more complicated&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Going beyond black-and-white banning of some set of questions, and getting into shades of gray among that set, amplifies the above problems immensely. It also massively complicates the policy’s stated response: no longer are we necessarily talking about the simple “just close it,” we’re talking about having a more nuanced response. That would be &lt;strong&gt;hard&lt;/strong&gt;. Much harder than what we’ve already attempted, and largely done poorly at. Just as we can’t well define where the line is, we can’t well define the various shades in play, nor the appropriate response to each.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And again, there’s no compelling reason to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;In the end, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; is just like any other tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question inviting speculation—about designer intent or any other subject—is a bad question, and should be edited and/or closed. Thinly-disguised rants don’t become good questions just because we’d be unbanning &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt;. Etc. and so on. I’m not suggesting—no one is suggesting—that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; become a get-out-of-jail-free card. Just that it no longer be “go directly to jail, do not collect $200” as it has been. This is about a reversion to our norm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don’t have special policies for the overwhelming majority of topics. In fact, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-recommendation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;game-recommendation&lt;/a&gt; banned, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;rules-as-written&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;rules-as-written&lt;/a&gt; burninated, and an elimination of our special policy about editing system tags, I’m not sure we have &lt;strong&gt;any&lt;/strong&gt;. And that’s a good thing. I supported special policies in some or all of those cases, and might personally feel some of them are still worthy of special exceptions, but it’s unquestionable that it’s a very nice state of affairs to avoid having &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt;. And that’s what this proposal would accomplish.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-03-22T17:41:32.467" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12011" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-22T17:47:03.883" Score="11" ViewCount="691" Body="&lt;p&gt;This meta is a check-in on: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8696/what-are-the-citation-expectations-of-answers-on-rpg-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I created this meta a few years ago so people could point to it while leaving a comment addressing an answer that has insufficient citation for something. It's supposed to explain the basics for the author you're giving feedback to so that you don't have to re-explain them yourself and can instead focus your energy on describing the specific thing they need to do with their answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Check-in: Time for review &amp;amp; adjustments&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's been just over three years since the Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A was created, so I want to check in on how it's doing at fulfilling that purpose, and if there's anything we can add, remove, or change to make it more effective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My intention has been that it got revised as needed along the way, but it being a &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt; will understandably make many folks hesitant to mess with it! So I'm opening the floor here for us to discuss the revisions we might make.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been the de-facto curator of this meta and it's been on my mind to ask about this, so naturally I have questions I want to ask you for feedback. I'm going to try (sort of rubbishly) to lay them out below. I'm also interested in your input generally so you're free to just provide whatever feedback you want in whatever format you want regardless of the prompts I'm providing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I need to disclaim that it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a community FAQ and community wiki, so it's still yours to edit, too! I'm not asking this so that you tell &lt;em&gt;me&lt;/em&gt; what I do with &lt;em&gt;my&lt;/em&gt; thing because it's not mine—I'm checking in what &lt;em&gt;we&lt;/em&gt; should be doing with &lt;em&gt;our&lt;/em&gt; thing to help it work well for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questions I have for you!&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Broadly, I'm interested in you considering your usage of the Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A when you use it as a reference point to direct users to: What works well? What doesn't work well? What would you add, remove, or change about it to help it work better for you?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you've got feedback on any/all of these questions you think is worth sharing, I'd be interested in your thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any common citation scenarios the Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A leaves out, that you find yourself missing when you go to reference it in feedback?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What would you have it cover?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What's most important to cover about that?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there any fluff in the Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A that by this point is not actually helpful, and makes using it harder rather than easier?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What would you suggest removing or replacing to that end?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When referencing our Citation Expectations, are there times you struggle to clearly indicate a relevant part of it more than other parts?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Where does this tend to happen for you?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What do you do to ensure people see the bit you need to indicate?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any spots in the Citation Expectations you regularly get pushback from authors when you reference them?&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What would you advise we do to shore it up and better support you guiding users?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there any “Not OK” scenarios you run into &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; often that aren't covered that we should be laying down detailed guidance for? (It's kind of surprising there's only one per section, but that's just how it shook out.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Or: What would you edit?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The above is a user survey to prompt conversation, but I'm interested also in what you might just propose you'd revise about the Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A, minor or major.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Also: Should we split up the answer post?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one's been on my mind since the start: personally I've considered splitting the answer up into multiple posts (general intro, objective citations, subjective citations) so that people can link to just one of those sections, but that gives up some control over the intro coming first. But maybe that doesn't matter at all. Would it be helpful for us to do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This check-in &lt;em&gt;isn't&lt;/em&gt; for settling unestablished issues around citations&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a couple of elephants in the room I need to acknowledge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, the smaller elephant: &lt;strong&gt;this meta is not about creating brand new citation expectations we don't already use.&lt;/strong&gt; The Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A is simply a guidebook. When I created it, it laid down nothing new, it just summarised what people were already saying to help save people some work. That should continue to be true. If you've got new proposals, I suggest raise them in a separate meta for discussion, and then in the future they might become part of our Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, the larger elephant: &lt;strong&gt;this meta is not about how to enforce our citation expectations.&lt;/strong&gt; Whether &amp;amp; when we delete, downvote, flag, etc is probably on the forefront of some peoples' minds, but if we have that conversation, it needs to happen in another space. The Citation Expectations Q&amp;amp;A is just there to help users succeed and to help you provide feedback for them. To whatever extent “how do we enforce it?” is a not-entirely-settled issue (and perhaps it never will be), like with the above elephant, this isn't a place to create those new rules. I want us to just focus on what's &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; the case. If you think the guide should mention something about how unsupported answers &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be handled, sure, that's possible. I'd like your assistance though in avoiding this meta getting derailed into debating &lt;em&gt;what to do with&lt;/em&gt; invalid citations—that's a different topic to tackle separately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-03-25T20:59:40.487" LastActivityDate="2024-01-22T17:11:44.413" Title="Checking in: do we need any updates to our Citation Expectations Q&amp;A?" Tags="|discussion|citations|meta|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12012" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12011" CreationDate="2022-03-22T18:53:42.590" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;There is room for subjective, experience-based answers to objective mechanics questions. Sometimes, they are necessary.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is one particular section of the citation guidance that I think could be improved upon:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Not OK: “I'd rule it like this” for mechanics questions with no citation&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People ask about mechanics because they're trying to better understand the game and how it works. Anyone can make a ruling, but that includes the person who asked the question, so we're not looking for this content. You should answer with how the game affirmatively handles the situation based on its text and cite the game's text to back up your statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if this was intentional, but this section reads to me as though well supported subjective, experience-based answers to mechanics questions should be avoided. In particular, the last sentence seems too restrictive:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should answer with how the game affirmatively handles the situation based on its text and cite the game's text to back up your statements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I think this is generally the best approach to rules questions, I don't think it is the only right approach. We need to be careful not to equate &amp;quot;mechanics&amp;quot; with &amp;quot;objective&amp;quot;. Sometimes, the written rules fail to provide consistency and clarity, and the only type of answer that strictly adheres to this portion of the guidance is the one that cites the rules and observes that they are inconsistent. In these cases, subjective, experience-based rulings are the &lt;em&gt;necessary&lt;/em&gt; component of a good answer to what appears to be an objective, rules-based question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's have an example. Consider the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/192724/62294&quot;&gt;Can you attack while using Echo Avatar?&lt;/a&gt;. On it's face, it appears to be a pretty straightforward rules question. Can you do this thing according to the rules? However, anyone with much experience playing as or DMing for an Echo Knight can tell you, the rules for the subclass are anything but straightforward. So I went on to provide an experience-based &amp;quot;here's how I ruled it&amp;quot; answer, and I think it would technically fall under the &amp;quot;Not OK&amp;quot; section mentioned above, since I didn't make any attempt to justify my ruling with the written rules, opting instead to justify it with an anecdote about how I wasted time at my high school job and a note about the ruling's practical utility at the table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think the section should be deleted, and it probably doesn't need too much change. I'm sure I could have come up with a better example, and I'm sure we could discuss whether or not my example falls afoul of that section at all. But maybe the language could be softened a bit, and maybe we could add something communicating that good subjective answers as described elsewhere in the guidance may still be a suitable response to objective, rules-based questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2024-01-22T17:11:44.413" LastActivityDate="2024-01-22T17:11:44.413" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12013" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-22T22:11:03.003" Score="11" ViewCount="598" Body="&lt;p&gt;We currently discuss whether designer intent questions are on-topic. There is a decent chance that they might become on-topic again — I wonder how one would ask a good designer intent question. I believe this question lays out exceptionally well how that works for homebrew review questions: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good homebrew review question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you think that this question is premature, then please tackle this question from a point of view that looks at what made those questions good designer intent questions when they were on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-07-13T15:20:52.553" LastActivityDate="2022-08-06T11:20:29.823" Title="How can I ask a good designer intent question?" Tags="|support|questions|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12016" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12017" CreationDate="2022-03-23T20:33:29.120" Score="14" ViewCount="218" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question of concern is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196998/how-can-i-preserve-books-but-keep-them-accessible&quot;&gt;How can I preserve books, but keep them accessible?&lt;/a&gt;. There has been a good bit of chatter in comments about the on-topicness of the question, and I have seen the close vote count change a few times. The question is short, so I will reproduce it here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I preserve my older, or more delicate, RPG books? My collection includes some older books (from the 1970s-1980s), some of which are in less than stellar condition. They may be paperbacks, have loose bindings, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to preserve them for future enjoyment, but also keep them accessible. My contractor is salivating at the thought of building an expensive, climate-controlled room with each book individually held in a display case. However, that would make the books inaccessible and difficult to enjoy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't need a way to safeguard the entire collection, just a curated subset of the most valuable or at-risk items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;books&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;books&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think VLAZ raised a particularly salient point in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196998/how-can-i-preserve-books-but-keep-them-accessible#comment535427_196998&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The expected usage of RPG books is quite different to, say, a novel. You'd be going through them a lot to reference different sections. Math books might not need be referenced that often or you could extract from them the small sections you need. For an RPG book, you might need to reference 100 pages (e.g., encompassing races, classes, combat rules) multiple times a session. Also, RPG books are usually shared around the table, so you might have one that, say, five people need to look up stuff during a play session. AFAIK, that's not how mathematicians use their books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; similar to how I used some of my maths texts while doing graduate work, I think the point is well made. But, given volume of comments and the observed up and down changes in the close vote count, I would like to offer this question up for a more thorough community review here on meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-03-24T08:03:20.550" LastActivityDate="2022-03-24T09:23:14.747" Title="Is this question about the preservation of books on topic?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|on-topic|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12017" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12016" CreationDate="2022-03-23T21:03:26.253" Score="25" Body="&lt;h2&gt;On Topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to open with an oft useful distinction. A question being askable on another stack or useful to other fields is irrelevant to its topicality here. Our criterion is fairly simple (some exceptions apply, but not here): Is the question &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; TRPGs (or LARPs etc.)? And perhaps a more easily workable framing for this kind of question: Is the thing asked about a part of the hobby?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Owning RPG books is a part of playing RPGs. So is keeping them and preserving them. And there's even aspects which are entirely RPG specific. RPG books (and varying with time and publisher) have specific properties. So asking here immediately focuses it to that kind of book (or those kinds). Secondly, RPG books have a specific use case for which they want to be kept &amp;quot;accessible&amp;quot;. Both of these would change massively if the same (or a similar) question was asked on Parenting or History, and so the answers should accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-03-23T21:03:26.253" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12018" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12016" CreationDate="2022-03-23T21:45:59.217" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sure, I agree with my own comment there but let me offer even more of an argument: If we were to say that &lt;em&gt;RPG books&lt;/em&gt; are not in any way special and thus not fit for this site, then I would immediately also think that &lt;em&gt;dice&lt;/em&gt; fall into the same category.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In what way are dice &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; related to RPGs than books?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would argue they are not. There are a variety of questions about dice &lt;em&gt;as props&lt;/em&gt; on the site.  How to use them, what probability curves you would get out of them, about dice rolling programs, etc. If &lt;em&gt;books&lt;/em&gt; are not special, then neither are these topics - probabilities should go to [stats.se], for example. Questions about dice themselves should be asked on other stacks, as well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do not think anybody would agree to that. Neither would I. Dice are intrinsically linked with RPGs. Even if not all RPGs use them, dice do have special meaning within the hobby. So do books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The oldest non-RPG physical book that I currently own is older than me. Comes from my father. And I have read it a lot - the cover is no longer attached to the rest of the pages, and for years now it smells of perfume after some was spilled onto it more than a decade ago. The book is &lt;em&gt;readable&lt;/em&gt; but it has had its share of adventures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An RPG book would laugh at this and call it a Tuesday. RPG books are regularly handed around, tossed, dropped, handled with dirty hands, have drinks spilled onto them, and generally have a rough time. Sure, not &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; are handled like that but it is what you can reasonably expect an RPG book to go through.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, books are &lt;em&gt;integral&lt;/em&gt; to RPGs. They contain rules, tables, lists, even artwork that you might need to look at multiple times during a session. Books are &lt;em&gt;the&lt;/em&gt; thing that make the session work. More than dice do, I would argue. If I were to be forced to prepare and play a session without either a book or without dice, I would go without dice. There are other ways to resolve situations in-game. There are very little other good ways to keep the entire table on the same page (some times literally).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep in mind what the site is about. It is about the hobby. And without the books, I would argue the hobby would not exist. It is a bit silly to make the claim that RPG books are not at all related to the hobby.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastActivityDate="2022-03-23T21:45:59.217" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12019" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12011" CreationDate="2022-03-24T02:45:05.973" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Subjective/Objective both creates a false dichotomy for citation expectation and creates too broad a distinction to be useful.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quoting &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11560&quot;&gt;an answer from a different issue&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A stack-worthy answer is one that says not just &amp;quot;what should I do&amp;quot; but &amp;quot;why will this help solve the problem I'm having&amp;quot;. Even if an answer contains a block of rules text, if nobody who reads the answer understands how to apply the rules text to the problem at hand and you can't or don't clarify it, then as far as everybody but you is concerned you've provided something completely irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There isn't a different expectation for different categories of answers, there's the same expectation for every answer: explain how this will help solve the problem in the original question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there are obviously different types of answers that can be given, and there's something to be said for categorization and what form explaining should take for each. Four categories of answer come to mind here: rules, philosophy, experience, and vibes. (If you're familiar with Max Weber's typology of social action you're going to see some commonalities and they're going to be intentional.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that rules and experience correlate to &amp;quot;objective&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;subjective&amp;quot; as they're summarized now, but &amp;quot;philosophy&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;vibes&amp;quot; are two useful kinds of answers that aren't really accounted for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Rules: &amp;quot;This will work.&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a rules answer provides a procedure to solve a problem, it expects that the efficacy of its steps can be objectively appraised. Usually this means that it runs through a clear course of action as specified in the game rules, which as part of the game people are expected to defer to as the authority. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/195820&quot;&gt;Here's one of my rules answers.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because people are expected to defer to the rules in the course of running the game, it helps to provide a clear means to find these rules while running the game - whether that's a page reference in a physical book or a link to an online resource. When practical, it also helps to provide as much of the relevant rules text as is used in the answer, to help people readily assess how effective its steps are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Philosophy: &amp;quot;You should do this.&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a philosophy answer provides a procedure to solve a problem, it expects that the underlying philosophy of its steps will find agreement and the steps will be judged an acceptable interpretation. While some philosophies are more personal or game-agnostic, many modern games are released incorporating both game rules and a philosophy of game-running. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/167773&quot;&gt;Here's one of my philosophy answers;&lt;/a&gt; &amp;quot;make adults seem childish and short-sighted&amp;quot; is part of the stated philosophy of running &lt;em&gt;Masks&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there isn't the expectation that the philosophy should be objectively regarded as correct, it will be judged on its usefulness for running the game, though this can be more of a given if it's the philosophy the game came with. The useful thing here is worked examples of play or game construction to show how the philosophy is applied, though these can be part of published game material if the philosophy came with the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Experience: &amp;quot;This worked for me.&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When an experience answer provides a procedure to solve a problem, it expects to be judged on the validity of the past experience the procedure is rooted in. The experience doesn't have to be the answerer's direct experience - part of the history of gaming is the documented actual plays of games. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/192474&quot;&gt;Here's one of my experience answers.&lt;/a&gt; Admittedly it kind of blurs the line, there's a bit of what you might call &amp;quot;philosophy of safety&amp;quot; in there maybe?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The important distinction is what it appeals to. Not &amp;quot;do you share this philosophy&amp;quot; but &amp;quot;do you relate to this experience&amp;quot; - there's not much recourse if you don't relate, other than an attempt to build a bridge by extending and analyzing the experience. It's certainly possible that voters and the querent will have varying degrees of being able to relate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Vibes: &amp;quot;This feels right.&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Vibes answers tend not so much to present procedures to solve problems, but when they do they expect to be judged on how much they resonate, how much fellow-feeling you have with the answer. Some vibes answers are an attempt to mask something deeper and more intricate with something quick and pithy, to &amp;quot;skip to the end&amp;quot; as it were, if a deep dive doesn't seem necessary. Others are more like a hopeful shot in the dark, but sometimes a shot in the dark connects. You can't deny there are vibes in you too. What's your favorite color? That's all vibes. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/123062&quot;&gt;Here's one of my vibes answers,&lt;/a&gt; and I don't think it's a coincidence that it's a frame challenge - I leave it at &amp;quot;given the limits of your setting I don't think your player is actually buying something that powerful&amp;quot; and don't go into discussing, like, build points and purchasing power in GURPS because I think the reframing is all the querent really needs to be able to solve their own problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It feels good to reach out into the Internet and vibe with someone, but the flipside of that is that when the vibe doesn't work there's not much you can do about it. If it was a leap over a vast chasm of explanation you can do that deep dive, but that also changes the type of answer it is and the expectations for backing it up. Vibes answers also tend not to be useful in broader contexts - if somebody has a &amp;quot;my player bought something too powerful&amp;quot; problem that they can't just vibe away, that answer isn't going to help them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;So, how do you evaluate whether an answer will help solve the problem?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For purposes of that evaluation, a block of rules text that nobody else understands how to apply isn't much different from a vibe that nobody else vibes with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, from top to bottom those categories do get more and more personally variable. You take a much greater risk that opinion is going to turn against you the further down you drop, so take that into consideration if you're deciding between, say, a rules answer and a vibes answer. Rules answers are &amp;quot;safer&amp;quot; for people with less overall experience - even if it does turn out that you don't give a useful answer, you can still learn something about how the rules apply in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2022-03-24T02:45:05.973" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12021" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2022-03-26T19:25:22.257" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;I detest the phrase.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mostly because it is condescending and patronizing. I also think that would be the only legitimate reason to ban it in most contexts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Besides that I also find it unhelpful and wrong. That can be dealt with by downvoting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wrong because it is nowhere stated that „spells only do what they say“ (as far as I know, and that’s the same problem. There very well might be other rules stated other then the spelldescription). Quite the opposite, the book specifically says that the dm adjucates everything that is not described. (Or even stuff that he can’t find the rule for during play).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35874" LastActivityDate="2022-03-26T19:25:22.257" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12022" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11401" CreationDate="2022-03-26T20:12:54.847" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sometimes people ask questions for which this phrase (or its equivalent) really is a key part of the answer.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not attached to the exact phrase &amp;quot;rules do what they say and nothing more,&amp;quot; but sometimes people do ask questions where part of the answer needs to say basically that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The pattern I'm talking about is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Querent notices something in the rules where, if they squint hard enough and import enough extra assumptions, they can &lt;em&gt;kind of&lt;/em&gt; imagine that it might imply something that isn't in the rules.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They have some reason to believe or want that to be the case:  Maybe their DM frequently imports physics-simulationist assumptions into their game so they expect the Commoner Railgun to work; maybe if the answer turns out to be &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; it would enable their build in some important way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;So they ask &amp;quot;Does [rules observation x] imply that [questionable outcome y]?&amp;quot;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;...but the answer to that question is pretty clearly &amp;quot;no.&amp;quot;  Whatever squinting they were doing when thinking about the question is &lt;em&gt;too much&lt;/em&gt; squinting, and the rules &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; actually imply the outcome they're asking about.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97334/can-i-use-perform-act-in-place-of-bluff&quot;&gt;This question, and my answer to it&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;, are a straightforward example of what I'm getting at here.  I didn't explicitly use the phrase &amp;quot;rules do what they say and nothing more,&amp;quot; but the spirit of my answer is the same.  The question is fundamentally a question about the rules, the correct answer is &amp;quot;no you can't do that according to the rules,&amp;quot; and the core reason that's true is that there aren't any rules telling you that you can.  I don't think there is a way to answer this question well &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; appealing to that principle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I endorse the other answers' positions that this phrase shouldn't be used to shoot down helpful suggestions for how to rule in cases where the rules are underspecified, or to provide correct-but-useless answers to questions where the querent's real question is something more like &amp;quot;how should I rule on X?&amp;quot;&#xA;But I think we should remember that this phrase became a cliche for a reason, and there &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; exist questions for which it's a genuinely useful insight.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="30299" LastEditDate="2022-03-26T20:42:34.167" LastActivityDate="2022-03-26T20:42:34.167" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12023" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9477" CreationDate="2022-03-27T12:24:15.830" Score="-3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Any post notice for this is inappropriate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You're offering advice to someone on how to improve their post. If you said it (nicely) in a comment it would be friendly and helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Putting it in a moderator tool instead makes it hostile and vaguely threatening.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why on Earth would anyone want that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2022-03-27T12:24:15.830" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12024" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12005" CreationDate="2022-03-27T13:02:37.033" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Stackable as Written&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a fine question as written, assuming it identifies a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would answer it with essentially the same answer I gave here:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84129/speaking-in-combat-as-character-vs-discussing-tactics/84136#84136&quot;&gt;Speaking in combat as character vs. Discussing tactics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2022-03-27T13:02:37.033" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12025" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-03-28T11:15:46.937" Score="14" ViewCount="343" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed GcL put comments under answers to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/197200&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; and edited its title with this edit description: &amp;quot;Removed personal tone from title.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Old Title:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can I make a Wall of Stone with 7200 hit points?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;New Title:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can a Wall of Stone be made with 7200 hit points?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And the comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer would be better without addressing the OP directly in the answer. Essentially, drop the &amp;quot;you&amp;quot;. Suggest something like &amp;quot;Using 5x5 panels is not available.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This answer would be better without addressing the OP directly in it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all honesty, I have seen &lt;em&gt;countless&lt;/em&gt; questions using &amp;quot;I&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;me&amp;quot; and countless answers using &amp;quot;you&amp;quot; (including rules-centric ones). I actually thought some of the personalization was helpful and had read the use of &amp;quot;you&amp;quot; as the generic pronoun form seen in &amp;quot;brushing your teeth is healthy&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But now I find myself questioning whether that was really the case. What do others think of the differences between these two styles of question and answer. Are there pros and cons to each? What should I consider when choosing between these styles?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-03-28T11:45:11.393" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T15:40:39.070" Title="Is it better to use or not use personal pronouns? Specifically, &quot;I&quot; in questions and &quot;you&quot; in answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12026" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-03-28T12:12:06.327" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If OP chooses &amp;quot;I&amp;quot;, you are in no position to challenge that&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a thing about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;editing&lt;/a&gt;: you shall only edit, if it improves the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some common reasons to edit are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;to add related resources or hyperlinks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9519/does-our-standing-policy-on-pronoun-gender-conflict-with-the-ses-recent-changes&quot;&gt;Changing the pronoun is doing nothing of this&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11633/should-rpg-se-enforce-not-enforcing-a-specific-standard-for-handling-gender-pron&quot;&gt;We don't enforce a pronoun&lt;/a&gt;. Likewise, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8586/are-you-allowed-to-change-citation-style&quot;&gt;changing citation style doesn't make a post better under those guidelines.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T15:40:39.070" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T15:40:39.070" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12027" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-03-28T12:48:23.203" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If I can use &amp;quot;we&amp;quot; in a mathematics publication, I can use it as the point of view for a stack question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a comment on this meta question, AncientSwordRage made the observation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This isn't a peer reviewed journal after all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But even if it were a peer reviewed journal, this isn't a position of enforcement we would even take. Speaking from the first person, typically using &amp;quot;we&amp;quot;, is standard fare in mathematics papers. Indeed, in the abstract of one of my own papers, we see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Using “eigenflag” embeddings, we give a very explicit description of these metrics in the case of the unitary group. As a byproduct we show that &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$ U_n / (U_{n_{1}}\times...\times U_{n_{k}})\$&lt;/span&gt; has&#xA;exactly &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$k!\$&lt;/span&gt; invariant complex structures, a count which seems to have hitherto&#xA;escaped attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it's good enough for research in Symplectic Geoemetry, it's good enough for table top RPGs. This is certainly not something we should care to enforce, and it typically shouldn't even be seen as an improvement to questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; case where such an edit should be seen as an improvement is where it resolves some sort of ambiguity associated with the phrasing and word choice.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-03-29T00:41:33.287" LastActivityDate="2022-03-29T00:41:33.287" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12028" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-03-28T15:18:04.093" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's no problem whatsoever with using “I” and “you” in answers. There just isn't—we do it all the time and have done for years. People frequently come here with a question of “Can I do this?” and ask it in those terms, and answers frequently opt to match those terms (“You can do this”).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means there's no problem or imperative here whatsoever with “I” and “you” and other forms of personal address. Editing out uses of “I” and “you” simply in and of itself is no improvement whatsoever; such edits for their own sake should be avoided.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's incorrect to suggest we &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be avoiding those terms for some reason because that's just not the case. It's unhelpful to instruct users to avoid personal address, or to make edits simply to eliminate use of peronal address. Doing these things is at best noise and potentially disruptive (like now) and confusing for new users learning the ropes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We may from time to time edit those particles &lt;em&gt;in the course of other improvements,&lt;/em&gt; however. Sometimes when a lot is going on in a question, a sentence might change from “I got hit and fell unconscious” to “my wizard got hit and fell unconscious” or whatever. This means we're not &lt;em&gt;forbidden&lt;/em&gt; from making these changes in the course of other normal work, just that we shouldn't be doing this out of some mistaken belief that I shouldn't be writing “I” in my question about what I can do with my wizard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is, sometimes, cause to avoid “I” and “you” in conversation: sometimes “you” can be read as accusative and put someone on the defensive (“you messed up here” comes with a lot of weight that “we messed up here” does not) and that can be avoided by other phrasing choices (like “we”!). This means an edit might change these &lt;em&gt;for tone reasons,&lt;/em&gt; but specifically because improvement of tone is a valid improvement to a question (and these changes might happen in the course of making that improvement), not because removing/replacing personal address was supported in and of itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-03-28T15:25:46.237" LastActivityDate="2022-03-28T15:25:46.237" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12029" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-03-28T15:51:33.550" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Generic 'You'&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I cannot speak for the original author of that answer, but I can speak for myself as a native speaker of English:  It did not even &lt;em&gt;occur&lt;/em&gt; to me that the phrasing was meant to speak directly to, or to directly address, the original querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather, it read to me like a use of the '&lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;generic you&lt;/a&gt;' which is the informal way of saying 'one'.  It wasn't actually until &lt;em&gt;this post&lt;/em&gt; that I realized what it was in that answer that was being called out as a direct address.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I could be wrong about the answer-writer's intent.  But I am sure I have written answers in that mode without even having a clear and conscious intent to use the 'generic you' grammatical structure-- it's a natural mode of speaking, and of informally writing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I see no issue at all with this usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only case I can see where this would be a problem is if 'you' is used to deliver a personal attack, which is clearly not the case here.  (And that would not be a 'generic' you, but a pretty specific one.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-03-28T15:51:33.550" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12030" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12031" CreationDate="2022-03-29T23:58:29.217" Score="6" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tabletop RPG system &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_Guard_Roleplaying_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Mouse Guard&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; (based on the comics of the same name) appears to have 2 editions. The first edition of the game was published in 2008, and the second edition was released in 2015.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Correspondingly, there are 2 tags for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse_Guard_Roleplaying_Game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Mouse Guard&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; RPG right now:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag was originally created in 2010. Its tag&#xA;excerpt currently reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about Mouse Guard, a tabletop RPG created by Luke Crane&#xA;based on the Mouse Guard comic books (by David Petersen) and his own&#xA;Burning Wheel system. The game was released by Archaia Studios Press&#xA;in 2008. It is set in a pseudo-medieval setting about an order of&#xA;anthropomorphic mouse rangers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag was created in 2017. Its tag wiki&#xA;currently reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about the second edition of the Mouse Guard tabletop&#xA;role-playing game. (See also: the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of these tag wikis/excerpts have been edited in years. The original versions of those tag wikis/excerpts were very barebones, and it seems I've been the only one to revise the guidance for either tag since then – and all I did was copyedit and slightly expand on what was already there. Importantly, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag guidance hasn't been meaningfully updated since before the 2nd edition even existed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know that our tagging practices have sometimes varied for other RPG system/edition tags, in terms of whether there is a &amp;quot;blanket&amp;quot; tag that covers multiple editions of a game (and if there is such a tag, whether that tag should be included in addition to a tag for the specific edition of the game that a question is about).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not an expert on the &lt;em&gt;Mouse Guard&lt;/em&gt; RPG system, so I can't really judge how the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag is being used right now. It seems like there are just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard+mouse-guard-2e&quot;&gt;4 questions&lt;/a&gt; with both the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-2e&lt;/a&gt; tags; there are another &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard+-mouse-guard-2e&quot;&gt;30 questions&lt;/a&gt; that have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag but not the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag. (According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/188352/33569&quot;&gt;this Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt;, the editions are not that different, so some of the questions in the latter category may be applicable to the system as a whole, and not system-specific.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, it's not clear to me which approach is being taken with this tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I think &lt;strong&gt;the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag guidance should be updated to reflect the intended usage&lt;/strong&gt; (and depending on what that usage is, some retagging might be warranted as well):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag only be used for questions about the&#xA;1st edition? (If so, should it be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-1e&lt;/a&gt;?)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag cover questions about the &lt;em&gt;Mouse&#xA;Guard&lt;/em&gt; RPG system as a whole or about multiple editions, but &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;questions about a single edition?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag be included on &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; questions&#xA;about &lt;em&gt;Mouse Guard&lt;/em&gt; (whether they're about the system as a whole or&#xA;about a particular edition), in addition to any edition-specific&#xA;tags?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Something else?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(I don't really favor any particular option here over the others; I just wanted to bring it to the community's attention so that the usage/guidance for the tag could be clarified accordingly.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whatever the community decides, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag guidance should probably be updated to reflect that consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2022-04-30T15:27:58.717" Title="The tag wiki/excerpt for [mouse-guard] should probably be updated" Tags="|discussion|tags|tag-wiki|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12031" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12030" CreationDate="2022-03-30T05:22:13.307" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'm in favor of three tags total.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Some questions under the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag should be migrated to the new tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-1e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt; A few questions under the existing tag ask about very specific things like conflict procedures with split mouse parties that only existed in the first edition of Mouse Guard, and have been removed in second edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keep the generic &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard&lt;/a&gt; tag.&lt;/strong&gt; A large number of questions about the system, however, don't have to be specific to 1E or 2E; 1E and 2E would give the same answer and an answer provided by somebody with only 1E knowledge would be largely useful in 2E still.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Update as of April 23&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've created a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mouse-guard-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mouse-guard-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mouse-guard-1e&lt;/a&gt; tag and attached it to the handful of 1e-specific questions we have.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2022-04-30T15:27:58.717" LastActivityDate="2022-04-30T15:27:58.717" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12032" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12009" CreationDate="2022-03-30T18:08:33.240" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Thanks RPG.SE&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I want to apologize for being so slow to respond to this, I do appreciate the shout out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More importantly, I want to thank this community. RPG.SE has ignited a passion in me for tabletop gaming that will last a lifetime. I've made new friends, learned a lot, and grown as a person thanks to many of you. I hope to have the privilege of enjoying many more years as a part of this community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-03-30T18:08:33.240" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12033" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12011" CreationDate="2022-04-02T05:07:32.883" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;We seem to have a lot of answers that ignore the Back It Up rule.  This is because we have a lot of questions that cannot be answered while respecting the Back It Up rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps the best example is all the homebrew-review questions.  People post their homebrew and other people tell them whether the homebrew is balanced, and none of the people answering have any experience with that specific homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of our gm questions have this issue as well, for example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193329&quot;&gt;What magic items would best make a (corrupt) city guard competitive with Paragon tier heroes?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/194893&quot;&gt;How to deal with incredibly rich PCs messing with combat balance&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/192553&quot;&gt;First time DM; Curse of Strahd; Did I just rush my PCs? How to do better?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More recently there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196667/how-can-we-as-players-stop-being-murderhobos/196673&quot;&gt;How can we as players stop being murderhobos?&lt;/a&gt;, which is not technically about GMing, but seems to fall in the same general bucket of &amp;quot;here is a problem our table has, please advise me on how to solve it&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these have the same problem, which is that the situation OP finds themself in is quite rare, and very few people have had any experience with it, so the site rules forbid nearly everyone from answering the question.  Of course people answer anyway, ignoring the rule.  And people upvote the answers anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we have a rule that is widely unenforced, the risk is that it leads to selective enforcement: when you see someone answer a question in a way that you don't like, the first thing you can do is to point out that it didn't &amp;quot;Back It Up&amp;quot; properly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand what the rule is meant to accomplish, and I don't see an obvious way to change the rules to make it work better.  But I don't feel that it's working very well right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Appendix: here are two examples involving actual calls to &amp;quot;Back It Up&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196667/how-can-we-as-players-stop-being-murderhobos/196673&quot;&gt;How can we as players stop being murderhobos?&lt;/a&gt;, OP's table has a problem because their group has committed some serious crimes, and wants advice on how to get the game back on track.  Several of the answers received comments asking for citations of how their advice went when implemented in their own experience.  Oddly, the highest-voted answer does not have a comment requesting a citation, even though it has no more citations than the other answers.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/181331/how-do-i-help-a-player-terrified-of-their-character-dying-in-combat/181349&quot;&gt;How do I help a player terrified of their character dying in combat?&lt;/a&gt;, OP wants advice on how to help a player feel better about participating in combat.  Several of the answers received comments asking for citations of how their advice had worked in practice.  Oddly, the highest-voted answer does not have a comment requesting a citation, even though (most of) the advice suggested by this answer has no citations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't understand why some of these answers received requests to &amp;quot;Back It Up&amp;quot; when other answers didn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="21179" LastEditorUserId="21179" LastEditDate="2022-04-03T02:27:32.330" LastActivityDate="2022-04-03T02:27:32.330" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12034" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-04-04T14:56:52.443" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;As a whole, I think we value the personal pronouns&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am certain there are more examples, but one relatively recent one was when we were deciding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11726/what-is-our-stance-on-unpinning-the-accepted-answer-from-the-top-of-the-list-of/11728#11728&quot;&gt;how to approach the option of pinning the top-voted answer above the accepted answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We ultimately decided to let an accepted answer default to the top and a key reason for that was acknowledgement that there are person-specific issues which need to be acknowledged. Even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11726/what-is-our-stance-on-unpinning-the-accepted-answer-from-the-top-of-the-list-of/11728#comment40285_11728&quot;&gt;the person writing the opposing opinion has indicated a switch in her preference on the matter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, as someone with ADHD I love really rigid rules that remove all vaguaries as it makes things very easy for me to process. But on the same note, I also really like to be verbose and over-explain and go off on tangents, and a variety of other esoteric personality traits because that is intrinsically part of who I am.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have many questions which focus on rule interactions and just as many, if not more, which focus on table dynamics. And in both cases the correct answer will likely be something along the lines of, &amp;quot;It depends,&amp;quot; and one of the things it depends on is what's going to work for the querent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So give me tired &amp;quot;mine's&amp;quot;, poor &amp;quot;I's&amp;quot;, huddled &amp;quot;me's&amp;quot; yearning for answers, and we shall respond with &amp;quot;you's&amp;quot; and stories of &amp;quot;this DM&amp;quot; to your teeming shore.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But seriously, I want to answer your question, not some universal question fundamental to space-time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2022-04-04T14:56:52.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12035" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12025" CreationDate="2022-04-06T08:56:33.620" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Removing &amp;quot;I&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;You&amp;quot; would be a regression.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a place of Search Engine Optimization, most search engines prefer a more literal match of someone's question. Most people, when searching, use these, and therefore, to make the answer easier to find, so do we.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Can my wizard wear heavy armor in [insert-rpg-here]?&amp;quot; is a perfectly valid search query, and exactly the kind of people that should be redirected to this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I don't think we should edit them in, honestly I'd be more okay with that than editing them out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48073" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-04-06T09:26:52.767" LastActivityDate="2022-04-06T09:26:52.767" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12036" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-04-06T20:16:33.650" Score="10" ViewCount="387" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've observed a few cases of users posting a non-answer on a question and then deleting the answer, usually leaving a note in the answer text about how they will come back later and write an actual answer to the question. When it has happened, it is usually the first answer posted, which is an important point - the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/36/enlightened&quot;&gt;enlightened badge&lt;/a&gt; can only be awarded to the first answer on a post. Conceivably, an answer that was posted then quickly deleted could eventually be eligible for the badge, when another answer rightfully ought to be, if it was posted while the deleted answer was still deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it okay to do this, or is this a practice that should be avoided?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="30218" LastEditDate="2022-04-06T22:11:56.887" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T16:03:36.233" Title="Is it okay to post a non-answer and then delete it if I intend to come back later and write an actual answer?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|deleted-answers|fastest-gun|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12038" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12036" CreationDate="2022-04-07T05:53:04.740" Score="15" Body="&lt;h3&gt;There are legitimate uses that we could never distinguish from illegitimate ones, and the illegitimate uses are not serious enough to consider throwing the baby out with the bathwater.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we seriously care that much about badges? I mean, yes, they play a role in the gamification scheme that the site runs on, but a relatively minor one compared to reputation, votes, and accepted checkmarks. A few badges—the review queue and editing ones—are more important because people look to those during moderator elections, and of course gold tag badges give you a banhammer, but Enlightened is not one of those. Badges like Enlightened are just a bit of fun, not a reason to get officious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In point of fact, Enlightened specifically is a fairly stupid badge. I guess the incentive is to just be more active, so you can see the question when it lands and answer first, but there is still a ton of luck involved. For sufficiently active users, though, it is a disproportionately easy source of silver badges. I suspect a plurality of mine are copies of Enlightened. I’m actually kind of negative on the badge just from first principles. Not all badges are created equal, and badges have been retired, historically, for not really representing things the Stack necessarily wants to encourage. Enlightened has lasted but in my mind it has to be the badge closest to getting the ax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anyway, my point is, badges aren’t very important, especially not Enlightened, so I struggle to believe anyone is engaging in these practices in order to game that badge. If they are... well, my opinion is that’s kind of sad, and they should have a little more respect for themselves. But more likely they just find it a convenient way to keep track of questions they’re interested in, I guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless, even if they were gaming Enlightened badges, I don’t see what we could or should do about it. Unless they explicitly state their intent, we couldn’t prove that’s what they’re doing (and we should assume good faith), and our options for dealing with it even if we somehow know about it are really limited. I guess the diamond mods could suspend them. But suspensions are one of the few things that this site doesn’t handle by community consensus, so I’m not sure what Meta could do even if we wanted to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, I just really doubt that this is any kind of cheating, and even if it is I don’t honestly care that much. My assumption is that some people find it convenient, and I see no problem with that. The drafts feature is limited and unreliable, and pulling out a separate program (e.g. Notepad) or website (e.g. pastebin) is inconvenient. We need a damn good reason to deny someone a tool that makes it easier or more comfortable to provide the answers that are the point of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(As another—now deleted—answer points out, deleting &lt;em&gt;incomplete&lt;/em&gt; answers, to complete them later, is absolutely acceptable. There is a long history of that and it has often been recommended by moderators and veteran users.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-04-07T15:49:06.740" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T15:49:06.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12039" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12036" CreationDate="2022-04-07T09:14:16.423" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Is it okay? In most cases. Is it good practice? Arguably.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is one exception: closed questions can't receive answers, but answers to them are inter-actable. Any workaround such as undeleting a quickly posted placeholder answer likely will cause problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While blocking someone else from receiving a badge isn't pleasant, leaving a placeholder answer communicates to other active high reputation users that someone is on the job and will come back to the question — that information is valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So if you find yourself in a situation where you want to indicate that you will come back to an answer, you should ask yourself whether supplying that information is necessary or whether you should instead omit a placeholder and come back later to post a proper answer. You will see that there are some more complex questions where communicating with other users is more valuable than when looking at quick to answer questions — make your decision on a case by case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T09:14:16.423" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12040" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12036" CreationDate="2022-04-07T12:39:06.483" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The convenience is not worth the issues it can cause. There are equally convenient alternatives that don't cause any issues.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main idea here is two-fold: doing this can cause problems, and there are other things you can do that don't cause any problems. First, the problems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Someone might care about badges, and that is okay.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is, by design, gamified via reputation points and badges. These things are a part of the system. Accumulating rep and badges is fun, and some users, &lt;em&gt;especially new users&lt;/em&gt; care about them. And this is okay, it is what they are there for. We should not be dismissive or derogatory of the idea of caring about badges. To be clear, I very much doubt any high rep users are too much concerned about the badge thing. I am not going to complain about missing out on what might have been my 400th enlightened badge when I can get five more tomorrow. But a new user with zero silver badges might care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Issues with the new user experience are well documented, both locally and on meta.se. And it is new users, users with no rep and no badges, that are most likely to express a meaningful level of concern for a missed badge, and I don't think it is right to tell them not to. Personally, I don't want to have this conversation with a new user:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hey, so I know that it looks like you were supposed to get your first silver badge for this good answer, but what happened is a user with thousands of rep and hundreds of badges posted a non-answer and deleted it so they could come back and edit it later, which blocked your answer from being eligible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would be a lovely addition to the already challenging new user experience Stack Exchange presents (/S). If we can avoid creating circumstances where a new user might feel cheated out of something they have every reason to believe they earned, we should.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It can create issues when used to circumvent question closure.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question that motivated this meta post was already at three close votes when the &amp;quot;answer&amp;quot; post was created and deleted. This allowed the answer to circumvent the closure of the question. Why is this a problem? The question's author returned and accepted the answer after the question was closed, and now has no reason at all to resolve the issues with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Alternative procedures.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See this meta: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/1177/674198&quot;&gt;Allow questions to be saved as drafts prior to posting&lt;/a&gt; In particular:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you start answering a particular question, but do not successfully submit, you will see your last saved answer draft the next time you visit &lt;em&gt;that particular question page&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;We save drafts automatically for all new answers &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; new questions once every 45 seconds.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Drafts are not supported on self-answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Drafts are not supported on edits.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You only get &lt;strong&gt;one&lt;/strong&gt; draft for an answer and one for a question. (If you start a new post, the old draft is cleared.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Each site has its own draft storage, e.g. you can have multiple draft questions saved on multiple StackExchange sites&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Drafts will be automatically cleared after a week.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Drafts work for anonymous users as well.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you start working on an answer, the system saves your work every 45 seconds and keeps it there for an entire week. There is no reason to submit the incomplete answer because the system will save it for you. &amp;quot;Just don't submit the answer until you're done&amp;quot; has all the same convenience as submitting the incomplete answer, but causes none of the issues outlined earlier.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, you can use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/3122/674198&quot;&gt;Formatting Sandbox&lt;/a&gt; on meta.se. Start an answer or edit an existing answer there and your work will be saved for time immemorial. It may get deleted in the distant future, but it will certainly be preserved for long enough to finish your answer and transfer it to the destination Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, just use a notepad on desktop or mobile. This is what I usually do. If I want to move on and work on other stuff before I finish an answer, I'll transfer it to a .txt file on notepad before writing other posts. It's just as easy as creating an incomplete answer, and it has exactly zero potential for causing problems on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-04-07T12:44:24.057" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T12:44:24.057" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12041" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12036" CreationDate="2022-04-07T12:47:25.473" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;It's not an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In isolation from badges, it has no real effect whatsoever. It doesn't hurt anything or anyone. For those that do this, it seems to be a convenient way to effectively create a to-do or post-it for themselves, or give them a spot to save their draft in a way they can access between multiple machines for a long time (which doesn't otherwise exist). About the worst I could do with this is create a whole bunch of front-page churn by doing this 20 times in a row, but we're not talking about anything on this scale.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Factoring in badges... some people sometimes won't get an Enlightened badge. But so what? They weren't going to get an Enlightened badge either if the first person made a short answer and kept it, but the second made a better answer. This kind of thing happens all the time. I've had tons of good answers that didn't get an Enlightened badge beacuse someone posted a short answer ahead of me or otherwise just beat me to the punch, and that's not an issue at all—it's just how things work out. Badges like Enlightened are like the lottery—you get them if the stars align in your favour and otherwise you don't. We don't set content policies based on who we think deserves what badges, or penalise people we think are obstructing others from badges.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Basically there's no “rightful” ownership of badges, and pursuing the line of thought that there might be is going to lead to a lot of pain, mainly for yourself. Do you want a system where we also penalise people for posting poor answers as the first one to a question because it also robs someone of an Enlightened badge?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So in summary: there's no real harm it causes, and issues around someone not getting a badge aren't real harm. This isn't worth worrying about. Consider it a quirk of the system and move on. What earns you a badge is between you, the system, and Stack Exchange's devs; if you think there's a serious problem here with that badge, request a change to its trigger condition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, trying to police this (with what—suspensions?) is going to create more suffering (for you, for others, and for diamond moderators) than the suffering of someone not getting a silver badge every now and then which was &lt;em&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; not promised or guaranteed or “rightfully” theirs in any fashion whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-04-07T16:03:36.233" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T16:03:36.233" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12042" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12043" CreationDate="2022-04-07T14:11:23.683" Score="2" ViewCount="79" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, I voted to keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/197479/making-decapitation-work/197482#197482&quot;&gt;a question&lt;/a&gt; open, believing that it was answerable and valid in its current form. I then answered the question, by posting a terse and incomplete answer, deleting it, and then taking the time to edit the deleted answer to answer more fully. As it turned out, by the time I'd completed writing the full version of my answer, the question had indeed been closed. But because my initial incomplete answer had been posted while the question was open, I was able to edit and repost my answer in its full form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I'm proud of the answer I posted (and still personally think the particular question was valid and appropriate for the stack) I found a point Thomas Markov made elsewhere quite compelling:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question's author returned and accepted the answer after the question was closed, and now has no reason at all to resolve the issues with the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an excellent point. The closure procedure is there to help improve questions, and maintain the integrity of the stack. The fact that users cannot answer a closed question is key to that process, incentivizing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8933/30218&quot;&gt;the community to edit&lt;/a&gt; and improve the question if they'd like to answer, and encouraging the asker of the question to improve it in order to get useful and helpful answers. But the ability to edit an existing answer allows users who answered quickly to circumvent this process. This could lead to questions which would otherwise have been edited and improved being left in their sub-optimal state, after receiving an answer they find useful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So my question is this: &lt;strong&gt;should steps be taken to ensure that a closed question not only locks out new answers, but also prevents users from un-deleting and/or editing answers they've already posted on that question&lt;/strong&gt; until the question is reopened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30218" LastEditorUserId="30218" LastEditDate="2022-04-07T14:34:18.730" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T15:30:43.973" Title="Should a closed question lock out users from undeleting (and/or editing) their existing answers?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|editing|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12043" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12042" CreationDate="2022-04-07T15:03:35.373" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No. Things are fine the way they are.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Editing is an essential part of maintaining quality, and maintaining quality is an essential feature of the stack. Even on closed questions, we want existing answers to be the best that they can be. We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;amp;q=closed%3a1&quot;&gt;lots of closed questions&lt;/a&gt;, and many of them have a lot of votes and historical significance. It is important to be able to revise them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you are describing in this question is more like what locking a question does. We have a little over &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=locked%3A1&quot;&gt;300 locked questions&lt;/a&gt;, and most of them I imagine are game/adventure/tool recommendation type questions. These questions and their answers cannot be edited by normal users. However, I have on occasion observed locked questions that really did need revisions, and I was able to reach out to a moderator in chat and mention the issue, and the matters were resolved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the problem with answers to closed questions getting accepted and questions not getting revised, I think this is &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; an unavoidable feature of the closure system, it is just going to happen sometimes in the course of normal use. I say &lt;em&gt;generally&lt;/em&gt; unavoidable because the observation I was making in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12040/62294&quot;&gt;the answer&lt;/a&gt; you pulled the quote from was that the problem &lt;em&gt;was&lt;/em&gt; avoidable in that particular instance. In the end, people are going to disagree on question closure, and that is okay. People who think a question works well within our guidelines can and will post answers to questions with active close votes, and that is okay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-04-07T15:30:43.973" LastActivityDate="2022-04-07T15:30:43.973" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12044" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12045" CreationDate="2022-04-11T08:51:43.257" Score="3" ViewCount="97" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes one can find a question or an answer containing a lot of typos and/or grammar errors: is it ok to proceed in correcting them (at the best of one's knowledge) or is it better to leave a comment to the author and suggest them to correct the post?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T15:01:47.147" Title="Is it okay to heavily correct a question/answer that contains a lot of typos/grammar errors?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|editing|policy|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12045" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12044" CreationDate="2022-04-11T09:19:24.430" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, that's absolutely fine and encouraged. Edits to fix grammar and typos help the entire community. From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/editing&quot;&gt;our editing help article&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;When should I edit posts?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so. The original author of a question or answer may always edit their own post, regardless of reputation level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To fix grammar and spelling mistakes&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The list continues but these are the important bits here.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fixing mistakes in the post is great! By doing so you also help make the post clearer and more legible. You may also rephrase in the process if it assists with clarity; some edits I've done have considerably restructured the post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The times I'll leave a comment instead of fixing an error myself are mainly those times I'm not sure &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to fix it: part of a sentence is semantically meaningless or can mean several different things. I'll improve what I can, then draw the author's attention to that bit and ask them to clarify for us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If they're having trouble communicating with us, for example if their English skill is limited and they probably won't be able to fix the sentence themselves, I might ask a pointed question or two in my comment that will resolve the ambiguity for me and then edit the post to resolve that error I left.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T10:16:29.790" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T10:16:29.790" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12046" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12044" CreationDate="2022-04-11T11:08:34.200" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;As long as you don't fix factual errors and tone&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wholeheartedly agree with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12045/30306&quot;&gt;doppelgreener&lt;/a&gt;, fix away what makes the answer more readable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But&lt;/strong&gt; don't alter the following to preserve the integrity of the answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Choice of examples&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Conclusions&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Bad examples that just don't work or wrong conclusions are the substance of the post, which is changing the meaning. If the question would require listing some examples of different types of pants, and the examples are all examples of the same type of plant (like, all of them are tomatos), then changing the examples is changing the substance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad example &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be fixed, but if that would mean you rewrite the whole answer: &lt;strong&gt;Instead, write a better answer and vote!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-04-11T15:01:47.147" LastActivityDate="2022-04-11T15:01:47.147" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12047" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12048" CreationDate="2022-04-12T17:01:00.183" Score="8" ViewCount="414" Body="&lt;p&gt;Should &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/197530/4563&quot;&gt;Most Overpowered Supporting Cohort - Crafter or Buff-Station?&lt;/a&gt; remain open, or be closed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-04-16T02:12:36.767" Title="Most Overpowered Cohort question closure" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12048" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12047" CreationDate="2022-04-12T17:01:00.183" Score="20" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It should be closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I initially voted to close this question, but then I retracted that vote and answered it based on the precise wording of the question at the time, with a fairly tongue-in-cheek answer that was supposed to illustrate the idea that, that tongue-in-cheek answer aside, there &lt;em&gt;is no&lt;/em&gt; answer to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That was clearly a mistake. I should have just left my close vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are many, many reasons why this question is impossible to fit into the Stack Exchange format:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Constraints are a “no true scotsman” situation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question has been edited multiple times in response to answers suggesting solutions, to in effect say “well no, not &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt;,” and we still have no idea what is or isn’t actually acceptable in an answer. The question alludes to a pair of apparently-highly-specific builds that must be considered precisely in any acceptable answers, but doesn’t indicate the details of either build. (That pair of builds also constitute a clear false dichotomy with respect to the title question, but we’ll ignore that I suppose.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The OP’s edits and comments have referred multiple times to “natural” parts of the game, “standard optimization techniques” versus that which “defies the purpose of playing the game in the first place.” There &lt;strong&gt;are no&lt;/strong&gt; “standard optimization techniques,” every table is different in what is considered acceptable and what is not. The things the OP considers “natural,” would not be allowed at any table I have ever so much as &lt;em&gt;heard of&lt;/em&gt;—which is fine, whatever floats OP’s boat, but &lt;em&gt;it is necessary for them to indicate what it is that floats their particular boat.&lt;/em&gt; OP seems to be under the misconception that everyone ever is on the same page with respect to things that vary wildly from campaign to campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Goals are completely unspecified&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1641/4563&quot;&gt;Optimization questions on this site are required&lt;/a&gt; to be very general—looking for best practices, things to be aware of, etc., for general character concepts or archetypes—or else &lt;em&gt;highly&lt;/em&gt; specific, indicating &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; what metric or quality is being optimized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question just wants to know the “best,” with zero definition of what that would entail. This is, quite simply, precisely the kind of thing we have decided we quite definitively cannot handle:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The common thread here is that the asker provides answerable requirements. As Brian says below if a thread does not have answerable reqs then we should be voting to close until they provide them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;(&lt;strong&gt;emphasis&lt;/strong&gt; original)&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Even if all of that was specified perfectly, the question is still &lt;em&gt;vastly&lt;/em&gt; too broad&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per comments, the request is for an answer to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Select spells for buffs, select items for craft, prove what results in better numbers and why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quite simply, you would never be able to do this comprehensively or definitively within the character limits of a Stack Exchange answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are &lt;strong&gt;thousands&lt;/strong&gt; of items, and &lt;strong&gt;thousands&lt;/strong&gt; of spells, in the system. Any given character can trivially have access to &lt;em&gt;hundreds&lt;/em&gt; of each—particularly with the kinds of high-power builds that the OP alludes to. Even with a clear goal and clear constraints, that means a &lt;em&gt;prepostrous&lt;/em&gt; number of combinations to consider. This is &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapsack_problem&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the knapsack problem&lt;/a&gt;, which “has been studied for more than a century, with early works dating as far back as 1897,” due to its difficulty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;And beyond that, the answer is going to be highly-specific to one individual in one campaign&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we nail down all of the specifics of all of the builds and all of the context in which decisions are made, we have narrowed things down so far that the results are going to be meaningless to anyone aside from that one PC seeking a cohort. Even small changes in any of the parameters could result in wildly differing results, because what is “best” necessarily relies upon &lt;em&gt;what you want and/or need&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It’s been said before, but worth repeating: SE is not a good place for novel optimization&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange is an excellent place to record and explain optimization that has been achieved elsewhere, but it’s a terrible format for actually developing optimization. The aforementioned knapsack problem applies, really, to most or perhaps even all RPG optimization problems, and the only way to achieve even a reasonable approximation of a solution (given that the knapsack problem is, for practical purposes, unsolvable with the number of potential inputs available in an RPG) is to have a &lt;strong&gt;lot&lt;/strong&gt; of people build off of each other’s work and/or head out into the wilderness to consider entirely new approaches, and iteratively build up a best approach. We can’t do that here; answers are supposed to be comprehensive, definitive, and largely fixed, not constantly updated with new contributions and ideas from myriad users and comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In general, this isn’t &lt;em&gt;necessarily&lt;/em&gt; a reason to close a question—for an optimization problem that just hasn’t seen a lot of attention, it is usually better to just leave it unanswered, or (if there’s been a little bit of work done on it) to answer with the current state-of-the-art and note the limitations of such an answer. But considering all of the issues above, I think there is no merit to keeping a question we will never be able to answer open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-04-12T18:10:51.447" LastActivityDate="2022-04-12T18:10:51.447" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12049" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12047" CreationDate="2022-04-12T17:53:16.207" Score="-14" Body="&lt;p&gt;WHY THE QUESTION SHOULD BE OPENED AND ANSWERED &amp;quot;AS IS&amp;quot;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;This GM would not allow this at his table.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Game and rules should be discussed, commented, analyzed in complete separation from &amp;quot;this GM&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;that table&amp;quot;. If GM has a say in what is or isn't acceptable, this is no longer a RAW discussion but a houserule discussion. Whether that's a realistic assumption when it comes to real game table is completely irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On a personal note though, my own experience (both as player and GM) says that Players and GM don't step on each other's turf. GM might throw a Template of Perfection on everything to be able to challenge players but he/she has no right to say a word about how far PC optimization goes. That's players department, not GM's, GM's right is to adjust the content to the new &amp;quot;actual power level&amp;quot; of his players.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing that I'm used to commonly being &amp;quot;restricted&amp;quot; are things that break the game (in a programming definition, as in &amp;quot;crash&amp;quot;, not as in &amp;quot;too strong&amp;quot;). Those would be infinite loops, infinite wishes, pun-pun or things that completely remove entire feature of the RPG system from the game (for example using Thought Bottle to double the amount of spells per day for basically free, at least compared to Pearls of Wisdom or Rings of Wizardry is completely fine, because it's still limited, while using the same Thought Bottle to generate infinite amount of crafting/casting XP is a no-go). In a similar matter using free Wishes (bound Efreeti) is fine as long as used to replicate any spell (effectively having access to any spell in the game but still limited to 3 uses per day) but using the same free Wishes to create infinite stream of GP is a no-go. All common sense, no need in having to explain this in every question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;What campaign are You playing?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Another thing that is completely irrelevant to RAW solutions. If the goal is to optimize some aspect of the character, the answer should be a ready-to-use optimized character. Whether it's actually a playable character in real game table is completely irrelevant to the question, unless specified otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately RPG is just a numbers game, statistics to be specific. Optimization can be done without ever needing to actually play the game, thus specifics related to the actual game doesn't matter. System itself provides tables for difficulty of pretty much everything, from combat encounters to skill checks. Optimizing means gaming those tables, going above and beyond what system designers deemed &amp;quot;challenging&amp;quot; for a specific PC level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Too much to analyze within SE character limit...&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Not exactly. Majority (99%?) of items and spells are completely and utterly useless. They are at best fluff-fillers or situational toys. As far as powergaming goes, there's only a small pool of usable things that just work regardless of campaign or character details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Unspecified definition of &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; in the question.&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;Maybe this is my video games background but &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; is very specific for me. Something that can break through every content designed for it's power level or higher (in case of D&amp;amp;D that would be a Character Level vs Challenge Rating). So for example it's obvious that character who walks through a CR balanced for him +3 is stronger than a character who walks through a CR balanced for him +1. Pure numbers, simply treat RPG like a video game, and everything becomes clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately &amp;quot;the best&amp;quot; RAW character, would be one that has 100% success chance on every roll possible, against all the official content ever created (yes, including epic, as most people tend to forget existence of this). That is of course impossible to achieve without exploits but it is a good measure for what the goal is. I actually simplified this a lot by restricting answer to Fighter character, which means only combat is relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Novel optimization thing.&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&#xA;While I agree that novel optimization is &amp;quot;on the edge&amp;quot; (doesn't cross this edge though) when it comes to being suited for SE, it's also probably the only place with enough community where it can be attempted, which justifies going a step further. The only real difference is that it requires a lot more from the person answering the question. It's not longer a &amp;quot;one paragraph for free SE points&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;answering someone who is too lazy to check rulebook&amp;quot; but becomes a &amp;quot;use Your character limit well and do quite a bit of research before answering&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50011" LastEditorUserId="40335" LastEditDate="2022-04-13T15:50:56.840" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T15:50:56.840" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12050" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-04-13T04:09:11.513" Score="-1" ViewCount="309" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/197639/at-what-level-does-each-class-get-its-subclass&quot;&gt;At what level does each class get its subclass?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When building a multi-classed character for a one-shot I wanted to know when each class receives its subclass, since subclasses provide a lot of personality and power to characters. Searching the internet found a lot of people asking the same question on various sites, clearly a common question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However the answers were all partial, wrong, or presented poorly making them unsuitable. I checked this site but unfortunately it hadn't been asked here as far as I could see.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I created a question and self answered it as clearly as possible with the pertinent commentary about which classes are unusual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was closed because the question could be answered by reading the rule book. This is however not a hard and fast rule, at least in the 5e sub-community, as the vast majority of questions receive answers from the rulebook. On the front page for example is a highly analogous question asking which PC races do not speak common, which is answered simply by checking the rule book and looking at each race. Many high rep users and moderators have interacted with this question - a moderator even answered the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm looking for a way to preserve this valuable Q&amp;amp;A for myself and others and hopefully understanding this new rule.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user73918" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T18:05:47.177" Title="Question Workshop: At what level does each class get its subclass?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12051" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12050" CreationDate="2022-04-13T08:02:14.080" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Problems raised by others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Relevance: some users are not sure why someone would ask this question. The contextual information in this thread sorted that out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The information is too easy to find: some users feel that answering the question simply involves reading through the rulebook, finding the relevant sections, pulling out that information, and compiling it. This is a harder problem to solve, I feel it's &amp;quot;hard enough&amp;quot;, or at least &amp;quot;harder than the average question&amp;quot;. More discussion is needed on this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user73918" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T08:02:14.080" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12052" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11204" CreationDate="2022-04-13T13:00:30.747" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;These are not duplicate questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133835/how-big-is-a-gemstone-in-the-dmg-gemstone-table&quot;&gt;How big is a gemstone in the DMG gemstone table?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is asking for guidance in wide array of potential options, some of which have 5e answers and some do not. The accepted answer uses a table from ADnD 1e. While that is understandable because of the breadth of the question doesn't offer a precise answer in the current edition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174769/how-big-is-a-5000-gp-diamond&quot;&gt;How big is a 5000 gp diamond?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However asks for 1 specific diamond value. Importantly a diamond used in a spell so that it could be important for a spellcaster to know the specifics of how easy it is to store or handle. Also importantly, there are at least two examples of it being described in DnD 5e in official sources. Meaning this question can be answered much more accurately than the previous one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comparison would be if someone asked &amp;quot;How big are cities in the Forgotten Realms?&amp;quot; vs &amp;quot;How big is Waterdeep in the Forgotten Realms?&amp;quot;. The answer to the first is almost certainly going to be generalized to a point where it is unlikely to include an answer to the second, even though the second can be answered much more accurately (and could be much more important to have an exact description for a given campaign).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="65254" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T13:00:30.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12053" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12050" CreationDate="2022-04-13T18:05:47.177" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not solving a question, it's presenting known rules in a new way&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, this is just preservation of notes. Even in this Meta, the author states, &amp;quot;I'm looking for a way to &lt;strong&gt;preserve&lt;/strong&gt; this valuable Q&amp;amp;A for myself...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that point, in both the original question and the reformulated question, it was &lt;em&gt;important&lt;/em&gt; that the answer contain the name of the feature that allows subclassing. But if this was just research on who subclasses when, all you need is a number. Not a whole table with names.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no value in having the names, other than in presentation of information. This is a lookup table for after the fact.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are details that would make more sense as a GitHub markdown file than as a Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="38834" LastActivityDate="2022-04-13T18:05:47.177" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12055" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11370" CreationDate="2022-04-20T20:40:22.957" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, they are not superior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MathJax tables are easier to read for my old eyes. Too thin numbers. And those excessively long cells make reading harder than it has to be.&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MYLcJ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/MYLcJ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47958" LastActivityDate="2022-04-20T20:40:22.957" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12056" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-04-22T20:07:01.963" Score="4" ViewCount="129" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently noticed that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt; was largely being used in conjunction with either the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&lt;/a&gt; tags, but not discussing the overarching system. I changed the tag info and description, but noting that I do plan, once I'm home from work, to quickly go in and fix tags. Two questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Should I space out the edits so as to not accidentally dominate the front page?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are currently no questions tagged for 1e that I noticed. I assume it's probably best to not create one until we need it, and to suggest on the tag usage to just use the umbrella one should there be such a question, and we can fix it in post?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess third question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;For questions asking about the difference between two editions, should those two edition tags be used, and not the umbrella tag?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10867" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2022-04-24T13:39:11.603" LastActivityDate="2022-04-24T13:39:11.603" Title="Fixing umbrella tag of mutants-and-masterminds" Tags="|discussion|tags|editing|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12057" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12056" CreationDate="2022-04-23T14:40:58.927" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Generally yes edits should be spaced out to avoid overwhelming the front page, and typically questions asking about the differences between two editions have been tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt; plus the two editions concerned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question seems to be jumping the gun however. The first question we ask about this shouldn't be “How do I handle this restructure?” but instead “&lt;em&gt;Should&lt;/em&gt; we restructure Mutants &amp;amp; Masterminds's tags, and should we do it like this?” and as far as I can tell that step got skipped completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons tags have some special handling to use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag only to discuss the system broadly and not for questions about specific editions, but that's not the default way to handle things, only the most visible. It's the rule we chose to apply to D&amp;amp;D's tags to help us keep things manageable in its expansive landscape, and other systems might have similar tagging rules applied if they need them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The default way we handle system tags is the default for all tags, “do whatever seems right”, which has shown up in a few past discussions about different systems:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7689/is-there-a-general-usage-guideline-for-tagging-between-editions-of-the-same-syst&quot;&gt;Is there a general usage guideline for tagging between editions of the same system where editions are very similar?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3396/should-these-gurps-questions-have-an-edition-specific-system-tag&quot;&gt;Should these GURPS questions have an edition-specific system tag?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6892/what-is-the-difference-between-the-fate-and-fate-core-tags&quot;&gt;What is the difference between the [fate] and [fate-core] tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That same idea came up in a question about how to structure Mutants &amp;amp; Masterminds in 2014:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3659/do-we-need-more-mutants-and-masterminds-edition-tags&quot;&gt;Do we need more Mutants and masterminds edition tags?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Back in 2014, we had an actual discussion about how we wanted to handle World of Darkness system tags as we looked to reorganise things, which is essentially what I'm suggesting should be happening here first:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4933/clean-up-tagging-for-world-of-darkness-related-questions&quot;&gt;Clean up tagging for &amp;quot;World of Darkness&amp;quot; related questions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt; tag contains instructions to handle it like D&amp;amp;D, but as you note, you added those instructions just before asking this meta; they weren't pre-existing. We should be cautious about essentially unilaterally restructuring a tag when that might not even be necessary or wanted by its other players. Granted, you're one of those players, and that counts for a lot, but nobody else has apparently had a chance to weigh in on this yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So instead of going straight to “I'm restructuring this, how should I do it”, I suggest the first conversation should be whether it's even helpful to do this so that Mutants &amp;amp; Masterminds players have a chance to comment on how their game should be organised on this site. This will also let people weigh in on your question #2 about what to do regarding a first edition tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-04-23T15:26:22.727" LastActivityDate="2022-04-23T15:26:22.727" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12058" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-04-25T17:13:02.710" Score="3" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a follow-up from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12056/10867&quot;&gt;Fixing umbrella tag of mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt;. There are currently 51 questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt;. Only 9 of them don't also have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-2e&lt;/a&gt; or  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds-3e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds-3e&lt;/a&gt; tag. Since &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mutants-and-masterminds&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;mutants-and-masterminds&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;mutants-and-masterminds&lt;/a&gt; is already implied for the two versions we have tags for (there's only a handful of identified 1E questions), it feels odd, inefficient I guess, to have it there so often when it really adds nothing to the classification of the questions. So, I asked advice on how to clean them up, and upon getting a suggestion of doing 5 each day (to avoid hogging the front page, I did so, only to find that I'd skipped a step of asking whether the group wants this change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not naïve enough to think that &lt;em&gt;Mutants and Masterminds&lt;/em&gt; is much of a big deal here, so on one hand, this change doesn't do much to improve the site. On the other hand, it's also so small that this isn't much disruption. We've already split out tags for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;, but some like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shadowrun&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;shadowrun&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;shadowrun&lt;/a&gt; don't really encourage people not to put on the umbrella tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FWIW, each edition has been different enough that answers for one seldom help much with the others, except perhaps passing on historical answers (2E had many more questions answered for it by Steve Kenson, the game designer, where they declined to provide those explanations in 3E).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10867" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-04-25T17:21:00.080" LastActivityDate="2022-04-26T16:08:07.370" Title="Should we remove the [mutants-and-masterminds] tag from questions about a specific edition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12059" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-04-25T18:25:15.370" Score="7" ViewCount="207" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt; tag is in bad shape. It's low volume, only 24 questions (14 open, 10 closed) so this is like cleaning the base boards behind the fridge, but big or small, we clean things when we see they need cleaning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first observation I want to make is that it is often being used to tag questions about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tactics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tactics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tactics&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tactics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tactics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tactics&lt;/a&gt; description reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions about tactical play, relating to how combat is planned and played out in a game, in individual encounters or in larger group situations. This encompasses tactical concepts directly tied to game mechanics, as well as more abstract discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt; appear to be tactics questions, in the sense that we have described the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tactics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tactics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tactics&lt;/a&gt; tag:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6066/as-a-dm-is-it-better-to-focus-fire-on-defenders-or-on-a-weaker-target&quot;&gt;As a DM is it better to focus fire on defenders or on a weaker target?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/5331/what-are-some-ideal-marching-formations&quot;&gt;What are some &amp;quot;ideal&amp;quot; marching formations?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16387/when-to-use-scarce-resources-in-combat&quot;&gt;When to use scarce resources in combat?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143033/how-can-i-discourage-prevent-pcs-from-using-door-choke-points&quot;&gt;How can I discourage/prevent PCs from using door choke-points?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91201/how-do-i-compensate-for-really-low-health-early-on&quot;&gt;How do I compensate for really low health early on?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130831/how-do-i-ensure-tactical-combat-is-interesting-for-my-large-party&quot;&gt;How do I ensure tactical combat is interesting for my large party?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7040/how-do-i-make-and-use-tactically-interesting-terrain&quot;&gt;How do I make and use tactically interesting terrain?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157730/how-do-we-kill-what-we-cant-see&quot;&gt;How do we kill what we can&amp;#39;t see?&lt;/a&gt; *&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/151948/how-can-a-mystic-circumvent-magical-fog-disrupting-line-of-sight&quot;&gt;How can a Mystic circumvent magical fog disrupting line of sight?&lt;/a&gt; *&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/28060/do-npcs-understand-target-priority-strategy&quot;&gt;Do NPCs understand target priority strategy?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/25631/how-effective-would-a-mech-be-in-a-city-environment&quot;&gt;How effective would a mech be in a city environment?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67823/my-dm-asked-me-to-betray-the-party-how-do-i-beat-them&quot;&gt;My DM asked me to betray the party; How do I beat them?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195954/as-a-pc-which-creatures-should-i-attack-first&quot;&gt;As a PC, which creatures should I attack first?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15580/what-are-some-good-sources-for-combat-tactics-for-a-gm-to-use&quot;&gt;What are some good sources for combat tactics for a GM to use?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, this is most of the questions. Also of note, the two that I have annotated with a &amp;quot;*&amp;quot; are less about tactics and more about looking for mechanics for overcoming a particular challenge.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second observation I want to make is that, to me, the tag description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt; is pretty vague:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions relating to long-range planning in the pursuit of a goal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just not sure what this is getting at. None of the questions tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt; jump out at me in a way that makes me say &amp;quot;oh &lt;em&gt;that's&lt;/em&gt; what the tag description is saying&amp;quot;. I cannot tease out the definition of the tag by looking at the questions it is on, even when ignoring the tactics questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Removing the tag from tactics questions seems like an obvious step here, but I'm not sure what to do with the tag. I'm leaning towards just burninating it, because in the eight years the tag has existed, it does not appear as though anyone has figured out exactly what it is for. But maybe it can be salvaged - I leave that to you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here are the remaining questions that I did not include in my list of tactics questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/6266/is-it-possible-to-turn-tensers-floating-disk-into-a-chariot&quot;&gt;Is it possible to turn Tenser&amp;#39;s Floating Disk into a chariot?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58221/strategic-play-elements-for-microscope&quot;&gt;Strategic play elements for Microscope&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14943/what-happens-when-a-creature-falls-on-another-creature&quot;&gt;What happens when a creature falls on another creature?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157849/how-to-play-a-devious-character-when-you-are-not-personally-devious&quot;&gt;How to play a devious character when you are not personally devious?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18856/needing-a-plan-to-win&quot;&gt;Needing a Plan to Win&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/79956/how-to-make-a-tavern-defensible-quickly&quot;&gt;How to make a tavern defensible quickly?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105842/what-do-strategy-vs-tactics-mean-in-tabletop-rpg-combat&quot;&gt;What do strategy vs tactics mean in tabletop RPG combat?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144524/is-there-a-guide-to-implementing-realistic-army-logistics-in-dd&quot;&gt;Is there a guide to implementing realistic army logistics in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148677/players-make-a-single-plan-with-no-backup-plan-then-complain-about-dm-unfairnes&quot;&gt;Players make a single plan with no backup plan, then complain about DM unfairness when their plan fails&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120309/armor-of-agathys-and-damage-prevention&quot;&gt;Armor of Agathys and Damage Prevention&lt;/a&gt; [closed]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of the open questions, three are just mechanics questions that don't need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tactics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tactics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;tactics&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt;. However, the one question about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/microscope&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;microscope&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;microscope&lt;/a&gt; may present a valid use case for the tag, if the tag can be defined well. Though, it is only one question. It asks about strategic play elements, which I think is just a synonym for competition in this context. As far as I can tell, this is the only question where a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt; tag may make sense, but the use there does not at all match what we've set the tag description as.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-05-03T12:53:31.650" LastActivityDate="2022-05-03T12:53:31.650" Title="[strategy]: burninate or fix?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12060" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12059" CreationDate="2022-04-25T22:50:16.563" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I vote burninate.&lt;/strong&gt; In my group, we have an in-joke: in response to any vague player questions, the DM says &amp;quot;roll Tactics&amp;quot;. The joke was born when a player dedicated a huge amount of skill points to a useless &amp;quot;Tactics&amp;quot; skill during Call of Cthulhu character creation, because his PC was a military genius. He then attempted to use that skill for all sorts of incongruous tasks. What I'm saying is, &lt;em&gt;we never said &amp;quot;roll Strategy&amp;quot;.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But seriously folks, TM makes a great point that it's a redundant tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44781" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2022-04-26T12:22:36.883" LastActivityDate="2022-04-26T12:22:36.883" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12061" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12059" CreationDate="2022-04-26T11:02:50.590" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Burn it.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tactics and strategy are meaningfully different, but we aren't using the tag for questions about strategy.&#xA;Most questions about strategy, such as &amp;quot;How do I effectively showcase the abilities of the BBEG?&amp;quot; venture into idea generation when they are about strategy e. g. &amp;quot;what strategy could my BBEG employ to build up their shadow market empire?&amp;quot; Asking a good question about strategy is really difficult, and if someone does, they should be able to use the tag for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have very few questions that could benefit from the tag, and none of them used it ( — I have read them, but none come to mind — ). We should burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/strategy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;strategy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;strategy&lt;/a&gt;, and if we get questions about strategy in the future, we could go from there and do re-tagging efforts, but fixing the tag doesn't seem worthwhile right now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2022-04-26T11:02:50.590" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12062" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12058" CreationDate="2022-04-26T14:28:49.543" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;If we don't know the edition, keep the tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's easy. we know the system, but not the edition - then we need to keep the system until such a time we can get a system added. See also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-dark-eye&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-dark-eye&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;the-dark-eye&lt;/a&gt; where we did exactly that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10021/30306&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the edition is &lt;strong&gt;relevant&lt;/strong&gt;: Vote to Close in addition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;If it is lore questions, keep the tag.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are asking lore, then the tag is perfectly appropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2022-04-26T16:08:07.370" LastActivityDate="2022-04-26T16:08:07.370" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12063" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12059" CreationDate="2022-04-26T14:36:27.107" Score="5" Body="&lt;h1&gt;What is strategy?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Strategy is &amp;quot;a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anything, it would be useful in a game that has a substantial amount of strategy in it. Like a game that allows using military unit movements and such. Currently &lt;strong&gt;none&lt;/strong&gt; of the questions do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I call for an &lt;strong&gt;EXTERMINATUS&lt;/strong&gt;: Burn.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2022-04-27T17:30:14.400" LastActivityDate="2022-04-27T17:30:14.400" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12064" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12058" CreationDate="2022-04-26T16:07:45.543" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Keep it so I can follow just one tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm given to think the editions aren't a million miles apart from each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unlike &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; etc, there isn't an overarching franchise to worry about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2022-04-26T16:07:45.543" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12065" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12059" CreationDate="2022-04-27T23:26:25.633" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Several of the answers at the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105842/23547&quot;&gt;What do strategy vs tactics mean in tabletop RPG combat? [closed]&lt;/a&gt; talk about the classic distinction between military strategy (broad policy choices that generally prepare one's side for battle) and tactics (procedures employed by one's troops during during specific engagements).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Tactics&lt;/em&gt; has a central place on this site.  During &amp;quot;[type of fight X] what's the best way to achieve [Y]?&amp;quot; is a tactical question.  We have many of these questions and we are good at answering them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions at the strategic level we don't do well with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes&lt;/strong&gt; we flat-out reject &lt;em&gt;Strategy&lt;/em&gt; questions:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Q: &amp;quot;What's the best way to enjoy playing a rogue?&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A: &amp;quot;We embrace a wide variety of playstyles.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes&lt;/strong&gt; we ask the querent to alter the question so much it is no longer a &lt;em&gt;strategy&lt;/em&gt; question, but one of &lt;em&gt;tactics&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Q:  &amp;quot;What's the best build for a rogue?&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A:  &amp;quot;What is your party like?  What is your game like?  What sort of opponents do you face?  Does your DM allow multiclassing?  Does your DM allow feats?  More information is needed for us to answer the question.  Tell us the specific problem you are having.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sometimes&lt;/strong&gt; an actual strategy-level question is well supported by the site:&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Q:  &amp;quot;What sort of magic items and feats should I be trying to acquire in order to maximize my damage as an assassin rogue?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the cases in which we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; actually support a strategy question, we don't call it &lt;em&gt;strategy&lt;/em&gt;  (In the example above, we would call it &lt;em&gt;optimization&lt;/em&gt; - other examples would fit well under other tags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Strategy&lt;/em&gt; questions are either inappropriate for the site, or can be broken down into questions that fit &lt;em&gt;tactics&lt;/em&gt; or some other tag.  There is no current need for a &lt;em&gt;strategy&lt;/em&gt; tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-04-28T09:39:37.853" LastActivityDate="2022-04-28T09:39:37.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12067" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-01T15:29:53.203" Score="4" ViewCount="219" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/198032/3548&quot;&gt;Flying a broom, light activity?&lt;/a&gt; lacks a system tag and is currently closed as unclear. Should it remain closed, or do we have enough information to guess the system?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The current guidelines (which are &lt;em&gt;recommendations&lt;/em&gt; we use to guide our decision-making about specific ambiguous cases, &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; hard-and-fast rules where a question that does not obviously meet the criteria for one outcome must therefore be subjected to another outcome without debate) can be found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11722/3548&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MOD REMINDER:&lt;/strong&gt; Be polite and assume good faith on the part of others. Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them stupid or evil. We're all trying to help this site be great.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2022-05-01T21:51:06.950" Title="Should this question about flying a broom be closed for lacking a system tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|specific-question|closed-questions|game-systems|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12068" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12067" CreationDate="2022-05-01T21:51:06.950" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It Is Clear Enough To Re-open&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The votes to reopen have it, at the time of this answer.  I cast the final vote, and my reasoning is this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Aspect of the Moon&amp;quot; is a feature of the 5e Warlock class, and to the best of my knowledge not a feature of any other edition or game system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, I am not expert in all editions or game systems, so I took 45 seconds to google:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Warlock&amp;quot; &amp;quot;Aspect of the Moon&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; gave tons of answers, most of which looked like 5e material&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Warlock&amp;quot; &amp;quot;Aspect of the Moon&amp;quot; -5e&lt;/em&gt; (which removes overt 5e-related responses) gave significantly few responses, and even most of those looked 5e-related, just not overtly labeled enough for Google to exclude them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Further, the question itself mentioned not only Warlocks and Aspect of the Moon, but also a lack of sleep requirements.  No longer needing sleep is one of the features of the 5e &lt;em&gt;Aspect of the Moon&lt;/em&gt; invocations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't see how this could be any more clear, absent the tag (which I have also requested the OP add to the post anyway.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-05-01T21:51:06.950" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12069" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-03T12:06:23.077" Score="13" ViewCount="1619" Body="&lt;p&gt;We, the elected moderators, wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels like things are going on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-check-in&quot;&gt;This community check-in has been done for the last few years&lt;/a&gt; (skipping 2020), and it was very helpful. As such, we'd like to share our thoughts and also get your feedback on what is going well and what we could improve. The process is modelled heavily on last year’s, but for everyone’s benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How this specific Q&amp;amp;A is run so that we get good value out of it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;One clear premise per answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;We'll post some of the things we've done/observations we have/things we think still need improvement. Please share your thoughts as well! Make sure to note whether you think the thing you’re writing about is an improvement, a problem, or some mix of the two (one person might see the same change as bad that you see as good, or vice versa)...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post only one kind of thing per answer, so that when people upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not, it's more clearly actionable. If you write an essay about 4 different things, it's not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with and thus it becomes difficult to act on that feedback. You can, of course, contribute multiple answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote the answers based on your agreement with whether you see that thing happening and whether you concur with the answer's premise (that it's good or it's a problem). (In other words, if someone says &amp;quot;We get too many questions about unicorns and I hate them,&amp;quot; you would upvote if you agree, and downvote if either you don't think we get too many questions about unicorns or if you don't hate them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No long comment threads&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This post isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a particular problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these answers can not be clearly vetted and voted on, so they will tend to remain undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with an answer, use your vote, but limit comment usage. Consider that it’s possible to disagree with an answer’s take, but that it’s possible the issue should still be discussed in full.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If appropriate, give your own answer, though having multiple answers on the same issue here is mostly gonna be hard to follow. If the answer would just be disagreeing with another answer, the effort would probably be better placed towards a dedicated meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt;, which we’d still like to summarise as Be Nice, applies to meta as well as the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust that you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. Focus on actions, rather than characterising people, and that extends how &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; those actions are characterised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we may have thoughts on things to bring up, in the interest of actually getting this started they're not gonna be here right away (read: we didn't want to delay this further in order to get those written). Hopefully others have noticed them too, and can beat us to it as well as bring up things we haven't picked up on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-05-03T12:11:35.493" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:17:40.933" Title="How is the community doing? [2022]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="7" CommentCount="0" ClosedDate="2023-05-24T08:49:28.457" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12070" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-05-03T12:37:19.693" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; – see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12157/are-questions-about-rule-intent-on-topic-2022&quot;&gt;Are questions about rule intent on-topic? [2022]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Rule intent questions?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a bit disappointing how long it has taken to get a verdict on rule intent questions. The scores settled on the meta over two months ago, with votes currently sitting at an overwhelmingly positive +27/-1 in favor of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/11953/62294&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;On this one, I think it actually should be up to ♦ mods&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;. A month ago, in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12013/how-can-i-ask-a-good-designer-intent-question#comment41495_12013&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt; linksassin stated:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;we are in favour of seeing them return in some form but haven't reached a consensus on what that will look like,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;indicating some level of general agreement about the direction to go. This comment was on this post, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12013/how-can-i-ask-a-good-designer-intent-question&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good designer intent question?&lt;/a&gt;, which was closed, with myself and doppelgreener providing close reasons in comments:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’m voting to close this question because for now, designer intent questions are off topic, so the only answer to this question is “you can’t”. The mods have said nothing about permitting these questions again, so we should wait until they make that decision and hear what they have to say about it before we try to write guidance. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12013/how-can-i-ask-a-good-designer-intent-question#comment41491_12013&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov Mar 22 at 22:22&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree this is a little premature to ask. They're not allowed right now so this is jumping the gun; if they stay gone then no guidance is relevant and the effort is wasted. Moreover the nature of their return will inform how we handle this kind of discussion. KRyan's argued that &amp;quot;designer intent&amp;quot; is not even well-defined in our current community operation. Will we deprecate its use as a concept? The way forward for how we even frame approaching this issue again is yet to be fully determined, whether by the mods or anyone else. Mods might lead that discussion but we should have it first. – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12013/how-can-i-ask-a-good-designer-intent-question#comment41494_12013&quot;&gt;doppelgreener Mar 23 at 3:13&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Linksassin's comment from above continues:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However I'm not opposed to the existence of this question, an answer guiding what the community feels a good 'designer intent' question looks like may help shape how we approach this moving forward. It would also keep us accountable to actually getting this done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I went on to suggest that meta was already slow enough, and that we shouldn't wait on guidance to take shape before making a ruling on rule intent questions; link responded:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Didn't mean to imply that we would wait on this meta, sorry if it came across that way. I meant that the community (if it wanted to) could use this meta to get started on creating the guidance which will be required while we are still dragging out feet trying to get organised. Basically, we will keep moving forward, if someone makes a good answer here we might take that into account but it (hopefully) won't change the timeline either way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So do we need to reopen Akixkisu's question and move the discussion along as link suggested? Is there something we can do to help you guys move this one along?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-29T00:17:40.933" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:17:40.933" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12071" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-05-04T17:37:08.377" Score="25" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The repeal of the &amp;quot;Don't Guess the System&amp;quot; policy has been exceedingly successful.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11279/what-is-the-don-t-guess-the-system-policy&quot;&gt;Don't Guess the System Policy&lt;/a&gt; was &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11658/revisit-iii-don-t-guess-the-system-policy/11669#11669&quot;&gt;repealed on September 3rd, 2021&lt;/a&gt;. The process was relatively free of controversy - no proposal for maintaining the policy was made, and the highest scoring proposal for repeal is currently scored at +65/-5: a landslide. In the time since, we have handled numerous questions with an unspecified system upon posting, my estimate based on poking around with SEDE is that we have handled somewhere in the realm of 80-100 questions that did not specify the game system. Under the old policy, all of these would have been closed prior to the OP themselves clarifying the system. Instead, most of these were able to get tagged and answered without ever having to go to closure review (I've added twenty-something system tags myself). We did recently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12067/should-this-question-about-flying-a-broom-be-closed-for-lacking-a-system-tag&quot;&gt;some discussion&lt;/a&gt; over the closure of one such question, but things were resolved in a timely manner, as is usually the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, I would say the repeal has been a great success.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-05-04T17:37:08.377" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12072" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-05-04T18:17:57.847" Score="20" Body="&lt;h3&gt;D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder questions continue to comprise nearly 90% of our questions.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Year&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;PF&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Total&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;D&amp;amp;D %&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;PF %&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;D&amp;amp;D+PF&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2016&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2756&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;948&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4499&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;61.3%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;21.1%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;82.3%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2017&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;3566&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;1300&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;5664&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;63.0%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;23.0%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;85.9%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2018&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4717&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;862&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6257&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;75.4%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;13.8%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;89.2%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2019&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4705&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;765&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6246&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;75.3%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;12.2%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;87.6%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2020&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;3616&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;507&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4622&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;78.2%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;11.0%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;89.2%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2021&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2272&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;496&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;3094&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;73.4%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;16.0%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;89.5%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2022&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;663&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;110&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;870&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;76.2%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;12.6%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;88.9%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you can see, the proportion of questions related to D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder games is &lt;em&gt;remarkably consistent&lt;/em&gt; at just under 90% of our questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm just reporting facts here, I'll leave it to others to discuss the positives and negatives associated with these observations in their own answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-05-04T18:17:57.847" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12073" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12080" CreationDate="2022-05-05T01:25:11.303" Score="2" ViewCount="300" Body="&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D 5e spell &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/dispel-magic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dispel Magic&lt;/a&gt; is extremely ambiguous and is the subject of many questions on this site. In my view, these questions and answers do not result in a clear interpretation of Dispel Magic, but a number of high-rank people on the site have suggested that it would be hard to ask a good clarifying question in this space due to a lack of focus. I feel that I have a clear and answerable question that would be useful to others on this site. @ThomasMarkov suggested I workshop it here; the proposed question follows.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm also wondering if, before posting the question below, it would be a better idea to post a separate question: &amp;quot;At a table where fun consists of advanced planning around the rules, what spell-interactions with Dispel Magic might a DM want to clarify in advance?&amp;quot; I think this would also be useful to a lot of people on this site, and I could answer it myself with the review of posts below (which feels like a better answer than question). Later, I could reference the question/answer in order to ask the question below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everything below is part of the proposed question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;How can I expand or rewrite Dispel Magic to be fun at a table where &amp;quot;fun&amp;quot; consists of advanced planning around the game's rules and mechanics?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The spell description for &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/dispel-magic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dispel Magic&lt;/a&gt; is the subject of many questions on this site (see below for a summary). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179646&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; makes a fundamental query about the spell, &amp;quot;How do I know if I can target an effect with dispel magic?&amp;quot; The only answer advises that DMs should rule based on their intuition and keep track of a list of rulings in order to be consistent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While this is good--probably ideal--advice at tables where &amp;quot;fun&amp;quot; is about the story or the role-play, there are also many tables that primarily enjoy D&amp;amp;D 5e as a venue to strategically plan around the mechanics and rules. At such a table, rulings about which players cannot easily reason ahead of time are an inherent negative that result in drawn-out arguments and reduced fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question asks the same question as the linked question above but in the context of such a table: &lt;strong&gt;For a table motivated by strategizing and planning around D&amp;amp;D 5e's mechanics and rules, how can Dispel Magic be extended or rewritten in order to cater to these interests and to avoid table arguments about how it works?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The goal of this question is to (1) make the rules of applying Dispel Magic clear in as many cases as possible while (2) remaining as short and simple as possible, and (3) not violating other rules as written or substantially unbalancing the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As background research and motivation, I have listed below a set of unclear cases with summaries of existing questions already about those cases from this site. This section is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; a list of individual questions that need answers. I'm looking for a synthesis of site-knowledge with play-experience into a simple set of rules or strategies that can be used at the kind of table described above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The relevant text of the Dispel Magic description is,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The remaining text deals with higher spell-levels, and isn't part of this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A review of spells for which the interaction with Dispel Magic is not clear and of the discourse about them on this site.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(The spells labeling each category are not exhaustive--they are just examples of spells in that category.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Aid, Bane, Bless, Charm Person, Faerie Fire, Longstrider, Sleep&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Spells that have (or can have) multiple targets for a single casting. If I am affected by a spell like &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/bless&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bless&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/bane&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Bane&lt;/a&gt;, which has multiple targets, and Dispel Magic is cast on me, does the spell end for me alone or for everyone affected by the spell?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99631&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; clarifies that, per Sage Advice, the effect ends only on the target of the Dispel Magic spell, not on every target.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Animate Dead, Ceremony, Create and Destroy Water, Find Familiar, Goodberry, Feeblemind, Leomund's Secret Chest&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells all have instantaneous durations, which is generally taken to mean that there is no ongoing magical effect. However, they all also either conjure something or have spell-effects that last beyond the casting. It is unclear if there is something that Dispel Magic can act on with these spells.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143212&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; about Find Familiar, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/146765&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about Feeblemind, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130561&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about Animate Dead all claim that spells with an instantaneous duration cannot be targeted or affected by Dispel Magic. This is also backed up by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/SA_Compendium.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;2015 Sage Advice compendium&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Ensnaring Strike&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell magically animates an object (a vine) that entangles the spell's target; however, the creature is the target, not the vine. To end the Ensnaring Strike spell, it is unclear whether one targets the vine or the ensnared creature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Entangle, Grease, Silence, Zone of Truth&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells create an area-of-effect that persists, but they also create spell-effects on individual creatures/objects (for example, Entangle creates an area of difficult terrain and can also restrain someone caught in the area during casting). It is unclear whether creatures who are affected by the spell-effect are freed of the spell-effect when Dispel Magic is cast on them, and whether casting Dispel Magic on them has an effect on the rest of the spell.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198088&quot;&gt;This question and its answer&lt;/a&gt; suggest that the area-of-effect must be targeted and that targeting a creature caught in the effect would have no effect.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Aura of Life, Circle of Power, Pass Without a Trace&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells are similar to category 4 (e.g., Entangle, Grease, Silence) in that they create an ongoing area-of-effect which in turn create spell-effects on targets in range. They are different from category 4 spells in that they have a target of self.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Because these differ only in targeting self rather than an area, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198088&quot;&gt;the question&lt;/a&gt; linked in category 4 likely applies.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Detect Thoughts, Locate Creature, Dream&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells target self, but they create ongoing spell-effects on others targets. It is unclear whether the Dispel Magic spell can be cast on a victim of these spells despite not being a proper target of the spell. (Notably, the Dream spell can be used as a powerful attack, making it a more interesting case with respect to game balance.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Flame Blade&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell has a target of self, but it creates a magical object that can be held only by the caster. It is unclear if dispelling Flame Blade requires that the caster or the blade be the target of the Dispel Magic spell.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I didn't find any questions specifically about this, but it seems intuitively related to category 8, below.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Heat Metal, Holy Weapon, Magic Weapon&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Similar to Flame Blade: these spells target an object that is typically &amp;quot;on&amp;quot; another creature for all intents and purposes. Can that creature be targeted to end the effect, or must the object on them be targeted?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198088&quot;&gt;This question and its answer&lt;/a&gt; indicate that the object that has been heated must be targeted by Dispel Magic, not the creature who is wearing/holding the object.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snare, Glyph of Warding&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells create a magical trap, but interestingly, the duration of both spells ends when the trap is triggered, at which point the victim is hoisted up into the air (for Snare) or the glyph is set off. It seems intuitive that the snare or glyph on the ground can be dispelled, but if the spell ends when the spell is triggered, can Dispel Magic be cast on the victim to release them from the snare? If the Glyph of Warding is charged with a spell like Banishment (meaning that, essentially, the Glyph concentrates on the spell for you), can anything be targeted by Dispel Magic (aside from the Banished creature, wherever they are)? Note that the spells' durations are not instantaneous.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133581&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; addresses the case of casting Dispel Magic on Banishment but does not directly address the Snare or Glyph of Warding spells. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/183423&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; clarifies that in general a spell whose duration is ended cannot be dispelled.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bestow Curse, Contagion, Geas&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells appear to be confusing mostly because their spell descriptions explicitly state that they can be removed with specific spells other than Dispel Magic. It is unclear if these explicit rules about certain spells dispelling them are exclusive (i.e., is Dispel Magic excluded because it is not explicitly mentioned?) One additional note is that Contagion states in its spell description that &amp;quot;Since this spell induces a natural disease in its target, any effect that removes a disease or otherwise ameliorates a disease’s effects apply to it,&amp;quot; which might be taken to mean that the spell's duration is for the natural disease and not the spell.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138882&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58873&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; both indicate that Dispel Magic works on these spells because it is not explicitly excluded.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Warding Bond&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell has a range of touch, but given that it is a magical bond between two people (caster and target), it is unclear if it can be dispelled by targeting the spell's caster.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99629&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asserts that one cannot use Dispel Magic on a spell's caster (assuming the caster is not also the target, one presumes). &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/78909&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; does not directly address this point, but the answer notes that Jeremy Crawford has tweeted that a caster may maintain multiple castings of Warding Bond at once, and since Warding Bond states that it ends if either its target or its caster is targeted by another Warding Bond spell, it seems reasonable to infer that the caster is not in any sense a target of the spell. By this logic, targeting the caster would not dispel the Warding Bond spell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Scrying&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell targets self, a bit like category 6 (Detect Thoughts, Dream), but it creates a luminous orb that follows the spell's victim. It is unclear if this orb can be dispelled or if the caster (target) must be dispelled or if both are allowed. It is also conceivable that the victim of a Scrying spell could be dispelled despite not being the official target of the spell, because the spell is, in a sense, &amp;quot;on&amp;quot; them.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158065&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asserts that the orb from a Scrying spell can be dispelled.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Clairvoyance&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Intuitively, this is like category 12 (Scrying), but Clairvoyance targets a location instead of self, and the Clairvoyance spell description states that orb it creates at that location cannot be interacted with. It is not clear if the &amp;quot;interacted with&amp;quot; clause applies to Dispel Magic or whether the location that is the target of the Clairvoyance spell is a valid target for Dispel Magic.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169791&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; is relevant in that it compares Scrying and Clairvoyance and some conclusions can be drawn from that, but it does not directly clarify the question of Dispel Magic.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Animate Objects, Conjure Animals&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Many spells both have non-instantaneous cast times and summon or animate multiple creatures. It is unclear if targeting one creature ends the spell on all summoned creatures.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/90140&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asserts that Dispel Magic ends the summoning spell for only the targeted creature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mislead&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell has a target of self, but it creates a magical illusory duplicate that can be moved independently and that acts as a scrying sensor for the caster. It is unclear if the duplicate may be targeted by Dispel Magic, given that the spell's target is self.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;I didn't find any posts about this spell and Dispel Magic, but it is fundamentally similar to the case of Scrying (if the orb from Scrying can be dispelled, it is hard to see how the illusory duplicate could be immune from being dispelled).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Eyebite, Telekinesis&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;These spells have a target of self, and they give the caster the ability to put spell-effects on other people. It is unclear if the effects of these spells can be removed from a creature by casting Dispel Magic on that creature.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Magic Jar&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This spell has a target of self, but it puts the caster's soul inside of a magic jar then allows them to possess another host body. It is unclear if the spell can be dispelled by casting Dispel Magic on the magic jar or on the soul or on the body left behind, or if it can be cast on the caster while they are possessing another body.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128697&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; concludes that one can cast Dispel Magic on the caster's soul while they are inside the magic jar (but not on the jar itself, which is not the target) or on the possessed host while the caster is possessing them in order to end the spell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Astral Projection&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;It is unclear if Dispel Magic can be cast on the soul in the Astral Plane or on the body left behind, or both, in order to end the spell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Twinned Spells&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Spells that are twin-cast using meta-magic are ostensibly the same spell; they are thus similar to the spells in category 1 (Bless, Bane, etc.).&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165113/&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; uses similar logic as the question noted in category 1 to conclude that casting Dispel Magic on the target of a twinned spell ends the spell only on that target.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Readied/Held Spells&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;If someone readies a spell on their turn, can it or they be targeted by Dispel Magic in order to dispel the readied spell?&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/80956&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; discusses this scenario; however, the currently-accepted answer says &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; and the currently-most-upvoted answer says &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; with a relatively small difference in votes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spells&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spells&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spells&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/house-rules&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;house-rules&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;house-rules&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="73324" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-05-05T17:54:50.240" LastActivityDate="2022-05-07T15:06:49.620" Title="Workshopping a question about Dispel Magic" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12074" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12075" CreationDate="2022-05-06T20:39:43.080" Score="5" ViewCount="130" Body="&lt;p&gt;In a lot of cases, the answers on this site do not make it especially clear which interpretation of a specific rule should be used. Here's a simple example – &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/106920&quot;&gt;these&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133071&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions about whether you can fly using a Mage Hand both have competing answers: (1) yes, and (2) no, because you Mage Hand only interacts with objects. While the &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; answer is more upvoted in each case, the upvote difference is fairly small so I don't consider the answers and votes to form an especially &lt;em&gt;clear&lt;/em&gt; consensus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Voting is used to resolve the kinds of discrepancies in this example, but in the absence of a clearly resolved consensus, is there anything wrong with opening a question that goes like this, &amp;quot;At our table, we accept answer 2, and, given that context, what are the rules about picking up a box that contains a creature?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Are there guidelines around this kind of conditional question?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is there a point at which such a question should &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; be asked because the consensus to the existing questions are too far against the conditional assumption?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I'm not asking about questions like this: &amp;quot;Given this home-brew rule at our table that is clearly in conflict with the official rules, how should we interpret the official rules?&amp;quot; (which I assume would be closed as opinion-based?) – I'm asking about questions where it isn't clear whether the home-brew rule is or is not in violation of the existing rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="73324" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-09T20:35:52.103" LastActivityDate="2022-05-09T20:35:52.103" Title="Is it okay to ask a question about clarifying the rules, given that the table accepts a specific interpretation of an ambiguous rule?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12075" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12074" CreationDate="2022-05-06T20:56:33.840" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;These should work&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have any examples to hand (I'd welcome them in comments), but questions which accept a specific ruling, or which has a specific house rule (up to homebrew subsystem), and ask about a specific rules interaction have worked as long as the rule or ruling is sufficiently clear (and there's a lot of judgement as to what is sufficient).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-05-06T20:56:33.840" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12076" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12077" CreationDate="2022-05-07T02:04:31.340" Score="1" ViewCount="82" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just had the experience of looking for the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;How do I ask a good question?&amp;quot; help page&lt;/a&gt; and struggling to find it. The very first thing I did to try to find it was type the page's exact title into the rpg.meta.stackexchange search bar and found... no questions that clearly asked this. I'm sure this admission makes me look like quite the newbie to anyone who has been on this site for a long time, but for people who haven't spent much time here (i.e., the people most likely to need to find the page), some/many of them will have failed to notice or remember where it is. I think I took a pretty intuitive route to finding the page, and a question with the page's exact title whose answer is the relevant link would be helpful to anyone taking this same route.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I (or someone) ask a question with this page's title and answer it with the appropriate link in order to help others find it? Is there a reason these kinds of questions are kept from the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="73324" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-09T20:33:41.753" LastActivityDate="2022-05-09T20:33:41.753" Title="I struggled to find a piece of documentation on the site; should I open a question that directs people to it and answer it?" Tags="|discussion|meta|help-center|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12077" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12076" CreationDate="2022-05-07T03:05:30.413" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We already have this, kind of.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The help center is linked at the very top of our site’s &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, we also have this Q&amp;amp;A:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2692/62294&quot;&gt;How do I ask &amp;#39;good&amp;#39; questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems to be what you’re looking for. If not, there’s nothing wrong with asking your question here. We’ve handled similar questions about navigating the site before. It’s one of the things meta is for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-05-07T03:44:53.490" LastActivityDate="2022-05-07T03:44:53.490" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12078" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12079" CreationDate="2022-05-07T05:01:40.527" Score="5" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;Suppose I ask a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; question, and I receive at least one answer that, though acceptable with respect to the site rules, I don't particularly like. (Maybe I feel they didn't read my post carefully enough or that they were overly critical of something creative I was trying out—the reason isn't really important, the point is that I'm likely to feel justified in my dislike of such a post whether I really am justified or I'm taking good criticism too personally.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It goes without saying that we all try as hard as possible to be objective on this site, but that's an unrealistic expectation when people are posting their own creations for others to review in public.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should I accept an answer to a such a question if I suspect that I might be biased against one or more of the answers? If so, how should I decide which answer to accept?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="73324" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-09T20:43:30.783" LastActivityDate="2022-05-09T20:43:30.783" Title="Should I accept an answer to a homebrew-review question if I think I might be biased?" Tags="|discussion|questions|answers|homebrew|accepted-answer|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12079" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12078" CreationDate="2022-05-07T09:55:40.397" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;You are free to accept any answer that you like, even when it has 20 downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/accepted-answer&quot;&gt;What does it mean when an answer is &amp;quot;accepted&amp;quot;?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Accepting an answer is not meant to be a definitive and final&#xA;statement indicating that the question has now been answered&#xA;perfectly. It simply means that the author received an answer that&#xA;worked for them personally. Not every user comes back to accept an&#xA;answer, and of those who do, they might not change the accepted answer&#xA;even if a newer, better answer comes along later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first paragraph of the article indicates that you should choose a good answer, but you are the arbiter of what you understand as a good answer to your question, even when you feel unqualified. Please use your best judgement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-05-08T00:09:24.477" LastActivityDate="2022-05-08T00:09:24.477" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12080" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12073" CreationDate="2022-05-07T13:35:45.997" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;I, too, long for a better &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;, and suspect that someone somewhere has something better than what my table has come up with, or at least something that would help us improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;However, I am concerned that your question is inherently opinion-based. It is essentially asking, &amp;quot;please give me your idea for a rewritten &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;.&amp;quot;&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, the definition of fun probably makes sense to you, but I suspect that different players and different tables have different opinions on what &amp;quot;advanced planning around the game's rules and mechanics&amp;quot; means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That makes it very difficult for someone to answer in a way that caters to your definition of fun.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think this part of your question is the crux of what you're trying to get at:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The relevant text of the Dispel Magic description is,&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The remaining text deals with higher spell-levels, and isn't part of this question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You might want to consider rewriting your question to focus on that section, and to state your problem. &amp;quot;This section does not work for us because reason1, reason2, reason3.&amp;quot; and then to ask for a solution.  &amp;quot;How can we solve this problem?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I think you &lt;strong&gt;don't&lt;/strong&gt; want, (and what is off-topic for this site), is people throwing out half-baked suggestions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I think you &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; want, is the experiences of others who have encountered and solved this problem in a way that is useful for them, that might be useful for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To that end you might want to end your question to an appeal to &amp;quot;good subjective&amp;quot;, and literally ask for what has worked for others.  Quoting from &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective / Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt;, &amp;quot;the best subjective questions unabashedly and unashamedly prioritize sharing actual experiences over random opinions&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, you might want to mention that you've reviewed all the 5e material at your disposal, including the SG Compendium.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastActivityDate="2022-05-07T13:35:45.997" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12081" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12073" CreationDate="2022-05-07T15:06:49.620" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;You also ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm also wondering if, before posting the question below, it would be a better idea to post a separate question: &amp;quot;At a table where fun consists of advanced planning around the rules, what spell-interactions with Dispel Magic might a DM want to clarify in advance?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe your intent is to post your separate question, answer it yourself, then use it in the question you really want to ask, about &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;. If I am understanding your intent correctly, you want to use those cases as a litmus test for &lt;em&gt;improved dispel magic&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, I think your goals are admirable, and I would love to see the results.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I think in addition to your own answer, this question would generate a lot of noise. I'm not sure that's completely bad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think also, to someone who has not drunk deeply of the rpg.se &lt;em&gt;dispel magic&lt;/em&gt; punch bowl, the question will not make much sense.  Again, does that really matter?  Maybe not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think as written, it's opinion-based, and likely the big closure sharks will rise from the depths and gulp it down for a mid-morning snack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;HOWEVER, I think if you ruthlessly simplify and focus your question, throw out everything extraneous, and request experience-based good subjective, you MIGHT have a good question.  If you do that you could conceivably within the body of your question have a section &amp;quot;Examples of Problems with Dispel Magic&amp;quot;, and say in general these are the sorts of challenges you'd like to employ, then provide your list.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastActivityDate="2022-05-07T15:06:49.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12082" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12076" CreationDate="2022-05-08T00:40:42.803" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We Already Encourage This, Exactly&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer&quot;&gt;Can I Answer My Own Question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes! Stack Exchange has always explicitly encouraged users to answer&#xA;their own questions. If you have a question that you already know the&#xA;answer to, and you would like to document that knowledge in public so&#xA;that others (including yourself) can find it later, it's perfectly&#xA;okay to ask and answer your own question on a Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a little-- no pun intended-- meta, but I see no reason this would be disallowed.  But like all questions and answers, both will run the risk of being downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-05-08T00:40:42.803" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12083" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12074" CreationDate="2022-05-08T21:01:52.553" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is an example of such a question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196169/how-can-i-bind-a-draconic-spirit&quot;&gt;How can I bind a draconic spirit?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what I said:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether the combination of summoning/conjuring and binding works isn't the question; the GM has ruled that it does. Likewise, the issue of concentration isn't the question; the GM has ruled in that regard also.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was pretty useful in not spawning debate on what wasn't in question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastActivityDate="2022-05-08T21:01:52.553" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12084" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-05-10T23:30:15.650" Score="18" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Activity is dwindling.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Users with the 25K privilege &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/site-analytics&quot;&gt;Access to Site Analytics&lt;/a&gt; can see for themselves: over the last five years (pulling a number out of my wool in order to ensure we're not overwhelmed by any signal unique to spring/summer of 2020) posts are down to about 1/3 of their previous volume, views are down to about 2/3 of their previous volume.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Anyone with that privilege and an inclination to more-rigorously crunch/present the numbers, please feel free to edit ^^.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Anecdotally: a few months back I started to run a game in an edition (and publisher) of Traveller that was new to me. When I had questions, rather than coming here--where Traveller volume is negligible--I went to the Traveller discord where hundreds of users are on any time I've dropped a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It makes me wonder if an age is passing....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2022-05-10T23:30:15.650" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12085" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-05-13T11:18:26.287" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;As far as I can see, my reasons for no longer posting here have not changed. I come back every few weeks and up/down tick question or answers of interest to me, but can no longer see the point in actually using the site in any other way. There are better forums when if you ask a question you are not treated as some student that needs to learn how to ask a correct question. The fact that there was even rules about &amp;quot;having to specify the system&amp;quot; when someone might have wanted a general answer, or &amp;quot;asking about designer intent&amp;quot;, is all part of the unfriendliness that I and others pointed out many years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastActivityDate="2022-05-13T11:18:26.287" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12086" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-14T03:02:29.270" Score="5" ViewCount="153" Body="&lt;p&gt;Referring to this: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198309/what-is-the-single-highest-damage-attack-that-can-be-made-by-one-tenth-level-cha&quot;&gt;What is the single highest damage attack that can be made by one tenth level character with no assistance, support, or magic items? [closed]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KVGfC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/KVGfC.png&quot; alt=&quot;This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers. Add details and clarify the problem being solved. This will help others answer the question. You can edit the question or post a new one. (Private feedback for you)&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Typically, if a question is closed, it will show 'closed by - list of names'.  I'm not sure why this is not the case for this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-18T17:36:31.030" LastActivityDate="2022-05-18T17:36:31.030" Title="If I (the question author) cannot see who voted to close a question, was it closed by a moderator?" Tags="|support|closed-questions|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12087" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12088" CreationDate="2022-05-14T04:45:17.640" Score="3" ViewCount="130" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198324/is-casting-unused-spells-in-the-morning-legit&quot;&gt;legitimate it is to cast unused spell slots in the moring&lt;/a&gt; before learning new spells. It was closed as a duplicate of if you can &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42123/does-a-short-combat-or-casting-one-spell-interrupt-a-long-rest&quot;&gt;cast spells during a long rest&lt;/a&gt;. After I edited it, to highlight that the question was different, as it was as much concerned about the narrative appropriateness of the tactic as about if its purely technical legal (it even laid out why I think it should be no issue technically), I hit the reopen button to submit it for review.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, it appears that my newfound status as a gold answerer for 5e questions changed the result of this action from &amp;quot;Hey, I totally think my questions is fine to ask, can you please, please, pretty please reconsider and reopen it?&amp;quot; to: the question is now reopened again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I was not aware this would happen (the status just changed this morning), and just want to highlight this here for review. While I of course would be much happier if the question would remain open, I don't want to mis-use the privileges of that status for my own questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-18T17:34:37.887" LastActivityDate="2022-05-18T17:34:37.887" Title="Oops, I reopened my own question" Tags="|support|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|vote-to-reopen|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12088" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12087" CreationDate="2022-05-14T09:40:31.140" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Why is this an “oops”?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You intentionally voted to reopen a question, and the system interpreted the vote according to your level of site privilege. The system is working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-05-14T09:40:31.140" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12089" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12086" CreationDate="2022-05-14T11:14:42.630" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is working as intended. You cannot (easily) see who closed your own question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/353946&quot;&gt;Can I no longer see who closed my question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/332499&quot;&gt;How could we improve our planned post notice improvements?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have clear and scary examples of times when users lash out at specific closers because their question was closed or deleted. Up to and including requiring police intervention or having their employers called because of closing someone's question. This isn't OK. I'd much rather a user be angry at the system for closing their question than at a person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Update: We've changed the post notices for question askers so that they do not see the usernames of close voters listed - this includes askers with the close/reopen vote privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We considered making it so that post owners with sufficient rep could still see the list, but decided against it primarily for cost/benefit reasons: the way our code is constructed right now, a lot of other code relies on a person being classified as either a post owner or a privileged user, but not both. This separation makes sense in most places, just not in this instance. And because the likelihood of a higher-rep user having their question closed is lower (and they’re more likely to know how to access the voters if necessary), we felt that this was an appropriate tradeoff.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We discussed changing the post notice language for users who do have permissions but decided to leave it as-is, so that still indicates that both the post owner and those with close/reopen vote privileges can see the names. Because post owners are still able to see who voted to close/reopen their question by going into the post history, it would be inaccurate to say that they do not have access to that information. It's merely harder to reach (and lower rep users are much less likely to find it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We think that the small change we've made is the best first step in solving this problem. It makes it much more difficult for users who might be angry to lash out at voters, while still being honest with voters that the post owner can see who voted on their post. And we're definitely open to feedback on this approach!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-05-14T11:14:42.630" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12090" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-23T03:20:34.293" Score="60" ViewCount="1051" Body="&lt;p&gt;I know it's been a while so it's not going to be any surprise to hear that I'm handing in my diamond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for reasons, it's multifaceted. Certainly I got burnt out on a lot of issues (handling the system tagging issue and the unprotection debacle specifically). However, life also threw me some fun stuff in the form of COVID, and a divorce, depression, and a new relationship. A big factor though is that I stopped playing D&amp;amp;D and all its offshoots and editions quite a while ago, which greatly reduced the amount of things that actively pulled me into engagement on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless though, I considered my experience moderating here positive and, if things change for me, I won't put out the possibility of going for a diamond again in the future if the site will still have me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I do want to thank the community for electing me and giving me the chance to be your moderator. I think this is a wonderful community and I was lucky to be able to have been your moderator. I hope the community continues to grow and get better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I won't be deleting my account or anything like that of course, and I'll likely be around very occasionally.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anybody wanted to contact me, currently the best way to do so is on Discord at rubiksmoose#9728.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28591" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-24T04:31:37.637" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T23:24:53.077" Title="Officially stepping down as moderator" Tags="|discussion|moderators|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12091" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12090" CreationDate="2022-05-23T04:52:01.850" Score="43" Body="&lt;p&gt;Well, I for one would like to say&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Thank You!&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You did an excellent job by us, and we are grateful. All the best!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-05-23T04:52:01.850" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12092" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12090" CreationDate="2022-05-23T08:20:50.123" Score="18" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I felt a great disturbance in the Force...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have been with us for years. You have been a cornercube we could rely on. And you have been here for all of us. For that I want to wish you&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojydNb3Lrrs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I feel tempted to ask you to&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FZNPxmTB4o&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Please don't go. The Drones need you. They look up to you.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will instead ask you to be the best you you can be and let me apologize for the mischief and grief and infighting the community had over the years. WE weren't always the most easy to handle, I know. So instead, let us part with one of the most magnificent messages a being could leave to someone else - and sorry to quote Douglas Andams twice, he is just too on point:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first letter was a “w”, the second an “e”. Then there was a gap. An “a” followed, then a “p”, an “o” and an “l”. Marvin paused for a rest. After a few moments they resumed and let him see the “o”, the “g”, the “i”, the “s” and the “e”. The next two words were “for” and “the”. The last one was a long one, and Marvin needed another rest before he could tackle it. It started with an “i”, then “n” then a “c”. Next came an “o” and an “n”, followed by a “v”, an “e”, another “n” and an “i”. After a final pause, Marvin gathered his strength for the last stretch. He read the “e”, the “n”, the “c” and at last the final “e”, and staggered back into their arms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-05-23T08:29:46.820" LastActivityDate="2022-05-23T08:29:46.820" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12093" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12090" CreationDate="2022-05-23T15:05:05.490" Score="27" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thanks for being a great co-mod!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm sorry to see you step down as a moderator, but it's totally understandable – it can be a stressful role, and life must come first. You did a great job as moderator; I couldn't have been elected alongside anyone better. (And you're welcome to be reinstated as mod if you ever change your mind.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good luck in your future endeavors, and feel free to hit me up on Discord or elsewhere anytime! :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2022-05-23T15:05:05.490" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12094" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-24T07:20:56.010" Score="4" ViewCount="208" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are two badges, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/34/tenacious&quot;&gt;Tenacious&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/35/unsung-hero&quot;&gt;Unsung Hero&lt;/a&gt; that never have been awarded. And other than the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/136/illuminator&quot;&gt;Illuminator&lt;/a&gt; badge that with enough diligence eventually can be awarded to someone willing to put in the hours, I'm not even sure it is possible to honestly achieve the easier one of the two, Tenacious, which says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Zero score accepted answers: more than 5 and 20% of total.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The entire site has just &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=score%3A0%20isaccepted%3Ayes%20is%3Aanswer&quot;&gt;136 accepted answers with 0 score&lt;/a&gt; out of 104K as of this writing, a bit more than 0.1%. It seems &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; unlikely anyone would get 20%+ such answers out of theirs unless they collaborated with someone to engineer just such an outcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why do we still have these badges? Is this because we cannot retire badges that have no useful application?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T20:11:13.990" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T20:11:13.990" Title="What good are the Tenacious and Unsung Hero badges?" Tags="|discussion|accepted-answer|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12095" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12094" CreationDate="2022-05-24T08:55:40.353" Score="28" Body="&lt;p&gt;They're in our Q&amp;amp;A system for sites like Stack Overflow where it's much, much harder to get upvotes. SO for example has &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/badges/225/tenacious&quot;&gt;65k Tenacious badges&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/badges/226/unsung-hero&quot;&gt;26k Unsung Hero badges&lt;/a&gt;. After so little engagement a user might feel like giving up, but then a badge appears telling them they're doing something special still &amp;amp; please keep trying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We just have them because we're using the same Q&amp;amp;A system and badges aren't defined on a site-specific basis. We don't need them because they don't reflect a problem we tend to experience, which is a good thing, but they'll still be around in our system for the sake of other sites that do need them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2022-05-24T10:58:45.503" LastActivityDate="2022-05-24T10:58:45.503" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12096" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-25T06:34:24.233" Score="2" ViewCount="104" Body="&lt;p&gt;The situation is the following: there are often questions where the querant is facing a very specific instance of a more general issue. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Someone wants to know &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198609/does-symbol-require-the-target-to-be-fully-inside-the-sphere&quot;&gt;when a colossal creature would be affected by Symbol&lt;/a&gt;. Here the general question is how much of a large or larger creature must overlap with a spells area of effect for the creature to be affected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Someone wants to know if &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133058/does-polymorph-cancel-bladesong&quot;&gt;polymporph cancels bladesong&lt;/a&gt; (or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136142/does-polymorph-cancel-rage&quot;&gt;rage&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198551/stars-druid-dragon-form-and-polymorph&quot;&gt;starry form&lt;/a&gt;). Here the general question is if polymorph removes only class features, or also ongoing effects caused by such class features.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, such questions are then used to close additional, similar questions, because they are a &amp;quot;duplicate&amp;quot; (even though they are asking for a different context of the problem). And it may be more difficult for the querant to accept that their question is a duplicate, given that the other question is talking specifically about another situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In all these cases, one could create a general form of the question, and answer the underlying issue cleanly and neutrally, which would also make it easier to refer to it when additional instances of the problem are asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This general form would to a large extent have the same logic in its answers as some of the individual questions, but would that make the question itself a duplicate? That is, is it correct to close a question as a duplicate, only because it has the same answer as another question, even though the scope of the question is different?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-05-25T08:19:43.513" LastActivityDate="2022-05-25T12:09:52.217" Title="Is the general form of a common question a duplicate of the specific forms?" Tags="|discussion|duplicates|policy|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12097" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-05-25T06:58:53.523" Score="8" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;I created a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198606/can-you-take-actions-outside-combat&quot;&gt;new question as a signpost&lt;/a&gt; for an existing question, because the existing question was using language that made it hard to find (at least for me), then immediately closed it as a duplicate, pointing to the other question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas&lt;/a&gt; recommended to &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/136555/discussion-between-groody-the-hobgoblin-and-thomas-markov&quot;&gt;not do that&lt;/a&gt;, but rather to edit and retag the original question to improve it, which I did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I still have some doubts about this. My concern is mostly that I do not feel comfortable materially rewording someone else's existing question. There also is this other &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7883/should-i-opt-not-to-create-a-signpost-duplicate-for-a-question-that-would-be-opi&quot;&gt;meta-question&lt;/a&gt; about creating a signpost question for searchability where the accepted recommendation was to create the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How to handle such situations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-05-26T15:41:48.967" LastActivityDate="2022-05-26T15:41:48.967" Title="Is creating duplicate signpost questions wrong?" Tags="|discussion|questions|editing|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12098" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12097" CreationDate="2022-05-25T11:37:57.063" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Signposts and Pointers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think it's useful to split up some terms here, because there are two very different situations you're gonna run into. I'll acknowledge that we use signpost kinda loosely, and I'm not really trying to change that. I'm here adopting the term pointer, because that's the term I usually use when explaining the usefulness of a dupe-closed question to (new) users. And much of that rationale applies here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having a question which asks via the &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; language someone used point to a question is useful, as others who search via the same terms will find the pointer and be directed to where their answer is. Do note that readers who are not logged in will be automatically redirected. Normally we expect the user posting that to not have found the dupe target, but in a nigh exact parallel to self-answering, that's not a requirement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ok, let's talk about (what at least I understand as) signposts: that's questions which are asked to serve as the dupe target for many other questions. The example that springs to mind is for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151000/52137&quot;&gt;spellcasting and multiclassing in D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt; and the thing to note is the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8717/52137&quot;&gt;preceding meta discussion&lt;/a&gt;. And the list of other questions that this question seemed to try to cover really implied this. Except there was no meta, and the dupe closure the wrong way. Though if you'd gone ahead and closed all those as a dupe of yours you'd have gotten a very different reaction.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Onto dissecting the specific question you posted. The list of questions on the topic read like it's the start of a meta discussion not a mainsite question. (Basically it reads like the meta discussion for making a signpost, as discussed above.) And the last paragraph reads more a comment on tag meaning expectations, which is possibly staring too close at our tag system. I decline to delver deeper into that, but I'll say I'd accept it as a reason for the dupe to exist. What seems missing, and this is kinda a self-answer phenomenon, is why you're asking a question. Not why you're posting it despite it being a dupe, but why you where searching in the first place. Dupe and self-answers are expected to be real questions too, and the only thing which forms the question itself in that post is &amp;quot;each of this things takes an action of some kind described under actions in the combat rules, so can you do it outside of combat? Or can you only use them in combat?&amp;quot;. The actual details and needs are what makes a good question, regardless of who asked, answered, or dupemarked it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Switching gears a little bit, when self-answering (and dupe marking is a kind of answer) it is fruitful to avoid the optics of rep-farming. Asking low quality questions they can answer themselves is what someone who's trying to generate internet points for themselves would do. So, whether consciously or subconsciously, some questions are gonna get hit by that reaction. Now obviously you're not doing that, but you'll want to avoid (accidentally) looking like it. (And no, you don't need to make it a CW to do so.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To summarize, yes it's ok to post pointer when you had a need. When doing so, make sure the question would be high quality enough to stand on its own (ie. if weren't closed and there wasn't other related questions). Explaining the closure (so it doesn't look weird) is a nice bonus, and realistically explaining first might be nicer than getting questioned afterwards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a footnote: I don't disagree with the title update on the target, I assume slashes can throw off (simpler) search functions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And a second footnote: The meta discussion isn't directly applicable as it's asking about the dupe closure the other way, and new question is/was non-dupe but later off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-05-25T11:37:57.063" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12099" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12096" CreationDate="2022-05-25T12:09:52.217" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We try to not deal in general questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While there can be some utility in general questions, having a specific question is basically always gonna be better. They have clearer scope, can deal with the specifics, and is the &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; problem someone is facing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we get into dupe closures, an A+X question should be closed as a dupe of B+X only when the equivalence between A and B is clear. If the querent has a reason to think they're different (even when it seems equivalent to us) we should reopen. Because the new question now has a specific, actual thing to address of whether that reason is correct or not, or even relevant. (Please encourage askers of dupes to add any such concerns to their question, should the marked dupe not give a satisfactory answer.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do have some very deliberate general questions. Typically to serve as signposts because it's something that comes up a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; and/or the dupe links are getting messy. These serve to reduce repetitions and/or give answers an easy (read here for more) for things that need it. High profile examples: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/151000/52137&quot;&gt;If I multiclass into 2 or more spellcasting classes, how do I determine my known/prepared spells?&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/105781/52137&quot;&gt;What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These often have the exact same problem with unsatisfactory dupe closures as the otherwise specific questions. Arguably slightly more as a question can be dupe marked even if the general target doesn't (and shouldn't) go into sufficient detail to answer some specific (sub)concern of the closed question. So the above with giving (or highlighting) a specific reason for it to be different applies all the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a final note I'd like to remind that we close questions as dupes of other questions, and that while having the same answer would be an indicator, it is not the arbiter of that. And I'd like to point out that spells and class features include any number of different effects, and a general question would have a hard time covering all of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-05-25T12:09:52.217" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12100" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7529" CreationDate="2022-05-26T06:37:57.450" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Five years later, and even the archive.wizards.com links are down. I've searched high and low for the content, but it's nowhere to be found (at least not in official places). This mostly affects Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons material; some Magic: The Gathering articles like &lt;a href=&quot;http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/259&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/259&lt;/a&gt; are now hosted here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/twenty-things-were-going-kill-magic-2013-08-05&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/twenty-things-were-going-kill-magic-2013-08-05&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've set up a script which examines posts for these URLs, checks the &lt;a href=&quot;https://web.archive.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wayback Machine&lt;/a&gt; for the latest snapshot and making an edit (on average one per day, in order to avoid flooding the homepage) if it was archived.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2023-03-27T20:25:41.943" LastActivityDate="2023-03-27T20:25:41.943" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12101" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12090" CreationDate="2022-05-26T13:21:26.163" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rubiks,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks so much for your service to the community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I remember your amusing icon from my earliest days on RPG.SE.  No doubt there's some precipitating story involving a plastic gadget, a hiker taking a rest, a curious elk, and a flash of otherworldly magic....&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Best wishes&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastActivityDate="2022-05-26T13:21:26.163" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12102" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12103" CreationDate="2022-05-27T14:43:00.107" Score="7" ViewCount="120" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/198678/23970&quot;&gt;What rarity is the Shadowsong bow in AL play, after the Content Catalog v9?&lt;/a&gt; originally had images of an item's description and of an AL catalog ruling. As is a habit, I &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/198678/2&quot;&gt;edited the post&lt;/a&gt; to replace images of these texts with their texts, thinking to improve accessibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I then noticed that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/198678/1&quot;&gt;original version&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;had&lt;/em&gt; summarized the texts in the images' alt-texts--OP clearly took some care to make this post work for those not viewing images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a reason to prefer either of those methods--providing good alt-text vs. inputting text directly--from an accessibility standpoint? From other perspectives?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T21:22:31.887" Title="How should alt-text be considered for accessibility?" Tags="|discussion|accessibility|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12103" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12102" CreationDate="2022-05-27T15:21:14.760" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Actual text should always be preferred&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think unless there's something in the visual form/presentation that is key to the issue (and that's gonna be fairly rarely, and even then also having a text quote might be good/needed), having it transcribed into a (normally formatted) text quote is preferable. While the difference to a screen reader may be minimal, and having text as an image doesn't allow the text to be scaled up or replaced by a higher legibility font.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And outside of accessibility, having normal text quotes looks better. Images lead to inconsistent type-face, size, and indent, and that's assuming the screen caps are high-res enough to not be noticeable. And there's the white box on off-white background thing you get with images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T15:21:14.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12104" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12102" CreationDate="2022-05-27T20:11:40.507" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Avoid images of text&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accessibility concerns with text in images (even with alt text) are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;You can't copy the text&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It won't be responsive, so the text will be awkward to read on some screens&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Anyone using custom styles can't apply them to the text (e.g. high contrast mode, more readable font, bigger font). Some of these styles are quality of life upgrades but others are necessary for some people to be able to read.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Many tools work only (or best) on text: popup dictionaries, Google Translate, searching (whether it's a search engine, SE search, or control + F), etc.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those reasons, you should avoid using images of text, even if you have appropriate alt text. Even when including &amp;quot;artsy&amp;quot; images of text, it's probably best to keep the transcription outside the alt text. For example, you might use an alt text of &amp;quot;dragon spitting fire at the Raising Creatures rules&amp;quot; and then duplicate the text of the rule below that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T20:11:40.507" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12105" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12102" CreationDate="2022-05-27T21:03:07.977" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Unless the format is significant, don't use pictures&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There might be cases where an error in the formating of the page is significant or assists in showing the problem or the formating itself is part of the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, unless such a situation arises, the pure plain text should always be preferred!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One random example would be from the Magic the Gathering card game: &lt;a href=&quot;https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Name%20Dropping&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Name Dropping&lt;/a&gt; has part of the text obscured by part of the picture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hWEn.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1hWEn.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Name Dropping card from MTG&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, even then, text can be used to show the readabilty problems after the picture easier and more readable. The text on the card reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gotcha - [obscured: Whenever] an opponent [...] // avoid commit[me]nts and open flames&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The errata'ed rules text reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Gotcha - if an opponent [...] // avoid commitments and open flames&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-05-27T21:22:31.887" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T21:22:31.887" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12106" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12090" CreationDate="2022-05-27T23:24:53.077" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I must accept being Moose deprived&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have commented any number of times that I miss our beloved Moose, and I guess we'll miss you some more. I may send you a funny pic now and again on Discord.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Been great having you as part of the voices of reason for as long as you could offer us your most precious gift: your time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2022-05-27T23:24:53.077" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12107" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:51:08.587" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A feature request or bug with this tag is something that has been evaluated as definitive to implementation.&#xA;However, either there is ongoing investigation on the methods to implement the proposal, or there are other&#xA;active projects that are ahead of it in priority for the site developers. Ideally, this tag indicates that&#xA;the proposal is intended to be implemented in the near term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrast &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-deferred&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-deferred&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-deferred&lt;/a&gt;, in which the feature is of lower priority and may be re-evaluated&#xA;on feasibility at a later date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by moderators and site developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T16:53:10.127" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T16:53:10.127" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12108" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:51:08.587" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the feature request or bug is something that is intended to be implemented or fixed, ideally in the near term." OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T16:53:16.710" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T16:53:16.710" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12109" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:51:40.100" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Before posting your question, please check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot;&gt;FAQs&lt;/a&gt;, and do a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search&quot;&gt;search&lt;/a&gt; to see if your problem already has a known solution or procedure. If you cannot find an answer, we will be happy to help you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T16:53:24.773" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T16:53:24.773" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12110" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:51:40.100" Score="0" Body="You need help with the use of one or more of the site's features." OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-29T14:01:15.907" LastActivityDate="2022-05-29T14:01:15.907" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12111" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:52:36.863" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A feature request or bug with this tag is something that has been evaluated as positive on potential,&#xA;but it is not present in the current work timeline. It is also not guaranteed to be implemented - when&#xA;it resurfaces the proposal may be re-evaluated and declined depending on how the situation has changed since then.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Contrast &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-planned&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-planned&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-planned&lt;/a&gt;, in which a feature is something that the site developers have&#xA;definitively approved for implementation but the timing is unknown.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by moderators and site developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T16:53:33.470" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T16:53:33.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12112" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-05-28T15:52:36.863" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the feature request or bug is something that is intended to be implemented or fixed, but not in the near term." OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-28T16:53:38.203" LastActivityDate="2022-05-28T16:53:38.203" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12113" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-05-29T12:51:54.930" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bug report is considered not reproducible if it is a bug that the site developers&#xA;would fix, but cannot due to an inability to recreate the problematic behavior in&#xA;spite of attempts to do so. Reports that are not reproducible typically represent&#xA;bugs that come from using unsupported browsers and tools, or because of sunspots&#xA;and other activity entirely unrelated to the site creating a momentary issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a bug can’t be reproduced due to being immediately presented as being through&#xA;an unsupported browser, thus bypassing the need of the site developers to even&#xA;attempt to reproduce the bug, then &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-declined&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-declined&lt;/a&gt; should be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are the reporter of a bug that receives this tag, it may indicate&#xA;that the bug was intermittent, or merely that you didn't thoroughly explain&#xA;the circumstances under which you encountered it. First, verify that &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;can still cause the bug to appear, and (if you can) then:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Describe in detail what you were doing when it happened. Include links to any relevant pages / posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;List the steps you took to encounter the bug.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Describe your environment: browser make and version, OS, add-ons, userscripts (if applicable).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Include screenshots if applicable. Use hand-drawn circles to highlight key portions&#xA;of the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by moderators and site developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-29T17:35:30.957" LastActivityDate="2022-05-29T17:35:30.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12114" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-05-29T12:51:54.930" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the site developers were not able to replicate the behavior reported." OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-29T17:35:24.440" LastActivityDate="2022-05-29T17:35:24.440" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12115" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-05-29T12:52:29.060" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;A bug report is considered reproduced only if the site developers have successfully reproduced the bug.&#xA;This tag should only be applied if the site developers cannot immediately address the bug, such as if&#xA;it requires further investigation into solutions or if the implementation of a fix would be stalled&#xA;for other reasons. When a fix is eventually implemented, the tag should become &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Status tags can only be applied by moderators and site developers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-29T17:35:35.770" LastActivityDate="2022-05-29T17:35:35.770" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12116" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-05-29T12:52:29.060" Score="0" Body="Indicates that the site developers were able to replicate the behavior reported, but cannot address its cause at this time." OwnerUserId="35449" LastEditorUserId="35449" LastEditDate="2022-05-29T17:35:19.023" LastActivityDate="2022-05-29T17:35:19.023" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12117" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12118" CreationDate="2022-06-02T16:01:15.270" Score="17" ViewCount="339" Body="&lt;p&gt;I looked into the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/site-analytics&quot;&gt;site analytics&lt;/a&gt; (25k+ rep only) just now and what I found was alarming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/swQgB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/swQgB.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Daily page views averaged between 50k and 60k consistently all year until about May 10th, when it just tanked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Surely 75% of readers did not all decide to never visit the site again on the same day. What in the world is going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-13T19:57:25.753" LastActivityDate="2022-06-13T19:57:25.753" Title="Site traffic fell off the table the week of May 10, 2022. What happened?" Tags="|discussion|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12118" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12117" CreationDate="2022-06-02T16:31:04.983" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;It is related to Stack Exchange recategorizing cookies. See Glorfindel’s answer to this meta.se question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/379047/674198&quot;&gt;Why has there been such a huge drop in &amp;quot;new visits&amp;quot; since May 9th, 2022, across multiple sites?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Educated guess, by no means official:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are committing to recategorizing the Google Analytics cookie as a “Performance Cookie” by May 13, 2022.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(source: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/378440/295232&quot;&gt;this answer by staff member @CesarM&lt;/a&gt; - the actual switch happened on &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/374897/why-is-the-google-analytics-cookie-defined-as-strictly-necessary-and-saved-wit/378440#comment1264074_378440&quot;&gt;May 10th&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;/site-analytics&quot;&gt;site analytics&lt;/a&gt; are powered by Google Analytics, and if users don't accept the cookies, they don't get registered as new visits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-06-02T16:31:04.983" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12119" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Locking a post typically prevents regular users from editing, commenting on, or voting on it (including delete/undelete votes); for locked questions, this prevents answering and voting to close/reopen as well. Only &lt;a href=&quot;/help/site-moderators&quot;&gt;site moderators&lt;/a&gt; (indicated by a diamond next to their username) may lock or unlock posts, or perform restricted actions on locked posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(If a question is locked, any existing answers on it are not automatically locked or affected by these restrictions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For more information on locked posts, see this Help Center article: &lt;a href=&quot;/help/locked-posts&quot;&gt;What is a locked post?&lt;/a&gt; – or the corresponding FAQ on Meta Stack Exchange: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22228/what-is-a-locked-post&quot;&gt;What is a &amp;quot;locked&amp;quot; post?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" LastActivityDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12120" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" Score="0" Body="Locking a post typically prevents regular users from editing, commenting on, or voting on it (including delete/undelete votes); for locked questions, this prevents answering and voting to close/reopen as well. Only site moderators may lock or unlock posts, or perform restricted actions on locked posts. (If a question is locked, any existing answers on it are not automatically locked/affected by these restrictions.)" OwnerUserId="33569" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" LastActivityDate="2022-06-02T18:57:12.383" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12121" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12122" CreationDate="2022-06-03T08:11:39.003" Score="0" ViewCount="145" Body="&lt;p&gt;I found that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/quintessence&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;quintessence&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;quintessence&lt;/a&gt; tag exists. For convenience, here is the tag excerpt:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Mage: the Ascension, quintessence is the substance that makes a thing &amp;quot;real&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;actual.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And tag wiki:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Mage: the Ascension, quintessence is the substance that makes a thing &amp;quot;real&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;actual.&amp;quot; It's manipulated through the Prime Sphere. Mages store it within their Patterns and spend it to augment spells or create magickal effects. These questions relate to the collection, use, and lore behind this substance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the time of writing this, nine questions are tagged with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag wiki is entirely correct: quintessence is a term with associated mechanics in Mage: The Ascension (MtAs) game which is part of the old/classic World of Darkness lineup. However, I hardly see how it is relevant to have its own tag. It &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; applies to MtAs games and there is not much knowledge that is related directly to quintessence that is not just knowledge of the lore and mechanics in MtAs games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wonder - is this tag really &lt;em&gt;needed&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-03T15:20:14.530" LastActivityDate="2022-06-03T15:20:14.530" Title="Is the [quintessence] tag quintessential?" Tags="|discussion|tags|world-of-darkness|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12122" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12121" CreationDate="2022-06-03T09:19:12.427" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;You're sort of asking the wrong question here. No tags are &lt;em&gt;needed&lt;/em&gt;; tags being “quintessential” or “really needed” are not requirements we apply to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All that a tag needs to do here to justify its own existence is to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/tagging&quot;&gt;describe the topic of a question so people can find it&lt;/a&gt; and not cause problems. The quintessence tag is doing this job just fine: people can have questions about quintessence and this tag will help them find answers. It's also fine if it's describing a mechanic in only one system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag isn't un-useful, or broken, or problematically nonspecific, and doesn't appear to be causing any chronic overcrowding of the tag line. It's also not a meta-tag (factoring in that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5308/1204&quot;&gt;the only-tag test is different here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Other sites you're familiar with may have rules localised to them that would have a tag like this removed, but we don't have any of those to apply here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By any measure quintessence appears to be a perfectly good tag doing a good job. The question seems to be asked on a basis that the requirements to keep a tag are steeper, that it must do more to justify its own existence, but that's just not the case here. It's a good tag, having it is free, everything is OK here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want to learn more about which tags we &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; dropped in the past and why, check out our &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/burninate-request&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;burninate-request&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;burninate-request&lt;/a&gt; list. Do note some of these requests were declined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-06-03T09:45:13.193" LastActivityDate="2022-06-03T09:45:13.193" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12123" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-06-03T17:12:56.483" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Our forum index hasn't been updated in over two years.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a handy dandy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/62294&quot;&gt;list of forums&lt;/a&gt; that we use to direct off topic questions. The last time it was substantially updated was March of 2020 (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/9335/10&quot;&gt;revision 10&lt;/a&gt;), with the removal of the dead Story Games Forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I quite literally know nothing about other RPG forums, so find myself ill equipped for reviewing the list outside of checking for dead links. It would be great if some of y'all&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; could give the index a little audit, checking for dead links, URL changes, forum shutdowns, unfortunate changes in attitude toward minority groups, etc. And if you are aware of any good candidates to add to the list, propose them in answer so the community can vet and vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 A contraction meaning &amp;quot;you all&amp;quot;, here referring to any reader, not just &amp;quot;you all the mods&amp;quot;.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-06-03T17:12:56.483" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12124" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12069" CreationDate="2022-06-03T19:14:18.880" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The FAQ proposal process is still kind of in limbo, and has been for a long time.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9961/faq-proposal-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;FAQ Proposal Index for Role-playing Games Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've made this observation before in chat (&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=57647222#57647222&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57085376#57085376&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/59733364#59733364&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;). I think it's time to try something new for FAQ proposals. The current process is not working because of a lack of participation. I don't have any ideas at the moment. But maybe we can have a brainstorming discussion soon...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-06-05T12:33:08.403" LastActivityDate="2022-06-05T12:33:08.403" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12125" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12126" CreationDate="2022-06-21T03:09:12.907" Score="3" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;The name says it all. Why are these badges (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/63/precognitive&quot;&gt;precognitive&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/badges/16/beta&quot;&gt;beta&lt;/a&gt;) unretired when you can't get them anymore?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77400" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-06-21T09:55:49.737" LastActivityDate="2022-06-21T11:04:53.197" Title="Why aren't the badges Precognitive and Beta retired?" Tags="|support|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12126" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12125" CreationDate="2022-06-21T11:04:53.197" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a side effect of badges being a network-wide system. Badges don't get retired from just one site; they get retired from the network wide badge system as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The beta badge being retired would imply Stack Exchange has decided it won't give it out anywhere ever again, even on future beta sites. It goes without saying that's not the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Although we can no longer earn beta badges here, they're still a part of the network badge system and people can still earn them within the stack exchange system elsewhere in the future, so it's not retired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2022-06-21T11:04:53.197" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12127" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-06-24T03:13:50.603" Score="7" ViewCount="334" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/199222/what-percentage-of-call-of-cthulhu-characters-start-drowning-on-average&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; after asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/199116/is-it-easy-to-start-drowning-in-call-of-cthulhu-7e&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; for two reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To get a better idea how drowning works in Call of Cthulhu 7th edition&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To use the answer to decide how to run my next game. If drowning chance was too high, I would find a way around it, and if drowning chance was too low I would bump up the difficulty.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I got was mostly people telling me that the probability didn't matter, which didn't help much. I was trying to tune the probability of drowning to have a 1/8 risk of getting drowned by sentient water, to give stakes but not a guaranteed death. But I mostly got no answer which wasn't helping me adjust dice rolls. There were some answers that gave good math and I think accurate rulings, which is enough for me to move forward.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should I ask questions relating to probability in the future to help people understand the questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user71562" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-02T01:19:42.610" LastActivityDate="2022-11-02T01:19:42.610" Title="How do I ask statistics questions on this site?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12129" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12127" CreationDate="2022-06-24T17:57:51.467" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;When you ask how best to use a hammer to drive a screw, you have to expect some number of people to suggest using a different tool.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You outlined your problem well, and it was clear what sort of answer you were looking for. &lt;em&gt;I've never played the game and I understood the question perfectly well&lt;/em&gt;. But one of the neat things about asking questions to a community of experts is that we often see that the best solutions to our problems don't even fit within the framing of our questions. When this happens, we call it a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;frame challenge&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A frame challenge is where an author answers a question in a wholly different way the querent never asked for, or potentially expressly forbade, but in a way the author feels will actually solve the problem. (Or otherwise improve the querent's life quality or prevent them from making some terrible mistake.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reading through the answers to your question, it looks like you got a couple answers working within the scope you asked for, and a couple answers challenging your framing based on their experience with the game. &lt;em&gt;This is the system working as intended&lt;/em&gt;. We can't forbid frame challenge answers, some of our best answers are exactly that. Sometimes a frame challenge changes the way you think about a problem and provides satisfying resolution; sometimes it doesn't. That's what votes are for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your particular case, it seems your question framing was quite ripe for being challenged. If I'm understanding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/199397/62294&quot;&gt;Glazius' answer&lt;/a&gt; correctly, some of what you are trying to do is somewhat at odds with how the game was intended to be run by its authors. To be clear, &lt;em&gt;this is okay&lt;/em&gt;. There is no &lt;em&gt;badwrongfun&lt;/em&gt;. But this is where the hammer and screw analogy comes in. There is nothing inherently wrong with driving a screw with a hammer, generally speaking (building codes notwithstanding). But the screw was not manufactured with the intent to be driven by a hammer. So naturally, when you ask for help, we must expect that someone is going to suggest that we are going about it the wrong way, that the screw was not made to be driven by a hammer. If you're happy with your hammer and don't care to use a screwdriver, just say thanks and move on, someone will probably come along and help you use the hammer, which is what happened to your question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-06-24T17:57:51.467" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12130" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12127" CreationDate="2022-06-25T14:03:12.743" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Please add details and clarify the problem being solved.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This is an injoke about some site boilerplate text. Hang around a while, you'll see it eventually if you haven't already.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of the functions of the domain knowledge that an expert should possess is to be able to distinguish the meaningful and meaningless elements of the relationships between things in that domain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is why the question page asks you to be specific and provide details. If things have come to the point that you hope anonymous strangers on the Internet will be able to solve your problem, you should be honest with yourself that you are, at least situationally, not an expert, and you do not know how meaningful some of the details of your specific situation are -- so provide as many as you can. Be open, be conversational, tell your story! (Well, not the personally identifiable details of your story. This is the Internet, after all.) If some of it turns out not to matter, or to be a distraction from the more relevant elements of your question, you can edit it out later -- regardless of site reputation you can always edit your own stuff freely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand the impulse to pull back into generalities to hope for something useful by chance, but if you need specific help, asking more and more general questions trying to find it is only likely to get you more and more general answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Especially in this case, wow! I mean -- you probably already know this, but I'm writing this just as much for a general audience -- &lt;em&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/em&gt; has been going for over 40 years now, and over most of that time it's built up something of a reputation as a real investigator meatgrinder. The seventh edition of &lt;em&gt;Call of Cthulhu&lt;/em&gt; (&lt;em&gt;CoC7E&lt;/em&gt;) is written in what I would, uncharitably, describe as &lt;strong&gt;a defensive crouch against its own reputation&lt;/strong&gt;. &amp;quot;Don't kill the investigators! Don't kill the investigators!&amp;quot; it's screaming, left and right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't kill the investigators... in general.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where possible try to avoid an outcome that will end the game (unless you wish to, of course).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-- &amp;quot;Failed Dice Rolls and Sudden Endings&amp;quot;, &lt;em&gt;CoC7E Keeper Rulebook&lt;/em&gt;, p. 86&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's &lt;em&gt;just fine&lt;/em&gt; to kill them in specific. Like, when the story's reached its climax and even their deaths would still be interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And hey, while I'm copping to being uncharitable! In what an outside observer would probably call a thoroughly predictable plot element, as this whole affair has dragged on I spent way too much time in close reading of that eldritch tome and it messed with my head a little. I've done jack all to help you get to this point and my responses to your more and more general queries have made the whole thing worse for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: thanks for putting yourself through the process and opening up about what you were trying to do. I'm sorry for the confusion you've been through, both personally induced and in general. If you want to head back to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/199116&quot;&gt;your original question&lt;/a&gt; and edit in all these details you've shared - the final confrontation, the dire threat, the desperate escape - I can absolutely get you a better answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2022-06-25T14:03:12.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12131" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12127" CreationDate="2022-06-26T09:27:11.137" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You can do so by asking a question only about [statistics]&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In earlier editions of Call of Cthulhu, there were none of these modern ideas of failing a skill check not leading directly to failure. In those old editions, when you failed a swim check, you started to drown, period. And if there was no land or boat nearby to drag yourself up to, you would die. It sounds like that is how you want to play, only with skill values that calibrate the probability to a level that you feel is the right one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In CoC 7e, the probability resolution mechanism still works pretty much in the same way, except for the addition of pushed rolls. But: &lt;strong&gt;the rules about resolving statistical probabilities are not the only rules of the game&lt;/strong&gt;. It does not end there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The rules about &lt;strong&gt;how to deal with the outcome of such rolls&lt;/strong&gt; are &lt;em&gt;just as much&lt;/em&gt; rules of the game, and they they have changed a lot from earlier editions and now loudly and clearly tell you to not let the investigators die if it does not make narrative sense. You prefer to ignore that part of the rules. You prefer to stick with the old-school approach, and let the die fall as they may, consequences be damned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And you can, but then you are overriding the game's rules. You either can ask a question about probabilities, which is hard to do in a vacuum outside the other game rules, or you can ask a question about how deadly the game rules make swimming. These are very different things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you just want a question about a statistical probablity calculation&lt;/strong&gt;: the way you could ask it is by providing all the assumptions and conditions, as you did with the swimming skill value, and the process that the sequences of rolls are to follow, for a hypothetical homebrew game you are considering. This game may be similar to CoC 7e, but it is not CoC 7e, as it ignores several of the core rules. Then, someone interested can calculate what the probabilities will work out to under the given assumptions and procedure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as soon as you combine this with how this will work in 7e, people will tell you: in a way that makes the statistical rolls really not that important.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-06-26T09:32:55.640" LastActivityDate="2022-06-26T09:32:55.640" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12132" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-06-27T10:34:13.627" Score="4" ViewCount="105" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a weird behaviour in SE today, where my daily Rep seems capped at 190, not 200:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kUr8S.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kUr8S.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's not clear to me what causes this behaviour, but earlier today, someone unupvoted a vote:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/40IUY.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/40IUY.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is that expected to be causing such behaviour? If not, what could be the reason? Or is this a bug?Everything else seems perfectly normal, some upvotes, some downvotes etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-28T14:46:28.680" LastActivityDate="2022-06-28T14:46:28.680" Title="Are un-upvotes lowering the rep ceiling?" Tags="|support|voting|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12133" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12132" CreationDate="2022-06-27T10:54:54.743" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Unupvotes aren't counted as part of the day they happened&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, unupvotes are treated as though the upvote never happened. That means &lt;em&gt;technically&lt;/em&gt; the rep loss happened to a previous day. However, to stop users worrying about the implications of time travel, the change tracker shows it happening at the day of the unvoting. So today you hit the rep cap of 200, but you also got a -10 rep modification that isn't actually part of the day's rep (see also bounties and accept bonuses).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can see your actual rep tally on &lt;code&gt;/reputation&lt;/code&gt;, which should have shown you as having earned 200 rep today (finding when the unupvote was taken from would require a fair bit of investigation, and is probably not worth your time).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2022-06-27T14:31:48.070" LastActivityDate="2022-06-27T14:31:48.070" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12134" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-06-27T19:00:32.310" Score="5" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;The recent release of the D&amp;amp;D 5e &lt;em&gt;Monsters of the Multiverse&lt;/em&gt; has changed the stat blocks of &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.themonstersknow.com/monsters-of-the-multiverse/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;around 200 creatures&lt;/a&gt;, and for PCs eliminated the concept of subraces, revised many racial traits, and changed the way racial ability points work at character creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/199484/23547&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asks about a bugbear racial trait specifically found in &lt;em&gt;Monsters of the Multiverse&lt;/em&gt; and would not apply to someone running a bugbear PC according to the legacy rules in &lt;em&gt;Volo's&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should there be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters-of-the-multiverse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters-of-the-multiverse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;monsters-of-the-multiverse&lt;/a&gt; tag to apply to such questions moving forward?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-06-27T20:40:22.710" LastActivityDate="2022-06-28T17:33:35.210" Title="Should we have a Monsters of the Multiverse tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12135" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12134" CreationDate="2022-06-27T19:56:39.287" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I don't see this as necessary&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We generally don't have tags for source books.&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; If a question is about X thing from book Y, it is really only &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; X and should be tagged as such. If and when specifying the source is relevant, that should must be done in text and not relegated to tags (they simply aren't supposed to do that duty).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm basing this partially on an expectation that most will simply be playing with the newer version, though in any case distinguishing version or source is the job of the question body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, it's possible this will change in the future and we should revisit it then, though for now let's not add a tag which will only bloat a handful of questions (and the tag slots on these questions seem already quite cramped).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; I'm sure you'll find some examples, but to my understanding those are books which create subdomains of the system on their own, not merely republish material with updates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-06-28T17:33:35.210" LastActivityDate="2022-06-28T17:33:35.210" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12136" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12137" CreationDate="2022-06-30T08:54:49.100" Score="10" ViewCount="306" Body="&lt;p&gt;A small note before the question itself : I'm unsure if this kind of question fits Meta, since it could easily be interpreted as nothing more than &amp;quot;How do I not offend other human beings?&amp;quot;. I decided to post it here because I specifically aim at increasing the quality of my answers in this stack, but also because there might be other people looking for the same answers. If there is some other place which would be a better fit for this question, please do indicate it and I will gladly move this issue over there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been lurking through this stack for quite a while, and decided only recently to create an account and start using what I've learned, both through reading through it and my own roleplaying experience. However, I've been running into an issue that left me puzzled.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, I believe I should explain my reasoning when building an answer for a question, as it might just as well be the issue here. When I make an answer, I usually start by stating the basic concept that I will then build upon in my answer. Usually, it will be one or multiple rules from the books that are the ground floor of my argument. I do this for multiple reasons :&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I make sure that the reader and I are using reasoning based on the same premises, which avoids possible misunderstandings later on in the reasoning.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This helps less experienced readers, by either teaching them or reminding them of those points.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If my premises are wrong, this allows more experienced readers to easily and accurately point out the reason as to why my answer is flawed, which then allows me to correct my answer in an efficient way.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the premises of my answer are cleared up, I can then explain more in details my reasoning, mention personal experience with the subject, then make a conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue I've had recently is that multiple people have told me that this method can be seen as condescending. The main argument for that was that it implies the reader does not know the basics of the rules, and thus stating the &amp;quot;obvious&amp;quot; is an insult to whoever is reading the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can understand that someone would feel offended by that, but I believe the arguments I've given also show that this structure (basic, agreed upon fact -&amp;gt; reasoning from those facts and adding external elements -&amp;gt; concluding based on those reasonings) is avantageous. The objective with this is not to correct the reader or put them down, but simply to make sure we are operating on the same page.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is the following : how do I answer a question in a meaningful way, without closing down to less experienced people, but also without offending more experienced readers? Should I discard completly this method of answering, or is there a way to modify it, in order to keep its advantages while negating the offending aspect of it? In the end, it might also simply be because english is not my native language, in which case I am at a loss for how to improve my answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastEditorUserId="77044" LastEditDate="2022-06-30T09:03:26.487" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:37:13.433" Title="How do I build a proper answer without sounding condescending?" Tags="|discussion|answers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12137" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12136" CreationDate="2022-06-30T11:29:03.393" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your approach seems fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At only four answers, it's early days in your RPG.SE career, but it seems like you're doing fine so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Out of the four questions, one had feedback that you might have been &amp;quot;kinda condescending in a way&amp;quot; which to me was misplaced and not true, one where the question asker &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; need a refresher on the fundamentals, and two without comment (at time of writing).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the answer where the asker needed the refresher, DG rightfully points out that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;in prior editions, undeath-type spells would deal a particular damage type, and that damage type would heal undead, which is a straightforward case of spells not doing merely what they say they do. This makes that header somewhat tonedeaf to the situation. They don't need to be told that the spell only does what it says, which is somewhat condescending here—they need to be told there's no side-effects of the damage type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess your approach and DG's is two sides of the same polyhedral. The 'golden rule' (as you put it) that &amp;quot;Spells only do what they say they do&amp;quot;, and 'there's no side-effect of the damage type' both get to the point but the 'golden rule' is somewhat overused, and it turned out the OP didn't misunderstand the spell but the damage type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That overuse of the 'golden rule' and the fact that the adjective &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/somewhat&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;'somewhat'&lt;/a&gt; here is doing more heavy-lifting than may have been obvious at first glance tells me you're approaching these questions correctly, but you just missed the mark once, but only somewhat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:37:13.433" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:37:13.433" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12138" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12136" CreationDate="2022-06-30T15:47:06.263" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your approach seems fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, I agree with everything in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12137/23970&quot;&gt;ASR's answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Second, my response to the commenter who found your approach condescending--and I assume they're well-intentioned and motivated by wanting to help people, too--would be that I write answers not only with the querent in mind, but with an eye to the long tail of readers who will ever encounter this Q&amp;amp;A. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/244534/311001&quot;&gt;We&amp;#39;re working on a new stat to help convey the reach of your posts here&lt;/a&gt; has a good discussion of this notion, especially at &amp;quot;You gotta get this to get us.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that, I, too, often err on the side of explaining a bit more, linking in more things than might be necessary, and being explicit in my reasoning. I agree with you that it makes error-correction easier, and I also find that it makes an answer useful beyond just its prompting question. The general theory being: &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=60723428#60723428&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;clearly supported experience-based answers for extremely specific circumstances are also guides to implementing the principles and techniques more generally&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2022-07-01T16:40:26.957" LastActivityDate="2022-07-01T16:40:26.957" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12139" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12136" CreationDate="2022-06-30T15:51:08.107" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Your approach to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/199565/4563&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; was &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the question that prompted this, you were asked for a “published method,” and you answered with&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;I am not actually familiar with the game you’re playing, I’m just assuming it’s similar to a game I am familiar with, and&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You don’t need a published method at all!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nowhere did you make any attempt to find a published method. In fact, you explicitly stated your lack of expertise on the matter. &lt;strong&gt;These are not good approaches to answering questions here.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Establishing your premises and providing reminders are fine as &lt;em&gt;parts of your answer&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But &lt;em&gt;partial answers&lt;/em&gt; are not acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our rules allow “frame challenges,” where a different answer is provided than the one the question seemed to request. The guidance on frame challenges recommends that such answers be paired with &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; answers to the question, and this sort of thing is the reason why: if someone already knows about Rule 0—which I think most people running games do—the answer is useless. There are times when it’s best to ignore the recommendation and provide &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; a challenge to the question. But this is almost never appropriate in questions about system content, and yes, it can feel condescending in those (most common) inappropriate situations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, it is not a full and complete answer to say “just Rule 0 it!” to a question about what the official or published content says about the matter. And answers have to be full and complete. And you should be familiar with the rules of the game you are answering rules questions about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-06-30T16:44:10.667" LastActivityDate="2022-06-30T16:44:10.667" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12140" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12136" CreationDate="2022-07-01T01:04:01.410" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You're Batting Two For Four, But It's Early Days&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a preface, I'm not writing this with the intent to jump down your throat, or beat you up or any such thing.  Having 50% of your answers flagged in comments by experienced members of the stack ain't great, but harping on the statistics of small samples ain't a great way to go through life, either.  If it were 50% of your answers flagged on forty questions, that would be a lot different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But you've asked for advice so I'm going to give some:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In general, defer to the frame of the question, especially when the frame is pretty specific.  In &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/199564/are-there-any-known-methods-or-suggestions-for-reverting-a-shadow-dragon-to-orig/199565#199565&quot;&gt;one of these cases&lt;/a&gt;, the querent was asking for a &amp;quot;known method&amp;quot; and/or a &amp;quot;published method&amp;quot; very clearly.  The subsequent edit made it even clearer, but you may already have answered by then.  Saying the NPCs are not necessarily bound by the textual rules, or that the GM can house-rule is... true, but not really useful.  Condescending?  I'm not sure, but definitely not helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In general, try not to make too many assumptions.  In the same question, you made the assumption that the querent was the GM.  I'll be honest, I read it the same way too, and if answering, probably would have answered in that vein; I would have been correct but at least partially correct by accident.  Not the biggest deal in the world, but definitely something to watch for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Try not to add details that aren't there.  I'll be honest, I'm not sure what the heck happened in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/199350/18269&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;-- it almost looks like the comment record has some deletions in it.  The first version of it seemed fine to me:  The premise that spells do only what they say they do is correct, and it also covered the possible source of confusion of the changes to relevant mechanics from 3.5e to 5e.  I don't understand the condescension angle, but nor do I understand bogging the answer down with discussions of homebrew and &amp;quot;The GM makes the rules.&amp;quot;  In this case, &amp;quot;The GM makes the rules,&amp;quot; cuts directly against &amp;quot;Spells do only what they say,&amp;quot; weakening the whole thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;About which, &amp;quot;The GM makes the rules&amp;quot; is, again, true but not always useful.  In my experience, it's rarely going to be a main pillar of your answer, except in some circumstances, including situations like:  The published rules are entirely unclear, a player is objecting to a house-rule, you have direct and relevant experience that following a rule as written leads to a disastrous or nonsensical result, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, experts gonna be experts and violate those guidelines.  I've done it myself.  But asking questions in comments is a good way to avoid some of those issues.  So is directly listing your assumptions in an answer if you &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; want to answer a question for posterity but the original querent seems non-responsive.  And when frame-challenging, try to do so politely and deferentially.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Finally, the basic approach you outlined seems fine and not condescending in itself, at least not to me.  I do similar things.  But usually only if an answer is complicated or long-winded.  Some answers need the full Five Paragraph Essay structure so beloved of American high school teachers; some just need a rules citation and a few sentences of backup and interpretation.  Also, when I do find myself over-analyzing things in a long-winded answer, I try to remember to add text to the effect of, &amp;quot;You probably know all this, but I'm writing this for a wider audience, sorry.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-07-01T01:04:01.410" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12141" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12143" CreationDate="2022-07-04T03:07:49.347" Score="1" ViewCount="81" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just got access to the &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/site-analytics&quot;&gt;Site Analytics&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; privilege, that allows one to look at activity charts for the RPG SE site. The first chart shows the number of posts each day, here for example for last week:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/w8gTB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/w8gTB.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would have expected that the total number of posts each day is the sum of the number of questions and answers, the two individual types of posts. However, looking at the chart, this is clearly not the case: for example, on June 29, there were no questions posted, so &amp;quot;all posts&amp;quot; would need to be identical to &amp;quot;answers&amp;quot; on that day, and instead it is larger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can someone explain where the difference is from? Is there another, hidden type of post? Is there some time delay effect? Or is there some bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(P.S. I am hoping I am not violating the site analytics recommendations on not sharing data here, as I think it is easy enough to see how many questions or answers were posted on a single day, even without it -- you can use the data explorer, or even just tally it up manually for a few days).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-06T15:45:52.120" LastActivityDate="2022-07-06T15:45:52.120" Title="Why do site analytics counts not tally?" Tags="|support|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12143" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12141" CreationDate="2022-07-04T13:11:30.223" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Because the plot isn't zero'd sensibly&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the 29th of june there weren't 0 posts, there was 5. The same on the 26 and 30th. For whatever reason the plotter put the y-zero at 5, that's why the data looks off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can hover over each data point to get the actual value, which is particularly useful as the x-axis markings and the actual days aren't aligned either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-07-04T13:18:26.647" LastActivityDate="2022-07-04T13:18:26.647" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12144" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-07-12T08:16:50.493" Score="2" ViewCount="303" Body="&lt;p&gt;Previously I have been told that it's ok to quote paid sourcebooks, even whole paragraphs. However today a mod edited my post to remove content that potentially violated copyright.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I made an answer to a question about calculating challenge rating in D&amp;amp;D that uses information from a paid sourcebook. Note that I did not directly quote or copy any information. Here is the answer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/199878/trouble-determining-cr-or-difficulty-for-homebrew-creatures&quot;&gt;Trouble determining CR or difficulty for homebrew creatures&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Interestingly other users who directly copy pasted from the sourcebook have been allowed to retain their answers, it's not clear why.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like a solid line to be drawn to inform me, and others, as to when it's ok to discuss the contents of paid source books&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user73918" LastEditorDisplayName="user73918" LastEditDate="2022-07-12T08:25:12.353" LastActivityDate="2022-07-12T14:52:27.960" Title="Quoting paid sourcebooks - copyright infringement?" Tags="|discussion|copyright|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12145" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12144" CreationDate="2022-07-12T09:03:39.950" Score="14" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Only quote as much as is needed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As has always been our guidelines, we should only quote as much of the paid sourcebooks as is required to sufficiently support our answers. Sometimes a question requires entire paragraphs to include the appropriate context for the question, where possible we should reduce or remove unrelated or superfluous parts of the quoted material. Additionally, we should &lt;strong&gt;always&lt;/strong&gt; be citing the source material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes questions exist which can be answered &lt;em&gt;solely&lt;/em&gt; by reproducing paid content. Let's imagine an example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;What is the stat-block for a Beholder?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearly this question is going to invite answers that re-produce paid content for free.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answer A:&lt;/strong&gt; The Beholder is found in the Monster's Manual on page X&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Answer B:&lt;/strong&gt; Here's the Beholder statblock: &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good answer to that question would advise where the content can be found. A problematic answer would just reproduce the content verbatim.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question we should consider when determining if content can/should be reproduced is &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Does my quoted content remove the need to purchase the source material?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; Looking back at our example if OP's goal was simply to obtain the paid content, answer B clearly removes the need to purchase they book, while answer A does not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This situation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's compare your original answer with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/199879/48759&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's&lt;/a&gt;. While, by character count both answer's reproduce a similar amount of paid content from the DMG, only one actually reduces the need to purchase the sourcebook.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thomas's answer quotes from the introduction of the chapter that explains what the rules cover and gives just enough of an example of what readers can expect from the materials so that they can judge whether they should purchase the material or not. It doesn't remove the need to purchase paid content to solve OP's actual problem however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In simplified terms that answer says &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;The rules for this are in the DMG and here is an example of what you can expect from those rules&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt;. It gives OP all the information they need to solve their problem, and a good gauge on whether it is worth spending money for the answer they seek, &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; reproducing the part that makes purchasing the DMG unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In contrast, your original answer reproduced the key table of content from the DMG (initially without attribution). While not exactly copy/paste, it had enough information in it that readers could easily get by with just that table rather than purchasing the DMG. This is why your answer got flagged and subsequently edited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel your answer is no less complete with a redacted table. It's a good explanation of the process and provides enough of the table to give a good worked example. Including the full table only serves to reproduce content without actually adding to the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;A word on consistency&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you've discovered, copyright can get messy and generally we prefer not to get involved in it. However we also try to discourage use of pirated or otherwise illegally obtained material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we always get the distinction right? Probably not. We aren't experts in this, but we follow the principles to the best of our ability. Sometimes this means a bit of inconsistency between different answers, but that is to be expected of a grey-area topic like copyright on SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-07-12T10:59:07.677" LastActivityDate="2022-07-12T10:59:07.677" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12146" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12144" CreationDate="2022-07-12T13:49:35.177" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If we become a place that helps people get away with not purchasing game materials we will hurt small content creators far more than we will hurt Wizards of the Coast.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;We absolutely cannot allow a multibillion dollar company's apathy toward negligible profit loss to determine how we approach this issue as a site&lt;/em&gt;. We already have a problem with D&amp;amp;D dominating our content, and making the stack an unsafe place for small companies and indie creators will be the last nail in the coffin for the 10% of questions that aren't from the D&amp;amp;D family. We should be encouraging users to diversify their game shelves, and we should be doing so in a way that helps the creators of those games. Becoming a place that helps remove the need to purchase game materials will be actively harmful to the game creators we want to see succeed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast reported $1.3 billion in revenue in 2021. When you consider that fact, giving a few people a way to avoid purchasing a $30 book doesn't sound that bad. And Wizards of the Coast probably wouldn't even care. Because of this, I have seen it suggested before that the way to handle it is not to worry about it, and if Wizards of the Coast wants to care, they can throw around their lawyers and money bags and Stack Exchange Legal will work it out. But Wizards of the Coast is going to feel very differently about this than an indie creator who sold 200 copies of their game last year. What is legal for us may still be harmful to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So asking &amp;quot;what is legal?&amp;quot; is simply asking the wrong question. It is important, &lt;em&gt;but it can only exclude particular practices.&lt;/em&gt; Being illegal is a good reason to avoid a particular practice, but &amp;quot;it is legal therefore we should do it&amp;quot; is not how we determine what we should do on the site. Instead, the question you should be asking is &amp;quot;what is best for the site?&amp;quot;. And in this case, while doing so probably won't hurt Wizards of the Coast, creating an environment that enables users to get around the need for purchasing game materials is actively harmful to the community and to those game creators who can't throw money at litigation with reckless abandon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when we see someone trying to do something that you can't do without the book, we should give them everything they need to do it with the book, rather than everything they need to do it without the book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-07-12T14:52:27.960" LastActivityDate="2022-07-12T14:52:27.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12147" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12013" CreationDate="2022-07-13T18:14:37.763" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Consider that design intent may not actually be the best solution to your problem.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I &lt;em&gt;don’t&lt;/em&gt; want to do here is tell anyone “this is a dumb question” or “you shouldn’t want this information”. Questions about design intent are on topic, and if that’s what you want to know, that’s great! Ask your question. However, I want to offer some guidance that might help you get better solutions to the problems you are experiencing at the table of play by rethinking the way you look at the problem you’re having.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What we have often seen with this type of question is that while it is phrased as a question of design intent, asking for an author-endorsed ruling on a particular rule, there is typically real conflict or misunderstanding about the rule propping up the question. That is, the querent doesn’t understand a rule, or has experienced conflict at the table of play about a rule, and is looking for the game designers to settle the issue for them. When this is the case, I think we may be engaging in something of an XY Problem, borrowing from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem&quot;&gt;this meta.se discussion&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=542341&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;XY&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://mywiki.wooledge.org/XyProblem&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;problem&lt;/a&gt; is asking about your attempted &lt;em&gt;solution&lt;/em&gt; rather than your &lt;em&gt;actual problem.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is, you are trying to solve problem &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt;, and you think solution &lt;em&gt;Y&lt;/em&gt; would work, but instead of asking about &lt;em&gt;X&lt;/em&gt; when you run into trouble, you ask about &lt;em&gt;Y.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To translate this to RPG terms, we have some kind of confusion, misunderstanding, or table conflict about some game rules (problem X), and we think that the game designer’s official ruling on the matter will resolve the issue (solution Y). And what I have often seen from questions of this type is a stripping down of the question content, because the querent doesn’t see that actual problem context as important when all they want is the developer’s ruling. This is how we arrive at what that linked meta discussion describes as “The problem”:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can lead to frustration by people who are trying to help you solve the problem because by the time you ask about it, the solution that you need help with might not have any obvious connections to the problem that you are trying to solve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the confusion or conflict you are having is being caused by the broader context a rules interaction occupies, asking a bare question about design intent risks disconnecting the rest of us from the thing that is actually causing your problem. Or as that meta discussion explains “How to avoid it”:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid falling into this trap, always include information about a broader picture along with any attempted solution. If someone asks for more information, or especially a more specific question, do provide details. If there are other solutions which you believe will be suggested and which you've already ruled out, then don't try to avoid going over them again – instead state why you've ruled them out, as this gives more information about your requirements and helps others provide better answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of just asking what the design intent for a rule is, put the rule into context for us. What was going on when the rule came up? What do you know about how the rule interacts with other rules? What ruling did you go with at the table, in the moment and why? I know I’m speaking in very general terms, and every situation will be different, warranting different levels of detail.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My intent is to encourage a bit of self-reflection about this type of question. &lt;em&gt;Is design intent really all I care about, or is the problem I’m trying to solve bigger than that?&lt;/em&gt; If it really is all you care about that’s fine too, you aren’t wrong for feeling that way. Or it may even be that your question isn't about rules at all, and there is no table conflict to go with it. Not every question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; even fits into the category of question that might benefit from this sort of reframing, so it certainly doesn’t make sense to bring to bear an expectation that this guidance be acted by question author’s. This is guidance for the one with the question, not guidance for curation and moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, I am not the first to suggest this. The idea I offer here is just old wine in a new wineskin. I stand on the shoulders of giants, so I will echo some of the guidance they provide. However, reader beware, &lt;em&gt;these posts were made in the context of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions being off topic.&lt;/em&gt; Now that such questions are on-topic, read these quotes through the lens of &lt;em&gt;improving&lt;/em&gt; an already acceptable question, rather than making an off-topic question acceptable:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Useful designer reasoning questions can be reframed into on-topic questions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A number of designer reasoning questions are secretly other kinds of questions, and can be rewritten as such. For instance, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120644/what-is-the-rationale-behind-the-comparatively-low-number-of-spells-known-for-so&quot;&gt;What is the rationale behind the comparatively low number of spells known for Sorcerers?&lt;/a&gt; can be reframed as, &amp;quot;Is it unbalanced to increase the number of spells known for Sorcerers?&amp;quot;. Likewise, &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/117226/what-have-designers-said-for-why-they-made-worn-items-fireproof&quot;&gt;What have designers said for why they made worn items fireproof?&lt;/a&gt; can be rewritten as, &amp;quot;Will making worn items flammable break my game?&amp;quot; (yes, it will).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These DMs are really asking about the practicality of homebrewed rules, which doesn't require a developer to weigh in. In fact, questions like these are probably &lt;em&gt;better&lt;/em&gt; served by other DMs who have firsthand experience with similar homebrew rules. Unfortunately, their current formulation actually bans such answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this way, many of the more borderline designer intent questions can be reframed into other topics. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/22944/how-do-touch-spells-work-in-pathfinder&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt;, about the wording of the rules, is a good example: it is a question about the rules that has some designer intent flavor, but is arguably not a designer intent question per se. Likewise, questions about game design can be asked that are about the game design itself, and not necessarily intent specifically.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7917/62294&quot;&gt;Icyfire&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Instead focus on: What problem are you trying to solve at the table?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a rule looks weird or feels out of whack, a lot of different questions arise, one of which is &amp;quot;what were they thinking?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What they were thinking&amp;quot; doesn't matter in our RPG.SE context.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=42972950#42972950&quot;&gt;I will quote @BESW for a good idea&lt;/a&gt; of why &amp;quot;we are here&amp;quot; on this stack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren't here on the Stack to read the rulebooks to people. We're&#xA;here to help people learn how to synthesize the mechanics, the&#xA;non-mechanical text, the social context, our personal experience, the&#xA;learning of the broader community, to apply all that to a particular&#xA;real-life problem someone's having and find a solution for it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to get the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; pointed at the problem to solve &lt;em&gt;so that play at the table isn't impeded by a given rule or decision&lt;/em&gt;, rather than being pointed at discomfort with a given design decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7918/62294&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Again, these quotes were written in the context of needing to take an off-topic question and rearrange it into an on-topic question. This is no longer &lt;em&gt;necessary&lt;/em&gt;, but changing your question in this way might change the kind of answers you receive, so take a moment to consider if your question might benefit from reframing in this way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-06T11:20:29.823" LastActivityDate="2022-08-06T11:20:29.823" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12148" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12149" CreationDate="2022-07-16T10:19:12.350" Score="16" ViewCount="210" Body="&lt;p&gt;I often want to see non-D&amp;amp;D related questions when searching on the site, but there's such an overwhelmingly large number of D&amp;amp;D related products (including Pathfinder and Starfinder) to exclude I sometimes get this warning when manually excluding then whilst searching:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/RQKO3.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/RQKO3.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;an attempt to manually exclude all D&amp;amp;D products from a site search, using the minus sign, resulting in a warning transcribed below&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please shorten this text to 240 characters or less (you are currently using 331 characters)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;n.b. the &lt;code&gt;ranger&lt;/code&gt; tag shown, in the screenshot, is unclosed as I first spotted the warning when editing an existing search&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How can I exclude these products quickly and easily from searches?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="2788" LastEditDate="2022-07-17T19:24:48.780" LastActivityDate="2022-07-26T12:58:46.560" Title="How to search for non-D&amp;D-related questions?" Tags="|discussion|support|search|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12149" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12148" CreationDate="2022-07-16T10:19:12.350" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Wildcards to the rescue!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use wildcards as per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/searching#:%7E:text=Use%20wildcard%20searches%20to%20broaden%20results%3B%20add%20an%20asterisk%20(*)%20anywhere%20in%20the%20word%2C%20like%20encour*%20or%20Ex*nge.&quot;&gt;search help page&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Use wildcard searches to broaden results; add an asterisk (*) anywhere in the word, like encour* or Ex*nge.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/380471/please-can-we-document-how-tags-and-wild-cards-interact-in-the-help-center&quot;&gt;not properly documented&lt;/a&gt; but you can do this within a tag. This will exclude all the products mentioned, as far as I can tell:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;-[dnd-*] -[adnd-*] -[dungeons-and-dragons] -[pathfinder-*] -[starfinder]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll need to manually enter this as the wildcards are not preserved, and will expand out again (I suspect this is how you got into your original pickle with character lengths).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LHYyBl.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LHYyBl.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;a successful search page showing all matching tags from the wildcards used above&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There you go, a whole 9 questions to look over, vs the 441 without those products excluded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Honourable mentions to &lt;code&gt;-[odnd]&lt;/code&gt; which might suggest using &lt;code&gt;-[*dnd*]&lt;/code&gt; as well as changing to use &lt;code&gt;[*finder*]&lt;/code&gt; to exclude &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lorefinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lorefinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;lorefinder&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ponyfinder&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;ponyfinder&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;ponyfinder&lt;/a&gt;, however as there are so few questions under those tags and  leading wildcards &lt;a href=&quot;https://sqlperformance.com/2017/02/sql-indexes/seek-leading-wildcard-sql-server&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;often upset indexed database tables&lt;/a&gt;, I've chose to exclude them from the above advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2022-07-19T01:51:24.857" LastActivityDate="2022-07-19T01:51:24.857" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2022-07-16T10:19:12.350" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12150" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12013" CreationDate="2022-07-17T18:53:39.163" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The current rules are that designer-intent questions are off-topic, thus the answer to this question is, currently, simply that you do not. However, my impression of the purpose of this discussion is to workshop what advice we may or may not give in the future, when designer-intent questions are allowed. The below is my suggestion, and furthermore is, I think, the only real answer possible that is consistent with the current consensus on the topic.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The community consensus, by a &lt;em&gt;large&lt;/em&gt; margin, was to allow designer-intent questions without &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; special rules or requirements—unless the ♦ moderators felt such requirements were &lt;em&gt;necessary&lt;/em&gt; for effective moderation of the site and that without such, things would be too much of a burden on them. Since the ♦ moderators have not indicated any such requirements that they feel are necessary to do their job, the community consensus is very clearly that &lt;em&gt;there aren’t any&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To wit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Follow the guidelines in “&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How do I ask a good question?&lt;/a&gt;”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ask about designer intent&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-intent&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-intent&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-intent&lt;/a&gt; tag&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have done that, &lt;em&gt;congratulations, you have asked a good designer-intent question.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-07-17T19:02:45.783" LastActivityDate="2022-07-17T19:02:45.783" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12151" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-07-18T12:25:03.930" Score="6" ViewCount="236" Body="&lt;p&gt;Back in 2018, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8197/62294&quot;&gt;V2Blast asked&lt;/a&gt; about the tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-resistance&lt;/a&gt;, and a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/8200/62294&quot;&gt;good reason for keeping them separate&lt;/a&gt; was provided. So I've no issues with keeping the tags separate. However, I think a small clean up may be in order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now, the tag description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; seems to cover &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; For questions primarily pertaining to creatures, player characters, and NPCs being less susceptible to one or more particular effects &lt;em&gt;or damage types&lt;/em&gt; in an RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question is just about resistance to one or more damage types, I think it should be covered by the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; tag without &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt;, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; is described:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; Damage resistance represents various mechanics that usually relate to an ability to shrug off or ignore damage of certain types and amounts in various RPG systems. It may be possible to bypass resistance by some means.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, I propose the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Remove resistance to damage types from the scope of the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; description.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add a line to the effect of &amp;quot;For questions about resistance to a damage type, use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; tag&amp;quot; to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; description.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; on the eleven or so questions I found that were about resistance to a damage type.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe I'm missing something here, and I would of course be willing to defer judgment on non-D&amp;amp;D 5e questions to others, but I think these steps will help to make the distinction between these tags more clear, and keep the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; from being muddled by questions that are just about damage type resistance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:07:25.387" Title="Can we clarify the distinction between [damage-resistance] and [resistance] and then clean up the [resistance] tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12152" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-07-24T16:52:12.880" Score="2" ViewCount="68" Body="&lt;p&gt;The SE system tracks a tally of how many questions you answered for a given tag, and at certain thresholds, awards badges (bronze, silver, gold) for that tag, that at least for gold status come with additional privileges, like being able to re-open a question single-handedly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But tags for questions can change over time: new tags can be added, old tags can be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does this affect the count, updating your status for the tag along with the question? Or does the system count the tags that were present at the time you answered the question, and does not update this later?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-07-24T17:41:30.323" Title="When is a tag on a question counted for badges?" Tags="|support|tags|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12153" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12152" CreationDate="2022-07-24T17:41:30.323" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Your tag score is recalculated each day.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Quoting from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/68395/674198&quot;&gt;this meta.se post&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What is a tag score?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A tag score is basically the combined total of all the upvotes (+1) and downvotes (-1) you've accumulated on &lt;strong&gt;answers&lt;/strong&gt; under that specific tag (votes on questions do not count). Multiple answers to the same question will all count toward the tag score and number of answers. Community wiki answers and deleted answers do not count towards your tag score. Tag scores are only recalculated once daily, at 03:00 UTC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So your score at the time of recalculation is a snapshot of the tag state of every question you’ve answered at that time. If tags change, it is reflected in your tag score at the time of the next recalc, and badge awards or revokes are executed whenever those scripts run.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-07-24T17:41:30.323" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12154" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12151" CreationDate="2022-07-25T18:41:10.330" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Having gone a week with no objections, I'll outline in detail the actions I intend to take, and give some time for voting and suggested improvements in comments.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Steps 1 and 2: Revise the description of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; to say:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions primarily pertaining to characters and other creatures being less susceptible to one or more particular effects in an RPG. (If your question is specifically about resistance to a damage type, use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; tag instead.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Step 3: Replace &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;resistance&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/damage-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;damage-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;damage-resistance&lt;/a&gt; on the following questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/193565/best-option-after-attuning-to-shield-of-missile-attraction&quot;&gt;Best option after attuning to Shield of Missile Attraction&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175823/do-goliaths-get-cold-resistance-from-the-mountain-born-trait&quot;&gt;Do Goliaths get cold resistance from the Mountain Born trait?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175117/discover-a-monsters-weakness&quot;&gt;Discover a Monsters Weakness?&lt;/a&gt; [duplicate]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/167187/how-can-i-gain-resistance-to-poison-and-or-necrotic-damage&quot;&gt;How can I gain resistance to poison and/or necrotic damage?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164148/what-ways-are-there-for-a-pc-to-negate-poison-damage-resistance-or-immunity-from&quot;&gt;What ways are there for a PC to negate poison damage resistance or immunity from an enemy?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161033/does-a-weapon-imbued-with-magical-tinkering-or-an-infusion-bypass-resistance-fro&quot;&gt;Does a weapon imbued with Magical Tinkering or an Infusion bypass resistance from non magic weapons?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140026/can-a-monk-with-empty-body-break-the-invisibility-while-keeping-the-resistances&quot;&gt;Can a monk with Empty Body break the invisibility while keeping the resistances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121131/do-magic-weapons-bypass-monsters-resistances&quot;&gt;Do magic weapons bypass monsters&amp;#39; resistances?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109457/do-weapons-enchanted-with-elemental-damage-count-their-normal-damage-as-magical&quot;&gt;Do weapons enchanted with elemental damage count their normal damage as magical?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/84012/62294&quot;&gt;Do magic weapons that require attunement count as magic (for Resistances) even if you are not attuned?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all the D&amp;amp;D 5e questions that would have tags revised; I'd ask that someone else with sufficient system expertise review the other systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-29T00:07:25.387" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T00:07:25.387" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12155" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12148" CreationDate="2022-07-26T12:58:46.560" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Create a new filter (not currently working)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is an option to create a filter from a search, as shown below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/br3JN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/br3JN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of a search for many tags, and the custom filters card shown with a red freehand circle. Instruction below.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can be accessed on a keyboard by tabbing through the tags until you reach a button labeled/named 'Filter'. Then you can click or tab to the textbox containing the searched for tags, and delete any tags not relevant to the filter (in my case, I deleted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell-resistance&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell-resistance&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;spell-resistance&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JeuBN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JeuBN.png&quot; alt=&quot;Modal Dialog allowing you to name the filter. The keyboard will be focused in the 'Filter Title' input.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately you cannot make an exclusively negative filter:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag queries cannot be exclusively negative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2022-07-26T12:58:46.560" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12156" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2022-07-27T13:24:08.337" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Cast 10th level spells &lt;em&gt;ad nauseum&lt;/em&gt;: SimuLimburger cheese&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/200237/22566&quot;&gt;has outlined an exploit upgrade that goes above and beyond the fermented dairy product that is a wish/simulacrum chain&lt;/a&gt;.  One can now turn it up to level 10, if one is an Arcana Domain Cleric, and cast level 10 spells all day long even though there are no level 10 spells in the game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2022-07-27T13:24:08.337" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12157" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-07-28T16:12:57.323" Score="21" ViewCount="744" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions asking for the designer reasoning behind a given rule or other game elements have a long history of needing moderation. (If you're interested in past discussions on the subject, you can get a good starting point &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11951/52137&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7914/52137&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.) In short, they tended to attract a lot of speculative answers that also got upvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Banning such questions wasn’t ideal either (to cut a long story very short), hence the above discussion culminating in this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Are questions which ask about the “why” of a game rule on-topic?&lt;/strong&gt; In other words, should such questions be allowed on RPG.SE?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7064/23970&quot;&gt;Return to FAQ Index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="48759" LastEditDate="2023-02-01T02:39:50.487" LastActivityDate="2023-02-01T02:39:50.487" Title="Are questions about rule intent on-topic? [2022]" Tags="|discussion|faq|on-topic|designer-reasons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12158" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12157" CreationDate="2022-07-28T16:12:57.323" Score="23" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Designer Reasons questions are on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Four years on from the initial ban, we’re somewhat tentatively opening the gates again. That means asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/designer-reasons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;designer-reasons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;designer-reasons&lt;/a&gt; questions is allowed. The community has changed, and the general expectation of support &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be sufficient to cover this question type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With some remarks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We’re doing this as something of a trial. Which is to say that we’ll be keeping an eye on it, and if it goes sour, we’ll revisit the issue. (No, we're not giving it a firm trial period.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If a question is attracting speculative answers (and normal curation isn’t handling it), it may need to be closed or otherwise moderated. If a question seems likely to draw speculation, consider whether it can be edited to discourage speculation, and/or leave a comment reminding answerers and voters of our expectations.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We want to encourage authors to explain &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; they're asking for designer reasons.&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is the same desire as always. We want to know why a question is being asked so we can help with the actual problem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In short, the guidance here still applies: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12013/52137&quot;&gt;How can I ask a good designer intent question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is making a question better; it is not a hard requirement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It’s ok for a question to go unanswered for long periods if it is answerable but no one has that answer (yet).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Please leave old designer-reasons questions be until/unless they come up naturally. If there is a question that needs an updated answer (and is fine aside from the old policy), or if there is some other compelling reason to reopen it, do so. But we decidedly want to avoid bogging down the reopen queue (and the home page for that matter) with these old questions.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We’ve had some consternation about questions that ask “why is X?” being interpreted as asking for designer reasons. However, that “why” can refer to many different kinds of questions (some requiring designer statements, some not). We will note that questions should still be clear about what they are asking for (e.g. what their “why” means) – and if they are insufficiently clear, they may need to be closed as unclear.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-07-28T17:32:29.917" LastActivityDate="2022-07-28T17:32:29.917" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12160" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12013" CreationDate="2022-07-29T21:26:00.697" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Help us understand what you want.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking, &amp;quot;why did this human being that none of you have ever met build this particular piece of a very complicated structure in a particular way,&amp;quot; is an &lt;strong&gt;incredibly&lt;/strong&gt; hard question to answer. You can help us out by making it clear what you're looking for in an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an answer along the lines of, &amp;quot;If you remove restriction X, then a player could just do Y and it would be ridiculously overpowered,&amp;quot; then &lt;em&gt;tell us that&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an answer along the lines of, &amp;quot;Well, 3 editions back when rule Z was added it was associated with the flavor of the Froob class, as based on the real-life froobers of frooblandia (see Wikipedia link). The Froob class has changed across editions to not really have much to do with the froobers any more, but rule Z hasn't changed at all since then, so it's really just a sacred cow,&amp;quot; then &lt;em&gt;tell us that&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want an answer along the lines of, &amp;quot;In this interview (link) Bob Gamewriter, who wrote the rules for that part of the system, said, 'I  was worried the Froob class would be too powerful, so I put in rules P &amp;amp; Q to try to prevent that. Also, someone in my home game who always plays a Froob irritates me, so I nerfed it a bit more to get back at him.' Meanwhile, over in this Twitter post (link), Sandy Alsowritesgames said that they were under a lot of time pressure and Bob's work didn't get edited as closely as it probably should have been,&amp;quot; then &lt;em&gt;tell us that&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you just ask, &amp;quot;Why must/can't I do A, as specified in the rules on page 123,&amp;quot; and leave it at that then we can't really tell what kind of answer you're looking for. That leads to you getting lots of answers that &lt;strong&gt;aren't&lt;/strong&gt; what you're looking for, which makes you &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; the answerers unhappy. You can improve your question by telling us whether you're looking for a mechanical perspective, a historical perspective, actual quotes from the designers, or something else.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-07-29T22:28:18.103" LastActivityDate="2022-07-29T22:28:18.103" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12161" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12215" CreationDate="2022-08-04T20:34:42.967" Score="5" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;Observe in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/history&quot;&gt;review history&lt;/a&gt; (10k+ only, will get pushed down as more reviews occur) that a user reviewed the same question for reopening less than an hour apart (screenshot for posterity):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JzuS7.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JzuS7.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/200474/timeline&quot;&gt;the question's timeline&lt;/a&gt;, that user's first review completed the review task at 18:58, and the user performed a second reopen review of the question at 19:56. I am not seeing anything else in the question's history that would have pushed the question back into the review queue for that user.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that the reopen vote count on the question went from 1 to 2 after the first review was completed with &amp;quot;Leave Closed x 3&amp;quot;, but I did not think that would have put the post back into the queue, at least, not for the same reviewers (I did not receive the question for review again).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is going on here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2022-09-12T11:07:16.363" LastActivityDate="2022-09-12T11:07:16.363" Title="How did the same user review this question for reopening twice?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|review|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12162" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12161" CreationDate="2022-08-04T21:08:12.217" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Repeatedly Leaving Closed is normal behaviour&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's two review items, because there was a new reopen vote after the first reopen review was completed. And, unless something was changed since the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369013&quot;&gt;new reopen queue&lt;/a&gt; came in that I've missed, being able to act on each of them in normal behaviour (there are some restrictions on SO, but I don't think even those would apply here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether the review item will actually show up for you can be a bit flimsy in my experience. In particular if you've already looked at it (you should still be able to go to it and act if you follow the direct link).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2022-08-04T21:08:12.217" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12163" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12157" CreationDate="2022-08-06T10:33:23.993" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, but...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;while in general, a question for Designer Reasons is allowable (currently), they have a reputation that warrants heightened attention to them. So before asking a Designer Intent question, ask yourself: Does your question fits one of these formats?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Why did the designers make this terrible rule?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Is this rule's outcome intended by the game's designers?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Is this the RAI for this rule?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7968/62294&quot;&gt;myxzplk&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If yes, read on, you might want to refine your question!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Often, Designer Reasons is barking up the wrong tree&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If your question fits the &lt;strong&gt;Type 1 question&lt;/strong&gt; in both tone and style: You are currently not asking for designer reasons and you don't actually seem to want designer reasons, you want to have validation of your dislike of a specific rule. That is opinion based and because of that, it is most likely &lt;strong&gt;off topic&lt;/strong&gt;, mainly for tonal reasons. To get it on topic, ask instead in a &lt;strong&gt;factual manner&lt;/strong&gt; if the designers have stated their goals or explained them!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others fall into a danger that &lt;strong&gt;Type 2 questions&lt;/strong&gt; pose: There are actually 2 different variants of the question that can be hidden in this style of asking:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;2A questions are actually wanting to know if the designer explained something specific. Those are good and &lt;strong&gt;on topic&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, 2B questions are different: Instead of asking if the rule interpretation is correct, they ask for the designer statements about a thing. Those latter questions are most often not about Designer Reasons at the core. Those &lt;strong&gt;could&lt;/strong&gt; be reframed to make them better. If you actually want to ask such a 2B question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Instead focus on: What problem are you trying to solve at the table?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a rule looks weird or feels out of whack, a lot of different questions arise, one of which is &amp;quot;what were they thinking?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What they were thinking&amp;quot; doesn't matter in our RPG.SE context.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=42972950#42972950&quot;&gt;I will quote @BESW for a good idea&lt;/a&gt; of why &amp;quot;we are here&amp;quot; on this stack:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We aren't here on the Stack to read the rulebooks to people. We're&#xA;here to help people learn how to synthesize the mechanics, the&#xA;non-mechanical text, the social context, our personal experience, the&#xA;learning of the broader community, to apply all that to a particular&#xA;real-life problem someone's having and find a solution for it&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to get the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; pointed at the problem to solve &lt;em&gt;so that play at the table isn't impeded by a given rule or decision&lt;/em&gt;, rather than being pointed at discomfort with a given design decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7918/62294&quot;&gt;KorvinStarmast&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Good Designer Reasons Answers use stated design goals&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good designer reason answer should use something that is publicly stated, where design goals of the game are discussed, or where changes to the game are reasoned. Interviews, errata, or even design documents are needed to back up a good answer. For example, a decent designer reason question might be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why were some items in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/maid&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;maid&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;maid&lt;/a&gt; renamed or totally rewritten from the Japanese version?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this, there is an &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.maidrpg.com/resources/MaidRPG_Nun_Approved.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;entire document&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; in existence, which not only gives the direct translation from the Japanese version for all items, it also explains each and every changed thing why it was done. In most cases, it was the missing cultural context in western countries or cultural inappropriateness of certain symbolism. And of course:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, the author [Ryo Kamiya] basically wrote this game as a huge dose of ironic humor at this whole Maid phenomenon.&#xA;As such, he used a lot of references, gags and dialogue text that can be best described as “sexy funny”.&#xA;Problem is, when we did a straight-up translation into English, some parts came out as “creepy sexy”.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ewen Cluney: Maid RPG&#xA;The Nun-Approved File, p.1&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-11T15:52:50.193" LastActivityDate="2022-08-11T15:52:50.193" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12164" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-10T17:39:24.060" Score="4" ViewCount="76" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just noticed that the featured question doesn't have the RPG.SE meta symbol, what's up with that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OuirZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OuirZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To append to this, the HNQ are also all jacked up:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/81Bfk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/81Bfk.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="47188" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-08-10T20:11:09.640" LastActivityDate="2022-08-10T20:12:49.723" Title="Meta Image not on meta question?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|user-interface|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12165" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12164" CreationDate="2022-08-10T20:12:49.723" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has been resolved, SE Dev Felippe Rangel &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/381143/674198&quot;&gt;writes on meta.se&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry about that! We're releasing new site themes (have you checked out &lt;a href=&quot;https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://datascience.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;https://datascience.stackexchange.com/&lt;/a&gt; lately?) and one of our themes had an issue while exporting our icons, they were exactly 1px wider than they should be for light themes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We've now pushed properly sized icons!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Appreciate the fast reporting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-08-10T20:12:49.723" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12166" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-17T17:58:28.027" Score="7" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I noticed something annoying when writing a question with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt; tag: the suggested tags box prioritizes prevalence over relevance. If I type &amp;quot;edition&amp;quot; into the tag box, here are my suggestions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UuUZZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/UuUZZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The desired tag, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt;, does not get suggested until I've typed &amp;quot;edition-c&amp;quot;, but &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conversion&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;conversion&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;conversion&lt;/a&gt; is still suggested over &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/edition-comparison&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;edition-comparison&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;edition-comparison&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Uatgn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Uatgn.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I should not have to get all the way to &amp;quot;edition-c&amp;quot; before the only extant tag that starts with &amp;quot;edi&amp;quot; is suggested (only one other tag that starts with &amp;quot;ed&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-17T18:22:59.867" LastActivityDate="2022-08-17T18:22:59.867" Title="Prioritize relevance over prevalence when suggesting tags" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12167" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-19T14:38:01.273" Score="19" ViewCount="363" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yesterday, Wizards of the Coast announced the playtest material for its next iteration of D&amp;amp;D, codenamed &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/one-dnd&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;One D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt;. Later that day, they released the first Unearthed Arcana document with part of the new ruleset: &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/character-origins/CSWCVV0M4B6vX6E1/UA2022-CharacterOrigins.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&amp;amp;icid_medium=crosspromo&amp;amp;icid_campaign=playtest1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Character Origins&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where it gets complicated is that while this is playtest material for a new iteration, it is backward-compatible with all 5e products, as confirmed on yesterday's &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.twitch.tv/magic&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;stream&lt;/a&gt;. The existing tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; is of course relevant, but should there be a new tag (e.g. &lt;code&gt;one-dnd&lt;/code&gt;) to specify that a question pertains to the new playtest ruleset?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35785" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-19T17:41:23.913" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T12:56:52.533" Title="Should there be a separate tag for One D&amp;D?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12168" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12167" CreationDate="2022-08-19T14:45:39.973" Score="37" Body="&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/61816795#61816795&quot;&gt;suggested in chat&lt;/a&gt; that we use &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt;, similar to the tags we used for the 5e and PF 2e playtests, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-playtest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions strictly about the playtest material would not need &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;, but questions about the interaction between playtest material and 5e material should get both tags. In the case that we see two system tags creating something of a tag burden, e.g. the question really needs four non-system tags, we can reevaluate those particular questions to see what works best in each case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-19T15:16:30.533" LastActivityDate="2022-08-19T15:16:30.533" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12169" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12167" CreationDate="2022-08-19T21:55:10.000" Score="24" Body="&lt;p&gt;Writing a separate answer to keep voting for this proposal separate from the other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Keep &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; separate from Unearthed Arcana content written for 5e&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This one seems pretty straightforward, but I want to leave it here for confirmation via vote anyway. It seems quite plain that &lt;em&gt;the One D&amp;amp;D playtest content is of a different substance than Unearthed Arcana content for 5th Edition&lt;/em&gt;. While the new playtest material is being referred to as Unearthed Arcana, it seems like a good idea to keep this next generation content distinct.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would mean &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; using &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; for One D&amp;amp;D content, unless, of course, the question was about the interaction between One D&amp;amp;D content and 5e Unearthed Arcana.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-08-19T21:55:10.000" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12170" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12167" CreationDate="2022-08-20T14:01:59.197" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-dnd-playtest-container&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; is not necessarily &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a few old &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-next-playtest-container&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; questions, which became &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; eventually. The systems used in both were quite different at times. one-dnd[-playtest] is the next evolution of it on the way to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-6e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-6e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-6e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-6e&lt;/a&gt; or whatever they will assign as the next edition's name. &lt;strong&gt;So we should give it (or its playtest) its own tag.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, I bet that in the future often the One-D&amp;amp;D[-playtest] questions should &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; have either &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/unearthed-arcana&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;unearthed-arcana&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;unearthed-arcana-container&quot;&gt;unearthed-arcana&lt;/a&gt; tag, as they are an ecosystem on their own, even if in flux and development. Once we have a sufficient... &lt;em&gt;branch&lt;/em&gt; from the previous edition, we also shouldn't tag it that way!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-08-31T12:56:52.533" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T12:56:52.533" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12171" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2022-08-21T13:30:01.760" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="-1" LastEditorUserId="-1" LastEditDate="2022-08-21T13:30:01.760" LastActivityDate="2022-08-21T13:30:01.760" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12172" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2022-08-21T13:30:01.760" Score="0" Body="For questions about RPG.SE's custom site design" OwnerUserId="22219" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2022-08-29T13:55:11.433" LastActivityDate="2022-08-29T13:55:11.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12173" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-22T08:54:52.657" Score="11" ViewCount="235" Body="&lt;p&gt;The new playtest material introduced the new terminology &amp;quot;D20 test&amp;quot;, which encompasses attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/200899/63061&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; asks for all rolls that do not fall under the &amp;quot;D20 test&amp;quot; umbrella: a new tag called &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-test&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-test&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;d20-test&lt;/a&gt; has been created.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we really need this new tag? Or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; is already sufficient?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:45:57.817" Title="Do we need a new tag for the &quot;D20-test&quot; terminology?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12174" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12173" CreationDate="2022-08-22T09:03:44.920" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Tag limitation, and effects/rules that affect all Tests&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As of now, the only effect/rule that affects all D20 Tests is the new rule on Inspiration. The fact such a rule exists does imply other rules or effects could be released that target D20 Tests as a whole. As a matter of fact, such effects already exist in 5e, without using this umbrella term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tagging questions regarding such effects with the current tags &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/attack-roll&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;attack-roll&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;attack-roll&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/saving-throw&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;saving-throw&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/skills&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;skills&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;skills&lt;/a&gt; (thanks to Thomas Markov for pointing that last one out, since there's no tag for ability checks specifically as of now) would require 3 tags. Knowing that there's only 5 slots per question, that is a sizeable amount that, in my opinion, would be a good reason to use a single tag for questions that target Tests, and not one of those specific kinds of rolls.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because there's only one rule that affects all Tests, this tag might have little use in the short term, but it would definitely benefit more questions later on, when more rules are released regarding those Tests.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastEditorUserId="77044" LastEditDate="2022-08-22T09:58:48.570" LastActivityDate="2022-08-22T09:58:48.570" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12175" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="11652" CreationDate="2022-08-22T13:33:28.320" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It should be closed as world-building&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different campaign worlds can/will have different different economic models.  This means that how 1gp relates to the cost/value of off-book items or are used in the larger economy comes down to world building.  There is not one single answer, other than the trivial &amp;quot;for stuff with assigned prices, that defines the value of 1gp; for other stuff it is up to the DM&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16003" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-22T13:35:57.810" LastActivityDate="2022-08-22T13:35:57.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12176" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12173" CreationDate="2022-08-22T16:45:02.893" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Wait and See&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's currently an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/inspiration&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;inspiration&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;inspiration-container&quot;&gt;inspiration&lt;/a&gt;. That combined with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-dnd-playtest-container&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; will currently encompass this, and the inspiration tag description already specifies the three areas it applies. As @Matthieu points out, there's really not much need for it now. If more rules are added using this mechanic, then we could add the tag - but given there wasn't really a need for a group term prior (and Inspiration already applied to all three of these things), it really seems possible that there will be no new rules using that terminology.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-30T04:45:57.817" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:45:57.817" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12178" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-24T15:14:56.607" Score="14" ViewCount="284" Body="&lt;p&gt;The next generation of D&amp;amp;D is finally peaking above the horizon with the announcement of &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1310-faq-one-d-d-rules-d-d-digital-and-physical-digital&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;One D&amp;amp;D&lt;/a&gt;, including the release of the first of many &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/one-dnd&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;playtest resources&lt;/a&gt;. Playtest content, especially the kind that will eventually replace the core rules, presents some unique challenges for our site. Changes to core rules are rare, happening in the form of (typically) minor errata. Wizards of the Coast is further complicating things for our site by releasing the rules in piecemeal fashion - the first playtest resource is only part of what is required to make a first level character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this stack has been around longer than D&amp;amp;D 5e, and I know that some of you who went through the era of the last D&amp;amp;D playtest are still around. So I am reaching out for guidance to the stack veterans who remember the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest. &lt;em&gt;What did we learn?&lt;/em&gt; What wisdom and guidance can you provide from your experience on the site during that time?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I don't mean to limit this question only to users who have been around for 8+ years. I am sure many of you whose introduction to Stack Exchange was more recent than D&amp;amp;D Next have valuable insight, so I'd like to leave this open for more general experience and guidance too, not just &amp;quot;lessons from the past&amp;quot;, as it were.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I know this is somewhat broad, but it's meta, so I'm loose with the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:46:35.707" Title="What did we learn during the D&amp;D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&amp;D playtest?" Tags="|discussion|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12179" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12178" CreationDate="2022-08-24T16:10:23.830" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't Rush to answer questions!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions in the next playtest came up with incomplete presentation and when rules on a topic were either not given complete or not linked. Some answerers thus relied on totally wrong rules. As a result, some questions did actually undergo multiple revisions that actually changed the asked question - and turned answer attempts into baseless speculations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead of rushing to get in the first answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Verify that what is written is actually what is asked&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Link the relevant resources to the question&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-30T04:46:35.707" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:46:35.707" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12180" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12178" CreationDate="2022-08-24T17:13:23.437" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Be mindful to enforce our normal quality standards on question seeding&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the D&amp;amp;D Next Playtest started, we saw brand new territory open up to ask questions nobody had asked yet. And there was a points incentive to ask them! This lead to a gold rush of sorts, which was fine, but the collapse in quality that happened was not fine: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4754/why-are-our-5e-questions-terrible&quot;&gt;Why Are Our 5e Questions Terrible?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Normally we wouldn't accept these questions. If you ask how something works without expressing any particular problem and it seems pretty plain and clear to us, we'll close your question as needing details/clarity, and ask you to explain what research you've done and/or what trouble you're actually having here. But when it came to playtest material we seemingly waived this quality bar completely for a long time, allowing no end of questions that had &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;no real, actual problem anyone faced&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially there's what I'd characterise as &lt;strong&gt;the Points Siren&lt;/strong&gt; happening: we get so excited to ask and answer new questions because we can get Points for it, and in the process the Points Siren has us waive our better judgement and lower all our usual quality standards until the site's languishing in low-quality material. (Something something metaphor about being dashed against the rocks something something.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The solution is to &lt;strong&gt;resist the Points Siren and apply our quality standards as normal in spite of it.&lt;/strong&gt; That means:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Constrain your questions about the new material to actual problems you're actually having: things you don't understand, things you're having trouble with in play. Don't ask “read this material back to me” style questions no matter how tempted you are.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;As readers, be judicious about the questions you see about the new edition. You &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; answer this new question and maybe get some points or updoot people, but does this question actually pass our usual quality bars? Is there a real problem they're actually having here? If this question was asked about an older edition (pretend it makes sense in context), would we accept it?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's other issues to be mindful of too. For example, a recurring theme was &lt;em&gt;impossible&lt;/em&gt; questions, like “How does the Sorcerer work?” when the Sorcerer did not exist yet in the material being asked about. These were essentially a user's efforts to get their foot in the door &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; early because it'd be inevitably asked later in some form. Thankfully the Points Siren didn't cause us trouble here and we correctly determined each time that these questions needed to be closed and left for when they could actually be answered. It'll be a thing, but it'll be a thing we'll resolve as it comes up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-08-24T22:59:05.593" LastActivityDate="2022-08-24T22:59:05.593" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12181" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12182" CreationDate="2022-08-25T08:14:37.757" Score="4" ViewCount="209" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200959/can-monsters-perform-critical-hits&quot;&gt;I asked a bad question.&lt;/a&gt; It happens. I'm sorry, I learned my lesson. As soon as I understood it was bad (a few downvotes and two answers within two minutes of each other telling me I misread), so of course I'm trying to do something about it. I check the question, and there is no way to fix it because it is inherently integrating the bad reading.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that this question is legit because several people I know (including myself) all made the amalgam between PHB and the core three books in the notice. This is therefore why I disagree with the &amp;quot;didn't do research&amp;quot; sentiment shown on the question page. But now that my nose is on that paragraph, I can't unsee it and I understand why people might think it's a bad question. But in my eyes, it's a good faith amalgam, which happens a lot.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I believe that we're better with the question than without because it's common to misread that paragraph as explained above or as seen numerous times on Reddit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Therefore I'm trying to delete it, but I can't (because of reasons outside of my reach: one answer, I can delete, two answers I can't). I'm trying to make a community wiki of it, but I can't. I tried to flag it to get it deleted by a mod then community-wikied, but both flags were dismissed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what am I supposed to do about it? Suck it up, take any downvote that comes, though I learned my lesson? How is that fair?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm aware of the Streisand effect that I will get more downvotes by posting this question, but at this point, I just want to know how this should be handled in this community compared to Stack Overflow where such a question would have been deleted on the first flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28410" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-25T14:57:16.377" LastActivityDate="2022-08-26T07:00:28.400" Title="I asked a bad question and there's nothing I can do to fix the question. What to do?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12182" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12181" CreationDate="2022-08-25T08:55:25.397" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't worry about it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Getting downvotes sucks, so I can sympathise with you concern but ultimately this isn't something you should stress over.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;You have actually gained rep from that question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At time of writing your question is at +2/-8 meaning while 8 users have downvoted, two have upvoted. As upvotes give +10 rep and downvotes -2 rep you have actually &lt;em&gt;gained&lt;/em&gt; 4 reputation, despite the downvotes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Why we won't delete the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once you post a question you are asking others to volunteer their time and energy to solve a problem for you. They are compensated for that in the form of reputation from their answer and the satisfaction of helping someone. If you delete your question it also removes their answers, wasting the time they spent on them and removing any reputation they might gain for their efforts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Deletion is worse for you than downvotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a system to automatically block repeat low-quality question. The exact formula for this isn't published to prevent users from gaming the system but we know that it punishes deleted questions far more than downvoted ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have enough reputation and a solid track record of good questions so this won't really be a concern for you. But it is a reflection of how we should regard the two. A downvoted but open question is far more valuable and desirable to the site than a deleted one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Edit to improve the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best way to avoid future downvotes (and maybe reverse previous ones) is to edit your question to improve it. Explain why you had the understanding you did. To put it another way; &lt;em&gt;show your work&lt;/em&gt;. Downvoters have stated it is due to lack of research so try to show what research you did do and how that led to you asking the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally I don't see the issue with the question as presented as it is based on an reasonable misunderstanding, but engaging with the comments to improve rather than delete is your best course of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2022-08-25T08:55:25.397" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12183" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-25T11:09:17.953" Score="7" ViewCount="373" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am asking because I don't understand what has happened to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/200970/40101&quot;&gt;When using the One D&amp;amp;D Playtest are you supposed to be using the 5e rules too?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question seems perfectly ok to me and I don't understand the downvotes or the closure reasoning.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks to me that we are just being precious about one DND questions ruining the site because they can't be properly answered yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case a comment said it was because the question was lazy and answerable within the first paragraph of the material, which explains downvotes but not closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What it doesn't explain is why an answer saying 'this is in the first paragraph' got downvoted into oblivion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All One D&amp;amp;D questions I have seen so far (and I don't follow the tag so haven't checked them all) are just full of downvotes that don't seem to follow our usual standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can anyone clarify what is going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-25T14:56:57.753" LastActivityDate="2022-08-29T04:48:21.573" Title="How are we judging One D&amp;D questions and answers?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|down-votes|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12184" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12183" CreationDate="2022-08-25T11:30:43.910" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;What material it is about for the question is not specified&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question does not point to the document of the playtest that is asked about. If tomorrow the playtest gets a new document, is that included?! under the current wording, that is &lt;strong&gt;very&lt;/strong&gt; ambiguous.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It is a &lt;em&gt;read the book to me&lt;/em&gt; question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question can be answered by just &lt;strong&gt;reading&lt;/strong&gt; the document that forms the basis for it. In contrast to questions that stem from bad formating in a book or the information being on the wrong page, it is in the &lt;strong&gt;very first paragraph&lt;/strong&gt;. Read the book to me questions are quite frowned upon on the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There is no actual problem proposed!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A casual reader of the document should have found the paragraph. It is not in an arcane other document or misaligned from bad formatting or just not reference, it's &lt;strong&gt;right there&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;It shows we have not learned anything from the DND-Next Playtest&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@SeriousBri &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12180/48759&quot;&gt;This meta about One-DnD question&lt;/a&gt; might explain some of it. The community doesn't want to encourage multiple questions about the new playtest that will likely be outdated in the next playtest release. This particularly one is low effort as is can be answered from the first paragraph of the playtest material. –&#xA;linksassin ♦ &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200970/when-using-the-one-dd-playtest-are-you-supposed-to-be-using-the-5e-rules-too#comment548354_200970&quot;&gt;2 hours ago&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12178/what-did-we-learn-during-the-dd-next-playtest-that-should-inform-how-we-approac&quot;&gt;Please read the question that a moderator commented you with.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-25T14:53:32.773" LastActivityDate="2022-08-25T14:53:32.773" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12185" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12183" CreationDate="2022-08-25T13:12:15.773" Score="16" Body="&lt;h3&gt;I downvoted some of these because they expect a canonical answer to a question that is &lt;em&gt;by design&lt;/em&gt; not supposed to have one.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think some of these questions are missing the point of a playtest.  This is playtest material that is changing the core rules. The playtest rules and the old rules aren’t supposed to fit together neatly. You’re supposed to take the rules we already have, and the new playtest rules, and mash them together as best you can, then provide feedback about what worked and what didn’t. There isn't supposed to be a canonical answer to how these rules interact. You’re supposed to figure out what you think the answer is supposed to be, then report back to Wizards of the Coast with what you found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So when a question asks,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The playtest rules contradict the core rules, what do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Pick a ruling, playtest it, write down how it worked out, report those findings to Wizards, and let them know you were initially confused by the contradiction and that it needs to be addressed in future playtest materials and the final product.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I downvoted some of these because they are trivial and lack research.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recently asked, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12178/what-did-we-learn-during-the-dd-next-playtest-that-should-inform-how-we-approac&quot;&gt;What did we learn during the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&amp;amp;D playtest?&lt;/a&gt;. In her answer, doppelgreener writes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two of the questions we've had so far were obviously this sort of question (the two that were self answered), and I could see on some of the others where someone would downvote for this reason.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for answers, I actually upvoted most (but not all) of them. The voting pattern on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-dnd-playtest-container&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; answers seems much less unusual to me than what we saw on the questions, so I don't feel there is much there that needs explaining.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-26T15:35:21.677" LastActivityDate="2022-08-26T15:35:21.677" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12186" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12181" CreationDate="2022-08-25T15:18:54.010" Score="4" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what am I supposed to do about it? Suck it up, take any downvote that comes, though I learned my lesson? How is that fair?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I fail to see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;unfairness&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;why you are required to do anything here&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You got 6 downvotes. A drop in the bucket. And you got two upvotes which more than compensates for the lost reputation. Over time you might get more votes in either direction but probably a lot less as time progresses.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might even turn out that you accumulate a lot of upvotes as time goes on. Who knows - perhaps in time, it turns out the question was really useful. Initial reception can often be misleading or not quite accurate. There are many questions that started out with negative score only to get quite a high score in later years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if that does not happen, there is hardly anything to lose. &lt;em&gt;Maybe&lt;/em&gt; some reputation but it matters very little - each upvote you get &amp;quot;negates&amp;quot; the reputation lost from 5 downvotes. Even if you end up with 20 downvotes on the question, 4 upvotes on any of your posts will offset that. And judging from your posts, getting upvotes is not an issue.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most of all, it is important to remember that &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; are not being punished with downvotes. Voting has always been about content rating. A post, as presented, is judged by the community to be useful or not useful. It is not &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; who is being rated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just taking your ball and going home seems far more &amp;quot;unfair&amp;quot; than having a single question with a negative score.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="22258" LastEditDate="2022-08-26T07:00:28.400" LastActivityDate="2022-08-26T07:00:28.400" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12187" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12183" CreationDate="2022-08-25T22:27:45.057" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question is worthy of its downvotes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others already explained this pretty well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;The answer is probably not&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it is good practice that a vote on an answer depends on whether the person who wrote it is the same as the question's author or not. Here if it wasn't an auto-answer it wouldn't have been downvoted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answers should be downvoted when they are bad answers, not when they are good answers to bad questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastActivityDate="2022-08-25T22:27:45.057" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12188" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12183" CreationDate="2022-08-29T00:43:32.157" Score="-7" Body="&lt;h1&gt;There are questions that need to be answered&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's remember the point of the site;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To build a Q&amp;amp;A index&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;To answer questions that people ask&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first part of the playtest has been released. There has been a lot of questions and debating arising from the rules. Questions I asked were made to answer real questions that real people are asking and debating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;There's no canonical answer because it's just a playtest&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't matter for two massive reasons. Firstly, when the rule is released it will be canonical. We need to understand what the rule means now, during the playtest, instead of worry about it at launch. The second reason is because when designers receive feedback they need to understand how players understood the wording of the rule, and how they played with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the whole point of a playtest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;The answer is obvious&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are real questions being debated by real people. High rep, highly experienced users are asking these questions. People in online communities like 4chan or reddit are debating them - there are multiple opinions and viewpoints. It's really jarring when someone says &amp;quot;ugh it's so obvious&amp;quot; then posts something incorrect or was confused about the answer &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; they read the posted answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;We don't know what the rules will look like on release&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's fine, these are questions for the playtest, not the final release.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;There's only one possible answer&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there? At least 3 have been proposed;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One D&amp;amp;D rules modify 5e rules wherever stated, but are otherwise the same.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One D&amp;amp;D rules are completely standalone&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The playtest is incomplete and we fundamentally can't be answer questions about it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It only seems obvious in hindsight because you've read the answer and the reasoning behind it. This is something that people are confused about and are debating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;The question is too simple&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are fine with &amp;quot;Read Me The Book&amp;quot; kinds of questions elsewhere in the site, why are we only applying this to One D&amp;amp;D? There will be a lot of confusion around One D&amp;amp;D because it's new, it's exciting, it's unstable, it's less accessible than 5e. There will be more &amp;quot;simple&amp;quot; questions just because of that. Go back and look at any questions from a system a week old, they will be simple because people miss things and people misread and people get confused easily.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;You're just rep farming&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have 1k rep, I'm happy to dump it as soon as I can. A mod can reset my rep. Downvoting everything I post because you don't want me to get rep is super lame. There are way easier ways to rep farm if that's what I cared about. I have tried to set my answers to community wiki to stop rep but this is an exploit apparently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will pledge now to dump my rep into bounties as soon as I can, ok? A mod can hold me accountable to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;I don't want to answer the question&amp;quot;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't agree with the concept of 'rep denial'. Sometimes you might feel as if you are competing with other people, but remember stacks are collaborative, not adversarial. If you leave a question you feel is too boring, too easy, not something interesting, or you don't have energy to answer, that's fine. Let someone else come and answer it. You can go answer a different question and get rep. Your 100k rep is no less impressive because someone else has 100k too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We shouldn't moderate based on this doctrine of trying to prevent people earning rep. The focus should be building the archive and answering questions, rep was supposed to be a minigame, a side feature to show which users are active. It was not meant to be the primary goal of the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Back to basics&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of the site is the Q&amp;amp;A index and to answer questions. Meta-site motivations like worrying about an answer becoming outdated within the next 2 years or the difficulty of the question or the rep of the asker are in direct contradiction to what our priorities should be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user77842" LastEditorDisplayName="user77842" LastEditDate="2022-08-29T04:48:21.573" LastActivityDate="2022-08-29T04:48:21.573" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12189" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12190" CreationDate="2022-08-29T10:22:35.210" Score="3" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;A question today created the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arianhrod2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arianhrod2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;arianhrod2e-container&quot;&gt;arianhrod2e&lt;/a&gt; tag, which is for Arianhrod 2nd edition. It's missing our conventional dash before the “-2e”, but now that this tag exists I can't create the corrected tag name myself:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tli7i.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;so that's why I'm here&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/tli7i.png&quot; alt=&quot;“The tag [arianhrod-2e] is too similar to [arianhrod2e]. If you think this new tag should be allowed, discuss it on meta.”&quot; title=&quot;so that's why I'm here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would the diamond mods please rename this tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-08-29T10:27:41.727" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:35:32.670" Title="Please rename [arianhrod2e] to [arianhrod-2e]" Tags="|support|status-completed|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12190" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12189" CreationDate="2022-08-29T10:33:08.823" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Done. The tag is now named &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arianrhod-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arianrhod-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;arianrhod-2e-container&quot;&gt;arianrhod-2e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now if someone who's knowledgeable about the game would give it an excerpt (and ideally description) so it doesn't get roomba'd, that'd be lovely (I'm having a hard time finding info about the 2nd ed that isn't in Japanese).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-08-30T04:35:32.670" LastActivityDate="2022-08-30T04:35:32.670" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12191" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12167" CreationDate="2022-08-31T02:29:34.043" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it would be good to have a one-dnd tag as well as a one-dnd-playtest tag the same way we have a dnd-next-playtest and a dnd-5e tag, or a pf-2e-playtest and pf-2e tag. People are already getting confused between the two so being able to separate the two out would help stop the confusion. It's no replacement for editing questions to change &amp;quot;in one D&amp;amp;D blah blah&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;in the Character Origins UA blah blah&amp;quot;, but it helps.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerDisplayName="user77842" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T02:29:34.043" CommentCount="12" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12192" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-31T05:05:24.043" Score="2" ViewCount="57" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently had a question that was intermittently closed. When &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/201061/timeline&quot;&gt;looking at the question history&lt;/a&gt;, the list of close votes differs from the list when looking at the list of voters in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/close/80638&quot;&gt;review queue&lt;/a&gt;. Two close votes appear only in the question history, one appears only in the review queue (which also only has four close votes overall, not five).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does the review queue only register close votes made via the queue, while the question registers votes from the question close link and the queue? Is it possible to vote close but miss the time window before some other vote was registered, and have the vote then not appear on the closing list in the history?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-06T14:56:00.463" LastActivityDate="2022-09-06T14:56:00.463" Title="How do the lists of close votes in the history and in the close vote queue differ?" Tags="|support|review|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12193" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12192" CreationDate="2022-08-31T08:09:09.007" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The review queue history is the history of reviews only.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two places to vote to close a question: the question page and the review queue. If you vote to close while performing a close vote review, it will show up in the review history. If you vote to close from the question page, it will only be seen if the question is successfully closed, and only in (up to) two places: the question timeline, and if the question is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; yours, the close voters will be shown in the closed banner.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-31T13:05:18.140" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T13:05:18.140" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12194" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-31T11:31:23.920" Score="5" ViewCount="185" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's (at the moment of this writing) &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22d%26d%20next%22%20%5Bdnd-5e%5D%20-%5Bdnd-next-playtest%5D%20is%3Aq&quot;&gt;about 29 questions&lt;/a&gt; that mention &amp;quot;DND next&amp;quot;, are tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and not tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-next-playtest-container&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some of these questions need to be retagged for sure, and apparently, such an initiative has started as old questions have had their tags swapped in the last few days. Two examples from the last hours are:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31709/using-3d6-instead-of-d20-for-dd-next&quot;&gt;Using 3d6 instead of d20 for D&amp;amp;D Next&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125303/was-murder-in-baldurs-gate-a-part-of-the-dd-next-5e-playtest&quot;&gt;Was Murder in Baldur&amp;#39;s Gate a part of the D&amp;amp;D Next/5e playtest?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To try to not overwhelm the main site with old questions and draw too much attention, we should stagger the re-tagging as needed, and possibly communicate which questions do or don't need attention further in this process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Which of the questions demand immediate attention and which might need to stay 5e only?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[For the record: we're down to about 18 on 2022-09-10]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Notes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e was officially published in or around July/August 2014, so the cutoff date for easy sorting is, that most items asked before are most likely playtest material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be possible that a considerable amount of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bdnd-5e%5D%20created%3A..2014-07%20is%3Aq&quot;&gt;more than 100 questions asked before July&lt;/a&gt;. About &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bdnd-5e%5D%20created%3A..2014-06%20is%3Aq&quot;&gt;30-ish of that&lt;/a&gt; might need the Next Playtest tag but had it swapped in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3530/can-we-rename-dnd-next-to-dnd-next-playtest-before-its-released?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;renaming to 5e&lt;/a&gt; - which would need to be reversed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-14T12:55:44.383" LastActivityDate="2022-09-14T12:55:44.383" Title="Tag-sorting: [dnd-5e] vs. [dnd-next-playtest]" Tags="|discussion|tags|dnd-5e|playtesting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12195" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12194" CreationDate="2022-08-31T12:07:33.177" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Change the tag for questions &lt;em&gt;specific&lt;/em&gt; to the playtest&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To sum up the history, the D&amp;amp;D Next tag used during the playtest was merged into D&amp;amp;D 5e upon release and later split again, which left a lot of questions that were specific to the playtest still tagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. Those questions which are specific to the playtest, eg. about rules which were changed before release or about the playtest itself, should be tagged correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not all the questions that mention it are actually specific to the playtest. Doubly the questions from sept. 2014 and later are unlikely to be so. (But you know, read them and use your judgement)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;On immediacy&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the most part though, retags like this aren't a high priority. Usually it's fine to retag as it comes up (and there's lovely wiggle-room for what it means to come up). And since the playtest is over and not of great interest, the questions simply don't come up very often leaving them unretagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since they've now come up, and there's not really that many of them, I think we're fine to fix them. Just for completeness though, I'll urge partaking users (and I'm probably going to among them) to show restraint with pacing so not to flood the homepage with 8 year old questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-08-31T18:39:36.330" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T18:39:36.330" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12196" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-31T17:53:36.493" Score="8" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;I was checking my bookmarks page and observed blue circles next to some of the questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9Lhb9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9Lhb9.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hovering over the circle shows the tool tip:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has new activity&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I checked the three blue questions, and the most recent activity on each ranged from 1.5 to 3 months, which doesn't seem very new. Additionally, I &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; I have visited the &amp;quot;bonus action spellcasting&amp;quot; question numerous times since it was last active. So it isn't at all clear to me what &amp;quot;new activity&amp;quot; means here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T17:53:36.493" Title="What exactly is indicated by the blue &quot;new activity&quot; circle on the bookmarks page?" Tags="|support|bookmarks|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12197" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-08-31T19:42:45.250" Score="0" ViewCount="146" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/201107/16003&quot;&gt;This D&amp;amp;D 5e question&lt;/a&gt; appears to be a question about in-universe lore (and was tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lore&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;lore&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;lore-container&quot;&gt;lore&lt;/a&gt;), but doesn't specify any specific setting. Does D&amp;amp;D 5e imply a specific setting?  Should we assume Forgotten Realms?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;More generally, to what extent should we consider 5e questions as existing with particular setting assumptions?   For example, this one of the answers to this question uses the &amp;quot;gods get their power from the belief of their worshipers&amp;quot; idea.  I suspect that that model for divine power, though commonly used, is not spelled out in the rule books, and so it is not necessarily the case that all campaign settings need to follow that model.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a little bit different from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8225/16003&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; in that what I'd like to discuss is what, if any, assumptions we can make about the setting for generic 5e question, rather than asking if a setting is required to specified for questions with the lore tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="16003" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-06T15:04:01.253" LastActivityDate="2022-09-06T15:04:01.253" Title="To what extent does D&amp;D 5e imply a setting?" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12198" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12197" CreationDate="2022-08-31T20:05:15.647" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The Multiverse covers everything&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D has a conceit that all campaign settings are embedded within an “oversetting,” known (currently) simply as “the Multiverse.” There are a large number of things that more-or-less “multiversal,” that is, they behave the same way everywhere in the multiverse—within each campaign setting as well as outside any of them, on the other planes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, it makes perfect sense to ask a question about lore within D&amp;amp;D that isn’t specific to any one setting, because there are things generally shared by all settings. This is, in fact, Wizards of the Coast’s preference for nearly &lt;em&gt;everything&lt;/em&gt;—they like to keep D&amp;amp;D pretty consistent across campaign settings when they can, because it makes it easier for players to get into new settings (read: become convinced to buy new products). Thus, most stuff—magic, spells, classes, feats, etc. etc.—all have the same lore behind them no matter where you go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the “default” of the Forgotten Realms, Wizards of the Coast has been adamant that this is not the case for 5e. They &lt;strong&gt;have&lt;/strong&gt; exported a number of things (e.g. the Weave) that were previously specific to FR, making them general concepts throughout the Multiverse, but officially, that isn’t because FR is the default, it’s because they’re ret-conning every place else to be a little more like FR. (And FR has had some of this coming back at it, particularly the necessity of patron deities.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The Multiverse is also its own setting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Multiverse is &lt;em&gt;also&lt;/em&gt; setting in its own right, with its own canon, history, characters, and so on. It is entirely reasonable to ask questions about it. Though it contains the Forgotten Realms, and Greyhawk and Eberron and Krynn and so on, plenty of things go on outside of those, and often go unnoticed within those—vagaries of the Blood War across the Lower Planes rarely influence life on the ground in Toril, for example.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be reasonable for there to be a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-multiverse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-multiverse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-multiverse-container&quot;&gt;dnd-multiverse&lt;/a&gt; for questions about these things, but I don’t see a lot of need for it, personally. I wouldn’t apply that to questions about, say, how spellcasting works within D&amp;amp;D’s lore—even though that is “multiversal,” it isn’t specific to the Multiverse as a setting, it applies to pretty much all D&amp;amp;D.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T20:05:15.647" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12199" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12197" CreationDate="2022-08-31T20:18:58.587" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e does not imply a particular setting. If the setting is unclear, and you think it matters, ask them to clarify.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/34/62294&quot;&gt;D&amp;amp;D has numerous official campaign settings&lt;/a&gt;. If I tell you &amp;quot;I'm playing D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot;, I've told you the game I'm playing, not the setting I am playing that game in. D&amp;amp;D 5e also has core rules and player options that work &lt;em&gt;independent&lt;/em&gt; of your choice of campaign setting. So a question tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; does not &lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt; imply a particular setting, even though it does imply some things about the setting, by virtue of the rules working across settings (e.g. spellcasting, certain monsters, connection to certain planes). Lore questions &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; imply at least some sense of being part of the &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D Multiverse&amp;quot;, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12198/62294&quot;&gt;KRyan's answer&lt;/a&gt; explains nicely, again by making certain assumptions based on the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, some questions are setting &lt;em&gt;dependent&lt;/em&gt;, not because of the game system the querent is playing, but because of the particular content they are enquiring about. If you think the setting matters for a question but it hasn't been specified, just ask them. If they have no specific setting in mind, and your &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; think their question has numerous, vastly different answers in different settings, to the point that the question should be split into multiple distinct questions, you can vote to close for &amp;quot;needs more focus&amp;quot;, though we have seen questions do just fine without being split up, even when the answer was setting dependent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;For this specific question, there are no exceptional settings respecting paladins.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes it does take a bit of system knowledge and expertise to know when a question is appropriately scoped, and in this case, I think the question is just fine. Sure, there may be some minor differences setting to setting in the particular details of how paladin oaths manifest, but since there are no official 5e settings with major exceptions for paladins, any minor details are better documented by an ambitious answer, rather than by multiple questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-08-31T20:46:11.597" LastActivityDate="2022-08-31T20:46:11.597" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12201" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-08T05:50:07.607" Score="3" ViewCount="77" Body="&lt;p&gt;I got a message this morning about reputation changes, stating they were due to a user being removed. However, there is no information which user that was. Is there any way to find out?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, this &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3551/user-was-removed&quot;&gt;Q&amp;amp;A&lt;/a&gt; seems to indicate that reputation changes only happen when a user was removed for fraudulent voting, but the message itself linked to a help page that states votes can be undone if a user is removed for any cause. Which of the two is correct?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-08T15:46:50.387" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T15:46:50.387" Title="Is there a way to find out which user was removed, and when are their votes reverted?" Tags="|support|voting|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12202" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12208" CreationDate="2022-09-08T06:12:04.593" Score="3" ViewCount="101" Body="&lt;p&gt;The main page of the site now appears to me as depicted below:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Nh7SN.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Nh7SN.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Main page of the site, with some questions in blue&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The first and third question there have a blue/cyan title: I supposed that it denotes that a question has been recently modified, but that's not the case, indeed the second question in the list as been modified too but it has the classical color (darker than the normal one since I visualized it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does this coloring mean?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-09-08T21:05:26.410" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T21:05:26.410" Title="Why some questions appear with a blue/cyan title?" Tags="|support|status-completed|user-interface|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12203" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12201" CreationDate="2022-09-08T06:39:52.917" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, and please don't try to&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There shouldn't be any &lt;em&gt;easy&lt;/em&gt; way for a non-moderator to determine which user was removed. With some investigation it might be possible to determine it but I'd discourage you from doing so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moderators can access deleted user profiles and can see when/why they were deleted. However that is privileged information and we aren't able to share it with non-moderators. Hence why I'd prefer you don't spend too much effort trying to uncover this information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not the votes are reverse depends on the number of votes cast by the user. If a user that has cast a lot of votes is deleted they often don't reverse the votes as it might result in large reputation drops for other users. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/268608/412432&quot;&gt;this main meta&lt;/a&gt; for details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're seeing a reputation change due to &amp;quot;User was removed&amp;quot; then the user that was removed had not cast a particularly high number of votes and the net effect on reputation from reversing them is minimal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T06:39:52.917" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12204" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12202" CreationDate="2022-09-08T10:56:45.010" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;The blue title indicates a question has &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/381863/watched-question-titles-are-changed-to-blue-on-themed-sites&quot;&gt;a tag that you are watching&lt;/a&gt;. The reason for the change, along with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/381858/why-has-the-green-accepted-answer-indicator-become-darker-on-all-the-sites&quot;&gt;darkening of the &amp;quot;answer&amp;quot; green&lt;/a&gt;, is for &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/419586/announcing-design-accessibility-updates-on-so&quot;&gt;increased visual accessibility&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T10:56:45.010" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12205" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12211" CreationDate="2022-09-08T13:07:22.480" Score="18" ViewCount="705" Body="&lt;p&gt;As &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is a single page game, here it is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IHtwB.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IHtwB.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Rules for the one-page RPG called 'Potato'&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; was mentioned in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/201287/62294&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; as an example of a one page RPG, and the objection was raised in the comments there that it wasn't an RPG. My question here is not about the closure of that question in particular, but rather more generally, &lt;em&gt;is Potato an RPG, or are questions about Potato off topic for our stack?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-08T15:44:56.200" LastActivityDate="2022-09-16T22:33:52.440" Title="Are potatoes on-topic here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|game-systems|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12206" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-08T13:45:50.210" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The role you play in &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;'A Hobbit just trying to exist'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other similar games you might play someone who is &lt;a href=&quot;https://boingboing.net/2022/03/29/play-trapped-in-a-cabin-with-lord-byron-the-one-page-rpg.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Trapped in a Cabin with Lord Byron&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all roles, &lt;strong&gt;you just pick them at the same time as the game&lt;/strong&gt;. You can tell stories about how the game went afterwards in the same way you can any other game here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, the 'role' aspect is constrained, and the 'game' part may not give many/any choices but I'd still say it's an RPG and therefore on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T13:45:50.210" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12207" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-08T14:17:01.287" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You don't need other players or a very open ruleset to roleplay&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At their core, Roleplay Games are what the name implies : games where you play the role of a character in a story. Whether that game is freeform or limited by strict rules, whether you're playing it in a group or alone, and even if you're the one telling the story or not, you're still playing the role of your character.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In that sense, I believe &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is a RPG. The rules do not give much room for choices, in opposition to the usual RPGs, but you're still playing the game of &amp;quot;getting in the character and playing out a story.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, you can just play out the mechanical aspect of it and reduce it to &amp;quot;roll dice, resolve, repeat&amp;quot;. But isn't that the same with other, more common RPGs?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T14:17:01.287" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12208" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12202" CreationDate="2022-09-08T20:42:53.877" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This was indeed a bug, and theme colors have been restored. Staff Dan Cormier &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/381914/674198&quot;&gt;reports&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This issue was caused by a non-theme color being set on watched post summary titles in a recent design system change. We've reverted that change and shipped the reversion. Thanks for the report!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-09-08T20:42:53.877" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12209" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-09T01:59:48.400" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, not on topic for RPGSE.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a game of solitaire where you roll dice and see what happens.  Calling this an RPG is a stretch at best.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;It's about roll playing, not role playing.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;This could be fun on a long bus or plane trip, though, and help to pass the time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2022-09-14T15:09:16.383" LastActivityDate="2022-09-14T15:09:16.383" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12210" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-09T06:19:33.053" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This is close enough to be on topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What makes a role playing game&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;you can imagine yourself to be one of the acting characters (check)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;there are rules, it is not just free-form improv (check)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;players have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/71265/what-is-player-agency-and-what-is-it-good-for&quot;&gt;agency&lt;/a&gt; to make meaningful decisions (fail)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potato is a game of solitaire dice rolling painted with a veneer of Tolkien. The near entire &lt;em&gt;lack of meaningful decision making&lt;/em&gt; is why it fails as a role-playing game for me. Like in the childrens game &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Ravensburger-Tempo-21420-small-snail/dp/B07QPKVT76&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Tempo, little snail&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;, the player has next to no influence on the eventual outcome, the game plays itself. With goodwill, you can consider the &amp;quot;Hurling in the back garden&amp;quot; mechanic to save the game from failing entirely on this count (even if there is an optimal strategy, which is very likely, the player may not know it or need to follow it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I do think this is not a reason to close the question as off-topic. There are many questions on the site that are only tangentially related to the hobby of role-playing games, for example there are many questions about the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200587/dice-odds-of-doubles-on-2d6-d4-d6-d8-d10-d12-and-odds-of-1&quot;&gt;statistical probabilities&lt;/a&gt; of dice rolls, that one could argue could belong on a statistics wiki. And while the community has drawn some explicit division lines around shopping questions or computer role-playing games, minigames is not one of them. I feel we can be more welcoming and inclusive in our scoping than to ban a question on a game like this, that overlaps in many ways with kind of games we enjoy discussing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; Play-acting is not essential to role playing games, role playing in an interacting world is. A lot of other things like rolling dice, the fantasy, horror or sci-fi genres are often also associated with role playing games, and are likewise not essential to the nature of the activity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are games without game masters, like the choose-your-own adventure books that can in the wider sense considered role playing games. You still imagine to be the main character, use rules (following the prearranged decision graph and sometimes simple mechanics to resolve fights), and make meaningful decisions at each node where you can choose one of serveral courses of action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-09-09T06:44:44.853" LastActivityDate="2022-09-09T06:44:44.853" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12211" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-09T18:37:12.073" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The author clearly intended &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; to be played as an RPG.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1,000 potatoes is a heap.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A premise I hope we can all agree on. I've had a successful harvest, locked myself underground, and the orcs are none the wiser. Just me and 1,000 potatoes in a heap on the larder floor. Each day I eat one of my potatoes. If 1,000 potatoes is a heap, certainly 999 is as well. Each day my heap of potatoes shrinks, and yet each day it continues to be a heap. But then comes the last day, the 1000th day of my respite from orcs and farming and the world. I've one last potato, but something has happened. I do not have a heap any more. Thinking back to yesterday, I had two potatoes - still not a heap. Somewhere between my first day and my last day, my heap stopped being a heap.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This problem is the well known &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Sorites paradox&lt;/a&gt;, classically formulated using grains of sand instead of taters. It seems that &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; the game is riding that unknowable line between heap and not a heap. Obviously, a game like &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; is an RPG - a heap of potatoes. And in comparison, &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; has taken some potatoes from the heap. It only has one role to play, the hobbit, and it is a solo game, so cooperation with other players has been taken out. But surely these two potatoes (choice of role and cooperative play) are not the essence of an RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what's missing? I've seen some arguments made in comments that other games that are obviously not RPGs could add some number of elements and be as much an RPG as &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; (arguing &amp;quot;not an RPG&amp;quot;). Maybe, except the authors of those games didn't do that. Yes it's simple, no there aren't a lot of mechanical choices given. But complexity and diversity of choice are not requirements for being an RPG (as though there were some objective standard), and the author &lt;em&gt;clearly&lt;/em&gt; intends it to be played as an RPG (they wrote RPG in the game's header).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So let's not have an identity crisis as a stack by trying to put to paper exactly what we think an RPG is supposed to be. There is already an epidemic in our hobby of smuggling expectations built on popular games like D&amp;amp;D into smaller, less known games. &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; subverts our expectations of what an RPG is, but the author clearly intended it to be played as one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is a heap.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-09-16T22:33:52.440" LastActivityDate="2022-09-16T22:33:52.440" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12212" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-09T19:18:24.613" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;By certain definitions it's not an RPG but we don't really have a stack for what it is so its best home is here.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can call them &amp;quot;journaling games&amp;quot;, like &lt;em&gt;The Quiet Year&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;How to Host a Dungeon&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Sweaters By Hedgehog&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Thousand-Year Old Vampire&lt;/em&gt;. The dice or other randomizers are there more as an oracle for a randomized future and your mechanical hooks of play are limited.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point of the game is to run the randomizer to some end point and experience the events and maybe create an artifact of your own, like the namesake journal or some kind of hand-drawn map.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Using a setup and a random progression to prompt stitching together a story in your own head&amp;quot; is the core feature here, and an activity a lot of more traditional RPGs also have a place for. While it can and does happen deliberately or incidentally in the board game or video game spaces, it's very rare to see a board game or video game where the entire point is just to get a setup and random progression and put the story together in your own head.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of the games I listed in the first paragraph don't really section themselves off from more traditional RPGs in any kind of commercial space, and of the available stacks people who have played tabletop RPGs are the most likely to have the experiences needed to read and understand the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastEditorUserId="19405" LastEditDate="2022-09-09T19:30:57.563" LastActivityDate="2022-09-09T19:30:57.563" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12213" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-10T11:45:51.133" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebook&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;game book&lt;/a&gt; on-topic?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Nobody would claim that many of the game books are not at least in some way RPGs. You read a page, decide a path, read the next. On the way, you take notes and choose what items to carry around with you and finally meet one of the ends. You take the &lt;strong&gt;role&lt;/strong&gt; of the protagonist of the story, you &lt;strong&gt;play&lt;/strong&gt; his role and it's a &lt;strong&gt;game&lt;/strong&gt;. A game book is pretty much the watershed area between a simple book where you watch the narrative unfold and a full-fledged RPG like &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Rats&lt;/em&gt; or the World of Darkness. Or to say it with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12211/30306&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's analogy&lt;/a&gt;: a Game Book is somewhere at the edge where a heap becomes just a couple of potatoes on the floor. Is the game book 5 or 10 or 100? I don't know, that might be book-dependent!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;&lt;em&gt;Potatoes&lt;/em&gt; is the essence of a game book&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Game books prescribe exactly what happens. &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; prescribes exactly what happens. Where's the difference? There's actually three:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Game Book has tons of text, &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is the essence.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is entirely dice-driven.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;On a technicality, &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; uses the engine of a &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-player_game&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Zero-Player Game&lt;/a&gt;, as there is no choice in what event happens. The only choice is in when to cancel orcs with potatoes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; does offer &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; the choice of the player in how to narrate it: Who is the visitor you hide from in the potato sack? Is that wizard trying to meet you wearing grey robes or is he all decked out in gold necklaces and armed with a boombox? That's up to the player!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In some regards, &lt;em&gt;Potato&lt;/em&gt; is more strict than a game book, but it is much more about playing your role than game books, so... it is more of an RPG than game books!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-12T15:15:14.367" LastActivityDate="2022-09-12T15:15:14.367" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12214" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12205" CreationDate="2022-09-12T05:43:30.460" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I said on the question... that is not a &lt;strong&gt;game&lt;/strong&gt;. A game is defined by actors making decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any length of text is not a game. You read it. It's a book. Only when it includes a decision making process like a choose-your-own-adventure, it becomes a game, because you have now become an actor with agency.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any video is not a game. You watch it. It's a movie. Unless it becomes very a different movie every time the player makes a decision. Then we call it a video game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A deck of playing cards is not a game. Until you define rules how and when to make decisions and what consequences those decisions have, then it becomes a card game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Potatoes has no in-game decisions. It has a single decision to make, and you can make that decision without any context, even before starting the game. You could even say it is not a real decision, because there is a mathematical optimization and you can make a good decision or a bad decision, but again, you can calculate that beforehand with no uncertainty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It also contains &lt;strong&gt;no&lt;/strong&gt; role playing. Someone said you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; play it out. Yes. You can. It is not explicitely forbidden by the rules. But is that really our argument why it is an RPG? Because R is not explicitely forbidden? I could claim that doing my math homework on the bus on my way to school &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; an RPG. The teacher never said I was forbidden to roleplay and I think my elven x² was level 3 by the time the bus stopped.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have pretty clear lines here. Choose-Your-Own-Adventure are not roleplaying by our standards. Games like Hero Quest are not roleplaying. Why? Because while you certainly &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; roleplay (and roleplayers probably will), they do not contain any material to do so.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So no. It is neither a game, nor roleplaying. So I don't see why it should be on topic here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2022-09-12T05:43:30.460" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12215" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12161" CreationDate="2022-09-12T11:07:09.800" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let's look at the whole timeline. As you can see in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/200474/revisions&quot;&gt;the post's revision history&lt;/a&gt;, the post was originally closed on Aug 4 at 14:07.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The post's 4th revision, on Aug 4 at 18:33, has the &amp;quot;added to review&amp;quot; note, which means that's what triggered it getting sent to the review queue — that was also a &amp;quot;significant edit.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you noted, that user's first review completed the review task at 18:58. That's for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/80351&quot;&gt;this review task&lt;/a&gt;, and the result was &amp;quot;leave closed.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/200474/timeline?filter=WithVoteSummaries&quot;&gt;the post's timeline&lt;/a&gt;, I then see another user cast a reopen vote, on Aug 4 at 19:32. That vote sent it to the queue again. As you noted, that created &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/80353&quot;&gt;a second review task&lt;/a&gt;, and that same user case a second &amp;quot;leave closed&amp;quot; vote, on Aug 4 at 19:56. This review task was completed on Aug 5 at 13:16.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since &amp;quot;SAME USER&amp;quot; (as noted in the question) didn't cast any close votes, they were able to interact with both review tasks. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12161/how-did-the-same-user-review-this-question-for-reopening-twice#comment41969_12162&quot;&gt;You note&lt;/a&gt; you were able to interact with the first task, but not the second: you were able to act on the first review task because it was sent to the queue as a &amp;quot;significant edit;&amp;quot; since the second one was due to a reopen vote and you'd already cast the original close vote, however, you weren't able to interact with the second review task.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, even though the UI could be a bit clearer on why you weren't able to interact with that 2nd review task, everything is working as expected here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastActivityDate="2022-09-12T11:07:09.800" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12216" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-15T17:29:56.937" Score="12" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;The first edition of &lt;em&gt;The One Ring&lt;/em&gt; was released in 2011 (by Cubicle 7). However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://freeleaguepublishing.com/en/games/the-one-ring/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Free League Publishing recently released a new (2nd) edition of the game&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now in its second edition, The One Ring™ comes with updated and&#xA;revised rules, a new visual style, and a focus on the land of Eriador&#xA;— the lone-lands west of the Misty Mountains.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, there is only one tag for the &lt;em&gt;The One Ring&lt;/em&gt; role-playing game: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;the-one-ring-container&quot;&gt;the-one-ring&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, at least one question on the site (which currently uses the same tag) is specifically about the second edition of the game: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195527/the-one-ring-2nd-edition-says-players-should-choose-their-favoured-selection-of&quot;&gt;The One Ring 2nd Edition says players should choose &amp;quot;their favoured selection of armour&amp;quot; as starting equipment, what does it mean by this?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should the &lt;em&gt;The One Ring&lt;/em&gt; 2e have a separate tag from &lt;em&gt;TOR&lt;/em&gt; 1e?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, if a separate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring-2e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;the-one-ring-2e-container&quot;&gt;the-one-ring-2e&lt;/a&gt; tag is created: &lt;strong&gt;Should the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;the-one-ring-container&quot;&gt;the-one-ring&lt;/a&gt; tag be renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-one-ring-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring-1e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;the-one-ring-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;the-one-ring-1e-container&quot;&gt;the-one-ring-1e&lt;/a&gt; accordingly?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3529" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-15T17:50:45.810" LastActivityDate="2022-09-16T15:36:24.547" Title="Should the new (2nd) edition of The One Ring be tagged separately from the first edition?" Tags="|discussion|tags|game-systems|rename-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12217" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-16T13:40:38.957" Score="10" ViewCount="305" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question discusses a one page, three score RPG called &lt;em&gt;Space Junk Cyberpunk&lt;/em&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201433/how-often-do-i-need-to-sing-happy-birthday-to-myself-to-survive-space-junk-cyber&quot;&gt;How often do I need to sing Happy Birthday to myself to survive Space Junk Cyberpunk?&lt;/a&gt; Right now the question has &lt;em&gt;three&lt;/em&gt; tags the describe only the game: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-page-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-page-rpg-container&quot;&gt;one-page-rpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/three-score-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;three-score-rpg-container&quot;&gt;three-score-rpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/space-junk-cyberpunk&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;space-junk-cyberpunk&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;space-junk-cyberpunk&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;space-junk-cyberpunk-container&quot;&gt;space-junk-cyberpunk&lt;/a&gt;. Now, we've had a discussion before about system tags being meta tags, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5307/is-the-only-tag-test-for-meta-tag-ness-broken-here&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (see also &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/?_gl=1%2A1bkd6sj%2A_ga%2AMTM4MTEzODA2My4xNjU0NTE5NDI1%2A_ga_S812YQPLT2%2AMTY2MzMzMzEwNS43LjEuMTY2MzMzNTEzOS4wLjAuMA..&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;), and we determined that a system tag is a valid exception to the general rule of avoiding meta tags. But here's the problem: one system tag is a valid exception, while three is almost certainly not. The &lt;em&gt;Space Junk Cyberpunk&lt;/em&gt; question linked above has &lt;em&gt;three&lt;/em&gt; system tags. All three tags describe something about the system the question is about, not the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I think we need a better system, because we're probably looking at invalid meta tags, and having a three tag tax before you even get to describing the question is too great a tag burden. So what is the best way to tag this question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-09-17T09:58:32.513" LastActivityDate="2022-09-25T21:20:58.420" Title="Three tag RPGs: we need a better system for tagging &quot;one page three score&quot; RPGs" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12218" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12217" CreationDate="2022-09-16T14:28:05.237" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Meta information about a system goes in the tag descriptor, not a separate tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the simplest question which resolves this (to me) is &amp;quot;where have we put this information before?&amp;quot; And for things like it being a one-page game (alongside say genre like fantasy, solarpunk, etc., or year of publishing, or being open source) goes in the tag description. It's useful for someone to get an idea of what the system is (or check that it's the same system, say) but it doesn't usefully describe the &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now if someone comes along and asks a (presumably &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;game-design-container&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt;) question about One Page games in general/specific, tagging that question with it seems warranted. Until then, it needn't exist (assuming we don't have such a question already and not found/tagged it).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;As for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/three-score-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;three-score-rpg-container&quot;&gt;three-score-rpg&lt;/a&gt; and [game-name]&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case I think it's best to consider Three Scores a game engine with a number of implementations/drifts (or drifts of each other). Conceptually similar to say &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fate&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;fate&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;fate-container&quot;&gt;fate&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/d20-system&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-system&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;d20-system&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;d20-system-container&quot;&gt;d20-system&lt;/a&gt; (which is D&amp;amp;D 3e backbone drifted to form other games). For systems like this, it makes a lot sense to have both. Considering how... let's say close, the drifts are, having the shared engine tag almost makes more sense than the individual implementations, but I don't think having them is any kind of issue either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the tag description and excerpt for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/three-scores-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-scores-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-scores-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;three-scores-rpg-container&quot;&gt;three-scores-rpg&lt;/a&gt; needs some help, right now I don't think it's very helpful if you aren't already familiar with what it is, which isn't ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-19T15:10:51.423" LastActivityDate="2022-09-19T15:10:51.423" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12219" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12216" CreationDate="2022-09-16T15:36:24.547" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes; we did this with AD&amp;amp;D 1e and AD&amp;amp;D 2e a few years back.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I'm not familiar enough with that game to get into details, it would be consistent with how we tag Traveller, AD&amp;amp;D, WoD, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastActivityDate="2022-09-16T15:36:24.547" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12220" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12217" CreationDate="2022-09-16T16:10:07.980" Score="22" Body="&lt;h3&gt;We should drop [one-page-rpg]; it isn't a useful tag&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(This answer has no specific comment on the other two tags, it's just tackling this particular one right now.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-page-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-page-rpg-container&quot;&gt;one-page-rpg&lt;/a&gt; is not a good, useful tag. It's simply a descriptor of publishing format and word count of one specific delivery of a game. I say this &lt;em&gt;as a fan of&lt;/em&gt; one-page RPGs. It is a thing several games might coincidentally have in common, and things people might be interested in, but it's not a useful category from the Stack's perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can't be an expert on “things that happen to be on one page.” Expertise on various RPGs that happen to be one page is non-transferrable — this isn't one common game system. Expertise in &lt;em&gt;Honey Heist&lt;/em&gt; does not transfer to &lt;em&gt;Lasers &amp;amp; Feelings&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;Space Junk Cyberpunk&lt;/em&gt; just on account of how they get printed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is just the same as how &lt;em&gt;GURPS&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;AD&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Vampire: the Masquerade&lt;/em&gt; do not have transferrable expertise just on account of how they might have similar page counts on their primary volume.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's also not a super meaningful descriptor: if I print Honey Heist out on two pages, it's still the same game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2022-09-16T16:10:07.980" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12221" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-18T08:08:10.653" Score="4" ViewCount="171" Body="&lt;p&gt;The question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/201450/62294&quot;&gt;True Polymorph + True Seeing = True Death?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question was originally closed as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113114/can-an-object-created-by-true-polymorph-be-used-as-a-consumable-spell-component&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, asking if using &lt;em&gt;true polymorph&lt;/em&gt; to create consumable spell components worked at all, but the question was later clarified to ask:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tangentially mentioned in that thread, someone assumes that a &amp;quot;consumed&amp;quot; spell component is the same as &amp;quot;destroying&amp;quot; an item and reducing it to zero HP, but I can't find anything RAW that supports that sentiment- and WotC is known for their explicit and intentional differentiation of terms.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for clarity, the question is what happens to a consumed spell component?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I closed it as a duplicate of this question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/189323/what-does-it-mean-for-a-spell-component-to-be-consumed&quot;&gt;What does it mean for a spell component to be consumed?&lt;/a&gt;, which asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the body of spell's description explicitly says a component is 'consumed' or it is implied by the material components description, what exactly happens to that component?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These seem to be exactly the same question. But the question was reopened by another user, so I'm asking here on meta since we've been through two close-reopen cycles at this point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this question a duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-09-18T08:13:56.477" LastActivityDate="2022-09-19T12:55:37.960" Title="Is this question about true polymorph and consumable spell components a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12222" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12221" CreationDate="2022-09-18T08:08:10.653" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is a duplicate and it should be closed.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201450/true-polymorph-true-seeing-true-death&quot;&gt;True Polymorph + True Seeing = True Death?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/189323/what-does-it-mean-for-a-spell-component-to-be-consumed&quot;&gt;What does it mean for a spell component to be consumed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We will examine these questions according to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;three duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are asking the exact same question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So for clarity, the question is what happens to a consumed spell component?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the body of spell's description explicitly says a component is 'consumed' or it is implied by the material components description, what exactly happens to that component?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Same question - what exactly does it mean for a component to be consumed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All the answers on &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; answer &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; directly, since the two questions are the exact same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not. One might offer the idea that the entire question isn't covered by &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;, but it doesn't have to be. The question is assuming the answer to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/113114/62294&quot;&gt;original dupe closure&lt;/a&gt;, and asking a question further to it. Between the original dupe target, which &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; assumes the answer of, and &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;, the entire scenario of &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; is addressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-09-18T08:08:10.653" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12223" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12221" CreationDate="2022-09-18T23:41:00.047" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is based on assumptions addressed by the duplicate questions, but asks something not covered by either&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question also asks:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have I just wiped the BBEG from existence, and if so, did his soul get consumed with him?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, “if I can polymorph a creature into a spell component, and if that component is consumed in the casting of a spell, what does it mean for the original creature?” and/or “is this a surefire way to permanently destroy any creature, including their soul?” Neither of these seem answered by the duplicate question(s). And this does seem to be the relevant part, despite how the asker has framed a clarification at the end.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there’s scope for the question to remain open with some editing, as while what the asker wants to know does depend in part on the answer to the duplicate, that answer’s ramifications for the asker’s scenario are still unclear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35508" LastActivityDate="2022-09-18T23:41:00.047" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12224" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12221" CreationDate="2022-09-19T12:55:37.960" Score="4" Body="&lt;h1&gt;It is not a duplicate&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e is an exceptions based game. Just because a general statement about components exists, it does not mean that there isn't a specific interaction with the True Polymorph spell that may require a more nuanced view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In particular, for a regular material component it doesn't really matter whether or not the material component is &amp;quot;de-magic-ed&amp;quot;, set to 0 hp and destroyed that way, destroyed utterly or excised from the multiverse.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a creature that is True Polymorphed into an object it very much matters which bit of them is &amp;quot;consumed&amp;quot;. Both for the purposes of the fight in question, as well as if they could be resurrected later.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This means that Criterion 2 in ThomasMarkov's answer is not satisfied:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case the answer for this combination is non-obvious from the answers for the first question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36850" LastActivityDate="2022-09-19T12:55:37.960" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12225" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-19T18:31:02.653" Score="9" ViewCount="94" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201483/what-happens-to-end-of-turn-saving-throws-to-end-a-condition-after-combat-ends#comment550087_201483&quot;&gt;This comment&lt;/a&gt; links to an answer to a related question, and when taken to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195530/are-rounds-just-for-combat-or-should-we-be-using-them-at-other-times-in-the-gam#:%7E:text=Rounds%20are%20for%20combat%2C%20yes,but%20also%20fast%2Dpaced%20situations.&quot;&gt;linked post&lt;/a&gt;, a portion of the text is highlighted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d1dp1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/d1dp1.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is this sorcery? How do you do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-09-19T20:58:29.867" Title="How do you link to a post and highlight a portion of its text?" Tags="|support|hyperlinks|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12226" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12225" CreationDate="2022-09-19T19:02:38.300" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is a feature specific to the Chrome browser, not this website. You'll see the link from that comment leads to a URL like this: &lt;code&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195530/are-rounds-just-for-combat-or-should-we-be-using-them-at-other-times-in-the-gam#:~:text=Rounds%20are%20for%20combat%2C%20yes,but%20also%20fast%2Dpaced%20situations.&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's long, but toward the end is that &lt;code&gt;#:~:text=&lt;/code&gt; parameter followed by a bunch of text. This instructs Chrome to highlight this text wherever it's found on the page, and possibly also to scroll to this text. The Google search engine makes heavy use of this feature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The technical term for this feature is a “text fragment” or a “scroll-to-text fragment”. Other browsers don't implement this feature yet, so don't depend on everyone seeing this highlighting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Read more about it here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.google/products/chrome/more-helpful-chrome-throughout-your-workday/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Google blog post about the feature (April 15, 2021)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://wicg.github.io/scroll-to-text-fragment/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Text fragments technical spec&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://caniuse.com/url-scroll-to-text-fragment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Scroll-To-Text fragment browser support&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-09-19T20:58:29.867" LastActivityDate="2022-09-19T20:58:29.867" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12227" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-09-23T20:13:54.417" Score="9" ViewCount="399" Body="&lt;p&gt;I don't mean to sound indignant or anything, but I must admit, I'm at a loss as to why this happened.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just yesterday, I posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201586/is-this-homebrew-artifact-overpowered-sword-of-forgotten-heroes&quot;&gt;a homebrew-review question asking about whether an artifact I had created was balanced.&lt;/a&gt; At time of writing this meta question, it currently has a score of -2 and a balance of -4/2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I mean, originally, my first thought was that the question would be closed for being off topic, but I thoroughly researched this subject before posting the question. I found &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8171/how-should-i-ask-about-my-dd-5e-homebrew-being-balanced&quot;&gt;two&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;separate&lt;/a&gt; RP meta posts giving me directions on how to ask a good homebrew-review question, and even discovered &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11347/does-it-break-anything-questions?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;this question here&lt;/a&gt; that, while it was asking something &lt;em&gt;slightly&lt;/em&gt; different, still was very similar and assured me that my question did belong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But the community didn't see it that way, and I don't get why. I followed the instructions: I explained the power level I was going for, I spoke about my potential problems with the item, and (when necessary) I listed my thought process behind each of the features that had significant meaning. However, it still has a negative score.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9095/75476&quot;&gt;An answer to a similar question&lt;/a&gt; states that the downvotes of these kinds of questions are usually due to lack of effort. However, as I stated earlier, I put in a lot of effort to make sure it followed the community guidelines. &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;So why was my question downvoted?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Similar, well-received Homebrew-Review questions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/152304/is-this-homebrew-magic-item-the-necklace-of-peer-pressure-balanced&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew magic item, the Necklace of Peer Pressure, balanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114400/is-this-homebrew-sword-of-wind-control-based-on-grasscutter-overpowered&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew sword of wind control based on &amp;quot;Grasscutter&amp;quot; overpowered?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/184430/is-this-homebrew-artifact-ready-to-finalize&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Artifact ready to finalize?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75476" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-09-24T01:27:23.887" LastActivityDate="2022-10-05T09:57:48.240" Title="Why was my homebrew-review question downvoted even though I followed the criteria?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|homebrew|down-votes|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12228" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12227" CreationDate="2022-09-24T14:18:26.600" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question is difficult to answer objectively&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As @nvoigt stated in their comment, the question features a lot of homebrew elements, such as the character's abilities and the fact that the campaign goes above the maximum level.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the item itself is very complex. It features a lot of different abilities, pros and cons, and so it is difficult to compare to an existing item or overall to make any kind of objective judgement without playtesting it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it shortly, it seems difficult to give an answer proper to this website (as in : objective, or &amp;quot;good subjective&amp;quot;) for an item that has so many variables to it, especially since most of those variables are homebrew themselves. The homebrew factor makes the question stray too far from official content to properly compare it and balance it with said official content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There might be more elements to this, such as people simply not liking the fact that the item takes unique abilities from other classes and gives it to a melee fighter (especially looking at &lt;em&gt;Wish&lt;/em&gt; and wild surge), but those are purely subjective reasons and there's not much you can do since it is a part of the item you're asking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastEditorUserId="77044" LastEditDate="2022-10-05T09:57:48.240" LastActivityDate="2022-10-05T09:57:48.240" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12229" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12217" CreationDate="2022-09-25T21:20:58.420" Score="3" Body="&lt;h1&gt;I would like a tag that actually describes this specific grouping of games&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-page-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-page-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-page-rpg-container&quot;&gt;one-page-rpg&lt;/a&gt; doesn't really work — there are many one-pagers with very different mechanics. &lt;em&gt;Lasers &amp;amp; Feelings&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Beep&lt;/em&gt;, &amp;amp;c. I agree with the preceding posts saying it's a &amp;quot;meta tag.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/three-score-rpg&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;three-score-rpg&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;three-score-rpg-container&quot;&gt;three-score-rpg&lt;/a&gt; also doesn't work. Because there's no mechanism by which you can pick up one of these things and know &amp;quot;aha! clearly I need to type the phrase &amp;quot;three-score-rpg&amp;quot; into RPG.SE.&amp;quot; A tag that will only get applied post-hoc by one of like 3 knowledgeable users isn't a very good tag, imo.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also think these games are simple enough that individual game tags are just gonna fade.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, what does that leave us with? Well, you're specifically discussing a bunch of games with the words &amp;quot;a one page RPG by Oliver Darkshire&amp;quot; on their title page. That's the unifying thing right now, some portion of that is likely to make a good tag on account of how these things do have a lot of similarities in design and presentation, &amp;amp;c.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't have a definite solution in mind, but note that the author labels the whole collection &amp;quot;Darkshire's One Page RPGs&amp;quot; (&amp;quot;and Stuff&amp;quot;) &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/deathbybadger/status/1569397989948399616&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastActivityDate="2022-09-25T21:20:58.420" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12230" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12227" CreationDate="2022-09-28T02:37:51.177" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;People treating downvotes as 'dislikes'.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is less of a certainty and more of a guess based on the results of posts on forums that use voting systems (mostly reddit) and/or comments on other forums regarding homebrew content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Effectively, I expect many people to consider your artifact to be overpowered as it allows access to Wish and other spells at the same time.  Rather than write an answer stating that, or downvoting answers that  they don't agree with, they instead downvote the question itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your homebrew item sits in a category that sounds overpowered at first glance (Wish!  powerful spells!  etc!) but on second glance is actually eh.  The 'flashy but not actually OP' category I think of it as, and it's one of the ones I see people react negatively to online, unless they are the kind of person who also thinks actual 'wish at will' is fun and cool.  Often if I have talked to people having that reaction and explained the downsides, they've fairly quickly come to realize it's not as powerful as it looks/sounds, and changed their kneejerk reaction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll note that of the other homebrew magic items posted onto this website, the lowest scored one is the artifact scythe that allows the user to cast disintegrate.  For whatever reason, being able to cast damage spells is seen as less of an 'impingement' on caster class territory than gaining other powers or abilities so this generally tracks with how I understand people view homebrew content. The scythe seems genuinely less powerful than wotc artifacts, and has a better formatted question, yet it still attracted far fewer upvotes than the other posts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question could probably have been formatted better, it was quite rambly and tl;dr, but I would not take the downvotes as a sign that your question was thought to be unuseful for a knowledge base, but rather people  treating the downvote question button as a 'dislike that magic item' button.  And as for people disliking a magic item that lets a noncaster cast a spell, well, not much you can do about that.  Wizards rule fighters drool has been a continuing attitude and part of D&amp;amp;D for the better part of half a century.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2022-09-28T02:37:51.177" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12231" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12227" CreationDate="2022-09-28T18:58:34.013" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Those aren’t “the criteria”&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Meta discussion on homebrew-review questions is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; criteria for asking homebrew-review questions. A question that ignores it is not automatically bad, and a question that follows it is not automatically good. It is just a series of suggestions for useful things you might include in a good question. &lt;strong&gt;That meta discussion is not actually all that important.&lt;/strong&gt; Some users are really big fans of that format, and try to push it on every homebrew-review question, but that’s their own preference, not policy. And trying to enforce it like policy—e.g. by closing questions that ignore it—is an abuse of moderation privileges and should be flagged for moderator attention.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Homebrew-review questions are kind of treated as second-class citizens here&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In a variety of ways, the community tends to treat homebrew-review questions much more negatively than it does most other kinds of questions, for example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closing or downvoting questions because they haven’t checked all the boxes from the meta discussion, even though everything in that meta discussion is wholly optional. Doesn’t apply to you since you followed it, but the fact that you thought it was “the criteria” certainly suggests you’ve been exposed to this behavior.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closing or downvoting questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12228/4563&quot;&gt;because they are hard to answer&lt;/a&gt;, even though hard-to-answer questions is the whole point of having experts to answer questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Closing or downvoting questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12230/4563&quot;&gt;because they seek review of homebrew that the voter doesn’t like&lt;/a&gt;, even though a question’s rating should never be a “popularity contest.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each of these are wrong, misuses of the relevant privilege. They’re also common. Homebrew-review questions, as a group, tend to be relatively difficult to answer, and only a small portion of the community has any interest in them. A portion of that portion is only interested in them because they don’t like them, or have very exacting standards for such questions (and don’t like any that don’t meet those highly-idiosyncratic standards). Since much of the community doesn’t really pay attention to homebrew-review questions, the portion-of-a-portion that is really negative about them can have an outsize voice. As a result, homebrew-review questions are often forced into an uphill battle to justify their own existence.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that’s why you ended up where you are.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-09-28T19:09:46.083" LastActivityDate="2022-09-28T19:09:46.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12232" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12233" CreationDate="2022-09-29T19:58:29.197" Score="10" ViewCount="217" Body="&lt;p&gt;At the time of posting, Wizards of the Coast has just released the second One D&amp;amp;D Playtest Unearthed Arcana. It is not surprising that &lt;em&gt;many rules appearing in the first article, Character Origins, have been changed or removed in the second article, Expert Classes.&lt;/em&gt; For example, the rules for critical hits were changed significantly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Weapons and Unarmed Strikes* have a special&#xA;feature for player characters: Critical Hits. If a&#xA;player character rolls a 20 for an attack roll&#xA;with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike, the attack&#xA;is also a Critical Hit, which means it deals extra&#xA;damage to the target; you roll the damage dice&#xA;of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time&#xA;and add the second roll as extra damage to the&#xA;target. For example, a Mace deals Bludgeoning&#xA;Damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier.&#xA;If you score a Critical Hit with the Mace, it&#xA;instead deals 2d6 + your Strength modifier.&#xA;If your Weapon or Unarmed Strike has no&#xA;damage dice, it deals no extra damage on a&#xA;Critical Hit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;-&amp;quot;Critical Hits&amp;quot;, &lt;em&gt;Character Origins&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This Unearthed Arcana article uses the rules for attack rolls and critical hits found in the 2014 &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Attack Roll&amp;quot;, &lt;em&gt;Expert Classes&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Given that there will be significant changes to individual rules from article to article, I think it may be a good idea to keep answers to question about a particular playtest article focused on the particular article asked about in the question, instead of providing new answers about playtest material released after the playtest material asked about in the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How should we handle newer playtest materials that change rules we've asked about from older playtest materials?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-09-30T13:23:06.620" Title="How should we handle changes to One D&amp;D playtest rules that affect questions about previous playtest materials?" Tags="|discussion|dungeons-and-dragons|playtesting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12233" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12232" CreationDate="2022-09-29T19:58:29.197" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here are some things that I think are best practices moving forward as new One D&amp;amp;D playtest articles are released.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;1. Questions should clearly identify which playtest material is being asked about.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've read through some of the D&amp;amp;D Next playtest packets (&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qwk8517jn2knnnb/AAD9jRQ6uEWXRWnwaowt7llWa?dl=0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;dropbox link&lt;/a&gt;), and of course, we see the same phenomenon occurring: some rules are changed significantly packet to packet. However, reading through our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-next-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-next-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-next-playtest-container&quot;&gt;dnd-next-playtest&lt;/a&gt; questions, it does not appear as though we really documented &lt;em&gt;which&lt;/em&gt; packet the questions and answers were working from. Of course, there's nothing to be done about that now, but I think we can learn from that experience moving forward, which we have; the first round of One D&amp;amp;D questions about the &lt;em&gt;Character Origins&lt;/em&gt; article are identified as such. So as more One D&amp;amp;D materials are released, we need to be sure that it is clear in the question what source document is being asked about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;2. Questions about one playtest article should stay about that playtest article.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a rule asked about in a question changes in a newer playtest release, &lt;em&gt;the question should not be updated to reflect that change&lt;/em&gt;. Instead, a question about a new rule should be a new question, because a change to the rule could (usually will) invalidate any answers given, and might even invalidate the question entirely (for example, the wholesale deletion of a rule invalidates the question). We &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; that the playtest rules are evolving, but I think there is value in preserving the original context of these questions. Further, even if a particular rule does not change from one article to the next, it is very likely that the &lt;em&gt;context&lt;/em&gt; of that rule will. For this reason, a question about an unchanged rule in a later document &lt;em&gt;is not a duplicate&lt;/em&gt; of the earlier question, as the rule is appearing in a different context, with answers needing to consider different material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;3. Answers to questions about one playtest article should stay about that playtest article.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is similar to the last point about questions. Since a question asked about a rule from a particular document, answers to that question should be about that particular document. &lt;em&gt;This is different from changes to rules in the official ruleset of the game&lt;/em&gt;. Answers to questions about the official rules &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be updated to reflect the most current official rules, since generally, everyone is using the official rules &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; as the foundation of their game. Since we shouldn't be updating questions to reflect the most recent playtest release, we generally don't need to be updating answers either. We don't need to be going back and checking all of the existing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/one-dnd-playtest&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;one-dnd-playtest&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;one-dnd-playtest-container&quot;&gt;one-dnd-playtest&lt;/a&gt; questions for updates every time a new playtest document is released. If you think it is valuable to mention a rule change from a later release that changes the answer to a question, this is best done as an end note or even a comment, and should not become the focus of the answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;4. Use good judgment.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, I don't want to give the impression that we should be perfectly rigid about these things. These points are what I see as general best practices for approaching questions about the playtest, but there may be exceptions. There may be questions or answers where straying from these practices would be best. So use your good judgment, do not hesitate to grab a second opinion in comments or in chat, and start a meta discussion if that doesn't work things out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-09-30T13:23:06.620" LastActivityDate="2022-09-30T13:23:06.620" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12234" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-10-04T01:49:57.203" Score="6" ViewCount="312" Body="&lt;p&gt;Is this the correct forum for Blood On The Clocktower questions? It's more of a social deduction game, and less of a RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="78940" OwnerDisplayName="Bafs" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-10-04T17:09:18.127" LastActivityDate="2022-10-06T04:17:10.200" Title="Is Blood On The Clocktower on topic here?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|game-systems|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12235" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12234" CreationDate="2022-10-04T02:41:01.027" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;No&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because it's not really a roleplaying game, it belongs more on &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;the Board &amp;amp; Card Games stack&lt;/a&gt;. There are already &lt;a href=&quot;https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bblood-on-the-clocktower%5D%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;4 questions about Blood on the Clocktower&lt;/a&gt; there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2022-10-04T02:41:01.027" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12236" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12238" CreationDate="2022-10-04T09:12:02.697" Score="4" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I happened to look up my reputation this morning, and it shows this for the &amp;quot;Year&amp;quot; tab:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/soFJu.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/soFJu.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that my reputation for the year is 100 points higher than my total reputation, even though I have only been around for 8 months, so all the months were I could gain any reputation and where I collected total reputation fall into this year. How can that be? I'd also have expected that total reputation has to be as large or larger than reputation from any time period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-10-11T04:01:06.050" LastActivityDate="2022-10-11T04:01:06.050" Title="How can I have more year reputation than total reputation?" Tags="|support|bug|status-bydesign|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12238" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12236" CreationDate="2022-10-04T09:43:25.287" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;You've &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/75095/groody-the-hobgoblin?tab=bounties&amp;amp;sort=offered&quot;&gt;offered&lt;/a&gt; bounties totalling 200 reputation. That's reputation you've earned and is thus counted in your yearly gain.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reputation leagues also &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/81456/294691&quot;&gt;don't count the association bonus&lt;/a&gt;. This means that, while your total reputation will accurately reflect your current reputation, the yearly count has a -100 from not counting the association bonus, but a +200 from counting your offered bounties as rep earned, which leaves a +100 discrepancy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33315" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-10-04T17:08:37.363" LastActivityDate="2022-10-04T17:08:37.363" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12239" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12240" CreationDate="2022-10-04T12:35:32.680" Score="10" ViewCount="255" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;reality-check-container&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; tag is a meta tag. In &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/08/07/the-death-of-meta-tags/&quot;&gt;The Death of Meta Tags&lt;/a&gt;, we see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason meta-tags are a problem is that they do not describe the content of the question. They describe some other aspect of the question, like the author’s skill level, or the author’s motivation for asking it, or generally what “kind” of question it is (poll, how-to, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's this last idea that tipped me off to the possibility that we were looking at a meta tag: reality check is a kind of question, but does not describe the content of the question. Now, the article goes on to list two tests for metaness of tags. First:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the tag can’t work as the only tag on a question, it’s probably a meta-tag. Every tag you use should be able to work, more or less, as the only tag on a question. Meta-tags, like [beginner], [subjective], and [best-practices], are useless by themselves — they tell you nothing at all about the content of the question (in addition to a system tag, .&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty positive that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;reality-check-container&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; fails this test, again, because it doesn't describe the content of the question. A reality check question &lt;em&gt;must&lt;/em&gt; have other tags describing the content we are supposed to be reality checking (in addition to a system tag, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5307/is-the-only-tag-test-for-meta-tag-ness-broken-here&quot;&gt;Is the Only-Tag Test for meta-tag-ness broken here?&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second test:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol start=&quot;2&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a meta-tag. In a cruel, ironic twist, the meaning of the tag [subjective] itself … is actually subjective. Ditto for [best-practices] and [beginner]. Best practices to whom? Beginner by what criteria? These tags are impossible to define by anything remotely resembling an objective metric. In comparison, the the meaning of tags like [java], [c#], and [javascript] are crystal clear to all but the nuttiest of nutbags.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure it fails this particular test. 8 out of the 9 questions asked do seem to use the tag in a manner consistent with its description. Only one question uses it in a &amp;quot;am I understanding this right?&amp;quot; kind of way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm not sure about test two, but I am pretty darn certain that this tag fails test one. It definitely cannot be the only tag on a question, and it just describes a question type, rather than describing the content the question concerns.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we burninate &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;reality-check-container&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-10-17T12:16:18.037" LastActivityDate="2022-10-17T12:16:18.037" Title="Reality check: I think [reality-check] is a meta tag. Should we burn it?" Tags="|discussion|status-completed|tags|burninate-request|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12240" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12239" CreationDate="2022-10-04T21:49:57.110" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Burn it either way&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know whether it should be considered a meta tag, but looking at the questions using it I don't think it's a &lt;em&gt;good&lt;/em&gt; tag. They largely fall into two categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions about game rules, motivated by &amp;quot;that doesn't make sense in reality&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt; e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180194/37154&quot;&gt;How does Crown of Stars interact with Greater Invisibility?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;reality-check-container&quot;&gt;reality-check&lt;/a&gt; isn't needed here; a question can describe specific ways or reasons for being confused, and answers should try to address the specific problems faced by the asker. The tag doesn't really help with that process.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions about reality, motivated by game mechanics&lt;/strong&gt; e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/181992/37154&quot;&gt;Spherical Diamond Phylactery&lt;/a&gt;. These questions aren't really about RPGs, and would be better asked somewhere else. These are mostly already closed anyway; the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/176640/37154&quot;&gt;only exception&lt;/a&gt; seems like it may have avoided closure mainly because it got a good answer saying &amp;quot;don't look at reality, look at game mechanics&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One additional category is &amp;quot;questions about GURPS&amp;quot; which seems to have &amp;quot;reality check&amp;quot; as a named mechanic/design concept. The tag could be redefined as referring to this specific concept (perhaps renamed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gurps-reality-check&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;gurps-reality-check&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;gurps-reality-check-container&quot;&gt;gurps-reality-check&lt;/a&gt; so people don't just add it to stuff without reading the definition), however since there are only 2 questions fitting this it might just not be necessary. I am not at all familiar with GURPS, so if someone thinks the &amp;quot;reality check&amp;quot; from that system is a clearly defined thing that warrants a dedicated tag then I'm not opposed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2022-10-04T21:49:57.110" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12241" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12234" CreationDate="2022-10-06T04:17:10.200" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vW2IG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vW2IG.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r358M.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r358M.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Blood on the Clocktower is a classic diceless freeform large-group roleplaying game.  The game instructs you to take on the roles (see: roleplaying) of a bunch of villagers in a gothically named village.  There's a GM.  You're meant to act in character, although it avoids saying to what degree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is entirely different to a board game where you don't do any roleplaying.  While there are likely versions of this game where no roleplaying occurs and it's just mechanical interaction/questions/guessing, just like how in D&amp;amp;D you can have a dungeon crawl with absolutely zero roleplaying or IC interaction and just 'I roll to attack' 'pass the chips' etc, the rules clearly indicate roleplaying is meant to occur (just as they do in D&amp;amp;D), there is a setting, there is a GM, etc.  Couldn't be more clearly on topic for this stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastActivityDate="2022-10-06T04:17:10.200" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12242" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12243" CreationDate="2022-10-13T16:22:48.087" Score="5" ViewCount="141" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am unsure if this fits RPG.se well enough, so I am asking it on meta to check before I do post it. If this is not quite a good fit, that's fine. &lt;strong&gt;Does this belong on RPG.se?&lt;/strong&gt; Why? What changes are needed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The initial question is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Background&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am making an RPG that uses poker/Yahtzee like hands from die rolls instead of the normal &amp;quot;dice+mods vs target number&amp;quot; paradigm for determining effects of character actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hitting a particular hand can have vanishingly small chances. The solution I am toying with implements partial successes to modify the target hand. Said another way: what other RPGS use modifiers for, this one would temporarily downgrade a defense. What normally requires a full house would require a straight, triple, or even 2 doubles, depending on the strength of the effect.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue is that this should also apply to the players. For example, they need to track (for their character) that a straight is now their upper limit instead of a full house, and the lower limit is now doubles instead of two doubles.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;The Question&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there any RPGs (or mechanics) out there that have a simple method for tracking a frequently-changing ranges of numbers or values?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ideal solution:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;has a low mental burden: these bounds may shift over a few  combat exchanges!&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;should be &amp;quot;nice&amp;quot; to a character sheet: it shouldn't involve anything significantly larger than a 8&amp;quot;x11.5&amp;quot; or A4 sheet of paper and be storable in a notebook or file folder.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;allows for multiple shifts in the range to track.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;Some Research&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best solution I am considering right now is side-of-sheet trackers and paperclips. The paperclips would mark the boundaries and it would be up to the players to move them up/down. Players would need to know what intervals to cover (like... &amp;quot;the distance between lower and upper bounds is three spaces.&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another solution would be to simply have common alternate states stored on character sheet, much like AC, Flat-footed AC, and Touch AC from D&amp;amp;D 3.5! That forces some design choices, like limiting the number of alternate states.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another is to simply not modify the range on paper at all, but include something like &amp;quot;act as if your resulting hand is actually of the next-most-unlikely (or next-most-likely) hand.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11763" LastEditorUserId="11763" LastEditDate="2022-10-13T17:41:39.957" LastActivityDate="2022-10-13T23:39:45.747" Title="Question Workshop: Character's Sliding Target Numbers" Tags="|discussion|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12243" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12242" CreationDate="2022-10-13T23:39:45.747" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This seems adequately on-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;game-design-container&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt; tag contains several questions related to alternative options for the classic &amp;quot;roll dice to determine success&amp;quot; formula, including questions about the statistical consequences and ease of use for systems more complicated than than &amp;quot;add up the numbers&amp;quot;. They're not tremendously common, but some of them have been quite well received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Some feedback&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think in order to answer this question people will need a little more information about how &amp;quot;target hands&amp;quot; work. In particular you mention &amp;quot;upper bounds&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;lower bounds&amp;quot;, as well as &amp;quot;upper limits&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;lower limits&amp;quot;. Are those actually the same thing, just with different words? What do they mean? Are certain hands &amp;quot;too good&amp;quot; and start missing for some reason? I think it would be difficult to judge a good solution without understanding what the ranges mean.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, I'm less confident on this one because it goes against what I expect out of Stack Exchange sites, but the well-received &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-design&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;game-design&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;game-design-container&quot;&gt;game-design&lt;/a&gt; questions I can find largely ask for &lt;em&gt;suggestions&lt;/em&gt; rather than examples, such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91264/what-dice-mechanic-gives-a-bell-curve-distribution-that-narrows-and-increases-me&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178596/dice-rolling-mechanic-where-modifiers-have-a-predictable-and-consistent-effect-o&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198559/adjust-difficulty-without-affecting-characters-capacity-without-adding-steps-t&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. I usually see indications that &amp;quot;Idea generating&amp;quot; questions are off-topic, but for this type of game/system design topic a clear list of what problems you have and what criteria you have for good solutions seems to be accepted. If you go this direction, you would definitely want more information about how the system works and why it doesn't seem adequate so far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2022-10-13T23:39:45.747" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12244" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12245" CreationDate="2022-10-17T22:45:47.870" Score="14" ViewCount="182" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/202167/why-is-foundry-vtt-healing-for-1d84&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; is about a potential bug in someone's Foundry VTT setup for PF2e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, are these kinds of questions about bugs in virtual tabletops (VTTs) on topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems hard to answer with certainty (it could be an errant mod they're using, or homebrew item), and likely to change over time – but also objectively answerable and potentially useful to future users (depending on the answer).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-10-19T16:42:55.920" LastActivityDate="2022-10-20T20:11:58.923" Title="Are questions about bugs in virtual tabletops (VTTs) on topic?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12245" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12244" CreationDate="2022-10-17T23:14:06.160" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;It's a bug&amp;quot; is (only) a possible answer&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A lot of folks use some kind of tool to help them in play or with character creation/management. And sometimes those throw out results the user doesn't expect or immediately understand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's possible the answer is that it's a bug in the tool. If so, answers should be able to demonstrate that (and comments are useful towards clarifying any needed info). It's not the stacks job to identify where the bug is (though if it's a known bug, that's useful for such an answer.), but perhaps helping what is correct and/or how to workaround it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another possible answer is that the user as forgotten or missed a rule or character option, which makes it standard fare for us (and it doesn't matter whether it's a digital tool, DM, or some guide or video that's given them conflicting or not understood information).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;These questions haven't been a problem before&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An example gallery from other tools (in no particular order):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/170099/52137&quot;&gt;Is it a bug or intended that Unarmored defense from barbarian and monk do not stack with each other?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/15019/52137&quot;&gt;What can limit dex for AC?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/14334/52137&quot;&gt;Where did my Human Avenger&amp;#39;s bonus at-will go in Wizards&amp;#39; Character Builder?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/27448/52137&quot;&gt;Builder lacks artifacts concordance improvement?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/114259/52137&quot;&gt;What penalty does a medium load apply to a characters Jump skill?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/175736/52137&quot;&gt;Does the bonus action attack from Polearm Master receive the bonus to attack and damage rolls from a magic weapon?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/13795/52137&quot;&gt;Unable to use Musical Instrument in Character Builder&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/5956/52137&quot;&gt;Can a human&amp;#39;s bonus at-will power be psionically augmented?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2022-10-17T23:39:47.487" LastActivityDate="2022-10-17T23:39:47.487" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12246" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12244" CreationDate="2022-10-17T23:46:27.347" Score="17" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Since March 2020, virtual tools and tabletops are the primary media many people use to engage with our hobby.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No points for guessing why. The fact of the matter is that since COVID began, many people have shifted away from in person games and physical tools to remote games using digital tools. Since 2020, 90% of my games have been virtual, and I’ve quit using paper sheets entirely in favor of D&amp;amp;D Beyond.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Virtual tools are how people engage with our hobby now. It would be tone deaf to the state of the industry to disallow questions about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We handle questions about paper sheets, dice, LARP props, miniatures, and battle maps. Why? These are the things people use to engage with the hobby. Why would virtual table tops and digital tool sets be treated differently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I do not mean to say that the recent advent of VTTs changed anything for this question. Online tools have been on topic since the stack's inception. This question from 8 days after the site's launch is about how to use an online tool: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/1185/62294&quot;&gt;How do I manage created content in D&amp;amp;D Character Builder?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-10-20T20:11:58.923" LastActivityDate="2022-10-20T20:11:58.923" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12247" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12244" CreationDate="2022-10-18T06:52:47.533" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes....&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's be perfectly clear about the answer:  Yes, these questions are on topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We have a number of questions on that topic already&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We have an infrequently used tag for Foundry (the existence of a tag is not absolute proof that something is on topic, but I consider it reasonable evidence that it is or once was.  In this case, VTTs are fairly new, so it highly unlikely to be a case of &amp;quot;once was.&amp;quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;They are prominent tools of the hobby, and we handle questions about other such tools and adjacent topics such as dice, statistics, including software such as the &lt;a href=&quot;https://anydice.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Anydice&lt;/a&gt; tool; it would be exceedingly strange to exclude VTTs without a good reason.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is no more natural home for them in the stack system at large, that I know of, or that I can imagine short of a specialty stack catering specifically to VTTs.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;...As Long As The Ordinary Stack Guidelines Apply&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In other words, no shopping list questions, no open-ended debates about which VTT is better, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we get more of these questions, we will naturally refine what it means to be a &amp;quot;good question&amp;quot; in terms of, say, information required to give a good answer (at a minimum, I would expect &amp;quot;what VTT&amp;quot; and possibly &amp;quot;what plug-ins&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;what RPG&amp;quot;) and what specific types of VTT questions can't be answered here, but it is not necessary to determine this right now; frankly, I think it's ill-advised to do so, and better to handle them as we see what types of questions we get.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2022-10-18T06:52:47.533" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12248" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-10-18T13:08:33.163" Score="12" ViewCount="298" Body="&lt;p&gt;Sometimes I feel that a question has some value, but it is formulated in a unclear way, or it seems to ask two questions in one post, which is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6453/63061&quot;&gt;not recommended&lt;/a&gt;. Despite its value, the question is not suitable for RPG.SE (at least, for what I understand what are the Stack's requirements).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Usually, I write a comment asking clarifications and sometimes I even vote to close for &amp;quot;need more focus&amp;quot;. In some cases, I think that the problem is quick to be solved and require minor modification, hence I prepare a draft of an answer, tailored for what I think the real question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I wait for the clarification from the OP or the decision on &lt;em&gt;closing/leaving open&lt;/em&gt; process (when it is present) before posting a first version of the answer, for being consistent and for avoiding to provide an answer that does not actually solves the problem&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a correct behaviour? Or should I provide an answer to the question I think the OP is asking regardless the &lt;em&gt;close/leave open&lt;/em&gt; process is going on?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a practical case, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/202171/63061&quot;&gt;If you're Githzerai or have the Telepathy feat, are spell components required for the spell-slot-powered castings?&lt;/a&gt;: in this case, I thought that there are two questions instead of one, regarding two different game features. I voted to close and I refrain myself to post an answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="63061" LastEditDate="2022-11-22T15:51:38.537" LastActivityDate="2022-11-22T15:51:38.537" Title="Should I provide an answer even if I voted to close a question?" Tags="|discussion|answers|closing-questions|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12249" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12248" CreationDate="2022-10-18T13:47:21.467" Score="20" Body="&lt;h3&gt;You should re-think your close vote&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is, of course, possible to “think” you know what the question is asking, and prepare for that, without being confident enough to actually post an answer—in that case, a vote to close seeking clarification is appropriate. Answering probably isn’t.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, in general, we close too many questions. The gatekeeping here has gotten extreme, and our falling activity levels in no way justify it. Questions are often closed seeking clarifications that are irrelevant, unnecessary, or “nice to have,” and they should not be. If you are thinking about answering a question, you should also be thinking about retracting a close vote. It won’t be the right call every time, but it may be some of the time. And the site would likely be better off if more people made that call more of the time. We err far too hard in favor of closure and clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are not here to seek question nirvana, we are here to solve problems. Good enough to answer is good enough to remain open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Answering a question you &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; is problematic and will be closed is poor&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just handling the easy thing first—getting your answer in before 5 close votes have accrued, as a way to evade the site rules, is poor form, and runs the risk of the answer being deleted by moderators. Please don’t do that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tangential to the question, I know, but important enough to state at the outset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Answering a question you “know” is fine but will be closed anyway can be good&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, scare quotes on “know,” but very often experts understand questions that the wider community does not—something that appears unclear to those unfamiliar with the domain can, in fact, be perfectly clear to someone who is. (People probably shouldn’t be voting to close in such cases, but then there is no simple test for someone to know what they don’t know.) Answering such questions can “save” them, by making it clear that they &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, of course, for it to be good, you have to be right. Still, no harm (generally), so no foul if you’re wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still tangential to the question, since you shouldn’t be voting to close such questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;There is just barely room for both an answer and a close vote&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The case is, “This question is borderline, and I think it’s over the line, but I’m not sure if the community agrees with me, and I have what I consider to be the best answer possible under the circumstances.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This can justify both a close vote and an answer, maybe. It’s usually a mess when it happens, but I have done so a few times and I have seen others with considerable experience and whom I respect here do so sometimes, and it can rarely be the right answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider: sometimes, the best way to handle a question that could, arguably, be closed, is to answer it and demonstrate the problems with the formulation of the question. Usually such questions are problematic because they turn out to be far broader than the querent thinks they are. Sometimes the best answer is to point that out, and close the question for narrowing. Other times, the best approach is to answer the question and address the unexpected broadness. An answer affords more space to do it, and ultimately, because the user was unaware of the hidden breadth or depth of their query, there is an opportunity there to “answer” their query with the real information they need to know.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any time that is the case, closure is a consideration. Sometimes I have decided quite unambiguously that a question should not be closed, but other times it’s been less clear. There are times where my answer itself &lt;em&gt;demonstrated&lt;/em&gt; why a question should be closed—because I’d write a huge answer discussing various directions and facets of the question and still not coming to a singular answer, as a “see, this is the best the question can be answered, and it’s still not really answered.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The other concern is Fastest Gun in the West, which shouldn’t be a concern but is. If you think a question should be closed, but it’s borderline and you’re not sure it will be, I think it’s reasonable to also answer it, saying “I don’t really think this question works, but if the community wants it like this, this is my answer.” Not ideal, but then, neither is the Fastest Gun in the West effect itself—it’s just something we have to deal with. Sometimes—rarely—answering and voting to close can be how we deal with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-10-18T13:47:21.467" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12250" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12248" CreationDate="2022-10-18T14:46:44.867" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you think the current question &lt;em&gt;cannot be answered&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;should not be answered&lt;/em&gt;, then the correct thing is to close vote until the question is edited such that it could be answered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, however, the question &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be answered then closure is unwarranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closure and answering are mutually exclusive - a question cannot both be closable and deserve an answer. The goals are exactly opposed. Of course, different people might take different stances but &lt;em&gt;the same user&lt;/em&gt; should not go for both actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Closure is for when a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;does not meet the rules&lt;/a&gt;. This could be because the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic&quot;&gt;within the scope of the stack&lt;/a&gt;. For example, asking about a video game or even about &lt;a href=&quot;https://cooking.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;cooking&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is inappropriate for the format of the stack. For example, soliciting discussion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is in need of editing before it can be answered. For example, there is not enough information or there are too many questions to answer.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Et cetera.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do avoid being overly eager with close reasons. A litmus test would be whether or not &lt;em&gt;somebody else&lt;/em&gt; can edit the question without changing its meaning such that a close reason not applicable anymore. There is some information that only the question asker can provide. However, if other users can edit to remove ambiguity or otherwise end up with a question that is within the rules, then closure is inappropriate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To similar effect, consider whether a question in its current shape is indeed answerable and on-topic. An edit might be a &lt;em&gt;nice to have&lt;/em&gt; but ultimately unnecessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="22258" LastEditDate="2022-10-21T07:12:20.613" LastActivityDate="2022-10-21T07:12:20.613" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12252" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-10-31T22:11:21.840" Score="0" ViewCount="346" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over my relatively short tenure here so far, it is my impression that there seem to be two schools of thought in the community of active contributors:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;one sees practical value in using averages based on generic assumptions or on collected statistics (this is my current perspective)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the other sees such averages as meaningless or not of value, and recommends asking questions for either a concrete situation, or about immutable mathematical truths&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second perspective can also motivate people to vote to close questions as opinion-based, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200474/what-is-the-average-number-of-encounters-per-day&quot;&gt;this question about the average number of encounters per day in a D&amp;amp;D 5e game&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What I understood from discussion at the time is that this could vary widely from table to table, and, so the conclusion, therefore it would be of no value in providing an averaged view; which, I think, is a slightly different argument than it being opinion based, it is an argument that it is artificial and not useful – but there is no closure option for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What reminded me today of this subject was that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; put a bounty on an answer that is the equivalent of &amp;quot;we cannot say&amp;quot; (in this case, for a question on what &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159563/is-there-an-accepted-likelihood-of-hitting-that-is-consistent-across-tiers-and&quot;&gt;the average to-hit chance per level is&lt;/a&gt;). I am grateful that he is not going quite as far as voting to close the question as opinion based (the fate of a closely related one on if one can use an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159601/can-this-ac-per-cr-chart-be-used-in-dpr-per-level-calculations&quot;&gt;average AC per level chart in DPR calculations&lt;/a&gt;), but he is offering 500 of his hard-earned Internet-Points for making great answers to support that view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I understand it right, he is a professional statistician, or at least, works in a role that requires professional use of statistics, and this makes me wonder if there is something fundamental I am missing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Staying with D&amp;amp;D 5e, as a thought experiment to support such a view, I could imagine a campaign world set after a magical cataclysm, where our heroes are among the only survivors, everything else they encounter is either a Zombie (AC 8), or a magically animated armor (AC 18). In this world the average encountered AC would be 13. Clearly a character would never get to fight an opponent with an actual AC 13, and an ability that allowed the character to always hit AC 8, 50 % hit AC 13, and never hit AC 18 would have a very different performance than what one would expect from that average in individual encounters with either monster type.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Such an extreme &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; of course exist, and here is exaggerated to make the point. In practice, I think extremes and outliers are rare, and because they are rare, there is still value in averaging, even if it will not work in a situation like this. But of course, to prove that with a low statistical chance of being wrong, one would need to sample a large number of modules or tables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most other questions that do not just ask for rulebook exegesis, for example how to handle problem players or how to deal with issues of player agency do not get closed as opinion-based, even though answers can often only be based on personal experience of one writer, and not on aggregated, objective knowledge across many tables, either.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when the question is about game statistics encountered in play, it appears that personal experience from years of play is not enough any more.&#xA;So what I'm wondering about are particularly about these related aspects:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do questions about numbers have to be mathematically stringent, or are rough approximations that do not hold in some (maybe even many) cases acceptable, without counting as opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Why would questions that are asking for statistics – either based on rulebooks, from surveys, or from collecting data – be opinion-based?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-02T01:23:53.147" LastActivityDate="2022-11-02T01:23:53.147" Title="What is the issue with questions looking for averages or statistics?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12253" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12252" CreationDate="2022-11-01T01:57:41.043" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Statistics questions that involve player &amp;amp; DM decisions are (usually) opinion-based.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wikipedia&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Two main statistical methods are used in data analysis: descriptive statistics, which summarize data from a sample using indexes such as the mean or standard deviation, and inferential statistics, which draw conclusions from data that are subject to random variation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notice a major commonality between those two methods: they work &lt;strong&gt;on data&lt;/strong&gt;. No data means no statistics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider that question about average chance-to-hit per level. To give a proper &lt;em&gt;statistical&lt;/em&gt; answer to that question, we would need a dataset with a large number of sample attacks, including &lt;em&gt;at least&lt;/em&gt; the attacker's level &amp;amp; attack bonus, the target's AC, and whether the attack has advantage or disadvantage. Further, that dataset would need to actually be &lt;strong&gt;relevant&lt;/strong&gt; to the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, it's admittedly &lt;em&gt;possible&lt;/em&gt; that an answerer could get a dataset relevant to the asker by either A) conducting a highly expensive worldwide survey of gaming groups to get a statistically useful representative sample of attacks over the course of each group's campaign, or B) stalking &amp;amp; spying on the asker's group to build a representative sample of &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; group's attacks over the course of a campaign. &lt;em&gt;In practice&lt;/em&gt;, however, that's not what happens; instead, answerers generally just come up with their best guess (i.e. their opinion) for a dataset.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some statistics questions are answerable purely from publicly available data (e.g. &amp;quot;What's the average Constitution save bonus by level of monsters in the Monster Manual?&amp;quot;), and those are perfectly acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastActivityDate="2022-11-01T01:57:41.043" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12254" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12252" CreationDate="2022-11-01T15:00:30.693" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Many of these &amp;quot;what is the average of...?&amp;quot; question should be setting off your XY alarm.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mentioned my occupation, so I'll give some insight into how it applies here. Part of my job involves collecting all sorts of data, finding meaningful patterns, and presenting those meaningful patterns to stakeholders so they can make good business decisions. Sometimes, those stakeholders have ideas about ways to look at the data, other descriptive statistics they want to see. Part of my job is to tell them if looking at the data that way can actually be helpful, or if it doesn't really apply to our process. As I have asked you many times, I have asked my vice president of operations: &lt;em&gt;what problem are you trying to solve with this information?&lt;/em&gt; He wants to know if trying to use that information is going to be a waste of the company's time, and perhaps more importantly, if trying to use that information could lead to poor business decisions. So I ask why he wants to know, he tells me why he thinks that information could be useful, and I advise him on the limitations of the data, the limitations of the statistics he's looking for, and whether or not I think it can actually tell him what he thinks it's going to tell him. In this business, &lt;em&gt;there is no such thing as information for information's sake&lt;/em&gt;. If it isn't going to make us more money, we aren't going to waste time trying to figure out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, the stack is not a business, at least, not for us. We can handle questions that are looking for trivia. But, the guiding principles for asking good questions are very similar. Just as my boss wants to know if the answer to his questions are actually going to help him make sound business decisions, the best Q&amp;amp;As here are those that are going to lead to positive outcomes at the table of play. Of course, not every question has to even attempt to do that, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161208/whats-the-greatest-number-of-hands-i-can-have-to-annoy-my-mother-in-law-with&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the greatest number of hands I can have to annoy my mother-in-law with?&lt;/a&gt; comes to mind as one of our successful &amp;quot;just for fun&amp;quot; questions with zero consequences for the table of play (though I hope Bluemoon was able to patch things up with his mother in law).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But when an investigation does appear to have potential consequences or application at the table of play, it is the sort of question where knowing &amp;quot;what are you planning to do with this?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;why do you want to know this?&amp;quot; provides answerers with the tools needed to write fantastic answers that improve your gaming experience. And this is where your XY detector should be going off. Consider your question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200474/what-is-the-average-number-of-encounters-per-day&quot;&gt;What is the average number of encounters per day?&lt;/a&gt;. I explained in &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/61725912#61725912&quot;&gt;a chatroom on the question&lt;/a&gt; how it runs into the XY problem. You wrote in that question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How much damage such a feature can be expected to contribute to combat depends heavily on how many encounters you'll have in a day, because once you run out of uses, it won't contribute any more damage. When planning your character and estimating average expected damage, you therefore often have to make an assumption about the number of encounters per day that will use up some of those limited resources.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll just quote my take from that chat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From what I can tell, the problem you are trying to solve is &amp;quot;I want an idea of how many encounters per day I can expect when I am building a character, because different builds perform differently with different numbers of encounters per day&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's your problem, X.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have asked a question about what you think a good solution Y is, &amp;quot;what's the average encounters per day?&amp;quot;, because you think knowing that will equip you to better build your characters.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Classic XY problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Instead, an on topic question might be something like &amp;quot;Some character builds are really powerful with only a few encounters per day, but taper off quickly as their resources are depleted. I want to take this into account during character creation, so how can I know how many encounters to expect on average at a given table?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the sort of question where experience based answers are what we are after. Because it is experience solving your actual problem, not experience with a mostly unhelpful solution you thought of.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your question asked &amp;quot;what is a good assumption for the number of encounters per day?&amp;quot;, and the answer is &amp;quot;there is no good assumption because it will be wrong more often than it will be right&amp;quot;. Instead, the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; solution to your problem there, and the answer to the question I suggested in chat, is to just discuss it with the dungeon master and other players at a session zero or before the game starts so you can inform you character creation decisions accordingly. The average number of encounters per day varies from table to table, so just figure out what it is likely going to be at your particular table, rather than bringing to bear some arbitrary expectation that is probably going to be wrong for most tables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing I really want to know is whether or not the answer to a question actually leads to &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt; outcomes at the table. Using a statistically accurate estimation of encounter per day as a tool for informing your character creation decisions is likely to lead to &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt; outcomes for you at the table of play. You will disappointed when the expectation you had was not met. This is why it is important to tell us &lt;em&gt;why&lt;/em&gt; you want to know something. And this is why I bountied &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/159599/62294&quot;&gt;Theik's answer&lt;/a&gt;: they observe that bringing the expectation of 65% chance to hit  to the table of play just isn't a realistic expectation, even if it is statistically accurate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is also my concern with your more recent question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/202476/what-is-the-average-damage-per-attack-for-monsters-by-cr&quot;&gt;What is the average damage per attack for monsters by CR?&lt;/a&gt;. You state in the question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The DMG on page 274 has guidelines about damage per round for monsters of each Challenge Rating. However, most monsters deal that damage as a combination of multiple attacks (and sometimes other abilities like breath weapons).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The reason this information is given is because it motivates the CR calculation used for monsters, and CR is the primary metric used in encounter design. In other words, &lt;em&gt;damage per round is an important consideration for assessing the challenge a monster brings to a fight&lt;/em&gt;. This is the metric you should be concerned about when designing encounters. However, your question asks about &lt;em&gt;damage per attack&lt;/em&gt;, but doesn't give any motivation for why. You already know the expected DPR for a given CR, which is the metric I'd expect you to be using in encounter design, so I have no idea why you want to know damage per attack independent of damage per round. My XY alarm is going off. Damage per attack is obviously going to be an inferior metric to damage per round for the purpose of encounter design. If you are trying to solve a problem with encounter design using damage per attack, I want to know what it is so that I can tell you if damage per attack actually helps you. And if you just want to know for the sake of knowing, just say that. It's okay. I withheld my vote to close that question because it is a question about the averages of readily accessible numbers. It isn't opinion based. But I've downvoted it because I don't think it is a good question, and I think the correct answer to the question could lead to bad outcomes at the table of play if it is used in the wrong way. Or as the downvote helper text says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This question&lt;/strong&gt; does not show any research effort; it &lt;strong&gt;is&lt;/strong&gt; unclear or &lt;strong&gt;not useful&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-11-01T19:14:54.697" LastActivityDate="2022-11-01T19:14:54.697" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12255" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-11-16T13:25:40.337" Score="13" ViewCount="366" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165241/can-i-recover-a-single-arrow&quot;&gt;Can I recover a single arrow?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the &lt;em&gt;third&lt;/em&gt; meta question relating to this main site question (see also &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9758/what-qualifies-as-an-actual-problem&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11716/do-questions-have-to-pose-an-actual-problem?noredirect=1&amp;amp;lq=1&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;), but it has popped back into the reopen queue several times now (&lt;strong&gt;five times&lt;/strong&gt; to be precise), so I'm coming to meta, hopefully to permanently settle this question's status.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll keep it short, I closed it as a duplicate, and I'll provide an explanation in an answer below. But of course, answers providing other solutions are welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-17T04:38:09.117" LastActivityDate="2022-11-17T17:07:03.190" Title="Settling the status of &quot;Can I recover a single arrow?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12256" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12255" CreationDate="2022-11-16T13:25:40.337" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;This question should remain closed as a duplicate.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165241/can-i-recover-a-single-arrow&quot;&gt;Can I recover a single arrow?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92203/is-ammunition-recoverable-and-reusable&quot;&gt;Is ammunition recoverable and reusable?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I voted to close this question as a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/92203/is-ammunition-recoverable-and-reusable&quot;&gt;Is ammunition recoverable and reusable?&lt;/a&gt;. Let's check the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7523/if-an-answer-to-question-a-can-be-found-in-question-b-should-we-close-a-as-dupl/7524#7524&quot;&gt;duplicate criteria&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Criterion 1:&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. &amp;quot;Obvious&amp;quot; here means I can tell at a glance that Question A would be covered by Question B.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firing and attempting to recover one arrow is obviously covered as a subset of the more general question &amp;quot;Is ammunition recoverable and reusable?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Criterion 2:&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. &amp;quot;Obvious&amp;quot; here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The highest scoring (and accepted) answer to &lt;strong&gt;Question B&lt;/strong&gt; provides a direct answer to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;, first by quoting and summarizing the relevant rules, then providing several examples of how those rules are applied in play, &lt;em&gt;including providing the scenario of &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt; as an example&lt;/em&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if we fire 7 arrows during the fight, we can recover half of 7, which is 3.5, rounded down, which is 3 arrow recovered. &lt;em&gt;If we only fire a single arrow, we can recover half of 1, which 0.5, rounded down, which is 0 arrows recovered.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additionally, the rest of the answers contain similar rulings based on the relevant rules and further guidance that is directly applicable to &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Criterion 3:&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There isn't a strong, compelling reason to cover Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met, this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is not. It remained closed through five reopen reviews spanning two and a half years before it collected four reopen votes, which allowed me to reopen and switch the close reason over to duplicate. The question is a duplicate, and is adequately addressed by numerous good answers on the linked question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 A note for transparency: In September 2021 I revised the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/92204/revisions&quot;&gt;accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; to more thoroughly explain the relevant rules and cover a couple of examples, including the example that explicitly covers the scenario of &lt;strong&gt;Question A&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-11-16T15:23:40.217" LastActivityDate="2022-11-16T15:23:40.217" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12257" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12255" CreationDate="2022-11-17T07:25:49.967" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think this is not an easy case, which is why it has popped back so often&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The particular issue (and if I recall right, I ended up to vote reopen due to it) here is that the general answer does not discuss the special problem you run into with a single arrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general answer has a rule that says, you recover half your ammunition, round down, which for a single arrow is you always recover 0. Case closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, that is not a satisfactory answer for the single arrow case if you look at what the rule portrays, p. 146 PHB:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the end of the battle, you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The intend is clearly that you get back half your ammunition. In the case of many arrows, the being off by one does not really register. But with a single arrow, you would expect that over many combats in which you shoot a single arrow, you would be able to recover it about half the time. The rounding rule obliterates this outcome, and you recover no ammunition whatsoever.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This problem surfaces especially for a single arrow, and I think deserves separate treatment. I do not think that the answer of just following the rounding rule in this special case is &lt;strong&gt;obvious&lt;/strong&gt;. I can easily see making a special exception ruling in this case as the DM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So the criteria for dupe-closing are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the question obviously covered by the other question?&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, a recovering a single arrow is obviously covered by a question about recovering ammunition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is the question already answered in an obvious way by the dupe target?&lt;/strong&gt; Yes, in a technical sense. I do not think it does answer the OPs underlying issue however, that the arrow would be &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; unrecoverable. The current form removed this, as far as I can see from the history, due to efforts of the OP to keep his question open, but it seems &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/165241/timeline#history_89fefc10-0f2c-43e6-a444-49dedf1d7721&quot;&gt;clearly to be his motivation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is there a strong reason to cover the question alone?&lt;/strong&gt; I think there is, because this special case leads to an unsatisfactory outcome using the general answer. Saying the general answer covers this point is just suppressing a discussion and explanation about how to handle the incongruence that happens in particular with a single arrow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-17T17:07:03.190" LastActivityDate="2022-11-17T17:07:03.190" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12258" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7218" CreationDate="2022-11-19T02:53:35.860" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;A fine plating of neufchatel provided by SilentAxe for the many contracted Nabassu, who has provided extensive details on how one might rise to elected power in the most reasonable way possible: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/192478/31402&quot;&gt;Via Demonic Pacts and subcontractors&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2022-11-19T02:53:35.860" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12259" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9758" CreationDate="2022-11-19T17:30:50.013" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;An 'actual problem' is an ambiguous catch all concept that is able to be used to levy any and all criticism without accountability to justifiable argument.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="53875" LastEditorUserId="53875" LastEditDate="2022-11-22T00:26:09.077" LastActivityDate="2022-11-22T00:26:09.077" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12260" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12248" CreationDate="2022-11-22T08:39:23.097" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is what I learned from other sites that might be useful to be applied here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answering and Voting-to-Close (VTC) a question gives a mixed signal about the quality of the question. Closing a question is meant to put it on hold so the OP can fix the problem within the question. Answering it might confuse the OP whether there is actually a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, when the OP edits the question, there is also a chance that your answer becomes invalidated. If you fix your answer too, that's good, but sometimes people leave answers invalidated by edits (although arguably, you shouldn't edit an answered question in a way that invalidates answers), and no one knows or cares enough to do clean-up (downvote or flag your answer). This is worst case scenario.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So, please use only one or the other, not both.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-11-22T13:06:40.253" LastActivityDate="2022-11-22T13:06:40.253" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12261" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-11-25T15:32:46.083" Score="7" ViewCount="226" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/203021/62294&quot;&gt;Rogue Holding Bonus Action to disengage once attacked&lt;/a&gt;, is an obvious duplicate of this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152204&quot;&gt;Can you ready a bonus action?&lt;/a&gt;. At least, the general question being asked is exactly the same - can you ready a bonus action? &lt;em&gt;However&lt;/em&gt;, the context in which this recent question is asking about readying bonus actions shows evidence of a fundamental misunderstanding of what those particular actions actually do. That is, the problem here is that if we had just closed this question as a duplicate without answering, they are led to an answer to their question about readying bonus actions, but are left with a misunderstanding of how the other things mentioned in the question work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this particular question I chose to write an answer instead of voting to close, linking the question it was a duplicate of and spending most of the answer discussing the confused assumptions the question made; my thinking is that &lt;em&gt;maybe&lt;/em&gt; the misunderstanding about other things made for the compelling reason Doppel talks about in her &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7524/62294&quot;&gt;third criterion&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There isn't a strong, compelling reason to cover Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met, this rarely happens.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also don't think &amp;quot;close the question and correct the confusion in a comment&amp;quot; work for this particular question, based on (again) Doppelgreener's guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7112/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're substantially solving their problem by correcting them, then post an answer and include the corrections as part of that answer. (Make sure you answer the question independently. Answers that solve just a little part of the problem don't get well received.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I'm not sure, hence asking here for guidance. How should we approach questions like this, where the general premise is obviously a duplicate, but the specific context presents significant confusion or incorrect assumptions that the asker would be well-served by having explained?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that this meta discussion is highly related to two previous meta discussions, which motivated in part my decision to answer:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7111/a-question-has-some-facts-majorly-wrong-should-i-be-correcting-them-in-comments&quot;&gt;A question has some facts majorly wrong: should I be correcting them in comments or an answer?&lt;/a&gt; (linked and quoted above)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3505/how-do-we-handle-it-when-the-askers-problem-is-just-that-theyre-confused&quot;&gt;How do we handle it when the asker&amp;#39;s problem is just that they&amp;#39;re confused?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of these questions really address the scenario where a duplicate is involved, so I think further discussion here is warranted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-29T16:38:31.437" LastActivityDate="2022-11-29T16:38:31.437" Title="A question is an obvious duplicate, but there is other confusion in the question worth addressing. What do?" Tags="|discussion|questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12262" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-11-26T15:59:42.963" Score="3" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/176001/can-i-twin-cast-a-cantrip-used-with-reaper-from-the-death-domain&quot;&gt;Can I twin cast a cantrip used with reaper from the death domain?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is the example I've just come across, but I have definitely run across many similar questions.  A duplicate question should be &lt;strong&gt;thoroughly&lt;/strong&gt; answered by an existing question.  This question is asking about a rule that is a different rule with different wording than the 'duplicate' question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An expert can look at the 'duplicate' question and infer that the rules interaction showcased there can (or could) also apply to Reaper and Twin Spell's interaction.  A layman may not.  In fact, having just interacted with a lot of beginner players, I would lay &lt;em&gt;significant money&lt;/em&gt; that they would not 99% of the time.  Likewise, someone searching for that specific interaction may not know to search for another, similar rules interaction to find an answer, especially if they are unfamiliar with the Stack Exchange site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why are questions about rules interactions that are in the same category as other rules interactions questions, but involve different rules or different interactions of those rules, marked as duplicate?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10075" LastEditorUserId="42375" LastEditDate="2022-11-29T17:54:03.957" LastActivityDate="2022-11-30T12:14:44.763" Title="Why are questions about similar, but not the same, rules interactions marked as duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|closed-questions|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12263" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12261" CreationDate="2022-11-26T18:48:35.817" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'd suggest to solve their problem&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the root motivation for answering questions here? I think it is that &lt;em&gt;we want to help the asker&lt;/em&gt; first and foremost, and secondly, we want to have an answer that will also be useful to future readers that have the same problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is the reason for closing questions as duplicates? Apparently, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/duplicates&quot;&gt;to help people find the right answer&lt;/a&gt;. By closing questions as duplicates, all questions point to the same question, and all the answers can be on that one question, so the good answers are not scattered around and hard to find. Of course, this only works &lt;em&gt;if these answers can fully answer the question posed&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, &lt;strong&gt;pointing to the duplicate may not help the querant&lt;/strong&gt; answer their question: they are confused about how the rules work, and may not be able to parse the technically correct answer, or understand how and why it applies to their case. So closing the question as a duplicate fails to achieve the fundamental goal of solving their problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To cite the last of your linked Q&amp;amp;As:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;3. They're confused and it's obvious. They've asked a question, but to really solve their problem requires poking at the confusion underneath.&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Answer it. Answer their question at face value, then poke at the confusion underneath: show them what they're confused about and unravel their confusion for them. Solve their problem on every level. That's what we do here: we don't answer questions blindly, &lt;em&gt;we solve problems&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-11-26T18:48:35.817" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12264" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12261" CreationDate="2022-11-27T20:44:07.547" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;In support of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12263/18269&quot;&gt;Groody's already excellent answer&lt;/a&gt;, I would add the following argument:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If two questions require significantly different answers to help their two respective querents, then they are functionally &lt;strong&gt;not duplicates of each other.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Different levels of expertise, understanding, or especially &lt;em&gt;misunderstanding&lt;/em&gt; between the querents can certainly result in questions that seem like duplicates, but functionally are not because of differences in the amount of detail and/or correction necessary to get both querents where they need to be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a judgment call, but as experts I believe it is one we can collectively make.  That said, it may be reasonable to link to one answer within another answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-11-29T16:36:31.777" LastActivityDate="2022-11-29T16:36:31.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12265" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12261" CreationDate="2022-11-28T08:50:23.470" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have to differentiate between question &lt;em&gt;partially&lt;/em&gt; answered by a duplicate and a question that is &lt;em&gt;completely&lt;/em&gt; answered by a duplicate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let's take a simplistic examples&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Existing question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Is a red die going to be the fastest for movement?&amp;quot; which is answered with a &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Complete overlap&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new question shows up which asks &amp;quot;Which colour die should I roll to move the fastest?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a complete overlap in this case. Closing as a duplicate is appropriate - the new question is fully answered by the existing one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Partial overlap&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A new question shows up which asks &amp;quot;How to move the fastest?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The existing question only &lt;em&gt;partially&lt;/em&gt; answers the new one. There might be other character options that help - when riding a horse you would be faster. Or wearing roller skates. Or choosing the most aerodynamic haircut. Etc. Several of these options probably need to be chosen to get &amp;quot;fastest movement&amp;quot;. And a red die is going to be one of the choices.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this case, the new question should be answered. An answer might as well point to the existing question and say something like: &amp;quot;For a die, choose a red one, see here why &amp;lt;link to question&amp;gt;. You also need to get a horse on roller skates.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Important to note is that a question &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; be partially answered by multiple other questions, thus closing with more than one duplicate target might cover it completely. Again, this should be done if the collection of targets do completely cover it. Given that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The fastest die to use is red.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the fastest mount is a horse on a skateboard.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The fastest way to move is a horse on roller skates paired with a red die&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the two individual answers do not answer the new question fully.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For this specific question, I would say it is a &lt;em&gt;partial&lt;/em&gt; overlap. Saying &amp;quot;you cannot hold a bonus action&amp;quot; does solve it but also there is the apparent misunderstanding of &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; the disengage or dash actions &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is an existing questions that describe disengage and dash, it could be closed as multiple duplicates. But if no such question exists, then it seems fine to answer it. It can become a canonical about these actions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastActivityDate="2022-11-28T08:50:23.470" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12266" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12262" CreationDate="2022-11-30T12:14:44.763" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;That particular question is a dupe and there are numerous similar cases&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the very least, this certainly isn't the only case of non-exact duplicates being closed as duplicates:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/149543&quot;&gt;If a sorcerer casts Sickening Radiance with the Careful Spell metamagic option, does he have to spend a sorcery point every round?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/95447&quot;&gt;Does crusader&amp;#39;s mantle stack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/194988&quot;&gt;When Peace Domain&amp;#39;s Emboldening Bond feature specifies a number of creatures equal to your proficiency bonus, can you choose fewer than that number?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/202341&quot;&gt;Would it be possible for a Multiclass Order of scribes wizard/sorcerer to put sorcerer spells into their spell book&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/184913&quot;&gt;Misty Step and Manifest Mind Order of scribes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/181704&quot;&gt;Can a Way of Mercy monk heal him/herself?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/180816&quot;&gt;Does Elemental Affinity apply to Create Bonfire?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/178903&quot;&gt;How does the Mobile feat interact with the Writhing Tide for a Swarmkeeper Ranger?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, personally, for me, I see no meaningful difference between these:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;when you cast [a] spell [...] that targets only one creature, you can have it target a second creature.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you cast a [...] cantrip that [...] targets only one creature, the spell can instead target two creatures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And so, those &lt;em&gt;particular&lt;/em&gt; questions are identical.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-11-30T12:14:44.763" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12267" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-02T15:10:53.423" Score="14" ViewCount="287" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the past, several bounties have been offered, both for making questions attract more answers and for rewarding already existent answers (which are the actual aims of bounties).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beside the default ones, some users started to write witty messages for the bounty: since I truly believe that a lot of them  contained clever puns or were very funny, I suggest to collect them here, in imperishable memory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastActivityDate="2022-12-04T15:45:42.120" Title="Witty, clever &amp; funny: let's collect the bounty's messages!" Tags="|discussion|bounty|just-for-fun|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="10" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12268" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12267" CreationDate="2022-12-02T15:10:53.423" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Reminiscents from &lt;em&gt;Arabian Nights&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thomas Markov offered 100 Rep Points on the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/202734/63061&quot;&gt;How many creatures fit on a Carpet of Flying during combat?&lt;/a&gt; and disrupted our childhood memories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry Aladdin. According to the rules of D&amp;amp;D, you unfortunately cannot show me the world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastActivityDate="2022-12-02T15:10:53.423" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12269" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12267" CreationDate="2022-12-02T16:34:17.083" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Rather than sit and laugh at &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/revision/1681237/2046029/list-of-my-bounties-including-the-bounty-comment&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;my own jokes&lt;/a&gt;, I'd like to put forward two posts I gave bounties to because I thought they were tremendously funny.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;I wanty the game&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From the early days of the site, myxzplk provides &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/4284/62294&quot;&gt;guidance for finding other players&lt;/a&gt; that has stood the test of time. The guidance is worthy of a bounty, but one phrase insightfully caricatures people who just fling their desire for players out into the universe expecting the game to come to them; it was for that phrase I offered this bounty message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;100 internet points to mxyzplk for this beautiful piece of English prose: &amp;quot;I wanty the game&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Four words, one of them spelled incorrectly, perfectly captures so many of the low effort &amp;quot;looking for group&amp;quot; posts I have sifted through across various forums and brick-and-mortar shop bulletin boards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;Refusing to play or refusing to allow the game to be played by others is not a playstyle.&amp;quot;&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/163377/62294&quot;&gt;How to deal with a player who says no all the time?&lt;/a&gt; presents a tale of a problem player who apparently doesn't actually want to play the game, declining to bite on any of the plot hooks and content opportunities presented by the DM. Upper_Case provides a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/163384/62294&quot;&gt;perfect diagnosis&lt;/a&gt; of the problem, for which I gave a bounty with message:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Refusing to play or refusing to allow the game to be played by others is not a playstyle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5174/can-we-affirm-that-rpg-se-embraces-a-plurality-of-playstyles&quot;&gt;embrace a plurality of playstyles&lt;/a&gt; on this site, Upper_Case helpfully points out that refusing to play the game and impeding the play for others is not a playstyle, so naturally, we shouldn't have to tolerate such silliness at the table of play. I don't know what it was, but something about the candidness of this statement gave me quite the chuckle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-12-02T16:34:17.083" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12270" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12267" CreationDate="2022-12-02T16:35:41.600" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Precious spices from the East India Company&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;After a long journey in the mystic lands of India, Thomas Markov brought me some spice for an answer to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/59951/63061&quot;&gt;Does every magic rod, wand, crystal, orb, and staff count as an arcane focus?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm awarding 500 Markov's Salt &amp;amp; Vinegar internet points to Eddymage's answer for the several keen observations made about the magic items from the more recent book releases. Warning: Internet points manufactured in a facility that also produces reddit karma.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastActivityDate="2022-12-02T16:35:41.600" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12271" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12267" CreationDate="2022-12-02T16:45:35.500" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Honoring the limited verbal skills of Hobgoblins&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;GROODY MAKE GOOD ANSWER. GIVE GROODY 200 LEGS OF DEER FOR MAGLUBIYET'S BLOOD FEAST.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/200790/does-the-wristpocket-spell-allow-a-bead-from-the-chronurgy-wizards-arcane-abeya/202252#202252&quot;&gt;Does the Wristpocket spell allow a bead from the Chronurgy wizard&amp;#39;s Arcane Abeyance feature to last forever?&lt;/a&gt; in reference of the screen name awarded to&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/75095/groody-the-hobgoblin&quot;&gt;Groody the Hobgoblin&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-12-02T16:45:35.500" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12272" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12267" CreationDate="2022-12-04T15:45:42.120" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;I very fondly remember this one from when I asked a question, then delved in to dig through all the books myself after I had gotten a few rather... opinionated answer to a very delicate question about how &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133398/30306&quot;&gt;the game itself presents their splats to stand towards LBGTQ-topics&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/133398/2100&quot;&gt;Trish's answer&lt;/a&gt; is the kind of things that we should show new comers to aim for. It deservers more recognition. - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/2100&quot;&gt;Sardathrion - against SE abuse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For an answer that &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8504/i-ran-out-of-characters-for-my-answer-what-to-do&quot;&gt;broke the limit of the text field&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2022-12-04T15:45:42.120" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12273" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-06T16:09:29.630" Score="7" ViewCount="229" Body="&lt;p&gt;This recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/202813/23547&quot;&gt;question&lt;/a&gt; prompted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/202858/23547&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, to which a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/202813/when-do-you-need-to-make-an-strength-athletics-check-to-climb-when-you-have-a#comment555933_202858&quot;&gt;comment&lt;/a&gt; asked &amp;quot;Where are you getting your quotes from? I cant find them in the PHB&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In attempting to source the putative rules quotes, I stumbled upon this intriguing &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.jugonestop.com/pregunta/133466/cuando-necesitas-hacer-un-chequeo-de-fuerza-atletismo-para-subir-cuando-tienes-una-velocidad-de-ascenso&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;page&lt;/a&gt;.  It is a complete Spanish translation, and not a bad one at that, of our site's page - much like you will sometimes see a question copied word-for-word on quora.  There are web adds on the page, so the most innocuous interpretation would be that this is just an enterprise to send bots out to harvest / scrape web content, translate it, and then sell web advertisement space (and perhaps promote the translation software, &amp;quot;Yandex&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While most of the poster's names have been changed (to give the impression that this is a legitimate site with actual members?), mine hasn't - and there is a link to my actual rpg stacks member page.  Should I be concerned about this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The page says that it is &amp;quot;Powered by StackExchange&amp;quot; - I doubt that arrangement is consensual.  Does someone at StackExchange want to know about this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there some aspect to this that is more sinister than selling web adds?  Perhaps people who think this is a real community site make an account and then something is done with their information?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastActivityDate="2022-12-06T16:43:56.643" Title="What sort of site is 'JugonesTop&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12274" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12273" CreationDate="2022-12-06T16:25:53.373" Score="14" Body="&lt;h3&gt;It's a Stack Exchange scraper, but in Spanish.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is explained fully in this meta.se post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/200178/674198&quot;&gt;A site (or scraper) is copying content from Stack Exchange. What should I do?&lt;/a&gt;, but here is the basic explanation of what the site is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What is a &amp;quot;scraper&amp;quot; and why is that bad?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Historically, SCRAPER here on Stack Exchange meant &amp;quot;Stack Content Republishers Attributing Poorly and/or Excelling at Ranking.&amp;quot; More generally, a scraper is another website which copies content from our sites either by scraping directly from our pages, accessing the information through our API, or some other means. In principle, there's actually nothing wrong with doing this. Our content is licensed under &lt;a href=&quot;https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0&lt;/a&gt; and is freely redistributable, so long as they follow the &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/&quot;&gt;attribution requirements&lt;/a&gt; and link back to us as the source. Some sites, however, do not follow these rules or bring up other concerns in the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site you mention appears to be doing this, but translating our posts into Spanish. The meta answer linked above goes into detail about what you should do about this, so refer to the instructions there for next steps. Giving it a cursory inspection, it appears to be in the &amp;quot;do not report&amp;quot; category, and if, as you say, the translations are actually good, it may actually be providing some value to Spanish speaking readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-12-06T16:43:56.643" LastActivityDate="2022-12-06T16:43:56.643" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12275" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-10T07:23:08.953" Score="4" ViewCount="103" Body="&lt;p&gt;The other day I saw a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203316/where-does-the-idea-of-selling-dragon-parts-come-from#comment556157_203317&quot;&gt;recommendation from Eddymage&lt;/a&gt; on how to include special characters using MathJax. Like this:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$&#xA;^\dagger&#xA;$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no experience with MathJax, and wanted to experiment how that works. And for some reason, sometimes the preview that is rendered under posts looks different than what you get when you hit submit (I have that experience with tables sometimes, and it was the case here, too).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than spamming the Meta or creating spurious posts on the main site, is there a test-bed post somewhere that can be used to play around with markdown and formatting, that is periodically purged of answers and comments?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="63061" LastEditDate="2022-12-10T10:23:22.073" LastActivityDate="2022-12-10T19:42:55.337" Title="Is there a way to test posts or formatting?" Tags="|support|formatting|markdown|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12276" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12275" CreationDate="2022-12-10T09:42:22.783" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The web interface contains this:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When writing a post, it includes a look on how the text is parsed below the text entry box. So &lt;code&gt;$a+b+c&lt;/code&gt; is rendered as code and &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$a+b+c\$&lt;/span&gt; is rendered as formula. Even Images are rendered fully so whatever the image links to, it is rendered, and I did... make snapshotception: &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OEKCp.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OEKCp.png&quot; alt=&quot;a snapshot of the text above right before inserting it&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2022-12-10T09:42:22.783" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12277" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12275" CreationDate="2022-12-10T10:54:30.343" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;We don’t have one here on RPG, but you can use &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3122/formatting-sandbox&quot;&gt;the sandbox&lt;/a&gt; on meta.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You mentioned tables sometimes being broken; this issue is documented in &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/357596/674198&quot;&gt;this bug report&lt;/a&gt; on meta.se, I'll reproduce the entire answer below for reference. You will notice in the answer below that the last markdown table renders as &lt;code&gt;text above table |test|test| |----|----| |test|test|&lt;/code&gt; when viewing this post, but if you pull up the post preview by clicking &amp;quot;Edit&amp;quot;, the preview renderer will replace the unparsed text with a preview of the mardown table.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have text right above or below the table, the preview renders the table markdown as a table. But after you save the post, the table is not rendered and just shows the markdown code.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can use the code below as an example. If you try to edit my answer, it shows a table in the preview but not in the backend-rendered post view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Raw Markdown:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&#xA;text above table&#xA;|test|test|&#xA;|----|----|&#xA;|test|test|&#xA;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;How it looks in Preview&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kszRf.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kszRf.png&quot; alt=&quot;Table formatted correctly&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Result after posting&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;text above table&#xA;|test|test|&#xA;|----|----|&#xA;|test|test|&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So either the backend renderer is broken or the preview renderer is broken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-12-10T14:27:39.307" LastActivityDate="2022-12-10T14:27:39.307" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12278" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12275" CreationDate="2022-12-10T19:42:55.337" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/3122/323179&quot;&gt;Meta SE formatting sandbox&lt;/a&gt; is a great option for testing formatting in a live post. However, it does not do MathJax. If you feel the need to experiment with posting MathJax you could borrow a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/316371/323179&quot;&gt;formatting sandbox on another meta site&lt;/a&gt; that has &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/216607/323179&quot;&gt;MathJax enabled&lt;/a&gt; (caveat: the delimiters may not be the same and some sites support additional formatting that RPG does not). &lt;a href=&quot;https://puzzling.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6052/25084&quot;&gt;Puzzling's formatting sandbox&lt;/a&gt; has MathJax, and I doubt anyone would say anything if you used it for whatever experiment you had in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2022-12-10T19:42:55.337" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12279" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-13T21:11:58.677" Score="11" ViewCount="364" Body="&lt;p&gt;The tag snippet for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;new-gm-container&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For questions specifically about problems inherent to becoming or tutoring a game master (GM). This tag is not for just saying &amp;quot;I am a new GM&amp;quot;: see the full tag wiki for important usage notes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The full tag wiki goes on to provide robust guidance for use of the tag, more robust than most, if not all, of our other tags. It seem we were very intentional about constructing the usage guidance to avoid the problem of just slapping the tag on questions that just happened to involve a new GM when the question didn't substantively relate to problems unique to new GMs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, it seems we have failed. Reading through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bnew-gm%5D+closed%3A0&quot;&gt;list of open questions&lt;/a&gt; tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;new-gm-container&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;, it seems we have done a rather poor job of applying the usage guidance we have for the tag. A large proportion of these questions are problems we have probably all faced in some form another as GMs, and just have the tag because the question author was new to the role.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The volume is not tremendous, but it is certainly non-trivial, so I am putting this here to get some community feedback for cleaning up this tag. I think it will probably be as simple as a standard retagging effort, but I wanted to get some thoughts and see some community support for the idea before undertaking the project. I'll also note that a good chunk of these are &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?page=2&amp;amp;tab=Relevance&amp;amp;q=%5bnew-gm%5d%20closed%3a0%20-%5bdnd-5e%5d&quot;&gt;not D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/a&gt;, with a large chunk of those being &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bnew-gm%5D+closed%3A0++%5Bdnd-4e%5D+or+%5Bdnd-3.5e%5D+or+%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D&quot;&gt;4e, 3.5e, and PF1e&lt;/a&gt;, and then another large chunk &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bnew-gm%5D+closed%3A0+-%5Bdnd-5e%5D+-%5Bdnd-4e%5D+-%5Bdnd-3.5e%5D+-%5Bpathfinder-1e%5D&quot;&gt;are not in the D&amp;amp;D sphere&lt;/a&gt; at all. So a retagging effort will require some coordination between several system experts to make sure it gets done right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For reference, here are the previous meta discussions we've had concerning &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;new-gm-container&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4913/lets-make-the-new-gm-tag-wiki-useful?rq=1&quot;&gt;Let&amp;#39;s make the [new-gm] tag wiki useful&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4982/what-can-should-we-do-about-new-gm&quot;&gt;What can/should we do about [new-gm]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4869/burninate-new-gm-tag&quot;&gt;burninate new-gm tag&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="36521" LastEditDate="2022-12-13T22:01:50.187" LastActivityDate="2023-12-24T19:49:32.113" Title="This tag is not for just saying &quot;I am a new GM&quot;: okay, but we did anyway. Now what?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12280" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12279" CreationDate="2022-12-14T13:40:04.177" Score="16" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Realistically this tag needs constant diligence and will need the occasional cleanup&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And that's fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Possibly just for my amusement, I'll try to go through the mechanisms at play here. Firstly, new GMs are heavily also going to be new contributors/askers, even more so than question askers in general. And new askers bring whatever tag system they're used to (which could just be a best guess), and doesn't strictly have the same goals the stack has. They want their question answered (and quickly, as a rule) far more than categorizing the question for future readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site doesn't push the tag description or excerpt very heavily either, and while we could give it a better warning (ie. in capital letters at the start) I doubt that would have a great effect (certainly no guarantee) and that feels unnecessarily aggressive. Editing tags aren't a great burden, and there's usually other tags to be fixed at the same time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yeah, expect the occasional wave of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;new-gm-container&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; being removed. It is for question inherent to being a new GM, not simply marking the asker as such nor for misunderstandings incidental to a new GM having not internalized the rules fully (experienced GMs can make the same muck up). As ever, a reminder to keep the collective rate of edits to old questions to a reasonable level. New questions (and other edits and changes) deserve the light too :)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="22219" LastEditDate="2022-12-21T20:13:09.837" LastActivityDate="2022-12-21T20:13:09.837" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12281" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-14T14:24:53.430" Score="1" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm quoting something that has a centered line of text in the source formatting (pg. 175 of the D&amp;amp;D 5e PHB). I initially used the MathJax display style environment $$ like so:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$10 + \text{all modifiers that normally apply to the check}$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check:&#xA;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$10 + \text{all modifiers that normally apply to the check}$$&lt;/span&gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, we generally prefer to avoid MathJax unless it is necessary (like the post contains math) since not all devices support it. So instead I've used the &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;nbsp;&lt;/code&gt; character to approximately center the line:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;                         10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;&amp;gt;Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check:&#xA;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;&amp;amp;nbsp;10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check&#xA;&amp;gt;&#xA;&amp;gt;If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So while the markdown looks ridiculous, the output nicely matches the source formatting without using MathJax. Is this a better solution than using MathJax to center the line? Are there any accessibility related reasons I should avoid doing this as well?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-12-21T10:45:44.940" Title="Does using numerous &amp;nbsp; whitespace characters to center a line of text cause accessibility issues?" Tags="|discussion|accessibility|mathjax|markdown|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12282" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12281" CreationDate="2022-12-14T14:36:44.227" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Irrespective of accessibility, it just isn't a good solution in general.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Checked my own post on my phone, and using &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;nbsp;&lt;/code&gt; doesn't work; it was aligned in the desktop browser I was using, but is going to be a crap shoot in other browsers and devices:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oATcNl.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oATcNl.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I guess there just isn’t a good way to center align text that isn’t MathJax.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-12-14T14:36:44.227" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12283" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12281" CreationDate="2022-12-14T15:13:45.847" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Unless formatting is important, don't quote formatting&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A general rule in quoting is, that formatting is not taken from a text unless it is important. Importance is usually only afforded to properties in the fontset, such as &lt;em&gt;italics&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;bolding&lt;/strong&gt; or CAPITAL LETTERS.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Text formatting on the page is usually not deemed essential in qupting, so a quote usually does not care for indentation or center format. The only exception in this is linebreaks, which often are deemed essential, and in some quotations are remarked with &lt;code&gt;//&lt;/code&gt; or a similar orthographic solution in case the quote can't contain actual linebreaks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Center-alignment&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;MathJax&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But if you absolutely must have center format, MathJax allows text with &lt;code&gt;$$\text{center}$$&lt;/code&gt; for &lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;$$\text{center}$$&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, MathJax isn't &lt;em&gt;always&lt;/em&gt; playing nice with screen readers, and such should be avoided for formatting only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;HTML doesn't work anymore&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; point, basic HTML was disabled from StackExchange, so that &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p align=&amp;quot;center&amp;quot;&amp;gt;test&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;, usually a center-aligned text, is now rendered as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;test&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, the relevant HTML code isn't visible in the dev-console &lt;code&gt;F12&lt;/code&gt;, and likewise the more verbose &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;p style=&amp;quot;text-align:center;&amp;quot;&amp;gt;test&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt; wouldn't get parsed as formatting but stripped, just like &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;div align=&amp;quot;center&amp;quot;&amp;gt;test&amp;lt;/div&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BoITb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/BoITb.png&quot; alt=&quot;A side by side of the first two paragraphs of this section and its view in the dev-console&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PLVkg.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PLVkg.png&quot; alt=&quot;A side-by-side of the edit window of the above text and the dev-console parsing, highlighting the DIV portion and the parsed output when removing the {code}format.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2022-12-21T10:45:44.940" LastActivityDate="2022-12-21T10:45:44.940" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12284" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12281" CreationDate="2022-12-14T16:14:26.790" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This is zero issue for screenreaders&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A screenreader will just treat all those spaces as a space and move to the next text it has to read aloud, so it won’t cause any problems for those who rely on them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Centering text is probably not an accessibility problem&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ignoring (for the moment) the “bug” &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12282/4563&quot;&gt;you found&lt;/a&gt;, this is effectively centering. I have never received guidance that centered text is a problem for accessibility, and I have worked a fair amount on accessibility under the direction of accessibility experts (to wit: I would not claim to be one, myself). Accessibility is vast, and frankly it’s not a monolithic agreed-upon thing: there are a lot of suggestions, sometimes contradictory, about many details, once you get beyond the low-hanging fruit of headings, contrast, &lt;code&gt;alt&lt;/code&gt; properties, and so on. But the general fact that most people find centering a useful way of “centering” some text is probably a good sign: it may very well &lt;em&gt;improve&lt;/em&gt; accessibility, done well.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But of course, this isn’t &lt;em&gt;actually&lt;/em&gt; centering the text&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As you point out, narrower viewports cause text that is “centered” in this way to look awful, since the line wraps and the “centering” turns into what it actually is: an indent. Worse, this isn’t limited to narrow viewports: different fonts, different font sizes, etc. etc. If someone doesn’t have the Georgia font installed on their system, they’re going to see a different font, and that font’s relative widths will (probably) be different. If Stack Exchange decides to &lt;em&gt;change&lt;/em&gt; the font in use—as they have in the past—then everyone’s “centering” will be off.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These problems aren’t really resolvable. Unless Stack Exchange offers proper centering, we don’t have it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-12-14T16:14:26.790" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12285" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-14T16:33:33.550" Score="8" ViewCount="178" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chameleon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;chameleon-container&quot;&gt;chameleon&lt;/a&gt; tag was just created for the D&amp;amp;D 3.5e prestige class, chameleon.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our guidance on when to create tags for individual classes is fairly vague (by necessity), and I think this one might be borderline, so I wanted to raise a discussion. Is this tag a good fit for the site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My thoughts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;There is some merit in grouping these questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chameleon is a weird, weird class. It raises a lot of thorny questions, revolving around its ability to swap its class features in and out and the sheer “My ‘Not Allowed to Qualify’ T-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt.”-ness of it. (Not least because that “T-shirt” doesn’t resolve all questions as well as its authors probably hoped it would.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;But it is &lt;em&gt;pretty&lt;/em&gt; specific&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The chameleon is a somewhat-obscure, one-off class from one supplement to one edition of D&amp;amp;D, that has never re-appeared in other editions of D&amp;amp;D and doesn’t have a lot of comparable classes in other games (to my knowledge). Moreover, even if we did have other chameleons, they likely wouldn’t be really the same topic as the one from &lt;em&gt;Races of Destiny&lt;/em&gt;, which is so specific to that implementation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;And I worry about “chameleon” being a generic term&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the tag should, perhaps, be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chameleon-prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;chameleon-prestige-class-container&quot;&gt;chameleon-prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; instead. Or even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races-of-destiny-chameleon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;races-of-destiny-chameleon-container&quot;&gt;races-of-destiny-chameleon&lt;/a&gt; instead. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races-of-destiny-chameleon-prestige-class&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon-prestige-class&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;races-of-destiny-chameleon-prestige-class-container&quot;&gt;races-of-destiny-chameleon-prestige-class&lt;/a&gt; is probably too much :P&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-12-16T19:00:44.663" LastActivityDate="2022-12-17T08:58:46.550" Title="Does [chameleon] blend in?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12286" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12285" CreationDate="2022-12-14T16:33:33.550" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;My personal suggestion (and, I guess, the thing you’re supporting if you upvote) is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Keep the tag, rename it to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/races-of-destiny-chameleon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;races-of-destiny-chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;races-of-destiny-chameleon-container&quot;&gt;races-of-destiny-chameleon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2022-12-16T19:00:28.557" LastActivityDate="2022-12-16T19:00:28.557" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12287" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12285" CreationDate="2022-12-14T17:59:12.463" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I agree with the reasoning in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12285/does-chameleon-blend-in/12286#12286&quot;&gt;KRyan's answer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But I suggest using a less wordy name for the tag instead:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chameleon-dnd-3.5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon-dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon-dnd-3.5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;chameleon-dnd-3.5e-container&quot;&gt;chameleon-dnd-3.5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48536" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-12-16T18:46:58.787" LastActivityDate="2022-12-16T18:46:58.787" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12288" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12285" CreationDate="2022-12-14T18:35:35.333" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12285/does-chameleon-blend-in#comment42315_12287&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov's comment on my other answer&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Perhaps of note, this would possibly be the first time we have ever&#xA;used a [&lt;code&gt;feature&lt;/code&gt;-&lt;code&gt;system&lt;/code&gt;] tag format for a tag (I checked the first 20&#xA;pages of tags), since questions always have a system tag. For&#xA;system-unique features with their own tags, we have always just&#xA;specified in the description that it refers to a particular system's&#xA;feature. I really don't think this is necessary, an appropriate tag&#xA;description should be adequate (since it has been in the past).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Checked the rest of our existing tags, we don't specify the system in&#xA;any of our tags about game features, and I'd rather not create the&#xA;precedent of doing so. I think just [chameleon] is fine, but KRyan's&#xA;suggestion of [races-of-destiny-chameleon] is probably fine, as&#xA;pointing out the source material is conceivably helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I suggest leaving the tag as is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chameleon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;chameleon-container&quot;&gt;chameleon&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48536" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-12-16T18:57:27.947" LastActivityDate="2022-12-16T18:57:27.947" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12289" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12290" CreationDate="2022-12-14T18:40:45.153" Score="7" ViewCount="163" Body="&lt;p&gt;Under the post &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203426/does-anyone-know-if-there-are-any-rules-for-materials-refinement-in-pathfinder&quot;&gt;Does anyone know if there are any rules for Materials refinement in Pathfinder &amp;amp; DnD type settings or similar?&lt;/a&gt;, there was a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203426/does-anyone-know-if-there-are-any-rules-for-materials-refinement-in-pathfinder?noredirect=1#comment556527_203426&quot;&gt;discussion in the comments&lt;/a&gt; about whether or not this counted as a &amp;quot;shopping for games&amp;quot; type of question (as described by this meta post: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5747&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me,  this did not sound at all like asking for what games had the given features.   Rather, it seemed to be looking for specific instances of a type of rule in a &amp;quot;single&amp;quot; game system (single here referring to the fact that many people cross over material for 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder 1E).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn't seem to be an opinion-based question asking for the best system to use; rather, it seems like a pure fact based closed form question.  &amp;quot;Where in the system I am already playing in might I find rules for this concept?&amp;quot; doesn't sound like game shopping at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71804" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2022-12-16T19:07:41.220" LastActivityDate="2022-12-16T19:07:41.220" Title="Does asking for a list of reference books within a typically interwoven set of systems that contain a specific rule count as &quot;shopping for games&quot;?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|game-recommendation|list-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12290" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12289" CreationDate="2022-12-14T19:40:15.007" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Game-recommendation questions were closed because everyone kept just recommending their own personal favorite game system for every question, and didn’t back up those claims the way we needed them to be backed up.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specifically, when the problem of everyone just recommending their favorite system was first discussed, the solution was to enforce Good Subjective, Bad Subjective by requiring answers to cite &lt;em&gt;actual experience doing the specific thing asked for in the recommended system&lt;/em&gt;. That is, we would just get inundated with answers of the form “I’m sure my personal favorite system &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; be great for this because...” and that wasn’t good enough. Our first step was to try enforce it through moderation tools.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It didn’t work. We still got bad answers, almost exclusively. Hence the revisit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In short, while in theory we could have provided answers rooted in &lt;em&gt;expert opinion&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. educated and backed-up, Good Subjective), what we actually got in practice was answers rooted in &lt;em&gt;personal opinion&lt;/em&gt; (i.e. just a feeling, no real basis, Bad Subjective). Moderation tools (and moderator effort) just wasn’t up to the task of preventing bad answers to these questions, and/or there just weren’t enough people qualified to give good answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that situation has zero similarity to this question. What’s specifically absent here is the &lt;em&gt;recommendation&lt;/em&gt;—the querent wants to know if there are &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; such subsystems, not asking for any opinions on which to use. That &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; be a problematic list question, if there were tons and tons of them, or it was open-ended, or we expected the list to just keep growing over time. But none of those apply to a game that’s nearing 20 years obsolete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The reasons for banning game-rec apply &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; to game-rec, and that’s the only thing the site has ever had consensus on.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There was a large discussion in which the community reluctantly agreed that game-recommendation had to be made off-topic, because of all these problems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In response, the ♦ moderators of the time declared &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; recommendation questions off-topic. There was never any discussion of this, there was never any consensus built for this, and there was a major fight over it on the topic of &lt;em&gt;tool&lt;/em&gt; recommendations. In the end, the ♦ moderators of the time simply declared “we are the moderators, and this is what we have decided.”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was not, to put it mildly, how the system was supposed to work. This was not, to put it mildly, a good time for the site. No one on the site should be giving that “policy” the breadth it claimed; it was claimed illegitimately.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2022-12-14T19:40:15.007" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12291" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12289" CreationDate="2022-12-14T20:05:29.267" Score="-1" Body="&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does there exist official D&amp;amp;D 3.5 rules for refining materials?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a shopping question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does there exist official Pathfinder rules for refining materials?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not a shopping question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While my specific goal is to find D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder specific materials... &amp;quot;Compatible&amp;quot; materials / rule systems are also acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a shopping question. This sentence from the question makes it into a shopping question. Any and every third party or homebrew ruleset with relevant content is an answer to this part of the question. I think this falls afoul of what BESW is talking in response to the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5903/can-we-ask-about-the-existence-of-a-game&quot;&gt;Can we ask about the existence of a game?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my dismay, I think &amp;quot;Does X exist?&amp;quot; is usually a very poor fit for our site. I'm not advocating a blanket ban, but they should be looked at carefully because they often fail to meet existing site definitions of Good Questions. This sort of question tends to suffer from not explaining the problem the querent is trying to solve; I'll talk about why that makes 'em hard to answer in a way the site will find useful, and how there's an existing solution to this problem when it arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I don't give an example to support an answer of &amp;quot;yes,&amp;quot; then most affirmative answers to this sort of question wind up being just a terse unadorned &amp;quot;Yes, X exists.&amp;quot; That's not the quality of information this site wants to accumulate. Answers should provide support for their conclusions; we frown on &amp;quot;left as an exercise for the reader&amp;quot; implications.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However! If I do give an example to support an answer of &amp;quot;yes,&amp;quot; then it quickly becomes indistinguishable from a recommendation that doesn't explain about why that particular thing is being recommended. Each answer mentioning a different example can be equally right and the voting breaks down.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The scope of the question, as it is written, is too broad, and amounts to seeking recommendations for third party or homebrew rulesets to use if official rules don't exist (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/203427/62294&quot;&gt;which they don't&lt;/a&gt;). Remove that last line from the question, and it's a rather straightforward &amp;quot;does &lt;em&gt;system&lt;/em&gt; have rules for &lt;em&gt;thing&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot;, which is something we've handled before.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-12-14T20:05:29.267" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12292" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-15T12:40:20.600" Score="6" ViewCount="229" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let us discuss the reasons that play a role when evaluating to vote for deleting a low-quality answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting answers perceived as low-quality is a contentious topic, and many cases aren't as clear-cut as we'd sometimes want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd appreciate insights into various decision-making processes that different community members use for evaluating answers perceived as low-quality 1.) to reflect on my method, and 2.) to offer other community members to reflect on their process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't intend this post as a prescriptive place for creating guidelines or best practices. Instead, I prefer it to be descriptive — focused on your concrete actions, not ideals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that edge cases where you walk us through your conflicting line of thought are most interesting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2022-12-15T12:54:46.433" LastActivityDate="2023-11-07T10:17:37.707" Title="Let us discuss the reasons that play a role when evaluating to vote for deleting a low-quality answer" Tags="|discussion|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12293" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12292" CreationDate="2022-12-15T14:34:40.047" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The deletion privileges page reads:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may vote to delete answers in the following cases:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is extremely low quality: There is little to no scope for improvement&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, this is extremely terse and doesn't provide much guidance. What does &amp;quot;scope for improvement&amp;quot; mean? &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/197568/674198&quot;&gt;Shog9 wrote an answer&lt;/a&gt; a while back giving his take on reviewing posts in the LQP queue, and I think it gives a helpful perspective:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I use a pretty simple algorithm when reviewing these, whether in /review or the flag queue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Does the post attempt to answer the question? &lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt; Delete, &lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt; goto step 2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Would it be possible for a reasonably-intelligent English-speaking person familiar with the topic to understand the solution being presented? &lt;strong&gt;No&lt;/strong&gt; Delete, &lt;strong&gt;Yes&lt;/strong&gt; Looks Good.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note that I don't make any attempt to determine if the solution is &lt;em&gt;correct&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;helpful&lt;/em&gt; or necessarily even &lt;em&gt;relevant to the question&lt;/em&gt; as part of this process (if I do happen to be familiar with the topic, I'll go back and vote/comment on it later though). I definitely don't concern myself with the potential for author edits, &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; the problems are such that I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; fix them myself (in which case condition #2 prevents deletion). Folks whose worthless answers are deleted are free to come back and post new ones with clear, useful information if they care to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My goal here is to remove the sorts of garbage that tend to infest popular forums after a while: questions as answers, idle kibitzing and gibberish/nonsense/stuff that's been through automated translation software a few too many times.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also note that from /review/low-quality, delete / recommend deletion responses allow you add a predefined comment - these comments will alert the author of the post (&lt;strong&gt;with a link to it&lt;/strong&gt;) even if the post is later deleted; they work essentially the same way as moderator comments in this regard, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/133729/treat-comments-on-deleted-posts-from-moderating-users-like-comments-from-diamond/143640#143640&quot;&gt;for the same reason&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, this bit is a crucial expansion on the deletion privileges guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I definitely don't concern myself with the potential for author edits, &lt;em&gt;unless&lt;/em&gt; the problems are such that I &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; fix them myself (in which case condition #2 prevents deletion). Folks whose worthless answers are deleted are free to come back and post new ones with clear, useful information if they care to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So one of my criteria looks something like &amp;quot;can I improve the post, or does it require the author to improve the post?&amp;quot; When I encounter a low quality, unsupported post that still appears to be relevant to the question, if I can improve it, I just do that, but if improving the quality of the post requires something only the author can provide, I'll lean towards voting to delete and/or flagging VLQ. The idea here is that if I can understand what the answer is trying to say, but maybe it just needs some citations, or the language needs to be clarified, the argument isn’t made as clear as it could be, or it’s missing pieces that I can fill in, I added those things with an edit; but if I can’t do those things, and can’t really see someone with more relevant expertise doing it, that’s when I lean toward a vote to delete.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To give an example of how I have applied this idea, consider this question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/149761/62294&quot;&gt;Is this homebrew Eldritch Invocation, Eyes of the Ooze, balanced?&lt;/a&gt; The question presents a homebrew feature and asks if it is balanced as written. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/149785/62294&quot;&gt;The accepted answer&lt;/a&gt; is excellent: it provides analysis, compares to other features, and offers a suggestion for balancing it that doesn't involve drastic changes to the feature's function. However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/149784/62294&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; is not so great:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It needs a level requirement of 15 to make it balanced, but then it's pretty good. Still on the stronger side though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That's the entire answer text; it provides a short opinion with no reasoning whatsoever. So reviewing Shog9's algorithm, yes it does attempt to answer the question, but what about the second criterion? While we can certainly understand that the answer's author thinks it would be balanced with a level requirement of 15, &lt;em&gt;they have provided nothing to us to help understand why that is an appropriate solution&lt;/em&gt;, and this is where we ask &amp;quot;but can I (or someone other than the author with sufficient expertise) improve the post?&amp;quot; In this case, the answer is &amp;quot;no&amp;quot; - no one but the author can provide the author's reasoning. Sure, if you agreed that 15th level would be appropriate, you could come up with some reasons, &lt;em&gt;but they would be your reasons, not the author's reasons&lt;/em&gt;. No one but the author can improve this post, so this answer falls under this bit of Shog's guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Folks whose worthless answers are deleted are free to come back and post new ones with clear, useful information if they care to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-07T10:17:37.707" LastActivityDate="2023-11-07T10:17:37.707" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12294" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12292" CreationDate="2022-12-15T19:59:02.530" Score="3" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Two similar edge-cases that I still have no idea how to handle&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two particular kinds of answers that I &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; have absolutely no idea how to vote on. Those being answers that are &lt;em&gt;objectively&lt;/em&gt; incorrect and answers that are toxic and/or propose solutions that are deeply flawed and problematic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the first case, there are answers like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/180063&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; which describes the notation &amp;quot;1d-4&amp;quot; objectively incorrectly, or &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/55498&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; which claims Rogues can only get Sneak Attack once per round. Both of these answers currently have a single delete vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For examples of deeply flawed answers, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/50464&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I hate to sound crass here, OP, but there's a reason that you &lt;strong&gt;don't date your fellow players&lt;/strong&gt;, and you're discovering it. Love tends to make one see something in another that other people don't, just by its very nature. This means that even if you're best friends with someone, they might end up being in love with someone you despise, even though that seems bizarre. Not to mention people tend to treat games differently. Your friend's husband obviously doesn't understand the point of the game, or doesn't care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The lack of perspective from the &amp;quot;innocent&amp;quot; member of the couple is what creates the rift in the table. You have to discuss this &lt;strong&gt;right now&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;as directly as possible&lt;/strong&gt; before negative sentiments become more deep-seated and someone explodes. You will not get lucky and have your GM divorce her husband suddenly or something equally unlikely. The worst case scenario is that you leave the table quietly, but your friendship will remain intact, while a full-table drama episode could end up with everyone hating each other.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beneath this answer is the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This attitude is condescending and toxic. Every couple I've ever gamed with has been terrified that their very existence could ruin the game, to the point that they impose pointless handicaps and limitations on their gaming habits. Couples have never been a problem in any of my groups, but this attitude toward them has. This querent's problem is a challenge faced by individuals, not an inevitable result of couples gaming.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And for another example, there's &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/30580&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;[...] Handicap his character forcing him to develop his RP skills. This can be done a million different ways. ex: forced polymorph, death with new creation requirements, equipment loss, forced individual diplomacy, Stat losses, unusual poisoning/enchantment, charmed/cursed equipment, or just have the other players kill his character if he is doing &amp;quot;evil things&amp;quot; and causing the party harm.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a million thanks that would case a player to start questioning his actions. And if they complain let it be known, this isn't a video game. Your actions and or inactions have consequences.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beneath &lt;em&gt;this&lt;/em&gt; answer is the following comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have intentionally not deleted this, as I believe (at time of commenting) -7 downvotes is more instructive than no answer. This is an abysmally wrong answer, however.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many of the site's lowest scoring answers fall into one (or both) of these categories. Furthermore Meta Stack Exchange even has some guidance on this kind of stuff:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/264293&quot;&gt;Why shouldn&amp;#39;t I delete wrong answers?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/128741&quot;&gt;If a valid answer is downvoted, what&amp;#39;s the motivation not to delete it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/240427&quot;&gt;Why is an answer that is so bad it is shown faded out kept around? Why not delete it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We even have a relevant Meta question ourselves:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8626&quot;&gt;Deleting of &amp;quot;bad&amp;quot; answers by Stackizens seems to be increasing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has a few answers as well as this comment:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes keeping a bad answer is quite helpful: it's very instructive in how to not use the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I &lt;em&gt;know&lt;/em&gt; there are people who think terrible answers, in at least some cases, should be kept around so that their highly-negative scores can showcase what &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to do. But I've also seen a lot of answers that fit into one (or both) of these categories get deleted and I've seen a lot of arguments about how deleting these is actually the &lt;em&gt;best&lt;/em&gt; thing to do. There's a lot of information on these with all sorts of proposed methods of handling them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That all said, I don't expect this answer will be helpful for deciding whether an answer should or shouldn't be deleted. I wanted to talk about a particular part of that decision-making process that, even after a sizeable amount of time here, and even after having given this considerable thought, I &lt;em&gt;still&lt;/em&gt; have no idea how to vote. People &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; disagree when it comes to these, and that's perfectly fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll end with probably my biggest takeaway from looking into these kinds of answers: deletion voting is not a science, it's not an exacting process with hyper-defined rules and objectivity; uncertainty is unavoidable and that's okay. Look around, ask around, figure out what other people think, and build up your own ideas about it. Trust me, there's a &lt;em&gt;lot&lt;/em&gt; of discourse on this and just when you think you've found all seven ways to handle question X, you'll find somebody suggesting three completely new ones.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastActivityDate="2022-12-15T19:59:02.530" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12295" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-16T18:52:15.903" Score="11" ViewCount="278" Body="&lt;p&gt;To continue &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11867/75095&quot;&gt;Thomas' tradition&lt;/a&gt; (which was a continuation of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5964/62294&quot;&gt;doppelgreener's tradition&lt;/a&gt;) of collecting the memorabilia of transient hat awards (and maybe also share the how we got secret hats? I think I got one but failed to record it, grrr... but there is a treasure map &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/384707/winter-summer-bash-2022-hat-list-%EF%B8%8F-%EF%B8%8F/384708#384708&quot;&gt;how to find them&lt;/a&gt;) here is a post for sharing selfies this year -- with hats! Apparently there is no special theme this year (but thanks to Splunk for sponsoring the event).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm only a poor hobgoblin, so I'll just say: be nice to people, and leave earth better than you found it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What follows is the template from Thomas (which he copied from doppel), explaining how this works:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Every Hatmas, we wear and see fun and dapper combinations of hats: the hats go away at the end of the Hatmas season, but we can still preserve some memories and pictures of the fabulous hattery we've seen. To that end:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's have a fun and/or slightly embarrassing yearbook.&lt;/strong&gt; Post the great hats and hatments you've seen. Show off the ones &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; made for yourself which you think are fantastic or fabulous or the greatest. If you spy an excellent thing in the wild, I guess you can stick that here too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I recommend one answer per person (or a small number), and revise it to make additions. Keep it silly, keep it fun, and be kind. (Everyone's going to feel self conscious posting anything here, so I suggest we leave criticism at the door.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How do I take a screenshot?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use the &lt;strong&gt;Lightshot&lt;/strong&gt; extension &lt;a href=&quot;https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/lightshot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Firefox&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href=&quot;https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lightshot-screenshot-tool/mbniclmhobmnbdlbpiphghaielnnpgdp?hl=en&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;for &lt;strong&gt;Chrome&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Windows 10:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;win&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;shift&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;s&lt;/kbd&gt; for the built-in &lt;a href=&quot;https://superuser.com/a/404279/50208&quot;&gt;Snipping Tool&lt;/a&gt;. In Windows 7, you'll have to search for that tool in the start menu. Otherwise take a screenshot of your browser with &lt;kbd&gt;alt&lt;/kbd&gt;+&lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, crop it in MS Paint, and save it as a PNG (not GIF or JPEG).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mac:&lt;/strong&gt; press &lt;kbd&gt;cmd ⌘&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;4&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click and drag to outline the region you want to screenshot. The screenshot will be saved to your desktop.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;On Linux:&lt;/strong&gt; Gnome/Ubuntu: press &lt;kbd&gt;shift ⇧&lt;/kbd&gt; + &lt;kbd&gt;print screen&lt;/kbd&gt;, then click-and-drag over the region you want to screenshot and save the screenshot somewhere. If the shortcut doesn't work, either set it up in System Settings/Keyboard/shortcuts/screenshots or use a tool like &lt;a href=&quot;http://apt.ubuntu.com/p/shutter&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shutter&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/current?tab=profile&quot;&gt;Here's a magic link to your public profile&lt;/a&gt; that's perfect for screenshots.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2022-12-17T02:57:39.203" LastActivityDate="2023-01-04T11:35:41.893" Title="Winterbash: Gimme all your Hatting!" Tags="|discussion|winterbash|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12296" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-16T19:02:55.920" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;This &lt;em&gt;literally&lt;/em&gt; what Groody do here most days. Read book, tell answer. Good DM screen, too! &amp;quot;I Voted&amp;quot; hat is for upvoting or downvoting. Groody only upvote of course in holiday time, no nasty downvoting! Punish later, for Magubliet's glory.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hvJay.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hvJay.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r0xr2.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/r0xr2.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sj734.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/sj734.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is rules lawyer hat for visiting boring Code of Conduct page, but Groody like better to dress up as Santa! Even better Santa beard for Hobgoblin is wild and yellow. Next one say is Albert Einstein, but Groody know, is no Stein, really is nice Santa beard. Also nice Santa beard in violet -- is gift from Dame Edna!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JTaGc.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/JTaGc.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NqVUS.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/NqVUS.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2eSKO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/2eSKO.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IoJ84.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/IoJ84.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-01-03T16:54:24.883" LastActivityDate="2023-01-03T16:54:24.883" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12297" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-16T19:45:09.170" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Thomas watching comment discussions that don't concern him:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oXtB5.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oXtB5.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2022-12-16T19:45:09.170" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12298" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-17T04:51:34.500" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;I normally don't care for the hats, and I'm normally quite inactive, but I popped in and decided to post some corrections in a comment on an ancient answer for an ancient question just in case someone came around looking at it.  Pretty sure that's how I got this secret hat called &amp;quot;Back in My Day&amp;quot;.  IDK, could be totally unrelated.  I definitely wouldn't recommend going around commenting on ancient questions for no reason.  Was my first hat though and I like it so I figured I'd commemorate it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8jfr9.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8jfr9.png&quot; alt=&quot;you youngins don't know what it was like&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12425" LastActivityDate="2022-12-17T04:51:34.500" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12299" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12285" CreationDate="2022-12-17T08:58:46.550" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dropping&lt;/strong&gt; the tag makes sense - it's a very specific tag, denoting one specific non-base/advanced/prestige class in a specific version of a specific (albeit popular) game. I looked through existing tags, and couldn't find any other prestige class except for this and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-archer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;arcane-archer-container&quot;&gt;arcane-archer&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chameleon&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chameleon&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;chameleon-container&quot;&gt;chameleon&lt;/a&gt; has 9 hits, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arcane-archer&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;arcane-archer&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;arcane-archer-container&quot;&gt;arcane-archer&lt;/a&gt; has 22, and a search for some other prestige classes, that don't have tags, found me &amp;quot;rainbow servant&amp;quot;, which gets 38 results, &amp;quot;incantatrix&amp;quot;, which gets 53, &amp;quot;sublime chord&amp;quot;, which gets 74, and &amp;quot;mystic theurge&amp;quot;, which gets 160.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In fact, we do not currently have a &amp;quot;theurge&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;dual-progression-class&amp;quot; tag for the &amp;quot;family&amp;quot; of prestige classes Mystic Theurge belongs to (with dual casting/manifesting/invoking/whatnot progression).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems that there really should be some thought as to if and when specific prestige classes should get their own tags. &lt;strong&gt;Guidelines&lt;/strong&gt; of some sort would be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="78212" LastActivityDate="2022-12-17T08:58:46.550" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12301" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-19T21:31:30.740" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Copied from &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/384850/335251&quot;&gt;my answer to the corresponding MSE post&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When one pair of sunglasses isn't enough...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vv28G.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Vv28G.png&quot; alt=&quot;Shizuo... with another pair of sunglasses&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(To be fair, Shizuo does have a tendency to break things.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2022-12-19T21:31:30.740" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12302" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-20T15:54:13.987" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A failed metamorphosis, teeth engulfed the petals.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3LF3u.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/3LF3u.png&quot; alt=&quot;A failed metamorphosis, teeth engulfed the petals.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2022-12-20T15:54:13.987" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12303" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-24T00:26:16.503" Score="2" ViewCount="67" Body="&lt;p&gt;Questions like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203565/dm-is-taking-too-much-time-in-my-opinion-on-side-missions-should-i-leave&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, which seems to have been asked by a very young person, would (in my opinion) be better answered by taking this into account (assuming it is indeed a group of ~13yo). Having a specific tag for questions about social interactions in a group of youngsters could help avoiding some answers that don't take it into account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What do you think, could such a tag be a good idea, is it unnecessary, or would it be problematic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28479" LastActivityDate="2022-12-24T01:23:14.443" Title="Could a &quot;young player&quot; tag be relevant?" Tags="|feature-request|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12304" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12303" CreationDate="2022-12-24T00:50:39.327" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;We already have this, I think! We currently have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kids&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kids&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;kids&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;kids-container&quot;&gt;kids&lt;/a&gt; and the much less used &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teenagers&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teenagers&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teenagers&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;teenagers-container&quot;&gt;teenagers&lt;/a&gt;, both covering real life social situations involving youngsters and slightly-less-youngsters. We can use the second one here if their age feels materially relevant to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure this particular question is about teenagers though; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203565/dm-is-taking-too-much-time-in-my-opinion-on-side-missions-should-i-leave#comment556983_203565&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt; would seem to clarify that the &lt;em&gt;characters&lt;/em&gt; are the ones being described as teenagers, not the players, which these tags we're discussing wouldn't be for. We might not know the age of the author.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-12-24T01:23:14.443" LastActivityDate="2022-12-24T01:23:14.443" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12305" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2022-12-25T10:27:56.370" Score="2" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I may be misunderstanding the rules of the site here, but I somehow assimilated the ruling that it is not neccesary to state the system and edition in the question, if it is provided as a tag -- to the extend that I even removed &amp;quot;D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;quot; from the title of questions tagged with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. Is this wrong?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For other tags, we do have guidance that the title and body of the question explicitly should include what the tag describes, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7140/why-do-we-ask-for-the-body-of-the-question-to-demonstrate-the-tags-it-uses&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. The top scoring answer claims that system tags are an exception, because supposedly people look at those when answering, but it is not clear to me, why?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2022-12-25T10:27:56.370" Title="Why are system tags treated different from other tags?" Tags="|support|tags|questions|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="5" ClosedDate="2022-12-25T13:01:20.893" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12306" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-27T12:38:59.263" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;It can be a little difficult to find a good hat when your avatar is a mermaid looking sideways, but then the site slam dunked this hat into my closet and it's &lt;em&gt;so&lt;/em&gt; on theme. I love it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DT1ui.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;x marks the spot&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/DT1ui.png&quot; alt=&quot;pirate hat&quot; title=&quot;x marks the spot&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also ate a cupcake and wore a pilot hat for a bit, and I got the sun for my solstice hat. Also the 2023 glasses look pretty good on me!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/biYsw.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;cake walk&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/biYsw.png&quot; alt=&quot;cupcake&quot; title=&quot;cake walk&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VJHju.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;maverick&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VJHju.png&quot; alt=&quot;pilot hat&quot; title=&quot;maverick&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LCXLZ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;solstice&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LCXLZ.png&quot; alt=&quot;solstice&quot; title=&quot;solstice&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LRftk.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;glasses with a number on top&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/LRftk.png&quot; alt=&quot;glasses&quot; title=&quot;glasses with a number on top&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Once I got my 11 hat, Akixkisu gave me the idea to wear it like a flower. &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZUv5U.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;11 will save the day&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZUv5U.png&quot; alt=&quot;11 as a flower&quot; title=&quot;11 will save the day&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2022-12-31T13:41:44.663" LastActivityDate="2022-12-31T13:41:44.663" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12307" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-27T19:26:51.157" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Winter Bash comes, and headwear is abound.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I pick just one, from all those found.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No more is needed, no matter what.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because I got myself - look just at that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Good ol' dice and a cat in a hat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OXYcn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/OXYcn.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastActivityDate="2022-12-27T19:26:51.157" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12308" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-28T12:57:00.283" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1/community&quot;&gt;Community&lt;/a&gt; is now wearing a hat!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/W1X1A.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/W1X1A.png&quot; alt=&quot;community wearing the verified hat&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(or is that more like a costume at this point?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2022-12-28T12:57:00.283" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12309" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2022-12-29T01:25:25.543" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O3Jym.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/O3Jym.png&quot; alt=&quot;ironman&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I Am Iron Man&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="78357" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T01:25:25.543" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12310" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12311" CreationDate="2022-12-29T01:38:18.743" Score="7" ViewCount="174" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question asks for help improving a custom item: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203635&quot;&gt;Is this armor the best my character can get?&lt;/a&gt;  They have already chosen 9 rules elements to add to the item. It will be difficult to think of a better way to improve the item. As it stands, the item will not be bound by wealth by level restrictions, gold cost, or combining features that require GM fiat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing something? Doesn't this make the question difficult to answer? Or should someone take a stab at trying to improve it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="78357" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-12-29T03:37:09.640" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T13:31:31.453" Title="How to handle &quot;make this better&quot; questions when the asker has little or no GM restrictions and has a lot of chosen options?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12311" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12310" CreationDate="2022-12-29T13:23:17.097" Score="13" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Difficulty is not a criterion for closure.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You'll notice that when you vote to close or flag for &amp;quot;needs improvement&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;question is too difficult&amp;quot; is not one of the reasons offered. Our site is one of the better places on the internet to ask difficult questions. We have lots of experts in lots of different games. Answering difficult questions is one of the things we're good at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This question has many of the key features of a good optimization question.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, about this specific question, I will admit, &lt;em&gt;I am not an expert in D&amp;amp;D 3.5e&lt;/em&gt;. However, I do have a bit of experience on the site, and it seems to me that this question has several of the key features of a good optimization question. Reading through, the question provides:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Campaign setting details&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Ground rules for building the item&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Relevant rules in place at the table&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Character build details&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Permitted and non-permitted sourcebooks&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A first attempt at optimization (&amp;quot;show your work&amp;quot;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Areas where that first attempt might be improved&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, this question provides extensive background details, expectations for the build, rules for the table and setting, and even a first attempt that answers may use as a starting point. This question provides far more detail than we typically see from optimization questions, and its objectives seem clear enough to me. I think the question is fine. But of course, I should hedge this with the reminder than I am not a 3.5e expert, so I may be missing crucial system knowledge that invalidates my analysis here, so keep that in mind.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2022-12-29T13:31:31.453" LastActivityDate="2022-12-29T13:31:31.453" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12312" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12279" CreationDate="2022-12-30T19:04:12.787" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;I still* think this should be renamed and synonymed to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning-to-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-to-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;learning-to-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;learning-to-gm-container&quot;&gt;learning-to-gm&lt;/a&gt;. That would make it clearly right on the right questions and obviously wrong on the wrong questions, making cleanup natural for editors reading new questions that don’t fit the tag—no familiarity with meta needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t think it would be a perfect tag, but I think it would be significantly easier for the community to organically maintain it without deliberate effort. It would become self-maintaining. And it’s a much more interesting tag—the sort of tag name people like to follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since it’s easy enough to reverse the renaming and synonym I think it’s worth trying. I don’t think it would hurt, and it might just automagically fix the problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;* The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4991/321&quot;&gt;original lengthy answer&lt;/a&gt; and comments on it are under &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4982/what-can-should-we-do-about-new-gm&quot;&gt;What can/should we do about [new-gm]?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="321" LastActivityDate="2022-12-30T19:04:12.787" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12313" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12314" CreationDate="2023-01-02T00:57:45.957" Score="3" ViewCount="93" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a rules question I believe isn't covered by the three similar (but not duplicate questions). Is this something that should be answered on the other questions or does it deserve it's own question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm interested in playing a College of Satire Bard from Unearthed Arcana: Kits of Old &lt;a href=&quot;https://efncool.com/2022/06/07/lost-arcana-the-dd-5e-subclasses-time-forgot/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;mentioned here&lt;/a&gt;. I found the &lt;a href=&quot;https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/04_UA_Classics_Revisited.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;PDF on wizards.com here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What is your climb speed with Equine Build and Tumbling Fool?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These three questions seem related.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148558/what-is-a-centaur-thiefs-climbing-speed&quot;&gt;Thief no longer cost extra&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148385/is-there-a-functional-difference-between-having-a-listed-climb-speed-and-being-a/148430#148430&quot;&gt;Difference between no longer costs extra and climb speed dealt with speed differences&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153515/how-does-the-athlete-feat-affect-the-centaur-playable-race&quot;&gt;The Athlete feat is a fix all&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems different because you climb speed from the Bard is equal to your normal speed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="78357" LastActivityDate="2023-01-02T02:28:32.663" Title="Would a question on Centaur Equine Bond &amp; an ability granting a Climb speed equal to normal speed be on-topic and not a duplicate?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|duplicates|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12314" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12313" CreationDate="2023-01-02T01:11:28.683" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;If the existing related questions don't answer the question for you — which you asking here rather indicates they don't — then it (probably/generally) isn't a duplicate. You'll probably benefit from stating what you've found in the other questions and what they leave unanswered/unclear, which would let answers clarify anything left between them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, for whatever reason it isn't (and with a brief skimming of the actual rules and Q&amp;amp;A I'm having a hard time seeing what would be a dupe of what) then you'll have made a duplicate pointer, which is not a bad thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And solely since this Q forgot to, for when you post the question remember to specify the game system (since the links will dispel any confusion, I suppose it's a reminder for the tag more than anything). (And just since I'm on the roll, the meta Q doesn't need it — it's different, read the excerpt.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-01-02T02:28:32.663" LastActivityDate="2023-01-02T02:28:32.663" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12315" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12295" CreationDate="2023-01-04T11:35:41.893" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Ferret must wear a hat&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aBOUN.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aBOUN.png&quot; alt=&quot;a cartoon ferret with a pirate hat from the winter bash superimposed&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Also my &lt;a href=&quot;https://scifi.stackexchange.com/q/270703/3804&quot;&gt;Data Hat&lt;/a&gt; looks nothing like &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_(Star_Trek)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Lt. Data&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oq9CR.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oq9CR.png&quot; alt=&quot;a cartoon ferret with a cave safety helmet with the brand Splunk on it&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2023-01-04T11:35:41.893" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12316" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-06T13:21:19.290" Score="4" ViewCount="193" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question arose from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/203802/77044&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;. However this is not the first time, and definitely not the last, that I've seen this issue, so it seems important to me to determine exactly how to treat those questions in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It happens that people that do not speak english wish to use the stack to ask a question. Most often those people will use automated translation tools, either to help with their own translation or to entirely translate the question (worst case scenario, here).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This often results in broken english which makes the question very difficult to understand. This causes situations where we would often have to try to guess what the asker's issue is in order to even try to tackle the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finding someone who can communicate with the asker for each case seems difficult, especially since there is no such thing as private messages on the platform. This most often leads to those questions being closed and forgotten.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apart from the straightforward &amp;quot;close it until they speak english properly&amp;quot; answer, is there anything else we can do when encountering those kinds of questions, in order to attempt at solving the asker's issue? Or is closing those questions the right way to deal with them, for the sake of keeping a &amp;quot;clean english-only Q&amp;amp;A&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or to put it more bluntly : do we prioritise solving issues even if a language barrier makes it difficult, or do we prioritise keeping cleaner, understandable questions for future readers?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-01-31T02:13:55.110" LastActivityDate="2023-01-31T02:13:55.110" Title="How to deal with poorly translated questions?" Tags="|discussion|questions|language|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12317" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12316" CreationDate="2023-01-06T13:46:39.030" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Clarifications, patience, and editing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;We&lt;/em&gt; need to understand the question. That doesn't strictly require perfect english, though obviously when language makes things ambiguous we need clarification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A trick that's often very useful is to ask an asker to confirm something. Eg. &amp;quot;I think you might mean ..., but I'm not sure&amp;quot;. In general, 3rd language speakers are gonna be better at parsing than expressing. That might honestly go for everyone. Words are hard.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mistranslation of names or terms should be fairly easy to correct that way. Be nice, and be patient, and it'll be fine.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If someone has a channel, language and time to help the querent and be a human translator for them they are free to so do. But that's obviously not a service we can reliably offer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As long as the problem to be solved is clear enough to answer, the question is fine (ie. should be open). Any quirks of language or translation — say errant spaces in front of colons :p — should be fixed by editing. That gets us the best of both worlds, we help the specific user and keep clear, understandable questions for future readers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T13:46:39.030" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12318" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12316" CreationDate="2023-01-06T13:56:37.853" Score="6" Body="&lt;h3&gt;For this particular question, translation does not appear to be the issue.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I left the initial comments and the first close vote (which S_E finished with his secret sauce), so I will give some motivation for it. In this case, mistranslation of terms isn't the issue; they are DMing a &lt;em&gt;Curse of Strahd&lt;/em&gt; game and one of their players is a Gloom Stalker Ranger. The actual trouble here is that the only other things we were told in the question is how the Gloom Stalkers features function. Umbral Sight and Dread Ambusher make the Gloom Stalker excellent at fighting in the dark, which is what the question explains. But, &lt;em&gt;the question doesn't tell us what the problem is&lt;/em&gt;. It just gives an explanation of how the features work, then asks what to do about it. We need to know what problems it is causing. I ventured a guess in my comment when I asked:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are you having trouble designing appropriately challenging encounters for the party and suspect the ranger's features are the reason?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But there are a myriad of other problems that could be at the heart of the this person's issue, and they simply haven't told us what that problem is. I think my guess is probably right, but we can't know until OP confirms, and we should not assume what hasn't been stated. So for this question, the issue isn't translation. The issue is that we weren't really given a question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-01-06T13:56:37.853" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12319" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12320" CreationDate="2023-01-09T22:00:16.560" Score="9" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been a long time lurker in this stackexchange, having spent most of my time at math.stackexchange.com.   I know each separate site can have its own community standards, so I was hoping to get clarification as to what is wanted here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I posted my first answer today here:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203884/is-there-a-simpler-way-to-roll-for-letters/203899?noredirect=1#comment557981_203899&quot;&gt;dice rolling&lt;/a&gt; where it was indicated that I should improve citations or documentation for verification.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It may just be the mathematician in me with that dreaded word &amp;quot;Clearly&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;it should be obvious&amp;quot;,   but I'm finding it hard to see how it is not perfectly clear that the procedure I described generates 2 chances at every letter other than Q and Z and 1 each for those,  thus yielding the result.  Do I actually need to include a full table of all results here as documentation, or is there something else being sought?  Actually seeking clarity here,  I hope I'm not coming across as combative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71804" LastActivityDate="2023-01-09T23:58:11.797" Title="Clarification for community bot's request for additional supporting information" Tags="|discussion|citations|community-bot|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12320" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12319" CreationDate="2023-01-09T23:58:11.797" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;That was me. Sorry, I meant to leave a comment that made sense and got distracted by other things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll admit, my understanding of what exactly this question is looking for has changed significantly since it was posted, due to the author's responses to some of the answers and their (now deleted) comments on the question. Were I to review your answer again in the First Answers queue, I'd mark it Looks OK.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;At the time&lt;/em&gt;, my understanding was that the question was intended to focus on methods of generating &lt;em&gt;names&lt;/em&gt;, rather than just generating letters randomly, and it wasn't clear that your answer was even concerned with actually generating names. So I meant to leave a comment explaining that, but got distracted. That's on me. I think your answer is fine, it adequately addresses what I understand the question to be looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-01-09T23:58:11.797" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12321" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-12T09:26:10.637" Score="3" ViewCount="126" Body="&lt;p&gt;Here is a reputation change from the &amp;quot;Time&amp;quot; view on the Reputation tab, showing +190 rep for an Upvote on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203935/do-bracers-of-archery-make-weapon-attacks-magical-for-overcoming-resistance-to-n/203937#203937&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;. As of the time of this writing, the answer had a total of 8 upvotes and 1 downvote. Where does this weird value of +190 rep come from? Clearly, each upvote only adds +10 rep, and given the total of currently +78 rep on the question, there is also no way this can represent the total of all upvotes (you get that in the &amp;quot;Post&amp;quot; view for the reputation tab). It can also not be the current running total in the day at that time, which was around 100, and neither can it be the total from the previous day (which ended about 9 hours ago, and likewise never got to a total of 190). So what is this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5C0lO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/5C0lO.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To add to the confusion, if I now look at it again about 10 minutes in on writing this question, it shows +80 instead of +190, with the &amp;quot;4 hours ago&amp;quot; timestamp gone and no entry for it. What is going on here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uiFir.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/uiFir.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T19:00:33.237" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T19:00:33.237" Title="Why do reputation changes listed in the &quot;Time&quot; view on the profile page view show large values?" Tags="|support|bug|reputation|profile-page|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12323" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-12T16:10:21.690" Score="15" ViewCount="519" Body="&lt;p&gt;When I google &amp;quot;can you counterspell a counterspell&amp;quot;, google returns an answer snippet from the site:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PAILv.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PAILv.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, this snippet comes from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/86789/62294&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, which has a score of -17 at the moment, making it one of the top 10 lowest scoring answers on our entire site. This is obviously not a good &amp;quot;featured snippet&amp;quot;. Normally, I would say &amp;quot;a score of -17 sends a strong signal to the reader about the quality of the information&amp;quot;, however, the google snippet does not reflect this score, and if a reader does not click the link in the google snippet, they will never see that this answer is one of the worst performing answers on our site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Deleting it should make it so that google's robots cannot fetch it for their snippet, so would it be appropriate to delete it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Alternatively, if everyone reading this goes and provides &amp;quot;this is misleading&amp;quot; feedback to the snippet, it may just go away on its own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-01-13T18:19:33.697" LastActivityDate="2023-01-16T17:40:22.353" Title="Should we delete this -17 answer that appears as an answer snippet in google search?" Tags="|discussion|deleted-answers|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12324" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12323" CreationDate="2023-01-12T19:54:22.670" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange sets the criteria for answer deletion as follows:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer is extremely low quality: There is little to no scope for improvement.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The answer doesn't attempt to answer the question; it may be a comment or a separate question altogether.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, whenever I conduct a review regarding deletion, I take both of those criteria very seriously. There are plenty of bad answers on this site, but not very many actually make it into the review queue for deletion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think a good reason for this is because the bar for deletion is pretty high.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the subject Answer extremely low quality with no scope for improvement? I don't think so. The Answer has a score of -17, but the breakdown is +3 and -20. The respondent also provided multiple comment responses attempting to clarify their point of view. While the community at large does not agree, this doesn't make the answer have 'little to no scope for improvement.'&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the subject Answer a legitimate attempt to answer the question? Unequivocally, my answer is yes. Do I agree with the answer? No. Does my opinion on the answer matter for this criteria? Also no.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Overall, our prerogative is to use moderation deletion tools in conformance with the site's stated criteria. Extending beyond that for things like search engine optimization is not something I can justify us doing barring a very good reason. From my review of the site's analytics, I can't see any startling data that justifies altering our current path (granted I'm not overly proficient in interpreting the analytics).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WAf2t.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/WAf2t.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1KBp1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/1KBp1.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2023-01-12T19:54:22.670" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12325" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-12T21:12:27.333" Score="17" ViewCount="592" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've created the following question today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203943/whats-going-on-with-dds-ogl-1-1-how-does-it-affect-me&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s going on with D&amp;amp;D&amp;#39;s leaked OGL 1.1? How does it affect me?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It got closed for being off-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't believe in it being the case. OGL is explicitly on-topic and RPG-related, as is issues regarding publishing, as per the current meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, it is true that the question is about an evolving issue, and it might not have a final answer right now. That doesn't mean it doesn't have value; this is an important topic for any D&amp;amp;D fan and creator alike. While it isn't usual to create a &amp;quot;currently evolving&amp;quot; set of question/answers, I believe that, in this case, it is worth it. This isn't a new potential ruleset or some minor detail of minor importance. OGL is at the heart of the hobby, the very thing that enabled it to grow to the size it is today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that said, I make my plea; please allow this one to live. OGL 1.1 is, as leaked, a crime against us, and all of the loyal community that our beloved hobby created around D&amp;amp;D. If the leaked version of 1.1 doesn't come to pass, that would be great news. But if it does materialize, then a lot of very dear publishers that already exist - and a few that are yet to publish anything, like yours truly - will be deep into trouble, with our work all but stolen by WotC in what boils down to an horrible money grab.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to keep an eye on this, and, if necessary, band together to ask WotC to listen to those that &lt;em&gt;made 5e into what it is today&lt;/em&gt;. But we can't do that if we don't know what's happening, what 1.1 means, and this place, as one of the most cherished beacons of information around D&amp;amp;D that exists in the internet today, is one of the best positioned to make that information available to those that seek it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I understand that this might be asking for far too much, and that the site wasn't designed for it. If we find that yes, the question should stay closed, then I won't fight that decision more than what I already did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, I ask: please keep that question open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11162" LastEditorUserId="10867" LastEditDate="2023-01-13T14:09:28.353" LastActivityDate="2023-01-29T21:34:03.137" Title="What is OGL 1.1: A request to reopen" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="6" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12326" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-12T22:10:25.463" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&amp;quot;Off-topic&amp;quot; is misleading feedback&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Starting at the top, the question wasn't closed as &amp;quot;off-topic&amp;quot; per se. It's just that giving a custom close reason means the site displays the default of &amp;quot;off-topic&amp;quot;. The first VTC for a custom reason also automatically posts a comment which opens &amp;quot;I'm voting to close this question because ...&amp;quot;. In this case that reason was:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the current time, the 1.1 is not published yet. Whole the text has been leaked, its legal force or enforcement isn't tested at all yet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now Too Localized is no longer an implemented close reason, but speculative or questions about Future Works have a bit of a mixed status on the network. Often they end up with too many &amp;quot;We can't know yet&amp;quot; answers and/or being wholly invalidated or unclear when that future comes about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question being part of a very developing scenario (ie. a new/future release) requires a bit of extra caution. We don't want questions where the expertise scope continues to increase, or which needs to include every tangential development. Often such question are asked to limit the scope to only be to current date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really think any of those concerns are applicable here. This question is specific and while it's likely that some parts of an answer will change in future, that is both addressable by an answer &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; something we can fix when it happens in the same way as errata, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The leak nature of the material changes the uncertainty of answers, but (as the two already have) they can address that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To put it in a different perspective, this question will work and be useful and have an answer even when a new licence is released (with the same naming scheme). It'll even have an answer if the new licence is never released, though in that case it'll mostly be irrelevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="10867" LastEditDate="2023-01-13T14:11:34.143" LastActivityDate="2023-01-13T14:11:34.143" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12327" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-12T22:19:25.133" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It is bad timing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the moment, all we have is a &lt;em&gt;leak&lt;/em&gt; and everybody is discussing what the parts mean or do not mean. It's not even known if this is an early version, or the current latest or if it was planned for release. Because of this, &lt;strong&gt;the situation is in flux&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A situation in flux means, that answers might become outdated within seconds - and invites speculation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As the one who cast the first vote: I did vote to close not because I don't want an answer, &lt;strong&gt;I voted to close to keep this place from becoming a rantbox like many others. From attracting speculation, which is a danger with such a loaded question.&lt;/strong&gt; Speculation is against our goals.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Stack is simply not a good place for dealing with a question so up-to-date.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-01-12T22:19:25.133" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12328" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-12T22:34:21.033" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;With small changes, it is worth opening&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's worth having a &amp;quot;What are the implications of the leaked 1.1&amp;quot; - even if the leaked ideas never actually get published, it's worth exploring the implications of what could have been.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Asking what the OGL 1.1 will be is pure speculation, the impact of the leak can be known though. It's effect on the community is something worth talking about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="61944" LastActivityDate="2023-01-12T22:34:21.033" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12329" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-12T23:33:00.880" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think we should keep this question open&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'll get to the point: this is one of the most important periods of D&amp;amp;D's history ever for the people who play it and create content for it. OGL 1.1's impacts are severe and far-reaching; it has major consequences for everyone, every player, and every business connected to D&amp;amp;D. People need to know about what's going on. OGL 1.1's text is not publicly available, but answering the question does not require it to be, because the important parts are very well known as a matter of public record at this point. What the question &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; asking is what's going on with OGL 1.1 and how it's going to affect us as players and as publishers, and sufficient detail is known about the OGL 1.1 to answer all of those things.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In-depth analyses of exactly this nature have already been made in multiple places:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://gizmodo.com/dnd-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl-1-1-open-gaming-license-1849950634&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Codega's original article on Gizmodo&lt;/a&gt;, which broke the news about OGL 1.1, goes into depth on exactly what's going on and how it affects players and publishers. She comments further about it &lt;a href=&quot;https://twitter.com/lincodega/status/1611021434553339906&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;in a twitter thread&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/01/beware-gifts-dragons-how-dds-open-gaming-license-may-have-become-trap-creators&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Electronic Frontier Foundation itself has waded in&lt;/a&gt;, provided an extensive essay on just how messed up OGL 1.1 is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;MyLawyerFriend, a lawyer, &lt;a href=&quot;https://medium.com/@MyLawyerFriend/lets-take-a-minute-to-talk-about-d-d-s-open-gaming-license-ogl-581312d48e2f&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;has also written a detailed analysis of OGL 1.1's impacts&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This may be a developing situation, but the known facts of OGL 1.1 and its impacts are at this point settled and being discussed at length by many sources, entire essays are already being written on exactly the topic the question is about with no real expectation they'll suddenly change, and it's fair for us to also tackle this topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If, somehow, the situation does drastically change such that all answers are invalidated, I suggest we timestamp the original question and open a new one about the new situation. But there's no current signs to suggest that's going to happen: OGL 1.1 is what it is and it's time to talk about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-01-12T23:46:03.687" LastActivityDate="2023-01-12T23:46:03.687" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12330" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12323" CreationDate="2023-01-13T00:49:57.667" Score="14" Body="&lt;h1&gt;No - That's Google's Problem&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Google has a faulty algorithm that is picking up the wrong answer. Google has control over that algorithm - we don't. We might change our policy to do something that works well-ish with Google's algorithm currently. But what if the algorithm starts creating snips for answers that have a -1? Or even only a +1, when there's a +200 accepted bountied answer to the same question that's short enough to snip? Moreover, what if Bing starts doing that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We don't control these sites, so we can't guarantee that we'll actually be able to fix the problem anyway. Trying to do so now as a matter of policy (even going against our policy to do it, as Pyrotechnical explains) will result in our policy becoming Sisyphus, rolling forever up a hill to perfect search engine integration everywhere but never being able to achieve it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastActivityDate="2023-01-13T00:49:57.667" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12331" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12323" CreationDate="2023-01-13T07:51:12.613" Score="15" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answer is wrong. Pure and simple. What a search engine chooses to show or not is a red herring in this case. At best it served as a catalyst to consider the answer but search engine previews should not really matter for the end result.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What does matter is the goal of the network providing useful information. And I cannot fathom how &amp;quot;wrong&amp;quot; can be &amp;quot;useful&amp;quot; given there is a correct alternative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Were there a question (naive example) with answers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Q: What is the result of 2+2? &lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A1: It is 4. &lt;br /&gt;&#xA;A2: It is 5.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then I cannot see any reason to keep A2. Similarly, the answer discussed here is like A2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12324&quot;&gt;Pyrotechnical says&lt;/a&gt; that the answer can be improved. I posit it cannot. It can only be &lt;em&gt;entirely changed&lt;/em&gt;. That is not what on the network we typically mean by &amp;quot;improvement&amp;quot;. Rewriting &lt;em&gt;parts&lt;/em&gt; for clarity or correcting some supporting information - yes, but &lt;em&gt;entirely&lt;/em&gt; changing the claim made in the answer - not really. At best, further development in time may require the answer to change drastically. If an answer was a &amp;quot;No&amp;quot; initially, it might become a &amp;quot;Yes&amp;quot; in ten years time. Yet that is not the case here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Still, if we really take it that the answer is improvable, then there is already a mechanism for that. The answer can still be deleted, then the author can edit and flag for a moderator to review and undelete the answer. Users with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/trusted-user&quot;&gt;the privilege to undelete answers (20k reputation)&lt;/a&gt; can also vote to undelete if they deem the answer to be useful. Users with 10k reputation &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools&quot;&gt;can see posts with undelete votes in the /tools section&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="22258" LastEditDate="2023-01-13T09:37:40.393" LastActivityDate="2023-01-13T09:37:40.393" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12332" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12321" CreationDate="2023-01-13T11:10:24.400" Score="9" Body="&lt;p&gt;This is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; caching but a bug with the display of scores. The easiest way to see it show up is when there is new activity on the votes. Note the yellow highlight in the reputation event - that means it is a new event (something you have not seen yet when visiting your reputation page). By comparison the items with grey background are already seen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To clarify new items (yellow background) have a problem where the calculation is incorrect. As far as I can tell, the calculation &lt;em&gt;is always wrong&lt;/em&gt;. However, the result might coincide with a correct calculation. Furthermore, the calculation is &lt;em&gt;consistently incorrect&lt;/em&gt;. You would not get random results - the calculated value will always be the same. The calculation is therefore taking into account factors it should now. By comparison, old items (grey background) are always correctly calculated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Furthermore, the problem is in the &amp;quot;Time&amp;quot; view for reputation changes (toggle buttons on the right side above the reputation list:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QuU8N.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Reputation history page with the three options for the display: &amp;quot;Post&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Time&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;Graph&amp;quot;.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/QuU8N.png&quot; alt=&quot;Reputation history page with the three options for the display: &amp;quot;Post&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Time&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;Graph&amp;quot;.&quot; title=&quot;Reputation history page with the three options for the display: &amp;quot;Post&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Time&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;Graph&amp;quot;.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the issue is encountered, a refresh will &amp;quot;fix&amp;quot; it but only because the item changes status to already seen, thus using the correct calculation logic, instead of the one for being unseen.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can &lt;em&gt;force&lt;/em&gt; the bug by appending the &lt;code&gt;StartDate&lt;/code&gt; parameter to the URL:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&#xA;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/75095/groody-the-hobgoblin?tab=reputation&amp;&lt;b&gt;StartDate=2023-01-12+07:00:00Z&lt;/b&gt;&amp;sort=time&#xA;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/75095/groody-the-hobgoblin?tab=reputation&amp;amp;StartDate=2023-01-12+07:00:00Z&amp;amp;sort=time&quot;&gt;Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See comparison of the results with and without the parameter:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With the StartDate parameter set to 2023-01-12 07:00:00Z:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/px9fa.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot; title=&quot;Reputation history of the question author for the last two days where a lot of items are marked as new/yellow background.&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/px9fa.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Reputation history of the question author for the last two days where a lot of items are marked as new/yellow background.&quot; title=&quot;Reputation history of the question author for the last two days where a lot of items are marked as new/yellow background.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some highlights:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are &lt;em&gt;eight&lt;/em&gt; events shown for today (2023-01-13).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The total for today is +95 reputation, yet somehow one of the entries is for +90. If the rep changes are summed up the result is way off to what the total is +10 +10 +10 +10 +15 +10 +90 +10 = 165 vs 95.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;One of the new entries for yesterday (2023-01-12) is an upvote event for +170 yet &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/203937&quot;&gt;the post it relates to&lt;/a&gt; sits at only +10 / -2 votes at this point in time.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When the StartDate parameter is omitted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cPeNu.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/cPeNu.png&quot; alt=&quot;Reputation history of the question author for the last two days where nothing is marked as new/yellow background. Everything is old/grey background&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some highlights:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are &lt;em&gt;six&lt;/em&gt; events shown for today (2023-01-13) compared to the eight shown before.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The total for today is +95 reputation and the events do add up to exactly this number: +10 +10 +20 +30 +15 +10 = 95.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The events do show completely sensible values. The upvote entry for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/203937&quot;&gt;the post which had at least one +170 before&lt;/a&gt; is just a +110 which is supported by all other site metrics: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/203937/timeline?filter=WithVoteSummaries&quot;&gt;the post history page&lt;/a&gt; shows the post got 11 upvotes yesterday and 1 today. Thus the post resulted in 110 reputation from yesterday.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This issue has been reported multiple times on Meta Stack Exchange and Meta Stack Overflow over the past year. Most likely more Meta sites, which I did not really follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The earliest report I can find is &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/377620/ghost-nonexistent-votes-in-reputation-tab&quot;&gt;Ghost (nonexistent) votes in reputation tab&lt;/a&gt; which is from 31st of March 2022. There was a bug from 23rd of February 2022 previous to that which was related with the display of reputation history events after the profile pages were updated see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/376538&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/376549&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; for examples. That was fixed. Presumably the behaviour I described above is also related to the profile updates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It has been nine months since the earliest report and so far, the responses I have seen from Stack Exchange to the reports are that the bug cannot be reproduced or no response at all. Thus I cannot even give &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/19514&quot;&gt;the usual six to eight weeks&lt;/a&gt; estimation for a fix.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="22258" LastEditDate="2023-02-03T08:20:17.613" LastActivityDate="2023-02-03T08:20:17.613" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12333" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-15T03:19:41.560" Score="1" ViewCount="69" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/194823/23547&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; includes brackets in its title:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do the relevant stats of a creature summoned via a &amp;quot;Summon [Creature Type]&amp;quot;-style spell change, if your stats change after you summoned it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see the reason for the brackets - it is clearly indicating that OP wants to ask about a number of related spells such as &lt;em&gt;Summon Aberration&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Summon Elemental&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Summon Undead&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;etc.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A more recent question, I believe &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/203953/23547&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt;, seemed related to me in the sense that it was asking about what happens to summoned creatures if the referenced statistics of their summoners change.  So I attempted to do the standard format &amp;quot;related&amp;quot; comment with a link to the prior question (I don't see my comment now so I expect it has been removed).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, when posting the comment, I found that the brackets in the question title interfered with the link-recognition, such that the title was not linked to the question but rather all of the text was displayed, as in the first comment below.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This interference is not found with a question or answer box, such as the same text posted here will format correctly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/194823/23547&quot;&gt;Do the relevant stats of a creature summoned via a &amp;quot;Summon [Creature Type]&amp;quot;-style spell change, if your stats change after you summoned it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In such a case, should I simply remove the brackets (as in the second comment below), even though this results in not correctly reproducing the title of the question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should question writers be discouraged from using brackets in their titles?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-01-19T20:52:00.127" LastActivityDate="2023-01-19T20:52:00.127" Title="Brackets in question titles" Tags="|discussion|questions|formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12334" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12333" CreationDate="2023-01-15T05:06:28.093" Score="4" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Special characters can be escaped with \&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have text you want a link on such as&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Testing [link] ideas&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can escape any troublesome characters by placing a \ before them, which makes the parser treat them as regular characters and never special ones, such as the ones that indicate the parts of a link.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;[Testing \[link\] ideas](https://rpg.stackexchange.com)&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yields:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com&quot;&gt;Testing [link] ideas&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36521" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-01-15T18:33:31.330" LastActivityDate="2023-01-15T18:33:31.330" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12335" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12336" CreationDate="2023-01-15T17:29:19.330" Score="4" ViewCount="75" Body="&lt;p&gt;Exempt-Medic noticed &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12334/1204&quot;&gt;in this answer&lt;/a&gt; that the following sequence invokes MathJax: &lt;code&gt;\\[MathJax!\\]&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See it here in action: \[MathJax!\]&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our configuration &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6335/1204&quot;&gt;ever since our original request to enable it&lt;/a&gt; was supposed to be &lt;code&gt;\$this\$&lt;/code&gt; for inline MathJax (&lt;span class=&quot;math-container&quot;&gt;\$this\$&lt;/span&gt;) and &lt;code&gt;$$this$$&lt;/code&gt; for blocks, but above &lt;code&gt;\\[this\\]&lt;/code&gt; also invokes a block.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What's going on that &lt;code&gt;\\[...\\]&lt;/code&gt; is invoking MathJax as well? Is it supposed to be doing that? Is this a bug or an expected feature?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-01-15T17:36:01.713" LastActivityDate="2023-01-15T23:25:29.527" Title="What's going on with \\[this sequence\\] invoking MathJax?" Tags="|support|mathjax|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12336" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12335" CreationDate="2023-01-15T18:00:53.197" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/375925/674198&quot;&gt;this meta.se answer&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;code&gt;\\[ ... \\]&lt;/code&gt; is one of the syntaxes used for “display style” math mode, the same environment as &lt;code&gt;$$ ...  $$&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-01-15T23:25:29.527" LastActivityDate="2023-01-15T23:25:29.527" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12337" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12323" CreationDate="2023-01-16T15:44:53.327" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;Although we don't need to do anything on account of Google itself, this highlights a potential gap for us to address in our Q&amp;amp;A collection:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't have an actual question covering whether counterspelling a counterspell is actually permissible, or how  it works.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We don't have a clear answer stating “yes it is, here's how.”&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think we should address that by having a Q&amp;amp;A that, you know, states this. “Can I counter a counterspell? How can I do that?” Then people can learn from that, Google can pick it up, and we can reference it in the question we're discussing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I considered suggesting that this question should be edited to do that. It comes pretty close: the question asks how to respond to it when this happens and none of the upvoted answers challenge the legitimacy of the events, and the answers that do are downvoted, which goes pretty far to imply things. But proving you can do that is a lot of additional work and a different topic, so that's a major scope change we shouldn't just slide in here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-01-16T17:40:22.353" LastActivityDate="2023-01-16T17:40:22.353" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12338" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-21T12:19:25.860" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think it is on-topic, but whereas a historical question about the OGL would be straightforward, this is a question about current events - and quickly changing ones at that. The OGL 1.1 has already been replaced by a draft of 1.2, and that is undergoing frequent clarification and a feedback process using the system established for use with Unearthed Arcana playtest material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the question is framed around how the change affects &lt;em&gt;players&lt;/em&gt;, who are the least affected group. So that answer could be definitive, at least when it comes to &lt;em&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/em&gt;. For other games the answer will vary depending on whether they adopt a new license and how that process will work, but that might require separate questions for each.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But can we give a broader answer, until this is resolved? Is this a question that might need to go on hold? Do we have precedent for “current events” questions? I can’t imagine it’s something that comes up too often here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="35508" LastEditorUserId="35508" LastEditDate="2023-01-29T21:34:03.137" LastActivityDate="2023-01-29T21:34:03.137" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12339" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12340" CreationDate="2023-01-21T12:47:38.160" Score="3" ViewCount="135" Body="&lt;p&gt;Ever since starting to build characters, I have struggled with trying to understand weapon damage and the merits of modifiers. After someone suggested that a 1d6 weapon with duelling hit stronger than Shillelagh, I decided to invest my time into gathering the info on just how strong single and dual dice weapons would be with up to a +10 modifier. &lt;em&gt;(aka, 1d4,2d4,1d6,2d6,[...], 1d12, and 2d12)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having composed everything into a nice, short and concise table, I wanted to share my findings with this community, as it has helped me tremendously with understanding D&amp;amp;D beyond my own limitations, and I hope this might help a player in the future who might be having a hard time to wrap their heads around the concepts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm posting this question first on Meta as I am not quite sure how to proceed: Should I pose a question like &amp;quot;How can I make sense of the different weapon damages?&amp;quot; and then post my findings in an answer? Or should I post all my findings in the question itself?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52781" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-01-21T13:24:35.643" LastActivityDate="2023-01-21T14:47:34.977" Title="How can I share research data?" Tags="|discussion|self-answering|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12340" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12339" CreationDate="2023-01-21T13:24:12.670" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It sounds like the you've got the basis for a self-answered question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to reiterate a basic premise of the site, because I think the specific perspective will be useful: Our Questions give a specific problem, and the answers give useful solutions to that problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Who posted the question and answer doesn't really matter. If its a good problem (it being an actually faced problem is a good way of getting there) and has a good solution (for whatever applicable meaning of good), then it's good Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the sounds of it, it sounds like you sure had a problem you faced and that should be the basic of the question. I'm struggling a bit to give direction, because I'm not quite sure what you've struggled to understand. And I'll very much recognize that it's not always an easy thing to formulate. I'm guessing we'll get a good idea from seeing the answer, so the general guidance would be to make sure you're still posing a good and clear problem. Try to ask the question as though you didn't actually have an answer for it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just for awareness, self-answered Q&amp;amp;A are often put to a bit higher of a standard, but the goals aren't different. The quality floor we'll accept is higher, so to speak. The fear is a user asking unneeded questions just to gain rep, which isn't a motivation we want to spend our efforts supporting.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9372/52137&quot;&gt;Are self-answer questions still allowed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4769/52137&quot;&gt;Should I post self-answered questions, for rules I clarify for my players?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Self-promotional examples which might be useful:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/152569/52137&quot;&gt;Which spells count for a Shepherd Druid&amp;#39;s features affecting creatures &amp;quot;summoned or created&amp;quot; by spells?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/163324/52137&quot;&gt;What is the history of the Artificer class for 5e?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2023-01-21T13:24:12.670" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12341" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12339" CreationDate="2023-01-21T14:33:31.260" Score="7" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Be careful not to smuggle the question's clarity into the answer.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12340/62294&quot;&gt;Someone_Evil's answer&lt;/a&gt; provides some helpful guidance here, but there is one trap in particular that I hope I can help you avoid. When you have a question &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; an answer already, you obviously already know what sort of answer you are looking for from your question. But when we write the question to post on the site, we need to do so in a way that makes it clear to everyone else what sort of answer you are looking for &lt;em&gt;without having to read the answer that you post along with it&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now, I know that the question you gave in your post here is more a &amp;quot;proof of concept&amp;quot; sort of example, not literally what you would put into the question box, but even from the title, I'm afraid that it may be too vague of a question for the site. But since you have already done research and computation sufficient for an answer, I'm sure it would be abundantly clear exactly what you meant by the question after reading the answer. The question itself needs enough context and details so that an expert reader would already be expecting at least the &lt;em&gt;kind&lt;/em&gt; of answer you are providing along with the question. If the answer makes clear the problem you were trying to solve, but the question does not, we've taken a misstep somewhere along the way. The clarity required for understanding and solving your problem must be entirely self-contained within the question so that when we read your answer, we can say &amp;quot;Yes, this is a good solution to the problem described in the question&amp;quot;, not &amp;quot;Oh, that's what the question means.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And just as Someone_Evil did, I can provide some shameless self-promotion of my own self-answered questions that have done well:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/175641/62294&quot;&gt;How can you tell the distances by road between the settlements of Ten-Towns in Icewind Dale?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/185506/62294&quot;&gt;What are Mythic Actions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/191721/what-are-all-of-the-published-off-label-uses-of-the-wish-spell&quot;&gt;What are all of the published &amp;quot;off-label&amp;quot; uses of the Wish spell?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-01-21T14:47:34.977" LastActivityDate="2023-01-21T14:47:34.977" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12342" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12344" CreationDate="2023-01-21T15:57:53.007" Score="1" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;As I have talked about &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12340/52781&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; in a bit more detail, I have always had an issue wrapping my head around certain core (and simple) concepts within &lt;strong&gt;D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/strong&gt;. In this particular case, the issue pertains to picking the right weapon for a build, beyond the simpler &amp;quot;longsword and a battle axe are the same things with different flavour&amp;quot; answers, such as why one would pick a mace over a greatclub as they both do the same amount and type of damage. I've tried asking the community in a few different ways getting either very specific answers pertaining to the weapons I've exampled, all the way to having my questions closed for being too vague, opinion-based, or confusing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've recently compiled all my data into an easy, clear, and concise form answering my concerns, and I wanted to share it with the community as a free resource for anyone who's been having/will come here having the same issue. However, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12341/52781&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; wisely pointed out that even the best answer can have issues if it doesn't proceed with a clear and concise question, which he suggested I workshop both first (and here I am).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;QUESTION:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What are the basic aspects to look for when deciding on your character's initial weapon?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; &amp;gt;Aside from the flavouring, such as between the 1d8 slashing damage of a longsword and battle axe, what other factors would come into consideration when choosing from among the weapons you're proficient in?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;ANSWER:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are quite a bit of factors to consider, such as any class and subclass bonuses you might get by favouring a certain kind of weapon, but I find a great place to start is by considering what kind of character you want to play and what modifiers are available to you during character creation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Where you want to position your character in battle becomes rather important, as it will heavily determine what kinds of options are available to you; Frontline fighters tend to gravitate towards the bulkier weapons as they focus on taking a hit and dishing it right back, whereas midline fighters often focus on fineness and one-handed weapons as it keeps them more versatile and utilitarian, back-line fighters focus on ranged attacks and taking that perfect shot, while spellcasters focus on staves as they double as a spellcasting focus.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From there, you can gather all the ways to add a modifier to your roll. While there are class features like Sneak Attack or Hex Warrior that might limit/alter your choices (but often comes at a bonus to damage), I find that there are 3 major categories of basic modifiers that you'll be dealing with going up from level 1 to level 4:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Proficiency and Ability Scores:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; From among the weapons you are proficient in, each one will be influenced by either your Strength modifier or Dex modifier for Fineness and Ranged weapons. For example, a level 1 fighter with 16 Strength and 15 Dexterity can add a +5 to their longsword attack rolls and +4 to their longbow attack rolls. &lt;em&gt;Note, proficiency only applies to attack rolls and not damage rolls.&lt;/em&gt; However, there are a few ways that a character might base their attacks on a different ability score, which &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/203982/52781&quot;&gt;Groody the Hobgoblin&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/203995/52781&quot;&gt;User2754&lt;/a&gt; have kindly listed, however they would be subjected to the same application of proficiency + ability mod.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Feats and Fighting Styles:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; While maintaining a theme (such as polearms, ranged, or bludgeoning) here can make for a rather powerful build, this too can add quite the outlier to your choices and each deserves their own consideration. For instance, a fighter might choose to compliment their Halbert with Great Weapon Fighting and Great Weapon Master to become a heavy hitter, while a ranger might opt to accent their druidic staff with Dueling, and Polearm Master for better area control.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Magic Weapons:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; While it won't be likely that a DM will grant you a +1 sword from the start, it is important to remember that +1, +2, and +3 weapons of all kinds exist in D&amp;amp;D, and even the most basic of models are considered magical and add the modifiers on top of all those you gain with their non-magical copies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are also weapons that break the rolls between two dice. While it won't affect the max damage between, say, a greataxe and a greatsword, it does affect the probabilities you might wish to achieve: single dice have a higher chance to roll max damage, but the double dice roll average damage more frequently.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a final bit of help, below you'll find a chart listing all the weapons available, what dice they use, and the average damage you can expect to gain from them with modifiers up to a +10. You can use it to compare different combinations of weapons and modifiers available to you to get a better understanding of what you can expect and maybe discover new combinations that will work better for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Weapon&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Dice&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+0&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+1&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+2&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+3&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+4&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+5&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+6&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+7&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+8&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+9&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;+10&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Blowgun, Fists&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Club, Dagger, Dart, Hooked Shortspear, Light Hammer, Sickle, Sling, Whip&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;3.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;4.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Double-Bladed Scimitar&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Hand Crossbow, Handaxe, Hoopak, Javelin, Mace, Quarterstaff (single), Scimitar, Shortbow, Shortsword, Spear (single), Trident (single)&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;3.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;4.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Greatsword, Maul, Oversized Longbow&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Battleaxe (single), Flail, Greatclub, Light Crossbow, Longbow, Longsword (single), Morningstar, Quarterstaff (Dual), Rapier, Spear (dual), Trident (dual), War Pick, Warhammer (single), Yklwa&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;4.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;None&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Battleaxe (dual), Glaive, Halberd, Heavy Crossbow, Longsword (dual), Pike, Warhammer (dual)&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;None&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Greataxe, Lance&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;None&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;21.9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Great Weapon Master&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Double-Bladed Scimitar&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;2d4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15.7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Greatclub, Morningstar, Quarterstaff (Dual),  Spear (dual), Trident (dual)&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;5.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Battleaxe (dual), Glaive, Halberd, Longsword (dual), Pike, Warhammer (dual)&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;6.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Greataxe&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;1d12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;7.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;8.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;9.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;17.5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;ALTERNATIVE&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;If the question I posed seems off, then would there be a feasible way to share this chart?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52781" LastEditorUserId="52781" LastEditDate="2023-01-22T12:28:50.867" LastActivityDate="2023-01-22T13:56:54.617" Title="Workshopping Question about picking the right weapon" Tags="|discussion|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12343" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12342" CreationDate="2023-01-22T12:56:14.467" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;I would definetely add a paragraph about the fact that these tables contain the &amp;quot;everything else being equal&amp;quot; data. I say this because I have not played at a table where that happens to be the case for at least a decade. Others do. Both is great. Both is roleplaying.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Soft/Meta considerations may be the campaign constraints you play in, the loot you expect to get, roleplaying considerations and other things I problably have never thought about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, if for your character, a nimble elven rapier were the best weapon dictated by the numbers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the fact that you are playing a book adventure about robbing the tomb of a dwarven hammersmith probably means there will be no magical rapiers. More like the default vanilla magical longswords, more likely a warhammer of sorts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;the fact that you are playing a dwarf and your whole clan will laugh about you and not take your seriously with an elven rapier might be a problem for your character&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;if you are using optional rules, the fact that you don't have a different damage type from the archers might be a problem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;if your campaign world is full of evil oppressive regimes that do not tolerate fighters, carrying more than a simple weapon might make you a target more than a bigger damage dice might be worth.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I saying that those considerations &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; to come into play?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. Many people just play very simple vanilla games, where optimization is a trivial math problem, no roleplaying involved at all. And it is perfectly fine to play that way and it would really help to have tables for that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All I'm saying is, add a little text explaining that those calculations are not the absolute truth, just the mathematics for the time when all else is being equal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2023-01-22T12:56:14.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12344" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12342" CreationDate="2023-01-22T13:29:38.433" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question is unclear and too broad&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The issue with the question as it is currently presented is that you began with it on the stack as &amp;quot;I made this helpful table, how do I share it?&amp;quot; That isn't a great way to start a question, but it doesn't mean it isn't salvageable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It does mean that a question needs to be more than just a vehicle for sharing work performed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The question itself&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As I said in a comment, the first thing you really need to do is step back and think back to before you made the table. What problem were you really trying to solve for yourself and why does the table help solve that particular problem (including verifying that it, in fact, does solve the problem.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The broadness&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are able to narrow down your question, then you can look at the table to see if it still fully applies.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You have currently clarified your question to be&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the basic aspects to look for when deciding on your character's initial weapon?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, you haven't defined when &amp;quot;initial&amp;quot; begins. What level is this character at? But this is just the start of unclear constraints. I don't see a path where a single question can ask what all the possible combinations are for optimal choices at level X for every race/class/Ability score/etc. There's just too many permutations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The table doesn't match your question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you are really are just asking about the aspects for considerations when choosing an optimal weapon, then the table doesn't answer that. It doesn't give an analysis of considerations or reasons why to pick one weapon over another due to whatever build design is currently being looked at.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Begin at the beginning&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Go back to what really generated your desire to ask this question. What are you really to solve? And then think about what an answer to that might look like.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even if you remove soft rp considerations, there are still mechanical decisions to be made that will define optimal for a build. Without those constraints, then this remains too broad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And honestly, it does sound like you may be interested in the question you are posing - it's just that your table doesn't answer that question, and that's okay. You may not be able to use your table as a self-answer, but you absolutely could get an answer to help clarify what to consider when picking for optimal damage only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2023-01-22T13:56:54.617" LastActivityDate="2023-01-22T13:56:54.617" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12345" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-26T15:10:22.153" Score="11" ViewCount="205" Body="&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As we say goodbye to the old year and welcome the new one, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22year+in+moderation%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the preceding calendar year&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As most of you here are aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;-- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't eliminate the need for having &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;moderators&lt;/a&gt; altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as we say goodbye to 2022 (and where did January go, right?) and dive head first into 2023, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/V0TPg.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;exciting&lt;/em&gt; stats&lt;/a&gt;. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Role-playing Games over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Action&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Community¹&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;All comments on a post moved to chat&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;87&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answer flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;436&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;390&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answers flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;807&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Bounties canceled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comment flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2,585&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;694&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments deleted⁷&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;7,239&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,199&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;39&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,241&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;83&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Escalations to the Community Manager team&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts bumped&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;44&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts deleted⁶&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;185&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;855&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts locked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;74&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;81&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts unlocked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Question flags handled⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;250&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;558&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions closed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;124&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;527&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions flagged⁵&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;899&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions migrated&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions protected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;28&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions reopened&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;176&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions unprotected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms created&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;148&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms proposed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;146&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tags merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;23&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;Close votes&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;34&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,888&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;First answers&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;666&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;First questions&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;401&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;Late answers&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;292&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;Low quality posts&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;657&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;Reopen votes&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;854&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁴: &amp;quot;Suggested edits&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;115&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,038&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users contacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users deleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users destroyed³&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;47&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users suspended²&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;24&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ &amp;quot;Community&amp;quot; here refers both to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;, and to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ A &amp;quot;destroyed&amp;quot; user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88994/what-is-the-difference-between-a-deleted-user-and-a-destroyed-user&quot;&gt;Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes). Community can handle these flags by at least one person voting to close a question that has a close flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Further reading:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? We posted a similar report here last year: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11910/2021-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2021: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/search?q=title%3A%222022%3A+a+year+in+moderation%22&quot;&gt;this report on other sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or peruse &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/386090/208518&quot;&gt;detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing everyone a happy 2023! ^_^&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2023-01-26T18:09:47.463" LastActivityDate="2023-01-27T16:26:36.720" Title="2022: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12347" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-01-26T18:03:24.870" Score="9" ViewCount="224" Body="&lt;p&gt;I made a claim in chat roughly a year ago:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11?m=60217831#60217831&quot;&gt;I'm staying dnd-5e neutral this year, and I've just posted my first question, and made sure to ask a non-dnd-5e question :D&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And I'd like to reflect on how that went for me, and what I learnt.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Motivation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My motivation originated from me asking a spate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dnd-5e-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions sometime in 2021 which were the sort of 'open to interpretation' questions where the literal reading of the rules wasn't as useful as just asking your GM to make a ruling.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I realised that, because of the way D&amp;amp;D 5e is written, it was all too easy to create hypothetical situations with unintuitive results, that ended up generating what felt like an almost infinite number of questions. At the same time, those questions would likely be useless if they ever came up in an actual game, because someone's GM might sensibly decide to rule a different, more intuitive way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This realisation was particularly important to me, because even without the non-hypothetical questions, D&amp;amp;D 5e content here vastly outnumbers that of other games and RPG topics.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Observations&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Firstly, I managed to keep to my word. All days on which I posted a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=user%3A2788+%5Bdnd-5e%5D+OR+%5Bdungeons-and-dragons%5D+is%3Aq+created%3A2022&quot;&gt;question tagged dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; also had a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=user%3A2788%20-%5Bdnd-5e%5D%20-%5Bdungeons-and-dragons%5D%20is%3Aq%20created%3A2022&quot;&gt;question posted without that tag&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Secondly, I definitely noticed occasions where I felt I was slightly 'manufacturing' a non-D&amp;amp;D question so I could ask a D&amp;amp;D question, but I did my best to make sure the non-D&amp;amp;D questions were all real problems I had, even if they weren't current problems. Othertimes I noticed I was completely holding off asking a genuine D&amp;amp;D question I had, because I couldn't think of a non-D&amp;amp;D question to go along with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And much more rarely did I notice I had 'saved up' a non-D&amp;amp;D questions to ask when I had a D&amp;amp;D question I needed answering. That felt weird, like I was still prioritising the D&amp;amp;D questions. It didn't last long.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One positive I noticed was that when I couldn't ask my D&amp;amp;D questions on this site, I ended up asking my group and my GM instead. That meant I knew how he'd rule, and the group was aware of my questions. I could go into more detail about how I thought it might be relevant, and didn't need to waste effort making sure the question wasn't too narrowly focused on our group or providing context to the community here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I also noticed I started looking for more non-D&amp;amp;D questions to ask, and eventually ended up asking them without having D&amp;amp;D questions in mind that I needed 'neutralising'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally I definitely stopped asking the bizarre theorycrafted questions that had little to no purpose, and only occasionally brought them to chat.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Was this exercise worth it? Would I do it again?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was certainly worth it to break me out of the habit of those questions about bizarre hypothetical situations. And it made me discover lots more non-D&amp;amp;D games I might have questions about.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly it encouraged me to bring the relevant questions to my group and GM.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think I'd strictly stick to this again, but I would go back to it if I found myself falling into bad habits.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I also included the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;dungeons-and-dragons-container&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tag, and had I felt the need to ask, other D&amp;amp;D versions would have been included too.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2788" LastActivityDate="2023-01-31T15:06:46.967" Title="I tried to stay D&amp;D question neutral last year, how did I do?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dnd-5e|dungeons-and-dragons|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12348" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12345" CreationDate="2023-01-27T16:26:36.720" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;2021 vs. 2022 Comparison for RPG.se&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GbqzO.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GbqzO.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YyIEn.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YyIEn.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vzmPQ.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vzmPQ.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7022/52137&quot;&gt;2017 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8680/8610&quot;&gt;2018 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9662/2019-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2019 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11355/2020-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2020 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11910/2021-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2021 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEDE Queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions-answers-and-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Total number of questions, answers per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1173867/total-number-of-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Comments per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-01-27T16:26:36.720" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12349" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12347" CreationDate="2023-01-28T02:23:58.227" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Congratulation!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As someone that does decidedly not like 5e for &lt;em&gt;various&lt;/em&gt; reasons (and Wizards did not endear itself to me in January this year especially), Kudos for asking rare game questions. For keeping the lights on for those off the mainstream. Maybe we can see an uptick in other systems (most likely Pathfinder) now that the storm is ebbing off? After all, Paizo just sold out their books that should have lasted until September! But in any way: let's hope for a diversified field of games! We embrace all game styles, so we should embrace all games!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-01-28T02:23:58.227" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12350" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12325" CreationDate="2023-01-28T02:29:26.090" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We might need to update the question to reflect the last week...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With OGL 1.1 Gone, and 1.2 utterly Destroyed (and Hasbro looking almost like they are back to the wall) within 7 days of them offering it, I think the question needs &lt;strong&gt;retooling&lt;/strong&gt; to make it a historical question about what happened in the hellish fortnight we just lived through...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The RPG world won't ever be the same. To quote Roll for combat:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/qLce2cdoBvw?list=TLPQMjcwMTIwMjM6-bisu83L4w&amp;amp;t=3009&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;I guarantee they had all these plans, but none of their plans had them failing&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We might need a &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; question to preserve the rundown of what happened for the History of Gaming, we might still not be through all of it, but... THIS was a fortnight of RPG History, possibly more impactful than the death of FASA, the sudden collapse of FanPro or similar... As I said when this question came up: the question itself is good, but it was ill timed, because it assumed that it was going to come either way... Then &lt;strong&gt;everybody&lt;/strong&gt; banded up and protested... and nothing came from 1.1 and 1.2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-01-28T17:11:01.283" LastActivityDate="2023-01-28T17:11:01.283" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12351" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12353" CreationDate="2023-01-30T21:58:46.733" Score="7" ViewCount="201" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently posted the question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/204360/62294&quot;&gt;What is the best way to bring a campaign to an end?&lt;/a&gt; on the Role-Playing Games Stack Exchange, but it was closed because it ended up seeming too broad or just phrased weird.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am having a hard time narrowing down the question to a singular problem. Should I just stick with the end question of &amp;quot;Is boredom a valid reason to end a campaign?&amp;quot;? Or is that also too much of an opinion-based question?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What could I do to improve it and allow it to actually be a question that can be answered? I want to narrow down the question so it's less opinion-based and more focused, but cannot for the life of me figure out how.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm really hoping that I can get the question re-opened, because I'm pretty sure the answers would be really helpful for me later on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Current version of the Question&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is mainly just a question I decided to ask out of curiosity because sometimes I can get bored of a campaign and I wouldn't want to end it because the players could still be enjoying themselves. The players have mentioned they liked combat scenes but would appreciate more opportunities for them to express their characters with role-play. With being a very inexperienced DM I know next to nothing about good ways to add changes to the campaign.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm currently just playing in the Eberron world with a homebrew questline and I don't really have a fully set idea what the players should strive for. (mainly because I cannot think of anything enjoyable)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really want to end the campaign but with no new ideas coming into my head to spice up how the game is played it's really hard to bring back the enjoyment from when the campaign felt fresh and new.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, the combat appears to drag on too much and that limits opportunity for roleplay. I have discussed with the players and gotten mixed responses. Some like the combat and some want more roleplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As DM, I would like more roleplay - but I also want all players to be happy. How can I adjust my campaign to do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50570" LastEditorUserId="50570" LastEditDate="2023-01-31T16:24:03.240" LastActivityDate="2023-01-31T21:30:51.253" Title="Workshopping &quot;What is the best way to bring a campaign to an end?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|dnd-5e|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12352" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12347" CreationDate="2023-01-31T15:06:46.967" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think this worked very well&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I did only join a year ago, and if someone had asked me before I saw this post of yours, I would not have put you down as a mainly D&amp;amp;D player. To the contrary, I thought you are mostly into more obscure 1-page role playing games and only have the occasional D&amp;amp;D question here and there, that being one of many different games you enjoy engaging in and playing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One positive I noticed was that when I couldn't ask my D&amp;amp;D questions on this site, I ended up asking my group and my GM instead. That meant I knew how he'd rule, and the group was aware of my questions. I could go into more detail about how I thought it might be relevant, and didn't need to waste effort making sure the question wasn't too narrowly focused on our group or providing context to the community here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is an excellent observation. Engaging here and having Q&amp;amp;As to work out a theoretically correct answer to a question is not needed for most practical play at home, and doing it is just much harder than asking your DM. The DM makes a call, and that is that. Even if the site here comes to another conclusion, at best you can point to an answer to help them consider, but especially during play it often is not worth the disruption in flow, and even afterwards, in the end it is their call.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-01-31T15:06:46.967" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12353" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12351" CreationDate="2023-01-31T18:16:34.257" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;To sum up from what I've observed of the community standards here,  this is a single-issue question and answer site where discrete (Single issue) questions that can have an answer backed by supporting evidence (Books/references for points of fact, specific anecdotes with how it helped solve the problem at hand for subjective help, see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;subjective questions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8696&quot;&gt;citations&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The scope of the question,  while more supporting evidence for the situation you are in can be useful, the actual question should be a discrete, single answer question.  The idea is for this site to be a repository for future users to be able to search for answers that have already been given,  so having each question focus on one thing is best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So,  let's look at the things that could be converted into questions and note before you actually ask them, you should search to see if they already have answers (as some are common things)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm currently just playing in the Eberron world with a homebrew questline and I don't really have a fully set idea what the players should strive for. (mainly because I cannot think of anything enjoyable)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What are some ways to integrate hooks to a homebrew quest to get their characters involved in roleplay?&amp;quot; is how I would phrase it.  I'm new here though, so if someone has a better phrasing, I'm up to changing it! same with all the future suggesitons&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't really want to end the campaign but with no new ideas coming into my head to spice up how the game is played it's really hard to bring back the enjoyment from when the campaign felt fresh and new.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd look up things on &amp;quot;DM burnout&amp;quot;,  there is likely material there.  If not,  a question of the sort of &amp;quot;What are some ways to restore DM interest in a campaign after the beginning?&amp;quot;  Here you might get DMs telling you how they dealt with it in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For me, the combat appears to drag on too much and that limits opportunity for roleplay. I have discussed with the players and gotten mixed responses. Some like the combat and some want more roleplay.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are ways I could speed up combat?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As DM, I would like more roleplay - but I also want all players to be happy. How can I adjust my campaign to do this?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;How can I balance a mixed table where some prefer more combat and some prefer more roleplay?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note each of these should be its own question...and before you run with them, I'd wait until some of the actual long time members of the community confirm that my suggestions are good :).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally,  So, the opening &amp;quot;What is the best way to...&amp;quot; Some of these questions are considered good/on topic here...if it could be answered with some form of specific reasoning why. Examples per Thomas Markov: &amp;quot;eat cheese cake&amp;quot; would be an opinion, whereas &amp;quot;to cook a cheese cake when I only have access to a 55 gallon drum and a welding torch&amp;quot; is something that people with experience can provide useful information on. The latter is acceptable here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;P.S. Speaking purely as myself as a mathematician I would prefer the more technically correct &amp;quot;What is an optimal way to...&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;The best way to&amp;quot;,  since there can be more than one optimal solution. Even more pedantically, a mathematician would prefer &amp;quot;maximal&amp;quot; as in mathematics &amp;quot;optimum&amp;quot; implies uniqueness.  However, in English, it can be accepted usage to say there is &amp;quot;more than one optimal solution&amp;quot;. That's not the community standard here though,  so please treat this final paragraph as a minor bit of pedantry that can be safely ignored.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71804" LastEditorUserId="71804" LastEditDate="2023-01-31T21:30:51.253" LastActivityDate="2023-01-31T21:30:51.253" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12354" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12355" CreationDate="2023-01-31T21:43:50.097" Score="12" ViewCount="149" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm 45 and table top RPGs have been a core part of my identity since I was 12, often the only way I had of socializing. Due to a variety of life circumstances, it has been about 2 years since I've been able to be in a game.  Until/unless I convince my girlfriend to give up 4 or so hours of our weekend time together, that's likely to stay the same (Bleh work+grad school).  So having this site for me to glance over and occasionally participate in has been a major lifeline to my sanity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am normally the type of person who reads all FAQs/Rules/etc. of any place I go into before I post.  Needless to say, I haven't had the time/energy to do that here. So to all the people who have been kind in directing me to the appropriate places, I am very grateful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71804" LastActivityDate="2023-02-03T11:56:09.443" Title="Thank you to the community" Tags="|discussion|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12355" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12354" CreationDate="2023-01-31T22:56:17.360" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Our &amp;quot;FAQ&amp;quot; are not always up to date anyway, and the consensus on other parts - like the line between a good designer reason question and a bad one - is not well documented. Nobody would skin you alive for not reading through them, we point you to where we have something if the need arises.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just do as you do, stay respectful and we help you figure the rest out. Glad to have you!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-03T11:56:09.443" LastActivityDate="2023-02-03T11:56:09.443" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12357" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-01T10:32:54.140" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h1&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8372/how-to-deal-with-answers-based-on-the-wrong-system-edition&quot;&gt;How to deal with answers based on the wrong system/edition?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is something that occasionally happens: people answer with 3.5 for Pathfinder, Pathfinder 1e for 2e, CoD for WoD. Having a handbook &lt;em&gt;what to do&lt;/em&gt; then can be helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-02-01T10:32:54.140" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12360" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12361" CreationDate="2023-02-03T17:30:07.877" Score="0" ViewCount="123" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm trying to work on posting at least one DnD related question each day and I'm finding it  difficult to actually get questions that get decent responses from the community. My best question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137643/can-the-dungeon-master-have-a-player-character&quot;&gt;Can the Dungeon Master have a player character&lt;/a&gt; was posted around 5 years ago and recently my questions have only been receiving barely above 10 up-votes. I really enjoy seeing how helpful the community is and really want to keep posting questions but I can't seem to ask questions that don't get closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions that could help me ask effective questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50570" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-03T18:06:36.450" LastActivityDate="2023-02-03T18:17:44.270" Title="How to ask effective questions?" Tags="|discussion|support|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12361" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12360" CreationDate="2023-02-03T18:17:44.270" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The title grabs attention&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good question has a title that grabs attention. Either the title is descriptive, or it is for some other reason making people think &amp;quot;huh?&amp;quot; and look at it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Framing&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good question is more than just the question. It has a good frame. It explains the problem well and contains all details.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Ask actual questions, not hypotheticals&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sometimes a question appears dragged in by the hair, because it's not an actual problem the person faces or something they try to understand, but made up just to ask a question. Avoid making up questions for asking a question's sake.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Avoid opinion-based questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You tried to ask a question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/204478/how-does-one-correctly-role-play&quot;&gt;what is correct roleplaying&lt;/a&gt; within the last half hour. I was typing up an answer there, as I saw that it was answerable from my point of view with a frame challenge. However, others did mention that people might feel it was opinion based. I didn't manage to answer in time till the question was deleted. I am not saying it was a bad question, but indeed, most certainly it &lt;em&gt;could&lt;/em&gt; have resulted in opinion-based answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Bear with time&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a few very well received questions, going up tp +40. However, only 33 of those are 10 or more upvotes, 42 are 5 or less votes, 5 of them without answers. That doesn't make my 40% of questions that only get 5 votes &lt;em&gt;bad&lt;/em&gt; questions. They just are not grabbing attention or people are not interested in the question. In fact, 5 of my questions have less than 50 views, 10 less than 100, 43 don't make 200 views, and only 19 make it to 1000 or more views. But as time goes on, you still get votes and answers, even on very old questions. Like, my top-voted question, untouched since 2021, just got a vote in the last week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-02-03T18:17:44.270" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12362" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-02-04T13:25:30.070" Score="5" ViewCount="269" Body="&lt;p&gt;In our recent &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12348/44723&quot;&gt;visual excerpt&lt;/a&gt; of a year in moderation, we see that community moderation actions have drastically declined. One explanation is that our site-wide quality improved drastically — simultaneously, our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/site-analytics&quot;&gt;site analytics&lt;/a&gt; are in decline. What is going on here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2023-02-13T17:36:20.180" Title="Has site-wide quality drastically improved while our analytics are in freefall?" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12364" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-02-04T22:23:57.663" Score="10" ViewCount="420" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7064/faq-index-for-role-playing-games-stack-exchange&quot;&gt;Our FAQ&lt;/a&gt; has become quite cluttered and convoluted. There are &lt;em&gt;many&lt;/em&gt; issues with it, but among the most pressing I currently see:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There are &lt;strong&gt;3&lt;/strong&gt; questions about recommendation questions, which is a mess. We might want to have one that covers &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; those types and points to specific sub-types of why those are banned.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2&lt;/strong&gt; different FAQs on Frame Challenge. Again, unifying them into a top one and branch from there seems to be in order.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Editing section might need serious updates, as we got multiple tools since all those in there were written.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;We have three FAQs that concern spam and trolls... Might we cut those to one somehow?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Several of the FAQs are linking to a later part in a series of discussions, which makes them appear misplaced... &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;status-completed-container&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt; as trivial.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All these issues might need to be addressed separately, but in general, it seems housekeeping is in order. For some of these issues, writing a special new &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; might be the best way to get the best of two worlds - retaining the old discussions and questions as well as incorporating the current stance on topics where it has changed due to the realities of the stack changing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-02-25T06:06:04.657" LastActivityDate="2023-02-25T06:06:04.657" Title="FAQ Maintenance 2023" Tags="|discussion|faq-maintenance|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12365" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For all overarching posts that are about handling and maintaining the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-container&quot;&gt;faq&lt;/a&gt;. This is not &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/faq-proposal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;faq-proposal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;faq-proposal-container&quot;&gt;faq-proposal&lt;/a&gt; - questions tagged with maintenance will never appear on the FAQ.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maintenance is about:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;establishing the processes that lead to an item becoming an FAQ or dropping from it&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;investigating the need to update, combine or remove entries of the FAQ.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" LastActivityDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12366" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" Score="0" Body="For discussions and policies that are about handling the FAQ and processes to update it. This is NOT about proposing a question for the FAQ." OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" LastActivityDate="2023-02-05T14:58:55.743" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12367" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12362" CreationDate="2023-02-05T15:02:40.230" Score="11" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Not necessarily.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The apparent drop in traffic is an artifact of how cookies for Google Analytics are categorized&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the 10th of May 2022, the cookies used by SE were changed. As a result &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12117/site-traffic-fell-off-the-table-the-week-of-may-10-2022-what-happened/12118&quot;&gt;Site traffic fell off the table the week of May 10, 2022. What happened?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/378440/389668&quot;&gt;Due to the altered cookies,&lt;/a&gt; pre-May 2022 data can't be reliably compared to post-May 2022 data.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The drop in &amp;quot;traffic&amp;quot; coincides with the swap of the cookies to a different model. Before that day, the analytics tracking cookie was mandatory, since then it is optional and positive acceptance is required to be tracked. As a result, tracked traffic declined since many people deny &lt;em&gt;performance&lt;/em&gt; tracking cookies by default.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Handled questions are not correlating to quality of questions but quantity of handlers&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The number of questions handled in some way or another does not only correlate with the quality of the questions, but the quantity of handlers. Watching the number of handling queue events handled by the site, a direct impact on all other handling categories above is to be expected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Or phrased differently: Many people identify many bad questions. If fewer people identify fewer bad questions, that doesn't mean there are more good questions, but just that there are fewer bad questions detected.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-13T17:36:20.180" LastActivityDate="2023-02-13T17:36:20.180" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12368" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:33:32.703" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5270/what-do-we-do-with-read-the-book-to-me-questions&quot;&gt;What Do We Do With &amp;quot;Read The Book To Me&amp;quot; Questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A discussion on a commonly problematic question type where users ask questions that can be simply answered by duplicating content from the official rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:33:32.703" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12369" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:36:14.810" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10132/why-do-i-need-to-specify-my-game-system-and-how-do-i-best-do-it&quot;&gt;Why do I need to specify my game system, and how do I best do it?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A good concise Q&amp;amp;A on why we ask for the game system and a discussion on the available methods to do so. Useful to link to new users confused as to why we close a question without a system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:36:14.810" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12370" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:40:36.113" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11176/what-are-the-rules-and-policies-of-rpg-se&quot;&gt;What are the rules and policies of RPG.SE?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A solid explanatory Q&amp;amp;A that looks at how we use terms like &amp;quot;rules&amp;quot; and how that differs from &amp;quot;policies&amp;quot; or the way other sites might use them. More helpful for catching users up on meta discussion or helping them learn the more nuanced parts of site expectations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:40:36.113" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12371" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:51:10.963" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11202/why-did-another-user-edit-my-post&quot;&gt;Why did another user edit my post?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One of our help-centre targeted Q&amp;amp;As that aims to explain the basic approach to collaborative editing we have as a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:51:10.963" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12372" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:52:49.617" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11165/what-does-it-mean-for-a-question-to-be-closed&quot;&gt;What does it mean for a question to be closed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another help-centre question, this one is about question closure and explains what it really means for new users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:52:49.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12373" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="9961" CreationDate="2023-02-07T03:54:18.520" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11193/why-are-users-saying-my-answer-isn-t-an-answer&quot;&gt;Why are users saying my answer isn’t an answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This help-centre extension Q&amp;amp;A focuses on what &amp;quot;not an answer&amp;quot; means and touches on some of the common terminology used to provide feedback on answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-02-07T03:54:18.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12374" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-02-07T17:44:09.177" Score="2" ViewCount="161" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have a question I want to ask and would like to run it by the community before I actually ask it so I can obtain feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is my question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Should I allow a Player to use a premade character?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In my 5th edition campaign based in the Eberron world we’ve recently obtained a new player. The player in question would like to play a premade rogue character. (I have no clue where he got the character from)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Character name: Bjorn Lightfoot&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(STR: 15)   (DEX: 17)   (CON:16)  (INT: 14)   (WIS: 14)   (CHA: 16)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Everyone in the campaign is playing a character they made themselves and fleshed out the backstory to. The new player just has to level up their character to level 4. I want to deny the character he is proposing because it seems like a pretty overpowered ability score setup despite the fact that most premade characters that are official are quite balanced. The highest score among any of the other players is a 15 which is only slightly higher than his lowest score. When I asked the 3 veteran players it was very undecided with one agreeing with me and one against me while the other was not really supplying their opinion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I really don’t want to be jumping to conclusions so should I allow this person to use his character regardless of the unfair advantage I believe it gives him?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything I should add or change to make this question actually answerable?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50570" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-07T20:03:05.950" LastActivityDate="2023-02-13T17:39:36.230" Title="Workshopping Help: &quot;Should I allow a Player to use a premade character?&quot;" Tags="|discussion|dnd-5e|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12376" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12364" CreationDate="2023-02-08T08:46:14.257" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Recommendation Questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Apparently, recommendation questions need a total revisit - Is that still the stance of the stack? At least 5 people voted on a comment to the opener, that they'd like to discuss the topic of topicality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5747/are-game-recommendation-questions-on-topic-revisited&quot;&gt;Are Game Recommendation Questions On Topic, Revisited&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5881/are-tool-recommendation-questions-on-topic&quot;&gt;Are tool recommendation questions on topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5787/i-want-to-ask-for-recommendations-but-thats-off-topic-is-there-any-way-to-ask&quot;&gt;I want to ask for recommendations, but that&amp;#39;s off topic. Is there any way to ask my question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All of these have different nuances, the stance might be outdated on some points. A standalone question should be asked:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Are Recommendation Questions on Topic? [2023]&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;relevant discussion:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;5 - Potentially unpopular opinion: I think it's worth revisiting the ban on recommendation questions instead of just cleaning the FAQ. I understand and at one time agreed with that reasoning behind the ban. Based on experience in other stacks, I increasingly disagree. –&#xA;Novak&#xA;Feb 5 at 22:16&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1 - FWIW, I've actioned some of the clear FAQs from the proposal index and also added all outstanding proposals. Once there has been some voting on those I will action the rest. –&#xA;linksassin&#xA;Mod&#xA;Feb 7 at 3:59&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;2 - @Novak: Given that the ban was put in place before I was even active on the site, I do think it's worth discussing, at the least – the community now isn't necessarily the same as the community when it was put in place. Even if the community decides to keep some or all of the ban in place, I think there is value in having that discussion again (as long as the discussion remains respectful and understanding). –&#xA;V2Blast&#xA;Staff&#xA;Mod&#xA;2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@V2Blast I was coming to the same conclusion. Going to mull what I want to say until (at least) the weekend, when I will have the time to put effort into a longer post. –&#xA;Novak&#xA;2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Novak I like the idea of putting forth one update question, which then encompasses all recommendation questions and replaces them on the FAQ. –&#xA;Trish&#xA;2 days ago&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Trish Updating and polishing sections of the FAQ is quite different from a major modification of site policy. –&#xA;Novak&#xA;yesterday&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@Novak identifying the need for it is part of maintenance. –&#xA;Trish&#xA;yesterday&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-10T15:39:30.843" LastActivityDate="2023-02-10T15:39:30.843" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12377" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12364" CreationDate="2023-02-08T08:51:50.223" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Frame Challenge FAQ&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6842/whats-a-frame-challenge&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s a frame challenge?&lt;/a&gt; and&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318/how-do-we-handle-a-desire-to-challenge-the-frame-of-a-question&quot;&gt;How do we handle a desire to challenge the frame of a question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of them are last updated in 2018 and 2019 respectively, so might warrant a look if everything is still ok. They are very close to one another in topic and might or might not need a slight touchup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as the FAQ page goes, at least they are listed in the wrong order on the FAQ (definition after use), and the use example might benefit from being indented as a lvl-2 bullet point.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Relevant discussion&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's unreasonable, for frame-challenges (or any particular jargon topic) to have separate &amp;quot;What is it?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;How do we do it here?&amp;quot; entries. I don't feel strongly about it. If we do, I will volunteer to write something up for consideration. –&#xA;Novak&#xA;Feb 5 at 22:14&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-10T15:40:06.467" LastActivityDate="2023-02-10T15:40:06.467" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12378" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12364" CreationDate="2023-02-08T08:57:45.667" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The Editing Section&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the very least, the order of the points in the Editing section is convoluted. I propose the following re-order, pretty much sorting from top level &amp;quot;style in general&amp;quot; over &amp;quot;specific points&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/is-there-a-style-guide-for-posts&quot;&gt;Is there a style guide for posts?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The top answer also needs a serious update due to formatting changes.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Do we have any accessibility updates here?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10074/mathjax-guide-for-rpg-se-how-to-format-pretty-tables-and-equations&quot;&gt;MathJax guide for RPG.SE: How to format pretty tables and equations?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is new, little action needed.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1483/is-there-a-functional-purpose-to-putting-things-in-code-text-here&quot;&gt;Is there a functional purpose to putting things in code text here?&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I don't &lt;em&gt;quite&lt;/em&gt; think this needs updates, but at least a look might be warranted.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3454/dont-signal-your-edits-in-text&quot;&gt;Don&amp;#39;t signal your edits in text&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I haven't seen a single edit in text in a long time. Retention as separate item is warranted, but pushing it to the last point of the editing and formating FAQ seems like the thing to do.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="47188" LastEditDate="2023-02-14T04:05:26.713" LastActivityDate="2023-02-14T04:05:26.713" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12379" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12364" CreationDate="2023-02-08T09:01:33.573" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Trolls and canned meat (SPAM)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We got at least two questions on those (I &lt;em&gt;thought&lt;/em&gt; it was three a few days ago...):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6698&quot;&gt;Eek! A troll in the Stack! What do I do?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/437/what-should-i-do-about-spam-questions&quot;&gt;What should I do about spam questions?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both might need a touchup, for example how to deal with a serious returning troll.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Joinder of those two seems very hard, but if someone is up to the challenge, it could shorten the FAQ a tad.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-02-08T09:01:33.573" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12380" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12364" CreationDate="2023-02-08T09:08:20.767" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;part X in titles - &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;status-completed-container&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1604/are-campaign-research-questions-on-topic-part-two&quot;&gt;Are campaign research questions on topic? [2012]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6524/how-should-we-use-community-wiki-part-iii&quot;&gt;How should we use Community Wiki? [2016]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These had a part number in the title. We might want to rename them to a year of when the consensus came along, removing clarity problems from the previous items.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-19T16:45:20.367" LastActivityDate="2023-02-19T16:45:20.367" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12381" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5418" CreationDate="2023-02-08T09:15:04.643" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Answers in comments are never acceptable.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6533/should-users-refrain-from-answers-or-partial-answers-in-comments&quot;&gt;Should users refrain from answers (or partial answers) in comments?&lt;/a&gt; for the full reasoning, but comments are simply not for answers. If the question isn't clarified into an answerable state, then maybe it'S time to ask your own question and self-answer that, but not comment on the initial question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-02-08T09:15:04.643" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12382" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12374" CreationDate="2023-02-08T09:33:24.703" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;The average roll that would result in that &amp;quot;pregen&amp;quot; is &lt;strong&gt;14.98&lt;/strong&gt;, while the expected roll would be &lt;a href=&quot;https://anydice.com/articles/4d6-drop-lowest/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;about 13&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it your question if that character was created with an official alternate system like... point buy or where it comes from? Then you might ask along the lines of: &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;Is there a way to identify the most likely character creation method of these statistics?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it your problem that you believe that there was cheating or very misunderstood or alternate rules applied for that creation? Then you might ask about an apparent cheating or misunderstood rules problem. &lt;a href=&quot;https://anydice.com/program/2d95a&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;BTW: 13-15 is the expected area for 4d6 not dropping.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it your problem to figure out if the player understood the rules of character creation and you can't check the character for correctness? Ask something aiming at: &lt;strong&gt;&amp;quot;I can't follow the character creation of a PC. How can I verify it was actually done correctly?&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-13T17:39:36.230" LastActivityDate="2023-02-13T17:39:36.230" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12383" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12385" CreationDate="2023-02-09T15:59:55.517" Score="45" ViewCount="996" Body="&lt;p&gt;Over at Meta Stack Exchange, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/385002/380710&quot;&gt;the guidance to date is that each Stack Exchange network site needs to decide for itself whether to ban ChatGPT-generated posts&lt;/a&gt;.  RPG SE Meta is the correct format for arriving at a consensus for that. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/421831&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow has banned it.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/384923/380710&quot;&gt;RPGSE does not have a per site meta entry in this thread.&lt;/a&gt; If nothing else, this Meta will allow us to share our policy, or discussion, on this topic with the other sites on SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;I recommend that we ban it.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have sufficient challenge curating the answers and questions posed by real people on a topic that has some subjectivity to it: game playing, and specifically TTRPGs.  Under the basic premise that the SE value proposition is favorable signal to noise ratio, ChatGPT only provides noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the RPG SE community in general agreement that we ban it, or, are there valid reasons not to enact a ban?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;@ThomasMarkov kindly added this meta to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/384923/380710&quot;&gt;the long list on Meta SE&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2024-03-26T12:38:18.897" LastActivityDate="2024-03-26T12:38:18.897" Title="Should this stack ban ChatGPT?" Tags="|discussion|policy|generative-ai|" AnswerCount="8" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12384" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-09T16:04:04.677" Score="39" Body="&lt;h2&gt;YES&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AI clearly doesn't understand RPGs, or the differences. All the apparent AI generated content of the last days was so low quality, that we had to throw it out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main reasoning I  suggest this is not to prevent its usage but to have a formal rule we can point to and based on that handle an offender's suspension.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples of text that reads like bad AI generation: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204619/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204619/revisions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204618/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204618/revisions&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204642/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204642/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Example of a better AI-generated answer, which is factually completely wrong: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204344/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/204344/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Let's ban Abominable Intelligence and its products!&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-02-10T15:36:47.353" LastActivityDate="2023-02-10T15:36:47.353" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12385" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-09T16:41:18.850" Score="24" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Ban Them For The Foreseeable Future&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...If we can.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In addition to messing around with these as a hobby, I have some formal academic knowledge as well.  I think they should be banned because I am not convinced of their reliability &lt;em&gt;in the domain of this stack&lt;/em&gt; and because they do not in any normal human sense &amp;quot;understand&amp;quot; what they say.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To take a tangent, consider the text to image engine of your choice. They all of them (to my knowledge, as of today) tend to produce portraits with malformed hands.  To a degree, this is a training problem.  The images are generated from 2D training sets which makes it extremely hard-- almost impossible-- for the AI to &amp;quot;understand&amp;quot; that a hand with fingers and thumb isn't some arbitrary set of flesh tentacles, but instead a very complex but still constrained shape with about a dozen and a half degrees of freedom.  That lack of &amp;quot;understanding&amp;quot; causes really creepy and off-putting images.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, they really struggle with relationships between figures.  You can often get an image of one person dressed or even posed a certain way, but getting two persons engaged in a specific activity or in a specific relationship is still very hard.  The &amp;quot;understanding&amp;quot; of those activities and relationships is lacking.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The ChatGPT and its relatives are similar.  What they do is manipulate symbols according to vast set of consistency constraints which provides a very compelling illusion of &amp;quot;understanding.&amp;quot;  But there is no understanding there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In our case especially, there is simply no good reason to trust ChatGPT for anything approaching a good-subjective question, for the simple reason that the AI hasn't actually run or played in a game, and has no experience of it.  At some point that will change-- just for fun someone will sign a bot up for an e-mail text-only game-- but even then, the AI will have no interior or emotional experience of the game as we do.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastEditorUserId="18269" LastEditDate="2023-02-10T01:48:32.943" LastActivityDate="2023-02-10T01:48:32.943" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12386" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-09T20:17:14.073" Score="26" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm going to reiterate &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/384468/404162&quot;&gt;the points I made when this question was proposed at the network-wide level&lt;/a&gt; in a more succinct form; you can read my answer in the link if you want the long form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Yes, ChatGPT (and other AI-generative tools) need to be banned on RPG.SE&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's for the simple reason that these tools, at least as they exist today, are incapable of producing output that does not commit plagiarism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a few criteria I would line out that I think are necessary prerequisites before they should be approved for use on this site (or any site in the Stack Exchange network), and they are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the tool clearly cites every single work that was used as part of its training and ingested into its dataset&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That every single work that was used provided explicit, specific, opt-in permission by its original author to be used as part of that specific tool and its training process&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the evidence of permission for each work that was used is easily accessible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the tool is able to cite, in its resulting output, the works sourced that were used to generate its output.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my knowledge, none of ChatGPT nor any other publicly available AI-generation tool is capable today of satisfying all these criterion (and it's my understanding that most-if-not-all of these tools are technologically incapable of doing so), and they should not be permitted until/unless they are developed to be able to satisfy these criterion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42386" LastActivityDate="2023-02-09T20:17:14.073" CommentCount="13" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12387" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-09T22:11:41.803" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Does it even matter?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't exactly disagree with the other answers, but I think there's an important thing to be pointed out here:  &lt;strong&gt;The main reason to ban ChatGPT is because it generates terrible, incoherent posts.&lt;/strong&gt;  Those posts are going to get downvoted and/or deleted because they're terrible regardless of what we decide here, whether or not they're recognized as AI-generated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Future, better AIs might be able to make posts that are indistinguishable from human posts.  At that point, such a ban will become unenforceable.  But for now, I think it mostly doesn't matter whether we ban ChatGPT &lt;em&gt;per se&lt;/em&gt;, because its content is &lt;em&gt;de facto&lt;/em&gt; already banned for being garbage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(Note that this doesn't apply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12383/should-this-stack-ban-chatgpt/12386#12386&quot;&gt;Xirema's answer&lt;/a&gt;, which is a separate reason to ban AI-generated content aside from its quality.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastActivityDate="2023-02-09T22:11:41.803" CommentCount="16" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12388" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-10T17:58:28.003" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, we should ban ChatGPT.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think there are a lot of good reasons to ban ChatGPT, but the one I want to focus on is about site health. If we allow ChatGPT, and if it gets to the point where generative text AI can give good answers to questions here, then the dominant point-gain strategy of this site stops being &amp;quot;have expert knowledge, be an active participant&amp;quot; and becomes &amp;quot;be the first person to post whatever ChatGPT says&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I don't see this as a short-term problem. I don't think ChatGPT as it stands today poses any risk of usurping us as RPG experts. But that can't be guaranteed forever. This assumes that all of the other reasons to ban ChatGPT are solved: that it doesn't plagiarize work, that it gives useful answers, that it has some sense of correct information and not just model fit, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The point structure of Stack Overflow/Stack Exchange as a whole is built to encourage good answers from experts. I like helping people, but also I like seeing the score go up on a post I've made. Posting answers that get up votes makes me feel good, and makes me more likely to keep coming back. If my expert knowledge is being out-scored by an AI, why would I bother answering?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT has its own value proposition. If people want to get AI-generated advice on TTRPGs, they can ask an AI. I think there's value on this site that gets substantially diluted if we allow people to repost answers taken from generative AI rather than relying on actual TTRPG knowledge taken from experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3195" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-13T17:27:21.477" LastActivityDate="2023-02-13T17:27:21.477" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12389" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" Score="0" Body="" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" LastActivityDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12390" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" Score="0" Body="This tag is used in requests for blocking one or more tags, preventing them from ever being recreated." OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" LastActivityDate="2023-02-12T14:28:29.787" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12391" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-14T23:11:19.340" Score="29" Body="&lt;h1&gt;Yes, a site-policy against ChatGPT is safe and useful&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a repost of my argument from &lt;a href=&quot;https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/a/10043/15909&quot;&gt;Worldbuilding Meta&lt;/a&gt;. If you read it there, this will be some deja-vu.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I argue that ChatGPT answers are both qualtiatively and quantitatively different than run-of-the-mill low effort answers from new users, and that a rule against them will make things better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;ChatGPT acts like a ban-evading hydra&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we ban someone for being disruptive, and they come back under a new account (in ways that we can prove is the same user), we don't treat the new account as a new person and start over, giving the &amp;quot;new&amp;quot; member of their community a chance - we ban the sockpuppet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we find the current instances of ChatGPT disruptive enough to ban, we should treat the others as sockpuppets of the same. It's an extraordinarily well-resourced hydra that gets humans all over the world to sockpuppet for it, but it's a hydra, nonetheless.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;ChatGPT users have no possibility for reform other than to stop using ChatGPT&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a human user posts an answer that is under-researched (or answers relative to the wrong system), they will receive downvotes and comments explaining what's wrong. They might fix the answer, delete it, or just leave it downvoted, but whatever else they do, they will also incorporate that feedback into their internal model (or &amp;quot;Learn,&amp;quot; as we humans call it). If their goal is to get upvotes, they will research their answers better. If their goal is to avoid criticism, they will leave the stack. Either of these outcomes is acceptable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT users are different. Any feedback we give to ChatGPT users gets blackholed. ChatGPT is not going to update its model in response to our feedback, in part because it &lt;em&gt;never receives&lt;/em&gt; our feedback. The user might look at the feedback (and may even learn something from it), but since we're never seeing their writing anyway, the quality of their posts does not improve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;I think most ChatGPT answers are made in bad faith&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect most ChatGPT users know full well what they're doing. The technology has been discussed enough now that its users can be expected to know that ChatGPT doesn't know anything they don't. People who continue to post uncited ChatGPT answers are likely doing so knowing full well that they cannot defend the answer's quality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can only speculate about their motivations for doing so. Some might be earnestly trying to see how well ChatGPT does with creative and esoteric prompts and others might be trying to test our community to see how well we can distinguish robots from humans, and still others might be trying to have some &amp;quot;harmless&amp;quot; fun - but I suspect &lt;em&gt;most&lt;/em&gt; are trying to farm accounts with history and rep (and the privileges that accompany it), to sell them to spammers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regardless of their motivations, all motivations I can imagine have two things in common:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A ChatGPT poster is not making a good-faith effort to provide a high-quality answer to the question asked.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A user whose first few posts are all unedited and unsourced ChatGPT responses is unlikely to ever contribute anything else to the site, and we should act accordingly.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;So why a policy?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A policy against ChatGPT serves two purposes: it will reduce the incentive to post such answers, and it will make moderation actions against ChatGPT trolls more efficient and consistent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Reducing incentive to post&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People who post bad-faith ChatGPT answers are doing so with a purpose: &lt;em&gt;they want an account with rep and history&lt;/em&gt;. If we make it clear, in policy and action, that repeatedly posting ChatGPT answers will not get them an account with rep and history, we take away that incentive. If we fail to do so, others will join them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Making it easier to moderate&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We do not, as far as I know, &lt;em&gt;ban&lt;/em&gt; people for making low-quality answers in&#xA;good faith. I certainly don't think we &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; ban users just because their posts are low quality (as long as they're responsive to feedback and don't repeat mistakes excessively). The problem is that usage of ChatGPT implies that someone will not be responsive to feedback and that they will repeat mistakes excessively. A policy against it allows moderators to act on that evidence, taking the usage of ChatGPT as evidence of bad faith, which will allow quicker, more consistent, and more objective moderation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1&gt;What about false positives?&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't think anyone's suggesting a zero-tolerance rule for anything that looks like ChatGPT (like some of what's happened on r/art). ChatGPT &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt; might be difficult to distinguish from human &lt;em&gt;answers&lt;/em&gt;, but ChatGPT &lt;em&gt;users&lt;/em&gt; are not hard to distinguish from human &lt;em&gt;users.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AI can be very convincing. If OpenAI, Google, or Microsoft made it a project to create an AI that could participate on Stack Exchange in a human-like manner, &lt;em&gt;they&lt;/em&gt; might succeed - however, most of what we're dealing with right now are script kiddies playing with a new toy, and we can look for human factors indicative of AI usage.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ChatGPT users can post long answers very quickly. (A user who posts a lot of long answers in a short amount of time is likely either using AI or plagiarizing from somewhere else)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ChatGPT users don't meaningfully engage in comment threads, even if they have the rep to comment. (A user who engages in comment threads is probably not using an AI)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ChatGPT users don't fix their answers when problems are reported. They often &lt;em&gt;can't&lt;/em&gt; because they don't understand the corrections. (A user who makes improvements to their answer or addresses problems that are reported is probably not using an AI)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;ChatGPT users never have unique insight. (No frame challenges, no considering problems outside the question's presented scope, etc. - a user who does these things is probably not using AI.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23445" LastActivityDate="2023-02-14T23:11:19.340" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12393" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-19T05:09:33.603" Score="25" Body="&lt;h1&gt;As a 20+ year AI developer, I say, Yes, we should ban it.&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have never touted my background on any answer on this stack before, but I want to say, I have done not just AI generally but natural language processing in particular, for a lot of companies, and I have over 20 issued (not just pending) US patents in this area -- and I say we need to ban it, because of how it works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT uses RLHI (Reinforcement Learning with Human Inputs). A number of systems like this are in the works from several companies. Each one is a statistical &amp;quot;big data&amp;quot; approach, through which it harvests snippets (phrases) from sentences all over the web (and/or from directly collected human responses), then parses them (first syntactically, then semantically),  and finally, reassembles them to make an answer -- then waits to see if the user who asked it the question gives good or bad feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The positive impact of that feedback is slow and gradual, at best, and depends on the quality and reliability of the feedback. The system tends to take no feedback as a soft confirmation that it is not wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Until and unless a very strong domain-specific model is built within ChatGPT that keys directly into RPG systems (it would literally have to train, for example, on this stack) -- it will not be reliable.  And if it &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; train on this stack, we would notice it - we'd see phrases from past answers getting parroted in bits and pieces in the new answers it creates.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And BTW, similar systems are coming from Microsoft and Google, and possibly later from Facebook and Apple, so, when we write the policy, it shouldn't say &amp;quot;ChatGPT&amp;quot;, it should say something like &amp;quot;machine learning-based chat bots including but not limited to ChatGPT&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48996" LastEditorUserId="48996" LastEditDate="2023-05-15T07:42:07.813" LastActivityDate="2023-05-15T07:42:07.813" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12394" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-02-22T07:10:32.080" Score="9" ViewCount="427" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/204824/23547&quot;&gt;This question&lt;/a&gt; about the origin of the name Yan-C-Bin has so far attracted only one answer.  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/204833/23547&quot;&gt;That answer&lt;/a&gt; makes the claim that all of the names of the Princes of Elemental Evil were made up &amp;quot;wholecloth&amp;quot; with &amp;quot;no mythological/cultural callback&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I thought that might be possible for Yan-C-Bin, it was clearly not true for at least some of the Princes, whose names incorporate Greek and Latin roots that match their aspects.  I said as much in a comment.  The comment has since been deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought my tone was respectful, and I don't think the comment is no longer needed, since as of this writing the answer still makes the claim.  I am pretty sure I actually posted the comment, because I initially posted noting the roots &amp;quot;hydr&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;cryo&amp;quot; and then within 5 minutes edited to add &amp;quot;ogre&amp;quot;; I would not have been able to edit had the first comment not posted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am at a loss as to why my comment was deleted.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-02-22T16:13:23.727" LastActivityDate="2023-02-22T16:13:23.727" Title="Why was a comment about etymology removed?" Tags="|discussion|comments|moderation|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12395" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12394" CreationDate="2023-02-22T11:19:39.750" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;All comments are subject to deletion, by design.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Naturally, I cannot comment on the exact reason your particular comment was deleted, since I neither know what it said, nor have the button to delete it. However, we often see users approaching comments with the expectation that comments have some sort of permanence as long as they follow the rules, and this is simply not the case. From the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment&quot;&gt;comments privileges page&lt;/a&gt; (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;What are comments?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Comments are &lt;em&gt;temporary &amp;quot;Post-It&amp;quot; notes&lt;/em&gt; left on a question or answer. They can be upvoted (but not downvoted) and flagged, but do not generate reputation. There's no revision history, and when they are deleted they're gone for good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By design, &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; comments are subject to deletion, at moderator discretion (usually, there are some automated systems that delete comments based on user flags). So you should have no expectations that any comment you post will be left up permanently. See this post for a number of reasons why your comment may have been selected for deletion: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1174/why-are-site-comments-being-deleted&quot;&gt;Why are site comments being deleted?&lt;/a&gt; It was probably for one of the reasons listed there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-02-22T11:19:39.750" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12396" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12394" CreationDate="2023-02-22T14:52:04.513" Score="-9" Body="&lt;p&gt;Because it’s unnecessary pedantry. It does not suggest any improvement to the answer, and it does not add any value being left there as is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems utterly implausible that anyone reading that question would be unaware of the meanings of “hydro” or “cryo.” No one is suggesting that the author invented those meanings, or just happened to coincidentally fall on those roots in their made-up name. No one reading it is ever going to get that impression. The answer clearly is referring to the specific usage of those roots, the “&lt;em&gt;names&lt;/em&gt;” that are actually what the answer claims to have been made up, and there is zero reason to “clarify” on that point, either in the answer or in a comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The comment &lt;strong&gt;should&lt;/strong&gt; be deleted, and should stay that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2023-02-22T16:06:40.993" LastActivityDate="2023-02-22T16:06:40.993" CommentCount="25" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12397" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12383" CreationDate="2023-02-22T22:34:20.053" Score="-5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Ban users that blindly regurgitate ChatGPT answers (or questions)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem we're facing is not that we have answers generated by ChatGPT. It's that we have an overflow of bad, low effort answers. To draw an analogy: suppose that in the early days of google, we had an influx of answers that simply google'd the question and pasted the top result. Would we ban using google? I'd hope that we'd instead ban users that exhibited this problematic behaviour instead.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So yes, we should have a category separate from LQ with a &amp;quot;fast track&amp;quot; to ban. Eg &amp;quot;keeps posting ChatGPT generated nonsense&amp;quot; where the fact that's generated exacerbates the problem and requires faster and more severe measures, especially if the &lt;em&gt;entire&lt;/em&gt; answer is generated. But that doesn't require banning the tool itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How this answer is different from the others:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It focuses on user behaviour, not an arbitrary restriction on tools&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It (hopefully) discourages a witch hunt: &amp;quot;oh, your third sentence really sounds like a ChatGPT one&amp;quot; and focuses on the merits of the post&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It allows carefully curated usage, similar to using google to search&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It avoids philosophical debates of whether an AI really understands RPGs&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It keeps us impartial. I'll admit that when I first saw some generated text I felt a pang of resentment - wow, what's the point of reading and learning? This is obviously not the case; but I'd hate to have a policy that someone will look at and say &amp;quot;ha, you're just insecure&amp;quot;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It keeps the rule enforceable and doesn't entice people to view it as a challenge.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A note on ethical concerns: While it's true that there are some very valid points, I think it's the poster's responsibility. If their work was transformative enough and they ensured there's no plagiarism, I don't see why they should be treated differently. Training sets are an interesting conundrum; yet again, do we ask how the user's spell checking or grammar checking was trained? Do we even check if they purchased the DMG? Obviously this is something to revising once, as a society, we respond to this change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a disclaimer, I have not used ChatGPT to any of my answers, nor do I want to; but I strongly feel that our rules should be based on objective criteria and avoid sensationalist language and knee-jerk reactions. If ChatGPT can pass the RPG stack's Turing test? So be it; in the meantime, warn people against it and ban problematic behaviours.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="11874" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-24T17:00:42.637" LastActivityDate="2023-02-24T17:00:42.637" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12398" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12399" CreationDate="2023-02-25T05:54:02.467" Score="8" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I enjoy using this site from time to time, but  I've got a few very popular tags ignore-listed because I &lt;em&gt;usually&lt;/em&gt; don't want to read or answer questions about them. (This isn't a value judgement about the game or anything — it's just pointless to look at the majority of D&amp;amp;D5 questions if you're not playing D&amp;amp;D5 and don't have the books on hand to research answers, due to the &lt;em&gt;highly detail-oriented and game-specific&lt;/em&gt; nature of questions like &amp;quot;How does this spell work?&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;How can I play this kind of character effectively?&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But all the ignore list does is make the text kinda greyish in the main page &amp;quot;Top Questions&amp;quot; view, while most of the content I see is still ignore-listed items. (I don't know exactly how it changed or when, but I remember the grey-out effect being more pronounced in the past as well?)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I try to set up a custom filter such as &amp;quot;not dnd-5e,&amp;quot; I get a popup that says:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tag queries cannot be exclusively negative.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What should I do if I actually want to &lt;em&gt;ignore&lt;/em&gt; the tag categories on my ignore list, so I can focus on less popular game questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2570" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-02-28T00:12:02.273" LastActivityDate="2023-02-28T00:12:02.273" Title="Filtering the site as a non-D&amp;D player" Tags="|support|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12399" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12398" CreationDate="2023-02-25T06:04:57.380" Score="22" Body="&lt;p&gt;Click edit on the Ignored tags box and swap your setting to Hide, as opposed to Gray out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PiMJb.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/PiMJb.png&quot; alt=&quot;image of ignored tags box in edit mode, with free hand circle pointing at the &amp;quot;Hide question&amp;quot; option&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastActivityDate="2023-02-25T06:04:57.380" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12400" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-02-28T11:33:28.343" Score="6" ViewCount="130" Body="&lt;p&gt;I enjoy reading HNQ posts on my sidebar, but now and then, I spot questionable content I'd like to see removed. How do I go about that most efficiently?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-03-01T16:09:27.567" LastActivityDate="2023-03-01T16:09:27.567" Title="What is the most efficient way to flag to remove a post from the HNQ?" Tags="|support|moderation|flagging|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12401" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12400" CreationDate="2023-02-28T11:46:09.397" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Moderators can remove posts from the HNQ&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a two-click process, easy as pie. So flag the post &amp;quot;in need of moderator intervention&amp;quot; and explain what you find problematic about its being featured.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Personally, if I were doing this on a site where I weren't a regular contributor I'd also drop into that site's main chatroom and ping a local mod to say &amp;quot;hey $localmod: I'm around in case you have any questions about that flag I just raised.&amp;quot; It's not necessary, and I know people have mixed feelings about chat, but I think it's a nice courtesy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2023-02-28T11:46:09.397" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12402" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-03-02T16:44:34.010" Score="2" ViewCount="165" Body="&lt;p&gt;See revision 10 of this answer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/152199/revisions&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/152199/revisions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hhMyc.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/hhMyc.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Neither of the other two buttons (Inline, Side-by-side Markdown) show anything either:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SQ0aA.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/SQ0aA.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Revisions 11 and 12 are also showing nothing, those are where I tried rolling back to 9 then back to 10.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On Windows 10, reproducible in both Edge and Chrome, as well as iOS safari, iOS Chrome, and the iOS Reddit app's in-app browser.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-03-02T19:43:09.897" LastActivityDate="2023-03-02T19:43:09.897" Title="Why doesn't this revision show that anything was changed?" Tags="|bug|revision-history|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12403" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12402" CreationDate="2023-03-02T17:33:42.763" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems there are &lt;em&gt;two spaces&lt;/em&gt; in the beginning of the last line (just before the word &amp;quot;Having&amp;quot;) in revision #9. These spaces were removed in revision #10. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.diffchecker.com/w0ZyXGb1/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;See diff online&lt;/a&gt;: revision #9 is on the left, revision #10 on the right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For posterity:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/997d9e04-e40a-4414-8afa-64bb8c95d2d2/view-source&quot;&gt;The source of revision #9&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/152199/edit/997d9e04-e40a-4414-8afa-64bb8c95d2d2&quot;&gt;direct edit link&lt;/a&gt;) is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;## At the very least, using the metric of &amp;quot;Something is a target if and only if it is explicitly called a target&amp;quot; does not work ##&#xA;&#xA;The PHB states (page 204):  &#xA;&amp;gt; A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect...&#xA;&#xA;If we wanted to only say a spell targets something if something it affects is explicitly called out as a &amp;quot;target&amp;quot; in the spell's description, we would run into a number of issues:    &#xA;&#xA;Some touch spells never actually use the word &amp;quot;target&amp;quot; but instead use the word &amp;quot;creature&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;object&amp;quot;.  These are spells are: &#xA;&#xA; - *Cure Wounds*, *Darkvision*, *Spare the Dying*, *Jump*, *Beast Bond*, *Dragon's Breath*, *Beast Sense*, *Protection from Energy*, *Revivify*, *True Seeing*, *True Resurrection*, *Remove Curse*, and *Life Transference*.   &#xA;&#xA;  Having these seemingly random spells not have targets would be a particularly odd decision.&#xA;&#xA;In addition, all three instantaneous cylindrical spells (*conjure volley*, *ice storm* and *flame strike*) never mention targets in their descriptions.&#xA;&#xA;Neither does every single AoE spell that is not instantaneous. &#xA;&#xA;The following spells also never mention having targets or that anything is considered a target:   &#xA;&#xA; - *Astral Projection*, *Beast Sense*, *Burning Hands*, *Feather Fall*, *Friends*, *Hellish Rebuke*, *Mass Healing Word*, *Meteor Swarm*, *Power Word Kill*, *Prayer of Healing*, *Shatter*, *Sunburst*, *Water Breathing*,&#xA;   *Word of Recall*, *Thunderclap*, *Word of Radiance*, *Sword Burst*, *Snilloc's Snowball Swarm*, *Thunder Step*, *Tidal Wave*, *Erupting Earth*, and *Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting*.   &#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;  Having all the above spells not have targets of any kind seems incredibly arbitrary and would mean that none of the above spells could be Twinned, War Cast, or put into a *glyph of warding*. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/revisions/997d9e04-e40a-4414-8afa-64bb8c95d2d2/view-source&quot;&gt;The source of revision #10&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/posts/152199/edit/9d81da1c-1e5a-4454-b7b3-03057923ad5a&quot;&gt;direct edit link&lt;/a&gt;) is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;## At the very least, using the metric of &amp;quot;Something is a target if and only if it is explicitly called a target&amp;quot; does not work ##&#xA;&#xA;The PHB states (page 204):  &#xA;&amp;gt; A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect...&#xA;&#xA;If we wanted to only say a spell targets something if something it affects is explicitly called out as a &amp;quot;target&amp;quot; in the spell's description, we would run into a number of issues:    &#xA;&#xA;Some touch spells never actually use the word &amp;quot;target&amp;quot; but instead use the word &amp;quot;creature&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;object&amp;quot;.  These are spells are: &#xA;&#xA; - *Cure Wounds*, *Darkvision*, *Spare the Dying*, *Jump*, *Beast Bond*, *Dragon's Breath*, *Beast Sense*, *Protection from Energy*, *Revivify*, *True Seeing*, *True Resurrection*, *Remove Curse*, and *Life Transference*.   &#xA;&#xA;  Having these seemingly random spells not have targets would be a particularly odd decision.&#xA;&#xA;In addition, all three instantaneous cylindrical spells (*conjure volley*, *ice storm* and *flame strike*) never mention targets in their descriptions.&#xA;&#xA;Neither does every single AoE spell that is not instantaneous. &#xA;&#xA;The following spells also never mention having targets or that anything is considered a target:   &#xA;&#xA; - *Astral Projection*, *Beast Sense*, *Burning Hands*, *Feather Fall*, *Friends*, *Hellish Rebuke*, *Mass Healing Word*, *Meteor Swarm*, *Power Word Kill*, *Prayer of Healing*, *Shatter*, *Sunburst*, *Water Breathing*,&#xA;   *Word of Recall*, *Thunderclap*, *Word of Radiance*, *Sword Burst*, *Snilloc's Snowball Swarm*, *Thunder Step*, *Tidal Wave*, *Erupting Earth*, and *Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting*.   &#xA;&#xA;  &#xA;Having all the above spells not have targets of any kind seems incredibly arbitrary and would mean that none of the above spells could be Twinned, War Cast, or put into a *glyph of warding*. &#xA;&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for why those do not show up on the site - I suspect it is a bug where the whitespace is trimmed or otherwise manipulated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastActivityDate="2023-03-02T17:33:42.763" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12405" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="7790" CreationDate="2023-03-21T11:47:34.620" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the years since, styles changed so that the bottom of the image is slightly lower than the descenders, in both regular text and headers:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/GkaJF.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks good. I'd say &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-completed&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-completed&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-status-completed-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;status-completed&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2023-03-21T11:47:34.620" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12406" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-03-28T15:50:09.167" Score="6" ViewCount="343" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question concerns this question on the main page: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/205466/deck-of-many-things-how-problematic-is-each-card-for-a-campaign&quot;&gt;Deck of Many Things: How problematic is each card for a campaign?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It was closed for a mixture of being unclear, being too broad, and being opinion-based. It has caused a vivid discussion and already collected some reopen votes. Independently of whether it gets reopened I would like to tackle possible concerns with this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Me explaining what I wanted to get out of the question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to be widely agreed upon that the Deck of Many Things can cause significant problems in a game up to and including ruining said game. This was for example discussed in [this question][2]. What I am interested in and which is different from that other question (happy to hear your concerns if you disagree) is the following:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Which cards specifically cause the negative effects that the Deck of Many Things exhibits?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What makes these cards so problematic?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suggested using a tier system to explain how likely a card is to exhibit significant problems which may cause a game to be ruined. In retrospect it seems this has caused more harm (&lt;em&gt;i.e.&lt;/em&gt; confusion) than good.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Concerns I believe to have seen expressed&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;It is a duplicate of this question:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/159040/why-is-the-deck-of-many-things-considered-unbalanced&quot;&gt;Why is the Deck of Many Things considered unbalanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is much more general than my question and the answers talk neither in detail about specific problems nor about specific cards that might cause them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The question is too broad:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not sure about this. It is clear that a rather long answer would be necessary because at least one to two sentences would be needed for each of the 22 cards in the &lt;em&gt;Deck&lt;/em&gt;. The impression of the question being too broad may also have arisen by me asking both for some kind of rating for each card &lt;em&gt;as well as&lt;/em&gt; a reasoning. However, I don't see how leaving the reasoning out could make for a good answer. Of course there could be another problem in this area that I haven't seen now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The question is unclear:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is obviously the case, otherwise it wouldn't have caused so much discussion. This does seem easy to fix, however, once the other concerns have been adressed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The question is opinion-based:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now this question is obviously not a rules question and I agree that the &lt;em&gt;Deck's&lt;/em&gt; effect on a campaign depends on the group. Nevertheless, it seems to me that someone with sufficient GMing experience and who has used the &lt;em&gt;Deck&lt;/em&gt; would be able to give an objective answer. Let's take, for example, the &lt;strong&gt;Donjon&lt;/strong&gt; card. In the comments, people said that this card could create problems because it will (at least temporarily) remove a character from the game and (unless it is permanent) require a quest to get the character back. It was also said, and I agree, that this unproblematic if the style of play includes making a new character with no hard feeling whenever a character is killed or similar. Saying: &amp;quot;This card is highly problematic if players are very attached to their specific character. If rolling a new character when necessary is part of the play style, or if a party can simply take on an adventure to get the character back while the respective player plays a different character for some time, it will not cause any big problems.&amp;quot; seems like an objective and useful answer for this particular card. I think, my idea with the tier system might be a problem because such a ranking would contradict an answer as nuanced as the example I give above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What should I do with my question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-03-31T18:03:45.850" LastActivityDate="2023-04-07T15:04:06.543" Title="How could I fix my question about the Deck of Many Things?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12407" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12406" CreationDate="2023-03-29T01:28:26.957" Score="17" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You Should Take It To A Discussion Forum&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You should take it to a discussion forum because in my opinion, even with the fixes, it's inherently opinion-based.  Really, it's twenty-two opinion-based questions wrapped up under one heading-- maybe even forty-four because both answers so far rate each card individually for both the GM/campaign and for the players.  And both questions hedge a lot and qualify a lot based on what the GM or the players might prefer in a game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, this question seems like one where, once there is enough detail about the preferences in the question, those details effectively provide much of the answer.  Not all opinion-based questions are like that, but this one seems to be.  (For example:  &amp;quot;You don't like cards that remove a character from play?  Oh, well then Donjon is obviously going to be a problem.&amp;quot;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think I have a higher tolerance for both subjective and opinion-based questions than most, but this seems like a very poor fit for the stack.  Separately, I actually do think it would be a good fit for discussion forums where it is more appropriate to discuss the reasons behind an answer, or discuss different ways to look at certain card draws and how to make them less devastating.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, going to go vote to re-close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2023-03-29T01:28:26.957" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12408" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-03-31T08:22:35.850" Score="4" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/205510/do-the-speed-factor-rules-affect-when-death-saves-should-be-rolled&quot;&gt;this question about death saves&lt;/a&gt; and noticed there is no tag for death saves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems to me as though such a tag would be useful. It is an important concept in multiple versions of D&amp;amp;D and a quick search showed that there are over 1,400 posts that contain the term.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am therefore wondering:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Should there be a tag for the term?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If not, should questions like mine be tagged &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-death&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-death&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-death&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-character-death-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;character-death&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/saving-throw&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-saving-throw-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;saving-throw&lt;/a&gt;, or both?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastActivityDate="2023-04-05T12:25:36.260" Title="Should there be a tag for death saves?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12409" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12408" CreationDate="2023-04-03T22:20:50.483" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Make a new tag&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If we only had to contend with D&amp;amp;D, I might say that the combination of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/character-death&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-death&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;character-death&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-character-death-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;character-death&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/saving-throw&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-saving-throw-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;saving-throw&lt;/a&gt; is enough even though I'm generally opposed to saying &amp;quot;use these two tags together to mean something specific&amp;quot;. However, D&amp;amp;D isn't the only system which has some kind of &amp;quot;near death&amp;quot; mechanic, and those systems don't necessarily use saving throws. As an example, Goblin Laws of Gaming (or at least the &amp;quot;Many rats on sticks&amp;quot; version of it which I've played) has &amp;quot;Fatal Wounds&amp;quot; which occur at negative HP, and the mechanics for surviving a fatal wound are substantially different from the game's &amp;quot;saves&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure if the tag should just be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/death-saves&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;death-saves&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;death-saves&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-death-saves-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;death-saves&lt;/a&gt; with the assumption that the D&amp;amp;D term will be most recognizable, or something more generic like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/near-death&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;near-death&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;near-death&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-near-death-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;near-death&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="37154" LastActivityDate="2023-04-03T22:20:50.483" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12410" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-04-04T11:51:16.713" Score="0" ViewCount="148" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/205466/deck-of-many-things-how-problematic-is-each-card-for-a-campaign&quot;&gt;this question on the Deck of Many Things&lt;/a&gt; which was closed as opinion-based. I would like to revisit the topic and ask for expert opinion from a different angle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To avoid as much controversy on the main site as the other question caused, I would like to submit the for review here before posting it (or refraining from doing so).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would like to ask a question along the lines of: &amp;quot;What concrete negative consequences does the Deck of Many Things usually have on a campaign causing its reputation as &lt;em&gt;campaign killer&lt;/em&gt;?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I feel like this question is not opinion-based but would like to hear your takes on the matter - that's what this post is for. &lt;strong&gt;Is that question stackable?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-04-05T17:19:30.290" LastActivityDate="2023-04-05T17:19:30.290" Title="Would this question about the Deck of Many Things be allowed?" Tags="|discussion|questions|subjective-questions|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12411" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-04-04T13:39:31.197" Score="9" ViewCount="159" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, recently &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72067/how-does-firesnake-work-raw-rai-or-house-rules&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; came to the front in the context of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7529/can-we-do-a-mass-update-on-old-wizards-links&quot;&gt;updating broken links&lt;/a&gt;. I added some more tags because I felt that the ones already there didn't really cover the question. Then someone voted to close the question as being too unfocused. I agreed with the initiator of the close voting and voted the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, although I had had a look at the question, voting to close had never occured to me. So my question is: If old questions (this one is 7 years old) come to the front, &lt;strong&gt;should I look at them from this perspective and vote to close if something jumps out?&lt;/strong&gt; That was definitely the case for this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11704/necro-closing-spam&quot;&gt;This discussion about close/reopen requests for old, &lt;em&gt;inactive&lt;/em&gt; questions&lt;/a&gt; is related, though I am not asking about digging stuff up. Rather I am wondering if I should be vigilant for old questions that might not fit current standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-04-05T17:13:08.470" LastActivityDate="2023-04-05T17:13:08.470" Title="Closing really old questions that have recently been bumped?" Tags="|discussion|closing-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12412" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12411" CreationDate="2023-04-04T14:17:41.597" Score="16" Body="&lt;p&gt;Copying part of my answer to the related question you linked: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11704/necro-closing-spam&quot;&gt;Necro-Closing Spam&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Off topic questions should be closed, regardless of age. This is consistent with local and network meta guidance.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener writes in her answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5987/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;close voting has nothing to do with a question's age, score, or answers. If it's close-worthy by our current standards, we close it, that's it. Sometimes answers help us recognise a question is good &amp;amp; worth keeping open, or not, but that's about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mxyzplk writes in their answer &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1173/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bad question, old or not, CW or not, should be closed. But the close should be like any other close - we should be seeing if something can be salvaged out of it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;AceCalhoon writes in their answer  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1172/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you do find an old post and want to do something about it, you have several tools at your disposal. Flagging it, with an explanation as to why it should be closed let's us know your thought. You can also vote to close yourself, although you'll probably need to do some work in meta and chat to get others to look at it within the window.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Doppelgreener returns with more guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6234/62294&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were game-recs and other old questions there, and I didn't dump them in from search. I'll get back to that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you find it so annoying to deal with, I encourage you to leave the review queue alone at those times. There's plenty of other people to cover for you. If you feel you're being hasty (as in, making poor reviews), please step back from the reviews and get a drink and do something more personally important to you. You avoiding review fatigue is important, the site getting good reviews is important, so it's a win/win if you step back when the review queue's fatiguing you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I agree there's no urgency in closing them. There is, however, importance in curating our site, and because our questions are timeless we can do that basically whenever. If we only leave curation 'til it's urgent, I can't imagine what condition our site would be in — it'd probably be a cesspool by then and you and I would be long gone. So, yeah, it's not urgent, but that doesn't matter or suggest we shouldn't be closing them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6233/62294&quot;&gt;same question&lt;/a&gt;, SSD provides  more guidance:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewers can just take bites out of it, and bow out when decision fatigue rears its head. Pressing &lt;kbd&gt;Skip&lt;/kbd&gt; when at all unsure helps a lot in that regard, too. Others will pick it up and take care of a few more, until the whole queue has been reviewed. Crowdsourcing at work!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's much preferable for the queue to balloon occasionally, and be handled by the normal crowdsourcing mechanisms it has for precisely such events, than for people to &lt;em&gt;refrain&lt;/em&gt; from flagging when they see something that deserves a flag. All that refraining results in is different people having to—redundantly—each stop and ponder how much flagging is “too much,” wasting user energy that would be better spent just about anywhere else on-site or off, just so that we can, inexplicably, prevent the flood-management measures designed into the system already from needing to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Clearing each flood with meta (and then spinning off metas that seek to define what is and isn't a flood!) would be, for similar reasons, far more wasteful and inefficient than just using flags and the review queues as they are designed to be used.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta.se guidance echoes this guidance &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/194117/674198&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;View all question with today's standards. If the question fits as per current standards then leave it open; if it doesn't fit then vote/flag to close it. If we keep the questions which don't fit as per current standards, then people will ask why the questions are still open.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This sentiment of closing old, off topic questions is represented further in these questions from Meta.se:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/123455/674198&quot;&gt;Is flagging to close old questions best practice?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/27007/674198&quot;&gt;How to get attention required to close old posts?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The testimony of both site-specific guidance and network meta guidance is overwhelmingly consistent: off topic questions should be closed without regard for age.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-04-04T14:17:41.597" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12413" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12408" CreationDate="2023-04-05T12:25:36.260" Score="5" Body="&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;Death saving throws&amp;quot; are just another saving throw&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This specific kind of saving throws has a few unique rules and such, but in the end it's just another saving throw, which falls under the tag of the same name. If we were to make a tag for every mechanic that is part of a larger category, but with a few specific rules for it, there would be no end to the tags which need to be created (which would pretty much defeat the point of tags in the first place).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I believe the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/saving-throw&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;saving-throw&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-saving-throw-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;saving-throw&lt;/a&gt; should do the trick, just like it currently does for other saving throws. As a matter of fact, it would even make sense to edit this tag's description to include those throws, as just about every other kind of throw is listed there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastActivityDate="2023-04-05T12:25:36.260" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12414" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12410" CreationDate="2023-04-05T14:36:27.520" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, it would not.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Your updated question doesn't fundamentally change the opinion-based issue that has closed your initial question. What is a concrete negative consequence is still going to be opinion-based as there has to be general agreement about it which there likely isn't.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What you can do&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you can do is step back and don't worry about finding a more generic question that may be helpful for &lt;em&gt;others&lt;/em&gt;. It's okay to focus on your needs and it's actually easier for you to elucidate your problem and what you're looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd begin with a self-analysis of the cards as they are. You know yourself, your players, and your table better than we do and you'll be able to identify cards that might be problematic for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The next step is the meat of the problem: figuring out your question. What is your goal with the analysis? Do you want to 'fix' cards? Avoid them? Something else? Figuring out how you want to the deck to work will help determine how we can answer and give you more targeted answers for your specific needs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The key is being in clear in your requirements, goals, and concerns you see with a particular card.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2023-04-05T14:36:27.520" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12415" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12406" CreationDate="2023-04-07T15:04:06.543" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Personally, I Think This is Answerable&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect that many will disagree with this point of view, however, as I stated in the comments I believe that some folks possess adequate expertise by virtue of being able to identify the concept of, 'failure state for the campaign', that renders this question answerable per the &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/&quot;&gt;Good Subjective, Bad Subjective&lt;/a&gt; criteria. My initial view on this question was to close, however, I reversed course after seeing that point of view.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any answer associated with this question is going to need to be long, ideally backed up by a combination of rules interpretations and table experience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I disagree with that taking such a question to a forum is likely to get you a better an answer. Rather, I think your signal to noise ratio is going to be off the charts due to how broad the question is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding the specific concerns you've listed:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. The question is a duplicate of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/159040/31402&quot;&gt;Why is the Deck of Many Things considered unbalanced?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I concur with your interpretation that the cited question is extremely broad and does not provide any criteria to evaluate the deck's cards with specificity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. The question is too broad&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Just because a question is hard to answer doesn't inherently make it unanswerable. The alternative to this would be to have you make 22 separate questions for each card in the deck, but that would make it more difficult to write an answer that also evaluates the deck as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A question with defined parameters that necessitate a long answer may take a long time to receive an answer, however, this doesn't mean it's unsuitable for the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. The question is unclear&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only thing that I might request clarification on is for you to define your tiers a bit more clearly to mitigate answers filling in blanks with whatever they think is appropriate. But you've provided information on what you're looking for, detailed what's happening at your table, and also provided some of your own initial insights so I think you're as clear as you can be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;4. The question is opinion-based&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, it is. But a good answer is going to need to be supported by experience as I stated above. Probably the perfect answer for this would need to be a self-answer because it's trying to get at the heart of what's a failure in the campaign for you; but that's also not practical. Alternately, learning the experiences of others can help you to evaluate how your own table might receive certain draws from the Deck. Ultimately, the community will vote as it sees fit, and you will award the check mark to whomever you see fit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One final thing I will note is it's likely that whatever answers you do get to the question will probably be under appreciated. I would recommend throwing some bounties as a thanks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2023-04-07T15:04:06.543" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12416" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-04-13T18:10:11.933" Score="9" ViewCount="227" Body="&lt;p&gt;My question was prompted by &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/198985/64093&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt; where the rules were unclear at the time of answering. The complete &lt;strong&gt;answer&lt;/strong&gt; was now replaced with recent info from errata. The question wasn't ever changed in a way that changes what is asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is guidance on updating old answers &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5548/how-to-ask-people-to-re-answer-a-question-in-light-of-new-information-when-you&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;e.g.&lt;/em&gt; here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6071/when-rules-change-but-votes-dont-how-to-handle-it&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The guidance seems to be that answers should be improved and wrong information should be removed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the present case I would however say that the info is not really wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the right course of action in this case?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Complete rewrite (as was done)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Create a new separate answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Add the new info but retain some or most of the original answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastEditorUserId="64093" LastEditDate="2023-04-13T20:34:02.957" LastActivityDate="2023-04-19T02:07:49.870" Title="Should an answer be rewritten completely if new external info becomes available?" Tags="|discussion|answers|editing|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12417" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-04-18T14:38:07.703" Score="8" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently we decisively &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12383/44723&quot;&gt;decided to ban ChatGPT&lt;/a&gt;. It would be welcome to indicate to other users in the review queues that we suspect AI-Chatbot abuse using a template comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2024-03-26T12:52:49.757" LastActivityDate="2024-03-26T12:52:49.757" Title="Can we get a custom &quot;suspected AI abuse&quot; deletion reason in review queues?" Tags="|feature-request|answers|deleted-answers|review|generative-ai|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12418" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12416" CreationDate="2023-04-19T02:07:49.870" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;What I have done in the past is to update the top of the answer with the updated information, and then left the rest as “but before this change, this is how things worked,” for historical curiosity and/or for the sake of those who upvoted the answer on the basis of that description.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an example, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/29545/4563&quot;&gt;my answer to “When using a reach weapon, which squares around me can I attack?” in Pathfinder 1e&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another approach is to edit the question itself to limit it to a particular timeframe, and possibly create a new question and link to it for the updated version. This is fairly clear and clean, but it would need to be a situation in which the before and after both warranted their own question—which is pretty unusual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last approach—which isn’t always an option, e.g. if your answer has been accepted—is to simply delete your answer. I don’t think there’s a lot of need for this, even when you can, though.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2023-04-19T02:07:49.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12419" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-04-19T12:20:50.273" Score="2" ViewCount="86" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178211/would-a-racial-feature-that-lets-you-learn-a-low-level-spell-of-your-choice-be-b&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; some years ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is about giving spells as a racial feature in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;. The answer is good but racial features of the kind have significantly changed in official publications (most notably, these spells can now also be cast with class spell slots) and I would like some analysis that considers this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the right way to go about this? A bounty on the old questions or a new question?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64093" LastActivityDate="2023-04-19T12:57:19.030" Title="I would like an update for this old question: Should I use a bounty or a new question?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|duplicates|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12420" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12419" CreationDate="2023-04-19T12:57:19.030" Score="9" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Bounty seems right, here.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Current answers are outdated&amp;quot; is a standard bounty reason, followed by the description &amp;quot;the current answer(s) are out-of-date and require revision given recent changes.&amp;quot; Seems like it fits your question exactly!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If recent changes had undercut or modified the premises of your &lt;em&gt;question&lt;/em&gt; in a significant way, I might suggest posting a new question and closing the old as a duplicate of the new--but it doesn't seem to me that's what's going on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2023-04-19T12:57:19.030" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12421" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12426" CreationDate="2023-04-24T22:07:03.823" Score="4" ViewCount="305" Body="&lt;p&gt;I want to ask a question about the ways people have used ChatGPT to create NPCs, characters, settings, and adventures for their D&amp;amp;D campaign. The question in mind is something along the lines of &amp;quot;what is the best way to use ChatGPT to help create content for my D&amp;amp;D campaign&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;what ChatGPT prompts are best for D&amp;amp;D character creation. Are question of this nature appropriate for this stack, or should they be posted elsewhere?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71240" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-04-30T23:01:27.467" LastActivityDate="2023-04-30T23:01:27.467" Title="Is asking a questions about ChatGPT as tool for character/NPC creation appropriate for this stack?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12422" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12421" CreationDate="2023-04-25T12:44:36.043" Score="-1" Body="&lt;h3&gt;This seems on par with other tool-related questions&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are plenty of questions about how to use specific tools for TTRPG content. The most obvious that comes to mind is Anydice. When you take them apart, most Anydice questions are nothing more than questions about how to use the tool, or about a mathematical problem for the tool.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You could make the argument that those would fit more on a mathematic-related or statistics-related stack, just like in our case you could point out that an AI-related stack would fit better. But for now, it seems like those questions are tolerated, or even encouraged, on the stack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, I don't see what makes &amp;quot;How do I use Anydice to make this model?&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;How do I use ChatGPT to generate this element?&amp;quot; different. Banning the latter while keeping the former makes little sense to me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Of course, this does not remove the basics of how to ask a question. Such a question should be focused enough that it has one specific problem to solve, without being too broad. For instance, &amp;quot;How to generate my campaign's contents with this tool?&amp;quot; is not a question fit for the site's format, but asking &amp;quot;How to generate the character sheet for my Human Cleric with this tool?&amp;quot; should be focused enough.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One is about finding a formula, or putting that formula into the right code for the tool. The other is finding what kind of prompt can be used to generate a target result, or a method to build said prompt according to different variables.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only difference I can think about is that there are many controversies around ChatGPT, or AI-based chatbots in general. However, those controversies shouldn't prevent an actual problem from getting a solution.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;However, can we even trust ChatGPT as a reliable tool?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before asking &amp;quot;How can I use X to do Y?&amp;quot;, a more important question might be &amp;quot;Can I use X to do Y reliably?&amp;quot;. I couldn't find a question asking something akin to &amp;quot;Can I use ChatGPT to generate [insert TTRPG content here] reliably?&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have not tried using ChatGPT to generate this kind of content, but I've witnessed content generation for other medias and games that looked very convincing, but was not valid content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As such, asserting whether or not this is the right tool for the job might be needed first, and that's where experts can share their experience with the tool and determine whether or not this use of ChatGPT is valid.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as Doppelgreener mentioned, this question might not be fit for the stack itself. Another meta Q&amp;amp;A might be needed for this decision.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77044" LastEditorUserId="77044" LastEditDate="2023-04-26T06:18:08.083" LastActivityDate="2023-04-26T06:18:08.083" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12423" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12425" CreationDate="2023-04-26T06:03:41.507" Score="2" ViewCount="152" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have some answers that I voted on when I had a different understanding of the rules from what I have now,or feel that I was too harsh in downvoting. Rereading them, I believe my original vote was incorrect. Here is &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/198163/in-combat-does-a-hidden-character-lose-half-their-speed/198166#198166&quot;&gt;an example&lt;/a&gt;, where I downvoted, but I now think the answer is correct, and would like to change my vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, since the author has not edited the answer since I voted, and since quite some time has passed since I voted, the answer is now &amp;quot;locked in&amp;quot;. I cannot change it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One way I found works is to fix minor glitches in the orginal answer, for example fixing some spelling mistakes, so it counts as edited and you can change your vote. But in general, guidance is to not do such minor edits, so I would like to avoid it going forward. Is there a better way?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this rule that you cannot change a vote once cast (and some time has passed - I think you have a few seconds right after you cast it to undo/change it) a global SE rule, or one that we enforce only on this stack?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are the benefits of that rule? It would seem to me that to change your judgment as you learn and correct earlier mis-votes would be a good thing. Is there some history with being able to change votes later leading to pathological voting behaviours?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-04-26T06:54:44.707" LastActivityDate="2023-04-26T13:56:46.870" Title="Is there a way to change your vote when you think better of it?" Tags="|support|voting|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12424" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12423" CreationDate="2023-04-26T06:22:28.660" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/5213/674198&quot;&gt;This meta.se FAQ&lt;/a&gt; explains the rules for changing votes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Limits on changing votes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In general, once you have voted, you cannot change your vote. There are two exceptions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exception one: you may change your vote within a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/38759/152859&quot;&gt;five minute window&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;from the time of the first vote you cast on that post&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Exception two: you may remove your vote after every time the post is edited (excluding grace period edits). If you cast a new vote after removing a vote under this exception, that new vote &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19235/is-this-a-bug-in-voting-or-is-it-supposed-to-work-like-this&quot;&gt;will have a new 5-minute window&lt;/a&gt; and will work exactly as above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Notwithstanding the above two exceptions, if you vote and undo your vote on a post 30 times, you cannot vote on that post again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;To simply undo a vote — i.e. make it as if you had never voted in the first place — &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/30557/cancel-a-vote-so-that-the-tally-goes-back-to-zero-and-not-minus&quot;&gt;click the &amp;quot;lit up&amp;quot; vote button&lt;/a&gt;. The result will be that neither an upvote nor a downvote is active, and you can come back to vote &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/18360/vote-too-old-to-be-changed-but-i-havent-voted/18373#18373&quot;&gt;any time you like&lt;/a&gt;. Only cast votes are locked in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;To reverse a vote — i.e. change an upvote to a downvote or vice versa — &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/30557/cancel-a-vote-so-that-the-tally-goes-back-to-zero-and-not-minus&quot;&gt;click the &amp;quot;unlit&amp;quot; vote button&lt;/a&gt;, as you usually would. There is no need to perform an undo first.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Close votes and reopen votes&lt;/strong&gt; that haven't aged away can be retracted on any question which hasn't already reached the threshold to close or reopen. Retracted close and reopen votes still count toward your daily close/reopen vote limit, and you cannot re-cast another close/reopen vote on the same question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is something that has been baked into the Stack Exchange system &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/6250/674198&quot;&gt;since nearly the Dawn of Time&lt;/a&gt;, but was originally put in place &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/18046/674198&quot;&gt;to combat tactical downvoting&lt;/a&gt; (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/posts/18046/revisions&quot;&gt;that answer’s list of revisions&lt;/a&gt; for more detail on the history). Jeff Atwood reduced the change window to a very brief time, then later increased it to five minutes to be consistent with the five minute grace period for editing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-04-26T06:22:28.660" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12425" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12423" CreationDate="2023-04-26T13:18:13.140" Score="10" Body="&lt;p&gt;The general approach is to not worry about it. It's one vote; undoing or recasting it only swings 1 or 2 points total on the answer. That's not that big a deal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Yes, you can unlock your vote by performing a revision, as you've discovered. However, making minimal edits solely for the purposes of unlocking a vote means you're littering the front page with trivial activity that other people check on. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit&quot;&gt;Trivial edits are discouraged&lt;/a&gt;, and your training stage of suggested edits prior to reaching 2k rep ought to have conveyed this lesson.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Votes you made in the past that you now regret are like most things that have happened in the past you now regret: they're just mistakes or things where we now know better, and they're not there to be changed, they're there to learn from or to show ourselves we've grown. So look back on that vote and feel it was wrong, but then move past it: it's locked in, don't worry about it, there were other people voting on the same thing and you were just a drop in a bigger current.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While we treat all content as current and you &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; have the tools available to change your votes, the site is not really equipped to let a prolific user reverse tons of votes long after the fact. Perhaps in theory there should be a reprieve letting you recast your votes after many years, but there isn't one right now. There's just unlocking your votes which done in any volume would be basically a misuse of your edit privilege.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Speaking personally, this author for one has unlocked a post to recast her vote only once in a blue moon in circumstances she felt strongly, but in almost all cases, I also had legitimate edits I wanted to make to genuinely improve the post. In just as many other cases, I felt strongly but moved on and didn't do anything, treating the vote as in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It sounds from the responses to this meta Q like you've been making a project out of reversing old votes. I would strongly discourage that: your energy is better focused anywhere else and such a project is a net negative on the site health, not an improvement. If you're not making a conscious project of it, it sounds like you're still preoccupied unlocking quite a few old votes with trivial edits, and you need to be moving on more often than this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So: the votes are in the past. Leave them be in the past. They're locked in, that's the way the system wants it, leave them that way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-04-26T13:56:46.870" LastActivityDate="2023-04-26T13:56:46.870" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12426" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12421" CreationDate="2023-04-26T23:44:57.247" Score="7" Body="&lt;h2&gt;These kind of questions should probably be asked on an AI stack&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing the discussion here, I think my questions are better fit for &lt;a href=&quot;https://ai.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Artificial Intelligence Stack Exchange&lt;/a&gt; I've realized that my questions/problems to solve with this tool more closely relate to &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prompt_engineering&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Prompt Engineering&lt;/a&gt;. For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I use ChatGPT to produce NPC and Monster stat blocks that are consistent with WoTC guidelines?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How can I use chatGPT to generate a campaign setting?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What prompts are effective to make ChatGPT generate Random encounters?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ignoring the fact that these questions may be opinion based or have too wide scope, these are really questions about how to prompt ChatGPT, not about how to create RPG game content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;This doesn't mean that all ChatGPT questions should be asked elsewhere&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, a question like:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is this AI generated encounter appropriate for 3rd level PCs?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Could be perfectly reasonable depending on the actually body of the question&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;How do we determine when questions relating to chatGPT are appropriate?&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When we determine if a question relating to ChatGPT is appropriate, we should consider:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;is the question asking about how ChatGPT &lt;em&gt;works&lt;/em&gt;?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;is the question asking about how to use &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; from ChatGPT?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the first situation, I think in general the question should be asked on &lt;a href=&quot;https://ai.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;AI stack exchange&lt;/a&gt;, and in the second I think it's more appropriate here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;What I'm missing&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The best challenge to what I have laid out here is from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12422/71240&quot;&gt;Matthieu's answer&lt;/a&gt;, where they ask (paraphrased): what separates this from other tool related questions?&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/62294/thomas-markov&quot;&gt;Thomas Markov&lt;/a&gt; answers this with:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...it is not on par with other tool related questions. Other tool related questions are framed as “how can I use X tool to solve Y” where Y is a specific problem to solve, and “generate context for a campaign” is not a specific problem to solve. It’s an open ended discussion prompt for generating ideas, which we don’t do here&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thomas points out another excellent way to look at ChatGPT related questions. The problem is that it's &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; difficult to give conclusive answers even to question formatted like this. Even for a question like &amp;quot;how can I use ChatGPT to solve (specific problem)&amp;quot;, there are so many different approaches you can take with ChatGPT that quantifying which answer is the best an becomes nearly impossible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71240" LastEditorUserId="71240" LastEditDate="2023-04-27T00:10:33.643" LastActivityDate="2023-04-27T00:10:33.643" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12427" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-05-11T07:18:04.650" Score="1" ViewCount="167" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/206185/is-tiamats-cold-breath-supposed-to-be-a-dex-save?noredirect=1#comment565475_206185&quot;&gt;Is Tiamat&amp;#39;s cold breath supposed to be a Dex save?&lt;/a&gt; seems to include a spoiler about the weapons of a boss within the title (I haven't finished the adventure including the boss so I don't know the extent of the spoiler). This old meta discusses how to deal with spoilers: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/192/should-we-worry-about-spoilers/720#720&quot;&gt;Should we worry about spoilers?&lt;/a&gt;, but doesn't specify how to make a good title to avoid spoilers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My suggestions for the aforementioned question would be: &amp;quot;Is this boss monster's breath weapon supposed to be a Dex save?&amp;quot;, but I am not sure if it is making the question too vague or hard to find for those who need it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="32750" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-05-11T11:21:02.113" LastActivityDate="2023-05-20T21:18:13.483" Title="Is this title a spoiler and how would we avoid the spoiler if so?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|spoilers|titles|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12428" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12427" CreationDate="2023-05-11T08:57:49.713" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It's not a spoiler&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is widely known that Tiamat has a stat block. The question if a specific stat block is correct is ok, and should not be a spoiler in itself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question does not specify which campaign, and Tiamat is the end boss in about half a dozen published campaigns, and her stat-block is used for her Krynn-Alter-Ego in at least 2 Dragonlance adventures if my memory serves me right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The specific question in question offers a very specific question that is not campaign-dependent: How does the &lt;em&gt;Bigby's/arcane hand&lt;/em&gt; spell interact with Tiamat's breath weapons?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If anything, the title is misleading and should be re-worded as &amp;quot;How does [Spell X] interact with Tiamat's breath weapons?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-05-15T15:30:52.430" LastActivityDate="2023-05-15T15:30:52.430" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12429" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-05-11T14:02:44.027" Score="1" ViewCount="88" Body="&lt;p&gt;For context I want link &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/206189/80177&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; as the question that inspired me to ask about the possibility for certain types of opinion-based questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question I asked, while having some rules based elements, obviously falls into the opinion-based category. I'm not here to dispute that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, this example got me thinking if there is a way to ask for suggestions and best practices for specific situations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Kind of like how &lt;a href=&quot;https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;Software Engineering&lt;/a&gt; is a place to ask specific types of questions that might fall under the opinion-based category on &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt;. For those unfamiliar, users are directed towards there if they ask more broad &amp;quot;design level&amp;quot; questions or best practices suggestions. In other words: questions that don't have a clear answer but are still useful to ask people with more experience and knowledge, and not just for the one asking the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Making a separate space for these kind of questions is probably too niche, as even in the comparison I've given Software Engineering is 1% the size of SO, and SO has multiple such specialised sites to reduce the load it gets. Therefore, in cases like this one, are there existing (or possibly even new) tags that can be utilised to mark and ask such questions?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;EDIT:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3204/how-do-we-ask-and-answer-subjective-questions&quot;&gt;This&lt;/a&gt; old question about subjective question has been linked in the comments and it offers some good context on the matter as it defines good subjective questions, gives some pointers to what they are, and defines them as generally allowed on the site but also gives pointers on how to answer them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My question is can this same rule of thumb be utilised but from a question asking perspective (e.g. via a tag) so that it is clear from the start what type of answers should be given. Additionally, this has a chance of reducing arguments of what is and what isn't too opinion-based to be closed as it provides clear guidelines to the mods what to look for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Edit 2:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The linked meta question does answer my question as (per discussion in the comments) all focused questions are treated as always available for good subjective answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="80177" LastEditorUserId="80177" LastEditDate="2023-05-11T15:54:39.423" LastActivityDate="2023-05-11T15:54:39.423" Title="Is there a way to ask focused opinion-based questions?" Tags="|discussion|policy|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="11" ClosedDate="2023-05-11T15:55:45.463" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12430" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12432" CreationDate="2023-05-17T00:22:39.897" Score="4" ViewCount="114" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's a new light-colored line between the site graphic and the top bar that didn't used to be there and looks like it probably isn't supposed to be there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How it used to look:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbJeG.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbJeG.png&quot; alt=&quot;old image, without line&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;(Ignore the annotations, it's from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8391/role-playing-gamess-updated-site-theme-is-live/8393#8393&quot;&gt;this post&lt;/a&gt;.  Also ignore the change to the sidebar menu.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How it looks now:&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z0KeX.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/z0KeX.png&quot; alt=&quot;current screenshot of site, showing line&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's happening on both Chrome and Edge; haven't tested other browsers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30299" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-05-18T00:36:56.587" LastActivityDate="2023-05-18T00:36:56.587" Title="Something about the site layout changed, adding an unsightly line between the top bar and the site graphic" Tags="|bug|status-completed|site-design|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12431" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12430" CreationDate="2023-05-17T02:16:17.980" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Digging into the CSS, it's caused by &lt;code&gt;border-bottom: var(--theme-topbar-bottom-border);&lt;/code&gt; in the top bar code:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;.s-topbar {&#xA;    min-width: auto;&#xA;    width: 100%;&#xA;    z-index: var(--zi-navigation-fixed);&#xA;    background-color: var(--theme-topbar-background-color);&#xA;    height: var(--theme-topbar-height);&#xA;    display: flex;&#xA;    border-top: var(--theme-topbar-accent-border);&#xA;    border-bottom: var(--theme-topbar-bottom-border);&#xA;    position: relative;&#xA;    align-items: center&#xA;}&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is in the &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://cdn.sstatic.net/Shared/stacks.css?v=f577556dfd12&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Shared&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; CSS, so I think it's a network-wide change. Not sure that it gives a particular benefit though, even on sites where the banner is completely black.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2023-05-17T02:16:17.980" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12432" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12430" CreationDate="2023-05-18T00:36:49.120" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/389234/335251&quot;&gt;Piper's answer&lt;/a&gt; to the MSE post about this issue, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/389222/335251&quot;&gt;Top bar embiggened?&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The white horizontal line is a bug. GitHub was down yesterday when we went to push a fix out. Should go out today.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The increased height (4px to be exact) is by design.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It looks like the white horizontal line bug has since been fixed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="33569" LastActivityDate="2023-05-18T00:36:49.120" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12433" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12427" CreationDate="2023-05-19T06:49:54.473" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;What exactly would be the spoiler?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Dragons had a dangerous breath since folklore tales were told.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The idea that there are different colors of dragons and they all come with their own alignment and breath weapon was codified for D&amp;amp;D at some point in the early 70s.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tiamat was first introduced in 1975 in Greyhawk and later in the Monster Manual I in 1977.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The multi-headed dragon form was inspiration for multiple pictures of cover art.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spoiler: Tiamats white head breathes ice&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;is like saying&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Spoiler: it's not a moon, it's a space station&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;on a Star Wars RPG.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Technically, that is correct. But come on, we don't need to be overprotective. The Titanic will sink. Achilles will take an arrow to the knee (sorry: heel). And white dragon heads breath ice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fun fact: I sat in the 2004 movie Troy and next to me was a girl who was seriously mortified that Achilles died after having been hit in the heel by an arrow. I will not add spoiler tags when I talk about someone's Achilles heel, even if it would cost me that moment where I reealized there are actually people out there not even knowing the most basic famous hero stories. We cannot cater to the lowest common denominator.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="7665" LastActivityDate="2023-05-19T06:49:54.473" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12434" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-05-19T16:11:42.567" Score="19" ViewCount="1304" Body="&lt;p&gt;We, the elected moderators, wanted to take a minute to check in and see how the community feels like things are going on the site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/community-check-in&quot;&gt;This community check-in has been done for the last few years&lt;/a&gt; (skipping 2020), and it was very helpful. As such, we'd like to share our thoughts and also get your feedback on what is going well and what we could improve. The process is modelled very heavily on last year’s, but for everyone’s benefit:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;How this specific Q&amp;amp;A is run so that we get good value out of it&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;One clear premise per answer&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Please share your thoughts on/observations about something you/we have seen or think needs improvement. Make sure to note whether you think the thing you’re writing about is an improvement, a problem, or some mix of the two (one person might see the same change as bad that you see as good, or vice versa)...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Post only one kind of thing per answer, so that when people upvote/downvote based on whether they agree or not, it's more clearly actionable. If you write an essay about 4 different things, it's not going to be clear what part(s) people agree or disagree with and thus it becomes difficult to act on that feedback. You can, of course, contribute multiple answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Upvote or downvote the answers based on your agreement with whether you see that thing happening and whether you concur with the answer's premise (that it's good or it's a problem). (In other words, if someone says &amp;quot;We get too many questions about unicorns and I hate them,&amp;quot; you would upvote if you agree, and downvote if either you don't think we get too many questions about unicorns or if you don't hate them.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No long comment threads&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;This post isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a particular problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these answers can not be clearly vetted and voted on, so they will tend to remain undone.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you disagree with an answer, use your vote, but limit comment usage. Consider that it’s possible to disagree with an answer’s take, but that it’s possible the issue should still be discussed in full.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;If appropriate, give your own answer, though having multiple answers on the same issue here is mostly gonna be hard to follow. If the answer would just be disagreeing with another answer, the effort would probably be better placed towards a dedicated meta.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As usual, the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/conduct&quot;&gt;Code of Conduct&lt;/a&gt;, which we’d still like to summarise as Be Nice, applies to meta as well as the main site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You may strongly disagree with other users or with the mods or whoever, but we trust that you can find ways to express what you like or don't like without being hostile or insulting to others. Focus on actions, rather than characterising people, and that extends how &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; those actions are characterised.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="52137" LastEditDate="2023-05-21T14:30:54.343" LastActivityDate="2023-06-22T13:21:59.730" Title="How is the community doing? [2023]" Tags="|discussion|community-check-in|" AnswerCount="10" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12435" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-20T11:27:08.273" Score="19" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Participation is still declining&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The trend of less and less use and engagement continues. Over the last year, compared to the same time frame a year ago, there were 20% fewer questions posed, and 19% fewer answers given, and as far as I can see from the charts (you need over 25,000 rep to be allowed to see them &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/site-analytics&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, although anyone is able to glean this from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/queries&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;data explorer&lt;/a&gt;, I believe). This has been trending over time, it is not caused by a steep drop off in the last few weeks or months driven by AI or ChatGPT and its pals, as far as one can see from the chart.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The total number of questions was about 2260 over the last year, or about 6 per day, the total number of answers was about 5150, so on average over the last year, we had about 2.3 answers per question. This ratio is largely unchanged from a year before, where it was 2.2 answers per question. It looks like, what is driving activity is mostly the number of questions being asked.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS. I personally asked about 90 questions over the last year. Without this, it would be down 22% on questions. I largely stopped asking questions, for reasons &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12085/75095&quot;&gt;I share with others&lt;/a&gt;. (I also answered 671 over the last year, and we theoretically would be down 27% on answers without that, but I'm positive someone else would have provided a satisfactory answer in my stead).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-05-21T19:09:11.507" LastActivityDate="2023-05-21T19:09:11.507" CommentCount="15" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12436" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-20T12:26:25.427" Score="21" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We don't guess the system but find it very fast&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In late 2021 we formally repealed Don't Guess the System, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12071/30306&quot;&gt;and had massive success.&lt;/a&gt; 2022 did not pop up many questions where we didn't figure out the system within at worst a day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; degree that is because it is often enough &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; questions that lack their tags or are mistagged as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dungeons-and-dragons-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-05-20T12:26:25.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12437" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12427" CreationDate="2023-05-20T21:18:13.483" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;I think coming up with a detailed spoiler policy for a forum like this will be very difficult and possibly counter-productive.  (I am willing to be proven wrong, but will be swayed by evidence of successful spoiler policies in other stacks rather than theoretical discussions.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I think it's useful to distinguish between two categories:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Specific Content Spoilers:  Here, I am thinking of the details of a particular adventure module, or RPG-related novel, movie, etc, that could only be gained by reading or playing through it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lore &amp;quot;Spoilers&amp;quot;:  Here, I am thinking of basic accumulated background knowledge, especially background knowledge from basic resources-- rulebooks like the DMG, the Monster Manual(s), or equivalents.  I have a hard time thinking of these as true spoilers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In this sense, Tiamat having cold breath isn't a spoiler.  The specific details of an encounter with Tiamat in a published module, even something as old as the original Dragonlance modules arguably could be.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are still probably edge cases here, but this is at least a useful clarification when we talk about this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2023-05-20T21:18:13.483" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12438" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-20T22:36:28.747" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;D&amp;amp;D and Pathfinder continue to lead questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The D&amp;amp;D pedigree systems together made up about 88% of all system specific questions, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12072/75095&quot;&gt;same as last year&lt;/a&gt;.&#xA;Here is a breakdown of other systems.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Family&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions (Sum)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Questions (Sum)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;D&amp;amp;D&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;1535&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;72,00 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pathfinder&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;346&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;16,23 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;WoD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;97&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4,55 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Warhammer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,70 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;l5r&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,52 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Mutants and Masterminds&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,47 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;GURPS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,42 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;CoC&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,28 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dungeon World&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,28 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FATE&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,28 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Blades In the Dark&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,23 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Urban Shadows&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,23 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dune&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,19 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Morphidius&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,19 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;PBTA&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,19 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Savage Worlds&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,19 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Numenara&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,14 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Traveller&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,14 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Shadowrun&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;0,09 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;(Other Systems)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;57&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;2,67 %&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tail of other systems has only 1 or 2 questions each.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PS. The count is based on &lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1752723/most-popular-stackoverflow-tags-prev-15-days-5000-questions&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this SEDE query&lt;/a&gt;, which I modded to look at the trailing 365 days, and having a lower limit of 1 on tags, instead 5,000. @Trish reported that this does not fit well with manual searches, or searches that use calendar year cut-off dates, for example on Legend of the Five Rings. I don't see where the query might be wrong, but I am not a SEDE expert, and it is possible it is off somewhere. Happy to amend this, in case anyone  can identify if something is wrong with it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-05-21T12:57:27.283" LastActivityDate="2023-05-21T12:57:27.283" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12439" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-21T15:45:59.550" Score="14" Body="&lt;p&gt;The following is from an answer I submitted to the 2021 Check-in, but it unfortunately remains.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We all understand the difficulty of communicating over text, but we also need to trust that other members are doing what they do because they care.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;There is likely a lack of trust within the community&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm worried about the community in that our pursuit for curatorial agreement is herding us into corners rather than bringing us together.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each time an issue comes up regarding something that has multiple camps it seems that each camp is only interested in presenting their opinion. Much like elsewhere on the internet, the desire for bridging, compromise, and agreement is less important than being right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And we have lots of views here about what is right.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rather than trying to convince others that you are right (or telling other that they are wrong), why don't we start with the basic idea that the vast majority are here and acting in good faith.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We are all trying to curate this stack to the best of our abilities with the beliefs we have to do so. Those beliefs are going to be different, but I think we need to realize that there is also a difference between perceived problems and actual problems. Our primary focus should be on actual problems: when an action by a user causes a real and clear issue that needs to be discussed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there isn't an actual problem, then maybe we should just let it slide. The majority of actions here still require more than one user, so if a group of users believe something is helpful, and another disagrees - that's okay. The system is working as normal. If we start complaining about how others are performing their curatorial duties and try to change them because we believe they should be doing something else, then I think that creates divide on the stack where there doesn't need to be one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's creating multiple issues like the needs for question closures, answer support, etc. What one person believes is helpful another person believes is wrong. And again, that's okay! What one person does really shouldn't be an issue. And if lots of folks are doing it and we're not seeing harm, then it's likely okay (although lack of visible harm doesn't mean there isn't harm.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We need to get to a point where we can trust each other. And that if a group overrides another group, that is also okay. And we just need to let it go as the community making a decision that is different from our own.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But that doesn't mean that either side can't try to move the site towards their ideals. If neither side had an ideal that they were striving for the site to achieve, I think that'd be a much bigger problem. We just need to do so respectfully on both sides and also try and understand where they are coming from so we can hopefully find a middle ground where we can work together rather than against. Because I do firmly believe that it is our public disagreements that drive people away - it's just ugly.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2023-05-21T15:45:59.550" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12440" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-22T15:08:36.947" Score="15" Body="&lt;h2&gt;We have consistently lost our best users to Moderation&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm putting this up because it's a trend I've noticed ever since I've joined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The moderation team aren't the most active visible members, or even very active visible members.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a statement of fact, not a judgement for or against the team. Each time there's been an election, some of our active and beloved members have run for a Moderator position. Once elected, the things we loved about them become much more infrequent.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't know what causes this, or if it's just the nature of moderation but I think it the way we choose our moderation and the expectations upon them create a problem for the site&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By removing active and visible members from the day to day, we lose the people that we actually voted for. They aren't doing the things we liked about them, and we've lost highly active members - and we generally aren't getting new stackizens that replace their input.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From my perpsective, our method of removing our best members from the active queues has cost us.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2023-05-22T15:08:36.947" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12441" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-23T02:09:07.100" Score="10" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The current moderator group is the least Q&amp;amp;A-active group of moderators we have ever had.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;NautArch made the same observation in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12440/62294&quot;&gt;his answer&lt;/a&gt;, so I've put together some visualizations that show the decline in activity of two of our moderator groups (posts-per-month):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wRSyc.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/wRSyc.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbE9p.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/YbE9p.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The pattern here should be pretty evident: getting elected correlates strongly with a sharp decline in writing questions and answers. Strictly in terms of writing posts on the site, the current moderator group is the least active a group of moderators has ever been, and have continued the trend of vanishing from typical site use after election:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qAh4e.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/qAh4e.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While NautArch's observation is true, that election leads to a decline in activity, the phenomenon of having the entire mod group being largely inactive is a more recent development, starting in the Fall of 2020. Throughout most of our site's history, the moderator group has provided consistent and visible main site content in the form of questions and answers, averaging 27 questions per month from June 2012 to August 2020, &lt;em&gt;nearly one post per day on average&lt;/em&gt;. From September 2020 till present, the site's moderators have averaged 5.6 posts per month. This year the mods have averaged 2.2 posts per month &lt;em&gt;as a group&lt;/em&gt;, so as individuals are only posting once every two months, on average.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;&lt;em&gt;For the first ten years of this site's history, the site's moderators were 12 times as active as they are now&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are flags getting handled? Sure. They are doing the things that regular members cannot. The duties that are unique to the moderator are being taken care of. But to me, &lt;em&gt;this is the bare minimum that we should expect from a moderator&lt;/em&gt;. I think it is okay to wish for more. I don't mean to oblige the team to become more active. I am only saying that I don't think this state of affairs is the best for the health of the site. A world where the people handling flags with their secret sauce are the same people you see regularly engaging with users &lt;em&gt;in the way normal users do&lt;/em&gt; is the ideal place for the site to be. And we just aren't there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether you think that is ideal or not is obviously up for debate. &lt;em&gt;But the fact that our moderator team does not act as regular members is indisputable&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-05-23T14:32:12.310" LastActivityDate="2023-05-23T14:32:12.310" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12442" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-05-23T19:00:00.993" Score="12" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Our forum index hasn't been updated in over &lt;s&gt;two&lt;/s&gt; three&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; years.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We have a handy dandy &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5449/62294&quot;&gt;list of forums&lt;/a&gt; that we use to direct off topic questions. The last time it was substantially updated was March of 2020 (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/9335/10&quot;&gt;revision 10&lt;/a&gt;), with the removal of the dead Story Games Forums.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I quite literally know nothing about other RPG forums, so find myself ill equipped for reviewing the list outside of checking for dead links. It would be great if some of y'all&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; could give the index a little audit, checking for dead links, URL changes, forum shutdowns, unfortunate changes in attitude toward minority groups, etc. And if you are aware of any good candidates to add to the list, propose them in answer so the community can vet and vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1 A contraction meaning &amp;quot;you all&amp;quot;, here referring to any reader, not just &amp;quot;you all the mods&amp;quot;.&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;&lt;sup&gt;2 I just copied my &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12123/62294&quot;&gt;answer from last year&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-05-23T19:00:00.993" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12444" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-06-05T10:48:24.967" Score="47" ViewCount="971" Body="&lt;p&gt;As of today, community members and diamond moderators across the Stack Exchange network are commencing a general moderation strike in protest of bad policy and worse treatment from Stack Overflow, Inc leadership:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389811/moderation-strike-stack-overflow-inc-cannot-consistently-ignore-mistreat-an&quot;&gt;Moderation Strike: Stack Overflow, Inc. cannot consistently ignore, mistreat, and malign its volunteers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;There is also &lt;a href=&quot;https://openletter.mousetail.nl/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;an open letter to Stack Overflow, Inc. here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This post is here to explain the situation, and as you read it, I invite you to consider whether you might join the strike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;(Stack Overflow, Inc. is the company that owns and runs the Stack Exchange network.)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What's happening?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In February, RPG Stack Exchange voted overwhelmingly to ban AI- and ChatGPT-generated answers: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12383/should-this-stack-ban-chatgpt&quot;&gt;Should this stack ban ChatGPT?&lt;/a&gt;. We have already seen and removed multiple such posts as a community.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many other communities also simultaneously banned AI-generated content, beginning with &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned&quot;&gt;Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; and including &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/20209/announcement-ai-generated-content-is-now-permanently-banned-on-ask-ubuntu&quot;&gt;Ask Ubuntu&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5221&quot;&gt;Academia&lt;/a&gt;, and others. You can see &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/384922/is-there-a-list-of-chatgpt-or-other-ai-related-discussions-and-policies-for-our/384923#384923&quot;&gt;a full list of discussions here&lt;/a&gt;. Stack Overflow, Inc. community managers &amp;amp; developers even formally assisted in supporting this policy by e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/gpt-policy&quot;&gt;creating a help page&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Last week on May 29th, Stack Overflow, Inc. leadership dictated a new policy to diamond moderators in private: they were forbidden from deleting AI-generated content, or suspending users for posting AI-generated content, under strict guidance that has not been made public. A post was made to Meta SE the next day (&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389582/what-is-the-network-policy-regarding-ai-generated-content&quot;&gt;What is the network policy regarding AI Generated content?&lt;/a&gt;) describing a public and less specific version of the guidance. Diamond moderators are bound by the moderator agreement to follow these instructions and can lose their diamonds for noncompliance.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Essentially, SO Inc leadership has instructed that AI content is now tacitly permitted across the network, contradicting all prior guidance from staff. This is in spite of community consensus, in spite of private protests by moderators, and in spite of the harm AI content will cause. Further, the very same moderator agreement that binds moderators also binds SO Inc to give staff previews and opportunity to provide feedback on policies like this—a covenant SO Inc disregarded and violated. Moderators are even bound to follow rules &lt;em&gt;that remain confidential,&lt;/em&gt; meaning moderators are forbidden from talking with us openly about the rules they must follow.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SO Inc's justification for this new policy &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/389583/152515&quot;&gt;in their meta post&lt;/a&gt; is based on suggesting GPT detectors have poor accuracy rates (but with no citation of how accurate moderators have been in exercising their judgment and expertise moderating AI content). It further makes a broad accusation of moderators being racially prejudiced in moderation (&lt;em&gt;“we also suspect that there have been biases for or against residents of specific countries”&lt;/em&gt;), which is a major claim that warrants major evidence but was given none.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond the harm this policy will cause the network, this situation is an extraordinary new low in the working relationship between the community and SO Inc leadership, one that apparently represents complete disregard for the community's will or even its expertise in the harm leadership's own policies will cause.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;What are we doing in response?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange community members and diamond moderators have organised a strike in protest not only of the policy, but of the conditions and treatment under which it was handed down. This strike calls for a cessation of moderation and curation activities: no casting or handling flags, no reviews, no closing/unclosing, no deleting/undeleting, no voting or posting (except on matters of the strike of course), etc. Smoke Detector, the community-run anti-spam bot, is also shutting down for the duration of the strike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;If you find this situation unacceptable as I do, I invite you to &lt;a href=&quot;https://openletter.mousetail.nl/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;sign the open letter and join the strike&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Due to a limitation in Stack Exchange's own authentication system, you may need to create a Stack Overflow account in order to sign the letter. Some of us might dislike having to do that, but appropriately enough to the topic at hand, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389811/moderation-strike-stack-overflow-inc-cannot-consistently-ignore-mistreat-an#comment1300373_389811&quot;&gt;as nitsua60 comments&lt;/a&gt; this is a system limitation we've been asking SO Inc to address for years. You can alternately &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/users/490835/mousetail&quot;&gt;contact mousetail&lt;/a&gt;, the person in charge of the letter (start a new room).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For those wondering, this post &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/425000/moderation-strike-stack-overflow-inc-cannot-consistently-ignore-mistreat-an#comment960098_425000&quot;&gt;cannot be featured&lt;/a&gt; because &lt;a href=&quot;https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/posts/5286/revisions&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange leadership is de-featuring all content referencing the strike&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Update for August 4th, 2023&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Negotiations between strike representatives and staff have been proceeding for the past month and a half.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The outcome of those negotiations is catalogued here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/391847/moderation-strike-results-of-negotiations&quot;&gt;Moderation strike: Results of negotiations&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A general timeline of negotiations is catalogued here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/390704/152515&quot;&gt;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/390704/152515&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Groups involved in the strike are currently discussing whether the outcome of these negotiations are sufficient to end their strike request (see update at top): &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/390106/moderation-strike-update-data-dumps-choosing-representatives-gpt-data-and-wh&quot;&gt;Moderation Strike update: Data dumps, choosing representatives, GPT data, and where we’re holding&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Update for August 7th, 2023&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The general call to strike has concluded today, with involved bodies voting to lift the strike and resume normal business again on the basis of the outcomes of negotiations: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/392032/152515&quot;&gt;Moderation strike: Conclusion and the way forward&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-08-08T22:31:57.383" LastActivityDate="2023-08-08T22:31:57.383" Title="Stack Exchange general moderation and curation strike begins today (concluded as of August 7th)" Tags="|discussion|moderation-strike|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="14" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12445" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-06-15T04:59:39.300" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;There seems to be little voting on tag synonyms&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a not a lot of entries on the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms?tab=Newest&amp;amp;filter=Suggested&quot;&gt;tag synonym voting page&lt;/a&gt;, and those that are there sometimes date back more than a year ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Synonyms either become active when reaching a score of 4, or removed when reaching a score of -2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The vote score between upvote/downvote buttons for tag synonyms does not have the capability to be expanded and show the totals separated, so it is possible that these votes are just hotly contended, and continue to hover around zero, but I doubt it. I think very few people actually care enough to even go there and vote.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The page is also somewhat obscure, to navigate to it, one first has to go to Tags, then click the &amp;quot;Show all tag synonyms&amp;quot; link, and then select the &amp;quot;Pending Approval&amp;quot; box, and as Akixkisu points out, you need to have at least a score of 5 in the tag you want to merge, which can be a show-stopper too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-06-15T08:32:59.157" LastActivityDate="2023-06-15T08:32:59.157" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12446" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-06-20T02:26:15.617" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The community is welcoming to new users&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While I'm not new to SE at large, as an 11+ year user on Stack Overflow, I'm new to the RPG group.  New to DM'ing a DnD 5e game, I've found this community to be an exceedingly helpful source of information with clear answers linking to authoritative documentation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Many questions I've had were already expertly answered by this community. I've had two situations where the answer wasn't obvious, and I asked...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One question I asked was definitely more vague but the second one resulted from me just not carefully reading the rules; but in both cases the answers were the same factual statements, without any criticism of my lack of research.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've also been surprised at the &amp;quot;reach&amp;quot; of my two simple questions with thousands of views in a few days.  Regardless of the metrics I've seen in other answers, the visibility of this site as a repository of knowledge is clear.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure there's anything actionable about this answer other than a comment that whatever you're currently doing to foster a community were good faith non-duplicate questions are clearly answered is a model that I wish were replicated elsewhere in SE.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="65874" LastActivityDate="2023-06-20T02:26:15.617" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12447" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12434" CreationDate="2023-06-22T13:21:59.730" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Overall, the site works for me for the systems I care about, with the minor caveat that the systems I care about, &lt;em&gt;Planet Mercenary&lt;/em&gt; and the various versions of &lt;em&gt;Mutants and Masterminds&lt;/em&gt;, don't tend to have all that many questions to answer. I occasionally dip into other questions, mainly to maintain my streak, and upvote likely-looking questions and answers, but my deeper engagement is limited by that I don't really do D&amp;amp;D these days.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="10867" LastActivityDate="2023-06-22T13:21:59.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12448" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-06-22T14:33:25.507" Score="5" ViewCount="164" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question apparently doesn't have a single correct answer: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/206825/&quot;&gt;What are some monsters that could trap NPCs for a long time without killing them?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, it is pretty narrow for being &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot;. Is this question on-topic?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11643/&quot;&gt;How can we distinguish &amp;quot;idea generation&amp;quot; questions from &amp;quot;asking for a solution&amp;quot; ones?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="27377" LastActivityDate="2023-06-23T14:20:50.467" Title="Should this question be considered &quot;idea generation&quot; and closed?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12449" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12476" CreationDate="2023-06-22T17:38:42.547" Score="2" ViewCount="143" Body="&lt;p&gt;I have about 3k words of a game system representing mostly additions and improvements to &lt;a href=&quot;https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Wushu_Open&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Wushu Open&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'd like to request comments, complaints, criticism, and concepts, but I fear that the site's character limit on the one hand, and the charity of readers on the other, may be working against my ever receiving the read-through-and-analyze that I hope to obtain from somebody in general, and the esteemed users of this site in particular, who to a greater or lesser degree live in my head as consulting spectres despite our minimal interactions (sadly not to the extent that I can elicit them for feedback).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've thought about asking a set of targeted questions for individual mechanics, but the loss of the context of the rest of the improved system as a whole will result in each mechanic being compared to Wushu base, rather than as it interacts with my system. A holistic analysis is needed, but I don't know how to make it fit here. Maybe this isn't the right place for it, but I hope that isn't the case.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As an aside, is this a game-design question rather than a homebrew-review one?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44781" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-06-22T18:17:01.003" LastActivityDate="2023-08-11T14:29:54.403" Title="How would I go about requesting homebrew-review for an entire game system?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|game-systems|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12450" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12449" CreationDate="2023-06-22T18:05:57.887" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Cut it to pieces!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you need 3000 words to explain the changes, we need more than 30000 words to explain the implications. As a result, we'd break the limits of the system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Another thing is, that people might have observations about sub-system, and not the others. Cutting it to one related block per question keeps it handleable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Connect the posts!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you have a series of questions, connect them via links to the previous part(s) that are relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-06-23T21:49:45.130" LastActivityDate="2023-06-23T21:49:45.130" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12451" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12448" CreationDate="2023-06-23T14:20:50.467" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Very borderline but possibly salvageable, IMO.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the current phrasing of things, especially the title, &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; veer too close to idea generation. &amp;quot;What are some&amp;quot; is a yellow-flag of a phrase, but not always unrecoverable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the core question is, &amp;quot;Due to a time dilation effect, I need ways to hold human captives for excessive amounts of time without aging and dying&amp;quot;, as I read it, that can be made stackable by limiting to published sources and doing a phrasing tidy-up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52159" LastActivityDate="2023-06-23T14:20:50.467" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12452" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12454" CreationDate="2023-06-28T02:56:51.347" Score="3" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9ebct.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/9ebct.png&quot; alt=&quot;Screenshot of RPG.se icon, which become the general Stack Overflow icon&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The icon has been changed. Is this an issue on my side (caching, or something), or on Stack Exchange's side? Or perhaps it was deliberately changed (by mods?)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-07-06T00:42:25.320" LastActivityDate="2023-07-06T00:42:25.320" Title="Why has the site's icon changed to the general Stack Overflow icon?" Tags="|bug|status-completed|design|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12453" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12452" CreationDate="2023-06-28T13:52:03.917" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I am now seeing a similar issue:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vIk36.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/vIk36.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-06-28T13:52:03.917" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12454" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12452" CreationDate="2023-06-29T23:03:34.913" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;Seems to be part of a known bug network-wide: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/390757/311001&quot;&gt;Sites&amp;#39; icons appear shifted / wrong sites&amp;#39; icons are appearing&lt;/a&gt; [meta.se post].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Short story: every time a new site is launched, it screws up the icons (for everyone) until some hours have passed and everything's percolated through the CDN.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastActivityDate="2023-06-29T23:03:34.913" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12455" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12456" CreationDate="2023-07-03T11:04:34.203" Score="10" ViewCount="388" Body="&lt;p&gt;I occasionally add fitting but missing tags to posts, for example if the question is about a monster and is missing the tag, I add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-monsters-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt;, or if it is about the action economy, but has no such tag, I might add &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/action-economy&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;action-economy&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-action-economy-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;action-economy&lt;/a&gt;. I typically do this when not all five slots on the question have been taken yet, and there is &amp;quot;white space&amp;quot; to add something without needing to boot something else out that the author (or other community members) added.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since I'm curious about portals, in the sense of &amp;quot;connections between times, places and worlds&amp;quot; I sometimes browse questions about portals if there is nothing else new or interesting going on. This is actually not that easy, because there are a lot of false positives:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Tales from the Yawning Portal is a collection of adventures for 5e, and often pops up&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Adventures that involve the eponymous Yawning Portal, such as Waterdeep: Dragon Heist also come up&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;A website called &amp;quot;Obsidian Portal&amp;quot; also tends to feature in the results&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These one can exclude by query language such as &amp;quot;-obsidian&amp;quot;, which is a bit laborious, but feasible.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;In 4th, there is a number of teleportation spells that function by means of creating a portal to step through. Sometimes the qeustions are about the actual portal, but a lot of the time, these are just questions about teleportation that the portal aspect is not important for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are of course also mundane portals, doorways, that show up&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These latter cases are not so easy to exclude, because they do not share a common element.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Because of all of this, I find the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/portals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-portals-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;portals&lt;/a&gt; tag especially useful, because it can help to find questions that are not primarily about teleportation, or any of these other things, but about the concept of a gateway to a different reality or place. And if I find a question that would benefit from it and has open space, or if I answer such a question, I tag it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I was new to the site, I used to tag a lot of questions in one day for another tag (glyph of warding, which was later decided to be replaced with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-spell-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trap&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-trap-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;trap&lt;/a&gt;, because individual spells normally do not have their own tags) flooding the &amp;quot;front page&amp;quot; with questions related to that. I was told that was bad practice and one should not do it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not doing that here. This typically is pretty low volume, I might create one or two such tags in a week, and certainly less than one a week on average. Is this a problem?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-09-26T16:00:01.503" Title="Is there an issue with tagging questions about portals?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12456" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12455" CreationDate="2023-07-11T22:15:31.480" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;There is something to be said about how you've framed the inquiry here. I'm sure &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/389811/674198&quot;&gt;the strike&lt;/a&gt; has something to do with the lack of engagement on your question, but the way you've framed it is doing you no favors for encouraging constructive engagement. In particular, your question is focused on a particular behavior you have been engaging in, and asks very pointedly:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You got a problem with me? (&lt;em&gt;paraphrased&lt;/em&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a decidedly poor way to start a meta discussion (believe me, I've tried), and in my experience, &lt;em&gt;solution focused&lt;/em&gt; inquiries lead to better discussions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, &amp;quot;is Groody's behavior a problem&amp;quot; is not a question I am interested in answering, but the motive here is clear enough: you think &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/portals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-portals-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;portals&lt;/a&gt; is a useful tag and that something should be done about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You've made a good case for why it is a helpful tag. I had originally thought &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teleportation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teleportation&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;teleportation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-teleportation-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;teleportation&lt;/a&gt; would be sufficient, but in many games, there are mechanics unique to portals that make them quite different from other forms of teleportation. So I am generally in favor of a retagging project. I've come up with this search as a decent starting place:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=portal+is%3Aquestion+-%5Bportals%5D+closed%3A0+-%5Btales-from-the-yawning-portal%5D+-%5Bpublished-adventures%5D&quot;&gt;portal is:question -[portals] closed:0 -[tales-from-the-yawning-portal] -[published-adventures]&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At time of writing this gives 120 questions that are probably about portals, that haven't been tagged yet, and are not about the Yawning Portal tavern. I am not sure of the best way to approach this as a retagging project. 120 questions is a lot of questions- five questions per day for three and half weeks is a long time to read about portals. Given the volume, I would probably prefer to see a list of candidate questions compiled first, then executed all at once, or in a couple batches spaced out by a week or more each. I think one to three large disruptions of the front page spread out over several weeks is favorable to consistent minor disruptions over several weeks. But that's just my opinion, and is obviously subject to change.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-07-11T22:15:31.480" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12457" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-07-14T10:31:50.450" Score="1" ViewCount="177" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22Tucker%27s%20Kobolds%22&quot;&gt;There are 40-ish items&lt;/a&gt; that discuss tucker's Kobolds as a concept on our site. Three of them are questions. They are a beloved (and feared) meme in our community...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Would we benefit from a Tucker's Kobolds tag or should we synonymize it into some other tag, such as Action Economy?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-07-31T06:44:45.463" Title="Would we benefit from a Tucker's Kobolds tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12458" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12457" CreationDate="2023-07-14T12:24:47.920" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;&amp;quot;Tucker's Kobolds&amp;quot; is an exceptionally specific search term, so creating a tag for it is just adding a tag tax.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no difficulty in finding questions and answers referencing Tucker's Kobolds because &amp;quot;Tucker's Kobolds&amp;quot; provides a specific and exhaustive search term for the subject. Creating a tag for it doesn't increase the discoverability of Tucker's Kobolds content, because just searching for it already finds everything. The only thing creating a tag for it does is add a tag tax to questions about it, so this is not a helpful tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-07-14T12:24:47.920" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12459" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12455" CreationDate="2023-07-14T18:03:37.550" Score="4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Working answer to review questions for tagging&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It might be useful to tag some of the untagged &amp;quot;Yawning Portal&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Obsidian Portal&amp;quot; questions too; I did not alter tags during this survey (neither for the questions that I think are a good match to add the portal tag), to keep the list of 120 questions stable for the preparation period.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From going over the long list, some general observations and suggestions:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The spell &lt;em&gt;gate&lt;/em&gt; is literally about creating a portal and calling a powerful creature through it. It might be an idea to tag questions about &lt;em&gt;gate&lt;/em&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-spell-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/portals&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;portals&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-portals-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;portals&lt;/a&gt;, similar to &lt;em&gt;gyph of warding&lt;/em&gt;'s &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-spell-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trap&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-trap-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;trap&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It might be useful to tag some of the questions that lack Yawning portal tags, at least those that are about the published compilation. Likewise for Obsidian Portal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure what common procedure is. I will let this hang around here for a week or two for feedback (site is pretty slow right now due to the strike).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update July 28&lt;/strong&gt;: I had no further feedback. If there are no objections, I will move ahead and tag all the ones in good matches in one single batch and leave the others alone. Feedback on tagging all the gate ones (another batch), or tagging all the missing &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tales-from-the-yawning-portal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-tales-from-the-yawning-portal-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&lt;/a&gt; ones (to differentiate those about the book from those that just deal with the inn) in another batch welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update, July 30&lt;/strong&gt;: Exectued the good matches tag. Will do the yawning portal one, too, which seems obvious, but not tag everything gate with portal for now.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update September 26&lt;/strong&gt;. Tagged the good ones from the maybe list. I think this wraps this up.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Good matches to add the tag&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/128605/how-many-creatures-can-step-through-a-teleportation-circle-before-it-closes&quot;&gt;How many creatures can step through a Teleportation Circle before it closes?&lt;/a&gt; Is about how many people can use a portal before closing, so specific about a portal's effect&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31824/permanently-hiding-items-objects&quot;&gt;Permanently hiding items/objects&lt;/a&gt; Interaction of portals and dead magic zones (Note from Thomas: this is not a question about portals. Solutions may include portals, but this is not asking about portals.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96313/can-a-bag-of-holding-destroy-a-sphere-of-annihilation&quot;&gt;Can a Bag of Holding destroy a Sphere of Annihilation?&lt;/a&gt; About the portal of bag of holding, and its interaction with rules about portals in Sphere of Annihilation (Note from Thomas: This question is not about portals, it is about a bag of holding. A question needs to do more than mention a bag of holding to be about portals.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49438/can-bag-of-holding-portable-hole-turn-enemies-inside-out&quot;&gt;Can Bag of Holding + Portable Hole Turn Enemies Inside-Out?&lt;/a&gt; About the effect of large creatures being pulled through a portal from their insides -- probably portals would be a better match here to tag than teleportation&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/114212/does-the-interior-of-a-portable-hole-rotate-to-adhere-to-the-holes-orientation&quot;&gt;Does the interior of a portable hole rotate to adhere to the hole&amp;#39;s orientation?&lt;/a&gt; Question about positioning of the portal of a portable hole, and its effects&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/109794/how-invulnerable-can-you-make-a-gate-door&quot;&gt;How invulnerable can you make a gate door?&lt;/a&gt; All about how to secure an actual planar portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Questionable, could possibly add tag.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Additional takes on if they should should not be tagged especially welcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26594/how-do-i-prepare-a-permanent-magic-circle-for-the-linked-portal-ritual&quot;&gt;How do I prepare a permanent magic circle for the Linked Portal ritual?&lt;/a&gt; Asks about setting up a permanent circle for Portal-type teleportation spells&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/175938/75095&quot;&gt;What happens when a Scrying target teleports away, or moves through a portal?&lt;/a&gt; Asks if there is a difference between teleporting and using a portal (but already has 5 tags)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49254/order-of-combat-operations-warlocks-curse&quot;&gt;Order of Combat Operations (Warlock&amp;#39;s Curse)&lt;/a&gt; Is about pushing someone through a magical portal, but main focus is on action economy and if you can retry that&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/205644/when-was-the-hither-thither-staff-introduced-in-dd&quot;&gt;When was the Hither-Thither Staff introduced in D&amp;amp;D?&lt;/a&gt; Could consider tagging as the staff is a portal magic item, like a glyph of warding is a spell trap, but the question itself is not about the portals. Already discussed with Thomas and decided to not tag to avoid needless controversy.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94673/would-a-constrained-portable-door-magic-item-be-game-breaking&quot;&gt;Would a constrained portable door magic item be game-breaking?&lt;/a&gt; Is about an item using portals (pretty cool idea actually), but gist is more about the balance effect of affording teleportation, not about the portal itself&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/168476/what-options-are-available-to-a-portable-hole-owner&quot;&gt;What options are available to a Portable Hole owner?&lt;/a&gt; About when the portal of a portable hole opens. I think would be OK to tag, done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/204407/how-to-increase-the-chance-of-a-spells-success-against-a-foe-that-can-save-vs-s&quot;&gt;How to increase the chance of a spell&amp;#39;s success against a foe that can save vs spells most of the time&lt;/a&gt; Using a portal to get rid of an otherwise impervious opponent (as one of the options)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/31824/permanently-hiding-items-objects&quot;&gt;Permanently hiding items/objects&lt;/a&gt; I'm unsure -- primarily about Numenera (which I have no experience with), but mentions something that effectively works as a portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132324/are-there-any-other-ways-to-travel-between-the-layers-of-the-nine-hells-besides&quot;&gt;Are there any other ways to travel between the layers of the Nine Hells besides the River Styx?&lt;/a&gt; Is about access to the hells, but portals are one of the options&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86599/how-to-introduce-a-new-setting-to-existing-characters&quot;&gt;How to introduce a new setting to existing characters?&lt;/a&gt; Is about narration, not portals specifically, although most of the options listed are portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/83249/how-do-we-transition-from-dd-4es-world-to-dd-5es-world&quot;&gt;How do we transition from D&amp;amp;D 4e&amp;#39;s world to D&amp;amp;D 5e&amp;#39;s world?&lt;/a&gt; Similar, about how to transition narratively between settings (here of different editions), portals being one way&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/175562/is-the-negative-energy-plane-underneath-golarion&quot;&gt;Is the negative energy plane underneath Golarion?&lt;/a&gt; About digging a physical hole that somehow acts as a portal between planes, tagged.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53675/can-a-teleportation-circle-be-made-in-the-air&quot;&gt;Can a teleportation circle be made in the air?&lt;/a&gt; Probably not, but maybe -- about Planar Portal spell, and if Teleportation Circle as the target of a portal can be in mid-air&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144604/what-defenses-are-there-against-being-summoned-by-the-gate-spell&quot;&gt;What defenses are there against being summoned by the Gate spell?&lt;/a&gt; Text of Gate mentioning portal.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144270/how-exploitable-balanced-is-this-homebrew-spell-spell-permanency&quot;&gt;How exploitable/balanced is this homebrew spell: Spell Permanency?&lt;/a&gt; Does have explicit rules text about portals, but already has 5 tags, and is not centrally about portals, so probably not good to replace exsiting tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201951/is-there-any-way-to-follow-a-banished-creature-to-the-demiplane&quot;&gt;Is there any way to follow a banished creature to the demiplane?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions portal as part of the gate spell, but the question is about placement, not the portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144399/how-do-nested-planes-pockets-work&quot;&gt;How do nested planes/pockets work?&lt;/a&gt; Outpockets in a way are like portals, so might be useful to tag, done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76077/managing-a-medieval-low-orbit-ion-cannon&quot;&gt;Managing a Medieval Low Orbit Ion Cannon&lt;/a&gt; It is about a portal-powered cannon, but the portal is not central to it. I think this is  likely a no, too. There might be other useful tags, like magic-item or balance to be better adds instead.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157508/do-you-die-on-another-plane-if-you-reached-that-plane-via-astral-projection&quot;&gt;Do you die on another plane if you reached that plane via Astral Projection?&lt;/a&gt; Core is behavior of the spell, and that is directly tied to using a portal, or not to reach another plane. I think this would be a fit, but it already has 5 perfectly reasonable tags, so I'd leave it alone.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/157540/by-raw-does-astral-projection-allow-you-to-keep-your-astral-body-when-you-leave&quot;&gt;By RAW, does Astral Projection allow you to keep your astral body when you leave the Astral Plane?&lt;/a&gt; Very similar, but this one does have free tag space, so I would add it. Done.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/188405/can-an-army-of-psionic-characters-create-a-crystal-sphere-in-the-astral-plane&quot;&gt;Can an army of psionic characters create a crystal sphere in the astral plane?&lt;/a&gt; Portals feature as one of several alternatives in a question that is mostly about psionics - I think likely not tag, but am not quite sure.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/206267/after-i-finish-casting-teleportation-circle-can-i-prevent-the-portal-from-immed&quot;&gt;After I finish casting Teleportation Circle, can I prevent the portal from immediately opening?&lt;/a&gt; Might be fit but has already 5 well-considered tags&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Togehter found 27 that maybe could be considered out of the 120. I think it likely will turn out to be more around a dozen to a score when we are done reviewing here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;No action&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all questions that mention the Yawning Portal, Obsidian Portal, are about mundane doorways, or have portals feature either in rules text of a spell like &lt;em&gt;teleportation circle&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;gate&lt;/em&gt;, but not being the gist of the question, or in some backstory or exposition.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought it might be useful to group these, to highlight some of the themes:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Yawning Portal&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/179745/does-the-spell-feather-fall-prevent-damage-from-falling-down-stairs&quot;&gt;Does the spell Feather Fall prevent damage from falling down stairs?&lt;/a&gt; Reference to the Yawning Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/196720/were-some-of-the-npcs-in-waterdeep-dragon-heist-player-characters-at-some-poi&quot;&gt;Were some of the NPCs in &amp;#39;Waterdeep: Dragon Heist&amp;#39; player characters at some point?&lt;/a&gt; Reference to the Yawning Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116181/does-difficult-terrain-stack&quot;&gt;Does difficult terrain stack?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103015/calculating-dungeon-length&quot;&gt;Calculating dungeon length&lt;/a&gt; mentions Yawning Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169801/can-a-large-creature-move-past-a-small-and-a-medium-creature-simultaneously&quot;&gt;Can a Large creature move past a Small and a Medium creature simultaneously?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113550/does-the-pack-tactics-monster-special-trait-really-only-apply-to-one-attack-roll&quot;&gt;Does the Pack Tactics monster special trait really only apply to one attack roll?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/130823/when-can-a-ranger-get-a-component-pouch-or-material-components-outside-of-star&quot;&gt;When can a Ranger get a component pouch (or material components) outside of starting equipment?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95402/where-is-my-best-source-of-information-on-the-red-wizards-of-thay&quot;&gt;Where is my best source of Information on the Red Wizards of Thay?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99345/whats-the-point-of-long-empty-hallways-in-dungeons&quot;&gt;What&amp;#39;s the point of long, empty hallways in dungeons?&lt;/a&gt; A &lt;em&gt;fantastic&lt;/em&gt; question and answer, but not really about portals, just mentioning Yawning Portal once again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169575/what-is-the-total-bonus-from-a-stone-of-ill-luck&quot;&gt;What is the total bonus from a stone of ill luck?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125222/is-using-an-eagle-whistle-considered-as-wearing-carrying-it-for-the-purpose-of-t&quot;&gt;Is using an Eagle Whistle considered as wearing/carrying it for the purpose of Telekinesis?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120133/how-to-handle-varying-party-size-players&quot;&gt;How to handle varying party size/players?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116892/how-do-you-properly-calculate-the-flying-speed-given-by-the-eagle-whistle-when-y&quot;&gt;How do you properly calculate the flying speed given by the Eagle Whistle when you have speed bonuses?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100285/how-should-i-handle-tpks-and-retrying-in-a-dungeon-crawl&quot;&gt;How should I handle TPK&amp;#39;s and retrying in a dungeon crawl?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/150618/what-is-a-gloomblade-the-magic-item-in-dd-lore&quot;&gt;What is a Gloomblade (the magic item) in D&amp;amp;D lore?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/143033/how-can-i-discourage-prevent-pcs-from-using-door-choke-points&quot;&gt;How can I discourage/prevent PCs from using door choke-points?&lt;/a&gt; About mundane doors/portals, plus Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120311/how-to-retain-a-player-who-resents-another-player&quot;&gt;How to retain a player who resents another player?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131239/when-is-passive-investigation-used&quot;&gt;When is Passive Investigation used?&lt;/a&gt; Yawning portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Obsidian Portal&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26069/what-changes-are-there-to-kingdom-management-in-ultimate-campaign&quot;&gt;What changes are there to Kingdom Management in Ultimate Campaign?&lt;/a&gt; About Obsidian Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/148949/how-is-it-possible-for-this-npc-to-be-alive-during-the-curse-of-strahd-adventure&quot;&gt;How is it possible for this NPC to be alive during the Curse of Strahd adventure?&lt;/a&gt; Obsidian Portal, again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/15088/encouraging-use-of-online-roleplaying-aids&quot;&gt;Encouraging use of online roleplaying aids&lt;/a&gt; Obisidian Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/112937/how-can-i-encourage-player-engagement-between-sessions-in-a-west-marches-style-g&quot;&gt;How can I encourage player engagement between sessions in a West Marches style game?&lt;/a&gt; Obsidian portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55103/how-can-i-manage-my-campaign-digitally-without-using-a-screen-at-the-table&quot;&gt;How can I manage my campaign digitally, without using a screen at the table?&lt;/a&gt; About Obsidian Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/2673/am-i-designing-my-campaign-setting-to-be-too-specific&quot;&gt;Am I designing my campaign setting to be too specific?&lt;/a&gt; Obsidian Portal mention&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203249/when-do-monsters-not-have-average-hp&quot;&gt;When do monsters not have average hp?&lt;/a&gt; Reference to Yawning Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Mundane Portals&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108323/open-a-portal-secured-with-arcane-lock-what-options-are-available&quot;&gt;Open a portal secured with Arcane Lock - What options are available?&lt;/a&gt; About mundane portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203815/how-to-handle-prepared-actions-when-you-are-expecting-to-see-an-enemy-but-you-ha&quot;&gt;How to handle prepared actions when you are expecting to see an enemy but you haven&amp;#39;t yet?&lt;/a&gt; Is about initiative ambushing someone coming thorugh a portal; issue might be same if you enter trough a door&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104291/does-a-2-weapon-affect-spell-damage&quot;&gt;Does a +2 weapon affect spell damage?&lt;/a&gt; Reference to the Yawning Portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/65141/a-player-takes-half-a-standard-action-what-am-i-supposed-to-do&quot;&gt;A player takes half a standard action, what am I supposed to do?&lt;/a&gt; About &lt;em&gt;hold portal&lt;/em&gt;, a spell dealing with mundane portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57928/do-incorporeal-creatures-trigger-symbol-spells-normally&quot;&gt;Do incorporeal creatures trigger symbol spells normally?&lt;/a&gt; about normal portals (warded with a symbol spell)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67766/can-you-search-for-hidden-doors-multiple-times-in-a-row&quot;&gt;Can you search for hidden doors multiple times in a row?&lt;/a&gt; Mentions concealed mundane portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201198/can-i-spam-caltrops-by-dropping-a-basket-full-of-them-from-altitude&quot;&gt;Can I spam caltrops by dropping a basket full of them from altitude?&lt;/a&gt; Mundane portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164497/break-dc-too-low&quot;&gt;Break DC too low?&lt;/a&gt; refrence to hold portal spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Ravenlofts powers to block exit&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101455/how-can-i-escape-ravenloft-in-spite-of-the-dark-powers&quot;&gt;How can I escape Ravenloft in spite of the dark powers?&lt;/a&gt; Not about portals but about overcoming Ravenlofts prison aspect&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122795/can-one-be-summoned-away-from-ravenloft&quot;&gt;Can one be Summoned Away from Ravenloft?&lt;/a&gt; Yet another one about how to escape Ravenloft&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/185389/what-happens-if-you-put-a-bag-of-holding-inside-another-bag-of-holding-in-barovi&quot;&gt;What happens if you put a Bag of Holding inside another Bag of Holding in Barovia?&lt;/a&gt; A third one on testing the limits of Ravenloft&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;The nine hells and devils&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/169544/how-would-a-steel-devil-act-on-its-own&quot;&gt;How would a steel devil act on its own?&lt;/a&gt; About devils, only mentions portal in side commment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133303/can-you-plane-shift-to-a-specific-layer-of-the-nine-hells&quot;&gt;Can you Plane Shift to a specific layer of the Nine Hells?&lt;/a&gt; is about plane shift, not portals (those are just mentioned as there are none that go to deeper layers in the hells)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Spell rules text (e.g. &lt;em&gt;gate&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;teleportation circle&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;astral projection&lt;/em&gt;) without focus on portals&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140771/can-a-creature-travel-from-the-destination-of-the-teleportation-circle-spell-bac&quot;&gt;Can a creature travel from the destination of the Teleportation Circle spell back to the source circle?&lt;/a&gt; About Teleportation Circle spells, but question is not about portal but about if the spell is two-way&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/125592/do-these-spells-require-access-to-the-material-components-for-the-spell-even-whe&quot;&gt;Do these spells require access to the material components for the spell even when cast from a Ring of Spell Storing?&lt;/a&gt; Mentions portal in rule text of Teleportation circle, but is really about material component treatment, not the portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/144884/does-duplicating-a-spell-with-wish-count-as-casting-that-spell&quot;&gt;Does duplicating a spell with Wish count as casting that spell?&lt;/a&gt; only mentions portal as part of teleportation circle spell&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97683/is-a-permanent-teleportation-circle-only-a-destination-and-not-a-point-of-depar&quot;&gt;Is a permanent teleportation circle only a destination, and not a point of departure?&lt;/a&gt; Yet another question about if teleportation circle is two-way&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/74618/can-any-creature-be-summoned-with-the-gate-spell&quot;&gt;Can any creature be summoned with the Gate spell?&lt;/a&gt; About what you can summon&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153904/what-other-ways-are-there-to-summon-a-specific-named-devil-besides-planar-ally&quot;&gt;What other ways are there to summon a specific, named devil (besides Planar Ally and Gate)?&lt;/a&gt; Again about gate and what can be summoned&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/108678/does-a-person-under-the-effect-of-astral-projection-count-as-on-a-different-plan&quot;&gt;Does a person under the effect of Astral Projection count as on a different plane for another caster on the same plane as their physical body?&lt;/a&gt; Again, about planes (and the gate spell), not portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145251/does-surprise-arrest-existing-movement&quot;&gt;Does surprise arrest existing movement?&lt;/a&gt; About surprise timing (again, mentioning gate, like the one above)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126195/exactly-what-mechanical-actions-drop-the-layers-of-a-prismatic-wall&quot;&gt;Exactly what mechanical actions drop the layers of a Prismatic Wall?&lt;/a&gt; About prismatic wall (where rules text mentions a spell that can open a portal)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Time dilation&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161760/is-a-spells-duration-tied-to-its-effect-or-the-time-experienced-by-its-caster&quot;&gt;Is a spell&amp;#39;s duration tied to its effect, or the time experienced by its caster?&lt;/a&gt; Not about portals, but about the effect of different flows of time&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/87345/what-planar-traits-prevail-in-extradimensional-spaces&quot;&gt;What planar traits prevail in extradimensional spaces?&lt;/a&gt; About time dilation and planes, not portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138022/how-exactly-does-the-feywild-time-warp-work&quot;&gt;How exactly does the Feywild time warp work?&lt;/a&gt; Not about the portal, but about how differnt speed of time flow works ... there are multiple questions on this, and there is already a time tag and a planes tag, which we might want to add to them (or more specific plane tags, like the feywild here)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Explicitly excludes portals&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76018/is-it-possible-to-permanently-create-transmute-metal-through-magic-without-9th-l&quot;&gt;Is it possible to permanently create/transmute metal through magic without 9th-level spells?&lt;/a&gt; Just states a portal is not applicable as a solution&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124275/how-long-does-it-take-to-travel-between-oerth-and-toril-by-spaceship&quot;&gt;How long does it take to travel between Oerth and Toril by spaceship?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions portals as in not having to wait for one&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41010/does-thaumaturgy-at-evocations-methods-and-speed-inflict-stress-like-evocatio&quot;&gt;Does thaumaturgy at &amp;quot;Evocation&amp;#39;s Methods and Speed&amp;quot; inflict stress like Evocation does?&lt;/a&gt; mentions not using portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/202719/does-this-sack-of-looting-work-as-a-simple-replacement-for-bag-of-holding&quot;&gt;Does this Sack of Looting work as a simple replacement for Bag of Holding?&lt;/a&gt; Evaluation for a non-portal version of bag-of-holding&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/201308/does-this-sack-of-carrying-work-as-simpler-replacement-for-bag-of-holding&quot;&gt;Does this Sack of Carrying work as simpler replacement for Bag of Holding?&lt;/a&gt; Again, question is about item without the portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Faking portals&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115129/can-minor-illusion-silent-image-be-used-to-make-it-look-like-youre-about-to-cas&quot;&gt;Can Minor Illusion/Silent Image be used to make it look like you&amp;#39;re about to cast other spells, to waste enemy Counterspells or Dispels?&lt;/a&gt; is about faking effects, one of them being a portal, not centrally about portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18843/how-do-spell-effects-stack-when-determining-the-dc-to-disbelieve-an-illusion&quot;&gt;How do spell effects stack when determining the DC to disbelieve an illusion?&lt;/a&gt; Another one about in how far illusions can credibly mimic other spell effects, portals only one example&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Side mentions in backstory or exposition&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/126054/need-help-making-a-headquarters-via-equipment-advantage-as-portable-pocket-dimen&quot;&gt;Need help making a Headquarters via Equipment Advantage as portable pocket dimension?&lt;/a&gt; Question is not about the portal, a side mention in an ability&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99927/how-do-ethereal-objects-creatures-work-on-the-outer-planes&quot;&gt;How do Ethereal objects/creatures work on the Outer planes?&lt;/a&gt; About planes, just mentioning portals as a means of travel&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153589/are-there-any-low-level-means-to-exit-the-ethereal-plane-to-a-plane-of-my-choosi&quot;&gt;Are there any low-level means to exit the Ethereal Plane to a plane of my choosing?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions not having found a portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58345/player-refuses-to-show-up-regularly-and-when-he-does-never-wants-to-roleplay&quot;&gt;Player refuses to show up regularly, and when he does, never wants to roleplay&lt;/a&gt; Question is about a problem player, portal is not central to the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139716/can-the-locate-object-spell-be-used-to-determine-if-an-npc-has-a-heart&quot;&gt;Can the Locate Object spell be used to determine if an NPC has a heart?&lt;/a&gt; Portal is only part of the backstory, actual question is about locate object&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195612/how-can-i-introduce-twists-to-a-heist-when-the-dice-always-succeed&quot;&gt;How can I introduce twists to a heist when the dice always succeed?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions a portal in passing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84091/how-do-i-design-a-net-throwing-device-for-my-gnomish-character&quot;&gt;How do I design a net throwing device for my gnomish character?&lt;/a&gt; Portal only mentioned as way BBEG appears&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/18383/how-can-i-do-an-interesting-and-engaging-siege-scenario-in-werewolf-the-forsake&quot;&gt;How can I do an interesting and engaging siege scenario in Werewolf: The Forsaken?&lt;/a&gt; Portal only mentioned in passing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122193/how-do-i-get-my-players-larp-characters-to-not-be-a-bunch-of-murderous-cretins&quot;&gt;How do I get my players&amp;#39; LARP characters to not be a bunch of murderous cretins?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions portals as a tactic in a side comment&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/197197/how-can-we-deal-with-being-frightened&quot;&gt;How can we deal with being frightened?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions using a portal as part of the introductory backdrop&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/120048/how-do-i-make-quests-rewarding-for-my-player&quot;&gt;How do I make quests rewarding for my player?&lt;/a&gt; Portal is only backstory element, not central to the question&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/33541/which-feats-fit-this-concept&quot;&gt;Which feats fit this concept?&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions the word portal as part of backstory&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4&gt;Other&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/96958/how-to-travel-to-skullport-from-waterdeep&quot;&gt;How to travel to Skullport from Waterdeep&lt;/a&gt; Question is not about portal per se, they just happen to be one of the ways to get to Skullport&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/138107/does-the-mordenkainens-magnificent-mansion-spells-mansion-exist-on-a-separate&quot;&gt;Does the Mordenkainen&amp;#39;s Magnificent Mansion spell&amp;#39;s mansion exist on a separate plane of existence?&lt;/a&gt; Is about planes, one where a portal is&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203810/is-erelhei-cinlu-in-faer%c3%bbn&quot;&gt;Is Erelhei-Cinlu in Faer&amp;#251;n?&lt;/a&gt; question about planar location&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/165181/what-demons-are-related-to-the-demon-lord-dagon&quot;&gt;What demons are related to the demon lord Dagon?&lt;/a&gt; About Dagon, just mentions a portal to his plane&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/107991/would-an-antimagic-field-set-off-a-sphere-of-annihilation&quot;&gt;Would an Antimagic Field set off a Sphere of Annihilation?&lt;/a&gt; About antimagic vs sphere, portal just being mentioned in sphere's description&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/94154/can-a-cleric-select-an-alignment-domain-that-is-not-offered-by-his-deity&quot;&gt;Can a cleric select an alignment domain that is not offered by his deity?&lt;/a&gt; Tangentially about the cleric &amp;quot;Portal&amp;quot; domain, not actual portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72409/how-can-an-earth-elemental-get-back-to-the-plane-of-earth&quot;&gt;How can an earth elemental get back to the Plane of Earth&lt;/a&gt; Only mentions a portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/142622/if-someone-influenced-by-the-gray-wastes-leaves-do-they-return-to-normal&quot;&gt;If someone influenced by the Gray Wastes leaves do they return to normal?&lt;/a&gt; Just mentions portal as a happenstance&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/91669/can-variant-familiar-imps-and-quasits-reform-their-bodies&quot;&gt;Can variant familiar imps and quasits reform their bodies?&lt;/a&gt; Asks about gate or other &amp;quot;portal type spells&amp;quot; to summon imps or quasits, but question is about identifiying an individual creature, not the portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/136267/is-there-any-way-to-fake-conceal-your-identity-when-casting-sending&quot;&gt;Is there any way to fake/conceal your identity when casting Sending?&lt;/a&gt; About sending, portals only mentioned in passing&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/174060/if-a-dragon-becomes-a-shadow-dragon-would-it-still-be-subject-to-a-previously-c&quot;&gt;If a dragon becomes a shadow dragon, would it still be subject to a previously cast True Polymorph&amp;#39;s reversal?&lt;/a&gt; Portal only mentioned as a way to travel to Shadowfell, question is about creature identity and polymorph effects&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/51404/what-happens-to-your-physical-belongings-in-twilight-and-shadow-realms&quot;&gt;What happens to your physical belongings in Twilight and Shadow Realms&lt;/a&gt; About the twilight realm, not about the portal to get there&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/178936/can-word-of-recall-teleport-through-planes-of-existence&quot;&gt;Can Word of Recall teleport through planes of existence?&lt;/a&gt; About limitations to teleport&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/139793/how-can-my-party-determine-if-a-particular-creature-has-a-heart&quot;&gt;How can my party determine if a particular creature has a heart?&lt;/a&gt; Similar&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145424/what-would-happen-if-you-cast-etherealness-while-on-a-demiplane&quot;&gt;What would happen if you cast Etherealness while on a demiplane?&lt;/a&gt; only quotes some rules text mentioning portals&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/67230/how-does-a-shadow-monk-teleport-into-magical-darkness-if-they-dont-have-line-of&quot;&gt;How does a shadow monk teleport into magical darkness if they don&amp;#39;t have line of sight to a square inside of it?&lt;/a&gt; Uses portal losely for teleportation exit location, question is about vision&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161370/do-dimensional-shackles-share-any-of-the-properties-of-manacles&quot;&gt;Do Dimensional Shackles share any of the properties of Manacles?&lt;/a&gt; Rule text mentions portals, but question is about manacle aspect&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161366/how-do-dimensional-shackles-work-in-an-antimagic-field&quot;&gt;How do dimensional shackles work in an antimagic field&lt;/a&gt; Again, just the rules text mentioning a portal&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/76868/how-do-i-respond-when-a-player-trivially-kills-my-boss-monster&quot;&gt;How do I respond when a player trivially kills my boss monster?&lt;/a&gt; just mentions portal as an environmental threat&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/164634/how-is-the-balance-on-my-homebrew-sorcerer-origin-wild-magic-alternate&quot;&gt;How is the balance on my homebrew Sorcerer Origin (Wild Magic, alternate)?&lt;/a&gt; Homebrew review, only mentions portal in background flavor text&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55103/how-can-i-manage-my-campaign-digitally-without-using-a-screen-at-the-table&quot;&gt;How can I manage my campaign digitally, without using a screen at the table?&lt;/a&gt; Subclass review that somewhat randomly uses the word in one of the feature flavor texts&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2023-09-26T16:00:01.503" LastActivityDate="2023-09-26T16:00:01.503" CommentCount="8" CommunityOwnedDate="2023-07-14T18:03:37.550" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12460" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-07-19T18:41:27.333" Score="7" ViewCount="118" Body="&lt;p&gt;I suspect something is deeply out of whack with RPG.SE's CSS (also for the RPG.META.SE site). I am not getting this on other SE sites currently (notice the between-text spacing, and the inconsistent font rendering in the second pic):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Xo6Rt.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Xo6Rt.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Janky-ass text formatting on RPG.SE&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kmIJh.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/kmIJh.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;More janky-ass text formatting on RPG.SE&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also: on RPG.META,SE:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/H4lKB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/H4lKB.png&quot; alt=&quot;Janky-ass text formatting on RPG.META.SE also.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But not on other SE sites (SCIFI.SE for comparison, none of the others in the SE network I have checked have this problem):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aBL6r.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/aBL6r.png&quot; alt=&quot;Not-janky-ass text formatting.&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a bug?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update 1:&lt;/strong&gt; I am using Firefox on Ubuntu 22.04.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update 2:&lt;/strong&gt; I get this behavior with all extensions disabled (and without them disabled). I &lt;em&gt;am not&lt;/em&gt; running Firefox in 'private mode'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Update 3:&lt;/strong&gt; I also get the behavior when &lt;code&gt;extensions.webextensions.userScripts.enabled&lt;/code&gt; is explicitly set to &lt;code&gt;false&lt;/code&gt; in about:config.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="17589" LastEditorUserId="17589" LastEditDate="2023-07-20T19:41:46.197" LastActivityDate="2023-07-20T19:41:46.197" Title="Something seems badly wrong with RPG.SE's and RPG.META.SE's CSS" Tags="|bug|css|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12461" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12462" CreationDate="2023-07-25T03:35:31.120" Score="5" ViewCount="137" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/207420/does-this-trigger-violate-gm-principles-can-it-be-fixed&quot;&gt;Does this trigger violate GM principles? Can it be fixed?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question has &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/powered-by-the-apocalypse&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powered-by-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;powered-by-the-apocalypse&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-powered-by-the-apocalypse-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;powered-by-the-apocalypse&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeon-world&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeon-world&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dungeon-world-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dungeon-world&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should the PBTA tag removed since Dungeon World defines what the question is about better?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question also specifically deals with Dungeon World and not the mechanic of general PBTA games&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40999" LastActivityDate="2023-07-25T12:13:35.457" Title="Should this general PBTA tag be removed when there is already Dungeon World tag?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12462" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12461" CreationDate="2023-07-25T12:13:35.457" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;When you don't know where the best answer is, it's okay to go a little wider.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It's a question about homebrew. I can see value in casting a wider net out to related systems in case something out there has taken a similar tack.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(even though in this case IMO that similar tack was right in their own backyard)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="19405" LastActivityDate="2023-07-25T12:13:35.457" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12463" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12457" CreationDate="2023-07-31T06:44:45.463" Score="-4" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Highly specific tags like &amp;quot;Tucker's Kobolds&amp;quot; can help&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is an benefit to having &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; tag: you can find the posts that are &lt;em&gt;concerened about&lt;/em&gt; this tag, vs. those that just may mention the term tangentially. Yes, you can also use &amp;quot;Tucker's&amp;quot; as a search term, which will find everything mentioning those kobolds, but then you have to sift through 47 posts to find those that actually are about them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also no limit to the number of tags that can be created so there is no real cost to it. Tagging liberally in fact is one of the flagship ways to support &lt;a href=&quot;https://yoast.com/focus-on-long-tail-keywords/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;The Long Tail&lt;/a&gt; of niche interests for discoverable content. Limiting tags to often-used ones is really defeating their purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tags even are useful if they are not comprehensive or uniform in use: even if only some questions that care about Tucker's Kobolds are tagged as such, that is already better than if none are, if you try to find this kind of post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Downsides of specific tags&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One limitiation is the that you can only add 5 tags to any one post, where this new tag might compete with other tags. But even for this purpose, I would prefer a more specific tag -- a tag like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-monsters-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; does not really help find much of anything, as there are over 2,000 questions tagged with it, and the alternative of combining several other tags actually eats up more of that space. In the discussion about &lt;em&gt;glyph of warding&lt;/em&gt;, we ended up concluding it should be &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spell&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;spell&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-spell-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;spell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trap&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;trap&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-trap-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;trap&lt;/a&gt; instead, and that is not only inaccurate when you use the glyph as a spell storage device for later use, it also eats up 2 slots instead of one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second downside is the pyschological unease tag curators have with a grown, patchy tag landscape. There is a  desire to have tags be comprehensive and unified -- the desire is that all questions for a given tag should have it, and separate, similar tags should be merged. The reason is that nobody can keep thousands of tags in mind, so if you want to curate tags, this incentivizes the use of fewer, broader tags. Unfortunately, this also makes the resulting tags less useful for discovery.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The last downside I could think of is related to that: if you care about all posts for Tucker's Kobolds having that tag if it exists, and you add it to them, you run into the issue of potentially flooding the &amp;quot;front page&amp;quot; for a few hours until other edits push your tagging out. To be honest, I do not understand what the big problem is with flooding but I think my take on the front page is unorthodox, and there are a few active community users that care about this a lot, and that alone makes it an issue. So, the tag itself is fine, but the behaviour it could cause if combined with tagging projects could be objected to.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-07-31T06:44:45.463" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12464" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12465" CreationDate="2023-07-31T17:38:52.590" Score="6" ViewCount="154" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm currently in the early stages of planning a campaign where my current idea is that the PCs will be travelling over a large continent, and the primary thing keeping them together is a curse that requires them to not go too far apart. I'm not sure how good of an idea this is, so I was thinking of asking about it here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I'm not sure if this would fall under the &amp;quot;opinion-based&amp;quot; question category, which is reason enough for questions to be closed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is this a question that would be on-topic for the RPG Stack Exchange, or should I take it somewhere else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52415" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-08-03T07:18:58.320" LastActivityDate="2023-08-03T07:18:58.320" Title="Are questions about the viability of a campaign or mission's premise acceptable?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12465" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12464" CreationDate="2023-08-03T05:16:23.850" Score="6" Body="&lt;h1&gt;This will likely be opinion based&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If I'm reading it correctly your proposed question is something along the lines of:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is it a good idea for a campaign to have the party cursed such that they cannot go too far apart?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Problems that make this a poor SE question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As stated your question has a number of problems, mostly to do with insufficient detail. If you edit this question to include the full text of your proposed question it will likely address most of these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How far is too far? You will need to define the relative distance allowed between victims of the curse. 30ft is a very different discussion to 10 miles for instance.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How is the curse enforced? What is preventing the PCs from simply ignoring this curse?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Is breaking the curse the main premise of the campaign? Or will there be other plot lines and the curse is merely there to prevent splitting the party or coming up with a better reason for them to want to work together?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To remain as an open question you will likely need to address most of the points above, as well as any that get raised in comments on the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;It's still likely opinion based&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our opinion-based closed reason states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This question is likely to be answered with opinions rather than facts and citations. It should be updated so it will lead to fact-based answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unless you can state the question in a form that will attract factual answers it will likely be closed as opinion based. &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;Is X a good idea?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; will almost always be opinion based. However it is possible to form a question such as &lt;em&gt;&amp;quot;What additional challenges will this curse pose for my party?&amp;quot;&lt;/em&gt; or similar where you focus on the mechanical limitations your curse imposes and how you might prepare for or mitigate those issues. How you tailor this will depend on exactly what kind of answer you are trying to get out of this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Try a forum or chatroom&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately it is possible to get this question into a format that could be asked on SE, however by that point it is likely no longer asking what you really wanted to ask. I gather you just want to bounce your idea of the collective wisdom of the community and get some feedback before going to far down the rabbit hole. That kind of discussion is much better suited to our &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/11/trpg-general-chat&quot;&gt;chat room&lt;/a&gt; or to one of our &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5449/ive-been-told-my-question-is-better-suited-to-a-forum-but-where-should-i-go&quot;&gt;curated list of forums&lt;/a&gt;. Good luck, hope you find the answers you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="48759" LastActivityDate="2023-08-03T05:16:23.850" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12466" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5999" CreationDate="2023-08-03T18:25:41.807" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;Since this question was answered the situation surrounding Fantasy Flight Games has changed.  The game was moved to Asmodee's RPG division, Edge.&#xA;Around this time, FFG/Edge/Asmodee released a series of books under the &amp;quot;Star Wars Roleplaying&amp;quot; brand.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://www.edge-studio.net/categories-games/star-wars-roleplaying/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://www.edge-studio.net/categories-games/star-wars-roleplaying/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These books do not fit into the old categories like Edge of Empire, etc. but are fully compatible with all three previous systems, and serve as a system unifying set of books.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So perhaps the tag, should there be one, might be called Star Wars Roleplaying System?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26408" LastEditorUserId="26408" LastEditDate="2023-08-04T15:44:01.900" LastActivityDate="2023-08-04T15:44:01.900" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12467" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-08-08T12:03:21.423" Score="13" ViewCount="283" Body="&lt;p&gt;As of Monday, the call for a strike has ended, see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://openletter.mousetail.nl/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;adjusted open letter&lt;/a&gt; and several organised groups are resuming operations:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://discord.com/channels/628507458452586497/1113027661170757762/1136675664771166329&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;moderator poll on Discord&lt;/a&gt;, which voted to end the strike.&#xA;See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://discord.com/channels/628507458452586497/1117590339188965396/1136733477383975104&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;community poll on Discord&lt;/a&gt;, which voted to end the strike.&#xA;See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/111347?m=56533428#56533428&quot;&gt;SOBotics poll in Stack Overflow chat&lt;/a&gt;, who voted to end the strike.&#xA;See the &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/message/56533313#56533313&quot;&gt;SOCVR poll&lt;/a&gt;, who voted to end the strike.&#xA;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/391912/526695&quot;&gt;Charcoal team discussed this internally and decided to resume operation&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, individuals decide if the negotiation result is satisfactory enough to stop striking. So while the coordinated call to strike has ended, I want to ask you as individuals:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How do you feel about the moderation-strike negotiation results?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What are things you are happy about concerning negotiations?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Are there still unresolved issues?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2023-08-08T12:46:17.597" LastActivityDate="2023-08-11T13:55:12.303" Title="How do our strike-participating community members feel about the moderation-strike negotiation results?" Tags="|discussion|moderation-strike|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12468" PostTypeId="5" CreationDate="2023-08-08T12:04:46.083" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;For questions regarding the moderation and curation strike.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2023-09-29T08:38:24.050" LastActivityDate="2023-09-29T08:38:24.050" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12469" PostTypeId="4" CreationDate="2023-08-08T12:04:46.083" Score="0" Body="For questions regarding the moderation and curation strike." OwnerUserId="44723" LastEditorUserId="44723" LastEditDate="2023-09-29T08:38:14.873" LastActivityDate="2023-09-29T08:38:14.873" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12470" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12472" CreationDate="2023-08-08T16:58:15.383" Score="18" ViewCount="196" Body="&lt;p&gt;Recently, NautArch edited &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207623/23547&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt; and &amp;quot;Adjusted headers for screenreader readability&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Largely this consisted of changing the one-hashtag heading [#] to two hashtags [##] and then progressively adding one further to each of the sub-headings.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A bit before that, V2Blast &amp;quot;fixed header formatting (for accessibility)&amp;quot; in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207600/23547&quot;&gt;my answer&lt;/a&gt;.  This included removing bolding [** **] for subsection headers and replacing it with hashtags [###].&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I appreciate these edits, but what would be even better would be a style guide explaining what format I should have used to begin with, so that I was not occupying the valued time of site editors.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/editing-help#comment-formatting&quot;&gt;Markdown help page&lt;/a&gt; explains what we &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do, but I think we need a page showing what we &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; do, and if one does not already exist, then perhaps here as a community wiki answer to this question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the course of the auto-review of this question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6498/use-real-headers-instead-of-fake-headers&quot;&gt;Use real headers instead of fake headers&lt;/a&gt; was suggested as a similar question (although I did not see it in my initial searches on &amp;quot;screenreader&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;readability&amp;quot;).  That's &lt;em&gt;one&lt;/em&gt; suggestion, but could we have a compiled list of them, linked to the individual how's and why's?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-08-08T17:10:51.667" LastActivityDate="2023-08-15T14:06:17.313" Title="What are some consensus recommendations for screenreader readability formatting?" Tags="|discussion|accessibility|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12471" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="5141" CreationDate="2023-08-09T02:48:57.927" Score="-11" Body="&lt;p&gt;We should permit opinion questions. They're the only interesting questions, and they're the only questions that matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="36817" LastActivityDate="2023-08-09T02:48:57.927" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12472" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12470" CreationDate="2023-08-09T05:01:10.297" Score="12" Body="&lt;p&gt;First of all, remember you can click on tags to see all the things tagged with them: &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/accessibility&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;accessibility&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-accessibility-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;accessibility&lt;/a&gt; is probably the best extant resource we have on this subject.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Beyond that, here are a few best practices off the top of my head. You’ll note that every one of these has some practical problems, however...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;MathJax is bad for many screen-readers; at least one very popular screen-reader cannot read it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This can vary a lot depending on which screen-reader you’re actually using, though.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Markdown tables are therefore much superior to using &lt;code&gt;\begin{array}&lt;/code&gt;. Markdown tables have pretty nice screen-reader support.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Markdown tables, however, also have a smaller font size. Readers with poor eyesight can have a difficult time reading them. This is effectively “two steps forward, one step back,” which sucks.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Abusing code formatting to create “tables” of preformatted text is really bad, too—screen-readers will just read the words sequentially, and give no indication of the spacing or how they line up with one another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bare URLs are bad, per @Laurel, which is easy to understand with a moment’s consideration: recognizing a URL and skipping over the blue text is easy with your eyes, but listening to the computer say “double-u double-u double-u dot example dot com slash something slash another dash thing dot pee dee eff” is awful (and that’s for a relatively short and simple URL). Always use hyperlinks with some actually-descriptive text in them (“click here” is considered a bad practice even ignoring accessibility issues).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Images (in the context of the bodies of our questions or answers) should basically always have an &lt;code&gt;alt&lt;/code&gt; property, which in the context of Markdown, means&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt;![You need to put some meaningful text in here][1]&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;alt&lt;/code&gt; property is read by screen-readers as a description for the image, and should describe the image in enough detail that someone hearing it will be able to understand what the image includes that is important in the context of the question or answer. There is no limit to the size of &lt;code&gt;alt&lt;/code&gt; properties, and remember a picture is worth a thousand words: you can get lengthy with this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In practice, describing images is hard. More often, &lt;code&gt;alt&lt;/code&gt; properties are just a brief description of &lt;em&gt;what&lt;/em&gt; the image is, not an actual description of the image itself. This is, in many contexts, probably good enough—certainly better than nothing—but it’s not the ideal.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Headings are ... the way Markdown is deployed on SE is not really right for what headings are supposed to be, for accessibility.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the unfamiliar, HTML headings have levels, from 1 which is largest, to 6, which is smallest. In HTML, these are created using tags, e.g. &lt;code&gt;&amp;lt;h2&amp;gt;Heading&amp;lt;/h2&amp;gt;&lt;/code&gt;; in Markdown, they’re created with an equal number of hashtags, as in &lt;code&gt;## Heading&lt;/code&gt;. These headings are extremely important for keyboard navigation (which is used with a screen-reader, but could also be used without one), as the preferred way of navigating is to jump from one heading to the next to find the section you want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The accessibility standards for the web say that each HTML page should have one (1) &lt;code&gt;h1&lt;/code&gt; (i.e. &lt;code&gt;#&lt;/code&gt;), which indicates the subject of the page. SE (appropriately) uses this for the question title, for example. The problem is, it should be the only one; &lt;code&gt;#&lt;/code&gt; shouldn’t (properly) be even allowed for answers. Moreover, every section of the page should have its own header, so every answer should start with an &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt; (i.e. &lt;code&gt;##&lt;/code&gt;), and that should likewise be the only &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt; in the answer. So answers should have a mandatory “title” field or similar, that gets &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt;, and then &lt;code&gt;h3&lt;/code&gt; (i.e. &lt;code&gt;###&lt;/code&gt;) should be the highest heading allowed in the body.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This would you to go to the &lt;code&gt;h1&lt;/code&gt; to get the point of the page, then go “into” that page to read each of the &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt;/&lt;code&gt;##&lt;/code&gt;s (each answer), and then (when you hear a heading you are interested), go “into” that answer and read/hear about whatever it has (including its own subsections as &lt;code&gt;h3&lt;/code&gt;/&lt;code&gt;###&lt;/code&gt; or less). That is how the web accessibility standards say things are supposed to go.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously, that’s not the reality on this site, and it probably never will be. Answers often don’t start with a header (of any size), may not even use a header at all. Many use only &lt;code&gt;h2&lt;/code&gt;s, but use multiple, so there isn’t one big header over the whole answer. Others may use an &lt;code&gt;h1&lt;/code&gt;, or even multiple, the same way. Or &lt;code&gt;h3&lt;/code&gt;s. None of these meet the standards. It’s not at all clear to me which, if any, of these non-standard heading layouts is best. It’s also not clear to me that it’s particularly helpful to try to make specific contributions fit within it, when the prescribed heading-based mode of navigation simply isn’t going to work on the site since that isn’t the layout we have. It seems to me that those that want to use keyboard navigation are going to have to use a different system anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am reaching out to some folks that are interested in accessibility and may know more than I do, to see if they have an opinion on this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2023-08-15T14:06:17.313" LastActivityDate="2023-08-15T14:06:17.313" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12473" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12467" CreationDate="2023-08-10T18:08:36.607" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'm very happy about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The strike not only achieved its main objectives, it uncovered a lot of breakdowns that go back years. We discovered, for example, that staff had been advised to not to converse with moderators over their actions and that moderators would be unresponsive to such conversations, which is the complete opposite of the truth: moderators were not only ready for such conversations, they expected them. This staff advice was a large part of how we got here—and the advice got that way basically through a game of bad telephone during a staff transition period. That's a bridge that had collapsed without anyone noticing, and it's been noticed and is being repaired.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If the strike &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; achieved its main objectives, we'd be looking at another strike being inevitable in only 1-2 years. That the strike not only did that &lt;em&gt;but also&lt;/em&gt; negotiations uncovered some underlying problems that the company is genuinely interested in resolving is an extraordinary outcome.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For a few years Stack exchange seems to have been on a bumpy trajectory with some good points but overall heading downwards. This is the first sign of unambiguous upward momentum I've seen in a long, long time, and the first sign Stack Exchange the company might be capable of doing the work to earn itself an upward trajectory again one day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-08-11T11:32:24.280" LastActivityDate="2023-08-11T11:32:24.280" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12474" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-08-11T06:51:49.123" Score="8" ViewCount="251" Body="&lt;p&gt;During the last several weeks, as the strike was going on, it &lt;em&gt;felt&lt;/em&gt; as if there was significantly less activity on the site, with several active contributors electing to not vote, edit, or Q&amp;amp;A.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The strike was announced on June 5th with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://openletter.mousetail.nl/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;open letter&lt;/a&gt;, and ended with a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/391847/moderation-strike-results-of-negotiations&quot;&gt;result of negotiations&lt;/a&gt; on August 2nd (acknowledging that individuals may still elect to continue engaging less after that).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone know what the quantitative impact of this was? How did the this period of about eight weeks differ from, say the same length period prior to this (to avoid larger, long term trends unduly influencing the comparison), or to the same period the year before (to avoid things like summer vacations impacting the comparison)? For example,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how many fewer questions and answers did we have per week?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how many fewer closures and reopens?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how many fewer comments, edits?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;how many fewer votes?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2023-08-11T21:06:16.170" LastActivityDate="2023-08-24T07:25:14.450" Title="What was the impact of the moderation strike on site activity?" Tags="|discussion|moderation-strike|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12475" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12467" CreationDate="2023-08-11T13:55:12.303" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I'm mildly optimistic and will soon resume my curation activities.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Currently, I'm waiting for the content warning implementation to resume my curation activities — from the negotiation results:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Stack Exchange, Inc. will implement a warning that will show to users pasting in content to the answer box, notifying the user about the prohibition on AI-generated content [...] Initial work on this has begun. Stack Overflow moderators have very recently been given a mockup of a first concept and their feedback has been requested.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My reasons towards optimism are similar to what doppelgreener articulates in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12473/44723&quot;&gt;her post&lt;/a&gt;. In addition, I feel like the infrastructure, while somewhat loose in organisation, proved that we can negotiate and achieve results. I immensely respect the representatives I voted for — Makyen and Mithical, in particular; I also value Cody Gray's work as one of our representatives and the contributions of many who participated and stayed on topic in the Discord.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, I do not trust SE Inc. to handle their future direction towards what I consider the strong suit of SE (see &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.co/labs/?utm_source=twitter&amp;amp;utm_medium=social&amp;amp;utm_campaign=so-events&amp;amp;utm_content=overflow-ai-prashanth&quot;&gt;Prashanth's new pet project — &amp;quot;the future of community &amp;amp; AI&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;), and one thing I'm unhappy about in particular is how &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/391990/526695&quot;&gt;Philippe phrases his apology&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would also like to take this opportunity to extend my most sincere personal apologies to mods who felt that in our previous text we were accusing them of racism. While that was not the intent of the text that I wrote (nor did that sentiment reflect the feelings of anyone involved in drafting the text), I can understand how it could be read that way, and I regret that we allowed it to be published like that. You have my sincere apologies, which I will also deliver in person at the upcoming mod/staff meetup.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By omission, there is no apology for how SE Inc. handled the policy and communication in general. So while he extends a hand towards the moderators regarding the implication of racism, I see no apology for the many missteps that moved me to join the open letter on June 3rd.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE Inc. has to eventually address the leadership's lack of understanding of its product to resolve the issues. However, SE's structure, community, and the value the community creates make it a knowledge hub and a place worthy of contribution. Otherwise, contributing elsewhere may be the best option, but it is unique in how the structure amplifies signal instead of noise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="44723" LastActivityDate="2023-08-11T13:55:12.303" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12476" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12449" CreationDate="2023-08-11T14:29:54.403" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;You would not and could not get an entire game system reviewed here. What you need is a playtest.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Our format is specifically engineered for problems that need solving. It is best at surfacing two kinds of answers: (1) answers providing objective fact, and (2) answers providing expert guidance to solve a problem based on direct experience. Critically, answers need to be able to be better or worse than one another. A question where this isn't the case is a survey or discussion, which aren't suitable for our system. See &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;What kind of answers should I avoid asking?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Playtesting a game system is fundamentally not compatible with our model and requires interactions that our model fails at. First off, a playtest is not a problem that needs a solution; it's a different kind of open exercise entirely. When a playtest concludes, it concludes with survey of playtesters and their experiences. If you want to investigate further, discussion with them about those experiences. The goal of surveying and discussing is to elicit feedback that helps you shape the system and understand whether it's achieving the objectives you have for that system, and all responses are valid and helpful for that process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there's factors like the sheer &lt;em&gt;scale&lt;/em&gt; of a playtest that make it inappropriate for our Q&amp;amp;A system to handle.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These are all good things! It's great that a playtest works that way! It's also fine that the process doesn't fit here; we're just razor-tuned to perform very well within a very specific scope and a playtest is not within that scope. Our system doesn't try to be the be-all end-all; we try to do our part within a larger ecosystem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you should do is organise your own playtest with independent groups, and come to us &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; an RPG design discussion space when you have specific problems you need assistance resolving, e.g.: what's the process for a successful round of playtesting, or you have done your round of playtesting and found a specific design problem you're not sure how to resolve.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2023-08-11T14:29:54.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12477" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-08-14T02:37:40.353" Score="17" ViewCount="613" Body="&lt;p&gt;So, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/207731/i-need-to-moon-the-party-a-lot&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; is gaining some attention due to its content - specifically about the act of &amp;quot;mooning&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Mooning is the act of displaying one's bare buttocks by removing clothing, e.g., by lowering the backside of one's trousers and underpants [...] mooning can be done for shock value, for fun, or as a joke.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, there is already a bit of back and forth about the validity/appropriateness of the question on SE. Some of the starting comments of the conversation:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Optimizing sexual assault is not appropriate. I’ve flagged this “rude or abusive”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;How is this sexual assault? Mooning people has a long history of being insulting for non-sexual reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It seems the situation is very location dependent, sometimes even within one country. For example in Maryland it's considered protected speechand acceptable even in the prescence of minors, in California it could be a sex offense (or not) depending on intent, and in Texas it is indecent exposure (a sex offense).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I can see how both are valid, based on personal views or opinions, and in some places, based on the law that this is inappropriate, however in other places and opinions (mine included) while incredibly rude, can still be a bit of fun, particularly in an enclosed environment among friends.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But, in saying that, we do try and maintain a level of etiquette and behaviour, so this would probably be worthwhile clarifying on.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="12193" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-08-25T16:10:40.057" LastActivityDate="2023-09-05T20:31:46.057" Title="Asking about &quot;mooning&quot;" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|moderation|etiquette|appropriateness|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12478" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12477" CreationDate="2023-08-14T17:16:01.213" Score="26" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Whether it belongs on Stack Exchange is a normative question rather than a legal one, but my personal opinion is that the linked question is acceptable.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Question includes some discussion of the law, at least by analogy. But Stack Exchange is completely allowed to take a narrower view of what is appropriate or even what is permitted than the law necessarily does. At its heart, this is a normative question for the community. Also, this is the type of normative question where reasonable minds can disagree.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With that said, my opinion is that this question is perfectly acceptable. We are talking about mooning someone in a way that is childish, but kind of funny in a childish way. My discussion of the law below gets far more graphic (by necessity) than the original post that spawned this question ever did.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, this site talks about in-game &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/122579/2902&quot;&gt;sexual assault&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/37699/2902&quot;&gt;all the time&lt;/a&gt;. Now of course, those discussions tend to center either on the best ways to avoid it, the best ways to handle it maturely when it fits in a mature story, or how to recover when something that should never have happened did happen. I hope to never see a question about how to actually optimize in-game sexual assault on this site. But, this is optimizing an in-game childish prank, not in-game sexual assault as that term is usually defined.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think the linked question is appropriate for this site, but I acknowledge that reasonable minds could differ. Also, to the extent we do want to use the law as an analogy, this would not constitute sexual assault in any jurisdiction I am familiar with. It might constitute indecent exposure, but it would not rise even to that level in the jurisdictions I am familiar with.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This is not sexual assault as it is defined in most USA jurisdictions.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a prelude to the legal discussion, I am a lawyer. But I am only licensed in Nevada, and I primarily practice civil appeals and real estate law. Nothing in this post, or anything I post on Stack Exchange should be considered legal advice.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am not certain this should really be addressed as a legal matter, but this question directly invokes the law at least as an analogy. While I have not done a complete survey of the entire United States much less the entire world, in every jurisdiction I am familiar with, mooning someone could not be considered sexual assault. In many jurisdictions, including Nevada the legal phrase &amp;quot;sexual assault&amp;quot; is synonymous or nearly synonymous with rape.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In Nevada for instance, the definition is located in NRS &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-200.html#NRS200Sec366&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;200.366&lt;/a&gt;. That is a rather long statute, but the core of it is:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;1.  A person is guilty of sexual assault if the person:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(a) Subjects another person to sexual penetration, or forces another person &amp;gt; to make a sexual penetration on themselves or&#xA;another, or on a beast, against the will of the victim or under&#xA;conditions in which the perpetrator knows or should know that the&#xA;victim is mentally or physically incapable of resisting or&#xA;understanding the nature of the perpetrator’s conduct; or&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(b) Commits a sexual penetration upon a child under the age of 14 years or causes a child under the age of 14 years to make a sexual&#xA;penetration on themselves or another, or on a beast.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, Nevada does not have a separate law by the title of rape and essentially uses sexual assault to address what many other states would call rape. California does have a separate offense of rape and instead has sexual battery as a lesser crime that involves either touching someone's &amp;quot;intimate parts&amp;quot; or forcing the other person to touch your intimate parts against their will. California's statute is even longer and hard to easily take a core quote from, but it is located at &lt;a href=&quot;https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=243.4.&amp;amp;lawCode=PEN&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;CPC 243.4.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;This probably isn't indecent exposure in most parts of the United States&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The definition of indecent exposure is highly variable throughout the United States and even more variable when you consider the world. In Nevada, at least as the statute is interpreted by the Nevada Supreme Court, indecent exposure requires exposure of the genitals or actual anus. &lt;em&gt;State v. Castaneda&lt;/em&gt;, 126 Nev. 478 (2010). Exposure of the buttocks alone is not enough for indecent exposure. &lt;em&gt;Id.&lt;/em&gt; at 489. California's interpretation of its indecent exposure laws similarly requires exposure of the genitals. &lt;em&gt;People v. Massicot&lt;/em&gt;, 97 Cal. App. 4th 920, 924, 118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 705, 707-08 (2002).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, exposure which does not by itself constitute &amp;quot;indecent exposure&amp;quot; can still be breach of peace or disturbing the peace, but in most places that requires malice. Also, I think this is a good time to emphasize that none of this is legal advice. And as a real side note, while I have not done a complete analysis, I think the First Amendment would likely prevent application of an indecent exposure law &lt;strong&gt;as long as&lt;/strong&gt; the exposure had a genuine expressive component and did not rise to the level of also breaching the peace. In other words, mooning someone to show contempt would probably have First Amendment protections in the U.S. under most circumstances even if some indecent exposure law would theoretically forbid it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2902" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-09-05T20:31:46.057" LastActivityDate="2023-09-05T20:31:46.057" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12479" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12477" CreationDate="2023-08-14T17:34:43.807" Score="20" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I think this is fine&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As stated in the original question's comments and cited in this meta question, we have previously permitted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161208/whats-the-greatest-number-of-hands-i-can-have-to-annoy-my-mother-in-law-with&quot;&gt;questions&lt;/a&gt; which involve rude gestures the likes of which would only fly in a PG-13 movie. And along those lines, I do note that the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/251323/whats-the-minimum-age-to-join-stack-overflow&quot;&gt;Stack Exchange's Terms of Service require a minimum age of 13 in order to sign up&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;With regards to whether this constitutes sexual assault, as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12478/31402&quot;&gt;Timothy's answer&lt;/a&gt; explains that is a legal question and the answer to it is 'it depends' (because it always depends).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, I think attempting to bar this question runs afoul of trying to enforce a conservative American mindset on accepted standards of decency, which I don't think is appropriate to do. Especially when we're talking about a relatively common dumb prank that I've absolutely witnessed growing up without perceiving it as something more than that. But I would also defer to the question itself which states there's no intent to take away the the freewill of any of the participants, rather to just have them perform a dumb prank. Certainly not anymore dumb than trying to get a bunch of people together to flip the bird at one person.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There were also some comments regarding whether this question should have some sort of trigger warning and I don't think that's anymore warranted than other things on this site which could be potential triggers for people. Bear in mind, we play games where regularly the players are murder hobos, where players will manipulate others for their own gain, steal and rob others, etc. I know that there is certain content which I'm not comfortable with and simply choose to ignore it, nothing about SE's system forces information that I don't want into my face.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="31402" LastActivityDate="2023-08-14T17:34:43.807" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12480" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12474" CreationDate="2023-08-24T07:25:14.450" Score="1" Body="&lt;p&gt;I'll add to this over time if I have time to run more queries, thank you @starball for the link to the page of SEDE queries, extremely helpful.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Topic&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Strike Period&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Year ago Period&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;Prior Period&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;% of Year Ago&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th&gt;% of Prior&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Questions&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;276&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;382&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;385&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;72%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;72%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Answers&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;592&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;908&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;871&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;65%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;68%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;Tag Wiki &amp;amp; Excerpt&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;44&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;11%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td&gt;83%&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The Tag Wiki Activity seems to have been unusually high a year ago.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-08-24T07:25:14.450" CommentCount="5" CommunityOwnedDate="2023-08-24T07:25:14.450" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12481" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-08-30T21:11:34.380" Score="2" ViewCount="214" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Request&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please enable syntax highlighting on &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Justification&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/314554/419891&quot;&gt;this answer&lt;/a&gt;, users can present feature requests to add syntax highlighting to StackExchange properties. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;rpg.stackexchange.com&lt;/a&gt; is one such property that currently does not support syntax highlighting. Anecdotally, code snippets appear in a minority of questions and responses, but when they do, they can be quite valuable (e.g., for simulations or in support of various theory). Syntax highlighting can make such snippets more accessible, even to those not intimately familiar with the languages.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;UPDATE: Below is a sample from posts&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;excluding &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anydice&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;anydice&lt;/code&gt; questions and answers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;where syntax highlighting would be helpful, but this is far from exhaustive. Note that in almost every answer (and many questions) in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anydice&quot;&gt;&lt;code&gt;anydice&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/a&gt; would also benefit from almost any curly brace language syntax highlighter (e.g., c).&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/28608/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/28608/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/30003/71245&quot;&gt;Untyped strength bonus in Herolab&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46296/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46296/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46314/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/46314/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65440/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/65440/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63160/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63160/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/96355/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/96355/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63412/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/63412/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/78712/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/78712/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/80288/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/80288/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/90820/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/90820/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/100426/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/100426/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/181910/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/181910/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/124993/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/124993/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/125650/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/125650/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/138507/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/138507/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166663/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/166663/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/183625/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/183625/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179895/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179895/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179045/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179045/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179047/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/179047/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/198632/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/198632/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/200357/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/200357/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/201379/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/201379/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/202075/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/202075/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/202128/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/202128/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/204052/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/204052/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/204069/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/204069/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205011/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205011/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205026/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205026/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205009/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205009/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205080/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205080/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205102/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205102/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205988/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/205988/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207193/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207193/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207979/71245&quot;&gt;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/207979/71245&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="71245" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-09-05T16:37:23.437" LastActivityDate="2023-10-19T20:01:06.350" Title="Enable syntax highlighting on RPG.SE" Tags="|feature-request|syntax-highlighting|code-formatting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12482" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12481" CreationDate="2023-09-02T21:45:33.717" Score="2" Body="&lt;h3&gt;The juice isn’t worth the squeeze &lt;em&gt;if&lt;/em&gt; this causes disruption for anyone.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Posts containing code supported by SE’s syntax highlighting make up a very small fraction of our posts and page views. This shouldn’t be surprising: coding isn’t what this site is about. Now, your contributions here are valuable - you have consistently provided innovative solutions to probability questions on this site with the suite of tools you have developed. But the questions you answer with python solutions are a very tiny fraction of this site’s scope. Because of this, if there is any chance at all that turning this on for our site causes disruption for anyone, we shouldn’t do it. The small net positive in readability to a niche corner of our site isn’t worth disrupting everything else for even a single reader.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-10-19T20:01:06.350" LastActivityDate="2023-10-19T20:01:06.350" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12483" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12484" CreationDate="2023-09-09T21:22:35.710" Score="3" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've noticed that over the past 2-3 days, I've earned the Yearling badge (earn 200 rep in a one-year period) at least 4-5 times, and just for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/208118/686&quot;&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; post. While I appreciate your appreciation ;-), I can't imagine that's working as intended.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Am I missing something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="686" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-09-23T23:08:50.473" LastActivityDate="2023-09-23T23:08:50.473" Title="Is the Yearling badge working correctly?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|badges|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12484" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12483" CreationDate="2023-09-09T22:51:38.373" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;All is good. You get one per year, as long as you have 200 times the number of years reputation. Therefore, suddenly happening upon a lot of rep can trigger multiple to be awarded around the same time. To repost the link you found: &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/43240/323179&quot;&gt;Details on how the Yearling badge works&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2023-09-09T22:51:38.373" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12485" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-09-16T19:56:00.177" Score="3" ViewCount="160" Body="&lt;p&gt;We have had several questions from people that play Baldur's Gate 3, and ask about how something that happens in the game works within the 5e tabletop rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208152/75095&quot;&gt;Can a warlock be transformed into a devil for breaking their pact?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/208237/animate-dead-in-bg3-has-me-wondering&quot;&gt;Animate Dead in BG3 has me wondering&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The second question is a good example that apparently the rules in the game work not exactly like the 5e rules (I haven't played the game yet, but based on the question, you can dispel zombies there).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should we allow these questions, or should we close them and send them to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://gaming.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;ARQADE stack&lt;/a&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Related:&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9776/are-all-questions-that-are-even-tangentially-related-to-computer-based-rpgs-or-c&quot;&gt;Are all questions that are even tangentially related to Computer-Based RPGs or computer games off topic for this stack?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-09-21T19:57:28.340" LastActivityDate="2023-09-21T19:57:28.340" Title="How should we deal with questions about 5e rules from people playing Baldur's Gate 3?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|dnd-5e|video-games|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12486" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12485" CreationDate="2023-09-16T20:04:37.067" Score="19" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Is the question &lt;em&gt;about&lt;/em&gt; BG3 or &lt;em&gt;inspired by&lt;/em&gt; BG3?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about BG3's mechanics or (game-specific) lore belong on Arqade: they're not about a paper &amp;amp; pencil RPG, they're about a video game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Questions about D&amp;amp;D 5e's rules or setting belong on RPG.SE: they're about a paper &amp;amp; pencil RPG, even if they were inspired by a video game.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2023-09-19T03:35:00.483" LastActivityDate="2023-09-19T03:35:00.483" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12487" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12488" CreationDate="2023-09-25T23:51:20.710" Score="1" ViewCount="70" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my question &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/208337/is-this-revision-of-the-level-2-transmutation-wizard-feature-balanced-version&quot;&gt;Is this revision of the level 2 Transmutation Wizard feature balanced? [Version 2]&lt;/a&gt;, I intended for &amp;quot;stone&amp;quot; to exclude glass, but I now realize that not everyone reading that has the same interpretation, especially as someone has already given an answer based on glass being included in stone. Would it be appropriate to edit &amp;quot;but not a gemstone&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;but not glass or a gemstone&amp;quot;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="83823" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-09-27T15:51:18.307" LastActivityDate="2023-09-27T15:51:18.307" Title="For homebrew review, is it appropriate to add features of the homebrew that were meant to be a part of it but weren't written down to the question?" Tags="|discussion|editing|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12488" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12487" CreationDate="2023-09-26T01:08:30.433" Score="6" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Don't alter the question in a way that invalidates answers&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you alter your question, you have to do it in a way that respects the answerer's efforts. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3001/what-do-we-do-with-answers-made-obsolete-by-a-question-change&quot;&gt;See This Meta.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A correction that clarifies something is generally ok, but a correction that alters the evaluation tremendously - such as removing a feature or lessening its latitude after you had been made aware of it - would violate the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/how-can-i-ask-a-good-homebrew-review-question&quot;&gt;homebrew review guidelines, Heading 2: Iterate in follow-up questions, not by editing the same question.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Remember the fix for the next iteration&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Maybe cutting out glass is not the only fix you want to do for Revision 3.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-09-26T01:08:30.433" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12489" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12491" CreationDate="2023-09-27T11:02:35.183" Score="2" ViewCount="139" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/84660/is-a-gm-hiding-rolls-standard&quot;&gt;This question on if a DM can hide their rolls&lt;/a&gt; is a very old question that was closed as opinion-based due to the answers that were coming in.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question itself seems to just be asking if hiding rolls is &amp;quot;standard&amp;quot;. However,&#xA;&amp;quot;standard&amp;quot; is pretty subjective and OP has asked about multiple systems in the body of their question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It very much seems like this question was closed for a few different reasons and now has been reopened with a potential absentee querent unable to confirm or make changes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Should this question remain open?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastEditorUserId="23024" LastEditDate="2023-09-27T11:18:55.547" LastActivityDate="2023-09-28T16:28:53.293" Title="Should this question on whether DM's hiding rolls is standard remain open?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|vote-to-close|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12490" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12489" CreationDate="2023-09-27T11:42:24.777" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;It should be closed&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Multiple systems&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent is currently asking if hiding GM rolls is standard practice in both 3.5e and 5e. These are two different systems with two different rulesets. The inclusion of both systems makes this too broad in my opinion. Answers need to be focused on one system.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Opinion-based question&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The question is also currently opinion-based asking about if it's standard practice. If OP was interested in knowing if there was a rule for this, this might be able to be reopened, but as it stands, that isn't what they are asking for and unless they become active again we don't know what their intent was.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The answers that came in were also heavily opinion-based, which seems to have been a partial cause for initial closure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Between the above two,it very much seems this question should be closed again.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23024" LastActivityDate="2023-09-27T11:42:24.777" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12491" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12489" CreationDate="2023-09-27T12:23:06.897" Score="8" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Remove the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dungeons-and-dragons-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; tags and leave it open.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Reviewing the existing answers, &lt;em&gt;none of them actually address the question from the perspective of D&amp;amp;D 5e&lt;/em&gt;. So the simple solution to the &amp;quot;multiple systems&amp;quot; problem is to just remove &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dungeons-and-dragons-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt;. This would not invalidate any of the answers. Further, we can direct OP to this question for how it is handled in 5e: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/102063/what-rolls-should-players-get-to-see&quot;&gt;What rolls should players get to see?&lt;/a&gt;. If we do this, &lt;em&gt;answers to everything they asked for are still accessible to them, but we have a properly scoped question&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for the concern about the question being opinion based, it anticipates the issue by phrasing the question accordingly (emphasis mine):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Obviously this is largely opinion-based, and I don't know if you treat that like Stack Overflow does, so I'll leave an objective question here: is hiding DM dice rolls from the players a standard practice &lt;strong&gt;according to game rules&lt;/strong&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Whether or not the rules address this problem is not opinion based.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Some of the answers do have quality concerns.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Several very poor answers were given for this question, which probably contributed to its closure as opinion based. These answers probably need some attention, warranting either deletion for providing a terse opinion statement with no helpful discussion, or a post notice where insufficient support is provided for whatever potentially helpful claim is offered.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-09-28T16:28:53.293" LastActivityDate="2023-09-28T16:28:53.293" CommentCount="6" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12492" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-09-29T11:19:35.963" Score="2" ViewCount="162" Body="&lt;p&gt;In the past days there was a series of questions for a homebrew version of a DnD-5e subclass: see the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208289/63061&quot;&gt;first&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208337/63061&quot;&gt;second&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208399/63061&quot;&gt;third&lt;/a&gt; iteration of the process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the last one a surprisingly (to me, at least) high upvoted&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/208411/63061&quot;&gt;answer&lt;/a&gt; stated that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While you've gotten some great feedback throughout this process, we were really the wrong group to ask. The person that you should be developing this homebrew with is your DM - not us. We don't know what your DM will accept and not accept, and not just because we're looking at big picture things, but also because every table is different.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This seems quite applicable to &lt;em&gt;every&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; homebrew question, both from DMs and from players: given the consensus received by this answer, I believe that this puts in discussion the fact that this stack should accept or not this kind of question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; 8 votes, at the time of writing this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; And maybe other game system are involved.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="63061" LastEditDate="2023-09-29T12:31:46.550" LastActivityDate="2023-09-30T18:48:22.727" Title="Should we still accept homebrew questions?" Tags="|discussion|on-topic|homebrew|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12493" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12492" CreationDate="2023-09-29T13:13:43.567" Score="18" Body="&lt;h3&gt;Homebrew questions in general, and that question in particular, are probably fine.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are a lot of reasons why people might create homebrew content. Some people simply enjoy the intellectual process of creating homebrew (and often then release it, either via free or paid means, to the public). Some people are DMs and make homebrew to help a player play exactly the kind of character they want. And some people, as in the question you referenced, are themselves players trying to make exactly the class they want.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally, it's only that final group that is likely to run into problems. People who are DMing or just want to create homebrew rather than use it themselves don't need anybody's permission to do what they want with their homebrew. As the answer you mentioned pointed out, just because we here at the Stack think a piece of homebrew is properly balanced and suitable for use doesn't mean that the player's DM will agree, potentially invalidating their reason &amp;amp; effort for making the homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even in these situations, however, the site's assistance is not automatically useless to the asker. Giving the player the ability to tell them DM &amp;quot;I worked with a group of people online to balance the homebrew, you can find our discussions [here]&amp;quot; may well influence the DM's decision about whether to allow the homebrew.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Further, there is a somewhat more philosophical aspect to this: The Stack's purpose is not to investigate &amp;amp; judge an asker's reasons for asking, it's to answer what was asked. Sometimes we need to tease out why someone asked so that we can give them a better answer (especially in the case of XY problems), but &amp;quot;is this homebrew balanced&amp;quot; doesn't really fall into that category. When we notice that an asker is creating homebrew they want to use as a player, there's no harm (and probably even some benefit) in helping them understand that no matter how much we help them it's ultimately the DM's decision, but we can still help them evaluate and improve their homebrew regardless of whether their DM approves or whether they ever even actually present it to their DM for consideration.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, it's worth noting that the Stack's goal is not just to help the asker, but also future readers. Just because an asker doesn't manage to get the homebrew we helped them refine approved by their DM doesn't mean that the homebrew itself, or the issues we identified and the solutions we found, won't be useful to someone else in the future. Our duty is just as much to the long tail as it is to the asker.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="3548" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2023-09-30T18:48:22.727" LastActivityDate="2023-09-30T18:48:22.727" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12494" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12495" CreationDate="2023-10-10T07:00:51.260" Score="5" ViewCount="134" Body="&lt;p&gt;There are a number of tags that describe specific published books, mostly adventure modules for D&amp;amp;D 5e, for example there is one for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curse-of-strahd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse-of-strahd&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse-of-strahd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-curse-of-strahd-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;curse-of-strahd&lt;/a&gt;, there is one for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tomb-of-annihilation&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tomb-of-annihilation&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tomb-of-annihilation&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-tomb-of-annihilation-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;tomb-of-annihilation&lt;/a&gt;, and one for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tales-from-the-yawning-portal&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-tales-from-the-yawning-portal-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;tales-from-the-yawning-portal&lt;/a&gt; (in addition to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/published-adventures&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;published-adventures&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-published-adventures-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;published-adventures&lt;/a&gt; one).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In many cases (like in all the cited ones here), these books represent re-imaginations or compilations of much older adventures (here, of &amp;quot;Ravenloft&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;Tomb of Horrors and &amp;quot;Dwellers of the Forbidden City&amp;quot;, or of a number of explicitly referenced modules from first or second edition, like the venerable &amp;quot;Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Against the Giants&amp;quot;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When are these module name tags to be used?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Some questions are about specific 5e monster rules that appear only in those modules, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/137371/does-a-duergar-spys-enlarge-action-double-its-damage-dice-from-its-sneak-attack&quot;&gt;Does a Duergar Spy&amp;#39;s Enlarge action double its damage dice from its Sneak Attack trait?&lt;/a&gt;, others are explicitly about that published book, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/124473/how-deadly-are-the-adventures-in-tales-from-the-yawning-portal&quot;&gt;How &amp;quot;deadly&amp;quot; are the adventures in Tales from the Yawning Portal?&lt;/a&gt;. In these cases it seems pretty clear cut to be book-specific and warrant the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Others however, like this one &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/134589/what-are-all-the-hints-in-acereraks-message&quot;&gt;What are all the hints in Acererak&amp;#39;s message?&lt;/a&gt; ask about features of the module (here a riddle), that are not specific to that 5e book, in a way that &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dungeons-and-dragons&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dungeons-and-dragons&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dungeons-and-dragons-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dungeons-and-dragons&lt;/a&gt; differs from &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-5e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-5e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-5e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-5e&lt;/a&gt;: they are about that adventure in general, not about that specific book in which it appears. Still this question is tagged with the 5e book.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the origial modules there often were idisyncratic rules interactions because back when then, the game rules did not cover these aspects in detail, and so writers made up ad-hoc solutions to things like difficult terrain. And in some cases, these aspects survive even in the current version of these modules, which may cause some more specific rules questions, like &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116181/does-difficult-terrain-stack&quot;&gt;Does difficult terrain stack?&lt;/a&gt; where an alternate resulution instead of standard difficult terrain is used, in this case the question is not tagged.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then there are questions are about some rule interaction that occurs in these modules, but it may be just a general rules question, triggered by running into it in the module. For example &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131239/when-is-passive-investigation-used&quot;&gt;When is Passive Investigation used?&lt;/a&gt; askes about passive investigation, and only mentions the TotYP module in the introduction.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been rather liberal in adding the tag if a question mentions the book represented by the tag and there is unused tag space, even if the question is not explicitly &lt;em&gt;about the book&lt;/em&gt;, because it seems to me that there actually would be exceedingly few questions that would hold up to scrutiny if one were to apply a strict measure and only tag questions that are &lt;em&gt;about that specific adventure book&lt;/em&gt; given the history of many of these  adventures, but maybe that is not the right approach. What would be good criteria on where to draw the line, what to tag and what to not tag?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-10-10T11:47:09.383" Title="When should we use sourcebook tags?" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12495" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12494" CreationDate="2023-10-10T10:49:54.783" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;There's not really a meta about it, but historically we started tagging &lt;em&gt;adventure&lt;/em&gt; source books in particular, and the reasons we started tagging individual adventures included at the very least:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It draws the attention of people who are familiar with that adventure to answer it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It lets people currently running that adventure find answers about bits they are stuck with.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;It lets people who don't want spoilers about that adventure hide the tag and thus reduce their chance of spoilers. (Tag descriptions for e.g. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/curse-of-strahd&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse-of-strahd&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;curse-of-strahd&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-curse-of-strahd-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;curse-of-strahd&lt;/a&gt; even talk about reducing spoilers.)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's no general imperative I'm personally aware of to tag source books beside adventures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you're asking about a D&amp;amp;D 4e monster that isn't specifically from an adventure, you just tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dnd-4e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dnd-4e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dnd-4e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dnd-4e&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/monsters&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;monsters&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-monsters-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;monsters&lt;/a&gt; and mention which monster manual or source book the monster's from. If you're asking about a mechanic, you just ask about the mechanic and reference what you read where. Tagging the book doesn't do much to help the question in cases like that because you're not looking for experts on the book, you're looking for experts on monsters or on the mechanic, and we don't tend to be concerned about spoilers for general game material.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-10-10T11:47:09.383" LastActivityDate="2023-10-10T11:47:09.383" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12496" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-10-20T14:18:16.753" Score="14" ViewCount="102" Body="&lt;p&gt;So Stack Exchange got new colors, and there’s a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/393939/190917&quot;&gt;Meta.SE&lt;/a&gt; Q&amp;amp;A about it, but this issue seems to be specific to our site: questions with watched tags get a color highlight, but the contrast between it and regular questions is quite slight, so those questions don’t actually stand out the way they should:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zV0OW.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zV0OW.png&quot; alt=&quot;Image from RPG.SE main page showing several questions, two with watched tags and three without, showing the limited contrast between the two&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This hadn’t been mentioned on the Meta.SE Q&amp;amp;A because most sites don’t have this problem: their contrast is greater:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ma7MB.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ma7MB.png&quot; alt=&quot;Image from Meta.SE main page showing three questions, one with a watched tag, to show the greater contrast&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The cause here is pretty clear, too: all sites use &lt;code&gt;--yellow-100&lt;/code&gt; for this highlight color, but our site uses a different background color for regular questions that is much more yellow-ish (&lt;code&gt;#FFFDF7&lt;/code&gt;) and thus much closer to &lt;code&gt;--yellow-100&lt;/code&gt; than the white (&lt;code&gt;#FFFFFF&lt;/code&gt;) used on most sites. We need either a custom &lt;code&gt;--yellow-100&lt;/code&gt; (and presumably customizations to the other &lt;code&gt;--yellow-###&lt;/code&gt; colors to correspond appropriately), or we need a custom rule that doesn’t use &lt;code&gt;--yellow-100&lt;/code&gt; for these questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/394027/190917&quot;&gt;Cross-posted this&lt;/a&gt; to the new color Q&amp;amp;A on Meta.SE for visibility.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-10-20T15:27:00.763" LastActivityDate="2023-10-20T15:27:00.763" Title="Watched questions contrast is really poor on our site" Tags="|bug|design|user-interface|site-design|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12499" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-10-28T10:22:44.880" Score="5" ViewCount="537" Body="&lt;p&gt;When writing an answer or a question on this stack, I try to be the clearest possible for exposing my problem or for proposing a solution, but I recognize two main issues&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;I use the same sentence structures again and again&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;My tendency is to employ the same words, again and again.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I believe that this comes from two aspects: I am not a native English speaker and my styles comes mainly from writing Math scientific paper, where the language is not very rich.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I thought then to ask for the help of Large Language Models (LMMs) such as CHATgpt, by asking something as &amp;quot; Improve the English of &amp;lt; part of question/answer &amp;gt;. Of course, one should check if the LLM produced a coherent writing and did not make up anything. For example, the part of one answer of mine reads;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The options presented in Table &amp;quot;Uthgardt Totems&amp;quot; are available at 3rd level, and such table shows the equivalent of these options to the animals of the original PHB's subclass and to the new option Tiger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The new options add new totem spirits: you have to follow the same subclass rules depicted in the PHB for the choices you are taking during leveling up. This means that you can choose a Tree Ghost totem at 3rd level, and subsequently the Eagle spirit at 6th level, since the PHB rules states, for the Aspect of the Beast feature, that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;you can choose the same animal you selected at 3rd level or a different one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;and a possible outcome of chatgpt is&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The choices outlined in the &amp;quot;Uthgardt Totems&amp;quot; table become accessible at the 3rd level. This table not only illustrates their counterparts among the animals featured in the original Player's Handbook (PHB) subclass but also introduces the new option, the Tiger.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These new options introduce additional totem spirits, and it's essential to adhere to the same subclass rules detailed in the PHB when making your selections during character advancement. This means that you can initially opt for the Tree Ghost totem at 3rd level and subsequently choose the Eagle spirit at 6th level, in accordance with the PHB guidelines for the Aspect of the Beast feature, which says that&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;you can choose the same animal you selected at 3rd level or a different one.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The meaning is the same, but the English is much better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Can we use such LLMs for improving the English of our posts? Or should we ban it for this purpose too?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; I am not asking if we should allow the employment of LLMs for &lt;em&gt;generating&lt;/em&gt; questions and answers (we already have a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12383/63061&quot;&gt;meta&lt;/a&gt; for that), but just for improving the language of a human written answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;em&gt;Ça va sans dire&lt;/em&gt;, the third issue regards typos and grammar errors...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="63061" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2024-03-26T12:38:57.887" LastActivityDate="2024-03-26T12:38:57.887" Title="Is it acceptable to use LLMs for improving the English of answers and questions?" Tags="|discussion|policy|generative-ai|" AnswerCount="5" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12500" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12499" CreationDate="2023-10-28T12:21:45.150" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;To sidestep your question for a moment, I have long believed, longer than the existence of LLMs, that you have provided some of the most consistently high quality answers on this site. I have never read one of your answers and thought “this needs some composition help”. Further, I’m pretty sure you are the top recipient of my bounties, both in reputation and number of bounties. I have an abundance of confidence that you don’t need LLM help, to the point that I’d be worried they might actually make your answers worse, at least in my opinion. Now, on to the actual question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;LLMs present a plagiarism problem for us.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I won’t reinvent the wheel here. &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12386/62294&quot;&gt;Xirema summarizes perfectly&lt;/a&gt; my trouble with LLMs, reproduced below in its entirety.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm going to reiterate &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/384468/404162&quot;&gt;the points I made when this question was proposed at the network-wide level&lt;/a&gt; in a more succinct form; you can read my answer in the link if you want the long form.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Yes, ChatGPT (and other AI-generative tools) need to be banned on RPG.SE&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And it's for the simple reason that these tools, at least as they exist today, are incapable of producing output that does not commit plagiarism.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There's a few criteria I would line out that I think are necessary prerequisites before they should be approved for use on this site (or any site in the Stack Exchange network), and they are&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the tool clearly cites every single work that was used as part of its training and ingested into its dataset&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That every single work that was used provided explicit, specific, opt-in permission by its original author to be used as part of that specific tool and its training process&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the evidence of permission for each work that was used is easily accessible&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;That the tool is able to cite, in its resulting output, the works sourced that were used to generate its output.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To my knowledge, none of ChatGPT nor any other publicly available AI-generation tool is capable today of satisfying all these criterion (and it's my understanding that most-if-not-all of these tools are technologically incapable of doing so), and they should not be permitted until/unless they are developed to be able to satisfy these criterion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-10-28T12:21:45.150" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12501" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12499" CreationDate="2023-10-28T15:04:51.730" Score="4" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, that’s fine.  All critiques of plagiarism are irrelevant if you are providing an answer and having it punch up your grammar.  Make sure it doesn’t change your meaning though before posting&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="140" LastActivityDate="2023-10-28T15:04:51.730" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12502" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12499" CreationDate="2023-10-28T20:39:39.113" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;I Think It's Fine For That Specific Purpose&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There are two broad classes of objections to clean-up AI, that I've seen (not limited to this forum):  The argument from copyright, and the argument from the virtue of labor.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To the former (copyright)&lt;/strong&gt;, I say this:  What matters more is the output of the tool, than the input.  No content producer has ever had the right to know whether another content producer has read their work first, or to know if they read a borrowed copy, or to demand attribution if that's the only link.  That's simply not how this works, how this has ever worked, or could ever work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What copyright law protects is concrete expressions.  And while I acknowledge that the academic literature is still being written on the copyright (and, interestingly, security) implications of how LLM models work, and the possibility of direct copying from the training corpora, the risk of direct copying seems &lt;em&gt;very low&lt;/em&gt; if you're giving it your own primary text and just asking for grammatical and stylistic clean-ups.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;To the latter (virtue of labor)&lt;/strong&gt;, I have heard that argument so many times in so many ways over the course of my life that they all just blend together into an undifferentiated muddle.  I collaborate on radar and satellite designs-- my work is improved, not degraded, by using calculators, spreadsheets, and numerical modeling packages.  I collaborate on writing their specifications-- my work is improved, not degraded, by spellcheckers and grammar checkers.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;(Ironically, but truthfully, I misspelled 'specifications' and 'misspelled' just now.  I've never been able to spell 'misspelled' right on the first attempt.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;These tools, for &lt;em&gt;this specific purpose&lt;/em&gt; are no different.  Like any other tool, they need to be used wisely, for instance a minimal check to make sure the meaning hasn't been changed.  But they are just tools designed to reduce the burden of certain tasks.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;But Note Well:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;  I am not &lt;strong&gt;in any way&lt;/strong&gt; changing my position on the topic of using these tools to &lt;em&gt;generate&lt;/em&gt; questions or answers wholesale.  They are nowhere near reliable enough to consider that application.  And when they are, people will bypass Stack Overflow entirely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18269" LastActivityDate="2023-10-28T20:39:39.113" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12503" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12499" CreationDate="2023-10-31T12:55:19.817" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;No, you should avoid using LLMs and ChatGPT for proofreading and for attempting to improve posts and their English. This is because it will make your posts worse, not better. Proofreading is not the function of ChatGPT and it is not something it will do for you.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The example post you gave us was already 99% fine. The GPT post &lt;em&gt;doesn't&lt;/em&gt; make it better. It introduces weird phrasing like “at the 3rd level” which we don't use because it doesn't understand how we write in our domain. It turns a sentence into marketing talk (“not only ... but also”) which has no reason to be that way. ChatGPT also makes several things wordier for no reason and rephrases several things for no actual benefit—these are not improvements! If this were submitted as an edit, I'd roll it back and ping the editor in comments to have words with them about editing guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The only things I'd have changed in the original were the phrasing of “and such table” and probably dropping the quotes around the name, and I don't need GPT to detect that or fix it for me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT was made for chat conversations. Like, you visit a company's website and want to speak to support and it offers an instant chat with a bot to route your query — ChatGPT was made for doing &lt;em&gt;that!&lt;/em&gt; That's why it has “chat” in its name. It is not a proofreading AI, it's a chat AI. If you give it input, it will generate chat, not proofreading. It will not make your post better.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You also don't want to pass your otherwise completely legitimate post through a filter that will turn it into ChatGPT output. Not only has that made your post worse, it's going to draw a target on it: you submitted a GPT output for a post and we ban those, and people are going to be looking out for GPT-ish posts to remove them. Passing a perfectly good post through ChatGPT is the best way to sabotage that post. (Or, worse yet, you'll create traps and problems for people trying to hunt down &lt;em&gt;actual&lt;/em&gt; GPT-based misuse of the site.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You already have perfectly adequate proofreading tools available: your own judgment and a spellcheck. You're doing well with them — keep using them and keep improving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-10-31T14:14:58.623" LastActivityDate="2023-10-31T14:14:58.623" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12504" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-11-01T01:47:48.393" Score="14" ViewCount="488" Body="&lt;p&gt;Paizo is re-releasing content for its Pathfinder Second Edition system, labeling it a &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/pathfinder/corepreview&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Remaster&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot;. There are significant differences in content, both in how its present and the actual effects of various rules elements.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need to create a [pathfinder-2r], [pathfinder-2.5], or similar tag to differentiate between questions about the original rules published vs. the new content? Should it be a synonym of [pathfinder-2e]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="28326" LastActivityDate="2024-02-21T19:37:48.797" Title="Do we need a separate tag for Pathfinder 2e Remastered?" Tags="|discussion|tags|synonymization|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12505" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12504" CreationDate="2023-11-01T18:19:50.087" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While they are significant overlap in certain rules, and the systems are compatible &amp;quot;in theory&amp;quot;, there are different versions of the same spell and/or rule in both systems, so we'll need clarity as to what system we are discussing. Some tables (like mine) will continue with the pre-Remaster rules (because we're playing a pre-Remaster AP with pre-Remaster characters and I own pre-Remaster books). This reminds me a bit of things DnD 3e vs 3.5e, or Pathfinder 1 vs DnD 3.5e.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;My Tag Proposal&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have a couple ideas, but my preference is to keep in sync with Archive of Nethys's plan (since we reference them often and they're the official SRD). Their plan was unveiled on the August 3rd 2023 update (scroll down here: &lt;a href=&quot;https://2e.aonprd.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https://2e.aonprd.com&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My preference:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Create tags [pathfinder-2e legacy] &amp;amp; [pathfinder-2e remaster].&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Mark most/all existing PF2e questions with [pathfinder-2e legacy]&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Alias [pathfinder-2e remaster] to [pathfinder-2e].&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We can then go through the old questions marked with &amp;quot;legacy&amp;quot; and tag them with [pathfinder-2e] if they aren't legacy specific questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The usage pattern would be:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use [pathfinder-2e] for questions that aren't specifically about legacy&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Use [pathfinder-2e legacy] for questions that are about &lt;strong&gt;legacy exclusive things&lt;/strong&gt;, like alignment.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have [pathfinder-2e remaster] alias to [pathfinder-2e] to instill that the Remaster is the current default and so users who are unsure which tag to use (Remaster or plain) will be helped.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="64464" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-02-21T19:37:48.797" LastActivityDate="2024-02-21T19:37:48.797" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12506" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-11-01T19:00:25.747" Score="2" ViewCount="166" Body="&lt;p&gt;Wizards of the Coast is releasing a replacement &lt;em&gt;Player's Handbook&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Dungeon Master's Guide&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Monster Manual&lt;/em&gt; for its Dungeons &amp;amp; Dragons Fifth Edition system, labeling them the &lt;strong&gt;2024 Core Rulebooks&lt;/strong&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1310-faq-one-d-d-2024-core-rulebooks-d-d-digital-and&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;There will be many fundamental updates to D&amp;amp;D&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; as part of this new release. There are &lt;a href=&quot;https://dndstore.wizards.com/us/product/820944/planescape-adventures-in-the-multiverse-digital-plus-physical-bundle#:%7E:text=2024%20AND%20BEYOND&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;updates and improvements to the classes, mechanics, items, and monsters.&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Do we need to create a [dnd-5e2024], [dnd-5.2e] (or whatever point-version the 2024 SRD gets), or similar tag to differentiate between questions about the original rules published vs. the new content? Should it be a synonym of [dnd-5e]?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="18128" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-01T23:39:30.387" LastActivityDate="2023-11-01T23:44:04.403" Title="Do we need a separate tag for D&amp;D 5e 2024?" Tags="|discussion|tags|dungeons-and-dragons|synonymization|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12507" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12506" CreationDate="2023-11-01T23:32:41.693" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Let’s wait until we have a question about it to have this conversation, or at least until we’re close enough to release to know a great deal more about the content. You don’t just create tags here. You first ask a question, then tag it appropriately. If the question you have asked really ought to have a tag that doesn’t exist yet, that’s the point at which we would create that tag. We don’t have any questions about it yet, and there aren’t really any questions you could ask yet that would need a new D&amp;amp;D edition tag, so this meta discussion is altogether premature. But when I think we know enough about the game to be able to meaningfully have a discussion about this, I’ll delete this answer and post a new one. But that will probably be sometime in 2024.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And while we’re on the topic, this meta discussion is still very relevant today: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11946/62294&quot;&gt;WotC announced that a &amp;quot;new evolution&amp;quot; of D&amp;amp;D will be coming in 2024. Is it too soon to pose and answer questions about it?&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-01T23:44:04.403" LastActivityDate="2023-11-01T23:44:04.403" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12508" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-11-05T10:43:42.150" Score="10" ViewCount="288" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-third-quarter-2023-financial-results&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Hasbro recently released its Q3 2023 sales figures&lt;/a&gt;, and boy, things are looking dire. They were &lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-second-quarter-2023-financial-results&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;even worse in Q2&lt;/a&gt; with an 11% Dip in the &lt;strong&gt;whole&lt;/strong&gt; segment &lt;em&gt;Wizards of the Coast and Digital Gaming&lt;/em&gt;, which only was smoothed out in the Q3 by the &lt;em&gt;millions&lt;/em&gt; of copies of Baldur's Gate 3 being sold, which &lt;em&gt;likely&lt;/em&gt; is an outcome of the people allegedly leaving DNDbeyond in early 2023 in the wake of the attempt of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203943/what-was-going-on-with-dds-leaked-ogl-1-1-in-january-2023-how-does-it-affect&quot;&gt;OGL 1.1/2.0&lt;/a&gt; and forcing all attempts in that direction to stall or be abandoned.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is the time ripe to call out for a &lt;em&gt;retrospective&lt;/em&gt; on the whole debacle and look at it from a historical standpoint, akin to such a question described below?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Situation Background&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/203943/what-was-going-on-with-dds-leaked-ogl-1-1-in-january-2023-how-does-it-affect&quot;&gt;In early January 2023,&lt;/a&gt; a document about a proposed OGL 1.1 and shortly after 1.2 were leaked proposing extreme changes. Those changes would have been been massive and lead to a massive uproar on fans, distributors and led to a massive change on other projects too. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.theguardian.com/games/2023/jan/12/dungeons-and-dragons-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Even mainstream media reported about an exodus within days&lt;/a&gt;. Allegedly, DnD Beyond hemorrhaged subscribers in the 5 digits, and numbers such as &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/10fa7mq/is_it_true_up_to_40000_dnd_beyond_subscriptions/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;more than 40000 players canceled&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; were mentioned, but the only sure data point is, that at some point &lt;a href=&quot;https://gamerant.com/dungeons-and-dragons-dnd-beyond-canceled-subscriptions-server-crash/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;the subscription-canceling page broke&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In the end, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;WotC caved&lt;/a&gt; at the end of January, and OGL 1.0a stayed untouched, but that did not make good any damage they did to themselves. Powerful influencers like &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F_rVAYoZio&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Critical Role&lt;/a&gt; still announced to stop using D&amp;amp;D around June.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Chaosium, Paizo, and other publishers began work on a different license to OGL 1.0a within a month of the leak. the &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.chaosium.com/content/orclicense/ORC_License_FINAL.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;ORC-license&lt;/a&gt; that was finalised &lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sico&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;in or around July&lt;/a&gt;. This is &lt;em&gt;breakneck speed&lt;/em&gt; for license writing, especially with thousands of people giving input into the public discussion.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Financial Data&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hasbro's &lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-first-quarter-2023-financial-results&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q1 2023&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-second-quarter-2023-financial-results&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q2 2023&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-third-quarter-2023-financial-results&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q3 2023&lt;/a&gt; don't mention the the screwup &lt;strong&gt;at all&lt;/strong&gt;, though Q2 shows a horrible 11% less net revenue from the segment that contains DnD-Beyond (&lt;em&gt;Wizards of the Coast and Digital Gaming&lt;/em&gt;), while Q3 showed a total of 40% gain in that segment. However, that Q3 report does not show the whole situation the &lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/static-files/a2a2197c-0a07-49c8-8506-34ccf3bee347&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Q3 Power Point presentation&lt;/a&gt; to it shows. That includes the &amp;quot;Wizards Tabletop&amp;quot; (+14%) and &amp;quot;Digital Gaming Licenes&amp;quot; (+23%) (such as Baldur's Gate III). Only &lt;strong&gt;2%&lt;/strong&gt; growth is on the back of &amp;quot;Digital Games&amp;quot; [owned by WotC], which seems to be the combination of DND-Beyond, Monopoly Go, and Magic the Gathering Arena.&#xA;&lt;a href=&quot;https://investor.hasbro.com/static-files/a2a2197c-0a07-49c8-8506-34ccf3bee347&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/oszli.png&quot; alt=&quot;Report Presentation Q3, p.16&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This, so &lt;a href=&quot;https://rollforcombat.com/author/glickadmin/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Stephen Glicker&lt;/a&gt; of Roll for Combat claimed in an &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuMwTdz77A8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;extract&lt;/a&gt; from a &lt;a href=&quot;https://youtu.be/onepJ881HRI?t=1176&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;longer stream&lt;/a&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/@DUNGEONCRAFT1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Professor Dungeon Master&lt;/a&gt;), would be a sure sign that the mass exodus from DND-Beyond was still affecting the company and might lead to massive impacts on Hasbro in total. It appears, that Wizards of the Coast would prop up the whole company as a whole. As a publisher and publisher agent for the past decades, his interpretation of the sales reports &lt;em&gt;sounds&lt;/em&gt; credible but...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Question (restatement)&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Does other data or reporting compound the interpretation that the debacle of the OGL 1.1/1.2, with its (alleged) mass exodus of players from DnD-Beyond, actually impacted the &lt;em&gt;Digital Games&lt;/em&gt; subsection of the &lt;em&gt;Wizards of the Coast &amp;amp; Digital Games&lt;/em&gt; department's numbers in the Q3 Hasbro earnings report in the claimed manner?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2023-11-05T11:48:16.550" LastActivityDate="2023-11-06T10:58:51.757" Title="Is the time right to ask about the events of early 2023 blowing up in Wizards of the Coast's face?" Tags="|discussion|question-scope|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12509" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12508" CreationDate="2023-11-05T11:53:57.247" Score="19" Body="&lt;p&gt;Speculating about the underlying causes of a lackluster earnings call from a company with a diverse product portfolio in very unstable economic times probably isn’t what we’re looking for on this site. I think there’s room to document what happened surrounding the OGL incident in Q1 as objectively as we can, but asking if or to what magnitude it impacted the Q2 and Q3 earnings is just inviting speculation. The question you’ve provided for workshop is, in my opinion, this sort of speculative question, and I would vote to close it as opinion based. But like I said, WotC’s actions around the OGL are a significant part of the company’s, and the broader hobby’s, history, so a question asking to document what happened based on available data would be on topic and valuable.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is not to say that an ambitious answer could not make the observation that earnings in the pen and paper D&amp;amp;D product space underperformed after the OGL debacle, while making the appropriate caveats about the broader economic climate, etc., but it’s that asking us to speculate that is the problem. I think we want to frame the question in a way that encourages objectivity and evidence based observations, rather than unprovable conjectures.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-06T10:58:51.757" LastActivityDate="2023-11-06T10:58:51.757" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12511" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12504" CreationDate="2023-11-09T06:47:54.607" Score="-1" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pathfinder-2e-remaster&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-remaster&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;pathfinder-2e-remaster&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-pathfinder-2e-remaster-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;pathfinder-2e-remaster&lt;/a&gt; comes to mind, as that is how it is advertized.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastActivityDate="2023-11-09T06:47:54.607" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12512" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12499" CreationDate="2023-11-11T05:20:05.397" Score="-2" Body="&lt;p&gt;What's commonly called artificial intelligence on the Internet nowadays is a method that, as with the machines it's run on, lacks will and intent. It is entirely responsive, entirely a reaction to inputs based on other inputs. It does not understand how people communicate, only the arrangements of words, because it does not have sentience.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When a real person tells you what they think somebody else is trying to say, there is interpretation founded on reason and expertise, from a person who understands that other people exist and tries to understand them. Someone who is capable of empathy because they're bought into the system of empathy as an actor in the world.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When you feed text that's lacking information into a machine, that machine can't uncover the information that's missing, it can only guess (the same way that when you feed a low-resolution photograph to a machine and ask it to upscale the photo to a larger size, it will make up elements of the image to fulfill your request, without truly having the information that would give it a better picture).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Most importantly, the machine can't be held accountable when it guesses wrong, because it isn't a being involved in the community, merely an automated service. The only person that can be held accountable is the person who decides to involve the machine in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For these reasons and more, it is less than reasonable to allow ML-parsed text to replace genuinely authored text, even in cases where a person is having difficulty expressing themself. The machine will not reduce difficulty except insofar as it suggests what's common. Sometimes that's what you need, but common text deserves no special priority on a question-and-answer site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;People will want to help you even if your command of the language you're using isn't the best.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4576" LastEditorUserId="4576" LastEditDate="2023-11-11T05:25:09.927" LastActivityDate="2023-11-11T05:25:09.927" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12514" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12515" CreationDate="2023-11-23T09:08:04.713" Score="4" ViewCount="331" Body="&lt;p&gt;Obvioulsy, the various fantasy settings may have their own, special holidays, for example in the Forgotten Realms, there are five annual holidays falling between the months, like Midwinter oder Midsummer, and a quadriennal holiday in Shieldmeet.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For holding a Thanksgiving- or Christmas-Themed session, I'd like to know if there any published adventures or monsters that have an actual real-world holiday theme. But I am not sure if that would run afoul of &amp;quot;Shopping Question&amp;quot; criteria, so I wanted to check here first if that would be OK to ask?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2023-11-23T13:00:05.367" LastActivityDate="2023-12-03T14:44:21.537" Title="Can I ask a question about whether there's published adventure content with a holiday theme?" Tags="|discussion|workshop-question|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12515" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12514" CreationDate="2023-11-23T12:59:04.293" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;This sort of idea has been discussed before in this meta:  &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5903/62294&quot;&gt;Can we ask about the existence of a game?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The main thrust of the issues outlined in BESW’s answer there is that this sort of question can turn out to be indistinguishable from a recommendation or shopping sort of question. “Recommend me a holiday adventure” and “are there any holiday adventures” have the same answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, as BESW states in their answer, “does X exist” is not, and need not be, wholesale off-topic, and I think putting some reasonable constraints on the question can make it more like a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-identification&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-identification&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-content-identification-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;content-identification&lt;/a&gt; question. As you have phrased it in the question here, I think you’re pretty close. “Has Wizards of the Coast [or &lt;em&gt;insert publisher&lt;/em&gt;] ever published a Thanksgiving or Christmas theme adventure?” is, to me, a reasonably scoped content identification problem. In contrast, “Are there any holiday themed one shots, including 3rd party publications” is just a recommendation question without the word “recommendation” in the title.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Turning now to holiday themed monsters, I think we need to be careful here. Simply asking, “Are there any published holiday themed monsters in 5e?” is likely to invite some speculation about a monster’s connection with some holiday. I can’t rule out the possibility of “vampires are halloween monsters lol” types of answers, and I’d be worried more thoughtful answers would still just be of the kind “hey this thing is related to this cultural tradition, therefore this monster must be too”. This opens the question up to any sort of connection I can contrive, and it turns into the bad sort of list question we want to avoid. However, if you ask the first question, about official holiday adventures, you probably get holiday themed monsters gift wrapped already, if the adventures exist.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-11-23T12:59:04.293" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12516" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-11-25T13:49:08.427" Score="8" ViewCount="441" Body="&lt;p&gt;This question was asked and answered in 2019 with clear consensus in this Q&amp;amp;A: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9082/62294&quot;&gt;Should questions about dice in general be on-topic?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, I am asking for a revisit of this discussion, in light of this question being reopened on the main site: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208518/62294&quot;&gt;Do you know the angles of a face for a 7 or 14 sided die?&lt;/a&gt; Notably, the question has no RPG-context whatsoever, and is solely about the geometry of dice faces.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, I am not talking about questions about AnyDice, or questions that are doing something with dice as part of game design or character builds or anything like that. This discussion is about questions that are just about dice themselves, such as the question linked above.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-12-10T14:20:59.900" Title="Should questions about dice in general be on-topic? [2023]" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12517" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12516" CreationDate="2023-11-25T13:49:08.427" Score="11" Body="&lt;h3&gt;If the word “dice” is the only thing that relates a question to RPGs, it is off topic.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Consider this revision to the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/208518/62294&quot;&gt;example question&lt;/a&gt; about dice geometry:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I need a 5 and 7 sided mathematically fair polyhedron. The decahedron could replace the existing pentahedron (If you're wondering the angles are nearly 52°, 128° and two 90° opposites from each other), but I couldn't find a way to make a perfect  heptahedron or the angles for a perfect tetradecahedron.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Analyzing the decahedron and octahedron there are 3 properties&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Have a circumsphere,&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;All faces must be congruent and&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Opposites sides must be parallel&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don't like the idea for using an octahedron as a substitute for the heptahedron, so don’t answer with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have changed nothing about the meaning of this question, I have only removed references to dice. The only thing that related this question to RPGs at all was that the polyhedra mentioned were described as dice. This question has nothing to do with RPGs, it is just a geometry question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is just an example of why this sort of question isn’t what this site is about. Questions that are similarly void of actual relation to RPGs should be off topic, and the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9088/62294&quot;&gt;original answer given by mxyzplk&lt;/a&gt; should remain the standard guidance on these types of question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, our site is about role-playing games. That's its appropriate scope.  That makes us tangentially good about a lot of things. Dice!  Desktop publishing!  Fiction! Weaponry! But we have to draw the line somewhere.  We're not board and card games.  We're not arbitrary historical questions.  We're not genre fiction questions.  We are good at all these things, but this is a site for RPG players and we owe it to them to stay focused on RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;General dice stats are not our exclusive domain and, whether or not some other stack answers those question well, they are not on topic and should not be unless specifically in a RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And finally, as I mentioned in the question, this is not about tools like AnyDice or dice rolling tools used on platforms like Discord. As I describe in &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12246/62294&quot;&gt;this answer about VTTs&lt;/a&gt;, these things are the tools of our hobby, and questions about using them are on-topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-11-25T19:13:22.660" LastActivityDate="2023-11-25T19:13:22.660" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12518" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12516" CreationDate="2023-11-27T09:57:59.133" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;The question linked in OP is borderline but not clearly off-topic&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Additional background&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The querent did in fact &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4770801/help-me-make-the-sides-and-faces-for-some-trapezohedrons-like-a-dice-d10-or-d14&quot;&gt;first ask on math.se&lt;/a&gt; -- notably with different text with what seems to be an attempt to use more mathematical language. At that time I linked a relevant existing question as a comment, but the question was neither closed as duplicate nor directly answered. Apparently the querent either did not see my comment or did not find the information sufficient, as they later asked here on rpg.se, bringing us to the current situation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I neither voted to close nor to (re-)open the question here. I think there are a couple of on-topic-for-rpg.se questions trapped inside, struggling to get out; this is why and how I answered the question on this Stack using RPG context, but there is a continuing breakdown in communication.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;math.se doesn't want context-less questions either&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is point #1 on math.se's &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9959/how-to-ask-a-good-question&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;how to ask a good question&amp;quot; FAQ&lt;/a&gt;. Actual question closure and de-duplication on math.se is spotty at best, but to be fair math.se has a larger flow of questions over a wide variety of topics, so the task is genuinely more difficult. Arguably, then, the criticism should be &amp;quot;this question does not provide enough context for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; Stack&amp;quot; rather than &amp;quot;this question is off-topic and should be asked on math.se or stats.se instead&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;The mere act of posting on rpg.se signals a &lt;em&gt;little&lt;/em&gt; context&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While insufficient on its own to make for good context, choosing to post here rather than on math.se or stats.se is not nothing. For example, if you post a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-statistics-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; question here, you are likely to get an AnyDice answer, which is a well-known tool within the RPG space and is usually close to ideal for a RPG context. Meanwhile, on math.se most people have never heard of AnyDice; you are more likely to get a probability generating function (PGF)-based answer, which while elegant from a certain mathematical point of view, is probably not as useful for a RPG context. (Though if any PGF enjoyers would like to make an argument for them in a RPG context, I'd love to read it.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For contrast, &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4807179/probability-mass-function-for-limited-exploding-dice-pools&quot;&gt;here is a recent question&lt;/a&gt; where the specific mathematical frame really is the focus rather than the RPG context.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For the question linked in OP, I chose to list several physical realizations of a d7 due to the RPG context. I do wish the querent was more clear as to whether this was what they were looking for.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Expertise tends to favor rpg.se&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've been monitoring the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dice-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dice&lt;/a&gt; tag on rpg.se, math.se, and stats.se near-daily for the past two years. If you post a dice question, there's a chance it will go unanswered on math.se, whereas &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anydice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;anydice&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;anydice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-anydice-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;anydice&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statistics&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;statistics&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-statistics-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;statistics&lt;/a&gt; on rpg.se have a perfect answer rate, with &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dice&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;dice&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-dice-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;dice&lt;/a&gt; just one short (and not due to lack of mathematical expertise). If the problem is easy, many people on rpg.se can answer it; if the problem is hard, you're better off looking for specialization than general math expertise, and I think that's going to be easier to find on rpg.se than anywhere else. RPGs are a narrower topic than math or even just statistics, so the intersection of the two is &lt;em&gt;ceteris paribus&lt;/em&gt; going to be a larger fraction of RPGs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I would personally prefer to answer the same question here than on math.se. The community and its moderation are stronger here, and contributions get more attention. Though I recognize that these rely in part on maintaining the quality and focus of questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72732" LastActivityDate="2023-11-27T09:57:59.133" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12519" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12516" CreationDate="2023-11-29T21:05:42.677" Score="2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Put them where they belong&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For my mind, unless the hypothetical dice question relates to an RPG more or less directly, it’s off topic. So, if it’s about probability or geometry it doesn’t belong here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But it does belong &lt;a href=&quot;https://math.stackexchange.com/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (Maths Stack Exchange); flag it so a mod can move it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="6203" LastActivityDate="2023-11-29T21:05:42.677" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12520" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12516" CreationDate="2023-12-02T17:31:15.460" Score="-2" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Treat each questions on its merits&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a mistake (I am being charitable here) to try and make a broad general rule when our site's level of expertise is sufficient to take care of this on a case-by-case basis.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;This isn't a problem that needs any solving&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;From a comment by @HeyICanChan  (thank you)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The site has 50,000 questions; just 300 are tagged &lt;code&gt;dice&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;Two-thirds of a percent? Seriously?&#xA;Folks should vote to close dice questions they think are off-topic.&#xA;Don't make a policy that will make the site seem even less welcoming.&#xA;–&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Each question about dice can, and needs to be, assessed to see how it applies to an RPG. If it doesn't, then it can be closed as off topic.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An attempt to make a &amp;quot;policy&amp;quot; about this is misguided.  Further that point, the volume of dice questions, or rather, the mass flow rate isn't of sufficient magnitude for this to reach the level of &amp;quot;problem&amp;quot; that needs solving.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I say again:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Treat each question on its own merits.&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Don't try and fix what isn't broken.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22566" LastEditorUserId="22566" LastEditDate="2023-12-10T14:20:59.900" LastActivityDate="2023-12-10T14:20:59.900" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12521" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12514" CreationDate="2023-12-03T14:44:21.537" Score="2" Body="&lt;p&gt;Even if “Has Wizards of the Coast [or insert publisher] ever published a Thanksgiving or Christmas theme adventure?” is off topic (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12515/25662&quot;&gt;another answer&lt;/a&gt; makes a convincing list that it is on topic), this can be tightly scoped enough that it is a perfectly fine list question:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;What holiday-themed adventures has WotC published?&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At that point, we can let the normal site mechanics resolve any disputes about whether e.g. a solstice-themed adventure counts as a Christmas-themed adventure.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2023-12-03T14:44:21.537" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12522" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-12-18T15:19:50.147" Score="0" ViewCount="313" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P5mLw.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/P5mLw.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This kind of confuses me.  In order to reply to a post/answer/thread, a new user, need not do anything other then create and account.  However, if someone comments to that post, the new user must have 50 &lt;strong&gt;reputation points&lt;/strong&gt; to reply to someone who commented on their personal answer?  So new users are effectively blocked from productive debate/problem solving concepts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What exactly is this actually preventing?&lt;/strong&gt;  Spammers can post new threads and make basic reply on anyone's question, but they cannot reply to a reply? Who is out there responding to spammers in the first place?  I personally just ignore them, but this requirement makes no sense to me.  I am trying to communicated with another user on a question, but I am block from talking to them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;At the same time I am repulsed by the concept that the only way to communicate with well anyone is by fishing for imaginary kewl points, which are only obtained by distracting from other questions with popular circular-logic answers that I have no investment in. I could not even find an appropriated tag for this message and it would not let me make one without 300 points.  Is this system intentionally designed to discouraged user from participating in this site?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;All this requirement does is successfully stops people from communicating/clarifying their questions and answers.&lt;/strong&gt;  It is based on popular responses, not what is fact or truth. I find this disrespectful and counterproductive to concept of the platform. It generally leads people to believe their &amp;quot;Karma&amp;quot; is authority, while placing undue restrictions of individuals interested in participating in the platform.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="85030" OwnerDisplayName="Joshua Gawain" LastEditorUserId="85030" LastEditDate="2023-12-19T00:42:23.130" LastActivityDate="2023-12-19T21:18:35.503" Title="Why do I need reputation to comment?" Tags="|bug|comments|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12523" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12522" CreationDate="2023-12-18T15:39:09.523" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Users can always comment on their own posts&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The 50 rep limit on comments is only towards commenting on other users' posts. Even users with one rep are able to comment on their own questions, and on answers their questions have received.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Regarding spammers, this limitation prevents them from posting spam on any old post; instead it becomes limited to questions and answers which will then push the question to the recent feed, where it'll be seen by users and removed (raise yer flags!).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also about 50+ topics: since each upvote gives 10 rep, getting a total of 50 is not a high bar. A single decent question or answer will earn that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="52137" LastEditorUserId="23547" LastEditDate="2023-12-18T15:55:51.020" LastActivityDate="2023-12-18T15:55:51.020" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12524" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12522" CreationDate="2023-12-18T15:42:53.630" Score="9" Body="&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questions and Answers have no requirements. They are the basic ways to interact with the site, and everyone can do them (well, everyone except those who have been banned).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The requirement you’re referring to applies to comments. Comments are used in a particular way here; the goal of the 50-point requirement is to give users time to learn the system before using it. They are intentionally low-value and intended to be fairly unimportant. Comments are also—by far—the most common vehicle for venting anger or frustration or whatever with personal attacks or other inappropriate behavior. Since comments do not bump questions, they would also be a tempting target for spammers, who could comment on old questions and go unnoticed. The requirement limits some of that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;The 50-point requirement is waived for commenting on various things relating to your own Q&amp;amp;A. Here, it seems you may have run into a bug. I am not 100% sure where the line is supposed to be, but based on documentation it does seem like you should be able to comment on that answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;However&lt;/strong&gt;, it should be noted that even if you can, it may not be true that you should. Generally speaking, we want you to respond to comments by editing the Question or Answer, or by ignoring them if you disagree and do not want to edit. Either way, once you are not going to take further action on the comment, it no longer serves a purpose and moderators will routinely delete such comments. If there is a comment you know you are done with (either because you did it or because you are not going to), you can flag it as No Longer Necessary and mods will typically delete it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The end-goal is a clean answer with no comments that just best reflects the position of the author (and whose votes reflect the position of the community). Comments are supposed to be primarily between the commenter and the author; nothing of importance to the wider audience should live there, because we want readers to be able to get all the information they need &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; reading through a whole conversation. Comments that are not serving the purpose of improving the question or answer, especially those that become conversation that overshadows the question or answer, will be deleted or migrated by moderators.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;And since this is an unusual use of posting functionality—that can seem superficially similar to replies as in a discussion thread—the comment functionality is slightly gated to try and help new users learn their idiosyncracies before they start to comment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Getting 50 points does not require interacting with 50+ questions or answers. An upvote on a question or answer is worth 10 points, so you need 5 upvotes total to get it (there are other activities that also earn points, and potentially fewer than 10 at a time, but those are largely irrelevant to new users). Many new users get that score with a single question or answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="4563" LastEditDate="2023-12-19T17:26:09.240" LastActivityDate="2023-12-19T17:26:09.240" CommentCount="30" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12525" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12522" CreationDate="2023-12-18T19:01:22.797" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; be able to comment on your own answer post.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I just tested this with a new account on the same question you answered:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VrYaK.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/VrYaK.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-12-19T21:18:35.503" LastActivityDate="2023-12-19T21:18:35.503" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12526" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12527" CreationDate="2023-12-22T16:35:04.917" Score="20" ViewCount="176" Body="&lt;p&gt;Please join me in congratulating &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/75095/nobody-the-hobgoblin&quot;&gt;Nobody the Hobgoblin&lt;/a&gt; (formerly Groody) for reaching 100,000 reputation!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zRW2S.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/zRW2S.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Notably, Nobody the Hobgoblin is the quickest user to ever reach 100k reputation, having done so in less than two years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your contributions, and here’s to another 100k! &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-12-23T22:33:51.927" Title="RPG.SE has admitted its first Hobgoblin to the 100k club" Tags="|discussion|reputation|just-for-fun|users|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12527" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12526" CreationDate="2023-12-23T22:33:51.927" Score="13" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Thank you, all of you!&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;First, thank you Thomas for calling this out -- nothing escapes your eagle eye.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thank you, to all of you who have been welcoming, supportive, gracious and patient with my antics. And above all, thank you for those of you who have enriched my understanding of the game with your wonderful answers to my questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2023-12-23T22:33:51.927" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12528" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12279" CreationDate="2023-12-24T19:49:32.113" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Leaving an answer here is a quick FYI, I’m going to start working through the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/new-gm&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;new-gm&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-new-gm-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;new-gm&lt;/a&gt; tag slowly, per our usual a-few-questions-a-day protocol.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-12-24T19:49:32.113" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12529" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12532" CreationDate="2023-12-27T23:53:16.657" Score="2" ViewCount="85" Body="&lt;p&gt;I just looked at this question (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/209743/40101&quot;&gt;Moving a Gargantuan Object&lt;/a&gt;) and either am going mad because a few people have seen it talk about morkoths and towers, but it no longer says that and I can't see an edit history.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What has happened here?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40101" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-12-31T20:42:09.523" LastActivityDate="2023-12-31T20:42:09.523" Title="Why can't I see edit history?" Tags="|bug|status-bydesign|editing|revision-history|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12530" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2023-12-27T23:54:23.570" Score="2" ViewCount="127" Body="&lt;p&gt;Three days ago new user Billy Lane asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/209728/23547&quot;&gt;How do I become a great gm?&lt;/a&gt;, with the full text of their question reading:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve played D&amp;amp;D on Discord now for a year, and I used to play D&amp;amp;D way-way back in the 80’s. And now I’m going to be dming my very first quest. And, I want to do an amazing job. I know it’s a learning process and will take time, but I’d love to know what are some specific things I can do to be a great gm?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was quickly closed as &amp;quot;needing more focus&amp;quot; (I think rightly so, though as a new user I think more could have been done to help OP understand &lt;em&gt;how&lt;/em&gt; to focus it) and is currently at +1/-2.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today KorvinStarmast was doing some copyediting and brought to the front page a post coincidently called &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/22625/23547&quot;&gt;How do I learn to become a good GM?&lt;/a&gt;.  It is nearly eleven years old and is currently sitting at +61/0.  Thomas Markov, since this hit the front page has voted to close, and there are two other close votes at present - but up until today this appeared to be a well-received question, with many answers totaling near +130.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As far as I can tell, these are pretty much the same question - you have DMs with some amount of experience, asking very generally for how to become better.  If it turns out the older question is closed, that would seem pretty consistent to me.  If so, I'd be interested in understanding the line between [closed] as modern maintenance, and 'left open for historical reasons, please don't ask questions like this now'.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If it is left open, I'd be interested in knowing whether the more recent question should be tagged as a duplicate, as well as what the older question has that at one point made it acceptable and well-received, but no longer meets our standards.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23547" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2023-12-31T20:41:08.423" LastActivityDate="2023-12-31T20:41:08.423" Title="Reconciling how we treated two questions asking for DMing advice" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|closed-questions|close-reasons|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12531" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12530" CreationDate="2023-12-28T02:46:44.763" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;The more recent question was closed for &amp;quot;needs more focus&amp;quot; because it is just a short discussion prompt (entire text quoted below):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve played D&amp;amp;D on Discord now for a year, and I used to play D&amp;amp;D way-way back in the 80’s. And now I’m going to be dming my very first quest. And, I want to do an amazing job. I know it’s a learning process and will take time, but I’d love to know what are some specific things I can do to be a great gm?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But as broad and unfocused as this is, the 2013 question casts an even wider net, asking more than just &amp;quot;how do I become a good GM?&amp;quot;, including:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How do I learn to become a GM? (needs more focus)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are good resources to use to learn to GM? (shopping question)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;What are examples of good GMing in books, blogs, and live play? (shopping question)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;How did you learn to be a good GM? (opinion based poll/discussion prompt)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Or do you feel as bad at this as I do, even when it's a successful, fun encounter? (opinion poll)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So to directly answer this meta question, we reconcile the treatment of these questions by treating them the same: closing them for &amp;quot;needs more focus&amp;quot;. The 2013 question in particular is asking &lt;em&gt;at least five distinct questions, none of which are themselves on-topic for the site&lt;/em&gt;. This should be a perfectly straightforward decision to close.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now to be fair to (some of) the answers, there is some good advice there. But the good advice that is there sits among a lot of noise. That is, there are pearls on that question, but that doesn't mean the question is good. &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/06/13/optimizing-for-pearls-not-sand/&quot;&gt;We are trying to optimize for pearls, not sand&lt;/a&gt;. And optimizing for pearls means curating the sand; in this case, that means closing questions that should be closed, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12412/62294&quot;&gt;regardless of how old the question is&lt;/a&gt;. That is, &lt;strong&gt;there is no &amp;quot;left open for historical reasons&amp;quot;&lt;/strong&gt;. This has been discussed over and over on this site (&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1173/62294&quot;&gt;2011&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5987/62294&quot;&gt;2015&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6232/62294&quot;&gt;2016&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11704/62294&quot;&gt;2021&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12412/62294&quot;&gt;2023&lt;/a&gt;), reaching the same conclusion every time: we close questions that should be closed, and a question's age is not part of that decision making process.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2023-12-28T02:58:51.967" LastActivityDate="2023-12-28T02:58:51.967" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12532" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12529" CreationDate="2023-12-28T03:33:01.847" Score="3" Body="&lt;p&gt;From the meta.se FAQ question, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/21788/674198&quot;&gt;How does editing work?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;hr /&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Grace period&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In order to prevent a series of tiny edits from showing up in the&#xA;revision history, a single user who makes a binding (not suggested)&#xA;edit to a post is given a 5-minute &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/tags/grace-period/info&quot;&gt;grace&#xA;period&lt;/a&gt;,&#xA;&lt;em&gt;except&lt;/em&gt; if one of the following conditions is true:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The previous revision was a rollback.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The new revision is a rollback (includes cases where one selects to edit a prior revision and doesn't make any changes).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The user does not have the &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/new-user&quot;&gt;remove new user restrictions&lt;/a&gt;&#xA;privilege.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;During this period, any additional edits they make are collapsed into&#xA;the same edit in the revision history, displaying only the final&#xA;outcome of all their edits within that 5-minute period. The grace&#xA;period ends after exactly 5 minutes, or if:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Another user edits the post, at which time &lt;em&gt;their&lt;/em&gt; grace period begins.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A comment has been added to the post since the previous revision by anyone other than the editor (ignores deleted comments).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If the post being edited is a question and an answer has been added since the previous revision (ignores deleted answers but &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt;&#xA;include answers by the editor).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The post is a question, and it has been closed since the previous revision.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2023-12-28T03:33:01.847" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12534" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-01-03T00:14:37.327" Score="2" ViewCount="252" Body="&lt;p&gt;BACKGROUND: I'm a buildmaker. I'm RAW RPG gamer, following the philosophy of &amp;quot;GM has no say when it comes to rules&amp;quot;, and I enforce this both as a GM and as a player. I love inventing things while at the same time trying to avoid following ready-to-use build guides. It's a mental challenge, it's a riddle, it's a minigame and I love doing it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;But since I mostly play big systems (I mean 100's of books kind of big), there is no way to memorize or even read every single rule and line of text that can be considered a clue to understanding some specific rule. And even then there's probably some errata or official magazine article that has something to add in the matter that I never knew existed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;PROBLEM: Most of the time my questions have a single goal of &amp;quot;how to make this work&amp;quot;. I don't care if it's OP, broken, unrealistic, game-breaking, intended to be errata'd (as long as it wasn't in the end for whatever reason) or problematic in any way shape or form. I'm interested in making something work, per RAW, bending rules as far as they can be bent but NEVER, EVER, breaking the rules and never, unless there is no other way, relying on GM's decision, because rules simply don't provide anything to go by.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I'm not interested in &amp;quot;what this GM would rule&amp;quot; or who would or wouldn't allow something at their table. And I'm getting a lot of those, so much that I'm running out of ways to politely tell author of the answer or comment that I'm not interested in that angle, nor will I ever be. I'm interested in getting desired result, by any means necessary within RAW ecosystem.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;EXAMPLE: My recent questions regarding Major Image spell for Pathfinder. I tried to split it in two (because several times before I was accused of squeezing several questions into one), I tried to specify my intentions (things I am sure should work and all I need is justification/precedent/single-long-forgotten-line-of-text-in-an-obscure-book in a way lawyer in court would present one to win his case).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea how to write such question properly to get the answer I need. So, how do I go about that?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="50011" LastActivityDate="2024-01-16T00:37:44.173" Title="How to ask for loopholes/hacks/edge cases or other ways to make things work?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="3" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12535" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12534" CreationDate="2024-01-03T00:40:15.167" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;You can’t make people do what you want. The most you can do is explain that you’re looking for a particular sort of solution; this is fine to do. As long as the answers attempt to address the problem, they can approach the problem however they like, even if it isn’t exactly the sort of solution you’re looking for. &lt;em&gt;This is a feature, not a bug, of the Stack Exchange model&lt;/em&gt;. Diverse perspectives are welcome and provide value to future readers too, not just the question asker. What you &lt;em&gt;can&lt;/em&gt; do is vote. Downvote answers that don’t satisfy what you’re after, upvote answers that do, and others are free to vote however they like. When an answer does satisfy you, you can accept it, which will pin it to the top of the answer list no matter the reader’s selected sort order.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If a question does not receive a satisfying answer, then you can offer a bounty for it, and include in the bounty text the sort of thing you’re looking for out of a bounty-worthy answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-01-03T00:40:15.167" CommentCount="20" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12536" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12534" CreationDate="2024-01-05T07:33:51.903" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Ask open ended questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In your current approach to these questions, you describe your loophole and supporting arguments as to why it should work, and then ask if your conclusion is correct. When people answer why it is not correct, you in comments follow up trying to invalidate or find gaps in their arguments. This (at least for me) creates the impression you may not be looking for an answer to the question, but for confirmation that your clever, creative reading works.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you really want to know if it would work, you can &lt;strong&gt;ask the question open ended&lt;/strong&gt;, for example, you can just ask if, rules as written an Illusion like &lt;em&gt;major image&lt;/em&gt; can impose conditions. Cut out the self-answer in the question that describes why you think it could or should. That way, you have a better chance to get neutral answers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Also, if you do not like the answers you get, you do not need to accept any. And, you can self-answer with your own conclusion, and open that up to voting by the community. My experience is that just like for confirmation-seeking questions, you will get downvotes if your answer is either wrong or unpopular; but at least this will provide you community feedback of how highly or not people think of your conclusion. You still can accept your own self-answer, no matter if it is the one with the most votes or not. The acceptance checkmark is an expression of what answer &lt;em&gt;you think&lt;/em&gt; is the best for your question, not what the consensus best answer is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Are you getting opinion based answers?&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Looking at the answers for your most recent example questions &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/209841/can-you-use-the-major-image-spell-to-replicate-cause-other-conditions&quot;&gt;Can you use the Major Image spell to replicate/cause other conditions?&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/209840/how-does-the-will-save-to-disbelieve-the-illusion-from-the-major-image-spell-wor&quot;&gt;How does the Will save to disbelieve the illusion from the Major Image spell work?&lt;/a&gt;, my impression is the answers are not opinion based, they provide ample support and rules citation for why what you want does not work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You say you like to find loopholes, even if they create abusable results, but you lack the in-depth mastery of the systems you are doing that in. When you ask a question of this nature on this site, where there &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; people who have that in-depth mastery, and they tell you why your idea of a loophole does not work based on that more comprehensive knowledge of the rules, they do exactly what you asked for. They answer in a RAW based way. Unfortunately, that answer means that your idea does not work.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/208064/75095&quot;&gt;great answer by @DanB&lt;/a&gt; that explains what RAW means: it does not mean that if the rules are silent on something, you get to do whatever you like. It means that -- especially if you want to do something unbalanced or exploiting the system -- you need an actual rule that states what you want to do is how it works, and no rules text that would stop it from working.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Lastly, there are some systems like 5e, where the spirit of the rules explicitly is to leave a lot to the DM, often refered to a &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/195052/what-is-the-source-of-the-rulings-not-rules-statement&quot;&gt;rulings, not rules&lt;/a&gt;&amp;quot; attiude. So, when you ask about an ill-defined area of the rules, by design the answer will be &amp;quot;Ask your DM&amp;quot;, sometimes with some &amp;quot;Here is what I would do based on my experience with this problem&amp;quot; thrown in. The reason you are not getting a RAW answer is because in those cases there is no rule written for what you ask, other than the rule the DM adjudicates such cases. So the answers tell you that RAW, there is no specific RAW answer. That does not make it an opinon based answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="75095" LastEditDate="2024-01-05T09:38:55.793" LastActivityDate="2024-01-05T09:38:55.793" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12537" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12540" CreationDate="2024-01-06T02:55:02.457" Score="13" ViewCount="233" Body="&lt;p&gt;Per a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12383/4563&quot;&gt;previous discussion&lt;/a&gt;, “generative AI” is banned on this site.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Per a &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/395881/190917&quot;&gt;recent site-wide announcement&lt;/a&gt;, we can request a banner in the answer box stating this policy, and linking to a new Help page that would be created for this purpose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As shown in that announcement, the banner would look something like this (but in our color scheme):&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/StYoj.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/StYoj.png&quot; alt=&quot;Image showing the answer field, in focus, with a banner saying &amp;quot;Reminder: Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools are not allowed on Stack Overflow. Learn more&amp;quot;&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The text of the banner is not customizable, but the text of the Help page that the Learn more link directs to is.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Thus, we need a consensus on&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do we want this banner?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do we want a Help page, and if so, what should it say?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s not clear to me that a banner is necessary for the Help page—Stack Overflow, for example, already had the Help page before the banner existed. So I believe that an answer of “no banner, but the Help page would be good and should say XYZ,” is a valid option.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastEditorUserId="23970" LastEditDate="2024-03-26T12:38:34.870" LastActivityDate="2024-03-26T12:38:34.870" Title="Do we want a banner/help page about AI policy?" Tags="|discussion|answers|policy|help-center|generative-ai|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12540" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12537" CreationDate="2024-01-06T14:40:56.880" Score="9" Body="&lt;h2&gt;A banner is not needed right now. Help page yes.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I've got a couple of kids. I learned very quickly that if you tell a kid not to do something, that's the thing they're going to do. &lt;em&gt;Especially&lt;/em&gt; if they weren't even going to think about doing the thing until you told them. &lt;em&gt;We do not have a problem with AI content right now&lt;/em&gt;. I can count on one hand the posts I knew or suspected of being AI generated. By putting a banner on the answer box, we're drawing attention to a problem that we don't have, pointing out the possibility of using AI to people who weren't thinking about using AI until we told them. &lt;strong&gt;No banner necessary for now&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However, AI generated content has been posted before, and it probably will be posted again. I think having a help page &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.com/help/ai-policy&quot;&gt;like the one on Stack Overflow&lt;/a&gt; would be a helpful resource as a &amp;quot;company official&amp;quot; position on use of AI. Our in-house meta discussion is, of course, sufficient, but an official help page is less vulnerable to &amp;quot;that's just like your opinion man&amp;quot; arguments. &lt;strong&gt;Yes help page&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2024-01-12T17:06:50.053" LastActivityDate="2024-01-12T17:06:50.053" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12541" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-01-07T17:06:17.297" Score="6" ViewCount="299" Body="&lt;p&gt;I posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/209876/does-stabilizing-reset-your-death-saving-throw-counter&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt;, and it keeps getting downvoted. However, the system won't let me delete it. What should I do about this? Should I vote to close it?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77400" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-01-12T18:49:31.597" LastActivityDate="2024-01-13T23:14:42.497" Title="What should I do if I have a downvoted question with upvoted answers?" Tags="|discussion|questions|voting|down-votes|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12542" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12541" CreationDate="2024-01-07T20:19:48.657" Score="10" Body="&lt;h2&gt;You learn from it and move on.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There’s nothing to be done with the question. It does not need to be closed, as none of our reasons for closure apply to it, nor should it be deleted, as none of our reasons for deletion apply to it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you can do is &lt;em&gt;learn from it and do better next time&lt;/em&gt;. The reason (I suspect) the question is getting downvoted is that its answer is spelled out quite plainly in the first place one should think to look, the section in the rules about death saving throws. I don’t actually know if you checked the rules or not before you asked your question. If you did, and you missed the line that answered your question, that’s fine, I’ve done that before too. But you should always try to do some research before asking a question here, and share with us what you’ve already done to find the answer. Our help center article on asking good questions states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is what seems missing from your question, and going through this exercise may have prevented you from needing to ask it at all.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Finally, in case someone else mentions this, &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/96746/674198&quot;&gt;SE staff is able to disassociate a post from your account&lt;/a&gt;, but requesting this be done simply because you are getting downvoted probably isn’t an appropriate use of this feature or staff time.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-01-07T20:19:48.657" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12544" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12534" CreationDate="2024-01-16T00:37:44.173" Score="0" Body="&lt;p&gt;Emphasize that you are only looking for RAW answers, and that the actual problem is the thought-exercise.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can find examples of how to successfully ask by looking through question histories from KRyan and HeyICanChan, among others.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For some game systems, asking any question strictly about the written rules will attract low-quality opinion-based answers. My experience suggests that there is a strong negative correlation between those answers and how satisfying that system is for rules analysis, so that may be a small loss.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is also an inexplicably fraught history here around asking about the literal implications of a ruleset. You may need to grow a thicker skin if you want to splash in those waters. That's neither fair to newcomers nor right, but pretending won't change the reality.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2024-01-16T00:37:44.173" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12545" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12546" CreationDate="2024-01-16T15:21:04.120" Score="12" ViewCount="330" Body="&lt;p&gt;I recently asked &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/209931/do-half-castes-preserve-their-caste-charms-if-they-exalt-as-another-type-of-exal?noredirect=1#comment577455_209931&quot;&gt;this question&lt;/a&gt; about Exalted Second edition and while I found the answer I found out that the term 'Half-caste' used in the game was also a slur. (I do apologize for not knowing it earlier. English is not my first language.) But what should be done for questions such as these?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40305" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-01-16T23:53:03.980" LastActivityDate="2024-01-17T01:56:38.133" Title="What should be done if a game term being asked about is a slur?" Tags="|discussion|code-of-conduct|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12546" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12545" CreationDate="2024-01-17T01:56:38.133" Score="18" Body="&lt;p&gt;Same as we do with questions that include any other word on &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;this list&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Recognize that that many words have different meanings in different contexts. If you're using a word as a slur, don't. Do something different instead. If you are using a word that is sometimes a slur, avoid using it in a way that may cause confusion about how you mean it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;For example, &amp;quot;orc&amp;quot; has seen recent use as a slur* against Russians. We do not need to endorse that usage to continue answering question about orcs in the context of fantasy games.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is distinct from the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11238/25662&quot;&gt;linked question&lt;/a&gt;, which asks about a slur used as a slur (albeit with a more complicated intent).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;*Regardless of any other context or provocations, it's clearly an ethnic slur.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="25662" LastActivityDate="2024-01-17T01:56:38.133" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12547" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12548" CreationDate="2024-01-17T08:30:50.323" Score="1" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;If I would like to reward a question with a bounty award, not an answer to the question, is there a way to do so?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If there is not, is it acceptable to gift reputation to a user for their question via a bounty on some other post they made, with appropriate commentary?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2024-01-26T04:24:35.673" LastActivityDate="2024-01-26T04:24:35.673" Title="Is there a way to bounty award a question?" Tags="|support|status-bydesign|questions|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12548" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12547" CreationDate="2024-01-17T09:24:22.223" Score="5" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No, there is not.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This was posted &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/135469/674198&quot;&gt;as a feature request&lt;/a&gt; in 2012, and marked &lt;a href=&quot;/questions/tagged/status-declined&quot; class=&quot;post-tag moderator-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;status-declined&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-status-declined-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;status-declined&lt;/a&gt; on meta.se:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Amongst the reasons for starting a bounty, one can select:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Reward existing answer&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;One or more of the answers is exemplary and worthy of an additional bounty.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why not enable one to reward excellent &lt;em&gt;questions&lt;/em&gt; in a similar manner?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SE staff animuson offers &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/137672/674198&quot;&gt;this explanation&lt;/a&gt; for declining the feature request, summarized in its first paragraph:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The problem with offering bounties on questions is &lt;strong&gt;it doesn't encourage any behavior from other users.&lt;/strong&gt; When users see a bounty available on a question, it encourages them to provide a detailed answer in an effort to be rewarded the bounty. Even if you are &amp;quot;rewarding an existing answer&amp;quot; it is still possible that someone else may find something even more useful than the answer you originally wanted to give the bounty to, which is one of the reasons why the time limit still exists.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Bounties are for answers and should only be used for answers.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The bounty system is designed for encouraging a particular type of engagement: answers to questions. This is what it is for, and this is what it should be used for (more on the intent behind the design of the bounty system can be found in animuson’s meta post linked in the previous section). Using the bounty system to “gift reputation” for anything other than bounty-worthy answers is reputation that the recipient &lt;em&gt;did not earn&lt;/em&gt;, since it is reputation gained via unintended methods. Now, if the recipient already has 25k reputation this isn’t that big of a deal, but below 25k rep, site privileges are locked behind reputation thresholds, and I’d really prefer reputation thresholds be met by gaining rep the intended way.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That said, if you still really want to award a particular user for a great question, go find a bounty-worthy answer of theirs. But please be sure it’s actually bounty-worthy. We can’t read your mind, and this works on the honor-system, but we will know something is up if you award a bounty to a clearly low-quality post.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-01-17T09:24:22.223" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12549" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-01-23T13:37:55.793" Score="14" ViewCount="169" Body="&lt;p&gt;Chat activity is pretty low these days. Because of this, the majority of the posts seen in our main chat room are from the HNQ bot. One user pointed out that &lt;a href=&quot;https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/65018715#65018715&quot;&gt;ignoring that bot makes the chat look much nicer&lt;/a&gt;. I think it’s time we turn the bot off for everyone, at least for now. While activity is low, this would allow for some semblance of continuity and visibility for the conversations that do happen, rather than conversations getting lost within a day or two as our site’s never ceasing hot question machine churns out HNQs.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Any objections?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-01-23T17:57:00.063" Title="Should we turn off the HNQ feed on our main chat room?" Tags="|discussion|chat|hot-network-questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12550" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12549" CreationDate="2024-01-23T17:57:00.063" Score="17" Body="&lt;p&gt;Yes, let's switch it off. It fills entire page scrolls with chat messages in the room which impedes our ability to have conversations there now that things are slower. It can move to the ticker, but it should no longer be a main chat feed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastActivityDate="2024-01-23T17:57:00.063" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12551" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-01-24T16:50:00.970" Score="8" ViewCount="226" Body="&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It’s that time of the year again! As we wave goodbye to last year and welcome the new one, we have &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22year+in+moderation%22+is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the preceding calendar year&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As most of you here might be aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.&lt;br /&gt;&#xA;-- &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/&quot;&gt;A Theory of Moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That doesn't eliminate the need for having &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/&quot;&gt;moderators&lt;/a&gt; altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks — folks like you. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference in ensuring Stack Exchange sites remain a valuable source of high-quality content on the web.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So as we say goodbye to 2023 (and January 2024… ahem) and move into 2024, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some &lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/pmN7M.gif&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;exciting&lt;/em&gt; stats&lt;/a&gt;. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Role-playing Games over the past 12 months:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;div class=&quot;s-table-container&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;table class=&quot;s-table&quot;&gt;&#xA;&lt;thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Action&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Moderators&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Community User¹&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;th style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;Community²&lt;/th&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/thead&gt;&#xA;&lt;tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;All comments on a post moved to chat&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;28&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answer flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;277&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;294&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Answers flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;45&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;488&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Bounties canceled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comment flags handled&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,788&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;146&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments deleted⁸&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3,078&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,764&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments flagged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,932&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Comments undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;29&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Escalations to the Community Manager team&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts bumped&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;27&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts deleted⁷&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;117&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;181&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;387&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts locked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;53&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts undeleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;68&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Posts unlocked&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Question flags handled⁶&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;153&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;315&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions closed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;75&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;226&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;121&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions flagged⁶&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;35&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;440&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions migrated&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions protected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions reopened&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;59&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Questions unprotected&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Revisions redacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag highlight language set&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms created&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tag synonyms proposed&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;8&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tags merged&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;6&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Close votes&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;43&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1,218&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;First answers&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;449&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;First questions&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;17&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;306&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Late answers&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;198&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Low quality posts&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;431&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Reopen votes&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;383&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Suggested edits&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;67&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;28&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;438&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Tasks reviewed⁵: &amp;quot;Triage&amp;quot; queue&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;User banned from review&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;User review-bans lifted early&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;User suspensions lifted early&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users contacted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users deleted&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users destroyed⁴&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Users suspended³&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;51&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;td style=&quot;text-align: right;&quot;&gt;0&lt;/td&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tr&gt;&#xA;&lt;/tbody&gt;&#xA;&lt;/table&gt;&#xA;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Footnotes&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;¹ This refers to the automated systems otherwise known as &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/-1&quot;&gt;user #-1&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;² This refers to &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users&quot;&gt;the membership of Role-playing Games&lt;/a&gt; &lt;em&gt;without&lt;/em&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators&quot;&gt;diamonds next to their names&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;³ The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁴ A &amp;quot;destroyed&amp;quot; user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/88994/what-is-the-difference-between-a-deleted-user-and-a-destroyed-user&quot;&gt;Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁵ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁶ Includes close flags (but &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; close or reopen votes). The community² can handle these flags by at least one person voting to close a question that has a close flag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁷ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;⁸ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3&gt;Further reading:&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? We posted a similar report here last year: &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12345/2022-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2022: a year in moderation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can also check out &lt;a href=&quot;https://stackexchange.com/search?q=title%3A%222023%3A+a+year+in+moderation%22&quot;&gt;this report on other sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or peruse &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/396299/208518&quot;&gt;detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Wishing everyone a happy 2024! ^_^&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22114" LastEditorUserId="22114" LastEditDate="2024-01-24T18:52:00.133" LastActivityDate="2024-01-28T01:33:53.690" Title="2023: a year in moderation" Tags="|discussion|moderation|site-statistics|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12552" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12551" CreationDate="2024-01-28T01:33:53.690" Score="6" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/s62zs.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/s62zs.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nwbnC.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/nwbnC.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8n8B1.png&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;https://i.stack.imgur.com/8n8B1.png&quot; alt=&quot;enter image description here&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Meta posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7022/52137&quot;&gt;2017 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/8680/8610&quot;&gt;2018 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9662/2019-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2019 stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11355/2020-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2020 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11910/2021-a-year-in-moderation&quot;&gt;2021 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/12345/62294&quot;&gt;2022 Stats&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;SEDE Queries:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/958293/number-of-questions-answers-and-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Total number of questions, answers per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://data.stackexchange.com/rpg/query/1173867/total-number-of-comments-by-year&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Comments per year&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-01-28T01:33:53.690" CommentCount="5" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12553" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12554" CreationDate="2024-02-03T13:32:37.400" Score="3" ViewCount="95" Body="&lt;p&gt;I do not know if it &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; a bug, but I seem to remember a few months back there was some text saying  &amp;quot;this question will be eligible for bounty in X hours&amp;quot;, but now I do not see it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Why is it gone? Do I remember correctly that it was there earlier?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/210351/what-is-the-chance-of-rolling-at-least-10-before-a-1-on-a-d20&quot;&gt;this is the question&lt;/a&gt;, I want to reward Daniel R. Collins for his very short and logical answer)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="9552" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-02-03T19:50:25.990" LastActivityDate="2024-02-12T17:24:12.150" Title="Where did the &quot;this question will be eligible for bounty in X hours&quot; button go?" Tags="|bug|user-interface|bounty|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="8" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12554" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12553" CreationDate="2024-02-12T17:24:12.150" Score="8" Body="&lt;p&gt;Accepting an answer removes the &amp;quot;question eligible for bounty in &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt; hours/days&amp;quot; link from your question, though &amp;quot;Start a bounty&amp;quot; will appear once the question is eligible (at least 48 hours old). See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/350183/323179&quot;&gt;Why is the &amp;quot;question eligible for bounty in x hours/days&amp;quot; link not shown when you accepted an answer?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2024-02-12T17:24:12.150" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12555" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12556" CreationDate="2024-02-14T13:50:02.270" Score="5" ViewCount="62" Body="&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/vote-up&quot;&gt;help center&lt;/a&gt; states:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can vote on posts 30 times per UTC day, plus 10 more times on questions only.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;However I find that to not be true. The other day, I did get a message banner that I have only 5 votes left. Any additional vote reduced those 5 votes by one, and after that was reduced to 0, no more voting, also not when trying to vote on questions. Total vote count was 35, I believe as I had voted on 5 questions, too.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears that you only get the 10 extra votes on questions, if you vote on them before you get the message that you are starting to run out.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is my understanding how that works correct, and is there a reason for this, or is it just a glitch of how that is coded up? It seems to be a bug to me that the order in which you vote on things makes a difference.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2024-02-14T14:06:56.733" Title="Varying limit of votes per day" Tags="|bug|voting|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12556" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12555" CreationDate="2024-02-14T14:06:56.733" Score="11" Body="&lt;p&gt;The formula is a bit more complicated than &amp;quot;30+10&amp;quot;. If you don't vote enough on questions first (i.e., before you've voted on 25 answers), you may only get as few as 30 total votes that day. It's confusing, but that's how it was designed. The intent was obviously to reward users who vote on questions (which get less votes than answers on most sites) with &amp;quot;bonus votes&amp;quot;. I assume the intent of this particular design was to have a system that isn't in your face while voting, though I can't justify the hidden complexity completely.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/5212/323179&quot;&gt;What are the limits on how I can cast, change, and retract votes?&lt;/a&gt; for a detailed explanation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="42375" LastActivityDate="2024-02-14T14:06:56.733" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12557" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-02-19T00:51:48.177" Score="3" ViewCount="197" Body="&lt;p&gt;Honestly I think the title says it all, but I'm happy to elaborate where needed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="81239" OwnerDisplayName="Sean " LastEditorUserId="3548" LastEditDate="2024-02-19T01:04:27.560" LastActivityDate="2024-02-20T21:00:50.090" Title="I need 50 reputation to post a comment, how can I gain reputation without commenting?" Tags="|discussion|comments|reputation|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12558" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12557" CreationDate="2024-02-19T00:59:24.193" Score="15" Body="&lt;p&gt;Post interesting questions and useful answers to questions. Upvotes on those will give you reputation. Being able to comment is among the first perks gained by gaining reputation.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As a closely related side note, you do not receive reputation for comments. (With thanks to ntsua60 and V2Blast).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="2902" LastEditorUserId="2902" LastEditDate="2024-02-20T21:00:50.090" LastActivityDate="2024-02-20T21:00:50.090" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12559" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12504" CreationDate="2024-02-20T18:29:08.427" Score="0" Body="&lt;h2&gt;No&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;While the Pathfinder Second Edition Remaster Project does include various changes to some of the original rules, it's not described as a new edition and doesn't warrant a new tag for applicable questions and answers. Instead, reprinted rules should be treated as any other errata for a system and addressed contextually based on the specific question/answer.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To quote the game's publisher Paizo's &lt;a href=&quot;https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6siae?Pathfinder-Second-Edition-Remaster-Project&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt; on the subject:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Today, we are pleased to reveal the Pathfinder Second Edition Remaster Project, four new hardcover rulebooks that offer a fresh entry point to the Pathfinder Second Edition roleplaying game! The first two books, &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Player Core&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder GM Core&lt;/em&gt;, release this November, with &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Monster Core&lt;/em&gt; (March 2024) and &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Player Core 2&lt;/em&gt; (July 2024) completing the remastered presentation of Pathfinder’s core rules. The new rulebooks are compatible with existing Pathfinder Second Edition products, incorporating comprehensive errata and rules updates as well as some of the best additions from later books into new, easy-to-access volumes with streamlined presentations inspired by years of player feedback.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Is this a new edition of Pathfinder?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;No. The Pathfinder Second Edition Remaster Project does not change the fundamental core system design of Pathfinder. Small improvements and cosmetic changes appear throughout, but outside of a few minor changes in terminology, the changes are not anywhere substantive enough to be considered a new edition. We like Pathfinder Second Edition. You like Pathfinder Second Edition. This is a remastered version of the original, not a new version altogether.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is distinct from the case with D&amp;amp;D 3.5 as an update to D&amp;amp;D 3.0, where the new books were marketed as version 3.5 of the rules. &amp;quot;Remaster&amp;quot; is never even mentioned in the new Pathfinder &lt;em&gt;Player Core&lt;/em&gt; or &lt;em&gt;GM Core&lt;/em&gt; books outside of a credited &amp;quot;Remaster Development Team&amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having a new tag for the remastered rules might become confusing because of this, with future Pathfinder 2e readers not knowing their books are updated versions of original books wholly replaced:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In time, the &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Player Core&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder GM Core&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Monster Core&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Player Core 2&lt;/em&gt; will replace the &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Core Rulebook&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Gamemastery Guide&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Bestiary&lt;/em&gt;, and &lt;em&gt;Advanced Player’s Guide&lt;/em&gt;, which Paizo will not reprint once their current print runs expire. Existing Pathfinder players should be assured that the core rules system remains the same, and the overwhelming majority of the rules themselves will not change. Your existing books are still valid. The newly formatted books consolidate key information in a unified place—for example, &lt;em&gt;Pathfinder Player Core&lt;/em&gt; will collect all the important rules for each of its featured classes in one volume rather than spreading out key information between the &lt;em&gt;Core Rulebook&lt;/em&gt; and the &lt;em&gt;Advanced Player’s Guide&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="72765" LastActivityDate="2024-02-20T18:29:08.427" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12560" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-02-22T13:18:12.257" Score="14" ViewCount="184" Body="&lt;p&gt;If you're a regular reader of RPG meta, this post over on Meta.SE might interest/concern you:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/396924/311001&quot;&gt;Changing how community leadership works on Stack Exchange: a proposal and rough timeline&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I post this just as an FYI; I don't think there's anything &lt;em&gt;specific to RPG&lt;/em&gt; implicated.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="23970" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-02-23T18:38:53.960" LastActivityDate="2024-02-23T18:38:53.960" Title="Evolution of Stack (Exchange) leadership" Tags="|discussion|moderation|stack-exchange|community|" AnswerCount="0" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12561" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-02-24T00:01:15.583" Score="5" ViewCount="234" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've recently posted a couple of questions that I think are both not entirely obvious or clear cut rules questions, and that as far as I could tell were also no dupes.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/210603/75095&quot;&gt;Can you cast a Wall of Force into water?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/210614/75095&quot;&gt;Can you stack swarms?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of them were met with immediate negative reception (i.e. downvotes). There was no comment as to why the downvotes, which is not that unusual.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I suspect it may be because these are questions that I personally could try and formulate an answer to, and so other regulars may feel these are somehow fake questions; in other words, these questions might receive a more neutral or more positive reception, if posed by a newcomer, where they would be taken as honest rules questions.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The context in which they are posed is that we are at an extended role-playing weekend, with me being one of the players. And because in this situation, my interpretation might be biased by what is more beneficial to the player characters, I am mostly asking for independent, well-informed rules interpretation on the matter. I felt adding all this to the questions would not be appropriate, when the question by itself seems to me a valid question anyone should be able to pose.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Is there anything I could do different or better here? Would it help to provide my take as a self-answer?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2024-02-24T15:48:09.240" LastActivityDate="2024-03-02T01:45:58.973" Title="Is there a better way to ask questions as a player?" Tags="|discussion|questions|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12562" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12561" CreationDate="2024-02-24T02:44:02.787" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask&quot;&gt;How do I ask a Good question?&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Both of the questions you link are missing evidence that you’ve researched this yourself or at least tried to work through the answer. On the first one, about &lt;em&gt;Wall of Force&lt;/em&gt; in water, I &lt;em&gt;did&lt;/em&gt; comment why I downvoted:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It isn’t clear to me which part of the spell description is causing confusion here. It targets “a point you choose within range” and doesn’t mention anything about terrain, can you add some details about what is making you think terrain might interfere with the spell?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You just ask the question without providing any details about how you’ve thought through the problem, what part of the spell description is tripping you up, or any other details that show you’ve tried to work this out yourself. The second question is similar in that you ask the question without providing the thought process or preliminary investigation that led to the question.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To me, both questions have very straightforward and obvious answers, but it’s okay if you don’t feel the same way. But for my vote, &lt;em&gt;I want to see that you’ve thought about the question enough to explain why it isn’t obvious to you&lt;/em&gt;. And I don’t see that either question does this.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastEditorUserId="62294" LastEditDate="2024-02-24T02:51:07.933" LastActivityDate="2024-02-24T02:51:07.933" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12564" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-03-04T03:39:19.943" Score="4" ViewCount="112" Body="&lt;p&gt;Especially in modern times,most popular series appear to get a TTRPG attached to them. Examples include Dishonored, A Song Of Ice and Fire, Warcraft. Are lore questions regarding these games considered to be on topic or is being on topic reserved for things that started their life as tabletop games and expanded (such as 40k and Vampire The Masquarade)?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="40305" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-03-12T20:23:25.040" LastActivityDate="2024-03-24T18:15:55.233" Title="Are lore questions on games that have a TTRPG attached to them on-topic?" Tags="|discussion|questions|on-topic|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="4" ClosedDate="2024-03-04T16:20:02.567" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12565" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12564" CreationDate="2024-03-04T11:52:52.877" Score="1" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There is no need for a double standard. If one game is allowed to have non-RPG lore sources, then so should another.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It should be all or nothing. Trying to ban lore questions on the basis of the source - whether it is &amp;quot;originally a TTRPG or not&amp;quot; is just senselessly unequal. Either ban all or none.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="22258" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-03-24T18:15:55.233" LastActivityDate="2024-03-24T18:15:55.233" CommentCount="9" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12566" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12567" CreationDate="2024-03-12T07:51:02.977" Score="3" ViewCount="125" Body="&lt;p&gt;We do have a separate tag for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-simulacrum-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt;, and as of this morning about 48 questions were tagged with it. I did check, because I was asking a question about the origin of the spell, which an &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/210811/can-fast-healing-or-regeneration-from-the-original-creature-repair-a-damaged-sim#comment580535_210812&quot;&gt;inquiry of @nijineko&lt;/a&gt; had made me curious about. I also tagged the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=simulacrum%20created%3A2024-03%20is%3Aquestion&quot;&gt;most recent other questions about it&lt;/a&gt;, that did not yet have the tag, and a couple of others, before stopping to not flood the front page with that.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The thing is, there are still &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/search?q=-%5Bsimulacrum%5D%20simulacrum&quot;&gt;351 other questions&lt;/a&gt; that have the term simulacrum as part of their text, and that are not tagged with the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;simulacrum&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-simulacrum-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;simulacrum&lt;/a&gt; tag. From a cursory inspection, most, but not quite all of them seem to be directly about the simulacra created by spell, or about interactions of those with other game features, as described in the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/simulacrum&quot;&gt;simulacrum tag notes&lt;/a&gt;, so most probably should have the tag.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So I'm asking the community: what should we do about it? Should we tag all these questions, in a retagging project? Or should we nix the simulacrum tag, because it seems to not add that much over just searching for &amp;quot;[spell] simulacrum&amp;quot;? Can mods autotag all the ones that are missing it, and we sort out the handful of misapplied tags manually? Or should we just do nothing?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-03-12T20:23:53.057" LastActivityDate="2024-03-12T20:23:53.057" Title="Simulacrum retagging" Tags="|discussion|tags|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="2" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12567" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12566" CreationDate="2024-03-12T10:56:08.660" Score="8" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Sounds good...&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The tag is established, it is not superfluous, so tagging the questions where relevant is appropriate. Please &lt;strong&gt;make sure&lt;/strong&gt; to check where it &lt;strong&gt;is relevant&lt;/strong&gt; as you go at it - &lt;strong&gt;not all questions that mention it are about them.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2&gt;Pace yourself&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Please pace yourself in retagging. Depending on your time availability, two small batches or one batch per day seems appropriate so you do not flood the front page. You might not have noticed, but there was or maybe even still is a &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/world-of-darkness&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;world-of-darkness&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-world-of-darkness-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;world-of-darkness&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-1e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-chronicles-of-darkness-1e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-1e&lt;/a&gt;/&lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chronicles-of-darkness-2e&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-chronicles-of-darkness-2e-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;chronicles-of-darkness-2e&lt;/a&gt; tagging initiative by VLAZ in the last weeks, pacing out in a pair of small batches about twice a day. Please coordinate some of the &lt;em&gt;necromancy&lt;/em&gt;, so we don't miss out on new content.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="30306" LastEditorUserId="30306" LastEditDate="2024-03-12T13:11:17.580" LastActivityDate="2024-03-12T13:11:17.580" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12568" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12570" CreationDate="2024-03-18T19:45:15.837" Score="6" ViewCount="282" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've been observing the following voting pattern on some of my older posts:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A larger number of older posts is being upvoted once (+10)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;A few days later, I get a message &amp;quot;Serial voting reversed&amp;quot;, with reassuring language that this is not my problem, its just the system doing its job, and the same someone apparently upvoted these posts, which is now being corrected (usually with a larger single deduction).&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It appears to me, now that this has repeated several times, that this likely is the same user upvoting and being corrected. Wouldn't it be more useful to tell &lt;em&gt;them&lt;/em&gt; these votes are being reverted, so they can understand that is not how they should be voting?&#xA;I suspect not even the mods can see who exactly is voting for what, and so they also may not be able to reach out and help here, but is that something the system could do?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="75095" LastActivityDate="2024-03-27T08:55:09.733" Title="Can the system let a serial voter know he or she shouldn't?" Tags="|support|feature-request|voting|" AnswerCount="4" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12569" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12568" CreationDate="2024-03-18T21:41:20.637" Score="5" Body="&lt;p&gt;Votes being identified by the serial vote detection are not necessarily &lt;em&gt;incorrect&lt;/em&gt; votes &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11353/62294&quot;&gt;(see here for more details)&lt;/a&gt;, that script just identifies patterns. So seeing the rep notification that the script has identified a pattern does not mean that another user should or should not have voted somesuch way, it only means that a pattern was identified that fit unpublished criteria. The script cannot assign moral value to the pattern, so it cannot tell a user “you should not be voting this way”, as their votes may be entirely legitimate.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you suspect voting patterns that are concerning to you, feel free to submit a custom flag to the moderators who can look into things further and request help from staff if they feel that is necessary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="62294" LastActivityDate="2024-03-18T21:41:20.637" CommentCount="11" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12570" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12568" CreationDate="2024-03-19T17:04:10.247" Score="13" Body="&lt;p&gt;This has actually been discussed a few times on Meta Stack Overflow and Meta Stack Exchange:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/53965/152515&quot;&gt;Why doesn&amp;#39;t vote &amp;quot;fraud&amp;quot; provide some feedback?&lt;/a&gt; (MSE, 2010)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/196327/152515&quot;&gt;Warn users that they might be committing vote fraud&lt;/a&gt; (MSE, 2013)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/290177/254830&quot;&gt;Should we notify serial upvoters?&lt;/a&gt; (MSO, 2015)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;(See also the linked duplicates on each question.)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The conversation winds up divided in the same ways each time:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;If someone is acting in good faith, it's certainly helpful to give them some feedback they goofed up to let them correct their behaviour.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;However if someone is acting in bad faith, they may use those same notifications to figure out how to fly under the serial voting detection mechanism's radar.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The same mechanism has to service Stack Overflow which deals with unique problems we don't. Because a high reputation on SO can be a boon on a software developer's résumé, there's &lt;em&gt;literal money incentive&lt;/em&gt; for people to secure upvotes fraudulently from sockpuppet accounts, voting rings, etc, hence why the discussions above are talking about serial voting as a form of vote fraud. Likewise they have actual issues with revenge downvoting and similar that we rarely or never see here.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The caution around bad-faith users has meant there's not a strong consensus of community support for notifying people engaging in serial voting. The cost of honest users not figuring it out seems like a fair trade, I guess.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2024-03-19T17:14:37.450" LastActivityDate="2024-03-19T17:14:37.450" CommentCount="4" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12571" PostTypeId="1" AcceptedAnswerId="12573" CreationDate="2024-03-20T17:07:41.147" Score="9" ViewCount="142" Body="&lt;p&gt;I've found several subclasses, optional rules, and other content on &lt;a href=&quot;https://dmsguild.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;Dungeon Master's Guild&lt;/a&gt; that I'd like to use in a game, all of which are Free or Pay What You Want. Is it OK to ask questions about the balance of this type of content? If so, would this use the &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-homebrew-review-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt; tag, or something else?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77400" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-03-24T18:18:24.357" LastActivityDate="2024-03-24T18:18:24.357" Title="Is it ok to ask questions about the balance of free content from DMsGuild?" Tags="|discussion|questions|dnd-5e|" AnswerCount="1" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12572" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12568" CreationDate="2024-03-21T19:38:16.680" Score="3" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Hmmm, this might be me.&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Having been fairly inactive for awhile, in recent months I have had a bit more time to devote to rpg.se.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have been moving from the present backward in time in the queue, reviewing, occasionally editing, and upvoting, sometimes until my votes are used up for the day.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;In moving backward in the queue, it is clear that there is a tide in the affairs of rpg.se.  It's obvious that for a few days one or another frequent answerer will be more present, and then another frequent answerer will move to the fore.  Some frequent answerers are more frequent than others, especially for a few days here and there.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I will try to vary my methods a bit.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="26732" LastEditorUserId="26732" LastEditDate="2024-03-21T20:03:18.570" LastActivityDate="2024-03-21T20:03:18.570" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12573" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12571" CreationDate="2024-03-22T13:44:05.183" Score="12" Body="&lt;h2&gt;Yes, we handle these sorts of questions&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It doesn’t actually really matter if it’s homebrew on some forum somewhere, something posted to the DM’s Guild for free or at some cost, or even official material: “what effects would adding this content to my game have?” is a reasonable question and one which we have handled just fine numerous times in the past.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As for &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/homebrew-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;homebrew-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-homebrew-review-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;homebrew-review&lt;/a&gt;... yes, I think it should apply, but then, it should probably also apply to a question of “hey, this new official book came out, and I have doubts about this new class,” which is fundamentally the same sort of question, but calling that “homebrew” review is just wrong. I think we should, perhaps, rename the tag &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/content-review&quot; class=&quot;post-tag&quot; title=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-review&amp;#39;&quot; aria-label=&quot;show questions tagged &amp;#39;content-review&amp;#39;&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot; aria-labelledby=&quot;tag-content-review-tooltip-container&quot;&gt;content-review&lt;/a&gt;, or something?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="4563" LastActivityDate="2024-03-22T13:44:05.183" CommentCount="7" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12574" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12568" CreationDate="2024-03-27T08:45:43.230" Score="-3" Body="&lt;p&gt;In my opinion people that have at least more than a basic amount of rep should get a warning. And even newbies should have something to tell them that there votes might be removed, if it looks like they have violated the rules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That is annoying. I come here may be once a month, look at the new questions etc (may be vote on an open or close) and see any questions for games I like, if the question is interesting I will upvote it and the answers if useful. I normally never down vote unless it is annoying. So as I might be here for 1/2hr in a month and do 10s of votes, and that means they might get be removed as a 'serial voter', even-though I have 11k of rep. What is the point of me bothering at all!&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="768" LastEditorUserId="768" LastEditDate="2024-03-27T08:55:09.733" LastActivityDate="2024-03-27T08:55:09.733" CommentCount="1" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12575" PostTypeId="1" CreationDate="2024-03-27T15:58:02.803" Score="3" ViewCount="151" Body="&lt;p&gt;After asking &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/211035/is-this-variant-of-the-armorer-artificer-balanced-compared-to-the-existing-subcl&quot;&gt;Is this variant of the Armorer Artificer balanced compared to the existing subclass?&lt;/a&gt;, which offered a wide range of options to choose from, I was informed that it simply had too much content. After this, I broke off a smaller chunk of the content, and it still got downvoted (not as much, though, and it mostly stopped once I transcribed the text from the image). The problem is that if I ask a separate question for each weapon, I'm left with lots of questions (which will crowd the &amp;quot;new questions&amp;quot; page) that take time to write. This might also cause me to get flagged for spamming questions (I don't know how the system works). How should I get a homebrew character option of this size analyzed?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Note: I don't have access to most other RPG forums (RPG.net, Reddit, and GitP are all blocked).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="77400" LastEditorUserId="33569" LastEditDate="2024-03-27T18:34:00.693" LastActivityDate="2024-04-02T14:02:18.383" Title="What should I do if I have a huge [homebrew-review] question that I need to break into smaller parts?" Tags="|discussion|specific-question|questions|homebrew|" AnswerCount="2" CommentCount="0" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
  <row Id="12576" PostTypeId="2" ParentId="12575" CreationDate="2024-03-27T21:09:13.183" Score="7" Body="&lt;p&gt;If it's a homebrew feature that's so expansive it can't even fit in a question here, I suggest that what you need is to do your own playtesting rather than ask us. I wrote about similar recently here in the context of &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/12476/1204&quot;&gt;review for an entire game system&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Content reviews here are particularly good for taking a specific feature and giving detailed notes on it—e.g. detailed examination of one character feature—or taking a broader picture and giving broader notes—e.g. assessment of a broad class and any major issues that stand out about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I think if a piece of content is so large it's straining our model, it's also going to strain our capacity to review it in any meaningful sense. A variant that large is going to have &lt;em&gt;so much&lt;/em&gt; going on, there will just be &lt;em&gt;so many&lt;/em&gt; different things to review and assess and &lt;em&gt;so many&lt;/em&gt; variables to take into account. We can point out, like, a few things here and there, but we can't reasonably approach a comprehensive review. It would reach the point of even &lt;a href=&quot;https://rpg.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask&quot;&gt;breaking our Q&amp;amp;A model&lt;/a&gt; such that nobody could approach a comprehensive answer. There's just too much &lt;em&gt;stuff.&lt;/em&gt; Breaking it up piecemeal isn't going to work so well either because then we're not evaluating it in the context of the bigger picture.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;What you need to do is instead do some legwork here: you've written the class, now you need to play it and test it, and compare it with other features to make sure  you're on the right track, and take note of any problems that come up, and try to fix them. What you can  then do is if you come across &lt;strong&gt;specific issues&lt;/strong&gt; you're having trouble resolving with specific features as surfaced by playtesting and research, come to us and ask about those specific things you're running into and how to resolve them.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Playtesting is an &lt;em&gt;incredibly&lt;/em&gt; rich vein of feedback that will make all kinds of issues stand out &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; fast, and they'll be issues you can work to identify and solve. We can help you with that process, but this will be the kind of thing where the benefit you get out &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; our capacity to help you will be proportionate to the work you put into playtesting effectively and into attempts to solve the problems yourself.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;" OwnerUserId="1204" LastEditorUserId="1204" LastEditDate="2024-03-27T22:17:35.713" LastActivityDate="2024-03-27T22:17:35.713" CommentCount="3" ContentLicense="CC BY-SA 4.0" />
</posts>